Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > Asian History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Asian History Asian History Forum - China, Japan, Korea, India, Australia, New Zealand, and the Asia-Pacific Region


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old January 10th, 2018, 06:00 AM   #11

Azad67's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: Aug 2014
From: pakistan
Posts: 783

Quote:
Originally Posted by tornada View Post
Isn't Khan originally a Mongol title? basically meaning King or Warlord? The Mongols were making incursions and forays in India under the Sultanate, and established a presence in much of North West India's edges. Couldn't the title and subsequent adoption as name have come directly from this source?
I'm not saying it can't also have been derived from the Mughals, but given the hegemonic domination of the Mongols on Central Asia in an ideological sense long after direct political power faded, I would think there would multiple lines of transmission of terminology from their culture. Like the term Noker, eventually culminating in the word for employee/servitor/servant in India
Khan is Turkic title as well. The Turkic ruler of Kara Khitai were using Khan titles (e.g Gur Khan). The early Turk arrivals in India were also using it. For example Under Iltutmish the iqta of Hansi was placed in charge of Malik Nushrat-ud- Khan. Sultan Balban (born in 1200 AD) was carrying the title of Ulugh Khan before ascendancy to throne. Other Turk nobles of the same period (early 13th century) were also carrying Khan titles e.g Qutlugh Khan , Izzuddin Balban-i-Kishlu Khan, Malik Arslan Khan Sanjar etc. All of the Afghan nobles in Lodi empire were using Khan title and it was legacy of earlier Turks, not Mongols. Tarikh-i-nama-Herat (written in 1318) gives a list of names of Afghan chieftains of mid 13th century Afghanistan (which was part of Mongol empire of Genghis Khan), none of them carries the title of Khan so it appears Afghans inherited it from Turkic Sultans of India during pre-Mughal period (1206-1526)
Azad67 is offline  
Remove Ads
Old January 10th, 2018, 06:06 AM   #12

tornada's Avatar
Wind Lord
 
Joined: Mar 2013
From: India
Posts: 15,109
Blog Entries: 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Azad67 View Post
Khan is Turkic title as well. The Turkic ruler of Kara Khitai were using Khan titles (e.g Gur Khan). The early Turk arrivals in India were also using it. For example Under Iltutmish the iqta of Hansi was placed in charge of Malik Nushrat-ud- Khan. Sultan Balban (born in 1200 AD) was carrying the title of Ulugh Khan before ascendancy to throne. Other Turk nobles of the same period (early 13th century) were also carrying Khan titles e.g Qutlugh Khan , Izzuddin Balban-i-Kishlu Khan, Malik Arslan Khan Sanjar etc. All of the Afghan nobles in Lodi empire were using Khan title and it was legacy of earlier Turks, not Mongols. Tarikh-i-nama-Herat (written in 1318) gives a list of names of Afghan chieftains of mid 13th century Afghanistan (which was part of Mongol empire of Genghis Khan), none of them carries the title of Khan so it appears Afghans inherited it from Turkic Sultans of India during pre-Mughal period (1206-1526)
There you go then. Multiple lines of transmission.
tornada is online now  
Old January 14th, 2018, 09:06 PM   #13

Dreamhunter's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jun 2012
From: Malaysia
Posts: 5,117
Blog Entries: 1

What about cricketer turned politician Imran Khan? How did he & his family initially get their Khan title?
Dreamhunter is offline  
Old January 14th, 2018, 09:25 PM   #14

Aupmanyav's Avatar
Atheist, Advaitist, Hindu
 
Joined: Jun 2014
From: New Delhi, India
Posts: 2,912

Father Niyazi, mother Burki. Mianwali, FATA, if that helps.
Aupmanyav is offline  
Old January 15th, 2018, 01:42 AM   #15

Shaheen's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: May 2011
From: Sweden
Posts: 2,425

Quote:
Originally Posted by tornada View Post
Isn't Khan originally a Mongol title? basically meaning King or Warlord? The Mongols were making incursions and forays in India under the Sultanate, and established a presence in much of North West India's edges. Couldn't the title and subsequent adoption as name have come directly from this source?
I'm not saying it can't also have been derived from the Mughals, but given the hegemonic domination of the Mongols on Central Asia in an ideological sense long after direct political power faded, I would think there would multiple lines of transmission of terminology from their culture. Like the term Noker, eventually culminating in the word for employee/servitor/servant in India
As Azad's post stated, Punjab was exposed to the usage of Khan earlier than the Mongol invasions due to Turkic influence. However a noteworthy point is that only Muslims ever seemed to use it. For example the 1857 freedom fighter Ahmed Khan Kharal, the Hayat Khan Nawabs of Wah or Shahbaz Khan Kamboh.
Shaheen is offline  
Old January 15th, 2018, 01:43 AM   #16

Shaheen's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: May 2011
From: Sweden
Posts: 2,425

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreamhunter View Post
What about cricketer turned politician Imran Khan? How did he & his family initially get their Khan title?
His family is from Mianwali, a transition zone between Pakhtun and Punjabi inhabited lands. "Ethnically" he would be considered a Pashtun but linguistically and culturally he is closer to a Punjabi.
Shaheen is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > Asian History

Tags
caste, converts, khan, title, upper



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Why did Christianity fail horribly in getting converts in North India? Ajanbahu Asian History 194 June 24th, 2017 10:31 PM
Pashtuns got 'Khan' title from Turk Sultans of Delhi , not Mongols Azad67 Asian History 0 May 19th, 2015 10:00 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.