weddid race

[trajan]

Does anybody know about the sub-division of the weddid race ?

I only know that Eickstedt divided a gondid race (Central India) from a malid race (in South India). But then where do the Munda-speaking tribals fit in and the weddid tribes in South East Asia and Indonesia ?

[aryavarta]

The classification of the aboriginal tribes of India is a complicated matter.

They form 8% of the population.

The ones in eastern India like Nagas, kukis, Mizos are of pure mongoloid descent.

The ones in central India like Bhils & Gonds, Santhals, Mundas, oraons are trickier.

Santhals & mundas are classified as austro-asiatic or proto-australoid. The language they speak is called the "Munda" family of languages.


Gonds & oraons speak a dravidian language.
Bhils speak an Indo-aryan language, but look just like the Gonds.


Some isolated tibes like Irulas who are found in the mountains of south india can be classified as negroid.

[Agrippa]

The main difference between the Weddid groups is in my opinion mainly defined by foreign admixture.

Indomelanid and Indid in the West and Protomongolid and Palaemongolid in the East. Just look at many people Cambodia which show in my opinion a clear Weddid characteristic.

I think that this group was formerly much more widespread than today and was the base from which Negritids, Melanesids, Australids and Tasmanids were descended from.

Its the same story like it is with the Khoisanids in Africa or the primitive Indian groups like the Fuegide in America which were just ousted by new, maybe more progressive (biological and technological) and numerous people.

This groups were assimilated and partly exterminated by more progressive and aggressive (not necessarily with violence but with very much power and pressure of masses of people) groups from the North.

As I said in India Europids and in South East Asia Mongolids.

[trajan]

Agrippa said:

The main difference between the Weddid groups is in my opinion mainly defined by foreign admixture.

Indomelanid and Indid in the West and Protomongolid and Palaemongolid in the East. Just look at many people Cambodia which show in my opinion a clear Weddid characteristic.

I think that this group was formerly much more widespread than today and was the base from which Negritids, Melanesids, Australids and Tasmanids were descended from.

Its the same story like it is with the Khoisanids in Africa or the primitive Indian groups like the Fuegide in America which were just ousted by new, maybe more progressive (biological and technological) and numerous people.

This groups were assimilated and partly exterminated by more progressive and aggressive (not necessarily with violence but with very much power and pressure of masses of people) groups from the North.

As I said in India Europids and in South East Asia Mongolids.

I remember having read somewhere that even in Indian weddid tribal groups such as the Santals, there is mongolid admixture.

[Agrippa]

I think the Mongolids partly evolved from a common ancestor with this "Australoids" of South and South East Asia.

Maybe because of that they have some Protomongolid genetic features.

Of course its possibel that there is Mongolid admixture too, there were/are small Mongolid groups in South Asia.

[AWAR]

Agrippa said:

I think the Mongolids partly evolved from a common ancestor with this "Australoids" of South and South East Asia.

Maybe because of that they have some Protomongolid genetic features.

Of course its possibel that there is Mongolid admixture too, there were/are small Mongolid groups in South Asia.

Actually, the pre-Aryan population of India ( Dravids ) and Australian aborigines genetically cluster with Mongoloids.

[Melnorme]

AWAR said:

Actually, the pre-Aryan population of India ( Dravids ) and Australian aborigines genetically cluster with Mongoloids.

I'm not sure if that statement is true for the Dravidians.

[Agrippa]

Melnorme said:

I'm not sure if that statement is true for the Dravidians.

I thought in earlier times too that Dravid and Weddid is the same and, in fact today it basically is.

But in the past its very likely that already Europid (Caucasoid) people of the Indid type brought it to India.

So I think if we are speaking about the Indian prehistory we are speaking about constant waves of immigrants from the North and the South with the only indigenous Weddid population which shared some common genetic features with Mongolids and Australoids.

Some of this later waves brought probably the Dravidic language.

At least that was one of the more serious theories I often read in books about India.

The Aryans were not the first Europids which came to India and brought their language and culture with them.

[AWAR]

Agrippa said:

I thought in earlier times too that Dravid and Weddid is the same and, in fact today it basically is.

But in the past its very likely that already Europid (Caucasoid) people of the Indid type brought it to India.

So I think if we are speaking about the Indian prehistory we are speaking about constant waves of immigrants from the North and the South with the only indigenous Weddid population which shared some common genetic features with Mongolids and Australoids.

Some of this later waves brought probably the Dravidic language.

At least that was one of the more serious theories I often read in books about India.

The Aryans were not the first Europids which came to India and brought their language and culture with them.

Yes, I agree. I think I've read somewhere that Dravidians moved into India not too long before Aryans.
( of course 'not too long' can mean anything in historical terms, I suppose it means 'a couple of thousand years' ).

[Graeme]

According to L Cavalli-Sforza the Dravidian speakers were one of the Neolithic groups in the east Fertile Crescent and they colonised the area east from there to India and were basically "pushed" out of the areas west and north of India by the IE speakers. He also describes these Dravidian speakers as caucasoid. The Brahui are a remnant population outside India.

I am not totally convinced of this view. As for the tribals some are Australoid and others negritoes. These two groups were probably the dominant populations from south India through to present day Vietnam to offshore islands. The south mongoloids from southern China immigrated south and west as far as Assam into the areas occupied by the Australoids and negritoes. A further complication is the later Indian and Hindu movement into South East Asia particularly Malaysia, Thailand and Cambodia. In Indonesia most of the indigenous Australoids and negritoes have been absorbed by south mongoloids. Some small populations just exist in Malaysia, the Philippines and Timor. Basically these people are being absorbed by south mongoloids. Todays Australids are very mixed and have affinities with melanesians and cluster genetically with the mongoloid groups. The extinct full blood Tasmanids eg Truganinni, Laney and Woureddy appear to be like mainland Aborigines in appearance except for tightly curled hair and darker skin.

[Agrippa]

be like mainland Aborigines in appearance except for tightly curled hair and darker skin.

Well, I saw some pictures and one skull in a museum and I say the Tasmanids are (were) the most primitive race of recent mankind.

Even on their skull you can see the extreme robustness, thickness of the bones and all primitive features even the earliest Europeans (or lets say sapiens on European ground) lacked.

Whether they are the most primitive relict race or they evolved in Tasmania in almost a similar way like the Neandertals (from more gracile to extreme robustness, prognathy etc.).

Every Australid looks progressive if you compare him with typical Tasmanids, even on the skull and that means alot because after the extinction of Tasmandis Australids are the most primitive ones.

images.statelibrary.tas.gov.au/tasimg/may1999/normal/AUTAS001125643825.jpg

www.zeemedia.com/aborigines/images/invapic1.gif

The Tasmanian aborigines were hunter-gatherers with an exceptionally basic technology. The Tasmanians made only a few types of simple stone and wooden tools. They lacked agriculture, livestock, pottery, and bows and arrows.

www.cwo.com/~lucumi/truganinni.jpg

Its a brutal an ugly story how they disappeared. Today just mixed Tasmanians exist which are more European than anything else.