From: Patrick Ryan
Message: 52697
Date: 2008-02-11
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rick McCallister" <gabaroo6958@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2008 7:37 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] Evoluation and History of Human Populations in South
Asia
> Yes, and DNA doesn't account for a Turkish invasion in
> Turkey, yet it's historically documented. As I
> remember only bout 1% of Turks have the epicanthic
> eyefold of Turkic in their historic homeland, while
> about 10% do in Azerbaijan and up to 50% in parts of
> Central Asia, compared to nearly all in Siberia do.
> I can only imagine how much or little DNA from the
> Ural Hungarians have --compared to Khanty-Mansi. Ot
> Finns to the Samoyeds.
> What are the DNA differences between the Santali and
> the Vietnamese?
> I imagine DNA research would probably say that Whites
> and Blacks were native to the US and that Native
> Americans moved in from Mexico and Central America.
> You conclusions regarding Indians, then constitute
> willful and aggressive ignorance along the lines of
> creationism, intelligent design, the flat earth, the
> hollow earth and the hypothesis that the earth rest on
> of the back of turtles all the way down
>
> --- Patrick Ryan <proto-language@...> wrote:
>
> > Thank you for the interesting material.
> >
> > I was just wondering - if we assume an ethnically
> > related population in
> > Iran, would an invasion or move into India by
> > Iranians speaking an IE
> > language coming into contact with virtually the same
> > ethnic Dravidians (and
> > others) speaking a separately developed language
> > still be a problem for you?
> >
> >
> > Patrick
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "mkelkar2003" <swatimkelkar@...>
> > To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2008 11:41 AM
> > Subject: [tied] Evoluation and History of Human
> > Populations in South Asia
> >
> >
> > "Fuller's arguments in this volume also have a
> > bearing on one of the most
> > contentious and long-term research problems in South
> > Asia prehistory,
> > i.e., the
> > origin and spread of languages, including hypotheses
> > which envision that
> > Indo-European languages were imported by farming or
> > later pastoral
> > communities
> > from the west(e.g., Allchin and Allchin, 1982;
> > Renfrew, 1987). Though
> > genes and
> > languages have been correlated with demographic
> > expansions of farming
> > populations and migrations towards South Asia
> > (Cavalli-Sforza et al.,
> > 1994),
> > recent studies of mitochondrial DNA argue against a
> > strong
> > differentiation of
> > peoples speaking Indo-Aryan and Dravidian languages
> > (Metspalu et al.,
> > 2004;
> > Endicott et. al.; this volume) and no support for
> > the entry of `Aryan'
> > populations is found in physical anthropological
> > data (Kennedy, 1995;
> > Walimbe,
> > this volume). Genetic studies have however, recently
> > been used to
> > support the
> > idea of migrations of Tibeto-Burman and
> > Austro-Asiatic speaking groups
> > from East
> > and Southeast Asia into India (see Endicott, et. al.
> > this volume),
> > which is consistent with
> > archaeological hypotheses which infer that the
> > Austro-Asiatic Munda
> > languages
> > were introduced by Neolithic populations from the
> > Northeast (e.g.,
> > Bellwood,
> > 2005) (though see Fuller, this volume, for a
> > contrasting opinion.),
> > (Petraglia
> > and Allchin 2007, pp. 15-15)."
> > Petraglia, M., and Allchin, B. (2007). Human
> > evolution and culture
> > change. In:
> > The evolution and history of human populations in
> > south asia.
> > Petraglia, M.,
> > and Allchin, B. (Eds.), Netherlands: Stringer, pp.
> > 1-20.
> > "Physical anthropological studies do not support an
> > a (sic) movement
> > of Aryan
> > speakers into the Indus Valley around 3.5ka
> > (Hemphill et al., 1991,
> > 1997).
> > According to these investigators, gene flow from
> > Bactria is an event
> > of much
> > later date, not having any impact of Indus Valley
> > gene pools until
> > around 2ka.
> > Kennedy (1984b) examined 300 skeletons from the
> > Indus Valley
> > Civilization and
> > concluded that the ancient Harrapans are not
> > markedly different in their
> > skeletal biology from the present-day
> > inhabi-tants(sic) of North
> > western India and
> > Pakistan. Kennedy (1995) also remarks that if an
> > Aryan invasion had
> > taken
> > place, obvious discontinuities in the skeletal
> > record should be found.
> > Hemphill
> > et. al. (1991) and Kennedy (1995) suggest that there
> > existed two
> > phases of
> > biological discontinuity within the Indus Valley
> > from the Neolithic
> > times to
> > around 2ka. The first is said to occur between 8 and
> > 4.5 ka which is
> > reflected
> > in the strong differences irrespective of the
> > occupational cont
> > inuity between the Neolithic and Chalco-lithic (sic)
> > inhabitants of
> > Mehrgarh and
> > post-Harrapan. The second discontinuity exists
> > between the
> > inhabitants of
> > Harrapa, Chalcolithic Mehrgarh and Post-Harrapa
> > Timargarha on the one
> > hand, and
> > the Early Iron Age (better known as the Gandhara
> > Grave culture)
> > inhabitants
> > Sarai Khola, on the other, between 2.8 and 2.2 ka.
> > Kennedy (1995:53)
> > concludes
> > that, "if Vedic Aryans were a biological entity
> > represented by the
> > skeletons
> > from Timargarah then their biological features of
> > cranial and dental
> > anatomy were not distinct to a marked
> > degree from what we encountered in the ancient
> > Harrapans." Comparing the
> > Harrapan and the Gandhara Grave Cultures, Kennedy
> > (1995:54) remarks, "our
> > multivariate approach does not define the biological
> > identity of an
> > ancient
> > Aryan population, but it does indicate that the
> > Indus Valley and Gandhara
> > peoples shared a number of craniometric,
> > odontometric and discrete
> > traits that
> > point to a high degree of biological affini
> > ty (Walimbe 2007, pp. 312-313)."
> > "If the hypothesis of an `Aryan Invasion' cannot be
> > supported using
> > physical
> > anthropological data, then the spread of
> > Indo-European languages in the
> > subcontinent needs to be explained on non-biological
> > grounds. There
> > is no doubt
> > that surplus agricultural economy of Harrapans
> > induced increased trade
> > contacts
> > with others (especially to the West). It seems much
> > more likely that
> > multiple
> > waves of Indo-European migration, in small numbers,
> > are possible
> > causing a
> > mingling of the immigrants and local populations.
> > There may have been
> > significant exchange and
> > assimilation of culture and languages on both sides.
> > The immigrants
> > may have
> > traveled back and forth to their original lands
> > taking language and
> > culture to
> > other Indo-European peoples. Human skeletal remains
> > excavated from
> > sites of
> > Harrapa and Mohenjodaro show a mixed ethnic
> > composition similar to the
> > present
> > (Kennedy, 1984b, 1995), showing support for
> > migration rather than an
> > invasion.
> > In recent years, human population genetics data
> > corroborates some
> > physical
> > anthropological influences, concluding that there is
> > no material
> > evidence for
> > any large scale migrations into India over the
> > period of 4500 to 800
> > BC (Walimbe
> > 2007, p. 313)."
> > Walimbe, S. R. (2007). Population movement in the
> > Indian
> > subcontinent. In: The
> > evolution and history of human populations in south
> > asia. Petraglia,
> >
> === message truncated ===
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Be a better friend, newshound, and
> know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
> http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
>
>