Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Topic: What are Indians classified as? Posted: 16-Oct-2004 at 01:48 |
What are Indians classified as in anthropology terms?
|
|
cattus
Arch Duke
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1803
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 16-Oct-2004 at 02:07 |
mongoloid. It is believed they originated from northeast asia via the Siberian/Alaska land bridge some 12,000 years ago.
|
|
maersk
Knight
Joined: 04-Sep-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 85
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 16-Oct-2004 at 12:51 |
i thought indians where genetically related to europeans......
|
"behold, vajik, khan of the magyars, scourge of the pannonian plain!"
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 16-Oct-2004 at 13:24 |
Originally posted by Catt
mongoloid. It is believed they originated from northeast asia via the Siberian/Alaska land bridge some 12,000 years ago. |
I meant Indians from South Asia.
|
|
cattus
Arch Duke
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1803
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 16-Oct-2004 at 14:13 |
yes, people of India are caucasian. They can even be considered to have their own sub-race and are very diverse within themselves. North-Indid/Penisular.
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 16-Oct-2004 at 15:11 |
Originally posted by Catt
yes, people of India are caucasian. They can even be considered to have their own sub-race and are very diverse within themselves. North-Indid/Penisular. |
I've always thought of Indians as Austroloids, or a different group from caucasoids. Do you know why they are considered caucasoid?
|
|
Anujkhamar
Chieftain
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1027
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Oct-2004 at 11:48 |
Well officially, indian's are either clasified as indo-aryan,
indo-dravidian or indo-mogoloid (there are more, but these are the
major ones).
however, as gurkhali said in the past (speaking of which, has anybody
heard from him recently), indo-aryans don't actually exist. so the
point of this post=0, but hey, get a 1+ post count
|
|
Gubook Janggoon
Sultan
Retired Global Moderator
Joined: 08-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2187
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 21-Oct-2004 at 18:03 |
Who would be the Indo mongloids?
|
|
Cywr
King
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6003
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 21-Oct-2004 at 19:40 |
i thought indians where genetically related to europeans...... |
East Asians and Africans are too, be more specific.
I've always thought of Indians as Austroloids, or a different
group from caucasoids. Do you know why they are considered caucasoid? |
Some are, Australoid that is (its a vauge grouping for 'southern' type people, Aust = south).
Facial features or something. Its all pretty vauge though.
Who would be the Indo mongloids?
|
Assam region, Arunchal Pradesh, Sikkum, and various types who live
there, bascily, extreme east and north east of the country. Basicly,
people who look vaugly Mongloid, but are culturaly and geographicly in
the India club.
Edited by Cywr
|
Arrrgh!!"
|
|
Gubook Janggoon
Sultan
Retired Global Moderator
Joined: 08-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2187
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 21-Oct-2004 at 23:59 |
Ahh I see. Thank you for the clarification.
BTW how does India deal with and view its minorities? Is it much like the U.S.?
|
|
Cywr
King
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6003
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 22-Oct-2004 at 09:42 |
In India, most, if not all ethnic gorups have a 'homeland' as it were,
within a Federal Rebublic structure, as opposed to the US, which is
built on immigration, with everyone all over the place. So naturaly,
the picture is going to be completly different.
|
Arrrgh!!"
|
|
Gorkhali
Janissary
Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 28
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 31-Oct-2004 at 10:47 |
Well officially, indian's are either clasified as indo-aryan, indo-dravidian or indo-mogoloid (there are more, but these are the major ones).
however, as gurkhali said in the past (speaking of which, has anybody heard from him recently) |
Hey Bhai, glad to hear you still remember me. I started college this year, and I've been so busy that I haven't had time to post here at all. Read the articles sometimes though, glad to see AE seems to have recovered from when we lost the old forum a while back.
|
Ayo Gorkhali!
|
|
Anujkhamar
Chieftain
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1027
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 03-Nov-2004 at 11:28 |
hey bhai, nice to know u're still here.
|
|
Jalisco Lancer
Sultan
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Mexico
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2112
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 03-Nov-2004 at 15:16 |
Yes, Gorkhali.
Good to see you around, Pal
|
|
Jhangora
Chieftain
Joined: 02-Oct-2005
Location: Korea, South
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1070
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 25-Oct-2005 at 11:09 |
Originally posted by Gubook Janggoon
Who would be the Indo mongloids? |
the people of Mongoloid descent remained undisturbed in the Himalayan region and the highlands of the northeast. Their affinity with the southeast Asian world is remarkable and is reflected in the motifs used in the crafts. Though the Mongoloid people influenced the racial pattern of tribes in the eastern provinces of Orissa and Bihar, by and large, they stayed within central India.
http://www.goindiago.com/culture/people.htm
|
Jai Badri Vishal
|
|
Rakhsh
Consul
Joined: 23-Oct-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 331
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 25-Oct-2005 at 19:08 |
Cywr is right Indians have been in India longer then Aryan or Mongolian invasion and migration, infact Peoples from PMG Austrlia etc Are Originally from India, we can find peoplke there at more thenn 50,000 BP, India has other ethnicities and has ties with other cultures and influenced and been influenced by others, I class Inians as being them Indians
It was the Jewel of the British Empire and has its own culture seprate from others in the world which is great.
But in Ethnicity it is more African, and Aryan with Mongolian
|
Never under estimate the predictablity of stupidity! - Bullet Tooth Tony
|
|
Maju
King
Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 25-Oct-2005 at 19:32 |
Below there is the (already posted) tree of human genetic diversity,
according to Cavalli-Sforza, with its explanation. I've named
here the Caucasian branch (pink) and the Indian sub-branch, which
I have also encircled in red.
It seems quite clear that Indians are basically Caucasoid, though this
tree would not deny any admixtures from other branches, provided they
are not majoritary. Yet, it looks like, if we divide Caucasoids in
three sub-branches, Indians do make up one of them, the other two being
Lapps (very mixed with NE Asians) and the western branch that includes Europeans, SW Asians and North Africans.
Btw, they don't seem to have any special relation with Africa, though
they could have some stronger connection with Australia. Dark skin
color is not privative from Africa, it's rather a good adaptation to
sunny climates that can develope predominant in any given population
rather fast (in evolutive terms) because of the existence of such
pigmentative potential in all or almost all human individuals and the
simple effect of natural selection forces.
Edited by Maju
|
NO GOD, NO MASTER!
|
|
Itihaas
Immortal Guard
Joined: 27-Jul-2005
Location: India
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 25-Oct-2005 at 21:02 |
Well, I am Dravidian so according to certain sources I found on the internet, Dravidians are a combination of Caucasian and Australasian. So basically we are a hybrid race. I'm not sure about how it works for Northindians though.
|
|
Rakhsh
Consul
Joined: 23-Oct-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 331
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 27-Oct-2005 at 07:42 |
Originally posted by cattus
yes, people of India are caucasian. They can even be considered to have their own sub-race and are very diverse within themselves. North-Indid/Penisular.
|
Uhmm how are indians Caucasian? Please explain this.
|
Never under estimate the predictablity of stupidity! - Bullet Tooth Tony
|
|
Rakhsh
Consul
Joined: 23-Oct-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 331
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 27-Oct-2005 at 08:04 |
ok here is something I wish to share, I believe Indians should be classed as africans, and their own ethnicity as they were there before Aryan migration.
When did humans first left africa, which way did they go?
For many years experts have believed (assumed) these early migration headed through what is now Egypt across the Sinai and into the middle east.
New Evidence suggests they might have taken a more southerly route, along the Arabian penisula into India, Indonesia and Australia.
A report in the issue of Science magazine raises the possiblity of coastal migration, the study is based on comparisons of mitochondrial DNA in various native populations.
The form found in the mitochondria (energy producing portion of cells) is inherited from the mother. By studying differences in mitochondrial DNA, we can estimate how long back has one group of people diverged from another/
A team lead by Vincent Macaulay from the university of Glasgow, proposes a single dispersal from Africa along the coastal route to India then Australia. A later off shoot led to the settlement of the Middle East then Europe.
Researchers studying the mitochondrial DNA of the Orang Asli (an Aboriginal population found in Malaysia), found that these people branched off from other asian lineages at around 60,000 years ago, soon after their ancestors left Africa.
by comparing the Orang DNA with other groups from India, Australia and elsewhere, the researchers concluded that a relatively rapid coastal dispersal occured at around 65,000 BP around the Indian Ocean and into Australia.
Cambridge University's Peter Forster and Shuichi Matsumura (who were not part of the team) hoped the paper would inspire further research (without public or private interest there will be a lack of funding). They estimated that early populations could have supported the idea of population spread which occured along the coast.
If the original africans had moved into the middle east and north they why was europe settled thousands of years later? And well after Australia was setted.
In europe, Neanderthals were replaced by modern humans only between 40,000 and 30,000 BP where as in Indians around 60,000 BP and Australias as early as 46,000 BP
BP= Before Present
This is what I base my opinion on
Edited by Rakhsh
|
Never under estimate the predictablity of stupidity! - Bullet Tooth Tony
|
|