"Mian Babban, post: 9549855, member: 184739"]I think in this and previous posts you are claiming that no one from Pakhtunkhwa/Roh has made any conquests, that only those who got Indianized after several generations, were able to emerge as rulers and conquerors. Basically you claiming that Pashtuns from their native lands never produced rulers and conquerors. I am going to enrich your knowledge on this. Shah Mir Swati , an adventurer from Swat, established the first Muslim dynasty of Kashmir. Dost Muhammad Khan Orakzai from Tirah went to India and conquered Bhopal and founded a dynasty with the help of his clansmen from Tirah. Tirah is in present-day FATA , tribal areas. Najib Khan Yousafzai from Buner (Khyber Pakhtunkhwa) went to India , enlisted himself as a common soldier but made so much progress that he ruled Delhi for ten years as a dictator. I have already mentioned Hafiz Rahmat Khan Barech. Now lets come to Persia. A Ghilzai army from Kanadahar led by Mahmud Hotak invaded and conquered Persia in 1722. Dont you know about that?. His father Mirwais had established independent emirate of Kandahar in 1708. Azad Khan Sulieman Khel from Ghazni ruled Azerbajian and North-western Persia for eight years. Read about him. And our Ahmad Shah Abdali had second largest Muslim empire after Ottomans in that age.
No, read very carefully what I wrote. No pashtun from Roh ruled over Delhi. Don't try and tell me Ahmed Shah Abdali ruled over Delhi.
Both Dost Muhammad Khan Orakzai and Najib Khan Yousafzai were 'emigrants' not conquerors. I don't need you make a point for me. Same goes for Hafiz Rahmat Khan. Come up with something better. Here is something to enlighten you about Shah Mir Swati. Do a simply google search before writing bs.
There are two theories regarding Shah Mir's origin. Historian A. Q. Rafiqi states that some Persian chronicles of Kashmir describe Shah Mir as a descendent of the rulers of Swat.[a] He thinks it more likely that he was a descedent of Turkish or Persian immigrants to Swat.[2] It has also been suggested that he belonged to a Sufi or Qadiri family.[3]
On the other hand, the 15th century Kashmiri historian Jonaraja, writing in the court of Shah Mir's descendant Budshah, states that Shah Mir came to Kashmir along with his tribe from the country of Panchagahvara (identified as the Panjgabbar valley between Rajouri and Budhal). He was said to belong to the family of an ancestor called Partha, who was described as a second Partha (an allusion to the Mahabharata hero Arjuna).[4][5] Some scholars state that the Panjgabbar valley was peopled by Khasas and so ascribe a Khasa ethnicity to Shah Mir.[6][7][8]
Most modern historians accept the Swati origins of Shah Mir.[3][9][10][11] Kashmiri scholar N. K. Zutshi, having critically examined the sources, reconciles the two versions by noting that the Persian chronicles mentions Swadgir rather than Swat, which he interprets as Swadgabar, meaning "suburbs of Gabar", which coincides with Jonaraja's description of Panchagahvara-Simani (on the borders of Panchagagvara).[12]
A. Q. Rafiqi states:
Shah Mir arrived in Kashmir in 1313 along with his family, during the reign of Suhadeva (1301–1320), whose service he entered. In subsequent years, through his tact and ability Shah Mir rose to prominence and became one of the most important personalities of his time.[13]
No one disagrees that for most of their history pashtuns of Roh have been ruled by non-pashtuns
Thats not true. They were successful , daring and enterprising as long as they had vigour and spirit of Pashtun. They became degenerated and degraded when they lost every thing that makes one Pashtun.
They were very enterprising no doubt they lived on trade routes. They were bold too as many are but that does not hold true only if you are pathan. Many people have these attributes.
Case in point. Look at the pathetic situation in Afghanistan, the nation of Bacha Baaz and think before you reply.
Rampur was a small state. You are blowing things our of proportion. No you do not have "great" heritage and descent. For Hindus and "Ajlafs", you are just an ordinary Indian Muslim. Linkage with a petty state of Rampur does not grant you wings and horns.
I am of a descendant of rulers of Hyderabad deccan. Search on google you will know how big or small they were. I am in no delusion about my history. I know very well who Rohillas were. Now share with me whose direct descendant you are and which kingdom's nobility your great grandfather was part of.
Where i made such a comment? they were never one body and are still not one body . They are tribal people and each tribe and family had their own interests and priorities. Some supported British, some opposed British.
No i am not doing that. It was rather unfortunate that Pashtun mercenaries of Roh in the army of Babur were cutting down their Lodi brethren at the battle of Panipat. A similar scene had happened before in which Pashtun chieftains from Roh in the army of Amir Timur were fighting against Mallu Iqbal Khan Lodi, the Afghan Wazir of Tughlaq empire.
You have claimed it again gain ex. telling me Rohillas showed great pashton hood by helping the Bangash Nawabs.
Obviously they didn't agree with you and your interpretation of history is wrong. Funny you never mention the names of these chiefs of Roh because you probably have a hard time finding them in the books you like to quote which are not considered neutral historical records by anyone. Case in point. Read the document below carefully. It challenges your claim about rohilla nawabs ancestry.
Also if you have a keen eye you will notice the difference in narrative between the the two. Pashtuns of Rohilla are always mentioned as tribes fighting while the ones in hind are mostly mentioned as a certain person of power fighting with his troops. Another point which I have consistently made
Superior Ashraf caste !.....its your insecurity and inferiority complex speaking. Honestly its cringy. For us you all are one and same i.e Hindis
Again moron there is no such thing as Ashrafi caste. Firstly clarify who is 'us'. Secondly what makes you think I care about what a low life tribal like you has to say about me. I suffer from no inferiority complex. You are suffering from inferiority complex as you like to claim other people's history.
They might have started calling themselves Ashrafis after becoming thoroughly Indianzied but they were not part of this non-sense when they were Pashtuns. Bahadur Khan Daudzai who was born in Peshawar and accompanied his father to India, founded Shahjahanpur city in 1647 and invited Pashtuns from 52 tribes of Roh. For each tribe he assigned a Mohallah so that the city had 52 Mohallahs. Thats tribal organization of Pashtuns.
I have stated this earlier before. It's another example of power consolidation. Even the Mughals settled tribes from Roh in hind. Many ruling families settled people of different ethnic backgrounds to consolidate power. It was not because they were crying out for pashtun nationhood or because of any tribal organization. It is a fact that tribalism took back seat in hind.
You have no understanding of power politics in medieval India or Afghan migration into Hind.
Apologies accepted (good to see that you are consulting books) but his father Shah Alam was not settled in Rohilkhand. He visited Rohilkhand to meet his run away slave Daud Khan (to convince him to return back to Roh) and during return journey, he was murdered by some robbers. So he is buried there. And you are talking about which Bahadur Shah I?. The Mughal King Bahadur Shah I died in 1712 and he was not related to any Rohilla.
Yes he was. I quoted you the source. No I am not talking about Bahadur Shah I the Mughal emperor. Figure it out for yourself.
Let me repeat myself. He was not a mansabdar of Mughal empire. It was Najib-ud-Daulah who was mansabdar of Mughal empire. Strictly speaking, Rohillas of Doab under regency of Hafiz Rahmat Khan were 'rebels' of Mughal empire. They were not sending income to the treasury of Delhi and were not bound by firmans of Delhi emperor.
I never said he was a mansabdar. I said he was part of Mughal nobility which he was. He was not even a nawab of Rhoillas he was a reagent ruling for his nephew. So don't try to twist my words.
"Rebels of Mughals" Read what i wrote moron. Go back and have a look. Mughal courtiers were rebelling against Mughals when he rebelled so were the Nawabs of Oudh and the future Nizams of Deccan. You really have no understanding of medieval politics of India or medieval politics in general. History can be summarized as former subjects rebelling against their ruler when they get weak.
So? Farsi was also lingua franca of Roh and entire present-day Afghanistan. Farsi is the national language of Afghanistan . What you have any thing to do with Farsi? you are a Hindi speaker
Firstly I am a Urdu speaker ( learn the difference between what modern day terminologies of Hindi and Urdu denote), Afghanistani charsi bacha baz, which took over as the ligua franca of the subcontinent from Persian and that is the reason that till this date Muslims all over the subcontinent speak Urdu and it is the national language of Pakistan. The reason I pointed out Persian was because the uncultured people of what is now KPK did not use Persian as language of their daily use either now or back then but Pathans of hind did along with Urdu. That's why Pashto lost significance very quickly. Which is another point differentiating the two.
https://nuzhat888.wordpress.com/2015/02/19/four-generations-of-hafiz-rahmat-khan-barech/ [/QUOTE]
So these ladies are descendants of Hafiz Rahmat Khan the Pashtun. They are just Indian looking people who dress like any other Indian. Hafiz Rahmat Khan was a Barech Pashtun, these ladies are not. They are just Indian Muslims of 'Ashraf' or 'Ajlaf' caste.
I know you have learnt a few new words but learn what they mean and don't overuse them. Yes they are the descendants of Hafiz Rahmat Khan. Have a look at a picture of Babur and Bahadur shah zafar and then go tell the world Bahadur Shah was not the descendant of Babur. They will call you out for the idiot that you are.
Disunity is key feature of Pashtuns and Qaim Khan Bangash attacked Rohillas on instigation of Safdar Janh who had eyes on Bangash's territories. Rohillas defeated Bangashs, and Safdar Jang occupied the Farrukhabad of weakened Bangashs. It was sentiment of Pashtun brotherhood that Hafiz Rahmat Khan did not tolerate the destruction of Bangashs at the hands of Awadh and subsequently helped his brethren, not just on this occasion but also on other occasions concerning Marathas.
Don't try to teach me history. You need to learn it first. Safdar Jung also helped Hafiz Rahmat Khan against the Maratha while at the same time was also trying to get rid of them. Stop making ridiculous claims. They were butchering each other like animals. Not all wars were fought to completely annihilate the enemy. It's called geo politics. Mughals did not not destroy all of existing nobility of hind when they came to Hind. Marathas reinstated mughal emperor in Delhi after they defeated him
Read who Hemu was. He was the chief minister of Adil Shah Suri and fought Afghan rebels across North India and the Mughal forces of Akbar and Humayun in Agra and Delhi. In fact Afghan Chieftains also sided with Humayun against Sher Shah Suri.
Typical MQM mindset. The inferiority complex of Ajlafs. Your sorts are claiming to be the heirs of Lodi and Sur emperors while other MQM-walas are calling themselves heir and grandchildren of of Mughal emperors....the fact is majority of Indian Muslims were converts from low castes of Hinduism according to historians.
Stop spewing out nonsense charsi Afghanistani. No they were not. It was a classicist society and everyone maintained their class identity. To this day in census in India Dalit muslims are counted as Dalit muslims and make up to 20% to 25% of muslim population. Dalit muslim populations are also present in Paksitan but no record is kept.
The reason they urdu speakers (Which you are equating to MQM) claim to be hiers of Mughals is because they are inheritors of their culture ex. Urdu was the official language of later Mughals (I can numerous other examples and they are not the only inheritors but it has nothing to do with you and your kind). Though it's development accelerated during Delhi sultanate. The culture created by Mughals and delhi dynasty filtered most strongly to muslims of UP and Nawabets of Oudh, Rampur, Deccan etc. and not to you tribals of Roh so off course they relate to them.
We do not claim to be supernatural or superior beings. Its you and your kind who are have low self esteem and are wannabe Pashtuns. You people link yourselves to us to feel great or superior or some thing like that. Be yourselves and you people will be at ease. As about what Pashtuns could do. The "dirt poor" Pashtuns decimated your Maratha kin at the battle of Panipat.
HaHa my Maratha Kin. I think you have completely lost your mind smoking chars. You are a wannabe and you try to associate yourself with Pathans of Hind. Read below and enjoy
Actually Lodi kingdom would not have survived without the help from tribes of Roh. Sharqi army had besieged Delhi, the capital, and Bahlol had only a small army of his own.
Yes, these mercenaries did make a big impact for Bhalul lodi but that is beyond the point. bhalol lodi was not fighting under them they were fighting under bahlol lodhi and therefore history remembers bhalol lodi not them and therefore in the context in which I said this they did not change history, Bhalul lodi did.
Roh was an independent territory, wild wild west, no kings or kingdoms.........Here is snippet from Afsana-i-Shahan
It was only in 18th century that Pashtuns realized that they need to have their own state or kingdom
Stop posting exaggerated bs from Afsana-i-Shahan which was written in Persian by Muhammad Kabir Bettani of Juanpur whose two previous generations were living in Hind. All these tribes were subjects of different kings (rebellious or not). It is a historically accepted fact. Stop reading bs from barmazid.com and read some proper literature on history.
And i forget to mention. Pashtuns at Mau did not like the Nawabi and Indian life style of Nawab Muhammad Khan Bangash
View attachment 401991
Yeah, sure but he was living it. They did not like the idea of one being greater than the other compared to nobility of Turik origion but they thoroughly enjoyed the fruits of civilization. Modeled their architecture on great muslim architecture of hind. They were no longer bound to their tribe but subservient to a bangash even if their weren't bangash. Within a few years the stone throwing was put to an end by his descendant to the throne. Them being adverse to one calming to be superior to others does not mean they were adverse to Ashrafi life style. In two to three generations (at most) they were patrons of Urdu and Persian, the arts and life style of the nobility of Hind.
I am in awe of Indians
[/QUOTE]
Pathetic post. You are in awe of the people in the picture, good for you. Go take a dip in your sewer. It will suit you well since your mind is already in the gutter.