My blog

Tag: ANI

  • Aryan Invasion Theory: Other debunking evidences (Part III)

    While the Aryan Invasion Theory/Aryan Migration Theory has been debunked beyond doubt by genetics, its proponents still try to claim ambiguity on other grounds — linguistics, archaeology, mythology etc. — similar to how creationists claim that Creationism is as plausible an explanation as Evolution.

    Linguistics evidence

    Since genetics debunks AIT/AMT, linguistic arguments are the first refuge for the AIT/AMT apologists. The reasoning is that the similarity between North Indian and European languages means Aryan invasion or migration must have happened. However, the problem with this assertion is that it derives its conclusion from partial information. The similarity of languages could have come from migration on either side — one cannot claim that Europe is the origin for the Indo-Aryan language family based on similarity of Indo-European languages alone. The British, who first propounded AIT/AMT, didn’t like the idea that the west might have had its origin from Indians, so they postulated that Europe gave rise to Indian languages and culture — and this is exactly what people trained in leftist and Marxist schools push even today.

    However, recent analysis on linguistics is also making life difficult for AIT/AMT proponents. Recent studies show that Sanskrit has more in common with the proto Indo-European language — which gave rise to the Indo-European language family — than any other European language.

    Sanskrit and Indo-European language connections
    Contextual replacement image. The original embedded media could not be recovered; this image does not reproduce the original dataset or copyrighted frame.

    The most important finding from linguistic reconstruction is that Sanskrit has the most in common with the proto Indo-European language, and not the Central Asian or Eastern European languages. For example, Childe gives 72 basic cognate proto Indo-European words constructed scientifically, of which Sanskrit has 70 words, German 46 words, Baltic 23 words, Slavic 16 words, and Greek 48 words. Sanskrit is the only Aryan language besides proto Indo-European to have retained three genders, three numbers and eight cases intact.

    Another evidence is presented using ancient mythologies. When you compare Greek and Vedic mythologies, there are many common elements. Similarly, German and Vedic mythologies share many common elements. But if you compare German and Greek, there are no common elements — meaning Sanskrit and Vedic mythology is the common element connecting the European language tree and mythologies. Also, Iranian Mythology has common elements only with Vedic mythology. But according to AIT, Aryans came from South Russia to Central Asia and then separated in Iran. This cannot be the case when Iranian mythology has nothing in common with any other European mythology of that time.

    Archaeological evidence

    The initial basis for AIT was based on the claim by Mortimer Wheeler when he found some skulls in archaeological sites around Harappa and used them to support AIT by claiming the skulls belonged to Dravidians killed by invading Aryans. However, subsequent archaeological research showed that the skulls were mere burial sites of IVC people and not the result of any fighting between invading armies and locals. In fact, there is no archaeological proof that any kind of invasion ever took place. This is the reason AIT proponents have recently changed their stand to Aryan Migration Theory — much like how creationists changed their theory to “Intelligent Design” keeping all but the name. But unfortunately for the proponents of AMT/AIT, even AMT falls flat on the archaeological evidence: there is no archaeological evidence for any kind of migration into IVC either.

    Another popular argument used by the AMT/AIT side is that IVC had no chariots and it was the Aryans who brought chariots and horses into India. This is a preposterous claim. India is protected from the north and north-west by the Hindukush, and any invader had to overcome it. The Greeks, who were known for their chariots, had to leave them behind when Alexander invaded India. So it is nothing more than wishful thinking to assume that nomadic barbarians from Central Asia could have achieved the feat of bringing chariots into India through the Hindukush two thousand years before Alexander — something that even he didn’t achieve. Michael Danino presents detailed evidence showing that horses were present in India much before the supposed Aryan invasion, and some recent studies actually claim horses are native to India.

    Ice Age evidence

    The world came out of the last ice age roughly around 10,000–12,000 years ago. India was not affected by the ice age to the same extent as Europe and Central Asia because of the presence of the Himalayas to the north. So the population living in India at that time could have easily migrated north towards Central Asia and then Europe as the ice age began to end and glaciers began retreating. This is consistent with what is observed in the genetic studies.

    However, AIT/AMT posits the opposite direction for migration. Why would Europeans and Central Asians, who were by then accustomed to ice-covered climate, migrate south into India specially at a time when the ice age had ended and the climate was getting hotter? It makes no sense that people who lived and survived in the ice-covered plains of Europe and Central Asia would abandon their native land specially at a time when it was turning greener and food was getting plentiful. Also, the cold temperature during the Ice Age would have supported smaller populations in Central Asia compared to India. So migration would have been possible only from the high-density area of India to Central Asia and Europe — not the other way around.

    Cultural perspective

    The latest attempt by AMT/AIT pushers is the theory of cultural assimilation — this way they don’t have to present any genetic or archaeological evidence, merely stating their assertions are true. As per this version, Aryans were not invaders but a small number of migrants — too small to be detected by any genetic or archaeological evidence — who over a very large period of time successfully managed to force millions of people living in IVC to give up their religion and language in favour of Indo-European languages and gods.

    This is by far the most absurd explanation for the Aryan Invasion Theory — it assumes that millions of Dravidians living in IVC, which was at that time the most populous region on the planet, had no good language or religion of their own and thus gave up their own civilisation and copied the few hundred migrating Aryans whose numbers were so low that current archaeology or genetic studies can barely detect them. Many people prefer such mental gymnastics rather than the much simpler explanation that the Aryan invasion or migration never happened and that the Aryan-Dravidian divide was an artificial construct of the British.

    Even after all these attempts, the Aryan Invasion Theory leaves behind many more questions than it solves. There are crores of temples for Dravidian Gods — Shiva, Vishnu and Brahma — all over India, while the Aryan gods — Indra, Varuna, Vayu, Agni etc. — have very few temples dedicated to them. Unless one is wilfully disingenuous, it makes no sense that the Aryan invaders or migrants who supposedly defeated the Dravidians would have adopted the gods of the Dravidians as the primordial deities above their own Indra or Vayu.

    This brings to an end this series of articles. The articles here have tried to debunk the most common arguments used by the supporters of AIT/AMT. Given the amount of propaganda and politics which supports the pro-AIT lobby, the mounting evidence against this theory will take some time to change things on the ground. Till that happens, the job of debunking this theory should continue at all levels.

  • Aryan Invasion Theory: The Genetics (Part II)

    Aryan Invasion Theory (AIT) has been debunked by almost all of the recent datasets and studies on genetics, linguistics, mythology/religion and archaeology. Yet this theory keeps cropping up in one form or other, especially in its milder form as the Aryan Migration Theory (AMT) — which is just the invasion theory rephrased as migration due to the lack of any archaeological evidence for invasion in the Indus Valley Civilisation (IVC) at 1500 BC. Most often, the proponents of AIT or AMT cite either outdated studies or half-truths to push their ideas. The most blatant case of misinformation is from the field of genetics — which unlike linguistics is a hard science with little room for guesswork.

    One of the most often used justifications for AIT is that North Indians have genetics similar to Europeans and hence this theory is true. The proponents even cite various genetics studies to show this point. However, this is a classic case of presenting half-truths. This similarity is higher between North Indians and Europeans than between South Indians and Europeans. While this genetic similarity does show that Indians and Europeans are related, it fails to show the direction of that relationship — it does not give information on whether Indians migrated to Europe or Europeans migrated into India. The proponents of AIT just push invasion from Central Asia and Europe as per their pre-conceived notions, and are almost always silent on the time period of this invasion or migration.

    But unfortunately for AIT proponents, deeper genetic studies can now give the direction of movement of population as well as the time period for this mixing. The recent studies on the genetics of R1a1 Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNPs) in the Y chromosome and mitochondrial DNA studies have helped understand the migration pattern of humans during the late Holocene period better. Y chromosome is found only among males and is inherited only by sons, giving valuable insight into patrilineal gene flow. Mitochondrial DNA is exclusively derived from the mother, helping understand matrilineal gene flow. By tracing Y chromosomes, one can trace the fathers and grandfathers of a group; by tracing mitochondrial DNA, one can trace the mothers and grandmothers.

    Lucotte G. is one such major study on genetics which studies the distribution pattern of R1a1 haplotype in detail among Europeans, Central Asians and Indians. The principle behind this study is that newer groups of people would have far fewer variations among them while older population groups would have a higher frequency of variations. This is how modern humans’ ancestry is traced back to Africans — because Africans have the highest amount of genetic variations among all groups of people today.

    In the present study we have extended the field of detection of haplotype XI/haplogroup R1a… We found high haplotype XI frequencies values in Afghanistan (18.4%), in Iran (26.5%), in Pakistan (28% and 30.4%) and in India; in this last subcontinent, the maximal value of 61.3% was found in Punjab… Datations show that the Z93 Pakistano-Indian group is the most ancient (about 15.5K years); in Europe, the Eastern populations are the most ancient (about 12.5K years) and the Northern ones the most recent (about 6.9K years).

    — Lucotte G., study on R1a1 haplotype distribution

    So the data gives evidence that the R1a1 found in Punjab is the oldest, the Central European haplotype is in the middle, and the Northern European R1a haplotype is the youngest. This pretty much buries the Aryan invasion and migration theories — if AIT or AMT were true, we would have seen from the genetic results that the Eastern European haplotype is the oldest and the Indian haplotype is the youngest, since AIT claims Europeans came as invaders/migrants to North India. The study states that Central/Eastern European population is 12.5k years old while Northern European population is 6.9k years old — and the Punjabi/North Indian population is at least 15.5k years old.

    As per Aryan Invasion Theory, IVC ended because of migration or invasion by Aryans around 1500 BC — 4,000 years ago. In the light of the above and similar genetic studies, the Aryan Invasion Theory is off the mark by at least 10,000 years. Since North Indian population is at least 15,000 years old, the claim that Hinduism is not native to India falls flat on its face — it makes Hinduism indigenous to India and India alone.

    The actual population composition of India

    As per the latest genetic studies, population of India is derived from two separate population groups — ANI (Ancestral North Indians) and ASI (Ancestral South Indians). The data suggests that ANI came to India at around 60,000 BC and ASI at around 45,000 BC. But the ANI and ASI are not synonymous with Aryans and Dravidians as some AMT/AIT enthusiasts try to make it seem. North Indians on average have about 60% ANI genes and 40% ASI genes while South Indians on average have 40% ANI and 60% ASI. The South and North Indian names for ASI and ANI denote their relative contribution to each group — not distinct Aryan or Dravidian entities. This is also the reason why South Indians share genetic similarity with Europeans. Since North Indians share 40% genetic material with South Indians, and Europeans share 60–70% genetic similarity with North Indians, Europeans have 20–30% genetic commonality with South Indians. This mixture of North and South Indian ancestors must have happened before 12,000 years ago — only then would South Indians share the DNA of Europeans. This also puts to rest the theory that Aryan invaders became upper castes and Dravidians became lower castes, as Hinduism originated roughly 5,000 years back — almost 10,000 years after the ANI and ASI had mixed.

    Ancestral North Indian migration context
    Contextual replacement image. The original embedded media could not be recovered; this image does not reproduce the original dataset or copyrighted frame.
    ANI migrations
    Ancestral South Indian migration context
    Contextual replacement image. The original embedded media could not be recovered; this image does not reproduce the original dataset or copyrighted frame.
    ASI migrations

    Technical summary on using genetics for dating migration patterns

    The first part is sample selection — random samples are taken from a selected population group and a particular gene loci is selected to study. Gene loci have multiple expressions. SNPs (Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms) are changes in a gene at a single nucleotide that do not change the behaviour of the gene significantly, producing no discernible phenotype difference. Because SNPs don’t confer any genetic advantages, they can be used as tools for studying distribution and migration of populations. A tallness gene, by contrast, cannot be used for studying migrations because survival advantages would confound the study.

    Let’s say there is a parent population A with a gene called R1a1, present in a place called X. After a few centuries, a sub-group of population A moves from place X to a new place Y. Since X is far from Y, any new mutations in A at X won’t be found in the population at Y. So while new mutations might occur in Y, X will have more variety of variations as the parent population. The higher the degree of variations in the genetics, the older the population must be. This is how scientists concluded that modern humans came out of Africa — because of the highest density of variations there.

    When scientists study X and Y populations and their SNPs, the population with a higher density of variations is the older one. This is how the above mentioned study by Lucotte concluded that Punjab, with the highest density of R1a, is the oldest population group among those studied.

    Other References:

    1. European Journal of Human Genetics, Vol. 18, No. 4 — R1a1 M458 chromosomes speak against substantial patrilineal gene flow from East Europe to Asia, including India, at least since the mid-Holocene.

    2. Journal of Human Genetics, Vol. 54, No. 1 — Highest frequency (up to 72.22%) of Y-haplogroup R1a1* in Brahmins suggested as a founder lineage, with extended phylogenetic analyses supporting autochthonous origin of R1a1 lineage in India.

    3. Indian Academy of Sciences study — Among R1a1a*(xM458) chromosomes, “the highest diversity is observed among populations of the Indus Valley yielding coalescent times above 14 KYA”, declining toward Europe where maximum diversity and coalescent times of 11.2 KYA are observed in Poland, Slovakia and Crete.