Pashtuns: A genetically South Asian ethnicity wrapped in self hate(?)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sky earth

Before their expansion into India, the Khalji people were mainly concentrated in Turkestan,[40][41][42] from one of the older members of the Hephthalite confederation, and included many nomads near Bactria (in Turfan) and east of modern Ghazni. Many migrated to various parts of Persia, including to parts of what are now Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan and India, then under the control of the Ghaznavids.[43] In Iran they migrated mainly to Pars, where they settled an isolated region which is called today Khaljistan ("land of Khaljis"). However, Persian-speakers in Iran also used the term Khalji to describe nomads of Turkic background in their country.[43] The Khaljis began to become Pashtunized (Afghanized) since the 8th century and later known as Ghilzais, part of the Pashtun ethnic group.[44]

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khilj...#Khalji_people

The Turkic origin of Khiljis isn't new science . The modern Ghilzais are Pashtuns because they mixed so extensively with Eastern Iranians that they became Pashtuns. Hepthalites, Sakas and any other steppe nomads in Central Asia were half Turkic anyway.

---

yes even afghans are with 5% east asian admixture more "turkish" than anatolian turks who are just a bunch of armenians,georgians and greeks who lost their identity.The khalaj were described as descendants of the iranic Hepthalites and sources mention that they didnt looked like turks and were not considered as turks by the real turks.They were always described as afghans just like other pashtuns and they are genetically identical to Durranis.Also early arabic and persian sources called everyone in central asia turkish because they had no good information about this regions and turk was just a broad term during this time . Even some pamiri mountain tribes in Badakshan were described as turkish by this idiots so forget to troll this forum with your pan-turanian fantasies.Khalaj were eastern iranic people who were a bit turkified but nothing more and they are descendants of saka,kushan and hepthalites who settled in afghanistan and mixed with the earlier population there

read this text
https://books.google.de/books?id=75F...khalaj&f=false

Some of them can pass as Romanians, since many Romanians are mixed with Gypsies and look kind off white/Pakistani. But nothing else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coon

Some of them can pass as Romanians, since many Romanians are mixed with Gypsies and look kind off white/Pakistani. But nothing else.

---

Did a pashtun pinched your girlfriend or what is your problem?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dynamo

That's how I you know bollocks, the last name khan is used by pathans, punjabis and indians not afghans. The term khan is actually Turkic not mongoloid you waste of embryo

---

No time to stay, but the term Khan is actually neither Mongol nor Turkic, contrary it is Iranic taken by both Turks and Mongols and derives from the Old Iranic word Khwan what means "the one who is lord of himself", basically King. As far as I remember from linguistic sources, Sogdian texts show the use of the Khan title too. It derives from Iranic Khwa, which in Kurdish for example means "self". In Persian it's "Kho".

"khwanim" is the female version and basically means Queen. Even today people use the word "Khanim" to refer to their wifes as in "my queen".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Demhat

No time to stay, but the term Khan is actually neither Mongol nor Turkic, contrary it is Iranic taken by both Turks and Mongols and derives from the Old Iranic word Khwan what means "the one who is lord of himself", basically King. As far as I remember from linguistic sources, Sogdian texts show the use of the Khan title too. It derives from Iranic Khwa, which in Kurdish for example means "self". In Persian it's "Kho".

"khwanim" is the female version and basically means Queen. Even today people use the word "Khanim" to refer to their wifes as in "my queen".

---

thank you bro, turks have adopted many things from eastern iranic people like sogdians and saka.Actually their whole nomadic lifestyle was copied from iranic people of northern central asia.They have many iranic loanwords today and not few iranic people were assimilated by them in central asia so that turkmen and even some uzbeks can look still very iranic

Allot of titles used by Mongols or even later Turkic tribes are actually of Iranic origin.

As another example "Ashina" a ancient tribe and the first ruling dynasty among Turkic speakers.

The Ashina however were actually a Scythian tribe and became turkified. Since they also existed among the Saka and the word Ashina derives from Iranic tongue and means simply "blue".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashina_%28clan%29

Quote:

---

Findley assumes that the Ashina probably comes from one of the Saka languages of central Asia and means "blue", gök in Turkic, the color identified with the east, so that Göktürk, another name for the Turk empire, meant the "Turks of the East".[13] This is seconded by the Hungarian researcher András Róna-Tas, who finds it plausible "that we are dealing with a royal family and clan of Saka origin".

---

"blue" as in "blue sky". The reason why the first Turkic dynasty and people called themselves "Gök Türk". Gök is the Turkic word for Sky.

Ashina is the East Iranic word for blue or "blue Sky". Since Turkish word for blue is "Mavi" but in Kurdish as comparison it is "shin" (I use kurdish because I am fluent in it).

Either Ashina is the Scythian equivalent to Kurdish "shin" or it is a combination of two Iranic words shin however is probably a Scythism into Kurdish since other West Iranic tongues like Persian don't use it.

Kurdish "shin"= blue
Kurdish and general Iranic Asman = Sky

In Kurdish we would translate "the sky is blue" = "Asman shina". Combine the words = Ashina? But this is only speculation. However it is no speculation that Ashina and Kurdish shin are related and both mean "blue"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vir9

thank you bro, turks have adopted many things from eastern iranic people like sogdians and saka.Actually their whole nomadic lifestyle was copied from iranic people of northern central asia.They have many iranic loanwords today and not few iranic people were assimilated by them in central asia so that turkmen and even some uzbeks can look still very iranic

---

The more you learn about them the more obvious it becames, Turks came to existence from Mongols merginh/absorbing with Tokharians and Iranic tribes of the East.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Demhat

Allot of titles used by Mongols or even later Turkic tribes are actually of Iranic origin.

As another example "Ashena" a ancient tribe and later ruling dynasty among Turkic speakers.

The Ashena however were actually a Scythian tribe and became turkified. Since they also existed among the Saka and the word Ashena derives from Irani tongue and means simply "blue".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashina_%28clan%29


"blue" as in "blue sky". The reason why the first Turkic dynasty and people called themselves "Gök Türk". Gök is the Turkic word for Sky.

Ashena is the Iranic word for blue or "blue Sky". Since Turkish word for blue is "Mavi" but in Kurdish as comparison it is "shen" (I use kurdish because I am fluent in it).

Either Ashena is the Scythian equivalent to Kurdish "shen" or it is a combination of two Iranic words.

Kurdish "shen"= blue
Kurdish and general Iranic Asman = Sky

In Kurdish we would translate "the sky is blue" = "Asman Shena". Combine the words = Ashena? But this is only speculation. However it is no speculation that Ashena and Kurdish Shen are related and both mean "blue"

---

very interesting information and in pashto shin means also blue. It seems that the early elites of turkish tribes were either iranic or heavily mixed with iranic people and had often r1a because of that.Many names of the early turkish rulers were non turkic . it is quite ironic that modern turkish nationalists call their ideology turanism because turan is also just an iranic word (mentioned in avesta) copied by them.

We dont know so much about the tocharian languages and maybe there are also much more tocharian loanwords in turkic languages than we expect today. But the influences of iranic people on turks were much more important than the tocharian influences.Interestingly the earliest official announcements of the ashina were written in sogdian and not in turkic

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vir9

yes even afghans are with 5% east asian admixture more "turkish" than anatolian turks who are just a bunch of armenians,georgians and greeks who lost their identity.The khalaj were described as descendants of the iranic Hepthalites and sources mention that they didnt looked like turks and were not considered as turks by the real turks.They were always described as afghans just like other pashtuns and they are genetically identical to Durranis.Also early arabic and persian sources called everyone in central asia turkish because they had no good information about this regions and turk was just a broad term during this time . Even some pamiri mountain tribes in Badakshan were described as turkish by this idiots so forget to troll this forum with your pan-turanian fantasies.Khalaj were eastern iranic people who were a bit turkified but nothing more and they are descendants of saka,kushan and hepthalites who settled in afghanistan and mixed with the earlier population there

read this text
https://books.google.de/books?id=75F...khalaj&f=false

---

The Khiljis weren't considered as real Turks by the older Turkic elite in the Delhi Sultanate because they mixed extensively with Pashtuns which resulted in their total assimilation into the modern Pashtuns. The Khiljis in Iran can still speak their Turkic language. The ethnonym Khalaj itself in Turkic means " kal aç". Stay hungry translated in English. Stop your Pan-Iranist lies. Khiljis/Khalajs are a Turkic people and that's universally accepted by scholars

Anatolian Turks have more Mongoloid admixture than Pashtuns. Pashtuns have only 2 - 6 Mongoloid admixture on average whereas Turks have 4-12% Mongoloid admix on average

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkic_Khalaj_language

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sky earth

The Khiljis weren't considered as real Turks by The older Turkic elite in The Delhi Sultanate because they mixed extensively with Pashtuns which resulted in their total assimilation into The modern Pashtuns. The Khiljis in Iran can still speak their Turkic language. The ethnonym Khalaj itself in Turkic means " kal aç". Stay hungry translated in English

---

the name khalaj derives from a region in afghanistan and not from such a ridicioulous etmylogy.Just give it up,they didnt looked turkish and they even didnt spoke turkish. Khalaj were already mentioned in pre-islamic bactrian coins and were part of the hepthalite and saka confederacy.They are genetically absolute identical to other afghan pashtuns