Some of our views were similar, but our views regarding the identity of the Indo-Aryans were different, & I think my previous explanations should clear any misconceptions. I give importance to archaeological, historical, cultural, & linguistic evidence as well, but genetic evidence is extremely important because it's the one thing that cannot lie. No one moved from Persia to the Indus, any movement that may have taken place, resulted during the period the Persians ruled over the Indus. The Indo-Iranian migrations to both Iran & the Indus are confirmed as of now. I think we both agree that the Indo-Iranians initially resided in Afghanistan when the migrations from Central Asia began.
The Indo-Aryans are a branch of Indo-Iranians. In fact the Indo-Iranians as a whole are present in modern day Pakistan. The Pashtuns & Balochis are an Iranic people. The Kashmiris & northern Punjabis are purely Indo-Aryan. You previously claimed that the Aryans were the same people as the IVC, that is not true at all & that is why I provided you with a source proving that Indo-European tribes migrated to the Indus. As such the Harappans are different from the Indo-Iranians.
I never claimed that the IVC was linked with the Vedic people, but it remains a fact that the Indo-Aryans lived with the Harappans for a short duration of time till their collapse before the advent of the Vedic civilization. We won't know who they (Harappans) were precisely till their script is deciphered. The Indo-Aryans differentiated themselves from Harappans, but they married some of their women, & adopted certain aspects of their culture. That is why there are some similarities between them.
I read the study that you referred to. The quote of 3000-8000 years from;
Shared Indo-European languages (i.e., Hindi and most European languages) suggested to linguists of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries that contemporary Hindu Indians are descendants of primarily West Eurasians who migrated from Europe, the Near East, Anatolia (Turkey), and the Caucasus 30008000 years ago (Poliakov 1974; Renfrew 1989a,b).
This has been quoted from a book written by Leon Poliakov, a French writer of Jewish origin, titled, The Aryan Myth: A History of Racist and Nationalist Ideas in Europe. Renfrew is also quoted, who also quotes from Poliakov. The reference of 3000-8000 years ago is declared highly suspect by various scholars who imply that the main theme of Poliakovs book was to denounce the Aryan racist theories and this date was not primarily based on historical dating of various pre-historical events and therefore this can not be taken as a historical fact.
Secondly, the association of so-called Indo-Iranians with IVC era is highly suspect as Indo-Iranians are primarily associated with introduction of horse and chariots. No horse or a chariot has ever been found in Harappa and Mohenjodaro or any other qualified IVC era site. This is mere speculation and highly suspect and I do not believe this. You may not agree with me. The assertion that it were Indo-Iranians who settled first in Afghanistan and later along Indus has never been proved archeologically as I said earlier as well that people of BACTRIA did migrate to Iran but not to IVC area. I have a problem with the term Aryan and its historical usage as well. The most comprehensive guide to the early textual history of the term Aryan remains that produced by a Nazi scholar, Hans Siegert (1941/42), but over the past years a series of detailed intellectual histories and themed volumes that touch on the Aryan question have been published. The issue here however is not simply the correcting of a misleading translation or the creation of a historical narrative, but the reconceptualization of the Aryan paradigm, and, as a corollary, the political history of linguistic theorizing.
Thirdly, the study you referred to has been superseded by many other studies that have been conducted later, and if I may, I would like to highlight some the quotes from that study published in the American Journal of Human Genetics in 2011:
The percentage of West Eurasian maternal lineages is substantial (up to 50%) in Indus Valley populations but marginal (<10%) in the south of the subcontinent.
Genome-wide scans on the Human genome diversity panel (HGDP) data involving 51 global populations have revealed that South Asia, represented by Pakistani populations, shares most signals of recent positive selection with populations from Europe,
the Near East, and North Africa.
Our simulations show that differences in haplotype diversity between source and recipient populations can be detected even for migration events that occurred 500 generations ago (~12,500 years ago assuming one generation to be 25 years).
Pakistan consistently appearing markedly more similar to West Eurasian than to Indian populations.
Combined with our ADMIXTURE and PCA results, this is powerful evidence that Pakistan is a poor proxy for South Asian genetic diversity, despite having often fulfilled this role in previous publications.
Within India the geographic cline of the Indus/Caucasus signal is very weak, which is unexpected under the ASI-ANI model, according to which the ANI contribution should decrease as one moves to the south of the subcontinent. This can be interpreted as prehistorical migratory complexity within India that has perturbed the geographic signal of admixture.
It was first suggested by the German orientalist Max Muller that ca. 3,500 years ago a dramatic migration of Indo-European speakers from Central Asia (the putative Indo Aryan migration) played a key role in shaping contemporary South Asian populations and was responsible for the introduction of the Indo-European language family and the caste system in India. A few studies on mtDNA and Y-chromosome variation have interpreted their results in favor of the hypothesis, whereas others have found no genetic evidence to support it.
The demographic history of Central Asia is, however, complex, and although it has been shown that demic diffusion coupled with influx of Turkic speakers during historical times has shaped the genetic makeup.
Patterning suggests additional complexity of gene flow between geographically adjacent populations because it would be difficult to explain the western ancestry component in Indian populations by simple and recent admixture from the Middle East.
In terms of human population history, our oldest simulated migration event occurred roughly 12,500 years ago and predates or coincides with the initial Neolithic expansion in the Near East. Knowing whether signals associated with the initial peopling of Eurasia fall within our detection limits requires additional extensive simulations, but our current results indicate that the often debated episode of South Asian prehistory, the putative Indo-Aryan migration 3,500 years ago falls well within the limits of our haplotype-based approach. Thus, regardless of where this component was from (the Caucasus, Near East, Indus Valley, or Central Asia), its spread to other regions must have occurred well before our detection limits at 12,500 years.
Therefore, any suggestion that there was a migration of people to the IVC after 12500 years before present may stand nullified as per this study.
