Page 73 of 73 FirstFirst ... 2363717273
Results 721 to 730 of 730

Thread: Waves of migration into South Asia

  1. #721
    Registered Users
    Posts
    4,676

    Quote Originally Posted by Generalissimo View Post
    I don't have a clue what language or languages were spoken in the IVC. Maybe Dravidian? If not, that's fine with me.

    The point that I've been making is that Harappans are genetically similar to present-day Dravidian speakers.
    Which present day Dravidian speakers?
    Brahui, Tuluva, Tamil, Paniya, Gond, Orao?

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to parasar For This Useful Post:

     anthroin (08-14-2017)

  3. #722
    Registered Users
    Posts
    513
    Sex

    The surprising thing about South Asians is that they are pretty homogenous for such a deeply divided group of populations. There is a continent-spanning "South Indian" autosomal signal that peaks in the Deccan and the west coast and stretches from Dravidians all the way to Indus-Ganges area, before dropping off as we approach the Pamirs and Hindu Kush. Austroasiatics and Dravidian Scheduled Tribes in the South and East have more "Onge" affinity on top of that (which gets forced into "Melanesian/Papuan" if Onge is not there), and Austroasiatics have "Cambodian/SE Asian" affinity layered on as well.

    The new genomes would probably shed light on regional diversity, but there probably is a single Neolithic signal in the whole of the subcontinent, i.e. a single Neolithic metapopulation, despite there being several events involved in the neolithicisation of India. The Indus Neolithic (earliest), Gangetic Neolithic (Iron Age) and S Indian Neolithic (also Iron Age) are very distinct events. I'm betting the Indus genomes will not cluster with present-day Indus Valley peoples, probably further south with the populations where the "South Asian" peaks, like Kannadigas or Maharashtri. Probably the "South Asian" signal represents the metapopulation shared between Indus Valley and Deccan Neolithic--certainly its geographic distribution matches this, as South Indian Neolithic emerges from central Deccan area and the component has a secondary peak there as well. Then "Onge" would represent the HG substrate that the "S Indian" mixed into and therefore peaks in tribal types in the far South and Chhattisgarh-Odisha forests in E India, and Balochis and Brahuis have more ancestry from the Iranian plateau that pulls them away from Indus Valley types.

    The Iran_Hotu ANE signal probably arrived from the North from prior admixture between C Asian HGs and Iran_Neolithics and is not a constitutive part of ASI in the far south, there's just too little shared drift among the high ASI types with ANE for ANE to be part of ASI.
    Last edited by Ryukendo; 08-14-2017 at 09:26 PM.
    Quoted from this Forum:

    "Which superman haplogroup is the toughest - R1a or R1b? And which SNP mutation spoke Indo-European first? There's only one way for us to find out ... fight!"

  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Ryukendo For This Useful Post:

     anthroin (08-14-2017), DMXX (08-31-2017)

  5. #723
    Registered Users
    Posts
    513
    Sex

    For example if you compare, using formal stats, Velamas (middle caste Dravidian zamindaris, or landowners, from C Deccan in Andhra) vs Chenchu (Dravidian HGs) the strongest difference is with Iran Neolithic, and in ADMIXTURE the corresponding largest difference is in % of "S Indian" and "Onge". So the spread of the South Indian ironworking pastoralist neolithic (yes the S Indian Neolithic was quite pastoral, focusing on cows and ashmounds, the central Deccan is very dry) is very likely correlated with "South Indian" autosomal signal carrying Iran_Neolithic, and is clearly independent of the Steppic movement, which you can see from the uncorrelated and orthogonal differences between upper caste-lower caste comparisons vs Dravidian HG-Dravidian farmer comparisons. "South Indian" in S India peaks among Velamas, and "Onge" among Dravidian HGs.
    Quoted from this Forum:

    "Which superman haplogroup is the toughest - R1a or R1b? And which SNP mutation spoke Indo-European first? There's only one way for us to find out ... fight!"

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Ryukendo For This Useful Post:

     anthroin (08-14-2017)

  7. #724
    Quote Originally Posted by Ryukendo View Post
    For example if you compare, using formal stats, Velamas (middle caste Dravidian zamindaris, or landowners, from C Deccan in Andhra) vs Chenchu (Dravidian HGs) the strongest difference is with Iran Neolithic, and in ADMIXTURE the corresponding largest difference is in % of "S Indian" and "Onge". So the spread of the South Indian ironworking pastoralist neolithic (yes the S Indian Neolithic was quite pastoral, focusing on cows and ashmounds, the central Deccan is very dry) is very likely correlated with "South Indian" autosomal signal carrying Iran_Neolithic, and is clearly independent of the Steppic movement, which you can see from the uncorrelated and orthogonal differences between upper caste-lower caste comparisons vs Dravidian HG-Dravidian farmer comparisons. "South Indian" in S India peaks among Velamas, and "Onge" among Dravidian HGs.
    First of all, though I only understood what most of you guys (all of you lol) wrote here only in bits and pieces, it was a very informing discussion, I felt. I think all the threads on the site related to this topic are good. But I did not understand one thing. You wrote South Indian ironworking pastoralist neolithic. While I do know that it is the case that South India was quite pastoralist even after ironworking began, I did not think ironworking was present from the earliest stages of the neolithic, particularly the phases during which the ashmounds were of central ritual importance. Was I wrong or did you have the same thing in mind as I did? Also, since the Megalithic-Iron Age (c. 1100 BC onwards) starts after the Neolithic, with almost a total cessation of ashmound creation (though striking cultural continuities seem to exist between the ashmound phase and the megalithic phase with "ash-circle graves" and such), some hypotheses exist that the Iron Age was a result of the entry of a new population (either the Dravidian speakers or the Indo-Aryans depending on the author). What do you think of those hypotheses? The admixture dates in Telugu Vaishyas (Komatis) at around 2200 BC, in my view indicates an admixture of the Dravidian-speakers with one of the ASI groups of Andhra, Dravidian speakers either starting the neolithic in 2800 BC themselves or joining, at a relatively short later point (such as 2500 BC or something like that) into the neolithic created by some of the ASI who shifted to neolithic (ashmounds thought of as having a "distinctive Indian air" about them, by Dorian Fuller) but not at the Iron-Age phase which begins to happen after 1400 BC. I also subscribe to the idea that Brahui is not a relic language in its current location, based on accepted linguistic evidence. The 2200 BC admixture date supports which hypothesis? That the Dravidian speakers entered South India at some point before or during the ashmound neolithic or with iron and megaliths?
    Last edited by anthroin; 08-15-2017 at 01:43 PM.

  8. #725
    Registered Users
    Posts
    413
    Location
    Gonur Tepe

    Quote Originally Posted by DMXX View Post
    Based on the (scant) archaeological data (mesolithic period specifically) and the uniparentals (Y-DNA R* + R2*, SC-S Asian specific mtDNA U subclades), it has been my contention for some time that there's a pre-EMBA, ANE-related genetic substrata in SC and S Asia. Said strata is represented in part by Iran_Hotu, which, as pegasus subtly points out, possesses some of that "EHG" which appears quite significantly in modern populations lying just to the east of it.

    That being said, I never anticipated that substrata to represent a considerable proportion of the total steppe-related signal the formal stats have provided. An arbitrary guesstimate shared with a former member via PMs was something to the effect of 5-10%. I imagine there's more of this strata in non-IE speaking populations (the Burusho may well possess the most of this among modern groups).

    The formal stats have supported my contention; with qpAdm, Mal'ta and Iran_Hotu did gobble up 3-5% of the total steppe from one Pashtun sample whose results I was privy to... But the majority remained LNBA steppe (38-42% from memory).

    In view of that, where Iran_Hotu and Mal'ta are included in the analysis, I think we can reasonably assume the outputs we're seeing are reasonable approximations of reality. There certainly is some pre-steppe ANE/EHG-like heritage in SC and S Asia, but I wouldn't go as far as pegasus in describing the current values as considerably inflated. Looks quite minor so far.

    Why the self-referencing? A testament to the rather drawn-out nature of this discussion - Many of us have been pondering over the data outputs for a good three years now. Given the complex nature of the region, I expect most participants in these discussions to face some degree of vindication down the line.

    Ultimately, only aDNA from the region itself will settle the matter
    .
    Yeah thats true. But my point was for non Brahmin South Indians , Dalits and Adivasi/Tribals. NW South Asians do have a considerable amount of Steppe ancestry. There was a recent paper which alluded to West Eurasian lineages entering South Asia 20 000 years ago, I am assuming its ANE related. We know that Paniya are 83-85% ASI, but when modelled they come out as 40% West Eurasian, so there are discprencies. While part of that West Eurasian is Iran_N derived the other has to be coming from some where else ( non Steppe ofcourse)
    Last edited by pegasus; 08-15-2017 at 04:32 AM.

  9. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to pegasus For This Useful Post:

     anthroin (08-15-2017), Awale (09-11-2017), Jean M (08-15-2017)

  10. #726
    Registered Users
    Posts
    21
    Sex

    I don't think Dravidian entered South-India during the iron-age but it probably expanded to occupy its current geographic distribution only the iron-age. It would be unlikely for there to be so little diversity amongst the south Dravidian languages otherwise
    Last edited by Vaishvamitra; 08-15-2017 at 11:59 AM.

  11. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Vaishvamitra For This Useful Post:

     anthroin (08-15-2017), Jean M (09-13-2017)

  12. #727
    Quote Originally Posted by Vaishvamitra View Post
    I don't think Dravidian entered South-India during the iron-age but it probably expanded to occupy its current geographic distribution only the iron-age. It would be unlikely for there to be so little diversity amongst the south Dravidian languages otherwise
    This is most likely correct. Prof. Bh Krishnamurti roughly puts the first major split of South Dravidian (Tamil-Pengo) into South Dravidian-I (Tamil-Tulu) and South Dravidian-II (Telugu-Pengo) roughly at around 1100 BC based on Sanskrit textual evidence from 8th-7th century BC Aitareya Brahmana and 4th century BC Natyashastra. This roughly corresponds to the time when iron was coming into increasing use in the core north Karnataka region and the archaeological record shows a rapid radiation of iron and megalithic culture from this core north Karnataka region into all the directions. But this is just a correspondence. It may also have been the case that Proto-South Dravidian-I and Proto-South Dravidian-II were somehow already distinct by the beginning of Iron Age (but not too long before the beginning of Iron Age) but continued to remain in close contact with each other.

  13. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to anthroin For This Useful Post:

     Jean M (09-13-2017), Vaishvamitra (08-16-2017)

  14. #728
    Registered Users
    Posts
    125
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Celto-Germanic, Near East
    Nationality
    Murcan
    Y-DNA
    R1b-U152 (Alsatian)
    mtDNA
    T2a1a

    United States of America Palestine Germany Ireland
    From September 9, 2017:

    http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/c...w/60431875.cms

    Earlier, the institute had found through research that ostrich lived in India 25,000 years ago. Now, palaeo-scientists would be researching on the DNA of 20 skeletons procured from Rakhigarhi and Farmana in Harappa. The institute will officially declare setting up of the ancient DNA laboratory on its foundation day on September 10. The lab would also be the first in South Asia to study DNA of the prehistoric age.

    "The institute has a rare collection of some of the oldest grains from the Gangetic plains and rare archaeological sites. Ancient DNA analysis may lead to major discovery in the field of palaeosciences," said BSIP director Sunil Bajpai.

    The institute will first conduct DNA study of the 20 skeletons from the Harappan site followed by that of horses, rice grains from Gangetic plains and grains from Harappan sites. "DNA study of the earbone and teeth of the 20 skeletons will be conducted. These skeletons were collected by the BSIP after excavation from two of the oldest Harappan sites," said scientist Niraj Rai.
    I'm confused...

    India's government-sponsored "Institute of Palaeobotany" has recently been renamed the "Institute for Palaeosciences", and just opened up a DNA lab 3 days ago to analyze the IVC aDNA?

    Is this a separate study than the one that was reported to be released any day now? Or is the Indian gov't trying to take control of this process to steer conclusions in a certain direction?...

  15. #729
    Registered Users
    Posts
    4,676

    Quote Originally Posted by K33 View Post
    From September 9, 2017:

    http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/c...w/60431875.cms

    I'm confused...

    India's government-sponsored "Institute of Palaeobotany" has recently been renamed the "Institute for Palaeosciences", and just opened up a DNA lab 3 days ago to analyze the IVC aDNA?

    Is this a separate study than the one that was reported to be released any day now? Or is the Indian gov't trying to take control of this process to steer conclusions in a certain direction?...
    By certain direction - you mean convert the rumored Y-L1 to R1a1?
    This is for the future, I think going forward.


    As far a Niraj Rai, has anyone see his paper or report for Roopkund?
    It was in a presentation ( http://tinyurl.com/gn83q98 ) but I have not seen the final version.

    "The most notable example, Mr Rai said, was that of a set of 100 samples taken from human remains on the shores of the Roopkund Lake, high in the Himalayas.
    The CCMB lab was able to show that the remains were most likely those of travellers from Iran who died during a hailstorm around 800AD.
    Until this finding, speculation had it that the remains were of Tibetan monks or of soldiers from an invading army."
    https://www.thenational.ae/world/arc...ntity-1.134368

  16. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to parasar For This Useful Post:

     MonkeyDLuffy (09-13-2017), palamede (09-14-2017)

  17. #730
    Quote Originally Posted by Megalophias View Post
    Did the introduction of agriculture at Mehrgarh involve a biological discontinuity? So far as I know they did not have any samples from an earlier population in the area, so the original Mehrgarh farmers could have been indigenous people who adapted agriculture. (The Neolithic Mehrgarh people were closest to Chalcolithic Maharashtrans and somewhat more distantly related to modern Maharashtrans). It was the Chalcolithic Mehrgarh people who caused a discontinuity (they were closest to Harappans, more distantly related to modern people from Andhra Pradesh).


    In any case the sample sizes are very small, so I wouldn't put too much weight on any of it.
    The core dental study (if that is the one you are talking about) regarding this 4500 BC discontinuity in Mehrgarh is also listed in the wikipedia page of Mehrgarh, so I understand it is all quite significant. In his chapter 31, "South Asia: archaeology" in the 2014 book "The Global Prehistory of Human Migrations" edited by Peter Bellwood, archaeobotanist Dorian Fuller associates this 4500 BC discontinuity with an arrival of some secondary neolithic migrating people from the northwest who brought lentil agriculture with them (He also posits a prior agricultural migration into Mehrgarh as a "pre-pottery Neolithic migration >7000 BCE"). And these unknown 4500 BC people may possibly have been the originators of the Harappan civilisation imposing themselves on the neolithic Mehrgarh people. (Your mention of the modern people of Andhra Pradesh as distantly related to these 4500 BC discontinuity causers is quite curious (have to wonder, AP of all places? Like, in opposition to the west coast or some such place? I'm not being disrespectful or anything to AP people; I'm one myself); but again, as you perhaps do, I'm quite strongly not inclined to take the relationships to modern peoples seriously, but the basic biological discontinuity between the neolithic and chalcolithic of Mehrgarh can be construed as reliable, I suppose? Please do tell me if that's not trustworthy too).

    Now my question is, is there any expectation that this precise question is one of those that gets an answer (I mean, any kind of support or opposition to existing hypotheses) in the India aDNA study to be published? That is, can it be expected to answer if the Harappan city-building people are the perfect biological descendants of the earlier Mehrgarh Neolithic people? Also, if possible, could you please give some examples of the precise questions that can be answered with this study (if you do, please try to include only those questions which are different than the vexatious (and if I may say so, quite uninteresting) Indo-Aryan question lol; edit: haha, unless it turns out that these 4500 BC discontinuity causers were Indo-Aryans themselves which seriously undermines results from linguistics and because the linguistic evidence is against such an early date for Proto-Indo-Aryan, I'm inclined to not take the idea seriously; though it remains a possibility that it represents some very archaic Proto-Indo-European itself in the area with Proto-Indo-Iranian being the only branch that either survived or supplanted the other PIE dialects in the area; these are not new ideas of course, and they do have little support; but miracles may happen; I don't know)? I'm guessing something about the megalithic people of South India may be known. Whether they were really the Central Asian Scythian-like people they are thought to be or not. Am I right here or not? (Interestingly, the megalith builders, are connected with the Pandavas of Mahabharata by Asko Parpola, who quite radically makes the polyandrous Pandavas as some Iranic-language speakers who built the megaliths in South India and inculcated the warrior culture seen later in the Old Tamil culture! Anyway, this is one of the many radical propositions that he makes, such as that the language of the IVC was Dravidian and all such).

    [The reason I ask is, I think I perceive on the internet, a general sentiment that the entire prehistory of India gets clarified, to every little detail, by this study to come, and to this sentiment, I too fell prey to very shamefully and naively, sometime ago. (Or maybe because it is I alone, who idiotically mistook the purely Indo-Aryan-Harappan mania of the internet as having anything to do with the other problems too, of the prehistory of India lol.) I now genuinely doubt if that's going to happen even in a distant future, let alone as a result of this very first study, however important. (I'm also inclined to think that nothing worthwhile can be known about the prehistory (I mean, before those megaliths) of South India with this study. Could you please confirm this if possible?)]

    Thanks a lot.
    Last edited by anthroin; 09-16-2017 at 10:03 PM.

Page 73 of 73 FirstFirst ... 2363717273

Similar Threads

  1. mtDNA C in South Asia
    By soulblighter in forum C
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 11-15-2016, 03:11 AM
  2. South Asia Y-DNA Distribution
    By Mehrdad in forum Other
    Replies: 94
    Last Post: 04-17-2015, 06:39 AM
  3. South Asia (Punjab) stuff
    By Dr_McNinja in forum General Sociology/Ethnology
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 10-21-2014, 03:48 PM
  4. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-16-2014, 10:21 AM
  5. Replies: 13
    Last Post: 02-26-2013, 07:43 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •