In India, election days invariably transform into occasions marked by politically charged accusations hurled between parties. The controversial statement made by veteran Congress affiliate Sam Pitroda, that “people in the east look like the Chinese, people in the west look like the Arabs, people in the north look like, maybe, Whites, and people in the south look like Africans...”, sparked a huge row.
The BJP swiftly condemned Pitroda’s comment as ‘racist’ and leveraged it to attack the Congress party and its nationalist credentials. Prime Minister Narendra Modi made an outright accusation against Congress for using skin colour to divide the nation, putting the major opposition party into a defensive position. Joining the chorus, AAP MP Sanjay Singh made it clear that no member of the INDIA bloc stands with Sam Pitroda's 'racist' remarks.
The Congress denounced Pitroda`s politically clumsy statement as “most unfortunate and unacceptable”, costing him the post as chairman of the Indian Overseas Congress, putting an end to the hue and cry over the controversy. His statement still requires an introspection, on whether it bears any scientific validity and if there is any ethical or moral impropriety.
What do genetics say?
The Indian population is not homogeneous, as Pitroda correctly points out. India comprises various unique ethnicities, colours, and cultural identities, which have resulted from the migration of different groups to the Indian subcontinent, as indicated by numerous linguistic and paleontological studies. The studies also demonstrate multiple instances of these groups mixing throughout history. However, many ethnic groups in India take pride in their perceived racial purity, considering their own identity as 'unadulterated'. The emergence of the new field of genetics challenges such dogmas, presenting undeniable evidence.
A recent groundbreaking genetic study conducted by Priya Moorjani’s research team at the University of California, Berkeley, and featured in the renowned journal ‘Science’, reveals that the Indian population, much like Europeans, possesses approximately 1-2 per cent Neanderthal genes. These genes were acquired through interbreeding with other humanoid species that existed solely in Europe and Western parts of Asia. Neanderthal species never inhabited the Indian subcontinent or regions east of India. In essence, this finding provides compelling evidence for significant migration into India from Eurasia.
Genetic research further reveals evidence for multiple migrations to the Indian subcontinent. The first major wave occurred from Africa, travelling through West Asia around 50,000-65,000 years ago. It was followed by another significant migration from West Asia about 8,000 years ago, and the much-debated migration of Aryan people from the Asian steppes roughly 4,000 years ago. Contrary to popular belief, all these migrant populations intermingled with the then-existing local populations of India, forming the present-day mixed ethnic tapestry.
Tony Joseph, author of the acclaimed book ‘Early Indians: The Story of Our Ancestors and Where We Came From,’ explains, “Genetic studies have shown that until about 2000 years ago, population groups in India were mixing on a very large scale without restrictions. Even population groups living in remote areas, cut off from the rest, today carry signs of that intermixing”.
Unity in diversity
The Indian population today is primarily composed of two major groups: the Dravidian language speakers and the Indo-European language speakers. Although these two groups are genetically divergent, they are not very distinct from each other and show evidence of considerable intermixing. Additionally, there is the Tibeto-Burman group in the northeast.
The Dravidians descended from the original African hunter-gatherers who arrived in India somewhat 50,000 years ago. They later interbred with migrants from Western Asia about 8,000 years ago, forming a new population called the Ancient South Indian (ASI) genetic lineage. The Aryans, who migrated to India from the Asian steppes during the Vedic times, interbred with the then-existing ASI groups to form another major group called the Ancient North Indian (ANI) genetic lineage. These are the current Indo-European language speakers of North India.
It is a fact that the mixing of population groups declined substantially after the institutionalisation of the caste system. India is currently a country with about 4500 anthropologically well-defined population groups. There are substantial differences among each population group in terms of endogamy practices, cultural traditions, physical attributes, geographic, and climatic position.
While there are some distinct phenotypical differences between north and south Indian populations, genetic studies reveal a complex interweaving of various groups that occurred thousands of years ago. Genetics has unequivocally demonstrated that no races or caste groups in India are inherently inferior or superior; rather, their formation resulted from interbreeding among various ethnicities at different points in history.
There is an underlying genetic bond among Indians, making divisive rhetorics and claims of racial purity a mere socio-political construct. Our diversity is akin to a delightful vegetarian thali, where no single dish can claim to define the entire meal’s flavour. India’s demographic tapestry is a remarkable amalgamation of numerous ethnic and racial groups, reflecting the 'unity in diversity' that defines the nation.
It is important to understand that genetic diversity is a virtue valued by nature, as a diverse gene pool can provide advantages in resisting various diseases, especially infectious ones. A population with lower genetic diversity often faces multiple disadvantages in terms of survival and adaptability.
The Indian cauldron
Whether someone likes it or not, genetic studies clearly show that all humans are descendants of African ancestors. There is enough scientific evidence substantiating the 'Out of Africa' migration theory, where early humans from Africa populated the entire world, with a portion of that population eventually reaching India and becoming the first Indians approximately 50,000-65,000 years ago.
There is nothing inherently malicious or insulting in Sam Pitroda’s statement; it’s simply scientifically inaccurate because he neglected the fact that there have been multiple and significant genetic admixture between various ethnicities. This makes it impossible to put Indians living in different regions into brackets like Chinese, Arabs, Whites, and Africans.
(Social anthropologist and novelist Thomas Sajan and US-trained neurologist Titto Idicula, based in Norway, write on politics, culture, economy, and medicine.)