Abdul Hai Habibi
n the Indian Historical Congress, held in 1939, one of the speakers who spoke on this issue said that the Khaljies were not Turks, and his studies were published in the Proceedings of the Indian History Congress. But before this Edward Thomas had published a book entitled The Chronicles of the Pathan Kings of Delhi, in 1871 in London, in which he recalls that from 1193 to 1554 A.D., the Delhi Sultans were Pathan=Afghan kings. During this period five Moslem dynasties and 40 kings ruled over the Delhi throne.[1]](Error 404 - Not found) Sir Wolseley Haig, who published the third volume of the Cambridge History of India in 1928, in which he discusses Turks and Afghans in India, says for the sake of precaution that the Khaljies were related to Afghans and adds that they were Turks who adhere to Afghan customs and live in the Garmser area of Afghanistan. Since their second race came into being in India, they have denied being the descendants of Turkish origin.[2]](Error 404 - Not found) In the whereabouts of 1205 A.D. and after the death of the Ghorid emperor Mui’ziz-ud-din Mohammad Saam, a number of Afghans, some of whom were of the Pashto speaking Afghan origin and others belonged to the Turkish race were raised in Afghan courts and got mixed with Afghans. Therefore, scholars like Thomas and his predecessors consider them afghan even they might have been related to Turks or Arabs. For example, when Khazir Khan, the son of Malik Sulayman conquered Delhi in 1404 A.D., he and his followers (according to Mohammad Qasim Firishta) considered themselves to be the descendants of the Prophet Mohammad. Yahya, son of Ahmad Shahrani, who wrote Tarikh-e Mubarak Shahi in 1404 A.D., in the name of his son Mubarakshah, and other historians like Shams Siraj A’fif in Tarikh-e Ferozshahi and Abdul Qadir Badayuni, the author of Muntakhab-ul-Tawarikh also consider this dynasty to be Sayyids or the descendents of Mohammad the Prophet. But Mohammad Qasim Ferishta says: “Before this Malik Sulamaan never claimed to be a descendent of the Prophet Mohammad.”[3]](Error 404 - Not found) The same subject has also been written by Maulawi Ahmad Ali Hindi.[4]](Error 404 - Not found) While Zakaullah, the modern Indian historian manifests that Malik Sulaymaan and his son were Afghans and not Sayyids of the Arabic race.[5]](Error 404 - Not found)
Since in this article the issue under investigation is the Khalji and refutation that they are linked to the Turks, explanations and details into other issues will not be discussed. From the available historical and linguistic reasoning it can be said that Khalji is the present Ghalji and is the name of certain Afghan tribes. This root is present in Gharj, Gharcha, Ghalcha and other historical words, and “gh” has converted to “kh”, hence Ghalji has been mispronounced as Khalji. This change is seen in the texts of the third, fourth and following centuries of the Hijera.
According to Minhaj Seraj there were over 15 great Khalji personalities who ruled from 1203 A.D. onwards over India and were spreading Khorasanian and Islamic culture all over northern India and the highlands of North Bengal.[6]](Error 404 - Not found) Once again the Khaljies ruled over Delhi from 1203 to 1320 A.D. All these rulers were the Ghaljis of Afghanistan. Several places are still known in Afghanistan as Khalaj. Such as the Khalaj (near Gizeo of Rozgan, north of Kandahar), the Khalaj[7]](Error 404 - Not found) of Helmand valley and the Khalaj of Ghazna, which Yaqut also mentions[8]](Error 404 - Not found) as being near Ghazni in the land of Zabulistan.
In view of linguistic analysis, Khalji, Ghalji or Ghalzi are Gharzay, meaning mountain-dwellers (in Pahsto ghar means a mountain and zay born of). In the tale of Kak Kohzad (Mulhaqat-e-Shahnama, vol. 5, p. 33) these people are of Afghan descent and according to the author of this book they lived in Zabul (between Ghazni and Helmand) in the plain which is linked with Hindwan. These people are said to be tent dwellers. Kohzad is the translation of Pashto Gharza and the Ghalji. Tent dwellers still live in the same manner in this region. Just as in Pashto this ancient word is Gharzay=Gharlji=Khalji. In Arabic it is written Gharj, and kohzad in Dari has the same structure and meaning. The term is so old that Panini, the founder of Sanskrit grammar (about 350 B.C.), has called the tribes of central and northern Rohita-Giri=Hindu Kush, as Pohita Giries or mountaineers[9]](Error 404 - Not found), which means kohzad or gharzay=Khalji.
We know that Indians called this land Roh. Huen Tsang has also noted this word in 630 A.D. and after 1203 A.D. Indian authors have called Afghanistan, (extending from Heart to Hasan Abdal) Roh[10]](Error 404 - Not found) and its inhabitants as Rohela, which means kohzad or Ghalji=Khalji. In India a place named Rohil-Kohzad is related to Rohela (Kohzad) and was the dwelling place of Afghans who had settled in India. In the names of some tribes “gh” has ben converted to “kh” e.g. Khir=Khez=Qir=Ghez[11]](Error 404 - Not found) or the present Saghar, south of Ghor, has been recorded as Saakhar by Minhaj Sierj.[12]](Error 404 - Not found)
With great doubt Mohammad Qasim Firisha states from Tabaqat-e Akbari of Nizam-ud-Din Ahmad Bakhshi Hirawi that Khaljies are the descendants of Khalij Khan, the son-in-law of Genghis Khan. But this statement is not true, since historical documents reveal that Khaljies or Ghaljies lived in Zabulistan three centuries before Genghis. The unknown author of Hudud-ul-Alam writes in 982 A.D.: “In Ghazna and the vicinity of these towns, which have been mentioned here, live Taraks of Khalj.” They are a nomadic people and possess a lot of sheep. These Taraks of Khalj are found in great numbers in Balkh, Tukharistan and Gozganan also.[13]](Error 404 - Not found)
Minhaj Siraj once again proves that the Khaljies ruled long before Genghis and his son-in-law over India and their empire stretched as far as the highlands of North Bengal. A full chapter of the 20[SUP]th[/SUP] part of his book deals with these people.[14]](Error 404 - Not found)
He says that the Khaljies live near Ghazni, Garmseer and Ghor, but has not said anything about these people being Turks. On the other hand, he clearly refers to other rulers of Turkish descent as Turks.
Khalj, which has been altered to Khalakh by calligraphers, was a well-known word among geographers long before the compilation of Hudud-ul-Alam. Ibne Khurdadbeh (844-848 A.D.) also speaks about Khaljiya. He confirms that there is a difference between Khalj and says: “the winter dwelling of Turks of Kharlukh (Kharlikh) is near Taraz and nearby them lie the pastures of Khalj (Khaljiya).[15]](Error 404 - Not found) From this it is evident that the nomadic tribes of Khalji of that time, similar to their present habits, moved towards warmer regions during the cold season of the year. According to Ibn-e Khurdadbeh these regions were called Jarmiya (Jurum of Baladhuri and Minhaj Siraj). Ibn-e Khurdadbeh writes that their winter pastures were on this side of the Oxus river (p. 3). Some of these nomadic tribes still go to these areas.
Another geographer Ibrahim Ibn-e Mohammad Istakhri (about 951 A.D.) writes Khalj are a clan of Atrak (most probably a plural of Tarak) who came to the region between India and Seistan during ancient times. They had large stocks of sheep and their language and clothes resemble those of Turks.[16]](Error 404 - Not found)
Some oriental scholars are of the belief that Gharjies are the descendants of Helthalites (presumably a mixed race of Hepthalite and Pakhts who have been living in Afghanistan since the Vedic Aryan period). Marquart says: Khalch or Kholackj are descendants of the Yaftals, who have been mentioned as Khwalas in Syrian sources (about 554 A.D.). After this in 569 A.D. ambassador Zemarchos has written this name as Xoliatai.[17]](Error 404 - Not found)
Mohammd son of Ahmad Khwarazmi (980 A.D.) says: Khalj and Taraks of Kabjiya[18]](Error 404 - Not found) are the descendants of Hayatila who held great prestige in Tukharistan.[19]](Error 404 - Not found)
The Khalj and Afghans have always been mentioned together and indispensably their place or origin and race was common. Abu Nasr Mohammad, son of Abdul Jabbar Utbi (1023 A.D.), in the conquests of Subuktagin writes as follows: “the Afghans and Khalj obeyed Subuktagin and reluctantly joined his forces.”[20]](Error 404 - Not found) Ibn-ul-Athir has also mentioned this event in the same manner.[21]](Error 404 - Not found)
Minorsky clearly writes that these Khaljies are the ancestors of the present Afghan Ghalji. Barthold and Haig have written the same in the Islamic Encyclopedia.[22]](Error 404 - Not found) It can therefore be said that Khalji or Ghalji were related to the Hepthalites and Zabul rulers, since the Helthalites, (Hayatila of Arabs) ruled over Zabulistan. Their features struck on coins resemble the features of the Ghalji youth who live in this area and have high noses, almond eyes, bushy hair, and strong features.
Therefore, Khaljies or Ghaljies are not the descendants of those Turks or Ghuz who had come to Khorasan during the Islamic period, but are Hepthalites of the Arian race who were famous as White Huns and lived in Tukharistan and Zabulistan and the name of their ancestors has remained in the names of the present Ghalji—the Kochi=Koshi tribes of Zabul. Similarly the root of Hiftal is seen in Yaftal and Haftali in Abdali. The word Ghalji is known in Badakhshan now as Ghalcha=Garcha. In Dari literature this word means a simple man or mountain dweller. Abu Tayib Musa’bi (about 938 A.D.), the poet of the Samanid court says:
If a Garcha can live over one hundred years,
Why did the Arab (Prophet) live only sixty three?
The word Koch and Baloch have been written in the same place in appendages of Shahnama, and the Arabs have Arabized them to Qufs and Balus. In fact they are Khalji=Ghalji nomads having an ancient history in Ariana. Some scholars believe that these Kochi (nomads) are the Apa Kochiya mentioned in Achaemenian inscriptions who lived in this region before commingling between the Hunnish Arians.[23]](Error 404 - Not found) The blending of White Huns of Arian descent with Pakhts (Paxtoons) in Bactria, the valleys of the Hindu Kush, Kabulistan, and Zabulistan was a natural phenomenon since two northern and southern branches of the Arian race have got mixed. It is not evident what language the White Arians (Hun=Hepthalite) spoke, but from the closeness of dialects in the upper Hindu Kush e.g. Gharcha, Wakhi etc. it can be guessed to have resembled Pashto and certain Pashto sounds which are not found in Pahlawi, Dari, Avesta and Sanskrit are present in these dialects until now. These white Arian Huns were Haftali (Abdali) who attacked India from Zabulistan and conquered Kashmir. The Sanskrit inscription of the 7[SUP]th[/SUP] century A.D. found in 1839 A.D. in Wihand on the banks of the Indus river near Attock refers to them as strong men who ate meat and calls them Turushka.[24]](Error 404 - Not found)
The Kashmiri historian, Kalkana, in his book Raja Tarangini (1148 A.D.) writes about these kings and their ferocious attacks over Kashmir and says that the Turushkas carried their weapons upon their shoulders and shaved half their scalp. He says that the Kushanid kings Kanishka, Hushka, and Jushka are the descendents of Turushka.[25]](Error 404 - Not found)
Turushka of Indian sources will be discussed later. The Huns who after the 6[SUP]th[/SUP] century A.D. increased in numbers after amalgamating with the Pashtoons and attacked India have been called Khans in India and until the present time Pashtoons are called Khan all over India due to the alteration of h and kh in central Asian languages. For example the Hwarazm was converted to Khwarazm. The Turks pronounce Khanam as Hanam while the Afridis of Khyber pronounce Khan and Khun. In Masalik of Ibn-Khurdadbeh the name of Turkhan has been written as Tarkhum (p. 41). Therefore it is possible that Huns or Khun could have been converted to Khan, which means that the Afghan Khalji Khans were not Turks and we have the following reasoning to prove this statement.
-
Mahmud Kashghari (1074 A.D.), who was of Turkish descent and a Turkologist says: The ghuz of Turkmans comprise 24 tribes, but two Khaljiya tribes resemble the Turks are not considered Turks.[26]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftn26) This Turkish historian who has studied the Turks and even note their tribes, refrains from adding the name of Khalj with the Turks.[27]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftn27) -
Mohammad son of Bakran in the whereabouts of 1203 A.D. writes: The Khaljies of Taraks migrated from Khalukh to Zabulistan. They have settled in the plain near Ghaznayn. Because of the hot weather their color has changed and they became swarthy, their language also changed. As a misreading Khalukh is read Khalj.[28]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftn28)
From this declaration of the author of Jahan Nama it is clear that due to differences in color and language the Khaljiya were separate by all means from the Turks and a misreading existed between Khalj and Khalukh.
3. Minhaj Seraj, who is from Khorasan and is well familiar with the affairs of this land, knows a number of Turkish rulers of India, but has always referred to the Turkish and Turks and the Khaljiya as Khaljies.
4. Zia Barani, the Indian historian (1357 A.D.) in his book Tarikh-e-Ferozshahi, has a special chapter where he says the king must be among the Turks but when Malik Jalaluddin Khalji ascended the Delhi throne he says: “the people found it difficult to tolerate a Khalji king.”[29]](Error 404 - Not found) Since Khaljies were not Turks Indian historians also considered them to be Afghans.[30]](Error 404 - Not found)
5. In Afghan literature the Khalji of India have been referred to as being Afghan Ghalji. Khushal Khan Khattak, the famous Pashto poet (died 1688 A.D.) in a long elegy enumerates the Afghan kings and considers Sultan Jalaluddin Khalji (1290-1295 A.D.) to be a Ghalji of Wilayat (Afghanistan).
“Then Sultan Jalaluddin ascended the Delhi throne who was a Ghalji from Wilayat.”[31]](Error 404 - Not found)
Afghans usually referred to the lands behind Khyber as Wilayat and the Indians referred to Khorasan and Afghanistan by this name. This shows that until the time of Khushal Khan the Khaljies were considered Afghans and not Turks.
6. Another reason which proves that the Khaljies are Afghans is an ancient book in which it is stated that the Pashto language (Afghani) is the language of the Khaljiya. Since Pashto is the language of the Pashtoons (Afghans) therefore the Khaljies are also Afghans.
A manuscript on the miracles of Sultan Sakhi Sarwar[32]](Error 404 - Not found) (known as Lakhdata died 1181 A.D. and buried in Shah Kot of Dera Ghazi Khan) is written in Persian whose author is unknown. In this book the author relates a story from Tarikh-e Ghazna by Abu Hamid-al-Zawali and quotes Hasan Saghani.[33]](Error 404 - Not found) “Kabul Shah, Khingil, who according to Yaqubi lived about 779 A.D.[34]](Error 404 - Not found) sent a poem in the Khaljiya language to the Loyak of Ghazni.” Analysis of this poem shows that it is ancient Pashto which is said to have been the language of Khaljiya. This means that the Khalji spoke Pashto, and they are the present Afghan Ghaljies.
7. Fakhruddin Mubarak Shah, well known as Fakhr-e Mudabir and author of Adab-al-Harb and other famous books, writing on the History of India (1205 A.D.) says that the armies of Sultan Qutb-ud-Din comprised of Turks, Ghori, Khorasani, Khalji and Indian soldiers.[35]](Error 404 - Not found) This proves that in the beginning of the 7[SUP]th[/SUP] century Hijera the Turks and Khaljies were two separate nationalities. If not so then they would not have been mentioned separately in the same sentence.
8. Until the time of Babur, the founder of the Indian Mughal dynasty the Ghalji of present Ghazna have been mentioned as Afghan Khalji and not as Turks. Babur says: “In 1507 A.D. we had ridden out of Kabul with the intention of over-running the country of Afghan Khaljies, northeast of Ghazni and brought back with us one hundred thousand head of sheep and other things.”[36]](Error 404 - Not found)
Turk-Tarak Turuska
There are two reason as to why the Khaljies have been mistaken to be Turks:
First: The Sakas, Kushanids and Huns came to Bactria and Tukharistan and southern Hindu Kush from Trans Oxiana and they were desert dwelling Arians and their culture resembled that of Turks of Altai and western China. These people probably had cultural and linguistic similarities with the Turks. Since these people got mixed with the aborigines of Ariana (ancient Afghanistan), the Tajiks and the Pashtoons. According to Jahan Nama their language and color changed. Therefore, Barthold and some other oriental scholars considered the Pashto speaking Ghaljies to be descendants of these people. Even the name Abdali is related to these people and Awdal=Abdal has derived from Haftal=Yaftal. Classic writers have written this name as Euthalite. The tribes of Kafiristan (present Nuristan), northeast Hindu Kush also referred to Moslem Afghans as Odal up to the 19[SUP]th[/SUP] century.[37]](Error 404 - Not found) The Kabul Shahs of the 7[SUP]th[/SUP] century whose titles and names were in Dari or Pashto were the descendants of the Dumi tribe of the Kushanids.[38]](Error 404 - Not found)
The second reason is that in Arabic script the word Tarak and Turk resemble each other and since Turks were well-known among Arab writers from the early years of Islamic period, therefore, they considered Tarak of the Afghan Khaljies to be Turks from the Turkish race. While the Taraki Ghaljies are famous Afghan nomadic tribes whose number in the plains of Ghazni (according to Shahnama from their land there was a way to Hindustan) surpass 50,000. Until the present time these people move towards the valleys of the Indus and Tukharistan during winter. They possess large herds of sheep, speak Pashto and are true representatives of Afghan culture.
But the word Turushka, mentioned in Sanskrit works, has been used in different forms in Raja Tarangini. In first Tarangini, shlok 170, three Kushanid emperors have been considered to belong to the Turushka tribe. Paragraph 20 of another Indian work, Chavithakara, also deals with this issue the same way.[39]](Error 404 - Not found) But in Rajaa Tarangini (vol. 2, p. 336) this word has been mentioned by Kalhana as the name of Muslim conquerors who were in war with the Kabul Shahs. Sir Aurel Stein says: “Undoubtedly, here Turushka means the Moslems. In 871 A.D. Saffarid Yaqub Layth captured Kabul and like the Arab conquerors attacked the remnants of Kabul Shah from Seistan and Rukhaj. Therefore the danger poised by Turushka, which Kalhans says, was from the south is not devoid of truth.[40]](Error 404 - Not found)
From these facts it is evident that the Indian word Turushka, as was thought, not only meant a Turk but was also used to mean the Arabs, the Saffarids of Seistan and all those who attacked India and the Kabul Shah from the west. For example, Harasha, a Turushka king ruined all the temples and idols of Kashmir about of 495 A.D.[41]](Error 404 - Not found) Discussing Samagram Raja (1003-1028 A.D.) in Tarangini 7 shlok 57 who was a contemporary of Subuktagin and Sultan Mahmud, the battles of Turushka Kammira conducted by Subuktagin or Amir Mahmud have been mentioned. This further means that Turushka was a word also applied to the conquerors from the west i.e. the Kushanids, Huns, Moslems and Turks. This word has also been inscribed in the Sanskrit inscription of Wihand, in which the carnivorous and mighty Huns have been called by this name.
The ancient Arians of the Vedic period who moved towards the east from Afghanistan called their soldiers Kshatria. This word (kash+tura) means a swordsman in Pashto. The title suits the warrior soldiers and the name of the Tarakay tribe is related to this same root. There are a number of other similar Afghan names of this type like Turman, Turyalay, Turkalanay with an initial tur+a suffix.
The word tura is widespread in a number of historical names like Turoyana, which according to the Vedas, was a king of the Pakht (Pashtoon) tribes. At present this world is used as turwahuney, meaning one who wields a sword. According to Kalhana, Turman was the name of a Kshatria king of Gandhara and in present usage also means a swordsman.
After reading the stated facts we can conclude that the Khaljies were Pashto speaking Taraks and not Turks. Confusion between the two words started in Arabic script from the early Islamic period.[42]](Error 404 - Not found) Similarly, the Iranian word Turushka did not mean Turks but as a converted form of the Vedic Kshatria, which has been used in Pashto literature as tur kash, meaning those soldiers armed with swords. However, it must be added that several centuries after the advent of the Christian era, Afghan Khaljies intermingled with powerful Turks of the courts in battles and journeys, therefore they acquired Turkish names and customs. Thus authors had a right to confuse the two nationalities while there existed a confusion between the words Tarak (the Afghan Khalji tribe) and Turk also. Due to these facts a number of Turkish words have been used in Pashto from the time of the Kushanids and the Hepthalites (Huns) and have acquired a special Pashto form, like wulus (nation), jirgah (a council) kuk (meaning rhythm in Turkish), khan (a chieftain=hun) and tugh (flag) etc.
It must not be forgotten that Mahmud son of Husayn Kashghari, the Turkish scholar 1073 A.D., has denominated a special form for Khalj. He says that in the Samarqand battles with Alexander only 22 persons were left from the Turkish tribes. While walking with their families as men on foot they met two persons carrying loads on their backs and consulted them. They advised them as follows: “Alexander is a passer by and he is bound to leave and will not stay in this country, only we will remain.”
In Turkish they referred to these two persons “qal-aj” meaning that they remained and stayed. Therefore they became famous as Khalj and their successors were the two clans of Khaljies. Since thier character and mode resembled the Turks Alexander said they are Turkman, that is they resemble the Turks. Hence they are still referred to as Turkman. All Turkish tribes are composed of 22 clans but the two clans of Khaljies do not consider themselves to the Turkish.[43]](Error 404 - Not found)
This denomination of Khalj and Turkman, in which Alexander was considered to be a Persian speaker, has the form of a fable and does not bear any historical evidence. But the fact that the Kushanids and Helthalites (Huns) were ruling over this land during the 7[SUP]th[/SUP] and 8[SUP]th[/SUP] centuries A.D. has been recorded in a number of historical and linguistic documents. Inscriptions also bear these facts. And that they have mingled racially and culturally with the Pashtoons is a very natural phenomenon.
Since the Kushanid and Yaftali tribes had a number of Turkish cultural and linguistic elements instilled among them and the Turharian Tigins ruled over the south and north of the Hindu Kush, until the beginning of the Islamic period, and Zabulistan (the present land of the Khaljies) was considered the center of the Hepthalites, bearing the title of Zabul Shah, it is possible that they married and got mixed with the Khalji mountain dwelling people. In this process they accepted the linguistic and cultural effects on one another. For example the word Bag (meaning God, king or great) which has a deep root in Sanskrit and Avesta was usually inscribed on the Achamenian, Sassanid, Kushanid and Yaftali inscriptions and coins. In Turkish it was entered in the form of Bag (meaning an emperor or king).[44]](Error 404 - Not found) On the other hand on the inscription of the Yaftali period, in Jaghatu of Ghazni, the Turkish title of Ulugh has been written with the name of a king in cursive Greek script and we know that Ulugh also means Bag or great. The names of most Khaljies and even other Afghans are Turkish like Qaraqush (a hawk), Balka (sage), Sanqur (falcon) etc.[45]](Error 404 - Not found) Previously we discussed a number of Pashto words bearing Turkish roots.
On the separation of the Khalji=Ghalji, Minhaj Siraj’s statement is worth consideration in which he says: “Sultan Jalaluddin Khwarazm Shah and Malik Khan of Heart reached Ghaznayn and a large army of Turks, and rulers of Ghor, Tajik, Khalji and Ghori gathered at their service.”[46]](Error 404 - Not found) Here Minhaj Siraj mentions the Turks and Khalj as two separate entities. Juwaini, in Tarikh-e Jahankusha also speaks about the presence of Khalji in the battle of Parwan and the defeat of the Genghis army.[47]](Error 404 - Not found)
In the common usage of the people of Khorasan the word Khalji was pronounced with a (ghein) as Ghalji. Even today in Afghanistan this mode of pronunciation is widespread. We also have historical proof for this statement: the oriental branch of the Moscow Academy of Sciences has printed in Arabic Al-Tarikh-ul-Mansuri of Mohammad son of Ali Hamawi from a unique manuscript in photographic form in which the supporters of Khwarazm Shah have been continuously referred to as Qalji.[48]](Error 404 - Not found) Since in western Khorasan and Iran (ghein) is pronounced as (qaf) qiran as ghiran and Quran as Ghuran, therefore, they converted Ghalji to Qalji and if they would have heard this word in the form of Khalji they would have written it in its original form, because these people do not convert (khe) to (Qaf).
Now after all these details we can conclude that Khaljies belong to the present Ghalji tribes of Zabul of Afghanistan, whose original name in Pashto was Gharzay meaning kohzad or mountaineer. Thus Gharzay was converted to Ghalji or Khalji in the historical records of Afghanistan and India.
[HR][/HR] [1]](Error 404 - Not found) The Chronicles of Pathan Kings, p. 7, Delhi 1967.
[2]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref2) Cambridge History of India. 3/61.
[3]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref3) Tarkikh-e Firishta, p. 162.
[4]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref4) Qasr-e A’rifan. P. 341, published in Lahore 1965.
[5]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref5) Tarikh-e Hindustan, Vol. 9.
[6]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref6) Tabaqat-e Naseri, I/422.
[7]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref7) Istakhri has mentioned these Khalk in the province of Helmand, p. 245.
[8]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref8) Mu’jan-ul-Buldan. 2/381.
[9]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref9) Hindustan as seen by Panini by Dr. Agrawala, Lucknow University, 1953.
[10]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref10) See Tarikh-e Farishta.
[11]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref11) Notes of Tabaye-ul-Haywan, 18.
[12]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref12) Tabaqate-e Nasiri 1/387, Habibi edition.
[13]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref13) Hudud-ul-Alam in which the word Khalj has been misinterpreted as Khalkh by the calligrapher and published that way.
[14]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref14) Tabakat-e Nasiri after 1/422.
[15]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref15) Al-Masalik wa al-Mamalik, 28.
[16]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref16) Masalik-ul-Mamalik of Istakhri, 245.
[17]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref17) Minorsky’s commentary on Hudud-ul-Alam, 347 from Iranshahar of Marquart after 251.
[18]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref18) In the original source Kanjina has been written incorrectly. In Bayhaqi it is Kapchi and in Tabaqat-e Nasiri Kochi and the Arabs have converted it to Qufs. In the appendages to the Shahnama it has been written Koch and at present this word is Kochi in Afghanistan. This word is a remnant of the name of Koshi=the Koshan of the first century B.C.
[19]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref19) Mafatih-ul-Ulum, 72.
[20]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref20) Tarikh-e Yamini, 26.
[21]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref21) Al-Kamil 8/348, Ibn-ul-Athir writes in Al-Kamil:L Yaqub Layth conquered Khaljiya and Zabul.
[22]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref22) Minorsky’s comments on Hudud-al-Alam, 348.
[23]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref23) Old Persian 165 and Sabk Shinasi by Bahar 2/67.
[24]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref24) Kabul by Alexander Burns, 190. London.
[25]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref25) Raja Tarangini 4/179, Tanslated by Sir Aurel Stein, London 1900, and India of Bohler 2/206.
[26]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref26) Divan Lughat-ul-Turk 3/307, Istanbul, 1915.
[27]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref27) Divant Lughat-ul-Turk, photographic publication p. 4-41.
[28]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref28) Jahan Nama, 73.
[29]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref29) Zia Barani’s Tarikh-e Ferozshahi, 173. Calcutta.
[30]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref30) Tazkira-e Bahaduran-e Islam, 2/331.
[31]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref31) Divan of Khushal Khan 669, Kandahar.
[32]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref32) For the biography of this saint refer to Khazinat-ul-Asfiya 2/248 and Ab-e Kawtbar by Shaikh Ikram p. 91 onwards.
[33]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref33) Born in Lahore 1181, died 1252 A.D.
[34]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref34) Tarikh-al-Yaqubi 2/131.
[35]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref35) Introduction to the History of Mubarak Shah, 33. London, 1927.
[36]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref36) Tuzuk-e Babur 127, Bombay.
[37]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref37) Charles Mason, narrative of various journeys in Baluchistan and Afghanistan. 1/232, London 1842.
[38]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref38) A new research on the Kabulshahan, p. 30, Kabul 1969.
[39]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref39) Aurel Stien’s comments on Raja Tarangini 1/30.
[40]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref40) Aurel Stein’s comments on Raja Tarangini after 336.
[41]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref41) Raja Tarangini. 7 shlok, 1095.
[42]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref42) Between 651-709 A.D. historians speak about Nizak rulers in Badghis, Merv and north of Kabul who have minted coins stating NYCHKMLKA in Pahlavi. These people or family have also been considered Turks while in the coins belonging to them Shah (o) Taraka Nisaga, with two short As of Taraka is evident (R. Ghirshman’s book on the Chinites=Hepthalites, p. 23 printed in Cairo in 1948). The word Taraka with two short As bears complete resemblance with the Afghan name Tarak.
[43]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref43) Diwn-ul-Lughat-ul-Turk 3/307.
[44]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref44) Diwan-ul-Lughat-ul-Turk 3/116.
[45]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref45) Refer to Tabaqat-e-Nasiri. Vol. 2. The Khalji kings in India.
[46]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref46) Tabaqat-e Nasiri 2/259.
[47]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref47) Jahan Kusha of Juwayni 2/194.
[48]](http://alamahabibi.com/English%20Articles%5CKhaljies_are_Afghan.htm#_ftnref48) Al-Tarikh-ul-Mansuri 140.
