What's new

Aboriginal Races of Frontier prior to the Pashtun invasions

Grandpa, why don't you present your theory on racial orgins of Indians?

UP and Biharis are the worst people in South Asia. Irrespective of their religion or caste. This has nothing to do with being hyderbadi or not.

Bro, you can't say a entire people are worst in South Asia. Before the British came to India, UP/Bihar area was the richest area in all of South Asia. It was also the political center of South Asia. That's why historically most rulers of India(including the Muslim ones) made UP/Bihar their power base. Reason why UP/Bihar lost it's prominence is because in 1857, most of the people that revolted came from these areas. So when the British hit back they retaliated really hard against all UP/Bihar. Rest of India began to be favoured by the British who developed all of India more than UP/Bihar.

Even army recruitment in UP were based on who revolted in 1857. Those UP Rajput tribes who had revolted were never again recruited while those UP Rajputs who remained loyal to the British were recruited, this is evident from their recruitment manuals such as the one written by Bingley(in Handbook on Rajputs) where he suggests which Rajputs should be recruited and which should not. The Pathans of Rohilkhand were especially vilified and punished. The Muslim nobility of UP/Bihar was almost all destroyed.
 
Last edited:
.
UP Pathans look very different then native UP people (despite mixing). But those who migrated to Karachi now probably marry freely with other muhajirs because they have created their own new identity/ethnic group "muhajir".
The ones in karachi, might be mostly the fake ones who assumed pathan caste after migration to new country. It is a fact that after migration to kararchi in 1947 , many saw it as an opportunity to register themselves as syeds, qureshis, pathan, mughals etc.
 
.
Bro, you can't say a entire people are worst in South Asia. Before the British came to India, UP/Bihar area was the richest area in all of South Asia. It was also the political center of South Asia. That's why historically most rulers of India(including the Muslim ones) made UP/Bihar their power base. Reason why UP/Bihar lost it's prominence is because in 1857, most of the people that revolted came from these areas. So when the British hit back they retaliated really hard against all UP/Bihar. Rest of India began to be favoured by the British who developed all of India more than UP/Bihar.

Even army recruitment in UP were based on who revolted in 1857. Those UP Rajput tribes who had revolted were never again recruited while those UP Rajputs who remained loyal to the British were recruited, this is evident from their recruitment manuals such as the one written by Bingley(in Handbook on Rajputs) where he suggests which Rajputs should be recruited and which should not. The Pathans of Rohilkhand were especially vilified and punished. The Muslim nobility of UP/Bihar was almost all destroyed.
That might have been a factor. But their mentality is fucked up too. That's the reason they are so backward. They are only good at producing babies.

I remember having a conversation with an UP guy in HYD. I asked him what you don't like about the south. He said too, " yahan bahut gaande kaale log hai". It was funny since this guy was dark himself and belonged to mochi caste. And also because this idiot came from the most backward state and had the nerve to look down upon the locals.
 
.
@Samandri: A bit off topic comment, but since you know a good deal about the pashtuns, I have a question for you. Do Durranis and Ghilzais consider each other "different" per say? And how long have the durrani-ghilzai rivalry been? Secondly, are Ghilzais found in Pakistan?

I was interested in Ghilzais because their former leader was a "Nasher", who claim descent from Mahmud of Ghazni. This guy is a descendant of the Nasher khan, and he doesn't look like a Pakistani Pakhtun to me:
fahard-darya.jpg

Yes we do... we also have @ghilzai my brother on this forum.

Durranis are more sophisticated and mild-mannered, while ghilzais are fiercer and far more traditional. Generally ghilzais were regarded as better warriors in the history but less civilized than durranis. Pashtunwali and pashtun culture is followed more strongly by ghilzais, even in north they are sticking to it while durranis would easily assimilate into dari population. Moreover ghilzais were nomads, portion of them still have nomadic lifestyle while durranis were always settled people.

Ghilzai-Durrani rivalry or enmity was noticeable in Mughal-Safavid wars. Durranis sided with Safavids while Ghilzais sided with Mughals. Ghilzais also aided Mughals in their campaigns against uzbeks during Shahjahan times While durranis were present in the courts of safavids since 16th century.

Kandhar became bone of contention between durranis and ghilzais. Safavid rulers obviously favoured durranis over ghilzais in case of kandhar but tides turned when Mirawais, a ghilzai chief of hotak branch captured kandhar from safavids in 1708. Ghilzais exiled durranis towards Herat. In 1719 ghilzais began to conquer sistan and in 1721 isfahan, capital of safavid empire, was captured by hotaki ghilzais.

In 1729 Nadir shah defeated ghilzais in iran and , as precautionary measure also defeated durranis of herat. Nadir shah won the support of durranis as well as tokhi branch of ghilzais who were bitter enemies of hotak branch of ghilzais who were still ruling kandhar. In 1738 nadir shah captured kandhar and handed it over to durranis, while hotaks were exiled to mashhad. The remaining branches of ghilzais were defeated by nadir shah one by one as far as kabul. India was actually invaded for the reason that some ghilzais had taken refuge there among mughals. In Nadir shah's victories against ghilzais, role of durranis was quite evident.

Ghilzais didnt support Ahmad shah abdali, or any durrani king or emir. At various points, ghilzais revolted against durrani rulers. When they revolted in the times of emir abdulal rehman, the iron king, large number of them were exiled to north. The nashar khan you mentioned, was chief of kharoti branch of ghilzais and they were exiled to kunduz in north by amir abdul rehman.

Ghilzais are not that great in number in Pakistan. Nasar branch of ghilzai, who were powindas, are settled in balochistan while there are some sulieman khels (another branch of ghilzais) in south waziristan. Lodhi tribes, are cousins of ghilzais, and are numerous in pakistan. Lodhi trribes includes niazis, marwats, kundis, dotanis, daulat khels, miankhels, sherwani, suris, prangis etc etc


There are African-Black people on coast of mekran, because they were bought as slaves by Balochs, the ones in karachi migrated from balochistan, when given freedom by their baloch masters due to great drought.

Alaka Nasirs are basically Kochis right? Mullah Fazlullah is also a Nasir... i know his relatives from Loralai... businessmen and settled..

P.S: Suleiman Khels are also settled in Zhob district..

@Samandri Are pathans of India fake? 99% of them don't look like the ones in Afghanistan? What about Hindus and SIkhs who claim to be pathans and look like Pathans?

Are Pathan and Baloch racially different? Do they inter-marry?

The average guy or the nationalist wont consider the indian "pathans" (who dont even speak or look like pashtuns) as Pashtun.... I.E: Shahid Afridi who claimed than Irfan Pathan etc are fake "Pathans".... Also there are no hindu "Pathans".

P.S: Pashtuns dont even use the term Pathan.
..............


Again you asked if Baluch marry Makranis... usually no... we dont... they were used as slaves and soldiers by Baluch states.... and many Baluch probably had african slave girls hence some might look "hybrid" ....

But there is no fixed rule or law that a Baluch cant marry a Makrani... specially in big cities... but its usually not the case.


As for Baluch and Pashtun inter marriages... depends on the family.. take me for an example... you bhabi is a Pashtun... and my family doesnt have any issues with that...and we are conservative... pardah etc is observed and so on.

Lol uncle, relax. I don't see a single post here which implies racism. Racism is making derogatory remarks about individual based only on their colour or race. I didn't see anyone doing that. Saying an African American is black skinned and a White American is white skinned is not racism. It's a fact.

And equating me with those rapists and hindutva extremists is totally uncalled for. I still don't see in which post I implied racism. Saying that an Awan is lighter skinned and more "caucasoid" looking than a kammi(a.k.a miscellaneous/serf tribes) is not racism. It's reality, which can't be denied. And if these statements imply racism, than don't blame me, blame the people who take on fake surnames. If a gypsy tribe is claiming a Pashtun origin, then their bluff needs to be exposed right?

My friend... i have "teli" n "Kumhar" classmates and they dont look like they way you described...
 
Last edited:
.
Yes we do... we also have @ghilzai my brother on this forum.



Alaka Nasirs are basically Kochis right? Mullah Fazlullah is also a Nasir... i know his relatives from Loralai... businessmen and settled..

P.S: Suleiman Khels are also settled in Zhob district..



The average guy or the nationalist wont consider the indian "pathans" (who dont even speak or look like pashtuns) as Pashtun.... I.E: Shahid Afridi who claimed than Irfan Pathan etc are fake "Pathans".... Also there are no hindu "Pathans".

P.S: Pashtuns dont even use the term Pathan.
..............


Again you asked if Baluch marry Makranis... usually no... we dont... they were used as slaves and soldiers by Baluch states.... and many Baluch probably had african slave girls hence some might look "hybrid" ....

But there is no fixed rule or law that a Baluch cant marry a Makrani... specially in big cities... but its usually not the case.


As for Baluch and Pashtun inter marriages... depends on the family.. take me for an example... you bhabi is a Pashtun... and my family doesnt have any issues with that...and we are conservative... pardah etc is observed and so on.



My friend... i have "teli" n "Kumhar" classmates and they dont look like they way you described...
Yes Nasars are basically kochis or powindas. About mullah fazlullah, are you talking about swat's one?, i thought he was yousafzai
 
. .
Yes we do... we also have @ghilzai My friend... i have "teli" n "Kumhar" classmates and they dont look like they way you described...

Kumhars of Potohar are actually a light skinned race. It's not rare to find a kumhar with really light complexion and eyes. The word Teli on the other hand is interchangeable with "chuhra". Man I hate sounding so bigoted haha, but it's the sad reality. And I'm surprised that your teli classmate admits that he's a teli. I have never seen educated telis ever admitting their origin.

PS: @Samandri : So btw you were saying that Niazi, Marwats etc are the cousins of Ghilzais. So does that mean you guys are not recognized as "proper Ghilzais", or are you considered a part of Ghilzais?
 
.
Kumhars of Potohar are actually a light skinned race. It's not rare to find a kumhar with really light complexion and eyes. The word Teli on the other hand is interchangeable with "chuhra". Man I hate sounding so bigoted haha, but it's the sad reality. And I'm surprised that your teli classmate admits that he's a teli. I have never seen educated telis ever admitting their origin.

He calls himself a malik... i asked him which "malik" and he replied honestly..
 
.
As for Baluch and Pashtun inter marriages... depends on the family.. take me for an example... you bhabi is a Pashtun... and my family doesnt have any issues with that...and we are conservative... pardah etc is observed and so on.

Bhabi ? :o:

I thought you weren't in a relationship ! :undecided:

But Pashtun-Baluch inter-marriages are there; I had a Barahui friend who's Mom was a Pukhtoon ! :)
 
.
Kumhars of Potohar are actually a light skinned race. It's not rare to find a kumhar with really light complexion and eyes. The word Teli on the other hand is interchangeable with "chuhra". Man I hate sounding so bigoted haha, but it's the sad reality. And I'm surprised that your teli classmate admits that he's a teli. I have never seen educated telis ever admitting their origin.

PS: @Samandri : So btw you were saying that Niazi, Marwats etc are the cousins of Ghilzais. So does that mean you guys are not recognized as "proper Ghilzais", or are you considered a part of Ghilzais?
We, lodhis, are not branches of ghilzais but are related to them through common ancestry. Lodhi and ghilzai are two branches of mati tribe . Infact Lodhis and ghilzais , were fighting continuous wars with each other for possession of lands in Afghanistan. Bulk of Lodhis migrated to India or were expelled by ghilzais after defeating them, its lohani branch (Marwats, mian khels etc) were the last one to be expelled from their abode by ghilzais. The only remaining lodhi tribe in Afghanistan is Dotani. You can say that though ghilzais and lodhis were relatives but rivals or enemies also. When Lodhis founded their empire in india, ghilzais had no role in it. Most of the lodhi tribes bodil

Sorry i mean Mulana Fazlurehman..
Thats interesting. Maulana fzalur rehman introduces himself as marwat to us, his village abdul khel in DI khan is a marwat village.........there are also nasars settled in DI Khan, so may he is a nasar settled among marwats of abdul khel. I have heard from some people that he is actually powindah, didnt know he was a nasar.
 
Last edited:
.
We, lodhis, are not branches of ghilzais but are related to them through common ancestry. Lodhi and ghilzai are two branches of mati tribe . Infact Lodhis and ghilzais , were fighting continuous wars with each other for possession of lands in Afghanistan. Bulk of Lodhis migrated to India or were expelled by ghilzais after defeating them, its lohani branch (Marwats, mian khels etc) were the last one to be expelled from their abode by ghilzais. The only remaining lodhi tribe in Afghanistan is Dotani. You can say that though ghilzais and lodhis were relatives but rivals or enemies also. When Lodhis founded their empire in india, ghilzais had no role in it. Most of the lodhi tribes bodil


Thats interesting. Maulana fzalur rehman introduces himself as marwat to us, his village abdul khel in DI khan is a marwat village.........there are also nasars settled in DI Khan, so may he is a nasar settled among marwats of abdul khel. I have heard from some people that he is actually powindah, didnt know he was a nasar.

He is a Nasar.
 
.
Stop trolling, hindustani. You are going consistently off-topic and i didnt say any thing about it to you but now you have blamed me and others of racism and bigotry, keep your inferiority complexes to yourself.....discussing "aboriginal races" is not racism but history. If you are sensitive to such topics, dont bother to visit it.



There are large number of descendents of Pashtuns in various parts of India. They wont exactly look like Pashtuns as they are settled there since centuries and have intermingled with local muslims. They have also lost pashto language and culture long ago but some of their customs and vocabulary speaks of their pashtun roots. Here is research article on them
Study of the Pathan Communities in Four States of India
Hi can I ask you a question?

Sir joe is my favorite Indain poster on PDF by far. Here is what he said about UP/Bihar differences.


"Finally, western UP is Jat and Gujjar dominated. Bihar has a cocktail of people who are entirely different and even look different.

I know that this is a series of bald assertions, but that is the best I can do about it for today. If you care to remind me ten days later, I could walk you through some of these differences"


Sir @Joe Shearer please share the differences between these communities?
UP has Jats and Gujjers? Are these not punjabi tribes?

Yes we do... we also have @ghilzai my brother on this forum.



Alaka Nasirs are basically Kochis right? Mullah Fazlullah is also a Nasir... i know his relatives from Loralai... businessmen and settled..

P.S: Suleiman Khels are also settled in Zhob district..



The average guy or the nationalist wont consider the indian "pathans" (who dont even speak or look like pashtuns) as Pashtun.... I.E: Shahid Afridi who claimed than Irfan Pathan etc are fake "Pathans".... Also there are no hindu "Pathans".

P.S: Pashtuns dont even use the term Pathan.
..............


Again you asked if Baluch marry Makranis... usually no... we dont... they were used as slaves and soldiers by Baluch states.... and many Baluch probably had african slave girls hence some might look "hybrid" ....

But there is no fixed rule or law that a Baluch cant marry a Makrani... specially in big cities... but its usually not the case.


As for Baluch and Pashtun inter marriages... depends on the family.. take me for an example... you bhabi is a Pashtun... and my family doesnt have any issues with that...and we are conservative... pardah etc is observed and so on.



My friend... i have "teli" n "Kumhar" classmates and they dont look like they way you described...
You're in school and married, congrats bro (Y)

Grandpa, why don't you present your theory on racial orgins of Indians?

UP and Biharis are the worst people in South Asia. Irrespective of their religion or caste. This has nothing to do with being hyderbadi or not.
HAHAHAHAHAHA
Holy shit I'm not even offended, very true (not so for UP, just bihar).
 
.
Hi can I ask you a question?


UP has Jats and Gujjers? Are these not punjabi tribes?


You're in school and married, congrats bro (Y)


HAHAHAHAHAHA
Holy shit I'm not even offended, very true (not so for UP, just bihar).

im not in school nor am i married.. im a univ student ..
 
.
The ones in karachi, might be mostly the fake ones who assumed pathan caste after migration to new country. It is a fact that after migration to kararchi in 1947 , many saw it as an opportunity to register themselves as syeds, qureshis, pathan, mughals etc.

The Urdu speaking people of Pakistan and India has diverse roots.The Rohilla leader Daud Khan was awarded the Katehar (later called Rohilkhand) region in the then northern India by Mughal emperor Aurangzeb Alamgir (ruled 1658-1707) to suppress the Rajput uprisings, which had afflicted this region. Originally, some 20,000 soldiers from various Pashtun tribes (Yusafzai, Ghori, Ghilzai, Barech, Marwat, Durrani, Tareen, Kakar, Naghar, Afridi and Khattak) were hired by Mughals to provide soldiers to the Mughal armies. Their performance was appreciated by Mughal emperor Aurangzeb Alamgir, and an additional force of 25,000 Pashtuns were recruited from modern Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Afghanistan and were given respected positions in Mughal Army. Nearly all of Pashtuns settled in the Katehar region and also brought their families from modern Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Afghanistan. During Nadir Shah's invasion of northern India in 1739, the new wave of Pashtuns settled increasing their population to over 100,0000. Due to the large settlement of Rohilla Afghans, the Katehar region gained fame as Rohilkhand. Bareilly was made the capital of the Rohilkhand state and it became Pashtun majority city with Gali Nawaban as the main royal street. Other important cities were Moradabad, Rampur, Shahjahanpur, Badaun, and others. After the Third Battle of Panipat fought in 1761 between the Ahmad Shah Durrani and Maratha Empire thousands of Pashtun and Baloch soldiers settled in the northern India. These diverse ethnic, cultural and linguistic groups merged over the centuries to the form the Urdu speaking Muslims.

Muhajir people - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
.
The Urdu speaking people of Pakistan and India has diverse roots.The Rohilla leader Daud Khan was awarded the Katehar (later called Rohilkhand) region in the then northern India by Mughal emperor Aurangzeb Alamgir (ruled 1658-1707) to suppress the Rajput uprisings, which had afflicted this region. Originally, some 20,000 soldiers from various Pashtun tribes (Yusafzai, Ghori, Ghilzai, Barech, Marwat, Durrani, Tareen, Kakar, Naghar, Afridi and Khattak) were hired by Mughals to provide soldiers to the Mughal armies. Their performance was appreciated by Mughal emperor Aurangzeb Alamgir, and an additional force of 25,000 Pashtuns were recruited from modern Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Afghanistan and were given respected positions in Mughal Army. Nearly all of Pashtuns settled in the Katehar region and also brought their families from modern Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Afghanistan. During Nadir Shah's invasion of northern India in 1739, the new wave of Pashtuns settled increasing their population to over 100,0000. Due to the large settlement of Rohilla Afghans, the Katehar region gained fame as Rohilkhand. Bareilly was made the capital of the Rohilkhand state and it became Pashtun majority city with Gali Nawaban as the main royal street. Other important cities were Moradabad, Rampur, Shahjahanpur, Badaun, and others. After the Third Battle of Panipat fought in 1761 between the Ahmad Shah Durrani and Maratha Empire thousands of Pashtun and Baloch soldiers settled in the northern India. These diverse ethnic, cultural and linguistic groups merged over the centuries to the form the Urdu speaking Muslims.

Muhajir people - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Not every muhajir claim pashtun ancestry, only 1/3. And rest claim arab/syed ancestry.
 
.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom