I've manged to get my hands on two Kho samples from Chitral, northern Pakistan, courtesy of
Khana from the comments at this blog and someone named Sam Sloan. Here's what
Wikipedia has to say about the Kho, who are Dardic-speakers and thus close linguistic relatives of the Kalasha people:
The Kho people are likely descendants of those who arrived in the region during the Indo-Aryan migration.[5] The Kho people formerly observed a form of ancient Hinduism;[6] during the Mongol invasion of India during the 1200s, many of the northern Kho converted to Islam.[7]
...
The Kho people speak the Khowar language, a member of the Dardic subgroup of the Indo-Aryan language family. The ethnologists Karl Jettmar and Lennart Edelberg noted, with respect to the Khowar language, that: "Khowar, in many respects [is] the most archaic of all modern Indian languages, retaining a great part of Sanskrit case inflexion, and retaining many words in a nearly Sanskritic form.”[9]
Moreover, Chitral is near Swat, which is the location of a Bronze Age cemetery that is generally presumed to be the oldest Indo-Iranian archaeological site in South Asia. It'll be interesting to compare the two Kho individuals to samples from this ancient burial ground if and when they're finally published (see
here and
here). Meantime, this is how they compare to the Kalasha from the HGDP dataset in several of my staple genome-wide analyses:
Overall, the qpGraph trees produce almost identical results for both the Kho and Kalasha. However, on the Kho tree, the drift path leading from C to Han is zero (i.e. no genetic drift), while on the Kalasha tree it's 18. That's a subtle, but perhaps important difference, because it suggests that the Kho and Kalasha have somewhat different types of East Eurasian admixture.
Indeed, in the West Eurasian and world Principal Component Analyses (PCA) the Kho pull more strongly towards the Bronze Age steppe and East Asia, respectively, compared to the Kalasha. This might mean that they've been less isolated genetically than the Kalasha since the initial Indo-Aryan settlement of what is now northern Pakistan.
I've also added the Kho to the Global 10 and Basal-rich K7 datasheets (see
here and
here, respectively). It might be possible to investigate in more detail the differences between the Kho and Kalasha by using this output to model their ancestry with nMonte (for instance, like
here).
See also...
Ancient herders from the Pontic-Caspian steppe crashed into India: no ifs or buts
Descendants of ancient European (fair?) maidens in Central Asia's highlands
Late PIE ground zero now obvious; location of PIE homeland still uncertain, but...
270 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 270 of 270Well... Happy Republic day and Australia day to Indian and Australian folks here .
and happy invasion day to the aboriginal australians
@Shah
I also have a feeling that David and all others who actively argued for the AIT were purposefully targeted in this thread by some of the commentators. I did not even get into the AIT issue, but was caught in the line of fire in the heat of the personal attacks.
Please note that the article I linked , where a leading scientist involved of the research has clearly hinted :
1. They have found Indo-European genes .
2. The people of Rakhigarhi were very similar to modern North Indian Brahmans .
Nothing surprsing . The samples belongs to the era of ~3000 -2500 BC .
There is no way this fits with Steppe Migration scenario . The scenario is finished and subjected to drastic compromises . Again nothing surprising for people who have studied in depth about the past of the Subcontinent, without any pre-conceived ideology! .
@myself
I also have a feeling that David and all others who actively argued for the AIT were purposefully targeted in this thread by some of the commentators.
I do not mean MomOfZoha here. I have no problem with her.
And about the R1a question , if we remember, the geneticists well before hinted that they have unpublished data .
So, instead of making baseless and cheap allegations , we have to just wait .
I am also very interested in Maykop results and if some BA Anatolian results come from relevant places ...
Okay, so there is no clear argument at present that can debunk the Out Of Eastern Europe theory regarding Proto-Indo-European.
An early Mesolithic or Late Upper Palaeolithic migration to Europe will not explain the many similarities between Sanskrit and other Indo-European Languages.
@Nirjhar007 This will debunk your claim.
If Vedic Aryans and Indo-Europeans are from India, how come there is no Onge/ASI/Jarawa ancestry in Europeans? Furthermore, if Indo-Europeans are from Indian, then how come there's a clear caste system and racial segregation in place with the upper castes having more European-derived ancestry than the lower castes? Where did this European ancestry come from? Did it originate in South Asia, then migrate to Europe? If this is true, how come no Iran Neolithic or ASI ancestry was found in Steppe EMBA and Steppe MLBA populations? Instead of saving face and arguing that there was not an Aryan invasion, you LARP and go a step further and claim that it was actually Indians who Indo-Europeanized the Steppe. Why do you make such fallacious claims and not present any evidence? 1+2=3 not 1+2=1,300,000,000. Now get that in your head. This is a simple issue and you are clearly deluded.
SOP,
If Vedic Aryans and Indo-Europeans are from India, how come there is no Onge/ASI/Jarawa ancestry in Europeans?
You need to understand a few things. ASI is not concentrated in North India but in South India. Most likely its origin is also in South India. If so, at certain point in time, ASI people likely moved from South India into North India. What if this migration into North India is as recent as 2000 BC ? What will you then say regarding the people who inhabited the Indus civilization ? Surely they would be more Iran_N related but with likely more ANE affinity.
Furthermore, if Indo-Europeans are from Indian, then how come there's a clear caste system and racial segregation in place with the upper castes having more European-derived ancestry than the lower castes?
As per Indian tradition, the Vedic culture originated in Haryana & Western UP on the banks of the now extinct Saraswati river. Who lives in Haryana & Western UP now ? It is the Jaats. Can you show me whether a low caste Jaat has lesser steppe_EMBA than a Brahmin ?
@Jaydeep Funny guy... Anyway, if you say how ASI moved north later, wouldn't it still mean that modern Indians are mixed, if regardless the Indo-European languages originated in India? And if they're mixed, wouldn't that mean that Europeans are genetically closer to the original Vedic Aryans, anyways? Because if you think about it logically, it would mean that even if the Indo-European languages originated in India, the original speakers and bearers of Vedic culture are now admixed and not like their original selves. Furthermore, how do you expect Eastern Hunter Gatherers to be in South Asia before they were in Europe? Even still, if the Vedic Aryans and Indo-Europeans did originate in South Asia, then where did that Iran Neolithic admixture go? Why hasn't it been found in Yamnaya or Steppe MLBA populations? Why is it only found in S/C Asia and to a much lesser degree, in some parts of Iran? Come on dude, all arguments you are putting forth are flawed. Even still, many castes have different genetic profiles, with some having more Iran Neolithic DNA and others having more Onge DNA.
David ran these for a friend of mine a while back, I believe.
Gujjar:
35% Steppe
45% Iran Neolithic
20% Onge
UP Brahmin:
40% Steppe
30% Iran Neolithic
30% Onge
Why is there a clear difference in proportions here? Clearly, you can see it's not the same. If all of these populations had the same exact admixtures, they would not vary significantly, which leads me to believe that all the Iran Neolithic and Steppe admixture in India is foreign.
The reason for the Jats high Steppe admixture is likely due to ancestry from later Steppe invaders, of which there were many. I don't need to tell you, you can kindly take a look yourself:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Pakistan#Classical_period_-_Middle_Kingdoms
Stop being in denial bud.
@nirjhar
"And about the R1a question , if we remember, the geneticists well before hinted that they have unpublished data .
So, instead of making baseless and cheap allegations , we have to just wait ."
...so why are they sitting on all this data?
@Bob Floy Why do you bother arguing with Nirjhar? He'll never let go of his narrative, no matter how much evidence you show him. He's a complete nut. I don't think it's right to call someone a nut, but in his case I make an exception. The way in which he talks is in a very anti-European, pro-Indian, almost racialist and supremacist tone. Why would you argue with someone who is clearly deluded beyond redemption?
SOP,
wouldn't it still mean that modern Indians are mixed, if regardless the Indo-European languages originated in India?
So ? Has any Indian denied this ? The question purely is about the origin of Indo-Europeans and about the Vedic Sanskrit historical tradition which makes the region of Haryana as the Vedic homeland. No one is concerned about racial purity. Stop going on a tangent.
wouldn't that mean that Europeans are genetically closer to the original Vedic Aryans, anyways?
How would you know that without having aDNA from such Vedic Aryans ?
how do you expect Eastern Hunter Gatherers to be in South Asia before they were in Europe?
EHG's major component is ANE. After the native americans, it is the Kalash in South Asia who have the greatest affinity to ANE and not modern Europeans. ANE likely has a very old presence in South Asia. The y-dna associated with ANE are y-dna R & Q & probably its parent y-dna P. You should know that both in Iran and India (South Asia), there are very old divergent lineages of y-dna Q. South Asia also has substantial presence of y-dna R2. Not to mention, very old divergent lineages of R1b. So, the EHG affinity is really the ANE affinity of South Asians which is of a very old timeframe.
Even still, if the Vedic Aryans and Indo-Europeans did originate in South Asia, then where did that Iran Neolithic admixture go?
The Iran Neolithic admixture along with steppe_EMBA admixture is a proxy for ANI in South Asia. It does not really prove that Iran_N or steppe_EMBA admixed into existing South Asian populations. That can only be proven once we have aDNA from South Asia. Most probably, aDNA from North India/Pakistan will show a population which is closely related to both CHG & Iran_N & Iran_Hotu with more ANE affinity. The reason for it is that the populations like Iran_N, CHG & ANI were most likely one group that spread out after the LGM into Caucasus, Iran, Central Asia & South Asia.
The reason for the Jats high Steppe admixture is likely due to ancestry from later Steppe invaders, of which there were many.
The above is just baseless speculation. There is ZERO evidence that there was any latter day steppe invasion of the Haryana region, let alone them contributing to the ancestry of the Jaats. On the other hand, the region of Haryana inhabited by the Jaats, being a Vedic homeland is a very old and accepted Indian tradition. It is not baseless speculation.
@shahanshah
Settle down.
@Jaydeep
The Kalasha show the highest affinity to ANE because, unlike Europeans, they're almost a 50/50 mixture of ANE-rich Neolithic farmers from Iran and also ANE-rich ancient steppe pastoralists, not because ANE is native to South Asia. See here...
https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-zIzwm1Yedqg/Wmg2IOkboSI/AAAAAAAAGZQ/Do5ari_zC1MWZvbgzLxZ4bAiWD8O6cNdgCLcBGAs/s1600/Kalash_qpGraph_01_2018.png
In fact, neither ANE nor EHG are native to South Asia. See here...
http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2018/01/unadmixed-basal-eurasians-lived.html
EHG is derived from European Upper Paleolithic peoples, and had nothing to do with South Asia in its formative stage.
so why are they sitting on all this data?
I have given you people my ''speculation'' :) ....
@Jaydeep Wow, I am not going to waste time addressing your delusions, and we should have already had the Swat samples of the early Vedic Aryans released to us now if it was not for a few Indian scientists delaying the process. Your understanding of genetics is limited my friend, and I clearly proved there were many later Steppe invasions into India, and you even deny these?
"There is ZERO evidence that there was any latter day steppe invasion of the Haryana region, let alone them contributing to the ancestry of the Jaats."
What's this?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Scythians_in_Indian_literature
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Scythians
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kushan_Empire
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alchon_Huns
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hephthalite_Empire
Were these Steppe invaders native to India, also?
@Bob Floy Alright, mate. I am just upset right now. Some people here are very ignorant of the realities.
@Nirjhar007 You have not given us anything. You have furthered your delusions in your own head, that's it.
I suggest you reevaluate your views with an open mind and honest opinion.
SOP,
You have limited wikipedia based understanding of Indian history. Please learn to behave or else do not have a discussion.
All those so-called invasions were not specific to Haryana. Infact there is no evidence that it even affected the region of Haryana. If those latter day invasions are the reason for the elevated steppe in Jaats, can you tell me why it is not showing in other people in South Asia whose regions were also under the rule of these later invaders ?
"And if they're mixed, wouldn't that mean that Europeans are genetically closer to the original Vedic Aryans, anyways?"
Sure they could be. Except we don't know if either these hypothetical pre-admixed IVC or European counterparts were "vedic". So In your mind if a population does not have ASI they have to be somehow "VEDIC" whatever that means to you.
"Even still, if the Vedic Aryans and Indo-Europeans did originate in South Asia, then where did that Iran Neolithic admixture go? Why hasn't it been found in Yamnaya or Steppe MLBA populations?"
Iran Neo is far removed in time and distance from yamnaya. Nevertheless surprisingly both Iran Neo and chalc are reasonable fits as ancestral populations of yamnaya.
Also most Indians don't give a shit about being originators of IE, thats frankly your obsession and that of many Europeans. Jaydeep represents a minority of Indians who is advocating both linguistic and genetic OIT. there are some linguistic grounds for it but nothing conclusive. I am neutral.
Now I come to the only DNA samples that can be reasonably connected to IE languages. Mycenaean, zoroastrian and zombies like the Kalasha. Is there a common thread that run thru these? nothing that Stands out Should we expect any?... anatolean chalc, CHG,EHG, Iran N? EHG is a poor ancestor for myceneans with its low admix % despite David's hype. none really work.
if we confine more regionally, a common thread connecting archaic, modern Iranian and zoroastrian populations is Iran neolithic, so it works somewhat as a partial ancestor of IE speakers. I doubt thats the whole story
Jeez Jaydeep , looks like most of the people here don't even need any dna of Ancient Greater India , they have known everything! . Wish we had their intelligence or at least of Shah .....
@nirjhar
"I have given you people my ''speculation''
It wasn't very clear, could you tell us again?
@Shahanshah of Persia
“Maybe you're right, but maybe you're not.”
Western scholars and Indian scholars do not understand Rigveda. Some of them write about it:
“A Still Undeciphered Text: How the scientific approach to the Rigveda would open up Indo-European Studies” K_Thomson
http://www.rigveda.co.uk/asut1.pdf
Here are the comments on the newest and the best English translation of RV from 2014:
http://www.rigveda.co.uk/speak-for-itself.pdf
I have that book, the translation is not bad because it is literal but it is evident that they don’t have a clue what RV is all about i.e. don’t understand metaphors.
When we get genetics sorted out new interpretations will follow because we will know who the IE were and the clue to RV is IE poetry and believes.
@shah
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Scythians_in_Indian_literature
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Scythians
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kushan_Empire
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alchon_Huns
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hephthalite_Empire
I dont think Scythian DNA a good fit for Jats? Kushanas originate from western china. Is this am example of European admixture in Jats?
@bob
Read the comment of January 25, 2018 at 12:33 AM in this thread again , I thought I was pretty clear.
David,
The Kalasha show the highest affinity to ANE because, unlike Europeans, they're almost a 50/50 mixture of ANE-rich Neolithic farmers from Iran and also ANE-rich ancient steppe pastoralists, not because ANE is native to South Asia.
How do you know this without having any aDNA from South Asia ? By assuming a few things, isn't it ? But without aDNA, you have no way to prove that your assumptions are correct.
Also, I am not talking about ANE as being the same as the Malta Boy. But I am talking about ANE related ancestry being very old in South Asia. The Malta Boy may have some East Eurasian admixture that is missing in South Asians.
In fact, neither ANE nor EHG are native to South Asia. See here...
The concept of Basal Eurasian is based on the premise that Usht Ishim is basal to all Eurasian populations. But Usht Ishim is not basal to all Eurasians, hence the basal Eurasian thing is just hot air.
And, I have never said that EHG is native to South Asia. I have said that ANE type ancestry is native to South Asia.
Just to test this, can you find out whether South Asians are closer to EHG or to ANE ? Thanks.
@postneo
Even if Yamnaya had ancestry from Neolithic and/or Chalcolithic Iran (which it doesn't!) that explains nothing for South Asia, because South Asians obviously have ancestry from ancient Eastern Europe, no matter how you look at things.
And this is where South Asian R1a-Z93 comes from. Obviously.
By the way, your denial in regards to the steppe input in Mycenaeans and painting it as something of a fantasy of mine is pathetic, considering that there's a paper from Harvard on the topic.
Enjoy.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature23310.html
But your denial is strong, so nothing will help.
@Jaydeep
Actually, it does. Gujjars and Rajputs also have high Steppe ancestry. Haryana as an entity did not exist then, lol... And of course these invaders would've affected Haryana, since they affected the entire region.
Gujjars and Rajputs, there's your answer. There are many more of these tribes, but these two have between 35 and 40% Steppe, and they were also affected. Another reason why these invasions did not affect "everyone" is because the invaders segregated themselves from the natives and did not further mix with them. Haryana Jatts may not even be native to Haryana, as some have suggested that migrated from the Indo-Scythian heartland further south one thousand years ago or so. Finally, your assertion that the Saraswati dried up in the Haryana region is very baseless. You may say that my assertion that the Haryana Jatts migrated from further south is baseless, and you could be right, but it proves how much of a hypocrite you really are. Anyway, Jatts are like descended from Indo-Scythians or Bronze Age Vedic Aryans who refused to assimilate into the Varna system, however, the latter is unlikely.
@nirjhar
"January 25, 2018 at 12:33 AM"
So you're basically saying the opposite of what most of us are saying?
You think that the results are being sat on because western academics won't like it?
@Nirjhar007 No comment.
@Jaydeep Definitely not going to comment on your nonsense.
@EastPole Well said mate, perhaps you are right. I will not say anything more.
@postneo No comment, and even if the Steppe admixture in certain South Asians, like Jatts and Gujjars, is not from Kushans/Scythians/Hunas, it does not mean that they lack Steppe admixture altogether. Steppe admixture ultimately originated in Eastern Europe, no IFS or BUTS.
http://eurogenes.blogspot.ca/2017/06/ancient-herders-from-pontic-caspian.html
@Bob Floy Let me quote his source and expose him for the LARPer he is:
Source: https://m.jagran.com/news/national-jagran-special-on-indo-european-languages-17304852.html
Title: In this case India's debtor is entire Europe, not just world master
"Genetic science is going to answer a question that has arisen due to debate between scientists and linguists across the world for a century. Soon this thing is going to come out completely in front of the whole world that the Indo-European language family grew from India. After the DNA investigation of the residues found after the latest excavation at the places of the Indus Valley Civilization almost a year ago, this mystery has started to emerge that the native place of speakers of this language family was India and from here it has spread all over the world. Happened.
Such is the recognition
Indo-European languages are spoken in large parts of Eurasian land, from Ireland and UK to Italy, France, Germany, Poland, Russia, Iran and northern India. The common fact of this language so far was that the language was Proto-Indo-European or the ancient language, from which all other Indo-European languages were started, starting with the Pontic Steps in Central Asia. The inhabitants of that area were the first to specialize in horse riding, chariot-driving pastralists. He had first acquired ownership on bronze technology.
A major change in history will come from research
These new practices and techniques were beginning to spread around Europe in around 3,000 BC and around 2,000 BC in South Asia with those benefits. Their language and culture also spread with them. But under the leadership of Dr. Neeraj Rai, the team of international scientists engaged in areas such as Hissar, Rakhigadi, Haryana has denied this fact on the basis of genetic research. A new round of discussion, debate and brainstorming will start all over the world as soon as the research published in the international journals will have a major transformation in the global history of human civilization.
In the team of Dr. Rai's team, the research done by other scientists from India and abroad came to know that these skeletons found in Rakhijdi belong to the ancestors of those species who are speakers of the languages of the Indo-European language family and themselves in the world. Have been claiming to be declared as the best species. The DNA of these skulls makes a lot of matches with the DNA of the North Indian Brahmins... Almost all the results of this research have surfaced. Shortly after their publication, there is a possibility of a break on the advent, aggression and dissemination of the Aryans."
This is what he keeps referencing. If you do not see the delusional mindset of whichever buffoon wrote this piece, then you have serious issues (not you, you know what I mean).
Anyway, it's best to ignore the delusions of these bigots. Why should we keep putting up with them if they do not want to listen? One thing is clear, this article has a very racialist tone, and David should not have allowed him to post it here.
@Jaydeep
How do you know this without having any aDNA from South Asia ? By assuming a few things, isn't it ? But without aDNA, you have no way to prove that your assumptions are correct.
By making inferences (not just assumptions) from currently available ancient and modern-day data.
Also, I am not talking about ANE as being the same as the Malta Boy. But I am talking about ANE related ancestry being very old in South Asia. The Malta Boy may have some East Eurasian admixture that is missing in South Asians.
This doesn't explain anything for South Asia, because South Asians have ancestry from ancient Eastern Europe. We can see this in genome-wide, Y-DNA and mtDNA data.
And, I have never said that EHG is native to South Asia. I have said that ANE type ancestry is native to South Asia.
Even if so, it makes no difference, because South Asians got the vast majority of their ANE-related ancestry from ancient Iran and Eastern Europe. This is very clear.
Just to test this, can you find out whether South Asians are closer to EHG or to ANE? Thanks.
There's either no significant preference for one or the other, or there's a slight preference for EHG.
Gond, who have by far the most ASI here, are the only pop with a positive Z score, probably because ANE is a whisker closer to ASI than EHG is.
result: Mbuti Brahmin EHG MA1 -0.0075 -1.870 685470
result: Mbuti Brahui EHG MA1 -0.0131 -3.813 633037
result: Mbuti Gond EHG MA1 0.0017 0.329 685470
result: Mbuti Kalash EHG MA1 -0.0148 -3.979 631942
result: Mbuti Kapu EHG MA1 -0.0138 -2.639 685470
result: Mbuti Brahmin EHG AfontovaGora3 -0.0057 -1.211 231782
result: Mbuti Brahui EHG AfontovaGora3 -0.0130 -3.000 220215
result: Mbuti Gond EHG AfontovaGora3 0.0020 0.344 231782
result: Mbuti Kalash EHG AfontovaGora3 -0.0100 -2.236 219773
result: Mbuti Kapu EHG AfontovaGora3 -0.0069 -1.166 231782
''So you're basically saying the opposite of what most of us are saying?
You think that the results are being sat on because western academics won't like it?''
I don't know they like or not , but looks like they are having trouble to explain what they found....
@Davidski I've noticed a common trend among the manner in which these OIT theorists and AIT deniers present their arguments.
>Immediately dismiss legitimate and credible evidence based on many studies on ancient Steppe and Neolithic Iranian populations and modern South Asians.
>Introduce their own, completely baseless, assertions time and time again. Often, each and every time these assertions are the same, usually centering around the pseudo-Steppe hypothesis.
>Hurl insults when they realize their fib and delusions have been legitimately debunked.
>Link Indian Nationalist websites as the ultimate proof for their claims.
>Wash, rinse, and repeat.
@Nirjhar007
"I don't know they like or not , but looks like they are having trouble to explain what they found...."
Don't you mean the Indian scientists? Why would Western, liberal, and PC scientists want to oppose and delay a discovery which proves that the Aryans originated in India? Please explain if you can. I already explained why Indian scientists would do such a thing. But to recap:
>National pride hurt
>Inter-caste relations
>Marxist threat
>A fallacious Belief that such studies legitimize the British Raj
>Prove that British colonizers were right about fair skinned Aryans invading darker skinned Dravidians and establishing a caste system (not being racist, just stating facts, skin color does not matter, as we are all humans and equal)
>Ultimately prove that Vedic Civilization was not native to India and had external roots
Basically, this is why the study has not been released. I dare you to challenge any one of these points.
"1) The paper mentions the veneration of horses yet doesn't mention the veneration of camels, which are only found in South Central Asia and Arabia before 1200 BCE. This means the split between Indo-Aryan and Indo-Iranian occurred in South Central Asia and not around the Steppes. This is also an evidence against OOI"
That's not true. Camels found in excavations around 1500BC in Central Kazakhstan.
"2) The Aryans of the Gathas and The older parts of the Rigveda were not chariot riding conquerers. It is in the later parts of the Rigveda and the younger Avesta where we see the Rathas(chariots) as tools of warfare. They were most likely wagons".
That's not true.
"3)" It is only hypothetically.
"4) Early Zoroastrians did not practice sky burials. This is a common misconception. The earliest attested Zoroastrians, the worshippers of Assara Mazash the Medes, did not practice sky burials as can be seen in Marlik."
That's not true. Zoroaster wrote that it is necessary to bury in the Avesta. In Zoroastrianism many ways of burial, different Zoroastrians buried in different ways.
@supernord
Iranics have nothing to do with Indo-Aryans in this particular context, and I do not know why he was trying to link the two.
South Asians have ancestry from ancient Eastern Europe. We can see this in genome-wide, Y-DNA and mtDNA data.
I like to be simple and practical . The shared ancestries nature will be explained, when the ancient data comes out .
@nirjhar
"I don't know they like or not , but looks like they are having trouble to explain what they found...."
Why don't you just come out and say what you really mean?
Your answers are evasive for some reason.
@Davidski
"EHG can be modeled as a mixture of ANE and WHG."
EHG is not a mixture them.
"Haak et al. didn't claim that it couldn't be modeled as ANE and WHG, they just said that their attempt to do so wasn't technically successful, probably due to the complexity of the model, but it was very close to being successful."
Haak rights, it is not possible to simulate a mixture from ANE and WHG, and there is not even some additional components, and no components. The easiest way to show over Ust-Ishim, if ANE and WHG are attracted to Ust-Ishim, EHG is not drawn. This is since the ancientest times. Yes, between them there was genetic exchange appeared in the process of moving EHG to the West, but the origin is different, although all three have a Northern kinship.
D-stats
result: Mbuti.DG Ust_Ishim WHG EHG -0.010450192 -2.41164
result: Mbuti.DG Ust_Ishim MA1 EHG -0.020089471 -3.70820
result: Mbuti.DG Ust_Ishim AG2 EHG -0.008866979 -1.11543
result: Mbuti.DG Ust_Ishim MA1 AG2 -0.009094419 -0.91815
result: Mbuti.DG Ust_Ishim MA1 WHG -0.009781695 -1.88666
result: Mbuti.DG Ust_Ishim AG2 WHG 0.004410225 0.62273
result: Mbuti.DG Ust_Ishim Switzerland_HG EHG -0.014317936 -2.80288
result: Mbuti.DG Ust_Ishim Switzerland_HG WHG -0.003612584 -0.80423
result: Mbuti.DG Ust_Ishim Switzerland_HG AG2 -0.008332484 -0.96960
result: Mbuti.DG Ust_Ishim Switzerland_HG MA1 0.005289703 0.91316
Why don't you just come out and say what you really mean?
Your answers are evasive for some reason.
The ''academic'' narrative is ''in trouble '' due to the data . I don't mean it though, just ''speculating'' but at least my ''speculation'' has a reference from a leading scholar of the huge study .
@Nirjhar
Rai isn't leading the study. He was asked to collaborate.
So that newspaper article is full of shit on a number of levels.
He is a leading author , and be sure he spoke out after discussing with other authors too , just to keep us ready of what is coming .
^Speculating ;) ....
@Samuel Andrews, MomOfZoha, Matt, and others in regards to issues that came up...
I definitely agree with Sam that ethnocentrism is the norm across the globe and not restricted to White, i.e. European-based, societies. Along with Hindu-centrists there are Sinocentrists, Iranocentrists, Turanocentrists, Afrocentrists, Arabocentrists, etc., and their agendas are actually politically implemented. Chinese colonialism and repression of the Uighurs & Sarikolis in the Tarim is a textbook example. Likewise, Kurdish chauvinism manifests itself in the ethnic cleansing of indigenous Assyrians and acts of terrorism against the Turkish state(not to mention their role in Armenian genocide for which the Turks are constantly blamed). It's coupled to their "We Wuz Aryanz" propaganda designed to seduce naive Europeans into supporting them.
I agree that Euro-descended people are at the bottom of the "victimization" hierarchy in the West, but Muslims---let's pretend they're a monolith---certainly aren't on top of it. Political shills are routinely spouting unsubstantiated stuff about Islam on FoxNews and InfoWars. I'm not going to delve of who's on top of the pyramid, but let's just say that Philip Giraldi at Unz or Razib's friend Kevin MacDonald are pushing the envelope, not Alex Jones or Cernovich. The whole idea of having a person or group above criticism relative to others doesn't sit well with most people.
Now, it's also necessary to make a distinction between ethno-NATIONALISM and CHAUVINISM. Indians are as entitled to nationalism as are Europeans, Sinics, Levantines or what-have-you. There's a HUGE difference between a strong sense of ownership & pride in your heritage(nationalism), though, and defining one's identity in opposition to other groups as chauvinists do. Btw, a lot of Indian nationalists DO accept AIT. Fringe Hindutvan chauvinists tend not to.
Chauvinists on the internet mainly focus on undesirable statistics in other groups. For ex, they hammer "muh Somalis be low IQ rapists" or "muh Persian rhinoplasty" but often have very little understanding of what underpins their own history/ancestry and even less so in racialism/genetics at large. They tend to be sycophants and merely switch ideologies/stances per contemporary politics. So, ironically, such "chads"(as they see themselves) are guilty of what they say to be a feminine habit! Like hard leftists, they have their own set of taboos and dogmas they'd love to see imposed. They randomly label you "SJW"(instead of "racist"). Often, they're not even real people, but agents of one form or another inducing clashes/bickering for higher political ends(US imperialism, Likud party, etc). Useful idiots are key in this dynamic, ofc.
Re/OIT and India
The main versions of OIT are dead, but it doesn't deem one "OIT" to point out nuances. LMAO Since when does "with us or against us" trolling have a place in science? There are more appropriate outlets for this kind of dialogue.
Now, the British conquered India, but they were wrong to think they were following in the footsteps of their ancestors. Celts&Germans and Europe proper=/=steppe but are/were cultural and biological hybrids of the western steppe(different branches than Andronovo, etc.) and EEF-derived folks. Just like the Indians are an amalgam.
It would be more correct, instead, to say that Brits were fulfilling the legacy of (European) Romans and Richard the Lionheart in their ME campaigns of WW1.
Yeah the ASI-heavy Gond show a stronger(but not exactly significant) affinity to ANE probably because of the archaic ENA ancestry in ANE as outlined in Fu, et al and a virtual lack of WHG-related alleles.
Gond shows no attraction to EHG nor to MA1.
result: Mbuti Gond EHG MA1 0.0017 0.329 685470
Z-value 0.329 == 0, STRONGER!
@supernord
1) You are absolutely correct. Can't believe I missed that!
2) The rathas of the Gathas and the were used for transportation, though raithi was only used once in a metaphorical sense. The warrior(mairya) in the Gathas was hypothesized to be a footman not related to charioteers (rathaeshtar) as in the Younger Avesta.
3) What do you mean? The homeland or the texts? The text part is actually proven by linguistics. The Younger Avesta is linguistically distinct from the older Avesta. You only have to look at the Vendidad which describes a Sassanid Savaran or the Yasna with its Hyaona(White Huns) enemies when in fact the enemies of Zarathushtra in the Gathas were all Aryans. The Younger Avesta contradicts the Gathas in every way actually.
4) Zoroaster did not write a thing about burials. It is accepted by everyone that he only composed the Older Avesta and by most only the Gathas. In the Younger Avesta it is considered a sin to bury bodies. It's hard to imagine the pious Medes ignoring that part.
Vara,
I just remembered about a recent research paper on the concept of Vara :) .
Protohistory of the vara. Exploring the Proto-Indo-Iranian Background of an Early Mytheme of the Iranian Plateau by Vidale, Massimo
See here if don't know yet :
http://jies.org/DOCS/jies_index/Vol45.html
I really urge you to read the research , I find it very interesting! .
@Supernord
As I said, it's not statistically significant.
I can send it to you! :) , just give your mail , post in my blog , I have moderation on :) .
@Nirjhar
Thanks!
@Vara
4)Zoroaster wrote about the rules of graves, as can be buried and that is not to bury in the ground and bury in the ground with the dogs. He listed so many ways of burial which Ahura Mazda dictated to him.
2) It's just a game of hypotheses. In Rig Veda Ariyans are charioteers.
Anthro Survey
Gond's D-value = 0.0017 is not stronger, it is very very little. STRONGER == 0!
@supernord
4) No text other than the Vendidad mentions burials and it's clearly not from Zoroaster. In the Vendidad graves must be destroyed.
2) The rathas of the late Rigveda is a war chariot for sure. However, the Rigveda itself had more than one author over a long period of time. The rathas of the early Rigveda is considered a wagon by most. You're right that it's mostly a game of hypothesis, but isn't the PIE issue just a game of hypothesis as well?
Zoroaster wrote about the rules of graves, as can be buried and that is not to bury in the ground and bury in the ground with the dogs. He listed so many ways of burial which Ahura Mazda dictated to him.
Give the reference .
"4) No text other than the Vendidad mentions burials and it's clearly not from Zoroaster."
This fictional interpretation, all to forge the result.
2) "late Rigveda" "The rathas of the early Rigveda is considered a wagon by most."
This fictional interpretation, all to fabricate the result.
No it’s based on the actual content of the well known chronological ordering of the Vedic books accepted by academia. There are several traits that correlate with chronology. Late Vedic books have similar meters as Avesta. Also there are Iran related references in the late books absent in the early ones. references to horse and camel are more in the late books. So a statistically supported pattern seems to emerge
It's all propaganda fans of the theory of the Out of India, among them many of the sanscritists. In fact, there is another chronology that does not match their propaganda. But since they were very active, they are more famous than neutral. The latter part of Rigveda is part of mandala 8, compilation mandala 9, mandala 10, and a compilation of mandala 1. The rest is the family of the mandala, in fact parallel text from different families. Nothing like that charioteers and horses and camels in it only in the late mandalas is not observed. On the contrary, in the Rig Veda camels are a symbol of riches.
@Supernord: I suspect you are spouting junk. I will verify when I get a breather. The texts are freely available and word/syllable counts can be checked and normalized. please specify your preferred chronology as a simple csv line and any references of disputed chronology. I don't know of any.
@supernord @Vara Why can't you two find a common ground instead of arguing about whether or not early Iranics and Vedic Aryans were Nordic or not? Clearly, they were not Nordic, but they were not like modern Iranians/Indians either. What I hate it is that Nordicists often try to "prove" their so-called supremacy to other nationalists by attempting to imply that the early post-BMAC Iranics and Vedic Aryans were Nordic, which is just as bad as what Nirjhar and Vara are doing. They were not pure 100% Nordic Ubermensch, get over it dude!
@Nirjhar Nothing you have said makes sense, and are just taking up bandwitdth. If you have nothing credible to say, you can leave. Thanks!
@Supernord
Why are crossbows, a late Sassanid weapon, mentioned in the Ormazd Yasht? Why does Zoroaster go from being full monotheistic in the Gathas to sacrificing to daeva inspired gods in the Yashts?
You can't keep calling whatever contradicts you an OIT propaganda. This has nothing to do with AIT or OIT. Also, where are the burial texts of Zarathushtra you mentioned, or this going to be the same as the Uzboy thing?
@Nirjhar
This paper is amazing! I like what the author is implying.
It seems Sarianidi's predictions of South Eastern Iran were correct even before the discovery of Jiroft.
Looks like the South Asian paper might surprise a lot of people.
@Vara Vedic Aryans did not come from Iran, don't be an idiot!
Vara,
I am glad you like it :) ,yes the paper is very good . As you see, we have to always study the culture in depth and carefully see the connections ,without any pre-conceived ideology , this scientific approach opens the doors of reality , which is beautiful ! .
But the world is filled with buffoons , who try their best to make you confused .
@Nirjhar007
"But the world is filled with buffoons , who try their best to make you confused ."
Like this one?:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPaCUJsZyPU&t=1458s
Nirjhar,
Can you share that paper with me ?
Thanks.
@Shahanshah of Persia
“Like this one?:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPaCUJsZyPU&t=1458s”
Listen to him, at 30:31 he claims that Slavic word ‘vodka’ came from Sanskrit ‘udaka’
https://youtu.be/qPaCUJsZyPU?t=1831
The fact is that it was the other way round. Sanskrit preserved not only many Slavic roots but also suffixes like ‘-ka’.
@EastPole I am not going to comment any further on this because I do not want to say anything offensive. I will say though that someone who thinks there is such a thing as the "Gawda" language family is clearly deluded. I think this is the type of stuff from where people like Jaydeep and Nirjhar get their ideology from.
@EastPole @Davidski @Salden @Onur Dincer Guys please skip to 15:10 of that video I linked. All of you will be in for a good laugh. It sums up perfectly what Salden was trying to say a while back. 😂
Post a Comment