The Maurya Empire: Pashtuns dont forget your Hindu and Buddhist Past

[KhalsaWarrior]

Its not confirmed if Kushans were the ancestors of Pashtuns. Apart from their Central Asian origins, they have been found to be related to the Scythians as well. Just like the Jatts and the Gurjars in the sub-continent.

[roadrunner]

Not this nonsense again khalsa. Indians have a hard time accepting the predominantly Dravidic foundation of their ancestry. Jatts and Rajputs are quite clearly not related to any Scythians. Some might have migrated into the group but by now would have been assimilated. Your evidence?

Pashtuns are quite clearly descendants of the Kushans I would add.

[KhalsaWarrior]

Not this nonsense again khalsa. Indians have a hard time accepting the predominantly Dravidic foundation of their ancestry. Jatts and Rajputs are quite clearly not related to any Scythians. Some might have migrated into the group but by now would have been assimilated. Your evidence?

Pashtuns are quite clearly descendants of the Kushans I would add.

How about you post your evidences first and then I can refute?

[roadrunner]

How about you post your evidences first and then I can refute?

Since Jatts and Rajputs are not Scythian, how can I find evidence to show it? You made the assertion, you provide the evidence.

[KhalsaWarrior]

Since Jatts and Rajputs are not Scythian, how can I find evidence to show it? You made the assertion, you provide the evidence.

I am talking about Kushans being Pashtuns. That was the original argument.

Though I dont use Wiki for references, the following text from the entry for Jatts contains sources in its footnotes.

The name Jat has frequently been connected to the names of the Getae and Massagetae, beginning with James Tod in 1829.[2] This suggests an ultimate origin of the Jat tribal group in the Indo-Scythian period of roughly 200 BC to AD 400. Alexander Cunningham connected it with the name of the Xanthii.[3]
G. C. Dwivedi writes that the Persian Majmal-ut-Tawarikh mentions Jats and Meds as the descendants of Ham (son of Noah), living in Sind on the banks of the river Bahar.[4][5] S.M. Yunus Jaffery believes that the Jat people have been mentioned in Shāhnāma, a well-known Persian epic.[6]
The Jats have apparently formed during the centuries following the collapse of the Kushan Empire, during the early medieval period. They are assumed to be the product of admixture of Indo-Scythian elements to local Indo-Aryan groups.[7]

References -

1. ^ Tod, J., Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan, Vol.1, Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd., London, 1972 (reprint), first published in 1829, pp. 623.
2. ^ B.S. Dhillon: History and Study of the Jats,ISBN 1-895603-02-1

[ayub]

Juts and Rajputs are from sakas. I just saw it on wiki. :p

[roadrunner]

I am talking about Kushans being Pashtuns. That was the original argument.

It's widely accepted. Coins I think are one bit of evidence but I'll look it up

Though I dont use Wiki for references, the following text from the entry for Jatts contains sources in its footnotes.

The name Jat has frequently been connected to the names of the Getae and Massagetae, beginning with James Tod in 1829.[2] This suggests an ultimate origin of the Jat tribal group in the Indo-Scythian period of roughly 200 BC to AD 400. Alexander Cunningham connected it with the name of the Xanthii.[3]
G. C. Dwivedi writes that the Persian Majmal-ut-Tawarikh mentions Jats and Meds as the descendants of Ham (son of Noah), living in Sind on the banks of the river Bahar.[4][5] S.M. Yunus Jaffery believes that the Jat people have been mentioned in Shāhnāma, a well-known Persian epic.[6]
The Jats have apparently formed during the centuries following the collapse of the Kushan Empire, during the early medieval period. They are assumed to be the product of admixture of Indo-Scythian elements to local Indo-Aryan groups.[7]

References -

1. ^ Tod, J., Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan, Vol.1, Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd., London, 1972 (reprint), first published in 1829, pp. 623.
2. ^ B.S. Dhillon: History and Study of the Jats,ISBN 1-895603-02-1

Changing names means nothing. Many Pashtuns have names whose origins weren't from the Pashtun lands, but it doesn't mean they originated from the Middle East. Names of tribes likewise do not prove anything. Sanskrit names of India were more common in Pakistan at one time. They don't prove very much unless there is strong evidence that the origin of those names/languages was with those same people.

[Emal_khan]

First of all thank you for sharing the information with us. Secod, unfortunately there is nothing mentioned about the origin of mauryans.

[kohestani]

i totally agree with this. I'd add that the Sikhs are either imported during the Sikh reign of terror, or converts trying to get favour.

Sikh rule was confined to the Peshawar valley, they even failed to subjugate the tribes of the peshawar valley during their short-lived rule. Sikhs never entered into the tribal areas as they were stopped by the tribes at Jamrud. All those Sikhs living in the tribal areas, and they are very few in number, are immigrants from Punjab.

According to WIKI, which has been ruined by the Indians, they (Sikhs) ruled over the whole Pakistan accept Sind, which is, of course, not true. In their (Indians) imaginary world they (Sikhs) ruled upto Jalalabad, some Indians have even captured Kabul in their imaginary world.

Edit: Some (Indians) have also captured Ghazni during Sikh rule in their imaginary world. They say that Sikhs brought back the gates of Somnath to India (which was probably a Hindu temple), that Mahmud Ghazni had allegedly taken away to Afghanistan, when they captured Ghazni from Afghans.

[kohestani]

There is much Buddhist past in pashtun areas. Swat is quite full of Buddhist relics. Hinduism was completely absent from Pashtun areas.

The Swat valley and Dir and other adjacent areas are home of Yusufzais and Swatis who came and settled in these areas in the last one millennium. And don't forget that Hinduism and Vedic religion are two different religions. Most of the people of the Indus valley practised Vedic religon or Budhism before the advent of Islam, evern Shamanism and Animism were widely practised, especially in the areas lying to the west of the Indus river.

[kohestani]

First of all thank you for sharing the information with us. Secod, unfortunately there is nothing mentioned about the origin of mauryans.

Mauryans were from India who had captured some eastern parts of Afghanistsan and added them into their kingdom. Don't forget it happened right after the invasion of Alexander the Great when all kingdoms of these regions were either completely annihiliated by the Greeks or they had become too weak to put any resistance to other invading armies after long wars against the Greeks, therefore, for Mauryans annexing these regions was a cakewalk. But just like Moghals, they only managed to contorl the "king road" for a short period of time, and just like Mughals they had also failed to subjugate the people of these regions.

[kohestani]

Since Jatts and Rajputs are not Scythian, how can I find evidence to show it? You made the assertion, you provide the evidence.

Jats and Rajputs wer actually Scythians, but after 2000 years they have been completey assimilated into the Indian society. Now after 2000 years they are as much Scythians as any Indian Pathan is a Pashtun.

[roadrunner]

The Swat valley and Dir and other adjacent areas are home of Yusufzais and Swatis who came and settled in these areas in the last one millennium. And don't forget that Hinduism and Vedic religion are two different religions. Most of the people of the Indus valley practised Vedic religon or Budhism before the advent of Islam, evern Shamanism and Animism were widely practised, especially in the areas lying to the west of the Indus river.

You sound like an intelligent fellow that knows his Afg-Pak history, based on posts so far. Clearly not the common member.

[roadrunner]

Jats and Rajputs wer actually Scythians, but after 2000 years they have been completey assimilated into the Indian society. Now after 2000 years they are as much Scythians as any Indian Pathan is a Pashtun.

Yes i suppose. However, names of people and of places are irrelevant in determining the past of Jatts and Rajputs. For example, Sanskrit you can argue is one of the Aryan languages, but it ended up in India due to cultural flow from Afg-Pak over millenia. So what else is there to base Scythian ancestry of the Jatt and Rajput? Genetics perhaps can rule out Scythian ancestry, but cannot confirm it.

On the subject of the Jatt and Rajput, what evidence is there that their languages are Scythian related? I'm not saying language proves anything btw.

[kohestani]

Yes i suppose. However, names of people and of places are irrelevant in determining the past of Jatts and Rajputs. For example, Sanskrit you can argue is one of the Aryan languages, but it ended up in India due to cultural flow from Afg-Pak over millenia. So what else is there to base Scythian ancestry of the Jatt and Rajput? Genetics perhaps can rule out Scythian ancestry, but cannot confirm it.

On the subject of the Jatt and Rajput, what evidence is there that their languages are Scythian related? I'm not saying language proves anything btw.

The Scythians were Iranic people so their language must be related to the old Persian. Now as far as these Jats or Rajputs are concerned they speak Indic languages, like Punjabi. But as I said earlier that those Scythians who came and settled in these areas some two thousand years ago don't exist anymore as such, they have been mingled with the local population.