Genetic evidence suggests the origins of Indian caste populations

[civfanatic]

You will find that these features are far more common among KoBras (Kokanastha Brahmins) than in the general population.

Yes, there tends to be a concentration of physical attributes among endogamous populations, and rigid social stratification tends to reinforce this. Nothing unusual about that.

 

[Known_Unknown]

Yes, there tends to be a concentration of physical attributes among endogamous populations, and rigid social stratification tends to reinforce this. Nothing unusual about that.

The unusualness is not in the fact that physical attributes are concentrated, but in the specific gene expressions which are reflected in the physical characteristics of the community, in this case being fairer skin and light coloured eyes compared to the general population.

 

[civfanatic]

The unusualness is not in the fact that physical attributes are concentrated, but in the specific gene expressions which are reflected in the physical characteristics of the community, in this case being fairer skin and light coloured eyes compared to the general population.

Yes, when you have fair-skinned people intermarrying exclusively with other fair-skinned people, the offspring and future generations also tend to be fair-skinned. This is not rocket science here.

There is also speculation that brahmin communities in Maharastra intermarried with Europeans (Portuguese colonists). Shudras and lower castes seldom intermarried with foreigners, though there are still quite a few fair-skinned shudras.

 

[Known_Unknown]

Yes, when you have fair-skinned people intermarrying exclusively with other fair-skinned people, the offspring and future generations also tend to be fair-skinned. This is not rocket science here.

You're missing the point. The thread is about the fact that Brahmins and upper castes in general have European features/ancestry compared to the lower castes. The pics above were posted to illustrate this.

If fair skinned and coloured eyed people existed equally across caste boundaries in antiquity, there would not be a higher prevalence of these features among the higher castes today.

There is also speculation that brahmin communities in Maharastra intermarried with Europeans (Portuguese colonists). Shudras and lower castes seldom intermarried with foreigners, though there are still quite a few fair-skinned shudras.

Pure speculation. KoBras were not historically settled in the areas under Portuguese colonization anyway, in fact they ran the Maratha Empire after Sambhaji as the Peshwas.

 

[civfanatic]

You're missing the point. The thread is about the fact that Brahmins and upper castes in general have European features/ancestry compared to the lower castes. The pics above were posted to illustrate this.

If fair skinned and coloured eyed people existed equally across caste boundaries in antiquity, there would not have been a higher prevalence of these features among the higher castes alone.

In distant antiquity, there were no such thing as caste boundaries because there were no such things as castes. Do you think the early migrants to arrive in India were already divided into Brahmins/Kshatriyas/Vaisyas/Shudras?

I believe that Indians were a highly diverse people even in pre-historic times, with an abundance of phenotypes and genotypes. When the caste system emerged in India, as societies in India became more complex and stratification kicked in, certain phenotypes and genotypes would congregate in certain communities. Though this was not a perfect process, as there are still plenty of dark-skinned brahmins and light-skinned shudras.

Mahesh Babu is a TFTA Telugu Shudra (Kamma) from Chennai. Please explain his existence:

 

[Razor]

All these pics (till this post) look like Indians that you might see everyday.

Anyway, that Mahesh-garu has elf ears.

 

[Singh]

@civfanatic @Known_Unknown very fair brahmins in that konkan region is thanks to Portuguese.

 

[Singh]

shinde is a daily too.

 

[civfanatic]

All these pics (till this post) look like Indians that you might see everyday.

That's what I said.

@civfanatic @Known_Unknown very fair brahmins in that konkan region is thanks to Portuguese.

That's what I said.

 

[Known_Unknown]

In distant antiquity, there were no such thing as caste boundaries because there were no such things as castes. Do you think the early migrants to arrive in India were already divided into Brahmins/Kshatriyas/Vaisyas/Shudras?

If one goes by the AIT (or, if you prefer to be more politically correct, AMT), caste stratification developed quite early after waves of Aryan settlers came to northwestern India.

I believe that Indians were a highly diverse people even in pre-historic times, with an abundance of phenotypes and genotypes. When the caste system emerged in India, as societies in India became more complex and stratification kicked in, certain phenotypes and genotypes would congregate in certain communities. Though this was not a perfect process, as there are still plenty of dark-skinned brahmins and light-skinned shudras.

Mahesh Babu is a TFTA Telugu Shudra (Kamma) from Chennai. Please explain his existence:

You still haven't explained why there is a higher prevalence of fair skin and coloured eyes among Brahmins compared to lower castes. If the mixing was fairly random (as it would be, if the early caste system is assumed to be flexible), then there would be a far higher proportion of fair skinned and blue eyed individuals among the lower castes as well.

In addition to the pics I posted, other KoBras with similar features include:
Shreeram Lagoo
Vikram Gokhale
Archana Joglekar
Sarika
Sai Paranjape
Hrishikesh Kanitkar

etc etc...for every example you give of a lower caste individual with fair skin, I can give you 5 KoBras.

EDIT: And these are just the famous personalities with both fair skin+light coloured eyes! If you go by fair skin alone (since that is more common that the combination), the number swells dramatically.

 

[Known_Unknown]

@civfanatic @Known_Unknown very fair brahmins in that konkan region is thanks to Portuguese.

Wrong. Maharashtra has 5 or 6 different Brahmin communities, but fair skinned individuals with light eyes are found only in KoBras, which as mentioned earlier, did not historically reside in areas under Portuguese colonization and hence could not have intermixed. Not to mention that any mixed individuals in those days would have lost their caste and certainly not have been accepted as "Brahmins" by the larger society.

There are also a large amount of fair-skinned individuals among the CKP and GSB castes, but light-coloured eyes are very infrequent with them. These Brahmins resided in areas under Portuguese colonization and may have inter-bred, but this is also highly unlikely, considering, as mentioned earlier, their possible loss of caste.

 

[civfanatic]

If one goes by the AIT (or, if you prefer to be more politically correct, AMT), caste stratification developed quite early after waves of Aryan settlers came to northwestern India.

There's little evidence for either of those statements.

Caste stratification seems to have become especially rigid starting in the Gupta period. As for the "Aryan invasion", the actual number of foreigners to arrive in India in the 2nd millennium B.C.E. was probably quite small. So small, that it had hardly any impact on Indian demographics of the time. The main consequence of the "Aryan invasion" was not a massive influx of new genes (for which there is little evidence), but the spread of a new language and culture across North India by Aryanized Indian (probably mostly Harappan) settlers. For similar cases in other parts of the world, see the Germanization of post-Roman Britain and the Indianization of Southeast Asia. The actual numbers of Germans (Anglo-Saxon) and Indians to arrive in Britain and SE Asia was probably quite small, but their cultural impact was huge relative to their size, mainly because large numbers of natives (Celtic Britons and Austro-Asiatic SE Asians) adopted the foreign culture. I think something similar happened with regards to the "Aryans" and the "native" Indians.

You still haven't explained why there is a higher prevalence of fair skin and coloured eyes among Brahmins compared to lower castes.

I have. People with such traits (fair skin, colored eyes and hair, etc.) were probably favored among certain communities, especially those of the higher castes, and endogamous marriage ensured that a fairly high concentration of these traits remained in those communities (compared to other communities).

If the mixing was fairly random (as it would be, if the early caste system is assumed to be flexible), then there would be a far higher proportion of fair skinned and blue eyed individuals among the lower castes as well.

Not really, given that there has been at least ~1,500 years of rigid social stratification to ensure disproportionate concentrations of physical attributes.

for every example you give of a lower caste individual with fair skin, I can give you 5 KoBras.

I'm sure you could, since as I already stated, there is a higher concentration of such individuals in higher castes. Though you haven't explained why there exist shudras who are lighter and taller than KoBras at all.

 

[Singh]

New research also showing Anatolia is the birth center of indo- European languages

 

[Known_Unknown]

There's little evidence for either of those statements.

Agreed, but there is also little evidence to the contrary. My premise is more likely though because while in a utopia, the caste system might have been fairly flexible, in the real world, it would be fair to assume that once a power structure had been established, the elites in that power structure would not have willingly given up their place in society. We see evidence for this desire to preserve social stratification through religious literature which promises a higher caste to a person in the next life (note, not present life) based on their actions in the present etc.

Caste stratification seems to have become especially rigid starting in the Gupta period. As for the "Aryan invasion", the actual number of foreigners to arrive in India in the 2nd millennium B.C.E. was probably quite small. So small, that it had hardly any impact on Indian demographics of the time. The main consequence of the "Aryan invasion" was not a massive influx of new genes (for which there is little evidence), but the spread of a new language and culture across North India by Aryanized Indian (probably mostly Harappan) settlers. For similar cases in other parts of the world, see the Germanization of post-Roman Britain and the Indianization of Southeast Asia. The actual numbers of Germans (Anglo-Saxon) and Indians to arrive in Britain and SE Asia was probably quite small, but their cultural impact was huge relative to their size, mainly because large numbers of natives (Celtic Britons and Austro-Asiatic SE Asians) adopted the foreign culture. I think something similar happened with regards to the "Aryans" and the "native" Indians.

I disagree. We find many examples of caste discrimination in the Mahabharata, which first appeared around 500 BC.

I have. People with such traits (fair skin, colored eyes and hair, etc.) were probably favored among certain communities, especially those of the higher castes, and endogamous marriage ensured that a fairly high concentration of these traits remained in those communities (compared to other communities).

Now this is something for which there is no objective evidence. What you're postulating is that different castes or communities had differing standards of beauty, because that is the only reason why such physical traits would have been preferred by those communities. I find that highly unlikely. Although beauty as a concept is fairly flexible over time, generally at a fixed point in time and in a specific society, the idea of beauty is the same.

Not really, given that there has been at least ~1,500 years of rigid social stratification to ensure disproportionate concentrations of physical attributes.

That's assuming that only Brahmins found fair skin and coloured eyes attractive, while the rest of society found dark skin attractive. Extremely unlikely to say the least, and in fact, when we look at the proliferation of genotypes associated with blonde hair and fair-skin in Europe, your position is on the opposite end of the spectrum.

I'm sure you could, since as I already stated, there is a higher concentration of such individuals in higher castes. Though you haven't explained why there exist shudras who are lighter and taller than KoBras at all.

Every case has exceptions. You are pointing out the exceptions, I am pointing out a trend.

 

[Singh]

Wrong. Maharashtra has 5 or 6 different Brahmin communities, but fair skinned individuals with light eyes are found only in KoBras, which as mentioned earlier, did not historically reside in areas under Portuguese colonization and hence could not have intermixed. Not to mention that any mixed individuals in those days would have lost their caste and certainly not have been accepted as "Brahmins" by the larger society.

There are also a large amount of fair-skinned individuals among the CKP and GSB castes, but light-coloured eyes are very infrequent with them. These Brahmins resided in areas under Portuguese colonization and may have inter-bred, but this is also highly unlikely, considering, as mentioned earlier, their possible loss of caste.

Since this particular community is isolated and has no similarity with any nearby group (hunza?) It is safe to assume two things
1. Inter mixing with foreigners/foreign descent
2. Genetic mutation

Genetic Mutation hitting only this particular community is not impossible but is improbable. A simple DNA test can show either of the two. Like it has shown that North Indian genetic markers are similar to Europeans.

 

[pmaitra]

If one goes by the AIT (or, if you prefer to be more politically correct, AMT), caste stratification developed quite early after waves of Aryan settlers came to northwestern India.

There's little evidence for either of those statements.

Au contraire, there is plenty of evidence. All you have to do is travel all throughout India by train and keep clicking pictures of people on the crowded railway stations. The sample size will be at least one million, if you happen to travel by trains that stop at many places. If the massive genetic diversity of India is not evidence enough, then no evidence will be enough. One can point out, but one cannot force one to acknowledge what one sees with his own eyes.

Caste stratification seems to have become especially rigid starting in the Gupta period. As for the "Aryan invasion", the actual number of foreigners to arrive in India in the 2nd millennium B.C.E. was probably quite small. So small, that it had hardly any impact on Indian demographics of the time.

There is no evidence to prove that migration was in small numbers. The current genetic stock of Indians indicates towards quite the opposite, i.e. an eclectic influx in large numbers.

The main consequence of the "Aryan invasion" was not a massive influx of new genes (for which there is little evidence), but the spread of a new language and culture across North India by Aryanized Indian (probably mostly Harappan) settlers.

Again, as I have already said, and as @Known_Unknown has given pictures, there is more evidence to support the Aryan Migration/Invasion Theory than to support this Indigenous Stock Theory.

Secondly, please define what you mean by Harappan Settlers.

For similar cases in other parts of the world, see the Germanization of post-Roman Britain and the Indianization of Southeast Asia. The actual numbers of Germans (Anglo-Saxon) and Indians to arrive in Britain and SE Asia was probably quite small, but their cultural impact was huge relative to their size, mainly because large numbers of natives (Celtic Britons and Austro-Asiatic SE Asians) adopted the foreign culture.

I have something to share about what exactly happened when the Anglo-Saxons migrated to what today would be the "land of the Angels," i.e. England.

Migration of the Germanic speaking people

When Britain gained "independence" from Rome in the year 410ce, the Roman legions withdrew leaving the country vulnerable to invaders. Soon after the withdrawal of Roman troops, inhabitants from the north began attacking the Britons. In response to these attacks, individual towns sought help from the Foedarati, who were Roman mercenaries of German origin, for the defense of the northern parts of England. As the legend has been told, a man named Hengest arrived on the shores of Britain with "3 keels" of warriors in 450ce. This event is known in Latin as the "adventus Saxonum," or the coming of the Saxons. At this time, the Foedarati stopped defending Britain and began conquering the territories on the southern and eastern shores of the country. These invaders drove the Britons to the north and west. The Saxons called the native Britons, 'wealas', which meant foreigner or slave, and from this term came the modern word Welsh. Eight to ten years later many British aristocrats (Celts) and city dwellers began migrating to Brittany, an event known as the second migration.

Full Article: Anglo-Saxon England

Please read the full article. There is a list of different tribes that got clubbed under "Germanic speaking people." (Linguistic Anthropology)

I think something similar happened with regards to the "Aryans" and the "native" Indians.

The alternative is also quite possible - indigenous Indians, such as the sedentary civilized IVC people, were driven out by the invaders or migrants from Central Asia and/or Caucasia, who were more nomadic and aggressive.

You still haven't explained why there is a higher prevalence of fair skin and coloured eyes among Brahmins compared to lower castes.

I have. People with such traits (fair skin, colored eyes and hair, etc.) were probably favored among certain communities, especially those of the higher castes, and endogamous marriage ensured that a fairly high concentration of these traits remained in those communities (compared to other communities).

If the mixing was fairly random (as it would be, if the early caste system is assumed to be flexible), then there would be a far higher proportion of fair skinned and blue eyed individuals among the lower castes as well.

Not really, given that there has been at least ~1,500 years of rigid social stratification to ensure disproportionate concentrations of physical attributes.

for every example you give of a lower caste individual with fair skin, I can give you 5 KoBras.

I'm sure you could, since as I already stated, there is a higher concentration of such individuals in higher castes. Though you haven't explained why there exist shudras who are lighter and taller than KoBras at all.

Apropos the emboldened part, agreed, but then, to even achieve a "high concentration of these traits" [sic.], we would have to begin somewhere, with those very genes that reflect those traits. We cannot have a tree if there was no seed in the first place.

 

[Known_Unknown]

Since this particular community is isolated and has no similarity with any nearby group (hunza?) It is safe to assume two things
1. Inter mixing with foreigners/foreign descent
2. Genetic mutation

Genetic Mutation hitting only this particular community is not impossible but is improbable. A simple DNA test can show either of the two. Like it has shown that North Indian genetic markers are similar to Europeans.

I guess the KoBras are a different kettle of fish, since it seems they are the newest (European?) arrivals to the subcontinent to integrate fully into Indian society. For a a long time, they were ostracized by the dominant Brahmin communities of Maharashtra and termed as "paravenu" . There is little record of them before their rise as Peshwas of the Maratha empire.

 

[pmaitra]

Since this particular community is isolated and has no similarity with any nearby group (hunza?) It is safe to assume two things
1. Inter mixing with foreigners/foreign descent
2. Genetic mutation

Genetic Mutation hitting only this particular community is not impossible but is improbable. A simple DNA test can show either of the two. Like it has shown that North Indian genetic markers are similar to Europeans.

I have to point out, that the mountains of Hunza Valley, and the Western Ghats of the Konkan Region are very different. Isolated communities tend to be found in remotely located parts. I do not think the Konkan Region was isolated or remote, when we have plenty of evidence of migration across much more inhospitable terrain, such as the Tarim Basin, Qizil Kum, Pamir Knot, Caucasian Mountains, etc..

Genetic mutation is possible, but the probability is very rare. If genetic mutation would explain the diversity of Indians, we should have found similar genetic variety amongst the Native American populations of South America. Mutation does not seem to be a significant contributor for the genetic diversity in India.

 

[parijataka]

@civfanatic @Known_Unknown very fair brahmins in that konkan region is thanks to Portuguese.

Hmm...you are an NRI @Singh! You have absolutely no idea about how rigid caste system was 5-600 years ago, at least in S India. Forget about intermarrying with Portuguese, even inter marrying among different castes would lead to a Brahmin becoming outcaste.

Though there were rules in the shastras for assigning the caste when a woman of upper caste married into lower caste and vice versa, caste system seems to be have been very rigid at least for past 1000 years.

 

[pmaitra]

Forget about intermarrying with Portuguese, even inter marrying among different castes would lead to a Brahmin becoming outcaste.

I second that.

Although, I do not think @Singh is an NRI.