Print Page | Close Window

Chingis Turkish or not

Printed From: History Community ~ All Empires
Category: Regional History or Period History
Forum Name: Ethnic History of Central Asia
Forum Discription: Discussions about the ethnic origins of Central Asian peoples. All topics related to ethnicity should go here.
URL: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=14162
Printed Date: 25-Apr-2024 at 08:31
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: Chingis Turkish or not
Posted By: Nestorian
Subject: Chingis Turkish or not
Date Posted: 20-Aug-2006 at 09:53

Someone once said Chingis was a Turk kidnapped and raised as a Mongol?

 
Comments??


-------------
Isa al-Masih, both God and Man, divine and human, flesh and spirit, saviour, servant and sovereign



Replies:
Posted By: barbar
Date Posted: 20-Aug-2006 at 10:51
Legend says that a blue eyed man came from the sky and then the mother of the Chengizhan was pregnant. Some people say this man might be Qirghiz.  Among Chengizhans sons  only Qubiley had black hair, then Chengizhan commented that "Qubiley looked like his uncles".  That means Chengizhan didn't look like his brothers.
 
That doesn't matter actually.  Chengizhan was Mongol, he was raised in Mongol society, and united the Mongol tribes and became the leader of the Mongols, and created a new history for the Mongols.
 


-------------
Either make a history or become a history.


Posted By: xi_tujue
Date Posted: 20-Aug-2006 at 16:17
Originally posted by forum.uz

Genghis khan had some cauasian blood in him.
 
He can be considered as half cauasian half asian.
yeah right 50-50  he might have some caucasian some


-------------
I rather be a nomadic barbarian than a sedentary savage


Posted By: Toluy
Date Posted: 22-Aug-2006 at 01:00
Tartar are turks or not?


Posted By: xi_tujue
Date Posted: 24-Aug-2006 at 06:18
Originally posted by Toluy

Tartar are turks or not?
 
yep kipchack turks


-------------
I rather be a nomadic barbarian than a sedentary savage


Posted By: tadamson
Date Posted: 25-Aug-2006 at 06:07
Originally posted by Toluy

Tartar are turks or not?


? which Tartar ?   the term has been widely used for various steppe peoples.


-------------
rgds.

      Tom..


Posted By: Snafu
Date Posted: 25-Aug-2006 at 18:30
Turkic and Mongol people interacted so much in those days that's it's impossible to separate the two. No one on the steppe was "pure" Turkic or "pure" Mongol. Every tribe had Turkic and Mongol people in it and most nomads had mixed ancestry. So it's pretty silly to argue who was Turkic and who was Mongol. They were both. They were Turco-Mongols.


Posted By: barbar
Date Posted: 27-Aug-2006 at 11:28
 
Although they were quite mixed with each other to some degree, they were distinct from each other all through the history.  


-------------
Either make a history or become a history.


Posted By: The Charioteer
Date Posted: 27-Aug-2006 at 15:53
at least to me, he doesnt look Turkish at all


-------------


Posted By: Afsar Beghi
Date Posted: 27-Aug-2006 at 16:57
Originally posted by The Charioteer

at least to me, he doesnt look Turkish at all


he looks turkic , and i think the topic owner should change his topic title , turkish and turkic are two different things!


-------------
Dadaloğlum bir gun kavga kurulur,
Oter tufek davlumbazlar vurulur,
Nice koç yiğitler yere serilir,
Olen ölür kalan sağlar bizimdir!


Posted By: Akskl
Date Posted: 27-Aug-2006 at 22:15
Genghis Khan on this portrait looks like a typical Kazakh Turk. I look in the mirror and I see the same face - only younger one. LOL
He was kind of Kazakh Turk - not a Khalkha Mongol.
 All settled Turk peoples  - like Turks of Turkey, various Tatars (Kazan, Astrakhan, Sibir, Crimean, etc.), Uzbeks, Uyghurs, Caucasus  Turks, etc., and even many non-Turkic peoples - Ukraininans, Iranians, Southern and Eastern Russians, Northern Chinese, Northern Indians, Balkan Bulgars, Romanians, etc. - all are results of mixing, metisation between Turkic nomads and local conquered settled peoples during many centuries of total military domination of the Turkic Steppe nomads on the periphery of the Great Steppe - great Eurasian belt between Danube river and Yellow sea. All these new mixed peoples  adopted all the settled culture of the local settled peoples. Sometimes Turkic language prevailed (in some distorted local dialectic form), sometimes - not.

Direct descendants of the Turkic nomads today are Kazakhs, very close to us (and almost totally exterminated by Russians) Noghays,  Steppe or Northern Crimean Tatars  (who  are in fact Noghays, too, and also almost totally exterminated),  very close to Kazakhs Uzbek nomads (who are not urban Sarts!) and Kyrghyzs, Turkmens, and maybe, Bashkirs, who are mixture of Turkic nomads and local Ugro-Finns.


Posted By: Erdene
Date Posted: 28-Aug-2006 at 07:01
GK does not look like a TURK or TURKIC....why do some TURKS try to implie that GK was a TURK or TURKIC.  He is a Mongolian just like ME!Thumbs Up

-------------


Posted By: barbar
Date Posted: 28-Aug-2006 at 10:21
Because some present Turks (Qazaqs) look also like Mongolian. Most of the decendants of CK became Turkic. They can't accept the fact that they are mixed with Mongols (I don't know why), so what they can do is try to claim the Mongols in CK time also Turkic, and justify their silly claim that they are pure Turkic. While others are mixed. Remember Nursultan Nezerbayev said "I'm pure Turk, Turks in Turkey are hybrids".

In Uyghur region, Qazaq people are mainly from the two tribes: Naiman and Kereyit. Naiman considered to be Sekkiz oghuz , but the name itsef is Mongolian word for eight. Why they use a mongol word as the name of the tribe? Kereyit always had very close relations with the Mongols. Historians clearly mentioned Naimans and Kereyits are racially quite different, Kereyits had strong Mongoloid feature.

Who are Qazaqs then? Qazaq considered to be the group who    seperated from the Uzbek ulus. Actually, all the Turkic Qipchaq people, who didn't have linage were called Qazaq. Why they didn't have ancestral linage? Remember the turkified Mongol people after the collapses of the Hords who became wonderers in the steppe of Deshti Qipchaq.   


-------------
Either make a history or become a history.


Posted By: Seko
Date Posted: 28-Aug-2006 at 10:56
The Oghuz are said to be named after the Madun, aka Mete (Oguz Han). The name also meant 'Turkic Tribes'.

The Sekiz Oghuz means - Eight Turk Tribes. Designation of numbers represents a union of tribes. Usually each union had specific territories they govererned. Yes, the Sekiz Oghuz are identified later as the Naimans. A Mongolized name of a Turkic union of tribes.

Even if the numbers have current Mongolian usage it still dates back to a time where the Turks used it prior to the Mengwu Shiwei.

The Orhon inscriptions lists the Oghuz unions as part of the GokTurks.

If my memory serves me correctly, I think it was the Uyghurs who served the Mongol administration with its written language.


    
    
    

-------------


Posted By: gok_toruk
Date Posted: 28-Aug-2006 at 11:38

(I've told you before), if we have to look for Mongolfied people, why we should just refer to Turks? Mongols ruled everywhere through Asia to Europe. So, how come we should expect such a mixture just among Turks?

By the way, Aq Saqal could use the same sentence over you: 'because most of Uighur are Caucaid (they're not totally), so they think all Turks are Caucaid'.
 
And about Kereyits, maybe you should revise your sentence that they had good relationship with Mongols. A great part of Kereyits escaped Chengiz Khan and came to Turkmens. You can find the tribe (and family names) Kerey among Turkmens.


-------------
Sajaja bramani totari ta, raitata raitata, radu ridu raitata, rota.


Posted By: barbar
Date Posted: 03-Sep-2006 at 12:58
Originally posted by Seko

The Oghuz are said to be named after the Madun, aka Mete (Oguz Han). The name also meant 'Turkic Tribes'.

The Sekiz Oghuz means - Eight Turk Tribes. Designation of numbers represents a union of tribes. Usually each union had specific territories they govererned. Yes, the Sekiz Oghuz are identified later as the Naimans. A Mongolized name of a Turkic union of tribes.

Even if the numbers have current Mongolian usage it still dates back to a time where the Turks used it prior to the Mengwu Shiwei.

The Orhon inscriptions lists the Oghuz unions as part of the GokTurks.

If my memory serves me correctly, I think it was the Uyghurs who served the Mongol administration with its written language.


    
    
    
 
I think you misunderstood me. I didn't say Oghuzs are not Turkic. Naiman to be considered as sekkiz oghuz are a theory. What I mean here is that they called themselves as Naiman, which is clear Mongol word. This surely shows their relation, to some level, to the Mongols.  I took these two examples as they were originally also considered to be Turkic. What I mean is even they are quite influenced by Mongols, let alone the other true  Mongol tribes to be part of Qipchaq Turks.
 
Uyghur were good allies of Mongols. Still we Uyghurs never think Mongols to have a common ancestors as us, maybe because we know Mongols better than other Turkic people. Maybe because we know our history better.
 


-------------
Either make a history or become a history.


Posted By: barbar
Date Posted: 03-Sep-2006 at 13:09
Originally posted by gok_toruk

(I've told you before), if we have to look for Mongolfied people, why we should just refer to Turks? Mongols ruled everywhere through Asia to Europe. So, how come we should expect such a mixture just among Turks?

By the way, Aq Saqal could use the same sentence over you: 'because most of Uighur are Caucaid (they're not totally), so they think all Turks are Caucaid'.
 
And about Kereyits, maybe you should revise your sentence that they had good relationship with Mongols. A great part of Kereyits escaped Chengiz Khan and came to Turkmens. You can find the tribe (and family names) Kerey among Turkmens.
 
I hope you don't have memory problem, as I answered to your this  question before.
 
It's very simple, the same life style (Nomadic) made mongols to mix with nomadic Turkic people than other settled groups.
 
I said Turkic tribes originally caucausoid based on the Historical and archeological  fact. I didn't deny our mixing with indo-europeans and some mongolic people. Now check Aqskl rubbish.
 
You need to learn history more. Kereyit had very good relation with Mongols. Toghul was the something like godfather to Chengizkhan. It was later that Chengizhan defeated kereyit.
 
So you have Kereyit families among Turkmans, that also explain why some of the Turkmans look Mongolic.
 
 
 


-------------
Either make a history or become a history.


Posted By: gok_toruk
Date Posted: 04-Sep-2006 at 01:57
First, read my posts again. This is the problem you always have got. You said Kereyit had a good relationship with Mongols and I said no, cause part of them escaped Chengiz Khan and came to Turkmens.

I've quoted a few lines from J.J. Sanders and how he thinks about ethnicity of Kereyits. Why don't you check it in 'Mongols'?

Shouldn't we expect some Mongoloid that was born during invasion? I mean people like bastards?

So because you have Caucaid looks, explians Turks ar caucaid?
 
I may need to study history more; but I definately don't need your advice.
 
As for stating idea, AqSaqal's quite right.


-------------
Sajaja bramani totari ta, raitata raitata, radu ridu raitata, rota.


Posted By: Forgotten
Date Posted: 04-Sep-2006 at 21:21
Originally posted by Snafu

Turkic and Mongol people interacted so much in those days that's it's impossible to separate the two. No one on the steppe was "pure" Turkic or "pure" Mongol. Every tribe had Turkic and Mongol people in it and most nomads had mixed ancestry. So it's pretty silly to argue who was Turkic and who was Mongol. They were both. They were Turco-Mongols.
 
  let us not forget that we cant compare the numbers of the mongols with the numbers of the turks "all groups" the mongols were much much less so its not true to say that the mongols efficted the physical apearnce of the all turks , temujin "which is turkic name" was lucky when he united his few monol tribes and started to fight the turkic tribes one by one while they were fighting each other.


Posted By: gok_toruk
Date Posted: 05-Sep-2006 at 16:53

Nice to hear somebody agrees with me here, Forgotton. I've always said mongols were very less, compared to Turks, in number. So, even if all Mongols migrated from Mongolia, they couldn't change all Turks' physical characteristics.



-------------
Sajaja bramani totari ta, raitata raitata, radu ridu raitata, rota.


Posted By: Forgotten
Date Posted: 05-Sep-2006 at 20:18
Originally posted by gok_toruk

Nice to hear somebody agrees with me here, Forgotton. I've always said mongols were very less, compared to Turks, in number. So, even if all Mongols migrated from Mongolia, they couldn't change all Turks' physical characteristics.

 
 Yes , The Mongol Tribes Population Cant Be Compared Even To One Of The Turkic Groups On That Period Of Time , i Wonder Why All The Eastern Europes Speacially Nowdays Russia Didnt Got Mongolized During The Days Of The Huns ! The Iranians During The Days Of The Mongols , Seljuks And Timur ! Why No One Is Talking About That ? Why They Dont Have Mongol Features ?
 
 its Totally Wrong To Say That All The Turkic Tribes Got Mixed With The Mongol Tribes , Let Us Remember That Not All The Turkic Tribes Fought The Mongols , Some Of Them Did And Some Of Them Were Allies.
 


Posted By: gok_toruk
Date Posted: 06-Sep-2006 at 08:10
That's all I wanted to mention and use to state original Turks were not Caucaid.

-------------
Sajaja bramani totari ta, raitata raitata, radu ridu raitata, rota.


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 07-Sep-2006 at 08:05

Originally posted by gok_toruk

That's all I wanted to mention and use to state original Turks were not Caucaid.

 

What an interesting ,funny idea !!!!!!!!!!!Wow ....



Posted By: gok_toruk
Date Posted: 07-Sep-2006 at 13:37
I didn't talk to you Baladcci; mind your own business.

-------------
Sajaja bramani totari ta, raitata raitata, radu ridu raitata, rota.



Print Page | Close Window

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz - http://www.webwizguide.com