What DNA Says About Aryan Invasion Theory -2

04-27-2007, 04:00 PM

QUOTEDo you have any indications as to why he would have been referring to Danavas and Devas when he does not say so outright? 

Yes, in Danavas he was describing the denizens of Lanka.

QUOTE(2) Celts have by now long been claimed as being IE people for speaking languages of the IE family. (That they are now found to have mostly Basque ancestry, as also most of the English, is another matter.).

Looking into the history of Ireland, the earliest inhabitants of the land were the Tuatha-De-Dannan (children of Goddess Danu). These are the proto-celts. The IE settlers came later according to Irish legends, they were the Milesians.

So the earlier celts can be distinguished from the later arrivals. Though both are now called celts. Both are now merged, so we can see male and female celtic dieties now. I am for the present believing that this is a feature post amalgamation of these two.

QUOTEAlso, Devas and Rakshasas at least have always been considered non-human by Indians, in spite of what the indologicals liked to preoccupy themselves with in order to prove their AIT.
Early Indians did not equate even Rakshasas with humans, as also alluded to in the Talageri link 

I recently found that there exists a tribe called Sudan in Kashmir to this day. This was referred to by many Indian experts like B. Raman while describing the paki General Mohammad Aziz (co-architect of kargil) who is supposed to belong to that tribe. Now Sudan is the shortened form of Su-Danava.

There is also a Indian model + movie actor by name of Inder Sudan, also a kashmiri.

From an Iranian source on the net also I read about this Sudanava thing and I found that these are indeed people. There was a northern group of Sudanavas around the Bactria region and southern group centred around North of Indus. So these are indeed human.

there is some discussions regarding this in this board as well.

http://www.beliefnet.com/boards/message_li...cussionID=14412

Husky · (This post was last modified: 04-28-2007, 06:25 PM by Husky.)

QUOTELooking into the history of Ireland, the earliest inhabitants of the land were the Tuatha-De-Dannan (children of Goddess Danu).
http://www.mythicalireland.com/mythology...index.html
QUOTEThe Tuatha DÃ© Danann were the mysterious god-like people of ancient Ireland, and were the race most closely connected with the ancient megalithic sites of Ireland such as BrÃº na BÃ³inne.Others have now turned this long-believed-to-have been superhuman population into humans and think because 'Tuatha' (said to mean tribe) is now often thought to be the cognate or otherwise related to the word 'Teuton', it refers to a human tribal affiliation. Some then trace the Danaan back to somewhere in mainland Europe (via Spain or France, France has Celtic presence).
I don't know that I can put complete faith in such proposals as they are recent and are barely based on the Irish traditions themselves from which the hypothesised human population group has been constructed from.

You can see the human-ising process even as early as 1897 - a time when scholars sought to read every superhuman/godly beings mentioned in any tradition as being merely human populations. See here:
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0015-587X...%3E2.0.CO%3B2-A
Note that this is backward projection. And, whether any Irish today believe that the Danaan are human does not constitute proof of the claims made at this link. Recent Irish now take their account from this human-ising process that has been taking place for the last 100+ years. The early Irish never believed the Danaan were mere mortals.

The relevant excerpt:
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0015-587X...TOR-enlargePage
Presidential Address: The Fairy Mythology of English Literature: Its Origin and Nature 
Alfred Nutt
Folklore, Vol. 8, No. 1 (Mar., 1897), pp. 29-53
This article consists of 25 page(s).

QUOTEIn that volume, which will appear shortly, I discuss the Celtic doctrine of re-birth. I was compelled to form a theory, which would fit the facts, of primitive conceptions of life and sacrifice; compelled also to determine the real nature of the Tuatha de Danann, the ancestors of the fairies believed in to this day by the Irish peasantry. In postulating an agricultural basis for the Tuatha de Danann mythology and ritual I do but find myself in accord with all recent students of mythology in this country. I need but mention the most striking instance of the way in which Mannhardt's teaching has borne fruit in this country: Mr. Farnell's Cults of the Greek Gods. But when I insist upon the dominant nature of the agricultural element in the fairy creed, I by no means deny or overlook the numerous other elements which have entered into it. The latter, however, are, I believe, secondary, the former primary.19th century people 'mythologists' and 'scholars' could see only either myths or humans in place of god-like beings where the traditions of other people were concerned (the babble however was kept above it all). Where they could not turn Gods or other beings into humans (Danaan), they turned them into myths: the Gods of Olympus, Asen.

As I said, this is backward projection. Not only does it not agree with the traditions and experiences of the pre-influenced population whose beliefs or folklore are being studied, but even the knowledge these 'scholars' had about the traditions they were studying were very limited. Nevertheless, their ideas - however novel and quaint, like Freud's - got much acceptance and have now become rather mainstream. To the point that these ideas have come to determine modern understanding of old traditions of the Irish and other populations themselves.

The same goes for many cultures throughout the world, not least of all India. In the Iranian and Indian cases it had (still has?) even been argued that Devas and Asuras must refer to the original IE Iranians and IE Indo-Aryans. This is nowhere indicated in our or Iranian literature.
Similarly, it was argued in some quarters that the Vanaras of the Ramayanam must be South Indians or 'aboriginals', making war on the Lankans with Rakshasas reduced to humans as well.

QUOTEFrom an Iranian source on the net also I read about this Sudanava thing and I found that these are indeed people. There was a northern group of Sudanavas around the Bactria region and southern group centred around North of Indus. So these are indeed human.How do we know that they are not named after those they worshipped? There are many tribes who have the same names as the Gods they worship. Even in India you have this with many groups of people. Some people name themselves after single Gods rather than a group, e.g. Bhoopathi. But then you have community names like Nagas. Iran too had communities named after a group of Gods or entities, based on who they worshipped/showed their allegiance to/claimed descent from.

But none of these match the descriptions in the Puranas or Vedas. Check Ramayanam and Mahabharatam for descriptions of various interesting celestial beings. Gandharvas - celestials said to be all male, married to Apsaras all female. Vasus - spirits/Gods of Fire. Nagas, Serpent Gods. Rakshasas - nemesis of humans, at night their magic powers are multiplied. Etcetera.
Yet western scholars from the 19th century at least want us to imagine that most if not all these Gods/beings were always intended to be human population groups, disregarding any descriptions to the contrary given in the Puranas and Vedas.
This is what they have done with many another culture. 'Who cares what the local traditions and writings say about any set of beings? Ignore. I know better' is the logic by which these scholars worked.

It is interesting to note however, that the christian 'scholars' of the time totally ignored tackling the Vampyre and other kreaturs they had in a similar manner. For instance, when the time for this fantasy was finally over, it was immediately relegated to myth, never turned into a population oppressed by any invaders or other such nonsense.

What I need from you (or anyone else) - and it is an unfair request, I know, because I have sought it before myself - is proof positive that people who bear names of Gods or groups of Gods/entities (Danavas, Danaan, ...) did not obtain those names from consciously being named after said Gods/entities. That is, that those names originally only ever referred to human groups and were not adopted from the Gods/entities they worshipped or showed allegiance to.

There is this female American writer (not Indian) who works under the pseudonym 'Acharya S' - she wrote some books summarising others' works on mythology. In one of her pages available online, she argued that Krishna is another solar motif of God being reborn via his son, giving it as another example of a precursor to the jeebus tale.
I think it was she, who, in one of her 'proofs' for Krishna being a solar myth said that he was also called Vasudeva and was son of Vasudeva. Q.E.D she said.
Problem is, in India people regularly name themselves after Gods - Krishna's dad Vasudeva was not a God himself but was merely named after a God.
I don't know if you understand the point I just made, but I can't at this moment explain it any clearer.
People who are researching traditions of other peoples - and traditions are always massive amounts of narratives concerning history, variations of history as well as stories - often don't understand certain subtle basics of the traditions or people they are studying. They then make such blunders. This happens regularly with New Agey writers and happened more frequently with 'scholars of mythology' of the 19th century and even before.

ADDED:
It is odd that Druidic reconstructionists should wish to accept the theories initially concocted by scholars of the incompetent era of around the 19th century in reconstructing their Druid past, when none of their Irish ancestors from before conversion ever believed the Danaan were human. Scarier still that any European Religion reconstructionists should wish to reconstruct their religions based on the highly dubious results from IE. No ancient European knew of IE. However, I see the person(s) at that link you posted seems to rely heavily on it.

04-27-2007, 05:30 PM

I suggest we hold our thoughts till this proof-positive can be retrieved and posted.

Going through various sources, I have reached the conclusion that those communities who named themselves after groups, have links to the groups they named themselves after.

I have some theories, which might not be proof-positive but when combined together with each other will begin to resemble certain interesting patterns. But I need time to digest some concepts myself before going on to debate them.

Husky · (This post was last modified: 04-29-2007, 06:53 PM by Husky.)

Sure.

At some point, I used to also read about the IE connections used to reconstruct European religions. Many people would toss about different meanings for Druid and relate it back to Hinduism. Some confused New Agey people thinking they were following Asatru went as far as trying to read Shiva and Shakthi into their stuff, and basically looked for corresponding IE motifs in everything (Yin-Yang is not IE, hence they avoided it).

But then the flipside of this shows how it is most useless (mentioned this several times elsewhere on IF): there are groups of Europeans who are reconstructing 'Vedic Religion' as if it's not alive in Hindu India, as if it is a separate entity from Hinduism and as if Hindus got it all wrong and they know better...

So reconstructing based on IE is not reliable, especially when it's at odds with the known beliefs of ancient practitioners of the European religion in question, as in the case of Irish. For the real historical Irish, something akin to folkatru (traditions relating to fairy folk) were very important. But as one can only find vague parallels at best with Vedic Religion on this, some Druid reconstructionists dump everything that is known about their religion in favour of imitating Hinduism. That can't be a good sign.

On the other hand, there are numerous serious reconstructionists out there, who don't use any IE stuff at all, but consciously avoid it. Iceland never lost Asatru, so no reconstruction necessary in their case. And the large Hellenismos groups don't try to find IE links either. Some Celtic groups also stay away from it.

But then there are some New Agey people, just as eager as those 'vedik reconstructionists' or whatever they are called, who were learning PIE to speak it and worship the PIE 'gods'! Good luck with that is all I could think of.
It's a mockery of the real Old Religions of Europe, I find.
So in the end, I just quit looking for more information about the IE-related speculations mentioned in such sites.

ADDED:
I wanted to mention the following when I originally wrote the post, but I didn't have any link to support it. It concerns an episode of the travel show 'Getaway' I think it was that I'd seen some years ago. One of the hosts was off to Iceland and among the many sights to be seen, they described a wood popularly known to house many pixies or trolls or some other little people.
In Iceland some people still see these creatures it seems, as they showed a lady famous in the country for seeing them. She couldn't speak English, but her son or other near-relative was also there in the episode and he was interviewed. He didn't believe in any of this, because he couldn't see them. But many locals believed her and regularly took her advice on matters that might affect these creatures. I think it was in the Getaway program where they mentioned that even the government deferred to her request not to build as planned in a location where she said many of these creatures lived. The government quickly called the construction off because of what she told them.

Today I was finally able to track down some background. It's a summary of this episode of Getaway, even if it only makes a very brief mention of the Icelandic lady:
http://getaway.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=17523
QUOTEHellisgerÃ°i Lava Park, meanwhile, is a landscaped leisure spot, first planted in 1924. Due to the amount of lava there, local folklore has it that the park has Iceland's highest concentration of elf activity. Eria, the Elf Lady, gives guided elf walks through the town and garden to show visitors "hot elf spots". Icelanders take their little people seriously and Eria swears she sees elves everywhere she goes. 
In The Netherlands and Germany and Scandinavian countries, their people used to believe in 'Kabouters', something which has now gone into Dutch folklore. But they say it was once part of general belief. People used to set out dishes for Kabouters and other creatures during dinner time. After christianity they kept up this practice - the church was unable to end it - but the dishes were thereafter dedicated to jeebus instead.
The English resort to describing 'Kabouters' with the term 'gnomes' I think, but gnome is the wrong word (I think it's Greek or Latin for 'wise'? - or so Tolkien wrote anyway). Everyone now the world over would have seen 'garden gnomes', that's what Kabouters were traditionally thought to have looked like.

All these other creatures that the N Europeans had, were part of the Old Traditions of the northern countries. In Ireland and Wales they had their own traditions about somewhat different creatures: like the Tuatha De Danaan of Tir Na Nog or whatever it was called, Giants and others. All of these had been fundamental parts of their lives and religious beliefs long ago.

**acharya** · 04-27-2007, 11:09 PM

QUOTECaste and Science: Hot Air and Cold Fusion
http://www.hinduwisdom.info/articles_aryan...n_theory/35.htm

N.S. Rajaram
http://www.organiser.org/10june2001/news5.htm

In an article titled "Genetic Evidence on the Origins of Indian Caste Populations", eighteen authors, mainly from Utah in the US and Vishakapatnam in India, led by Michael Bamshad of the Department of Pediatrics from the University of Utah make the claim that there were several waves of immigration into India, the last of which (from Europe) was responsible for the caste system. In their words:

"In the most recent of these waves (of immigration), Indo-European-speaking people from West Eurasia entered India from the Northwest and diffused throughout the subcontinent. They purportedly admixed with or displaced Dravidic-speaking populations. Subsequently, they may have established the Hindu caste system and placed themselves in castes of higher rank."
In his press statements, Bamshad has gone much further claiming: "We are able to demonstrate unequivocally that the upper castes are more similar to Europeans than lower castes..." This finding, they claim, is based on genetics.

To a scientifically informed person knowledgeable about the field, it is apparent even at first glance that it is the Aryan invasion theory all over again along with its associated Aryan-Dravidian conflicts. This is now presented as the product of 'genetics research', protected from scrutiny by opaque jargon-filled language. Genetics of course cannot tell if some people living thousands of years ago were Aryan speaking or 'Dravidic-speakers'. What Bamshad & Co are presenting is simply their presumption that they are trying to pass off as 'scientific findings' using some samples-all from near Vishakapatnam-and some numerical measures that they claim indicates the nearness of Indian population groups to the people of Europe. Their specific claim is that the upper caste Hindus are genetically closer to Europeans whereas the lower and middle castes are Asiatics.

All this of course is part of the Marxist claim- that 'class' became 'caste' in India, imposed by the Aryan invaders. And now all this is 'proved' by the magic of science! So at one stroke, this Utah pediatrician and his Dravidian colleagues, aided by samples from Vishakapatnam, have shown that both the Colonial-imposed Aryan invasion-part of the "White Man's Burden" but now adopted by Indian Marxists-and the Class-to-Caste transition propounded by Indian Marxists (and Dravidian politicians) are supported by genetics!

But the sheen was off the claim almost immediately after it was made. The same week, Bryan Sykes, a professor of genetics at Oxford University, made exactly the opposite claim: The British White population carries African and Asian genes. (The same must hold for other European populations.) But unlike the Utah researchers, he made no claims about their relationship to upper and lower class Britishers and their ancestry. So what does all this mean? It means that over tens of thousands of years, human populations have moved over large areas, and it is impossible to reduce it to simplistic models favoured by invasionists (successors to the "White Man's Burden") and Marxists. Further, it is misleading to use terms like "European" and "West Eurasian" to people so long ago, when they may not yet have moved into Europe or Eurasia from their original home in Africa-or even possibly India as Indian records indicate. (So Europeans could be carrying Indian traces rather than vice versa.)

There is also a fundamental scientific fallacy in the Utah study. Caste and language-like religion-is a man-made classification, not a law of nature. It is absurd to assign laws of nature to them, although Marxists believe that their classification is also a scientific law of history. Actually, Sir Julian Huxley warned against it long ago: "In 1848 the young German scholar Friedrich Max Muller (1823-1900) settled in Oxford. ...About 1853, he introduced into English usage the unlucky term Aryan as applied to a large group of languages. ...Moreover, Max Muller threw another apple of discord. He introduced a proposition that is demonstrably false. He spoke not only of a definite Aryan language and its descendants, but also of a corresponding 'Aryan race'. The idea was rapidly taken up both in Germany and in England."

Now, thanks to Bamshad & Co, this discredited notion as well as the Marxist Class-to-Caste Law has become scientific! If their theory (based on a sample from Vishakapatnam) has any validity at all, then Brahmins and Kshatriyas all over India must have some common physical features indicating their European ancestry. But they do not. For example, Brahmins and Kshatriyas in Kerala look like Keralites, those from Assam look like Assamese and those from Kashmir look like Kashmiris. This diversity goes to show that the Indian population is ancient, having lived in the same region long enough to have adopted to the environment by natural selection. What they have in common are certain cultural traits modified by regional factors like language, dress and food. These are acquired characteristics that have nothing to do with genetics.
These Utah researchers should perhaps next apply their methodology to Christians. They can then discover Catholic genes and Protestant genes. And among Protestants they may further find Anglican genes, Lutheran genes, Methodist genes, Baptist genes-all the way down to Mormon genes in the Mormon capital of Salt Lake City, Utah. Their methodology is the kind of numerology that can be used to prove anything anywhere. In plain English, their science is just so much hot air.

Academic prestige: image and reality

At the heart of this approach is a belief that academic prestige can overcome unsound scholarship. The goal of some of these academics, especially in the West, is not so much to make or present true scientific discoveries, but use the prestige that goes with their position to bluff and bulldoze Indians, in the hope no one will dare question them. This was also the thinking behind a recent propaganda campaign launched by a couple of 'Indologists' that tried to bluff their way with assertions like "no horse at Harappa, and any evidence to the contrary must be faked". To some extent, their faith in the servility of the Indian intelligentsia is justified: Indian journalists in particular rarely question any statement by a Western scholar. They believe that anything coming from the West must be true, and it is not for any Indian to question it.

As a former US academic I have the unhappy duty to shatter this illusion: the University of Utah and many others in the US are by no means distinguished for research excellence. Some may recall that more than ten years ago a couple of electro-chemists from the University of Utah (Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischman) claimed that they had created 'Cold Fusion' in a bottle. This amounted to the claim that they could create and control an unlimited energy source like a hydrogen bomb in a bottle, which would eventually solve the world's energy problems. It has not turned out that way. California is having daily blackouts. The work reported by Michael Bamshad and his colleagues-also from the University of Utah of Cold Fusion fame-falls in the same category.

The message of all this is that any claim should be subjected to critical scrutiny and not accepted simply because it happens to come from a person and/or institution that enjoys prestige. To take an example from the other extreme, the mathematician Srinivasa Ramanujam was working as a clerk in the Madras Port Trust when he made some of the greatest discoveries in modern mathematics. And Albert Einstein was himself a "clerk, third class" at the Swiss Patent Office in Bern when he discovered the Special Theory of Relativity. Yielding to prestige is the response of an illiterate.
Institutional problems
What is happening in academia for such extravagant claims that fail to stand scientific scrutiny to be becoming increasingly more frequent? One might almost say, the less substantial the research, the more extravagant the claim made for it. It is a complex issue, but may be summarized as deriving from polarization of academic life in the US. There is a severe shortage of technically qualified people. As a result, US is forced to import scientists and engineers in large numbers. Soon, teachers will be in short supply. This shows that American universities, especially research universities, are just not graduating enough scientists and engineers-or even science teachers. The feeling is widespread in America-among the public as well as in official circles-that universities are neglecting the educational needs of the country in the name of research. This has reduced the flow of money into universities, forcing them increasingly to seek funding from outside for their research: all they have to sell is their 'research', not their usefulness to society or meeting its educational needs. The demand for such funds is always greater than the supply. As a result, these researchers have also to be salesmen. This has resulted in an explosion of journals and other publications, recently supplemented by electronic journals (websites). To be heard in this cacophony of claims and demands, one is forced to make more and more extravagant claims. Quality becomes secondary and quantity becomes all-important. This is called "publish or perish", it is not entirely new, but now it has assumed unmanageable proportions. In such an environment, survival takes precedence over concern for quality or even truth. So almost anything is published as long as it adds to the researcher's bio-data. This is what is behind publications like the one authored by Bamshad & Co.
In the final analysis, what we are witnessing is a struggle for survival by a disenfranchised academic priesthood that will resort to any means to ensure its survival. And this includes hot air and Cold Fusion.

Writing as far back as 1939, Sir Julian Huxley, one of the great natural scientists of the century, observed: "In England and America the phrase 'Aryan race' has quite ceased to be used by writers with scientific knowledge, though it appears occasionally in political and propagandist literature. In Germany, the idea of the 'Aryan' race received no more scientific support than in England. Nevertheless, it found able and very persistent literary advocates who made it appear very flattering to local vanity. It therefore steadily spread, fostered by special conditions." (1887-1975), British biologist and author, who achieved renown both as a scientist and for his ability to make scientific concepts clear to the public through his writings. He served as the first director-general of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). Huxley was knighted in 1958.Â

**acharya** · 04-27-2007, 11:17 PM

Wondering what this may mean for the AIT and the vedic references to redheads etc.....

European Skin Turned Pale Only Recently, Gene Suggests (AAPA)

QUOTEPHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA--At the American Association of Physical Anthropologists meeting, held here from 28 to 31 March, a new report on the evolution of a gene for skin color suggested that Europeans acquired pale skin quite recently, perhaps only 6000 to 12,000 years ago.

This contradicts a long-standing hypothesis that modern humans in Europe grew paler about 40,000 years ago, as soon as they migrated into northern latitudes,â the article states, reporting on a March meeting of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists. Pale skin is said to have an adaptive value at high latitudes: âUnder darker skies, pale skin absorbs more sunlight than dark skin, allowing ultraviolet rays to produce more vitamin D for bone growth and calcium absorption.â The new date was based on genetic studies that suggested a âselective sweep occurred 5300 to 6000 years agoâ or up to 12,000 years ago, âgiven the imprecision of method.

Hmmmmm, eh?

dhu · (This post was last modified: 06-01-2007, 05:52 PM by dhu.)

QUOTE(Raju @ Apr 27 2007, 05:10 AM)The Basque, Irish, Welsh etc are considered to be proto-Europids and are till today fighting the Indo-European colonizers symbolized by the modern day nomenclature of 'protestants' and 'invading IE celtic tribes' in spain.
[right][snapback]67912[/snapback][/right]


Same thing we find in mideast with the shia sunni affair. Alot of people were shocked with saddam's heartfelt harangue of persians during his final moments. The IE-zation of "europe" resulted in a whole host of unprecedented rifts, carried over under one guise or another.

04-29-2007, 08:55 AM

BMC Evol Biol. 2007 Mar 28;7:47.

Y-chromosome evidence suggests a common paternal heritage of Austro-Asiatic populations.

* Kumar V, * Reddy AN, * Babu JP, * Rao TN, * Langstieh BT, * Thangaraj K, * Reddy AG, * Singh L, * Reddy BM.

Molecular Anthropology Group, Biological Anthropology Unit, Indian Statistical Institute, Hubsiguda, Hyderabad, India.
vikranttibriwal@... < vikranttibriwal@...>

BACKGROUND: The Austro-Asiatic linguistic family, which is considered to be the oldest of all the families in India, has a substantial presence in Southeast Asia. However, the possibility of any genetic link among the linguistic sub-families of the Indian Austro-Asiatics on the one hand and between the Indian and the Southeast Asian Austro-Asiatics on the other has not been explored till now. Therefore, to trace the origin and historic expansion of Austro-Asiatic groups of India, we analysed Y-chromosome SNP and STR data of the 1222 individuals from 25 Indian populations, covering all the three branches of Austro-Asiatic tribes, viz. Mundari,
Khasi-Khmuic and Mon-Khmer, along with the previously published data on 214 relevant populations from Asia and Oceania.

RESULTS: Our results suggest a strong paternal genetic link, not only among the subgroups of Indian Austro-Asiatic populations but also with those of Southeast Asia. However, maternal link based on mtDNA is not evident. The results also indicate that the haplogroup O-M95 had originated in the Indian Austro-Asiatic populations ~65,000 yrs BP (95% C.I.25,442-132,230) and their ancestors carried it further to Southeast Asia via the Northeast Indian corridor. Subsequently, in the process of expansion, the Mon-Khmer populations from Southeast Asia seem to have migrated and colonized Andaman and Nicobar Islands at a much later point of time.

CONCLUSION: Our findings are consistent with the linguistic evidence, which suggests that the linguistic ancestors of the Austro-Asiatic populations have originated in India and then migrated to Southeast Asia.

05-10-2007, 03:51 AM

What is your opinion about indian Y-chromosome.
Here are aproximate percent of the diferent haplogroups.
north indian
R1A 37%
L 28%
H 14%
C 8%
F 4%
R2 4%
J 3%
O 3%

south indian
L 29%
H 18%
F 15%
J 14%
R2 10%
R1A 9%
C 5%
O 1%
Haplogroups L,H,C,F,O,are considered as existent in India from paleolithic.J(J2) is considered as marker for expansion of neolithic from Middle east.
Some put R2 as original from Middle east or even Europe,while others consider original from India.
The problematic marker is R1A which is considered to originate in Ukraine 10000 years ago.Some belive that it reach India by paleolithic hunters from Ukraine imediatly after ice age( or of course as aryans on horses).
Except Ukraine,Kashmir genotype is similar in proportion and diversity,so some propose Kashmir as original place for R1a ,while it can be sugest a genetic Continuum from Ukraine to Kashmir.
I mention that R1a and J2 are only 2 major groups that India share Europe,while all the others(L,H,C,F)are absent.
Were i can find more data regarding this problem?

a map whit world y-chromosome
http://www.geocities.com/littlednaproject/W-MAP.GIF

**acharya** · 05-10-2007, 03:58 AM

dhu · (This post was last modified: 05-13-2007, 08:48 AM by dhu.)

QUOTEMait Metspalu, Toomas Kivisild4, Hans-JÃ¼rgen Bandelt4, Martin Richards and Richard Villems
Institute of Molecular and Cell Biology, Tartu University and Estonian Biocentre, Riia 23, Tartu, Estonia

Conclusion
The SCR of the pioneer phase of the peopling of the vast territories of Asia has gained increasingly strong experimental support, thanks to recently acquired deeper phylogenetic and phylogeographic knowledge about the spread of mtDNA (and Y-chromosomal) variation in this continent. Much, if not all, of the early settlement process can be seen as a âfast train to Southeast Asia and Australia along the SCRââindeed, so fast that the founder haplotypes at the base of haplogroups M, N, and R reached all major destinations alongside the route, as far down as Australia. It appears that Central Asia and southern Siberia were not involved in the initial peopling of the continent. It is also evident that the initial fast train phase was followed by a long-lasting freezing of the major geographic pools of maternal lineages in the south and further gene flows northwards from Southeast Asia and subsequently back westwards along the Steppe Belt extending from Manchuria to Europe. At present, western Siberia, the Urals, and Central Asia form a huge continuous admixture zone encompassing East and West Eurasian maternal lineagesâa process that has so far had only a minimal influence on the essentially distinct autochthonous patterns of mtDNA variation in most of South Asia, East Asia, Southeast Asia, and Australasia. 
http://www.springerlink.com/content/h007402m82331750/

dhu · 05-14-2007, 03:06 AM

reinserting comment:
QUOTEwiki on R2:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R2_(Y-DNA)

Haplogroup R2 (M124) is a Y-chromosome haplogroup. Unlike the other subgroups of haplogroup R, it is confined to South Asia and nearby regions.

The rest of the article is typical genographic type obfuscation. R2 firmly anchors the R haplos in India. R1b was preglacial and R1a postglacial, both out of India. They are all derived from K dubbed as Krishna by Oppenheimer.

05-14-2007, 04:07 AM

QUOTE(dhu @ May 14 2007, 03:06 AM)reinserting comment:
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTEwiki on R2:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R2_(Y-DNA)

Haplogroup R2 (M124) is a Y-chromosome haplogroup. Unlike the other subgroups of haplogroup R, it is confined to South Asia and nearby regions.

The rest of the article is typical genographic type obfuscation. R2 firmly anchors the R haplos in India. R1b was preglacial and R1a postglacial, both out of India. They are all derived from K dubbed as Krishna by Oppenheimer.
[right][snapback]68718[/snapback][/right]
</div>
if you have more detailed and recent information about R1a please bring it here.

dhu · 06-01-2007, 07:22 PM

QUOTE> On Mon, 07 Feb 2005 16:29:20 +0000, fauxdk@comcast.net
> wrote:
> > List:
> >
> > Since I came under considerable heat in relation to my statements about the
> origins in place and time of R1a1 (M17), I thought a quote from Oppenheimer from
> his book, "The Real Eve" would be in order especially since it appears to have
> gained considerable respect in the academic community. If you recall I argued
> for an origin of M17 in Northern Pakistan or India and was basically "shouted
> down". You can now duke it out with Oppenheimer.
> >
> > "For me and for Toomas Kivsild, South Asia is logically the ultimate origin of
> M17 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 hits 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". (p. 152)
> >
> > This statement, with which I entirely agree, is in direct competition with the
> views of Wells in his book, "The Journey of Man" where he has M17 as emerging in
> Europe and migrating to the east into Central Asia and ultimately bringing the
> Indo - European langugage into India. He also maintains that the highest
> diversity of M17 is in the Ukraine, thus bolstering his argument. This latter
> argument simply cannot be supported based on the databases to which I have
> access. There is extremely low diversity in the Ukraine and adjacent areas, as
> well as eastern Central Asia. However the R1a1 (M17) diversity in Pakistan is
> immense - precisely as Oppenheimer has said. > >
> > For those who chose to criticize my statements, you will have to realize that
> you are stuck in the late 1990s where it was simply a given that M17 emerged in
> the Ukraine. This pillar is crumbling under the weight of solid evidence to the
> contrary.
> >
> > David F.
> >

dhu · (This post was last modified: 06-01-2007, 07:59 PM by dhu.)

QUOTE(k.ram @ Apr 29 2007, 08:55 AM)BMC Evol Biol. 2007 Mar 28;7:47.

Y-chromosome evidence suggests a common paternal heritage of Austro-Asiatic populations.
.....

RESULTS: Our results suggest a strong paternal genetic link, not only among the subgroups of Indian Austro-Asiatic populations but also with those of Southeast Asia. However, maternal link based on mtDNA is not evident. The results also indicate that the haplogroup O-M95 had originated in the Indian Austro-Asiatic populations ~65,000 yrs BP (95% C.I.25,442-132,230) and their ancestors carried it further to Southeast Asia via the Northeast Indian corridor. Subsequently, in the process of expansion, the Mon-Khmer populations from Southeast Asia seem to have migrated and colonized Andaman and Nicobar Islands at a much later point of time.

CONCLUSION: Our findings are consistent with the linguistic evidence, which suggests that the linguistic ancestors of the Austro-Asiatic populations have originated in India and then migrated to Southeast Asia.
[right][snapback]68008[/snapback][/right]


Amazing. Talageri's endorsement of Chatterji's Indian AA theory may yet be proven right. If they need such ancient time depths and specific markers to link the Indian AA poplations to SEA, then what about all the other markers known to originate in India? What were they linked with? We can complete the china-Mao, India-Nehru equivalency with a similar SEA-Ho factor.

**Hauma Hamiddha** · 06-01-2007, 08:42 PM

QUOTEAmazing.Â Talageri's endorsement of Chatterji's Indian AA theory may yet be proven right.


I tend to agree that the support for the Indian AA theory might be emerging in these molecular studies. An scientist from India mentioned his as yet unpublished work which might have more to say in this regard -- we must await their publication. However, it also says others things that might not fit well with the prevalent thought on this thread.

**acharya** · 06-01-2007, 08:52 PM

This review is from: The Real Eve: Modern Man's Journey Out of Africa (Hardcover)

I found reading The Real Eve a little difficult to stick to, getting lost occasionally among all the letters identifying this group and that group. Hanging in there, though, was worth it. Most of the literature I've read recently has accepted the theory that species H. sapiens and its immediate Homo ancestors originated in and spread from Africa. Although other scenarios have been proposed from time to time, the Mitochondrial Eve study topped off the debate so that it is now taken almost as a given. What was less contentious throughout most of the discussion is the route by which the various species of our dynasty took to arrive in Europe, which was usually through the Levant to Europe and Asia. In The Real Eve Dr. Oppenheimer gives very cogent reasons for believing otherwise.

Following genetic studies conducted recently by a variety of researchers including himself, the author puts together for the reader an intriguing tale of a southern exodus across the Red Sea to Yemen and from there to coastal Asia, where the Beachcombers as he describes the culture, spread from India to the Americas and when climate permitted to the Levant and Europe. What makes his theory so forceful is the interwoven elements of genetics, archaeology, paleontology, geography and paleoclimatology with which he creates it.

What I found most fascinating was Dr. Oppenheimer's critique of the American adversarial style of archaeological and anthropological studies. His description of an entrenched elder generation vigorously fending off the encroachment of an energetic younger generation that is trying to make a name for itself by overturning respected theories is not far off the mark. Reputation means academic power and control of grants and tenure. With cut backs in government finance of education and research, these plums are harder to come by than they were, and he-and it's usually been a "he" in these situations-who controls the department controls the future of the fledgling wannabes. I saw this type of professional skirmish in action myself while studying history some time ago. The reader can see it in action by simply following the course of the debate over the peopling of the Americas that has occurred in the literature of the past 50 years. Dr. Oppenheimer gives a blunt overview of it in his book.

Clearly there is a political dimension to research on the DNA method of human migration

What is most admirable about the discussion-despite its confusion for the lay person-is the fact that the author tends to stick with genes rather than individuals. Other authors try to depict individuals like Oppenheimer's Nasreen or Cane as people to capture the reader's imagination. While this is entertaining, it also creates the false idea that "A" Nasreen lived and breathed when in fact a particular gene sequence rather than a person is what is being followed. Human beings are masses of genetic sequences which we reshuffle with each generation. I found myself getting caught up in this mystique of an individual Eve when I first started reading literature on the subject, and it took a while to get the concept clear of personalities. I think the sense of gene flow is more apparent in this work than in others I've read.

dhu · (This post was last modified: 06-01-2007, 11:36 PM by dhu.)

QUOTEI tend to agree that the support for the Indian AA theory might be emerging in these molecular studies.Â An scientist from India mentioned his as yet unpublished work which might have more to say in this regard -- we must await their publication. However, it also says others things that might not fit well with the prevalent thought on this thread.
[right][snapback]69634[/snapback][/right]


No need to get overexcited over a minority of types in India or dream up a resurrection of a witzelian para-munda hypothesis. Haplo O derivation from 'Krishna' has been known for some time. What is amazing here is that this minority Indian Haplo O can be linked to a specific language group in a, more or less, 1:1 fashion, in deep time. In no way does this negate Oppenheimer's conclusion about Western "Caucasoids" and their ultimate roots in India. India is a diversification crucible with room for more than one language family. The key factor is not the stocks of languages which can vary d/t convergence, divergence, founder effects, and whole host of other factors, but rather the gross number of languages, which requires in-depth time to fully develop.

QUOTEp 239
One of the branches, Group O, is found nearly exclusively in East and Southeast Asia.Â I shall call this branch Ho, afetr both the Chinese explorer.. . If we imagine that this branch was born, like the maternal lines B and F, when a beachcombinhg Krishna arrived in Burma from India, then Ho splits easily into three branches.Â All three branches now have representatives in China, Indo-China, and Southeast Asia, but they differed in their degree of Northern spread.

dhu · (This post was last modified: 06-02-2007, 12:55 AM by dhu.)

QUOTE(acharya @ Jun 1 2007, 08:52 PM)
Clearly there is a political dimension to research on the DNA method of human migration

[right][snapback]69636[/snapback][/right]


Wel they have no problem associating a minority Indian marker with AA. Do the same type of analysis with the other plethora of Indian-derived markers and all hell breaks loose.

dhu · 06-02-2007, 06:05 PM

QUOTEIn his book The Real Eve, Oppenheimer hypothesizes that Eurasians have South Asian origins, with the founding population of Caucasoids (Western Eurasians) originating in northwest India, while the founding population of Mongoloids (Eastern Eurasians) originated in northeast India/Nepal. Caucasoids spread north and west into Central Asia, West Asia, North Africa and Europe, as well as south into southern India and Sri Lanka, while Mongoloids spread north and east into Siberia, East Asia, Southeast Asia, Polynesia, the Americas and Greenland. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Oppenheimer

Login




Remember me Lost Password?