46 DOI: The Development of Khow Culture and the Arrival of ...

DOI:

UOCHJRS, ISSN: 2616-6496, Vol. 4 | Issue 2 |January-June 2021

46

The Development of Khow Culture and the Arrival of

Islam in District Chitral Pakistan

Syed Anwar Ali Shah PhD Scholar Qurtuba University of Sciences and Technology Peshawar

[email protected] :Email

Dr. Tajuddin

Assistant Professor in Education, University of Chitral

[email protected] Email:

Dr. Assad-us-Samad Faculty of Education University of Chitral

Email:[email protected] DOI:

Abstract:

This paper attempted to explore the development of Khow culture

in Chitral by applying methods of critical inquiry into different

components of culture, especially on Khowar language. The

research proved that Prototype Khow culture came into existence

in Chitral through the interaction of Dravidians with the

indigenous people of Chitral (known as “Pisacha” i.e., [Kalash]

who spoke and observed “Pisacha” [Kalash] language and

culture). The language in turn developed six speech sounds

different from the languages whose origins do not go to the Indo-

Iranian roots. Moreover, Khowar has its distinct inflectional

system. Some of the words with medial and terminal /k/ sound have

their close affinity with Dravidian rather than Sanskrit as well as

Turkic. However, the findings showed that the Khow culture

initially nurtured in Chitral from the interaction of Dravidian with

the Pisachas (Kalash) the aboriginal inhabitant of the region. It

moved towards its maturity during the assaults of Aryans, Turks

and Persian invaders. The Persian invaders introduced Islam in

Chitral. Thus, the Khow culture is the amalgamation of different

cultures coming from its southern and northern peripheries of the

region, while Islamic culture seemed to be introducing in this

region from the north and northwest of Chitral.

Keywords: Khow culture, Dravidian, Pisacha, Agriculture

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

DOI:


47

Introduction

This article explored the development of Khow culture and the

arrival of Islamic culture in Chitral. The Khow culture is observed by a

small community, confined to a mountainous region, which is hardly

accessible to the outside world due to its harsh terrain (Deck, 1992). It has

been a culture of a tribal society, deprived of formal education since its

inceptions; therefore, it did not grow much academically and mostly

remained static due to scarcity of research on its various attributes and

components. Although Chitral is strategically located right in the center of

different cultures (Israr, 2012): It has close cultural ties with Central Asian

countries on the northern side and shares the same bond with Asian

countries in the south (Warburton, 2007) making it a repository of various

cultures.

Therefore, Khow culture has a rich diversity encompassing all the

cultures that it has encountered. Before, the British occupation of this

region, several invading forces attacked on Chitral coming both from

northern and southern borders .Some of the invading forces left behind their

people who settled down in this region and mingled with the indigenous

population to develop a society comprising various ethnic groups who

afterward helped evolve a compact culture to be known as Khow culture,

which eventually gave birth to Khow caste (Baig, 1999). The word “Khow”

does not relate to any specific ethnic group. This multiethnic society

fostered a common language known as Khowar language and helped to

cement mutual relationship as a unifying force (Decker, 1992; 42).

Similarly, when the British came to Chitral as a colonial power, they

considered Chitral as an important strategic point, serving as a checkpoint

against invasions from the north thus protecting British India and

indigenous rulers from hostile forces (Thomson, 1981; 296). Hence, it

DOI:


48

served as a defensive wall for British India as well as for the indigenous

rulers, against the invading forces (Faizi, 1996). A few individuals initiated

some sort of investigation into this culture at a personal level for their own

interest (Decker, 1992). The reason why no such task was undertaken seems

to be the lack of easy access to Chitral; in the first place as high mountain

ranges like the Hindu Kush, Karakorum and Himalayas broke

communication links for a good part of the year (Curzon, 2012). Even those

who worked on the Chitral obtained information from outside resources

instead of physically accessing the region (Curzon, 2012). However a major

contribution to language study was made by Morgenstern, who visited

Chitral in 1929, which in fact paved the way for further interest to study in

various field in this region, thus a few other individuals tried to probe into

a diverse subjects (Decker, 1992). Correspondingly, an effort has yet to be

made on Khow culture or (Chitrali culture) and no study has ever been

conducted in this regard leaving a big gap to be bridged if this study is to be

made. Like all other communities living in cultural pocket holes, Chitralis

have also developed distinctive cultural-based values.

Similarly, in this age of globalization with fast-paced advancement

in the study of cultures, Khow culture still remains in the background, and

endangered due to scarcity of good academic research. Hence this paper,

address the question like, how the Khow culture developed under the

influences of different cultures?

The paper may be helpful in preserve this unique culture for future

generations and will provide a platform for further studies. Besides, a new

avenue of research can be opened for debates and discussions in academic

circles to elevate the study of such neglected, marginalized, inferior culture

in global concentrations.

Material and Method:

DOI:


49

The qualitative method was employed to analysis and interpretation

of the data to achieve the objectives for this study. Moreover, most of the

data in this paper is taken from languages (main component of culture) to

achieve the objective of the study, i.e., the development of Khow culture

and the arrival of Islam in Chitral, (KP) district Pakistan.

Discussion:

Chitral from toponyms to demonyms, as the word “Chitral” is an Anglicized

form of “Che-Thraar,” with first syllable pronounced as a retroflex variation

“ch” followed by a soft “t,” long “a” and “r” sounds. On the surface, it

seems to have been derived from “chethur,” literally “from the field/farm.”

In its local context, the word refers to a town in the south of Chitral, which

is the capital of the area, since the British domination.

The language spoken by the majority of people in the valley of Chitral is

Khowar (/k/aspirated), literally “language of Khow.” The enthnonym

“Khow,” a word of an unknown origin, is used as a rival candidate for

comparison with “Kalash.” According to local traditions, the ethnic origin

of “Khow” is placed in the northern parts of Chitral that is Turkkow and

Mulkkow valleys (Ismail, 2019). There are no written sources to historically

trace the emergence of “Khow culture” in the northern valleys as an ethnic

group to dominate the areas where the Kalash tribe(s) reigned earlier. The

more we dig in history, the fuzzier it becomes. Hence we have to rely on

toponyms, which bear linguistic clues regarding the origin of place names

and their inhabitants (ibid). The place names in the valleys of Chitral have

four major layers: Dravidian, Sanskrit, Turkic and Persian.

The Dravidian Layer in Khow Culture:

The term Dravidian was introduced by a linguist “Robert” in his work titled

“Comparative Grammar of the Dravidian or South Indian Family of

DOI:


50

Languages”. He proclaims that Dravidians were living in India before the

evolution of Sanskrit and the Aryans migration to India. It is believed that

they were the first inhabitants of the sub-continent and spoke a language,

called Dravidian language (Gersian, 1928). Subsequently, the migration of

the Dravidians continued, and they reached in the extreme northern regions

of the present Pakistan and Afghanistan, and evolved into an unfasten

culture in these regions

(http:>///en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dravidian_languages) One of the Dravidian

cultural component, i.e., language, which is the largest families of

Languages in the world; includes seventy-three languages spoken by more

than two hundred and twenty two million people in India, Sri Lanka, and

certain areas of Pakistan. Now the only Dravidian language spoken in

Pakistan and Afghanistan is Brahui. Presently, most of the Dravidian

languages are spoken in the southern part of Indian sub-continent. It is

believed that Dravidians were Indian natives and spread throughout India

and spoke Dravidian languages (Morgenstierne, 1947). Later on the

invasion of Indo-Aryan from the north compelled Dravidians to move into

the southern part of India, and, hence the Vedic Sanskrit the Dravidian

cultural traits might have fused due to the expansion of Dravidian in the

north. It has also been suggested that in the northwest of the sub-continent

some indigenous cultures may have been observed earlier (ibid). Thus the

Kafir (Nuristani) which make up the northern part of the subcontinent have

languages with many Dravidian words along with Sanskrit, which in turn

shows that Dravidian prevailed in what is now northern Pakistan, (of which

Chitral makes a part). Sanskrit came to these regions after Dravidians

(Morgenstierne, 1947). The origin of Sanskrit belongs to Central Asia, and

seemed to obtain a great influence of the Dravidian culture, such as

Dravidian loan words in their languages. As a result, Dravidian and Indo-

DOI:


51

Aryan cultures shared many convergent features due to their long proximity

with each other in this region (Rahman, 1999).

The major attribution to the Indo-Aryan phonology from Dravidian

is the voicing or weakening of the intervocalic stop consonants, e.g., “asta”

(eight) “sapta” (seven) in Sanskrit, while in Dravidian these are “attha”

(eight) “satta” (seven) etc

(file:>///Dravidian%20languages%20and%20SOUNDS.html).

Although, Sanskrit culture originated from Central Asia but nourished into

its full glory in the northern India (now northern areas of Pakistan) called

Chitral (http:>//www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/171083/Dravidian-

languages). Biddulph argues that Khow culture has very close association

with “Kalash” culture as compared to the other languages of those regions.

It is assumed, earlier people called ‘Pisacha’, speaking ‘Pisacha language;

inhabited the regions between Hindu Kush and Himalayas (Gardezi, 1989)

and is supposed to be the single culture in the region (Biddulph, 1977).

The above mentioned clues revealed that the Khow cultural traits in its

initial stage does not come from Aryan sources, but point to the presence of

an earlier form of culture, which might be termed as Prototype Khow

culture, and in turn emerged as a result of interactions between ‘Pisachas’

and ‘Dravidians’. However, a renowned linguist, Moergenstine (1947) says

that the origin of many words in Khowar language is not known. This

unknown characteristic of Khowar words supports the proposition of the

‘Pisachas’ and ‘Dravidians’ interaction in Chitral before the Aryan

invasion. Moreover, Khowar language has developed its own Inflectional

system different from Sanskrit, is another proved (ibid). Though, the

European theorists usually focus on Sanskrit as the mother to most of the

languages spoken today in Asia. However, some recent studies point to the

links between Dravidians, Turkish and the languages spoken by the

DOI:


52

aborigines of Australia. This assumption prompts one to revisit the Sanskrit

model. Theoretically, this model is a convenient tool for categorizing

linguistic layers to find out the cultural traits. Things become complicated

when the reader tries to imagine the linguistic situation before the rise of

Aryans in India. In this regard, linguists rely on the religious texts of the

Hindus and the Zoroastrians. Interestingly, the differences between the two

sources are not so great to treat them as two distinct sources. So it is difficult

to dig out any literature about the exact cultural history of Khow culture,

hence to find out such information we have to rely only on the existing

speech sounds and words for our supposition. It is presumed that Khowar

has been spoken in Chitral since its early history i.e., 5th century B.C. (Faizi,

1996). According to Ismail Solon ‘Khowar is believed to be an old

language; certainly older than Persian’ (Sloan, 2981).

These assumptions suggest the history of Khow culture, which is usually

called Prototype Khow culture; begins with the interaction of Dravidian

with the indigenous inhabitant called ‘Pisachas’ (Kalash community). There

are words (vocabularies) in Khowar, which can be used as a reference to

such supposition. In linguistics, the study of the history of words is called

etymology (Turner, 1973), shows when words entered in one language from

the other and from what sources, and with the passage of time how meaning

and form of that words have been changed. The hybrid of this evolution is

called the process of the phono-semantic; and this method of linguistic

study is being applied on the Dravidian words in Khowar language, i.e.

‘/vari/’ means seed or grain; (Emwnwu, 1984) and the word exists in

Khowar as ‘/varo/’ means seed or grain. At the end of the word the vowel

/i/ changed into /o/ vowel sound. When the people increase and become

multilingual, (Magnus, 2005) as a result of swelling regional changes, the

resulting language could undergo parallel changes either through actual

DOI:


53

contact or as a result of mutual cultural or biological conditions; an example

from Dravidian are the words ‘/vari/’ and ‘/varo/’ already mentioned. In

Proto Dravidian language the word “/var/” means written language

(Emwnwu, 1984), while in Khowar the word “/var/” means language i.e.

/Kho-var/ (the language of the “Khow ”People), it indicates that the word

“/var/” has been derived from Dravidian. A word of the Dravidian and

Khowar in the same form and meaning is “/nul/” means twist (ibid), which

is used as a sandal beneath the feet of horse, mule etc. The word

“/gonada/”(Crystal, D. 1988), in Dravidian means, “wall” while in

Khowar“/kanda/” means “wall”; only the /g/ sound has been changed into

/k/ sound. Another vocabulary in Dravidian is “/kal-an/” means threshing

ground (ibid). It is“/khol-an/” in Khowar, /k/ sound is aspirated and the

vowel sound /a/ has been changed into /o/ sound; and used as plural form

of “/khol/”. The word “/gonad/” means a piece of wood used as a hook of

something like axe etc, in Dravidian, while this word in the same meaning

Khowar in “/gondaro/”. A word “/kott-ay/” (Emwnwu, 1984), in Dravidian

means ‘fort’ whereas the word “/kotani/ or /kotanai/” means bungalow in

Khowar. “/kali/” (ibid) means in Dravidian to join or come together, “/kali/”

in Khowar has the same meaning; it is a staff to fasten the bullocks for

tilting. “/koric/” in Dravidian means to nip off the husks of grain, in Khowar

the word is pronounced “/kromic/” in the same meaning i.e., to nip off the

husks of grain (Emwnwu, 1984). “/pal/”means a kind of harrow both

Dravidian and Khowar used for tilting. “/nar/” means water in Dravidians,

while in Khowar /nar/ means the gushing point of water. The above cited

cognate words of Dravidian shows the foundation of Khowar leximes,

which are mostly related to agricultural stuffs. These also reveal that

agriculture in Chitral started from that very point of time when Dravidian

reached in Chitral. Besides, there are other words of Dravidian homophone

DOI:


54

words also exists in Khowar, a glittering example is the word “/Kotakai/”

(ibid), even now used for a room attached to a mosque. Keeping in view the

consonant clusters of the above lexeme, the following Khowar words

seemed to be derived from the Dravidian: such as, Kotakai (room attached

with Mosque), Kitori (dried mulberries), Kuto (a small and low room),

Kuthuk (stone of apricot), Kotik (castrate), Kutek (Pitcher), Kotho

(shoulder), Kano (blind) etc. The noun “/ure/” in proto Davidian means

house, while in Khowar it is pronounced by modification as “/dure/”

(Magnus, 2005), means house./paran/ (Emwnwu, 1984), means the place of

fire or the sides of fire place in proto Dravidian and the some word /paran/

is used for the same meaning in Khowar. A word /tak/ (ibid, 274), means to

sustain or to tie-up in proto Dravidian, the word /tak/ in Khowar has the

same meaning as tie-up, which is used in Khowar like this

“Istoroheratakkora” means, tie-up the horse there. The word /pot/ in proto

Dravidian means the blast of the boiling dish during boiling process; (Ibid,

77), and this word is used for the same meaning in Khowar, i.e., “shakhish-

pot doyan”. Dravidians prevailed in the country before Aryan immigrations.

(ibid, 6- 15). In this way Khowar has developed its distinct phonology, and

inflectional system in its initial stage (Faizi, 1976: 8). There exist six speech

sounds in Khowar, hence, makes it different from other languages coming

from the Indo-European or Indo-Iranian roots.

The inhabitants who learnt the language on his mother's knee could easily

distinguish these forms, whereas outsiders can never learn the phonemes,

no matter how long they stay in Chitral (Sloan, 1981). Among these, the

most interesting are the /chh/ aspirated and /ch/ non-aspirated sounds, the

word Chitral itself is the best example; never pronounced correctly by

outsiders (ibid). Among the people of these regions, Chitral is always

pronounced and written “Chitrar”: it seems to rise from an inquisitive lack

DOI:


55

of ability to make a distinction between the letter “r” and “L”, (In this way

“/Konur/” becomes “/Konul/”, the “/Lowri Pass” the “/Rowli/” Pass etc

(Biddulph, 1971). To differentiate the above-mentioned phonemes; word

like "/chuchi/" means "tomorrow morning" has two entirely different 'ch'

sounds. The former is aspirated palato-alveolar and the latter is un-aspirated

palato-alveolar. Besides, "/Chuy/" means "night" is palato-alveolar while

"/chuy/" means "hungry" is retroflex. "/char/" means "a cliff" or an oval

ground is un-aspirated palato-alveolar and "/char/" means "a dry leaf" is un-

aspirated retroflex. There are six instances of tonality in Khowar, which

may be due to the close contiguity of China (Sloan, 1981), for example,

"/mik/" (short) meaning "uncle" but "/mik/" (long) meaning urine. Consider

the following sentences i.e., "/Mikobiman/" (long) it means "I am going to

urinate," while, "/Mikobiman/" (short) it means" I am going to meet Uncle”.

These sentences show; the smallest units serve the aim of differentiating

meaning of phonemes. Phonology examine how sounds replace one another

in different forms of the same morpheme “allomorph”, syllable structure,

stress etc (Anderson, & Ewen, 1987).

The Sanskrit and Persian Layers in Khow Culture:

The geography of Chitral exposes its historical and cultural links with

Central Asia through the northern routes (Faizi, 1996). The old Silk route

that connected China with Afghanistan in the south of Pamir and in the north

of Chitral over a small corridor, which has come to be known as “Wakhan”

that is a narrow area of nomad population of Khirghiz (Israruddin, 2012).

The route passed through Chitral that once remained great center of trade.

Since the dawn of history, immigrants, traders, and invaders have been

passing through the following routes from Central Asia, (Baig, 1999),

leaving behind their linguistic influences. Broghal Pass in Yarkhun valley

connects China, Central Asia, Russia and Wakhan with Chitral, commonly

DOI:


56

referred by locals, Boroghulo Aan. In the same region two other passes i.e.,

Kan Khun Pass and Darwaza Pass, the former connects Yarkhun valley with

Kan Khun valley of Wakhan, while the later connects Baroghal directly

with Wakhan (Faizi, 1996). Shahjunali Pass connects Torikhow valley with

Wakhan (ibid). Besides, there are so many other passes, which connect

Chitral with Central Asian and Afghanistan (Faizi, 1996). It is obvious that

many people belonging to all walks of life came to Chitral through these

routes from Central Asia and left tremendous impacts on Khow culture.

Thus, the Khow culture has under gone considerable influences of Aryan

culture and Sanskrit language, which have visible in the names of various

villages in Chitral bear “graam” as suffixes i.e., Maragraam, Shagraam,

Shograam, Mizhigraam and Zondraangraa etc (Framus 1992). The word

“mair” in Sanskrit, refers to hills and mountains whereas “graam” refers

village, city etc: thus the toponym “Maragraam” may be read as “mountain

village or village at the foot of mountain.” A village in Mastuj valley is

called Graamuli, lower village (Muli means below in Khowar). Shagraam

and Shograam may be variations on the same toponym with “sha/sho” as

prefix, probably from Shiav (god) and might be read as “divine village.”

Mizhigraam is in Lot-kuh valley, which is in the north of Chitral town. The

prefix”mizh” may be read as “muzha” meaning common in Khowar.

Zondhraangraam has “zondray” in it, which is clearly an ethnotoponym

(means village of Zondhray tribe), as “Zondray” refers to a tribe in Chitral.

The suffix “dhoor” (house in Khowar) is used with many ethnonyms to

suggest the ownership of a given location in a village. Some of the examples

are Sayyedaan-dhoor (house of Sayyeds). Besides, some words still used in

Khowar language and culture, are Bat (boiled rice), Shoula (meat mixed

rice), Gabin (pregnant), Heem (snow). The word “/Kishee/” is used in

Sanskrit for a field while in Khowar it is used for ploughing.

DOI:


57

The formation of the infinitive in Khowar has a close affinity with Turkic

(ending in /k/ sound) and not any language of Aryan origin (Baig, 1999).

The verbs of Khowar usually have uniform ending sound /k/ at it ends like

Turkish (Raquette, 1913). The formation of verb in Khowar shows the

linguistic and cultural affinity with Turkish. Normally the most important

items of a language are verbs, which are inherited but not borrowed. While,

other words in a sentence characterize it as belonging to a particular

language. Though, morphologically speaking, verbs fail to identify a

particular sub-class and even in the later phase of the Indo-Aryan, the

endings are often misplaced, due to the use of double or multiple forms. In

the case of a diachronic study of a language with corresponding languages,

a morphological approach would help to classify the general structure of the

language family. On the other hand, phonological studies may prove

valuable in order to identify the chronological or stage wise changes in a

language. Phonological change determines a matching morphological

change through absorption of conjuncts, endings and extensions etc.

However in the state, where a dialect seems to have grown into a full fledged

language mainly due to stimulating interaction with many languages. In the

present case this evidence is meager and hence for the purposes of our study

that how much Turkish has influenced verbs of Khowar. Like Turkish the

verbs of Khowar usually have uniform ending sound. Consider the

following example the common words having same meaning in both of the

languages and cultures, Akhlik (to comb), Brik (to die), Blacheik (to

collect), Alik (to marry), Anjik ( to wear), Anjik ( to wear), Boik (to plant)

and Chomik (to pain), etc. In addition, Uighur is known to the oldest form

of the Turkish language and adopt uniform writing. Many rulers of the area

including the Mongols adopted it as a state language (Nazir 1990). It is very

likely that some common words in Khowar might have come directly from

DOI:


58

the Uighur e.g. “Ghori”(big plate), Chapoti” (bread), “Tumar” (iron) in

Khowar it is “chumar”, “Dukkan” (shop) (Mardin,1976), the word “chi” is

suffixed in Uighur to form a noun, for example “khazana” (khazanchi),

“deg” (degchi), “dol” (dolchi) all these are the typical influence of the

Turkic traditions (Nazeer, 1990).

It seems to be certain that Dravidian had long been in the regions at that

time of the earliest Aryan immigrations (Grison, 1977). Some of those

Persian Aryan invaders from the north influenced, no doubt, by the non-

Aryan language of the earlier residents, developed its own lines, which is

neither Iranian nor Indian but something in between both. Later on, Iranian

speakers followed them to the Pamir and settled there, becoming the

ancestors of the speakers of the Ghalchah languages and cultures (proto

Iranian languages of Pamir). Thus, at present the Hindu Kush spreading to

not distantly related languages and observed different cultures, on the north

of Pamir, the Ghalchah languages and on the south the semi- Iranian Dardic

languages and cultures. There were successive Ghualchah invasions, for the

Khowar Language of Chitral valley into the accessible regions from Pamir;

that is why Khowar has close association with the Ghalchach languages and

cultures rather than the other Dardic cultures and languages spoken in the

more inaccessible regions of Gilgit and Kafiristan (ibid). Wakhi is one of

the Pamir languages; it is kept in the group, called Ghalchah, in 1876 by

Grieson. He further elaborated that Khowar seemed to be the language of

the Ghalchah invaders. In 1938, Morgenstierne observes the words and

vocabularies shared by Khowar and Wakhi and their fascinating nature and

the both observed the Islamic culture mostly introduced by Pir Shah Nasir.

They recite the Quranic verses as well as the Persian devotional poetry of

Shah Nasir and Jalal uddin Romi in their religious ceremonies. Besides, the

Sunni Muslim in the area also recite their prologue of prays in Persian. The

DOI:


59

connection of these norms and linguistics sentences or words may provide

proof that there was once a very close contact of the Khow culture with the

Persian and Wkhi speaking populations. Morgenstierne proposes that such

relationship might be due to the Broghal Pass, while Professor Israruddin

suggests that in the near past there were various passes in Tourkhow and

Molkhow valleys, which connect Chitral with Wakahan, other parts of

Afghanistan and Central Asia, later on due to the frequent intervention of

Bolsheviks into these valleys the passes were artificially turned into

Glaciers. Till now some of the Wakhi, and Persian speaking Muslims

Wakhis from Wakhan corridor and from Gorno-Badakshan of Tajikistan are

visiting Chitral subdivision Mastuj Booni (Magnus, 2005). The Wakhiks

are employed, to harvest and thresh wheat crop with low wages, by many

people of Chitral especially Booni and Matuj (ibid). The Wakhi speakers,

who have come to Chitral from Gorno-Badakshan of Tajikistan, have a

complex linguistic and cultural impact on the lives of the Muslims of

subdivision Chitral. They are teaching Russian phrases to some of the

people in the area (ibid). Besides this printed pictures of Russian models in

various hotels and houses are seen. These pictures depict the life of Tajik

Muslim, Moscow and other important cities of the Russian Muslims. These

serve as the source of discussion to the locals (ibid). Those who knew some

cultural traits of Persian or Wakhi would exaggerate and always try to

incorporate them into Khow culture. It indicates that Islamic culture came

to Chitral form Central Asia from the north and northwest.

Conclusion:

The finding of the paper showed that the Prototype Khow culture came to

exist in Chitral from the interaction of Dravidians with the indigenous

people called “Pisacha” now called (Kalash) of Chitral. They were known

as “Pisacha” and spoke “Pisacha” language and observed Pisacha or Klash

DOI:


60

culture. The Khowar language developed in its initial stage the six speech

sounds different from the languages coming from the Indo-Iranian roots. On

the other hand the cited words (nouns) mostly concerned with agricultural

stuff have been still in us in Khowar language and culture indicated that

agriculture started in Chitral from that point of time, when Dravidians

accessed in to the southern regions of Chitral. Later on the Aryans came to

these regions from the north as invaders, so, Sanskrit language and culture

influenced on Khow culture in its developmental stage, which played very

important role in the development of the Khow culture. Hence, Khowar has

borrowed so many names of the villages and mountains from Sanskrit.

Besides, the Turkic and the Ghalchach languages i.e., Persian and Wakhi

have very considerable share in the development of Khowar language and

its culture, because of its geographical contiguity with Eastern Turkistan

(Xinjing) and Wakhiks of Gorno-Badakhshan and Wakhan corridor of

Afghanistan. In near past the people of those areas were passing through

Chitral in the form of preachers of Islam and pilgrims to Macka by leaving

behind their cultural influences Khow culture. Thus the Islamic culture was

introduced in Chitral during eleventh century, and later on this culture

developed and penetrated the whole area of Chitral except the three valleys

Bmburant, Rumber and Berer. The inhabitants of these three valleys still

observe the Kalash or semi Kalash culture.

References:

Kish, Stephen J., Kathleen Shannak, Ali Rajput, John HN Deck, and Oleh

Hornykiewicz. "Aging produces a specific pattern of striatal dopamine loss:

implications for the etiology of idiopathic Parkinson's disease." Journal of

neurochemistry 58, no. 2 (1992): 642-648.

DOI:


61

Biddulph, J. "Standardized management of diarrhoea in young

children." Paediatrica Indonesiana 11, no. 5 (1971): 37-46.

Biddulph, Mike. "The problem with thinking about or for urban

design." Journal of Urban Design 17, no. 1 (2012): 1-20.

Faizi, Inayatullah. Wakhan: A window into Central Asia. al-Qalam, 1996.

Shah, Nasreen Aslam. "AGEING HOME-BASED WOMEN-WORKERS

IN KARACHI: SELECTIVE FINDINGS." Pakistan Journal of Women's

Studies= Alam-e-Niswan= Alam-i Nisvan 23, no. 1 (2016): 11.

Burguière, André, and Raymond Grew, eds. The construction of minorities:

Cases for comparison across time and around the world. University of

Michigan Press, 2001.

Israr, Ali, Seung-Chan Kim, Jan Stec, and Ivan Poupyrev. "Surround

haptics: Tactile feedback for immersive gaming experiences." In CHI'12

Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1087-

1090. 2012.

Warburton, Darren ER, Peter T. Katzmarzyk, Ryan E. Rhodes, and Roy J.

Shephard. "Evidence-informed physical activity guidelines for Canadian

adults." Applied physiology, nutrition, and metabolism 32, no. S2E (2007):

S16-S68.

Maclnnis, E., and M. Baig. "A modified submental approach for oral

endotracheal intubation." International journal of oral and maxillofacial

surgery 28, no. 5 (1999): 344-346.

Waser, Nickolas M., and Mary V. Price. "A comparison of pollen and

fluorescent dye carry‐over by natural pollinators of Ipomopsis aggregata

(Polemoniaceae)." Ecology 63, no. 4 (1982): 1168-1172.

Alim, A. R. L. I. "Türkiye'de Sosyolojinin Eleştirel Kapasitesi: Şerif Mardin

Üzerine." Türkiye Araştırmaları Literatür Dergisi 11 (2008): 633-652.

DOI:


62

Cauchi, Abigail, Andy Gimblett, Harold Thimbleby, Paul Curzon, and

Paolo Masci. "Safer “5–key” number entry user interfaces using

Differential Formal Analysis." In The 26th BCS Conference on Human

Computer Interaction 26, pp. 29-38. 2012.

Jaziri, Nesrine, Ayda Boughamoura, Jens Müller, Brahim Mezghani, Fares

Tounsi, and Mohammed Ismail. "A comprehensive review of

Thermoelectric Generators: Technologies and common

applications." Energy Reports (2019).

Eidiani, Mostafa. An overview of energy strategies in the diagnosis of

transient stability by the example of the closest unstable equilibrium point-

persian. Technical Report· December 2015, DOI: 10.13140/RG. 2.1, 1928.

Evans-Cross, Messrs, MS Ramaswami Aiyer, E. S. M. Perowne, Miss A.

Getty, Captain TA Shurlock, Messrs Roy Brewer, M. L. Sherman et al.

"ANNIVERSARY GENERAL MEETING 15th May, 1947." (1947).

Rahman, Aminur. "Micro-credit initiatives for equitable and sustainable

development: who pays?." World development 27, no. 1 (1999): 67-82.

Biddulph, R. H. "Boronizing for erosion resistance." Thin Solid Films 45,

no. 2 (1977): 341-347.

Harsono, Ariyanto, and Muhammad Faizi. "Anaphylactic Shock Associated

with Scratch Testing." Paediatrica Indonesiana 36, no. 11-12 (1996): 258-

64.

Abbas, Najam. "Parameters promoting or prohibiting participation: a case

study of youth in northern Pakistan." Revista UNISCI 29 (2012): 113-131.

Baig, Taimur, and Ilan Goldfajn. "Financial market contagion in the Asian

crisis." IMF staff papers 46, no. 2 (1999): 167-195.

Raquette, Gustav. "Eastern Turki Grammar." Practical and Theoretical

with Vocabulary 3 (1913).

DOI:


63

Abadir, Karim M., and Jan R. Magnus. Matrix algebra. Vol. 1. Cambridge

University Press, 2005.

@ 2017 by the author, Licensee University of Chitral, Journal of Religious Studies. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

46 DOI: The Development of Khow Culture and the Arrival of ...

Documents

Transcript of 46 DOI: The Development of Khow Culture and the Arrival of ...