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

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.