Origins of the Afghans

The name "Aqhon" probably has no bearing on the Ephthalites.  In the west, the Ephthalites were also called "White Huns" which looks like a transliteration on "Aqhon".    In the east they were called Hayathelites by the Persians, Ye-tai by the Chinese, and simply Hunas by the Indians, but no eastern source called them "White Huns".  The personal name "Aqhon" must therefore have another etymology.

Again, the Chinese called them Ye-tai.

The Chinese called the eastern "Avars" the Ruruan.  As for them being Turkic, the evidence suggest that they were Mongolic of speech, not Turkic.

The real "Tura" tribes were Iranic-speaking, not Turkic-speaking.  "Tura" or "Turan" is merely a borrowing from Persian sources for "eurasian nomad", which during the time of the earliest Iranian history were Iranic-speaking nomads. 

No.  We actually have a correlation between "Pahtun" and the name of an ancient Afghani mountain tribe known to classical Greek historians as the Pactyans.  There were first attested by Herodotus about 430 BC.  This would be more than 200 years before the Hun expansion from Mongolia, and 1000 years before the Gok-Turk expansion.

The ancient Saka language was an Iranian language.

The name "khan" is a word that has been adapted by many peoples of different backgrounds.  Its use may have been an indication of ethnic origin at one time, but because it spread so far and wide, other peoples have adopted its use.  The Rajputs of western India make much use of it themselves.

Incidently, the Huns (Xiongu) didn't use this title, they used the title "shan-yu".  The earliest known people to have made use of the title "khan" were the Ruruan, and they were Mongolic-speaking.

why cant you just tell me? maybe its because you are pulling this stuff out of your a$$?

there is nothing about pan iranism in this thread.

and pan iranism is not only for iranians from iran, there are afghan pan iranists, tajik pan iranists, kurdish pan iranists, etc...

@ oslonor: i want you to tell me in what ways iran is not culturally attached to afghanistan.

Regarding the topic, afghans are just another iranic tribe, am i not correct?

sorry for my ignorance, but i would also like to know more about the origion of afghans.

Majority of Iranians are genetically and culturally distinct from Afghans.

botht the safavids and the qajars preserved and even enhanced iranian culture. they adopted all aspects of iranian culture.

infact they became so iranian that they called iran persia, and called themselves kings of persia.

oslonor, you dont know anything about iran, especially by saying that iran is a turkish islamic republic or that isfahan and the other cities have a turkish culture.

are you anti turk or something? thats what it seems like, it seems like you blame everything on turks.

i dont think oslonor realizes that teh culture celebrated in central asia and the caucusus is actually iranian.

he probably thinks its afghan.

oslonor, afghanistan was part of iran for a very long time, afghan culture is the same as iranian culture. we speak the same language, have the same celebrations, had the same religions, etc....

the iranian empires didnt even originate in afghanistan, but in modern day iran. and the ancient iranian empires of sogdia and bactria were located in north central asia, not in afghanistan.

trust me, turkic nations have more iranian culture in them then we have turkic culture.  iran is not a turkic nation, its an iranian nation, we just have a large turkic population.

infact, my theory is that azari's are actually turkified iranic peoples, and this is supported by facts. 

if you combine the total iranic population of iran to the total turkic population (for this example, including azari's since they are now turkic although not origionally) iranic people are the majority.