Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Mongols

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 5>
Author
barbar View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar
retired AE Moderator

Joined: 10-Aug-2005
Location: Italy
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 781
  Quote barbar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Mongols
    Posted: 27-Aug-2006 at 11:13
Uzbeks were called such because of Uzbekhan, who was the decendant of Chengizhan. But this doesn't mean he and his followers were Mongols.
 
Note the name itself, Uzbeg, it is pure Turkish.
 
He and his followers were well Turkified.
 
However, denying the relation between Uzbeks (Qipchaq) and Mongols isn't very rational.
 
 
 
  
 
 
Either make a history or become a history.
Back to Top
Akskl View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 31-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 132
  Quote Akskl Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Aug-2006 at 22:31
For those who can read Russian:

About Genghis Khan and his so-called "Mongols"  
О Чингиз хане и его "монголах":
http://zonakz.net/phorum/viewtopic.php?t=370&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0
http://www.kyrgyz.ru/forum/index.php?showtopic=23&st=0
http://www.rupoint.co.uk/showthread.php?t=15084
http://www.kub.kz/viewtopic2.php?topic=215&forum=10&start=720&status=&asc=
http://bb.ct.kz/index.php?showtopic=10532
Back to Top
gok_toruk View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
9 Oghuz

Joined: 28-Apr-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1831
  Quote gok_toruk Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Aug-2006 at 12:06

What was the necessity for Mongols to loose their mother tongue and to be part of Turkic world? That's what has happened to Kereyits, Naimans, etc. See, I don't beleive these tribes were Mongol. But that's what you suggest. 

All old Mongol names are really somehow unintelligible or seem very archaic for modern Mongol speakers. In fact, those Mongolian words which seem to be understable in Turkic are not few (in fact, the name 'Temyrshy' itself is of Turkic origin) 
Why virtually all Hazaras believe their ancestors spoke Turkic and not Mongolian? Why they changed all those old names (Burqan Qaldun for instance)?


Edited by gok_toruk - 28-Aug-2006 at 12:39
Sajaja bramani totari ta, raitata raitata, radu ridu raitata, rota.
Back to Top
Savdogar View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar

Joined: 20-Jul-2006
Location: Uzbekistan
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 58
  Quote Savdogar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Aug-2006 at 14:39

Ok i will tell you WHY WE GOT the name UZBEK.

in 1924, our "leaders", Russians who are "extremely" clever about our culture, history started to divide nations into ethnic groups. All who live in Bukhara, Khiva, Turkestan became uzbeks due to last invader Shaybanikhan. WE ARE NOT NACIONALIST. WE dONT CARE WHAT BLOOD WE HAVE. WE ARE MIXED.

I accept some uzbeks have blood of Kipchaks, but they usually live in Surkhandarya and Kashkadarya.
I am from Tashkent, who are karlug turks speaking Chagatai turk, in great ALisher Navoi wrote his "bestsellers".
 
THIS HISTORY FORUM, YOU SHOULD KNOW TURKS STARTED INVADE UZBEKISTAN (modern) before Christ. IN VI century, Tashkent became part of TURK KHAKANATE.
 
AND WHERE ARE THESE TURKS UNTIL SHAYBANI, DID THEY DISAPPEAR????
so until shaybani this region was populated by mongols, right???they built this ancient cities, right?
 
...i dont need this...
Back to Top
Savdogar View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar

Joined: 20-Jul-2006
Location: Uzbekistan
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 58
  Quote Savdogar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Aug-2006 at 14:49
Please, tell me, why those italians who live ITALY, claim ROMAN EMPIRE, CIVILIZATION. Oh my GOD, how they DARE?! Romans were not italians. please find me any word "italian".
 
we have the same situation. there was CITIZINSHEP of CITY. THERE WERE NO ETHNIC groups, no NATIONALITY in modern Uzbekistan, or Maverounnahr or Bukhara, Khiva, Kokand khanates.
 
Aksakal, why do you need HIM?
Timur is another issue, it is cult of Karimov (he is from Samarkand, got it?)
although he invaded many countries, he REBUILT Samarkand.
 
I should admit that those Kipchaks also did very great. they rebuilt Bukhare, which was heavily destroyed by Chengiz khan.
 
 
when I write in CAPS LOCK, I show my emotions.
please dont take it as a REMARK.
 
Omadlar.
Good Luck
...i dont need this...
Back to Top
xi_tujue View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Atabeg

Joined: 19-May-2006
Location: Belgium
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1919
  Quote xi_tujue Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Aug-2006 at 15:18
Originally posted by Savdogar

AND WHERE ARE THESE TURKS UNTIL SHAYBANI, DID THEY DISAPPEAR????
so until shaybani this region was populated by mongols, right???they built this ancient cities, right?
 
 
No persians did
I rather be a nomadic barbarian than a sedentary savage
Back to Top
Akskl View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 31-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 132
  Quote Akskl Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Aug-2006 at 20:32
Our history was totally distorted, perverted and stolen. By Russian Communist chauvinistic censors, by Khalkha-Mongol nationalistic Communist censors, by most of Western historians who do not understand importance of the Steppe nomads tribal structure and who do not care about difference between Khalkha-Mongols and Turkic nomads (i.e. Kazakhs, Noghays, Turkmens, Kyrghyzs), and because of terrible phonetical problems of Chinese script.
Now it is time to restore historical truth. Achievements in DNA analysis and efforts of new young well-educated multi-lingual independent historians will help.
 

Edited by Akskl - 28-Aug-2006 at 20:35
Back to Top
raygun View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar

Joined: 02-Apr-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 80
  Quote raygun Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Aug-2006 at 21:41
Hi all.
 
I have always enjoyed reading the history of the steppe. But I have to say it is also very confusing for the outsiders not living in the steppe region to understand the dynamics of normadic culture.
 
The one issue that confound me is, why did the modern Mongols not speak Turkic, if Genghis Khan (he's Mongol right?) had unified both Mongol & Turkic tribes int eh 13th centuary?
 
Surely the majority would have assimilated the lesser tribes into their language & culture? Also, why have the Turkic people adopted Islam, but not the Mongols? Why did Mongols chosed Tibetan religion instead & not join their Turkic friends?
 
cheers
 
Back to Top
Seko View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
Spammer

Joined: 01-Sep-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8595
  Quote Seko Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Aug-2006 at 22:20
Good questions raygun. If only I had the answers!

Take any theory (just don't think they're all mine, cause most of these sentiments have been shared on these very pages by various members before):

- the modern Mongols are Khalka's who later established themselves into Mongolia and hence their language is dominant.

- the modern Mongols are really the same as the historical Mongols and they always spoke Mongolian.

- the historical Mongols spoke Turkish and they now live outside of Mongolia. The current Mongolians are not the same as them.

- the modern Mongols speak Mongolian while the Khazak mongolians speak Turkic. There are more modern Mongols in Mongolia, so they win.

- I've been drinking too much tea and the caffine is making me say these things.

- ...


The Altin Ordu (Golden Horde) 'Mongols' actually did take up Islam. As did most of the Ilhanids. They all set up camp and established their own empires in previously Islamic lands mind you. Same for the influence regarding the residents of Mongolia taking on the Tibetan Buddhism.


    http://www.innermongolia.org/english/tibetan_buddhism.htm

Edited by Seko - 28-Aug-2006 at 22:23
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Aug-2006 at 16:29

Kazakhstan is new young nation. They need historical deep root which they find it only in Chinggis Khaan lines.

It is true that most of aristocrats from Mongolia to Altan Ord were Chinggisids.

Uzbeks and Khazaks are from Zochi line and Tsagadai line and their subjects Mongol tribes and subjugated Kypchag, Other Turkic tribes, Persian people. Generation after generation, these groups heavily mixed. Mongols adapted turkic language and islam. So they become foundation of present day tatars, kazakhs, uzbeks who are muslims.

Even Russian Kossaks are from Mongol tataar stock. Heavily mixed with runaway russian peasants. Russian peasants adapted nomadic life style, still christian, stealing a women from Tatar, Turkic tribes. Kossaks were enjoying in the vacuum left by Altan Orda.
 
Zuungar Empire was built by non-chingisid mongols. Zuungars were powerful due relative properity from controling Silk road through Tarim basin, avoiding struggle against Ming which was taking toll of Eastern Mongols.  Zuungar Mongols tried to claim throne of all Mongolia. But it was never accepted by Chinggisid Mongols. Zuungar Mongols were controling Kazakhs, Tibets and Tarim basin silk road cities:-Kashgar Khotan. 
 
After several generation Kalmyks moved to west  
Kalmyks- (Torguud Mongols) moved to west. They were completely strangers to their long lost cousins Crymean tataars or Kazakhs. Kalmuk Mongols accepted agreement with Russia to be border state against North Caucasia and Crymea.
 
----------------------------------------------------------------
 
In Mongolia.
Mongolian aristokrats are from Ogedei and Tolui line
The heads[zasag noyod] of more than 300 khalkh-mongolian banners were all descendants of Chinggis Khan, i.e. of Gersenz Khuntaiji(youngest son of Batmunkh Dayan Khan). They ruled till 1921, partly till 1930.

In addition there were so-called "taijis", who had not much power but certain number of subjects[albat ard] due to their descent line of Chingis(esp. of Gersenz). Poor taijis, who had not any subject and property, were called "хохь тайж". In Mongolia there are many people whose grandfathers or great-grandfathers were taijis or sons of taijis.

Moreover the nobles who bore the manchu titles such as "wang", "gung", "beil", "beis", "tuslagchi gung", "zangi" etc were all descendants of Gersenz, i.e. of Chingis. Such a title was inherited from father to one of his sons since the khalkha nobles were bestowed by Manchu King with this titles in 1696.

Chinggunjav of Hotogoid and the second Bogd of Khalkha were famous Chingisids of 18th century. Chinggunjav was executed for his rebellion in Beijing. The Bogd's brother Rinchindorj was also brought to Beijing and forced to take poison.

The most famous Chingisids of the 20th century were:

Sain Noyan Khan Namnansuren (first prime minister after 1911)

Khoshoi Chin Wang(this is title) Khanddorj(he was one of the initiators, who declared independence from Manchu. In 1911 he went to Petersburg for a treaty with Russia)

Tusheet Khan Dashnyam(Together with the other 3 Khans, i.e. Zasagt Khan, Sain Noyan Khan and Cecen Khan, he sent a letter to Russian Tzar for help)

Natsagdorj(he was a famous writer and his father was a "хохь тайж")


Edited by Zorigo - 29-Aug-2006 at 16:49
Back to Top
raygun View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar

Joined: 02-Apr-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 80
  Quote raygun Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Aug-2006 at 22:18
Thks for your relpies Seko and Zorigo.
 
If I read correctly, Khalkha Mongols are decendents of Ghengis Khan yes. Then is their difference from other Mongolic tribes like Khazaks and Uzbeks (in terms of language and religion) an attempt (for lack of a better word) to differentiate their Ghengis Khan lineage from other non-Ghengis decended Mongols?
 
Looking at the map we can see that East Turkistan stands between Mongolia and Tibet. I would have thought that the Uyghurs being closer would have affected Mongolians not only with their written script, but also spoken language (Turkic) and religion (Isalm) as well.
 
But somehow, Mongolians only adopted the script, but retained their spoken language (with some Turkic loan words, yes?) and leap-frog over Uyghur's Islamic influences to the Tibetans for their religion.
 
My line of thought is that it was a matter of choice, not of circumtances.
 
 
Back to Top
Akskl View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 31-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 132
  Quote Akskl Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Aug-2006 at 23:24
Zorigo keeps to falsify history.
Even in 1600's Genghis Khanites who ruled Khalkha Mongols - Altyn Khan, Dayan Khan - spoke Turkic language.  Russian envoys sent to them in 1600's used Kyrghyz (i.e. Turkic)  interpreters. (see "Russia, Mongolia, China" by John F.Baddeley, in two volumes, Burt Franklin, New York 1967)

Russians of 13-16 centuries always used term "Tatars" for Turkic nomads, and when Calmucks arrived later,  they called them Kalmyks,  not Tatars, because they understood the difference. Calmucks were totally different people - not Turkic one (although with some Turkic influence), very close to the the Khalkha-Mongols and Buryats, Buddhists as well, and their rulers were not Genghis- Khanites.

Rene Grousset "The Empire of the Steppes - a History of Central Asia" transl. from the French by Naomi Walford, Rutgers University Press
New Brunswick, New Jersey, and London, Sixth paperback printing, 1999

p.528
"...Galdan reacted vigoriously. At the beginning of 1688 he in his turn invaded the territory of the Tushetu-khan, annihilated his army on the Tamir, a tributary of the Orkhon, and allowed his men to PLUNDER THE JENGHIS-KHANITE TEMPLES OF ERDENI DZU AT KARAKORUM..."

It is funny - but Calmucks claim too that they have direct relation to Genghis Khan!


Edited by Akskl - 29-Aug-2006 at 23:49
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Aug-2006 at 19:12

 I think there are some terminolgy need to be clarified.

Khalkha Mongol, tataar, Kazakh and Uzbeks :--

Most confused one is Tataar..

Before Mongol conquest to west, this name used to apply only to Eastern Mongolian tribal alliance- Tataar.

The original Tataar Mongols ( Ta-ta or Da-da in chinese source) inhabited the north-eastern Mongolia by lake Buir in the 5th century and, after subjugation in the 9th century by the Khitans, later when Jurchen Jin Dynasty annexed Khitan Liao State, Tataars had formal relationship with Jin State, migrated southward, stayed there till founding the Mongol empire under Genghis Khan. Earlier before Chinggis Khaan, Ambagai Khan of Hamag Mongol clan was betrayed by Tataars who sent him under arrest to Jin state, Beijing (Jundu or Zhongdu) where Ambagai was executed by nailing to wood horse. His last wish was "take my revenge from Tataar"

Tataar/Tatar actually comes from "tata", the old Mongolian word for nomad (it literally means "to haul."). The Chinese and Europeans obviously borrowed the term from the nomads themselves. There's a lot of confusion about the word because many steppe tribes used it in their names (The 30 tatars, the Buir lake tatars, etc.)

One of these tribes killed (poisoned) Genghis Khan's father Esugei baatar in 1170.

1194. Mongol tribes Hatagin, Saljiud assaulted border towns of Jin

1195. Jin sent armies of combined force of Chinese and Tatar to pacify the Hatagin, Saljiud tribes, occupied 14 camps. But Tatar and Jin alliance broke over war booty and other ethical issues.

1196. Jin desided to teach disobiedent Tataars. Temujin allied with Jin. First time Temujin won Tatars near Ulz river which is Eastern Mongolia.

1200. Hatagin Saljiud tribes attacked Temujin and they were beating back. Same winter Tsagaan, Tutaud, Alchi, Aluhai 4 tataar tribes attacked Temujin.

1202. Temujin fought against Tataar tribes and utterly destroyed them near Dalan Nomrog.

Chingis Khaan issued following law before the fight

-"Don't go after war booty before you destroy your enemy. Once enemy is destroyed, their things are ours anyway, there will be enough time to divide. If we retreat, everyone should come back where we started. Whoever did not come back shall be killed"

in SHM

154. After the battle, Chinggis Khaan called all people from close relatives (Altan Urag) in one yurt (ger) and started khurultai to discuss about faith of lost tatars
They said:-

"Because tatars killed our ancestors since a ancient time, we have to finish them at once, measuring the men to wheel of cart.

Their wife and children shall be divided to every door, they will be our slave generation to generation"

After decison was made, all went out of yurt (ger)

Tataar Lord Ikh Cheren asked Belgutei :- What did you discuss/ decide?

Belgutei answered:- You 'll be all measured to wheel of cart. Taller will be killed.

Upon hearing that Tataar Ikh Cheren called his subject to be prepared and built a barricade/ obstruction.

Mongols paid heavy cost for destroying the barricade. When Mongols started executing tataars , tataars all had knife hidden in their sleeves and saying:- need pillow to die. So in that way many Mongol soldiers also suffered very much.

After finishing the execution, Chinggis Khaan issued order :- We all discussed together. Because of Belgutei revealed the secret decision of khuriltai, our soldiers suffered lots of loss. Belgutei is not allowed to join Khuriltai anymore.

Chinggis Khaan made Esugen-daughter of Ikh Cheren his queen. Esugen said;- Dear Khaan, if you wish you can find my sister-Esui. She is more beautiful, only for khaan. But i don't know where she is now

Chinggis Khaan said :- If you say so, i can find her, but how about you?

Are you leaving your queen place for your sister?

Esugen said:- Dear Khaan, if you find my sister, i'll give my place to her.

Chinggis Khaan found Esui. Esugen kept her words and sat below her sister.

That was how wise queen Esui found.

So all tataar men are killed, their families distributed among every door-Mongol family.

Under the leadership of Chinggis's grandsonn Batu Khan,  Mongols moved westwards, driving with them many stems of the Turkic Ural-Altayans towards the plains off Russia  The name of Tatar, given to the invaders, was afterwards extended so as to include different stems of the same Turkic-Mongoloid branch in Russia, and even the bulk of the inhabitants of the high plateau of Asia and its northwestern slopes, described under the general name of Tatar.
They got the name "Tatar" probably because others started calling them such, not because they had special ties to one particular pre-Genghis tribe Mongol Tatar of Eastern Mongolia. For Europeans and Russians the name Tatar was most suitable for invading Mongol horde whose orgin is unknown, probably from hell-Tartarus, they rumored- which is derived from Tartarus[1], the Greek god of the underworld, as a reference to the brutality of Turco-Mongol hordes in Europe.
 They are ALL descendants of the Golden Horde of Batu Khan regardless of their ethnic background . (of course, heavily mixed with different substratal groups).  However, it is probable that it was mostly members of the subjugated Tatar tribe that followed Bat Khan in founding the Golden Horde.Tatars today got to be Sunni Muslims.
But when the Russians used the name on Golden Horde related tribes, it most likely meant ANY Turkic-speaking Muslim groups near the Russian zone of influence. Please note that the Crimean Tatar language is very different from Kazan Tatar, which is in fact much closer to Kazak and Kyrgyz, who do not usually use the name "Tatar. The Kazakhs are very much similar to descendants of the Golden Horde. They don't seem to use the name "Tatar" themselves much, unlike their cousins in Kazan and Crimea.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------Interesting to see there are Tatars everywhere-from China, Siberia to Poland

Chinese Tatar's ancestors are Volga Tatar tradesmen who settled mostly in Xinjiang. Kazan (Tatarstan) Tatars have more common with the Chuvash, Maris and Russians. But Chuvash, Maris are not considered as Tatars. Bashkirs speak a language very similar to the Kazan Tatars language. But Bashkirs are not Tatars.

 The Crimean Tatars are subdivided into three sub-ethnic groups: the Tats (not to be confused with the Tat people) who inhabited the mountainous Crimea before 1944 (about 55%), the Yalıboylus who lived on the southern coast of the peninsula (about 30%), and the Noğays (not to be confused with the Nogai people) - former inhabitants of the Crimean steppe (about 15%). The Tats and Yalıboylus have a Caucasian physical appearance, while the Noğays retain Central Asian characteristics. Nogai Tatars - are mixed origin with Turks and Mongols. Named after their leader Nogai, fierce independance made them eventually separate ethnic.

Western Qasim Tatars capital is the town of Qasнm inn Ryazan oblasti with, closely allied with Moscow.

Lithuanian Tatars- After Tokhtamysh was defeated by Tamerlane, some of his clan sought refuge in Grand Duchy of Lithuania. They were given land and nobility in return for military service and were known as Lipka Tatars. They are known to have taken part in the Battle of Grunwald.
 
Polish Tatars:- The Tatar settlers were all granted with szlachta (~ nobility) status, a tradition that was preserved until the end of the Commonwealth in the 18th century. They included the Lipka Tatars (13-14 centuries) as well as Crimean and Nogay Tatars (15th-16th centuries), all of which were noticeable in Polish military history, as well as Kazan Tatars (16th-17th centuries).
 
---------------------------------------------------------------
 
Tatars are remnants of Golden Horde (Altan Orda of Batu Khan). Various turkic, bulgar, kypchag, mongol tribes were heavily mixed and disintegrated depending on their location, alliance and their leader's preferance during  long decline of Golden Horde Empire.
I assume name tatar is for those who were subject of Golden Horde.


Edited by Zorigo - 30-Aug-2006 at 19:51
Back to Top
blitz View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 02-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 103
  Quote blitz Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Aug-2006 at 19:16
Originally posted by raygun

Thks for your relpies Seko and Zorigo.
 
If I read correctly, Khalkha Mongols are decendents of Ghengis Khan yes. Then is their difference from other Mongolic tribes like Khazaks and Uzbeks (in terms of language and religion) an attempt (for lack of a better word) to differentiate their Ghengis Khan lineage from other non-Ghengis decended Mongols?
 
Let me try to explain, friend.
 
Khazakhs and uzbeks are  not mongols but turks. But in the past their nobles were of mongol origin because Genghis Khan had conquered the kyptchak turks, made the other turkic tribes vassals and given those subjected people to his sons Jochi and Cagadai. So today's kazakhs and uzbeks are mixed people of mongolian and turkic origin and those of turkic origin were in the past in overwhelming majority and the mongolian minority was assimilated by their turkic subjects. Do you understand? (My english is not good)
 
Also the mongolian language is much different than turkic although both belong to Altaic language group. Altaic languages are: Mongolian, Turkic, Tungus(Manju, Evenki, Nanai etc).
 
 
Originally posted by raygun

Looking at the map we can see that East Turkistan stands between Mongolia and Tibet. I would have thought that the Uyghurs being closer would have affected Mongolians not only with their written script, but also spoken language (Turkic) and religion (Isalm) as well...
 
There are common words in Mongolian, Turkic and Tungus languages.  But mongols took their script from uighurs and not the language. There are turkic words in Mongolian but in Turkic there are also many mongolian words specially in the so called Cagadai-turkic language.


Edited by blitz - 30-Aug-2006 at 19:20
Road to wisdom: err, err and err. But less, less and less!
Back to Top
blitz View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 02-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 103
  Quote blitz Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Aug-2006 at 19:30
Originally posted by raygun

Hi all.
The one issue that confound me is, why did the modern Mongols not speak Turkic, if Genghis Khan (he's Mongol right?) had unified both Mongol & Turkic tribes int eh 13th centuary? Surely the majority would have assimilated the lesser tribes into their language & culture?
 
On the other hand one can ask: Why should mongols speak turkic if they had their own language.  Mongols had conquered whole China but they didn't speak chinese to each other.  
 
Originally posted by raygun

Also, why have the Turkic people adopted Islam, but not the Mongols? Why did Mongols chosed Tibetan religion instead & not join their Turkic friends?
 
cheers
Mongols and turks were not always friends. Greater part of turks adopted islam long before Genghis Khan.  I think, mongols adopted tibetan buddism because of political reasons beacuse at that time there was no unity between mongols.
Road to wisdom: err, err and err. But less, less and less!
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Aug-2006 at 19:55
Originally posted by Akskl

Zorigo keeps to falsify history.
Even in 1600's Genghis Khanites who ruled Khalkha Mongols - Altyn Khan, Dayan Khan - spoke Turkic language.
 
Mrs Akskl . Since you don't know Mongolian Language, leave Mongolian language alone.  Instead of accusing me false or trying to prove Mongols as Turks:-
Why don't you post about real origin of Kazakh people. That would be very interesting. 
Back to Top
blitz View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 02-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 103
  Quote blitz Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Aug-2006 at 20:31
Originally posted by Akskl

Zorigo keeps to falsify history.
Even in 1600's Genghis Khanites who ruled Khalkha Mongols - Altyn Khan, Dayan Khan - spoke Turkic language.  Russian envoys sent to them in 1600's used Kyrghyz (i.e. Turkic)  interpreters. (see "Russia, Mongolia, China" by John F.Baddeley, in two volumes, Burt Franklin, New York 1967)
 
Akskl, I think you are wrong. 
 
There were 2 Altan Khans: 1) Altan Khan of Tumed. He never ruled Khalkha. His horde was in today's inner Mongolia. 2) Altan Khan of Hotogoid. He didn't rule Khalkha too, because at that time there were 3 khalkha khans(Tushet Khan, Jasagt Khan, Cecen Khan). Hotogoid was then not regarded as part of Khalkha although this Altan Khan (his given name is Sholoi) was the cousin of Jasagt Khan Laikhur.
 
In russian archive there are still letters of this Altan Khan and his son Ombo-Erdene sent to russian tsar. They were all written in mongolian language. See this in the book "Russko-mongolskiye posolskiye otnosheniya 17. veka" by N.P Shastina. In this book there are also letters from khalkha Tushet Khan and oirad Galdan Boshigtu Khan to russian tsar, written in mongolian language.  
 
And the kyrgyz interpreter doesn't matter because Altan Khan always invaded kyrgyzs of Ob and Yenisey and they were vassals of Altan Khan. So, according to russian sources, kyrgyzs(I don't mean the kyrgyzs of Tien Shan ) prefered to serve russians and hoped that they could free them from the yoke of the mongols.

Originally posted by Akskl


Russians of 13-16 centuries always used term "Tatars" for Turkic nomads, and when Calmucks arrived later,  they called them Kalmyks,  not Tatars, because they understood the difference. Calmucks were totally different people - not Turkic one (although with some Turkic influence), very close to the the Khalkha-Mongols and Buryats, Buddhists as well, and their rulers were not Genghis- Khanites.
Of course kalmyks and turks are different, because kalmyks are mongols. Tatars of today are turkic but 800 years ago they were mongols.
 
The rulers of oirads or kalmyks were also descendants of Chingis Khan's brother Khasar.
 
And on the other hand  to be a mongol one don't need to be a descendant of Genghis Khan.

Originally posted by Akskl

Rene Grousset "The Empire of the Steppes - a History of Central Asia" transl. from the French by Naomi Walford, Rutgers University Press
New Brunswick, New Jersey, and London, Sixth paperback printing, 1999
 
p.528
"...Galdan reacted vigoriously. At the beginning of 1688 he in his turn invaded the territory of the Tushetu-khan, annihilated his army on the Tamir, a tributary of the Orkhon, and allowed his men to PLUNDER THE JENGHIS-KHANITE TEMPLES OF ERDENI DZU AT KARAKORUM..."

It is funny - but Calmucks claim too that they have direct relation to Genghis Khan!
ERDENI DZU was founded in the late 16th (after 1580) on(or near) the ruin of the former mongol capital  Kharakhorum. It has nothing to do with Genghis Khan.     
Road to wisdom: err, err and err. But less, less and less!
Back to Top
gok_toruk View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
9 Oghuz

Joined: 28-Apr-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1831
  Quote gok_toruk Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Sep-2006 at 15:03
Kazakstan is a new COUNTRY; but not a new nation. You can't ignore Kiptchaks' history. In an story which is for the founder of Hunnic Empire (Mete Qaan = Oghuz Qaan), in a part, there goes to talk about Kiptchaks.
 
Accepting new languages and religions, as Savdagar says, is not like having a morning breakfast. And as they believe, Turks were ranked as 3rd or 4th in Mongolian society. So, how come they LOST their language (their heritage) and even their CULTURE?
 
AkSakal is right when he talks about what Russian historians have written. They clearly distinguished Tatars from Kalmyks.
Sajaja bramani totari ta, raitata raitata, radu ridu raitata, rota.
Back to Top
gok_toruk View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
9 Oghuz

Joined: 28-Apr-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1831
  Quote gok_toruk Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Sep-2006 at 15:07
Old Mongolian language is really difficult (if not to say impossible) for modern Khalkha Mongols. The structure is also VERY different. One of the parts linguists focus on to show their difference (old Mongolian and modern day Khalkha Mongolian) is that modern Mongolian lacks the use of '- qan' or '- ken' which is frequent in old day Mongolian (and also in Turkic). Instead, '- yan' is used which is EXACTLY the same as Tungusic language. As for me, I believe Khalkha Mongol PEOPLE and LANGUAGE are of Tungusic origin.

Edited by gok_toruk - 01-Sep-2006 at 15:08
Sajaja bramani totari ta, raitata raitata, radu ridu raitata, rota.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Sep-2006 at 15:56
Originally posted by gok_toruk

Old Mongolian language is really difficult (if not to say impossible) for modern Khalkha Mongols. The structure is also VERY different. One of the parts linguists focus on to show their difference (old Mongolian and modern day Khalkha Mongolian) is that modern Mongolian lacks the use of '- qan' or '- ken' which is frequent in old day Mongolian (and also in Turkic). Instead, '- yan' is used which is EXACTLY the same as Tungusic language. As for me, I believe Khalkha Mongol PEOPLE and LANGUAGE are of Tungusic origin.
 
1. Please try to put word examples and comparission your fact about mongolian language ending- (qan-ken).
What is "an"
Due to grammatical differences of Old Mongolian Script and Modern Kirillic Script, some spelling of words changed in XX century.
for example;-
Ulaanbaatar is Modern mongolian
Ulaganbagatur is Old Mongolian-
Old Mongolian long vowel -always had G -in between. Modern Mongolian doesn't have.
Language sentence structure and everything else is same.
 
2. Mongolian language speaker can not communicate with Tungus speakers at all. It is very different.
 
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 5>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.109 seconds.