Akbar and other Mughals

[Halaku Khan]

Please don't quote Michel Danino, if you want to be taken seriously. Mr Danino is a journalist and his opinion has same value as mine. Besides Mr Danino has ruined all his credibility, whatever he had, after he came out in defense of N.S.Rajaram, when he (Rajaram) was caught red handed, concocting archeological evidence.

Aryan Invasion Theory (AIT) is dead as door knob, and some of the first historians who questioned this theory are the leftist ones (surprise surprise). Ms Romila Thapar, way back in 60s proved that the theory is unsubstantiated. The theory that is widely accepted by international archeologists and historians, is of Aryan Migration (AMT).

I suggest you read on the following people (off the top of my head)

Michael Witzel, Steve Farmar, Asko Parpola, Joseph Staahl, Iravatham Mahadevan etc.

Avoid like e-bola: (i.e. if you don't want to be a typical jingo)

N.S.Rajaram, Talageri, Jha, Stephen Knapp, Lal, Koenraad Elst etc.

The Aryan migration theory too, is now disproved.

The article by Danino gives very unambiguous verbatim quotations from credible scientific literature.

The polemical types like to use ad-hominem arguments, but that is a pretty despicable tactic, imho.

 

[toxic_pus]

Although pointed out by Nemesis, Toomas Kivisild's paper was contradicted by Richard Cordaux et. al. Any paper that uses Kivisild's paper as reference is to be avoided.

Excerpts from Cordaux's paper

The origins of the nearly one billion people inhabiting the Indian subcontinent and following the customs of the Hindu caste system are controversial: are they largely derived from Indian local populations (i.e. tribal groups) or from recent immigrants to India? Archaeological and linguistic evidence support the latter hypothesis, whereas recent genetic data seem to favor the former hypothesis.[...] We find that caste and tribal groups differ significantly in their haplogroup frequency distributions; caste groups are homogeneous for Y chromosome variation and more closely related to each other and to central Asian groups than to Indian tribal or any other Eurasian groups. We conclude that paternal lineages of Indian caste groups are primarily descended from Indo-European speakers who migrated from central Asia approximately 3,500 years ago.

 

[Khajur]

There are some difference of opinions in this subject matter. Indus valley civilization did cover central asia too basically it spread up to Babylon of Iraq.

what??
Where did u learn this piece of history??

Its Indus valley civilization ...it spreaded around Indus valley extending to some areas in Gujarat and Rajastan.

PS:Some of ur observations makes me feel u badly want to rewrite history.

 

[toxic_pus]

The Aryan migration theory too, is now disproved.

The article by Danino gives very unambiguous verbatim quotations from credible scientific literature.

The polemical types like to use ad-hominem arguments, but that is a pretty despicable tactic, imho.

AMT is far, far, far, far from being disproved. On the contrary, new evidences are coming to light almost on yearly basis.

EDIT: Read a little bit about Andronovo culture and Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex (BMAC)

Many of the 'credible scientific literature' he quotes have been refuted later on.

 

[TopCat]

what??
Where did u learn this piece of history??

Its Indus valley civilization ...it spreaded around Indus valley extending to some areas in Gujarat and Rajastan.

PS:Some of ur observations makes me feel u badly want to rewrite history.

Here is the catch. You are talking about Harappan and Mohenjodaro as of your Indus Valley civilization. Somewhat you are right.
But historian and archeological findings suggest that there is huge geographical areas starting from Babylon to current day India had a civilization dating back 6000 BC which includes your Harappa and Mohenjodaro. I am not talking about a particular city here.

 

[Halaku Khan]

Although pointed out by Nemesis, Toomas Kivisild's paper was contradicted by Richard Cordaux et. al.

Kivisild's 2003 paper was a very detailed effort.

Cordaux's line of argument does not explain the greater diversity of M17 in South Asia, rather than in Central Asia.

And there are several papers later than Cordaux's paper which come to an entirely different conclusion.

Any paper that uses Kivisild's paper as reference is to be avoided.

One cannot just discard evidence because it is inconvenient.

 

[ant80]

Since i have no idea of the of the latest developments in Archaeo-genetics apparently - primarily a paper by Toomas Kivisild which is taken by members of the Hindu right in India and abroad as conclusive proof against Aryan migration - i will let experts refute it. Please feel free :-

Recent Findings in Archaeogenetics and Aryan Migration Theory

Some extracts -

Yes, clearly I'm not informed of the "latest developments". Kindly drink the right wing kool aid somewhere else.

Hello Nemesis, with respect, I would like to point out there there will be more similarity between individuals of different race than between one individual and his/her next-door neighbor. There is a book called "The Red Queen: Sex and the Evolution of Human Nature" by Matt Ridley. And there are other books called The Selfish Gene and Sperm Wars by various authors that I would recommend for a thorough description of why that is true. Not arguing either way, but that finding of greater similarity between Brahmin and Western European has to be taken with a pinch of salt.

There have been other studies as well. I am going to investigate into this after I finish my PhD, but there are scientific publications since 2001 that are significant as well. I'd like to point out this sentence which is telling from the above article.

If biologists had never been told anything about such a migration, they would be incapable of inferring it from the DNA of Indians, whether tribes or upper castes, from the South or North.

 

[toxic_pus]

Kivisild's 2003 paper was a very detailed effort.

Cordaux's line of argument does not explain the greater diversity of M17 in South Asia, rather than in Central Asia.

Because that was not the objective of the research. It was primarily to find if the caste groups in India are indeed indigenous. What it found was:

Haplogroups R-M17, J-M172, R-M124, and L-M20 are among the most frequent Y lineages in caste groups.They are all significantly more frequent in caste than in tribal groups. The average frequency of R-M17 in 15 tribal groups from four different states of India is only 9% (or 6% if the Chenchus are excluded). Thus, the unusually high frequency of R-M17 in the Chenchu tribe (27%) is not representative of other tribal groups and hence cannot be taken as evidence for an Indian origin of R-M17, as claimed previously [This is the reference to Kivisild et al]. By contrast, R-M17 is present in all Indian caste groups and reaches a frequency of 40% in north caste groups. Given the high frequency of R-M17 in central Asia (typically 20%–40%), its rarity in west Asia and its absence in east Asia, Indian R-M17 Y chromosomes most probably have a central Asian origin. Haplogroup J-M172 in India may have a west Asian origin. However, it was noted that the M67 marker, which is common in west Asian J-M172 chromosomes, is almost absent from Indian J-M172 chromosomes. Given that J-M172 is rare in Indian tribal groups, absent in east Asia, and typically found in central Asia at frequencies of 10%–20%, it is possible that Indian J-M172 chromosomes originate from central Asia rather than west Asia. Haplogroup R-M124 is restricted to the Indian subcontinent, Iran, and central Asia. It generally occurs at low frequencies (1%–4%) except in Indian caste groups and Indo-European speakers from central Asia (8%). Haplogroup L-M20 is found predominantly in India and Pakistan (15%) and has tentatively been associated with the expansion of farming, thus implying a non Indian origin.

In sum, although largely the same haplogroups are found in tribal and caste groups, they exhibit significantly different distributions in that the most frequent haplogroups in tribal groups are significantly rarer in caste groups and vice versa. Moreover, haplogroups that are likely to be of indigenous origin are in higher frequency in tribal groups, whereas haplogroups that are likely to be of non indigenous origin are higher in frequency in caste groups.

And there are several papers later than Cordaux's paper which come to an entirely different conclusion.

Please provide those papers. It will be interesting.

One cannot just discard evidence because it is inconvenient.

Give me a break.

 

[toxic_pus]

Not arguing either way, but that finding of greater similarity between Brahmin and Western European has to be taken with a pinch of salt.

Any genetical study on a large community of people, trying to determine their origin and trajectory of evolution, is always to be taken with a pinch of salt, because of immaturity of the techniques used. However these studies do provide a direction and unless proved otherwise, there is no reason why these should be dismissed by a wave of hand.

I'd like to point out this sentence which is telling from the above article.

If biologists had never been told anything about such a migration, they would be incapable of inferring it from the DNA of Indians, whether tribes or upper castes, from the South or North.

No scientific discipline walks alone. It needs to be corroborated from other discipline as well. If archeological evidence, as well as biological evidence point to the same direction, it means that a theory, on which evidences are being sought, is more than likely to be correct. But if these evidences are at loggerheads with each other, then it means, that the theory needs to be revised. Thats how science works - through validation.

You seem to be a man of science. That makes it even more unfortunate that you are buying this BS.

 

[third eye]

Could we come back to Akbar & other Mughals please.

 

[faisal4pro]

Could we come back to Akbar & other Mughals please.

I dont know the reason of this thread!
This section is for Pakistan's Defense not for Mughals!

Mughals are not Pakistani at all! so dear Mods

Close this thread!

 

[Halaku Khan]

Because that was not the objective of the research. It was primarily to find if the caste groups in India are indeed indigenous.

It may not have been the objective of his research. But the higher diversity of M17 in South Asia shows that South Asia was the source, not the destination of the migration.

Please provide those papers. It will be interesting.

Look at the refs to the 2006 papers given in Danino's article.

Give me a break.

Do take one.

 

[toxic_pus]

It may not have been the objective of his research. But the higher diversity of M17 in South Asia shows that South Asia was the source, not the destination of the migration.

The bold part has been proved wrong by Cordaux et al. You would have known it if you had read my earlier post where I have quoted the relevant part. Here it is again:

The average frequency of R-M17 in 15 tribal groups from four different states of India is only 9% (or 6% if the Chenchus are excluded). Thus, the unusually high frequency of R-M17 in the Chenchu tribe (27%) is not representative of other tribal groups and hence cannot be taken as evidence for an Indian origin of R-M17, as claimed previously. By contrast, R-M17 is present in all Indian caste groups and reaches a frequency of 40% in north caste groups. Given the high frequency of R-M17 in central Asia (typically 20%–40%), its rarity in west Asia and its absence in east Asia, Indian R-M17 Y chromosomes most probably have a central Asian origin.

The above turns Kivisilid's finding on its head. Their research clearly shows, that Kivisild et al made sampling error, depending too much on a particular tribe, the Chenchu tribe to draw their conclusion. Also, the spread of M17 appears to be West-Easterly and not the other way round.

And mind you, Cordaux's research was based, in large part, on Kivisilid's research.

 

[Halaku Khan]

The bold part has been proved wrong by Cordaux et al. You would have known it if you had read my earlier post where I have quoted the relevant part. Here it is again:

The above turns Kivisilid's finding on its head. Their research clearly shows, that Kivisild et al made sampling error, depending too much on a particular tribe, the Chenchu tribe to draw their conclusion. Also, the spread of M17 appears to be West-Easterly and not the other way round.

And mind you, Cordaux's research was based, in large part, on Kivisilid's research.

Cordaux talks about frequency of occurrence in some tribal groups - not diversity. So that does not disprove the observations about diversity in South Asia vis-a-vis Central Asia.

Furthermore, Kivisilid mentions several South Indian tribes where M17 is significant, not just the Chenchu.

 

[toxic_pus]

Cordaux talks about frequency of occurrence in some tribal groups - not diversity. So that does not disprove the observations about diversity in South Asia vis-a-vis Central Asia.

Furthermore, Kivisilid mentions several South Indian tribes where M17 is significant, not just the Chenchu.