AHC/WI/POD: Successful unified Indo-Greek Empire and settlement.

Albert.Nik

Banned
By the way coming back to topic, the number of Greek that migrate to India were only 250.000 and the population of that side of the subcontinent was around 8 million IE modern day Afghanistan and Pakistan so how can the Greeks establish their empire in India without being indianized first, Hindus or Buddhist will not give up their faith or culture and become Greek , and Greek was used only As language of administration and lingua franca not beyond that unless you increase the number of migrants by a factor of 10 then that would be a ASB since in my opinion I think there aren't so many Greeks back then
Graeco-Buddhism was quite widespread back then first of all. Plus,today's Hinduism didn't exist then which came late after the Indo-Greeks were no more. While Sanskrit would be used for special purposes,Prakrits,Greek,Iranian and Nuristani languages would be the language of daily use. That's how it had been. Classical Sanskrit was never a spoken language and was only for religious and special purposes. First traces of today's Hinduism is said to have begun during and after the Gupta rule and most of the followed Gurus today were born after 800CE. So in this TL Graeco-Buddhism or Graeco-Vedism will pervade. Of course,it would look nothing like today's Hinduism and that is to be discussed elsewhere. There are many more PODs for that. The priestly class would initially consider them impure but eventually they would have to overhaul their worldwiew. That's how History has worked everywhere. Considering the population,you can consider a greater India in this timeline not just the regions of Indian subcontinent OTL. In this timeline,I would expect Graeco-Buddhism or a Helleno-Vedism to be the most followed religion.
 

Deleted member 116192

Culture =/= genes.
Provide genetic evidence that these "similar" looks are due to inheritance and I will accept it.
You'll probably find you can't.
That's what I meant, he keeps saying facts about y chromosome which is paternal lineage notthing about mitochondrial DNA which Is maternal lineage. Say if the mother doesn't have your typical European characteristics how can the child be full European it will have some European features of its father but nothing beyond that the child is a member of a new race of people which may share some similarities with its European counterparts but they are not the same.
Now let's not get into the argument of its not pure race there is admixture ewww . No race is superior and no race is inferior as the characteristics of a race are a product of environment that they live in. The southern Europeans look different not only because of racial mixing with other people but also due to the sun.

Now as for central Asian Scythian they looked like Asronan and Arteshtaran of ancient Iran or the old Brahmins of India who were known to keep a pure lineage both on the maternal and paternal side for a very long time and it's only after some time that these people began to mix with the rest of the population so the answer to the question did the Scythian look like northern European stock the answer is a resounding no, the look like old Indo Iranian people, and I don't think a lot of them were blonde may be brown some ginger and blonde hair but it's hard to know since Indo Aryans or Iranians cremated their dead or perform sky burial
 

Deleted member 116192

Graeco-Buddhism was quite widespread back then first of all. Plus,today's Hinduism didn't exist then which came late after the Indo-Greeks were no more. While Sanskrit would be used for special purposes,Prakrits,Greek,Iranian and Nuristani languages would be the language of daily use. That's how it had been. Classical Sanskrit was never a spoken language and was only for religious and special purposes. First traces of today's Hinduism is said to have begun during and after the Gupta rule and most of the followed Gurus today were born after 800CE. So in this TL Graeco-Buddhism or Graeco-Vedism will pervade. Of course,it would look nothing like today's Hinduism and that is to be discussed elsewhere. There are many more PODs for that. The priestly class would initially consider them impure but eventually they would have to overhaul their worldwiew. That's how History has worked everywhere. Considering the population,you can consider a greater India in this timeline not just the regions of Indian subcontinent OTL. In this timeline,I would expect Graeco-Buddhism or a Helleno-Vedism to be the most followed religion.
How are you going to achieve this with 250.000 people? They were farmers and army men not men of letters and these people will convince the priests of Hinduism, how? They hated them because they were uncultured in their eyes and they didn't perform vedic sacrifices at first BTW We did have Hellenic Hinduism, that's how Hinduism got a lot of its female deities, astrology and other cultural aspect
 

Albert.Nik

Banned
Culture =/= genes.
Provide genetic evidence that these "similar" looks are due to inheritance and I will accept it.
You'll probably find you can't.
What does this even mean in the current context? Migrations have been the part and parcel of Human history. Indo-European migrations is more than proved. Most of Scythia(West Central Asia),Tarim Basin and Eastern Iran,regions where Pure Indo-Aryans survive had few to none people before Indo-European migrations. Most of Europe was populated by this migration as well. I am aware of a lot of people denying that migration but most of which turn out mostly to be Pseudoscience or Religious elements.
 
Last edited:
But anyway,Ossetians are the direct descendants of Scythians in their purest form surviving today. I suggest you read about them.
You really have a weird fixation on historical/cultural/genetic pureness.
Ossetians might be the people with more cultural ties with Alans, a sub-group of Sarmatic peoples themselves more or less related to Scythians. Except in nationalist and protochronist historiography, I never saw argued they were "pure Scythians". (If you really had to find the "last" Scythians in the sense Herodotus gave, you'd find them in Crimea where they were last identified as distinct people from Sarmatian groups)
Now, what "Scythians" meant for ancient peoples in the broadest sense : let's first remember that neither Greeks or Romans really attempted to be scientific ethnographers and had only a faint idea of the relations between peoples in European hinterland. It's why they ended calling Celts (originally a people, or more probably a regional coalition) undifferentiated groups out of remotness and dropling of records. The same happened with Illyrians (we know were a group largely defined by Greeks and their interaction with locals, that gathered an awful lot of Celtic, Gaetic, Italic or other Balkanic groups), later with Germanics and without real doubt with Scythians. Ethnographically, it had approximatly as much value as "Hyperboreans", or more surprisingly the old Thierry's hypothesis about Kimris (which, even if you're not knowing it giving it's a fairly old and local thesis, you're basically using with some genetic considerations) : after all if we define broadly enough Scythians as any IE people with more or less ties with proto-northern Iranic archeological cultures, we could as well include Cimmerians into the mix and make them the responsible of phenotype closeness (assuming that standardized description of Scythians are reliable, see below) in Europe. Of course, the problem is that it's neither archeologically or historically attested (especially as we know that proto-Germanic peoples might had a really important non-IE substrate culturally).

Now it's possible Greeks borrowed a lot of considerations on Scythians from a mix of their own interaction in Black Sea, but as well with interactions Persians and Medians had with Sakas, which was as well more of a geographical terming applied to a range of various if related peoples rather than any real description of unified phenotype/genetics or even firm cultural continuity. Think of "Scythians" as it was about "Ligures", "Barbarians", "Berbers", etc. a broad term based on experience neighboring peoples, the only that wrote them down and systematized them. It created a systematized depiction of Scythians from the Vth century BCE to the Vth century AD among Greeks and Romans whom accuracy is suspicious by its systematisation alone when we know you had whole migrations, mixing and desertions of peoples in the length of a whole millennia.


Now as for central Asian Scythian they looked like Asronan and Arteshtaran of ancient Iran or the old Brahmins of India who were known to keep a pure lineage both on the maternal and paternal side for a very long time and it's only after some time that these people began to mix with the rest of the population so the answer to the question did the Scythian look like northern European stock the answer is a resounding no, the look like old Indo Iranian people, and I don't think a lot of them were blonde may be brown some ginger and blonde hair but it's hard to know since Indo Aryans or Iranians cremated their dead or perform sky burial
The problem arise from systematized description of Barbarians of the steppe by Greeks, who not only generally assumed whoever they encountered were representative of the whole of "borderless" regions where far Barbarians lived (every people North of Celts are Celts and look alike, every people North of Scythians are Scythians and look alike, etc.) but furthermore were re-used continuously for a millenia as a proto-ethnographic trope even when very obviously you had a lot of various human groups mixing and movement.
So while it's perfectly reasonable to think peoples they encountered in Pontic coast and near hinterland had a "Nordic" phenotype (described as grey eyes and clear hairs which might mean as well blonde/reddish or even light brown) the trap there is to assume that you had a direct and unaltered phenotype/cultural or even genetic continuity if not stasis.

That said, I find equally risky and dubious at best to apply to ancient and protohistorical peoples the same practices you can see in social groups within related/later peoples : it looks convincing but implies a definite, concious and continuous ethnicisation of social classes that are rarely (at best) found historically or archeologically. Generally, in the manner of generation, such identity is the result of a quick mixing-up which is common enough that it ends (amusingly) with a large stress on a percieved and mythified ethnic origin.
 

Deleted member 116192

What does this even mean in the current context? Migrations have been the part and parcel of Human history. Indo-European migrations is more than proved. Most of Scythia(West Central Asia),Tarim Basin and Eastern Iran,regions where Pure Indo-Aryans survice had few to none people before Indo-European migrations. Most of Europe was populated by this migration as well. I am aware of a lot of people denying that migration but most of which turn out mostly to be Pseudoscience or Religious elements.
Nobody is denying that migration took place, what is being denied is that Scythian wherever may be look the same which is not the case and they look same or similar to northern European stock
 

Albert.Nik

Banned
Nobody is denying that migration took place, what is being denied is that Scythian wherever may be look the same which is not the case and they look same or similar to northern European stock
Fine. But then we must ask who were the natives in that region. East Asians appear in this region a lot later. In the fringe/border regions I agree. Scythians in Afghanistan,East Caspain,Tarim Basin and Sogdia could not have a large scale admixture. In Xiongnu yes. 88% of the exhumed ones were said to be Asian and 11% fully European. Yes,they were Scythian and Xiongnu begins at the Eastern edge of Scythia. That's why original Indo-Aryans survive in highly mountainous regions.
 
How are you going to achieve this with 250.000 people? They were farmers and army men not men of letters and these people will convince the priests of Hinduism, how? They hated them because they were uncultured in their eyes and they didn't perform vedic sacrifices at first BTW We did have Hellenic Hinduism, that's how Hinduism got a lot of its female deities, astrology and other cultural aspect

Of course an Indo-Greek state will become largely Indianized, but that’s not to say that cultural cross-pollination won’t go the other way as well. IOTL the Greek language persisted for centuries after its arrival into the region, as long or longer than it did in, say, Persia. Greco-Buddhist Art is another sign of that cross-pollination and an obvious suggestion that there were artisans among the arrivals and not just military men and farmers.
 

Deleted member 116192

The problem arise from systematized description of Barbarians of the steppe by Greeks, who not only generally assumed whoever they encountered were representative of the whole of "borderless" regions where far Barbarians lived (every people North of Celts are Celts and look alike, every people North of Scythians are Scythians and look alike, etc.) but furthermore were re-used continuously for a millenia as a proto-ethnographic trope even when very obviously you had a lot of various human groups mixing and movement.
So while it's perfectly reasonable to think peoples they encountered in Pontic coast and near hinterland had a "Nordic" phenotype (described as grey eyes and clear hairs which might mean as well blonde/reddish or even light brown) the trap there is to assume that you had a direct and unaltered phenotype/cultural or even genetic continuity if not stasis.
You misunderstood me based on one off post I made, the purpose of that post was to draw comparison between the Scythian of central Asia to the ancient Indo Iranian people who went on to create Indian civilization and Iranian civilization and that central Asian Scythian some what resembled these ancient Indo Iranian who by themselves very diverse, (this is proved by investigation of ancient kurgan, while Indo European were the majority shall I say they weren't the only group of people but I think I need not tell this to you as you already know about this ) and not the people of northern Europe, that was the purpose of using the top caste of ancient Iran and India as they did preserve their linage for some time before intermixing again not all preserved their so call linage, many even during the time of endogamy married outside their group for various reasons and thus is was generalizing (sorry about that but had to resort to it for argument sake hope you understand)

If you go back and read my posts you will find me saying indirect way that Scythian were not homogeneous they inter mixed with European, Siberians, proto Turk's and Mongolian people the argument was critized and I even apologized for crudely dividing Scythian into pontic and central Asian as these were nomads and didn't care Asia or pontic steppe

In conclusion I didn't argue racial continuity or genetic stasis I just used it for argument sake to say not all Scythian were alike (quite ironic) and that some resembled ancient castes composition
 

Deleted member 116192

Of course an Indo-Greek state will become largely Indianized, but that’s not to say that cultural cross-pollination won’t go the other way as well. IOTL the Greek language persisted for centuries after its arrival into the region, as long or longer than it did in, say, Persia. Greco-Buddhist Art is another sign of that cross-pollination and an obvious suggestion that there were artisans among the arrivals and not just military men and farmers.
Of course they included artisans among the migrants back in the day when there was no specialization or division of labour a lot of artisans were in the army that is not to say artisans were not amongst the migrants many were actually. But I don't think 250.000 people who migrated were men of letters who go on impose the Greek way of life In bactria and other parts of modern day Afghanistan and Pakistan to extent that the culture becomes more Greek than Indian or south asian for that you need more people

Giving and taking between culture is common I know that and I also know that Greek influence lasted for a very long time in those parts but for a unified Indo Greek empire to be established the Greeks should not get Indianized to a large extent and should retain their Greek identity, influence the natives to adopt a Greek way of life to achieve a stable base for such a empire as the region in which Greek empire is to establish is quite diverse and if the Greek elite get indianize to a significant extent they will start to quarrel with other Greeks who happen to adopt a different culture or their Indian subjects declare independence further de stabilizing the empire
But Indo Greek kingdoms on the scale of our time line is certainly possible anything more is quite difficult due to the diverse nature of the subcontinent getting in the way of empire building
 

Albert.Nik

Banned
You misunderstood me based on one off post I made, the purpose of that post was to draw comparison between the Scythian of central Asia to the ancient Indo Iranian people who went on to create Indian civilization and Iranian civilization and that central Asian Scythian some what resembled these ancient Indo Iranian who by themselves very diverse, (this is proved by investigation of ancient kurgan, while Indo European were the majority shall I say they weren't the only group of people but I think I need not tell this to you as you already know about this ) and not the people of northern Europe, that was the purpose of using the top caste of ancient Iran and India as they did preserve their linage for some time before intermixing again not all preserved their so call linage, many even during the time of endogamy married outside their group for various reasons and thus is was generalizing (sorry about that but had to resort to it for argument sake hope you understand)

If you go back and read my posts you will find me saying indirect way that Scythian were not homogeneous they inter mixed with European, Siberians, proto Turk's and Mongolian people the argument was critized and I even apologized for crudely dividing Scythian into pontic and central Asian as these were nomads and didn't care Asia or pontic steppe

In conclusion I didn't argue racial continuity or genetic stasis I just used it for argument sake to say not all Scythian were alike (quite ironic) and that some resembled ancient castes composition
I understand that controversial things of the past and present are inevitable on the AH website. The mixing possibly happened due to some kind of Upheavel that forced the originals of the Indo-Aryans into the Gangetic plains. The description of dark skinned peoples who are mostly portrayed in bad light appear in the last few contents of the Rig Veda. That means before a war described in the book,Indo-Aryans,still homogeneous and pure European race,were ruling by themselves without admitting non whites or interfering with them. They were probably looking by then like Europeans itself. A bond event might have caused this conflict which ended up in the extinction of original Indo-Aryans.
 

Deleted member 116192

I understand that controversial things of the past and present are inevitable on the AH website. The mixing possibly happened due to some kind of Upheavel that forced the originals of the Indo-Aryans into the Gangetic plains. The description of dark skinned peoples who are mostly portrayed in bad light appear in the last few contents of the Rig Veda. That means before a war described in the book,Indo-Aryans,still homogeneous and pure European race,were ruling by themselves without admitting non whites or interfering with them. They were probably looking by then like Europeans itself. A bond event might have caused this conflict which ended up in the extinction of original Indo-Aryans.
I don't know about that part in the Rig Veda, I don't think Rig Veda made unfavorable reference to people of color only it listed out many tribes which were composed of white skinned people also Rig even mentions possibly Persians as parsu they were fair skinned but they were described as enemy
As for white only ruling class I doubt that considering most of Indo Aryans were men not women, so some intermixture must have happened before the next wave of Indo Aryan migrants who had a favourable sex ratio came along I know this for a fact so I really doubt early Rig Vedic India had white ruling class
 

Albert.Nik

Banned
I don't know about that part in the Rig Veda, I don't think Rig Veda made unfavorable reference to people of color only it listed out many tribes which were composed of white skinned people also Rig even mentions possibly Persians as parsu they were fair skinned but they were described as enemy
As for white only ruling class I doubt that considering most of Indo Aryans were men not women, so some intermixture must have happened before the next wave of Indo Aryan migrants who had a favourable sex ratio came along I know this for a fact so I really doubt early Rig Vedic India had white ruling class
Was it two waves? And what is said was the reason for the gender imbalance?
Extinction?? Then what am I? Yeah had some intermixture but that doesn't mean my culture and my lineage from the Indo Aryans is extinct
Our Languages,names or Gods,partially race also survives. Not entirely extinct. In remote hill regions the actual one survives almost fully. I think our culture has changed a lot since our ancestors that long back. Our ancestors are lucky that they have descendents who feel proud about them and when possible in the future,revive the original peoples as well in our country. But aren't you Indo-Scythian also? :openedeyewink: (take the last sentence lightly)
 

Deleted member 116192

Was it two waves? And what is said was the reason for the gender imbalance?
Not two but multiple, the early waves consisted mainly of men because that how initial wave of migration are, look at the Turks, Mongols, The Spanish in the new world, the Portuguese in India as well as the new world, even the migration wave from Africa and Middle East to Europe are men, I don't know why but that's How it is
 
How are you going to achieve this with 250.000 people? They were farmers and army men not men of letters and these people will convince the priests of Hinduism, how? They hated them because they were uncultured in their eyes and they didn't perform vedic sacrifices at first BTW We did have Hellenic Hinduism, that's how Hinduism got a lot of its female deities, astrology and other cultural aspect

I agree with you on the astrology aspect as well as that of leaving victory pillars and rock edicts but do you have any sources on the introduction of female deities? Goddesses ranging from Saraswati, Ushas and Nirrti to Sri and Sarayu have been present in the Vedic corpus from the earliest Mandalas of the Rig Veda.


Edit:
As for the racial phenotypes being discussed in this thread, Indo-Aryans were already seeing an upsurge of dark-skinned and not so much Indo-Iranian looking folks as early as the Rig Veda. Angirasa is very famously described as such and Agastya is labelled as dark skinned in the Puranas. Colour really doesn’t seem to be on anyone’s mind no matter which translation of the Vedas you go by, Ralph TH Griffith, Monier Williams, Radhakrihsnan or Mueller.

Whatever it was the people of the archaeological Swat culture had substantial amounts of mitochondrial DNA that stemmed from what would these days be defined as the south.
 
Last edited:

Albert.Nik

Banned
I agree with you on the astrology aspect as well as that of leaving victory pillars and rock edicts but do you have any sources on the introduction of female deities? Goddesses ranging from Saraswati, Ushas and Nirrti to Sri and Sarayu have been present in the Vedic corpus from the earliest Mandalas of the Rig Veda.
I agree @Freedom2018 . Goddess worship has evolved as it had independently among all Indo-European religions. Doesn't need outer agents for goddess and gods unless the migrants leave their mark strongly for centuries.
 

Albert.Nik

Banned
The locals were refered to as Dasus. Dasyu,Dahyu is an another word used. They have always been written about in bad light or portrayed as enemies often. As per Mahabharat,a prince was denied the throne being a 'Dasi Putra'. They seem to have admitted some into as required. Dasu is not a word which has any good meaning in any given context except Deva/(any God) Das which is a Sanskrit version of Abdullah(Slave of God in Arabic,I don't know if it used by Arab Christians as well). While those who were dark skinned but had allied with the Indo-Aryans might not have been viewed unfavourably,the ones who refused to were not usually favourable. You cannot ignore that the bottom castes and most scheduled tribes have the least DNA of the Indo-Aryans. Indo-Greeks,Indo-Scythians,Kushans,Other Iranians,Huns seem to have assimilated into the upper castes first established by the Indo-Aryans. Khatri,Agarwal,Jatt,Kayastha,Gujjar,Brahmin(not all but maybe most),Tulu Kshatriyas,Nairs,Rajputs are the prominent forward Castes of India all of which have good amount of Indo-European origin. The middle Castes have little less IE origin compared to the ones listed above. The ones at the bottom have the least. The arrangement looks like it was first created as an Indo-Aryan superstates while natives were tried to be tamed to be in the best interest to the to them as much as possible. Those who couldn't be tamed were considered as uncouth as described in later texts. However this was never smooth and oppositions have happened often crushed. The society during Rig Vedic era was still tribal as far as most sources say. Eastern Iranians seem to have been friendly with Indo-Aryans than Western Iranians. Kamboj is said to be Nuristani. Gandhari tribe is an Indo Aryan tribal confederation possibly ancestor of Dardic languages. Dardic speakers are within whom the Original Aryans who are left pure today and live in heavily mountain regions and mostly pastoral. Kalash,Pashayi easily pass White N European while Kashmiri Pandits and Muslims also pass as Iranians or Southern Europeans. Kashmiri is also Dardic. Indo-Aryan migration into India is very interesting thing but also many possibly offensive things are contained in it.
 
Top