What DNA Says About Aryan Invasion Theory-1

[acharya]

<span style='color:blue'>
The interesting points:
Good sampling from many Indian locations

Parpola's theory Indus is dead: The evidence for a Dravidian-Indus connection is not supported by any markers. So Dravidians did not author the Indus civilization.

Witzel's Theory Indus is dead: The markers do not support an Austro-Asiatic origin for Indus either. In fact the clusters are as distinct as they can be.

R1A1's epicenter seems to be in Pamir region. From here it seems to have spread in one direction to Central Asia and Europe and in another to interior India. But the time of spread appears to be much more ancient than the 1500 BC of Kuzmina/Witzel's nonsense theory. So this cannot have anything to do with a late AIT and in any case it did not come from deep Europe.

There are relationships within brahmins that transcend regional differences (see below). Many markers are shared by Iyer, Iyengar, Konkanasta Brahmin and Bengal Brahmin. So a core brahmin group spreading out is a possibility. Interestingly Iyer and Kbr form a close cluster despite the former being typically dark and the later fair. UP brahmins seem to have had a major component from the West most likely as Shakadvipi brahmins.

Many India Muslims are recent Hindu converts and group closely with brahmins and other Hindus.

Central Asian Rajputs dead: Rajputs while forming a distinct group are more Indian than Central Asian.

In my opinion the simplest solution to the mess is to propose a much earlier divergence of Indo-European than is current. If we posit an Indo-Aryan itself being distinct by 5000 BC then we could account for much of the observed molecular evidence. But the dispersion point of Indo-European should move closer to India most likely in the Pamir area. I am sure many OIT people will be happy to go with that.
</span>