Who is an Indian? Who is a human being? These questions rack the mind to an extent, and there are a variety of political contentions that have given birth to heated debates since the beginning of modern times. It is true that when I touch upon this topic, I am liable to create a controversy for this topic is where groups with different aspirations and identities clash with each other, and in recent times, quite too much. It’s a sensitive agenda that I undertake indeed. In such a situation, it becomes clear that we have to probe into the issue to discover the truth. And this was not a creative effort of mine but my discovery of truth through an intermediary which is a book called Early Indians: The Story of Our Ancestors and Where We Came From by Tony Joseph, and this literature is persuasive to the extremes. And I desire to disclose what I think of diversity here by illustrating what I learnt one by one.
The world is dominated by human beings, or the Homo Sapiens in scientific terms. And the Indian subcontinent also consists of diverse religions, cultures, castes, tribes, and this has led to interpretations that either India is an amalgamation of different communities or is the rightful land of a particular group. This issue, therefore, has led to the rise of historical distortions, which need to be condemned.
First, who are ‘modern’ humans? They are Homo Sapiens, a separate species who have evolved from primates, and are different from ‘archaic’ humans like Homo Neanderthals, Denisovans, Homo Erectus, whom we can consider to be intermediaries in the evolution of apes into sapiens. Homo Sapiens are a specific species while sharing familial relations with members of the other Homo species.
So, how did these modern humans or Homo Sapiens originate? They have spread around the world. Did they originate in one particular place or did each species of Homo Sapiens emerge in each region? Did modern humans settle in India after their origin from a common point or did they originate in India itself while being distinct from other modern humans in the world?
The study of genetics, which has been leapfrogging in the last decade, has provided us many unknown answers. DNA evidence has shown that all modern humans living in the world today are all descendants of a single population from Africa, and that they migrated out of Africa 70,000 years ago, so rightly called as the Out of Africa (OoA) migrants.
What is the logic of genetics? Our genome inherits data from our parents. We inherit mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) from our mother and never from our father. Basically, we have been inheriting the same mtDNA way back to ancient times. We also have 23 pairs of chromosomes in our DNA, and one pair are the sex chromosomes. Males inherit the Y chromosome and females the X one from the father, while combining with the X chromosome of the mother always. Similarly, the Y chromosome that we inherit can be traced back to ancient times on paternal lines. In short, the mtDNA from our mother and the Y chromosome from our father in the case of males can be traced back to Africa. Archaeologists have conducted studies by extracting samples from the skeletons of early modern humans, and the sequence of our genomes correspond to the DNA of the modern humans from Africa. To tell more shortly, all modern humans share the same part of the DNA with Africans, and we all originated from Africa, therefore we are one big family. Modern humans did not originate in each region but originated in Africa and spread across the world.
The mtDNA and Y chromosome are only parts of the genome, while other parts are used to identify the different ethnicities of each region. The other parts of the genome are called ‘haplogroups’. Let’s just illustrate this: A and B belong to different ethnicities, and they indeed date back to Africa, yet they are different from each other, because different sections among the Out of Africa migrants mixed with each other to form haplogroups and sub-haplogroups, and therefore, A and B belong to different haplogroups and sub-haplogroups. We can use haplogroups to trace people to a particular section of the Out of Africa migrants.
We will come to India now. The first modern humans to settle in India were in Bhimbetka, because that is the first site identified by archaeologists to be occupied by modern humans. Out of Africa migrants could not, of course, directly cross into other continents because of climate changes. Homo Sapiens originated in Africa 300,000 years ago but could not exit Africa until 70,000 years ago due to right climactic conditions. They crossed into the Middle East because of a bridge connecting today’s Egypt to the Levant, and some sections went to Europe, some to Eurasia and the Russian region, some to India, then to Southeast Asia, from India to China, then from Russia to North America by crossing the Bering Strait, then finally to South America 16,000 years ago, but migrants did not move in a straight line, and often mixed with each other, going back and forth, as a second set of migrants later moved into Europe, then back again to the Middle East, and I could go on.
The earth had glacial periods which meant that the First Indians (as we shall call them) could have only entered India 65,000 years ago due to the right climactic conditions, tabled in the Marine Isotope Stages. 50-65% of all Indians derive their ancestry from the First Indians, including almost all regions, all linguistic groups, all castes, all tribes of the country.
What came next? We are aware of the Indus Valley Civilization that was the first urban civilization in the subcontinent. Most of the areas lie in today’s Pakistan, and some in Rajasthan, Punjab, Haryana and Gujarat. We shall refer to the civilization as the Harappan Civilization for convenience and proper usage of terms.
Mehrgrah is a historical place of interest to archaeology. This small hamlet was the seed of the Harappan Civilization. It was discovered in 1976 by a French archaeological mission. The people here led rural lives and built clay houses with specific designs. They practiced pottery and had native flora and fauna. Why are we focusing on this particular place now? Let us now shift to another area.
The Natufians were a group with a culture in the Levant that spread to many parts of West Asia, including the central Zagros mountain region, where ancient Iranians originated and became farmers. They had a specific culture of domestication of animals, burials, pottery, et cetera, and were mostly rural.
Now, why Mehrgarh is of so much interest? The place’s culture, construction, practices correspond to the brickmaking of the people of Zagros, their pattern of domestication of animals, their burial practices, and also to the rice cultivation and other agricultural practices of the Harappan Civilization. Let’s say there was a ‘sort of a cultural continuum’ between the cultures of Harappa and Zagros.
Not only archaeology, but the study of ancient DNA proves this point. The DNA of an ancient individual from the Harappan Civilization (from Rakhigarhi, Haryana) carries the mixed ancestry of the First Indians and the ancient Iranians of Zagros. Ancient Iranians and the First Indians laid the foundation of the Harappan Civilization. This might seem a smaller sample, but the genetic profile of the individual is not a rarity but is widespread as the profiles of eleven more individuals who had migrated from the Harappan Civilization to other cities Harappa had connection with had the same DNA. The Harappans derived their ancestry from the First Indians and ancient Iranians, while they had no single connection to the Steppe pastoralists (or the ‘Arya’) who only entered Harappa during its waning times.
Let us continue the story of Harappa, India’s first urban civilization. They had a unique culture with a Great Bath, good sewer systems, clay houses, and lived in the Indus region in Pakistan and north-western India. Their language is not decoded yet, and the Elamite language from the regions of Mesopotamia would have very well been spoken but is only a candidate. Testimony contributing to the cultural connections between Mesopotamia in the West Asian region and the Harappan Civilization is a case in point as Elamite might have been used. The Elamite language has been linked to Dravidian languages, quite remarkably. In proto-Elamite and proto-Dravidian, many words are alike. This is not just a statement, but examples of different varieties can prove the point that Elamite and Dravidian languages are connected more than just through speculation. To illustrate a few instances:
1. Proto-Elamite-pot (young animal); Proto-Dravidian-pot (young animal or plant); Tamil-pottu (sapling)
2. Proto-Elamite-vari (to fix, tie, hold); Proto-Dravidian-vari (to bind, tie, fasten); Tamil-vari (to bind, tie, fasten)
3. Proto-Elamo-Dravidian-um (to process grain); Achaemenid Elamite-umi (to grind grain); Proto-Dravidian-um (husk, chaff); Tamil-umi (husk, to become chaff)
4. Old Elamite-ni (you); Dravidian-ni (you)
5. Proto-Elamite-Dravidian-nal (day); Middle Elamite-na, nana (days); Proto-Dravidian-nal (day)
6. Proto-Elamo-Dravidian-ul (interior, inside, mind, heart, to think); Middle Elamite-ulhi (dwelling place, residence, sanctuary); Tamil-ullam (mind, thought)
7. Proto-Elamo-Dravidian-kat (bed, throne); Royal Achaemenid Elamite-kat (place, throne); Proto-Dravidian-kattil (cot, bedstead, throne of distinction); Tamil-kattil (cot, bedstead), and I could go on and on.
This means that the Harappan Civilization has nothing to do with the Aryas and were descendants of the First Indians and ancient Iranians. Indeed, Dr. Iravatham Mahadevan, who has researched about Indo-Dravidian connections, has denounced the relations between the Aryas and Harappa as,
1. The Harappan Civilization was an urban civilization, while early Vedic society that came afterwards was rural and pastoral, and the Indus Valley region had already had an urban revolution after agriculture ceased to be their main occupation.
2. Indus Valley seals depict many animals but not the horse, and the horse and the chariot were a defining characteristic of Aryan societies, and only shows chariots being pulled by bulls.
3. The tiger, mentioned in Indus seals, are not mentioned in the Rig Veda.
4. Harappans worshipped buffalo-horned male god, mother goddess, the peepul tree, the serpent, and the phallic symbol, all of which not derived from the earliest Vedas but from the pre-Aryan population.
However, Mahadevan says that Indus heritage is shared by both Dravidian and Indo-Aryans, and as he reads it, the message of the Indus script is unity in diversity.
There is also a reason to believe that Dravidian languages may have originated in India as long as 2800 BCE, before the Mature Harappan phase, when there is evidence of rural areas and pastoralism in South India, in north Karnataka especially. There is also hefty evidence suggesting that the Harappans moved from the north to the south and introduced pastoralism in Dravidian society built on the foundation of Dravidian presence in India, before an urban Indus Valley Civilization could originate. There is compelling evidence of movement of early Harappans to south India as an expanse from Gujarat and Rajasthan, through the Deccan, down to south India is covered in grasses, and this would have been a route taken by pastoralists from Harappa who settled in Dravidian lands. As illustrated by research, 800 or more villages in Maharashtra have Dravidian names, and even Dravidian river names in Maharashtra are also a case in point. This suggests that early Harappans moved along the west coast of India to reach South India and laid the foundation of Dravidian society as the Harappan Civilization was coming into fruition.
There is also the notable migration of Austro-Asiatic speakers who migrated from the south- east Asian regions of Indonesia, Malaysia, etc, who migrated back into the Indian mainland. Their genetic profile is also present among contemporary Indian population.
The next group to enter India is the Arya. Who were they? They were pastoralists who were not among the composition of the Harappans (First Indians and ancient Iranians) and the Dravidians. Why do we say that the Aryans entered India and that Indians did not exit India to become Aryans? This is because the DNA mapping of Steppe pastoralists into India have proved this assumption, and the movement of Harappans into Europe to found Indo-European languages (related to the Aryans’ proto-Sanskrit) is not genetically mapped. Through the study of genetics, there is a DNA trace that proves that Steppe pastoralists’ genome merged with those of Harappans, and not the other way around.
The Aryans mainly came from the group of Yamnaya, corresponding to their haplogroup. The Yammnaya were a group in the Steppe region who expanded to Europe and replaced the first Out of Africa migrants in Europe. The preponderance of the Y chromosome in the Yamnaya implies that they had more political and social power at competing with local mates than local groups. Sanskrit is related to Indo-European languages, and these events portray the culture of the Yamnaya belligerently mixing with the first OoA migrants of Europe.
The Aryas came from these Yamnaya of Europe and entered India during the decline of the Harappan Civilization. The clear attribution to ancient DNA provides that Aryans were alien to the Harappans. The conflict between late Harappans and the oncoming Aryans has been recorded, as illustrated by the stark contrast between the Rigveda principles and the Harappan practice. The Rigveda denounces ‘shishna-deva’ (phallus god), for instance, while Harappan artifacts convey that phallus worship is part of their culture. The main gods of the Rigveda do not have Harappan representation. Today, there are eight tribal groups speaking Dravidian languages, who are indigenous, without any Steppe pastoralist ancestry. Indeed, Aryans mixed with the Indians of their day and contributed to the genetic makeup of today’s Indians, but it is a farce if it is claimed that they are the only ancient Indians and that they were connected to Harappa. The Aryans mixed with those in the subcontinent, but at a later point of time, they practiced endogamy, and this led to the rise of the caste system, and the separation of the Aryan haplogroup proves that endogamy had started with the caste system, yet Aryans mixed with the early Indians way before that.
Today, Indians are not only made of the First Indians and ancient Iranians who were the composition of the Harappans, and the Aryans, but there were many migrations later, that of the Greeks during Alexander’s time, the Jews, the Huns, the Sakas, the Parsis, the Syrians, the Mughals, the Portuguese, the British, the Siddies.
Each of these groups might have different haplogroups but we can never ascertain the superiority or inferiority of one particular group, which will only lead to discrimination. Secondly, even if these groups belong to different haplogroups, they are all humans, as we are all Africans in the first place.
To sum up, we all originate in Africa, the mixing of the First Indians and ancient Iranians led to the rise of the Harappan Civilization, there was a connection between Harappan and Dravidian societies, the Aryans came only during later Harappan times and mixed with the subcontinent, and many migrations followed (including those of the Mughals) contribute to the Indian pizza, as Tony Joseph calls it. India is not a society made of one single culture of Vedic religion as many misunderstandings and politically motivated superstitions claim, but is a society composed of diverse communities. We are all different. Indeed, the Muslims came much later, yet they are an integral part of India, and if their entrance is considered ‘colonialism’, the same word can be applied to every other migration that came previously, that of the Aryans and everyone else. Different groups have fought in the past with each other, but today we live in a secular country that respects the rights of the diverse groups it accommodates within its frontiers. There is simply no single strand of history as Hindu nationalists falsely claim, and if there is, it can be only that we are all Africans.
Tony Joseph provides a phrase expressed exquisitely about the human species in his epilogue, ‘We are all migrants.’