The Secret History of the Mongols

Oh dear Aksakal

Edited by Zorigo - 01-Jun-2006 at 03:20

Don't worrey Akskl has a bee in his bonnet..........

He thinks that Mongolian didn't exsist and they all spoke Turkish, thus they all were Turkish.

It's mince, my only fear is that people might be teaching/propagating such rubbish.

http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/10636


The Project Gutenberg EBook of The Travels of Marco Polo Volume 1
by Marco Polo and Rustichello of Pisa

[10] ["The Keraits," says Mr. Rockhill (_Rubruck_, 111, note), "lived on
the Orkhon and the Tula, south-east of Lake Baikal; Abulfaraj relates
their conversion to Christianity in 1007 by the Nestorian Bishop of
Merv. Rashideddin, however, says their conversion took place in the
time of Chingis Khan. (_D'Ohsson_, I. 48; _Chabot, Mar Jabalaha, III._
14.) D'Avezac (536) identifies, with some plausibility, I think, the
Keraits with the _Ki-le_ (or _T'ieh-le_) of the early Chinese annals.
The name K'i-le was applied in the 3rd century A.D. to _all_ the
Turkish tribes, such as the _Hui-hu_ (Uigurs), _Kieh-Ku_ (Kirghiz)
Alans, etc., and they are said to be the same as the _Kao-ch'e_, from
whom descended the _Cangle_ of Rubruck. (_T'ang shu_, Bk. 217, i.;
_Ma Tuan-lin_, Bk. 344, 9, Bk. 347, 4.) As to the Merkits, or
Merkites, they were a nomadic people of Turkish stock, with a possible
infusion of Mongol blood. They are called by Mohammedan writers
Uduyut, and were divided into four tribes. They lived on the Lower
Selinga and its feeders. (_D'Ohsson_, i. 54; _Howorth, History_, I.,
pt. i. 22, 698.)"--H. C.]      End of quote

Edited by Akskl - 31-May-2006 at 19:02

Well, raygun, among the people believed to be descendants of old Mongols, there are 'Hazara' people of Afghanistan. They're just like we Central Asians. But there comes Mongol- descents of China and present day Mongols of Mongolia. They are Mongoloid... but the forms of eyes are different. You know, we've got distinctions in our own place (Central Asia); but not to the degree found in present day Mongols. Hazaras and Mongols of China and Mongolia are all Mongols? But why do they differ? Should we take into account the Manchu- Tungusic influence in eastern ones? Hazara people are believed to marry inside their society rather than with Afghan Uzbeks, Turkmens or Kazaks. So, the chance to intermix with Turkic tribes fails there. But the intersting thing is that they still look like we Central Asians.

I think more likely than not, the ethnic composition of Mongols has changed to some extent. 800 years is more than enough time, even in sedentary cultures and without any mass migrations.

Of course, culturally, the identity is always very persistent throughout history.

I have two English translations of the Secret History and a Russian one. And I am going to buy another English translation - Professor de Rachewiltz's one. Urgunge Onon's one has numerous references to the "Orhon Turkish" dialect (i.e. Turkic language) for explanatiions and translation of hundreds of names and words.

Ultimately, no analysis can uncover the original text because the only known versions of the secret history are all traslated from a chinese version.


Edited by Imperator Invictus - 25-May-2006 at 01:30

I have two English translations of the Secret History and a Russian one. And I am going to buy another English translation - Professor de Rachewiltz's one. Urgunge Onon's one has numerous references to the "Orhon Turkish" dialect (i.e. Turkic language) for explanatiions and translation of hundreds of names and words.


Edited by Akskl - 24-May-2006 at 23:35

I don't believe in the 'Turkic People'. I mean I don't think they were the same ethnical and racial people; let alone to be nationalist; thanks for your description 'inikim'. We're just trying to support what we think... that is old Mongols are not the same people as present day Mongols. I'm not saying they were Turkic. Note the thing.

Turkic peoples and Mongolian (Khalkha, Buryats, Kalmucks) peoples have different and mutually incomprehesible languages. As we know from the Secret History, Genghis Khan's troops had huge cultural and linguistic problems when they were conquering Khori-Tumats - ancestors of modern Buryats, who are practically the same people as Khalkha-Mongols. And at the same time the Genghis Khan troops considered Kypchaks, Qanglys, Ongut Turks and other Turkic tribes as brethrens, who had the same language and culture. Naimans, Kereits, Qongurats, Jalairs etc. were Turkic tribes - now parts of Kazakhs - as well as Kypchaks, Qanglys, Onguts (Waqs or Uaks now).

In recent translation of the Secret History made by Urgunge Onon you can see hundreds and hundreds explanations of the words and names which can be possible only by using what he called "Orkhon Turkish" - i.e. practically Kazakh language. Is Urgunge Onon also "nationalist"?
Also, all geographical names in the Secret History are Turkic, and today on territory of modern Mongolia they all sound totally different.

http://www.zanabazar.mn/Guide/Burkhan/burkhan.html

...Another locale in the Khentii Mountains frequented by Zanabazar was 7724-foot Khentii Khan Uul, also known as the Burkhan Khaldun of the Khamug Mongols. The top of this mountain is where, according to legend, Chingis Khan went to pray for guidance before going into battle. (It should not be confused with the Burkhan Khaldun of the Uriankhai, where Chingis, in an famous episode in his early life, hid from the Merkit tribesmen who had kidnapped his wife Bцrte and tried to kill him, now identified by most historians as 7534-foot Erdene Uul, about twenty miles southwest of here.)... End of quote

TWO Burkhan-Khaldun mountains!! And both have Khalkha-Mongolian names now - Khentii Khan Uul and Erdene Uul! How is this possible - not to know which of the mountains is the SACRED one of Genghis Khan, and to rename it?!  It is obvious that Khalkha-Mongols have no relation to Genghis Khan and his  so-called "Mongols" (i.e. Mangqols).



Edited by Akskl - 20-May-2006 at 23:25

Originally posted by Imperator Invictus Yes they were very closely related to each other. Most of the purpose in making a differentiation between them on this board are nationalistic or silly.

The differenciations were made by historical facts. Actually someone who is claiming Mongols as Turkic are nationalistic or silly.

BTW, they did closely related, Turkic people mixed with Tungustic people, and vice versa.  Mongols are Tungustic people with strong Turkic influence. 

 

 

 

Originally posted by Se�mis of Arierep Hello! Someone could tell when the brothers of Temujin or Genghis Khan passed away? I have this names: Qasar; Belgutei; Qaciun and Temuge. Also i would like to know more about is elder son, Joti, because i have the impression that he passed away before is father.

 

Temujin's youngest brother Temuge lived to be an old man. He was executed sometime in the early 1240's when he tried to seize the throne after Ogedai Khan's death. Belgutai, Temujin's half-brother, also lived to a very old age. He was still alive when Mongke Khan was enthroned in 1251, and some sources say he died in 1255. Another half-brother, Bekter, was killed by Temujin in childhood. I don't know when the other brothers Jochi Khasar and Kachi'un died. 

And yes, Temujin's eldest son Jochi did die a few months before his father. The two were on very tense terms and it is suspected by some that Jochi was assasinated. But there's no proof of this.