The Indo-European Origins

Benjamin Lloyd

A short essay on Indo-European origins. Parts I & II, summarize (rather incompletely) the various lines of evidence
put forth by Shrikant Talageri in favor of Indian PIE homeland. Part III presents genetic evidence of a significant
contribution of South Asia to the Don-Caspian Steppe during the 4th millennium BCE. This is not my original idea, and
has been discussed in genetics forums. Part IV examines the impact of Late Bronze Age Steppe migration into India in
a new light.

Part I: Who were the Vedic Aryans?

Early Vedic India was divided into many different tribes that spoke different dialects of Indo-European. Six tribal
confederations that figure prominently in Rig Veda are Puru, Anu, Druhyu, Yadu, Turvasu and Ikshvaku. The speakers
of Rig Vedic Sanskrit were the Puru tribe. The Rig Veda was composed by the Bharata tribe, a sub-tribe of Puru. In
fact, when placed in historic context, the Rig Veda is nothing but the world as seen through the eyes of Bharata tribe.
The Bharata-Purus resided in the Sarasvati valley, while the Panchala-Purus inhabited the upper Ganga valley. The
Ikshvakus lived in the lower Ganga valley. Anu were residents of Kashmir and Punjab, while Druhyu were settled in
the North-Western frontiers known as Gandhara. Yadu were settled in the Gujarat region while Turvasu were in
Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh. Each of these tribal confederations encompassed innumerable sub-tribes.

Rig Veda consists of 10 Books (Mandalas) labelled 1 to 10, although linguists have determined their chronological
order to be as follows:

Early period – Books 6,3,7 and early parts of Book 1

Middle period – Books 4,2, and middle parts of Book 1

Late period – Books 5,8,9,10, and late parts of Book 1

This order is basically consistent with anukramanis, the traditional list of composers of verses and their genealogy. A
careful reading of Rig Veda and Avesta, along with archeological record gives us 8 lines of evidence that Rig Vedic
people were native to India and definitely did not enter India from the North-West.

EVIDENCE #1:

The rivers mentioned in each of the Rig Vedic books, in chronological order, clearly show a migration of Rig Vedic
authors from East to West:

The oldest MaNDala VI knows of no river to the west of the SarasvatI.

MaNDala III refers to the first two rivers of the Punjab from the east: the SutudrI and the VipAS.

MaNDala VII refers to the next two rivers of the Punjab from the east: the ParuSNI and AsiknI.

The middle upa-maNDalas of MaNDala I contain the first reference to the Indus, but none to the rivers west of the
Indus.

MaNDala IV contains the first references to rivers west of the Indus.

Thus, the earliest recorded location of the Indo-Aryan tribe Puru is in the Gangetic plains, and they certainly did not
enter India from the North-West. They came into contact with areas to their West only after Sudasa begins his
Westward conquests, and in their earliest periods weren't aware of rivers to the West of Sarasvati, contrary to what
one might expect if Indo-Aryans entered India from the West.
EVIDENCE #2

The Western conquests of Sudasa are talked about extensively in Rig Veda. Meanwhile none of the ancestors of
Sudasa such as DivodAsa (VII.18.25), SRnjaya (VI.47.22) and DevavAta (IV.15.4) are associated with any river to the
West of Sarasvati. Hymn III.33 records Sudasa's conquests in the regions of the SutudrI and the VipAS rivers, with
Vishwamitra as his priest. Later on, Mandala 7 describes Sudasa's victories in regions of the ParuSNI and AsiknI
rivers, with Vasishtha as priest. In VII.83.1, two of the tribes fighting against SudAs, the PRthus and the ParSus, are
described as marching eastwards (prAcA) towards him. VII.6.5 refers to the defeat of Dasyus (enemies), and
describes them as being chased Westward.

EVIDENCE #3

Evidence from place names. While places in Haryana are fairly distributed in all Mandalas, Punjab (Sapta Sindhu) is
referred to only in the Middle and Late MaNDalas. Afghanistan (Gandhara, Gandhari, Gandharva) is directly or
indirectly referred to only in the Late MaNDalas. Sudasa also expanded his kingdom to further East. Hymn III.53.14
speaks of Sudasa's battle with the King of Kikata (Magadha/Bihar).

EVIDENCE #4

Evidence from animal names. The Rig Veda mentions the following animals:

1. The Elephant (ibha, vAraNa, hastin, sRNi)

2. The Buffalo (mahiSa)

3. The Indian Bison (gaura)

4. The Peacock (mayUra)

5. The Chital or Spotted Deer (pRSatI)

These animals are found only in India, and yet their etymology is purely Indo-European. On the other hand, uSTra,
the bactrian camel of Afghanistan, is referred to only in the following (Late Period) verses: I.138.2; VIII.4.7; 5.37;
46.22, 31. This indicates that RigVedic Aryans migrated to Afghanistan only in the Late periods of Rig Veda (contrary
to what is asserted by the Aryan migration theory).

EVIDENCE #5

Evidence from Avesta indicates that early Iranians were aware of Punjab and Afghanistan, but not areas further to
the West or the North. Therefore, their origin must lie eastwards in Punjab.

EVIDENCE #6

All changes in the archeological cultures of North India can be explained as local developments of the Indus Valley
Civilization in the west and Oche Colored Pottery culture in the east. There is no material archeological trace of an
influx of foreign migrants. This clearly implies that if at all there were immigrants into India, they largely assimilated
into Indian culture.

EVIDENCE #7

Evidence from river names. North Indian rivers have Indo-European names, despite the fact that river names resist
change even after new migrants have settled and replaced an older culture. Thus, it may be concluded that North
Indian river names have been more or less the same since Harappan times, and indicates the presence of Indo-
European languages in India since at least the earliest Copper Age. The Rig Veda does not mention any places or
rivers with non-Indo-European names. The Indus people, alleged to be non-Indo-European, had towns and cities, but
no alleged non-Indo-European place-names have survived. Contrast this with the Native Americans, who did not
have large towns and cities, but their place-names and river-names have survived in large numbers, for example,
Massachusetts, Mississippi, etc.
EVIDENCE #8

Evidence from Mitanni inscriptions. Mitanni was a Hurrian-speaking state in northern Syria and southeast Anatolia
from 1500 to 1300 BCE. While the Mitanni kings were Indo-Aryan, they used the language of the local people, which
was at that time a non-Indo-European language, Hurrian. Mitanni inscriptions contain Indo-Aryan words for:

* a few numerals,

* a few words associated with horses (horse‐colors, chariots, racing),

* the names of a few Vedic gods,

* the Sanskrit word for "bead" (mani), and

* a large array of personal names adopted by the ruling class

Mani is a late word, very common in post‐Rigvedic texts, but found in the Rigveda only in two hymns, I.22 and 33, in
late parts of book 1. As for the names of rulers, they contained the following prefixes/suffixes:

1.‐atithi: Biriatti, Mittaratti, Asuratti, Mariatti, Suriatti, Devatti, Indaratti, Paratti, Suatti.

2. ‐ashva: Biriassuva, Bartassuva, Biridasva.

3. -ratha: Tusratta

4. -medha: Biriamasda.

5. -sena: Biriasena.

6. -bandhu: Subandu.

7. -uta: Indarota, Yamiuta.

8. Vasu‐: Wasdata, Waskanni.

9. Rta‐: Artasumara, Artatama, Artamna.

10. Priya‐: Biria, Biriasauma, Biriasura, Biriawaza, Biriatti, Biriassuva. Biriamasda, Biriasena

Names with these suffixes and prefixes are only found in the Late Books, with the exception of one reference of
Citraratha in IV.30, which has been classified by Oldenberg as a late addition in book 4. Thus, it is very clear that
Mitanni migrants separated from Indo-Aryans sometime after the composition of the Late books of Rig Veda. Thus,
the composition of Rig Veda (which undoubtedly happened in India), must have been completed long before their
separation from Indo-Aryans. Shrikant Talageri has argued that since the Mitanni by 1500 BCE had already adopted
the language of local people, and had retained only a few words and names from the Late Rig Veda, they must have
been present in the region from at least 1700 BCE. Hence, their migration out of India must have taken place a few
centuries before that, and the composition of Rig Veda would have been even earlier, pre-2000 BCE. This is totally
inconsistent with the timeline of the so-called "aryan migration".

Part II: Who were the Indo-Europeans?

If Rig Vedic Aryans were the Puru tribe, who were other Indo-Europeans? The answer is to be found in Rig Veda
itself, the oldest surviving Indo-European literature. Mandala 7, one of the early books, tells of a Battle of Ten Kings
(Dasarajna). In this war, several tribes teamed up with a rival branch of Bharatas to wage war against the Trtsu-
Bharatas led by King Sudasa. The Trtsu-Bharatas were victorious, and are said to have defeated and “scattered” the
following tribes:
 • Alina: From whom descended the Iranian nomadic tribe called Alans, as well as a Greek tribe known as
Hellenes.
• Bhrigu: Followers of Bhrigu who migrated out of India after this war founded the state of Phrygia. Bhrigu is
known to have introduced the custom of keeping a sacred fire. Iranian fire priests were called Atharvans,
who in the Vedic tradition are known as descendants of Bhrigu. Interestingly, a class of ancient priests in
Greece were called “phleguai”, a Greek dialectical form of “Bhrigu”. The Greeks also remembered the Vedic
priestly class of Angiras, whom they called Angelos (divine messengers). The Iranians demonized Angiras,
calling him Angra Mainyu (the “Satan” of Zoroastrianism).
• Bhalana: From whom descended the Balochs.
• Druhyu: Rig Vedic authors referred to Druhyu by the name of their priestly class. This same priestly class is
found among the historic Celts by the name of Drui or Druids. It is possible that Greek tree nymphs called
Dryads represented a faint memory of their prehistoric contacts with Druhyu/Druids.
• Parsu: From whom descended the Persians.
• Pani: In later history, the name is used to refer to some Scythian tribes.
• Paktha: From whom descended the Pashtoons.
• Shivas: From whom descended the Khivas
• Prithus: From whom the Parthians descended.
• Simyu: From whom descended Sirmios and Sarmatians.

Thus, we have clear indication within the Rig Veda itself that other Indo-European tribes were pushed towards the
North-Western frontiers, from where some of them migrated westwards and established many territories, at times
retaining the same tribal name as they held during early Rig Vedic times. The Indo-Europeans who stayed in India
gradually adopted the culture and language of Bharata tribe owing to the elite dominance of Bharata warrior
nobility. Indications of this assimilation can be seen in the interesting case of Bangani, a Garhwali dialect spoken in
Uttarakhand, which has a very old kentum substrate, indicating an early presence of kentum dialects such as Celtic,
Germanic or Italic.

So, when did this out-of-India migration happen? There can be no doubt that the expansion of nomadic tribes of the
Steppe played a huge role in the spread of Indo-European language in Europe. Their linguistic impact in some other
parts of Asia, particularly in India, may not have been as noticeable. However, if we wish to understand when and
how Indo-Europeans migrated out of India, we must investigate the origins of the Steppe people. This will be
covered in the next part.

Part III: The Origins of the Steppe nomads

The Yamnaya culture (3300–2600 BCE) of the Pontic-Caspian Steppe undoubtedly played a major role in the spread
of Indo-European languages in Europe. Genetically, it descends from two earlier cultures: the Khvalynsk culture
(4900 - 3500 BC) of the middle Volga region, and a culture of the Don-Caspian Steppe, represented by burial sites like
Progress and Vonyuchka, that began to expand into the Steppe from late 4th millennium BCE onwards.
Sources used: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1FSzKKknFGcOgfyA76q9PD7B-n-MJs7L8/view

Tool used: https://vahaduo.github.io/vahaduo/

As can been seen from these tests, Yamnaya culture derives more than half of its ancestry from the Don-Caspian
sites of Progress and Vonyuchka. Don-Caspian culture is in turn derived heavily from Khvalynsk (around 50%), but
more surprisingly derives around a quarter of its ancestry from a people closely related eneolithic Sarazm (Tajikistan,
4000 BCE):

I have tried every possible source of Iranian-related ancestry, yet none of them even come close to giving as good a
fit as Sarazm. It seems that eneolithic Sarazm was derived heavily from an Iranian-related Hunter-Gatherer group
unique to South Asia, and the same group was also a major source of ancestry in Harappan cultures (Shinde et al,
2019). The Sarazm samples, therefore, serve only as a proxy for the actual migrants, demonstrating that a migration
from South Asia to Don-Caspian Steppe did take place during mid-4th millennium BCE. It seems likely, therefore, that
the aforementioned Battle of Ten Kings (Dasarajna) took place early in the 4th millennium BCE, triggering a North-
westward migration out of South Asia into the Don-Caspian Steppe.
Part IV: The impact of Late Bronze Age Steppe migration in South Asia

India was the Vedic and Indo-European homeland and Steppe people got a good portion of their ancestry from out
of India migrants. This raises the question: then what was the impact of the Late Bronze Age Steppe migration in
South Asia? India was Sanskrit-speaking Vedic at the time of Steppe migration (~1600 bce). The Steppe migrants
entered from the northwest. During the early phase, they interacted with northwestern settlements like "Gandhara
grave culture". Samples from that period in that region actually show a female-biased admixture from Steppe. The
reasons for this are simple. The Steppe people were not "warrior elite". They were nomads. And an urban woman is
not going to marry a male nomad. The reverse, however, is very much possible. Hence, the initial diffusion of Steppe
ancestry, especially in the northwestern regions, was female mediated.

Later on, when Steppe people migrated into inner India and established some settlements, they may have been in a
better position to marry urban women. Having said this, in any migration a male-bias is to be expected, since women
don't tend to migrate as much as men. For instance, Parsi or Jewish ancestry in India is also mostly male-mediated,
but this is obviously not on account of elite dominance. Therefore, the diffusion of Steppe ancestry in India was a
slow process, rarely involving elite dominance and obviously too late in Vedic history to have been the factor
responsible for introducing proto-Sanskrit in India. But this is not to say that some of the Steppe migrants did not try
their hand at becoming warriors. Two cases may be examined: the Pandavas and the Shakyas.

Initially, the Steppe migrants were nomads and the males did not marry the city-dwellers. Given that the migrant
population would have already been mostly males, this would have created a severe shortage of women for males. It
is likely that these Steppe migrants therefore adopted the custom of brothers sharing a single wife. Later on, when
they established sedentary communities, some of them may have retained this custom. Many Sakas have historically
practiced this. Many North Indian hill tribes still had this kind of custom until very recent historic periods.

Now let us analyze the polyandrous marriage of the Pandavas. It completely goes against Vedic marriage norms. In
the Mahabharata epic, they have to invent all sorts of excuses to justify it, although none of them make any
historical sense. The simplest explanation would be: The Pandavas were Steppe migrants, and vassals of Kuru.
Polyandry was permitted in their community, although it is not certain how prevalent it may have been. Pandava
rulers may have also traced a maternal descent from the Kurus, thus giving them a partial claim to the throne. The
roots of the Kurukshetra war lie not in the treachery of the Kurus but in the rebellion and conquests of Pandavas.
Yudhishtir, the Pandava King, is said to have conquered the entire Indian sub-continent (this may be exaggerated).
This inevitably brought them in conflict with the Kurus, who also happened to have a large empire, and held many
states as vassals. A Great War thus ensued, involving many vassal tribes on both sides. The War not only caused
great loss of lives, but also resulted in consolidation of State-power, eventually leading to the emergence of the
Mahajanapadas.

Another interesting candidate for early Steppe settlement is the Shakya tribe, in which the historic Buddha was born.
It is possible that they were originally Steppe migrants, as is suggested by their name. Steppe nomads later came to
be known as Shaka, so Shakya could mean "descended from Shaka". Shakyas were vassals of Kosala, and claimed
descent from the Solar King Ikshvaku (a very ancient Kosala King). According to Buddhist sources, the Shakyas
believed that they were descendants of Ikshvaku but were exiled into the mountains. This indicates that Shakyas
may have originally been a nomadic hill tribe. Later on, they may have established a vassal republic under Kosala.