Poll
Do you believe in Aryan invasion theory ?
🏏T20 Asia Cup 2025: India vs Oman, 12th Match, Group A at Abu Dhabi🏏
Bigg Boss 19 - Daily Discussion Topic - 20th Sep 2025 - WKV
Deepika starts shooting for King
Yeh Rishta Kya Kehlata Hai Sept 20, 2025 Episode Discussion Thread
Armaan has always been the victim
🏏 Asia Cup 2025: Sri Lanka vs Bangladesh, Super Four, Match 1 Dubai🏏
Anupamaa 20 -24 Sept 2025 Written Update & Daily Discussions Thread
Singer Zubeen Garg Passes Away
Book Talk Reading Challenge & Book Bingo ~ Oct 2025 Sign up open!
Fav contestant this year?
Downfall is Real! No one even cares for SPA pics this year
Related new fanfics
Star Parivaar Ki Favourite Saas
Homebound - OSCARS 2026 Official Indian Entry
These were Deepika's demands for Kalki
Akshay Kumar Is Back To Giving Hits
“Why aren’t Bollywood actresses supporting Deepika? - Upala KBR
Yeh Rishta Kya Kehlata Hai Sept 21, 2025 Episode Discussion Thread
Comedy With Kangana
Chunkey Panday happiest for Ahaan’s success (Saiyaara)
Widely believed theory of Indo-Aryan invasion, often used to explain early settlements in the Indian subcontinent is a myth, a new study by Indian geneticists says.
The origin of genetic diversity found in South Asia is much older than 3,500 years when the Indo-Aryans were supposed to have migrated to India, a new study led by scientists from the Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology (CCMB), Hyderabad, says. The study appeared in American Journal of Human Genetics on Friday.
The theory of Indo-Aryan migration was proposed in mid-19th century by German linguist and Sanskrit scholar Max Muller.
He had suggested that 3,500 years ago, a dramatic migration of Indo-European speakers from Central Asia played a key role in shaping contemporary South Asian populations and this was responsible for introduction of the Indo-European language family and the caste system in India.
"Our study clearly shows that there was no genetic influx 3,500 years ago," said Dr Kumarasamy Thangaraj of CCMB, who led the research team, which included scientists from the University of Tartu, Estonia, Chettinad Academy of Research and Education, Chennai and Banaras Hindu University.
"It is high time we re-write India's prehistory based on scientific evidence," said Dr Lalji Singh, former director of CCMB. "There is no genetic evidence that Indo-Aryans invaded or migrated to India or even something such as Aryans existed". Singh, vice-chancellor of BHU, is a coauthor.
Researchers analysed some six lakh bits of genetic information in the form of SNPs drawn from DNA of over 1,300 individuals from 112 populations including 30 ethnic groups in India.
The comparison of this data with genetic data of other populations showed that South Asia harbours two major ancestry components. One is spread in populations of South and West Asia, Middle East, Near East and the Caucasus. The second component is more restricted to South Asia and accounts for more than 50 per cent of the ancestry in Indian populations.
"Both the ancestry components that dominate genetic variation in South Asia demonstrate much greater diversity than those that predominate West Eurasia. This is indicative of a more ancient demographic history and a higher long-term effective population size underlying South Asian genome variation compared to that of West Eurasia," researchers said.
"The genetic component which spread beyond India is significantly higher in India than in any other part of world. This implies that this genetic component originated in India and then spread to West Asia and Caucasus," said Gyaneshwar Chaube of University of Tartu, Estonia.
If any migration from Central Asia to South Asia took place, the study says, it should have introduced apparent signals of East Asian ancestry into India. "Because this ancestry component is absent from the region, we have to conclude that if such an event indeed took place, it occurred before the East Asian ancestry component reached central Asia," it said.
Originally posted by: return_to_hades
The Indo-Aryan migration theory like any other theory has holes and inconsistencies.
It still is a solid theory that explains the current patterns of linguistics, genetics and architecture. The Aryan migration is not limited to India alone. It refers to a large scale migration of people from the Caucasus mountains into Europe and Eurasia. It then delves into the impact of these migrations on language and culture.I buy the Aryan migration theories on account of two major factors- The structure of the Indo-European language tree, such as the similarities between German and Sanskrit. The Dravidian language tree has a completely different structure that shows it evolved differently.- The genetic differences between North and South.Criticism of the Aryan migration theory is more due to socio-political and religious reasons rather than truly anthropological reasons. However, the migration theory does not have to conflict with the dating of the vedas or indigenous civilizations. It is quite possible that an indigenous Indus valley civilization pre-dated the migration and the migrants folded into that culture rather than creating that culture.One major aspect lacking in the criticism is that it only explains an alternate history for the Indian subcontinent but ignores the gaping holes in the rest of Eurasia.
Originally posted by: qwertyesque
Looks like Aryan invasion makes us feel more manly as descendants of some "manly" races is it compared to those meek dravidians...? The anthropological interest is more from some egotistical standpoint rather than a genuine interest in human behavior...and history!! even the research would be biased either way. The weird part of this counter theory related to genetic influx is really absurd.. there is no relevance of this research to aryan invasion...there was no discovery of genetics then so how can they extrapolate the data to make such conclusions..its veri clear that indians from any part dont look like europeans... somehow the genetic makeup gets diluted over time and its veri difficult yo connect it back to a different race after a few generations..i am willing to accept the aryan invasion theory based on likelyhood of occurrences!
Originally posted by: ChotaBheem
why cant migration from South Asia to Europe.Why not from central Asia to Europe.
Originally posted by: ChotaBheem
Why only from Europe to rest of world.
Originally posted by: ChotaBheem
There is always possibility of two way traffic.
Originally posted by: ChotaBheem
Indo-European language tree ok.Similarity between German and Sanskrit but if we research on south Indian languages it has rich percentage of Sanskrit word or originated words.Why so ?
Originally posted by: return_to_hades
BungalowCummerbundJuggernautGuruGymkhanaThugPunditAll English words of Indian origin. Because language evolves and absorbs local elements.The Indo-European language tree is based not just on words, but linguistic, structural and grammatical ties within the Indo-European language trees.
Aryan and Dravidian Languages
The Indo-European languages and the Dravidian do have important differences. Their ways of developing words and grammer are different. However, it is a misnomer to call all Indo-European languages Aryan. The Sanskrit term Aryan would not apply to European languages, which are materialistic in orientation, bacause Aryan in Sanskrit means spiritual. When the term Aryan is used as indicating certain languages, the term is being used in a Western or European sense that we should remember is quite apart from its traditional Sanskrit meaning, and implies a racial bias that the Sanskrit term does not have.
We can speak of Indo-European and Dravidian languages, but this does not necessarily mean that Aryan and Dravidian must differ in culture, race or religion. The Hungarians and Finns of Europe are of a different language group than the other Europeans, but we do not speak of them as of a Finnish race, or the Finns as being non-Europeans, nor do we consider that their religious beliefs must therefore be unrelated to those of the rest of Europe.
Even though Dravidian languages are based on a different model than Sanskrit there are thirty to seventy per cent Sanskrit words in south Indian languages like Telugu and Tamil, which is much higher percentage than north Indian languages like Hindi. In addition both north and south Indian languages have a similar construction and phraseology that links them close together, which European languages often do not share. This has caused some linguists even to propose that Hindi was a Dravidian language. In short, the language compart- ments, like the racial ones, are not as rigid as has been thought.
In fact if we examine the oldest Vedic Sanskrit, we find similar sounds to Dravidian languages (the cerebral letters, for example), which are not present in other Indo-European tongues. This shows either that there were already Drvidians in the same region as the Vedic people, and part of the same culture with them, or that Dravidian languages could also have been early off-shoots of Sanskrit, which was the theory of the modern rishi, Sri Aurobindo. In addition the traditional inventor of the Dravidian languages was said to have been none other than Agastya, one of the most important rishis of the Rig Veda, the oldest Sanskrit text.
Originally posted by: return_to_hades
Did you know Caucasus mountains are not in Europe? They are actually the border of Europe and Asia. The Aryan migration is from Caucasus to Europe and Asia.Not all migrations are Eurocentric. Are you aware of Out of Africa theory? Most human civilization originated and migrated out of Africa.Are you aware of the Mughal-Mongol genealogy? The genetic origins began in Mongolia, invaded Persia and then moved into Asia.
Originally posted by: ChotaBheem
Relevance hai.
Aryan invasion theory itself gives importance to genetics difference.Aryan invasion theory says north Indians are genetically more close to Middle East.In this theory two major ancestral components Ancestral North Indian(ANI) and Ancestral South Indian(ASI)So agr 3500 saal pehle Europe sey ek naya race aya to genetically influx hona chahiye.Jo ki abhike human cells se analysis kar saktey hain.So agar ek theory genetics per jor deta hai to usko deny bhi genetics ke upar kia jayega.Rahi baat influx nikalne ki to Science is much advanced now and article main mention hai ki kaise researchers ney data analysis kia.Dusra ye sirf ek scientific research hai mainey koi counter theory yahan per post kia hi nahin hai.
Originally posted by: qwertyesque
CB, that not so convincing.. brits rules us for 200 years... how many indians look like brits...aur maine researchers ka dsata analysisi bhi pada... it doenst hold water.. this also means if the researchers are told to ignore history and prove the british invasion purely based on gentic information you know what they will cocnclude!!! answer this question.. chalo maan lete hai invasion nahi hua.. infiltration toh hua.. how many blue eyed indians do you find in our country today? The counter theory assumes that the influx led to interrracial settlements which in itself in a wrong assumption leading to their conclusion..its like asians in the US today.. although there are so many indians in the US that doesnt mean the white genetic structure will see any change.. .sociology, history and politics and genetics can all happen independent of each other.. Lets see how far this indian counter theory goes.. just cos some folks spent time on something and came up with some conclusion doesnt make it the right conclusion!! Lets wait and watch
Chat Clubs
Members Lounge
