Pashtuns are Yeptalites, Kushans, Scythians?

[Afghanfootball]

We don't know much about the language that the Paktyans (Arachosians) spoke. We just know that they were Iranic, were the ancestors of Pashtuns, and lived in lands where Pashtuns live today. It is possible that Bactrian was not a single language but just the name given to languages part of the East Iranic dialect continuum. If you Google Paktyan or Arachosian language, very very little info comes out on it. They could have spoken a "Bactrian language" or its possible the Paktyan/Arachosian language was an East Iranic sister language to Bactrian.

I never thought of Pashto and other eastern iranic languages just being different bactrian languages. Would make sense since Bactrian was actually called Arya (Rabatak Inscription).

[Firdousi]

Little man, Pashto is useless for you not me. For me your Farsi is useless

Nobody cares about you. Farsi, Arabic, Turkish and Urdu/Hindi have been lingua franca of this region for more than a millennium now. Pashto can not be included into this category.

Brother stop with the hatred. We are brothers. I don't care about your smell and your ugliness. We are all human beings.

[Firdousi]

I never thought of Pashto and other eastern iranic languages just being different bactrian languages. Would make sense since Bactrian was actually called Arya (Rabatak Inscription).

Actually Herat was called Arya:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aria_(satrapy)

You need to educate yourself bro and stop stealing our heritage.

[Firdousi]

Its so obvous that this ferdowsi guy is an irani or punjabi troll.

Bechesh most of Iranians don't even know about your existence. I mean you are obsessed with them but for the average uneducated Iranian Afghan means Hazara. They don't even know there is a tribe called Pashtun. Must be painful lol

[Sarbani]

I never thought of Pashto and other eastern iranic languages just being different bactrian languages. Would make sense since Bactrian was actually called Arya (Rabatak Inscription).

The counter argument to Paktyans (Arachosians) being Bactrian is that Bactria and Arachosia existed as separate provinces of the Achaemenid Empire. However; Gedrosia, Carmania, Susiana, etc. were all known to be ethnic Persian majority but existed as separated provinces from Persia proper. The same could have been the case with Bactria, Aria, and Arachosia. After all, Arachosia is named after a river and the people living in Arachosia were called Paktyan as their ethnic identity as opposed to Arachosian. This could also explain how all East Iranic speakers from Peshawar all the way to Kandahar call themselves one name (Pashtun). In between the Pamiri-speaking Badakhshan and Pashtun-speaking areas, there is a gap of Persian speakers. These Persian speakers disrupted the natural East Iranic dialect continuum. I wonder if before the Persianization of north Afghanistan, the Pamiris' ancestors called themselves a derivative of the term "Pashtun". The names they go by now (Yazgulamu, Shughni, Sarikoli, Ishkashimi, etc.) seem to tribal identities. The lands they live in also used to be historically considered part of Bactria.

I've only considered the theory that Paktyans may have been a subgroup of Bactrians when I realized that province doesn't equal ethnicity (as I stated above) and that there is no information on a "Arachosian/Paktyan language" anywhere on the Internet. Also, the only East Iranic language (excluding Scythian/Saka) spoken by empires in Loy Afghanistan (Kushans, Hephthalites, etc.) were all Bactrian speaking.

Btw, Bactria was also called "Pakhlo" before (at least according to the Wiki page of Hephthalites). Pakhlo, Balkh, Takhar, Tocharia (Tokharia), and Bactria all have the same etymological root. The extinct centum language speaking people of the Tarim Basin who's language is called Tocharian today are completely unrelated to the real Tocharians who are now known to be Bactrians. The reason the extinct Tarim Basin people are called Tocharian is because of an initial confusion by linguists.

[Firdousi]

The counter argument to Paktyans (Arachosians) being Bactrian is that Bactria and Arachosia existed as separate provinces of the Achaemenid Empire. However; Gedrosia, Carmania, Susiana, etc. were all known to be ethnic Persian majority but existed as separated provinces from Persia proper. The same could have been the case with Bactria, Aria, and Arachosia. After all, Arachosia is named after a river and the people living in Arachosia were called Paktyan as their ethnic identity as opposed to Arachosian. This could also explain how all East Iranic speakers from Peshawar all the way to Kandahar call themselves one name (Pashtun). In between the Pamiri-speaking Badakhshan and Pashtun-speaking areas, there is a gap of Persian speakers. These Persian speakers disrupted the natural East Iranic dialect continuum. I wonder if before the Persianization of north Afghanistan, the Pamiris' ancestors called themselves a derivative of the term "Pashtun". The names they go by now (Yazgulamu, Shughni, Sarikoli, Ishkashimi, etc.) seem to tribal identities. The lands they live in also used to be historically considered part of Bactria.

I've only considered the theory that Paktyans may have been a subgroup of Bactrians when I realized that province doesn't equal ethnicity (as I stated above) and that there is no information on a "Arachosian/Paktyan language" anywhere on the Internet. Also, the only East Iranic language (excluding Scythian/Saka) spoken by empires in Loy Afghanistan (Kushans, Hephthalites, etc.) were all Bactrian speaking.

Btw, Bactria was also called "Pakhlo" before (at least according to the Wiki page of Hephthalites). Pakhlo, Balkh, Takhar, Tocharia (Tokharia), and Bactria all have the same etymological root. The extinct centum language speaking people of the Tarim Basin who's language is called Tocharian today are completely unrelated to the real Tocharians who are now known to be Bactrians. The reason the extinct Tarim Basin people are called Tocharian is because of an initial confusion by linguists.

So.. Bactrians, Soghdians, Parthians, Tocharians, Pamiris, Hephtalites, Scythians, Tajiks,.. everything and everyone is Pashtun. You don't have any evidence. But who cares, right? Let make stuff up! South Korea is also Pashtun! Same thing goes for Somalia, Ethiopia and Sweden! They were Pashtun once but evil Parsiban forced them to leave their true Pashtuniat! lmao

You nationalist people are hilarious.

[Sarbani]

So.. Bactrians, Soghdians, Parthians, Tocharians, Pamiris, Hephtalites, Scythians, Tajiks,.. everything and everyone is Pashtun. You don't have any evidence. But who cares, right? Let make stuff up! South Korea is also Pashtun! Same thing goes for Somalia, Ethiopia and Sweden! They were Pashtun once but evil Parsiban forced them to leave their true Pashtuniat! lmao

You nationalist people are hilarious.

Bactrians would be the ancestors of Pashtuns IF Paktyans (Arachosians) were a subgroup of Bactrians, which is what we're debating right now.

Hephthalites and Tocharians (not the Tarim Basin ones) are well known to have been Bactrians. Anyways, them being Pashtun only applies if Paktyans were a subgroup of Bactrians.

Pamiris are from the historic region of Bactria.

Most Tajiks are definitely Persianized East Iranics (which includes Pashtuns).

Nobody said anything about Sogdians or West Iranics being Pashtun. That's just strawmanning.

[Aryana]

We don't know much about the language that the Paktyans (Arachosians) spoke. We just know that they were Iranic, were the ancestors of Pashtuns, and lived in lands where Pashtuns live today. It is possible that Bactrian was not a single language but just the name given to languages part of the East Iranic dialect continuum. If you Google Paktyan or Arachosian language, very very little info comes out on it. They could have spoken a "Bactrian language" or its possible the Paktyan/Arachosian language was an East Iranic sister language to Bactrian.

Yes, it could've been a continuum, since many empires (e.g. Kushans, Hepthalites) used this as their language. However, the Pashto language might've taken a different route. E.g. Avestan --> Bactrian -> Pashto ignores the fact that the Scythian language was also very similar to Pashto.

[Aryana]

So "Aryana" you're NOT a linguist, you have no academically peer reviewed references. you make really poorly linked phonetic arguments, which do not match what we currently know about current Eastern Iranian languages.

How do you expect a well educated, and objective audience to take you seriously? This is low quality attempt at scholarship. Like Geocities Website, HTML "Under Construction" for 10 years level.

This is a discussion on the origin of Pashto and Pashtuns. We're discussing this possibility, and I have given evidences for my opinion.

[Firdousi]

Bactrians would be the ancestors of Pashtuns IF Paktyans (Arachosians) were a subgroup of Bactrians, which is what we're debating right now.

Hephthalites and Tocharians (not the Tarim Basin ones) are well known to have been Bactrians. Anyways, them being Pashtun only applies if Paktyans were a subgroup of Bactrians.

Pamiris are from the historic region of Bactria.

Most Tajiks are definitely Persianized East Iranics (which includes Pashtuns).

Nobody said anything about Sogdians or West Iranics being Pashtun. That's just strawmanning.

Brother you are guessing all the time. Facts. Evidences. Proofs. Its the only valid things when it comes to science and history.

May I know why Pashtun nationalist want so badly to be related with Bactrians? I know Bactria got probably the richest and most interesting history in the region so everyone wants to have a small piece of it but sometimes you guys go very far. Just saying.

[Sarbani]

Actually Herat was called Arya:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aria_(satrapy)

You need to educate yourself bro and stop stealing our heritage.

Bactrian was known natively as Arya/Aria.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bactrian_language

[Firdousi]

Yes, it could've been a continuum, since many empires (e.g. Kushans, Hepthalites) used this as their language. However, the Pashto language might've taken a different route. E.g. Avestan --> Bactrian -> Pashto ignores the fact that the Scythian language was also very similar to Pashto.

LMAO

So know you will claim also Scythians for yourself? hahaha

[Firdousi]

Bactrian was known natively as Arya/Aria.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bactrian_language

No source bro. I have no problem with Wikipedia as long as a reliable link or source are shared.

[Sarbani]

Yes, it could've been a continuum, since many empires (e.g. Kushans, Hepthalites) used this as their language. However, the Pashto language might've taken a different route. E.g. Avestan --> Bactrian -> Pashto ignores the fact that the Scythian language was also very similar to Pashto.

Scythian is classified as north east Iranian and Pashto is classified as south east Iranian. They have been established as different. The Ossetian language in the Caucasus is the only language that is directly descended from Scythian. The next closest related language to Scythian is Sogdian.

[Sarbani]

No source bro. I have no problem with Wikipedia as long as a reliable link or source are shared.

Arya/Aria is a term used by all Indo-Iranians, it was never used to refer to a specific ethnicity. This is common knowledge, I only posted the Wiki link just in case.

Anyways, here's another link: