I have to say I'm disillusioned!
I would say that is true if you consider just the Dravidians. But there are many who are Sakas. No question their origins.
GGG ping
India itself is as much an admixture of genetic types as the people of North and South America who are commonly referred to as "American Indians". There are ethnic types ranging from those who could easily pass for European to those that are definitely of East Asian derivation, and even some of Polynesian origins.
Some migrations are of greater extent, and began much earlier, than common belief has credited them with being.
Probably the great transmitter of culture across the "Indo-European" tribes was more the existence of the Persian Empire than of any actual migration of people from one place to another. Armies travel, not harvesters of grain and herders of animals.
The word "punch" and Punjab (Panjab) are both derived from the Sanskrit word for "five" (Punjab is a region with five rivers, and punch had five ingredients), which is similar to the Greek word pente meaning "five."
English "five" is also related, but the original p changed to f in the Germanic languages (Greek pater, English "father," Latin piscis, English "fish," Greek polos, English "foal," etc.)
In India, there are a number of nationalists who believe that all that is India or Indian, originated from India alone.
I wouldn't be surprised if Vijendra Kashyap is one of them.
The finding disputes a long-held theory that a large invasion of central Asians, traveling through a northwest Indian corridor, shaped the language, culture, and gene pool of many modern Indians within the past 10,000 years.FWIW, I don't accept geographical origin ideas proceeding from genetic studies, because single individuals living long ago have a disproportionate influence (through chance, for the most part) on large current populations; also, a lot of things have gone on in the past 10,000 (or 50,000, or 100,000) years which are not written down. It goes without saying that genetic material from that long ago is essentially nonexistent, so all the data collected merely shows current distributions.
That theory is bolstered by the presence of Indo-European languages in India, the archaeological record, and historic sources such as the Rig Veda, an early Indian religious text.
Gad! We outsourced English?
Please FREEPMAIL me if you want on or off the
"Gods, Graves, Glyphs" PING list or GGG weekly digest
-- Archaeology/Anthropology/Ancient Cultures/Artifacts/Antiquities, etc.
Gods, Graves, Glyphs (alpha order)
If you look at recent DNA studies of the British population most Brits (including the English) can still trace their genetic heritage to Celtic origins while the English language is mostly a potpourri of German (Anglo-Saxon), Norse, and French, with a few residual traces of Gaelic thrown in.
Just because we'll agree to speak your language doesn't mean we're going to let you diddle our sisters.
India is truly a mixed society. I believe the first people were Vedda, which I suspect they are related to Ainus of Japan.
