Aryans: Religion and Genetics

SamCDKey:

This study shall have to demonstrate then in what ways the prior study was wrong to give such a differing result, although this may be part of it:

"Recent claims for a linkage of haplogroups J2, L, R1a, and R2 with a contemporaneous origin for the majority of the Indian castes' paternal lineages from outside the subcontinent are rejected, although our findings do support a local origin of haplogroups F* and H. "

-Majority of the Indian castes' paternal lineage- was never part of what was claimed in the other study, which affirmed an affinity chiefly amongst the upper castes. Intermixing lower-castes which were demonstrated to have far less of connection would only serve to muddy the connections.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

This is true not only for the Y chromosome haplotypes but also in the mtDNA analysis when it is more comprehensively conducted:

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=379225

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetics_and_Archaeogenetics_of_South_Asia

Very fascinating stuff, including the noting that the closer Iranian sources are not likely candidates for r1a1, which is more often found in Russia and Eastern Europe.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

SamCDKey:

Mitochondrial DNA is addressed in the above article from Wikipedia and links it with female caste mobility compared to male. Similarly, it does not seem that many Aryan women interbred with Indian men, and thus an maternal origin in India is very certain.

 

They did. The PNAS used a bigger sample size and compared more SNPs (single nuclear polymorphisms) and compared with a a bigger database of previous genetic analysis.

They also did not restrict themselves to a few groups but compared across all groups and all available data from West Asia, East Asia, Southeast Asia, Central Asia, Europe, the Near East, and Ethiopia.

They also used more comprehensive tools of genetic analysis:

 

The groups taken in India, however, admit of historical unlikelyhood of descent from the Aryan invaders. The high-castes were the most likely candidates and by swamping them with more samples from lower-castes, one is left with a different picture. A study that specifically focused a large percentage of upper-castes. is in order, would you not agree? Specifically when a previous test which more closely looked at the upper-castes, had differing results.

 

This is not science. This is bias.

One does not arrive at a theory from selected data. The hypothesis should precede the collection of data, not determine its selection.

 

SamCDKey:

Nonsense.

How might one judge from whence the NOrmans came if one's analysis included a general population of England? One would conclude, wrongly, that the Scandinavian origins of the Normans were questionable based on the majority of the population of England having roots in Saxony, or even worse, in Celtic and Pictish origins if judged by Cornwall, Wales, and Scotland.

The same holds here. If you want to analyze from whence the most likely candidates for Aryans come from, one must analyze the upper-castes, specifically, the upper castes of Western and North-Western descended people. Specifically if one considers the purposed minor interbreeding of Aryan females with native Indian males, and the Y-chromosome presence in the other studies, then one must conclude that this approach is SIGNIFICANTLY more scientific than for determing the origins of a specific part of Indians.

I'd also like to point towards something interesting I found whilst searching on Wiki for r1a1:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R1a1

R1A1, which is closely related to the Kurgan hypothesis and found extensively in Russia and Eastern Europe, is found in India, but with an apparent ancientness predating any of the proposed Aryan invasions. Could this be the more significant reason for the linguistic and religious ties?

 

This post makes no sense.

Are you familiar with the methodology of DNA analysis?

 

SamCDKey:

This post makes no sense based on...? Historically there have been examples of conquering people that made up a numerical minority of the population. I gave an example to you in regards to the Normans in Britain. One might also speak of the native Roman population in much of her Empire, as well as even the Mongols in great swathes of theirs. If the Aryans in India made up a small amount of the population rooted in the upper-castes in certain areas (thought to be in the Northwest), then an analysis of the general population of India would lead one to believe that very little connection existed, despite the DNA evidence that remains to show otherwise in the castes which it is considered they likely are more present in.

I am also familiar with DNA analysis, but not to a professional extent, if you are asking if I am a biologist/geneticist/medical researcher, or any other related profession.

In regards to R1A1, the connection of the Eastern-European and Russian peoples to R1A1, as well as Finno-Ugric connections in Indo-European languages, all point out to a possibility of a more ancient population of R1A1 people in India. The ancientness of the people was mentioned in the Wikipedia article and it would fit in line well with linguistic evidence.

 

Yes but the frequency of haplotype distribution would show the direction of the migration and according to the two papers I linked to, there is no support for an Aryan migration into India.

 

SamCDKey:

R1A1 is found in 1 out of every 2 men in the Ukraine, Poland, and Russia. It is less so in India, but still prominent in certain areas. Moreover, Finno-Ugric connections in Indo-European languages are found in all Indo-European languages, whereas Sanskrit is the only Indo-European language to have Dravidian. An Eastern-European origin for R1A1 fits in with this linguistic connection to the Finno-Ugrics, where the languages remain spoken today, as well as with the origin of the modern horse, and with certain words spoken about in other articles that are unlikely to come from India. Similarly, the Kurgan Hypothesis claims this region as the origin of Indo-European.

This is an extremely fruitful little Wiki page on it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R1a1

Moreover, if this is correct, this would show an even greater affinity to the R1A1 Europeans than what was thought. This would be most intriguing and go extremely, extremely well with the religious connections we find between Hinduism, Zoroastrianism, and the European pagan beliefs.

 

I'll be going to bed now so you won't be hearing from me for several hours. A lovely discussion with you so far, though. I do hope to continue it (though perhaps not as intense) later.

 

http://www.dadamo.com/wiki/wiki.pl/Haplogroup_R1a1_(Y-DNA) - One last thing I found. Very intriguing stuff. Take a gander.

 

We seem to be going around in circles.

Linguistic analysis is based on hypothetical assumptions of words which may have existed and on the basis that their meanings would be identical to what they are today, both of which have no way of being proven.

Frequency distribution of haplogroups (both from mitochondrial DNA analysis and from Y chromosome analysis) do not support differences between the caste groups in North and South India. Looking at one factor in isolation can give a false positive or a false negative and is ovecome by using a bigger sample size and more SNPs.

Both these facts together repudiate the Aryan invasion theory.

 

Thanks, its been fun. I learned a lot of stuff I was not aware of. Good night.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

i thought aryans were irani
excellent traders
good entertainers
well done o aryan

 

SamCDKey:

Actually, the field of linguistics in relation to the INdo-Europeans is extremely complicated, has almost four hundred years of history, and can be demonstrated even today with disparate languages. Welsh and Bengali, for instance, sound almost alike when giving the digits.

That is the surprising findings: R1A1 is found in pretty much all castes, as opposed to the upper-caste influences found in the other study. This would also support claims of cultural continuity, as the population of European migrants would have been a long-standing part of the culture.

R1A1 might change the conception of an invasion to a more ancient movement of people, yes. However, it most certainly cements an INdo-European community and gives reasons for both the spread of Indo-European languages and the common religion.

Gustav:

Iran is populated by Aryans, yes. Or Indo-Europeans. Intermixed with a lot of Turkic descended and speaking people, too.

 

So, your Glorification of a Bunch of Conquering Barbarians has no significance today, when, again, Barbarians are trying to Conquer the World?

You would not be the first Intellectual to side with Barbarism over Civilization.

But you should appreciate the company you keep. You are shoulder to shoulder with Adolf Hitler.

I hope you're proud.

 

Leo Volont:

I'd have you present any instance in this conversation where I have affirmed the supremacy of Aryans or glorified them. I simply affirm their connection with Hinduism.