Forums
What DNA Says About Aryan Invasion Theory -2 - Printable Version

+- Forums (http://india-forum.com)
+-- Forum: Indian History & Culture (http://india-forum.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Indian History (http://india-forum.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+--- Thread: What DNA Says About Aryan Invasion Theory -2 (/showthread.php?tid=539)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32


What DNA Says About Aryan Invasion Theory -2 - dhu - 02-25-2010

N did these jokers in. N is part of the same late asiatic process as R and is distinctly correlated with Uralic. With N in sight, there is no way to deny the reality associated with R. A perfect game of chess.


What DNA Says About Aryan Invasion Theory -2 - ramana - 02-25-2010

[quote name='dhu' date='24 February 2010 - 08:35 PM' timestamp='1267043270' post='104511']

N did these jokers in. N is part of the same late asiatic process as R and is distinctly correlated with Uralic. With N in sight, there is no way to deny the reality associated with R. A perfect game of chess.

[/quote]





In plain English? Remember that there are always many unlisted folks browing for knowledge. We communicate among oursleves but more importantly to others.


What DNA Says About Aryan Invasion Theory -2 - ramana - 02-25-2010

two links:



New evidence shows populations survived the Toba super-eruption 74,000 years ago



and



Newly Discovered Archaeological Sites In India Reveals Ancient Life



Dhu, I have a question. What if the Bible's story of Garden of Eden is about the Garden and not about the wrath of God? IOW it might document the fact that mankind left India for there is no other garden in the contiguous area? India is the Garden Of Eden they talk about.


What DNA Says About Aryan Invasion Theory -2 - dhu - 02-25-2010

India definitely is within the Euro-Abrahamic horizon since the inception but they had to consolidate all the intervening areas before proceeding to India. Just look at two examples:



Actual Indian Roma proceed to Europe in their Vardos: But, it is Egypt which gets blamed. (similar to the damning of Egypt in the OT?).

The entire Native American population gets wiped out as they search for Indians: an Indian identity is foisted upon these hapless targets.



In both the cases, they manage to obscure the identity of the Indians. It is a sign of deep fixation. Of course, they do find Indians at last...



India figures very highly in the euro consciousness in all periods. So why should the consciousness of India dim as we proceed closer to the initiating event, as maintained by the conventional account? Isn't such a stance colored by a belief in original sin, and ignorance as the natural state?



We can deny these realities but only by drawing a distinction between the intentional and the unintentional, which itself is problematic, and especially so for the untiring champions of the 'divine plan' and 'will to power'.



I think you are remembering that post stating that: references to India in the West have always been concrete, and the reverse representations have not.


What DNA Says About Aryan Invasion Theory -2 - dhu - 02-25-2010

Quote:you have raised several significant questions. I had at first thought of not adding my bit, as this can perhaps go on into pages. You can blame Ramanaji for redirecting my attention. <img src='http://www.india-forum.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Big Grin' />



There can possibly be a connection to OIT and what you call monotheistic cultural terrorism. But I would rather think of it from entirely different viewpoint. Monotheism almost always appears in connection with the need for unification, either for a society under threat of fragmentation or for an empire where a regime needs homogenization and subjugation of disparate units under single central authority. Examples of the former would be Adi Shankara's advaita, Chaitanya/Basavanna's movements. Examples of the second will be Akhenaten, the Mosaic system (faced with unification needs against Canaanites) , Constantine, Carolus Magnus of the Franks, and of course the ideology of the "last" prophet of Islam. There is no direct reason as to why OIT should in itself give rise to monotheism, unless OIT specifically can be shown to give rise to monotheism, by sponsoring the two factors given above.



We have to remember that OIT also should strictly speaking encompass a migration ina different direction - that through the north-west passage but taking a more easterly route towards Siberia. Eventually this migration intermingled with more southerly expansions out of India through SE Asia, to form the various communities of China, Korea and Japan, and eventually the early Americans. We do not see such monotheistic cultural terrorists (I am not considering modern China - but previous Chinese empires, even though evolving towards a type of monotheism were still not culturally terroristic towards India).



I would hazard a hypothesis here, (supporting this with narrative reference would take pages <img src='http://www.india-forum.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Smile' /> ) : maybe we should consider the possibility that at least some of the OIT migrations had a strong component of enforced migration or expulsions of Indic tribes and groups who either lost out over territorial resources or could not compete with those who remained. For reasons of migrations we can look at modern migrations - and we can reasonably assume thatsimilar causes drove people in the past. Druhyas, Panis - there are clear narratives of Indic groups losing out or being expelled who settle increasingly more and more to the west. [color="#0000FF"]Is it possible that these groups carried memories of their "uhrheimat" and always had a social psychological urge to return "home"[/color]? Simultaneously just as modern victims of forced migrations, did they carry a social anguish and a deep seated need for "revenge" and reconquering? Monotheism would then become just a tool for simplification of rules and unification. The Greeks and Romans were not monotheistic incidentally - and Alexander definitely was not. Just like Cyrus, Alexander is reputed to have encouraged multiple religions and even sponsor them himself. Also there are hints of this compromise or apparent abandonment of insistence on monotheistic violence in the Old Testament references to "reasons behind the fall" of Solomon (tolerance of his wives' native religions and even shadow of suspicion of participating in them - possibly an allegory to religious tolerance).



The recognition of ancient links could be a motivator to get even - to overcome that source which disinherited. There could be a longshot about moon+Shiva+megalithic phallic/fertility cults in the Islam story. But OT here probably (the use of lunar symbols in common with lunar cults in Canaan and a synbol of Shiva as well - stories of Lat/Manat taking refuge at Somnath - phallic rock symbols, some of which might have been reshaped under Islam, etc...)



Quote:Now I think we are going into more detailed analysis of monotheism per se. I was just responding to the connection to OIT angle. My points were only in respect of primarily the two later strands of what we loosely called the revealed traditions - and their apparent obsession with "conquering" "heathen" India. It is the sense of hostility and the desire to erase Indic "culture" that I was trying to relate. The main problem with the "local" reaction against "conquering Indic cultures" coming out of India theory is as I see it, that OIT had also NE Asian components almost along similar timelines, and we do not see obvious similar developments. So OIT alone would not explain this reaction. If we say it was prior native populations which resented this later expansion - then we have to wait for more genetic evidence, as at the moment, it does seem that the major peopling of the middle -east did indeed happen from western Indian expansions - so that there could not have been sufficient pre-existing populations to carry on social memories of "trauma". So I hypothesized, that there were probably differences in the nature of migrations among the various branches - and some were expelled while others simply move out of necessities not connected to human action, say droughts etc. Mere expansions need not always engender murderous hostility - since another significant and better documented OIT took place in SE Asia, (agreed, much later than the ones you are referring to) before Islam in those parts we do not see any such retaliatory initiatives back on India.



The origins of the revealed traditions (communism could be thought of as an inversion of Judaeo-christian traditions) probably also needs other components which can be discussed.





Quote:One of the primary arguments used in timing stages of development - rates of mutation - in linguistics, genetics is that current greater diversity of forms should appear at the earlier origin or source. If we extend that logic to philosophies or ideologies (they also mutate - and in fact could have great similarities to language itself) then we can have a theory of why we find the great diversity of religions and faiths or belief systems within the Indian heartland. A reasonable analogy to linguistic/genetic mutation will therefore indicate much greater diversity in the source region than in other areas where people simply carried over these ideas but where therefore they had much less time to "mutate" and proliferate. Of course there would be many other factors that modify this.



The much longer time line could also indicate why Indic philosophies show a tendency to evolve into meta-religions - frameworks or theories for religion rather than religions themselves. This is the fundamental difference from the later branches - and appears to be polytheistic to others. As a framework, it can analyze and put each "religion" or particular faith in its "box" within the framework. The revealed traditions therefore have great difficulty in comprehending and analyzing this as they simply do not have the tools.



Revealed traditions in particular carry the stamp of arising out of desert/arid marginal/subsistence economies which were in constant military conflict over scarce reproductive resources. Such conditions explain a lot of the tendencies :



(1) a great need to look for fertile, irrigated lands - fresh water/gardens

(2) a hatred of "luckier", richer economies - and therefore of the "city" and its "cosmopolitanism" - interpreted as "loose morals/sin"

(3) a great emphasis on sex for reproduction - and penalization of deviations

(4) greater demand for male births, as males are lost in military conflicts, and simultaneously greater demand for women, if needed to be acquired from conquered populations - for reproduction of more fighting males (this is something that could perhaps be shared by populations in and around India that faced wars of attrition in the past)

(5) simpler economies but occasional exposure to the riches of the "city" leading to intolerance of complexity, fear of loss from the group by "seduction", and the need for strict rule based faith systems and protecting reproductive resources, - probably an important factor behind proposition of a single supreme authority - this defence against "corruption" gives rise to the "siege" mentality so peculiar even in the philosophical characteristics.

(6) an inherent hatred and desire to erase more sophisticated and complex urbanized/cosmopolitan cultures that sit on fertile/well irrigated lands.



What DNA Says About Aryan Invasion Theory -2 - dhu - 02-27-2010

It is painfully obvious that there was a layered settlement of eurostan from Asia:



1. Paleolithic IJ from ME

2. Holocene R from Greater India. Holocene N from East Asia



K and F expansion in interior Asia is carelessly backdated from the seminal colonization of eurostan at 40K.



The originating locus for the westwards migrations shifts progressively Eastwards:



R1b C.Asia

R1a Afpak

R2 Bengal



Nichols notices this as well. Kentum migrates out from C Asia. Iranian/Satem from Afpak. Lastly the classical sanskrit/mittani/Sindoi migrations from interior India.



It seems to be saturation-dependent migration out of India. Saturation of the euro periphery.


What DNA Says About Aryan Invasion Theory -2 - dhu - 03-03-2010

[url="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1244654/Study-finds-Britons-descended-farmers-left-Iraq-Syria-10-000-years-ago.html"]Most Britons descended from male farmers who left Iraq and Syria 10,000 years ago (and were seduced by the local hunter-gatherer women) [/url]

By David Derbyshire



That is the actual title.


What DNA Says About Aryan Invasion Theory -2 - dhu - 03-03-2010

[url="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/how-settler-farmers-fathered-europes-males-1872887.html"]How settler farmers fathered Europe's males[/url]


What DNA Says About Aryan Invasion Theory -2 - Husky - 03-03-2010

Quote:Most Britons descended from male farmers who left Iraq and Syria 10,000 years ago (and were seduced by the local hunter-gatherer women)

By David Derbyshire



That is the actual title.
Dailymail titles aside, just like biblicals (christians, muslims) will argue that this "proves" adam-and-eve etcetera (though it actually does the opposite), many western oryanists will similarly choose to read this as vindication: their oryanism already claims Mesopotamia (and its civilisation) in its origins.





[quote name='dhu' date='03 March 2010 - 09:15 AM' timestamp='1267587446' post='104740']

[url="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/how-settler-farmers-fathered-europes-males-1872887.html"]How settler farmers fathered Europe's males[/url][/quote]Silly title is going to confuse people, example response: "So they didn't father Europe's females....?"



But anything in there explaining how the ancient Syro-Iraqis introduced the European casta system after invading and subjugating the adivasis of Europe and stealing their wyfmen, and driving the aboriginal men to the Basque regions (or to Ireland)?





An interesting side-effect will be that some Europeans/Americans, who will assume that the ancient inhabitants of say Iraq were Arabs, will get offended to have Arabian ancestry.


What DNA Says About Aryan Invasion Theory -2 - dhu - 03-04-2010

[quote name='Husky' date='03 March 2010 - 08:00 PM' timestamp='1267626122' post='104771']But anything in there explaining how the ancient Syro-Iraqis introduced the European casta system after invading and subjugating the adivasis of Europe and stealing their wyfmen, and driving the aboriginal men to the Basque regions (or to Ireland)?

[/quote]



These felloews approach every topic through the prism of theology. In many cases, theology is a defense mechanism, in others a lever for a propaganda point. And every topic is turned into a personal test.



For example, Central Asia harbors lines that are ancestral to the europeanist ones; but because there are ALSO intrusive E Asian lines in C Asia, these fellows are given an opportunity to frame C Asia as a mix of normative European and E Asian lines. And this framework then affords an opportunity to DEDUCE a casta system and sequence of herrenvolk movements from Europe into C Asia (not attested until advent of czarist monotheism, and even then feebily so). But when questioned individually, they will (when feeeling generous) admit a C Asian origin for individual European lines. Through the "rigor" of concrete linguistic relationships, they can transform any set of facts into a framework purporting their pack think.


What DNA Says About Aryan Invasion Theory -2 - dhu - 03-04-2010

The theory is gone. I don't know how these jokeroos can survive this. If R1b itself is holocene and represents a massive intrusion from Zagros, then how can they propose R1a1 into India from Europe during the same timeframe; and that too with India posing a much greater challenge and obstacle (compared to the ME). And the direct evidence has yet to be considered. It is another uber fantasy.



The smarter ones are keeping quiet - but it will be to no avail. The theory cannot be resurrected now. Further resolution will be local only; the transcontinental clades have already been elucidated.


What DNA Says About Aryan Invasion Theory -2 - HareKrishna - 03-09-2010

The fact that an earlier haplotype like D is in high frequency in Tibet and Himalaya sugest that himalayan area was inhabited pretty earlier.


What DNA Says About Aryan Invasion Theory -2 - acharya - 03-09-2010

[quote name='dhu' date='04 March 2010 - 10:12 AM' timestamp='1267677273' post='104795']

The theory is gone. I don't know how these jokeroos can survive this. If R1b itself is holocene and represents a massive intrusion from Zagros, then how can they propose R1a1 into India from Europe during the same timeframe; and that too with India posing a much greater challenge and obstacle (compared to the ME). And the direct evidence has yet to be considered. It is another uber fantasy.



The smarter ones are keeping quiet - but it will be to no avail. The theory cannot be resurrected now. Further resolution will be local only; the transcontinental clades have already been elucidated.

[/quote]


What DNA Says About Aryan Invasion Theory -2 - dhu - 03-09-2010

It was discussed on IF long time back. A very recent expansion time for R is a nightmare for gora. And this is precisely what the data is showing.


What DNA Says About Aryan Invasion Theory -2 - G.Subramaniam - 03-10-2010

[quote name='dhu' date='09 March 2010 - 10:54 PM' timestamp='1268154963' post='105001']

It was discussed on IF long time back. A very recent expansion time for R is a nightmare for gora. And this is precisely what the data is showing.

[/quote]



Dhu, a few days ago, the Y-DNA of King Tut was found to be R1B

R1B seems to start in Iran and go south of the caspian sea on both sides of the mediterranean

Many Berbers have R1B too

The basques are R1B too

Meaning the original R1B language was non-IE



On wiki, the earliest dates of R1A is 14000 BC in India

and 9000BC for Poland

Assuming at 9000BC, the slavs were in Af-pak and migrated with IE-Satem

and at 5000BC, went into R1B areas as an IE speaking elite

the satem-centum switch is likely to have happened at this point



Satem = R1A, Centum = R1B



For example the sentence

The wolf mother



is Vrkasya Matam in Sanskrit and Vilkos Matina in Lithuanian

both R1A, Satem



Whereas in Greek and Latin, both R1B, it is Lupum Mater



I think Centum languages are like Malayalam

A large amount of Sanskrit words but ultimately rooted in Tamil



Thats why the excercise to find proto-IE is a fools errand



It may be easier to find Proto-Satem


What DNA Says About Aryan Invasion Theory -2 - dhu - 03-10-2010

GS,



Kentum may just be a rider at the tip of the overarching expansion out of Afpak. Talageri and Nichols propose an unified expansion out of S Asia with Kentum at the northern edge and appropriate remnants in India. And R1a1 is an exact corollary to such an expansion. In contrast , the euro proposals consist of herrenvolk movements in every which direction (as dictated by expediency). And they cannot correlate to any expansion phenomenon at all. Satem may just be an in situ transformation of the kentum, which started even as kentum was expanding from C Asia into European.


What DNA Says About Aryan Invasion Theory -2 - G.Subramaniam - 03-11-2010

Y-DNA shows an Aryan invasion of Europe

Western Europe is 70% R1B, 10% R1A

The mt-DNA on the other hand is mostly pre-existing hunter-gatherers

The Euros killed off most of the men and raped the women



Same R1B phenom is seen in latin america


What DNA Says About Aryan Invasion Theory -2 - dhu - 03-11-2010

Non-IE R1b out of Zagros/Iran/ME/Anatolia strengthens an IE dispersal via R1a1 out of S Asia. Rather than correlating multiple discrete movements out of india, we only need to envision one unified expansion (with local variation in that expansion contributing to the kentum-satem distribution).


What DNA Says About Aryan Invasion Theory -2 - dhu - 03-11-2010

R1a1 age (especially in Europe) will probably come down with further revision. R1b is being touted as Neolithic out of ME. R1a1 out of S Asia may be the same, with possibly an even later date for expansion compared to R1b.


What DNA Says About Aryan Invasion Theory -2 - G.Subramaniam - 03-11-2010

I dont believe Kentum is ancient R1B

The basques, King Tut, Berbers all R1B speak non-IE



R1B got IE language as part of Aryan Invasion / Elite replacement from slavic R1A

and possible kentum developed at this point