Forgetting the past

How could the Indo-Aryans have been from somewhere else if it is not recorded in their traditions? This is a common question that comes form many Indians. It is an entirely Indo-centric perspective. This is a description, not a critique. After all, the Indo-European Greeks have no lore of migration in the Hesiod. Many, such as the Athenians, consider themselves autochthonous. The Egyptians have no lore of migration. In contrast, the Sumerians seem to have had legends of migration from the “south” (perhaps marshland to the south of Mesopotamia proper). And the oldest Sumerian city does happen to be the most southern one (Eridu). The Norse have no history of migration from elsewhere, but it is almost certainly a fact that the Nordic Bronze Age cultures came out of the post-Bell Beaker and Corded Ware societies after 2000 BC, whose roots lay ultimately to the south and east.

Finally, as I have written elsewhere, in the space of less than 200 years the Celtic Britons of what became England abandoned their native language and cultural memory and replaced it with that of pagan Germans. We know from both fine-scale modern genetic analysis of the British Isles, as well as ancient DNA, that the majority of the ancestry of the modern English dates to the period before the arrival of the Anglo-Saxons. And yet pre-Germanic language and cultural folkways had only a trivial impact on the English. Even royal houses, such as those of Wessex, who were likely of native British origin (the earlier rulers in the genealogy have Celtic forenames!) “retconned” their origin to be from the Germanic god Wotan.

If, as I believe, the Indo-Aryans are rooted primarily in the Sintashta culture which flourished around ~2000 BC, and the Vedic culture flourished in South Asia by ~1500 BC, that allows for only five centuries to “forget.” Your mileage may vary, but 20 generations seems a bit short to forget this when these people were punctilious in matters of antique ritual.

To answer this conundrum, I propose something entirely conjectural and hypothetical, but not impossible: the Brahmin caste emerged as a fusion of Indo-Aryan ritualists and pre-Aryan priests. In terms of total ancestral contribution, the latter is actually more preponderant than the former. Though the language of the former is dominant, most people accept that the Vedic culture was somehow synthetic. A hybrid. Perhaps the pre-Aryan priesthood was culturally more dominant than we may suppose, and as its roots were deeply indigenous, they promoted the ideology that their hybrid caste was in India in toto immemorial?

0

54 Replies to “Forgetting the past”

  1. City of Athens was founded much before Greeks came to today’s Greece. Greeks do not consider themselves indigenous in Greece but they also do not want to confess that they came from somewhere. They came from Egypt when they were expelled together with Jews and Serbs during the Exodus. The first Aryan leader after his expedition to SA on the way back took the ancestors of Greeks and Jews from Mesopotamia and brought them to Egypt. Crete’s Mino culture was not Greek’s. For long time Greeks lived only in a couple places on the coast and islands, all the rest of today’s Greece was occupied by indigenous Serbian tribes.

    English (Edward Longshanks) conducted ethnic cleansing firstly by expelling Jews from British Isles and after by conducting the genocide against Irish expelling them from the mainland to the west island where they were dying from starvation. Their language, names and sports were prohibited. Until then, Celts had identical names with Serbs considering that they also originated in Vinca’s civilisation in today’s Serbia. John Watmough professor of Comparative Linguistics from Cambridge compiled the list of old Celtic name and toponyms. There are still a few old Serbian names that are used by Irish (e.g. Tara, Damian, Bruce, etc). London and Thames are also Serbian words. Wiltshire (with Stonehenge) got its name from the name of a Serbian tribe which lived in this area. The main town there is Salisbury which original name is Serbarium.

    It was a good comment by Numinous in a thread about Vedic forefathers. Only – Arthurian legend is not English, it is Celtic and older before English came to British isles. It was falsified in the movie with Whoopi Goldberg where it is everything described as English.

    1+
    1. Damn Milan, you must be imbibing some soma?

      I’m not sure if all that was *totally* forgotten. Arguments have been made that certain locations in the Vedas might have originally referred to more northerly places that were subsequently transferred to the landscape of South Asia so nothing is that certain – some elements of this migration might have been preserved but in dubious ways that lead to arguments that will never be resolved, unlike the genetic data which points towards an obvious direction (which wasn’t exactly “mainstream Europe” of the time either, just to remind people).

      Similarly, even though post Dark Ages Greeks didn’t have a clear memory of a coherent migration into Greece from somewhere else, there were at least memories of peoples on the move within Greece and neighboring regions and the general presence of mobility down to times close to the writers. The proto-Greek migration might have happened relatively early anyway, up to c. 2200 BC. That’s a long time down to Hesiod and Homer, especially for a culture that adopted writing and abanded the fixation on the oral much more readily than the Indians did.

      But yes, even if something of all this was preserved in distorted form, no Indo-European-speaking population seems to have memories of ultimate urheimat and none mostly lived in it (the eastern steppe becoming mostly just a small part of the vast East Iranic area later on) anyway in post-dispersal times. Arguments could be made with reference to more recent migrations and populations as well, like you did in the Anglo-Saxon case. It’s nothing too convincing and seems rather biased unless one is willing to admit it’s also an argument against OIT (nevermind, it can always be handwaved with arguments about “continuity”, even though that’s also a matter of later, historical events which also affected parts of South Asia like Pakistan), so paleolithic continuity a la Alinei it is. 🙂

      2+
      1. If I ignore your apparent bad mood let me conclude. You are agree with my note re English and Celts. You are also agree with me that Greeks also came from somewhere to today’s Greece but you may expected more argumentation. I wrote abut this before I will do again. The point is that we agree with Razib’s assertion about (non)memories of migration.

        Finally, re OIT (or OHT – out of Harayana) I mentioned couple times. I had sympathies for OIT proponents because I think that they are Hindu patriots. I support every patriot from any background. However, OIT become to look like a sect or political movement which only try to find only evidence which support that ‘Aryans’ originated in Punjab (Harayana, Utar Pradesh) and went to Europe. They ignore genetics, linguistics, toponyms, mythology, rituals, etc, which all state the opposite and their only source are epic’s verses where search for astronomy evidence.

        0
    2. Crazy ethnic chauvinists make me chuckle and absolutely nobody is better at it than the Turks, North Koreans and the Serbs.
      The things Modi could learn from those pros.

      0
  2. Do Austronesian-speakers have any memory of their phenomenal dispersions? (I confess I don’t know very much about them.)

    1+
  3. “the Brahmin caste emerged as a fusion of Indo-Aryan ritualists and pre-Aryan priests. In terms of total ancestral contribution, the latter is actually more preponderant than the former.”

    This is a fact not a theory. There is a clear IVC substratum most marked in the later layers of the Rig Veda. The relatively late hymns of Agastya contain peaceful yogic philosophy. Yoga is attested to in the iconography of the IVC . It is foreign to the original Aryan religion.

    I am willing to bet that the most violent anti-Dasa, anti-black, anti-heathen verses are the most archaic and predate this mass hybridisation/reconciliation.

    There is convincing evidence that Dravidian priests and gods such as Murugan were demonised in the Rig Veda:

    http://www.sastwingees.org/2010/04/11/revelations-from-the-rig-veda/

    0
    1. It is clear from the Y chromosome data of Brahmins that the Aryan male ritualists became the new elite among the segment of the IVC priesthood that they merged with.

      0
      1. Yes exactly so somehow argued that Brahmins are Dravidians and sub-stratum defeats the purposes.

        By the same token the Mughals are very much Indian because of their Indian wives/mothers but they are perceived in historiography (for better or for worse) as a disruption to India’s past.

        I find it funny that so many are extolling the lovely syncretisation of Aryan, Dravidian etc (not really my battle) but fast forward a few millennia later and they are totally indifferent to a modern version of syncretism…

        Guess we can’t help what we love

        0
        1. Who says Moghals are not Indians?

          https://twitter.com/kaeshour/status/1075741066152853505?s=20

          BTW the debate within Indian culture wars is less about “Moghals” per se, more about Islam and Muslims. Moghals are a proxy for Islam for many people.

          Also, Moghals themselves did have a tendency to accentuate their foreign (Turkic) antecedents. Cf. torture and murder of Sikh gurus, tame surrender of Delhi to Nadir Shah and the subsequent qtl-e ām, use of Persian in court (rather than Urdu/Hindustani) etc.

          [This is in stark contrast to Iranic or Turkic C Asians before Islam]

          1+
          1. Slapstick:

            Are you claiming that the Mughals allowed (perhaps tacitly) Nadir Shah to enter and loot Delhi, or were lukewarm in their resistance? Any evidence to support that charge? Given the other threats the Mughals faced (biggest being the Marathas), that doesn’t sound like a good move to me.

            Zack:

            He meant Katl-e-aam (mass killing), ordered by Nadir Shah in Delhi after one or more of his soldiers was killed in a skirmish/brawl in one of the local markets.

            0
          2. I mourn the destruction of Delhi by the Colonisers rather than the Persians. I always assumed Delhi stopped being Mughal because of the Mutiny & Urdu.

            Ghalib would probably feel more at home at Karachi than Delhi these days

            0
        2. “By the same token the Mughals are very much Indian because of their Indian wives/mothers but they are perceived in historiography (for better or for worse) as a disruption to India’s past.”

          Its fascinating that the first instance of muslim groups which are “claimed” to be Indian always happens to be Mughals and not the Delhi Sultanate/ happens to be Akbar(not Aurangzeb) and not
          Allaudin Khilji . I mean strictly speaking, genetically and supposed matrilineal heritage should imbue even the Sultanate kings as much “Indian” as the mughals. But funnily no one makes that claim. I wonder why.

          0
          1. I guess because we don’t really know much about the Sultanate-

            There is something about the Mughals that keeps Pakis enthralled.. its that heady mix of decadence and incompetence that we’ve directly inherited – droll

            1+
        3. Seriously its is only due to Hindutva brainwashing that many modern day Hindus particularly in the North deny the Indian-ness of the Mughals.

          I think most Hindus would revere people like Dara Shukoh. Unfortunately, his Islamic fundamentalist brother Aurangzeb won.

          One important difference in the Aryan invasion compared to the Muslim invasion, is that the native Dravidian religion fused with the Aryan one to form Hinduism.

          Islamic fundamentalism on the other hand can not fuse with any other religious ideology.

          0
          1. As pointed out above it is not the matter encoded in chromosomes but the matter embedded in the brains that makes Mughals ‘foreign’ to many Indians. Their love of a language (Farsi) that no one spoke or understood (save those who were required to) or much cares about. Through much of Muslim rule random wanderers/adventurers from lands to the West would come in and in short order begin to lord it over the locals.

            Even so the latter day popularity – or lack thereof – of individual Mughal rulers is in direct proportion to their religious intolerance. Being roasted to death for refusal to convert does something to the onlookers that is unrelated to what exact percentage of your genotype is ‘steppe’, Iranian or whatever.

            3+
          2. Not sure about the relevance of the Sultanate patronising Persian. Regardless of who did, these languages did not – perhaps were meant not to – penetrate the general population to whom it remained as foreign as English did until a few decades ago.

            It is worth noting that in the time of Aurangzeb – the last of the great Mughals – the Mughals had been in India for a period shorter than the Brits had in 1947.

            0
  4. “Your mileage may vary, but 20 generations seems a bit short to forget this when these people were punctilious in matters of antique ritual.”

    Perhaps the past was not forgotten so much as actively suppressed, in something like the way that late Roman Christians actively persecuted and tried to eliminate residual pockets of pagan belief.

    0
    1. Some suggest that fixng the date of Jesus’ birth was to supplant traditional sun cycle celebrations with more acceptance of a new faith by appropriating festive mood.

      0
  5. Razib

    “Your mileage may vary, but 20 generations seems a bit short to forget this when these people were punctilious in matters of antique ritual.”

    LOL. While reading this i felt you would come to the opposite conclusion, ie 20 gen is long enough and folks can forget their past, considering Britons did it in just 200 years.

    What you propose makes sense to me as well. This also opens a new set of fascinating questions as to what is really “Aryan” and what’s “Indus Valley” . Murugan is claimed to be a dravidian god in the same way the Pashupatinath Seal is claimed to be Proto-Shiva. Your hypothesis would lend support to that idea that the Aryans actually built upon the Indus Valley gods and rituals, modifying and appropriating them. It seems true of other deities like Jagganath and Balaji. But many historians and archaeologist have also rejected this view, so just putting it out there.

    Only one question remain, you propose that “Brahmin caste emerged as a fusion of Indo-Aryan ritualists and pre-Aryan priests. “. Now genetically we have found the highest steppe/Aryan ancestry in the upper castes/Brahmins if i am not wrong ,that would mean they are supposedly the more “pure” (for lack of a better word) , wouldn’t the fusion also happen genetically and lowered their steppe ancestry significantly, but seems like the lower you go down the caste hierarchy the more ASI you get , ie the most mixing of ASI and Aryans happened towards the middle and not at the top/bottom which retained more of their Aryan/ASI part. Considering the degree of the fusion i am a bit perplexed as to why the “steppe” component remained that high within the upper castes.

    Sorry if this question doesn’t make sense.

    0
    1. Now genetically we have found the highest steppe/Aryan ancestry in the upper castes/Brahmins if i am not wrong ,that would mean they are supposedly the more “pure” (for lack of a better word) , wouldn’t the fusion also happen genetically and lowered their steppe ancestry significantly, but seems lik

      a minority of their ancestry is steppe. well over 50% of n indian brahmin ancestry is iranian farmer+AASI. also, there are some Y chromosome (paternal) lineages like R2 found among brahmins which i doubt are step related.

      the reich lab estimates steppe is about 30% of the ancestry of “ANI” btw. north indian brahmins are lik 60-70% ANI. rough numbers. but this implies 15-30% “aryan”.

      1+
      1. “north indian brahmins are lik 60-70% ANI. rough numbers. but this implies 15-30% “aryan”.”

        This is certainly very important point. This goes on to prove that how politics can create issues out of complete non-issues. Even if one were to assume that “aryans” were foreigners, this will imply that only 15-30% ancestral components of average Indian are foreign. Even the highest caste Brahmin is solidly more Indian than non-Indian.

        This need not even have been a debate. And now this is a firestorm.

        3+
  6. “If, as I believe, the Indo-Aryans are rooted primarily in the Sintashta culture which flourished around ~2000 BC”

    How are you seeing this? I am looking at Allentoft at al supplementary data for Yamnaya, andronovo, and Sintashta, and Reich lab data for Indians, and not readily clear which one corresponds to Indian migration. I would have guessed an earlier one.

    The reason I argue this is if Andronovo or some other cultural remains had acquired some of the features of Sintashta (chariots, burial, etc) before they transferred to India, they have 900-1000 years to forget their culture. It is easy to acquire newer technology. Also, transit through Iran/central asia over a period of 1000 years also could have played a role.

    I am not greatly bothered about only 500 years to forget. One can read Baburnamah and understand that Tashkent and Fergana are a different world compared to India, but yet none of the great grandchildren of Babur or Khilji remember the Turkic origins. May be the Andronovo or Afanasievo did not even have a grasp of their culture, not fully formed, when they started their journeys.

    0
    1. but yet none of the great grandchildren of Babur or Khilji remember the Turkic origins.

      That’s a strange thing to say. They were very much aware of their origins, which were well-documented in their times (and that’s how we know it too.) There’s some record (from Europeans) of Jahangir speaking Turkish and receiving C. Asian visitors, if I’m not mistaken.

      0
    2. I am looking at Allentoft at al supplementary data for Yamnaya, andronovo, and Sintashta, and Reich lab data for Indians, and not readily clear which one corresponds to Indian migration.

      latest reich lab stuff is pointing to later waves (steppe_EMBA). second, r1a emerges later (srubna is r1a-z93). finally, it doesn’t look like ‘steppe’ shows up in transoxiana until around 2000 BC.

      0
  7. If, as I believe, the Indo-Aryans are rooted primarily in the Sintashta culture which flourished around ~2000 BC, and the Vedic culture flourished in South Asia by ~1500 BC, that allows for only five centuries to “forget.”

    I don’t know if 1500BC is supposed to be a hard-and-fast marker of anything. It’s an estimate (of the original verses of the Rig Veda, I guess) as it is. The date (or date range) I’m most fascinated by is ~500BC to 0, when the “mixing” of the various ANI and ASI populations seem to have finally ended (for unknown reasons.) The corollary is that mixing was common and not frowned upon until that period. Isn’t it likely that a population that was in the making until ~500BC might not bother to retain vague memories of a distant snowy homeland by that time? The important stuff, i.e., how to practice the rituals correctly, were passed down; probably people didn’t care to propagate historical information that virtually no one even by 1500 BC could have related to?

    0
    1. I believe Razib is dating the Vedic age in India from genes, i.e., from the first evidence of steppe-MLBA interaction with India. That is not definitely before 1800 BC.

      I went back to Moorjani, and note that Brahmin, sindhi and Dharkar groups were admixed 1800-1900 years ago

      0
        1. Now I got your attention, I am asking about the Steppe-EMBA percentages listed in the Pathak paper. I realize that the percentages are not precise and the ratio of percentages are relevant, but having such low levels of AASI have not been a feature in any of the Indian populations (whereas that has been true for Pathan and some Punjabi populations). Why is the Patak/Chaubey paper off compared with Metspalu papers? I agree that the jats have the highest Steppe ancestry and this has been proven in similar forms elseweher, but the numbers in this paper sound doubtful.

          0
  8. “the Brahmin caste emerged as a fusion of Indo-Aryan ritualists and pre-Aryan priests. In terms of total ancestral contribution, the latter is actually more preponderant than the former.”

    I wrote this as a response to another comment, but Moojrjani Table 1 estimates Brahmin, U.P. admixture date as 1,885 years (metspalu estimate is 2,494 years) . Granted that may be the last admixture date, but still points to the idea that Brahmins were formed later and posed them on the top of the chain much later than the multiple admixture events. Also, the ANI% in UP Brahmins (< 60%) and maximum steppe_MLBA in ANI no more than 40-50% suggests that InPE and AASI dominate the Brahmins too.

    0
  9. More telling evidence from the Rig Veda:

    “At one place Indra is described as converting the DAsas into Aryas”

    KaNva, Angiras and other Rishis of the late Rig Vedic period are described as black or dark:

    “It would appear that towards the end of the Rig Vedic period some of the blacks seers and DAsa priests were worming their way into the newly organised Aryan community”

    Source: ‘Sudras in Ancient India’ by Ram Sharan Sharma

    0
  10. @Numinous
    // Are you claiming that the Mughals allowed (perhaps tacitly) Nadir Shah to enter and loot Delhi, or were lukewarm in their resistance? //

    Latter. No native monarchy hands over the keys to a foreigner, and performs the ceremony to mark their investiture to kingship, after losing just one battle (cf battle of Karnal). The Moghals had a tendency to see India as their malkiyat as opposed to their native land. Akbar was an exception to this rule.

    2+
    1. Tens of thousands of Indians around Delhi (mostly Muslim) were massacred by the Persians when they had instigated a riot against Nadir Shah’s forces. If you can find an example of Hindus engaging in such resistance (and paying for it so steeply) please cite it.

      As for, “handing over the keys to a foreigner, and performing the ceremony to mark their investiture to kingship”, let me direct you to the Rajputs.

      0
      1. “If you can find an example of Hindus engaging in such resistance (and paying for it so steeply) please cite it.”

        No of course where have the Hindus ever resisted the foreigners. Of course. All resistance was by muslims only , that too “Tens of thousands” as you said correctly.

        0
      2. Is there any actual basis for the “mostly Muslim” designation for those massacred by Nadir Shah ? And is it known whether they were actually resisting or just civilian collateral damage ?

        0
        1. Delhi was historically a Muslim-majority city, so I’m inferring that most of those killed were Muslim.

          The massacres by Nader Shah weren’t war-time collateral damage, but calculated reprisals on the general populace due to his soldiers coming under attack by raids (organized by both civilians and soldiers) during the Persian occupation of the city.

          0
          1. “so I’m inferring that most of those killed were Muslim.”

            OK, so just speculation i.e. no actual history. What, for instance, rules out the possibility that the Muslims of Delhi colluded (as some Muslims did, say, with Abdali against Marathas) and the killings were of the Hindus who resisted or who were seen as kaffirs undeserving of normal human treatment ?

            Not saying that is what happened but what rules it out ?

            0
          2. “Whose to say the Muslims didn’t collaborate”

            There’s no evidence for it. The accounts of horror we have from the massacre are written by Muslim Delhians who vilify the Persians, with Mughal officials being the ones pleading with Nadir Shah to stop the slaughter.

            0
      3. Lol

        Normally I don’t respond to trolls, but this one cracked me up 😂

        Rajput dynasties continued to have uneasy relations with Moghals, and later Marathas. And outlasted them both.

        2+
  11. To answer this conundrum, I propose something entirely conjectural and hypothetical, but not impossible: the Brahmin caste emerged as a fusion of Indo-Aryan ritualists and pre-Aryan priests. In terms of total ancestral contribution, the latter is actually more preponderant than the former.

    You are thinking on the right lines, questioning the chronology put forth by others. But it still does not overcome many of the contradictions archaeologically as well as technically.

    My personal theory is that: Brahmins were traditionally an intellectual group (functional experts, human encyclopedia, sky watchers etc), before the” by birth freeze” aka caste came into force. This assertion is supported by the diverse Y lines in Brahmins which is the same as others. Also since they were more like a cost center, hence citizens were supposed to feed and shelter them in return for their valued services. It is plausible that R1a L-657 or their ancestors also had some expertise (which we do not know what it was or from where they were), of whom a few were bought in or inducted into the four fold for their services and from there the founder effect took off.

    However even this theory like yours cannot explain away the contradiction of L-657 being older than Srubnaya, and all the ancient R1a-Z93 found in Central Asia is the brother clade of L-657. And no R1a-Z93 has been found in Eastern Europe Forest Steppe zone till now. So where did the Z93 originate and how did it land in Srubnaya, as well as the most important question is where did L-657 originate and when did it enter South Asia?

    And while we are at it, as of today with the currently available data L-657 is a founder effect in South Asia, which totally disqualifies it as the donor of Steppic signal. As the Y-signal would have propagated but at the same time it would have been completely absorbed into the native ancestry.

    2+
  12. Razib & Slapstik,

    If the Brahmanical priesthood was so fundamentally influenced by the the supposed pre-Aryan Indus Valley preisthood, how do you explain the following peculiar features of the Druids.

    Caesar related that the Druids took charge of public and private sacrifices, and many young men went to them for instruction. They judged all public and private quarrels and decreed penalties. If anyone disobeyed their decree, he was barred from sacrifice, which was considered the gravest of punishments. …Caesar also recorded that the Druids abstained from warfare and paid no tribute. Attracted by those privileges, many joined the order voluntarily or were sent by their families. They studied ancient verse, natural philosophy, astronomy, and the lore of the gods, some spending as much as 20 years in training. The Druids’ principal doctrine was that the soul was immortal and passed at death from one person into another.

    https://www.britannica.com/topic/Druid

    I agree with the proposition that the sophistication of Brahmnical practice and belief system must have emerged from a settled agricultural semi-urban community like the Indus Civilization. But how did this exist among the Celtic Druids if they had nothing to do with the Indus civilization ?

    —————

    It also needs to understood that when Megasthenes was in India around 300 BCE, he was informed by the knowledgeable Indians that they counted 6454 years and 153 kings between Sandrocottus (Chandragupta) and their 1st king whom he called Dionysius but who is more correctly identified in Indian tradition with Prthu Vainya.

    If the Indians had preserved a memory of this supposed very ancient tradition 6450 years old, why could they not have preserved the migration of the Indo-Aryans which supposedly happened only 1200 years before Megasthenes’ time ?

    0
    1. I agree with the proposition that the sophistication of Brahmnical practice and belief system must have emerged from a settled agricultural semi-urban community like the Indus Civilization. But how did this exist among the Celtic Druids if they had nothing to do with the Indus civilization ?

      But what about the priesthood of the other branches of IE-speakers? Do we know whether Greeks also had the concept of soul-migration? Or the Norse, or the Balts, or Iranians? If we only have 2 supporting data points, it could be a coincidence, or there may be an altogether different explanation, no?

      informed by the knowledgeable Indians that they counted 6454 years and 153 kings

      That’s 42 years per king. Sounds quite high to me; would that really have been possible back then for such a long period (7 millennia)? Do you know if other cultures have claimed similarly long lineages, or were Indians circa 300BC sui generis?

      0
  13. 1. I think the interesting question is not just what (migration) was forgotten, but also what was “remembered”. What do we do with recording in RigVeda of 10 kings battle (Sudas), and stories of *emigration* of various tribes to the west? What do we do with memories of Saraswati (which by 1500 BC was long dried out)?

    2. Razib’s suggestion is intriguing (Brahnmin’s are pre-steppe-input priests combined with steppe input around 1500 BC). It can resolve some pieces of the puzzle as he points out. But I wonder (as a lay reader): is it possible then that these pre-steppe-input priests were the ones who “owned” already-old RigVeda (and, yes, therefore already IE or PIE, but may be a different variant of IE language?)? So, the steppe input can be real (of course) but so can Saraswati-era RigVeda-in-India be real. Of course, I know this goes against current consensus; but I’d appreciate some kind knowledgeable soul to explain what are non-dismissive concrete arguments against this “hypothesis”. I suppose they’d be linguistic?

    1+
  14. Complete amateur here.
    One way to reconcile the out of India theory with the genetics flowing inward and direction of linguistics a diffusion inward and outward is suggested by the last paragraph here:
    https://medium.com/@subhashkak1/the-death-of-proto-indo-european-2ba0df1cb2cd

    “A reasonable way to understand the spread of IE languages is through the process of diffusion together with some movement of people in a manner that is not so different from the spread of Indian culture in Southeast Asia.”

    What if the Vedic culture and language diffused out, and then either ethnic or religious conflict caused a culturally/religiously/linguistically allied but genetically distinct external population to migrate to “India” and merge with the indigenous population? It would be like if Kampuchean or Bali Hindus had to flee their homes and “returned” to India. They would be genetically distinct but culturally allied.

    Towards Indo-Aryan vs indigenous Brahmin, I’ve harbored uneducated guesses about (though maybe that is a much later merge event) whether Iyers(Shaivite) were more indigenous than Iyengars(Vaishnavites), as later comers. Whether the self-immolation of Sati over non-inclusion of Shiva in her father’s Vedic rites and then later marriage of Shiva and Parvati was towards reconciling two distinct, i.e., more ancient and later traditions. Whether Vyasa made his heroic figures, men and women, in the Mahabharata, mostly dark-skinned (as he was himself) to make a point to fair-skinned people he lived among. Valmiki made Rama dark-skinned, as he was himself was, presumably too.

    0
  15. Towards Indo-Aryan vs indigenous Brahmin, I’ve harbored uneducated guesses about (though maybe that is a much later merge event) whether Iyers(Shaivite) were more indigenous than Iyengars(Vaishnavites),

    genetically the same.

    0

Comments are closed.