Quote:
Originally Posted by WaltzingMatilda
The information revolution--"Taliban style"--makes for very effective grass-roots organization...but what does Shabnamah tell us about the insurgency?
|
An excellent read!
It is a very good development over other scholarly papers that the author took some time to research Afghan - AND what became "Afghan" from 11th to 18th Century - history. As one somewhat acquainted with the region, it was a pleasant surprise to read an in-depth Western scholarly paper that dealt with Afghan history as more than "Alexander's Invasion + British Invasion + Soviet Invasion. Period." The author is definitely on the right track by identifying some of the key personalities in Afghan and Pre-Afghan historic narratives (almost none of whom had anything to do with the periods the stereotypical papers make much of). More insight into two other crucial periods of what becomes "Afghan" history may be useful:
(a) The period directly before the conversion of Afghans to Islam under Turkic invders (like Gazhnawis).
(b) The period of Pathan hegemony in various North-West Indian states in 14th Century.
As they may come in useful in building a counter-narrative that doesn't ceed the story entirely to mad mullahs and perpetually rebellious savages.
<nitpick>
1. namah: Translates more accurately to "edicts" or "diary" than simple "letters".
2. The "liberation of Kandahar" by Ghilzais in 1709 is a tenouous claim; Kandahar passed hands between the Mughals and the Persians 22 times - the Afghans didn't count for much until 1730s.
3. Ghuri and the Ghorids (his clan) are ethnic Afghans. All other ethnic identifications are remarkably correct.
</nitpick>