Talk:Ali Mohammed Khan

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles

India: History Stub‑class Mid‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
Stub	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Indian history workgroup (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article was last assessed in May 2012.

Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:

You must be logged-in to an autoconfirmed or confirmed account (usually granted automatically to accounts with 10 edits and an age of 4 days)

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

It is requested that an image or photograph of Ali Mohammed Khan be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

To this guy below me, you are clearly mistaken, AMK was from Bangash tribe. Just search google books.. There is no point in fixing the page since people keep changing it. https://books.google.com/books?id=MMFdosx0PokC&pg=PA322&lpg=PA322&dq=nawab+ali+muhammad+khan+Bangash&source=bl&ots=gyhs46CYBr&sig=q_sS5jZeDGj6zrc2ZOO7pv2EGog&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCEQ6AEwAjgKahUKEwjkhIqz-svIAhXImYAKHeUWCyM#v=onepage&q=nawab%20ali%20muhammad%20khan%20Bangash&f=false

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Zeeshan haider000 (talk • contribs) 11:58, 18 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Mohammad khan bangash was different person, he was founder of farrukhabad. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jawwad khan marwat (talk • contribs) 07:42, 4 May 2014 (UTC)Reply

Muhammad Khan Bangash was born in 1665 and was a Mughal noble. Ali Muhammad Khan was a Rohilla, not Bangash and he was born in 1706 AD. The former founded Rohilkhand , the latter state of Farrukhabad.

Nawab Ali Mohammad Khan was Jat not so called ahir

Latest comment: 10 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Please work on this issue some anonymous user change his family background @Sutyarashihi men, can sort this out Truthfindervert (talk) 08:05, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

Origin

Latest comment: 9 months ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Multiple historians explicitly mention that the subject was a Jat. But not a single historian mentions that the subject was an Ahir: a couple of them are simply summarising the primary sources without stating whether he was a Jat or an Ahir. So unless a historian actually states that he was an Ahir or was born in an Ahir family, we cannot make that claim by ourselves. In short, if one wants to add that claim, please find a source by a historian which states that he was an Ahir. - NitinMlk (talk) 22:17, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

User:NitinMlk,

"There is a good deal of controversy over the origin of Ali Mohammad Khan. According to Ghulam Ali he either belonged to a Jat family or a Saiyyed family. Imad-us Saadat, Nawal Kishore, 40 ; Ghulam Husain says that Ali Mohammad was the son of an Ahir. Siyar-ul Mutakhirin, N.K. P. 853 ; Shiv Prasad holds that he was the son of Daud Khan Rohilla. Tarikh-i Farah Bakhsh, Aligarh, MS. f. 12 b ; Allah Yar Bilgirami says that Ali Mohammad Khan was a Rajput. Hadiqat-ul-Aqalim, N.K. p. 139. Also see Maasir-ul Umara, II, 841^[1]. Another source to add for summary of primary sources. Chariotrider555 (talk) 00:01, 18 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Chariotrider555, can you please wait for 2-3 days? I am a bit busy in real life. But I will add these claims most probably on Sunday using better sources, as the source provided by you is a conference paper that has never been cited by anyone. - NitinMlk (talk) 19:19, 18 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Chariotrider555, two decades afer writing the conference paper that you cited here, Iqbal Husain authored a scholalry source which contains his latest opinion.^[2] So I will add his opinion in the footnote. The only clear claim that Husain makes is that Khan was not an Afghan. Note that the detailed footnote provided in his book shows that the Ahir/Rajput claim is self-contradictory and that the Sayyid claim was actually rejected by the same Maulvi who made that claim in the 20th century.^[3] - NitinMlk (talk) 20:00, 21 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

References

^ Husain, Iqbal (1971). "A CALENDAR OF SAMBHAL DOCUMENTS RELATING TO REVENUE GRANTS AND APPOINTMENT OF QAZIS (1697-1761)". Indian History Congress. 33: 235.
^ Husain, Iqbal (1994). The Ruhela Chieftaincies: The Rise and Fall of Ruhela Power in India in the Eighteenth Century. Oxford University Press. p. 41. ISBN 978-0-19-563068-8. It is acknowledged on all hands that 'Ali Muḥammad Khan was not an Afghan. That he was a Saiyed is at best dubious; that he was a Jat, or of some other local peasant caste is more than probable.
^ Husain, Iqbal (1994). The Ruhela Chieftaincies: The Rise and Fall of Ruhela Power in India in the Eighteenth Century. Oxford University Press. p. 41. ISBN 978-0-19-563068-8. Several sources (notably Ashob, 317b; G.R., 7a; Yādgār-i Bahādurī, p. 848; Imād, p. 40) say that he was by birth a Jat. Atkinson, Vol. V, p. 657, quotes in support a common saying prevalent in the area: 'Look at the bounty of God: a Jat from Bankuli has become the Raja of Aonla.' The author of Ḥadīqat-ul Aqālīm, p. 139, gives two different versions. At one place he calls him Daud Khan's son, and at another place writes of his Rajput origin. Shiv Prasad, 12b, designates him a son of Dāud Khān. The author of Siyar, pp. 853 and 856, calls him both an Ahir and an Afghan. Najmul Ghani discusses this controversy extensively in Akhbār-us Ṣanadīd (Lahore, 1906), pp. 50–9, and rejects the view that 'Ali Muḥammad Khan belonged to a Saiyed family. In the subsequent edition of Akhbar-us Şanadid (Lucknow, 1918), pp. 71–4, and in his Tarikh-i Awadh, Vol. I (Lucknow, 1919), he, however, concedes the Saiyed origin of 'Ali Muḥammad Khān. Saiyed Altaf 'Ali writes that later on Najmul Ghani once again rejected the Saiyed origin of 'Ali Muḥammad Khan in 1930, in his unpublished history of Rampur (Hayat Hafiz Rahmat Khan, Karachi, 1963, p . 49)

Add topic

[1] Husain, Iqbal (1971). "A CALENDAR OF SAMBHAL DOCUMENTS RELATING TO REVENUE GRANTS AND APPOINTMENT OF QAZIS (1697-1761)". Indian History Congress. 33: 235.

[Husain-2] Husain, Iqbal (1994). The Ruhela Chieftaincies: The Rise and Fall of Ruhela Power in India in the Eighteenth Century. Oxford University Press. p. 41. ISBN 978-0-19-563068-8. It is acknowledged on all hands that 'Ali Muḥammad Khan was not an Afghan. That he was a Saiyed is at best dubious; that he was a Jat, or of some other local peasant caste is more than probable.

[Husain2-3] Husain, Iqbal (1994). The Ruhela Chieftaincies: The Rise and Fall of Ruhela Power in India in the Eighteenth Century. Oxford University Press. p. 41. ISBN 978-0-19-563068-8. Several sources (notably Ashob, 317b; G.R., 7a; Yādgār-i Bahādurī, p. 848; Imād, p. 40) say that he was by birth a Jat. Atkinson, Vol. V, p. 657, quotes in support a common saying prevalent in the area: 'Look at the bounty of God: a Jat from Bankuli has become the Raja of Aonla.' The author of Ḥadīqat-ul Aqālīm, p. 139, gives two different versions. At one place he calls him Daud Khan's son, and at another place writes of his Rajput origin. Shiv Prasad, 12b, designates him a son of Dāud Khān. The author of Siyar, pp. 853 and 856, calls him both an Ahir and an Afghan. Najmul Ghani discusses this controversy extensively in Akhbār-us Ṣanadīd (Lahore, 1906), pp. 50–9, and rejects the view that 'Ali Muḥammad Khan belonged to a Saiyed family. In the subsequent edition of Akhbar-us Şanadid (Lucknow, 1918), pp. 71–4, and in his Tarikh-i Awadh, Vol. I (Lucknow, 1919), he, however, concedes the Saiyed origin of 'Ali Muḥammad Khān. Saiyed Altaf 'Ali writes that later on Najmul Ghani once again rejected the Saiyed origin of 'Ali Muḥammad Khan in 1930, in his unpublished history of Rampur (Hayat Hafiz Rahmat Khan, Karachi, 1963, p . 49)

[1]

[2]

[3]