--- On Sat, 26/9/09, Pranesh Prakash <the.solips...@gmail.com> wrote:
From: Pranesh Prakash <the.solips...@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [silk] What should one make of the Indian genomic study? To: silklist@lists.hserus.net Date: Saturday, 26 September, 2009, 8:35 PM Sorry. Throughout I should have said ASI/ANI ancestry. ------------------------------------------------------- From what I can make out, newspaper accounts are completely off the point. The study essentially says that the dates for existence of ASI/ANI ancestry pre-date what we have been talking about by a considerable period. In effect, we have to revise backwards these dates by nearly a millennium at a time. The implications? The Aryan-speaking nomads may have been around in North-West and Gangetic India earlier than suspected, as much as a thousand years earlier, and may well have been contemporaries of the Indus Valley Civilisation. Their coexistence in completely different geographies is quite easy to accept. What is disconcerting is a possibility that they may have pre-dated the IVC; does that mean that the IVC was an intruding civilisation, embedded within a surrounding ANI population? Not really. The simple explanation remains what the evidence shows: the Indus Civilisation was generated from the settlements in Baluchistan and Pakhtunistan which were traced to nearly 3500 BC, and the Aryan-speakers were further north, further east, coming down the Ganges-Yamuna line and avoiding the strong walled cities to their south and west. They may have curved around and proceeded down into the interior, and their boundaries with the Indus Civilisation may have been marked by the extent of archaeological evidence of IVC sites.
