What's new

Khalj Sultans of Delhi were not Afghans

Status
Not open for further replies.
So do you agree?

100% disagree. But it is good to know the unvarnished view that you have. It is honest. I will be equally honest in saying that I am diametrically of the opposite view. :D

Khaljis did not conquer Afghanistan and did not have kingdoms and armies. They were simply settlers and had same life style as Afghans (sheep herders, nomads, etc). According to historians of Mahmud Ghaznavi times (Utbi and Gardezi), Khaljis were largely infidels before Sebuktagin.

Khaljis looked different from other Turks (who were Mongoloid) because they were White Huns ;

Mohammad Khwarazmi in Mafatih-ul-Alam (975 AD) says, "The Hayatila are a tribe of men who had enjoyed grandeur and possessed the country of Tukharistan ; the Turks called Khalukh , or Khalaj, are their descendants." (Hayatila is the Arabic and Persian name for the Hepthalites).

Tukharistan (ancient Bactria) was in present-day Northern Afghanistan between Hindu Kush mountain range and Amu Darya. In mid-fifth century AD, Tokharistan became the stronghold of Hephthalites. Byzantine historian of the 6th century , Prokopios, wrote about Hepthalites ; ," The Ephthalites are of the stock of the Huns in fact as well as in name; however they do not mingle with any of the Huns known to us......They are the only Huns who are white-skinned and their faces are not ugly" ......"their territory lies immediately lie immediately to the north of Persia , and their city, called Gorgo, is located near the Persian frontier"......"

Really appreciated this post, and the references. Of course I know about the mysterious Hephthalites or Epthalites; they were a force in their days, and were the last to fall to the resurgent kingdoms of the plains. But I hadn't connected them to the Khalji.
 
.
Khiljis are a nomadic tribe. They were a big backbone of the army of Ghazni and strong allies of Mahmud Ghaznawi. The most popular claim about them is that they are of Turkic background, mixed with Pashtun nomads and adapted Pashtun way of life. But the tribe originates from current day Afghanistan; most likely from the far Southern Afghanistan.

However if you guys are talking about the kings of India then they were X generation Turks/Pashtuns who lived in India long enough to be considered natives. But as expected, they're known as the barbaric Muslim foreigners who apparently didn't even know how to chew on a meat. Typically as it is.
 
.
Kashmir is part of India. And will remain forever. Kasmiri Muslims are free to go to their beloved Pakistan.
Lols

Kashmir belongs to Kashmiris and they will get independence at any cost.
 
. .
Kashmir is ours kashmiries can go to hell
Isn't that where you lot go after you die eg burn yourself into hell? Or do you believe in being reincarnated in this same world so you could worship the other 999 gods you couldn't in this life?
 
. . .
Isn't that where you lot go after you die eg burn yourself into hell? Or do you believe in being reincarnated in this same world so you could worship the other 999 gods you couldn't in this life?
Why are you bringing religion here?
 
. . . .
Most Central Asia was once homeland to native Iranic populations, Turkic/Mongoloid conquests and settlements changed the demographics of this region, so its not surprising when you see some Turkic people who look more Iranian but think they are related to Genghis Khan. :lol:
 
.
Ghilji (plural of Ghiljaey) is dialectal modification of Ghilzi or Ghalzai (غلزی) which in turn is derived from Ghal-zoey (غل زوی) according to Pashtun tradition. One of the five men sent o Afghanistan by compiler of Makhzan-i-Afghani (to investigate genealogies of Pashtuns), was a Ghilzai by name of Hamza Khan Tokhi. So in early 17th century Ghilzais were not claiming any connection with Khalj Turks. Its after Abdul Hai Habibi's work that Ghilzais of Afghanistan (the educated ones) have started connecting themselves with Khaljs of the past.

Also Ghilji is plural of Ghiljaey......while Khilji (which is actually mispronunciation of Khalji) is singular. The plural of Khalj or Khalji is Akhlaj or Khalaj. Khalj was also the name of place adjacent to Seistan on banks of river helmand, so Khalji ,meaning inhabitant of Khalj, (like Ghori is inhabitant of Ghor) was also used but the proper name of the tribe was Khalj. Its a coincidence that Ghilji (plural) sound very similar to Khalji (singular).
 
.
However if you guys are talking about the kings of India then they were X generation Turks/Pashtuns who lived in India long enough to be considered natives. But as expected, they're known as the barbaric Muslim foreigners who apparently didn't even know how to chew on a meat. Typically as it is.

Asalamu Alaikum

I don't understand these guys, they don't consider any Muslim ruler indigenous even if he was born and spent all his life in the sub-continent. It's bloody ridiculous. A lot of them don't even consider the Mughals local, which just makes me give up.
 
.
Asalamu Alaikum

I don't understand these guys, they don't consider any Muslim ruler indigenous even if he was born and spent all his life in the sub-continent. It's bloody ridiculous. A lot of them don't even consider the Mughals local, which just makes me give up.

true but if you ask a british indian or american indian if he is a british or american then their reply is yesss we were born and raised here soo we belong to that country whereas those who ruled a country didnt considered according to then international law as the citizens of the country woww...
 
.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom