Talk:Pashtun
|
|
Anon, in edit summary: What controversy where? Who declines this fact? No controversy at all!
I "decline" this "fact". The Pashtuns are no more the true Afghans than white people are the "true" Brits, or any other such rubbish. Evercat 20:44 19 Jul 2003 (UTC)
There's some equivocation going on in the article as it now stands. First it's said that "Afghan" can refer to a particular ethnic group rather than inhabitants of a particular country, but then it's claimed that, by this logic, other groups are not true Afghans. This might be logical if "Afghan" is again being understood in the ethnic rather than national sense, but it isn't at all clear (in the article) which sense is intended (in this second claim). Evercat 21:21 19 Jul 2003 (UTC)
- So I've fixed it, I think. Evercat 21:29 19 Jul 2003 (UTC)
I converted the population estimates for Afghanistan and Pakistan from %'s to absolutes, then added the three together for the estimate. Thus, these unsourced numbers, in addition to being arbitrary, may be wildly inaccurate. I think that we should cut out the descriptions of prominent Pashtuns. We can make a list if it's that important. The only Pashtuns important to this page are those that are important within the group, i.e. had some effect on the group itself. DanKeshet 20:27, Mar 3, 2004 (UTC)
external links at dangoor dot com
Hi!
It is interesting to note that there are a number of externals links from this wikipedia entry to various articles at dangoor.com, and that these external articles are confusing the issue of the twelwe tribes of israel versus the ten lost tribes versus the tribes *not* lost (that would be jews)
I did a google on mr Dangoor and he seems like an honest nice chap? Why then this deceptive lingo?
mvh // Jens M Andreasen
Frankly, this article is a mess. I've copy edited what was there, but I don't know the topic well enough to work on it. This needs cleanup on all sorts of counts: it has a lot of POV material; the links give high profile to non-mainstream views (Pashtuns as lost tribes of Israel) without the article really discussing the scholarship on this issue. I could go on, but I think almost anyone can see it on a quick read. Please, someone who knows this topic, please give this article some attention. -- Jmabel 01:49, 21 May 2004 (UTC)
"True Afghans"???
Via anonymous edits, we're back to Pashtuns as "the true Afghans" and the descendants of lost tribes of Israel. It the first paragraph of the "History" section we have:
- "...what are believed to have been Aryan tribes of Central Asia..."
- Believed by whom? And isn't "Aryan" a rather discredited word, more redolent of 19th century ethnology (not to mention its appropriation by the Nazis) than of current usage?
- The term "Aryan" is a somewhat discredited word. In Indo-European linguistics, the term is now replaced with "Iranic/Iranian", "Indo-Iranian", or "Indo-Aryan". In its non-racist applications, all the term "Aryan" is meant to reflect, as it should in this context, is that a particular ethno-linguistic group belongs to the West or East Iranian branches of the Indo-European language family, and as such has a number of characteristics in common. In this sense, therefore, Pashtuns, whose language, Pashto, is a West Iranian language like Farsi or Kurdish, are "Aryans", but as noted this is a culturally loaded word in many languages. There is a separate issue of the "Aryan Invasion Theory", as some term it, which while originally meant to explain the presence of Indo-European and Dravidian language families in India simultaneously; this theory as I understand it is not relevant to the issue of Iranian linguistics, and is also heavily loaded with racist connotations. By this token, the Pashtuns are an "Aryan" tribe, but this is vacuous at best. I would replace this passage with language to the effect simply that "Pashtuns are an ethnolinguistic group whose language, Pashto, is a member of the West Iranian branch of the Indo-European language family" --KASchmidt 03:19, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Believed by whom? And isn't "Aryan" a rather discredited word, more redolent of 19th century ethnology (not to mention its appropriation by the Nazis) than of current usage?
- "...and the Bnai Israel which was deported to Khorasan by the Assyrians."
- "Lost Tribes" and not even attributed as someone's claim.
- "Ethnic Pashtuns, correctly understood as ethnic Afghans..."
- "...correctly..." As in those who hold other opinions on this controversial matter are incorrect. Again, if this opinion can be attributed to someone, fine, that may belong in the article, but not in the narrative voice of the article.
- the North West Frontier Province of Pakistan: ..."known to the Pashtuns as 'Pashtoonistan'."
- Seems likely enough, but is this considered slang usage, or the Pashtun name, or what?
- "There are different theories about the origins of the Pashtun."
- Apparently so. So let's cite and attribute accurately.
- "It is widely beleived (sic) they are a mixture of ethnic groups and cultures."
- Again, believed by whom? And what ethnic groups and cultures?
This is not a topic I know much about. Would someone knowledgable in this area please replace these vague and, in some cases, POV claims with some substance? Thanks in advance. -- Jmabel 02:53, Jul 24, 2004 (UTC)
List of tribes
A recent anonymous edit dropped Jadoon and Kharoti from the list of tribes. I have no idea of the validity of this edit, nor of other similar recent edits, and no one is citing any sources at all. I suspect obscure socio-political agendas. If someone can cite sources on these tribes it would be very welcome. I suspect that in the circumstances specific citation on each tribal name, even the most obvious, would be useful. -- Jmabel | Talk 18:58, Nov 4, 2004 (UTC)
Reply list of tribes
Jadoons Mashwanis and Tareens have been added in the Pashtun tribes of the main page but it dosn't mean to take some tribes off of the main page, Swati tribe was already present there (ofcourse due to it's importance as larger Pashtun tribe). We don't have the right to scale them from our likes and dislikes so every tribe has as much importance as mine to me. "Che ta sok na maney ... Ta ba hum sok na mani". We will have to respect each and every Pukhtoon and his tribe, because every tribe has it's great story of breavery. Kharoti would be added soon *smile*
Wasim Afridi Haider
- A further comment on this: verifiability of the list of tribes would be made a lot easier, especially for those of us how are not expert in this area, if:
- When an editor wants to add a tribe to the list and there is not yet a corresponding Wikipedia article, he/she should give some sort of citation so that we know he/she is not just making this up.
- When an editor wants to remove a tribe from the list (which I would think should rarely happen, but it has happened a lot), an explanation should be given on this talk page.
In fact, someone keeps removing citations, which makes it extremely hard for anyone but an expert to know whether the list is legitimate. -- Jmabel | Talk 19:37, Nov 7, 2004 (UTC)
bizarre external links
Hello. I am new to this. The external links have that "Ogam writing found in Virginia we are all Atlantans it says so in xxxx book" vibe to them. Deleted them all.
Germsteel 09:37, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Levels of societal organization
Why was the following removed from the article? To the best of my knowledge it is entirely correct and correctly cited.
More precisely, there are several levels of organization: the tabar (tribe) is subdivided into kinship groups each of which is a khel. The khel in turn is divided into smaller groups (pllarina or plarganey), each of which consists of several extended families or kahols. [Wardak, 2003, p. 7] "A large tribe often has dozens of sub-tribes whose members may see themselves as belonging to each, some, or all of the sub-tribes in different social situations (co-operative, competitive, confrontational) and identify with each accordingly." [ibid., p. 10]
The reference, still in the article, is:
* Wardak, Ali "Jirga - A Traditional Mechanism of Conflict Resolution in Afghanistan" (http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/APCITY/UNPAN017434.pdf), online at UNPAN (the United Nations Online Network in Public Administration and Finance, 2003.
-- Jmabel | Talk 19:29, Nov 7, 2004 (UTC)
Thanks, I put it back.
--Germsteel 05:00, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Kharoti
Kharoti a Pashtun tribe is now glowing on the main page. We Pashtun must respect each and every tribe among us wether it is small or large, but never to humiliate as done by the Brithers in the past and by some of our own Pashtun brothers .. CHA KARE.....AKHPALA.....BIYA GILA SA LA.
Origins of Swatis
Dear Anon,
Swatis cannot be listed as one of the tribes because they are more than one tribe - they are a mixture of tribes (by YOUR own words) and those tribes are already listed! Swatis are in the same "pot" as the Pashtuns of Chachh also styled "Chachhi Pathans". These are a mixture of Afridis, Yousafzai, Khattak and Ghilzai and Abdalis (Durranis), thus there is no Pashtun tribe as such called "Chachhi". That's going by your argument that Swatis are Pashtuns in the first place.
Second point: In what language does "Swati" mean "Loud Speaker" definitely not in Pashto!!
Third point: History is written "in the eyes of the beholder" i.e. some ones "freedom fighter" is another's "rebel".. If you are reading up about Pashtuns, it is wise to also read books written by non-Pashtuns. Furthermore it is important to go as far back as possible to the original source. Just because something gets published does not mean it is correct. Sometimes it gets misinterpreted. To work that out, you have to read several books written on the subject by different authors, so that you can read between the lines and work out what actually happened. That is why "research" is so rewarding.
In that way you get the whole picture with all its "rawness". I strongly recommend that you read the following books mentioned below, because in these books the origins of the Swatis is described as non-Pashtun and controversial. Apart from the Swatis and Mashwanis (who are actually Syeds), all the other Pashtun Clans mentioned in the list are authentic" i.e. mentioned in several books.
By the way this "Munsif Khan", what are his credentials? Did you get the informations about Mashwanis from his writings , because that is also incorrect (and for the readers benefit, Swatis and Dilazaks both inhabited the present day Swat before the Yousafzai, and both were pushed into Hazara by the Yousafzai as the came into Swat(read the references below).
Below are SIX sources of reference that state Swatis are notlisted among the genuine Pashtun tribes. Please take time to read them:
1. Notes on Afghanistan and part of Baluchistan: geographical, ethnographical, and historical.
Extracted from the writings of Afghán and Tajzík historians, geographers, and genealogists; the histories of the Ghúris, the Turk sovereigns of the Dilhí Kingdom, the mughal sovereigns of the house of Tímúr, and other Muhammadan chronicles; and from personal observations.
By Major H.G.Raverty , Bombay Native Infantry (retired). Published London .1880 Author of a "Grammer" and "Dictionary" of the Pus'hto or Afghan Language; "The Gulshan I-Roh, or Selections, Prose, and Poetical, in the Afghan Language;" "The Poetry of the Afghans, from the Sixteenth Century to the Nineteenth Century;" "The Fables of Aesop Al-Hakim in the Afghan Language;" "Translation of the Tabakát-i-Násirí, from the Persian of Minhá-i-Saráj;" "The Pus'hto Manual," etc etc.
2. The People of India: A series of photographic illustrations of the Races and Tribes of Hindustan. Edited by J.Forbes and Sir John William Kaye, London, Indian Museum 1872.
3. Notes on the Eusofzye tribes of Afghanistan
By The Late Capt. Edward Connolly (published after his death in the First Afghan War, in the Asiatic Journal and Monthly Register for the British and Foreign India, China, and Australasia. Vol.XXXV-New Series, May-August, 1841.)
4. The Pathans: 500 B.C.-A.D. 1957 (Oxford in Asia Historical Reprints) by Sir Olaf Caroe.
5. Gazetteer of the Hazara district, 1907; (N.-W.F. province district gazetteers: vol. I.A) by Hubert Digby Watson.
6. Ibbetson, Denzil, Edward Maclagan, and H.A. Rose 1919. A Glossary of the Tribes and Castes of the Punjab and North-West Frontier Province. Volume I. Lahore: Sperintendant of Government Printing.
Reply origin of Swatis
Dear Anomymous,
You have mentioned some referencef of books in your discussion now let me explain about my authors one of them is Henry Walter Bellew(1834-1892) was a civil surgeon in Peshwar and wrote a first Pashto dictionary and appointed as chief Political Officer in Kabul in the second Afghan War, his theory about Pashtuns were as given below.
Suleman=Rajput Solan=Solanki. Daud=Daudputra among Muslims=Rajput Dadi or Dadika. For example zai and khel suffixes Pakhtun bloodliness. He think zai=persian zadan(to give birth)=sunskrit jan; and khel=sunskrit kul(family). Kuldip means lamp of the faimily. The pakhtun use zai and khel interchangeably.
Now some more Suri pukhtun=syrians by the son of seluekus who ruled that part of Alaxander eastern empire.
Afridis mentioned by Herodotus Aparytai brought to their present abode by Ghaznavi. But they came from Afghan province of Maimama.
Orakzai mentioned by Arriyan(roman historian)Arasakoi and their rivals Bangansh originally came from Ghazni.
Bangash=Bangak=Bangat Chohan Rajputs.
Turis=Tiwaris Rajputs of India.
Utmanzai=Utoi Greek tribe. Utmanzai subsection Baddo=Yaddo of Rajput tribe of Krishna; Ballo is Rajput balla khatri.
Mandal=Jat tribe Mada, version Mandanr, live along Jadoon or Gadun tribes(of Hazara which is sanskrit Abhisara), which names are the varient of the Jadu Rajput tribe. These are Yadavas of India.
Gaduns=Gajni=Ghazni.
Afghan Bhittanis=Bhattis, the elite of the Rajputs serving at the court as Ministers.
Mahmands="the great Mand". From Peshawar=Rajput near Bombay. Pliny calls them Mandriani of Afghanistan; they the wends of Austria. A branch of them called the baizai are located in Kohat which was an old greek city.
So these what we are in front of Western authors like Mr Henry and lot of others. You have mentioned what did your Sir Olif Caroe said about Swatis but you didn't mentioned what did he say about Mashwanis and what he wrote about the origin of whole Pashtuns ??
Now do Mr Anonymous think his ancenstor is just one man whose name was Qais baba ?
I will sugest you to read some Muslim writers also as "Pashtun in the light of History by Syed Bahadur Shah Zafar kaka khel" ... "Pashtun" by Dr Habibullah tazi.
Continue !
Now I would like to write some views about the origin of Swatis as written some great authors. One of them is Twarikh-e-Hafiz Rehmat Khani (pir moazzam shah)is considered a land mark in Yousafzai history is in Persian and Pashto but now you can find it in Urdu version also. Their rivals were Dilazaks and Swatis, he mentioned them as Pashtun tribes. At one place "Twarikh" said, Yousafzais start fighting against Dialzaks, Swatis and Khiljis to capture their lands.
Kindly don't miss to read a book "Tazkara" Pashtuns in their origins and history .... another book from the same author is "The efforts of Yousafzai tribe by Khan Roshan Khan".
Another book by Abdul Ali Ghorghashti is "Pashtunkhwa" in which he discussed about the origin of Pashtuns.
Lot of Mughal writers mentioned them as Afghans, I will refer you to read a book Babar Nama by King Zaheeruddin Babur(First Mughal Emperor) in which he mentioned them as Afghans alongwith Yousafzais.
who were Mitravis(tribe)? When Yousafzais refudge in the Peshawar and Swat valley due to ferocious steps taken by Mirza Alag Baig (Twarikhe-Hafiz Rehmat Khani) and in front of Ahund Darwaiza, the king of Kabul was Mirza Quli Baig both the authors were almost of the same time and ofcourse we would find lot of differences in their books if we go deeper and deeper. Haider
"Ritrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Pashtun"
Reply to "202.142.186.2 -Anonymous- Re: Swatis
Thank you or replying!
We now have some dialogue on this issue.
I have read Henry Walter Bellew’s book, and the one which you have got your citations from is called “An Inquiry into the Ethnography of Afghanistan”.
Bellew essentially says that the Pathans spring out from the Rajputs who once were predominant in that region, and goes to quite length in to saying how certain Sanskrit words can be related to the present day Pathan tribes. I am not debating the origins of the Pathans. Some say, the Pathans are the remnants of the Greek armies left by Alexander the Great, others say they are the Lost Tribes of Israel, and Bellew (only) draws them up from the Rajputs that originally were in that region.
(My question is that if the Pathans were originally Rajputs, why are they still not Rajputs? Rajputs as a Tribe does exist in both India, where they are Hindu by religion and in Pakistan where they are Muslim. In fact, Rajputs exist through out Pakistan’s North West Frontier Province (NWFP), where they speak only Pashto. They are proud of being Rajput. Complexion-wise they are dark. Pathans, on the whole are fair – often being mistaken for being “Turkish/Greek/Italian/Iranian/Syrian, ”. Hence they have quite a large amount of “outside blood” in them, and this ties in with their folklore that they migrated to that region).
What the historians and anthropologists are all in agreement with is that the Swatis are definitely a heterogeneous group and THESE historians/anthropologists don’t include them (i.e. the name “Swati”) in the Pathan genealogies. There is nothing wrong with people knowing this. By your own argument the tribes that make up the Swatis are all listed in the Geneologies (i.e Khiljis/Ghilzai, Bhittanis) –so what’s the problem? As a Pashto proverb goes: “If Gold is pure, why should it fear the fire?”
Regarding Sir Olaf Caroe, and his book - The Pathans – although well written and similar in layout to the book: Across the border or Pathan and Biloch by Edward E. Oliver, (London, 1890) – [anyway has the Pathan geographical locations from that book]. There is some “bias” towards Pathan tribes who were on the sides of the British. You get an idea when you read several books on the topic. He does mention however that the Mashwanis (he spells it as Mishwanis) are Syed from the Father’s side and Pathan from the mother’s side, and does not include them (or the Swatis) in the Pathan genealogies.
- Insaaf.
Reply
Dear Anonymous
Mr Caroe mentioned Mashwanis as Pashtuns and had some discussion about their bravery also, but as you say their proginator was an Arab and married a Pashtun woman so will be considered Arabs, if that then what would you say about the MOST GREATEST TRIBE Khiljis/Ghalji/Ghilzai or Ghalzai, ofcourse you should have better information what does Ghal means in Pashto, do you think the whole Khiljis are illicit generation ? The man who married Bibi Mato was a Turk and bibi mato was a daughter of Shikh batan so why are you considering them as authentic Pashtuns, that way all of them are Turks not Pashtuns or will you consider them as Turkish blood Pashtuns ?
I am sorry to say my friend you do have knowledge but need some new investigation because Almighty Allah gave us ability to explore some new invasions like what really happened. Authors like Syed Bahadur Shah Zafer kaka khel, Dr Habibullah Tazi and Abdul Ali Ghorghashti have discussed the origin of Pashtuns and describe the topic through great logics. What you like is authentic and dislike is gossips, that's illogical. One thing which I will clear here that these discussions are to find the facts not to hurt any one.
When Yousafzais refudge in Swat they have met their Afghan brothors Swatis and Dilazaks to gain their sympathies as Abdul Qayyum Balala has written in his lenghty article in www.swatvalley.com. He believes that Swatis came to that region with Mahmud Ghaznavi when Raja Gira was the ruler, Mahmood commanded the conquest of the fort(where they took refudge at Hudigram) to his general Pir Khushal. In short they have subdue them after a bitter war even Pir khushal was martyred. After conquering Swat, Mahmud settled two tribes of Afghan here one them is Swati and second one Dilazak and later driven away by Yousafzai tribe. It should be mentioned here both Swatis and Dilazaks have welcomed them and ditributed furtile land also, but soon they were soon attracted by the natural properties of the area, Yousafzais learned the art of betrayal from Tajack, so they compelled the originally settled Swati and Dilzak to quit Swat, who crossed Indus and took refudge in Hazara.
In my opinion any Pashtun tribe do not need any sort of Certificate from any local or Western Authors because these are the people who are living from thousand of years in that regoin. As you said Mashwanis are from Arabs (which is ofcourse a bigger honor) then they would called Arabic blood Pashtuns as same as Khiljis are Turkish blood Pashtuns.
As Khan Roshan Khan wrote in his book "Tazkara" Mashwani is a geoghraphical name, he believes that when they were ousted from Syria they refugded in a City name MOSH to the east of Farat, since then they are called Mashwanis.
Now some comments about Swati Pashtuns .... the oldest people of Swat were Hindus, a time come when they were ousted by Pashtuns(Swati,Dilazak) and established their dynasties and after period of time they have been expelled by Yousafzai Pashtuns.(See a book "History of India" page 859).
Khan Roshan Khan have his own views about Swati Pashtuns as they came to Swat with Sultan Shahabuddin Ghori, where they ousted the non muslims and captured the whole region and ruled for more than three hundred years, he also wrote that one of Swati tribe elder moved from Batkhela to Kashmir and established his dynasty there, which exist from 1339 AD to 1561 AD. He also mentioned that Swatis never accepted the sovereignty of Alag Baig and King Babur, they fought against them bravely but lost and later on by Yousafzai ....in Hazara they fought against Turks and captured hills and plains of Pakhlai under the leadership of Syed jalal Baba. He also explained about some sub sections of Swatis like Deeshan or Dodan(same) was a tribe near the frontier of Syria which is belong to Bani Dodan Bin Bani Khazima.
In most of the Moghal authors Swatis are Afghans as in a book "Iqbal Nama Akbari" written by Molvi Zakaullah Dehelvi 5th edition page no 536.
I will strongly recommend to read Muslim Authors also ...... a book like "Tareekhe Khan Jahani Makhzane Afghani" written by Khawaja niamatullah Harvi in the times of Moghul King Jahangir in early 17th century .. in which he mentioned what Mohammad Ghori did to spread Pashtuns all over the India..... third time when he had twelve thousand soldiers of Afghan tribes each of them were the masters in their talent and bravery, defeated Raja Pathora Chohan who was the King of India defeated and further killed, he ordered to setteled those Afghan tribes in Kohistane Roh, Kohe Suleman, Ashnagar or Kashghar, Bajawar and from Kabul to river Neelab(the north of Attock) and from the areas around Qandhar to the boundries of Multan, he appointed Moizuddin Ghori to compelete this task, the first city where they settled was Ashnagar. After compeletion of settlements he considered it as a great victory for the future to creat an Islamic society. Haider
Reply "2" to "202.142.186.2 -Anonymous- Re: Swatis
A case of not seeing "The Wood From The Trees":
You still fail to understand what I am saying, and without realising it have agreed that the "Swatis" are heterogeneous - which is what I was saying.
What ever the real origins of the Pathans, by the 1400s, approximately 600 hundred years ago, a "family tree" emerged that linked the Pathans as being related to each other in some way.
If you take a look at this family tree you find for example a name like "Yusuf" and then a line leading off to another name "Yusufzai", meaning this "Yusuf" is the progenitor of the Yusufzai.
Now, no-where do you get a name, again for example "Yusuf" leading to "Swati", because the "Swati" are heterogeneous - either Pathans/non-Pathans- mixtures of both. Furthermore the tribes that make-up the "Swati" are ALREADY mentioned on the genealogical tree i.e. Khilji/Ghilzai, Bhittanis , and others.
So going back to the List of Pashtun Clans in Wikipedia, it serves no purpose to list "Swati" as a SEPARATE clan when in fact it is a mixture of Pathan clans, that are already mentioned.
Its like listing Khyberees as a "new" clan, when in fact this is made up of "Afridis and Orakzai"- two Pathans clans already mentioned on the list who live in that region.
As long as there is a note on the main Pashtun page referring the interested reader to the discussion board, that's fine by me. The reader can make up their own mind.
Insaaf.
Reply
Infact what I was trying to say something about ORIGINS but here I would give you some information e.g if some small khwar(in pastho)or rivers from different parts of the mountains making their way to Abasin(Indus River), can or would it effect the great Abasin, the answer would be defenitley in no, so in the same way I have already asked you about origins of Mashwanis and Khiljis but failed to get my answer! Swatis came to that region in 11th or 12th century because some authors believes in 11th century(Mahmood Ghaznavi) and some in 12th century with Mohammad Ghori and they well settled their under a rule called TAPA(pashto word in which more than one tribe will defend against their enemies togather brotherly) under which they established their dynasty. Authors have written and mentioned them as a tribe in their books and Articles as I mentioned in my previous discussions. If Kakar is on the tribes list than why Jadoon is there ? Because Jadoons are from Kakar, if Batani is there then why Khiljis are there? same Niazis and Marwat belong to Batan, these are the subtribes so they have the right to glow, so as Swati and Mashwani deserves that! For you more important you can see a tribe Swati in Batan family tree in www.khyber.org. You can view by your ownself, what I have seen in that family tree it was like " Shajara = Qais Abdul Rashid - Sharban baba - Ghorghasht - Baitnika/Baitan/Bait and from Bait or bhittani - Dotani - Koti - Chaki and from Chaki - Berum - Hamdani - SWATI - Bashor - Khaki and Batazi. That's their research and ofcourse Pashtuns and their tribes still need to be explored, some times we will have to go far far back but some times through our own minds with some new research. This is another question that I myself don't believe in that lineage due to some more information to get. I will advise you to go somewhere to Alaska or places like that where you would defintely find pure races of SKIMOS without any mixture and please don't use the word "Pathans" for Pashtuns or Pakhtuns because the word Pathan have never been used by any Pashtun or Pashtun Scholars because Pashtuns have never liked to be called Pathan(if someone know have information)... otherwise I will have to believe, you are one of them agreed, who gave half of dozen names to Pashtuns like Rohela, Sulemani, Khurasani etc ?? it is a word used by Mr Caroe and by Indians for Pashtuns.
Reply "3" to "202.142.186.2 -Anonymous- Re: Swatis
NOTE: Please do visit www.khyber.org and you will see EXACTLY what I am saying regarding Swati heterogeneity.
Insaaf.
- Links from articles into talk spaces are against Wikipedia policy. See, for example, Wikipedia:Avoid self-references. -- Jmabel | Talk 03:18, Nov 21, 2004 (UTC)
Reply
So here you comes ..... Khyber has mantioned them as one Pashtun tribe....Didn't you see them as a TRIBE in tribes list seperately in Khyber.org.... Didn't you see Swati tribe in Batani family tree ??
Reply "4" to "202.142.186.2 -Anonymous- Re: Swatis
I'm glad you raised this point. Content on Khyber.org doesn't undergo the same academic rigor as material posted on Wikipedia. Anyone can post anything on the internet. This is the bigggest problem. That's why this critique started on your posting. We don't want Wikipedia to become like other sites. We want authentic - hard earned facts to be posted on this site. YOU told us that "Swati" was a Khilji, and now YOU are saying he is Batani! What you are saying about Swatis I understand -basically that BEFORE the Pathan family trees were created in 15th Centuary, Pashto speaking tribes from Afghanistan came to the Swat region as part of the Armies of the various kings from Afghanistan and these are the "Swatis" that's fine but we don't know for sure who these tribes were - there is only conjecture. Some say Khiljis, Bhittanis and Yousafzai and "others" - hence it's a mixture of clans. Read what "Azmary Afghan" wrote on http://www.khyber.org/pashtotribes/s/swati.shtml - since you like to believe that site.
- Insaaf .
Reply
I have already request you not to use word PATHAN for PASHTUN but I think you must be an Indian BHOPALI PATHAN *smile*
Don't forget, that was me who advise you to visit Khyber.org and will guide you to some other valuable sites also .... What you were insisting that Swatis as a tribe should not be on tribes list as Khiljis and Bhittanis are already there so Khyber proves you totally wrong as you have seen a tribe Swati with Khilji and Bhittani in Khyber.
You have mentioned that Family Tree was created in 15th century when Pashtuns came to that region, but for your kind information Pashtuns were already there from the time of Mehmood Ghaznavi and Mohammad Ghori as part of the Armies and Chiefs and try to concenterate on a word Pakhtunkhwa, Pashtuns were everywhere around far far back than 15th century. So who gave the newly come Pashtuns the authority to create a Family Tree for the older Pashtuns so as the ASPASIS (YOUSAFZAIS) were in Bajawar and Konar from the time of Hakha Manshi four hundred years before the death of Christ? Even thousand and thousand of Pashtuns were non-muslims in the time of Mehmood Ghaznavi.
I am still stand on my words, majority of Swatis belong to Khilji and Bhittani tribes, as far as Swati in Batani Tribe list I have mentioned before that is Khyber new research.(please see my previous article). Every Pashtun tribe is as important as me to mine.
Now point is, what would you say after seeing Swati as a seperate tribe in Khyber, when you were opposing it so rediculously ? The way you are discussing seems to be, do not believe in the unity of Pashtuns and Pakhtunkhwa in place of N.W.F.P . Just for you in Pashto " CHA KARE AKHPALA .... BIYA ... GILA SALA. *S*
Reply "5" to "202.142.186.2 -FINAL SUMMARY- Re: Swatis
The word "Pathan" has been around for hundreds of years. It is was used by the Moghuls and is currently how you refer to the "Pakhtoons/Pashtoons" in the subcontinent. Anthropologists also use this term profusely in their writings (like Dr Fredrick Barth). It is the usual term in the English medium. Throughout the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, English medium newspapers always descibed the "Pakhtoon/Pashtoon" of Afghanistan as "Pathans". "Pashtun" - in the English language that is - has only recently come into the prominence after Sept 2001 with the fall of the Taliban. Don't forget that the Late Ghani Khan used the word "Pathan" in all of his English writings (see his book: The Pathans), and he has done more for the Pathan cause than you ever will. If it was okay for him to use it, it's okay for me. A name is a name - after all. Why do you say "Angrez" in urdu and not "Englishman" . To say "Englishman" is not phonetically difficult in urdu. Likewise saying Pathan in English for the word Pakhtoon/Pashtoon.
Regarding Bhopali Pathans - there you go again belittling other Pathans ( first it was Kharoti, and now this. By the way this is very un-Pathan-like...but then agai n you would only know this if you were a Pathan) -all I can with surety is that at least they have a credible, non-debatable lineage on the Pathan family tree which is more than I can say for Swatis.
An English proverb for you: "People who live in glass houses should'nt throw stones." Or the Pakhto equivalent: "A sieve said to the kettle, "You have two holes."
To summarise: The discussion on the Swatis hetergeneity has come to an end: I stated WITH ORGINAL REFERENCES, that the Swatis have a questionable orgin regarding their Pathan pedigree by some authorities and are heterogenous by all accounts. None of the information you have provided, as the readers can see, disproves this and the discussion has therefore ENDED.
Insaaf
The term Pathan
I know some contributors have expressed the opinion that the term Pathan is not a proper term to refer to the Pashtuns/Pakthuns. I would like to suggest that we add the following right after the first sentence:
- The term "Pathan" is often used to refer to the Pashtuns. It is the Urdu/Hindi word for the Pashtuns and strongly disfavored by Pushtuns themselves.
What say?—iFaqeer (Talk to me!) 10:36, Nov 26, 2004 (UTC)
Reply The term Pathan
I know in some cases that some Pashtuns from Afghanistan dislike the word "Pathan" since it signifies they are from "Pakistan" (and so "enslaved" or "Traitors" and traditionally Afghanistan wanted NWFP to be part of Afghanistan as it used to be before the British convinced the Amir of Afghanistan to sign it off to them in an attempt to "secure the Indian border" as a result of a Peace Treaty after the Second Afghan war in 1878. The British guaranteed the Amir of Afghanistan that they would not invade Afghanistan again if he gave them that "Eastern border area" - only to have another Afghan War in the 1920s!-the Third Afghan War.)
But Pashtuns from Pakistan, have no problem with it. For example the Late Ghani Khan who with his father Abdul Ghaffer Khan did alot for the Pathan cause, always used "Pathan" in his English writings. So if "Pakistani Pashtuns" didn't like it why did he use it?
What people get confused with is this if you are speaking in "Pashto", and you say he is a "Pathan" - then that is a word of scorn, implying that he a "slave of the govt." If you are speaking in Pashto, you would never say "He is a Pathan" but He is a Pashtoon". However if you are speaking in Urdu/Hindi or English, you can say Pathan and no-one will mind (as long as you are speaking in English/Urdu/Hindi), because that's "convention".
So in answer to your question, perhaps it would be appropriate to add:
- The term "Pathan" is often used to refer to the Pashtuns. It is the Urdu/Hindi word for the Pashtuns and NEVER USED BY THEM WHEN REFERRING TO THEMSELVES IN PASHTO. (I've capitlaised my suggestion).
Hope that helps,
Insaaf.
- I'd have no problem with that, but can I suggest instead:
- Joe - I feel it's a bit harsh to use the word "insult". For two reasons: firstly, if you go to graveyards in a city e.g Peshawar or Karachi, where you have both Pathans and non-Pathans, you will see written on the tombstones, in Urdu, the person's name, Pathan family name, e.g. Khattak and then "Qaum (i.e. tribe): Pathan". So its not that bad a word. Secondly, in Pashto if you said someone is a "Pathan" rather than a Pushtun, you are hinting that "he" is not one of "us" (where "us" would be "Pushtun", and how derogatory the word "Pathan" is then would depend on the context of what is being said and what is being inferred. So perhpas just leave "in Pashto, the word "Pathan" is taken as an insult", out.
- Insaaf.
- Fine. So when the article is unprotected, we will add "The Urdu/Hindi word "Pathan" was until the late 20th century the most common word in English to refer to the Pashtuns. However, this word is never used by the Pashtuns themselves when speaking in Pashto." -- Jmabel | Talk 21:10, Nov 30, 2004 (UTC)
Reply but not a Final One
If you are happy with PATHAN for PASHTUN than keep saying it because you are living somewhere outside the Pakhtunkwa and I can see some influence of them on you(like Fredrick Barth, Your Sir etc etc). If Indians and Britishers use the term Pathan then you will be much happier with some terms as SULEMANI for PASHTUN from Arabs and KHURASANI from Iranis, so now say it again it's OK what are we calling by different names by different Nations ... Pashtun is Pashtun, don't try to make it a dictionary for the whole World. Mr Anonymous it's our duty to rectify the matters like that otherwise they will soon be awarding us two or three more names *smile*. Now Mr Caroe again as he wrote a Book "PATHAN" and discussed PASHTUNS, that was such a big blunder with Pashtuns made deliberately just for their Political advantages as they knew they would not govern anymore so let them destroy into pieces through their names, that was just a term of their own liking otherwise no where else you would find term PATHAN not even from the MUGHAL AUTHORS. I will consider it a Joke with Pashtuns from Britishers. In reply of your Enghish Proverb, I am a very small human of my All Mighty ALLAH so how could I dare to throw stones even I know I live in a rental House(no further comments). Stop degrading MASHWANIS also. Just write, what your Sir had his views about them *s*. I think you didn't read my previous articles properly(I am reading you very carefully) like in Pashto "che ta sok na maney .. Ta ba ham sok na mani" Translation; If you wouldn't accept or respect anyone then nobody would respect or accept you also. It was me who wrote about Kharoti in their Pashtun box(click on Kharoti), It was me who wrote Kharoti is glowing on the main page in Tribes list. NOTE: But really sorry to say that is you, who is making changes on the main esp about Swatis claiming them Syeds, infact readers are well aware that Swatis have never claimed them as Syeds (which is ofcource a greater honor). Please don't invite the wrath of GOD by making these SINS. You mentioned your refereces about Swatis, MY REFERENCES have overcome on it, let readers to decide. Our discussions should be in a positve way not to hurt anyone. So what really you want to select "Repay in kind or attack in return" ? My speacial comments for you that People living In Pashtunkhwa from hundreds and thousands of years definetely would be consider Pashtuns, dosn't matter if they have migeratted from Arab or they belong to Aryans, It was HISTORY which make them united through LANGUAGE, CULTURE AND TRADITIONS (In short Pashtunwali), now you can easily find my point for Bhopali Pathans by their Culture, Traditions and Language, if they have forgotten their language it's OK, where rest of the Pashtunwali(Pashtun code of honor) gone? The ball is in your court now. From your side it's ended but I will be always here INSHA ALLAH because RESEARCH is open.
- See #Pakhtunwali below.—iFaqeer (Talk to me!) 22:31, Dec 16, 2004 (UTC)
=Re: Reply but not a Final One
- This is the misunderstanding - you are making the issue into a "geopolitical" one. No-one is saying that people who have lived in that area for thousands of years do not belong to that area. That part of the world is a mosaic of different ethnicities and tribes - you have Gujars, Rajputs and so on who have lived there 1000s of years - and they have a right to that region like anyone else. They still consider themselves not to be Pathans / Pashtuns despite the fact that they speak Pashto.
You must know that there are SIKHS who live in the Khyber Agency. There are HINDUS in Swabi - They still speak Pashto. There are non-Pathans in the Tribal Areas - and they follow Pashtunwali. But they are proud of their heritage. They still say we are not Pathans.
TheTajiks, Uzbeks, Hazaras of Afghanistan have been living with Pathans - but consider themselves to be separate regardless of language and culture etc. Look at the topic from and anthroplogical point of view. Trying to see how the tribe (Pathans) interacts with other tribes (non-Pathans) and how they see the world. For a moment forget about trying to unite the different ethnicities into one "PashtunKhwa" or "Land of The Pashtuns" - that's taking it to a "political" level. Everyone is proud of their heritage - and they should be or better be.
- See #Pakhtunwali below.—iFaqeer (Talk to me!) 22:30, Dec 16, 2004 (UTC)
Reply not a Final One1
Dear Anonymous, Kindly send/write some authentic information about their Language, Culture and Traditions also (Gujars, Sikhs and everyone you mentioned). Are they strict on Pashtunwali ? Do they speak Pashto inside their houses also ?? What is their Mother tongue ?If the tribes you mentioned do speak Pashto outside with Pashtuns then atleast they are far better than Pathans(in your term) of Bhopal etc, who have forgotten their Language and everything. (No more comments for such a Golden Reply *smile*). *Khudai Pa Aman*
- See #Pakhtunwali below.—iFaqeer (Talk to me!) 22:31, Dec 16, 2004 (UTC)
Re: Reply not a Final One1
These are only some of my references - you ask a lot but never read them - Pukhtun Economy and Society: Traditional Structure and Economic Development in a Tribal Society (1980) by Dr Akbar S. Ahmed - and especially for you: Millennium and Charisma among Swat Pathans, Dr Akbar S. Ahmed (by the way this refers to the Yousafzai who now occupy Swat).
My question to you: on Wikipedia Pashtun article - why don't you allow the two view points of what is a Pashtun? Why don't you allow readers to make up their own mind - let them weigh up the evidence and decide. That's the whole beauty of Wikipedia, that you are given the opportunity to look at "both sides of the same coin," and not FORCED one viewpoint from one angle only.
Everyone else who has been contributing to the Pashtun page has no problem with the two definitions.
Second Question:
You wrote earlier:"My speacial comments for you that People living In Pashtunkhwa from hundreds and thousands of years definetely would be consider Pashtuns, dosn't matter if they have migeratted from Arab or they belong to Aryans, It was HISTORY which make them united through LANGUAGE, CULTURE AND TRADITIONS (In short Pashtunwali)".
Now, everyone who lives in that region practices Pashtunwali - including the Sikhs, the Hindus and the Gujars and the other non-Pathan tribes. What distinguishes one from the other is the EXTENT to which they carry it out. I.e. in a case of "Tor" ie. female dishonour where a boy and girl have eloped, the father will kill his son and the girls parents will kill their daughter, but a non-Pathan may not carry it out to that extreme (i.e. the mother may intervene and beg the father to spare the son/daughter)- although they can also.
My question to you is that if Osama bin laden stays in the tribal areas (just for the sake of argument assume he is there) - and if he follows pashtunwali - will he be the father of a "NEW" "Pashtun" tribe?? the Osama Khel?? This is what your statement is saying. It makes the Pathan geneologies a joke.
Insaaf.
Reply but not a Final One2
I have never here or any place else thrust my point of view to Friends, listeners, it's up to them to make up their mind. I have always discussed in a positive way to find the facts. But you are just trying to thrust your views on us.Poeple have equal rights to write/send whatever they like.
Yes It was History, which make them united through their LANGUAGE, CULTURE AND TRADITIONS. Do you have any single example in the history of the world, just one man has delivered a NATION, Qais baba had four sons namely Batani, Sarbatni, Ghorghust and Karlani(was not a real son), one of them was found under the Karai(Pashto word) since then they called Karlani? Now point is, can you see any mixing or purity about Karlani right from the begening in Pashtuns, the infant which was found might be a Turk or Tajik and Arab or whatever, definitely not a Pashtun because Qais baba had only three real sons, why will you consider Karlanis(which include Wazirs, Masuds, Afridis, Khattaks and Banuchis etc) as authentic Pashtun tribe even you know what you have your own views through different references ... or will you agree me, every tribe who have slowly and gradually converted and created Pashtunwali through evolutionary period would be condider Pashtuns? Every one around now have better knowledge that KARLANIS are much GREATER PASHTUNS as compare to others.
Will you please define a word you mentioned "TOR", If you meant a Pashto word, which is Black in English then you will be considered wrong because Pashtuns don't use the verb Tor for your above said crime (boy and girl), It is mostly used by Sindhis as "KARI" and "KARO"(black girl and black boy) for the above mentioned sin. We would simply call them like "Alak ao Genai Makh tor ka", We don't have to immitate terms from our Sindhi brothers. Try to be some positive about Pashtuns rather than mentioning these sort of talks.
What a man would expect of you who even don't like to write "Peace be upon him" with the GREAT GREAT GREAT name of Mohammad(Sallallaho Allaihi Wassallam).
Please don't try to switch and toggle here and there by asking such a rediculous querry like about "suppose, assume, think etc". Do you think the creation of a Nation is just an overnight game, It takes centuries and thousands of years through evolution, Osama Khel ?? *smiling*
You will be highly appreciated if you go to Pashtun main page and click on Bhittani, Barakzai, Khilji, Mahsud, Mohammadzai and Barakzai to fill those empty boxes with some bright side positive information about these great Pashtun tribes.
- Amen to that!—iFaqeer (Talk to me!) 19:37, Dec 3, 2004 (UTC)
Reply "to "202.142.186.2 -Anonymous- Re: Swatis
AT LAST!
I am glad that you now will not delete views that are not supportive of your own view from the Pashtun article on Wikipedia. This whole discussion has been worthwhile!!! (P.
I am also glad that you now do look at tribal genealogy names to determine who is a "Pashtun" - this is why belonging to a TRIBE is important in being recognised asa Pathan - hence the Afridis and Yousafzai of Bhopal.
(...but there is a catch in your wording - why just "positive information??" - why can't we write controversial issues as long as we support them with references and let the readers decide. Controversial issues at least "peak" the readers interest and cause them to initiate their own research. This is the beauty of Wikipedia - is it not?)
Insaaf
Reply Bhopali Pathan
I am glad also to be catched but the point is what was I trying to catch, that was just for the sake of Pashtun tribes but "Spi lakai ba sama nashi"understandable if you are a Pashtun, otherwise consult your Pashtun friend if you are a BHOPALI PATHAN*smiling*
Reading/Writing need some virtuosity which I am sure you don't have. I think you will take centuries like what really happened in the past, slow and steady wins the race but the race is over, by taking that much time definetely you will become the father of another race like Canada Khel as same as Bhopal Khel ! There is always Tit for Tat.
Don't worry I won't delete/erase any material wether in favour or not, let readers to decide now.
Don't forget to visit us in future because "Never say Never Again". Take care PATHAN(another race).
Reply Bhopali Pathan -to 202.142.186.2
Language and culture can be learnt by anyone - as they say in Pashto:
"A dog's tail doesn't become straight, even if it is kept in a pipe for a hundred years"
There are many others, and I'm sure you know them. Sadly for you it's only now that you've realised what they really mean! REAL Pathans have known all along (as you can tell from the Pashto proverbs) that language and culture can be lost and acquired, but being able to trace yourself to the Geneolgical tree of the Pathans is what eventually counts regardless of everything - hence the reason why there are so many proverbs on this subject. (*definitely having the last laugh*)
Insaaf.
Reply
Thanks replying
Now what you doing is tilting away of our main discussion, we were trying to convince each other but failed then why don't we better let readers to make up their own minds, as tried to write the two most prominent views about pashtuns, one of them lineal defition as from one Progenitor like Qais Abdul Rasheed and second one is Cultural defition as hundreds of years of history in the relevant geographic area, who speak the same language(Pashto) and live in a similar manner.(Pashtunwali) Continue
The Pashtun tribe Swati has been proven through both from it's Cultural and Lineal definitions, the matter of include and exlude would not effect any more.
But incase of Bhopali Pathans you have just one way, the Geneolgical defintion, which you think is in favour to include them as Pashtuns, that's the reason why you insist on only one view. The language and calture can be lost and acquired but defentiely it will take atleast one or two hundred years if willing after that who will give them a certificate of as they are homogeneous not heterogeneous because living hundreds of years without culture and language with other Muslims and Non Muslim people of Bhopal, mixture will be quite visible.
- See #Pakhtunwali below.—iFaqeer (Talk to me!) 22:36, Dec 16, 2004 (UTC)
Reply to: 202.142.186.2
The purpose of this discussion was to allow the two definitions of "who is a Pashtun" to remain on the article page so that the reader can decide. This has now been met - end of story.
This debate has been going on in Pathan hujras for centuries and it would be foolish of you to think that it can be resolved once and for all on this discussion page. Just bear in mind all the proverbs to help you decide which definition is correct:
"When the donkey returns from Mecca it remains a donkey." Pashto proverb.
Reply
Dear Anonymous..... Yes that what I meant exactly, debate and discussion about Pashtuns were from centuries and it will keep continue due it's importance as an interesting subject but don't you think that should be in a delicate way rather than to defame anyone as majority of Western authors did in the past. Author like James W Spain, what she wrote esp about Pashtun Tribes like Afridis, Bannuchis and Dawars, she just looks satisfied with Yousafzais and few more tribes, that's what I am against authors like that who just tried and trying to let the World to see Pashtun vs Pashtun through discrimination. Atleast you would get my this point. If you do believe in Lineal way, that's your right but try to think on the Culture way also, in which I do believe in. I don't believe in the Creater, Originater, Inventor, Builder, Author, Designer, Founder, Mastermind, Maker, Planner and Father would be just one man for the entire Pashtuns or Pashtuns of his time(even in a limited area) had accepted him as symbolic Progenitor, which will be more suspecious for your accepted view, would go in favour of Cultural view.(same language, same culture etc).
For your interest a Poetry by Dr Yaseen Iqbal Yousafzai, hope you will enjoy it to translate. -- Haider 15:23, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Za sada Pakhtun yama -- Za sada Insaan yama
Na da khalaq pejanam -- Na la poye pa zaan yama
Yao lala Pathan krama-- Bal lala Afghan krama
Yao da LENIN yar krama--Bal the SHEIKH janan krama
Yao rata Patkey wahi --Bal rata sarbaz wai
Za ka zaan par na manam--Har maidan key mar shwama
Khudai Rasool ta wa goorai--Dumra me lag praigdawai
Khudai de dasey owaha -- Za de che sanga khwar krama
Poya pa har tiki yam -- Dost au Dushman pejanam
Za us rawaikh shwam -- Khog au khogman pejanam
Za us beena shwam -- Shal au kafan pejanam
Dumara lewaney nayam -- Nor me ba sok na wajni
Nor ba khwago kholo na zam -- Zaronoo kheeran pejnam
Za saada Musalman yama -- Toul imaan imaan yama
Za ba hum moskey shama -- Ghali shaan ba owayam
Na da bal watan yama -- Na da bal Jahan yama
Za saada Pakhtun yama
Za saada Insaan yama
These were few lines taken from Yaseen Iqbal's Poetry, you can find compelte of it in http://geocities.com/pashtopeotry/pukhtun/html.
Reply to: 80.255.41.42/202.142.186.2
I agree with you that James Spain is selective in his praise for certain tribes - but that is why I said in the beginning of this discussion that you should read several books and then "read between the lines".
However going back to Poetry - remember that poetry is written on the "spur of the moment" and is written "from the heart" i.e. emotional and therefore not always correct. It just makes an interesting read.
Proverbs on the other hand take time, decades, to develop and arise through personal experience . Proverbs are the distillation of "Wit and Wisdom."
As they say in an Arabic Proverb:
"If you want to avoid the mistakes, take heed of the proverbs."
Anyway as I said before - this discussion is now becoming pointless - it is two sides of the same coin. We should "agree to disagree."
Insaaf.
Reply
Humans without Emotions would be like a Robot, that's why as they say admire true emotions, above poetry as appreciated by a famous pashtun genuis Dr Habibullah Taizi. I will type for almost third time a Pashto proverb "Cha kare akhpala - Biya - Gila sala". We first and then some authors. It's look like they are driving Pashtuns wherever they want !!! Continue ...
I am quite knowledgeble to discuss on just these two theories about Pashtuns. Discussion has it's importance as transfer of views and knowledge aswell and it should never be end so it is very pointed rather than pointless.
Protected
Just in case anyone is wondering, the protection of this article was at my request because of the repeated anonymous deletion of material that every registered user active in the article seems to consider to be an appropriate consensus version. -- Jmabel | Talk 21:34, Nov 27, 2004 (UTC)
Now unprotected. -- Jmabel | Talk 22:57, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)
Pakhtunwali
May I ask a question of the folks invoking Pakhtunwali—as politely as possible? Some folks have been invoking Pakhtunwali, yet remaining anonymous. Do you think it is worthy of/in conformance with that code of honor to engage in an interaction like this and not reveal your identity?
Secondly, is there/shouldn't there be an article on Pakhtunwali?—iFaqeer (Talk to me!) 22:40, Dec 16, 2004 (UTC)
The word Afghan, Sprenger, "some people"
The following was anonymously deleted:
- Some people claim that the word "Afghan" appears in the inscriptions of Shahpur I at Naghsh-e Rostam which names Goundifer Abgan Rismaund. Also, according to Sprenger a similar name 'Apakan' occurs as the designation of the Sassanian Emperor Shahpur III.
The deletion comment was, "'some people claim' is not enough to allow a clear bullshit to get in an article. what kind of logic is this 'some people cliam' business?"
I'd agree that "some people claim" isn't worth much. I'd really like to see a citation on this before restoring. As for Aloys Sprenger, can someone either come up with a direct citation of Sprenger, or at least some reliable document that quotes him as saying this? -- Jmabel | Talk 21:06, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)
jambel please give reference to your text
you added
- "Prior to this period no other book mentions that Afghans are descended from Jewish tribes"
can you tell your references for this statement?
Zain 21:15, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Not mine, I just restored it because it was deleted without comment. I've now communicated with the anon who deleted it. It sounds like he has earlier references and will provide them, which is fine by me. This is a much-vandalized article, so as a matter of process I restore unexplained deletions. -- Jmabel | Talk 21:18, Jan 8, 2005 (UTC)
- I can't understand why this page is vandalized? Any reason?
- Zain 21:54, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Yes. Constant battles between a cultural and a patrilineal definition of Pashtun. I do my best to make sure the article continues to embrace both. -- Jmabel | Talk 22:41, Jan 8, 2005 (UTC)
- Also, much back-and-forth over how much of this article shoudl be dedicated to the theory that the Pashtun are descended from the Lost Tribes of Israel. My own take would be to give that about three paragraphs here and a main article elsewhere. -- Jmabel | Talk 22:57, Jan 8, 2005 (UTC)
- Well it is easy to solve by using 'cite your refrences'. And with the claim you can tell who is making this claim. Any way I have detailed examples with my personal observations. I'll like them to put their views on talk where I can give them examples.
- Second they can give a full seperate article of ancestory. There are several claims but jewish claim is most known/believed. It is the only claim used in encarta!.
- Zain 23:09, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
"Gibberish"
I cant beleive the gibberish, and totally unscienific mumbo jumbo written here about the whence came the pashuns. An Eastern Iranian people of Central Asia writen in the encyclopedia as desended from some "lost tribes of Israel"??? The ariticle is as hilarious as it is an insult to academia. Omer Khan omerlivesOmerlives 04:23, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- I don't think it's gibberish, but I also don't like the way it's presented in the article. However, I lack the expertise to respond to it.
- As far as I can tell, what we have here is a good accounting of something that many of the Pashtun believe about their own origins, and solid documentation that this belief was shared by many 19th-century British and that there are still some non-Pashtun today who agree. The citations appear to be good, and they do demonstrate (just about exactly) that much. What is missing, and it will require someone with knowledge about the Pashtun which I lack, is a comparably solid set of citations demonstrating that this is now a minority opinion among anthropologists.
- I had deleted earlier half-baked material related to the "Israelite origin" theory, as had some others. However, this material seems good enough that it at least mostly belongs here. I don't think it's "gibberish" at all, but I do think that without the counter-view -- now dominant except among the Pashtun themselves -- also being presented, it is misleading. I, for one, would welcome someone presenting that counter-view. -- Jmabel | Talk 17:29, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)
Tanoli a Pathan Caste
Tanoli belong to Dara Tanawal in Afghaniztan. They are pure pathans. Infact Tanoli is not a caste. Tanawal is the name of area by the virtue of which they are called tanolis. Tanolis originally consist of following castes Mughals Suleman Khel Bagiyal Rans Malik Matyal Bansyal These all are pathan tribes who are resident of Tanawal hence called Tanolis
Genetics
Is there any citation for the recent anonymous contribution about genetics? If not, it probably shouldn't be in the article. -- Jmabel | Talk 18:59, Jan 28, 2005 (UTC)
Untenable historicity
As a student of anthropology, i am quite taken aback and, quite frankly, disappointed at the assertions made in the main article introducing the Pashtuns/Pakhtuns, concerning the historic origins of the Pashtun people. While it is a well-known fact that in their own cultural lore, the Pashtun regard themselves as descendants of Jacob - Bani Israil - it is (or should be) equally well-known that this is not supported by any evidence of history or physical anthropology. The Pashtuns are not a semitic people: like the Baloch, they are an eastern Iranian people (i would say "Aryan" as it is accurate in this context). "Iranian", here, refers not to the citizens of the Republic of Iran, but to the numerous ethnicities that speak (or have historically spoken) the various languages and dialects that make up the Iranian sub-branch of the Indo-Iranian branch of the Indo-European family of languages. This makes the Pashtuns and the Baloch related to other people sharing the same linguistic heritage, which would certainly include most of the population of Iran, but also other people outside, and to the west of Iran, such as the Kurds of Iraq and Turkey, or the Ossetians of Georgia and Russia in the Caucasus. They are NOT related to the Afro-Asiatic (a.k.a "Hamito-Semitic") speaking people of the Middle & Near East and North Africa, which includes the original Hebrew people and the Arabs.
Certainly, a corpus of traditional Pashtun folk literature exists that contends that the Pashtuns are the lost tribes of the Jewish Diaspora. Many early Western "Orientalists" also bought into this view. But please understand, all of this harks back to a time when the sciences of paleo- and physical anthropology were in their infancy. Lacking the benefit of an understanding of the peopling of the earth, the only recourse available to early commentators and contemporaries of, say Olaf Caroe, were the traditional folklore and/or scriptures of various people.
Adhering doggedly to such views now would be quite at par with the mindset: Ancient Egyptians and Mesoamericans both had pyramids... hence they must have been the same people... and they came from Atlantis!
Kamran Saeed | Talk .
Kamran, I agree with almost all you said. I myself am a student double majoring in bio and anthro and have taken increasing interst in demography, history, linguistics and historical linguistics. I wish I had more time to write/correct articles for the sake of academia and pursuit of truth in knowledge.
One thing worth mentionig is that ARYAN today in almost ANY context is a misnomer or atleast politically incorrct. If referring to the language family than indo-european is more acurate as it has nothing to do with race, origin or political claim. Ofcourse, I hope fortunately most people are educated and informed enough to know that use of ARYAN as a race is total hogwash and myth. One may speak of a Urheimat or proto indoeuropean population which most philoligist, linguists and archaelogists locate anywhere from Anatolia, caucuses to north of blacksea and even to the east of Caspian. But that has little or no bearing on the use of the word ARYAN itself which is a modern political psuedo construction. The racial ELEMENTS and features of the proto indoeuropean peoples is a topic of another discussion and one unsettled even today. Probably it was a amalgam of near eastern races of Asia Minor in the neolithic age like most of the other populations of the ancient world.
This leaves using the word ARYAN to refer to people who atleast in some historical context referred to themselves as such. Hence many times the meta sub-family of indo-european which includes modern langauges such as Farsi, Kashmiri, Punjabi, Pashto, Kurdish, Ossetic, Marathi, Gujarati etc are referred to as the ARYAN family. However, the sound cognate of this word is aslo found in other IE sub families such as Celtic and proto-Greek vocabulary. Hence, even for this purpose the use of INDO_IRANIAN langauge family is more appropriate. Coming to the even further sub division of this meta Indo_Iranian entity, The Sanskrit derived branch is referred to as Indo_Aryan but more recently as Indic....which ever one suits th fancy of the researcher.
Yes Iranian as a linguistic title has absolutely nothing to do with the Republic of Iran. Perhaps modern Iran is not even central to the discussion when referring to IRANIAN ethno-linguistic genesis in ancient times at all! Unfortunately politics, ethnocentrism, personal ghosts, hatred and fear engulf such discussions if those who control the discussion themselves belong to the ethnicity under question and overshadows the true esssence of scholarship: pursuit of the truth with HONEST attempts to overcome one's prejudices.
omerlivesOmerlives 04:23, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Population
"The total population of the group" was recently, anonymously modified from 42 million to 35 million, without citation. I have no reason to think one uncited estimate is any more accurate than another. Does someone have a citable estimate? -- Jmabel | Talk 20:04, Feb 16, 2005 (UTC)
Spin Khan Ghalji
Hazara, through ages, has remained a permanent part of Pakhtunkhwa. Some people, due to their superfluous information, think that the inhabitants of Hazara are hindko speaking but the fact is Majority of them are pashtuns and speak pashto as thier mother tongue.In this paper, I intend to put before the readers the basic information and historical facts on the topic. Hazara, since long, has been inhabited by Pukhtuns. This area is known as Hazara. The word Hazara means good place. Its root is Hozar; Ho stands for good and Zar for place. The word zar denotes the same meaning composites like Gulzar (the place of flowers), Marghuzar (the place of birds), Lalazar (the place of tulips.) A well known Pashto poet, Hameed Baba, says: Da Bagram Da Lalazar Bulbulan War'a Da Hameed Khushgoyayae Kr'l Khamosh. [All the nightingales of the Lalazar of Bagram, Were hushed by the melodies of Hameed.] The land of Hazara remains green even in the summer. The area of Chaj, adjacent to it, is famous for reed (naloona) and thickets (darge). Both of these things are used in making winnowing fan and folding bamboo curtains. Pashto words chaj means winnowing fan and checki stands for folding bamboo curtain. The recent history of Hazara shows that Gadana (jadoon tribe) live on the major portion of this land. This tribe consists of two sections, named after Salar and Mansoor, both of them being brothers. The descendents of Salar live in the western parts having the notable place of Abbottabad and mansoor with the adjacent areas. Gadana or Jadoon, the major racial part of Pukhtuns, live near the area of the Yousafzai and share their pleasures and pains. In addition to Salar and Mansoor, other Pakhtun tribes like those of Tareens, Swati and Mashwanis are also living in Hazara. Field Marshal Mohammad Ayub Khan belonged to the Tareen tribe. Many Pashto poets, like Hussain Ahmad and Ahmad Gul, belonged to the Pakhtun tribes of Hazara. A collection of poetry of Hussain of Paklae has been published in Peshawar. James Darmsteter, a French orientalist, had collected poetry of those poets living in Hazara, with the help of Maulvi Ismail and others, and published them under the title Da Pakhtunkhwa HaaroBahaar. This collection has a variety of forms like Charbeta and Ghazal. The book also contains odes on the gallant struggles of the Pukhtuns against the Sikhs and Britishers for the defense of their mother land. Deshan khel which is a clan of Swati tribe also live within the parts of Hazara.They belong to those tribes which had migrated from Swat to Hazara when the Yousafzai occupied their land. Deshan khel were then living in Swat. Swati is the biggest land owning Tribe in the region. Some Dalazak also moved to Hazara after a series of unsuccessful clashes with the Yousafzai who had come down from Kabul. Dalazak, descendent of Kodi, belong to the Karlan group of the Pakhtun tribes. It is evident from the history of Hazara that it is the land of the Pukhtuns. As Jahangiris(subsection of Swatis) dynasty of Swati tribe was from Jalal Abad to Jehlum. Swati ,Dalazak, Tareen, Gadana, Mashwani , Tanoli and other Pakhtun tribes, are its original inhabitants. Tordil, a well know hero of a Pakhtun folklore composed during the reign of Mughul emperor Akbar, was portrayed as belonging to Dalazak tribe. He fell in love with a Yousafzai girl. Their romance has been composed by Sardar Khan Khattak. Some people claim that the Hindko is the widely spoken language in Hazara. Thier claim is not correct and is based on wishful guess work. Hindko is spoken only in urban areas. It is not a language, but a dialect of Hindi, as is evident from its very name. The people who claim it to be their language do not belong to this area but had migrated from Hind. Similarly there are Hindkowans or other nonPukhtuns living in other cities of Pakhtunkhwa. In addition to Hindko there are some other regional languages like Gujri, Kohistani and Noori which are spoken in Pakhtunkhwa. But the major and dominant language is Pashto, an ancient language of IndoAryan origin with rich literature and culture. Even today, majority of the rural population of Hazara is speaking Pashto. They have, at least, eight literary associations and have been making remarkable contributions to Pashto language. (anonymously added 18 March 2005)
Overall problems with this page
This page needs an entry in something like Snopes.com (http://www.snopes.com) to straighten out the bizarro Lost Tribes of Israel thread. The very large section in question beginning "The claim of Afghans to be the Bani Israel (Children of Israel) is not founded on oral tradition alone. It is supported by ancient monuments ..." and ending in "Pashtun Israelite Origins" contains citations to texts before 1900. A sample search on three of the cited authors Bellew, Caroe, Ben-Zvi found not a single citation in a modern refereed journal article.
Links and references to other Lost Tribe/Israelite articles simply give the appearance of legitimate scholarship to what could only kindly be called flights of fantasy.
This is not a matter of view point either. Documenting the state of knowledge from 50, 100, 200, 300 years ago to support some notion is not a form of legitimate research. It should instead bring up big RED FLAGS.
See Kamran's comment above.
--Germsteel 09:04, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- I agree that the theory has little basis in fact. Quite possibly it belongs in an article of its own (much as we do with, for example, various conspiracy theories about 9/11). However, it should certainly not simply be deleted. This was clearly someone's very careful research, and the theory, even if discredited, is an encyclopedic topic. -- Jmabel | Talk 18:23, Mar 20, 2005 (UTC)
Tanoli removed again
The Tanoli's are NOT a Pashtun tribe. Any Pashtun will tell you that. Look in any PROPERLY RESEARCHED book on the Pashtuns and you will find out.
IMPORTANT: As you may have noticed a number of websites have started using the information we have in Wikipedia.
What this means is that it is EXTREMELY important for references to be incorporated and for the information to CORRECT, otherwise the reputation that this site is "anyone's message board" will spread, and the hard work by some contributers will be wasted - and that would be a shame. My references for Tanolis NOT being Pashtun are (as well as common knowlwedge):
The Hazara Gazetteer by JD Watson 1907 The Pathans by Olaf Caroe (and references within) Pukhtun Society and Economy by Prof Akbar S Ahmed Notes on Afghanistan by Raverty
I can give others if need be.
Insaaf.
- Perhaps we need another section to this article explicitly listing those tribes that are not Pashtun in terms of patrilineal descent, but who live in the same region and are culturally similar? It might head off some edit wars. -- Jmabel | Talk 23:50, Apr 5, 2005 (UTC)
GREAT IDEA!
- Insaaf
Don't Deny this universal fact (Tanoli are pashtun)
I can also refer you a few books which will lead you to the fact that tanolis are pathans UPANAN 01437
Al-Afghan Tanoli by Ghulam Nabi Khan History of Hazara Sher Bahadur Khan Panni The Constitution revolution in Frontier Sir Abbott
and very many more references. I can have a debat on this topic. My tribe is Suleman Khel. I am called tanoli because I belong to the area so called Tanawal. This is illetaracy of our people that they don't wanna understand. Every person who lives in Tanawal whether he is a swati, jadoon or anybody else he will be called tanoli. So Tanoli is not basically a caste. Caste is pathan. Now Sibghat ullah Mujadadi is our prior forefather who belongs to Afghanistan.
Non-encyclopedic material
I cut this recent rambling, POV, and partly first-person material recently added to the article. This is simply not encyclopedic material, but I'm preserving it here in case there is something here worth mining.
- According to Tarikh-e-Farishta By Qasim Farishta written in 1560s AD, he mentioned Afghans (I think he was mentioning Pashtuns as Afghans otherwise Pashtuns are much much ancient then the term Afghan)as Qabti Fironni, he took this referrence from a book name Matlaulanwar. He wrote when Hazrat Moosa Allaisalam over come on Firon, majority of Qabtis embraced Moosa's religion but unfortunately a group from Qabtis didn't accept this religion and goes in favour of F
- iron to accept him as God, for this sin they had put on exile to move to Hindustan and dwell in Koh e Suleman where they had been known as Afghans. He also revealed that this group Afghans were present with Abraha to attack on Kaba sharif and where they couldn't save themselves from the wrath of God. (In my opinion Pashtun is Pashtun who speaks Pashto and lives in Pakhtunkhwa. How it is possible the name is Afghan and speaks Pashto) ... According to his knolwledge the term Pathan was applied to Afghans because in the times of Muslim kings they were first settled in PATNA so called as Pathans by Indians.
- (Craving for new research). We must be thankful to the Greek historian Herodotus who mentioned Pashtuns as Pashtun by their name Pakat and land of the pashtuns as Paktivas(Pashtunkhwa)and we can also see these names of Pashtuns in Righved(Indian) and Osta of Persian religous book, both the books were of 13 to 16 hundred BC, it shows clearly that the Pashtuns were all around in Pakhtunkhwa from more than 3500 years that's why they have mentioned this great nation from their original name.
Reply to Nonencyc
Now it's seperate of what you have done in the main so let readers to decide now, be a nice gentle man to avoid editing anyone's contribution please !
Opinion
While fixing some spelling and grammar in this article I came across this sentence:
(In my opinion Pashtun is Pashtun who speaks Pashto and lives in Pakhtunkhwa. How it is possible the name is Afghan and speaks Pashto) ...
Personal opinions shouldn't be included in articles. I don't really know anything about the subject but the word opinion stuck out. If there's a reference you can provide that'd be great! Thanks! Rx StrangeLove 14:16, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Reply Opinion
As far as grammer and spelling mistakes concern I may be a bit weaker but as my point concern it's quite clear and understandable. Articles are usually written for opinion with references and my reference is visible.(Tarikh-e-Farishta) People admire new research .. Thanks ! Haider
- Can someone with more patience than I have for it right now try to explain to this anonymous user why the material he keeps adding is not appropriate to Wikipedia? And maybe look through it to see if something in there belongs in that article? I'd be a lot more willing to deal with it if his substantive edits didn't seem to be mixed with what seems to me to be outright vandalism (removal without explanation of accurate material expressing other points of view). -- Jmabel | Talk 23:24, Apr 9, 2005 (UTC)
- From a quick survey of references, it appears that the source claimed (Qasim Farishta) is generally considered to provide exaggerated, unreliable information. Nor is it clear whether what we have is really what that doubtful source claims, since it seems to be based on the poster's recollection. The intelligibility of the passage is also borderline. With all these problems, I consider this unverifiable material and will remove it again. The point attributed to Herodotus also leaps to a conclusion that he was referring to Pashtuns, without establishing why this connection should be made. More precise statements, preferably quotes from actual documents that we can trace, would be more acceptable. --Michael Snow 00:18, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Is there anyone who send me any single example half of dozen names given to one Nation or I would say thrust names on Pashtuns, those are Rohillas, Sulemani, Khurasani, Afghani and Pathani ? Where Pashto has gone and it's speakers Pashtuns? Giving references is something else and to agree with them other ! Transfer of views will be appreciated, this is the best way to gain knowledge. Thanks! Wasim Afridi
What's wrong with Bhopali Pathans if they once migrated from Pakhtunkhwa to Indian places like Patna and Bhopal and become Pathans due to name PATNA ! Haider
- I'm sorry, but I can't even understand what you're trying to say here. --Michael Snow 17:36, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Page protection
I've protected the page at the request of Michael Snow and Jmabel as posted on WP:RFP. I've never edited this page before and have little relevant knowledge on the subject. However, it is clear there are differences which need to be addressed without continual edit warring over the content. User:Bkonrad/sig 02:35, Apr 11, 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks. I see at least three issues here:
- The article should distinguish between those tribes that are universally considered Pashtun, and those that are accepted by those who use a definition based on adherence to Pashtunwali or other cultural factors, but not by those who rely strictly on claims of patrilineal descent. Haider keeps removing this, without explaining why.
- Haider keeps adding clearly unencyclopedic material, some of it even first-person to the article, and making remarks that we are all finding incomprehensible in the talk page.
- It is quite possible that Haider knows something that belongs in the article. Is there anyone who (whether they agree with him or not) can possibly give what they believe will be a comprehensible summary of what he is saying, so that we can evaluate it on its merits rather than having an edit war?
- It wouldn't surprise me if there is more, and that I am missing something. -- Jmabel | Talk 03:31, Apr 11, 2005 (UTC)
Reply to make myself clear
Hello to Friends! First of all I just want to say that I am not here to thrust my views on anyone around, the main cause to be here was to gain some knowledge through transfer of views. I have some contribution in Pashtun Tribes to fill those empty boxes by some genuine information, those were totally empty before me, I thought I have done something good but what I have found "Block" as a user but that was I think totally a misunderstanding. I am here because I found Wikipedia a different site without any suppression. One another thing which is very important to tell my Friends about my English, it's a bit weaker so if I write anything wrong and someone find it wrong according to grammer will highly be appreciated to rectify it, by the way I will improve my English very rapidly if I keep continue with Wikipedia and Friends.
Now something about the Pashtuns Tribes. Discrimination has been made in the Pashtuns Tribes list by some of my Friend by giving some references from Hazara Gazetteer 1883-84, in the same book the Tribes has been discussed as Pashtuns through their cultural definition, now my point is, in the same book a Tribe name Jadoon has also been discussed like that so Jadoon should also join down two of them, a Pashtun Tribe Dilazak is facing the same problem , same Shalmanis are there with the same discrimaination. As Shalmani accoriding to a book "encyclopedia of the races by E.D Macligan/H.A Rose" and "Panjab Castes by Denzil Ibbeston" are at the same stage where above mentioned tribes are. In the same book Khilji/Ghalji or Ghalzai are mentioned as Turks Qalchi which means Sword man and they have also adopted the language and traditions of Pashtun so are called Pashtuns, that way they should also join the Swati,Jadoon,Shalmani and Dilazaks. According to Dr Bellew Pashtun Tribe Kharoti he identifies them with the Arachoti of Alaxander's historians and points out that they still live in the ancient Arachosia so it also dosn't prove them from Qais Abdul Rasheed baba. In one another book "Khilji Family by K.S Lal" Khiljis were the sons of Changaiz Khan's son in law Qlaeech Khan so as Swati Tribe has been mentioned as Tajigiree Turks by a Pashtun genius Dr Sher Bahadur Khan Panni in his book "History of Hazara" according to that book those turks adopted the language, culture and triditions of Pashtuns. A book by Abdul Ali Ghorghushti "Pakhtunkhwa" he discussed swatis as from Karlanis. Who put Swatis in Bhittani family tree, a son of Qais Abdul Rasheed (which I don't believe in) so that way Swati is also present in Patrilineal definition. Qais Abdul Rasheed had only three real sons one of them namely Ghorghust,Subatani and Bhittani or batani, the fourth one was a step son found under the karai (pashto word) by which he named as karlani from which the Wazir, Mahsud, Afridi, Khattak, Bangash and Bannuchi etc came into bieng. (For readers benefits a Book "Tareek-e-Khanjahani-Makhzani Afghani by Khwaja niamatullah harvi written in the times when Jahangir was the King of India and lot more books)That means Karlanis were not Pashtuns according to Patrilineal definition, on the other hand they had also adopted the same code of life (Pashtunwali) so are called Pashtuns, because an infant who was found under that karai might be from another race of that region like Turk or Arab etc but defenitely not Pashtun, so they should also join the Tribes who accepted Culture. I can send more tribes those who adopted/accepted the language of Pashtuns if required but a question will definitely come into mind, Who is Pashtun just two or three tribes ? My request is kindly take those discrimaination off of the main page among the Pashtun Tribes even it dosn't looks good also, let it be in a straight one lane alphabetical wise ! I will recommend a book for Pashtun lovers "Pashtun in the mirror of their race by Syed Bahadur shah zafer kaka khel" I was really thinking to stop myself calling as Pashtun due to that so many stories to trace this great Nation but when I read Kaka's book I found myself as a Proud Pashtun. Thanks to all ! Haider 12:58, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)Haider
Just one sided judgment
I will take it as just one sided decision about the list of Pashtuns Tribes on the main page or someone especial has the authority to make it controversial deliberately accoriding to his liking. I have already tried to make it easy in my previous writings just above through some logical references.
Administrators must have come forward to resolve Pashtun page problem.
Thanks! Haider 12:59, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)Haider
There are two most prominent views about the Pashtuns, one is patrilineal definition (as from one Progenitor Qais Abhul Rasheed, who was from Bani Israel), while the second one is Cultural definition (Aryans, who created and accepted the same language and Culture through evolutionary period).
The topic has been discussing in Pashtun hujras from centuries, belittling among them will be so regretful in the Tribes List of Pashtuns.
Haider 19:38, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)Haider
- Haider, at least two of us with whom you've been battling are administrators. The article as it stands is very clear on the patrilineal vs. the cultural definition of Pashtun, and covers both. One of the edits you've kept making is to obliterate the distinction between which tribes are univerally considered Pashtun and which are considered so only under the patrilineal definition. I presume that this means you come from the "cultural" side of the debate. If you look at the edit history of the article, you will see that prior to us making this distinction, we kept having people from the "patrilineal" side entirely remove, for example, the Swatis. I'm not at all an expert on the topic (although I know experts, and have talked to them) and it's very hard for me to imagine any other appropriate way of handling the list.
- As for the addition you keep trying to make: (1) Wikipedia is not a soapbox. The encyclopedia articles are to be written from a neutral point of view. You simply cannot say, in the article, "I think he was mentioning...", "In my opinion", "Craving for new research", "We must be thankful". (2) It is by no means a given that Herodotus' Pakat are the Pashtun. You don't even give a good citation of a reputable scholar who believes this to be the case. (3) Michael Snow, who usual knows what he's talking about, says that Qasim Farishta is, at best, a controversial source. (4) May I suggest, that since your English is obviously not so great, that instead of trying to write a passage in the article yourself, that you indicate here on the talk page whatever facts you feel are missing from the article, or what in the article you think is false? Please, don't try for florid language, you are only making yourself harder for us to understand. Just the basic facts, stated as simply as you can. Or, if there is some other language in which you feel you can explain this better than in English, tell us what and we can probably get hold of someone to translate. -- Jmabel | Talk 05:40, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC)
Reply to Jmabel
- Jmabel, I really I didn't know, I was Battling two of my friends both of them are administrators so it means that's what panishment I am having in return? (Catching in your words)I can't afford any battle against administraters !
I thought I was trying to take part in debate to reach on some concensus concerning this dispute. Will you please take a look as I wrote something regarding this issue in headings "Make myself Clear"? Read that carefully and try to concenterate those references, wrong or right !
Now I will need some of your attention please !
That's what I am reciting from a book name PANJAB CASTES by DENZIL IBBESTON what he wrote about Khiljis! The true Pathans(Pashtun) are apparently of Indian origin. Their language is called Pashto or Pakhto and they call themselves pukhtana or Pakhto speakers; and it is the word of which Pathan is the Indian corruption. They held in the early centuries of our era the whole of the safed koh and Northern Suleman systems, from the Indus to the Helmand and from the sources of the spread into their country and adopted their language and customs; and just as Englishmen, so all who speak the Pakhto tongue came to be included under the name Pathan(Pashtun). Thus the Afghans and Gilzais(Khiljis or Ghaljis) are Pathans(Pashtun) by virtue of their language, though not Pathan origin. The Gilzais (Khiljis) are a race probably of Turkish origin, their name bieng another form of Khichi, the Turkish word for Swordman.
Now in the same book of Mr Denzil Ibeeston about Swatis, Jadoons, Tanolis, Dilazaks and Shalmanis, he wrote almost the same cultural definition as he wrote about Khiljis as assamilated with them in manners, customs and character. These Tribes chiefly occupy the Hazara divison.
Haider 13:12, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Now some more from Mr Denzil Ibbeston in his own words!
The origin and early history of the various tribes which compose the Afhgan nation are much are much disputed by the authorities of wheight who hold very different views. I have in the following sketch followed the account given by Dr. Bellew, as it affords a convenient framework in which to base a discription of those tribes. But it is said to be doubtful wether the distinction which he so strongly insists upon between Pathan proper and Afghan proper really exists or is recognised by the people; While the Jewish origin of any portion of the nation is most uncertain.
In Another Paragragh he wrote It is not certain when the Afghans of Ghor moved down into the Kandhar country where the Gandghari colony was settled; but they probably came as conquerors with the Arab invaders of the 1st century of the Mohammadan aera. They soon settled as the dominant race in their new homes, intermarried with and converted the Gandhari, and adopted their language; and in course of time the two races became fused together into one Nation under the name of Afghans, as distinguished from the neighbouring Pathans(Pashtuns)of whome I shall presently speak, though the original stock of Ghor still called themselves Bani Israil to mark the fact that their origin was distinct from that of their Gandhari kinsmen. It is probable that this tradition of Jewish origin was little more distinct than is the similar tradition of Norman descent which some of our English families still preserve. Thus the Afghan proper includes, firstly the original Afghans of Jewish race whose principal tribes are the Tarin, Abdali and Shirani, and secondly the descendants of the fugitive gandhari , who include the Yusuzai, Mohmand, and other tribes of Peshawar. These latter returned about the first half of the 15th century of our era to their original seat in the Peshawar valley which they had left nearly ten centuries before; while the original Afghans remained in Kandhar, where in the middle of the 18th century they made themeselves rulers of the country since known as Afghanistan, shortly afterwards moved their capital to Kabul. Mr Ibbeston next says; I have said that the Gandhari were one of the four great divisions of the Pactya of Herodotus. The other three nations included under that name were the Aparyte or Afridi, the satragyddae or Khatta, and the Dedicae or Dadi, all alike of Indian origin. Mr Ibbeston says; These three nations constitute the nucleus of the Pathans (Pashtuns) proper. But around this nucleus have collected many tribes of foreign origin, such as Scythic Kakar, Rajput Waziri, and the many tribe of Turk extraction included in the KARLANI section who came in with Sabuktagin and Taimur; and these foreigners have so encroached upon the original territories of the Pactyan nation that the Khattak and Afridi now hold but a small portion of the countries which they once occupied, while the Dadi have been practically absorbed by their Kakar invaders. The whole have now become blended into one nation by long association and intermarriage, the invaders have adopted the PAKHTO LANGUAGE, and all alike have accepted Islam and have invented traditions of common descent which express their present state of association. He wrote about Mashwanis as are descended from a Sayyad Father by a Kakar woman and are allied to Kakar Pathans
These were the lines takes by Mr Denzil Ibbeston as far as you do believe in him! Now how many tribes left to be differentiate among the great Pashtuns? There are still lot to be discussed if something more required. If you don't have much information about Pashtuns then keep yourself away of this topic or read in between the lines with some great interest! Experts here would be more helpful for creative and positive concensus and If some one who don't want even to listen then there's is nothing I can do to solve atleast Pashtun page dispute.
Pashtuns were every where in Pakhtunkhwa even before the times of Hakha Manshi four hundred years BC when Assakenois and Aspasois were the most barbarious tribes of the region like Swat, Bajawat, Dir and Hazara, where they fought against Alexander of Maccedonia so bravely and killed his governers even Alexander himslef has been injured, all of above given names are still in Pakhtunkhwa. Now try to find out who were Pashtuns, it was history which make them united by their language, traditions and customs through evolutionary period.
Haider 14:30, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I am signing all of my previous wrote stuff on this page because I didn't know how to sign when I first came in and join Wikipedia.
Haider 17:08, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Proposal
Here's a suggestion: Why don't have more than one list of Pushtun tribes: one by genetics; one by culture and so on. And also have a section describing "Indian Pathans" (or even "Bhopali Pathans"), explaining their origin, how they have intermarried and also that "Khan" and "Khan Bahadur" were also used as titles given by the British and inherited, etc. and ahve nothing to do with a Paukhtun family background...What say?67.118.240.18 21:09, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- "Why don't have more than one list of Pushtun tribes: one by genetics; one by culture." Excuse me, but that is basically what we have, that User:Haider is running roughshod over. There is a list of the tribes that are incontestably considered Pashtun, and a list of the ones that are culturally, but not patrilineally, Pashtun. If there are more distinctions that should be made, I'm open to that, but Haider was collapshing the distinction that is there. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:56, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)
Jmabel, I think you are just trying to gain some more knowledge through me about Pashtuns otherwise there is no need to defferenciate Pashtuns tribes like this ! It's some sort of game for you playing with Pashtun tribes? I think you are not paying any attention in this dispted matter otherwise I would have get my reply, just by saying we have two lits of tribes is not the proper answer as a reliable administrater, what I want is, reply me as I have try to proven something about the various tribes of the Pashtuns on the same page. Just see what Mr Denzil Ibbeston (1847-1908) says about different tribes of Pakhtunkwa(Land of Pashtuns),are they incontestable or contestable since you believe in that?
And please don't come so harsh if someone is trying to solve this dispute by contributing some proposals regarding Bhoplai Pathans also! -Haider 10:35, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Jmbel,I have right now a list of Pashtuns family tree (Shajara) in which I can see a name Swati in Batani family tree, it may be their new research or whatever but I don't believe in that genealogical tree, it is just for you since you do believe in that ? -----Haider 17:08, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Still there is a message on the main page of Pashtun, "This page is protected from editing until disputes have been resolved on the discussion page". The question is who will solve these disputes, any Angel or someone do think he is battling with me ? -- Haider 19:45, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Mistake in "Who is Pashtun"
Mistake in "Who is Pashtun" My point about patrilineal defition that Qais Abdul Rasheed had three real sons namely Surbatani, Batani and Ghorghusht, the fourth one was found under karai (Pashto word) from which he had been calling as Karlani, now an infant might be a Turk, Tajik or Arab but definitely not Pashtun because he wasn’t the blood of Qais baba so according to this how come Karlanis which consist of Wazirs, Mahsuds, Khattaks, Afridis and Bangash etc are Patrilineal Pashtuns ? Today we can see Karalanis are much greater Pashtuns as compare to other Pashtuns of Pashtunkhwa (Land of Pashtuns). But in the main page of Pashtun in an article “Who is Pashtun”, writer made an intentional mistake by mentioning Four sons of Qais Abdul Rasheed, where he tried to lead a reader! Now if we take a look about Khiljis (Gilzais) their father was a Turk Prince, he married Bibi Mato, daughter of Sheikh batan (son of Qais baba), how would we consider them as Patrilineal Pashtuns because Khiljis mother was a Pashtun not Father . Every body knows Khiljis are the most greatest among the Pashtuns Tribes.. (For readers benefit , a Book by niamatullah hirvi –“ Tareekh e Khan Jahani – Maghzane”-Afghani written in 17th century). Wazirs, Mahsuds, Afridis, Bangash, Khattaks, Swatis, Khiljis, Jadoons, Dilazaks, Tanolis, Mashwanis and Shalmanis are great Pashtun Tribes and they do not need any sort of certificate from any writer! -- Haider 22:51, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC) Haider, that last point is exactly the spirit we have to focus on in writing here. We are not issuing certificates here on who is and isn't Pakhtun. We are trying to document what is out there in the real world. And in my humble opinion, we need to present a complete picture: provide as complete a list as possible and where some or even a majority of people dispute something, to say that on the page. And also explain what other things are out there that either claim to be Pakhtun or have Pakhtun origins--or even can be confused with Pakhtun (like people with the title Khan and Khan Bahadur, for example).—iFaqeer (Talk to me!) 00:45, Apr 16, 2005 (UTC) IFaqeer, you have been mistaken I think, I didn't mentioned you one who is nominating certifcates here to Pashtuns, kindly see what I was taking references from a Book (Tareekhe Khan Jahani - Maghzani Afghani),since someone believe in him but I don't! Niamatullah Hirvi(who was an Afghan) was the author in the reign of Mughal Emperor Jahangir where he was appointed as Events writer by the King and served as Government Civil Servent for some years, due to some reasons he was terminated of his job then he attached himself with an Afghan KhaneJahan Lodhi who was an adopted son of King Jahangir. These were the people who have been honored as with the title of Khans with lands, there were lot numerous who had these titles in Mughals and British Period. -- Haider 12:28, 16 Apr 2005 (U
Jmbel,Mashwanis mother was from Kakar Tribe and father was an Arab that's what we have in some books like Panjab castes by Denzil Ibbeston and some others also, Khiljis father was a Turk and her mother was from Batani tribe. Since the Pashtun lineage traditionally stems from the Father !! Who will believe in it ? What to say Jmbel? According to your criteria Khiljis are in and Mashwanis are out if that then both the Tribes do not deserve even to place them in Pashtuns tribes list! Both the above Tribes are definitely Pashuns without any argument by any means as Khan Roshan Khan described them in his book "History of Pashtuns and it's reality". What left now to resolve disputes? How many tribes left in your list? On the other hand we can see some Pathans in India we know them by their famous name Bhopali Pathans, they claim themselves as Pashtuns, they have lost their body of customs or traditions passed down from generation to generation, language and every thing ! Nobody will reckoned them as Pashtuns by any view cultural or Patrilineal. -- Haider 15:08, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Culture
There were many glorious civilizations which were once at the zenith of enviable glory, but now they have lost their climax and, there is no trace of their dazzling and gloring cultures and societies. In other words, we may say that the splendour is due to two factors, i.e., an eye on the culture and civilization, and hard struggle for the future. But history is a witness that the former is more important. In the words of Changez Khan, "If you want to crush a nation completely, you can't succeed unless and until you do not crush their culture". This shows the significance of culture. But nowadays, the Pashtoons are turning their eyes from their past. It has even become a great controversy as to who the pashtoons are? To which land they originally belong to, and how did their culture and civilization flourish?
No one can deny the fact that if the nations at the culmination of their splendour and glory forget their glorious culture and civilizations then nothing will save them from sinking into the abyss of miserable calamity and disaster.
Many historians and writers have tried their best to compile books and conduct research in this matter, but very few have been able to find out the truth. According to their research, Pushto is one of the most ancient languages of the world which has been spoken from the Hindukush hills in the south west of Asia to the bank of the River Indus for thousands of years. It is said about the age of this language that it is almost four thousand years old.
How much Culture can play a role to destroy a Nation, we can easily be achieved from above two paragraphs. If we want to help Pashtun nation then we will have to take some keen interest to promote it's Culture and Language. They must think about themselves who have lost their Culture, Language and Identity, what would they call themsleves after one or two generations? -- Thanks Munshi Ahmed Jan -- Haider 16:36, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Marwat
The predecessor or the ancestor of the Marwat was named as Marwat and there is a hill in Katwaz, Afghanistan, which is called Marwati. The Marwat tribe formerly inhabited there, and so they were named Marwat. The word Marwat is derived from Arabic word “Murrawat”, which means compassion, generosity and manliness. This really reflects and interprets the word Marwat on account of their moral values, habits, social contacts and hospitality even to day. In the past, the Aryan Chiefs took oath in the name of the Marwat tribe’s modesty, when they were sworn as leaders of their tribe’s.
The modern Western historians are of the view that all these old names are of geographical importance. For instance, Bait is the center of river Dajla and Farrat, and Haroot and Maroot are the names of two tribes. They were famous in the past for their purity. In the ancient religious books they have been mentioned in literary and allegorical sense. (For readers benefit, Dood-e-Chirag by Dr Syed Chiragh Hussain).
There are lot of disputes to be solved but a healthy debate is required about the two most prominent theories regariding Pashtuns, As we have just read Cultural defintion of the Great Marawats. Pashtun is a Garden and defenders are Tribes. -- Haider 17:43, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Still Blocked Pashtun page
Do anyone think, discussion is on the rise to resolve the disputes on Pashtun main page regarding Tribes list or who will solve these disputes? Do just a man has the authority to block or unblock it without any logical reason, dosn't it hurt the beauty of Wikipedia? Now a time comes that a higher authority will come to solve and unblock that concerning page to let the lovers of wikipedia to edit it with some great references. -- Haider 15:00, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Haider, you have not acknowledged anyone else's concerns about the changes you, as a minority of one, are making to the article. The article is blocked because you were repeatedly editing without seeking consensus; indeed, you were editing in opposition to clear consensus.
- I would be perfectly happy to see the page unblocked, but not if it means that you intend to resume (1) removing material describing the existence of views other than your own, and (2) adding unencyclopedic material. -- Jmabel | Talk 04:12, Apr 28, 2005 (UTC)
Jmabel, Infact I was trying to reach at some consensus about Pashtun Tribes list, but not any what I wrote as an article, What I wrote on this page earlier were mostly all about Pashtun Tribes list. I really do admire the friends who have some knowledge utilizing it through their contributions about Pashtuns, they are already been appreciated to take part in healthy discussions. Do you think if the page unblocked I will go and make changes again, definetely not. Basically there are two most famous views about the origin of Pashtuns, one is Cultural and second one is Lineal defintions, which has been discussing in Pashtun Hujras from centuries and that dosn't mean to differentiate Pashtun Tribes like this as it is in Pashtun Tribes list right now. As a contributor I have my right to edit those tribes in alphabetical order with announcements at the same Pashtun talk page. So can you see any dispute even now? As they say (Pashto proverb) Jranda ka de plaar da - Kho pa waar da. (If well belong to someones father even then he will have to wait for his turn). -- Haider 17:01, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- So, do I understand that if we open this up, you will not remove the distinction between the list of tribes that are Pashtun by partilineal descent and those who are Pashtun only by a cultural definition? -- Jmabel | Talk 04:52, Apr 29, 2005 (UTC)
Jmabel, You are just making it an issue ! If you or any of my friend want to take part in debate/discussions will be appreciated, so that must be in Pashtun Talk page or otherwise you will have to add so many tribes like Turkish blood Pashtuns, Arabic blood Pashtuns and the step son of Qais baba's tribes etc etc in the Pashtuns Tribes list as far as cultural defintion concern. I think I have some rights also to edit those tribes wihtout any distinction among them. -- Haider 19:16, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- I take it, then, that you will not make such a commitment. In that case, I will continue to request that the page remain protected. -- Jmabel | Talk 04:03, Apr 30, 2005 (UTC)
Jmabel, It's up to you now but don't you think you are just misusing your authority? There is no need to be positive about Pashtuns but you have no right to make distinction among them! For you a Pashto proverb "Uss Pisho shekha shwa" and another one "Che sa karey haga ba rebey". Kindly try to learn Pashto also atleast to understand these proverbs. One very significant point, you have never tried to answer my replys point to point as I wrote so much tried to resolve this dispute? . Thanks ! -- Haider 22:36, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- No: I'm not just not misusing my authority, I'm not using it. Because I am an active editor in this page, I am not functioning as an administrator on this page. I made my reverts, and the request for page protection, exactly like any other editor could.
- And, again, I am not the one "making" the distinction. Clearly, large numbers of Pashtun make a distinction between those who have patrilineal descent from the Pashtun forefathers and those who do not. Frankly, I don't adhere to this distinction, I adhere to the cultural definition, but this is an encyclopedia article, and I (unlike some people) am interested in having it accurately reflect the range of well-documented views held by significant numbers of people. For some time we attempted to maintain a single list, and the result was that that patrilinealists kept coming in and simply deleting tribes such as the Tanoli and Swati whom they don't consider Pashtun. Listing these with a distinction is, as far as I can see, the only way we can get an article that explains both points of view.
- Also, please, understand: I don't have a large stake in this. I'm working on this mainly with the goal of a good, evenhanded article. I've been just as persistent about people who are trying to remove the Swati from the article as I am about you trying to suggest that no one makes this distinction.
- I don't have final word on this: you can request that the page be unprotected exactly as easily as I can. But as long as it is your intention to abolish the mention of a distinction that a large number of Pashtun clearly make, and as long as you intend to re-insert copy in the article that is in no way encyclopedic and simply expresses your own personal opinions and ramblings, I will continue to say that the article needs to be protected from that, and I will continue to be ready to revert those changes if the article is unprotected and you make them. And, as you have seen, I will not be the only person ready to revert them. -- Jmabel | Talk 05:20, May 1, 2005 (UTC)
Jmabel, I am here with Wikipedia for almost six months, I havn't saw a man making changes in Pashtun Tribes like this. Pashtuns according to some reliable books have never make any sort of distinction among them, (For readers benefit "Pashtuns" by Syed Bahadur shah Zafer kaka khel and "Pashtun" by Dr Habibullah Tazi, and also "Pukhtunkhwa" by Abdul Ali Ghorghashti), if someone with lesser knowledge comes in and start editing, dosn't mean that would be consider his last words.
Now I have some questions regarding this dispute.
1- Do you believe in Patrilineal or Matrilineal definition about pashtuns?
2- Are you sure Qais baba had three sons and a fourth one was his stepson?
3- Tell me about khattaks, do you believe that when a brother unveiled his damsel, when it was discovered that the one in the finest clothes was a ugly old maid, on the other hand his three brothers found were comely young virgins when unveiled. The fortunate younger brothers laughing and twitted the other in selecting such a bride and said in Pashto "Pa khatta larey" , that is " You have gone into the mud or you have put your foot in it", from this Afghan genealogist, is derived the name of Khattak or will you take them as Sattagydae of Herodotus were identified in the Saitak, Sattak, and Khattak of modern writers? (see Races of Afghanistan by Dr Henry W Bellew).
I will consider these folklores a joke with great Pashtun tribes. Pashtuns will never reckoned Bhopali Pathans as Pashtuns due to their Culture and Language as they say "Da kali ooza kho da karkhey ma ooza", and for Pahtuns a proverb "Pa kanri joka na lagi".
Now kindly come to me with some authentic information with point to point. Bieng an Afridi from tribe I will defend and define every pashtun tribe because I love Pashtuns. I want to gain knowledge not to waiste!
Swatis, who claim patrilineal descent from Mohammad(Peace be upon him),(which is a bigger honor) the founder of Islam,(that's what we see on Pashtun main page), dare to write here also, is it right? Do you have any reference? All you have to do is just to send replys now or take off those rubbish information of the main ! Can't you see such a big lie on the main page? Go and apply revert policy here also! Atleast you must take care the beauty of Wikipedia !
Pashto proverb for you "Bal ta naseehat kaway - auo zaan dey hair day". Kindly try to translate these precious proverbs. L Khan Canada - Take care -- Haider 12:21, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
- It's not a matter of what I believe, it's about what various authorities believe. They are in conflict with one another, and it is our job to report all views to which a reasonable number of knowledgable people subscribe. -- Jmabel | Talk 00:52, May 2, 2005 (UTC)
Pashto
Please add a small section on pashto mentioning its genetic classification which is IndoEuropean> Indo-Iranian> Iranian> Eastern Iranian. And a link to pashto langauge wiki page. I am surprised there is no mention of that here amidst all this supreme mumbo jumbo of misinformation, insecure obsolete nationalistic unscholarly artice. (Added anonymously)
Tribe
About what Tribe is, I have taken this paragraph from some of my very close friend from his collections(Books, Articles etc). I really found it very impressive and interesting for me and my friends here.
Tribe, group of people sharing customs, language, and territory, such as the Apache people of North America. Anthropologists stress the importance of kinship in tribes. Usually a tribe has a leader, a religion teaching that all its people are descended from a common ancestor, and a common language and culture. A tribe is often small in size, is fairly limited in its contacts with other societies, and is correspondingly ethnocentric in its view of the world. Experts disagree about the relative importance of linguistic, political, and geographical boundaries for defining tribal groups. Whatever definition of tribe is chosen, however, exceptions to it abound. The most important criteria for a tribe continue to be linguistic and cultural resemblances. -- Haider 20:43, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Unprotected
Three weeks is way too long. Please be nice. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 14:14, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
Thanks to all
I have made some changes regarding Pashtun Tribes list to marshall them in an alphabetical order, it now really reflects the beauty of Wikipedia. Infact there was no need to make any sort of distinction among Pashtun Tribes, anyway it looks so impressive and great now ! Before making any changes without any references, one should come and take part on discussion page. Thanks -- Haider 15:59, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
I have just add some authentic paragraph about Great Khiljis in empty box as I already filled empty boxes of different Pashtun Tribes before. -- Haider 16:43, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
Pashtun tribe Mashwani was missing from the tribes list, just added now -- Haider 17:46, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
Mistake in "Who is Pashtun"
Wazirs, Mahsuds, Afridis, Bangash, Khattaks, Swatis, Khiljis, Jadoons, Dilazaks, Tanolis, Mashwanis and Shalmanis are great Pashtun Tribes and they do not need any sort of certificate from any writer! -- Haider 22:51, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Haider, that last point is exactly the spirit we have to focus on in writing here. We are not issuing certificates here on who is and isn't Pakhtun. We are trying to document what is out there in the real world. And in my humble opinion, we need to present a complete picture: provide as complete a list as possible and where some or even a majority of people dispute something, to say that on the page. And also explain what other things are out there that either claim to be Pakhtun or have Pakhtun origins--or even can be confused with Pakhtun (like people with the title Khan and Khan Bahadur, for example).—iFaqeer (Talk to me!) 00:45, Apr 16, 2005 (UTC)
IFaqeer, you have been mistaken I think, I didn't mentioned you one who is nominating certifcates here to Pashtuns, kindly see what I was taking references from a Book (Tareekhe Khan Jahani - Maghzani Afghani),since someone believe in him but I don't! Niamatullah Hirvi(who was an Afghan) was the author in the reign of Mughal Emperor Jahangir where he was appointed as Events writer by the King and served as Government Civil Servent for some years, due to some reasons he was terminated of his job then he attached himself with an Afghan KhaneJahan Lodhi who was an adopted son of King Jahangir. These were the people who have been honored as with the title of Khans with lands, there were lot numerous who had these titles in Mughals and British Period. -- Haider 12:28, 16 Apr 2005 (U (That was my reply) -- Haider 19:41, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
TO ALL:
For some time I have not been around - my apologies for that.
Tanolis are ALL OVER THE PLACE in Hazara, and NO ONE Considers them Pashtun - that is the REAL world. PLUS the books support that.
Even in Swabi no one considers them Pashtun, so Haider - are you a Tanoli that you want them included? If so fine if that makes you feel happy, but in the REAL WORLD TANOLIS ARE NOT PASHTUN. Sorry for the capitals but noone seems to undrstand that fact. The MASHWANIS THEMSELVES say they are not PASHTUN but SYED - that is the REAL world. I met a Mashwani and asked him if he was a "Pathan" and he said "No" we are SAYED.
So I am putting them in a separate column: Pashunns in the REAL World and Pashtuns in CYBERSPACE.
- I don't know why are you editing like this, please be calm and cool and stop vandals! I have already mentioned my tribe see what I wrote earlier, and please come with your sign(Name). -- Haider 18:52, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
Kindly stop making changes, what I wrote on this discussion page ! -- Haider 19:25, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
Cheers! Insaaf
- You can't do this-no such thing as cyberspace Pashtun. Please read WP:POINT. People are Pashtun or they are not. Sort it out on this page and reach a consensus. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 18:25, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
(Reply from Isaaf):
Haider and Tony - The point is this: Mashwanis and Tanolis are not Pashtun. Simple. That's on Paper and more importantly on the Ground - i.e. if you actually GO TO the place such as HAZARA district where there are Mashwanis and Tanolis, the local poeple say "Yes Mashwanis and Tanolis are not Pashtun". This is what the actual people belonging to these tribes also say. I have Mashwanis and Tanoli friends. Unfortunately people contributing to this topic don't want to believe that.
It's as clear as someone saying a Bantu Tribesman from Africa belongs to the Bedouin tribes of Arabia. The continent is Africa and the people are of a similar complexion but that is where the similarity ends.
And regarding "Pashtuns in Cyberspace" - you will have to accept the fact willingly or unwillingly, that anyone can post anything on the internet, without having any knowledge on the subject. Unfortunately, webapges BORROW information, as is what is happening with wikipedia, and hence alot of mis-information is being copied from wikipedia and being propogated. Hence "knowledge of Pashtuns" is being generated on Cyberspace, which actually is "baseless" on the ground and so exists only in Cyberspace.
From Insaaf
- Insaaf, it's no problem to me, but if you have a difference of opinion on this with others then you have to be able to produce verifiable information that you are right. If you don't, you're just asking us to take your word for it (and we don't do that in this encyclopedia). So if you have some book, professor, contactable person, etc, you can reference then cite it or them. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 01:22, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
- : Thanks Tony and JMabel for correcting the page, here are some references;
1. Notes on Afghanistan and part of Baluchistan: geographical, ethnographical, and historical.
Extracted from the writings of Afghán and Tajzík historians, geographers, and genealogists; the histories of the Ghúris, the Turk sovereigns of the Dilhí Kingdom, the mughal sovereigns of the house of Tímúr, and other Muhammadan chronicles; and from personal observations.
By Major H.G.Raverty , Bombay Native Infantry (retired). Published London .1880 Author of a "Grammer" and "Dictionary" of the Pus'hto or Afghan Language; "The Gulshan I-Roh, or Selections, Prose, and Poetical, in the Afghan Language;" "The Poetry of the Afghans, from the Sixteenth Century to the Nineteenth Century;" "The Fables of Aesop Al-Hakim in the Afghan Language;" "Translation of the Tabakát-i-Násirí, from the Persian of Minhá-i-Saráj;" "The Pus'hto Manual," etc etc.
2. The People of India: A series of photographic illustrations of the Races and Tribes of Hindustan. Edited by J.Forbes and Sir John William Kaye, London, Indian Museum 1872.
3. Notes on the Eusofzye tribes of Afghanistan
By The Late Capt. Edward Connolly (published after his death in the First Afghan War, in the Asiatic Journal and Monthly Register for the British and Foreign India, China, and Australasia. Vol.XXXV-New Series, May-August, 1841.)
4. The Pathans: 500 B.C.-A.D. 1957 (Oxford in Asia Historical Reprints) by Sir Olaf Caroe.
5. Gazetteer of the Hazara district, 1907; (N.-W.F. province district gazetteers: vol. I.A) by Hubert Digby Watson.
6. Ibbetson, Denzil, Edward Maclagan, and H.A. Rose 1919. A Glossary of the Tribes and Castes of the Punjab and North-West Frontier Province. Volume I. Lahore: Sperintendant of Government Printing.
7. [1980] Pukhtun Economy and Society: Traditional Structure and Economic Development in a Tribal Society. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. by Dr Akbar S. Ahmed.
From Insaaf
- Well, that's a bibliography, but it isn't citations. Citations mean specific page numbers, and what you claim is being asserted. That allows someone else to verify. -- Jmabel | Talk 07:12, May 2, 2005 (UTC)
There he go again, first the page was blocked and now start making changes in Pashtun tribes list, which is in correct form now! -- Haider 11:06, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
Mashwanis are pashtuns according to a book (Pathans by Olaf Caroe, page no 472 in Urdu edition translated by Professor Dr Ashraf Adeel).
Mashwanis are pashtuns according to a book (Origin of Pashtuns and their History by Khan Roshan Khan, page no 183,184).
Mashwanis are Pashtuns according to a book, in it's addtional Pashtuns tribes tree (Tareekhe khan jahani written by niamatullah hirvi in 17th century, which was originally in Persian language, translated in urdu by Dr Mohammad Bashir Hussain, last page 808).
The Mashwanis are descended from a Syed father by a Kakar woman and allied to the Kakar Pashtuns.(book Panjab Castes by Denzal Ibbeston, page no 92)
Mashwani a Pashtun tribe, also registered themselves as Syeds. (a book, Encyclopedia of the races by E.D Magligan and H.A Rose urdu edition translated by Yasir Jawwad, page no 405).
Khiljis/Gilzais are a race of Turkish origin, their name being another form of Kilchi, the Turkish word for Swordsman.( book Panjab Castes by Denzel Ibbeston, page no 62).
The true Pathans are apperantly of Indian origin. Their language is called Pashto or Pakhto and they call themselves Pukhtana or Pushto speakers, and it is this word of which Pathan is the Indian corruption. They held in the early centuries of British era the whole of the safed koh and northern suleman systems, from the Indus to the Helmand and from the sources of the Swat river and Jalalabad to Peshin and Quetta. The Afghans and Gilzais spread into their country and adopted their language and customs. (same book , Panjab Castes by Denzel Ibbeston, page no 62).
In his own words , I have included in my account pashtuns and a few allied races, who thought not usually acknowledged as Pashtuns, have by long association become closely assimilated with them in manners, customs and character. They chiefly occupy Hazara division and are called Dilazak, Swati, Jadun Tanoli and Shilmani.(same book, Panjab Castes by Denzil Ibbeston, page no 64).
Now what some traditional historian have their views about Pashtuns . Qais Abdul Rasheed had three real sons, forth one was his step son, his name was Karlani. ( Books – Tareekhe-Khan Jahani Maghzane Afghani, Khulasatul Ansab by Hafiz Rehmat Khan and History of Pashtuns by Sardar Sher Mohammad Khan Gandapur and some more). Afridis , Bangash , Wazirs , Mahsuds , Orakzais , Khattaks and Bannuchis etc belong to Karlanis, as far as lineal definition concern, now the point is, an infant which was found was not Pashtun definitely, because Qais Abdul Rasheed had only three real sons. Those who believe in Patrilineal view, it totally proves them wrong.
We have three views about the origin of Pashtuns now, Patrilineal, Matrilineal and Cultural? Insaaf please send me your email address I just want to send you a very classical book "Pashtun in the light of their origin by Syed bahadur Zafer Kaka Khel(Tamgha e Imtiaz)", or stop belittling Pashtun Tribes kindly!
Now will insaaf tell me that how many tribes left in his distinctive list ? Or will he keep opposing me ridiculously (Cyberspace Pashtuns)without any logic? I am an Afridi Pashtun and do believe in untiry of the Great Pashtun Tribes without any discrimination ! -- Haider 16:39, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
Lovely Proverb
There are many outsiders came in at different time, migrated to Pashtunkhwa and assilimated with them in language and culture, that will never effect the origin of Pashtuns, like if some Turks came in and get mingled with Pashtuns, that dosn't mean, we would call them Turks, they will be called Pashtuns due to their language and culture. For example there are so many rivers making their way and fall in Great Abasin(Sind River) before they fall, they have their identity but once they fell in Abasin(sind river), they lose their identities, those rivers couldn't effect the identity of Abasin.
Language and Culture create nations ! What a lovely Pashto Proverb here for friends "Da kali ooza kho da karkha ma ooza" (Leave your village but don't leave your line". Thanks -- Haider 22:30, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
Controversial issue on some tribes sholud be indicated on main page
(Note: My use of CAPITALS is to make those words stand out from the "haze" of writing, and not to be taken as "Shouting")
Believe it or not I actually DO have the above references (as I have an interest in this area also) but not at hand with me right now so I cannot give you the book pages. However, the books which I have quoted above are EASILY accessible in the US or the UK through interlibrary loan. The books you have quoted (URDU ones) I don't think I can get in the US or the UK, otherwise I would have definitely read them by now.
So my references are more easy to check up on (i.e. you quoting a page number doesn't authenticate it).
Regarding Denzil Ibbetson - the fact that his book mentions Shalmanis and Jaduns as assimilated into Pashtuns, shows his lack of knowledge in this subject, since these are well established tribes (see again my above references).
IMPORTANTLY, when studying the history of the Pashtuns, try not to take just one book and say that's correct. Read several books preferably by non-pakhtuns as they will be unbiased (that's my experience - ) but read several books to get an idea of what really may have happened.
If you read all these books there is something that comes across to you. Some tribes such as the Afridis, Wazirs, Khattaks, Bangash, have no recollection of a foreign land other than the one they inhabit. I.e. Waziristan for the Wazirs and Tirah/ Khyber for the Afridis. You are the most best one to tell me about your own tribe. But this is what I have understood from those books.
So these tribes could have an "Indian" origin, in reality (as you put it).
However some, such as the Yousafzai, Jadoons, Mohmands, Mohammadzai, always say they came from "around Qandahar" in Afghanistan. So these tribes are not "Indian" but "foreign" whatever that may mean since in the subconscious is the image of a migration. So these are not indigenous to the lands they now inhabit. This is the main thing I have learnt in all my readings on the Pakhtoons. Interestingly these are also the "True" descendants of Qais, who also was "foreign". The Karlanri Pashtuns, are the Afridis, Wazirs Bangash, etc. who in folklore are not true sons of Qais, and interestingly, never claim to come from a foreign place - in all the readings I have read. You may have read those Urdu books that may say something else.
Regarding the Mashwanis, just like you are the best person to tell me about the history of the Afridis, the Mashwanis are the best to tell me about their history. Mashwanis tell me they are Syeds not Pashtuns, so who am I to argue with them?
You know the Pashto proverb, that translates as:
"Although the Pir (Saint) does not fly, his disciples would have him so." Such has happened on Wikipedia for the Mashwanis, Tanolis and Swatis.
You have your reasons I have mine. Both are valid and SINCE Wikipedia is not the USUAL type of Encyclopedia this DIFFERENCE of views should be mentioned in the main page and the interested reader then can read further in the discussion. THIS is the BEAUTY of Wikipedia.
So I URGE contributers to help me keep that message . OBVIOUSLY, the Mashwanis , Tanolis, Swatis are controversial tribes, 80% of this discussion page debates this issue, and therefore, THIS has to be portrayed in the main page.
Wikipedia is not a "Pashtun Unity or Nation website'. The fact of the matter is there are some tribes that are more controversial more than others.
In Pashtun villages, you are only a Pashtun if your father is a Pashtoon and you follow Pashtoonwali. SIMPLE. (IDEALLY, your mother should be Pashtun too). All the rest you read on the main artcle page is what some people believe and so Wikipedia includes their views (to be a COMPREHENSIVE source).
You as a Pashtun should know that. In fact this is EXACTLY what your proverb (Lovely proverb) says; You should not forget your lineage.
I hope we can end this discussion with BOTH views being supported on the main page, as this is "What is out there."
Insaaf
Reply controversial issue
Even in Swabi no one considers them Pashtun, so Haider - are you a Tanoli that you want them included? If so fine if that makes you feel happy, but in the REAL WORLD TANOLIS ARE NOT PASHTUN. Sorry for the capitals but noone seems to undrstand that fact. The MASHWANIS THEMSELVES say they are not PASHTUN but SYED - that is the REAL world. I met a Mashwani and asked him if he was a "Pathan" and he said "No" we are SAYED. (from insaaf to Haider) .
Remember what you had for me ? Now it's time to say you in Pashto "Par me ka - Mar me ka" (Convince me through Jirga/debate/discussion), or don't come harsh again !
Did I make any shout when pashtun page was blocked, (as you were shouting,, not now but some time earlier) as some of my friend requested,, but I was keep in touch to write some references here so calmly?
First a book Panjab Castes by Denzil Ibbeston was your choice to take reference from,, not mine! (lacking knowledge now, as you mentioned)
Second a book Pathans by Olaf Caroe was your choice to take reference about Mashwanis, which prooves you so wrong ! (Pathans by Olaf Caroe "english" will be in my hands soon). Will you accept the page nos then ?
Third a book encyclopedia of races by E.D Magligan and H.A Rose was your choice to proove something about Mashwanis not mine !
What would you say about great Khiljis and Karlanis? On the other hand I have showed you some information through books ! Do you have a book "Maghzane Afghani by Niamatullh Hirvi of 17th century", if yes then you can see a Tribe name Mashwani in his lineal tree? Karlani was an adopted son,, not a real one ,, do you believe in that ?
Now the major problem with you is, (same book,,same author) you are taking references which goes in favour of you only and trying to duck under it, what he wrote about some other tribes !
Do you think just the people of Qandhar or migrated from around,, are Pashtuns ? This is a real world and please try to face some reality about great Pashtuns and their land (Pashtunkhwa). Please accept the beauty of Wikipedia and stop belitilling Pashtun tribes.
First you will have to reach at some consensus then you should go and make changes whatever you like,, so please don't make any changes in Pashtun tribes list or I will request for page protection(Locked).
just send me your postal address , I promise you I will send you these books which you don't have.
Believe me I don't even believe in those books but since you believe in them. I have a collection of books regarding Pashtuns and can proove more tribes if required .
I have a friend from Mashwani Tribe also,, when I asked him about his origin , he replied without any hesitation ,, Is there any doubt ?
Why do you believe in ,, more controversial and less controversial Pashtun tribes ? I can't see even none out there !
- A lovely Pashto proverb is not mentioning lineage,, that indicate us about Culture (Tradition, rules, laws etc) -- Haider 11:12, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
Another Pashtun tribe Dilazak has been added in Tribes list!
-- Haider 15:03, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
I just want your attention here ,, what is out there in an article on the main page of Pashtuns !
The cultural definition would include all Pashto speakers and those tribes and communities who have assimilated into Pashtun tradition, who, however, may not have a patrilineal connection. A prime example of this are the Arab tribes who settled amongst the Pashtuns after the Arab invasions of Afghanistan and Sindh during the rise of Islam. These same tribes today are considered Pashtun by some due to their cultural assimilation of Pashtun culture. Additionally, some feel that this cultural definition excludes those whose connection is merely ancestral- though of this there is great debate and historical precedent. Taking this idea further, the cultural definition would exclude the Afridis and Yousafzai of Bhopal. A pashto proverb would take place here so perfectly "Che pa khoi sara sani vi - Da hagho sara yaari vi -- Haider 16:13, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
= Reply 1 =
Haider, I mentioned before that you should not go by just one book - but several. Olaf Caroe's book does have mistakes like all history books - they are a mans perspective as he sees the history fit. Hence you should always try to read more than one at least. But he does mention that they are not Pashtuns by the "true" definition (in the beginning pages on geneologies) because their father was a Syed. However, "He" likes to make them Pashtuns because they helped the British. But remember he does make the distinction.
Tell me what do the books above say about Tanolis? Is Tanoli in Nimatallahs book a Pashtun tribe? Are Tanolis Pashtuns in the Hazara Gazetteer? Are they Pashtuns in Hilary Roses. Book on the Castes of Panjab and the northwest Frontier? It is clearly a definite "No" for the Tanolis - you must agree with me on that? Can we come to that consensus?
"Syeds" are a distinct group among Pashtun villages who are treated with great respect because they belong to the family of the Prophet. These Syed families are not considered Pashtun, despite the fact that they follow Pashtunwali and speak Pashto. The non-Pashtuns on this forum aren't aware of that.
They think that being Pashtun is a bit like being "American". Everyone can be it. But infact, being Pashtun is a bit like being "English", only the "White, Christian, "indigenous"people of England are "English" the rest are "British". This is the mentality of the villages, and the majority of Pashtunkhwa belong to the Village.
Haider, being a Pashtun you must be aware that Pashtuns are accused of certain crimes that go against Pashtunwali. Most (not all) of these crimes are committed by "Pashtuns" who are "assimilated" into the Pashtuns, i.e. are not Pashtuns by lineage, and so are not as Passionate about Pashtunwali as a Pashtun belonging to a recognised tribe would be. Hence they give "Pashtuns a a bad name." This is why I am so passionate about Highlighting which tribes are controversial and which are not.
It is important for non-Pashtuns to be aware of that. For instance the "Pashtuns" of the cities like Peshawar, who are Rajputs initially or migrated also consider themselves Pashtuns. But Haider brother, these people don't have one iota of Pashtunwali in them, they destroy your hopes with their false promises. You know what I mean. We are both Tribals.
Out of Pashtunwali, I will not make any changes to the main page until I have convinced you. For starters at least remove Tanolis from the list.
Insaaf
Reply1 controversial tribes
Insaaf my dear brother, I didn't take references just from one book as you can watch it out - very politely, it was you my brother, who took references about mashwanis to proove them non Pashtuns according to Olaf Caroe - am I right?
About tanolis it is very visible in Hazara Gazetteer as author wrote that they have long association become so assimilated to the pashtuns it is difficult to seperate them. Major Wace had his views almost the same. Yes you are right I didn't find name Tanoli in Niamatullah's hirvi book but there are so many tribes missing like the great Yousafzais? And please do take some time atleast, what Hirvi wrote about some other tribes like the great Khiljis and Karlanis !
Mashwanis were on of British side that's what you said if that then what was wrong about the great Swatis with Hassanzais, chgarzais and akazais,, as they fought against them for almost forty years 1852 to 1892 in Hazara,(Still we can see some tribal areas of the Swati country like Thakot, Nandhiar, Tikri, Battagram, Agror, Allai and Deeshan). - Mashwanis were in favour so they have recieved some incentives,, you meant - Swatis were against them so they have recieved some names like,, Decietful, coward, cruel etc etc? For Swatis bravery see books "Campaigns on the North West Frontier" by Captain H.L. Nevill and "From the Black Mountain to Waziristan" by Colonel H.C Wylly .
Insaaf, you just believe in Lineal view about Pashtuns - why are you persisting people like me to believe in the same view as we can see, there are lot of controversies as compare to Cultural view.
Believe me I really working on a book regarding Pashtuns but it will take time because it's not an easy job because want to write a creative one, a cousin of mine is helping me in this task.
Dosn't matter if Pashtun is living in Urban or rural areas.
See what a Pashtun Mir Afzal Khan Jadoon wrote about some Pashtuns !
Various scholars have presented a new theory on scientific lines about the origin of Afghans. Fraser tytler pleaded for the mixed race theory according to which the Pashtuns are Aryans by origin, but have intermingled with elements of Turkish, Mongol and other strains. He is supported by Charles miller, saying that they had been on the scene for centuries, by a bubbling ethnic stew of Persian, Greek, Scythian, Turk and Mongol to mention only a few of the invading and migrating peoples who contributed their racial ingredients to the Afghan stock. Abdul Ghani khan, a Pashto poet and philosopher (late) also share the same opinion. He considers the Afghans as a mixture of many races that came through their areas from central Asia. Suddum (mardan) , Khyber (Peshawar) and elum (swat) are the places, which resemble in names those of bani Israel. Mir afzal khan Jadoon is of the opinion that the features as well as the habits of the Afghans resemble those of the Jews. Apart from the clans of Karlanr and mati, tannulis, swatis and Jadoons are similar to the Jews in their dwelling and clothes.
Insaaf, it's not an easy dispute to be solved !
In last I will delete Tanolis only, kindly don't even think about other Pashtun Tribes,, it's not because I am convinced, but If you are happy with that and will gives you some satisfaction - please don't forget as they say "Snake in the Grass" (They don't like unity of Pashtuns). I have a humble request to read a book "Pashtun in the mirror of their race" by Syed Bahadur Shah Zafer Kaka Khel .
Brother, If I some day convinced you, promise me you will add Tanolis as Pashtuns. Take care ! -- Haider 18:11, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
Shitak has been added to Pashtuns tribes list. -- Haider 18:23, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
Reply2
Dear brother Haider Khana,
Thank you for doing that. For your information, in the 1907 book of the Hazara Gazetteer they don't say this about the Tanolis.
But can I ask you one thing if you could explain this to me? If Tanolis are Pashtuns because of their long association, then shouldn't Bannuchies and Peshawaries also be Pashtuns? These are people who have lived there for centuaries, and have "assimilated" into Pashtun culture. So they are Pashtuns? Correct by your line of thought.
A Peshawari friend of mine used to always tell me that he too was a Pashtun. I once asked him his "tribe" and he said Rajput. So Rajput should be Pashtun? Another firend of mine who really was a Pashtun in habit and behaviour, I once asked him his tribe he replied "Queraish, Pukhtun "(He was from Malakand Agency). So that would mean Queraish and Rajputs are also Pashtuns? It would also include the Gujars of PakhtunKhwa, because these are also assimilated into Pashtun culture. Because they all follow Pakhtunwali.
You must also include Dhunds as Pashtun, because these are also mountain tribes who are living in Pakhtunkwa and have assimilated into Pashtun cultures and the list goes on.
So there has to be a proper way to catgeroize who is Pashtun and who is not. I have mainly only read the books written by English writers, plus the ones written by Dr Akbar Ahmed (I recommend them (by Dr Akbar Ahmed) to you - they are a must to anyone wanting to write about Pashtuns - read: Millenium and Charsima among Swat Pathans, Resistance and Control in muslim society (all about Waziristan) and Pukhtun Society and Economy - all about Mohmand Pukhtuns, then he has written a book on Islam and the muslim world, (can't remember its name ) - but it talks about muslim history, and had a number of chapters devoted to Pukhtuns as examples of a certain type of muslim living in the middle east, Afghanistan and Pakistan).
In those books I have always come to understand that Tanolis are not Pashtun, The Mashwanis are by father, not Pashtun, and Swatis are the people who inhabited Swat, before the Yousafzai and were pushed into Hazara by them and are a mixture of non-Pashtun tribes. These books also have said that If you look at the Sub-tribes/sections in the Swatis you come across names like "Hindwal" and Pallal", names which indicate a non-Pashtun origin, (since Pashtun sub-sections end in "Zai" and "Khel".
In all these books there are a set number of tribes that are unequivocally "recognised" as Pashtun, and is the list we have on wikipedia MINUS the "three" above tribes which are always controversial. So the GOOD thing is that we tell the interested reader that there are three types of classification of Pashtun. So that covers everything in a sense.
Anyway, take care for now - pa makha de kha!
Insaaf.
Reply
Insaaf Pashtun, First of all let me correct you about the great Swatis that "Pallal and Hindwall" are not the subsection of Swatis ,, they belong to Tanolis! Swatis have khels like Jhangiri, Khankhel, Sherkan khel, Shan khel, Khawaja Kheli, Khazani khel, Deeshan khel or Deshai, Surkhel and some like Malkal, inzali etc. Add Khel at the end, would become inzali khel.
I don't believe in,, as about the migration of Yousafzais from Qandhar in that massive way,, they were already present there (Swat etc) so as Swatis. Let me tell you one important thing about Swatis that the last Swati ruler Owais Jahangiri was died in his own territory at Manglore,, not in Hazara ! (Remember Jahangiris dynasty was from Jalalabad to Jehlum including Hazara's lands and mountains). An interesting point,, who are Jahangiris and Khazanis of Iran? (Two related tribes of Iran, as Ishaaq Jahangiri of Iran holding a ministry there) !
In Hazara Gazetteer about Tanolis,, you can see,, what I wrote about them on page no 64 !
The Mashwanis mother was from Pashtun Tribe then please tell me about Khiljis as their mother only were from Pashtun Tribe,(that's your line of thought). There are lot of Khels in Mashwani Tribe as Yousaf Khel is one of them. I forgot to ask you about Mashwanis bravery,, where were your views when they were fighing against Sikhs (Hari singh Nalwa) in 18th century?
What I do believe in that if a tribe's mother language is Pashto then they would be defenitely consider Pashtuns,, and ofcourse mother language is not easy to adopt in over nights. Do I add Quraish, Rajputs, Dhunds etc in Pashtuns tribe list, if not then there is no need to discuss on them.
Bannuchis definitely are Pashtuns ,, what view would go against them? You will feel better if you read some of the Pashtun authors also! First you will have to change your mind like by thinking "less controversial tribes and much controversial tribes",, more controversial tribes of Pashtuns would take place in list and less dosn't deserve that, every Pashtuns tribe is controversial,, whether less or more but are!! (what a funny way to think about Pashtuns).
What I know through my personnel observations that Bhopali Pathans are not Pashtuns even if they had some links with Pashtuns severel hundred years ago, and Pashtuns who do speak Pashto around the world would be considered Pashtun,(They have leave their country but didn't leave their Narakha or Karkha"Mark").
I can prove so many subsections in some of the famous Pashtun tribes,, they didn't use khel or zai at the end,, for example in Surban sections like Tokhi, Tangi, Sepal, Khadar, Sulmehak etc,, what does these names sounds like? There are numerous in defferent major tribes,, I can show you, if you want me to do .
Insaaf brother, I don't know,, what three views about Pashtuns you have,, definetly not Matrilineal and Cultural?
What you beleive in,, Pashtuns are from Bani-Israel? Pashtuns a Greek race? Pashtuns a Sythic race? Pashtuns a Heterogenous race? Pashtuns a branch of Irani race? Pashtuns very old race? Pashtuns were Aryans?
Cha lala Pathan krama - Cha lala Afghan krama
Za saada Pashtun yama - Za saada insaan yama.
Thanks -- Haider 10:33, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
Reply3
My dear brother Haider Khana!
I still cannot understand why Tanolis are Pashtun because of their long assimilation with Pashtuns, whist the same long assimilation with Pashtuns, keeps the Rajput a Rajput, a gujar a Gujar, a Dhund a Dhund, a Quarish a Quairash and so on. So there is a flaw in your logic.
Anyway, you've raised some interesting points, but let me add something. There were many tribes of Hazara , both Pashtun and non-Pashtun that fought the Sikhs bravely, many times. I don't deny that. In fact Olaf Caroe and other writers as you pointed out regarding the Swatis, that those Pashtun tribes that helped the British were often described as "brave" whilst those that fought against them or did not help them, were regarded as cowards, deceitful, and yet these same "Coward" tribes campaigned against the British many times! So it's a bit of a contradiction by the british historians and shows their bias.
There were Pashtun tribes who did not help Major Abbott against the Sikhs but that is because of two reasons, that I found after reading Major Abbotts Peshawar diaries: (1) those tribes didn't like the British and actually were not under their control (2) Dost Mohammad had made a Peace Treaty with the Sikhs and so the Pashtuns had no big cause to fight the Sikhs at that point. Also, Major Abbotts army (before he met the Masshwanis) consisted of "Peshawaris" and only God knows who these really were.
Anyway just a point to bear in mind when you read Olaf Caroes book.
Language is something that can be acquired and lost. If I can speak English better than any other language that doesn't mean that I am English, although I have blue eyes and ginger hair and fair, freckly skin. Although first they will be deceived but when you start to get to know me then you would realise that I am not English at all. So my behaviour will show people who I am.
Likewise with Pashto. Although, initially you are happy to meet other "Pashtuns" after awhile you start to realize "this Pashtun " is "good" and this is "bad". Its their behaviour and whether they guide their life by Pashtunwali that acts as a yard stick for you to measure them by and classify them as "good" or "bad".
So for me language is not important, but Behaviour.
So this is why I give no attention to language, but behaviour and tribe/lineage.
How the Pashtuns arose is lost in the abyss of time, but the important point as Ghani Khan said in his book the Pathans, that they are there, and consist of certain tribes that have been chronicled in Pashtun literature as descendants of one family tree. The tribes who have come to belong to that family tree are "Pashtun' and the tribes who don't are 'non-Pashtun'. The Ghilzai, however they arose are part of this tree from the time the family tree was constructed. The lineage now of the Ghilzai is Patrilineal. I guess the same is true of the Mashwanis you have met who want to be Pashtuns as opposed to the Mashwanis I have met who want to be Syed instead.
The Swatis as I was told earlier by someone (earlier on this discussion board) are a mixture of different Pashtun tribes, and so my answer to that person was that they should therefore ideally be classified under the names of those Pashtun tribes.
Anyway, these discussions can go on forever and a day, and although we will be wiser, but probably nowhere nearer to settling this.
As friends we agree to disagree!
Pa Makha de Kha! Insaaf.
Reply(3)
Insaaf my great pashtun brother, Infact that’s not exactly just what I am telling about Tanolis, but according to some books as I took referenceses from – As I told you earlier aslo, I didn’t see Great Yousafzais in Niamatullah Hirvi’s book , and some other famous tribes also – As far as Gujars, Karal, Dhuds etc concern ,, believe me they do not speak Pashto as their mother tongue. But Tanolis esp in Mardan and on the Western outskirts of Hazara ,, they are strict on Pashunwali and speaking Pashto as their mother tongue.
Brother, I have already prove Mashwanis as in your line of thought (Genealogical Tree), so as Great Swatis in Bhittani and Great Khijis as included in the same race and the adopted son of Qais Abul Rasheed! But I don’t believe in them - you know,, what I do believe in !
I really admire your credentials and ability, my request is to you , be a little bit positive about Pashtuns , there are large numbers of tribes(your line of thought - less or more controversials) and as we know that there are numorous tribes assimilated in Pashtuns, but definitely a question will take place in mind , who is Pashtun then?
You are right , if you are good in English that doesn’t mean , you will become an English man but will it be worth full to lose your own mother tongue(Pashto) in reply ! English is necessary but not compulsory – That is a great loss for the entire Pashtun nation – You know one thing , There are three major parts in creation of a nation ,, Language, Culture and Land ! It will not take just one generation to lose Language but how much time it will take to be acquired again (No idea)?
We will have to sphere some time for some new research regarding Pashtuns- A Pashtun will tell you itself , he is a Pashtun ,, doesn’t need any certificate.
Ofcouse as friends together we would find some great information about other Pashtuns tribes also like "Dawars" – What they have their views about them like W.G Spain and others – Those all are unbearable for me atleast if I am a Pashtun.
Anyway take great care ! Khudai pa amaan . -- Haider 10:46, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
Cut from article
Recently added under "culture", in the middle of some other stuff. Not very coherent in its own right, and certainly ill-placed. I've cut it from the article and brought it here in case anyone can actually do something with it. -- Jmabel | Talk 01:06, May 15, 2005 (UTC)
- During Past and in Present( Taliban regim) Practicaly Pashtunwaly is a unity against non Pashtuns, our histry is full of exampales, Abduraman khan kiling Hazarah and other non pashtun tirbes occuping thier land discriminating them. followed by Nader khan kiling non pashtuns ocuping thier lads ileagaly giving to Pashtuns in north of Khorasa ( now Afghanistan)
- and tha crime was done by Taliban All Was under Pashtunwaly. as we saw in the past , Pashtunwaly is Pashtun back up Pashtun regardless of he doing good or crim, past history of pashtunwaly shows that Pashtunwaly is cod of Racism.
Pashtuns from Parthia
The Persian Empire was an empire of satraps. There were two persian empires, the Achaemenid Dynasty who were from the clan called PasarGADae (sons of Gad). This was intermarriage between the Israelite tribe of Gad and a Median ruling clan. The second Persian Empire was the Sassanian Empire. These were the Madaii of old, and Iranians today. Between the two Persian empires there was the Parthian Empire. The Pashtuns were descendants of the first Persian Empire, who were forced to Migrate East by the Sassanians. They intermarried with Cushites who are predominate in southern India.
The Parthian Empire was controlled by the tribe of Ephraim (who were exiled to the Caspian Sea area by the Assyrians) and their ruling dynasty was the Arsacids, descendants from the tribe of Judah. The Dahan or Thahanites, the Bachtrians, and the Eranites, were the main tribes controlling the Empire. In 224 AD when they fell and migrated west, they became known as the Getae and Anglii. History knows them as the Visigoths.
The Achaemenid Persians wound up in Afghanistan and Pakistan as Pashtuns. The Parthian ruling dynasty was involved in the Anglo, Saxon and Jutes, invasion of Britain. The Sassanian Persians remained today in Iran.
response
Uh, no. Getae and Anglii were West Germanic tribes (Geats and Angles); Visigoths were East Germanic. Not only were they not the same as one another, they were not Iranians. Their languages are incredibly different from Parthian. There is no consensus linking the Medes with any particular modern or historical people, although Sasanid sources like the Karnamag-i Ardakhshir suggest to some that the Kurds are descendants of the Medes.
There was a period of centuries intervening between the end of the Achaemenid and the beginning of the Sasanian empires; it is ridiculous to suggest that the Sasanians had anything to do with the fall of the Achaemenids. The Achaemenids were defeated ca. 326 BCE by Alexander the Great.
Furthermore, "Pasargadae" is not the name of a tribe. It is the name of a place and it has nothing whatsoever to do with Biblical history. In fact, there is no credible evidence linking Biblical figures with figures from Iranian history.--KASchmidt 01:49, 21 May 2005 (UTC)
Oh, except for explicitly named Iranian figures, of course. The Book of Esther doesn't exactly gibe with historical fact, but it's kind of close, as long as we're on the subject. But Israelites? No. --KASchmidt 17:58, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
Plus, Parthian has to connection to "Pathan", if that's what you were trying to do. The Iranian rendering of the parthians was parnae or parni, while parthian is the western rendering. And I have no idea where you got the incredible fact that Ephraim tribe controlled the parthians. Parthians were known as a wandering semi-nomadic people wandering east of the caspian and what is today turkmenistan. The Cushites have absolutely nothing to do with southern india either linguistically, genetically or geographically. Cushitic langauge family is spoken in Somalia, eritrea, southern Sudan etc.. The Achaeminid Persians too have no connection to pashtuns or pashtun ethnogenesis. Bactrains were a people living in Bactria, not Parthia. Bactria is in uzbekistan and north afghanistan. I would think that Bactrians have contributed significantly to the pashtuns both genetically and linguistically. BTW KASchmidt. Visigoths were also West Germanic. VISI means west in gothic as opposed to ostrogoths or east germanic.
omerlives138.23.82.86
New Additions
Since Awans, Tanolis, Malik, who are being included as Pashtuns simply because they live in that area then I have included Gujarzai, Rajputs and the like who have lived there since time immorial - why should THEY be denied that right?
INSAAF!!
Reply New Addtion
Insafa, Sstarey Mashey, Khushala Ussa! I don't know who added above mentioned tribes as Pashtuns like Awans and Maliks, I didn't make any changes since our last consensus,, you are free to remove those tribes,, but why did you add some groups ,, after all you are a sensible man ! I am taking those tribes off from the tribes list! Take care and be happy always. -- Haider 19:27, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)