1. The proposal of the earliest stage of migration of proto- Tulu tribes is based on (a) the presence of Tulu words in African and Sumerian derived languages. The basic word ‘Tulu’ itself can be found in several place names and persons names. Similarly the Tulu words bant, oor (<.ur1=village), uri2 (<.ur2=to burn), ain (<.ai=five), sike(<.sige=sultriness), sima (samba=lion), puttu (putt=to birth) etc. are derived from ancient African/Mediterranean proto languages.
2. The timing suggested ca.2000 BC is approximate and is based on the mass migration of tribes out of Africa due to adverse environments like drought and desertification. There are actually many phases of African migrations beginning with the origin of evolved man around 165,000 years ago. Since the words Tulu, bant, oor, ain etc were well formed in African –Mediterranean region during the 4000-2000 BC period, the ca.2000 BC migration episode has been considered. The dates can be further refined with availability of new data.
3. The place of origin or initial dispersal was chosen as Ethiopia based on the presence of maximum number of place-name associations with the word Tulu. Even in those early days Tulu might have been a small ethnic group. Apparently even now there are ethnic groups called Tulu in Ethiopia.
4. For comparison of genome characteristics of Ethiopian and Tulu people extensive data may be required on either side, since both sides have undergone extensive human assimilations in the post-migration period. Right now, there may not be sufficient compilation of genetic data on this front, especially on the Tulunadu side. Besides, the present day Ethiopian have also changed considerably because several generations of migrations to and from Africa throughout the history. Apart from the declared complexities of genetic substructure of Ethiopian chromosomes, at least three major phases of back migrations from Asia into Ethiopia have been explained based on Y -chromosome genetic studies (Ornella Semino and others, 2002).Beside the present, Ethiopian (and Yemeni) maternal lineages are said to be composites of sub-Saharan and West Eurasian mtDNA haplogroups suggestive of extensive bidirectional gene flow on either sides of the Red Sea (Toomas Kivisild et al, 2004).
As pointed out by Kivisild et al (2003) in the Indian context, “It will take larger sample sizes, more populations, and increased molecular resolution to determine the likely modest impact of historic gene flows to India on its pre-existing large populations”
®
A heritage blog by: Ravindra Mundkur & Hosabettu Vishwanatha
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
A Coastal estuary
Holegadde near Honavar,Uttara Kannada dist, Karnataka
Copy? Right - but kindly remember to acknowledge!
" tulu-research.blogspot." ತುಳು ರಿಸರ್ಚ್. ಬ್ಲಾಗ್ಸ್ಪಾಟ್. ಇನ್
Have a nice day !
For comparison of genome characteristics of Ethiopian and Tulu people extensive data may be required on either side, since both sides have undergone extensive human assimilations in the post-migration period. Right now, there may not be sufficient compilation of genetic data on this front, especially on the Tulunadu side.
ReplyDeleteIndeed, the genetic data for Tuluva-s is non-existent (except for Koraga-s).
But if data from Kannada/Tamil and Telugu regions are any indication (from paternal side...maternal side is strongly India specific for most of the communities in India) then all the later assimilations include populations within India or at the most eastern Iran. There is little bit(10-15%) eastern European/Central Asian input. However, African input is hardly observed.
Considering Indian clans have older presence in India(30000-10000BP) than Ethiopian clans(migrating around 6000 BP-2000BP), I would rather consider Ethiopian clan(if at all they migrated to India) merged with Indian clans and not the other way round.
I agree with your suggestion that incoming groups merged with earlier aborigines.(I was using the word 'assimilation').Indian aborigines have put their stamp of presence since some 75,000 years, before present (Jwalapuram,Vindhya etc).(Coastal data on similar lines must have been destroyed due to high rainfall and other attendant natural calamities.) Since then they must have proliferated and evolved within (southern and rest of)India.Let us visualize that five or ten migrant couples came with their children as settlers into the territory inhabited by some thousand or more couples of aborigines.( Shall we call the aborigines proto-Munda?)
ReplyDeleteIf we consider that the genome ratio (of proto-Munda: Early Dravidian population) has remained same throughout the later evolutionary times,then we can expect 1% genome representation of original Early Dravidians as against 99% of Proto-Munda.I hope this explains paucity of newer/later genetic haplotypes in the south Indian scenarios.
I wish some of our own Universities would take up extensive,systematic genetic sampling studies from our expansive population.