• 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
What DNA Says About Aryan Invasion Theory-1
David Frawley has an old article on the Celts that traces their origin to the Druhyus in Afghanistan. http://northernway.org/school/onwarticles.html The article is dated since it is pre-Oppenheimer.

Yes, they were purged by the Christians and disappeared with scarcely a whimper.

I would ascribe their origin to a hybrid mix of SE Asians and SSVC peoples. Their iconography and technology was SE Asian-Chinese in origin. Their language and knowledge was Indian in origin. Their long westward trajectory traces back to an originating locus far in the East.

also see talageri: http://voi.org/books/rig/ch7.htm

Subhash Kak has summarised in article on Sulekha. It would be great if somebody can write a nice FAQ style article on this topic.
Complete Text:

<b>Did Early Humans Go North or South?
Science Magazine</b> | 2005-05-13 | Peter Forster and Shuichi Matsumura

By analyzing the DNA of living humans from different locations, geneticists are able to assemble a detailed reconstruction of prehistoric human colonization of the world. This research endeavor was championed by the late Allan Wilson [HN1] and his colleagues (1, 2), who led the way with their studies of maternally inherited mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) [HN2]. Their work led to the proposal of a recent African origin for modern humans, some 5000 generations ago. Anthropologists and geneticists have since joined forces to create a broad framework of possible prehistoric human migration routes [HN3] and time scales (3-6). The two latest additions to this framework are described by Thangaraj et al. [HN4] (7) on page 996 and Macaulay et al. [HN5] (8) on page 1034 of this issue.

Our current understanding is that modern humans arose ~150,000 years ago, possibly in East Africa, where human genetic diversity is particularly high. Subsequent early colonization within Africa is supported by old genetic mtDNA and Y chromosome branches (often called "haplogroups" [HN6]) in the Bushmen or Khoisan [HN7] of the Kalahari Desert, and in certain pygmy tribes [HN8] in the central African rainforest. Early humans even ventured out of Africa briefly, as indicated by the 90,000-year-old Skhul and Qafzeh fossils [HN9] found in Israel. The next event clearly visible in the mitochondrial evolutionary tree is an expansion signature of so-called L2 and L3 mtDNA types in Africa about 85,000 years ago, which now represent more than two-thirds of female lineages throughout most of Africa. The reason for this remarkable expansion is unclear, but it led directly to the only successful migration out of Africa, and is genetically dated by mtDNA to have occurred some time between 55,000 and 85,000 years ago. Studies of the paternally inherited Y chromosome [HN10] yield time estimates for the African exodus that are in broad agreement with those derived from mtDNA.

It is at this point in the narrative that the studies by Thangaraj et al. (7) and Macaulay et al. (8) come into the picture. Which route did the first Eurasians take out of Africa? Most obvious, perhaps, is the route along the Nile and across the Sinai Peninsula leading into the rest of the world (see the figure). But if that were so, why was adjacent Europe settled thousands of years later than distant Australia? In Europe, Neanderthals were replaced by modern humans only about 30,000 to 40,000 years ago, whereas southern Australia was definitely inhabited 46,000 years ago and northern Australia and Southeast Asia necessarily even earlier (9, 10). [HN11] Or did our ancestors instead depart from East Africa, crossing the Red Sea and then following the coast of the Indian Ocean (11)? A purely coastal "express train" would conveniently explain the early dates for human presence in Australia, but would require that humans were capable of crossing the mouth of the Red Sea some 60,000 years ago. Why, then, was this feat not repeated by any later African emigrants, particularly when the Red Sea level dropped to a minimum about 20,000 years ago?

Ideally, these questions would be answered by investigating ancient fossils and DNA from the Arabian Peninsula. But because this option is currently not available, Thangaraj et al. and Macaulay et al. have centered their investigation on the other side of the Indian Ocean, in the Andaman Islands and Malaysian Peninsula. Both groups used genetic studies of relict populations known to differ substantially from their Asian neighbors to estimate the arrival time of the first humans in these locations. Thangaraj and colleagues sampled the Andamanese [HN12], who were decimated in the 19th century by diseases imported by the British and then suffered displacement by modern Indian immigration (12). Macaulay and co-workers sampled the native tribal people of Malaysia, called the Orang Asli [HN13] ("original people").

Fortunately, the two teams arrived at compatible conclusions. In the Andaman Islands, Thangaraj et al. identified the M31 and M32 mtDNA types among indigenous Andamanese. These two mtDNA types branched directly from M mtDNA, which arose as a founder 65,000 years ago. This time estimate for the arrival of M founder mtDNA is matched by that of Macaulay and co-workers. These investigators found mtDNA types M21 and M22 in their Malaysian data set. These M types are geographically specific branches of M that branched off from other Asian mtDNA lineages around 60,000 years ago. Thus, the first Eurasians appear to have reached the coast of the Indian Ocean soon after leaving Africa, regardless of whether they took the northern or the southern route. Interestingly, the adjacent Nicobar Islands do not harbor any old mtDNA branches specific to the islands. Instead, their mtDNA has a close and hence recent genetic relationship (on the order of 15,000 years or less) with the mtDNA of other Southeast Asian populations. This is not unexpected given the more Asian appearance of the Nicobar islanders.

Macaulay and colleagues go two steps further and estimate the prehistoric migration speed of early humans along the coast of the Indian Ocean; they also estimate the likely population size of the emigrant population. Comparing genetic dates of founder types between India and Australia, and assuming a 12,000-km journey along the Indian Ocean coastline, they suggest a migration speed for the first Eurasians of 0.7 to 4 km per year. This value is of the same order of magnitude as genetically dated inland journeys of migrant populations during the last Ice Age, 60,000 to 10,000 years ago (6) [HN14].

One intriguing question is the number of women who originally emigrated out of Africa. Only one is required, theoretically. Such a single female founder would have had to carry the African L3 mtDNA type, and her descendants would have carried those mtDNA types (M, N, and R) that populate Eurasia today. Macaulay et al. use population modeling to obtain a rough upper estimate of the number of women who left Africa 60,000 years ago. From their model, they calculate this number to be about 600. Using published conversion factors, we can translate this estimate into a number between 500 and 2000 actual women. The authors' preferred estimate is several hundred female founders. All such estimations are influenced by the choice of parameters and by statistical uncertainty; hence, it is understood that the true number could have been considerably larger or smaller. Improved estimates will involve computer simulations based on informed scenarios using additional genetic loci.

Time is short if researchers wish to secure data on dwindling indigenous populations such as the Andamanese and the Orang Asli. The studies by Macaulay et al. and Thangaraj et al., which are devoted to the peoples inhabiting the "southern route" along the Indian Ocean, are therefore very welcome. We hope that the new findings will inspire archaeological exploration between the Arabian Peninsula and Southeast Asia in search of the remains of the first Eurasians 50,000 to 100,000 years ago.


R. L. Cann, M. Stoneking, A. C. Wilson, Nature 325, 31 (1987) [Medline].

L. Vigilant, M. Stoneking, H. Harpending, K. Hawkes, A.

C. Wilson, Science 253, 1503 (1991) [Medline] [JSTOR].

P. Endicott et al., Am. J. Hum. Genet. 72, 178 (2003) [Medline] [Abstract/full text].

R. Cordaux, M. Stoneking, Am. J. Hum. Genet. 72, 1586 (2003) [Medline] [Full text].

P. A. Underhill, Cold Spring Harbor Symp. Quant. Biol. 68, 487 (2003) [Medline].

P. Forster, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London B Biol. Sci. 359, 255 (2004) [Medline].

K. Thangaraj et al., Science 308, 996 (2005).

V. Macaulay et al., Science 308, 1034 (2005).

G. Barker, Asian Perspect. 44, 90 (2005) [Issue abstracts].

J. M. Bowler et al., Nature 421, 837 (2003) [Medline] [Nature].

S. Oppenheimer, Out of Eden (Constable, London, 2003) [publisher's information].

S. Venkateswar, Sci. Am. 280, 82 (May 1999) [Abstract].

Seafood Was the spur for Man's First Migration

By Roger Highfield, Science Editor

The lure of a seafood diet may explain why the first people left Africa, according to a genetic analysis published today that overturns the conventional picture of the very first migration of modern humans.

The international project shows - contrary to previous thinking - that early modern humans spread across the Red Sea from the Horn of Africa, along the tropical coast of the Indian Ocean towards the Pacific in just a few thousand years.

<b>And it suggests that the first migratory wave probably included fewer than 600 women, the mothers of all non-Africans alive today - including modern Europeans, whose ancestors splintered off from the group of pioneers around the Persian Gulf</b>.

The new insight into the first human migration has emerged from DNA evidence described today in the journal Science by the Leeds biologist Martin Richards, the Glasgow statistician Vincent Macaulay and colleagues.

Early modern humans in East Africa initially survived on an inland diet based on big game but by 70,000 years ago, archaeological finds suggest their diet had changed to a coastal one consisting largely of shellfish.

However, climate change seems likely to have reduced the Red Sea's shellfish stocks, driving them to seek better fishing grounds.

Much of what we know about human migrations comes from studying mitochondrial DNA, that found in the "power packs" of cells, which is inherited maternally, from modern populations.

The amount of variation in mitochondrial DNA sequences among different groups reflects the amount of time since the groups diverged from each other.

The team studied DNA from aboriginal populations of South East Asia, notably the Orang Asli ("original people") of the Malay Peninsula, the direct descendants of the first modern people to settle in South East Asia.

Comparing their DNA with that of other people around the world allowed the team to piece together what happened in those formative years - helping to rewrite the human story.

Dr Macaulay said such studies of genetic diversity will help to reveal the genetic mutations behind many common diseases.

The work is backed by a second study, also in Science, by an Indian team that studied indigenous populations on the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, which lie between India and Myanmar.

The team from the Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology in Hyderabad identified two relatively old populations of Andaman islanders that probably survived in genetic isolation there since the out-of-Africa migration.

• A French genetics study comparing strains of leprosy-causing bacteria indicate that the disease may have begun in East Africa, not India as previously thought, and then spread to the other continents through European colonialism and the slave trade.

The ability to trace an infection back to a certain region may help health workers to monitor the movement of the disease over time and determine the geographic source of new infections.
The Case is becoming solid for the southern route. Essentially, a southern route is a <i>prima facie</i> argument for derivation of Inidan caste populations from relict populations. Direct genetic evidence for relatedness between relict and caste groups is also available, of course.

video link available with this article:
How did early humans first leave Africa? Research suggests they took coastal route
By Randolph E. Schmid

- When humans first left Africa, which way did they go?

For many years experts have assumed these early migrants headed through what is now Egypt, across the Sinai and into the Middle East.

But new evidence suggests they may have taken a more southerly route, along the coasts of the Arabian peninsula into India, Indonesia and Australia.

Two reports in Friday's issue of the journal Science raise the possibility of the coastal route. The studies are based on comparisons of mitochondrial DNA in various native populations.

<b>DNA is the coded set of instructions in cells that enables reproduction. The form found in the mitochondria, the energy producing portion of cells, is inherited from the mother. By studying differences in mitochondrial DNA, scientists can estimate how long ago one group of people diverged from another group.</b>

Studying aborigines in Malaysia
In one paper, a team led by Vincent Macaulay of the University of Glasgow, Scotland, proposes a single dispersal from Africa along a coastal route to India and Australia. An offshoot led later to the settlement of the Middle East and Europe.

Researchers studied the mitochondrial DNA of the Orang Asli, an aboriginal population in Malaysia. These people branched off from other Asian lineages around 60,000 years ago, soon after their ancestors left Africa, according to the team.

By comparing that DNA and that of other groups in India, Australia and other locations, researchers concluded there was a relatively rapid coastal dispersal from about 65,000 years ago around the Indian Ocean and into Australia.

Evidence from Andaman and Nicobar Islands
A second paper reports the study of indigenous tribal populations on the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, between India and Myanmar.

These researchers, led by Kumarasamy Thangaraj of the Center for Cellular and Molecular Biology in Hyderabad, India, found two relatively old populations of Andaman Islanders that probably survived in genetic isolation since the out-of-Africa migration.

But this team concluded that the Nicobarese populations were more closely related to other populations in Southeast Asia, suggesting that their ancestors arrived much more recently from the east.

Further research needed
Peter Forster and Shuichi Matsumura of the University of Cambridge, England, hoped the papers would inspire further research in the area.

Forster and Matsumura, who were not part of either research team, noted in a commentary that the age estimates for early populations can add support to the idea of a population spread that occurred first along the coasts.

If the original Africans had moved into the Middle East and north, then why was Europe settled thousands of years after Australia, they asked in a commentary. In Europe, Neanderthals were replaced by modern humans only between 40,000 and 30,000 years ago, while southern Australia had been settled as early as 46,000 years ago.

The research was funded by United Productions, the Discovery Channel, the British Academy, the Royal Society, the University of Huddersfield, the Wellcome Trust, the Italian Ministry of the University, Muzium Negara Malaysia and Universiti Putra Malaysia.
More evidence of the overwhelming east-to-west gradient. There is a parallel migration from Southeast Asia (Haplo F) to Central Asia and eventually to Eastern Europe. Iranians, Croats are all derived populations from this South/Southeast Asian expansion.

<b>Madagascar populated from Africa and Borneo</b>

The Malagasy people of Madagascar carry the genes from ancestors in both nearby East Africa and also distant Borneo suggesting a big migration from Asia back to Africa 2,000 year ago, British researchers reported on Tuesday. The genetic study supports the puzzling finding that the Malagasy language more closely resembles Indonesian dialects than east African tongues but does little to answer the question of how the settlers arrived.

Madagascar, the largest island in the Indian Ocean, lies 250 miles off the coast of Africa and is 4,000 miles from Indonesia. Its long isolation has led to the evolution of unique animals, including lemurs, rare birds and plants. A team of genetics experts at the universities of Cambridge, Oxford and Leicester looked at both the Y chromosomes of Madagascar residents, inherited virtually unchanged from father to son, and the mitochondrial DNA, passed directly from mothers to their children.

Tiny mutations in these two forms of DNA provide a kind of genetic clock that can help scientists trace human migration and inheritance. The results showed clear similarities to sequences found on the island of Borneo, now shared by Indonesia, Malaysia and Brunei. “The origins of the language spoken in Madagascar, Malagasy, suggested Indonesian connections, because its closest relative is the Maanyan language, spoken in southern Borneo,” said Matthew Hurles, of the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute at Cambridge, who helped lead the study.

“Malagasy peoples are a roughly 50:50 mix of two ancestral groups: Indonesians and East Africans. It is important to realize that these lineages have intermingled over intervening centuries since settlement, so modern Malagasy have ancestry in both Indonesia and Africa.” <b>The findings suggest a substantial migration from southeast Asia between 1,500 and 2,000 years ago,</b> the researchers report in the American Journal of Human Genetics.
notice the name:

<img src='http://images.wildmadagascar.org/pictures/isalo/benja_sunrise_0037.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
Benja Ramanandoria, an ethnic Merina, near the Isalo National Park in western Madagascar. Merina generally have features characteristic of Indonesian ancestry.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Benja Ramanandoria<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Raman- more Sanskrit.

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->• A French genetics study comparing strains of leprosy-causing bacteria indicate that the disease may have begun in East Africa, not India as previously thought, and then spread to the other continents through European colonialism and the slave trade.

The ability to trace an infection back to a certain region may help health workers to monitor the movement of the disease over time and determine the geographic source of new infections. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Never heard before that leprosy bacteria was originated from India.
another summary article :

Eve Explained: How Ancient Humans Spread Across the Earth
By William F. Allman

The greatest journey ever undertaken left behind a trail of unanswered questions: How did our species arise and spread around the globe to become the most dominant creature on the planet? Part of the answer came two decades ago, when scientists stunned the world with the finding, based on genetic research, that all humans alive today can claim as a common ancestor a woman who lived in Africa some 150,000 years ago — dubbed, inevitably, "Eve." But while the notion of an African origin of the human family has grown to be accepted by most scientists, the details of how Eve's ancestors swept out of Africa to populate the rest of the world have remained murky.

Now a team of scientists claim that, based on research on the ancient climate, findings in archaeology and a new, clearer genetic picture of how the human family tree has branched over the eons, the ancient itinerary of the human diaspora can finally be pieced together. It is an epic story of escape from starvation, glaciers and volcanoes and braving shark-infested waters in flimsy rafts. And like any good tale, it has a surprise ending: Contrary to established thinking, it appears that our human ancestors took a more southerly route out of Africa, traveling east across the Red Sea into what is now Yemen, and then through India and all the way to the far reaches of Australia, before they swung up into Europe. "There was only one migration out of Africa," says Stephen Oppenheimer of Oxford University, who is a leading proponent of this new synthesis of our species's incredible journey. "They couldn't go north — that was blocked by a desert — so they had to go south."

A crucial cornerstone of Oppenheimer's piecing together of the human itinerary is the recent finding by Huddersfield University geneticist Martin Richards and his colleagues that the world's entire population can be traced back to a family tree that has its roots in Africa and a single branch leading out of the continent and into the rest of the world. Based on analysis of thousands of DNA samples from people worldwide, Richards' research reveals a detailed map of the human family tree and its various branches.

Digging Through Genes

Richards' research extended the work of scientists over the past two decades who have been reconstructing human origins by studying snippets of DNA from tiny cellular structures called mitochondria. Part of every cell in the human body, mitochondria produce the energy needed by all living creatures and, remarkably, possess their own DNA that is completely independent of the principal cellular DNA residing in the nucleus. Known as mitochondrial DNA — or mtDNA — this genetic material has a property that makes it a unique tool for studying human origins: During conception, half the mother's DNA and half the father's DNA merge to create a unique suite of genes that goes into creating a human being. But mtDNA does not undergo this genetic reshuffling; rather, the mitochondria — along with their mtDNA — in a sperm cell wither and die, while the mitochondria present in the egg cell live on intact from generation to generation. Thus everyone carries with them a more-or-less exact copy of the mtDNA from their mother, and their mother's mother, and her mother, and her mother, and so on back through countless generations.

The term "more or less exact" is the key to scientists solving the mystery of human origins. That's because like all DNA, mtDNA is subject to random mutations over the eons. And because these mutations are passed intact to the next generations, they in effect become "tracers" of family branches. If two strands of mtDNA from two different people reveal the same mutation, these people must share the same ancient great-great-great-grandmother from whence this mutation arose. Working from the assumption that genetic mutations occur more or less regularly over time, scientists can compare two samples of mtDNA, noting where they have shared mutations and where they do not share mutations, and resolve the time in prehistory when the peoples' ancestral populations diverged. Using this technique, researcher Rebecca Cann and her colleagues showed that all humans can be traced back to an ancient mitochondrial "Eve" who lived in Africa perhaps 150,000 years ago.

This "Eve" was by no means the source of all the genes in the world's living population. After all, each person is a reshuffled combination of 30,000 genes from many different ancestors stretching back generations. But each person's mtDNA is a copy from only one direct line of ancestors: their mother's mother's mother's mother, etc. In the same way, the mtDNA from Eve merely acts as a tracer that links all present-day humans to a single population of ancient humans, estimated at 10,000 people or so, who lived in Africa several hundred thousand years ago.

The Climate Connection

While Richards' genetic research suggests that only one branch of ancient humans migrated out of Africa to give rise to modern populations, research on ancient climate changes helps pinpoint the time when this migration must have occurred, argues Oppenheimer. Some 80,000 years ago, the world's climate began to cool into a period of glaciation. The polar ice caps reached far down into Europe, lowering sea levels and turning much of Africa into arid desert. This climatic shift occurred roughly at the time when the genetic evidence suggests that the tree of human life sprouted a branch that crossed onto the Arabian Peninsula toward India and Southeast Asia. Indeed, notes Oppenheimer, human-made tools dating back nearly 75,000 years have been found as far east as Malaysia. From there, our human ancestors pushed across shark-infested waters to Australia, where they left behind stone artifacts dating back 60,000 years.

There were no doubt other human migrations out of Africa before this time. For example, ancient human remains dating from 100,000 to 120,000 years ago have been unearthed in what is now Israel. However, these populations, like others, perished without leaving their genetic imprint on present-day humans. By the time the climatic changes gave rise to the exodus some 80,000 years ago, the migration pathway out of Africa through the Near East was blocked by the Sahara desert, says Oppenheimer, and so the only way out was southward.

It was only after the climate shifted again some 50,000 years ago, creating strong monsoons that turned what was once desert into the lush growth of the so-called "Fertile Crescent" stretching from the Arabian Gulf to Turkey, that humans had the pathway to begin the push into what is now modern-day Europe. The land at that time was populated by another kind of human — Neanderthals — who had reached there hundreds of thousands of years before.

While the two species of humans shared the continent for more than 10,000 years, recent studies of DNA drawn from Neanderthal fossils reveal that there was no interbreeding between the two populations that left a trace in the modern world. <b>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.</b>

The Incredible Journey

The final stage in the human odyssey was again triggered by climate change: The genetic evidence suggests that as the seas retreated during the buildup of the polar ice caps 20,000 to 25,000 years ago, humans crossed over the bridge of land — now underwater — that connects what is now Siberia and Alaska, says Cambridge University's Peter Forster. The distinctive makers in the strands of mtDNA they brought with them are still found in Siberia and Asia today. These ancient humans spread throughout all of the Americas, surviving the intense glaciation that followed, and leaving stone tools dating back 16,000 years at a site in present-day Pennsylvania. The peopling of the planet was complete.

Despite the sweeping saga of migration and branching of the human family tree over the past 7,000 generations since "Eve," perhaps the most startling result of the new picture of human evolution is how very closely related are all humans. In fact, the research reveals that there is less genetic variation among Earth's entire population of humans than there is in a typical troop of our closest relative, the chimpanzee. In the quest to find ancient family ties, one need look only to one's neighbor — or to the far end of the globe. "We are all born with an extraordinary interest in where we came from, and who our relatives are," says Oppenheimer. "This really brings home that we are just one big, very close family."
Dental evidence has always suggested out-bound migrations into C Asia and Europe. This was always covered up by the europeanists . C Asia is a center for amplification of atavistic traits due to the isolating geography .

by S. U. Deriyangala (2003)

The Indodont pattern is ancestral, shared with the relict vanguard :

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Balangoda Man probably represents the earliest evidence of the ancestral dental pattern of anatomically modern humans (AMHS) in <b>South Asia. This Indodont pattern,</b> suggests common ancestry, probably of great time depth encompassing Southeast Europe and parts of Southeast Asia as well (ibid.:138,180,198,203).[/b]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

cited by Deriyangala :

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->During the late Pleistocene,<b> Early Indo-Sundadont populations may have separated into two divisions.</b> <b>One branch (Sundadont).... The second branch (Indodont)</b> migrated to the west and northwest into the Near-Mid East, Eurasia, and eventually North Europe. This hub-and-spoke scenario may well explain why mt DNA results for modern Sri Lankan Vedda suggest they cluster between European and North Asians (Harihara et al. 1988; Saitou and Harihara 1989). Although current molecular genetic data are patchy, populations in India also appear situated between Europe-North Asia groups (Majumdar 1997)....<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Yes, as we now know, the South Asian populations <i>appear</i> to be <i>intermediate</i> because they are ancestral to the <i>atavistic extremes</i> of Europe and North Asia.

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The close affinity of [Balangoda Man].... with recent Melanesians, and to a lesser degree with modern Australian Aborigines, suggests that the Indodont (or Early Sundadont) pattern may be ancestral to the populations of the Sahul region. A recent study using Alu insertion polymorphism data indicates that the inhabitants of Sahul are as genetically similar as African groups to an unknown AMHS ancestral population (Stoneking et al. 1997).... Craniometric data... suggest a strong link between Australasians and South Asians (Kennedy 1975).<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Indodont affinity to Sundadont anchors Indodont to the original relict populations in India. Therefore, the indodont -derived populations in C Asia, SE europe, etc., <i>must have</i> come from the India region.
dhu, you need to put together a suammary article for us to propogate.
An anthropological principle is that transfer of human genes, goods and ideas is a lot more efficient along the east-west axis (it was extremely difficult over north-south axis).

This “rule” however started to have an impact on the way hunter-gatherer societies transitioned toward sedentary agro-societies – about 15-20K years ago. By the time we come to year 2000BC, the result is that east-west axis has consistently distributed human population centers – the logistics are smoothened out and the spread is autocatalytic. Along north-south axis, if you look at Americas you basically end up with only 3 main population centers: SouthEast-North America, Mexico region and the Andes area.

These three civilizations remained largely insulated from each other because the transfer of goods, people and ideas requires intermediate population centers, which were absent. So although the Andean people domesticated lamas, Mexico never really benefited from it and remained without draft animals till they saw horses brought in by the Spaniards.
Domestication of cow and horse was followed by widespread use throughout Eurasia – facilitating the transition from hunter-gatherer society to agrarian societies, which can invest time and effort on innovation and sophistication.

South African Bushmen did not see a “wheel” till after the arrival of Europeans.
User "Anand Nair" on Sulekha..

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--> Posted by Anand Nair on Jun 2, 2005


Please visit http://www.bradshawfoundation.com/journey/ for a pictorial depiction of man's migratory history, based on Openheimer's DNA studies.

You miss some crucial aspects:-

1. Agriculture and animal domestication had not been accomplished by man ANYWHERE in the world till 10,000 years from the present times.

2. In South Asia (that is in the region of present day Pakistan and Afghanistan), farming was introduced for the first time only 6000 years back!

3. The above means that that the Vedic (agricultural) civilazation is LESS THAN 6000 years old. Before that we were hunter gathererers.

4. DNA studies (by Openheimer or any one else) have NOT revealed any genetic migration from India to Europe (or vice versa) in the last 10,000 years.

5. Thus it is clear that THERE IS NO GENETIC EVIDENCE that there was any migration of genes from India to Europe AFTER the emergence of the Vedic culture.

6. The currently accepted Aryan Migration (to India from Europe) theory is based on linguistic evidence that needs to be explained. That is, to explain the existence of Indo-Aryan languages in the North, and Dravidian languages in the South. This theory postulates this migration (cultural, if not genetic) to have occured ONLY within the last 6000 years.

7. The above is a working hypothesis to explain the linguitic evidence and has no political overtones. This is a hypothesis that can be easily falsified if contrary evidence comes up some time in the future.

8. As of now, such contrary evidence has NOT surfaced -- certainly not from genetic studies.

9. The grandiose idea of India being the "cradle of civilizations" is a political view point that is not based on any evidence. Why not Africa getting this honour? (There is genetic evidence for this). Farming & animal domestication first occured in the Fertile Crescent (present day Iraq, Syria), Mesoamerica and in North Africa. Why not regard these areas as the cradle of the agricultural civilization?

10. Are the proponents of the hypothesis of India being the cradle of civilization (what does it matter anyway?), ready to abandon their view point, if in future, evidence to the contrary surfaces?

Anand Nair<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
"Nair" - i smell a keralite commie !

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->he currently accepted Aryan Migration (to India from Europe) theory is based on linguistic evidence that needs to be explained. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

this is ridiculous. linguistic evidence should only be used as a supportive one, not the primary one. Genetics and archeology are the primary ones and the AIT fails miserably on these.

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The grandiose idea of India being the "cradle of civilizations" is a political view point that is not based on any evidence<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

and the grandiose idea of white man spreading civlisation is not a political view according to this self-flagellating macaulay-putra !!


i second Ramana's request.

Please put together a summary of your posts in this thread which we can host here as a point of reference.
This Nair was responding to my post as Sinhala:

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->>>1. Agriculture and animal domestication had not been accomplished by man ANYWHERE in the world till 10,000 years from the present times.<<<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

As i said to him earlier, emigration from India would have accelerated as India approached Neolithic and a catastrophic cultural shift as presupposed by AIT is inconceivable with the start of neolithic. Same can be said for the other major neolithic which is chinese.

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->>>>2. In South Asia (that is in the region of present day Pakistan and Afghanistan), farming was introduced for the first time only 6000 years back!<<<<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

This is a malicious lie. All archaeologists trace independent Neolithic development in SSVC down to Mehrgarh which is dated to 9000BP, by even the pakis. Oldest neolithic is taro horticulture in N. Guinea as pointed out by Oppenheimer in his first book. And if there was diffusion of the neolithic, then it must have been from east to west

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->>>>3. The above means that that the Vedic (agricultural) civilazation is LESS THAN 6000 years old. Before that we were hunter gathererers.>>><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Even as hunter gatherers, India was a five steps ahead of rest of the backwater regions of asia. that is why here was so much emigration form india to regions north, etc, as proved by oppenheimer. there was footnote in deriyangala's book that archeologists in the Sri Lanka now test for silica on lithic tools since these were being used to "harvest cereals" at 17,000 BCE (horton plains). This book was taken taken offline as of yesterday and there is some german error signal in its place. Anyone can test an see that the link that i cited earlier to earlier has been disabled.

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->>>4. DNA studies (by Openheimer or any one else) have NOT revealed any genetic migration from India to Europe (or vice versa) in the last 10,000 years.>><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Not true. Figure 1.3 on page 135 derives euro mtdna lines J and T1 from the Near East at dates a few thousand years after 10K BP. All these lines had originally come out of india. Also the route taken by gypsies into the balkan heartland for Europe is the prototype for indian migration via the Mideast conduit. Again, the value of Oppenheimer is the overarching pattern he proves for east to west transmission.

As i said to NAir on Sulekha:

"The fact remains that to explain the genetics of Indians, the presence of Europeans is inconsequential. However, to explain the genetics of Europeans, a profound Indian ancestry must be assumed."

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->>>>5. Thus it is clear that THERE IS NO GENETIC EVIDENCE that there was any migration of genes from India to Europe AFTER the emergence of the Vedic culture.<<<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

which, even if true ( and it certainly is not as shown in figure 1.3 ), is negated by the fact that there is plenty of textual and cultural evidence for Indic inundation of regions as far as the black sea (eg the pontic Sindoi). Nair was previously citing a date of 50,000 for Oppenheimer which he ceased to do after i bought up oppenheimer's 10,000 BP evidence for indian origin of euro lines.

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->>>6. The currently accepted Aryan Migration (to India from Europe) theory is based on linguistic evidence that needs to be explained. That is, to explain the existence of Indo-Aryan languages in the North, and Dravidian languages in the South. This theory postulates this migration (cultural, if not genetic) to have occured ONLY within the last 6000 years.<<<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

As pointed out by someone else on sulekha, no one has a heart attack when placing origin of at least four to five language families in and around the anatolia cubicle. these type of hysterics are reserved only for Indians. Also why would dravidian center of gravity be in TN if it had originated in N India. In that case the center of gravity would be Maharashtra or thereabouts

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->>>7. The above is a working hypothesis to explain the linguitic evidence and has no political overtones. This is a hypothesis that can be easily falsified if contrary evidence comes up some time in the future.>><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

This fabled Linguistic evidence was taken care long time back by Talageri and Elst.
Oppenheimers histogram shows expansion of J ( from Near East into Europe ) a few thousand years after the 10K mark.

Haplogroup J is also called HG9

According to Kivislid :

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Indians appear to display the higher diversity both in haplogroups 3 and 9 -- even if a pooled sample of eastern and southern European populations was considered. If we were to use the same arithmetic and logic (sensu haplogroup 9 is neolithic) to give an interpretation of this table, then the straight-forward suggestion would be that both Neolithic (agriculture) and Indo-European languages arose in India and from there, spread to Europe.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

This means that both markers previously used to mark the so-called "IE Speakers" - M17 and HG9 - have LOCAL indian origins.

"Consider the people of India. Physical anthropologists traditionally
have classfiedIndians as "Caucasians," a term invented in the
eighteenth century to describe people with a particular set of facial
features. But this classification has never sat particularly well with
some Europeans, who were offended by being lumped with the
dark-skinned people of the (Indian)subcontinent. Gradually a kind of
folk explanation emerged, which held that several thousand years ago
(1500 B.C.)India was overrun by invaders from Europe (aka the AIT!).
These light skinnned warriors (aka the chariot riding "Aryans.")
interbred with the existing dark-skinned populations (or the "dasyus")
that the Indians acqired European features (and the "IE languages").

Recent studeis of mitochondrial DNA and the Y chromosome have revealed
a different picture. Incursions of people from Europe into India have
certainly occurred, but they have been less extensive than supposed,
and genes have flowed in the opposite direction as well (meaning no
support for the AIT and support for the OIT). The physical
resemblance of Europeans to Indians appears instead to have resulted
largely from their common descent from the modern humans who left
Afica for Eurasia (p. 160-161), all parantheses added)."

Olson, Steve (2002), "Mapping Human History: Discovering the Past
Through Our Genes," Boston, New York: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Quoted by M. Kelkar
related story.

pointing to the antiquity of southern civilisations, negating the "invaded and pushed to south" nonsense.


Unearthing a great past

Photographs: A. Shaikmohideen

<img src='http://flonnet.com/fl2213/images/20050701000106501.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
The centrepiece of the discoveries is this potsherd with the motifs of a woman, a stalk of paddy, a crane, a deer and a crocodile.

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->THE Iron-Age urn-burial site at Adichanallur, about 24 km from Tirunelveli town in southern Tamil Nadu, has attracted nationwide attention for three important findings: <b>an inscription in a rudimentary Tamil-Brahmi script </b>on the inside of an urn containing a full human skeleton; a potsherd (fragment of broken earthenware) with stunningly beautiful motifs; and the remains of living quarters (rampart wall, potters' kilns, a smith's shop and so on) close to the site.

<b>The Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) started digging the site in February 2004, <i>about 100 years after the last excavation activity there</i></b>.  <!--emo&Sad--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad.gif' /><!--endemo--> It is an extraordinarily large urn-burial site spread over 114 acres (45.6 hectares) on a low, rocky hillock on the right bank of the Tamiraparani river, close to a lake and surrounded by paddy fields and banana plantations. The first phase of excavation in 2004, stretched between February 4 and July 5. In the six trenches that were dug then, the ASI ran into a range of spectacular finds. Each trench was a square, 10 metres by 10 metres. T. Satyamurthy, Superintending Archaeologist of the ASI, Chennai Circle, is the overrall director of the excavation.

A total of 157 burial urns were found, 57 of them intact and 15 with complete human skeletons inside. Many of the urns, especially those that contained human skeletons, were covered with another urn, in what is called a "twin-pot" system. They had been buried after cutting the rock in circular pits, into which the urns were lowered in a three-tier formation. The earliest burials formed the lowermost tier, which left enough space above to accommodate future burials.

Among the artefacts discovered at the burial site were a profusion of red ware, black ware, black-and-red ware, copper bangles, copper ear-rings, iron spear-heads, terracotta lids with tiered knobs, terracotta vessels that could be used both as lids and as bowls, globular vessels and long-necked utensils. There were vases, pots with exquisite decorations, broken daggers and swords made of iron. There were also Neolithic celts, iron implements, urns with clan marks and urns with hooks inside.

The urns with skeletons had inside them empty miniature vessels, rice, paddy and husk. The miniature vessels were of three types: bowls, small vases and pots. Made of polished blackware, they are thought to have had religious significance. These small vessels invariably had their lids on. The lids were decorated with dotted, floral or geometrical designs and were painted. Some lids had tiered knobs that looked like chess pieces

One urn had the skeletons of a mother and a child. Some skulls had disintegrated, the bones had become fragile. Some urns were broken, and were filled with earth, obviously the handiwork of treasure-hunters. Three copper bangles and some copper chisels were also found at the site.

Outside, around the urns, were bigger pots, which were red ware. Iron implements, knives, daggers, spearheads and Neolithic celts used in farming were found around the urns. Some pots rested on ring stands of different shapes. The lids came in different shapes - conical, globular, and so on. More than a thousand pot-vessels were unearthed intact. Lots of terracotta beads in conical shape and hop-scotches were found.

What is fascinating is the discovery of urns with clan/tribe marks. Some urns had ornamentation such as thumb-nail impressions running all round the neck. The clan marks included three lines separating out from the top, with knobs, and garland-like designs.

Satyamurthy called the Adichanallur burial site "the earliest site in Tamil Nadu" and was sure that <b>its history would go back to 1,000 B.C.</b> "In our excavation, we have come across a culture earlier to the megalithic period. It is a well-stratified culture. The pottery is typologically different from that of megalithic pottery," he said. (According to archaeologists, <b>the Iron Age in South India stretched between 1,000 B.C. and 300 B.C. The Iron Age and the megalithic age were contemporaneous in South India. The Iron Age signifies the beginning of civilisation</b>).

The centrepiece of these discoveries is the potsherd with motifs in appliqué designs. It was found inside an urn which had a human skeleton. At the centre of the motifs is a tall, slender woman with prominent breasts and wearing a knee-length dress. Her hands are clinging to her sides and the palms seem to be spread out. Next to her is a sheaf of standing paddy and a crane is seated on the paddy stalk. There is a beautiful, young deer with straight horns and upturned tail. There is also a crocodile, and a knob mark. The appliqué designs were made using clay. A small thin rope was used to bring about the serrated effect in each motif.

Satyamurthy called the potsherd "a unique find because no such motifs have been found so far in burial sites in Tamil Nadu. These motifs resemble pre-historic cave paintings found in central Tamil Nadu, including Erode and Dharmapuri districts." Archaeologists are agreed that the depiction of the woman signifies the mother-goddess/fertility cult.

G. Thirumoorthy, Assistant Archaeologist, ASI, Chennai Circle, who led a young team during the first phase of the excavation (other members were M. Nambirajan and P. Aravazhi), also said that the potsherd was "a unique find in the excavation of the Iron Age period, especially in South India." In other urn-burial sites in India, potsherds with such appliqué motifs have not been found so far. One expert, who found them "amazing" and "fantastic", said <b>these motifs could be as old as 700 B.C</b>. Arun Malik, Assistant Archaeologist with ASI, said: "Normally, such motifs are not found on pottery as they are generally seen only in pre-historic cave paintings."

Thirumoorthy said: "Adichanallur shows the importance given to the dead in Tamil society. The excavation reveals the mode of burial practice, the disposal of the dead, the religious beliefs prevalent then, and the socio-economic conditions of the people who lived here at that time."

The inhabitants of Adichanallur used an ingenious method to bury their dead. Thirumoorthy pointed out that these megalithic people were intelligent and had foresight because they used barren and not agricultural land to bury their dead. Besides, the urns were buried on a hillock, where they could not be flooded by the nearby river or the lake. "This is actually, a rocky hilly area. The urns were inserted after cutting the rocks in pit forms. It is not like digging the earth or sand. This is laborious work. Their intention was to accommodate the burials that would come later. That is why they went as deep as possible," he said. They obviously used iron crowbars to cut the rocks. The crowmarks on the sides of the pits could still be seen.

The excavation has brought to light the town's fortification/rampart wall, which was made of mud with stone veneering in parts. Three potters' kilns with ash, charcoal and broken pots were found, confirming, according to Satyamurthy, that this was a habitational site. "It looks like a crowded town which was busy. On the one side is the burial site. Within 500 metres you have the kilns, which means life was active. It may have been an urban centre," he said.

Nambi Rajan said the trenches revealed a man-made floor paved with lime plaster. There were holes on the floor to hold posts. . A few individual letters in Tamil-Brahmi script have been found on potsherds. Plenty of potsherds with graffiti, especially the ladder symbol, have been unearthed. Artefacts unearthed include carnelian beads, terracotta beads and so on.

Some specialists are of the opinion that Adichanallur must have been a busy mining and industrial centre. The making of bronze figurines, iron implements such as swords, daggers and arrow-heads and big urns showed that it was a busy industrial township, they say.

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->For presentation to a mostly non-biologist audience at the Human Empowerment Conference (HEC), Houston, Texas, USA; Sept 16 – 18, 2005 (Session Chair: Koenraad Elst, Moderator: Srinivasan Kalyanaraman):


Summary: The so-called Aryan invasion, an idea designed to divide the Hindus of Northern and Southern Bharat, was never supported by any concrete evidence and yet was elevated to the stature of a theory. It has been pushed in secondary school textbooks as a dogma. Science now conclusively rejects any notion of any Aryan invasion of the Indian subcontinent.

I. Background

Study of changes (mutations, insertions) in chromosomal DNA is very difficult due to its magnitude. In humans, the egg contains 22 chromosomes plus the X sex chromosome, and the sperm has similar 22 plus either the X or the Y sex chromosome. An XX combination in the embryo ensues a female, and an XY a male. There are some 3 billion DNA base pairs in the 46 chromosomes in a human cell. Studying changes as markers in only the Y chromosome can be simpler, but traces only the male ancestry.

Cells contain mitochondria, structures where oxygen is utilized. A mitochondrion has its own DNA, only 16,569 base pairs long, and entirely independent of the chromosomal DNA. Following mutations in the mtDNA is thus significantly easier, but traces only female ancestry as the mitochondria are descendants of the egg, with no contribution from the sperm.

Attempts at linking of populations through insertions of repeat sequences are underway (1), but call for abundant caution because sampling errors, numbers of markers employed, choices of markers, statistical models selected for analysis, etc., influence the results of such studies (2). More importantly, polymorphism (different alleles, or slightly different forms of the same gene) subjected to local positive selection can result in convergent evolution, the reverse also holds true, and these can lead to abnormal conclusions regarding histories of populations (2). Attempts to demonstrate similarities amongst Asian and European gene pools not only suffer from such drawbacks in spite of vigorous statistical analysis, but also can be explained by multiple mechanisms (3).

II. North & South Bharatiyas Share mtDNA, Which Is Distinct From That of Europeans

Extensive sequencing and statistical analysis of a part of mtDNA which has sustained mutations (the mitochondrial hypervariable region I, HVR I), from reasonable sample sizes, has shown that certain sequences dominant in Europe are uncommon in India, and when found, are almost equally divided amongst the North and South Indians. Conversely, there are sequences common to both the North and South Indians which are uncommon in Europe (4). These data have been used to estimate the time of diversion of the peoples of Europe and Asia in the Pleistocenic era (4), emphasizing that these are phylogenically different peoples (5).

III. North & South Bharatiyas Share Tissue Antigens, Distinct From Those of Europeans

All diploid human cells express a set of proteins on their surfaces, HLA-A, B and C, which are unique to an individual. They are coded for in the major histocompatibility complex of genes (MHC class I) on chromosome 6. These are the proteins which are recognized as non-self by the immune system in transplant rejection, and are variously called transplant antigens, phynotypic markers, cell-surface markers, etc. All of these proteins in all persons have identical structures and functions, yet can be distinguished from others. Not all 6 class I antigens (3 each from paternal and maternal copies of chromosomes 6) may be unique to an individual; some are identical or similar. MHC class II proteins (DP, DQ, DR) are expressed by some immune system cells only, but may be even more polymorphic.

Analysis of the DNA sequences coding for the different forms of these proteins (alleles) demonstrate that while populations which are closely related, geographically or through known migrations, show similarities in their class I and II MHC antigens, the Asians and the Europeans are distinct, separate but equal, peoples.

Conclusion: The stark lack of similarities in the gene pools of the Indian subcontinent and Europe, vividly evident in the mtDNA and the MHC complex, destroys any ‘Aryan invasion’ notions, and confirms the genetic uniformity of peoples of the Indian subcontinent.

Chandrakant Pansé, Professor of Biotechnology
Newton, Massachusetts, DrCP@rcn.com
Indian-Americans for Justice & Peace, www.iajp.org

I gratefully acknowledge research support from my dharmapatnee Dr. Ujwala Pansé, professor of biochemistry, and our sukanya Kumaree Anjali Pansé.

1. Callinana PA, Hedgesa DJ, Salema A-H, Xinga J, Walkera JA, Garbera RK, Watkinsc WS, Bamshad MJ, et al. Comprehensive analysis of Alu-associated diversity on the human sex chromosomes. Gene 317, 103-110 (2003).

2. Bamshad M, Wooding S, Salisbury BA, Stephens JC. Deconstructing the Relationship Between Genetics and Race. Nature Rev. Gen. 5, 598-609 (2004).

3. Watkins WS, Rogers AR, Ostler CT, Wooding S, Bamshad MJ, Brassington AE, Carroll ML, Nguyen SV, Walker JA, Ravi Prasad BV, et al. Genetic Variation Among World Populations: Inferences From 100 Alu Insertion Polymorphisms. Genome Res. 13, 1607-1618 (2003). http://www.genome.org/cgi/content/full/13/7/1607.

4. Kivisild T, Bamshad MJ, Kaldma K, Metspalu M, Metspalu E, Reidla M, Laos S, Parik J, Watkins WS, Dixon ME, Papiha SS, Mastana SS, Mir MR, Ferak V, Villems R. Deep common ancestry of indian and western-Eurasian mitochondrial DNA lineages. Current Biol. 9, 1331-4 (1999).

5. Disotell TR. Human evolution: the southern route to Asia. Curr. Biol. 9, R925-8 (1999).

6. Arnaiz-Villena A, Karin M, Bendikuze N, Gomez-Casado E, Moscoso J, Silvera C, Oguz FS, Diler AS, de Pacho A, Allende L, Guillen J, Laso JM. HLA alleles and haplotypes in the Turkish population: relatedness to Kurds, Armenians and other Mediterraneans. Tissue Antigens 57, 308-317 (2001).<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->ARYAN INVASION <b>PROPAGANDA</b><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I like this, instead of the "Aryan Invasion <b>Theory</b>". The Aryan Invasion nonsense should not be considered even as a theory.

Btw, Dhu, welcome back. This thread sorely needs your attention. Pl update us.
Deraniyagala's online book on Sri Lanka was taken offline the day after I posted a few relevant quotes on this forum. This means that this forum is being actively monitored by the westerners and that they are extremely scared. I feel that Deriyangala's work may be able to push origin of neolithic in india back by ten thousand years. This would be the last nail in the coffin of aryan invasion propaganda. Even the google cache, which had previously been overlooked, has been removed, when I rechecked just now.

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)