From OIT to AIT

By GauravL 122 Comments

For TL;DR jump to My reasons for this position today are


Yesterday I tweeted about how OIT is becoming an Article of Faith on the Hindutva Wing in a thread related to Ruchir Sharma podcast where he dodged the AIT question. I further tweeted the change in my position of one supporting OIT (till 2018) to AIT by 2018 especially in face of the recent genetic evidence and following the work by Razib Khan. I was contacted by BP regular guest and host of the Carvaka podcast – Kushal Mehra and we had a long (3 hours) chat. His reading of the issue (Archeology and Rgveda) is much more robust than mine and I felt as Hemu’s army would’ve felt battling Babur’s projectiles. (though I am still not convinced by his argument). Hence I write this piece to evaluate my evolution with the Aryan question and also putting my current position & its defense in digital ink.

Like most Indians, I had read about the Aryan invasion theory as a historic fact and only got introduced to the inherent racism in the initial framing of the AIT after my schooling. In 2008 the paper, Reconstructing Indian Population History came out and the terms ANI and ASI got popularized. The media commentary on the paper (as with the Rakhigarhi paper) seemed to suggest the genetic data had refuted the AIT. Influential public figures like Subramanian Swamy (who appeared a lot more respectable to me in 2008-09) and few lesser-known Marathi influencers and others championed the debunking of the AIT myth in the public sphere which was not refuted except well enough except by historians like Romila Thapar (in whom I have low trust around politically charged topics as proven in Babri case). Things started getting heated in Indian Media around 2013-14 with after the publication of Genetic Evidence for Recent Population Mixture in India. But my interest in the Aryan issue came due to this article by scientist and influencer Anand Ranganathan on newslaundry (before then I had been largely ignored the arguments and counterarguments). I had some instinctive unease with these ANI/ASI argument against AIT but chose to ignore my doubts as Geneticists from India & commentators like Anand Ranganathan (who is a scientist), Sanjeev Sanyal, even anti-Hindutva Shashi Tharoor chose to concur with the views refuting the AIT.

In the following year or two, I read the following

  • Romila Thapar on Ancient History (small bands of herders)
  • Upinder Singh (who is non-committal)
  • Michael Daninos Lost River (the most reverent Sarasvati)
  • Free Papers on Academia – especially the Michael Witzel and Shrikant Talegeri debate.
  • Koenraad Elst’s blogs.
  • Edwin Bryant’s Indo Aryan controversy book.
  • Sections of Mallory’s book
  • Ambedkar’s book on Shudras

I particularly saw the linguistic arguments for AIT to be weak largely attributable to my ignorance of the field. I see myself as extremely ignorant about history in general around then, for my interest in non-fiction is very recent (2015 onwards). In some ways, I am still not well-read compared to most authors/commentators here. I  haven’t read any history from outside India other than British, American, and WW2.

Hence I was moderately convinced by Danino’s Sarasvati argument back then. Additionally following the Witzel-Talageri debate I found a lot of criticism of Talageri ad-hominem and patronizing. The dismissal of Talageri’s work as a bank clerk’s revisionist Hindutva did not seem scholarly to me (I mean Witzel’s criticism did not appear scholarly but ad-hominem). In my view, Edwin Bryant’s book confuses as it doesn’t take a position after 500+ pages. However in the end the lack of Archeological support for AIT (no significant change in material culture) made me convinced that the AIT was flawed. As I see this as a binary problem i.e either AIT or OIT has to be true to explain the spread of Indo-European languages, my position was that of OIT. I also felt AMT is a workaround for the problematic parts and holes in the AIT.

In 2017-18, around the time The Genomic Formation of South and Central Asia hit the biorxiv and created quite a few waves in the Indian media, articles by Tony Joseph, Shoaib Daniyal, and Hartosh Bal made enough noise on my twitter timeline to make me take a renewed interest in the controversy. Around that time David Reich’s book was published and most AIT guys used Reich’s book to bolster their claims. By the time I had completed Reich’s book I was almost convinced of the AIT yet I made an effort to cross-check the counterviews. I reached out to Anand Ranganathan who sort of dodged my cross-questions. I also reached out to Swarajya Magazine (of whom I was a subscriber in 2018/19) and was not at all convinced by the explanation given by them here and here. On reading work by Razib & other genome bloggers who got a shout out in David Reich’s book I was even more convinced by their arguments. I read Tony Joseph’s Early Indians and it does a good job of laying out the data IMO. However one always notices the author’s political biases coming up especially around his handling of Caste( I find it extremely stupid to look back at events that are speculated 2000 years ago with today’s moral compass and use it making political points calling the Brahmins in 100 AD the original Tukde-Tukde gang.)

I have since, also read David Anthony’s book, Narsimhan and Shinde papers, read most BP blogs (including JR’s pieces) and comments on AIT/OIT, followed a small bit of linguistics, and listened to the views of Niraj Rai, Shrikant Talageri (on Carvaka), Koenrad Elst. I still continue to hold the view that AIT probably happened and more importantly OIT seems highly implausible.

My reasons for this position today are:

  1. I am partial to the view that Genes and Languages are moderately correlated. There are exceptions as readers of this blog would know, but they are exceptions. As the genetic data points out that 10-20% of Indian ancestry comes from Bronze Age Steppe, I find it highly implausible that such large changes wouldn’t result in some language change – especially given the gradients of Steppe wrt North/South and Caste. Additionally, the complete absence of AASI like genetic ancestry beyond the boundaries of the Mauryan & Mughal empires at their zenith is big deal. If any kind of OIT that doesn’t explain satisfyingly falls short. (Roma Gypsies have AASI)
  2. On the whole, I find the Steppe hypothesis works well linguistically and archaeologically to an exceptional degree in my reading – for Europe. By Occam’s razor, it would be fair to assume India isn’t an outlier among regions speaking Indo-European. Small objections like this don’t debunk the entire Steppe hypothesis IMO.
  3. The lack of material culture change associated with AIT is a problem, but the same objection is also present for OIT. Lack of evidence isn’t the absence of evidence. At best archaeologically the AIT/OIT debate is a Tie.
  4. I find Talageri’s work lays excessive claim on his interpretation of Rgveda and Avesta. I find the Rgveda has no memory of invasion argument weak. What we know of the Rgveda might just the memory preserved post the Bharata victory in the Dasarajna (Victor’s memory). It would be plausible that memories of invasion may be lost by accident of history. I am no expert on either Rgveda or Linguistics (I have read only 4-5% of Ralph T.H. Griffith translation) but I still find the lack of scholarly approval of Talageri’s work a problem from believing his work. However, on Kushal’s advice, I am going to read his entire work – 3 books hopefully by sometime next year.
  5. I take the Horse argument seriously. The paucity of equid bones IVC itself is significant. Especially if you compare them to Steppe sites. (The Botai & other steppe sights are extreme in the sheer quantity of horse bones). On the whole, I find Anthony’s horse hypothesis holds in face of the data we have today.
  6. I don’t see the Sanuali find as a game-changer. The Daimabad hoard Bull drawn cart/chariot has been known for decades. I don’t think the argument for Sanauli chariot being Horse-drawn is convincing yet. Also, the lack of spoked wheels would make the chariot less agile which would make it not a War-chariot like Sintasta. Anthony had to fight a lot for years before even his finds (which are far more impressive than Sanauli) at Sintasta were taken seriously as a war chariot by the community. His chariots were disproved by peers for things like width, length, etc. At the least, it’s premature to call the Sanauli chariot as a deal-breaker for AIT. Additionally latest the dating of Sanauli at 1800BCE isn’t far enough from the 1500+-200 date given for AIT. Rather the 1800BCE dating appears consistent with Asko Parpola’s first Pre Rgvedic Arya migration theory.
  7. I have heard Slapstik’s BP podcast, read his comments, and also those of some others who know linguistics along with some light reading of linguistics. The linguistic argument appears robust enough for my non-expert ears.
  8.  In historic times, since the Persian invasion during the time of Bimbisara to the invasion of Abdali – the flow of invasions has been Strictly One Way – from the Bolan/Khyber pass to the Subcontinent. (in some cases as speculated with some Hunas – via Kashmir). Examples of these being Persians, Greeks, Sakas, Parthians, Kushanas, Hunas, Arabs, Turko Afghans, Mongols, Mughals, Persians, and Afghans. These invasions have a concrete economy to them – the fertile and prosperous lands of the Indo-Gangetic plains. So it begs the question – why would Indo-Aryans go out if they were indigenous. Many reasons for coming IN & almost no for going out.
  9. I find the arguments over Sarasvati which convinced me once unconvincing today. I think the argument comes from the position of reverence to the holy Sarasvati from the Rgveda & laying excessive emphasis on it. I am convinced by the general argument of the same names being used for rivers by migrating people and we have many examples of that in the country. Additionally, the Shtich that the Yamuna changed course and dried up Sarasvati made famous by Amish’s fiction appears on its face – an extraordinary claim with almost no concrete evidence.

Closing comments:

  1. It’s fair to say both sides in India are fairly motivated by politics. I don’t find the OIT arguments as ridiculous as some AIT supporters find, but one can’t ignore the identity politics and question of Islam being catalytic in the debate. Personally, I don’t think this is a coherent position, I supported the OIT while being a Liberal opponent of Hindutva for almost 2-3 years and even today I am open to change my mind in face of new evidence. However, I think it’s unlikely that I will be easily convinced without some genetic data or more archaeological data (more chariots around 2500 BCE with horses).
  2. A salient point made by Talegiri is worth noticing. He claims that the Indians who continue to support AIT are Brahmins who have not yet given up their supremacist mindset. He also conjectures such support for AIT goes hand in hand with the defense of Varna. Growing up as a Chitpavan Brahmin I know this argument has some truth to it, though Maharashtrian Brahmin communities have given up those supremacist ideas in 2020. In a way, Hindutva has united what Varna/Jati had divided.
  3. A version of OIT seems to be too fantastic to be true but works with genetics and archaeological findings. This theory being Aryas composed the Vedas before 3000 BCE, some of them settled in IVC cities, some went out into the Steppe. And then these Steppe people spread the languages and a pulse came back around 1500 BCE and composed the latter Rgveda. I naturally don’t buy this 🙂
  4. In the end, the difference is what kind of evidence people are willing to buttress their arguments on. Most of the time such opposing views would talk past each other. I get a feeling no amount of Ancient DNA will convince OIT folks who take the Rgvedic & archeological arguments over Genetics/Linguistics. Personally, I am partial to Genetics\Linguistics as I find it more Sciency than Reconstruction from texts & archaeology (or lack thereof).

Postscript:

I plan to read Talageri’s books, Asko Parpola’s Roots of Hinduism, Mallory’s book again in the coming years as I find the issue fascinating. I guess that Razib, Slapstik, and others who have been at this topic for years on the blog might be finding the topic boring by now. Still, I would urge them to comment and point out any inconsistencies or blindspots I may have had in my summary above. Same for OIT guys – as already mentioned I will be reading Talegiri – is he the main guy you rely on? How many of you are patrons of Kushal’s AIT/OIT work ? which appears to be very extensive.

I said above that Talageri is not Hindutva but have been corrected by Kushal made the change in the blogpost.

5+

122 Replies to “From OIT to AIT”

  1. issue isn’t ideologically polarized yet. right now there are plenty of hindutva/ish ppl who are OK with AIT. they just don’t talk about it much cuz it’s not that important, and a minority of their ideological peers are vocal and care a lot. it will probably become ideologically polarized, idk

    1+
    1. I think most people are sensible and unless pushed they don’t take a hard position. How many Hindus defend vedic cosmology? or creationism? Some weirdos like Hare-Krishnas do but majority even in villages actually knows that all this (including religion) is made up BS, they are just acting and conforming. But where is the pressure or advantage in conforming to OIT for a lay person? Muslims really want AIT to be true to justify coerced conversions and other depredations. The caste Hindus want AIT to be true so that they too can claim to be elves, the lower castes want AIT to be true because it is currently trendy to feel victimized. There is no need to back OIT.

      The conspiracy theorists (aka mah narrative, nazariyati people) would never accept, it’s not that they thought this through anyways. As expected each humiliating debate lost would make them bitter and more vocal, if their every move is predictable why bother?

      2+
    2. Agree with Razib. Its a non issue. I dont think it would become an ideological polarized issue going forward as well. No ideology in N-India will start the debate by saying “we are all outsiders” and hope to win anything.

      The only folks who are on the AIT side as of now are mostly S-Indians and Bengali bhadraloks (from the Hindu side) and non Hindus (Daniyal ,Joseph). Sometimes they merge as well. And for them AIT is just an improvised version of their earlier argument, for S-Indians it was Aryans are the enemy, and for non Hindus ,Hindus can’t claim sole legitimacy on the land.

      But these arguments for or against are just preaching 2 the choir, and has no impact outside of the bubble.

      1+
  2. Even if we knew nothing much about linguistics, genetics or archaeology, just the distribution of IE languages is enough to figure out that IE homeland is not in India. Circumstantial evidence I know but enough to shift the odds away from India.

    Also it is obv to any Indian that the whole debate is not really about Arya homeland at all but something else entirely. These are the tangled webs we weave and complex dances we execute when we don’t want to spell out what we really think.

    3+
        1. In my eyes – Islam and its position that is a crucial part but not the only emotional motivation of OIT. There is the rebuttal of racist AIT which still causes some grievances to Indians as another strand along with some supremacist view of owns history. WeWuzTheVirginalSmart

          0
          1. @Gaurav

            You shouldn’t kid yourself.

            Indians (Hindus) have a LOT of appetite for “white” ancestry, if it weren’t for the bragging rights / street cred lost w.r.t. exogeneity of Islam. Hindus didn’t assimilate into Islam, but couldn’t digest it either and that original sin animates much of Hindu conservatism including this OIT shizzle. End of.

            0
          2. Indians (Hindus) have a LOT of appetite for “white” ancestry,
            I don’t refute this. I know from my own Caste how there is an appetite for Jewish ancestry leading to fantastic conspiracy theories. Now the same folks who championed these conspiracy theories take umbrage at these theories today.

            Islam may have been the starting point but now the movement has a life of its own. Having said that there is a strand in OIT which stems from the rejection of white man’s explanation – be it an attack on Max muller and others or even some attack on Parpola, Pollock, Witzel, Reich today. It not very dissimilar to nativist reactions to colonialism in other parts (like Chinese rejection of Out of Africa).
            Both these (appetite for white ancestry and rejection/conspiratorial view of all things white) can be seen as reactions to colonization born out of inferiority complex

            0
    1. @ slapstik Bingo. After reading this, I felt as though i did something wrong by not investing on this much beyond my teens and early 20’s. You put in a non trivial amount of time gaurav. I wish you the best. ( I did however secretly root for oit when new genetic evidence was presented as though it was correct, i was however willing to wait).

      0
      1. Well as I alluded to Folks like Kushal have arguably spent 10-20* more time.
        I don’t look back at the time spent as sunk cost – rather this debate interested me in history and especially the various streams of migrations and languages.
        I took interest in BP and Razibs work also because of this topic. And how I want to read a lot more about world history which would be enjoyable I believe.

        1+
    1. I haven’t read his commentary on this issue Though I was referred to it once. I have seen his work on Bhargavas when I was looking at potential names with good sound/meaning and history for my baby which I found fascinating and some other readings of scriptures Though.

      0
  3. Muslims really want AIT to be true to justify coerced conversions and other depredations. The caste Hindus want AIT to be true so that they too can claim to be elves, the lower castes want AIT to be true because it is currently trendy to feel victimized. There is no need to back OIT.

    yeah but most of these people don’t care either. the only muslims who seem to really be into AIT are secular left muslims. even pak nationalists bring it up without verve. a lot of caste hindus DON’T want it to be true. it separates them from the rest and breaks india unity?

    idk. you can get a lot of things from the science. e.g., everyone in india is an ANI/ASI mix. that’s something that is real. the biggest % of ancestry is IVC. so you can use that.

    the main sticking point is that the steppe % is highish in some groups and a lot of the culture (language) is steppe and so has shallow roots. also, the sex bias in steppe ancestry is ‘uncomfortable’ some ppl here have proposed sexy male slaves. which is not impossible, but unlikely

    4+
    1. Yup; the Data can fit for cohesion more than division I guess. Caste being the obvious dividing feature – but we don’t need genetics to tell us that right !

      As Razib says – IVC is the strongest contender for indian ancestry – and that culture as alluded to by many including Parpola binds Hinduism along with Vedic thought – for folks who don’t want Vedic thoughts.

      Additionally the Shtich that Rgvedic people were foreigners doesn’t work at all for 1500bce. As they had no robust memory of external homeland they clearly thought of themselves are Local – Though differentiated from Non Aryas.

      But even if OIT (Talageri one) is true or the sexy slave – there will be things there which could be uncomfortable – Just because sex slaves were males doesn’t make the Sex slaves Ok against female slaves or Dasyus.

      Clearly the Janapada period (post Dasarajna) was one of mixing of 2-3 differential cultures where Arya’s weren’t always on top and were allies and enemies with both aasi like folks and IVC likes folks.

      0
  4. @Gaurav

    Very concise summary of your travel on the left and right sides of the debate.

    I see this as the Indian historical equivalent of the “Big Bang vs Cyclical Model” in astronomy. Difference is – there are sincere attempts to harmonize and explain both the empirical and circumstantial data opposing either theory. Roger Penrose, this year’s Nobel Prize winner, is a very meticulous backer of the Cyclical Model – and to do that he has to explain why the cyclical model will not conflict with anisotropic data of the CMB or the implications for quantum theory.

    There is a singular lack of these type of efforts to explain the “deviations” in AIT vs OIT – viz. the lack of archaeology for AIT – especially when there exists ample archaeological proof for all the other historic invasions since the time of Bimbisara.

    Or for example, the absolute lack of speculation/theorizing regarding the language/dialects of IVC if AIT were to be true. It remains the only ancient “mute” civilization – at least in the eyes of AIT backers. Parpola hypothesizes extensively without any controls.

    In addition to OIT, I am partial to a few exotic theories – like the “Aryan Slave Theory” and the “AIT before 4000 BC”. In the end, I would like to rank the science behind the reasoning.

    1. Archaeology – top of the list – there would be no debate if there were no artifacts and of course, it is driven largely by empiricism.

    2. Analysis of literary artifacts – this is an exercise in rationality – but provides a solid backing to the coherence emerging from other empirical disciplines.

    3. Geohydrology and Fluviology – Sarasvati might in the end dispel the darkness. Over 20 papers in the last 5 years are proving that a glacial fed river existed until 4600 kya between the Sutlej and the Yamuna (like the Rgveda states). After all, why do Rakhigarhi, Kalibangan and Dholavira lie in close proximity to the Ghaggar Hakra paleochannel?

    4. Genetics – Empirical field but the sample survival bias of aDNA (100 Steppes samples to 1 Indian) might have distortion effects. But still this is the one field that will conclusively provide time periods to the debate.

    5. Linguistics – Trash because it is not amenable to calculus. Can neither predict nor quantify rate of change. Not even a hard science.

    4+
    1. Yes. I guess people will come up to different conclusions also based on their preferences not just biases. That’s how minds work I guess. Other debates in science r also testimony to it.

      I for once don’t find the OIT position impossible – if anything the changing contours of Out of Africa has humbled most folks on certainty of positions wrt deep history. If Reich can speculate – as he did that Homo erectus like creatures went out around 1million years ago and future evolution took place in Eurasia instead of Africa before back migration around 300000-400000 years – the Fantastic theory of back migration also can be speculated.

      I just don’t think it’s plausible from my POV as of Now.

      0
  5. There is no clinching evidence for AIT – all circumstantial. A good defence lawyer can easily shred AIT in the Western Court of Approval and Authentication. OTOH, to say , genes and languages went out of India to form languages and peoples even in Europe in historical times, much before gypsies – is a stretch . BTW, Indologists in the early part of 19th century believed exactly that. Even Karl Marx , writing in 1850s , calls India, source of “our religion and languages” , even as he was vaguely approving of British colonialism as a capitalist advance against Indian fuedalism.
    Basically all these debates and arguments are about real or imagined hegemonic thought systems, whether disapproving or approving such a hegemony.. If you are a committed dravidian ideologue, you would go for full monty Ayran Invasion theory , which presumably would prove Sanskrit and brahmins are alien to India and would delegetimise them in some way. If you beleieve in OIT, it would somehow counter the delegitimisation theories of Dravidian ideology, Dalits , Khalistanis and who else. If you are a British colonisliast AIT would legitimise their own hegemony in some way. Some 30 years back, I met an Hindi Instructor in a large Indian government company who was fully convinced aryans defeated dravidians and drove them to south India and he was describing it as if were a vivid scene from Sholay and therefore Hindi was the right National language and that justified his job AIT-OIT arguments are seeking legitimizations in an ideological power play. Historians think of the future and imagine the past

    2+
  6. in the 19th century sanskrit seemed likely to be the most ancient indo-european language. basal. so it wasn’t totally unreasonable to posit that india was the source.

    1) the discovery through translation that linear B was greek pushed indo-european in mainland europe to before 1000 BC
    2) the discovery of hittite in anatolia pushed indo-european to 2000 BC there

    so argument from antiquity go weaker. the origin of the language family got way more prehistoric

    today there is evidence for massive and strong gene flow into north/west s asia and into ‘upper castes’ that is very recent. btwn 0 and 2000 BC, with panmix peaking btwn 1000 BC and 0 AD. perhaps the newcomers didn’t bring a new culture/language, just genes. most geneticists are skeptical of this. i don’t argue much about it because the evidence is strong enough i don’t care what OIT ppl think, though i read some of that stuff because they bring new facts to light that are interesting and refine our understanding

    3+
  7. 4. Genetics – Empirical field but the sample survival bias of aDNA (100 Steppes samples to 1 Indian) might have distortion effects. But still this is the one field that will conclusively provide time periods to the debate.

    i thought i explained to you why this is a misleading issue re: sample comparison. one whole genome samples an individua’s whole pedigree back for hundreds of years and samples of parts of other peoples’ genomes.

    this is why in europe we haven’t learned much about mesolithic hunter-gatherers after the first genome (we have dozens now). one individual is representative of a whole population if there is panmixia

    sample size does matter. but not nearly as much as you think it does. the fact is rakhigahari woman does not resemble any living person in india EVER sampled due to their proportions (much higher non-steppe west eurasian than AASI, no steppe ancestry) is very informative.

    5+
    1. Yes, I understand that. But twenty aDNA samples (gender distributed equally) from the Indian Heartland in the 5000 yBP timeframe will make the findings robust. Sample of one is a cliche.

      0
      1. Yes, I understand that. But twenty aDNA samples (gender distributed equally) from the Indian Heartland in the 5000 yBP timeframe will make the findings robust. Sample of one is a cliche.

        you are not a geneticist, so you don’t know what you are talking about. for other readers i will explain

        – gender distribution is irrelevant unless you want Y chromosome. that is all. men and women have the same mtdna distribution, and male/female ratio can be inferred from the X chromosome (it is present 2/3 of the time in female lineages, so men reflect this).

        – no idea what “cliche” means. don’t throw words out there to bluff, i know you’re full of shit when you do that

        – the results from a genome of one ARE robust. that’s because when you sample 3 billion base pairs that’s 3 billion observations. so, using methods like PSMC you can use variant heterozygosity on the genome to infer the whole population history of the lineage. you seem to think individuals are magic, but they’re not. in genetics individuals are just bundles of genes, and you have 20,000 to sample from per individual. when genetics consisted of 1-10 markers sample sizes of individuals were more important

        yes, a sample of 20 would be better. but it would not be 20x better. depending on the population structure more like 2-3x better.

        0
        1. Men and women would have the same distribution if it is the same population. But what if there were distinct sub populations. On an internal level this could be caste in a settlement, and on an external level it could be different settlements/cultures like eastern domain vs western domain and other distinctions that we may not be aware of.

          Though it will all be a combinations of Iran and aasi, there can be different combinations in different places (more r30 in one, more m5 in another, more u7 in a third location) which might end up somewhat correlating with different cultural zones. Same with ydna, some zones having more J, some having more R2 and some with more L.

          0
  8. I had a similar journey on this topic. From being very sure about AIT (but unhappy about it) to being very sure about OIT to now understanding something very complex did happen that is nuanced and not easily summarized into terms like AIT or OIT. In this long journey I was led into different directions by very different people with very different political agendas (even knowledgeable people like eurogenes have an agenda). In the end I found Razibs explanation of things most convincing. He was able to come to the debate with deep knowledge of the science as well as an understanding of the south Asian culture without being biased by it as he is an atheist from a Muslim family. So in the end, I prefer his AMT explanation the best.

    Having said all that, the word Arya to me is not a Z282 word it’s a Z93 word. It’s very difficult to get some of the euros to admit that. Stop cultural appropriation! AryanLivesMatter! Jai Shri Indra!

    2+
  9. “one whole genome samples an individua’s whole pedigree back for hundreds of years and samples of parts of other peoples’ genomes.” — @Razib dada, Apologies for my stupid questions but

    (i) what if there were strong endogamic clusters present in the IVC region ? In that case, would the rakhigarhi woman be representative of the whole IVC population ?

    (ii) In a *hypothetical* case where late harappan and PGW samples don’t turn out to have any steppe ancestry, would that mean a revision of timeline for the arrival of steppe folks beyond the sapta-sindhu ? I believe by the time of yajueveda, the aryans had already reached the gangetic plains

    0
  10. I’m surprised this debate even exists after all the findings and progress that’s been made in the field of genetics, archeology and linguistics by now.
    Just shows how out of touch with reality the whole Hindutva movement is.

    2+
    1. On the other hand, many Muslims in the Indian subcontinent believe that they descended from invaders and not from Hindus. The lack of respect for scientific data underpins many naratives.

      6+
      1. Green Veggies: “On the other hand, many Muslims in the Indian subcontinent believe that they descended from invaders and not from Hindus. The lack of respect for scientific data underpins many naratives.”

        That statement is half true for Pakistanis. I only wish more people subscribed to the true part, i.e. a large number of Pakistanis did not have Hindu ancestors.

        Around 80% Pakistanis in my experience actually believe they had Hindu ancestors. Looks like this narrative sold well.

        By the time Muslims arrived in Sindh, Brahminism coming from the Gangetic plains was not very well established. Most Sindhi and Punjabi groups were Avarna, with lots of hostility between these groups vs. Brahmins as recorded in the Chach nama. In other parts of Pakistan Hindu varna people did not exist. The Hindu Shahi Kshatriya were the furthest the Gangetic Hindus went, ruling over a largely non-Hindu population.

        For most of history, before arrival of Zoroastrianism and Buddhism, ancestors of Pakistanis practiced Indo-European religions similar to what the Kalash practice. No caste, no unhygienic rituals, no temple prostitution.

        0
        1. After this spiritual realisation, you can convert to Buddhism and Zoroastrianism (both religions have Indic influence); be closer to your ancestors.

          2+
          1. fulto: “After this spiritual realisation, you can convert to Buddhism and Zoroastrianism (both religions have Indic influence); be closer to your ancestors.

            We can go further back and reclaim our cave roots. Let’s all become cave men and establish one global culture!

            Lol jokes aside, the way forward is Westernization, not a thousand steps back.

            1+
        2. practiced Indo-European religions similar to what the Kalash practice. No caste, no unhygienic rituals, no temple prostitution.

          first, this is bullshit. that people in pakistan would not be called Hindu. it is as valid as OIT. there were brahmins and Buddhists in sindh.

          second, i am a big respecter of the kalash. but hygenic is not something i would describe them as… (reading about their habits and customs). you seem to be trading in the idea of the dirty and licentious hindu. you should open your mind and join the 21st century. the fact is most peoples define outgroups as dirty and licentious. perhaps it says more about human psychology than actual cultural practices?

          3+
          1. “first, this is bullshit. that people in pakistan would not be called Hindu. it is as valid as OIT. there were brahmins and Buddhists in sindh.”

            You gotta admit Brahmins were recent entrants and the vast majority of Sindh population at the time of Chach nama was Avarna. Buddhism made great inroads in Pakistan and beyond, no doubt.

            “second, i am a big respecter of the kalash. but hygenic is not something i would describe them as… (reading about their habits and customs).”

            Why so? It’s all relative though. May be not so clean by Western standards.

            ” you seem to be trading in the idea of the dirty and licentious hindu. you should open your mind and join the 21st century. the fact is most peoples define outgroups as dirty and licentious. perhaps it says more about human psychology than actual cultural practices?”

            I don’t hate Hindus. But the unhygiene impression is sort of universal. See how the Indian Hindu wife of this Western vlogger compares Pakistan and India at the end of her visit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WvnjZMXb5dE

            Despite India and your ancestral country Bangla desh having comparable GDP, India’s open defecation rate is 53% as opposed to Bangla’s 4%.

            How is that possible without cultural differences?

            1+
          2. @J Khan
            Stop being an idiot. India’s open defecation rate is 25.7% vs Pakistan’s 10.7%. You are not so much better. Government priorities and lack of education easily explain why this is so. Since you claim to be modern, you can leave Islam; it is also a relic of the past. What do you say?

            3+
          3. fulto: “Stop being an idiot.”

            Another Hindu nationalist who can’t take criticism and resorts to ad hominem.

            fulto: “India’s open defecation rate is 25.7% vs Pakistan’s 10.7%. You are not so much better. Government priorities and lack of education easily explain why this is so.”

            Where did you get those absurd figures? Anyways watch this brave Indian woman doing a TED talk on this matter to understand this issue. She provides solid data and statistics to highlight the problem: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V35Vw29tay0

            fulto: “Since you claim to be modern, you can leave Islam; it is also a relic of the past. What do you say?”

            I’m not a practicing Muslim anyway. But I absolutely love how Islam and Christianity has replaced most primitive religions based on racism and caste. If you’re not a upper caste you should not defend the indefensible. Just the other day a Dalit girl was raped and killed, in 2020! ‘Ancient’ness hasn’t quite lost steam yet.

            2+
          4. @J Khan
            This is my last reply to you. It must be nice being as bigoted and misinformed as you.

            India: 3.5 – 25% (Depending on which report you choose to believe)
            Pakistan: 10%
            How does it sound now? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_defecation)

            There are enough problems in your society, religion, etc. Deal with problems in your country, culture, etc. before claiming anything. I wish the best to you.

            2+
  11. Just shows how out of touch with reality the whole Hindutva movement is.

    i keep pointing this out: most hindu nationalists don’t care/believe in OIT. it’s a smal vocal minority. i know hindu nationalists who are 100% in alignment with me on these questions. but, they don’t talk much about it in public because a minority of their fellow travelers are vocal and abusive about it. but even these are a minority in a minority. a lot of OIT people are wrong, but they’re not nasty.

    4+
    1. Team dynamics and team loyalty I guess. I have seen lot of Hindutva folks leave these questions with as certainty as Rahul Dravid left the ball outside off stump.

      0
  12. (i) what if there were strong endogamic clusters present in the IVC region ? In that case, would the rakhigarhi woman be representative of the whole IVC population ?

    this is an issue. but the indus periphery cluster shows a cline. if one had to put her with any population, it would be the indus periphery individuals.

    (ii) In a *hypothetical* case where late harappan and PGW samples don’t turn out to have any steppe ancestry, would that mean a revision of timeline for the arrival of steppe folks beyond the sapta-sindhu ? I believe by the time of yajueveda, the aryans had already reached the gangetic plains

    it could. one thing to consider is that the landscape india 1500-1000 BC was ‘patchy’. there were ‘pure’ AASI in india probably 2,000 years ago or so. there were probably ‘pure’ ivc people 500-1000 years after the arrival of the aryans?

    note that i always point out: steppe and AASI goes up in swat valley at the same time. this indicates reflux from ‘contintental’ india as the whole subcontinent becomes integrated under the trident of indra!

    you’re welcome hindus.

    1+
    1. Don’t know if this is a stupid question, but is it possible to run hirisplex on the rakhigarhi woman?

      Also depending on the proportion of Iran-Related to AASI, the IVC population may also have shown significant phenotypical differences amongst its population. Is that accurate to say?

      Would be quite ironic if the caste system actually has origins in the Dravidian culture of the IVC.

      1+
      1. I have a Shtick –
        Jati is IVC – specialized roles due to large scale urban life
        Varna is Vedic – similar to Avestic and Persian 3 part system

        Razib what does the Genetics say about this Shtick

        0
        1. urban areas are always a small % of the population. also, everywhere we know they are demographic sinks. rural areas are where it’s at.

          jati is pretty robust in areas of south india with low steppe. there are ppl who think jati is native/indian, while varna was brought in by aryans. so it’s not unreasonable. whatever caste is, it is not indo-european. the caste systems in other indo-european societies are pretty simple, and divided between 2-4 groups that had class/occupational connotations. india is different

          2+
      2. Don’t know if this is a stupid question, but is it possible to run hirisplex on the rakhigarhi woman?

        ah, good idea. i didn’t think of that. not sure if those markers are there.

        i assume there were phenotypic differences in the population, yeah

        1+
  13. I consider myself above the artificial divide AMT/OIT, it is a local Indian folklore. However, on several occasions I was subjected to unsubstantiated attacks from OIT side. Considering that they have an ideological agenda which can be destroyed by a single evidence, I predicted that they would finish in lunacy if they don’t change their approach. As new evidence appears every day, so it intensifies their aggression. After couple attempts for me to be banned without any justification, I was called for e.g. a 60ies-style racist and some other names. Apart from personal attacks new oit generations start openly lying (e.g. ‘Byzantine historical sources documented arrivals of Slavic colonists’). I will dedicate a separate comment to some of their lie. In the past I had very respectful correspondence with leading OIT proponents in India. Sometimes, I send them, before I publish, my writings to have a look, even I know that we disagree in almost all things.

    I already said that at BP, since I in a half-joke discovered that Slapsie was a crypto-oit, he censored all my comments. I also stopped sending my comments. However, yesterday, not knowing who the author of the Urdu-Hindi text was, I sent a question to S Qureishi regarding Sanskrit because I noticed that he has a good knowledge of Sanskrit and local languages. This question was visible for a half of day and after that was deleted by Slapsie. For me, it was one of the most primitive things I have seen at BP. BP admins can consider that this can be perceived as their editorial policy and some would not like to be associated with such anti-intellectual environment.

    Anyway, currently there is a linguistic discussion at BP. I provided many new facts which are against oit mantra. There was no single objection which would find something incorrect. The dividing range is that Sanskrit has not originated in India and oit is not interested to discuss anything further. I realised that SA people, including almost all here at BP, are not ready yet to accept some things from their ancient history. Razib said: ‘perhaps the newcomers didn’t bring a new culture/language, just genes.’ Very interesting, it is possible to be an AMT (re genes) and an OIT (re Sanskrit and everything else). It opens many questions – what was the language of newcomers for several thousands of years before arrival, have they brought at least some words to Sanskrit, what has happened with their high culture from thousands of years before, have they forgotten to bring anything from this culture to new homeland and came empty handed, when and how Sanskrit left SA (probably after this arrival) and influenced languages in Europe and who did this, etc, etc.

    0
  14. All the points — raised by OP — can be explained very easily. I promise that I won’t talk past any point — and leave any argument unattended so to speak — he raises in this post; he, and everyone else, is welcome to cross-question me on any point. My answers, however, do not prove that OIT is true beyond doubt; my only goal is to demonstrate how fragile all the proofs are, to be honest.

    First of all, I appreciate that OP, even with his lack of knowledge, has made an effort to collate all the proofs that he thinks are true; a willingness to learn is a virtue that everyone should possess. Secondly, I would like to state that we don’t know things concretely; and things are evolving at a very fast pace; only time will tell what is the truth.

    Thirdly, OP seems to be unaware that astronomical proofs are available for dating Rig Veda.

    Fourthly, the title of the OP’s post is wrong. It should be AMT. Among scholars, it is well known that AIT has been debunked; no knowledgeable person asserts that it is true; AMT is another matter. I wish that OP in the future reads more current literature, and updates himself.

    Here is a point by point rebuttal to his post:

    Point 1
    OP makes the flawed assumption that AASI is the native ancestry. How do we know this? What is known currently is that there was at least one more ancestry in India, i.e., Iran_N before Harappa; its time of arrival in India is unknown. Furthermore, Reich asserts the homeland to be either Armenia or Iran. So, for OIT, this point is covered.

    Point 2
    What works for Europe does not work for India — linguistically and archaeologically — as OP himself has stated. Occam’s Razor breaks as the assertion is based on faulty reasoning and correspondence. Another reason is that the spread of IE languages is a complex event, so how does Occam’s razor work?

    Point 3
    I don’t understand how there is no “lack of material culture proof” for OIT. When there is material culture continuity — proven by archaeology — for India, this statement makes no sense. I hope OP clarifies this point.

    Point 4
    There are various other proofs from Rig Veda available that have been discovered by Talageri, such as: the names of tribes, flora and fauna, etc. I hope OP can answer all of them.

    Point 5
    For people who take horse argument — including me — very seriously:
    1. No horse in PIE.
    2. Painting of horse riders dated to OCP culture.
    3. I do hope that OP goes through the paper “Beyond Harappa: Chariots and Horses in Prehistoric India” for the current understanding of horse finds in India.

    Point 6
    The shape of the chariot made Indian archaeologists assert that the chariot was equid driven. All this is based on the laws of physics in the sense that only an equid can fit into the chariot discovered.
    Besides, Genetics has debunked Asko Parpola’s theory. He had postulated the arrival of IAs from BMAC based on words in Sanskrit that are solely present in it. According to him, IAs borrowed these hypothesized loan words from an unknown BMAC language. Now, with IAs having bypassed BMAC, there is no question of BMAC loan words in Sanskrit. Therefore, Asko Parpola’s theory is now dead.

    Point 7
    To answer this question, the OP must provide the linguistic proofs that he thinks are convincing. In the meantime, some linguistic facts:

    1. No Dravidian word in Old Rig Veda.
    2. All places/rivers of North India have IE toponyms.

    How do these facts allow AMT to be likelier than OIT? I hope that OP can elucidate his assertion and clear away my ignorance.

    Point 8
    This argument does not work as even without conquering any lands Indian culture and languages spread to China, and its neighboring areas. Moreover, both BMAC and IVC shared culture + belief and spoke a related language; IVC had colonies in Mesopotamia. We also have an example of the Mongol Empire — despite its extent — having a very small to negligible impact in spreading a language. The OP can read the genetic impact of Mongols from the following nature paper “Genetic imprint of the Mongol: signal from phylogeographic analysis of mitochondrial DNA.”

    Point 9
    Again, OP is posting outdated information. He should read the paper, published by a nature journal in 2019, for the current view on Saraswati “On the existence of a perennial river in the Harappan heartland”

    Quote from the paper
    “”
    We establish that during 80-20 ka and 9-4.5 ka the river was perennial and was receiving sediments from the Higher and Lesser Himalayas. The latter phase can be attributed to the reactivation of the river by the distributaries of the Sutlej.
    “”
    What we know scientifically: The Saraswati was perennial between ~ 7000 BC to ~2500 BC, and dried by ~1900 BC has been well established. The OP further asserts that various rivers had the same names. How does that explain the name Saraswati — describing a perennial river — given to a dead river? Nadi Sukta of Rig Veda fixes the location of Saraswati; I encourage the OP to read it for his satisfaction.

    To conclude, the proofs above are based on the current state of the art. Tomorrow, they can change a lot with more evidences.

    2+
      1. OP == “Original Poster” (in this instance, you.)

        I think you can just assign timepaas research work: of going through the archives of this web log starting ~5 years ago. Will save you a lot of time.

        1+
        1. @Numinous
          Believe it or not, I have been reading posts, related to Harappa, on this blog for at least half a decade. Furthermore, I want to play from both AMT and OIT side; it is much more fun that way; I can like do a neutral scholar mode. Sadly, very few people post from the OIT angle, and nobody asked me to post from the AMT side 😩. I will try to do it if you ask me.

          In my opinion, whether OIT or AMT is true, South Indians — whether in Harappa or Vedas — played an important, perhaps integral, part. So, why do Indians love to fight so much?

          4+

        1. Thirdly, OP seems to be unaware that astronomical proofs are available for dating Rig Veda.

          I dont lay much weight on astronomical proofs in ancient texts. As i heard Talageri on Carvaka neither does he. As I have seen sometimes they are easy to twist as per ur preference. But i havent read the complete Rgveda to be confident.

          Fourthly, the title of the OP’s post is wrong. It should be AMT.

          I dont find any different between AIT and AMT just semantics to appear less abrasive.


          Point 1
          OP makes the flawed assumption that AASI is the native ancestry. How do we know this? What is known currently is that there was at least one more ancestry in India, i.e., Iran_N before Harappa; its time of arrival in India is unknown. Furthermore, Reich asserts the homeland to be either Armenia or Iran. So, for OIT, this point is covered.

          AASI being indigenous is the strongest case. And its not just genetics – we know phenotypically that Indians are differentiated from the rest of the world. Like many, i assume it due to the AASI as most other components r found elsewhere as well.


          Point 2
          What works for Europe does not work for India — linguistically and archaeologically — as OP himself has stated. Occam’s Razor breaks as the assertion is based on faulty reasoning and correspondence. Another reason is that the spread of IE languages is a complex event, so how does Occam’s razor work?

          Human beings being similar to its likely similar modes of transmission took place. Reich puts this point well in the Tale of two subcontinents and it also comes across in Narasimhan paper. Common origin in steppe seems to be the simplest explanation for spread of indo european languages. even if it works for 80% its fair to assume it will work for all.


          Point 3
          I don’t understand how there is no “lack of material culture proof” for OIT. When there is material culture continuity — proven by archaeology — for India, this statement makes no sense. I hope OP clarifies this point.

          We dont see change of material culture in Iran, Central Asia associated with OIT.


          Point 4
          There are various other proofs from Rig Veda available that have been discovered by Talageri, such as: the names of tribes, flora and fauna, etc. I hope OP can answer all of them.

          No i cant 🙂 havent read his work in detail

          No horse in PIE. – hekwos refer this to Slapstik?
          Painting of horse riders dated to OCP culture. where ?


          The shape of the chariot made Indian archaeologists assert that the chariot was equid driven. All this is based on the laws of physics in the sense that only an equid can fit into the chariot discovered.
          Equid yes – Not horse though in my reading and even equid part is contested.

          Besides, Genetics has debunked Asko Parpola’s theory. He had postulated the arrival of IAs from BMAC based on words in Sanskrit that are solely present in it. According to him, IAs borrowed these hypothesized loan words from an unknown BMAC language. Now, with IAs having bypassed BMAC, there is no question of BMAC loan words in Sanskrit. Therefore, Asko Parpola’s theory is now dead.

          I don’t hold the view that if one detail of a large theory is disproven we disprove the entire theory. By that logic, all OIT and AIT theories can be disproven. The answer often lies somewhere else. Asko Parpola is a very well-respected scholar of linguistics and his theories are very well respected even by people who oppose him. His work cannot be brushed aside this easily.


          1. No Dravidian word in Old Rig Veda.

          Can it mean Aryas weren’t interacting much with Dravidians | would you agree? That seems likely if its new people coming in right? barriers take time to break.

          2. All places/rivers of North India have IE toponyms.

          Won’t speculate from a position of ignorance. Refer to Slapstik or others.
          All I know is there are Dravidian toponymns in Rajasthan, Gujarat, and Maharashtra and we know archaeologically than western and southern IVC collapsed later than North.


          Point 8

          Razib has answered this


          Again, OP is posting outdated information. He should read the paper, published by a nature journal in 2019, for the current view on Saraswati “On the existence of a perennial river in the Harappan heartland”

          Perennial yes, Does the paper confidently imply Glacier fed – apparently Yes? Will wait a few more years for more research to come up – for or against.


          How does that explain the name Saraswati — describing a perennial river — given to a dead river? Nadi Sukta of Rig Veda fixes the location of Saraswati; I encourage the OP to read it for his satisfaction.

          Witzel refers to the Hakra as Sarasvati – we don’t know if it was this dead at 1500BCE. Haven’t collated all the Sarasvati references – but there are often enough contradictions in texts themselves. As I said the excessive emphasis on Sarasvati and its memory is not something I give too much credence too. Is it a valid point yes – not a deal-breaker anyway.

          In the end, Numinous put it best
          Broadly speaking, it looks like people who believe in genetic science are compelled, if grudgingly to assign the preponderance of evidence to AIT/AMT, whereas those who assign a low weight to genetics and treat the contents of the Rig Veda as gospel history (like you) gravitate to OIT.

          1+
        2. @GauravL
          In the place, where you asked me, I have tried to answer from the AMT perspective.

          My reply:

          I dont lay much weight on astronomical proofs in ancient texts…
          Talageri only talks about proofs that are derived based on Rig Vedic verses. Astronomical dating of Rig Vedic texts based on the precession of the earth’s axis is datable and verifiable; it gives a date much before AMT migrants arrived. However, let us leave this point since it does not convince you. If you are interested, you can read the book “Descriptive Archaeoastronomy and Ancient Indian Chronology (2020) [A. Ghosh]” for a comprehensive review of the majority of OIT proofs.

          Point 1
          AASI being indigenous is the strongest case…
          I never denied it, but this does not imply that AASI was the only native ancestry present in India, when it isn’t — as proven by genetics; Iran_N ancestry is also indigenous in the sense that it has been present in India for a very long time, i.e., much before PIE. It is the Iran_N/CHG ancestry that is found — without exception — in every single IE group; Reich also considers Iran_N/CHG ancestry as a marker for PIE. India is big enough to hold 2 ancestries easily. Furthermore, later on, only during the time of Harappa, the AASI ancestry is found around India in BMAC, Iran, etc.

          Point 2
          Human beings being similar to its likely similar modes of transmission took place….
          The argument does not work as Europe was rural and India urban.

          Point 3
          We dont see change of material culture in Iran…
          That is untrue, archaeologically. Central Asia, parts of Iran, and Harappa had shared material culture + belief. On the basis of this, it was asserted that these regions spoke related (to what extent is unknown) languages.

          Point 4
          I hope if you have time, do read Talageri’s work.

          Point 5
          Painting of horse riders dated to OCP culture. where ?…
          Please go through the paper that I linked for all the horse proofs. Specifically for painting, read the pages 750-752 of ASI paper “A note on Chariot Burials found at Sinauli district Baghpat U.P”.

          Point 6
          Equid yes – Not horse though in my reading and even equid part is contested.
          Rig and Yajur Vedic horse had 17 pairs of ribs. Central Asian/Steppe horses have 18 pairs of ribs.

          Point 7
          I don’t hold the view that if one detail of a large theory…
          Even chariots are contested as having originated in Steppes, another key part of his theory. Moreover, the problem is that he asserts BMAC and Swat valley have shared material culture, i.e., are IA regions; Bustan, which is IA region, also has no or negligible Steppe ancestry. How does that work when IAs bypassed BMAC? My assertion is that a different explanation is needed; nobody – from the AMT side – appears to be working on it.

          Point 8
          Razib has answered this
          He answered partially. I also mentioned that historically, Indian culture and languages have dispersed without the direct spread of Indian ancestry.

          Point 9
          Can it mean Aryas weren’t interacting much with Dravidians | would you agree?
          Yes, the linguistic fact implies isolation. Somehow, IAs remained isolated in India, or near it, for a long time. To further illustrate, in any region with a sizable population, languages don’t die so easily; they leave substratum influences. Firstly, one explanation may be that Dravidians had nothing to do with Harappa — as asserted by Witzel; there is no support for his theory genetically though. Parpola, on the other hand, believed Harappa was Dravidian. An invasion may plausibly explain either of the scenarios; archaeology, on the other hand, asserts that only migration is possible.

          Nonetheless, IAs were pastoralists, so why did they invent their terms for IVC technologies if they spoke an unrelated language to Harappans? A question to ponder. In the whole Rig Veda, there are only 3% loan words. I once posted loan words in different IE languages on this blog. You can take a look and decide for yourself what is true. Link: https://www.brownpundits.com/2020/07/18/open-thread-brown-pundits-7-18-2020/#comment-67181

          The best explanation – according to me – is that Harappa was IE speaking; note I am not saying India was PIE.
          All I know is there are Dravidian toponymns in Rajasthan …
          The linguistic fact is important in the sense that it provides no support for migration/invasion.
          Point 10

          Perennial yes, Does the paper confidently imply Glacier fed – apparently Yes? Will wait a few more years for more research to come up – for or against.
          Sutlej is glacier-fed. Maybe, future research may change our understanding.

          Point 11
          Witzel refers to the Hakra as Sarasvati – we don’t know if it was this dead at 1500BCE…
          At this point, I also cannot say 100% that I am right. The iron age, nevertheless, started from the 16th century BC in India; Rig Veda must be composed by that time.
          As you can see, the proofs are inconclusive and will remain so. You can choose whatever side you think is right; but read Talageri’s work.

          3+
    1. @timepaas:

      This is a tiresome discussion at this point, but I’ll just say that all your points as weak, and further, have been discussed and challenged and responded to as nauseum on this very website for YEARS! Yet, every once in a while, someone like you comes along thinking of themselves as the fount of all wisdom, regurgitating the same tired tropes.

      Broadly speaking, it looks like people who believe in genetic science are compelled, if grudgingly to assign the preponderance of evidence to AIT/AMT, whereas those who assign low weight to genetics and treat the contents of the Rig Veda as gospel history (like you) gravitate to OIT.

      2+
      1. @Numinous
        I never said that I have proven OIT. My points were answers to the questions that @GauravL raised.

        Who knows what is true; frankly, I don’t know all the answers; and I cannot prove OIT conclusively. You are welcome to believe in AMT, if you think it is true; maybe, it is, and maybe I am wrong.

        3+
  15. We also have an example of the Mongol Empire — despite its extent — having a very small to negligible impact in spreading a language. The OP can read the genetic impact of Mongols from the following nature paper “Genetic imprint of the Mongol: signal from phylogeographic analysis of mitochondrial DNA.”

    1-i explained to you in another thread that the mongol expansion correlates with the soldification of turkic language. why are you bringing up this misleading point? i even told you at the time western mongolia was turkic (kerait and naiman were turkic)

    2-mitochondrial dna is maternal lineage. the spread of mongols was mostly males. mtdna would underestimate the impact, Y would overestimate. you clearly lack experience with the genetic literature you are citing. please don’t embarrass yourself in the future.

    these sorts of long rambling comments are not pleaseworthy to me

    1+
    1. @Razib Khan
      I believe a person must be shameless in the pursuit of knowledge 😃; after all, ignorance is the greatest shame. In the last post, I thought you were talking about the ~90% figure; I looked in detail, and that is wrong. In the future, I will post what I think is the correct figure with detailed references if I get time.

      Firstly, the genetics paper that I linked also talks about Y-DNA, and makes a similar point to what you have posted. Secondly, as far as I know, the initial army was Mongolian; that is why I thought it was a good example; maybe I am wrong; I will treat Mongols as an anomaly and not post about them. Thirdly, my long comments are because of nuances attached to the evidences. Fourthly, AMT can be right, and I can be totally wrong; no harm in admitting it.

      1+
      1. Secondly, as far as I know, the initial army was Mongolian

        no. the mongols as we understand were created by the mongol empire. the borgijins were one of the mongol speaking tribes in central mongol (the khitai were distantly related). but the dominant people in Mongolia at the time the keraits were turkic.

        the mongol empire mongolicized Mongolia. it fused the non-borgijiins together into the mongols (the khalkha mongols). mongol speaking ppl outside of this group, like the oirats of the west, remain somewhat distinct.

        you are delving into history you simply have no knowledge of. i happen to know a bit about mongol history.

        some of your points have nuance. a lot of them are quite muddled.

        that being said, you are not prone to the smug midwittery of ugra. perhaps you shall mature.

        0
  16. Continuing from my other comment about competing cosmological theories, when Roger Penrose also supported the cyclic universe theory, it caused consternation. Big Bang was well settled and chugging along, having received acclaim from the scientific world as well as the Christian/Judeo leaning Western elites – who found fresh winds in their theological sails. Now here was a celebrated mathematical physicist from Oxford who threatened to disrupt that warm, convivial consensus.

    The first counter-attack came in the form of “What existed in the earlier universe? And what caused it to collapse?” Sir Roger along with other members of his camp have published over 50 papers containing detailed mathematical explanations for the effect of the earlier universe and its interactions with the quantum world of the current universe.

    In the same vein, what do AIT backers think about the IVC? It leaves a rather large hole in the linguistic timeline of the Indian landmass.

    What language did they speak? If not IE, then Zagrosian?
    What IVC literature survives to this date?

    Asko Parpola is a well known researcher who did some long running research into these questions. He was feted by the Dravidian parties of Tamilnadu, which in a way contributed to the dimming of his scholarly status. Some of his assumptions have been thoroughly discarded by other researchers.

    It is my view that AIT lacks plausible explanations on “what happened anterior to it”. And this is also its Achilles Heel. It is rather inarticulate and unable to cogently synthesize on what sort of linguistic framework, for example, enabled the homogenization of building structures (down to the size of the bricks) 800 kms apart.

    2+
  17. Continuing from my other comment about competing cosmological theories, when Roger Penrose also supported the cyclic universe theory, it caused consternation. Big Bang was well settled and chugging along, having received acclaim from the scientific world as well as the Christian/Judeo leaning Western elites – who found fresh winds in their theological sails. Now here was a celebrated mathematical physicist from Oxford who threatened to disrupt that warm, convivial consensus.

    what the fuck are you talking about?

    In the same vein, what do AIT backers think about the IVC? It leaves a rather large hole in the linguistic timeline of the Indian landmass.

    stop uttering vapid bullshit. language families disappear all the time. ask the etruscans

    2+
    1. @Razib

      https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691119793/fashion-faith-and-fantasy-in-the-new-physics-of-the-universe

      Roger Penrose lays down why he thinks pre-cosmological explanations of Big Bang was pop-science to some degree (….like nothing existed before BB) and that it cannot explain anomalies in CMB.

      “…language families disappear all the time…”

      Ok, what was the family that disappeared from IVC? For example, what were the words for milk and diary products in that alternate family? AIT/AMT theorists limit themselves to the AFTER with implausible explanations. For example, OP posted above that Jati might be IVC and Varna might be Aryan. But the root of the word Jati is IE. IVC must have been IE speaking and there was also an invasion of people from the Steppes.

      5+
  18. GauravL, really appreciated this piece and the good faith impartiality of your approach. I’ve stopped following every twist and turn in the debate, possibly because I’m decidedly skeptical of OIT (never met a proponent who was emotionally divested).

    1+
  19. @slapstick on white ancestry pining

    Totally agree. I’ve wasted enough time arguing with extremely virulent versions of such types who want to make the case their group is more or less phenotypically some 19th century pseudoscientific classification, as a means of exotifying themselves in a manner that makes them, in their heads, more racially akin to recent global power broker groups.

    1+
  20. “Indians (Hindus) have a LOT of appetite for “white” ancestry”

    I think this phenomenon is heavily qualified by region, and to a lesser extent by caste. NW Jat/Jatt are most heavily into this, followed by some Konkan Brahmin communities. Its possible that some Rajputs are into such narratives as well. To be fair, some of these communities do have overwhelming amounts of Steppe ancestry as some commentators have pointed out.

    I’ve not heard many Bengali, Tamil or for that matter Kashmiri Brahmins show such inclinations.

    0
  21. I dont know how you can say AIT and AMT is only different on account of semantics after writing this in introduction.
    Quote / Like most Indians, I had read about the Aryan invasion theory as a historic fact and only got introduced to the inherent racism in the initial framing of the AIT after my schooling./
    There was a clear narrative in AIT which had to be revised after lack of evidence. SJW have used this to build false equivalence with later invasions.

    Personally I find myself agreeing to Aryan assimilation theory as explained by Razib in ‘They came, they conquered, & they were swallowed’ blogpost. Further the entry of Steppe people was not a single pulse event since no simple movement of people in either direction satisfies all the claims and counterclaims mentioned. The most interesting facts that stand out are:
    – Place toponyms in Gangetic plains being IE while those on western coast being Dravidian
    – Higher steppe and AASI for gangetic people at expense of relatively lower IVC
    – Jati endogamy still strong in south with lowest Steppe contribution
    – AASI contribution outside south asia and evidence for any out of India migration is weak at best

    According to current evidence I think the steppe were already in India since much longer time in areas outside influence of IVC (i.e gangetic forests). How they reached there bypassing IVC is open question. The decline of IVC + another wave of steppe could have resulted in shaking up the whole subcontinent and synthesis of Hinduism as we know from earlier beliefs of various constituent groups.

    1+
    1. iamVY

      I don’t know how you can say AIT and AMT is only different on account of semantics after writing this in the introduction.
      There was a clear narrative in AIT which had to be revised after lack of evidence. SJW have used this to build false equivalence with later invasions.

      Because I feel even if the Arya migrated there must’ve been conflicts. I don’t see it being Kumbaya. It would be a migration-only if the Indo-Gangetic plain was sparsely populated. Coming to historic invaders/migrants.

      Greeks – did they invade YES – were they assimilated – to a certain extent they must be. They took native religions for one.
      Sakas – did they invade – YES – were they assimilated by Indians – YES – Did to go native – Yes – First Sanskrit inscription is attributed to a Western Kshatrapa ruler.
      Turko-Afghans / Mughals – did they invade – YES – Were they assimilated by Indians? NO

      Yet all of the above are invaders at some point even those who assimilated.
      Hence it’s fair to assume Arya also were invaders who assimilated and lost all memory of invasion.

      0
      1. “Turko-Afghans / Mughals – did they invade – YES – Were they assimilated by Indians? NO”

        Wouldn’t that answer differ from what type of ‘Indian’ you are posing this question to?

        If u ask a Pakistani/Bangladeshi/Liberal/S-Indian/Muslim they would have a different answer to a North-Central Hindu Indian.

        0
        1. Objectively –
          Can you find people who claim to be descendants of any of the earlier invaders?
          Outside some theories of Rajputs and Jatts which r largely laughable – it’s a firm NO.

          That is not the case for Turko-Afghans and Mughals & two of our neighbours r testament to them.

          So its objectively true IMO.

          0
          1. …but is it believed so, is my question.

            Does the normal Pakistani or a Bangladeshi believe the Turko-Mughals didn’t assimilate? Does the liberal, Bhadralok and S-Indian believe they didn’t assimilate? Does the Indian muslim believe they didn’t assimilate?

            1+
      2. Although nothing you wrote is wrong, you are missing the woods for trees here.

        There was conflict at every stage of human expansion. Once the first people settled any group that arrived must have had conflicts. But there is no AASI invasion, IVC invasion theories being talked about. On other hand AIT was considered as done deal much before everything became clear. And that too when there is so much uncertainty in the exact dates, prevailing conditions, exactly how much did they influence others and how much were they themselves influenced at the end.

        Motivated people have been extending false equivalence from much later dates and very different conditions in order to satisfy a narrative. And I think one needs to be careful in lumping everything as one and same.

        1+
        1. I get that yet I remain skeptical of using words which on there own don’t mean what I want the words to mean. Even if I don’t imply the caricature AIT from 19th century – the word and it’s full form work enough for me to use it.

          These were my exact concerns with use of Indic and Dharmic.

          0
          1. Unless you are into coining new words like Savarkar, I suggest using one which most people mean when they say something. Especially the ones who have long history associated with it

            1+
  22. Witzel’s substrate paper !
    Further RV substrate names of persons, tribes and rivers include some exactly from the areas where Indus people are to be expected: in their late/post- Indus new settlement area (J. Shaffer 1995: 139) in the eastern Panjab, in Haryana (Kuruks.etra), and especially east of there, well into the Gangetic plains. Even during the middle/late Vedic period, the local rivers of E. Panjab are
    still designated by non-Indo-Aryan names: the famous Bharata chieftain Sud¯as crosses (RV 3.33) the Sutudr¯ı and Vip¯a´s and settles on the Sarasvat¯ı. They are not explainable from IA:
    Too much Sanskrit symbols to type here – But Witzel says;

    Sutudri is non IA name
    Vipas is non IA name
    Sarasvati’s non-IA name is Vai´sambhaly¯a
    Sindhus non-IA name is sende

    Is this sane ? or conjecture or BS ?

    0
    1. @GauravL
      That could have worked if there was any support for his theory. He postulates that Harappans spoke an unknown language. So, he goes around searching for words he thinks can support his position. However, the fact remains that there are no Dravidian loan words in Old Rig Veda. Consensus view is that all river/place names in North India have IE toponyms.

      1+
      1. TP, you have pretty diverse knowledge. Can you analyse for us the words ‘rg’ and ‘veda’ by going to the essence not only citing the wiki? You may become globally famous if you are sufficiently persuasive. Razib also will be impressed. Cheers.

        0
      2. @Milan Todorovic
        My answer is the same as @NM.

        Before starting, some observations regarding PIE and linguistics:

        1. In the childhood phase of linguistics, scholars used to do linguistics research by finding cognates. In adulthood, they consider isoglosses too.
        2. PIE is a hypothetical construction. How you choose to construct it determines what you get.
        3. All IE languages are innovative and conservative in some respect.

        “”
        1776, from Sanskrit rigveda, from rg- “praise, hymn, spoken stanza,” literally “brightness,” from PIE *erkw- “to radiate, beam; praise” + veda “knowledge,” from PIE *weid-o-, from root *weid- “to see.” A thousand hymns, orally transmitted, probably dating from before 1000 B.C.E. Related: Rig-vedic.
        “”

        For more authoritative answer you should post on linguistics stackexchange.

        Source
        Etymology Online

        0
  23. Can someone explain why zebus from India “invaded” the southern Levant region more or less the same time that Mittani were there?

    https://science.sciencemag.org/content/365/6449/173.full

    At this point, this is a robust finding (“this” = movement of zebus from India to central Asia and no movement of torines to India). I have seen 3-4 papers documenting the same. Yet, this data point never plays any role in AIT-OIT debate. Can the geneticists give me an answer?

    Typical explanations of missing torines: migrating populations used the already domesticated local populations. No explanation given to zebu genes in central asia whatsoever.

    1+
  24. why are you guys so exercised by domestics? their patterns don’t always match humans. the dogs in europe date to the first farmers, not the ones that the steppe ppl had (ancient dna forthcoming). so? who knows?

    the adaptations for domestic animals follow climate bands. the zebu adaptations are pretty useful across the tropics. they’re all over sub-saharan african. show up in the last few thousand years. doesn’t take a genius to figure out why.

    1+
  25. You gotta admit Brahmins were recent entrants and the vast majority of Sindh population at the time of Chach nama was Avarna. Buddhism made great inroads in Pakistan and beyond, no doubt.

    this is irrelevant. first, you don’t know this. second, they’re hindus to muslims. you pakistanis are super obsessed with brahmin concepts, but when it comes to putting kufars to the sword you know very well there is no difference. indians are ‘hindu’ in a broad sense.
    I don’t hate Hindus. But the unhygiene impression is sort of universal. See how the Indian Hindu wife of this Western vlogger compares Pakistan and India at the end of her visit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WvnjZMXb5dE

    yeah, you compare pakistan to ALL of india??? it’s not an apples to apples comparison.

    finally, re defecation, that is a cultural difference. but it’s due to the idea you should defecate far from where you live. unfortunately that’s unhygenic today, but in the past it was the opposite (the roman house plans had latrines next to kitchen!)

    1+
    1. “I don’t hate Hindus. But the unhygiene impression is sort of universal. See how the Indian Hindu wife of this Western vlogger compares Pakistan and India at the end of her visit:”

      To me its interesting that how the very same stereotypes pervades in Hindu household about the Muslims. LOL

      2+
  26. Yeah ! Extremely fascinating how Muslim stereotypes of Dirty Hindus are mirror of Hindu stereotypes of Dirty Muslims.

    Hindu UC are repelled by eating habits (lot of UC r pretty extreme on eating and purity) , beards, burqas of Muslims as well as co religionists ( but Muslims have a special place in their hearts – especially today after seeing those Tablighi bros on TV for weeks).

    Razib’s pt is valid – lot of customs could be seen as hygienic in the pre industrial society with lower population – though now it’s a smell hole. I still know some farmers who defecate in their farms – but that’s fine they have huge farms and finally it helps the farm.

    1+
    1. I think it has to do with socio-economic conditions as well. The only in house representation of Hindus and Christians in Pakistan would be the Bhil tribes and the sweeper. Think of what Indian stereotypes of tribals and sweepers are. In India our muslim stereotype is living in Ghettos, and butchers and stuff. Its not really SRK.

      0
    2. When I was a kid, the stereotype of Muslims was that they only bathe on Fridays.
      “Jumme ke jumme nahate hain”

      People are much more PC nowadays.

      0
  27. Yup – that must be right.
    But it’s roots may also be in the Pakistan movement itself – whose elites shared the view and Dirty Hindu stereotype (cow piss drinking) is voiced by them since a 100 years ago.

    Hindu muslim stereotypes are also largely attributed to the current bad states muslims live in along with looking down at Meat eaters. That exists in Brahmins/ other veg castes for other meat eaters too. Somehow I have not seen that attitude in My Jain friends – bigotry towards Non veg – but I may be mistaken by my sample.

    Jain readers can comment if I am mistaken.

    0
    1. I think it ran both ways before 47. I have Punjabi hindu folks who narrated the same separate glasses for water (akin to Dalits ) for Muslims laborers when they lived in Lahore and stuff

      Post partition it’s the whole open defecation thing which adds to the whole hindu=dirty stereotype.

      0
    2. It exists, especially among older crowd. Several of my family members my grandparent’s age take pride in never even sipping from a water cup in a Muslim or non vegetarian Hindu house.

      Younger generation is diff. This has more to do with greater proportion of urban population among jains and exposure than anything else. Urban young hindus are also not like this.

      1+
  28. I’m not a practicing Muslim anyway. But I absolutely love how Islam and Christianity has replaced most primitive religions based on racism and caste. If you’re not a upper caste you should not defend the indefensible. Just the other day a Dalit girl was raped and killed, in 2020! ‘Ancient’ness hasn’t quite lost steam yet.

    it is a fair point that Islam and xtianity are universalist. but you do know that that universalism applies only to believers. ISIS operationalized the hadiths that the women of the unbelievers are fair game. “those you can grasp with your left hand and right hand.” these views are common among musliims, e.g., the kuwati princess defending gulf men havinig sex with russian escorts (“concubines”). the sexual abuse of Dalits is a problem, but it occurs from upper caste hinidus and upper caste muslims (see omar ali’s earlier post how this practice unites the men of both religions in some villages).

    Christianity like Islam also allowed for slavery and extermination of unbelievers. the last pagans in Europe aside from the sami lived in latvia. the Christian rulers refused to allow for their baptism into the early 15th century because then they would have human rights and not be allowed as slaves.

    you’re as intelligent as ugra.

    3+
    1. “Christianity like Islam also allowed for slavery and extermination of unbelievers. the last pagans in Europe aside from the sami lived in latvia. the Christian rulers refused to allow for their baptism into the early 15th century because then they would have human rights and not be allowed as slaves.”

      Razib, I must disagree with the way this is said, as I feel you paint too broad a stroke here.

      Christianity (without specifying encompasses, Catholics, Protestants, Orthodox, Nestorians and other sects) has not “allowed” for slavery or extermination of unbelievers. Christianity has always been a little schizophrenic in this regard. There were always those who spoke out against slavery throughout Christianity’s history, from Saint Gregory of Nyssa (372 AD), all the way to the christian abolitionist in the beginning of the most heinous period of history in the USA. I agree it has haphazardly occurred throughout history in different regions where Christianity was prevalent, but again the way it is referenced sounds like the whole religion and all the followers everywhere. Even extermination of unbelievers is not universally allowed/condoned.

      I think a better description would be something along the lines of slavery and extermination have historically occurred “even” in countries or areas where christians have been in majority or in power.

      Sorry to nitpick, but I feel it’s a little misleading by just using the name of a whole religion, especially regarding slavery.

      Christianity is the reason why slavery has been erased from a greater part of the world today, whether by military action, or inspiring individuals, even in non-christian countries.

      Also, there are no major groups of Christians today involved in extermination of unbelievers, ISIS style (or ISIS inspired like the Sri Lanka bombings that killed 300 “Easter” worshipers), and even nothing like pogroms unleashed against Indian Christians (Orissa 2008, Gujarat Dangs district 1998, and other more random isolated attacks across the country, ) in the not too recent past.

      Not saying all Christians are perfect, there are racists, bigots and the worst among them, but I think there is a better way to respond that trying to throw the whole of Christianity and its followers under the bus.

      0
      1. MAH:
        [ed against Indian Christians (Orissa 2008, Gujarat Dangs district 1998, and other more random isolated attacks across the country, ) in the not too recent past.]

        Small scale riots in India vs. mass extermination by Christians in the new world, inquisition in India, burning at stake of Hindus..

        Evangelical Christian apologist spotted

        0
        1. @observer
          “Evangelical Christian apologist spotted”

          RSS IT Shaka spotted, mention any atrocity the righwing bhakts commit againt minorities in recent history, RSS IT shaka swoops in to say stupid things, good job!

          0
        2. tbf most of the death in the new world was due to disease. the church opposed in the man brutal treatment (the rulers in the metropole itself). it was the the colonial and creole elites which engaged brutality.

          of the various European powers during he age of discovery the Portuguese do seem incorrigible assholes. their record of what we’d call war crimes in the Indian ocean left everyone confused and ultimately was instrumental in their marginalization.

          1+
      2. Sorry to nitpick, but I feel it’s a little misleading by just using the name of a whole religion, especially regarding slavery.

        you are nitpicking. you are aware i know a lot about christianity and history. there were plenty of slaves in anglo-saxon england when the normans arrived. the institution faded with the normans. why? no one knows, saxons were no less christian than normans (arguably more christian, since normans were 100 years out of paganism and saxons were 350-450 years) but it wasn’t ideological.

        in any case, you are wanting to have an argument about something that is outside of the purview of this blog post, and also totally contentious (it is highly disputable that christianity is the reason slavery was banned in a necessary sense, and perhaps even in a sufficient sense).

        christians today are quite a bit more liberal than muslims, that is true. but it is not true that that was clear in 1500.

        your cursory response doesn’t indicate that you a deep knowledge of this topic, but you were just offended, which is your right. but that’s my last comment on this.

        0
        1. I apologize Razib, if it seemed that way, I am not trying to get into an argument, I just want to give my opinion, I know how well read you are.

          I have read a lot of history as well, and agree, I have no excuse for what other christian groups have done in the past.

          And I am not offended, I just wanted to give my opinion, I know this blog is pretty void of brown christian voices, so I feel it’s my duty to pipe up every now and then.

          Just so no one gets the wrong impression, I am not putting down any other religion or nonreligion, ,my personal opinion is to keep religion out of government and the public space.

          No need to reply, I have said what I wanted to say, and will continue to look forward your very interesting and informative posts.

          1+
      3. Exactly what Razib said wrt 21st century. But by most accounts Portuguese inquisition of Western MH was more brutal than Mughal conquests of MH or British Company+Crown conquest of India. That went on till 18th century but is now largely forgotten chapter in history.

        Though there aren’t any culture wars going on in Goa. If you notice A large portion of Catholics are actually voting for BJP – BjP has a lot of Christian leaders in Goa.

        0
        1. I believe that all major Christian streams (Catholics, Anglicans, Protestants) practiced or approved slavery, except Serbian Orthodox Church (I think, so-called Byzantine also had slaves). I wrote before, in several thousands of years of their history, Serbs never practised slavery. It reminds me to write a comment which is related to this matter and that is one of the reasons why Westerners are strongly against Vinca and why they’ve been trying to hide and ignore the oldest European civilisation, culture and literacy.

          0
          1. the first xtian group that uniformly rejected slavery were narrow radical protestant groups. e.g., the quakers come to mind. but there were others. i’ve read the ancient essenes were not down with slavery.

            hate wang mang all you want, but he was the first ruler who abolished slavery in totality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_China#Han_dynasty_(206_BC_%E2%80%93_220_AD)

            (like the french revolutionary abolition it was revoked, but the chinese never used slavery as extensively as western societies, though i think one can make an economic case re: labor surplus)

            1+
        2. the inquisition wasn’t really that bad. i agree with the proposition that is a protestant ‘black legend.’ the inquisition arguably was more moderate than what the people would have done without restraint…look at witch paranoia in protestant europe (happened far less in catholic europe).

          2+
        3. @GauravL
          “Exactly what Razib said wrt 21st century. But by most accounts Portuguese inquisition of Western MH was more brutal than Mughal conquests of MH or British Company+Crown conquest of India. That went on till 18th century but is now largely forgotten chapter in history.”

          Exactly, the PORTUGESE of the past, not Christianity, one nation group that does not make up the majority of Christians in the world.

          Wow you seemed to have jumped a little too quickly into this conversation, just in case you think I am one those that is casting any sort of criticism of hinduism, I don’t think of hinduism as responsible for any of the atrocities committed against minorities in India, just the rightwing militant elements who are inspired by the fascist tendencies of Nazi Germany.

          Also the British Company+Crown conquest were not too keen on promoting christianity in India because it interfered with their business, it’s like me blaming all of hinduism for unscrupulous indian immigrant business types that were corruptly exploiting parts of Africa and Asia, the only difference is that the British were better at gathering armies to conduct their businesses.

          Even other christians like the Greek Orthodox on Cyprus and Ibo Catholics in Nigeria could not count on any fellow christian help from the British since it didn’t economically benefit them.

          I’m just saying this can’t be attributed to the whole of Christianity, especially if you are only talking about certain european christians more likely interested in treasure and power instead of religion.

          For what it’s worth I have no respect for what the Portugese and Spanish did during colonization and the British I just see as opportunists, but christians within those countries criticized them for their actions as well.

          Not trying into a argument here just want to make you are aware of what I’m trying to say.

          0
          1. Exactly, the PORTUGESE of the past, not Christianity, one nation group that does not make up the majority of Christians in the world.

            what are you even trying to say? why would you argue this point with me? do you think i don’t know about the history of the Christian religion? you seem to overly sensitive on this issue. there are idiots on these comments who will misinterpret what i say, but when they come, come back at THEM.

            now we’ve gone down a moron rabbit whole where you are defending a position about Christianity as a whole, and also asserting things which are highly contentious and disputable such as “Christianity is the reason why slavery has been erased from a greater part of the world today.” so others can’t attribute things to Christianity as a whole, but you can?

            here is the first approximation truth, British evangelical protestants along with enlightenment liberals (as we’d call them) drove this. not all evangelical protestants. not all secular liberals. but these were the two main groups. it is not well known that of the abolitionist terrorists who stood with john brown against slavery, only one was a Christian, john brown himself. all the others were free thinkers, some were anti-clerical. the laggards re slaver were muslims. cultures like china and japan never had much slavery, and Chinese dynasties periodically attempted to stamp out of the practice (their reasons were not liberal individualist, but more based on their idea of a ‘good society’ as one based on free farmers).

            i made a casual comment about the delay of baptism on the estates of lettish knights in latvia due to the fact that baptism, as had occurred in other nearby baltic domains, allowed for the church to intervene on behalf of the serfs, and you flip your shit about how i’m talking about Christianity as a whole? do you even know much about the baltic crusades and the brutality meted upon the native peoples by knights who fought under the cross, and likely retarded the spread of Christianity???

            2+

          2. Though there aren’t any culture wars going on in Goa. If you notice A large portion of Catholics are actually voting for BJP – BJP has a lot of Christian leaders in Goa.

            My point was THIS with the background of Portuguese rule in Goa. – These Culture wars and history wars can maybe seen as a imposition of frictions today on the past. As there are no significant frictions in Goa (there may be some) on comparison to Christianity in Orissa or Andhra we don’t see these culture wars & see BJP/RSS get support among Catholics (more than Muslims or even Sikhs). What I implied is there may be path dependence BUT current frictions also play a significant role (more so than the so called Trauma of the past) IMO.

            0
          3. @Razib
            “what are you even trying to say? why would you argue this point with me? do you think i don’t know about the history of the Christian religion? you seem to overly sensitive on this issue. there are idiots on these comments who will misinterpret what i say, but when they come, come back at THEM.”

            Sorry Razib, I was talking to GauravL, not you, he jumped in rather quickly on this conversation and I just wanted to respond to him in case he was being reactive thinking I was trying to criticize hinduism, I want to be clear up what I was trying to say, please ignore.

            0
          4. @GauravL
            “Though there aren’t any culture wars going on in Goa. If you notice A large portion of Catholics are actually voting for BJP – BJP has a lot of Christian leaders in Goa.

            My point was THIS with the background of Portuguese rule in Goa. – These Culture wars and history wars can maybe seen as a imposition of frictions today on the past. As there are no significant frictions in Goa (there may be some) on comparison to Christianity in Orissa or Andhra we don’t see these culture wars & see BJP/RSS get support among Catholics (more than Muslims or even Sikhs). What I implied is there may be path dependence BUT current frictions also play a significant role (more so than the so called Trauma of the past) IMO.”

            In kanyakumari, which has a large christian population this also happened, the BJP candidate wasn’t a christian, but he was seen as a pretty good guy who seemed to be for everyone’s interest. Maybe the same happened in Goa? This might similar to the way the republicans are always being seen as a anti-hispanic/latino party in the USA, but they still field Hispanic candidates to try to win their vote, which they have won quite a few. The BJP has been trying to make inroads into a lot of areas where christians have more influence in India. They are trying the same ploy in the christian majority northeastern states as well and were fielding christian candidates in Kerala also. The BJP wants to win and in a way I suspect they are trying to convince mainstream hindus more than christians that they are on the up and up and have no agenda against minorities. That is until they are able to consolidate the diverse hindu opinions into their vision of what India should be. the RSS the ideological source of the BJP though is very good at looking at the long game, the BJP’s ascendancy was a long time in planning. Don’t know what that will hold in the future for minorities, we shall see.

            0
          5. yes – My point was Riots don’t happen in a vacuum. Though its condemnable that they happen at all in 21st century democracies
            RSS Project has takers in the populous because of real problems wrt Hindu-Muslims today. I don’t think most of the culture wars are due to history but due to present. That spiel doesn’t stick against Christians (you may think from social media but that’s not representative in voting patterns) bcoz large swathes aren’t fearful of Christians. Or wherever intermingling of H-C is more the identity politics of RSS will get traction – else it wont was my point. Plus we don’t have Christian Pakistan & Bangladesh (so its tough to rile up the sentiment) – so my limited point being Christians can be circumspect of Hindutva but they don’t need to be as apprehensive as Muslims IMO.

            Anyways i would like your comment on : https://www.brownpundits.com/2020/08/31/why-hindutva-worries-me-annual-onam-debates/

            0
        4. It is still remembered Crusaders’ sack of Constantinople one of the biggest in history ever in early 13th cAC, their looting, robbing, killing and raping of citizens….

          In the 13th cAC, when Serbia was the strongest kingdom in Europe, tzar Dusan brought a famous constitutional law (Dusan’s zakonik) similar to Manu’s law, which was actually the state regulation which defined the rights and responsibilities of various ranks but prohibited slavery. There were poor people and people without land, but they were free and worked for richer as ‘freelancers’.

          In the first Serbian Constitution after the liberation from Ottomans in the 19th cAC the first article was – every slave who steps on Serbian soil is a free man.

          One of the road question – my patchy sources say about one of early Aryans’ kingdoms in Goa. Anyone has more information about this?

          0
  29. I don’t hate Hindus. But the unhygiene impression is sort of universal. See how the Indian Hindu wife of this Western vlogger compares Pakistan and India at the end of her visit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WvnjZMXb5dE

    Didn’t really bother watching but I can see that it’s about the Kartarpur Corridor

    Did she visit far beyond the Kartarpur area into the non-tourist/non-pilgrim places? Not really a fair comparison if she didn’t. There’s a huge incentive to keep tourist spots clean.

    And apart from that, Pakistan just has two heavily populated cities- Lahore and Karachi, and even then, only Karachi has a very high pop. density-
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_world_cities_by_population_density

    Would be interested to see comparisons between cities with similar population densities, because otherwise I would naturally expect Pakistan to be cleaner

    And the second question is- how much does the whole “universal” view of hygiene even matter? Most polls/surveys I’ve seen still view ‘Indian Hindus’ to be better immigrants than ‘Pakistani Muslims’ and the BBC World Service Poll had Pakistan as the third most-negatively viewed country

    0
  30. OIT vs AIT is become enthusiast pastime I guess.
    OIT people “Dasyus/Dahyus/Druhyus (personal name of Persia) exist in Mesopotamia tablet in Far/Anshan region (I have whole name exactly matches the tablet). Exist during Darius times too.
    I would drop bit by bit IA tribes and Non IA names information, so their outrageous claims of non- academic people would be fun on academia.
    Western Kshratrapa all names exist in Saurashtra, Malwa, Lata, Ujjayaini and Soppara, people are not aware.
    Indian Mare/horse 17 ribs is called Khoro/Goro/Ghodo name exist in Gujarat.
    The Horse of 18 ribs is difficult to breed in India even with air-condition in stable (none breed any? fantasy). Majority of IA tribes were at outskirts till 1st century AD.
    Dahli/Bahlika is foreign tribe living in Bactria/Arachosia mentioned in Atharvaveda
    *** Human defecation is no manure to farms if its not processed.

    0
  31. Gaurav,

    I respect your intellectual curiosity and readiness to follow the facts and, based on them, to form own opinion. Usually people when they get older become intellectually inflexible and rigid. OIT is a movement which has a problem in their initiation. Without any facts they established an ideological agenda. Since that, they have been trying to find supporting evidence. I guess they think that they protect Indian culture, but this cannot be achieved on wrong premises.

    However, if you try to get all facts based on above mentioned sources, you will not accomplish that. Western scholars have been trying unsuccessfully for 200 years to resolve so called ‘Aryan’ issue. Very often they simply try to justify the colonial agenda. There is a segment of virtually hidden literature which has a different view. I do publish from time to time some of their research (recently I quoted some respected French Sanskritologists from 19-20th century). If you stick only to the above literature, you will remain in this circulus vitiosus for ages. Someone mentioned exotic theories such as Aryan Slave theory (maybe even Aryan Alien theory). Why no one wants to compare any Slavic language with Sanskrit and publish his/her findings? I will give you an analogical illustration in a different comment, but for now – everyone (except oit) agrees that Aryans were so-called Slavics (simply there are no other candidates). Have you ever seen in any scientific paper or in a serious text this assertion? Why not?

    0
    1. Actually, I need to correct myself. Alokananda Mitre, Tagore’s granddaughter, studied Slavic languages for 30 years and found that modern Serbian is the most similar to Sanskrit (22% identical and 11% very similar). Also, the above-mentioned French/Suisse Sanskritologists also published their research 150 years ago and came to the similar conclusions. I already did and I will cite more of their findings. Many of their findings were confirmed by modern genetics. But, they re sidelined and their findings are often, not coincidentally, hidden. You should include such material in your readings if you want to have a comprehensive picture.

      0
    2. I like to think of myself as 30 young – As I was less flexible 10 years ago & more certain (out of ignorance & arrogance).

      Why no one wants to compare any Slavic language with Sanskrit and publish his/her findings? I will give you an analogical illustration in a different comment, but for now – everyone (except oit) agrees that Aryans were so-called Slavics (simply there are no other candidates). Have you ever seen in any scientific paper or in a serious text this assertion? Why not?

      Arent Indo-Iranian closes to Slavic languages ? most linguists say so too. Anthony also places separation of Slavs and Indo-Aryans close to each other

      1+
      1. I don’t know what is ‘Indo-Iranian’. Also, the term ‘Slavic’ is used after the 7th cAC. Before that, it was only Serbian language and the term ‘Slavic’ should not be used. So, as in the neighbouring thread – there is no ‘Slavic group of languages’ during Aryan times. There was only Serbian language. Your first task is to fix the taxonomy.

        0
      2. According to Milan:

        1. Vinca is the PIE Urheimat. It, however, goes against genetics.
        2. Serbs were present in Serbia since time immemorial. This goes against extensive Byzantine records that document the arrival of Slavics. You can read regarding Sclaveni on Wikipedia to learn more about the topic.
        3. He considers cognates in IE languages as proof for deciding that Serbian is the PIE; no IE language is as all are descendants of it. In fact, even Baltic has more PIE words than Slavic. He forgets that something like isoglosses exist in his analysis.

        I have time and again called out his misinformation to no avail.

        2+
  32. But I absolutely love how Islam and Christianity has replaced most primitive religions based on racism and caste.

    Almost pulled a Kabir there lol. I’m just gonna ask you some of the questions that he couldn’t answer or didn’t wanna answer (seeing that you both make the same claim). Preface- I’m well aware that no religion (including Hinduism) is perfect and each has its own flaws. And before you throw around “Hindutva” comments- I can guarantee you that I’m less religious than you are. I was pretty much an atheist up until a few years ago. However after seeing predatory/alarming behaviour among the muslims around me and reading some basic history and current affairs, I went back to calling myself a Hindu. 1. I agree that casteism is bad and has its origins in certain Hindu scriptures, but why do S. Asians muslims still follow it (don’t try denying, you know as well as everyone else on this blog)? And what’s with surnames like Bajwa, Chaudhary, etc.? 2. Why did they come up with their own caste-like distinctions such as Ashraf/Ajlaf? Isn’t everyone equal in the eyes of allah? : ) 3. And what about sectarian violence in islam? You people harp on about caste-based violence, but almost never speak about sectarianism, which is arguably far more violent- Bombing of a Shia Hazara (Hazara also face ethnic violence, although it’s more about religion today) wedding last year- https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/bloody-suicide-attack-on-kabul-wedding-kills-at-least-63/2019/08/18/ace5f0d4-c17d-11e9-a5c6-1e74f7ec4a93_story.html Find me an incident where a Dalit wedding was bombed with 60+ casualties, I’ll wait. I’m not denying that Dalits face violence in certain places in India, but the magnitude is entirely different. India has reservations in place in order to address the inequality and to try and correct things, meanwhile you’re moving in the other direction- https://thediplomat.com/2020/09/the-changing-landscape-of-anti-shia-politics-in-pakistan/ Dalits are still considered to be Hindus and India has laws to abolish untouchability and tries to prevent mistreatment, meanwhile your Govt. actually has laws that encourage harassment of Ahmadis and prevent them from practicing their religion. And yet you have the audacity to teach about primitiveness lol. There’s a reason why all those minorities from Pak are fleeing to India. Don’t know how you people even convince yourselves that you’re somehow in the right here. Let alone the subcontinent, they aren’t even safe in the west- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Ahmadis And I already mentioned about the lack of scientific temper in the islamic world- https://www.brownpundits.com/2020/07/11/open-thread-brown-pundits-7-11-2020/ You have the upper hand and you’re still lagging behind “most primitive”, lol. I could also bash you based on terrorism in the 21st century, apostasy/blasphemy laws, LGBT rights, etc., but I’m sure you’ve heard those anyway. And tbh don’t bother replying if you’re gonna bring up the past like the other 2 did on the thread I linked, I’m speaking about the modern era. Once again- I’m well aware that no religion is perfect, but if you’re gonna call another religion(s) “most primitive”, then you better make sure the facts back it up.

    4+
  33. Isthisreal,
    There are four exact copies of your comment in trash. You deleted then or Asimnet ? I just checked the trash and restores this comment. I don’t delete comments myself if I can avoid
    Personally I enjoyed the Rantish comment’ very reminiscent of Bhimrao – whose rants also I tend to enjoy

    0
    1. I didn’t delete anything. They weren’t showing up at all, so I thought it might’ve been a glitch and posted it a few times just to check what’s up.

      Although the first 2-3 were properly formatted, unlike this one.

      0
  34. And I am not offended, I just wanted to give my opinion, I know this blog is pretty void of brown christian voices, so I feel it’s my duty to pipe up every now and then.

    hm. i guess that’s true. though brown Christians are not too many either so to be expected

    2+

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.