Ancestral home of Sher Shah Sur

[Samandri]

But Mr. Luffy, different books and papers say different things so how can we come to a definite conclusion? Just like some writers believe the Marwats being of Lohani Indian lienage while others don't.

If we go by coincidences , then here is your Hindu cousin in India, Sudhir Kakar, a famous author

[tilla_jogian]

If we go by coincidences , then here is your Hindu cousin in India, Sudhir Kakar, a famous author

Kakar is also khatri surname.

[Kushan Prince]

If we go by coincidences , then here is your Hindu cousin in India, Sudhir Kakar, a famous author

Coincidences don't exist, your tribe is clearly descended of Lohana hindu merchant traders that adopted Islam after their arrival in central asia. The fact that they were both trading tribes proves it even more.

Its funny too since this old Marwat fella also looks like a typical south asian




I guess rumours of their indian roots are true.

[Kushan Prince]

Lohanas of sindh are merchant/baniyas, muslim lohanas changed surname to Memon, Khoja and possibly Vohra. There is posiblity name being similar is just coincidence. Lohana is not name of tribe but whole ethnic group. And with in that ethnic group there are many tribes/clans.

The names are identical, just changing the last letter won't change their roots. Its clear and evident since both the Afghan lohanis and hindu lohana's were merchant traders and both were settled in Multan.

https://books.google.ca/books?id=7tIwAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA93&lpg=PA93&dq=lohana+afghan+tribe&source=bl&ots=_jSUPU9TcP&sig=Ls6KJ8N1R9JQdgqQcS0ZB86SHAk&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj30_OEjLfKAhXBsYMKHUpXA4Q4FBDoAQgdMAE#v=onepage&q=lohana%20afghan%20tribe&f=false

The lohana's were also mentioned as great carriers of the afghan trade in the writing above. My theory is that they were originally indian who probably mixed with afghan traders making them less distinctive from each other. Funny thing is that there is even a Powhindah clan that is called "Baloch Khel" so would that mean they could be of possible Baluch origins?

Who knows...

[Zaadgaan Kabul]

Some points:

1. Shir Shah Suri wasn´t Pashtun since his grandfather came from Ghor/Herat. Kakars are Pashtunized Gujjar/Gakkar/Kakkar/Gakhar tribe that adopted 500 years ago ''Pashtu''. Kakars are originally from Peshawar valley. We find still Hindu and Muslim ''Kakar'', Panjabi, Pashtu, Sindhi speaking ones.

2. He was a central asian, thus a ''horse breader'' and an adventurer in India. His name ''Muzzafir'' point it! India was never home of horses or a country where horses were breeded

3. The term Ghor is the southern dialect of ancient Sogdian/Parthian (depending on dialect it was also called Goor and Gowra) meaning mountain. In Pashtu mountain may be called as ''ghar'' but ghar is still not ghowr, goor or gowra. A divertation of the word ghar to ghor/goor or from ghor/goor to ghar is not plausible. Sogdian and Parthian were strong languages/dialects (see modern Persian-> darakht, barg, sag, peshak, karte, ...)

4. Pashtuns never existed in the modern region of Ghor. They were always recognized in the eastern parts of Ghazni (meaning Zabul) (good preferences to this is tarikh al yamani, kitab-e-yamini utba' or al-Birunis description about the ''Afghans'')

6. The name Sur was later adoptet by many Indians, particularely Indo-Muslims to honour Muslim rule in India (hub of paganism) as it was always a tradition to adopt noble names of the glories Muslim past .. none of them are related with the ZURIS (not Suris). Some Pashtuns adoptet it when they became one of the integral parts of Zurid empire

7. Shir Shah´s grandfather moved from Ghor to ''the lands of the Rôhillas'' married there the daughter of an ancient ''Afghan'' chief. Later his son did the same. While Farid ''Shir Shah'' himself married a princess of the Little Moghules, an Iranian nobility and possibly a Rajput princess.

8. Shir Shah´s mother-tongue was Persian. His skills in Arabic and Hindustani were very good. The court language was Persian, Turki and Hindustani with view Arabic elements (Sayyeds, Nawabis and Khwajas) .. nowhere it is mentioned that Pakhtu was used or Pashtuns have served in the court. Pashtuns were used as soldiers with some privileges, so were Baluchis and Kashmiris but also other people (Kabulis and Badakhshanis).

9. To invalidate all your claims about his origin you just need to read (a copy of) Sarwani´s Tarikh Sher Shahi, Farid Khan´s court biographer!

10. The Zurid era is not a Pashtun, Indian or Tajik era or a dynasty but that of a multi-ethnic confederancy (Tajiks, Pashtuns, Baluchis, Rajputs , Arabs, Turks) created by force of the political situation of that time ... don´t know how someone can make claims on this family for his own ethnic. The Baluchis who always played an important role in overthrowing India by supporting Lodhis and other ''Afghan'' dynasties are mostly not mentioned. Without Baluch people the Lodhis, Khaljis, the Kharejits, the Sayyeds and some other could never take over India

11. The Zurids made claims on figures from Persian Shahnama. I strongly doubt that ''Pashtuns'' knew Shahanama then. Even if that was the case why should they have used names from it, a book where ''Afghans'' were demonized as much as possible (thiefs, murderers, barbarians, cave-dwellers, brain-eaters, ''ghul'' ... Akwan, Kek Kohzad, worshipper of Ahriman (meaning shaitan)..)

12. Among the Persian elites in Delhi many representatives and survivors of their ''cousins'' and brother in laws from Herat/Ghor, the Kart Maliks, were part of the Zurid court. At least 12 vezirs and former Kart-Malik members were ruling and administrating with them in Delhi.

[Zaadgaan Kabul]

Don´t forget that the ''city'' shahrgari means or must be translated as ''city foundery'', a name and an adaptation of their ancestral home - Ahangaran - land of blacksmithes

[Samandri]

Zaadgaan Kabul

You are not making any sense like [MENTION=5723]Kushan Prince[/MENTION]. Kakars are not Ghakars or Khokars of Punjab, earlier British officers of 19th century just assumed that all these tribes must be related because their names sounded same to them. Later other British officers, with good academic credentials, corrected the mistakes of earlier British officers in their works. Ghakkars and Khokars are confused with each other even to this date, due to mis-translations and confusion of British translators.

Sher Shah was a Pashto speaker, refer to the page 124 and 163 of Tarikh-Sher-Shahi. And no, he didnt marry Rajput or Mughal princess. Your story about Sher Shah's grandafther moving from "Ghor" to "land of Rohillas" and marrying daughter of "ancient Afghan chief", and his real name being "Muzaffar" is ridiculous and invented , i hope you are not serious.

[Zaadgaan Kabul]

Zaadgaan Kabul

You are not making any sense like @Kushan Prince. Kakars are not Ghakars or Khokars of Punjab, earlier British officers of 19th century just assumed that all these tribes must be related because their names sounded same to them. Later other British officers, with good academic credentials, corrected the mistakes of earlier British officers in their works. Ghakkars and Khokars are confused with each other even to this date, due to mis-translations and confusion of British translators.

Sher Shah was a Pashto speaker, refer to the page 124 and 163 of Tarikh-Sher-Shahi. And no, he didnt marry Rajput or Mughal princess. Your story about Sher Shah's grandafther moving from "Ghor" to "land of Rohillas" and marrying daughter of "ancient Afghan chief", and his real name being "Muzaffar" is ridiculous and invented , i hope you are not serious.

lol ... better you leave historical science and the study of classical literature as scientific matter to others, dude. Neither Afghanistan nor the Pakis can stay away from nationalism and falsification to history when it comes to their region. Maybe that´s a reason why the whole world does not take any ''historian'' from these regions serious.

[Zaadgaan Kabul]

Zaadgaan Kabul

You are not making any sense like @Kushan Prince. Kakars are not Ghakars or Khokars of Punjab, earlier British officers of 19th century just assumed that all these tribes must be related because their names sounded same to them. Later other British officers, with good academic credentials, corrected the mistakes of earlier British officers in their works. Ghakkars and Khokars are confused with each other even to this date, due to mis-translations and confusion of British translators.

Sher Shah was a Pashto speaker, refer to the page 124 and 163 of Tarikh-Sher-Shahi. And no, he didnt marry Rajput or Mughal princess. Your story about Sher Shah's grandafther moving from "Ghor" to "land of Rohillas" and marrying daughter of "ancient Afghan chief", and his real name being "Muzaffar" is ridiculous and invented , i hope you are not serious.

lol ... better you leave historical science and the study of classical literature as scientific matter to others, dude. Neither Afghanistan nor the Pakis can stay away from nationalism and falsification to history when it comes to their region. Maybe that´s a reason why the whole world does not take any ''historian'' from these regions serious.

The non-Pashtun Sarwani who wrote Tarikh Sher Shahi was related by marriage with Sher Shah... according to himself. He was definitely a Pêrsian-speaker.

[Samandri]

lol ... better you leave historical science and the study of classical literature as scientific matter to others, dude. Neither Afghanistan nor the Pakis can stay away from nationalism and falsification to history when it comes to their region. Maybe that´s a reason why the whole world does not take any ''historian'' from these regions serious.

The non-Pashtun Sarwani who wrote Tarikh Sher Shahi was related by marriage with Sher Shah... according to himself. He was definitely a Pêrsian-speaker.

Sarwani is a Pashtun tribe, from Lodi division, they were the most powerful nobles of Lodi Sultans.

Farsi was langauge of literature. Tarikh-i-Sher shahi is also called Tuhfa-i-Akbar Shahi, it was gift for Akbar. Makhzan-i-Afghani was also in farsi, so was Khulasatul ansab and other books authored by Pashtuns.

[tilla_jogian]

The names are identical, just changing the last letter won't change their roots. Its clear and evident since both the Afghan lohanis and hindu lohana's were merchant traders and both were settled in Multan.



https://books.google.ca/books?id=7tI...0tribe&f=false

The lohana's were also mentioned as great carriers of the afghan trade in the writing above. My theory is that they were originally indian who probably mixed with afghan traders making them less distinctive from each other. Funny thing is that there is even a Powhindah clan that is called "Baloch Khel" so would that mean they could be of possible Baluch origins?

Who knows...

There is some possibility because both are known for trade living not far from each other. I will not be shocked if there is some truth there. But not shocked either if there is no relation.

Remember converted lohanas now identify as memon, khoja and vohra. You will find them in Karachi, many of them are very rich. So it's not like all converted lohanas adopted pathan identity.

[tilla_jogian]

@ Zaadgan

"1. Shir Shah Suri wasn´t Pashtun since his grandfather came from Ghor/Herat. Kakars are Pashtunized Gujjar/Gakkar/Kakkar/Gakhar tribe that adopted 500 years ago ''Pashtu''. Kakars are originally from Peshawar valley. We find still Hindu and Muslim ''Kakar'', Panjabi, Pashtu, Sindhi speaking ones."

There are punjabi khatris who are kakars. There are also many Pakistani pakhtuns with kakar surname, because I keep coming across many well known Paki pakhtuns kakars on news articles.

When Ghaznavi invaded, 5000 hindu "Kakars" fought him. Now historians believe they were probably khokhars. Not sure about Ghakkhars because they claim persian origin, personally I believe Ghakkhars are not persian origin. They are locals who started to claim foreign origin because they allied with mughals.

Another posibility is that punjabi khatris are probably those kakars. It's believed punjabi khatris used to be kashatriya once opon time before invaders made them traders. Not sure about this either.

Basically not 100% sure who are those 5000 hindu kakars who fought Ghaznavi.

[Samandri]

There is some possibility because both are known for trade living not far from each other. I will not be shocked if there is some truth there. But not shocked either if there is no relation.

Remember converted lohanas now identify as memon, khoja and vohra. You will find them in Karachi, many of them are very rich. So it's not like all converted lohanas adopted pathan identity.

Sher Shah's grandfather was a trader, so was Bahlul's and many prominent Indo-Afghans arrived in India as traders. Kushan Prince from Balkh near central asian border claims to be a Kakar, but he is not aware of the fact that many clans of Kakars, Pannis ,Tarins and Miyanas were part of Kochi/powinda. Nuhanis or Lohanis , Niazis , Gandapurs and many other tribes are no longer part of kochi but have settled down. Mostly Ghilzais and Dotanis are kochi nowadays. Lohanis have extensive tribal branching, this is absent from Memons etc.

If we go by pheonetics, then there is also a clan of Jats by name of Lohana in Punjab. If we go by coincidences, then Kakar is also branch of Khatri caste, as told by you, which is a merchant caste. Nohani is also a Baloch tribe.

[Samandri]

And Kabuli guy is incorrect in saying that Kakars are from Peshawar valley (i dont think he knows much about Pashtuns). Kakars are inhabitants of Zhob and surroundings, since unknown times.

[Samandri]

clan that is called "Baloch Khel" so would that mean they could be of possible Baluch origins?

Who knows...

Academically speaking , you are a moron. There are even clans of Pashtuns by name of Tatar Khel, not that they were of Tatar race, but because their progenitor was named Tatar Khan (e.g Tatar Khan Lodi, Tatar Khan Kansi etc). Might seem weird to you, but Pashtuns do have weird names like this. E.g Multan Khan Afridi who fought against British. Its not that he had connections with Multan, parents named him so.