Jump to content

Talk:Bengalis

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Damien2016 (talk | contribs) at 19:12, 13 April 2017. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Why emphasis on race on an article about a Linguistic group??

I don't think worn out phrases like "Melting pot of races" and "diverse origin" needs to be added in an Ethno-Linguistic article since it sounds racist and 19th century. Considering that the whole world and all modern ethnicities/regions are a 'melting pot', the only purpose this phrase serves is to appease Race Theorists or to Assimilate/Subjugate minorities of Bengal region and Rob them of their separate entity similar to what happened in Russian empire and USSR. Patches of Dravidian, Austro-asiatic and Tibeto-burman speaking tribes are found all over northern half of South Asia who can speak the majority language of their respective region but that obviously doesn't mean they belong to that very majority ethnicity. It should be noted that there have been numerous agitations for Separate Identity/State by tribal people in West Bengal and elsewhere in India.

Secondly, genetic studies on Dravidian, Tibeto-Burman and Austro-asiatic TRIBAL populations of Bengal region and rest of India show a very distinct gene pool for them than the general populations(Indo-Aryan, Dravidian castes, Muslims) of South Asia, Bengali Included. Bengalis like other Indians are part of the same typical South Asian gene pool while Tibeto-Burmese are very similar to East-Southeast Asian people. The Austroasiatic and Dravidian speaking tribes of Bengal are mostly Southeast Asian in their Y-DNA(male Lineage).

Historic Settlement

The links provided only mentions the existence of an old culture in 2 links while another link makes a passing comment about 1000 bc civilization being Dravidian which seems to be just a 'EuroCentrist view'. Anything which is old, is automatically Dravidian. Even nobody is sure of the linguistic affinities of Indus Valley Civilisation and can only hypothize, I wonder how these links prove them to be dravidians let alone Tibeto-Burmans and Austro-Asiatics. Unless some Scriptures are unearthed from that location the whole point seems to be Moot. Moreover genetic studies indicate a Male-mediated migration/invasion of Austro-asiatic people from South East Asia where the linguistic group might have originated. Similar case with Tibeto Burmese populations. Just because some populations are tribal doesn't necessarily mean they are oldest settlers. Ahom people of Assam enjoy tribal status but were recent invaders.

All in all what I'd suggest is rid the page of racist overtones and respect Bengalis as they are. Tribals of Bengal region already have/can have separate pages and need to be respected as such. Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:45, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Magadha

@Fylindfotberserk: Magadha was entirely in Southern Bihar, all mainstream sources agree with this. References to Ashoka and Buddha are not relevant to Bengal. Please don't steal other people's history.Damien2016 (talk) 19:11, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]