:Talk:Brahui people

This article begins saying "The Brahui are a Scythian-speaking sub-ethnic group of the Baloch". Later, under Origins, it says "The fact that other Dravidian languages only exist further south in India has led to several speculations about the origins of the Brahui." Then, under the heading Language, it says "The Brahui language is a Dravidian language". This article does not have any internal consistency. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.217.95.16 (talk) 00:24, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Since when are Brahui considered Dravidian??? this is not factually correct and is often promoted by indians who want to associate themselves to all things foreign. Brahui are an ethnic group inhabiting Balochistan and there exists no linguistic or genetic study to link the Brahui to the Dravidians in any form, yet this article seems to state it as fact! Brahui are a clearly Iranic people who show no genetic association whatsoever with the Dravidian/indian gene pool at all. Please correct this error and make this article more factual! Cheers —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.2.91.136 (talk) 09:54, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Brahui is a language not a people. Those who speak Brahui are Baloch by race.

Brahui or Bravee is a language spoken only by Baloch people. Though the national language of the Baloch race is Baloch anf Brahui is their,Balochs, second language after Balochi. There is a lot of confusion in west(Europe,North America) that Brahui speakers are different from Balochi speakers,infact Baloch is a one race and had two languages Baloch and Brahui. Those who speak Brahui are known as Brahuis(or Brahui Balochs).Baloch society is divided in tens of tribes, some tribes speak Brahui and some speak Balochi, there are many tribes who spoke Balochi and Brahui both. Like the Langov tribe ,who live in central Balochistan at Mangochar area, speak Balochi as their first language and Brahui as second. The Bezenjo tribe live in Khuzdar, Nal and regions of Makkura, who speak Baloch and Brahui both like one house speaks Balochi the other speaks Brahui. And one of the largest tribes of the Balochs the Muhammadsanis speak both of the languages. We must see the Bangulzai tribe which infact is a Brahui speaking tribe but the sub-tribe of the Bangulzai the Garanis speak Balochi and are known as Balochi speaker Bangulzais. Presently Brahui is spoken in Balochistan(Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan) northern Iran, Trukmanistan, Sindh and Gulf Arab states. The Kings/Khans of Balochistan were Brahui speakers but their court languages was Balochi.

Brauhi's are not Baloch they are their own people.Akmal94 (talk) 10:16, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

I didn't name this article and maybe the name should be changed if it's meaning is unclear. It could be changed to "Brahui speakers" or something like that. It's not talking about a race or tribe but about those people who speak Brahui. I moved the "Comments by..." off the front page because the informal tone would get this article back into the wikify bin where it has been since the "Comments by . . ." was added the first time. Mattisse(talk) 23:16, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

well bascially if you see brohi(Barhi) are not balouch but now they are mixed and it is hard to find who is and who is not beacuse many tribes speak balouchi and borhi at meantime and khan of kalat are from Brohi tribe too but they are though to be balouchi and they are proud of it. Yeah Brohi(most of my friend write brohi rather then the way you wrote it)(Barhui) speak Bravi(or Brahui Language).

Khalidkhoso 04:49, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

what religion are they?

Muslim Specially Sunni sect (most of them thought to be orthodox in Sindh as religious point of view).

any thing u wanna know ask

Khalidkhoso 04:44, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

For dedicated editors of this page: The "Related Groups" info was removed from all {{tl|Infobox Ethnic group}} infoboxes. Comments may be left on the Ethnic groups talk page. Ling.Nut 20:28, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

== Dravidians are an ethnic group. ==

Genetically Dravidian speakers of India are different from Indo-Aryans as proved in David Frawley's work and recent genetic studies. However Brahui people are neither Indo-Aryan or related to Dravidian peoples of South India as they are ethnically same as the Balochis. Change ethnic Dravidians to ethnic Iranian people who speak a Dravidian language.

:David Frawley is a fringe writer, not a geneticist. Indeed his evidence comes from very obsolete literature on race. India is very genetically diverse. There are no clear distinctions between definable groups, for sure, but that does not have any relevance to the fact that Brahui are Dravidian. I's not a biological concept. Paul B 10:22, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Just because modern Brahui speakers in Balochistan reject the Dravidian origin of Brahui(for obvious reasons), doesn't change the fact that structure of the language is distinctly dravidian by any linguistic standards, that is why there is a general consensus among scholars around the world about Brahui's dravidian origin. Now, ethnic or genetic compositioin of the Brahui speakers is a totally different matter and is obviously more akin to Balochis, being sorrounded by them, so is the modern vocabulary of the language.

First off, what are the obvious reasons you are talking about? And what linguistic standards, scholars and consensus are you referring to? There is no such thing. The Dravidian theory, is just that, a false theory that was suggested but not proved by Colonial rulers some 200 years ago. It has largely been debunked and rejected by most modern historians including the famous Dr. Dani, a pioneer and the foremost expert in Indus Valley Civilization. Get your facts straight and please only post veriable and accurate data in this article. Cheers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.228.164.238 (talk) 05:59, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Brahui language is the last remnant of Indus valley civilization which started with the Mehargarh culture in Balochistan. This situation is more like Greeks or Italians in America that speak English as their first language. There is a tendency among Baloch people to identify with Iranians as Iran controls a part of Balochistan. But, Balochistan in itself is an amalgamation of different linguistic and cultural influences. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.145.76.44 (talk) 00:15, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

::The Brahui may have intertwined with Balochi people, but their language is undoubtedly Dravidian. I can't see a reason anyone would think otherwise. --92.18.184.24 (talk) 14:25, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Assuming that this article is about the ethnic group, as the lead sentence indicates, it would seem appropriate to merge in the orphaned article Brahui tribes. --Bejnar (talk) 22:32, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

:I think the Brahuis did. And archeologically speaking - the Indus Valley Civilisation and nearby mountaineers and/or wanderers that were probably related to the IVC. Y-DNA speaking - haplogroups J2, and maybe also some L, H, R2, maybe a little R1a*. The Balochs probably assimilated some of these haplogroups, because haplogroup R1a1a makes only 50% among Baloch. 95.27.96.242 (talk) 02:54, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Baloch are not 50% R1a1a, i have no idea where you are getting this info form. Akmal94 (talk) 10:18, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Joshua Project is not a reliable source so don't add it please.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_163#Joshuaproject.net — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.210.203.230 (talk) 04:43, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified {{plural:1|one external link|1 external links}} on Brahui people. Please take a moment to review [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=748253245 my edit]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090106182953/http://www.ipdf.gov.pk/tmpnew/DF_Baluchistan.php to http://www.ipdf.gov.pk/tmpnew/DF_Baluchistan.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{tlx|Sourcecheck}}).

{{sourcecheck|checked=false}}

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:46, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

There seems to be some confusion in this article. Brahui speakers does not equate to being Dravidian. The language might be Dravidian origin, however, the people speaking it don't magically become Dravidian. By that logic, all English speakers around the world are English. There needs to be some major corrections done in this article. --PAKHIGHWAY (talk) 16:45, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

:I don't think there's any other than linguistic reality to the term "Dravidian". "Dravidian people" is simply a shortcut for "people who speak a Dravidian language". – Uanfala (talk) 18:37, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

:{{ping|PAKHIGHWAY}} R1a1-L645 and recent European ancestry should not prove that they are assimilated Indo-Europeans. The Burusho have a lot of that as well, but are they? We know that the Dravidian and Burusho languages also arrived quite recently from somewhere from north-west. That place could have been Eastern Europe and quite recently. There is a view (maybe not the majoritarian at the moment) that modern Indo-European came from Western Europe. In that case it could not have been R1a and overwhelmingly Western Steppe Herders ancestry (which are overwhelming only on British Isles, but not France or Spain), instead they should have had an almost equal share of Early European Farmers. And of course no relation to Fatyanovo culture, Andronovo culture, BMAC, Painted Grey Ware culture and other so early cultures. Even if Indo-European had nothing to do with Western Europe, Eastern Europe could still have housed all of those language families. Finnic-speakers also have a lot of R1a1-L645 and they usually seem to be more recent migrations than N-L729, which could possibly point that Finnic languages were brought by R1a1-L645 to non-Finnic N-L729 populations. The "second urbanization" in India from the 6th century BC could maybe point to the arrival of Indo-European languages. We don't have any texts before the 3rd century BC. India still has its' native language - Kusunda. --95.24.71.165 (talk) 22:21, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Brahui speaking tribes of Balochistan consider themselves as Baloch.

Brahui is just a language spoken in Balochistan Reyasatkhan (talk) 11:07, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

:{{ping|Reyasatkhan}} What do you mean "consider" and what is the source? --95.24.71.165 (talk) 22:07, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Nothing was removed. There already existed the more-accurate passage:

{{talkquote|About 15% of them are estimated to be primary speakers of Brahui, who are mainly found in Pakistan. Half of the rest may be secondary speakers of Brahui with primary language as Balochi while the other half are estimated to speak no Brahui "at all".}}

FYI, {{U|Uanfala}}. Thanks, TrangaBellam (talk) 16:42, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

:Oh, I've missed that. So, just "unrestore" my text and move the above passage into the language section? I don't think it belongs in "Population". – Uanfala (talk) 16:47, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

::I agree. TrangaBellam (talk) 16:49, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

TrangaBellam (talk) 16:48, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

Brahui is a language of Baloch people .There is no such people or ethnic group called Brahua.This article must be corrected. Mansoor 78611 (talk) 01:27, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

@Axedd -- apologies. I reverted one later rev than I intended. JayCubby 17:58, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

:No issues. Axedd (talk) 17:59, 9 May 2025 (UTC)