What is ‘Kohistani’?

The term ‘Kohistani’ literally means ‘of the mountains’ or ‘mountainous’ – referring to the people who inhabit mountainous regions and their way of life.

It does not denote a specific language, community, cultural identity or ethnic group. Rather, it is a broad geographical descriptor applied to individuals residing in mountainous terrains, whether they belong to the Khel Daas Kohistani of the Thar Desert’s hilly areas or the Indus Kohistanis, such as Afzal Kohistani.

There is no linguistic, cultural, or ethnic similarity between Khel Das Kohistani and Afzal Kohistani; their commonality lies only in the fact that outsiders perceive them as belonging to mountainous regions.

The term ‘Kohistani’ has Persian origins and was historically used by educated elites and invaders, particularly during the Mughal era, to describe those dwelling in the mountains as the official and literary language then was Persian.

Before this, in northern Pakistan, indigenous communities were referred to as Kafir (non-believers) by outsiders and invaders even though none of these communities were used to it. This term was also used to legitimise the conversion of these people.

Following the 16th century and subsequent Pashtun invasions, these indigenous inhabitants – many of whom followed their ancestral pastoral animistic religions, akin to the present-day Kalash tribe – were labelled as Kohistani after their conversion to Islam. This classification was used to distinguish these indigenous groups from others after their conversion to Islam. This similar phenomenon occurred in eastern Afghanistan and southern parts of Northern Pakistan.

As the history, culture, and identity of these indigenous people were erased, subsequent generations lost their ancestral languages and traditions, adopting the colonial labels imposed upon them. This phenomenon was particularly more rampant in the mountainous regions of northern Pakistan, where the absence of organised state structures made it easier for Pashtun settlers to assert dominance over the native populations. However, regions such as Gilgit, Hunza and Chitral remained largely unaffected due to the presence of established states, the challenging topography and the strategic importance of these areas in the longstanding geopolitical rivalry between Britain and Russia called the Great Game.

Consequently, British intervention prevented Pashtun expansion into these territories. As a result, despite being more mountainous with lofty mountains, these regions – Gilgit and Chitral – were never labelled Kohistan or Kohistani. In contrast, the southern regions, such as present-day Hazara Kohistan, Upper Swat and upper reaches of Upper Dir, were designated as Kohistan, and their people and languages were referred to as Kohistani.

Over time, successive generations of these indigenous communities adopted the term ‘Kohistani’ as their own. Many even began to take pride in the label.Due to the absence of rigorous academic research by locals and systematic governmental efforts to document the region’s linguistic and cultural diversity, the term ‘Kohistani’ has continued to be misapplied.

In 2011, when the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa government introduced a curriculum bill recognising five languages – Pashto, Hindko, Saraiki and Khowar – it also included Kohistani as a fifth language. However, this decision led to a dispute in Hazara Kohistan/Indus Kohistan (comprising Lower Kohistan, Upper Kohistan, and Kolai-Palas Kohistan districts), where two distinct languages – Shina and Maiyo which is also known as Indus Kohistani – are spoken on either side of the Indus River. Speakers of both languages insisted on calling their respective languages Kohistani, creating a deadlock that ultimately stalled efforts to incorporate Kohistani into the curriculum of public education in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa as a subject.

A similar ambiguity emerged in Pakistan’s 2023 Digital Census, where Kohistani was listed among 14 mother tongues. As a result, over 900,000 individuals were recorded as native Kohistani speakers, further obscuring the linguistic landscape. It remains unclear whether these figures refer to Shina Kohistani (spoken by over 450,000 people) or Indus Kohistani (spoken by approximately 300,000 people). Despite their linguistic differences, many speakers of these languages insist on calling themselves Kohistani.

Likewise, many Gawri speakers from Kumrat Valley in upper Dir also identify themselves and their language as Kohistani. Similarly, some Torwali and Gawri speakers in Upper Swat refer to themselves and their language as Kohistani – although the 2023 Census data shows that only about 30,000 people in the entire Bahrain Tehsil in Swat identified their language as Kohistani, while more than 141,000 individuals classified their language under the Other category in this tehsil.

These figures include speakers of Torwali, Gawri, and Gujari. The actual Torwali-speaking population in this region exceeds 100,000, while the Gawri-speaking population is over 60,000, and the Gujari-speaking population is around 40,000. Many of the Torwali, Gawri and Gujari speakers were categorised as Pashto speakers in the tehsil Bahrain in Swat because the Pashto-speaking population in this area was about 60,000 in the 2017 census but in the 2023 census their number was estimated as more than 96,000.

Unfortunately, the 2023 Census did not include separate categories for Torwali, Gawri and Gujari, nor did it account for Gawar Bati, Khowar and Palula speakers in Chitral. Consequently, census officials in urban areas – where many migrants from these regions have settled – mistakenly recorded these speakers as Kohistani.

In global linguistic databases, such as Ethnologue, Glottolog, and Unesco, these so-called Kohistani languages are referred to by their different linguistic names: Shina Kohistani and Indus Kohistani. Ethnologue currently recognises 7,164 languages worldwide, Glottolog lists 8,605, and Unesco identifies 8,324 languages the world over.

The term Kohistani is not indigenous and creates confusion regarding the linguistic and cultural identity along with the indigeneity of the communities it labels. Instead, academically recognised names for these languages and people are more precise and reflective of their indigenous heritage.

One could argue that these languages historically lacked formal names, as their speakers likely referred to them simply as ‘our language’. However, the names given by these linguistic communities to one another hold greater legitimacy and historical continuity than colonial labels.

These names are deeply rooted in indigenous identity, as they were developed through inter-community interactions rather than imposed by external invaders. Historical continuity is a key factor in assessing indigeneity, which is intrinsically linked to distinct cultural traditions, social customs, linguistic uniqueness and a deeply embedded sense of temporality and spatiality.

The writer heads an independent organisation dealing with education and development in Swat. He can be reached at: ztorwali@gmail.com