What's new

Khilji, the first Afghan dyansty of Hindostan

Khiljis were Turks. Lodis were the first Afghan dynasty in India.

Lodhis were also "turks" , they were just living in the area what is now called afghanistan. Lodhis are closely related to Ghilzais/Khiljis, so if Khiljis were turks so were Lodhis. The only "true" genuine pashtun/afghan that ever rose to power was Ahmed shah abdali.
 
.
The case of the Khiljis is actually very similar to the case of the "Mongol" Khanates after Ghengis Khan death. The Golden Horde or the Chagatai Khanates (from which the Mughals descendent) had nothing to do anymore with Mongols and were completely Turkiczed. The Khiljis had also nothing to do anymore with Turks as they were completely Pashtunized.

Lodhis were also "turks" , they were just living in the area what is now called afghanistan. Lodhis are closely related to Ghilzais/Khiljis, so if Khiljis were turks so were Lodhis. The only "true" genuine pashtun/afghan that ever rose to power was Ahmed shah abdali.
Lodhis were also "turks" , they were just living in the area what is now called afghanistan. Lodhis are closely related to Ghilzais/Khiljis, so if Khiljis were turks so were Lodhis. The only "true" genuine pashtun/afghan that ever rose to power was Ahmed shah abdali.

No Lodhis were definitely Pashtuns. They had nothing to do with Turks. Khiljis were more like a mixed Turko-Pashtun people where the Pashtun element was stronger in the end and that's also the reason why they were looked down by the other Turks
 
Last edited:
.
The case of the Khiljis is actually very similar to the case of the "Mongol" Khanates after Ghengis Khan death. The Golden Horde or the Chagatai Khanates (from which the Mughals descendent) had nothing to do anymore with Mongols and were completely Turkiczed. The Khiljis had also nothing to do anymore with Turks as they were completely Pashtunized.

Khiljis/Ghilzais even to this day follow their ancient central asian turkic ways of life, they still follow predominantly nomadic life style. Aslo Khiljis are believed to be most probably remnants of Hepthalites who took on turkic language after turkic tribes invaded in southern central asia after the fall of Hepthalites. Pashtun Ghilzais/Khilijis do not show any sign of mongloid features which strengthens this hypothesis.

The case of the Khiljis is actually very similar to the case of the "Mongol" Khanates after Ghengis Khan death. The Golden Horde or the Chagatai Khanates (from which the Mughals descendent) had nothing to do anymore with Mongols and were completely Turkiczed. The Khiljis had also nothing to do anymore with Turks as they were completely Pashtunized.




No Lodhis were definitely Pashtuns. They had nothing to do with Turks. Khiljis were more like a mixed Turko-Pashtun people where the Pashtun element was stronger in the end and that's also the reason why they were looked down by the other Turks

I do not know what is your source of information but Lohdis are a branch of Ghilzais/Khiljis in afghanistan.
 
.
Khiljis/Ghilzais even to this day follow their ancient central asian turkic ways of life, they still follow predominantly nomadic life style. Aslo Khiljis are believed to be most probably remnants of Hepthalites who took on turkic language after turkic tribes invaded in southern central asia after the fall of Hepthalites. Pashtun Ghilzais/Khilijis do not show any sign of mongloid features which strengthens this hypothesis.



I do not know what is your source of information but Lohdis are a branch of Ghilzais/Khiljis in afghanistan.
Khiljis/Ghilzais even to this day follow their ancient central asian turkic ways of life, they still follow predominantly nomadic life style. Aslo Khiljis are believed to be most probably remnants of Hepthalites who took on turkic language after turkic tribes invaded in southern central asia after the fall of Hepthalites. Pashtun Ghilzais/Khilijis do not show any sign of mongloid features which strengthens this hypothesis.



I do not know what is your source of information but Lohdis are a branch of Ghilzais/Khiljis in afghanistan.

Ghilzais follow the Pashtunwali and speak an Eastern Iranian language today. They have nothing to do with other Turkics as they speak an Eastern Iranian language and belong to the Pashtun ethnic group. The Aryans themselves were also steppe nomads like the Turks but that still doesn't change the fact that we have culturally nothing to do with each other besides Islam. The Khiljis were mostly a mixed Turko-Afghan tribe where the Afghan element took over the Turkic element at the end and that's also the reason why they got completely Pashtunized at the end. The ethnonym of Bulgarians is also Turkic but they have nothing to do with Turkic peoples as they are Slavs.
 
.
Ghilzais follow the Pashtunwali and speak an Eastern Iranian language today. They have nothing to do with other Turkics as they speak an Eastern Iranian language and belong to the Pashtun ethnic group. The Aryans themselves were also steppe nomads like the Turks but that still doesn't change the fact that we have culturally nothing to do with each other besides Islam. The Khiljis were mostly a mixed Turko-Afghan tribe where the Afghan element took over the Turkic element at the end and that's also the reason why they got completely Pashtunized at the end. The ethnonym of Bulgarians is also Turkic but they have nothing to do with Turkic peoples as they are Slavs.

You know in this region when people say they are descended from a certain group that does not mean that they are interested in all other modern populations with same descent, they are just uniquely taking pride "ONLY" in their own ancestors, people are very clannish in this part of the world and their is no room for european idea of "pan" X or "pan" Y ideas. So even if Khiljis know they are turks but that does not make them as having any kind of "feeling" for anyother modern group who also considers itself "turk". A Ghilzais/Khilijis will happily take on an "uzbek" or "turkmen" turkic in afghanistan in case of war, they will also take on their rival "pashtun" tribes despite being pashtuns themselves, the situation is very different here.
 
.
Lodhis were also "turks" , they were just living in the area what is now called afghanistan. Lodhis are closely related to Ghilzais/Khiljis, so if Khiljis were turks so were Lodhis. The only "true" genuine pashtun/afghan that ever rose to power was Ahmed shah abdali.

Ahmed shah Abdali didn't ruled any part of modern India anyway and Durrani rule lasted for only about 50 years in Indian areas . Anyway, don't discount the Suri empire, although it too was very short-lived.
 
.
You know in this region when people say they are descended from a certain group that does not mean that they are interested in all other modern populations with same descent, they are just uniquely taking pride "ONLY" in their own ancestors, people are very clannish in this part of the world and their is no room for european idea of "pan" X or "pan" Y ideas. So even if Khiljis know they are turks but that does not make them as having any kind of "feeling" for anyother modern group who also considers itself "turk". A Ghilzais/Khilijis will happily take on an "uzbek" or "turkmen" turkic in afghanistan in case of war, they will also take on their rival "pashtun" tribes despite being pashtuns themselves, the situation is very different here.

Sorry but I have never heared that. Ghilzais seem to take pride in being Pashtuns but I have never seen it that a Ghilzai feels connections with other Turkics and I was on many Afghan forums. I find it actually strange because Uzbeks also don't feel any connections with Mongols although their ethnonym come from a Ghengis Khan descendant
 
.
Ahmed shah Abdali didn't ruled any part of modern India anyway and Durrani rule lasted for only about 50 years in Indian areas . Anyway, don't discount the Suri empire, although it too was very short-lived.

Again Suris were also branch of Ghilzai/Khiljis, yes they were pashtunized turks. As I said before the only genuine pashtun ruler in the history of south asia was ahmed shah abdali. All other so-called "aghans" were either fully turks or pashtunized turks of afghanistan.
 
. .
Again Suris were also branch of Ghilzai/Khiljis, yes they were pashtunized turks. As I said before the only genuine pashtun ruler in the history of south asia was ahmed shah abdali. All other so-called "aghans" were either fully turks or pashtunized turks of afghanistan.

Well Ghilzais were anythjng than pure Turks and that's also the reason why they became Pashtuns at the end. The Pashtun tribes no matter if Durranis or Ghilzais are all mixed with their neighbours but the core element in both tribes were Eastern Iranian peoples and that's also the reason why Pashtuns speak an Eastern Iranian language
 
.
Sorry but I have never heared that. Ghilzais seem to take pride in being Pashtuns but I have never seen it that a Ghilzai feels connections with other Turkics and I was on many Afghan forums. I find it actually strange because Uzbeks also don't feel any connections with Mongols although their ethnonym come from a Ghengis Khan descendant

I have an Uzbek friend who claims to be direct descendant of Timur Lang. The Mongol connection is there, but its mainly for the descendants from nomadic elite. Most of the subject class was sedentary Soghdian/iranic serts, many were Tajiks, today the bulk of their population is descended from this sedentary element, just like Moghuls (of Moghulistan) are a minority among today's Uighurs, the bulk being from a mix of sedentary Qarluq, Tokharians and original Yugur tribes from Mongolia..
 
.
I have an Uzbek friend who claims to be direct descendant of Timur Lang. The Mongol connection is there, but its mainly for the descendants from nomadic elite. Most of the subject class was sedentary Soghdian/iranic serts, many were Tajiks, today the bulk of their population is descended from this sedentary element, just like Moghuls (of Moghulistan) are a minority among today's Uighurs, the bulk being from a mix of sedentary Qarluq, Tokharians and original Yugur tribes from Mongolia..

Yeah but Timur himself had no connections with Ghengis Khan. His Mother tongue was Chagatai Turkic which is closely related to the Uzbek language. Wikipedia says that this tribe was originally Mongolic that became Turkified but that doesn't count in my eyes.
 
.
Yeah but Timur himself had no connections with Ghengis Khan. His Mother tongue was Chagatai Turkic which is closely related to the Uzbek language. Wikipedia says that this tribe was originally Mongolic that became Turkified but that doesn't count in my eyes.

Mixed Turko-Mongol race but culturally, religiously and linguistically Turkified - Timurids and Mughals. This is what I believe.
 
.
Yeah but Timur himself had no connections with Ghengis Khan. His Mother tongue was Chagatai Turkic which is closely related to the Uzbek language. Wikipedia says that this tribe was originally Mongolic that became Turkified but that doesn't count in my eyes.

Timur - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Timur, Tarmashirin Khan, Emir Timur, Timur Beg Gurkhani[1] (Persian: تیمور‎ Timūr, Chagatai: Temür "iron"; 9 April 1336 – 18 February 1405), historically known as Tamerlane[2] (Persian: تيمور لنگ‎ Timūr(-e) Lang, "Timur the Lame"), was a Turko-Mongol ruler of Barlas lineage.

Exhumation
418px-Timur_reconstruction01.jpg

A forensic facial reconstruction of Timur by M. Gerasimov (1941).

Timur's body was exhumed from his tomb in 1941 by the Soviet anthropologist Mikhail M. Gerasimov. From his bones it was clear that Timur was a tall and broad chested man with strong cheek bones. Gerasimov reconstructed the likeness of Timur from his skull. At 5 feet 8 inches (1.73 meters), Timur was tall for his era.[citation needed] Gerasimov also confirmed Timur's lameness due to a hip injury. Gerasimov also found that Timur's facial characteristics conformed to that of fairly Mongoloid features with somewhat Caucasoid admixture.[77] In the study of "Anthropological composition of the population of Central Asia" shows the cranium of Timur predominate the characters of the South Siberian Mongoloid type.[94] Timur is classified as being closer to the Mongoloid race with some admixture.

Barlas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
According to the Secret History of the Mongols, written during the reign of Ögedei Khan [r. 1229-1241], the Barlas shared ancestry with the Borjigin, the imperial clan of Genghis Khan and his successors, and other Mongol clans. The leading clan of the Barlas traced its origin to Qarchar Barlas,[1] head of one of Chagatai'sregiments. Qarchar Barlas was a descendant of the legendary Mongol warlord Bodonchir (Bodon Achir; Bodon'ar Mungqaq), who was also considered a direct ancestor of Genghis Khan.[5]

Due to extensive contacts with the native population of Central Asia, the tribe had adopted the religion of Islam,[2] and the Chagatai language, a Turkic language of the Qarluq branch, which was heavily influenced by Arabic and Persian.[6]
 
.
Lodhis were also "turks" , they were just living in the area what is now called afghanistan. Lodhis are closely related to Ghilzais/Khiljis, so if Khiljis were turks so were Lodhis. The only "true" genuine pashtun/afghan that ever rose to power was Ahmed shah abdali.
Khiljis, lodhis, suris, niazis, lohanis etc were culturally, linguistically pashtuns. Racially they were not full turks but mixed with pashtuns. Thats why khiljis were not accepted as turks in the delhi.
Lodhis and suris were very strong pashtuns, whatever their origins were, they wrote pashto books and kept pashtun traditions. The swati dynasty of kashmir was also pashtun though you insisted on calling them turks.
Take the example of punjab. Every punjabi speaker is punjabi despite of so many heterogenous groups.
Afghans have true afghans as well as afghanized ones. Yousafzais, durranis, kakars, mohmands etc are true afghans while ghiljays are afghanized ones but with strongest adherance to pashto and pashtunwali.
 
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom