Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
Sarmat
Caliph
Joined: 31-May-2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3113
|
Quote Reply
Topic: Tamerlane Posted: 12-Apr-2008 at 17:09 |
Originally posted by Vorian
What is the difference between Turkic and Mongolic anyway? |
Language, religion, customs (to the lesser extent). This it today.
600 years ago it was quite different. The distinction was more blurred. New Mongol nation included many Turkic tribes. And also most of the nomadic Turks and Mongols were Tengrianists.
|
Σαυρομάτης
|
|
alish
Janissary
Joined: 04-Aug-2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 17
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Apr-2008 at 17:46 |
Sarmat ! I didn't say that russians called Central Asia as Mogoliston.... I was talking about ethnicities and nations of the region....! However, russians called Central Asia as Chigatay (in fact no Central Asians used this name for the region) and called the nations of Mavarounnahr as "chigatayskiyi mogoly" which is crap.....(nobody knows were they disappeared). There is only one reason for that - to mix the elements of information with mongolian legacy, so there would be such understanding that it was mongols and here we go, every thing is being related to mongols..... Tatars i think is slightly different topic.... Shortly, nations of Mavarounnahr are unique... and i strongly believe it was the same before......!
|
|
Bulldog
Caliph
Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Apr-2008 at 18:16 |
Russians called Central Asia, "Turkiston", a term which came into usage during the end of the Mongol and beginning of the Timurid reign. The region known as Turkiston also included, southern Turkiston or Afgan Turkiston which was an official province.
|
What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine
|
|
omshanti
Baron
Joined: 02-Nov-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 429
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Apr-2008 at 23:44 |
Originally posted by Sarmat12
I don't think you can blame him for that. He was a person of his time; everybody did this. If he would lose a battle to some other warlord the same fate would find his people.
He simply wanted to damage his enemies as much as he can. At the same time he made Samarkand the most brilliant Muslim city of its time. For sure another ruler would do totally the same thing. The difference regarding Tamerlane is that he was able to conduct large wars with strong enemies, covering vast territories; for that reason, naturally, all these were followed by the large scale atrocities. |
Originally posted by Julius Augustus
he was just following what the Hordes before his time did. |
I find it quite interesting that for example many people blame the Europeans such as the British, Spanish or ... etc empires for colonization, slavery, anthropology ...etc, when with the logic above ''everybody was doing it''.
Edited by omshanti - 12-Apr-2008 at 23:45
|
|
kafkas
Samurai
Joined: 27-Feb-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 117
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 30-Apr-2008 at 05:24 |
Saying Mongols and Turks were the same is like saying the Italians and Germans were the same. They're different nations of people but evolved in a similar region. Turks & Mongols are both Altai peoples if you want to look at it that way.
Edited by kafkas - 30-Apr-2008 at 05:25
|
|
|
xi_tujue
Arch Duke
Atabeg
Joined: 19-May-2006
Location: Belgium
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1919
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 01-May-2008 at 08:57 |
^you my friend are an idiot I have read most of your post and make no sence you agree with people but after taht you still haven't learned anything and still say what you think is right. I don't realy care if you're offended or not for the simple fact that people are trying to debate here and you say something wich distract people from the orginal debate or make oneside look redicilous because you agree with that side. how ever I appologise to the rest for not being online lately Back to Topic Tamerlane was what ever he wanted to be. I think it has been mentioned over and over again That in that time you had to have relations with the Cingsid dynasty inorder to have right to rule. This is the same reason why the Ottomans never could conquer the Crimean Tatars because they had a higher claim on the Title than a simple Turkic tribe. As for the Term Turk: It isn't a ethnic term........ well it wasn't back in those days. Accualy it isn't either today. The term Turk is a Lingual & cultural term ofcourse in some extend. For instance The turkic tribes of the Middle ages consited of the 'turks', various mongolic tribes & Iranian Tribes. I think the absorbation of the iranian tribes by some of the Asiatic nomads led to the difference or 'separation' between the Mongolians & Turks, culturaly & in appearance (to some extend). But the same could be said for the Mongolians they might have some Turkic tribes in them who knows in 200 years the Tuvans will be a mongolian Tribe even today they are seen as mongolians by some. I even heard that the Khalkha are orginaly a Tungus Tribe and have nothing to do with Cingis Khan. How ever I think the mongolians have soem tungus Tribes in them. My point is That the Nomads of Central Asia asiatic or Iranian had no sence of race or ethnicity as we do in modern times. They simply didn't care. who are we to try to define their 'ethnicity'. They were who ever they wanted to be I realy should read my posts over be4 posting them
Edited by xi_tujue - 01-May-2008 at 14:38
|
I rather be a nomadic barbarian than a sedentary savage
|
|
Seko
Emperor
Spammer
Joined: 01-Sep-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8595
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 01-May-2008 at 12:39 |
Well, appears you got your second wind xi_tujue. Welcome back to the forum. One word of caution though, no matter how much you disagree with another member please refrain from expletives or insults.
Carry on...
|
|
kafkas
Samurai
Joined: 27-Feb-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 117
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 01-May-2008 at 18:12 |
Originally posted by xi_tujue
^you my friend are an idiot
I have read most of your post and make no sence
you agree with people but after taht you still haven't learned anything and still say what you think is right.
I don't realy care if you're offended or not
for the simple fact that people are trying to debate here and you say something wich distract people from the orginal debate or make oneside look redicilous because you agree with that side.
|
Okay, you've attacked me before for no reason although I've never directed a single post towards you, and I have no idea who the hell you are. 1) Your grammar sucks. 2) Your spelling sucks. 3) MY conclusion is that you can't understand my posts and that's why you're frustrated.
Edited by kafkas - 01-May-2008 at 18:42
|
|
|
Sarmat
Caliph
Joined: 31-May-2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3113
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 01-May-2008 at 18:32 |
Everybody, please refrain from ad hominem attacks. Next time I'll just issue an official warning to anybody who violates this rule.
|
Σαυρομάτης
|
|
Yungsiyebu_Uriankhai
Samurai
Joined: 29-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 108
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 18-May-2008 at 06:17 |
Originally posted by xi_tujue
Tamerlane was what ever he wanted to be. I think it has been mentioned over and over again That in that time you had to have relations with the Cingsid dynasty inorder to have right to rule. This is the same reason why the Ottomans never could conquer the Crimean Tatars because they had a higher claim on the Title than a simple Turkic tribe.
|
Tamerlane was the Turkicized Barlas, and the Barlas(Barulas) was originally a branch of Borjigin family of Nirun Mongols, their first ancestor was Barulatai who was tall and strong with big appetite, so his father gave him Barulatai as first name, and his descendants named their clan as Barulas.
General Khubilai(?—1211) who was a Barulas, was one of the most famous generals of Chinggis Khan. Khubilai, Urianghai's Zelme and Sebutai, and Besud's Zebe were famous as four mastiffs of Chinggis Khan.
There were at least 3 Barulas clans after Mongol Khanate was established.
1) a group of Barulas followed Chagetai Khan with Honggirat and another 2 nameless Mongol clans, the group was that Tamerlane probably originated from directly; their leader was Kharaljar who was probably a brother of general Khubilai;
2) a group of Barulas belonged to the right wing of the Mongols, their leader seemed Kharaljar too, their descendant should be one of ancestors of the morden Mongolians.
3) General Khubilai's Barulas followed a son of Chinggis Khaan and his Merkit Queen Hulan, who was dead during conquest of Russia with Batu Khan, their descendants probably spread widely cross the central asia.
Originally posted by xi_tujue
But the same could be said for the Mongolians they might have some Turkic tribes in them who knows in 200 years the Tuvans will be a mongolian Tribe even today they are seen as mongolians by some. |
Tuva known as Tanu Urianghai before, was a Turkic group sharing a similar traditional with Mongols, Tuva was also ethnic multi-original, Tumad, a Siberian forest tribe during time of Chinggis Khan, was probably the most important ancestor, and their Urianghai ancestors probably migrated from central Mongolia ever inhabited by Urianghai tribe, or Tuva's Urianghai was the original Urianghai tribe in Siberia forest. They were conquered by Oirat Mongols and people probably couldn't distinguish Urianghai Mongols and Tuva's Urianghai, or they were similar during that time, so Tuva was named as Tanu Urianghai and influenced by Oirat Mongols heavily since they was conquered.
Some scholars link Tumad to the ancient Tuba Xian-bei, while Urianghai was linked to Xiong-nu, but no valid evidence to prove those theories. Both Tumad and forest Urianghai probably were more Turkic than Mongolic during time of Chinggis Khan.
Originally posted by xi_tujue
I even heard that the Khalkha are orginaly a Tungus Tribe and have nothing to do with Cingis Khan. How ever I think the mongolians have soem tungus Tribes in them. |
Halha was the largest Mongolian group today, multi-original too, the core ethnic clan was Jalair, a Mongolian-speaking tribe even before Chinggis Khan, most of Halha Mongols weren't Tungus origins although we don't neglect the Tungus elements with Halhas and other Mongols, the details:
Edited by Yungsiyebu_Uriankhai - 18-May-2008 at 06:28
|
|
Sukhbaatar
Janissary
Joined: 28-May-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 28
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 29-May-2008 at 06:15 |
I'm quite interested to read on Timur's conquest of the Golden Khanate which was ruled by Tokhtamysh. Both were Chingisid yes, and powerful leaders.
Tokhtamysh was no minor military leader either. According to Dmitri Donskoi the Muscovians used firearms for the first time in Russian history during the siege of Moscow, but he still succeeded in subjugating the Muscovian state. Betraying his ally Timur (Tamerlane), he brought about his own downfall and the downfall of the Golden Khanate.
However, does anyone have any recommended texts to read in regards to the Timur/Tokhmatysh War?
|
|
Sarmat
Caliph
Joined: 31-May-2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3113
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 29-May-2008 at 18:36 |
According to Dmitri Donskoi?
Dmitri Donskoi was a prince of Moscow; he wasn't a chronist. I don't know of any chronicles by left from him.
Tokhtamysh was able to take Moscow only by tricking the defenders of Moscow out by promising them peace if they do so. When the Moscovites opened the gates and went out of the city, Tatars ambushed them and get into the city.
|
Σαυρομάτης
|
|
Penelope
Chieftain
Alia Atreides
Joined: 26-Aug-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1042
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 31-May-2008 at 18:59 |
Originally posted by Sarmat12
According to Dmitri Donskoi?
Dmitri Donskoi was a prince of Moscow; he wasn't a chronist. I don't know of any chronicles by left from him.
Tokhtamysh was able to take Moscow only by tricking the defenders of Moscow out by promising them peace if they do so. When the Moscovites opened the gates and went out of the city, Tatars ambushed them and get into the city. |
That is some good information.
|
|
alish
Janissary
Joined: 04-Aug-2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 17
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 22-Jul-2009 at 01:46 |
ONE WORD - AMIR TEMUR was U Z B E K - the true and only nation of Transoxiana......
I argue with anybody to prove my statement above, with real and reasonable facts.....
|
|
Bulldog
Caliph
Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 27-Aug-2009 at 10:01 |
Birardar, Oz'bek is the name of a pollitical leadership, its the name of a state formed by Turkic peoples just as Seljuk or Ottoman or Timurlu is. Amir Timur was a Turkic muslim with possible Mongol-Turko relatives.
You know whose words these are
'Biz Kim Mulki Turon, Amiri Turkistonmiz, Biz Kim Millatlarning eng Qadimi i va eng ulug'i, Turkning bosh Bug'unimiz.'
Amir Temur
|
What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine
|
|
alish
Janissary
Joined: 04-Aug-2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 17
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 23-Sep-2009 at 02:45 |
What nation is that then Turkic muslim I mean it really is not fleshy enough... besides as you exampled yourself he wrote in pretty uzbek language..... if you take modern Central Asian nations.... none of those built a house except uzbeks and tajiks.... Maybe Otto von Bismark also didn't call himself a german, but prussian or something else..... it really doesn't matter but the language, traditions are what represents the nation.....
|
|
Bulldog
Caliph
Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 23-Sep-2009 at 06:13 |
Alish What nation is that then Turkic muslim I mean it really is not fleshy
enough... besides as you exampled yourself he wrote in pretty uzbek
language..... if you take modern Central Asian nations.... none of
those built a house except uzbeks and tajiks.... Maybe Otto von Bismark
also didn't call himself a german, but prussian or something else.....
it really doesn't matter but the language, traditions are what
represents the nation..... | Alish, qandaysiz? Oz'beks hadn't yet formed when Amir Temur was alive, his language was Turki and by Turkic muslim he was a Turk and his state Turko-Mongol/Persian influenced. This doesn't mean he isn't todays part of todays Oz'bekistans heritage aswel, as both are muslim and Turkic and speak a Turki language like him. This is why micro-nationalism just causes problems, Amir Temur, Babur, Ali Sher Nav'oi, Ahmad Yasavi, Mahmud Kashgar'i, Ulug Bek etc etc are heritage of Turkistan and Turkic people in general not just one group.
|
What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine
|
|
BOOBOOCH5
Immortal Guard
Joined: 05-Mar-2015
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 05-Mar-2015 at 05:56 |
I know this is a very old thread, but your post caught my eye. Where can I find the source for Tamerlane's observation about shining skulls and the genius of the inhabitants?
|
|
BOOBOOCH5
Immortal Guard
Joined: 05-Mar-2015
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 06-Mar-2015 at 06:20 |
Originally posted by Zagros
..... A year later on his return he noted how the skulls shone so brightly in the sun, attributing it to the genius of the slain.....
|
I cannot find anything in any of the sources about Tamerlane making such disturbing comments on his return to Isfahan. It would certainly add to his legacy if it were true. Can anyone post a link or cite a source on this?
|
|
BOOBOOCH5
Immortal Guard
Joined: 05-Mar-2015
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 06-Mar-2015 at 06:22 |
Originally posted by Zagros
....A year later on his return he noted how the skulls shone so brightly in the sun, attributing it to the genius of the slain.
|
I cannot find this in any of the sources, nor can I find a weblink that specifically says this....though I really do want to read more about this incident specifically. Can anyone cite a source or post a link about this happening on Timur's return to Isfahan?
|
|