Diane Hawkey- Dental Morphology and Modern Human origin

7000 year old remains from SRi Lanka

Dental Morphology and Modern Human origin.[MMH].

Sri Lanka

Dental crowns and Roots  traits are now been used to trace the origins of anatomically modern humans. Sample of teeth are more durable are  better preserved than any  remains of human skeleton, bones etc  Perhaps the best and only available item scientific methods for any analysis with the present knowledge. A study conducted by Diane Hawkey of the department of Anthropology, ArizonaStateUniversityon samples available in South East Asia ‘Peopling of South Asia; Evidence  for Affinities and Micro-evolution of India and Sri Lanka’. This book was published by the Department of Museums Colombo and for sale at the Museum Bookshop[ Less than $ 10.]

The sample of teeth from remains  found of and at

  1. Sri Lanka[H/G] Hunting and Gathering[37,000-6,500 BP]- from Fa-Hein Cave, Batadombalena Bellan Bandi Palassa , etc

PEP Deraniyagala recreated the scene of the Man that lived at Bellan bandi Palessa with the findings there..  The ancient hunting and food gathering man was taller than the present [ 1940?] Sinhalese the male was average height of 5 Ft 8 inches, and females were 5 ft  4 inches. He had the knowledge of fire, wore ornaments and use stone implements[found on site] and drew sketches of  animal shown  in diagram.

Specimens from Batadoma lena- 15,000 BP

2.India-[H/G]Hunting and Gathering[ 7,500-2,800 BP- [before present]  from Bagor. Bhimbetka, etc.

Indus Civilisation [ 4,350-3,350 BP]- Harappa , Mohendejo-daro etc.

At most of the Late Indus sites, there are later intrusions of Painted-Grey ware believed by Lal (1953) and Wheeler (1959) to have been brought in with the arrival of Indo-European-speakers. The Painted- Grey -ware hypothesis is under considerable doubt due to recent dates that place the culture to 700 to 1,000 years later than the traditional arrival date of indo-European speakers (Kenoyer, 1991).Earlier the belief was that the Aryan arrived  1000 years after the fall of the Indus Civilisation, this view has now changed.

Currently, Indo-European-speakers comprise approximately 80% of  India’s languages (Coon,1965)and occur mainly in the north, extending down into the  western coastal regions (Trautmann,1981).Fairservis and Southworth(1989)suggest that both Austro-Asiatic and Tibeto-Burman linguistic families were also present in the Indus civilization spanning an area that may have not only been ethnically diverse(Mughal,1990; Possehl, 1982, 1990b) but linguistically diverse as wel1. A similar model is proposed forMesopotamiaalso viewed as a multi-linguistic and multi-ethnic society ( Krimer 1953; Parpola 1994)

The current distribution of the Dravidian language suggests that theInduspopulation may have been displaced  to the south due to the expansion of the Indo- European –speaking populations into the North -West . If there is a generic-linguistic link between Indus and modern Dravidian language populations, it is expected thatInduswill be dentally  most similar to Dravidian speaker( recent South Indian, Sri Lanka Tamil), rather than to Indo-European-speakers (recent ).

Certain accepted fact was tested using this method. Few of them are of interest is shown below for the reading pleasure for those in the web.

Hypothesis 6.2 -Indus civilization and Deccan Farming/herding are phenotypicaly similar to non-caste, Dravidian-speaking populations of recent south India and Sri Lankan Tamils, rather than to modern Inco-European ( Afghanistan/Pakistan, Bengal, Sri Lankan Sinhalese, West India caste), Austro-Asiatic (East India’ or Tibeto-Burman Myanmar ,Nepal, Northeast India) linguistically defined populations.

Discussion: The Indus Civilizations the earliest South Asian population to have been linked with a language group. While Dravidian (or a Proto-Dravidian form) is widely assumed

to be with language family of the Indus peoples (Allchin and Allchin, 1982; Bernhard, 1983;

Bongard-Levin, 1986; Sincar, 1955), theIndusscript is  undeciphered at the present time (Parpola,1994).- . and moreover, there is general disagreement about the earlier affinity of the Dravidian languages, although some researchers maintain that Dravidian was a linguistic isolate peculiar toIndia(Sarkar,1972;Zograph1962). Ruhlen(1976} recognizes three branches of Dravidian northern, central, southern Indian, with Brahui spoken in present-dayPakistan.

Today there are more than 25 known Dravidian language although their affinities are by means clear(Ruhlen1976.1987,Trautmann198l; Zograph 1982) In its Present distribution,  the majority of Dravidian-speakers reside-within the southern portion of India ( below 18 to 20 latitude), although small pockets of Dravidian speech are found among Indo-European speakers in Madha-Pradesh, Orissa, Bihar and Baluchistan) The isolated Brahui Language of Baluchistan, in particular, has often been used as evidence for widespread geographic distribution of Dravidian by Harappa times (Rsily,.1915; Sastri ,1967; Sastri and Srinivasachari.1970;Zide and Zvelebil, 1976). The term “Dravidian” itself, however comes  a Sanskrit word originally applied only to the South Indiankingdom ofConjeveram, but it . been expanded connote all non-indo-Europium speakers in South Asia (Tinker 1989).Thomas Huxley ( 1859, I 870) was the first to propose a genetic link between the so-called Austaloid-Veddoid  population of southernIndia,Sri Lanka and the Andaman) and the

Dravidian language, an opinion shared by later anthropologists  (Haddon 1924; Risley 1915;

Sakar,l97l;Swidetzky,1966).The physical descriptions of theInduspeoples obtained from Sanskrit Vedic accounts, indicated that the dasyu (or dasa) habitants were short-statured darkly pigmented, and playtyrrhine individuals (Bernhard, 1983; Risley, l9l5) a description similar many modem Dravidian  speaking populations ofSouth India( Bernhard (1983) however pointed out that a Sanskrit word for an incomprehensible language (“an-as“) may have been correctly translated to mean broad-nosed (a-nas) rendering Vedic accounts of the Indus prototype of little use for affinity assessment.

At most of the Late Indus sites, there are later intrusions of Painted-Grey ware believed by Lal (19531 and Wheeler (1959) to have been brought in with the arrival of Indo-European-speakers. The Painted- Grey -ware hypothesis is under considerable doubt due to recent dates that place the culture to 700 to l,000 years later than the traditional arrival date of indo-European speakers (Kenoyer, 1991). currently, Indo-European-speakers comprise approximately 80% of  India’s languages (Coon,1965)and occur mainly in the north, extending down into the  western coastal regions (Trautmann,1981).Fairservis and Southworth(1989)suggest that both Austro-Asiatic and Tibeto-Burman linguistic families were also present in the Indus civilization spanning an area that may have not only been ethnically diverse(Mughal,1990; Possehl, 1982, 1990b) but linguistically diverse as wel1. A similar model is proposed forMesopotamiaalso viewed as a multi-linguistic and multi-ethnic society ( Krimer 1953; Parpola 1994)

The current distribution of the Dravidian language suggests that theInduspopulation

may have been displaced  to the south due to the expansion of the Indo- European –speaking populations into the North -West . If there is a generic-linguistic link between Indus and modern Dravidian language populations, it is expected thatInduswill be dentally  most similar to Dravidian speaker( recent South Indian, Sri Lanka Tamil), rather than to Indo-European-speakers (recent

Afghanistan/Pakistan, Bengal, SriLankan Sinhalese,West India cast) or to the Austro-Asiatic peoples( East India) or Tibeto-Burman populations (Myanmar,Nepal, North-east Indian).

Child Skull Beli lena 12,000 BP

Results.

The results is just a beginning of a lot  future research ,a  lot more work need be done , with more Human remains been discovered. The results of all available data is given below according to what I understand from Daina Hawkey;s Book.

The numbers with in parenthesis (  ) shows the similarity if low i.e  (0.000)then very similar traits observed, the greater the value greater the difference in traits observed.

.

1.The Sri Lankan Vedda Traits, The Sri Lankan Sinhalese(0.000) and Sri Lankan Tamil(0.016) are more alike than they are to any other laterSouth India populations. The three recent Sri Lankan populations are more similar to each other than to the Sri Lankan Hunting and Gathering(0.135).

What of the Iron Age Sri Lankan found at Pomparippu and Ranchimadama.???

2.The Sri lankan Sinhalese Traits: The Sri Lankan Vedda(0.000)  and The Indian-Hunting and gathering(0.000)  is close, Lankan Tamils (0.032), arecloser to one another than to Sri Lankan Hunting and gathering (0.106).

3.. The Indus Teeth Traits

The MMD results (Table 6.5) with protostylid-data included indicate there are

similarities between Indus-South India (0.079), and Indus-Sri Lanka Tamil (0.037), However

closer affinities  are observed between Indus and the  recent Sri Lanka Sinhalese.(0.011)

Afghanistan/Pakistan, Bengal (0.033), andBengal(0.042). In addition, the Indus sample is also similar to non-caste East Indian (0.042),  But unlikeMyanmar(0:008.)Nepal(0.203.) orNorth-east India(0.247.). The Sri Lankan Vedda(0.086)The Sri Lankan H/G ( 0..303).Removal of the protostylid data from analysis results in a much closer similarity in dental pattern between  Indus and Sri Lankan Tamils (0.007) and South India (0.038) along  with Afghanistan /Pakistan , Bengal(0.000), , Sri Lanka Sinhalese (0.000) and East India (0.000). Indus now ,share a slightly closer similarity in dental pattern withMyanmar (0.087),although not with  Northeast India, (0.154),. OrNepal (0.192.) There is a moderate dissimilarity between the Indus andWest India caste (0.149.) for six traits.

The Sri Lankan Vedda(0.068)The Sri Lankan H/G ( 0..095).

4.The Deccan F/H sample Traits(with protostylid data) , does  suggest with East India (0.000), Myanmar (0.004); North West India(0.002)and Nepal(0.022) Similarities also exist with the Sri Lanka Sinhalese (0.008), Afghanistan/Pakistan (0056.), Bengal (0.077.) along with Sri Lanka Tamil (0.046)  and South Indian (0.065). MMD values do not vary greatly when the protostylid is excluded from analysis, although Deccan F/H does not exhibit similarity with West-India Caste (0.238.) for the six trait comparison .The Sri Lankan Sinhalese(0.000).

The Sri Lankan Vedda(0.000)The Sri Lankan H/G ( 0..018).

Deccan TR (with prorostylid) is surprisingly unlike South India(0.141.) and Sri Lanka Tamil (0.184.). Instead, it, is similar to Nepal(0.029),Myanmar(0.052), andEast India(0.081).While similar to Sri Lanka Sinhalese (0.042), Deccan TR is unlike Afghanistan/Pakistan(0.140.) and Bengal(0.217.). As with Deccan FA, the results do not change greatly with exclusion of the protostylid data, with Deccan TR dissimilar to westIndiacaste (0.486.) for six traits. The Sri Lankan Vedda(0.164)The Sri Lankan H/G ( 0..202).

GROUPINGS

Results of cluster analysis with protostylid data (Figure 6.1), suggest four major clusters

a. The first contains Indus, Deccan F/H, Deccan TR, and East India, Sri Lanka Sinhalese and Myanmar.

b. South India and Sri Lanka Tamil are grouped in the third major cluster, along with a Sub cluster Bengal- Afghanistan/Pakistan .

c. With out the protostylid Indus is found in the third major cluster with Afghanistan/Pakistan, Sri Lanka Sinhalese and Bengal.

d. The other sub-cluster, of this group  Contains  South Indian and Sri Lanka Tamil.

Both Deccan F/H and Deccan TR are in the first major cluster, with Deccan TR sub-clustering only withIndia’s H/G and Sri Lanka H/G. Deccan F/H is in a sub-cluster with East India andNortheast India.

Major clusters (with protostylid) are graphed on MDS results  (Figure 6.2)Indus and Deccan TR both appear somewhat distant from  other groups although Deccan F/H is closer in proximity to Sri Lanka Sinhalese,EastIndia,Nepal,Myanmar and Northeast India South India

is equidistant fromIndusand Deccan F/H. When the MMD values are mapped onto the MDS results (Figure6.3), a much closer similarity  is seen  betweenIndus, Deccan F/H, Deccan TR and all modern groups (with the exception of Nicobar). All three Mature Agricultural/Pastoral groups share several populations in common (depicted in shaded area of Figure 6.3) -Deccan TR,India H/G, andEast India.

Results.

The results is just a beginning of a lot  future research ,a  lot more work need be done , with more Human remains been discovered. The results of all available data is given below according to what I understand from Daina Hawkey;s Book..

The numbers with in parenthesis (  ) shows the similarity if low i.e  (0.000)then very similar traits observed, the greater the value greater the difference in traits observed.

1.The Sri Lankan Vedda Traits, The Sri Lankan Sinhalese(0.000) and Sri Lankan Tamil(0.016) are more alike than they are to any other laterSouth India populations. The three recent Sri Lankan populations are more similar to each other than to the Sri Lankan Hunting and Gathering (0.135).

[What of the Iron Age Sri Lankan found at Pomparippu and Ranchimadama.???]

2.The Sri lankan Sinhalese Traits: The Sri Lankan Vedda(0.000)  and The Indian-Hunting and gathering(0.000)  is close, Lankan Tamils (0.032), are closer to one another than to Sri Lankan Hunting and gathering (0.106).

Impression by Mr PEP Deraniyagala

3.. The Indus Teeth Traits

The MMD results (Table 6.5) with protostylid-data included indicate there are similarities between Indus-South India (0.079), and Indus-Sri Lanka Tamil (0.037), However closer affinities are observed between Indus and the recent Sri Lanka Sinhalese.(0.011).

Afghanistan/Pakistan, Bengal (0.033), andBengal(0.042). In addition, the Indus sample is also similar to non-caste East Indian (0.042),  But unlikeMyanmar(0:008.)Nepal(0.203.) orNorth-east India(0.247.). The Sri Lankan Vedda (0.086).The Sri Lankan H/G ( 0..303).

Few Settlements as Rachimadama shown in Udawalave Area dated to 3300 BP is found in the Island . The Time of decline of Indus Vally Civilization_ Dr S Deraniyagala.

Removal of the protostylid data from analysis results in a much closer similarity in dental pattern between  Indus and Sri Lankan Tamils (0.007) and South India (0.038) along  with Afghanistan /Pakistan , Bengal(0.000), , Sri Lanka Sinhalese (0.000) and East India (0.000). Indus now ,share a slightly closer similarity in dental pattern withMyanmar (0.087),although not with Northeast India, (0.154),. OrNepal (0.192.) There is a moderate dissimilarity between the Indus andWest India caste (0.149.) for six traits.The Sri Lankan Vedda(0.068)The Sri Lankan H/G ( 0..095).

4.The Deccan F/H sample Traits(with protostylid data) , does  suggest with East India (0.000), Myanmar (0.004); North West India(0.002)and Nepal(0.022) Similarities also exist with the Sri Lanka Sinhalese (0.008), Afghanistan/Pakistan (0056.), Bengal (0.077.) along with Sri Lanka Tamil (0.046)  and South Indian (0.065). MMD values do not vary greatly when the protostylid is excluded from analysis, although Deccan F/H does not exhibit similarity with West-India Caste (0.238.) for the six trait comparison .The Sri Lankan Sinhalese(0.000).

The Sri Lankan Vedda(0.000)The Sri Lankan H/G ( 0..018).

Deccan TR (with prorostylid) is surprisingly unlike South India(0.141.) and Sri Lanka Tamil (0.184.). Instead, it, is similar toNepal(0.029),Myanmar(0.052), andEast India (0.081).While similar to Sri Lanka Sinhalese (0.042), Deccan TR is unlike Afghanistan/Pakistan (0.140.) and Bengal(0.217.). As with Deccan FA, the results do not change greatly with exclusion of the protostylid data, with Deccan TR dissimilar to westIndia caste (0.486.) for six traits. The Sri Lankan Vedda(0.164)The Sri Lankan H/G ( 0..202).

GROUPINGS

Results of cluster analysis with protostylid data (Figure 6.1), suggest four major clusters

a. The first contains Indus, Deccan F/H, Deccan TR, and East India, Sri Lanka Sinhalese and Myanmar.

b. South India and Sri Lanka Tamil are grouped in the third major cluster, along with a Sub cluster Bengal- Afghanistan/Pakistan .

c. With out the protostylid Indus is found in the third major cluster with Afghanistan/Pakistan, Sri Lanka Sinhalese and Bengal.

d. The other sub-cluster, of this group contains  South Indian and Sri Lanka Tamil.

Both Deccan F/H and Deccan TR are in the first major cluster, with Deccan TR sub-clustering only withIndia’s H/G and Sri Lanka H/G. Deccan F/H is in a sub-cluster with East India andNortheast India.

Major clusters (with protostylid) are graphed on MDS results  (Figure 6.2)Indusand

Deccan TR both appear somewhat distant from  other groups although Deccan F/H is closer in proximity to Sri Lanka   Sinhalese, EastIndia, Nepal, Myanmar  and Northeast India South India is equidistant fromIndusand Deccan F/H. When the MMD values are mapped onto the MDS results (Figure6.3), a much closer similarity is seen betweenIndus, Deccan F/H, Deccan TR and all modern groups (with the exception of Nicobar). All three Mature Agricultural/Pastoral groups share several populations in common (depicted in shaded area of Figure 6.3) -Deccan TR,India H/G, and East India.

Further reading

A detailed description of early human habitation are given in

OLDEST HUMAN FOUND IN SRI LANKA http://www.visittolanka.com/history-of-sri-lanka

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s