Anyone who is curious about the Aryan/Dravidian controversy

Topic started by Hindu Shahi (@ 12-235-124-134.client.attbi.com) on Thu Oct 10 20:51:05 .
All times in EST +10:30 for IST.

I have a theory based upon reading on this subject for a few years...

I think the indian subcontinent was first inhabited by australoids and negrittos(who were substantially less in number than the australoids). There was a mass dravidian migration from the Iran area. These dravidians were either Elamites or closely related to them. The reason for leaving may have been drought since these people were farmers.

They settled in modern day pakistan area. These dravidians are caucasoids of the mediterranean branch. They drive out and slaughter the aboriginal population driving them into the hills. However mass miscegenation takes place. Aryan nomads begin to filter in later on. I don't think there was some invasion with barbaric hordes slaughtering these dravidians. The aryans are far less in number than the dravidians, they are absorbed completely. But their language and culture is so dominant that it is accepted over the original dravidian tongue by much of the population. These mixbreed dravidian/australoid/aryan people begin to spread out all over India. The dravidians who held on to their languages begin to migrate southwards past the vindhyas. There is a dominant australoid population there. Mass miscegentation takes place.

The DRAVIDIANS ARE ABSORBED BY THE MORE NUMEROUS ABORIGINALS. However some communities like the Coorgis and Todas stay relatively isolated. But the aboriginals accept the dravidian language and culture over their own munda tongue.

Same story up north, the mix bred dravidian/aryan/aboriginal people filter out eastwards and mix more with the aboriginals who have been driven eastwards.

This can explain why Eastern and South Eastern India tend to have the darkest and most australoid population.

Within the last 1200yrs, North West India has experienced a vast influx of different people and vast miscegenation. However....this is recent and relatively superficial admixture. Remember PHENOTYPE DOES NOT DICTATE GENOTYPE. To back up this claim, I reproduce this quote:

"Moreover, the observed differences between Indian communities are much smaller than those between Indians collectively and Europeans (or Africans etc.) collectively. A provisional table of the genetic distance between populations shows that North-Indians and South-Indians are indeed very close, much closer than “Aryan” North-Indians and “Aryan” Iranians are to each other."

A press report on a recent anthropological survey led by Kumar Suresh Singh explains: “English anthropologists contended that the upper castes of India belonged to the Caucasian race and the rest drew their origin from Australoid types. The survey has revealed this to be a myth. ‘Biologically and linguistically, we are very mixed’, says Suresh Singh (…) The report says that the people of India have more genes in common, and also share a large number of morphological traits. ‘There is much greater homogenization in terms of morphological and genetic traits at the regional level’, says the report. For example, the Brahmins of Tamil Nadu (esp. Iyengars) share more traits with non-Brahmins in the state than with fellow Brahmins in western or northern India. (…) The sons-of-the-soil theory also stands demolished. The Anthropological Survey of India has found no community in India that can’t remember having migrated from some other part of the country.”72 Internal migration accounts for much of India’s complex ethnic landscape, while there is no evidence of a separate or foreign origin for the upper castes.


Among other scientists who reject the identification of caste (varNa) with race on physical-anthropological grounds, we may cite Kailash C. Malhotra:


“Detailed anthropometric surveys carried out among the people of Uttar Pradesh, Gujarat, Maharashtra, Bengal and Tamil Nadu revealed significant regional differences within a caste and a closer resemblance between castes of different varnas within a region than between sub-populations of the caste from different regions. On the basis of analysis of stature, cephalic and nasal index, H.K. Rakshit (1966) concludes that ‘the Brahmins of India are heterogeneous and suggest incorporation of more than one physical type involving more than one migration of people’.

http://www.bharatvani.org/books/ait/ch49.htm


Responses:


  Tell your friend about this topic

Want to post a response?

Post a response:

Name:

E-mail:


Please Reload to see your response


Back to the Forum