14 February 1483 was born Babur-Tigr, the great conqueror of India

14 February 1483 was born Babur-Tigr, the great conqueror of India 14 February 1483 was born in the family of Emir of Fergana Omar-Sheikh Mirza. Zahir ad-Din Muhammad Babur was born (the word Babur means "tiger"). Babur's father was from the Timurid family, a direct descendant of the famous "Iron Lame" Tamerlane. Mother, Kutlug Nigorkhanym, was from the clan of Chingizids, daughter of the Mogulistan ruler Yunuskhan. Babur entered historyas commander, founder of the largest in the 16-18 centuries of power in India and Afghanistan - the Mogul Empire, as well as a scientist, poet and writer. This makes Babur a very interesting person. You can find quite a few successful commanders and conquerors in history, but for them to be so many talented people, this is rare.


He spent his childhood in Andijan, where he was happy. Here he received an education, he showed love for poetry. Before he dies, he will yearn for Fergana. Already at 11, he was forced to take over the reins of the Fergana Principality - his father died on June 9, 1494, at the age of 39. From the very beginning of the reign, Babur had to fight for his destiny and for Maverannakhr - the region between Amudarya and Syrdarya (Sogdiana), including such famous cities as Samarkand, Bukhara, Khiva, etc. His position was precarious. In the region were constant strife. There were enough feudal lords, who wanted to grab something from their neighbors, subjugate them, or simply plunder. Even his brother came out against Babur, and he had to divide the Fergana principality into two parts. His main opponent was the Uzbek Khan Mohammed Sheybani (the founder of the state of Sheybanids). The strife among the Timurids led to the fact that Shaybani Khan 1501 finally seized Samarkand and made it the capital of his state. Babur was entrenched in Tashkent, where he tried to knock together a coalition of feudal rulers against Sheibani. However, due to the betrayal of several princes, he was defeated. In 1500 — 1505, Babur was ousted by Khan Sheibani to Afghanistan, where he created a new state with its capital in Kabul. Before 1512, he unsuccessfully tried to repel Bukhara and Samarkand. The idea to conquer India was born already in 1504, when Babur was just 21 a year. However, due to the short-sightedness of relatives and feudal lords, this idea had to be postponed and tried to reclaim the native lot.

In Afghanistan, Babur created a strong army, and after failing with Samarkand, he decided to seize India. Northern India had already been subordinated to the Muslim rulers by this point - the Delhi Sultanate was created in the 13 century. However, by the end of the 14 century, the sultanate was already weakened and after the invasion of the army of Timur, fell apart. In the 15 century, the limits of the sultanate were limited to the two confines of the Ganges and Jamna. The Indian subcontinent divided dozens of small and large state entities, often hostile to each other. In 1518 - 1524, Babur's troops made several raids on Punjab (northwestern India), seizing large loot. The turning point in the moods of the nobility occurred as a result of the fact that the powerful enemy of Babur Sheibani-Khan started a campaign against Afghanistan. He was joined by other Central Asian rulers. Resist such a power was not possible, because of the constant strife Afghan tribes. “I was left alone in Kabul, the enemy is very strong, and we are very weak,” says the emir of Kabul to those close to him. - Having such a strong and powerful opponent, we must find a place for ourselves; while there is time and opportunity, we need to get away from such a powerful and formidable enemy. ” We decided to go to India not with a robber raid, but with an aggressive campaign.

The governor of Punjab Daulat Khan, who was at enmity with the Sultan Ibrahim Lodi who reigned in Delhi, decided to support the actions of Babur. Daulat Khan had supporters in Delhi, where they were unhappy with the rule of the cruel Sultan Ibrahim Lodi. Prince Sangram Singh was among the conspirators. Thus, the conspiracy of the Indian political elite became the main prerequisite that predetermined the fall of the Delhi Sultanate. Instead of meeting the enemy on distant frontiers, the highest dignitaries of the Sultan launched him inland to overthrow the Sultan with Babur’s hands.

Daulat Khan himself planned to take the throne in Delhi, believing that Babur’s campaigns, like Timur’s invasion, are predatory. The troops of Babur, laden with rich booty and satiated with violence, will leave India themselves. However, he miscalculated. Babur took Lahore in 1524 and did not leave, and next year he made a new campaign. Punjab governor opposed him, but was defeated.

21 April 1526 of the year on the Panipat plain, on the way from Lahore to Delhi, a decisive battle took place 12-thousand. case of Babur with 40-th. the army of the Delhi Sultan. The victory of Babur’s troops was predetermined by the use of artillery and guns, in which the ruler of Kabul had a complete advantage, and the tactics of covering the enemy’s flanks by cavalry detachments. In India, firearms weapon they knew, but the useless commander Ibrahim neglected them and planned to crush Babur's squad with the pressure of powerful cavalry. Babur tied the wagon train between them, covered them with shields. Between the carts there were openings for guns, musketeers and cavalry. The flanks of the defense line were covered with moats and abutments. All the attacks of the enemy cavalry troops Babur reflected the harmonious rifle-cannon volleys and horse counterattacks. When the Delhi cavalry was upset, it was overturned by flank blows of cavalry. The Delhi Sultan laid down his head in this battle. Thousands of Indian warriors laid down their heads in this battle. The road to Delhi was open.

30 April 1526, Babur became the first padishah of Delhi, who founded the Mughal state. The rout of the troops of the Delhi Sultan under Panipati, the news of his death were a shock to North India. Without delay, Babur captured the two main cities of the sultanate, Delhi and Agra. His warriors occupied all government buildings, palaces and treasury. There was almost no resistance. His troops immediately began restoring order in the district. Babur immediately issued a decree prohibiting robbing and offending families of defeated enemies, which inclined many people to his side and did not provoke a response wave of resistance that terror could cause. Babur also immediately rewarded his comrades-in-arms and soldiers. From the Indian treasures of warlords and ordinary soldiers issued money, as well as various goods, weapons and horses. In addition to these distributions, land, land, and pastures were distributed. Generous gifts received Kabul, Ghazna, Kandahar and even Mecca, where they were sent through wanderers. This generosity has caused many rumors that have reached neighboring countries. According to one of them, the incoming padishah distributed all the treasures of India he had captured and left nothing for himself, acting as a wandering dervish. Vladyka Babur himself reflected this thought in verse: "I do not belong to the fraternity of dervishes, but, as a king, I am their brother in spirit."

It should be noted that Babur’s desire to stay in India and make it home for all the descendants of Genghis Khan and Timur was not accepted by everyone. Indignation arose in the troops. There were deserters. The first among those who fled was the first adviser to the padishah, Khoja Kalan, who left under the pretext of handing out gifts and became the ruler of Kabul. Warriors in many ways for them strange and unusual in nature, the climate of India. Babur had to gather a council, where he convinced the leaders to remain in India: “For how many years we have been trying and suffering, we went to distant states and led the troops, exposing ourselves and people to the dangers of battle and war! By the grace of God, we have crushed so many enemies and seized so vast lands. What kind of strength and necessity do we now have, without reason, forcing us to abandon possessions, conquered after so many labors, and return again to Kabul in order to put ourselves to the test of poverty and weakness? Let anyone who wants good to us, no longer speak such words, and he who can no longer be steadfast if he wants to leave, let him go and not give up on it. ”

True, he also had to break the resistance of the Rajput princes, led by Sangram Singh, who, seeing that Babur was not going to leave, gathered a large army. The companions of Babur were frightened and persuaded him to leave India, they had already grabbed great riches and were afraid of losing them. They said that "one should be content with the mercy of Allah, which he bestowed." However, for Babur, it was a high point, and he was not going to retreat. The main dream of his life came true. As a token of his faith, he ordered the destruction of wine stocks, although he liked to drink and made a vow not to drink (he fulfilled it). The decisive battle of the Rajputs with Babur's army took place at Khanua (near Sikri) in March 1527. And once again, the superiority of Babur's troops in artillery and handguns played a decisive role. More numerous Rajput troops attacked Babur’s defenses. However, their attacks broke against a skillful defense and counterattacks. Rajput princes suffered a crushing defeat. Their leader Sangram Singh (Rana Sanga) was seriously injured and died the same year. None of his descendants dared to continue the fight. This victory over the Rajput confederation led to the final establishment of Babur’s power over Northern India. Having achieved success, Babur moved the center of the newly formed state to Agra. Until the end of his life - 1530, he expanded his power, joining the valley of the Ganges to it, to the borders of Bengal. He defeated 6 on May 1529, the battle of Gogre, the rulers of Bihar and Bengal.

Part of the Afghan troops Babur returned to their homeland, loaded with rich booty. The other part remained in India. The warriors received land plots from the padishah. New landowners usually hired local residents who were better versed in local conditions. Babur conducted the formation of the tax administration and the centralized control system in the new power, but did not manage to complete this work. These tasks were already solved by his successors. Despite a very brief reign - 1526-1530, Babur was able to lay the foundations of a future great power, uniting a significant part of fragmented India. He streamlined land and water relations, the tax system. According to his instructions, a large construction program was launched, mosques, baths, buildings of various purposes were built, and wells were rummaged. In the largest Indian cities - Delhi, Agra, Lahore, Devalpur, the padishah laid gardens and parks with ornamental plants. Apparently, the first such building in India was a large garden, called Kabul-Bakht, founded in Panipat in honor of the victory over the Delhi Sultan Ibrahim Lodi. In the gardens laid out in India, the padishah first applied the experience of growing melons and grapes from Central Asia. During his numerous trips around the country, Babur tirelessly planned the construction of roads that were supposed to be framed by shady irrigated gardens.

Babur paid great attention to the improvement of the major Indian cities subordinate to him. The architecture, the layout of public and private buildings, their exterior details and the interior, took a lot from the style adopted in Central Asia, while at the same time they could organically combine with the Indian style. In architecture, there was a synthesis of two styles. This process was developed under the heirs of Babur.

The founder of the new power actively sought to strengthen trade and economic ties with Afghanistan, Iran, and Central Asia. Babur’s decree was issued on the improvement of the caravanserai, the construction of special wells on trade routes, the preparation of food and fodder for travelers. All these activities were aimed at increasing trade with neighboring countries and the normalization of relations with them. Babur normalized relations with the Sheibanids. Padishah, even shortly before his death, Babur sent an ambassador to the Russian ruler, Vasily Ivanovich.

Before his death, Babur appointed an heir - he became the eldest son Humayun. The rest of the sons received Punjab, Kabul and Kandahar, and were obliged to obey their elder brother.

Babur was noted not only as an outstanding commander and statesman, but also as a very educated person who knows how to appreciate art. In his capital, Agra, the padishah gathered around him many talented writers, poets, artists, musicians, researchers, to whom he paid great attention. He tried to learn more about local customs, traditions, was distinguished by observation. He studied the history and culture of the peoples of Central Asia, Afghanistan and India. The merits of Babur as a historian, geographer, and ethnographer are now recognized by world oriental science. He was noted as a prominent poet and writer who wrote the historical work "Babur-name". In this autobiographical composition, the padishah left a description of the great cities of Central Asia, Khorasan, Afghanistan, Iran and India. For modern science, his reports on Samarkand, Bukhara, Kabul, Ghazni, Balkh, Fergana, Badakhshan, Delhi, Devalpur, Lahore and other cities and places are invaluable. He also described caravan routes, trails leading from Kabul to India, and to Central Asia. The work found an excellent reflection of the descriptions of nature, flora, fauna, geography of Central Asia, Afghanistan and India. The book also contains information about the political life of India, fragmentary data about the history of this country. In "Babur-name" a lot of data on Indian ethnography: it is told about the caste system, customs, the life of the common people and the feudal nobility.

Babur's Peru also owns a treatise on poetics; the poetic presentation of the Muslim law and the development of the alphabet - “Hatti Baburi” (“Alphabet of Babur”). The “Alphabet” was created on the basis of Old Turkic letters and was distinguished by a more simplified in style, as compared with complex Arabic letters.

Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

36 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Frigate
    Frigate 14 February 2013 09: 09 New
    • 7
    • 0
    +7
    What I still love this site for is that among the authors there are normal adequate people who are more likely to interest the broad masses in something and open their eyes to all sorts of hamsters of various currents. Although I do not completely agree with the article, but the general provisions are true and reasonable, so PLUS.

    I already know that srach and mutual insults will begin here.
    1. baltika-18 14 February 2013 11: 30 New
      • 7
      • 0
      +7
      Quote: Frigate
      opens eyes to all kinds of hamsters of various currents

      If a person’s opinion does not coincide with the generally accepted one, this does not mean that he is a hamster. So with this expression you provoke some readers of the site in advance to a negative attitude. If you do not provoke readers
      Quote: Frigate
      I already know that srach and mutual insults will begin here.
      , then this will not happen. Someone will put a plus, someone a minus, that's all. hi
    2. Borat
      Borat 14 February 2013 12: 42 New
      • -1
      • 0
      -1
      Babur is none other than medieval Vlasov ... He, on the bayonets of an external aggressor, tried to seize power in Central Asia, promising for this to become an obedient protectorate and Shiite boy and give his people to the Iranian shah ... But to his great shame and fortune The people of the Shaibanids were able to break both the external aggression and the internal enemy of the traitor Babur and threw him out of the country ...
      1. spanchbob
        spanchbob 14 February 2013 20: 18 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        Borat,
        "But to his great shame and happiness of the people, the Shaibanids were able to break both the external aggression and the internal enemy of the traitor Babur and threw him out of the country .."
        -. Then the Sheybanids were invaders, Bobur wanted to return to his homeland, even with the support of the Iranians, and this was his mistake. But the people know him and love him more than Sheybani, and as a poet (he is also a classic of Ubek literature). I don’t know the truth of his poems, I didn’t read it, only to Baburname. In Europe they wrote about him: A gentleman among kings and a king of gentlemen.
        1. Borat
          Borat 15 February 2013 09: 04 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          The history of modern Uzbeks begins with the Shaibanid dynasty. Thanks to the Shaibanids, centralized power was discontinued, albeit for the time of civil strife and restored. Shaybanids flesh from flesh and blood from blood children of Central Asia and not strangers Shiite Iranians who sold to weakling babur. A disgrace crawled on his knees in front of the Kyzylbashs ... The shaybanids threw off the timurids and threw off peace on the land for at least a hundred years. And do not la la about traitors. Traitor he is the traitor and the point.
          1. spanchbob
            spanchbob 15 February 2013 16: 37 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            Who lived before the advent of nomadic Uzbeks - not an Uzbek? Sam himself probably from the nomadic, so why are you jerking? Yes, and nomadic Uzbeks came here, adopted the culture and name of the local population and became known as the Turk (until 1924)
            1. Marek Rozny
              Marek Rozny 16 February 2013 15: 12 New
              • 3
              • 0
              +3
              Medieval non-nomadic inhabitants of the territory of present-day Uzbekistan - Tajiks and Sarts. Do you not know this?
              1. spanchbob
                spanchbob 17 February 2013 10: 52 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                I know that. The people who lived on the territory of Uzbekistan called themselves Turks, they were called sarts by the peoples living in the north of it, including the Kazakhs. For example, the Iranians called it Turk. In the Middle Ages, the peoples living north of Iran, namely the Iranians, were called Tajiks. Modern Tajiks began to settle, some forcibly, and some voluntarily, from 8 to the beginning of the 16th century. They say Tajiks like Iranians in Farsi - Dari, which finally took shape in the 15th century. And you say that this is the homeland of the Iranians? I understand the Kazakhs - since I don’t have one, then I don’t have a neighbor .. Nomadic Uzbeks who moved here in the 16th century make up about 1/6 of the population of modern Uzbeks. The rest are descendants of the people who lived before the advent of nomadic Uzbeks and called themselves Turks until 1924. Census of 1926 - 85% of the population still consider themselves Turks. And you better know themselves who they are by nationality Or Arabs and Iranians in cf. centuries mistakenly calling the local population the Turks. Perhaps you were to consult with you.
                1. Marek Rozny
                  Marek Rozny 18 February 2013 11: 48 New
                  • 3
                  • 0
                  +3
                  Sarti is a settled autochthonous Tajik (Sogdian) population, which adopted the language of the Turkic conquerors. They called themselves Türks (Turks), although they had no cultural or genetical relation to them (if you do not pay attention to a small part of the Türkic-Türks, who switched to a settled lifestyle and assimilated among local Sarts). In the same way, the conquered Greeks, Armenians, Jews and Kurds of Byzantium switched to the Turkic language of the Oghuz and began to call themselves Turks (Turks). These Uzbek "Türks" did not have a tribal system initially, but this is the basis of the foundations of the Turkic-Mongolian life. "Nomadic Uzbeks" - primordial Turks. Other components of the Uzbek nation have no connection with the Turks, except for the imposed Turkic language.
            2. Borat
              Borat 18 February 2013 10: 53 New
              • -1
              • 0
              -1
              Quote: spanchbob
              Sam himself probably from the nomadic, so why are you jerking?

              Nomadic is not a nomadic one; I know for sure that UZBEK and the blood of my ancestors, including the Shaybanids, are flowing in my veins and they did not sell their homeland to the Iranian Shiites and drove these invaders as best they could ... unlike cowards and venal skins like a babur. ..
      2. Turan
        Turan 17 February 2013 03: 08 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Borat dear comrade, what kind of Iranians are you talking about? Then the Safavid state was headed by Shah Ismail Khatai ...
    3. texnar
      texnar 15 February 2013 21: 50 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Frigate, and the rest of the articles that are on this site are not uploaded by adequate people, so what? Or do the rest of the articles not interest the broad masses in anything? I agree with baltika-18 Quote: Frigate
      opens eyes to all kinds of hamsters of various currents
      If a person’s opinion does not coincide with the generally accepted opinion, this does not mean that he is a hamster. So with this expression you provoke some readers of the site in advance to a negative attitude. If you do not provoke readers.
      1. Frigate
        Frigate 15 February 2013 22: 09 New
        • -1
        • 0
        -1
        Quote: texnar

        Frigate, and the rest of the articles that are on this site are not uploaded by adequate people, so what? Or do the rest of the articles not interest the broad masses in anything? I agree with baltika-18 Quote: Frigate
        opens eyes to all kinds of hamsters of various currents
        If a person’s opinion does not coincide with the generally accepted opinion, this does not mean that he is a hamster. So with this expression you provoke some readers of the site in advance to a negative attitude. If you do not provoke readers.

        Svendslav, first look into the site, understand what is most here crap discuss, earn respect by giving normal non-offensive comments, at least read our dispute with the respected Baltika-18 in the topic http://topwar.ru/23393-byl-pro-inoka-peresveta-ili-kak-cerkov-k-russkomu -podvigu
        -primazalas.html # comment-id-874670
        and also http://topwar.ru/23599-pora-svalivat-iz-sshashki.html#comment-id-874653

        We have separate conversations with the respected Baltic-18 and we better understand each other and correct them, but you did not even deserve anything to quote him or my words.
        Regards, I hope for your understanding.
        1. Octavian avgust
          Octavian avgust 15 February 2013 22: 32 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          What works have you earned something incomprehensible ??? Can you even be in charge of baltika-18? Boy stop, don't be so angry.
  2. Prometey 14 February 2013 11: 25 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Frigate
    This is not the topic for which spears will break)
    1. baltika-18 14 February 2013 12: 29 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Quote: Prometey
      This is not the topic for which spears will break)

      Well said.
  3. Borat
    Borat 14 February 2013 12: 21 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Babur is none other than a traitor to the Motherland who sold himself to the Iranian Shah Ismail and his Shiite movement for the sake of power in Central Asia and the victory over the true patriots Sheybanids. It has become known that the author is silent about this aspect of Babur's life. It is unlikely that he deserves more attention than the Shiite apostate. That’s why he died outside the borders of his native land since there was no place for him here after his deals with an external enemy by the Iranian Shiites, Shah Ismail ...
    1. KuzmichDP 14 February 2013 20: 28 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Barat, where did you come from such a patriot, I suppose the product is ripe KARIMOVSKAYA THEORY OF TEACHING HISTORY ??? And the article is excellent, honestly did not expect that on this site, so plus, definitely.
      1. spanchbob
        spanchbob 14 February 2013 21: 23 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Not an eyebrow, but in the eye!
      2. Borat
        Borat 15 February 2013 09: 05 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Do you eat something from whose grubs you feed? State Department? by the hara on the avatar it is clear what exactly from them ...
        1. Turdaun
          Turdaun 15 February 2013 13: 47 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Are you so angry? For "Babur" they say his "deeds" and that says it all. Great man and point.
          1. Marek Rozny
            Marek Rozny 16 February 2013 15: 16 New
            • 3
            • 0
            +3
            I noticed that the Kazakhs usually perceive the barrases of Babur and Temirlan as “their own” (even though the Kazakhs do not have this kind), but the Uzbeks usually perceive these people as “enemies”. Despite the fact that there is a cult of Temirlan in Uzbekistan, I often encounter Uzbeks in forums where they consider him an enemy of their people.
            1. spanchbob
              spanchbob 17 February 2013 10: 55 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Marek Rozny,
              One and no one knows who the people are!
  4. Prometey 14 February 2013 13: 40 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Borat
    After 600 years, this does not matter)
    1. baltika-18 14 February 2013 15: 28 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Quote: Prometey
      After 600 years, this does not matter)

      And he said it again well.
    2. Borat
      Borat 15 February 2013 09: 07 New
      • -1
      • 0
      -1
      Quote: Prometey
      After 600 years, this does not matter)

      The main thing to remember is who is who .... he is a traitor and after a thousand years it will remain so and it doesn’t matter who he later became ...
  5. Marek Rozny
    Marek Rozny 14 February 2013 16: 22 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    Thank you for the article. The site is really good because here you can read a variety of interesting military-historical materials. Respect to the author of the article again.
    By the way, Babur is from the Barlas clan. This genus still lives in Uzbekistan. And the Delhi Sultanate, on the lands of which he created his state in India, was founded by Jalaladdin - the son of Khorezmshah Muhammad, who was once defeated by the ancestors of Babur, who were part of Genghis Khan’s troops. Once the ancestors of Babur squeezed out part of the steppes from Uzbekistan to India, and then Babur himself was pushed out there. True, the Horde did not leave Jalaladdin alone, capturing the Delhi Sultanate a little later, and Babur was lucky in this regard.
    Jawaharlal Nehru, assessing the extent of the conquest of India by the steppes from Turkestan, once wrote in one of his historical works that the Turks had a greater influence on Indian culture than the British. Although, by and large, IMHO, the Türks had an influence more on Northern India than on this whole country. But Nehru knows better, of course.
    1. spanchbob
      spanchbob 14 February 2013 20: 34 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Marek Rozny,
      "Jawaharlal Nehru, assessing the extent of the conquest of India by the steppes from Turkestan, once wrote in one of his historical works that the Turks had a greater influence on Indian culture than the British." Barlases have lived in Turkestan for 300 years and ceased to be considered steppes. They called themselves like all the people - the Turk (Turk in Russian pronunciation), unlike the Kazakhs, Turkmens and lr. Hence Turkestan. And the people until 1924 continued to be called when the Soviet government renamed the Uzbeks
      1. Beck
        Beck 14 February 2013 21: 45 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        Quote: spanchbob
        They called themselves like all the people - the Turk (Turk in Russian pronunciation), unlike the Kazakhs, Turkmens and lr. Hence Turkestan.


        I do not agree here. After the fall of a single Turkic Kaganate, from Ussuri to the Volga, two independent states were formed. East Turkestan is the main region of the Uigur-Xinjiang district of the PRC and adjacent areas of western Mongolia, flat Tibet. Western Turkestan - Semirechye, southern Kazakhstan, Central Asia. The border between them went along the mountains of the Dzungarian Alatau.

        Subsequently, various khanates existed on these lands and the names of Western and Eastern Turkestan retained the concept only as a designation of geographical territory. Like Sarah Ark.

        The Uyghurs of Xinjiang do not call themselves Turkic (but certainly belong to the Turkic peoples), but they dream and fight for the creation of an independent Uyghur state called the Republic of East Turkestan.
        1. Beck
          Beck 14 February 2013 22: 42 New
          • 4
          • 0
          +4
          Quote: spanchbob
          And the people until 1924 continued to be called when the Soviet government renamed the Uzbeks


          According to my assumption, from the common Turkic substrate of the territories of Kazakhstan and Central Asia, Kazakhs and Uzbeks began to stand out and separate in the 15th century.

          Even under the Khan of the Golden Horde, Uzbek, in the steppes east of the Volga, some Turkic tribes assumed the common name Uzbekin honor of the khan. Then they separated and began to be called nomadic Uzbeks.

          After the collapse of Ak-Orda, Khan Abu al-Khair from 1428 united under his authority almost the entire territory of Kazakhstan, with the exception of Mogolistan located in the territories of present-day Southeast Kazakhstan and Xinjiang. Here is the diverse tribal Turkic population of the Khanate of Abu al-Khair and bore the generic name nomadic Uzbeks.

          Officially, Central Asia was not included in this Khanate of Abu al-Khair. But Abu al-Khair had a great influence on the territory of modern Uzbekistan. In 1430, Khorezm was captured for a short time. In 1446, for a short time captured the cities of Signak, Suzak, Samarkand. In 1446, Abu al-Khair moved the capital of the state from Tours to Sygnak. In the 50s of the 1451th century, Abu al-Khair intervened in the internal feuds of the Timurids of Maverannahr. In XNUMX, Abu al-Khair helped Timurid Abu Said defeat another Timurid Abdullah and come to power. In Samarkand, he married the daughter of the Sultan of Maverannahr, an outstanding astronomer and astrologer Ulugbek.

          In 1458, the sultans Janbek and Giray, dissatisfied with the policies of Abu al-Khair, left his authority in the existing Turkic institute (custom) of Cossacks - into free Cossacks. But they left not as it should be alone, but in violation of traditions they took away all the tribes subject to them. These tribes have taken on a generic name ҚazaҚ. After the death of Abu al-Khair in 1968, the sultans Janibek and Giray seized supreme power in the steppe. The descendants of Abu al-Khair, Sheybanid, with tribes close to them, were expelled to the territory of modern Uzbekistan. Where the Sheybanids became ruling khans.

          It was these Sheybanids with their tribal tribes who brought their name to the nomadic Uzbeks to the territory of Bukhara, Samarkand, Khiva, from the time the word nomadic left and the Uzbek remained. Of course, their names remained, but in the historical chronicles the name of the tribes of the territory of Uzbekistan as Uzbeks was fixed. The ethnonym Uzbek no longer spread to the steppes.

          So the common name Nomadic Uzbeks was divided into the actual Uzbeks and Kazakhs. The difference between the settled Turks of Uzbekistan and the nomadic Turks of the steppe was that the Uzbeks belong to the Oguz group, and the Kazakhs belong to the Kypchak group of Turkic peoples.
          1. spanchbob
            spanchbob 15 February 2013 17: 59 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Beck,
            “According to my assumption, from the common Turkic substrate of the territories of Kazakhstan and Central Asia, Kazakhs and Uzbeks began to stand out and separate in the 15th century.” - Correctly, according to your assumption! If the common substrate of the Türks existed as far back as the 15th century, then when such peoples as Turkmens, Ottomans (now Turks) were formed, and who lived on the territory of modern Uzbekistan. Read the inscriptions on the stones of the ancient Turks And in what language are they written? Read the Shahnameh. In ancient times, the Iranians called the people of Turan Turks.
            - "Uzbeks belong to the Oguz group, and Kazakhs belong to the Kypchak group of Turkic peoples." ---- It is true that the Kazakhs belong to the Kipchak group. But advice to you - do not say anywhere else that the Uzbeks belong to the Oguz group. They will simply laugh at you. Oguzes include: Turkmens, Azerbaijanis and Turks (modern). Uzbeks and Uighurs relate specifically to Turkic or, as in Soviet historiography, to Wed. Asian group. Kyrgyz people like Tuvans, Evenks, Khakkas to the eastern group. By the way, the word Khakas is the Chinese pronunciation of the word Kyrgyz, and the Kirghiz overpowered it from there, by the end of the 18th century.
            1. Beck
              Beck 17 February 2013 16: 38 New
              • 2
              • 0
              +2
              Quote: spanchbob
              Correctly by your assumption!


              And why so unfriendly? What did not agree on the price in the market? Here is communication., Anyone can be wrong. And then I did not write in detail, there is not enough space. I can also find fault with your writings. But this is of no use.

              I classified Uzbeks as Oguzes for a general understanding of what I wrote. But if you so unreasonably advise me not to speak, I will continue. The Uzbeks themselves formed from several groups of Turkic tribes.

              According to the Uzbek scientist A. Ilhamov, modern Uzbeks are the descendants of at least three ethnic communities:
              Deshti-Kipchak nomadic Uzbeks, who for the most part migrated to the Central Asian region at the end of the XNUMXth century;
              Local Turkic tribes and clans from the so-called Chagatai tribes who joined them as well as Oguz Turkic tribes and clans;
              Sarts, consisting of a settled Turkic-speaking, mainly urban population of mixed Turkic-Persian origin and not having its own separate tribal structure. Note, however, that the term sart was not extended to the territory of the Bukhara emirate.


              In general, the Turks came to South Kazakhstan and Central Asia with the penultimate wave of resettlement of Turkic peoples from their ancestral homeland, the steppes of Mongolia in the 6th century, with the formation of the Turkic Khaganate. Here, the Turks assimilated the local Iranian-speaking population - the descendants of the Indo-European Aryans, subsequently Andronovites, later Turans. And only then from this crosses were formed today's peoples of the Uzbeks, Turkmens. And this from the lower Syr-Darya and Amu-Darya in the 10th century the Oguz Turks who became modern Turks left for their new homeland.

              When Turan existed and had neighborly relations with Iran, there were no Turks in Central Asia at all. And the Iranians did not call the Turans Turks, they called them Turans.

              In general, the word Turk is a common ethnonym for all Turkic-speaking peoples. The first is the common Turk, then the Turkic people, then the Turkic tribe.

              Judging by your koment, you have reduced to one what you read, both fiction and non-fiction and pseudoscientific literature. Therefore, refer to the true Turkic only Uigurs and Uzbeks.
              1. spanchbob
                spanchbob 17 February 2013 18: 21 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                Beck,
                Do not be offended - I just wrote "by your assumption", but it’s so.
                For the first time I hear about Ilhamov, although I was engaged in history, there are simply a lot of these authors. Oguzes among Uzbeks are only Khorezm Uzbeks. Sart is a term used by peoples north of Uzbekistan, but not by the Uzbeks themselves. AND . Burns - “Journey to Bukhara” - This country is called Turkestan by the self-designation of the people living here. “19th century A. Navoi and Temur and Bobur called themselves Turk and many who lived in this country. Read the“ Shahnameh ”that is written there. Read the ancient Iranian Vedic books - it is written there about the times before the Turkic Kaganate. And it is written about the local population - TURK. Because the Turks themselves were relocated from here by Zhujani ave. in 4c. They just returned to their historical homeland. And they lived in Mongolia not in the steppes , and in the mountains .. That the Turkic Kaganate is a native all the Turks is nonsense. The Türkic Kaganate was defeated by the ancient Uigurs, who were defeated by the Kyrgyz on the Yenisei. The Yakuts, Tuvans, and many others, who are from the Türkic Kaganate, although they belong to the Türkic-speaking peoples. Turkmens, with the exception of the Seljuks who settled at 10, began populate modern Turkmenistan only in the 16th century. Read Abulgazi separates the Turkmens from the Turks. Yu. Balasagunsky - "Collection of Turkic and Kipchak dialects" and divides these peoples. . He’s talking about Afrosiab, a rigger for Samarkand. “He was a Turk and his name was Alp Ar Tunga, but the Tajiks (it’s about the Iranians who fought with him) called him Afrosiab.” Here you can go on endlessly, but to round off, the DNA of the Uighurs and part of the Uzbeks from the ancient Turkic population show that they live they are in the territory of Central Asia for about 40 thousand years - the British biologist S. WELLS. . And only the Uzbeks have a tribe of Turks, and the largest among 92 is Well, there are none among other peoples
                1. Beck
                  Beck 18 February 2013 12: 03 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  Quote: spanchbob
                  I just wrote "by your assumption", but it’s so.


                  I already wrote on the site, in less detail, now I will repeat briefly.

                  Türkic-speaking peoples, like Slavic, Germanic ones, existed before any scientific classifications of the 19th century. In the vastness of Kazahahstan and Central Asia, starting from the 3rd millennium BC, Indo-European Aryan tribes lived. Over time, scientists began to classify them as tribes of the Andronovo culture. Even later, these tribes received the names of the Isseydons, Tochars, Saks, Massagets, Yuzhens, Derbiks, Scythians, Sarmatians, Haomovargs and others. They all spoke the Indo-European dialects of the Iranian group.

                  The ancestral home of the Turks is the steppes of Mongolia and the mountains of Altai. The first Turkic-speaking people mentioned in history are the Huns. First mentioned in Chinese sources from the 2nd century BC. The Huns created a nomadic power, the most famous representative of the head of the tribal union Shanuy Mode. (What title was exactly unknown - shanyu is a Chinese word and the title could sound differently in Turkic). After a two-century war with China, the Huns began to migrate to the west, which laid the foundation for the millennium-long resettlement of Turkic peoples in Kazakhstan and Central Asia.

                  1. The wave. In the 1st century AD part of the Huns moved to Xinjian and southeastern Kazakhstan (Semirechye). Here were assimilated Yuzheni, Saki and other Indo-Aryan tribes.
                  2. In the 2nd vector, part of the Huns moved to northern Kazakhstan and the Volga region where the Sarmatians and Ugro-Finnish tribes were assimilated. In both of these waves, the resulting cross began to speak Turkic languages. In the 4th century, part of the second wave of Huns under the Europeanized name of the Huns left with the conquest of Europe, which caused the Great Migration of Peoples.
                  3. In the 6th century, initially, on the territory of Mongolia, the Turkic Kaganate was formed, which subsequently spread from Ussuri to the Don. It was a union of Turkic Alemens with the hegemony of the Turk tribe. Subsequently, the scholars named all related these languages ​​by the name of the Turkic tribe. But she could also name the Hunnic languages. In the 6th century, the Turks penetrated into southwestern Kazakhstan and Central Asia and assimilated the Indo-European Iranian-speaking tribes of the former Turans, in particular Tohar.

                  As a result of these migrations, a cross between the tribes of Türks and Iranian Arians, who spoke Turkic languages, turned out. It is from the lower reaches of the Syr-Darya and Amu-Darya that the Oghuz Turks withdrew in the 10th century and marched with battles to Anatolia, where they formed the Ottoman Empire. Along the way, they assimilated many peoples, but retained their language. Among them were many Oguz tribes, but they called themselves the common name of the Turk. What Europeanized sounds like a Turk.

                  Turk is a common self-name. The Turkic people are Tatars, and Gagauzians, and Tuvans, and others. And then Tatars, Gagauzians and Tuvans.

                  The self-name "Uyghur" is used by groups of Turpan, Kumul, Kuchi until the XVI-XVII centuries, when the process of Islamization of the population of East Turkestan was finally completed. With the adoption of Islam, the population of East Turkestan began to refer to itself simply as “Muslims” or “Türks,” and also by the name of their ethnographic group (yurt) —Kashgarets, Dolans, Machins, Taranches. And all together they called themselves countrymen.
                  And after the revolution, at the conference, the Uyghurs returned to their old name.
                  1. spanchbob
                    spanchbob 20 February 2013 19: 29 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    Beck,
                    I have cited a few specific facts about the Uighurs, the Tajiks, and the Turks, but you pretend that you don’t see, and you continue to bend your line. If a person does not want to see, no facts will help.
        2. Frigate
          Frigate 15 February 2013 09: 02 New
          • -2
          • 0
          -2
          Quote: Beck
          I do not agree here. After the fall of a single Turkic Kaganate, from Ussuri to the Volga, two independent states were formed. East Turkestan is the main region of the Uigur-Xinjiang district of the PRC and adjacent areas of western Mongolia, flat Tibet. Western Turkestan - Semirechye, southern Kazakhstan, Central Asia. The border between them went along the mountains of the Dzungarian Alatau.

          Subsequently, various khanates existed on these lands and the names of Western and Eastern Turkestan retained the concept only as a designation of geographical territory. Like Sarah Ark.

          The Uyghurs of Xinjiang do not call themselves Turkic (but certainly belong to the Turkic peoples), but they dream and fight for the creation of an independent Uyghur state called the Republic of East Turkestan.

          If you look at history like that, then in EURASIA, in almost any state, Turks or Turkic-speaking ruled. In the same China, still the Turkic elite, although of course they do not admit it
          1. Octavian avgust
            Octavian avgust 15 February 2013 22: 36 New
            • -1
            • 0
            -1
            Yes, even in Antarctica, penguin empires ruled the Turks. It's funny, and you fell below the plinth with your national patriotism. You will soon cease to give a hand in some places.
            1. Turan
              Turan 17 February 2013 03: 16 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Octavian avgust It is immediately noticeable that your knowledge of history is not insignificant, you should know that the history of Asia is 99% connected with the Türks !!!!
            2. Beck
              Beck 17 February 2013 16: 58 New
              • 3
              • 0
              +3
              Quote: Octavian avgust
              Yes, even in Antarctica, penguin empires ruled the Turks


              Judging by your koment you are a Slav. I'll tell you why you taunt someone else's story. When the topic of Russian history is raised on the site and the Russians discuss the deeds of their princes and tsars, I do not laugh, because in a general sense I know Russian history.

              You are nothing not knowing about another story you start to taunt. Because they have never even been interested in general history, where there are chapters on the history of the Turks. And now, for you, what you hear sounds unnatural. Since you did not know and do not want to know another.

              Laugh further, because your laughter is perceived only as a neurasovannaya, cattle laugh ..
              1. Marek Rozny
                Marek Rozny 18 February 2013 11: 52 New
                • 2
                • 0
                +2
                My plus, Beck.
                1. Beck
                  Beck 18 February 2013 13: 11 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  Quote: Marek Rozny
                  My plus, Beck.


                  Thank you Countryman, the most accurate concept for this word in our country is Tamyr. Mocking the history of any nation is not permissible.

                  Olzhas Suleimenov - Let us raise the steppes without humiliating the mountains.
        3. spanchbob
          spanchbob 15 February 2013 17: 02 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Beck,
          "The Xinjiang Uigurs do not call themselves Turkic (but certainly belong to the Turkic peoples)," - It’s hard to explain to people what they don’t understand. Do not tell Soviet historiography. Uigurs until 1921 were called Turks, as were Uzbeks. In 1921, in Alma-ata, it was decided to call them Uyghurs, although they have no relation to the ancient Uyghurs. In 1924 they created Uzbekistan and called them Uzbeks, which is why both Turkestan and East Turkestan. All the rest are simply Turkic-speaking peoples. Something before, the Kazakhs did not know that they were Türks. They even say it is not a Turk, but that (o) rick. Tamerlan said, we are the Turks, the backbone of the Turkic-speaking peoples. In no other history of other Turkic-speaking peoples did the word Turk occur before. The Uzbeks have the largest tribe of the 92s called the Turk and it does not occur among other peoples. The term Turk is artificially introduced by Professor Minorsky to designate all Turkic-speaking peoples in 1905
          1. Turan
            Turan 17 February 2013 03: 20 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            spanchbob I do not agree with swami. The term Turk was actively used throughout history. And then the division of the Türks. On all of us the well-known Türkic peoples is the recent past. In the Safavid state of Kotruy, Ismail was created by the first state. the language was Türkic and it was called Türkic.
            1. spanchbob
              spanchbob 17 February 2013 11: 11 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Turan,
              They had a Turkic language, who argue, but they, like Azerbaijanis, belonged to the cutting branch of the TURKING-LANGUAGE peoples. Now everyone calls themselves Turks, this has never happened before. There were Oguzes, Kipchaks, and it was Turks (not modern Turks). Turkic peoples is an artificial term introduced in 1905. The same thing is Slavs, Romans, Germans, Polynesians. etc. For example, a Turkman (previously it was just Oguz) means similar to a Turk (Farsi Turkmonand). Question: who was Nizami by nationality?
      2. Frigate
        Frigate 15 February 2013 08: 59 New
        • -1
        • 0
        -1
        Quote: spanchbob
        And the people until 1924 continued to be called when the Soviet government renamed the Uzbeks

        That's about it, too, I want to reach out to many people. The fact is that after the revolution and when everything was relatively quiet, then in the Uzbek Soviet Union there were also leaders who were engaged in the territorial definition of the country and national, therefore a new nation of Uzbeks was created, but in which not only the Central Asian Uzbeks, but also other peoples were rewritten in passports to collect the necessary number of Uzbeks so that it would be possible to create the USSR. Tajiks were especially subjected to such processes, and indeed, in Uzbekistan they determine nationality not like you are, but write who you look more like if the Tatar looks like Russian, then Russian, if Tajik, then Uzbek. I do not insult the feelings of the Uzbek brothers, it was just such a thing in history, as in many republics, when regional proletarians were created in the revolution
        1. spanchbob
          spanchbob 15 February 2013 18: 18 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Frigate[
          "The Uzbek Soviet Union also found leaders who were engaged in the territorial definition of the country and national, so a new nation of Uzbeks was created, but in which not just Central Asian Uzbeks, but also other peoples were rewritten in passports to collect the necessary number of Uzbeks," - you at least know who were the leaders of the UzSSR For all the time of its existence. Not a single Uzbek (yes, one was F. Khojaev and he was shot). Nobody forced anyone. Tajiks have such a nature. If you find one Tajik who swears to me that they forced me, I will take my shoes with you. This is absolutely nonsense invented to justify their actions. You need to live in Uzbekistan to understand that this is just nonsense. Why didn’t they make Kazakhs or Kyrgyzs, Turkmen and Karakalpaks and many others? There are many Uzbeks similar to the Kazakhs.
          1. Frigate
            Frigate 15 February 2013 18: 41 New
            • -2
            • 0
            -2
            Quote: spanchbob

            Frigate[
            "The Uzbek Soviet Union also found leaders who were engaged in the territorial definition of the country and national, so a new nation of Uzbeks was created, but in which not just Central Asian Uzbeks, but also other peoples were rewritten in passports to collect the necessary number of Uzbeks," - you at least know who were the leaders of the UzSSR For all the time of its existence. Not a single Uzbek (yes, one was F. Khojaev and he was shot). Nobody forced anyone. Tajiks have such a nature. If you find one Tajik who swears to me that they forced me, I will take my shoes with you. This is absolutely nonsense invented to justify their actions. You need to live in Uzbekistan to understand that this is just nonsense. Why didn’t they make Kazakhs or Kyrgyzs, Turkmen and Karakalpaks and many others? There are many Uzbeks similar to the Kazakhs.

            Brother, of course, I’m sorry, yes, I don’t bring facts, yes, but I myself lived there and in no case say anything bad about Uzbekistan and I have no right. I have relatives who are in a different nation, but I do not claim that Uzbekistan did wrong, it was just that for me personally.
            I think it makes no sense for us to argue, brother, we better forget about this conversation.
            1. Octavian avgust
              Octavian avgust 15 February 2013 22: 42 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Lazhanul, It is a pity that you were not recorded in this way. And then I would stay there and wait for a new Union or something else. negative
            2. spanchbob
              spanchbob 16 February 2013 10: 07 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Frigate,
              I was probably harsh, but this is from that injustice when they attribute to the nonexistent. The first secretary raised the issue of Tajiks in Uzbekistan
              UzSSR Nishanov .R - Tajik himself by nationality. He denied rumors about the forced record of "Uzbek" in the passports of Tajiks. The Tajiks themselves were recorded by the Uzbeks, but not all - many were recorded by the Tajiks. In Uzbekistan, Russians don’t speak and don’t know Uzbek, the same are Kazakhs, Karakalpaks, Kyrgyz, and others, and they live in peace and work. Where else can you meet this?
              1. Frigate
                Frigate 16 February 2013 10: 16 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                Quote: spanchbob

                Frigate,
                I was probably harsh, but this is from that injustice when they attribute to the nonexistent. The first secretary raised the issue of Tajiks in Uzbekistan
                UzSSR Nishanov .R - Tajik himself by nationality. He denied rumors about the forced record of "Uzbek" in the passports of Tajiks. The Tajiks themselves were recorded by the Uzbeks, but not all - many were recorded by the Tajiks. In Uzbekistan, Russians don’t speak and don’t know Uzbek, the same are Kazakhs, Karakalpaks, Kyrgyz, and others, and they live in peace and work. Where else can you meet this?

                Yes, now we understand each other and do not take it to heart. Yes, Uzbekistan is a calm and quiet country in terms of national relations. I especially liked it when I found out that all Turkish TV shows and sects of various movements are closing. It wouldn’t hurt Kazakhstan either
              2. Marek Rozny
                Marek Rozny 16 February 2013 15: 27 New
                • 2
                • 0
                +2
                I had a bunch of relatives living in Uzbekistan (Tashkent and Chirchik). Now everyone has moved to Kazakhstan, although they miss their native places. According to their passport and RU, they remained Kazakhs, but they often mention in conversations that many correspond with Uzbeks (especially Tajiks). Formally, they don’t seem to be forced, but it’s more profitable for career reasons.
      3. Marek Rozny
        Marek Rozny 16 February 2013 15: 33 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        None of the Turkic nomads of Uzbekistan (including the Barlases) turned into settled ones, but remained nomads. Only a small layer of Turks turned into Sarts, where Tajik culture dominated (but not the language). But judging by the Russian pre-revolutionary censuses, the number of Sarts was relatively small. In addition, the nomads were unevenly located throughout Uzbekistan. Mostly in the Tashkent region, Karakalpakstan, etc. There were few settled natural "Uzbeks" there.
        1. Frigate
          Frigate 16 February 2013 15: 39 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: Marek Rozny
          In addition, the nomads were unevenly located throughout Uzbekistan. Mostly in the Tashkent region, Karakalpakstan, etc.

          in childhood, a guy from Tashkent came to us for a vacation, played, talked in Kazakh, only then when they grew up and talked about a nation on some topic, he said that he was an Uzbek. I have nothing against it, I just always wanted to know the history of such incidents, why it happens.
          There is a friend, he is Uzbek according to his passport, but in fact, Turkmen
        2. spanchbob
          spanchbob 17 February 2013 11: 28 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Sorry, but you write nonsense - you can’t decide for another culture, Then the Uyghurs have Tajik culture. Tajiks until recently, a single people with Iranians (they were called Tajik) adopted the culture of local Turks as well as nomadic Uzbeks. This is proved by the difference between the cultures of Iran and Tajikistan. and the almost complete absence of differences in the culture of Uzbeks and Uyghurs. Now, speaking of the census, it was carried out in the territories of the Turkestan gene. governorship, but not on the territory of the Bukhara emirate. and the Khiva khanate.
  6. Marek Rozny
    Marek Rozny 14 February 2013 16: 39 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    The descendants of the steppe conquerors, the Hazaras, still live in Afghanistan. They are the few who have somehow preserved their original nomadic culture in Mogolistan. The rest disappeared into local peoples. Although the Khazars have lost their language and are now speaking the Persian dialect. Nevertheless, they are still proud of their warlike character and the fact that they are "descendants of Genghis Khan’s troops."
    1. KuzmichDP 14 February 2013 20: 39 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Say it right, Marek.
  7. ikrut 14 February 2013 20: 49 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    I would add to this article that Babur’s conquest of North India laid the foundation for such a well-known but little studied Indian spiritual tradition as Sikhism. It was among the Sikhs that the most staunch opponents of the Islamization of India were brought up. No numerous attempts by Babur and his followers to Islamize the Sikhs were successful. At the same time, many Muslims became Sikhs. At first, Sikhism was very tolerant. And he did not distinguish between Hindus and Muslims. Further Mughal pressure on the Sikhs began to spill over into armed confrontations. A military community was organized among the Sikhs, which eventually united all the Sikhs. Military training has become an important part of their lifestyle. It is this, over time, that has subsided in the cause of the Sikh militancy and the education in their ranks of the best and most daring wars of India. Gradually, Sikhism ideologically “took possession” of the whole Punjab and became an independent culture and spiritual tradition of North India. They built their own cities and temples. And now they do not feel bad :)))
    1. Marek Rozny
      Marek Rozny 16 February 2013 15: 23 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Very interesting remark. He never delved into the culture of the Sikhs and did not know about it. Thank you for such information!
  8. Rds12
    Rds12 15 February 2013 02: 26 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Article zero. A huge number of inaccuracies. The author of the article is full prof. He does not know elementary historical facts. In 1400 ~ 1500, there were no Uzbeks at all. This is the "work" of the so-called historians, who at one time divided the Slavs into Russians, Ukrainians, Belarusians, etc.
    If you simply begin to study the history of Central Asia, India, China and the world in one, you will understand how much time is here. Dreamers. Stephen King smokes nervously on the sidelines.
  9. воронов 15 February 2013 20: 19 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    A very informative article
  10. Nomad 18 February 2013 12: 08 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Quote: Marek Rozny
    My plus, Beck

    Join us!
  11. The comment was deleted.