Paper Adds Support to Aryan Invasion Theory

Note: Repost from the old blog.

The notion that an “Aryan Invasion” that occurred 3,500 years ago in India and subsequently shaped the physical and religious landscape of the country is a controversial one, but it is steeped in Indian socio-cultural politics. Though it is uncontroversial outside of India, a huge debate has heated up inside India.

On the one side are the Dalits and their allies. The Dalits claim that they were the original Indians and practiced some sort of a nice, Utopian religion. I don’t know if it was Goddess worship, but I guess it was something like that. The Dalits really hate Hinduism, because Hindus have decided that Dalits are born and doomed through life to be lower than whale shit, and that’s at the bottom of the ocean.

So the Dalits say that these Aryans (White folks) invaded down from the steppes to the north and west (possibly Tajikistan or around Iran) and conquered a large part of India. They brought with them Hinduism and caste. They made themselves the lighter Brahmin caste and made the darker folks lower castes, and the darkest of all were made into Dalits. So the Aryan invasion started the whole mess.

Hindu nationalists (Hindutvas) love their Hindu religion and feel that it can do no wrong, so they dislike this Aryan invasion theory. Their whole line is that there was no Aryan invasion. Hinduism was native to India and was not some wicked religion brought by evil lighter-skinned dudes. This theory is also very popular with Brahmins, almost all of whom support caste, no matter what they tell you.

White nationalists, some high caste Indian racialists and Afrocentrists all support the Aryan invasion theory. White nationalists feel that there are two races in India – light-skinned cool guy “Aryans” in the north who are smart and get everything done in India, to the extent that anything gets done there, and darker Dravidians, who are apparently inferior muds or something.

In reality, there are just Indians of varying shades. The ones towards the northwest to tend to be more European-looking and lighter, and the ones heading to the south and east from the northwest to tend to get darker and more Dravidian looking. However, there are plenty of dark-skinned North Indians with varying degrees of Dravidian features, and in the south, there are a lot of lighter folks with more European features.

The “Aryans” and “Dravidians” have gotten so mixed in over 3,500 years that these categories no longer make much sense, except to idiots. In which case, they are encouraged to continue using them.

High caste Indian racialists go along with this, and hang out in White nationalist fora trying to convince White nationalists that funny looking light-skinned Indians are really just White people too, albeit with patchouli oil and a taste for curry. White nationalists are dubious about admitting wogs into their midst of their White purity.

Afrocentrists like this theory because they moronically think that Dravidians are Black folks. Except that they are not. Actually, all Indians are pretty closely related and are very distant from Africans – they are no closer to Africans than anyone else on Earth. Any resemblance to Africans is just convergence, genetic drift or coincidence.

Well, India was populated by all these really cool Indian Black folks and then evil White dudes came in, brought an evil White Supremacist religion called Hinduism, and cruelly imposed it on the darkies.

In the midst of all of this swarming intellectual idiocy, it falls to the scientists to add some sense to the discussion.

This interesting paper (available on this blog here) adds to the evidence for an Aryan invasion.

They did find that higher-caste folks tended to be lighter than lower-caste Indians, but that was just a trend. There are light-skinned low-caste Indians in the northwest and many of the Brahmins of South India are quite dark.

They also found a trend for lighter skin and more European features and genes towards the northwest and darker skin, more indigenous features and more Asian genes and one moved to the south and east. The paper felt that they had evidence for a large introgression of European-looking peoples maybe 3000-4000 years ago, though things have gotten pretty mixed up since.

Other papers studying the genetics of India have concluded Indians have been evolving, more or less in situ without a lot of outside inputs, for 15-20,000 years (call it 17,000 years). The result has been this endlessly varying type we call the East Indian. And where did the Indian stock come from prior to 17,000 years ago?

The authors were not sure, but they felt that the seed for the stock that started to grow the modern Indian tree came from the Middle East 17,000 years ago.

India, along with North Africa, the Caucasus and the Middle East, is also one of main staging grounds for the evolution of Caucasians and proto-Caucasians from 39,000-52,000 years ago. In particular, there was a movement out of India to North Africa 30,000 years ago which probably helped to create the Berbers.

There are also other, lesser known influences on the people of India and Pakistan. The Mohajirs in Uttar Pradesh are heavily Persian and Arab. Former Pakistani President Musharaff is a Mohajir, so his background was mostly Arab and Iranian.

Mohajirs are the Muslims that fled India to Pakistan during the bloody partition in 1947. They have since suffered a lot of persecution in Pakistan and are not all that well-liked there. They have set up their own patronage system, along with patronage political parties, that benefit them and only them.

We see an interesting thing in the far western states of Haryana and Rajasthan. Possibly 50% of the population of Haryana and probably all of Rajasthan is related to Scythians from 1,500-2,000 yrs ago. The Scythians were probably the same as the Ossetians of today. Long ago, the Ossetians were known as the Alans, horse-riding nomads of the Central Asian steppes.

There are some theories that try to connect to the Alans to Japan, especially to the Caucasian-appearing Samurai caste, in an invasion centuries years ago. This rests on similarities between Alan names and legends and those of the Samurai. At present, the Alan-Japanese theory remains little more than a controversial hypothesis.

The Caucasian appearance of the Samurai class is probably due more to their Ainu roots than to any Alan invasion.

Even today, the Japanese ruling class looks different (some say, more Caucasian) than the rest of the Japanese, who are closer to the Yayoi, rice-farmers from Korea who invaded 2,300 years ago and conquered the island, displacing the Ainu. The Ainu, despite superficial Caucasian appearances, are actually anthropologically Australoids close to Aborigines. Genetically, they are Asians.

References

Bamshad M, Kivisild T, Watkins WS, Dixon ME, Ricker CE, Rao BB, Naidu JM, Prasad BV, Reddy PG, Rasanayagam A, Papiha SS, Villems R, Redd AJ, Hammer MF, Nguyen SV, Carroll ML, Batzer MA, Jorde LB, 2001. Genetic Evidence on the Origins of Indian Caste Populations. Genome Res 11: 994–1004. Download on this blog here.

204 Comments

Filed under Africa, Ainu, Anthropology, Asia, Asian, Asians, Caucasus, East Indians, Evolution, Genetics, Hinduism, History, India, Japanese, Middle East, Modern, Nationalism, Near East, North Africa, Northeast Asians, Pakistan, Physical, Political Science, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Regional, Religion, Reposts From The Old Site, Science, South Asia, South Asians, White Nationalism

204 responses to “Paper Adds Support to Aryan Invasion Theory

  1. Are the Christians of India higher caste, middle caste or lower caste people?

    I have an Indian friend who is a Roman Catholic and she has a medium skin tone, very thin lips and a very long nose..

    • I guess it just depends. Lately a lot of low castes are converting to Christianity. The problem is that in North India, even low castes can be fairly light.

      • Ricks1977

        Really – I must say thats new to me. I guess it is probably bullshit but my US Born Indian-Am Friend mentioned you can tell the Lower Caste ppl (EG Dalits) most of the time due to their “broader noses / shorter statue / wider faces and dark brown skin”….

        The problem is Robert, when I went to India on Business at least 50% – 60% had these features. The “Bollywood” Fair Skinned Caucasoid Heavy Indian is 10-15% Tops, the Weathish Colored Caucasoid/Mostly Caucasoid Indian is maybe about 20%-25% top, India for the Most part is is a Dusky to Dark Brown Nation. Tamils and Far South Indians are close to African complexion.

        Indians are Obsessed with White/Light Skin much more so than Latinos/Hispanics…, but then the Latino have much, much higher Intermarriage Rates (and I feel a closer affinity) to US Whites than Indians/Indian Americans, Jeez I know many Latino Women that will (implicitly) only date/marry white men, so they have their vanilla papi (LOL) so their kids turn out very fair (most of the time). Sorry slightly off topic it still surprises me how different NW Euro and Latino Mixtures are in comparison to Southern/Iberians and Latino Mixtures, most of the time they turn out white or near white!….

        • A-Man

          Ricks i Would say some tamilians and south indians HAVE the same skin tone as african people. Even me as a medium skinned south indian has been compared to medium skinned black guys.

      • A-Man

        Hello, Robert
        How many migrations were there into India after the australoids and negritos came? I heard there were like 3-4 migrations. One was dravidians from middle east and then the people from the caucaus and after that the aryans from central asia. Is this true? or do you believe only the aryans and dravidians migrated and mixed with the australoid && negrito natives?

    • Uncle Milton

      Are the Christians of India higher caste, middle caste or lower caste people?

      I have an Indian friend who is a Roman Catholic and she has a medium skin tone, very thin lips and a very long nose..

      My understanding is, for the most part, if they are Christian, they probably came from the lower castes. As for light/dark skin color, I think it depends upon the region they came from. I know two Indian Christians from the South of India who are quite dark. I know someone from Western India who is from the caste just above the Dalits and he has about the same skin tone as a friend of mine who is Brahmin (the highest caste..)

      One exception might be people from the area of Goa which was colonized by the Portuguese. Apparently quite a few people from that area are not only light skinned but have light colored eyes. This could be from ongoing settlement from places like Persia… (the origin of the Parsis an ethnic group in India, predominantly around Mumbai/Bombay who originally fled from Muslim persecution in Persia…the most famous Parsi was Freddy Mercury of the band Queen.)

    • In response to Uncle Milton–

      I have seen a lot of South Indian(Kerala) christians here in New Jersey and New york churches and most of them very light colored(olive skinned).. Some of them were quite dark.. Some had medium skin tone.. Most of them were very light and some were very pale. They were of Roman catholic and Malankara Catholic faith.

      I don’t think they are of the lower caste. If they were lower caste Christians, they wouldn’t have the money to come to USA in the first place.

      Most of the Indians in the U.S belong to middle and high caste families..

      If they were low caste, they would have looked like the typical dark dravidians. But, I didn’t see that in those South Indian christians..

      There ARE lower caste christians in India. they are called the dalit christians and these people have seperate burial grounds and everything since these dalits are not allowed to be buried along with the higher caste christians

    • Tom

      If your friend is from Goa or any other former Portuguese colony and is roman catholic she may be part Portuguese.

  2. Ramesh

    Thanks, I was looking for this post. The fact is upper caste people do tend to be lighter than their surrounding populations. So in North India where the population is brown, upper castes are pale. In Kashmir where the average person is pale, the Kashmiri pundits look like Euro. In south India where the common people are black, the upper caste have the Indonesian copper colour. However throughout India you come across Brahmin populations (Chitpavan Brahmins of Konkan, Maithili Brahmins of Bihar, Saraswat Brahmins of Karnataka which is in the south ) who look very pale nearly like Northern Europeans. In Maharastra for example, we have Chitpavan (Kokanastha) Brahmins and Deshastha Brahmins. The Chitpavans have a lot of Northern European facial features with light coloured eyes being quite common. They tend to have pale skin. The Deshasthas have strong Caucasian facial features but have medium skin colour.

    As far as Christians are concerned, some Christians like the Syrian Malabar Christians, St. Thomas Christians of Kerala were have upper caste as well as Jewish ancestry. Their population is small. Ironically a Christian saint, one of the 12 disciples called St. Thomas came to south India before Christianity reached England. Most other Christians are predominantly lower caste as Christianity was a way to escape the caste system. These were converted by European missionaries. However some of these new converts were upper and middle castes. But most Christians tend to be darker and I guess they are lower caste.
    However you cannot escape the caste system in India. It seems upper caste Christians have retained their snobbery and only marry other upper caste Christians. They even have separate grave yards!

    • So, what about South Indian(Kerala) Christians with this skin color? Are they upper caste, middle caste or lower caste?

      These are some pics of my friends who are Christians of Kerala origin but they live in the U.S.

      Most of the South Indian(Kerala) Christians I have seen have that skin tone.. I have seen darker skinned ones too..

    • I know a fellow who is warrior caste (middle caste) and he converted out to Christianity anyway.

      It’s sad but true that even after conversion, the Christians have developed their own caste system! Even the Muslims in India have caste. I understand that even Sikh Punjabis have caste, though the ones in the US often say it’s stupid. Unbelievably, caste persists even among Indian Maoists! The Maoists tried for a long time to wipe out caste, but they could not get rid of it, and now the movement seems to have made some sort of peace with it.

    • Ramesh

      It is like you just cannot get rid of the caste system in India. It reappears all the time even when eradicated.

    • Ramesh

      Actually I may be wrong, but I think Sikhism is the only religion which has got rid of caste. Where Buddhism, Islam and Christianity failed, Sikhism might have suceeded.
      The reason why every Sikh has a surname of ‘Singh’ was that no body could determine the person’s caste. By knowing a person’s surname you can get an idea about what caste the person belongs to. So now since everybody is ‘Singh’, problem solved.
      However I may be wrong and the caste system might have crept back into Sikhism. I will not be surprised if that is true. However most Sikhs tend to be fair, tall and have very strong Caucasian features. Most of the best soldiers in India are Sikhs.

    • We have many Punjabis where I live. They are some of the finest people in my country! If all immigrants were like these Punjabis, no one would have a problem with any immigrants. I have spoken to some of these Punjabis, and they told me that there is casteism with Punjabi Sikhs, even though there is not supposed to be. Generally, they thought that casteism was stupid.

    • Tom

      So if you can kind of tell what caste a person is by their last name; what caste does a person with the last name ‘Patel’ belong too?

      It seems that 90% of every Indian I have ever come across in the US has that last name.

    • Yes you can tell caste by last name in general. The Brahmins and people like that are experts on it and they know 100’s of last names and have them figured out by caste, subcaste, all that. The caste system is insanely complex and even though there are maybe 100’s of castes, there are probably 1000’s of subcastes or maybe even more.

      I had a professor named Mistral and I asked my Brahmin friend about him, and he said it’s some working-class caste, mostly carpenters.

  3. James Schipper

    Dear Robert
    Racial purity can be maintaned only if there is monogamy and very little non-marital relations between the races. That was the case with, for instance, blacks and whites in the US. Were the Aryan invaders of India monogamous? If their men could take several wives, then some of those wives would have to be non-Aryan.
    Suppose that aristocrats in Europe had been polygamous ant that they had on average 4 wives, then about 75% of aristocratic wives would have been of peasant stock. A ruling group can maintain its genetic distinctness only if it is endogamous as well as monogamous. The non-marital sexual relations between a dominant group and a dominated group insure that genes from the dominant group enter the gene pool of the dominated group, even though the dominant group itself can remain pure.
    What happened in India is probably that in the beginning the upper caste was racially quite different from the other castes and also much lighter. However, non-marital sexual relations upper-caste men and women of the lower castes insured that the lower classes became lighter and polygamy practiced by upper-caste men insured that the upper caste became darker.
    Regards. James

    • Yes James, it’s actually rather humorous. Originally, sure, there was an Aryan Invasion of lighter skinned folks who set up a caste system to preserve their priveleges. The high caste Brahmins were always said to be lighter skinned. However, through some curious miracle, those light-skinned Brahmins have been somehow been getting darker and darker over the centuries! Indian writers and scholars have noted this. Obviously, though the caste system set up serious penalties for marrying out of caste (especially for high castes) somehow, these high castes, just got darker and darker. Surely it was not that punishing Indian sun. What happened was more what you imply: despite the serious strictures against marrying out of caste, esp for high castes, it apparently happened nevertheless.

      The moral to the story, as you suggest: racial purity are awfully hard to maintain, even in as rigidly policed a system as India’s. Human nature, the sex drive and the fact that we fall in love rather indiscriminately assure that most racial purity schemes are doomed.

      • A-Man

        Robert I feel like india is going to be a potpourri in the next couple of years. Like there will be no difference in caste because everybody will be diluted. like some brahmins these days can’t be distinguished from middle to low caste south indians in south india.

    • Ramesh

      James, ancient India was not like South Africa but more like Mexico or Brazil. The Aryans who came (I believe they looked like Eastern Europeans) were predominantly male with very few females. They married the ‘native’ Indian women but the ‘native’ Indian males did not have access to the upper caste females and this process continued. This explains why certain upper caste Y haplogroups have spread into the lower castes as they had a lot of sex with the native women. So the process that took place in India 4000 years ago was what took place in like Brazil and Mexico 400 years ago except you can replace Spaniards with an Eastern European like population.

    • Ramesh

      “However, through some curious miracle, those light-skinned Brahmins have been somehow been getting darker and darker over the centuries! Indian writers and scholars have noted this. ”

      Hi Robert, I would like to know which Indian scholars and writers wrote about upper caste Indians becoming darkier. Just out of interest.

    • I am not sure Ramesh, but it’s been noted that the Brahmins have been getting mysteriously darker down through the centuries, despite the fact that they supposedly are not allowed to marry out to darker folks.

      • A-Man

        Yeah recent studies have shown South Indian Brahmins have about 12-27% Australoid DNA on average . This could probably be the reason. Because 27% is a LOT of australoid DNA.
        Thank You,
        Akhil Tummala

    • Ramesh

      Yes, what you say is most probably true due to the extreme interbreeding between the invading males and local females (Spanish males mating with blacks and Native American females sound similar).
      However I was hoping to find some sources which say that the upper castes were becoming darker, out of interest.

      Brahmins interbreeding with the lower caste women is very common in history. A lower caste women could marry a upper caste woman and join the upper caste but a lower caste male could not do that. In the Hindu epic Ramayana, King Jashrath could not get children. He and his brahmin priests had a yagna (fire worship and sacrifice to the fire) where horses were sacrificed. Later the queens were sent to the Brahmins for the night (for a romp) and in nine months Rama and his brothers were born. Rama is the hero of the epic and is an incarnation (avatar) of the Hindu god Vishnu.
      In Kerela there were some castes who gave some of their women to be impregnated by brahmins. My tamil brahmin friend claims, that this process helped raise the IQ of those castes.
      In India there was a system of ‘devdasis’ where lower caste women were wed to a male deity in a temple and thus became the property of the temple. In reality they became the sex-slaves of the priests.
      The upper castes did not allow others to access their babes but actively went after the women of other castes.

    • Tom

      “However, through some curious miracle, those light-skinned Brahmins have been somehow been getting darker and darker over the centuries!”

      How do you know it wasn’t the punishing Indian sun? A couple thousand years is easily enough time for some adaptation to happen to light skinned Indians in the south. Indigenous people in sunny areas are darker for a reason; it protects your skin.

    • It’s generally conceded that the Brahmins have been getting darker due to intermarriage. There are many Indians who are still very, very White, almost as White as I am. We have Punjabis around my town and a number of times I mistook them for European Whites. True, they look kind of Med-like, but a number of them have skin that is quite light.

      • A-Man

        Yes I agree Robert. Punjabis would be very med looking like southern europeans because they are mainly a mixture of middle eastern dravidian genes and aryan genes kind of like italians which made them look alike. The average high caste punjabis according to DNA sampling are only like 5-10% australoid on average and Some even have ONLY 1% australoid blood, but you wouldn’t consider some of them white because of the warm climate in india as they had to tan.
        Thank you,
        Akhil Tummala

    • Tom

      “Human nature, the sex drive and the fact that we fall in love rather indiscriminately assure that most racial purity schemes are doomed.”

      I agree about sex drive particularly in men. A man that has been deprived of sex long enough will mate with just about any female regardless of attraction. In Brazil the men preferred Portuguese women over all else but since their was a shortage they shacked up with the natives.

      I disagree that love or attraction is indiscriminate. I watched a doc on the discovery channel and they did a study that showed that both men and women are most attracted to members of their own race.

      At the university I went to (tolerant and open like most universities nowadays) the vast majority of couples and hook ups that I saw were between members of the same race.

    • If we are overwhelmingly attracted mostly to our own race, then there should be few problems with the race-mixing that the White nationalists deplore, no?

    • Tom

      They deplore any amount of race mixing over zero percent. I think white nationalists exaggerate a lot in order to try to help their movement.

      I suppose it all depends on where you live, where I live it happens but at a low rate.

      Look at the Roma in Europe. Yes, they are a little mixed but don’t you think they would have been completely assimilated into Europe at large by now if we are all just bound to mix? Same goes for all those small turkic groups in Russia.

    • The Roma as I understand have extremely strong proscriptions against marrying non-Roma. They rival the Jews in that regard. True, some groups have been able to resist outmarrying, but they do this by imposing a thing called Culture on their group to prevent what would be otherwise heavy outmarrying. If humans really had little tendency to outmarry, there would be no need to impose this Culture thing with its heavy penalties and whatnot.

      In short, I find the notion that we are biologically opposed to outmarrying to be rather dubious. Were this the case, there would be no need for harsh cultural proscriptions against it.

    • Tom

      I don’t think culture was invented to guard against out marriage.

      Historically in Europe most threats to culture were from other cultures of the same race. So racial preservation was not a big issue in that sense.

      Jews are not that much different looking then Europeans and so it is debated able if they are of different racial stock. I’m not sure about the Roma.

    • Culture was not invented to prevent outmarriage, but culture was used to prevent outmarriage, because genetic tendencies alone were not up to snuff for doing the job.

      The Roma are different. They are from India.

  4. Are Dravidians dark caucasoid people? What about the semites?

    I read in a magazine that one german anthropologist placed dravidians as “dark caucasoids” and semites as “black caucasoids” ! Is there any truth to it?

    • Yes, genetically, all of the Indians are Caucasoids except for the Asians of the NE. Surely by genes the Dravidians are dark Caucasoids. They look so different from the rest of Caucasians possibly, in my opinion, because they are a very ancient type of Caucasian. The Semites are obviously Caucasoids, except for a few of them who have lots of Black blood, like Prince Bandar of Saudi Arabia.

      However, if you go by skulls, at least some Dravidians are Australoids like Papuans and Melanesians.

      Depends on how you want to divide people up.

    • Ramesh

      Those Christians might be Syrian malabar Christians or Nasrani Christians who have jewish and brahmin ancestry. Kerala is a very interesting state where arabs, jews and even Greeks and Chinese would come to trade in the past. However Mallus (people from Kerela speak Malayalam hence we call them mallus) are very conservative when it comes to inter-caste marriage.

  5. the reason why I asked this is that I am a Semite living in the U.S and most of my south Indian friends are very olive/light skinned(they are lighter than me) and they don’t look like the typical dark dravidians you see on the slums or villages in South India. The weird thing is that all of my south Indian friends are Christians and they are from Kerala but they live in the U.S

    The Tamils that I see in the U.S do look like the typical dark dravidians.

    • Ramesh

      Sorry posted in the wrong place.
      Those Christians might be Syrian malabar Christians or Nasrani Christians who have jewish and brahmin ancestry. Kerala is a very interesting state where arabs, jews and even Greeks and Chinese would come to trade in the past. However Mallus (people from Kerela speak Malayalam hence we call them mallus) are very conservative when it comes to inter-caste marriage.

    • They really dark Dravidian types are quite poor and are unlikely to come to the US.

    • Ramesh

      Yup, you are right, the U.S.A tends to get the elites and middle classes.

  6. But my North Indian friends that live in the U.S are quite pale.

  7. Ger

    I get the impression that the darker South Indian Aryan types are more mathematically competent than lighter Aryan North Indians (who may be more literature-inclined).

    • Ramesh

      Yes you are talking about the south Indian Brahmins especially the Tamil Brahmins (Tambras) who make up only anout 3% of the population of South India. Actually the literature inclined are the Eastern Indian Bengalis (A Bengali Brahmin called rabindranath tagore became the first non-White to get a Nobel Prize for literature in 1913!). North Indians are predominantly businessmen.

    • Actually this may be due to the fact that the South Indians may be more Asian in genes and the North Indians may be more European in genes. Europeans are good at lit but not so good at math. With Asians it’s the opposite, better at math but not so good at language skills. At least on IQ tests anyway.

    • Ramesh

      Asians being extremely good in maths. Does that explain why China dominates the Maths olympiad?

    • Yes, Asians are superior at math. In particular, if you look at their IQ scores, they are skewed in that they are superior in V-S (math) and not as good in verbal (IOW, their math scores are quite a bit higher than their verbal scores. Their overall IQ is superior to Whites, but that is only because they are so much better in V-S.

      American Indians show this same skewing in their IQ’s whereby their V-S is much better than their verbal. This makes sense since they are from Asia originally.

  8. Ger

    Yeah, of course Ramanujan was a Tamil Brahmin. It would be interesting analyze stats from Indian states to see which area is best at Mathematics Olympiads etc. I’m not sure what cultural traditions and pressures have led to Tamil mathematical skills.

    • Ramesh

      I do not know for sure. I had a lot of friends from that group. one of my friend claims they faced similar pressures as Ashkenazis. In Tamil state, they are a much smaller percentage of the whole population than the percentage of Brahmins in other states. Due to affirmative action, they (and other upper castes like Nayars) got kicked out of the government jobs and thus moved to the private sector leading to the software boom.
      In North India, Brahmins (and other upper intellectual castes like Kayasthas) are a bigger percentage of the population and thus could not be dislodged from the government sector. The upper caste talent is stuck in the inefficient government sector and thus the north could not see the economic boom like the south. A child in south India dreams to become a software engineer, a child in the ‘cow belt’ (northern states of bihar, Madhya Pradesh, chhattisgarh, utter pradesh, jharkhand) dreams of joining the Indian administration service and thus become a government employee.

    • Ramesh

      BTW all brahmins are closely related. All brahmins have only 4 gotras. Gotra means descent from a famous man, a king or rishi (sages of India like the druids of the Celts). So if your gotra is ‘Vishwamitra’, it means your fathers descent goes all the way to the sage Vishwamitra (means ‘friend of the world’) You cannot marry someone from your gotra because that is inbreeding and is bad. Neither can you marry someone from a different caste or jati as that is outbreeding and is bad too.

      Since all brahmins have only 4 gotras it means they are a highly related group. North Indian brahmins and South Indian brahmins (and Bengali, Maharastrian etc… brahmins) are higly related. A typical non-Brahmin caste can have 50 gotras.

  9. To Ramesh- nope, they weren’t Syro Malabar or Nasrani Christians..

    They were ALL roman catholic or simply catholics Christians and most of my roman catholic christian friends were lighter than me

    • Ramesh

      Some of those of Syrian Malabar ancestry have gone to the Roman catholic side. I know few of them who have joined Catholic, other Protestant, Mormons and Orthodox churches. Fair people are not impossible in the south.
      This lady in the video is a tamil brahmin.

      Her popular name is Hema Malini.

  10. whodareswings

    Old Hindutva proverb… “Don’t come to India for the drugs and yogis if you’ve never heard of Koenraad Elst.”

    …Most Tamil nationalists have been spoonfed a particular version of the Aryan Invasion theory (AIT). In general, the AIT claims that the Indo-Aryan (and Kafiri and Proto-Bangani) branches of the Indo-European language family were brought into South Asia from the northwest. The Tamil nationalist variety claims moreover that the speakers of Indo-Aryan languages including Sanskrit subdued and displaced the original population of the Indus-Saraswati Civilization (ISC), and that the latter consisted of speakers of Dravidian, the language family of which Tamil is the best-known member. There is in fact no proof for this “Aryan invasion” nor for the Dravidian character of the ISC (which even pro-AIT scholars now deny), but this lack of proof is amply compensated for by the intensity of the theory’s political exploitation.

    In Lanka, in the Tamil Tigers’ understanding, the Aryan-Dravidian confrontation of about 4,000 years ago is now being re-enacted. The Indo-Aryan-speaking Sinhalese Buddhists have tried, since independence, to impose their language on the whole country, trampling on the distinct identity of the Tamil minority. They managed to get India’s Prime Minister Indira Gandhi’s co-operation for the “repatriation” of those Tamils whose parents had been settled in Lanka during British rule. They tried to suppress the Tamil attempt to preserve their identity and freedom by setting up an independent Tamil Eelam. And now they are militarily overrunning and dismantling that de facto Tamil state.

    Contrary to international perception, this is not primarily a religious war. The Sinhalese resented the Tamil “overrepresentation” in the civil service and the professions that had developed under colonial rule. Along with the Indian Muslims, the Sikhs and particular Christian groups, the Tamils were “the spoiled children of the British empire”. In the British scheme of the racial characteristics of their subject nations, the Buddhists in Lanka and Burma counted as indolent, the Tamils as hard-working. Therefore, they transferred Tamil labour to Lanka and Burma, whence the immigrants were again expelled in the 1960s, as well as to Malaysia, where they eke out a meagre existence as dhimmi-s, and Singapore, where they thrive. Ethnic envy and mistrust is sufficient to explain the genesis of the Tamil-Sinhalese conflict. The key event in its escalatioon was the declaration of Sinhalese as only national language.

    more: http://koenraadelst.blogspot.com/2009/01/lanka-aryan-invasion-at-last.html

    • The Hindutvas are inveterate liars and Est is one of their most shameless shills. The Hindutvas hate the Aryan Invasion theory because it makes high castes and Hindus out to be bad guys. Supposedly White folks from the West came into India, subjugated the peace-loving native peoples, destroyed their loving religion and imposed evil casteist Hinduism on them. This is the Dalit and South Indian meme.

      It’s easy to see why Hindus and high castes dislike a theory that makes them and their religion out to be bad guys and a bad thing, but it’s probably true.

      If you hear someone arguing strenuously against the Aryan Invasion theory, they are usually a high caste and a Hindutva sympathizer (actually, almost all Brahmins are Hindutva sympathizers).

      • Pepperoncini

        Old thread but I saw the link on the right and clicked it.
        Thanks Robert for not pussy footin around when it comes to criticism of Hindutva lies. Too many people try too bloody hard to be diplomatic when speaking about current and past events.
        Elst is a hindutva fellow traverller. Ditto for Frawley and Kazanas and all the other Westerners who support Hindutva lies.

        Nothing unusual that some Westerners will support Hindutva. a) due to outright hatred of Muslims and b) it furthers Indo-European supremacy by abrogating the IVC for Indo-European culture.

        In the colonial era, the West had a love affair with Indo-Aryan India, believing that Aryans were the civilizers and creaters of everything and the non Aryans were savages. This view was in no small part aided by Brahmins. But according to a Western history book I owned, there were some Westerners who cautioned against viewing the non Aryans as culturally and technologically inferior . What really demolished this myth of Aryan culture as civilizers was the discovery of IVC. Suddenly the Brahmin and other Hindu elite saw their cherished position as civlizers/superior come crashing down. The truth started to come out, i.e. that far from Aryans being the civilizers and non Aryans being the savages, the opposite was the truth.

        BTW, If anyone refers to the Indus Valley Civilization as Indus Saraswati or Saraswati Sindhu or some version which includes the name Saraswati, then they are Hindutva. Real academics and historians only call it IVC or Harappan.

        Thankfully there are Western academics and atleast 2 Indian ones I know of who oppose the Hindutva rewritting of History.

        Simply put, if you want to know about Indian history, read Western academics. Indians (and this is true for a lot of Asia) are too racially/ethnically biased to make good historians. If Western Civ ends up being relegated to inferior status by various Asian cultures, there will be a notable deteriation if not outright destruction of honest scholarship (as it pertains to History,Culture, Religion,Language).

    • Ramesh

      “Actually, almost all Brahmins are Hindutva sympathizers.”

      110% correct.

    • Ramesh

      Ironically the Brahmins and Jain merchants were the engine of the anti-British congress party. The upper castes who themselves came many years ago as invaders found the new invaders (the British) as competitors. The British had banned certain Hindu practices like Sati, the devdasi system (where old senile Brahmin priests romped with lower caste teenager babes), child marriage etc… When some 11 years old girls died in Bombay province due to child marriage, the British administration increased the marriageable age to 16. This pissed off Brahmin leaders like lokmanya tilak. The industrial revolution introduced by the British made the feudal caste system obsolete in function. A lower caste guy could go to college and become a barister or an engineer. One such lower caste person Mr. Ambedkar became a barrister and designed the Indian constitution. Mr. Ambedkar is like a god to dalits and lower castes. Earlier, in Hindu times, if a lower caste person was caught reading the vedas he was badly punished for it (something like pouring molten silver in the ears for just hearing the slokas (Vedic hymns) being chanted). Ironically the British rule was good for the Brahmins (and all Hindus) as it stopped Islamic oppression. And more irony of all that is that lower caste leaders like Jyotiba Phule (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jyotirao_Phule)considered the British as benevolent. It is like the super exploited (lower castes) preferred the big exploiter (British) to keep the smaller exploiters (upper castes) in check as the smaller exploiter was closer to home.
      This book by Jyotiba Phule is a must read
      http://defeatpoverty.com/articles/Slavery%20Book/Slavery%20–%20Intro.pdf
      http://defeatpoverty.com/articles/Slavery%20Book/Slavery%20–%20Preface.pdf
      http://defeatpoverty.com/articles/Slavery%20Book/Slavery%20–%20Part%201.pdf
      http://defeatpoverty.com/articles/Slavery%20Book/Slavery%20–%20Part%202.pdf

  11. whodareswings

    A great book about the Great Book

    The new book by Shrikant Talageri, claiming to present “the final evidence” on the Indo-European Homeland question, goes a long way indeed in disproving the Aryan Invasion Theory and establishing India as the land of origin of the migrations that spread the Indo-European language family over half of the Eurasian continent, from Bengal to Portugal and from Lanka to Norway.

    The kinship between the languages spoken by most Indians and by most Europeans, jointly known as the Indo-European (IE) language family, is usually explained through the Aryan Invasion Theory (AIT). The AIT holds that in the mid-second millennium BC, a group of immigrants brought the Indo-Aryan branch of IE from Russia through Central Asia into India and then imparted it to the natives. Alternatively, the Out-of-India Theory (OIT) holds that the common homeland of IE was in India, whence some groups emigrated to Central and West Asia and Europe, where their dialects mingled with local languages to become Greek, Slavic, Germanic, etc. Recent attempts to give a convincing formulation to the OIT and buttress it with evidence were still clumsy or fragmentary, but now, the OIT has come of age with Shrikant Talageri’s book: The Rigveda and the Avesta, the Final Evidence (Aditya Prakashan, Delhi).

    more:
    http://koenraadelst.blogspot.com/2009/01/great-book-about-great-book.html

    • Koenraad Elst is a great big liar. He’s a shill for Hindutva fascists, who are notorious liars. The IE out of India theory is probably wrong. The homeland of the IE speakers was in an area from SE Ukraine east to S Kazakhstan and north to the Lower Volga. Basically, between the Caspian and Black Seas north of the Caucasus.

      In order for this theory to be correct, the oldest IE branches would be in India. They are not. They are in Anatolia.

    • Ramesh

      One major reason why Brahmins do not support the AIT is because this gives ammunition to lower caste activists and revolutionaries (and Afrocentrists who are never taken seriously by anybody here) who can accuse the Brahmins of being foreign exploiters. If the AIT is wrong then they are only native exploiters which is much better. But this is rubbish; Brahmins today are as Indian as any. There has been too much interbreeding to say that Brahmins are foreigners. Many lower caste people have the ‘invader genes’ and nearly all Brahmins have ‘local genes’. The Aryans were the conquistadors of India. It is like dark skinned mestizos telling today’s more white looking mestizos to leave Mexico because they are foreigners. Absurd.

    • This makes good sense, Ramesh.

    • Ramesh

      I have never seen this but have heard that in Tamil Nadu state you see grafiti like ‘Brahmins go home’. Where are they supposed to go? Iran? Ukraine? Russia? wtf. Maybe we should all go back to Africa. Then we should all go back to the oceans where we originally came from. Brahmins have nowhere to go but stay in India.

      Anyways most Brahmins (and other upper and middle castes) are leaving for the U.S.A anyways as they cannot stand the indian style affirmative action. The cream of India are leaving for the U.S.A and the U.K. But you need not feel sorry for them as deep inside most upper caste people (I am upper caste but not brahmin) have a belief in their own superiority with respect to the lower castes (and probabaly the whole world).

  12. DeadCult

    Bamshad’s 2001 study was refuted in 2006 here:

    http://www.pnas.org/content/103/4/843.full?ck=nck

    What do you think of this?

  13. Ramesh

    Ironically the Brahmins and Jain merchants were the engine of the anti-British congress party. The upper castes who themselves came many years ago as invaders found the new invaders (the British) as competitors. The British had banned certain Hindu practices like Sati, the devdasi system (where old senile Brahmin priests romped with lower caste teenager babes), child marriage etc… When some 11 years old girls died in Bombay province due to child marriage, the British administration increased the marriageable age to 16. This pissed off Brahmin leaders like lokmanya tilak. The industrial revolution introduced by the British made the feudal caste system obsolete in function. A lower caste guy could go to college and become a barister or an engineer. One such lower caste person Mr. Ambedkar became a barrister and designed the Indian constitution. Mr. Ambedkar is like a god to dalits and lower castes. Earlier, in Hindu times, if a lower caste person was caught reading the vedas he was badly punished for it (something like pouring molten silver in the ears for just hearing the slokas (Vedic hymns) being chanted). Ironically the British rule was good for the Brahmins (and all Hindus) as it stopped Islamic oppression. And more irony of all that is that lower caste leaders like Jyotiba Phule (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jyotirao_Phule)considered the British as benevolent. It is like the super exploited (lower castes) preferred the big exploiter (British) to keep the smaller exploiters (upper castes) in check as the smaller exploiter was closer to home.

    • Yes, I always thought this. I told this to a Brahmin I know who supports the Hindutvas and he was outraged and furious and refused to believe it. As a general rule, the Brahmins that I know, really, really, really HATE the British and British colonization. They refuse to see any good at all to come out of it. Most of them recite this line about how India was the leader of the whole world until they got colonized by the Brits, and how colonization reduced them to 3rd world status.

      They are also often VERY hostile to Whites, which is a reflection of their rage at being colonized. The rage is all about these Europeans coming in, telling them their civilization was inferior and trying to enlighten them.

      I recall that in the 1800’s at one point the British just chucked a lot of Indian science because so much of it was just flat out wrong and even violated modern scientific principles that are not controversial. They redid the science curriculum and brought in all British science texts with the latest European science state of the knowledge.

      The Brahmins are to this day FURIOUS about this affront to their glorious Indian science which sadly had gotten some stuff all wrong.

      The practice of suttee is denied and caste is glossed over or they just refuse to discuss it. Most of them support it to one degree or another. Others simply say that caste is dead in India and is not an issue anymore. The only issue is reverse discrimination against Brahmins!

      One guy denounces all of Western medicine as garbage and even refuses to go to hospitals where it is practiced because he feels so insulted that Western medicine has supplanted his Ayurvedic stuff. I don’t know about Ayurvedic, there may be something to it, but I would not toss Western medicine.

      What’s going on is simple. These guys feel humiliated. We came in and replaced their science and medicine with more modernized principles and that was so humiliating that they refuse to accept it.

      None of these guys will admit to being Hindutvas either, and one says he hates them. But when you talk to them, they keep repeating these same Hindutva talking points over and over.

      • A-Man

        Yeah some brahmins i talk to are pretty weird in school. They have fair and lovely creams and want to be more aryan or white, but as soon as they open history book and people talk about AIT they get pissed and mad at the european people which is kinda delusional and stupid in my opinion.

    • Ramesh

      Ayurveda has some effective stuff but no, it cannot western medicine, that is for sure. I know people who have been cured by Ayurveda. One guy I know got rid of his stammering through Ayurveda. But on the other hand I know of idiots (always Brahmins) who would have nothing to do with western medicine (only our great Ayurveda for me) only to reach a critical stage in some disease and it is western science (usually an operation) which saves them.

  14. I don’t think Brahmins are becoming dark skinned..

    In the beginning of the video, you can see a South Indian Brahmin lady and she is quite pale.

    (Just ignore the language they are speaking because its from some south indian movie)..

  15. WS

    RL:“So the Dalits say that these Aryans (White folks) invaded down from the steppes to the north and west (possibly Tajikistan or around Iran) and conquered a large part of India.”

    Tajikistan/Iran is much too far east and south to be the origin of the ‘Aryans,’ I think.

    I think it more likely that the Aryans invaded the area that’s now NW India/Pakistan slowly and incrementally from places as far north and west as what is now northwestern Ukraine or even from areas closer to the central and eastern Baltic Sea.

    Note that mtDNA Haplogroup T shows up in decent amounts among high-caste (i.e., Whiter) Indians and Pakistanis, and mtDNA-HG-T is also still found in Europe – “Haplogroup T is thought to have originated in Mesopotamia/the Fertile Crescent approximately 10,000-12,000 years ago, and then moved northwest into Europe and east as far as modern Pakistan and India … Haplogroup T is currently found with high concentrations around the eastern Baltic Sea.” – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_T_(mtDNA)

    • artritico

      The Aryan invasion was not straight from the IE homeland. First an IE group migrated into Central Asia and evolved into Aryans. Then a group of Aryans invaded India, while others went all over the Middle East (these were the Mittani, who were Indic in language according with what was attested).

    • That makes a lot of sense. Haplogroup T originated in Iraq 11,000 years ago and moved east to northern Pakistan and India. This must be the Aryan invasion thing. The same group then moved northwest into Europe and ended up in high amounts around the Baltics. After 11,000 years, we would not expect much similarity to be left and indeed Latvians look much different from Punjabis.

    • The Aryan invasion was not straight from the IE homeland. First an IE group migrated into Central Asia and evolved into Aryans.

      The IE homeland being in southern Russia north of the Caucasus 8000 years ago, a group split off maybe 6000 YBP. These were the Indo-Iranians. Now we need to locate the homeland of the proto-Indo-Iranians.

      Then a group of Aryans invaded India,

      Ok, this group left the Indo-Iranian homeland and west east to India. This makes sense.

      while others went all over the Middle East (these were the Mittani, who were Indic in language according with what was attested).

      This is very interesting. I have never heard of these people. Yours is one of the best analyses yet, but it figures, as you’re one of the best commenters!

  16. WS

    Remesh:“Anyways most Brahmins (and other upper and middle castes) are leaving for the U.S.A anyways as they cannot stand the indian style affirmative action. The cream of India are leaving for the U.S.A and the U.K.”

    That’s REAL bad news Ramesh…just more evidence showing that extremely multiracial/multiethnic nations are utter FAILURES.

    As the ‘cream’ or best people of India continue to abandon the country for the USA, UK, or other White nations, the country will of course just get even worse as the low-caste morons continue to take over. Don’t you intelligent Indians have any sense of nationalism or social responsibility toward your fellow Indians, even if they are low-caste? Why are so many of you high-castes cowardly abandoning the Indian nation when you are of course the people most capable of fixing it? Don’t you realize that as more and more of you ‘elite’ high-caste Indians keep leaving (AKA ABANDONING) the country it will of course just keep getting even worse as the idiotic lower-castes keep taking over everything and thus ruining it further?

    • artritico

      Errrr………….the “lower cast morons” are the people responsible for Harappan civilization

    • WS is a White nationalist. He really doesn’t care about people abandoning their country. He’s just against Indians, who he considers to be non-Whites, immigrating to the US, because he thinks that only European Whites should be able to come to the US.

      That’s REAL bad news Ramesh…just more evidence showing that extremely multiracial/multiethnic nations are utter FAILURES.

      The problem with this theory is that all Indians are pretty much just one race. The ones in the North, the ones in the South, it’s really all one group. There’s about as much variation among them as there is among Europeans. The castes are like classes.

      Your analysis is like saying that East Coast Brahmins like Pappy Bush and Arkansas White Trash are two different races. They are not. They are different classes in the same race. One is upper class and another is lower class. Caste is pretty much just the same – it’s a class distinction rather than a racial one.

    • Yes, the Harappan civilization was probably a Dravidian one.

    • Ramesh

      I guess it it simple as one can make more money in America and life is quite good. The USA is over all a much friendlier nation than say Japan which is rich too. English is the language spoken in the U.S.A so that helps.

    • I love these Punjabi Sikhs here who live near me. I wish all immigrants to the US were as good as these people. They are a model immigrant group.

    • Ramesh

      Actually Sikhs would make one of the best migrants from India. They get along well with westerners even though they are patriotic towards India. I guess one reason of this is they are small in numbers for a religion of about 20 million followed by 100s of millions of Hindus and Muslims. During the 1847 mutiny, the Sikhs supported to the British East India Company against the others. The muslims are aggressive while Hindus are snobs. The Brits were atleast neutral outsiders. They fought the Brits like lions but once conquered they stuck to them (same with the Gurkhas). Indeed Sikhism came out as a reaction to Islam. Non-muslims or dimmis were forced to have shorter beards than Muslims. So they have big beards, indeed men never cut their hair. Dimmis could not carry weapons only, muslims could thus Sikhs are told by their religion to carry the sharp bomerang disk weapon in defiance. Muslims ate halal, Sikhs are prohibited from eating halal (and kosher too).
      Most of the jokes in India are made on Sikhs as they have a reputaion of being stupid but more honest and brave. Personally I believe they one of the best people in India.
      I think you can say the same thing about the mongoloid Nepali Gurkhas (there are many Gurkhas in India as well). They are just like Sikhs in everything (brave, honest, friendly) except that they are shorter. Indeed even the British National Party in the U.K do not mind immigration of Gurkhas and supported them recently for their right to stay in the U.K!

    • Ramesh

      Besides Sikhs on average tend to have stronger Caucasian features and are taller than average in India.
      http://images.google.co.uk/images?hl=en&q=Sikhs&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wi
      Hindus have a reputation of being sneaky short dark cowards among both Muslims and Sikhs but Sikhs always side with hindus against muslims.

    • Ramesh

      This will give you an idea of how small a group they are in the subcontinent.

  17. I don’t believe in the aryan invasion theory.

    I believe South Asians crossed the mountain ranges by Iraq in ancient times.

  18. Why do some South Indian brahmins look kinda asian?

    I saw this video posted by Juliette and that Brahmin lady at the beginning of the video looks kinda asian..

    I also have a South Indian brahmin friend here in the U.S and she also looks kinda asian and she is quite pale. Besides, I am North Indian.

    • Those light-skinned North Indians often show around 15% Asian genes on genetics tests. I think the Asian genes are something like Kazakh, Tajik, Uzbek, Tibetan or something like that from the southeastern range of the Mongoloids on the steppes. You can see it in their eyes a lot of the time. North Indians sometimes have a bit of an Asian type eye fold, but not much.

      Your average East Indian shows around 10% Asian or Mongoloid genes.

    • But, that lady in the video is South Indian. I guess she is a Kerala Brahmin or a Tamil Brahmin. I searched her on wikipedia.

  19. DK

    I enjoyed this post tremendously. Did Ambedkar create the Aryan invasion theory in whole or part, or did he just promote it heavily?

  20. Ramesh

    There are two facts I know which support the invasion theory.
    The first is Somaruss. Soma is a medicianl herb and it was fermented to make Somaruss, a drink. The Vedas dedicate several poems in praise of this Somaruss. The early Aryans seemed to enjoy it. However if I am not mistaken, Somaruss never grows in India but in Central Asia with Afghanistan being the southernmost point where Soma is found.

    The second is the word for the tribals in the North Indian languages. It is ‘adivasi’. If you analyse the roots of this word, ‘adi’ means before or earlier while ‘vasi’ means to someone who lives in a place. So the translation is ‘someone who lived here before us’ in other words aboriginal.

  21. Based on my observation, Indian people look mixed with European and Asian because I notice some Mexicans who are mixed with Red Indians (American Indian) and Spanish look similar to the Indians in my workplace.

    Mexicans(that are mixed with native american and spanish) and Indians look very much alike.

    • Tom

      There is a whole range of what Indian people look like. The Indians that you work with may not at all be representative of the country and all its castes as a whole.

  22. but the brown skin tone of some Indians can be attributed to the fact that India is close to the equator and hot climate.

    One of my friends have been to India and he said India is scorching hot. When he got back to the US after his visit in India, he was like 3 shades darker than his original skin tone.

    According to my observation, Indians have caucasian facial structures and most of the Indians I have seen very deep set big eyes and prominent noses.

  23. fx

    Robert Lindsay : “Yes, I think they came from Central Asia. The Proto-Indo-Iranian homeland was probably somewhere in Central Asia.”

    Well, recently, there has been more info that stregthens the Kurgan theory.

    I’m thinking of this : http://www.springerlink.com/content/4462755368m322k8/fulltext.pdf

    It’s to be noted that peoples with the kind of phenotypes described in the study are found through the whole part of Asia where indo-european languages have been or were.

  24. cursed

    A pleasurable tour de force of the sub continent.

  25. I think that Low caste Dravidians are not pure dravidians. They are obviously mixed with australoids.

    The middle class and upper class dravidians are the pure dravidians since they have the round face, prominent nose, deep set eyes and everything. I read that the dravidians are known as “dark caucasoids” but they can come in different shades.

    These are pics of Low caste, Middle caste and High caste dravidians.

    Low caste Dravidian: http://media.photobucket.com/image/low%20caste/hazarika/bhaisahab/tri.jpg

    Middle class Dravidian: http://www.sajaforum.org/images/anil_with_hat.jpg

    High class Dravidian: http://photomoto.cn/images.php/i132_AishwaryaRai30.JPG

    If you compare low caste dravidians to australoids, they have the same nose, facial structure etc.

    Picture of an australoid: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/bigphotos/images/070507-aborigines-dna_big.jpg

    But if you compare middle and upper class dravidians, they have the same round facial structures, same nose, lips, eyes etc.

    So, I think that the middle and upper caste dravidians are the ‘pure’ dravidians.

    Low caste dravidians are obviously mixed with australoids. So, they lack caucasoid facial structures, lips, nose etc.

    In case of aryans(North Indians), they all look the same regardless of caste.

  26. Here are some other pics of low caste, Middle class and upper class dravidians..

    Low caste dravidian: http://www.worldproutassembly.org/images/caste_woman.jpg

    Middle caste dravidian: http://www.simplymarry.com/timesmatri/faces/images/telugu_girl.jpg

    High caste dravidian(Brahmin): http://justonbollywood.com/images/deepika-padukone-lima.jpg

  27. Ramesh

    This is a very good book on India, indeed it is a gem. It is the Imperial Gazeteer of India written under the British India government. No one studied India in such detail as the British Imperial administration.

    http://dsal.uchicago.edu/reference/gazetteer/

    In that check out this

    and this

    (Do not forget to go to the next page by clicking the arrows.)
    Very interesting read.

  28. What do you mean by Mediterranean?

    http://www.nationsencyclopedia.com/Asia-and-Oceania/India-ETHNIC-GROUPS.html

    According to the link above, it says that the dark complexioned dravidians in the South are a mix of mediterranean caucasians and australoids..

    What does Mediterranean caucasian mean? Where do they come from?

    Thanks !

    • Traditionally, the Northern Aryan types were seen as a type of the Mediterranean race, a subrace of Caucasians traditionally including Southern Europeans, Berbers and Arabs. I think it is a reach to include Indians in that group and I don’t agree with Aryans as Meds. Clearly they are Caucasians though.

  29. Ramesh

    What is strange is that many Mongoloid- Cucasoids look like north Indians.
    Many north Indians look like Cucasoids with a slight mongoloid touch with very less Australoid.

    Check these Uyghur pop babes from China. They are a mix of Caucasians (Persians, extinct Tocharans, Russians) and Mongoloids. The girl in green and the girl in red can pass as north Indians easy. Indeed I have seen north Indian girls who look like these two. Hell, the girl in red could even pass as a upper caste South Indian. The girl in blue is too Mongoloid and will pass as the mongoloid Indians like Ladhakis.

    Ironically these Uyghurs are closely related to the Mughals who ruled India for about 500 years before the British. The Mughal culture of India was just Uyghur-Mongol culture transplanted to India.

    Check the Pakistani cricket legend Imran Khan

    North Indians are more similar to Pakistanis than they are to South Indians. Similarly Indian Bengalis are more similar to Bangladeshis than they are to other Indians. Just like how the Flemish of Belgium are more similar to the Dutch than they are to the Belgiun Waloons.

    And check out the Indian beauty legend and queen of Jaipur, Gayatri Devi

    She has a combo of Caucasian and Mongoloid features.

    • If the Aryans did originally come from Northern Kazakhstan, it should not be so surprising that they have some Mongoloid features. I have seen studies showing that N Indians have 15% Mongoloid genes.

    • the girl in red looks like this middle caste South Indian girl from Kerala:

    • Ramesh

      Yup, aryan that is true. If you picture that red dressed girl in a traditional south Indian dress walking in a street in Madhurai, she would just fit in and everybody would guess she is brahmin from her looks.
      If that girl in green were to wear a Punjabi dress (salwar kameez) and were to walk the streets of Amritsar she would just fit in. Nobody would guess that she is not a punjabi.

    • Even more than that, I would say that that Kerala mid caste woman looks like a European! I look at her and I wonder how some of these idiots can say that Indians are not White. Some Indians at least on phenotype are very much White people.

      I consider White to mean at the very least someone who has a broadly European like phenotype. That includes White Turks, Armenians, Azeris, Iranians, Georgians, the Caucasus, White Arabs, White Berbers, Pashtuns, and White North Pakistanis and Northeast Afghans, including the Kalash.

  30. Ramesh

    Talking of Tocharians, they were a Aryan tribe speaking a Indo-European language (Most European languages, Persian, Dari, North Indian languages including Sanskrit and Sinhalese belong to this group.)
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tocharians
    I am sure they were related to the Aryans who came to India fro Persia. Recently they found mummies of Tocharians in the Tarim basin of China.
    http://video.google.es/videoplay?docid=-1362674044731979808&ei=Qy9mSr_dC52G2wL83eg0&q=tarim+mummies&hl=en&client=firefox-a
    http://www.monstersandcritics.com/smallscreen/news/article_1374891.php/National_Geographic_presents_the_blue-eyed_blonde_Chinese_mummies
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarim_mummies
    http://www.therightperspective.org/2008/11/29/2700-year-old-blond-haired-blue-eyed-mummy-found-in-china/
    Some say that the Uyghurs got their Caucasian looks from these Tocharians who were overwhelmed by Mongoloid peoples later forming the Uyghurs.
    Since most Indo-Aryans burned their bodies, there was very little trace of them. Except these.

  31. Ramesh

    Anyway you guys have to agree, in some ways atleast my country is one of the most interesting in the world.

    • Hey, Ramesh. Are you North or South Indian?

    • Ramesh

      I am a Northie (Mathur). My ancestors came from Mathura in North India as my surname suggests.

    • Yes, I almost don’t even want to get into studying India too much because it is a whole universe in and of itself and my brain is already full of enough information.

      BTW Ramesh, welcome to the blog! And thx for being on good behavior here. Some Indians (Hindutvas) have not been so helpful. You’re one of my best commenters right now.

    • Ramesh

      Thanks, and this is a great blog. I have learnt a lot here.

  32. There are brown skinned middle caste South Indians(Kerala) too like this one:

    but their facial structures tend to very caucasian looking..

    Another pic of a middle caste South Indian: http://photos-a.ak.fbcdn.net/photos-ak-sf2p/v199/95/102/503298347/n503298347_433608_4994.jpg

    Higher caste South Indians tend to be lighter like this lady: http://wallpapers.oneindia.in/d/163988-3/asin05.jpg

    That high caste Kerala lady is a Syrian Christian and Syrian christians are upper caste Christians in Kerala.

    About 93% of Kerala Christians are Syrian Christians..

    the rest 7% Christians in Kerala are the dalits aka untocuhables.

    • yeah, those brown skinned middle caste south Indians do have caucasoid facial features.

      I knew that 93% of Keralites are Syrian christians..

      The Christians in kerala are really light skinned and they have caucasian facial features like that lady above.

      Syrian christians are upper class christians.

  33. This lady from Karnataka also looks very european/middle eastern. She is a Kshatriya(high caste):

    This lady from Kerala looks very Turkish/Iranian looking.

    http://img229.imageshack.us/i/20051209004sm6.jpg/

  34. Is long nose a Caucasoid trait? Because I have seen many Indians/Pakistanis/Middle easterners with long noses and its very prominent at the tip..

    • Yes, a long nose is very Caucasian. No other race has it, I don’t think.

      • A-Man

        Fulanis and some central africans have it and most of them are pure black and also many oromos and some south africans without european have it, but i do agree that it is similar in caucasians out of everyone else, then comes africans, then it is asians.

  35. I thought Indians were black. I am african american and I am not an afrocentrist

    If Indians are caucasian, Why do Indians have negroid facial features?

    Here are some pics of Indians with negroid facial features.

    Just admit it.. Indians are BLACK.. Israelis, Egyptians, Celts, Romanians, Filipinos are BLACK..

    No one can deny it !

    • Look Shaniqua, if you can’t settle down, I’m going to have to ban you, ok?

      Romanians are a largely Mediterranean White type related to the Dacians. The ancient Romans were a Romanian group.

  36. If Indians are caucasians, Why do Indians have negroid facial structures?

    Look at these Indian ladies. See for yourself.

    These South Indian women have the big booties and everything just because they are BLACK !

    Israelis, Egyptians, Celts, Filipinos are ALL BLACK.

    • alpha unit

      What is negroid about these women’s facial features?

      • A-Man

        I don’t think she looks 100% black but she does look part black and if she had curlier hair she would look even more black. Even though she has a high nose bridge her nostrils are wide and her chin has australoid influence and her skin is kind of mulattoish. So yes she does show some australoid/negroid facial features.

    • Ramesh

      According to this afrocentrinut, she

      and this women belong to the same race.

      Need I say more. LOL.
      I know we are not White, I never claimed we were but we definitely are not black.

    • I think a lot of Indians really ARE White. The ones that have a very European looking phenotype are for all intents and purposes White folks.

    • Caucasians and white are 2 different things..

      Whites are from europe..

      Caucasians are Middle easterners, North africans, Indians/pakistanis, Central asians and Europeans

  37. See other pics of South Indian women:

  38. North Indian women are BLACK too. they also have negroid facial structures and lips.

    if Indians are not black, How come they have thick lips?

    • No need to deal with Afrocentric crap on here, but…

      Black, or African, is defined by either:

      a. genes

      b. phenotype (skull).

      The only Blacks on Earth are native to Africa. There are a few elsewhere but they only moved there in the last 500 years. There are some Black types or mixed types in Arabia.

      “Israelis, Egyptians, Celts, Filipinos”

      Israelis are White. Jews are White, either European, Berberid, Armenid, Caucasid, Iranid or Arabid types (Caucasian). The only Black Jews are Ethiopians.

      Most Egyptians are mostly White and only 9% Black. 9% doesn’t count. There are some Egyptians that are more Black but they are not the majority. Even those are only about 50% Black.

      Celts are Whites from Northern Europe, Keltids.

      Filipinos are Asians by genes and phenotype.

      No humans in India are Black. There are no Black genes in India and no Indians have mostly Black genes. Further, no Indians are Black on phenotype. This gets confusing because Indian Australoids appear similar to Blacks, but the Australoid and African races have different phenotypes and genes. Australoids have large lips like Blacks and have other features that superficially appear Black.

      That’s the end of the discussion on this, Shaniqua. If you can’t accept it and keep on posting, I am going to ban you. Thanks.

      • Dinesh

        Not sure if this page is still active but let me add a quick note here. Shaniqua’s claim has a bit of truth in it though her intent and the proof seem quite misplaced.

        Indians do have a small extent of black blood. There are both pure blooded blacks in India and mixed blooded ones . Blacks made by at least one route, east Africa – Middle-east- Western India route. The other plausible one is probably before India separated from the African land mass. Pure blooded Africans in Andaman islands are the prime example for this. Gujrat till date has pure blooded Africans whose customs and culture are a mixture of surrounding practices and those that they brought with them but are racially African. The result of black admixture with dravidians is visible in south. In fact I have a lower caste India friend who very much looks like a light skinned African with afro hair, thick lips and round nose with thick bridge. See the links below with pics.

        http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/picture_gallery/06/africa_india0s_african_communities/html/1.stm

        http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/1077982.stm

        http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/1035389.stm

    • Ramesh

      Genetically Indians are very distant to black people. We are closer to Europeans and other Asians from East Asia and Middle East.

      I believe black people want to claim us because by doing this they can also claim our civilization. The fact is afrocentrists have a dilemma, Africans far away from the Northern parts were savages until the 1850s. See, Afrocentrists hardly write about the yaruba or hutus. They write about Egypt, India, China and even the Vikings! All of them have nothing to do with blacks. They never discuss about sub-saharan africa much because they want to cover up the painful and unpleasant fact that all the people there were savages. They are the most embarrassed about their own ancestors. They could have promoted some of the good things that came out of sub-saharan Africa (like African wisdom etc…). But no it has to be about Egypt or Hannibal. So how do a people with such poor history take on Whitey who have invented the modern world and have a rich heritage? Claim other civilizations as their own.
      Or blacks deep inside hate the fact that they are born black and take it as a curse. According to them,’ if we suffer from the disadvantage (I so wish I was white) of being born black then why should others escape from this disease’. The way to cure this disease of afrocentrism is improving the self esteem of blacks. But I think it is an impossible task.

    • Blacks do not have a problem with self-esteem in general. They have higher self-esteem than Whites. That includes both males and females. I think this is due to greater extroversion in Blacks since extroversion leads to higher self-esteem and introversion leads to lower self-esteem in general.

      I really doubt that Blacks deep down inside hate themselves. Afrocentrism for sure is a way for Blacks to promote self-esteem among Blacks and a positive history.

      It’s true that Sub Saharan Africa did not accomplish much, but they were some of the first humans to develop agriculture and later they developed full array agriculture with plantations, surplus, animal husbandry, etc. Africans had agriculture way before Whites did.

      Keep in mind that Sub Saharan Africans were smelting iron far before most Whites were. SSA’s were some of the first people on Earth to smelt iron.

      In short, while SSA’s did not achieve a high civilizational level, it’s wrong to call them savages. I don’t like the term, but really it means hunter gatherers. Think Amerindians.

      Afrocentrism is ridiculous. US Blacks today are a very advanced people. Blacks ought to build on that and move on.

    • WP

      Great points above Ramesh.

      I maintain that chattel slavery was actually mostly good for Sub-Saharan Blacks because it allowed them to spread out and scatter their genes all across the ‘New World’ (Western hemisphere), whereas if Black slavery would have never happened they would’ve never moved beyond their Sub-Saharan habitat. I don’t even think that Sub-Saharan Blacks made it over to Madagascar before various seafaring Asiatic groups did even though it is a huge island not far off the coast of Africa. Frankly, that’s pathetic.

      If Blacks would have never been enslaved, they would have of course continued to languish in utter barbarism and obscurity in Sub-Saharan Africa (just as they still do today). Bringing Blacks to the Western hemisphere allowed them to advance beyond the Stone Age, and now Blacks have MUCH more ‘Black territory’ (in the Caribbean, in South America, and in North America) than they would have never been able to have gained on their own because of their innate Black barbarism and general idiocy.

    • WP

      RL:”US Blacks today are a very advanced people. Blacks ought to build on that and move on.”

      Yeah, only because so many of them are 25+% WHITE.

      Face the cold, hard, brutal facts – without some White genes, most of those ‘Blacks’ would forever remain anti-civilizational morons.

    • Blacks appear to have made it to Madagascar a long time ago. The Mikea were already there when the Asians showed up. Mikea were Black hunter gatherers.

    • alpha unit

      How is innate White barbarism different from innate Black barbarism?

    • US Blacks don’t have enough White in them to but boost their IQ’s to about 73 or so from a 67 African base.

      Their IQ’s are much higher than that, possibly because they have been breeding eugenically over here (selecting for a more progressive phenotype and higher IQ Blacks to breed with) and also simply the positive effects of living here in the US, an environment which is very good for your brain and civilizational skills.

    • Ramesh

      I agree Robert that black people in general have higher self esteem. But deep inside (I suspect)
      they hate themselves. Deep inside.

      Well I take away the word ‘savage’. Sorry, my wrong. Hunter-gatherer it is. You just claimed that africans used iron before Europeans. How many afrocentronuts have ever claimed this fact? Why do they never celebrate the achievements of subsaharan african blacks? Why do they concentrate on Egypt and India and Native Americans and China and Knights and Samurai and Vikings instead of celebrating the yaruba or xhosa? Why?

    • alpha unit

      Where is Shaniqua to answer these and other pressing questions? Only an Afrocentrist can explain what motivates Afrocentrists.

    • Tom

      US black people are on average about 15% white. However, that number depends on what part of the country you are in and class.

      Black people in the deep south have a lot less white blood then black people in the cities (north and south). I’m not sure why.

      Also, lighter skinned black people have traditionally made up the elite class of black people in the US specifically in New Orleans.

    • WP

      Tom:”Black people in the deep south have a lot less white blood then black people in the cities (north and south). I’m not sure why.”

      It’s because we Southern Whites have healthier racial instincts than Northern Whites and would never intentionally soil the White gene pool with inferior Black genes.

      It’s a little known fact that many urban Northern Blacks with so-called ‘White blood’ are actually part-Jewish and decidedly not part-White.

      Even H. L. Gates (recently in the news) was surprised to find out later in his life that he had some Jewish blood:

      Consider the story of Harvard University’s Henry Louis Gates, Jr., an African American, who was both shocked and bemused to learn that his DNA on his mother’s side did not track back to the Yoruba people as he had long thought. The Yoruba have a rich mythology and are believed to have been among the most culturally sophisticated of the African cultures before the arrival of Europeans. “A number of exact matches turned up,” Gates wrote, “leading straight back to that African Kingdom called Northern Europe, to the genes of (among others) a female Ashkenazi Jew. Maybe it was time to start listening to ‘My Yiddishe Mama,” he quipped. – http://www.gnxp.com/blog/2007/10/10-questions-for-jon-entine.php

      We all know that Blacks generally aren’t too bright, and thus a shot of Ashkenazi Jewish blood can help to bring their lagging Black intellects up to decent/normal/modern levels.

      Since American Ashkenazi Jews seem to want to help Blacks so much, I propose that the American Ashkenazi community start breeding wholesale with American Blacks in order to bring the Black intellect up to normalized levels. The Black IQ in the USA is around 85, and the Jewish IQ is about 115…thus if they start breeding en-masse you’ll eventually have a bunch of Black/Jew crossbreeds with an average IQ of around 100. Sounds like a great plan, right? Come on y’all…I just want to help the Blacks live better lives, and this is clearly the best way to do it.

      I think that ALL of the precious JAP daughters of ALL the far-leftist ‘anti-racist’ Jewish professors in the USA should kick-off this new and exciting Jewish/Black genetic alliance.

      “You first, Jews!”

    • Tom

      “It’s because we Southern Whites have healthier racial instincts than Northern Whites and would never intentionally soil the White gene pool with inferior Black genes.”

      The problem with that argument is that the black people in the cities have part white blood that dates back to the days of slavery in the south. It isn’t recent racial mixing.

      US blacks have white blood in them because slave owners and/or overseers had sex with the female black slaves. The offspring would still be enslaved but was given house work and treated better.

    • Ramesh

      I believe the White (and probably Native American) infusion into blacks of the Americas (Caribbean, Latin America, North America) is much more than many people think. Indeed a substantial minority of black people do not look like West Africans anymore. Their combination of dark skin and European-native American features means some of them look like Asian Indians. Hence the claim by many afrocentrinuts that Indians are blacks. Anybody who sees non-horn (non Ethiopian, non Somali) black Africans will realise that Asian Indians are nothing like them. But African Americans are different.

    • Tom

      I’ve seen DNA studies that state that African Americans are about 15 percent white. Some have more white blood then that but in the deep south the amount of white blood is lower then 15 percent.

      I don’t know where you live but most of the African Americans I have seen do not look like Asian Indians. They look like black Africans except they are dark brown instead of black.

      Of course it all depends on geography; a city like New Orleans has a mulatto aristocracy on top of the black masses.

  39. This south Indian lady has thick lips because Indians are black.. caucasians can’t have big lips..

    • Golden Gopher

      Shaniqua, Angelina Jolie has full lips so is she also African now? None of those pictures you posted look even remotely African.

  40. This south Indian lady has big boobs because big boobs are negroid feature.. Caucasians can’t have big boobs.

    • I am Norwegian and my lips are bigger than all of those Indian girls you posted..

      and I don’t have an inch of black blood in me..

      Shut up and take your stupid afrocentrist crap elsewhere

    • alpha unit

      So big boobs are negroid feature? Please continue…Shaniqua.

    • Ramesh

      There are many pure White women who have bigger boobs than those. You are a joke. And what about the fact that Indians do not have negroid hair. Thus we are not black.

  41. Ger

    “The only Blacks on Earth are native to Africa. There are a few elsewhere but they only moved there in the last 500 years. …. No humans in India are Black. There are no Black genes in India and no Indians have mostly Black genes. Further, no Indians are Black on phenotype. ”
    On the contrary, Siddis have been in India for maybe a thousand years:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siddi

    • Siddis are the only blacks that exist in India..

      the rest of the Indians are caucasians except for some tamils and low caste dalits because they are australoid in phenotype.

      The slums of India are filled with these low caste dalits aka untouchables.. They form like 25% of the whole Indian population.

    • Ramesh

      Siddis make up 0.00000001% of India. They are so rare, I or other Indians never see them in their lives. In Pakistan there are black Makranis who make up only a tiny percentage of pakistan’s population. Ironically it were the evil Whitey British who gave the makranis freedom from Islamic slavery after immediately conquering Sindh in Pakistan.

    • Golden Gopher

      Ger, The Siddis are a very recent arrival (11th century) and you are right, they are Africans. They were brought over to India by Arab traders as slaves but Ramesh is correct, they are almost negligible. I believe they number about 50,000 and in a pop. of more than 1B, it is insignificant.

  42. fx

    @ Robert Lindsay :

    “I think a lot of Indians really ARE White. The ones that have a very European looking phenotype are for all intents and purposes White folks.”

    Indeed, and some persons of the indo-european speaking regions of Asia are strikingly Europoids.

    There are pictures of such individuals here :

    http://pastmist.wordpress.com/

    They seem to match the description of the recent human genetics article I mentionned above, concerning south Siberians/central Asians of bronze/Iron age (probably ancestors of the Indo-iranian speaking Scythians/Sakas and also of the “Aryans” of India and Persia).

    (excerpt here for the ones that didn’t read the full article : http://www.springerlink.com/content/4462755368m322k8/ )

    • Do you have an english version of that link?

      It is french and I can’t understand what they really saying

    • Ramesh

      I had a Rajput friend (from the North Indian state of Rajasthan) who was related to some Rajput royalty. Rajputs are the guys who live in the Indian desert state of Rajasthan. You know those maharaja guys you see on Indian tourism programs who live in hill forts and opulent Indian palaces. They are brave in battle and were one of the designated ‘martial races’ in the British Indian empire. These people tend to come from a community called Maheswaris and a few of them are very very fair by Indian standards but not quite Northern Euro white (may be med).
      Now when I was in London, I came across a Polish guy who looked typical Northern Euro but also looked exactly like a fairer version of my friend. It makes sense as the Rajputs are the descendants of Scythians who came from Crimea. Poland ruled Ukraine and possibly the Crimea and is related to that place. It is widely believed that the Scythian (called Sakas by the ancient Indians) males married extremely dark skinned tribal females living in India called Bhils to give rise to the Rajputs. It was like the Aryan invasion all over again. But this took place many centuries after the Aryan invasion.

    • Ramesh

      They had recently found a Scythian mummy in Mongolia!

      http://www.spiegel.de/international/0,1518,433600,00.html

      There is one similarity between Scythians and Aryans. Both invaded India-Persia and the edges of the Far East.
      In India Persia both burnt their dead bodies (like the Romans, Anglo Saxons etc…) and did not leave much of a physical trace except in the genes of the people here. In the Far East-Central Asia buffer region, unlike Persia-India, both of them hardly left any genetic heritage (and did not influence the culture much it seems) but they left many mummies. Peculiar similarity many centuries apart.

  43. Lucky

    It seems like there is an “Aryan invasion” every few hundred years into India. The last one being the British.

  44. fx

    “Do you have an english version of that link?”

    Nope, sorry. Anyway, that was more about the pictures.

    Ramesh : “It was like the Aryan invasion all over again. But this took place many centuries after the Aryan invasion.”

    Well, Basically everywhere there have been Indo-european languages (from India and Xinjiang to northwestern Europe) we find the haplogroup ADN-Y R1a1, so we can logically conclude that there is very probably a link.

    The ancient cultures related to the Kurgan ones (supposed to be the origin of the early indo-europeans), that spread in time in central Asia (like the Andronovo one) and south Siberia
    have human remains that have shown to be almost exclusively R1a1 and there are mtDNA haplogroups that seems to be related to Europe as well (subclades of mtDNA H, HV, U2, U4, U5 subclades, subclades of T, some K subclades (all also found in Europe)) as we can see in the more recent study.

    R1a1 and those mtDNA haplogroups are found among population like Kalashas, Burusho, Tadjiks, and others etc … that often have the characteristics given by the study, and that seems to be the only haplogroups able to explain this
    (except in India where the mtDNA haplogroups (women lineages) seem to be mainly of Dravidian origin).

    The genetic study I talked of says that the remains of these bronze age/Iron age R1a1 were europoids generally with light hair, light-colored eyes and pale skin. So … we can assume that both Scythians (sakas) and original Aryans of South Asia had that kind of phenotypes or at least many of them.

    The ADN-Y R1 haplogroup descendants are the main component of the Europeans (R1b and R1a) so the link between all these elements seems to be credible and “clicking” together.

    And IIRC, one of the bones of the Krasnoyarsk region (In Russia roughly above the west of Mongolia) of a culture apparently indo-european, had the same genetical signature that one of the Xinjiang europid mummy (Xinjiang is in north-western China, in the Tarim Basin – a region where europid characteristics are still found sometimes).

  45. fx

    “The genetic study I talked of says that the remains of these bronze age/Iron age R1a1 were europoids generally with light hair, light-colored eyes and pale skin.”

    Oops. What I meant is that the genetic study on these remains/bones, that were of the Y-DNA haplogroup R1a1, have reached the conclusion that a lot of them had that kind of characteristics (some genes allow to know it, like the HERC2 that gives information about eye color)

    Sorry for my flawed english.

  46. Do Dravidians refer to all the people of South India or just the Tamils?

    When I googled the word ‘dravidian’, it says they were the native dark skinned people living in South India.

    If they are dark, How come there are a LOT of light skinned South Indians?

    Most of the upper caste and middle caste South Indians are light skinned and the Christians of Kerala are very light too since they are originally Brahmins who were converted to Christianity.

    • The lighter skinned folks of the South are not the natives. They came later on. Dravidian is a type of person in India. The Dravidians have mixed so much with the North Indians that it is often hard to tell where one ends and the other begins. The pure Dravidian is more a type that does not look like a North Indian. Dravidians in general appear to be Caucasians on phenotype, but some like the Tamils and some tribals seem to be Australoids on phenotype. It all gets pretty confusing.

      • A-Man

        Robert isn’t it true that some of the Forward Castes in South India like the kammas and reddies where historically lower castes NOT middle and high castes?

    • Middle caste and Upper caste South Indians and Chrsitians of Kerala don’t look like your typical dravidians..
      If you compare Middle/Upper caste South Indians to pure dravidians, they look very different in facial structures and eveything.

      Middle caste South Indian: http://niralimagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/lakshmi-menon-br.jpg

      Higher caste South Indian: http://www.stat.colostate.edu/images/iyer.jpg

      Pure Dravidian: http://www.aiouiuc.com/abhishek_iyer.jpg

    • deadcult

      Emma: “Middle caste and Upper caste South Indians and Chrsitians of Kerala don’t look like your typical dravidians..
      If you compare Middle/Upper caste South Indians to pure dravidians, they look very different in facial structures and eveything.”

      The persons in the 2nd and the 3rd pictures appear to have the same last name. I believe they are of the same caste.

  47. Majority of the christians in Kerala(especially Roman Catholics and Syrian Christians) are Brahmin converts. The other christians in Kerala and other parts of South India were the dalits or the low caste.

  48. WOW, Do Roman Catholics of Kerala really belong to the upper caste? Are we really Brahmin converts?

    I am a roman catholic and My parents are from Kerala too.

    I am yellow skinned and my mom is very pale and my father is light brown skinned. They are both Roman catholics.

    I also have a very prominent nose and my lips are thinnish.

  49. If North Indians have 15% mongoloid blood in them, How much percentage of mongoloid blood do South Indians have?

    Because I have this friend who is South Indian(he lives here in the U.S) and he looks very asian. He gets mistaken for filipino all the time.. He looks like an asian person with light tan skin and his eyes are very filipino. I was shocked to hear that he is South Indian. Specifically, He is from Kerala.

    • There are South Indians who look very caucasian like these South Indians:

      I have seen south Indians who look very australoid especially in Tamilnadu.

      Most of the South Indians I have seen in the U.S have caucasian facial features and some are quite dark.

      I have never seen an asian looking South Indian.

  50. Pingback: New Traffic Record On Robert Lindsay August 1 « Robert Lindsay

  51. Well I feel the author of this post know nothing about the content of Vedas (ancient Indian scriptures) which according to Aryan invasion theory were written by Aryans . There is not even a single place in all 4 vedas where place outside India is mentioned . Everything in the writings circulates around india and another big reason can be there is no other place in the world where scriptures similar to Vedas are found nor there are any people who relate themselves to these. Did 100% Aryans came to India leaving no clue where they came from. If Aryans wrote Vedas why there is no mention of some foreign land anywhere in scriptures , why only bharat varsha (India) and its places and rivers. Above all Nomadic people Aryans can never even have dreamt of writing such an advance scriptures which have mention of powers 10 raise to 59. Max Muller, the inventor of this theory doubted his own finding (Six systems of Indian philosophy by Max Muller) at the end of his life. Why so people think that nothing great can be done by Asians and all came from Europe. Its just 50 years of Independence from 200 + 1000 years of slavery from moughals and british and India has created 1000s of scientists. The core of Mathamatics came from India. Learn about Hindu Arabic number system and contribution of Aryabhatta.
    There is no dark or light skinned… it all depends on the climatic condition. If there are 3 generations of south Indian living in Kashmir, he will turn light skinned. Cast system is a creation of some stupid Brahmins, it was not like that earlier. Please look at all aspects, one sided approach….

    • It has been conclusively proven that the Aryans have their origin in Northern Kazakhstan. Before that, in southern Russia. They didn’t really come from Europe at all – they came from Eurasia and then from Asia.

      There is no further debate about this matter, and the proof rests on anthropology and linguistics. The Vedas are not a reputable source.

      A South Indian will NOT genetically change their skin color in 3 generations in Kashmir, forget it.

      Ethnic nationalism is all crap, and Indian ethnic nationalism is no less stupid and insane as any other variety.

    • Siddhanath Jha

      Vedas are related to Zoroastrain scriptures like Zend Avestan( Similar to Arthva Veda

  52. There is actually no “aryan invasion”.. It is actually bullshit made by british people to divide Indians into dravidians and aryans so that they won’t unify..

    There is evidence here, Read this:

    http://www.indoaryans.org/Aryan-Dravidian-Controversy.html

    All Indians are the same member of the Mediterranean caucasian race..

    Although the Tamils are mixed with australoid..

    • Besides, the scientist who proved that Aryan invasion theory is a myth is NOT even Indian.. He is a European and his name is David Frawley..

      Click the link of that I gave you and he clearly proves there was no “aryan invasion” at all and Indians are all the same race.. South Indians and North Indians are all members of the Mediterranean caucasian race..

    • If you compare a North Indian to a South Indian, they look the same except for may be their skin color.. South India is located near to the equator which makes the people living there brown.

      Here is a North Indian: http://www.arts.ri.gov/images/kulkani.JPG

      Here is a South Indian: http://www.southdreamz.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/shriya-saran.jpg

      What difference is there between them?

      There are dark North Indians and pale South Indians tooo….

    • I don’t agree with this Indian nationalist crap at all.

      It’s a proven fact that Aryans came from Northern Kazakhstan and before that, from the Pontic Steppe. That’s why they speak an Indo-European language. That’s why their genes are related to I-E speakers. We can trace their movements both archeologically and linguistically.

      I really don’t want to argue about this anymore, thx.

    • A-Man

      I would say in my opinion, Tamilian people and Telugu people are the most australoid mixed south indians and keralites and people from karnataka are the least but there are exceptions.

  53. anindian

    Some points to ponder upon:
    1) Vedas are not everything in Hinduism, though they form some of the core. There are many books written in ancient mathematics and science in the post-Vedic period which are as relevant to the history of Hindus, if not more than the Vedas. Look at the books written by Bhaskara (there were two Bhaskaras recorded in history), Aryabhatta, Apastamba, Baudhayana, Varahmihira and several other authors. Some of them have had their base south of the Vindhyas, which indicates the migration of the culture of the Vedic people southward. i am guessing the actual migration of Vedic people might also have taken place either before or after the completion of the writing of the Vedas.(500-1000 BCE). Read about the myth of Agastya and his followers and the Vindhyas.
    2) Skin color depends on the climate and gradually over generations (maynot be 3 but lets say about 30 generations) it is sure to change.
    3) People speaking different languages derived from a root language (or speaking the root language itself) need not share genetic origins or race. For example, I am an Indian, if I speak or write in English, a Europe-originated language, that does not make me European. I bet the same applies to speakers of Indo-European languages.
    4) Based on several references in the Vedas against dark-skinned tribes, one cannot assume that all the scriptures of the Hindus (the sruti and smriti) were written by the highly-advanced fair-skinned race-preserving cohort known as Aryans who came down from central Asia and pushed the locals down south. One severe contradiction to this simplistic theory is, how come there are references of lower-caste tribals getting upgraded to the higher caste of Brahmins (like Valmiki, Vishwamitra) in the epics written by these same racially-finicky people(the Aryans) that was allowed to be published without censorship. The racial references in the Vedas are at best ambigious. If the Aryans were the vanguards of Hinduism and they were the creators of the scriptures , how did dark-skinned gods like Vishnu and Shiva find their ways into the texts. More likely they should have been shown as demons given the benchmarks by which they would have decided.
    Given all these, there surely exists a possibility of a fair-skinned race coming down from Afghanistan or central Asia and contribution to the creation of Hindu scriptures and merging with the locals, infact there could be several races of this type migrating in at different points of time. But to say that they did this at the expense of a dark-skinned race or an indigenous race is pure baloney, given the facts. Infact the genesis of Hindu scriptures could have come from different parts (including the non-Indo-European parts which may include Sanskrit speakers of Dravidian origin) of the Indian subcontinent. Likewise, tribes that had originally entered from the northern borders of India (one of them being the Aryans) must have migrated all over the country giving an inseparable and indistinguishable genetic mixture that we know as the people of India today. Also the caste system in ancient India upto a period must have been rather fluid and based on occupation than ancestral as is the popular notion. Hinduism (atleast the history and references from Hinduism) seems to have a much greater tolerance for skin color and caste than is touted to be.

  54. Pingback: More On Hinduism, Race, Caste and the “Aryan Invasion” « Robert Lindsay

  55. fx

    A Rai : “There is not even a single place in all 4 vedas where place outside India is mentioned”

    R Lindsay : “The Vedas are not a reputable source”

    And anyway The Persian Avesta tradition and Zarathoustra, the Persian sage, said that the original home of the Aryan (Aryanem Vaejah) was located in Central Asia (Sounds like the Andronovo culture to me, or its successor).

    Here’s an excerpt of a book by John Boardman (the archeologist) :

    http://books.google.fr/books?id=nNDpPqeDjo0C&pg=PA191&lpg=PA191&dq=aryanem+vaejah&source=bl&ots=TlHx-VIFBm&sig=WA8t5xzvnCdM_KKw98MeYkvnRhM&hl=fr&ei=yBSVSs7IE57bjQew26HrDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2#v=onepage&q=aryanem%20vaejah&f=false

    Reminder : The Iranians can as much claim a filiation to the Aryans than the Indians.

    The name Iran means etymologically “Land of the Aryans”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran#Name

  56. Bikram

    Very amusing discussion. Please read the recent article in Nature (Sept 24, 09)…Indian are a hybrid product of two distinct gene pools that united more than 40000 years ago. Perhaps Indian are the root of asian, european…and so you see all kind of colors.

  57. fx

    @ Bikram :

    Oh, you’re talking of that study that says that ancestral north Indians and Europeans are part of a same group ?

    “First, the ANI and CEU form a clade, and further analysis shows that the Adygei, a Caucasian group, are an outgroup. Many Indian and European groups speak Indo-European languages, whereas the Adygei speak a Northwest Caucasian language.

    It is tempting to assume that the population ancestral to ANI and CEU spoke ‘Proto-Indo-European’, which has been reconstructed as ancestral to both Sanskrit and European languages, although we cannot be certain without a date for ANI-ASI mixture”

    “forms a clade” = are a group

    ANI = Ancestral North Indians

    CEU = Utah Mormons of Northern and Western European descent. (“European”-type population sample for the study)

    > David Reich et al., Reconstructing Indian population history, Nature 461, 489-494 (24 September 2009) | doi:10.1038/nature08365


    An Indo-iranian invasion from outside india is very likely.
    Not much is left to the imagination.
    During bronze age, Kazakhstan was the place of the Andronovo culture which is strongly believed to be an indo-european culture (and more exactly, an Indo-iranian culture).

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andronovo_culture#Ancient_DNA

    “A 2004 study also established that, during the bronze/iron age period, the majority of the population of Kazakhstan (part of the Andronovo culture during bronze age), was of west Eurasian origin (with mtDNA haplogroups such as U, H, HV, T, I and W), and that prior to the thirteenth-seventh century BC, all Kazakh samples belonged to European lineages. ”

    > http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1691686

    And south Siberian population of Andronovo were found to be often fair-skinned, blue/green-eyed and light-haired.

    Also, the y-DNA haplogroup R1a1 was by far majoritary in this population. This haplogroup is found from India (especially the north) to north-western Europe. Big clue again.

  58. Neo

    Hi,
    I am Neo and a shudra by birth in Hindu religion which I deny to own. Kindly go through my comments in the other link
    https://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2009/08/23/more-on-hinduism-race-caste-and-the-aryan-invasion/#comment-33754

    Just wanted to share the link of the book written by the writer of Indian Constitution, the great Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar. It explains the religion of vedas and brahmins.
    http://www.ambedkar.org/riddleinhinduism/21A1.Riddles%20in%20Hinduism%20PART%20I.htm

  59. Neo

    Few things about Rama and Krishna. From Ambedkars book

    http://ambedkar.org/riddleinhinduism/21C.Riddles%20in%20Hinduism%20PART%20III.htm#a08

    Go ahead if you like reading read the complete book with more than 25 chapters. The complete Hinduism is fake.

  60. Tejaswini Vemburia

    The most contentious issue in the world history is Aryan Invasion theory. The problem is that Indian sub continent is unique in the sense that it notices everybody but it is not noticed by everybody. Indians have problem among themselves but not with the rest of the world. But rest of the world is baffled by India due to existence of so many colours, races languages etc. This is the problem with Pakistanis, Bangladeshis and Chinese as well. Unfortunately it is the dishonesty of the Indian intellegentia to understand this. The business class and labour class is pan Indian. There is no language barrier even though they dont know local language yet they somehow manage. This is due to purely understanding the nature of life belief in Karma and hope for elevation in the next birth which is the cornerstone of all Indian religions. That is why when the Indian kings fought most bitter battles among themselves the vengence did not spread to other communities but restricted to warriors only. With this background if we look into the history the racial theory will become totally irrelevant. All the Dharma Sastras were enacted only to rule the masses. The caste is a loose world. It is not hereditary but people themselves found it convenient to fit into the system. I put forth further arguments in this regard: i)The Buddhist/jain sources are older to Puranas in Sanskrit. In Jainism there are only three classes and no Brahmins but essential elements of Vaidik traditions viz.,chanting Gayathri manthra, Propiation of Gods, ascetism, tonsure of head even by ladies observance of chaturmasya Vrata etc. ii) A large number of Brahmins contributed to Buddhist theology. iii)In the absence of Arya Dasyu war in Jain/Buddhist literature what is the interpretation of defeat of Indra in the hands of Bodhisatvas. In Jain literature the Vedic kings like Bharata went for dig vijaya where there is no mention about Arya dasa war. Why is that there is complete absence of arya dasa war in those literature. Even if we assume that Jainism is rebellion against Brahmin order why is that there is no mention about Brahmins?iv)History starts in India only in Bihar ,Bengal and South India where there were kingdoms. Western and Northern India did not have original kingdoms. The western kshatraps and kushans were foreigners while satavahanas and Rashtrakutas were of Karnataka. The entire kingdoms of Deccan Chalukyas,Kadambas and Gangas were of Gangetic origin.v)Here comes the crux of the problem. Even assuming Dasas are Dravidians then who were the Dravidians. The entire Deccan people are from Himalayan plains as evidenced by spread of Buddhism in Godavari Krishna basin all the dynasties starting from Ikshvakus to Kalachuris are from Ayodhya. In respect of Tamilnadu its history ended with sack of Madurai by Malik Kafur. At present 40% of people in Tamil Nadu are of Telugu origin. Kerala’s history is even more mysterious since there is not even an iota of trace of tamil but for Palghat Iyers though the temples there were solemnised by Alwars. Thus in the absence of historical continuity and multiplicity of ethnic tribes which cannot happen in aggresive atmosphere dominated by Aryan hegemony. Thus it is futile to go ahead with a theory where there is no continuation or linked history chronologically .

  61. Sekhmet

    Here’s another point of view. It’s possible that aryans were spawned from albinos and grouped together because of their lack of pigment and sun sensitivity.
    http://realhistoryww.com/world_history/ancient/Indus_Valley_India_1.htm
    One thing is for certain, those high levels of melanin have a superior pineal gland and those lacking melanin have a high rate of calcified pineal glands. Apparently melanin is mother nature’s great equalizer…

  62. Pingback: The Aryan Controversy

  63. vidyadhara

    I am a kangaroo and I must jump to conclusions. ha ha ha. This is the summary of the aryan invasion theory.

    Somehow europeans must be included into an aryan invasion model for India. And it does not matter one bit how this is done. The spectrum of theories that is offered just have one particular objective. Each aiming at the same end result from a large variety of vantage points.

    This is not science, perhaps it is reasonable battle strategy. For foisting upon the heathen a certain political philosophy.

    Europe could not have had any significant human population until the end of the last ice age. Around 10000 BC. And then not amounting to much even until well into the days of the roman empire.

    India’s large native population would always be impossible to “subdue” let alone replace with a foreign population in any significant measure. It is entirely inconceivable that in 3000 BC or even 1500 BC there could be a large scale invasion by a foreign population from an icy waste land of europe, that is large enough to replace well developed local society. And still not form any notable empire.
    Was there anything even within Europe amounting to an empire? before 500 BC. And yet the first empires of europe were from greece hardly “european”. The greeks themselves surely recent immigrants from central asia, following the land as it was emerging from the ice ages.

    There is absolutely no evidence offered about such an invasion into india. Not archaeological, not scriptural, not genetic. Nothing.

    Just vague speculation, claiming authority of “scientific” investigation. Just a pile of european colonialist mumbo jumbo claiming legitimacy through invented “indologist” terminology.

  64. Pingback: Blogging Notes | Beyond Highbrow - Robert Lindsay

  65. super intelligent Bengali Brahmin

    Lindsey,Bengali Kulin Brahmin with around half million population produced Tagore and IVF pioneer doctor both which was later verified to be worth of Nobel prize…200 yrs ago they created Bengal renaissance…and in US with less than 10,000 population they have more than 250 US patents,Nobel laureate signature award winner,and one of greatest biologist of last century(who has not won Nobel yet),2 Pulitzer,13 Grammy…etc all within last couple of decade…how it’s possible?

  66. Pandey

    Rushton estimated the Brahmin IQ to be 110 on average which is close to Ashkenazi but in terms of intelligence Tamil Brahmins,who have darker skin are very strong while Bengali Brahmin who have shown highest caucasian blood in their genetics along with some East Asian blood(well Bengal is very close to Tibet) are probably one of the smartest in the planet.I’m a lighter skin Brahmin from UP but unfortunately we have not much achievements in science and art to boast.Why only Bengali and Tamil Brahmins are so smart?Razib Khan has done a research on it and his theory tells Tamil Brahmins are more similar with south -west people while Bengali Brahmins are most hybrid race with south Asian,East Asian ,west Asians and estern European blood-all their famous names such as Mukherjee,Tagore,statistician Mahalanobis,RavishankarJhumpa Lahiri etc had caucasian looks…may be they are pure Aryan.

  67. Tejaswini Vemburia

    The indo Aryan theory is the most stupid and intellectually dishonest theory. The reasons are: the supporters conveniently take the word Aryan from Vedas but take Dravida from Buddhist literature after thousand years. The actual theory should be Arya Dasa theory. Poor protagonists there is no word dasa or dasyu in Tamil. See the sequence of events. There is clear case of backward integration. Take 326BC as the starting point. Link it with Buddhism. Take sixteen janapadas from Buddhism. Then go to Jainism. Then go to Satapadabrahmana and lastly Rigveda. Is it science?is it not ridiculous? One should hung his head in shame. First of all sixteen janapadas correspond to sixteen provinces of DariusI. There was bitter animosity between followers of Gomata and Ahura Mazda and followers of Gomata retreated to India as Jains. That is why we find that from the period of Darius I to Demetrius we find only Jainism. But for Tamil there was no Literature for Hindus in Prakrit. It was only during Indo Bactrian kings worship of Siva and Vishnu was encouraged with Rudradaman and Kadambas and lastly Guptas. Unlike in Tamil where in Sangam literature where performance of sacrifices were described minutely why was it no king of North till Agnimithra never performed any sacrifice or why was it not recorded. Take the case of growth of Sanskrit. It was western Kshatrapa Rudradaman first introduced Sanskrit followed by Kadambas adopted by Vakatakas and Guptas who had matrimonial alliances with Kadambas. Why was it the early poets Bhasa Bharavi hailed from South. The greatest puzzle is while majority of South Indians are meat eaters the western India is completely vegetarians. This is not surprising since DariusI and Demetrius shifted to vegetarianism. All the Vedic Gods Indira, Agni,Varuna,Surya.are all black. Even now Pallars an SC Community call themselves Mallas and Devendrakula Vellalas and their rituals are Indo Aryans. Lastly Unlike North South India is the most unstable region no community can boast of even five hundred years since after the collapse of Chola empire and invasion of Malik Kafur there was complete breakdown of social set up and who ever were fortunate adopted higher social hierarchy. There was no continuity in food habits or dress code. But for Temple worship all other things change with efflux of time. Let the North Indian elite stop with Indo Aryan theory with Dasas upto Narmada and leave South India as such and not introduce Dravidas not found either in Tamil or Vedas.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s