• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Indo-Aryan: Did they ever enter the Indian subcontinent from the outside? Or did these people develop indigenously in the Greater Panjab?

River Sea

Well-Known Member
The Indo-Aryan Controversy: Did they ever enter the Indian subcontinent from the outside? Or did these people develop indigenously in the Greater Panjab?

Michael Witzel asked?
Who were the “Aryans”? What was their spiritual
and material culture and their outlook on life? Did they ever enter the Indian
subcontinent from the outside? Or did these people develop indigenously in the
Greater Panjab?


Michael Witzel begins on page 354 with the number shown on the left, or number 341 at the bottom of the page. This is the same page where Michael Witzel begins.
 
Last edited:

River Sea

Well-Known Member
For example, Swaminatha Aiyar writes:
. . . from a linguistic point of view also, Dravidian is more comparable to
Indo-Aryan than to any other language family in the world . . . But
Dravidian may be the first to have been separated and went north. Next
the centum people separated and left through the Himalayan passes to
Caspian or Pamir and then to Europe etc. The satem speakers left after
that, batch by batch. The last batch might have been the Iranians.
(1975, quoted with approval by Misra 1992: 73–8)

The Indo-Aryan Controversy: Evidence and Inference in Indian History

Page 373 from left side or page 359 bottom page (same page)

 

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
The Indo-Aryan Controversy: Did they ever enter the Indian subcontinent from the outside? Or did these people develop indigenously in the Greater Panjab?




Michael Witzel begins on page 354 with the number shown on the left, or number 341 at the bottom of the page. This is the same page where Michael Witzel begins.
I'm not your go-to man for Indo-Aryan history, but all the research seems to agree that H sap sap evolved in Africa, from where waves of emigration occurred at various times.

As I understand it, this, and the directions the emigrants variously took, are derived from the DNA of human remains ─ rare and random finds ─ and crossed fingers.

After that, I don't think I can add much.
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
Indo-Aryans migrated to India around 4,000 years ago from Afghanistan. As late as in Alexander's time the region was known as Ariana.
alexander_empire.jpg
 
Last edited:

Bharat Jhunjhunwala

TruthPrevails
The Indo-Aryan Controversy: Did they ever enter the Indian subcontinent from the outside? Or did these people develop indigenously in the Greater Panjab?




Michael Witzel begins on page 354 with the number shown on the left, or number 341 at the bottom of the page. This is the same page where Michael Witzel begins.
Witzel is a hardcore supporter of invasion theory. Let us explore what others have to say.
 

Bharat Jhunjhunwala

TruthPrevails
I'm not your go-to man for Indo-Aryan history, but all the research seems to agree that H sap sap evolved in Africa, from where waves of emigration occurred at various times.

As I understand it, this, and the directions the emigrants variously took, are derived from the DNA of human remains ─ rare and random finds ─ and crossed fingers.

After that, I don't think I can add much.
Oppenheimer says they reached south asia at 60kya. Then they migrated from South Asia to Europe 40 to 25 kya. So another westward migration is entirely plausible.
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
Oppenheimer says they reached south asia at 60kya. Then they migrated from South Asia to Europe 40 to 25 kya. So another westward migration is entirely plausible.
They - Who? Do you mean the first humans? Another Westward Migration of which people, from where to where, when?
Such a vague post on history is really meaningless. There is no evidence of a large western migration from India in any age,
If you have any such evidence, kindly mention that.
The oldest Indo-European culture that I find in Wikipedia is Seroglazovo (Seroglazovka culture - Wikipedia - 7th Millennium BCE).Yes, from there, IE people moved West around (approx.) 4,500 BCE (Starčevo–Körös–Criș culture - Wikipedia), to North 3,500 (Samara) and East around 2,500 BCE (Oxus Valley). Those who moved East were later known as Indo-Iranian Aryans. The Indian branch arrived around 2,000 -1,500 BCE.

1706885032467.png
Early human migrations - Wikipedia
 
Last edited:

River Sea

Well-Known Member
Oppenheimer says they reached south asia at 60kya. Then they migrated from South Asia to Europe 40 to 25 kya. So another westward migration is entirely plausible.

Human migrations out of Africa, Stephen Oppenheimer


Essentially there are only two or perhaps three routes out of Africa. One is across the mouth of the Red Sea, the other is across the Suez, and the third is across the Straits of Gibraltar. And really there's very little evidence that the original modern human migration went across Gibraltar, although other migrations certainly did. And so it's a choice of two, between the mouth of the Red Sea and the Suez. And to determine which route was taken, we really have to look at the descendant lineages, or descendant haplogroups or genetic lines, which are on the other side of that gate. And if we look in southern Arabia in India, we find all of the early branches of M and N [two human lineages] in great profusion. If on the other hand, we look in the Near East, all we find is N. And not only do we only find N, we only find highly derived groups of N, which are characteristic of Europeans and Near Easterners. And so the diversity of lineages that are found outside the gate, northern gate, are very much less than the diversity of lineages which are found to the east of the southern gate.

African mitochondrial DNA tree, Stephen Oppenheimer


Interviewee: Stephen Oppenheimer. Geneticist Stephen Oppenheimer talks about the mitochondrial DNA and Y chromosome lineages of our ancestors. (DNAi Location: Applications > Human origins> Migrations> Videos > Paths out of Africa)

There's only one branch of the African mitochondrial DNA tree, that's called L3 [a human lineage], which is related to all non-African populations. And it appears that L3, split into two outside Africa, around 80,000 years ago, and these two branches have been called M and N, and if you look at all well populations, you'll find either one or both of these, in fact in European populations there's only N, and in all other non-African populations there are both M and N descendants. In the case of the Y chromosome, there's one mutation, M168, which was discovered in Peter Underhill's laboratory, and M168 again, accounts for all non-African populations.
 

GoodAttention

Active Member
For example, Swaminatha Aiyar writes:
. . . from a linguistic point of view also, Dravidian is more comparable to
Indo-Aryan than to any other language family in the world . . . But
Dravidian may be the first to have been separated and went north. Next
the centum people separated and left through the Himalayan passes to
Caspian or Pamir and then to Europe etc. The satem speakers left after
that, batch by batch. The last batch might have been the Iranians.
(1975, quoted with approval by Misra 1992: 73–8)

The Indo-Aryan Controversy: Evidence and Inference in Indian History

Page 373 from left side or page 359 bottom page (same page)


This is a good starting point, because many of the "holes" that this source identifies can now be understood in the context of the 4.2kiloyear event.

The 4.2kiloyear event was not understood in the detail we have today at the time these theories were considered.
 

River Sea

Well-Known Member
This is a good starting point, because many of the "holes" that this source identifies can now be understood in the context of the 4.2kiloyear event.

The 4.2kiloyear event was not understood in the detail we have today at the time these theories were considered.

@GoodAttention
I'm only putting this here to help me reference 4.2 kilo year. Which is 2200 BC

@GoodAttention You show yk. found it: 4.2-kiloyear event - Wikipedia
4.2-kiloyear event
The 4.2-kiloyear (thousand years) BP aridification event (long-term drought), also known as the 4.2 ka event,[2] was one of the most severe climatic events of the Holocene epoch.[3] It defines the beginning of the current Meghalayan age in the Holocene epoch.

Starting around 2200 BC, it most likely lasted the entire 22nd century BC. It has been hypothesised to have caused the collapse of the Old Kingdom in Egypt, the Akkadian Empire in Mesopotamia, and the Liangzhu culture in the lower Yangtze River area.[4][5] The drought may also have initiated the collapse of the Indus Valley Civilisation, with some of its population moving southeastward to follow the movement of their desired habitat,[6] as well as the migration of Indo-European-speaking people into India.[7] Some scientists disagree with that conclusion, citing evidence that the event was not a global drought and did not happen in a clear timeline.
 
Last edited:

River Sea

Well-Known Member
@GoodAttention

How does 4.2-kiloyear event become 2200 BC

AI Overview
Learn more…Opens in new tab

The 3.2k yr BP Event caused a megadrought in some regions of ...

The 4.2-kiloyear event, also known as the 4.2-kiloyear BP aridification event, occurred around 2200–1900 BCE. This is when a megadrought, or a drought lasting more than 10 years, affected the Mediterranean, west Asia, the Indus River Valley, and northeast Africa.


The 4.2-kiloyear event is thought to have been caused by a number of factors, including:
  • Weakening of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation (AMOC): This disrupted global ocean currents and caused changes in temperature and precipitation.
  • Shift of the Intertropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ): This shifted southward abruptly.
  • Increased El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO) variability: This also contributed to the climatic conditions of the event.
  • Explosive volcanism in Iceland: However, some studies suggest that the low sulfur content of Icelandic volcanoes meant that it had a negligible impact on global climate.

The 4.2-kiloyear event is thought to have contributed to the decline of several civilizations, including the Old Kingdom in Egypt, the Akkadian Empire, the Liangzhu Empire, and the Indus Valley Civilization.
 

River Sea

Well-Known Member
@GoodAttention

The 4.2-kiloyear event, also known as the 4.2-kiloyear BP aridification event, occurred around 2200–1900 BCE

Is 1900 BCE earlier or later then 1500 BCE?

AI Overview
Learn more…Opens in new tab

1900 BCE is earlier than 1500 BCE; when using the BCE system, a larger number indicates a further point in the past.


Explanation: "BCE" stands for "Before the Common Era," and in this system, the further back in time you go, the larger the number becomes. So, 1900 BCE is 400 years earlier than 1500 BCE.
 

River Sea

Well-Known Member
@GoodAttention
1900 BCE is earlier then 1500 BCE

Chalcolithic Beginnings of the Bronze Age after 4000
BCE. How?

4000 BCE was earlier than 1900 BCE.

Humans discovered how to use copper indifferent cultures around the world. Raw copper is common and it has a low melting point and it is easily malleable..

copper history - Google Search Chalcolithic

Copper is one of the oldest metals used by humans, dating back more than 10,000 years. Archaeological evidence suggests that Neolithic humans first used native copper in the regions of modern-day Turkey, Iran, Iraq, and the Indian subcontinent around 8,000–5,000 BCE. They used it as a substitute for stone in coins and ornaments, and may have also hammered it into shapes.

8000 BCE was earlier than 1900 BCE.

@cladking look copper
@cladking You showed pyramids help water land yet wonder about copper. If copper brings harm or not harm?

(2) Copper and tin would have been traded - bringing humans out of the stone age circa 3500 BCE.

3500 BCE was earlier then 1900 BCE

Writing wasn't invented until 3200 BC when people became to not be able to be proficient in AL because it had become too complex. Many pidgin languages sprang up that used the exact same vocabulary (PIE) but were formatted like our modern languages. The meaning of anything written in such a confused language drifted so writing was invented to stop this drift.

3200 BC was earlier then 1900 BCE
 
Last edited:
Top