Tweet
I've decided I should try to pull the various discussion regarding the genetic dimension of the Indo-European Urheimat question into a thread on the genographic forum, rather than the geneology forum, because, in my opinion, it is more appropriate here.
This is the thread called "YCC Hap I and Indo-Europeans - Redux"
And this is the thread: "R1b Diversity: East vs. West"
I stumbled upon this presentation discussing the "Out of India" Urheimat hypothesis. I am willing to entertain the proposal, in part because the genetic evidence hints that there might be something to it. OTOH, I have criticisms of the proposal.
B. B. Lal presents the argument that the Kurgan culture can be ruled out because it was a pastoral culture rather than an agricultural one. In this he draws on the following:
But S. V. Makhortykh, in his(?) paper titled The North Black Sea Steps in the Cimmerian Epoch proposes that
That suggests that nomadism was not the primitive model from which agriculture arose, but rather nomadism arose due to climate change and the advantages it offered over an agricultural way of life. Furthermore, I am aware of evidence that suggests the Scythians had a diverse economy in which nomadism was only one participant. There also seem to have been fixed agricultural settelments in the original Scythian homeland in the region of Pazyryk. (I will have to dig for sources). And Herodotus tells us some Scythians did practice agriculture.
But, lest it be assumed that I am following the Kurgan hypothesis for the origins of the Proto-Indo-Europeans (PIE), I should be clear that I believe the Scythians represented a secondary expansion, and probably the source of the currently observed distribution of R1a in Europe.
One problem with the "out of India" proposal, as I see it, is the lack of evidence for the use of wheeled vehicles in South Asia as early as would be required by his model. The linguistic evidence suggests the PIE were using wheeled vehicles long before they appeared in India.
Trying to bracket the date for the Rig Veda based on the disappearance of the Sarasvati river makes a lot of sense. I have to wonder, however, how reliable the current dating is. There is also some dispute as to whether the recently detected riverbed is even the right river. I tend to believe it is the Vedic Sarisvati, but that is based on limited knowledge.
I have to do a bit of back paddling regarding the relationship between the Cimmerian expansion and the arrival of the Tarim Mummy people in Xinjiang. What I am calling the Cimmerian expansion is an archaeologically attested process that begain around the beginning of the final millennium BCE. It did leave the pontic steppe fairly vacant, but not completely desolated. I am still associating this expansion with the influence that engendered the Scythian culture.
But that alone did not suffice to produce the subsequent Scythian explosion. That was driven by a climate fluctuation that produced lower temparature and more percipitation in the region of Uvs Nuur and Tuva. The additional percipitation led to a significant increase in pasture biomass, and thus to a corresponding increase in the food supply. Baby Scythians and baby horses had enough to eat. Lookout world!
Much of what is said about the ethno-linguistics of the Tarim Basin and neighboring regions is conjectural, but Mallory and Mair gave me the impression that Scythians (AKA Saka) began to appear in the Tarim at some point after the initial settlement by "Tocharians", entering from the north. I need to review the literature before I say much more. What I do feel confident in saying is that the authors suggested pretty strongly that the earliest of the mummies were of a slightly different (more 'nordic') physical type than the people who lived there at the beginning of the current era. By that time there had been significant contribution from a Saka population living in what is now eastern Afghanistan.
I feel pretty strongly that the Scythians and their offspring were the ones who spread R1a into Europe. One might say the contribution found in the Germans is attributable to the sons of Saka. That would be Sakasons. I'm not sure where that R1a came from, but wild speculation tells me Uvs Luur.
It may not be popular these days, but I believe the Germanic language family has a significan Aryan contribution. That could very well have been contributed by the Saka who are usually understood to have been Iranian speaking.
History tells us there were multiple incursions of Saka into India, and probably into Iran. Despite the latest spin on the genetic evidence, I am inclined to believe this history explains the high level of R1a found in the higher casts of India. I do not know if the original Indo-Aryans would have been primarily R1a carriers or not.
Indo-Aryan is attested to in Anatolia and Messopotamia with the Mitanni. The Mitanni may have been fairly influential in Egypt for some period of time. They may well have even married into the Pharaohonic dynasty over multiple generations.
The if and when of the "Aryan invasion" of India are hotly contested notions. My education placed the earliest inroads of Aryans into India at around 1200 BCE. If that is accurate, it would mean the Mitanni preceeded the Indian Aryans by centuries. I'm inclined to ask if they are not one in the same.
It's interesting to note the name of Rama's father King Dasaratha appears in the Ramayana and bears a striking similarity to the name King Tushratta.
I'm throwing this in for gratis:
This is the thread called "YCC Hap I and Indo-Europeans - Redux"
And this is the thread: "R1b Diversity: East vs. West"
I stumbled upon this presentation discussing the "Out of India" Urheimat hypothesis. I am willing to entertain the proposal, in part because the genetic evidence hints that there might be something to it. OTOH, I have criticisms of the proposal.
B. B. Lal presents the argument that the Kurgan culture can be ruled out because it was a pastoral culture rather than an agricultural one. In this he draws on the following:
On the techno-cultural level, the Kurgan people were essentially at a pastoral stage. Discounting this equation, Renfrew (1999: 268) holds that on the European scene mounted warriors appear only as late as the turn of the second-first millennia BCE and these could in no case have been Gimbutass Kurgan warriors predating the facts by some 3,000 years. On the linguistic turf, there comes a severe attack by Kathrin Krell (1998) who finds a great incongruity between the terms found in the reconstructed Indo-European language and the cultural level met with in the kurgans. For example, Krell holds that the Indo-Europeans had reached an agricultural level whereas the Kurgan people were just at a pastoral stage.
"the apperance of the first nomadic horse-riding groups on the historical arena coincided with considerable changes of the environment in the Final Bronce Age. Worsening of climate conditions had a negative effect on the Pontic steps archaeological cultures with a mixed pastoral-agricultural economy. Steppe populations adjusted to the new conditions by adopting a new nomadic way of life as well as by developing new lands.
But, lest it be assumed that I am following the Kurgan hypothesis for the origins of the Proto-Indo-Europeans (PIE), I should be clear that I believe the Scythians represented a secondary expansion, and probably the source of the currently observed distribution of R1a in Europe.
One problem with the "out of India" proposal, as I see it, is the lack of evidence for the use of wheeled vehicles in South Asia as early as would be required by his model. The linguistic evidence suggests the PIE were using wheeled vehicles long before they appeared in India.
Trying to bracket the date for the Rig Veda based on the disappearance of the Sarasvati river makes a lot of sense. I have to wonder, however, how reliable the current dating is. There is also some dispute as to whether the recently detected riverbed is even the right river. I tend to believe it is the Vedic Sarisvati, but that is based on limited knowledge.
I have to do a bit of back paddling regarding the relationship between the Cimmerian expansion and the arrival of the Tarim Mummy people in Xinjiang. What I am calling the Cimmerian expansion is an archaeologically attested process that begain around the beginning of the final millennium BCE. It did leave the pontic steppe fairly vacant, but not completely desolated. I am still associating this expansion with the influence that engendered the Scythian culture.
But that alone did not suffice to produce the subsequent Scythian explosion. That was driven by a climate fluctuation that produced lower temparature and more percipitation in the region of Uvs Nuur and Tuva. The additional percipitation led to a significant increase in pasture biomass, and thus to a corresponding increase in the food supply. Baby Scythians and baby horses had enough to eat. Lookout world!
Much of what is said about the ethno-linguistics of the Tarim Basin and neighboring regions is conjectural, but Mallory and Mair gave me the impression that Scythians (AKA Saka) began to appear in the Tarim at some point after the initial settlement by "Tocharians", entering from the north. I need to review the literature before I say much more. What I do feel confident in saying is that the authors suggested pretty strongly that the earliest of the mummies were of a slightly different (more 'nordic') physical type than the people who lived there at the beginning of the current era. By that time there had been significant contribution from a Saka population living in what is now eastern Afghanistan.
I feel pretty strongly that the Scythians and their offspring were the ones who spread R1a into Europe. One might say the contribution found in the Germans is attributable to the sons of Saka. That would be Sakasons. I'm not sure where that R1a came from, but wild speculation tells me Uvs Luur.
It may not be popular these days, but I believe the Germanic language family has a significan Aryan contribution. That could very well have been contributed by the Saka who are usually understood to have been Iranian speaking.
History tells us there were multiple incursions of Saka into India, and probably into Iran. Despite the latest spin on the genetic evidence, I am inclined to believe this history explains the high level of R1a found in the higher casts of India. I do not know if the original Indo-Aryans would have been primarily R1a carriers or not.
Indo-Aryan is attested to in Anatolia and Messopotamia with the Mitanni. The Mitanni may have been fairly influential in Egypt for some period of time. They may well have even married into the Pharaohonic dynasty over multiple generations.
The if and when of the "Aryan invasion" of India are hotly contested notions. My education placed the earliest inroads of Aryans into India at around 1200 BCE. If that is accurate, it would mean the Mitanni preceeded the Indian Aryans by centuries. I'm inclined to ask if they are not one in the same.
It's interesting to note the name of Rama's father King Dasaratha appears in the Ramayana and bears a striking similarity to the name King Tushratta.
I'm throwing this in for gratis:
. Considering the fact that caste system was created in North-West India(present day Pakistan, Punjab(India)), why shouldn't one expect that high R1a among Brahmins show that Haplogroup frequency in North-West India? Just a thought. Well, it's also possible that historical migrations also might have changed haplogroup frequency. Tamil Brahmins show R1a at 28%, however, Bengali Brahmins have it at 45%. May be extra 17% are those from Sakas. 
. You are absolutely right! Minimum risk(or no risk at all) and total success. Indeed, that explains why Hinduism is not much about celibacy, whereas, Buddhism and Jainism founded by Kshatriyas stressed on that fact(obviously they didn't want best brides or for that matter any). Perhaps, that explains the role reversal in Indian society 
The Kalash were never part of the Aryan migration to India, but they are descendants of Alexander's Greeks who stayed back.
Comment