Military Review

Tactics, armor, weapons of medieval Eurasia. Part of 2

46
Before the opening of the Tatar armors, it was believed that the Tatar-Mongols, except for leather armor, had nothing. Franciscan, diplomat and intelligence officer Plano Carpini claimed that he had supplied armor from Persia. And Rubruk wrote that Tatars get helmets from Alans. But from another source, we see that the local masters of Ulus Juchi learned how to make their own sample of armor, Rashid ad-Din writes about this. All these authors cannot even be suspected of sympathizing with the Tatar-Mongols.


The armors of the Tatars were very diverse, but the most common were armors of soft materials, quilted with wool, cotton, etc. Such shells were called "Khatangu Degel," which means "hard as steel." Buffalo (ridge) made of metal and hard leather were made into strips and plates. Combining vertical leather with thin leather stripes, they collected lamellar armor, and combining horizontal stripes, they obtained laminar armor. All shells were decorated with various embroidery and painting, the plates were polished to a shine. But the absolute innovation for the West was a shell, on a soft base of which metal plates were attached, sewn from the inside out and attached through the skin to the outer covering of thick durable colored fabric. The rivets stood out vividly against the background of the fabric and were a peculiar decoration. This shell was borrowed from China, where it was invented as the secret armor of the emperor's bodyguards. By the end of the XIV century. it was already distributed throughout Eurasia and up to Spain. In the Tatar khanates and in Russia the shell of such a type was called “kuyak”. Already at the beginning of the XIV century. in the Golden Horde ring-lamellar armor was invented. In it, steel plates are connected by steel chain weaving.

Tactics, armor, weapons of medieval Eurasia. Part of 2


Turkish javshan invented on the territory of the Golden Horde. XV century.

There were three types of such shell: Javshan, Behter and Hoguzlik. Such armor possessed exceptional protective properties and flexibility. Naturally, it was expensive to manufacture, and only noble and wealthy warriors could afford such armor.

Plano Carpini wrote in his notes “HISTORY TARTARUS":

«Weapon at the very least, everyone should have at least one: two or three bows, or at least one good one, and three large quivers full of arrows, one ax and ropes to pull the implements. The rich have swords, sharp at the end, cutting on one side only and somewhat crooked; they also have an armed horse, shin covers, helmets and armor. Some have armor as well as covers for horses made of leather, made as follows: they take straps from a bull or another animal wide in arm, pour them resin together three or four, and tie them with straps or strings; on the top strap, they put the strings on the end, and on the bottom strap - in the middle, and they do it to the end; hence, when the lower belts bend, the upper ones stand, and thus double or triple on the body. They divide the cover of the horse into five parts: on the one side of the horse one and on the other side of the other, which extend from tail to head and are tied at the saddle, and behind the saddle on the back and also on the neck; they also place the other side on the sacrum, where the connections of the two sides are connected; in this piece they make a hole through which they expose the tail, and also lay one side on the chest. All parts extend to the knees or to the ties of the legs; and before their foreheads they put an iron band, which on both sides of the neck is connected with the above-mentioned sides. Lats also have four parts; one part extends from the hip to the neck, but it is made according to the position of the human body, as it is compressed in front of the chest, and from the hands and below it fits round around the body; behind the sacrum, they put another piece that extends from the neck to the piece that fits around the body; on the shoulders, these two pieces, namely the front and rear, are attached by buckles to two iron bands that are located on both shoulders; and on both hands on top they have a piece that extends from the shoulders to the wrist, which are also below open, and on each knee they have a piece; All these pieces are connected by buckles. The helmet is iron or copper from above, and that which covers the neck and throat all around is made of leather. And all these pieces of leather are made in the manner indicated above. ”

He continues:

“For some, all that we have named above is composed of iron as follows: they make one thin strip about the width of a finger, and the length of a palm, and so they prepare many strips; In each lane, they make eight small holes and insert three straps tight and strong inside, put the strips one on another, as if climbing up the ledges, and tie the above-mentioned strips to the straps with thin straps, which pass through the holes noted above; in the upper part, they sew one strap, which doubles on both sides and is stitched with another strap, so that the above bands fit well and firmly together, and form one strap from the bands, and then tie everything together in pieces, as mentioned above . And they do it both to equip horses and people. And they make it shine so that a person can see his face in them. ”

We add that the weight of gold jewelry horse harness reached two kilograms, which indicates the wealth of the Mongolian nobility. Archaeological materials found in southern Siberia and Mongolia can be judged on the richness of horse harness ornaments.

There were Mongol-Tatar and helmets, dome-shaped with a pointed top. They were riveted or linked from several metal and leather parts. The neck, and sometimes the face, was covered by a barmitsa, made in a lamellar or laminar way. Masters of Eastern and Eastern Europe borrowed from the Tatars a tall thin spire, a visor, metallic scuffles and the protection of the center of the face with a half mask (part 1 of this article).


Tatar Misyrka - a lightweight helmet found in the area of ​​the Kulikov field, that on the Don - Tanais

"... it is not difficult to guess what exactly such a helmet became the prototype of the military caps of the next centuries - and even in the armies of Western European countries", - writes in the book The Great Horde: Friends, Enemies and Heirs, G.R. Enikeev.

Since the last decade of the XIV century. they began to be widely used sash leggings and mail leggings with a disc on the knee (dizlyk). Folding bracers (Kolchak) were especially common.

The design of the Tatar-Mongolian shield deserves a deeper consideration, although they did not always use it. They spread this type of construction in the territory from China to Turkey and Poland. She was called Khalkha (kalkan). Kalkan was made of strong, flexible, calibrated rods, stacked concentrically around the wooden umbon. Between themselves, the rods were connected by threads or fine fibers according to the tapestry principle. It turned out a convex round shield woven according to the principle of weaving and decoration of reed mats, only not rectangular, but concentric. On wooden umbon fastened iron. In addition to the aesthetic properties, kalkan had high protective properties. Elastic rods sprung and sharply threw back the blade of the enemy, and the arrows stuck in it. Over time, the Italians, who lived on the shores of the Black and Azov Seas, in the territory of the Juchi Ulus, were borrowed from iron bands, this greatly strengthened the shield.

Thus, the Tatar-Mongolian warrior and his warhorse were not inferior to the enemy in weapons and armor. Although in fairness it must be said that the expensive heavy armor was available mainly from the nobility, as elsewhere at that time. But leather, not inferior to metal, had almost every warrior of the Tatar-Mongolian army.

To be continued ...

Sources:
Gorelik M.V. Khalkha-kalkan: the Mongolian shield and its derivatives // East-West: a dialogue of cultures of Eurasia. Cultural traditions of Eurasia. 2004. Issue 4.
Enikeev G.R. Great Horde: friends, enemies and heirs. M .: Algorithm, 2013.
Petrov A.M. The Great Silk Road: about the simplest, but little known. M .: Eastern literature, Russian Academy of Sciences, 1995.
Rubruk G. Journey to the Eastern Countries of Wilhelm de Rubruk in the Summer of Goodness 1253. Translation by A.I. Maleina.
Plano-Carpini, John de. The history of the Mongols. Per. A.I. Maleina. SPb., 1911.
Kradin N.N., Skrynnikova T.D. Empire of Genghis Khan. M .: Eastern literature, 2006.
Author:
Photos used:
From the books of K.A. Ablyazov "The historical fate of the Tatars", G.R. Enikeeva "The Great Horde: friends, enemies and heirs"
46 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. V.ic
    V.ic 21 January 2016 06: 48
    +1
    Yeah, and on "misyurks", quite naturally, the trademark of "Tartary" = two-headed eagle is sewn.
    1. avt
      avt 21 January 2016 09: 23
      0
      Quote: V.ic
      "Tartaria" = two-headed eagle.

      This is how his ... golden eagle steppe! laughing According to scientists, it came from somewhere in Arabia, well, quite possibly, again the word is .... either Turkic or Arab ..... in general, the bowl is shorter. laughing
      Quote: parusnik
      .And where is the second Kulikovo field .....?.

      I don’t know where the second is, but on the first, which was pointed out by the local landowner and Nikolka # 1, a military monument of the SECOND DISCHARGE was erected, they just can’t find anything, although according to the legend Dima stood there for three days, if not more, buried the dead.
    2. tacet
      tacet 21 January 2016 11: 22
      +4
      Why are you so confidently claiming that your eagle is exactly? for the first time, a double-headed eagle appeared on the coat of arms of the Moscow state in 1497. under Ivan III, only now he kept his wings down. In the image, as you can see, the wings are raised. With the same degree of probability it can be argued that this is the coat of arms of Byzantium (it is he in the image)
      1. Glot
        Glot 21 January 2016 13: 55
        +2
        for the first time, a double-headed eagle appeared on the emblem of the Moscow state in 1497. under Ivan III, only now he kept his wings down. In the image, as you can see, the wings are raised. With the same degree of probability it can be argued that this is the coat of arms of Byzantium (it is he in the image)


        So he came to Russia from Byzantium and came. And the Horde is by no means here.
        1. tacet
          tacet 21 January 2016 14: 46
          +2
          I believe that the fact that Byzantium often used hired foreign troops (however, for which it paid in April 1204, but did not draw conclusions (true) from this, will not be news for you)
        2. Mangel olys
          21 January 2016 16: 51
          +1
          Quote: Glot
          for the first time, a double-headed eagle appeared on the emblem of the Moscow state in 1497. under Ivan III, only now he kept his wings down. In the image, as you can see, the wings are raised. With the same degree of probability it can be argued that this is the coat of arms of Byzantium (it is he in the image)


          So he came to Russia from Byzantium and came. And the Horde is by no means here.


          Here you can see: http://fakeoff.org/history/sokrytoe-nasledie-zolotoy-ordy#.VpTxOxtTVhw.vk
          1. Glot
            Glot 21 January 2016 18: 55
            +2
            Here you can see: http://fakeoff.org/history/sokrytoe-nasledie-zolotoy-ordy#.VpTxOxtTVhw.vk


            You at least check the links.
            Here is a quote from your link:
            In 1273, long before the marriage of Prince Ivan III of Moscow with Sophia Paleolog, the ruler of the Horde Nogai married the daughter of the Byzantine emperor Mikhail Paleolog - Ephrosinia Paleolog, and adopted Orthodoxy, but also a two-headed Byzantine eagle as the official coat of arms of the Horde.


            And now, although I don’t like VIKI, but what would I not run far:
            https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9D%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%B0%D0%B9
            He was never a khan either. laughing
            Ehhh ... well, what to talk about ... Doctors on enemies ... laughing
        3. Aljavad
          Aljavad 22 January 2016 03: 09
          +1
          So he came to Russia from Byzantium and came. And the Horde is by no means here.


          Hmm .. My humble think, this misyurka is late. The 16th century, or even the 17th. It may have been found in those parts, but it has nothing to do with the famous battle. Painfully well preserved. And vapche, "misyurka" - "a hat from the country of Misr", i.e. Egypt. Unlike "erikhonka".
      2. The comment was deleted.
    3. Mangel olys
      21 January 2016 11: 34
      +3
      Quote: V.ic
      Yeah, and on "misyurks", quite naturally, the trademark of "Tartary" = two-headed eagle is sewn.

      "On the Kulikovo field, which is on Don Tanais, excavations were carried out in order to find the weapons of the fallen soldiers. Two spearheads and the personal pistol of Khan Mamai were found. On the pistol there is a two-headed eagle, exactly the same as on the Tatar Misyurk. that for the first time this symbol appeared on the coins of Batu Khan, although some argue that not Baty, but Janibek. In any case, it is a symbol of the Tatar horde. "
      Source: BYCHKOV A. MOSCOW. LEGENDS AND MYTHS (HISTORICAL LIBRARY) - 2010
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. Glot
        Glot 21 January 2016 13: 53
        +1
        "On the Kulikovo field, which is on Don Tanais, excavations were carried out in order to find the weapons of the fallen soldiers. Two spearheads and the personal pistol of Khan Mamai were found. On the pistol there is a two-headed eagle, exactly the same as on the Tatar Misyurk. that for the first time this symbol appeared on the coins of Batu Khan, although some argue that not Baty, but Janibek. In any case, it is a symbol of the Tatar horde. "
        Source: BYCHKOV A. MOSCOW. LEGENDS AND MYTHS (HISTORICAL LIBRARY) - 2010


        Without touching on "Mamai's personal pistol", I advise you to study the works of Fedorov-Davydov, Sagdeeva and others on the numismatics of the Horde.
        No, it was not a symbol of the Horde.
      4. The comment was deleted.
      5. Heimdall47
        Heimdall47 21 January 2016 14: 24
        +5
        Khan Mamaia’s personal pistol. On the gun

        Is that such a joke - a gun at the end of the 14th century? Mauser, I guess? )) And the Khan’s personal mobile phone was not found?
        1. tacet
          tacet 21 January 2016 14: 56
          0
          The first pistols appeared in Europe during the period of wick locks and were a musket with a truncated barrel and a very shortened butt. Such a musket with a truncated barrel was called a musketon. The first of the known samples dates back to 1420. Judging by the date, Mamai went to the other world only 40 years before the first pistol appeared in Europe. But he still didn’t live in Europe, but in a more developed (at that time) part of the world, but it could very well be the owner of this weapon. Then his pistol is a new word in the history of weapons!)
          1. abrakadabre
            abrakadabre 22 January 2016 09: 10
            +3
            1. Muskets and musketons appeared 150-200 years later than Mamaia. In his time, even arquebuses were not even in the project. Only the first govovniks appeared.
            2. Blunderbuss is never a pistol, but a shortened "gun". Moreover, very cumbersome by modern standards. Yes, it was used in the cavalry. Yes, used in the Navy. But due to the inconvenience and extremely narrow niche of application, such a weapon cannot be a weapon of a military leader. Give Mamai another halberd and a couple of two-handed saber swords.
            To consider a musketon as a pistol is a completely speculative pulling of a hedgehog on a globe in the spirit of Fomenko.
    4. Aljavad
      Aljavad 22 January 2016 03: 03
      +3
      sewn on the brand name "Tartaria" = two-headed eagle.


      Albanians were noisy outraged ...

      In general - the Byzantine eagle. we received it as a dowry with the princess.
    5. Ulan
      Ulan 21 December 2016 20: 46
      0
      Misyurka was a very common helmet in the Russian army.
  2. Glot
    Glot 21 January 2016 07: 03
    +4
    Tatar Misyrka - a lightweight helmet found in the area of ​​the Kulikov field, that on the Don - Tanais

    “... it is easy to guess that it was such a helmet that became the prototype of the military caps of the following centuries - and even in the armies of Western European countries,” G.R. writes in the book “The Great Horde: Friends, Enemies, and Heirs” Enikeev.


    Judging by the image of the eagle, this "misyurka" is something more, later than the events of the Kulikovo battle.
    So the author, having learned from a certain Enikeev, without double-checking it, is misleading.
    If there are large, clear photos of this "misyurka" then I think the delusion will become more obvious.
    1. abrakadabre
      abrakadabre 21 January 2016 09: 18
      +5
      Hmm ... Refer to Yenikeev G.R. as a source, it’s the same as in a textbook on nuclear physics to refer to the authoritative opinion of shamans from the Mumba-Yumba tribe. The remaining indicated sources are very respected in the matter under consideration.

      But!
      1. In addition to the huge quotation from Karpini and the lengthy arguments of Mr. Enikeev, the article has practically no materials (except for the construction of the kalkan) drawn from other sources listed by the author. And there is something to learn on the topic. Very much there.
      Only one Mikhail Viktorovich Gorelik of monographs, articles and other works on the subject under consideration has a carriage and a trolley. And everything is thoroughly written there, very detailed, there is a bunch of images-reconstructions according to archaeological, museum and graphic data.

      2. Judging by the presentation of the material and the depth of analysis, despite the rather voluminous quotes from Karpini, the main part was taken precisely from the opus of the aforementioned, ask the Lord ... the character of Enikeev.

      3. Declare the topic of the article so globally and attach only two, far from the most informative illustrations ... And this is if there is just an ocean of extremely high-quality samples on the network. From museum exhibits and fine art to scientifically valid modern reconstructions of a full range of weapons for any age ...

      4. Even the scarce material presented is presented haphazardly. Neither in the chronological, nor in the evolutionary, nor in the geographical key is there an analysis.

      All this is extremely sad. Because it most closely resembles a ukhistory. Only arranged in a Tatar-nomadic manner.

      I can offer the author to take the bibliography of Gorelik, A. Kirpichnikov and get acquainted with several general analytical works. Other serious authors too.

      Offhand (according to Gorelik):
      1. Gorelik M.V. Army of the Mongol-Tatars of the X — XIV centuries. Martial art, weapons, equipment. - Moscow: Publishing House "Technique-Youth" and LLC "Eastern Horizon", 2002. - 88 p.
      2. Gorelik MV, Mongol-Tatar defensive weapons of the second half of the XIV - beginning of the XV century. // Kulikovo battle in the history of our country (materials of the anniversary scientific conference). M.: Publishing House of Moscow University, 1983. - S. 244-269.
      3. Gorelik M.V. Early Mongolian armor (IX - first half of the XIV century) // Archeology, Ethnography and Anthropology of Mongolia: Sat. Articles / Resp. ed. A.P. Derevyanko. Novosibirsk: Science. Sib. Department, 1987.P. 163-208.
      4. Gorelik MV Stepnoy battle (From the history of the military affairs of the Tatar-Mongols) // Military affairs of the ancient and medieval population of North and Central Asia. Novosibirsk: B.I., 1990.S. 155-160.
      .
      A complete list of this author alone will take several pages.

      Yet:

      L.A. Bobrov. Iron Hawks Maverannahra
      L. Bobrov. Yu.Khudyakov. Defensive armament of a late Asian Middle Ages warrior
      Kuleshov. Yu.A. Mongol Plate Cavalry
      .
    2. tacet
      tacet 21 January 2016 10: 59
      +1
      What does not suit you an eralik?
    3. alex-cn
      alex-cn 22 January 2016 09: 56
      +1
      In the army of the Moscow kingdom, Misyurka lasted until the 17th century, and among Caucasians until the beginning of 20!
  3. parusnik
    parusnik 21 January 2016 08: 06
    +2
    Tatar Misyrka - a lightweight helmet found in the area of ​​the Kulikov field, that on the Don - Tanais... And where else is the second field of Kulikovo .....? .. And the two-headed eagle on the Tatar tsar .. from which opera .. A series of articles for health began, ended for peace ...
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Nikolay K
      Nikolay K 21 January 2016 11: 23
      0
      In fact, the Nepryadva River, near the Kulikov Field, flowed into the Don, otherwise called Tanais.
      1. abrakadabre
        abrakadabre 22 January 2016 09: 33
        0
        In what century was the geographical name Tanais widely used?
        What language is the given toponym taken from?
        1. V.ic
          V.ic 22 January 2016 21: 28
          0
          Quote: abrakadabre
          name Танais? What language is the given toponym taken from?

          Oh, oh, oh ... hammer it into the search engine and it will open to you ... But to me "tn" seems very suspicious. B.A. Rybakov in the book "Ancient Scythia" seems to have cited a couple of words with a "bottom" like Don и Dnieperlike Iranism ...
          1. Aljavad
            Aljavad 25 January 2016 02: 48
            0
            And here "tn" seems very suspicious to me. B.A. Rybakov in the book "Ancient Scythia" seems to have quoted a couple of words from the "bottom" such as the Don and the Dnieper, as Iranisms ...


            The root "dn" (Don, Dnieper, Dniester, Danube ...) is purposefully Indo-European, meaning "water-river". In modern Ossetia there are a lot of streams and gorges with such a root. Here, the unkind memory of Karmadon ...
          2. abrakadabre
            abrakadabre 25 January 2016 07: 53
            0
            I don’t have to drop in. I already know. Let the opponent respond. At the same time, maybe it will restore order in my head.
    3. Aljavad
      Aljavad 22 January 2016 03: 49
      +2
      And where is the second Kulikovo field ...


      Yes, in Moscow! On Kulichki! Hello from Fomenko! laughing
  4. Crown
    Crown 21 January 2016 12: 52
    +2
    Recently, Tatar homegrown historians have discovered this)))) Ukrainians nervously smoke. In short, plagiarism is evident
    1. Scraptor
      Scraptor 21 January 2016 14: 23
      0
      Or you can just google the seal of the Golden Horde ... it’s the very bitterness.
      Chain-plate armor was not invented (and the masters were trophy or from tributaries), making full chain mail for a long time, the plates are much easier.
  5. Divandek
    Divandek 21 January 2016 13: 09
    -9
    There were no Tatars or Mongols. This is an invention for foolish people.
    1. V.ic
      V.ic 21 January 2016 14: 09
      +5
      Quote: Divandec
      There were no Tatars or Mongols. This is a fiction.

      Yeah, there was little vodka and it was sad ... belay
  6. ArcanAG
    ArcanAG 21 January 2016 15: 44
    0
    Can you find out the sources from which it follows that the ring-plate armor was invented in the Golden Horde?
    It seemed to me that he came from somewhere in Iran / Turkey. And he appeared already when the Horde broke up into the khanates.
    1. Mangel olys
      21 January 2016 16: 16
      +3
      Quote: ArcanAG
      Can you find out the sources from which it follows that the ring-plate armor was invented in the Golden Horde?
      It seemed to me that he came from somewhere in Iran / Turkey. And he appeared already when the Horde broke up into the khanates.

      Examples of well-preserved armor:
      1. Bek-bike area (Dzhangala burial, 19): uniquely complete lamellar shell, broadsword, saadak, stirrups. It is stored in the Saratov Museum of Local Lore (see: I. Sinitsin, Archaeological Monuments on the Maly Uzen River (Saratov Region and Western Kazakhstan) // KSIIMK. Issue 32 M., 1950)
      2. Barrow No. 3 of the Ozernovsky III burial ground, Orenburg region, cenotaph (grave without a dead person): full lamellar shell, helmet with a lamellar barmitsa (see VV Ovsyannikov Concerning the defensive armament of the late nomads of the Southern Urals // Military science of ancient and medieval Population of North and Central Asia. Novosibirsk, 1990).
      1. abrakadabre
        abrakadabre 22 January 2016 09: 41
        +1
        So what? You are asked to bring not preserved samples of this type of armor, but evidence that it was in the Horde that such armor was invented.
        Figuratively speaking, you are talking about Thomas, and you are talking about Yeryoma.

        We have examples of well-preserved ring-plate armor (bakhterets) in our club. But this does not mean that this type of armor was invented by our guys.
        In the same way, I’ll finish the plate Gothic legs by the end of the week, again, for our club. But this does not mean that I invented the Gothic armor.
  7. sleeping sayan
    sleeping sayan 21 January 2016 16: 39
    0
    When I was in school, 80 (eighties). That was the witness of the excavation (South Siberia). The archaeologists from Leningrad (St. Petersburg) worked. They had such a group (Search) like. In 84 or 85, they organized an exhibition in our school. There was everything: helmets, chain mail, sabers, swords, horse harness, arrowheads and spears. The findings related to the Scythian period. Then all this was taken to Leningrad (St. Petersburg). And everything where everything is, it is now. Surely sold , for private collections.
  8. Mr. Pip
    Mr. Pip 21 January 2016 17: 05
    +1
    I am certainly not an expert in "helmet phones" - but I regularly catch myself thinking that the author is diligently passing off "Mongols and Co" as Tatars request
    1. Mangel olys
      21 January 2016 17: 55
      +2
      Yes, I think so. The word "Mongol" appeared only during the lifetime of Chyngyz Khan. Under this word, he united the peoples. This is a political name.
      In the “Complete Description of the Mongol-Tatars,” Tatars, according to the ancient Chinese literary tradition, are divided into white, black, and “wild” (Men-da bei-lu, p. 45-48). By whites we mean tribes wandering along the Great Wall of China, subordinates - tribes of the deep regions of Mongolia, and by "wild" - Mongol tribes of the northern, taiga regions. The South Sun diplomat Zhao Hong (1221) writes: “The so-called wild Tatars are very poor and even primitive and have no abilities. [They] only know what to ride on horses after all [others]. The current emperor Chinggis, as well as all [his] generals, ministers and dignitaries are black Tatars ”(Men-da bei-lu, p. 48). Zhao Hong further notes that the name of the dynasty sounds like “The Great Mongolian State” (Men-da Bei Lu, p. 53). In the text of The Secret History of the Mongols, re-transcribed using Chinese characters, the ethnonym Mongol is transmitted through man-ho with a superscript da-da (Tatars).
      1. Mr. Pip
        Mr. Pip 21 January 2016 19: 13
        +1
        Quote: Mangel Olys
        Yes, I think so.

        I think you are replacing the notions - Tatars live in Tatarstan - Mongols in Mongolia - and we live in Russia in 2016 and if we are adequate people, we use the generally accepted terminology today - you have as many rights to the Mongol Empire as you have today Bulgaria to Tatarstan.
        1. Mangel olys
          21 January 2016 20: 00
          0
          You know, this is not a substitute for concepts. This is the memory of their ancestors, the history of their people. For the convenience of manipulating the human consciousness, it must be deprived of historical memory. In artistic form, Chingiz Aitmatov brilliantly expressed such amnesia, introducing the new term “mankurt” into circulation: a person who has forgotten his past loses his identity, and a people left without history becomes incapable of development. Amnesia in terms of history is the basis for the assimilation of peoples. In order to remove some people from the historical arena, it is enough to deprive them of long-term memory.
          1. Mr. Pip
            Mr. Pip 21 January 2016 22: 45
            0
            Quote: Mangel Olys
            This is the memory of their ancestors, the history of their people.

            Well then, do not forget how the Mongols "defeated and enslaved" your ancestors - your ancestors have the same attitude to the Chingizids as mine hi
            1. Mangel olys
              22 January 2016 06: 24
              0
              Quote: Mr PIP
              Quote: Mangel Olys
              This is the memory of their ancestors, the history of their people.

              Well then, do not forget how the Mongols "defeated and enslaved" your ancestors - your ancestors have the same attitude to the Chingizids as mine hi

              I repeat once again, the Mongols are a political term. Who defeated whom?
              1. abrakadabre
                abrakadabre 22 January 2016 09: 44
                +1
                Then, so as to make it clearer:
                The military contingents from the territory of present Mongolia with the attached contingents of conquered peoples defeated the military contingents of your ancestors from the territory of present Tatarstan. So understandable?
          2. Aljavad
            Aljavad 22 January 2016 04: 03
            +2
            You know, this is not a substitute for concepts. This is the memory of their ancestors, the history of their people.


            I don’t know how Siberians are, but Crimean Tatars almost don’t understand Kazan Tatars. Azerbaijanis under the king were called "Transcaucasian Tatars". The ethnonym lives its own complex and strange life.

            As well as "Bulgars-Bulgars Volga-Balkars".
            1. Mangel olys
              22 January 2016 06: 29
              0
              Do you say this from the words of others or do you know the Tatar language?
              1. Aljavad
                Aljavad 25 January 2016 02: 54
                0
                Do you say this from the words of others or do you know the Tatar language?


                This was told to me by a Tatar who positioned himself as "Moscow". Later confirmed by the Crimean. Well, and a primer: different groups of the Turkic language family. Like the Gagauz and Yakuts. Only under a similar name.

  9. sleeping sayan
    sleeping sayan 21 January 2016 20: 40
    +2
    Mangel Olys. Why the Mongolian language is not too similar with the Turkic languages. But the Buryat and Yakut languages ​​are similar, i.e. they have similarities.
    1. Mangel olys
      22 January 2016 06: 39
      +1
      Quote: sleeping Sayan
      Mangel Olys. Why the Mongolian language is not too similar with the Turkic languages. But the Buryat and Yakut languages ​​are similar, i.e. they have similarities.

      Because modern Khalkha - the Mongols have nothing to do with the Tatars - the Mongols do not have. For example, according to the traditions of the Yakuts (Sakha), their ancestor Elle was from the Tatars.
  10. sleeping sayan
    sleeping sayan 22 January 2016 09: 21
    0
    Well, this is a tradition. And, according to one version. Yakuts, this is one of the Mongol tribes who didn’t (want to) go on a campaign to the west. What is common between: Uryankhay Sakhalar and Uryankhay Tyvalar. but they are looking for Genghisides in them. Now the Tatars are trying to find them at home. And why, the present Mongols are not related to the Tatar-Mongols.
  11. Ironax
    Ironax 23 January 2016 14: 44
    +1
    What a mess? E-mine, the sites of the respective museums have catalogs with photos of exhibits. found on the Kulikovo field. Please bother checking the information. If you see pre-biased one way information - do not rush to take it on faith, even if you really want to!
  12. Arbogast
    Arbogast 23 January 2016 21: 57
    +1
    Quote: Mangel Olys
    It was a clash of different clans of the same people.
    Maybe so, maybe ... what
    Since ancient times, in Central Asia and Mongolia, including the confrontation and interaction of 2 ethnic components. Turkic and Mongolian respectively ..
    Simplified:
    I. Hunnu and Xiangbi
    II. Türks and Mongols
    III. Kazakhs and Dzhungar (Kalmak)
    They are so intertwined that it is sometimes extremely difficult to draw a line between the Turk and the Mongol.
    (Something reminiscent of the Slavic and Ugrofin foundations of Russia, where there are also disputes about the fundamental principle).
    For example, the clan / tribe "Naiman", which is uniquely from Mong. -8 (eight), but historical sources mention that the previous historical n-d in this territory roamed "Segiz-Oguz", where Segiz in most Turkic languages ​​also means 8 (eight).. repeat
    With regard to the ancient Türks, LN Gumilev, "Ashina" had Mongolian clans in the Türkic-speaking environment ..
    In the age-old confrontation between the Dzungars and the Kazakhs, there were precedents when separate clans of both Kazakhs and Kalmaks took the side of the historical "enemy". Those. some Kalmak clans acted as allies of the Kazakhs against other clans of the Dzungars. And vice versa, individual clans of Kazakhs were renegades of their people in alliance with the Kalmaks ..