AIT, NEW genetic evidence

[Rajarshi Banerjee]

NG> Within few centuries, by a very tiny elite populace, Malayalam
is created out of Tamil.

RB> This is very interesting. What was the language in kerala like before
malyalam came along?
Surely it did not belong to a different language family.

NG> 3-5 % ethnic Aryans with archery, chariots & new type of religion would
have worked wonders in about
3 millennia.

RB> Ethnic Aryans must have worked their wonders from 1700 to 1000 BC not 3
millenia. I dont find that too impausible either. But start thinking about
how unified and organized the initial IA speakers would have had to be.
Surely the IVC language would have had some inertia and would take a lot of
swallowing to do. Archery is a stone age invention and would not have
dazzled anyone. Archery was probably invented by hunter gatherers to kill
birds and other game. Tribals in India surely used things like bows and
arrows.

NG> It is not the horse itself, but the horse religion is of interest to
IVC  culture. No horse in 1000s of IVC seals! After 1700 B.C.,
Prof. Witzel thinks Dravidians could have introduced horse into
India (EJVS, 1999)  first, but not the chariots.

RB> The horse argument is exactly what I am trying to explain away when I
say:
The horse obsession of vedic society could be explained as signs of the
times when some of the vedas were finalized. It does not rule an earlier IA
presence in India, earlier components of the vedas and other non horse
centric IA speakers.

NG> Also, how to explain dravidian elements (retroflexion, syntax, words
etc.,) in
North India?

RB> According to Dr. Witzel retroflexion in sanskrit is distinct and has an
independant origin from dravidian. Also dravidian loan words occur at a
fairly late stage in vedic.

NG> Is this a complete reversal of the majority academic opinion about
the languages in IVC.

RB> Majority or minority academic opinion regarding the IVC language is not
worth much simply because there is not enough evidence.

NG> Is this hinting that the IE home is India?
Archaeologists have not bought that theory.

RB> We dont have to deal in such absolutes. I am only making a conjecture
and I really dont know. India could have had a subset of IE speakers at an
early stage. If there was an IE homeland in central asia, nothing would
prevent migrants from settling in places in western India or pakistan at
early dates, After all it was warm, less arid, there was more game and there
were more animals to domesticate. The indian branch may have split from PIE
at a really early stage. IE spread to europe would be slower due to less
hospitable conditions.

NG> "Elite dominance" strategm of the IA expansion in India starting
from around 1500 BCE is explained in academic publications widely.
Some of them in Indology archives, pointers given in earlier
mail.

RB> Its just a theory, not known history. I can accept it when more details
are known, but other ideas can also be explored.

regards

R. Banerjee