|
Post by balamir on Dec 5, 2006 22:03:12 GMT 3
I think they were a Turkic people, but I don't know many information about them. May be they were Mongol. Who were they?
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Dec 6, 2006 1:50:30 GMT 3
They were a Mongolic people, not Turkic nor Tungusic. I am not sure, but they originially must have been from the Xianbei ‘N”Ú people.
I also want to learn more about them.
|
|
|
Post by balamir on Dec 6, 2006 19:05:13 GMT 3
Hmm,ý always thinked they were Turkic,thanks.
|
|
|
Post by stirner on Dec 7, 2006 17:03:38 GMT 3
There is an online thesis on the origins of the Khitans which outlines the various theories about their origin, there is a very slight Chinese bias to overall thesis but it outlines the evidence very well. It's a pretty long read but very interesting ... ethesis.helsinki.fi/julkaisut/hum/aasia/vk/xu/historic.pdf The conclusion is like I stated in a previous thread, and which is also accepted by other authors, that Khitan are probably descended from the eastern part of the Xianbei tribe (Donghu) who resided in what was Manchuria since the second century B.C. It's of course extremely difficult to be exact in making these judgments - there is also evidence of Xiongnu (Hunnic) influence as well.
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Dec 7, 2006 17:58:08 GMT 3
Interesting article, I will save it to my computer, thank you
|
|
|
Post by Saran on Dec 27, 2006 14:06:31 GMT 3
Never knew the Kitans were more Chinese than Mongol. Thought they were Mongols, that;s what they teach us here
|
|
|
Post by BAWIR$AQ on Dec 27, 2006 21:14:33 GMT 3
Interesting fact: Khitans gave name to all of China
The name of the sinicized Khitan tribes survived in the Turkic, Mongolic, and Russian names for China and Chinese people.
Qazaq: Qıtay Uyghur: Xitay Ozbek: Xitoy Russian: Kitay Mongolian: Hyatad
|
|
|
Post by snafu on Dec 27, 2006 23:51:12 GMT 3
And even in English too. At one time "Cathay" was a popular English name for China. And it comes from "Khitai".
|
|
|
Post by Saran on Jan 2, 2007 7:31:43 GMT 3
I was trying to find out about Kidan on monstudnet.mn forum and one of the guys told me the following and he claims the KIdans were Mongols. I didn't understand much, however, wanted to share it here, maybe you guys understand it better than I do:
BC-VIII-III Dunhu BC-III-MEIII Syanbi (descendents of Dunhu), Uhuan (descendents of Dunhu) AD III-V Mujun (descendents of Syanbi) AD III-VI Toba (descendents of Syanbi) AD IV-VIII Togoon (descendents of Mujun) AD IV-VI Nirun (descendents of Hunnu & Syanbi) AD IV-XIII Kidan (a tribe originated from Nirun, Nirun's originated from Dunhu) AD VI-XII Barga (a tribe originated from Nirun, Nirun's originated from Dunhu) From AD IX till now on Mongol (Mongol tribe of the Three Rivers, direct descendents from Nirun)
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Jan 4, 2007 4:05:51 GMT 3
It seems to be a list of the evolutions of Mongolic peoples, but the names are written in bad Chinese romanisation. According to this list, the Khitans were descended from a people called Nirun which was formed earlierly by a mixture of Xiongnu and Xianbei. I am not sure how accurate that information is.
|
|
|
Post by Saran on Jan 18, 2007 14:18:42 GMT 3
Kidan State Kidans were people living on the right side of Luuha /Lyaohe/ river and were considered as part of Syanbi Mongols. In 388, Kidans were defeated by Muyun and To Bei armies and migrated to the east and split into two parts, Kidan and Kumosi. By the end of the 8th century, tribes Elui and Ilu were the most powerful of all Kidans and, got the authority of the state.
Abuji / Ambagyan/, the 8th generation of Elui founded the stable state of Kidan between 907 and 918. Elui Abuji settled a unique state structure of Northern and Southern Orde. This was because of the specific nature in his territory. Kidan’s invasion of Northern China may have led to this structure. In the Southern Orde, the inhabitants were mostly farmers, while in the Northern Orde, the original Kidans and their other nomadic relatives were living.
Elui Abuji spent most of his active life in utilizing his state’s internal and external affairs and statehood. This resulted over 100 years of stable state dominating in central Asia after his death. The next generations of Khans reformed the structure of the state. These reforms were considering the changes in central Asia during the 10th to the 9th century. These changes in central Asia were the empowering Zurchid State and its threats over Mongols. The reforms that the Khans made were aimed at uniting more Mongol tribes.
The Kidans made interesting attempts to combine urban and nomadic lifestyles together. There were nine generations of Khans and the state survived for 220 years. By the time Zuchid state was invaded by the Golden State, Elui Dashi, a nobleman migrated to the Balhash Nuur and founded Khar Kidan state and conquered southern Turkestan and Horezm. The Khar Kidan existed for 90 years /1124-1213/
|
|
|
Post by tadamson on Feb 9, 2007 20:19:41 GMT 3
The Khitan or Quidan were steppe nomads descended from the Xianbei, they spoke a language which is classed as mongolian rather than turkic or tungnustic (all interrelated language groups). The Liao Empire period saw them adopt a dual government (steppe style for the nomads, Chineese style for the settled Chinese and Bohai population) that was the model for later Jurchin and Mongol Empires. After the fall of Liao, remnants formed the Western Liao (Karakhitai) empire in Central Asia, which incorporate large numbers of Turkic subjects.
|
|
|
Post by surebaturu on May 3, 2007 19:34:07 GMT 3
The Khitan or Quidan were steppe nomads descended from the Xianbei, they spoke a language which is classed as mongolian rather than turkic or tungnustic (all interrelated language groups). The Liao Empire period saw them adopt a dual government (steppe style for the nomads, Chineese style for the settled Chinese and Bohai population) that was the model for later Jurchin and Mongol Empires. After the fall of Liao, remnants formed the Western Liao (Karakhitai) empire in Central Asia, which incorporate large numbers of Turkic subjects. Hello everyone, my 1st post here .... i will like to follow on from what Tadomson offered here, perhaps the identity of the Khitans could be seen from 2 areas: Linguistic I think rather than classifying Khitan as a Mongolian language, perhaps it should be classified as a 'somewhat' Mongolic language... according to the scant linguistic evidence that the Khitan script had offered us.. however, bearing in mind that there were jurchens and other tungusic peoples neighbouring them, a tungusic influence might be present... i can't say for certain about khitan, but many of the 'mongolic-related' words from manchu do seemed to be borrowed from or via khitan.... the reverse might well have happened ... at least looking at daur, supposedly descended from khitan, do seem to suggest this. we must not forget the Xiao, one of the clans that made up the ruling class, was supposed to be turkic itself.. therefore, Culture compared to the jurchens, the khitans were a true steppe culture, this was often cited as a reason why they resisted sinification much better than the jurchen/manchus... cultural wise, they don't seem to be a tungusic people
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on May 3, 2007 23:45:14 GMT 3
Hello Surebaturu, welcome to SHF!
|
|
|
Post by Saran on May 21, 2007 13:11:13 GMT 3
The Khitan or Quidan were steppe nomads descended from the Xianbei, they spoke a language which is classed as mongolian rather than turkic or tungnustic (all interrelated language groups). The Liao Empire period saw them adopt a dual government (steppe style for the nomads, Chineese style for the settled Chinese and Bohai population) that was the model for later Jurchin and Mongol Empires. After the fall of Liao, remnants formed the Western Liao (Karakhitai) empire in Central Asia, which incorporate large numbers of Turkic subjects. Hello everyone, my 1st post here .... i will like to follow on from what Tadomson offered here, perhaps the identity of the Khitans could be seen from 2 areas: Linguistic I think rather than classifying Khitan as a Mongolian language, perhaps it should be classified as a 'somewhat' Mongolic language... according to the scant linguistic evidence that the Khitan script had offered us.. however, bearing in mind that there were jurchens and other tungusic peoples neighbouring them, a tungusic influence might be present... i can't say for certain about khitan, but many of the 'mongolic-related' words from manchu do seemed to be borrowed from or via khitan.... the reverse might well have happened ... at least looking at daur, supposedly descended from khitan, do seem to suggest this. we must not forget the Xiao, one of the clans that made up the ruling class, was supposed to be turkic itself.. therefore, Culture compared to the jurchens, the khitans were a true steppe culture, this was often cited as a reason why they resisted sinification much better than the jurchen/manchus... cultural wise, they don't seem to be a tungusic people Nice points, Surebaturu . You meant to have the name Suhebaturu or Surenbaturu?
|
|