were all the pashtun territories in pakistan conquered by the sikhs or the british

[Smarty]

The most interesting story is of kashmirs. Afghans had ruled kashmir for 75 years, their period was stable, peaceful and prosperous but kashmiris had complaints that afghans are not civilized and soft like mughals and were wary of their harsh tax policy. Kashmiri nobles themeselves invited ranjeet singh to get rid kashmir of foriegners like afghans. Ranjeet singh was hesitant due to geography of kashmir but kashmiris told them that number of durrani troops stationed there is very small.
When sikhs attacked kashmir, few thousands strong durrani army asked local kashmiris to help them but they refused. British authours say that sikhs brought death and devestation to kashmir. They persecuted muslims and banned their religous practices. To inflict fear, they started hanging muslims on daily basis. Economy of kashmir got collapsed and kashmir was hit wih worst starvation. Once prosperous kashmir became valley of death and starvation.

[Smarty]

[MENTION=17453]EvilPakistani[/MENTION]
your spineless kashmiris are ever since under occupation of non-muslims. Sikhs went cruel on you because you people were sheeps. We liberated one third of your kashmir, full kashmir could have been liberated if you people had guts to stand up for yourselves. Even from 1989 to 2003 punjabi and pashtun militants had to fight for you against indian army.

[EvilPakistani]

[MENTION=17453]EvilPakistani[/MENTION]
your spineless kashmiris are ever since under occupation of non-muslims. Sikhs went cruel on you because you people were sheeps. We liberated one third of your kashmir, full kashmir could have been liberated if you people had guts to stand up for yourselves. Even from 1989 to 2003 punjabi and pashtun militants had to fight for you against indian army.

lol thanks for the insults, and no Pashtuns didn't entirely liberate Kashmir or even a third, Pashtun tribes did assist in fighting the Hari Singhs forces and assisting Kashmiri Lashkars in Poonch, however once the Indian military got involved that's when the Pakistan army launched an offensive, so with the help Pak arm, half of kashmir would have been part of India.

[EvilPakistani]

[MENTION=1234]Smarty[/MENTION]
Kashmiris are fighting against India and most of the fighters indigenous, not foreigners, it's just that there are only less than 10 million Kashmiris compared to 50 Pashtuns, so we have a smaller community.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/11/kashmir-conflict-new-wave-militants

^This guy is only 17 and there are many guys like him fighting against india

[pashtun2121]

well the Sikhs and british didn't work together or trust each other

so the Sikhs would of never got the british help when they invaded places like Peshawar

only time the Sikhs and british worked together fighting against the Pashtuns would of bin after 1849 after second anglo Sikh war when many Sikhs were signed up by the british as mercenary soldiers

the three anglo afghan wars were fought between afghans and british mercenaries
96% of the british east indian companies army was of Indians

first war over 90% of mercenaries bengali muslims made up the british army that invaded Afghanistan

in second and third war it was gurkhas and Sikhs mercenary soldiers that made up over 90% of the british forces that invaded afghanistan

[Toramana]

Mostly, Sikh exaggerate their successes in Peshawar Valley. But their claims are just hollow boosting aimed at self glory. Pashtuns historically have been a rural tribal people and were not urban dwellers. The didn't even maintained a regular army. Every tribe would fight its own war or at most a union of tribes would go to war together. Pashtuns moved to urban centers only recently, e.g., Peshawar in 1960s and 1970s were a Hindko-speaking city. Pashtuns migration to Peshawar happened after 1960s and 1970s and gained momentum in 1980s till this time. Transportation mode wasn't good at that time and Pashtuns didn't care what happened to Peshawar as long as they were free in their rural hamlets.

Even the advanced British found it very hard controlling Pashtuns what let alone Sikhs.

And the point is, Sikhs had their heyday just once and then never rose again as a nation. It is un-conceivable how can they gain their independence from India. The same is true of Punjabi Muslims who would become Indian subject forever or vassal of India if they lost control of Pakistan that British hand them for their subservience to the British colonialists.

This is not to say, Pashtuns have never been defeated or conquered---in fact they have been defeated many time but what is remarkable is Pashtun resilience and the ability to rise again and again in history.

[kanishka]

Mostly, Sikh exaggerate their successes in Peshawar Valley. But their claims are just hollow boosting aimed at self glory. Pashtuns historically have been a rural tribal people and were not urban dwellers. The didn't even maintained a regular army. Every tribe would fight its own war or at most a union of tribes would go to war together. Pashtuns moved to urban centers only recently, e.g., Peshawar in 1960s and 1970s were a Hindko-speaking city. Pashtuns migration to Peshawar happened after 1960s and 1970s and gained momentum in 1980s till this time. Transportation mode wasn't good at that time and Pashtuns didn't care what happened to Peshawar as long as they were free in their rural hamlets.

Even the advanced British found it very hard controlling Pashtuns what let alone Sikhs.

And the point is, Sikhs had their heyday just once and then never rose again as a nation. It is un-conceivable how can they gain their independence from India. The same is true of Punjabi Muslims who would become Indian subject forever or vassal of India if they lost control of Pakistan that British hand them for their subservience to the British colonialists.

This is not to say, Pashtuns have never been defeated or conquered---in fact they have been defeated many time but what is remarkable is Pashtun resilience and the ability to rise again and again in history.

Hindko city? So that means Peshawar doesn't belong to Afghanistan because all major cities in Afghan province were originally Punjabi speaking before Pashtun migration and Pakistan has the right to them, right?

[Toramana]

Hindko city? So that means Peshawar doesn't belong to Afghanistan because all major cities in Afghan province were originally Punjabi speaking before Pashtun migration and Pakistan has the right to them, right?

Peshawar and other KP towns are located deep within Pashtun-inhabited territory. Since recorded history they have been inhabited by Pashtuns. Before Khakhis (branch of Saribani Pashtuns) came to Peshawar Valley, it was dominated by Dalazaks, Shalmanis, and other Pashtun tribes of mainly the Karlanri branch (other tribes of Karlanri group are Afridis, Orakzais, Khattaks, Shiataks, Wazirs, Masuds, etc.).

The non-Pashto speaking people of Peshawar actually were camp followers of Mughal army and armies of later empires. That is because Peshawar was one of the transit points and a kind of land-port town between Kabul (Central Asia) and Dehli (South Asia) where trading caravans would camp and rest and different empires would maintain military contingents to strengthen defenses against attacks from the north. The same thing happened to Karachi which originally was a Baluchi-Sindhi town. The difference with Peshawar is, Peshawar has been re-Pashtunized whereas in the case that is next to impossibility.

These non-Pashto speaking people lived inside the walled city. During later Mughal period and the succeeding Sikh and British periods )especially British), there was large scale migration of non-Pashto speaking people to Peshawar and with the increase in their numbers, they started living in the suburbs of Peshawar as well.

Non-Pashto speaking people live in the towns on the main route between Attok and Peshawar due to the security provided by different imperial armies. That suggests they migrated from somewhere else and started living on the main route under the protection of armies guarding these routes.

Punjabi ethnicity started forming in 15th Century. It is not an ancient ethnicity.

[Toramana]

But now people of Peshawar whatever their language may have been in the past.

[Toramana]

"The British laid out the vast Peshawar Cantonment to the west of the city in 1868, and made the city its frontier headquarters.[15] Additionally, several projects were initiated in Peshawar, including linkage of the city by railway to the rest of British India and renovation of the Mohabbat Khan mosque that had been desecrated by the Sikhs.[11] The British also constructed Cunningham clock tower, in celebration of the Golden Jubilee of Queen Victoria, and, in 1906, constructed Victoria Hall (now home of the Peshawar Museum) in memory of Queen Victoria.[11] The British greatly contributed to the establishment of Western-style education in Peshawar with the establishment of Edwardes College and Islamia College in 1901 and 1913, respectively—these were established in addition to numerous other schools, many of which are run by the Anglican Church.[11]

Peshawar emerged as a centre for both Hindko and Pashtun intellectuals. Hindko speakers, also referred to as Khaarian ("city dwellers" in Pashto), were responsible for the dominant culture for most of the time that Peshawar was under British rule.[22]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peshawar

"

[Kushan Prince]

But now people of Peshawar whatever their language in the past are Pashtuns whatever their language may have been in the past.

So are you saying the pashtuns of peshewar are pashtunized? i'm confused now.

[Karachi]

who were the people of (Gandhara) civilization? were they of (indic) stock like (hindko people) or eastern Iranians like Pashtuns??

To be honest the whole area of KPK is confusing, because it has been a melting pot of many cultures, especially the Iranian and Indic cultures, Peshewar as a city has been at the center point of all this history

[Pakwatan]

who were the people of (Gandhara) civilization? were they of (indic) stock like (hindko people) or eastern Iranians like Pashtuns??

To be honest the whole area of KPK is confusing, because it has been a melting pot of many cultures, especially the Iranian and Indic cultures, Peshewar as a city has been at the center point of all this history

Trust me, my bihari friend.. Even Hindkowans are closer to our people than you Indians.

[Smarty]

Very informative post by toramana, it has cleared up my confusion about peshawer.

[Karachi]

Trust me, my bihari friend.. Even Hindkowans are closer to our people than you Indians.

Your people? are you pashtun now? How hard is for you to understand that (indic) is a term used for anyone who speaks (indic) languages and practices indic cultures

Indic does not necessarily mean present day India you dumbass, even much of pakistan is Indic, except KPK, Balochistan, Dardic areas. Punjab/Sindh which form 70% of Pakistan are defiantly related to the people from north India, rather to Iranian peoples. Anyone who knows a bit about history, culture, languages etc.. will tell you this, but you are too dumb to understand it

I am not Bihari and have nothing to do with them