What's new

Mongol conquest of Europe;A short glimpse

However none of these were as organized as the mongols .Huns were before the time of 'rus'.And these same fuedal confederations had beaten back the pechenegs and cumans.But with the mongols it was different.
We see same pattern in china,beating back nomadic steppe tribes like huns,etc but they too fell to the mongols.And china was possibly the most richest/advanced/powerful nation on earth at that time.
Our ancestors lived near the steppe for thousands years. Maybe they were not called Russ, and Slavs - all the same. We called steppe Wild Field, because of endless waves of nomads invaders.
In any case, if Russia were united when the Mongols came - they would not have won.
 
The Famous Malik Kafur , the head general in army of Alauddin Khilji was a ethnic Indian . In 1305 Kafur defeated the Mongols at the Battle of Amroha . Malik was a great military genius. He accomplished what no Muslim before him had been able to do. He also was the person who paved the way for the further permanent conquest of the Deccan by the Muslims.

Also Zafar Khan was the Muslim Indian general of Alauddin Khilji . Zafar Khan holds the honour of being one of the few undefeated military commanders in history.Zafar Khan defeated an invading Mongol army near Jalandhar in 1297 which secured Alauddin Khilji's throne.In 1299, a horde of 200,000 Mongols entered India with the intention of conquest. Though vastly outnumbered, Zafar Khan showed desperate valor in battle. The Mongols were defeated, but Khan did not survive.




There may have been a few hindus in his army as well . Alauddin`s army was well documented , with `huliya` of every soldier also recorded along with other details . `Diwan e Arz` kept record of all of them . Not sure if it has been preserved




The Hazara People of Afghanistan are a mixed group . Most probably of Kushan descent who later mixed with mongols

Malik kafur was orginally a hindu from gujarat.Captured ,converted during alauddin's early wars and also 'u know what'[begins with c].Does gujarat sound like pakistan as u claimed in earlier posts?
I have no sources that says zafar khan was non-turk.If u have plz tell.As far as i know all 4 of alauddin's 'khans' ,khizir khan,zafar khan,ulugh khan and nusrat khan were all turkish origin with whom he planned to conquer the world and set up a new religion before mongol invasions brought him back to reality.He even declared himslef sikander i sani[second alexander].
As for hazara people why don't u go ask themselves.They proudly declare themselves descendants of genghis khan.And DNa evidence proves mongolian heritage.If mongols were defeated where did these people come from?
 
Malik kafur was orginally a hindu from gujarat.Captured ,converted during alauddin's early wars and also 'u know what'[begins with c].Does gujarat sound like pakistan as u claimed in earlier posts?
I have no sources that says zafar khan was non-turk.If u have plz tell.As far as i know all 4 of alauddin's 'khans' ,khizir khan,zafar khan,ulugh khan and nusrat khan were all turkish origin with whom he planned to conquer the world and set up a new religion before mongol invasions brought him back to reality.He even declared himslef sikander i sani[second alexander].
As for hazara people why don't u go ask themselves.They proudly declare themselves descendants of genghis khan.And DNa evidence proves mongolian heritage.If mongols were defeated where did these people come from?

Malik Kafur was a Hindu who converted to Islam , But it was not about his "earlier religion" , it was about his ethnicity , He was a ethnic Indian and the head general of army of Alauddin like many other local officers . And going by your logic , Jinnah was born to "former parsi" gujarati parents so Pakistanis cant claim him ???
That is not how it is my friend .. Kafur was a North Indian Muslim and he did a great service to the Muslims of Sub continent , that makes him a hero for Muslims and may be a villain for Hindus............... And Yes , most of the army men and officers of Alauddin were from North West India !!

The allegation about plans of setting up a new religion is really absurd , he liked himself to be called the right hand of Abassid Caliph and he was a practicing Muslim , He banned alcohol etc. in Delhi . His title of "Alexander the second" has to do more with "stopping the un stoppable Mongols" . Hindu elite of India had reasons for hating him as he was the first one in the history to confiscate the land/awards that the govt. gave to Hindu Feudal elite , in favour of common Hindus , But this is a very lengthy topic and we may discuss it some time in a separate thread dedicated to the achievements of Alauddin Khilji the great and his Indian Army ....


Even Tamerlane declared himself the descendant of Genghis Khan , which he was not . The Saffavids of Persia claimed "Sayyad" descent , which was surely wrong . The present day Saudi regime declares a false descent like wise .... It is not about "What one claims" , its about "what he really is" ... DNA evidence partially proves "Mongol" descent of Hazaras . Means Hazara is a mixed group , most probably of Kushan origin which later mixed with mongols , and that is what I said ...
 
Last edited:
Hopefully we will raise the Turco Mongol banner one day again

Our ancestors lived near the steppe for thousands years. Maybe they were not called Russ, and Slavs - all the same. We called steppe Wild Field, because of endless waves of nomads invaders.
In any case, if Russia were united when the Mongols came - they would not have won.
Actually Tatars under Golden Horde steamrolled the Rus. Slavic people had to pay tribute and bow down when they saw Tatars. You became vessel state.
 
Hopefully we will raise the Turco Mongol banner one day again


Actually Tatars under Golden Horde steamrolled the Rus. Slavic people had to pay tribute and bow down when they saw Tatars. You became vessel state.
And how it all ended for the Tatars?
Mongol yoke was actually a boon for Russia. Our people went east to conquer all the Mongol and Tatar khanates. And stopped only in America.
 
And how it all ended for the Tatars?
And how did it end for the Russians? Your empire crumbled equally and most of Turkics got independence. Also Russian women are corrupted by communism or maybe it is their Slavic blood but they seem to sleep with everybody other than Russian men. Maybe you should not drink that much. But to come back. Every empire has its rise and fall.
 
And how did it end for the Russians? Your empire crumbled equally and most of Turkics got independence. Also Russian women are corrupted by communism or maybe it is their Slavic blood but they seem to sleep with everybody other than Russian men. Maybe you should not drink that much. But to come back. Every empire has its rise and fall.
Russian Empire reborn in the form of the Customs Union and the Eurasian Union.
Can you say something of this kind about the Ottoman Empire?
Just do not touch our women. They are beautiful and smart. And yours selling as if it is a phone or a car.
 
Russian Empire reborn in the form of the Customs Union and the Eurasian Union.
Can you say something of this kind about the Ottoman Empire?
Haha, you can say bye bye to that fantasy. Even Putin is not that delusional to think he can rebuild the Russian empire. Most of ex communist countries absolute hate the idea. Hell even your Slavic neighbors hate your guts. I don't see it happening. There are so,e countries like Kazakhstan but that is for mutual benefit. Nothing to do with empire. Turkey has oil and gas pupline plans with all Turkic states. The Goldenhorde is regrouping again. Building up their ranks. Making their sword sharp and stretching their bows. With the permission of Tengri, lord of the blue sky and protector of the Turkic people. A new dawn will reemerge,
 
Haha, you can say bye bye to that fantasy. Even Putin is not that delusional to think he can rebuild the Russian empire. Most of ex communist countries absolute hate the idea. Hell even your Slavic neighbors hate your guts. I don't see it happening. There are so,e countries like Kazakhstan but that is for mutual benefit. Nothing to do with empire. Turkey has oil and gas pupline plans with all Turkic states. The Goldenhorde is regrouping again. Building up their ranks. Making their sword sharp and stretching their bows. With the permission of Tengri, lord of the blue sky and protector of the Turkic people. A new dawn will reemerge,

Tengriiiii :lol:
 
Our ancestors lived near the steppe for thousands years. Maybe they were not called Russ, and Slavs - all the same. We called steppe Wild Field, because of endless waves of nomads invaders.
In any case, if Russia were united when the Mongols came - they would not have won.

Russia
Malik Kafur was a Hindu who converted to Islam , But it was not about his "earlier religion" , it was about his ethnicity , He was a ethnic Indian and the head general of army of Alauddin like many other local officers . And going by your logic , Jinnah was born to "former parsi" gujarati parents so Pakistanis cant claim him ???
That is not how it is my friend .. Kafur was a North Indian Muslim and he did a great service to the Muslims of Sub continent , that makes him a hero for Muslims and may be a villain for Hindus............... And Yes , most of the army men and officers of Alauddin were from North West India !!

The allegation about plans of setting up a new religion is really absurd , he liked himself to be called the right hand of Abassid Caliph and he was a practicing Muslim , He banned alcohol etc. in Delhi . His title of "Alexander the second" has to do more with "stopping the un stoppable Mongols" . Hindu elite of India had reasons for hating him as he was the first one in the history to confiscate the land/awards that the govt. gave to Hindu Feudal elite , in favour of common Hindus , But this is a very lengthy topic and we may discuss it some time in a separate thread dedicated to the achievements of Alauddin Khilji the great and his Indian Army ....


Even Tamerlane declared himself the descendant of Genghis Khan , which he was not . The Saffavids of Persia claimed "Sayyad" descent , which was surely wrong . The present day Saudi regime declares a false descent like wise .... It is not about "What one claims" , its about "what he really is" ... DNA evidence partially proves "Mongol" descent of Hazaras . Means Hazara is a mixed group , most probably of Kushan origin which later mixed with mongols , and that is what I said ...

Malik kafur was captured at a young age and castrated .Thats how he was converted,that he was a capable general is his merit.And my answer was in contention with someone's reply that muslims from modern day pakistan were responsible for saving subcontinent.Well gujarat is not in modern day pakistan.And obviously much of alauddin's army would be from N-W india as that was the central power base of the sultanate.But officers were almost exclusively turkish.And the troops that really did the hard hitting - The horse archers and ghulam malied lancers were also turkish.This was how it was during the sultanate period.
Turks appointed turks and when later lodis came they appointed afghans only.Diversity came with mughals who themselves were a mixed bunch.
As for right hand man of the caliph that title was traditionally taken by all sultans.Others sent a asked for a firman,alauddin never bothered to .Anyways it was lame because by this time hulagu's hordes had already ended both caliph and baghdad.
If u think of absurd,just read the books.Man was a autocrat and suppressed ulema and nobility under his bootheel.Not just hindu elite.Everyone.And yes he was brilliant.The market control policy and army organization were among the finest in indian middle ages.But that doesn't mean he wasn't occasionally delusional.His own words -
'With my four khans,like the companions of the prophet i could conquer the earth and set up a new creed'-not exact words but along this line.This is from chronicles of islamic historians.It was only seriousness of mongol invasions that brought him back to reality.
What nonsense kushan origin.Kushans had been out of the picture for more than thousand years.Why is it biting you to accept hazaras as mongol descendants.Its widely accepted and proudly professed by the community themselves.Is it because it would undermine your 'theory'?
 
As for right hand man of the caliph that title was traditionally taken by all sultans.Others sent a asked for a firman,alauddin never bothered to .Anyways it was lame because by this time hulagu's hordes had already ended both caliph and baghdad.

In 1261, following the devastation of Baghdad at the hands of the Mongols, the Mamluk rulers of Egypt re-established the Abbasid caliphate in Cairo. The first Abbasid caliph of Cairo was Al-Mustansir. The Abbasid caliphs in Egypt continued to maintain the presence of authority, but it was confined to religious matters. The Abbasid caliphate of Cairo lasted until the time of Al-Mutawakkil III, who was taken away as a prisoner by Selim I to Constantinople where he had a ceremonial role. He died in 1543, following his return to Cairo.



If u think of absurd,just read the books.Man was a autocrat and suppressed ulema and nobility under his bootheel.Not just hindu elite.Everyone.And yes he was brilliant.The market control policy and army organization were among the finest in indian middle ages.But that doesn't mean he wasn't occasionally delusional.His own words -
'With my four khans,like the companions of the prophet i could conquer the earth and set up a new creed'-not exact words but along this line.This is from chronicles of islamic historians.It was only seriousness of mongol invasions that brought him back to reality.

Well if you are referring to History of Ziauddin Barani , then you should know that his "Tarikh-i-Firuz Shahi" was written by him during his exile to please the new angry sultan (Feroz Shah Tughlaq) , unfortunately for him , he was not rewarded for his works and died poor in 1357. He does not consult contemporary writings , and his uncle , Qazi Ala-ul-Mulk , the Kotewal of Delhi during reign of Alauddin Khilji is the alleged hero of this particular episode . So this claim of Barani becomes highly suspicious ...



What nonsense kushan origin.Kushans had been out of the picture for more than thousand years.Why is it biting you to accept hazaras as mongol descendants.Its widely accepted and proudly professed by the community themselves.Is it because it would undermine your 'theory'?

Well you can call it nonsense , but this is infact the most popular theory on origin of Hazara people . In history , there are theories , not verdicts

Another popular theory proposes that Hazara are descendants of the Kushans, the ancient dwellers of Afghanistan who are believed to have built the Buddhas of Bamiyan. Its proponents find the location of the Hazara homeland, and the similarity in facial features of Hazara with those on frescoes and Buddha's statues in Bamiyan, suggestive. However, this belief is contrary not only to the fact that the Kushans were Tocharians, but also to historical records which mention that in a particularly bloody battle around Bamiyan, Genghis Khan's grandson, Mutugen, was killed, and he allegedly ordered Bamiyan to be destroyed in retribution.
. The theory, and the one accepted by most scholars, however, is that Hazara are a mixed group. This is not entirely inconsistent with descent from Mongol military forces. For example, Nikudari Mongols settled in eastern Persia and mixed with native populations who spoke Persian. A second wave of mostly Chagatai Mongols came from Central Asia and were followed by other Mongolic groups, associated with the Ilkhanate and the Timurids, all of whom settled in Hazarajat and mixed with the local, mostly Persian-speaking population, forming a distinct group

Hazara people - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Without taking side in this controversy (see also Ferdinand, 1959, 1964; Mousavi, pp. 28-31), it seems probable historically that the origins of the Hazāras lie with the Mongolian and Turkish groups which progressively penetrated the infertile mountainous region situated between Persia, Central Asia, and India between the 13th and the 15th centuries, mixed with the local population and adopted their language. It must also be pointed out that Turko-Mongolian people, like the Hephtalites (5th and 6th centuries), were already present in what is today Afghanistan and therefore may also have played a role in the ethnogenesis of the Hazāras (Mousavi, p. 38).

Nevertheless, Fredrik Barth’s work on ethnicity (1969) has made it evident that group identity is not defined by objective traits and does not follow from a common origin or even a common culture. It is, rather, the result of a constant process of social interaction by which a boundary is created and maintained in an enduring way. There are many Middle Eastern examples where distinct groups were formed by people of heterogeneous origins in marginal regions following a continuing process of inclusion and exclusion and of resistance to central powers (Canfield, 1973a, pp. 10-12 and 1973b, pp. 1511-13). In the case of the Hazāras, the feeling of belonging to one group does not proceed from a supposed Mongolian origin, but from a process of marginalization which started several centuries ago. As mentioned already, the term hazārahas been used to designate a heterogeneous group, including some Sunni groups (for instance in the district of Rustāq, province of Taḵar, or the district of Nahrin, province of Baḡlān). It seems to refer as much to a social position as to a common historical origin.






Malik kafur was captured at a young age and castrated .Thats how he was converted,that he was a capable general is his merit.And my answer was in contention with someone's reply that muslims from modern day pakistan were responsible for saving subcontinent.Well gujarat is not in modern day pakistan.And obviously much of alauddin's army would be from N-W india as that was the central power base of the sultanate.But officers were almost exclusively turkish.And the troops that really did the hard hitting - The horse archers and ghulam malied lancers were also turkish.This was how it was during the sultanate period.
Turks appointed turks and when later lodis came they appointed afghans only.Diversity came with mughals who themselves were a mixed bunch

I think this has been discussed before . North West Indian Muslims held important positions in Alauddin Khilji`s govt., And they successfully defended India against repeated Mongol invasions ..
 
Last edited:
In 1261, following the devastation of Baghdad at the hands of the Mongols, the Mamluk rulers of Egypt re-established the Abbasid caliphate in Cairo. The first Abbasid caliph of Cairo was Al-Mustansir. The Abbasid caliphs in Egypt continued to maintain the presence of authority, but it was confined to religious matters. The Abbasid caliphate of Cairo lasted until the time of Al-Mutawakkil III, who was taken away as a prisoner by Selim I to Constantinople where he had a ceremonial role. He died in 1543, following his return to Cairo.

Yes.And alauddin though he took the title as earlier sultan never sent for a firman like all the others including illtutmish and balban.



Well if you are referring to History of Ziauddin Barani , then you should know that his "Tarikh-i-Firuz Shahi" was written by him during his exile to please the new angry sultan (Feroz Shah Tughlaq) , unfortunately for him , he was not rewarded for his works and died poor in 1357. He does not consult contemporary writings , and his uncle , Qazi Ala-ul-Mulk , the Kotewal of Delhi during reign of Alauddin Khilji is the alleged hero of this particular episode . So this claim of Barani becomes highly suspicious ...

And barani is still considered among the greatest of the sultanate age historians.Depicting alauddin badly does nothing to firuz shah tughluq.Depicting mhd bin tughluq badly which he did would please him.



Well you can call it nonsense , but this is infact the most popular theory on origin of Hazara people . In history , there are theories , not verdicts

Another popular theory proposes that Hazara are descendants of the Kushans, the ancient dwellers of Afghanistan who are believed to have built the Buddhas of Bamiyan. Its proponents find the location of the Hazara homeland, and the similarity in facial features of Hazara with those on frescoes and Buddha's statues in Bamiyan, suggestive. However, this belief is contrary not only to the fact that the Kushans were Tocharians, but also to historical records which mention that in a particularly bloody battle around Bamiyan, Genghis Khan's grandson, Mutugen, was killed, and he allegedly ordered Bamiyan to be destroyed in retribution.
. The theory, and the one accepted by most scholars, however, is that Hazara are a mixed group. This is not entirely inconsistent with descent from Mongol military forces. For example, Nikudari Mongols settled in eastern Persia and mixed with native populations who spoke Persian. A second wave of mostly Chagatai Mongols came from Central Asia and were followed by other Mongolic groups, associated with the Ilkhanate and the Timurids, all of whom settled in Hazarajat and mixed with the local, mostly Persian-speaking population, forming a distinct group

Hazara people - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Without taking side in this controversy (see also Ferdinand, 1959, 1964; Mousavi, pp. 28-31), it seems probable historically that the origins of the Hazāras lie with the Mongolian and Turkish groups which progressively penetrated the infertile mountainous region situated between Persia, Central Asia, and India between the 13th and the 15th centuries, mixed with the local population and adopted their language. It must also be pointed out that Turko-Mongolian people, like the Hephtalites (5th and 6th centuries), were already present in what is today Afghanistan and therefore may also have played a role in the ethnogenesis of the Hazāras (Mousavi, p. 38).

Nevertheless, Fredrik Barth’s work on ethnicity (1969) has made it evident that group identity is not defined by objective traits and does not follow from a common origin or even a common culture. It is, rather, the result of a constant process of social interaction by which a boundary is created and maintained in an enduring way. There are many Middle Eastern examples where distinct groups were formed by people of heterogeneous origins in marginal regions following a continuing process of inclusion and exclusion and of resistance to central powers (Canfield, 1973a, pp. 10-12 and 1973b, pp. 1511-13). In the case of the Hazāras, the feeling of belonging to one group does not proceed from a supposed Mongolian origin, but from a process of marginalization which started several centuries ago. As mentioned already, the term hazārahas been used to designate a heterogeneous group, including some Sunni groups (for instance in the district of Rustāq, province of Taḵar, or the district of Nahrin, province of Baḡlān). It seems to refer as much to a social position as to a common historical origin.


So if mongols never controlled the area as u earlier said,where did these settlers come from that led to intermixing?



I think this has been discussed before . North West Indian Muslims held important positions in Alauddin Khilji`s govt., And they successfully defended India against repeated Mongol invasions ..

I have presented by views as well.But not imp positions.Soldiers yes.As for kafur,well u know 'how' he was converted.and at what price.
 
I have presented by views as well.But not imp positions.Soldiers yes.As for kafur,well u know 'how' he was converted.and at what price.

I know Alauddin is accused of certain moral crimes by some Hindus , and their reason for hatred towards Muslim rulers is quite understandable , No primary source however confirms any of those allegations
Regarding positions held by Indians in Alauddin`s govt. I have a few "offline" sources too, that also confirm that the locals held high positions and played the most important role in defending India against the Mongol invasion . I will write about it in detail when i have time .
 
Last edited:
I know Alauddin is accused of certain moral crimes by some Hindus , and their reason for hatred towards Muslim rulers is quite understandable , No primary source however confirms any of those allegations
Regarding positions held by Indians in Alauddin`s govt. I have a few "offline" sources that confirm that the locals held high positions and played the most important role in defending India against the Mongol invasion . I will write about it in detail when i have time .

So ur saying kafur agreed to be u know what?It is hindu propaganda?
And no i don't hate alauddin,i actually kinda like him .He was capable in both adminsitration and warfare despite being illiterate,ambitious and ruthless and kept everybody in their place,not just hindus as u keep claiming.Alauddin is the typical absolute monarch,like a sultanate louis xiv.
 
Back
Top Bottom