The Genomic Formation of South and Central Asia by VM Narasimhan · 2018 · Cited by 5 · Related articles Mar 31, 2018 · ... Niraj Rai, Kendra Sirak, Viviane Slon, Kristin Stewardson, ...
The reason the researchers call them Indus Valley periphery individuals is because they cannot be sure that their genetic makeup is the same as most of those who lived in the Indus Valley, because they did not have access to ancient DNA from Indian sites. But for the most part they seem to use these individuals as proxies for the people of that civilisation.
The make-up of Indus Valley periphery individuals is straightforward: a mixture of Iranian agriculturists and the South Asian hunter-gatherers, or Ancient Ancestral South Indians.
[...]
... some of the Indus Valley population moves further south, mixing more with South Asian hunter-gatherers to create the Ancestral South Indian population
[...]
Ancestral South Indians have the same basic mix: South Asian hunter-gatherers and Iranian agriculturists, with a higher amount of the former.
YYTnote: India was originally South Asian hunter foragers' land. Article can back assumptions it took West Eurasian input to jumpstart IVC. A genetics picture is emerging of West Eurasian creating or 'helping' civilizations of all adjacent peoples. 1800's anthropology and historians said as much. Science and technology change but the mindset behind institutions succede from slavery days excuses.
posted
Rakhigarhi was originally included in the Reich overviewed report.
Cultural differences between team members and lab owner caused them to be taken out.
Rai and some other team members of the Reich approved report made a Rakhigarhi report of their own.
Descent means everything in India. That's why the Rakhigarhi report may never see light. Afaik the 'Reich' on the sub-continent's people is still in preprint.
Genomics is not neutral or bias free. It's a tool the wielder uses to their advantage.
Irula are best genomic subs for ancient Harappan civilizers. Check them out while waiting on publishing approval for both reports.
=====
From Reich's book
Clyde Winters Member # 10129
posted
The Haryana site of Rakhigarhi is not an Indus Valley site. This site is much older than the IVC and probably created by the Munda people
Marija Member # 23167
posted
This is a hot topic in India now, proponents of the AIT up against nationalist Hindus who claim that Indoeuropeans originated in India.
There are Vedic traits evident in the Harappan civilization, and long before the purported AIT.
There is also a distribution of the Y-haplogroup R, considered the commonest of Indoeuropean types originally, in India which does not fit with the scenario of R coming from the N so recently, nor of association with a ruling caste.
Hindutva advocates are now pushing so hard in the Out-of-India direction that they've become as dogmatic as the AIT proponents. The truth, no doubt, is somewhere in between.
There are Vedic references to a war following which the losing side was expelled from India. Some claim those are the steppe Indoeuropeans, the Yamnaya, Sintashta, etc. Others say they are the Iranian-speaking Indoeuropeans.
Very ancient R did indeed come from India, there is little doubt, as it descends, along with Q, from P. Whether the more ancient R types in India can be assumed to have spoken Indoeuropean is of course not a reasonable assumption.
Tyrannohotep Member # 3735
posted
quote:Originally posted by Marija: There are Vedic traits evident in the Harappan civilization, and long before the purported AIT.
Wouldn't this simply mean that the Indo-Europeans settling in India would have received cultural and religious influence from the indigenous Indian populations that absorbed them? We would expect something like that happening even if we were to subscribe to AIT.
BTW, welcome to the forum.
Marija Member # 23167
posted
quote:Originally posted by Tyrannohotep:
quote:Originally posted by Marija: There are Vedic traits evident in the Harappan civilization, and long before the purported AIT.
Wouldn't this simply mean that the Indo-Europeans settling in India would have received cultural and religious influence from the indigenous Indian populations that absorbed them? We would expect something like that happening even if we were to subscribe to AIT.
BTW, welcome to the forum.
Thank you.
Well... many traits are associated with the IE simply because they're recorded in the Vedic literature, which of course is written in IE language (Sanskrit).
And there are Vedic references, supposedly written before the "invasion", mentioning Harappan cities which had disappeared by 2000 bce.
What many in India are asserting is that the IE languages and (Vedic) culture were not entirely alien, not from the steppes, but originating in India. If the incoming IE's (Aryans, so-called) had adopted all of this from the indigenous Harappans, then what was their (IE) culture? There are many aspects of Vedic culture which also trace to the north.
People migrated in, yes. Parts of Hindu religion and culture are traced to these IE, yes. However, we still cannot definitively affirm that the Harappan civilization was entirely pre or non-Aryan.
We do know that haplogroup R originated in India or just north of it. So did palaeolithic peoples move into the steppes, and then return once they had horses and chariots?
posted 
