Talk:Indo-Aryan migrations

(Redirected from Talk:Indo-Aryan migration theory)
Latest comment: 18 days ago by Joshua Jonathan in topic Arguments

Genetics info from D Reich

edit

According to geneticist David Reich, Sintashta and Andronovo, the two cultures often associated with the Indo-Aryans and Indo-Aryan languages, did not directly contribute any DNA to India[source]:

"Often in the story told with the steppe hypothesis, the Yamnaya give rise to later groups called the Sintashta and Andronovo that then contributed to India. But genetic data from those populations so far call into question that model, as they do not work statistically as sources of ancestry in India." — David Reich

[Source] Reich, David (March 2018). "Ancient DNA Suggests Steppe Migrations Spread Indo-European Languages"

Pretty interesting, since the theory focus a lot on Sintashta/Andronovo migrations which apparently did not happen. In the source Reich mentions that Sintashta/Andronovo-related ancestry reached India later than hypothesized, through a later culture that carried it (thus indirect contribution) 46.176.160.196 (talk) 11:28, 3 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

Please read footnote 2 at the end of that paragraph from which you pulled the quote.

”In the year since this lecture was delivered, my laboratory and another laboratory have generated new ancient DNA data from Central Asia. With these data in hand, we have been able to show that groups like Sintashta and Andronovo in fact have mixed with some of these newly sampled populations to produce a plausible source population for South Asians.” Chariotrider555 (talk) 14:41, 3 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

"Aryan Invasion Theory (history and controversies)" listed at Redirects for discussion

edit

  An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Aryan Invasion Theory (history and controversies) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 3#Aryan Invasion Theory (history and controversies) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Senator2029 【talk】 21:08, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

Infobox military conflict

edit

@HorCrux48: FYI: the IVC had already started to decline, due to climate change, when Indo-Aryan people started to migrate into northern India, also due to climate change. The 'Aryan Invasion Theory', bt which you seem to be informed, is outdated and incorrect. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 19:29, 31 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

@RegentsPark and Bishonen: does one of you care to convince this editor of their misunderstanding? Thanks. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 19:30, 31 March 2023 (UTC)Reply
@HorCrux48: If you find your additions reverted, please seek consensus on the talk page rather than edit warring to add it back. I'm removing your infobox and suggest you explain here why you think it necessary. Wait for consensus and, if you get it, then add it back. (See WP:BRD and WP:EW)--RegentsPark (comment) 20:39, 31 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

Semi-protected edit request on 28 January 2024

edit

Please change:

The Gandhara Grave, Cemetery H, Copper Hoard and Painted Grey Ware cultures are candidates for subsequent cultures within south India associated with Indo-Aryan movements.

to:

The Gandhara Grave, Cemetery H, Copper Hoard and Painted Grey Ware cultures are candidates for subsequent cultures within South Asia associated with Indo-Aryan movements. Lekhak (talk) 15:38, 28 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Not done: no reason given for the proposed change. M.Bitton (talk) 16:08, 28 January 2024 (UTC)Reply
"south India" in this sentence doesn't make any sense. "South Asia" does. It appears to be a typo, hence my simple correction.
Regardless of the controversy, The Gandhara Grave, Cemetery H, Copper Hoard and Painted Grey Ware cultures within South Asia is generally conjectured to be associated with Indo-Aryan movements all over the literature.
For instance:
"Aryans in the Archaeological Record: The Evidence Inside the Subcontinent" by J.F. Heinen: This chapter from the book "The Quest for the Origins of Vedic Culture" delves into the archaeological evidence for Indo-Aryan presence in South Asia, with a specific focus on the Gandhara Grave Culture.
UNDERSTANDING PATTERNS OF CULTURAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE POST-HARAPPAN PERIOD ( ND MILLENNIUM TO 600 BCE): A STUDY ON ARCHAEOLOGICAL DATABASE" by Upinder Singh: This article examines the cultural developments in the post-Harappan period, including the Cemetery H Culture and its possible connection to Indo-Aryan migrations.
"The Copper Hoard Culture and the Aryans" by B.B. Lal: This article presents the case for associating the Copper Hoard Culture with Indo-Aryan migrations, based on shared features with Central Asian cultures.
"The Painted Grey Ware Culture" by R.S. Sharma: This book provides a detailed study of the Painted Grey Ware Culture, including its chronology, distribution, and relationship with other cultures in South Asia. It also addresses the ongoing debate about its association with Indo-Aryan migrations.
Regardless of the on-going debate on cautious approach on associating these cultures with Indo-Aryan movements, the current sentence with "south India" doesn't make any sense at all, and it appears to be a typo. Hence my simple request. Lekhak (talk) 18:36, 28 January 2024 (UTC)Reply
Look at the locations of those cultures. They have nothing to do with south India: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cemetery_H_culture#/media/File:Rigvedic_geography.jpg
This whole subcontinent is South Asia. South India is the a small part of South Asia (south of India), which has nothing to do with Gandhara Grave, Cemetery H, Painted Grey Ware, and Copper Hoard Culture.
Hence my attempt to correct what appears to be a simple typo. Lekhak (talk) 18:49, 28 January 2024 (UTC)Reply
 
Map of these cultures in the North West corner has nothing to do with south India
Lekhak (talk) 19:00, 28 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

"south India" in this sentence doesn't make any sense. "South Asia" does. It appears to be a typo, hence my simple correction.

Regardless of the controversy, The Gandhara Grave, Cemetery H, Copper Hoard and Painted Grey Ware cultures within South Asia is generally conjectured to be associated with Indo-Aryan movements all over the literature. For instance:

"Aryans in the Archaeological Record: The Evidence Inside the Subcontinent" by J.F. Heinen: This chapter from the book "The Quest for the Origins of Vedic Culture" delves into the archaeological evidence for Indo-Aryan presence in South Asia, with a specific focus on the Gandhara Grave Culture.

UNDERSTANDING PATTERNS OF CULTURAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE POST-HARAPPAN PERIOD ( ND MILLENNIUM TO 600 BCE): A STUDY ON ARCHAEOLOGICAL DATABASE" by Upinder Singh: This article examines the cultural developments in the post-Harappan period, including the Cemetery H Culture and its possible connection to Indo-Aryan migrations.

"The Copper Hoard Culture and the Aryans" by B.B. Lal: This article presents the case for associating the Copper Hoard Culture with Indo-Aryan migrations, based on shared features with Central Asian cultures.

"The Painted Grey Ware Culture" by R.S. Sharma: This book provides a detailed study of the Painted Grey Ware Culture, including its chronology, distribution, and relationship with other cultures in South Asia. It also addresses the ongoing debate about its association with Indo-Aryan migrations.

Regardless of the on-going debate on cautious approach on associating these cultures with Indo-Aryan movements, the current sentence with "south India" doesn't make any sense at all, and it appears to be a typo.

Done. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 20:07, 28 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

SST

edit

After battle in which caste Aryans has gone 2409:4081:2D00:9135:478F:39AD:1EE1:A34 (talk) 13:40, 4 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Arguments

edit

If there were really Aryan migrations, then why there is no similarity of culture, tools, art forms and pottery as the people who migrated must have brought these with them. Why there is no mention of migration and gene mixing in the literature of indigenous people of the Indian subcontinent 2409:40D1:3:169D:782D:28FF:FEDC:1C38 (talk) 15:05, 30 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Because they made Indian culture after 700 years of disconnecting from Central Asian Aryans 223.178.209.63 (talk) 09:58, 27 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
WP:NOTAFORUM. Brusquedandelion (talk) 04:09, 28 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
Similarities with who or what? Shintashta? There are: language, chariots, burial customs. The basic form of the mandala is derived from the basic outline of Shintashta settlements. Mention of migration: in which "indigenous literature"? The Vedas? Why would those texts do so? But they do mention people with Aryan and non-Aryan names. Let's turn it around: if the Aryans originated in India, how do you explain the linguistic, genetical and religious similarities between Indian and European people in a credible way? See Talk:Indigenous Aryanism#'No Support in mainstream scholarship' for non-credible ways. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 04:25, 28 October 2024 (UTC)Reply