Dweller wrote: ↑Sun Oct 17, 2021 12:44 pm
And those warlike Sintashta people were not some united ancestors of all modern Europeans, but in majority of R1a haplogroup, mostly spread in India, central Asia and among Slavs. Other than this haplogroup, there is some R1b, which is largest in Western Europe, but not more than it could be found among Slavs.
What haplogroup would be the connection, what cultural links are there, and how they fare when compared to such connections in modern Indians or even Slavs?
It seems that for some, the issue is about feeling the need for connection and maintaining some racial identity beliefs so they can practice dhamma properly, even though it will be mostly a gross obstruction to practice.
No doubt it is fostering increased identity view clinging to a temporary form. Actually one could be reborn into any race, or even fall from the human state altogether. One finds various hair and eye colored dogs also so coloring is not a guarantee of much....
Regarding the subject, even among academic researchers there can be some implicit bias also, they sometimes wish to support their views if possible. The situation is far worse amongst the lay public trying to put together some story to fit their idealized self concept.
Looking at haplogroups though can be misleading I think and overly simplifies the issue.
Sometimes for example the male Y-haplogroup r1a1 (the unbroken line of male descent) has been associated with being supposedly the 'Aryan gene'.
https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... escendants
The evidence shows a back migration of this gene from somewhere near far Eastern Europe into the Indo Iranian region.
But what is misleading is where in the story we want to begin, and when do we do we identify them as 'Aryans'? Presumably when the language had formed.
Actually some of the oldest strains of r1a1 are found in India and Iran even present at high levels in some low castes in South India, having migrated earlier from somewhere near present day Kazakhstan and Siberia. From India and Iran they migrated and reached parts of Europe, and then have migrated back into Iran and India later supposedly 'as Aryans'. They were no doubt very dark skinned at the earlier time also.
So if we use this gene supposedly as a marker (which many think is too simplistic) do we say the Aryans 'originated' in Eastern Europe? Or in the Greater India region and Iran since they came to Europe from there? Or in Siberia? Or only when they lost sufficient skin color?
- Village woman.jpg (64.89 KiB) Viewed 1142 times
So it depends on the timeline we want to look at. People are very mixed and related when we start going back.
Basically it's a complex issue at this point and the field is still developing hugely, obviously for some their cherished self views are being overturned and much of the discussion you see is some level of coming to terms with this.