Joined: 31-May-2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3113
Topic: Origin of Tatar Posted: 10-Sep-2007 at 14:18
Well again, you wrote it by yourself, the name of Chagatay Ulus comes from Chagatay, the son fo Chinghizkhan and hence the name of the language also has origin in the name of the son of Chinghiz khan.
Please explain me, is that so humiliating or what? Why can't the name of the language be traced back to the name of Mongolian ruler? I just can't get it? Mongols and Turks are very close after all.
BTW Ottoman Turks were usually called Romeis or Rumiis in Maverannarh.
Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800
Posted: 10-Sep-2007 at 15:29
Sarmat
Well again, you wrote it by yourself, the name of Chagatay Ulus comes from Chagatay, the son fo Chinghizkhan
I agree, Chagatay was the second son of Chinghiz Khan, the Chagatay Ulus was established by Chagatay's grandson.
and hence the name of the language also has origin in the name of the son of Chinghiz khan.
Please explain me, is that so humiliating or what? Why can't the name of the language be traced back to the name of Mongolian ruler? I just can't get it? Mongols and Turks are very close after all.
Because its incorrect, its a historical confusion.
The Turki of the region existed far before the Mongol Empire, the language had been going through a development into a literary language since the Gok-Turk era, the Uygur Khagnate, then the Karakhanids.
After the Chagatay Ulus was established this same Turki carried on developing and this continued. It was the primary basis for the later lingua-franca of the Chagatay Khanate and Central Asia and the Timurids.
It is therefore designated by linguists and historians as the Chagatay Turkic language. But its contemporaries such as Timur-Lenk or Babur, simply called it Turki.
(wiki)
BTW Ottoman Turks were usually called Romeis or Rumiis in Maverannarh.
All Turks in the old Roman lands were called "Rumi", the Seljuks, Beyliks etc
It was the Europeans who first called todays Turkey, "Turchia", where the name derives. Turks called the area "Rumi" or "Rum" (Rome).
Edited by Bulldog - 10-Sep-2007 at 15:34
What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine
Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800
Posted: 10-Sep-2007 at 15:34
Mongols and Turks were ofcourse very close, they both also speak "Altaic" languages and had similar lifestyles, lived in the same region and had confederacies with each other. This isn't about any feelings against Turks or Mongols just about history.
What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine
Joined: 04-Aug-2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 17
Posted: 11-Sep-2007 at 12:02
Originally posted by Sarmat12
Dear alish,
Could you clarify a little bit on your previous post. What is the more valid version of the origins of the name "Uzbek" in your opinion?
BTW, do you know that the name of the old Uzbek language was "Chagatay"?
Chagatay was the second son of Chinghizkhan, the most part of the modern Central Asia including modern Uzbekistan, was given to Chagatay as Ulus, by his father.
Sarmat,
It is obvious that you have obtained knowledge about the CA history from the sources which were provided by people who lived thousands of miles from CAsia first, and second have been falsified for different political reasons... In order to give you clear opinion about the origins of "uzbek" title or nation in general, I would like to briefly give general understanding about some features of these nations, central asian nations...
Nomad nations lived in large area, steppes where these groups of nomad nation did not see each other at all... because they lived separately from each other, they had many differences in dresses, traditions and also languages... but these nations had a lot of things in common... In 16th centuries UZBEKS contained 92 urug' - clan... (urug' means "family group")... Minority of these clans also contained qozoq groups who then started to seperate from uzbeks... One of the leaders of uzbek groups also popular with title - QIPCHOQLAR, was Shayboniyhon who united the groups and gained the power in Mavarounnahr... Now, then who were the nations leaving in Mavarounnahr before Shayboniyhon... They were the nations of turkic origin who spoke turkiy which is the same as uzbek language... Yes, the region was called Chigatay, but it was only military or political division of the teritory by mongolians, the descendants of Chingiskhan who ruled until 1395... (after that there were no mongolian rulers)... If more realisticly, how can you imagine that for ex. : when Mirzo Ulugbek ruled Mavaraunnahr, the capital was Samarkand, and he named his state Chigatay... How can you imagine that, unfortunately, you do not have clue to that... It was Chigatay for short period of time before Temur... During and after Temur's rule, there were no more Chigatay or anything related to mongolians... After Temur there was 'bekliklar' period where the title 'bek' was the ruler of designated region. where every 'bek' was independent... Then, qipchoqlar came from the North... Then it was 'honliklar' period...just histiorians name that way... The nations of Turkiston was devided into two big origins, dependig where they belonged to... Qipchoqlar and Qorachoponlilar - settled turkic nations of Mavarounnahr... But this nation named themselves as uzbeks(uz - self, bek - ruler) in general, distinguishing themselves by their origin - qipchoqlar or qorachoponlilar... Then russians took over the CA... During this period people just forgot about qipchoq, qorachoponli or any such things like urug'.... which did not mean anything any more... It was Turkiston Guberniyasi and manythings have changed after that... Shortly, Uzbeks are the union of turkic clans who were involved in political life of Central Asia, who built the states, developed art, made trade relations and also destroyed each other...
Joined: 04-Aug-2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 17
Posted: 12-Sep-2007 at 00:57
Originally posted by Sarmat12
Well again, you wrote it by yourself, the name of Chagatay Ulus comes from Chagatay, the son fo Chinghizkhan and hence the name of the language also has origin in the name of the son of Chinghiz khan.
Please explain me, is that so humiliating or what? Why can't the name of the language be traced back to the name of Mongolian ruler? I just can't get it? Mongols and Turks are very close after all.
BTW Ottoman Turks were usually called Romeis or Rumiis in Maverannarh.
The reason that uzbek language can not be traced to the mongolian ruler because uzbek language was never named as chigatay language...First time I heard that, even my mother language is uzbek and lived in Samarkand for so many years... What kind of chigatay language are you talking about? There is no literal art that mentioned as chigatay language ... Chigatay was the given name for the certain part of the CA for short period of time and nothing more... It is russians who always trace every aspect of turkic history back to mongolians. This is not humiliating, this is like calling your name by different names and how you feel about it... Uzbeks and mongolians are not that close as you mentioned... Mongolians have completely different language and completely different traditions... Even Temur is popular as a mongolian, Babur as a mughal... Then it is such a logical understanding that mongolian came to Central Asia, and suddenly became uzbek... What's going on man... Take it real...
Babur wrote:
Kecha kelgimdur debon ul sarvi gulru kelmadi,
Kuzlarimga kecha tong otquncha uyqu kelmadi.
Does it look like some kind of mughal language... No bro... This is just uzbek language... Ask anybody who can speak uzbek... no words here even does not come close to mongolian or astronomical mughalian language... Mughal is miphology of europians and nothing more...
Another example , I think the best of the best:
Orazin yopqoch kuzimdun sochilur har lahza yosh,
Buylakim paydo bulur yulduz, nihon bulg'och quyosh.
Mir Alisher Navoiy.
These are the words that I use every day... this is my mother language...
Alisher Navoiy lived during Shohruh's rule in Hirot. Do you think that Shohruh, the youngest son of Temur, was mongolian and helped Navoiy to encourage turkiy language... Shohruh also wrote poems... not in mongolian that's for sure...
If you have any other question about uzbek language or nation, please do not hesitate to ask me...
Joined: 08-Feb-2014
Location: Russia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1
Posted: 08-Feb-2014 at 04:12
It’s very interesting information.
Thanks so much.
But it must be said: unfortunately, in
the official history there are many pro-Chineseand
Persian falsifications about the "wild nomads", "incredible
cruelty of nomadic mongol-tatar conquerors", and about "a war between
the Tatars and Genghis Khan” etc. Of course, that was for some political and
ideological reasons.
Well, perhaps you know, that a famous
Tatar historian-scientist D. Iskhakov wrote in 2000: “the real history of
Tatars, of the people in every respect historical, is not written yet”.
However, recently were published books,
written by independent Tatar historian Galy Yenikeyev (Galy Rashid uly
Yenikey) about the unwritten (hidden) real history of Tatars. One of his books - is
published in English language: "Forgotten
Heritage of Tatars". This
e-book you can easily find on Smashwordscompany
website: http://www.smashwords.com/profile/view/MIG17
There are a lot
of previously little-known historical facts, as well as 16 maps and illustrations
in this book. Also this
book givesa wellgrounded
rebuttal of the Chinese-persian myths about
"incredible cruelty of nomadic mongol-tatar conquerors", and about
"a war between the Tatars and Genghis Khan” etc.
On the cover of
this book you can see genuine appearance of Genghis Khan. It is his lifetime
portrait. Notes to the portrait from the book say: \"...In the ancient
Tatar historical source «About the clan of Genghis-Khan» the author gives the
words of the mother of Genghis-Khan: «My son Genghis looks like this: he has a
golden bushy beard, he wears a white fur coat and goes on a white horse...»
[34, p. 14].
As we can see,
the portrait of an unknown medieval artist in many ways corresponds to the
words of the mother of the Hero, which have come down to us in this ancient
Tatar story. Therefore, this portrait, which corresponds to the information of
the Tatar source and to data from other sources, we believe, the most reliably
transmits the appearance of Genghis-Khan...\".
Some more information
from the above-mentioned book
by Galy
Yenikeyev; primarily we
should know the truth about the meaning of the names "Mongol" and
"Tatar" (“Tartar") in the medieval Eurasia:
the name
"Mongol" until the 17th-18th centuries meant belonging to a political
community, and was not the ethnic name. While “the name "Tatar" was
“the name of the native ethnos (nation) of Genghis Khan …” , “…Genghis Khan and
his people did not speak the language, which we now call the
"Mongolian”…" (Russian academic-orientalist V.P.Vasiliev, 19th
Century). This is also confirmed by many other little known facts.
So in fact
Genghis Khan was a Tatar and a great leader of the all Turkic peoples. But with
time many of his descendants and tribesmen became spiritually disabled and
forgot him and his invaluable doctrine and covenants... Tatars of Genghis Khan
-medieval Tatars - were one of the Turkic nations, whose descendants now live
in many of the fraternal Turkic peoples of Eurasia - among the Tatars, Kazakhs,
Bashkirs, Uighurs, and many others.
About it and about many other things
from the true history of Tatars and other fraternal Turkic peoples, which was
hidden from us, had been written, in detail and proved, in the above-mentioned book "Forgotten Heritage
of Tatars" (by Galy Yenikeyev).
The term "Tatar" is the most diversely used epithet. It means different things for different nations.
Originally, Tatars were either a Tungusic or a Mongolian people that fought tribal wars against Temuchin.
Then, Tartary is an east Siberian region spread to the east of Mongolia. I doubt whether there are any (Tungu or Mongol) Tatars in that area now.
Old Europeans called almost all the steppe tribes Tatars whether they were Mongols or steppe Turks or Tungus,
The there are these people called Tatars living in southwest Russia, Tatarstan and Ukraine etc. They have nothing in common with the east Tatars who were Chinoid in facial features and perhaps Tungusic in language.
Can someone clarify this matter?
The word Tartars or Tatars first came into use in about the 5th Century CE.
They were a Turkic group, and did in fact war against the Mongols at various times.
In about the 13th Century, the Tartars allied themselves with the Mongols to form the Golden Horde. The Cumans (Caucasians from China) and the Kipchaks also joined.
Within the Soviet Federation there about 5.5million Tartars today.
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