|
|
Post by kapusta281 on May 3, 2015 23:33:25 GMT 3
I think this question is pretty simple.
Uzbeks nowadays celebrate Timur as they national hero. But i think, he actually wasn´t Uzbek at all. I think Uzbeks came into Transoxiana later with Shaybanians and were in conflicts with Timur´s descendants. Am I right?
If yes, why Uzbek celebrate him? Weren´t Shaybanians and particularly Muhammad Shaybani excellent rulers to be proud of?
|
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on May 4, 2015 10:39:03 GMT 3
Hi kapusta281, welcome aboard.
Timur was surely not an Uzbek. The problem here lies beneath the ethnonym "Uzbek" itself, because before the Soviet period in the 20th century, "Uzbek" was the name of Kipchak-speaking nomads of Transoxiana and the descendents of the founders of the Shaybanid Uzbek Khanate in the 16th century. These Uzbeks had broken away from the Golden Horde just like the Kazakhs did; they later invaded Transoxiana and ended the Timurid Empire there. The local population of Transoxiana were known as "Sarts" (a term of Sanskrit origin meaning "merchant"), both the Eastern Iranic Tajiks (descendents of Soghdians and Transoxianian Persians) and the sedentarised Turks who spoke and wrote in the Chaghatai dialect of Middle Turkic. The real Uzbeks symbolised Turko-Mongol nomadism while the Sarts symbolised Turko-Iranian sedentarism. Timur himself was a Turkic-speaker, his origins came from the Barulas (or Barlas) tribe of the Mongols who were Turkified in Transoxiana during the late 13th century (large groups of Turks settled in Transoxiana following the Mongol conquest and they helped the conqueror Mongols to become Turkified). Even though his ancestors were Mongol nomads, he was brought up as the member of a Turkic sedentary military class which was culturally more closer to the Turko-Iranian "Sarts". Most of the modern Uzbeks are also descendents of these Turko-Iranian Sarts but when creating new nationalisites, the Soviets decided to give the name of the ruling class to the entire population and merged the Sarts and Uzbeks into an artificial "Uzbek" identity. The real "Uzbeks" are still a Kipchak-speaking minority in rural parts of Uzbekistan but most of the modern Uzbeks are just historical "Sarts". That is why modern Uzbeks consider Timur to be an Uzbek hero, because Timur was really the hero of Transoxianian Turko-Iranian population.
|
|
|
|
Post by kapusta281 on May 5, 2015 0:54:48 GMT 3
Thanks for you answer and welcoming.
I studied Timur just briefly, but suppose he is admired, because combined benefits of nomad and sedentarized living and both groups of people gave appropriate role in society. Is that right conclusion?
On the other hand, Muhammad Shaybani (along with his ancestors and descendants, he is just like the most significant figure), i consider as the one, who blocked Iranization of West Turkestan. Is it possible to agree with it?
Sure i know about soviet creation of nationalities, i just didn´t put Sarts into this context. The ones, you named as "real Uzbeks", i heard to be called as "steppe Uzbeks", but that´s just a detail. More important is to ensure, who Sarts actually are. I found several theories, but think the most likely is, they are mix of Uzbek people, who settled into towns, and Tajiks, who lived in the towns before their arrive, and whom they imitated in customs and behavior and later mingled. Can you agree with it?
(I am like a novice to older history, i am supposed to write a work about soviet central asia, but it is both - important and interesting, to know roots of some issues.)
|
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on May 5, 2015 11:10:05 GMT 3
Thanks for you answer and welcoming. You're welcome  I studied Timur just briefly, but suppose he is admired, because combined benefits of nomad and sedentarized living and both groups of people gave appropriate role in society. Is that right conclusion? Yes that's a right conclusion. Both the sedentary population and nomadic or newly-sedentarized former nomadic military elite of Transoxiana benefited from Timur and his actions. Even though Transoxiana quickly recovered from the destruction caused by Genghis Khan's Khwarazmian campaign, it was Timur who really enriched the cities, especially Samarkand. He also put an end to inner strife among the Chaghatai Khanate, because before Timur acquired the control of Transoxiana, Chaghatai rulers used to plunder Transoxianian cities whenever there was unrest in the region, even though the cities belonged to themselves. Timur brought peace and welfare into Transoxiana, that's why he was loved by all. On the other hand, Muhammad Shaybani (along with his ancestors and descendants, he is just like the most significant figure), i consider as the one, who blocked Iranization of West Turkestan. Is it possible to agree with it? Honestly I don't know much about that issue, but it might be right. Sure i know about soviet creation of nationalities, i just didn´t put Sarts into this context. The ones, you named as "real Uzbeks", i heard to be called as "steppe Uzbeks", but that´s just a detail. Yes, in linguistics their dialect is known as "Kipchak Uzbek". More important is to ensure, who Sarts actually are. I found several theories, but think the most likely is, they are mix of Uzbek people, who settled into towns, and Tajiks, who lived in the towns before their arrive, and whom they imitated in customs and behavior and later mingled. Can you agree with it? Yes, I agree with that. (I am like a novice to older history, i am supposed to write a work about soviet central asia, but it is both - important and interesting, to know roots of some issues.) That's right too |
|
|
|
Post by Temüjin on May 5, 2015 15:25:18 GMT 3
the problem is, there is no real ethnonym for the population of Mawaraannahr (Transoxania) at the time of Temür, as it was also a very diverse population. i personally don't really like the name Sart as it is really vague, and ususally simply refers to urban population (as opposed to nomads) and sometimes as synonym for Tajik, even though there were also urban Turkic people of course. the language spoken at the time in Mawaraannahr was Jaghatay Turkic which was simply called Turki at the time. thus, the logical consequence would be to simply refer to the Turkic population of Mawrannahr and to Temür himself as Turk.
|
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on May 5, 2015 22:32:25 GMT 3
That's very right.
|
|
|
|
Post by kapusta281 on May 6, 2015 0:28:42 GMT 3
For me the nationalities before Uzbeks and Kazakhs seems pretty confused, but i am sure, there were used terms such as Kalmyks, Kypchaks, Kimaks, Uyghurs, Oghuzes Karluks or Oirats. What happened to them? They were not use during Timur´s period? By the way, when we touched the topic of Sarts, do you know Masov´s work "History of a National Catastrophe"? If yes, what do you think about? I know, this is going to be slightly off topic from khanates, but i think, that´s no problem. My personal opinion (as I read it few months ago) is, he shows several interesting facts, that are not well-know, but unfortunately mixing truth and hardline ideology, while considering Sarts as Tajiks. www.angelfire.com/rnb/bashiri/Masov/MasovHistoryNationalCatastrophe.pdf |
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on May 6, 2015 14:29:03 GMT 3
For me the nationalities before Uzbeks and Kazakhs seems pretty confused, but i am sure, there were used terms such as Kalmyks, Kypchaks, Kimaks, Uyghurs, Oghuzes Karluks or Oirats. What happened to them? They were not use during Timur´s period? Most of them fell out of use after the 15th-16th centuries. By the way, when we touched the topic of Sarts, do you know Masov´s work "History of a National Catastrophe"? If yes, what do you think about? I know, this is going to be slightly off topic from khanates, but i think, that´s no problem. My personal opinion (as I read it few months ago) is, he shows several interesting facts, that are not well-know, but unfortunately mixing truth and hardline ideology, while considering Sarts as Tajiks. www.angelfire.com/rnb/bashiri/Masov/MasovHistoryNationalCatastrophe.pdfWell as far as I know, "Sart" was a term used originally by Turko-Mongol nomads for the Iranic population of Transoxiana. Turkic population in Transoxiana before the Mongol invasion was quite limited and it was more widespread in the countryside rather than in the cities. That was when the Turks and later the Mongols called the urban population "Sart". When Turks also started to settle down in the cities, the name "Sart" was applied for them as well. |
|
|
|
Post by kapusta281 on May 8, 2015 0:06:09 GMT 3
Masov is one of the scholars that claim, there live millions of Tajiks in Uzbekistan, that are violently uzbekized. He shows in that work some facts, that are not widely discussed, but also he have some controversial statements, for example refers to Tajik situation as genocide, though they got their republic (although not fully representative) and claims, panturkist leaders were war criminals (probably means Enver Pascha, who was one of many). I wanted to know your opinion, while we came to the Sart issue, cause i think, he mess Sarts of turkic origins with pure Tajiks. But if you don´t know what i talk about, just leave it, it is long and rather boring text.
|
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on May 8, 2015 10:46:36 GMT 3
Honestly I don't know much about the Uzbekization of Tajiks in the 20th century. What I know is that even today there is a significant Tajik minority in Uzbekistan and Bukhara is a very Tajik-Persian city where Turkics are a minority themselves, while Khiva, Samarkand and Tashkend stand out as more Turkic cities. Claiming that there was a "Tajik genocide" seems unlikely to me.
|
|
