Talk:Awan (tribe)

Awans are 100% Indo-Europeans

In recent times, there have been several large scale DNA tests of various Pakistani races/tribes; and I have read some papers that are of quite reliable provenance , that seem to prove that Awans are 100% of Indo-European origins. Mithocondrial DNA testing has shown with over 80% accuracy rates that the Awans are closely related to a number of Rajput and other indigenous South Asian tribes in Northern Punjab and nearby regions . The fact that some tribes converted totally and some partially to Islam at a certain time has nothing to do with the genetic factors. There are several old Hindu tribes that converted entirely and are all Muslims today eg Jhodras, Ghebas, Noons , Arains, Dhond-Abbasis, Karlals, Bambas etc ; whereas there are others that are mostly Muslims in Pakistan area now with some smaller non-Muslim populations in India -such as Tiwanas, Khattars, Tarars and so on. I shall try to dig out the DNA based research articles and share here for everyone's edification. I strongly believe we should all forget about these fake claims (due to our continued complexes about our old /true origins after accepting Islam) and take pride that we are who we are , in fact , and that our elders did accept the truth of Islam centuries ago. (Hamid Ali Awan, Havelian, NW Pakistan)

References

Mārg̲: A Magazine of Architecture and Art, Volumes 1-2

1946, page 32:

"The people of this area are 90 per cent Muslims of the Awan tribe. They are an independent and proud set, claiming unmixed descent from a tribe of Arab invaders."

The above can be included in the main article.

User:RevolutionaryPatriot

Jat Origins Reference from British Gazetteer - not allowed ?

The book reference ultimately refers to a British Gazetteer, which to my understanding are not allowed to be included in the Wikipedia articles.

Khan, Sabir Badal (2013). Two Essays on Baloch History and Folklore: Two Essays on Baloch History and Folklore. Università di Napoli, "l'Orientale". p. 40.

Verbatim:

"Similarly, the Awans, said to be of Jat origin (Attock District Gazetteer 1932: 82), claim Arab origins having descended from Ali, the son-in-law of Prophet Muhammad, from a wife other Fatima...."

[1]https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=8N1JCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA40&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false QutbShah (talk) 21:04, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

Why is it not? RevolutionaryPatriot (talk) 05:26, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

My understanding is the British Colonial sources are not allowed on Wikipedia, which this book is referring to. Awans are definitely not of Jat origin instead the Colonial author maybe confusing the common term for a farmer, which is also Jat. QutbShah (talk) 21:49, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

It's about Indian caste topics. Also it is fair to use in this context, it is not a nonsensical writing piece. RevolutionaryPatriot (talk) 10:50, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Can caste label/terminology apply to a tribe? QutbShah (talk) 20:15, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

It is not a "Punjabi tribe"

I just noticed that an edit has been made to this article in the opening paragraph where it says that Awan is a "Punjabi tribe" - "originating from Punjab region". There is no proper source to claim anyone of these two claims (there can not be because its not realistically true). The two sources provided do NOT say that the tribe originated from Punjab region or is ethnically from Punjabi group of people. One source say that they were being recruited in British army back in the day when British were recruiting from the Punjab region, there is no mention of the tribe's ethnicity or origin there. The second source is simply a derivative dictionary which can not be used as a primary source (see WP:DICTS).

Awan tribe's affiliation with any ethnolinguistic group of people is not at all defined by reliable historians and those who do affiliate them say they're "people of Arab origin who speak Awankari (distinguished tribal language)", which in itself is extremely broad and vague of a definition.

The article should be restored to previous version where it said that the tribe "resides" predominantly in Punjab, Khyber and Azad Kashmir. That is more correct and better. If there is really a need to mention the ethnicity and origin of the tribe than do mention the correct one which is that "Awan is an Arab tribe, closely related to Sayyids, predominantly living in Punjab, Khyber and Azad Kashmir ... ". --Greentree0 (talk) 18:09, 12 July 2024 (UTC) Greentree0 (talk) 18:09, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

I've agreed on this for a while. This is not a sourced addition to have written "Punjabi tribe". It is a known "odd one out" when this is listed alongside Cheema, Arain and Chattha which anyone in the Pakistan topic area would know. There would be plenty sources calling it Arab and the few cherry picked sourced used to try demonstrate it as a "punjabi tribe" just dont support the claim. RevolutionaryPatriot (talk) 14:00, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Even cherry picking isn’t possible in this case because no source reliable or unreliable say that tribe “originated”, or is “ethnically”, from Punjab.

With all due respect, what the editor did by adding such a bizarre thing in intro makes it quite evident that editor do not respect Wikipedia and its guidelines :)

- Greentree0 (talk) 11:57, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm able to edit the article. Tell me what you want the body to say and what should be cited. RevolutionaryPatriot (talk) 06:04, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

Also I dont think I'll be including "Arab" tribe either. In fact Im in favour of wording just mention the tribes presence in which region and the viewer can read all about ethnicity and genetics when scrolling.

"A tribe of (punjab ajk hazara) that claims Arab origin"? RevolutionaryPatriot (talk) 09:13, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi RevelationaryPatriot,

I hope you are having a good day. If I were you then I would have kinda reverted it back to its previous version where there was no infobox (there isn’t a need for infobox yet because there is no sourced info about language or religion in the main article), and removed the improper use of word “Punjabi” in the description as well as the main paragraph. The use of Punjabi, Khyber and Azad Kashmir with "predominantly reside" is correct tho.

As for Arab origin reference, I would have just changed the line "They claim to be descendants of the Qutub Shah who came to the region with Mahmud of Ghazni."

to

"The tribe claim Arab, particularly Alid, origin through its primary ancestor Qutub Shah, who came to modern-day Pakistan with Mahmud of Ghazni."

I would have removed the reference to Jatt origin theory in the "History" section as well because British Raj sources can not be used for ethnicity or tribe related articles and the source which is in the article is basically a footnote of a book where the author has explicitly stated that the information is borrowed from a British Raj source

(Why British Raj sources can not be used? - It is extensively discussed on many WP forums and there is kinda consensus of editors on this. Moreover, in case of Awans, they are referred as Greeks, Rajputs, Arabs, Turkic and even Persians in those sources not only Jatt. So, it'll be either mentioning all of those fringe theories or none at all).

I would have included a genetic studies section as well, like Kalash article has. I have already shared information regarding the genetic studies in “clear the fog” section of this talk page. Good luck! :)

- Greentree0 (talk) 05:59, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Qutab Shah Awan is arab particularly alid origin. And most population of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa khuwa the use of pashto language and hindko this not punjabi tribes that's why i request change this history because most Qutab Shah Awan is resident of bannu and hazara division.@ 86.99.140.65 (talk) 09:44, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

 Done -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 15:47, 14 October 2024 (UTC)