|
|
Post by Subu'atai on Jun 4, 2011 12:30:17 GMT 3
It's a pain in the ass, need some help with this, ok we've established some facts (correct me if they are incorrect):
1) Majority of the "Mongols" who invaded Europe during the 13th century were actually of Turkic ethnic. Hence establishment of Turkic-centric successor states, not Mongol successor states.
Yes yes it's common sense but need a source >.<
(This is why you hurry and publish your book Khagan!!!!)
2) Majority of Modern day Mongolians are descended from Mongols who established the Yuan Dynasty in China, while Moghul/Hazara are descended from Chagatai and Ilkhanate khanates/dynasties.
Also common sense, but can that statement be considered a fact?
Ne sources that reinforce this would be welcome
|
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Jun 5, 2011 6:04:07 GMT 3
You just need to check the history books that tell about the general history of Mongols, they all should be written there AFAIK.
|
|
|
|
Post by Subu'atai on Jun 5, 2011 15:37:45 GMT 3
It's been 2 years since steppe history research! Or 3... I can't remember! =/
Hell come to think of it how long has it been?
Need something with the full statement not just "Kipchak Khanate was mostly Turkic", etc
Getting too old for this >.<
|
|
|
|
Post by Subu'atai on Jun 5, 2011 15:41:19 GMT 3
Nevermind... I'll find it eventually, just lazy
|
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Jun 5, 2011 21:59:14 GMT 3
I guess every book about the Golden Horde has that. Besides, Golden Horde documents written in Qypchaq Turkic have been published as well. Back home I have a book about those documents.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ardavarz on Jun 6, 2011 1:00:57 GMT 3
|
|
|
|
Post by Subu'atai on Jun 6, 2011 6:40:17 GMT 3
Thanks, though I guess I'll have to use the term "leads us to believe..." etc
I was hoping for a full statement like "Majority of the "Mongols" who invaded Europe during the 13th century were actually of Turkic ethnic." Rather then "Kipchak Khanate was mostly Turkic" etc
So far using "A history of Ukraine" by Magocsi, closest I got to that statement.
|
|
|
|
Post by Temüjin on Jun 6, 2011 20:02:29 GMT 3
1) Majority of the "Mongols" who invaded Europe during the 13th century were actually of Turkic ethnic. Hence establishment of Turkic-centric successor states, not Mongol successor states. well, i'd even disagree with that. the "successor" states were pretty mongolic in character, the turkic being predominant however. it isn't necessary that the newcommers (mongol invaders) had to include a majority of turkic subjects (actual ethnicity of Chinggis' Mongol Empire is a whole subject in itself). like the eastern roman empire, it went back to being predominantly greek after the western half fell, but it never lost the roman culture completely. of course that said, the roman culture itself was ever since greek-influenced itself, so not alien at all. same can be said about Mongols and Turkic prevalence in conquered territories. |
|
|
|
Post by Subu'atai on Jun 7, 2011 0:54:36 GMT 3
Argh! You just gave me a morning headache >.<! Heh
|
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Jun 7, 2011 12:01:23 GMT 3
Yup, I agree with Babur's definition.
|
|
|
|
Post by Subu'atai on Jun 7, 2011 17:09:21 GMT 3
Argh... double headache... d**n it man, I'm doing descendancy as a part of this stupid annoying "cross culture in business" BS and what moulded two cultures to what it is today and how to deal with the BS crap... for more "positive relations" >.>
Man, I think I may have bitten more off than I can chew by thinking I can study full-time and work full-time as well... the missus wins the bet... BAH! Unless I can... hmmm >.>
|
|
