Gandharis were Pactyans?

[Samandri]

Nice cooked up story with no historical reference..

Why on earth i will consume my time in consulting and giving you the page numbers of the Mughal sources? you are a troll ( i have also seen your trolling on historium)

A typical Indian has grotesque body like this

[Saleh]

Oops no reference of afghans.only India and indians

Thats because in ancient times people went by a different identification than today. Afghan/Pashtun, etc were sub/tribe identities as populations were much smaller.

Anyway that map proves Gandharans couldn't have been Indian since Indian world began east of Indus River.

There is also the fact that Sindh province name is the origin of the term Indian, which puts the nail in the coffin. Indian world began with Sindh province.

[Saleh]

.Gandhara was trans Indus kingdom and Indians were living right upto jalalabad valley not Peshawar valley .This is 600 BC map of India before Cyrus was born.

India is derrived from Sindh. Sindh is East of Indus River. Case closed.

West of Indus people have very little in common with South Asia, racially, culturally, phenotype, etc.

[Samandri]

If you afghans are Gandharis accept your forefathers were indic race and followers of hindu dharma.If some ****ty afghans say Gandharis were Buddhist then find out what was the religion of Gandharis pre Buddhism.Find out religion of chanakya,areya,charaka and panini. Buddhism came to Gandhara only after Ashoka changed his religion in 3rd century BC.i have no problem if afghans too consider there forefathers as indic race and followers of hindu dharma

Indians care less about their "Hindkowan" brother of KP. Who knows, you might be a Pakistani troll pretending to be an Indian

.........

An Indian kid in his comfort zone

[Saleh]

These Gandharan statues Look way too non-South Asian to be "Indian":



Map of Gandhara:



Most likely these people were related to Hunza people, some mountain Pashtun populations and maybe some Nuristani type people.

Some Hunza people:










If you want to claim these people as " Indian" Go ahead.

[Elite Pakhtun]

I'm still waiting for those claiming Mahmud of Ghazni replaced the population with Pashtuns to provide some sort of evidence. He only converted existing population at the time. Evidence counter to this is most welcome.

[Samandri]

Please provide me prove of a single pashtun tribes which has origin in Peshawar valley.Its almost null.Pashtun tribes - Wikipedia
Points:tanolis are not pashtuns but pashtunised indics.

Whats the history of this?

[Elite Pakhtun]

Please provide me prove of a single pashtun tribes which has origin in Peshawar valley.Its almost null.Pashtun tribes - Wikipedia
Points:tanolis are not pashtuns but pashtunised indics.

It doesn't work that way. The burden of proof lies on you/others that are claiming the Pashtuns were transported to NWFP via Mahmud of Ghazni and were not present before that. Upon making such a claim, please present the evidence.

Many tribes do not specify exact place of origin, as well there are some tribes of Syed origin, and finally the Safi tribe claims to be descendants of Gandhara. I'm sure there may be more, but it is fairly irrelevant even if there is. It's not my turn to provide evidence, it's the opponents turn.

[Samandri]

I know you guys suffer from identity crisis sometimes you consider yourselves as Gandharis(indic) and sometimes iranian .Read this book State and Tribe in Nineteenth-Century Afghanistan: The Reign of Amir Dost ... - Christine Noelle - Google Books it says pashtun began settling in Peshawar valley in 14th century but I gave you early date of settlement in11th century(oops my mistake) and please gandhara's history .Read the history of Gandhara Gandhara - Wikipedia and Gandharis Gandhari people - Wikipedia its very clear the people living in Peshawar valley were indic and followers of hindu dharma.The answer for your question is "we don't have any problem if afghans too consider their forefathers as indic and followers of hindu dharma"(repeated many times).But problem arises when you consider yourselve as Iranian race but steal the history of indic race.

Are you an idiot? you have to back up your claim with primary sources, contemporary or near contemporary. You made your claim after reading my posts without verifying it and now you are doing "oops".

[Elite Pakhtun]

I know you guys suffer from identity crisis sometimes you consider yourselves as Gandharis(indic) and sometimes iranian .Read this book State and Tribe in Nineteenth-Century Afghanistan: The Reign of Amir Dost ... - Christine Noelle - Google Books it says pashtun began settling in Peshawar valley in 14th century but I gave you early date of settlement in11th century(oops my mistake) and please gandhara's history .Read the history of Gandhara Gandhara - Wikipedia and Gandharis Gandhari people - Wikipedia its very clear the people living in Peshawar valley were indic and followers of hindu dharma.The answer for your question is "we don't have any problem if afghans too consider their forefathers as indic and followers of hindu dharma"(repeated many times).But problem arises when you consider yourselve as Iranian race but steal the history of indic race.

Gandhara people were Buddhist. It wasn't until the Hepthalites that there was "Hindu" influence.

I think you're unfamiliar with historic facts. Hindu was an ethnic reference until around the 18th century. It meant peoples east of the Indus. In the 18th century European traders started referring to Hinduism as a religion. It was primarily polytheistic religion, with no set doctrine. It wasn't the same thing you see today with Vishnu Ganesh etc, until the 18th century, at which point it became more "standardised".

Furthermore, being followers of some form of polytheism doesn't mean they were of indic admixture. Before Islam, Saudi Arabia was following this kind of polytheistic religion. Are they also indic now?

Can you screenshot the relevant part you're trying to link? On my end google books won't show me the text.

[Saleh]

Gandhara people were Buddhist. It wasn't until the Hepthalites that there was "Hindu" influence.

I think you're unfamiliar with historic facts. Hindu was an ethnic reference until around the 18th century. It meant peoples east of the Indus. In the 18th century European traders started referring to Hinduism as a religion. It was primarily polytheistic religion, with no set doctrine. It wasn't the same thing you see today with Vishnu Ganesh etc, until the 18th century, at which point it became more "standardised".

Furthermore, being followers of some form of polytheism doesn't mean they were of indic admixture. Before Islam, Saudi Arabia was following this kind of polytheistic religion. Are they also indic now?

Can you screenshot the relevant part you're trying to link? On my end google books won't show me the text.

The guy is an idiot. Indic litteraly is derrived from Sindh region/people who lived east the Indus river. to refer to other ancient peoples west of indus based on religion or culture as ''indic'' makes little sense. It's like Arabs in 1000 years claiming every non-Arab Muslim region as populated by people of Arabic race.

[Saleh]

Bitch relax.
Gandhara was a trans Indus kingdom(how much time should I say bitch) .Who said west of Indus is Iranian land in ancient times?. Gandhara kingdom was also in potohar plateau,punjab.India in 1200bc vedic map.Vedic map too shows Gandhara as trans Indus kingdom.
Where is afghan or pashtun or pakhtun or paikhanaton

No disrespect, but I think I will take ancient Greek scientists works over a book containing stories of blue colored elephant Gods.

Eratosthenes' map of the ancient world (276–194 BCE):



The ancient map shows ''India'' clearly begins east of Indus, thus the modern name ''India''. Indus river serving as natural border between ancient Ariane and Indian subcontinent.

Ariana, the Latinized form of the Ancient Greek Ἀρ(ε)ιανή Ar(e)ianē (inhabitants: Ariani; Ἀρ(ε)ιανοί Ar(e)ianoi),[1] was a general geographical term used by some Greek and Roman authors of the ancient period for a district of wide extent of land between Central Asia[2] and the Indus River

[Samandri]

Here it goes

Hindu, you are high on cow piss. The snippet from the book quotes an "opinion" of British scholar Raverty (without quoting the original source) that there were no Pashtuns in Peshawar valley before Timur. But at the same time it also gives reference from 17th century source Makhzan-i-Afghani that Pashtuns were settled in these areas in late 12th or early 13th century. Make up your mind gobar-eater. The relevant excerpt from Makhzan-i-Afghani runs as ;

"It was some time after this, that Sultan Shehab Uddeen ordered Melik Moëzz Uddeen, one of his first Omras, to remove the whole nation of the Afghans from the mountainous districts of Ghor, and to settle them in the mountains about the residence Ghazneen, that they might prove the guardians of the seat of the empire, and check the infidels about Hindustan. In concurrence with his instruction, Moëzz Uddeen prevailed upon all the Afghans to move from the Kohistan of Ghor, and to take up their abode in Koh Suleiman, Ashnaghur, and the territories of Bajour, from the frontier of Kabul to the Neelab, and from the districts about Candahar to the Multan, at any place he thought fit and convenient:-(Roh is the same with Koh (mountain); its length extends from Bajour as far as the districts of Bahkar; its breadth runs from Hassan Abdal to Kabul: Candahar lies within the confines of this mountainous district, as also Koh Suleiman and Ashnaghur, which was the first town inhabited after their emigration in Kohistan"

Cow-piss-drinker, its obvious that Makhzan-i-Afghani of very late period has its dates confused and must have based its history on hearsay and oral traditions because the Ghaznavid history of 11th century, Bayhaqi, mentions the Afghans/Pashtuns to be settled in the hills of Ghazni while Makhzan-i-Afghani of 17th century say they were settled in Ghazni in the reign of Moizuddin Ghori.

Listen troll, if we have to rely on 17th century source like Makhzan-i-Afghani then why not the famous Tarikh-i-Ferishta of 17th century?. Tarikh-i-Ferihsta tells us that in the year 63 AH (682 A.D), the Mahumedan Afghans, issuing from their mountain , invaded and laid waste the inhabited countries, such as Kirman (Kurram), Shiewaran (place in Khyber), and Pishawar". And that Afghans built a fort in the vicinity of Peshawar which they named Khyber. The relevant page from English translation of Tarikh-i-Ferihsta

[Saleh]

Just replace the word American with Gandharis.

This is real AFGHANISTAN.
These words must be said by every afghan.

lol.

I am very certain this guy is a troll now.

[Samandri]

Just replace the word American with Gandharis.

This is real AFGHANISTAN.
These words must be said by every afghan.