Austrian stock living in Africa sending blessings to my cousins in the subcontinent, you guys are beautiful, make the best damn food in the world and are too good at dancing.
Thank you, please ignore the triggered comments by our right wing fanatics. They don't represent all subcontinent, they're a bunch of radicals with free internet & lot of unemployment.
Everyone eccept Africanists and Africans themesleves think that. 52 separate countries with hundred of thousand different languages and dialects and thousand different ethnicities and different cultures with various landscapes (Africa isn't only desert, savannahs and equatorical forests). Africa is huge and amazing, Occident doesn't know Africa.
@@whatapp4797 that’s right, they were all Indo tribes. I can’t understand how people cannot see the resemblance or make the connection. Indians, because of the geographical location has multitude of genetic mixtures so the appearance are very exotic but all in all these people all migrated from the Indus Valley
@@nsvdmuraliprasad2316 the Hittites language is Indo European and derived from Sanskrit, look it up. Language gives a clear indication about ethnicities
I may be misremembering this, but my understanding is there's a small group in Afghanistan that speaks a language so close to Romani that it is believed to be the original homeland. Similarly, Basque also seems to have had its origin there, or at least to I have a sister-language there.
@@gerardmichaelburnsjr.the romani their language is very similar to the language in what is north Western India for some reason and nobody hasn't come up with any correct idea why they really left.that they travelled through Persia.the middle east .north Africa. the balkans.greece.spain.eastern Europe. Western Europe eventually Britain and Ireland slowly intermixing as they travelled west.i look English but my mum's grandmother did look romani and my two uncle's black hair brown eyes and olive skins.in the mid victorian times romani were put under alot of pressure to settle down in one place for school and the census that is how my mum's romani side got settled.i looked it up on the 10 year census and they seemed to appear from nowhere in th 1860's
@@gerardmichaelburnsjr. the people who are called romani left North western India probably a 1000s years ago travelled through Persian.middle east.north Africa.the balkans.greece.easten Europe. Spain and then western Europe and then Britain and Ireland all the time slowly mixing with the local people along the way.i look English my mum's grandmother does look Romani black hair dark skin both my mum's brothers had black hair brown eyes and olive skin.ive only have to be out in the sun a little bit and o tan very brown
I don't know why western people only consider dark skinned South Indians as Indians. Even though not all South Indians are dark. They think all Indians are dark, which is absolutely ridiculous.
I don't know what you're implying here. the Indo-European migrations from the steppes of e Ukraine and European Russia into India, for example is definitely not nonsense, and they've impacted Europe much more than India, since it's rare to see anyone below 20% Yamnaya in Europe.
He is trying to hide linkage to european origin of upper caste Indians aka hindu Brahmins or ruling class elite indians as they are politically amassing power claiming their indigenousness and otherising everyone else. So Indo Aryan migration hurts their narration.😂
Cyrus the Great, in effect the founder of the Persian empire, said he and his people were Aryans. The word 'Iran', means 'Aryan' in Farsi. The Medes, who dominated what is now Iran before the Persians, said.the Persians were Invaders from the north, the Uman Mazda, or at least related to them, and could speak with each other without interpreters. So, Aryan may not qualify as a 'race', which is a hard to define term, but they were evidently a large culturally and linguistically defined people at one time.
For those of you who're making fun in the comment by typing " _lol_ or _Yk truth always tastes the_ ...." should realize that they also have those Arya-DNA in them. I suggest them to get their DNA Tested! Let's see if they themselves can digest what they consider as bitter truth or not! It's my open challenge to you all!
@@gerardmichaelburnsjr. Arya simply refers to noble, hardworking, civilized, and honest people. You can hear people from Russia, Africa, the Arab world, the USA, America, Europe, Japan, or China proudly stating that they come from a civilized and cultured society! That's precisely what Arya means in Sanskrit or Pali! It did not mean race! IDK about Iranian or Avestan as I haven't studied those languages! But I'm pretty sure they also meant this!
The founder population in China was not overwhelmed though, they continue to persist in China and gave rise to all modern eastern Chinese populations. Eastern Chinese are still 100% of East Eurasian origin having descended from various ESEA lineages, while Indians are on average 30-45% East Eurasian, having partially descended from the related AASI lineage.
@@nickb3345 Firstly, Indians don't look "Black". The Ancient East Eurasians did not look "Black" either. Google "Tianyuan man reconstruction", that's what they looked like. Secondly, the lighter skinned ESEA or rather Neo-East Asian lineages descend from the darker skinned pre-EDAR East Eurasian groups that populated Asia (like Tianyuan Man who lived in northern China). Tianyuan Man is a more a Basal East Eurasian lineage and the predecessor to all modern East Asians. Tianyuan-related ancestry as a result is also known as "Basal East Asian" and forms one of the main East Eurasian branches alongside AASI and AA. So Chinese people don't have dark skin because the East Eurasian lineages that they descend from belong to the Neo-East Asian branch of the East Eurasian meta-population, these populations developed lighter skin and also developed the EDAR gene. However physically speaking, there are common characteristics shared between many ancient and modern East Eurasian populations, regardless of skin colour, like straight black hair, high cheekbones and neotenous features. Additionally, the dry earwax allele that is found in Asia is the result of East Eurasian ancestry. So dark skinned Asian groups like the Onge and Irula of India and the Semang and Maniq of Malaysia and Thailand respectively are genetically closer to light skinned Chinese, Japanese and Koreans than they are to populations outside of the Asia-Pacific. The difference is that the Onge, Irula, Semang and Maniq developed from a more basal East Eurasian lineage and lived in S/SE Asia where they retained their darker skin, whilst the Chinese, Japanese and Koreans developed from more recent East Eurasian lineages that developed lighter skin.
You are wrong that Brahmins have highest steppe DNA. It is Jats/Jatt(peasant class ) have highest % of stepee DNA, followed by Khatri/Arora (mercantile class), Gurjars ( Cattle hearders) and then Brahmins.
I am going to do a video on this. Could you link any sources for what you just commented here. I think I saw that Jatt had highest too like 50 percent or more.
All human beings start or came from africa.however the rest countries do not want to say.because they may feel undeveloped,3rd world country.the truth is africa is the mother of all humanties.❤🎉
Some will hate me for this but i believe that India is the cradle of mankind. India is where mankind first came about for reasons below which make total sense!! If you take one strand of South Indian straight hair and hold it over heat like a candle flame, it will curle up to look like our African brothers hair. Because a major part of Africa was on the equator where it was very hot, when ancient natives of India moved to Africa and the equator they eventually became darker skinned and their hair curled up because of the heat. The features also changed to deal with the extreme heat at the equator. The noses became wider so as to release the hot air faster. (The opposite is true of Europe, because of the extreme cold, the ancient native of India that moved there, had to retain body heat and so their noses were smaller so as not to lose that heat. So the migrations had to have started from India. Likewise when migrations from India reached Europe because of very little sun, they became light skinned. I also saw Albinos in the Dalit community and from a distance I thought they were Europeans. My mind was trying to figure out how these European tourists got left behind India and were so poor???. There is even a YT video of albinism in India and how those who have it look 100% European. I am not trying to be mean. In fact there is a girl in North India that was in the news, that has albinism and had blue eyes and blonde hair, and is mistaken as German, although she sounds 100% Indian. And she is very pretty, she does not look like someone that has Albinism. Sadly, she feels very lonely as she is viewed as a foreigner. And i believe Indians also went to Asia where again a mutation occurred with the eyes. I believe the cradle of mankind is India, as it makes complete and total sense that all different races that have come about in the world would come from the Indian people. It is very difficult to make sense of the Out of Africa theory and make that jump for Europeans to have come from Africa. It does not make sense. And for the Indian to come from Africa to have their hair straighten up....!! There would be no environmental factors to cause the hair to straighten up! i expect to get a lot of hate but like has happened before, the scientific community will figure out they got it all wrong when skeletons of ancient people are found in India and the world.
You have an interesting theory. Something happened in India, its like the tower of babel for languages, it could be the land of origin of many races or a precursor. They need to find many ancient skeletons from 5,10,15, 20K years ago from various regions of India, then we get a better picture. Its possible from India people migrated to various regions, after thousands of years the descendents migrated back to India? Who knows, so far no one knows 100% for sure.
I saw the YT video of a Albino woman in India, she looks like a northern European woman, not even from southern Europe. Indians who lose their pigment due to autoimmune condition, they also look European.
@@Just_forfun9140 The oldest skeletons found in india are from river narmada, dates back 140000 years. they're also the oldest pre-neolithic remains we have in the world. there's a video on YT about this recent discovery
Amazing video. This is perhaps the best illustrated video I've seen on the topic of genetics. You copied off of Ancestralbrew didn't you? Even so, your content is much better.
North Indians___ light skin or little bit brown skin mixed Western Indians __ light skin or brown skin mixed East Indians__light skin South Indians _ black skin tone❤
The vedas and all languages including sanskrit were developed by indegenous people.Continet of europe is temperate and till 18th century bathig was a luxury whiek indus valley was civikized with well laid places for bath and drains etc.The civilization was indegenous ,migrants and invaders might have happened as India is warm and had fertile lands.
Unfortunately the DNA claims given here about skeletons fron the Indus Valley Civilization are factually incorrect. Only one skeleton provided enough DNA to provide a genetic analysis, and the closest match was to Ancestral South Indian DNA. In addition, an extensive analysis of modern DNA in India showed the whole of the Indian population to be much more closely related to each other than populations outside India, and a gradual variation in for example Iranian farmer/Yamna DNA North to South and Tibeto-Burmese DNA North East to South. This is evidence of a mingled Indian population with a slow and steady influx of external DNA from trade and peaceful migration than a significant influx due to invasion and displacement of the native population. The complete absense of Yamna DNA is not stastically significant in a sample size of one, particularly if the two populations were separate cultures which coexisted in the same area in different settlements as in the Oxus Valley Civilization. What this means is that the Yamna DNA was also present in India at the same time as the Ancestral South Indian DNA prior to the Indus Valley Civilization. There is also a Dravidian language called Brahui which is spoken to the present day Pakistan to this day, close to where the ancient Indus Valley cities in Pakistan were. It should also be noted that the Yamna culture and Indus Valley Civilization cultures were completely different - the former were nomadic cattle herders who lived a pastoralist livelihood, and had an oral tradition of history much like in early Arabia or Europe, whereas the Indus Valley Civilization was settled, highly urbanised, and very structured. The post Indus Valley Civilization Indian Civilization seems to be a merger of the two cultures with the reverence for the cow, and the pastoral traditions in the Rig Veda, and the memorization of mantras coming from the Yamna traditions, and the writing of both North and South India, yoga, certain practices like yoga and certain deities like Shiva, and certain symbols like the Swastika, and a tradition of river/sea faring transport coming from the Indus Valley Civilization. If you want to know how this might have come about, look at the ancient Oxus Civilization which had Indus Valley and Yamna towns built close together and trading with each other. My take on this is that the Western coast was Ancestral Indian and they moved up the river valleys which were occupied by people of the Yamna culture to access raw materials for industrial manufacture and set up the Indus Valley cities on rivers to trade, mine, and process products for export to the Middle East and other places by sea. As in the Oxus, the two cultures merged and intermarried and became the modern Indian populations. The Indus Valley Civilization declined due to changing of the course of the Saraswathi river system, cutting off navigation to the sea, and only the minor part of the Indus Valley cities on the Indus river survived - explaining the persistence of Brahui in Baluchistan. The merging of the populations in culture, lifestyle and religion led to Hinduism, and the modern Indian culture. The claim that the R1 Y haplogroup shows that Indo Aryans invaded India from the steppe/Europe is debunked by the DNA evidence. There was a Yamna invasion of Europe which has been shown by DNA evidence. However this is not the case in India. There is no sudden change in R1 haplogroup in India that would indicate a sudden invasion. In addition the largest variation in the R1 haplogroup occurs in India, and the lowest in Western Europe, with Caucasian and Slavic DNA being closest to the Indian R1 haplogroup. This indicates the origin of the R1 haplogroup occurred in India and moved to Western Europe via the Steppe rather than the other way around. This probably occurred in two stages with Yamna populations moving into the steppes earlier, and then from the steppes to Western Europe in the transition from neolithic culture to early bronze age, and again during the bronze age collapse.
Brother you wrote a long line agreed..am north Indian east..but the Brahmin family in my tribe why they have blue,green some cat eyes..explain..also blond hair..suprise..
@@thatweirdintjkiddo6251 I am not archeological expert nor biologist but explain me Brahmins they call them self Arya putra,arayan..not Iranian but Russian Aryans their birth place steppe Rusia,look at Mahabharata serial they call themselves Arya putra.. Aryans belong to Europe..Brahmins I have seen have blue,green eyes some brown blond hairs..that's ain't Indian .are they..northern people more traits of rains..explain..
@@vikramgurung3043 I got u brah you r a northeast Indian tribal but u confused how some Indians special Brahmins and other North indians got blue eyes? The thing is we North Indians have partial Ancestry from Iranian Hunter Gatherers (Caucasoid) population who mixed with AASI (East Eurasian core) tribals from Central India and created Indus Valley Civilization and later Indo Iranians (Aryans) migrated splitted from our slavic cousins and migrated to Indian Subcontinent and Iranian plateau during late IVC and they mixed with IranHG dominant people of IVC and gave rise to us. We own our blue eyes and somewhat light hair and skin to our Indo Iranian and Iranian hunter gatherer ancestors.
4:44 There is no such thing as Pathan Indians. The word pathan is an indianized word for Pashtuns ( The dominant ethnic group of Afghanistan ) The Pashtuns/Afghans are eastern iranic. So it doesn’t make sense to call them indians. Thats like calling a spanish guy slavic.
Whether we like it or not, the Vedas mention these famous migrations and also the Sintashta culture. These Indo-Europeans from Eastern Europe migrated to Central Asia and eventually settled in India. They played a key role in shaping the original Hindu traditions and language. These populations, which were relatively small and consisted of more men than women, eventually mixed with the local population despite the caste system.
The evidence suggests to me that the Sintashta/Andronovo people were the first west/central Asian migrants to India, and they brought martial capability (1) chariots (2) Indo-European language (3) Vedas. However, the majority of central Asian/steppe DNA in Indian populations today (e.g. in jats) comes from much, much later migrations. Evidence: jats didn't except the Vedas except by force/coercion, and Hindu puranas and epics mention chariots (which originate from Sintashta) and revere the Vedas.
@@gilles9532 You have it all twisted. Indian culture did not originate in Eastern Europe else the culture and languages would still be used in Europe if it was so. The Indo Europeans country of origin was in India, they journeyed through the kyber Pass into Central Asia and into Eastern Europe, not the other way around. Your theory are all lies concocted by the British through Max Mueller. Before Mueller died, he admitted he lied and the the journey was FROM India and not INTO India. There are no Ancient Hindu temples in Europe. Get your facts right
Whatever the DNA may say , every Tribe in India , whether organised in a state or not,is its original inhabitants . What’s a Tribe- a linguistic group, a division of mankind from single linguistic group in the beginning,and settled all over the world in its own territories now we see. The mankind first separated to each other in group by differences of tongues, later also separated by division of Land into continents. Further later,due to fights between groups, enslaving of defeated one mixing of blood occurred. As Sanskrit is written in dev nagri lipi,which is no earlier than 600 years.
I love this. Why didn't I discover this sooner? I'm African American, only 13% of my DNA is European (Nothern), but decades ago, an Indian who worked at an Indian restaurant I frequented finally asked my if I was Indian. At that time, I never wore my hair natural. My complexion is similar to Angelo Bassets, just a bit redder. At the time, I was surprised that an Indian could imagine that I was Indian, but this suggests, that with my hair straightened, I resemble the southernmost Indian. Plus, I'm petite, only 4.10.5.
My opinion here is based on me being a Southern Indian and I have observed enough faces in the region: I'm not a historian or any research scholar. But I can say this video clip is not hundred percent right.: . This author purposely forgot that India is Asia head. There is not a thing discussed about "the Indian Asian race"...... Possibly, logically Asiatic Indians still exist with exact Asiatic facial features all throughout the country. African mixes are there but very less percentage. Southern side people are more of an Asian features Iranian or some other white ethnic group features mix. Southerners have dark skin due to the super tropical climate not because of the African mix. Having African Asian features mix clans also there in minimum percentage. See Africa itself has so many clans which are different from each other with different facial bone structure and different body types, Even though all of them are in Africa. No race or no ethnicities are hundred percent pure. If they are all hundred percent pure then they must be very new clans. If we talk "About India DNA", We should wonder how many level of human integration amalgamation have been happening in India for the past 9,0000 years. This many thousands of clans keep on mingling growing exponentially and creating a new clan gene set is amazing . It is really the height of being in a great civilization. So no one can find the exact source DNA groups. It is not really necessary also. Mixed clans produce healthy gene pool. So why bother??! . I least bother to make sense anyway. This is just my personal opinion. Don't take it as a serious note. 😅
You are referring to the AASI but the idea of pure AASI peoples living in modern India is no longer true, the people of India are so heavily mixed that a full AASI person does not exist. This is why there are still no samples to date where an individual is 100% AASI. However there are tribal groups in parts of eastern and southern India who are mostly of AASI heritage that happen to have more "Asiatic" features similar to those found in tribals of Southeast Asia like the Semang and Maniq. This is because they are all of East Eurasian (Basal Asian) origin and share closer genetic affinity to Tianyuan Man than most other Indians do.
Could that be a reason why many Indians have thin legs? Becasue the ancestors were sitting a lot on the chariot and horse while traveling? It's just a theory that came up in my mind...
This video is ok only. You should not jump to conclusions that IVC people spoke Tamil kind of statements without any proof. Please read my conclusions and statements which I made by referring Shinde report. I sent it to many videos including Ancestral Brew channel. Zagrosian Iranians who mixed with South Asian Hunter Gatherers(who were present all over south asia as hunter- gatherers) to form Indus Valley Civilization were those who split from Iranian pastoralists and hunters 8,000 years before they learned farming from Fertile Crescent, Iraq. So the language spoke by IVC people would have been proto Elamite mixed with some language spoken by South Asian hunter gatherers. Indo Aryans came after the decline of Indus Valley Civilization. They came from Southern Russia bordering Kazhaksthan. Before entering Afghanistan and Pakisthan. They learned agriculture from people of Bactria Margiana Archaeological Complex. That's why agricultural methods and crops used by Indo Aryans in Vedic period was identical to BMAC and not related to IVC. (Aryans cultivated barley, pulses and lentils in the banks of Saptha Sindhu, West Punjab. It was only after they mixed with IVC people they began to farm rice on Yamuna &Gangetic plains.) Sanskrit, Avestan & Mittani are closely related languages than any other Indo European language. All these three languages are 3700 years old. Only relation we have with these European languages is because there is a common ancestor for all Indo European languages originated in West Eurasian Steppes that was not Sanskrit. It is yet to be foundout. Sanskrit originated in Afghanisthan. Later spread to Saptha Sindhu region, Ganga, Yamuna & Narmada. Finally came down to Southern Peninsula & Srilanka. Tamil originated in Tamilnadu from Proto Dravidian. It is 2800 year old language. IVC people spoke a language related to Proto Elamite. While South Asian Hunters spoke a Srilankan Vedda related or Australian Aboriginal language. Both languages are not spoken today in South Asia. Ok coming to genetics 63% Indians are mix of people from South Russian Steppes, Zagros,Iran& South Asia. North Indians have more Steppe ancestry because of various invasions and settlements from Turkmenstan, Persia etc. But their basic DNA is same as South Indian Upper & Middle castes. North Easterners and Ladakhi people have Sino Tibetan and Sino Burmese ancestors. But their culture and traditions are like any indigenous tribal culture found around our country. No matter where we come from we are Indians first. Jai Hind. Yours Gouri Sankar.K 👍🙏🇮🇳 www.palakkadwalks.blogspot.com
@@jspillai1869 Hello madam, there are lot of stories about Nairs like any other community based on phenotypes, facial features and folklore. Ahichatra (Rampur, U.P)Naga and Nepali Newar origins are the most popular stories about Nairs and Bunts circulating on the internet. Bunts, Nairs, Ambalavasis and Thiyyas are matrilineal castes. But none of the castes in UttarPradesh or Uttarakhand are matrilineal. Nagas were worshipped in many parts of India particularly forest tribes. We don't know what South Asian Hunters and Zagrosian people worshipped before Indo Aryan migration. 70% of what we call Hinduism was invented by Indo Aryan/Sanskrit speakers only. It is an umbrella term for many philosophical thoughts and spiritual beliefs.(Vedas, Upanishads, Dharmashastras, Puranas, Ithihasas, Agamas, Thantras etc.) It maybe fascinating to know that ancient people were more broadminded when it comes to marriage. People of Indian subcontinent is a great example. Steppe DNA of Tamil Brahmins are highest among Southern Brahmins. Iyer - 13-20% Iyengar - 11-20% Tulu Brahmin - 15% Namboodiri - 12-16% Telugu Brahmin - 12-17% Kannada Brahmin - 11-18% Marathi Brahmins - 13-16% Konkani Brahmins - 13-17% Closest Genetic Distance Of Tamil Brahmins To Other Communities. (Iam a mix of Iyengar and Iyer.) 1. Telugu Brahmins 2. Malayali Nairs 3. Malayali Nasranis 4. Gujarati Baniyas 5. Punjabi Gujjars 6. Marathi Brahmins 7. Kannada Brahmins 8. Konkani Brahmins 9. Bengali Brahmins 10. UttarPradesh Kayasthas Steppe DNA of Nairs & Pathare Prabhus are highest among South Indian non Brahmins. Nairs on average have 10% steppe DNA. It reaches 16% maximum. Pathare Prabhus on average have 14% steppe DNA. It reaches 18% maximum. Steppe Blood Of Non Brahmin South Indians Who Have More Than 5% Are Given Below Nairs - 10-16% Bunts - 10-12% Ambalavasis - 8-14% Thiyyas - 9-11% Kodavas - 10-13% Ezhavas - 7-11% Reddy - 5 - 9% Balija - 6 - 9% Kamma - 7-11% Vellalar - 9-10% Mukkulathor - 8-12% Vokkaliga - 5- 10% Marathas - 8-12% Mahar - 8-10% Chandra Seniya Kayastha Prabhu - 10-16% Pathare Prabhus - 14 - 18% Among Non Hindus in South India Nasranis - 9-15% Konkani Christian - 15% Mappilas - 10% Rowther - 12% Marakkar - 9% Hyderabadi Muslim - 14% Nadar Christian - 8% As you all know Iam an online researcher and blogger specializing in philosophy, spirituality, history, linguistics, archaeology and genetics of south asia. I want to share a great news in this group us Tamil Brahmins have largest percentage of Sintastha blood (Poltkava + Abashevo) among South Indian Brahmins. Iyers - 13% - 20% Iyengar - 11% - 20% And we have the largest percentage of Indus Valley Civilization blood (Zagrosians From Iran/Proto Elamites + South Asian Hunter Gatherers) among all Brahmin groups in India. Iyers - 54% - 73% Iyengars - 49% - 68% Wow..😃👌🏻 Proud to have both in large amounts.🇮🇳 30% Tamil Brahmins have 13- 20 %Anatolian DNA received from BMAC. And 20% of us have 3 - 9% Sino Tibetan DNA too. Courtesy : South Asian Ancestry Reddit. Thankyou.
Asia is Egypt, Turks, Arabs, Israel, Persia, India. It is India that is related to all. ALL the teachers of ALL the faiths are Asian because it was their spiritual history, their narrative which at the beginning had nothing to do with the Europeans, Africans, Orientals. Afghanistan, Pakistan and parts of Iran was India, it was not a separate ethnicity that came from the North, it was a Brutal faith Ìslam``. Sadly the Kings of Asia also brought in African slavery, and later the Portuguese brought in African slavery into South India. Th British came in as false friends and when India realized the `Sun was Set`on the empire nonsense. Sadly the British left India poor, her educated genocide, and her lands, power divided. The original faith of India was scientific. The west colonized currency and faith. You do not need to go through a European manipulated faith to love Asian Christ, his words like the Indian Prince `Buddha`s words were meant for everyone. The names, stories in the Old Testament are Asian e.g. Sarai, Amir, Shemi (Indian). Look up the Anahata Chakra, this was the symbol before any faith. Yeshiva/Yeshua was Jesus real Jewish Asian name, Jesus was given to assimilate with the Greek deity Zeus. Asia was a separate civilization which at the beginning had nothing to do with the Europeans, Africans, Orientals. Asia went corrupt `Babel`and was scattered, eventually it will be put back together and that will be Sanatan Dharma
There only few million tamis in sri lanka and a million of them arent even mative but recently brought by the british.. only after 13th century after the chola invasion tamiks settled here permanently in north.. aprt from that sinhalese are originally aryan but nowadays only up country sinhalese got the original early aryan genetics.. low country has lost its aryan roots due to crazy south indian migrations..
These are taken from some from some propagated source which seems to never even been validated. Mostly propagated from west. Just as you say the upper caste or brahmins are found to be genetically closed to europeans which itself comes from a pre-made assumption that aryan invasion is already true and higher caste were the once who invaded india. They will not specify whom they connected higher caste with like the once who were brahmins (who were priests, recite mantras, read scroiptures) if you would have then you will found south india which they call ancestral indian have more brahmins than north indians which are genetically close to european according to them. Even in south india there are huge amount of temples which even today are runned by priests, they have even villages which teach old gurukul system. It is ridiculous to put up anything on any pre made assumption and connect it with something else entirely. Even the word "caste" was introduced by europeans(mainly from brits) in 1800s. If you say that aryan were higher caste they invade ancestral indian what are the text that supporting it? what are the translation of "caste" in indo-aryan language at that time which aryans introduced in india? What did they call it? If you could not answer it, then only tell one reference of translation of word "caste" in any of indian subcontinental text before 1700s in any of languages used in this this region.
5:31 here... No you'd be pretty wrong to have said Caste system was based on Race... If so then most of the Brahmans and Kshatriyas would've been people with predominantly more of Yamanaya group But that certainly is not the case Otherwise the research is alright Caste fold wasn't so brutal in the past The idea went horribly wrong for sure But it was never made to be a mean to suppress one group And as you said the population was pretty mixed and it is till this date A good video but giving statements about a social structure without gathering proper intel is wrong It may feed wrong ideas to the viewers
There have been quite a few studies based on skeletons found in the Rakhigarhi and IVC sites, Gandhara, Roopkund, BMAC, etc. As well as studies on modern day groups. Sample sizes in studies of modern Indian populations tend to be very small in comparison with other countries.
@@tsMuthuraman-hm6wg correct, without proof the west did claim the Aryan invasion theory. If somebody with proof, claims that ancient migrations happened from southeast asia to Europe. They will not accept, because of their superiority complex.
Well migrations from asia to europe did happen and is well acknowledged , the biggest of which is the anatolian farmers migrating from modern asian turkey to europe(5k-10k years ago), haplogroup F migrating from india (60k years ago) , and even the steppe people werent just from europe, the proto indo Europeans lived in places like south russia(europe) AND kazakstan and central asia. the proto indo European werent just europeans
Dravidian are not Africans Dravidians are highest in the world mainly Tamil Nadu madhura city chola Dynasty time advanced and kumarykandamu lost of this civilization
i dont think any of it is true , i stopped watching when you said Iranians came to India ,the truth is Indians migrated to Iran, history will be updated by Indians just wait a little more , as lot is happening in India, lot of research based on new excavations
@@adityachoubey4946 hahaha trolling Indian nationalist who literally claim Indo Europeans aka Caucasus/Iranian hunter gatherers and Eastern European hunter gatherers are Indians 😂🤡 were Indians. I see nothing wrong in it😂😂😂😂.
Fake 😂 Aryan theory is debunked . Even south indians many habe fair skin and north many have dark skin .major indian DNA comes from harrappa ancestry .this is said by your own david reich .😂
Aryan theory is not debunked. It's accepted globally by all geneticists. Only few Indian geneticists with strong political views on this issue reject it
I’m not Indian myself but I have tons and tons of ancestors from India like years back I think 10 century or something so it’s interesting to watch my people nowerdays has dark skin and a lot of Indian complexions
This whole theory is based on just 60 skeletons that were found? Or did I miss something? Do we all have some Yamnaya DNA, no wonder the reason for wars and violence all over the world.
It is true that a skeleton or skeletons from the Indus Valley has DNA that is Iranian related, but the idea that it was the IRANIANS who migrated into India and gave us this Iranian ancestry is just an assumption. Why can't the opposite be true as well? In fact a study by Vasant Shinde actually showed that it was the otherway around, as he showed that one individual who was a woman had a DNA that is ANCESTRAL to the Iranian population. But this is only one individual, because analysing DNA in India is very difficult, due to India's harsh climates, and geography.
You should use your brain to analyse things being said. ``` He ignores that R1A L657 is the most common clade found in India accounting for over 70% people. There's not even one L657 sub clade found in Sintashta or steppe region, also this subclade evolved/mutated around 4200 ybp or 2200 BCE. Mean admixture date of the caste with highest steppe ancestory(high caste Brahmins) is around 900-500 BCE. *Stop lying man* ```
@@Ancestrallinguist You’re incorrect with your postulation that Modern day Indians are up to 47% steppe/Yamnaya. That’s an absurdly high amount making them like the English in terms of their Steppe related ancestry. No, Modern day Indians up to 47% descendent from a population of Andronovo people mixed with a little BMAC genetics on their way down. This population I am talking about that entered India were only ~35% Steppe/Yamnaya admixed. Remember around 1000 years had passed between the time of the Yamnaya and their expansion into Eurasia. They mixed with other peoples (mainly Iranian derived) and became new cultures. Andronovo is not steppe! So like I said, the people who entered India and brought the Indo-European language with them were only around ~35% steppe. This means that ‘India_Jatt’ sample would be only around 16% yamnaya derived (47x0.35 - 16.45), as an example.
Bunkum. Consider this irony first. You say Indus civilization was 65% Iranian farmers 35% AASI who wee Africans. You say later the Europeans came and mixed with these people. Strange that neither the Tamils of the South who formed the native Indian animistic and tantric culture nor the Brahmins all over India who formed vedic culture resemble wither the Iranian farmers or the Europeans respectively. You are neglecting the following facts: Indo Aryans migrated to India from South Central Asia Hindukush region. Around 2200 to 1900 BC, Sinthasta and Andronovo culture had been formed in Southern Kazakhstan region. BMAC culture had been formed in the Northern Afghanistan region. Indus Valley civilization had been formed in North Western India and Pakistan region. These cultures traded a lot with each and other and there was lot of movement of people between these cultures. Eg. Andronovo mixed a lot with BMAC to its South and vice versa. BmAC mixed a lot with IVC to its South and vice versa. Only from these mixed cultures a certain group called Indo Aryans migrated South of the Hindukush and formed the vedic culture. Similarly the Dravidian or tamil group was already developed in Northwestern India by then. The Andronovo, BMAC who were chalcolithic Iranians and the Dravidian people wer all Caucasoid, I repeat Caucasoid which is the keyword here. So Sinthasta which was already far removed from the earliest Proto Indo European Yamnaya culturally and racially mixed with BMAC who wer also caucasoid having their own culture and racial mix to form the Indo Aryans of South Central Asia who later migrated to India. When they arrived they met native peoples who were also caucasoid but different culturally and racially from them. Later there was further racial and cultural mixture in India to form the basis of Hinduism and the Indian race as we see today. Ascribing Brahmins to be Europeans and Tamils or Dravidians to Iranian farmers and proto africans is a very simplistic way of killing the history of modern day Indian race and culture. I did not talk about the Indian tribals and that is where I see the AASI people having greater prominence culturally and racially bit they are not related in any way to the mainstream South and North Indians of India.
I will give example of fire culture. This fire worship is not found in any of the Indo European speaking people except the zorostrians who were originally Iranian and the Brahmins/upper castes of India. Its found in a weird sort of way though in Lithuania that is it. You have to accept that Sinthasta/Indo Iranians/Indo Aryans had a culture which was much more evolved from the earliest proto Indo European of 3500 BC. There could be some remote similarities in language and practices as I Greek or Roman history but culture is a continuous evolution that happens every 500 years or so. If Hinduism developed from a fusion of Vedic and native Indian practices, why cannot Sinthasta of 2200 BC or even Indo Aryan culture of South Central Asia of 1500 BC go through multiple cycles of cultural change and taking in the local people practices and also absorbing them racially into their fold. This is what happened in Indo Aryan people when they settled around Sindhu river. They were completely a different people to not only proto Indo European but also Sinthasta both culturally and racially. Bottomline Indians are not modern day Europeans in even 0.000001% of their ancestry both racially and culturally. Btw there was no concept of Europe in 2000 BC, duh.
Long story short, they are the minority people who came from Persia, destroyed the Indus and Gandhara civilizations made the caste system, made Dravianes slaves, and still the same DNA based on hatred rules India.
Punjabi brahmin. I have: Ancient Ancestral South Indian 35.4% Zagros (Iranian) Neolithic Farmer 30.0% European Hunter-Gatherer 15.4% Caucasus Hunter-Gatherer 11.6% Anatolian Neolithic Farmer 7.6%
Is Ancient South Ancestral DNA a way of not saying African DNA? I'm asking because I saw information about a lot of people in India having African DNA.
@@JAMESJOHNSON-qs8qg No it's a different group - another word for them is Onge. They were the ancestors of Papuans and Aus aborigines. However, there is some African heritage in India including an African tribe called the siddhis, and some admixture from ancient trade routes (sea).
@@JAMESJOHNSON-qs8qg It's true all human haplogroups can be traced back to Africa. As far as we know, it was the AASI people who were the first modern human migrants to India from Africa, but today they aren't regarded as Africans because they have been in India since before anyone else. There is also Indian (from the time of ancient and classical and medieval India) DNA in east Africa, especially in Somalia (where Indian traders settled and married local women).
I agree with that too...the reason being, if you take one strand of South Indian straight hair and hold it over a candle flame, it will curle up to look like our African brothers hair. Because a major part of Africa was on the equator where it was very hot. Eventually they became darker and their hair curled up because of the heat. The features also changed to deal with the extreme heat at the equator. The noses became wider so as to release the hot air faster. ( The opposite was true of Europe, because of the extreme cold, they had to retain heat and so their noses were smaller so as not to lose body heat. So the migrations had to have started from India. Likewise when migrations from India reached Europe because of very little sun, they became light skinned. I also saw Albinos in the Dalit community and from a distance I thought they were Europeans. My mind was trying to figure out how these European tourists got left behind India and were so poor???. There is even a YT video of albinism in India and how those who have it look 100% European. I am not trying to be mean. In fact there is a girl in North India that has albinism that has blue eyes and blonde hair, and is mistaken as German, although she sounds 100% Indian. And she is very pretty, she does not look like someone that has Albinism. Sadly, she feels very lonely as she is viewed as a foreigner. And Indians also went to Asia where again a mutation occurred with the eyes. I believe the cradle of mankind is India, as it makes complete sense that all different races that have come about from the Indian people. It is very difficult to make sense of the Out of Africa theory and make that jump for Europeans to have come from Africa. It does not make sense. And for the Indian to come from Africa to have that hair change and straighten up. Call me names for my theory but one day I will be vindicated when science catches and the missing links are found in India. 6:31
This video is misleading in several aspects. It is almost propoganda Eg The Aryans migration/invasion theory has been debunked thoroughly. The CASTE is 100% Portuguese word. Until colonialisation , India had VARNA & JATI
@@tsMuthuraman-hm6wg Seriously, please study the latest evidence. There is no architectural or any other evidence to support the Aryans Invasion/Migration theory into India. And for sure they did not create SANSKRIT LANGUAGE or produce the RIG VEDAS, (which was the motivation for manufacturing the Aryans Migration Theory). The colonial elites and current elites do not want the world to examine the very real OUT OF INDIA THEORY .....for which there is a vast amount of evidence. Slowly all this is being revealed. The good thing is, the Western simply dismiss the truth and evidence supporting the OUT OF INDIA THEORY .
I like it because there are less likes on these videos - in which case it is usually truthful. Those crazy Indian nationalist stay away when faced with truth
Yamnya were not aryans they are just 7 %that is too low it’s later migration through Muslim invasion as proved it’s more with pathans who are descendants of Muslim invaders of medieval times
The real name should be Pakistan's India because the Indus Valley is located in Pakistan. Bhartiya Punjab and Kashmir belong to the Indus Valley. Tamil Nadu Bengalis have nothing to do with india
Completely neglecting the fact that modern European race especially North west Europe and also all the North Eastern Europe has majorly a component of native European fatmers racially. Yamanaya had neither blonde hair nor blue eyes which developed in Europe among European farmers. Even the skulls recreated of Yamanaya bear resemblance more to Indian features than modern day European features. Native europeans adopted the language of the Yamanaya but esp North west and North east europe has a major native european component in their race. Some remote similarities in race between upper caste Indians and Europeans can be found only with certain people of Central and South Central and South eastern europe that too only with a few. Because Yamanaya racial component went majorly to Sinthasta but it was diluted a lot in Europe by native European racial component.
If you look at some of the Irish very closely they have upper caste Indian features, same for Eastern French, Northeastern Spanish around Catalonia, Northern Italians, southwrn Germans and the Swiss, some Romanians, Hungarians etc. Because these come from the Celtic people who were originally in Central and Eastern Europe from where they migrated through French territory to eventually land up in the British Isles and mainly the western part of the Isles. But even the Irish are majorly mixed with the Viking and Scandinavian settlers and the Normans. So similarities to Indian upper caste people features is few and far in between. Take note that Vikings were no way original Indo Europeans they have derived their racial component mainly from very ancient migrations from Siberia. The Vikings, Germanic people the Saxons and Angles, the Norman's who were basically the Vikings settled in France form the main component of modern day North Western Europeans like the Germans, English, 60% French, 30% Irish and also the very ancient Siberians form bulk of the racial component of North Eastern europeans like the Czechs, Russians, Baltic countries etc.
Thanks for understanding. May I admit though that there are some remote similarities between Indo Aryan, ancient Saxon and Norse mythology. This is well covered in a video by a lady comparing Indo European gods (I don't have the video link as of now, will share it later). But the Saxons, North Germans were mixed racially with the Scandinavians though the resultant race may have adopted some of the original Indo European mythology and hence the similarities. I am a upper caste Brahmin myself and have lot of interest in comparative ancient mythology and discovering the roots. Bottomline, there was of course an original proto Indo European race emerging from the Caucuses in Eurasia and spreading East and west through the huge area of the open steppe grasslands. But difficult to connect them racially in the modern context necause there has been racial admixture over the centuries both sides European as well as Asian.. I find Indo Aryan like features in only some of the Europeans but rhat too if I look at their faces very closely. And Indo Aryan or Brahmin/upper caste Indian features itself is mixed not directly but indirectly absorbing racial features of the native Indians though even as of today after admixture you can differentiate Indo Aryan features in upper castes with those of the native Indians. Of course we are all proud Indians now culturally and racially irrespective of the caste differentiation.
Yamnaya had Blonde hair and blue eyes in low frequency Yamnaya= Eastern European hunter gatherer+ Caucasus/Iranian hunter gatherer. EHG carried genes for blue eyes,red hair and CHG carried some genes for light skin and some blonde hair variants.
@@thatweirdintjkiddo6251 lol read history first instead of writing after drinking 😂 Yamanaya were caucaus people and had no blonde hair. It was corded ware culture and bell Beaker culture that developed out of Yamanaya mixing with a few European farmers that had traces of blonde/brownish hair and greenish/Hazel eyes.
Only western people are very uneducated on that matter would see it this way. But it is difficult to know or understand India if you have never been there. Great video.
Its not a correct analogy. Iranian used to rule almost half of North India at time of Alexender and there was a lot of Iranians moving in North India. Secondly a lot of Greeks used to visit India. They even had conquered some areas of India for small duration. Due to all this there was a lot of mixing of dna. The only time India was properly attacked was by Islamic Invaders and then by British. So genes only show genes but you cannot predict how the gene got there. You need to carefully analyze the history and culture of the area.
... DNA historian does not know who his own father is ... he asked his mother, she does not know either ... the dude, the son of an unknown father, seems to be suffering from terminal mental illness ...
0:12 The video has barely started and there is already an error that Dravidians don't look like Africans, they are like North Indians with darker skin. And it is skin color that bothers Europeans because they think that North Indians are a subcategory of the superior white race and South Indians are Africans a subcategory of the inferior black race.
If the Indo-Aryans close to Europeans were the Brahmins & priest that founded the Caste system in India, then the closest to their Hindu religion of ancient India I can think of is “Greek Mythology” or “Egyptian Mythology”. So Id suspect the Indo-Aryans entered India just around 300 BC during Alexander the Greeks conquests & expansion to Near East Asia, North Africa like Egypt is part of Alexander’s conquered territories. But I still hypothesized that the earliest inhabitant of India subcontinent look like those in Southeast Asia today, the Austroasiatics & Austronesians, their history is very early as 3,000 BC. Before India people got heavily mixing to Melanesians of Papua & Australoid and Persians & Greeks, or maybe even Egyptians. Coz how do you explain the spread of Buddhism & Hindu religion, even language & Abugida script system on those territories in Southeast Asia but the inhabitants look way too different in phenotype of Austronesian & Indian; in the same way why Buddhism & Hindu didnt spread to Melanesian territories in Papua NG & Australian aborigines.
You have nothing to do with india or indus valley civilization modern day indus valley located in pakistan and you belong to Bharat first correct name of your country
Absolutely wrong.about 7000 years before Christ Era. Already a well civilised society was in place when Ram and his ancestors were ruling. There were interaction between Iran and Bharatha Varsha then itself.
