From: mkelkar2003
Message: 41914
Date: 2005-11-08
--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, george knysh <gknysh@...> wrote:
a
> > > > > > dominant
> > > > > > > over that of the locals amongst which they
> > > > > > > settled.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Irrelevant.
> > > > >
> > > > > GK: Love it (:=)) Ideological thinking.
> > > > > Q.E.D.
> > > >
> > > > I am not the one asking people to believe in the
> > **IDEA** that a
> > > > small coterie of people speaking a language
> > called PIE (or its
> > > > dialects) spread it around from Northern Ireland
> > to Sri Lanka and
> > > > yet erase all identity of themselves. So who is
> > the IDEAlogue
> > > here?
> > > >
> > > > M. Kelkar
> > >
> > > GK: Let's see. Our ideologue 1- ignores the
> > main point about
> > > the difficulty of tracing archaeological remains
> > of nomadic cultures
> > > as applied to the arrival of Indo-Aryans in India,
> >
> > (Kelkar)A classic philologically tautological
> argument.
> > Because the
> > "Indo-Aryans" are nomads they are not traceable and
> > why are they
> > nomads? because they are not traceable.
>
> ****GK: No. The argument is rather this: because the
> Indo-Aryans are indeed in India, and because they
> indubitably arrived there from "outside" as indicated
> by genetic research,
What genetic research? That is why the Olson quotation must be read in
full. Here it is. Please read it carefully:
""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
India was overrun by invaders from Europe. These light skinned
warriors interbred with the existing dark-skinned populations that the
Indians acqired European features. Recent studies 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. 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 (Olson,
2002, p. 160-161)."
There is no evidence that a particular "Indo-Aryan" are foreign and
"Non-Indo-Aryans" are natives. The Indian subcontient contains all the
genetic diversity of Central Asia and Europe and *then some.* It is
like this the Indian Sucontinent contains genes WXYZ and Central Asia
and Europe contain only WX or YZ or XZ etc.
Please read Oppenheimer (2003) book *in its entirety* to understand
the migration patterns of humans out of Africa. There is very similar
book by geneticist Spencer Wells. Here is our summary of Oppenheimers
book:
"In a trail blazing work prominent geneticist Stephan Oppenheimer has
convincingly argued that all the non African peoples of the world have
descended from the first Out of Africa Eve mtDNA strain known as L3
and the first Out of Africa Y chromosome line labeled as M168.
Moreover, South Asia and in particular India has been a major location
of flowering for L3 and M168 as they spread through out the rest of
the world about 90,000 years before present. The story according to
Oppenheimer (2003) is as follows. The African people carrying L3 and
M168 left that continent across south Red sea across the southern part
of the Arabian penninsula towards Pakistan and India. On the maternal
side the mtDNA strain L3 split into two daughters which Oppenheimer
labels Nasreen and Manju. While Manju was definitely born in India the
birthplace of Nasreen is uncertain, tentatively placed by Oppenheimer
in southern Iran or Baluchistan. Manju and Rohani (should be Rohini?),
Nasreen's most prolific daughter both born in India are the
progenitors of all non African peoples.
The story on the paternal side is a lot more complex. M168 had three
sons, of which Seth was the most important one. Seth had five sons
named by Oppenheimer as Jahangir, H, I, G and Krishnna. Krishnna born
in India turned out to be the most prolific of Seth's sons. Krishnna
through his son Ho, grandson Ruslan through Polo, and great grandson
M17 through Ruslan, played a major role in the peopling of South Asia,
East Asia, Central Asia, Oceania and West Eurasia (see Appendix 2, p.
374-375 of Oppenheimer 2003). Oppenheimer (2003) has
this to say about M17 and his father Ruslan:
"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)." (Oppenheimer, Stephen (2003), "The Real Eve: Modern Man's
Journey out of
Africa," New York: Carroll and Graf Publishers.)"
The migration suggested by IEL into the Indian Subcontinent at the
suggested times is definitely not supported by any genetic evidence.
This is not to say that The gene flow outlined above by Oppenhiemer
coincides with the spread of "IE languages" out of the Indian
subcontient. The dates of genetic flow are just too deep for the
current model of IEL. But the fact still remians that the current
model is NOT supported by genetic evidence.
The situation is hardly unique to the Indian Sub. The lack of genetic
evidence for IE speaking intruders into Europe AT THE REQUISITE DATES
is part of Alinei's PCT.
See section 3.2 p. 4 of the link below:
<http://www.continuitas.com/interdisciplinary.pdf>
M. kelkar
and because their connection to
> the other IE languages indicates an earlier
> "Indo-Iranian" phase in the steppes of Eurasia,
> deduced from a combination of archaeological,
> linguistic, and historical arguments, then the absence
> of conclusive archaeological proofs for the arrival
> and settlement in India is more than likely due to
> their nomadic way of life, on the analogy of the
> Pechenegs of the Ukrainian steppes. Were it not for
> the other indicators, the nomadic hypothesis would
> indeed be questionable. But in context, it is quite
> plausible. ****
>
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>