Indian middle caste averages by State (S Indian, W Eurasian, and E Eurasian)

These are averages of Indian MIDDLE castes from each state or the group average based on harappa or certain individual samples. For some states there were no harappan averages so i used individual samples posted on forums. Assam, himachal pradesh, and chattisgarh are estimated based on individual forum users and they're middle castes anyways.

South Indian
https://i.imgur.com/1HE3YmQ.png

West Eurasian(Baloch, Caucasian, Northeast Euro, Med, SW asian)
https://i.imgur.com/QBqkTFB.png

East Eurasian (NE/SE asian, Siberian, American, Beringian)
https://i.imgur.com/GVOHV7K.png

Isn't the East Eurasian a bit high? My guess is that the East Eurasian isn't purely EE but includes some West Eurasian due to having some ANE admixture.

By the way, can you give some examples of Indian middle castes?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mingle

Isn't the East Eurasian a bit high? My guess is that the East Eurasian isn't purely EE but includes some West Eurasian due to having some ANE admixture.

By the way, can you give some examples of Indian middle castes?

---

I think Beringian might be ANE mixed but the other components like Northeast/Southeast asian, siberian, and american might be pure east eurasian. some groups get 1-2% beringian but central indian states and eastern states for example mostly get ne/se/siberian shift.

these are the populations i used
pops used
Kashmir = Kashmiri avg (harappa)
Punjab = Jatt sikhs
Haryana = Haryana Jatts
Himachal = Kenji (himachal rajput)
Uttarakhand = Uttaranchal brahmin but they make up 20% of that state's population so fairly representative
Rajasthan = rajasthani rajput
Gujarat = gujarati avg.
UP = kshatriya
Kerala = nairs
bengal = bengali avg.
bihar = bihari avg.
assam = jortita (AG. user)
sikkim = bhutia
arunachal pradesh = nysha
mizoram, manipur, tripura = burmanese
Meghalaya = khasi
Chattisgarh= Arlus (Ag. user)
Orissa = Bengali/Oriya sample (HRP0050)
Jharkhand = Eastern UP/Jharkhand sample (HRP0313)
Andhra, Karnataka,tamilnadu = averages
Maharashtra,Goa = Marathi speaking (HRP0407)
Madhya Pradesh = Madhya Pradesh/Uttar pradesh sample (HRP0319)

Why is that state in the East is so dramatically different to others?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Not a Cop

Why is that state in the East is so dramatically different to others?

---

That's the Northeast region and they're predominantly mongoloid in their genetic makeup. Historically they weren't really part of the general indian subcontinent (except for Assam, central northeastern state). They had some indic influence for sure, as you can see with their south indian percentages and west eurasian. Even burmese and tibetans do. But genetically, culturally, linguistically, etc they're similar to eastern asians like Tibetan, Southern Chinese, and Burmese populations. The northern state called Uttarakhand has significant mongoloid as well on average from nearby Tibet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Not a Cop

Why is that state in the East is so dramatically different to others?

---

They're Southeast Asians and mainly speak Tibeto-Burman languages (rather than Indo-Aryan/Dravidian languages) and are only part of India cause of British colonialism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thambi

That's the Northeast region and they're predominantly mongoloid in their genetic makeup. Historically they weren't really part of the general indian subcontinent (except for Assam, central northeastern state). They had some indic influence for sure, as you can see with their south indian percentages and west eurasian. Even burmese and tibetans do. But genetically, culturally, linguistically, etc they're similar to eastern asians like tibetan, Southern Chinese, and Burmese populations. The northern state called Uttarakhand has significant mongoloid as well on average from nearby Tibet.

---

Its interesting that Khas people from Uttarakhand have notably more EE than Khas people from Nepal. If I had to take a guess, Uttarakhand is somewhat genetically diverse and they happened to take a sample from the most EE-shifted part of UK (northeast UK?). That's the only way I can explain the 20%+ difference between Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mingle

They're Southeast Asians and mainly speak Tibeto-Burman languages (rather than Indo-Aryan/Dravidian languages) and are only part of India cause of British colonialism.

---

British gave them independence to do whatever actually. They just joined india after independence, either by force or will. They fit better in india than in china or burma anyways given their decent affinity with indic culture, especially assam.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mingle

Its interesting that Khas people from Uttarakhand have notably more EE than Khas people from Nepal. If I had to take a guess, Uttarakhand is somewhat genetically diverse and they happened to take a sample from the most EE-shifted part of UK (northeast UK?). That's the only way I can explain the 20%+ difference between Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh,

---

I think himachal is more similar to kashmiri paharis an rajputs. The tibetan groups there didnt mingle much i think with the indo aryan populations but in uttarakhand i think its a cocktail lol. I mean LOL its a brahmin with 30% mongoloid, similar to a nepali chhetri. I can only imagine how the rajputs/kshatriyas score. I have one bisht sample, uttarakhand rajput, with over 60% tibetan shift in oracles. Not sure how representative that individual is so thats why i didnt use that sample. Its crazy actually. MDL told me kinnaur region has more east asian mixed folks compared to rest of pahari region.

# Population Percent
1 NE-Asian 47.64
2 S-Indian 20.28
3 Baloch 13.74
4 SE-Asian 5.54
5 Siberian 5.11
6 NE-Euro 4.68
7 Caucasian 1.78
8 SW-Asian 0.85
9 Papuan 0.29
10 Pygmy 0.06
11 American 0.02
12 Beringian 0.01

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 nepalese-b (xing) 8.97
2 garo (chaubey) 24.11
3 burmanese (chaubey) 24.51
4 uyghur (hgdp) 26.91
5 nepalese-c (xing) 27.6
6 hazara (hgdp) 28.88
7 tu (hgdp) 30.37
8 mongola (hgdp) 30.76
9 xibo (hgdp) 31.28
10 naxi (hgdp) 31.94
11 yi (hgdp) 32.52
12 kyrgyz (hodoglugil) 33.62
13 kyrgyz (xing) 34.11
14 japanese (hgdp) 34.34
15 khasi (chaubey) 34.39
16 tibet (simonson) 34.92
17 kazakh (harappa) 35.16
18 hezhen (hgdp) 35.75
19 uzbek (behar) 35.83
20 daur (hgdp) 36.3

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 65.2% tu (hgdp) + 34.8% kanjar (metspalu) @ 2.62
2 65.1% tu (hgdp) + 34.9% dharkar (metspalu) @ 2.64
3 64.8% tu (hgdp) + 35.2% srivastava (reich) @ 2.65
4 64% tu (hgdp) + 36% bihari (harappa) @ 2.69
5 64.6% tu (hgdp) + 35.4% ap-brahmin (xing) @ 2.69
6 64.7% tu (hgdp) + 35.3% iyengar-brahmin (harappa) @ 2.74
7 64.7% tu (hgdp) + 35.3% up-muslim (metspalu) @ 2.74
8 64.9% tu (hgdp) + 35.1% singapore-indian-b (sgvp) @ 2.75
9 56.9% nepalese-c (xing) + 43.1% han-nchina (hgdp) @ 2.87
10 65.1% tu (hgdp) + 34.9% tharu (metspalu) @ 2.92
11 64.7% tu (hgdp) + 35.3% iyer-brahmin (harappa) @ 2.98
12 53.7% nepalese-c (xing) + 46.3% naxi (hgdp) @ 3
13 64% tu (hgdp) + 36% karnataka-brahmin (harappa) @ 3.03
14 64.3% tu (hgdp) + 35.7% gujarati (harappa) @ 3.08
15 60.6% han-nchina (hgdp) + 39.4% srivastava (reich) @ 3.12
16 64% tu (hgdp) + 36% vaish (reich) @ 3.16
17 64.1% tu (hgdp) + 35.9% caribbean-indian (harappa) @ 3.17
18 64.3% tu (hgdp) + 35.7% up-kshatriya (metspalu) @ 3.18
19 64.2% tu (hgdp) + 35.8% up (harappa) @ 3.18
20 64.3% tu (hgdp) + 35.7% brahmin-tamil-nadu (metspalu) @ 3.21

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thambi

British gave them independence to do whatever actually. They just joined india after independence, either by force or will. They fit better in india than in china or burma anyways given their decent affinity with indic culture.

---

I didn't mean that the Brits forced them to join India, but the later effects of their policies led to them being aligned with the Republic of India. If it wasn't directly governed by the British, it would have been independent like Sri Lanka or Nepal (Indian lands that didn't join the Republic of India due to not being under British administration) or Bhutan (TB land that never joined India due to not being under British administration).

Myanmar also has affinity with Indic culture by the way and was considered part of the Indosphere (along with most of SE Asia).

Quote:

---

I think himachal is more similar to kashmiri paharis an rajputs. The tibetan groups there didnt mingle much i think with the indo aryan populations but in uttarakhand i think its a cocktail lol. I mean LOL its a brahmin with 30% mongoloid. I have one bisht sample, uttarakhand rajput with over 60% tibetan shift in oracles. Its crazy actually.

---

Do you remember how much EE Nepalis Khases score?

Do you know if there are any significant differences between Garhwalis and Kumaonis, and which part of UK the sample in the OP is from?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mingle

Do you remember how much EE Nepalis Khases score?

Do you know if there are any significant differences between Garhwalis and Kumaonis, and which part of UK the sample in the OP is from?

---

Nepali Brahmins (nepalese-a group on harappa) get 8% EE. (4% NE asian, 2% Siberian, 1% SE asian, and 1% American). Similar to kashmiris and himachal folks
Nepali Chhetris/kshatriyas (nepalese-c) get 30% EE. (24% Ne asian, 3% Siberian, 1%SE asian, 1% American, 1% Beringian). Pretty much the same as uttaranchal brahmin.

Kumaonis are more eastern shifted than garwhalis from what I've seen on AG. both MDL and poi told me that. they had no clue about where the brahmin sample is from actually. However the bisht sample i just posted might be from kumaon region but not sure. Its mixed overall i think. average paharis native to uttarakhand might be anywhere from 30%-60% East asian shifted in general.

You created this map yourself? I'm surprised Kerala stands out a little from their neighbouring states.

How does Sri Lanka average?