Military Review

How and why Kazakhstan changed the capital

140
9 June 1994, the then President of Kazakhstan Nursultan Nazarbayev finally decided on the need to transfer the capital of the country from Almaty to another city. He announced that the capital would be transferred to Akmola, as the city of Tselinograd, the former Akmolinsk was called from 1992 onwards. In 1998, Akmola was renamed to Astana, which in translation from Kazakh language means “capital”.




The main reasons for the transfer of the capital


The mid-nineties of the last century was a difficult time for Kazakhstan as a young state. The economic situation of the country left much to be desired, the danger of conflicts on interethnic grounds remained. By a happy coincidence, Kazakhstan managed to avoid large-scale riots and armed clashes, but this does not mean that there was no potential threat in the republic - although Kazakhstan was initially more multinational than the neighboring republics of Central Asia, Kazakh also grew from the end of the 1980. nationalism.

On the other hand, the Russian, especially the Cossack population of Northern Kazakhstan remained, from the point of view of the Kazakh authorities, an extremely risky factor. But the authorities did not like the location of the old capital of Almaty. Formally, the supporters of the transfer of the capital motivated their position by the proximity of Alma-Ata to the state border with China, climate features, seismic risk. In fact, the main reason for the transfer of the capital of the country were very different factors and considerations.

By the end of the 1980-s in the ethnic and demographic terms in Kazakhstan there was an uneven distribution of the population. In the south and southeast, the majority of the population were ethnic Kazakhs, who constituted more than 50-60% in areas such as Kzyl-Orda, Guryev, Chimkent and some other areas. Overpopulation was characteristic of the southern and south-eastern regions of Kazakhstan, caused by a high birth rate and initially larger population, while the northern lands of the country looked much more empty.



In addition, in the north and especially in the north-west of the country, the Kazakhs were in the minority, but there lived a large Russian and Cossack population and, from the point of view of the Kazakhs, adjoined to the Russian peoples — Germans, Poles, Ukrainians, Jews, Tatars . At one time in the north of Kazakhstan they even wanted to make German autonomy, and Tselinograd - Akmola was considered as its potential administrative center.

The leadership of Kazakhstan was terribly afraid of rejection of vast northern lands, especially since similar processes took place in the entire post-Soviet space — it is enough to give examples of Transnistria, Nagorno-Karabakh, South Ossetia, and Abkhazia. Therefore, the country's authorities were interested in increasing the number of ethnic Kazakhs in the north of the country, but how could this be done? The best way out was to increase the attractiveness of Northern Kazakhstan for ethnic Kazakhs from other regions of the country. And here the ideal option was the transfer of the capital from Almaty, located in the south of the country, in one of the North Kazakhstan cities.

Initially, Pavlodar was considered as a potential capital. However, then the Kazakh leaders decided that it is still located too close to the Russian border. Historians who had little idea of ​​the technical side of the transfer of the capital, asked to stop the choice on Ulytau - the district center in the Dzhezkazgan region. This was explained by the fact that the geographical center of Kazakhstan is located in Ulytau. However, Ulytau had a number of its problems - from the lack of a rail link to a small amount of water. In addition, Ulytau - a small district center - would hardly look solid and attractive, would require enormous resources and a lot of time to turn the town into a worthy successor to Almaty.

In the end, the authorities of the republic chose Akmola. After all, it was a fairly large city, a hub of road and rail links between the south of the republic and the northern, eastern and western regions. By the way, about making Akmola, then called Tselinograd, as a republican center, was thought even under Nikita Sergeyevich Khrushchev. True, they wanted to turn Tselinograd into the capital of the autonomous Tselinny Republic, which they were going to isolate from the Kazakh SSR. But then the leadership of the Soviet Union refused from plans to create a Tselinny Republic. The later plans to create the German Autonomous Republic with the capital in Tselinograd were not crowned with success. However, the infrastructure of Tselinograd had a very good one - from transport highways to telephone communication.

From Akmolinsk to Tselinograd


About. that Alma-Ata is a Russian city, until 1921, called Faithful, is known to all. But the new capital of Kazakhstan was also founded in the process of colonization of the Kazakh steppes by the Russian Empire. In 1830, a Cossack outpost was founded - an order from Akmolinsky, named after the neighboring Kazakh settlement of Akmol - “White Shrine”. Around the outpost, Russians and Cossacks quickly settled with their families. This is how the settlement of the Cossack Territory arose, the founder of which was the participant of the Battle of Borodino, colonel Fedor Kuzmich Shubin-the second.

How and why Kazakhstan changed the capital


16 June 1863 of the Akmola fortification was given the status of a district city, and on October 21 of the year it received the status of a regional city - the center of Akmola region. The districts of the Siberian Kirgiz region - Kokchetav, Atbasar, Akmolinsky, and part of the regimental districts of the Siberian Cossack army were included in the Akmola region.

In 1931-1936 through Akmolinsk stretched the railway to Kartaly (Chelyabinsk region), after which the city received a new impetus to development. However, the real impetus to the transformation of Akmolinsk into a modern city gave the development of virgin lands, which began under Nikita Khrushchev. 20 March 1961, Akmolinsk was renamed Tselinograd, which turned into the center of the Virgin Lands.

In Tselinograd, the largest agricultural machinery plant in the Republic of Tselinselmash and the Kazakhselmash plant were established in the republic, and grandiose construction work was launched. On empty lands, new high-rise urban neighborhoods have grown, numerous social infrastructure facilities have been built - schools, hospitals, palaces of pioneers.



In 1970-s, the authorities of the Soviet Union seriously thought about the possibility of creating a German autonomy within the Kazakh SSR, but the Kazakh party nomenclature headed by the first secretary of the Communist Party of the Kazakh SSR Dinmukhamed Kunayev responded in time. With the support of the republican authorities, protests against the creation of German autonomy were organized and, ultimately, the Union leadership refused this idea. In the 1992 year, when Kazakhstan was already an independent state, the republican authorities took the course of de-russification and renamed Tselinograd Akmola.

The capital named "Capital"


Translated from the Kazakh language, the toponym “Astana” is translated as the capital. This is exactly how the authorities of sovereign Kazakhstan decided to officially rename Akmola in the distant 1998 year. But the decision to transfer the capital to Akmola was made earlier.

In June, 1994 of the year, Nursultan Nazarbayev finally decided that the power of the republic would go from Almaty to Akmola. 6 July 1994, the official decision on the transfer of the capital was made by the Supreme Council of Kazakhstan, and on December 10, the presidential decree on the transfer of the capital to Akmola was signed on 1997. 6 in May 1998 of the year Akmola was renamed to Astana, and 10 in June of 1998 of the year the authorities of Kazakhstan presented the city as the new capital of the republic.

After the transfer of the capital of Kazakhstan to Astana, rapid growth of the city began, which rapidly developed and soon became the second largest city in Kazakhstan. Huge funds were invested in the development of Astana, which contributed to attracting a large number of internal migrants from all regions of Kazakhstan. As a result, against the background of the general deurbanization of 1990-x - the beginning of 2000-s, Astana showed surprising growth rates for Kazakhstan.

In June, 2017, Astana officially received the status of a million-plus city - its population exceeded 1 a million people. In 1989, only a little more than 281 thousands lived in Tselinograd. Thus, the population of the city has quadrupled.



After turning Astana into the capital of Kazakhstan, the ethnic composition of the population of the city changed dramatically. By the 1989 year, when Kazakhstan was still a part of the USSR, 54,10% of the population of Tselinograd were Russians, another 9,26% were Ukrainians, 2,92% were Belarusians. Thus, the Eastern Slavs accounted for 66,28% of the city’s population - two thirds of its inhabitants. Another 6,72% of the population of the city were Germans, 0,98% - Poles, 3,32% - Tatars. As for ethnic Kazakhs, in Tselinograd, by the 1989 year, they constituted only 17,71% of the city’s population. The Uzbeks, Kirghiz, Uighurs, in other regions of Kazakhstan, being very impressive minorities, in Tselinograd also had an insignificant number - 0,23%, 0,03% and 0,02% of the population, respectively.

Thus, by the year 1989, Tselinograd was ethnically primarily a Russian and Russian-speaking city. But over the thirty years of Kazakhstan’s independence, the situation has changed beyond recognition. According to the 2018 of the year, ethnic Kazakhs make up 78,18% of the population of Astana - the absolute majority. Russian in the city now only 13,41%, and the Germans - 0,90%. Emigration to Russia also played a role (the Germans left for Germany), and natural causes due to the low birth rate, but the main factor in changing the ethno-demographic picture was, of course, the internal migration of Kazakhs from Astana to other regions of Kazakhstan. Against its background, the number of Ukrainians, Belarusians, Tatar Bashkirs was reduced, but the number of Uzbeks, Kyrgyz, Uighurs increased.

For thirty years, Astana has become a kind of showcase of modern Kazakhstan. When they want to demonstrate the well-being of Kazakhstan, especially in comparison with the neighboring Central Asian republics, a prosperous Astana becomes one of the first proofs.



Nur-Sultan


20 March 2019, the new president of Kazakhstan, Kasym-Zhomart Tokayev, suggested renaming Astana Nur-Sultan - in honor of the first president of Kazakhstan, Nursultan Nazarbayev. Translated from the Arabic, “Nur” means “light”, and “Sultan” means “power”. Renaming the capital, the new head of state thus wanted to show special respect to his predecessor, Nursultan Nazarbayev.

The proposal to rename was supported by the Parliament, after which on March 23 Tokayev signed a decree on renaming Astana to Nur-Sultan. Interestingly, residents of the city were not only officially allowed to continue to be called Astana residents, but also allowed not to change documents in connection with the renaming of the city, leaving the legal force of all documents in which Astana is a place of birth and registration.

Of course, the renaming of Astana to Nur-Sultan caused irony, especially abroad, but in Kazakhstan this event took place without any special excesses, except for a few small pickets and publications in the opposition press.
Author:
Photos used:
sputnik.by, vlast.kz
140 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. kvs207
    kvs207 10 June 2019 05: 46
    +12
    "After the transformation of Astana into the capital of Kazakhstan, the ethnic composition of the city's population also radically changed. By 1989, when Kazakhstan was still part of the USSR, 54,10% of the population of Tselinograd were Russians, another 9,26% were Ukrainians, 2,92% were Thus, the Eastern Slavs accounted for 66,28% of the city's population - two-thirds of its inhabitants. Another 6,72% of the city's population were Germans, 0,98% - Poles, 3,32% - Tatars. then in Tselinograd by 1989 they accounted for only 17,71% of the city's population. "

    But there were cities in Kazakhstan where there were practically no Kazakhs, for example Stepnogorsk.
    He lived in Kazakhstan for nearly 40 years, 20 of them in Tselinograd - Astana, and I can say that the mid-90s, despite the extremely difficult situation, was just the time when everyone lived together, as they were in the same .. . difficult situation. In my native small mining town, 2 full-fledged microdistricts and 2 quarters were abandoned.
    1. Ross xnumx
      Ross xnumx 10 June 2019 06: 35
      +4
      Quote: kvs207
      But there were cities in Kazakhstan where there were practically no Kazakhs, for example Stepnogorsk.

      Meanwhile, the population growth in Kazakhstan is evident:
      1991 - 16
      2017 - 17
      And a comparison with the Russian Federation is not in our favor. So ... It's time to decide something: either continue to develop Moscow, or develop the country until it has shrunk to the size of the Moscow region ...
    2. Civil
      Civil 10 June 2019 09: 10
      +6
      Transition to the Latin alphabet, the outflow of Russians, non-recognition of the Crimea. Friendship is growing stronger.
      1. Semurg
        Semurg 10 June 2019 10: 53
        +3
        Quote: Civil
        Transition to the Latin alphabet, the outflow of Russians, non-recognition of the Crimea. Friendship is growing stronger.

        Actually, in Kazakhstan, there were three or four attempts to make the local "our Crimea", such a strong friendship, and then make surprised eyes and lament, and why the Kazakhs do not welcome our Crimea in Ukraine, yeah bad nema.
        1. Evgesha
          Evgesha 12 June 2019 13: 01
          0
          Yah!!!
          several attempts of what ????
          If you said so - then enlighten what kind of attempts these were !!!
          and we really read .... and compare with what was
      2. tihonmarine
        tihonmarine 10 June 2019 11: 27
        0
        Yeah, I got a unit in the red square for Kazakhstan.
    3. Semurg
      Semurg 10 June 2019 11: 58
      +4
      Quote: kvs207
      "

      But there were cities in Kazakhstan where there were practically no Kazakhs, for example Stepnogorsk.
      He lived in Kazakhstan for nearly 40 years, 20 of them in Tselinograd - Astana, and I can say that the mid-90s, despite the extremely difficult situation, was just the time when everyone lived together, as they were in the same .. . difficult situation. In my native small mining town, 2 full-fledged microdistricts and 2 quarters were abandoned.

      As students, we went to Stepnogorsk because there was a closed city with separate supplies. Somehow we got through and came to the grocery store, and there was stew and condensed milk, etc. True, our aunt saleswoman refused to sell products, wondering where the Kazakhs got out from here and threatened to call the police, and passersby refused to buy us in the store.
    4. knn54
      knn54 10 June 2019 17: 21
      +1
      At the meeting of the Supreme Council, Nazarbayev named 26 reasons / signs of the transfer of the capital. I wonder if the "ethnic bias" was officially announced as one of the reasons?
      The first capital was the Kyrgyz Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic (then the Kazakhs were called Kyrgyz) Orenburg (Orynbor) since 1919.
      Second-Kzyl-Orda (Ak-Mosque) - since 1925. Then the republic was called the Kazakh.
      That is, Astana / Nur-Sultan is already the FOURTH capital (after Alma-Ata).
  2. Mr Credo
    Mr Credo 10 June 2019 06: 32
    +17
    An interesting article and an interesting look at events. Judging from the article, as I understand it, there has been a redistribution of the population. Well, as in Russia. Previously, they went to Moscow for sausage, now at work. I think our government should take a closer look at the experience of Kazakhstan and also transfer the capital. If we intend to develop the North and the Far East, then the transfer of the capital to these regions is quite logical. If you transfer the capital to the Far East, then the states and China and Japan will become closer. And a maritime message is nearby. And Moscow will breathe better. In general, some pluses. If you transfer the capital to Franz Josef Land, the northern territories will receive a powerful incentive for development, and only real Russian patriots will want to live there! So, without violence, we will get rid of all lovers of an easy life! yes
    1. Proxima
      Proxima 10 June 2019 09: 24
      +6
      Quote: Mister Creed
      I think our government should take a closer look at the experience of Kazakhstan and also transfer the capital.

      Machiavelli principle: if you want to keep territories - make the capital of the state in these territories. So did Mehmed II (Istanbul), Peter the Great (Petersburg). Kazakhs once again demonstrated that this principle works brilliantly. good
      1. Proxima
        Proxima 10 June 2019 09: 37
        +4
        By the way, the Kazakhs having moved the capital to Tselinograd, simultaneously made a record. Astana is now the capital number one in the world for the severity of the climate! She took this "honorable" place from the Mongolian Ulan Bator.
        1. Humpty
          Humpty 10 June 2019 10: 17
          0
          Quote: Proxima
          Astana is now the number one capital in the world in terms of the severity of the climate!

          Yah ? La Paz forgotten (the actual capital). It is not objective to judge the severity of climate solely by the difference in temperature in winter and summer.
          1. Proxima
            Proxima 10 June 2019 10: 34
            +1
            Quote: Humpty
            Yah ? La Paz forgotten (actual capital)

            Here, either - the capital, or - no, the third is not given, at least for statistics.
            Quote: Humpty
            It is not objective to judge the severity of climate solely by the difference in temperature in winter and summer.

            As far as I remember, there is a set of indicators, the temperature difference: annual, monthly, daily. Suppose, in July, a temperature difference of 42 degrees was recorded! belay How do you not severely?
            1. Humpty
              Humpty 10 June 2019 10: 41
              0
              Quote: Proxima
              temperature difference of 42 degrees! How do you not severely?

              If every day, then this is serious. I met the daily difference from + 30 to - 20, but very rarely. Arriving at La Paz airport, visitors often wear oxygen masks so they don’t turn off. Yes + hard ultraviolet.
              1. Proxima
                Proxima 10 June 2019 10: 58
                +2
                Quote: Humpty
                At La Paz airport, arrivals often wear oxygen masks

                If climatologists select such a mathematical criterion as the temperature difference, then a lot of variations appear. For example Reykjavik. Yes, the annual temperature difference there is very small, but you must admit, it is not very pleasant to live when mushroom rains in February and snow in July.
          2. Proxima
            Proxima 10 June 2019 10: 45
            +1
            Quote: Humpty

            Yah ? La Paz forgotten (actual capital)

            I just watched La Paz. Even if he were the official capital of Bolivia, then he did not stand next to the severity of the climate with Astana.
            1. Humpty
              Humpty 10 June 2019 10: 58
              -1
              Quote: Proxima
              I just watched La Paz. Even if he were the official capital of Bolivia, then he did not stand next to the severity of the climate with Astana.

              In Astana, or how it has become confused already, the severity of the climate is largely eliminated by seasonal change of caps. The difference in severity will be immediately noticeable if you compare how many times you can squeeze out in the cities we mentioned. And the level of ultraviolet radiation in Astana is close to zero compared to La Paz. The sun in places and at 0 degrees does not warm, but carbonizes the skin.
              .
              1. Proxima
                Proxima 10 June 2019 12: 32
                +1
                Quote: Humpty
                The difference in severity will be immediately noticeable if you compare how many times you can squeeze out in the cities we mentioned.

                If I were faced with the choice of where to live in La Paz or in Reykjavik, I would choose a Bolivian city. Yes, Reykjavik on mild climate can give odds to many capitals. But who has given up such softness? Yes, the monthly average temperatures of any month are there in the black. Yes, what is a 20-degree frost, the inhabitants of Reykjavik can only imagine hypothetically. But how to live in a city where the average temperature of the warmest month of July is only plus 11 belay - unclear! request
        2. Babalaykin
          Babalaykin 11 June 2019 07: 12
          0
          photo reflected
      2. MBRSS
        MBRSS 10 June 2019 16: 54
        +1
        Peter the Great (Petersburg)

        and did anyone consider the economic component of such an idiotic decision? It was enough to build a fortified city and shipyards, since it was too much to lean on the fleet (from which, as the history of the country showed, it turned out to be not enough).
        About Kazakhstan itself: I wonder how many% of non-Kazakhs are now in power. In parliament, municipalities?
    2. tihonmarine
      tihonmarine 10 June 2019 11: 30
      0
      I agree with the Creed, it hurts too logical.
  3. wooja
    wooja 10 June 2019 07: 29
    0
    interesting...,
  4. 40guns
    40guns 10 June 2019 08: 15
    +4
    The author was too lazy or hesitated to write about the reasons that made the Kazakhs a minority in their own land?
    1. Humpty
      Humpty 10 June 2019 10: 34
      +3
      Quote: 40guns
      in their own land

      In China, Dzungaria, Russia, Khiva? Who else was the "colonizer" of the wolf-fertile steppes?
      Quote: 40guns
      hesitated to write about the reasons that made the Kazakhs a minority

      Nowhere except Kazakhstan seem to be shy to write about the real reasons for what you mean.
      Only having human decency, a filthy broom does not poke reasons into the person asking.
      Others, though not having a gram of self-criticism, think according to the principle - "If Nurbek has a crooked face, then everyone except Nurbek is guilty."
      1. Yaik Cossack
        Yaik Cossack 11 June 2019 09: 12
        +1
        Well, and how - do they write the whole truth right in Kazakhstan? All-all? In the 1916 year that Turkish agents and mullahs raised a treacherous rebellion in the rear of warring Russia? That the Kazakhs, who insisted on "equal rights", refused in the conditions of war only to go to the rear services so that the freed Russians went to the front? That during the uprising, the Kazakhs slaughtered the peaceful Russian population - women and children. What when the natural retribution of rebels and murderers came, then the Kazakhs began to migrate en masse to China? Are they writing?
        No, you write that the Russians deliberately destroyed the Kazakhs in the 30 years during collectivization and starvation. Although it was not Russian, but the Soviet government.

        In fairness, Astana should be renamed to Leninsk. This is who the true creator of Kazakh statehood and your current historically unfair borders is. But you will not get historical justice from the Kazakhs. However, the future is always unpredictable; it can bring many surprises. Kazakhs deceived Russian and Soviet. But to deceive the Chinese, will it succeed. Yes, and densely populated Uzbekistan is at hand, in which the Islamic revolution is brewing.

        Now in Kazakhstan a chauvinistic waste. It is constantly written that the Russians should be obliged to the kindhearted Kazakhs, since the Kazakhs graciously sheltered them during the years of World War II. But they say about Russian colonialism at every step. Even the member of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the CPSU, Comrade Nazarbayev, spoke about him more than once, including the Soviet period. True, the Russian "colonialists" built cities, universities, roads. But about this - silence.

        That's all their "decency", one is mentioned, about the rest they pretend that this was not.
        1. Humpty
          Humpty 11 June 2019 09: 30
          0
          Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
          Now in Kazakhstan a chauvinistic waste. It is constantly written that the Russians should be obliged to the kindhearted Kazakhs, since the Kazakhs graciously sheltered them during the years of World War II.

          Incredible blasphemy. Kazakh chauvinists are not aware.

          "Even a member of the Politburo of the CPSU Central Committee, Comrade Nazarbayev, spoke about him many times, including the Soviet period."

          Many more where and what he said, and not only talked but also tried to do. For example, I dreamed of a country of Kazakhs from Altai to the White Sea.
          Quote: Yaitsky Cossack

          That during the uprising, the Kazakhs slaughtered the peaceful Russian population - women and children. What when the natural retribution of rebels and murderers came, then the Kazakhs began to migrate en masse to China? Are they writing?

          Why should they write about their merits to Kaiser Germany?
        2. Togrul
          Togrul 11 June 2019 18: 51
          +1
          Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
          Well, and how - do they write the whole truth right in Kazakhstan? All-all? In the 1916 year that Turkish agents and mullahs raised a treacherous rebellion in the rear of warring Russia? That the Kazakhs, who insisted on "equal rights", refused in the conditions of war only to go to the rear services so that the freed Russians went to the front? That during the uprising, the Kazakhs slaughtered the peaceful Russian population - women and children. What when the natural retribution of rebels and murderers came, then the Kazakhs began to migrate en masse to China? Are they writing?


          Here it is not necessary to erect a slander. Almost all of the killed Russian colonialists, and there were about 2900 on the conscience of the Kyrgyz. And they were killed in the Przhevalsky district of the Semirechensk region. There are also collections of documents that indicate the names and descent of those who participated in the massacre.
        3. Togrul
          Togrul 11 June 2019 21: 15
          +1
          Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
          In fairness, Astana should be renamed to Leninsk. This is who the true creator of Kazakh statehood and your current historically unfair borders is.


          By the way, I agree. Plus, you must definitely install a monument to Yeltsin. On Independence Square.
  5. Boozer
    Boozer 10 June 2019 08: 25
    +4
    If the Kazakhs moved the capital to the region where the Kazakhs were in the minority, then the Russian capital should be transferred to the northern Caucasus ...
    1. tihonmarine
      tihonmarine 10 June 2019 11: 35
      0
      Better say that in Sochi to move the capital.
  6. yehat
    yehat 10 June 2019 09: 35
    +3
    Quote: Mister Creed
    If we intend to develop the North and the Far East, then the transfer of the capital to these regions is quite logical.

    repeatedly raised the question of moving the administrative capital to Novosibirsk.
    From the point of view of logistics, martial law and a number of other issues, this generally looks almost perfect.
    but in the 90s, the opposite process began - literally everything began to spread itself in zeroing in Novosibirsk, in all neighboring regions the population and economy began to melt rapidly, and Moscow began to swell on the contrary like a cancerous tumor. And now the transfer of the capital no longer looks so good.
  7. DimanC
    DimanC 10 June 2019 10: 38
    -2
    You look at the pictures - right home laughing
  8. nafanal
    nafanal 10 June 2019 12: 30
    +1
    For some reason, they did not name yet another reason for the transfer of the capital .. Namely, the division of Kazakhs into zhuzes .... They are not something that conflict but are jealous of each other .. It was the dominance of the southern zhuz in Alma-Ata that prompted the ruling elite-mainly immigrants from Northern Kazakhstan to move the capital. Yes and industry is mainly located north of A-Ata
    1. Semurg
      Semurg 10 June 2019 13: 48
      +3
      You get lost laughing There is no southern zhuz, as well as the northern one. And the ruling elite is mainly not from northern Kazakhstan. hi and the Kazakhs are not divided into zhuzes, but consist of them. There is not and there was not a single mezuzov conflict. So headquarters, you supposedly heard a ring, but I don’t know where he is.
      1. nafanal
        nafanal 10 June 2019 14: 23
        +1
        You know, I’m aware of the existence of the Junior Middle and Senior Zhuzes. I just named them by the occupied territory. I lived for some time in Kazakhstan and was interested in history. They even somehow differ from the rest. More light-skinned .. consider themselves an elite. Middle-center and east .. Junior-west and south-west .. Khan of the younger - Abulkhair was the first to turn to Russia about a protectorate. And the attitude towards him in some part of the Kazakh the society is ambiguous ... It was the Kazakhs of the Elder Zhuz who traveled with nationalistic ideas to Kazakhstan when this whistle-blowing perestroika began. Nazarbayev guessed what nationalism would lead to .. The smartest one turned out ... Therefore, he moved the capital away to the north .. from nationalists ..
        1. Semurg
          Semurg 10 June 2019 15: 42
          +2
          Zhuz lands are considered to be from the Syr Darya, the upper reaches and a strip to the north are the senior, the middle reaches and the strip to the north are the middle zhuz, the lower reaches with the Aral Sea and the strip to the west and north are the younger zhuz. Kazakhs do not have an elite in jazz division, only personal fidelity of the National Academy of Sciences and its policy of building an authoritarian state is the only parameter for joining the ranks of the elite both in politics and in the economy. Khan of the younger zhuz Abulkhair wanted to exploit the RI in his desire to become a khan of all Kazakhs, but something went wrong (se la vi). There was no prejudice towards him, he acted at that time and with the means that he had, the more he led the All-Kazakh army in two important battles with the Dzungars. The transfer of the capital was not for the sake of cutting off the nationalists as you write, but for the sake of cutting off the former party-economic nomenclature (elite), which the National Academy of Sciences knew as a portfolio holder from Kunaev, like Putin from Sobchak. He took young people with him to Astana, mostly under the age of 40 years.
  9. armata_armata
    armata_armata 10 June 2019 13: 10
    0
    Well, you can’t imagine worse Nur-Sultan, it would be better if they called Nazorbayevka
    1. Semurg
      Semurg 10 June 2019 13: 51
      +2
      It would not be better to leave Astana. Now we will wait for the death of the National Academy of Sciences, then there will be an audit of all his affairs and then we can roll back to Astana, though it will be a pure circus.
      1. nafanal
        nafanal 10 June 2019 14: 25
        +2
        There is nothing to be done ... Such a mentality .. Flattery in the traditions of the East ...
        1. Aposlya
          Aposlya 11 June 2019 06: 46
          +2
          Those. when Tsaritsyn was called Stalingrad, and Peter - Leningrad, is this also the eastern mentality leapfrog? And then Washington, what to justify? :)
  10. NF68
    NF68 10 June 2019 14: 59
    0
    For thirty years, Astana has become a kind of showcase of modern Kazakhstan. When they want to demonstrate the well-being of Kazakhstan, especially in comparison with the neighboring Central Asian republics, a prosperous Astana becomes one of the first proofs.


    It is beautifully written.In the center of Astana, everything looks really good. But only until you look into other districts of the city, far from the center of Astana. There the "showcase" looks quite different.
    1. Semurg
      Semurg 10 June 2019 15: 50
      +4
      I will tell you a great secret in any city there are ceremonial districts, and there is a bit to the side like "shanghai". Or in Moscow, Paris, London and others like that, it is not so, although they have been in the status of capitals for hundreds of years.
      1. NF68
        NF68 11 June 2019 16: 39
        0
        Quote: Semurg
        I will tell you a great secret in any city there are ceremonial districts, and there is a bit to the side like "shanghai". Or in Moscow, Paris, London and others like that, it is not so, although they have been in the status of capitals for hundreds of years.


        But not in any capital of the world there are so many show-offs as in Astana.
        1. Semurg
          Semurg 11 June 2019 17: 31
          0
          Yes, it’s normal in Astana, the ruler adorns his capital. Or do you think when Peter1 defended his Paradise it was not contemplated by contemporaries. Either there when the king of France built the Tuileries or Fontainebleau it was not a show off, or the Eiffel tower was not considered a show off by contemporaries. It should take about 100-200 years in the status of the capital of Astana and the show-offs of present-day Astana will turn into a highlight of Astana. Like now the palaces of St. Petersburg and the Eiffel Tower in Paris.
          1. NF68
            NF68 12 June 2019 16: 26
            0
            Quote: Semurg
            Yes, it’s normal in Astana, the ruler adorns his capital. Or do you think when Petr1 defended his Paradise it was not contemplated by the Pontoons contemporaries. Either there when the king of France built the Tuileries or Fontainebleau it was not a show off, or the Eiffel tower was not considered a show off by contemporaries.


            All this was several centuries ago.

            100-200 years should pass in the status of the capital of Astana, and the show-offs of present-day Astana will turn into a highlight of Astana.


            People in Kazakhstan live now and have problems above the roof. The government of Kazakhstan could use the available funds to greater advantage. First they build the capital, then it is renamed and so on and so on.
            1. Semurg
              Semurg 12 June 2019 17: 58
              0
              There are always and always problems above the roof and they must be solved in a complex. One of the solutions to the complex of problems was the transfer and construction of a new capital. Renaming Astana already wrote, it was, to put it mildly, a premature step.
              1. NF68
                NF68 13 June 2019 15: 26
                0
                Quote: Semurg
                There are always and always problems above the roof and they must be solved in a complex. One of the solutions to the complex of problems was the transfer and construction of a new capital. Renaming Astana already wrote, it was, to put it mildly, a premature step.


                The funds spent on the transfer of the capital of Kazakhstan could be spent with much greater benefit. For the same medicine, which, as you move away from the old and new capitals, simply turns into nothing. Going to hospitals, it is now advisable for the patient to take not only his own medications, but also his doctor, since one cannot particularly rely on the current luminaries of medicine.
    2. Evgesha
      Evgesha 12 June 2019 13: 08
      +1
      N the fellow ...
      Astana is a horror of architecture !!
      No style.
      They called a crowd of different architects and gave everyone freedom in design
      and in the end, everyone built what they wanted - and in the end, a complete disorder in style ..
      just complete horror.
      1. Semurg
        Semurg 12 June 2019 18: 06
        0
        It’s like it was a deal with the union, even the film was shot with the comedy Irony of Fate or with light steam. When they build twin neighborhoods with identical houses, with the same furniture, people don’t see any difference in different cities.
  11. MoJloT
    MoJloT 10 June 2019 17: 06
    0
    why Kazakhstan changed the capital
    It is much more interesting why the Kazakhs decided to change their place of residence, from Kazakhstan to Russia ...
    1. Aposlya
      Aposlya 11 June 2019 07: 01
      +2
      Quote: MoJloT
      It is much more interesting why the Kazakhs decided to change their place of residence, from Kazakhstan to Russia ..

      And you ask yourself, why are Russians leaving the Russian Federation? The answer lies on the surface ...
    2. Yaik Cossack
      Yaik Cossack 11 June 2019 08: 50
      +2
      They asked humiliatingly, since they were defeated by the Western Mongols-Dzungars. Citizenship was accepted voluntarily. True, predatory raids on the border continued, prisoners were sold into slavery in Central Asia. These were the "subjects"
      1. MoJloT
        MoJloT 11 June 2019 09: 20
        +3
        The truth at the same time continued predatory raids
        Now the same thing, only in our cities.
        1. Aposlya
          Aposlya 11 June 2019 13: 23
          -1
          Quote: MoJloT
          Now the same thing, only in our cities.

          Can you give examples of Kazakh raids, or again OBS?
          1. MoJloT
            MoJloT 11 June 2019 16: 02
            0
            Is everything normal with your memory? Here is the tip of the iceberg.
            Ibaydullo Subkhanov in the Moscow region organized an armed gang to attack citizens. In his organized crime group he attracted natives Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan ... five of which were naturalized citizens of the Russian Federation. The Moscow Regional Court convicted five members of the so-called GTA gang accused of murdering drivers on the roads of three regions of Central Russia. The judge recognized the charges against the defendants as proven. Hazratkhon Dodokhonov, Sherdzhon Kodirov, Anvar Ulugmuradov, Umar Khasanov and Zafardzhon Gulyamov are accused in the murders of 17 people and in two attempts, as well as in banditry, robberies, illegal manufacture and storage of weapons and theft of documents.
            It is known that in 2011 Subkhanov left for Syria, where he underwent military training and joined the international terrorist organization ISIS (banned in Russia). In 2012, he came to Russia on forged documents.
            1. Togrul
              Togrul 11 June 2019 18: 48
              +1
              Quote: MoJloT
              Is everything normal with your memory? Here is the tip of the iceberg.
              Ibaydullo Subkhanov in the Moscow region organized an armed gang to attack citizens. In his organized crime group he attracted natives Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan ... five of which were naturalized citizens of the Russian Federation. The Moscow Regional Court convicted five members of the so-called GTA gang accused of murdering drivers on the roads of three regions of Central Russia. The judge recognized the charges against the defendants as proven. Hazratkhon Dodokhonov, Sherdzhon Kodirov, Anvar Ulugmuradov, Umar Khasanov and Zafardzhon Gulyamov are accused in the murders of 17 people and in two attempts, as well as in banditry, robberies, illegal manufacture and storage of weapons and theft of documents.
              It is known that in 2011 Subkhanov left for Syria, where he underwent military training and joined the international terrorist organization ISIS (banned in Russia). In 2012, he came to Russia on forged documents.


              And not a single Kazakh surname.
      2. Aposlya
        Aposlya 11 June 2019 11: 46
        0
        Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
        They asked humiliatingly, since they were defeated by the Western Mongols-Dzungars.

        Are you the Kazakhs who are not Ukrainians beguiled? No one ever asked for citizenship, learn the materiel! There was talk of a military alliance, which later turned into a protectorate, but no more. The Kazakhs themselves exterminated everyone in their Dzungars ...
        1. Yaik Cossack
          Yaik Cossack 11 June 2019 11: 59
          0
          I do not need to repeat the nonsense of Kazakh propaganda. It’s now they are lying in Kazakhstan with might and main - supposedly, the Kazakhs, when citizenship was requested, you see how the nomads had in mind a completely different, equal union)))

          See the text of the Oath, for example, of Abulkhair, read books, including by Kazakh researchers (Shoinbaev for example), and study. Cossacks asked for Russian citizenship. As received in 1731-1740.
          And the Kazakhs did not exterminate the Dzungar - this is a lie. Dzungar defeated China, after which the Kazakhs, predictably, again changed Russia and took on new citizenship ... of China. The truth then again recognized the Russian ....
          I will not arrange an educational program, it’s a pity for the uneducated people of their time.
          1. Aposlya
            Aposlya 11 June 2019 13: 21
            0
            I do not need to repeat the nonsense of Kazakh propaganda.

            You can’t talk normally without rudeness?
            Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
            See the text of the Oath, for example, Abulhair

            Can you provide a historical document ?! Can you also translate Arabic script, or what is called "hawah everything that will be served"?
            The fact that Abulkhair allegedly annexed the Kazakhs of the Younger Zhuz to Russia was first written by A.I. Levshin in the 30s of the XIX century. His book “Description of the Kyrgyz Cossack or Kyrgyz Kaisat hordes and steppes” was written by order, its truthfulness aroused doubts among Chokan Valikhanov. He revealed many shortcomings of Levshin’s book, ridiculed him, calling him “Herodotus of Kazakh history”. Levshin strongly praised Abylay Khan and tried to denigrate Abulkhair and Abulmambet, distorting many historical facts.

            According to Levshin, Abulkhair allegedly swore an oath to Russia 3-4 times. And he never did it. For example, in 1736, Abulkhair helped the Bashkir rebels, and Levshin depicted the opposite. Many scientists have disproved Levshin in these matters, including the English researcher Olcott. Until now, a Russian translation of his 1730 letter has been cited as evidence of the loyalty of Abulkhair Khan of Russia. But the original does not match the translation!
            Here is the translation usually quoted:
            “Message to Petersburg to Her Majesty.
            To Her Majesty the Empress Empress, the greatest, noble, wealthy and clever owner of many lands, we wish God's mercy for a successful state every day, monthly and every year. Our statement to Your Majesty is that we did not have close relations with the Bashkir people subordinate to you, who are beyond the Urals. Desiring to be completely subordinate to Your Majesty, I send my messenger along with your subject Aldarbay. This Aldarbay demanded a messenger from us to Your Majesty, and therefore we, Abulkhair Khan, with the numerous Kazakh people of the Middle and Small Zhuzes subject to me, we all bow before you, we are your servants and all together with the common people we wish your patronage and look forward to your help, in order to live in harmony with the subjects of the Bashkir people beyond the Urals.
            We wish you all well-being and will be your subjects.
            (Transmitted): Seitkul, Chief Messenger of Kuttumbet with his comrades. "
            ***
            The words highlighted by us are absent in the original letter. Here is the correct translation of this historical document made by Amantai Isin:
            “The greatnesses and mercies of a high state above, ruling the lands of Her Majesty the white great empress, are addressed with ordinary intent. From day to day, from month to month, from year to year, the state remains in good health and multiplies. Our statement to Your Majesty is as follows. There is no agreement between us with the people of Your Majesty the Ural yestek-bashkorts. Now, wanting to receive protection and calmness under the cover of your imperial majesty, I am sending, having attached to the forest road the Urals yestek, your ambassador to your subject Aldarbai. Since this Aldarbai asked the ambassador to your imperial greatness, we Abulkhair Khan, forty dignitaries of the Kazakhs, the Middle and Younger Zhuzes, with all the Karas subject to me, bow our heads.
            Label: we want to reach an agreement with your servants from the Ural yeshteks. With your label, let us be in agreement.
            The sent ambassador Seitkul led by Kutlumet and comrades. "

            The purpose of the letter is clear from the words highlighted by us: to restore friendly relations with the Bashkirs, and not to ask for citizenship from Russia at all. Learn the materiel! :)
            1. Yaik Cossack
              Yaik Cossack 11 June 2019 16: 58
              +1
              Listen, with such childish tricks you only make people laugh. Why should I palm off the text of the letter and generally the correspondence when I ask about the Oath - a legal document. On the web, she is.
              And you wag because you do not want to take the oath.
              Why do not you want - because they completely break your Kazakh chauvinistic myth.
              Well, so be it. I will help you as a humanitarian aid. I will give some excerpts.

              The text of the oath of Khan Abulkhair 1738
              “I, the Kyrgyz-Kaisak people khan, Abulkhair, promise and swear by the almighty god that I want and must, with all my clan and with all my horde, the most blessed, sovereign Empress and autocrat of the Russian nation and so on ... a faithful, kind and obedient slave and subject ... "

              The text of the oath of Sultan Ablai 28 August 1740
              “For the Kyrgyz-Kaisatz people, the undersigned Saltan promise and swear by the almighty God that I want and owe with all my kind and with all my horde the most blessed ... Empress ... To be a faithful good and obedient slave and subject ... "

              Source: Monuments of Russian law. T.5. 1725-1762. M.2014. C.19, C.22.

              I hope that after such a whipping, sanity will prevail in you, "lover of materiel" ...
              1. Aposlya
                Aposlya 11 June 2019 20: 03
                0
                Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
                Well, so be it. I will help you as a humanitarian aid. I will give some excerpts.

                Link to the studio! fellow
                It is especially pleasing that these two khans called their people "Kirghiz-Kaisaks" and the text of the oath is one to one! And this is especially when you consider that Abulkhair Khan was just the same killed after he refused to go under the arm of the Russians! You see absolutely everything with history as bad as with science, if such fanfiction goes off with a bang ... as an example of fakes, I can also advise you a letter from Princess Anna, daughter of Yaroslav the Wise - after all, most still believe that it was!
                Or have you already invented it yourself - so to speak "sucked out of your finger"?
                1. Yaik Cossack
                  Yaik Cossack 11 June 2019 20: 27
                  +1
                  So I already gave the link. This book is online.
                  The fact that the oaths coincide is nothing strange, they are pretty standard. They were prepared in Russia. And the Kazakh khans accepted, that is, agreed with everything.

                  Surely you did not realize that you could not get involved in the discussion?
                  But if I post a scan of the book, will you apologize to me? Otherwise, you will finally look like a dishonorable person. Yes or no?
                  1. Aposlya
                    Aposlya 12 June 2019 12: 02
                    +1
                    Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
                    So I already gave the link. This book is online.

                    So will there be a link or not to the document itself ?!
                    We know about the oath of Khan Abulkhair only from the diaries of Neplyuev and that’s all! Well, what is supposedly the text of the oath is just a letter to his Russian queen for a completely different reason! fellow
  12. Oquzyurd
    Oquzyurd 10 June 2019 18: 25
    -10
    "Akmola was renamed to Astana, which is translated from the Kazakh language and means" capital "." The word "Ostan (A) ovka" originates from the word "Astana". It will be easier for everyone to understand what the word "Astana" means yes Most likely, I suppose that this place was for stopping various merchants and a caravan for a respite. Some Turkic-speaking "Astana" means in Russian - "Edge or Line". Let me clarify that I mean the Line-Edge of possession, country, or edge- feature of a balcony, houses, for example) For example, Azerbaijanis say "Evin Astana-sy" which means "Edge of the house", a platform near the step.
    1. The comment was deleted.
      1. Aposlya
        Aposlya 11 June 2019 06: 56
        -1
        Well, the campaign before us is a clear victim of education reform in Russia!
        Asy are sacred in Old Russian. Starorussky - this is when the Turks-Kazakhs did not smell not only in Central Asia, but also in general. ASIA - it is also an estate in Ancient Russia.

        Ases were actually Turks all the way, not Russian or even Slavs! fellow
        The Arab geographer Abulfeda (1321) writes: “To the east of the Abkhaz on the sea, there is the city of Alani (Medinet Allania). This city is so called because it is inhabited by a people named Alana. Alans are Turks who adopted Christianity ... Next to them lives the people of the Turkic race of Assa. This people has the same origin, the same religion as the Alans. ”
        Tana - as the Italians called the river DON. Tana, Tanais, Tanaity.

        What else nafig Italians? The ancient Greeks called the Don River Tanais, indicating in the same way that it was so named after the Scythian tribe that lived along this river. The tribe of Tana is still alive - it is part of the Kazakhs of the Younger Zhuz.
        It seems to me that the Turk-Kazakhs, through the appropriation of the names and symbols of RUSI, want to justify the right to land owned by Ruskim.

        It seems to me that you stupidly skipped history as an object! The Russians then crossed the Volga only under Ivan the Terrible only in the 4th century!
        Russians came to the lands of the future "Pavlodar, Semipalatinsk, Ust-Kamenogorsk" only after the 18th century.
        The Ural Cossacks settled on the Ural River (Yaik) in the middle of the 16th century. When the Nogai Horde roamed there. Subsequently destroyed by the Dzungars.

        So, after all, you set the Dzungars on the Nogai horde, so that later you would come there ....

        In short, here is a very difficult case with the vector of heavy chauvinism ...
        1. Yaik Cossack
          Yaik Cossack 11 June 2019 08: 47
          +1
          So the fascist illiterate teens pulled themselves up. Ases were Iranians. Dzhungars never fought with the Nogy horde. Yaitsky town was founded at the beginning of the XVII century. Well and so on.
          1. Aposlya
            Aposlya 11 June 2019 11: 39
            0
            Where did you see fascism in my post? And I haven’t been pulling on a teenager for a long time already, so already 30 years old ... although if you are already over 80 years old, then okay ... :)
            Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
            Ases were Iranians. Dzhungars never fought with the Nogy horde.

            There is a bunch of chronicle evidence that the Ases are exactly the Turks, but the fact that they "suddenly became" Iranians - not a single one ...
            And by the way, the Dzhungars just fought with the Nogais. Kalmyks, the same dzhungars and they fought with Nogais ...
  13. M. Michelson
    M. Michelson 10 June 2019 20: 20
    0
    Fine acted. Stupid name of the capital The capital was replaced by Vladisvet. By an amazing coincidence coinciding with the name of the first president.
    If they called Nazarbay, it would be funnier.
    1. joker
      joker 11 June 2019 02: 57
      0
      Proxima, regarding the transfer of the capital, I agree to 100% the capital of the Russian Federation - to Chechnya !!! The capital of Russia, as part of the Russian Federation, - to Vladimir - capital city !!!
      And to call the capital of the Russian Federation! Utinsk!
      Unemployment in the Caucasus will instantly disappear; everyone will service and guard the brain center of the RF GDP.
  14. Yaik Cossack
    Yaik Cossack 11 June 2019 11: 46
    -2
    Good article!
    Now we need to write more about the truth about the post-Soviet states, since the media in Russia mainly praise the regimes there (for money, by order or thoughtlessness, it makes no difference). Therefore, the inhabitants of Russia have a distorted idea of ​​our "allies".
    Few people, for example, know Nazarbayev’s numerous statements (especially during his visits to the USA and Turkey) that Kazakhstan and Russia are not allies at all. Kazakhstan opposes Russia on the issue of Crimea and a number of other problems. Duplicity in the East is like valor!
    Russia does not know that Kazakhstan and Russia are competitors in the energy market, huge loans were simply forgiven to Kazakhstan already in the zero years, Kazakhstan benefits from the Customs Union by about 1 billion dollars a year, after 2014 in Kazakhstan politics is oriented against Russia (creation of territorial units, etc.), although we transfer weapons to Kazakhstan almost for free, etc., etc.
    The Russians have no future in Kazakhstan and never will, but Russia continues to pay for the formation of an objectively hostile state.

    Kazakhstan's “multi-age” nature is actually an attempt to play on the contradictions between Russia, the United States and China, playing them off against each other in their own interests. But why is Russia?
    Everything, Kazakhstan is an independent state. It's time to stop living the phantoms of the USSR. About .. ali, so about .. ali))) Fix losses and play in a new way. It is in Russia's interests to either have a completely friendly regime there (which is utopia), or not help the enemies, strengthen the border and invest resources in their own development by paying for the resettlement of Russians in Russia (the majority of Kazakhs cannot even work in the oil industry - only as bosses or in the state apparatus, qualified specialists - Russian or foreign).
    The influence of radical Islam is growing in Kazakhstan, tribalism is also there (no matter how they try to convince us of the opposite), let them figure it out themselves ...
  15. Yaik Cossack
    Yaik Cossack 11 June 2019 12: 03
    +1
    Quote: Aposlya
    Where did you see fascism in my post? And I don’t pull on a teenager for a long time already, so 30 already ...


    You flatter yourself. By aplomb and lack of knowledge.
    The fabrications of the fascist pan-Turkists about "ases" do not have any evidential power. Everything has long been sorted out.
    1. Yaik Cossack
      Yaik Cossack 11 June 2019 12: 05
      +1
      There are many good scientific works on the Alans, their descendants are modern Ossetians. Not Turkic-speaking even once. But on a number of Caucasian and Turkic sites, the topic is exaggerated. They have Scythians - Turks, and Sarmatians - too. Well it is, offtopic.
  16. Yaik Cossack
    Yaik Cossack 11 June 2019 12: 17
    +1
    Quote: Aposlya
    There is a bunch of chronicle evidence that the Ases are precisely the Turks, but the fact that they "suddenly became" Iranians - not a single one ... And by the way, the Dzungars just fought with the Nogais. Kalmyks, the same Dzungars and they fought with the Nogais ...


    Wow, come on, give your "chronicle testimonies")) Iman Bashhi's "chronicle" is not an hour)))))

    About Kalmyks - merged, but continue to try to get out? )))
    Dzhungars (zyungars, zyungars, zengors, zyungars, zhungars; Mong. Zүүn gar, Kalm. Zүn һar) is a political term, which means the population of the Dzungar khanate.
    I will surprise you - even part of the Khalkha entered the Dzungaria, Kazakhs who accepted citizenship, even the Turks of Xinjiang and the Uighurs.
    The Oirot clans, known as Kalmyks, were never included in the Dzungar state; rather, on the contrary, they left for internal political reasons and under pressure.
    Read more and fantasize less.
  17. Yaik Cossack
    Yaik Cossack 11 June 2019 12: 31
    0
    Quote: Aposlya
    The Arab geographer Abulfeda (1321) writes: “To the east of the Abkhaz on the sea, there is the city of Alani (Medinet Allania). This city is so called because it is inhabited by a people named Alana. Alans are Turks who adopted Christianity ... Next to them lives the people of the Turkic race of Assa. This people has the same origin, the same religion as the Alans. ”


    Everything is clear - I guessed right. This Abulfeda is constantly exaggerated on the Caucasian Karachai-Balkarian and Vakhnakh sites as part of a massive attempt to represent the Alans as Türks. )))
    They misrepresent both the translation and the internal and external context. At the same time, the "Turkists" absolutely ignore the entire set of sources, archaeological and ethnographic data. So it's not interesting, it's all kindergarten ...
  18. Yaik Cossack
    Yaik Cossack 11 June 2019 12: 35
    +1
    Quote: Aposlya
    The tribe of Tana is still alive - it is part of the Kazakhs of the Younger Zhuz.


    Well, I said ... kindergarten. )))) It turns out that the Kazakhs called Tanais Tanais, after the name of their tribe, and the ancient Greeks heard the name from them! This is what the children's folkhistory looks like ...
  19. Aposlya
    Aposlya 11 June 2019 13: 26
    0
    Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
    And the Kazakhs did not exterminate the Dzungar - this is a lie. Dzungar defeated China, after which the Kazakhs, predictably, again changed Russia and accepted new citizenship ...

    Again lie! It was the Kazakhs in their steppes who completely defeated the Dzungars ... But those Dzungars that were in the territory of China had already cut the cows, not the Chinese.
  20. Yaik Cossack
    Yaik Cossack 11 June 2019 14: 36
    +1
    Quote: Aposlya
    Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
    And the Kazakhs did not exterminate the Dzungar - this is a lie. Dzungar defeated China, after which the Kazakhs, predictably, again changed Russia and accepted new citizenship ...

    Again lie! It was the Kazakhs in their steppes who completely defeated the Dzungars ... But those Dzungars that were in the territory of China had already cut the cows, not the Chinese.


    Kazakh false patriotic whistles and tweeters about your great victories leave for internal use.
    Kazakhs were beaten by both Galdan-Boshoktu-khan, and Tsevan Rabdan, and Galdan-Ceren. And even Amursana. Yes, pay attention - in the Battle of Orbulak in 1643, the Dzungars were defeated by Central Asian emirs with the support of a small detachment of Kazakhs. You should not attribute this victory to yourself)))
    The Dzhungars captured even your boasted Khan Ablai, sat and gnawed bones, as one source reports)))
    He then swore to the Manchus, didn’t they know? Do not they write this in Kazakh textbooks?

    You will not succeed in giving out any skirmishes and separate local battles with success for the Kazakhs after the rout, as well as finishing off individual Amursana units after its defeat by the Chinese-Manchurian army.
    Dzungaria was defeated during the 3 wars with Manchurian China. These are well-known facts.
    Here is one from the English-language Wikipedia, since you do not believe Russian sources (I hope you already know the Latin alphabet):

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dzungar_people

    In 1697, two relatives of Galdan Boshugtu Khan, Danjila and Rabdan, surrendered to the Qing Kangxi Emperor.
    ...
    After a series of inconclusive military conflicts that started in the 1680s, the Dzungars were subjugated by the Manchu-led Qing dynasty (1644 – 1911) in the late 1750s.
    Clarke argued that the Qing campaign in 1757–58 "to the complete destruction of not only the Dzungar state but of the Dzungars as a people." After the Qianlong Emperor led Qing forces to victory over the Dzungar Oirat (Western) Mongols in 1755, he originally was going to split the Dzungar Khanate into four tribes headed by four Khans, the Khoit tribe was to have the Dzungar leader Amursana as its Khan ...
    Amursana rejected the Qing arrangement and rebelled since he wanted to be leader of a united Dzungar nation. Qianlong then issued his orders for the genocide and eradication of the entire Dzungar nation and name, Qing Manchu Bannermen and Khalkha (Eastern) Mongols enslaved Dzungar women and children while slaying the other Dzungars.
    ...
    The Qianlong Emperor then ordered the genocide of the Dzungars ... Wei Yuan estimated the total population of Dzungars before the fall at 600,000 people, or 200,000 households.

    Everything, further educational program from my side, I consider exhausted.
    1. Yaik Cossack
      Yaik Cossack 11 June 2019 14: 55
      +1
      Oh, it turns out that Kazakh chauvinistic propaganda is presented with might and main in the Russian-language Wikipedia (rather, they would have switched to the Latin alphabet).
      I read:
      "In 1643, in the gorge of the Orbulak River, the famous Orbulak battle took place, in which 600 Kazakh soldiers led by Zhangir Sultan with the support of 20 thousand soldiers, brought to the aid of the Emir of Samarkand Zhalantos Bahadur from the Kazakh clan Tortkar ... stopped the 50 thousand army of the Dzungars .. "

      So the victory of the troops of Samarkand turns into .... the victory of 600 Kazakhs with the help of 20 thousand other soldiers ...
      Was Zhalantos a Genghiside?

      There is still about the battle of Anraka. Allegedly, either 30 thousand or 150 thousand Kazakhs allegedly defeated 100 thousand Dzungars. According to legend ... It is clear that this is all nonsense. Neither the Dzungars nor the Kazakhs could have such armies. They are not privatized by numerous Chinese sources. There was a local battle and, by the way, according to Chinese data with unclear results. The Dzungarian detachment retreated, but was not destroyed.
      And it seems after this supposedly decisive "victory" a few years later in 1739-1741. Dzungars conquer most of the Kazakh territory ...
      So we have vivid examples of modern chauvinistic Kazakh propaganda.
      It’s interesting, does she mention that in 1756 the Chinese completely defeated Khan Ablai, after which the Kazakhs fled in panic to the Russians with pleading for protection? ))) Probably not ...
      1. Yaik Cossack
        Yaik Cossack 11 June 2019 15: 09
        0
        And here are the sources of "knowledge" of Kazakh jingoistic patriots.
        Type the battle of Anraka in the network, and immediately Kazakhstan sites will pop up.
        Here, admire one of them:
        http://ec-sport.kz/?p=5119

        Title: "Anrakay battle - death of the Dzungar Khanate".

        The truth is further in smaller letters: "... we will tell about the Anrakay battle, which marked the beginning of the death of the Dzungar Khanate."
        So to speak, they cut a little sturgeon)))
        But, even if we omit all the flooded nonsense and fantastic details about this battle, then how can it be "the beginning of the death of the Dzungar Khanate", if then this khanate of the Kazakhs not only defeated, but also occupied key regions? What is the beginning of victory here? The fact that having kicked the Kazakhs, the Dzungars fought further with China and lost to him? Yes, the Dzungars were then defeated, but what have the Kazakhs to do with it?
  21. Yaik Cossack
    Yaik Cossack 11 June 2019 17: 02
    0
    Quote: Aposlya
    Can you provide a historical document ?! Can you also translate Arabic script, or what is called "hawah everything that will be served"?

    Is this what you call "normal conversation"?
    I hope now you will not carry nonsense about the lack of documents? In the Russian archives there are ligature and its professional translations, everything has been published many times a long time ago in academic publications.
    I do not "hawala", but I refute your lies.
  22. Aposlya
    Aposlya 11 June 2019 19: 05
    0
    Quote: MoJloT
    Hazratkhon Dodokhonov, Sherdzhon Kodirov, Anvar Ulugmuradov, Umar Khasanov and Zafardzhon Gulyamov

    What do you think, and which of them is Kazakh ?! Maximum Uyghur or Uzbek ...
    You do not forget that we also have Koreans as well as Russians with Ukrainians and other Germans ... we have a multinational country.
  23. Aposlya
    Aposlya 11 June 2019 19: 20
    0
    Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
    Kazakh false patriotic whistles and tweeters about your great victories leave for internal use.
    Kazakhs were beaten by both Galdan-Boshoktu-khan, and Tsevan Rabdan, and Galdan-Ceren. And even Amursana. Yes, pay attention - in the battle of Orbulak in 1643, the Central Asian emirs defeated the Dzungars with the support of a small detachment of Kazakhs.

    For your information, these so-called Central Asian emirs were Kazakhs! :) You will not understand this, since you have only chauvinistic stories in your brains about the history of the Kazakhs, and more, alas, nothing stuck there ... Who led the army? Zhangir Khan is a Kazakh Khan. Well, your so-called "emirs" are just one Yalangtush Bahadur from the Kazakh clan Alshin - a division of the Younger Zhuz! The fact that he is from the territory of modern Uzbekistan does not prove anything, since Tashkent was once part of the Kazakh Khanate! Or you didn’t know about it ?! fellow
    Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
    He then swore to the Manchus, didn’t they know?

    You have the text of his oath to the Manchus, otherwise you don’t even give a link in your flight of fancy ...
    Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
    Everything, further educational program from my side, I consider exhausted.

    Those. on the territory of Kazakhstan the Dzungars like the hooves themselves threw back or did the Russian troops really knock them out of here? With your logic, it’s not a friendship that came out in life ...
  24. Aposlya
    Aposlya 11 June 2019 19: 22
    0
    Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
    Yes, the jungars were then defeated, but what have the Kazakhs to do with it?

    The fact that the main troops were knocked out by the Kazakh wars, but the manzhur already finished off the weakened Dzungarian nomads - the old people, children and those militias who survived after the Dust Campaign! But you cannot understand this with your chauvinistic clips!
  25. Aposlya
    Aposlya 11 June 2019 19: 24
    0
    Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
    I hope now you will not carry nonsense about the lack of documents? In the Russian archives there are ligature and its professional translations, everything has been published many times a long time ago in academic publications.

    Those. you yourself can’t translate, but believe only in a convenient point of view? Everything is clear with you!
    1. Yaik Cossack
      Yaik Cossack 11 June 2019 20: 17
      0
      I believe in translations of Russian Orientalists and academic publications. Why do I need to translate myself. Can you translate?
      So do you still continue to dispute the authenticity of the oath I brought from the collection? Yes or no?
  26. Aposlya
    Aposlya 11 June 2019 19: 27
    +1
    Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
    Was Zhalantos a Genghiside?

    As a matter of fact, he was from the Tortkar family! This is Junior Zhuz, a unit of Alshin! They have nothing to do with Genghisides ... This only once again shows your meager knowledge in this matter ...
  27. Yaik Cossack
    Yaik Cossack 11 June 2019 19: 28
    +1
    Quote: Aposlya
    The fact that he is from the territory of modern Uzbekistan does not prove anything, since Tashkent was once part of the Kazakh Khanate! Or didn’t you know about this ?!
    That
    The fact that the Khan Chingizids of the Kazakh khanates periodically committed aggression and captured Turkestan cities is well known. And here that Samarkand and Tashkent are Kazakh, you have already surpassed yourself. Uzbeks here strongly disagree)))
    Well, dear forum participants, you can see quite convincingly on these examples the fact of the existence of militant Kazakh chauvinism. Look how easily a raid of impartiality flew from them and what got out came out. But how they walked around in Russian history))))
  28. Yaik Cossack
    Yaik Cossack 11 June 2019 19: 31
    0
    Quote: Aposlya
    You have the text of his oath to the Manchus, otherwise you don’t even give a link in your flight of fancy ...


    You do not want to thank me first for the fact that I found your previous oaths, dispelled your dense delusions? And they breathed so, so they boiled with righteous anger and ... pretend that nothing happened))))
  29. Yaik Cossack
    Yaik Cossack 11 June 2019 19: 34
    0
    Quote: Aposlya
    Those. on the territory of Kazakhstan the Dzungars like the hooves themselves threw back or did the Russian troops really knock them out of here? With your logic, it’s not a friendship that came out in life ...

    So the Dzungarian army went to war with China. What could they expect among the Kazakh steppe when there was a war for survival with China. Or maybe you have facts other than inflamed national pride?
    No, of course, after the victory of China, the Kazakhs then attacked the small detachments of the Dzungars and nomads, who were fortunate enough to get away from the Manchurians ... mischief, so to speak. But the honor of defeating the Dzungars does not belong to them.
  30. Yaik Cossack
    Yaik Cossack 11 June 2019 19: 37
    0
    Quote: Aposlya
    The fact that the main troops were knocked out by the Kazakh wars, but the manzhur already finished off the weakened Dzungarian nomads - the old people, children and those militias who survived after the Dust Campaign! But you cannot understand this with your chauvinistic clips!


    Well, you are already in passionate begin to lie uncontrollably. You are no longer referenced to facts. You cannot refute anything from what I write.

    The result is satisfied.
    1. Yaik Cossack
      Yaik Cossack 11 June 2019 19: 45
      +1
      Now for the rest of the forum participants:
      The tragedy of Dzungaria began after the death of Galdan-Tseren in 1745. Dynastic strife and civil war broke out between various applicants. Then in 1754 the offensive of the huge Manchu army began, which defeated the Oirats (Dzungars). Then Amursan rebelled, but was defeated by China and fled to the Russians.
  31. Aposlya
    Aposlya 11 June 2019 19: 56
    -1
    Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
    No, you write that the Russians deliberately destroyed the Kazakhs in the 30 years during collectivization and starvation. Although it was not Russian, but the Soviet government.

    Those. when in the 30s the Kazakhs were exterminated, you say that the Soviet government did it, right? And how the whole Kazakhstan was built up with "cities and factories" so all the Russians did it according to your own words? lol
  32. Yaik Cossack
    Yaik Cossack 11 June 2019 20: 19
    0
    Quote: Aposlya
    Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
    Was Zhalantos a Genghiside?

    As a matter of fact, he was from the Tortkar family! This is Junior Zhuz, a unit of Alshin! They have nothing to do with Genghisides ... This only once again shows your meager knowledge in this matter ...

    Unlike you, if I do not know, then I ask. I will believe you, if you lay out the proof.
    If not, then I will assume that you were insulted as with the oath
  33. Yaik Cossack
    Yaik Cossack 11 June 2019 20: 20
    0
    Quote: Aposlya
    Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
    No, you write that the Russians deliberately destroyed the Kazakhs in the 30 years during collectivization and starvation. Although it was not Russian, but the Soviet government.

    Those. when in the 30s the Kazakhs were exterminated, you say that the Soviet government did it, right? And how the whole Kazakhstan was built up with "cities and factories" so all the Russians did it according to your own words? lol


    You do not leave the topic. Then we will discuss it. Have you read the oaths?
  34. Yaik Cossack
    Yaik Cossack 11 June 2019 20: 34
    +1
    Quote: Togrul
    Almost all the killed Russian colonialists, and there were about 2900 on the conscience of the Kyrgyz. And they were killed in the Przhevalsky district of the Semirechensk region.


    That is, the torn apart civilians (women and children) are "colonizers". Based on your context, it turns out that they need it? Don't feel sorry for them?
    Well, dear visitors of the forum, you see "ordinary fascism" classic, unalloyed.
    And the murders of peaceful Russians in Semirechye and Turgay, the siege of Turgai - is it not Kazakhs?
    I worked in RGVIA specially with f. 400 op.25 d.11417. "The case of the suppression of the uprising of the Kyrgyz called to field work." So I'll lay out the facts, don't blame me. As soon as you merge, your fellow tribesmen have already merged with the oath of the khans. They began to blunt, they say ... than prove. Boy talk.
    Somehow I’ll get together and write an article.
    1. Togrul
      Togrul 11 June 2019 20: 55
      0
      Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
      That is, the torn apart civilians (women and children) are "colonizers". Based on your context, it turns out that they need it? Don't feel sorry for them?


      I don’t understand why you get so colonized and colonized by the word. It’s quite an official term of those times.



      Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
      And the murders of peaceful Russians in Semirechye and Turgay, the siege of Turgai - is it not Kazakhs?


      In Semirechye - the Kyrgyz. I rummage through the documents - I can get the tribal affiliation and the names of the leaders. The siege of Turgay - Kazakhs. Only there (in Thurgai) were the Russians marked by the killings of civilians.

      Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
      I worked in RGVIA specially with f. 400 op.25 d.11417. "The case of the suppression of the uprising of the Kyrgyz called to field work." So I'll lay out the facts, don't blame me. As soon as you merge, your fellow tribesmen have already merged with the oath of the khans. They began to blunt, they say ... than prove. Boy talk.


      Spread it out. I already leaked one stupid vatan somehow. He couldn’t find anything but to be sure. Especially when I posted the facts of the massacres of Russian children and women of Kazakhs.
    2. Togrul
      Togrul 11 June 2019 21: 01
      0
      Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
      Well, dear visitors of the forum, you see "ordinary fascism" classic, unalloyed.


      M-de, you need to treat your head. laughing

      Regarding the killing of children and women in Turgay

  35. Yaik Cossack
    Yaik Cossack 11 June 2019 20: 40
    0
    Quote: Togrul
    Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
    Well, and how - do they write the whole truth right in Kazakhstan? All-all? In the 1916 year that Turkish agents and mullahs raised a treacherous rebellion in the rear of warring Russia? That the Kazakhs, who insisted on "equal rights", refused in the conditions of war only to go to the rear services so that the freed Russians went to the front? That during the uprising, the Kazakhs slaughtered the peaceful Russian population - women and children. What when the natural retribution of rebels and murderers came, then the Kazakhs began to migrate en masse to China? Are they writing?


    Here it is not necessary to erect a slander. Almost all of the murdered Russian colonialists, and there were about 2900 on the conscience of the Kyrgyz. And they were killed in the Przhevalsky district of the Semirechensk region. There are also collections of documents that indicate the names and descent of those who participated in the massacre.


    !!!
  36. Yaik Cossack
    Yaik Cossack 11 June 2019 21: 14
    +1
    Quote: Togrul
    I don’t understand why you get so colonized and colonized by the word.

    That is, the word is, and your fascist context - they killed not women and children, but colonialists. And now trying to get out. But it won’t work out.
    1. Togrul
      Togrul 11 June 2019 21: 16
      0
      Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
      That is, the word is, and your fascist context - they killed not women and children, but colonialists. And now trying to get out. But it won’t work out.


      This is your personal hallucination to see fascists everywhere. In addition, the killing of non-combatants is the work of the Kyrgyz. Will you take a word or provide you with documents?
  37. Yaik Cossack
    Yaik Cossack 11 June 2019 21: 15
    +1
    Quote: Togrul
    Only there (in Thurgai) were the Russians marked by the killings of civilians.


    Oh how. Did the Russians rebel themselves and besiege themselves?
    1. Togrul
      Togrul 11 June 2019 21: 17
      0
      Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
      Oh how. Did the Russians rebel themselves and besiege themselves?


      No. They killed children and women of peaceful Kazakhs. Actually, your ancestors did this long before those events, right?
  38. Yaik Cossack
    Yaik Cossack 11 June 2019 21: 17
    +1
    Quote: Togrul
    M-de, you need to treat your head. Regarding the killing of children and women in Turgay


    You quote an incomprehensible quote from nowhere, which contains out of context some words about the killings and think that this is a proof?
    Here, your fellow tribeer is grimacing, cannot believe the oaths of Kazakh rulers in official publications ... do you think that you are proving something with a text torn from somewhere?
    1. Togrul
      Togrul 11 June 2019 21: 23
      0
      I made these screenshots a couple of years ago for a discussion with one of your brother's minds. Source - one of the Soviet books on the topic.
  39. Yaik Cossack
    Yaik Cossack 11 June 2019 21: 20
    0
    Quote: Togrul
    Spread it out. I already leaked one stupid vatan somehow. He couldn’t find anything but to be sure. Especially when I posted the facts of the massacres of Russian children and women of Kazakhs.


    Well, uncovered. And I have just caught more than one smart Kazakh in arrogance and illiteracy. Well, what can you do, you only have such smart ones.
    1. Togrul
      Togrul 11 June 2019 21: 23
      0
      Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
      Well, uncovered. And I have just caught more than one smart Kazakh in arrogance and illiteracy. Well, what can you do, you only have such smart ones.


      Are you up to it?
  40. Yaik Cossack
    Yaik Cossack 11 June 2019 21: 22
    +1
    Quote: Togrul
    Spread it out.


    Where is "please"?
    I’m enlightening you here, I’m not sparing my strength, and you begin to command, as at home))))
    1. Togrul
      Togrul 11 June 2019 21: 25
      0
      Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
      Where is "please"?
      I’m enlightening you here, I’m not sparing my strength, and you begin to command, as at home))))


      Oh, your self-esteem is overpriced. Intelligence does not catch up with her. =)
  41. Yaik Cossack
    Yaik Cossack 11 June 2019 21: 24
    +1
    Quote: Togrul
    I made these screenshots a couple of years ago for a discussion with one of your brother's minds. Source - one of the Soviet books on the topic.


    One ... many years ago ... quote quoted ... Proofs will be?
    1. Togrul
      Togrul 11 June 2019 21: 26
      0
      Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
      One ... many years ago ... quote quoted ... Proofs will be?


      This is quite a proof. No? Or do you think photoshop?
      1. Yaik Cossack
        Yaik Cossack 11 June 2019 21: 33
        +1
        This is not proof. No book output.
        The text itself is about nothing. In quotes, there is a certain complaint ".... oh-boy, the head of the district killed a hundred people." Or maybe this is a slander, or maybe just killed rebels are named among those killed. Even your footnotes are cut off.
        1. Togrul
          Togrul 11 June 2019 21: 37
          0
          Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
          maybe among the killed are just killed rebels.


          From among children and women? Not. Just tell me directly that you are not sorry for the murdered children and women of the Kazakhs.

          Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
          This is not proof. No book output.


          I'll look for. This is one of the books devoted to the uprising, or S. Asfendiyarov D.
          "National liberation uprising of 1916 in Kazakhstan" or B. Suleimenov, V. Ya. Vasin.
          "Uprising of 1916 in Kazakhstan"
  42. Yaik Cossack
    Yaik Cossack 11 June 2019 21: 36
    +1
    Quote: Togrul
    Oh, your self-esteem is overpriced. Intelligence does not catch up with her. =)


    I perfectly understand your intention to reduce the matter to personal insults in order to cover up the foolish tribesmen who were retelling the patriotic Kazakh tales here, nothing more remains for you. But do not hope.
    1. Togrul
      Togrul 11 June 2019 21: 40
      0
      Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
      I perfectly understand your intention to reduce the matter to personal insults in order to cover up the foolish tribesmen who were retelling the patriotic Kazakh tales here, nothing more remains for you. But do not hope.


      Just answer you in your own manner. And if you want a civilized discussion, then you are welcome.
  43. Togrul
    Togrul 11 June 2019 21: 43
    0
    Now, regarding the murders of Russians in Semirechye.

    Breakdown of losses by counties. Vernensky district is Kazakhs. Jarkent - Uyghurs and Kazakhs. Pishpeksky and Przhevalsky are Kyrgyz. Also in the killings of the Russians were involved Dungans from the Mariinsky village.



    Oh yes. Source Collection of documents "Uprising of 1916 in Central Asia and Kazakhstan" M.1960.
  44. Yaik Cossack
    Yaik Cossack 11 June 2019 21: 47
    +1
    Quote: Togrul
    From among children and women? Not. Just tell me directly that you are not sorry for the murdered children and women of the Kazakhs.

    Do you have a moral right to demand from me when the first announced that they were only killing "colonialists"? Which directly implies the absence of separate women and children from them.
    Now you are aroused by the "rebels" whom I specially screwed you into. Now you feel sorry for the women and children, they are Kazakhs, and not some Russian "colonialists".
    This is your position called immoral cynicism. You perfectly demonstrated it.

    And now I will answer you. Unlike the Kazakh Natsiks, I feel sorry for all civilians.

    But the text you quoted does not prove anything. I’ll try to explain again, not even to you, but to all who read. You brought some complaint. It itself may contain the truth, part of the truth or fiction and fraud. Therefore, taken separately - does not prove anything.
    1. Togrul
      Togrul 11 June 2019 21: 54
      0
      Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
      Do you have a moral right to demand from me when the first announced that they were only killing "colonialists"? Which directly implies the absence of separate women and children from them.


      It suggests itself.

      Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
      Now you are aroused by the "rebels" whom I specially screwed you into. Now you feel sorry for the women and children, they are Kazakhs, and not some Russian "colonialists".
      This is your position called immoral cynicism. You perfectly demonstrated it.


      I have nothing against the rebels. Women and children are really sorry.

      And now I will answer you. Unlike the Kazakh Natsiks, I feel sorry for all civilians.


      Let me doubt it. And then what right do you have to present Kazakhs for the dead Kyrgyz Russian children and women, and even having on their conscience the murder of Kazakh children and women?


      Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
      You brought some complaint. It itself may contain the truth, part of the truth or fiction and fraud. Therefore, taken separately - does not prove anything.


      But tell me why they invent or Russian completely guided by the Vienna Convention?
  45. Yaik Cossack
    Yaik Cossack 11 June 2019 22: 21
    +1
    Quote: Togrul
    Let me doubt it. And then what right do you have to present to the Kazakhs for Russian children and women killed by the Kyrgyz, and even having on their conscience the murder of Kazakh children and women?


    So you yourself brought up the list of those killed in the Semirechensk region. There, about three dozen killed Russians fall to the share of Kazakh districts. But Russians were killed in other areas as well. So don't "rock the rights of offended innocence". Yes, the Kyrgyz killed a lot more. It doesn't whitewash you in any way.
    The same documents also contain explanations - why the Kazakhs did not manage to kill a lot.

    1. Togrul
      Togrul 11 June 2019 22: 29
      0
      Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
      So you yourself brought up the list of those killed in the Semirechensk region. There, about three dozen killed Russians fall to the share of Kazakh districts. But Russians were killed in other areas as well. So don't "rock the rights of offended innocence". Yes, the Kyrgyz killed a lot more. It doesn't whitewash you in any way.
      The same documents also contain explanations - why the Kazakhs did not manage to kill a lot.


      So it was about children and women, and they are on the conscience of the Kyrgyz. Not weak yes. 2000 were killed and 1000 captured by the Kyrgyz, and presented to the Kazakhs, and even claim that it does not whitewash the Kazakhs. If you search through the documents, you will find the role of the Dungans, for which, by the way, the Russians killed about 5 hundred of them.
      1. Yaik Cossack
        Yaik Cossack 11 June 2019 22: 43
        0
        Do not try to make an insulted innocence of yourself. The Kazakhs also killed, only military units and self-defense did not give them much to kill. Above that is evidence. They wanted to take Turgai, but they couldn’t. So everyone is good.
        1. Yaik Cossack
          Yaik Cossack 11 June 2019 23: 17
          +1


          Here is one of the cases ...



          But the answer to the question - why the massacre failed - the Russian population managed to take refuge in their villages.
          1. Yaik Cossack
            Yaik Cossack 11 June 2019 23: 23
            +1
            I explain - although the Kyrgyz are mentioned in the text, in fact, they mean the Kazakhs of the Peter and Paul County. Until the 20's, this term denoted both the current Kazakhs and the Kyrgyz.
          2. Togrul
            Togrul 12 June 2019 09: 39
            0
            If they wanted to burn a village, they would burn It’s not a tricky business.
        2. Togrul
          Togrul 12 June 2019 09: 39
          0
          In fact, Kyrgyz and not Kazakhs killed women and children. This is a fact that you cannot deny. They wanted to take Turgai - yes. And it is clear that there were isolated cases from the Kazakhs. And the Russians are more massive.
  46. Yaik Cossack
    Yaik Cossack 12 June 2019 10: 44
    0
    Quote: Togrul
    If they wanted to burn a village, they would burn It’s not a tricky business.


    Not. They wanted, but they couldn’t. Scared.
    1. Aposlya
      Aposlya 12 June 2019 12: 07
      0
      Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
      Not. They wanted, but they couldn’t. Scared.

      Tokhtamysh Khan somehow burned Moscow and did not scare, but then scared? They simply regretted it, Kazakhs are not Cossacks, they did not carry out the genocide of the population ...
    2. Togrul
      Togrul 13 June 2019 09: 26
      0
      They couldn’t take Turgai, but burn the village. Well, this is not a tricky business. Just do not need anyone.
  47. Aposlya
    Aposlya 12 June 2019 11: 52
    0
    Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
    Look how easily a raid of impartiality flew from them and what got out came out. But how they walked around in Russian history))))

    How beautifully you are trying to throw your chauvinistic reasoning over others, Goebbels would have envied! For your information, the Tashkent Khan Tursun - twice swore allegiance to the Kazakh Khan Yessim. After an attempted rebellion, the army of Tursun Khan was defeated and Tashkent became part of the Kazakh Khanate, i.e. from the 17 century. This is a story, not your cries of chauvinism! :)
    1. Togrul
      Togrul 13 June 2019 09: 25
      0
      Quote: Aposlya
      How beautifully you are trying to throw your chauvinistic reasoning over others, Goebbels would have envied! For your information, the Tashkent Khan Tursun - twice swore allegiance to the Kazakh Khan Yessim. After an attempted rebellion, the army of Tursun Khan was defeated and Tashkent became part of the Kazakh Khanate, i.e. from the 17 century. This is a story, not your cries of chauvinism! :)


      Tashkent Khan Tursun was a Kazakh. :)
  48. Aposlya
    Aposlya 12 June 2019 12: 04
    0
    Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
    what did I find to you the previous oaths, dispelled your dense delusions?

    This is not the text of the oath, but some kind of fake written under one carbon copy!
    1. Yaik Cossack
      Yaik Cossack 12 June 2019 20: 11
      +1
      What Latin alphabet should you go to when you don’t understand the Cyrillic alphabet, young dropout. Or just carry nonsense - is it your corporate identity to disguise your sink? So rotten. I understand that you have a burnt ass, but it's not my fault. You just do not know the history of your people.

      I patiently repeat. Authentic documents are provided in official collections of legal acts. There are scans. Originals in AVR. Their authenticity is recognized by all scientists, including Kazakhstan. The texts are the same for all signatories because they are specially made typical for all Kazakh khans. That there were no legal conflicts. I finish this repetition, if your intellect does not cope with the above, then I am not a teacher. Then you can grimace and clown about how much you will fit, but without me.
  49. Yaik Cossack
    Yaik Cossack 12 June 2019 20: 17
    +2
    Quote: Aposlya
    Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
    Look how easily a raid of impartiality flew from them and what got out came out. But how they walked around in Russian history))))

    How beautifully you are trying to throw your chauvinistic reasoning over others, Goebbels would have envied! For your information, the Tashkent Khan Tursun - twice swore allegiance to the Kazakh Khan Yessim. After an attempted rebellion, the army of Tursun Khan was defeated and Tashkent became part of the Kazakh Khanate, i.e. from the 17 century. This is a story, not your cries of chauvinism! :)


    You do not know the history of Central Asia. The Kazakhs periodically captured Tashkent, but could not hold for a long time. And as for the oaths - will there be proofs? At least from collections of documents. You are grimacing here, you do not want to recognize the real documents of the oath of the Kazakh khans of Russia, but do not bring the evidence yourself. Double morality is obtained. However, they themselves assured that the oaths did not mean anything to nomads - the treacherous Kazakhs only did not swear allegiance to anyone, but still betrayed them))))
    The fact that the Kazakh Kazakh offer you to argue with the Uzbeks. Unless you are a coward of course.
  50. axiles100682
    axiles100682 13 June 2019 11: 56
    0
    It happened without experts on the fact that the population no longer pays attention to all these fools of those in power. We have power on our own, we are on our own