GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2006-12 > 1166301874


From: "Sasson Margaliot" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Aryan, Arian, Arianism....
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2006 22:44:34 +0200
References: <BAY134-F390932A50AF5AC75F7A9A9B8D40@phx.gbl><587939.75962.qm@web52105.mail.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <587939.75962.qm@web52105.mail.yahoo.com>


On 12/15/06, ellen Levy <> wrote:

> Can someone tell me how this ridiculous discussion
> even made it onto the list?

The word Aryan was mentioned, quite properly, in discussion of Asian
R1a in the thread called "R1a in Mongolia".

The question was genetic evidence pro or contra "the concept of
movement of R1a from Central Asia to India". The subject is 100%
appropriate to this List, and completelly unrelated to any "supremacy"
ideas.

> The issue that was being explored here was whether
> geneticists had successfully linked the migrations of
> the Indo-Aryans (a linguistic group) with the origins
> and migrations of a genetic group, specifically R1a.

Actually, also L and R1

> Talk about a discussion that departed radically and
> unnecessarily from it's beginnings!

Exactly

> Sasson, perhaps a helpful dose of sensitivity that you
> appear to be lacking would greatly assist in this
> discussion.

> The "Aryan race" was explored as a
> "hypothetical possibility"?
> Yes, your completly
> correct.

This is exactly what the linguists who discovered the facts were doing.

> Thus, I don't
> believe your statement contributes any relevant
> information to the discussion and unnecessarily
> inflames sensitivities. We are discussing the issue
> of R1a=Indo-Aryans (a linguistic grouping of peoples),

I simply pointed out the fact that there was some confusion in this
discussion between the three levels of linguistic grouping:

1) Indo-European Family
2) Indo-Iranian Group
3) Indo-Aryan Sub-Group

Proper discussion of R1a in India requires clear understanding of
these distinctions

> not the question of the Nazis idea of racial "Aryan"
> supremacy or how it was "considered" by them.

I was not talking about "Nazis" but about the 19th century LINGUISTS
who pointed out similarity between German language and Indo-Aryan
languages.

> No one was talking about the concept of
> Aryan racial supremacy until you posted about it. And
> since the concept isn't "real" except in the minds of
> dead Nazis and their contemporary counterparts, why
> was more time on it?

Actually, the field of Genetic Genealogy is already being used by
present-days racists in various ways. It is one of primary functions
of Genetic Genealogy community to keep thing as clear as possible,
espessally in the case of the potentially sensitive Haplogroups (like
R1a)

> I suggest we return to the relevant discussion,

The Sengupta 2006 clearly shows (as do some other recent studies) that
R1a is very ancient in India. In fact, Sengupta 2006 mentions
"Indo-Aryans from Central Asia" only in the context of J2a !!!

> which
> it whether there is sufficient genetic evidence to
> link the origins and migrations of particular
> haplogroup (R1a) to the movement of a particular
> linguistic entity (Indo-Aryans).

For this particular haplogroup (R1a) the apparent genetic evidence is
being reconsidered. There are other possibilities, for example L and
J2a.

No one yet commented on the fact that L is very high in various
"castal" populations
and is very low in "tribal" populations. If the (branch of) Haplogroup
L were not original Indo-Arians, then can the data be explaned?



Sasson Margaliot

This thread: