Major DNA ancestry database now correctly lists Pakistanis as Central Asian

[Gandhi G in da house]

All major Pakistani ethnic groups cluster together and share a very close genetic admixture. Pashtuns, Punjabis, Sindhis, Baloch, Kashmiris, etc... are closer to each other than any other ethnic group in terms of genetics.

Is this because of inter-marriage and mixing ?

If Pashtuns of Pakistan are so similar to Pakistani Punjabis, that means they must be genetically different from Pashtuns of Afghanistan now ? Similarly, the Pakistani Punjabis must be different from Indian Punjabis now because of mixing with Pashtuns etc. ?

 

[SingHee]

The land that compromises modern-day Pakistan has always been an Indo-Aryan speaking region (post-Harrapan), even that of KPK. Persian was a court language for some dynasties, correct, but for the vast majority of our ancestors, they (or at one time) largely spoke an Indo-Aryan language.

You are right that Punjabi was developed around the 13th century, but before that, they spoke Indo-Aryan languages, such as Gandhari of KPK, East Afghanistan and North Punjab. These languages would combine, mix, develop and mutate to create the various Indo-Aryan dialects/languages of Pakistan today such as Punjabi, Sindhi, Seraiki, Hindko, Dardic, Pahari, etc...

However, our native languages are only spoken by around 3-4% of the Indian Population, so a linguistic connection to Indians is a bit irrelevant. When they bring up Pakistanis being able to speak/understand "Urdu-Hindi", they need to realize that Urdu is a language that we adopted (like English) and only around 8% of Pakistanis speak Urdu as their mother tongue. Prior to 1947, hardly anyone in modern-day Pakistan spoke Urdu.

Languages do indeed mix and develop as you say, but we do know that they carry similar genetics as other Central Asian populations and the R1 Y-chromosome haplogroup in much of the population. Therefore, as they mixed with similar people at the same time as the Persian language was being formed in the region, it must be assumed they were speakers of a very similar language at the time.

Of course, many of these languages have continued to develop and diversify over time, so the changes we see today may not have been as distinct from a historic perspective of the Steppe language. Moreover, the Iranic and Indo eponym is so highly politicised, I have stopped putting any weight in it.

 

[ACE OF THE AIR]

so indus valley civilization has now become central asian ?

Well read some history first. Indus valley Civilization left river indus and settled at the banks of a river due East i.e Ganga. This was due to many factors but the most prominent one was the uncontrollable nature of Indus River which would change direction and floods. Later on this Civilization was renamed the Indian Civilization. The invasion of Alexander The Great which ending the Arian empire form the region which is currently Pakistan was the final nail in the coffin. Later on the fighters of the Alexander continued his conquest and settled here. People of Kalash. https://www.thebrokebackpacker.com/exploring-the-kalash-valley-in-pakistan/

The modern day Pakistan descendants are great grand children of mainly central asian origin and middle east.

 

[Talwar e Pakistan]

So we have gone from al-bakistani to mountain dwellers

I dont like this sweeping mentality of uniform ethnicity in Pakistan.
Pakistan will always remain a multi-ethnic nation and this diversity is what makes us strong.
Its pathetic to see fellow Pakistani's trying to lump themselves with arabs or persians or central asian.

We are separate ethnic groups, that does not mean we are also genetically distinct. Ethnicity focuses on a cultural-linguistic aspect.

 

[Shah_Deu]

Sorry for going off topic but since you said this -

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ans-after-ny-bomb-scare-idUSTRE64655Y20100507

Pakistanis pose as Indians after NY bomb scare

We can sit here on a Pakistani forum, throw insults at Indians all day and get a dozen likes but the ground realities wont change.

Just the freedom and decency that you enjoy on this forum without being abused (unlike IDRW and likes) speaks for itself! We wouldnt be acting this way if we ever wanted to be like you!

 

[Talwar e Pakistan]

Awww don't cry. Wisdom is all over the internet. It was the Aryan invasion which drove the Dravidian inhabitants of the Indus Valley Southward. Get out of your Pakistan Studies text book.

I am too lazy and I am not here to spoon feed you. You are free not to believe.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/259980920_Dravidian_is_the_language_of_the_Indus_writing

One that I found after brief research.

Here, one more-

https://www.harappa.com/sites/default/files/pdf/script-indus-parpola.pdf

You need to understand that this is simply one of countless theories and is based upon the Elamite-Dravidian hypothesis which explains that the Indus Region was colonized by Iranian Neolithic Farmers from Elam who created the Indus Valley Civilization, some migrated into modern-day India and mixed in with a majority aborigine-like indigenous population to create the Dravidians.

The theory doesn't state anything about "Dravidian Inhabitants of the Indus Valley" being pushed out by Aryans. There is no conclusive evidence for this, but there definitely is a possibility.

Also, your first article is based off of an "independent researcher" who has no credibility.

Is this because of inter-marriage and mixing ?

If Pashtuns of Pakistan are so similar to Pakistani Punjabis, that means they must be genetically different from Pashtuns of Afghanistan now ? Similarly, the Pakistani Punjabis must be different from Indian Punjabis now because of mixing with Pashtuns etc. ?

Not at all, this is primarily due to sharing the same two main genetic components. This also extends to NW Indians (such as Punjabis) who are closer to Pakistani ethnic groups than they are to other Indian ethnic groups. While some sparse NW Indians such as the Ror of Haryana are even closer to Tajiks than they are to North Indians.

 

[denel]

In line with scientific research findings, people of Pakistan origin are now correctly listed as Central Asian in one of the largest and most reputed commercially available ancestry DNA testing databases.

AncestryDNA now lists all ethnic Pakistanis in the Central Asia - South category, as this is now the accepted norm in scientific research papers. Following the same norms, Afghanistan and Tajikistan are also included in the same category. I had earlier also reported the scientific research findings and papers concerning Pakistan, but seeing it now included in a major commercial ancestry genetic test is quite interesting.

The personal DNA testing company adds the following specific details for the region:



Images depicting the geographic region

View attachment 585910 View attachment 585911 View attachment 585912

i question this entire scheme.
For example the entire monsoon corridor is of mixed ancestry- this is incorrect overall. Same also for iran - over 20 plus distinct ethnicities or even across central asia - e.g. uzbek - over 4 distinct seperate groupings.

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

In line with scientific research findings, people of Pakistan origin are now correctly listed as Central Asian in one of the largest and most reputed commercially available ancestry DNA testing databases.

AncestryDNA now lists all ethnic Pakistanis in the Central Asia - South category, as this is now the accepted norm in scientific research papers. Following the same norms, Afghanistan and Tajikistan are also included in the same category. I had earlier also reported the scientific research findings and papers concerning Pakistan, but seeing it now included in a major commercial ancestry genetic test is quite interesting.

The personal DNA testing company adds the following specific details for the region:



Images depicting the geographic region

View attachment 585910 View attachment 585911 View attachment 585912

Finally, they are correctly depicting our ancestral origins from Mongolia and Central Asia as Iranic nomads.

I wrote about it previously in my thread on the topic, we are mostly Iranic origin people (includes Punjab, Sindh, Kashmir too.)

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/the-sakas-scythians-kushans-hephthalites-white-huns.610977/

 

[Gandhi G in da house]

You need to understand that this is simply one of countless theories and is based upon the Elamite-Dravidian hypothesis which explains that the Indus Region was colonized by Iranian Neolithic Farmers from Elam who created the Indus Valley Civilization, some migrated into modern-day India and mixed in with a majority aborigine-like indigenous population to create the Dravidians.

The theory doesn't state anything about "Dravidian Inhabitants of the Indus Valley" being pushed out by Aryans. There is no conclusive evidence for this, but there definitely is a possibility.

Also, your first article is based off of an "independent researcher" who has no credibility.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/41927733?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

Clyde Ahmad has published as well.

The Dravidian theory is the most widely accepted theory about the IVC now. There are many more sources on the internet about this besides what I posted.

 

[Talwar e Pakistan]

Finally, they are correctly depicting our ancestral origins from Mongolia and Central Asia as Iranic nomads.

I wrote about it previously in my thread on the topic, we are mostly Iranic origin people (includes Punjab, Sindh, Kashmir too.)

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/the-sakas-scythians-kushans-hephthalites-white-huns.610977/

We're really not, we don't have ancestral origins from Mongolia except for fringe ethnic groups like the Hazara. Mongoloid/Turkic admixture is nearly nil among Pakistanis.

Scythians, Kushans, Bactrians and etc... who were indeed North East Iranic had a genetic impact upon Pakistanis but it pales in comparison to our two main genetic components.

 

[krash]

Heck us Pakhtoon arent even the same in our own ethnicity. We may speak pakhto and follow our code but we arent the same.

Haha, true. Neither are Punjabis, tbh. Then you have that whole belt of Saraikis to make it even more interesting.

NW Indians are related to all major ethnic groups of Pakistan, including Baloch and Pashtuns. Though these NW Indians make up a meager 3-4% of the Indian population. You even have the Ror from Haryana (originated from Sindh) that are more West Asian shifted than most Pashtuns.

These are immigrant populations, no?

Do you have any estimates of how many Sindhis and Punjabis are of Baloch origin ?

A fair bit many. The admixture in Southern Punjab reached levels where they now identify as a completely separate ethnic group, i.e. Saraikis. Their language is also a mixture of Punjabi, Balochi and Sindhi.

Iranic is fine, but to exclusively say Persian is incorrect.

Well, tomato tomato, no?

Pashto came much later and wasn't a dominant language in modern-day KPK which largely spoke an Indo-Aryan language known as Gandhari until 800-1000 AD.

The modern formalised form of Pashto came later. Proto-Pashto is recorded as far back as the time of the Greco-Bactrian Kingdoms, also evidenced by Pashto's import of Greek words.

The Achaemenids didn't technically "rule" modern-day Pakistan, they had invaded and forced the defeated polities to become tributary states. These polities were largely autonomous, had their own kings and armies, hence Persian influence was minimal. When Alexander arrived, there was no evidence of any Persian remnants.

Incorrect. Cyrus' armies physically invaded modern day Pakistan from north west and then worked their way south. These conquered lands were made into the satrapies (provinces) of Gandara (known as Parapamisadae by the Greeks), Sattagydia and Maka. We know of the former two from the Behistun Inscription. The Greek historians Xenophon and Ctesias even suggest that Cyrus conquered as far as into modern day India. Modern historians however place these satrapies till the banks of Indus.

Later on Darius I conquered an additional province which he names as 'Hidush' in his inscriptions. This was later transliterated to Hindush and then Indos by the Greeks. It is believed that it was still under Achaemenid control when Alexander invaded.

Regardless, the original point was about ancient Persian influence in the lands of modern day Pakistan.

Sorry for going off topic but since you said this -

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ans-after-ny-bomb-scare-idUSTRE64655Y20100507

Pakistanis pose as Indians after NY bomb scare

Haha, yeah. Pakistanis in foreign lands posed as Indians to avoid Islamophobia at its zenith. You know, the way Indian Muslims have had to pose as Hindus to save themselves since centuries. Glad that you could find some solace at a time when even Indian expats don't want to be identified as such.

We can sit here on a Pakistani forum, throw insults at Indians all day and get a dozen likes but the ground realities wont change.

Insults were not thrown at any Indian. Your statements, specifically, were ridiculed. There's little more that they deserve. Your feelings were just collateral damage. Ground realities.

 

[Talwar e Pakistan]

https://www.jstor.org/stable/41927733?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

Clyde Ahmad has published as well.

The Dravidian theory is the most widely accepted theory about the IVC now. There are many more sources on the internet about this besides what I posted.

It is a popular theory, but definitely not the most widely accepted theory.

Also, these "Dravidians of IVC" are no where close to the Dravidians of today, who mostly descend from an indigenous population that adopted the language of the IVC migrants.

These are immigrant populations, no?

All populations are immigrant populations, ancestors of the IVC are thought to have come from Elam (Southern Iran) or the fertile crescent while the ancestors of the Vedic Aryans originated from the steppes of Siberia.

 

[SingHee]

i question this entire scheme.
For example the entire monsoon corridor is of mixed ancestry- this is incorrect overall. Same also for iran - over 20 plus distinct ethnicities or even across central asia - e.g. uzbek - over 4 distinct seperate groupings.

Please check below.

Finally, they are correctly depicting our ancestral origins from Mongolia and Central Asia as Iranic nomads.

I wrote about it previously in my thread on the topic, we are mostly Iranic origin people (includes Punjab, Sindh, Kashmir too.)

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/the-sakas-scythians-kushans-hephthalites-white-huns.610977/

Similar to the scientists who created the ancestry database, I prefer to use the word Persianite, which is a more accurate description of linguistics, culture, history and genetic affinity within the Steppe people of Central Asia.

Modern Iranians, similar to Indians, are largely adoptees, but who played a relatively more significant role in the historic formation of the culture.

Thank you for the link, I will read through the contents.

 

[xyxmt]

so indus valley civilization has now become central asian ?

yes clearly Indus has nothing to do with India

 

[Indus Pakistan]

so indus valley civilization has now become central asian ?

No, it is what it always has been. A Indus River civilzation with hinterlands going deep into Afghanistan. Thus we can call this Af-Pak. Refer to annotated map below of River Indus. Of course Ganga India is nicely missing from this whereas Pakistan is focal point.

No, this only concerns the current inhabitants of Pakistan.

This is about coterminous Pakistan. Yes 'coterminous'.

neither is it accurate to group 1/4th of the world population into one category "South Asians/Indians".

Well said. I have always found it amusing how people in Europe, walking on a bland white canvas, take one step here, "oh Irish", one here "oh English", one step there "oh German, Dane, Welsh, Norweigan, Swede, Dutch, Belgian all in a space of 300 miles and 250 million people who practically look, smell the same. Yet in our part of the world 1,400 miles of geography, with 1.8 billion people [like you said 1/4 of humanity] every religion you can imagine, every language family, every differant environment from desert, to tropical swamps to ice cold mountains are all the same. Lumped into just one monolith.

Wtf?

Those of you have followed will know I have always included Sikh Punjab, Himachel Pradesh as being Indus people. The findings here fit with my view nicely. Only about 3% fragment of India is Indus people.

Within in India they have two broad divides. The northern arc dominated by Ganga swamps and a souther peninsula dominated by deccan India. The findings again confirm this divide.