History of the South Asian subcontinent: baluchistan?

Print Page | Close Window

baluchistan?

Printed From: History Community ~ All Empires
Category: Regional History or Period History
Forum Name: History of the South Asian subcontinent
Forum Discription: The Indian sub-continent and South Central Asia
URL: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=19198
Printed Date: 23-May-2024 at 12:46
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com

Topic: baluchistan?

Posted By: mughal
Subject: baluchistan?
Date Posted: 15-Apr-2007 at 13:38

i have a question about baluchistan, was it part of british india, because how did it become part of pakistan then? because through out its history baluchistan was never part of india, it remained under the persian empire.

Replies:

Posted By: Omar al Hashim
Date Posted: 15-Apr-2007 at 21:50

Most of Baluchistan was not under persian empires, it was semi or totally independent. Eastern Baluchistan was affiliated by not directly ruled by the English in much the same way FATA was. It had its own amirs (including my great-great grandfather) and cheifs that had nominal allegiance to the Englishs.

-------------

Posted By: pathan
Date Posted: 21-Apr-2007 at 22:48

it was also never part of india, yes it was mostly independent, but most baluchis themselves realte themselves more closer to persians.

Posted By: TeldeInduz
Date Posted: 21-Apr-2007 at 23:25

Originally posted by pathan

it was also never part of india, yes it was mostly independent, but most baluchis themselves realte themselves more closer to persians.

They believe themselves to be more Arab actually. Syrian..But I think it's just their imagination.

-------------
Quoo-ray sha quadou sarre.................

Posted By: Omar al Hashim
Date Posted: 22-Apr-2007 at 02:47

Not Syrian, Omani definitely. Baluchistan and Oman are very close really.

-------------

Posted By: Azat
Date Posted: 22-Apr-2007 at 03:07

Hi Omar

Nice to know you are from baluchistan .Now as per Britishers Jats are the original inhabitants of Belochistan.Same story is told by narration of Arab chronicles who wrote that these areas and territories between makran and kimran are controlled by Jats .Again as we read chachnama people of sivistan were Buddhist Jats and same was verified by christian mercenaries who visited these areas in eighteenth century even hear some love story like heer ranja involving boy and girl from Bloch and Jat tribes.

Now question I wanted to ask whether the Jat community present earlier have totally merged in belochi mainstream identity.

Again who are Makrani having significant Bruhie component and these makranis now having moved to kutch areas call them jats ,Are bruhies of Belochistani similar to jats of other areas ,again we hear that zahri ,bejanjo and other tribes are called jagdali is it similar to jats ?What is the actual position and who were original inhabitants of Baluchistan?

Posted By: TeldeInduz
Date Posted: 22-Apr-2007 at 03:18

Originally posted by Omar al Hashim

Not Syrian, Omani definitely. Baluchistan and Oman are very close really.

Oman is close, but Balochis generally don't believe they're from there. More they think Haleb, Allepe in Syria. I don't really think it's either personally.

-------------
Quoo-ray sha quadou sarre.................

Posted By: Leonidas
Date Posted: 22-Apr-2007 at 04:36

Northern Iran, South Caspian sea is what ive read and they don't see themselves as Arabs. The Syrian story may only represent either a part of it or are part of them and it doesn't imply an arab background

Posted By: TeldeInduz
Date Posted: 22-Apr-2007 at 04:56

Originally posted by Leonidas

Northern Iran, South Caspian sea is what ive read and they don't see themselves as Arabs. The Syrian story may only represent either a part of it or are part of them and it doesn't imply an arab background

The "legend" they believe is that they're from Allepe in Syria, of Kurdish stock, that later moved to some place in Northern Iran and then to their present locations.

The most commonly accepted account of the origin of the Baloch is that they migrated eastward with their kindred Kurd tribes in waves from around Aleppo (Haleb) in Syria over some 1500 years starting from before the Christian era. Whereas the Kurd majority settled in Iraq, Turkey and Iran, the Baloch moved to the southern reaches of the Caspian Sea, later migrating into Iranian and Pakistani Balochistan from the sixth to fourteenth centuries2.

http://www.southasianmedia.net/magazine/journal/8_balochistan.htm - http://www.southasianmedia.net/magazine/journal/8_balochistan.htm

But it's most likely not true, just another theory like the others that seem to exist. It's more or less proven they're not Semitic, but they do/did consider themselves as Semitic people. They're not Arab anyway, Pakistani is the only sure thing the Eastern Baloch are.

-------------
Quoo-ray sha quadou sarre.................

Posted By: Omar al Hashim
Date Posted: 22-Apr-2007 at 21:29

I had never heard of that before. The Baluch do not consider themselves Arab, but they do consider that they have strong ties with the Omani Arabs - who are just a short distance away across a well traveled sea.

-------------