QuoteReplyTopic: Tartar and Mongol Posted: 22-Aug-2006 at 01:09
As I know, Genghis khan's father has a will that killing the Tartars all except those lower than a wheel. Was it executed?
I think there are so many tribes before Henghis khan united them, but did those tribes contain Tartar? If it did, then whether the concept of Mongol should contains Tartar?
Having researched the various implications of the name Tatar I'd like to share the following distinctions.
I'll break them up into pre/post Mongol periods.
Pre -
Whether the Chinese created the term or they even borrowed it, the Ta Ta (tatar) have been associated as "Steppe dwellers" or nomads. The Orhon Inscriptions mention tribes of Tokuz Tatar and Otuz Tatar. This labelling is similar to a wide usage of classification used by other Turk federations. (Tokuz Oghuz, Sekiz Oghuz, Alti Oghuz, etc.) The words Tokuz means dokuz or the number nine in Turkish. Otuz is the number thirty. The numbers designate the amount of united tribes within that particular union.
The inscriptions also note that the Tokuz Tatar and the Tokuz Oguz were allies who rose against Bilge Khan and the GokTurks. *The various tribal affiliations were all part of the larger GokTurk Empires throughout the periods between 552 ad and 750 ad.
Duiring the Turko/Mongol/Tatar battles for steppe leadership (and survival) at the time of Temujin we also have reference to the name Tatar. This tribal federation was often at odds with the Mongols of Temujin. Who were they? That is a question I haven't figured out yet, even with my bizarre assumption of a Dadan/Turk affiliation.
Post-
The name Tatar erupted onto the world scene with vigour once the confederation of steppe tribes from Mongolia was led by Cengiz Han in 1206. Mostly western writers of the period and later travellers would group the 'Mongols' into Tatars. Later in history we find the name Tatar used for most any central asian Turk or Mongol people. The Soviets also had a knack for giving ingenious names to various groups of the same people. But they were not the original tribes known as Tatars. If anything, and ethnicity aside, the Tartars lost their original designation as Tokuz or Otuz Tatar. Later we have names such as Kara Tatar, Tatars of Kazan (land of the original Bulgars in current Tatarstan), Crimean Tatars, etc. The Kara Tatars are an earlier usasge of the term. They were mentioned in a book by Koprullu as the invaders of Anatolia during the overthrow of the Seljuks by the Ilhanids.
siberia and central asia if i'm not wrong or just siberia (including mongolia and machuria) was called tatary so could it be that the in habitans of this region were called tatars turks mongolians and manchus
I rather be a nomadic barbarian than a sedentary savage
Like Seko said the Tatar "tribe" that Temujin destroyed was really a loose confederacy of several tribes. The secret history names four of those tribes--the Duta'ut, the Alchi, the Aluqai, and the Ca'a'an. I think the Tatars were probably using the name to evoke the glory of past Tatar confederacies. I don't think there was ever a single, continuous Tatar tribe. Just a lot of unrealted Tatar confederacies.
Tatars were Turkic speaking nomads long before Genghis Khan (see Orkhon
inscriptions), during Genghis Khan times, and are Turkic speaking
settled peoples today. "Theories" that they were ostensibly "Mongol
speaking tribe" in 12th-13th centuries are just ridiculous.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum