Nick
Don't worry boddy no-boddy is claiming Gurids, ever since Pan-Turkist started their project almost every sound turkic to them.
Sorry but who is claiming Ghurids? its not Turks, I don't know why your getting worked up over a minor dynasty.
Nick
the central asian turks were first brought in as slaves from siberia by the Arabs. and stationed to north of Bokara/Samarkand.
Actually you'll find that the slaves were also Turks from Transoxia (including Bukhara/Samarqand) not from Siberia, infact few Turkic slaves were from Siberia, Arabs wern't in Siberia for goodness sake.
Nick
Anyways the only prove we have is that Samanids had had three Turkic genrals, of whom two got killed and remianed with 5000 slaves and one brave guy who was also a slave, whom he was given a share of power and samanid's daughter and later he had married his daughter with another slave Siberian (Turkic) and then then their child Mahmmod was born 1/4 Afghan and 3/4 turkic. Mahmmod was the only Turkic in his empire and I think even he would not care about his siberian root (turkic Root)
So now your flipping and turning from the Ghurids to the Ghaznivids, you do realise that they are two different dynasties?
A powerfull Slave family within the Samanids turned on their masters, overthrew them and took command from within. This led to the collapse of the Samanids.
AlpTekin became leader of the Ghaznivids, who was followed by Sebuktekin and then Mahmed of Ghazni.
Your correct that only the leaders of the Ghaznivids were Turks, most the people they ruled were Afgans. We don't have the convenience of asking if he "cared" or not about his roots, its a subjective question. What we do know is that, they formed a millitary class, a millitary oligharchy made up of Turks. For example, one of Mahmud of Ghazi's famous generals was Ayaz son of Aymaq. Also Ghaznivids opened the doors to the "Karakhanids", who spread and developed Turkic arts, culture and literature and also bought a huge Turkic migration all over the "Turkistan" region.
The Ghurids who took control of the Ghaznivids were Afgan and ruled the region after.
Nick
the fact that turk is not a race but refers to people of comment root altiac langauge
Your point being?
There is only one race, the human race, Afgans are not a race, Persians are not a race, English are not a race. There are no seperate races, and the differences we have due to geographical factors were made present thousands of years before any of todays nations existed.
Therefore, we have "nations", not races. Nations are socio-linguistic groups of people, united by some common kingship, identity, ties, history, feeling of belongin/ acceptance. Hence, you don't have to look like type "a" or type "b" to be of a nation, or have a certain genetic structure or fit a certain "stereotype" to be part of a nation. Therefore you and the other guy have absolutely no rights telling people if they "are" of "are not" Turks, only they do.
Edited by Bulldog - 19-May-2007 at 10:21