Re: [tied] Re: Genetic Studies and Aryan Migrations

I haven't read Danino, so my comments rely exclusively
on the quote from his "conclusion" as given below.
1) If there are neither "Caucasoid" nor "Central
Asian" genes in the Indian pool studied, and if one
concludes thence that there is no
"genetic" proof of invasion or infiltration from the
north, then one ought also, in the absence of further
arguments, hold that there is no "genetic" proof of
the reverse movement. Which leaves us with two
"unpenetrated" solitudes. And yet the linguistic facts
suggest a very close relationship between Indic and
Iranic and between Indic and other Indo-European
languages.
2) So if the above holds, then we must conclude that
genetics is completely irrelevant to the issue of AIT
vs. OIT.
But is the above (and the quote below) really true?

> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "vishalsagarwal"
> <vishalagarwal@...>
> wrote:
> >
> > The following new paper has appeared, synthesizing
> all recent
> > publications on this subject--
> >
> > Title: Genetics and the Aryan Debate
> > Author: Michel Danino
> > Publication: _Puratattva_, Bulletin of the Indian
> Archaeolgical
> > Society, New Delhi, No.36, 2005-06,
> >
> >
> > Excerpt from 'Conclusion' section of the paper:
> > [QUOTE BEGINS] It is, of course, still possible to
> find genetic
> > studies trying to interpret differences between
> North and South
> > Indians or higher and lower castes within the
> invasionist
> framework,
> > but that is simply because they take it for
> granted in the first
> > place. None of the nine major studies quoted above
> lends any
> support
> > to it, and none proposes to define a demarcation
> line between tribe
> > and caste. The overall picture emerging from these
> studies is,
> > first, an unequivocal rejection of a 3500-BP
> arrival of
> > a 'Caucasoid' or Central Asian gene pool. Just as
> the imaginary
> > Aryan invasion / migration left no trace in Indian
> literature, in
> > the archaeological and the anthropological record,
> it is invisible
> > at the genetic level. The agreement between these
> different fields
> > is remarkable by any standard, and offers hope for
> a grand
> synthesis
> > in the near future, which will also integrate
> agriculture and
> > linguistics.[....] Genetics is a fast-evolving
> discipline, and the
> > studies quoted above are certainly not the last
> word; but they have
> > laid the basis for a wholly different perspective
> of Indian
> > populations, and it is most unlikely that we will
> have to abandon
> it
> > to return to the crude racial nineteenth-century
> fallacies of Aryan
> > invaders and Dravidian autochthons. Neither have
> any reality in
> > genetic terms, just as they have no reality in
> archaeological or
> > cultural terms. In this sense, genetics is joining
> other
> disciplines
> > in helping to clean the cobwebs of colonial
> historiography. If some
> > have a vested interest in patching together the
> said cobwebs so
> they
> > may keep cluttering our history textbooks, they
> are only delaying
> > the inevitable. [END QUOTE]

____________________________________________________________________________________
Any questions? Get answers on any topic at www.Answers.yahoo.com. Try it now.