Afghans in Hudud Al Alam

[Afghanfootball]

"Saul, a pleasant village on a mountain. In it live Afghans".

"The king of Ninhar had Muslim, Afghan, and Hindu wives".

Very interesting to see Afghans mentioned as something other than Muslim and Hindu in the 10th century.

Thoughts?

[Samandri]

Keep in mind the Saul village of Afghans and the King of Ninhar are not mentioned togather in the Hudud-i-alam, the two mentions are not connected with each other. Its Wikipedia which has done commentry that Saul is probably near Gardez. All we are told in Hudud-i-alam is, that Saul is a pleasant vilage on a mountain. Which mountain? We dont know.
Elsewhere in the book, the author talks about King of Ninhar, that he had wives of different backgrounds, Muslims, Afghans and Hindus. Hudud-i-Alam was written in 982 A.D and at that time Ghazni was ruled by Subuktagin, who had enrolled large numbers of Afghans in his army according to Kitab Yamini. Why King of Ninhar, before conversion to Islam, was keeping women of Afghans and other Muslims as his wives?. They must have come into his possession as booty in wars with Subuktagin, or may be he simply raided down south. The mention is of wives of King, not of the inhabitants of Ninhar/Nangarhar.

The author of Hudud-i-Alam seems to have not much information about Afghans, thats why just two vague references. King's Muslim wives were perhaps Turko-Persian, who at that time were leading representatives of Muslims in the region, and Afghans are distinctively mentioned separately, perhaps, due to their lack of integration with other Muslims and the heavy presence of unislamic tribal customs in their culture. Akhund Darweza mentions Dilazak Afghans as "infidels" , out of his bigotry , due to which some British authors thought that Dilazaks must have been Hindus or Budhists, but from Baburnama, one can tell they were muslims, they had muslim names.

[Samandri]

Even before Hudud-i-alam, there is mention of Afghans in book al-tanbih by Masudi, written in 965 A.D. It states that "the rubat or fortified caravanserai of Badakhshan stands over against various kinds of Turks viz of Vakhan, Tibet and Ayghan". (Awghan has been pronounced as Ayghan)

In the above , Masudi is showing ignorance about Ayghans (Afghans) like author of Hudud-i-alam. Nether Ayghans nor those of Tibet are Turks. Afghans were not natives of Badakhshan, yet you see them marauding there in 10th century. Its obvious, very little was know about Afghans at that time.

[Samandri]

I have English translation of Hudud-i- Alam with me (will upload it later)

On page 91, Gardez is mentioned as "frontier town between Ghaznin and Hindustan, situated on the summit of a mound and possessing a strong fortress with three walls. The inhabitants are Kharjiites."

[Samandri]

Hudud-i-Alam says that Ninhar's King has many wives, over thirty Muslim, Afghan, and Hindu (wives). "The rest of the people are idolators. In (Ninhar) there are three large Idols.

It also mentions Lamghan (Laghman) on next page, that " it is emporium of Hindustan and a residence of merchants and it possesses idol-temples".

[Samandri]

Kharjiites referring to Khiliji. Any info on east Afghanistan in areas like Kunar or Nuristan?

No, it is referring to sect of Khawarij

[Samandri]

On page 111, Kabul is described as " a borough possessing a solid fortress known for its strength. Its inhabitants are Muslims and Indians , and there are idol-temples in it. The royal power of Raja of Qannauj is not complete untill he has made a pilgrimage to those idol-temples , and here too his royal standard is fastened."

[Samandri]

Khaljis are also mentioned :"In Ghaznin and in the limits of the boroughs which we have enumerated, live the Khalaj Turks who possess many sheeps. They wander along climates , grazing grounds and pasture-lands. These Khalaj Turks are also numerous in the provinces (hudud) of Balkh , Tukharistan, Bust, and Guzganan." (page-111)

[Samandri]

Ghur is described as : "a province amid mountains and rugged country. It has a King called Ghur Shah. He draws his strength from the mir of Guzganan. In the days of old this province of Ghur was pagan (Kafir) ; actually most of the people are Muslims. To them belong numerous boroughs and villages. From this province come slaves , armour, coats of mail, and good arms. The people are bad-tempered, unruly, and ignorant. They are white and swarthy" (page-110)

[Samandri]

I saw a snippet of a book which said that Ibn Battuta specified Saul was between Paktia and Roshayinna?.

Afghans have been nomads and at that time it should be no supreme that they would be featured in Badakhshan or Ningarhar. Though I don't how you'd come to the conclusion that the Afghan were booty from war with Subuktagin.

I'd say two possibilities are very likely Pashtuns were living there already and obviously would be married to the king of Ninhar or as a sign of an alliance Pashtuns tribes could have married off their daughters to him. I strongly doubt a king of Ningarhar would have enough strength to raid the south.

I was just throwing a guess. About Ibn-i-batuta's mentioning of Saul, i am not aware of it. I will check it though when i get the book

[Afghanfootball]

Ghur is described as : "a province amid mountains and rugged country. It has a King called Ghur Shah. He draws his strength from the mir of Guzganan. In the days of old this province of Ghur was pagan (Kafir) ; actually most of the people are Muslims. To them belong numerous boroughs and villages. From this province come slaves , armour, coats of mail, and good arms. The people are bad-tempered, unruly, and ignorant. They are white and swarthy" (page-110)

The description sounds identical to how one would describe a Pashtun. Just take out the ignorant part. Ghor shahs must have some sort of relationship with Kabul and Zabul Shah.

[Samandri]

Interesting that he has also made the mistake of calling them Turks. Suprised to see there was a large population all around the country (at the time Khorasan).

They are described as having life style very similar to Ghilzai nomads of today i.e Kochis. It can not be a coincidence, Ghilzais today are found in and around Ghazni. Why early geographers are mentioning them as Turks, its a mystery to me. They appear to be very numerous in those times, what happened to Khalajs of Northern Afghanistan?, perhaps Mongol invasion has some thing to do with it

[Samandri]

The description sounds identical to how one would describe a Pashtun. Just take out the ignorant part. Ghor shahs must have some sort of relationship with Kabul and Zabul Shah.

You do have a point, Tajiks are not exactly hot-tempered and unruly people.

[Afghanfootball]

They are described as having life style very similar to Ghilzai nomads of today i.e Kochis. It can not be a coincidence, Ghilzais today are found in and around Ghazni. Why early geographers are mentioning them as Turks, its a mystery to me. They appear to be very numerous in those times, what happened to Khalajs of Northern Afghanistan?, perhaps Mongol invasion has some thing to do with it

Yes I was going to make the connection with kochi as well. My guess is Arabs would have been a bit unfamiliar with Afghans. So the mistakes could have come from Turks being rural nomadic people and the fact that turks who the Arabs were more familiar with were allied with Afghans.

Ghilzai up north may either been pushed south by Turks/mongols or adopted dari.

[Afghanfootball]

[MENTION=18842]History of Pashtuns[/MENTION]
It seems like mountain Pashtun areas weren't apart of Khorasan but were a frontier area between it and Hindustan. Though Qandahar was considered apart of Hindustan it seems.

Though it's obvious Afghans were distinguished from Indians so it's a bit strange to see Qandahar apart of Hindustan.

http://rbedrosian.com/Ref/Minorsky/hudud10.htm