Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedTurkic Origins in North Pakistan

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>
Author
Sarmat View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 31-May-2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3113
Direct Link To This Post Topic: Turkic Origins in North Pakistan
    Posted: 21-Jun-2007 at 02:20
Originally posted by Xiongnu Hun

Turks are one nation including peoples,not many nations.Turkic is not just a family of languages,today being is a Turk is lingual but this because of mixing with other peoples(so we look pyhsically different),we are the same nation.

There aren't any Iranian Turkic nomads,just Altaic.
 
Is it your own new theory?
 
Based on your logic all the people on the earth are one nation, since we orginate from the same ancestors in Africa, anyway.
 
How come all the diversity of nations and ethnicities exist? Different Turkic nations have so different history, culture and background that one could hardly call them one nation.
 
The biggest similarity between Turkic ethnicities is the their languages which are related to each other but still they are different and very often not mutually intelligible.
 
The closest pattern for your theory could be the Arabs. One nation, living in many countries. But this theory is also very weak. Although at least a standard classical version of Arabic exist for all the Arabs.
 
But there is no any "standard Turkic" for all the Turks. You have to study Kazakh or Uzbek if you are from Turkey and want to speak to those people and vice versa.
 
I am afraid that the realilty is too different from you idealized thinking.
 
P.S. I think qaraniq by Iranian Turkic nomades just meant Turkic people living in modern Iran.


Edited by Sarmat12 - 21-Jun-2007 at 02:23
Σαυρομάτης
Back to Top
Cuneyt View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 15-Jun-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Jun-2007 at 07:27
If Arabs can call themselves Arabs because they identify themselves as so and unify themselves as so, and Europeans can call themselves Europeans and Identify themselves as so and unify themselves on this basis.
 
Then why do some of you have a problem with Turks identifying themselves as Turks and feeling a kinship with each other.  Turks all over the world have a feeling for each other that includes culture, shared background, food, customs, history and language.  I don't understand why some people in this forum are so against this idea and want to prove otherwise.
 
I think only Turks themselves have the right to identify themselves and on what basis.  Just the same as other people like Europeans, Arabs, Christians, Muslims, Slavs, Africans or whoever have their right and their own criteria.
 
Yes I know we are all humans and I am not saying one group of humans is better than another, but just as you make your closest friends with people like yourself, who probably share the same interests and have things in common with, sharing Ethnicities can be the same.
 
Socio-Political nations and countries are rather a new phenomenom,  before that people would group themselves as "peoples" and "ethnicities"  of which Turks are surely one!
Back to Top
Bulldog View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Jun-2007 at 08:04
Sarmat
Is it your own new theory?
 
Based on your logic all the people on the earth are one nation, since we orginate from the same ancestors in Africa, anyway.
 
No, were all one race as we all have same ancestors in Africa.
Nation is a socio-cultural grouping of people who have linguistic, cultural, historical bonds and share a similar identity.
 
 
Sarmat
How come all the diversity of nations and ethnicities exist? Different Turkic nations have so different history, culture and background that one could hardly call them one nation.
 
All large nations have various people's and cultures due to the large geographical area which they inhabit.
 
Arabs in Algeria are different to Arabs in Kuwait but they're still Arab.
 
Sarmat 
The biggest similarity between Turkic ethnicities is the their languages which are related to each other but still they are different and very often not mutually intelligible.
 
It depends which Turkic groups your referring to.
 
Most Turks trace ancestory back to the same Turks, have similar legends, came originally from the same areas.
 
Linguistically three main dialects are Oghuz, Qarluk, Kipchak. Oghuz has the largest number of speakers around 120 million with mutual integibility, there is relatively high integibility with Qarluk but lower with Kipchak.
 
 
 
Sarmat
The closest pattern for your theory could be the Arabs. One nation, living in many countries. But this theory is also very weak. Although at least a standard classical version of Arabic exist for all the Arabs.
 
Arabs implemented, Fusha standardsed Arabic.
 
Turks can do the same, some Turkic leaders are keen on having this developed then its up to the states to implement.
 
 
 
Cuneyt
Then why do some of you have a problem with Turks identifying themselves as Turks and feeling a kinship with each other.  Turks all over the world have a feeling for each other that includes culture, shared background, food, customs, history and language.  I don't understand why some people in this forum are so against this idea and want to prove otherwise.
 
 
During the Soviet era it was against their interests to allow Turks doing this and getting closer together, that's why most intellects in the Turkic world were killed and extradited during this era. But now its ended, Turk isn't "taboo" anymore, it will take a few generations still but there are more and more voices from "Turkiston" calling for a union of states in the region.
 
 
 
Cuneyt
I think only Turks themselves have the right to identify themselves and on what basis.  Just the same as other people like Europeans, Arabs, Christians, Muslims, Slavs, Africans or whoever have their right and their own criteria.
 
Exactly.


Edited by Bulldog - 21-Jun-2007 at 08:16
      What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine

Back to Top
Sarmat View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 31-May-2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3113
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Jun-2007 at 08:32
Originally posted by Cuneyt

If Arabs can call themselves Arabs because they identify themselves as so and unify themselves as so, and Europeans can call themselves Europeans and Identify themselves as so and unify themselves on this basis.
 
Then why do some of you have a problem with Turks identifying themselves as Turks and feeling a kinship with each other.  Turks all over the world have a feeling for each other that includes culture, shared background, food, customs, history and language.  I don't understand why some people in this forum are so against this idea and want to prove otherwise.
 
I think only Turks themselves have the right to identify themselves and on what basis.  Just the same as other people like Europeans, Arabs, Christians, Muslims, Slavs, Africans or whoever have their right and their own criteria.
 
Yes I know we are all humans and I am not saying one group of humans is better than another, but just as you make your closest friends with people like yourself, who probably share the same interests and have things in common with, sharing Ethnicities can be the same.
 
Socio-Political nations and countries are rather a new phenomenom,  before that people would group themselves as "peoples" and "ethnicities"  of which Turks are surely one!
 
Dear Cuneyt, I'm sorry I didn't want to heart your warm feelings towards Turkic people and their unity. I just wanted to point out that Turkic people are very diverse and different in their cultures, which of course is very good.
 
So, my idea, was simply, that Turkic influences in Pakistan are not Turkish influences, because Turkey has a distinct culture of its own, influenced heavily by Near Eastern Arabian kingdoms, and even Greeks and Europeans. That's why you can not simply say that Turkic in Pakistan=Turkish.
 
That was my point. It is wonderful nevertheless that Turkic people in different parts of the world feel their affinity and are interested in their culture.


Edited by Sarmat12 - 21-Jun-2007 at 08:34
Σαυρομάτης
Back to Top
Sarmat View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 31-May-2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3113
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Jun-2007 at 08:43
Originally posted by Bulldog

No, were all one race as we all have same ancestors in Africa.
Nation is a socio-cultural grouping of people who have linguistic, cultural, historical bonds and share a similar identity.
 
 
 
 
Yeah, but the first homo sapienses definetely were coming from one linguistic, cultural and hostorical bond so they were one nation in the very beginning.
 
I still doubt that the big Turk nation exists. Turkic is a designation for a language family: like Slavic, Germanic, Semitic etc.
 
In order, to know the the real attitude of people of different Turkic ehtnicites to the existence of the big Turkic nation, we should probably make a poll, whether they consider themselves for example Azeri and Uzbek first and then Turks or they consdider themselves Turks at the first place. I, however, doubt that most of them will make choise number one.
 
Σαυρομάτης
Back to Top
Cuneyt View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 15-Jun-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Jun-2007 at 10:42

Dear Sarmat12, thank you for you post but you can be rest assured that you did not hurt my warm feelings to Turkish people as you put it.  This is a forum where we can discuss and surely have differing opinions so I appriciate your ideas even though I may not agree with them, nothing for anyone to get hurt about.

Actually if you read my previous posts you will find I never once mentioned that "Turkic in Pakistan=Turkish" as you wrote.  I see that you prescribe to the Turkic Vs. Turkish termanology, which is fine, but many would disagree and call a Turk a Turk.  So I understand the point you are coming from and where this idea stems from, and I am well aware that the greatest Turk (or as you prefer Turkic) influnce in Pakistan is of the Chagtai branch if you are talking about language and direct descendants.  but remember that the area that is now Pakistan has always had close links with the Turks of Turkey and the Ottoman Empire too.  The Muslims rulers acceptied the Ottoman Caliphs as their spiritual leaders for many centuries.  Also since the USSR made contacts between central Asian Turks very difficult for the people of Pakistan they continued to have a very close relationship with the people of Turkey.  You can easily find information on the concerns of Turkish learders such as Enver Pasha and Mustapha Kamal to the freedom of Muslims in the Indian subcontinent from the British.  Also the help the people of Pakistan sent to the people of Turkey during their war of independence. Then later the CENTO block was formed in the 1950s.  Many politcal learders of Turkey have studied in Pakistan and many from Pakistan have studied in Turkey, including the present Leader of Pakistan.  In literature, add the poems by Mohammed Iqbal about Turkey and the poems of Fazil Hsn Daglarca about Pakistan.  Even if you ask Pakistanis today which country is close to their hearts and the most brotherly they will say Turkey and maybe many Turkish people would say the same about Pakistan.  But my point in starting this thread was not to say Pakistan equals Turkey the country or that Turkey has had the greatest "Turkic" influence on Pakistan, please read my first post again.Smile

On a side point, Sarmat12 you said:

"So, my idea, was simply, that Turkic influences in Pakistan are not Turkish influences, because Turkey has a distinct culture of its own, influenced heavily by Near Eastern Arabian kingdoms, and even Greeks and Europeans".

If I were to be cheeky I would say that infact makes the Pakistani experience even closer to the experince of the people of Turkey, as I am sure you are aware the Greeks were also in Northern Paksitan for Hundreds of years also the Europeans as you put it were there to in the form of the British and the Muhammed bin Qasim the Arab also conquered Pakistan and gave his Arab influence.  Also both peoples of Pakistan and Turkey are prodominately Muslim and have a Muslim culture. Both are Jamuriyat and they have similar looking flags!Wink

Of course I still never said in any of my posts Pakistan = Turkey, just we have close ties by ancient historical empires and in relatively modern times too.

I totally agree with Bulldog where he says:

"Turkic connection to Pakistan lies further back than the Timurids (not Ozbeks, Shaybani laid foundations of Ozbek state), the Turk-Shahis (I'm not certain about their history?), the Gaznivids, the Delhi Sultanate, Khilijis, Tughlak dynasty, QutubShahi dynasty,  famous historical leaders like Raziya Sultana, Iltutmush, Aybek etc."

"Distance is not an issue, if your a Turk your a Turk"

Thanks to all for keeping this thread alive, I am finding it facinating!Clap

Edited by Cuneyt - 21-Jun-2007 at 10:47
Back to Top
Bulldog View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Jun-2007 at 13:56
Sarmat
So, my idea, was simply, that Turkic influences in Pakistan are not Turkish influences, because Turkey has a distinct culture of its own, influenced heavily by Near Eastern Arabian kingdoms, and even Greeks and Europeans. That's why you can not simply say that Turkic in Pakistan=Turkish.
 
Turks were in Pakistan before they were in Turkey, therefore this is pointless. Turks who influenced Pakistan also made Turkey Turkey, the country is Turkey, official language Turkish, identity Turk because of these Turks.
 
Ofcourse there are elements of other cultures which have been fused into the dominant culture however, this is not part of this discussion.
 
 
Sarmat
I still doubt that the big Turk nation exists. Turkic is a designation for a language family: like Slavic, Germanic, Semitic etc.
 
In order, to know the the real attitude of people of different Turkic ehtnicites to the existence of the big Turkic nation, we should probably make a poll, whether they consider themselves for example Azeri and Uzbek first and then Turks or they consdider themselves Turks at the first place. I, however, doubt that most of them will make choise number one.
 
In Iran, Turks are called Turks, there not called Azeri, Azari were a completely different people who spoke an Iranic language, its historically incorrect to call them Azari.
In Afganistan, Turks are called Turks.
Tajiks call Ozbek's, Turks, etc etc
 
There is no point in denying that they're Turks, also comparisons are wrong as they are not identical and have different factors.
 
Infact, leaders of Turkic states like Sultan Nazarbayev of Kazakistan goes as far to state that they're the original Turks and that the Turks West of Caspian Sea Turks due to them.
Turkmenbashi in the Ruhnama writes that the Selcuk and Ottoman Empires are actually they're history and that they're the Turks that founded it, meaning they're the reason why today places like Turkey and Azerbaycan are Turks.
 
They are correct, the only reason there are Turks West of the Caspian sea is because of Turks who conquered the region. Its unlogical to claim that Central Asian Turks arn't Turks as they're the entire reason why there is a single Turk in Azerbaycan or Turkey or Balkans etc
 
Geographically there are Azeri Turk, Turkiye Turk, Cypriot Turk, Afgan Turk etc
 
 
 
Cuneyt
 The Muslims rulers acceptied the Ottoman Caliphs as their spiritual leaders for many centuries.  Also since the USSR made contacts between central Asian Turks very difficult for the people of Pakistan they continued to have a very close relationship with the people of Turkey.  You can easily find information on the concerns of Turkish learders such as Enver Pasha and Mustapha Kamal to the freedom of Muslims in the Indian subcontinent from the British.  Also the help the people of Pakistan sent to the people of Turkey during their war of independence. Then later the CENTO block was formed in the 1950s.  Many politcal learders of Turkey have studied in Pakistan and many from Pakistan have studied in Turkey, including the present Leader of Pakistan.  In literature, add the poems by Mohammed Iqbal about Turkey and the poems of Fazil Hsn Daglarca about Pakistan.  Even if you ask Pakistanis today which country is close to their hearts and the most brotherly they will say Turkey and maybe many Turkish people would say the same about Pakistan.  But my point in starting this thread was not to say Pakistan equals Turkey the country or that Turkey has had the greatest "Turkic" influence on Pakistan, please read my first post again.Smile
 
I agree.
Also didn't Pakistan and Turkey sign  Regional Cooperation for Development  along with Iran.
 
Pakistan and Turkey have great relations polliticall and socially, also they have both been building ties with the newly independant Turkic states now the Iron curtain has been lifted.
Historically, Pakistan, Afganistan, Central Asia and Turkey (Ottoman connection) have many ties.
Pakistan-Turkey relations could build these ties again and promote co-operation.
      What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine

Back to Top
Bulldog View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Jun-2007 at 14:45
p.s Cuneyt
 
I read that Qutubshahi's were a Oghuz-Turkmen Turkic group who migrated to the Pakistani area, is this true?
      What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine

Back to Top
Sarmat View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 31-May-2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3113
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Jun-2007 at 16:35
Originally posted by Cuneyt

Dear Sarmat12, thank you for you post but you can be rest assured that you did not hurt my warm feelings to Turkish people as you put it.  This is a forum where we can discuss and surely have differing opinions so I appriciate your ideas even though I may not agree with them, nothing for anyone to get hurt about.

Actually if you read my previous posts you will find I never once mentioned that "Turkic in Pakistan=Turkish" as you wrote.  I see that you prescribe to the Turkic Vs. Turkish termanology, which is fine, but many would disagree and call a Turk a Turk.  So I understand the point you are coming from and where this idea stems from, and I am well aware that the greatest Turk (or as you prefer Turkic) influnce in Pakistan is of the Chagtai branch if you are talking about language and direct descendants.  but remember that the area that is now Pakistan has always had close links with the Turks of Turkey and the Ottoman Empire too.  The Muslims rulers acceptied the Ottoman Caliphs as their spiritual leaders for many centuries.  Also since the USSR made contacts between central Asian Turks very difficult for the people of Pakistan they continued to have a very close relationship with the people of Turkey.  You can easily find information on the concerns of Turkish learders such as Enver Pasha and Mustapha Kamal to the freedom of Muslims in the Indian subcontinent from the British.  Also the help the people of Pakistan sent to the people of Turkey during their war of independence. Then later the CENTO block was formed in the 1950s.  Many politcal learders of Turkey have studied in Pakistan and many from Pakistan have studied in Turkey, including the present Leader of Pakistan.  In literature, add the poems by Mohammed Iqbal about Turkey and the poems of Fazil Hsn Daglarca about Pakistan.  Even if you ask Pakistanis today which country is close to their hearts and the most brotherly they will say Turkey and maybe many Turkish people would say the same about Pakistan.  But my point in starting this thread was not to say Pakistan equals Turkey the country or that Turkey has had the greatest "Turkic" influence on Pakistan, please read my first post again.Smile

 
Great, thank you for understanding my posts right. I totally agree with you. My idea was just that different Turkic cultures are diverse by themselves.
Σαυρομάτης
Back to Top
Sarmat View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 31-May-2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3113
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Jun-2007 at 16:39
Originally posted by Bulldog

 
In Iran, Turks are called Turks, there not called Azeri, Azari were a completely different people who spoke an Iranic language, its historically incorrect to call them Azari.
In Afganistan, Turks are called Turks.
Tajiks call Ozbek's, Turks, etc etc
 
 
 
Again I just meant that of course all Tatars, Ozbeks, Kazakhs, Azeri, Turkish are Turks.
 
But Tatars are not Ozbeks, Kazakhs are not Azeri and Turkmen are not Turkish.
 
That's it !
Σαυρομάτης
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Jun-2007 at 19:46
Dear Buldog , cool down , I am not Arash, be a little more creative,lol.
I just saw a post about your back ground , I was wondering of you are a Turk, you know what's the meaning of being Turk for me. 
anyhow I'd be in Istanbul in July maybe I can find more about your defination of Turks there.
 
Turks have diffrent nations, they do not share a common history in last 500 years and turkish Turks are different from Iranian Turks or Ozbeks.
salut old buddy
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Jun-2007 at 19:48
By the way , I forgot to say that the tallest guy in out town , somewher in Canda, is a Pakistani Turkmen, I can communicate with him without any problem but only in english
Back to Top
Bulldog View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Jun-2007 at 20:30
Qaraniq
Turks have diffrent nations, they do not share a common history in last 500 years and turkish Turks are different from Iranian Turks or Ozbeks.
salut old buddy
 
They share a common 2000 years of history Wink
They migrated to distant lands from each other and some lost contact for centuries. However, they retained their identity.
 
However, were now in a new age, the world is much smaller, before it would take months to get from Kashgar to Istanbul but now its takes a few hours and with telecommunication contact takes a few seconds.
 
There are differences among Turks but it doesn't change the fact they're Turks, I don't understand why you expect everybody to be "identicle", go to any country and there are regional differences.
      What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine

Back to Top
Kerimoglu View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 05-Oct-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 313
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Jun-2007 at 13:04
Hehe, look, this what you call a jealouseness
 
Man the wounds  we injured in your history will never heal till armageddon, even if you claim so. Wink
 
Turks, we are and were the most energetic people of central asia, have aerned pretty enough enemies and rivals throughout the history, and today, adding up 1 guy and his family to our ranks, will not weaken Persians man, come on.
 
Also, if I call myself a Turk, then I am a Turk, especially when I do have all the qualifications that a Turk do. What the hell you have to do with this????
History is a farm. Nations are farmers. What they planted before will show what is going to grow tomorrow!
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Jun-2007 at 16:57
Originally posted by Kerimoglu

Hehe, look, this what you call a jealouseness
 
Man the wounds  we injured in your history will never heal till armageddon, even if you claim so. Wink
 
Turks, we are and were the most energetic people of central asia, have aerned pretty enough enemies and rivals throughout the history, and today, adding up 1 guy and his family to our ranks, will not weaken Persians man, come on.
 
Also, if I call myself a Turk, then I am a Turk, especially when I do have all the qualifications that a Turk do. What the hell you have to do with this????
 
Hi Kerimoglu,who is the persian guy, do you mean me?,lol, I am not Persian bro, and persian history like many other old nations has many up and downs, Turks mixed with Persians in a way which they are almost same, did you hear this one:
Bork siz bas olmaz
Fors siz turk olmaz.
 
I aree that the war between Persians and  Turks caused the lots of Pain for Persians( ofcourse they lost the game 1000 years ago), but also persian won the cultural war and the large group of Turks in Iran (20m-=3 times of the population of your country ) are assimilating with speed of a rocket, I visited Iran and I know even in Tebriz the people speak persian with their kids. Turks and Iranians and pakistanies need each other to make a better life for their nations.
 
Also could you pleas tell me specifically what do you mean by all qualification a turks does, is that what you learn in Azerbaijani high schools?
serefe qardas
 
 
 
 
 


Edited by qaraniq - 22-Jun-2007 at 17:00
Back to Top
Bulldog View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Jun-2007 at 17:12

Look "Shinai" stop trying to hijack the post with this nonsense again.

Persians won no cultural war, Persians have their culture and Turks have their culture and these two have fused aswell and both are wonderfull. What is wrong with you, this complex you have is so deep, we can't have any post without you sticking some Turk-Persian conflict into it. Look, this post isn't about Persians, nobody is writing bad things about Persians, what is your problem. And let's do some simple maths, 1000 years ago hardly any Turks in North West Iran, today 25 million...You see, there is no need for silly conspiracy stories or subjective fantasy stories, the Facts speak for themselves. You go to Tebriz and see for yourself if they're assimilating or if every-year Turkish awareness is growing in the area Wink go to Youtube and type, Tebriz, you'll soon wake-up.

"Mankurt"
 
 
 


Edited by Bulldog - 22-Jun-2007 at 17:15
      What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine

Back to Top
Bulldog View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Jun-2007 at 17:24
Back to the topic.
 
Cuneyt I found this on Wikipedia
 
 
 

Karlugh Turks

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

At the end of Timur's invasion of India in 1398-99, Timur left behind a legion of Qarluk Turks as the rulers of the Hazara region of India (now part of the North West Frontier Province of Pakistan). The locals called these Turks the Karlugh Turks and the legion Hazara-i-Karlugh. The first Karlugh Turk ruler of Hazara was Sultan Shahab-ud-Din and the last one was Sultan Mehmud Khurd.

The Karlugh Turks who claim descent from Timur were the ruling class of Hazara until the 1700s, when they were overthrown by the locals. They formed Turki Shahi dynasties for the most part between 1400-1700 and were even acknowledged as the rulers of Hazara by the Mughals, who were also Timur's descendants.

[edit] Current Karlugh Settlements

The descendants of the Karlugh Turk continue to live in the Hazara area of Pakistan and Azad Kashmir, mostly in the mountainous regions. They had continued to maintain a very secluded and exclusive lifestyle until the late 1800s and early 1900s. According to the Imperial Gazetteer of India, v. 13, p. 79, published in 1909, some 2000 persons returned themselves as Turks, descendants of the Turkomans who came with Timur in 1398. It is more probable, given the fact that most Turkish villages were in inaccessible mountainous regions at the time of 1901 census, that the actual number could be as high as around 10,000. Currently, some of the main Karlugh Turkish villages in Hazara Division are Manakrai and Bayan in Haripur District, Behali and Mohar in Mansehra District and RichhBehn in Abbottabad District.

[edit] Karlugh Turks and Mughal Empire

The Mughals acknowledged Karlughs as the local rulers, and probably due to their common central Asian origin, never levied taxes on the state of Pakhli Sarkar. However, during the reign of Mughal Emperor Akbar, the then Karlugh Turk ruler Sultan Hussain Khan revolted against the Mughals citing increased interference on the part of Mughal Empire. This revolt was put down by Akbar who eventually pardoned and restored Sultan Hussain Khan as the ruler of Pakhli Sarkar.



Edited by Bulldog - 22-Jun-2007 at 17:25
      What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine

Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Jun-2007 at 18:56

The Nortehrn pakistan is a part of central Asia not India. Saka, kushans white Huns, oguz tribes have left a significant influence there, the tribes men of the northern Pakistan kept many essential part of central asians and  Turkic culture.

zinde bad pakistan
Back to Top
Cuneyt View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 15-Jun-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Jun-2007 at 11:14

There are many, but these are the major Turkish Empires Covering Northern Pakistan:

Yāmīn al-Dawlah Abd al-Qāṣim Maḥmūd Ibn Sebk Tegīn

Tīmūr bin Taraghay Barlas
 
 
Zāhir ud-Dīn Mohammad Babur Khan
 
 
Salaam Bulldog, Thank you for the info you posted up.  Yes indeed the Qutbshahi sultans who moved up to Delhi and then went to set up a Deccan Empire were indeed Oghuz-Turkmen from the Turkmenistan-Armenia region.  Their tribe was the Qara-Qoyunlu.

 

Back to Top
Kerimoglu View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 05-Oct-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 313
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-Jun-2007 at 03:25
Lol qaraniq, I never told you're a Sarmatr, it is just every time Turks open a topic and say someone is Tur, even though that someone is not Persian, Persian member appear and say they were not Turks. That I have seen for 3 years that I have been in this forum
 
BTW, I also was in Iran and I saw that no one talks Persian in Tabriz, and whoever talks Persian there, Azerbaijan turks do not consider him normal.
History is a farm. Nations are farmers. What they planted before will show what is going to grow tomorrow!
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.203 seconds.