Langbahn Team – Weltmeisterschaft

Talk:Bactria

Untitled

Please see the notes I wrote under the Daxia (Ta-Hsia) discussion page Thanks. John Hill. — Preceding unsigned comment added by John Hill (talk • contribs) 5 March 2006‎

Most of modern-day Afghanistan?

Copied from User talk:Kanguole:

Is not just the history of North Afghanistan alone it is the history of the entire country of Afghanistan some parts of Uzbekistan and Tajikistan is not important, but the majority of Afghanistan is even Afghan Tajiks are more genetically close to Pashtuns (especially they are like very much the same people to Afghan Pashtuns by genetics its like they were from the same family or a same group of people but dont speak the same language or follow the same cultures today) then they are to Tajiks of Tajikistan itself as well as Pashto the language of the Pashtuns is said to be descended or quite close to Bactrian itself. 2402:E280:3D48:133:DCBE:D886:B3F0:CB7C (talk) 09:26, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is incoherent. Also, genetics and language are irrelevant. What is relevant is that all the sources identify Bactria with the area between the Amu Darya and the Hindu Kush. Kanguole 16:10, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
https://iranicaonline.org/articles/bactria#prettyPhoto
Please have a look at the Figure 5 and 6 from this site its given on this site (also there are many inscriptions of Bactrian as a language found in the entire length and breadth of Afghanistan or Afghanistan as a country not just a certain region or North Afghanistan of course Pashto didn't suddenly emerge as an alien language today Tajiks are trying to claim this history for themselves only due their own political agenda) this is what everyone is referring to so am I also the Hindu Kush makes sense as everyone knows its a mountain region the Bactrian plains don't as it is just a small region Straddled North of the Hindu Kush and Oxus the Hindu Kush means the entirety of Afghanistan etc or other regions which where conquered or ruled by the Bactrians like the Alochan Huns or Kushans or Indo Greeks or Greco-Bactrian Kingdom had larger empires then just a region of the Hindu Kush areas. 2402:E280:3D48:133:38B2:E8D0:98D7:C74A (talk) 18:14, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please try to express yourself in sentences.
The indicated Figure 5 is labelled as a map of Bactria, and directly contradicts your claims. Figure 6 shows Bactrian inscriptions, which are a different matter – noone would claim that everywhere that English is spoken or written is England.
This is not about modern languages or modern politics, but rather the historical region.
The phrase "Bactrian plain" occurs in a direct quotation of the words of Leriche and Grenet. By changing those words, you are giving a false account what they said, which is completely unacceptable. Kanguole 19:47, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please have a look at the territorial extend of Greco-Bactrian Kingdom, Indo-Greek Kingdom, Kushan Empire, Kushano-Sasanian Kingdom, Kidarites, Alchon Huns, Nezak Huns, Turk Shahis here I mentioned all the Pre islamic empires or Kingdoms that where present in Afghanistan in ancient times they weren't at all only concentrated in one particular region like just a small part of North Afghanistan this is what Western historians dont get but become experts of history of other regions or country's they are not even from region or country instead of clarifying with intellectuals or historians or archeologist of that same very country instead of making big claims they do the same thing with Egyptians as if Egyptians looked like European people.
Your statement is like would you consider, a English Person from Somerset to be different from a English person from Greater Manchester like say if today if suppose a person from Somerset speaks German instead of English.
I never denied originally Bactria proper is like regions South of Āmū Daryā especially Balk (Bactra) [Balkh], Tashkurgan, Kondūz [Kunduz], Sar-e Pol, and Šīrīn Tagāō [Shirin Tagab], but to consider parts of the Hindu Kush or rest of the Hind Kush as not tributary regions always under the control of the Bactrians or political control of the Bactrians is just like saying Pashtuns don't have a history that's what many Tajiks want.
Who knows if Tajiks of Afghanistan were not Persianized then they would be speaking Pashto or at least like a similar dialect of Pashto which is mutually intelligible like say Hindi Urdu is not Persian, also they would be calling themselves Pashtuns or similar people to the Pashtuns just like most Indians who speak Hindi but with different dialects itself among Indians, but all consider themselves as Hindi speakers. 2402:E280:3D48:133:38B2:E8D0:98D7:C74A (talk) 06:37, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have a better quotation or any think that you can add that sounds as fair share for both Tajiks and Pashtuns then of the author Pierre Leriche. 2402:E280:3D48:133:5D33:FCF:F227:147B (talk) 18:29, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Because it looks like it seems he is a historian that has never been to Afghanistan or learned its complex history or anything but just talks of the areas around Balkh. 2402:E280:3D48:133:5D33:FCF:F227:147B (talk) 18:31, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Also the regions that he mentions is not even majority Tajik. 2402:E280:3D48:133:5D33:FCF:F227:147B (talk) 18:32, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Like say Šīrīn Tagāō [Shirin Tagab] or Faryab province is mostly a Uzbek majority province or region today even Sar-e Pol is majority Hazara not Tajik and Tashkurgan (in which is a town in China far away from Afghanistan is also Uyghur by a majority not Tajik. 2402:E280:3D48:133:5D33:FCF:F227:147B (talk) 18:33, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Only Balkh is majority Tajik but its multi ethnic with Uzbeks and Hazara and Turkmen and Arabs and Pashtuns even Kunduz is Pashtun by a majority but Tajik nationalists. 2402:E280:3D48:133:5D33:FCF:F227:147B (talk) 18:34, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Are gone claim that Pashtuns are not native their but came as settlers 100 years ago when Tajiks themselves are not the majority in Kunduz but the second largest ethnic groups living in Kunduz after the Pashtuns are the Uzbeks not the Tajiks who are only the third largest Tajiks are only majority in Badakhshan and that the author didn't mention. 2402:E280:3D48:133:5D33:FCF:F227:147B (talk) 18:35, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Leriche focusses on the area around Balkh (Bactra) because he's writing an article about Bactria. So do all the other historians writing about Bactria. Even you admit that the area was "Bactria proper".
You persist in viewing this ancient land through the lens of modern countries, languages and ethnic groups. That always distorts the history. Kanguole 22:00, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Where is your evidence that Pashtuns and Tajiks are closely related? DNA studies show the closest relatives of Afghan Pashtuns to be Pakistani Pashtuns and Pamiris. 2607:FEA8:4D60:590:E07E:FCF7:8AB0:F214 (talk) 23:37, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bactrian =/= Pashto

@Afghan.RecordsWhy are you trying to connect Pashto with Bactrian outright? Balkh was not home to original Pashtuns and Pashto language. 69.109.242.61 (talk) 05:14, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am not building anything it’s already there I am sharing it. I am not the author of the Cambridge book that I cited. You have to understand that wikipedia is not your personal library that you can edit other people out. Also, the evidence for Pashto language being similar to Bactrian, and Bactrians connection has been cited with trusted, academic sources, and experts of the subject. Your personal opinion does not matter in such topics. Afghan.Records (talk) 05:18, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Afghan.Records:
Give me direct citations that says Pashto was spoken in Balkh during ancient and medieval times?

Bactrians influencing Pashto and being part of their ancient ancestry is fine; however, directly connecting Bactrian vis a vis as the Pashto is incorrect and not supported by any reputable source. 69.109.242.61 (talk) 05:23, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You’re not in a place to demand sources from me. You can check the sources I cited and made sure their links are available. Also, please don’t forget that you cannot just edit a whole ethnicity out because you don’t agree with an academic statement. Interrupting based on nationalism and racism can permanently ban your IP.
Thank you Afghan.Records (talk) 05:26, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Afghan.Records:
Again, your sources don’t say that Pashto was spoken in Balkh during ancient and medieval times like your edits indicates . If you don’t have one that does, I am going to work on reverting those statements. Thanks. 69.109.242.61 (talk) 05:30, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My source is about Pashtuns bactrian descent. It does not claim Pashto was spoken in Balkh. Learn the difference. Also, the sources talk about Pashtos similarly to Bactrian language there is no such statement made that pashto was spoken in balkh.
Thank you, Afghan.Records (talk) 05:33, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You have some sources saying Pashto is descended from Bactrian. Even if that is the consensus view, it does not justify describing the ancient Bactrians as Pashto. That would be like saying the ancient Romans were French or Spanish.
Also, the Mukhidinov source actually says the descendents of Bactrian are the Pamir languages, which contradicts your claims. Kanguole 15:21, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have not put any sources that states Pashto is a descendant language of Bactria those statements were made way before I was in Wikipedia. I put sources that Pashtuns are considered to be descendants of Bactrians nothing more. Afghan.Records (talk) 15:23, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Mukhidinov source you added does not support that claim. But as I said above, that is secondary: whether that is consensus or not, it does not justify describing the ancient Bactrians as Pashto. Kanguole 15:54, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I just added a Cambridge and Harvard source about Pashtuns being the descendants of Bactrians I did not add anything about their language I believe it was there long ago. However, I reverted an edit that removed Pashtuns bactrian descent so it might show that I added that source but I haven’t. Afghan.Records (talk) 16:15, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK. Would you like to address the main point? Kanguole 16:20, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes the only thing that I added that I will defend is Pashtuns also being kf Bactrian descent. Its from an expert on the subject, a Cambridge publishing, and with the URl available for confirmation. However, it’s being reverted without a good explanation by multiple people getting me caught in what seems like an edit war. The users refuse to discuss in the talk page and are betting on me reaching revert limits. Afghan.Records (talk) 16:25, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In that case, why are are you edit-warring to restore your claim that Bactrian was Pashto? Kanguole 16:32, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I just restored the Bactrian descent of Pashtuns, you can remove the language part not my concern. Afghan.Records (talk) 17:37, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not your concern that you disrupt an article? Once again proving that you are WP:NOTHERE. Also, per Pashtuns, their origins are clearly disputed, yet you're presenting it as if they're descended from the Bactrians by cherrypicking sources, a tactic you have used in other articles too. HistoryofIran (talk) 17:40, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wow putting words on my back? I said I am not concerned with Pashto connection to the Bactrian language. My main argument is against Propaganda agents removing the name of Pashtuns from articles. Afghan.Records (talk) 17:46, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's not what "propaganda" means, and you're yet to actually the address the concerns made, but I doubt you will do that. HistoryofIran (talk) 17:48, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is your trying to disrupt the identity of Pashtuns and actively remove them to manipulate information. You cannot even defend them your disruptings. Afghan.Records (talk) 17:50, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for proving my point. HistoryofIran (talk) 18:41, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I have reverted that edit. Kanguole 18:33, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Alright Thank you for your cooperation and help Afghan.Records (talk) 18:36, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Who is actually biased?

@HistoryofIranhas accused me of being because I provided a source for history of Iran we cam talk here and nit enter an edit war as you clearly are trying to push something? Afghan.Records (talk) 14:03, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@HistoryofIrancome here and discuss you are disrupting Afghan.Records (talk) 16:01, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why are you actively removing the Bactrian heritage of Pashtuns? The source is from an expert and has a URL your argument is exactly what? Afghan.Records (talk) 17:38, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why remove Pashtuns?

We have talked this out before but people are still cutting Pashtuns out. Why? Why should it be not here as the evidence is strong and the source is reliable and has been linked. (Please don’t tell me “your API report says this”) as you can clearly open the source with a tap I have done the work to provide the link. Afghan.Records (talk) 19:08, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article is a not place to add every (cherrypicked) statement of an author that suggests a possible relation between the Pashtuns and Bactrians. That's not how you write a good article, and as you've already been told, the origins of the Pashtuns are still ultimately disputed, and thus it should be treated as such. What's worse is that you not only do this to Bactrians, but other groups too. Also, your ANI report says this [1]. HistoryofIran (talk) 23:42, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How the hell are the origins of Pashtuns disputed? They speak an indo-Iranian language and they have R1a haplogroup. It’s you Iranians that have mixed origins. Removing Bactrians as the possible ancestors of Pashtuns shows you have a bias against them. 2607:FEA8:4D60:590:E07E:FCF7:8AB0:F214 (talk) 23:36, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The origin of Pashtuns is disputed but the author clearly stated they are the descendants of Bactrians not like how you phrase it to be a mere connection. I suggest you read the book again and interpret it literally as the author wrote it and do not make your own interpretation. Origin of Pashtuns being not yet 100% clear doesn’t mean they should be excluded from historically important people and we can’t just delete them from everything. Afghan.Records (talk) 00:13, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You are adding (spamming excessive amounts of statements by authors) a possible Pashtun connection to multiple ethnic groups but ask how they are disputed? You even did it in Theories of Pashtun origin, what do you think that article is about? Clear WP:CIR issues here. And you think I am hurt that you're calling me mixed? Don't assume that I share the insecurity as you. HistoryofIran (talk) 02:26, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It was primarly centered in the North, but covered most of Afghanistan.

@HistoryofIran: What source do you what I am arguing based on why dont you read many Web source about Bactria on the internet every where many historians agrees that Afghanistan it self was Bactria but the North was were it was primarily situated. 2402:E280:3D48:133:DD64:77ED:A3BB:C477 (talk) 15:14, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It seems you still haven't read WP:RS, WP:CITE and WP:VER. --HistoryofIran (talk) 15:23, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So this is not a reliable source your saying,
This Britannica article does not specially say North Afghanistan but says parts of modern Afghanistan but also includes Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan.
https://www.britannica.com/summary/Bactria
This article does not claim that North Afghanistan was only Bactria,
https://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/bactria
So you dont claim this to be reliable source,
https://greekreporter.com/2024/04/28/bactria-the-ancient-greek-state-in-afghanistan-video/
So your saying this is fake ,
https://www.worldhistory.org/Bactria/
Bactria according to this article
https://www.the-persians.co.uk/bactria.htm
Please have a look at this,
https://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/watkins/bactria.htm
Please have a look at this.
https://oxfordre.com/classics/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780199381135.001.0001/acrefore-9780199381135-e-1038#acrefore-9780199381135-e-1038
Here this article claims that northern Afghanistan, western Tajikistan, southern Uzbekistan, and eastern Turkmenistan but see their geographic description including most of Afghanistan,
The territory which formed Bactria lay between the mountains of the Hindu Kush to the south-east and the River Oxus in the north, and at times formed part of the semi-mythical kingdom of Turan, and the later Islamic region of Khorasan. Bactria was neighboured to the south by Paropamisadae, to the west by Aria and Margiana, and to the north by Sogdiana and Ferghana, with the Pamirs lying between it and the north-western edge of the Himalayas. Today its territory forms parts of northern Afghanistan, western Tajikistan, southern Uzbekistan, and eastern Turkmenistan, and the name survives in the Afghan province of Balkh. In its time it became famous for its warriors and for being the birthplace of Zarathusta, the founder of Zoroastrianism.
https://www.historyfiles.co.uk/KingListsFarEast/AsiaBactria.htm
Now here it claims that Bactria is northern Afghanistan, southern Tajikistan, southern Uzbekistan but according to their geographic description,
The Bactria region leads to the Tajik and Uzbek mountains (His-
sar) in the north, the Pamir in the east, the Hindu Kush in the south, and the deserts of
southern Turkmenistan and Iran in the west.
if they are claiming parts of the Hindu Kush then that included most of Afghanistan.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/366529264_bactria
Now here this article is claiming that Bactria is a country in Northern Afghanistan but according to their geography,
Situated between the Hindu Kush mountain range in the south and the river Oxus (Amudar'ya) in the north, it is essentially an east-west zone that consists of extremely fertile alluvial plains, a hot desert, and cold mountains.
So, after 2000 BCE, several parallel zones can be discerned:
-the Hindu Kush mountains in the south;
-the foothills and the fertile agricultural zone;
-the desert;
-the river Oxus.
North of the river was the steppe, which was occupied by Sogdians, with whom the Bactrians must have exchanged products.
https://www.livius.org/articles/place/bactria/
Their are many articles like this on the Internet and Britannica is what many people use here on the Wikipedia as a reference even Encyclopaedia Iranica but it seems you dont really see all this but simply claim that,
Bactria is just an area within the north of modern Afghanistan.
Even if historians claim just Northern Afghanistan as Bactria but they also include the Hindu Kush in the end to describe their geography which includes vasts parts or most parts of the country of Afghanistan. But your argument is that,
Bactria was an ancient Iranian civilization in Central Asia based in the area south of the Oxus River (modern Amu Darya) and north of the mountains of the Hindu Kush.
No historian claims this very rare people do just to excluded rest of Afghanistan (instead of saying most parts of Afghanistan or most parts of modern-day Afghanistan) and be bias or just a racist with other so and so people. 2402:E280:3D48:133:5495:9AF6:D1BF:754A (talk) 04:28, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't argued nor claimed anything, I just said cite WP:RS for your additions, it's not rocket science. And seeing some of those links and lack of quotes, you clearly haven't read the links I posted. And for that you are accusing me of racism (you were just warned for your hostile comment against me and Iranians [2]), do better. I couldn't care less about your ethnicity (nor anyone elses for that matter), the world doesnt revolve around your ethnicity. You however, clearly seem to care about mine. HistoryofIran (talk) 11:59, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You point to a series of sources (Britannica, Encyclopaedia Iranica, Oxford Classical Dictionary) that say Bactria was the plain between the Oxus (Amu-Darya) and the Hindu Kush, and then say it's racist not to include all of modern Afghanistan. There's a gap in your logic. Kanguole 12:16, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That is what I am saying but @HistoryofIran: claims that Bactria does not include the Hindu Kush but was North of the Hindu Kush. 2402:E280:3D48:133:2DC3:2C55:FEB3:DCAD (talk) 12:34, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I still haven't claimed anything, WP:CIR issues. HistoryofIran (talk) 12:58, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My friend what I am saying is you dont need to include all of Afghanistan but at least included the word most of modern-day Afghanistan that will at least include more then 90% of the country (in peoples minds if they read this page) if not the whole country. Not North of the Hindu Kush my man that is like literally nothing 5 to 10% inside Afghanistan.
Here you wanted source here it is see,
https://www.google.co.in/books/edition/The_Treasure_of_the_Oxus/p14VAAAAYAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=Bactria+geography+south+of+the+Oxus+and+Hindu+Kush&pg=PA6&printsec=frontcover
Its from a book,
Bactria and Sogdiana corresponding to the territory of Afghanistan which lies beyond the Hindu Kush and the Southern part of Bokhara. 2402:E280:3D48:133:5005:885:5BB3:6A8E (talk) 11:27, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is the history of all of Modern-day Afghanistan, as a country but the region was centered in a particular region which still includes majority of the country, not just a very small part Afghanistan particularly just a part of North Afghanistan. 2402:E280:3D48:133:5005:885:5BB3:6A8E (talk) 11:37, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please provide a source to your argument your defending here on Wikipedia. If Bactria does not include parts of Afghanistan then what just a region North of the country, and only North of the Hindu Kush is Bactria because rarely people agree that it does not even include parts of the Hindu Kush (because that will directly include a large part of Afghanistan today) even if it was very much Centered in the North of modern Afghanistan.
Their is no genetic studies done on Pamiri groups like the Munji and Yidgha (due to war in the Afghanistan) who are said to descent from Bactrians (they live South of the Amu Darya) instead of Pashtuns (as well) because your claiming their origins is disputed (even today) and said to have multiple origins from different people.
I am quite sure that Munji people will be very close to Pashtuns genetically speaking then to even any other Pamiri related group further in the Pamir mountains they are geographically much close to Pashtun lands as well which makes sense the Yidgha people have also mixed with Dards and can even be more close to Pashtuns especially Pakistani Pashtuns who have some Dardic admixture in them. 2402:E280:3D48:133:2DC3:2C55:FEB3:DCAD (talk) 12:30, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Are you replying to me? Because I still haven't made a single argument, nor claimed anything. You're speaking to ghosts. HistoryofIran (talk) 12:59, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Because you seem to exclude even a part of the Hindu Kush and stick to the argument that Bactria was just a area in Northern Afghanistan. When no historian claims that Bactria was North of the Hindu Kush (but just say it was between the Oxus and the Hindu Kush), yes of course Bactria was centered in Northern Afghanistan but it just not a area just within North of modern day Afghanistan. 2402:E280:3D48:133:5005:885:5BB3:6A8E (talk) 11:46, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah yes, asking for WP:RS = I am excluding even a part of the Hindu Kush. Are you done putting words in my mouth? HistoryofIran (talk) 13:12, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Quelle: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bactria