From: shivkhokra
Message: 64598
Date: 2009-08-04
--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Francesco Brighenti" <frabrig@...> wrote:
> Yet, if we take the conclusions of these genetic studies literally, then they would indicate not only that there was no Indo-Aryan immigration in the second millennium BCE, but that there were no Saka, Kushana, Huna, and later on Afghan-cum-Turk Muslim invaders (nor any other invaders) into India in historical times either. And given all the historical evidence to the contrary, that would be patently absurd!
>
No. You have made a bad assumption. Please understand Panini's Sutra: Sudranam aniravasitanam (2 4.10). With Mllecha, i.e foreigners, Hindus did not intermarry. This continued from the first contact with foreigners thru the times of the islamic invasions, british invasions and is true even today. It is a rule (and if you dig hard you will find few exceptions here and there. For example famous actess Sharmila Tagore, was converted to Islam, and married Nawab Pataudi a few decades ago etc.). So how do you expect the genes of Hindus to have traces of Aghan,Turk or British DNA?
Now if you were looking for the said genes in the muslim population of India or anglo-indian population your answer would ofcourse be different.
Sahoo and Sengupta et al are entirely consistent and there is nothing absurd in their conclusions as you would like us to believe.
Hope this helps.
Shivraj