Shanghai Two Milleniums Older Than Previously Thought

The headline and lead sentence make it sound like they've found evidence that the city of Shanghai was built 6000 years ago, but the actual content of the article only seems to indicate they've found evidence that people were living in the region of present-day Shanghai 6000 years ago. That's a huge difference.

Good point. People were living in the basin doesn't translate to people having founded a city there. Or else, Rome could be said to be dating from at least the Stone Age, Jericho is KNOWN to date from at least 4000 BC as a city, and probably millenia earlier as a campsite!

"Where do you get THAT??? "

I got it from the book The Tarim Mummies, by JP Malloy and Victor Mair. They were quoting from the work of an Indian archaeologist named Narain, who said, that Indo-Europeans originated in the Gansu region of China.

I'm beginning to think they originated somewhere around Sundaland and migrated up the river valleys of China at the end of the Ice Age...some also probably went/came by boat. They were probably the original Sumerians.

When Sundaland went underwater, they spread out all over the world taking their megalithic and pyramid building custom with them. Relatives of Kennewick Man, Spirit Cave Man, etc.

Also, I've been toying with another idea. It is that the red-headed mummies of the Tarim Basin are distantly related to the Celts of Hallstadt, Austria, a distance of 4-5,000 miles. Mair can't explain the close similatities of these people when there are no archaeological or linguistic traces of a migration between these two points. My idea: The Austrian Celts came by boat and the Tarim Basin group migrated over land from the Sundaland region.

"People were living in the basin doesn't translate to people having founded a city there."

Sand-Covered Huns City Unearthed

TRACKING THE TARIM MUMMIES

A solution to the puzzle of Indo-European origins?

BY DAVID W. ANTHONY

Archaeological and linguistic evidence places the Indo-European homeland in the North Pontic region. Members of one Indo-European group (the Yamnaya culture) that migrated to the western Altai Mountains, where they are identifiable as the Afanasievo culture, may have later moved into the Tarim Basin of what is now western China.

The Indo-European problem is one of archaeology's oldest, most contentious questions. More than 200 years ago, in 1786, English jurist and scholar Sir William Jones realized that Latin and Greek shared a common origin with Sanskrit, the ancient language of Hindu law and religion. These three languages, he proposed, had developed from a single ultimate parent language, now called Proto-Indo-European. Linguists soon added most of the languages of Europe (including English), Iran, and northern India-Pakistan to the family, and eventually discovered several extinct cousins, including Hittite, spoken in Anatolia about 2000-1000 B.C., and Tocharian, a group of two (or possibly three) languages spoken about A.D. 500-800 in the Buddhist monasteries and caravan cities of the Tarim Basin in what is now western China. All of these languages still display telltale traces of the same Proto-Indo-European grammar and vocabulary. But where and when was the elusive mother tongue spoken? And by what historical circumstances did it generate daughter tongues that became scattered from Scotland to China?

In 1995, media reports brought to the public's attention astonishingly well-preserved remains of European-looking people, dressed in European-looking clothes, buried in the Tarim Basin between about 1800 B.C. and A.D. 500. This came about through the persistent efforts of Victor Mair, a professor of Chinese and Indo-Iranian literature and religion at the University of Pennsylvania. Long known to specialists but poorly understood and little studied, the Tarim mummies (not really mummies, but bodies preserved by dry conditions) quickly became the focus of intense interest and debate. Riveting photographs appeared in ARCHAEOLOGY (March/April 1995, pp. 28-35) and Discover. Academic papers on the mummies were edited by Mair for the 1995 Journal of Indo-European Studies. Film crews working for Nova and the Discovery channel soon followed Mair to the deserts of northwestern China; the Discovery show ("The Riddle of the Desert Mummies") was nominated for an Emmy. In 1996, Mair hosted a conference of 50 international experts on the archaeology, linguistics, and physical anthropology of the Central Eurasian societies related to the mummies; the proceedings were published in two dense and informative volumes in 1998, and textile specialist Elizabeth Barber issued a book on the Tarim textiles.( Barber's book is titled: "The Mummies Of Urumchi")

Now Mair has teamed with James Mallory, a distinguished Indo-European linguist and archaeologist at Queen's University in Belfast, to write The Tarim Mummies, which explores the difficult and controversial questions about the languages, identities, technologies, migrations, and physical traits of the mummies. It is a fascinating and readable account and presents a valuable compendium of recent research on a little-known region that has long been the focus of romantic speculation by travelers and explorers from Marco Polo to Aurel Stein. To determine the ethnic and linguistic identity of the Tarim mummies requires, as they say, "a feat of archaeological and linguistic legerdemain," but it is an intriguing game to follow, for it sheds light on the documentary, linguistic, archaeological, and skeletal evidence that must be used to attempt a linguistic and ethnic prehistory of eastern Central Asia.

In the end, their "working hypothesis" is that the earliest Bronze Age colonists of the Tarim Basin were people of Caucasoid physical type who entered probably from the north and west, and probably spoke languages that could be classified as Pre- or Proto-Tocharian, ancestral to the Indo-European Tocharian languages documented later in the Tarim Basin. These early settlers occupied the northern and eastern parts of the Tarim Basin, where their graves have yielded mummies dated about 1800 B.C. They did not arrive from Europe, but probably had lived earlier near the Altai Mountains, where their ancestors had participated in a cultural world centered on the eastern steppes of central Eurasia, including modern northeastern Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tadjikistan. At the eastern end of the Tarim Basin, people of Mongoloid physical type began to be buried in cemeteries such as Yanbulaq some centuries later, during the later second or early first millennium B.C. About the same time, Iranian-speaking people moved into the Tarim Basin from the steppes to the west. Their linguistic heritage and perhaps their physical remains are found in the southern and western portions of the Tarim. These three populations interacted, as the linguistic and archaeological evidence reviewed by Mallory and Mair makes clear, and then Turkic peoples arrived and were added to the mix. The Tarim Mummies J.P. Mallory and Victor Mair New York: Thames and Hudson, 2000 $50.00 (cloth); 352 pages

Shanghai is in a less than ideal location and some distance from the Grand Canal. Although a city was there long before the Europeans make their mark, it didn't become important until it was the center of European trade dominance. I rather suspect that most Chinese cities have very long histories just because the civilization is so old.

"Where do you get THAT??? "

Here's the actual qoute from the book, The Tarim Mummies

"As we have just mentioned, the people who emerge as the Tocharians in western sources are often equated with a branch of the Yuezhi of Chinese sources who were driven from the Gansu borderlands by the Xiongnu, then further west by the Wusun, arriving at the Oxus, and going on to conquesr Bactria and establish the Kushan empire. Narain argues that once one accepts the equation Tocharian = Yuezhi, then one is forced to follow both the Chinese historical sources (which for him would propel the Yuezhi back to at least the 7th century BC) and the geographical reference of their first cited historical location (Gansu) to the conclusion that they have lived there 'from time immemorial'. Narain infers that they had been there at least since the Qijia culture of c.2000BC and probably even earlier in the Yangshao of the Neolothic. This would render the Tocharians as virtually native to Gansu (and earlier than the putative spread of the Neolithic to Xinjiang) and Narain goes so far as to argue that the Indo-Europeans themselves originally dispersed from this area westwards. Seldom has a tail so small wagged a dog so large."

The Relationship Between Basque And Ainu

I dunno -- such an early contact would have been visible in the physical characteristics of the descendents, but all signs point to isolation between the groups for millenia

It is that the red-headed mummies of the Tarim Basin are distantly related to the Celts of Hallstadt, Austria

Could be -- they were both branches of the Indo-European family of peoples -- so the Tocharians would be one branch and the Celts another and the GErmanics another and the slavs another and the iranis another etc.