Video does not explain the reasoning behind the conclusions. Ancients undivided India is a huge geographical location, bound to have variations. Variations don’t mean that Aryan migration is true. That myth is busted by the very fact that all the holy sites as in the vedic or sangam literature are within the geographical boundaries of ancient India. Even today when people migrate they keep some ties to their original land. It is seen in their culture and writings. That is not the case with Vedic culture. No ties to central asia locating any holy land there. My personal opinion - Vedic culture was wide spread that is why the influence on European languages. Sanskrut has been phonetically pure, as languages derive from mother language they add apabhransh.
Thanks for commenting. I shall start with the last statement. We are all entitled to our opinions but those may not be a reflection or a validation of historical past as they are usually not backed by evidence. How widespread was 'Vedic Culture' is something that needs corroborative data. Anyways let me put my POV on this video. First, this video is not about the Aryan debate per se but is concentrated on the relevance of the genetic data wrt the debate. So, I have not gone in the details of the linguistic and archaeological data. So, DNA analysis will not give us the 'reasoning behind the conclusions'. It will only give us the results and it is the job of the historian to interpret the historical meanings of the result. I have tried to discuss how ANI, ASI, R1a1a, and Rakhigarhi genetic results have been interpreted from difference theoretical perspectives. Your point about 'Variations don't mean that Aryan Migration is true' is not very clear, but you seem to be upset about my inference that Aryans migrated to the subcontinent. You are entitled to your position but I have tried to demonstrate the basic roots of the Indian civilization go back to the indigenous inhabitants of the subcontinent but subsequent influx of the steppe ancestry related genetic markers in Ancestral North Indian and the proliferation of the Indo-European languages indicate a strong possibility of migration, even if on a limited scale. You may disagree but any counter position should ideally be based on a counter argument based on evidence. Thanks for your comment once again.
@@itihaskoshHistory Dear researcher, there is bound to be mixing of population from neighboring areas. Let’s assume for a moment that there was Aryan migration as you presented and there was a distinct Indigenous population. What is the corroborating evidence? You were quick to point out that my statement of vedic culture being widespread is my opinion, but don’t want to admit that what you presented is your opinion not fact. When you migrate if nothing you will bring memories of your old land distinct from the new land, which is not reflected in so called Aryans. Every single reference is to the geographical boundaries of ancient India no outside land. Strange for people who came from outside isn’t it??? Now about widespread Vedic civilization. Please refer to Yezidis of Iraq as an example (close enough to central Asia)?
@@dnyaneshbhatte6288 I can not help if you choose to turn away from the evidence not only discussed in the video but also reiterated in the previous comment. Let me reiterate it once again. The post-Harappan influx of the steppe ancestry related genetic markers in Ancestral North Indian as demonstrated in a number of research papers and the proliferation of the Indo-European languages, which is also accepted by the adherent of OIT though in opposite direction in their opinion, seen together indicate a strong possibility of migration. I have given a list of research papers wrt the Genetic evidence vis-a-vis the Aryan debate (if you scroll below the chapter in the description of the Video), but for the specfic relevance I would recommend you the following papers - Narasimhan et al. (2019): "The Formation of Human Populations in South and Central Asia" Published in Science; and Shinde et al. (2019): "An Ancient Harappan Genome Lacks Ancestry from Steppe Pastoralists or Iranian Farmers" Published in Cell; and there are many more papers which will be discussed in an upcoming video. I would also request you to consider that I am ONLY looking at the genetic evidence while you are more concerned with the linguistic evidence. In so far as Yezidis are concerned, please cite a solid evidence beyond general similarities like peacock and festivals to prove the point which by the way, any supporter of AMT can also argue to prove his/her point. I believe that no single type of evidence, much less the linguistic evidence, will ever give us concrete answers to historical problems of the nature of the Aryan debate.
@@SanjaySharma-zs8lc You are once again saying the same thing. It is like touching the tail of the elephant and saying elephant is like a snake. Drawing conclusions from a single parameter is dangerous, leads to wrong conclusions. I would look at all available parameters before drawing conclusions. That is my point of contention. Rest you are smart enough. About ANI ans ASI why don’t you also say that they mixed before 1900 years from present? It was then the real segregation occurred. Or are these references deliberately not mentioned?
What can be done if you keep holding a snake believing it to be an elephant's tail.. You are actually only repeating what I mentioned in my previous comment. While linguistic and archaeological evidences have been used for a long period of time do argue for amt or oit, the genetic evidence has made significant addition to the historiography of Aryan debate. ANI is absent in the Rakhigarhi specimen which is dated to around 2600 BCE, so ANI is later than that. Also genetic studies have shown that ASI is absent in modern Central Asian Gene pool which would be necessary to validate OIT.
Best thing is sir always took very controversial topics and defined its simply very thanks a lot sir ❤
Insightful video ❤❤❤
Thankyou...
Vedic Aryans were fish eating Brahmins who were from yamnaya tribe who lived along saraswati river don’t mix Hindi and English that’s dumb
Video does not explain the reasoning behind the conclusions. Ancients undivided India is a huge geographical location, bound to have variations. Variations don’t mean that Aryan migration is true. That myth is busted by the very fact that all the holy sites as in the vedic or sangam literature are within the geographical boundaries of ancient India.
Even today when people migrate they keep some ties to their original land. It is seen in their culture and writings. That is not the case with Vedic culture. No ties to central asia locating any holy land there.
My personal opinion - Vedic culture was wide spread that is why the influence on European languages. Sanskrut has been phonetically pure, as languages derive from mother language they add apabhransh.
Thanks for commenting. I shall start with the last statement. We are all entitled to our opinions but those may not be a reflection or a validation of historical past as they are usually not backed by evidence. How widespread was 'Vedic Culture' is something that needs corroborative data. Anyways let me put my POV on this video. First, this video is not about the Aryan debate per se but is concentrated on the relevance of the genetic data wrt the debate. So, I have not gone in the details of the linguistic and archaeological data. So, DNA analysis will not give us the 'reasoning behind the conclusions'. It will only give us the results and it is the job of the historian to interpret the historical meanings of the result. I have tried to discuss how ANI, ASI, R1a1a, and Rakhigarhi genetic results have been interpreted from difference theoretical perspectives. Your point about 'Variations don't mean that Aryan Migration is true' is not very clear, but you seem to be upset about my inference that Aryans migrated to the subcontinent. You are entitled to your position but I have tried to demonstrate the basic roots of the Indian civilization go back to the indigenous inhabitants of the subcontinent but subsequent influx of the steppe ancestry related genetic markers in Ancestral North Indian and the proliferation of the Indo-European languages indicate a strong possibility of migration, even if on a limited scale. You may disagree but any counter position should ideally be based on a counter argument based on evidence. Thanks for your comment once again.
@@itihaskoshHistory Dear researcher, there is bound to be mixing of population from neighboring areas. Let’s assume for a moment that there was Aryan migration as you presented and there was a distinct Indigenous population. What is the corroborating evidence? You were quick to point out that my statement of vedic culture being widespread is my opinion, but don’t want to admit that what you presented is your opinion not fact.
When you migrate if nothing you will bring memories of your old land distinct from the new land, which is not reflected in so called Aryans. Every single reference is to the geographical boundaries of ancient India no outside land. Strange for people who came from outside isn’t it???
Now about widespread Vedic civilization. Please refer to Yezidis of Iraq as an example (close enough to central Asia)?
@@dnyaneshbhatte6288 I can not help if you choose to turn away from the evidence not only discussed in the video but also reiterated in the previous comment. Let me reiterate it once again. The post-Harappan influx of the steppe ancestry related genetic markers in Ancestral North Indian as demonstrated in a number of research papers and the proliferation of the Indo-European languages, which is also accepted by the adherent of OIT though in opposite direction in their opinion, seen together indicate a strong possibility of migration. I have given a list of research papers wrt the Genetic evidence vis-a-vis the Aryan debate (if you scroll below the chapter in the description of the Video), but for the specfic relevance I would recommend you the following papers - Narasimhan et al. (2019): "The Formation of Human Populations in South and Central Asia" Published in Science; and Shinde et al. (2019): "An Ancient Harappan Genome Lacks Ancestry from Steppe Pastoralists or Iranian Farmers" Published in Cell; and there are many more papers which will be discussed in an upcoming video. I would also request you to consider that I am ONLY looking at the genetic evidence while you are more concerned with the linguistic evidence. In so far as Yezidis are concerned, please cite a solid evidence beyond general similarities like peacock and festivals to prove the point which by the way, any supporter of AMT can also argue to prove his/her point. I believe that no single type of evidence, much less the linguistic evidence, will ever give us concrete answers to historical problems of the nature of the Aryan debate.
@@SanjaySharma-zs8lc You are once again saying the same thing. It is like touching the tail of the elephant and saying elephant is like a snake.
Drawing conclusions from a single parameter is dangerous, leads to wrong conclusions. I would look at all available parameters before drawing conclusions. That is my point of contention. Rest you are smart enough.
About ANI ans ASI why don’t you also say that they mixed before 1900 years from present? It was then the real segregation occurred. Or are these references deliberately not mentioned?
What can be done if you keep holding a snake believing it to be an elephant's tail.. You are actually only repeating what I mentioned in my previous comment. While linguistic and archaeological evidences have been used for a long period of time do argue for amt or oit, the genetic evidence has made significant addition to the historiography of Aryan debate. ANI is absent in the Rakhigarhi specimen which is dated to around 2600 BCE, so ANI is later than that. Also genetic studies have shown that ASI is absent in modern Central Asian Gene pool which would be necessary to validate OIT.