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

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Population through History

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>
Author
Hushyar View Drop Down
Consul
Consul


Joined: 16-Apr-2005
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 301
  Quote Hushyar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Population through History
    Posted: 27-Jun-2005 at 02:35

HulaguHan:


Turks and Mongols are the same, Mongols are just the descendants of the Eastern Turks (Eastern Tu-c'hueh)

Turks and mongols are completely different peoples, In old Time they had simmilar cultures but they are different peoples,Up to what I know no phylologist until now proved completely that Turkic and Mongolian languages have common roots.
Tu-chueh(chinese word for gokTurk) was a steppe empire that consisted many turkic , mongolian, Tungustic and Iranian Tribes and this fact that some mongols were under their rule does not prove that they were descendants of Tu-chueh.Founders of these empire Tu_chueh died in middle of 9th century ater QirQizes invaded mongolia and ended UyGhur Empire there.
I have heard that maybe Naimans were turks(which many are opposed to that) but basic core of mongol Arny were mongol Tribes (up to what I know and I have no knowledge in turko-mongol History except what that related to Iran History)


Hushyar, there were always immigrations to Anatolia. One wave occured with Timurlenk, like Oguzoglu mentioned

Immigration to Anatolia from Iran (and vice versa) occured in 5 different phase.
1)In end of 11th century that Saljuqs after Malazgard ,immigrated to Anatolia and also Alparsalan transferred some Turkic tribes from central Asia to Anatolia.
2)After Mongol invasion that majority of Turkomens of Khorasan who remained alive fled to azarbaijan with Jalaleddin, but their advance was blocked by combined force of Rumi saljuqs ,Ayyubids and Abbasid chaliphate,but in time of Ilkhanids some of them entered eastern Anatolia.
3)In time of Chubanian and then Jalayerids there was a bidirectional immigration of tribes between Anatolia nad Iran.
4)After Timur invasion to Azarbaijan and defeating Jalayerids and QaraQoyunlu confedration many Tribes from Azabaijan immigrated to Anatolia.
5)In the 15th and beginning of 16th century we see the immigration from Anatolia to Azarbijan.

Back to Top
Temujin View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Sirdar Bahadur

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Eurasia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5221
  Quote Temujin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Jun-2005 at 13:14

Originally posted by Hushyar


Nationalistic feelings in my words??!!, no sir , I feel some romantic feelings (19th century style) about admiration of big men in your words which does not base on facts.

your nationalisitc for sure, Transoxania is no way Iranian, its the same bullshti from some Turks claiming all of Central Asia is theirs. Transoxania is Transoxania, and BTW, at the time Mongols came to Iran Iran itself has previously been conquered by the Kwarazmians, do you have numbers on their death tolls? or perhaps did they conquer iran "peacefully" because they were iranian brethren?

2)Not most but we can say that half of the famous building In transxosania belongs to Teymurids(not Timur),ofcourse all of them can not be compared to transxosania before mongol invasion,but there is no doubt that Timur atleast somehow restored civilization in the desert that mongol created but how did he do this and by what cost?by plundering Khorasan, India,Mazandaran , sistan, Isfahan, Azarbaijan, Georgia, Baghdad, Syria,...I mean he razed half of the world to beautify his capitals in Samaqand and Bokhara.

this is another proof that you just want to show that iran suffered so much from foreign conquerers all the time, yet most of the architectural wonders Iranians are so proud of have been constructed by those conquerors

3)What do you know about Timur or what is your sources about him?He was a great commander, nobody doubt it, but Nazies were great commanders and still missle technology mostly is invention of Nazies, but i see no reason to admire nazies for that.

you're wrong here Nazis did not invent anyhting else than nationalsocialism and weird racial theories, thats all. Rocketry was invented by German scientists under the Nazi regime. neither were Nazis great comanders, unless you think massacres on civilians are great battles.

4)Most of his massacars has been written by his own or his descendent historians and in the end they wrote "It was god will to punish those who sank in sin and disobeyed the king of world",have you read zafarnameh it is completly biased and completly defends Timur, (he was official historian of Timur)and then see how good this man was.

yet regarding Mongol times, most hsitories on Mognols were written by non-Mongols, what does that tell us? even in secret history of Mongols they openly write about so called genocide, but we know that something like a genocide within Mongol triebs did usually not happen, the other tribe did cease to exist, but not their members, they were enslaved and distributed amongst other tribes. so if we read of a genocide this in most cases means enslavign and relocating, not mass-murder.

5)Timur political  effect in history  was nothing except we assume the great list of cities that he razed.He just delayed the the fall of Constantipole and Anatolia by the hands of Othmans,he just sacked syria and create some pyramid of skulls and eyes in Ba'albak and Halb and.....but Mamaliks remanied powerfull and remained for 100 years later.In his war with QaraQoyunlues he many times ruined Azarbaijan,ArmeniaGeorgia (which acually ended the golden time of history in georgia),but after his death QaraQoyunlues became the ruler of westrn Iran.He sacked punjb and 100'000 of prisoners there ,By beheading and creating the biggest Skull pyramid in his life, and nothing changed in India.After his death ,his sons and grandsons just ruled another ordinary kingdom that exist befor timur invasion in Iran.

6)For considering the dimension of the brutality of Timur , I think we must see the Shahrokh son of Timur that was enemy of his father policy and tried his best to restore Khorasan to an acceptable level, he even tried to move his capital to there but he couldn't find any safe city there except Harat that after defeat of Al_e_kart by the Hand Of Timur surrounded with no resistance.

7)And never Judge except you have sufficient data,if you want I can list all of the basic sources about Timur invasion here(most of them have not been translated yet and i don't know how could you have access to them except going to Usa and National Congress Library which atleast has a micofilm from all of these books).

why you number your paragraphs? and my source is Dr David Nicolle who teaches islamic architecture at the university of Jordan, he uses the same sources as you do, yet he thinks Timur was thoguh cruel, oen of the gretest rulers of the eastern islamic world. i still fail to see what your horror stories about Mongols and Timur trying to proove? onyl thign you do is trying to deny the civic and cultural achievements of them.

Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor

Suspended

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792
  Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Jun-2005 at 13:29

Transoxania was in no way shaope or form Iranian? What do you mean by that?  As in ruled by Iranians? Or populated by Iranians? Clarify please.

And please highlight the nationalist points specifically in his post, I fail to see them.

Back to Top
Temujin View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Sirdar Bahadur

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Eurasia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5221
  Quote Temujin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Jun-2005 at 13:58
look in the other thread "why did the Mongols descide to expand" in the stepep forum, he did gave numbers about Iranian casualties only, and in this thread he did gave numbers of casualties in Iran during Timurs conquest, I wonder why he limits himself to Iran, and what the casualties actually got to do with the original topic at all? for me it seems he just want to put Mongols and Timurids in a bad shape because they did bad to Iran in his opinion. of course his intention is more clear in the other thread but i descided to reply here because his initial post perfectly fits into the pattern he had already used in the other thread.
Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor

Suspended

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792
  Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Jun-2005 at 14:33
Oh, well, as far as I can see he was expanding on my stating the effect of Temujin and Timur's atatcks on Iran with regards to its impact on population, which throughout Iran's jistory has beeen by far the most significant.  
Back to Top
ramin View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 16-Feb-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 921
  Quote ramin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Jun-2005 at 21:53
Originally posted by Afghanan

"In 522 b.c., when Cambyses' son Darius ascended the throne as the king of kings of Persia, his empire was the greatest in the world. It stretched from the Aegean to Afghanistan, from the Black Sea to the Blue Nile. It was estimated to have contained 50 million people, an unimaginable population for that time.
I'm sorry but Darius was not Cambyses' son (), so I cannot accept the number of 50M for the population.

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

Yes Iran is ruled by Iranians who wished to be Arabs!
They don't wish to be Arabs, in fact I personally think they're even anti Arabs to some degree. But surely they're using "the religion" to keep the blined people blind. It is their weapon and privilege to use the religion in order to be in power. nobody knows that if they're really religous or not, but one thing is for sure and that fortunately or unfortunately is in Iran the majority of people are not Muslims anymore (consider being Muslim means practising the religion).
"I won't laugh if a philosophy halves the moon"
Back to Top
Miller View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 25-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 487
  Quote Miller Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Jun-2005 at 22:23

Originally posted by ramin

consider being Muslim means practising the religion

I think it means believing in the religion

Back to Top
ramin View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 16-Feb-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 921
  Quote ramin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Jun-2005 at 23:30
one who believes in a religion would practise it, otherwise it's insanity.

Other than that, what I meant was that nowadays Iranians don't practise Islam and IF being a muslim is based on practising the religion, then Iranians are not Muslims.
"I won't laugh if a philosophy halves the moon"
Back to Top
Hushyar View Drop Down
Consul
Consul


Joined: 16-Apr-2005
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 301
  Quote Hushyar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Jun-2005 at 01:55

Originally posted by Temujin


Transoxania is no way Iranian, its the same bullshti from some Turks claiming all of Central Asia is theirs. Transoxania is Transoxania

Don't compare me with panturks,Yes Transxosania is Transxosania, and yes sassanaids never ruled there except very breaf period and again it is true that after mongol invasion there was a gap between Iran and transxosania, but I again  repeat that between 9th century to Mongol invasion transxosania was culturally part of  Iran.You have doubt ok,lets see whats difference between my style and your romantic style.
Do you know what is shahnameh? a story that has been written by Ferdowsi and he lived in tus in khorasan,ok but you are wrong .wrong !!!! every source and every encyclopedia confirms that but I'll assure you that you are wrong.Shahnameh is a name that in 10th century many Samanid writers (in transxosania) gave to their legendary history of Iran, Like Abo'l'mo'id balkhi like Abumansur like Daqiqi and many others and Ferdowsi was the last of them. Do you know samanaid Kings called themselves Iranian king and heirs of Sassanaids? do you know that in 10 th century modern persian was official langluage of transxosania while in fars and Isfahan and Azarbaijan pahlavi dialects was main language of peoples?No ofcourse not,So please refer to Moqadasi a geographer (you can ask from your professor). Do you know that the biggest center of Sho'ubieh (a sense of Iranian nationalism that I have doubt even your professor has ever heard that) was Transxosania? So please go and study and don't compare me with panturks plz.
Speaking about Islamic and Islamic Iranian history without knowing Arabic and Persian is ridiculous,They are prequisite for this and It is like that you don't have any knowledge about Latin and then came and say that all of Roman History is wrong  and was written by greeks that were hostile to Romans.meaningless


at the time Mongols came to Iran Iran itself has previously been conquered by the Kwarazmians, do you have numbers on their death tolls? or perhaps did they conquer iran "peacefully" because they were iranian brethren?

not Kwaazmians but Khwarazmshahs  and they were a turkic dynasty that ruled Khwarazm and their main army was composed of Turkic nomads.Do you know how they conqured Iran?lets me tell it for you.
Once upon a time there were some oghuz people that defeated a great king named Sanjar and then they sacked Khorasan and then Kerman, then came some Mongol and turkic federation tribe named Qarakhitayis and they defeated Oghuzes and captured Kerman.In the west and south of Iran there were remanants of Iraqi Saljuqs with Some Atabegs who are fighting (in deserts not in cities) and killing eachother soldiers (not civillian because they want a people to rule them after winning the war), Then a man by the name of Alaeddin Takkesh ruler of Khwarazm appeared and defeated all of them and unified Iran.Was he barbarian? No he, his father and his grandfather were ruler of khwarazm, His great granfather was a commander in Saljuq army.Was he a good man?well he was not a saint but atleast he didn't raze any city.   


this is another proof that you just want to show that iran suffered so much from foreign conquerers all the time, yet most of the architectural wonders Iranians are so proud of have been constructed by those conquerors

I told that
It is true that Timur has buit some building in Bukhara and Samarqand , But by what cost?

and see what was your conclusion:
What did Timur do for Iran?What did he do except killing ,pillage,masaccare( I didn't use the word genocide for Timur because only Mongols act go in this catagory by the meaning of genocide), yes he built some building in Samarqand and Bukhara, but he devastated Khorasan,for it.You see a building in Samarqand ,I see 70,000 headless corps in Isfahan,and remeber this big city that was saved from Arabs and Mongols , became a ruined city until shah Abbas rebuilt it.Do you want to know good patroners of architecture,see Malikshah, Harun, Shah Abbas, how many cities they burnt for erecting so many architectures?Even mahmud Ghaznavi can not be compard to Timur (not at all),Yes he many times invaded india, killed many and enslaved more and  devastated many cities, but in front of a terrible monster like Timur what did he do?In what expedition mahmud Ghazanavi or any Ghurid kings in India killed 100,000 persons and their historian said " And our lord created the biggest minarit from the heads of Kafirs that nobody saw it before , to spread true religion" and half of those heads belongs to muslims.And you saw a mosque in Bukhara and forget every thing.Plundering from India to Meditrenian Sea for building a few mosques in two city!!!!
His sons and grandsons just tried to rebuilt a ruined inheritance that their father gathered for them. and still they did their best to some how revive life in Khorasan atleast, but after Mongols and then Timur It never changed back to its older day, Not in safavid times and not in later periods, until 20th century.you don't know this because you didn't study carefully history, You see history just a place to simulate an army for DBA games or Totalwars Scenarios,This approach is wrong.

And you said I yet most of the architectural wonders Iranians are so proud of have been constructed by those conquero
  

Actually you answered to this question yourself
I  said intentionally

Nazies were great commanders and still missle technology mostly is invention of Nazies, but i see no reason to admire nazies for that.

and you answered


you're wrong here Nazis did not invent anyhting else than nationalsocialism and weird racial theories, thats all. Rocketry was invented by German scientists under the Nazi regime. neither were Nazis great comanders, unless you think massacres on civilians are great battles.

I agree that It was germans that buit missles ,Mark I ,II ,jet motors, Sulfamides,many new polymers,Tiger tanks,.......Not Nazies,but It was Nazies that committed genocide.Ok so what prevents you to extend this reasoning to Mongol or Timurid Times??Am I feeling a double standard??

Actually existance of Shahrokh,Sultan Hosein Byqra or Ologh Beyk in Timurids or Ghazan Khan and Oljaytu in Ilkhanids is an honour for Iranian Civilization.It just shows How deep and rich was this culture that could create such heirs from that parents.It was so rich that even after those blows could change sons to patroners while their father did their best to destroy this culture and civilizaion.Same  thing could be said about Yuan dynasty in China, They civilized their conqueres and changed those killing machines into humans .(of course Every thing has its cost,For Iran this cost was so heavy).


yet regarding Mongol times, most hsitories on Mognols were written by non-Mongols, what does that tell us?

1)It says that Mongols were so uncivilized that all of their history was written by non-Mongols.
2)It says that all of these sources wether were mongol's ally or enemy are unified that mongol brutality was unique and unbelievable.
3)It says that you believe every pleasant thing that they wrote, and don't believe any unpleasnt things.


 even in secret history of Mongols they openly write about so called genocide, but we know that something like a genocide within Mongol triebs did usually not happen, the other tribe did cease to exist, but not their members, they were enslaved and distributed amongst other tribes. so if we read of a genocide this in most cases means enslavign and relocating, not mass-murder.

So your source is secret History of Mongols,I hope you read some of those huge critisims that were written for this book, and you still believe it as a reliable source,but it is interesting that you reject so many other histories just because they were written by Non-mongols!!! and all of them are lie or exagerated!!!!!very good Indeed.

At first I want to say that as I said before, Mongols usualy killed every person and even animals (I didn't quote many things you can go and read yourself), sometimes they used prisoners for conquering other cities , they usually sent craftsmen to mongolia and many times womens enslaved , But in most of times every body was killed and this massacare took place very planned and systematic.You can refer yourself and see it.I gave you sources and there are many other sources from chinese and Russian and European that all of them confirm these sayings.

Secondly It is well known that Temuchin was not a sadistic Killer (unlike Timur) He never killed just for pleasure , or tiled minarites from eyes and skulls like Timur,His masscare(or better said genocide) was completely planned.He wanted to create a stepp empire, In this plan Nomads were his tools, So he subdued them, rearranged them and relocated them even renamed them to dissolve their old tribal bonds and creat from them a new nation and army that is ruled by Changiz Yasay.But in this plan settled civilization did not fit, So he simply exterminate any traces of this kind of civilization that saw in front of himself. 



why you number your paragraphs?

because I love numbers

 and my source is Dr David Nicolle who teaches islamic architecture at the university of Jordan, he uses the same sources as you do, yet he thinks Timur was thoguh cruel, oen of the gretest rulers of the eastern islamic world.

He thinks so , good for him so I must believe him?  Are you joking? I gave you  so many clues and you tell me I know a professor that he is good and respectful and he says that it is wrong!!!??Come on, I am not speaking about Sumerian history that you quoute from that scientist or phylologist.How  did he find that he was gratest Islamic ruler?does he have a Time Tunnel  or machine ?has he traveled to old time by a  wormhole? He just uses same sources tha I use.
Come on man,go and  read those books then come and discuss with me forget about professor x or y .Even if encyclopedia of Britannica writes that Timur was a good and Kind man and doesn't give any proof ,I have no obligation to believe it.History is science and science needs proof.History books are our main sources about discussing History.If you don't accept them , so you can not accept anything and even you can claim that Timur is not a real person.
 


 i still fail to see what your horror stories about Mongols and Timur trying to proove? onyl thign you do is trying to deny the civic and cultural achievements of them.

I use letters because you have allergy to numbers
a)They were not stories, They were pure facts that were written by Historians that lived in That specific time.
b)civic and cultural achievements of them??!!!! O.K.I think you need some drills to learn more about history of Islamic world in middle ages so I answer your claim with a question, I will say some big names that grown up in Transxosania and khorasan and all of them lived before mongol invasion, and one of them was killed by mongols.
Ibn Sina, Biruni, Farabi, Khayyam, Ghazali, Ferdowsi, Attar, Qattan Marwazi, Khwarazmi,jorjani, Aljaber (alchemist europeans call him jeber).There are many other names but these are icons.
May you please mention some names after mongol or Timur invasion who were born and lived in this regions that be comparable to above names.
Nasireddin Tusi? No He was born and raised before mongol invasion,when Mongols ruined Tus (and  It is still a ruined city , you can come to mashahd and see it) he was living with Ismaelies(Hashashins) in one of their towers.
Ologh beyk?He was a big man but not comparable with them, if you want to mention him I can say 100 names.
So I want you to tell me about some big scientists or philosepher that lived after Mongol or Timur invasion in Khorasan or Transxosania.Good luck!!!!

 

 

 

Back to Top
Hushyar View Drop Down
Consul
Consul


Joined: 16-Apr-2005
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 301
  Quote Hushyar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Jun-2005 at 01:58
Originally posted by Temujin


I wonder why he limits himself to Iran

Because He(Hushyar) never speaks about a thing which has not complete knowledge about it.If he spoke about China or Russia or Eastern Europe you'll ask ok what is your sources? He has no way except saying that i have read it from that book, At that time you can find another professor Nicole to say that he has a History that denies those saying, But now nobody can help you, you must quote from original books and compare them and He(Hushyar)knew that your dogmatism will break by studying them.

and what the casualties actually got to do with the original topic at all

Actually It was happened unintentionally, he (Hushyar)was innocent.

for me it seems he just want to put Mongols and Timurids in a bad shape because they did bad to Iran in his opinion. of course his intention is more clear in the other thread but i descided to reply here because his initial post perfectly fits into the pattern he had already used in the other thread.

I hope in this thread you'll undrestand that Mongols and Timur (not Timurids) can not be defended.
Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor

Suspended

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792
  Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Jun-2005 at 07:04

Temujin are you seriously denying Timur's and Ghengis's horrors?  This is a military/civilization history forum Hushyar is perfectly entitled to discuss and inform any relevant point to this and the horrors of ghengis and timur are undeniable and and very worthy of mention, facts often whitewashed with western Romanticism. Speaking in relative terms the Mongols were worse than the Nazis.

Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor

Suspended

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792
  Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Jun-2005 at 07:06
There are records dating back thousands of years stating that Iranic peoples lived in Transoxania, not nationalism but fact.
Back to Top
Temujin View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Sirdar Bahadur

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Eurasia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5221
  Quote Temujin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Jun-2005 at 14:16

Hushyar Ok you're pretty much right abotu everyhting, this is a little misudnerstandign apparently. it was not my intention to downplay Mongols or Timrs conquest of Iran, and i don't deny that both openly slaughtered towns and groups of people if it was pleasent fro them, but i think too much of their conquest si a little exaggerated, yes I know of the Shanameh and other sources (I think you do underestimate my knowledge of iran and the topic in question a bit) but do you really believe in a statement like "he slaughtered both humans and animals"? I mean if you loook at nomad society you'll see that they almost completely live of animals, in fact animals are almost sacred to them and the killing of their animals was almsot ritualized. I personally believe the author of this source just stated that in order to show the brutality of Mongols, I don't think we can take that literally, or do you also believe that the kings of Makedonia were really the descendands of Greek gods when Herodot writes so in his texts?

another thing you should look at in this case is the other side of the story, the Steppe point of view. Mongols (Timur not so much as he was semi-nomadic) lived of their own pastrues and the Steppe alone, but once a big tribal confederation is formed, the Nomads have to look for new lands in order to survive, this means extensive plunder of foreign lands. adn what i don't liek about you and what you ahev to change is to accept non-Iranian non-islamic sources, I fail to see why other sources can eb inconsistent but your sources are automatcially 100% true? and yes, Nomads usually don't write down their history...one of the reasons being majority of Nomads don't had alphabets at all, however Temjin did introduce an alphabet to Mongols, so you can't say they were barbaric at all, he also made use of islamic and chinese advisors, also uncommon for a barbarian...

well, you said yourself you only talk about Iran becasue you only talk about things you know about, but this is not the case here, you talk about Temujin and Timur who were totally different from Iran and even Urban civilization in general. two completely different worlds. adn about Transoxania, of course i knwo abotu teh cultural influence of iran voer Transoxania, however at the time in question (13th to 15th century) Transoxania was more Turkic than iranic, and Timrus empire was not an Iranian but a Transoxanian that used to include Iran.

and about double standard: the thirty years war from 1618-1648 killed 1/3 of German population, that is much more than WW2, yet no one blames Swedes or French as mass-murderers....

Back to Top
Hushyar View Drop Down
Consul
Consul


Joined: 16-Apr-2005
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 301
  Quote Hushyar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Jun-2005 at 07:51

This discussion is funny, It was started with population then leadd to Turks brutality then Timur brutality and now Mongols.

Originally posted by Temujin


but do you really believe in a statement like "he slaughtered both humans and animals"? I mean if you loook at nomad society you'll see that they almost completely live of animals, in fact animals are almost sacred to them and the killing of their animals was almsot ritualized. I personally believe the author of this source just stated that in order to show the brutality of Mongols, I don't think we can take that literally, or do you also believe that the kings of Makedonia were really the descendands of Greek gods when Herodot writes so in his texts?

I just give the data, Interpretating is another story,I just give you some example:
In History of Vesaf "When mongols invaded the Beyhaq ( a small town near Neyshabur) mongol soldiers complained to their commanders that why they must kill slaves instead of using them, their commander siad that Sobotay is comming after us and will reach here in just two days, if he will hear a dog bark, all of our families will be enslaved"
Another example is Ibn Asir:
Mongols after razing Neishabur and its village , killed Mulex and oxes so that nobody could live there again
And Rashiddin complained that shortage of mules and oxes and sheeps in khorasan is because of extinction all of these animals in Time of Changiz.
These may be exaggeration although maybe those stories that tells about killing 600,000 in Samarqand or 1,500,000 in Neyshabur or 1,000,000 in Heart or similar numbers are exaggerated specially each source gave different data but.
Theses numbers and Stories show that Mongols massacre style was different and unique  and  had no similarities not before and not next. So you can not compare Mongol genocide with other conquerors, They didnt came for plunder or punishing, They came for extinction and thats why even Timur could not wipe the mongol picture from minds of people.


another thing you should look at in this case is the other side of the story, the Steppe point of view. Mongols (Timur not so much as he was semi-nomadic) lived of their own pastrues and the Steppe alone, but once a big tribal confederation is formed, the Nomads have to look for new lands in order to survive, this means extensive plunder of foreign lands.

It is true and actually History of central Asia is defined by war between Pastoral life and settled Life. But I ask a question? Were Mongols the only nomads who invade central Asia or Iran or China or Russia? Saljuqs were nomads too, They conquered Iran and Anatolia, Why Tughrol or Alparsalan or Malikshah are not hatred kings but Temuchin is, one of the most hatred kings of all history, So we can not say that it was just hate of Nomads from Settled life. Temuchin policy was to exterminate any traces of civilized life on its path Why?
Well Its just my opinion , maybe his initial difficulties in north of china frightened him that only his brilliancy of commandership could defeat Chinese and at last Chinese with their more number would sweep his empire, may be He was frightened from His nation by assimilating in conquered nation loses its power and even its existence, may be he thought for establishing a permanent empire, so he must convert any civilized to desert so that his Yasa be only law that is obeyed. I dont know but looking at wars between his succesors Qubilay and Hulaku for defence of civilized life from one side and other mongol leaders to support of nomad life may show that Temuchin Doctrine was hostility towards any form of civilized life and extinction of any form of it.


I fail to see why other sources can eb inconsistent but your sources are automatcially 100% true? and yes, Nomads usually don't write down their history...one of the reasons being majority of Nomads don't had alphabets at all, however Temjin did introduce an alphabet to Mongols, so you can't say they were barbaric at all, he also made use of islamic and chinese advisors, also uncommon for a barbarian...

The barbaric is rational actually Tasmanains had civilization, Actually every human society has its own civilization, I used term barbaric for mongols just because they were hostile to any form of settled civilization (except using craftsmen and also using their experience in conquering a city or castle) and tried to vanish it.
And sources ,when I spoke about sources I mean first hand sources ,you dont accept Islamic sources , so refer to Chinese sources, refer to European sources,I know atleast one Chinese source of that time: Men-xun and one European source plano Karpini do you know other sources which refer to the same time: you can refer to it. I dont think It make any difference.


well, you said yourself you only talk about Iran becasue you only talk about things you know about, but this is not the case here, you talk about Temujin and Timur who were totally different from Iran and even Urban civilization in general. two completely different worlds.

a)I said that I speak about Islamic civilization because I have access to first hand sources this does not mean that I have no knowledge about  general world history , but in this field (general world history) my knowledge is like yours ( some contemporary books, Internet, Encyclopedias ) and this kind of knowledge is not deep and may lead person to conclude hastily (like you).
b)Timur belongs to Islamic history and all of sources about him are in Persian and Arabic (and one or two Jaghatayee book, Foma Metsopi an Armenian historian, and treaties of Klavikho)
c)I spoke about effect of Mongols on Islamic civilization to show that Mongols used ethnic cleaning and so He is different from other killers and could be equaled to Hitler.
But I knew that Chinese and Western sources also  will confirm me.


and about Transoxania, of course i knwo abotu teh cultural influence of iran voer Transoxania, however at the time in question (13th to 15th century) Transoxania was more Turkic than iranic, and Timrus empire was not an Iranian but a Transoxanian that used to include Iran.

I said:

I again  repeat that between 9th century to Mongol invasion transxosania was culturally part of  Iran.

There is no contradiction between what I said and what you claimed, but If you have doubt about Before Mongol Invasion ,again read my previous post. I think I have proved it , and If you want I can gave you another proofs.


and about double standard: the thirty years war from 1618-1648 killed 1/3 of German population, that is much more than WW2, yet no one blames Swedes or French as mass-murderers....

you again make me to label my quotes:

a)In thrity years war population of Germany was decreased from 11 to 12 million people to 8 million or from 20 million to 13.5 million ( from internet and Will Durrant, and Encyclopedias). This war lasted for 30 years and German soldiers were responsible as French , Spanish or Swedish soldiers. This is a duration of life a generation and may be more of it was because of  decrease of child birth or increase of death rate between childs.
b)In  mongol Invasion we had two phase 1)Invasion Itself which lasted only 2 years (Actually 1 year) and the other year was war between Jalaleddin and Mongols In Parwan and Sind battles. In This short Period we can not think to famine or disease.And majority of massacres took place in this short period. In the second phase 2) After Mongol Invasion until 10 to 20 years Transxosania  and Khorasan remained unpopulated because as I said before:

Iran was agricultural country, but Iran is also is a semi desert country, It means for having agriculture there must be elaborate networks of irrigation,(which was one of the most important works of local governments),By killing  majority peoples and exterminating the any instuition (before Holagu khan) there was no repair in irrigation networks and the result was famine which emptied khorasan even more.Khorasn which was the richest province in Iran before mongol invasion, never could achieve the former situation. Central Asia which was one of the most advanced places of world in 10th,11th and 12 century, became  and still is a most backward places of world.

Conclusion: Invasion of Mongols was nothing except disaster for civilized people in China Iran and Eastern Europe and the only role they played was to drawing back History in their conquered lands (I am not speaking about steppes) .

Back to Top
HulaguHan View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 26-Jan-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 370
  Quote HulaguHan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Jun-2005 at 14:39

Hushyar,

10 centuries ago, in Eastern Turkestan there was no significant difference. If you observe it carefully, main difference between todays Western Turkestan and Mongolia is, first one is influenced by Iranian culture while the latter is Chinese.

Like you said Qirqiz or Kirghiz (Turkik) tribes collapsed the Kaghanate of Uighurs. And ended the Uighur Empire.

Tu-c'hueh and Uighur tribes are completely different with respect to politics. Latter one is  a descendant of Hunnic branch like Avars and Khazars. Uighur domination ended but Tu-c'hueh existance did not.

Cenghis took the title of Kaghan from a tribe called Keraits. Both people spoke the same languages in that time with different dialects.

While claiming two different nations, you should show us the differences. Today Mongolians consider the Tu-c'hueh as their ancestors. Protect Orkhun tablets.

The difference of Mongolians and Turks came with Cenghis Kaghans invasions actually. Still many historians in Turkey dislike, moreover hate Mongolians, because they fought against Islam. The Mongols who chose Sunni Islam as a religion is considered by the most respected (!!!!) Turkish historian, Kamuran Gurun. This idiot considers converting to Shiite Islam as Iranification. Well history is one thing we could not do manage to do in our past.

But for example I am a Timur fan , I read his life, and he is a fierce Turkish nationalist who wants to first convert all Turks to Islam then attack China. He considers non-muslim Turkiks who are not referred as Mongols as Turks. In those days, a difference in the languages would be realisable. Dude if you want to analyze who are Turks, I suggest all of you, concentrate on Timur.

Yes there was a great hate in the WESTERN islamic Turkish world to the brothers came from Mongolia (That land was supposed to be called Eastern Turkestan, but somehow when we see Cenghis destroying Samarkand, its name suddenly appears to be Mongolia).

On many accounts, Timurlenk is insulted as Mongolian who were a devout Muslim and a fierced Turkish nationalist, by Ottomans !!!!.

This civil discrimination sh*t, off course broke the lines between the Oghuz tribes who are in Iran and Anatolia, Western Turkestan and Eastern Turkestan. Eastern Turkestan except Uighurs (Their civilized life together with Islam helped them to protect their identity) became almost Chinified. Poor Mongols, left to their fate was lost.

Timur made campaigns on the nonmuslim Turkiks, such as Uzbeks and others. Both were called Mongolian at that era. Grousset mentions this issue. Later Uzbeks embraced Islam. Now they are considered as Turkik.

Now let me tell you what are the major divisions of Turkiks.

1) Xiong Nu

2) Tu-c'hueh (They took the name Turk for the first time)

3) Qitans

The horde which Mongols are related to is Hitays on many sources. But in truth, Qitans are ancestors of Uzbeks, like Grousset mentions. The inhabitants of Tu-'c' hueh are the ancestors of Mongolians now.

Turn back to Huns, Uighurs, Avars and Khazars are their true descendants. Oghuz are also believed to be Hunnic origined Turkiks.

This is a very hazy topic because as I said, we made history, but wrote nothing.

Still there are religious discrimination in Turkey. Like you mentioned about the Khurasani Turkomans. THey are not regarded as Turkik in Turkey by many illiteral islam fanatics nor a muslim.

I remember Ataturk once said, a nation which does not know its history is doomed to fail.

I am not bullsh*tting by saying Mongolians are also Turkik. I know the mind and thoughts of the very person who divides the nation into Mongolian and turkik.

You know what, this Kamuran Gurun dude and many other islamist Turkish historians, claim Samanids are pure Turkik. What say you?  hahahahahahah

Do not worry, every able minded people knows they are pure Iranian.

 



Edited by HulaguHan
Back to Top
HulaguHan View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 26-Jan-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 370
  Quote HulaguHan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Jun-2005 at 14:42

Temujin, Transoxiana is historically Iranian. Tu-c'hueh just invaded there. and lost it after approximately 100 years from the invasion. And that place remained non Turkik until the Qarakhanid Invasion.

All central Asia belongs to us dude, like Central Europe belongs to Germanics.

Back to Top
HulaguHan View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 26-Jan-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 370
  Quote HulaguHan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Jun-2005 at 14:47

Up to what I know no phylologist until now proved completely that Turkic and Mongolian languages have common roots.

That is very strange, what type of phylologic root are you searching? I assure you I do not understand Kazakh, Turcoman, Kirghiz and Uzbek languages too.

We are far more influenced by Anatolian Iranians which are Armenians and Kurds; in some south-eastern cities Arabic; and off course mainly Greko-Roman cultures.

Mongolia is a landlocked region, like Kazakhs were Russianified, they were Chinified. Today we can not say Mongolians and Turkey Turks are the same people. Turkey Turks are now completely out of Turkik nation, as far as I am concerned. We have mixed with people so much. People here like Ihsan claims there were no mixings. I am not an Ottoman society lover, but results are accurately seen.  Turks do not have that Mongoloid appearance now.



Edited by HulaguHan
Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor

Suspended

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792
  Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Jun-2005 at 15:01
Tajikistan is part of Central Asia and it isn't Turkic .  I have noticed abundant though faint mongoloid features in turkish (anatolian) people and in some Iranian populations. 
Back to Top
HulaguHan View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 26-Jan-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 370
  Quote HulaguHan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Jun-2005 at 22:14

Originally posted by Zagros Purya

Tajikistan is part of Central Asia and it isn't Turkic .  I have noticed abundant though faint mongoloid features in turkish (anatolian) people and in some Iranian populations. 

Yes , sorry, it is my mistake. Well, I think, we should add Iranic Soghdians, the natives of Transoxiana also.

And, I am not sure, but I have never met a Pan Turkist Turkik racist here. but TBH, I want to tell what I know, and discuss with you.

I saw people who disliked and Iranified the tribes who became Shiite (even in the times of Arab dominated Shiite days like Il Khanids).  Il Khanids embraces islam after learning it from their ARABIC SERVANTS!!!!!!!! And that bastard says, Il Khanids prefered to be Iranic.

Zagros Purya, out of many in Turkey, in the beginning our historians suck.  

Back to Top
Hushyar View Drop Down
Consul
Consul


Joined: 16-Apr-2005
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 301
  Quote Hushyar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Jun-2005 at 02:10

I realy dont want to speak about turks ,Mongols and central Asia because It is a complicated problem and knowing old Turkic languages and specially Chinese language is perquisite but you.

Originally posted by HulaguHan


I am a Timur fan

I am sorry for you

Dude if you want to analyze who are Turks, I suggest all of you, concentrate on Timur.

I am sorry for Turks too !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1


he is a fierce Turkish nationalist

No he was not, If he was , I was very sorry for Turkish nationalist

 


Yes there was a great hate in the WESTERN islamic Turkish world to the brothers came from Mongolia

 Brothers!!!!!!!! Oh yes


That land was supposed to be called Eastern Turkestan, but somehow when we see Cenghis destroying Samarkand, its name suddenly appears to be Mongolia).

Man where do you find these theories??


Timur made campaigns on the nonmuslim Turkiks, such as Uzbeks and others. Both were called Mongolian at that era


Grousset mentions this issue

Poor Grousset, if he was alive and saw what you quoted from Him, he..

Later Uzbeks embraced Islam. Now they are considered as Turkik.

So being Turkic is too easy.


Now let me tell you what are the major divisions of Turkiks

Xiong Nu
2) Tu-c'hueh (They took the name Turk for the first time)
3) Qitans


I think you are the first man that find this classification.

The horde which Mongols are related to is Hitays on many sources. But in truth, Qitans are ancestors of Uzbeks, like Grousset mentions. The inhabitants of Tu-'c' hueh are the ancestors of Mongolians now

a)Please dont mention Grousset , His body under tomb trembles
b)How do you find these stories?


Turn back to Huns, Uighurs, Avars and Khazars are their true descendants. Oghuz are also believed to be Hunnic origined Turkiks.

Ok Hulagu what do you want me to say you? 


I remember Ataturk once said, a nation which does not know its history is doomed to fail

.
I am against it. Actually backward people who has nothing except their past came and only speak about their history, Look youngs , adults and oldmen ,which of them does speak about their past?

You know what, this Kamuran Gurun dude and many other islamist Turkish historians,
claim Samanids are pure Turkik. What say you

Good for them!!!!!!!


Do not worry, every able minded people knows they are pure Iranian

.Good for them too!!!!!!!!



That is very strange, what type of phylologic root are you searching? I assure you I do not understand Kazakh, Turcoman, Kirghiz and Uzbek languages too

I didnt mean you, I said linguistics up until now could not prove that Turkic language group and Mongolian language group belong to same language family , I mean , it is not proven that they had a common ancestor.


We are far more influenced by Anatolian Iranians which are Armenians and Kurds

Armenain are not Iranic
I dont think Kurds have much effect on Turks.


Back to discussion , It is very difficult to trace your discussion so I arrange and number your claims and try to answer them.you claimed that:
1)Turks and Mongols were same people and even you said Cenghis took the title of Kaghan from a tribe called Keraits. Both people spoke the same languages in that time with different dialects.
2) Latter one is  a descendant of Hunnic branch like Avars and Khazars. Uighur domination ended but Tu-c'hueh existance did not.
Turn back to Huns, Uighurs, Avars and Khazars are their true descendants. Oghuz are also believed to be Hunnic origined Turkiks.

3)You said Amir Timur was a great Turkish nationalist and
Timurlenk is insulted as Mongolian who were a devout Muslim and a fierced Turkish nationalist, by Ottomans !!!!.
4) Timur made campaigns on the nonmuslim Turkiks, such as Uzbeks and others. Both were called Mongolian at that era. Grousset mentions this issue. Later Uzbeks embraced Islam. Now they are considered as Turkik.


Answers:
1)Turks and Mongols are completely different peoples and have different ancestors, their language are different and no one up to now could find any way to relate these language together.(they had 200 -300 common words and their language forms are similar which can be related to borrowing).And while Turkic languages in 12 century ago were very like each other and could be easily understood, Mongolian and Turkic language were completely different language even in time of Changiz or any time before it.
First traced of turks related to southern Siberia while Mongol  migrated to Mongolia from Western Manchuria and Eastern Mongolia.
2)Huns, Xiung-nues and Gokturks were great steppe Empires that ruled many Tribal federations. These does not mean that those tribes were their descendants. When Huns invaded Europe they Subdued many German tribes and In challon too many German Tribes were Huns allies. Does it mean that Germans are descendants of Huns?
If  by Tu-chueh you mean the original Tribe federation that founded Gokturk Empire, I must say that After Qirqizes invaded Mongolia and Uighurs fled to Turfan, Tu-chueh disappeared.
And oghuzes alike Uighurs belonged to Tie _le federation that Chinese named them Gao-che, and they were different from those who found Xiung-Nu . Avars are complete different story and khazars were a different Tribal confederation that maybe ruled by Huns or GokTurks but they were seperate peoples.
Khitans were Mongols and Xiung Nues didnt have any descendants (Except maybe Huns)
3)Timur in his time is not considered as Mongol but as Tatar which was a name given to all Turks who lived outside middle east.(wether Muslim or not)
And in 1400 speaking a thing as Turkish nationalism is meaningless.
4)You completely got confused about Uzbeks. Uzbek was the name of one of the Shibani khaqans who was mongol. His descendants through the time became Turkifed and muslim. When Mohammad Shibek khan one of his descendants invaded Transxosia and khorasan and founded Uzbek khanates, At that time in Transxosnia prevelant language was Jaghatayi language  (very similar to Uighur language) then this language formed modern Uzbek language and those people became modern Uzbek nation. I mean Timur actually ruled on Uzbeks (of course at that time they were not called uzbaks) so he could not invade them. If you mean Shibani Khanates well they were Muslim at that time and maybe spoke a Qipchaq dialect  language at that time.



While claiming two different nations, you should show us the differences. Today Mongolians consider the Tu-c'hueh as their ancestors. Protect Orkhun tablets

When peoples of Mongolia clame that Gokturk empire belongs to them ,they mean that Turks and Mongols together formed the Gokturk empire, And it is true that Turkic tribes were Dominoat in that Empire but this empire centered in Mongolia and it is considered on of the heritages of Mongolia.
Like In Iran We consider safavids are Iranian (not Iranic) at the same time founders of this dynasty spoke  Azari so What? This does not mean that we are descendants of safavids neither means that safavids belongs to people of Turkey.


Hulagu I have no special knowledge about Turkic History there is a room in Steppe  and Central Asia that you can discuss it with other members who surely had more knowledge than me in this specific field.

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>

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.