Recent advances in the understanding of the evolution of the Asian continent challenge the long‐held belief of a faunal immigration into the Himalaya. Spiny frogs of the genus Nanorana are a characteristic faunal group of the Himalaya–Tibet orogen (HTO). We examine the phylogeny of these frogs to explore alternative biogeographic scenarios for their origin in the Greater Himalaya, namely, immigration, South Tibetan origin, strict vicariance. We sequenced 150 Nanorana samples from 62 localities for three mitochondrial (1,524 bp) and three nuclear markers (2,043 bp) and complemented the data with sequence data available from GenBank. We reconstructed a gene tree, phylogenetic networks, and ancestral areas. Based on the nuDNA, we also generated a time‐calibrated species tree. The results revealed two major clades (Nanorana and Quasipaa), which originated in the Lower Miocene from eastern China and subsequently spread into the HTO (Nanorana). Five well‐supported subclades are found within Nanorana: from the East, Central, and Northwest Himalaya, the Tibetan Plateau, and the southeastern Plateau margin. The latter subclade represents the most basal group (subgenus Chaparana), the Plateau group (Nanorana) represents the sister clade to all species of the Greater Himalaya (Paa). We found no evidence for an east–west range expansion of Paa along the Himalaya, nor clear support for a strict vicariance model. Diversification in each of the three Himalayan subclades has probably occurred in distinct areas. Specimens from the NW Himalaya are placed basally relative to the highly diverse Central Himalayan group, while the lineage from the Tibetan Plateau is placed within a more terminal clade. Our data indicate a Tibetan origin of Himalayan Nanorana and support a previous hypothesis, which implies that a significant part of the Himalayan biodiversity results from primary diversification of the species groups in South Tibet before this part of the HTO was uplifted to its recent heights.