Samandri
BANNED
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2014
- Messages
- 1,959
- Reaction score
- -10
- Country
- Location
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Pamir mountains are tajikistan, karghistan, badakhshan and pakistan, how do you explain connection between pamiris and ghurids, with so much distance between two?. Heratis and farsiwans of ghor are related to iran , not badakhshanis . Hazaras and aimaks are forming majority and both are legacy of mongol invasion. Pashtuns live in southren districts of ghor and just below that, pashtun belt starts i.e it is adjacent to it from west and south. No signs of pamiri tajiksOkay and any sources for your claim
The language of the Ghurids is subject to some controversy. What is known with certainty is that it was considerably different from the .
I think there is a great possibility that Ghurids were originally Pamiri "Tajiks" who adopted to Persian
Hindostan was still a mess before the invaders came...
Dont you know that every Hindu king was fighting eachother in Hindostan before Muslim invaders came?
We civilized you guys otherwise you would have killed eachother in constant wars and caste system...
You Civilized India?? and today that civility is rampant in the world..just the opposite way...muslims killing muslims by hundreds each day. So as world is getting civilised, you are getting uncivilised. Is it?
Those primitives civilized you Hindus and made the biggest empires of the world...
Dont forget that your ancestors were their subsidaries... And you have the audacity to act tough on the internet
Iranica is twisting the words, contemporary historians , persians themeselves, are saying that ghurids spoke different langauge than persian. But iranica/wiki has twisted the facts and is saying that it is subject of controversy and were speaking form of persian different than court langauge. Patrons of persian langauge and art? They also say so about durrani empire. They should provide historical source and details which indicate that ghurids were iranians and patron of persian civilization. They are not able to explain why ghurids had soori/suri surnames.
Yes but new sources suggest that they were Tajiks and most scholars today seem to support a Tajik origin for Ghorids. The most important thing is that they definitely spoke Persian neither Pashto not a Turkic language. Read this sentence again and make up your mind
Instead, the consensus in modern scholarship (incl. Morgenstierne, Bosworth, Dupree, Gibb, Ghirshman,
Longworth Dames and others) holds that the dynasty was most likely of Tajik origin.[13][14][15]
Ghilzais are a different story and the most possible theory for their origin is a mixed Khalaj Turkic and Eastern Iranian origin
Strange that in case of khiljis , you are not going with westren historians who consider khiljis and ghilzais to be same. I am interested how you prove ghaljis and khiljis to be two different ethnic groups. Do explain why they were not accepted as proper turks but afghans in delhi court. Is it a coincidence that babur mentions about powerful khilji/khalaj people south of ghazni, which is nowadays traditional stronghold of ghilzais. Even much biased iranica agrees that ghilzais are pashtunized khalaj that were remnants of hepthalites and originated from turkemistan and were indo-iranian rather than turks.I would go with Western scholars opinions considering the nationalism that afflicts most Eastern scholars.
As for Ghilzai's, I have serious doubt that they have anything to do with Khilji's/Khalaji's, in other words, I believe it is another tall nationalistic claims by Afghans. I want to open a thread in the Iranian subsection on this Ghilzai/Khilji/Khalaj issue to get more information.
@Samandri is it ok to ask your ethnic origin?
I would go with Western scholars opinions considering the nationalism that afflicts most Eastern scholars.
As for Ghilzai's, I have serious doubt that they have anything to do with Khilji's/Khalaji's, in other words, I believe it is another tall nationalistic claims by Afghans. I want to open a thread in the Iranian subsection on this Ghilzai/Khilji/Khalaj issue to get more information.
@Samandri is it ok to ask your ethnic origin?
Turks themselves have 7-10 % Mongoloid admixture on average. It's a fairytale imagination that some "Mongoloid" looking nomads were able to to spread their language to dozens of Anatolians without mixing with them. Turkmens weren't fully Mongoloid when they conquered Anatolia, as Turkmens from Turkmenistan have also only 15-20 % Mongoloid admixture. In genereal parlance: The average Turks carries the genes of the conquerers and the conquered ones
Even Turkmen themselves are mixture of Iranic but to say they are only 15-20% Mongoloid is TOTTALLY WRONG.
No, they don't have only 15-20% Mongoloid admixture if we are talking about other parts of Turkmenistan.
They have from 22 - 56% Mongoloid
View attachment 89659
View attachment 89660
Even the Afghan Turkmen are 37 - 45% Mongoloid Mongoloid and have 45% haplogroup Q and Iran 42% Q
The average Mongoloid admixture of Turkmens in the Yunusbayev study is 15 %. I know that Turkmens from Afghanistan are more Mongoloid admixed but that doesn't seem to be the case of Iranian Turkmens and those from Turkmenistan
Haplogroups rarely tell anything about your about your genetic make-up. So classifiyng haplogroup Q as Mongoloid isn't valid.