Thread by @arunachalite

Based on genetic studies I’d say that Kuki-Zos are more ancestral to Manipur than the Meitei and Nagas due to the presence of higher percentage of Austroasiatic paternal ancestry. Here’s why

Austroasiatic people were native to the region of Manipur before the arrival of https://t.co/vCe3ypNcPh

https://twitter.com/vicayana/status/1682297370489520128

Tibeto-burman group like Nagas and Meitei. The chart below shows the prevalence various Y-haplogroups among various Kuki-Zo tribes.

The sample size for this study was Kuki (60), Hmar (80), Mara (90), Lai (92) and Lusei (92). Austroasiatic Y halplogroup O2a in Kuki-Zo tribes

ranges from a high of 82.3 % in Lusei to a low of 14.3 percent in Kuki. While Tibeto-burman Y halplogroup ranges from 85% in Kukis to a low of 20% percent in Mara.

The prevalence of high percentage of Tibeto-burman y halplogroup in Kukis in Manipur than the other Kuki-Zo tribes

can be explained by their more northerly area of domicile, availing them more opportunities for intermarriages with later arrivals of Tibeto-burman groups like the Nagas. While those Kuzi-Zo tribes living in the south have less Tibeto-burman paternal ancestry.

So where do the Meiteis fit in all these? Are they descended from of Arjuna and Chitrangada of the a Mahabharata? Or are they descended from African migrants? I have not come across any studies showing the prevalence of different Y-halplogroups in Meities

but based on an article by a Meitei guy wherein he posted his own DNA analysis I’ve come up with a hypothesis.
In his post the Meitei guy said that his DNA test revealed that his paternal Y halplogroup is O-M117. O-M117 is sino-Tibetan Y halplogroup. It is a descendant or

subgroup of Y halplogroup O-M134. Many tribes in northeast India including the Nagas predominantly belong to this halplogroup. (Please note that Nagas might also belong to O-M177 subgroup as the Meitei but the study from which the chart below is taken didn’t test for subgroups)

So based on the Meitei guys DNA test results and the data from the study I posted, the source paternal ancestry of Meities might’ve come from the Nagas. These ancestral Nagas might’ve moved to the Manipur valley where they encountered a people similar to the Kuki-Zo

and through the forces assimilation (war, conquest, intermarriages) a composite population was created which later on became the Meiteis. The fact that Meitei language bears Lexical resemblance to both Kuki and Tangkhul lends credence to this composite population theory.

So circling back to main point of this thread, how does this prove that the Kuki-Zos were more ancestral to the Manipur? Like I said in the beginning of the thread that genetic studies and studies of historical migration show that Austroasiatic people were the

first to settle the region in a east to west direction starting from southern China to the foothills of Nepal and north to south direction starting from the foothills of Arunachal to the north of of Bengal.

So it posits that Austroasiatic people would also settled

Manipur including the Valley area, and since Kuki-Zo people have high percentage of paternal ancestry from Austroasiatics it is safe to assume they would have arrived in Manipur earlier than the Tibeto-burman Meities who in turn descended from the Nagas.

I am just presenting a hypothesis based on genetic and historical migrations events and not relying on what this geographer or what that historian wrote about Kuki-Zo. In a way I’d argue that my hypothesis is more credible.

I would welcome good faith comments from Meities on my thread presenting more credible hypothesis supporting their argument that they arrived in Manipur earlier than Kuki Zos. But until then I am sticking to theory that Kuki Zos were the first to settle Manipur

References:

Tracking the genetic imprints of lost Jewish tribes among the gene pool of Kuki-Chin-Mizo population of India

genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.11…

The Northeast Indian Passageway: A Barrier or Corridor for Human Migrations?
academic.oup.com/mbe/article/21…

I AM MANIPUR – Discovering my roots.

kanglaonline.com/2017/09/i-am-m…

Addendum: Most north-east Indians including Nagas and other Tibeto-burman ethnic groups have Austroasiatic ancestry but it is from the maternal side, that is, Tibeto burmans marrying Austroasiatic women.

Whereas in the case of Kuki-Zo besides Tibeto-burman they also have a high percentage of paternal ancestry from Austroasiatics.

Pic: Wa people from Yunnan, China, an Austroasiatic ethnic minority

Pic: Khasi women, Khasis are also Austroasiatic

Pic: Typical Mizo women

@yt_thounaojam

@yt_thounaojam Some Kuki Zo tribe have high percentage of Austroasiatic paternal ancestry, for instance in this study 80 % percent of Mara sample had O2a Y-halplogroup.

Kuki Zo are different from other NE Indians because they have a higher auustroastic paternal ancestry.

@yt_thounaojam If the focus is on studying deep historical migrations and patrilineal ancestry, Y-DNA studies are more suitable due to their specific inheritance patterns and slower mutation rates.

@yt_thounaojam My theory is simple, Meities were originally a conglomeration of different tribes. The Austroasiatic ones arriving earlier and the Tibeto-burman a little later. Over time one tribe became powerful and dominant and subjugated and unified the rest.

@yt_thounaojam Along with Bengali Brahmins also came the Bengali Kayasthas, Das and Basus. Scribes, records keepers and clerks.

@yt_thounaojam The Bishnupuriyas were lower caste Hindus that came along with the Brahmins. They married local women.

@yt_thounaojam @Swusiza My hypothesis is that when Tibeto-burman groups arrived in Manipur they married women from a population similar to Kuki Zo already settled in the valley.

Can be easily confirmed if a Y-DNA and MTDNA study of Meities are conducted