Tajiks of Swat?

[Friends of Baloch]

Most of this article seems like nonsense to be honest: http://www.thefridaytimes.com/tft/th...s-of-pakistan/

The writer's FB and discussion, which is notably anti-Pashtun (not neccessarily the fault of the author though but other commentators): https://www.facebook.com/arif.akhund...13615549321179

[Toramana]

Most of this article seems like nonsense to be honest: http://www.thefridaytimes.com/tft/th...s-of-pakistan/

The writer's FB and discussion, which is notably anti-Pashtun (not neccessarily the fault of the author though but other commentators): https://www.facebook.com/arif.akhund...13615549321179

Friend of Baluch, Tajaks do exist in Swat. Mostly, they have villages in Upper Swat in Sakhra, which is a scenic valley in Swat, and villages in Madayan area. They can also be found in Dir, Mardan, and Charssada.

Some authors, e.g., Major Raverty, did say Swatis are Tajaks yet the issue is still unresolved.


As for the author of the article, he is really confused about his own identity. Some years back, he was claiming a Turkish descent.

[jahan2]

this is some news. I actually didn't know there were (native) Tajiks in Pakistan.

[Elite Pakhtun]

Most of this article seems like nonsense to be honest: http://www.thefridaytimes.com/tft/th...s-of-pakistan/

The writer's FB and discussion, which is notably anti-Pashtun (not neccessarily the fault of the author though but other commentators): https://www.facebook.com/arif.akhund...13615549321179

It is the fault of the author. Read some of his comments... he's just another (wannabe?) tawjik kunni.

The first url reads like a psuedo-historical piece with no references and high degree of bias. There are no Tajiks in swat. If there were, more than enough time has elapsed that they intermingled with locals and are long since pashtun. But I'm skeptical they were there in the first place.

[Samandri]

A while ago i found this Akhundzada Arif Hasan calling names to Yousafzais and Pashtuns in comment section of my blog. I blocked him from commenting.

[Samandri]

He is claiming that "Dehqans" were aristocratic ruling class.....this is non-sense, it simply means "peasants" and they were serfs of the Sultans of Swat. If you ask him to cite any source for the claim that Dehqans meant aristocratic ruling elite at any point in the history, he wont be able to cite any. Moreover from "Tawarikh-i-Hafiz Rahmat Khani" , the original version of which was written around 1620 AD, informs us that one of the three sections of Swatis was of Yousafzai extraction who had migrated from Kandahar in ancient times. So it appears Swatis were not homogeneous people.

[Firdousi]

Friend of Baluch, Tajaks do exist in Swat. Mostly, they have villages in Upper Swat in Sakhra, which is a scenic valley in Swat, and villages in Madayan area. They can also be found in Dir, Mardan, and Charssada.

Some authors, e.g., Major Raverty, did say Swatis are Tajaks yet the issue is still unresolved.


As for the author of the article, he is really confused about his own identity. Some years back, he was claiming a Turkish descent.

Are they native people of refugees from Afghanistan? Many places in eastern Pashtun provinces have huge Tajik pockets who predate their fellow Pashtun neighbors (Gardez, Urghun, Ghazni, etc). It wouldnt surprise if exist some Tajik pockets across the Hindu Kush after all Tajiks have been traveling between Khorasan and Hindustan for centuries.

[Nekrofrost]

I remember a similar post here about gibari swatis too so idk

[Nekrofrost]

Found it http://www.pashtunforums.com/pashtun...ri-tajiks.html

[jahan2]

I wouldn't be surprised if a good portion of Pashtuns were in reality Tajiks in Pashtun coating.

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

The word Tajik is a very vague ethnonym, it generally refers to people who used Farsi as a lingua franca, but doesn't necessarily mean they were ethnically Persian. Khwarzemi, Soghdians, Pamiris, Gabaris etc may fit this category. This also explains why Panjshiris and Heratis are quite dissimilar even though they both speak a dialect of Farsi. Their ancestors were probably not Persians. For sure Pashtuns have absorbed or had tribed that transitioned into Pashtun social fabric over the course of time. This is even referenced in our own lore.

Ghilzais, particularly Kharotis have some Turk-affiliation (I read that it is alleged that somehow Kharotis were remnants of Ghaznawids). So it would not surprise me if Pashtuns of today have different ethnic origins from among clans who were originally Tajiks cum-Soghdians-Khwarzemis and so on.

[Kakar-Wardak]

Tajiks of Tajikistan are more mongoloid than those of afghanistan.

[Friends of Baloch]

Friend of Baluch, Tajaks do exist in Swat. Mostly, they have villages in Upper Swat in Sakhra, which is a scenic valley in Swat, and villages in Madayan area. They can also be found in Dir, Mardan, and Charssada.

Some authors, e.g., Major Raverty, did say Swatis are Tajaks yet the issue is still unresolved.

People of Swat prior to Pashtun settlement were not Tajiks or any other Iranic people. The Achaemenid sources label it a foreign, Indian territory (Gandhara, along with Hindush) and it is labelled as part of the "Aniran" (ie, non-Iranian lands) in the Sasanian era.

In the Alexander Chronicles written by Greek and Roman generals they also refer to Brahman priests and Indians generally in those parts.

Any Tajiks in Swat, which i think would be few and far between, are clearly foreigners and much later arrivals to that region. The 'natives' were most likely Indians and extinct groups which the Kalash and Nuristani once belonged to.

In the few urban and trading posts in the region, that likely would have had a mixture of communities, but there is zero evidence that the villages and surrounding country were "Tajik". Frankly, the evidence suggests that it was mostly Indian, the Indic's now known as Hindkowans.

As for the author of the article, he is really confused about his own identity. Some years back, he was claiming a Turkish descent.

I read his profile description and he seems to be a typical citizen of Pakiland. He is confused about his identity, and appears to have adopted the Indic inferiority complex that Pakiland so naturally inspires in its citizens, even reaching to the minority non-Indic groups.

According to him, his father is a Pashtun and his mother is English. But for some reason, he has decided that he wants to be a 'Persian' and is actually, somehow 'Persian'.

This is Pakiland for you. This is what living in an inferior Punjabi state does to people, where even a mixed Pashtun-Englishman is confused of who he is and feels dirty and ashamed of being associated with Pakis, and so wants to believe he is something else and is in owe of foreigners, particularly Persians and dreams of being a 'Persian'. It is a typical paki story.

Persian, the so called "high culture" that every Indic tells themselves it is, and know that they can never be equal to.

It's sady really.

The is no greater inferiority complex than the Paki and Indian lust for that which is 'Persian'.

[Ambatin]

People of Swat prior to Pashtun settlement were not Tajiks or any other Iranic people. The Achaemenid sources label it a foreign, Indian territory (Gandhara, along with Hindush) and it is labelled as part of the "Aniran" (ie, non-Iranian lands) in the Sasanian era.

In the Alexander Chronicles written by Greek and Roman generals they also refer to Brahman priests and Indians generally in those parts.

Any Tajiks in Swat, which i think would be few and far between, are clearly foreigners and much later arrivals to that region. The 'natives' were most likely Indians and extinct groups which the Kalash and Nuristani once belonged to.

In the few urban and trading posts in the region, that likely would have had a mixture of communities, but there is zero evidence that the villages and surrounding country were "Tajik". Frankly, the evidence suggests that it was mostly Indian, the Indic's now known as Hindkowans.

I read his profile description and he seems to be a typical citizen of Pakiland. He is confused about his identity, and appears to have adopted the Indic inferiority complex that Pakiland so naturally inspires in its citizens, even reaching to the minority non-Indic groups.

According to him, his father is a Pashtun and his mother is English. But for some reason, he has decided that he wants to be a 'Persian' and is actually, somehow 'Persian'.

This is Pakiland for you. This is what living in an inferior Punjabi state does to people, where even a mixed Pashtun-Englishman is confused of who he is and feels dirty and ashamed of being associated with Pakis, and so wants to believe he is something else and is in owe of foreigners, particularly Persians and dreams of being a 'Persian'. It is a typical paki story.

Persian, the so called "high culture" that every Indic tells themselves it is, and know that they can never be equal to.

It's sady really.

The is no greater inferiority complex than the Paki and Indian lust for that which is 'Persian'.

Pretty sure Mughals and every other Turko-Mongol-Persian empires brought some Persian speakers with them who probably settled all across the region in South Asia as well as Pakistan.

You can't say he is a self hater because he has doubts about his true identity.

No proper DNA Testing has been done on the population of Punjab. Specially us Jatts. On the samples We cluster closer to Persians than to Tamils.

[maneatinglizard]

I wouldn't be surprised if a good portion of Pashtuns were in reality Tajiks in Pashtun coating.

It's probably a mix of this and the reverse.

"Tajik" as a self-designation is new. I'm pretty sure some groups that are called Tajiks still don't like the term. As such, Tajiks aren't a single, monolithic group.

Rather, I think the best way to describe Tajiks is that they are a Persianized people who are primarily of Eastern Iranian origin. Modern Tajiks mostly descend from urban people who spoke any of the now extinct Eastern Iranian languages (like Khawarezmian, Sogdian, Bactrian, etc.) that were gradually supplanted by Persian. Some of them are likely also Western Iranians (Persians and other groups, probably not including Kurds), but I don't think the number is very high, as genetically they're closer to Pashtuns than Persians, and lack the Middle Eastern aspect that Persians tend to have.

In contrast, Pashtuns are basically a tribal Eastern Iranian people who speak Pashto. So, the basic differences between Pashtuns and Tajiks are language (Pashto vs Persian) and social organization (tribal vs non-tribal, though I think some Tajiks may still be organized into tribes). There are cultural differences too, but these are minor, and both can pretty neatly fit into the overall culture of Central Asia.

Looking at those definitions, it's pretty easy to imagine people who were Pashtun at one time losing their tribal identity and language, eventually becoming "Tajik" even if that didn't exist as a distinct identity at the time, and the reverse happening as well, with previously non-Pashtun Eastern Iranians adopting Pashto and Pashtun identity, eventually being assimilated into the Pashtun tribal structure.

As for the article in question, I haven't read too much about the subject, but referring to any group of people from the past with a modern ethnonym like Tajik is anachronistic, and usually driven by nationalistic fervor rather than reality. So the people the article is referring to may have been the ancestors of some modern Tajiks, but they would not have referred to themselves as such at the time. It's like calling the ancient Aryan tribes Pashtuns because some of their descendants are modern Pashtuns. It's wrong and annoying, and usually only done because nationalists tend to have inferiority complexes that leave them desperate to find any way to elevate the status of their national identity throughout history. Likewise annoying is how people like Zamakhshari and al-Khawarizmi have been subsumed into the nationalist Persian identity (and hence are referred to as Persians), despite the fact that the first was definitely Khawarezmian, not Persian, and the second is of unknown ethnic background, but is probably also Khawarezmian. You can find this kind of historical appropriation with every nationalistic movement (Turks claim Sumerians were Turkic lol), it's not just a Tajik thing.