PDA

View Full Version : Me vs. Some South Asian People



TJRocks760
03-13-2018, 05:46 PM
Hey all,

I hesitated to ask this, but I want to get this off my chest mainly because I'm hoping others could relate.

So, I've had some discussion over the past year with family and other people about some of my results. I showed them my GedMatch results or talked about the little info I have about ANI and ASI for South Asians.

Perhaps I'm doing it the wrong way or perhaps I shouldn't discuss it ever at all. But, it seems as though the South Asians I talk to will listen to what I have to say at first and then later it's like they're a whole new person. The discussion is exciting at first but then they almost attack me saying things like I'm, "trying to be white."

I don't even know what to say to that.

Sapporo
03-13-2018, 06:39 PM
What do you mean by "trying to be white?" By discussing the West Eurasian (ANI like) versus "indigenous" ASI like related components among South Asians? The Steppe NE Euro admixture? You're not giving enough detail. Also, for people who are for a better lack of a term, "ignorant" about South Asian genetics, a lot of the stuff we discuss might come across as offensive or "trying to be this or that" to the average person. I don't got into detailed discussions regarding admixture calculators or ancient DNA with my friends or family. Only people on this forum whom I know in person or on social media.

TJRocks760
03-13-2018, 06:48 PM
Sapporo yes all of the above! And the stuff I've learned on this forum from people like khana, parsar, etc.

I recently found out about my great grandma being persian from a cousin I hadnt talked to for over 20+ years and so we started talking about my results. He didn't say anything negative, but conversations like the one I had with my cousin come up quite a bit between friends and family.

My assumption is that this information should be spread to those "ignorant" about South Asian genetics so it excites me to talk about what I've learned, but in return for sharing the knowledge I feel rather than others show same excitement it's like they've been offended by something or attack me personally.

deuterium_1
03-13-2018, 07:29 PM
I understand what the OP of this thread is talking about, I had to explain to one of my cousins why claiming Central Asian ancestry among Pakistanis and North Indians is not such a big deal since many (if not most) of us have some Bronze Age Central Asian DNA from the Andronovo culture.

TJRocks760
03-13-2018, 08:03 PM
Thank you for sharing your experience. I feel that this was important for me. I did feel like maybe I was going about it the wrong way but your reply makes me think maybe it's not what I'm doing wrong.

I too talk similarly as you about what you mentioned your reply.

So how do you usually handle this type of negative comment?

redifflal
03-13-2018, 10:37 PM
There's a lot of pseudo science in the air about genetics and race etc. I was discussing my genographic results with my grandmother's brother (a professor and internationally renown in his field). I casually mentioned my autosomal percentages, and my own interpretation (gathered from input on this forum) regarding ANI ASI Neolithic bronze age Indo European etc... before going further, I feel it is important to mention some physical background here.
My grandmother's father was a West Bengal Brahmin, long headed sharp featured fair complexions broad shouldered and was over 6 feet tall. My grandmother's mother is also a Bengali Brahmin but with roots in eastern Bangladesh, and she was very dark skinned, button nosed and round faced and very very short. As expected in recombination of varied phenotypes, my grandmother got her father's side's light complexion and sharp features but was still very short like her mom's side, while her brother got nothing from his dad and is an exact replica of the males on his mom's side.
So after I tell him my percentages, he legitimately ponders and says, "hmm I wonder how much your grandmother must be... If you are 74% Caucasian then she must be 90%. I'm probably like 40%."
I was like wtf yo. It is one thing trying to guess from my results as to what my grandmother would be. But why would my grandmother and him have any difference? I figured he probably thought this was some kind of colonial craniometry crap lol. After that I stopped telling anyone anything about genetics because there is a learning curve. Matter of fact, there is an unlearning curve first, then the learning curve.

deuterium_1
03-13-2018, 11:39 PM
Thank you for sharing your experience. I feel that this was important for me. I did feel like maybe I was going about it the wrong way but your reply makes me think maybe it's not what I'm doing wrong.

I too talk similarly as you about what you mentioned your reply.

So how do you usually handle this type of negative comment?

Well in my case, it is usually because of identity. The majority of opposition to my DNA results comes from my Pakistani side, my Indian side do not really have much trouble accepting the results since we have always said that we are descended from converts. We also celebrate the main Hindu festivals like Dussehra, Diwali and Holi as well as both Eids so I have grown up embracing both parts of my cultural heritage (both Hinduism and Islam).

The only Indians who was sceptical of my results was a friend influenced by the writings of Periyar (who famously didn't believe in the Aryan Invasion Theory) and another one whose views was more in line with Hindu nationalist thought.

Are you of Indian or Pakistani descent by the way?.

TJRocks760
03-14-2018, 12:50 AM
I'm Pakistani descent. I love the Hindu festivals so I celebrate with my Indian friends and then Eid etc with my family. I don't identify as either religiously though.

My biological anthropology professor believed in the out of india theory and he was Australian born. Regardless, that class really got me interested in the evolution of human species and the migration pathways of humans Out of Africa. Ever since watching Bill Nye the eyes of nye episode on race I had been wanting to do my own test. But that class got me interested and Spencer Wells documentary Journey of Man was a recommended documentary for me in class. In it he travels to India to do dna testing and that sort of opened my eyes as well. My professor seemed pretty level headed he taught out of africa theory quite well so I was pretty surprised when a student asked his views and he didn't accept himself what he was teaching in class. To me he was a good educator even though likely wrong.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HyXhS_KHjBQ


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_xTG6VXlIQ


This is fascinating for me but if I have to be attacked by people who I know including family and friends I don't want to be apart of it.

Censored
03-14-2018, 03:42 AM
I don't even know where to start on all the bogus crap I see coming from South Asians regarding genetics and ethnicity.
You have people claiming Pakistanis and North Indians are the exact same. You have people claiming there are "Aryans" and "Dravidians" in India which are supposedly two distinct races. Some people claiming that north Indians are heavily mixed with recent invaders like Greeks and Moghuls.

Then there are people claiming all kinds of foreign ancestry which rarely, if ever, turns out to be real. And of course every other Indian on the internet insisting that they don't "look Indian" and that they look "Persian, Greek, or Italian" when they just look like the guy from Harold and Kumar.

Am I alone in feeling like our community is a lost cause when it comes to education?

TJRocks760
03-14-2018, 06:26 AM
Honestly, it's the "you're trying to be white," mentality that might be stopping South Asians from getting that education. I was talking to a Paki girl the other day who wishes she was arab or persian rather than Paki. But, the question is where's this coming from? I've talked to others who refuse to strictly identify as Paki but instead claim Italian heritage when clearly that's not the case.

On a side note, my lithuanian friend just found out that he has Italian heritage. Our other Italian friend said he can accept him into the Italian community. So, as a joke I claimed 0.03% Italian so they can claim me as one of theirs.

deuterium_1
03-14-2018, 08:14 AM
I'm Pakistani descent. I love the Hindu festivals so I celebrate with my Indian friends and then Eid etc with my family. I don't identify as either religiously though.

My biological anthropology professor believed in the out of india theory and he was Australian born. Regardless, that class really got me interested in the evolution of human species and the migration pathways of humans Out of Africa. Ever since watching Bill Nye the eyes of nye episode on race I had been wanting to do my own test. But that class got me interested and Spencer Wells documentary Journey of Man was a recommended documentary for me in class. In it he travels to India to do dna testing and that sort of opened my eyes as well. My professor seemed pretty level headed he taught out of africa theory quite well so I was pretty surprised when a student asked his views and he didn't accept himself what he was teaching in class. To me he was a good educator even though likely wrong.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HyXhS_KHjBQ


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_xTG6VXlIQ


This is fascinating for me but if I have to be attacked by people who I know including family and friends I don't want to be apart of it.

The Out of India Theory is unfortunately politically motivated, it is not unlike an Indian version of Eurocentrism or Afrocentrism.



I don't even know where to start on all the bogus crap I see coming from South Asians regarding genetics and ethnicity.
You have people claiming Pakistanis and North Indians are the exact same. You have people claiming there are "Aryans" and "Dravidians" in India which are supposedly two distinct races. Some people claiming that north Indians are heavily mixed with recent invaders like Greeks and Moghuls.

Then there are people claiming all kinds of foreign ancestry which rarely, if ever, turns out to be real. And of course every other Indian on the internet insisting that they don't "look Indian" and that they look "Persian, Greek, or Italian" when they just look like the guy from Harold and Kumar.

Am I alone in feeling like our community is a lost cause when it comes to education?

Pakistanis and North Indians are very similar though, especially Punjabis on both sides of the border. I have family in Lahore who have married local Punjabis (I think Khokhars if I recall) so they are pretty assimilated.

In Britain we have both Indian and Pakistani Punjabis, it is difficult to tell the difference sometimes even as someone who is from Delhi originally where there are many Punjabis (some of whom originate from what is now Pakistan).



Honestly, it's the "you're trying to be white," mentality that might be stopping South Asians from getting that education. I was talking to a Paki girl the other day who wishes she was arab or persian rather than Paki. But, the question is where's this coming from? I've talked to others who refuse to strictly identify as Paki but instead claim Italian heritage when clearly that's not the case.

On a side note, my lithuanian friend just found out that he has Italian heritage. Our other Italian friend said he can accept him into the Italian community. So, as a joke I claimed 0.03% Italian so they can claim me as one of theirs.

It doesn't help integration in Britain I feel, if they are concerned with claiming a mythical Arabic or Persian ancestor to feel different from both Indians and people here, check this video out:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1c0dvmRlR0

Censored
03-14-2018, 09:50 AM
Pakistanis and North Indians are very similar though, especially Punjabis on both sides of the border. I have family in Lahore who have married local Punjabis (I think Khokhars if I recall) so they are pretty assimilated.

In Britain we have both Indian and Pakistani Punjabis, it is difficult to tell the difference sometimes even as someone who is from Delhi originally where there are many Punjabis (some of whom originate from what is now Pakistan).

Well I think a distinction can be made between Northwest Indians and north Indians as a whole. North India also includes Uttar Pradesh and in many definitions Bihar. Those people are different from Pakistani Punjabis. And Punjabis are the closest to North Indians after Muhajirs. When you consider Sindhis, Pashtuns, and Baluch, the notion falls apart pretty quickly.

I guess what really bothers me about this whole thing is that it always starts with someone saying "Pakistanis are much lighter than Indians" and some Indian inevitably replies back with "No, Pakistanis are different from south Indians but Pakistanis and North Indians are exactly the same". Something about this seems self hating and delusional, especially when people from the NW of the subcontinent have a different look and genetics compared to those in the North Central region.

Basically it is a kind of political move by a lot of North Indians to distance themselves from South Indians and allow themselves to feel superior.

bmoney
03-14-2018, 10:35 AM
Well I think a distinction can be made between Northwest Indians and north Indians as a whole. North India also includes Uttar Pradesh and in many definitions Bihar. Those people are different from Pakistani Punjabis. And Punjabis are the closest to North Indians after Muhajirs. When you consider Sindhis, Pashtuns, and Baluch, the notion falls apart pretty quickly.

I guess what really bothers me about this whole thing is that it always starts with someone saying "Pakistanis are much lighter than Indians" and some Indian inevitably replies back with "No, Pakistanis are different from south Indians but Pakistanis and North Indians are exactly the same". Something about this seems self hating and delusional, especially when people from the NW of the subcontinent have a different look and genetics compared to those in the North Central region.

Basically it is a kind of political move by a lot of North Indians to distance themselves from South Indians and allow themselves to feel superior.

South Indians and Dalits are proxy for the indigenous South Asians who sit on the bottom of the South Asian social ladder.

Given that all SAs are technically mixed-race, some much more than others, this gives us tremendous insecurities about our self-perception like it does with other admixed groups

You have people trying to associate with pure ancestries such as Indo-Aryans with the Vedic Aryans and some Tamils with Lemuria

Agree, the whole term 'North India' is a misnomer more to be used as a proxy for Indo-Aryans who do form a cultural bloc but differ quite a bit in phenotype among themselves.

Punjabis, Kashmiris, Paharis and Haryanvis are used to stereotype North Indians, excluding other Indo-Aryans from Central, East and communities in West India who form the majority

From what I've observed South Indians do consider North Indians to be fairer skinned and different of appearance, but not significantly different. This might be due to most South Indians interacting more with Indo-Aryans such as Marathis, Biharis and UP people and less so Punjabis and Pahari people.

Ask anyone in Delhi how phenotype changes the moment you take a bus to Agra and enter UP, you know there are distinct 'looks' in India associated with regions and further structured by caste, NW, North-Central, East, West, South with regional overlaps. Genetics is consistent with this.

However in countries like UK, Australia and Canada where Punjabis form a large proportion of SA diaspora and the majority of North Indians, Punjabis technically are statistically the proxy for North Indians and when you say North Indian here you're generally referring to Punjabis whether Hindu or Sikh.

Are Pakistanis fairer than Indians? - on the whole yes this true and they also have less ASI ancestry on average, though this is probably due to old West Eurasian rather than recent Turco-Arab-Persian ancestry. The variation between them and NW Indians however is not much, and they do have old ASI pockets shown by samples such as PJL though they aren't numerically the majority like with India

bmoney
03-14-2018, 10:50 AM
I don't even know where to start on all the bogus crap I see coming from South Asians regarding genetics and ethnicity.
You have people claiming Pakistanis and North Indians are the exact same. You have people claiming there are "Aryans" and "Dravidians" in India which are supposedly two distinct races. Some people claiming that north Indians are heavily mixed with recent invaders like Greeks and Moghuls.

Then there are people claiming all kinds of foreign ancestry which rarely, if ever, turns out to be real. And of course every other Indian on the internet insisting that they don't "look Indian" and that they look "Persian, Greek, or Italian" when they just look like the guy from Harold and Kumar.

Am I alone in feeling like our community is a lost cause when it comes to education?

LOLL - to play the devils advocate Indo-Aryans do have a recent admixture wave the Dravidians did not receive (Moorjani) - if you look at any PCA you will see a north bloc, east bloc and south bloc with decent overlap among them all, but general regions corresponding to geography.

Except maybe Dalits who Razib has said rarely differ whether from UP or Tamil Nadu, and of course Brahmin South Indians who have the steppe signal

So to generalise - yes there is a concept such as Dravidians who are two way ancient West Eurasian (Iran_N) + ASI and Indo-Aryans who are 3-way ancient West Eurasian (Iran_N) + ASI + Steppe

deuterium_1
03-14-2018, 11:18 AM
Well I think a distinction can be made between Northwest Indians and north Indians as a whole. North India also includes Uttar Pradesh and in many definitions Bihar. Those people are different from Pakistani Punjabis. And Punjabis are the closest to North Indians after Muhajirs. When you consider Sindhis, Pashtuns, and Baluch, the notion falls apart pretty quickly.

I guess what really bothers me about this whole thing is that it always starts with someone saying "Pakistanis are much lighter than Indians" and some Indian inevitably replies back with "No, Pakistanis are different from south Indians but Pakistanis and North Indians are exactly the same". Something about this seems self hating and delusional, especially when people from the NW of the subcontinent have a different look and genetics compared to those in the North Central region.

Basically it is a kind of political move by a lot of North Indians to distance themselves from South Indians and allow themselves to feel superior.

Sindhis are also pretty close to North Indians too, in terms of phenotypes some look like their North Indian neighbours too.

They do resemble each other a lot to be honest. Even some Kashmiris can resemble Punjabis, I recall reading on these forums that there may be some genetic affiliation between both groups too?. There is definitely evidence of migration between both regions, one example being Nawaz Sharif:

22102


South Indians and Dalits are proxy for the indigenous South Asians who sit on the bottom of the South Asian social ladder.

Given that all SAs are technically mixed-race, some much more than others, this gives us tremendous insecurities about our self-perception like it does with other admixed groups

You have people trying to associate with pure ancestries such as Indo-Aryans with the Vedic Aryans and some Tamils with Lemuria

Agree, the whole term 'North India' is a misnomer more to be used as a proxy for Indo-Aryans who do form a cultural bloc but differ quite a bit in phenotype among themselves.

Punjabis, Kashmiris, Paharis and Haryanvis are used to stereotype North Indians, excluding other Indo-Aryans from Central, East and communities in West India who form the majority

From what I've observed South Indians do consider North Indians to be fairer skinned and different of appearance, but not significantly different. This might be due to most South Indians interacting more with Indo-Aryans such as Marathis, Biharis and UP people and less so Punjabis and Pahari people.

Ask anyone in Delhi how phenotype changes the moment you take a bus to Agra and enter UP, you know there are distinct 'looks' in India associated with regions and further structured by caste, NW, North-Central, East, West, South with regional overlaps. Genetics is consistent with this.

However in countries like UK, Australia and Canada where Punjabis form a large proportion of SA diaspora and the majority of North Indians, Punjabis technically are statistically the proxy for North Indians and when you say North Indian here you're generally referring to Punjabis whether Hindu or Sikh.

Are Pakistanis fairer than Indians? - on the whole yes this true and they also have less ASI ancestry on average, though this is probably due to old West Eurasian rather than recent Turco-Arab-Persian ancestry. The variation between them and NW Indians however is not much, and they do have old ASI pockets shown by samples such as PJL though they aren't numerically the majority like with India

From what I have seen on these forums, there have only been a handful of samples which do show some Persian or Arabi ancestry. It is generally in regions on the western coast of India which are known to have had trade links with the Arabian Peninsula since antiquity.


LOLL - to play the devils advocate Indo-Aryans do have a recent admixture wave the Dravidians did not receive (Moorjani) - if you look at any PCA you will see a north bloc, east bloc and south bloc with decent overlap among them all, but general regions corresponding to geography.

Except maybe Dalits who Razib has said rarely differ whether from UP or Tamil Nadu, and of course Brahmin South Indians who have the steppe signal

So to generalise - yes there is a concept such as Dravidians who are two way ancient West Eurasian (Iran_N) + ASI and Indo-Aryans who are 3-way ancient West Eurasian (Iran_N) + ASI + Steppe

My maternal side despite being Bihari do resemble Punjabis somewhat in terms of phenotype. I posted my grandfather's DNA results in another thread and it probably reflects endogamy practices in his family which preserved their Pre-Islamic caste identity.

MonkeyDLuffy
03-14-2018, 01:21 PM
Issue with South Asians is that aside from some minority like us which probably makes up .0001% of the SA population, no one else knows about genetics and always go with phenotypes. With a subcontinent of over a billion of people, of such mixed heritages, it is very easy for atypicals to pop up or certain community preserves certain looks regardless of their genetics.

If you talk to a regular joe, he will look at only the phenotype, and would associate genetics with that. Hence you have have communities in SA especially muslims claiming such exotic lineages, but in reality very small percentages have mix, which is usually very diluted as well unless someone is recently mixed like Khana's family. In old times you could just move from one kingdom to other kingdom and claim to be any Caste or community you'd like. Let's say a Dalit moves from Punjab (who can look like other punjabis) moves to old time Karnataka and claims to be brahmin. There is no way to verify him since it was very easy to lie and no one would go to Punjab to verify it. Now this Dalit will marry with local Brahmin community and his genetics will become part of that community.

I usually post straight forward harsh replies because being on anthro forums for almost 6-7 years now I have seen amazing claims which makes no sense, and so have I seen exotic claims among muslim population of SA. Good chunk of muslims I meet from karachi claim to be syed, then you have someone from Bengal claiming to be Turkish while scoring exactly like a Bengali. Where did this inferiority came from? People who were from privileged communities, when they converted to Islam they either kept their last names like Muslim punjabis or knew they converted. So such claims does not come from them.

Redifflal's comment reminds me of my talk with my mom when my results came in, when I told her I score almost identical to a Punjabi Brahmin, and very similar to Kashmiris. She was like "Oh that means we're from Brahmin background, because Hindu Tarkhans claim to be descendant of Brahmins". I facepalmed but I don't blame her. It just helps pushing the agenda and a normal person would interrupt it in a way they would like. On my journey on anthroforums, I have posted my pic, my family pics, and phenotypically they were guessed between straight from balkans to afghanistan and in between. I have been called half chinese or full bengali phenotypically. My genetics speak otherwise.

That is why I'm against the comfort of using phenotype to guess genetics or ancestry. If you have legit ancestry, it will show in results, if not it won't. Still at the end of the day 99% of you is South Asian, stop hating that side.

MonkeyDLuffy
03-14-2018, 01:30 PM
Well I think a distinction can be made between Northwest Indians and north Indians as a whole. North India also includes Uttar Pradesh and in many definitions Bihar. Those people are different from Pakistani Punjabis. And Punjabis are the closest to North Indians after Muhajirs. When you consider Sindhis, Pashtuns, and Baluch, the notion falls apart pretty quickly.

I guess what really bothers me about this whole thing is that it always starts with someone saying "Pakistanis are much lighter than Indians" and some Indian inevitably replies back with "No, Pakistanis are different from south Indians but Pakistanis and North Indians are exactly the same". Something about this seems self hating and delusional, especially when people from the NW of the subcontinent have a different look and genetics compared to those in the North Central region.

Basically it is a kind of political move by a lot of North Indians to distance themselves from South Indians and allow themselves to feel superior.

I never considered UP or Bihar to be part of North India. UP is a huge region, West UP is more North India like. In terms of general population, excluding khana like families which are not huge in numbers, the lowest SI scoring South Asians are Sindhi Hindus and Hindu jats from Rajasthan. The highest Euro and caucasian scoring Individuals are Hindu jats and Sindhi Hindus/Punjabi Khatris. We've a huge database of Punjabis and Kashmiri samples of both sides, and they are completely identical except couple of samples which are obviously mixed because of migration of Pashtuns or Balochs in provinces like west Punjab or Azad kashmir.

As in terms of looks both Pakistani and Indian Punjabis confirmed you can't distinguish Punjabis from each other unless they are wearing a religious attire or accessory that makes it obvious. Kenji.aryan was a Himachali brahmin, looked like someone from Dardic regions, but was more SI or east asian than average punjabi. If he was muslim he could've claimed any exotic ancestry he wants.

khanabadoshi
03-14-2018, 08:47 PM
Hey all,

I hesitated to ask this, but I want to get this off my chest mainly because I'm hoping others could relate.

So, I've had some discussion over the past year with family and other people about some of my results. I showed them my GedMatch results or talked about the little info I have about ANI and ASI for South Asians.

Perhaps I'm doing it the wrong way or perhaps I shouldn't discuss it ever at all. But, it seems as though the South Asians I talk to will listen to what I have to say at first and then later it's like they're a whole new person. The discussion is exciting at first but then they almost attack me saying things like I'm, "trying to be white."

I don't even know what to say to that.

LOL... It might surprise you that I -- the guy who types all day about this stuff on this forum, whose posts get reposted on other forums, write about this in r/Pakistan on Reddit, and reply to e-mails all day from Gedmatch -- haven't figured out how to talk about this too much with my own family, a family that is actually interested in the results (I mean how else did I get so many old people to test), -- and a family unburdened by pre-existing notions of caste or ethnic dynamics.

When I am visiting my family... the majority of the people whose results I post are sitting in the same room as me having chai. Sometimes, it comes up, "so how is all that DNA stuff coming", my mother will wonder why I tested her sister and not her, and various cousins will all be vying to be next. The first cousin I recently tested has 2 other brothers... all 3 were arguing for me to pick them over the other brother hahah. But when the topic comes up, I just give a little general breakdown... partially because it's very hard to simplify for someone who has no idea of the terminology. So you have to speak in metaphors or generalizations and you have be careful to be clear enough so that an incorrect implication is not conveyed (explaining the magnitude of a difference/similarity is not easy to covey).

However, it really comes down to this: how do I explain to them that autosomally they are so different from each other...? On this forum, Sadia and Balqees' results are seen as 2 extreme polar opposite results of people in South Asia... in my real life... Sadia and Balqees are 2 old ladies that like eating bakarkhani, probably see each other a couple times a week, and love yelling at me to get married. It may blow your mind that Sadia -- the undisputed ASI queen of my family -- is considerably fairer-skinned than Balqees -- the undisputed Steppe queen -- phenotypes people? hahahaha.

Literally, I told my family when I know more (crosses fingers for good genomes from Rakighari) I will make a power point presentation for everyone and actually write up a detailed explanation going from the basics and building up to a discussion of the complexities. Giving bits and pieces here and there, leaves rooms for twisting, and unintentional spreading of misinformation. There is no other way to really bring someone into this niche world we are in without really attempting to give them the knowledge necessary to process it first.

In short, it easy to talk about this stuff with other people also in this "journey of knowledge", but I don't feel knowledgeable enough to confidently explain any of this to an "outsider" yet, such that I don't feel worried about the consequences of them repeating my words to another.

Censored
03-14-2018, 08:54 PM
I never considered UP or Bihar to be part of North India. UP is a huge region, West UP is more North India like. In terms of general population, excluding khana like families which are not huge in numbers, the lowest SI scoring South Asians are Sindhi Hindus and Hindu jats from Rajasthan. The highest Euro and caucasian scoring Individuals are Hindu jats and Sindhi Hindus/Punjabi Khatris. We've a huge database of Punjabis and Kashmiri samples of both sides, and they are completely identical except couple of samples which are obviously mixed because of migration of Pashtuns or Balochs in provinces like west Punjab or Azad kashmir.

As in terms of looks both Pakistani and Indian Punjabis confirmed you can't distinguish Punjabis from each other unless they are wearing a religious attire or accessory that makes it obvious. Kenji.aryan was a Himachali brahmin, looked like someone from Dardic regions, but was more SI or east asian than average punjabi. If he was muslim he could've claimed any exotic ancestry he wants.

I understand Punjabis on both sides are the same. I’m also aware how much phenotype can vary within the same region. My own mom’s side resemble East Indians much more than Marathis. However there is a general acknowledgement that different subcontinental regions have an overall different look. No one has a problem admitting Gujus look different from Orissans but for some reason people get butthurt when someone suggests that Pakistani Punjabis look different from UP people? Why?

Worst is that there is a hypocrisy where certain(not all) North Indians love to proclaim how different they look from South Indians like me but get very defensive at any hint that Pakistanis are phenotypically more Caucasian compared to them. I see this a lot among self hating Indians and Hindu nationalists.

deuterium_1
03-14-2018, 09:57 PM
Issue with South Asians is that aside from some minority like us which probably makes up .0001% of the SA population, no one else knows about genetics and always go with phenotypes. With a subcontinent of over a billion of people, of such mixed heritages, it is very easy for atypicals to pop up or certain community preserves certain looks regardless of their genetics.

If you talk to a regular joe, he will look at only the phenotype, and would associate genetics with that. Hence you have have communities in SA especially muslims claiming such exotic lineages, but in reality very small percentages have mix, which is usually very diluted as well unless someone is recently mixed like Khana's family. In old times you could just move from one kingdom to other kingdom and claim to be any Caste or community you'd like. Let's say a Dalit moves from Punjab (who can look like other punjabis) moves to old time Karnataka and claims to be brahmin. There is no way to verify him since it was very easy to lie and no one would go to Punjab to verify it. Now this Dalit will marry with local Brahmin community and his genetics will become part of that community.

I usually post straight forward harsh replies because being on anthro forums for almost 6-7 years now I have seen amazing claims which makes no sense, and so have I seen exotic claims among muslim population of SA. Good chunk of muslims I meet from karachi claim to be syed, then you have someone from Bengal claiming to be Turkish while scoring exactly like a Bengali. Where did this inferiority came from? People who were from privileged communities, when they converted to Islam they either kept their last names like Muslim punjabis or knew they converted. So such claims does not come from them.

Redifflal's comment reminds me of my talk with my mom when my results came in, when I told her I score almost identical to a Punjabi Brahmin, and very similar to Kashmiris. She was like "Oh that means we're from Brahmin background, because Hindu Tarkhans claim to be descendant of Brahmins". I facepalmed but I don't blame her. It just helps pushing the agenda and a normal person would interrupt it in a way they would like. On my journey on anthroforums, I have posted my pic, my family pics, and phenotypically they were guessed between straight from balkans to afghanistan and in between. I have been called half chinese or full bengali phenotypically. My genetics speak otherwise.

That is why I'm against the comfort of using phenotype to guess genetics or ancestry. If you have legit ancestry, it will show in results, if not it won't. Still at the end of the day 99% of you is South Asian, stop hating that side.

I hinted at phenotypes because some Muslims like to attribute fair skin complexion to a foreign ancestor from the Middle East or Central Asia.


I understand Punjabis on both sides are the same. Iím also aware how much phenotype can vary within the same region. My own momís side resemble East Indians much more than Marathis. However there is a general acknowledgement that different subcontinental regions have an overall different look. No one has a problem admitting Gujus look different from Orissans but for some reason people get butthurt when someone suggests that Pakistani Punjabis look different from UP people? Why?

Worst is that there is a hypocrisy where certain(not all) North Indians love to proclaim how different they look from South Indians like me but get very defensive at any hint that Pakistanis are phenotypically more Caucasian compared to them. I see this a lot among self hating Indians and Hindu nationalists.

As someone of part UPite heritage, the state is divided into several regions including Awadh and Purvanchal which can be quite different from each other in some ways. Purvanchal for example has a substantial amount of Bhojpuri speakers while Awadh was historically a centre of Urdu speakers east of Delhi.

I haven't come across Pakistani Punjabis being compare to UPite people but between "mohajirs" and UPites it could make sense as some families did migrate to Pakistan from that region. There is still a strong affinity between Punjabis from both sides of the border especially when they meet such as in the UK.

I witnessed this during a recent family wedding where guests from Indian and Pakistan Punjab were conversing with each other in Punjabi.

kush
03-14-2018, 11:11 PM
I understand Punjabis on both sides are the same. Iím also aware how much phenotype can vary within the same region. My own momís side resemble East Indians much more than Marathis. However there is a general acknowledgement that different subcontinental regions have an overall different look. No one has a problem admitting Gujus look different from Orissans but for some reason people get butthurt when someone suggests that Pakistani Punjabis look different from UP people? Why?

Worst is that there is a hypocrisy where certain(not all) North Indians love to proclaim how different they look from South Indians like me but get very defensive at any hint that Pakistanis are phenotypically more Caucasian compared to them. I see this a lot among self hating Indians and Hindu nationalists.

Its because of the indo-aryan/dravidian division. North indians and pakistanis are indo-aryans and south indians are dravidians. This is how it's been traditionally. However these are just differences based on languages rather than race. Many indians use those two terms interchangeably to refer to language groups and race. Idk why this occurs. I won't say lack of education either since people are taught about aryan invasion and stuff and based on this most assume that north indians and south indians are of different races.. I think people assume there's an ethnic barrier after maharashtra crossing into the four south indian states and people suddenly start looking australoid or something. Thats where the problem occurs imo. Obviously a marathi dude will be closer to the next door kannadiga genetically rather than to a punjabi or kashmiri from northwest india or pakistan. I think people are not exposed to individuals from different regions, cultures, etc that much unless they go to big cities like Delhi, Mumbai, Bangalore, etc. Due to this lack of exposure, people from certain regions have general stereotypes regarding people from other regions. An average north indian thinks all south indians are 'kaala' and an average south indian assumes every state above andhra/karnataka as northern india along with how 'fair/white' they look. Can't blame north or south indians in this case since both are not exposed to each other on a regular basis.

Censored
03-14-2018, 11:33 PM
Sindhis are also pretty close to North Indians too, in terms of phenotypes some look like their North Indian neighbours too.

They do resemble each other a lot to be honest. Even some Kashmiris can resemble Punjabis, I recall reading on these forums that there may be some genetic affiliation between both groups too?. There is definitely evidence of migration between both regions, one example being Nawaz Sharif

Looking at the Harappa spreadsheet, the Sindhi average appears to be around 27% South Indian, so that is quite a bit lower than most of North India. They are probably the most western shifted of all Indo-Aryan speakers. For some reason I thought they were only around 21% South Indian so I was wrong but still not particularly close to N. India.

Also, why bring up Kashmiris? Kashmiris mostly don't even identify as Indian so using them as an example of North Indians is questionable.

I don't deny overlap but whenever people talk about "Pakistanis and North Indians" they are always using the most NW Indian groups and comparing them to the most eastern Pakistani groups to attach some kind of connection between these vast entities. Punjabis are 44% of Pakistan so I can understand why people would use them as a benchmark for that nation, but why do they use Haryana and Punjabi people to represent all North Indians when these two areas together aren't even the majority of the North Indian population?

And where do Pashtuns and Baloch Pakistanis fit into this? What about Biharis?

bmoney
03-15-2018, 12:40 AM
Looking at the Harappa spreadsheet, the Sindhi average appears to be around 27% South Indian, so that is quite a bit lower than most of North India. They are probably the most western shifted of all Indo-Aryan speakers. For some reason I thought they were only around 21% South Indian so I was wrong but still not particularly close to N. India.

Also, why bring up Kashmiris? Kashmiris mostly don't even identify as Indian so using them as an example of North Indians is questionable.

I don't deny overlap but whenever people talk about "Pakistanis and North Indians" they are always using the most NW Indian groups and comparing them to the most eastern Pakistani groups to attach some kind of connection between these vast entities. Punjabis are 44% of Pakistan so I can understand why people would use them as a benchmark for that nation, but why do they use Haryana and Punjabi people to represent all North Indians when these two areas together aren't even the majority of the North Indian population?

And where do Pashtuns and Baloch Pakistanis fit into this? What about Biharis?

Dont forget Bengalis, the second largest Indo-Aryan ethnicity and one of the largest ethnicities in the world. That reminds me, there's the other wave of NE Asian admixture in Bengal, Nepal and NE India as well as the SE Asian admixture present in Bihar, Orissa, Jharkhand, all of whom are Indo-Aryan speaking.

Marathis are also a huge cultural force in SA and have a large population. I wish there were more genetic studies into the Marathi people considering how crucial they are to the 3 main ancestral components in SA

I think the main reasons for the misconception are the fact that the Punjabi people (Pakistani + Indian) form a much larger % of the diaspora and also Bollywood (the main representation of Indo-Aryans in the media) is heavily Punjab dominated and Punjabis are considered a representation of idealised Indo-Aryan beauty

khanabadoshi
03-15-2018, 01:50 AM
Looking at the Harappa spreadsheet, the Sindhi average appears to be around 27% South Indian, so that is quite a bit lower than most of North India. They are probably the most western shifted of all Indo-Aryan speakers. For some reason I thought they were only around 21% South Indian so I was wrong but still not particularly close to N. India.

Also, why bring up Kashmiris? Kashmiris mostly don't even identify as Indian so using them as an example of North Indians is questionable.

I don't deny overlap but whenever people talk about "Pakistanis and North Indians" they are always using the most NW Indian groups and comparing them to the most eastern Pakistani groups to attach some kind of connection between these vast entities. Punjabis are 44% of Pakistan so I can understand why people would use them as a benchmark for that nation, but why do they use Haryana and Punjabi people to represent all North Indians when these two areas together aren't even the majority of the North Indian population?

And where do Pashtuns and Baloch Pakistanis fit into this? What about Biharis?

I have to agree, NW India is often used to define North India. There is a case for this, so long as one also includes at least half of Pakistani Punjab and all of Kashmir in this definition. Then you can say UP and Bihar are North-Central India, or something like that; or you keep calling UP/Bihar North India, and the former region NW India. However, you are right -- people do compare results of 2 regions that should be similar as they are right next to each other and both called Punjab... with no geographic boundary and extrapolate a conclusion to extend to a much larger scope than is reasonable. Of course, it make sense to extrapolate and say the average Pakistani is like this, since the average Pakistan does live in the northeastern portion of Pakistan Punjab... however, when it comes to Northern India... the average North Indian does not live in Punjab, nor is a Jatt, nor lives in NW portion of North India.

A Punjabi's result in India is as much representative of North India as a whole as a Pathan's result in Pakistan is of the northern half of Pakistan. It is unreasonable to define the typical Pakistani result based on a Pashtun, and thus, unreasonable to define the typical North Indian's result based on a Punjabi.

Yes, a Jatt and a high-caste Gujarati, and some other groups fall in the normal variation of Pakistani Punjab and/or Sindh, and yes lots of Pakistani Punjabis (and of course Muhajirs) fall in the range of UP/Bihar and Gujarat -- but one must keep perspective, you are comparing the majority populace of one region, to a minority populace of another. A Muhajir is a minority in Pakistan and a Punjabi is a minority in Northern India, and if one makes a distinction between a Pakistani Muhajir and a Pakistani Punjabi... then one must make a distinction between Punjab as a whole and the rest of North India.

Put it this way... Sapporo and I score similar to each other; unees bhees kay farq haan. Is it more reasonable to say that Sapporo scores like a Pakistani or that I score like a North Indian? If your gut reaction isn't to say that I score like a North Indian... then you've proved Censored's point, you have to accept that neither does Sapporo. Being native to a place doesn't preclude one from being a minority in a region as a whole.

All that being said........ I still think it is acceptable to consider everything from Pakistani Punjab to Bihar as one region with a large range of variation; so long as one keeps in perspective the average of this region is defined by someone like Parasar, not someone like me or MDL.

bmoney
03-15-2018, 02:42 AM
I have to agree, NW India is often used to define North India. There is a case for this, so long as one also includes at least half of Pakistani Punjab and all of Kashmir in this definition. Then you can say UP and Bihar are North-Central India, or something like that; or you keep calling UP/Bihar North India, and the former region NW India. However, you are right -- people do compare results of 2 regions that should be similar as they are right next to each other and both called Punjab... with no geographic boundary and extrapolate a conclusion to extend to a much larger scope than is reasonable. Of course, it make sense to extrapolate and say the average Pakistani is like this, since the average Pakistan does live in the northeastern portion of Pakistan Punjab... however, when it comes to Northern India... the average North Indian does not live in Punjab, nor is a Jatt, nor lives in NW portion of North India.

A Punjabi's result in India is as much representative of North India as a whole as a Pathan's result in Pakistan is of the northern half of Pakistan. It is unreasonable to define the typical Pakistani result based on a Pashtun, and thus, unreasonable to define the typical North Indian's result based on a Punjabi.

Yes, a Jatt and a high-caste Gujarati, and some other groups fall in the normal variation of Pakistani Punjab and/or Sindh, and yes lots of Pakistani Punjabis (and of course Muhajirs) fall in the range of UP/Bihar and Gujarat -- but one must keep perspective, you are comparing the majority populace of one region, to a minority populace of another. A Muhajir is a minority in Pakistan and a Punjabi is a minority in Northern India, and if one makes a distinction between a Pakistani Muhajir and a Pakistani Punjabi... then one must make a distinction between Punjab as a whole and the rest of North India.

Put it this way... Sapporo and I score similar to each other; unees bhees kay farq haan. Is it more reasonable to say that Sapporo scores like a Pakistani or that I score like a North Indian? If your gut reaction isn't to say that I score like a North Indian... then you've proved Censored's point, you have to accept that neither does Sapporo. Being native to a place doesn't preclude one from being a minority in a region as a whole.

All that being said........ I still think it is acceptable to consider everything from Pakistani Punjab to Bihar as one region with a large range of variation; so long as one keeps in perspective the average of this region is defined by someone like Parasar, not someone like me or MDL.

Parasar is highly NW shifted for his area, so he is atypical for Indo-Aryan SA as a whole.

I'd say I'm closer to the pop average of UP/Bihar than he is, you can see this on Pois PCAs

khanabadoshi
03-15-2018, 02:44 AM
Parasar is highly NW shifted for his area, so even he is atypical for Indo-Aryan SA as a whole. Having said that there are a lot of NW Indo-Aryans in Pakistan, so maybe he is closer to the average.

But in India, id say I'm closer to the pop average of UP/Bihar than he is

I was thinking that a Brahmin is a bad example as I typed it...LOL but I couldn't think of anyone else from North India who isn't a Brahmin and posts on here. At least the point was understood... it even furthers it... if Parasar isn't representative of Northern India than Harayana Jatt surely isn't.

Censored
03-15-2018, 03:37 AM
I have to agree, NW India is often used to define North India. There is a case for this, so long as one also includes at least half of Pakistani Punjab and all of Kashmir in this definition. Then you can say UP and Bihar are North-Central India, or something like that; or you keep calling UP/Bihar North India, and the former region NW India. However, you are right -- people do compare results of 2 regions that should be similar as they are right next to each other and both called Punjab... with no geographic boundary and extrapolate a conclusion to extend to a much larger scope than is reasonable. Of course, it make sense to extrapolate and say the average Pakistani is like this, since the average Pakistan does live in the northeastern portion of Pakistan Punjab... however, when it comes to Northern India... the average North Indian does not live in Punjab, nor is a Jatt, nor lives in NW portion of North India.

A Punjabi's result in India is as much representative of North India as a whole as a Pathan's result in Pakistan is of the northern half of Pakistan. It is unreasonable to define the typical Pakistani result based on a Pashtun, and thus, unreasonable to define the typical North Indian's result based on a Punjabi.

Yes, a Jatt and a high-caste Gujarati, and some other groups fall in the normal variation of Pakistani Punjab and/or Sindh, and yes lots of Pakistani Punjabis (and of course Muhajirs) fall in the range of UP/Bihar and Gujarat -- but one must keep perspective, you are comparing the majority populace of one region, to a minority populace of another. A Muhajir is a minority in Pakistan and a Punjabi is a minority in Northern India, and if one makes a distinction between a Pakistani Muhajir and a Pakistani Punjabi... then one must make a distinction between Punjab as a whole and the rest of North India.

Put it this way... Sapporo and I score similar to each other; unees bhees kay farq haan. Is it more reasonable to say that Sapporo scores like a Pakistani or that I score like a North Indian? If your gut reaction isn't to say that I score like a North Indian... then you've proved Censored's point, you have to accept that neither does Sapporo. Being native to a place doesn't preclude one from being a minority in a region as a whole.

All that being said........ I still think it is acceptable to consider everything from Pakistani Punjab to Bihar as one region with a large range of variation; so long as one keeps in perspective the average of this region is defined by someone like Parasar, not someone like me or MDL.

Thanks Khana, I was worried I wasn't clear enough but you got it down perfectly and explained it far better than I ever could. But I was wondering, if you would consider everyone from Punjab to Bihar as part of one region, where would Sindhis fall? They have been heavily affected by Baloch migration haven't they?

Also, how do you define the region? Are you including just the entire Gangetic plain minus Bengal?

Sapporo
03-15-2018, 05:59 AM
Looking at the Harappa spreadsheet, the Sindhi average appears to be around 27% South Indian, so that is quite a bit lower than most of North India. They are probably the most western shifted of all Indo-Aryan speakers. For some reason I thought they were only around 21% South Indian so I was wrong but still not particularly close to N. India.

You're probably extrapolating the 4-5 Sindhi Hindu samples on Harappa (mostly Lohana) for all Sindhis. I've seen some Hindu Sindhis score 30-32% SI. So, they have the same range as Jatt Sikhs as anexample. However, Muslim Sindhis form the majority of Sindhis and they are heavily Baloch shifted based on the HGDP samples (46% Baloch and around 29% South Indian with Caucasian and SW Asian usually following and some minor West African and North Eurasian). On an individual basis, some score 50%+ Baloch on Harappa which suggests clear Baloch admixture. Because of this heavy Baloch pull, they usually appear to be more "South Asian shifted" than myself on various calculators since this Baloch pull is ultimately just an Iran N pull, which is more common throughout South Asia in comparison to Caucasian or Steppe admixture that shows up on various calculators.

Either way, I wouldn't use 5-6 Haryana Jats as representative of all Haryana Jats or 4-5 Sindhis as representative of all Hindu Sindhis. On the other hand, I have over 40 Jatt Sikh (of various clans) Gedmatch kits so they're probably representative of most of the variation you would see. Overall, the differences between a group like Hindu Sindhis versus Muslim Sindhis is less Baloch affinity in the former and more Caucasus leaning for the Hindu Sindhis. Between Hindu Sindhis and Jatt Sikhs, it is a Caucasian versus Euro Steppe pull. Sindhis lean in the Caucasus direction while Jatts in the Steppe direction. At the end of the day, most of the populations in the Northwest are relatively similar. They just pull in different directions on PCA.



Also, why bring up Kashmiris? Kashmiris mostly don't even identify as Indian so using them as an example of North Indians is questionable.

I don't deny overlap but whenever people talk about "Pakistanis and North Indians" they are always using the most NW Indian groups and comparing them to the most eastern Pakistani groups to attach some kind of connection between these vast entities. Punjabis are 44% of Pakistan so I can understand why people would use them as a benchmark for that nation, but why do they use Haryana and Punjabi people to represent all North Indians when these two areas together aren't even the majority of the North Indian population?

And where do Pashtuns and Baloch Pakistanis fit into this? What about Biharis?

I agree Kashmiris aren't representative of the majority of the North Indian population (North-Central India would be such as UP). Still, for Kashmiris, it's irrelevant if they don't consider themselves Indian. They're at least still representative of NW Indians genetics wise. Both Kashmiri Pandits and Kashmiri Muslims score like Northwest South Asians (Punjabis and Sindhis) rather than Northern Dardic groups or Pashtuns. They're firmly on the South Asian cline despite what some of them might claim based on certain phenotypes that exist among them.

Censored
03-16-2018, 07:51 AM
LOLL - to play the devils advocate Indo-Aryans do have a recent admixture wave the Dravidians did not receive (Moorjani) - if you look at any PCA you will see a north bloc, east bloc and south bloc with decent overlap among them all, but general regions corresponding to geography.

Except maybe Dalits who Razib has said rarely differ whether from UP or Tamil Nadu, and of course Brahmin South Indians who have the steppe signal

So to generalise - yes there is a concept such as Dravidians who are two way ancient West Eurasian (Iran_N) + ASI and Indo-Aryans who are 3-way ancient West Eurasian (Iran_N) + ASI + Steppe

What exactly is it that signifies this steppe ancestry? Is it the NE Euro component? I wonder if this is the reason some Indians score Euro on ftDNA and 23andme and others don't.


Issue with South Asians is that aside from some minority like us which probably makes up .0001% of the SA population, no one else knows about genetics and always go with phenotypes. With a subcontinent of over a billion of people, of such mixed heritages, it is very easy for atypicals to pop up or certain community preserves certain looks regardless of their genetics.

If you talk to a regular joe, he will look at only the phenotype, and would associate genetics with that. Hence you have have communities in SA especially muslims claiming such exotic lineages, but in reality very small percentages have mix, which is usually very diluted as well unless someone is recently mixed like Khana's family. In old times you could just move from one kingdom to other kingdom and claim to be any Caste or community you'd like. Let's say a Dalit moves from Punjab (who can look like other punjabis) moves to old time Karnataka and claims to be brahmin. There is no way to verify him since it was very easy to lie and no one would go to Punjab to verify it. Now this Dalit will marry with local Brahmin community and his genetics will become part of that community.

I usually post straight forward harsh replies because being on anthro forums for almost 6-7 years now I have seen amazing claims which makes no sense, and so have I seen exotic claims among muslim population of SA. Good chunk of muslims I meet from karachi claim to be syed, then you have someone from Bengal claiming to be Turkish while scoring exactly like a Bengali. Where did this inferiority came from? People who were from privileged communities, when they converted to Islam they either kept their last names like Muslim punjabis or knew they converted. So such claims does not come from them.

Redifflal's comment reminds me of my talk with my mom when my results came in, when I told her I score almost identical to a Punjabi Brahmin, and very similar to Kashmiris. She was like "Oh that means we're from Brahmin background, because Hindu Tarkhans claim to be descendant of Brahmins". I facepalmed but I don't blame her. It just helps pushing the agenda and a normal person would interrupt it in a way they would like. On my journey on anthroforums, I have posted my pic, my family pics, and phenotypically they were guessed between straight from balkans to afghanistan and in between. I have been called half chinese or full bengali phenotypically. My genetics speak otherwise.

That is why I'm against the comfort of using phenotype to guess genetics or ancestry. If you have legit ancestry, it will show in results, if not it won't. Still at the end of the day 99% of you is South Asian, stop hating that side.

One thing I will say though, is that there is a major lack of understanding of ancient populations. People always look at Punjabis or Pashtuns phenotypically or genetically and say "See, this must be the result of the Greek invasion" when in reality this is coming from a much older source of proto-European ancestry. Laymen always assume recent admixture events/invasions/migrations are the way to explain differences but they are sadly mistaken.

Also while everyone loves to rag on South Asian Muslims for always claiming foreign ancestry, Hindus, I find, are often no better. Upper castes/North Indians claiming Aryan heritage while others claim they had a British ancestor with no proof. For some reason I see a lot of them claiming to be mixed with Persians too which is ridiculous and makes no sense whatsoever...the only explanation I can come up with is them confusing Persians with the so-called "Aryans" as Iranians often claim to be their direct descendants.

deuterium_1
03-16-2018, 10:00 AM
Looking at the Harappa spreadsheet, the Sindhi average appears to be around 27% South Indian, so that is quite a bit lower than most of North India. They are probably the most western shifted of all Indo-Aryan speakers. For some reason I thought they were only around 21% South Indian so I was wrong but still not particularly close to N. India.

Also, why bring up Kashmiris? Kashmiris mostly don't even identify as Indian so using them as an example of North Indians is questionable.

I don't deny overlap but whenever people talk about "Pakistanis and North Indians" they are always using the most NW Indian groups and comparing them to the most eastern Pakistani groups to attach some kind of connection between these vast entities. Punjabis are 44% of Pakistan so I can understand why people would use them as a benchmark for that nation, but why do they use Haryana and Punjabi people to represent all North Indians when these two areas together aren't even the majority of the North Indian population?

And where do Pashtuns and Baloch Pakistanis fit into this? What about Biharis?

There have also been demographic changes in Sindh including a large influx of migrants after Partition, I am not sure if this is detectable on a genetic level yet.

Despite their self-identification, Kashmiris are still part of this North Indian group genetically.

Many Muslim families settled from what is now Haryana and Punjab in Pakistan so this could partly explain it.


What exactly is it that signifies this steppe ancestry? Is it the NE Euro component? I wonder if this is the reason some Indians score Euro on ftDNA and 23andme and others don't.



One thing I will say though, is that there is a major lack of understanding of ancient populations. People always look at Punjabis or Pashtuns phenotypically or genetically and say "See, this must be the result of the Greek invasion" when in reality this is coming from a much older source of proto-European ancestry. Laymen always assume recent admixture events/invasions/migrations are the way to explain differences but they are sadly mistaken.

Also while everyone loves to rag on South Asian Muslims for always claiming foreign ancestry, Hindus, I find, are often no better. Upper castes/North Indians claiming Aryan heritage while others claim they had a British ancestor with no proof. For some reason I see a lot of them claiming to be mixed with Persians too which is ridiculous and makes no sense whatsoever...the only explanation I can come up with is them confusing Persians with the so-called "Aryans" as Iranians often claim to be their direct descendants.

There have been numerous foreign invasions via the Khyber Pass including the Persians, Greeks, Scythians, Kushans, Hephthalites, Turks and Mughals. This has not been represented in any results that I have seen.


The steppe ancestry present in many South Asian populations was introduced via a group which descended from the Sintashta and Andronovo cultures of Siberia who were Proto Indo-Iranians. So there is a common heritage with ancient Persians if we go back to the Bronze Age. The deity Mitra in the Rig Vedas is just one example of this common link.

parasar
03-16-2018, 04:09 PM
...
There have been numerous foreign invasions via the Khyber Pass including the Persians, Greeks, Scythians, Kushans, Hephthalites, Turks and Mughals. This has not been represented in any results that I have seen.
...

It is represented, but it is trace. For example we do come across Y-C M217 (eg. Hazara) and R1b-M73 (eg. Barlas) in South Asia.

The reason it is trace that even a substantial invasion such as that of the Mughals was highly filtered by the demographics of the areas they passed through, especially for the rank and file. Though Babar did write in Turki, for the most part the Mughals were highly Persianized which a Mongol descent mainly in name.

Same with the Arabs and Greeks. While the Macedonians may have contributed a few E, I, here and there, for the most past Indo-Greeks had completely merged into the populace of the NW.

As far as the Persians, Shak, Kushan, Pahlav/Parthav, I doubt if it was ever easy to distinguish them from Indus area populations.

deuterium_1
03-16-2018, 07:24 PM
It is represented, but it is trace. For example we do come across Y-C M217 (eg. Hazara) and R1b-M73 (eg. Barlas) in South Asia.

It is well known that the Hazara are indeed descended from Mongol soldiers in Afghanistan, some of whom are possibly descended from the NegŁderi Mongols. The Barlas mainly belong to the Mughal "caste" if I am correct?


The reason it is trace that even a substantial invasion such as that of the Mughals was highly filtered by the demographics of the areas they passed through, especially for the rank and file. Though Babar did write in Turki, for the most part the Mughals were highly Persianized which a Mongol descent mainly in name.

That is true and there are still descendants of the Mughals to be found in Old Delhi etc but they are not very numerous.William Dalrymple recounts meeting them in his book, "City of Djinns".



Same with the Arabs and Greeks. While the Macedonians may have contributed a few E, I, here and there, for the most past Indo-Greeks had completely merged into the populace of the NW.

Arabs did indeed settle on the western coast of South Asia and this is well attested such as in Kerala but more broadly families like my own who also live in Pakistan like to claim Arab descent to feel superior to the native "Ajlaf" caste which is really an appropriation of the caste system in my view but was defended as far back as the time of the Delhi Sultanate by the likes of Juzjani.

The presence of Greeks in the Indus Valley is well attested by archaeology and numismatics, for example Menander Soter reigned over Punjab and lands south of the Hindu Kush from his capital in Sialkot where he struck very pure silver coins (up to 99.19% purity (https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=wTZuAAAAMAAJ&dq=indo-greek+silver+purity&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=99.19)) thanks to the silver mines under his control. It is said that he launched raids as far as Pataliputra (Patna) in Bihar but it is unlikely that he left any genetic traces during his brief foray down the Gangetic plains.



As far as the Persians, Shak, Kushan, Pahlav/Parthav, I doubt if it was ever easy to distinguish them from Indus area populations.

Persians have seen a considerable influx of peoples into their genepool which have indeed left a mark according to what I have seen of Kurd's research. I am not sure if this is the case with India to be honest. By Shak, I presume you mean the Scythians? they survived much longer on the western coast of India particularly in Gujarat and Northern Maharasthra. I would be interested to see if this left any genetic traces especially as endogamy could have preserved it and these people were absorbed into existing Indian society through their adoption of Hindu customs etc.

The Kushans were themselves part of the Yuezhi confederation which broke away as they fled west to flee the Xiongnu. They likely absorbed many groups as many tribal confederations of the Eurasian steppe did so it would be very hard to detect any descent from them. The same would go for the Pahlav/Parthav (who I presume were the Indo-Parthians?) in that they were likely a ruling elite only and thus did not mix much with the native population.

parasar
03-17-2018, 12:35 AM
It is well known that the Hazara are indeed descended from Mongol soldiers in Afghanistan, some of whom are possibly descended from the NegŁderi Mongols. The Barlas mainly belong to the Mughal "caste" if I am correct?

That is true and there are still descendants of the Mughals to be found in Old Delhi etc but they are not very numerous.William Dalrymple recounts meeting them in his book, "City of Djinns".



Arabs did indeed settle on the western coast of South Asia and this is well attested such as in Kerala but more broadly families like my own who also live in Pakistan like to claim Arab descent to feel superior to the native "Ajlaf" caste which is really an appropriation of the caste system in my view but was defended as far back as the time of the Delhi Sultanate by the likes of Juzjani.

The presence of Greeks in the Indus Valley is well attested by archaeology and numismatics, for example Menander Soter reigned over Punjab and lands south of the Hindu Kush from his capital in Sialkot where he struck very pure silver coins (up to 99.19% purity (https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=wTZuAAAAMAAJ&dq=indo-greek+silver+purity&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=99.19)) thanks to the silver mines under his control. It is said that he launched raids as far as Pataliputra (Patna) in Bihar but it is unlikely that he left any genetic traces during his brief foray down the Gangetic plains.



Persians have seen a considerable influx of peoples into their genepool which have indeed left a mark according to what I have seen of Kurd's research. I am not sure if this is the case with India to be honest. By Shak, I presume you mean the Scythians? they survived much longer on the western coast of India particularly in Gujarat and Northern Maharasthra. I would be interested to see if this left any genetic traces especially as endogamy could have preserved it and these people were absorbed into existing Indian society through their adoption of Hindu customs etc.

The Kushans were themselves part of the Yuezhi confederation which broke away as they fled west to flee the Xiongnu. They likely absorbed many groups as many tribal confederations of the Eurasian steppe did so it would be very hard to detect any descent from them. The same would go for the Pahlav/Parthav (who I presume were the Indo-Parthians?) in that they were likely a ruling elite only and thus did not mix much with the native population.

Right. No disagreement about the Greeks, Arabs, Mughals (or even the English). Their presence and rule is well documented for about 100-200 years each. And while autosomal evidence is difficult to discern, uniparentals don't recombine. And that uniparental evidence shows the impact to be minimal, not zero, but trace.

As far as the Pahlavs/Parthians (Parthav) and Persians (Parsu), they are already attested in the Rg Ved as living in South Asia.
https://books.google.com/books?id=t6TVLlPvuMAC&pg=PA521
https://books.google.com/books?id=t6TVLlPvuMAC&pg=PA504

Regarding the Shak, that word is later so I assume that they entered South Asia late in about 1000-800 BC. But they are considered Tur (Turanian vs Aryan) by some. But the Turvasu are also considered a Rg Vedic tribe. So perhaos they are a combination (who isn't?) https://books.google.com/books?id=X2hBAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA323 Cf. Thomas Sakastana https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-the-royal-asiatic-society/article/ix-sakastana/5BBD7D57442E5B29119D88736C0475AC

Of the Tukhars, while there is a clear mongoloid element in them (we see that in some Mughals too), they too were from the border areas of South Asia - the Hatak region of Tibet. Pretty much as El Beruni describes them - "Turks who were said to be of Tibetan origin."

Descendants of of Mughals are to be found all over South Asia. My nanny (Khaddija, RIP) in Patna was a Mughal from Mughlai-tola. Many of them have run into bad times (but when you speak to them their refined Persian culture still shows).

TJRocks760
03-17-2018, 01:47 AM
I never considered UP or Bihar to be part of North India. UP is a huge region, West UP is more North India like. In terms of general population, excluding khana like families which are not huge in numbers, the lowest SI scoring South Asians are Sindhi Hindus and Hindu jats from Rajasthan. The highest Euro and caucasian scoring Individuals are Hindu jats and Sindhi Hindus/Punjabi Khatris. We've a huge database of Punjabis and Kashmiri samples of both sides, and they are completely identical except couple of samples which are obviously mixed because of migration of Pashtuns or Balochs in provinces like west Punjab or Azad kashmir.

As in terms of looks both Pakistani and Indian Punjabis confirmed you can't distinguish Punjabis from each other unless they are wearing a religious attire or accessory that makes it obvious. Kenji.aryan was a Himachali brahmin, looked like someone from Dardic regions, but was more SI or east asian than average punjabi. If he was muslim he could've claimed any exotic ancestry he wants.

I remember kenji. He was one of the first people to talk to me on these boards. He was nice.

Are Indian Punjabis and Pakistani Punjabis distinguished on other terms besides one being Indian and the other being Pakistani and religiously. Genetically? For instance, when I look at some of my ancestry matches I get sikhs that match with me and my families never had sikh relatives.

TJRocks760
03-17-2018, 01:55 AM
Its because of the indo-aryan/dravidian division. North indians and pakistanis are indo-aryans and south indians are dravidians. This is how it's been traditionally. However these are just differences based on languages rather than race. Many indians use those two terms interchangeably to refer to language groups and race. Idk why this occurs. I won't say lack of education either since people are taught about aryan invasion and stuff and based on this most assume that north indians and south indians are of different races.. I think people assume there's an ethnic barrier after maharashtra crossing into the four south indian states and people suddenly start looking australoid or something. Thats where the problem occurs imo. Obviously a marathi dude will be closer to the next door kannadiga genetically rather than to a punjabi or kashmiri from northwest india or pakistan. I think people are not exposed to individuals from different regions, cultures, etc that much unless they go to big cities like Delhi, Mumbai, Bangalore, etc. Due to this lack of exposure, people from certain regions have general stereotypes regarding people from other regions. An average north indian thinks all south indians are 'kaala' and an average south indian assumes every state above andhra/karnataka as northern india along with how 'fair/white' they look. Can't blame north or south indians in this case since both are not exposed to each other on a regular basis.

I've never lived in Pakistan or India so my perspective is definitely tainted. However, my family largely either grew up in India (grandparents) or Pakistan (most of my family). And my Pakistani family has seen all of Pakistan I feel from their conversations they have. I'm a little surprised when you say they aren't exposed to individuals from different regions. Even in todays time where mass travel up and down the countries is so easily available. Maybe my interpretation of what you said is too simplistic.

TJRocks760
03-17-2018, 02:02 AM
It is represented, but it is trace. For example we do come across Y-C M217 (eg. Hazara) and R1b-M73 (eg. Barlas) in South Asia.

The reason it is trace that even a substantial invasion such as that of the Mughals was highly filtered by the demographics of the areas they passed through, especially for the rank and file. Though Babar did write in Turki, for the most part the Mughals were highly Persianized which a Mongol descent mainly in name.

Same with the Arabs and Greeks. While the Macedonians may have contributed a few E, I, here and there, for the most past Indo-Greeks had completely merged into the populace of the NW.

As far as the Persians, Shak, Kushan, Pahlav/Parthav, I doubt if it was ever easy to distinguish them from Indus area populations.


Hi Parasar!

I'm having some difficulty following mainly because I'm a noob on this topic.

I hear from many friends and family the reason why such and such is chita or gora is because of the greeks or the mughals. But, from what I understand you're saying there wouldn't have more than just traces from these invading groups.

So, even with these foreign invasions you're saying there wouldn't have been that much mixture of these invading genes into the gene pool of the South Asian population?

This seems to counter the notion that those chita or goras are due to such foreign invasions. What I am not able to decipher is how come? Considering they must have stayed in the South Asian population for so long wouldn't the genes mix quite a bit?

bmoney
03-17-2018, 06:56 AM
Hi Parasar!

I'm having some difficulty following mainly because I'm a noob on this topic.

I hear from many friends and family the reason why such and such is chita or gora is because of the greeks or the mughals. But, from what I understand you're saying there wouldn't have more than just traces from these invading groups.

So, even with these foreign invasions you're saying there wouldn't have been that much mixture of these invading genes into the gene pool of the South Asian population?

This seems to counter the notion that those chita or goras are due to such foreign invasions. What I am not able to decipher is how come? Considering they must have stayed in the South Asian population for so long wouldn't the genes mix quite a bit?

The steppe people were gora/chita particularly the EHG. Look at the Kalasha

If R1a-M417 is the oldest in Ukraine, it came with EHG and levant neolithic both of which are associated with light skin allele combinations, so light skin has been in the subcontinent for 4000 years or so independently.

If West Eurasians such as the Indo-Greeks brought further ancestry - it would be diluted to such as extent that it would do nothing to impact the already 3 way steppe/Iran_N/ASI combo that most Indo-Aryans are genetically composed of, so its far more likely that the skin colour is a result of ancient ancestry over recent ancestry

deuterium_1
03-17-2018, 08:40 AM
Right. No disagreement about the Greeks, Arabs, Mughals (or even the English). Their presence and rule is well documented for about 100-200 years each. And while autosomal evidence is difficult to discern, uniparentals don't recombine. And that uniparental evidence shows the impact to be minimal, not zero, but trace.

As far as the Pahlavs/Parthians (Parthav) and Persians (Parsu), they are already attested in the Rg Ved as living in South Asia.
https://books.google.com/books?id=t6TVLlPvuMAC&pg=PA521
https://books.google.com/books?id=t6TVLlPvuMAC&pg=PA504

Regarding the Shak, that word is later so I assume that they entered South Asia late in about 1000-800 BC. But they are considered Tur (Turanian vs Aryan) by some. But the Turvasu are also considered a Rg Vedic tribe. So perhaos they are a combination (who isn't?) https://books.google.com/books?id=X2hBAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA323 Cf. Thomas Sakastana https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-the-royal-asiatic-society/article/ix-sakastana/5BBD7D57442E5B29119D88736C0475AC

Of the Tukhars, while there is a clear mongoloid element in them (we see that in some Mughals too), they too were from the border areas of South Asia - the Hatak region of Tibet. Pretty much as El Beruni describes them - "Turks who were said to be of Tibetan origin."

Descendants of of Mughals are to be found all over South Asia. My nanny (Khaddija, RIP) in Patna was a Mughal from Mughlai-tola. Many of them have run into bad times (but when you speak to them their refined Persian culture still shows).

I have at least one Anglo-Indian relative somewhere in the UK, when I find them I do hope to carry out a genetic test (with their permission of course).

Rene Grousset's Empire of the Steppes although it is old now, I feel gives a really good overview of Steppe peoples from the Cimmerians and Scythians to the Dzungars.


Well one of my cousins' mother who is from Western UP, she is apparently a Barha Sayyid if I recall correctly. the Barha Sayyids are notorious for producing the Sayyid brothers who overthrew and murdered several Mughal emperors. I would need to test a paternal relative of this line to see if there is any validity to this claim, they lived in Delhi before Partition.

deuterium_1
03-17-2018, 08:48 AM
Right. No disagreement about the Greeks, Arabs, Mughals (or even the English). Their presence and rule is well documented for about 100-200 years each. And while autosomal evidence is difficult to discern, uniparentals don't recombine. And that uniparental evidence shows the impact to be minimal, not zero, but trace.

As far as the Pahlavs/Parthians (Parthav) and Persians (Parsu), they are already attested in the Rg Ved as living in South Asia.
https://books.google.com/books?id=t6TVLlPvuMAC&pg=PA521
https://books.google.com/books?id=t6TVLlPvuMAC&pg=PA504

Regarding the Shak, that word is later so I assume that they entered South Asia late in about 1000-800 BC. But they are considered Tur (Turanian vs Aryan) by some. But the Turvasu are also considered a Rg Vedic tribe. So perhaos they are a combination (who isn't?) https://books.google.com/books?id=X2hBAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA323 Cf. Thomas Sakastana https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-the-royal-asiatic-society/article/ix-sakastana/5BBD7D57442E5B29119D88736C0475AC

Of the Tukhars, while there is a clear mongoloid element in them (we see that in some Mughals too), they too were from the border areas of South Asia - the Hatak region of Tibet. Pretty much as El Beruni describes them - "Turks who were said to be of Tibetan origin."

Descendants of of Mughals are to be found all over South Asia. My nanny (Khaddija, RIP) in Patna was a Mughal from Mughlai-tola. Many of them have run into bad times (but when you speak to them their refined Persian culture still shows).


I do have an Anglo-Indian relatively apparently but I have not found him yet. It would be interesting to see his admixture results as his mother was half Indian (from Azamgarh) and half English.

One of my aunts is apparently descended from a family of Sayyids in Karnal. Her family then moved to Delhi until partition, and I believe belong to "Saadat-e-Bara" if I recall.

TJRocks760
03-17-2018, 03:13 PM
The steppe people were gora/chita particularly the EHG. Look at the Kalasha

If R1a-M417 is the oldest in Ukraine, it came with EHG and levant neolithic both of which are associated with light skin allele combinations, so light skin has been in the subcontinent for 4000 years or so independently.

If West Eurasians such as the Indo-Greeks brought further ancestry - it would be diluted to such as extent that it would do nothing to impact the already 3 way steppe/Iran_N/ASI combo that most Indo-Aryans are genetically composed of, so its far more likely that the skin colour is a result of ancient ancestry over recent ancestry

Outstanding.

Thank you for sharing this. My follow up question is what is meant by traces from these other invading groups? How I'm understanding it is that when these invading populations came into South Asia they were so separated they never intermixed with the SA population and basically kept to themselves. Hence why only traces are found in SA gene pool of these invaders. But, somehow something tells me that's not what traces means and it's not that simple.

bmoney
03-17-2018, 10:52 PM
Outstanding.

Thank you for sharing this. My follow up question is what is meant by traces from these other invading groups? How I'm understanding it is that when these invading populations came into South Asia they were so separated they never intermixed with the SA population and basically kept to themselves. Hence why only traces are found in SA gene pool of these invaders. But, somehow something tells me that's not what traces means and it's not that simple.

Because their numbers were not large enough to impact autosomal ancestry down the line - at least not compared to massive pop migrations such as Neolithic Iranians and Steppe people and their mixing events with the paleolithic SAs already present

A common analogy is the British in India - Anglo-Indians (historical, not recent mixes) are a very low % of the population and among them the ones that remain are probably 80-90% SA autosomally by now and that was only 300 years ago at most

Mingle
03-17-2018, 10:55 PM
Looking at the Harappa spreadsheet, the Sindhi average appears to be around 27% South Indian, so that is quite a bit lower than most of North India. They are probably the most western shifted of all Indo-Aryan speakers. For some reason I thought they were only around 21% South Indian so I was wrong but still not particularly close to N. India.

Also, why bring up Kashmiris? Kashmiris mostly don't even identify as Indian so using them as an example of North Indians is questionable.

I don't deny overlap but whenever people talk about "Pakistanis and North Indians" they are always using the most NW Indian groups and comparing them to the most eastern Pakistani groups to attach some kind of connection between these vast entities. Punjabis are 44% of Pakistan so I can understand why people would use them as a benchmark for that nation, but why do they use Haryana and Punjabi people to represent all North Indians when these two areas together aren't even the majority of the North Indian population?

And where do Pashtuns and Baloch Pakistanis fit into this? What about Biharis?

I think its fair to say that most Pakistanis are genetically the same as Northwest Indians, but I agree extending it to all of North India is a bit of a stretch.

Sapporo
03-17-2018, 11:46 PM
I think its fair to say that most Pakistanis are genetically the same as Northwest Indians, but I agree extending it to all of North India is a bit of a stretch.
Agreed. I think the point of contention here is what actually defines Northwest India because if you only include Jammu & Kashmir, Indian Punjab, part of Himachal Pradesh, Haryana, part of Rajasthan and small portions of the population of Gujarat or Western Uttar Pradesh, the population isn't actually that significant. I have no idea how to get accurate estimates but I'd wager it is less than 10% of the overall population of India.

deuterium_1
03-17-2018, 11:51 PM
Is Uttarakhand classified as Northwest India as well in this context?.

Censored
03-18-2018, 12:07 AM
Because their numbers were not large enough to impact autosomal ancestry down the line - at least not compared to massive pop migrations such as Neolithic Iranians and Steppe people and their mixing events with the paleolithic SAs already present

A common analogy is the British in India - Anglo-Indians (historical, not recent mixes) are a very low % of the population and among them the ones that remain are probably 80-90% SA autosomally by now and that was only 300 years ago at most

Also very important is that the migrations were massive when the native population at the time is considered. 10,000 neolithic farmers coming at a time when most of the population are tribal hunter-gatherers and scarce is going to have a greater impact than 30,000 Pashtuns coming during one of the Islamic conquests.

bmoney
03-18-2018, 12:24 AM
Also very important is that the migrations were massive when the native population at the time is considered. 10,000 neolithic farmers coming at a time when most of the population are tribal hunter-gatherers and scarce is going to have a greater impact than 30,000 Pashtuns coming during one of the Islamic conquests.

exactly.

Separately, lets not forget caste structure

Razib has commented on a common genetic cluster of paleolithic-like people ranging from the NW to the North-Central to the South who are remarkably consistent and should be excluded from regional comparisons

bmoney
03-18-2018, 12:26 AM
Is Uttarakhand classified as Northwest India as well in this context?.

yes they are genetically north or north/west Indian just like Khas Nepali Brahmins.

There does seem to be East Asian admixed communities within the state though, represented by samples such as Uttaranchal Brahmin

pnb123
03-18-2018, 12:49 AM
yes they are genetically north or north/west Indian just like Khas Nepali Brahmins.

There does seem to be East Asian admixed communities within the state though, represented by samples such as Uttaranchal Brahmin

I think unmixed Uttaranchalis might be scoring similar to us (idk for sure though). Culturally and geographically, I think they're North Indians. I also heard that sizable population of UP Brahmins/Rajputs migrated to Uttaranchal & mixed with native Uttaranchalis. So there probably is a lot of variation in their genetics. Nepali Brahmins deviate a bit culturally, as we have no such ancestry to claim anywhere in India. They also didn't keep any track of migration or geneology of any sort that would help us go back to ancestors. We probably were an offshoot of some North Indian Brahmin group, though.

Kulin
03-18-2018, 12:55 AM
Agreed. I think the point of contention here is what actually defines Northwest India because if you only include Jammu & Kashmir, Indian Punjab, part of Himachal Pradesh, Haryana, part of Rajasthan and small portions of the population of Gujarat or Western Uttar Pradesh, the population isn't actually that significant. I have no idea how to get accurate estimates but I'd wager it is less than 10% of the overall population of India.

That's still a big population. Western UP itself is very huge. Even Delhi, (although a cosmopolitan city but is comprised by majority of Punjabis/Haryanvis/Western UPites) has a population of 19 million. Rajasthan also has a fairly large population.

kush
03-18-2018, 01:04 AM
Agreed. I think the point of contention here is what actually defines Northwest India because if you only include Jammu & Kashmir, Indian Punjab, part of Himachal Pradesh, Haryana, part of Rajasthan and small portions of the population of Gujarat or Western Uttar Pradesh, the population isn't actually that significant. I have no idea how to get accurate estimates but I'd wager it is less than 10% of the overall population of India.

Yeah agree with what you said. It probably would be around 10-15%. I think you can add Delhi to that list as well. It has a metro population of 20 mill and roughly half of them are punjabi by origin. Many western punjabis are present as well that came after the partition if im not wrong.

I have seen few UP brahmins from Ghaziabad and they could easily fit in the northwest. However, I'm not sure how representative they are of entire western UP region. Western UP has a population of 70 million so it's quite densely populated. Also, I've met decent amount of gujjus that could fit in among native punjabis. I wouldn't say just a small portion tbh.

bmoney
03-18-2018, 02:53 AM
I think unmixed Uttaranchalis might be scoring similar to us (idk for sure though). Culturally and geographically, I think they're North Indians. I also heard that sizable population of UP Brahmins/Rajputs migrated to Uttaranchal & mixed with native Uttaranchalis. So there probably is a lot of variation in their genetics. Nepali Brahmins deviate a bit culturally, as we have no such ancestry to claim anywhere in India. They also didn't keep any track of migration or geneology of any sort that would help us go back to ancestors. We probably were an offshoot of some North Indian Brahmin group, though.

Yes I agree about that

People like MS Dhoni seem like a UP pop who settled there

pegasus
03-18-2018, 05:31 PM
There have also been demographic changes in Sindh including a large influx of migrants after Partition, I am not sure if this is detectable on a genetic level yet.

Despite their self-identification, Kashmiris are still part of this North Indian group genetically.

Many Muslim families settled from what is now Haryana and Punjab in Pakistan so this could partly explain it.



There have been numerous foreign invasions via the Khyber Pass including the Persians, Greeks, Scythians, Kushans, Hephthalites, Turks and Mughals. This has not been represented in any results that I have seen.


The steppe ancestry present in many South Asian populations was introduced via a group which descended from the Sintashta and Andronovo cultures of Siberia who were Proto Indo-Iranians. So there is a common heritage with ancient Persians if we go back to the Bronze Age. The deity Mitra in the Rig Vedas is just one example of this common link.

Sintashta and Androvono are Iranic, they are too late to be your Indo Aryan source as well and definitely not the source of the vast majority of Steppe ancestry in South Asians . Fatenevo or Abashevo are the very likely candidates. Steppe is defined as roughly EHG and CHG , with ANF becoming substantial with Corded Ware and Bell Beakers.

pegasus
03-18-2018, 05:50 PM
The steppe people were gora/chita particularly the EHG. Look at the Kalasha

If R1a-M417 is the oldest in Ukraine, it came with EHG and levant neolithic both of which are associated with light skin allele combinations, so light skin has been in the subcontinent for 4000 years or so independently.

If West Eurasians such as the Indo-Greeks brought further ancestry - it would be diluted to such as extent that it would do nothing to impact the already 3 way steppe/Iran_N/ASI combo that most Indo-Aryans are genetically composed of, so its far more likely that the skin colour is a result of ancient ancestry over recent ancestry

Light skin alleles were largely brought by Neolithic/Mesolithic Iranians, they were largely dark skinned themselves but definitely carried the gene , climate adaption also plays a role , people in mountainous/alpine climates tend to be markedly lighter than those in Indus Gangetic plains, generally speaking.

deuterium_1
03-18-2018, 06:03 PM
Sintashta and Androvono are Iranic, they are too late to be your Indo Aryan source as well and definitely not the source of the vast majority of Steppe ancestry in South Asians . Fatenevo or Abashevo are the very likely candidates. Steppe is defined as roughly EHG and CHG , with ANF becoming substantial with Corded Ware and Bell Beakers.

There are some similarities between late Andronovo axes and Luristan axes which could hint at this but the earlier Sintashta appears to be a better candidate for the Indo-Iranians:

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/10.1086/324130.pdf?refreqid=excelsior%3A4df64a7302a4090205 b25c38ba9619db

pegasus
03-18-2018, 07:45 PM
There are some similarities between late Andronovo axes and Luristan axes which could hint at this but the earlier Sintashta appears to be a better candidate for the Indo-Iranians:

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/10.1086/324130.pdf?refreqid=excelsior%3A4df64a7302a4090205 b25c38ba9619db

Obviously there will be similarities they are Indo Iranians after all, just as they are common IE motifs, but those cultures are too late and the fact EMBA is the proxy for Indo Aryans pretty much proves that. There is no such thing as earlier Sintashta , that would be Potlovka. You just proved my point Plateau Iranics derive from Yaz who in turn are derived from Androvono/Sintashta cultures.

deuterium_1
03-18-2018, 08:24 PM
Obviously there will be similarities they are Indo Iranians after all, just as they are common IE motifs, but those cultures are too late and the fact EMBA is the proxy for Indo Aryans pretty much proves that. There is no such thing as earlier Sintashta , that would be Potlovka. You just proved my point Plateau Iranics derive from Yaz who in turn are derived from Androvono/Sintashta cultures.

Do you have any journal articles on that? I would be happy to read that.

Didn't Iranian peoples also have some genetic input from the BMAC? They are known for their figurines and bronze seals.

parasar
03-18-2018, 10:13 PM
Hi Parasar!

I'm having some difficulty following mainly because I'm a noob on this topic.

I hear from many friends and family the reason why such and such is chita or gora is because of the greeks or the mughals. But, from what I understand you're saying there wouldn't have more than just traces from these invading groups.

So, even with these foreign invasions you're saying there wouldn't have been that much mixture of these invading genes into the gene pool of the South Asian population?

This seems to counter the notion that those chita or goras are due to such foreign invasions. What I am not able to decipher is how come? Considering they must have stayed in the South Asian population for so long wouldn't the genes mix quite a bit?

Some yes, but not that much as one would presume due to admixture. Selection can play a big part.

Just compare bronze age Ukraine to current - a drastic change.
"The selection coefficients inferred directly from serially sampled data at these pigmentation loci range from 2 to 10% and are among the strongest signals of recent selection in humans."
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2014/03/05/1316513111

The gradient for lactase pesistence has been as strong or even stronger.
"The strongest signal of selection is at the SNP (rs4988235) responsible for lactase persistence in Europe. Our data (Fig. 3) strengthens previous reports that an appreciable frequency of lactase persistence in Europe only dates to the last four thousand years."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4918750/

So if you go by the selection logic, light color has been selected for in the Kalash (but not lactase persistence which is at 0).

Similary in northern India there is selection for lighter skin, but the same positive selection is not there in southern India.
"both of our haplotype-based selection tests demonstrated evidence of positive selection in North Indians, but no such evidence of positive selection was found in South Indians"
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3820762/

bmoney
03-18-2018, 11:15 PM
Some yes, but not that much as one would presume due to admixture. Selection can play a big part.

Just compare bronze age Ukraine to current - a drastic change.
"The selection coefficients inferred directly from serially sampled data at these pigmentation loci range from 2 to 10% and are among the strongest signals of recent selection in humans."
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2014/03/05/1316513111

The gradient for lactase pesistence has been as strong or even stronger.
"The strongest signal of selection is at the SNP (rs4988235) responsible for lactase persistence in Europe. Our data (Fig. 3) strengthens previous reports that an appreciable frequency of lactase persistence in Europe only dates to the last four thousand years."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4918750/

So if you go by the selection logic, light color has been selected for in the Kalash (but not lactase persistence which is at 0).

Similary in northern India there is selection for lighter skin, but the same positive selection is not there in southern India.
"both of our haplotype-based selection tests demonstrated evidence of positive selection in North Indians, but no such evidence of positive selection was found in South Indians"
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3820762/

Last paper was interesting, haven't come across it yet.

Look what I found buried in there:

Similarly, Toda have higher A allele frequency (0.86) compared to Kurumba (0.20), their geographical neighbors, most likely due to their higher proportion of West Eurasian ancestry which is supported by Y chromosome evidence [37].

Also southern Brahmins are excepted and AAs do not carry the A allele due to East Asian ancestry:

Notably, Brahmins, irrespective of their geographic source (North, Central or South India) have higher A allele frequency (Table S5). Conversely, the higher longitudinal correlation could be due to the fact that Tibeto-Burman and Austroasiatic speakers are characterized by very low A allele frequency (Table S6) because of their East Asian ancestry [26], [38].

The Toda have the 5th highest A allele frequency among all Indian pops North/South/West/East sampled:

22192

Also Bengalis (Kolkata) were in there with 64%, the lowest allele frequency among non-tribal Indo-Europeans among the sample pops

BENGALI KOLKATA WEST BENGAL Indo-European East 22.57 88.37 21 0.64

parasar
03-18-2018, 11:46 PM
Last paper was interesting, haven't come across it yet.

Look what I found buried in there:

Similarly, Toda have higher A allele frequency (0.86) compared to Kurumba (0.20), their geographical neighbors, most likely due to their higher proportion of West Eurasian ancestry which is supported by Y chromosome evidence [37].

Also southern Brahmins are excepted and AAs do not carry the A allele due to East Asian ancestry:

Notably, Brahmins, irrespective of their geographic source (North, Central or South India) have higher A allele frequency (Table S5). Conversely, the higher longitudinal correlation could be due to the fact that Tibeto-Burman and Austroasiatic speakers are characterized by very low A allele frequency (Table S6) because of their East Asian ancestry [26], [38].

The Toda have the 5th highest A allele frequency among all Indian pops North/South/West/East sampled:

22192

Also Bengalis (Kolkata) were in there with 64%, the lowest allele frequency among non-tribal Indo-Europeans among the sample pops

BENGALI KOLKATA WEST BENGAL Indo-European East 22.57 88.37 21 0.64

And both are IBD

"The Light Skin Allele of SLC24A5 in South Asians and Europeans Shares Identity by Descent"

and

"13910*T allele ... We confirm that the mutation is identical by descent to the European allele and is associated with the
same .1 Mb extended haplotype in both populations."
http://mega.bioanth.cam.ac.uk/pdfs/GallegoRomero2011LCTIndiaMBE.pdf

So no doubt about common ancestry.

The A allele interestingly is at 0.710 in the Kalash while some South Asian groups are at 1.

Kalash (SA001481O) 48 (6/27/2007) N.A 0.710 0.290
Burusho (SA001482P) 50 (6/27/2007) N.A 1.000 0
Brahmin [Kashmiri] (SA004456T) 40 (7/11/2017) N.A 1.000 0
Brahui (SA001475R) 50 (6/27/2007) N.A 1.000 0
https://alfred.med.yale.edu/alfred/SiteTable1A_working.asp?siteuid=SI007419V

bmoney
03-19-2018, 12:19 AM
And both are IBD

"The Light Skin Allele of SLC24A5 in South Asians and Europeans Shares Identity by Descent"

and

"13910*T allele ... We confirm that the mutation is identical by descent to the European allele and is associated with the
same .1 Mb extended haplotype in both populations."
http://mega.bioanth.cam.ac.uk/pdfs/GallegoRomero2011LCTIndiaMBE.pdf

So no doubt about common ancestry.

The A allele interestingly is at 0.710 in the Kalash while some South Asian groups are at 1.

Kalash (SA001481O) 48 (6/27/2007) N.A 0.710 0.290
Burusho (SA001482P) 50 (6/27/2007) N.A 1.000 0
Brahmin [Kashmiri] (SA004456T) 40 (7/11/2017) N.A 1.000 0
Brahui (SA001475R) 50 (6/27/2007) N.A 1.000 0
https://alfred.med.yale.edu/alfred/SiteTable1A_working.asp?siteuid=SI007419V

So pegasus on the money - the allele came with Neolithic/Meso Iranians looking at the Brahui but were also carried by and probably supplemented to by Steppe pops

So this seems to be an old Eurasian common ancestor allele - do you think its ANE or basal related?

The Kalash look like the product of a highly steppe/Iran N pop having 1/4 admixture from a dalit like SA pop

passion
03-19-2018, 02:21 AM
I always made a point that you cant separate Pakistani ethnicities based on linguistics or region (West vs East) Pakistan, there is consensus among people that Pashtuns and Balochs and even Kashmiris are vastly different from Punjabis when many of them form a cline which ultimately form the complete genetic system of the region. I hear lots of statements like apart from Pashtuns and Balochs this and that when the reality is you cant separate them from other Pakistanis like this. Funny thing is that if you go by phenotype many indic populations are the lightest in the region.(Chitral/Gilgit Baltistan)

Sapporo
03-19-2018, 02:43 AM
Yeah agree with what you said. It probably would be around 10-15%. I think you can add Delhi to that list as well. It has a metro population of 20 mill and roughly half of them are punjabi by origin. Many western punjabis are present as well that came after the partition if im not wrong.

I have seen few UP brahmins from Ghaziabad and they could easily fit in the northwest. However, I'm not sure how representative they are of entire western UP region. Western UP has a population of 70 million so it's quite densely populated. Also, I've met decent amount of gujjus that could fit in among native punjabis. I wouldn't say just a small portion tbh.

Western Uttar Pradesh may be densely populated with 70 million people but the issue is what percentage of them are from groups like Western UP Brahmins, Western UP Jats or foreign admixed Muslims? Those are the groups with a genetic affinity to the Northwest India/Pakistan. As for Rajasthan, I’d imagine those with a Northwest/Pakistani affinity are Brahmins, Jats and some Rajputs. Finally, for Gujarat, it would apply to those of Sindhi origin such as Lohana/Memon/Khoja, Brahmins and some foreign admixed Muslims. I mistakenly forgot to include Delhi since its population is treated separate to Haryana. My mistake. Anyways, perhaps, my estimate of less than 10% was understated but like you noted, it’s probably no more than 10-15% of the overall Indian population.

Censored
03-19-2018, 04:05 AM
I always made a point that you cant separate Pakistani ethnicities best on linguistics or region (West vs East) Pakistan, there is consensus among people that Pashtuns and Balochs and even Kashmiris are vastly different from Punjabis when many of them form a cline which ultimately form the complete genetic system of the region. I hear lots of statements like apart from Pashtuns and Balochs this and that when the reality is you cant separate them from other Pakistanis like this. Funny thing is that if you go by phenotype many indic populations are the lightest in the region.(Chitral/Gilgit Baltistan)

A common theme among people less informed on this topic is to use linguistic, cultural, and phenotypical observations to separate people instead of genetics. It is one of my biggest pet peeves. Literally ANYONE can start speaking another language or eating different foods, it does NOT suddenly change their genetics. Phenotype is also multifactorial. Natural selection for one-as Punjabis lived in a hotter climate than Pashtuns, they naturally evolved to be darker although a greater amount of ASI DNA certainly has an impact as well.

passion
03-19-2018, 04:43 AM
A common theme among people less informed on this topic is to use linguistic, cultural, and phenotypical observations to separate people instead of genetics. It is one of my biggest pet peeves. Literally ANYONE can start speaking another language or eating different foods, it does NOT suddenly change their genetics. Phenotype is also multifactorial. Natural selection for one-as Punjabis lived in a hotter climate than Pashtuns, they naturally evolved to be darker although a smaller amount of ASI DNA certainly has an impact as well.

I think the reason Punjabis appear darker holistically than their West and Northern neighbors is because of presence of large number of low castes , if there were no low castes people will see a clear cline, even if climate remains same.

kush
03-19-2018, 05:38 AM
I think the reason Punjabis appear darker holistically than their West and Northern neighbors is because of presence of large number of low castes , if there were no low castes people will see a clear cline, even if climate remains same.

True. Punjab has the highest percentage of untouchables (SC/ST) in all of india. More than 1/3 actually. Decent number of intercaste marriages also happened in the past and made few high caste individuals appear south east shifted phenotypically.

Censored
03-19-2018, 06:09 AM
I think the reason Punjabis appear darker holistically than their West and Northern neighbors is because of presence of large number of low castes , if there were no low castes people will see a clear cline, even if climate remains same.

Yes, more low caste people would result in higher overall ASI ancestry for the region as I mentioned.

kakiasumi
03-19-2018, 06:55 AM
I always made a point that you cant separate Pakistani ethnicities best on linguistics or region (West vs East) Pakistan, there is consensus among people that Pashtuns and Balochs and even Kashmiris are vastly different from Punjabis when many of them form a cline which ultimately form the complete genetic system of the region. I hear lots of statements like apart from Pashtuns and Balochs this and that when the reality is you cant separate them from other Pakistanis like this. Funny thing is that if you go by phenotype many indic populations are the lightest in the region.(Chitral/Gilgit Baltistan)

Sorry for my ignorance but I have a question for you. How are Chitrali people Indic?? I am really excited to know the connection between Indic people and Chitrali people.

bmoney
03-19-2018, 08:04 AM
Sorry for my ignorance but I have a question for you. How are Chitrali people Indic?? I am really excited to know the connection between Indic people and Chitrali people.

I think passion was categorising Indic against Iranian - those being the two main linguistic groups in Pakistan

Khowar (کهووار), also known as Chitrali, is an Indo-Aryan language of the Dardic subbranch. "Kho" means the people of Chitral, "War" means language. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khowar_language

The Indo-Aryan or Indic languages are the dominant language family of the Indian subcontinent. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Aryan_languages

bmoney
03-19-2018, 08:14 AM
True. Punjab has the highest percentage of untouchables (SC/ST) in all of india. More than 1/3 actually. Decent number of intercaste marriages also happened in the past and made few high caste individuals appear south east shifted phenotypically.

To expand on that, I dont think SC/ST perfectly overlaps the 'dalit' genotype identified by Razib as a % of the pop

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scheduled_Castes_and_Scheduled_Tribes#/media/File:2011_Census_Scheduled_Caste_caste_distributio n_map_India_by_state_and_union_territory.svg

Punjab has the highest %, but in terms of the genotype I would expect the southern and central Indian states to be higher than Punjab

passion
03-19-2018, 08:58 AM
Sorry for my ignorance but I have a question for you. How are Chitrali people Indic?? I am really excited to know the connection between Indic people and Chitrali people.

i meant they speak an indo aryan language, sorry should have elaborated more clearly.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khowar_language

Censored
03-19-2018, 09:03 AM
To expand on that, I dont think SC/ST perfectly overlaps the 'dalit' genotype identified by Razib as a % of the pop

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scheduled_Castes_and_Scheduled_Tribes#/media/File:2011_Census_Scheduled_Caste_caste_distributio n_map_India_by_state_and_union_territory.svg

Punjab has the highest %, but in terms of the genotype I would expect the southern and central Indian states to be higher than Punjab

I believe he also mentioned that caste is kind of messy in the northwest region where you have low castes like Jatt being some of the lowest ASI of all.

bmoney
03-19-2018, 12:40 PM
I believe he also mentioned that caste is kind of messy in the northwest region where you have low castes like Jatt being some of the lowest ASI of all.

I wouldnt call Jatts low caste. Shudra status is an exonym for the tribes of Punjab who never belonged to the Brahminical caste system or were new to it. Like the Sindhi and Brahui

Jatts own more land than Brahmins in East Punjab and are more culturally influential

Avarna would be a better description

It seems that Dalits of Punjab however did belong to the caste system

My caste are officially Sudra according to the Brahmins (unless we paid Brahmins for Kshatriya status) but also own more land than Brahmins, though are not as influential in literature and cultural output.

I would also call us avarna rather than shudra as we are not shudra by occupation and neither are the Jatts

bmoney
03-19-2018, 12:41 PM
i meant they speak an indo aryan language, sorry should have elaborated more clearly.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khowar_language

There is a genetic connection as well, as the proto-Indo-Aryans passed on their genetics to modern speakers

Mingle
03-19-2018, 08:18 PM
Yes I agree about that

People like MS Dhoni seem like a UP pop who settled there

MS Dhoni's family is originally from Jharkhand.

Mingle
03-19-2018, 08:19 PM
Sintashta and Androvono are Iranic, they are too late to be your Indo Aryan source as well and definitely not the source of the vast majority of Steppe ancestry in South Asians . Fatenevo or Abashevo are the very likely candidates. Steppe is defined as roughly EHG and CHG , with ANF becoming substantial with Corded Ware and Bell Beakers.

Sintashta and Andronovo are cultures that existed before the split between Iranic and Indo-Aryan. Its probably more accurate to say that they are Indo-Iranic.

bmoney
03-19-2018, 11:18 PM
MS Dhoni's family is originally from Jharkhand.

Hes a Kumaoni Rajput actually, his family is settled in Jharkhand

Kulin
03-20-2018, 12:45 AM
I wouldnt call Jatts low caste. Shudra status is an exonym for the tribes of Punjab who never belonged to the Brahminical caste system or were new to it. Like the Sindhi and Brahui

Jatts own more land than Brahmins in East Punjab and are more culturally influential

Avarna would be a better description

It seems that Dalits of Punjab however did belong to the caste system

My caste are officially Sudra according to the Brahmins (unless we paid Brahmins for Kshatriya status) but also own more land than Brahmins, though are not as influential in literature and cultural output.

I would also call us avarna rather than shudra as we are not shudra by occupation and neither are the Jatts

Jats are pretty similar to the Patidar community of Gujarat. They were known as 'Kanbis' before the 1800s, and were considered shudra, but during Mughal times, as well as British times, they became quite wealthy/powerful, and had come to own a lot of land in villages due to the prevailing land distribution system. Around the 19th century, they also begin adopting 'ritually pure' traditions like vegetarianism and vashnavism, while previously, they were noted to be non-vegetarians and followers of Shaktism. They also led a claim to vaishya/bania status, though a bit different to the martial status of Jats, has still a lot of parallels. Today, they are the biggest, and also the most powerful community in Gujarat, and also probably the most numerous among the Indian diaspora (after Punjabi Jats). Phenotype/genotype wise, Patidars aren't "northwest shifted" like the Jats, but still have a few occurring individuals who can look 'Central Asian'.

bmoney
03-20-2018, 04:29 AM
Jats are pretty similar to the Patidar community of Gujarat. They were known as 'Kanbis' before the 1800s, and were considered shudra, but during Mughal times, as well as British times, they became quite wealthy/powerful, and had come to own a lot of land in villages due to the prevailing land distribution system. Around the 19th century, they also begin adopting 'ritually pure' traditions like vegetarianism and vashnavism, while previously, they were noted to be non-vegetarians and followers of Shaktism. They also led a claim to vaishya/bania status, though a bit different to the martial status of Jats, has still a lot of parallels. Today, they are the biggest, and also the most powerful community in Gujarat, and also probably the most numerous among the Indian diaspora (after Punjabi Jats). Phenotype/genotype wise, Patidars aren't "northwest shifted" like the Jats, but still have a few occurring individuals who can look 'Central Asian'.

Patidar/Patel is another great example - thanks for that

Patels are high ANI and ASI genetically with less 'new steppe' as seen in castes like the Tiwari Brahmins

Other castes with similar profiles: Marathas, Bunts, Coorgis - is it just me or is there an ANI/west coast correlation

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maratha
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bunt_(community)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kodava_people

poi
03-20-2018, 04:31 AM
Hes a Kumaoni Rajput actually, his family is settled in Jharkhand

Oh. I always thought Dhoni had that khas pahari look. Dayum didn't know he was a Kumaoni.

pnb123
03-20-2018, 04:53 AM
Oh. I always thought Dhoni had that khas pahari look. Dayum didn't know he was a Kumaoni.

He deviates a bit from stereotypical mainstream Khas Pahari look, imo. But he could fit in the diversity.

pegasus
03-20-2018, 05:32 AM
Sintashta and Andronovo are cultures that existed before the split between Iranic and Indo-Aryan. Its probably more accurate to say that they are Indo-Iranic.

They are too late for that. Sintashta and Androvono definitely fall in the Iranic group, along with Arkhaim. They were driven out of the Steppe by the Iranics. Iranic and Indo Aryan split occurred in the Samara region, not in the Kazakh Steppe or BMAC , as I previously thought. Also these people were in the Swat/KPK areas by 1900-1800 BC.

Mingle
03-20-2018, 04:33 PM
They are too late for that. Sintashta and Androvono definitely fall in the Iranic group, along with Arkhaim. They were driven out of the Steppe by the Iranics. Iranic and Indo Aryan split occurred in the Samara region, not in the Kazakh Steppe or BMAC , as I previously thought. Also these people were in the Swat/KPK areas by 1900-1800 BC.

Do you know when Indo-Iranic split into Indo-Aryan and Iranic? And which culture did the split happen in?

Anjuman-i Taraqqi-i Urdu
03-20-2018, 07:28 PM
I don't even know where to start on all the bogus crap I see coming from South Asians regarding genetics and ethnicity.
You have people claiming Pakistanis and North Indians are the exact same. You have people claiming there are "Aryans" and "Dravidians" in India which are supposedly two distinct races. Some people claiming that north Indians are heavily mixed with recent invaders like Greeks and Moghuls.

Then there are people claiming all kinds of foreign ancestry which rarely, if ever, turns out to be real. And of course every other Indian on the internet insisting that they don't "look Indian" and that they look "Persian, Greek, or Italian" when they just look like the guy from Harold and Kumar.

Am I alone in feeling like our community is a lost cause when it comes to education?

Well said. You are not alone.

Anjuman-i Taraqqi-i Urdu
03-20-2018, 08:18 PM
Hey all,

I hesitated to ask this, but I want to get this off my chest mainly because I'm hoping others could relate.

So, I've had some discussion over the past year with family and other people about some of my results. I showed them my GedMatch results or talked about the little info I have about ANI and ASI for South Asians.

Perhaps I'm doing it the wrong way or perhaps I shouldn't discuss it ever at all. But, it seems as though the South Asians I talk to will listen to what I have to say at first and then later it's like they're a whole new person. The discussion is exciting at first but then they almost attack me saying things like I'm, "trying to be white."

I don't even know what to say to that.

From what I gather, I assume you're an American of Pakistan descent (ie. Overseas Pakistanis)? Well let me just say this, and don't take this offensively, but most "brown people" living in the West (particularly the USA I've noticed) seem to be suffering from mass confusion. I've spent some time in the United States and I can easily say they're one of the most confused immigrant groups I've come across...particularly the 1st generation American South Asians who have isolated themselves in no mans land. When I mean no mans land, I mean to say they neither adopt American culture fully and they neither adopt the culture of their parents background/homeland, and hence they get stuck in what I call no mans land. It's within this "no mans land" that "Desi American culture" formed. It's probably one of the most lamest, confused cultures I've ever seen in America.

People within this "American Desi culture" have major trouble differentiating nationality, ethnicity and religion from one another. They also assume that all South Asians are brown, speak "hindi" and there is no difference between any ethnic groups of Pakistan, India, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh. I know exactly what you're referring to when you hear "trying to be white." That's just your typical Desi American making a buffoon of him or herself.

redifflal
03-20-2018, 10:09 PM
Nowhere in TJR's original post did he mention whether his audience was fellow ABCDs. It could be his parents or family in Pakistan for all you know. In other anecdotes on this thread on topic of general scientific ignorance among south Asians, whether mine or MDL, we've written about our elders, should be easy to assume these are not Desi Americans but people within the subcontinent. Yet once again Anjuman i lashkar i toiba has gone off on a rant throwing some 2-3 million people under the bus, along with several "not to be offensive but..."

Like wtf is this guy? Comes here on a genetics forum and makes a username over some 1800s Islamist militia for defense of Urdu and makes inflammatory post against Hindi and extends to Hinduism from post 1. Now posting random crap against some millions of people out of whom his extent of interaction is possibly his own cousins (sample size 2).

Generalissimo
03-21-2018, 12:18 AM
You guys should read this. Looking back, it's not perfect, but it's pretty close to what you'll see in the new paper on Central Asia.

Through time AND space? (http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2017/05/through-time-and-space.html)

Remember what I said when you're soon reading about the "Bronze Age steppe pastoralists" moving south into South Asia, brining Indo-European languages with them.

pegasus
03-21-2018, 01:59 AM
Do you know when Indo-Iranic split into Indo-Aryan and Iranic? And which culture did the split happen in?

Previously the 1500 BC Vedic date was chosen by the British Asiatic Society and somehow that stuck, but genetics and archaeology has upended that. I would say Abashevo and Potlovka cultures in the Samara region in Southern Russia is the likely place for the split. As to when it happened, it has to be before 2100 BC but less than 2600 BC.

pegasus
03-21-2018, 02:07 AM
From what I gather, I assume you're an American of Pakistan descent (ie. Overseas Pakistanis)? Well let me just say this, and don't take this offensively, but most "brown people" living in the West (particularly the USA I've noticed) seem to be suffering from mass confusion. I've spent some time in the United States and I can easily say they're one of the most confused immigrant groups I've come across...particularly the 1st generation American South Asians who have isolated themselves in no mans land. When I mean no mans land, I mean to say they neither adopt American culture fully and they neither adopt the culture of their parents background/homeland, and hence they get stuck in what I call no mans land. It's within this "no mans land" that "Desi American culture" formed. It's probably one of the most lamest, confused cultures I've ever seen in America.

People within this "American Desi culture" have major trouble differentiating nationality, ethnicity and religion from one another. They also assume that all South Asians are brown, speak "hindi" and there is no difference between any ethnic groups of Pakistan, India, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh. I know exactly what you're referring to when you hear "trying to be white." That's just your typical Desi American making a buffoon of him or herself.

I notice a lot of your posts are too much of a social commentary but this is not a forum for that, like that Hindi/Urdu thread came off as a bit creepy and way off tangent. Being objective is far better than pouring your own biases. Thats great your passionate on issues, but that stuff is fine on Anthroscape or the Pak defense forum not here.

Censored
03-21-2018, 03:02 AM
From what I gather, I assume you're an American of Pakistan descent (ie. Overseas Pakistanis)? Well let me just say this, and don't take this offensively, but most "brown people" living in the West (particularly the USA I've noticed) seem to be suffering from mass confusion. I've spent some time in the United States and I can easily say they're one of the most confused immigrant groups I've come across...particularly the 1st generation American South Asians who have isolated themselves in no mans land. When I mean no mans land, I mean to say they neither adopt American culture fully and they neither adopt the culture of their parents background/homeland, and hence they get stuck in what I call no mans land. It's within this "no mans land" that "Desi American culture" formed. It's probably one of the most lamest, confused cultures I've ever seen in America.

People within this "American Desi culture" have major trouble differentiating nationality, ethnicity and religion from one another. They also assume that all South Asians are brown, speak "hindi" and there is no difference between any ethnic groups of Pakistan, India, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh. I know exactly what you're referring to when you hear "trying to be white." That's just your typical Desi American making a buffoon of him or herself.

Let's not pretend that the older generation is much better. Sure they know the difference between Tamils and Bengalis and low and upper castes but they also make ridiculous erroneous statements as well. Just browsing many sites online, it seems many so called ABCDs know about our partial ancestral south Indian/aboriginal roots than those straight from India.

Also, as someone born and raised in the US, I can understand why nobody in my generation gives a shit about inter South Asian ethnic differences. There are too few of us and America is nowhere near familiar enough with our culture for it to really be relevant. Growing up, it was a pain in the ass trying to convince people that I wasn't Arab even though I look nothing like one, so them associating me with anything in South Asia is good enough. We just do not have the luxury of flaunting ethnic differences which are no longer even relevant to us.

Also, most Indian/Pakistani parents here don't even try to educate their children about any of this. 90% of everything I learned about South Asia was not from my parents but from the internet as I have a general interest in anthropology(as well as other obscure topics). I never once heard my family talk about the caste system-I only learned it in a middle school class.

bmoney
03-21-2018, 03:27 AM
You guys should read this. Looking back, it's not perfect, but it's pretty close to what you'll see in the new paper on Central Asia.

Through time AND space? (http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2017/05/through-time-and-space.html)

Remember what I said when you're soon reading about the "Bronze Age steppe pastoralists" moving south into South Asia, brining Indo-European languages with them.

My prediction is that a population like Potapovka2-Srubnaya_outlier will eventually be discovered on the Late Bronze Age steppe, perhaps even at a site linked to the Andronovo horizon, and it'll fit the bill as a main player in the story of the peopling of South Asia.

Interesting - did your position change since then?

TJRocks760
03-21-2018, 03:47 AM
From what I gather, I assume you're an American of Pakistan descent (ie. Overseas Pakistanis)? Well let me just say this, and don't take this offensively, but most "brown people" living in the West (particularly the USA I've noticed) seem to be suffering from mass confusion. I've spent some time in the United States and I can easily say they're one of the most confused immigrant groups I've come across...particularly the 1st generation American South Asians who have isolated themselves in no mans land. When I mean no mans land, I mean to say they neither adopt American culture fully and they neither adopt the culture of their parents background/homeland, and hence they get stuck in what I call no mans land. It's within this "no mans land" that "Desi American culture" formed. It's probably one of the most lamest, confused cultures I've ever seen in America.

People within this "American Desi culture" have major trouble differentiating nationality, ethnicity and religion from one another. They also assume that all South Asians are brown, speak "hindi" and there is no difference between any ethnic groups of Pakistan, India, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh. I know exactly what you're referring to when you hear "trying to be white." That's just your typical Desi American making a buffoon of him or herself.

That's not exactly what I was saying. To your comment, "that's just your typical desi american making a buffoon of him or herself."

I think what you're referring to is when desi people may call other desis "white washed," for listening to a certain type of music, or dressing a certain way, or whatever.

My post had nothing at all to do with that. There's a saying, "the mind only sees what its prepared to see." Your response was sort of prepared for a different conversation. Not this conversation though.

My "you're trying to be white," is due to me sharing knowledge on South Asian ancestry and getting a mixed response from the elder South Asians, but I believe perhaps I'm wrong it may not be limited to elders but just the topic being niche and only a handful of us knowing the genetic history of South Asians.

Anjuman-i Taraqqi-i Urdu
03-21-2018, 11:11 AM
I notice a lot of your posts are too much of a social commentary but this is not a forum for that, like that Hindi/Urdu thread came off as a bit creepy and way off tangent. Being objective is far better than pouring your own biases. Thats great your passionate on issues, but that stuff is fine on Anthroscape or the Pak defense forum not here.

What's exactly wrong with what I said? Truth sometimes hurt. Most of you people live in America and talk like you're actually Pakistani or Indian.

Talk about a confused group of people. This entire subforum looks weird to me to be honest.

Anjuman-i Taraqqi-i Urdu
03-21-2018, 11:16 AM
Let's not pretend that the older generation is much better. Sure they know the difference between Tamils and Bengalis and low and upper castes but they also make ridiculous erroneous statements as well. Just browsing many sites online, it seems many so called ABCDs know about our partial ancestral south Indian/aboriginal roots than those straight from India.

Also, as someone born and raised in the US, I can understand why nobody in my generation gives a shit about inter South Asian ethnic differences. There are too few of us and America is nowhere near familiar enough with our culture for it to really be relevant. Growing up, it was a pain in the ass trying to convince people that I wasn't Arab even though I look nothing like one, so them associating me with anything in South Asia is good enough. We just do not have the luxury of flaunting ethnic differences which are no longer even relevant to us.

Also, most Indian/Pakistani parents here don't even try to educate their children about any of this. 90% of everything I learned about South Asia was not from my parents but from the internet as I have a general interest in anthropology(as well as other obscure topics). I never once heard my family talk about the caste system-I only learned it in a middle school class.

Nice rebuttal. I agree with your points.

pegasus
03-21-2018, 11:47 AM
What's exactly wrong with what I said? Truth sometimes hurt. Most of you people live in America and talk like you're actually Pakistani or Indian.

Talk about a confused group of people. This entire subforum looks weird to me to be honest.

I personally could care less what you have to say but thus far all I have seen is unhinged rants and defensive responses. As I mentioned before this is not the platform for that, you can go to another forum for that. If its weird you can leave.

MonkeyDLuffy
03-21-2018, 05:15 PM
A short lived troll. Rest in pepperoni.

deuterium_1
03-21-2018, 05:34 PM
They are too late for that. Sintashta and Androvono definitely fall in the Iranic group, along with Arkhaim. They were driven out of the Steppe by the Iranics. Iranic and Indo Aryan split occurred in the Samara region, not in the Kazakh Steppe or BMAC , as I previously thought. Also these people were in the Swat/KPK areas by 1900-1800 BC.


BMAC does seem quite unique to me in terms of what they left behind to be honest, this is a bronze seal stamp used by them:

22250

To me, the Andronovo culture does seem to resemble the later Luristan culture (which was Iranic as far as I know).I am not sure if that is a mere coincidence or not (has any Luristani remains been found?).

pegasus
03-23-2018, 03:04 AM
BMAC does seem quite unique to me in terms of what they left behind to be honest, this is a bronze seal stamp used by them:

22250

To me, the Andronovo culture does seem to resemble the later Luristan culture (which was Iranic as far as I know).I am not sure if that is a mere coincidence or not (has any Luristani remains been found?).

I wish we knew what language they spoke and their genomes. It would be interesting to know how much Keltminar ancestry they have.