Pashtuns: A genetically South Asian ethnicity wrapped in self hate(?)

Why do the Pashtuns (who form a significant amount of the Pakistani population and are the largest group in Afghanistan) have such an extreme amount of self hate regarding what they are?
Historically, they are tied to South-Central Asia. Genetically, they're CLOSELY linked with other South Asian populations such as the Punjabi Jatts, Kashmiris, and Sindhi's. Geographically, most of them live in Pakistan. after that Afghanistan. Last time I checked Pakistan was South Asia, and Afghanistan lies both in South Asia and Central Asia.
Pashtuns are clear cut South Asian people by genetics. They cluster with other Northwest South Asians. I was reading some comments on this forum, and once again I noted that there are Pashtuns who live in some bubble regarding this fact.
They think that because they speak an Iranic language, they are somehow not related to their closest geographical and historical brothers; the Indic Pakistanis and Northwest Indians.
This menace needs to stop. A Turkic speaking Turk from Turkey is closer genetically to a Semitic speaking Syrian, an Iranic speaking Kurd or Persian, than to a Turkic speaking Central Asian, by genetics. A Turkic speaking Azerbaijani is genetically much and much closer related to a Persian speaking Iranian, or a Kartvelian speaking Georgian, than to a Turkic speaking Uyghur. By the same logic, an Iranic speaking Pashtun is closer to an Indo-Aryan speaking Sindhi, Kashmiri, Himachali, and even up to including High Caste Hindu's from Central India, than to any West Asian group. Linguistics =/= genotype, the same way all people know and acknowledge that phenotype =/= genotype.

Pashtuns don't just ''cluster'' somewhere loosely in South Asia, no they cluster firmly in South Asia genetically. Some South Asians just sound so self-haterish on the internet. For outsiders its very confusing and quite a hilarious scene. I assume the ''lightness'' factor plays a role as well considering what role it always has played in south asia. Would be the reason why Pashtuns (as they are so-called the lightest south asians, no?) find it so insulting to be compared to their darker but close genetic brothers, the Sindhi's, high caste Hindu Indians, Kashmiri's, etc.

The haplogroup R1a (Y-DNA) is found at a frequency of 51.02% among the Pashtun people. Paragroup Q-M242 (xMEH2, xM378) (of Haplogroup Q-M242 (Y-DNA)) was found at 16.3% in Pashtuns.[89] Haplogroup Q-M242 is also found at a frequency of 18% in Pashtuns in the Afghan capital of Kabul.[90]

According to a 2012 study:

"MDS and Barrier analysis have identified a significant affinity between Pashtun, Tajik, North Indian, and West Indian populations, creating an Afghan-Indian population structure that excludes the Hazaras, Uzbeks, and the South Indian Dravidian speakers. In addition, gene flow to Afghanistan from India marked by Indian lineages, L-M20, H-M69, and R2a-M124, also seems to mostly involve Pashtuns and Tajiks. This genetic affinity and gene flow suggests interactions that could have existed since at least the establishment of the region's first civilizations at the Indus Valley and the Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex."

source: Haber M, Platt DE, Ashrafian Bonab M, Youhanna SC, Soria-Hernanz DF et al. (2012). "Afghanistan's Ethnic Groups Share a Y-Chromosomal Heritage Structured by Historical Events". PLoS ONE 7 (3): e34288. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0034288. PMC 3314501. PMID 22470552.

World plots/PCA's.

http://www.cell.com/cms/attachment/2...915790/gr1.jpg

http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/3...scalabeled.jpg

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal...09103-f3.2.jpg

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-HwyKjFcicA...34288.g001.png

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%...l.pone.0076748


As compared to West Asia/European/Eurasia plots

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-UCP5T1pduG.../s1600/1_2.png

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-_6XAIk6ygt...s1600/waeu.png

http://img89.imageshack.us/img89/694...t13labeled.png

http://pichoster.net/images/2014/02/...asia%20PCA.png

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Ish7688voT...urasianpca.jpg

Sure they're not the same as other South Asians etc in all aspects, but genetically, geographically and to a certain good extent phenotypically, they are firmly South Asian. Culturally however they received influence from wider regions.
Pashtuns, like all other South Asian populations are very far from West Asians genetically, and even more further from Europeans. (Tbh, even hilarious to discuss all this)
A Pashtun is genetically closer to Indians all the way up to South India, than he is towards a West Asian Georgian.

A population hailing mostly from Pakistan (clear cut South Asia) and from Afghanistan (a nation in South Asia and Central Asia), that genetically cluster and overlap with peoples such as Punjabi Jatts, Baloch, Sindhi's, and high caste Hindu Indians, are just South Asian.

"South Asian" doesn't equate Punjabi/Tamil/Sindhi etc. it's a wide diverse region. We're talking about genetics however. Genetically they overlap and cluster with other South Asians (or either Punjabi Jatts, Kashmiri, Himachali people are not South Asian anymore genetically?), geographically they are also mostly South Asian (worlds largest amount of Pashtuns live in South Asian Pakistan), so they are South Asians. Of course their language and culture differs somewhat from other close clustering South Asians (Punjabi Jatts, Kashmiri's etc), but did/does it change their genetics remotely significantly? No.

Pashtuns, should embrace their closest genetic, historical, and cultural brothers, the Indic Pakistanis, and the Northwest Indians, and not be such self haters on the internet. It all doesn't change reality and neither does it bring anything to either peoples other than more chisms and hate in that already troubled region of the world.

As far as I Know Pashtuns are genetically far northwestern shifted South Asian population, with West and Central Asian admixture that makes them unique :p

They don't have problems with Sikh jatts from what I know they hate pakistani punjabis for distroying their country and using it as a puppet state for so long

Not just Pashtuns actually most of the Muslim meta-ethnicities there. Claiming all sorts of lineage from Arabic to Persian. I don't know if this is because of caste system (?). It has implications in the real world, especially when linked to Islamic radicalism (in a non-direct way). Many British Pakistanis have joined ISIS because of strong, superficial affinity with the Middle East and West Asia - they are willing to fight for MENA causes instead of their own. You even see it in universities - raising money for MENA causes instead of pumping it to their own countries. They think if you are light-skin and don't look typical Indian, you must have Arabic/Persian/Turkish ancestors - which makes no sense. I think it's a social issue which needs looking into.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cyra

Not just Pashtuns actually most of the Muslim meta-ethnicities there. Claiming all sorts of lineage from Arabic to Persian. I don't know if this is because of caste system (?). It has implications in the real world, especially when linked to Islamic radicalism (in a non-direct way). Many British Pakistanis have joined ISIS because of strong, superficial affinity with the Middle East and West Asia - they are willing to fight for MENA causes instead of their own. You even see it in universities - raising money for MENA causes instead of pumping it to their own countries. They think if you are light-skin and don't look typical Indian, you must have Arabic/Persian/Turkish ancestors - which makes no sense. I think it's a social issue which needs looking into.

---

There is lot of bad blood between Muslims n non Muslims in subcontinent. Majority of Muslims converts were low casts Hindus from North west India even now a days they are sort of low casts in India. Nbecsuse of this and Friday sermons at local mosque they think they are Arabian because Muslim
Originated in Arabia.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jatt

There is lot of bad blood between Muslims n non Muslims in subcontinent. Majority of Muslims converts were low casts Hindus from North west India even now a days they are sort of low casts in India. Nbecsuse of this and Friday sermons at local mosque they think they are Arabian because Muslim
Originated in Arabia.

---

They have a very good culture and beautiful people. That's why it just doesn't make sense to me.

Forget about Pakistanis and afghNs even bangladeshis think they come from Arabs and Persians. This coming of Islam in indiA has spell doom for these people. Divided India and these people are like having one leg in one boat and Another in another boat

Indians themselves are very different people. I would say Pashtuns are more similar to Iranians than they are to Punjabis. Just look at their language for one, or their looks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cyra

They have a very good culture and beautiful people. That's why it just doesn't make sense to me.

---

What is hAppening between Israel and Arabs. Multiply the hatred 10 times that is how Muslims and non Muslims are in subcontinent

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stefan_Dusan

Indians themselves are very different people. I would say Pashtuns are more similar to Iranians than they are to Punjabis. Just look at their language for one, or their looks.

---

Look at the genetic charts he posted. Pathans are almost the same as other Pakistani groups. They do not cluster with Iranians on regional PCA plots.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jatt

What is hAppening between Israel and Arabs. Multiply the hatred 10 times that is how Muslims and non Muslims are in subcontinent

---

Islam is the culture of the Arabs, the quran is written in their language, the most holy site (Mecca) is on Arab lands, the most important prophet (Muhammad ) was Arab. This is why all Muslims kind of wish they were truly Arab even if they don't fully realize their intents. It was Arab conquests that brought Islam to them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stefan_Dusan

Indians themselves are very different people. I would say Pashtuns are more similar to Iranians than they are to Punjabis. Just look at their language for one, or their looks.

---

Lookwise they are more like Kashmiris but culture is sort of Persian which itself is not big deal differ t to Pakistani culture

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Willem

Look at the genetic charts he posted. Pathans are almost the same as other Pakistani groups. They do not cluster with Iranians on regional PCA plots.

---

u place too much importance on genetics, their language is closer to Persian. Plus, I don't think good genetic results have been done on them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stefan_Dusan

u place too much importance on genetics, their language is closer to Persian. Plus, I don't think good genetic results have been done on them.

---

Language classification means nothing to racial affinity, especially in groups that underwent language shift through elite dominance (very common around the world).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stefan_Dusan

Islam is the culture of the Arabs, the quran is written in their language, the most holy site (Mecca) is on Arab lands, the most important prophet (Muhammad ) was Arab. This is why all Muslims kind of wish they were truly Arab even if they don't fully realize their intents. It was Arab conquests that brought Islam to them.

---

Turks and Persians are proud though and Persians are even anti-Arab. (at least what I've seen).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Willem

Language classification means nothing to racial affinity, especially in groups that underwent language shift through elite dominance (very common around the world).

---

where someone plots on a PCA plot means even less. I'd say Pashtuns look closer to Persians than Punjabis. This is from some experience with all 3 ethnic groups.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cyra

Turks and Persians are proud though and Persians are even anti-Arab. (at least what I've seen).

---

It depends how Muslim they are. The Turks though have their own mythos because they lead the Ottoman Empire.

Pashtuns dont hate indians and dont deny that they have south asian admixture.But they are not south asian people because they speak an eastern iranic language and even genetically the south asian components are not dominant and came from the maternal side.Pashtuns were nomads in the past and were culturally closer to central asian turks than to indians.They are in no sense south asian people and i thought that only indians who have some kind of weird fetish for pashtuns claim such things.They even dont look similar and their tribal culture is very foreign for south asia

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vir9

Pashtuns dont hate indians and dont deny that they have south asian admixture.But they are not south asian people because they speak an eastern iranic language and even genetically the south asian components are not dominant and came from the maternal side.Pashtuns were nomads in the past and were culturally closer to central asian turks than to indians.They are in no sense south asian people and i thought that only indians who have some kind of weird fetish for pashtuns claim such things.They even dont look similar and their tribal culture is very foreign for south asia

---

I know from talking to Indians, they have some "tribes" of their own, I'm curious, can u explain Pashtun tribal hierarchy and customs?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cyra

Turks and Persians are proud though and Persians are even anti-Arab. (at least what I've seen).

---

So are Indians. Have you ever met an Indian even online who show favorBle view of these people. It's always Pakistani and bAngladeshi who have abnormal love for these good for nothing people. Persians were once ZorastrNians but Islamic conquest changed them to today's people. Islam met resistance in India. We have indegenous religions like Hinduism Sikhism and budhism. Since these countries are overwhelmic Islamic there are no conflicts. If Muslims were minority I their region things would been different

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vir9

Pashtuns dont hate indians and dont deny that they have south asian admixture.But they are not south asian people because they speak an eastern iranic language and even genetically the south asian components are not dominant and came from the maternal side.Pashtuns were nomads in the past and were culturally closer to central asian turks than to indians.They are in no sense south asian people and i thought that only indians who have some kind of weird fetish for pashtuns claim such things.They even dont look similar and their tribal culture is very foreign for south asia

---

Buddy your people in indian Punjab we call them pashoris they are shawl vendors. Don't mix up Indians N Pakistanis. You are sort of low cast India

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stefan_Dusan

where someone plots on a PCA plot means even less. I'd say Pashtuns look closer to Persians than Punjabis. This is from some experience with all 3 ethnic groups.

---

most pashtuns have this typical afghan look Attachment 53060 but some can look like persians,uzbeks or punjabies but on average they look similar to persians than indians

what the hell are talking about???? i am not from india or pakistan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vir9

what the hell are talking about???? i am not from india or pakistan

---

I beg pardon for mistooking for afghan. Don't insult an Indian by saying we like
Afghans. Who the fuck R they. We can crush them like bugs. My ancestors ruled over that part Nd even to this day they say to their kids chup Che Singh nalwa vagela. Meaning keep quite or Sikhs will come. Just don't talk indians and Pakistani mentality as same. The people these Pakistani worship are like cockroach for us. Got it my friennd

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stefan_Dusan

I know from talking to Indians, they have some "tribes" of their own, I'm curious, can u explain Pashtun tribal hierarchy and customs?

---

pashtun customs are based on the ethnical code pashtunwali which is probably of pre-islamic origin and for some pashtuns as much as important as their islamic religion.Pashtuns have many tribes and clans which are based on patrilineal ancestry.Pashtuns always took foreign women and married them because they only identify with their paternal line so some pashtuns can look north indian,persian(tajik) or even a bit turkish because their ancestors mixed with non-pashtun women but most pashtuns preserved this typical afghan look.In pakistam some regions were only recently pashtunized and here more pashtuns can have a indic look which is rather uncommon among afghan pashtuns but exists.

i didnt say that all indians have a fetish for pashtuns but many indians and indian pakistanis seem to be "facinated" by them or want to claim them as indian people

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vir9

pashtun customs are based on the ethnical code pashtunwali which is probably of pre-islamic origin and for some pashtuns as much as important as their islamic religion.Pashtuns have many tribes and clans which are based on patrilineal ancestry.Pashtuns always took foreign women and married them because they only identify with their paternal line so some pashtuns can look north indian,persian(tajik) or even a bit turkish because their ancestors mixed with non-pashtun women but most pashtuns preserved this typical afghan look.In pakistam some regions were only recently pashtunized and here more pashtuns can have a indic look which is rather uncommon among afghan pashtuns but exists.

---

Pashtonwali my ass. They are known for selling their women in Pakistan. Anyone who can't find a wife go to pashtoon areas and buy women.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jatt

Pashtonwali my ass. They are known for selling their women in Pakistan. Anyone who can't find a wife go to pashtoon areas and buy women.

---

funny that pashtuns say exact the same thing about indian people.Prostitution exist everywhere in the world but is surely more widespread in india than in tribal pashtun areas of afghanistan and pakistan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vir9

pashtun customs are based on the ethnical code pashtunwali which is probably of pre-islamic origin and for some pashtuns as much as important as their islamic religion.Pashtuns have many tribes and clans which are based on patrilineal ancestry.Pashtuns always took foreign women and married them because they only identify with their paternal line so some pashtuns can look north indian,persian(tajik) or even a bit turkish because their ancestors mixed with non-pashtun women but most pashtuns preserved this typical afghan look.In pakistam some regions were only recently pashtunized and here more pashtuns can have a indic look which is rather uncommon among afghan pashtuns but exists.

---

In Serbian tribes it's based on male founder as well (seed), however taking a foreign woman is still discouraged, it happens from time to time. I was curious about your codes of conducts to compare, what u call "Pashtunwali" for example in Serbian system,

If u descend from same man, u cannot marry anyone inside it. So even if u have to back a 1000 years to get a common ancestor, u still cannot marry. Usually villages are based on one or two tribes, and they cannot marry within the village.

Second, if u do not descend from same man, u have to trace ur ancestry to 8 generations to make sure there is no common link. For example if ur great-grandmother came from the same family (here clan, not tribe) u cannot marry even though this is all female lines.

I find the above two most important, as it underlines how people organize. For example, I still can go to someone from the same male founder, and we trace to 1300s, and he will treat me how an American will treat a first cousin, or even better. At same time, I keep in touch with only immediate cousins form my female line.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vir9

i didnt say that all indians have a fetish for pashtuns but many indians and indian pakistanis seem to be "facinated" by them or want to claim them as indian people

---

There was no Afghanistan before Ahmed shah abdali got power. This area
Was under hindushahi Kings. At least know afghan history before talking. N by the way they look quite similar to valley of Kashmir people. You wanna deny I don't give two hoot about it anyways

Quote:

---

In Serbian tribes it's based on male founder as well (seed), however taking a foreign woman is still discouraged, it happens from time to time. I was curious about your codes of conducts to compare, what u call "Pashtunwali" for example in Serbian system,

If u descend from same man, u cannot marry anyone inside it. So even if u have to back a 1000 years to get a common ancestor, u still cannot marry. Usually villages are based on one or two tribes, and they cannot marry within the village.

Second, if u do not descend from same man, u have to trace ur ancestry to 8 generations to make sure there is no common link. For example if ur great-grandmother came from the same family (here clan, not tribe) u cannot marry even though this is all female lines.

I find the above two most important, as it underlines how people organize. For example, I still can go to someone from the same male founder, and we trace to 1300s, and he will treat me how an American will treat a first cousin, or even better. At same time, I keep in touch with only immediate cousins form my female line.

---

yes pashtuns also still prefer pashtun women for their sons and in rural areas most people are unmixed but urbanized pashtuns or pashtuns who live in a region inhabited by a large non-pashtun majority are often mixed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stefan_Dusan

In Serbian tribes it's based on male founder as well (seed), however taking a foreign woman is still discouraged, it happens from time to time. I was curious about your codes of conducts to compare, what u call "Pashtunwali" for example in Serbian system,

If u descend from same man, u cannot marry anyone inside it. So even if u have to back a 1000 years to get a common ancestor, u still cannot marry. Usually villages are based on one or two tribes, and they cannot marry within the village.

Second, if u do not descend from same man, u have to trace ur ancestry to 8 generations to make sure there is no common link. For example if ur great-grandmother came from the same family (here clan, not tribe) u cannot marry even though this is all female lines.

I find the above two most important, as it underlines how people organize. For example, I still can go to someone from the same male founder, and we trace to 1300s, and he will treat me how an American will treat a first cousin, or even better. At same time, I keep in touch with only immediate cousins form my female line.

---

Bro this pashtoonwali type shit is
Common in Indians too. But we are sort of getting westernized.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jatt

Bro this pashtoonwali type shit is
Common in Indians too. But we are sort of getting westernized.

---

As are Serbs if they move to cities. It's sad to me. Anyways in Serbian custom, you have a special family designated during marriage (kum) and from there, your first son/first daughter marry 1-1 each of this family. So it used to be, your wife was chosen before you were born. This was done to strengthen ties between families. However communism was brutal here, and outlawed this.

There is also tradition of 'blood brotherhood' it's elaborate ceremony where u drink the blood of each other before elders. But after it's done, you can no longer marry anyone from this family line, nor can your descendants, almost like your seeds are the same.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jatt

There was no Afghanistan before Ahmed shah abdali got power. This area
Was under hindushahi Kings. At least know afghan history before talking. N by the way they look quite similar to valley of Kashmir people. You wanna deny I don't give two hoot about it anyways

---

yes afghanistan is a young state but this doesnt mean that afghans(pashtuns) didnt existed before this period and there was also no indian state before 1947 but indian civilization is very old .Afghanistan was dominated by eastern iranic tribes like kushan,scythians,hepthalites,tocharians and bactrians in the pre-islamic period.These eastern iranic tribes represent the ancestors of modern pashtuns and modern pashto is classified as eastern iranic language similar to scythian,baktrian and pamiri but later pashtuns also mixed with indians,turks and persians.Pashtuns were originally nomads and some of their tribes like abdali(hepthalites) or sakazai(saka=scythians) show that eastern iranic nomads played a very important role in the ethnogenesis of pashtuns.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stefan_Dusan

As are Serbs if they move to cities. It's sad to me. Anyways in Serbian custom, you have a special family designated during marriage (kum) and from there, your first son/first daughter marry 1-1 each of this family. So it used to be, your wife was chosen before you were born. This was done to strengthen ties between families. However communism was brutal here, and outlawed this.

There is also tradition of 'blood brotherhood' it's elaborate ceremony where u drink the blood of each other before elders. But after it's done, you can no longer marry anyone from this family line, nor can your descendants, almost like your seeds are the same.

---

We have gotra system. Where men and women from same gotra can't marry. We exchange our turbans As a sign of brotherhood. And then consider the guy whom we changed turbans as real brother

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vir9

yes afghanistan is a young state but this doesnt mean that afghans(pashtuns) didnt existed before this period and there was also no indian state before 1947 but indian civilization is very old .Afghanistan was dominated by eastern iranic tribes like kushan,scythians,hepthalites,tocharians and bactrians in the pre-islamic period.These eastern iranic tribes represent the ancestors of modern pashtuns and modern pashto is classified as eastern iranic language similar to scythian,baktrian and pamiri but later pashtuns also mixed with indians,turks and persians.Pashtuns were originally nomads and some of their tribes like abdali(hepthalites) or sakazai(saka=scythians) show that eastern iranic nomads played a very important role in the ethnogenesis of pashtuns.

---

India is one of the worlds most ancient and continuous civilization. Actually ancient Greeks give us this name India. India is 1000s year old my friend. Much older than pashtoons and as far as language is concerned check language family tree both Persian and Indian language are branches of same family. Ancient iranic language is Avesta which is sImar to Sanskrit Indian language.
I

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stefan_Dusan

Indians themselves are very different people. I would say Pashtuns are more similar to Iranians than they are to Punjabis. Just look at their language for one, or their looks.

---

Well genetically they're not as you see, to any West Asian ethnicity. By far.

Indians themselves are very diverse and the way you mention ''Indians'' (as if it's an ethnicity), is nothing more than utterly wrong. Kashmiris and Tamils are very different people for starters, but are both Indians (those Kashmiris who live in Indian territories that is). Punjabis got quite some diversity as well. Punjabi Jatts for example, are genetically very very close to Pashtuns, and historically as well, yet other Punjabi tribes are much more distant.
In other words; you can't talk about such concepts as if it's some homogenous group.

About the language, Pashto language is an Eastern Iranian language and alongside Ossetian (spoken by the North Caucasian Iranian ethnic group, the Ossetians), the only significant existing Eastern Iranian languages these days. Persian is an Western Iranian language, like Kurdish, Talysh, and Tat, and an average Persian speaker can understand about as much Ossetian as he can understand Pashto; well exactly, close to nihil. Or you wanna say now that because Pashto and Ossetian belong to the same language tree (Iranic) and even to the same linguistic regional distribution as well (Eastern) that Ossetians and Pashtuns are close as well? That would be almost like comparing diferent human races, in my humble opinion.
Linguistics are a very fluid concept and I'd rather not use that argument. An advanced Persian speaker can understand about ~50% of Azerbaijani Turkish yet it doesn't belong to the same family tree of linguistics.

Phenotypically, the average Pashtun looks between a North Indian, a West Asian, and with some Central Asian Turkic touch. Yet his genetics put him the closest with other Northwest South Asians (Punjabi Jatts, Kashmiris, high caste Hindu Indians, etc)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cyra

Turks and Persians are proud though and Persians are even anti-Arab. (at least what I've seen).

---

Well Persians did rule over the Arabs before the Arabs ruled over them to be honest. Also Arab nationalists are often anti-Persian. Persians have had their own culture and civilization so hence they don't need to feel affinity to stranger. Well the people in the Indian subcontinent did not, although most of it came via Turko-Persian dynasties and not the Arabs. So they think their is cultural link with Turks and Persians, despite their is not much as their culturally south Asian. The Arab lineage is claimed because they want to be more genuine or what have you, but they relate themselves to the Turks, Persians, and so on because they were basically a people with rich empires, the Arabs to but they feel more kinship to the Turks, Persians who don't have much genetic relation to them due to linguistic or cultural elements brought on. The Arab impact on the Indian subcontinent was very small, the Turko-Persians made a good lasting effect especially under the Mughals.

actually afghan pashtuns are close to some pamiri people of eastern tajikistan genetically who have similar genetic admixtures(west asian,indoeuropean,south asian,central asian and a bit east asian) But i think that pashtuns of pakistan are quite close to northern pakistanis but afghan pashtuns are more west asian and east asian shifted so they cluster rather with pamiri people

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nabatea1

Well Persians did rule over the Arabs before the Arabs ruled over them to be honest. Also Arab nationalists are often anti-Persian. Persians have had their own culture and civilization so hence they don't need to feel affinity to stranger. Well the people in the Indian subcontinent did not, although most of it came via Turko-Persian dynasties and not the Arabs. So they think their is cultural link with Turks and Persians, despite their is not much as their culturally south Asian. The Arab lineage is claimed because they want to be more genuine or what have you, but they relate themselves to the Turks, Persians, and so on because they were basically a people with rich empires, the Arabs to but they feel more kinship to the Turks, Persians who don't have much genetic relation to them due to linguistic or cultural elements brought on. The Arab impact on the Indian subcontinent was very small, the Turko-Persians made a good lasting effect especially under the Mughals.

---

Bro they like Arabs way more than Persians and Turks in my opinion because prophet Muhammad was Arab. They have high regard for Arabs.