What's new

Khiljis are Pashtuns

Joined
Jun 23, 2010
Messages
5,341
Reaction score
-29
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
1- From the available historical and linguistic reasoning it can be said that Khalji is the present Ghalji and is the name of certain Afghan tribes. This root is present in Gharj, Gharcha, Ghalcha and other historical words, and "gh"has converted to "kh", hence Ghalji has been mispronounced as Khalji. This change is seen in the texts of the third, fourth and following centuries of the Hijera.

2- According to Minhaj Seraj there were over 15 great Khalji personalities who ruled from 1203 A.D. onwards over India and were spreading Khorasanian and Islamic culture all over northern India and the highlands of North Bengal.[1] Once again the Khaljies ruled over Delhi from 1203 to 1320 A.D. All these rulers were the Ghaljis of Afghanistan. Several places are still known in Afghanistan as Khalaj. Such as the Khalaj (near Gizeo of Rozgan, north of Kandahar), the Khalaj[2] of Helmand valley and the Khalaj of Ghazna, which Yaqut also mentions[3] as being near Ghazni in the land of Zabulistan.
[1] Tabaqat-e Naseri, I/422.
[2] Istakhri has mentioned these Khalk in the province of Helmand, p. 245.
[3] Mu’jan-ul-Buldan. 2/381.


3- In view of linguistic analysis, Khalji, Ghalji or Ghalzi are Gharzay, meaning mountain-dwellers (in Pahsto ghar means a mountain and zay born of). In the tale of Kak Kohzad (Mulhaqat-e-Shahnama, vol. 5, p. 33) these people are of Afghan descent and according to the author of this book they lived in Zabul (between Ghazni and Helmand) in the plain which is linked with Hindwan. These people are said to be tent dwellers. Kohzad is the translation of Pashto Gharza and the Ghalji. Tent dwellers still live in the same manner in this region. Just as in Pashto this ancient word is Gharzay=Gharlji=Khalji. In Arabic it is written Gharj, and kohzad in Dari has the same structure and meaning. The term is so old that Panini, the founder of Sanskrit grammar (about 350 B.C.), has called the tribes of central and northern Rohita-Giri=Hindu Kush, as Pohita Giries or mountaineers[1], which means kohzad or gharzay=Khalji.
We know that Indians called this land Roh. Huen Tsang has also noted this word in 630 A.D. and after 1203 A.D. Indian authors have called Afghanistan, (extending from Heart to Hasan Abdal) Roh[2] and its inhabitants as Rohela, which means kohzad or Ghalji=Khalji. In India a place named Rohil-Kohzad is related to Rohela (Kohzad) and was the dwelling place of Afghans who had settled in India. In the names of some tribes “gh” has ben converted to “kh” e.g. Khir=Khez=Qir=Ghez[3] or the present Saghar, south of Ghor, has been recorded as Saakhar by Minhaj Sierj.[4]
[1] Hindustan as seen by Panini by Dr. Agrawala, Lucknow University, 1953.
[2] See Tarikh-e Farishta.
[3] Notes of Tabaye-ul-Haywan, 18.
[4] Tabaqate-e Nasiri 1/387, Habibi edition.



4- With great doubt Mohammad Qasim Firisha states from Tabaqat-e Akbari of Nizam-ud-Din Ahmad Bakhshi Hirawi that Khaljies are the descendants of Khalij Khan, the son-in-law of Genghis Khan. But this statement is not true, since historical documents reveal that Khaljies or Ghaljies lived in Zabulistan three centuries before Genghis.

5- Minhaj Siraj once again proves that the Khaljies ruled long before Genghis and his son-in-law over India and their empire stretched as far as the highlands of North Bengal. A full chapter of the 20th part of his book deals with these people.[1] He says that the Khaljies live near Ghazni, Garmseer and Ghor, but has not said anything about these people being Turks. On the other hand, he clearly refers to other rulers of Turkish descent as Turks. Khalj, which has been altered to Khalakh by calligraphers, was a well-known word among geographers long before the compilation of Hudud-ul-Alam. Ibne Khurdadbeh (844-848 A.D.) also speaks about Khaljiya. He confirms that there is a difference between Khalj and says: “the winter dwelling of Turks of Kharlukh (Kharlikh) is near Taraz and nearby them lie the pastures of Khalj (Khaljiya).[2] From this it is evident that the nomadic tribes of Khalji of that time, similar to their present habits, moved towards warmer regions during the cold season of the year. According to Ibn-e Khurdadbeh these regions were called Jarmiya (Jurum of Baladhuri and Minhaj Siraj). Ibn-e Khurdadbeh writes that their winter pastures were on this side of the Oxus river (p. 3). Some of these nomadic tribes still go to these areas.
[1] Tabakat-e Nasiri after 1/422.
[2] Al-Masalik wa al-Mamalik, 28.


5- Another geographer Ibrahim Ibn-e Mohammad Istakhri (about 951 A.D.) writes Khalj are a clan of Atrak (most probably a plural of Tarak) who came to the region between India and Seistan during ancient times. They had large stocks of sheep and their language and clothes resemble those of Turks.[1]
Some oriental scholars are of the belief that Gharjies are the descendants of Helthalites (presumably a mixed race of Hepthalite and Pakhts who have been living in Afghanistan since the Vedic Aryan period). Marquart says: Khalch or Kholackj are descendants of the Yaftals, who have been mentioned as Khwalas in Syrian sources (about 554 A.D.). After this in 569 A.D. ambassador Zemarchos has written this name as Xoliatai.[2]
Mohammd son of Ahmad Khwarazmi (980 A.D.) says: Khalj and Taraks of Kabjiya[3] are the descendants of Hayatila who held great prestige in Tukharistan.[4]
[1] Masalik-ul-Mamalik of Istakhri, 245.
[2] Minorsky’s commentary on Hudud-ul-Alam, 347 from Iranshahar of Marquart after 251.
[3] In the original source Kanjina has been written incorrectly. In Bayhaqi it is Kapchi and in Tabaqat-e Nasiri Kochi and the Arabs have converted it to Qufs. In the appendages to the Shahnama it has been written Koch and at present this word is Kochi in Afghanistan. This word is a remnant of the name of Koshi=the Koshan of the first century B.C.
[4] Mafatih-ul-Ulum, 72.


6- The Khalj and Afghans have always been mentioned together and indispensably their place or origin and race was common. Abu Nasr Mohammad, son of Abdul Jabbar Utbi (1023 A.D.), in the conquests of Subuktagin writes as follows: "the Afghans and Khalj obeyed Subuktagin and reluctantly joined his forces."[1]Ibn-ul-Athir has also mentioned this event in the same manner. [2]
[1] Tarikh-e Yamini, 26.
[2] Al-Kamil 8/348, Ibn-ul-Athir writes in Al-Kamil:L Yaqub Layth conquered Khaljiya and Zabul.


7- Minorsky clearly writes that these Khaljies are the ancestors of the present Afghan Ghalji. Barthold and Haig have written the same in the Islamic Encyclopedia.[1] It can therefore be said that Khalji or Ghalji were related to the Hepthalites and Zabul rulers, since the Helthalites, (Hayatila of Arabs) ruled over Zabulistan. Their features struck on coins resemble the features of the Ghalji youth who live in this area and have high noses, almond eyes, bushy hair, and strong features.
[1] Minorsky’s comments on Hudud-al-Alam, 348.

8- Therefore, Khaljies or Ghaljies are not the descendants of those Turks or Ghuz who had come to Khorasan during the Islamic period, but are Hepthalites of the Arian race who were famous as White Huns and lived in Tukharistan and Zabulistan and the name of their ancestors has remained in the names of the present Ghalji—the Kochi=Koshi tribes of Zabul. Similarly the root of Hiftal is seen in Yaftal and Haftali in Abdali. The word Ghalji is known in Badakhshan now as Ghalcha=Garcha. In Dari literature this word means a simple man or mountain dweller. Abu Tayib Musa’bi (about 938 A.D.), the poet of the Samanid court says:
If a Garcha can live over one hundred years,
Why did the Arab (Prophet) live only sixty three?

9- The word Koch and Baloch have been written in the same place in appendages of Shahnama, and the Arabs have Arabized them to Qufs and Balus. In fact they are Khalji=Ghalji nomads having an ancient history in Ariana. Some scholars believe that these Kochi (nomads) are the Apa Kochiya mentioned in Achaemenian inscriptions who lived in this region before commingling between the Hunnish Arians.[1] The blending of White Huns of Arian descent with Pakhts (Paxtoons) in Bactria, the valleys of the Hindu Kush, Kabulistan, and Zabulistan was a natural phenomenon since two northern and southern branches of the Arian race have got mixed. It is not evident what language the White Arians (Hun=Hepthalite) spoke, but from the closeness of dialects in the upper Hindu Kush e.g. Gharcha, Wakhi etc. it can be guessed to have resembled Pashto and certain Pashto sounds which are not found in Pahlawi, Dari, Avesta and Sanskrit are present in these dialects until now. These white Arian Huns were Haftali (Abdali) who attacked India from Zabulistan and conquered Kashmir. The Sanskrit inscription of the 7th century A.D. found in 1839 A.D. in Wihand on the banks of the Indus river near Attock refers to them as strong men who ate meat and calls them Turushka.[2]
The Kashmiri historian, Kalkana, in his book Raja Tarangini (1148 A.D.) writes about these kings and their ferocious attacks over Kashmir and says that the Turushkas carried their weapons upon their shoulders and shaved half their scalp. He says that the Kushanid kings Kanishka, Hushka, and Jushka are the descendents of Turushka.[3]
[1] Old Persian 165 and Sabk Shinasi by Bahar 2/67.
[2] Kabul by Alexander Burns, 190. London.
[3] Raja Tarangini 4/179, Tanslated by Sir Aurel Stein, London 1900, and India of Bohler 2/206.


10- The Huns who after the 6th century A.D. increased in numbers after amalgamating with the Pashtoons and attacked India have been called Khans in India and until the present time Pashtoons are called Khan all over India due to the alteration of h and kh in central Asian languages. For example the Hwarazm was converted to Khwarazm. The Turks pronounce Khanam as Hanam while the Afridis of Khyber pronounce Khan and Khun. In Masalik of Ibn-Khurdadbeh the name of Turkhan has been written as Tarkhum (p. 41). Therefore it is possible that Huns or Khun could have been converted to Khan, which means that the Afghan Khalji Khans were not Turks and we have the following reasoning to prove this statement.
a. Mahmud Kashghari (1074 A.D.), who was of Turkish descent and a Turkologist says: The ghuz of Turkmans comprise 24 tribes, but two Khaljiya tribes resemble the Turks are not considered Turks.[1] This Turkish historian who has studied the Turks and even note their tribes, refrains from adding the name of Khalj with the Turks.[2]

b. Mohammad son of Bakran in the whereabouts of 1203 A.D. writes: The Khaljies of Taraks migrated from Khalukh to Zabulistan. They have settled in the plain near Ghaznayn. Because of the hot weather their color has changed and they became swarthy, their language also changed. As a misreading Khalukh is read Khalj.[3]
From this declaration of the author of Jahan Nama it is clear that due to differences in color and language the Khaljiya were separate by all means from the Turks and a misreading existed between Khalj and Khalukh.

c. Minhaj Seraj, who is from Khorasan and is well familiar with the affairs of this land, knows a number of Turkish rulers of India, but has always referred to the Turkish and Turks and the Khaljiya as Khaljies.

d. Zia Barani, the Indian historian (1357 A.D.) in his book Tarikh-e-Ferozshahi, has a special chapter where he says the king must be among the Turks but when Malik Jalaluddin Khalji ascended the Delhi throne he says: “the people found it difficult to tolerate a Khalji king.”[4] Since Khaljies were not Turks Indian historians also considered them to be Afghans.[5]

e. In Afghan literature the Khalji of India have been referred to as being Afghan Ghalji. Khushal Khan Khattak, the famous Pashto poet (died 1688 A.D.) in a long elegy enumerates the Afghan kings and considers Sultan Jalaluddin Khalji (1290-1295 A.D.) to be a Ghalji of Wilayat (Afghanistan).
“Then Sultan Jalaluddin ascended the Delhi throne who was a Ghalji from Wilayat.”[6]
Afghans usually referred to the lands behind Khyber as Wilayat and the Indians referred to Khorasan and Afghanistan by this name. This shows that until the time of Khushal Khan the Khaljies were considered Afghans and not Turks.

f. Another reason which proves that the Khaljies are Afghans is an ancient book in which it is stated that the Pashto language (Afghani) is the language of the Khaljiya. Since Pashto is the language of the Pashtoons (Afghans) therefore the Khaljies are also Afghans.
A manuscript on the miracles of Sultan Sakhi Sarwar[7] (known as Lakhdata died 1181 A.D. and buried in Shah Kot of Dera Ghazi Khan) is written in Persian whose author is unknown. In this book the author relates a story from Tarikh-e Ghazna by Abu Hamid-al-Zawali and quotes Hasan Saghani.[8] “Kabul Shah, Khingil, who according to Yaqubi lived about 779 A.D.[9] sent a poem in the Khaljiya language to the Loyak of Ghazni.” Analysis of this poem shows that it is ancient Pashto which is said to have been the language of Khaljiya. This means that the Khalji spoke Pashto, and they are the present Afghan Ghaljies.

g. Fakhruddin Mubarak Shah, well known as Fakhr-e Mudabir and author of Adab-al-Harb and other famous books, writing on the History of India (1205 A.D.) says that the armies of Sultan Qutb-ud-Din comprised of Turks, Ghori, Khorasani, Khalji and Indian soldiers.[10] This proves that in the beginning of the 7th century Hijera the Turks and Khaljies were two separate nationalities. If not so then they would not have been mentioned separately in the same sentence.

h. Until the time of Babur, the founder of the Indian Mughal dynasty the Ghalji of present Ghazna have been mentioned as Afghan Khalji and not as Turks. Babur says: “In 1507 A.D. we had ridden out of Kabul with the intention of over-running the country of Afghan Khaljies, northeast of Ghazni and brought back with us one hundred thousand head of sheep and other things.”[11]
[1] Divan Lughat-ul-Turk 3/307, Istanbul, 1915.
[2] Divant Lughat-ul-Turk, photographic publication p. 4-41.
[3] Jahan Nama, 73.
[4] Zia Barani’s Tarikh-e Ferozshahi, 173. Calcutta.
[5] Tazkira-e Bahaduran-e Islam, 2/331.
[6] Divan of Khushal Khan 669, Kandahar.
[7] For the biography of this saint refer to Khazinat-ul-Asfiya 2/248 and Ab-e Kawtbar by Shaikh Ikram p. 91 onwards.
[8] Born in Lahore 1181, died 1252 A.D.
[9] Tarikh-al-Yaqubi 2/131.
[10] Introduction to the History of Mubarak Shah, 33. London, 1927.
[11] Tuzuk-e Babur 127, Bombay.


11- There are two reason as to why the Khaljies have been mistaken to be Turks:
First: The Sakas, Kushanids and Huns came to Bactria and Tukharistan and southern Hindu Kush from Trans Oxiana and they were desert dwelling Arians and their culture resembled that of Turks of Altai and western China. These people probably had cultural and linguistic similarities with the Turks. Since these people got mixed with the aborigines of Ariana (ancient Afghanistan), the Tajiks and the Pashtoons. According to Jahan Nama their language and color changed. Therefore, Barthold and some other oriental scholars considered the Pashto speaking Ghaljies to be descendants of these people. Even the name Abdali is related to these people and Awdal=Abdal has derived from Haftal=Yaftal. Classic writers have written this name as Euthalite. The tribes of Kafiristan (present Nuristan), northeast Hindu Kush also referred to Moslem Afghans as Odal up to the 19th century.[1] The Kabul Shahs of the 7th century whose titles and names were in Dari or Pashto were the descendants of the Dumi tribe of the Kushanids.[2]
The second reason is that in Arabic script the word Tarak and Turk resemble each other and since Turks were well-known among Arab writers from the early years of Islamic period, therefore, they considered Tarak of the Afghan Khaljies to be Turks from the Turkish race. While the Taraki Ghaljies are famous Afghan nomadic tribes whose number in the plains of Ghazni (according to Shahnama from their land there was a way to Hindustan) surpass 50,000. Until the present time these people move towards the valleys of the Indus and Tukharistan during winter. They possess large herds of sheep, speak Pashto and are true representatives of Afghan culture.
But the word Turushka, mentioned in Sanskrit works, has been used in different forms in Raja Tarangini. In first Tarangini, shlok 170, three Kushanid emperors have been considered to belong to the Turushka tribe. Paragraph 20 of another Indian work, Chavithakara, also deals with this issue the same way.[3] But in Rajaa Tarangini (vol. 2, p. 336) this word has been mentioned by Kalhana as the name of Muslim conquerors who were in war with the Kabul Shahs. Sir Aurel Stein says: “Undoubtedly, here Turushka means the Moslems. In 871 A.D. Saffarid Yaqub Layth captured Kabul and like the Arab conquerors attacked the remnants of Kabul Shah from Seistan and Rukhaj. Therefore the danger poised by Turushka, which Kalhans says, was from the south is not devoid of truth.[4]
From these facts it is evident that the Indian word Turushka, as was thought, not only meant a Turk but was also used to mean the Arabs, the Saffarids of Seistan and all those who attacked India and the Kabul Shah from the west. For example, Harasha, a Turushka king ruined all the temples and idols of Kashmir about of 495 A.D.[5] Discussing Samagram Raja (1003-1028 A.D.) in Tarangini 7 shlok 57 who was a contemporary of Subuktagin and Sultan Mahmud, the battles of Turushka Kammira conducted by Subuktagin or Amir Mahmud have been mentioned. This further means that Turushka was a word also applied to the conquerors from the west i.e. the Kushanids, Huns, Moslems and Turks. This word has also been inscribed in the Sanskrit inscription of Wihand, in which the carnivorous and mighty Huns have been called by this name.
The ancient Arians of the Vedic period who moved towards the east from Afghanistan called their soldiers Kshatria. This word (kash+tura) means a swordsman in Pashto. The title suits the warrior soldiers and the name of the Tarakay tribe is related to this same root. There are a number of other similar Afghan names of this type like Turman, Turyalay, Turkalanay with an initial tur+a suffix.
The word tura is widespread in a number of historical names like Turoyana, which according to the Vedas, was a king of the Pakht (Pashtoon) tribes. At present this world is used as turwahuney, meaning one who wields a sword. According to Kalhana, Turman was the name of a Kshatria king of Gandhara and in present usage also means a swordsman.
After reading the stated facts we can conclude that the Khaljies were Pashto speaking Taraks and not Turks. Confusion between the two words started in Arabic script from the early Islamic period.[6] Similarly, the Iranian word Turushka did not mean Turks but as a converted form of the Vedic Kshatria, which has been used in Pashto literature as tur kash, meaning those soldiers armed with swords. However, it must be added that several centuries after the advent of the Christian era, Afghan Khaljies intermingled with powerful Turks of the courts in battles and journeys, therefore they acquired Turkish names and customs. Thus authors had a right to confuse the two nationalities while there existed a confusion between the words Tarak (the Afghan Khalji tribe) and Turk also. Due to these facts a number of Turkish words have been used in Pashto from the time of the Kushanids and the Hepthalites (Huns) and have acquired a special Pashto form, like wulus (nation), jirgah (a council) kuk (meaning rhythm in Turkish), khan (a chieftain=hun) and tugh (flag) etc.
It must not be forgotten that Mahmud son of Husayn Kashghari, the Turkish scholar 1073 A.D., has denominated a special form for Khalj. He says that in the Samarqand battles with Alexander only 22 persons were left from the Turkish tribes. While walking with their families as men on foot they met two persons carrying loads on their backs and consulted them. They advised them as follows: “Alexander is a passer by and he is bound to leave and will not stay in this country, only we will remain.”
In Turkish they referred to these two persons “qal-aj” meaning that they remained and stayed. Therefore they became famous as Khalj and their successors were the two clans of Khaljies. Since thier character and mode resembled the Turks Alexander said they are Turkman, that is they resemble the Turks. Hence they are still referred to as Turkman. All Turkish tribes are composed of 22 clans but the two clans of Khaljies do not consider themselves to the Turkish.[7]
This denomination of Khalj and Turkman, in which Alexander was considered to be a Persian speaker, has the form of a fable and does not bear any historical evidence. But the fact that the Kushanids and Helthalites (Huns) were ruling over this land during the 7th and 8th centuries A.D. has been recorded in a number of historical and linguistic documents. Inscriptions also bear these facts. And that they have mingled racially and culturally with the Pashtoons is a very natural phenomenon.
Since the Kushanid and Yaftali tribes had a number of Turkish cultural and linguistic elements instilled among them and the Turharian Tigins ruled over the south and north of the Hindu Kush, until the beginning of the Islamic period, and Zabulistan (the present land of the Khaljies) was considered the center of the Hepthalites, bearing the title of Zabul Shah, it is possible that they married and got mixed with the Khalji mountain dwelling people. In this process they accepted the linguistic and cultural effects on one another. For example the word Bag (meaning God, king or great) which has a deep root in Sanskrit and Avesta was usually inscribed on the Achamenian, Sassanid, Kushanid and Yaftali inscriptions and coins. In Turkish it was entered in the form of Bag (meaning an emperor or king).[8] On the other hand on the inscription of the Yaftali period, in Jaghatu of Ghazni, the Turkish title of Ulugh has been written with the name of a king in cursive Greek script and we know that Ulugh also means Bag or great. The names of most Khaljies and even other Afghans are Turkish like Qaraqush (a hawk), Balka (sage), Sanqur (falcon) etc.[9] Previously we discussed a number of Pashto words bearing Turkish roots.
On the separation of the Khalji=Ghalji, Minhaj Siraj’s statement is worth consideration in which he says: “Sultan Jalaluddin Khwarazm Shah and Malik Khan of Heart reached Ghaznayn and a large army of Turks, and rulers of Ghor, Tajik, Khalji and Ghori gathered at their service.”[106] Here Minhaj Siraj mentions the Turks and Khalj as two separate entities. Juwaini, in Tarikh-e Jahankusha also speaks about the presence of Khalji in the battle of Parwan and the defeat of the Genghis army.[11]
In the common usage of the people of Khorasan the word Khalji was pronounced with a (ghein) as Ghalji. Even today in Afghanistan this mode of pronunciation is widespread. We also have historical proof for this statement: the oriental branch of the Moscow Academy of Sciences has printed in Arabic Al-Tarikh-ul-Mansuri of Mohammad son of Ali Hamawi from a unique manuscript in photographic form in which the supporters of Khwarazm Shah have been continuously referred to as Qalji.[12] Since in western Khorasan and Iran (ghein) is pronounced as (qaf) qiran as ghiran and Quran as Ghuran, therefore, they converted Ghalji to Qalji and if they would have heard this word in the form of Khalji they would have written it in its original form, because these people do not convert (khe) to (Qaf).
Now after all these details we can conclude that Khaljies belong to the present Ghalji tribes of Zabul of Afghanistan, whose original name in Pashto was Gharzay meaning kohzad or mountaineer. Thus Gharzay was converted to Ghalji or Khalji in the historical records of Afghanistan and India.
[1] Charles Mason, narrative of various journeys in Baluchistan and Afghanistan. 1/232, London 1842.
[2] A new research on the Kabulshahan, p. 30, Kabul 1969.
[3] Aurel Stien’s comments on Raja Tarangini 1/30.
[4] Aurel Stein’s comments on Raja Tarangini after 336.
[5] Raja Tarangini. 7 shlok, 1095.
[6] Between 651-709 A.D. historians speak about Nizak rulers in Badghis, Merv and north of Kabul who have minted coins stating NYCHKMLKA in Pahlavi. These people or family have also been considered Turks while in the coins belonging to them Shah (o) Taraka Nisaga, with two short As of Taraka is evident (R. Ghirshman’s book on the Chinites=Hepthalites, p. 23 printed in Cairo in 1948). The word Taraka with two short As bears complete resemblance with the Afghan name Tarak.
[7] Diwn-ul-Lughat-ul-Turk 3/307.
[8] Diwan-ul-Lughat-ul-Turk 3/116.
[9] Refer to Tabaqat-e-Nasiri. Vol. 2. The Khalji kings in India.
[10] Tabaqat-e Nasiri 2/259.
[11] Jahan Kusha of Juwayni 2/194.
[12] Al-Tarikh-ul-Mansuri 140.


Khaljies are Afghan

@kalu_miah, @charon_2 @@joe_shearer


Phonetic Derivation of Ghilzai from Pashtu
Pashto is a S-O-V language with split ergativity. Adjectives come before nouns. Nouns and adjectives are inflected for gender, number (singular/plural), and case (direct, oblique I, oblique II and vocative). The verb system is very intricate with the following tenses: present, subjunctive, simple past, past progressive, present perfect and past perfect. In any of the past tenses (simple past, past progressive, present perfect and past perfect), Pashtu is an ergative language; i.e., transitive verbs in any of the past tenses agree with the object of the sentence.

Importantly, for our discussion, Pashtu has more vowels and consonants than either Arabic or Persian (Dari/Farsi). As a result, the Pashto alphabet has several letters which do not appear in any other Arabic script. For example, the letters representing the retroflex consonants Tt, Dd, Rh and Nn are written like the standard Arabic "teh", "d�l", "reh" and "nun" with a "panddak", "gharrwandai" or also called "skerrai" attached underneath, which looks like a small circle: ړ ,ډ ,ټ, and ڼ, respectively. It also has the letters "�in" and "�eh" (representing voiceless and voiced retroflex frictives), which look like a "sin" and "reh" respectively with a dot above and beneath: ښ and ږ. The letters representing "ts" and "dz" are also specific to Pashtu; they look like a ح with three dots above and an hamza (ء) above; څ ("ṡe")and ځ("że"). It has a number of additional vowel diacritics as well.

Based on the pronunciation of letters Pashtu has two major dialects referred to as the "soft" and "hard". The division mainly arises in different pronunciation of ښ and ږ. In the "soft" dialect ښ is pronounced as "shīn" and "k'hīn". In the "hard" dialect ږ is pronounced as "ge" and "ẓhe" in the "soft" dialect.

Interestingly, Arabs and Persians at times tend to interchange between ﻕ "qāf" and ک "kāf". An example frequently encountered is the interchange between Qandahar and Kandahar. Even westerners have carried this error in their writings. The most notorious being Avicenna's Canon of Medicine. Here we notice that the Arabic ﻕ has been transformed to ک. Thus Qanon has been transmuted to Canon "Kanon". Those who understand the grammar of Arabic and/or Persian can easily attest to such transformations.

Now we have to go back and examine how the Persians and Arabs treat the non-existent Pashtu letters in their language in their writings and pronunciations. One that both seem to have problems with is the Pashtu ځ("że"). As already mentioned this letter is unique to Pashto, and not found in either Persian or Arabic, or in any of the European languages. In Persian this letter is usually substituted for ﺝ "jīm". Thus, we have examples such as the Pashtu ځيب (pocket) "żeb" is transformed to جيب (pocket) "jeb", ځنګل (Jungle) "żengal" is changed to جنگل (Jungle) "Jangal", ځای (place) "żāy" is written as جای "Jāy", and so forth. In fact this transformation can be seen even in how Pashtun tribal names are written and pronounced. Obvious examples are ځاځی "Zazai" is changed to جاجی "Jaji" or ځدران "Zadran" to جدران "Jadran".

Also, one more interesting pervasive transformation that one notices is the interchange between ﺥ "Kh", ﻍ "Gh" and ﻕ "Q". An example of this triangular transformation is well understood by Nizamuddin Ahmad who proposed that the Khilji were descendents of Qulji Khan, Chengiz Khan's son-in-law. He makes this wrongful assertion as he understands that "Q" and "Kh" are interchangeable, and since changing "Kh" to "Q" one can link Khilji with Qulji, he can construct linkage [1]. Nevertheless, this theory has no merit as the word Khilji was in common use at least two centuries prior to Chengiz Khan's appearance in Afghanistan. Furthermore Alama Habibi points out that Minahaju-s Siraj the author of Tabakat-I Nasiri writes Sakhar, a territory south of Ghor, for the present day Saghar. [2]

So how does this brief introduction to the written relationship between Arabic and Persian help with understanding the origins of Ghilzai Pashtuns. Before we can answer that question, let us examine how the non-Pashtuns referred to the Ghilzi (singular Ghilzai) and the answer will become obvious. Ghilzi Pastuns have been variously called Khalji, Khilji, Ghalji, and example of each abound historical books. Caroe supports this assertion by stating, "Khalji is merely the Persianized" [3] term for Ghilzai. Nevertheless, the real and original pronunciation is Ghilzi. As we saw in the last paragraph "Kh" is interchangeable with "Gh" and "J" with Pashtu "że", and if that transformation is performed the Persian/Arabic forms of Khalji, or Ghalji -- in accordance with accepted phonetic differences ... becomes GHALZI. This pattern of transformation between Arabic/Persian to Pashtu is not unique to the Ghilzi Pashtuns, but it is also true for the Zazi (Jaji) and Zadrans (Jadran).

Moreover, with the appropriate phonetic changes one more pattern emerges and that is the ending "zai", which means offspring of. This suffix is frequently found amongst Pashtun tribal names to indicate their line of descent. "zai" is very similar in meaning with suffix "son" in English family names and "ian" of Armenians. Besides Ghilzai, we have Zazai. Others along that pattern include Alekozai, Barakzai, Yusufzai, Popalzai, and tens more. As can be deduced -- based on phonetics -- the Persian and Arab word Khilji is non-other than the Pashtu Ghilzi. Interestingly, the word Ghilzai or Ghalzai means a "son of mountains". The Pamiris of Afghanistan, as mentioned before, who share linguistic relationship with Pashtu are called Ghalchas --- Mountaineers. [4]
Ghilzai Afghans
 
Last edited:
. .
Xelecistan-Az

The Khalaj West of the Oxus

V. Minorsky

Excerpts from "The Turkish Dialect of the Khalaj", Bulletin of the School of Oriental Studies, University of London, Vol 10, No 2, pp 417-437

Muslim authors agree that the Khalaj are one of the earliest tribes to have crossed the Oxus. In addition to I. Khurdadhbih whom we have quoted above, Istakhri (circa AD 930) [1] says: “The Khalaj are a class of Turks who in the days of the old (fi qadim al-ayyam) came to the country stretching between India and the districts of Sijistan, behind Ghur. They are cattle breeders of Turkish appearance (khilaq), dress, and language.” Mas’udi, Muruj (AD 943), iii, 254, speaks of the Turkish tribes “Ghuz and خرلج living towards Gharsh (= Gharchistan) and Bust in (the region) adjoining Sijistan”. Contrary to Marquart, Eranshahr, 251, I think that خرلج must be read here *Kharlukh, and on the other hand, under Ghuz the author may mean the Khalaj, for, as we now know from Kashghari, the Khalaj were considered as the two “lost tribes” of the Ghuzz. [2]

mahmud_ghazni2.jpg
If Istakhri and Mas’udi (?) place the Khalaj on the middle course of the Helmand, the compilator of the Hudud al-Alam (AD 982), f. 22b quotes the Khalaj in the region of Ghaznin and the adjoining districts. He speaks of their wealth in sheep and describes their habit of wandering along pasture-lands. He adds that the same tribe is numerous in “Balkh, Tukharistan, Bust and Guzganan”. In fact the name is misspelt in the MS. as خلخ and it is very possible that the author has mixed together the Khallukh خلخ and Khalaj خلج. In Tukharistan and (?) Balkh he most probably has in view the former tribe, and in Ghaznin, Bust, and Guzganan the latter.

The Saffarids were the first Muslim dynasty to penetrate into Central Afghanistan. According to Ibn al-Athir, vii, 171, [3] Ya’qub conquered (AD. 868) “the Khalaj, Zabul and other (lands) but I do not know the year in which it happened….”

The Ghaznavids, from the outset of their activity, had to deal with the Khalaj. Nizam al-mulk [4] reports an episode of Sabuktagin’s early career when he was sent by his master Alaptagin (d. 352/963) to collect taxes from “the Khalaj and Turkmans”, which he tried to do by peaceful means. In 385/995 Sabuktagin being in Herat, sent summons to the rulers of Sistan and Guzganan as well as to the *Khalaj Turks. [5]

Utbi, in his history (written circa 411/1020) refers to the Khalaj several times: i, 55, he announces his intention to narrate Mahmud’s victories “in India, as well as among the Turks and Khalaj”; i, 88, (Persian translation, 43, very free), he reports that after Mahmud’s expedition against India, “the Afghans and Khalaj submitted to him”; ii, 78 (Pers. Transl, 294): when Ilak Khan took up a menacing attitude Mahmud arrived in Ghazna and summoned “the Khalaj Turks, ever on their horses, [6] manly son of swords…” Equally, during the inroad of Qadir Khan to Tukharistan. Mahmud rushed to Balkh “with his Turkish, Indian, Khalaj, Afghan, and Ghazna troops…”

The fact that the Khalaj were associated in Mahmud’s victories may account for their subsequent ambitions, Already under the weak Sultan Mas’ud, they became restive. On 19 Muharram 432/1040, Mas’ud had to send an expedition from Ghazni in order to obtain the submission or punishment of the Khalaj who, during his absence, had committed some transgressions (fisad), Abul Fazal Bayhaqi, ed. Morley, 826, 830 [where خلج is mis-spelt as بلخ]

Najib Bakrans geography Jahan-nama, written (circa AD, 1200-1220) on the eve of the Mongol invasion, contains a particularly interesting paragraph on the changes which the originally Turkish tribe was undergoing: “The Khalaj are a tribe of Turks who from the Khallukh limits migrated to Zabulistan. Among the districts of Ghazni there is a steppe where they reside. Then, on account of the heat of the air, their complexion has changed and tended towards blackness; the tongue (zuban) too has undergone alterations and become a different language (lughat).”

In the earliest mention of Juvaynis Jahan-Gusha, i, 132, “the Khalaj of Ghazni” are curiously associated with “Afghans”; a levy (hashar) of these two tribes mobilized by the Mongols took part in the punitive expedition to the region of Merv, ii 194-8: after the disruption of the kingdom of Sultan Muhammad Khwarazim Shah, a “numberless” mass of “Khalaj and Turkmans from Khorasan and Transoxiana” gathered at Purshavur (Peshawar) under the leadership of Saif al-Din Ighraq (var. *Yighraq) [7] – Malik, who according to a gloss was himself a Khalaj. This army defeated the petty king of Ghazna, Radhi al-Mulk, but when Jalaladin Khwarazim Shah arrived in Ghazna, Ighraq came to greet him. After Jalaladin defeated the Mongols at Parvan, the Khalaj, Turkmans, and Ghauris of his army quarrelled with the Khwarazimians over the booty and finally retreated towards the south. Ighraq returned to Peshawar while his rival Nuh-Jandar stayed at *Ningrahar, but Ighraq retraced his steps and killed him. Finally, Mongol detachments reached the spot and destroyed the whole of the 20,000 - 30,000 Khalaj, Turkmans, and Ghauris who had abandoned Jalaladin. [8]

This historical sketch very clearly shows the gradual expansion of the southern branch of the Khalaj from the lower course of the Helmand to the environs of Ghazna and later to the neighborhood of Peshawar; on the other hand, it indicates how the Khalaj were utilized by the lords of the time and how gradually they found their way to power.

India was ever a most welcome field for energetic adventurers, and as early as AD. 1197 Muhammad Bakhtiyar Khalji [9], acting on behalf of the Ghurid Muiz al-Din Muhammad occupied Bihar and AD. 1202, at the head of a small troop of horse, conquered Lakhnauti in Bengal of which he became the governor.

In 689/1290 Jalal al-din Firuz Khalji succeeded the Mamluk kings on the throne of Delhi and his short-lived dynasty lasted till 1320. [10]

Another Khalji dynasty, descended from a brother of Firuz, ruled in Central India (Malwa) AD. 1436-1531. Equally the Lodhi kings of Delhi (AD. 1451-1526) belonged to a Khalji family which was established in Multan already towards AD 1005.

The Khalji in India were considered as Afghans and perhaps in the fifteenth century possessed no knowledge of Turkish but we must remember what Najib Bakran says on the changes undergone by the Khalaj of Afghanistan. In Afghanistan and India the descendants of the Khalaj are called Ghal-zae, i.e. “sons of the thief”. [11] This later popular etymology and the legend built up round it are certainly artificial. The fact is that the important Ghilzai tribe occupies now the region round Ghazni, [12] where the Khalaj used to live and that historical data all point, to the transformation of the Turkish Khalaj into Afghan Ghilzai. Even the phonetic evolution of the name has nothing astonishing. The ancient Turkish form was Qalaj (or Qalach), and it is well known that Turkish q was heard by the Arabs now as kh and now as gh. [13] Qalaj could have a parallel form *Ghalaj of which it was easv to bring the end in conformity with the usual Afghan terminology of zae, zai (= Persian –zada).

Notes:
[1] In the account of the province of Davar on the Hilmand.

[2] After all Mas’udis vague passage may even not refer to the Khalaj but only to the Kharlukh and the Turkmans (often quoted alongside with the Khalaj).

[3] Probably based on the history of Ibn al-Azhar al-Akhbari, see Barthold, Zur Geschichte der Saffariden, in Oriental Studien Th. Noldek, 1906, pp 173, 186.

[4] Siasat Nama (485/1092), ch. xxvii, p. 96

[5] Gardizi, 56. The text has Turkan-e Sulh but the editor has already suggested the reading *Khallukh. I admit the necessity of the emendation, but, in view of the circumstances, I prefer *Khalaj.

[6] Ahlas al-Zuhr

[7] The alternance of initial i- and yi is frequent; cf. Inal/Yinal

[8] But certainly not at all the Khalaj.

[9] i.e. Khalaji. In Indian pronunciation the middle short vowel of a tri-syllabic word regularly omitted (shafaqat > shafqat), shafaqal > while a mono-syllabic word ending in two consonants becomes bi-sylabic (fahm > faham).

[10] His father had the Turkish title Yughrush, see M. F. Koprulu, Zur Kentniss der altturkischen Titulatur, in Korosi Csoma Archivum, 1938, Erganzungsband, p. 339, who quotes Tarikh-e Farishta, I, 152, 155.

[11] Or with a further reduction of the vowel: Ghilzae, in Persian Ghiljai

[12 See Longworth Dames, Afghanistan and Ghilzai in EI. The author seems not to have realized the weight of the earlier historical evidence and disbelieved the possibility of the transformation Khalaj > Ghilzai, fully admitted by other collaborators of the EI. (Barthold, Sir W. Haig); cf. laso Marquart, op. cit., 253. In fact there is absolutely nothing astonishing in a tribe of nomad habits changing its language. This happened with the Mongols settled among Turks and probably with some Turks living among Kurds. [Sir W. Haig in the Cambridge History of India, III, 90, gives a pertinent reply to Raverty: “If the Ghilzay be not Khaljis it is difficult to say what has become of the latter.”]

[13] Cf. Tabari, iii, 1416: Ghamish < Turkish Qamish “a reed”.

POSTED BY MEHRAN BAHARLI AT 10:26 AM
 
.
If Khiljis are Turks then so are the South Slavic Bulgarians. Of course they are Pashtuns lol.

What about the Turkic Sakhas in Siberia? Are they Iranians?

The Saka (Old Persian Sakā; Sanskrit शाक Śāka; Greek Σάκαι;Latin Sacae; Chinese: 塞; pinyin: Sāi; Old Chinese *Sək) were aScythian tribe or group of tribes of Iranian origin.[1] They were nomadic warriors roaming the steppes of modern-day Kazakhstan.

Yakuts (Sakha: Саха, Sakha), are a Turkic people[7] who mainly inhabit the Sakha (Yakutia) Republic.
 
. .
Rise of Islam in Bengal, role of migration | Page 13
cross posted:

I completely agree that present day Ghilzai's have nothing much to do with Turkic people. But that is not the debate here, the debate is about Khalaj tribe and their origin whether they were Turkic or not. @Marwat Khan Lodhi is saying Khalaj was originally a Pashtun tribe, I am saying this is incorrect, they were originally a Proto-Turkic tribe and their branches still speak that Proto-Turkic Khalaj language, settled in many places, other than Afghanistan, such as Iran, Azerbaijan, Southern Russia and Turkey (post #182 and 184 above, also see links below). I do not believe they were originally Pashtun or Iranic like Marwat is suggesting according to this article, which I believe is full of conjectures:
Khaljies are Afghan

It is possible they were part of Hepthalite confederation, but they were a Turkic and nomadic part of that confederation:
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/southasianarchaeology/Hepthalites.pdf
Scythians subsets: Kushans, Hephthalites, Sakas, Gujjars, and Parthians
Talessman's Atlas - Hephthalites
(search for Khalaj in these pages)

This video About page also has a very detailed description of Khalaj tribe history and their Turkic origin.

Khilji dynasty
"The Khalji people
Before expansion into India, the Khaljis were mainly concentrated in Turkestan. In the writings of Al-Biruni, Ibn-Batuta, , Al-Khwarezmi, Masudi, Varahamihira, and in Juzjani's Hudud ul-'alam min al-mashriq ila al-maghrib, they are presented as a group of Turkic origin which formed one of the older members of the Hephthalite confederation, and included many nomads near Bactria, in Turfan (Turkestan) and eastward of modern Ghazni. Many migrated to Iran, and possibly also to Armenia, Iraq, Anatolia, Turkmenistan, thePunjab and what are now modern Pakistan and Afghanistan, especially around the Sulaiman Mountains, then under the control of the Ghaznavids (see also the article on the Ghalzais). In Iran, they migrated mainly to Pars, where they settled an isolated region which is called today as Khaljistan - Land of Khaljis. However, Persian-speakers in Iran also use the term Khalji to describe any nomads of Turkic background in their country. The Khilji people of Iran and Afghanistan, the Ghilzai, and the of Bengal and Sindh claim to be descendants of medieval Khilji clans, though they have intermarried greatly with other groups and many share few physical similarities with the original Khiljis. Most modern Khilji people and tribes have very few cultural links with the original Turkic tribe, except for the Khiljis of Iran and Afghanistan, who speak a Khalaj dialect of the Khalaj language group. Modern Khalji people are not more comparable to the past Khalji tribes who were of pure Turkic stock. For example in the case of India, modern Khalji people became ethnic Indians and lost their east-Asian features and their Turkic identity. In Iran, Afghanistan and Iraq, they are either of hybrid origin or in the case of Turkmen Khalji tribe they kept Turks but became cultural Iranians and Indians. Because of this fact, most of modern Khalji people and tribes have no more ties or any kind of an identity that trace them intentional to the Turks, except for the Khaljis of Iran and Afghanistan."

Khilji dynasty information
"Origin of the Khalji people
It seems, that the larger Khilji tribe was once member of Hephthalites of central Asia who also conquered -invaded- India. Originally, the Khaljis were mainly dwelling in Turkestan, except in some casesE.J. Brill's First Encyclopaedia of Islam, 1913-1936, p. 326Eran, Land zwischen Tigris und Indus, 1879, p. 268The Pathans: 550 B.C.-A.D. 1957,by Olaf Kirkpatrick Caroe or members of ancient Gökturks. In older scripts of Al-Biruni, Al-Khwarezmi, Masudi, in Juzjani's Hudud ul-'alam min al-mashriq ila al-maghrib and of Arab and Indian historians (Ibn Batuta, Ibn Khaldun or Vahara Mihira etc.) they are considered as one of the original (in the sense of real) members of the Hephtalite's confederation and of Turkic origin who are also found as nomads near Bactria, in Turfan (Turkestan) and east-ward of modern Ghazni in Afghanistan. Possibly, they have split themselves from these large area up and moved to Iran, Armenia, Iraq, Anatolia, Turkmenistan, Punjab) and modern Pakistan and Afghanistan, around the Sulaiman Mountains under the GhaznavidsThe Cambridge History of Iran, 1968, p.217 by William Bayne Fisher, Ehsan Yarshater, Ilya Gershevitch and Richard Nelson (see also on Ghalzais). In Iran, they moved to Pars where they settled an isolated region which is called today as Khaljistan - Land of Khaljis. However, Persians of Iran use the term Khalji also to describe nomads of Turkic background in their country. Also in in the Kohistan district of Pakistan, there is a place called after the Khiljis. The Khilji people of Iran and Afghanistan, the Ghilzai (also called Khaldjish) fraction of the Pashtuns, the Khaldji people of Bengal and Sindh are considered as descendants of ancient and middle-age Khalji (sub-)tribes. However, modern Khalji people are not more comparable to the past Khalji tribes who were of pure Turkic stock. For example in the case of India, modern Khalji people became ethnic Indians and lost their east-Asian features and their Turkic identity. In Iran, Afghanistan and Iraq, they are either of hybrid origin or in the case of Turkmen Khalji tribe they kept Turks but became culturally Iranians and South Asian. Because of this fact, most of modern Khalji people and tribes have no more ties or any kind of an identity that trace them intentional to the Turks, except for the Khaljis of Iran and Afghanistan, who speak a Khalaj dialect of the Khalaj language group.

Cultural achievements and religious propagation
The main court language of Khiljis became Persian, followed by Arabic and their own native Turkoman language and some of north-Indian dialects. Even if it was not related with their nature as original nomads and had no ties with urbane cultures and civilizations, the Khilji of Delhi promoted Persian language to a high degree. Such a co-existence of different languages gave birth to the earliest and archaic version of Urdu. According to Ibn Batuta, the Khiljis encouraged conversion to Islam by making it a custom to have the convert presented to the Sultan who would place a robe on the convert and award him with bracelets of gold.The preaching of Islam: a history of the propagation of the Muslim faith By Sir Thomas Walker Arnold, pg. 212 During Ikhtiyar Uddin Bakhtiyar Khilji's control of the Bengal, Muslim missionaries in India achieved their greatest success, in terms of number of converts to Islam.The preaching of Islam: a history of the propagation of the Muslim faith By Sir Thomas Walker Arnold, pg. 227-228"

During 1221 Mongol invasion, many Khalajes joined the Mongols. Some Mongols claim part descent from Khalaj:

Kharchin Mongols - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"The Kharchin were originated from the Kipchak guard troops served in Khanbalik or Dadu (today's Beijing, great capital of Yuan empire) and other Chinese areas, and also the Kipchak royal horse herder groups in the present Khovd Province and its neighborhood areas of Mongolia. The Kipchaks got the name of Kharchin because their horse herders were famous for their tribute of horse milk wine to Yuan emperors, the Kharchin originally means people who brew black horse milk wine. Some scholars also argues that the Kharchins were originated at least partly from the Khalaj of the historical Khorasan area in today's Iran and Afghanistan, who were a sub-group of the Oghuz or Arghu Turks. The Kharchin's Bolai Tayisi was the successor of Arugtai Tayisi, he recovered the power of the eastern Mongols against the Oirads."

The ethnic origins of the Kharchin Mongols - History Forum ~ All Empires
"Asud, Kharchin and Sharnud were known as the Huuchin or old Kharchin, who were the core tribes of the Yunsheebuu Tumen. The Asuds were originated from the Yuan Empire's royal guard troops of the Alans, the Asud's Arugtai Tayisi could be recognized as the first leader of the Yunsheebuu-Kharchin tribal alliance and one of the most important leaders during the Northern Yuan dynasty. The Kharchins were originated from the Kipchak guard troops served in Khanbalik or Dadu(today's Beijing, great capital of Yuan empire) and other Chinese areas, and also the Kipchak royal horse herder groups in the present Khovd province and its neighborhood areas of Mongolia. The Kipchaks got the name of Kharchin because their horse herders were famous for their tribute of horse milk wine to Yuan emperors, the Kharchin originally means people who brew black horse milk wine. Some scholars also argues that the Kharchins were originated at least partly from the Khalaj of the historical Khoransan area in today's Iran and Afghanistan, who were a sub-group of the Oghuz or Arghu Turks. The Kharchin's Bolai tayisi was the successor of Arugtai tayisi, he recovered the power of the eastern Mongols against the Oirads. There's no the exact clues for the origins of the Sharnuud yet, but Yunsheebuu Tumen's Sharnuud shouldn't be simply considered as yellow-head Uriankhai or others, while there're so many tribes like Uriankhai, Naiman and Buryat, that consisted of such a clan of the Sharnuud, even some of the Mongolized Uigurs were named as the Sharnuud too. The name of Sharnuud may suggest their non-Mongoloid physical characters, Yunsheebuu's Sharnuud seems some European looking group followed with the Alans and Kipchaks to serve for the Yuan court in Khanbalik(Dadu)."
 
.
@kalu_miah, just because there is small presence of khalaj in iran, doesnt mean khalaj are not ghilzais. Ghilzais became very important power players in iran in 18th century. One of the ghilzai , a general of nadir shah, even became ruler of azerbaijan and westren persia. Many Ghilzais are still nomads, called kuchis, like the khilji, they live in tents and carry cattles with them. These nomads migrate back and forth between northren afghanistan and westren pakistan. In the past , some of these nomads might have settled in iran.
Your assessment is that khiljis were still turks in 12th century, while all the historical sources agree that they were not recognized turks at all in delhi. As @charon_2 said they were pashtunized long time ago, in 8th century or even before that period. My theory is that they were not exactly turkic group but east iranian stock like backtrian, sogdians, scythians etc. Who got absorbed in another east iranian group , pashtuns. In 12th century they were fully pashtunized but were trying to claim turkic identity to give legetimacy to their rule in the turkic dominated nobility of india. Proper turks had very strong reasons to reject their bogus claim. If khushal identify jalaludin khilji as a man from country of ghilzais then it means it was a common knowledge in india that khiljis were afghans/pashtuns (khushal khan served mughals in india).
 
.
@kalu_miah, just because there is small presence of khalaj in iran, doesnt mean khalaj are not ghilzais. Ghilzais became very important power players in iran in 18th century. One of the ghilzai , a general of nadir shah, even became ruler of azerbaijan and westren persia. Many Ghilzais are still nomads, called kuchis, like the khilji, they live in tents and carry cattles with them. These nomads migrate back and forth between northren afghanistan and westren pakistan. In the past , some of these nomads might have settled in iran.
Your assessment is that khiljis were still turks in 12th century, while all the historical sources agree that they were not recognized turks at all in delhi. As @charon_2 said they were pashtunized long time ago, in 8th century or even before that period. My theory is that they were not exactly turkic group but east iranian stock like backtrian, sogdians, scythians etc. Who got absorbed in another east iranian group , pashtuns. In 12th century they were fully pashtunized but were trying to claim turkic identity to give legetimacy to their rule in the turkic dominated nobility of india. Proper turks had very strong reasons to reject their bogus claim. If khushal identify jalaludin khilji as a man from country of ghilzais then it means it was a common knowledge in india that khiljis were afghans/pashtuns (khushal khan served mughals in india).

I also agree with you about their stock. People say Khiljis now are mixed with pashtuns thats why they don't show difference. That does not make any sense going by genetic tests.
 
.
I also agree with you about their stock. People say Khiljis now are mixed with pashtuns thats why they don't show difference. That does not make any sense going by genetic tests.
Exactly. I know people wont read that long article but this point is important.
"Fakhruddin Mubarak Shah, well known as Fakhr-e Mudabir and author of Adab-al-Harb and other famous books, writing on the History of India (1205
A.D.) says that the
armies of Sultan Qutb-ud-Din comprised of Turks, Ghori, Khorasani, Khalji and Indian soldiers.[10] This proves that in the beginning of the 7th century Hijera the Turks and Khaljies were two separate nationalities. If not so then they would not have been mentioned
separately in the same sentence."
Even a 12th century historian consider turks and khiljis as separate nationalities. Even babur, a turk himself, mention khiljis of ghazni as afghans in baburnama. He doesnt use world ghilzai, but khilji.
 
.
Exactly. I know people wont read that long article but this point is important.
"Fakhruddin Mubarak Shah, well known as Fakhr-e Mudabir and author of Adab-al-Harb and other famous books, writing on the History of India (1205
A.D.) says that the
armies of Sultan Qutb-ud-Din comprised of Turks, Ghori, Khorasani, Khalji and Indian soldiers.[10] This proves that in the beginning of the 7th century Hijera the Turks and Khaljies were two separate nationalities. If not so then they would not have been mentioned
separately in the same sentence."
Even a 12th century historian consider turks and khiljis as separate nationalities. Even babur, a turk himself, mention khiljis of ghazni as afghans in baburnama. He doesnt use world ghilzai, but khilji.

I mean unless khilji is very very small tribe then maybe. We know Mongols have left their mark in central asia/Afghanistan. When someone marries you genes get passed down, yes it gets diluted but the traces are still left. Another interesting thing, Afghan pashtuns in east near Pak border don't show any east asian genes. While those who live with Tajiks, Hazaras, Uzbeks in north do.
For exemple these samples were taken from North Afghanistan.

afghan | Search Results | Harappa Ancestry Project
 
.
Exactly. I know people wont read that long article but this point is important.
"Fakhruddin Mubarak Shah, well known as Fakhr-e Mudabir and author of Adab-al-Harb and other famous books, writing on the History of India (1205
A.D.) says that the
armies of Sultan Qutb-ud-Din comprised of Turks, Ghori, Khorasani, Khalji and Indian soldiers.[10] This proves that in the beginning of the 7th century Hijera the Turks and Khaljies were two separate nationalities. If not so then they would not have been mentioned
separately in the same sentence."
Even a 12th century historian consider turks and khiljis as separate nationalities. Even babur, a turk himself, mention khiljis of ghazni as afghans in baburnama. He doesnt use world ghilzai, but khilji.

There is a lot of inferences here and interpretation and assumptions.
Turks could mean anything in the above context, as it can mean Mongol [ Mughal ] too in the case of Babur, who you called a Turk. What it shows is that being a Turk is synonymous with being a Mughal [Mongol]

Ghilzais are a mix-breed between Turks and local people.
 
.
I mean unless khilji is very very small tribe then maybe. We know Mongols have left their mark in central asia/Afghanistan. When someone marries you genes get passed down, yes it gets diluted but the traces are still left. Another interesting thing, Afghan pashtuns in east near Pak border don't show any east asian genes. While those who live with Tajiks, Hazaras, Uzbeks in north do.
For exemple these samples were taken from North Afghanistan.

afghan | Search Results | Harappa Ancestry Project
I guess its because of intermarraiges with hazaras, uzbeks and tajiks. In north Afghanistan, there were 4 million pashtuns during taliban regime, who often mention their uzbek, tajik or hazara relatives or are themeselves biracial.
 
.
I guess its because of intermarraiges with hazaras, uzbeks and tajiks. In north Afghanistan, there were 4 million pashtuns during taliban regime, who often mention their uzbek, tajik or hazara relatives or are themeselves biracial.

Yes thats why, as i said genes gets diluted but also passed down. The traces are always there. I am pretty sure Khilji girls has been marrying non-khilji pashtuns also right?
 
.
I mean unless khilji is very very small tribe then maybe. We know Mongols have left their mark in central asia/Afghanistan. When someone marries you genes get passed down, yes it gets diluted but the traces are still left. Another interesting thing, Afghan pashtuns in east near Pak border don't show any east asian genes. While those who live with Tajiks, Hazaras, Uzbeks in north do.
For exemple these samples were taken from North Afghanistan.

afghan | Search Results | Harappa Ancestry Project

Uzbeks [ Mughals ] settled in large numbers across UP and Bihar.

In Punjab they settled around Rawalpindi and Jammu

That is where the mixing happened.

Another interesting thing, Afghan Pashtuns settled 10 times more across the UP and Bihar as compared to Punjab. However, very few went back to the rugged Pashtun areas to bring back east indian genes
 
.
Uzbeks [ Mughals ] settled in large numbers across UP and Bihar.

In Punjab they settled around Rawalpindi and Jammu

That is where the mixing happened.

Another interesting thing, Afghan Pashtuns settled 10 times more across the UP and Bihar as compared to Punjab. However, very few went back to the rugged Pashtun areas to bring back east indian genes

Sir have you seen uzbeks and punjabi mughals?
 
.
Back
Top Bottom