I feel like steppe ancestry could be native or super ancient. We know we share genetic similarities with europeans. But how can we be sure where 'steppe' comes from? Given how widespread steppe is in subcon i feel it is very ancient. Our population has always been so much larger than central asia that millenia of recorded invasions couldnt alter our genome. So i feel steppe likely arrived much before or during early IVC when our population had yet to grow so large. Rakhigarhi is but just one sample to guess the demographic makeup of entire ivc.
>>1286
>But how can we be sure where 'steppe' comes from?
And that is entite reason this nonsense falls or crumbles down, it could be that all Haplos are native and we just slept with bunch of steppe women or steppe was native, jeets are losing it over theories that are likely to change every decade
>>1286
>o i feel steppe likely arrived much before or during early IVC when our population had yet to grow so large. Rakhigarhi is but just one sample to guess the demographic makeup of entire ivc.
No steppe was found at any IVC sample. None.
>>1288
>While genetic studies confirm that the Bronze Age Steppe migration into India was heavily male-biased, modern Indians do carry Steppe DNA in their maternal lines, just in much smaller amounts compared to their paternal lines.
i think we have both
>>1293
>i think we have both
Sure? I think matrilineal lines are just in trace amounts, also the ai google search is bullshit, it pulls from useless sites.
>>1292
Its the other way round. I see people claiming R1a comes from steppe but all the studies i see merely talk about distribution and not origin. On wikipedia page of R1a, possible place of origin is 'Eurasia' i.e. entire asia and europe because they are not sure
>>1297
But no haplo cape from subcon, it is all migrant haplos, not even the one that peaks in dravidan populace, they came from africa about twice as long ago as others
>>1286
Jeets are ignorant that humans in their modern form has existed for more than 50k years. Muh steppe, muh ivc, muh adivasi
It takes less than a century to wipeout entire populations and replace them with other ethnicities.
>>1300
You are missing my point though, no one is saying go coom inside some dalit abbo, i am saying none of the haplos are native to subcon at all, it makes no sense to say "R1" is not from subcon
>>1302
This, we dont have any evidence that R1a is a actually hand in hands with the autosomal steppe, it could have been AASI or IVC or even something else entirely and other groups pretty much got rid of the component being heavier over years, its entirely possible even if not most probable
>>1299
>It takes less than a century to wipeout entire populations and replace them with other ethnicities.
Nah not really. We will all be muslims and speaking Chagatai or persian and carrying y haplogroup Q if it was that simple.
>>1305
Not really, you are conflating genetics and autosomal components with the political nignoggery, keep euch stutf aside when looking at arhcaeogenetics or precognitibe bias gets the best of you.
I do believe steppe comes from outside of India and if you look at india only the regions closer to central asia got mixed with steppe people
If steppe would have been native to subcon then we would definitely seen it throughout the subcon which is not the case
>>1307
But we do see it throughout subcon. Even dravidians couldn't remain untouched (they carry 5 to 15%). Also steppe's distribution is quite random. It has decent presence in zagros heavy NW but is in higher amounts in north central and gangetic plains.
>>1308
But I also do not believe that Aryan invasion bs those cumskin spew , the kuru homeland which is modern India has most steppe in whole subcon , if you go by cumskin logic of " more arya more steppe" then modern day brahmins would be obc of the region , steppe is relatively high in rors, jaats, jangids, kamboj etc
If we say vedic caste system is related to ivc then it doesn't make sense to as that it would mean "more zagros more arya" but still we have exceptions as rabari , kathi , lohana , gujjars are absurdly high zagros but most are considered LCs or obcs
>>1302
>Also why are you linking r1a to autosomal steppe?
I don't know, I think its maybe dogma. But from what I have heard online, pretty much everyone links r1a to steppe.
>How are you so sure
My argument was that since R1a is only found in the patrilineal lines, not the matrilineal (U,H,J,T something) lines (in trace amounts, okay, no need to be pedantic). If R1a was an indigenous thing, we would see much higher amounts of matrilineal lines. The misconception was that If R1a is not associated with steppe, you cannot draw the conclusion that the corresponding matrilineals lines were (U,H,J,T,). So I don't know what to think now.
>>1311
I think the anon who said there are the regional castes and castes of the equall stature mixed with each other often, maybe brahmins mixed with each other due to simolar roles but the warrior agro castes did not
>>1311
>steppe is relatively high in rors, jaats, jangids, kamboj etc
I've heard online that jaats were some kind of later arrival into the subcontinent from the steppe, so thats why they have more steppe, despite not having high caste. I don't know much on this, I am tamil, can any northie share his thoughts on the matter.
>>1309
Only a few Dravidians who are either SIBs , nairs and those tulunad bunts reddies are somewhat steppe and they are max 10-12 except SIBs who are kinda like baniyas of Gujarat or marwari , but as we know baniyas are high aasi then even chamars , so we could definitely say these groups where ancient north grps who could have migrated to south
>It has decent presence in zagros heavy NW but is in higher amounts in north central and gangetic plains.
Well it's half truth, north western grps are still more steppe than gangetics , but this it even proof it more that steppes were outside of subcon , the countless waves of steppe who after the fall of ivc moves towards ganges and made it their homeland
>>1317
The migration thing felt like bs for me honestly, it would not make sense for them to have non R1a haplo in that case, with rors i can still see some plausibility
>>1317
Well I am not sure about it tbh , some says jatts were scythian tribes
The thing is steppe was also relatively mixed as central Asian region is crossroad of many tribes, so what we need is further bifurcation of steppe , that what kind of steppes are that
>>1321
The migration theory would make a lot of sense if we saw Steppe peak on those who has R1a and not the rest of them, there are good chances jaats are native or migrated arround the same time everyone did
>>1316
It's speculated that they have an additional iron age steppe input from the scythians probably
>inb4 scythians have east asian which is absent in modern day jaat populations
Not all Scythians cultures had substantial east asian related ancestry. The scythians groups responsible for the creation of the Indo Scythian culture were closely related to the Kangjus, who didn't have east asian
>>1315
>explain its saturation in peoole who dont have R1a haplo
Aryan invasion theory does have an explanation for it.
>Steppe males arrive (R1a)>Kill off a lot of indigenous males, but not all (H,L,etc)>Steppe males reproduce with indigenous females (offspring R1a)>The children of steppe males and native female all had R1a>Many surviving indigenous males reproduce with the half steppe kids, thus introducing, H,L, etc back into the genepool.
Thus, you do have some people, who despite not having R1a have high steppe.
>>1323
Well yes I agree most steppe were kinda heterogeneous tbh just like today
Let's say the steppe in jatt and a bhumihar should be further studied for more precision
>>1326
Is the Bhumihar average much higher than Gangetic Brahmins and Rajputs? I think Kanyakubja Brahmins, Gaur Brahmins, Tyagis and Bhumihars all score similiar amounts of Steppe
I believe there were migrations and invasions too but migration were more and dynamic from both steppes and iranian zagros too , the ivc population has many components like anf , zagros , bmac , anatoliaon related
>>1327
>Aryan migration theory
If you accept that steppe corresponds to R1a, then it was either an invasion where indigenous males were killed, or a nair style mass cuckoldry event. (In all certainity the former)
>to a certain extent
Why only to a certain extent? It explains it perfecly, the only gap being the R1a- Steppe correspondence. If that is done, everything will make sense.
>>1328
Bhumihars of gangetics specially bihar score more steppe than rajputs some score more than Brahmins
Weirdly the most steppe brahmin I have come across as rajasthani specially parekh or pushkaran Brahmins which is weird as rajasthan is more farmer heavy
>>1330
>R1a- Steppe correspondence
Well because of this i said so as kashmiris who are fair skinned and are considered "High steppe" ( they are less than haryana and HP) have same level of R1a as Biharis as far as I know and even many southern are more R1a than Kashmiris
>>1335
>Well because of this i said so as kashmiris who are fair skinned and are considered "High steppe" ( they are less than haryana and HP) have same level of R1a as Biharis as far as I know and even many southern are more R1a than Kashmiris
Fair, but according to another anon (maybe you), the AASI component in kashmiris is different from the AASI component in south, since AASI was there for the longest time, it's not unreasonable to think that AASI in different regions may have had different adaptation to environment, and hence different skin colours, I'd expect the AASI in kashmir to have evolved to be whiter than AASI in south.
>>1338
I ve had not said this tbh about aasi but this is a very good point , aasi could not possibly be a single population as subcon is too big , and environment does play a high effect in phenotype determination
>>1339
>>1338
Amazing points tbh anon , caste kangers are really low iq faggots who can't digest these details,then always belive that genotype=phenotype, but this is not true in most extent
>>1340
>aasi could not possibly be a single population as subcon is too big
I think AASI was a "single population" (Whatever that may mean) in the same sense that all humans out of africa are a "single population". Sure, they at one point, might have been one group that moved out and into a certain region, but since the amount of time was really long, and distances were really hard to traverse back then, we would see a lot of environmental adaptations and founders effect. I'm fairly sure AASI wasn't really homogenous despite being "a single population".
>>1337
Haven't seen any pareekh qpadm runs but a private sample on g25 is the least aasi shifted and most steppe shifted among all brahmin groups. It scores 21 AASI and 34 Steppe on my calculator.
>>1342
By 'single population' I mean the same what you described here , as also this is true that for aasi that it is considered a "ghost population" because we don't have much idea about them , people used "paniyas" as markers of aasi which is not 100% truth as aasi of gangetics ,south and north could be very much different
>>1345
>21 aasi
It is relatively low for brahmins and for rajasthanis , I have found rajasthan to be a very amusing place
>High steppe
Pareekh Brahmins and jaats
>High zagros
Marwari rajputs , rabari , gujjars
>High AASI
Baniyas , kayastha, meghwal(SCs)
Many obcs and ST have low aasi and high steppe zagros here
Highest vegetarians but still one of the tallest in india
Very interesting tbh
>>1346
>aasi of gangetics ,south and north could be very much different
Yes, but with the case of kashmir, due to it's remoteness, the genetics would be the most different compared to to the othe AASIs, due to founders effect. So, the kashmir execption as you discussed above can be somewhat ignored or pushed aside as an exception. Do you know of any other counterexamples? I.e groups that are fair skinned and (relatively) low R1a and lower steppe than haryana and HP.
>>1348
If not, this would (almost) validate the aryan invasion theory >>1325, with the only gap being steppe-R1a correspondence not being conculsively linked.
>>1347
Yup. Also there are Meenas who are classified as Scheduled Tribe but they score like Baniyas and Meghwals rather than Bhils who are another Tribal group.
How do Bishnois score like though. Never seen a Bishnoi sample so far. From what I've heard they're mostly Jaats and few of them were originally Rajputs.
>>1351
Don't know about bishnoi tbh , as far as I know they are STs right?
I ve read on Twitter that north Gujarat and sindh and rajasthan has somewhat similar ancestral components
>>1353
qpAdm , I've used it's a genetic tool for population genetics and components comparison,
There are many like g25 harrapaworld, genoplot, 23and me and various more , i prefer qpAdm more because it's more precise statistical tool outhere
>>1354
Bishnois are OBCs in Rajasthan. I guess that's the only place they're found. Maybe there are a few in Haryana and Gujarat too?
>I ve read on Twitter that north Gujarat and sindh and rajasthan has somewhat similar ancestral components
Yes, Sindhi Sammats, North Gujarati groups like Rabari, Mer and Western Rajasthani groups have similar Ancestral Components. Very high Zagros with relatively low AASI and Steppe. Some of these groups have AASI in lower 20s, combined with even lower Steppe. Crazy Zagros.
>>1356
I've read discourse about aasi and steppe phenotype kanging but never about zagros and farmer,
Indians usually always either undermine or ignore their zagros aspect I don't why?
>>1323
>Not all Scythians cultures had substantial east asian related ancestry.
But its unlikely we were invaded by western scythians (who lived around ukraine). We were invaded by eastern ones who had significant east asian input and jats dont seem to show genetic signs of those scythians.
>>1357
I've noticed a surge in Zagros kanging recently. Some Rabari accounts on twitter are involved in it.
>>1355
What are the technical requirements for using qpadm? Where to learn it from?
>>1358
Fair. I had heard that the invading scythians were closely related to the Kangju confederation which had displaced them and that the Kangjus didn't really have any substantial East Asian admixture. I could be wrong though.
>>1342
>>1346
Also there was never a pure AASI race which is why we will likely never find pure AASI sample. AASI is simply the statistically derived genetic drift that makes south asians distinct from iranians or other west eurasians.
>>1358
Or it could some proto western scythians heavy population was there in central asian steppes who invaded or migrated to india , some mixed with locals and some were strict endogamoous ,
Then after this proto western sycthian could have been reduced by eastern ones , modern central asian show compents of western till this date
>>1318
Nope i have seen south indian landowning castes like kammas, reddy, vokkalingas, vellalar also carry 5 to 10% steppe. Thats a significant chunk of dravidian population carrying steppe despite being in deep south. I have seen even dravidian dalits get some trace amounts.
>>1366
Those castes are similar to like patel and baniya like
I have not said that steppe traces are not going to present in indian population
We can see traces of aasi in afgan and tajik tribes , so what
>>1318
>north western grps are still more steppe than gangetics.
Nope. Steppe actually peaks in north-central jats (haryana, west UP, rajasthan) than punjabi jatts. Gangetic brahmins and bhumihars also score higher steppe than NW brahmins. So it isnt as simple as you think.
>>1369
Afghan Pashtuns and Tajiks have a good chunk of AASI. Around 10-14 in the North and Northeast and 7-10 for Southern Afghan Pashtuns. I think AASI influence extends till Iranian Khorasan
>>1370
Fair , not denying that , but it's only some for caste ,
Many north west are still more steppe heavy than our eastern counterparts
>north-central jats (haryana, west UP, rajasthan) tha
Anon that area is considered norh west
>>1369
>so what?
Well it shows how pervasive steppe is in south asia that even deep south couldn't stay untouched. It casts doubt on recent arrival of steppe in subcon and suggests steppe could be ancient. Thats what OP was about.
>>1372
>but it's only some for caste.
Thats an understatement. Brahmins form like 10 to 15% population in UP and bihar. 20 to 25% of haryana and west UP is jat. It isnt a minority component. It is widespread which is what OP was emphasising.
>>1373
There i as Theory anon that after fall of ivc , steppe mixed with ivc population that went south and mixed with southern ancient population, that's how they could have steppe , and if steppe would be ancient in subcon there would be definitely ancient steppe heavy population in regions other than north west and north which got their from outside india but we don't find those
>>1375
This is assuming rest of india was some sparsely populated unconquered territory before collapse of ivc. Theres no evidence for it. In fact, gangetic plain had agriculture and cities contemprous with IVC. You simply dont find excavated ruins because the region has been continually inhabited.
>>1286
i not gonna read all these mostly wrong posts
1. IVC was aryan
2. Steppe was not aryan
3. IVC early middle and late corresponds to RIgveda Mabharata and Ramayana
4. Shiva is an aryan god
5. Indus seals are Sanskrit
6. Dravidians were also at some point part of the IVC
>>1376
Maybe not bihar but UP surely has 10 to 15% brahmins. If you include bhumihars thats another steppe heavy population.
>how come this proves that steppe were ancient to india in any way.
Because if a component is so widespread in subcontinent it hints it had integrated itself in the founding stock.
>>1286
>Given how widespread steppe is in subcon i feel it is very ancient
No i does not, contrary to it it's aasi which is most widespread in indian subcon and it's surrounding region, the proof is that population of tamil Dalits and tribals of jharkhand and chattisgarh are high aasi , with little to less steppe and even afgan have good aasi than steppe of paniya
>Our population has always been so much larger than central asia that millenia of recorded invasions couldnt alter our genome.
Well agree , but waves of heavy migration did but not to a whole subcon level rather on chunks of it which is North West and north
>So i feel steppe likely arrived much before or during early IVC when our population had yet to grow so large
Some definitely would have but not so large as we can see ivc heavy population which is those reddys patel and baniya like which are ivc heavy and this "ivc" also varies a lot some where more zagros heavy which were more closer to Iran :-sindh, north Gujarat . Some where more aasi heavy like interior Gujarat which still has high koli and patel population which are ivc:- aasi heavy , this also proof that interior india was more aasi heavy rather steppe
>>1377
>In fact, gangetic plain had agriculture and cities contemprous with IVC
Interesting, source and citations please
>rest of india was some sparsely populated unconquered territory before collapse of ivc.
Nope not saying that but this also indicate something
>IVC was not a monolith>Farmer to zagros vary here , some more zagros , some where equal but not less>Some of them migrated east and mixed>When ivc collapse>Stepped arive via openning of Hindu Kush entered india and moved across of gangetic plains we see more steppe and aasi ratio and low zagros>Rest untouched ivc didn't get this steppe because people shifted to new economics zones "the Ganges zone"
>>1380
Aasi is not a monolith so it does not prove anything. There were multiple pops throughout subcontinent that are clubbed together as this ghost population called AASI. So comparing aasi of tribals and others is redundant.
Also if a component forms like 20% of ancestry of subcontinental population(averaging all castes) it is a big deal. It is in realm of possibility it is much more ancient and not a result of post IVC migration.
>>1381
>Interesting, source and citations please.
Well its hard to prove because as i said gangetic plain has been continuosly inhabited so you wont find IVC like excavation sites and intact cities (the humid climate and widespread usage of timber in ganga plains doesn't help in preserving ruins either) but some evidence has been found. Ganga plain was fertile so it is in realm of possibility there existed a civilisation contempraneous to IVC.
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/kolkata/varanasi-is-as-old-as-indus-valley-civilization-finds-iit-kgp-study/articleshow/51146196.cmshttps://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/kolkata/varanasi-is-as-old-as-indus-valley-civilization-finds-iit-kgp-study/articleshow/51146196.cms
>>1364
>Could you elaborate on what you mean by that I don’t really understand exactly.
Since south asians are a separate 'race' or 'population' due to geography its natural we dont score same as iranians. Its inevitable when a population evolves separately. This is called 'genetic drift'. Geneticists are interpreting this genetic drift as AASI and normiejeets end up thinking it is some unique race when in reality pure AASI people didn't even exist.
>>1325
>Thus, you do have some people, who despite not having R1a have high steppe.
That would make a lot of sense if the amount of steppe people had did not end up being the same as R1a males, steppe quantities also seems to vary by community rather than with one's haplogroup
>>1328
Surprisingly, since Rajputs and most Brahmin tend to be a little more farmer heavy, unrelared but dunny that nearly all three high steppe concentration groups are land owners or agros
>>1330
I doubt it was something akin to them being killed, because if an invasion did take place, realistically non Steppe haplo (since i cant say R1 could be the only one) would have been wiped out all of north west entirely. It will not make sense that they could take over entire nation but it would make sense if they wiped out moolniwasi dalits and proceeded ro habituate themself in a stronghold before moving in deeper, it does not seem like something similar to that happened.
>>1384
>Geneticists are interpreting this genetic drift as AASI and normiejeets end up thinking it is some unique race when in reality pure AASI people didn't even exist.
The damage from allowing underage fags to post on internet had dire consequences
>>1385
>That would make a lot of sense if the amount of steppe people had did not end up being the same as R1a males, steppe quantities also seems to vary by community rather than with one's haplogroup
I didn’t get this? I think it makes perfect Sense.
>>1387
>realistically non Steppe haplo (since i cant say R1 could be the only one) would have been wiped out all of north west entirely
I doubt that, population would have been too high for a complete genocide in the modern sense. The ratio of indigenous people to steppe invaders wpuld have been really low, they wouldn’t have been able to ensure all males were killed, and once this was done, they wouldn’t be able to ensure indigenous male - half’s steppe female pairings wouldn’t occur.
