bawýrsaq, could you give us some more information about Abilai Xan?
Abilay Khan - Kazak khan 1711 - 1781
One of the most prominent figures in the Kazak history, the legendary ruler of Kazaks who dedicated his life to the struggle against the invasion of Oirats and the colonization attempts by Russian empire and Qing dynasty of China. He managed to restore the power of the Kazak khanate, destroy the Oirat state, and keep the balance between the policies towards Russia and China.
Last Edit: Sept 3, 2006 23:03:22 GMT 3 by BAWIR$AQ
normally, many Turkologists use ï as a transcription letter for ý while they use î for long i.
There is no standard Latin-based Kazak alphabet. We still oficially use Cyrillic.
The one I used with the painting is one of the many suggested ones, it is currently used by the national news agency KazInform and, therefore, is more widespread among other Kazak Latin alphabets. This alphabet is also featured on the website of Turkey's Ministry of Culture
Nice & Huge pic! I can see Kultegin & Atilla -role in Kazak history?
Kültegin and the Second Turkic qaghanate had an impact on the whole Turkic history. I wouldn't necessary put him on "top" of this painting, but his Orkhon-Enisey inscriptions are considered a great legacy of all Turkic peoples.
At that time, there was no such thing as Kazakstan, so it's incorrect to tie him to the exact territory. He ruled in what now is known as Mongolia, and roots of Kazaks and all Turks lie in that area east of Altay.
Kazak historians believe thart Atilla (Edil qağan) was born near the Volga river (which is called Edil by Kazaks, and Atil by Arabs). Attila's Huns migrated from the steppes east of Altay to Europe through Kazakstan, and on the territory of Kazakstan and southern Russia they intermixed with Sarmatians and started their move towards Europe. So yes, we have a link to Attila there.
I don`t see The Great Khaan!? -the person who claimed, moved & mixed Kazak ppl.
Şıñğıs han is still a very controversial figure in Kazak history. Over 70 years Soviets taught Kazaks that he was a foreign invader that invaded Kazakstan and etc.
But, in fact, as I said before, there was no Kazaks and Kazakstan at that time, and we only emerged after the breakup of Golden Horde, so there's no point in saying that Şıñğıs attacked Kazaks.
Secondly, around 40% of today's Kazaks comprise of tribes like Nayman, Kerey, Qoñırat and Jalayır, who lived in what is now Mongolia, and came to Kazakstan with Şıñğıs han. Most of them (Naymans and Kereys for sure) were Turkic-speaking tribes, because Turks lived there for centuries.
Thirdly, most of the population of 13-century Kazakstan was nomadic Turks who, in most cases, willingly came under Şıñğıs han's command, because they saw him as a all-nomadic unifier regardless of the language. As you all know, Şıñğıs proclaimed himself as a ruler of "all people living in the felt tents", so Kipchaks and other tribes of Kazakstan saw him as a friendly nomad in the struggle against the sedentary Khwarazmian empire, that was organizing raids on Kipchaks. That is why it is not correct to say that Şıñğıs conquered Kazakstan's territory, he only conquered the sedentary south, but the most of the nomads willingly joined him.
BTW, painting includes Joşı han, who's lived and died in Kazakstan, and who's dynasty and Golden Horde played a large role in Kazakstan's history.