Non-Pashtun Pashtuns and Pashtuns non-Pashtuns

[Smarty]

This is a conspiracy of non Pashtuns and enemies of Pashtuns to belittle tribes like Turis, Wardak, Jajis etc that they are not original Pashtuns. They are Pashtuns like any other Pashtun. Turis are especially targeted because they are Shias.

If you go by this argument they come from Iran etc, then the whole Pashtun ethnic group is not Pashtun because we do not know wherefrom they came to the present location and previously there was no Afghanistan or Pashtunistan, so the land was called by different names including the name of Iran for the whole area.

Agreed. I cant trust the words of every one, some time tribal jealousies are involved. But Turis do look very different from other tribes of hills, highlanders, da ghra khalak are usually sur speen. Though turis strongely follow pashtunwali and are quite brave people. If some turis are claiming iranian origin, it must be recent phenomena due to influence of shiaism. They and jajis are listed as branches of khogiani, a karlanri tribe. I would study about them and would post some stuff later. But let me tell you there is no conspiracy against turis because of their faith. Their cousins jajis are sunnis. And turis are not exactly helpless minority, they are armed to teeth and are into warring like other tribes. Infact their enemy blame them for being extra violent, not sparing even children.

[Smarty]

Ain-e-akbari describe Nangarhar as tajik area, nowadays pashtuns live in it. So Tajiks didnt disappear into thin air, they either got expelled or absorbed as hamsaya. Bajaur has very high concentration of serfs, it has unique culture, khan here is like a king. Most of the serfs of bajauries are mentioned as people of Kafiristani/nuristan race (bajaur used to be part of greater kafiristan along with kunar). Pashtuns do have class system in their society, 1-Pashtuns and 2- non-pashtuns. Historically they were warrior class, they refrained from other professions.

[Smarty]

I have just checked Peshawer gazeteer 1897. British say that in peshawer valley (peshawer, charsada, mardan, nowshera and swabi), only 47.3 percent of population are 'true pathans', the rest are people of indian extraction, and are called 'hamasaya'.

[Toramana]

Khushal, I think traditionally and in a strict sense, Pashtuns are those that are born of Pashtun (which means Pashto-speaking) ancestry, speak Pashto, and that have a Pashtun tribal lineage. The lineage requirements entitles one to certain privileges, e.g., share in ancestral as well as communal land, protection, and social-political support mechanisms that come with being a member of a tribal organization.

This traditional definition also has political dimensions in that it enables one tribe to assert its autonomy and claim to resources vis-a-vis another.

There is one problem with the view that one can still be a Pashtun while not being able to speak Pashto, i.e., it doesn't have any practical example or importance. I have observed that how much a person's claim to being a Pashtun may be, until he can speak Pashto, he is not treated a Pashtun in Pashtun society. May be this is not the case in Afghanistan but this is the case in KP.

All human groupings have psychological, political, and economic function, i. e., one needs emotional and psychological support, protection against potential or real adversaries, etc. and tribal organization was one way to satisfy that in primitive times. If a higher social organization, e.g., a state or modern society, can satisfy those needs, one doesn't feel the need to be a member of a tribe. That is why people adopt citizenship of other nations and then forget in practical terms who their ancestors were.

[khushal]

They along with wardaks are list as pashto speaking non-pashtun tribes in books. I read that Jajis are not considered true Afghans by neighbouring tribes even though they claim to be karlanri. Dr.bellow thinks Turis are basically awans while jajis are kira kitai (or some thing like that ) from iran (i must say Dr.bellow's theories cant be taken seriously). I would do a proper study of your tribe though. I have not seen jajis but lot of turis. Turis are quite dark-skinned and short for highlanders, very different from bangash. A bangash told me that turis were once hamsaya of bangash, who acquired territories through conquests.

Dont take anything serious from what people say, they usually make things up according to their bias. Turi and Bangash are rivals since Turi kicked the Bangash out of Kurrum. Turis used to migrate from the mountains of Paktia to the Kurrum valley in the winter time when Bangash were settled there. They took Kurrum when they saw an opportunity. The Moghul emperor Babur mentions Turis in Kurrum in his diary in the year 1506.

Skin pigmentation is not a good factor to determine anything. Turi's are dark skinned but it has more to do with the climate they live in around Kurrum. Zazi, Mangal, Turi that live in Kurrum are darker skinned, but when they move to places like Peshawar, or Kabul, their skin becomes lighter.

Zazi and Turi speak exactly the same and our are customs are very similar except that they are Shia. When you go to Kurrum, one can not tell the difference between a Zazai, Turai or Mangal by looking at them. Only when a Mangal talks, then one can tell he is Mangal. Our elders tell us that Jon Baz Khan(Zazai) and Tur Baz Khan(Turai) were brothers from the Khogyani branch. They also tell us that Wardak is somehow related and close to us but I don't know the details. I dont know if we are related, but linguistically, we are very similar, but it could have been that these three tribes were allies in history. I do know that in history Zazai and Turai have fought together with neighboring tribes against the Bangash and Mangal over territory.

It is common that most Pashtun tribes challenge a neighboring tribes "Pashtuness." For example, we Zazi challenge Mangals claim to be pashtun just because we have land disputes with them and they do the same with us, we label them as baighyrat and kacha and they do the same. Its hard to say what is true and what is myth since very little written history exists about it.

I've been trying to find some written material about how the Turi and half of Bangash became Shia and when they became Shia. I dont really trust what the English has written about the tribes unless they can back it up by valid sources. If you can find anything, please share it.

[DSM0305]

[QUOTE=Badlun;762032]

One is Pashtun, when he acts in the interest of Pashtuns. Unlike the Indic people, we don't have a caste system, kam-asal Pashtun label is mostly used by western born people and is out of touch with reality. Kam-asal is an ordinary insult in Pashtun society and have nothing to do with identity.

In this topic, everyone seems to be very emotional invested and forgot their rational thinking. Pashtuns were warriors in ancient times and not some academics, so not much have been written about their origins. Basically whether it is linage or linguistics, in the end it doesn't matter. What matters is whose interest the person working towards.
It doesn't matter if our interest for Pashtuns is based upon conservatism, modernism, religion, nationalism or something else. but rather the fact that the purpose of the action was meant for the interest of Pashtuns.

To give an example.
Taliban will be considered a Pashtun interest, but so will the likes of Najibulah, Daud Khan, Ashraf Ghani, Karzai as well. The point is, it not about what ones ideology is, but rather whose interest you have in mind. One can argue whether those mention above are good or bad, but one thing they had in common was that they represented an interest of Pashtuns(whether they succeed or failed, its another discussion).

Lets take Abdullah x2 as an example. He desperately claimed Pashtun linage to win the election, but he actively worked against Pashtun interest. This was one and foremost reason that he was disqualified as Pashtun. In the other hand, we had a Persian speaking General whose Pashtun linage was a bit foggy, but because he worked in Pashtuns interest, he was considered a Pashtun even amongst Persian speakers.

To make everything short. If one supports Pashtun interest, he is a Pashtun. Linguistics and linage is in the foggy site of the realm, and everyone can claim and pretend. Whether one is Indian or Persian, all of them can pretend to be Pashtuns. In the end what matters is whose interest one works toward, and also the only way to identify a Pashtun.[/QUOTE

This is a very strange standpoint. Many orientalists, people like Osama, Russians, Americans, Chinese, and other non Pashtuns claim to work for the interest of Pashtuns, but it does not qualify him/her to be a Pashtun.

Pashtuns are sons/daughetrs of one father/mother and children can be good or bad but their actions do not disqualify them to be be children of their parents. Taliban are the worst enemies of Pashtuns but they are Pashtuns.Mother Teresa if would come to Afghanistan and help Pashtuns and work for their interest wont make her Pashtun.

Lineage is the most important factor to be Pashtun or not. Language and Pashtunwali are secondary qualifications.

Its not about what they claim, but rather what they had in mind doing it.
Osama, Russians etc. all had either personal interest or some ideological and found Pashtuns befitting allies in their course. The same way Taliban found Osama a befitting ally, and some Afghan communist leaders found Soviet Russia as befitting ally. The same story continues today too, where Taliban find Pakistan a good ally and the government the allied forces.

What I am trying to say is that, it is all about whose interest in mind one have. Basically whether one sees himself as Pashtun first, and everything else secondary, thirdly etc.

What good does ones linage make, if the person with Pashtun blood sees himself as Pashtun secondary, thirdly etc. You will see people claiming Pashtun linage in India and Punjab, but do they really see themselves as Pashtun first, or do they see themselves as Indian/Punjabi first...

So basically it not about saying whose interest they working with, but rather whose interest they had in mind, when doing a certain action.

[Smarty]

One is Pashtun, when he acts in the interest of Pashtuns. Unlike the Indic people, we don't have a caste system, kam-asal Pashtun label is mostly used by western born people and is out of touch with reality. Kam-asal is an ordinary insult in Pashtun society and have nothing to do with identity.

In this topic, everyone seems to be very emotional invested and forgot their rational thinking. Pashtuns were warriors in ancient times and not some academics, so not much have been written about their origins. Basically whether it is linage or linguistics, in the end it doesn't matter. What matters is whose interest the person working towards.
It doesn't matter if our interest for Pashtuns is based upon conservatism, modernism, religion, nationalism or something else. but rather the fact that the purpose of the action was meant for the interest of Pashtuns.

To give an example.
Taliban will be considered a Pashtun interest, but so will the likes of Najibulah, Daud Khan, Ashraf Ghani, Karzai as well. The point is, it not about what ones ideology is, but rather whose interest you have in mind. One can argue whether those mention above are good or bad, but one thing they had in common was that they represented an interest of Pashtuns(whether they succeed or failed, its another discussion).

Lets take Abdullah x2 as an example. He desperately claimed Pashtun linage to win the election, but he actively worked against Pashtun interest. This was one and foremost reason that he was disqualified as Pashtun. In the other hand, we had a Persian speaking General whose Pashtun linage was a bit foggy, but because he worked in Pashtuns interest, he was considered a Pashtun even amongst Persian speakers.

To make everything short. If one supports Pashtun interest, he is a Pashtun. Linguistics and linage is in the foggy site of the realm, and everyone can claim and pretend. Whether one is Indian or Persian, all of them can pretend to be Pashtuns. In the end what matters is whose interest one works toward, and also the only way to identify a Pashtun.

Were those Durranis acting in the interest of pashtuns when they, after taking a beating from Nadir shah quli, joined him in his wars against ghilzais?. Did Hotaks get disqualified as pashtuns when they slaughtered tokhis who then joined hands with Nadir shah quli?. Did Khushal khattak and his forefathers get disqualifed as pashtuns when they were serving mughals and joined mughal expeditions against yusufzais?. Did he recover his pashtun identity when he rebelled against mughals?

[Smarty]

Dont take anything serious from what people say, they usually make things up according to their bias. Turi and Bangash are rivals since Turi kicked the Bangash out of Kurrum. Turis used to migrate from the mountains of Paktia to the Kurrum valley in the winter time when Bangash were settled there. They took Kurrum when they saw an opportunity. The Moghul emperor Babur mentions Turis in Kurrum in his diary in the year 1506.

Skin pigmentation is not a good factor to determine anything. Turi's are dark skinned but it has more to do with the climate they live in around Kurrum. Zazi, Mangal, Turi that live in Kurrum are darker skinned, but when they move to places like Peshawar, or Kabul, their skin becomes lighter.

Zazi and Turi speak exactly the same and our are customs are very similar except that they are Shia. When you go to Kurrum, one can not tell the difference between a Zazai, Turai or Mangal by looking at them. Only when a Mangal talks, then one can tell he is Mangal. Our elders tell us that Jon Baz Khan(Zazai) and Tur Baz Khan(Turai) were brothers from the Khogyani branch. They also tell us that Wardak is somehow related and close to us but I don't know the details. I dont know if we are related, but linguistically, we are very similar, but it could have been that these three tribes were allies in history. I do know that in history Zazai and Turai have fought together with neighboring tribes against the Bangash and Mangal over territory.

It is common that most Pashtun tribes challenge a neighboring tribes "Pashtuness." For example, we Zazi challenge Mangals claim to be pashtun just because we have land disputes with them and they do the same with us, we label them as baighyrat and kacha and they do the same. Its hard to say what is true and what is myth since very little written history exists about it.

I've been trying to find some written material about how the Turi and half of Bangash became Shia and when they became Shia. I dont really trust what the English has written about the tribes unless they can back it up by valid sources. If you can find anything, please share it.

Cant disagree with you on this, the neighbouring tribes do question each other pashtun-ness. When i gather material about both tribes, i would share it here and tag you.

[khushal]

Agreed. I cant trust the words of every one, some time tribal jealousies are involved. But Turis do look very different from other tribes of hills, highlanders, da ghra khalak are usually sur speen. Though turis strongely follow pashtunwali and are quite brave people. If some turis are claiming iranian origin, it must be recent phenomena due to influence of shiaism. They and jajis are listed as branches of khogiani, a karlanri tribe. I would study about them and would post some stuff later. But let me tell you there is no conspiracy against turis because of their faith. Their cousins jajis are sunnis. And turis are not exactly helpless minority, they are armed to teeth and are into warring like other tribes. Infact their enemy blame them for being extra violent, not sparing even children.

Smarty,
The dark skin comes from the climate of Kurrum. In America, people think I am a white guy, but when I go to Kurrum, it takes about a month before I darken up. I dont darken up in Tel or Peshawar but for some reason Kurrum has that effect.

[Toramana]

Sometimes political or cultural factors related to image perception also play role in how much one feels oneself to be part of a group. This is especially true of assimilated and transitional groups. An example is Parachas of Mingora. We Parachas of Mingora are actually Kashmiris that after some time of arrival in Mingora adopted Pashto for obvious reasons. As tribal thinking was dominant at that time we started to emphasize our Pashtun affinity by becoming politically more active in Pashtun nationalist parties.

Many of our elders were Pashtun nationalist leaders during 1970s. Chacha Karim Baksh was a candidate for national assembly from the ANP front. Seth Kamran also contested elections on ticket from ANP. Pashtun nationalism and emphasis on Pashtun culture was so high that our families were choosing traditional Pashtun names for their children and were very active supporting Pashtun literary societies.

Ironically, there is a reverse trend going on now a days especially in the young generations. Being a prosperous community, Parachas have always liked sophistication, urbanity, and a cosmopolitan outlook. As Pashuns have become more and more associated with conservatism and tribal thinking, the youngster lot has increasingly become less enthusiastic to be identified with Pashtuns. This may be an example of how perception influences one's choice of grouping and identity.

[DSM0305]

Were those Durranis acting in the interest of pashtuns when they, after taking a beating from Nadir shah quli, joined him in his wars against ghilzais?. Did Hotaks get disqualified as pashtuns when they slaughtered tokhis who then joined hands with Nadir shah quli?. Did Khushal khattak and his forefathers get disqualifed as pashtuns when they were serving mughals and joined mughal expeditions against yusufzais?. Did he recover his pashtun identity when he rebelled against mughals?

That my point. It is not about the ideology they have held, but rather the thought behind ones action. Whether one supports Taliban or the Communist is secondary. It is the thought behind the action that count. As long they thought that their action will somehow benefit Pashtuns, they will be considered Pashtuns in my book.

[tilla_jogian]

I have just checked Peshawer gazeteer 1897. British say that in peshawer valley (peshawer, charsada, mardan, nowshera and swabi), only 47.3 percent of population are 'true pathans', the rest are people of indian extraction, and are called 'hamasaya'.

Interesting, from British gazzeter of punjab it seem like % is somewhat similar from what I have read on Gujranwala, Gujrat and some other areas. 55% are zamindars which mean jats, awans, rajputs, gujars for exemple. In 2nd comes banyas like khatris/sheikh and brahmins/syed who make 10-15%.

And 30-35% are kammis who belong to different tribes and background. This will be the case even now in rural areas. But cities are somewhat different beast since they have seen lots of migration from Indian punjab and even byond after 1947.

While native Pak punjabis only started to migrate to cities after 1947 in large numbers, especially kammis who had more reasons to move to city then others.

[khushal]

Khushal, I think traditionally and in a strict sense, Pashtuns are those that are born of Pashtun (which means Pashto-speaking) ancestry, speak Pashto, and that have a Pashtun tribal lineage. The lineage requirements entitles one to certain privileges, e.g., share in ancestral as well as communal land, protection, and social-political support mechanisms that come with being a member of a tribal organization.

This traditional definition also has political dimensions in that it enables one tribe to assert its autonomy and claim to resources vis-a-vis another.

There is one problem with the view that one can still be a Pashtun while not being able to speak Pashto, i.e., it doesn't have any practical example or importance. I have observed that how much a person's claim to being a Pashtun may be, until he can speak Pashto, he is not treated a Pashtun in Pashtun society. May be this is not the case in Afghanistan but this is the case in KP.

All human groupings have psychological, political, and economic function, i. e., one needs emotional and psychological support, protection against potential or real adversaries, etc. and tribal organization was one way to satisfy that in primitive times. If a higher social organization, e.g., a state or modern society, can satisfy those needs, one doesn't feel the need to be a member of a tribe. That is why people adopt citizenship of other nations and then forget in practical terms who their ancestors were.

"awal khpul bya bal" right. Ofcourse in tribal society, kinship is first. The people that migrate to our areas would never be really considered true pashtuns since they are not related to us by blood even though they can speak the language and follow pashtunwali. Its like when an African moves to Germany and his great great grandkids are fully germanized. The White Germans would never truely accept him as one of them. Thats natural. But the german that has adopted french language and customs is going to be less respected by the germans than the guy with african ancestory who has adopted german language and customs. That was my point about the panjabized imran khan and the pashtunized kasibgars.

Its the same in afghanistan. Those persianized pashtuns are not really counted as pashtun by rural non persianized pashtuns. They are however counted as pashtun by other persianized pashtuns.

[tilla_jogian]

Sometimes political or cultural factors related to image perception also play role in how much one feels oneself to be part of a group. This is especially true of assimilated and transitional groups. An example is Parachas of Mingora. We Parachas of Mingora are actually Kashmiris that after some time of arrival in Mingora adopted Pashto for obvious reasons. As tribal thinking was dominant at that time we started to emphasize our Pashtun affinity by becoming politically more active in Pashtun nationalist parties.

Many of our elders were Pashtun nationalist leaders during 1970s. Chacha Karim Baksh was a candidate for national assembly from the ANP front. Seth Kamran also contested elections on ticket from ANP. Pashtun nationalism and emphasis on Pashtun culture was so high that our families were choosing traditional Pashtun names for their children and were very active supporting Pashtun literary societies.

Ironically, there is a reverse trend going on now a days especially in the young generations. Being a prosperous community, Parachas have always liked sophistication, urbanity, and a cosmopolitan outlook. As Pashuns have become more and more associated with conservatism and tribal thinking, the youngster lot has increasingly become less enthusiastic to be identified with Pashtuns. This may be an example of how perception influences one's choice of grouping and identity.

Now Parachas are Kashmiris lmfao


Your discrtiption of paracha sound like banyas, otherwise known as trading caste. Modern world is made for south asian trading castes.

[khushal]

Interesting, from British gazzeter of punjab it seem like % is somewhat similar from what I have read on Gujranwala, Gujrat and some other areas. 55% are zamindars which mean jats, awans, rajputs, gujars for exemple. In 2nd comes banyas like khatris/sheikh and brahmins/syed who make 10-15%.

And 30-35% are kammis who belong to different tribes and background. This will be the case even now in rural areas. But cities are somewhat different beast since they have seen lots of migration from Indian punjab and even byond after 1947.

While native Pak punjabis only started to migrate to cities after 1947 in large numbers, especially kammis who had more reasons to move to city then others.

KP was not originally pashtun. The migrants are pashtun. In fact pashto was not even a major language in peshwar before the afghan refugees migrated in the early 80's.