Re: Pakistani Identity?
LastOfTheDinosaurs,
You are not making sense when you claim that there is “no continuity” from Indus Valley Civilization to Pakistan. The memories of Harappan Civilization might had been forgotten through the centuries (until rediscovered 80 years ago), but its cultural/racial/geographical legacy lived on with its people who simply evolved with the arrival of newcomers. Pakistan region was exclusively the base of various civilizations and kingdoms such as the Harappan Civilization, the RigVedic Aryan country of Sapta Sindhva, the Scythian kingdom of Sakastan, the Greco-Buddhist civilization of Gandhara, and much more. With its evolving Harappan culture/race as its foundation, the fusion of newcomers and the natives kept the evolutionary cycle and today the synthesis is the Pakistani identity. Indus is to Pakistan what Nile is to Egypt and Tigris-Euphrates to Iraq with the legacy/heritage of its ancient civilizations. All great civilizations were interrupted by invasions, but its legacy/continuity always survived in different forms.
This is what the renowned archeologist on Harappan Civilization, Mark Kenoyer, has to say about the Harappan continuity/legacy, “Although earlier scholars thought that the Indus civilization disappeared around 1700 B.C., recent excavations in Pakistan indicate that the civilization gradually became fragmented into smaller regional cultures referred to as Late or post-Harappan cultures. The ruling classes and merchants of the major urban centers were no longer able to control the trade networks that served to integrate such a vast geographical area. The use of standardized weights, writing and seals became unnecessary as their social and political control gradually disappeared. The decline of the major urban centers and the fragmentation of the Indus culture can be attributed in part to changing river systems that disrupted the agricultural and economic system. Certain distinguishing hallmarks of the Indus civilization disappeared. Others, such as writing and weights, or aspects of Indus craft technology, art, agriculture and possibly social organization, continued among the Late and post-Harappan cultures. These cultural traditions eventually became incorporated in the new urban civilization that arose during the Early Historical period, around 600 B.C.” And this was published on Discover Magazine, “The legacy of the ancient Indus cities and their crafts people remains. The bead makers of the region continue to make beads based on Harappan techniques — though carnelian is now bored with diamond-tipped drills. Shell workers still make bangles out of conch shells. And in the crowded marketplaces, as merchants hawk the superiority of their silver over the low-quality ore of their neighbors, as gold and jewels are weighed in bronze balances, it’s hard to imagine that a 4,000-year-old Harappan bazaar could have been terribly different.”
With your logic many different people around the world wont be able to claim their heritage because their ancient civilizations were not “memorized” and thus lacks “continuity”. So according to you, the descendents of Mayans who happen to be today’s Guatemalans and Yucatanians have no right to claim their proud heritage of Mayan Civilization because they lacked memory/continuity since it was accidently rediscovered only a hundred years ago. There are many other examples. To make it simple, if you or your future generation forgets the name/memory of your great-great-grandfather then it does not mean that there is no continuity from him.
Geographical landscapes are diverse in many different countries, having commonality with neighboring countries. Same thing holds true for Pakistan, however, Pakistan’s natural boundaries are Karakoram mountains in the north, Sulaiman/Hindu-Kush mountains in the west, Arabian Sea in the south, and Thar desert and the Sutlej river on its east. This unique landscape with Indus river and its tributaries as its lifelihood made Pakistan region distinct from others. Sutlej-Thar have been the traditional-natural boundary between the Indus and Gangetic peoples: Yahoo | Mail, Weather, Search, Politics, News, Finance, Sports & Videos which made Pakistan region distinct in its historical background. Moreover, Indus Valley (lets take Sindh) and the heart of Gangetic Valley are thousands of miles apart. Historically both regions evolved with its own language, religion, race, culture, etc.
The combined six commonalities of history, race, culture, religion, linguistics, and geography was “too broad/insufficient” for you to accept a Pakistani identity for the different ethnic groups of Pakistan. Well at least the ethnic groups of Pakistan have much more commonality between themselves when compared to our neighbors’ ethnic groups. Take Iran for instance who has only 63% Indo-Iranians and the rest Altaic and Semitic peoples. Afghanistan is almost 80% linguistically Indo-Iranian, and 1/3rd racially Mongoloid. India is 69% linguistically Indo-Iranian and the rest Dravidians, Sino-Tibetans, and Austrics… and so on and on. So what commonality do Pakistan’s neighbors’ ethnic groups have to give its national identity? Pakistan has an advantage in this aspect and the commonalities I stated in my previous post are very significant to define Pakistan’s identity. Pakistan’s current Islamocentric and Indocentric establishment has not yet fully capitalize on this in order to create a stronger Pakistani identity.
Your argument for countries based on ethnic groups is unrealistic based on the current geo-politics of the region, and will open up a pandora box. Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran, and India are multi-ethnic countries and the case for ethnic separatism can be valid for all of these countries. National identity is engineered for multi-ethnic countries. Pakistan’s linguistically Indo-Iranian, racially Caucasoid, geographically Indus Valley, historically Harappan-Aryan-Scythic-Turkic-etc, culturally Indo-Iranian-Islamic, and religiously Muslim commonalities between its ethnic groups makes it a very strong national identity, yet distinct from its neighbors. Sure most neighboring countries will always have some commonality with a country but the differences are usually greater.
As far as the term Afghan is concerned, sure in the past it exclusively meant Pashtun (in the national and ethnic sense), but that meaning evolved to a different one since today an Afghan is only a citizen of present-day Afghanistan. This is the accepted definition of Afghan worldwide, including among the non-Pashtun Afghans. In fact, non-Pashtun Afghans strongly oppose to the usage of Afghan as meaning Pashtun since it will represent Pashtun domination of Afghanistan. Other countries that you gave examples with ethnic name as the name for their country are ethnically the overwhelming majority (+80%), on the other hand Pashtuns are only 38% of Afghanistan. Even Wikipedia states, “Pashtuns are also historically referred to as ethnic Afghans as the terms Pashtun and Afghan were synonymous until the advent of modern Afghanistan and the division of the Pashtuns by the Durand Line”.
By the way, you mentioned the Turkic attacks of Mahmud Ghaznavi. Gandhara’s Raja Jaipal allied himself with its eastern neighbors not based on religion or ethnicity, but on purely military-defence lines. And why should he have not when a looting invader is threatening to destroy his kingdom.
maybe the basics..