The Mughals who ruled India were from Turkic origins and not Mongols. But the word "Mughal" is the transcription of "Mongol". Why??? Because at this time, the prestige of Gengis Khan was still so great among nomadic people that all nomadic leaders claimed they descended directly from the Great Conqueror: Timur Lang, Babur, etc. Also "Mongol" became for many submitted people a synonym for "nomadic invaders from the steppes". Same thing for "Tatars" (= nomadic tribes from the steppes of Turkic and Mongol elements) for Russians and Eastern Europeans.

Same phenomenon when the German Confederation in the Middle Ages refered to himself as the "Holy Roman Empire": it thought it was the continuation of the Great Roman Empire.

because it was the Roman Empire for some time...

but the Moghuls were indeed Mongols that later became culturally Islamic Turko-Persian. Timur was from a Mongol clan, that's prooven.

The Holy Roman Empire of German nations was the Roman Empire for some time??? Let me laugh!

Voltaire as a joke, said that it has nothing Holy, nothing Roman and nothing of an Empire. It was just a Confederation of German nations.

Mongol nationalists say that it is proven that Timur was from a Mongol, like Turkic nationalists say he was Turkic. How many percent Mongol or Turkic blood is enough for these nationalist pricks to prove the filiation to their own culture? It is just a stupid debate, Mongol people do not need Timur to be a great nation, Mongolia was a great nation in the past like Turkic nations (Uighur for instance). Now Mongolia and Turkic states are at the bottom of everything, and stupid nationalists like Temujin needs Timur (a great man in the great World history) to prove themselves, but Timur and Gengis would be afraid of you, Temujin, to be afraid to have you as a fan!

I will not debate on Timur or Babur's lineage because this topic is reserved to searchers and experts.

My point is: even if he descended from Gengis, how many percent of Mongol blood did he still have in his body?

Every body here must understand that the Mongols at that time were EXOGAMOUS: there was no problem for them to take foreign women as wifes. So stop the f*ck about blood and lineage, and just consider the cultural heritage of the Mongols: nomadic invaders liked to be called "Mongols/Mughals" because it was a sign of respect for the great Mongol conquerors. Just like the German nations respected the Great Roman Empire. That's just as simple as this!

searchers and experts? so you're an expert on teh HRE?

and what exactily is wrong with Baburs lineage? it's clearly larely Mongol, so what's your problem at all?

Well, this forum on history seems to be polluted by nationalist brains. To all, and for people from Mongolian origins (maybe are they Buddhist too, and would they understand me), I would like to say that you do not need this such small detail (were Timur and Babur Mongol?) to say that your culture was and is rich.

Your ancestors were wise to marry with people from different cultures and to embrace different religions. Do not disappoint them by your nationalistic brains!

nationalist? so tell me what Babur was? Afghan?

All I know is that Babur was related to Ghengis Khan, or so he claimed. The Mongols, after decades of conquest and rule, had mixed with those they conquered. It wouldn't be surprising if he could be Turkish, Persian and Mongol.

Location: Egypt

Really?

Originally posted by Ptolemy Location: Egypt Really?

no, Germany.

guys, please. we're talking here about the dynasty, not the genetical pool of the rulers, nor the people subejct to them. please tell me a sin gle royal family in history that was NTO of mixed blood? since they're royal it's logical that they marry nobles from other coutnries, but sicne when does that change the dynastic line? I mean were the Valois Austrian just becasue they regularly married Habsburg princesses?

Gabriel, the theory of Mughals being "descendants of Mongols" is no "nationalist rhetoric" but just a universal theory. It would be natural for even an uneducated anti-Mongol person to think so considering that the world Mughal means "Mongol" and they look so similar.

I agree with your basic point though- the cultural heritage was more important than the blood.

For the matter, a large sector of Uzbek society is descended from Mongols according to the book Taliban by Ahmed Rashid.

"Every body here must understand that the Mongols at that time were EXOGAMOUS: there was no problem for them to take foreign women as wifes. So stop the f*ck about blood and lineage, and just consider the cultural heritage of the Mongols: nomadic invaders liked to be called "Mongols/Mughals" because it was a sign of respect for the great Mongol conquerors. Just like the German nations respected the Great Roman Empire. That's just as simple as this!"

Please don't swear.