Tajiks of Swat?

[Toramana]

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.

Friend of Baloch, Pashtun settlement of Swat happened during 15th and 16th centuries when the Khakhi-Khel tribal confederacy that included the Pashtun tribes of Yousafzai, Mohammadzais, Tarklanris, Gadun, etc. put an end to the Gabari principality of Swat. I remember roughly but cannot recall clearly that Tawarikh-i-Hafiz Rahmat Khani writes, the Gabari spoke Gabari while the subjects spoke Dari.

It is unlikely that people of Indian origin inhabited Swat and the adjoining Dir, Malakand, and Bajuar, and there is strong evidence to suggest that most of the inhabitants of Swat at the time of its conquest by Khakhi Khel were of Dardic origin albeit with a strong component of Tajak or Tajak-like people. May be this component was a transitional group between Dards and Tajaks. Most likely, they were of the same extraction as Pashais/Kohistanis and Nuristanis. Kohistanis still live in Dir, Swat, and Indus Kohistan, and their areas conjoin that of Swatis. It seems when Khakhi Khel conquered Swat, they were pushed to mountains just like Swatis were pushed to Hazara.

As I said before some writers suggest Swatis are Tajaks. In my opinion, they were originally Dards with some sections being Tajaks.

If there were any groups of Indian stock, they possibly are represented today by Gujars, who are a sedentary people living in villages under Yousafzai control and engaged in traditional style cattle-breeding and dairy farming.

Shalmanis most likely are originally Tajaks.

Hindkowans if any were likely living in Peshawar Valley in the towns along Indus especially closer to Punjab.

[Toramana]

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.

They are native people not refugees and have significant landholdings and are part of the local elite. Now they are called Akhund Khel. Few villages in the neighborhood of Madayan town of Swat belong to them. Madayan itself might have significant population of Akhund Khel Tajaks. Besides, they are found in Shangla, in Indus Kohistan in Thakote, and in Baffa, Hazara.

In Dir, they Tajaks identify themselves with the ethnonym of Tajak. They have dwellings in the Barawal and Shahi-Binshai region of Dir along the border with Kunar.

Tajak families are also found in the rest of Pukhtunkhwa towns. There is one village close to Peshawar called Gahra Tajak.

Many of the religious families esp Akhunzadgans among Pukhtuns are originally Persian. Most likely, they are Tajaks because they are Sunnis by Sect.

[maneatinglizard]

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.

I don't buy the "Ghilzai are Khilji Turks" theory. This isn't the thread to discuss it, but if the largest group of Pashtuns were originally Turks, we'd have a lot more Asian looking Pashtuns than exist.

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.

They did, and the Pashtun Delhi Sultanates brought Pashtuns with them too. However, only a massive migration would affect the gene pool of a native population, especially one that was already large.

This is why there is no genetic remnant of the Greek invasion in Central Asia or India, despite Alexander's invasion and the subsequent Greek kingdoms that ruled over parts of it for up to 200 years. Likewise, it's unlikely there are many South Asians with significant Persian or otherwise Iranian ancestry.

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.

There has been plenty of testing of Punjabis. DNA testing in general is very new and unrefined, but Punjabis certainly don't lack for representation in genetic studies.

As for where Jatts cluster, I don't know why anyone would assume that you'd be closer to Tamils, as Jatts and Tamils are located very far apart, and clustering has a strong geographical bias.

Friend of Baloch, Pashtun settlement of Swat happened during 15th and 16th centuries when the Khakhi-Khel tribal confederacy that included the Pashtun tribes of Yousafzai, Mohammadzais, Tarklanris, Gadun, etc. put an end to the Gabari principality of Swat. I remember roughly but cannot recall clearly that Tawarikh-i-Hafiz Rahmat Khani writes, the Gabari spoke Gabari while the subjects spoke Dari.

It is unlikely that people of Indian origin inhabited Swat and the adjoining Dir, Malakand, and Bajuar, and there is strong evidence to suggest that most of the inhabitants of Swat at the time of its conquest by Khakhi Khel were of Dardic origin albeit with a strong component of Tajak or Tajak-like people. May be this component was a transitional group between Dards and Tajaks. Most likely, they were of the same extraction as Pashais/Kohistanis and Nuristanis. Kohistanis still live in Dir, Swat, and Indus Kohistan, and their areas conjoin that of Swatis. It seems when Khakhi Khel conquered Swat, they were pushed to mountains just like Swatis were pushed to Hazara.

As I said before some writers suggest Swatis are Tajaks. In my opinion, they were originally Dards with some sections being Tajaks.

If there were any groups of Indian stock, they possibly represented by Gujars, who are a sedentary people living in villages under Yousafzai control and engaged in traditional style cattle-breeding and dairy farming.

Shalmanis most likely are originally Tajaks.

Hindkowans if any were likely living in Peshawar Valley in the towns along Indus especially closer to Punjab.

"Dardic" is an invented designation created by colonial researchers based on shoddy research. There's no such thing as a "Dard." People who are classed as "Dards" by outsiders don't see themselves as such, they don't have any shared history or culture, and who is a Dard and who isn't constantly changes (Nuristanis used be considered Dards, they've since been reclassified as a separate, third branch of Aryan).

[Toramana]

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.

I agree with that. Just like some Laghmanis seem to have recently transitioned to Pashtun ethnic-cultural milieu, the Punjsheris might have been Dards such as Kohistanis and Pashais that gradually adopted Dari as a language. I somewhere read they had Parachi speaking people among themselves.

The process of assimilation is even today going on in Dir and Swat Kohistanis who are on the verge being assimilated by Pashtuns because most of their interaction occur with Pashtuns.

[Friends of Baloch]

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.

No you're not 'pretty sure' about that, you are clueless about it. The Mughals were tiny in number compared to the Indians they ruled and had to rule through local proxies and subordinates, mainly Hindus. Akbar's court was full of Hindus along with converted Indians. By the time of Aurangzeb there were hardly any co called "Mughals" left and most of the people serving him were natives, including Hindus (despite what Hindu fanatics want to believe, even Aurangzeb had Hindus serving at his court).

The Mughals did not build many settlements in India. Most of what they built were forts, mosques and monuments to glorify themselves in existing cities. They themselves mostly lived separate lives from their subjects in the Turkic style mobile tent city.

The most famous city founded by Mughals, Fatehpur Sikri, was inhabited by natives because there were no 'Mughals' to settle in it. That is one of the reasons why it was abandoned shortly after being built. The other being water scarcity.

Persians have little to do with the Mughals. Mughals brought Persian court culture to India, but very few people. Just a meagre 12,000 to 15,000 Persians were loaned to Homayoun by the Safavids to reconquer India from the Afghans. All of them were cavalrymen and they returned back to Persia. Akbar, Jahangir and Shah Jahan had a few Persians serving in their court, mostly career seekers who also went back.

By Aurangzeb's time there were almost no Turks left, and very few Persians at the Mughal court. After he died, the language from ruler to subject had to be switched to Hindustani/Urdu because no one but the tiny Mughal court that was left could understand Persian, and none of the Mughals knew Chagatai Turkish anymore.

I know it is another favourite fiction of pakis to make believe that hordes of 'Persians' came to setlle all over India, "including Pakiland", during the Mughal rule in the hopes that they can claim some 'Persian ancestry' within their Dravidian family tree. But they dont know anything about Iran or Persian history.

The fact is the population of Iran was decimated by the Mongol conquest in the 13th century (with another collapse after Temur's conquest in the 14th century) and did not begin to recover until the 19th century through to the start of the 20th century, after which it experienced significant growth for the the first time in hundreds of years.

In the 15th, 16th and 17th centuries, Iran's population was miniscule. There were very few 'Persians', and Turks had replaced Iranians in most of Central Asia. As it relates to the Mughals, there is no record of any significant or even noticeable movement of 'Persians' to the Mughal empire. Iran had its own empire, the Safavids. There would have been no Persians to make any demographic impact on Mughal India anyway even if the Mughals did try to woo them to migrate, which they didnt.

The only known and verified settlement of 'Persians' ever to occur in South Asia was the migration of the Parsis to Gujarat. Their orign in Iran is confirmed by historical record, the continuation of the Zoroastrian relgion among the Parsis, and also by DNA that has confirmed that Parsi Y-DNA is foreign to India and originates from Iranians.

There is no evidence of any other Persian migration to South Asia. No record of it, and no evidence for it.

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.

You say that no proper testing on Jats has been done but then claim straight after that "on the samples" Jats are supposed to cluster closer to Persians than to Tamils? So which it it? What are these samples?

If Jats and other "low caste" Hindu people 'clustered' genetically with 'Persians' more than their fellow Dravidians, then you would 'cluster' along with Parsis too, since they are true descendants of Persians. But you dont. Punjabis have nothing to do with Parsis and have no relation to them. Parsis are genetically noticeably at a distance from Indians, which includes Punjabis. So dont come here and lie to people. You have nothing to do with Persians. You are just a desparate wanabe that is ashamed of being Indian.

Just do your DNA like your fellow Jat Punjabi like this guy if you are in any doubt:

[Friends of Baloch]

Friend of Baloch, Pashtun settlement of Swat happened during 15th and 16th centuries when the Khakhi-Khel tribal confederacy that included the Pashtun tribes of Yousafzai, Mohammadzais, Tarklanris, Gadun, etc. put an end to the Gabari principality of Swat. I remember roughly but cannot recall clearly that Tawarikh-i-Hafiz Rahmat Khani writes, the Gabari spoke Gabari while the subjects spoke Dari.

It is unlikely that people of Indian origin inhabited Swat and the adjoining Dir, Malakand, and Bajuar, and there is strong evidence to suggest that most of the inhabitants of Swat at the time of its conquest by Khakhi Khel were of Dardic origin albeit with a strong component of Tajak or Tajak-like people. May be this component was a transitional group between Dards and Tajaks. Most likely, they were of the same extraction as Pashais/Kohistanis and Nuristanis. Kohistanis still live in Dir, Swat, and Indus Kohistan, and their areas conjoin that of Swatis. It seems when Khakhi Khel conquered Swat, they were pushed to mountains just like Swatis were pushed to Hazara.

As I said before some writers suggest Swatis are Tajaks. In my opinion, they were originally Dards with some sections being Tajaks.

If there were any groups of Indian stock, they possibly are represented today by Gujars, who are a sedentary people living in villages under Yousafzai control and engaged in traditional style cattle-breeding and dairy farming.

Shalmanis most likely are originally Tajaks.

Hindkowans if any were likely living in Peshawar Valley in the towns along Indus especially closer to Punjab.

Babur wrote in the Baburnama that he killed many Hindus in Bajaur if i am not mistaken. I need to find my copy of the book to double check. So there were definitely Indics in Swat before Afghans started becoming dominant there. But i agree that there must have been other indigenous groups related to Kalash etc there that are now extinct as a people and propbably absorbed into Pashtuns.

I am not convinced at all about Tajiks though.

[Toramana]

Babur wrote in the Baburnama that he killed many Hindus in Bajaur if i am not mistaken. I need to find my copy of the book to double check. So there were definitely Indics in Swat before Afghans started becoming dominant there. But i agree that there must have been other indigenous groups related to Kalash etc there that are now extinct as a people and propbably absorbed into Pashtuns.

I am not convinced at all about Tajiks though.

Hindus in this context most likely means pagans. It doesn't mean
Indians. There were sra kafar predominant in that area before they were pushed into high mountains by the invading tribes. The modern descendants may be Kalash and Nooristanis and Safis now disguising as Pashtuns.

[Friends of Baloch]

Hindus in this context most likely means pagans. It doesn't mean
Indians. There were sra kafar predominant in that area before they were pushed into high mountains by the invading tribes. The modern descendants may be Kalash and Nooristanis and Safis now disguising as Pashtuns.

In the Baburnama he talks about Kafiristan and identifies the 'Kafirs' in that exact term as a people living in the mountains and river basins not far from Kabul. But he never calls them "Hindus" as a term for pagans, because they werent Hindus, which has always been an ethnonym for South Asians.

When talking about Bajaur, he clearly mentions Hindus by name and having killed many of them there. He isnt talking about non-Muslims, he is talking about Indians.

Likewise he talks about actual 'Moghals', and the actual 'Moghalistan', ie, the Mongols. He talks about them being shamans and pagans, but never uses the word "Hindu" for them or as a term for them being 'pagan'.

[salman47]

They are native people not refugees and have significant landholdings and are part of the local elite. Now they are called Akhund Khel. Few villages in the neighborhood of Madayan town of Swat belong to them. Madayan itself might have significant population of Akhund Khel Tajaks. Besides, they are found in Shangla, in Indus Kohistan in Thakote, and in Baffa, Hazara.

In Dir, they Tajaks identify themselves with the ethnonym of Tajak. They have dwellings in the Barawal and Shahi-Binshai region of Dir along the border with Kunar.

Tajak families are also found in the rest of Pukhtunkhwa towns. There is one village close to Peshawar called Gahra Tajak.

Many of the religious families esp Akhunzadgans among Pukhtuns are originally Persian. Most likely, they are Tajaks because they are Sunnis by Sect.

As far as I know, no one in Gara(thats what we call 'Gara Tajak') speaks Parsi, only Pashto!

[Toramana]

In the Baburnama he talks about Kafiristan and identifies the 'Kafirs' in that exact term as a people living in the mountains and river basins not far from Kabul. But he never calls them "Hindus" as a term for pagans, because they werent Hindus, which has always been an ethnonym for South Asians.

When talking about Bajaur, he clearly mentions Hindus by name and having killed many of them there. He isnt talking about non-Muslims, he is talking about Indians.

Likewise he talks about actual 'Moghals', and the actual 'Moghalistan', ie, the Mongols. He talks about them being shamans and pagans, but never uses the word "Hindu" for them or as a term for them being 'pagan'.

The existence of a Hindu principality or local power in that region since the time of Mahmood of Ghazna is not attested by any other historical document...that also as late as 16th Century. He might be referring to Hindus living among Muslims as traders.

[Elite Pakhtun]

This is why there is no genetic remnant of the Greek invasion in Central Asia or India, despite Alexander's invasion and the subsequent Greek kingdoms that ruled over parts of it for up to 200 years. Likewise, it's unlikely there are many South Asians with significant Persian or otherwise Iranian ancestry.

You are wrong. The only way to conclusively determine remnants of Greek DNA is to find common ancestors i.e. find the same greeks as the ancient greeks that were in the region at the time.

You'd have to assume the Greeks of today are the same as the ancient greeks... a very flawed assumption. Same story with Persians, Syeds, etc. Unless you can control for what happened in the past X amount of generations, the information we have available is too limited right now to draw any conclusion of this sort.

You're also ignoring what happens to DNA with time. As well, you're grossly exaggerating how large of a data set we have to actually analyze this. 20-30 (****... call it 2-300) results on 23&me is not at all representative.

With the Kalash, some people did some DNA test, and they found common genetic traits with Austrians. Some have concluded that this means some Austrians today have some DNA of ancient Greeks. Although this conclusion is still considered a stretch.

[Friends of Baloch]

The existence of a Hindu principality or local power in that region since the time of Mahmood of Ghazna is not attested by any other historical document...that also as late as 16th Century. He might be referring to Hindus living among Muslims as traders.

He was either talking about Yousefzai Afghans who had abandoned Islam or about both Yousefzai and Indians together. Babur uses both 'Afghan' and 'Hindu' in his commentary about attacking Bajaur, but notes that the Afghans there that he attacked were not Muslims.

[Friends of Baloch]

You are wrong. The only way to conclusively determine remnants of Greek DNA is to find common ancestors i.e. find the same greeks as the ancient greeks that were in the region at the time.

You'd have to assume the Greeks of today are the same as the ancient greeks... a very flawed assumption. Same story with Persians, Syeds, etc. Unless you can control for what happened in the past X amount of generations, the information we have available is too limited right now to draw any conclusion of this sort.

You're also ignoring what happens to DNA with time. As well, you're grossly exaggerating how large of a data set we have to actually analyze this. 20-30 (****... call it 2-300) results on 23&me is not at all representative.

With the Kalash, some people did some DNA test, and they found common genetic traits with Austrians. Some have concluded that this means some Austrians today have some DNA of ancient Greeks. Although this conclusion is still considered a stretch.

It's not flawed, it is correct and has actually been discussed in the news just this week that modern Greeks are indeed largely descended from their earliest Minoan and Mycenaean ancestors.

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-...eks-180964314/

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/...nt-dna-reveals

https://phys.org/news/2017-08-civili...s-science.html

[Toramana]

Akhund Khels trace their ancestry to Akhund Darweza Baba.

"These akhund khel living in puran, hulandar, and kana ghorband, Dist. Dir and dor mera this clan of Akhund Khel are the descendant of Great Islamic Scholor Akhund Darweza baba(1533 A.D). he was Tajik (TURK) according to his own book "tazkira" his family tree is. Akhun Darweza s/o Gadai s/o Saadi s/o Durghan s/o Ahmed s/o Matta s/o Jewan s/o Janati. Akhund Darweza was disciple of Pir Baba of Buner. Akhund Darweza was fomous for polemical work against Bayazid Ansari's teachings. Darweza cursed Bayazid and denounced his teaching as the worst deviations. He was author of many books most famous are makhzan and tazkira tul abrar wal ashrar."

According to Sardar Ali Akhund Khel.

"Akhund Darweza Baba is Sheikh Darwezai ibn Gada ibn Sa’di al-Chistii, born either in 1533 or 1549 (depending on the authority quoted) and died in 1048/1638, in the reign of Mughal Shah Jahan Shah. An accomplished scholar of formal outward religious sciences and lore, as well as a powerful mystic, and a well accomplished poet in Pashtu and Persian, Sheikh Darweza's tomb lies in Hazarkhwani Graveyard, Peshawar, Pakistan, and may Allah be well pleased with him, may his Secret be sanctified. Aamin. Hazrat Darweza is the author of the following books; Tadhkirat al-Abrar wal-Ashrar (Persian), Irshad al-Talibin (Persian), Irshad al-Muridin (Persian), Makhzan al-Islam (Pushtu completed by his son ‘Abd al- Karim), Sharh Qasidah Amali (Persian) and Sharh Asma’al-Husna (Persian)."

They seem to be more widespread than I initially though present not only in Swat but also Hazara and other parts of KP. For example, in Konch Valley 45 kilometer north of Mansehra, Hazara, they have 15 villages: Kako, Shangrita, Neen Suk, Maira, Harora Pain, Harori Bala, Chinari, Chaghar Kote, Maidan, Sairai, Jabarai, Bakrian, Dana, Gali, and Bhatti. This exactly where Swati Gabaris also live, therefore the close link between the two.

On Akhund Darqaiza Baba tomb, we have the following family tree.



Akhund Daewiza was a disciple of Pir Baba who was a Sayed of Tirmiz Uzbakistan. Both had close relationship with each other. The progeny of Pir Baba are called Pir Khel and mostly live in Mardan, Pirano Dagga, and Buner .

[Elite Pakhtun]

It's not flawed, it is correct and has actually been discussed in the news just this week that modern Greeks are indeed largely descended from their earliest Minoan and Mycenaean ancestors.

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-...eks-180964314/

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/...nt-dna-reveals

https://phys.org/news/2017-08-civili...s-science.html

https://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v15/n1/pdf/5201726a.pdf?foxtrotcallback=true