How old is the Pashto Language?

[retro]

You can reconstruct an approximate form of a proto language of a language family or subgroup, this works by utilizing comparative linguistics and taking the most common linguistic features etc and generalizing common lexical roots; you can’t, however, construct a proto language of a single language by simply analyzing it but you can determine if some earlier form of that language was the proto form if you know the earlier form, however what is known about the known Eastern Iranic languages does not let us conclude that the affinity is inasmuch as one can say one of those was the ancestor of Pashto. Its very difficult to analyze Pashto within a historical frame as there is no historical account of it prior to a few centuries ago so we no absolutely nothing about its early form and the only thing we can do is analyze its linguistic features and this sadly has turned out rather futile if the task is to delineate its precise historical development.

Morgenstierne contends that distinctly Indic (i.e. Sanskrit) features of Pashto seem borrowed rather than primordial, this is because those features are almost entirely lexical and lexical influence is the most superficial of all linguistic influence but the more -difficult to influence- features of Pashto (e.g. syntax) are not distinctly Indic so it appears that Pashto did not branch out of the Indo-Iranian tree with the Indo side. We can infer thus that either the proto Pashto was some form of some Eastern Iranic language or that it directly evolved from proto Indo Iranian.

Well as I'm sure your aware, Sanskrit isn't a Indic language, it's Indo-Iranian. The closest among the European languages to Sanskrit is Lithuanian (on account of it's isolation) and both are seemingly Indo-European relics.

Sanskrit sunus son - Lith. sunus;
Sanskrit viras man - Lith. vyras;
Sanskrit avis sheep - Lith. avis;
Sanskrit dhumas smoke - Lith. dumas;
Sanskrit padas sole - Lith. padas.

It's possible that the Eastern Iranic languages are closer to proto-Indo-Iranian, than Persia. As the ancient Persians where most likely Near Eastern, agriculturists. Whilst the northern Indo-Iranian peoples, such as the Scythians and early Centum outliners like the Tocharians; where clearly nomadic and therefore far more likely involved in cultural transmission. However I don't know comparable, Eastern Iranic languages are to one another let alone to Persian or what percentage of Pashtun and Tajik are borrowings from Turkic and other languages.

Whilst all Eursians are in the end of Indic extraction. The Archaeological evidence of a Indic or Central Asian, Indo-European Urheimat really isn't all that compelling.

Ugric has Iranic borrowing and in ancient times, Ugric and Indo-Iranic spheres very likely overlaped in the Urals. In my opinion, both Kurgan and Anatolian hypothesis, can be supported by placing proto-IE's Urheimat, along the banks of the Black Sea. In fact it's not at all inconceivable, that our elusive, proto-Indo-Europeans where originally some kind of ancient, early neolithic, Black Sea, fishing community.

Although I'm not entirely convinced that proto-IE Urheimat is in Anatolian. Anatolia and the Transcaucasus in a historical sense, do mark something of a Centum/Satem boundary in Western Asia. As at one time, the Northern fertile crescent was clearly under very considerable Indo-European influence. As even the Hurrians to the south, somehow aquired a Indo-European elite.

What is more, the Cimmerians, Scythians and other Indo-Iranians, who launched raids against the Balkans, Assyrians, Urartians etc. Where by no means the first Indo-Europeans in the Near East. Since Anatolian, Centum Indo-European speakers Hittites etc. and indigenous Near Eastern peoples, certainly have neolithic affiliations.

It's also intresting to note that the Ossetian language is of Indo-Iranic origin and the Ossetians likely accultrated it from the Alans (a Sarmatian tribe related to the Scythians). Now whilst Ossetic men like Georgians are native Caucasians in a ethnic sence. Many of the the women of the region are apparently of Iranic decent. However I highly suspect that this was not always the case and that the Ossetians, make up was altered by emigration. As it's fair to say that the Alans, where excessively fond of marauding. Since in Europe the Vandals and Suebians (Eastern Germanics) where allies of the Alans and their confederation managed to launch incursions, as far to the West as to attempt an invasion of Roman Gaul.

[ScimitarXEdge]

San·skrit (s?#131;n'skrĭt')
n.
An ancient Indic language that is the language of Hinduism and the Vedas and is the classical literary language of India.
[Sanskrit saṃskṛtam, from neuter of saṃskṛta-, perfected, refined : sam, together + karoti, he makes.]
San'skrit'ist n.

http://www.indicstudies.us/Archives/...s/sanskrit.htm

[آريا]

New Pashto was created in the early Islamic period when many words from Persian and Arabic were borrowed.

The modern northern "Pukhto" dialect developed later because of consonant shifts like sh>kh and zh>g in northern Pashtunistan.
(Similarly, /sh/ yielded /kh/ also in the Khughni and Sarikoli languages of the Pamir region).

Middle Pashto was spoken in pre-Islamic times possibly in Loy Kandahar/Zabul/Sakastan and its speakers were called "Saka" people. Their language is not attested but Saka/Sakzi/Shakya are mentioned in Persian and Indian texts.

Besides, some names of Saka kings of Gandhara and northwestern ancient India known from coins appear to be Middle Pashto because of the /d/ > /l/ consonant shift. E.g. Spala-hores (spada>spala=army; hura=god) and Spala-gadama (spala=army; gadama=diminutive of dama=leader).

Old Pashto was closely related to Avestan. We don't know when and where in Afghanistan it was spoken. But according to the Aryanologist Georg Morgentierne: It is, however, possible that the original home of Paṧtō may have been in Badaḵšān, somewhere between Munǰī and Sangl. and Shugh., with some contact with a Saka dialect akin to Khotanese.

[retro]

San·skrit (s?#131;n'skrĭt')
n.
An ancient Indic language that is the language of Hinduism and the Vedas and is the classical literary language of India.
[Sanskrit saṃskṛtam, from neuter of saṃskṛta-, perfected, refined : sam, together + karoti, he makes.]
San'skrit'ist n.

http://www.indicstudies.us/Archives/...s/sanskrit.htm

Sanskrit is a Indo-Aryan language and is of Indo-Iranian extaction. The Indic, Indo-Aryan languages of the north are Indo-European languages, unlike the Indic Dravidian languages of the south. Pashto, Sanskrit and even English are all Indo-European languages and they all have common origins. You do understand this?

Sanskrit is far more arcane than Pashto in so far that it has retained more of it's original characteristics. As Pashto has heavy borrowing of Arabic, Persian, Turkic and Greek.

[ScimitarXEdge]

I will trust Baseer on linguistics matters; he actually studies this stuff.

Baseer pointed out that Lexical analysis is superficial at best in determining antiquity.

[بصير]

Well as I'm sure your aware, Sanskrit isn't a Indic language, it's Indo-Iranian. The closest among the European languages to Sanskrit is Lithuanian (on account of it's isolation) and both are seemingly Indo-European relics.

Sanskrit sunus son - Lith. sunus;
Sanskrit viras man - Lith. vyras;
Sanskrit avis sheep - Lith. avis;
Sanskrit dhumas smoke - Lith. dumas;
Sanskrit padas sole - Lith. padas.

It's possible that the Eastern Iranic languages are closer to proto-Indo-Iranian, than Persia. As the ancient Persians where most likely Near Eastern, agriculturists. Whilst the northern Indo-Iranian peoples, such as the Scythians and early Centum outliners like the Tocharians; where clearly nomadic and therefore far more likely involved in cultural transmission. However I don't know comparable, Eastern Iranic languages are to one another let alone to Persian or what percentage of Pashtun and Tajik are borrowings from Turkic and other languages.

Whilst all Eursians are in the end of Indic extraction. The Archaeological evidence of a Indic or Central Asian, Indo-European Urheimat really isn't all that compelling.

Ugric has Iranic borrowing and in ancient times, Ugric and Indo-Iranic spheres very likely overlaped in the Urals. In my opinion, both Kurgan and Anatolian hypothesis, can be supported by placing proto-IE's Urheimat, along the banks of the Black Sea. In fact it's not at all inconceivable, that our elusive, proto-Indo-Europeans where originally some kind of ancient, early neolithic, Black Sea, fishing community.

Although I'm not entirely convinced that proto-IE Urheimat is in Anatolian. Anatolia and the Transcaucasus in a historical sense, do mark something of a Centum/Satem boundary in Western Asia. As at one time, the Northern fertile crescent was clearly under very considerable Indo-European influence. As even the Hurrians to the south, somehow aquired a Indo-European elite.

What is more, the Cimmerians, Scythians and other Indo-Iranians, who launched raids against the Balkans, Assyrians, Urartians etc. Where by no means the first Indo-Europeans in the Near East. Since Anatolian, Centum Indo-European speakers Hittites etc. and indigenous Near Eastern peoples, certainly have neolithic affiliations.

It's also intresting to note that the Ossetian language is of Indo-Iranic origin and the Ossetians likely accultrated it from the Alans (a Sarmatian tribe related to the Scythians). Now whilst Ossetic men like Georgians are native Caucasians in a ethnic sence. Many of the the women of the region are apparently of Iranic decent. However I highly suspect that this was not always the case and that the Ossetians, make up was altered by emigration. As it's fair to say that the Alans, where excessively fond of marauding. Since in Europe the Vandals and Suebians (Eastern Germanics) where allies of the Alans and their confederation managed to launch incursions, as far to the West as to attempt an invasion of Roman Gaul.

Indic as in the Indo branch of the Indo-Iranian tree, I never asserted that Sanskrit isnt Indo-Iranian. I cant comment on the history discussed there, I only know about the Linguistic side to all of this and am merely a novice to the history. The reason why Sanskrit played a preponderant role in reconstructing Proto Indo Iranian is because its one of the few old Indo Iranian languages we are aware of and because of the literature in it, we know alot about it too. Sadly because Iranians and pretty much all Eastern Iranians appeared to be largely nomadic and not an established (sedentary) civilization, they didnt leave much literature or sources about their languages.

[retro]

Indic as in the Indo branch of the Indo-Iranian tree, I never asserted that Sanskrit isnt Indo-Iranian. I cant comment on the history discussed there, I only know about the Linguistic side to all of this and am merely a novice to the history. The reason why Sanskrit played a preponderant role in reconstructing Proto Indo Iranian is because its one of the few old Indo Iranian languages we are aware of and because of the literature in it, we know alot about it too. Sadly because Iranians and pretty much all Eastern Iranians appeared to be largely nomadic and not an established (sedentary) civilization, they didnt leave much literature or sources about their languages.

Sanskrit is important, as it has retained more of it's arcane characteristics, than other Indo-European languages.

Much of Eastern Iranian history is very sketchy and derived from third part Greek and Persian sources. Whilst the Bactrians adopted a Greek script, and where quite a fussion of things cultrally. Bactria was nevertheless very close linguistically to other Eastern Iranians languages.

Bactrian thus “occupies an intermediary position between Pashto and Yidgha-Munji on the one hand, Sogdian, Choresmian, and Parthian on the other: it is thus in its natural and rightful place in Bactria” (Henning, BSOAS 23, 1960, p. 47).

2. Foreign elements. A non-Iranian element, presumably a remnant of the language which the Tokharoi had brought with them to Bactria, is clearly apparent in Kushan onomastics (Kujula Kadphises, Nokonzoko, etc.). The suffix -šk occurs frequently, especially in royal names: Kanēško, Ooēški, Bazēško, Kozgaški. Its similarity to the Kuchean (Tocharian B) suffix -śke (fem. -śka), the most characteristic name-formative in that language (cf. W. Krause, Ural-Altaische Jahrbücher 25, 1953, pp. 11ff.), can scarcely be coincidental (see V. V. Ivanov in Narody Azii i Afriki, 1967/3, pp. 106-18, English summary on pp. 234-35).

Perhaps surprisingly, Bactrian seems to have adopted little from Greek other than its alphabet. The month-name Gorpiaiou and the Greek divine names mentioned above come into the category of foreign vocabulary rather than that of loanwords.

Encyclopædia Iranica | Articles

Eastern Iranian languages been altered by external borrowings and Pashto has seemingly been subject to a variety of Indic, Persian, Arabic and Turkic influences.

The most pervasive external influence on Eastern Iranian has been that exerted by the neighboring Indian languages, as is most evident in the development of aspirates (Khotanese, Parachi, Ormuri) and retroflex consonants (Khotanese, Pashto, etc.). However, similar developments are found in Baluchi (North-Western Iranian), which is also spoken in close proximity to Indian. Indian loanwords are found already in most Eastern Middle Iranian languages (but also in Parthian) and increase in number in the modern period.

IRANIAN LANGUAGES: EASTERN IRANIAN LANGUAGES - (CAIS) ©

Bactrian Treasure

‪Ancient Aryan Treasure in Afghanistan‬‏ - YouTube

[Toramana]

Nice discussion. Thanks Basir and retro. Can we assign the development of modern Pashto to a period from Saka invasion (100 BC) to the arrival of Islamic armies (7th, 8th AD)? Proto-Pashto and proto-Pashtun might have existed long before that and might be ancient in that sense. Somehow, one feels that the development of modern Pashto somehow coincided with the formation of Pashtun ethnicity (in which Sakas, White Huns, and Kushans played a major role).

And beware of SE, an ideologue for Arab pan-fascism.

[Shayesta]

Yes, my Iranian friend tell me that in Iran, they are taught that Pashto pre dates Farsi.

Has he got any old book or something?

[ScimitarXEdge]

And beware of SE, an ideologue for Arab pan-fascism.

that's just what farangay house slaves try to portray to discredit Islam because it's a threat to their hegemony

[ScimitarXEdge]

Retro your response is a bit of a red herring; no one is denying Pashto's place in relation to Eastern Iranian languages .....what's on debate here is the antiquity of Pashto as a definitive language. There seems to be an attempt to manufacture terms like "Proto Pashto" as some superficial attempt to portray the antiquity of Pashto....but if "Proto Pashto" began as a dialect of Bactrian, Khotanese/Saka Yognobi/Soghdian etc. Then really it would just be a sub dialect of those languages, nd not identifiably Pashto

even our resident White Washed Farangified members like Toramana acknowledge that Pashto's identifiable evidence is extremely recent (within the last 1000 years)

[retro]

Nice discussion. Thanks Basir and retro. Can we assign the development of modern Pashto to a period from Saka invasion (100 BC) to the arrival of Islamic armies (7th, 8th AD)? Proto-Pashto and proto-Pashtun might have existed long before that and might be ancient in that sense. Somehow, one feels that the development of modern Pashto somehow coincided with the formation of Pashtun ethnicity (in which Sakas, White Huns, and Kushans played a major role).

Modern Pashto has Middle Eastern/Indic influences and ethnically, pashtuns are paternally, slightly closer to Middle Eastern than Tajiks. However Pashto clearly has far older Indo-Iranian roots.

Whilst this study is on Uzbek populations, it is none the less of intrest. Since at present there is seemingly an absence of mtDNA data from Afghanistan.

However if you look at Fig.4 in the pdf document below. You can see the Afghani Uzbek populations mtDNA is almost entirely Western Eurasian in composition.

The mtDNA composition of Uzbekistan: a microcosm of Central Asian patterns

http://209.85.48.16/4802/123/0/p1005689/The_mtDNA_composition_of_Uzbekistan.pdf

In term of the wider region matters are complicated somewhat, by the fact that Iranic and Turkic people are not unrelated and even many Turko-Mongol peoples have Western Eursian or Uralic ancestry. What is more, the Indo-Iranians where not necessarily, the first Western Eursians peoples in the region and it's Iranic inhabitants, quite possible, aren't all descended from the same Eastern Iranian stock. As the Yuezhi/Tocharians also R1a1 Haplogroup types.

After the fall of the Persian empire to the Greeks. For a while the Bactrians where actually quite influential cultrally in region and Alexander, seemingly went out of his way to legitimize his rule by adopting local customs. However the Bactrian empire, whilst civilized was weak militarily and soon found it's self subject to conquest, first by the Sakas, and then by the Yuezhi/Tocharians.

The Yuezhi where allied with Tang/Han against the Hunnic/Siberian Xiongnu. However they ended up being displaced by the Xiongnu and it's the Yuezhi confederation, who in turn displaced the Sakas and founded the Kushan empire in Northern India.

Meanwhile the Uighurs in alliance with the Tang eventually managed to oust the Xiongnu and they aborbed the regions various Hunnic and remnant, Indo-European elements. Which is why around 15% of the Uyghurs ancestry is Yuezhi/Tocharian.

The Uighurs also have a fair amount of of Anatolian/Near Eastern Western Eursians, silk road ancestry and it's worth noting, that the Uighurs not only adopted Buddhism, but even founded their own Buddhist empire.

Uighurs are intriguing people and the ancient Chinese writers, didn't know quite what to make of them. Many of the Uighurs musical instruments, likely traversed the silk from India or the Middle East.

'Russian scholar Pantusov writes that the Uyghurs manufactured their own musical instruments; they had 62 different kinds of musical instruments and in every Uyghur home there used to be an instrument called a "dutar".'

‪Uyghur MTV: Arzigul Tursun's Gulzarangza‬‏ - YouTube

[khushal]

Has he got any old book or something?

I asked him that at the time, he said no, it was in his high school.

[Toramana]

Modern Pashto has Middle Eastern/Indic influences and ethnically, pashtuns are paternally, slightly closer to Middle Eastern than Tajiks. However Pashto clearly has far older Indo-Iranian roots.

How could you say that? Any DNA study supporting that.

[graveyardofempires]

How could you say that? Any DNA study supporting that.

dont ask more questions from these selfimposed scholars on Pashto and origins of pashtuns.

look at these guys talking all types of things,Pashtuns are turks,pashtuns are mideastern,blahblahblah.