4 ms·
The article doesn't seem to refer to Dravidians at all. And the place where the art was found is an Indo-Aryan speaking region (though admittedly bordering a Dr
by _emacsomancer_ 8y ago
The article doesn't seem to refer to Dravidians at all. And the place where the art was found is an Indo-Aryan speaking region (though admittedly bordering a Dravidian-dominant area).
- gumby 8y ago> And the place where the art was found is an Indo-Aryan speaking region (mostly) today, true, but these traces appear to far far predate the arrival of indo-aryan genes, languages and memes.
- _emacsomancer_ 8y agoYes, but presumably they also pre-date the arrival of the Dravidians, who seem to have been preceded by the Mundas, who seem to have themselves been preceded by speakers from a distinct language family (or families).