See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/282237193

Genetics and the Aryan Issue

Chapter · January 2014

CITATIONS READS
2 4,494

1 author:

Michel Danino
Indian Institute of Technology Gandhinagar
10 PUBLICATIONS   41 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Fluvial morphodynamics at Markanda–Bata drainage divide in NW India View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Michel Danino on 28 September 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 History of Ancient India
Volume III

THE TEXTS, POLITICAL HISTORY AND

ADMINISTRATION
Till c. 200 BC

Editors
Dilip K. Chakrabarti and Makkhan Lal

Vivekananda International Foundation

New Delhi

Aryan Books International

New Delhi
Cataloging in Publication Data—DK
[Courtesy: D.K. Agencies (P) Ltd. <[email protected]>]

History of ancient India / editors, Dilip K. Chakrabarti and Makkhan Lal.

v. 3 cm.
Contributed articles.
Includes index.
Contents: v. 3. The texts, political history and administration, till c. 200 BC.
ISBN 9788173054822

1. India—History. 2. India—Politics and government. I. Chakrabarti, Dilip K., 1941-

II. Makkhan Lal, 1954- III. Vivekananda International Foundation.

DDC 954 23

ISBN: 978-81-7305-482-2

© Vivekananda International Foundation

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, utilised in any form or
by any means, electronic and mechanical, including photocopying, recording or
by any information storage and retrieval system without prior permission
of the authors and the publishers.

Responsibility for statements made and visuals provided in the various papers
rest solely with the contributors. The views expressed by individual authors
are not necessarily those of the editors or of publishers.

First Published in 2014 by

Vivekananda International Foundation
3, San Martin Marg, Chanakyapuri, New Delhi - 110 021
Tel.: 24121764, 24106698; Fax: 91-11-43115450
E-mail: [email protected]
www.vifindia.org
in association with
Aryan Books International
Pooja Apartments, 4B, Ansari Road, New Delhi - 110 002
Tel.: 23287589, 23255799; Fax: 91-11-23270385
E-mail: [email protected]
www.aryanbooks.co.in

Designed and Printed in India at

ABI Prints & Publishing Co., New Delhi.
 Foreword ix
Contents Editorsí Preface xix

Part I
THE VEDIC TEXTS AND RELATED ISSUES
I.1. The Aryan Hypothesis: Theories 3
and Arguments
ó Makkhan Lal
I.2. The Horse and the Aryan Debate 30
ó M. Danino
I.3. Genetics and the Aryan Issue 44
ó M. Danino
I.4. India of the Vedic Texts 65
ó Dilip K Chakrabarti
I.5. Traditional Political History 112
ó Dilip K Chakrabarti

Part II
THE BUDDHIST AND JAINA TEXTS
II.1. The Buddhist and Jaina Texts 127
ó K.T.S. Sarao and Anita Sharma

Part III
POLITICAL HISTORY AND
ADMINISTRATION TILL c. 200 BC

III.1. Janapadas, Mahajanapadas, 183

Kingdoms, and Republics
ó K.T.S. Sarao
III.2. The Achaemenid Expansion 205
to the Indus and Alexanderís
Invasion of the North-West
ó Cameron A. Petrie and
Peter Magee
 The Texts, Political History and Administration till c. 200 BC

vi

III.3. The Mauryas 231 VII.3. Charsadda 512

ó Ranabir Chakravarti ó Cameron A. Petrie
III.4. Cheras, Cholas and Pandyas 276 VII.4. Hathab 523
ó K.Rajan
ó Milisa Srivastava
Part IV VII.5. Jhusi (Pratishthanpur) 525
IRON AGE TO EARLY HISTORY ó J.N. Pal
IV.1. Ganga Plain and North-Central 301 VII.6. Kapilavastu-Lumbini 541
Vindhyas
ó Rakesh Tewari
ó Rakesh Tewari
VII.7. Kausambi 551
IV.2. Peninsular and Southern India 343
ó J.N. Pal
ó R.K. Mohanty and
Tilok Thakuria VII.8. Mahasthangarh 566
IV.3. Early Agriculture in the Middle 379 ó Sufi Mostafizur Rahman
Ganga Plain VII.9. Mathura 574
ó K.S. Saraswat ó Vinay Gupta
Part V VII.10. Pataliputra 593
INSCRIPTIONS AND COINS ó B.R. Mani and Vinay Gupta
V.1. Asokan and Post-Asokan 413 VII.11. Rajagriha 599
Inscriptions (up to c. 200 BC)
ó B.R. Mani and Vinay Gupta
ó Ashvini Agrawal
VII.12. Sarnath 609
V.2. Evolution of Coinage and 422
ó B.R. Mani
Early Indian Coins
VII.13. Sisupalgarh 617
ó Devendra Handa
ó B.B. Lal, R.K. Mohanty and
Part VI Monica Smith
THE GROWTH OF EARLY HISTORIC CITIES
VII.14. Sravasti 629
AND STATES
ó Ashok K Singh
VI.1. Early Historical Urbanism and 435
State Formations VII.15. Sugh 635
ó Makkhan Lal ó Devendra Handa
VII.16. Sunet 643
Part VII
SITE REPORTS ó Devendra Handa
VII.1. Ayodhya 501 VII.17. Taxila 652
ó Ashok K Singh ó Cameron A. Petrie
VII.2. Chandraketugarh 506 VII.18. Tosali 664
ó Dilip K Chakrabarti ó Dilip K Chakrabarti
 Contents
vii

VII.19. Vaisali 668 VII.21. Wari-Bateshwar 681

ó Ashok K. Singh ó Sufi Mostafizur Rahman
VII.20. Varanasi 673 Contributors 691
ó Ashok K Singh Index 693
 Editorial Note
I.3. Genetics and the [There cannot be anything more unpleasant in the study
of human affairs than the concept of race and the
Aryan Issue enormous literature built around it. The modern DNA
studies have cast doubt on the validity of many of the
earlier assumptions, and in this paper Danino
demonstrates how the notion of the Aryans has not been
supported by these studies in any way. This paper by
Danino also provides an excellent introduction to the
relevant DNA literature, including the opinions of M.
Bamshad, P. Majumdar and others who seem to be keen
on justifying the nineteenth century assumptions of race
and language through something as sophisticated as
molecular biology. He, however, makes it abundantly
clear through his literature review that such attempts
are thoroughly belied by the researches of scholars like
Oppenheim, Kivisild, Sahoo, Sengupta, Raychaudhuri
and many others.]

BACKGROUND
Until the mid-twentieth century, anthropology
was rooted in the concept of race. It took World
War II and the horrors perpetrated in the name
of an Aryan Herrenfolk for racialóand,
generally, racistótheories to collapse. Rather
late in the day, anthropologists realized that race
cannot be scientifically defined, setting at naught
over a century of scholarly divagations on
ìsuperiorî and ìinferiorî races. Following in the
footsteps of pioneers like Franz Boas (1912),
scientists such as Ashley Montagu (1942) now
strongly criticized the ìfallacy of raceî.
Despite notable exceptions (e.g., Datta
1935), Indian anthropologists, building on
nineteenth-century work (especially that of H.H.
 Genetics and the Aryan Issue
45

Risley, see Trautmann 1997; Chakrabarti 1997), study, Mortimer Wheelerís claim that skeletons
went on listing imaginary Indian racesó found in the streets of Mohenjodaro were
including the fabled Aryan and Dravidian evidence of a massacre by invading Aryans. In
racesófor a few more decades, and indeed further research, Kennedy questioned the whole
some of them occasionally linger on in todayís Aryan construct from an anthropological
history textbooks. Until the 1960s, for example, standpoint, calling the said Aryans ìillusiveî
skeletal studies from Mohenjodaro and Harappa (Kennedy 1999: 182) and asking, ìHow could
found it natural to stick colourful labels on the one recognize an Aryan, living or dead, when
different ìracesî supposedly going into the the biological criteria for Aryanness are non-
composition of the Harappan population: existent?î (Kennedy 1995: 61) His conclusion
Caucasoid, Mediterranean, Caspian, Proto- was emphatic:
Australoid, Mongoloid, etc. (Sewell & Guha
1931; Bose et al. 1962) Such a method, or lack Biological anthropologists remain unable to lend
support to any of the theories concerning an Aryan
of it, left unanswered the big question at the
biological or demographic entity.... What the
heart of the Aryan debate in India: Could the biological data demonstrate is that no exotic races
hypothesis of the entry into the subcontinent of are apparent from laboratory studies of human
a new people (since we will henceforth shun remains excavated from any archaeological sites....
the word ìraceî) in the 2nd millennium BC be All prehistoric human remains recovered thus far
proved or disproved on biological grounds? from the Indian subcontinent are phenotypically
identifiable as ancient South Asians.... In short, there
Only from about the 1970s did non-racial
is no evidence of demographic disruptions in the
anthropological work begin to provide reliable north-western sector of the subcontinent during and
leads on Indiaís protohistory. Revisiting the immediately after the decline of the Harappan
skeletal data, Pratap C. Dutta (of the culture. (Kennedy 1995: 60, 54)
Anthropological Survey of India) found that
however great the Harappansí internal diversity The last statement rules out the arrival of a
may have been, there was ìa genetic continuum new people in the 2nd millennium BC as
envisaged by the Aryan scenario. It was
between the Harappans and the present-day
endorsed by other experts, such as Brian
people of the region.î (Dutta 1984: 73) While
Hemphill and John Lukacs (Hemphill et al.
Dutta refrained from drawing further
1991, 1997), who found only two pre-and
conclusions, S.R. Walimbe was more
protohistoric discontinuities in the populations
forthcoming:
of the Indus Valley, especially its western and
Reassessment of the [Harappan] skeletal record northern fringes: ìThe first occurs between 6000
strongly indicates that the hypothesis of and 4500 BC... [with] another discontinuity at some
identification of ìforeignî phenotypic element or point after 800 BC but before 200 BC.î (Hemphill
unceremonious slaughter of native Harappans is not et al. 1991: 174) If, then, the biological
supplemented by bone evidence. (Walimbe 1993: continuity extends from 4500 to 800 BC, it again
113) leaves no room for any mass immigration around
Walimbeís conclusion was partly based on 1500 BC.
the work of Kenneth Kennedy (1982, 1984) who Such conclusions are implicitly endorsed in
had refuted, on the ground of a careful skeletal a 2007 study led by Jay T. Stock, which observes
 The Texts, Political History and Administration till c. 200 BC

46

a general level of homogeneity among the South sizeable invasions of the historical period failed
Asian samples.... An analysis of South Asian to do so. More logically, other scholars still insist
cranial morphology in the context of the global that ìthe Indo-Aryan immigrants seem to have
pattern of human variation suggests that been numerous and strong enough to continue
populations of the Indian subcontinent have a and disseminate much of their cultureî (Sharma
relatively unique and homogenous pattern of 2001: 52), but they now find themselves on the
cranial morphology.... [This] suggests that, wrong side of archaeological and biological
independent of whether or not there was an evidence.
important demographic event in the mid-
Holocene [i.e., c. 4000 BC], there was relatively A POWERFUL NEW TOOL
little gene flow from outside of south Asia The last two decades have seen the entry of
afterwards. (Stock et al. 2007: 257, 262) genetics into the arena. While it may be argued
The study also finds that ìthe tribal/nontribal that bioanthropologists could have missed a few
boundary has been genetically more fluid than tell-tale skulls, Indian populations still carry
generally thoughtî (Stock et al. 2007: 262), an genetic markers which, one day, will enable us
important observation which, as we will see, will to reconstitute the history of their settling in India
be amply confirmed by genetics studies. in fairly complete detail. In the meantime,
important results have come to light.
In 2007, too, Walimbe showed the pitfalls
of interpreting changes in cranial shapes in terms In trying to reconstruct ancestry, biologists
of foreign gene flow, and concluded: use two types of DNA, the complex molecule
that carries genetic information. The first, Y-
Cranial and dental morphological data clearly DNA, is contained in the Y-chromosome, one
indicate genetic continuity from the Mesolithic era. of the two sex chromosomes; it is found in the
The hypotheses regarding massive population cellís nucleus and is transmitted from father to
movements during the protohistoric period cannot son. The second, mtDNA or mitochondrial DNA,
be supported on available skeletal data. (Walimbe
is found in mitochondria, kinds of power
2007: 315)
generators found in the cell, but outside its
Turning to archaeology, it is now well nucleus; this mtDNA is independent of the Y-
accepted that there is no sign in the Northwest DNA, simpler in structure, and transmitted by
of an intrusive material culture in the 2nd the mother alone (to her male or female child).
millennium BC (Bryant 2001; Chakrabarti 2008; For various reasons, all this genetic material
Danino 2006b; Danino 2010; Gupta 1996; Jarrige undergoes slight alterations or ìmutationsî in the
1995; Kenoyer 1998; Lal 1998; Lal 2002; Shaffer course of time; those mutations then become
1984). This double invisibilityóarchaeological characteristic of the line of descendants and are
and biologicalóhas compelled die-hard called ìgenetic markersî. If, for instance, the
proponents of the invasion / migration scenario mtDNAs of two humans, however distant
to downscale it to a ìtrickle-inî infiltration (Witzel geographically, exhibit the same mutation, they
2001), limited enough to have left no physical necessarily share a common ancestor in the
traces. But they are at pains to explain how such maternal line.
a ìtrickleî could have radically altered Indiaís Much of the difficulty lies in grouping
linguistic and cultural landscape, when far more genetic markers that share the same sets of
 Genetics and the Aryan Issue
47

mutations into ìhaplotypesî (from a Greek word with distinct ethnic entitiesóa relic of the
meaning ìsingleî), genetic fingerprints of sorts nineteenth-century erroneous identification
that have found a wide array of applications, between language and race; as a result, a genetic
from therapeutics to crime detection to connection between north Indians and Central
genealogy. Similar haplotypes are then brought Asians has automatically been taken to confirm
together into ìhaplogroupsîónot to be confused an Aryan immigration in the 2nd millennium BC,
with the old notion of ìraceî. Such genetic disregarding a number of alternative
markers can then be used to establish a ìgenetic explanations. We will return to these pitfalls.
distanceî between two individuals or two More recent studies, using larger samples
populations. and more refined methods of analysis, both at
Identifying and making sense of the right the conceptual level and in the laboratory, have
genetic markers is not the only difficulty; dating often reached very different conclusions. One
their mutations remains a major challenge: a of the first such studies, in 1999, was conducted
marker of Y-DNA may undergo one mutation by a team directed by the Estonian biologist
every 250 to 500 generations, which is not too Toomas Kivisild (who will be associated as
precise. Genetics, therefore, needs inputs from author or co-author with many of the studies
palaeontology and archaeology, among other cited below); it relied on 550 samples of mtDNA
disciplines, to verify its historical conclusions. and identified a haplogroup ìUî as indicating a
With their help, it becomes tempting to turn deep connection between Indian and West-
human genetic variation into actual history. Eurasian populations. However, the authors
Several ambitious attempts at a comprehensive opted for a very remote separation of the two
story of human prehistoric migrations have come branches rather than a recent population
out in recent years, including ìclassicsî such as movement towards India; in fact, ìthe
L.L. Cavalli-Sforzaís Genes, Peoples, and subcontinent served as a pathway for eastward
Languages (2000), Stephen Oppenheimerís The migration of modern humansî from Africa some
Real Eve: Modern Manís Journey Out of Africa 40,000 years ago:
(2004) or Spencer Wellsís The Journey of Man: We found an extensive deep late
A Genetic Odyssey (2004). Pleistocene genetic link between contemporary
Europeans and Indians, provided by the mtDNA
INDIAíS CASE haplogroup U, which encompasses roughly a
Since the 1990s, there have been numerous fifth of mtDNA lineages of both populations. Our
genetic studies of Indian populations, often estimate for this split [between Europeans and
reaching apparently divergent conclusions. Indians] is close to the suggested time for the
There are at least three reasons for this: (1) the peopling of Asia and the first expansion of
Indian region happens to be the most genetically anatomically modern humans in Eurasia and
diverse in the world after Africa, which makes likely pre-dates their spread to Europe. (Kivisild
the interpretation of the data a complex and et al. 1999: 1331)
delicate exercise; (2) early studies relied on small In other words, the genetic affinity between
samples, while thousands are required for the Indian subcontinent and Europe ìshould not
statistical reliability; (3) some of the studies fall be interpreted in terms of a recent admixture of
into the trap of trying to equate linguistic groups western Caucasoids with Indians caused by a
 The Texts, Political History and Administration till c. 200 BC

48

putative Indo-Aryan invasion 3,000ñ4,000 years (Roychoudhury et al. 2000: 1190) Significantly,
BP [before present].î (Kivisild et al. 1999: 1333) most of the mtDNA diversity observed in Indian
This was probably the first major challenge to populations is between individuals within
the invasionist model arising out of genetics. populations; there is no significant structuring
The second was published just a month later. of haplotype diversity by socio-religious
Authored by the U.S. biological anthropologist affiliation, geographical location of habitat or
Todd R. Disotell, the study dealt with the first linguistic affiliation. (Roychoudhury et al. 2000:
migration of modern man from Africa towards 1187).
Asia, and found that migrations into India ìdid That is a crucial observation, which later
occur, but rarely from western Eurasian studies will endorse: on the maternal side at
populations.î Disotell made observations very least, and in the regions studied, there is no such
similar to those of the preceding paper: thing as a ìHinduî or ìMuslimî genetic identity,
nor also a high- or low-caste oneóhence the
The supposed Aryan invasion of India 3,000-4,000 paperís title: ìFundamental genomic unity of
years before present therefore did not make a major
ethnic India is revealed by analysis of
splash in the Indian gene pool. This is especially
mitochondrial DNA.î The authors also noted that
counter-indicated by the presence of equal, though
haplogroup ìUî, already noted by Kivisild et al.
very low, frequencies of the western Eurasian
(1999) as being common to north Indian and
mtDNA types in both southern and northern India.
Thus, the ìcaucasoidî features of south Asians may
ìCaucasoidî populations, was found in tribes of
best be considered ìpre-caucasoidî ó that is, part eastern India such as the Lodhas and Santals. This
of a diverse north or north-east African gene pool would not be the case if it had been introduced
that yielded separate origins for western Eurasian through Indo-Aryans. Such is also the case of
and southern Asian populations over 50,000 years the haplogroup ìMî, another marker frequently
ago. (Disotell 1999: R926) mentioned in the early literature as evidence of
the invasion: in reality, ìWe have now shown
Here again, the Eurasian connection is traced
that indeed haplogroup M occurs with a high
to the original migration out of Africa, so that frequency, averaging about 60%, across most
ìthe supposed Aryan invasion of India 3000ñ Indian population groups, irrespective of
4000 years ago was much less significant than geographical location of habitat. We have also
is generally believed.î (Disotell 1999: R925) shown that the tribal populations have higher
frequencies of haplogroup M than caste
GENES, RELIGION, CASTE AND LANGUAGE populations.î (Roychoudhury et al. 2000: 1189)
A year later, thirteen Indian scientists led by Also in 2000, twenty authors headed by
Susanta Roychoudhury studied 644 samples of Kivisild contributed a chapter to a book on
mtDNA from some ten Indian ethnic groups, Europeís archaeogenetics. They first stressed the
especially from the East and South. They found importance of the mtDNA haplogroup ìMî
ìa fundamental unity of mtDNA lineages in India, common to India (with a frequency of 60%),
in spite of the extensive cultural and linguistic central and eastern Asia (40% on average), and
diversityî, pointing to ìa relatively small even to American Indians; however, this
founding group of females in India.î frequency drops to 0.6% in Europe, which is
 Genetics and the Aryan Issue
49

ìinconsistent with the ëgeneral Caucasoidnessí The second study, a particularly detailed one
of Indians.î This shows, once again, that ìthe dealing with the genetic heritage of Indiaís
Indian maternal gene pool has come largely earliest settlers, relied on nearly a thousand
through an autochthonous history since the Late samples from the subcontinent, including two
Pleistoceneî (Kivisild et al. 2000: 271), in other Dravidian-speaking tribes from Andhra Pradesh.
words, before some 15,000 years ago. Looking Among other findings, it stressed that the Y-DNA
at mtDNA as a whole, the paper stated, ìEven haplogroup M17, regarded till recently as a
the high castes share more than 80 per cent of genetic marker for an Indo-Aryan migration, and
their maternal lineages with the lower castes and indeed frequent in Central Asia, is equally found
tribalsî (Kivisild et al. 2000: 271), which also in the two tribes under consideration, which is
runs counter to the invasionist thesis. Taking all inconsistent with the invasionist framework.
aspects into consideration, the authorsí Moreover, one of the two tribes, the Chenchus,
conclusion was: is genetically close to several castes, so that
there is a ìlack of clear distinction between
We believe that there are now enough reasons not Indian castes and tribesî (Kivisild et al. 2003b:
only to question a ìrecent IndoñAryan invasionî into 329)ó fact that can hardly be overemphasized.
India some 4000 BP, but alternatively to consider
India as a part of the common gene pool ancestral This also emerges from a study of genetic
to the diversity of human maternal lineages in distances between eight Indian and seven
Europe. (Kivisild et al. 2000: 267) Eurasian populations. These distances,
calculated on the basis of 16 Y-DNA
In 2003, Kivisild published two more
haplogroups (Fig. 1), challenge many common
studies. The first dealt with the origin of
assumptions: not only are the Chenchus close
languages and agriculture in India and stressed
to five castes, as just mentioned, but we find
Indiaís genetic complexity and antiquity, since
another tribe, the Lambadis (probably of
ìpresent-day Indians [possess] at least 90 per
Rajasthani origin), stuck between western
cent of what we think of as autochthonous
Europe and the Middle East, Bengalis of various
Upper Palaeolithic maternal lineages.î (Kivisild
castes close to Mumbai Brahmins, and Goan
et al. 2003a: 221) The authors noted:
Brahmins and Punjabis (both of whom one
The Indian mtDNA tree in general [is] not would have expected to be closest to Central
subdivided according to linguistic (Indo- Asia (assuming an Aryan immigration) as far
European, Dravidian) or caste affiliations, away as possible from it. It becomes clear that
although there may occur (sometimes drastic) no simple framework can account for such
population-wise differences in frequencies of complexity.
particular sub-clusters. (Kivisild et al. 2003a:
The next year, a study directed by Mait
216)
Metspalu analyzed 796 Indian (including tribal
This again highlights the old error of and caste populations from different parts of
conflating language and race or ethnic group: India) and 436 Iranian mtDNAs. Of relevance
there is no ìHindi-speaker geneî or ìTamil- to our purpose is the following observation:
speaker geneî, and again no ìupper-caste geneî
or ìlow-caste geneî, despite entrenched Language families present today in India, such as
misconceptions still prevalent in this regard. Indo-European, Dravidic and Austro-Asiatic, are all
 The Texts, Political History and Administration till c. 200 BC

50

Fig. 1. Genetic distances between eight Indian and seven western Eurasian populations, calculated for 16 Y-DNA
haplogroups (adapted from Kivisild et al. 2003b: 325).

much younger than the majority of indigenous European, Dravidian, Austro-Asiatic and Tibeto-
mtDNA lineages found among their present-day Burmese being the main onesótook shape
speakers at high frequencies. It would make it later, without requiring massive population
highly speculative to infer, from the extant mtDNA
displacements. The authors do find traces of an
pools of their speakers, whether one of the listed
ìEurasian contributionî to the Indian maternal
above linguistically defined group in India should
be considered more ìautochthonousî than any other gene pool, but they attribute it partly to a ìlarge-
in respect of its presence in the subcontinent. scaleî immigration some 40,000 years ago, and
(Metspalu et al. 2004) partly to ìrelatively low-intensity long-lasting
Thus, Indian populations probably spoke admixture at the border regions as well as a
now extinct languages when they settled in consequence of numerous but probably limited
India; the current language familiesóIndo- migrations during the last 10,000 ybp [years
 Genetics and the Aryan Issue
51

before present].î (Metspalu et al. 2004) In IndoñAryan immigration: ìThe influence of

conclusion, the authors see: Central Asia on the pre-existing gene pool was
minor. ... There is no evidence whatsoever to
a genetic continuum that spans from the Near East conclude that Central Asia has been necessarily
into India extending north into Central Asia. The
the recent donor and not the receptor of the R1a
coalescence times of these haplogroups suggest
lineages.î (Sengupta et al. 2006: 218; the R1a
that this continuum took shape somewhere
between 30,000 to 50,000 ybp, thus falling within
lineages being a different way to denote the
the climatically favorable interglacial period. We haplogroup M17).
notice that the extant U7 and W frequencies along Finally, and significantly, this study indirectly
the proposed continuum are not uniform. U7 is more rejected a ìDravidianî authorship of the Indus-
predominant in Iran, Pakistan, northwestern India Sarasvati Civilization, since it noted, ìOur data
and the Arabian peninsula, while W is more frequent are also more consistent with a peninsular origin
in the western Near-East, Anatolia and the Caucasus.
of Dravidian speakers than a source with
The coalescence ages of the Indian- and Iranian-
specific U7 clades suggest that the time-window of
proximity to the Indus....î (Sengupta et al. 2006:
this continuum was closed by ca. 20,000 ybp. 202) They found, in conclusion, ìoverwhelming
(Metspalu et al. 2004) support for an Indian origin of Dravidian
speakers.î (Sengupta et al. 2006: 219) This runs
If so, the main genetic connection between counter to a popular but merely speculative
northwest India and Iran, would date to before thesis that the Harappans were basically
20,000 years ago, and would not be attributable ìDravidiansî, a thesis which archaeology also
to a recent split between Indo-Aryans and Irano- fails to support (Danino 2009).
Aryans.
Another Indian biologist, Sanghamitra Sahoo,
CENTRAL ASIA; DRAVIDIAN SPEAKERS; CASTE-
headed a study of the Y-DNA of 936 samples
TRIBE CONTINUUM covering 77 Indian populations, 32 of them
tribes. Their work confirmed earlier findings:
Three studies relevant to our investigation
ìThe sharing of some Y-chromosomal
appeared in 2006. The first was headed by the
haplogroups between Indian and Central Asian
Indian biologist Sanghamitra Sengupta. Based on
populations is most parsimoniously explained
728 samples covering 36 Indian populations, it
by a deep, common ancestry between the two
announced in its very title how its findings
regions, with diffusion of some Indian-specific
revealed a ìMinor Genetic Influence of Central
lineages northward.î (Sahoo et al. 2006: 843)
Asian Pastoralistsî, i.e. of supposed Indoñ
So the southward gene flow that had been
Aryans, and stated its general agreement with
imprinted on our minds for two centuries may
the previous study. For instance, the authors
turn out to be wrong: it appears that early
rejected the identification of some Y-DNA
population flow was out of, not into, India. The
genetic markers with an ìIndo-European
authors continue:
expansionî, an identification they called
ìconvenient but incorrect... overly simplistic.î The Y-chromosomal data consistently
(Sengupta et al. 2006: 217-18) To them, the suggest a largely South Asian origin for Indian
subcontinentís genetic landscape was formed caste communities and therefore argue against
much earlier than the dates proposed for an any major influx, from regions north and west
 The Texts, Political History and Administration till c. 200 BC

52

Fig. 2. Genetic distances between populations estimated from Y-haplogroup frequencies (from Sahoo et al. 2006).

of India, of people associated either with the other (average Fst value = 0.07) than they are to
development of agriculture or the spread of the the tribal groups (average Fst value = 0.06)î
Indo-Aryan language family. (Sahoo et al. 2006: (Sahoo et al. 2006: 844), an important
843) confirmation of earlier studies. (Fst is, simply
The second of the two rejected associations put, a measure of the degree of differentiation
is that of the Indo-Aryan expansion. The first, among populations; its values range from 0 to
that of the spread of agriculture, is the well- 1). In particular, ìSouthern castes and tribals are
known thesis of Colin Renfrew (1989), which very similar to each other in their Y-
traces IndoñEuropean origins to the beginnings chromosomal haplogroup compositions.î
of agriculture in Anatolia and sees Indo- (Sahoo et al. 2006: 845) As a result, ìit was not
Europeans entering India around 9000 BP along possible to confirm any of the purported
with agriculture: Sahoo et al. see no evidence differentiations between the caste and tribal
of this in the genetic record. (There are also poolsî (Sahoo et al. 2006: 847)ówhich
considerable archaeological difficulties with effectively negates the picture dictated by the
Renfrewís thesis, both in and outside India; Aryan paradigm of tribal adivasis vs. caste
besides, recent evidence on the practice of Hindus as descendants of Indo-Aryans
agriculture in the Ganges Valley as early as in immigrants. In reality, today we have no way to
the eighth millennium points to an indigenous determine who in India is an ìadiî-vasi (original
origin of Indian agriculture; however, a inhabitant), but enough data to reject this label
discussion of this issue is beyond the scope of as misleading and unnecessarily divisive. Our
this paper.) whole notion of ìtribeî in the Indian context,
which anyhow carries a heavy colonial baggage,
The same data allow the authors to construct
turns out to be deeply flawed, as a few Indian
an eloquent table of genetic distances between
anthropologists had already pointed out (e.g.,
several populations, based on Y-haplogroups
Singh 2011).
(Fig. 2). We learn from it, for instance, that ìthe
caste populations of ënorthí and ësouthí India The same year, Noah A. Rosenberg directed
are not particularly more closely related to each a study on ìLow Levels of Genetic Divergence
 Genetics and the Aryan Issue
53

across Geographically and Linguistically Diverse modern Dravidian-speaking and non-Dravidian-

Populations from Indiaî. It found that ìgenetic speaking groups of our study.î In other terms,
variation in India is distinctive with respect to the ìadmixtureî between the two linguistic
the rest of the world, but that the level of genetic groups, if it took place, could have resulted from
divergence is smaller in Indians than might be repeated population contacts over a long time.
expected for such a geographically and In 2007, Gyaneshwer Chaubey, together
linguistically diverse groupî (Rosenberg et al. with M. Metspalu, T. Kivisild and R. Villems,
2006: 2053), stressing again the subcontinentís reviewed many earlier studies, including some
genomic unity, in contrast with regions outside of those quoted above, and stressed the ìcaste-
the subcontinent: ìThe noticeable genetic tribe continuumî, as it is now called. The paper
divergence of India from other regions is asked:
coupled with low levels of genetic divergence
across the subgroups within India.î (Rosenberg whether any of these can be singled out as more
et al. 2006: 2053) Significantly (and keeping in ìautochthonousî than others. However ... this would
mind that Fst is an index of genetic distance or be highly problematic, first, because the language
differentiation). families involved are generally believed to be far
younger than the time frame required for the
Compared to groups that speak Indo- peopling of India. Secondly, such ìautochthonousî
European languages, the groups in our study that Indian-specific mtDNA and Y chromosome lineage
speak Dravidian languages (Kannada, groups are widely spread across language borders
Malayalam, Tamil, and Telugu) did not show in the subcontinent ... and the putative language
noticeably different patterns of pairwise Fst shifts make it hard to infer the original tongue for
values, and in particular, they did not show a every population studied even during the historic
greater Fst from populations of Europe and the period and perhaps impossible for earlier times.
Middle East. Although a process of ancient Thus, the present-day linguistic affinities of different
admixture with indigenous Dravidian speakers Indian populations per se are perhaps among the
most ambiguous and even potentially controversial
by Indo-European populations originating to the
lines of evidence in the reconstruction of prehistoric
west of India might have been expected to result
demographic processes in India. (Chaubey et al.
in an elevated genetic distance from modern 2007: 97)
Dravidians to European and Middle Eastern
populations, our analysis does not find evidence In lay terms, this means, once again, that
of such an admixture process. (Rosenberg et al. current linguistic groups in India cannot be
2006: 2054-55) equated to corresponding ethnic groups: the
demarcation lines do not coincide. The paper
This ìadmixture processî is the one that
also agreed with earlier studies that ìMost of the
would have followed an Aryan invasion or
Indian-specific mtDNA haplogroups show
immigration, and which the study failed to
coalescent times 40,000ñ60,000 YBP.î
document. ìHowever,î it continued, ìthe
(Chaubey et al. 2007: 97)
admixture scenario is not directly contradicted:
the data are compatible with a view in which The same year, Phillip Endicott, together
the admixture occurred in such a manner that at with Metspalu and Kivisild, took a closer look at
its conclusion, similar contributions of ancestral the question of ìmodern human dispersals in
Dravidians were present in the precursors of the South Asiaî. Their observation as regards Indiaís
 The Texts, Political History and Administration till c. 200 BC

54

linguistic demarcation lines is an unambiguous sometime after an initial colonization, in a

rejection of the older paradigm: polarity opposite that expected by the McAlpin
model. ... This population subdivision occurred
The Austro-Asiatic and Tibeto-Burman language during pre-historical times and argues against
groups may retain a distinctive genetic signature
an origin of Dravidian in the Iranian plateau and
due to their relatively recent introduction and
limited subsequent male gene flow. However,
recent displacement southward by Indo-
consistent divisions between populations speaking European agriculturists. The current data are
Dravidian and Indo-Aryan languages are harder to more consistent with the Deccan origin modelî
define with reliability. The complex and intertwined (Underhill 2008: 108). In other words, Dravidian
history of changes in language, subsistence patterns, speakers appear to have originated within the
demography and political intervention, makes it Indian subcontinent, a view already proposed
difficult to relate genetic patterns to these by the American archaeobotanist Dorian Fuller
widespread linguistic categories. The evidence from
who, on the basis of archaeobotanical as well as
mtDNA argues against any strong differentiation
linguistic evidence, opted for ìproto-Dravidians
between these (and other) major language groups
..., and therefore nullifies attempts to trace, somewhere within the core range of modern
maternally, the large-scale population movements Dravidians... the main directions of dispersal
once speculated to have accompanied the arrival would have been out from the Deccan towards
of Indo-Aryan languages. (Endicott et al. 2007: 238) its peripheries and zones of isolationî (Fuller
2003: 207-208).
In a 2008 paper, Peter A. Underhill warned
against what he called ìpitfallsî in interpreting
BACK TO CASTE
the genetic data, in particular ìa simplistic
understanding of the seductive storyline The next year, the Indian geneticist Swarkar
provided by the Y chromosomeî (Underhill Sharma piloted a study on the vexed issue of
2008: 105). Without going into the technical the origins of the caste system. It reviewed and
intricacies involved, let us mention that Underhill attempted to assess the competing theses in the
is led to question the conventional view that field. Studying a sample of 681 Brahmins and
Dravidian speakers originated from southwest 2128 tribals and Scheduled Castes, the authors
Persia, a view that derived, among others, from found ìno consistent pattern of the exclusive
the work of the U.S. linguist David W. McAlpin presence and distribution of Y-haplogroups to
in the 1970s (see McAlpin 1981), which built distinguish the higher-most caste, Brahmins,
upon perceived parallels between Dravidian from the lower-most ones, schedule castes and
and Elamite. Although often quoted as the last tribals.î (Sharma et al. 2009: 51) In their view,
word on the origin of Dravidian speakers, the Y-haplogroup R1a1 held the key to the
McAlpinís thesis had failed to convince some origins of the caste system; exploring its
of his own colleagues, including experts on frequency not only in India but also in the rest
Dravidian linguistics (see Comments in McAlpin of Eurasia and Central Asia in particular, they
1975; also Zvelebil 1990: 104-115). With a fresh found that ìthe age of R1a1 was the highest in
look at the data from genetics, Underhill finds a the Indian subcontinentî and concluded ìin favor
haplogroup (called L1-M27), which forms an of the suggestion that there has been no bulk
important component of genetic make-up of migration from Central Asia to India.î (Sharma
West Asian populations, ìemanating from India et al. 2009: 54, 52) Their next observation was:
 Genetics and the Aryan Issue
55

Interestingly, among different groups, the age of and predate the upper bound of the age estimate
Y-haplogroup R1a1 was highest in scheduled of the Indo-European language tree. ... The
castes/tribes when compared with Central Asians presence and overall frequency of haplogroup
and Eurasians. These observations weaken the R1a does not distinguish Indo-Iranian, Finno-
hypothesis of introduction of this haplogroup and
Ugric, Dravidian or Turkic speakers from each
the origin of Indian higher most castes from Central
other.î The earlier use of this marker for Indo-
Asian and Eurasian regions, supporting their origin
within the Indian subcontinent (Sharma et al. 2009: European migrations would thus be unjustified,
54). unless proto-Indo-European can be pushed back
beyond 10000 BC, which most linguists would
Their conclusion deserves to be quoted at be unwilling to accept. Moreover, the
some length: distribution of sub-haplogroups of R1a ìwould
The observation of R1a in high frequency for the
exclude any significant patrilineal gene flow
first time in the literature, as well as analyses using from East Europe to Asia, at least since the mid-
different phylogenetic methods, resolved the Holocene periodî (Underhill et al. 2010: 483),
controversy of the origin of R1a1, supporting its precluding once again any significant migration
origin in the Indian subcontinent. Simultaneously, from eastern Europe to Asia since about 4000
the presence of R1a1 in very high frequency in BC.
Brahmins, irrespective of linguistic and geographic
Significantly, the authorsí study of frequency
affiliations, suggested it as the founder haplogroup
distribution for the haplogroup most commonly
for the population. The co-presence of this
haplogroup in many of the tribal populations of India, associated with Indo-European speakers, R1a1a
its existence in high frequency in Saharia (present (which, for our purpose, is the same as M17),
study) and Chenchu tribes, the high frequency of differs from more conventional studies, but
R1a in Kashmiri Pandits (KPsóBrahmins) as well as agrees with the preceding one (Sharma et al.
Saharia (tribe) and associated phylogenetic ages 2009), in that it displaces the centre of gravity
supported the autochthonous origin and tribal links for this marker from eastern Europe or Central
of Indian Brahmins, confronting the concepts of Asia to the Indian subcontinent (see Fig. 3).
recent Central Asian introduction and rank-related
Eurasian contribution of the Indian caste system. For our most recent study, we turn again to
(Sharma et al. 2009: 54) Metspalu, who piloted in 2011 a study of 142
samples from 30 ethnic groups in India. The
This is an emphatic rejection of the Aryan chief finding was that ìIndian populations are
scenarioís views on the origins of caste, although characterized by two major ancestry
the paper ended on a cautionary note calling components, one of which is spread at
for more representative samples. comparable frequency and haplotype diversity
In 2010, Underhill was the lead author of a in populations of South and West Asia and the
study that examined the relationship between Caucasus. The second component is more
European and Asian Y chromosomes within the restricted to South Asia and accounts for more
haplogroup R1a, which has been regarded as a than 50% of the ancestry in Indian populationsî
marker of the supposed Indo-European (Metspalu et al. 2011: 731). But the first
migrations. The authors found that ìcoalescent component, shared with regions west of India,
time estimates of R1a1a correlate with the timing ìcannot be explained by recent gene flow, such
of the recession of the Last Glacial Maximum as the hypothetical Indo-Aryan migrationî
 The Texts, Political History and Administration till c. 200 BC

56

Fig. 3. Geographic distribution of haplogroup R1a1a frequency; see Underhill et al. 2010: 481 for detailed explanation.

(Metspalu et al. 2011: 740). The evidence, U.S. biologist Michael Bamshad found that
instead, ìsuggests multiple gene flows to the ìupper castes are more similar to Europeans than
South Asian gene pool, both from the west and to Asiansî and concluded that ìY-chromosome
east, over a much longer time spanî (Metspalu variation confirms Indo-European admixtureî
et al. 2011: 741). The authors also offered a (Bamshad et al. 2001). Such conclusions were
welcome reminder of the complexity of genetic soon cited (not without some glee) as proof of
origins in the Indian context: the Aryan migration theory, until they were
swept away by later studies.
Several aspects of the nature of continuity and
discontinuity of the genetic landscape of South Asia The same year, the Indian geneticist Partha
and West Eurasia still elude our understanding. P. Majumder acknowledged the ìfundamental
Whereas the maternal gene pool of South Asia is unity of mtDNA lineages in India in spite of the
dominated by autochthonous lineages, Y extensive cultural and linguistic diversityî
chromosome variants of the R1a clade are spread (Majumder 2001: 535), but, citing Romila Thapar,
from India (ca 50%) to eastern Europe and their remained committed to the view that ìpastoral
precise origin in space or time is still not well nomads originating in the Central Asian steppes
understood (Metspalu et al. 2011: 739). may also have contributed to the gene pool of
India. The entry of humans from these regions
DIVERGING VIEWS into India was through the northwest corridor of
Despite the above barrage of studies challenging India. ... It is known that after the entry of the
the conventional scenario, geneticists are yet to Aryan-speakers into India, the Brahmins were
reach unanimity about the origins of Indian the torch-bearers and promoters of Aryan ritualsî
populations. Thus a 2001 study directed by the (Majumdar 2001: 541-44). In a more recent
 Genetics and the Aryan Issue
57

study, Majumdar repeated the same supportî it. Quite the contrary, as mentioned
methodological error, basing himself on the earlier, archaeological evidence actually runs
belief that there was ìa conquest of this region against the migrationist view, while linguistic
[the Northwest] by nomadic people from Central evidence is ambivalent and can be explained
Asia, who spoke Indo-European languages. This through non-diffusionist models. The authors do
conquest by Indo-European speakers introduced not seem to have realized the circularity of their
a social structure that is hierarchical (the caste approach, accepting the supposed Indo-
system), and persists even to this dayî (Majumdar European migration and suiting the genetic
2008: 280). Additionally, he invoked obsolete evidence to it.
linguistic evidence such as the existence of ìthe In 2008, a study entitled ìGenetic landscape
existence of a solitary Dravidian-speaking of the people of India: a canvas for disease gene
group, the Brahuiî as evidence for the spread explorationî was published by the Indian
of Dravidian speakers into South Asia, unaware Genome Variation Consortium (with seven co-
of the fact that Brahui has long been shown to authors and some 150 collaborators); its primary
be a recent entrant into Baluchistan (see focus was to identify ìmarkers on disease or
references in Danino 2009: 76-77). Similarly, the drug-response related genes in diverse
notion of a ìproto-Elamo-Dravidian languageî populationsî. However, it did remark on the
(Majumdar 2008: 282) refers to the above- connection between linguistic and ethnic groups,
mentioned thesis by McAlpin, which as we saw noting ìhigh levels of genetic divergence
stands challenged by genetics and between groups of populations that cluster
archaeobotany. This shows the danger of trying largely on the basis of ethnicity and languageî
to suit the genetic evidence to predetermined (Indian Genome Variation Consortium 2008: 3),
theories instead of letting it speak on its own while most of the above-mentioned studies saw
terms. However, in a recent popular article, no such coincidence between genetic and
Majumdar adopted a more cautious line: ìThe linguistic clusters. Again, ìWe observed that on
initial view that there was large-scale migration a pan-India level, the tribal and caste populations
from Central Asia into India has been are significantly differentiated. Besides, within
significantly modulated.î (Majumdar and some geographical regions, tribes and castes
Balasubramanian 2009: 76) subclassified by language are also well
The same pattern can be found in the 2004 differentiatedî (Indian Genome Variation
study directed by the French geneticist Richard Consortium 2008: 11), in apparent contradiction
Cordaux, who argued that ìpaternal lineages of to the above caste-tribe continuum. It is difficult
Indian caste groups are primarily descended to decide whether there is an absolute criterion
from Indo-European speakers who migrated for such ìdifferentiationsî or if they are a matter
from Central Asia 3,500 years ago. Conversely, of relative emphasis and ultimately personal
paternal lineages of tribal groups are inclinations. Finally, the authors, referring to
predominantly derived from the original Indian Romila Thaparís History of India of 1966, write:
gene pool.î (Cordaux et al. 2004: 231) But the ìIt is contented that the Dravidian speakers, now
precision of the date is suspect, and the only geographically confined to southern India, were
evidence provided for the said migration was more widespread throughout India prior to the
that ìarchaeological and linguistic evidence arrival of the Indo-European speakers. They,
 The Texts, Political History and Administration till c. 200 BC

58

possibly after a period of social and genetic acceptance, again, of a ìtemptingî linguistic
admixture with the Indo-Europeans, retreated theory, the study did not offer a date for the
to southern India.... Our results showing genetic proposed separation of ANI from European
heterogeneity among the Dravidian speakers populations. Moreover, its statistical methods are
further supports the above hypothesis. The Indo- very elaborate and need to be tested by other
European speakers also exhibit a similar or higher workers in the field. For instance, whether its
degree of genetic heterogeneity possibly populations samples were adequate is doubtful:
because of different extents of admixture with although the study involved 25 Indian
the indigenous populations over different time populations, it was far from representative: many
periods after their entry into India.î (Indian Indian states were completely left out (Himachal
Genome Variation Consortium 2008: 9-10) This Pradesh, Punjab, Haryana, Bihar, West Bengal,
is another clear case of circularity: a now Orissa, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu and a few
discarded thesis is accepted a priori and ìgenetic Northeastern states) or represented by a single
heterogeneityî interpreted along those lines in population (Jammu & Kashmir, Uttaranchal,
disregard of more likely alternatives: if those Rajasthan, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Jharkhand,
populations were long settled in India, limited Chattisgarh, Kerala). With such a poor
population movements and complex interactions distribution, it is hard to take seriously the
(not just from north to south) since Palaeolithic concepts of ANI and ASI, which, moreover, are
times could easily account for ìgenetic hardly defined; it may be asked whether
heterogeneity among the Dravidian speakersî. introducing them does not also introduce an
Such methodological flaws are not expected of a artificial division among Indian populations. The
scientific study of this standard. authors were however careful enough to qualify
Another differing view was published in their conclusions:
Nature in 2009. An Indo-U.S. team directed by We warn that ìmodelsî in population
David Reich introduced the concepts of genetics should be treated with caution. Although
ìAncestral North Indiansî (ANI) and ìAncestral they provide an important framework for
South Indiansî (ASI) and found them ìgenetically testing historical hypotheses, they are
divergentî. For instance, the ANI were found to oversimplifications. For example, the true
be ìgenetically close to Middle Easterners, ancestral populations of India were probably not
Central Asians, and Europeansî and ìANI homogeneous as we assume in our model, but
ancestry ranges from 39-71% in most Indian instead were probably formed by clusters of
groups, and is higher in traditionally upper caste related groups that mixed at different times.
and Indo-European speakers.î (Reich et al. 2009: (Reich et al. 2009: 492)
489) Although the study noted degrees of ìANI-
More examples of methodological flaws in
ASI mixtureî, it found it ìtempting to assume
genetics studies were discussed by Nicole
that the population ancestral to ANI and CEU
Boivin in 2007:
spoke ëProto-Indo-Europeaní, which has been
reconstructed as ancestral to both Sanskrit and In reading the genetics literature on South Asia, it is
European languages, although we cannot be very clear that many of the studies actually start out
certain without a date for ANI-ASI mixture.î with some assumptions that are clearly problematic,
(Reich et al. 2009: 492) Apart from the a priori if not in some cases completely untenable. Perhaps
 Genetics and the Aryan Issue
59

the single most serious problem concerns the immigration left no trace in Indian
assumption, which many studies actually start with literature, in the archaeological and the
as a basic premise ... that the Indo-Aryan invasions anthropological record, it is undetectable
are a well-established (pre)historical reality. (Boivin at the genetic levelóunless a priori
2007: 352)
assumed to be true.
Boivin discusses this flaw in several studies, “ A rejection of facile and largely colonial
such as Bamshad et al. 2001 or Cordaux et al. assumptions that tribal groups are
2004 cited above, pointing out that they ìconfirm descendants of Indiaís ìoriginalî
such invasions in large part because they actually inhabitants (adivasis), while Dravidian as
assume them to begin with.î (Boivin 2007: 352) well as Indo-European speakers have later
Among other methodological issues, she notes entrants as ancestors.
the failure to take into account the genetic legacy “ A rejection of a sharp genetic demarcation
of known invasions, especially of historical line between tribal and caste populations:
periods, and the ìproblematic assumption ... that there is no significant (or, at least,
caste is unchangingî, e.g. that todayís Brahmin definable) genetic pattern to differentiate
necessarily had Brahmin ancestors, which need Brahmins, Dalits and tribals, all of whom
not be correct, or again that castes were strictly may be regarded as autochthonous in
endogamous, which is rarely the case (Boivin origin.
2007: 354). In other words, genetics studies Besides, Indiaís considerable genetic
ignoring the fluidity of the social entities going diversity can make sense only by using a time-
by the name of castes are likely to reach scale not of a few millennia, but of 40,000 to
erroneous conclusions. 60,000 years. In fact, several studies, such as
Stephen Oppenheimer (2003), Llu·s Quintana-
CONCLUSIONS Murci et al. (2004), Vincent Macaulay et al.
Genetics of human populations is a relatively (2005), Hannah V.A. James and Michael D.
young discipline, which, in the Indian context, Petraglia (2005), have in the last few years
has to contend with an acknowledged diversity proposed that modern humans migrating out of
as well as complexity. We are still far from being Africa first reached southwest Asia around
75,000 BP, and from here, went on to other parts
able to re-create a comprehensive genetic
of the world. In simple terms, except for
history of Indian populations. In the meantime,
Africans, all humans would have ancestors there.
let us sum up the main conclusions reached by
In particular, one migration started around 50,000
the first group of sixteen studies examined in
BP towards the Middle East and Western Europe:
this chapter as far as the Aryan debate is
concerned: Indeed, nearly all Europeansóand by extension,
“ A rejection of the addition to Indian many Americansócan trace their ancestors to only
four mtDNA lines, which appeared between 10,000
populations of a ìCaucasoidî or Central
and 50,000 years ago and originated from South
Asian gene pool about 1500 BC, and the Asia. (Allman 2004)
assertion of an indigenous origin for most
Indian populations, including upper Oppenheimer, a leading advocate of this
castes. Just as the putative Aryan scenario, summarizes it in these words:
 The Texts, Political History and Administration till c. 200 BC

60

For me and for Toomas Kivisild, South Asia is logically human prehistory, but that the autochthonous
the ultimate origin of M17 and his ancestors; and elements of its genetic heritage have not been
sure enough we find the highest rates and greatest dominated by these later comings and goings.
diversity of the M17 line in Pakistan, India, and (Endicott et al. 2007: 240)
eastern Iran, and low rates in the Caucasus. M17 is
not only more diverse in South Asia than in Central
In the authorsí opinion, more refined studies
Asia, but diversity characterizes its presence in based on larger population samples ìwill
isolated tribal groups in the south, thus undermining continue to emphasize the genetically complex
any theory of M17 as a marker of a ëmale Aryan patterns present, and are increasingly unlikely
invasioní of India. One average estimate for the to support reductionist explanations of simplistic
origin of this line in India is as much as 51,000 years. demographic and cultural scenarios. Rather, they
All this suggests that M17 could have found his way should put weight behind the suggestion that
initially from India or Pakistan, through Kashmir, West and South Asia, as conduits for the
then via Central Asia and Russia, before finally settlement of the rest of the world, are
coming into Europe. (Oppenheimer 2003: 152) central to comprehending modern human
This would mean that India acted ìas an evolution outside of Africa.î (Endicott et al.
incubator of early genetic differentiation of 2007: 240)
modern humans moving out of Africa.î (Kivisild Genetics is a fast-evolving discipline, and
et al. 2003b: 327) Endicottís study quoted earlier while we must expect frequent new
also argued in favour of: developments to gradually build up a synthetic
view of the origins of Indian populations, it is
a rapid dispersal of modern humans from eastern certain that we will never have to return to the
Africa and subsequent settlement of South Asia. A nineteenth-century racial fallacies of waves of
single exodus along a southern, possibly coastal,
Aryan migrants driving tribal autochthons into
route is a parsimonious conclusion to draw from
the hills or Dravidian speakers southward. Such
contemporary patterns of haploid genetic
distribution and diversity. ... The population entities have no reality in genetic,
movements of the Holocene, together with the bioanthropological, archaeological or cultural
appearance of West Eurasian mtDNA lineages in terms. In this sense, genetics is joining other
the period 40ñ20 ka, indicate that South Asia has disciplines in helping to clean the cobwebs of
indeed been ìat the crossroadsî for much of modern colonial historiography.

REFERENCES
Note: Most of the genetics papers listed below Bamshad, Michael. et al. 2001. Genetic Evidence on the
are available on the Internet; entering their full Origins of Indian Caste Populations. Genome
title and their lead author in a search engine Research 11: 994-1004.
should suffice to locate them. Boas, Franz. 1912. Race, Language and Culture. New
Allman, William F. 2004. Eve Explained: How Ancient York: Macmillan.
Humans Spread Across the Earth. Website of Boivin, Nicole. 2007. In Michael D. Petraglia & Bridget
Discovery Channel, 21 August 2004; available Allchin (eds.), The Evolution and History of
online at http://webhost.bridgew.edu/rsylvester/ Human Populations in South Asia: Inter-
eve.rtf. disciplinary Studies in Archaeology, Biological
 Genetics and the Aryan Issue
61

Anthropology, Linguistics and Genetics. Springer, R. Lukacs (ed.), The People of South Asia: The
Dordrecht, pp. 341-61. Biological Anthropology of India, Pakistan, and
Bose, N.K., et al. 1962. Human skeletal remains from Nepal. New York & London: Plenum Press, pp.
Harappa. Anthropological Survey of India, 59-75.
Calcutta. Endicott, Phillip, Mait Metspalu and Toomas Kivisild.
Bryant, Edwin. 2001. The Quest for the Origins of Vedic 2007. Genetic evidence on modern human
Culture: The IndoñAryan Migration Debate. New dispersals in South Asia: Y chromosome and
York: Oxford University Press. mitochondrial DNA perspectives: The world
through the eyes of two haploid genomes. In
Chakrabarti, Dilip K. 1997. Colonial Indology:
Michael D. Petraglia & Bridget Allchin (eds.), The
Sociopolitics of the Ancient Indian Past. New
Evolution and History of Human Populations
Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal.
in South Asia: Inter-disciplinary Studies in
óñ. 2008. The Battle for Ancient India: An Essay in Archaeology, Biological Anthropology, Linguistics
the Sociopolitics of Indian Archaeology. New and Genetics. Springer, Dordrecht, pp. 299-44.
Delhi: Aryan Books International.
Fuller, Dorian. 2003. An Agricultural Perspective on
Chaubey, Gyaneshwer, Mait Metspalu, Toomas Kivisild Dravidian Historical Linguistics: Archaeological
& Richard Villems. 2007. Peopling of South Asia: Crop Packages, Livestock and Dravidian Crop
Investigating the CasteñTribe Continuum in India. Vocabulary. In Peter Bellwood & Colin Renfrew
Bio Essays 29: 91-100.
(eds.), Examining the Farming/Language
Cordaux, Richard, Robert Aunger, Gillian Bentley, Ivane Dispersal Hypothesis. McDonald Institute for
Nasidze, S.M. Sirajuddin & Mark Stoneking. 2004. Archaeological Research, Cambridge, pp. 191-213.
Independent Origins of Indian Caste and Tribal
Gupta, S.P. 1996. The IndusñSarasvati Civilization:
Paternal Lineages. Current Biology 14: 231-35.
Origins, Problems and Issues. Pratibha Prakashan,
Danino, Michel. 2006a. Genetics and the Aryan Debate. Delhi.
Puratattva (36) 2005-06: 146-54.
Hemphill, B.E., J.R. Lukacs & K.A.R. Kennedy. 1991.
óñ. 2006b. LíInde ou líinvasion de nulle part: Le Biological Adaptations and Affinities of the Bronze
dernier repaire du mythe aryen, Les Belles Age Harappans. In R.H. Meadow (ed.), Harappa
Lettres, Paris. Excavations 1986ñ90: A Multidisciplinary
óñ. 2009. A Dravido-Harappan Connection? The Issue Approach to Third Millennium Urbanism,
of Methodology. In T.S. Sridhar & N. Marxia Gandhi Prehistory Press, Madison, pp. 137-182.
(eds.), Indus Civilization and Tamil Language. Hemphill, B.E., A.F. Christensen & S.I. Mustafakulov.
Department of Archaeology, Government of Tamil 1997. Trade or Travel: An Assessment of
Nadu, Chennai, pp. 70-81. Interpopulational Dynamics among Bronze Age
óñ. 2010. Les migrations aryennes en Inde. Dossiers IndoñIranian Populations. In Raymond Allchin &
díArchèologie 338: 54-61. Bridget Allchin (eds.), South Asian Archaeology,
Datta, Bhupendranath. 1935. Races of India: A critique 1995. Oxford & IBH Publishing, New Delhi, vol. 2,
of Reports on Indian Anthropology. Journal of the pp. 855-71.
Department of Letters. University of Calcutta, vol. Indian Genome Variation Consortium. 2008. Genetic
26, pp. 1-84. Landscape of the People of India: A Canvas for
Disotell, T.R. 1999. Human Evolution: The Southern Disease Gene Exploration. Journal of Genetics
Route to Asia. Current Biology. 9(24): R925-28. 87(1): 3-20.
Dutta, Pratap C. 1984. Biological Anthropology of James, Hannah V.A. & Michael D. Petraglia. 2005. Modern
Bronze Age Harappans: New Perspectives. In John Human Origins and the Evolution of Behavior in
 The Texts, Political History and Administration till c. 200 BC

62

the Later Pleistocene Record of South Asia. Current DNA and the Population Prehistory of Europe.
Anthropology 46 (Supplement): S3-S27. McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research,
Jarrige, Jean-François. 1995. Du nèolithique ã la Cambridge, pp. 267-75.
civilisation de líInde ancienneî. Arts Asiatiques. Kivisild, Toomas, Siiri Rootsi, Mait Metspalu, Ene
Paris, vol. L, pp. 5-29. Metspalu, Juri Parik, Katrin Kaldma, Esien Usanga,
Kennedy, Kenneth A.R. 1982. Skulls, Aryans and Flowing Sarabjit Mastana, Surinder S. Papiha & Richard
Drains: The Interface of Archaeology and Skeletal Villems. 2003a. The Genetics of Language and
Biology in the Study of the Harappan Civilization. Farming Spread in India. In Peter Bellwood & Colin
In Gregory L. Possehl (ed.), Harappan Renfrew (eds.), Examining the Farming/
CivilizationóA Contemporary Perspective. 1st Language Dispersal Hypothesis, McDonald
edn., Oxford & IBH Publishing, New Delhi, pp. Institute for Archaeological Research, Cambridge,
289-95. pp. 215-22.
óñ. 1984. Trauma and Disease in the Ancient Kivisild, T., S. Rootsi, M. Metspalu, S. Mastana, K. Kaldma,
Harappans. In B.B. Lal & S.P. Gupta (eds.), The J. Parik, E. Metspalu, M. Adojaan, H.-V. Tolk, V.
Frontiers of the Harappan Civilization. Books Stepanov, M. Gölge, E. Usanga, S.S. Papiha, C.
and Books, New Delhi, 1984, pp. 425-36. Cinnioglu, R. King, L. Cavalli-Sforza, P.A. Underhill
& R. Villems. 2003b. The Genetic Heritage of the
óñ. 1995. Have Aryans Been Identified in the
Earliest Settlers Persists Both in Indian Tribal and
Prehistoric Skeletal Record from South Asia? In
Caste Populations. American Journal of Human
George Erdosy (ed.), The Indo-Aryans of Ancient
Genetics 72(2): 313-32.
South Asia. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin & New York,
pp. 32-66. Lal, B.B. 1998. India 1947ñ97: New Light on the Indus
Civilization. Aryan Books International, New
óñ. 1999. Paleoanthropology of South Asia.
Delhi.
Evolutionary Anthropology 8(5): 165-85.
óñ. 2002. The Sarasvati Flows On: The Continuity of
Kenoyer, Jonathan Mark. 1998. Ancient Cities of the
Indian Culture, Aryan Books International, New
Indus Valley Civilization. Oxford University Press
& American Institute of Pakistan Studies, Karachi Delhi.
& Islamabad. Macaulay, Vincent, Catherine Hill, Alessandro Achilli,
Kivisild, T., M.J. Bamshad, K. Kaldma, M. Metspalu, E. Chiara Rengo, Douglas Clarke, William Meehan,
Metspalu, M. Reidla, S. Laos, J. Parik, W.S. Watkins, James Blackburn, Ornella Semino, Rosaria Scozzari,
M.E. Dixon, S.S. Papiha, S.S. Mastana, M.R. Mir, V. Fulvio Cruciani, Adi Taha, Norazila Kassim Shaari,
Ferak & R. Villems. 1999. Deep Common Ancestry Joseph Maripa Raja, Patimah Ismail, Zafarina
of Indian and WesternñEurasian Mitochondrial DNA Zainuddin, William Goodwin, David Bulbeck,
Lineages. Current Biology 9(22): 1331-34. Hans-Jürgen Bandelt, Stephen Oppenheimer,
Antonio Torroni & Martin Richards. 2005. Single,
Kivisild, Toomas, Surinder S. Papiha, Siiri Rootsi, Jüri Parik,
Rapid Coastal Settlement of Asia Revealed by
Katrin Kaldma, Maere Reidla, Sirle Laos, Mait
Analysis of Complete Mitochondrial Genomes.
Metspalu, Gerli Pielberg, Maarja Adojaan, Ene
Science 308(5724): 1034-36.
Metspalu, Sarabjit S. Mastana, Yiming Wang,
Mukaddes Golge, Halil Demirtas, Eckart Majumdar, Partha P. 2001. Ethnic Populations of India as
Schnakenberg, Gian Franco de Stefano, Tarekegn Seen from an Evolutionary Perspective. Journal
Geberhiwot, Mireille Claustres & Richard Villems. of Biosciences 26(4) Suppl. 533-45.
2000. An Indian Ancestry: A Key for Understanding óñ. 2008. Genomic Inferences on Peopling of South
Human Diversity in Europe and Beyond. In Colin Asia. Current Opinion in Genetics & Development
Renfrew & Katie Boyle (eds.), Archaeogenetics: 18: 280-84.
 Genetics and the Aryan Issue
63

Majumdar, Partha P. & Balasubramanian. 2009. Who are Central Asian Corridor. American Journal of
We? Geo (Indian edn.). June, pp. 73-76. Human Genetics 74(5): 827-45.
McAlpin, David. 1975. Elamite and Dravidian: Further Reich, David, Kumarasamy Thangaraj, Nick Patterson,
Evidence of Relationship. Current Anthropology Alkes L. Price & Lalji Singh. 2009. Reconstructing
16(1): 105-15 Indian Population History. Nature 461(7263): 489-
McAlpin, David W. 1981. Proto-Elamo-Dravidian: The 94.
Evidence and Its Implications. Transactions of the Renfrew, Colin. 1989. Archaeology and Language: The
American Philosophical Society 71: 3-155. Puzzle of Indo-European Origins. Penguin Books,
Metspalu, Mait, Toomas Kivisild, Ene Metspalu, Jüri Parik, London, 1989.
Georgi Hudjashov, Katrin Kaldma, Piia Serk, Monika Rosenberg, Noah A., Saurabh Mahajan, Catalina
Karmin, Doron M. Behar, M. Thomas P. Gilbert, Gonzalez-Quevedo, Michael G.B. Blum, Laura
Phillip Endicott, Sarabjit Mastana, Surinder S. Papiha, Nino-Rosales, Vasiliki Ninis, Parimal Das, Madhuri
Karl Skorecki, Antonio Torroni & Richard Villems. Hegde, Laura Molinari, Gladys Zapata, James L.
2004. Most of the Extant mtDNA Boundaries in South Weber, John W. Belmont & Pragna I. Patel. 2006.
and Southwest Asia Were Likely Shaped during the Low Levels of Genetic Divergence Across
Initial Settlement of Eurasia by Anatomically Modern Geographically and Linguistically Diverse
Humans. BMC Genetics 5: 26. Populations from India. PLoS Genetics 2(12): e215,
Metspalu Mait, Irene Gallego Romero, Bayazit 2052-61.
Yunusbayev, Gyaneshwer Chaubey, Chandana Roychoudhury, Susanta, Sangita Roy, Badal Dey, Madan
Basu Mallick, Georgi Hudjashov, Mari Nelis, Reedik Chakraborty, Monami Roy, Bidyut Roy, A. Ramesh,
M‰gi, Ene Metspalu, Maido Remm, Ramasamy N. Prabhakaran, M.V. Usha Rani, H. Vishwanathan,
Pitchappan, Lalji Singh, Kumarasamy Thangaraj, Mitashree Mitra, Samir K. Sil & Partha P.Majumder.
Richard Villems & Toomas Kivisild. 2011. Shared 2000. Fundamental Genomic Unity of Ethnic India
and Unique Components of Human Population is Revealed by Analysis of Mitochondrial DNA.
Structure and Genome-Wide Signals of Positive Current Science 79(9): 1182-92.
Selection in South Asia. The American Journal of
Sahoo, Sanghamitra, Anamika Singh, G. Himabindu,
Human Genetics. December 9, 89: 731-44.
Jheelam Banerjee, T. Sitalaximi, Sonali Gaikwad,
Montagu, Ashley. 1942. Manís Most Dangerous Myth: R. Trivedi, Phillip Endicott, Toomas Kivisild, Mait
The Fallacy of Race. Columbia University Press, Metspalu, Richard Villems, & V.K. Kashyap. 2006.
New York. A Prehistory of Indian Y Chromosomes: Evaluating
Oppenheimer, Stephen. 2003. The Real Eve: Modern Demic Diffusion Scenarios. Proceedings of the
Manís Journey out of Africa. Carroll & Graf National Academy of Sciences 103(4): 843-48.
Publishers, New York. (For an introduction to Sengupta, Sanghamitra, Lev A. Zhivotovsky, Roy King,
Oppenheimerís theory, see S.Q. Mehdi, Christopher A. Edmonds, Cheryl-
www.bradshawfoundation.com.) Emiliane T. Chow, Alice A. Lin, Mitashree Mitra,
Quintana-Murci, Llu·s, Rapha‡lle Chaix, R. Spencer Wells, Samir K. Sil, A. Ramesh, M.V. Usha Rani, Chitra M.
Doron M. Behar, Hamid Sayar, Rosaria Scozzari, Thakur, L. Luca Cavalli-Sforza, Partha P. Majumder,
Chiara Rengo, Nadia Al-Zahery, Ornella Semino, & Peter A. Underhill. 2006. Polarity and
A. Silvana Santachiara-Benerecetti, Alfredo Coppa, Temporality of High-Resolution Y-Chromosome
Qasim Ayub, Aisha Mohyuddin, Chris Tyler-Smith, Distributions in India Identify Both Indigenous and
S. Qasim Mehdi, Antonio Torroni, & Ken Exogenous Expansions and Reveal Minor Genetic
McElreavey. 2004. Where West Meets East: The Influence of Central Asian Pastoralists. American
Complex mtDNA Landscape of the Southwest and Journal of Human Genetics 78(2): 202-21.
 The Texts, Political History and Administration till c. 200 BC

64

Sewell R.B.S. & B.S. Guha. 1931. Human Remains. In Paper 5. Linguistics, Archaeology and the Human
John Marshall (ed.), Mohenjodaro and the Indus Past. Kyoto, pp. 103-09.
Civilization. Arthur Probsthain, London, vol. 2, pp. Underhill, Peter A., Natalie M. Myres, Siiri Rootsi, Mait
599-648. Metspalu, Lev A. Zhivotovsky, Roy J King, Alice A.
Shaffer, Jim G. 1984. The Indo-Aryan Invasions: Cultural Lin, Cheryl-Emiliane T. Chow, Ornella Semino,
Myth and Archaeological Reality. In John R. Lukacs Vincenza Battaglia, Ildus Kutuev, Mari Järve,
(ed.), The People of South Asia: The Biological Gyaneshwer Chaubey, Qasim Ayub, Aisha
Anthropology of India, Pakistan, and Nepal. Mohyuddin, S. Qasim Mehdi, Sanghamitra Sengupta,
Plenum Press, New York & London, pp. 77-90. Evgeny I Rogaev, Elza K. Khusnutdinova, Andrey
Pshenichnov, Oleg Balanovsky, Elena Balanovska,
Sharma, Ram Sharan. 2001. Advent of the Aryans in
Nina Jeran, Dubravka Havas Augustin, Marian
India. Manohar, New Delhi.
Baldovic, Rene J Herrera, Kumarasamy Thangaraj,
Sharma, Swarkar, Ekta Rai, Prithviraj Sharma, Mamata Vijay Singh, Lalji Singh, Partha Majumder, Pavao
Jena, Shweta Singh, Katayoon Darvishi, Audesh K. Rudan, Dragan Primorac, Richard Villems & Toomas
Bhat, A.J.S Bhanwer, Pramod Kumar Tiwari & Kivisild. 2010. Separating the Post-Glacial
Rameshwar N.K Bamezai. 2009. The Indian origin Coancestry of European and Asian Y Chromosomes
of paternal haplogroup R1a1* substantiates the within Haplogroup R1a. European Journal of
autochthonous origin of Brahmins and the caste Human Genetics 18: 479-84.
system. Journal of Human Genetics 54: 47-55.
Walimbe, S.R. 1993. The Aryans: The Physical
Singh, K.S. 2011. Diversity, Identity, and Linkages: Anthropological Approach. In S.B. Deo & S. Kamath
Explorations in Historical Ethnography. Oxford (eds.), The Aryan Problem. Bharatiya Itihasa
University Press, New Delhi. Sankalana Samiti, Pune, pp. 108-15.
*Stock, Jay T., Marta Miraz˙n Lahr and Samanti Kulatilake. Walimbe, S.R. 2007. Population Movements in the Indian
2007. Cranial Diversity in South Asia Relative to Subcontinent during the Protohistoric Period:
Modern Human Dispersals and Global Patterns of Physical Anthropological Assessment. In Michael
Human Variation. In Michael D. Petraglia & Bridget D. Petraglia & Bridget Allchin (eds.), The Evolution
Allchin (eds.), The Evolution and History of and History of Human Populations in South
Human Populations in South Asia: Inter- Asia: Inter-disciplinary Studies in Archaeology,
disciplinary Studies in Archaeology, Biological Biological Anthropology, Linguistics and
Anthropology, Linguistics and Genetics. Springer, Genetics. Springer, Dordrecht, pp. 297-319.
Dordrecht, pp. 245-68. Witzel, Michael. 2001. Autochthonous Aryans? The
Trautmann, Thomas R. 1997. Aryans and British India. Evidence from Old Indian and Iranian Texts.
Indian edn., Vistaar, New Delhi. Electronic Journal of Vedic Studies 7(3) §8.
Underhill, Peter A. 2008. Interpreting Patterns of Y Zvelebil, Kamil V. 1990. Dravidian Linguistics: An
Chromosome Diversity: Pitfalls and Promise. Introduction. Pondicherry Institute of Linguistics
Toshiki Osada & Akinori Uesugi, (eds.), Occasional and Culture, Pondicherry.
[MD]

View publication stats