Early Indo-Aryan Physical Anthropology from the Gandhara Grave Culture Complex

[Vesuvian Sky]

Published in: Origin of the Indo-Iranians (2007)
Author: Elena Kuzmina (professor of archaeology Moscow University)

http://books.google.com/books/about/The_Origin_of_the_Indo_Iranians.html?id=x5J9rn8p2-IC


The most important evidence of the Andronovan origin (of the Gandharan grave complex) are also the data on the appearance of the camel, horse, chariot, and their cult, and the style of the images of chariots in Thor and Godara (see Chapter 8).

The statement about the northern origin of the Swat culture is corroborated by the anthropological data which have been discussed in Chapter 11. Twelve skulls from the graves of Butkara II and four skulls from the settlement of Aligrama have been found. They belong to the Mediterranean type that is represented in Central Asia. B. A. Litvinsky (1972: 186) has underlined “a remarkable resemblance between a series of skulls from Swat and the Saka skulls from the Pamirs” which was first noted by B. Bernhard (1967: 317-385). It suggests a genetic relation between the two populations. Among the 25 skulls from Timargarha this type is represented, as well as a massive proto-Caucasoid type which was distinctive for the steppe Andronovans, a Veddoid (3 skulls) usual for the indigenous inhabitants of Hindustan, and a Mongoloid type (2 skulls) which might have appeared during Ghaligai period III from Kashmir.

The population of Swat formed over four millennia. But what was their ethnic identification? Some have identified the creators of the Swat graves with the Iranians (Castaldi 1968; Silvi Antonini 1973). Most scholars led by B. and R. Allchin (1972: 303) and B. K. Thapar (1981: 299) presumed that this culture had originated from Iran and belonged to the Rigvedic Aryans. A. Parpola (1994: 16, 17) assumed that the first wave of the Aryan migration could have started in the Danube region and the Early Gandhara Grave culture was proto-Rigvedic = proto-Dardic, and Late Gandhara was Late Rigvedic = Nuristani. Recently (2002a: 71-72) he has stressed that contacts between Ghaligai IV and the BMAC, and between Ghaligai V and Hasanlu V existed; he also has supposed that a part of the Indo-Aryans moved through the northern regions of Hindustan and the Gandhara culture area is equivalent to that of the Dardic language. The third group—S. Gupta (1972; 1979), E Kuz’mina (1972a, b; 1974; 1975)—has regarded the population found in the cemeteries as Rigvedic Aryans having come not from Iran, but from Central Asia.

The attribution of the culture to the Aryans is supported by the analysis of burial rites that are paralleled in the Vedas. The Aryan etymology of the toponyms in Gomal and Swat is another proof: Ved. Gomatī-Gomal, Suvāstu- Swat, Kubhā-Kabul, Sindhu-Indus, Kumu-Kurram (Stein 1917: 91-99; Toporov 1962: 59-66; Elizarenkova 1972: 12, 13; 1989: 440-443; Allchin and Allchin 1973: 218). But these facts indicate the common-Aryan, not the Vedic character of the Swat culture, and show that different groups of the Indo-Aryans—Dards and Nuristani among them—migrated to this region.

G. Tucci (1963; 1977) has demonstrated the resemblance of the ancient culture of Swat to that of its modern inhabitants—the Dards. He suggested that its origins should be searched for in Central Asia. K. Jettmar (1960; 1966; 1975: 466), having done the ethnographical research of the Hindukush population, concluded that the Dards and Nuristani have numerous survivals of the ancient Indo-Iranian culture. These traits emerged in the Andronovo culture and then they were conserved in the isolated mountain valleys.

[blogen]

I see their descendants in the Indo-brachid type, maybe the Indo-brachids were a Protoeuropid+Indid mix originally with few Iranid, Alpine and Taurid influence.

[Vesuvian Sky]

After reading the 'Sayan Archaeological Complex' article, it seems Kalash, Pamiri, and Dard people preserve aspects of the Proto-Indo-Iranian phenotype the best.

And thank goodness for archaeologists like Kuzmina and Sokolova who tell it like it is and don't try and lie and cover up stuff with the oh so popular autochtonus development nonsense theories the likes that Hausler and Whittle tout.

[blogen]

Exclusively the considerable proportion of the Protoeuropid type was interesting in these cemeteries. This presupposes a direct wandering from Central Asia with only a short stop on the BMAC area. Since the Protoeuropid type was rare in the Southern farming lands of Central Asia, but this was the common type in the Northern steppe region. The Andronovo tribes conquered the BMAC in two significant wave, but the northern conquerors were a minority here.

[Vesuvian Sky]

The Andronovo tribes conquered the BMAC in two significant wave, but the northern conquerors were a minority here.

Yes.

Its interesting though because the caste system develops in India, after all this. In other words, substantial admixture is clearly in present day Indo-Aryan populations as a result of, even in the upper castes as I pointed out here:

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?118467-The-Sayan-Archaeological-Complex&p=2489649&viewfull=1#post2489649

It shows that contrary to belief, the caste system develops not to preserve the race of the Indo-Aryans, but rather their status among Dravidian people they encounter. The caste system of India is just too complex and unique to the Indo-Aryans to be trumped as part of the PIE world. Besides, they're clearly admixed.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

Yes.

Its interesting though because the caste system develops in India, after all this. In other words, substantial admixture is clearly in present day Indo-Aryan populations as a result of, even in the upper castes as I pointed out here:

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?118467-The-Sayan-Archaeological-Complex&p=2489649&viewfull=1#post2489649

It shows that contrary to belief, the caste system develops not to preserve the race of the Indo-Aryans, but rather their status among Dravidian people they encounter. The caste system of India is just too complex and unique to the Indo-Aryans to be trumped as part of the PIE world. Besides, they're clearly admixed.

The ancient dna was typical of modern east europeans. So that theory is pretty silly one. Obviously no matter what you do there will be some amount of mixing over 3k-5k years time.

[Rambo07]

LOL, by the time Indo Iranians were living in the Savastu region, they were already considerably mixed even more so than when they were at BMAC, they were in the Vedic state.
I concur with Blogen.

[Vesuvian Sky]

The ancient dna was typical of modern east europeans. So that theory is pretty silly one. Obviously no matter what you do there will be some amount of mixing over 3k-5k years time.


Andronovo male aDNA? Their M-17 haplotypes were closer to Balto-Slavs. Ancient European autosomal DNA:


http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Aif8O5EXGNI/UI7Frkq91DI/AAAAAAAAHEw/ZLHV2wQwi4U/s640/globe13.png

The Upper Castes have like 50% South Asian admixture to them. Obviously due to admixture upon invasion into N. India.

[Shah-Jehan]

Yes.

Its interesting though because the caste system develops in India, after all this. In other words, substantial admixture is clearly in present day Indo-Aryan populations as a result of, even in the upper castes as I pointed out here:

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?118467-The-Sayan-Archaeological-Complex&p=2489649&viewfull=1#post2489649

It shows that contrary to belief, the caste system develops not to preserve the race of the Indo-Aryans, but rather their status among Dravidian people they encounter. The caste system of India is just too complex and unique to the Indo-Aryans to be trumped as part of the PIE world. Besides, they're clearly admixed.
The caste systems apply to Dravidians, Tibeto-Burmans and anyone whose regarded Hindu, not only Indo-Aryan speakers.

[Vesuvian Sky]

The caste systems apply to Dravidians, Tibeto-Burmans and anyone whose regarded Hindu, not only Indo-Aryan speakers.

Yes, but typically, as I understand, the Dravidian people are usually at the lower rankings of the caste system. No?

[GrebluBro]

Yes, but typically, as I understand, the Dravidian people are usually at the lower rankings of the caste system. No?

I recently learnt that North (Indo-Aryan) Indian and South/Dravidian Indians follow different caste systems..

North Indians castes (by prestige order) => 1) Brahmin 2) no idea 3) NI 4) NI 5) Dalits

South Indians => 1) Brahmin 3) Dalits 2) others

Indo-Aryan Speakers and Dravidian Speakers own diffferent provinces.. they're not mixed (tiny percent migrated)


http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/plc/clpp/images/langmaps/india_lang_1973.jpg

[Shah-Jehan]

Yes, but typically, as I understand the Dravidian people are usually at the lower rankings of the caste system. No?

No, I mean there are Brahmins present in Dravidian speaking groups such as Tamils, Kannada etc people and even in Tibeto-Burman speaking people in the Northeast of India.

It is often a misconception that Dravidians are regarded as low-caste but, the caste system is often based on occupations and does not really demean anyone except of course the outcasts or untouchables, the Dalits who are present in both Indo-Aryan and Dravidian groups.

[Vesuvian Sky]

To either Shah-Jehah or South Asian:

Do Dravidian and Indo-Aryan people ever marry/mix in India at present day or is there are strict division here?

[Shah-Jehan]

To either Shah-Jah or South Asian:

Do Dravidian and Indo-Aryan people ever marry/mix in India at present day or is there are strict division here?

No, there isn't any such divide based on language groups. Most marriages are often limited to religious, ethnic etc divides but, mixes do occur when people from one state in India migrate to another. A famous case of Dravidian-Indo-Aryan marriage is of Aishwariya Rai (Tulu) and Abhishek Bachan (Indo-Aryan) but, both of them are Brahmins of course.

However, I have never heard of Indo-Aryan or Dravidian speakers marrying Austroasiatic people or tribal people in general.

[GrebluBro]

To either Shah-Jehah or South Asian:

Do Dravidian and Indo-Aryan people ever marry/mix in India at present day or is there are strict division here?

It happens only among Educated communities of big cities

[Rambo07]

To either Shah-Jehah or South Asian:

Do Dravidian and Indo-Aryan people ever marry/mix in India at present day or is there are strict division here?

Original Dravidian people were actually your regular Indo Brachids/North Indids with IranoCM thrown in here and there. If you look at Brahui people, who are Dravidians that becomes evident.
ANI actually peaks in them and they look like your typical Indo Aryan types.

Dravidian expansion in the South was actually more of a cultural one, than a racial one. The same can be said for Sanskrit in the North, more of a cultural one, than a racial one.
Though ironically vast Vedic culture is probably best maintained by the Brahmins of Southern India.

[Smeagol]

Original Dravidian people were actually your regular Indo Brachids/North Indids with IranoCM thrown in here and there. If you look at Brahui people, who are Dravidians that becomes evident.

Yeah, that's true. It's funny when people say all of the Europid elements in South Asians come from the Aryans, because that's obviously ridiculous. The Dravidians originated in the north and expanded to the south, assimilating the native racial types.

[Shah-Jehan]

Original Dravidian people were actually your regular Indo Brachids/North Indids with IranoCM thrown in here and there. If you look at Brahui people, who are Dravidians that becomes evident.
ANI actually peaks in them and they look like your typical Indo Aryan types.

Dravidian expansion in the South was actually more of a cultural one, than a racial one. The same can be said for Sanskrit in the North, more of a cultural one, than a racial one.
Though ironically vast Vedic culture is probably best maintained by the Brahmins of Southern India.

The Brahuis migrated to the Balochestan in about 1000 AD where they acquired their racial Iranic elements.

[Rambo07]

Yeah, that's true. It's funny when people say all of the Europid elements in South Asians come from the Aryans, because that's obviously ridiculous. The Dravidians originated in the north and expanded to the south, assimilating the native racial types.

Yes, the ANI component peaks in Brahui at 86%, Baloch 83%, its a very South Asia specific marker which arrived there 12 000-15000 years ago, when mammoths were roaming around.
Constructing ASI is much more difficult, as it runs the gamut from paleo caucasoid , australoid, veddoids, and paleo mongolid types.

[Rambo07]

The Brahuis migrated to the Balochestan in about 1000 AD where they acquired their racial Iranic elements.

NO they did not. The Brahui are relics of a larger Dravidian population which once populated the region. People who are related to Kurds, migrated to Balochistan, they Iranified those Brahui living
in Balochistan for the most part and they became the Baloch. If Brahui had migrated to the region from other parts of India or South Asia, their ANI components would not be so high.
The fact you have retroflexive sounds in Baloch and not other NW Iranian languages, proves that. Retroflexive sounds are a key feature in Dravidian languages.

What your saying was actually what most people thought, as they were too isolated to last that long in a sea of Indo Aryan languages. Their genetics results totally resolved that.

[Rambo07]

Yeah, that's true. It's funny when people say all of the Europid elements in South Asians come from the Aryans, because that's obviously ridiculous. The Dravidians originated in the north and expanded to the south, assimilating the native racial types.

The main caucasoid component in South Asia, Afghanistan, and Eastern Iran, comes from ANI ie Baloch components.
BMAC Indo Iranians were already considerably removed from other Indo Europeans, the ones in the Swat were even further removed from the BMAC ones.

[GrebluBro]

The Brahuis migrated to the Balochestan in about 1000 AD where they acquired their racial Iranic elements.

They look different from South Indians who speak Dravidian language.
In fact, most Indians look different from Brahuis
In caste obsessed South Asia, mixing was quite impossible over the past 1000 years.

[blogen]

Original Dravidian people were actually your regular Indo Brachids/North Indids with IranoCM thrown in here and there.

Probably the Dravidians were the Mediterranid (Indid, Iranid, etc.) component of the Indians.

[GrebluBro]

Even among Dravidians, phenotype vary a lot cuz of 1000+ years of climate difference...

People from Kerala/Malayali look visibly different from Tamil Nadu and both of them were same ethnicity until 1500 years ago.

[Rambo07]

Probably the Dravidians were the Mediterranid (Indid, Iranid, etc.) component of the Indians.

Brahui and Baloch are good estimations of that phenotype of ANI. Honestly they are do not different too much from people in Sind and Punjab, though you see a lot more IranoCM in Brahui/Baloch.
As ANI moved through the Gangetic plains and into the South they intermixed with the ASI ( Ancestral South Indian) peoples who are ambiguous but have a range of phenotypes from paleo caucasoid, veddoids, paleo mongolids, and you get a range of looks and colors.

[Rambo07]

Even among Dravidians, phenotype vary a lot cuz of 1000+ years of climate difference...

People from Kerala/Malayali look visibly different from Tamil Nadu and both of them were same ethnicity until 1500 years ago.

Major mixing occured 4500-2000 years ago, though I believe there was mixing going far before that, because certain phenotypes simply look too archaic to have just arisen from relatively recent mixing.
Especially if you look at Keralid, Indo melanid types and Todas.

[Rambo07]

After reading the 'Sayan Archaeological Complex' article, it seems Kalash, Pamiri, and Dard people preserve aspects of the Proto-Indo-Iranian phenotype the best.

And thank goodness for archaeologists like Kuzmina and Sokolova who tell it like it is and don't try and lie and cover up stuff with the oh so popular authochtonus development nonsense theories the likes that Hausler and Whittle tout.

Kalash are Dards.

[Vesuvian Sky]

Concerning Brahui/Dravidian debate:


The ethnonym "Brahui" is a very old term and a purely Dravidian one.[4] The fact that other Dravidian languages only exist further south in India has led to several speculations about the origins of the Brahui. There are three hypotheses regarding the Brahui that have been proposed by academics. One theory is that the Brahui are a relic population of Dravidians, surrounded by speakers of Indo-Iranian languages, remaining from a time when Dravidian was more widespread. Another theory is that they migrated to Baluchistan from inner India during the early Muslim period of the 13th or 14th centuries.[5] A third theory says the Brahui migrated to Balochistan from Central India after 1000 AD. The absence of any older Iranian (Avestan) influence in Brahui supports this last hypothesis. The main Iranian contributor to Brahui vocabulary is a northwestern Iranian language, Baluchi, Sindhi and southeastern Iranian language, Pashto.[6]

[Vesuvian Sky]

Concerning ANI/ASI


Results of studies based upon autosomal DNA variation have also been varied. In a major study (2009) using over 500,000 biallelic autosomal markers, Reich hypothesized that the modern Indian population was the result of admixture between two genetically divergent ancestral populations dating from the post-Holocene era. These two "reconstructed" ancient populations he termed "Ancestral South Indians" (ASI) and "Ancestral North Indians" (ANI). According to Reich: "ANI ancestry is significantly higher in Indo-European than Dravidian speakers, suggesting that the ancestral ASI may have spoken a Dravidian language before mixing with the ANI."[42]

Further building on Reich et al.'s characterization of the South Asian population as historically based on admixture of ANI (Ancestral North Indian) and ASI (Ancestral South Indian) populations, a 2011 session paper by Moorjani et al. states that a "major ANI-ASI mixture occurred in the ancestors of both northern and southern Indians 1,200-3,500 years ago, overlapping the time when Indo-European languages first began to be spoken in the subcontinent."[43]

Basu et al. (2003) suggests concludes that "Dravidian tribals were possibly widespread throughout India before the arrival of the Indo-European-speaking nomads" and that "formation of populations by fission that resulted in founder and drift effects have left their imprints on the genetic structures of contemporary populations".[37] The geneticist PP Majumder (2010) has recently argued that the findings of Reich et al. (2009) are in remarkable concordance with previous research using mtDNA and Y-DNA:[44]

Central Asian populations are supposed to have been major contributors to the Indian gene pool, particularly to the northern Indian gene pool, and the migrants had supposedly moved into India through what is now Afghanistan and Pakistan. Using mitochondrial DNA variation data collated from various studies, we have shown that populations of Central Asia and Pakistan show the lowest coefficient of genetic differentiation with the north Indian populations, a higher differentiation with the south Indian populations, and the highest with the northeast Indian populations. Northern Indian populations are genetically closer to Central Asians than populations of other geographical regions of India... . Consistent with the above findings, a recent study using over 500,000 biallelic autosomal markers has found a north to south gradient of genetic proximity of Indian populations to western Eurasians. This feature is likely related to the proportions of ancestry derived from the western Eurasian gene pool, which, as this study has shown, is greater in populations inhabiting northern India than those inhabiting southern India.

[Rambo07]

Concerning Brahui/Dravidian debate:

That theory was debunked with genetics tests within the past 10 years. It would be simply impossible for Brahui to have such high levels of ANI to be coming from Central India.
The retroflexive consonants in Baloch further proves that, as no NW Iranian languages have that.
Baloch are more or less Iranified Brahui.

Their ANI components are very high.
http://www.harappadna.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Brahui.png

Light Blue is ANI/Baloch

[Vesuvian Sky]

That theory was debunked with genetics tests within the past 10 years. It would be simply impossible for Brahui to have such high levels of ANI to be coming from Central India.
The retroflexive consonants in Baloch further proves that, as no NW Iranian languages have that.
Baloch are more or less Iranified Brahui.

Their ANI components are very high.
http://www.harappadna.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Brahui.png

Light Blue is ANI/Baloch

They seem to be a relatively mixed group:


Brahuis display a variety of Y-DNA haplogroups, the two most important of which being haplogroup R1a - with its mass diffusion among populations of Central/South Asia and associated with the early eastern migrations of Indo-Iranian nomads - and haplogroup J, which, though found among other subcontinental peoples, is nevertheless more typical of Near-Eastern populations.[11][12] Other, relatively minor, low-frequency haplogroups among the Brahui are those of L, E1b1a, G, and N.[11][12]


They are Sunni Muslims so naturally they aren't confined to stricter marriage practices like Dravidians in the caste system are. Also, they migrated to Pakistan where the population would be more ANI like anyway. They appear to be an exception among the Dravidians rather then the norm autosomal wise. Ergo this still makes a lot more sense:




According to Reich: "ANI ancestry is significantly higher in Indo-European than Dravidian speakers, suggesting that the ancestral ASI may have spoken a Dravidian language before mixing with the ANI."

Further building on Reich et al.'s characterization of the South Asian population as historically based on admixture of ANI (Ancestral North Indian) and ASI (Ancestral South Indian) populations, a 2011 session paper by Moorjani et al. states that a "major ANI-ASI mixture occurred in the ancestors of both northern and southern Indians 1,200-3,500 years ago, overlapping the time when Indo-European languages first began to be spoken in the subcontinent."[43]

Basu et al. (2003) suggests concludes that "Dravidian tribals were possibly widespread throughout India before the arrival of the Indo-European-speaking nomads" and that "formation of populations by fission that resulted in founder and drift effects have left their imprints on the genetic structures of contemporary populations".[37]