QuoteReplyTopic: pashtun tribes Posted: 01-Nov-2006 at 12:03
Originally posted by kush_boy2003
culturally no european will see any difference between indian and a pakisthani, not even cultural.of course there are difference all over subcontonet. there is just a lot of diversity.
Culturally, some Europeans due to ignorance will not THINK any difference between Indian and Pakistani. The reason is that a lot of the migration to the West was from (North)western Indians and (Eastern) Punjabi Pakistanis, who arent so different in appearance (though culturally are very different). A superficial knowledge of someone is just the appearance.
If you look at Pakistan though, in the North West, the North, the South West, you have people that look completely different to all types of Indians generally. In the East of Pakistan you have people who look a bit like extreme Northwest Indians. Again Northwest Indians are the fringes of India and not the majority or standard Indian look, which is clearly Dravidian.
culturally no european will see any difference between indian and a pakisthani, not even cultural.of course there are difference all over subcontonet. there is just a lot of diversity.
Culturally, some Europeans due to ignorance will not THINK any difference between Indian and Pakistani. The reason is that a lot of the migration to the West was from (North)western Indians and (Eastern) Punjabi Pakistanis, who arent so different in appearance (though culturally are very different). A superficial knowledge of someone is just the appearance.
If you look at Pakistan though, in the North West, the North, the South West, you have people that look completely different to all types of Indians generally. In the East of Pakistan you have people who look a bit like extreme Northwest Indians. Again Northwest Indians are the fringes of India and not the majority or standard Indian look, which is clearly Dravidian.
TeldeInduz whether someone is from J & K or Tamil Nadu or Gujarat or Bengal, they are Indian! We can't be pigion holed.
Listen to yourself with your "fringes of India and not having the standard Indian look, which is clearly Dravidian" So i see, conveniently, Punjab and Kashmir are a fringe but not Kerela and Tamil Nadu which are right on the other end. And how about Assam or dont they count?
People in these posts keep going on about how tall fair atheletic Indians don't really represent India, how ancient Indian culture doesn't really represent India, its getting very tiresome, what is it sour grapes?
You talk about how punjabis aren't really reprentative of Indians and then go on and on about Pashtuns. How representaive are they of Pakistan - 95%???
culturally no european will see any difference between indian and a pakisthani, not even cultural.of course there are difference all over subcontonet. there is just a lot of diversity.
Culturally, some Europeans due to ignorance will not THINK any difference between Indian and Pakistani. The reason is that a lot of the migration to the West was from (North)western Indians and (Eastern) Punjabi Pakistanis, who arent so different in appearance (though culturally are very different). A superficial knowledge of someone is just the appearance.
If you look at Pakistan though, in the North West, the North, the South West, you have people that look completely different to all types of Indians generally. In the East of Pakistan you have people who look a bit like extreme Northwest Indians. Again Northwest Indians are the fringes of India and not the majority or standard Indian look, which is clearly Dravidian.
TeldeInduz whether someone is from J & K or Tamil Nadu or Gujarat or Bengal, they are Indian! We can't be pigion holed.
Listen to yourself with your "fringes of India and not having the standard Indian look, which is clearly Dravidian" So i see, conveniently, Punjab and Kashmir are a fringe but not Kerela and Tamil Nadu which are right on the other end. And how about Assam or dont they count?
People in these posts keep going on about how tall fair atheletic Indians don't really represent India, how ancient Indian culture doesn't really represent India, its getting very tiresome, what is it sour grapes?
You talk about how punjabis aren't really reprentative of Indians and then go on and on about Pashtuns. How representaive are they of Pakistan - 95%???
India is not Punjab. Punjab is on the fringe of India..hence mixing with Pakistani Punjabis. Tamil Nadu is not representative of the whole of India, BUT it is more representative of India than Punjab (more population).
If you look at the average person in central India, they look completely different to the average person in central Pakistan.
And I never said Pashtuns were representative of Pakistan. They form a part of the Pakistani people, Punjabis another part, Sindhis, Balochis, and Muhajirs as well as other ethnic groups.
My point that Pakistanis look different to Indians on average is very true. On average is the keyword here. if you go to then entire west side of Pakistan you will hardly find anyone who looks like anyone in India. if you go to the East side of Pakistan, you will find some people that look like the people on the Indian border with Pakistan. That's about it. You will not find Bengali looking people in Pakistan or people who look like central, south, southwest Indians (which is what most of India is), except those that have migrated there.
Pakistan is a mixture of central asia and the subcontinent. If you think NWFP wants t join with Afghanistan you're mistaken. Pakistan has turned into a safe haven not only for subcontinental people but also for Afghanistani people.
This proves how much of Pashton you really are... specially when you call Pashtonistan/Pakhtonkhaw NWFP! You just got PWND!
I don't know how could you... who don't look Afghan, who do not speak and write Afghani(Pashto) and who have no idea about Pashtonwali or pashton culture or history could really know what the people of Pashtonistan really want?
Indeed if you pakis are that sure about royalty of Afghan then lets have a referendum... lets see what they want... why British only included India or Pakistan option in 1947 which forced majoirty of pashtons to boycott the referendum... what in this wild world the Pashtons have in common with Pakistani or India? I could understand the reason for Hindu Panjabis and Muslims panjabis dont want to live together why the f Afghans of Pashtonistan were prevented to rejoin Afghanistan? Think about it you are human, and you even claim to be Afghanhow in this wild world you can shut your eyes to the greatest injustice in history of man kind when the British divide the Muslims Afghans from their ethnic kinsmen into a den of terror we all recognize as Pakistan. Go on, allow us Afghans to measure your true brotherhood to fellow Muslims.....denounce Pakistan for having dutifully served Britain's interests in south Asia.
Afghanistan postion has been clear from start.... "We can not recognise the N.W.F.P as part of Pakistan so long as people of North West Frontier Province have not been given an opportunity, free from any kind of influence, I repeat, from any kind of influence, to determine for themselves whether they wish to be independent, rejoin Afghanistan or become part of Pakistan." Hosyn Aziz, Afghanistan's Representative at UNO Gen. Assembly (Sept. 1947)
Considering Khushal Khan Khattak lived during Moghul times, and the word Pathan was coined during British times after the Moghuls, I hardly think you're going to find Pathans like him calling himself a word that had not been invented. Rest assured my out of touch friend, many Pathans call themselves Pathan when speaking English..it's not a big issue, just one way the nationalists like to "big themselves" as being more Pashtun than the majority who couldnt care less.
If you'd paid attention to what I've said, you'd know I said when speaking Pashto, Pathans say Pakhtun, when speaking English or other languages Pathans say Pathan, because that is the common language.
You need to read more books other then what they teach you in Pakistani Madrassa. The word Pathan was NOT coined during British it was a demagoguery word used by Indians way before British PATHAN basically means girl kidnapper thus it really doesnt matter what British usedhow could any Afghan in right state of mind would use a foreigner denoted offensive word to describe him/her self? Lets say tomorrow the British would call Afghan/pashtons thief or barbarians would you also use these terms to describe yourself? (assuming you are Afghan/pashton not some half breeds whom could not even speak Pashto) It is behind my head to cope with rational behind the usage of word Pathan, some clowns like you want to use.
Pakistan is a mixture of central asia and the subcontinent. If you think NWFP wants t join with Afghanistan you're mistaken. Pakistan has turned into a safe haven not only for subcontinental people but also for Afghanistani people.
This proves how much of Pashton you really are... specially when you call Pashtonistan/Pakhtonkhaw NWFP! You just got PWND! I don't know how could you... who don't look Afghan, who do not speak and write Afghani(Pashto) and who have no idea about Pashtonwali or pashton culture or history could really know what the people of Pashtonistan really want?
It's really very simple. The people of NWFP do not want to join with Afghanistan. If parts of Afghanistan want to join with Pakistan, that would suit them though. I cannot say that the people of NWFP want to do this or that since no referendum has been carried out, but I know that they would much rather be a part of Pakistan than Afghanistan. In fact 80% of the Afghan refugees into Pakistan want to settle into the area. The scale of mass immigration (which you wont hear about on your Delhi news service) is such that Pakistan is having to issue ID cards to all these Afghans to keep track of them.
I have no idea why you're so hung up about names like "Pakhtunkhwa" when this seems like a minor detail
Indeed if you pakis are that sure about royalty of Afghan then lets have a referendum... lets see what they want... why British only included India or Pakistan option in 1947 which forced majoirty of pashtons to boycott the referendum...
A referendum right now would almost certainly show 99% of Pashtuns from NWFP wanting to join Pakistan. The reason is simple. Anybody in their right mind would want to join Pakistan over Afghanistan right now for peace, security and prosperity. You're simply out of touch with ground realities. Why do you think millions of Afghans are still flooding into Pakistan even now, and that almost all of them (80%) want to settle in Pakistan and not Afghanistan? In fact, the problem is so large scale, that the government has issued id cards to all Afghan refugees to keep their numbers in check.
what in this wild world the Pashtons have in common with Pakistani or India? I could understand the reason for Hindu Panjabis and Muslims panjabis dont want to live together why the f Afghans of Pashtonistan were prevented to rejoin Afghanistan? Think about it you are human, and you even claim to be Afghanhow in this wild world you can shut your eyes to the greatest injustice in history of man kind when the British divide the Muslims Afghans from their ethnic kinsmen into a den of terror we all recognize as Pakistan. Go on, allow us Afghans to measure your true brotherhood to fellow Muslims.....denounce Pakistan for having dutifully served Britain's interests in south Asia.
Afghanistan postion has been clear from start.... "We can not recognise the N.W.F.Pas part of Pakistan so long as people of North West Frontier Province have not been given an opportunity, free from any kind of influence, I repeat, from any kind of influence, to determine for themselves whether they wish to be independent, rejoin Afghanistan or become part of Pakistan." Hosyn Aziz, Afghanistan's Representative at UNO Gen. Assembly (Sept. 1947)
What kind of influence were the Afghans who voted in the referendum under?
Considering Khushal Khan Khattak lived during Moghul times, and the word Pathan was coined during British times after the Moghuls, I hardly think you're going to find Pathans like him calling himself a word that had not been invented. Rest assured my out of touch friend, many Pathans call themselves Pathan when speaking English..it's not a big issue, just one way the nationalists like to "big themselves" as being more Pashtun than the majority who couldnt care less.
If you'd paid attention to what I've said, you'd know I said when speaking Pashto, Pathans say Pakhtun, when speaking English or other languages Pathans say Pathan, because that is the common language.
You need to read more books other then what they teach you in Pakistani Madrassa. The word Pathan was NOT coined during British it was a demagoguery word used by Indians way before British PATHAN basically means girl kidnapper thus it really doesnt matter what British usedhow could any Afghan in right state of mind would use a foreigner denoted offensive word to describe him/her self? Lets say tomorrow the British would call Afghan/pashtons thief or barbarians would you also use these terms to describe yourself? (assuming you are Afghan/pashton not some half breeds whom could not even speak Pashto) It is behind my head to cope with rational behind the usage of word Pathan, some clowns like you want to use.
The meaning of the word Pathan isnt horseman or kidnapper. You seriously need to get some more education on the subject. It's derived from the British that is true, but it's probably just a sanskritized version of some word or other. If it were this bad, many Pathans or Pashtuns would not use this word, but they do.
Which is the proper homeland of the pathans. Afghanistan or pak ?
As for as i know afghanistan is the proper homeland of pathans .Most of the pashtun tribes in pakistan have migrated from region of the present day afghanistan to adjacent indian areas constituiting nowadays N.W.F.P province of pakistan commonly called pakhtunistan.
There were two types of migration occured few centuries ago
1-Migration to present day pakistan
2-Migartion to india
Migration to Present day pakistan
Pathan tribes used to migrate as a whole tribe from one place to other. One of the first tribe who migrated to northern portion of N.W.F.P province of pakistan ( at that time it was a region of hindustan) was Dilazak tribe who get assimilated with local people unable to maintain their race and culture. Two centuries later yousafzai a large and powerful pathan tribe arrived from a region near kabul to here to find already an organized people claiming themselves afghans. Yousafzais refused to accept them afghans (because of their darker looks and semi pathan culture) and started a war against them to occupy their regions and drive them from that valley( later called as yousafzai valley) .This fights continued for decades eventually result in total destruction of dilazaks ,those survived fled to india.(today dilazak is an almost extinct tribe of pashtun).
Yousafzais never assimilated into locals and remain pashtun.Other tribes like khalils,mohammends,mohammedzai,karlanris etc also migrated from afghansitan and settled near yousafzais regions to transform the region totally into afghan dominted area.
Similarly southern portion of N.W.F.P was get settled by tribes migrated from ghilzai afghan area including lodhi and lohani tribes. Most of these tribes were defeated by powerful tribes in afghanistan result in their search of new ares for settlement. these large scale migrations created a homogenious region of afghans from chitral to D.I khan district.
Pathans of these region extend only the region of afghanistan to indus river. they were succesful in preserving their identity because the region before their arrival lack any significiant population.Few centuries later this region became centre of pashtun power and also became secondary source of pathan migations.
But it should be rememberd that pashtun region of balochistan province and some tribal agencies are part of orignal land of pashtuns.
Migration to india
Not all the tribes shifted to adjacent areas of afghanistan but some also migrated to distant india.The first true pathan tribe to move into india was lodhi tribe. Lodhis were successful in establishing rule in india. they needed their menpower of their countrmen which would strengthened their rule in india. So sultan bhalol lodhi invited pathan families in afghanistan to try their fortune in india.Only few and weak tribe of pashtuns accepted invitation and migrated to alien lands of india. The migration of individual pathans continued untill the end of lodhi dyanasty by moghals. Lodhi empire was basically a governament based on tribal system. Tribal leaders were very powerful and army was organized on tribal basis. Every tribe was given certain reion to rule and manage.
They were not united and usually one tribe used to fight with other.When moghals arrived they destroy their organistan and made them weak.
The final blow was given to the pathan power in india by suris who were themselves pathans. Sher shah suri snatched power moghal hamayun and once again established pathan dyansty in india but with different mood. he was fearful from pathan tribal leaders and respective tribal unity so he dispersed concentreted pathan colonies and sent individual pathan families into different parts of country including bengal. He forcibly settle pathans (belonginf different tribes of pashtuns) in Bengal and gave them land. This was a cruel act and few centuries later pathans in bengal lost their identity. when moghals defeated suris and established rule ,their power was never challenged by afghans because of their dispersed conditions carried out by sher shah suri.
the second and last pathan migration into india was in 18th century.these were bangashes and yousfzais occupying farrukabad and rohilkhand respectively.
To the time of partition of india in 1947 many princely states were ruled by pathans.
Rampur ruled by rohilla pathans
Palanpur ruled by lohani afghans
Bhopal ruled by aurakzai pathans
jonagadh ruled by babar pathans
tonk ruled by yousafzi or rohilla pathans
malerkotla ruled by sherani afghans
Complete BS.
Refer to accounts of Herodotus, he mentions a tribe called Paktuek, and their homeland, Pakya, stretching from Abaseen river all the way to the South of Kabul, you think the Paktueks of Herodotus were a different people? Nonsesne, Pashtuns always inhabited this land, it's a proven fact.
Regarding the Lodhi tribe, from what i know, they are a sub-branch of the Ghori Tribe of the Afgans, from Central Afghanistan, they decend from the rulers of the Ghorid Kingdom, and are related to the Afghan Tribe of Suri, from which Sher Shah Suri hailed.
My Tribe wasn't on the list, ajeba da. By the way, i belong to the Dawlatzai Tribe, sub-tribe of the Ghiljais, and the main Pashtun Tribe of North Afganistan.
:: Ghilzai/Ghaljai
The biggest of all Pashtun/Afghan Tribes living today, they number at around 16 million in Greater Afganistan [Amu to Abaseen].
Mirwasi Khan Hotaki, and Shah Mahmud Hotak - The Conquerer of Persia were Ghaljais.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Share Topic
Printable Version
Google
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Windows Live
Yahoo Bookmarks
reddit
Facebook
MySpace
Newsvine
Furl
Topic Search 
Topic Options
Quote 
Topic: pashtun tribes
By the way, i belong to the Dawlatzai Tribe, sub-tribe of the Ghiljais, and the main Pashtun Tribe of North Afganistan.
