Some basics of skin color--- When we became humans as a separate branch from primates such as Chimpanzees, we lost hair (except on our heads to protect us from the sun) to keep us cool. But even for Chimpanzees underlying their black hair their skin is still white! We all human beings were white to begin with. UV radiation stimulates melanocytes to produce melanin in the skin for protection to make it dark. Then we all became black for thousands of years in Africa then again to different shades of colors only in last few thousand years as we migrated out to different parts of the world with exposure to different levels of UV radiation. If Chitpavans (ed.--a fair skinned community in maharashtra) had been settled for thousands of years in Konkan area, by evolutionary changes there would have been no difference of their skin color and the surrounding population. Without a doubt until last generation significant number of members of this community were extremely fair in complexion yet living in a very hostile tropical climate at the sea level with very high UV radiation. Today we know that this relationship of UV radiation to skin color is like a catch 22. If the skin color is too dark then UV radiation does not go through the skin to stimulate the production of Vitamin D in the skin. In colder climates if you cover the skin all the time, then similar things happen: result is rickets. So some UV radiation must pass through the skin, so the color of the skin has to lighten up. If it is too light then lot of UV radiation passes through and damages your folate supply and circulating antibodies, so it must become dark. If a new community settles in a different region in the world it clearly leaves its track of time of adaptation to UV radiation and eventually forms its own blend of skin color over time, as it is noted in last few hundred years in Chitpavans. Chitpavans had not been for thousands of years in Konkan. May be just under last one thousand years (Scientific American, Skin deep, pages 74-81, October 2002).....Dr..Jay
I enjoyed looking at your website. You are invited to visit chitpavans.com to learn about current genetic findings.
--excellent, detailed site, scientific and objective outlook clarifies several misconceptions and doubts, even though the results may be somewhat unflattering to some chitpavan (kokanastha) brahmin individuals. Some people call them "jewish" but it is likely they have migrated from iran-afghan uplands in medieval times and share a common pagan khazar gujar ancestry with the ashkenazim.
Also, the theory of mitochondrial african "eve" is based on a few crucial assumptions which may or may not be warranted...a variant of the theory says the african "eve" whose descendants migrated was not H.sapiens but non-human of a much earlier age, H.erectus. Then there is some evidence which cannot be explained by the theory, like why some "mongoloid" populations show shovel shaped incisors which are found in very ancient choukotien fossils which are NOT H.sapiens. So lets wait for the various theories to be satisfactorily established. The present sample numbers are too small and the "caste" categories may not be properly established. There's also the biases, well....
A. Raj( salsa_shark99--- yahu):--
Do you have any information on Turkish Hindu kings? vaguely heard about this but there was never an information I could find. Were turkish hindu eliminated the same way afghan hindus were? Butchere by droves of islamic conquerers? Tajik Hindus as wel I have never heard of before... Anyway, I just wanted to pass along a few interestin links that I thought you might find useful http://126.96.36.199/hpg/cesmg/peopling.html
and A landmark study done by a stanford professor about south asia at http://www.voi.org/books/ait/ch49.htm
"Moreover, the observed differences between India communities are much smaller than those betwee Indians collectively and Europeans (or Africans etc. collectively. A provisional table of the geneti distance between populations shows that North-Indian and South-Indians are indeed very close, much close than “Aryan” North-Indians and “Aryan” Iranians are to each other."
Interesting isn't it
----Thanks for the link, I was searching for Prof Gadgil's pages. Do you have URL of Prof. Cavalli-Sforza's works ? Prof Gadgil's work is very illuminating. But he is a bit too enthusiastic in relying on the soft science of comparative linguistics, in this case "language spread equals people spread". If I may make a humble suggestion, linguistics can only be a secondary or tertiary and that too partial indicator to archeological or genetic work and can never be any "proof" or "factual evidence". There is a possible factual mistake in Prof. Gadgil's work : he states horse stirrups are found only in 600 AD in China: this is doubtful, as corroded horse bridles, mouth bits and what seem to be iron stirrups have been found in south indian megalithic graves of 300 AD or even earlier. Also he relies too much on "no technological development in India" scenario , which is totally incorrect, being based on mughaloid and british imperialist researchers' biases. And there is no explanation why no Indus valley artefacts or designs are found anywhere in south India, the classical dravida land, if his theory of dravidians in indus area is to hold.
About hindu turks, check specialised history publications and numismatics for the details of "Hindu Shahi kings" of Kabul. These are the folks you are asking about. While they dont figure prominently in history books ( why? hmm..again..), they are very well known to even beginner coin collectors. They issued large number of "bull -horseman" coins, the design was retained for many centuries, also by successor afghan rulers. The legend on the coin "Sri Hamvira" also was retained for a time. Also according to some historians the Kushan's army included turkish tribes, as did Changiz Khan's. As to what happened to the hindu turks, well some were killed , some migrated and merged into rajputs and other upper castes, and some were retained by the new management after 'retraining'.
Arun J.( firstname.lastname@example.org ):--
"I am not a "castist" or "racist" but now on the verge of being one, atleast one of them if not both which I dont want to. "
(A long email is summarised as follows)---Is intelligence inherited or developed. Are some "races" inferior to others. Should I marry in my own caste . Indian students from India seem to be brighter than Indian students brought up in the USA. Is it because of rigorous education system in india thats keeping us a little ahead of others in Universities? Could caucasian/ whites be more intelligent than most others. Is there any any site that offers I.Q meassurements of diferent races. Do you think having any vedic education as primary education will help one in any way? Why do you think I got so preoccupied with these things? is it just becase I am inferior and wanted to compensate, or is it just a rational approach. WHY DO YOU DO ALL THESE STUDIES? DID YOU EVER FEEL LIKE ME?
----heh. I've never felt like you anytime. I notice you are a velanadu brahmin. I dont care a shit about being politically correct, so here's what I have observed. There are many breeds of dogs. All dogs are the same species, but breeders artificially interfere to achieve some required characteristics. So you have rottweilers and chihuahuas. What happens when they mix? Only that there is less likelihood of the progeny retaining the required characteristics. Required by whom? The breeder. But this comes at a grave cost, this type of genetic meddling ...inbreeding generally results in accumulation of defects...sufficient to kill off the group very soon. "Mix breeds" are seen to be very smart, besides they have a mind of their own, and are extremely healthy and tough compared to the breed dogs. They survive. This is Nature's plan, not the breeders'. From Nature's view, the 'mongrels' are superior in the niche they have taken up.
Some families show greater number of bright children. There is no doubt about 20% is inherited from their genes. But faced with a change in the environment it may not be very useful. I think nutrition during childhood, when the brain grows fast, and mental stimulation plays a larger part....even upto 80%. Haven't you met dumb whites/ upper castes/ wealthy/ socially high status people and and very bright poor people/ blacks/ /underpriviliged/ Scheduled caste people? So water is the same everywhere.
Most Indians are racist casteist to a degree, reverse racism is the latest fad...racism from below, subaltern racism.., coconutism...terrific. It is so refreshing to have someone to hate and sneer at, especially when the RGKleinburger stock you invested in hasnt yet reached rock bottom.
Anyway on a more immediate note, if you felt inferior anytime, dont worry, you know best, you probably ARE inferior, dude. Just live with it, nobody expects you to design rockets in your mind while on the north face of mount everest and simultaneously perform advanced neurosurgery on your unfortunate pal who fell into a crevasse. Do well in one thing. Just be a decent human being like 90% of the people, get on with life, and forget about all these old ideas, ok? And better post to the various Indian discussion boards, I think there'll be many waiting to respond to clever posts. Dont ask me things I dont know.
UPDATE: JAN 2005 by Arun
I gave up on being or working towards being the smartest one on the planet. My conclusion = (my advise to all) if you are smart you will know it, you don't have to ask anyone if you are. If you are not, you might begin get worried about, which itself is another indicator that you are not.
HOWEVER SUCCESS DEPENDS ON HOW PERSISTENT YOU ARE ABOUT YOUR GOALS THAN HOW FAST OR CRITICAL (smartness) YOU CAN THINK. I gave up trying to prove myself because I don't have the kind of perseverance it takes to reach my ideal (expected/dreamed) state of mind.
I figured that I am "very good" at NOT doing certain things such as writing technical papers/english, excellent interpersonal skills and portray charm etc., in spite of recognizing their importance in a successful journey of life. But then, who cares? At this time I settled down happily with what I could get from what I had, a bi-monthly paycheck, a cozy & comfortable job, a used car plus a brand new 600cc Motorcycle, and a cheap apartment with free cable:). I am really content on having as much "FUN" as possible before I turn into a morbidity statistic (30ish).
(I think it's a total waste of time to deal with stupid issues such as races, classes, or religion.... so on and so forth)
Thanks again man! for your response!
Hi, I have a few questions...
1) Are all the white people coming from the Neanderthals?
2) How many different species of Human beings do you think exist and what seperates them from one another?
3) In any boxing match, when an Afro fights a white man, why is it so that 99% of the time the Afro Wins?
4)What do you have to say about the 'Vaanar' people at the time of the Ramayana? who were they ? ---yogi
------Yaar dont take these things too seriously ! The idea is just to nudge people to THINK AFRESH. Anyway I'll try to answer with my limited knowledge.
"White people" are a mixture of recent asian immigrants like huns, goths, ionians, keltics, germanics, etc etc PLUS "old aryan", PLUS old european (etruscan, north saharan, maltese etc) PLUS basque PLUS african PLUS paleolithic folks like H neanderthalensis, H. erectus and many other undiscovered species/subspecies.
There is only ONE species of human being and nothing really differentiates them except acquired cultural traditions and some inherited things like skin, colour, bone structure etc.
"Afros" as you put it, are recent development in evolution and an improvement over the older types ( 'non-afros' ). I know this is not according to the racist view but there are good reasons for this. Besides there is a phenomenon called hybrid vigour.
Vaanar may be neanderthals or gigantopithecus or H erectus or just muscular well built hairy guys....I do not know.
Vamshi( email@example.com ):--
hi im vamshi, i have read ur article on the history of the Reddy's and i would wish to know more .i was wondering if u would be so kind as to give me some pointers on where i can get more data regarding this subject.
I happened to find your webpage about Rajus randomly on the net and was intrigued by what I had read. IF you recall, I had emailed you many months back.
Your writeup brought up a few more questions for me... note *When I refer to Rajus, I refer to the kshatriya ones.
1. Where do you think the original group of Rajus originated from? Where do you think Madhava Verma and his clan came from in Northern India? Rajasthan?
2. We know today's northern Kshatriyas are mainly of scythic/dravidic stock. The original aryan kshatriyas ceased to exist as a community due to frequent intermarriage. You mentioned in your article that many of them may have converted to buddhism?
In that case, are Rajus of scythic extract, vedic aryan extract, or a mixture of both?
3. Are Rajus "Rajputs" or "Kshatriyas". There seems to be a high amount of overlapping with those terms.
4. My mother once told me of a mass migration of Raju kshatriyas from Burma(Myanmar) around partition time. Most of them died trying to migrate to the south. Some of them made it into Tamil Nadu. Do you have any idea how Rajus ended up in far flung places like Nepal and Burma?
5. Did the Rajus of Tamil Nadu mix in ancient times with the local tamil kings and their respective families?
------Thanks for contacting us again after a year!
Some of your points we've been examining, so here's what we got.
1. There does not seem to be any "original" group of Rajus. Or any caste/community for that matter.
At present state of research nobody knows where Vishnukundin Madhava varma's clan came from. At a guess they could be subordinates of the earlier Satavahanas.
2. You wrote,
" We know today's northern Kshatriyas are mainly of scythic/dravidic stock. The original aryan kshatriyas ceased to exist as a community due to frequent intermarriage. You mentioned in your article that many of them may have converted to buddhism? In that case, are Rajus of scythic extract, vedic aryan extract, or a mixture of both?"--sorry, We know NO SUCH THING AS YOU HAVE STATED.
There is no such thing as "dravidic" stock" nor "aryan" stock. These terms relate to language, not genes. Please dont use loose/casual/undefined terms in serious investigation. So WE DO NOT KNOW AT ALL what "stock" the aryan kshatriyas belonged..Again, how do you define "original aryan kshatriyas?"
Only if you are clear on this you can make further statements like "ceased to exist", and even further give elaborate reasons.
The Rajus and everybody else, as I have repeated several times, have DIVERSE roots not confined to your two mentions.
3. Rajus and Rajputs------Sorry, Rajus would consider it an insult to be called Rajputs for reasons I shan't go into. I am also answering other persistent emails about Rajput connections here: it is very brief since it actually falls outside the scope of the page, actually. There is no overlap as "Rajput" is connected to western India only, specifically Rajasthan Gujarat Sind-Punjab Afghanistan areas. There are three broad rajput sections in stories, but these stories are mostly embroidered legends and later concoctions. Briefly the large sections are Gurjara Pratiharas, the Pramaras, and the Guhillas: there are several feudatories in early times who later became semi independent. The Gurjara Pratiharas originated in Ujjain. They were ejected by the Rashtrakutas and fled first to Gujarat, then fled again to north to Kannauj, UP. They settled down with capital at kannauj and expanded to Bihar as well, later linked up with Punjab and Afghanistan areas also. Before the Gurjara-Pratiharas in Kannauj there are no "rajput "kingdoms in Uttar Pradesh. The Rashtrakutas further attacked kannauj and the Rajput kingdom collapsed into little pieces. These little northern Rajput kingdoms were quarreling with one another all the time. Finally they were all disposed of by turkish and afghan raiders. Eventually most of the survivors made a deal with the new management gave up some palaces and forts etc and joined imperial service, thus they managed to hold on to their estates. Only one state consistently refused to make any 'deal'. Later the Mughals, Col Tod and the Brits glamorised the later Rajputs for agendas of their own. This has been taken up by popular north Indian culture, which has a mughal base. (Please note: examine the facts of history in a detached way, and then you will see what the true story is. It is better to accept the facts and analyse why such and such a thing happened, for instance the ramifications of feudal society, rather than propagate fake "history" which never happened. ).
The southern Rajputs (pramara), also to some extent Mewad, etc, are attested descendants of the powerful and noteworthy and importantly, long lived rule of Rashtrakuta and Bhil people. Earlier in history, the Chalukyas from the southern Deccan took over the satavahana--saka areas of Gujarat and South Rajasthan (and effectively repelled Harsha vardhana's one and only southern misadventure.) The chalukyas of Laata are well known. The succeding Rashtrakutas (also from the Deccan) ejected the Gurjara Pratiharas from Ujjain as mentioned above. The Gurjara pratiharas may have merged with the earlier Northern Sakas, Kushan and yepthal Hun peoples, of whom there is no trace today otherwise. Their descendants could be not only the rajputs but also some of the jats and other communities. And in Sindh, the earlier "rajputs" were brahman kings. The Pramaras (of Rashtrakuta origin) were absorbed by the later Kalyani Chalukyas and several seem to have migrated back to the Deccan area where they originally came from.
What about the Gurjaras? Where did THEY come from? They could be one of the nomadic "saka-pallava" tribes migrating from seistan (western afghanistan bordering iran) via the bolan pass and still more south baluchi mountain areas. Gurjar is the same as khajar and Georgia.
One should be careful of dates: The Sakas proper (e.g. Rudradaman) were of a much earlier time (contemporary with satavahanas, and before the Guptas even) and they did not care to be called Rajputs or anything else. The Sakas ruled in western India and blended with the deccan satavahanas. A group associated with the Sakas, called Pahlavas, finally even made it to distant kanchi, in Tamil nadu.
As for Rajus-- the earliest connections seem to be of Chalukyas - Vishnukundins. There is no connection earlier than these, even in folk memory. This rules out pallavas, satavahanas, etc at the present state of research.
4.---Rajus going to Burma is connected to the (recent) expansion of the british empire. But they went as businessmen, actually. In recent times ( last 200 years) the sons and daughters of "princely states" under the British made a point of intermarrying with other ones.
5. "Did the Rajus of Tamil Nadu mix in ancient times with the local tamil kings and their respective families?"
----one very brief example. Eastern Chalukya king married Chola emperor's daughter. The son of the union inherited both the states. He was crowned king of the combined chalukya- chola dynasty. But with rival kings often attacking Vengi, he felt Tanjavur was safer and better, and shifted to Chola areas. There was a large wave of people from eastern chalukya lands to chola lands. Certainly they merged. Not just royals and feudals....the common people too.
Further...." Chalukya " is often changed to chaliki, soh'laki, solakki, salunkhe (also a temple item), solangi and solanki. Please also remember the mahrattas took over Tanjavur -Vellore from the post vijayanagar nayaks and there was a large marathi immigration too in 1600's. In my humble opinion the upper caste /land holding /business communities of northern tamilnadu (including rajus reddiars vellallas mudaliars chettis --maybe even some vanniyars and kurbas, etc) have some link to all these (recent) immigrants. But as I pointed out , ALL of us are "mixed". Please appreciate the rich culture and traditions, not imaginary genetics.
Kiran Kumar ( kkp_hyd--yahoo.com ):--
Hello , It is really interesting to know the facts of diff castes... I am very much interested (probably many..) in knowing about the KAPU caste more. You added just a draft notes regarding kapus which, might make kapu readers to feel bad. I would appreciate, if you can give more and separate info on this community...at least make separate link on kapus(with the same info in draft notes) till you get the whole info. Thanks, KKP.
----Heh, Kaapu community is so large, it needs several pages not just one. We cannot do justice in small article: so I said this is only a beginning DRAFT article. Also remember everybody knows about brahmins and reddis and mughals etc etc more than they want to know :-). OK, now lets make a start.
What details can YOU send. Community sub-community: region: house names , sub-clans/ gothram whatever: what shrines are traditional : some surnames and what they mean: are there any special observances: special foods: special skills: famous people: etc.
Now, these simple questions have to be answered by large number of people to get any coherent account of the Kaapus. On top of that there are so many subdivisions! Then they have migrated internally so you have toorpu kaapu, etc. Now you understand why it is only a small draft beginning?
So write the answers and make a start. Then we can modify the questionnaire to get accurate results (and not some imaginary nonsense all Indian communities seem to love !)