Pakistan, the IVC, and a Land of continuous migration and mixing

[Vikramaditya1]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

This is peak we wuzzery.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Let me break it down for you.

The idea that Pakistanis often claim Middle Eastern or Central Asian ancestry isn’t something I made up—it’s a pretty well-known cultural trend. For decades, Pakistan has tied its identity to Islamic history and foreign lineages, while ignoring its own pre-Islamic and indigenous roots, like the Indus Valley Civilization. This isn’t just about a few shajra-e-nasab claims; it’s a whole narrative that puts more weight on connections to invaders or Islamic figures than on the actual history of the land.

Look at how Pakistan’s schoolbooks and cultural discourse glorify Arabs, Persians, and Mughals while barely mentioning the IVC or indigenous traditions. Even in casual conversations, you’ll hear people proudly claim to be "descended from Arabs" or "Mughals," like that’s somehow better than acknowledging the rich history of their own land.

The funny thing is, while you’re asking for data, this obsession with foreign lineage isn’t based on anything solid. It’s mostly cultural fluff. So maybe instead of throwing around accusations of propaganda, take a hard look at how Pakistan’s own narrative sidelines its indigenous heritage to glorify outsiders. The proof is all around—you just have to stop ignoring it.

Great…since it’s such a “well known” cultural trend…spanning decades…it shouldn’t be hard for u to present some data?

Look up the meaning of “deflection” before using that word. It wasn’t deflection…it was a direct counter to ur “claim”…not a deflection.

Still awaiting data of the prolific proof that is supposedly all around.

 

[vasanthm]

Great…since it’s such a “well known” cultural trend…spanning decades…it shouldn’t be hard for u to present some data?

Look up the meaning of “deflection” before using that word. It wasn’t deflection…it was a direct counter to ur “claim”…not a deflection.

Still awaiting data of the prolific proof that is supposedly all around.

Give me some time, let me do some 'research'

 

[AjayGhatak]

I think your question is questionable. Why should superficial and peripheral cultural issues like religion and language dictate one's interest in history and genetics? I am as far from Ethiopia as I can be in every possible way, but I am extremely interested in

Ardi - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I highly doubt Pakistani fascination here with IVC is a purely academic one. Its weird actually. I mean these folks are, at the same time:

1. Literally worship culture coming out of middle east.

2. Absolutely reject the local culture to the point they argued that they are a different nation and even genetics. LOL! You should have seen massive amount of "We have different DNA" threads in past.

3. Identify massively with icons coming from middle east and turkey.

And now they have such a hard interest in IVC that they are hell bent of proving that they are the real successors of IVC and IVC actually came from northern Europe. We actually do not know enough to say who are the real successors of IVC are.

This is the weird part. On one hand you have a people who want to burry their non-islamic past and build a purely islamic identity and nationhood and at the same time lay a complete claim on a past civilization whose successors are not properly known and argue a connection to the europeans.

This is why I question.

 

[vasanthm]

I highly doubt Pakistani fascination here with IVC is a purely academic one. Its weird actually. I mean these folks are, at the same time:

1. Literally worship culture coming out of middle east.

2. Absolutely reject the local culture to the point they argued that they are a different nation and even genetics. LOL! You should have seen massive amount of "We have different DNA" threads in past.

3. Identify massively with icons coming from middle east and turkey.

And now they have such a hard interest in IVC that they are hell bent of proving that they are the real successors of IVC and IVC actually came from northern Europe. We actually do not know enough to say who are the real successors of IVC are.

This is the weird part. On one hand you have a people who want to burry their non-islamic past and build a purely islamic identity and nationhood and at the same time lay a complete claim on a past civilization whose successors are not properly known and argue a connection to the europeans.

This is why I question.

Isn’t it funny how the narrative shifts? First, they claimed to have “different DNA,” boasting about being descendants of Arabs, Persians, or Turks, while rejecting their indigenous roots to push an Islamic identity. Now, suddenly, they’re “true sons of the soil” tied to the Indus Valley Civilization, whose ancestors just adopted an “enlightened” foreign religion.

For years, they ignored or buried their non-Islamic past, idolizing Middle Eastern and Turkish culture. Now they’re desperate to claim the IVC, even spinning wild theories about European links. It’s hard to take this sudden interest seriously—it feels more like another convenient narrative than genuine pride in history.

 

[EugeneP]

I highly doubt Pakistani fascination here with IVC is a purely academic one. Its weird actually. I mean these folks are, at the same time:

1. Literally worship culture coming out of middle east.

2. Absolutely reject the local culture to the point they argued that they are a different nation and even genetics. LOL! You should have seen massive amount of "We have different DNA" threads in past.

3. Identify massively with icons coming from middle east and turkey.

And now they have such a hard interest in IVC that they are hell bent of proving that they are the real successors of IVC and IVC actually came from northern Europe. We actually do not know enough to say who are the real successors of IVC are.

This is the weird part. On one hand you have a people who want to burry their non-islamic past and build a purely islamic identity and nationhood and at the same time lay a complete claim on a past civilization whose successors are not properly known and argue a connection to the europeans.

This is why I question.

I view it as present day Pakistan rejecting modern cultural affiliation with historic South Asia (and preferring to identify itself as culturally Middle Eastern) but trying to explore history of the place. i.e. they may (mentally) disconnect from the people but connect with the place. If I can proffer an analogy, many Native Americans (your 'First Nations') may not identify with dominant Eurocentric culture but surely, they identify with North America. Somewhat similar (and less so) with African Americans.

 

[vasanthm]

I view it as present day Pakistan rejecting modern cultural affiliation with historic South Asia (and preferring to identify itself as culturally Middle Eastern) but trying to explore history of the place. i.e. they may (mentally) disconnect from the people but connect with the place. If I can proffer an analogy, many Native Americans (your 'First Nations') may not identify with dominant Eurocentric culture but surely, they identify with North America. Somewhat similar (and less so) with African Americans.

Isn’t a place just earth and soil? When we talk about a civilization, it’s not just about the land—it’s about the people, their culture, and their beliefs. You can’t claim to connect with the history of a place while rejecting the very essence of the civilization that lived there. Civilizations are defined by the people who built them, not just the geographic coordinates they happened to occupy. Disconnecting from the people and culture while trying to embrace the land feels hollow and selective.

Turkey for instance, they’re a great example of a nation that embraces its layered cultural history. They don’t just preserve, study, and present their Byzantine, Anatolian, or Christian past—they’re genuinely proud of it. It’s an integral part of their identity, even as a majority Muslim country. That’s how you honor a place’s history—not by cherry-picking parts of it while ignoring or rejecting the people and cultures that actually shaped it.

 

[EugeneP]

Isn’t a place just earth and soil? When we talk about a civilization, it’s not just about the land—it’s about the people, their culture, and their beliefs. You can’t claim to connect with the history of a place while rejecting the very essence of the civilization that lived there. Civilizations are defined by the people who built them, not just the geographic coordinates they happened to occupy. Disconnecting from the people and culture while trying to embrace the land feels hollow and selective.

People migrate from land to land all the time and embrace the new land as their own. Why can't the reverse be true? Pakistan may consider itself as a Middle Eastern country that by a tectonic act ended up in South Asia! As an example, you can easily observe that Pakistanis are more obsessed with the difficulties of Palestinians than those of Pakistanis.

 

[FuturePAF]

There were different ethnicities throughout history. But none of them had different religions or prophets. So, people migrating around was common and not a major event that defined civilisations.

Buddhism emerged out of what we would call Hinduism nowadays. That religion shifted the civilization, and had a profound effect on events; the Buddhism empire all the way into Afghanistan for example.

Jainism is also another religion that emerged from that time. Both around 500-600 BCE. Approximately a thousand years after the start of the period of the Aryan invasions/migrations.

Remember it is about mixtures and probably Male dominated migration and intermarriage, taking over a settled population. They don’t need to be the whole population, just the top supplanting the ruling class, with their descendants getting a preferential opportunity to marry and dominate the ethnic group.

The theory is also not a massive invasion of Aryans but bands of Aryans moving in over hundreds of years. One band could have a different agenda than another.

 

[FuturePAF]

Isn’t a place just earth and soil? When we talk about a civilization, it’s not just about the land—it’s about the people, their culture, and their beliefs. You can’t claim to connect with the history of a place while rejecting the very essence of the civilization that lived there. Civilizations are defined by the people who built them, not just the geographic coordinates they happened to occupy. Disconnecting from the people and culture while trying to embrace the land feels hollow and selective.

Turkey for instance, they’re a great example of a nation that embraces its layered cultural history. They don’t just preserve, study, and present their Byzantine, Anatolian, or Christian past—they’re genuinely proud of it. It’s an integral part of their identity, even as a majority Muslim country. That’s how you honor a place’s history—not by cherry-picking parts of it while ignoring or rejecting the people and cultures that actually shaped it.

With the change in religion a cultural and religious shift occurred but it was gradual and as ethnicities the retention of at least some if not a lot of the cultural practices from the pre-islamic culture. Sindhi culture comes to mind as the most prominent example. Pre-partition, Sindh was 30% Hindu. Jinnah’s vision wasn’t the mass migration of people on the basis of religion, but for the non-Muslim minorities of Pakistan to have their rights protected as he feared the rights of Muslims would not be protected in a united India.

Jinnah’s death, soon after Independence, was followed with leaders that failed to live up to his vision. Hence the imposition of Urdu (and english) as the national language(s) for example. The flag isn’t all green, the white part is there for a reason, and not meant to be a token gesture. Now is the time for Pakistan to embrace its history and ancestry, as you say the Turks have embraced their history.

 

[Joe Shearer]

The anti Pakistani brigade in India all seems to resemble the ethnicities in the Ganges basin.

The rest of this thread is verbiage.

 

[Joe Shearer]

You don't get a say how and what we do with it.

Oh, we get a say. Just crouching up in a foetal position, sticking your fingers in your ears and trying to drown all voices by loud, continuous noises doesn't ensure your ability to control the conversation, if this can be called a conversation.

 

[Joe Shearer]

I hope that provides a a little clarity.

Much.
Not very complimentary, though.

 

[Joe Shearer]

The descendants of that civilization still live in Pakistan, make up most of the population, but as mixtures with peoples that came later.

Try to understand, and I say this with considerable empathy, that the IVC was an episode, that was never remembered in the roughly 400 or 500 years that intervened. It was re-discovered by Indians from undivided India, including a Punjabi and a Bengali.

Pakistanis need to get rid of this illusion that there is any direct lineal or linguistic or civilisational connection between the IVC and present-day nation-states.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Watch the video, Shiva/Rudram was addressed; adopting a local diety or iconography over an indo-European diety.

A fair observation, but speculative. Nobody has succeeded in connecting the apparent icons from IVC seals with the Vedic Rudra or the post-Vedic Siva. This connection is a myth-making exercise.