quote:The studied individuals [from ancient Mesopotamian sites in Syria] carried mtDNA haplotypes corresponding to the M4b1, M49 and/or M61 haplogroups, which are believed to have arisen in the area of the Indian subcontinent during the Upper Palaeolithic and are absent in people living today in Syria. However, these same haplogroups are present in people inhabiting today’s Tibet, Himalayas, India and Pakistan.
According to this recent map which had theorized the early OOA exit was into Southern Arabia, rather than out of Egypt the path that follows is along the coast of Southern Iran/Pakistan to India.
Then it doubles back and again into Iran/Iraq (Mesopotamia) and then on to the entire Western half of Eurasia
A separate route goes into the Eastern half of Eurasia, the common factor, India
"Out of Africa Route-Into India and the Peopling of Eurasia"
lioness productions. Sept 2013
Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
I know almost nothing about the story of Mesopotamia beside that it was great civilization. This article, if true, accurate and representative shows that the current people living in Syria today, the current population structure, are not the same as the ones in the past during the ancient empires.
It talks about "depopulation and recolonisation".
quote:This[preceding dental study] showed a stable population until after the Mongolian invasion which resulted in a large depopulation of northern Mesopotamia in the 13th century CE. The final major change occurred during the 17th century with Bedouin tribes arriving from the Arabian Peninsula.
We know that a similar situation probably happened between Ancient Egypt and modern Egypt.
Considering that Syria is at war at the moment, I hope to see the study previewed Beyoku out soon, with the official result out, we would have something concrete to talk about from that angle. Any news Beyoku?
aDNA of Ancient Egyptian remains, as well as aDNA study for other ancient civilizations in the Sahara and the rest of Africa can be very interesting to study ancient population structures (which are usually different that in the far past due to multiple migrations events, climate change, invasion, admixture, depopulation, etc).
What I retained is that ancient population in the past are not always the same as modern population.
Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
Anybody knows if those results make sense in relation to the history of Mesopotamia (past and more modern)? Was there a Mongolian and Bedouin invasion resulting in modern depopulation and repopulation?
Posted by Ebony Allen (Member # 12771) on :
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: I know almost nothing about the story of Mesopotamia beside that it was great civilization. This article, if true, accurate and representative shows that the current people living in Syria today, the current population structure, are not the same as the ones in the past during the ancient empires.
It talks about "depopulation and recolonisation".
quote:This[preceding dental study] showed a stable population until after the Mongolian invasion which resulted in a large depopulation of northern Mesopotamia in the 13th century CE. The final major change occurred during the 17th century with Bedouin tribes arriving from the Arabian Peninsula.
We know that a similar situation probably happened between Ancient Egypt and modern Egypt.
Considering that Syria is at war at the moment, I hope to see the study previewed Beyoku out soon, with the official result out, we would have something concrete to talk about from that angle. Any news Beyoku?
aDNA of Ancient Egyptian remains, as well as aDNA study for other ancient civilizations in the Sahara and the rest of Africa can be very interesting to study ancient population structures (which are usually different that in the far past due to multiple migrations events, climate change, invasion, admixture, depopulation, etc).
What I retained is that ancient population in the past are not always the same as modern population.
Of course they are not the same. The people living in these areas were black. The Sumerians, Babylonians, Phoenicians, Elamites, Persians, Assyrians, Akkadians, and more were all black people. They had a profound influence on Greek mythology.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
stop fronting
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
Of course they were. Now, where is Goredema?
Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ebony Allen: Of course they are not the same. The people living in these areas were black. The Sumerians, Babylonians, Phoenicians, Elamites, Persians, Assyrians, Akkadians, and more were all black people. They had a profound influence on Greek mythology.
It doesn't seem they were black people (aka African people) either according to the haplogroups posted above. MtDNA M4b1, M49 and M61 haplogroups are very rare among modern unadmixed African people. Possibly maybe I don't know 30-60kya separate those haplogroups from their origin in Africa (those dating always changes I don't remember the latest) with little interaction with African people afterward (due to distances) for a relatively long time. That is the origin of all humans before the OOA migration.
Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
quote: black people (aka African people)
Major mistake confusing a continent for a color.
May I suggest Aeschylus, Manilius, and al~Jahiz for who are the black people of the old world.
Of course you're free to acquiesce to the 21st century revamped notion of the African "negro" as the only true black people on the planet, though I'd agree that Ebony Allen stretches black identity too freely disallowing the fact of colour variance among ancient Arabian plate and Arabian Sea people.
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
Ebony Allen, just now reading your post above mine. Since its easy to misinterpret, I just like to point out that my "of course they were" is not in relation to you saying the Ancients weren't the same as the moderns, but to the thread title.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Of course they were. Now, where is Goredema?
Posted by xyyman (Member # 13597) on :
That was a great thread. Can someone find and bump it?
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler:
quote: black people (aka African people)
Major mistake confusing a continent for a color.
May I suggest Aeschylus, Manilius, and al~Jahiz for who are the black people of the old world.
Of course you're free to acquiesce to the 21st century revamped notion of the African "negro" as the only true black people on the planet, though I'd agree that Ebony Allen stretches black identity too freely disallowing the fact of colour variance among ancient Arabian plate and Arabian Sea people.
I haven't read this one yet. But all recent papers on ancient DNA proved Sergi right thus far. Where am I going with this? Sergi suggested that the ancestral population of Mesopatamia originated in the same region as all Meditarrean civilizations...Sudan area.
Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
This paper is interesting but it does not really show a relationship with India. We already have abundant evidence of a relationship between india and Sumer based on the trade between sumer and Dilmun, the name fo the Indus Valley.
This paper reexamines speciments from Terqa that date to the middle of the 2nd millenium BC.
Terqa is located between Ebla and Sumer. There is no evidence that this was a Sumerian site.
The original excavators of specimen TQ28F 112, which is now classified as hg M49, was originally said to belong to hg K (M9). This gentleman was tall and carried a bronze sword, he may have been indigenous, since the earliest skeleton from Terqa, date to 6000BC and carried hg K.
The people at Terqa were not isolated from the rest of the world. The people at Terqa had trade relationships with the East, as illustrated by the discovery of cloves at terqa. Cloves were cultivated on the Molucca Island. No matter what the origin for specimen TQ28F 112, the people of Terqa were not Sumerians. Specimen TQ28F 112, if we accept his identification as M49, would place the indidividual in Tibet and therefore would not confirm any alledged migration of Dravidian or Indo-Aryan people into Mesopotamia, from India.
We do have firm evidence of Dravidians using red-and-black ware migrating from Nubia, into India and Mesopotamia.The Sumerians and Dravidians belonged the Maa Civilization, that formerly existed in Middle Africa. The Dravidians who settled the Indus Valley, which was called Dilmun by the Sumerians according to Kramer, had intimate relations with the Sumerians, but not the people of Terqa.
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: I know almost nothing about the story of Mesopotamia beside that it was great civilization. This article, if true, accurate and representative shows that the current people living in Syria today, the current population structure, are not the same as the ones in the past during the ancient empires.
It talks about "depopulation and recolonisation".
quote:This[preceding dental study] showed a stable population until after the Mongolian invasion which resulted in a large depopulation of northern Mesopotamia in the 13th century CE. The final major change occurred during the 17th century with Bedouin tribes arriving from the Arabian Peninsula.
We know that a similar situation probably happened between Ancient Egypt and modern Egypt.
Considering that Syria is at war at the moment, I hope to see the study previewed Beyoku out soon, with the official result out, we would have something concrete to talk about from that angle. Any news Beyoku?
aDNA of Ancient Egyptian remains, as well as aDNA study for other ancient civilizations in the Sahara and the rest of Africa can be very interesting to study ancient population structures (which are usually different that in the far past due to multiple migrations events, climate change, invasion, admixture, depopulation, etc).
What I retained is that ancient population in the past are not always the same as modern population.
The war in Syria is also based on ethnic cleansing. Not just religious interpretation.
By this I mean, some ethnic groups may represent ancient populations. But we might never find out, since millions of people are fleeing the country at this moment, while other simply can make it out, and get killed.
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:The studied individuals [from ancient Mesopotamian sites in Syria] carried mtDNA haplotypes corresponding to the M4b1, M49 and/or M61 haplogroups, which are believed to have arisen in the area of the Indian subcontinent during the Upper Palaeolithic and are absent in people living today in Syria. However, these same haplogroups are present in people inhabiting today’s Tibet, Himalayas, India and Pakistan.
In addition, if I may?
Received: May 22, 2013; Accepted: July 20, 2013; Published: September 11, 2013
mtDNA from the Early Bronze Age to the Roman Period Suggests a Genetic Link between the Indian Subcontinent and Mesopotamian Cradle of Civilization
quote: Abstract
Ancient DNA methodology was applied to analyse sequences extracted from freshly unearthed remains (teeth) of 4 individuals deeply deposited in slightly alkaline soil of the Tell Ashara (ancient Terqa) and Tell Masaikh (ancient Kar-Assurnasirpal) Syrian archaeological sites, both in the middle Euphrates valley. Dated to the period between 2.5 Kyrs BC and 0.5 Kyrs AD the studied individuals carried mtDNA haplotypes corresponding to the M4b1, M49 and/or M61 haplogroups, which are believed to have arisen in the area of the Indian subcontinent during the Upper Paleolithic and are absent in people living today in Syria. However, they are present in people inhabiting today’s Tibet, Himalayas, India and Pakistan. We anticipate that the analysed remains from Mesopotamia belonged to people with genetic affinity to the Indian subcontinent since the distribution of identified ancient haplotypes indicates solid link with populations from the region of South Asia-Tibet (Trans-Himalaya). They may have been descendants of migrants from much earlier times, spreading the clades of the macrohaplogroup M throughout Eurasia and founding regional Mesopotamian groups like that of Terqa or just merchants moving along trade routes passing near or through the region. None of the successfully identified nuclear alleles turned out to be ΔF508 CFTR, LCT-13910T or Δ32 CCR5.
quote:Most Indian groups descend from a mixture of two genetically divergent populations: Ancestral North Indians (ANI) related to Central Asians, Middle Easterners, Caucasians, and Europeans; and Ancestral South Indians (ASI) not closely related to groups outside the subcontinent. The date of mixture is unknown but has implications for understanding Indian history. We report genome-wide data from 73 groups from the Indian subcontinent and analyze linkage disequilibrium to estimate ANI-ASI mixture dates ranging from about 1,900 to 4,200 years ago. In a subset of groups, 100% of the mixture is consistent with having occurred during this period. These results show that India experienced a demographic transformation several thousand years ago, from a region in which major population mixture was common to one in which mixture even between closely related groups became rare because of a shift to endogamy.
--Priya Moorjani
Genetic Evidence for Recent Population Mixture in India
The American Journal of Human Genetics, Volume 93, Issue 3, 422-438, 08 August 2013
quote:Originally posted by lamin: That Stringer 2011 map is erroneous. Haplogroup analysis does not support a pre-Islamic movement from West Asia into Africa.
The map is also incomplete in that it does not show much of the intra-Africa continental movements. After all, humans were in Africa for more than 70% of the appearance of Homo Sapiens. That Africa map should therefore be denser with arrows than anywhere else in the world.
Haplogroup analysis DOES support a pre-Islamic movement from West Asia into Africa.
the map is not supposed to show intra-Africa continental movements. It's an Out of Africa map And it is alos focused on the Peopling of Eurasia as the subtitle on the map indicates
This map illustates the thread theme> a relation between Indians and Mesopotamians
Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol: It's becoming rather interesting,
quote:Most Indian groups descend from a mixture of two genetically divergent populations: Ancestral North Indians (ANI) related to Central Asians, Middle Easterners, Caucasians, and Europeans; and Ancestral South Indians (ASI) not closely related to groups outside the subcontinent. The date of mixture is unknown but has implications for understanding Indian history. We report genome-wide data from 73 groups from the Indian subcontinent and analyze linkage disequilibrium to estimate ANI-ASI mixture dates ranging from about 1,900 to 4,200 years ago. In a subset of groups, 100% of the mixture is consistent with having occurred during this period. These results show that India experienced a demographic transformation several thousand years ago, from a region in which major population mixture was common to one in which mixture even between closely related groups became rare because of a shift to endogamy.
--Priya Moorjani
Genetic Evidence for Recent Population Mixture in India
The American Journal of Human Genetics, Volume 93, Issue 3, 422-438, 08 August 2013
Shared and Unique Components of Human Population Structure and Genome-Wide Signals of Positive Selection in South Asia
Mait Metspalu et al 2011
abstract
South Asia harbors one of the highest levels genetic diversity in Eurasia, which could be interpreted as a result of its long-term large effective population size and of admixture during its complex demographic history. In contrast to Pakistani populations, populations of Indian origin have been underrepresented in previous genomic scans of positive selection and population structure. Here we report data for more than 600,000 SNP markers genotyped in 142 samples from 30 ethnic groups in India. Combining our results with other available genome-wide data, we show that Indian populations are characterized by two major ancestry components, one of which is spread at comparable frequency and haplotype diversity in populations of South and West Asia and the Caucasus. The second component is more restricted to South Asia and accounts for more than 50% of the ancestry in Indian populations. Haplotype diversity associated with these South Asian ancestry components is significantly higher than that of the components dominating the West Eurasian ancestry palette. Modeling of the observed haplotype diversities suggests that both Indian ancestry components are older than the purported Indo-Aryan invasion 3,500 YBP. Consistent with the results of pairwise genetic distances among world regions, Indians share more ancestry signals with West than with East Eurasians. However, compared to Pakistani populations, a higher proportion of their genes show regionally specific signals of high haplotype homozygosity. Among such candidates of positive selection in India are MSTN and DOK5, both of which have potential implications in lipid metabolism and the etiology of type 2 diabetes.
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol: It's becoming rather interesting,
quote:Most Indian groups descend from a mixture of two genetically divergent populations: Ancestral North Indians (ANI) related to Central Asians, Middle Easterners, Caucasians, and Europeans; and Ancestral South Indians (ASI) not closely related to groups outside the subcontinent. The date of mixture is unknown but has implications for understanding Indian history. We report genome-wide data from 73 groups from the Indian subcontinent and analyze linkage disequilibrium to estimate ANI-ASI mixture dates ranging from about 1,900 to 4,200 years ago. In a subset of groups, 100% of the mixture is consistent with having occurred during this period. These results show that India experienced a demographic transformation several thousand years ago, from a region in which major population mixture was common to one in which mixture even between closely related groups became rare because of a shift to endogamy.
--Priya Moorjani
Genetic Evidence for Recent Population Mixture in India
The American Journal of Human Genetics, Volume 93, Issue 3, 422-438, 08 August 2013
The dates conform to the dates for the Indo-European invasion of India. The Indo-Aryan Indians used painted grey ware.
.
Yes, it does. Whereas other studies dispute this invasion.
Here is an old study. From the same region. Not directly related to the issue. Never the less it's interesting. It gives explanation to the intrusion into Africa, from the Levant.
quote: ABSTRACT: The genetic profile of Palestinians has, for the first time, been studied by using human leukocyte antigen (HLA) gene variability and haplotypes. The comparison with other Mediterranean populations by using neighbor-joining dendrograms and correspondence analyses reveal that Palestinians are genetically very close to Jews and other Middle East populations, including Turks (Anatolians), Lebanese, Egyptians, Armenians and Iranians. Archaeologic and genetic data support that both Jews and Palestinians came from the ancient Canaanites, who extensively mixed with Egyptians, Mesopotamian and Anatolian peoples in ancient times.
Thus, Palestinian- Jewish rivalry is based in cultural and religious, but not in genetic, differences.
The relatively close relatedness of both Jews and Palestinians to western Mediterranean populations reflects the continuous circum-Mediterranean cultural and gene flow that have occurred in prehistoric and historic times. This flow overtly contradicts the demic diffusion model of western Mediterranean populations substitution by agriculturalists coming from the Middle East in the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition. Human Immunology 62, 889-900 (2001). ã American Society for Histocompatibility and Immunogenetics, 2001. Published by Elsevier Sciece Inc.
[...]
During the second millennium BC, Egyptian hegemony and Canaanite autonomy were constantly challenged by such ethnically diverse invaders as the Amorites, Hittites, and Hurrians from Anatolia and the East. These invaders, however, were defeated by the Egyptians and absorbed by the Canaanites, who at that time may have numbered about 200,000. Egyptian power began to weaken, and new invaders or autochthonous people appeared or made themselves noticeable [4].
[...]
By 1500-1200 BC the Greek presence was very scarce in Canaan, according to archaeologic records [6]. In fact, the “Mycaenian” Greeks attacked Crete by 1450 BC after rendering tributes to Cretans by a relatively long period.
The Cretan Aegean Sea empire was destroyed and continued by the Mycaenians. Greeks are found to have a substantial HLA gene flow from sub-Saharan Ethiopian and Black people [3,20]. This is why Greeks are Mediterranean outliers in all kind of analyses [19-21,28]. This African genetic and cultural input was documented by Herodotus [33] who states that the daughters of Danaus (who were black) came from Egypt in great numbers to settle in Greece. Also, ancient Greeks believed that their religion and culture came from Egypt [33]. An explanation of the Egypt-to-Greece migration may be that a densely populated Sahara (before 5000 BC) may have contained an admixture of Negroid and Caucasoid populations, and some of the Negroid populations may have migrated by chance or unknown causes towards present day Greece [19,34-36].
This could have occurred when hyperarid Saharan condition become established and large-scale migration occurred in all directions out from the desert. In this case, the most ancient Greek Pelasgian substratum would come from a Negroid stock. A more likely explanation is that at an undetermined time during Egyptian pharaonic times a Black dynasty with their followers were expelled and went towards Greece where they settled [20, 30].
Once an African input to the ancient Greek genetic pool is established, it remains to be determined what the cultural importance of this input is for constructing the classical Hellenistic culture. The reason why a sub- Saharan admixture is not seen in Crete is unclear but may be related to the influential and strong Minoan empire, which hindered foreigners establishment if the African invasion occurred in Minoan times [19, 20].
--Antonio Arnaiz-Villena et al.
The Origin of Palestinians and Their Genetic Relatedness With Other Mediterranean Populations
quote:Originally posted by GOMTUU: The Myth of the Aryan Invasion of India.http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_history/ancient/aryan/aryan_frawley.html
Yes, I know that one.
Then we have this:
The Aryan Invasion Theory is False - Genetic Evidence
No trace of “demographic disruption” in the North-West of the subcontinent between 4500 and 800 BCE; this negates the possibility of any massive intrusion, by so-called Indo-Aryans or other populations, during that period.
Deep late Pleistocene genetic link between contemporary Europeans and Indians, provided by the mtDNA haplogroup U, which encompasses roughly a fifth of mtDNA lineages of both populations. Our estimate for this split [between Europeans and Indians] is close to the suggested time for the peopling of Asia and the first expansion of anatomically modern humans in Eurasia and likely pre-dates their spread to Europe.”
Haplogroup U, being common to North Indian and “Caucasoid” populations, was found in tribes of eastern India such as the Lodhas and Santals, which would not be the case if it had been introduced through Indo-Aryans. Such is also the case of the haplogroup M, another marker frequently mentioned in the early literature as evidence of an invasion: in reality, haplogroup M occurs with a high frequency, averaging about 60%, across most Indian population groups, irrespective of geographical location of habitat. Tribal populations have higher frequencies of haplogroup M than caste populations.”
- U.S. anthropologists Kenneth Kennedy, John Lukacs and Brian Hemphill.
Migrations into India “did occur, but rarely from western Eurasian populations.” There are low frequencies of the western Eurasian mtDNA types in both southern and northern India. Thus, the ‘caucasoid’ features of south Asians may best be considered ‘pre-caucasoid’ — that is, part of a diverse north or north-east African gene pool that yielded separate origins for western Eurasian and southern Asian populations over 50,000 years ago.
- U.S. biological anthropologist Todd R. Disotell.
There is a fundamental unity of mtDNA lineages in India, in spite of the extensive cultural and linguistic diversity, pointing to a relatively small founding group of females in India. Most of the mtDNA diversity observed in Indian populations is between individuals within populations; there is no significant structuring of haplotype diversity by socio-religious affiliation, geographical location of habitat or linguistic affiliation.
- Scientists Susanta Roychoudhury and thirteen others studying 644 samples of mtDNA from ten Indian ethnic groups.
mtDNA haplogroup “M” common to India (with a frequency of 60%), Central and Eastern Asia (40% on average), and even to American Indians; however, this frequency drops to 0.6% in Europe, which is “inconsistent with the ‘general Caucasoidness’ of Indians.” This shows, once again, that “the Indian maternal gene pool has come largely through an autochthonous history since the Late Pleistocene.” U haplogroup frequency 13% in India, almost 14% in North-West Africa, and 24% from Europe to Anatolia. “Indian and western Eurasian haplogroup U varieties differ profoundly; the split has occurred about as early as the split between the Indian and eastern Asian haplogroup M varieties. The data show that both M and U exhibited an expansion phase some 50,000 years ago, which should have happened after the corresponding splits.” In other words, there is a genetic connection between India and Europe, but a far more ancient one than was thought.
If one were to extend methodology used to suggest an Aryan invasion based on Y-Dna statistics to populations of Eastern and Southern India, one would be led to an exactly opposite result: “the straightforward suggestion would be that both Neolithic (agriculture) and Indo-European languages arose in India and from there, spread to Europe.” The authors do not defend this thesis, but simply guard against “misleading interpretations” based on limited samples and faulty methodology.
The Chenchu tribe is genetically close to several castes, there is a “lack of clear distinction between Indian castes and tribes.
- Twenty authors headed by Kivisild - Archaeogenetics of Europe - 2000.
“Language families present today in India, such as Indo-European, Dravidic and Austro-Asiatic, are all much younger than the majority of indigenous mtDNA lineages found among their present-day speakers at high frequencies. It would make it highly speculative to infer, from the extant mtDNA pools of their speakers, whether one of the linguistically defined groups in India should be considered more ‘autochthonous’ than any other in respect of its presence in the subcontinent.”
- Mait Metspalu and fifteen co-authors analyzing 796 Indian and 436 Iranian mtDNAs. 2001.
Geneticist Toomas Kivisild led a study (2003) in which comparisons of the diversity of R1a1 (R-M17) haplogroup in Indian, Pakistani, Iranian, Central Asian, Czech and Estonian populations. The study showed that the diversity of R1a1 in India, Pakistan, and Iran, is higher than in Czechs (40%), and Estonians[12].
Kivisild came to the conclusion that "southern and western Asia might be the source of this haplogroup": "Haplogroup R1a, previously associated with the putative Indo-Aryan invasion, was found at its highest frequency in Punjab but also at a relatively high frequency (26%) in the Chenchu tribe. This finding, together with the higher R1a-associated short tandem repeat diversity in India and Iran compared with Europe and central Asia, suggests that southern and western Asia might be the source of this haplogroup".[12]
“Given the geographic spread and STR diversities of sister clades R1 and R2, the latter of which is restricted to India, Pakistan, Iran, and southern central Asia, it is possible that southern and western Asia were the source for R1 and R1a differentiation.”
- Kivilsid - 2003
Based on 728 samples covering 36 Indian populations, it announced in its very title how its findings revealed a “Minor Genetic Influence of Central Asian Pastoralists,” i.e. of the Indo-Aryans, and stated its general agreement with the previous study. For instance, the authors rejected the identification of some Y-DNA genetic markers with an “Indo-European expansion,” an identification they called “convenient but incorrect ... overly simplistic.” To them, the subcontinent’s genetic landscape was formed much earlier than the dates proposed for an Indo-Aryan immigration: “The influence of Central Asia on the pre-existing gene pool was minor. ... There is no evidence whatsoever to conclude that Central Asia has been necessarily the recent donor and not the receptor of the R1a lineages.”
“Dravidian” authorship of the Indus-Sarasvati civilization rejected indirectly, since it noted, “Our data are also more consistent with a peninsular origin of Dravidian speakers than a source with proximity to the Indus....” They found, in conclusion, “overwhelming support for an Indian origin of Dravidian speakers.”
The frequencies of R2 seems to mirror the frequencies of R1a (i.e. both lineages are strong and weak in the same social and linguistic subgroups). This may indicate that both R1a and R2 moved into India at roughly the same time or co-habited, although more research is needed. R2 is very rare in Europe.
Sanghamitra Sengupta, L. Cavalli-Sforza, Partha P. Majumder, and P. A. Underhill. - 2006.
“The sharing of some Y-chromosomal haplogroups between Indian and Central Asian populations is most parsimoniously explained by a deep, common ancestry between the two regions, with diffusion of some Indian-specific lineages northward.”
“The Y-chromosomal data consistently suggest a largely South Asian origin for Indian caste communities and therefore argue against any major influx, from regions north and west of India, of people associated either with the development of agriculture or the spread of the Indo-Aryan language family.”
“Southern castes and tribals are very similar to each other in their Y-chromosomal haplogroup compositions.” As a result, “it was not possible to confirm any of the purported differentiations between the caste and tribal pools,” a conclusion that directly clashes with the Aryan invasion theory which purports that male European Aryans chased tribal adivasis and aboriginals down south.
Sanghamitra Sahoo, T. Kivisild and V. K. Kashyap. - 2006.
When Homo sapiens migrated out of Africa, he first reached South-West Asia around 75,000 BP, and from here, went on to other parts of the world. In simple terms, except for Africans, all humans have ancestors in the North-West of the Indian peninsula. In particular, one migration started around 50,000 BP towards the Middle East and Western Europe: “indeed, nearly all Europeans — and by extension, many Americans — can trace their ancestors to only four mtDNA lines, which appeared between 10,000 and 50,000 years ago and originated from South Asia.”
-Lluís Quintana-Murci,Vincent Macaulay,Stephen Oppenheimer,Michael Petraglia,and their associates
“For me and for Toomas Kivisild, South Asia is logically the ultimate origin of M17(Y-DNA Haplogroup R1a, associated with the male Aryan invasion theory) and his ancestors; and sure enough we find the highest rates and greatest diversity of the M17 line in Pakistan, India, and eastern Iran, and low rates in the Caucasus. M17 is not only more diverse in South Asia than in Central Asia, but diversity characterizes its presence in isolated tribal groups in the south, thus undermining any theory of M17 as a marker of a ‘male Aryan invasion’ of India. One average estimate for the origin of this line in India is as much as 51,000 years. All this suggests that M17 could have found his way initially from India or Pakistan, through Kashmir, then via Central Asia and Russia, before finally coming into Europe.”
-Stephen Oppenheimer
A (2009) study headed by geneticist Swarkar Sharma, collated information for 2809 Indians (681 Brahmins, and 2128 tribals and schedule castes). The results showed "no consistent pattern of the exclusive presence and distribution of Y-haplogroups to distinguish the higher-most caste, Brahmins, from the lower-most ones, schedule castes and tribals". Brahmins from West Bengal showed the highest frequency (72.22%) of Y-haplogroups R1a1* hinting that it may have been a founder lineage for this caste group. The authors found it significant that the Saharia tribe of Madhya Pradesh had not only 28.07% R1a1, but also 22.8% R1a*, out of 57 people, with such a high percentage of R1a* never having been found before. Based on STR variance the estimated age of R1a* in India was 18,478 years, and for R1a1 it was 13,768 years.
In its conclusions the study proposed "the autochthonous origin and tribal links of Indian Brahmins" as well as "the origin of R1a1* ... in the Indian subcontinent".
S. Sharma, argued for an Indian origin of R1a1 lineage among Brahmins, by pointing out the highest incidence of R1a*, ancestral clade to R1a1, among Kashmiri Pandits (Brahmins) and Saharias, an Indian tribe. - Sharma et al 2009
"This paper rewrites history... there is no north-south divide." "There is no truth to the Aryan-Dravidian theory as they came hundreds or thousands of years after the ancestral north and south Indians had settled in India."
The study analysed 500,000 genetic markers across the genomes of 132 individuals from 25 diverse groups from 13 states. All the individuals were from six-language families and traditionally upper and lower castes and tribal groups. "The genetics proves that castes grew directly out of tribe-like organizations during the formation of the Indian society."
"Impossible to distinguish between castes and tribes since their genetics proved they were not systematically different." The present-day Indian population is a mix of ancient north and south bearing the genomic contributions from two distinct ancestral populations - the Ancestral North Indian (ANI) and the Ancestral South Indian (ASI).
"The initial settlement took place 65,000 years ago in the Andamans and in ancient south India around the same time, which led to population growth in this part,'' said Thangarajan. He added, "At a later stage, 40,000 years ago, the ancient north Indians emerged which in turn led to rise in numbers here. But at some point of time, the ancient north and the ancient south mixed, giving birth to a different set of population. And that is the population which exists now and there is a genetic relationship between the population within India."
The study also helps understand why the incidence of genetic diseases among Indians is different from the rest of the world. Singh said that 70% of Indians were burdened with genetic disorders and the study could help answer why certain conditions restricted themselves to one population. For instance, breast cancer among Parsi women, motor neuron diseases among residents of Tirupati and Chittoor, or sickle cell anaemia among certain tribes in central India and the North-East can now be understood better, said researchers.
The researchers, who are now keen on exploring whether Eurasians descended from ANI, find in their study that ANIs are related to western Eurasians, while the ASIs do not share any similarity with any other population across the world. Thangaraj and Singh at a press conference.
"Reconstructing Indian Population History" - David Reich, Kumarasamy Thangaraj, Nick Patterson, Alkes L. Price & Lalji Singh - 2009
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: What do you make a this?
Swenet, I already had it posted earlier on. In this thread.
In their opening statement they start with:
quote: Most Indian groups descend from a mixture of two genetically divergent populations: Ancestral North Indians (ANI) related to Central Asians, Middle Easterners, Caucasians, and Europeans; and Ancestral South Indians (ASI) not closely related to groups outside the subcontinent.
The date of mixture is unknown but has implications for understanding Indian history.
Here is what is being said in a source, published in the: European Journal of Human Genetics (2003) 11, 253–264
quote:The Indian mtDNA gene pool appears to be more closely related to the east Eurasian gene pool (including central, east and southeast Asian populations) than the west Eurasian one (including European and Caucasian populations).
This is in a paper published by: Eur J Hum Genet. 2011 January; 19(1): 95–101.
quote: Major R1b Founder Effect in West Europe
R1b-M412 appears to be the most common Y-chromosome haplogroup in Western Europe (>70%), while being virtually absent in the Near East, the Caucasus and West Asia (Figure 1f). Recent founder effects could explain why the M412-L11 assemblage of chromosomes is abundant and restricted to Western parts of Europe (Figure 1f and g).
--Natalie M Myres et al.
A major Y-chromosome haplogroup R1b Holocene era founder effect in Central and Western Europe
And we have: BJMG 11/2 (2008) 25-30 10.2478/v10034-008-0030-0
quote:Although it was not possible to determine a contribution of Neolithic farmers to the Caucasian gene pool, the principal component analysis showed clear differences between these populations and those of Europe, Siberia and Asia. No evidence of correlation between genetic and linguistic data in our populations was disclosed.
Armenians are a separate ethnic group, which originated from Neolithic tribes of the Armenian Uplands. In the 12th- 11th centuries BC...
However, we cannot exclude a Neolithic contribution to the contemporary gene pool. The possible reason for the absence of the frequency distribution gradient can be genetic drift, reinforced by isolation that could conceal the influence of Neolithic farmers on the Caucasus populations [1,21].
While an Alu insertion marker does not have enough power of resolution to assess the contribution of the influence of Neolithic farmers on the Caucasian gene pool, it clearly separates both South and North Caucasus populations (except Karanogays) from Siberian and Asian populations.
--Litvinov S*, Kutuev I, Yunusbayev B, Khusainova R, Valiev R, Khusnutdinova E
ALU INSERTION POLYMORPHISMS IN POPULATIONS OF THE SOUTH CAUCASUS
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Stringer/Nat Geo 2011
quote:Originally posted by lamin: That Stringer 2011 map is erroneous. Haplogroup analysis does not support a pre-Islamic movement from West Asia into Africa.
The map is also incomplete in that it does not show much of the intra-Africa continental movements. After all, humans were in Africa for more than 70% of the appearance of Homo Sapiens. That Africa map should therefore be denser with arrows than anywhere else in the world.
Haplogroup analysis DOES support a pre-Islamic movement from West Asia into Africa.
the map is not supposed to show intra-Africa continental movements. It's an Out of Africa map And it is alos focused on the Peopling of Eurasia as the subtitle on the map indicates
This map illustates the thread theme> a relation between Indians and Mesopotamians
The movement on that map seems odd, if you're trying to couple it with the spread of India, ancient Mesopotamia and North Africa at the same time.
Anyway, the most likely candite group to enter, I think, are Gypsy people. These people are from a India dispersal. However, it is being said that they entered Central Europe recently.
A Microsatellite Guided Insight into the Genetic Status of Adi, an Isolated Hunting-Gathering Tribe of Northeast India
S. Krithika, Suvendu Maji, T. S. Vasulu*
Biological Anthropology Unit, Indian Statistical Institute, Kolkata, India
Tibeto-Burman populations of India provide an insight into the peopling of India and aid in understanding their genetic relationship with populations of East, South and Southeast Asia. The study investigates the genetic status of one such Tibeto-Burman group, Adi of Arunachal Pradesh based on 15 autosomal microsatellite markers. Further the study examines, based on 9 common microsatellite loci, the genetic relationship of Adi with 16 other Tibeto-Burman speakers of India and 28 neighboring populations of East and Southeast Asia. Overall, the results support the recent formation of the Adi sub-tribes from a putative ancestral group and reveal that geographic contiguity is a major influencing factor of the genetic affinity among the Tibeto-Burman populations of India.
Its not a critique of the paper as much as it is an analysis of the ramifications of the paper, within the context of a long history of (pseudo) scientific writing on the subject. I've never bought into the idea that the Indo-Aryan invasion is a myth (even though the amount of academics that were jumping on on that bandwagon was staggering). Forget the complex Linguistic and Morphometric stuff; if you're an academic and you're able to look at the Adivasi people and the people in the Bollywood movies, and somehow come to the conclusion that they're a continuum of the same meta-population (like Northern and Southern Europeans), then clearly, there is something horribly wrong with you. Razib Khan cites an academic who takes this to the max and who is of the mindset that not just the Indo-Aryan migration, but the caste system is a recent construct as well, which goes to show how far some of these researchers are willing to go with their blatant denialism. Make no mistake about it, there are flat-earthers in science, too.
Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
It is sad to say but much of the push to claim that the Dravidians are indiginous to India, amd there was no Aryan invasion is an attempt by the Hindutva (Hindu Nationalist) to make it appear that Dravidians are not related to Africans and that ancient Dravidians were Aryan speakers and did not recently settle in India.
Most Indian geneticists are Hindutva so they use genetics to attempt to deny that the Aryan invasion was a reality and that the Dravidians did not found the Indus Civilization. As a result, they ignore or intentionally refuse to publish data showing Dravidians and Africns are related--but they are unble to keep all geneticist lying about the myth of unity between Indian population.
The problem the Hindutva has is that they cannot rewrite decades of archeological and linguistic evidence supporting the unity of Dravidian and African people.
Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: It is sad to say but much of the push to claim that the Dravidians are indiginous to India, amd there was no Aryan invasion is an attempt by the Hindutva (Hindu Nationalist) to make it appear that Dravidians are not related to Africans and that ancient Dravidians were Aryan speakers and did not recently settle in India.
Most Indian geneticists are Hindutva so they use genetics to attempt to deny that the Aryan invasion was a reality and that the Dravidians did not found the Indus Civilization. As a result, they ignore or intentionally refuse to publish data showing Dravidians and Africns are related--but they are unble to keep all geneticist lying about the myth of unity between Indian population.
The problem the Hindutva has is that they cannot rewrite decades of archeological and linguistic evidence supporting the unity of Dravidian and African people.
Refering to this quote from the study:
quote:The studied individuals [from ancient Mesopotamian sites in Syria] carried mtDNA haplotypes corresponding to the M4b1, M49 and/or M61 haplogroups, which are believed to have arisen in the area of the Indian subcontinent during the Upper Palaeolithic and are absent in people living today in Syria. However, these same haplogroups are present in people inhabiting today’s Tibet, Himalayas, India and Pakistan.
Are you saying the M4b1, M49 and/or M61 MtDNA haplogroups are haplogroups of African origin (post OOA of course, since all humans ultimately come from Africa, including indo-Aryan)? Those MtDNA hg seem to be rare in unadmixed African people.
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: Most Indian geneticists are Hindutva so they use genetics to attempt to deny that the Aryan invasion was a reality and that the Dravidians did not found the Indus Civilization.
Indeed. I do believe that the discomfort generated by the idea of highly civilized Indian aboriginals secretly plays a role in the staunch denialism of some of these proponents. After all, if the Aryan Invasion is not a myth, the creators of the Indus Valley complexes must be sought elsewhere. It certainly wouldn't have been the first time European ideologues and their lackeys concocted the presence of enlightened outside civilizing forces (who, for some reason always 'happen' to be molded in their image), to not have to deal with the distressing prospect of 'primitives' running the show, way before their ancestors did.
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: It is sad to say but much of the push to claim that the Dravidians are indiginous to India, amd there was no Aryan invasion is an attempt by the Hindutva (Hindu Nationalist) to make it appear that Dravidians are not related to Africans and that ancient Dravidians were Aryan speakers and did not recently settle in India.
Most Indian geneticists are Hindutva so they use genetics to attempt to deny that the Aryan invasion was a reality and that the Dravidians did not found the Indus Civilization. As a result, they ignore or intentionally refuse to publish data showing Dravidians and Africns are related--but they are unble to keep all geneticist lying about the myth of unity between Indian population.
The problem the Hindutva has is that they cannot rewrite decades of archeological and linguistic evidence supporting the unity of Dravidian and African people.
Refering to this quote from the study:
quote:The studied individuals [from ancient Mesopotamian sites in Syria] carried mtDNA haplotypes corresponding to the M4b1, M49 and/or M61 haplogroups, which are believed to have arisen in the area of the Indian subcontinent during the Upper Palaeolithic and are absent in people living today in Syria. However, these same haplogroups are present in people inhabiting today’s Tibet, Himalayas, India and Pakistan.
Are you saying the M4b1, M49 and/or M61 MtDNA haplogroups are haplogroups of African origin (post OOA of course, since all humans ultimately come from Africa, including indo-Aryan)? Those MtDNA hg seem to be rare in unadmixed African people.
I neither have heard of that before, but who knows? Could be Clyde has different sources for info.
quote: The presence of M haplogroup in Ethiopia, named M1, led to the proposal that haplogroup M originated in eastern Africa, approximately 60,000 years ago, and was carried towards Asia [34].
Macrohaplogroup M is ubiquitous in India and covers more than 70 per cent of the Indian mtDNA lineages [28], [36]–[38]. Recent studies on complete mtDNA sequences (~187) tried to resolve the phylogeny of Indian macrohaplogroup M. As a result, M2, M3, M4, M5, M6 [28], [36], [39]–[40], M18, M25 [38], M30, [41], M31 [42], [24] M33, M34, M35, M36, M37, M38, M39, M40 [22], M41, M42 [43], M43 [23], [44], M45 [45], [M48, M49, and M50 [46] haplogroups of M that was identified in India helped to a certain extent in understanding M genealogy in diversified Indian populations. In the above background, extensive sequencing of complete mtDNA of South Asia, particularly India, is essential for better understanding of the peopling of the non-African continents, and pathogenesis of diseases in various ethnic groups with different matrilineal backgrounds.
--Adimoolam Chandrasekar et al. 2009
Updating Phylogeny of Mitochondrial DNA Macrohaplogroup M in India: Dispersal of Modern Human in South Asian Corridor
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Indeed. I do believe that the discomfort generated by the idea of highly civilized Indian aboriginals secretly plays a role in the staunch denialism of some of these proponents. After all, if the Aryan Invasion is not a myth, the creators of the Indus Valley complexes must be sought elsewhere. It certainly wouldn't have been the first time European ideologues and their lackeys concocted the presence of enlightened outside civilizing forces (who, for some reason always 'happen' to be molded in their image), to not have to deal with the distressing prospect of 'primitives' running the show, way before their ancestors did.
I believe the fundamental discomfort here comes from the fact that a barbarous light-skinned people (the Aryans) conquered and oppressed a dark-skinned civilization (the Indus Valley dudes) and that Hinduism as a belief system has its foundation in this oppression. That image isn't very flattering to upper-caste Hindus for obvious reasons.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
It is sad to say but much of the push to claim that the Dravidians are indigenous to India.....
what is your evidence that the Dravidians are not indigenous to India? If they are immigrants to India when did they come there?
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Truthcentric:
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Indeed. I do believe that the discomfort generated by the idea of highly civilized Indian aboriginals secretly plays a role in the staunch denialism of some of these proponents. After all, if the Aryan Invasion is not a myth, the creators of the Indus Valley complexes must be sought elsewhere. It certainly wouldn't have been the first time European ideologues and their lackeys concocted the presence of enlightened outside civilizing forces (who, for some reason always 'happen' to be molded in their image), to not have to deal with the distressing prospect of 'primitives' running the show, way before their ancestors did.
I believe the fundamental discomfort here comes from the fact that a barbarous light-skinned people (the Aryans) conquered and oppressed a dark-skinned civilization (the Indus Valley dudes) and that Hinduism as a belief system has its foundation in this oppression. That image isn't very flattering to upper-caste Hindus for obvious reasons.
Various Hindu people say that Aryan is a culture, nothing ethnic. I've heard many denounce the "race" claim.
Posted by Tukuler (Member # 19944) on :
Yes, this is cloudy. Some Indians say the old translations of the Vedas is corrupt when it comes to Aryas and Dasu because the Euros wanted to read their supposed ancestors into the record.
I have read of black Aryans (nobles) but the Veda xlations make the wars a white vs black thing with Indra aiding his white friends and Dasyu described as noseless (low or no bridge).
Thing is are Indians in the west going to tell the truth or deliver face saving PC? Does the code of Manu in fact state that something is odd when a Brahmin is black and a Sudra is white?
I don't think "white" dominance in India can be attributed to the British since it seems too ingrained in the society.
Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
It is sad to say but much of the push to claim that the Dravidians are indigenous to India.....
what is your evidence that the Dravidians are not indigenous to India? If they are immigrants to India when did they come there?
Dravidians related to C-Group, research of B.B. Lal. They arrived in Indus Valley 2800BC.
The came to South India after migrating from Indus Valley, or they crossed into S. India via Kumarinadu.
Clyde the the Indus Valley Civilization aka Harappan is considered to have begun 3300 BC thats 500 years earlier but the roots of it are said to go back 7000 BC
Early Food Producing Era (Neolithic) 7000-5500 Mehrgarh I (aceramic Neolithic) 5500-3300 Mehrgarh II-VI (ceramic Neolithic)
Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate:
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: It is sad to say but much of the push to claim that the Dravidians are indiginous to India, amd there was no Aryan invasion is an attempt by the Hindutva (Hindu Nationalist) to make it appear that Dravidians are not related to Africans and that ancient Dravidians were Aryan speakers and did not recently settle in India.
Most Indian geneticists are Hindutva so they use genetics to attempt to deny that the Aryan invasion was a reality and that the Dravidians did not found the Indus Civilization. As a result, they ignore or intentionally refuse to publish data showing Dravidians and Africns are related--but they are unble to keep all geneticist lying about the myth of unity between Indian population.
The problem the Hindutva has is that they cannot rewrite decades of archeological and linguistic evidence supporting the unity of Dravidian and African people.
Refering to this quote from the study:
quote:The studied individuals [from ancient Mesopotamian sites in Syria] carried mtDNA haplotypes corresponding to the M4b1, M49 and/or M61 haplogroups, which are believed to have arisen in the area of the Indian subcontinent during the Upper Palaeolithic and are absent in people living today in Syria. However, these same haplogroups are present in people inhabiting today’s Tibet, Himalayas, India and Pakistan.
Are you saying the M4b1, M49 and/or M61 MtDNA haplogroups are haplogroups of African origin (post OOA of course, since all humans ultimately come from Africa, including indo-Aryan)? Those MtDNA hg seem to be rare in unadmixed African people.
No. I am saying that they don't prove a relation between Dravidian and Mesopotamians.
Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Clyde the the Indus Valley Civilization aka Harappan is considered to have begun 3300 BC thats 500 years earlier but the roots of it are said to go back 7000 BC
Early Food Producing Era (Neolithic) 7000-5500 Mehrgarh I (aceramic Neolithic) 5500-3300 Mehrgarh II-VI (ceramic Neolithic)
The IVC did not begin 3000BC. Mehrgrh and IVC two different civilizations.
Posted by TRUTH HITMAN (Member # 19500) on :
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
It is sad to say but much of the push to claim that the Dravidians are indigenous to India.....
what is your evidence that the Dravidians are not indigenous to India? If they are immigrants to India when did they come there?
Dravidians related to C-Group, research of B.B. Lal. They arrived in Indus Valley 2800BC.
The came to South India after migrating from Indus Valley, or they crossed into S. India via Kumarinadu.
Good to meet with you Clyde I have a question for you about the Dravidians I have been reading books on Hebrew migrations all over Earth I came accross this book
On page 133 fishberg discusses Black Jews in India
Quote:
p 133
"The black Jews are of a totally different type. Schmidt observed that the colour of their skin is of various shadings, ranging from fair, like that of the European Jews, to dark, like that of the Dravidians, among whom they live."-------The Jews: a study of race and environment : Fishberg, Maurice
So according to Fishberg and Schmidt these BLACK HEBREWS look like the Dravidians that they live around.
He further stated
"Most of the black Jews are hardly to be distinguished from the native Hindus living on the Malabar coast"--------The Jews: a study of race and environment : Fishberg, Maurice
So Black Hebrews look just like hindus Dark skin
Now the Hebrew Historian Josephus quoted a man named Clearchus of Soli who mentioned a Hebrew people called "Calami" in India
Quote - "Jews are derived from the Indian philosophers; they are named by the Indians Calami, and by the Syrians Judaei, and took their name from the country they inhabit, which is called Judea; but for the name of their city, it is a very awkward one, for they call it Jerusalem." Josephus, Contra Apionem, I, 22.
So there is written EVIDENCE that a HEBREW PEOPLE called by Indians "Calami" lived in India
Also According to Josephus Hebrew tribes existed in India during the time of Rome.
CHAPTER 5. Josephus Antiquity of Jews book 11
HOW XERXES THE SON OF DARIUS WAS WELL DISPOSED TO THE JEWS; AS ALSO CONCERNING ESDRAS AND NEHEMIAH,
"The entire body of the people of Israel remained in that country; wherefore there are but two tribes in Asia and Europe subject to the Romans, while the ten tribes are beyond Euphrates till now, and are an immense multitude, and not to be estimated by numbers"
So black Hebrews lived in Asia
So my question is How do you know that the Dravidians are not descendants of exiled Hebrews?
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Clyde the the Indus Valley Civilization aka Harappan is considered to have begun 3300 BC thats 500 years earlier but the roots of it are said to go back 7000 BC
Early Food Producing Era (Neolithic) 7000-5500 Mehrgarh I (aceramic Neolithic) 5500-3300 Mehrgarh II-VI (ceramic Neolithic)
The IVC did not begin 3000BC. Mehrgrh and IVC two different civilizations.
OK fine
you said
"Dravidians related to C-Group, research of B.B. Lal. They arrived in Indus Valley 2800BC."
Then were the people at Mehrgarh indigenous Indians?
Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
quote:Originally posted by TRUTH HITMAN:
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
It is sad to say but much of the push to claim that the Dravidians are indigenous to India.....
what is your evidence that the Dravidians are not indigenous to India? If they are immigrants to India when did they come there?
Dravidians related to C-Group, research of B.B. Lal. They arrived in Indus Valley 2800BC.
The came to South India after migrating from Indus Valley, or they crossed into S. India via Kumarinadu.
Good to meet with you Clyde I have a question for you about the Dravidians I have been reading books on Hebrew migrations all over Earth I came accross this book
On page 133 fishberg discusses Black Jews in India
Quote:
p 133
"The black Jews are of a totally different type. Schmidt observed that the colour of their skin is of various shadings, ranging from fair, like that of the European Jews, to dark, like that of the Dravidians, among whom they live."-------The Jews: a study of race and environment : Fishberg, Maurice
So according to Fishberg and Schmidt these BLACK HEBREWS look like the Dravidians that they live around.
He further stated
"Most of the black Jews are hardly to be distinguished from the native Hindus living on the Malabar coast"--------The Jews: a study of race and environment : Fishberg, Maurice
So Black Hebrews look just like hindus Dark skin
Now the Hebrew Historian Josephus quoted a man named Clearchus of Soli who mentioned a Hebrew people called "Calami" in India
Quote - "Jews are derived from the Indian philosophers; they are named by the Indians Calami, and by the Syrians Judaei, and took their name from the country they inhabit, which is called Judea; but for the name of their city, it is a very awkward one, for they call it Jerusalem." Josephus, Contra Apionem, I, 22.
So there is written EVIDENCE that a HEBREW PEOPLE called by Indians "Calami" lived in India
Also According to Josephus Hebrew tribes existed in India during the time of Rome.
CHAPTER 5. Josephus Antiquity of Jews book 11
HOW XERXES THE SON OF DARIUS WAS WELL DISPOSED TO THE JEWS; AS ALSO CONCERNING ESDRAS AND NEHEMIAH,
"The entire body of the people of Israel remained in that country; wherefore there are but two tribes in Asia and Europe subject to the Romans, while the ten tribes are beyond Euphrates till now, and are an immense multitude, and not to be estimated by numbers"
So black Hebrews lived in Asia
So my question is How do you know that the Dravidians are not descendants of exiled Hebrews?
The Hebrews originated in Egypt. By the exodus of the Hebrews the Dravidians had already founded the South Indian megalithic, and Indus Valley civilizations. Also the Dravidian languages are not related to Hebrew.
.
Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Clyde the the Indus Valley Civilization aka Harappan is considered to have begun 3300 BC thats 500 years earlier but the roots of it are said to go back 7000 BC
Early Food Producing Era (Neolithic) 7000-5500 Mehrgarh I (aceramic Neolithic) 5500-3300 Mehrgarh II-VI (ceramic Neolithic)
The IVC did not begin 3000BC. Mehrgrh and IVC two different civilizations.
OK fine
you said
"Dravidians related to C-Group, research of B.B. Lal. They arrived in Indus Valley 2800BC."
Then were the people at Mehrgarh indigenous Indians?
Yes, they were Munda people.
In the sub-continent of India, there were several main groups. The earliest inhabitants of India were the Negritos, and this was followed by the Proto-Australoid, the Mongoloid and the KushitesDravidians). The Proto-Australoid race, Mongoloid race and Africoid/ Mediterranean skeletal remains were all found at Harappan sites. The Australoid people are a mixed group that combines the classical Mongoloid and pgymies. The speech of this group of Austroloids is believed to be Austric, a specimen of this language survives in the Munda speech.(Thapar 1972,p.26) The Africoid/Mediterranean group is associated with Dravidian culture. The Negritos founded the earliest culture in the Indus Valley at Mehrgarh in 6000 B.C. They had domesticated goats and sheep and grew cereals.
.
Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
The Dravidians and Mande began to migrate out of Africa by 2800BC. They were part of the C-Group. They first settled in Iran and from here expanded into Central Asia and the Indus Valley.
B.B. Lal ("The Only Asian expedition in threatened Nubia:Work by an Indian Mission at Afyeh and Tumas", The Illustrated London Times , 20 April 1963) and Indian Egyptologist has shown conclusively that the Dravidians originated in the Saharan area 5000 years ago. He claims they came from Kush, in the Fertile African Crescent and were related to the C-Group people who founded the Kerma dynasty in the 3rd millennium B.C. (Lal 1963) The Dravidians used a common black-and-red pottery, which spread from Nubia, through modern Ethiopia, Arabia, Iran into India as a result of the Proto-Saharan dispersal.
B.B. Lal (1963) a leading Indian archaeologist in India has observed that the black and red ware (BRW) dating to the Kerma dynasty of Nubia, is related to the Dravidian megalithic pottery. Singh (1982) believes that this pottery radiated from Nubia to India. This pottery along with wavy-line pottery is associated with the Saharo-Sudanese pottery tradition of ancient Africa . I call these people the Proto Saharans. I discuss their history here:
Aravaanan (1980) has written extensively on the African and Dravidian relations. He has illustrated that the Africans and Dravidian share many physical similarities including the dolichocephalic indexes (Aravaanan 1980,pp.62-263; Raceand History.com,2006), platyrrhine nasal index (Aravaanan 1980,pp.25-27), stature (31-32) and blood type (Aravaanan 1980,34-35; RaceandHistory.com,2006). Aravaanan (1980,p.40) also presented much evidence for analogous African and Dravidian cultural features including the chipping of incisor teeth and the use of the lost wax process to make bronze works of arts (Aravaanan 1980,p.41).
There are also similarities between the Dravidian and African religions. For example, both groups held a common interest in the cult of the Serpent and believed in a Supreme God, who lived in a place of peace and tranquility ( Thundy, p.87; J.T. Cornelius,"Are Dravidians Dynastic Egyptians", Trans. of the Archaeological Society of South India 1951-1957, pp.90-117; and U.P. Upadhyaya, "Dravidian and Negro-African", International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics 5, no.1) .
There are also affinities between the names of many gods including Amun/Amma and Murugan . Murugan the Dravidian god of the mountains parallels a common god in East Africa worshipped by 25 ethnic groups is called Murungu, the god who resides in the mountains .
Up until the South Indian megalithic period the Dravidians continued to use black-and-red ware and Libyco-Berber/Indus Valley writing. Under the influence of the Ethiopians the script changed into what it is today. The architecture of the Dravidians is an ornamented pyramid with statues and other featured added within the construction of the pyramid.
Lal BB. 1963. “The Only Asian Expedition in threatened Nubia: Work by an India Mission at Afyeh and Tumas”. The Illustrated Times, London 20 April.
Singh, H.N. 1982. History and archaeology of Blackand Red ware. Vedic Books.net: Manchester.
Indus Valley
Archaeological and linguistic evidence indicates that the Dravidians were the founders of the Harappan culture which extended from the Indus Valley through northeastern Afghanistan, on into Turkestan. The Harappan civilization existed from 2600-1700 B.C. The Harappan civilization was twice the size the Old Kingdom of Egypt. In addition to trade relations with Mesopotamia and Iran, the Harappan city states also had active trade relations with the Central Asian peoples.(Winters 1990) Fairservis (1975) makes it clear that early cultures of Baluchistan are analogous to Early Dynastic Sumerian, this movement eastward of the ancient Kushites led to the rise of the Indus cultures. The Sumerians probably called the Indus Valley Dilmun. Dilmun was a rich trade center that provided Sumer with many valuable trade items.
There is physical evidence which suggest an African origin for the Dravidians. The Dravidians live in South India. The Dravidian ethnic group includes the Tamil, Kurukh,Malayalam, Kananda (Kanarese), Tulu, Telugu and etc. The civilization here is called the megalithic, The ancient Indo-Aryan writings make it clear that the Indians were dark-skinned (varna) and had flat noses. (Durant 1935, p.396) This fact is supported by the Ali Tiraavitar (Old Dravidians) who are black as their African brothers with a difference in hair texture. In ancient Tamil poems they are described as mamai (black). In addition, the ancient Dravidians practiced a matriarchal system in Kerala and South Kanara.
In addition among the ali tiravitar, the system of inheritance passes from the uncle to his nephews, instead of to his sons (maru makkal Tayam) as in Africa. And in both South India and the Western Sudan of Africa, the dead were buried in terra cotta jars.
Dravidians used red-and Black pottery. They cultivated millet.
. All Indians are not Black. You may be able to classify the Dravidian and Munda people as Black.
There is mtDNA data uniting Africans and Dravidians.
Can Parallel Mutation and neutral genome selection explain Eastern African M1 consensus HVS-1 motifs in Indian M haplogroup http://www.bioline.org.br/pdf?hg07022
The most interesting fact about this evidence is that the Dravidian language is closely related to the Niger-Congo group. There are other linguistic groups that separate the Niger-Congo speakers from the Dravidians. The fact that they are genetically related indicates that the Dravidians recently came to India.
Reich et al, Reconstructing Indian population history, Nature 461:489-494 claims that the Indian Cline divides Indians into two groups Ancestral North Indians (ANI) and Ancestral South Indians (ASI).
The ANI are related to western Eurasians and speak Indo-Euopean languages. The ASI on the otherhand speak Dravidian languages. This genetic data clearly divides the North and South Indians, and supports AIT; and the replacement of an original Dravidian speaking people in the north by the invading Indo-European speaking Vedic people.
After the Hittites defeated the Hatti and Kaska and other peoples belonging to the Hurrian and Mitanni kingdoms, these people were uprooted and forced into Iran. The lost of Anatolia to the Hittites, probably forced these people to become nomads.
In Iran they probably formed a significant portion of the Proto-Arya population. Here they may have met Indo-Iranian speaking people,who may have practiced a hunter-gatherer existence, that adopted aspects of their culture , especially the religion and use of Mitanni religious terms and chariot culture. Joining forces with the Mitannian-Hurrian exiles they probably attacked Dravidian and Austronesian speaking people who probably lived in walled cities. The Austronesian and Dravidian people probably came in intimate contact during the Xia and Shang periods of China.
I have to reject the Afghanistan origin for the Indo-Iranian speaking people because the cultures there in ancient times show no affinity to Indo-European civilization. Given the Austronesian and Dravidian elements in Sanskrit and etc., I would have to date the expansion of the Indo-Aryan people sometime after 800 BC, across Iran, India down into Afghanistan, since the Austro-asiatic people speaking languages related to Southeast Asian groups probably did not begin to enter India until after the fall of the Anyang Shang Dynasty sometime after 1000 BC.
This would explain why "the Vedic and Avestan mantras are not carbon copies of each other", they may have had a similar genesis, but they were nativised by different groups of Indic and Iranian speakers after the settlement of nomadic Hurrian and Mitanni people in Iran.
The Indo-Aryan speaking people became strong in India after 1000 B.C. The Aryans made the Dravidians and other native Indian people into slaves like the Munda. They organized a caste system based on race. The highest caste was based on the priesthood or Brahman, after him came the rajanya or warriors and aristocracy caste and then the craftsmen or Varsya caste, and lastly the Sudra caste, called pariah. The Sudra represented the first Black population that lived in India before the coming of the Indo-Aryans.
In the early Indian writings the aristocracy and warrior caste was referred too as rajanya. After the kshatriya conquered the Indo-Aryans, the warrior class was called Kshatriya.
The Brahmanic civilization lasted from the 3rd to the 4th centuries B.C. During this period the Laws of Manu were written.
The Laws of Manu became India's first civil and political code.
There were two Indo-Aryan migrations into India. The first waves of Indo-Aryans arrived from the Indo-Iranian borderlands when ecological conditions had improved.These Indo-Aryans began to settle areas formerly occupied by Dravidian-speaking Harappans.
As the Aryans moved southward other Dravidian-speaking groups living in isolated villages in the Punjab and Haryana, probably allowed Indo-Aryan tribal groups to settle in their respected urban centers. This would explain the association of BRW with PGW in the Punjab dating between 1000-1300 B.C.( Singh 1982, p.xli) It would also explain the mention of the highly developed civilization of the non-Indo-Aryan speakers in the Rg Veda.
The second and major wave of Indo-Aryans probably entered northern India around 1000-800 B.C. This would explain why almost all the dependable PGW dates cluster around 800-350 B.C.(Agrawal & Kusumgar 1974, p.132)
This corresponds to the research of --Priya Moorjani, Genetic Evidence for Recent Population Mixture in India, See:The American Journal of Human Genetics, Volume 93, Issue 3, 422-438, 08 August 2013
The dates for ANI admixture of Moorjani et al, conform to the dates for the Indo-European invasion of India. The Indo-Aryan Indians used painted grey ware.
By the advent of the second Indo-Aryan migration the Dravidians were weakened by drought and famine and they were easily defeated and pushed out of the Gajarat. The PGW folk appears to have pushed the Dravidians into the Dekkan.
Due to the early Dravidian presence in Northern India there is a Dravidian substratum in Indo-Aryan. There are Dravidian loan words in the Rg Veda, even though Aryan recorders of this work were situated in the Punjab, which was occupied around this time by the BRW using Dravidians.
Emeneau and Burrow (1962) have found 500 Dravidian loan words in Sanskrit. The Dravidian loans in Indo-Aryan are expected to reach 750.
Indo-Aryan languages illustrates widespread structural borrowing from Dravidian in addition to the lexical loans. For example, Kuiper (1967) has noted the increasing frequency of Dravidian type retroflex consonants in Indo-Aryan. Southward (1977) has also recorded the Dravidian structural features borrowed by the Indo-Aryans. .
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
Clyde takes over thread
Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Clyde takes over thread
Not really I am just answering the questions you asked. .
Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Clyde takes over thread
Not really I am just answering the questions you asked. .
It's well appreciated. Thank you. I don't know much about the history of this part of the world.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
no comment
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
quote:The studied individuals [from ancient Mesopotamian sites in Syria] carried mtDNA haplotypes corresponding to the M4b1, M49 and/or M61 haplogroups, which are believed to have arisen in the area of the Indian subcontinent during the Upper Palaeolithic and are absent in people living today in Syria. However, these same haplogroups are present in people inhabiting today’s Tibet, Himalayas, India and Pakistan.
Something I've already surmised based on cranial and linguistic evidence. Looks like the first civilizations were all developed by dark-skinned folk (not that it matters but this definitely shifts the dominant narrative).
Posted by xyyman (Member # 13597) on :
Indian migrants? I have reservation...because of the geographic proximity. More to come.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Indian migrants? I have reservation...because of the geographic proximity. More to come.
(note this map is Out of Africa only and doesn't show poulation migrataions inside Africa unless they pertain to migrations out of Africa, for example, along Nile river valley is not shown)
Here's another Out of Africa map which shows the same exist out of Africa from Ethiopia/Djbouti into Yemen, however it also shows a branch going up into Arabia as well as the Eastern branch to India. But if you look at what came first, humans in India or humans in Mesoptamia ( southern Iraq, Kuwait and parts of western Iran.) this map could support Mesopotamia before India, maybe. But the top green map shows India first, corresponding to the article
However Mespotamia is far ahead in time from early man and these maps may or may not be relevant if later migrations are involved, nevertheless you can see how early man migrations would have led to DNA of these regions overlapping
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Indian migrants? I have reservation...because of the geographic proximity. More to come.
Who ever said they migrated directly from India?
Posted by xyyman (Member # 13597) on :
This is what the author is implying. Check the headliner.
Anyways...Assuming the paper has been vetted...I will like to see a comparison between the haplogroups...Higher resolution to cross check the diversity and age between the sub-continent and the Levant area.
Double checking the OP. I came across one recent paper that tested aDNA of remains in the Levant circa 8000bc - 3000bc. Most haplogroups were H, HV* and ...West African L2a!!! Which makes more sense. In keeping with Arabian Peninsular/Levant area being a geographycal extension of Africa
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Indian migrants? I have reservation...because of the geographic proximity. More to come.
the fairly close proximity between these civilizations is what makes it plauisble
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Indian migrants? I have reservation...because of the geographic proximity. More to come.
the fairly close proximity between these civilizations is what makes it plauisble
Pseudo babble.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
fuck you, stop trolling
Posted by xyyman (Member # 13597) on :
Fernández E, Ortiz JE, Torres T, Pérez-Pérez A, Gamba C, et al. (2008) Mitochondrial DNA genetic relationships at the ancient Neolithic site of Tell Halula
Posted by xyyman (Member # 13597) on :
Researching aDNA in the Near east I came something on my fag boy Paabo.
Research on ancient DNA in the Near East Mateusz Baca(2008)
Quote: Population genetics based on aDNA studies
The first isolation of human DNA from an ancient specimen, which also happens to be linked to the Near East, occurred during the pre-PCR era when Pääbo (1985) cloned fragments of a DNA sequence from the brain tissue of an Egyptian mummy. However, the obtained sequence was most probably the result of contamination; regardless, this work paved the way for aDNA research.
Th re was a successful attempt to recover DNA from a 5300 year-old specimen from Israel (Agamy 2002). Th e obtained sequence was characterized by two polymorphic sites and its haplotype was different from those of the investigators. The results were not published except for in a conference abstract.
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: fuck you, stop trolling
I am agreement, stop the pseudo babble.
Posted by Sundjata (Member # 13096) on :
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: This is what the author is implying. Check the headliner.
No where in the "headliner" is this implied nor was precedence given to India. All that is implied or explicitly stated is that there's a genetic link between people on the Indian Subcontinent and Mesopotamia. It can just as well be the case that the populations diverged somewhere in the Middle East before each went their separate route.
"This may represent either that the individuals are descendants of migrants from much earlier times (Palaeolithic), spreading the clades of the macrohaplogroup M throughout Eurasia and founding regional Mesopotamian groups like that of Terqa, or they are from merchants moving along trade routes passing near or through the region."
Posted by IronLion (Member # 16412) on :
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Indian migrants? I have reservation...because of the geographic proximity. More to come.
the fairly close proximity between these civilizations is what makes it plauisble
Pseudo babble.
You are correct. All correct... Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
Basal M, N and R lineages are found along the trail described by the coastal migration hypothesis, independent of Indian migration. Hence, finding M lineages (assuming the paper is correct) elsewhere along this trail (e.g. Mesopotamia), doesn't mean Indians actually migrated there (although this IS possible due to strong ancient links with the Indus Valley). Again, assuming this paper is correct, it is revolutionary because indigenous basal M is generally absent in the Middle East. Many people intuitively oppose a black Egypt because they find it incredible that Ancient Egypt underwent such dramatic demographic changes. They go to Egypt, see the people and intuitively find it simpler to believe their was continuity. These mtDNA sequences, whether they're M or not, are rare in the Middle East and so they seem to mirror and add additional support to the so called 'Afro-centric' notion that that such monumental demographic changes are very plausible and may even be the rule rather than exception for ancient 'civilizations' that gradually became multi-cultural over time.
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by IronLion:
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Indian migrants? I have reservation...because of the geographic proximity. More to come.
the fairly close proximity between these civilizations is what makes it plauisble
Pseudo babble.
You are correct. All correct...
It may came off as being sarcastic. But I am serious.
quote: "Studies of human mtDNA genomes demonstrate that the root of the human phylogenetic tree occurs in Africa. Although two mtDNA lineages with an African origin (haplogroups M and N) were the progenitors of all non-African haplogroups, macrohaplogroup L (including haplogroups L0-L6) is limited to sub-Saharan Africa.
--Sarah A. Tishkoff, (2006). Whole-mtDNA Genome Sequence Analysis of Ancient African Lineages
quote: Although Haplogroup M differentiated soon after the out of Africa exit and it is widely distributed in Asia (east Asia and India) and Oceania, there is an interesting exception for one of its more than 40 sub-clades: M1.. Indeed this lineage is mainly limited to the African continent with peaks in the Horn of Africa."
--Paola Spinozzi, Alessandro Zironi . (2010). Origins as a Paradigm in the Sciences and in the Humanities. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. pp. 48-50
quote:“..the M1 presence in the Arabian peninsula signals a predominant East African influence since the Neolithic onwards.“
-- Petraglia, M and Rose, J (2010). The Evolution of Human Populations in Arabia:
Posted by Truthcentric (Member # 3735) on :
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Basal M, N and R lineages are found along the trail described by the coastal migration hypothesis, independent of Indian migration. Hence, finding M lineages (assuming the paper is correct) elsewhere along this trail (e.g. Mesopotamia), doesn't mean Indians actually migrated there (although this IS possible due to strong ancient links with the Indus Valley). Again, assuming this paper is correct, it is revolutionary because indigenous basal M is generally absent in the Middle East. Many people intuitively oppose a black Egypt because they find it incredible that Ancient Egypt underwent such dramatic demographic changes. They go to Egypt, see the people and intuitively find it simpler to believe their was continuity. These mtDNA sequences, whether they're M or not, are rare in the Middle East and so they seem to mirror and add additional support to the so called 'Afro-centric' notion that that such monumental demographic changes are very plausible and may even be the rule rather than exception for ancient 'civilizations' that gradually became multi-cultural over time.
That's precisely why this paper interests me. I personally don't care too much what ancient Mesopotamians looked like, but if they turn out to differ significantly in genetics from modern Middle Easterners, that shows that you can't use modern populations as a proxy for what people in a given area looked like 4,000 years ago.
Posted by IronLion (Member # 16412) on :
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol: It may came off as being sarcastic. But I am serious.
..:
Lionese is a loquacious dunce. I know that for years now... Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Basal M, N and R lineages are found along the trail described by the coastal migration hypothesis, independent of Indian migration. Hence, finding M lineages (assuming the paper is correct) elsewhere along this trail (e.g. Mesopotamia), doesn't mean Indians actually migrated there (although this IS possible due to strong ancient links with the Indus Valley). Again, assuming this paper is correct, it is revolutionary because indigenous basal M is generally absent in the Middle East. Many people intuitively oppose a black Egypt because they find it incredible that Ancient Egypt underwent such dramatic demographic changes. They go to Egypt, see the people and intuitively find it simpler to believe their was continuity. These mtDNA sequences, whether they're M or not, are rare in the Middle East and so they seem to mirror and add additional support to the so called 'Afro-centric' notion that that such monumental demographic changes are very plausible and may even be the rule rather than exception for ancient 'civilizations' that gradually became multi-cultural over time.
You've read the whole Moorjani article? They are discussing M much?
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Truthcentric:
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Basal M, N and R lineages are found along the trail described by the coastal migration hypothesis, independent of Indian migration. Hence, finding M lineages (assuming the paper is correct) elsewhere along this trail (e.g. Mesopotamia), doesn't mean Indians actually migrated there (although this IS possible due to strong ancient links with the Indus Valley). Again, assuming this paper is correct, it is revolutionary because indigenous basal M is generally absent in the Middle East. Many people intuitively oppose a black Egypt because they find it incredible that Ancient Egypt underwent such dramatic demographic changes. They go to Egypt, see the people and intuitively find it simpler to believe their was continuity. These mtDNA sequences, whether they're M or not, are rare in the Middle East and so they seem to mirror and add additional support to the so called 'Afro-centric' notion that that such monumental demographic changes are very plausible and may even be the rule rather than exception for ancient 'civilizations' that gradually became multi-cultural over time.
That's precisely why this paper interests me. I personally don't care too much what ancient Mesopotamians looked like, but if they turn out to differ significantly in genetics from modern Middle Easterners, that shows that you can't use modern populations as a proxy for what people in a given area looked like 4,000 years ago.
Yes, and this has been repeated many times over.
I even was called all kinds of names for pointing out that modern day populations in the Levant entered there recently.
That region has a turbulent history. As it still does.
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Basal M, N and R lineages are found along the trail described by the coastal migration hypothesis, independent of Indian migration. Hence, finding M lineages (assuming the paper is correct) elsewhere along this trail (e.g. Mesopotamia), doesn't mean Indians actually migrated there (although this IS possible due to strong ancient links with the Indus Valley). Again, assuming this paper is correct, it is revolutionary because indigenous basal M is generally absent in the Middle East. Many people intuitively oppose a black Egypt because they find it incredible that Ancient Egypt underwent such dramatic demographic changes. They go to Egypt, see the people and intuitively find it simpler to believe their was continuity. These mtDNA sequences, whether they're M or not, are rare in the Middle East and so they seem to mirror and add additional support to the so called 'Afro-centric' notion that that such monumental demographic changes are very plausible and may even be the rule rather than exception for ancient 'civilizations' that gradually became multi-cultural over time.
You've read the whole Moorjani article? They are discussing M much?
Yeah, this one is interesting too, despite of the inconsequentials:
Indian Siddis: African Descendants with Indian Admixture
Figure 3. Y-Chromosomal and mtDNA Haplogroups in Siddis(A) Y-chromosomal haplogroup frequencies in the populations analyzed. Abbreviations are as follows: SG, Siddis from Gujarat; CH, Charan; BH, Bharwad; SK, Siddis from Karnataka; MD, Medar; GV, Gram Vokkal; KR, Korova; and KV, Kare Vokkal. The African-specific B and E1b1a haplogroups in India were found exclusively among the Siddi population.(B) Distribution of mtDNA haplogroups in Siddis. Details of diagnostic mutations that define haplogroups are shown in Figure S5.
quote: The presence of Indian-specific sublineages of M and N (R and U, which include M2, M3, M5, M6, M33, M35, M39, M57, R8, R30, and U2 haplogroups) is indicative of recent admixture with indigenous Indian populations (Figure S5).26
quote: The Siddis (Afro-Indians) are a tribal population whose members live in coastal Karnataka, Gujarat, and in some parts of Andhra Pradesh. Historical records indicate that the Portuguese brought the Siddis to India from Africa about 300–500 years ago; however, there is little information about their more precise ancestral origins. Here, we perform a genome-wide survey to understand the population history of the Siddis. Using hundreds of thousands of autosomal markers, we show that they have inherited ancestry from Africans, Indians, and possibly Europeans (Portuguese). Additionally, analyses of the uniparental (Y-chromosomal and mitochondrial DNA) markers indicate that the Siddis trace their ancestry to Bantu speakers from sub-Saharan Africa. We estimate that the admixture between the African ancestors of the Siddis and neighboring South Asian groups probably occurred in the past eight generations (∼200 years ago), consistent with historical records.
priya Moorjani. Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
India’s Fragmented Society Was Once a Melting Pot
quote: “In India we celebrate the commonality of major differences,” wrote the celebrated author Shashi Tharoor about his native country. “We are a land of belonging rather than of blood.” Indeed, India’s 1.24-billion-strong population is one of the world’s most diverse, with 700 ethnic and language groups and possibly many more, depending on how they are counted. Today, most of these groups keep pretty much to themselves, only rarely marrying outsiders. But a new study concludes that several thousand years ago, the entire subcontinent underwent a period of massive intermarriage, shuffling its population’s genetic deck so thoroughly that it left clear traces—even in the genomes of today’s most isolated tribes.
In recent years, genetic studies of modern Indians have provided a host of new insights into the ancient history of this sprawling nation, which harbors nearly one-sixth of the world’s population. A key finding, reported in 2009 by a team led by geneticist David Reich of Harvard Medical School in Boston, was that most Indians today are descendants of two major population groups: Ancestral North Indians (ANI), who probably migrated into the subcontinent 8000 or more years ago from the Middle East, Central Asia, and Europe; and Ancestral South Indians (ASI), who were native to the region and had been there much longer. The study also showed that these two groups began to mix at some point in the past, although just when was not clear.
Reich and his colleagues teamed up with researchers from the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology in Hyderabad, India, to take a much closer look at the genetics of modern Indians. Using both newly generated and previously published genetic data from 571 people representing 73 ethnic and language groups, 71 from India and two from Pakistan (which prior to Indian independence from British rule in 1947 was considered part of India), the team analyzed the genetic differences among the subjects using several powerful statistical methods. The analysis included nearly 500,000 genetic markers on the subjects’ DNA.
The results, reported online today in The American Journal of Human Genetics, paint a complex picture: Beginning about 4200 years ago, ANI and ASI populations, which previously had kept mostly separate, began mating together, a flurry of intermarriage that probably lasted more than 2 millennia. Then, beginning about 1900 years ago or somewhat later, mating patterns shifted dramatically. Local populations became entrenched, eschewing intermarriage with other groups and adopting a cultural pattern of what researchers call endogamy, the practice of marrying only within an ethnic or social group.
“There was a major demographic transformation in India from a region where mixture was pervasive to one in which it is very rare because of a shift to endogamy,” says lead author Priya Moorjani, a geneticist at Harvard Medical School.
The traces of this alternating pattern can be clearly seen in the genomes of modern Indians today, the study finds. For example, the percentage of ANI ancestry ranges from a high of 71% in the Pathan ethnic group of northern India to a low of 17% in the Paniya group of southwest India, meaning that the degree of ancient admixture is still measurable and significant in even the most isolated and endogamous ethnic groups.
“The most remarkable aspect of the ANI-ASI mixture is how pervasive it was, in the sense that it has left its mark on nearly every group in India,” Moorjani and her co-workers write.
What accounts for this pattern? The team points out that the period of intermarriage overlaps with a time of huge social upheavals in India, including the collapse of the ancient Indus civilization—which thrived on the Indian subcontinent between about 2600 B.C.E. and 1900 B.C.E.—as well as large-scale population movements and the rise of the Vedic religion, the predecessor of modern Hinduism. But after 1900 years ago, India’s caste system became a major cultural force, the team concludes, based on its new genetic findings and confirmed by evidence from ancient religious texts. The system rigidly defined four social classes, with the Brahmans at the top and the Sudras at the bottom. Intermarriage was not allowed between them. The Rig-Veda, India’s oldest surviving text and a founding document of ancient Hinduism, does not mention the caste system in its earliest sections, probably written some 3000 years ago; only much later are references to it found.
“The bulk of the Rig-Veda describes a society in which there is substantial movement among groups,” Moorjani points out. The four-caste system is only mentioned in an appendix written much later, she says, consistent with the genetic evidence.
The study is “carefully and cautiously crafted,” says Toomas Kivisild, a population geneticist at the University of Cambridge in the United Kingdom, and has “major significance for understanding the complex demographic processes in India that led to the endogamous rules of the caste system.”
Lynn Jorde, a geneticist at the University of Utah in Salt Lake City, calls the results “intriguing,” but cautions that they need to be confirmed with a larger number of samples from even more regions of the Indian subcontinent, as well as with the use of complete DNA sequences from the entire genomes of all the individuals studied.
The team agrees that more needs to be done and suggests that ancient DNA studies of prehistoric burials—which would give scientists a finer grained picture of population mixing in the ancient past—could be the next step in this ongoing research.
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol: It may came off as being sarcastic. But I am serious.
..:
Lionese is a loquacious dunce. I know that for years now...
An reiterating, repetitive one that is.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
It's funny how every single time I ask somebody else a question Troll Patrol jumps in and tries to answer the question on an emotional quest for attention
Posted by TP (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: It's funny how every single time I ask somebody else a question Troll Patrol jumps in and tries to answer the question on an emotional quest for attention
Your ass needs to be tapped?
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
that's the delusion that motivates you
new initial version of screen name is also short for "toilet paper"
Posted by TP (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Clyde takes over thread
Not really I am just answering the questions you asked. .
Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
Here were talking about population replacement just like in in modern egypt with the Eurasians (Greeks, Romes, Assyrians, etc) and the Arab conquests.
Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: Here were talking about population replacement just like in in modern egypt with the Eurasians (Greeks, Romes, Assyrians, etc) and the Arab conquests.
what's the E3 frequency on modern Egyptians?
Posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate (Member # 20039) on :
The situation may be a bit different toward the south.
Posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova (Member # 15718) on :
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol:
quote:Originally posted by GOMTUU: The Myth of the Aryan Invasion of India.http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_history/ancient/aryan/aryan_frawley.html
Yes, I know that one.
Then we have this:
The Aryan Invasion Theory is False - Genetic Evidence
No trace of “demographic disruption” in the North-West of the subcontinent between 4500 and 800 BCE; this negates the possibility of any massive intrusion, by so-called Indo-Aryans or other populations, during that period.
Deep late Pleistocene genetic link between contemporary Europeans and Indians, provided by the mtDNA haplogroup U, which encompasses roughly a fifth of mtDNA lineages of both populations. Our estimate for this split [between Europeans and Indians] is close to the suggested time for the peopling of Asia and the first expansion of anatomically modern humans in Eurasia and likely pre-dates their spread to Europe.”
Haplogroup U, being common to North Indian and “Caucasoid” populations, was found in tribes of eastern India such as the Lodhas and Santals, which would not be the case if it had been introduced through Indo-Aryans. Such is also the case of the haplogroup M, another marker frequently mentioned in the early literature as evidence of an invasion: in reality, haplogroup M occurs with a high frequency, averaging about 60%, across most Indian population groups, irrespective of geographical location of habitat. Tribal populations have higher frequencies of haplogroup M than caste populations.”
- U.S. anthropologists Kenneth Kennedy, John Lukacs and Brian Hemphill.
Migrations into India “did occur, but rarely from western Eurasian populations.” There are low frequencies of the western Eurasian mtDNA types in both southern and northern India. Thus, the ‘caucasoid’ features of south Asians may best be considered ‘pre-caucasoid’ — that is, part of a diverse north or north-east African gene pool that yielded separate origins for western Eurasian and southern Asian populations over 50,000 years ago.
- U.S. biological anthropologist Todd R. Disotell.
There is a fundamental unity of mtDNA lineages in India, in spite of the extensive cultural and linguistic diversity, pointing to a relatively small founding group of females in India. Most of the mtDNA diversity observed in Indian populations is between individuals within populations; there is no significant structuring of haplotype diversity by socio-religious affiliation, geographical location of habitat or linguistic affiliation.
- Scientists Susanta Roychoudhury and thirteen others studying 644 samples of mtDNA from ten Indian ethnic groups.
mtDNA haplogroup “M” common to India (with a frequency of 60%), Central and Eastern Asia (40% on average), and even to American Indians; however, this frequency drops to 0.6% in Europe, which is “inconsistent with the ‘general Caucasoidness’ of Indians.” This shows, once again, that “the Indian maternal gene pool has come largely through an autochthonous history since the Late Pleistocene.” U haplogroup frequency 13% in India, almost 14% in North-West Africa, and 24% from Europe to Anatolia. “Indian and western Eurasian haplogroup U varieties differ profoundly; the split has occurred about as early as the split between the Indian and eastern Asian haplogroup M varieties. The data show that both M and U exhibited an expansion phase some 50,000 years ago, which should have happened after the corresponding splits.” In other words, there is a genetic connection between India and Europe, but a far more ancient one than was thought.
If one were to extend methodology used to suggest an Aryan invasion based on Y-Dna statistics to populations of Eastern and Southern India, one would be led to an exactly opposite result: “the straightforward suggestion would be that both Neolithic (agriculture) and Indo-European languages arose in India and from there, spread to Europe.” The authors do not defend this thesis, but simply guard against “misleading interpretations” based on limited samples and faulty methodology.
The Chenchu tribe is genetically close to several castes, there is a “lack of clear distinction between Indian castes and tribes.
- Twenty authors headed by Kivisild - Archaeogenetics of Europe - 2000.
“Language families present today in India, such as Indo-European, Dravidic and Austro-Asiatic, are all much younger than the majority of indigenous mtDNA lineages found among their present-day speakers at high frequencies. It would make it highly speculative to infer, from the extant mtDNA pools of their speakers, whether one of the linguistically defined groups in India should be considered more ‘autochthonous’ than any other in respect of its presence in the subcontinent.”
- Mait Metspalu and fifteen co-authors analyzing 796 Indian and 436 Iranian mtDNAs. 2001.
Geneticist Toomas Kivisild led a study (2003) in which comparisons of the diversity of R1a1 (R-M17) haplogroup in Indian, Pakistani, Iranian, Central Asian, Czech and Estonian populations. The study showed that the diversity of R1a1 in India, Pakistan, and Iran, is higher than in Czechs (40%), and Estonians[12].
Kivisild came to the conclusion that "southern and western Asia might be the source of this haplogroup": "Haplogroup R1a, previously associated with the putative Indo-Aryan invasion, was found at its highest frequency in Punjab but also at a relatively high frequency (26%) in the Chenchu tribe. This finding, together with the higher R1a-associated short tandem repeat diversity in India and Iran compared with Europe and central Asia, suggests that southern and western Asia might be the source of this haplogroup".[12]
“Given the geographic spread and STR diversities of sister clades R1 and R2, the latter of which is restricted to India, Pakistan, Iran, and southern central Asia, it is possible that southern and western Asia were the source for R1 and R1a differentiation.”
- Kivilsid - 2003
Based on 728 samples covering 36 Indian populations, it announced in its very title how its findings revealed a “Minor Genetic Influence of Central Asian Pastoralists,” i.e. of the Indo-Aryans, and stated its general agreement with the previous study. For instance, the authors rejected the identification of some Y-DNA genetic markers with an “Indo-European expansion,” an identification they called “convenient but incorrect ... overly simplistic.” To them, the subcontinent’s genetic landscape was formed much earlier than the dates proposed for an Indo-Aryan immigration: “The influence of Central Asia on the pre-existing gene pool was minor. ... There is no evidence whatsoever to conclude that Central Asia has been necessarily the recent donor and not the receptor of the R1a lineages.”
“Dravidian” authorship of the Indus-Sarasvati civilization rejected indirectly, since it noted, “Our data are also more consistent with a peninsular origin of Dravidian speakers than a source with proximity to the Indus....” They found, in conclusion, “overwhelming support for an Indian origin of Dravidian speakers.”
The frequencies of R2 seems to mirror the frequencies of R1a (i.e. both lineages are strong and weak in the same social and linguistic subgroups). This may indicate that both R1a and R2 moved into India at roughly the same time or co-habited, although more research is needed. R2 is very rare in Europe.
Sanghamitra Sengupta, L. Cavalli-Sforza, Partha P. Majumder, and P. A. Underhill. - 2006.
“The sharing of some Y-chromosomal haplogroups between Indian and Central Asian populations is most parsimoniously explained by a deep, common ancestry between the two regions, with diffusion of some Indian-specific lineages northward.”
“The Y-chromosomal data consistently suggest a largely South Asian origin for Indian caste communities and therefore argue against any major influx, from regions north and west of India, of people associated either with the development of agriculture or the spread of the Indo-Aryan language family.”
“Southern castes and tribals are very similar to each other in their Y-chromosomal haplogroup compositions.” As a result, “it was not possible to confirm any of the purported differentiations between the caste and tribal pools,” a conclusion that directly clashes with the Aryan invasion theory which purports that male European Aryans chased tribal adivasis and aboriginals down south.
Sanghamitra Sahoo, T. Kivisild and V. K. Kashyap. - 2006.
When Homo sapiens migrated out of Africa, he first reached South-West Asia around 75,000 BP, and from here, went on to other parts of the world. In simple terms, except for Africans, all humans have ancestors in the North-West of the Indian peninsula. In particular, one migration started around 50,000 BP towards the Middle East and Western Europe: “indeed, nearly all Europeans — and by extension, many Americans — can trace their ancestors to only four mtDNA lines, which appeared between 10,000 and 50,000 years ago and originated from South Asia.”
-Lluís Quintana-Murci,Vincent Macaulay,Stephen Oppenheimer,Michael Petraglia,and their associates
“For me and for Toomas Kivisild, South Asia is logically the ultimate origin of M17(Y-DNA Haplogroup R1a, associated with the male Aryan invasion theory) and his ancestors; and sure enough we find the highest rates and greatest diversity of the M17 line in Pakistan, India, and eastern Iran, and low rates in the Caucasus. M17 is not only more diverse in South Asia than in Central Asia, but diversity characterizes its presence in isolated tribal groups in the south, thus undermining any theory of M17 as a marker of a ‘male Aryan invasion’ of India. One average estimate for the origin of this line in India is as much as 51,000 years. All this suggests that M17 could have found his way initially from India or Pakistan, through Kashmir, then via Central Asia and Russia, before finally coming into Europe.”
-Stephen Oppenheimer
A (2009) study headed by geneticist Swarkar Sharma, collated information for 2809 Indians (681 Brahmins, and 2128 tribals and schedule castes). The results showed "no consistent pattern of the exclusive presence and distribution of Y-haplogroups to distinguish the higher-most caste, Brahmins, from the lower-most ones, schedule castes and tribals". Brahmins from West Bengal showed the highest frequency (72.22%) of Y-haplogroups R1a1* hinting that it may have been a founder lineage for this caste group. The authors found it significant that the Saharia tribe of Madhya Pradesh had not only 28.07% R1a1, but also 22.8% R1a*, out of 57 people, with such a high percentage of R1a* never having been found before. Based on STR variance the estimated age of R1a* in India was 18,478 years, and for R1a1 it was 13,768 years.
In its conclusions the study proposed "the autochthonous origin and tribal links of Indian Brahmins" as well as "the origin of R1a1* ... in the Indian subcontinent".
S. Sharma, argued for an Indian origin of R1a1 lineage among Brahmins, by pointing out the highest incidence of R1a*, ancestral clade to R1a1, among Kashmiri Pandits (Brahmins) and Saharias, an Indian tribe. - Sharma et al 2009
"This paper rewrites history... there is no north-south divide." "There is no truth to the Aryan-Dravidian theory as they came hundreds or thousands of years after the ancestral north and south Indians had settled in India."
The study analysed 500,000 genetic markers across the genomes of 132 individuals from 25 diverse groups from 13 states. All the individuals were from six-language families and traditionally upper and lower castes and tribal groups. "The genetics proves that castes grew directly out of tribe-like organizations during the formation of the Indian society."
"Impossible to distinguish between castes and tribes since their genetics proved they were not systematically different." The present-day Indian population is a mix of ancient north and south bearing the genomic contributions from two distinct ancestral populations - the Ancestral North Indian (ANI) and the Ancestral South Indian (ASI).
"The initial settlement took place 65,000 years ago in the Andamans and in ancient south India around the same time, which led to population growth in this part,'' said Thangarajan. He added, "At a later stage, 40,000 years ago, the ancient north Indians emerged which in turn led to rise in numbers here. But at some point of time, the ancient north and the ancient south mixed, giving birth to a different set of population. And that is the population which exists now and there is a genetic relationship between the population within India."
The study also helps understand why the incidence of genetic diseases among Indians is different from the rest of the world. Singh said that 70% of Indians were burdened with genetic disorders and the study could help answer why certain conditions restricted themselves to one population. For instance, breast cancer among Parsi women, motor neuron diseases among residents of Tirupati and Chittoor, or sickle cell anaemia among certain tribes in central India and the North-East can now be understood better, said researchers.
The researchers, who are now keen on exploring whether Eurasians descended from ANI, find in their study that ANIs are related to western Eurasians, while the ASIs do not share any similarity with any other population across the world. Thangaraj and Singh at a press conference.
"Reconstructing Indian Population History" - David Reich, Kumarasamy Thangaraj, Nick Patterson, Alkes L. Price & Lalji Singh - 2009
^Good info Patrol. In essence also kills Clyde's Nubian origin claim for the Dravidians.
Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:Good info Patrol. In essence also kills Clyde's Nubian origin claim for the Dravidians. [/QB]
LOL. This does nothing to defeat the reality that the Dravidians originated in Nubia and the Indo-Europeans invaded India between 1200-1000BC. The appearence of Grey ware in India document the Aryan Invasion Theory (AIT).
The archaeological literature and Vedas make it clear that the Aryans invaded India. Moreover the genetic evidence shows a separation between Dravidian and Indo-Aryan speakers around the time the Indo-European people invaded India.
The study by Reich et al, Reconstructing Indian population history, Nature 461:489-494 claims that the Indian Cline divides Indians into two groups Ancestral North Indians (ANI) and Ancestral South Indians (ASI).
[qoute]
Abstract India has been underrepresented in genome-wide surveys of human variation. We analyse 25 diverse groups in India to provide strong evidence for two ancient populations, genetically divergent, that are ancestral to most Indians today. One, the 'Ancestral North Indians' (ANI), is genetically close to Middle Easterners, Central Asians, and Europeans, whereas the other, the 'Ancestral South Indians' (ASI),[j] is as distinct[/i] from ANI and East Asians as they are from each other. By introducing methods that can estimate ancestry without accurate ancestral populations, we show that ANI ancestry ranges from 39–71% in most Indian groups, and is higher in traditionally upper caste and Indo-European speakers. Groups with only ASI ancestry may no longer exist in mainland India. However, the indigenous Andaman Islanders are unique in being ASI-related groups without ANI ancestry. Allele frequency differences between groups in India are larger than in Europe, reflecting strong founder effects whose signatures have been maintained for thousands of years owing to endogamy. We therefore predict that there will be an excess of recessive diseases in India, which should be possible to screen and map genetically.
News: India's Fragmented Society Was Once a Melting Pot Fri Aug 9, 2013 11:36 pm (PDT) . Posted by: "Robert Karl Stonjek" r_karl_s India's Fragmented Society Was Once a Melting Pot 2013-08-08 12:00 Moorjani et al., Am J Hum Genet (2013) Mix and then match. Ancient Indians from the north (ANI) and south (ASI) of India first intermarried widely and then began sticking to their own groups.
"In India we celebrate the commonality of major differences, " wrote the celebrated author Shashi Tharoor about his native country. "We are a land of belonging rather than of blood." Indeed, India's 1.24-billion- strong population is one of the world's most diverse, with 700 ethnic and language groups and possibly many more, depending on how they are counted. Today, most of these groups keep pretty much to themselves, only rarely marrying outsiders. But a new study concludes that several thousand years ago, the entire subcontinent underwent a period of massive intermarriage, shuffling its population&# 39;s genetic deck so thoroughly that it left clear traces-even in the genomes of today's most isolated tribes.
In recent years, genetic studies of modern Indians have provided a host of new insights into the ancient history of this sprawling nation, which harbors nearly one-sixth of the world's population. A key finding, reported in 2009 by a team led by geneticist David Reich of Harvard Medical School in Boston, was that most Indians today are descendants of two major population groups: Ancestral North Indians (ANI), who probably migrated into the subcontinent 8000 or more years ago from the Middle East, Central Asia, and Europe; and Ancestral South Indians (ASI), who were native to the region and had been there much longer. The study also showed that these two groups began to mix at some point in the past, although just when was not clear.
The results, reported online today in The American Journal of Human Genetics, paint a complex picture: Beginning about 4200 years ago, ANI and ASI populations, which previously had kept mostly separate, began mating together, a flurry of intermarriage that probably lasted more than 2 millennia. Then, beginning about 1900 years ago or somewhat later, mating patterns shifted dramatically. Local populations became entrenched, eschewing intermarriage with other groups and adopting a cultural pattern of what researchers call endogamy, the practice of marrying only within an ethnic or social group.
"There was a major demographic transformation in India from a region where mixture was pervasive to one in which it is very rare because of a shift to endogamy," says lead author Priya Moorjani, a geneticist at Harvard Medical School.
"The most remarkable aspect of the ANI-ASI mixture is how pervasive it was, in the sense that it has left its mark on nearly every group in India," Moorjani and her co-workers write.
What accounts for this pattern? The team points out that the period of intermarriage overlaps with a time of huge social upheavals in India, including the collapse of the ancient Indus civilization- which thrived on the Indian subcontinent between about 2600 B.C.E. and 1900 B.C.E.-as well as large-scale population movements and the rise of the Vedic religion, the predecessor of modern Hinduism. But after 1900 years ago, India's caste system became a major cultural force, the team concludes, based on its new genetic findings and confirmed by evidence from ancient religious texts. The system rigidly defined four social classes, with the Brahmans at the top and the Sudras at the bottom. Intermarriage was not allowed between them. The Rig-Veda, India's oldest surviving text and a founding document of ancient Hinduism, does not mention the caste system in its earliest sections, probably written some 3000 years ago; only much later are references to it found.
The team agrees that more needs to be done and suggests that ancient DNA studies of prehistoric burials-which would give scientists a finer grained picture of population mixing in the ancient past-could be the next step in this ongoing research.
This genomic evidence is further support for Aryan Invasion Theory and Dravidian founding of the Harappan civilization.
This is a great paper it supports the two wave migration of Indo-Europeans into India. Moorjani et al found that I-E speakers had two periods of admixture. This corresponds to the archaeological evidence that I-E speakers using painted grey ware migrated into Baluchistan and Gujarat according to Raman, and Joshi between 1300-1000BC. The archaeological evidence makes it clear that a second wave of I-E speakers using PGW enter the Gangetic Plains between 800-600 BC.
The ANI are related to western Eurasians and speak Indo-Euopean languages. The ASI on the otherhand speak Dravidian languages. This genetic data clearly divides the North and South Indians, and supports AIT; and the replacement of an original Dravidian speaking people in the north by the invading Indo-Aryan speaking Vedic people.
Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
The ANI Indo-Aryan speakers did not come into India peacefully, the Rig Veda supports the AIT
Firstly, the Vedas talk about wars in North India between the Vedic and non-Vedic people who lived in pura or tripura (walled cities or forts). The Vedas make it clear that the Aryans invaded India.
Thusly, Indra was called the puramdar “fort destroyer. There is nothing in the vedic literature that refers to South India.
The term dasa referred to people, not spiritual matters as you alledge. In Ralph T.H. Griffth (trs) Rig Veda (1896) of Book 2 hymn X1:18 we read “Thou hast disclosed the light to light the Arya; on they left hand, O indra, sank the Dasyu. [19] May we gain wealth, subduing with thou succour and the Aryas, all our foes, the Dasyus”. This makes it clear the Arya/Vedic people were attacking the Dasa/ Dasyus to steal their wealth and legacy. The presence of Indo-Aryan speakers in the North illustrates their success.
The name for cities, the term used in the Rigveda is pur, meaning a 'rampart', 'fort' or 'stronghold' ….. Indra, the Aryan god, is puramdar, 'fort destroyer'…. In brief, 'he rends forts as age consumes a garment'. Where are or were these citadels
Rig Veda, tr. by Ralph T.H. Griffith, [1896], at sacred-texts.com
17 The Vārṣāgiras unto thee, O Indra, the Mighty One, sing forth this laud to please thee, Ṛjrāśva with his fellows, Ambarīṣa, Surādhas, Sahadeva, Bhayamāna. 18 He, much invoked, hath slain Dasyus and Śimyus, after his wont, and laid them low with arrows. The mighty Thunderer with his fair-complexioned friends won the land, the sunlight, and the waters. 19 May Indra evermore be our protector, and unimperilled may we win the booty. This prayer of ours may Varuṇa grant, and Mitra, and Aditi and Sindhu, Earth and Heaven. HYMN C. Indra.
5 He who is Lord of all the world that moves and breathes, who for the Brahman first before all found the Cows; Indra who cast the Dasyus down beneath his feet,—him girt by Maruts we invoke to be our Friend.
HYMN CI. Indra. HYMN CIII. Indra. 1. THAT highest Indra-power of thine is distant: that which is here sages possessed aforetime. This one is on the earth, in heaven the other, and both unite as flag with flag in battle. 2 He spread the wide earth out and firmly fixed it, smote with his thunderbolt and loosed the waters. Maghavan with his puissance struck down Ahi, rent Rauhiṇa to death and slaughtered Vyaṁsa. rmed with his bolt and trusting in his prowess he wandered shattering the forts of Dāsas.t thy dart, knowing, Thunderer, at the Dasyu; increase the Ārya's might and glory, Indra. 4 For him who thus hath taught these human races, Maghavan, bearing a fame-worthy title, Thunderer, drawing nigh to slay the Dasyus, hath given himself the name of Son for glory. 5 See this abundant wealth that he possesses, and put your trust in Indra's hero vigour. He found the cattle, and he found the horses, he found the plants, the forests and the waters. 6 To him the truly strong, whose deeds are many, to him the strong Bull let us pour the Soma. The Hero, watching like a thief in ambush, goes parting the possessions of the godless. 7 Well didst thou do that hero deed, O Indra, in waking with thy bolt the slumbering Ahi. in thee, delighted, Dames divine rejoiced them, the flying Maruts and all Gods were joyful. 8 As thou hast smitten Śuṣṇa, Pipru, Vṛtra and Kuyava, and Śambara's forts, O Indra. This prayer of ours may Varuṇa grant, and Mitra, and Aditi and Sindhu, Earth and Heaven.
HYMN CXXX. Indra. 1. Come to us, Indra, from afar, conducting us even as a lord of heroes to the gatherings, home, like a King, his heroes' lord. We come with gifts of pleasant food, with juice poured forth, invoking thee, As sons invite a sire, that thou mayst get thee strength thee, bounteousest, to get thee strength. 2 O Indra, drink the Soma juice pressed out with stones. poured from the reservoir, as an ox drinks the spring, a very thirsty bull the spring. For the sweet draught that gladdens thee, for mightiest freshening of thy strength. Let thy Bay Horses bring thee hither as the Sun, as every day they bring the Sun. 3 He found the treasure brought from heaven that lay concealed, close-hidden, like the nestling of a bird, in rock, enclosed in never-ending rock. Best Aṅgiras, bolt-armed, he strove to win, as ’twere, the stall of kine; So Indra hath disclosed the food concealed, disclosed the doors, the food that lay concealed. 4 Grasping his thunderbolt with both hands, Indra made its edge most keen, for hurling, like a carving-knife for Ahi's slaughter made it keen. Endued with majesty and strength, O Indra, and with lordly might, Thou crashest down the trees, as when a craftsman fells, crashest them down as with an axe. 5 Thou, Indra, without effort hast let loose the floods to run their free course down, like chariots, to the sea, like chariots showing forth their strength. They, reaching hence away, have joined their strength for one eternal end, Even as the cows who poured forth every thing for man, Yea, poured forth all things for mankind. 6 Eager for riches, men have formed for thee this song, like as a skilful craftsman fashioneth a car, so have they wrought thee to their bliss; Adorning thee, O Singer, like a generous steed for deeds of might, Yea, like a steed to show his strength and win the prize, that he may bear each prize away. 7 For Pūru thou hast shattered, Indra ninety forts, for Divodāsa thy boon servant with thy bolt, O Dancer, for thy worshipper. For Atithigva he, the Strong, brought Śambara. from the mountain down, Distributing the mighty treasures with his strength, parting all treasures with his strength. 8 Indra in battles help his Āryan worshipper, he who hath hundred helps at hand in every fray, in frays that win the light of heaven. Plaguing the lawless he gave up to Manu's seed the dusky skin; Blazing, ’twere, he burns each covetous man away, he burns, the tyrannous away. 9 Waxed strong in might at dawn he tore the Sun's wheel off. Bright red, he steals away their speech, the Lord of Power, their speech he steals away from them, As thou with eager speed, O Sage, hast come from far away to help, As winning for thine own all happiness of men, winning all happiness each day. 10 Lauded with our new hymns, O vigorous in deed, save us with strengthening help, thou Shatterer of the Forts! Thou, Indra, praised by Divodāsa's clansmen, as heaven grows great with days, shalt wax in glory.
BOOK 2 HYMN XI. Indra. 1. HEAR thou my call, O Indra; be not heedless: thine may we be for thee to give us treasures; For these presented viands, seeking riches, increase thy strength like streams of water flowing. 2 Floods great and many, compassed by the Dragon, thou badest swell and settest free, O Hero. Strengthened by songs of praise thou rentest piecemeal the Dāsa, him who deemed himself immortal. 3 For, Hero, in the lauds wherein thou joyedst, in hymns of praise, O Indra, songs of Rudras, These streams in which is thy delight approach thee, even as the brilliant ones draw near to Vāyu. 4 We who add strength to thine own splendid vigour, laying within thine arms the splendid thunder— With us mayst thou, O Indra, waxen splendid, with Sūrya overcome the Dāsa races. 5 Hero, thou slewest in thy valour Ahi concealed in depths, mysterious, great enchanter, Dwelling enveloped deep within the waters, him who checked heaven and stayed the floods from flowing. 6 Indra, we laud thy great deeds wrought aforetime, we laud thine exploits later of achievement; We laud the bolt that in thine arms lies eager; we laud thy two Bay Steeds, heralds of Sūrya. 7 Indra, thy Bay Steeds showing forth their vigour have sent a loud cry out that droppeth fatness. The earth hath spread herself in all her fulness: the cloud that was about to move hath rested. 8 Down, never ceasing, hath the rain-cloud settled: bellowing, it hath wandered with the Mothers. Swelling the roar in the far distant limits, they have spread wide the blast sent forth by Indra. 9 Indra hath hurled down the magician Vṛtra who lay beleaguering the mighty river. Then both the heaven and earth trembled in terror at the strong Hero's thunder when he bellowed. 10 Loud roared the mighty Hero's bolt of thunder, when he, the Friend of man, burnt up the monster, And, having drunk his fill of flowing Soma, baffled the guileful Dānava's devices. 11 Drink thou, O Hero Indra, drink the Soma; let the joy-giving juices make thee joyful. They, filling both thy flanks, shall swell thy vigour. The juice that satisfies hath helped Indra. 12 Singers have we become with thee, O Indra: may we serve duly and prepare devotion. Seeking thy help we meditate thy praises: may we at once enjoy thy gift of riches. 13 May we be thine, such by thy help, O Indra, as swell thy vigour while they seek thy favour. Give us, thou God, the riches that we long for, most powerful, with stare of noble children. 14 Give us a friend, give us an habitation; Indra, give us the company of Maruts, And those whose minds accord with theirs, the Vāyus, who drink the first libation of the Soma. 15 Let those enjoy in whom thou art delighted. Indra, drink Soma for thy strength and gladness. Thou hast exalted us to heaven, Preserver, in battles, through the lofty hymns that praise thee. 16 Great, verily, are they, O thou Protector, who by their songs of praise have won the blessing. They who strew sacred grass to be thy dwelling, helped by thee have got them strength, O Indra. 17 Upon the great Trikadruka days, Hero, rejoicing thee, O Indra, drink the Soma. Come with Bay Steeds to drink of libation, shaking the drops from out thy beard, contented. Hero, assume the might wherewith thou clavest Vṛtra piecemeal, the Dānava Aurṇavābha. Thou hast disclosed the light to light the Ārya: on thy left hand, O Indra, sank the Dasyu. 19 May we gain wealth, subduing with thy succour and with the Ārya, all our foes, the Dasyus. 2. gain was that to Tṛta of our party thou gavest up Tvaṣṭar's son Viśvarūpa. 20 He cast down Arbuda what time his vigour was strengthened by libations poured by Tṛta. Indra sent forth his whirling wheel like Sūrya, and aided by the Aṅgirases rent Vala. 21 Now let that wealthy Cow of thine, O Indra, yield in return a boon to him who lauds thee. Give to thy praisers: let not fortune fail us. Loud may we speak, with brave men, in the assembly.
HYMN XX. Indra. 1. As one brings forth his car when fain for combat, so bring we power to thee—regard us, Indra— Well skilled in song, thoughtful in spirit, seeking great bliss from one like thee amid the Heroes. 2 Indra, thou art our own with thy protection, a guardian near to men who love thee truly, Active art thou, the liberal man's defender, his who draws near to thee with right devotion. 3 May Indra, called with solemn invocations. the young, the Friend, be men's auspicious keeper, One who will further with his aid the singer, the toiler, praiser, dresser of oblations. 4 With laud and song let me extol that Indra in whom of old men prospered and were mighty. May he, implored, fulfil the prayer for plenty of him who worships, of the living mortal. 5 He, Indra whom the Aṅgirases' praise delighted, strengthened their prayer and made their goings prosper. Stealing away the mornings with the sunlight, he, lauded, crushed even Aśna's ancient powers. 2. 3. He verily, the God, the glorious Indra, hath raised him up for man, best Wonder-Worker. He, self-reliant, mighty and triumphant, brought low the dear head of the wicked Dāsa. 7 Indra the Vṛtra-slayer, Fort-destroyer, scattered the Dāsa hosts who dwelt in darkness.For men hath he created earth and waters, and ever helped the prayer of him who worships. 8 To him in might the Gods have ever yielded, to Indra in the tumult of the battle. When in his arms they laid the bolt, he slaughtered the Dasyus and cast down their forts of iron. 9 Now may that wealthy Cow of thine, O Indra, give in return a boon to him who lauds thee. Give to thy praisers: let not fortune fail us. Loud may we speak, with heroes, in assembly.
BOOK 3
HYMN XXXI. Indra. 1. WISE, teaching, following the thought of Order, the sonless gained a grandson from his daughter. Fain, as a sire, to see his child prolific, he sped to meet her with an eager spirit. 2 The Son left not his portion to the brother, he made a home to hold him who should gain, it. What time his Parents gave the Priest his being, of the good pair one acted, one promoted. 3 Agni was born trembling with tongue that flickered, so that the Red's great children should be honoured. Great is their germ, that born of them is mighty, great the Bays' Lord's approach through sacrifices. 4 Conquering bands upon the Warrior waited: they recognized great light from out the darkness. The conscious Dawns went forth to meet his coming, and the sole Master of the kine was Indra. 5 The sages freed them from their firmbuilt prison: the seven priests drove them forward with their spirit. All holy Order's pathway they discovered he, full of knowledge, shared these deeds through worship. 6 When Saramā had found the mountain's fissure, that vast and ancient place she plundered thoroughly. In the floods' van she led them forth, light-footed: she who well knew came first unto their lowing. 7 Longing for friendship came the noblest singer: the hill poured forth its treasure for the pious. The Hero with young followers fought and conquered, and straightway Aṅgiras was singing praises, 8 Peer of each noble thing, yea, all excelling, all creatures doth he know, he slayeth Śuṣṇa. Our leader, fain for war, singing from heaven, as Friend he saved his lovers from dishonour. 9 They sate them down with spirit fain for booty, making with hymns a way to life eternal. And this is still their place of frequent session, whereby they sought to gain the months through Order. 10 Drawing the milk of ancient seed prolific, they joyed as they beheld their own possession. Their shout of triumph heated earth and heaven. When the kine showed, they bade the heroes rouse them. 11 Indra drove forth the kine, that Vṛtra-slayer, while hymns of praise rose up and gifts were offered. For him the Cow, noble and far-extending, poured pleasant juices, bringing oil and sweetness. 12 They made a mansion for their Father, deftly provided him a great and glorious dwelling; With firm support parted and stayed the Parents, and, sitting, fixed him there erected, mighty. 13 What time the ample chalice had impelled him, swift waxing, vast, to pierce the earth and heaven,— Him in whom blameless songs are all united: all powers invincible belong to Indra. 14 I crave thy powers, I crave thy mighty friendship: full many a team goes to the Vṛtra-slayer. Great is the laud, we seek the Princes' favour. Be thou, O Maghavan, our guard and keeper. 15 He, having found great, splendid, rich dominion, sent life and motion to his friends and lovers. Indra who shone together with the Heroes begot the song, the fire, and Sun and Morning. 16 Vast, the House-Friend, he set the waters flowing, all-lucid, widely spread, that move together. By the wise cleansings of the meath made holy, through days, and nights they speed the swift streams onward. 17 To thee proceed the dark, the treasure-holders, both of them sanctified by Sūrya's bounty. The while thy ovely storming Friends, O Indra, fail to attain the measure of thy greatness. 18 Be Lord of joyous songs, O Vṛtra-slayer, Bull dear to all, who gives the power of living. Come unto us with thine auspicious friendship, hastening, Mighty One, with mighty succours. 19 Like Aṅgiras I honour him with worship, and renovate old song for him the Ancient. Chase thou the many godless evil creatures, and give us, Maghavan, heaven's light to help me
20 Far forth are spread the purifying waters convey thou us across them unto safety. Save us, our Charioteer, from harm, O Indra, soon, very soon, make us win spoil of cattle. 21 His kine their Lord hath shown, e’en Vṛtra's slayer, through the black hosts he passed with red attendants. Teaching us pleasant things by holy Order, to, us hath he thrown open all his portals. 22 Call we on Maghavan, auspicious Indra, best Hero in this fight where spoil is gathered. The Strong who listens, who gives aid in battles, who slays the Vṛtras, wins and gathers riches.
HYMN XXXII. Indra 1. DRINK thou this Soma, Indra, Lord of Soma; drink thou the draught of noonday which thou Iovest. Puffing thy cheeks, impetuous, liberal Giver, here loose thy two Bay Horses and rejoice thee. 2 Quaff it pure, meal-blent, mixt with milk, O Indra; we have poured forth the Soma for thy rapture. Knit with the prayer-fulfilling band of Maruts, yea, with the Rudras, drink till thou art sated; 3 Those who gave increase to thy strength and vigour; the Maruts singing forth thy might, O Indra. Drink thou, O fair of cheek, whose hand wields thunder, with Rudras banded, at our noon libation. 4 They, even the Maruts who were there, excited with song the meath-created strength of Indra. By them impelled to act he reached the vitals Of Vṛtra, though he deemed that none might wound him. 5 Pleased, like a man, with our libation, Indra, drink, for enduring hero might, the Soma. Lord of Bays, moved by sacrifice come hither: thou with the Swift Ones stirrest floods and waters. 6 When thou didst loose the streams to run like racers in the swift contest, having smitten Vṛtra With flying weapon where he lay, O Indra, and, godless, kept the Goddesses encompassed. 7 With reverence let us worship mighty Indra, great and sublime, eternal, everyouthful, Whose greatness the dear world-halves have not measured, no, nor conceived the might of him the Holy. 8 Many are Indra's nobly wrought achievements, and none of all the Gods transgress his statutes. He beareth up this earth and heaven, and, doer of marvels, he begot the Sun and Morning. 9 Herein, O Guileless One, is thy true greatness, that soon as born thou drankest up the Soma. Days may not check the power of thee the Mighty, nor the nights, Indra, nor the months, nor autumns. 10 As soon as thou wast born in highest heaven thou drankest Soma to delight thee, Indra; And when thou hadst pervaded earth and heaven thou wast the first supporter of the singer. 11 Thou, puissant God, more mighty, slewest. Ahi showing his strength when couched around the waters. The heaven itself attained not to thy greatness when with one hip of thine the earth was shadowed. 12 Sacrifice, Indra, made thee wax so mighty, the dear oblation with the flowing Soma. O Worshipful, with worship help our worship, for worship helped thy bolt when slaying Ahi. 13 With sacrifice and wish have I brought Indra; still for new blessings may I turn him hither, Him magnified by ancient songs and praises, by lauds of later time and days yet recent. 14 I have brought forth a song when longing seized me: ere the decisive day will I laud Indra; Then may he safely bear us over trouble, as in a ship, when both sides invocate him. 15 Full is his chalice: Glory! Like a pourer I have filled up the vessel for his drinking. Presented on the right, dear Soma juices have brought us Indra, to rejoice him, hither. 16 Not the deep-flowing flood, O Much-invoked One! not hills that compass thee about restrain thee,
Once here incited, for thy friends, O Indra, thou breakest e’en the firm built stall of cattle. 17 Call we on Maghavan, auspicious Indra, best Hero in this fight where spoil is gathered, The Strong who listens, who gives aid in battles, who slays the Vṛtras, wins and gathers riches.
HYMN XXXIV. Indra. 1. FORT-RENDER, Lord of Wealth, dispelling foemen, Indra with lightnings hath o’ercome the Dāsa. Impelled by prayer and waxen great in body, he hath filled earth and heaven, the Bounteous Giver. 2 I stimulate thy zeal, the Strong, the Hero decking my song of praise forth; Immortal. O Indra, thou art equally the Leader of heavenly hosts and human generations.
Reading, his band Indra encompassed Vṛtra; weak grew the wily leader of enchanters. He who burns fierce in forests slaughtered Vyaṁsa, and made the Milch-kine of the nights apparent. 4 Indra, light-winner, days' Creator, conquered, victorious, hostile bands with those who loved him. For man the days' bright ensign he illumined, and found the light for his joy and gladness. 5 Forward to fiercely falling blows pressed Indra, herolike doing many hero exploits. These holy songs he taught the bard who gaised him, and widely spread these Dawns' resplendent colour.
6 They laud the mighty acts of him the Mighty, the many glorious deeds performed by Indra. He in his strength, with all-surpassing prowess, through wondrous arts crushed the malignant Dasyus.
7 Lord of the brave, Indra who rules the people gave freedom to the Gods by might and battle. Wise singers glorify with chanted praises these his achievements in Vivasvān's dwelling. 8 Excellent, Conqueror, the victory-giver, the winner of the light and Godlike Waters, He who hath won this broad earth and this heaven, -in Indra they rejoice who love devotions.
9 He gained possession of the Sun and Horses, Indra obtained the Cow who feedeth many. Treasure of gold he won; he smote the Dasyus, and gave protection to the Āryan colour. 10 He took the plants and days for his possession; he gained the forest trees and air's mid-region. Vala he cleft, and chased away opponents: thus was he tamer of the overweening. 11 Call we on Maghavan, auspicious Indra, best Hero in the fight where spoil is gathered, The Strong, who listens, who gives aid in battles, who slays the Vṛtras, wins and gathers treasures.
HYMN XXXV Indra. 1. MOUNT the Bay Horses to thy chariot harnessed, and come to us like Vāyu with his coursers. Thou, hastening to us, shalt drink the Soma. Hail, Indra. We have poured it for thy rapture. 2 For him, the God who is invoked by many, the two swift Bay Steeds to the pole I harness, That they in fleet course may bring Indra hither, e’en to this sacrifice arranged completely. 3 Bring the strong Steeds who drink the warm libation, and, Bull of Godlike nature, be thou gracious. Let thy Steeds eat; set free thy Tawny Horses, and roasted grain like this consume thou daily. 4 Those who are yoked by prayer I harness, fleet friendly Bays who take their joy together. Mounting thy firm and easy car, O Indra, wise and all-knowing come thou to the Soma. 5 No other worshippers must stay beside them thy Bays, thy vigorous and smooth-backed Coursers. Pass by them all and hasten onward hither: with Soma pressed we will prepare to feast thee. 6 Thine is this Soma: hasten to approach it. Drink thou thereof, benevolent, and cease not. Sit on the sacred grass at this our worship, and take these drops into thy belly, Indra. 7 The grass is strewn for thee, pressed is the Soma; the grain is ready for thy Bays to feed on. To thee who lovest them, the very mighty, strong, girt by Maruts, are these gifts presented. 8 This the sweet draught, with cows, the men, the mountains, the waters, Indra, have for thee made ready. Come, drink thereof, Sublime One, friendly-minded, foreseeing, knowing well the ways thou goest. 9 The Maruts, they with whom thou sharedst Soma, Indra, who made thee strong and were thine army,— With these accordant, eagerly desirous drink thou this Soma with the tongue of Agni. 10 Drink, Indra, of the juice by thine own nature, or by the tongue of Agni, O thou Holy. Accept the sacrificial gift, O Śakra, from the Adhvaryu's hand or from the Hotar's. 11 Call we on Maghavan, auspicious Indra, best Hero in the fight where spoil is gathered, The Strong, who listens, who.gives aid in battles, who slays the Vṛtras, wins and gathers riches.
HYMN XXXIX. Indra. 1. To Indra from the heart the hymn proceedeth, to him the Lord, recited, built with praises; The wakening song sung forth in holy synod: that which is born for thee, O Indra, notice. 2 Born from the heaven e’en in the days aforetime, wakening, sting aloud in holy synod, Auspicious, clad in white and shining raiment, this is the ancient hymn of our forefathers. 3 The Mother of the Twins hath borne Twin Children: my tongue's tip raised itself and rested silent. Killing the darkness at the light's foundation, the Couple newly born attain their beauty. 4 Not one is found among them, none of mortals, to blame our sires who fought to win the cattle. Their strengthener was Indra the Majestic he spread their stalls of kine the Wonder-Worker. 5 Where as a Friend with friendly men, Navagvas, with heroes, on his knees he sought the cattle. There, verily with ten Daśagvas Indra found the Sun lying hidden in the darkness. 6 Indra found meath collected in the milch-cow, by foot and hoof, in the cow's place of pasture. That which lay secret, hidden in the waters, he held in his right hand, the rich rewarder. 7 He took the light, discerning it from darkness: may we be far removed from all misfortune. These songs, O Soma-drinker, cheered by Soma, Indra, accept from thy most zealous poet. 8 Let there be light through both the worlds for worship: may we be far from most overwhelming evil. Great woe comes even from the hostile mortal, piled up; but good at rescue are the Vasus. 9 Call we on Maghavan, auspicious Indra, best Hero in the fight where spoil is gathered, The Strong, who listens, who gives aid in battles, who slays the Vṛtras, wins and gathers riches.
HYMN XLIX. Indra. 1. GREAT Indra will I laud, in whom all people who drink the Soma have attained their longing; Whom, passing wise, Gods, Heaven and Earth, engendered, formed by a Master's hand, to crush the Vṛtras. 2 Whom, most heroic, borne by Tawny Coursers, verily none subdueth in the battle; Who, reaching far, most vigorous, hath shortened the Dasyu's life with Warriors bold of spirit. 3 Victor in fight, swift mover like a warhorse, pervading both worlds, rainer down of blessings, To he invoked in war like Bhaga, Father, as ’twere, of hymns, fair, prompt to hear, strength-giver. 4 Supporting heaven, the high back of the region, his car is Vāyu with his team of Vasus. Illumining the nights, the Sun's creator, like Dhiṣaṇā he deals forth strength and riches. 5 Call we on Maghavan, auspicious Indra, best Hero in the fight where spoil is gathered; The Strong, who listens, who gives aid in battles, who slays the Vṛtras, wins and gathers treasure.
.
Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:Good info Patrol. In essence also kills Clyde's Nubian origin claim for the Dravidians.
M1 in India it is found in India. This supports the recent spread of the Dravidians in India, which is supported by archaeology and linguistics.
In the Kivisild et al 1999 study of Indian mtDNA around 15% carried haplogroup M1. See:
The Eastern African hg M1, HVS-I signature motif is 16,129, 16,189, 16,223, 16,249, and 16,311. In the Kivisild et al figure below we see the same motif. The mutations are shown less 16,000.
Here you can clearly see:mutations 129,189, 223 and 311, in Indian M1.
The Dravidians and Mande began to migrate out of Africa by 2800BC. They were part of the C-Group. They first settled in Iran and from here expanded into Central Asia and the Indus Valley.
B.B. Lal ("The Only Asian expedition in threatened Nubia:Work by an Indian Mission at Afyeh and Tumas", The Illustrated London Times , 20 April 1963) and Indian Egyptologist has shown conclusively that the Dravidians originated in the Saharan area 5000 years ago. He claims they came from Kush, in the Fertile African Crescent and were related to the C-Group people who founded the Kerma dynasty in the 3rd millennium B.C. (Lal 1963) The Dravidians used a common black-and-red pottery, which spread from Nubia, through modern Ethiopia, Arabia, Iran into India as a result of the Proto-Saharan dispersal.
. B.B. Lal (1963) a leading Indian archaeologist in India has observed that the black and red ware (BRW) dating to the Kerma dynasty of Nubia, is related to the Dravidian megalithic pottery. Singh (1982) believes that this pottery radiated from Nubia to India. This pottery along with wavy-line pottery is associated with the Saharo-Sudanese pottery tradition of ancient Africa . I call these people the Proto Saharans. I discuss their history here:
Aravaanan (1980) has written extensively on the African and Dravidian relations. He has illustrated that the Africans and Dravidian share many physical similarities including the dolichocephalic indexes (Aravaanan 1980,pp.62-263; Raceand History.com,2006), platyrrhine nasal index (Aravaanan 1980,pp.25-27), stature (31-32) and blood type (Aravaanan 1980,34-35; RaceandHistory.com,2006). Aravaanan (1980,p.40) also presented much evidence for analogous African and Dravidian cultural features including the chipping of incisor teeth and the use of the lost wax process to make bronze works of arts (Aravaanan 1980,p.41).
There are also similarities between the Dravidian and African religions. For example, both groups held a common interest in the cult of the Serpent and believed in a Supreme God, who lived in a place of peace and tranquility ( Thundy, p.87; J.T. Cornelius,"Are Dravidians Dynastic Egyptians", Trans. of the Archaeological Society of South India 1951-1957, pp.90-117; and U.P. Upadhyaya, "Dravidian and Negro-African", International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics 5, no.1) .
There are also affinities between the names of many gods including Amun/Amma and Murugan . Murugan the Dravidian god of the mountains parallels a common god in East Africa worshipped by 25 ethnic groups is called Murungu, the god who resides in the mountains .
Up until the South Indian megalithic period the Dravidians continued to use black-and-red ware and Libyco-Berber/Indus Valley writing. Under the influence of the Ethiopians the script changed into what it is today. The architecture of the Dravidians is an ornamented pyramid with statues and other featured added within the construction of the pyramid.
The architecture makes it clear that they have remained faithful to classical pyramid style.
Dravidians have a unique culture—but it is analogous to many culture presently found in Africa.
Dholavira in Gujarat state is one of the five largest Harappan sites The study showed that there were two major migrations into India in the last 10,000 years.
The first one originated from the Zagros region in south-western Iran (which has the world's first evidence for goat domestication) and brought agriculturists, most likely herders, to India.
This would have been between 7,000 and 3,000BCE. These Zagrosian herders mixed with the earlier inhabitants of the subcontinent - the First Indians, descendants of the Out of Africa (OoA) migrants who had reached India around 65,000 years ago - and together, they went on to create the Harappan civilisation.
Prehistoric art hints at lost Indian civilisation In the centuries after 2000 BCE came the second set of immigrants (the Aryans) from the Eurasian Steppe, probably from the region now known as Kazakhstan. They likely brought with them an early version of Sanskrit, mastery over horses and a range of new cultural practices such as sacrificial rituals, all of which formed the basis of early Hindu/Vedic culture. (A thousand years before, people from the Steppe had also moved into Europe, replacing and mixing with agriculturists there, spawning new cultures and spreading Indo-European languages).
Other genetic studies have brought to light more migrations into India, such as that of the speakers of Austro-Asiatic languages who came from south-eastern Asia.
^ The emboldened part above is supported by Y-chromosomal data as was discussed several times before.
But now a newer study has come out.
Genome of nearly 5000-year-old woman links modern Indians to ancient civilization: The sampled individual, most likely a woman based on her DNA, was buried among dozens of ceramic bowls and vases in an Indus site known as Rakhigarhi, about 150 kilometers northwest of modern-day Delhi. Archaeological evidence suggests she lived sometime between 2800 and 2300 B.C.E. Her genome closely matched DNA from 11 other individuals who had been found at sites in Iran and Turkmenistan, where conditions favor better DNA preservation. (Those individuals belong to a set of 523 ancient DNA sequences used to chart the population history of South Asians and published today in Science.)
Knowing that the Indus civilization traded with those regions, and that those 11 individuals had little in common genetically with others buried in their regions, Reich and colleagues concluded they were likely Harappan migrants.
Now working with a bank of Indus genomes presumed to be 12 individuals strong, the researchers compared their genetic signatures to DNA from other ancient civilizations in Eurasia as well as modern populations. A resulting Indus family tree revealed that although the civilization collapsed nearly 4000 years ago, its genetic stock forms the basis of most people living in India today, the team reports today in Cell.
The Science paper, also led by Reich, notes that modern people from North India also bear the genetic marks of ancient interbreeding with herders from the Eurasian steppe, a vast grassland that stretches across northern Asia, moving southward around 2000 B.C.E. Those steppe herders carried European DNA from previous interbreeding events, the authors note, explaining the once-perplexing genetic link between Europeans and South Asians. Over the next few thousand years, the groups in north and south India intermixed, leading to the modern population’s complex ancestral mix.
One surprise concerns DNA related to ancient Iranians, which was previously found to be prevalent in modern South Asians. The finding seemed to back a popular belief among anthropologists that migrants from the Fertile Crescent—which comprises modern-day Iran and gave rise to the world’s first farmers who began to rove about 10,000 years ago—moved east at some point and mixed with South Asian hunter-gatherers, introducing agriculture to the Indian subcontinent. Yet the new study suggests the Iranian-related DNA in both the Indus individuals and modern Indians actually predates the rise of agriculture in Iran by some 2000 years. In other words, that Iranian-related DNA came from interbreeding with 12,000-year-old hunter-gatherers, not more recent farmers, Reich explains.
“It seems likely there were independent advents of farming,” says biological anthropologist Gyaneshwer Chaubey at Banaras Hindu University in Varanasi, India, who wasn’t involved with the study. One explanation, he notes, might be that ancient South Asians learned farming practices from their neighbors without interbreeding with them. Posted by Tyrannohotep (Member # 3735) on :
Dholavira in Gujarat state is one of the five largest Harappan sites The study showed that there were two major migrations into India in the last 10,000 years.
The first one originated from the Zagros region in south-western Iran (which has the world's first evidence for goat domestication) and brought agriculturists, most likely herders, to India.
This would have been between 7,000 and 3,000BCE. These Zagrosian herders mixed with the earlier inhabitants of the subcontinent - the First Indians, descendants of the Out of Africa (OoA) migrants who had reached India around 65,000 years ago - and together, they went on to create the Harappan civilisation.
Prehistoric art hints at lost Indian civilisation In the centuries after 2000 BCE came the second set of immigrants (the Aryans) from the Eurasian Steppe, probably from the region now known as Kazakhstan. They likely brought with them an early version of Sanskrit, mastery over horses and a range of new cultural practices such as sacrificial rituals, all of which formed the basis of early Hindu/Vedic culture. (A thousand years before, people from the Steppe had also moved into Europe, replacing and mixing with agriculturists there, spawning new cultures and spreading Indo-European languages).
Other genetic studies have brought to light more migrations into India, such as that of the speakers of Austro-Asiatic languages who came from south-eastern Asia.
^ The emboldened part above is supported by Y-chromosomal data as was discussed several times before.
But now a newer study has come out.
Genome of nearly 5000-year-old woman links modern Indians to ancient civilization: The sampled individual, most likely a woman based on her DNA, was buried among dozens of ceramic bowls and vases in an Indus site known as Rakhigarhi, about 150 kilometers northwest of modern-day Delhi. Archaeological evidence suggests she lived sometime between 2800 and 2300 B.C.E. Her genome closely matched DNA from 11 other individuals who had been found at sites in Iran and Turkmenistan, where conditions favor better DNA preservation. (Those individuals belong to a set of 523 ancient DNA sequences used to chart the population history of South Asians and published today in Science.)
Knowing that the Indus civilization traded with those regions, and that those 11 individuals had little in common genetically with others buried in their regions, Reich and colleagues concluded they were likely Harappan migrants.
Now working with a bank of Indus genomes presumed to be 12 individuals strong, the researchers compared their genetic signatures to DNA from other ancient civilizations in Eurasia as well as modern populations. A resulting Indus family tree revealed that although the civilization collapsed nearly 4000 years ago, its genetic stock forms the basis of most people living in India today, the team reports today in Cell.
The Science paper, also led by Reich, notes that modern people from North India also bear the genetic marks of ancient interbreeding with herders from the Eurasian steppe, a vast grassland that stretches across northern Asia, moving southward around 2000 B.C.E. Those steppe herders carried European DNA from previous interbreeding events, the authors note, explaining the once-perplexing genetic link between Europeans and South Asians. Over the next few thousand years, the groups in north and south India intermixed, leading to the modern population’s complex ancestral mix.
One surprise concerns DNA related to ancient Iranians, which was previously found to be prevalent in modern South Asians. The finding seemed to back a popular belief among anthropologists that migrants from the Fertile Crescent—which comprises modern-day Iran and gave rise to the world’s first farmers who began to rove about 10,000 years ago—moved east at some point and mixed with South Asian hunter-gatherers, introducing agriculture to the Indian subcontinent. Yet the new study suggests the Iranian-related DNA in both the Indus individuals and modern Indians actually predates the rise of agriculture in Iran by some 2000 years. In other words, that Iranian-related DNA came from interbreeding with 12,000-year-old hunter-gatherers, not more recent farmers, Reich explains.
“It seems likely there were independent advents of farming,” says biological anthropologist Gyaneshwer Chaubey at Banaras Hindu University in Varanasi, India, who wasn’t involved with the study. One explanation, he notes, might be that ancient South Asians learned farming practices from their neighbors without interbreeding with them.
It sounds like the ancient Harappan people were an Iranian/ASI mix that later acquired steppe ancestry from incoming Indo-Europeans. The latter I had already predicted, but I admit to having underestimated the earlier Iranian contribution. I stand corrected on that front.
I wonder what was going on in the rest of the subcontinent during the heyday of the Indus Valley Civilization? Would there have been some farming villages in areas like the Gangetic plain or the Deccan, or were those regions still populated predominantly by hunter-gatherers?
(This map claims that most of India was populated by "simple farming societies" around 2000 BC, though I question how accurately it represents other regions like most of Africa.)
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tyrannohotep: It sounds like the ancient Harappan people were an Iranian/ASI mix that later acquired steppe ancestry from incoming Indo-Europeans. The latter I had already predicted, but I admit to having underestimated the earlier Iranian contribution. I stand corrected on that front.
You forgot the ANI component which was much more prevalent than the Iranian one. The earliest/first component was ASI associated with OOA, followed later on by ANI which branched off a Central Eurasian component that gave rise to East Asian and Eastern Europeans. ANI actually mixed with if not displaced ASI in much of subcontinent except in the south and particularly isolated areas. Thus Indians for a while were comprised mainly of ASI and ANI, later came a wave of the Iranian neolithic or rather mesolithic component in the northwest which is as much related to ANI as Australasian ancestry is related to ASI.
quote:I wonder what was going on in the rest of the subcontinent during the heyday of the Indus Valley Civilization? Would there have been some farming villages in areas like the Gangetic plain or the Deccan, or were those regions still populated predominantly by hunter-gatherers?
Yes, there is evidence that the Gangetic Plains were effected by rice-farming people from Southeast Asia (Austro-Asiatic?).
quote:(This map claims that most of India was populated by "simple farming societies" around 2000 BC, though I question how accurately it represents other regions like most of Africa.)
I question the map as well. Why are Nubians classed as "simple farming" society but not a "complex" one when Sudan was the original center of sorghum farming and Egyptian texts speak of Nubian nations, and what of Ta Seti which was an actual "state society"? Weren't the Elamites organized into a state as well?? And what about millet farming in the Sahel of West Africa? Also, while the Indus Valley does indicate some sort of state organization it is not as conclusive as say Nubian Ta-Seti.
Posted by Tyrannohotep (Member # 3735) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: You forgot the ANI component which was much more prevalent than the Iranian one. The earliest/first component was ASI associated with OOA, followed later on by ANI which branched off a Central Eurasian component that gave rise to East Asian and Eastern Europeans. ANI actually mixed with if not displaced ASI in much of subcontinent except in the south and particularly isolated areas. Thus Indians for a while were comprised mainly of ASI and ANI, later came a wave of the Iranian neolithic or rather mesolithic component in the northwest which is as much related to ANI as Australasian ancestry is related to ASI.
ANI was what I was referring to when I mentioned Indo-European or steppe ancestry. Or do you believe that's different?
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ I Think you're confused with ANE (Ancient North Eurasian) ancestry or as it used to be called as that component was further clarified.
ANI (Ancient North Indian) ancestry is a much older ancestral component that broke away from a common Eurasian cluster that gave rise to East Asians and Siberians as well as some Europeans. ANI peoples entered India from Central Asia and mixed with ASI peoples during the Upper Paleolithic prior to the Zagros/Iranian mesolithic peoples entering. After the Iranian component came the Indo-European steppe or ANE.
Posted by Tyrannohotep (Member # 3735) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Think you're confused with ANE (Ancient North Eurasian) ancestry or as it used to be called as that component was further clarified.
ANI (Ancient North Indian) ancestry is a much older ancestral component that broke away from a common Eurasian cluster that gave rise to East Asians and Siberians as well as some Europeans. ANI peoples entered India from Central Asia and mixed with ASI peoples during the Upper Paleolithic prior to the Zagros/Iranian mesolithic peoples entering. After the Iranian component came the Indo-European steppe or ANE.
Understood.
Posted by BrandonP (Member # 3735) on :
quote:Skin appears to be orange, yellowish brown (see Figures 1, 6), red brown (see Figure 5) and brown in the third millennium. A general change to bright red (see Figure 7) and red brown (see Figure 2) took place in the second millennium. In the first millennium skin is rather dark, albeit not on all media.
I wonder if these shifts in representations of skin color reflect diachronic change in the locals' phenotype? It would make sense for early Semitic-speakers like the Akkadians to have been darker-skinned on average than the Sumerians due to the former's ethnic and linguistic ties to northeastern Africa.
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
