A recent study on mitochondrial DNA, Y chromosome DNA and DNA markers related to the coat colour of the horse remains from well-preserved archaeological sites in Anatolia and neighbouring areas, found out that they were not autochthonous to these regions but introduced at the end of 3rd millennium BCE. The abstract of the paper is produced below from the Journal, Science Advances
Title:
Ancient DNA shows domestic horses were
introduced in the southern Caucasus and Anatolia during the Bronze Age
The conclusion:
An article on this study can be read in News Network Archaeology under the caption ‘Domestic Horses Probably Did Not Originate In Anatolia’
The date, at the end of 3rd millennium is
the same time Mahabharata war ended followed by a dispersal of people. While
the people of Dvaraka, following the flood that coincided with the exit of
Krishna moved along the river Sarasvatī and settled along the banks over a
period of 7 months under the guidance of Arjuna, where did the losers residing
in the Sindhu region go is a million dollar question, when answered would solve
many a confusion on AIT and Sindhu civilization. (I choose to use only Sindhu
and not club it with Saravati because two different people, differing in religious
ideology had occupied these two river banks – the details of which will be
given in my upcoming book on the date of Mahabharata.)
Now the focus falling on a suddenly introduced genetic
material in the horses of Anatolia at the end of the 3rd millennium BCE,
the sites of horse domestication in India, deduced from Mahabharata, deserve a
relook. These details delved in my paper (READ
HERE There are 40 distinct points, 16 on Aryan and the rest on Dravidian issues discussed) are briefly given here to impress upon the point that horses were bred
right from the time of Manu’s children and were professionally raised in Sindhu
region and NW India, giving scope to deduce that the horse breeders could have
left their regions to Central and east Europe around the said time, which obviously
coincided with the end of Mahabharata war.
The Sindhu region was ruled by Jayadratha, the
son-in-law of the Kaurava family. There were 10 kingdoms under him (MB 8.5 and
3.265) in this region. In addition, Jayadratha wielded influence till Vāhlika
(also known as Bactria) through his marriage with the women of Gāndhāra,
Kāmboja and Yavana (MB 11.22.11) all of them forming part of BMAC (Bactria-
Margiana Archaeological Complex)
The Sindhu region was home for excellent breed of horses
which were lean-bodied, but strong and could endure long journey. (MB 3.71).
Gāndhāra, Kāmboja and Arāṭṭa were known for horses known as Kalmaṣa, Tittiri
and Mandūka (MB 2.27, 2.50, 6.91). Indic history shows that migrations had
happened to these regions from East India and not from outside India, prompting
us to deduce that people had chosen these places for the autochthonous availability
of horse breeds.
For example Amāvasu, the grandson of Manu and son of Pururavas
and Ila, going to the west (Baudhanya Srauta Sutra), mis-interpreted by
AIT-ians as a proof for AIT, had chosen Gandhara –Vahlika (Balkh) regions that
were known for indigenous breeds of horses. Horses playing an important role in
mobility, the regions where they live and reproduce in plenty were the much
sought after. And in those days of spreading out and peopling around, presence
of indigenous horse breeds could have been the attractive and motivating
feature for migration.
Similarly Sumantu, the 5th descendant of Amāvasu in his direct
lineage preferred to shift to Sindhu region known for indigenous horses. The
name Sindhudweepa
to Sumantu makes it known that he was perhaps the earliest to discover and
occupy the Sindhu region.
In the direct lineage of these two persons, namely, Amāvasu
and Sumantu, came up Vishvamitra!
This must shut down any speculation that Amāvasu was a
migrant from Europe.
The major horse breeding regions had come under the
control of people of specific lineage who must have held something like a
confederation among themselves for bargaining power. By the time of Mahabharata
the entire horse breeding region came under Jayadratha. Looking at the events
in Mahabharata, we are led to speculate that Jayadratha was tolerated in the incidence
of attempted molestation of Draupadi, mainly because he controlled the horse
breeding regions. Until such a time that the Pandavas could wrest control of
his region from him, which happened only with the Great War, people were not willing
to upset him completely.
What happened after the war?
Jayadraratha having lost his life and the region
coming under Pandava control, many die hard followers
of Jayadratha must have escaped further west and North West with their horses.
The time period of sudden
genetic material seen in the Anatolian horses must take into account this
migration from India and analysis of traditional Indian breeds of the Sindhu
region and of the NW including Afghanistan.
Why no horse emblem in any of the Indus motifs is
also answered in my paper.
The prominent Harappan motifs are found to be the
emblems of the losers – Unicorn of Jayadratha, bull of Kripa (though Kripa was
taken into their fold by the Pandavas, the losers bearing allegiance to those
related to Kripa, namely Asvattahma and Drona had continued to trade – as defeated
ones used to take up Vaishya-hood) and the elephant, the 3rd highest
recurring seal was the insignia of Duryodhana. The Bull seal had travelled
outside India and inside India, to Tamil lands. The later migration of this emblem
was through Pallavas who claimed ancestry from none other than Asvatthama!
Interestingly, no king of India had horse as his emblem
or in his standard. This was so till the beginning of the Common Era. That animal
motifs in the royal
seal or emblem
were continued to be used in their trades is the natural and logical inference
for the appearance of the different animals except horse in the Harappan seals.
