PDA

View Full Version : Carbon Dating Shows UP’s Sanauli Had Chariot-Riding Warriors In 1900 BC



Shahmiri
15-07-20, 06:41
Carbon Dating Shows UP’s Sanauli Had Chariot-Riding Warriors In 1900 BC, Here’s What It Means For Aryan Invasion Theory (https://swarajyamag.com/news-brief/carbon-dating-shows-ups-sanauli-had-chariot-riding-warriors-in-1900-bc-heres-what-it-means-for-aryan-invasion-theory)

Also read this new article:

A Vedic Aryan Homeland in the Steppes? A Critique of the Kurgan Hypothesis (http://indiafacts.org/a-vedic-aryan-homeland-in-the-steppes-a-critique-of-the-kurgan-hypothesis/)

Ygorcs
15-07-20, 07:52
Reading beyond the most sensational headlines that the media will obviously prefer:
"A recent report submitted by the Birbal Sahni Institute of Paleosciences in Lucknow to the ASI had said that there are two C-13 (carbon dating) dates -- 3815 and 3500, with a margin of error of 130 years -- for the Sanauli site. It added, "Carbon dating marks this site as an earliest history of a warrior tribe in the Indian subcontinent (sic)."

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/74254040.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst

This is actually great news for proponents of the steppe Indo-Aryan expansion into South Asia, South-Central Asia and even the Near East in association with the spread of horse-driven war chariots and the diffusion of steppe ancestry into South Asian. If you consider the datings and their margins of error, they can fit validly in a range from 1370 B.C. (lower end) to 1945 B.C. (upper end). That's almost exactly when many linguists, geneticists and other scholars of ancient historical evidence have always assumed Indo-Aryan diverged definitely from Indo-Iranian as a whole and started spreading to India: roughly 1500 B.C. or a bit later. It all fits together, but I'm sure people who hate this idea or have long dedicated themselves to disproving it will see it under completely distinct lens.

Shahmiri
15-07-20, 09:29
Reading beyond the most sensational headlines that the media will obviously prefer:
"A recent report submitted by the Birbal Sahni Institute of Paleosciences in Lucknow to the ASI had said that there are two C-13 (carbon dating) dates -- 3815 and 3500, with a margin of error of 130 years -- for the Sanauli site. It added, "Carbon dating marks this site as an earliest history of a warrior tribe in the Indian subcontinent (sic)."

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/74254040.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst

This is actually great news for proponents of the steppe Indo-Aryan expansion into South Asia, South-Central Asia and even the Near East in association with the spread of horse-driven war chariots and the diffusion of steppe ancestry into South Asian. If you consider the datings and their margins of error, they can fit validly in a range from 1370 B.C. (lower end) to 1945 B.C. (upper end). That's almost exactly when many linguists, geneticists and other scholars of ancient historical evidence have always assumed Indo-Aryan diverged definitely from Indo-Iranian as a whole and started spreading to India: roughly 1500 B.C. or a bit later. It all fits together, but I'm sure people who hate this idea or have long dedicated themselves to disproving it will see it under completely distinct lens.



Please read the article, it is important to know where Sanauli is located, as you mentioned "Carbon dating marks this site as an earliest history of a warrior tribe in the Indian subcontinent (sic)", in the first article it is questioned: "How come the Indo-Europeans arriving from central Asia reached Sanauli in western Uttar Pradesh 300 to 500 years before they reached Indus?" In fact this warrior tribe conquered the lands from the south to the north, not vice versa, so their original land couldn't be in Central Asia.

Ygorcs
15-07-20, 09:52
Please read the article, it is important to know where Sanauli is located, as you mentioned "Carbon dating marks this site as an earliest history of a warrior tribe in the Indian subcontinent (sic)", in the first article it is questioned: "How come the Indo-Europeans arriving from central Asia reached Sanauli in western Uttar Pradesh 300 to 500 years before they reached Indus?" In fact this warrior tribe conquered the lands from the south to the north, not vice versa, so their original land couldn't be in Central Asia.

How do they know there were no Indo-Europeans in the Indus Valley or close to it without aDNA samples? There are only a tiny handful of aDNA samples from India before the 1st millennium B.C. They just have no means to affirm that so categorically.

How do they know this warrior tribe was conquering lands from the south to the north when they have just found signs of this population and have barely started to understand the findings, let alone the origins of the people that built it? Sounds like wishful thinking to me at least a priori.

Also, look where Sinauli (Bhagpat) is located. It's very, very close to the highlands where Indo-Aryans are supposed to have started descending toward the lower lands of India after having crossed it or even having lived in the highland valleys there for some time (https://imgur.com/a/GEOTAOf - see map). Again, it all fits the steppe migration theory as it's understood now.

Shahmiri
15-07-20, 10:45
How do they know there were no Indo-Europeans in the Indus Valley or close to it without aDNA samples? There are only a tiny handful of aDNA samples from India before the 1st millennium B.C. They just have no means to affirm that so categorically.

How do they know this warrior tribe was conquering lands from the south to the north when they have just found signs of this population and have barely started to understand the findings, let alone the origins of the people that built it? Sounds like wishful thinking to me at least a priori.

Also, look where Sinauli (Bhagpat) is located. It's very, very close to the highlands where Indo-Aryans are supposed to have started descending toward the lower lands of India after having crossed it or even having lived in the highland valleys there for some time (https://imgur.com/a/GEOTAOf - see map). Again, it all fits the steppe migration theory as it's understood now.

It doesn't talk about aDNA samples but archaeological evidence of horse chariots, those ones which have been found in the north are 300 to 500 years after Sanauli ones, as you see here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chariot this is historical map of the spread of the spoke-wheeled chariot:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/77/Chariot_spread.png

The main point is that according to the steppe migration theory of David Anthony, Indo-European chariot-riding warriors were in the north of India between 1500 to 1200 BC but this study shows they were in this region 300 to 500 years earlier, almost the same period that they were in Russia.

Coriolan
15-07-20, 12:07
The great advantage of chariots is that they are fast. It only took a few centuries for them to spread from the Urals to China and the Middle East. This study now shows that they reached northern India around the same time.

Shahmiri
15-07-20, 12:58
The great advantage of chariots is that they are fast. It only took a few centuries for them to spread from the Urals to China and the Middle East. This study now shows that they reached northern India around the same time.

It doesn't work so, this steppe theory can work when we have chariots in Russia (2000 BC) > Central Asia (1800 BC) > Pakistan (1500 BC) > India (1200 BC), when we know "Chariots were used in Mesopotamia from before 3000 B.C.": http://www.mesopotamia.co.uk/tombs/explore/w_char2.html and Sumerian gigir "chariot" has an Indo-European origin: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/k%CA%B7%C3%A9k%CA%B7los there can be no reason to say these chariot-riding warriors came from Russia to India.

halfalp
15-07-20, 17:13
This chariot was a Solid Wheel Chariot, not a Spoked one, so not very reminescent of Sintashta-Andronovo Horizon. I dont really understand the point of this topic.

Indo-Europeans dont have the monopoly for Warrior or Chariot. There was Chariots in Europe and Mesopotamia before Sintashta, there was Warriors everywhere long times before anything Indo-European.

The found of this artefact doesn't contradict the Indo-European Expansion in Soutn Asia, nor it has to be Indo-European in any way.

Shahmiri
15-07-20, 20:18
This chariot was a Solid Wheel Chariot, not a Spoked one, so not very reminescent of Sintashta-Andronovo Horizon. I dont really understand the point of this topic.

Indo-Europeans dont have the monopoly for Warrior or Chariot. There was Chariots in Europe and Mesopotamia before Sintashta, there was Warriors everywhere long times before anything Indo-European.

The found of this artefact doesn't contradict the Indo-European Expansion in Soutn Asia, nor it has to be Indo-European in any way.

Ok, so those chariot-riding warriors who conquered India had solid wheel chariot but those who invaded several centuries later had spoked wheel chariot, is it true?

I think those who invaded later from Central Asia were actually Iranian nomads, like early Indo-Scythians, about the history of spoked-wheel chariots, we read:

http://uupload.ir/files/ne1d_chariot.jpg

halfalp
15-07-20, 20:43
Ok, so those chariot-riding warriors who conquered India had solid wheel chariot but those who invaded several centuries later had spoked wheel chariot, is it true?

I think those who invaded later from Central Asia were actually Iranian nomads, like early Indo-Scythians, about the history of spoked-wheel chariots, we read:

http://uupload.ir/files/ne1d_chariot.jpg

We dont have any context, so we dont know much. We barely have any ancient dna from the prehistoric indian subcontinent. The transmission of solid wheeled chariot to the indian subcontinent dont necessarily imply an invasion, it could be cultural transmission through the middle-east -> iran.

Mesopotamia trading with IVC could be an option. Another option could be transmission from central asia, through early migration of eastern europe ( the kind of people that would found Afanasievo ), but there is even least proof for that.

The important thing is to not mingle too much things in the same basket.

Indo-Iranian Languages, linked to Corded-related Cultures, linked to Sintashta, linked to Spoked-Wheeled Vehicules is one thing.

Link every ancient Chariots, or War-like symbolism with Indo-Europeans without clear Archeological / Genetical link is another. Not everything coming from prehistoric Iran or Indian will imply some Indo-European context.

Shahmiri
15-07-20, 21:42
We dont have any context, so we dont know much. We barely have any ancient dna from the prehistoric indian subcontinent. The transmission of solid wheeled chariot to the indian subcontinent dont necessarily imply an invasion, it could be cultural transmission through the middle-east -> iran.

Mesopotamia trading with IVC could be an option. Another option could be transmission from central asia, through early migration of eastern europe ( the kind of people that would found Afanasievo ), but there is even least proof for that.

The important thing is to not mingle too much things in the same basket.

Indo-Iranian Languages, linked to Corded-related Cultures, linked to Sintashta, linked to Spoked-Wheeled Vehicules is one thing.

Link every ancient Chariots, or War-like symbolism with Indo-Europeans without clear Archeological / Genetical link is another. Not everything coming from prehistoric Iran or Indian will imply some Indo-European context.

Please read the second article in my first post, there is really nothing which shows Indian culture originated in the Central Asia, the same thing can be said about Iranian culture but there were certainly strong links between Iranian, Central Asian and Eastern European cultures, the important point is that Indo-Iranian culture originated in Indo-Iranian lands (east of Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan and north of India), some people from this region migrated to the Levant and north of Eurasia but the majority of them have always lived in their own lands.

halfalp
16-07-20, 09:52
Please read the second article in my first post, there is really nothing which shows Indian culture originated in the Central Asia, the same thing can be said about Iranian culture but there were certainly strong links between Iranian, Central Asian and Eastern European cultures, the important point is that Indo-Iranian culture originated in Indo-Iranian lands (east of Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan and north of India), some people from this region migrated to the Levant and north of Eurasia but the majority of them have always lived in their own lands.

We already have discussed this many times... If you really was that sure about your own hypothesis, you wouldn't spam them everywhere on the internet 24/7.

Shahmiri
16-07-20, 10:44
We already have discussed this many times... If you really was that sure about your own hypothesis, you wouldn't spam them everywhere on the internet 24/7.

This is not my hypothesis, I didn't write those articles, the absolute majority of Iranian and Indian scholars never believe the steppe theory of Indo-European origins but everywhere on the internet you just read about this theory, it shows spammers are actually other people.

ratchet_fan
16-07-20, 14:31
Why does it matter what Indian and Iranian "scholars" believe? The facts disagree with them.

bicicleur
16-07-20, 14:42
Reading beyond the most sensational headlines that the media will obviously prefer:
"A recent report submitted by the Birbal Sahni Institute of Paleosciences in Lucknow to the ASI had said that there are two C-13 (carbon dating) dates -- 3815 and 3500, with a margin of error of 130 years -- for the Sanauli site. It added, "Carbon dating marks this site as an earliest history of a warrior tribe in the Indian subcontinent (sic)."

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/74254040.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst

This is actually great news for proponents of the steppe Indo-Aryan expansion into South Asia, South-Central Asia and even the Near East in association with the spread of horse-driven war chariots and the diffusion of steppe ancestry into South Asian. If you consider the datings and their margins of error, they can fit validly in a range from 1370 B.C. (lower end) to 1945 B.C. (upper end). That's almost exactly when many linguists, geneticists and other scholars of ancient historical evidence have always assumed Indo-Aryan diverged definitely from Indo-Iranian as a whole and started spreading to India: roughly 1500 B.C. or a bit later. It all fits together, but I'm sure people who hate this idea or have long dedicated themselves to disproving it will see it under completely distinct lens.



yes, but the story would alter a bit
todays consensus is that the Indo-Aryans arrived after the abondanment of the IVC cities
these dates suggests that the Indo-Aryanns may have expelled the last people of the IVC

Ygorcs
16-07-20, 15:00
yes, but the story would alter a bit
todays consensus is that the Indo-Aryans arrived after the abondanment of the IVC cities
these dates suggests that the Indo-Aryanns may have expelled the last people of the IVC

The steppe hypothesis has long advocated an arrival of Indo-Aryans after the IVC decline or during its final stages. Those ideas linking the IVC decline directly to a prior arrival of Indo-Aryans have long been abandoned at least by geneticists and linguists alike.

Also, I don't think Indo-Aryans expelled the natives at all. Maybe some fled their conquests and the expansion of their herders, but I think the majority stayed and were simply under new rule.

Shahmiri
16-07-20, 15:32
Why does it matter what Indian and Iranian "scholars" believe? The facts disagree with them.

What are these facts, those things which are said by non-scholars who know almost nothing about Indo-Iranian culture?!

ratchet_fan
16-07-20, 17:24
What are these facts, those things which are said by non-scholars who know almost nothing about Indo-Iranian culture?!

Kuzmina and Mallory have more knowledge about Indo-Iranian culture in the bottom third of their left pinky than the advocates of an IE origin in India, Iran or wherever have combined.

Shahmiri
16-07-20, 18:14
Kuzmina and Mallory have more knowledge about Indo-Iranian culture in the bottom third of their left pinky than the advocates of an IE origin in India, Iran or wherever have combined.
I asked about your 'assumed' facts, especially those ones which answer this critique:
A Vedic Aryan Homeland in the Steppes? A Critique of the Kurgan Hypothesis (http://indiafacts.org/a-vedic-aryan-homeland-in-the-steppes-a-critique-of-the-kurgan-hypothesis/)

It is really funny that you think some European archeologists know about Indo-Iranian culture more than Indian and Iranian scholars.
Kuzmina is dead but Mallory also talks about the possibility of an IE origin near Iran, read: "Twenty-first century clouds over Indo-European homelands"

ratchet_fan
16-07-20, 19:07
I asked about your 'assumed' facts, especially those ones which answer this critique:
A Vedic Aryan Homeland in the Steppes? A Critique of the Kurgan Hypothesis (http://indiafacts.org/a-vedic-aryan-homeland-in-the-steppes-a-critique-of-the-kurgan-hypothesis/)
It is really funny that you think some European archeologists know about Indo-Iranian culture more than Indian and Iranian scholars.
Kuzmina is dead but Mallory also talks about the possibility of an IE origin near Iran, read: "Twenty-first century clouds over Indo-European homelands"

There's not a single reference to any aDNA in that article.

Shahmiri
16-07-20, 19:25
There's not a single reference to any aDNA in that article.

Read this section: "A Comment on Recent Genetic Findings and Aryans"

About Mallory, also read his recent work which was published this year: "The Impact of Genetics Research on Archaeology and Linguistics in Eurasia" where we read about Indo-European homeland:


Genetics has pushed the current homeland debate into several camps: those who seek the homeland either in the southern Caucasus or Iran (CHG) and those who locate it in the steppelands north of the Caucasus and Caspian Sea (EHG).

It seems he is also among advocates of an IE origin in Iran!

Shahmiri
18-07-20, 10:39
I wrote an article about the origin of Indo-Iranian culture: Indo-Iranian culture originated in Indo-Iranian lands (East of Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan and north of India) (https://www.academia.edu/43650866/Indo-Iranian_culture_originated_in_Indo-Iranian_lands_East_of_Iran_Afghanistan_Pakistan_an d_north_of_India_)

Ygorcs
18-07-20, 13:12
Read this section: "A Comment on Recent Genetic Findings and Aryans"

About Mallory, also read his recent work which was published this year: "The Impact of Genetics Research on Archaeology and Linguistics in Eurasia" where we read about Indo-European homeland:

It seems he is also among advocates of an IE origin in Iran!

Caucasus or Iran, and he also seems, at least in the sentence you are quoting, to be just describing a fact (the 2 main hypothesis advocated by scientists today and plausible by archaogenetic studies), not stating any personal opinion.

In any case, no geneticist in the entire world today doubts that the IE expansion happend via the Western Eurasian Steppe migrations during the EBA and EMBA. It's pretty much consensus. The issue is just where PIE was first spoken, not where it was last spoken and started to expand and split into different languages.