Talk:Ancient history of Afghanistan

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I propose the deletion of this page[edit]

This page must be a redundancy. I dislike the idea of dividing Afghanistan history into a pre and post-Islamic phase. I recognize the convenience of doing this, because Islam is in a sense the beginning of "history" in Afghanistan in regards to local sources of information. I dislike this because Afghanistan has an immense ancient signifigance as the birthplace of Monotheism with Zoroastrian or Proto-Zoroastrianism. Look at the preeminence of the Bactria Margiana Complex and sites like Gonur Tepe, the heritage of the Silk Road cities. I think Afghanistan's golden age was over by the Islamic era, and shouldn't be grouped into a prehistorical era. There are plenty of outside sources that allow us to construct Afghan History. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.147.122.34 (talk) 00:15, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As a Danish scholar with roots in Balkh, Afghanistan, I agree. It is impossible to divide Afghanistan in a Zoroastrian and post-Islamic history given how Afghans have intertwined their way of practicing Islam with the way they practiced Zoroastrianism. Thus, the invention of Hanafi fiqh by an Eastern Iranian whose origins were most likely from modern-day "Afghanistan." Moreover, there is the example of Mevlana Balkhi also known as "Rumi" who practiced, taught and promoted Sufism which has many added Zoroastrian elements to it. Hasan Basri, the most likely inventor of Sufism also had Persian roots. Not to mention the most important point which is that even traditional Islam argues that it is a reformation of Christianity and Judaism while adopting blatant Zoroastrian traditions and practicing. The most glaring one being the practice of cleansing oneself and praying five times per day in a certain direction. The entire practice comes from Zoroastrianism. Including the practice of "self-cleansing" through Ramadan which arguably is inspired by Behnam in Zoroastranism. CopenhagenScholar (talk) 19:48, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gandhara?[edit]

I remember reading that the ancient indian kingdom of Gandhara (mentioned in the Mahabharata) (related to Kandahar?) comprised of portions of present day afghanistan. Is this historically proven?

Yes, Gandhara goes as far as Kabul and Begram. Regards PHG 11:57, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
No, Gandhara did not go as far as Kabul and Begram proper. As noted by Encyclopedia Britannica, Gandhara is a historical region in what is now northwestern Pakistan. It corresponds to the Vale of Peshawar and having extensions into the lower valleys of the Kābul and Swāt rivers. The lower valleys of the Kabul river denotes the part in modern-day Pakistan, not Afghanistan. There is no historical evidence that Gandhara wenst as far as Kabul and Begram. Regards CopenhagenScholar 20:59, 14 Mar 2024 (UTC)

Recent edits[edit]

This article seems to have been written about India rather than Afghanistan until I started making some changes that reflect what most reference books denote. Peripheral events in India and using Indian religious texts as verbatim history is not academic. Nor are speculations about tribes and languages (Indo-Aryan is a specific language group related to the Iranian, but distinct and the Iranian languages dominated Afghanistan and still do). Also, aside from the known evidence about the Shahis, a Hindu presence as anything but a small minority is doubtful as the Pashtuns don't have any ancient Hindu temples in their regions and most of the people who ruled their areas were Buddhist and Zoroastrian. The only region that probably had a large Hindu minority would be around Kabul and Peshawar and even there they were outnumbered by the Buddhists. Writing from a religious perspective simply further dilutes the quality of this article. This article is about Afghanistan/Aryana and what took place there that we know of from historical records and archaeological evidence and not simply vague religious texts. It's like writing history from the Bible, it's not verifiable and not always supported by archaeological evidence. Tombseye 18:39, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Tombseye, is there any ancient evidence that the Pactyans were living in Kandhahr? What time frame? When did the migration to Kabol/Peshawer from there took place? Were Pactyans in north-east Afghanistan at the time of Alexander's invasion? King Ashoka's rock edicts V and XIII found located at Hazara (east of river Indus) and Shahbazgarhi (west of river Indus) refer only to the Yonas, Kambojas, and Gandharas as the most prominent frontier people living on the borders of his empire. No reference to the Pactyans etc in any of these edict...major or minor. Can you comment on this situation please? KLS.
Hello KLS. There is only mention by Herodotus and the Greco-Romans as they were apparently some group living east of Iran in roughly the same areas as Afghanistan and many people attribute them as the early Pashtuns. The time-frame then would be roughly the Median/Achaemenid Persian to Greek periods. As with most of these references, no one knows for certain who these names apply to and whether or not these are major tribes, or people who morphed into modern populations such as the Pashtuns and Tajiks. What I go by mostly is the their language and genetic evidence of the populations tested that show an Iranian background (I just added some information on this at the Iranian peoples article) for most Afghans. Basically, the Yonas, Kambojas, etc. are not known exactly because we do not know what happened to these people. Were they small tribes that moved to India and expressed things about their cousins who were assimilated in Afghanistan? And the borders of Asoka's empire when? Would the borders correspond to western Pakistan or southeastern Afghanistan? It's all guess-work at any rate. And the problem also is that the names seemed to change the further east one goes. Alexandros becomes Iskander which becames Sikander. Ionion becomes Yavana in India. The names are a mess, so as to who these Pactyans, Kambojas, etc. were, we don't know for certain. What we do know better starts from the Median period onward as their records are much more numerous and widespread. Tombseye 00:47, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks Tombseye, for your frank and reasonable comments. I would like to present, sometime later, some views/information on the Kambojas of ancient Afghanistan for the information of the general readers.

I have the following text taken from "Ancient Afghanistan: From the Aryans to the Medes. 1500 BCE - 551 BCE" OF this article.

"The Avestan is believed to have been written in ancient Ariana (or Aryana), possibly the earliest name of Afghanistan which indicates an early link with Iranian tribes to the west. Due to the similarity between early Avestan and Sanskrit (and other related early Indo-European languages such as Latin and Ancient Greek)..."

Regarding the above view of this Article, I would however, like to introduce the following views from some noted pioneers in the field for the interest of the readers.

According to noted scholars like Dr Wilhelm Tomaschek, professor of historical geography at the University of Vienna and Dr J. C. Vidyalnakar a front-ranking Indian scholar, of all the Iranina dialects, the language of Zend-Avestan is most closely allied to the Galcha dialect called Munjani (Bhartiya Itihaas ki Mimansa, p 229-30, Dr Vidyalankar). Munjani dialect is spoken in south-west of Pamirs has been identified as belonging to ancient Kambojan language (Linguistic Survey of India, Vol X, p 456; Journal of Royal Asiatic society, 1911, pp 801-02, Dr G. A. Grierson; Ancient Kamboja, People and the Country, 1981, p 217).


My comment is: If the views of the above scholars are correct, then Avestan was probably written in Avestan dialect spoken round ancient Bahlika/Badakshan-Pamir regions rather than in Ariana/Aryana (if Ariana/Aryana = Aria = Herat).

Counter-comments from others would be welcome.

KLS

Hello KLS. I find the information about the Kambojas very interesting. I have come across mention of them in the past, but have recently been learning more about them. I think a few points need to be emphasized here though. First, they appear to be an Iranic people of ancient times who were obviously wiped out in some way. Either assimilated by other Iranian peoples and/or also forced to move etc. I am generally quite hesitant to accept religious texts as verbatim history, but the Kambojas appear to show up quite a bit so I am convinced that they did exist in some capacity, but I am not sure that they were necessarily called 'Kambojas' in ancient times or that they are the main progenitors of other Iranic peoples. Also, the geographic location of Munjani in Badakhshan is still in Afghanistan/Aryana and does not preclude that the Avesta was written in Balkh as we know that languages are often spoken over a much wider expanse and then contract due to various events. Most of the archaeological evidence that is quite scant and remnants of the Avesta and the majority of academics believe the Avesta originates somewhere in Afghanistan as part of the beginnings of the Eastern Iranians. For example, Prof. Rahim Shayegan (UCLA and Harvard) believes that the Avesta correlates with Bactria:
The Avesta and the Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex (BMAC)
In this presentation I want to discuss the possibility of a historical connection between the so-called Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex (ca. 2000-1750 B.C.) and the Avesta. The BMAC culture is defined on the basis of typologically similar artifacts (seals, ceramics) and monumental buildings, reflecting the emergence of a complex society. It lasted for about 250 years and then collapsed, as evidenced by the precipitous decline of urban settlements and the disappearance of artifacts. At the same time, however, there is an abundance of BMAC artifacts on the Iranian plateau and in the Indo-Iranian borderland, although no artifacts indigenous to the plateau and Indo-Iranian borderland have been found in the heartland of the BMAC culture itself. This situation can, in my opinion, be explained either by raids into or expansion from BMAC territory, or both, but not by peaceful trade. The collapse of the BMAC heartland may therefore have been triggered by the abandonment of the heartland in favor of the periphery. The only large population that might conceivably have entered the Iranian Plateau at this time, would seem to be the Iranians themselves.
The Avestan texts are divided into two chronological layers, Old and Young Avestan. A period of presumably several centuries (4-5 centuries) separates the two. The language of both the Old and Young Avestan texts, as well as the geographical horizon of the Young Avestan texts, point to northeastern Iran as the place where the texts were composed. The fact that the Young Avestan texts contain no certain reference to Media, may indicate that they very composed before the time of the Median empire, that is, before ca. 700 B.C.
A terminus ante quem for the composition of the Young Avestan Texts does not, however, indicate a date for the composition of the Old Avestan texts; however, the differences in language and contents point to a break that can only have been caused by a major historical event. I would like to suggest that the collapse of the BMAC and the movement of Old Avestan communities into the Iranian plateau may be the important historical event needed to explain the differences between the two groups of texts. Thus, I suggest that the Old Avestan texts belong to the Iranian communities of the Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex (2000-1750 B.C.), whereas the Young Avestan reflect the religious evolution of the same population after they settled in the northeastern part of the Iranian Plateau (ca. 1200-1000? B.C.). [1].
Michael Witzel also at Harvard, has examined and compared both early Iranic and Indic remnants of the Aryans and also concludes that the Avesta originates in what is today Afghanistan AND specifically near the vicinity of Balkh [Journal of Vedic Studies 7-3 (EJVS) 2001(1-115)]. There are a ton of more academics who support this THEORY, with the caveat that much of the evidence is circumstantial and hypothetical and we are back to square one.
Lastly, I think this section should include more information on the possible early split between the Iranians and Indo-Aryans and the possible early formation of the Indo-Aryans before they moved on past the Indus river where they were absorbed into the larger aboriginal population, but managed to bequeath their languages in the same that the Magyars did in Hungary. An interesting book on the subject is Prof. Rajesh Kochhar's book, The Vedic People, Their History and Geography, (Orient Longman, Delhi 1999) that makes the claim that nearly all of the pivotal moments of Indo-Aryan cultural formation took place outside of India (as in west of the Indus, possibly as far north as Uzbekistan and northeastern Iran) and then permeated there later. His arguments have some problems obviously, since most archaeological finds correlating with Vedic civilization are in fact found in India and not in the northwest and frankly the evidence seems to be scant that other than the high probability that the Indo-Aryans came from the northwest into South Asia as noted from extant literature, the rest of the chronology is highly suspect and the evidence also quite sparse. Well let me know what you think. I think I will add some of the information and also mention the Kambojas as a possible Iranic people who dwelt in ancient Afghanistan at some point that is not exactly known as well as regardless they appear to have existed in some fashion even if they are not exactly defined since we're talking about millenia of history. Tombseye 20:34, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi Tombseye, many thanks for your response. I greatly appreciate your input. You indeed have raised very important and relevant issues here.

Now let’s us discuss your following assertion first.

You write:

During this early period, the Pashtuns, an Iranian tribe from Kandahar, emerged and began to expand outward rapidly and eventually spread from Gandhara (near modern Peshawar) and Kabul to Baluchistan and Herat. Herodotus mentions a tribe called the Pactyan as inhabiting much of what is today Afghanistan and northwestern Pakistan and it is speculated by some that these people were the ancient ancestors of the Pashtuns, although, aside from phoenetic name similarities, this remains unproven. Mainly pagan at first, many Pashtuns appear to have adopted Buddhist and Zoroastrian traditions due to contact with both Iranic and Indic cultural influences.

Your above text assumes that:

1.The Pactyans were FIRST located in Kandhar (southern Afghanistan).

2.From Kandhar, the Pactyans outspread outwards towards Gandhar in eastern Afghanistan.

3.Then from Gandhar (Kabol and Peshawer), they again moved to Balochistan (located to the southern side of Afghanistan) as well as to Heart (located to west of Kabol).

Some questions here:

1.Is your above text based on some ancient documented evidence or else it is merely a spectulation/conjecture?

2.Herodotus (fifth c BCE) refers to some PACTYAN people located toward in Eastern Afghanistan/Kashmir. Is this the first references to the Pactyans?

3.What are other ancient Greco-Roman sources which also make similar references to the PACTYAN people, besides Herodotus? Do they locate them in Kandhar or Gandhar? Can you please present ALL the relevant text from those Greek/Roman sources here?

Thanks

KLS

I rewrote the section so that people realize that I meant the Pashtuns came from the Kandhar region near the Suleiman Mountains. The part about the Pashtuns originating near the Suleiman Mountains and Kandahar is concensus view based upon academic theories rather than 100% certainty. It's a hypothetical theory based upon fixing them in a central location from whence they disseminated like for example the Indo-Europeans who are placed anywhere from the Ukraine to Central Asia. same deal.
It's all a mess really as accounts conflict greatly. Pactyan here, Afghan there, Bactrian, Arian, etc. Like I said everything that is known is mere guesswork in my opinion and that's why I said it's speculation.
Ah, I perhaps made it confusing the way I wrote it, but I did not mean that Pactyans came from Kandahar and the Suleiman mountains as we still don't know for sure if they're Pashtuns. Not my views, but the views of others here who generally speculate. See, the Pactyans are connected by some to the Pashtuns because they have lived in eastern Afghanistan for centuries and, in my opinion, the name similarities are what prompt people to connect people to various places without certainty.
A lot of what's said is based upon historians I've read and other info. I got from books on ancient Afghanistan. Arrian also writes about the region west of the Indus as populated by Iranic peoples and yet his references are extremely vague as well and he doesn't mention the Pactyan by name, but mentions similar names for local places in Afghanistan that others refer to. Strabo demarcates the Indus as being the boundary between Ariana (afghanistan) and India in Geography Book IV and mentions wild tribes that fit some of the characteristics of the Pashtuns, according to some interpretations. Arrian's Indica and other works relate the people of the region again in a vague fashion as the people around Gandahara are called 'Indians', but not like Indians and outside where he claims India begins. One interpretation would be to just say they are Indo-Iranian, but who really knows? The Greco-Roman writers/historians/geographers appear to often quote Herodotus (who made wild claims about animals that didn't exist etc.)themselves and thus the Pactyans (or some variation on their name) turn up, but aren't established at all. Basically, mention of tribes in the region either with names that sound similar to Pashtun or Afghan or that sound similar to the names of Pashtun tribes such as the Afridis, Yusufzai, etc. (when used by the Greco-Romans and later Arabs) and are picked up on as evidence of the Pashtuns, but it's all conjectural as there is no solid evidence of any of exactly who the Pashtuns were and where they lived exactly. What people who read these accounts look at is similarities in descriptions of the people, their sociological patterns, who they seem similar to (usually the people we're talking about in Afghanistan are described as similar to the Bactrians or other Iranian people). Your points are valid in that I think I'm going to have to add more information and re-write some things that clarify that a lot of things are not verified and may never be. Tombseye 09:45, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi Tombseye, thanks for you reply.

First, from what you write and believe, I come to the understanding that the name Pactyan appears only and only in The History of Herodotus. No other ancient Greek, Roman or other foreign writings has addressed them as PACTYAN (or its modified equivalent). Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Second, the name Pactyan was not the original name for these people while they were living in Kandhar/Suleiman regions.

Third, these people outspread from Kandhar/Suleiman during Median rule over Afghanistan around 700 BCE. One of their section spread to Herat, another to Kabol/Peshawer (time frame 7th c BCE).

Fouth, these Kabol/Peshaweran-migrants from Kandhar/Suleiman are the Pakthas (of Sanskrit Vedic text) and the Pactyans (of Herototean History).

Fifth, during Alexander's invasion in the last decades of 4th century BCE, it were these Pactyans/Pakthas who had faced Alexander in Kabol/Peshawer/Swat/Kunar valleys.

Sixth, the alternative name of the Pactyans was Gandharas i.e the terms Gandharans and Pactyans were synomymous and related to same people of east Afghanistan...the ancestors of the Pashtuns.

Seventh, from Kabol/Peshawer, one of their section later, spread south to Balochistan in post-Alexander period.

Eighth, the Bactrians are also same ethnic people as the ancestors of Pashtuns.

Please corect me explaining suitably wherever I have understood it incorrectly.

Thanks. KLS.

  • It looks like Mr Tombseye agrees with the points I have raised in my above write-up since he has not corrected me if I understood his views differently. Therefore, the foregoing discussion concludes that the Herodotean Pactyans are same as the Pushtuns (or the else the ancestors of the Pushtuns). Though linguistically impossible, this is generally accepted as true by many scholars including Olaf Caroe among others. Personally I also agree on identifying Pactyans with Pakthas of the Rigvedic literature. Now, the Pactyans are referred to only and only by Herodotus. None of any other classical writers has made any reference to Pactyans (Tombseye, please correct me if I'm wrong). And in the Rig Veda, a minor Iranian clan called Paktha is once (and only once) referrred to in the context of Battle of Ten Kings (BTK). Most people often identify Rigvedic Pakthas with Herodotean Pactyans or Partuikes. Wether Herodotean Pactyans are same people as the Vedic Pakthas is not clear if we go by the opinions of the scholarship. And those who identify Pactyans with Pushtuns also identify Herodotean PAKTUIKE (land of Pactyans) with GANDHARA, land of land Gandharans, thus equating the PACTYANS with the GANDHARANS. This may or may not be true. We will continue on this topic in our next write-up.

Thanks

KLS.

Alright, I've been editing other things that needed the attention. Now, a few points here. First, these are all theories and the association is via names only. It's not fact and should be presented as theories and not concrete fact. These things aren't as well known as the Median Empire and Achaemenids for example. Second, this page is looking like an advertisement for the Kambojans, who frankly are a minor group historically as they either vanished and/or passed through the region it seems. This article should mention them and link to the articles that describe the Kambojans and that's it. This article actually talks more about them then the other more numerous peoples which is bizarre and no encyclopedia would or does go along with it. The Kambojans, for a group that numbers a few million and claims descent from these ancient people (partially obviously), seem to take up quite a few articles AND are incorrectly linked to the Iranian peoples page with EVERY article about them. They should only link to the Iranian peoples from the Kambojan people page and not all the other things about them because the Iranian peoples is about the tribes and ethnic groups, not every single individual and event pertaining to the Kambojans. Otherwise, we'd have Khomeini and Durrani and Saladin linked to it which is not the case or intent. I think at this point a good thing would be to discuss POSSIBLE links to the Indo-Aryan Rig Veda with the stipulation that there is no Indian culture coming from South Asia that this is about as the Aryans were passing through on their way to India and not coming from India. This is what every reference book writes. Thus, the use of the term cultural Indian links is just plain inaccurate as the Indo-Aryans didn't call themselves Indians or even knew much about India when they were still IndoAryans in Afghanistan. They may not even have been Hindu as there is evidence that Hinduism may have simply arose along the Ganges after the Indo Aryans arrived and merged their pantheon of deities with local traditions to create the religion. IndoAryan is NOT a race today, but a language group and the genetic links between Indians in the north and south are very well realized. At best, these early Indo-Aryans would worship in some ways that might seem similar. We need to keep this article about Afghanistan's known history and BRIEFLY mention some possibilities and wikify the article so that all points are covered. I keep seeing this same paragraph show up at the start of the Afghanistan page, at the etymological page and in the history page and the Kambojan page. I can see mentioning it twice, but 4 times? We might as well discuss the origins of the Pashai or Kafirs of Nuristan too. Also the article is a mess as the Kambojans are Iranian in one sentence and Indo-Iranian in another and then Indian in culture. How is that possible? The Nuristanis speak an Indo-Iranian language (meaning its a separate branch and not that its a combination of the two). If the Kambojans were an Iranic people, then that's that and some of them probably moved to India and vanished into the population along with their language. End of story. The rest is conjecture. Tombseye 08:26, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Some THOUGHTS on Pactyans/Pakthas/Kambojas.

  • In his Inquiry (440 BCE), Herodotus writes: “In addition, there are other Indians who BORDER on the city of Kaspaturos and the country of Paktuike, these live TO THE NORTH AND IN THE DIRECTION OF THE NORTH-WIND as compared with the remaining Indians, and their way of life is almost the same as that of the BACTRIANS. THEY ARE THE MOST WARLIKE OF ALL INDIANS…. (Book 3/102).
  • Now the important question arises: Who are these most-warlike Indians who lived to the north of the Paktuikes of Herodotus?.

1. Herodotus (484 BCE- 425 BCE) mentions Pactyan/Paktuike people or their country about five times or so in his Inquiry (Books: 4/44; 3/102, 3/94, 3/95; 7/83, 7/85). One school of scholars identify the Herodotus’s Paktuike with Gandhara country. The city of Kaspatyros of Herodotus (Kaspapyros of Hecateus) is thought to be Paskapuros and is identified with Sanskrit Purushpura (modern Peshawer), an important city of Gandhara. Kaspapyros is specifically stated to be the city of Gandhara by Hecateus of Miletus.

Hence PAKTUIKE= GANDHARA (according to one school of scholars)

2. Basing on Aramaic Inscriptions of king Ashoka (Reign: 273 BCE to 232 BCE), many noted scholars identify the Paropamisadae region as the land inhabited by the Kambojas. This Paropamisadae region comprised, besides other areas, the Kapisa, Lamghan and Swat valleys also.

Scholars like Dr S Levi are of the opinions that Sanskrit names KAPISA and KAMBOJAS are identical terms and are Indian versions of some non-Sanskrit name which was not easily transliteratable in Sanskrit (See also: Epigraphia Indica, Vol XIX-1, p 11, Indian Antiquary, 203, 1923, p 52; Indian historical quarterly, Vol XXV-3, 1949, pp 190-92 etc). Eminent scholars like Dr W. W. Taran, Dr Moti Chandra, Dr S. Chattopadhyaya, W. K. Fraser Tytler, M. C. Gillett, Donald N. Wilber and others also hold that Kapisa and Kamboja are identical.

Regarding Kapisa (Panini Kapisi) and its inhabitants, the 7th c Chinese pilgrim Hiuen Tsang writes: ‘Their (i.e people of Kapisa) literature is like that of Bactrian/Tukharan people, but their customs, common language and rules of behavior differ somewhat’. ……Based on pilgrim’s write-up on Lan-Po [Lamghan] (See Book II), Kapisa was not, unlike Gandhara, regarded as a part of India…. ( See also: Early Eastern Iran and the Atharvaveda, Persica-9, p 114, fn 80, Dr Michael Witzel).

Further, ancient Commentator on Bana Bhatta specifically connects the Kambojas with the Bahlika (Bactria)-----Kambojah-Bahlika-Desajah---(Quoted by H. W Bailey in Ancient Kamboja , Iran and Islam, 1971, p 66).

4. From classical sources, we know of some IRANIAN names around Kunar valley and on its west---- such as the ASPASII clan (from Iranian horse=ASPA) , and CHOASPES, the Greek name for Kunar which also has Iranian suffix Aspa embedded in it (Choaspa = Cho.aspa = river of excellent horses--- cho = kho= eu = excellent, aspa = horse). All this evidence strongly points to this region being under the IRANIAN cultural influence.

To the east of these Iranian Aspasiois and on river Swat, were located the Assakenois of Arrian whom Arrian considers Indians in culture (See Indika, I, 1-3). It is also notable that the name Assakenois comes from Sanskrit Ashvaka and therefore, obviously points to INDIAN INFLUENCE prevailing around Swat/Oddyana region. This view is further reinforced from the name SUASTOS, which is Greek rendering for Sanskrit SUVASTU (modern name Swat-- Su = excellent, vastu = a dewlling place (Dr Michael Witzel). But on the other hand, Dr. Marquart's plausible explanation of Choaspes = *hu-aspa =*eu-aspa= 'having excellent horses', is also stated to be an Iranianized rendering of the Sanskrit name SUVASTU (SUVASTU >SWAT). See Serindia : Detailed report of explorations in Central Asia and westernmost China--Vol. 1, by Sir Aurel Stein, 1921). This defininitively points to the prevalence of Indian cultural influence around SUVASTU (Swat/Oddyana) as comapared to Iranian region of Konar (Choaspes).

It is very important to note that the Assakenois (i.e ASHVAKAS) of Arrian are located to north of the Gandharas or the Paktuike of Herodotus (Book 3/102). Thus, the Herodotean reference to MOST WARLIKE INDIANS (Book 3/102 above), to all probability, alludes to these Indian ASHVAKAN people living in the Swat region. These ASHVAKANS are also located exactly on the north of Gandhara and therefore, could be none-else than the WARLIKE INDIANS ALLUDED TO BY HERODOTUS (3/102).

AND LASTLY: 7th century Chinese pilgrim Hiuen Tsang, while writing up on Lan-Po [Lamghan] (See Book II), states: Going south-east from Lan-Po 100 li or so, we cross a great mountain (ridge), pass a wide river, and so come to Na-kie-lo-ho [the frontiers of North India]. This 7th century evidence also demonstrates that the valleys of Kunar north of Kabol (land of Aspasians) were not considered Indian in culture/language and customs.

Thus the ASHVAKAS or Assakenois of Swat region were obviously an Indianised branch of the Indo-Iranian people involved in HORSE-CULTURE. The Aspasios of Kunar at this time, were obviously following the IRANIAN horse culture. It is thus obvious that the Aspasios and Assakenois of the classical writings represented both the Indian as well as Iranian sections of the Indo-Iranian horse-people. This conclusion may be compared to the Scholars’ views that the Kambojas are known to have had IRANIAN as well as INDIANS affinities/descent (Dr Keith, Dr Macdonnel, Dr Kamboj, W. K. Fraser Tytler, M. C. Gillett, Donald N. Wilber etc).

5. It is of interest to note here that scholars identify these cavalrymen i.e Ashvakas/Ashvakayanas/Ashvayans of the Indian sources ( or the Assakenois/Aspasios of the classical sources) as the clans of the Kambojas (in reference to their equestrian nature).

6. NOW, the Bharatavarsha section of the numerous Puranas refers to some Indian Kashatriya colonies located around Hindukush, neighboring to the Bactrians and it also specifically makes reference to the Kambojah-Dardashcaiva (Kambojas and Daradas) tribes in the same textual verse ( See W. Kirfel’s list of Bharatavarsha countries of Uttarapatha, p 44). This reference gives a powerful clue that the territories of the Kambojas and the Daradas were coterminous.

kShatriyopamadeshAshcha vaishyashUdrakulAni cha |
KAmbojAdardashchaiva barbarAshcha AngalaukikAH ||
(Matsya Purana 113/42)

(See: also Ancient Kamboja in Iran and Islam, 1971, Dr H. W. Bailey).

In addition, Mahabharata at some places also brackets the Kambojas and the Daradas together e.g. DARDAN SAHA KAMBOJAI (verse II.27.23)------ this epic evidence gives further powerful support to the above view.

Daradansaha Kambojairajayatpakashasanih. || 20 ||
(MBH 2.27.20)

And the Kambojas are also specifically bracketed with the Gandharas in Ashokan Inscriptions (3rd c BCE):

Yona-Kamboja-Gandharanam………….(Rock Edict V).

Thus the Kambojas are known to have been neighbors both to the Daradas as well as the Gandharas.

The Daradas are known to have inhabited Chitral/Gilgit region west of Indus (Daradistan).

The Gandharas of Mauryans era are attested to be located in Peshawer to Rawalpind.

Taken together, this evidence irrefutably affirms that the Kambojas of Ashoka, the Mahabharata and the Bhuvanakosha section (Bharatavarsha) of numerous Puranas were certainly located in the Paropamisadae region (in Kapis/Kunar/Swat valleys) so as to be neighbors BOTH to the Gandharas ( located in Peshawer/Rawalpindi) as well as the Daradas (located in Chitral/Gilgit).

QUEESTION OF MAJOR OR MINOR TRIBE

7. Actually Mahabharata refers TWO KAMBOJA lands/countries:

(i) PARAMA-KAMBOJAS as living neighbors to Rishikas/Tukharas (Yue-ches) in Transoxiana region and

(ii) KAMBOJAS living as neighbors to the Daradas on the southern side of Hindukush (MBH II.27.23-27).

This is clearly specified in context of Arjuna’s war expeditions against the tribes of Uttarapatha.

Daradansaha Kambojai.rajayatpakashasanih. || 20 ||
..................................................
Lohan Parama.Kambojan-Rishikanuttaranapi. || 23 ||

— (MBH 2.27.20-23)

Both Kambojas and the Parama-Kambojas are stated to have participated in the great epic war with an Askshauni army consisting of wrathful Kambojan warriors. Their army has metaphorically been styled like a swarm of locusts covering the battle-field of Kurukshetra. (MBH 5/19/21-23). This sufficiently shows that the Kambojas in ancient times were indeed a MAJOR TRIBE. Therefore, it is not correct to state that ancient Kambojas formed a MINOR TRIBE. According to Dr Law, among the Kshatriya tribes of ancient times, the Kambojas did occupy a very prominent place (Some Kshatria Tribes---, 1924, p 241, Dr B. C. Law).

8. It is also important to note that the Pactyas/Paktuike are referenced ONLY AND ONLY by Herodotus. No other foreign/classical source, whatsoever, refers to the Pactyans/Paktuike. Rig Veda makes just ONE reference to a minor clan called PAKTHA (Rig Veda VII.18,19, 83) in context with the Battle of Ten Kings (BTK) which was fought on river Purusni (Ravi) in Punjab. No other Indian sources, whatsoever, makes any reference to the Rig Vedic Pakthas and no other classical source other than Herodotus makes any references the Pactyans.

On the other hand, there are repeated references to the Kambojas in the whole gamut of ancient Indian literature--Sanskrit and Pali-- both religious and non-religious,---ncluding the Vedas, Epics, Puranas, Arathashastras, Kamshastras, dramas, grammatical texts, Royal Biographies and host other literature besides Inscriptional references as far as Bengal and Sri Lanka.

If Rigvedic Pakthas are the same as Herodotean Pactyans as is often believed, it shows that the Pakthas/Pactyans in ancient times may indeed have been a minor tribe from Indian point of view so as not to find frequent references in ancient Indian sources as the Kambojas do.

It is therefore incorrect and unreasonable to say that the ancient Kambojas have less claim to authentic history as compared to the Pakthas or Pactyans who, rightly or wrongly, are thought by some to be the ancestors of the Pushtuns.

It is unreasonable to give more weightage to the literary evidence of Herodotus (5th c BCE) with regards to Pactyans and Gandharas over INSCRIPTIONAL evidence of king Ashoka (3rd c BCE) with regards to the Kambojas and Gandharas. This is because the literary evidence of Herodotus has been susceptible to being tempered with or prone to scriber’s errors down the road where as the inscriptional evidence of king Ashoka is untemperable. There are claims from some noted scholars that the Classical sources may have been tempered with over the time.

It is also very strange that while Herodotus (440 BCE) makes no reference to the Kambojas, king Ashoka (3rd c BCE), on the hand, gives high prominence to the Kambojas (and Yonas) (R.E XIII). And there is no reference to Pakthas/Paktuke in Ashoka’s records. Moreover, while the Kambojas also find reference in Ptolemy’s geography (i.e. Tambyzois, (K)Ambautai, Komoi), and in the records of Hiuen Tsang and others also, there is absolutely no reference to the Paktui/Paktuke/Pakthas in any foreign source except Herodotus.

At one place, Herodotus refers to the Gandharas and Pactyans as TWO DISTINCT PEOPLE (Book 7/66-67). Hence it may be possible that the Pactyanas are NOT THE SAME PEOPLE as the Gandharas. Further, since Herodotus does NOT NAME THE Kambojas (who are otherwise, a very important people around this time per Indian sources since they find prominent mention among TWO OF THE IMPORTANT MAHAJANAPADAS located in eastern Afganistan from eigth c BCE downwards), it may therefore be possible that the Pactyans of Herodotus may have been either SAME PEOPLE as the Iranian Kambojas or else they may have been an offshoot from them (speculation at this point).

These are some points to ponder over.

KLS.


  • SOME ANCIENT SOURCES ON EASTEERN AFGHANISTAN COMMUNITIES

A: The Achemenids sources on ancient communities of Eastern Afghanistan:

Behistun inscription of Darius (522-486) refers to Gadara (Gandhara), Thatagu (Sattagydai), Harauvati (Archosia) and Maka while his Persepolis Inscriptions adds Hindu to the above list. Interestingly, the Babylonian/Akaddian version of Darious’s Behistun inscriptions substitutes GADARA with PARUPAIRSAINNA (Paropamisadae). THIS MAY INDICATE THAT GANDHARA [PURUSHPURA (PESHAWER) TO TAXILA (RAWALPINDI)] AND THE KAMBOJA (=PAROPAMISADAE) WAS CONSIDERED AS ONE UNIT IN ACHAMENID RECORDS. However, the Behistun inscription of Darius supported by its Aramaic version discovered at Elephantine (Egypt) shows that the Achaemenian Strapy of Archosia under Darius extended as far as KAPISKANI. This Kapiskani probably was same as Sanskrit KAPISI (Ptolemian Kapisa) located in Paropamisadae (= Kamboja) region.

As can be noticed above, the Achaemenid records do not make any reference to name Kamboja as such. However, their reference to KAPISKANI may probably refer to the Paropamisadean branch of the Kambojan territory/community.

B: Herodotus (484-425 BCE) reference on Ancient Communities of East Afghanistan:

Herodotus in his History (440 BCE) enumerates Sattagydai (Thatagu), Gandhario (Gandhara), Dadicae (Daradas?) and Aparytae (Apritas=Afridis?) as the communities of EAST AFGHANISTAN (upper Indus) which according to him formed 7th strapy of Darious (Upper-Indus region). INDIA of Herodotus is assumed to have included Sindhu/Sauvira (lower/mid Indus) and formed the 20th strapy of Achaemenids.

AGAIN, it can be noticed that Herodotus also does not make any direct reference Kambojas as such. But since in his Inquiry, Herodotus at one place specifies the Gandharas as DISTINCT people from the Paktuikes, it may hold a clue that the Paktuike may have some connections with Ashokan Kambojas. Or else, the Herodoten term Gandhara may have comprised also the Kambojas as well.

C: Indian references on ancient communities of Eastern Afghanistan:

The most important Indian source of Maurya king Ashoka (272-233) refers to the important ethnic groups of eastern Afghanistan which formed the important provinces of his empire. The three important ethnic people/their lands are referred to as Yona, Kamboja and Gandhara. While rock edicts V refers to Yona-Kamboja-Gandhara, his edict XIII refers only to the Yonas and Kambojas (Yona-Kambojesu).

According to scholars, before the arrival of Greek Yonas (or Yavanas) in third quarter of 4th century BCE, the Kambojas and Gandharas were the most important communities of what is now eastern Afghanistan (The Land of the Kambojas, Purana, Vol V, No 2, July 1963, p 257, Dr D. C. Sircar). This is because Kamboja and Gandhara two important ancient Mahajanapadas (Great Kingdoms) of Pre-Buddhist era which are referred to in Buddhist texts like Anguttaranikaya were located in what is today Afghanistan. After Alexander’s invasion, however, the Greeks had their settlements predominantly in Archosia while the Kambojas remained a predominant settlement north of river Kabol in Paropamisade and the Gandhara community continued to dominate south of river Kabol from Peshawer to trans-Indus region including north-west Punjab.

Mahabharata evidence

The inscriptional reference of king Ashoka is perfectly seen in the third associative formula of Mahabharata (said to have been composed around the start of Christian era and was emphasized by Dr H. C. Raychaudhury). This epic expression similarly associates the Yonas, Kambojas and Gandharas---three people, in the same verse of the MBH and interestingly, just like Ashoka’s edicts, it also uses the Prakrtic form Yona instead of usual Yavanas of Indian texts:

uttara pathajanmanah kirtayishyami tanapi. |
Yona-Kamboja-Gandharah Kirata barbaraih saha. || 43 ||

(MBH 12/207/43-44).

After Alexander’s invasion, the Yonas had become very important community, at least politically, in eastern Afghanistan. The Yonas (or Yavanas) are bracketed again and again with the Kambojas in many verses of Mahabharata and some other texts which were composed in the following period and added to the epic.

The Bilingual Inscription of king Ashoka (Shar-i-Kuna inscription) found from Kandhahar in 1957 contains Ashokan inscructions written in Greek and Aramaic language. It is believed by scholars that the Greek version was meant for the Greeks or Greco-Iranian population of Archosia where as Aramaic version was intended for the Kambojas. The fact that Ashokan edict XIII refers to two people in a compound expression YONA-KAMBOJESU reveals that there was close connections of Yonas with the Kambojas and hence some Kamboja settlements had extended south of Kabol as far as Kandhahar.

The Buddhist text Majjhima Nikaya attests that in the lands of Yavanas, Kambojas and some other frontier nations, there were only two classes of people...Aryas and Dasas...the masters and slaves. The Arya could become Dasa and vice versa:

Yona-Kambojaseu annesu cha panchchantimesu janapadesu dvea vanna,
ayyo ceva daaso ca ayyo hutva daaso hoti daaso hutva ayyo hoti ti.

— (Majjhima Nikaya 43.1.3)

The Commentary [Majjhima Commentary, II, p.784] further informs that if a Brahmin goes to country of Kambojas or Yavanas with his wife for purpose of trade and dies there, his wife would then be compelled to work for her living and her children might consort with slaves, in which case their children would be slaves. This attests that in the lands of Kambojas and the Yavanas (yona.kambojesu), there was no place for Brahmanas.

A information similar to Majjhima Nikaya (43.1.3) is also supplied by Ashoka's Rock Edict XIII which conveys similar information on Yonas (directly) and the Kambojas (indirectly) stating that Brahmanas and Shramanas are found every where in his empire except in the lands of Yonas etc (See: The Land of the Kambojas, Purana, Vol V, No 2, July 1963, Dr D. C. Sircar, p 253; Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum, Vol I, p 209; Ancient Kamboja, People and the Country, 1981, p 3).

nathi cha se janpade yata nathe eme nikayia anataa yonesu bahmane cha shamne.

— (R.E XIII).

This shows that in wake of Alexandera's invasion, the Yonas had founded their settlements as neighbors to the Kambojas. As the Yonas are known to have been predominantly located in Archosia, hence some sections of Kambojas were defintely living as neighbors to these Archosian Yavans in north of Kandhahar and thus the culture and social customs of these two people had become similar over time. The Kambojas are believed to have copied or borrowed heavily from the Yonas in respect of culture and social customs and thus some sections of Kambojas may have become fully grecianised.

It is no wonder that the Brahmanical literature composed around this period states both of these communities as Barbaric/Mlechcha people of Uttarapatha or north-west E.g

uttarashchapare mlechchha jana bharatasattama. || 63 ||
Yavanashcha sa Kamboja Daruna mlechchha jatayah. |

(MBH 6.11.63-64)

Many more ancient references similar to the above with regards to the Kambojas/Yonas can be presented here. But important thing to note here is that in all these ancient references, there is absolutely no clue, whatsover, to the Pactyans or Pakthas--said to be ancestors of Pushtuns. This gives us an idea that the Pakthas/Pactyans, if they indeed were the ancestors of modern pushtuns, were indeed a very minor community in ancient times much less important than the Kambojas.

On the otherhand, it can be argued that some of the Afghan clans of modern Afghanistan/North-west Pakistan may have descended from these Ancient Kambojas. It is apparent that all ancient ethnic identies like the Saka, Yavana, Gandhara, Kuru, Kosala, Magadha, Matsya, Huna, Kushana/Yueche etc have totally disaappeared in the sands of time except for few ancient tribes such as the Indian Yadavas and the Iranian Kambojas and Pahlavas. They all appear to have formed into a hotch-potch mass of vocationalized communities in the north/north-west with numerous ethnicities so merged togethher that it may not be now so-easy to distinguished them apart. As for the Kambojas, only a minuscule number of them have been able to still maintain their distinct ancient identity (as Kamboj, Kamboh and Kamoz/Kams) while rest of them have also apparently merged/absobed into various modern ethnic groups in Afghanistan and north India/Pakistan. It is interesting to point out here that many clan names of modern Kamboj (or their close variants) can still be found in some of the important communities of India/Pakistan and Affghanistan of today.

KLS.

I think the scholarship of KLS trumps that of Tombseye far as I am concerned. Interestingly, the caste "Kamboj" exists in modern North India to this day: they count themselves as Kshatriya. Koestler's book 'The 13th tribe' mentions the Kunders of Central Asia, who live on as Kundera's in modern Slovakia & Kundra's in North India.

If modern Indian scholarship wants to make the case for a Hindu Afghanistan & can support it with inscriptions on stone by King Asoka, as opposed to tamperable texts of Herodotus ( who as Tombseye concedes, 'also made up stories about fantastic animals' ) I personally have no problem with it. I think the cavilling has a bit to do with unsustainable hegemony of Hellenaic discourse, due to the debt that the Judeo-Christian tradition owes it. However, scholarship supports him who has the most cogent data. Much of the archaeological dig in Bamiyan & Ghor has now been destroyed by unsupervised excavavtion by locals, as documented in Rory Stewart's excellent book : "The Places In Between." —Preceding unsigned comment added by MajMaverik (talk • contribs) 08:18, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Mauryan Period[edit]

Hello All,

I just wanted to raise a point regarding Ancient Afghanistan and the Mauryan Period. Mauryan rule was long enough and significant enough for individual mention, esp considering Alexander/Seleucid rule lasted barely 30 years versus the 120 years of Mauryan rule (Chandragupta 305BCE-Subhagasena roughly 180BCE). Perhaps we should consider a separate section. I wanted to reach out to the main contributors on this page prior to making any unilateral changes. Please let me know what you think.

Best Regards,

Devanampriya 18:59, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ancient Afghanistan was part of ancient India[edit]

This article makes it seem like ancient Afghanistan was everything but ARYAN HINDU WHICH MAKES NO SENSE.....Before Islam, yes there were other religions, but the entire region was the same as India = Aryans who were of ancient Hinduism....I mean if Hinduism is the oldest surviving religion, and India is right next to present day Afghanistan, then how can anyone say Hinduism/Aryans werent the oldest of Afghanistan? I mean Afghanistan is right next to India (Before the creation of Pakistan) and since there were no boarders, it doesnt make sense to say talk about Ancient Afghanistan as if it was different or seperate from ancient India.....and by the way.....Aryans did not migrate from Afghanistan to INdia.....it was all one land....THere was no invasion or migration....U cant say they were in Afghanistan and THEN went to India....It was all one land 71.119.255.31 03:26, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe because they were not the same people? There is clear distinctions and differences noted between ancient inhabbitants of Afghanistan an indians from the works of Herodotus and Strabo. Afghanistan was mainly inhabbited by Indo-Iranians while india by Indo-Aryans. Not only that but your own indian sources mention afghans as meelecha. Clearly not the same people and the differences today are as clear as night and day. Akmal94 (talk) 22:36, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Authenticity of this Quote[edit]

Can anyone provide scholarly reference for this quote?

In a letter to his mother, Alexander described his encounters with the western and northern tribes (Afghans) thus: "I am involved in the land of a 'Leonine' (lion-like) and brave people, where every foot of the ground is like a wall of steel, confronting my soldier. You have brought only one son into the world, but everyone in this land can be called an Alexander.”

1. Did Alexander write a letter to his mother mentioning this?

2. Which tribes is he referring to? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.134.242.122 (talk) 00:46, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ask for citation before you delete such information from articles.--Bagwoosh (talk) 00:39, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This quote needs to be deleted as it has no citation. Please provide citation for this quote or delete it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.89.143.142 (talk) 23:44, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why are quotes added which are not even cited? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.89.143.142 (talk) 23:49, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

aria[edit]

Under sub-category Alexander the Great, Seleucid-Mauryan rivalry, and Greco-Bactrian Rule, 330 BCE–ca. 150 BCE, they are referring to ancient Aria (now around modern day city of Herat) but when the link is clicked, a topic about music comes up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Afgnadeem (talk • contribs) 22:04, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on Pre-Islamic period of Afghanistan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:43, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Pre-Islamic period of Afghanistan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:20, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Pre-Islamic period of Afghanistan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:18, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Pre-Islamic period of Afghanistan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:58, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Omission of Helmand Culture/Helmand Civilization[edit]

Why ? There's mentions of Indus Valley Civilization but none of Helmand Civilization or little or less of BMAC which are indigeneous to modern day Afghanistan which is not the case with IVC. I see some Indian interference in this page and it's sad, too much lacking also on "Iranian" Huns such as Kidarites or Nezaks for example. Little to no mention about Tokharistan and Tang dynasty. 2A02:8428:809E:6701:6CD6:1D6D:9C30:F765 (talk) 15:06, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ancient_history_of_Afghanistan&oldid=1213727408"