The
study of human migrations around the world, based on human genome,
has established the fact that Australian aboriginals migrated to
Australia from Papua- New Guinea, about 35000 to 40000 years ago. At
that time, Australia and New Guinea were a single land mass, called
Sahul.. This can be easily confirmed from the fact that ancient
genetic association is found between New Guineans and Australians.
The humans arrived there from the Indonesian archipelago after
crossing the sea in small boats. Australia is thought to represent
one of the earliest migrations for humans after they left Africa. The
migration of modern humans around the earth, apparently proceeded via
two routes: the northern route that gave rise to modern Asians
23,000-38,000 years ago and an earlier southern route, which followed
the coast around the Arabian Peninsula and India to the Australian
continent. It has been suggested that the ancestors of aboriginal
Australians diverged from the ancestral Eurasian population
62,000-75,000 years ago and, based on archaeological evidence,
reached Sahul ( Australia-New Guinea landmass ) by 35000 to 45,000
years ago. This group of humans on an early southward migration out
of Africa, is believed to have diverged to Australia, New Guinea and
Philippines about 36000 years ago.
So far
it was thought that after this migration, the new inhabitants to
Australia lived in perfect isolation there till Europeans arrived in
late Nineteenth century. A new research article published in the
science magazine Nature on 14 January 2013 and referring to a study
outlined in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences ,
claims that this was not so and aboriginal Australians did have a
window of contact with outside world about 4000 years back. This
study was carried out by researchers of the Max Planck Institute for
Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany under leadership of
Mark Stoneking, a geneticist at the Max Planck Institute. The team
checked the entire genomes of 344 individuals, including aboriginal
Australians from the Northern Territory, highlanders from Papua New
Guinea, several populations from Southeast Asian and India and a
handful of people from the United States and China and compared their
genetic variations.
Perhaps
the most interesting finding of this study is a curious fact that
Australian aboriginal genome shows fair amount of mixing with Indian
genes. Irina Pugach, a postdoctoral researcher in Mark Stoneking’s
laboratory, discovered the signs of the Indian migration to
Australia says that “ Some aboriginal Australians can trace as much
as 11% of their genomes to migrants, who reached the island around
4,000 years ago from India. This genetic mixing, or gene flow,
between the Indian and northern Australian populations; taking place
around 141 generations ago, could not have occurred during the
initial wave of migration into Australia because it is absent from
New Guinean and Mamanwa (a Negrito group from the Philippines)
genomes, and it is too uniformly spread across the northern
Aboriginal genomes to have come from European colonists.” She says
further; “ Our findings suggest substantial gene flow from India to
Australia 4,230 years ago, well before European contact. Currently
the accepted view is that Australia has been completely isolated for
almost 45 thousand years following its initial colonization in the
late 1800s. "
This
study brings up a totally new finding that there was an Indian
migration to Australia around 4230 years ago. This date exactly
matches with arrival of two more things in Australia, stone tools
that formed the tips of weapons, called Microliths and a wild dog
known as Dingo, which makes it's first appearance in fossil records
around this time.. This article says that the dingo, which most
closely resembles Indian dogs, was probably brought in by the Indians
along with their stone tools. Prof Stoneking adds: "We don't
have direct evidence of any connection, but it strongly suggestive
that microliths, dingo and the movement of people were all
connected."
Another
interesting finding is that, out of the populations considered in the
study, Dravidian-speaking groups are the best match to be the source
populations for this Indian migration to Australia. However, Ms.
Pugach warns: “ This does not mean the ancestors of these groups
actually were the source population. It is possible, that there is
another group which we didn't sample yet. Another possibility is that
this group doesn't even exist anymore.”
Regarding
genetic mixing of up to 10% of Indian genome, she says: "We have
estimated the amount of Indian contribution to Australian genomes at
around 10%, but this number doesn't tell us anything about how many
individuals might have migrated. This number depends on the size of
the Australian population at the time, and we don't know how big it
was. The amount of Indian ancestry could have become inflated through
the process known as genetic drift, especially if the Australian
population was small."
I am
quite sure that there would a large number of studies on this topic
in future. What really baffles me is that this period of migration
appears to be the same period in which Indus-Ghaggar civilization was
at zenith in Indian sub continent, yet at the same time, a group of
Indians from south, left Indian shores to migrate to a far off land
to begin a new life. It has been found that people of Indus civilization knew how to build ships to cross the seas, as they had a flourishing trade with the middle east. We do not have to stretch our imagination too far to think, that an adventurous group of Indians sailors might have actually set their sails towards Australia and succeeded in landing there.
17
January 2013
I think this is an interesting find and certainly some of the current australian aborgine population may have migrated from south/central India or even the Andaman and Nicobar Islands (however these are again people of the african race certainly migrants from Africa to India). There have been several research articles on these lines and more molecular research work is required. It is quite likely that during those times the migrant traffic may have been more towards south east asia (Indonesia for e.g was it a hindu nation ?) and drifted to Australia. I think more intensive genetic and anthropological research can bring out these links. Any way, an interesting development and the Australians can have the 'dingo' as their pet animals.
ReplyDeleteIndian Citizen