Talk:Durrani Empire

Recent deletion of source(s)
This reference, Connecting Histories in Afghanistan: Market Relations and State Formation on a Colonial Frontier by Shah Mahmoud Hanifi, p185; "Timur Shah transferred the Durrani capital from Qandahar in 1775-76. Kabul and Peshawar then shared time as the dual Durrani capital cities, the former during the summer and the latter during the winter season.", checks out. It can be viewed via amazon.com(if you have an account). This reference and the information "Peshawar(1776–1818; the secondary, winter capital)", should be restored. --Defensor Ursa 18:19, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Not moved Mike Cline (talk) 16:54, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Durrani Empire → Afghan Empire – It was known as Afghan Empire, Afghanistan, Afghan Kingdom, Afghan monarchy, emirate of Afghanistan, kingdom of Afghanistan, and kingdom of Kabul, and ruled by the Durrani dynasty and Barakzai dynasty. I don't know who called it Durrani Empire, even Britannica puts it as the "last Afghan empire". Others too. --Nasir Ghobar (talk) 22:38, 29 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I oppose its move. Afghan empire can refer to a collection of different Afghan-ruled dynasties, one of which is the Durrani dynasty/empire. I see not why we should merge different dynastic states together. The current method gives a better understanding of Afghanistan's historical evolution.Qatarihistorian (talk) 10:57, 30 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I am opposed, for the moment. My major concerns:
 * the article has only 9 inline citations, half of which are tertiary sources(3 Britannica, 1 Library of Congress and 1 Encyclopedia Iranica). Per Reliable Sources, "Tertiary sources such as compendia, encyclopedias, textbooks, obituaries, and other summarizing sources may be used to give overviews or summaries, but should not be used in place of secondary sources for detailed discussion."
 * this article is in dire need of secondary sources written by historians. One source used as a historical reference is from the CIA? Really?
 * Once the issue of sourcing has been addressed, I believe we can make a better decision as to the article's proper name. --Defensor Ursa 17:17, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
 * 1. Qatarihistorian, we already have Durrani dynasty and Barakzai dynasty. My idea is to make this into one article and create sections for the different dynasties, similar as Mughal Empire, Sikh Empire and others. This article is about the empire, state, nation, country, from 1747 to 1973 (modern history of Afghanistan). It was clearly Afghan monarchy originating to one Afghan man, with the two dynasties being divided into Durrani and Barakzai. In all historical records, treaties, maps, books, etc., you mostly find "Afghan" kingdom, Afghan rulers, and Afghanistan. Also, the green and white flag that you keep re-applying is bogus, I've done research on that so lets not put bogus flags in a major article like this one unless you have solid evidence. To my understand that is a flag of some kind of a Shia group, and Afghanistan's rulers have always been Sunnis.
 * 2. Defensor Ursa, Britannica and Library of Congress are mainly based on the works of Louis Dupree (professor) and Nancy Dupree, who spent their life in Afghanistan since the 1950s to study the country, its history and its people. If you are not familiar with Afghan history why do you get involve? I know that anyone can comment or suggest something, I just want to know that since you guys showing signs of not being familiar with the Afghan history then why out of no where you came and got involved? Anyway, the only problem is that "Afghan empires" existed before the 18th century, so I'm thinking that we add a section for those from Delhi Sultanate era here also.--Nasir Ghobar (talk) 21:02, 30 August 2012 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Variant spellings of "Durrani"
English spellings of the name "Durrani" vary. It may occur in the literature as Dooraunee, Douranee, Dourraunnee, etc. Other spellings which attempt to transliterate the Pashto name are Dorrani, Durani, Durrani. The Pashtun dynasty covered modern Afghanistan, northeastern Iran, the Kashmir region, Pakistan, and northwestern India. The Durrani Empire is considered the foundation of modern Afghanistan and Ahmad Shah known as the Father of Afghanistan who adopted the name "Dorrani" or "Durrani" meaning "pearl of the pearls". Mountstuart Elphinstone (1779-1859) was a British administrator, statesman and historian who became the Governor of Bombay. He wrote a definitive history on the Durrani Empire, "An account of the kingdom of Caubul, and its dependencies in Persia, Tartary and India : comprising a view of the Afghaun nation and a history of the Dooraunee monarchy," 1815. Appendix A of this work, "History of Caubal from the foundation of Dooraunee monarchy," provides biographical and character information on the Durrani monarchs.Consignee (talk) 19:01, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Comparative size
Neither of the sources quoted so much as mentions the size of the Durrani empire in relation to the Ottoman Empire. In fact, no mention of the Ottoman Empire appears in either. In any case, the statement that the Durrani realm was the second largest contemporary Muslim empire is contentious, given the size of Persia (also an empire) and the Omani Sultanate at that time. I have therefore removed this very dubious claim, especially in view of the short extent of time during which Ahmad Shah's realm was at its greatest extent. The question should be discussed here, and a valid source provided, before such a statement is repeated. Mzilikazi1939 (talk) 06:48, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Durrani Empire. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://encarta.msn.com/text_761569370___42/Afghanistan.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 13:32, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Durrani Empire. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://encarta.msn.com/text_761569370___42/Afghanistan.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130207183925/http://www.khyber.org/books/pdf/ahmad-shah-baba.pdf to http://www.khyber.org/books/pdf/ahmad-shah-baba.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 23:34, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Islam in South Asia
I like to add this template to this page but not sure what the problem is. This page is part of a series on Islam in South Asia. Please help! 65.95.136.96 (talk) 14:25, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I am going to let this go because I can understand why this template is appropriate for this page. (121.219.22.188 (talk) 08:23, 5 October 2017 (UTC))

Content dispute
Has recently been making major changes to this article, with edit summaries along the lines of "I have ancient knowledge" and "I know this is true". These are not valid reasons to change the article. I invite to discuss the matter here, and to provide the sources from which this ancient knowledge is drawn. If they are valid, we can consider making the changes. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 13:11, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

The map is incorrect. It doesnt show the full size of empire, like sistan etc. I think this one is better detailed. http://www.barmazid.com/2014/03/map-of-durrani-empire-at-its-peak-1761_28.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:4643:C8EC:0:7845:9593:DA67:5919 (talk) 22:11, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

PLEASE CHANGE MAP! I have already said that the map is not historically correct please change it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:4643:C8EC:0:A811:7B5F:8D73:D5BC (talk) 15:01, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Wrong map
this map is not true. khorasan was not a part of their Territory. khorasan was ruled by Afshar dynasty. in 1769, Ahmad shah camped to Khorasan but he couldn't conquer mashhad — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nimazandyf (talk • contribs) 11:03, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
 * "When Ahmad Shah died in 1772, his Durrani Empire encompassed all of today's Afghanistan, Baluchistan, Iranian Khorasan,"  Doug Weller  talk 11:16, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

This here is the most accurate and perfect map with dates and time line. https://alchetron.com/Durrani-Empire#demo — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:4643:C8EC:0:B88F:9C6D:8AEE:6A9F (talk) 16:47, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
 * But I don't think we can use it due to copyright problems. Doug Weller  talk 16:25, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

I don't think that is a problem, (if fair use is applied) and in this case it is fair use. You can go ahead and change it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:4643:C8EC:0:3DED:A748:266B:F86C (talk) 20:49, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Wrong map
Khorasan was ruled by afshar dynasty and they couldn't Conquer Mashhad. the khorasan of iran was a buffer between zand empire and afghans.. do you understand?! or not?! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nimazandyf (talk • contribs) 17:18, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Map of the Durrani Empire
Hello LouisAragonI have seen you reverting the map of the Durrani Empire which I added calling it "not an improvement", adding a tertiary source(Iranica) and removing all the books I have cited. First of all I am not implying Iranica to be a bad source, it's completely the opposite, however it is a fact that its a tertiary source. Nonetheless this does not mean we should completely ignore other authentic sources and authors like Jonathan L Lee. But even more important is the point that the source from Iranica itself is contradicting the map you want to revert to itself. The previous "blue" map does not include the rule over Sistan which sources were added for. But much more importantly which was also the main point in trying to create a new more accurate map was the expansion towards India. The “blue” map does not include Kashmir, where persicution of the Durranis under their rule is literally documented(source was also mentioned) Indian Punjab, Haryana(Panipat), all the territories north of Sirhind and the installation of Shah Alam as puppet ruler of Delhi. Those territories were important parts of the empire and the rule and conquest over them is mentioned very detailed in all the sources I have added for the map, even on Iranica. Best regards Xerxes931

HistoryofIran I would like to add you too here. The article on Iranica which is roughly mentioning the Durrani empire does contradict your map, "his empire extended from the Āmū Daryā (Bactria and Badaḵšān annexed in 1164/1751) to the Oman Sea, and from Khorasan (where Šāhroḵ, grandson of Nāder Shah, became his vassal in 1162/1749) to the Ganges plain (fall of Delhi, 1170/1757). For several decades the Dorrānī empire was the dominating regional power. Its victory over the strong army of the Maratha confederation at Panipat (1174/1761) even played a decisive historical role, by giving the British enough time to consolidate the foothold they had gained in Bengal at the battle of Plassey (1170/1757)." Delhi and Panipat are not included in your map. Also the previous map of you is literally going according to modern borders for the western, southwestern and eastern parts which, I hopefully don't have to explain why, is always the wrong way to go.


 * Wha? The map I created a long time ago is literally a copy of the map of Iranica . Also you have to ping users for them to see you've messaged them, like I've just done. --HistoryofIran (talk) 21:23, 17 April 2020 (UTC)


 * I realized that too, both maps look very similar. However their description of the empire does not correspond with their map, the invasion of Delhi and the battle of Panipat are not only documented by Jonathan Lee. Iranica itself is also usually a good source but it remains a tertiary source and them having a map which is drawn along modern borders does not make it accurate (talk) 21:23, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Not really, also invasion =/= control. Again, there's nothing wrong with having a map based on modern borders, if we're going to talk about the looks of maps, then your map is missing Africa and Europe among other things, I'm sorry, but it's just generally less detailed and worse looking. --HistoryofIran (talk) 21:32, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
 * There is certainly always inaccuracy which comes along with drawing a map based on modern borders. I don't know why a map about the Durranis needs to include Africa or Europe. I also know that invasion does not mean control, however Ahmad Shah Durrani installed his puppet Alamgir in Delhi and not only invaded it. Your opinion about the aesthetics of both map still remains subjective opinion, for that we could get a third party,let alone that imo the purple map looks better, however I don't see what is important about aesthetics of a historic map, it is the historic accuracy and details which play a role. You also talked about my map having less details while it is rather the opposite. The blue map of you does not mention the capital, in this case two capitals, it does not even have the winter capital Peshawar mentioned on its map and again is drawn along modern borders and lacks Delhi, which was as mentioned before multiple times a puppet.
 * How so? Why do we use it in so many articles? Look, I'm not going to discuss about something that is clear as daylight. My map is based on a high quality source, yours isn't, that's just a pure fact. You should do some research regarding a source before you add it. You already got reverted by two other users besides me, so clearly I'm not the only one that disagrees with you. --HistoryofIran (talk) 21:56, 17 April 2020 (UTC)


 * You don't bring any arguments, the only thing that you are saying is that your map is better and are completely ignoring every argument I bring up and just respond with "my map is better". The only source you are using is a tertiary source from an article which is not even mainly about the Durrani Empire and are proclaiming it as a high quality source. There was also only one other user who reverted the map and not 2.
 * There's no point in discussing with you, as you are completely ignoring what I'm saying. Go ahead and create a RFC if you're so sure then. --HistoryofIran (talk) 22:04, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

I think this map is the best and most accurate description of durrani empire, (which mentions dates and size). https://alchetron.com/Durrani-Empire The current map is not accurate and totally outdated. Hope something is done soon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:4643:C8EC:0:F4E8:F47B:ABC1:B18E (talk) 20:53, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

All of them are wrong Durrani didn't even Control the entirity of Pakistan In his own letter Ather the battle of panipat He mentions that He wants peace with the Marathas Hence they can keep their territories Back The only territories Durrani ever had In the subcontinent were Afghanistan and some border parts of Pakistan and even that is debetable Bhima Palavīṉamāṉa (talk) 15:02, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

RfC about the map of the Durrani Empire
What do people think about the current map of the Durrani Empire: File:Durrani_Empire_1747_1862_AD.png being exchanged for this one: File:The_Durrani_Empire_at_its_greatest_Extent_2.png. Xerxes931 (talk) 22:31, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

The current map is drawn along modern borders, which is in my opinion never a good attempt and the map is based on a tertiary source solely which is only briefly mentioning the subject of this empire. It also lacks details about the capitals, the winter capital is not even mentioned on it. And based on thid sources    it also lacks some regions which I added on the purple map, which I also suggested for replacing the current one. Also the tertiary source which is used to support the current map is rather contradicting it here "his empire extended from the Āmū Daryā (Bactria and Badaḵšān annexed in 1164/1751) to the Oman Sea, and from Khorasan (where Šāhroḵ, grandson of Nāder Shah, became his vassal in 1162/1749) to the Ganges plain (fall of Delhi, 1170/1757)." The current map does not include Delhi while the new one suggested by me does(Edit: as some were complaining about my map being not focused enough on the region I updated it a bit, added a few more cities and also highlighted the vassals). On the other side the creator of the first map which is User:HistoryofIran thinks that the aesthetics of his map are by far better than the one I created and that my map does not show Europe and Africa. As the creator of the current map does not want to agree on this subject on the Talk page, I want to know your opinion on this. Xerxes931 (talk) 22:31, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Support current map That's because the Iranica source is not about only the Durrani Empire, but Afghanistan in general. That doesn't make the source less valid. The current map is a literally a copy of the Iranica one, so it's not contradictory at all. You need to read again, it doesn't state that Delhi was under Durrani control. Two of the first citations are low quality, if reliable at all, and its by the same author, so you could just have posted one of them. The third source simply mentions that Kashmir was under Afghan control, which is already illustrated in the current map. The stuff mentioned in the fourth source (not sure how reliable this one is) is likewise illustrated in the current map. The same goes for the last source, great. Thus the map you are proposing is not only worse looking, but also less historical correct (for some reason you included parts of China in the Durrani realm?). --HistoryofIran (talk) 23:00, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
 * The current map is better, since it has national borders which gives it context. The one by Xerxes931 appears to be off centered, small, awkward, and initially difficult to identify just where it is located. --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:02, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Current map is way better per the above comments. The one provided by Xerxes931 is in fact a map of Asia with a small part colored to show the Empire, while the current one is centered on the Middle-East and shows the Empire's location and borders better. ---Wikaviani  (talk) (contribs)  23:09, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
 * New one looks better With edits in mind I support the new map. The gains of Panipat is represented as well as Afsharid suzerainty, so while small it's a definite improvement. Lee does emphasize Durrani sovereignity over Delhi, however it may be argued that this sovereignity was never at the same level as their hold over Shah Rukh. It's very much a judgement call whether or not you'd want Delhi represented, however on a greatest extent map I see nothing wrong with it's addition. The old map is seven years old, looks very much dated at this point so we could do with an update. Anang192 (talk) 01:51, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Current. No comment on Delhi. Doug Weller  talk 10:31, 18 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Newer one is better. The current shows modern borders. Khestwol (talk) 19:36, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I like how the supporters of the newer map haven't commented on the fact that none of the sources support its exaggerated extent. --HistoryofIran (talk) 00:04, 19 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Current map is better per points raised above. Idealigic (talk) 12:06, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Newer - Much higher quality and better description. 🌺Kori🌺  - ( @ ) 19:50, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:37, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Durrani Empire 1747 1862 AD.png

Was the Durrani Pashtun or Persian
It is a genral fact that the Durranis are Pashtuns. Everyone knows that the Durranis are a Pashtun tribe..Infact they are the most powerful and influental Pashtun tribe to this day.

Ahmed shah Durrani, was a pashtun, and spoke Pashto, sources also say the same thing. Yawn please dont change the status of the pashto language to poetry and replace it with persian. Infact Pashto was used as poery and the the language of the durranis

Id like your opinions before i edit it yo make it more accurate Pashtunfacts (talk) 14:40, 10 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Again, this is not a forum. Also, you literally changed a cited quote to something made up by you, that is highly disruptive. You're not making anything more 'accurate' by changing/removing sourced information or/and adding your own personal opinion, no matter what simulation we're living in. I highly suggest you to stop this and read the rules. --HistoryofIran (talk) 15:23, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

(talk) Technically we have sources of the Durrani court in Kandahar calling themselves Iranian but not any of them calling themselves Afghan/Pashtun... However they were described by others as Afghans(Pashtuns) and the Abdali tribe is obviously a Pashtun one, that however doesn’t stand in contradiction with them speaking Persian or considering themselves Iranian. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xerxes931 (talk • contribs) 13:03, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

British protectorate
hello I would like to speak concerned the information on the English protectorate on the Durrani empire under the reign of Shah Shuja Durrani firstly there are no sources secondly a protectorate must be under an official statues like the treaty of Gandamak which put the emirate of afghanistan under protected state or so like morocco with france the durrani empire has nothing to formalize with the british empire and thirdly Shah shuja took power with the help of the english and not under english authority the english wanted an allied government and puppet and also its the only wikipedia page to which I see this questionable information appearing AfghansPashtun (talk) 20:11, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

New addition
Added Battle of Peshwar Battle of attock Battle of lahore I have copied Articles from these pages respectively

References are given In each article Bhima Palavīṉamāṉa (talk) 15:25, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Stop removing my content
Battle of attock Battle of Peshawar Battle of Lahore Please stop removing these sections


 * Sorry, but this is far from an improvement. Random mention of battles have no place in an article like this, and they are copy pasted as well without any attribution made. --HistoryofIran (talk) 09:23, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

But these are important battles Which are worth mentioning

The entire history of battles during durrani s power should be mentioned Bhima Palavīṉamāṉa (talk) 14:58, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:23, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
 * War flag of Khanate of Bukhara.svg

Territorial extent
@Noorullah21; even at peak of its power the dynasty didn't controlled Gilgit-Baltistan, north of province of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa including Chitral and Kohistan. Similarly, in Sindh (ruled by Kalhora Dynasty) and Khanate of Kalat, Durranis didn't have direct control. If you have sources saying anything else, mention them otherwise it will be wrong to write it as countries of Afghanistan and Pakistan instead of much of Pakistan.Sutyarashi (talk) 15:18, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

@Sutyarashi The Durranis held all of these territories and I will explain first before I list my sources.

The Khanate of Kalat and Sindh were both under Durrani Suzerainty, they were both generally accepted to be directly ruled by them as well, especially Sindh whose ties grew even stronger during the Talpur-Kalhora civil wars.

The Durranis also did own Kohistan and Chitral, they even fought in Kohistan multiple times during civil war, and especially in later Dost Mohammad’s campaigns.

So now, I will list the sources.

- Sindh Source discussing up to Afghan rule and suzerainty. I believe also goes in about Kalat

Jonathan Lee’s source, goes on about everything, Kohistan, Kalat, Durrani Rule, Sindh too. 

Goes over Kalat, and more.

These are the sources well used and proverbed in what you might be looking for, the Durranis not only ruled these territories, and had suzerainty over a lot of them.

I can get you the page numbers later, but not right now since I am busy, but here are the books for now and sources which you can dive into yourself to research, they do have legend settings on certain starting pages, so you can look through and find the page you are looking for, hope this helps. Noorullah21 (talk) 15:36, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

Sources in the article also mention their spanning of these territories, including all of Pakistan. Some more sources in general that could help;

State and Tribe in Nineteenth Century Afghanistan The Reign of Amir Dost Muhammad Khan (1826-1863), Studies In Later Mughal History Of The Punjab 1707 To 1793.

Noorullah21 (talk) 15:52, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

The Afghans also did not lose Gilgit (and the Kashmir region in general) until following the Sadozai Monarchies collapse into civil war, and the Battle of Shopian Noorullah21 (talk) 15:54, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

Remove the flag
It was never the flag of the Durrani Empire and the hyperlink which it's under literally proves that, it has no source either. It's been elaborated here multiple times before. 97.125.139.119 (talk) 00:14, 23 December 2023 (UTC)