AHC: Iranic speaking Pakistan/Hindus valley

The territories compromising modern Pakistan host today various Iranian speeches(20% today are speakers of Iranian languages) and were ruled frequently by Iranian states, but ultimately the majority languages of Punjab, Kashmir and Sindh remained Indo-Aryan speeches.
The challenge is to have those regions be majority Iranian speaking at any point in time in history with any POD after 0 CE.
 
Most Iranic speakers of modern Pakistan do not live in the Idus valley, but in the mountains and their outskirts. That is to say, territories we wouldn't consider as part of India if the British hadn't created that weird colonial border.

I would argue that the substantial majority of Iranic that do live in the valley are not necessarily recent pashto migrants from the medieval-to-modern period of domination of Iranian or Iranized dynasties, but rather the compound result of centuries of slow migration dating back to the Achemenids, with the Pashtunization efforts of the Durrani causing most of them to be linguistically assimilated (if they hadn't been already by previous migration facilitated by the Mughals).

The only way I see this as being remotely possible, is if an Iranian nation with a substantial powerbase outside of the Indus conquers it and holds it during the high to late middle ages, and makes it so that the prestige of Persian causes it to start displacing some of the local languages, which come to be seen as "uncultured". Later on, in the modern age, some form of public education is established, priorizing Persian over other languages, and discouraging their use.

And it would still achieve only partial success.
 
I would argue that the substantial majority of Iranic that do live in the valley are not necessarily recent pashto migrants from the medieval-to-modern period of domination of Iranian or Iranized dynasties, but rather the compound result of centuries of slow migration dating back to the Achemenids, with the Pashtunization efforts of the Durrani causing most of them to be linguistically assimilated (if they hadn't been already by previous migration facilitated by the Mughals).

The only way I see this as being remotely possible, is if an Iranian nation with a substantial powerbase outside of the Indus conquers it and holds it during the high to late middle ages, and makes it so that the prestige of Persian causes it to start displacing some of the local languages, which come to be seen as "uncultured". Later on, in the modern age, some form of public education is established, priorizing Persian over other languages, and discouraging their use.

And it would still achieve only partial success.
Is there a reason why the linguistic border seem to be so stable? I mean if it was really something caused by a 2500 year process I would have imagined it to go further than the left bank of the Indus river, especially with all the various groups that moved in(Achaemenids, Greeks, Kushans, Schytians, Hunas, Arabs, Afghans, Mughals)

But there were many Iranic nations that brought prestige languages from Persia or Central Asia to the region.

I mean I would call IOTL a partial success already in the sense that Punjabi and Sindhi has been influenced a lot by Iranic languages, but I really don't get why having any type of complete linguistic switch would be so hard in this specific region, especially considering
 

Albert.Nik

Banned
0 CE opens up immense possibilities.
A strong Scythian Empire
A strong Sogdian Empire
A strong Kushan Empire might have been ethnically and linguistically Tocharian(centum language) but Iranian(western and eastern) settlers might have been brought in as well.
Even Indo-Greek empire might be ethnically and linguistically Greek but Iranian groups might also come in.
Parthian or Sassanid conquest,settlement and consolidation of the Indian territories.
 
Top