Page 206 of 441 FirstFirst ... 106156196204205206207208216256306 ... LastLast
Results 2,051 to 2,060 of 4410

Thread: Waves of migration into South Asia

  1. #2051
    Banned
    Posts
    440
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Bengali
    Y-DNA (P)
    R2A2 (R-P267)
    mtDNA (M)
    M52A

    Caste systems were there worldwide primarily as an economic structure. India's is touted the most because the caste system is intertwined with religion and philosophy of birth as the consequence of past karma.

  2. #2052
    Registered Users
    Posts
    3,633
    Sex
    Y-DNA (P)
    L1a1
    mtDNA (M)
    M30
    Y-DNA (M)
    R-L295

    Quote Originally Posted by pegasus View Post
    It looks like a type 0 22% corresponds with the "Anatolia" but the proximal models have them around 10-15% Steppe, the later Cemetery H has around 18%, but also has higher AASI going from approx 21.6 to 30% AASI.
    Note SPGT is from Swat /KPK so these populations even today are less AASI , cemetery H is from the Northern Punjab, where there are more AASI shifted people even today.
    But who brought steppe in Swat if not for R1a?

  3. #2053
    Registered Users
    Posts
    3,633
    Sex
    Y-DNA (P)
    L1a1
    mtDNA (M)
    M30
    Y-DNA (M)
    R-L295

    Article by Tony Joseph on the paper

    https://www.thequint.com/voices/opin...uages-sanskrit

  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to bmoney For This Useful Post:

     Dr_McNinja (04-04-2018),  Sapporo (04-03-2018)

  5. #2054
    Banned
    Posts
    440
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Bengali
    Y-DNA (P)
    R2A2 (R-P267)
    mtDNA (M)
    M52A

    Quote Originally Posted by bmoney View Post
    Article by Tony Joseph on the paper

    https://www.thequint.com/voices/opin...uages-sanskrit
    I knew people like Tony Joseph were going to run with this in media lol. Again very irresponsible on the geneticists part because if you start out with wanting to fit data into a massive migrationist model, you WILL find ways to do so by hook and crook. Essentially what did this paper do? It modeled the individuals labeled as Indus Periphery as how much they could be modeled into Iran_n and also into Steppe_EMBA/Mlba and the rest they said must be an AASI. Prior to this when they only had modern DNA, they looked at how much modern south Asians could be modeled into Iran_n and Steppe_EMBA and said rest must be ASI.
    The least this paper could have done at least with the authority it carries is say ANI ASI is now invalid and said aDNA from deeper inside subcontinent will help resolve what is now defined as AASI. But no, they are so sure of their migrationist model based on half baked analysis, and now deracinated yuppies like Tony Joseph are running with it with their "we are all migrants" kumbaya. How the hell someone is a "migrant" after ten thousand years beats me.

  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to redifflal For This Useful Post:

     bmoney (04-03-2018),  Sapporo (04-03-2018)

  7. #2055
    Registered Users
    Posts
    3,633
    Sex
    Y-DNA (P)
    L1a1
    mtDNA (M)
    M30
    Y-DNA (M)
    R-L295

    Quote Originally Posted by redifflal View Post
    I knew people like Tony Joseph were going to run with this in media lol. Again very irresponsible on the geneticists part because if you start out with wanting to fit data into a massive migrationist model, you WILL find ways to do so by hook and crook. Essentially what did this paper do? It modeled the individuals labeled as Indus Periphery as how much they could be modeled into Iran_n and also into Steppe_EMBA/Mlba and the rest they said must be an AASI. Prior to this when they only had modern DNA, they looked at how much modern south Asians could be modeled into Iran_n and Steppe_EMBA and said rest must be ASI.
    The least this paper could have done at least with the authority it carries is say ANI ASI is now invalid and said aDNA from deeper inside subcontinent will help resolve what is now defined as AASI. But no, they are so sure of their migrationist model based on half baked analysis, and now deracinated yuppies like Tony Joseph are running with it with their "we are all migrants" kumbaya. How the hell someone is a "migrant" after ten thousand years beats me.
    the article was ok, but got political in its summary

    ive asked Vagheesh on twitter as to why he thought the Indus periphery component was informative as its already an admixed component

    Also asked him where the 22% steppe in the Swat sample came from with only 1 R1a sample and why the text of the study is not consistent with the admixture bar graph

    Other users have pointed out that linking steppe with Vedic traditional custodians is not entirely consistent with steppe levels peaking in avarna Jats in all calculators as opposed to UP Brahmins, and that Bhumihars are not Vedic text custodians as implied in the article - so not sure why they drew this conclusion:

    We found the strongest two signals in Brahmin_Tiwari
    499 (p=210-5) and Brahmin_UP (p=410-5), and more generally there was a striking enrichment of
    500 a Z≥3 signals in groups of traditionally priestly status in northern India (57% of groups with Z≥3
    501 were Brahmins or Bhumihars even though these groups comprised only 11% of the 74 groups we
    502 analyzed in northern India). Although the enrichment for Steppe ancestry is not found in the
    503 southern Indian groups, the Steppe enrichment in the northern groups is striking as Brahmins and
    504 Bhumihars are among the traditional custodians of texts written in early Sanskrit. A possible
    505 explanation is that the influx of Steppe_MLBA ancestry into South Asia in the mid-2nd
    506 millennium BCE created a meta-population of groups with different proportions of Steppe
    507 ancestry, with ones having relatively more Steppe ancestry having a central role in spreading
    508 early Vedic culture.
    Last edited by bmoney; 04-03-2018 at 02:45 PM.

  8. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to bmoney For This Useful Post:

     Dr_McNinja (04-04-2018),  redifflal (04-03-2018)

  9. #2056
    Registered Users
    Posts
    149
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by redifflal View Post
    I knew people like Tony Joseph were going to run with this in media lol. Again very irresponsible on the geneticists part because if you start out with wanting to fit data into a massive migrationist model, you WILL find ways to do so by hook and crook. Essentially what did this paper do? It modeled the individuals labeled as Indus Periphery as how much they could be modeled into Iran_n and also into Steppe_EMBA/Mlba and the rest they said must be an AASI. Prior to this when they only had modern DNA, they looked at how much modern south Asians could be modeled into Iran_n and Steppe_EMBA and said rest must be ASI.
    The least this paper could have done at least with the authority it carries is say ANI ASI is now invalid and said aDNA from deeper inside subcontinent will help resolve what is now defined as AASI. But no, they are so sure of their migrationist model based on half baked analysis, and now deracinated yuppies like Tony Joseph are running with it with their "we are all migrants" kumbaya. How the hell someone is a "migrant" after ten thousand years beats me.
    Actually what the paper showed isn't entirely new. Discoveries over the past few years were already pointing towards it. Also I think this paper has derailed claims made by people of both the Indian right and left. 10 years ago Tony Joseph would probably have been writing about how Aryans subjugated black Dravidian natives into slavery. Genetics now shows that such theories were nonsense..

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to Vaishvamitra For This Useful Post:

     redifflal (04-03-2018)

  11. #2057
    Banned
    Posts
    440
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Bengali
    Y-DNA (P)
    R2A2 (R-P267)
    mtDNA (M)
    M52A

    Quote Originally Posted by bmoney View Post
    the article was ok, but got political in its summary

    ive asked Vagheesh on twitter as to why he thought the Indus periphery component was informative as its already an admixed component

    Also where the 22% steppe in the Swat sample came from and why the text of the study is not consistent with the admixture bar graph
    I agree that Indus Periphery lacking steppe is probably the only and most informative piece in this study along with the elevated steppe in the later Swat valley samples. There's something there definitely. But again it might all be held inside the now mysterious AASI which once again, isn't aDNA derived but rather aDNA-un-derived lol

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to redifflal For This Useful Post:

     bmoney (04-03-2018)

  13. #2058
    Registered Users
    Posts
    338

    Slightly different but related topic- does anyone know if Asko Parpola posited migrations from Iran to northwest India as responsible for bringing agriculture there and discussing the situation there about the transition to pre-pottery-neolithic? We know he (as well as others) supported the existence of and talked about Indo-Aryan migrations (not the scale of it but the number of persons that are required to introduce language in that ancient period) and he seems to have been right with his positing of there having been some good amount of rivalry between Indo-Aryans and BMAC people if the interpretation from this paper that Indo-Aryans bypassed BMAC is related to this. He always seems to be asserting that Dravidian was the language of that Indus valley and was its native language (he does not entertain the links posited between Elamite and Dravidian by some very low number of scholars), so did he speak about any difference between Iranian agriculturist-related folks and Indian hunter gatherers of that area? Or he kinda considered that northwest India was somewhat like West Asia always, culturally and genetically (not expecting an involved discussion of this aspect from a philologist but curious if he said anything about this), even before the neolithic?

    I know, I could try to read myself, but am feeling a bit lazy now and wanted to see if any of you learned people are already familiar with it and would kindly like to help me out. That, and I felt like bringing up Asko Parpola for no reason lol.

    Note: I was assuming that the paper shows the evidence for Indo-Aryan migrations in the second millennium BC and not earlier and later. Please try to proceed by just assuming this may be true. I'm not saying that it must be true. Please consider for the moment that it is true and this moment alone. Thank you.

  14. #2059
    Registered Users
    Posts
    149
    Sex
    Location
    Beyond the Wall
    Ethnicity
    Naga Asura
    Y-DNA (P)
    R-Z93
    mtDNA (M)
    U1a3

    Quote Originally Posted by anthroin View Post
    Slightly different but related topic- does anyone know if Asko Parpola posited migrations from Iran to northwest India as responsible for bringing agriculture there and discussing the situation there about the transition to pre-pottery-neolithic? We know he (as well as others) supported the existence of and talked about Indo-Aryan migrations (not the scale of it but the number of persons that are required to introduce language in that ancient period) and he seems to have been right with his positing of there having been some good amount of rivalry between Indo-Aryans and BMAC people if the interpretation from this paper that Indo-Aryans bypassed BMAC is related to this. He always seems to be asserting that Dravidian was the language of that Indus valley and was its native language (he does not entertain the links posited between Elamite and Dravidian by some very low number of scholars), so did he speak about any difference between Iranian agriculturist-related folks and Indian hunter gatherers of that area? Or he kinda considered that northwest India was somewhat like West Asia always, culturally and genetically (not expecting an involved discussion of this aspect from a philologist but curious if he said anything about this), even before the neolithic?

    I know, I could try to read myself, but am feeling a bit lazy now and wanted to see if any of you learned people are already familiar with it and would kindly like to help me out. That, and I felt like bringing up Asko Parpola for no reason lol.

    Note: I was assuming that the paper shows the evidence for Indo-Aryan migrations in the second millennium BC and not earlier and later. Please try to proceed by just assuming this may be true. I'm not saying that it must be true. Please consider for the moment that it is true and this moment alone. Thank you.
    I don't recall if he was specific about the direction from which the proposed migrations occurred but the impression I was left with was mostly from the north and maybe some from the west. He does a great job of hypothesizing what could have occurred at the BMAC sites which was so transformational for the IE speakers. He goes through how the terms Asura and Dasa are in fact referring to other central asian tribes (as anyone who has a parsi friend or has researched Zoroastrianism already knew) and how the passages in the rig veda referring to Indra breaking citadels and forts etc are clearly references to BMAC structures and not Harappan structures as many had theorized for so long.

    Because he understands both Sanskrit and Tamil he can come to some surprisingly insightful conclusions, especially compared to other western indologists who have a narrower view on things.

    Where he struggles is when he reaches a bit too far with certain theories. For example, he posits that Indra (a name which is not of Indo European origin and the central diety in the rig veda) is possibly a Uralic derivation from Immar which I find very far fetched. In fact, given the findings of how much AASI genetics are in the BMAC sites (especially outside the main citadels and towers), I would argue there is just as good a reason to say that he was of Harappan/Indus Valley origin. It certainly makes sense as Indra is known for "liberating the waters and fighting the snake that holds the waters" - a concept that people in both the Indus valley and BMAC region would find very attractive given the deteriorating condition of the river systems in Indus valley and the desiccation occurring at the BMAC sites at this time frame.

    My pet theory is that IE speakers merged with IVC migrants living on the BMAC outskirts, adopted some of their religion (Indra) and then a religious conflict occurs where some aryan tribes side with the BMAC and some others with the IVC/IE speakers aryan side. This battle is the battle that is referred to in the rig veda where indra smashes the asuras/dasas etc. And this conflict is the schism that creates the proto-avestan and proto-rig vedic religions. Which is why devas are bad people in the parsi holy books. The devas then stay until the BMAc area completely dries up and then they have to move at which point they move into southern Afghanistan. And then from there, they slowly trickle out over the next millenia into India but at a much slower rate than people think.

    Also they find their mighty war chariots to be quite useless in the new Indian terrain. Heck even in the mahabharata they have to agree to meet at a certain location for the big war in order to even use the chariots. Chariots are great in the steppe and in deserts but try going through indian forests with them.

    So there is no invasion (in fact the incoming migrants already have some AASI genetics in them and start to look Indian)... they (and subsequently north indians) speak an IE language... everyone keeps the IVC religion (which includes Indra). So Rig veda is a document which basically attests to how IE speakers become proto-hindu. It still has some of the old IE gods which are becoming really irrelevant in the rig veda, but really the important one is Indra and other IVC gods like Rudra (also not an Indo European word btw) Visnu, Vak etc start showing up too...

    I think this explains the current genetics of India and the absolute lack of any historical, linguistic or archaeological evidence for an invasion.
    Last edited by thorin; 04-03-2018 at 04:52 PM.

  15. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to thorin For This Useful Post:

     anthroin (04-03-2018),  bmoney (04-03-2018),  palamede (04-04-2018),  razyn (04-03-2018),  redifflal (04-03-2018)

  16. #2060
    Registered Users
    Posts
    338

    Quote Originally Posted by thorin View Post
    I don't recall if he was specific about the direction from which the proposed migrations occurred but the impression I was left with was the north and some to the west. He does a great job of hypothesizing what could have occurred at the BMAC sites which was so transformational for the IE speakers. He goes through how the terms Asura and Dasa are in fact referring to other central asian tribes (as anyone who has a parsi friend or has research Zoroastrianism already knew) and how the passages in the rig veda referring to Indra breaking citadels and forts etc are clearly references to BMAC structures and not Harappan structures as many had theorized for so long.

    Because he understands both Sanskrit and Tamil he can come to some surprisingly insightful conclusions, especially compared to other western indologists who have a narrower view on things.

    Where he struggles is when he reaches a bit too far with certain things. For example, he posits that Indra (a name which is not of Indo European origin and the central diety in the rig veda) is possibly a Uralic derivation from Immar which I find very far fetched. In fact, given the findings of how much AASI genetics are in the BMAC sites, I would argue there is just as good a reason to say that he was of Harappan/Indus Valley origin. It certainly makes sense as Indra is known for "liberating the waters and fighting the snake that holds the waters" - a concept that people in both the Indus valley and BMAC would find very attractive given the deteriorating condition of the river systems in Indus valley and the desiccation occurring at the BMAC sites at this time frame.
    Wow! Thank you very much! And welcome to this forum and I wish you a not-very-stressful-and-awkward future here lol. First of all, I would like to note that what I write in the following may be quite erroneous as I'm not very knowledgeable in philology as I personally am typically not very interested in philology, so please forgive me for those mistakes. But I should also say that I hate-love Asko Parpola like anything though. I very reluctantly read a chapter or two of his Roots of Hinduism book, especially all the connections about durgA, 'one difficult to pass/enter', referring to BMAC-type forts, SAradA, 'of Sarat' (?) having to do with the autumnal festivals of BMAC-ised Iranians or something like that, Sambara connected to Iranian samvara, etc. and these concepts being brought by later Iranians to India blew away my mind like anything. That man is like a Shakuntala Devi (edit: more like Albert Einstein as Shakuntala Devi is like a calculator; this is the reason I detest writing anything on the internet; I write stupid stuff like this without thinking and regret it later; it's almost like I write stuff just to get some weird enjoyment of awkwardness and embarrassment out of it) of philology, I guess. Brain teeming with hypothetical but interesting connections always. He is mostly proven right with respect to the relations between Indo-Aryans and BMAC/BMAC-ised Iranians who were very likely the Dasas or at least the one of the first Dasas, I believe.

    What did he think about the origins of the earliest neolithic in the northwest though? Did he think that it was borne out of migrations from Iran as we now more or less know the case to be? Also, what are his speculations about the ultimate Urheimat of the Dravidian languages? (That is, from which hunting-gathering population does Asko Parpola believe Dravidian inherited its Swadesh-list-type core and other highbrow vocabulary? northwest Indian or Iranian (as I'm mainly asking about his view, I'm including only those two possibilities)? If he talks about something like those things in that much detail, that is.)

    Thank you very much again though. This made my day.

    Edit: Regarding Indra, what you said is quite interesting and Michael Witzel if I remember correctly speculates that the word Indra was borrowed from BMAC languages- for it to have been Harappan which is a very valid possibility, Asko Parpola would have been required to find an etymology from Dravidian as his speculative Dravidian hypothesis dictates and he may have failed to do so and thus searched for alternative etymologies. As far as I am aware of, such complex religious entities are less likely to be possible to be reconstructed to Proto-Dravidian and Proto-Dravidian folks also look like they had more attachment to mountains and rocks than rivers though I may be projecting the later behaviour of likely Dravidian offshoots in the megalithic period of south India and the words for 'king' related to the word for 'mountain' in South Dravidian languages, etc. onto Proto-Dravidian.
    Last edited by anthroin; 04-03-2018 at 05:14 PM.

  17. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to anthroin For This Useful Post:

     redifflal (04-03-2018),  thorin (04-03-2018)

Page 206 of 441 FirstFirst ... 106156196204205206207208216256306 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 05-21-2020, 09:38 AM
  2. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 11-16-2018, 09:16 PM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-17-2017, 04:01 AM
  4. Replies: 13
    Last Post: 02-26-2013, 08:43 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •