|
Post by Yazig on Apr 25, 2012 23:53:45 GMT 3
This thread is useless. Why is it even here? Alexander is from Macedonia. This has nothing to do with steppe people. He only fought them.
|
|
|
Post by choronzon on May 25, 2012 13:49:35 GMT 3
Let me also write my own opinion. Chingishan bears wider universality than Aleksander, he even surpassed in some ways Attila the Hun. And in terms of warrior spirit, Aleksandr’s army bleaking besides Hunns and Chingis han’s army. Even let them have poor armour but due to higher morale nomads would definitely win the war with Aleksandr. Chingishan throughout his career wasn’t inflicted by any defeat and he was successor of his predecessor Attila. They were chosen by supernatural powers to wage successful wars against ill-luck.They came from the same ancestor Oguz Han– huns deified him as god of war,according to legends Oguz Han’s army was guided by wolves, wolves were totems of nomads, actually the word “oguz” has more ancient origin which means in shamanistic terms as the “source of all being”, “the primeordial state of all being” later on Oguz Han was worshipped as god of war: Oguz- Chaos. According to legends Attila the Hun found the sword of god of war-Chaos (his grand ancestor Oguz Han’s) thus the rule over the world was given to Attila by supernatural powers. Success in warfare went all along with hunns. Only near the Rome hunns were defeated by deseases, we may call it was inflicted by god of war “Nurgle”, Chaos-Nurgle God of Disease,Decay that orchestrates plagues, diseases and wins indirectly simply through the plagues that sweep whole armies but god Chaos-Khorne (who acts by massacring others, preferring in close combat) was apparently on hunns side and helped hunns to win Catalaunian battle. Chingishan wasn’t defeated by any plauges (as Aleksandr died from unknown desease) neither lost any battle. No doubt we may put Chingishan on more higher position than Aleksandr, and that Chingishan would win Aleksandr it’s indisputable.
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on May 26, 2012 12:39:04 GMT 3
Oghuz Khan was not a real person.
|
|
|
Post by hjernespiser on May 26, 2012 19:57:34 GMT 3
There's a theory that the word "oguz" (and oghur) actually is a term meaning something like a military/political unit originating from the old Xiongnu system of arrows. Nomadic empires made divisions of people rather than territory. On the one hand people belonged to a "bone" and a "tribe" by blood but they also belonged to a military/political unit by political designation. When a new leader took power (or people were conquered), he usually re-organized them. Also compare with the Manchu banner system (Chinese 旗) and Mongol tumens.
The entire family belonged to the unit. It is an idea we settled people may have a difficult time understanding because we're so used to military units and logistics as separate from the civilian world. Yet nomads had military logistics built into their civilian life so there was little distinction to them. We're also so used to moving between states or countries, political units of territory.
I believe that these military/political units influenced the ethnogenesis process.
|
|
|
Post by Ardavarz on May 26, 2012 23:35:02 GMT 3
There is such theory that maybe Mao-Tun Shanyu - the founder of Xiongnu empire - was the historical prototype of Oghuz Khan. Scholars like Yakinth Bichurin and Zeki Validi Togan have noticed similarity between the legend of Oghuz Khan and the biography of Mao-Tun Shanyu as told in the Chinese chronicles. Also the legendary genealogy of the Oghuz tribes from the 6 sons and 24 grandsons of Oghuz Khan seems to represent the Xiongnu military/political structure with the 6 so-called "horns" or "angles" (nobles from the Shanyu family designated with the Chinese title wang - "king") and the 24 "grand ministers" (da cheng) - heads of units of 10 000 people (like Mongolian tumens).
Some scholars have suggested that the name "Mao-Tun" could be a Chinese rendering of the title "Baghatur". Although I am more inclined to interpret it with the name Vihtun (as O. Pritsak thinks), if we assume the former hypothesis, the maybe the Mongolian deity Baghatur Tengri (god of victory) could be a later deification of Mao-Tun Shanyu.
|
|