Massive migrations from Steppes to Bronze Age India is a myth

[MOESAN]

I think there is no facts that the steppe components originated in bronze age. Moreover one foot of andronovo people did not enter south asia. We need lots of DNA of siberia and central asia in the middle of south asia and east europe to reach a conclusion. Genetics is now on a very early stage, hence, it is not good to think yamna has a patent of the steppe component.

I think genetist might have a same mistake as russian anthropologist did. When cromagnon type skulls suddenly appeared in europe and siberia/central asia, they called them as protoeuropid(or paleo europid) and are making people (even scholar like David Anthony) think that they are all related with modern european. However, it is proved now that the cromagnon has nothing to do with modern people with anthro/ genetic data.

We need more results WITH FAIRNESS. Really Long way to go.

You are confusing 'cro-magnon' sensu strictu with modern labelled 'cro-magnoids'. But these last ones, if they are not the first true 'cro-magnons', have some heritage of it + others from Paleolithic and more of other descendants of Mesolithic; all the way the Mesolithic people of Europe and Western Eurasia were all closer between them that they were to other populations (CHG, Anatolia HG, Natufians, ANA...) - You cannot say these 'cromagnoids' of Mesolithic heritage have not left any input among modern Europeans. They only have been diluted, some directly by Anatolians, other mixed with CHGlike pops, and in different proportons according to place.
&: Their 'cromagnon' type skulls didn't appear suddenly as you say, they stayed allover, with more than a variety, in Western Eurasia, since remote times.

 

[Shahmiri]

One way or another, 10-15% steppe ancestry is massive for India because of its population size. Its population was probably at least 10x of Anatolia during the migrations but you see less steppe in Anatolia until the Turks.

5% steppe ancestry is also massive for Bronze Age India but genetic studies show it is just a myth.

 

[johen]

To MOESAN, I cannot reply to your last post:

My ultimate point is whether it is good to classify the cromagnon-like (protoeuropid) people by modern classification tool, genetics.

According to two well-known american anthropologists, modern american indian (like black foot) skulls cluster with cromagnon. They have 70% east asian. Russian anthropologist said that ancient baikal skull is paleo type like american indian. They have almost full of east asian.

At Late bronze age in Mongolia, chandmann skulls clusters with blackfoot indian and cromagnon, having 50% sintashta admixture (as I remembered). Xioungnu skull is like jomon and polynesian, paleo type.

According to russian anthropologist, cromagnon-like proto-europid is defined like this:
“protoeuropean’s anthropological type (a massive variant with a large sized head, low and wide face, rectangular orbits, and with flattening of the upper part of the face)”
Any, Any, Any russian anthropologists are never defining “ proto-europid”, but just saying “ cromagnon-like” except one scholar. I think the protoeuropid description fits EHG. However, russian scholars NEVER calls EHG as proto-europid, b/c their skulls have an aspect of mongoloid.

They calls skulls from yamna to scythian as proto-europid in their anthro encyclopedia.
Among them andronovo proper is just cromagnon-like proto-europid, and the other skulls were broadly cromagnon-like (med-mixed) according to russian scholars. Yamna cromagnon factors seems be from EHG.

They are all cromagnon-like people, but with different genetic admixture each other.
Is it ok to classify them by genetic admixture or Y Hg?
Problem is their cultures are same. Yamna culture is not special, but sunhead and animal culture like american indian.

As I quoted several times, afanasievo, okunevo(invader?), andronovo people(colonizer?) and karasuk people used same sanctuary at altai. This is not just one accident, but thi inheritance.
At that time the sanctuary is like king’s castle, b/c shaman is everything, but the others nothing in steppe nomad culture.

Thus, I think there were no wars between west cromagnon-like people and east cromagnon-like people at central asia/siberia at bronze age. There were fights between cromagnon-like people and farmers at that time like farmers against HG, I think.
That fight seems to end when european invaded america.

 

[Ygorcs]

5% steppe ancestry is also massive for Bronze Age India but genetic studies show it is just a myth.

How many BA aDNA samples from India and Pakistan exist so far? A handful, and simply no aDNA sample at all between ~2,000 B.C. and ~1,000 B.C. What happened in the intervening millennium is still totally unknown regarding genetic changes. To make matters even worse, all the DNA samples from only a tiny number of sites in northern Pakistan and 1 (1 only) in Rakhigarhi associated with the IVC - and, tellingly, with absolutely no steppe ancestry, unlike the later 1,000-500 B.C. DNA samples from Pakistan, which do have steppe ancestry.

I would be a lot more cautious before making such categorical statements based on extremely sparse and insufficient evidence (except if you have some ideological, political or ultranationalist agenda to further, so scientific reliability matters very little in that case).

 

[Ygorcs]

In the ancient Persian sources the original land of Slavs was in Harahvait (Arachosia) in modern Afghanistan, in Shahnameh Saklab (land of Slavs) was actually a large region in the east of Iran, neighbor to Chin (China) and Hind (India): http://www.heritageinstitute.com/zoroastrianism/shahnameh/page23.htm

Troops from Chaghan and Chin, Saklab and Hind

With Shamiran from Shakn, Shangul from Hind, The king of Sind and from Saklab Kundur.

I will not leave a man from Chin, Saklab,

Cleave ye the ranks of Chin and of Saklab;

Will bring a host from Hind, Saklab, and Chin?

Of Siyawush, that Hind, Shingan, Saklab,

Of Chin and of Saklab have fought Iran

Brought from the marches of Saklab and Chin

Yet those from Shakn, Kashan, Saklab, and Hind

When such an army hath arrived from Chin, Saklab, Khatlan, and from our own Piran,

From Hind, Saklab, Hart, and from Pahlav
...

The title of Saklab (Slavic) kings was Kundur (Old Church Slavonic kŭnędzĭ).

And what's the evidence that Saklab equals Slav/Slavic? Mere sound similarity or something else?

 

[kingjohn]

How many BA aDNA samples from India and Pakistan exist so far? A handful, and simply no aDNA sample at all between ~2,000 B.C. and ~1,000 B.C. What happened in the intervening millennium is still totally unknown regarding genetic changes. To make matters even worse, all the DNA samples from only a tiny number of sites in northern Pakistan and 1 (1 only) in Rakhigarhi associated with the IVC - and, tellingly, with absolutely no steppe ancestry, unlike the later 1,000-500 B.C. DNA samples from Pakistan, which do have steppe ancestry.
I would be a lot more cautious before making such categorical statements based on extremely sparse and insufficient evidence (except if you have some ideological, political or ultranationalist agenda to further, so scientific reliability matters very little in that case).

And only 1 sample was r1a in swat north pakistan samples if i remember correctly
Instead other haplogroups i2a and even the rare e-m123*(without m34 mutation) were found...

 

[Shahmiri]

How many BA aDNA samples from India and Pakistan exist so far? A handful, and simply no aDNA sample at all between ~2,000 B.C. and ~1,000 B.C. What happened in the intervening millennium is still totally unknown regarding genetic changes. To make matters even worse, all the DNA samples from only a tiny number of sites in northern Pakistan and 1 (1 only) in Rakhigarhi associated with the IVC - and, tellingly, with absolutely no steppe ancestry, unlike the later 1,000-500 B.C. DNA samples from Pakistan, which do have steppe ancestry.

I would be a lot more cautious before making such categorical statements based on extremely sparse and insufficient evidence (except if you have some ideological, political or ultranationalist agenda to further, so scientific reliability matters very little in that case).

Dr. Niraj Rai says "We have gathered Ancient DNA evidence now" and this evidence proves migration from Steppes to Bronze Age India is a myth.

About Pakistan, there are about 70 samples from 1400-300 BC in the Narasimhan et al study, and there is just one R1a which is believed to be from 500-300 BC, it means less than 1.5% steppe ancestry. I think we should actually ignore this sample which is from the Achaemenid era, he could be a Central Asian soldier in the Persian army.

 

[Shahmiri]

And what's the evidence that Saklab equals Slav/Slavic? Mere sound similarity or something else?

Ferdowsi wrote Shahnameh in the 10th century AD, in this period Slavs had no name other than Saklab in the Middle East: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saqaliba

 

[Shahmiri]

maybe they simply didn't find the earlier than EIA samples, particularly if Aryans really cremated virtually all of their dead

That is a good point, almost all Bronze Age samples from Kazakhstan are R1a, so they couldn't be Aryans because Aryans cremated their dead.

 

[PMillitech]

I can't understand why one would necessarily interpret Z93 distribution in India, as anything more than late moving IE peoples (Scythians) and perhaps barbarians. Z93 is not characteristically Indo-European - no single haplogroup defines Indo-Europeans, as divergent early Caucasoid populations became homogenized by the Chalolithic (otherwise we would expect to see vast genetic distances between, say modern Greeks and Western Europeans - what we see in fact is continuity). R1a did not originate in Altai, anyways. There is far more genetic diversity to the South, and immediate ancestral clades of Z93 are clearly derived from West Asia. Scholars have not bothered to challenge the West Asian origin of R1a since Underhill's massive study in 2014.

 

[Jack Johnson]

Lord the echo chamber is strong here or maybe I’m misreading things. Ancient DNA talks and BS walks. As far as pre-Middle-Late Bronze Age, ancient DNA is concerned, Y-DNA Haplogroups R1a-M417, R1b-M269, R1b-V1636, and R1b-V88, have only ever been found in Europe and in the case of the first three, only ever in Eastern European populations ancestral/related/derived from the Proto-Indo European speakers of the Pontic Caspian and East European Forest Steppes; these people are also known as Western Steppe Herders (WSH). We have Eastern European Hunter Gatherers (EHG) from the Mesolithic and Neolithic, with R1a, R1b, Q1, J1 and I2, none of them have any recent West Asian admixture; it is all ANE and WHG related. Everywhere M417, M269, and V1636 are found, there is steppe autosomal DNA related to EHGs. These genetic components have been found in Bronze Age Bell Beakers from France, the Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland, Germany, Ireland and Britain; in the Chalcolithic/Early-Middle Bronze Age Iberians and in Bronze Age samples from the Balearic Islands; in Bronze Age Sicily; in the Corded Ware samples from the Baltic, Estonia, Russia, Belarus, Poland and Germany; in the Battle Axe Culture samples from Scandinavia; in Mycenaean Greece, Bronze Age Anatolia, Bronze Age Armenia, Middle-Late Bronze Age Central Asia and Siberia and so on, this list could go ad nauseam. The evidence is undeniable. There have been hundreds upon hundreds of Neolithic samples sequenced from Western Asia and North Africa (well over a thousand I’m pretty sure), and not one..not a single one belongs to R1b or R1a let alone M269, M417, V1636 or even V88 (the latter of which more than likely originated in European hunter gatherer populations). Neolithic movements and migrations from Western Asia into Europe, Africa and South Asia, are not linked to R1, they are linked to G2a, and H2, and to a lesser extent subclades of J2, T1, J1, L, E1b1b, and even subclades of C1a2. That is reality, that is facts, modern day distributions of haplogroups are no indicator of how DNA actually spread; we are no longer stuck perpetually with theories from 2003-2010. Almost every single paper that has been published on ancient DNA, since roughly 2013-2014, has confirmed the “Steppe Hypothesis,” and the paleo-genetic data correlates with archeology, linguistics, and anthropology. The earliest samples containing both R1a-Z93 and R1a-Z94, have only ever been found in Yamnaya-Corded Ware related populations on the Eastern European steppes, with deep-basal, upstream clades to boot. These samples are from Srubnaya (I0232, I0430, I0361, I0423, I0424, and very likely I0360), Srubno-alakulskaya (MUR003, KZB002, KZB007)—all dating from 1880-1200 BCE, Fatyanovo-Balanovo (six males were derived for R1a-Z93), Eneolithic Romania (I11955 and I11913), Early-Middle Bronze Age Poltavka (I0432, also identified as the Poltavka Outlier or Potapovka 1), and in an Eneolithic Sredny Stog II sample from Alexandria, Ukraine (I6561, who belongs to R1a-Z94>Y26+). I don’t know if we are in agreement here so I apologize if this comes off as somewhat callous, but this needs to be addressed and this ideological misinformation needs to end. R1a-M417 and R1b-M269 and other various clades such as V1636, come from the Proto-Indo Europeans of Eastern Europe, and they are ultimately derived from Mesolithic-Neolithic Eastern European Hunter Gatherers with Ancient North Eurasian ancestry. That is that.

 

[Shahmiri]

Lord the echo chamber is strong here or maybe I’m misreading things. Ancient DNA talks and BS walks. As far as pre-Middle-Late Bronze Age, ancient DNA is concerned, Y-DNA Haplogroups R1a-M417, R1b-M269, R1b-V1636, and R1b-V88, have only ever been found in Europe and in the case of the first three, only ever in Eastern European populations ancestral/related/derived from the Proto-Indo European speakers of the Pontic Caspian and East European Forest Steppes; these people are also known as Western Steppe Herders (WSH). We have Eastern European Hunter Gatherers (EHG) from the Mesolithic and Neolithic, with R1a, R1b, Q1, J1 and I2, none of them have any recent West Asian admixture; it is all ANE and WHG related. Everywhere M417, M269, and V1636 are found, there is steppe autosomal DNA related to EHGs. These genetic components have been found in Bronze Age Bell Beakers from France, the Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland, Germany, Ireland and Britain; in the Chalcolithic/Early-Middle Bronze Age Iberians and in Bronze Age samples from the Balearic Islands; in Bronze Age Sicily; in the Corded Ware samples from the Baltic, Estonia, Russia, Belarus, Poland and Germany; in the Battle Axe Culture samples from Scandinavia; in Mycenaean Greece, Bronze Age Anatolia, Bronze Age Armenia, Middle-Late Bronze Age Central Asia and Siberia and so on, this list could go ad nauseam. The evidence is undeniable. There have been hundreds upon hundreds (well over a thousand I’m pretty) of Neolithic samples sequenced from Western Asia and North Africa, and not one, not a single one belongs to R1b or R1a let alone M269, M417, V1636 or even V88 (the latter of which more than likely originated in European hunter gatherer populations). Neolithic movements and migrations from Western Asia into Europe, Africa and South Asia, are not linked to R1, they are linked to G2a, and H2, and to a lesser extent subclades of J2, T1, J1, L, E1b1b, and even subclades of C1a2. That is reality, that is facts, modern day distributions of haplogroups are no indicator of how DNA actually spread; we are no longer stuck perpetually with theories from 2003-2010. Almost every single paper that has been published on ancient DNA, since roughly 2013-2014, has confirmed the “Steppe Hypothesis,” and the paleo-genetic data correlates with archeology, linguistics, and culture. The earliest samples containing both R1a-Z93 and R1a-Z94, have only ever been found in Yamnaya-Corded Ware related populations on the Eastern European steppes, with deep-basal, upstream clades to boot. These samples are from Srubnaya (I0232, I0430, I0361, I0423, I0424, and very likely I0360), Srubno-alakulskaya (MUR003, KZB002, KZB007)—all dating from 1880-1200 BCE, Fatyanovo-Balanovo (six males were derived for R1a-Z93), Eneolithic Romania (I11955 and I11913), Early-Middle Bronze Age Poltavka (I0432, also identified as the Poltavka Outlier or Potapovka 1), and in an Eneolithic Sredny Stog II sample from Alexandria, Ukraine (I6561, who belongs to R1a-Z94>Y26+). I don’t know if we are in agreement here so I apologize if this comes off as somewhat callous, but this needs to be addressed and this ideological misinformation needs to end. R1a-M417 and R1b-M269 and other various clades such as V1636, come from the Proto-Indo Europeans of Eastern Europe, and they are ultimately derived from Mesolithic-Neolithic Eastern European Hunter Gatherers with Ancient North Eurasian ancestry. That is that.

When we say Indo-European we mean Indian and European, not just European, R1a and R1b have not been found in Bronze Age India, so they didn't relate to Indian and Indo-European people. They probably relate to Vasconic, Uralic and other non-Indo-European people who live in Europe.

 

[Shahmiri]

Dr. Niraj Rai on Twitter:

It is impractical to imagine that the dogmatic Aryan Migration Theory will be erased so easily. After all, it is repeated so many times in academia. And people with colonial era slave mentality and inferiority complex are so fond of it!

India really needs a second Mahatma Gandhi, as an Iranian, I strongly support Niraj Rai and other Indian scholars who try to enlighten Indian people.