Ethnicity of People in Thailand

[Danderman123]

One major difference between South Asians (Indians) and east Asians (Thai, Chinese, Japanese) comes from when humans traveled from Africa into India, and then into Indochina and China, they encountered Something Else. There were already hominids living in Indochina and China, just not Homo Sapiens. East Asians carry a small genetic reminder of their encounter with these hominids, known as Denisovans, as a result East Asians are distinct from other Homo Sapiens.

 

 

[SiSePuede419]

My understanding is African people lived in Thailand first, but they were probably all murdered by the invading Chinese who are racist as <deleted>. ????

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maniq_people

[Danderman123]

2 minutes ago, SiSePuede419 said:

My understanding is African people lived in Thailand first, but they were probably all murdered by the invading Chinese who are racist as <deleted>. ????

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maniq_people

Negritos are not Africans. They are East Asians genetically.

[spidermike007]

Thais are very mixed. Some of the women have the most exotic looks. Few know of their family roots, besides the Chinese Thais. 

 

The fascinating thing about Thais, is that they are all of mixed ethnicity. Few know it, and few will admit it. But it is nearly 100%. Going back to the days of ancient Ayutthaya and Sukhothai, Thailand was a major trading nation. And people from all over the region came to trade, many of whom stayed. Producing the most astonishing women as a result. Indians, Sumatrans, Burmese, Cambodians, Vietnamese, Chinese, Japanese, Turks, Persians, and more, resulting in some great looks on some of them today. 
 

[Sigmund]

Very true in the facts of the OP. Despite what some caucasians try to claim, Thai's feel more comfortable say with indians then with some mouthy brit or yankee.

[Danderman123]

To recap the bidding:

 

The basic genetic or ethnic foundation of the people current living in Thailand is Mon (Khmer). However, the Mon people were Indianized about 1500 years ago, which left religious and genetic traces.

 

Finally, the Tai people migrated from China, bringing their language, customs, and some genetic contributions.

 

Thai culture today bears hallmarks of all of these cultures, including Chinese, brought down by the Tai people.

 

One interesting example is the hand movement of Thai dancers. These superficially mimic Chinese hand movements, but lack the storytelling of the Chinese style. Actually, the hand movements seen in Thailand closely resemble Khmer style. But the hand movements in Khmer/Mon culture provide meanings for the hand positions, whereas the Thai style has no meanings, they just look good. Obviously, when the Tai people arrived in Thailand, they learned the hand movements, but not the meaning.

[Foxx]

8 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

One interesting example is the hand movement of Thai dancers. These superficially mimic Chinese hand movements, but lack the storytelling of the Chinese style. Actually, the hand movements seen in Thailand closely resemble Khmer style. But the hand movements in Khmer/Mon culture provide meanings for the hand positions, whereas the Thai style has no meanings, they just look good. Obviously, when the Tai people arrived in Thailand, they learned the hand movements, but not the meaning.

Almost total tosh.  Following the sacking of Angkor the Siamese brought all the court dancers back with them.  Thai dancing is a direct descendent of Khmer dancing.  And the gestures do have meanings.

[Eleftheros]

On 9/27/2023 at 11:34 PM, Danderman123 said:

About 1500 years ago, there was a Hindu kingdom throughout Indochina. So what is now Thailand was then India. This had a big impact on demographics in current Thailand.

I'm not sure that blanket statement quite works.

 

From what I understand, Indochina was covered by what are described as "Indianized" kingdoms, but whether that implies a large influx of people we would describe as "Indian", I don't know. Also, who were those Indians - Indo-Aryans or Dravidians?

 

One interesting line of research is the Cham people of Vietnam, a supposedly South Asian group who, via a circuitous route via Borneo and Taiwan, ended up in coastal Vietnam where they formed the Champa "Indianized" kingdom. There's still a handful of them in HCMC, and they look, well, perhaps less Sinitic than the Viets, though not noticeably "Indian".

 

It seems possible that back then in this region there was an Indian ruling caste and a huge indigenous peasant population - maybe that's how they got Angkor Wat built.

[Danderman123]

19 minutes ago, Eleftheros said:

I'm not sure that blanket statement quite works.

 

From what I understand, Indochina was covered by what are described as "Indianized" kingdoms, but whether that implies a large influx of people we would describe as "Indian", I don't know. Also, who were those Indians - Indo-Aryans or Dravidians?

 

One interesting line of research is the Cham people of Vietnam, a supposedly South Asian group who, via a circuitous route via Borneo and Taiwan, ended up in coastal Vietnam where they formed the Champa "Indianized" kingdom. There's still a handful of them in HCMC, and they look, well, perhaps less Sinitic than the Viets, though not noticeably "Indian".

 

It seems possible that back then in this region there was an Indian ruling caste and a huge indigenous peasant population - maybe that's how they got Angkor Wat built.

The Chams spoke a language in the same family as Malayan and Tagalog. When they ruled in Vietnam, the current Vietnamese were simply a southern Chinese group that occupied northern Vietnam, and were independent of the Chinese kings.

 

But, no Cham influence in Thailand.

 

As for the Indian influence in Thailand on a cultural level, it is enormous. It's interesting to learn what came from India, what came from the Mon people, what was a Chinese influence, and what the Tai people brought.

 

My opinion is that the Thai influence was similar to the Anglo-Saxons in England - they brought language, some customs, but were a small population that didn't make much of a genetic contribution.

 

I suspect that the genetic contribution from India was very high, based on the number of Thais who look Indian.

 

One more note on the Denisovans: scientists now believe that there was 2 different flavors (some call them different species): those who passed through Indochina, and those in northern China, Korea, Mongolia, etc.

 

Edited October 5, 2023 by Danderman123

[Danderman123]

39 minutes ago, Foxx said:

Almost total tosh.  Following the sacking of Angkor the Siamese brought all the court dancers back with them.  Thai dancing is a direct descendent of Khmer dancing.  And the gestures do have meanings.

err.. that's what I wrote, more or less, except that Mon dancing is Khmer dancing.

 

Except I had no idea that the Thai hand gestures have meaning. I never met anyone in Thailand who knows that.

[fondue zoo]

13 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Except I had no idea that the Thai hand gestures have meaning. I never met anyone in Thailand who knows that.

I get hand gestures directed at me all the time.

Flipping the Garuda, someone told me, very old and full of meaning.

[fondue zoo]

18 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

err.. that's what I wrote, more or less, except that Mon dancing is Khmer dancing.

 

Except I had no idea that the Thai hand gestures have meaning. I never met anyone in Thailand who knows that.

 

Is this it?

 

 

 

 

[mrwebb8825]

On 9/27/2023 at 11:34 AM, Danderman123 said:

Starting 70,000 years ago (more or less), the first Homo Sapiens walked out of Africa,

stopped reading after here:

"The oldest known evidence for anatomically modern humans (as of 2017) are fossils found at Jebel Irhoud, Morocco, dated about 360,000 years old. Anatomically modern human remains of eight individuals dated 300,000 years old, making them the oldest known remains categorized as "modern" (as of 2018)."

[swissie]

Here is a clue: Look at the eyes of Thais. Not truly "Asian" but Almond shaped. Indicating that old time "Immigrants from India" mixed and mingled with "the locals" quite extensively.

 

[Danderman123]

11 hours ago, swissie said:

Here is a clue: Look at the eyes of Thais. Not truly "Asian" but Almond shaped. Indicating that old time "Immigrants from India" mixed and mingled with "the locals" quite extensively.

 

Not exactly. Assimilation of Indians would change eye shape of some Thais, but wouldn't cause the standard Thai eye to change - there would be some Thais having "Chinese" eyes, and others Indian eyes.

 

The latest theory is that the subspecies of Denisovans in Indochina was slightly different from Denisovans in northern Asia, with different eye shapes. The gap between the two subspecies was somewhere in southern China.

 

So the people of Indochina are all genetically similar, with some Indian admixture declining on a west - east basis, with some northern Chinese admixture.

 

 

[Danderman123]

15 hours ago, mrwebb8825 said:

stopped reading after here:

"The oldest known evidence for anatomically modern humans (as of 2017) are fossils found at Jebel Irhoud, Morocco, dated about 360,000 years old. Anatomically modern human remains of eight individuals dated 300,000 years old, making them the oldest known remains categorized as "modern" (as of 2018)."

Homo Sapiens may have been in Africa for 360,000 years, but didn't permanently leave Africa until 70,000 years ago.

[mrwebb8825]

7 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

Homo Sapiens may have been in Africa for 360,000 years, but didn't permanently leave Africa until 70,000 years ago.

"

When did humans leave Africa to Europe?

 

 

By reanalysing human skull fragments discovered four decades ago in Greece, an international team of researchers now believe that an early modern human migration out of Africa may have reached Europe by at least 210,000 years ago. This pushes back the known date of Homo sapiens in the region by more than 150,000 years."

 

https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/news/2019/july/modern-humans-may-have-been-in-europe-150-000-years-earlier-than.html

[Danderman123]

27 minutes ago, mrwebb8825 said:

"

When did humans leave Africa to Europe?

 

 

By reanalysing human skull fragments discovered four decades ago in Greece, an international team of researchers now believe that an early modern human migration out of Africa may have reached Europe by at least 210,000 years ago. This pushes back the known date of Homo sapiens in the region by more than 150,000 years."

 

https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/news/2019/july/modern-humans-may-have-been-in-europe-150-000-years-earlier-than.html

The money quote is "humans permanently left Africa 70,000 years ago". There probably many human migrations out of Africa, but none permanent before 70,000 years BCE. As far as we know today.

[mrwebb8825]

59 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

The money quote is "humans permanently left Africa 70,000 years ago". There probably many human migrations out of Africa, but none permanent before 70,000 years BCE. As far as we know today.

thought humans still lived in Africa today hence, never has been a permanent leaving. 😁

[Danderman123]

12 hours ago, mrwebb8825 said:

"

When did humans leave Africa to Europe?

 

 

By reanalysing human skull fragments discovered four decades ago in Greece, an international team of researchers now believe that an early modern human migration out of Africa may have reached Europe by at least 210,000 years ago. This pushes back the known date of Homo sapiens in the region by more than 150,000 years."

 

https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/news/2019/july/modern-humans-may-have-been-in-europe-150-000-years-earlier-than.html

One of the issues identifying skull fossils is that immature individuals of other species look a bit like Homo Sapiens (it's called "neotony"). So, some alleged HS fossils are really just young Neanderthals. Could be the case in Apidima.

[mrwebb8825]

10 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

One of the issues identifying skull fossils is that immature individuals of other species look a bit like Homo Sapiens (it's called "neotony"). So, some alleged HS fossils are really just young Neanderthals. Could be the case in Apidima.

Guess it all boils down to who do you believe and which discipline you follow. Darwinism makes chronological sense as adaptation and evolution can be proven to some extent in some species but still clearly limited. (gaps in evolution lines) I find it hard to fathom that an ameba morphed into a dinosaur. (I know that wasn't a single step but you get my point)

Creationism works with faith but doesn't reflect timelines correctly unless completely misinterpreted by the "Learned Scholars' " translations of an ancient dead language written by the interpretations of ancient dead men who heard it from...? (God) (can't be proven hence the faith needed) Places man on Earth 7 days after it was created and populated by 1 man and 1 women...? (Again, simplified for a point)

Ancient Alien Theorists subscribing to "The Big Bang" theory make some sense in claims that extra terrestrials sent DNA strands to a newly forming planet then made follow up visits over a period of millions of years to cultivate and advance the growth but still doesn't explain what Paleontologists, Anthropologists and Archeologists claim to be fact even though none have a point of origin so doesn't discount nor discredit the Ancient Alien Theorists.

We very well could be a giant lab experiment. 😁

[Danderman123]

15 hours ago, mrwebb8825 said:

Guess it all boils down to who do you believe and which discipline you follow. Darwinism makes chronological sense as adaptation and evolution can be proven to some extent in some species but still clearly limited. (gaps in evolution lines) I find it hard to fathom that an ameba morphed into a dinosaur. (I know that wasn't a single step but you get my point)

Creationism works with faith but doesn't reflect timelines correctly unless completely misinterpreted by the "Learned Scholars' " translations of an ancient dead language written by the interpretations of ancient dead men who heard it from...? (God) (can't be proven hence the faith needed) Places man on Earth 7 days after it was created and populated by 1 man and 1 women...? (Again, simplified for a point)

Ancient Alien Theorists subscribing to "The Big Bang" theory make some sense in claims that extra terrestrials sent DNA strands to a newly forming planet then made follow up visits over a period of millions of years to cultivate and advance the growth but still doesn't explain what Paleontologists, Anthropologists and Archeologists claim to be fact even though none have a point of origin so doesn't discount nor discredit the Ancient Alien Theorists.

We very well could be a giant lab experiment. 😁

One advantage of Evolution is the availability of evidence.

[mrwebb8825]

9 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

One advantage of Evolution is the availability of evidence.

still based on interpretation - if monkeys evolved into man, why are there still monkeys? if it were only a certain species of monkey, wouldn't the original species have vanished? which species is now missing?

[Danderman123]

15 hours ago, mrwebb8825 said:

still based on interpretation - if monkeys evolved into man, why are there still monkeys? 

Please tell me you were joking when you posted that.

 

Of all the lame talking points that the Creationists came up with, that talking point was the stupidest.

[mrwebb8825]

7 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

Please tell me you were joking when you posted that.

 

Of all the lame talking points that the Creationists came up with, that talking point was the stupidest.

I don't subscribe to any 1 discipline - Creationists can't explain dinosaurs - Evolutionists can't explain "The Ark" - Ancient Alien Theorists can't explain either.

I think "Best Guess" based on previous learned people's "Best Guess" is not unlike school rivalries and there's very possibly an, as yet unknown answer that will emerge.

Up until Einstein no one thought that spacetime (4th dimensional measurement - 19th century) was as curved as the Earth and now that's being challenged. It was only 3 centuries before that that it was believed the Earth was flat until disproved by Magellan.

If you argue from a single corner of the room you will miss the ideas of the other 3 corners and the meeting of those ideas somewhere in the middle. 😉

[Danderman123]

45 minutes ago, mrwebb8825 said:

I don't subscribe to any 1 discipline - Creationists can't explain dinosaurs - Evolutionists can't explain "The Ark" - Ancient Alien Theorists can't explain either.

I think "Best Guess" based on previous learned people's "Best Guess" is not unlike school rivalries and there's very possibly an, as yet unknown answer that will emerge.

Up until Einstein no one thought that spacetime (4th dimensional measurement - 19th century) was as curved as the Earth and now that's being challenged. It was only 3 centuries before that that it was believed the Earth was flat until disproved by Magellan.

If you argue from a single corner of the room you will miss the ideas of the other 3 corners and the meeting of those ideas somewhere in the middle. 😉

There is no Ark.

 

In the time frame of the Biblical Flood, there were major civilizations that have left records. None of them mentioned the Flood.

[Danderman123]

47 minutes ago, mrwebb8825 said:

It was only 3 centuries before that that it was believed the Earth was flat until disproved by Magellan.

If you argue from a single corner of the room you will miss the ideas of the other 3 corners and the meeting of those ideas somewhere in the middle. 😉

The Greeks measured the circumference of the Earth 2,500 years ago.

 

Using Science, great discoveries have been made. 

 

Follow the evidence.

[puck2]

On 9/29/2023 at 8:58 AM, Danderman123 said:

One major difference between South Asians (Indians) and east Asians (Thai, Chinese, Japanese) comes from when humans traveled from Africa into India, and then into Indochina and China, they encountered Something Else. There were already hominids living in Indochina and China, just not Homo Sapiens. East Asians carry a small genetic reminder of their encounter with these hominids, known as Denisovans, as a result East Asians are distinct from other Homo Sapiens.

 

 

 

Hmmm ......... Great recording of a picture on a digital camera many thousand years ago 😉.

 

 

How much was the license fee?

 

 

Edited November 6, 2023 by puck2

[Danderman123]

1 minute ago, puck2 said:

 

Hmmm ......... Great recording of a picture on a digital camera many thousand years ago 😉.

 

How much was the license fee?

 

 

An artist's conception. The first image I have seen that indicates why Asians don't look like their African ancestors.