04-15-2005, 09:51 AM
(This post was last modified: 04-15-2005, 10:17 AM by dhu.)
Indian populations are mostly indigineous to the subcontinent with periodic outward expansions corresponding to major shifts in subsistence patterns: middle > upper paleolithic >> neolithic, etc.
The Place of the Indian mtDNA Variants in the Global Network of Maternal Lineages and the Peopling of the Old World
Both western and eastern Eurasian-specific mtDNA haplogroups can be found in India together with strictly Indian-specific ones. However, in India the structure of the haplogroups shared either with western or eastern Eurasian populations is profoundly different. <b>This indicates a local independent development
over a very long time period. </b>Minor overlaps with lineages described in other Eurasian populations <b>clearly demonstrate that recent immigrations have had very little impact on the innate structure of the maternal gene pool of Indians.</b> Despite the variations found within India, these populations stem <b>from a limited number of founder lineages.</b> These lineages were most likely <b>introduced to the Indian subcontinent during the Middle Palaeolithic, before the peopling of Europe and perhaps the Old World in general.</b>
Our demographic analysis reveals <b>at least two major expansion phases</b> that have influenced the wide assortment of the Indian mtDNA lineages. The more recent phase, which according to our estimation started around 20,000-30,000 years ago, seems to correspond to the transition from the Middle to the Upper Palaeolithic. The first expansion phase may reflect a demographic burst immediately after the initial peopling of India around 50 - 60 thousand years ago. <b>This wave of expansion brought forward also those maternal lineages that can rightfully claim the name of Eurasian Eves.</b>
04-15-2005, 10:13 AM
(This post was last modified: 04-15-2005, 11:45 AM by dhu.)
The apparent diversity of the Indian physical type is not due to "mixing" of various peoples coming from outside. Rather, it is because all the different (non-African) types were "generated", more or less, within greater India. From Kivislid 1999 above:
<b>More than ten per cent of the Indian mtDNA sequences do not belong to any of the continent-specific mtDNA haplogroups characterised so far</b> (Tables 1, 2). Nevertheless, the position of these lineages in the world-wide mtDNA phylogeny (Fig. 1) is not difficult to reveal: <b>they all stem out of a node that occupies a crucial position in the human mtDNA phylogenetic tree</b> (Kivisild et al., manuscript in preparation). It coincides with a hypothetical branching point connecting a large number of distinct, well-characterised mtDNA haplogroups. Theoretically, the existence of such a node was obvious already earlier and in one of the schemes it has been defined as R* (Macaulay et al. 1999). However, thus far it has existed as an âempty nodeâ. <b>Defining it as the founder of a super-haplogroup of mtDNA lineages allows one to say that it is an ancestral state of all western Eurasian sequences</b> belonging to haplogroups H, V, J, T, U and K <b>and has the same position relative to eastern Eurasian and Amerind sequences</b> belonging to haplogroups F and B (Fig. 1). The western Eurasian haplogroups listed above constitute about 90% of mtDNA variation in Europe, whereas an Asian-specific haplogroup B is close to fixation in some Polynesian populations (Lum et al. 1998; Sykes et al. 1995) and, together with <b>haplogroup F,</b> makes up a large portion of the mtDNA varieties found in <b>southeastern Asian populations</b> (Ballinger et al. 1992).
04-15-2005, 10:36 AM
(This post was last modified: 04-15-2005, 10:47 AM by dhu.)
Sundaland, that is Greater SE Asia, was apparently the size of North America!!!
<img src='http://www003.upp.so-net.ne.jp/kodaisi/sundaland.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
<img src='http://personalpages.tds.net/~theseeker/Sunda_files/image006.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
04-15-2005, 12:04 PM
(This post was last modified: 04-15-2005, 12:18 PM by dhu.)
The most amazing thing is that Kivisild was second author in the infamous Bamshad study of indian caste populations which had forcefed AIT to the general public. Since then, Kivisild has apparently straightened up, dropped the manipulative, witzelian fool Bamshad, and proceeded with his own ground-breaking work, turning full a 180 degrees towards the pursuit of truth.
04-15-2005, 12:33 PM
(This post was last modified: 04-15-2005, 12:34 PM by dhu.)
Deep common ancestry of indian and western-Eurasian mitochondrial DNA lineages.
About a fifth of the human gene pool belongs largely either to Indo-European or Dravidic speaking people inhabiting the Indian peninsula. The 'Caucasoid share' in their gene pool is thought to be related predominantly to the Indo-European speakers. A commonly held hypothesis, albeit not the only one, suggests a massive Indo-Aryan invasion to India some 4,000 years ago . Recent limited analysis of maternally inherited mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) of Indian populations has been interpreted as supporting this concept  . <b>Here, this interpretation is questioned.
We found an extensive deep late Pleistocene genetic link between contemporary Europeans and Indians, provided by the mtDNA haplogroup U, which encompasses roughly a fifth of mtDNA lineages of both populations.</b><b> Our estimate for this split is close to the suggested time for the peopling of Asia and the first expansion of anatomically modern humans in Eurasia</b>      and <b>likely pre-dates their spread to Europe.</b>
Only a small fraction of the 'Caucasoid-specific' mtDNA lineages found in Indian populations can be ascribed to a relatively recent admixture.
04-15-2005, 12:56 PM
(This post was last modified: 04-15-2005, 01:59 PM by dhu.)
An Excerpt from an article previously posted: Basically, it is a convoluted way of saying that Western Eurasians and Eastern Eurasians are derivative extremes of the Indian type.
An Indian Ancestry: a Key for Understanding Human Diversity in Europe and Beyond
The absence of haplogroup M in Europeans, compared to its equally high frequency among Indians, eastern Asians and in some Central Asian populations is inconsistent with the 'general Caucasoidness' of Indians. Any relationship between Indians and 'Caucasoids' must therefore be based on qualitative and quantitative data on genetic markers common to Europeans and Indians. Analyzing Indian maternal lineages further, we found that an extensive overlap was provided by haplogroup U. <b>The distribution of haplogroup U (Table 31.1) is a mirror image of that for haplogroup M:</b>
the former has not been described so far among eastern Asians but is frequent in European populations as well as among Indians (Kivisild et al. 1999a). This reverse analogy goes further: Indian U lineages differ substantially from those observed in Europe and their coalescence to a common ancestor, like that for the haplogroup M lineages, datesback to about 50,000years (Kivisild et al. 1999b). <b>We infer from the fact that Indians and other populations do not generally share mtDNA lineages at the tips of the branches of the global phylogenetic tree with either eastern or western Eurasians that the Indian maternal gene pool has come largely through an autochtonous history since the Late Pleistocene.</b>
04-15-2005, 01:31 PM
(This post was last modified: 04-15-2005, 03:24 PM by dhu.)
Tribal and Caste Indians are from the same stock (and both are Hindus). As if any external validation was ever needed to "prove" the Hinduness of Tribals or the Nativeness of Dharma.- It was always a false question predicated upon unnatural Abrahamic needs.
The genetic heritage of the earliest settlers persists both in indian tribal and caste populations
Kivisild et al, 2003
Two tribal groups from southern Indiaâthe Chenchus and Koyasâwere analyzed for variation in mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA), the Y chromosome, and one autosomal locus and were compared with six caste groups from different parts of India, as well as with western and central Asians. In mtDNA phylogenetic analyses, the Chenchus and Koyas coalesce at Indian-specific branches of haplogroups M and N that cover populations of different social rank from all over the subcontinent. Coalescence times suggest early late Pleistocene settlement of southern Asia and suggest that there has not been total replacement of these settlers by later migrations. H, L, and R2 are the major Indian Y-chromosomal haplogroups that occur both in castes and in tribal populations and are rarely found outside the subcontinent. <b>Haplogroup R1a, previously associated with the putative Indo-Aryan invasion, was found at its highest frequency in Punjab but also at a relatively high frequency (26%) in the Chenchu tribe.</b> This finding, together with the higher R1a-associated short tandem repeat diversity in India and Iran compared with Europe and central Asia, suggests that southern and western Asia might be the source of this haplogroup. Haplotype frequencies of the MX1 locus of chromosome 21 distinguish Koyas and Chenchus, along with Indian caste groups, from European and eastern Asian populations. <b>Taken together, these results show that Indian tribal and caste populations derive largely from the same genetic heritage of Pleistocene southern and western Asians and have received limited gene flow from external regions since the Holocene.</b>
The phylogeography of the primal mtDNA and Y-chromosome founders suggests that these southern Asian Pleistocene coastal settlers from Africa would have provided the inocula for the subsequent differentiation of the distinctive eastern and western Eurasian gene pools.
Note: This paper has an excellent section on "INDIA as an incubator for early genetic differentiation..."
04-18-2005, 11:14 AM
(This post was last modified: 04-18-2005, 02:29 PM by dhu.)
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Haplogroup R1a, previously associated with the putative Indo-Aryan invasion, was found at its highest frequency in Punjab but also at a relatively high frequency (26%) in the Chenchu tribe. This finding, together with the higher R1a-associated short tandem repeat diversity in India and Iran compared with Europe and central Asia, suggests that southern and western Asia might be the source of this haplogroup. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
R1a is also known as M17, which was previously touted by the AIT/AMT/ATIT/ALTT (Aryan Lost Tribe theory) "theorists" as the invasion marker for "IE speakers". Now it turns out that even this marker had originated in India, made its way to Central Asia, and, from there, colonised europe.
For me and for Toomas Kivisild, South Asia is logically the ultimate origin of M17 and his ancestors; and sure enough we find highest rates and greatest diversity of the M17 line in Pakistan, India, and eastern Iran, and low rates in the Caucasus. M17 is not only more diverse in South Asia than in Central Asia but diversity *characterizes* its presence in isolated tribal groups in the south, thus undermining any theory of M17 as a marker of a `male Aryan Invasion of India', (p. 152).
Study of the geographical distribution and the diversity of genetic branches and stems again suggests that Ruslan, along with his son M17, arose early in South Asia, somewhere near India, and subsequently spread not only south-east to Australia but also north, directly to Central Asia, before splitting east and west into Europe and East Asia (p. 153).
04-18-2005, 02:19 PM
(This post was last modified: 04-18-2005, 02:39 PM by dhu.)
The genetic heritage of the earliest settlers persists both in indian tribal and caste populations - Kivisild et al, 2003
Our low STR diversity estimate of haplogroup R1a in central Asians is also consistent with the low diversities found by Zerjal et al. (2002) and suggests a recent founder effect or drift being the reason for the high frequency of M17 in southeastern central Asia. In Pakistan, except for the Hazara, who are supposedly recent immigrants in the region, the frequency of M17 was similarly high in the upper and lower courses of the Indus River valley (Qamar et al. 2002). The frequency of R1a drops from â¼30% in eastern provinces to 10% in the western parts of Iran (Quintana-Murci et al. 2001). <b>Both Pakistanis and Iranians showed STR variances as high as those of Indians, when compared with the lower values in European and central Asian populations.</b> Unexpectedly, both southern Indian tribal groups examined in this study carried M17. The presence of different STR haplotypes and the relatively high frequency of R1a in Dravidian-speaking Chenchus (26%) make M17 less likely to be the marker associated with male âIndo-Aryanâ intruders in the area. More- over, in two previous studies involving southern Indian tribal groups such as the Valmiki from Andhra Pradesh (Ramana et al. 2001) and the Kallar from Tamil and Nadu (Wells et al. 2001), the presence of M17 was also observed, suggesting that <b>M17 is widespread in tribal southern Indians.</b> <b>Given the geographic spread and STR diversities of sister clades R1 and R2, the latter of which is restricted to India, Pakistan, Iran, and southern central Asia, it is possible that southern and western Asia were the source for R1 and R1a differentiation. </b>
04-19-2005, 10:18 AM
(This post was last modified: 04-19-2005, 10:26 AM by dhu.)
Out of Eden
, essay by Stephen Oppenheimer
<i><b>Stephen Oppenheimer of Oxford University is a leading proponent of the view that all non-Africans are descended from just one single group who journeyed out of Africa about 80,000 years ago to spread and inhabit every corner of the world. Out of Eden is based on his work which maps and plots that incredible journey in time and space â across land, river and ocean â through a combination of genetics, archaeology and climate study. </b></i>
We have all wondered why people around the world look so different and what possible ancestral relationships exist between them. Do all the human âracesâ derive from several geographic sources or just one? And if we are all related, how did we get to be where we are today?
The dominant view is that the ancestors of all modern humans expanded recently from Africa to replace all archaic human types throughout the world. The Out-of-Africa theory was originally based on study of variation in anatomical features, but recent genetic study has provided a solid scientific foundation for the hypothesis.
In recent years, geneticists have succeeded in building large âfamily treesâ of individual genes and their variants, using technology that sequences our DNA. This research is helped enormously by the fact that two tiny elements of our DNA pass intact without mixing from generation to generation â the Y Chromosome through the male line from our fathers, and âmitochondrial DNAâ (mtDNA) through the female line by our mothers. The first major breakthrough in using these two gene systems to trace our genetic prehistory was made 15 years ago by Hawai'ian geneticist Rebecca Cann and colleagues. They published the first mtDNA tree showing that all modern humans traced back to a single African female ancestor, often labelled âMitochondrial Eve. The mtDNA finding was subsequently mirrored for the Y Chromosome or the Adam chromosome.
Since mutations occur at a constant â though random â rate, it was then possible to date not only the branches, but the base of the tree. The age of the modern human tree was less than 200,000 years. This confirmed the âGarden of Edenâ theory that modern humans, arising in Africa, had only recently replaced all earlier human species throughout the world.
<b>One Exodus </b>
The Adam and Eve trees also have the power to answer more detailed geographic questions of how we came out of Africa; which exit route did we take, how many exits were there and where did we go next? The most important advance in the past five years was the fine resolution of the mtDNA tree by English geneticist Dr Martin Richards with colleagues from England, New Zealand and Germany. This showed only one of the multiple African mtDNA branches peopling the whole of the rest of the world. Geneticists have confirmed a similar finding for several other gene trees including the Y Chromosome. Logically this single branch pattern makes it extremely unlikely there was more than one Exodus. In other words, only one band successfully made it out to colonise the rest of the world.
The implications of only one Exodus are enormous. First, it means all non-African peoples including Europeans, Indians, Chinese, Australians and Native Americans are related, and are recent descendants of that one small family band. Secondly we can now begin to get an idea of the genetic trail from Africa, which could tell us not only when they left and where they went, but how each modern regional group is related to the others.
It is not quite as easy as that, however. A mitochondrial genetic tree is, in reality, more like several strands of creeping ivy branching over the Earth. Multiple genetic lines migrated in parallel, thus eroding, even further, out-moded concepts of âraceâ. One region will share strands of different genetic branches with neighbouring regions; but each region has its own unique new growth. It is the new twigs and leaves that tell us where people migrated to and where they went after that. Genetic branches, however, only have approximate dates; so the reconstruction of these ancient migrations has to be matched with archaeology, the dramatic effects of changing climate and natural geographic corridors and barriers.
<b>Two routes out</b>
I have taken this reconstruction right back to Africaâs doorstep. There are only two routes out of sub-Saharan Africa to Asia, one up the Nile corridor, through Egypt and the Suez to the Levant, and the other in the South across the mouth of the Red Sea and along the Arabian coast to the Yemen and Oman. <b>For most of the past 100,000 years, the Syrian and Arabian deserts separated South Asia from the Levant and Europe. So, taking the northern route meant that emigrants could only go further north to Europe and the Caucasus. Taking the southern route meant continuing along the coast of the Indian Ocean to India, the Far East and Australia. </b>
<b>Archaeology and climate both favour the southern route. Australia was colonised at least 20,000 years before Europe.</b> If there was only one Exodus through the northern route, Europe should have been colonised earlier. <b>My argument on the reason for the late colonisation of Europe is that the ancestors of West Eurasians had to wait somewhere in South Asia, such as the Arabian Gulf, until the climatic amelioration after 50,000 years ago allowed them to make their way north to the East coast of the Mediterranean. The genetic evidence is consistent with this delay.</b>
There are other elements to the climatic argument. Between 80,000-50,000 years ago sea levels were lower and the short crossing of the mouth of the Red Sea directly from sub-Saharan Africa would have been less hazardous than crossing the Sahara desert to North Africa. Recent evidence of systematic beachcombing near the mouth of the Red Sea on the west coast, stretching back as far as 125,000 years ago, supports this.
<b>The clincher is the genetic evidence. Reasonably we might suppose that our emigrant band from Africa would leave a trace of their early genetic branches at the start of their trail. There is no evidence for this in the northern route through North Africa, to the Levant or Europe. Furthermore one of the two earliest mtDNA branches outside Africa, the Asian âMâ branch is virtually absent in these places. By contrast in India, the first major dispersal point along the Southern route, we find all the earliest genetic branches outside Africa and at great diversity and antiquity.
Dating the Exodus is another matter. Increasing genetic evidence from East Asia and the Antipodes suggests the Exodus could be as old as 80,000 years, but the genetic dating method lacks precision. Here the archaeology may help me in my synthesis. A picture is growing of rapid spread of beachcombers round the Indian Ocean over land-bridges through Indonesia to Bali. 70,000 years ago a severe glaciation briefly locked up enough water to lower the sea level by 80 metres, taking the coast of Timor to within 100 miles of Australia. Archaeological evidence for the earliest occupation of Australia by modern humans suggests that this is the only time they could have got across.
Other dates further back on the trail support this 80,000 year Exodus. An anatomically modern human skull from Liujiang in South China was recently re-dated to over 70,000 years ago. There is increasing consensus that certain pebble tools only appear in South East Asia with the arrival of modern humans over 70,000 years ago. One group of these tools was found in Kota Tampan in the Malay Peninsula, encased in volcanic ash from the great Toba eruption, now accurately dated to 74,000 years, indicating the presence of modern humans already halfway to Australia.
Later events â such as the peopling of the Americas and the drama of the last Ice Age â are also illuminated by the new genetic tools. Many archaeological preconceptions, such as the size of Neolithic expansions resulting from animal domestications and agriculture, can now be held up to the scrutiny of the tree that tracks people. The study of archaeology is changing forever.
An unabridged version of this article can be found in the July 2002 issue
of Geographical Magazine (www.geographical.co.uk
A few footnotes:
1. The commonly used mercator map projects a eurocentric view of the world in which the northern hemisphere is disproportionately represented. For example, Greenland is represented the same size as Africa, whereas, in reality, Greenland is 14 times smaller than Africa. The Arno Peters map corrects these eurocentic distortions:
<img src='http://www.odt.org/Pictures/PetersOutlSmall640h.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
The so-called eurasian steppe doesn't look so forbidding anymore!! A Banjari gypsi wagoneer knife-thrower in Kashmir is as equidistant from Aral Sea as from Kashi.
2. Also let us remember that, contrary to the usual indologist stereotypes, it is europe which is the cul-de-sac in eurasia. India is the veritable center or heartland of Eurasia. Geographically, the steppe is Greater India's backyard.
3. Population of Greater India dwarfs that of regions north as well as the ME. China and India are the two generative engines in Eurasia.
Posted: Sat Apr 23, 2005 12:08 pm Post subject: Dravidian and Aryan Myths
I quote Sir.John Marshall, in his book Mohenja-dara and Indus Valley Civilisation, vol-1 Page vi-viii says:
"Taken as a whole, the Indus Valley people's religion is so Charesteristicaly Indian as hardly to be distinguished from still surviving Hinduism....
One thing that stands out both at Mohenjadara and Harappa is that the Civilisation hitherto revealed at these two places is not an incipent civilisation, but one already age-old and sterotyped on Indian soil, wit many millennia of human Endeavour behind it."
Now please note that Hindusthan or Hindu is not from Sindu river, but "the Landmass between Himalyas and Indu Maga Samudram" and this place is Hindustan and people are Hindus and the book of ESTHER of Old Testament calls India as Hodu a minor variation of Hindu.
Sanskrit and Tamil are two eyes of India and the Father and Mother of World Languages", and because Sanskrit had a 6th Century BCE , Grammer of Panini, Europeans said that Such a Knowledge cannot be Indian, and came the Fradulant Aryan Theory. Now any Indian who calls Aryan or Dravidian a section of Indians, they believe Indians are incapable of Knowledge and Civilisation.
Christian Falsehood to "Divide and Rule and Convert" should be confronted with facts.
Politicians for their personal growth wants Tamils to be Divided, and hate Tamilans-Brahmins, Tholkappiar was A BRAhmin.
DRAVIDIAN MOVEMENT- WHAT IS IT?
The Europeans seeing that India has the mother of all their Languages- Sanskrit and Tamil, and Much Superior Divine contacts than the much confused Hebrews.
Portughese, first under Loyala and later by Fransis Xavier, broke each and every temple in Goa, then Inquisition was brought. "Anybody who has ANy God idols are helping Brahmins can be killed", this was Xavier wanted law. Robert DENObili, tried deception, he staying in Madurai, during Naicker Period, was required to read Tamil and Telugu but also required SANSKRIT, made a fraud Veda, called Yesur Veda, but failed miserably, and caught for fraud, left Madurai and died lonely in Chennai, and his converts remained less than 300 by all deception means.
One Colonel.Boden, who served in India for morethan 2 decades, felt bad on failure of Conversion Business, Pledged Huge Amount to OXford University for Sanskrit Scholarship, to help Missonaries.
Came RajaRamMohanrai, wel versant in Sanskrit and Persian, other than Bengali and English, Learned HEBREW, GREEK AND LATIN and found Brahmo SAmaj,
British who felt his ideals are closer to Christians and a Conversion of A Prominant Brahmin, would fetch huge returns, appointed a Learned Bishop to shaddow Rai, and convert him. RESULT, Rev. Fr. Adams was converted from Xty to Brahmos.
This created huge problems, then using the Boden's Trust, a Non-British, Non-Anglican church member Young Maxmuller was picked to translate Vedas, and ALL Indian Libraries were forced to buy his books. Monier Williams etc., are the product of this Boden Trust.
Wrong Fradulant translation by Muller, etc., was used for Aryan race theory.
By this they say Hinduism is not Indian and also the Europeans are the Aryans, who then becomes the cradle of Sanskritetc.,
Any body who calls a section of Hindus as Aryans and others as Dravidians are accepting the Missionaries fraud that Indian are not brained to make Sanskrit and Tamil and they are European imports.
Dr. Ambedkar, who was never a Hinduism supporter, wrote:
1.THe Vedas do not know any such race as the Aryan race.
2.There is no evidence in the Vedas of any invasion of India by the Aryan race and its having conquered the Dasas and Dasyus supposed to be the natives of India.
3.There is no evidience to show that the distinction between Aryans, Dasas and Dasyus was a racial distinction.
4. THe Vedas do not support the contention that the Aryas were different in colour from the Dasas and Dayus .....
" If anthropometry is a science which can be depended upon to determine the race of a people ..... then its measurements extablish that the Brahmins and the Untouchables belong to the same race. From this it follows that if the Brahmins are Aryans the Untouchables are also Aryans. If the Brahmins are Dravidians, the Untouchables are also Dravidians...
WRITINGS AND SPEECHES - EDUCATION Dept. Govt. of Mahrashtra vol -7 page 85 and 302-303.
The Casteism is increased due to the Dravidian rule.
The Dravidian Fathers want their Posting and Party Leadership to their Sons. Eg.Karunanidhi, Ramdoss etc.,
Unless We Indians understand the Mission of Church- to divide and Convert, of which Hate - Brahimins means hate Hinduism, Church comes in; Indian Civilisation and Culture would have grave problems.
People should expect proper handling of People respecting indiviuduala and their position, Law should not be Intimidated by falsehood and Position,
04-28-2005, 06:14 AM
(This post was last modified: 04-29-2005, 03:43 AM by dhu.)
Please remember that even minor movements within civilizations such as India and China are faithfully recorded while comparatively major ones in the asian backwaters will hardly be remembered by anyone, if at all noticed. The ones that we do know about such as those of the Huns, Mongols, and Sakas are only known through their peripheral impacts upon the two great Asian sister civilizations of India and China. Even so, these so-called horde invasions in the east always come from the east itself and are most characteristic of Mongolians and Altaics and hardly of such ancient white trash as the ruskis, etc. Even the Hyksos horde, which pinched Egypt, was a semetic one- where they came from and how they originated among the semetics is conveniently glossed over as that would dispel the europeanist delusion of aboriginal albino hordes invading the east. The Hittites are definitively known to have entered from the East and probably belonged to the same wave as the authentically Indic Mittani and Kassites. I see the slow, measured movements of the Kurds, Iranians, and Gypsies as models for successive Indic colonizations of Northern Asia. Greeks are well known as a minor sub-branch of our Parsee cousins.
Here Oppenheimer turns the conventional wisdom about Central Asia as a melting pot upon its head. Of course, he goes beyond the typical eurocentric garbage to rely upon dead solid genetic evidence:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->A third of today's Central Asian genetic stocks are west Eurasian 'Nasreen' maternal lines.Â Half of these consist of HV stock.Â The usual explanation for this 'Europe in Asia' presence is a recent eastward emigration along the Silk Road.Â the problem with this argument is that HV's common European daughter V, who might be expected to have joined such a movement, is absent from Central Asia.Â Furthermore, most of the other West Asian Eurasian Nasreen lines in Central Asia look more like they have come directly from India than from Europe.Â In other words, HV could have originally come from South Asia, round the east of the Caspian Sea, and then gone the other way, westward into Europe.Â There is Y-chromosomal support for this view of an alternative east-west route for South Asian genetic clans entering Europe via a Central Asian detour.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Oppenheimer then goes on to make the same case for the major Y components in central asians- TAT and M17.
05-01-2005, 08:35 AM
(This post was last modified: 05-02-2005, 05:05 AM by dhu.)
The value of oppenheimer's work is that it shows the deep east -to- west gradient at all points in time over the past 50,000 years. We are seeing systematic civilizational developments in the East with export of disparate elements to the West. As said by someone else, AIT is a case of Reverse Entropy Theory wherein a systematic civilization in the east is created by random motions in the west.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Sri Lanka, then a peninsula to the south of India, is extraordinary in that it turns the east--west cultural tables.Â Reliable evidence gives a date of <b>28,000 years ago for the manufacture of microliths on Sri Lanka.</b>Â These tiny, specialist stone blades <b>did not appear in Europe and the Levant until 10,000 years ago.</b>Â Indeed, in a tantalizing find, one level below these microliths, another more basic microlith layer layer has been dated to between 64,000 and 74,000 years ago.Â If the date of this find is confirmed, then it could be the smoking gun of the trail out of Africa around 70,000 years ago.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So here is a case where the mutant albinos were <b>18,000 years behind</b> the Sri Lankan pioneers!!!
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->In other words, HV could have originally come from South Asia,<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Should we consider South Asia as Pakistan and India or Indian coastal or Ganges region??
Reference of South Asia is very confusing.
05-02-2005, 04:47 AM
(This post was last modified: 05-02-2005, 08:38 AM by dhu.)
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->South Asia includes all the countries initially found along the pioneering beechcombing trail round the northern shores of the Indian ocean.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The oldest genetic diversity outside Africa is found in India in the beachcomber remnants such as Veddas and Chenchus. These originals subsequently expanded into the regular indian "caste" type-which have the 2nd greatest diversity outside africa. The indologist creeps were fond of saying that the indian "caste" populations had come in and wiped out these aboriginal veddas, chenchus, etc. Oppenheimer says that this is completely wrong. The standard Indian "caste" populations are <i>direct descendants of</i> the vedda types.
Another argument implicit in oppenheimer's thesis is that stone age does not mean culture-poor and language-poor. Think of the rich cultures of the native americans, categorically stone age, but as culturally developed as the Vedic Hindus. In this respect, all the different waves from India, up the Indus, into C. Asia and regions north were not just bland peopling events, but major cultural founder events. Oppenheimer proves that this happened not once, but on many different occasions, across tens of thousands of years; so much so, in fact, that it can be seen as a historical principle of east-to-west and south-to-north diffusion and migration. Also there was a considerable time differential between the incubation period in South Asia, and the first tentative ventures north: 30,000 years.
Oppenheimer's genius is that he follows common sense which had long ago been buried by the euro-racists: black evolves to brown which, in turn, mutates to pale skin. Of course, he goes much deeper into the genetics.
would it be possible for u to summarise ur posts into an article?
it is important that this new and concrete evidence is disseminated far and wide so that the aryan invasion nonsense is consigned to the dustbin where it belongs.
forget the others..many an indian still has a worldview based on that nonsense.
05-03-2005, 10:03 PM
(This post was last modified: 05-03-2005, 10:17 PM by dhu.)
Even Oppenheimer, in his first book Eden in the East, operated under the assumption of Aryan Invasion into India. In Eve, however, he has let go of all preconceptions and operated solely on the basis of the genetic evidence.
His work is also important because it basically cuts China into two, a southern half allied with SE Asia, and a Northern half derived from the Southern half. The same is mirrored in India where North India is ultimately derived from South India (dravidian transforming into sanskrit). Kak realized this in his latest rediff article, although it is mutely stated. The time depths are phenomenal.
I don't think North Indians would be averse to a south or East origin of their equally arya culture. The same cannot be said of the Chinese, unfortunately, who are currently investing heavily in forcefitting the now defunct multiregional theory into a northern chinese origin for modern man. Oppenheimer's work has turned into a boon for Indians and a huge headache for the Chinese, although the south-to-north dynamics that he explicates basically operates the same in both civilizations.
Personally, I think Oppenheimer, Kivisild, Villems, and group should be given ample breathing space to work for the time-being. The west realizes that Oppenheimer's work is irrefutable and conclusive; therefore, the silence from their end. It is also possible that their work can be sobotaged in the future and I do not expect our romila thapar establishment to take up the flag.
Oppenheimer also traces the corded ware culture to SE Asia (Eden in the East). Corded ware and double sided celts were previously touted as the aboriginal albino conan culture of the north. His evidence for SEA origin of corded ware is pretty strong and I'm sure the SSVC vedics were the intermediaries in this yet another southern expansion into the tundra north.
Basically, we have a lot of work ahead of us, in collating all these disparate threads. In non-genetic matters, Oppenheimer does not operate from an Indic perspective but rather a SEAsian one.
there is a saying in tamil that "kal thoanri mann thonraa kaalathe mun thoanri mootha kudi thamizh kudi" which means that " the tamil community was formed even before stones and sand was formed".
it does makes sense that if the beach combers would grow in size and settle inland and go on to become the great river valley civilisations.
people forget that india is a huge place in terms of arable land and living space and it is entirely possible that the sanskrit speaking "aryans" (harappans) and tamil speaking dravidians could live in peaceful coexistence without one invading the other or diplacing. since there were no mortal outside threat in those times these cultures could easily diversify and exist on its own right.
ur comments on mercator projection maps were insightful.
perceptions clouds reality.
thinking more abt it..even the north -south chauvinism is partly due to the maps.."up" north and "down" south. "upper" people invade "lower" people..eh?
i heard that in OZ and NZ they have maps upside down showing the south pole on top and north pole down.
btw, what do the usual suspect, the marxist "historians" like romila etc saying about these new developments in the genetics field and the discovery of dwaraka and the city off the coast of tamil nadu?