Talk:Awan (tribe)/Archive 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6

The use of Ham-Saya term

Alamsherkhan (talk) 13:29, 8 August 2011 (UTC) I have gone through the remarks which come from one of the editors that while population census Awan’s in some areas of NWFP are listed as "Hamsaya". Some of the editors consider it impolite word as regards to tribe. First of let us see the common meaning of Hamsaya before I explain what it mean in Pashtun community. "Ham-saya" is common term used in Pakistan for neighbour. Ham is used to explain the second word like, Ham- Rakab, Ham Zulf, Ham- Piyala , Ham-Nawa and Ham-Nasheen etc . Saya mean shadow and the word to word meaning of Hamsaya is the persons sharing same shadow. In Pashtun tribe community word Hamsaya is used in the meanings of adoption and protection. This term is used for the small group of individuals who got invited by a local tribe to work/stay in tribal Pashtun society. Simply it mean "a guest under protection". Hamsaya declaration by a tribe ensure their safety during the stay in the Area. This rule still works in all tribal areas and the news reporters and visitors mostly get benefit of this customary law.

Page protected

Instead of blocking both User:Alamsherkhan and User:Rawalpindi Express, both of whom have exceeded WP:3RR by a long way, I have protected the page instead so that the dispute can be discussed here. Please note that when the article is unlocked, any repeat of such an edit-war will result in long blocks for the participants. Black Kite (t) (c) 11:04, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Request to keep Article in present till upto consensus

Zarrigul (talk) 14:25, 9 August 2011 (UTC)The article in current form is perfectly balanced and should be maintained till both matter is settled with consensus as all the claims are smartly represented in the article. I disagree with Averriost point of view that Rawalpindi Express was giving justifications for his deletions . Non of the 41 references, prove Gorara , as Gohar shah and Khokhar as Muhammad Shah but he is trying to modify the names of famous Rajput clans to support his fictitious claim (to link them with Qutab Shah). Similarly he recently have modified the Wikipedia article on Mehmood Ghaznavi without any credentials to support his additions. No one will have objection if a group of Awan claim themselves to be descendant of Qutab Shah or descendants of Hazrat Ali K.w. and this citation one time get place at origion but hence it is claim and many does not agree with that so he don’t have right to claim that all agree with his claim while we can see a lot of scholarly work with different point of view available on the topic of origin. Though unfair Repeated citation and modifications in other related articles proves that he is engaging himself in non constructive.

Bibliograpy, references, books

Some editors have asked about the references and books in their posts. The basic sources of history of the Awan tribe are the following books: The first four books are the most ancient books on the subject. Please start a new section, if you want to discuss this bibliography. If you want to improve this list, name of author, name of publisher, then fell free to edit it.

1. Kihalastah al-Nisab, a treatise written by Jamal ad-Din Hasan ibn Yusuf ibn 'Ali ibn Muthahhar al-Hilli. This is a treatise on the descendants of 'Ali Ibn Abi Talib', Alawi. This treatise also includes the descendants of Ali Ibn Abi Talib who migrated to other countries after the rise of Umayyad Caliphate.

2. "Mirat-al-Israr" was written in Persian by Abdur Rahman Chishti. It was written sometime during the reign of the Moghul emperor Jahangir (1605-26 CE). The author based the work on an earlier (and now lost work) by Mulla Muhammad Ghaznawi, a contemporary of the Sultan Mahmud and Salar Mas’ud.

3. Mezan Hashmi, written by Maulana Hashim Shah Alwi

4. Mezan Qutbi, written by Qutb Shah.

5. Tareekh Alwi, Maulvi Haider Ali. 1897

6. Tareekh Bab-Ul-Awan (A History of the Awan Tribe), Muhammad Noor-ud-Din Sulemani 1906.

7. Zad ul Awan by Muhammad Noor-ud-Din Sulemani. 1901

8. Griffin, L.H., 1865, The Panjab Chiefs: Historical and Biographical Notices of the Principal Families in the Territories Under the Panjab Government, Chronicle Press

9. History of Awan, by Muhammad Sarwar Khan Awan, 2009 by the Al- Faisal Nashran, Lahore.

10. Talbot, W.S., 1991, Gazetteer of the Jhelum District 1904: Part 1, Sang-e-Meel Publications, p.100 and Kaul, H., 1912, Report on the Census of Punjab 1911.

11. Rose, H.A., 1997, A Glossary of the Tribes and Castes of the Punjab and North-West Frontier Province, Nirmal Publishers and Distributors, p.p. 25-29.

12. Ibbetson, D., 2001, Punjab Castes, Sang-e-Meel Publications, p.170.

13. Tan, T.Y., 2005, The Garrison State: The Military, Government and Society in Colonial Punjab, 1849-1947, Sage Publications India Pvt Ltd, p.74.

14. Sarwar, S., 2002, Wadi Soon Sakesar: The Soon Valley, Al-Faisal Nashran,

15. Alvi say awan tak .by Abdul Hafeez Alvi

16. Miratul Awan

17. Safar nama kiliar –Malik Muhammad Nawaz Awan of Attock

18. Tarikh Attock by Malik Muhammad Nawaz Awan of Attock

19. Yadgare Aslaf by Malik Khuda Bakhsh Awan of Khabekki

20. Tazkara tul awan by Malik Sher Mohammad Kalabagh

21. Awan Gotain by Malik Mohabbat Hussain Awan

22. Omdatul talib (Arabic)

23. Awan mashaikh uzam by Malik Mohabbat Hussain Awan

24. Awan tarikh kay ainay main by Malik Mohabbat Hussain Awan 25. Shamsul awan 26. Haqiqatul awan by Baba Hashim Awan

27. Awan Shakhsiat by Malik Mohabbat Hussain Awan

28. Tarikh budhial

29. Wadi Soan kay akhan

30. Zia e soan

31. Riazul Awaisia

32. Aulad e amirul mominin by wazir rul Hussain Alvi Iran

33. Tarikh siadat alvia

34. Tarikh mashaikh azam by Syed Zainunl Abidin Alvi

35. Tehqiqul awan Khawas Khan

36. Nasbul Salihi

37. Tarikh awan by Malik Mohammad Perve Awan of Azad Kashmirz

38. Tehqiqul ansab by Abdul Karim Awan Kashmir

39. Alvi Awan Tarikh two volumes by Mohabbat Hussain Awan

40. Karb e durum by Dost Mohammad Mohib, Wadi Soan Sakaser Khoshab

41. Tarikh Alvi by Khursheed Ahmad Alvi Karachi

42. Awan Shakhsiat Azad Kashmir by Malik Mohabbat Hussain Awan

43. Allama Muhammad Yousuf Gabriel Hayat o khidmat by Prof. Tassadaq Hussain ( it is composed of history of Allama Muhammad Yousuf Gabriel and valley Soan and Awan history also)

44. Alvi Awan Qabila. Mughtasar Taaraf – by Allama Muhammad yousuf Gabriel

Averroist (talk) 15:49, 28 July 2011 (UTC)


The reference books regarding Awan's

Ghazanfaralvi (talk) 18:18, 10 August 2011 (UTC)Mr Averriost have you read the books you are quoting as reference? I am afraid you copied the list from some where and pasted in this article. the Book Bab -al-Awan you placed at Number six(6) of the list of references. This book deny your claim regarding origin of Awan's and the Shajrah of Salar Qutab Haider. Please read it carefully or ask me to let you know the page numbers of the book. I have chance to read a book regarding Salar Masood (writer Ejaz Masoodi) at 2nd page the writer of book explain that through holy dreams he got the authentic information on this topic. The "theory of holy guidance through dream for authentic history" is new experience for me. whether we can use such kind of information as evidence? cheersGhazanfaralvi (talk) 18:18, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

There are many school of thoughts of historians of Awan History. I made the complete list of all the books,that I could find. If a book is against my arguments, I also added the name of that book, because it is on History of Awan tribe. Cheers Averroist (talk) 08:18, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Is it constructive contribution

Zarrigul (talk) 19:37, 10 August 2011 (UTC)Ghazi Saiyyed Salar Masud (Persian: غازى سيد سالار مسعود) (died 14 Rajab 424AH / 1032 AD) was nephew of Sultan Mahmud Ghaznavi and a Muslim missionary. Salar Masud was a Islamic scholar who came along with his uncle Jalaluddin Bukhari and teacher Syed Ibrahim Mashadi Bara Hazari (Salar-i-Azam of Sultan Mahmud Ghaznavi) in early 11th century to the South Asia for propagation of Islam.[1] Salar Masud was born at Ajmer on 22 January 1015 AD. He was son of Ghazi Salar Sahu who was married to Sitr-i-Mu'alla, a sister Sultan Mahmud Ghaznavi. Salar Sahu was a descendant of Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyyah, son of Hazrat Ali. Salar Masud was very young when he took part with his uncle Sultan Mahmud Ghaznavi the invasion of Somnath (1026 AD). While his uncle returned to Ghazni after victory at Somnath, Salar Masud settled in South Asia to further his ambitions.[2] Salar Masud entered India with an army in May 1031 AD with intention of permanent settlement and Islamization of its population. Salar Masud was one of the first Muslim missionary in the region of Mewat and Rajputana nearly 150 years before Sufi Khawaja Moinuddin Chisti. Salar Masood marched on to Delhi and defeated King Mahipal Tomara.[citation needed] After victories across in Northern India plains and passing through Meerut, Kannauj and Malihabad he arrived in Satrikh. He stayed and encamped here up to mid 1033. He was soon after joined by his father from Kabuliz near Kashnur. Salar Masood Ghazi conquered Amroha in 589 AH/1093 AD. Please note the contradiction at one page “He came with his uncle and teacher to propogate Islam. and in next sentence he claim, he born at Ajmer . next joke he was born on 22 Jan 1015AD and Died on 1032AD (age of 17 ) but next paragraph in Somnath section it is mentioned he took part with his uncle in invasion of Somnath (1026AD) mean child of 11 year. In invasion section of same article editor claim he entered India in Mat 1031AD (this is 3rd claim of entering India) and in 1093 he conquered Amroha. A person who died in 1032 conquered Ambroha well. Sir now I admit he can guide people through spiritual dream even after his death. Seems this page is created to make connection and the Editor claims he is the ancestor of Awan’s. Below you can find that how soberly the editor injucted Ghazi Salar Masud into the family of Mehmood Ghaznavi family to prove his connections with Awans.Sultan Mahmud Ghaznavi was born on November 2, 971 in Ghazni to Sultan Sebüktigin. Yusuf Sebüktigin was his younger brother. Sultan Mahmud's twin sons succeeded him in succession: Mohammad Ghaznavi and Ma'sud Ghaznavi I. Maw'dud Ghaznavi was his grandson by his son Mas'ud Ghaznavi. Ghazi Saiyyad Salar Masud (Persian: غازى سيد سالار مسعود) was son of Sitr-i-Mu'alla, sister of Sultan Mahmud Ghaznavi. According to Buzurg of Shahriyar, Sultan Mahmud had 9 wives and close to 56 children with up to 32 women[citation needed].I am leaving it to the administrator and the readers to decide whether these are constructive contributions?Zarrigul (talk) 19:37, 10 August 2011 (UTC)


Is it constructive contribution, Response

It is requested that while making copy and paste, please delete numbers and words like,(1), (2), and [citation needed]. Regards Averroist (talk) 11:57, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Arab origin Fact or Fiction

Hi Averroist And Rawalpindi Express
Averroist you did not respond to my last post where I provided sources for my information you questioned . You must both allow the article to develop and not assume guardianship as that is hampering all the information collecting on this page to be transferred to the article .

Many contemporary eminent Pakistani scholars such as Dani have rejected this notion of Awans descended from Arabs , Aitzaz Ahsan in his book The Indus Saga has made the following observations about Awans .

I have already provided the patently Hindu names of various Awan tribes in my earlier post , that were in use till earlier this century before Awan names were Arabised . Khattars , Khokhars , Chauhan , Bhusin , Chandhar , Ghulle , Harpal and so many more are existing Muslim and Hindu/Sikh Punjabi communities now living in Pakistan and India .

This article needs to be severely reworked to make it more balanced .

On a different point , the martial races theory is now a very discredited colonial construct even in Pakistan . And I wonder how encyclopedic is it to base the entire article on a defunct theory .
Cheers Intothefire (talk) 17:02, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

  1. ^ The Indus Saga from Pataliputra to Partition by Aitzaz Ahsan , Published by Roli Books , PAGE 116

Alamsherkhan (talk) 04:05, 8 August 2011 (UTC) Dear infothefire . Being fair with the history we need to accept conversions, cross marriages and isolation from major tribes on the basis of conversion or cross marriage. No doubt some Sayyad are found every where and all accept them. the claim of arab origin for Arian / Awan is baseless. They are either the local or sub brance of Afghans /Baluchs who lost their linkage with main tribe after marriages with local girls and some are clear cases of adopted tribes, like khokhar Awan , Chuhan Awan similar like recent Bilawal Zardari Bhutto case. i guess that happend when first few people from khokhar and chohan tribes converted to muslims or they got adopted by Awan muslim familes. Migration of groups from Afghanistan and central asia to indian contigent we can find often . Even Rajput and Barhamans are also settlers. better we discuss the issue on blood lines instead of religions like I suggested before to find true links we need to search living evidences in our customs. I would appreciate if let me know whether have you ever heard about the customs of breaking "chorrni" in wedding , Gharoli and Rangoli . what kind of wedding dance your area have ? kumher (ghummer) Sammi, Luddi, Khaid , Do chap or Barballa?

Arab origin Fact or Fiction, Response to Intothefire

I have already given response to your last post, but as you have mentioned the issue, i.e., Hindu names of various Awan tribes, Khattars , Khokhars ,etc,here is my response;

You should read the complete book, and then cite from it. Awan is the most respectable and historical tribe of Arab origin of ancient repute. Therefore, it is (and it was) the desire of many tribes to claim connection with them. For other tribes, who cannot claim this connection always insist on the origin of Awan tribe as their own branch. Jats, Hindus, and even Pashtun, as you and Alamsherkhan are insisting. Now let us read the book again;




When Sir Denzil Ibbetson wrrtes that but the Awans do not always admit the relationship or Awans, looks upon the Khattars or Khokars (or we can made other tribes) as an inferior section of the tribe, what does it mean.

Averroist (talk) 14:52, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

  1. ^ Panjab Castes",by Sir Denzil Ibbetson, 1883, P.467
  2. ^ Panjab Castes",by Sir Denzil Ibbetson, 1883, P.467
  3. ^ Panjab Castes",by Sir Denzil Ibbetson, 1883, P.468

Alamsherkhan (talk) 17:57, 9 August 2011 (UTC)Dear Averriost not only Awan's but each and every tribe in this world is equally respectable. You need to understand that Awan is not a faith or Hindo is not a tribe. So how you compare each other. Religion or Race are 2 different Topics and please don’t mix them. Is is still unknown from where this word came and which language it originates from. Ghori was not Arabic or Sanskrit speaker and common people of Khorasan were not used to these languages so why he was option less to derive a title from the languages which the common people were not used to. It is same like one uneducated person name his son and while in youth his educated son find the justification of his name through consulting dictionaries of different languages. If explanations you get through consulting dictionaries of different languages satisfy you and feel you proud of it. I will respect your opinion and really i personally dont have any concern till you dont include me start considering me Sayyad too. A simple submission is that I dont want to be which my forefathers have not claimed for. I am good what I am without any complex. Khattar live in Tehsil Fateh Jand, Tehsil Attock, Tehsil Hasan Abdal and Haripur. Their neigbour are Pashtuns and Gheba Awan who claim to be the descendants of Barlas (subtribe of Mughal.s) Some Gakharr do claim of their Mughal Barlas origin. First you make your claim more clear. Do you consider them Gheba’s as Awan’s? if not then Khattar’s are so far from Awan’s of Bhera. regards Alamsherkhan Alamsherkhan (talk) 17:57, 9 August 2011 (UTC)


Aitzaz Ahsans quotation about Awan

So far as the Aitzaz Ahsans's quote is concerned, he mentioned the name of Awan tribe with other tribes as just random comments. I think that the word "Awan" would have been mentioned for only one time in the whole book. What claim he has to be authority on our subject. It is the policy of Wikipedia, that the subject must be decided by the expert on the subject. I have added a complete bibliography in this discussion page of more than 40 books. Why you ignore all of them. Why don't you read the books that have been entirely written on this subject. I have mentioned the name of four ancient books. Then there is a book published in 1897. The there is book published in 1901. Then there is a book published in 1906. Why you ignore all of them.

Averroist (talk) 15:15, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Response to Averroist frm Intothefire

  • 1)Here's a quote from Ibbetson , please put balance in the quotes in the article .

The originally Hindu Character of these names is patent, and not explained away by the tradition that Chauhan and Khokhar took their mother’s name[1]

  • 2)Your quotes on the so called superiority or inferiority is simply a peacock comment and irrelevant to the discussion at hand . Stick to the topic .
  • 3)The discussion here is not on the merits or demerits of any religion but on the origin of the Awans ....please focus on the topic at hand .
  • 4)Moreover Jat denotes an ethnicity , Hindu a religion ,Pashtun a linguistic group ...what are you saying ? beats me .
  • 5)I provided Aitzaz Ahsans quote and you dismissed that as well . Not only has he pointedly spoken about the Awans , but also focused on the unsound notion of a few Arab (not one he talks about a few)families having been responsible for populating the entire region .
  • 6)I have already provided the Indian names of the Awan clans from Ibbetson .
  1. ^ A Glossary of the Tribes and castes of the Punjab and North -West Frontier Province compiled by AH ROSE and based on the Census Report for the Punjab 1883 , by Sir Denzil Ibbetson and the census report for the Punjab 1892 by Sir Edward Maclagan . Published By the Asian Educational Services .

This article is completely imbalanced

Response to Intothefire from Averroist

1. You are really very clever to isolate a sentence from it para and context, so as to give your own meaning. The complete para is on p.26, with 6 footnotes, and read as follows;


Here the writer clearly states the Hindu character of these names with reference to the names of Chauhan and Khokhar. Now tell me who was Gohar Shah, the elder son, who settled near Sakesar. Why do you ignore the meaning of whole para?

2. The quotes are not the simply peacock comments, but these are the of quotes of Sir Denzil Ibbetson written in "The Census of the Punjab Province, 1881. "The Report has always been recognized as one of the most remarkable official publications in India, and a work of the greatest value both from the administrative and from the literary and scientific point of view."

Cheers Averroist (talk) 07:44, 12 August 2011 (UTC)


Alamsherkhan (talk) 15:48, 12 August 2011 (UTC)Mr Averriost . Title is given for recognition of one’s services so we have to think why Sultan Mehmood was needing to derive word/words from the languages which he was not knowing or his countrymen were not used to . People like you, are consulting dictionaries to find a justification for a false story/theory which seems to be narrated by a local Girdawar to colonial officer , so keep on doing it.

  • What if one claim that Awan is derived from hai-wan which mean wild , cruel or inhuman .. Invaders are usually titled like these words by locals for their war crimes. So that claim would be more justified as compared to your’s. As Haiwan is commonly used in local languages. For you it resembles with Aon or Ahwan but doesn’t resemble with Awgan . if you accept this resemblance you will not need to find dictionaries. I am sorry to say that you are trying to give your own meaning to everything so don’t blame other’s..
  • You have explain how it Kalgan resemble with Kalan Shah? Kalgan is derived from which language? It is justified if one have objection on this connection. When you claim of Arab connection then you have to prove that Kalgan is Arabic word . A person proud of his Arab origin name his children as kalgan, gorrara, Toi/Jajjh, Chohan and Khokhar don’t make any sense. None of his children carry Arabic name. Why?
  • Still it need to prove that he Qutab Shah ruled Herat as from old history books we don’t find any evidence regarding that. Qutab ud din Aibak was a General of Ghouri army who later become King but this nullify your claim of attachment of Awan’s with Ghazanvi.
  • Gorrara is more close to Arrora, or Gerrara /Kerrar, local tribes living in the same area as compare to Gohar Shah (Hope you know to write Gohar in Arabic persian and urdu languages) . Write as Gauhar is not correct, understand the writing difference of Go not Gau )Gohar mean pearl but Gauher does not mean pearl.Alamsherkhan (talk) 15:48, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

True meanings of Awan or Qutab Shahi Awan and their origin

It is common believe that Awan is ancient Sanskrat word derived from Ahwan or derived from arabic word Aon with meaning of "Helper" or "defender". Thanks God still no one come with claim that Awan is derived from english word "Own" which mean adoption. “Title of Helper” for a regular army General or group of Soldiers does not make any sense . So the theory to derive Awan from Ahwan (Sanskrit), Aon (Arabic) and "Own" (English)seems unusual and baseless.
In the ancient Arabic language word "Nasr" is commonly used to express the "Help". The word "Nasar" / Madadgar were commonly used by Afghans and Turks to mntion the Helper. Moreover every muslim know the sacrifices of “Insar–e-Medina” for their help to Immigrants of Mecca. So It is strange that Sultan was helpless to Honor his General with a proper title and he needed to derive a word of foreign language which the common people were not familiar with, . The whome who claim that he was appointed as governor by Haroon Rasheed , don't explain why the famous General after winning war opted not to go back and stick to a small piece of arid land while the less famous generals were honored with more land as compare to him.
The term Qutab Shahi Awan is self explanatory. Use of this term provide us 2 leads to think over it :-

  • 1. in common translation it separates a group of Awan’s out of Main Awan tribe as successors of Qutab Shah and in no way it represent whole Awan tribe.
  • 2. If the use of word “Shahi” we consider in the light of term "Sikha Shahi", Afsar Shahi" and “Hindu Shahi” it means rule and the meaning Qutab Shahi Awan comes as “Awan's of Qutab rule” .

If Awan really mean helper than it make connection with adopted son of Sultan Ghouri (Qutab ud din Aibak who later become King). There are different claims regarding origin of Awan's . King Babur in his travel memoirs mentioned the Maliks of Salt Range as youger borthers of Gakhar chieftains. This Zafer name seems to be the oldest evidence so far discussed on this forum. King Babur at any place does not mention the word “Awan “ particularly although he mentioned the presence of Jats ,Janjuas and Jud's in Salt range .
King Babur Mentioned 18 names out of which 16 resembles with Mongol, Afghans names . the 2 having Muslim names were from his own team (not the local). While we see that Arabs are too strict for their culture and most cases extra ordinary sensitive in terms for their customs. How a person with Arab origin start naming his children with non Arabic names? (i.e Gowrrara, Kalgan, Tori/Jhajh, Khokhar and Chohan)
Awans of Attock (Pindi gheb) and khattarr’s consider themselves a Barlas (Taimurid origin) Instead of Arab origin . Some of Awan,s consider them as Jat Rajputs. claim of Arab origin starts getting attention during colonial rule( which is difficult to verify from old history books) but latterly got multiplied and used by other stereo type historians as evidence. This baseless claim have a lot of contradictions (for meaning of title, appointment as governor of Herat, marriage with Ghaznavi sister, 2-3 dozens fake family tree which even nullify each other.
. The theory that all Awan's are descendants of Qutab Shah is worst form of exaggeration. Today Awan population is exceeding 4 Million. If we apply same growth rate for other communities of the region that make a different picture of world population in year when Ghanavi was preparing his first offensive to India. How to believe that population of Khorasan including Iran , Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Qazikistan, kyrghistan and Uzbikistan was less than 300 count of head. then from where he arranged his army?
if we apply the same growth rate for Pashtun and Baluch who came alongwith Awan's then today Baluch of Pakistan are succesors of 20 Soldiers and Pashtun living at Pakistan are Successors of 70 Soldier. This seems a miracle that 100 soldiers (10+20+70) successfully kept the control on newly occupied areas (Today’s Pakistan)for more than a century till Muhammad of Ghaur conquest.
Very strange that the editors who are providing reference from Sir, H.A.Rose Book ,The Glossary of tribes, skip the tribes mentioned at the beginning of the book . Ab-Wani and Ag-Wana at page three. These tribal names are self explanatory and meaning show them Zamindars. Why editors need to consult dictionaries when we see the word Awan resembles with Ab-Wani and Agwana.
We see in latest researches for ruins of Gandhara, Harappa and Mohan jo dero, the researcher find their links with other nations through their utencils, music instruments, costumes, signs and symbols and they consider them as evidence . To find truth we need to pay attention to living evidences around us within our culture, costumes , way of life, common proverbs and the dialect. I know it is difficult for the people who are doing chose and pick to prove their point of view. The persons who consider themselves encyclopedia on Awan's, are skiping useful information which is available in the books they are using as authentic sources. I humbly request them that please set a side their sectarian/religious cause while contributing to this page as sectarian and religious cause base contribution will neither serve your sect/religion nor the community Alamsherkhan (talk) 18:41, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Building Concensus

Now lets move towards building consensus . I have concentrated on providing ample content from reliable sources on this discussion page ,that can improve the article and provide the balance , I really have no interest to delete content , but object to deletion of focused reliable content .

There are three theories on the origin of the Awans that we have been discussing here .

  • 1 That a gentleman by the name of Qutb Shah from Herat or Ghazni accompanied Muhmad Ghazni , and he and his sons married various Hindu Women and their children took their mothers names .
  • 2 That the Awans are a indigenous collection of clans from the Punjab that converted to Islam or were converted to Islam
  • 3 That they are one of the lost tribes of Israel

Futher that
1) It is plausible for such a large population of people to have descended from one ancestor or
2) That it is implausible for such a large population of people to have descended from on ancestor

Further that
1)Awans are descendents of Arabs or
2)That Awans are descendants of Indians (or Aryans , or South Asians , or Hindus ,or Pre Islamic Pakistanis ,)

If we build the topic from here with equal balance from reliable citations of books in English or English translations ...we could have a consensus soon .Look forward to comments from the other editors here .
Intothefire (talk) 19:05, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Zarrigul (talk) 12:54, 10 August 2011 (UTC)@Inforthefire Thankyou very much for your suggestions. Really you did well. I have little bit modifed the three theories on the origin of the Awans to leave the room for future claims . Hope soon we are able to develop consensus.

  • 1. That a gentleman by the name of Qutb Shah from Herat or Ghazni accompanied Muhmad Ghazni , and he and his sons married various Hindu Women and their children took their mothers names .
  • 2. That they are the branch clan of a tribe who accompanied Mehmood Ghanavi and settled at the westren Bank of Indus but later got isolated because of their marriages within local Indo Aryan tribes.
  • 3 (a). They Awans are a indigenous collection of clans from the Punjab that after conversion got adopted by the tribes who came to the area with Mehommod Ghaznavi and were living at western Bank of Indus River . later they Helped Qutab ud din Aibak , A General of Muhamad of Ghour and got title of Awan and thus called Qutab Shahi Awan .
  • 3(b). That Awans are a indigenous collection from local Indo-Aryan soldiers enslaved by Mehmood Ghaznavi during war and were taken to Ghazni . later they converted to Islam or were converted to Islam. They Joined Qutab ud din Aibak army during Muhammad of Ghour expedition and got Title of Qutab Shahi Awan (Helpers of Qutab rule).
  • 3©. That Awan’s are descendant of small group of Ga-karr/Ka-karr who helped Qutab ud din Aibak and got the title of Awan.(Majority of Gakarr’s resisted the Ghori expedition)

Futher that

  • 1) It is plausible for such a large population of people to have descended from one ancestor or
  • 2) That it is implausible for such a large population of people to have descended from on ancestor

Zarrigul (talk) 12:54, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Alamsherkhan (talk) 15:46, 11 August 2011 (UTC) I am sorry for becoming part of a problem. Being new comer I am looking farward to learn more from seasoned editors and am thankful to the admin for giving us chance to be more positive and constructive while contributing.
In my opinion the following points needed to add for consensus.
 Awan’s are said to have settled in different regions of the Punjab and to a lesser extent, what now constitutes parts of the North West Frontier Province; Gorrara, settled near Sakesar, Kalgan, settled in Kalabagh, , Tori ‏/Jhajh settled in Tirah/Afghanistan, Chauhan colonized the hills close to the Indus and Khokhar, settled by the Chenab.

  • 1. That Khokhar, Chohan , Kalgan ,Gorrara ,Kalgan, Tori and Jaji are ancient local tribes and after conversion got adopted by the new settlers
  • 2. That Khokhar, Chohan , Kalgan ,Gorrara ,Kalgan, Tori and Jaji are decendant of Qutab Shah from his local convert wife/wives and Some of Qutub Shah’s sons are supposed to have assumed names that reflected the Hindu heritage of their mothers and the Awan sub-clans that trace their origins to these particular individuals, bear the names of their eponyms.
  • 3. That Mr. Khokhar and Mr. Chohan after conversion married the daughters of Qutab Shah and continued to link their family with main local tribe and the other Awan clans were part of Mehmood ghaznavi army

regards. Alamsherkhan

Hi Averroist
Calling me cleaver is really not going to improve this article .
Please participate like the other users here now to build consensus .
If Ibbetson states contradictory theories , very well lets place both in the article , I have no objection.
Similarly lets have Rawalpindi Express also participate here to contribute to the consensus .
Because here on it wont be fair if the two of you continue to delete content contributed by other editors. if you are unwilling to constructively participate in this effort to build consensus .
CheersIntothefire (talk) 18:02, 12 August 2011 (UTC)


Hi infothefire

Keeping his comment for you at the end of Shajrah Nasb, it Seems Averriost have nothing to contribute for consensus at this page . He mentions that Awan's are not the decendants of Qutab Shah and others are trying useless to prove this Qutab Haider who he think to be ancestor of Awan got settled in eastren Punjab far away from Salt range. More over he is not mentioned by the colonial officers so where he stands? Let us ask him to request Rawalpindi Express to join here for consensus. they are in good relations and recently he have awarded him a star. Rawalpindi Express please accept my greetings for having the star.Zarrigul (talk) 20:10, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

In my opinion the term Helper may not apply on the Arab / Afghan /Turk / Qutabi / Israelite or Aryan Soldiers who accompanied Ghanavi or Ghauri as this was their part of Job. The issue finding the meaning of title form dictionary does not make sense. Helper term may probably used for local tribes. I have gone through the points for consensus shared by other editor . While studying a book “Bab al Awan” published in 1927, I found that the writer have briefly discussed the claims from Afghan / Turk / /Bani Israel and Qutabi origin. The book contains the references of previous books so I suggest to include these claims.

  • 1. That It is plausible for such a large population of people to have descended from one ancestor or
  • 2. That it is implausible for such a large population of people to have descended from on ancestor
  • 3. That Awan are the branch clan of Arab / Afghan /Turk / Qutabi / Israelite or Aryan who accompanied Ghanavi or Ghauri and settled at the western Bank of Indus but later got isolated by main tribe due to marriages within local tribes.
  • 4. That Awans are a indigenous collection of clans from the Punjab that after conversion got adopted by the tribes who came to the area with Mehommod Ghaznavi and were living at western Bank of Indus River . later they Helped Qutab ud din Aibak , A General of Muhamad of Ghour and got title of Awan and thus called Qutab Shahi Awan .Ghazanfaralvi (talk) 06:50, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Awan's cultural resemblances with Baluch and Afghans

The cultural dances famous in Awan tribe are almost War exercise to build muscles and to improve of skill sword fight. Aan living in villages like to perform in their cultural events . Here under I am pasting links of video of Awan cultural dance and some from southern Punjab and Baluchistan. The cultural resemblance establish connections between Awan’s , Baluch’s and Afghan’s.

Zazi/Jhaji/Chachi cultural resemblance with Turks

historianclaim that Zazi/Jhaji are Awan. here under i am pasting few links of cultural resemblance. This is some sort of Uyghur Xinjiang (Turk) poetry which resembles with “lughat” a famous cultural event custom of Tori and Jhajh Awan’s of Kurrum and Afghanistan.

Zazi/Jhaji Dances.

Clips from Afghan dance for resemblance.

This Afghan dance resembles with Sammi performed at Chiniot and Jhang .

Dance resemblabces with turks

Alamsherkhan (talk) 19:20, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Editprotected request

The article is currently protected from editing until disputes have been resolved, but it has protectected on the wrong version, therefore I want to bring into your notice one thing. The article according to the last edit made by Rawalpindi Express contains 41 references, but Alam Sher Khan deleted first five references in his last edit, and User talk:Black Kite protected the article with only 36 references.

It is the policy of Wikipedia that, "Good articles start with a brief lead section introducing the topic." Please compare this brief lead section of both versions. The administrator must also see the history of contributions of both users. Rawalpindi Express is giving justification in edit summary of every edit, while Alamsherkhan is deleting, removing referenced material,referenced citations and referenced quotes from this article without any edit summary, and thus he is engaging in non-constructive vandalism. And you have protected the article on his last edit.

Rawalpindi Express has long contributing history with positive edits against vandalism, but Alamsherkhan is a new user with a history of engaging in non-constructive vandalism.

It is therefore requested that the the article should be restored to the last edit made by Rawalpindi Express, so that till the disputes have been resolved, the standard, principles and guidelines of Wikipedia must be maintained.

Regards, Averroist (talk) 08:05, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

☒N Not done. Please find consensus for this edit before requesting it. The version by Rawalpindi Express does appear more complete at first glance, but the edit warring by the two of them is the reason why the article was protected in the first place, so another revert would not be helpful. If his version is indeed better, you should have no trouble convincing others of that, e.g. via WP:3O.  Sandstein  21:17, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Response to claim of Hashmi origin

Conspiracy of Awan Hashmiyat origin , is almost unfairly repeated by historians .the claim is based on ending name of Qutab Shah while Shah is common ending name of even Turks and Pashtun’s , like Mehboob Shah , Sher Shah , Shah Wali or Shah Baig Etc but ending name Shah does not make them Hashmi. Awan.s still keep pre Islamic Names like Alam Khan, Faqir Khan , Sher Khan, Fateh Khan gul Baz and Sher Baz etc. In case of Hashmi origin , the successor’s of Qutab Shah must be keeping Islamic names or at least maintain Shah as last name . This claim of Arab origin starts getting attention during colonial rule( which is difficult to verify from old history books) but latter got multiplied and used by other historians as evidence. This baseless claim have additional following contradictions which are not supported by any historical evidence:-

  • The title of Awan ..
  • a) It is claimed that Sultan Mehmood Ghaznavi honoured his general with title of “ Awan” which mean helper in Sanskrit. Why a king will use a word to honour his general which he and his general have never heard before? While we see he was having a plenty of Familiar words to express the word helper as”Madadgar”, “Dast-e- Rast” , “Nasir” and “Insar” etc”. It is strange that a king recall a General as Helper while he is doing his job.
  • b) The theory based on that all Awan's are descendants a person named Qutab Shah is worst form of exaggeration. Today Awan population is exceeding 4 Million. If we apply same growth rate for other communities of the region that make a different picture of world’s population in year when Ghanavi was preparing his first offensive to India. How to believe that population of Khorasan including Iran , Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Qazikistan, kyrghistan and Uzbikistan was less than 300 count of head. then from where he arranged his army?
  • c) if we apply the same growth rate for Pashtun and Baluch who came along with Awan's then today Baluch of Pakistan are successors of 20 Soldiers and Pashtun living at Pakistan are Successors of 70 Soldier. This seems a miracle that 100 soldiers (10+20+70) successfully kept the control on newly occupied areas for a century or more till Muhammad of Ghaur conquest.
  • d) . A lot of families living in Pakistan claim to be "Sayyed" but for many matters there are different fom Awan's for the following reasons:-
  • i. Sayyed's dont marry their daughters to non Sayyeds but Awan's dont follow this practice.

ii. Sayyed Female usually strict for Parda and dont take active part in the family financial affairs in the past but Awan female are active earning partners of family in agriculture and live stock.

  • iii. Non of a Sayyed family have this much major population in the area like Awan have.
  • iv. "Sayyed" mostly focused to work as preacher/religious leaders/Saints but Awan's in majority chose to survive as Soldiers/agriculture workers.
  • Appointment as Governor of Herat,

Some editors claim that Father of Qutab Shah was Governor of Herat but his name we can’t find in the history of Herat as Governor.

  • Marriage with Ghaznavi sister,

Qutab Haider,.who is said to married with sister of Sultan Mehmood.. Commonly It A well known military leader or family servant could have access to the family of King but keeping in view of Sultan’s religious behaviour to Ismaili Shia Sect, it seems impossible. This marriage does not got recorded by historians for centuries which make the claim baseless. Whereas Sultan’s only sister actually was married to Abu Hasan Mamun from khewarzm during year 1015 and that event is part of history.

  • Dozens of fake family tree which even nullify each other.

There are dozens of Shajra Nasab of Arab origin which are contradictory with each other and some where we find the names which does not match with history books of the past. == Awan’s as Afghan sub claim== Awan’s are said to settle in existing locations along with Afghans. The under mentioned resemblance are enough to prove that Awan’s are sub clan of Afghan’s:-

  • a) Physical appearance
  • b) Interest in herding and choosing arid hills area to live
  • c) Sharing common Name pattern upto 18th century
  • d) Similar folk dances like ghummer, ludi , barballa and khaid.
  • e) Wedding customs of breaking chonrri, gharroli and waving groom.
  • f) Throwing blood at entrance of home for some occasions
  • g) To put lattern at place where where a family member lost his breath(40 days)
  • h) War like extremist attitude.
  • i) Actively believe in revenge .
  • j) Very touchy and sensitive for self respect.
  • k) Hot tempered.
  • l) Traditional in attitude.
  • m) Love their culture and customs.
  • n) Like to known as Maliks and Khans
  • o) Awan’s of Hazara use the word “KHALI” (which mean empty or holiday) for

Saturday similar as Kirlanrri Afghan dialect Zarrigul (talk) 06:02, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Changes without consensus

recently some editor have made changes in article instead having consensus. unnecessary repetition of claim has already objected by other editors. If senior don't respect the instructions what they could expect from newcomers . Editor is requested to mend the article to the form it was protected and join discussion form for consensus. Zarrigul (talk) 23:44, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Re: Alamsherkhan

Alamsherkhan has contacted a number of users in order to make false allegations about me. I am reproducing the response I sent him, and all those he has got in touch with:

Alamsherkhan, there is little use in appealing to Averroist (amongst others), since he also not only realises the extent to which you have vandalised the article, he has also informed Black Kite about this (and as you know, it was Black Kite who took the step of protecting the article); to quote him:

“Thanks for protectecting the article from editing, but I want to bring into your notice one thing. The article according to the last edit made by Rawalpindi Express contains 41 references, but Alam Sher Khan deleted first five references in his last edit, and you have protected the article with only 36 references. It is the policy of Wikipedia that, ‘Good articles start with a brief lead section introducing the topic.’ Please compare this brief lead section of both versions. You must also see the history of contributions of both users. Rawalpindi Express is giving justification in edit summary of every edit, while Alamsherkhan is deleting, removing referenced material,referenced citations and referenced quotes from this article without any edit summary, and thus he is engaging in non-constructive vandalism. And you have protected the article on his last edit. Rawalpindi Express has long contributing history with positive edits against vandalism, but Alamsherkhan is a new user with a history of engaging in non-constructive vandalism. It is therefore requested that the the article should be restored to the last edit made by Rawalpindi Express, so that till the disputes have been resolved, the standard, principles and guidelines of Wikipedia must be maintained. Regards Averroist (talk) 17:05, 8 August 2011 (UTC)”

It is also Averroist who awarded me with the Anti-Vandalism Barnstar, for my “endless work for protecting Wikipedia article on Awan.”

Moving on, if you are going to make allegations about me, then at least ensure that there is a kernel of truth to what you say. To say that I don’t respect the opinions of others, is complete and utter nonsense. If this was the case, then why didn’t I remove the citation recently added by Intothefire (whom you’ve also appealed to), which mentions the views of Professor Hasan Dhani? As I have emphasised before, despite me being an Awan, I have no cast-iron opinions regarding the origin of the Awan tribe, and that is why I have incorporated the viewpoints of authors who consider the traditional claim made by the bulk of the tribe to Arab origins to be reasonable, as well as the opinions of commentators who reject this contention. Moreover, Intothefire’s inclusion is valid, because his addition was fully referenced – this is a basic point that you still fail to grasp. In fact, apart from Averroist highlighting that you continue to ignore this crucial point, even Intothefire has pointed this out to you (and I quote him directly from a message he left on your user page), “Since this is an encyclopedia , its best that that all information provided is backed up by valid and reliable secondary sources .” Above all, when I myself contacted you, I categorically stated, “...if you are in possession of source material you’d like to add to the article, providing that it is relevant to the subject matter, and fully referenced, then please do contribute to the article, thereby making it more comprehensive.” (And I welcome said additions from anyone else.)

As Intothefire has underlined (and as did I when I got in touch with you), this is an encyclopedia, not a forum for your personal opinions. You assert that I have attempted to keep a "hold" on this article – this is patently untrue. You have only started making contributions to Wikipedia; had you been doing at an earlier point, you would have been aware of the fact that the article in question had not only become a complete mess (which you have taken it back to, due to grammatical errors on your part, and alterations you have made to the structure of the article that have disrupted its flow, as well as rendering it unreadable at times), it was also full of personal points of view, such as those you are attempting to add to the article. As such, a number of senior editors, tagged the entire article and decided that additions to the article that were unreferenced, would have to be removed. Due to this, I spent a number of months accumulating a wide range of source material – whatever was contained within the article that I was able to substantiate, I retained, and whatever I was unable to substantiate (with the aid of valid source material), was removed (as per the request of the senior editors). In fact, to this day, I continue to endeavour that all additions made to the article are fully referenced, I continue to make additions to the article in an effort to improve it (such as the addition of the photo gallery, and the views of contemporary scholars), and when necessary, I continue to refine and clean up the article – so this isn’t a question of me trying to keep a “hold” on the article as you claim, it’s a question of me putting months of hard work into ensuring this is an article of the highest quality possible, that also conforms to certain standards set by Wikipedia (and it is not only Averroist who acknowledges this. Recently, Intothefire also said of my contributions, “Thankyou for the great effort and attention you put into the article . Your contributions are commendable.”), only to have you arbitrarily remove valid and fully referenced additions that do not conform to your personal point of view, and add viewpoints that are unsubstantiated.

Contrary to what you claim, whatever my own personal opinions may be, I have not added them to the article (respecting the fact that doing so is unacceptable as this is an encyclopaedia, and not my own personal thesis) – just recently, Intothefire raised concerns about additions to the article that he considered to constitute personal viewpoints, and having reached a consensus with him (as he made perfectly reasonable points), these additions were removed (thus once again negating your claims about me not being prepared to accept the opinions of others). I should also stress that not all of the material included within the article was added by me either (once again underlining just how false your claims about me are), and all such material has been retained on the basis that it can be substantiated by reliable references. As for you claiming that you object to the “repetitions” I have made within the article, once again, not only are your expressing a personal point of view (which, given the nature of your edits, I don’t wholly accept, but look upon as being a judgement coloured by your biases), it’s a claim that is invalid because the quotes and citations you have removed (valid and fully referenced, and thus your actions are unjustified), lend weight to the additions made to the article as they substantiate and reinforce these pertinent additions. You state, “For me Kalgan more resembles with Kalkan or kalakhan instead of Kalan Shah. Gowrarra , resembles with Arorra. gow-rrara do means cow herder in Pashtu while he insist to place him as Gohar Shah in th article. For him Khokhar Awan and Chohan Awan got the names of mother tribes but I am of opinion Mr.Khokhar and Mr. Chohan married Qutab shah Daughters and the got attached with Awan tribe as Qutab Shah’s adopted Sons.” Firstly, is it arrogance that blinds you to just how ironic the claims you make about me are, in the light of such a statement? In case it needs to be pointed out to you yet again, these are your own personal opinions, and thus, unless you can back them up with referenced source material, it is not reasonable to expect them to be included within the article. Secondly, I am not insistent on naming the individuals in the fashion you so object to, due to my personal viewpoints, but because those are direct quotes and citations, and therefore those who authored the works that reference has been made to, refer to these individuals as such – therefore, if you are not already aware of this, please let me draw your attention to the fact that you cannot alter a direct quote or citation. As for what you have to say about Rose needing to cite page numbers from a dictionary in order to support his views, that’s just ridiculous; the work authored by Rose, is widely-respected and widely-acknowledged, and has been cited by other experts in this field (and as it is, you not have cited a single page number from any valid or recognised source – does this not smack of hypocrisy on your part?). And in case it escaped your attention, I actually did cite a dictionary reference relating to the etymology of ‘Awan’ (complete with a page number).


Lastly, at least have the decency not to spread blatant lies about me; you told Averroist that I “got warning for deletion” – that you can be so disingenuous, beggars belief; I never received any such warning, the reality is, Palltrast warned me about engaging in an edit war with you – it’s the same warning you also received from him, and in the interests of jogging your memory, let me reproduce said warning that was left on your user page, as well as mine:

“You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Awan (Pakistan) . Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively. In particular, the three-revert rule states that: 1. Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block. 2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right. If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Palltrast (talk) 06:38, 8 August 2011 (UTC)”

Your hypocrisy and attempts to twist the truth, are breathtaking, Alamsherkhan.

Rawalpindi Express (talk) 16:38, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Text from Glossary of tribes page 25-27

The Awans are an important tribe , exclusively Muhammad an, chiefly found in salt range ., where they possess an awankari. but also widely spread to the east, south and west of that tract. Extending along the whole length of the range from Jhelum to The Indus. They are found in great numbers throughout the whole country beyond it up to the foot of Sulemans and Safed Koh .though in trans-indus Bannu they partly, and in Dera Ismail khan wholly merged in Jats, a term which in those parts means little more than nondescript peasant. In Peshawar the Awans are included in the Hamsaya and Faqir class. In Kohat toward Khushak Garh, they resemble with Awans of Salt range bu else where in the district they are hardly distinguishable from the Bangash and Niazi;s among whom they live. The Independent possessions of the Awans in salt range were once very considerable and in its western and central portion they are still the dominant race. As a dominant race in the eastern limit of their position coincide approximately with the western border of the Chakwal and Pind Dadan Khan Tahsils but they have also spread eastward along the foot of hills as far as the Sutlej, and southwards down that river valley into Multan and Jhang. They formerly held all the plain at foot of western Salt range but have been gradually driven up into the hills out by the Pathans advancing from Indus and Tiwanas from the Jhelum. The word Awan is not implausibly derived from Ahwan, Helper but various explanation of its origin are given. According to one tradition the Awans, who claim Arab origin, are descendants of Qutan Shah, himself descended from Ali, and were attached to Muhammad armies which invaded India, as auxiliaries, whence their names in Kapurthala a moe precise version of their legend makes them Alvi Sayyeds, who oppressed by the Abbasids, sught refuge in Sindh and eventually allied themselves with Sabuktagin, who bestowed on them the title of Awan. But on the best available account of the tribe Awan indeed, are said to be of Arabian origin and descendent of Qutab Shah, but he said to have ruled Herat and to have joined Mehmood of Ghazni, when he invaded India. With him came six of his many sons: Gauher Shah Gorrara, who settled near Sekesar, Kalan Shah or Kalgan who settled near Dhandkot (Kala Bagh): Chauhan who colonized the hills near Indus: Khokhar or Muhammad Shah who settled on the Chenab: Tori and Jhaji whose descendents said to be still found at Tirah and else where. Originally Hindu character of these names is patent and not explained away by the tradition that Chauhan and Khokher took the their mother’s names. In Gujrat tradition gives Qutab Shah three wives, from whom sprang the Khokher and the four muhines or clans of the Awans. By Barth, his first wife, he had son named Khokhar : by Sahd , he had Khurara or Gorara , and by Fateh Khatoon, three sons – Kalgan , Chauhan and Kundan.

regards Alamsherkhan Alamsherkhan (talk) 20:32, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Re Rawalpindiexpress

Rawalpindi Express Thank you for appearing on this page again. Really I was missing you too much and happy to see you here. Sorry for my ignorance and troubling you but hope you will forgive me being new comer with lack of experience. I spent a number of months accumulating a wide range of source material – whatever was contained within the article that I was able to substantiate, Yes I believe you have spent a lot of time consulting books to find references which support you claim and unfairly overlooked the references which are against the claim. You have references from “glossary of tribes.” What you think about the “Ab-Wan” tribe mentioned at page 2 of the book and “Ag-Wan “ tribe mentioned at Page -3. Why these 2 tribes does not resemble with Awan but Ahwan resembles? Reference of FerozSons dictionary and it’s translation for “Ah-wan” could get place in the article but same dictionary is not secondary source for translation of “Hai-Wan”.

If you are fair enough, you can see find Kal-ghan as Kohli (Kal= waste of oil seeds and Ghan = Kholo ) and Gow- Rarra as Cow herder in Pashtu dictionary. Both are professional identities like Mochhi, Nai, kumhar, Taili ,Paoli , Ab-wan, Ag-wan, Jal-wan and Pehlwan. Now you can understand why” Dhani bull” is famous in Pakistan. I guess during your research you have read the book Bab Al Awan published during 1925 and there in a lot of claims regarding Awan’s are briefly discussed. Does not it mean that Awan’s had difference of opinion over issue of origin even before and after publication of population census report. But while reponding claim of Pashtun/Afghan origin you mentioned that claim of Awan’s from Bani Israel is just a personnal point of view . Is it a fair comment by a fair and decent editor who have studied the book and is well aware about the claim existance in past? Writer of the book “Bab-Al-Awan at two places agree that the claim might be true and do mention the Persian books which verify that claim. You carefully read the article which you consider balance . The claim which consider correct unnecessarily got repeated many times. No one could have objection on the references but at the end of each reference why you need to repeat the claim? It seems like advertisement “Buy one and get one for free” at grocery shop.

Lastly, at least have the decency not to spread blatant lies about me; you told Averroist that I “got warning for deletion” – that you can be so disingenuous, beggars belief; I never received any such warning, the reality is, Palltrast warned me about engaging in an edit war with you: I never received warning but Palltrast warned me which part is correct? , the first one or second one? . Please clam down and reconsider what you really want to say? What would be the result if you keep on engaging youself in edit war? Yeah I got the warning too but I never asked someone to delete or edit on my behalf so decent man what is your real intension for asking him to do the same for you?

and it is time for you to celebrate at some one did that what you wanted. some one offered shoulder to your gun but I am going to do the same as you this makes difference between both of us. Rawalpindi Express let us leave it to other readers to guess that who is hypocrite and attempting to twist the truth,

regards Alamsherkhan Alamsherkhan (talk) 21:17, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Alamsherkhan, I can detect a strong sense of sarcasm in your opening remarks – believe me, such juvenile behaviour will get you nowhere, and does your credibility no favours.

Quite frankly, I am now rather tired of having to counter the same fallacious allegation that you make over and over and over again, that is, I have “overlooked” references which reject the claim made by the Awan tribe to Arab origins – once again, let me re-iterate the same point I have had to repeatedly make when engaging in a discussion with you: contrary to what you falsely claim, I have included fully referenced additions that cast doubt upon the Awans being descended from Arabs (just as I have included fully referenced material that supports the Awans’ claim to being of Arabian origin) – the proof is there for all to see, hence the names of Cunnigham, Kaul, Brandreth and Dhani, have been clearly cited as commentators who do not accept the claim of the Awans to Arab ancestry. Thus, how much longer are you going to persist in bandying your redundant claim? And how many times must I underline, that the article does not include any of my own personal viewpoints?

If I was being unfair, then I would not have invited you to make additions to the article, on the proviso you can back up your contributions with fully referenced and valid source material – how many editors must point out to you, that this is a basic requirement when one goes about making additions to an encyclopaedia? As for the issue of Awans supposedly being of Afghan or Hebrew descent, it is a topic that I have previously discussed to the point of exhaustion, and as such, I neither have the time, nor the desire, to re-ignite a debate about this subject, which, when it comes down to it, is entirely futile as it is an exercise in conjecture. And why is it so difficult for you to understand that you simply cannot alter direct quotes and citations? If you were able to comprehend this point, you wouldn’t keep asking me the same questions that I have addressed previously. I also see that you have completely missed a crucial number of points I have made before – firstly, I explained to you that the article does not claim that the Awans are definitively of Arab origin, hence reference being made in the opening to the Awans being putatively descended from Arabs (and therefore, your claims about the article not being balanced in this respect, are once again proven to be unfounded). Secondly, though the claim to Arab descent by the Awan tribe may be a point of dispute, it nonetheless is the traditional belief that the bulk of the tribe subscribes to (a recorded fact, that numerous authors have emphasised, some of whom have been cited in the article); as such, this, together with the fact that the Awans – whatever their true origins may be – have long been recognised as an “exclusively” Muslim tribe, is a salient feature of the Awan tribe, and integral to its identity; hence, these vitally important points have formed the core of the opening to a number of commentaries on the Awan tribe, including those authored by individuals who are suspicious of the Awan claim to Arab origin, and this is why it is perfectly valid for the opening of the Wiki article on the Awans, to follow suit (particularly when a Senior Research Fellow at Oxford University – Alison Shaw – has been cited in the opening of the article, in order to validate what has been outlined). I’m advertising along the lines “Buy one and get one for free” at a grocery shop? Your analogy doesn’t even make any sense. However, if you are asserting that I am attempting to promote the view that the Awans really are of Arab origin, then for the umpteenth time, let me underline the fact that I do not hold any definitive views regarding the origins of my tribe. It also seems that you have overlooked a crucial point I have already made, in response to your tenuous claim vis-a-vis the issue of “repetition”; as I have already stressed, at one point, senior editors demanded that all additions to the article be fully referenced, otherwise they would take action to remove all unsubstantiated material from the article – therefore, what you claim is “repetition”, is actually an attempt made to satisfy the requirements outlined by a number of senior editors, whereby fully referenced citations have been added to the article in order to support and substantiate material that had been previously added.

Are you really so disingenuous that you are now going to engage in a pointless game of semantics with me? You falsely informed Averroist that I received a warning for deleting content from the article, when in actual fact, I was warned about getting into an edit war with you – there is a distinct difference between the two. Thus, I do not have to reconsider what it was that I was attempting to say, as it clear for all to see. Furthermore, it is rather galling that you informed Averroist about the warning I received, yet you conveniently failed to mention that you received the same warning yourself. Worse still, on the basis of a false predication, you then went on to make allegations that had no basis in truth, as to why I sought Averroist’s support. For your information, I was perfectly within my rights (as per Wiki rules), to ask Averroist to help me protect the edits I have made to the article, which (unlike your edits) are in accordance with Wiki guidelines, and especially so when (as you have conveniently overlooked) before getting in touch with Averroist, I contacted you out of courtesy, in an effort to resolve what had turned into a prolonged dispute – and what was your response? You completely ignored the points I made in relation to Wiki etiquette, and carried on as you were. Unfortunately for you, your attempts to appeal to Averroist came to naught, as he had already informed one of the senior editors that you were engaging in non-constructive vandalism, by removing fully referenced and valid material from the article (without providing any justification for doing so), and replacing it with unreferenced and unsubstantiated material (contrary to the standards expected of an article contained within an encyclopaedia).

As for your closing remarks, I have no reason to “celebrate” anything in relation to this article – thankfully, my life is enriching enough for me not to have to rejoice over the outcome of an edit war on Wikipedia. I also don’t have to worry about allegations of hypocrisy being levelled at me by others, or being accused of twisting the truth, because I have responded to each of your allegations adequately enough. And for your information, that stunt you pulled whereby you lied to Averroist about the nature of the warning I received, yet concealed the fact that you received the very same warning, is hypocrisy on your part (and an example of you distorting the truth). To take umbrage at me appealing to another editor for his help (in order to safeguard the integrity of the article, which was a perfectly well-intentioned endeavour), yet then appeal to other editors yourself, is hypocrisy on your part. And to maintain that an author that has been cited in the article should have provided “page numbers” from a dictionary to back up his opinions, yet not provide a single academic reference yourself when making alterations to the article, does smack of hypocrisy on your part.

I am now finding it irritating having to provide retorts to what you have to say, especially as I have better things to do than to keep going around in circles with you. As for other “readers” they don’t have to “guess” who is the hypocrite, and who has attempted to twist the truth when it comes to you and I – it is for clear for all to see...

Rawalpindi Express (talk) 04:57, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi Alamsherkhan , Zarrigul , Rawalpindi Express and Averroist
I am summarizing issues we have discussed here to build consensus
  • That Awans are descendants of the sons of Qutb Shah and Hindu women they married
  • Awans as indigenous Pre-Islamic tribes of the Indus region
  • Historical evidence points to descendants of Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyyah being Shia , so was Qutb Shah a Shia?
  • Mahmud Ghazni attacked the Shia kingom of Multan
  • Possibility of relationship with Pashtun tribes and Israeli lost tribes
  • Linguistic and cultural pointers to origin
  • Mahmud Ghazni and his army were Turk or Tajik or Central Asian but not Arab
  • Identifying a credible secondary source that mentions Qutub Shah

and
a) That each of these above points should be included in the article .
b) That aggressive deletion of content must be avoided
c) Content should be backed by secondary and reliable sources
d) Article should be balanced .

Intothefire (talk) 17:10, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Infothefire I agree with your conclusion and I am not going to put myself in edit war. Here under I am reproducing Rawalpindiexpress opinion which he included in the article but the his quoted references does not verify it :- Let me point out the parts which any of references does not varify:

  • a) though the bulk of those belonging to the tribe are not Shias
  • b) and as such, a number adopt the title, Alvi – particularly those who migrated from East Punjab to Pakistan - although not all of those who refer to themselves as Alvi are Awans.
  • c) Maintain (and have always maintained)
  • d) (but by a wife other than the Prophet's daughter, Fatimah).

at the top of discussion page i am reproducing the text from book Glossary of Tribes. regards Alamsherkhan Alamsherkhan (talk) 20:26, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Request for edits in article

Awan were not from a Warrior class before entering India, as H.A. Rose in his book quote a tradition that Awans were attached to invading Army as auxiliaries. ( Cook, Mashki, Quli, animal handler, Hisabdar or food server etc)

H.A Rose mentions another tradition which claim that Awans does not joined the Sultan at Herat but they were living at Sind much earlier before this expedition.

According to H.A Rose Qutab Shah has already been married at Herat and was father of many sons , only six of his sons joined the expedition to India

H.A Rose further mention that Qutab Shah had sons Gorara from his wife Sahd (Muslim) and Chauhan from another wife Fateh Khatoon (Muslim).

Ghazanfaralvi (talk) 16:05, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Rose, H.A., 1997, A Glossary of the Tribes and Castes of the Punjab and North-West Frontier Province, Nirmal Publishers and Distributors, p.p. 25-29
  2. ^ Rose, H.A., 1997, A Glossary of the Tribes and Castes of the Punjab and North-West Frontier Province, Nirmal Publishers and Distributors, p.p. 25-29
  3. ^ Rose, H.A., 1997, A Glossary of the Tribes and Castes of the Punjab and North-West Frontier Province, Nirmal Publishers and Distributors, p.p. 25-29
  4. ^ Rose, H.A., 1997, A Glossary of the Tribes and Castes of the Punjab and North-West Frontier Province, Nirmal Publishers and Distributors, p.p. 25-29

Intothefire

Hi Intothefire. I have reservations about incorporating of all the points into the article that you make reference to (especially conjecture based around linguistic and cultural patterns, because as I have stated before, although these can indicate where certain ethnic groups originated from, they are also factors that are often the result of cross-cultural exchanges etc., as well as both indigenous and migrant groups adopting the language, social mores, traditions, and customs of their neighbours and those they have settled amongst, and therefore not an entirely reliable method by which to draw such conclusions. As for the contention that the Awans are a Pathan sub-group, descended from the ancient Israelites, it is so far-fetched a theory, that I have yet to come across a range of academic studies giving it any credence, making reference to it, or even listing the Awans as a Pashtun clan); however, as said before, I have no objection whatsoever to others adding material – including that relating to subject matter I consider to be dubious - as long as it is substantiated by valid, reliable and fully referenced sources (and indeed – as I have emphasised previously – in the past, senior editors have requested the removal of unsubstantiated material from the article).

It is also in the interests of maintaining the integrity of the article, that I have removed the citation you have added – I have come across it many times before, and there is a problem regarding its provenance, reliability and accuracy. According to the citation as it stands in Ahmed Abdulla’s work (which you have listed in the reference section), “Almost 70% of the population of the Punjab comprises of Rajputs and Jats and the various branches of their race...” (See: http://books.google.com/books?ei=nZxVTo3YKsvLsgafwbAa&ct=result&id=pfQLAAAAIAAJ&dq=ahmed+abdulla+70%25+awans&q=almost+70%25#search_anchor). However, the citation as it stood in the article, stated, “Almost 60% of the population of the Punjab comprises of Rajputs and Jats and the various branches of their race...” which is also consistent with what can be found at http://www.oocities.org/pak_history/punjabis.html and http://mehmoodahmed.blogspot.com/2008/11/leading-tribes-of-punjab-and-their.html (amongst other sites, and I presume this is the figure cited by Syed Abdul Quddus, as you listed one of his works in support of the citation you included in the article, and you also quoted the figure of 60% that is to be found elsewhere). I am having a hard time confirming whom this quote is actually attributable to, and whether it is 60% of the population of the Punjab, or 70% of the population of this region (or indeed a different figure altogether) that reference should be made to. A similar issue did arise not so long ago, when a senior Wiki editor highlighted that one of the books listed by the article as a reference source (Encyclopaedia of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh by Om Gupta), was comprised of material plagiarised from a number of sources, and as such, it was deemed unreliable, and deleted from the list of works referenced by the article. However, from the source material available to me at home that is valid and reliable, I have attempted to replace your citation with a quote that more or less makes the same point.

Regards

Rawalpindi Express (talk) 06:18, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Alamsherkhan

Hi Alamsherkhan. Let me address the points you have raised:

(a) Anyone who belongs to the Awan tribe (such as I do) will know that whilst there are indeed Awans who belong to the Shia sect, most Awans do not (unlike the majority of those who claim descent from Hazrat Ali, which was the purpose of emphasising this fact). However, I have removed reference to this, as I presently am not in possession of any reliable sources that substantiate this point.

(b) Again, those who belong to the Awan tribe and those who have some knowledge of it, will know that a number of my kinsmen and kinswomen adopt the title Alvi, particularly those who migrated from East Punjab (such as my mother and father’s families. And on my father’s side, I do indeed have relatives who refer to themselves as Alvi). It is also a fact that not all those who are called Alvi, are Awans; perusing the following article will confirm this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alavi_%28surname%29; but as I currently don’t have access to source material that confirms these points (and even though it’s an established fact that not all those who carry the surname Alvi, are Awans), I have also deleted reference to both of these points. However, the fact that there are Awans who refer to themselves as Alvi, can be found within the article; please refer to the section that lists a number of prominent Awans – amongst these names, you will find that of Major General Ameer Faisal Alavi. Furthermore, it can be confirmed that he was a member of the Awan tribe, as I provided a link (that can be found in the reference section) to a piece written about him by his sister (the well-known journalist, Lady Nadira Naipaul), in which she mentions her family’s tribal origins. Moreover, the article also cites Rose’s comments about the Awan tribe possibly being Alvi Sayyids. Therefore, reference being made to the basic fact that a number of Awans use the title Alvi, is valid, and remains part of the article.

(c) It is beyond me, how you can claim that the statement within the article that opens with the words, “Most Awans maintain (and have always maintained) they are descended from an individual named Qutb Shah...” is not substantiated by any references, when directly below that statement, the following direct quote is to be found: “All branches of the tribe are unanimous in stating that they originally came from the neighbourhood of Ghazni to India, and all trace their genealogy to Hasrat Ali the son-in-law of the Prophet. Kutab Shah, who came from Ghazni with Sultan Mahmud, was the common ancestor of the Awans.” In fact, in his book, Punjabi Musalmans, J.M. Wikeley states that the Awans maintain that they “...have been Musalmans from the beginning...” as per their claims to Arab ancestry through Qutb Shah (and I have now cited relevant sections of Wikeley’s work in the reference section).

(d) The point about Awans claiming that Qutb Shah was a descendant of Hazrat Ali, but through a wife other than Hazrat Fatimah, has now been verified by the use of a reliable source, which has naturally been fully referenced in the relevant section. As such, reference to this within the article has been retained.

It is ironic that you’ve reproduced that section of text at the top of this discussion page, as it includes information you were hell-bent on deleting from the article. Oh, and I am not looking to engage in an edit war either.

Regards

Rawalpindi Express (talk) 06:18, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

insertions in original references need to get addressed

  • Article is going well now but still have unfair insertions in the original referrences which change the meaning of referrence. these insertions need to get addressed

Zarrigul (talk) 21:13, 25 August 2011 (UTC).

Rawalpindiexpress

  • a) You have to go with rules which you set for others . Thanks for accepting that somewhere you have added remarks for which you don’t have reference to support.
  • b) Adoption the title Alvi, is not Issue. A lot keep the title of Farooqui, Siddique , Usmani and Zaidi . etc whereas they accept that they are not Arab. These titles does not guarantee them Arab origin. I do know a family Settled at Rawalpindi. (Brig Alvi , Ex head Pathology department Army Medical college Rawalpindi ) His father Adopted Alvi title Now he and his brother Bashir Alvi OGDC ,do use this title but hundreds others of their family don’t use this title.

Many Indian clans began to change their clan names after conversion to Islam. Awans of Gujranwala all gave their clan name as Jatt in the Gujranwala District Gazzeteer.

  • c) “Unanimous “ in the presence of a lot of contradictory family traditions need to reconsider. There are a lot of claims of different origin discussed in Books at the same time when colonial officers were collecting these traditions, I would be obliged if you let us know which reference support “The point about Awans claiming that Qutb Shah was a descendant of Hazrat Ali, but through a wife other than Hazrat Fatimah,” Is this not addition in the reference? Now you started proving your opinion through reliable sources, Rawalpindi Express , it is really shocking.

.” In fact, in his book, Punjabi Musalmans, J.M. Wikeley states that the Awans maintain that they “...have been Musalmans from the beginning”

  • This multi meaning sentence. Please let me know (Islamic point of view)which prophet for the first time started preaching Islam ?” This will clarify what this sentence really mean. Here you are supporting my claim.
  • The Qutab Shah descendant of Hazrat Ali who is used as link in Awan family tree lived at Baghdad and was laid to rest there .

The thesis of Miss Sabiha Shaheen is the only fair link which may connect Awan’s with Qutab Shah. When Altamus refused to help the Shah of Khorasan with fear of Mongol, A Pashtun Subedar of Multan hosted him at Multan . To reach Multan, Khewarzm Shah’s army used the same track where today Awans live in Majority. regards Alamsherkhan (talk) 13:30, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Alamsherkhan, I really don’t mean to be rude, but it is clear that English is your second language, and as such, I really am struggling to make sense of what you have to say. Nevertheless, I will attempt to address the points you have made:

The rules I made reference to, were not set by me, but Wikipedia. Furthermore, I have already pointed out that there was material contained within the article that was not originally added by me, and it is specifically this material that I removed from the article, because although much of it was valid (for reasons I have already gone into), it was nevertheless unsubstantiated. Therefore, your allegations against me are unfounded.

When did I state that carrying the title Alvi is a guarantee that one is of Arab origin? I was simply providing a retort to the issue you had raised in relation to this matter (and I answered your concerns perfectly satisfactorily). When will you finally understand that the aim of the article is not to prove that the Awans are of Arab origin? If this was the case, then the article wouldn’t also cover the opinions of those who reject the Awan claim to Arab origin. How many times must this point be made? All the article does, is reflect what the traditional belief of the Awans is, vis-a-vis their origins, something that every serious study about my tribe also makes reference to. And you don’t need to tell me that there are numerous Awan families that don’t use the title Alvi - I am already well aware of this, as members of my mother and father’s families use a variety of surnames (including Alvi). Oh, and contrary to what you state, I have yet to meet a Zaidi, Naqvi etc. who does not claim be of Arab descent (though there may well be those bearing these names, who do not consider themselves to be of Arab origin).

It really is now getting tiresome repeating the same point, over and over again.

What on earth are you on about when you state that my actions are “shocking”? Due to you not being able to fully express yourself in English, most of what you have to say makes very little sense. I’m sorry, but there is nothing that needs to be “reconsidered” as far as the citation dealing with the Awans being “unanimous” in regards to their claim to Arab descent is concerned – the British conducted what is still considered to be the most extensive census study undertaken in the Punjab, and their findings reflected exactly what was conveyed to them by the majority of the members of each of the ethnic groups that resided there at that point in time (and indeed, continue to reside in this part of the Subcontinent). Furthermore, contemporary studies such as those conducted by Alison Shaw of Oxford University (whose study has been cited in the article), point to the same findings, i.e. the vast majority of Awans profess to be of Arab origin (and indeed, Shaw also stresses that there are a number of those belonging to other Punjabi Muslim communities, who accept this claim). There may well be some Awans who have a different tale to tell when it comes to their supposed origins, but being an Awan myself, the overwhelming majority of Awans I know of, have come across and continue to come across, all claim to be of Arab descent; and even those Awans I have met who are open to a number of differing theories regarding their origins, recognise the fact that the bulk of our tribe claims Arab origins, and indeed, this is a fact that a plethora of source material dealing with my tribe, also recognises (and some of these sources have been referred to in the article). As for the point you keep raising about Awans claiming to be descended from Hazrat Ali, but by a wife other than Hazrat Fatimah, I don’t see why I need to provide you with this as the reference I have cited in support of this contention, can be found in the reference section of the article, but nonetheless, here it is:

Punjab District Gazetteers: Attock District, 1930, 1932, Superintendant Government Printing, p.80 (And the direct quote reads, “Kutb Shah, according to the Awan account, was descended from Ali, the son-in-law of the Prophet, but by a wife other than Fatima...”)

Once again, to re-iterate, it’s not my intention to be rude when I state this, but it’s clear that you have problems fully comprehending the English language; the sentence you make reference to, is clear-cut, and does not have “multiple” meanings at all, and it’s because you’re struggling understand it, that you’re now asking bizarre questions regarding who it was that first preached Islam. Hence, for you to allege that I am supporting your claim, is simply untrue – I have done nothing of the sort. As it is, I really don’t have the time to point out the obvious meaning of the sentence you have highlighted, or to be drawn into what could turn out to be a time consuming theological debate (depending on the position one adopts).

As for what you have to say about Sabiha Shaheen’s thesis being the only “fair” account of the Awans possibly being descended from Qutb Shah, well, that is entirely your own opinion. As I’ve said to you before, if you want to add material to the article that counters the traditional claim of the Awan tribe in relation to its origins (i.e. the claim to Arab descent), then do so, as long as the material is supported by references that are valid, reliable and academic in nature (with the material in question also being fully referenced, e.g. the title, year of publication and the publisher of the work being cited, being provided, as well as relevant page numbers). And let me emphasise this now: according to Wiki guidelines, an obscure link on the Internet, does not qualify as a valid secondary source.

I honestly get the impression that you’re now arguing for the sake of it, because I have repeatedly stated that I am not interested in pushing any particular viewpoint regarding the origins of my tribe; all I have done is present a variety of viewpoints in relation to this topic - including the point of view that the majority of my tribe subscribes to - all substantiated by scholarly source material. It is you who is intent on disproving something that cannot even be proven or disproven in the first place (unless all those who declare themselves to be Awans, were to undergo DNA testing, thereby verifying their origins).

Regards

Rawalpindi Express (talk) 06:56, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Ghazanfaralvi

Hi Ghazanfaralvi. I don’t know how you can definitively state that the Awans did not belong to a “warrior class” before they entered the Indian Subcontinent, as reliable evidence does not exist to confirm what “class” it was that the Awans belonged to, prior to settling in this region (in fact, it cannot even been confirmed or denied with any certainty, if the Awans even are of foreign extraction). I also find it astounding that on the basis of Rose stating that a tradition exists which purports that the Awans were attached as auxiliaries to the Muslim armies that invaded India, you’ve concluded that they served in the capacity of cooks, animal handlers and the like. The fact is, auxiliaries attached to ancient armies, also served in a military capacity; the auxiliary soldiers recruited by the Roman legions, who served in the infantry and cavalry, are a good example of this. The traditions relating to the Awans being Alvi Sayyids who sought refuge in Sindh, and Qutb Shah being joined by six of his sons in the invasion of Northern India, have already been covered by the article. I’m not sure what the purpose of you stating that Sahd and Fateh Khatoon are Muslim names, is – are you asserting that both women (if they actually were genuine historical figures), were Muslims before Qutb Shah married them? Because if this is the case, then the fact is, they could also have been non-Muslims, who upon marrying Qutb Shah and embracing Islam, adopted these names - in fact, you cite Rose as mentioning the tradition that maintains Fateh Khatoon was the mother of Chauhan; well, according to Wikeley (whom I've mentioned above), "... a Hindu origin has been assigned to the Awans by some writers, who point to the originally Hindu character of two of Kutb Shah's sons, Chohan and Khokhar, which is not explained away by the tradition that these two took their mother's name."

Regards

Rawalpindi Express (talk) 06:18, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Rawalpindi Express it is very easy to make such conclusion. Why non of his Sons were a regular soldiers ? Is it not enough to doubt the claim of warrior class ? The writers declare them as Auxiliary , Family traditions claim to be Helper instead Soldier.

  • If you agree that all Auxillary were "Helpers" and were Arabs or Alvi's then count of these Helpers were in thousands. As auxillary consisting seven soldiers would be a Joke.
  • To win a war, brave and trained soldiers are not the only factor. logistics play key role .In recent history we can see how Germans lost in Russia when they failed to arrange logistics at a far away place. So we must have to assume that Ghaznavi have good enough arrangments for logistics.
  • The distance from Ghazni to Peshawar is more than 300 Km . Ghaznavi army could have taken approximately a month to reach Peshawar while having thousands of foot soldiers. thousands of camels/Horses, War logistics , cavalry soldiers etc. Daily water consumption For army may exceeding 30000-50000 gallons (varify from daily water requirement assumed for british or indian solider , a gallon per head). whole the area is in lack of water. Just to arrange water/food he was needing thousand of Helpers.

Tradition claim that Qutab Shah came with Ghaznavi along with six of his many sons. . This tradition clarifies that his six sons born and grown up out side India. So if this tradition is correct then we have to accept that:-

a) mother of chohan was Muslims by birth or b) Chohan is not real son. perhaps son in law or adpoted son c) claim of Choahan as decendants of Qutab Shah is baseless.

  • all the traditions have some issues when we cross check them. Here in this article some one have added Hazrat Sultan Bahu as Awan.His faimly tree claim that Qutab shah had a Son namely Ameer Shah , who was ancestor of Hazrat Sultan Bahu but we don't find Ameer Shah in any of these traditions.

Ghazanfaralvi (talk) 02:53, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Response to Ghazanfaralvi by Averroist

As there is no concept of academic research in our society and therefore no research was made with regard to auxiliary unit in the army of Mahmud of Ghazni, but as the word was used by a British author of Roman heritage, here are;
Types of auxiliary unit in the army of ancient Rome

Now please tell me where Awans stand in this context.

Averroist (talk) 09:21, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

  • Hi Averroist . recheck your earlier comments while other editors agree that there were thousands of Helpers but you insist that Qutab Shah and his sons were the only “helpers“.
  • The Roman Cavalry , Alares, Vataphract, Clibanarii and Dromedarii which you mentioned were a kind of regular regiments raised before or during war. Hope you have carefully read the relevant articles regarding them .
  • If you consider that Auxillary as reserve army or a kind of civil armed force then you have to admit that “Awan” "the helpers" are multi race people . So you have to give up claim of Arab origin.
  • Moreover for common man Rangers, and Civil Armed Forces are equal to Soldiers , they never consider them “Helpers”, or the people of civil armed forces never consider themselves as “Helpers” But a cook, a person of medical team or accounts even wearing colorful army uniform will consider himself “Helper of Soldier”.
  • Averroist, When Awans unanimously claim that they were “Helpers” not the Soldiers then where your claim stands.

Regards Alamsherkhan Alamsherkhan (talk) 13:48, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

On the basis of what you have to say, Ghazanfaralvi, it actually isn’t “very easy” to draw the conclusions you have, as everything you have stated, constitutes nothing but conjecture. And for the record, I am not making any cast iron claims myself, just pointing out what is an overriding flaw in your argument. The simple fact is, in the absence of incontrovertible evidence or substantive source material, yours is just yet another theory, nothing more, nothing less.

Rawalpindi Express (talk) 06:56, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Aryan Origin not Arab

Like other North Indian people, they are Aryans who are Arab Wannabe's. Heck, Arabs and other muslims conquer rajput people and call them sons of Arabs..--137.207.34.204 (talk) 04:53, 13 January 2015 (UTC) Like other Brahmin, Khsatriyah, Rajput, Jat which make up most of Punjabis, Sindhis and other North Indians. You guys come from proto-indo-europeans. Proto-Indo-European are your roots. This qutbh shah dude was probably just one dude. Yeah, you toss in a few arabs, but those Arabs lived and married local Aryan women and made them muslim but over time, they lost Arabic and learned Aryan languages. As time went on, eventually, you became Punjabis, and Punjabis are a branch of Indo-Aryans like your fellow Janjua, Gakhar and what not tribes, then Pashtuns to a much farther extent, then you reach Indo-Europeans whom connect you people and other Punjabis, as well as Pathans with English people :D .--137.207.34.204 (talk) 05:15, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Apparently, you don't the the difference between aryan and indo-aryan. Akmal94 (talk) 08:08, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

When Awan’s got settled at Mianwali

Chakrala is the oldest and the largest village a seat of Hindu Tribe Chikar , of Mianwali District in the Punjab province of Pakistan.It was captured by Local Muslims in the 13th century by the aid of invaders from the North-western tribes. Chakrala is also a Union Council (administrative subdivision) of Mianwali Tehsil and is located 10 miles (16 km) away from the Mianwali Talagang road at 32°6'0N 72°22'0E]. The area is has been predominantly inhabited by Awan tribes for the last six centuries.

  • This text above is produced from another Wikipedia article regarding village Chakrala . During 13th century Sadar karabogha Khan head of Khattaks along with Niazi and Awan tribes conquered the area's at the west Bank of river Indus. Awan had their first settlement in Kohat and Mianwali areas. Later during 16th century these advanced towards eastren side of Indus river including Attock , Chakwal, Shah pur and Sargodha and the Awan shifted to new settlement, leaving their previous settlement for Saghri.s. More probably 13th century was the time when they got the title of helper. Please be noted that Chakrala is the birth place of lance naik Sher Shah Awan VC (Victoria Cross).

Zarrigul (talk) 11:03, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Awan’s do keep khel System

Ahmed Gul Khel is a name of a small clan of Sighaal Awan tribe. The small hamlet where the clan resides is known as Dhoke Ahmed Gul Khel which is a part of Kalri Village in Tehsil and District Mianwali of Punjab, Pakistan. This is situated at distance of 37 Kilometers from Mianwali off the Rawalpindi-Mianwali Road. Nearby village of Rikhi is part of mauza Kalri. Namal Lake and Namal College are also at a short distance from Ahmed Gul Khel. This village is part of Awankari Region. Awankari is an exclusive area of Awan tirbe between Mianwali, Attack, Chakwal, Khushab and Jhelum Districts. Awankari is also dialect of Awan tribe of Awankari Region. This village belongs to Ahmed Gul Khel subtribe of Sighaal Awan Tribe. Sighaal Awan tribe is exclusively found in Mauza Kalri and parts of Namal area. Famous Personalities of this clan are • Haji Sub. (R) Malik Fateh Khan Awan Late served in British Army and Pakistan Army. He was awarded Indian Order of Merit, The Italy Star and half a dozen other medals for his bravery during World War II. • Malik Muhammad Yar Awan Late • Mehr Khan Awan belonging to Ahmed Gul Khel subtribe is resident of this area. He holds Diploma in Medical Laboratory Technology and B.Sc. Medical Technology from National Institute of Health, Islamabad, B.A. From the then Government College, Lahore, M.A. Economics and M.A. History (European) from University of the Punjab, Lahore, and MBA with specializations in Human Resource Management, Marketing and Finance from Virtual University of Pakistan. He has more 15 years of experience in the field of General Management and Human Resource Management. Text produced from Wikipedia article Ahmed Gul Khel Awan. Zarrigul (talk) 11:02, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Zarrigul, since you have reproduced text from a Wikipedia article in an effort to support your contention, let me do the same as you; the following is extracted from the article, Shadia, Punjab:

The dwellers of this village are mostly from Zameendars consisting of Janjua clan which are sub divided as Malu khel, Phato Khel, Mulke Khel, Mehrwan Khel, Anwar Khel, Azmat Khel, Aziz Khel, Sikandar Khel, Moosi Janjua, Laungi Janjua, and Bejari Janjuas etc.

Are you now going to claim that a Rajput tribe such as the Janjua, are of Pashtun origin, or descended from the Ancient Israelites? Rawalpindi Express (talk) 00:24, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Punjabis like awans don't have Khels, only Pashtuns do and only Pashtuns can use it as it is part of their tribal system just like Zai's are. Also, none of these tribes are recognized by Pakistan and you have to provide proof for this claim as this sounds very doubtful. Unless some Pakis are influenced by Pashtuns, it impossible for them to use. Akmal94 (talk) 08:11, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Awan_(tribe)/Archive_4&oldid=1067816883"