Talk:Khan (title)

message: "The word is believed to be a derivation of Kohen, the Hebrew word for high priest, or some say Khagan (though that apparently means 'khan of khans'). It was known in Europe since the 13th century, when Mongol hordes overran Eastern and Central Europe, e.g. Latin chanis, Greek kanes, Old French chan, Jewish "Cohen," recorded in English circa 1400. The Hebrew origin of the word is attributed to the Assyrian conquest and expulsion of the Israelites in 722 B.C.E. to what is today Afghanistan, with the Pashtuns (or "Pathans") being their genetic descendants. The term made its way East from there."
First off, the second sentence doesn't make sense.  Secondly, proposing a Hebrew origin of a word used by north central asian nomads is a little absurd.  The claim that the Pashtuns are the "genetic descendants" is not only irrelevant to the article, it's also likely wrong, as I've read no paper on population genetics that supports this-- I'll be convinced otherwise if the author can provide an academic source for these claims.  In anycase, provide SOURCES.
D.E. Cottrell 21:12, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's so absurd, unsourced ridiculous and impossible that I removed it. Anybody wishing to reinstate any such claims, please source with authoritative (as per modern scholarship, not as per religious faith) material, and discuss it first. --Svartalf 10:58, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Issue with the Introduction

message: The disambiguation text at the very top says, "Khan" and "Khanate" redirect here. But this is the "Khan" article (that's the title!) so of course "Khan" redirects here. I'll remove "Khan" from it. Comrade4·2 04:17, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  '"Khan" and "Khanate" redirect here.' 

message: I would have thought that the existence of the name "Khan" in pop culture would be mentioned in this article (due to the huge influence of Star Trek on western society).  I know I myself traveled to Wikipedia hoping to find information on the Star Trek Khan, but there was none to be had. 24.84.119.214 15:30, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: see Khan Noonien Singh Guss2 08:21, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  No pop culture reference? 

message: Jadoon is a Pashtun tribe, but where their dynasty were, or that had been existing somewhere? What we have heard and read about few of the dynasties like Khilji dynasty, Lodhi dynasty, Swati dynasty and few more amongst pashtuns.   Take care.    Haider 22:01, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dynasty? 

message: An alternative theory to the Mongol origin for this term in South Asia is that it could possibly have come to this area with the invasion of Northern Persia, Afghanistan and Gandhara, in Northern India, by the Epthalite Huns lasting from circa 450 to 550 CE. The Epthalites introduced the feudal tenure in Pathan areas, of which fertile Gandhara formed the base. It is believed that this word was the title of Epthalite princes, as it was of all Hunnish and Khazar tribes; and many believe that "KHAN!" is actually the Persian corruption of the word "HUN!" itself. From northwestern India and Persia this name later spread to the rest of the Indian subcontinent, as it was from these regions that Islam got introduced to the Indian subcontinent, whose rulers for almost a millennium were Central Asian Muslims. Reasoning for the theory of Hunnish origin for "Khan" in Pathan culture also lies in the fact that many Pathan "Khan families" have Hunnish physical features, that can be attributed to the their influence. (Though local legends abound, attributing these to the Greek influence under Alexander who invaded this place, that seems highly improbable, aside from perhaps the Kalash or other regional South Asian tribes that have direct traditions of Greek ancestry dating back to the time period (see: Gill (clan)). Greek features are also not entirely the same as general Central Asian physical features, with prominent differences being the brow and shape of the nose as well as eye and hair color being lighter in indigenous peoples of the region. See the book "The Pathans", by Sir Olaf Caroe in this regard).
Sir Olaf Caroe, the only source cited here, was apparently  a British governor of an Indian province, and his book was published in 1958. He is/was not an expert in history, and the info can't be up to date. Parts of the text sound oddly old-fashioned, especially the discussions of race, and it's hard not to laugh at this statement: 
Many believe that "KHAN!" is actually the Persian corruption of the word "HUN!" itself"
--91.148.159.4 12:08, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If thats the case then why are your alleged ordinary folk calling them Khan also? It's even taken as a surname in the south east asian continent, so who are you to claim such ridiculous bias? Go away, this sock puppet of yours has also been found out Mumtaz.--Raja 15:51, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moved from article 

message: I moved the article Khan to Khan (title). Since there are a lot of uses for the word "Khan," it seemed logical to have the article Khan redirect to the page Khan (disambiguation). I hope that's OK with everyone else. —Crazypersonbb 23:00, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moved 

message: ===Khang vs the Chinese Wang===
Is there a linguistic relationship between Khan and the chinese Wang, as Wang means king in chinese （王), and khan obviously has a similar meaning? This anonymous comment was posted on 18:35, 4 July 2006 by user:131.112.128.230''
===Khan vs. Chinese Han===
I don't suppose there is any connection between the Altaic word and the Chinese ethnicity?--Adoniscik (talk) 05:20, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no need to open a new sub-section here while I opened Talk:Khagan#Etymology and pinged you before. Read my comment. And nobody says only Vovin's opinion is legit. --Wario-Man (talk) 05:07, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Etymology

message: I don't suppose there is any connection between the Altaic word and the Chinese ethnicity?--Adoniscik (talk) 05:20, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Khan vs. Chinese Han

message: ,  A more detailed Etymology section is needed on the Khagan and Khan pages. While the current section mentions other etymologies in passing, it mainly focuses on the opinions of Alexander Vovin. The etymology of these titles have been discussed by many linguists for many many years, so just focusing on the opinions of one linguist is not accurate.Bozcelik (talk) 00:02, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no need to open a new sub-section here while I opened Talk:Khagan#Etymology and pinged you before. Read my comment. And nobody says only Vovin's opinion is legit. --Wario-Man (talk) 05:07, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: More detailed Etymology

message: Pan-Turkist and Turkish nationalistic users all over Wikipedia claim all empires and all history and all people as Turkish. Several of them are pushing for POVs on this article. One such POV is labeling the Göktürks as a "Turkish Empire".
See the article Göktürks, the are from Central Asia, not Turkey. Admins should watch out for such nationalistic POV pushing on Turkic related articles. Turkish and Turkic are very different meanings.
"Turkish" and "Turkic" are different, the former is a subgroup of the latter, but ultimately these words exists in English only. In Turkish (it's probably the same in other Turkic languages), there is a single word for these two, "Türk", and there is no way to know who it refers to without further explanation.--Mttll (talk) 16:06, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: That's only partially correct. The Göktürk Empire was a heterogeneous confederation of different nomadic tribes, some of the Altaic, some Indo-European, some maybe of other origins. It's name is derived from the Chinese t'u-chüeh, "Turks", the name applied to the Ashina, the leading clan of the empire. There is much debate about the origins of this tribe. They may have been original Turkic-speakers. But there is also the possibility that they were remnants of previous Indo-European nomads (Scythians) who later adopted the language of their Turkic subjects (the first known inscriptions of the Gökturks are written in Soghdian, and - with the exception of "Khan" - all of their royal and military titles were of Indo-European Iranian origin). However, I agree with you that there is no direct link between the Gökturks and modern Turks (with the exception of linguistics). Tājik (talk) 12:59, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: "Indo-European" is a language family, not a description of nationality - there were no "European" tribes in the Go-Turks.50.111.50.240 (talk) 06:22, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Göktürk Empire is not "Turkish" 

message: Aqthar Jan belongs to one of the famous KHAN family.Hails from the Pathan culture.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.164.57.8 (talk) 11:56, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aqthar Jan 

message: Someone wrote:
:After Genghis' conversion to Islam and eventually his death, the empire would soon start a process of gradual disintegration, with his successors initially preserving the title "khan".....
First of all, this is not true, and secondly, you did not add any reference that supports your wild claims.Ghengis Khan died as pagan and he was buried in a pagan manner. To claim that he was Muslim seems to be yet another effort by pan turkish nationalistic elements to paint him modern "turkish", but honestly this is utter bullshit (sorry for the language). If nobody has any objections, I will remove that part. Also I do not see the point why the live of any particular Khan needs to be discussed in such detail. This article should just describe the title "Khan".
95.223.187.171 (talk) 03:52, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: This is obviously nonsense and I've removed it. --Latebird (talk) 07:14, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ghenghis Khan did not convert to Islam 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Khan (title). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080514122925/http://www.khyber.org/articles/2007/StudyofthePathanCommunitiesinF.shtml to http://www.khyber.org/articles/2007/StudyofthePathanCommunitiesinF.shtml
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:41, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Can you explain why you added this merge template to this article? Jarble (talk) 18:59, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with ''[[Khagan]]'' 

message: In 2010, a citation-needed tag was placed on the last paragraph about Bulgarian Khans.  It is high time that was referenced! 50.111.50.240 (talk) 06:24, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: cleanup needed for old tag

message: Yamate kudasai 103.120.5.194 (talk) 11:42, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yamate kudasai