Military Review

The value of ambush in the Mongolian strategy and tactics of warfare. Part of 1

86
Armed forces of the Mongol ulus states in the XNUMXth – XNUMXth centuries used various tactical methods of the battle, which were traditional for the steppe military art of Central Asian nomads and had a noticeable impact on the further development of military affairs. The conquests of Genghis Khan and the martial art of the Mongols and their heirs can be considered the highest rise in the development of military affairs of the nomads of Eurasia, which for a long period determined weapons recruitment and combat training of soldiers, military organization, strategy and tactics of warfare of peoples who were their successors or came into long contact with them. One such widely used technique was to lure the enemy into a pre-prepared ambush. In our understanding, such a tactical method of warfare was characteristic of many steppe peoples and appeared, most likely, from a variety of hunting practices (round-up or corral techniques), but it was among the nomads of the Mongol era that it took the most developed and perfect form. However, there is another point of view, according to which “this technique grew out of the practice of raids, when some soldiers captured the prey and left with it, while others stood (usually secretly) in full readiness to support the attackers and repel the blow of the pursuers. This was repeated countless times and, finally, it began to be practiced in field combat as well. ”


The value of ambush in the Mongolian strategy and tactics of warfare. Part of 1


The use of such a tactical method of combat, as an ambush, has been known since ancient times. The Chinese military theorist Sun Tzu wrote on the question of interest to us: “The commander should sacrifice something that the enemy wanted to have at home. ... Offering him a bait [hereinafter referred to as highlighted by us. - AK], he encourages the enemy to move on, and at the same time with a detachment of well-chosen people, he lies in wait for him in ambush. ” In favor of our point of view about the origin of ambushes from hunting skills and their further use in combat practice, says that Sun-tzu uses such concepts as to offer "bait" and "trap him in ambush." These considerations, in our opinion, convincingly testify precisely to the model of the behavior of the hunter who, through a special bait, watches his victim. Indeed, sources from the era of the Mongol conquests fully confirm the very wide use of tactical retreat to lure the enemy into an ambush.

The Mongolian army in 1209 approached the fortified Imen Tangut outpost, which defended the approaches to the capital Xi Xia, in which the 50-thousandth Tangut army defended. For two months, both sides did not take any active steps. Then the mobile Mongol cavalry attacked the Tanguts, who, having easily repelled the attack, began to pursue the enemy. During the chase, the Tangut army was unexpectedly ambushed and completely destroyed. In the autumn of 1212, Mongolian troops surrounded the western capital of the Jin Empire. The Jurchen command sent an army led by commander-in-chief Aotun-shan to the rescue of the city. Then Genghis Khan "sent an army that lured [retreat] to Migoukou (" fortress-outpost in the Great Wall of China "), but, turning to meet, attacked them and completely destroyed them." Thus, the Jurchen army fell into a special ambush by the Mongols and was defeated. In the military practice of the Mongolian armies such cases can be a lot. At the same time, it is clear from this example that the Mongolian command staff in the planning of military operations significantly outplayed its adversary in operational and tactical terms. At the same time, it can be said that the tactical retreat of a small part of the troops (advanced, guard) to engage the enemy in an ambush was one of the most important elements in the overall military strategy of the Mongols during the invasion of their troops into the enemy country.



The Mongolian terminological equivalent of an ambush as an element of combat is not entirely clear. In Turkic languages, the concept of "ambush" was transmitted by the word "bead" (from the ancient Turkic pusuγ - ambush) - letters. "Hiding, hidden, sitting in ambush", or "lurk, hiding." Ambushes were used both in carrying out separate military operations, and as the main method of warfare as a whole by the commanders of nomads from ancient times. So, on the eve of the battle with the Mongols, the Naiman Tayan Khan offered his son Kuchluk the following plan of military operations: “It is known that the horses of the Mongols are skinny. Let us do this: we will send our people to the other side of Altai, and ourselves, pulling ourselves up and moving lightly, will advance the troops from left to right and lure them into an ambush. So, engaging them in minor skirmishes, we will reach the heights of the southern slope of Altai. During this time, our herds will be fed up. Then we, having exhausted the Mongols in this way and having exhausted their horses even more, then we will strike them right in the face! ” Such a course of struggle was planned by the Naiman leader, apparently proceeding from the lack of confidence in the preparedness of his own troops for war. The main emphasis here was placed on the fact that in the process of pursuit, deliberately diverging into the deep rear of the Naiman troops, the Mongols and their horses would not endure a grueling march, and thereby exhaust their natural resource, i.e. more precisely, the physiological capabilities of war horses will be weakened. But such a program of hostilities was rejected by the Naiman warlords.

John de Plano Carpini, quite well acquainted with the Mongolian military techniques, especially emphasized the intentional desire (inclination) of the Mongols to engage the enemy in a place favorable to them, based primarily on the superiority of the enemy in manpower. “You need to know that every time they envy enemies, they go against them, and each throws three or four arrows at their opponents; and if they see that they cannot defeat them, they retreat back to their own; and they do this for the sake of deception, so that the enemies pursue them to the places where they ambushed; and if their enemies pursue them until the aforementioned ambush, they surround them and thus injure and kill. Similarly, if they see that there is a large army against them, they sometimes move away from it for one or two days' journey and secretly attack another part of the earth and plunder it; they kill people and destroy and devastate the earth. And if they see that they cannot do this, they retreat back ten or twelve days. ” In the latter case, the Mongols tried with their devastating predatory raids to force the enemy army to move in the direction they needed, where a prepared army was waiting for them, secretly preparing for a massive attack. Therefore, the urgent military recommendations of the Plano Carpini intended for the command leadership of medieval Western European armies boiled down to the following: 1) “if the Tatars make a feigned flight, then you don’t have to go far behind them, if you can’t accidentally look around so that the enemies aren’t carried away into the prepared an ambush, as they usually do, and another detachment must be ready to help that detachment in case of need ”; 2) "the units must beware of not running far behind them because of ambushes, which they usually arrange, because they are more fighting with cunning than with courage"; 3) "if the Tatars retreat, ours still should not withdraw or separate mutually, since they do it feignedly to separate the troops and after that freely enter the land and ruin it all." The indicated tactical instructions of the papal ambassador were not useless and reflected those historical realities. Thus, the "cunning" and "cunning" of the Mongols, in his opinion, consisted in a skillful and tactically competent arrangement of troops, the best (shock) of which was in ambush.



In the famous battle on the river. Sind (Indus), which is considered the last major battle between Jalal ad-Din and Genghis Khan, is indicative of the use by the Mongolian commanders of the hidden military units that were in ambush. The Mongols won the victory largely due to tactical tricks with the timely use of a selective ambush regiment. At the beginning of the battle, Jalal ad-Din managed to break the center of the Mongol formation, literally, as an-Nasavi figuratively remarks, “breaking through the roads through it”. Even Genghis Khan himself was forced to take flight, imitating a retreat. “However, before the battle, the damned ambushed ten thousand horsemen from among selected warriors who had the title of bahadurs. They came to the right flank of Jalal ad-Din, where Amin-Malik was, and broke it, throwing it to the center. As a result, the order of battle [Jalal ad-Din] was upset and its resilience was shaken. ” This led to the final defeat of the remaining troops of the brave Khorezm sultan. The Mongols, like other Central Asian nomads, were masters in organizing tactical surprises and at the same time were afraid to be ambushed. According to a well-informed Chinese author, “their [black Tatars] moving army all the time fears a sudden strike from an ambush.” Interestingly, the military experience of that time shows that if the opponents of the Mongols in the fight against them introduced tactical techniques using ambushes, then they could successfully resist them in open battles. We give some typical examples. One day, a certain Tatar emir, Koke Bejkem, “the leader of a thousand horsemen,” joined the sultan of Jalal ad-Din, who committed some serious offense and was forced to flee from the Mongols. This warlord “advised the sultan to leave the prey in the way of the Tatars, and to hide himself in ambush while they were engaged in [this] bait, and drink their hands of revenge to drink them from the cup of death. His advice was sound, and the Sultan equipped Utur Khan — and he always distinguished him and brought him closer, believing that his loyalty and bravery did not require testing and did not need proof, was led by four thousand horsemen as an avant-garde. He ordered Utur Khan to drag the Tatars after him when they approached, so that they would reach for the death den and come to the place of repentance. ” But because of the cowardice of this military leader, this tactical version of the battle was not implemented.

When the expeditionary corps of Jabe-Noyon and Subedei-bakhadur returned from the far western raid in 1223 – 1224. their path passed through the lands of the Volga Bulgars. The locals “ambushed them in several places, ... met them and, luring them until they stopped at the ambush site, attacked them from the rear, so that they (the Tatars) remained in the middle; he squeezed their sword from all sides, many were slain, and only a few of them survived. It is said that there were up to 4 000 people. ”

The Jin commander, Xu-Din, intending to block the Mongolian troops’s way across the Yellow River (Huang He), called in troops from five districts: Jiang-chjeu, Xu-chjeu, Shih-cheu, Ji-cheu and Myn-cheu - and put them in such position so that they could attack from the front and from the rear. When the Mongols crossed over from Xi Jing, in San-mine, to the north and approached the city of Phin-yang, Xu-Din entered into a battle with them. Mongolian troops were defeated and left. ”



In the famous battle of Ain-i Dzhalut, which, according to some historians, dispelled the frightening myth about the invincibility of the Mongols, the commander of the Mamluk army, Sultan Kutuz, specially set part of the army in an ambush. "And he himself, sitting [on a horse], stood up with a small number of [warriors]." The Mongol army rapidly attacked the Mamluks, continuously shooting from their bows. "And Kuduz dodged and hit the road." The Mongols “set off after them, and killed many of the misirs. When they reached the ambush site, the misrts from three sides rushed from the ambush and rushed to the Mongol army. From early morning until noon they fought hand to hand. The Mongolian army resisted becoming unbearable, and in the end it turned to flight. ”

Very effectively, the Mongols used the ambush during the assault on the heavily fortified fortresses of the enemy. Having precipitated the capital of Khorezm, the city of Urgench (Gurganj), “a small number of horsemen of the Mongolian army rushed to the gate [of the capital] and rushed to steal cattle. Several short-sighted people imagined [to themselves] that [all] the Mongol army is this small number of people. A detachment of horse and foot went on these riders; the Mongols rushed from them [in fear], like wild game from Silk, until they reached the outskirts of Bag-i Khurram, located in one farsang of the city. There the fighting [Mongolian] cavalry flew out from an ambush behind a wall and surrounded this squad. They killed about a thousand people and followed the fugitives into the city through the gate of Kabilan [Catilan?] And penetrated to a place called Tiura. ”

A separate expeditionary corps, led by Subedei-Bahadur and Jebe-Noyon, purposefully moved westward and reached Georgia (Gurdzhistan). “The Georgians gathered in large numbers and went to war. Jebe sent Subadei with an army against them, while he himself, with five thousand bakhadurovs, was ambushed. Subedai deliberately fled, and the Georgians set off to pursue him. [Then] Jebe came out of the ambush, coming from the flank, and destroyed all. The usual reception of their [Mongols] in most battles was as follows, ”states Rashid ad-Din20. This story with the defeat of Georgians in Rashid ad-Din is repeated twice: “When they got along with each other, Jebe with five thousand people went [in ambush] to one hidden place [Gushe-i-pan-Khan], and Subedai with the army went ahead . At the very beginning of the battle, the Mongols fled: the Gurgia began to pursue them. Jebe left the ambush: they were captured in the middle [of both Mongolian units: retreating and attacking from the ambush]. ” The battle was so bloody that thirty thousand of the ninety-thousand Georgian troops died, according to Rashid al-Din. Georgian and Armenian sources give similar information about this battle. As follows from these data, the Mongols, knowing about the numerical superiority of the enemy, decided to lure the Georgians into a convenient area for themselves and hit them from two sides, thereby taking them to the environment. Thus, the connection to the battle of the tactical reserve detachment of the Mongols was a complete surprise to the Georgians. It should be especially emphasized, following Rashid ad-Din, that the battle using the ambush squad was a typical tactical device not only of the Mongols, but of all the nomadic peoples of the Great Steppe.



In the Black Sea steppes, the Mongol detachments in May 1223 met with the allied Russian-Polovtsian army. “When the Mongols saw their superiority, they began to retreat. The Kipchaks and the Uruses, believing that they retreated in fear, pursued the Mongols at a distance of twelve days of travel. Suddenly, the Mongol army turned back and hit them, and before they got together, managed to smash [a multitude] of people. They fought for one week, and finally the Kipchaks and the Uruses fled. ” It is clearly noticeable here that the Mongols accepted the plan for a tactical retreat of their troops, in view of the obvious overwhelming superiority of the enemy, and placed their stakes on a temporary tactical retreat with the task of luring them into an ambush trap.

Abu-l-Ghazi, describing the seven-year campaign (1236 – 1242) of the Mongolian troops, described in his essay an interesting story about an ambush arranged by Shiban - the hero of the western march. "Shiban Khan told his brother Sain Khan:" Give me six thousand people in addition to the soldiers who are with me; at night, I will be ambushed in the rear of the enemy; the next day, along with the dawn, you will attack him from the front, and I will attack him from the rear. ” The next day they did. When the battle broke out, Shiban Khan, rising from an ambush, rushed with cavalry to the shaft and, hurrying, went over the shaft. Inside the shaft, the camp was cordoned off from all sides with carts tied with iron chains: the chains were cut, the carts were broken, and everyone, acting with spears and sabers, the footmen attacked the enemy: Sain-khan in front, Shiban-khan from the rear. At this place they beat seventy thousand people. ” A simultaneous attack from two sides (frontal and rear) on the enemy fortified camp seemed to disorient the enemy and allowed the Mongolian assault ambush units to seize the defensive shaft, surround and complete the rout of the enemy. At the same time, the frontal attack of the Mongols diverted the attention of the besieged from the rear (decisive) attack from an ambush.

To be continued
Author:
86 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. PKK
    PKK April 30 2016 06: 06
    -6
    To the author "+" for voluminous material. Only in those days was the Empire of Rusich at the head of the Tsar, the Empire stretched from present-day Egypt to the center of North America. As it was called, one cannot say, but at the end it was called Tartaria. Tartaria is mentioned even in the Atlas Commander of the Red Army in 1938.
    1. kalibr
      kalibr April 30 2016 06: 55
      +6
      And pyramids in the amount of 104 pieces were also erected by the Rusichs in Egypt? Did not know!
      1. barvas
        barvas April 30 2016 07: 11
        +6
        This is a trifle wink here our ancient brothers Ukrainians dug up the Black Sea and do not boast about it, and the Jews even created the earth in seven days, then they flooded and again the peoples on the earth lit drinks
        1. Max_Bauder
          Max_Bauder April 30 2016 09: 57
          +5
          This is a type from the row - Have you heard the Dead Sea ?! it was me who "slammed" him laughing
      2. Mangel olys
        April 30 2016 07: 16
        +2
        What kind of porridge in the head does not happen. I agree with you, Vyacheslav Olegovich. Let's see what the reaction will be after the second part of the article.
      3. activator
        activator April 30 2016 16: 17
        -1
        Quote: kalibr
        And pyramids in the amount of 104 pieces were also erected by the Rusichs in Egypt? Did not know!

        Who knows .. But all the questions to V.A .. CHudinov
        Isis. First, consider some images of the gods of Egypt. The image of the goddess Isis, Fig. 2. At first glance, there should be absolutely no Russian inscriptions on it, but they are available. First, I read the inscriptions on the pedestal - the protokirillov inscription YARA, the runic inscription ISIDA and the mixed inscription Naked. The first word means the location of Isis, Yarov Russia, the second - the name of the goddess, the third - the state of her clothes; her torso is really naked. On her crown, under the horns, the word affectionate is read. Here the words are read: YAROVA RUSSIA and MAKOZHI VIK. The last inscription is extremely interesting: the Egyptian Isis, therefore, was understood to mean the Russian goddess Makosh.

        A number of inscriptions can be read on the shoulders of the statue. Here the words are written: WORKSHOP MAKOZHI (therefore, the sculpture was not made by the Egyptians, but by Russian masters), ISIDA YARA (that is, Isis Yarovaya Rus), LIK MAKOZHI and YAROVA RUSSIA. So, before us is a Russian product on an Egyptian plot.
        More details here https://cont.ws/post/162664
        1. kalibr
          kalibr April 30 2016 17: 26
          +2
          Black and white graphics don't prove anything at all. In the journal TEKHNIKA-YOUTH for 1968, there was the same drawing of the Mayan astronaut. Say from a slab in a pyramid in Palenque ... But it turned out later that one should look not from the side, but from the end. Moreover, black lines connected in the drawing that which was not really connected! And in the end ... "an astronaut who flew in a rocket was buried in the pyramid!" And here I see the same thing. Well, you need to somehow raise the circulation of your books?
          1. activator
            activator April 30 2016 18: 41
            0
            I will be glad to get acquainted with your color debunking point of view, but for now I see what I see and it’s not cuneiform writing, not a rhombus or some other horseradish, but these are Russian letters. Some time ago everyone tried to prove that crop circles are a matter of two morons with filings and ropes, even a movie was shot as they did. But for some reason they missed such trifles as the increased radiation background on the original circles, bent rather than broken stems and even twisted around the axis.
            1. kalibr
              kalibr April 30 2016 19: 18
              0
              In Youth Tech, they also saw what they saw. And you need a stove - Google to help, everything is there! And why then jump into circles? Did I write about them?
              1. activator
                activator April 30 2016 19: 28
                +1
                I also did not write about Maya cosmonauts, but for some reason you stuck it as an example. I understand that you have nothing to refute Chudinov’s work (well, except as an example with the Mayan astronaut)
                1. kalibr
                  kalibr April 30 2016 20: 29
                  0
                  You wrote about the figure on which it is not clear who and how the drawings were drawn. I wrote about the slab - also an object of stone carving. And I’m not going to refute Chudinov’s work, too much honor for fantasies. Does he have publications in the journal Questions of History or Scientifically American? If there is, I am ready to read them and talk. No - leave this topic. I do not argue with non-historians.
                  1. activator
                    activator April 30 2016 21: 42
                    0
                    You remind me of a school teacher whose arguments all boil down to the fact that I am a teacher, I studied at the institute.
                    1. kalibr
                      kalibr 1 May 2016 07: 43
                      0
                      For students, this is not the weakest argument. And many people know history precisely according to the school curriculum - a step to the right, a step to the left and without system knowledge. Someone knows the extent of the university program, but this is not enough to qualify for something serious. I asked below how the Jews tried to spoil the Old Russian annals and what answer did I receive? And you tell me something about the arguments ...
        2. TұrKBөrӨ
          TұrKBөrӨ April 30 2016 17: 53
          0
          I know Maru, MOTHER there is no heard.
  2. barvas
    barvas April 30 2016 06: 54
    -3
    author well yes well yes negative And for some 300 years they did not leave writing after themselves? Pagodas and shards with graves are not visible, and the bloodline has not changed for 300 years among the Slavs, about this science has been silent for some time lately. Do you see the author working on the Tatar-Mongol yoke? How are the Jews trying to trick us and our chronicles? A simple technically savvy layman will tell you what technologies and resources are needed to maintain such an invincible horde, because sabers are not made from manure. Well, stupid wassat
    1. Aposlya
      Aposlya April 30 2016 09: 51
      +4
      Well, if you have not heard of the ancient writing of the Türks, this does not mean at all that it was not ... At the same Genghis Khan, the so-called Old Uigur writing was used.

      And before it, the Türks used runic writing.
      1. Mavrikiy
        Mavrikiy April 30 2016 14: 52
        +3
        Quote: Aposlya
        Well, if you have not heard of the ancient writing of the Türks, this does not mean at all that it was not ... At the same Genghis Khan, the so-called Old Uigur writing was used.

        And before it, the Türks used runic writing.


        And you have not tried to put a leaf vertically and write and read will be more convenient. Trust me.
        You are a funny person.
    2. kalibr
      kalibr April 30 2016 11: 58
      0
      And how did the Jews try to spoil our annals? From now on, please read a little more ...
      1. barvas
        barvas April 30 2016 13: 07
        0
        A whole galaxy of German Jews brought from the Jews.
        1. Cartalon
          Cartalon April 30 2016 13: 21
          0
          Tirana Petrosyan brother of Armen father of Armen - Jews brother Jews, all around Jews
        2. kalibr
          kalibr April 30 2016 15: 20
          +4
          But that's not the answer! The question was not where they were brought from, but HOW did they try to "spoil" the chronicles? Did they spit on them? Cut out the pages, defecate? How specific! I am sure that everyone here will read your story about this with great interest!

          ANSWERS TO THE QUESTION DO NOT FOLLOW!
    3. Give the light
      Give the light April 30 2016 14: 08
      +1
      At the expense of the Mongols, there were huge doubts, Turkish-speaking people were. As long as the world known to us used bronze-copper weapons, they (in my opinion) used iron. My opinion is Slavs and Turks are very closely interconnected. And before their arrival numerous troops are known.
      Quote: barvas
      How are the Jews trying to trick us and our chronicles?

      Those. Do you acknowledge that Zion is in power? Maybe in these chronicles it’s not at all what we want to know.
      1. kalibr
        kalibr April 30 2016 15: 24
        +3
        No fakes were found in those chronicles (modern). They began to print (publish) during the reign of Emperor Nicholas I. What then was the Zion in power? Wake up! Starting drinking on Saturday is bad! And what and where were the Jews then? And what did they distort in the annals - only specifically?
        Quote: Give light
        Maybe in these chronicles it’s not at all what we want to know
        - that is, you do not know, but guessing? Then maybe you are not here, but to gypsies?
  3. parusnik
    parusnik April 30 2016 08: 17
    +3
    The article is good .. but somehow the discussion has already gone the wrong way .. Again .. The great Tartaria, where did the Mongols go ... but were they ..
  4. Seraphimamur
    Seraphimamur April 30 2016 08: 29
    +1
    Article plus. Only I still can not understand what kind of Mongols in question. For some reason, the Mongols from history do not have Mongol names. Or maybe it was not the Mongols whose descendants now live south of Lake Baikal.
    1. Aposlya
      Aposlya April 30 2016 09: 53
      +6
      Those ancient "Mongols" were ordinary Turkic tribes. Modern Mongols (Kalmyks and Khalka) are descendants of the Tungus peoples and are not related to Genghis Khan in any way ...
      1. Cartalon
        Cartalon April 30 2016 10: 07
        0
        If the people of Genghis are Turks, when and how did the Mongols oust the Turks from the hulk if this was not done during the Khitan or Khitan times, too, the Turks?
        1. Starshina wmf
          Starshina wmf April 30 2016 10: 34
          0
          This is a disease among Kazakhs, like dill. They themselves, too, should be grateful to the Soviet Union for appearing, or they used to be called Kyrgyz-kaisaks. Dill there were all kinds of seas, and Kazakhs argue hoarsely that Genghis Khan is Kazakh. Genghis Khan is from the Mongol clan And there were no smells of any Türks here. During the campaign to the west, the Türks were cannon fodder. The commanders were Mongols, and the Mongol guard. There were about 4 thousand warriors in total. And the rest were Türks and Turkmens.
          1. Cartalon
            Cartalon April 30 2016 11: 13
            0
            Most likely, the Turk or the Mongol was not particularly important, at one time the Turkic-speaking Huns who did not want to leave the hulk adopted the name Xianbi, although those Mongolian-speaking people think such metamorphoses have happened more than once, and the majority of the population understood both languages.
          2. Aposlya
            Aposlya April 30 2016 11: 57
            +2
            Quote: Starshina wmf
            This is a disease among the Kazakhs, like dill. They themselves, too, should be grateful to the Soviet Union for appearing, or they used to be called Kyrgyz-kaisaks.


            Even in the 10th century we were called the word KAZAK, judging by the Persian books. Well, and the fact that Russian officials called us "Kyrgyz-Kaisaks", so what? Russians call Ukrainians crests, Belarusians - Bulbushes, Germans - Germans, people of Sakha - Yakuts. The Russian Turkic peoples called all the Chokh Tatars, not distinguishing who was an Azeri or a Karachai, and now it’s generally just lumps ...
            It just shows your culture ...

            Quote: Starshina wmf

            Dill there all sorts of seas dug, and the Kazakhs hoarsely argue that Genghis Khan is Kazakh. Genghis Khan is from the Mongol clan. And no Turks smelled of anything.

            Learn the materiel! Rashid Ad Din wrote that Genghis Khan is from the Kiyat tribe, and this is a Turkic tribe. He also listed all the tribes of the ulus of Genghis Khan and wrote that they are all TURKS ...
            1. Cartalon
              Cartalon April 30 2016 12: 08
              -1
              Are you sure that it has always been Turkic and give a reference to these Persians or an explanatory translation, the term Cossack can exist perfectly without the Cossack people
              1. Aposlya
                Aposlya April 30 2016 12: 24
                0
                Quote: Cartalon
                Are you sure that it has always been Turkic and give a reference to these Persians or an explanatory translation, the term Cossack can exist perfectly without the Cossack people

                Are you talking about the Kiyat tribe? The creation of the Kiyat tribe is described in the "Oguz Nam" - a Turkic literary monument. Bichurin dated the events in Oguz Nam to the 5th century BC. So I'm sure of that. The Kiyat tribe itself at this moment is part of the Kazakhs, the Karakalpaks, and the Nogais. But the Mongolian peoples do not have it. Yes, the Mongols do not have any tribes or clans at all, they are divided into aimaks, i.e. geographically. Aimak is a district ...

                Here is the link:
                1. Portolan
                  Portolan April 30 2016 14: 49
                  -1
                  Quote: Aposlya
                  Here is the link:


                  What do you think is this evidence?
                2. Mavrikiy
                  Mavrikiy April 30 2016 15: 29
                  0
                  Quote: Aposlya
                  Quote: Cartalon
                  Are you sure that it has always been Turkic and give a reference to these Persians or an explanatory translation, the term Cossack can exist perfectly without the Cossack people

                  Are you talking about the Kiyat tribe? The creation of the Kiyat tribe is described in the "Oguz Nam" - a Turkic literary monument. Bichurin dated the events in Oguz Nam to the 5th century BC. So I'm sure of that. The Kiyat tribe itself at this moment is part of the Kazakhs, the Karakalpaks, and the Nogais. But the Mongolian peoples do not have it. Yes, the Mongols do not have any tribes or clans at all, they are divided into aimaks, i.e. geographically. Aimak is a district ...

                  Here is the link:

                  Well, why, it's a cute song, which I don't know about, but +. I remember we danced to the "Genghis Khan", and they explained to us that there "Moscow, Moscow will be bombarded with bombs", okay.
                  Very reminiscent of proud Ukrov. History, not just, but a super story was created from Adam and Eve. And they became proud, and angered God. Now they are sausage. After all, you won’t wish such an enemy, but we considered them the closest and did not distinguish between ourselves. Well crest, cunning, thief, but a Cossack and a warrior. Well, of course he believes.
                  And now ... We are not there, but we sympathize and help. "You must understand why I am telling you this." You do not have us, other forces will tear you apart, China for example, but we will not help. And a great story will be written for you .... But you will no longer be there.
                  First, wash, be cleaned, what God sends, with blood, water ... And here are the options.
                  1. Aposlya
                    Aposlya April 30 2016 22: 30
                    0
                    Quote: Mavrikiy
                    First, wash, be cleaned, what God sends, with blood, water ... And here are the options.

                    What else to do? Muzzle jam not to spread? bully
                3. Alibekulu
                  Alibekulu April 30 2016 16: 57
                  +2
                  Quote: Starshina wmf
                  They themselves, too, should be grateful to the Soviet Union for having appeared, otherwise they were called Kirghiz-kaysaks before.
                  Well then, Kalmaks should be grateful to the Kazakhs for their ethnonym, which they have become famous in the world. Kalmaks - i.e. remaining..
                  Quote: Starshina wmf
                  Kazakhs are hoarsely arguing that Chingis Khan is Kazakh. Chingis Khan is from the Mongolian kind. And what kind of Turks did not smell here
                  Well, Turkism gape there gape from all sides. Accordingly, questions arise. And about many words / ethnonyms / terms / there is duplication, both from the Turkic and Mongolian ..
                  Even the name Mongolia is strikingly similar to the self-name of the power of the ancient Turks - Mangi Yel (Ancient Turkic kaganat). Genghis Khan of the Borjigin clan, which can be comprehended as bori zhien - i.e. "wolf nephew" ..
                  Even the Mongolian "Khalkha" can be related to the common Turkic Kalkan - shield. And there are a lot of such coincidences.
                  In turn, there is a version that the very first Türküts were Mongols found themselves in the Türkic environment. And the Mongolian-Turkic substrate proper became the basis of the future Turkic Kaganate.
                  Again, the ruling clan of other Turks "Ashina", Gumilyov L.N. derives from the Mongolian meaning "wolf".
                  Quote: Aposlya
                  The tribe itself KIyat
                  Ksta wink I suppose that of the kind of kiyats - Daniel Quat ..
            2. tlauicol
              tlauicol April 30 2016 13: 05
              -1
              Rashid Ad Din could not be wrong, compose or lie in the end?
              1. Cartalon
                Cartalon April 30 2016 13: 19
                0
                No, of course he is a Turk
                1. Aposlya
                  Aposlya April 30 2016 13: 33
                  +2
                  No, he was a Persian. Or rather, even a Persian Jew ...
              2. Aposlya
                Aposlya April 30 2016 13: 33
                +1
                And what's the point of lying to Rashid Ad Dinu, who was by the way a vizier of the hoolagids (Genghisides)?
                1. Mangel olys
                  April 30 2016 15: 03
                  0
                  Quote: Aposlya
                  And what's the point of lying to Rashid Ad Dinu, who was by the way a vizier of the hoolagids (Genghisides)?

                  By the way, although he served with them, he did not like them, if he did not hate them.
                  1. Cartalon
                    Cartalon April 30 2016 16: 21
                    0
                    Rashid Ad Din, God forbid, if he at least read his story and certainly he didn’t write it, people wrote it more accurately collected from the chronicles
                2. tlauicol
                  tlauicol April 30 2016 19: 43
                  0
                  Sense of lying? To exalt, to praise, not? Surprise naive readers with yellowish sensations and exaggerate - of course! To be mistaken? Easy - he was not in the described regions, he wrote from other people's words. Correspondingly, the composers also could have lied for praise, exaggerated for a red word, lied, forgotten in the end.
                  Karachorum at Rashid 2 days from Taraz? He was not there! But the Franks and Italians, living witnesses for 50 days traveled!
                  At the same time, Rashid indicates the distance from Beijing to Karakoram in postal stations (after all, the official): the number of postal stations is 37 and the distances between them are 25-30 km or 5 Farasangs - this is 1000-1100 km. Mongolia. And to the Seven Rivers is three times further.
                  How to believe him request
              3. Mavrikiy
                Mavrikiy April 30 2016 19: 41
                0
                Quote: Tlauicol
                Rashid Ad Din could not be wrong, compose or lie in the end?

                Don’t you feel sorry for him? After 30 years, the shard will not remain from him. Great, proud, mighty, dust ... 30 years no more. They are doomed. Russia - preservation of identity, China - dissolution, USA - meat. Looks like they made a choice. NAZAR will leave, not history will end, the light will go out. And the guys imagine themselves.
            3. Give the light
              Give the light April 30 2016 14: 59
              0
              Nobody needs the Turkic question now. You, we use phraseology-divide and conquer the current reality. Yes, and in the historical spiral, the Turks (like all tribal tribes that lived then) have fulfilled their role) we live. I am the representative of two super ethnic Slavs and Turks, I think like a lot of classing themselves as one or the other.
          3. Give the light
            Give the light April 30 2016 14: 14
            +1
            They also called Kazakhs and Cossacks again a substitution? Well, how is it now that Zion is in power with us and rules a completely different large nation?
        2. Aposlya
          Aposlya April 30 2016 11: 53
          -1
          Quote: Cartalon
          If the people of Genghis are Turks, when and how did the Mongols oust the Turks from the hulk if this was not done during the Khitan or Khitan times, too, the Turks?


          The Mongols ousted the Türks from the territory of modern Mongolia in the 16th century. Over the entire territory of Mongolia, the graves of the Turkic Khagans from the 5th-8th centuries AD were scattered Until the 20th century, this territory, like the region of Inner Mongolia, was called Turkestan if that. XUAR - East Turkestan, so to speak a splinter from the greater ...

          About Khitan - a moot point. Someone refers them to the Tungus (protomongolans), someone to the descendants of the Huns (prototurks) ...
          1. Cartalon
            Cartalon April 30 2016 12: 15
            0
            You do not tell me about the mound of Turkic and Uyghur kaganate, the Chinese of the Turks from the Mongols were able to distinguish so that where the Chinese have a story about the crowding out of the Turks in the 16th century. Given that the Oirats that you hated already acted in the 15th century if my memory serves me right. Khitan’s department of Xianbi, or you think Xianbi and Dong-hu are also Türks, once you got on a horse and went into the steppe, it means Türk. checked does not change the war of the Oirats from the Ming Dynasties 1449
            1. Aposlya
              Aposlya April 30 2016 12: 28
              0
              Quote: Cartalon
              You do not tell me about the mound of Turkic and Uyghur kaganate

              Why tell me about them, you yourself can read about them - type in the Orkhon written monuments, there are many of them, for example, Stela Kultegin, Prince of the Eastern Turkic Haganate: http://bitig.org/?mod=1&tid=1&oid=15&lang= r
              There, by the way, there are other graves of the Khagans, with a description, photographs and translations from runic inscriptions.
              1. Cartalon
                Cartalon April 30 2016 12: 46
                0
                Miraculously, it’s just irrelevant how to deal with the fact that the Mines are fighting with the Mongols as Oirats and not with the Turks, despite the fact that they distinguish them from others since the time of the Huns and Syanbi
                1. Aposlya
                  Aposlya April 30 2016 12: 59
                  0
                  Quote: Cartalon
                  Miraculously, it’s just irrelevant how to deal with the fact that the Mines are fighting with the Mongols as Oirats and not with the Turks, despite the fact that they distinguish them from others since the time of the Huns and Syanbi


                  In fact, the Oirats do not belong to the Mongols in any way, although they once belonged to the so-called Dzungar Khanate since the 16th century. This is mistake. Oirats are now Altai Turks who once lived in Moghulistan until the 17th century. They are often confused with the Dzungars, whom the Turks of Moghulistan called the word "dunkhyz" (dunhu, ie Tungus). Those. Oirats are Turks.
                  And by the way, the Majuras fought just the same with the Jungars - the Dunhu, and not with the Oirats. Although it may also cling to the Oirats, as the Oirats, as I wrote, were also subordinate to them ...
                  And what exactly confuses you in this?
                  1. Cartalon
                    Cartalon April 30 2016 13: 18
                    0
                    I understood everything. Once on a horse it means Türk and since Türk means Kazakh, I don’t enter into discussion with you anymore.
                    1. Aposlya
                      Aposlya April 30 2016 13: 34
                      +1
                      Quote: Cartalon
                      I’ve understood everything. Once on a horse, it means Türk and once Türk means Kazakh


                      And why did you draw such a conclusion? It’s not clear ... Well, all right ...
                  2. Portolan
                    Portolan April 30 2016 14: 54
                    +1
                    Quote: Aposlya
                    Actually, the Oirats do not belong to the Mongols, x


                    Oirats
                    a group of Western Mongolian peoples (Derbets, Bayats, Torguts, Olets, Zakhchins, etc.). The number in Mongolia is 145 thousand people (1992), in China 25 thousand people. Oirat language. Believers are Buddhists.

                    http://www.classes.ru/all-russian/russian-dictionary-encycl-term-40378.htm
                    https://how-to-all.com/%D0%B7%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%87%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B5:%D0%BE%D
                    0%B9%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%82%D1%8B
                    1. Aposlya
                      Aposlya April 30 2016 22: 57
                      0
                      http://www.narodru.ru/smi4253.html

                      Altai Turkic-tele from ancient times until June 1, 1922. Historical and ethnographic essay
                      On the 250th anniversary of the Altai joining the Russian Empire


                      .... "LP Potapov must be given his due, he was one of the first researchers who made the correct conclusion that Telengets are not legitimately referred to as an alien ethnonym" Oirots. "Proposing to the Russian government to replace the ethno-term" Oirots "with the geographical term" Altaians " , having turned this term into an ethno term, but under the influence of the teachings of Bishop VI Verbitsky, he divided the newly minted “Altaians” into “northern” and “southern.” He mistakenly singled out (and possibly deliberately) from a single people of Telengets into independent ethnic groups of Tau-Telengets in Teleuts, Arytelengets in Tubalars, Altyn-Kol Telengets in Telengits, thereby artificially splitting a single people into four “narodiks.” LP Potapov undoubtedly possessed information that the Tubalars, Teleuts, Telengits and Altaians were one and the same the TELE people, who were not conquered by the Russian state from 1609 to 1717, deliberately kept silent about the history of the Altaians of the XNUMXth-first quarter of the XNUMXth centuries "
    2. Max_Bauder
      Max_Bauder April 30 2016 10: 07
      +2
      These Mongol tribes dissolved among the conquered Turkic tribes. All who were on the territory of the Golden Horde are the descendants of those Mongols. The greatest descendants of the Horde people are Kazakhs. For example, in the Kazakh language there are a lot of those words that are in the "Secret Legend" - the chronicle of the Mongols, and other sources.

  5. svp67
    svp67 April 30 2016 08: 31
    +2
    In those days, the army observed a more or less harmonious combat formation, and, most importantly, controllability, only when it stood still and in the appearance of the senior commander, controllability was lost with the beginning of any movement. Moreover, as soon as the soldiers broke through to the enemy wagon train, the war for them also ceased, and the usual robbery began. So, that maintaining manageability and discipline has always been a difficult and main task for any commander. Genghis Khan introduced one but very severe punishment for any violation of discipline on the battlefield - DEATH and this punishment was IMMEDIATE. So in his troops was discipline, and therefore controllability. That is why the Mongols managed to smash the opponents who outnumbered them. They made a maneuver of false retreat, broke the unity of the enemy army and at the right time began to beat him in parts.
    1. Forward
      Forward April 30 2016 15: 46
      +2
      Not exactly what you're talking about! Yes, they certainly punished with death! But there were other rules in the army of Genghis Khan. For example, the fact that representatives of conquered peoples could be enlisted in the army according to general rules! That is, conditions were created when the conquered peoples, in economic terms, did not differ much from the conquerors. Slaves and nions were equal before the law. Of course, I’m not talking about Mongolian veterans. They were allocated as you know, and received most of the conquered property (compared with the rest of the army). But it was a guard. - Mechanism over legal coercion in the Mongol empire! In addition, rules were made when they executed the one who threw in trouble, on the battlefield, his comrade. Agree a very strong incentive for a fighter! And this was not the applied law of the Mongolian army. And the third factor (and very important) of the loyalty of the army of Genghis Khan! This is verotirpity. The army will not fight if it does not believe that heaven is not on their side. Even under pain of the death penalty. The steppes professed the cult of Ten Tengri. That is the cult of worshiping heaven. It was the title faith, so to speak. But there is evidence that the Nestorians took a serious part in the ideology of the Mongolian army.
  6. Riv
    Riv April 30 2016 08: 52
    +1
    Interesting ... "Busu" - we still have the word "busy". Means: "gray, inconspicuous". The gray cat can be called "Busik". I thought this word was from the local dialect, but this also turns out to be from the Turkic.
    1. Hurray
      Hurray April 30 2016 10: 07
      -2
      Wikipedia: beads = belt (Mongolian)
      1. Riv
        Riv April 30 2016 13: 50
        0
        Fu! Forget about the Mongols! There was no such people at that time, and the country of "Mongolia" was even less so.
  7. barvas
    barvas April 30 2016 08: 56
    -4
    There is one single criterion for the hardness of the testicles of all peoples on the earth, this is the size of the territory on which the given people live fellow The larger the area, the taller the nuts. And do not need some kind of pseudoscience in the form of a story. If Tatars with Mongols live today in the Gobbi deserts, then their balls were soft laughing and what can be 300 years here fool
    1. atalef
      atalef April 30 2016 09: 12
      +2
      Quote: barvas
      There is one single criterion for the hardness of the testicles of all peoples on the earth, this is the size of the territory in which the given people live.

      Then the Mongols generally have to drag nuts on the ground, 3 million people, and a country with a density of 1.8 people per sq km. (18th largest in the world) It also easily makes Russia (8 people per sq. Km).
      Well, Australia (density of 2 people per sq. Km) - makes it (in your opinion) version so cool. that all the armies of the world should be afraid of their fighting kangaroos. laughing
      1. barvas
        barvas April 30 2016 10: 10
        -4
        It’s clear that after the yoke they decreased wink Yes, and their country and for nothing no one needs laughing
    2. Amestigon
      Amestigon April 30 2016 11: 03
      +3
      Quote: barvas
      There is one single criterion for the hardness of the testicles of all peoples on the earth, this is the size of the territory on which the given people live

      Alexander of Macedon came to Egypt and India. The Roman Empire had possessions from Spain to the Middle East, from England to Africa. The empire of Charlemagne occupied most of Europe. And where are they now? Do you seriously think that the current political map is forever?
      And besides, you somehow forgot that a great many peoples live on the territory of Russia. How are you going to share? wink
      1. ver_
        ver_ April 30 2016 14: 44
        -6
        ... The Roman Empire never existed in nature .. This is a myth. He was born in the 15th century, when the Empire had already disintegrated and each of its fragments began to write a history for itself, "licking" it from the history of Russia. So the Queen Mother of Medici was written off from Sophia Palaeologus - the wife of John 4 (the Terrible), Alexander the Great - from Alexander Nevsky (yes, he fought in those places at one time) .. together with his father Yaroslav ..
        1. Amestigon
          Amestigon April 30 2016 15: 24
          +2
          Quote: ver_
          ... The Roman Empire never existed in nature .. This is a myth. He was born in the 15th century, when the Empire had already disintegrated and each of its fragments began to write a history for itself, "licking" it from the history of Russia. So the Queen Mother of Medici was written off from Sophia Palaeologus - the wife of John 4 (the Terrible), Alexander the Great - from Alexander Nevsky (yes, he fought in those places at one time) .. together with his father Yaroslav ..

          Do not tell me where such grassy give grass? laughing
        2. Cartalon
          Cartalon April 30 2016 16: 18
          0
          When will you tell me all the same who when and why forged the Troyan column? what
    3. TұrKBөrӨ
      TұrKBөrӨ April 30 2016 18: 06
      0
      Mentally separated all the republics and the AO, what remains? It turns out that the Russians have two beads in that place, and the one that is closer to Europe is slightly larger. smile
  8. valerii41
    valerii41 April 30 2016 09: 19
    +1
    The "Tatar-Mongol yoke" sounds beautiful. Do the Tatars know the Mongolian language or the Mongols know the Tatar language? Are there certificates or other signs of land ownership for Russian princes in museums? Where were the capitals where did the Russian princes go to worship the Tatar-Mongol khans? All conquests changed the language or the local dialect was preserved and the input was the language of the conquerors, for example, the countries of Africa and Asia. Russians also use the Tatar-Mongolian language performance drav, loser, downshifter and other merchandise, our rulers have mastered this language well Gref and Medvedev and are stewing in the drive Once again, I repeat where our princes went to get certificates of ownership of estates as in an anecdote. Two cows are sitting fishing, a flock of files is flying and asking where is the road to the South, one cow waved its hoof and the files flew away. The second flock of files is flying, too, asks the way to the South; the second cow waved its hoof in the other direction; the files flew away.
    1. Aposlya
      Aposlya April 30 2016 09: 55
      0
      It seems like in Saray (Astrakhan), went to Sygnak ...
    2. Hurray
      Hurray April 30 2016 10: 12
      0
      Victim of the ege. Half of those conquerors dissolved in the peoples of Eurasia. Those. and you have a sufficient percentage of impurities. You can be proud and consider yourself a descendant of those warriors.
    3. Amestigon
      Amestigon April 30 2016 11: 45
      +5
      Quote: valerii41
      Do the Tatars know the Mongolian language or the Mongols Tatar?

      What kind of Tatars and Mongols are you talking about?
      For the first time, the ethnonym "Tatars" appeared among the Mongol-Tungus-Manchu tribes who wandered in the VI-IX centuries to the southeast of Lake Baikal. In the XIII century with the Mongol-Tatar conquest, the name "Tatars" became known in Europe. In the XIII-XIV centuries it was extended to some peoples of Eurasia, which were part of the Golden Horde.

      Tie historical names to modern concepts and think that this is one and the same, at least naive. And that is to say the least.
      Quote: valerii41
      Where are the capitals where Russian princes went to worship the Tatar-Mongol khans?

      Are you banned in Google? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Barn
      Quote: valerii41
      All conquests changed the language or the local dialect was preserved and the entrance was the language of the conquerors, for example, the countries of Africa and Asia.

      Quite the opposite happened quite often. Conquerors switched to the local language. This is called assimilation. The simplest example is the conquest of England by William the Conqueror. I know somehow I haven’t heard the English speak French. Although the English nobility really spoke French almost until the centenary war.
      Quote: valerii41
      Russians also use the Tatar-Mongolian language performance drag, loser, downshifter and other mercenary, our rulers have mastered this language well Gref and Medvedev and boil in the drive

      Let it be known to you that many Russian words have Turkic roots and came to us from the Tatars.
      Going on the attack with the singing of zurna, the Russians, together with the Tatars, shouted "Hurray!" - “hit!”; they called each other in the Tatar manner “heroes”, “Cossacks”, “ulans”; many Türkic words quietly entered the Russian language: ataman, guard, quiver, esaul, bunchuk, raid, damask, nagaika ... Pushkin once wrote that “an alien language is not spread by saber and fire, but by its own abundance and superiority. What new concepts that required new words could bring us a tribe of barbarians who had no literature, no trade, no legislation? ... Hardly fifty of the Tatar words passed into the Russian language ... ". The great poet turned out to be wrong, not 50, but at least 250 Turkic words were translated into the Russian language - anyone can be convinced of this, it is enough to open Fasmer's etymological dictionary. Borrowing touched not only the military sphere, many borrowed Turkic words refer to the field of trade, crafts and everyday life: bazaar, shop, goods, customs, altyn, steelyard, barn, arshin, damask steel, brick, wick, cart, carpet, mattress, sofa, iron, pencil, sausage - and many other examples can be given. Oriental borrowings have so much entered into our lives that sometimes we don’t even notice them: for example, the word “cheap” is the Arabic word “di seamstress” - “this is not much.” Many names of fabrics were borrowed; clothing was also borrowed, oriental “caftans”, “dressing gowns”, “dohi”, “fur coats”, “sheepskin coats”, “sarafans”, “Armenians”, “cloaks”

      http://hist1.narod.ru/Science/Russia/Mongol.htm
  9. Cartalon
    Cartalon April 30 2016 10: 03
    +3
    My God again, Veliko Türks - Fomenkovtsy - Grand Tatars - Hyperborea and Atlantis, are not at all interesting.
  10. barvas
    barvas April 30 2016 13: 22
    -2
    It makes no sense to convince someone of your own misery. I have my own annals, and there are no Tatar-Mongols, but there is a civil bloody massacre. And it all began with the advent of an alien religion to us.
    1. Aposlya
      Aposlya April 30 2016 13: 35
      +1
      Quote: barvas
      It makes no sense to persuade someone you have my own words. I have my own chronicles.


      Fomenko-Nosovsky's fabrications have become "your chronicles"? laughing
    2. Amestigon
      Amestigon April 30 2016 13: 43
      +3
      Quote: barvas
      It makes no sense to convince someone of your own misery. I have my own annals, and there are no Tatar-Mongols, but there is a civil bloody massacre. And it all began with the advent of an alien religion to us.

      The civilian massacre was before the invasion of the Tatar-Mongol. And the feud was called.

      If you mean that instead of the Mongol-Tatars there were some Scythian-Siberian Russ-pagans, then I personally passed.
  11. King, just king
    King, just king April 30 2016 14: 17
    +1
    90 thousand Georgians in the 13th century? Figasse ce stories and posts!
  12. ver_
    ver_ April 30 2016 14: 32
    -5
    Quote: PKK
    To the author "+" for voluminous material. Only in those days was the Empire of Rusich at the head of the Tsar, the Empire stretched from present-day Egypt to the center of North America. As it was called, one cannot say, but at the end it was called Tartaria. Tartaria is mentioned even in the Atlas Commander of the Red Army in 1938.

    Quote: PKK
    To the author "+" for voluminous material. Only in those days was the Empire of Rusich at the head of the Tsar, the Empire stretched from present-day Egypt to the center of North America. As it was called, one cannot say, but at the end it was called Tartaria. Tartaria is mentioned even in the Atlas Commander of the Red Army in 1938.

    .. The article is another opus, or idiocy .. Mongolia was founded in 1920
    and, of course, the Mongol invasion in the 14th century can be written either by a teacher-girl zombie in school or by an inadequate person.
    Mughal = great - in those days they called Russia.
    Tatars, Khazars, and in later times Cossacks called horse warriors, that is, cavalry .. Tartaries in Russia called the territories: Malaya, Belaya, Pegaya, Velika .. Already very few people want to expose our ancestors as subhuman ..
    1. Chisayna
      Chisayna April 30 2016 16: 03
      0
      Small, White, Great is understandable. And Pegaya? What is Pegaya Rus? And the inhabitants are probably Pegorus?
      1. kalibr
        kalibr April 30 2016 20: 42
        0
        This is a country of Rus sinned with Ethiopians. But only the black color in them did not mix with white, but went on the skin with spots. Hence the name piebald Russ. But they became extinct, because no one wanted with them ... only the name and color of the horses were left!
        1. Chisayna
          Chisayna April 30 2016 23: 59
          0
          Yeah, soon spring would pass, spring would pass, pass and aggravation. Well, Belarus, Little Russia, Great Russia. Now, even Pegaya Rus.ver, and there was nothing in Yabloko?
  13. ver_
    ver_ April 30 2016 14: 55
    -2
    Quote: parusnik
    The article is good .. but somehow the discussion has already gone the wrong way .. Again .. The great Tartaria, where did the Mongols go ... but were they ..

    Quote: parusnik
    The article is good .. but somehow the discussion has already gone the wrong way .. Again .. The great Tartaria, where did the Mongols go ... but were they ..


    The Mongols appeared in 192 as a result of the unification of the Khalkhov and Airov tribes ... and the election of the Khan and the formation of the state of Mongolia ..
    1. Mangel olys
      April 30 2016 15: 19
      0
      TRUTH, WHERE NEXT, but for now "into milk." smile
    2. Aposlya
      Aposlya 1 May 2016 08: 05
      +1
      Quote: ver_
      The Mongols appeared in 192 as a result of the unification of the Khalkhov and Airov tribes ... and the election of the Khan and the formation of the state of Mongolia ..


      Do not write nonsense, huh? The Mongol peoples have never chosen any khans at all! They have the title of leader is KONTAIKCHI and they are not elected, but passed by inheritance ....
  14. Yereke
    Yereke April 30 2016 18: 12
    +1
    ))) .. The Mongolian terminological equivalent of an ambush as an element of the combat system is not entirely clear. In Turkic languages, the concept of "ambush" was conveyed by the word "busu" (from the ancient Turkic pusuγ - ambush) - letters.

    Of course it’s not clear, there was no mention of the Mongols, these are the Turks, our ancestors, then all the tribes later formed the Zhuzes of the Kazakhs, even the name of Shyngyskhan, Temirshin (Iron) is not Mongolian))) feed yourself with these stories further .. they just flawlessly admit that it was the TURKS conquered them, so everyone dumps the ignorant Mongols, for whom this glory fell like manna from heaven
    1. Paven
      Paven April 30 2016 20: 14
      +1
      Well, I don’t know how anyone is sad, but according to the history of my city (documents from the beginning of the 19th century were preserved), a dozen Cossacks dispersed a couple of hundred Kazakhs when they were greyhounds. And then those * offended * Kazakhs wrote a cart to the governor))) This is a historical fact. what further invent about the militancy of the Turks)))
      1. Aposlya
        Aposlya 1 May 2016 08: 07
        +1
        Quote: Paven
        Well, I don’t know how anyone is sad, but according to the history of my city (documents from the beginning of the 19th century were preserved), a dozen Cossacks dispersed a couple of hundred Kazakhs when they were greyhounds. And then those * offended * Kazakhs wrote a cart to the governor))) This is a historical fact. what further invent about the militancy of the Turks)))


        Golden Horde recall? laughing
        Well, as for the Cossacks ... the military could always disperse an unarmed crowd, especially with the support of the authorities, so do not whistle here ... lol
        1. Paven
          Paven 7 May 2016 19: 53
          0
          Absolutely unarmed)))) Two hundred Kyrgyz kaisaks, armed with knives and firearms, boiled a dozen Cossacks. And it all started when the Kazakhs began to graze cattle in the gardens, well, naturally they made a remark, they climbed into a bubble, got Lyuley ... Offended and gathered two hundred * cool * horse-drawn horsemen ... and then the Cossacks distinguished themselves, There were no losses from the Cossacks, there were a couple of scratches and a few bruises from the attacking 8 corpses, and several dozen wounded. many of the wounded were missing their ears (they didn’t cut off, but they cut off for a gallop) ... and so. It’s documented everything is documented. So out of the Türks, the soldiers are only a crowd ... And the spirit is rather weak against the Cossack.
  15. PKK
    PKK April 30 2016 19: 09
    +2
    Quote: Starshina wmf
    During the campaign to the west, the Türks were cannon fodder. The commanders were Mongols, and the Mongolian guard. Only about 4 thousand soldiers. And the rest are Türks and Turkmens.

    From this moment in more detail, please. How many thousand km did the cavalry go and when did it return? How many days did they go? Did they carry wall-beaten cars? Who made buckles for this horde? Who made swords and arrowheads? All these requests were always not get an answer. And the Horde was, and in the winter they moved easily and naturally.
    1. kalibr
      kalibr April 30 2016 20: 32
      0
      There is a book by M.V. Burner about the Mongol-Tatar army. Must be on the web. He's been doing this for many years. Take a look. There is a book by Soloviev about the weapons of Siberia. There too.
  16. Paven
    Paven April 30 2016 20: 06
    -1
    The article is so-so, far-fetched. And the term Mongol-Tatars was coined a couple of centuries ago. The most interesting thing about the Kazakhs was written in comments, they really have a bizik that Genghis Khan is their ancestor. That's only interesting, judging by some descriptions Genghis Khan was not a Turk, but he was quite a European. Yes, and somehow I had a dispute with the Kazakhs over their relationship with Genghis Khan. According to the descriptions of Genghis Khan’s troops, they didn’t spare anyone if they resisted, and they cut everyone who was above the hub of the wheel of the cart, etc. e. they left only children, well, young women, so that they gave birth. That is, it turns out that the ancestors of the Kazakhs were simply excised and ... what ...))) But now, this is the result of complete dissolution in the southern tribes. And by the way, I have friends-archaeologists with 40 years of experience already, and so according to them, burials of Turks earlier than 10-11 centuries, in the territory of modern Kazakhstan, were not found. Europioid settlements are found, and moreover in large numbers. But ... they give them out for supposedly Turkic or even bury or forbid excavations. Yes, and supposedly the Turkic runic has been deciphered ... yes, to hell there! Each goose interprets it differently, and no other normal translation has been achieved. And lastly, look at the material on the Caspian and then you will understand that numerous stories about the Türks are just nonsense: http: //iskatel.info/to-chego-vyi-ne-znali-o-kaspijskom-more.html
    They came in Kazakhstan, and more recently, no more than 300-400 years, and before that they were just passing)))
    1. Portolan
      Portolan April 30 2016 20: 39
      -2
      Quote: Paven
      then you will understand that numerous stories about the Turks are just nonsense:


      the fact is that the TURKS themselves do not. Who are they? There are Turkic-speaking Yakuts, Kazakhs, Kyrgyz, Uzbeks, Turks, but no Turks have been found yet. The answer is given only by the Fomenko-Nosovsky theory. The Russian people were BILINGUAL. They spoke Russian and Turkic, however, and now the Turkic-speaking Russians have remained-these are modern Tatars. The Tatars get a glorious history according to the FIN, it was they who conquered Constantinople and founded the state of Atamania-Porta-Orda. But they are hidden in the history by Romano falsifiers, and as for the Kazakhs , then it’s the young people of the 19th century and to make it, some kind of 1000 year history is false.
      1. Aposlya
        Aposlya 1 May 2016 08: 18
        +1
        Quote: Portolan
        the fact is that the TURKS themselves do not exist.


        I look sect fomenkonutyh already completely flies from coils! It’s bad to see everything with education in Russia, even if you don’t even have the brains of the usual history of your country, at least learn and protect!
        1. Portolan
          Portolan 1 May 2016 08: 35
          -6
          Quote: Aposlya
          I look sect fomenkonutyh already completely flies from coils! In your ro


          you would have your own mouth ... you would have covered up, except for Kazakh nationalist nonsense you can say nothing. Fomenko-Nosovsky’s ALL BASIC EVIDENCE BASIS is based on mathematical calculations, so HX is REAL SCIENCE, in contrast to the traditional historical rewriting of German falsifications.
          1. Aposlya
            Aposlya 1 May 2016 20: 39
            -1
            You don’t have a mouth, you’re treating your brains with Nuna! laughing
            The whole Fomenkovshchina, by the way, is based not on mathematical calculations, but only on assumptions, distortions of facts, as well as ordinary falsifications. And how Fomenko treats historical figures - Zadornov is resting !!! Batu Khan he has Dad damn, and Mom is Mamenkin!
            in short!
            1. Portolan
              Portolan 1 May 2016 22: 47
              -1
              Quote: Aposlya
              The whole Fomenkovshchina, by the way, is not based on mathematical calculations, but whether


              you there in Kazakhstan will soon become completely dumb, instead of chasing a blizzard at the great Russian scientists who open their eyes to real history, it would be better to read something clever, but the fact that the Kazakhs are not from the Cossacks, but by themselves and thousands of years behind, then you are not much different from ancient ukrov ...
              1. Aposlya
                Aposlya 2 May 2016 20: 18
                -2
                Quote: Portolan
                then you are not much different from ancient ukrov ...


                So your "great Rusky uchennye" and were a model for ukrov! laughing
                1. Portolan
                  Portolan 3 May 2016 00: 50
                  +1
                  Quote: Aposlya
                  So your "great Rusky uchennye" and were a model for ukrov!


                  Well, this is not true, but it is your incompetence and ignorance.
    2. Aposlya
      Aposlya 1 May 2016 08: 16
      0
      Quote: Paven
      And now that this is the result of complete dissolution in the southern tribes. And by the way, I have archaeological friends with 40 years of experience already, and so, according to them, burials of Türks earlier than 10-11 centuries in the territory of modern Kazakhstan were not found .


      You seem to be a head since childhood attached! Do the names of tribes such as Kiyat, Naiman, Kipchaks, Kangly, etc. tell you anything? So these tribes lived on the territory of modern Kazakhstan back in the days when no Batu Khan came to Russia and everyone there was not "you..al" as you put it.
      Learn the materiel ... Well, as for the anthropological portrait of the Türks, a person changes it within 1-2 generations and it depends only on the women they take as their wife and from whom the baby is born! laughing Look at the Gagauz, and these are the descendants of the Pechenegs (Oguzes). Look at the Karachais-Balkars - direct descendants of Alan. Neither one nor the other is Mongoloid, since they did not encounter the Mongolian peoples in the Middle Ages ....
      1. Paven
        Paven 7 May 2016 20: 02
        0
        In the territory of modern Kazakhstan, the burials of the Mongoloids, to which all Türks belong, were not found before the 8th-9th centuries. Unlike the European settlements, the Slavic component, with the inscriptions runes, weapons and home belongings. You are not recognized by any Kazakh scientists and politicians in that historically, the land of Kazakhstan did not belong to the Kazakhs, and of all the genera who were listed here. And they can rewrite history, as it happens for example with the events of 1986 in Alma-Ata ... What can I say if my great-grandfather is in Kustanai if once a year I met a Kazakh in the steppes, I was so surprised. And my great-grandfather was a Cossack, and I didn’t get off my horse, I was constantly on the road. You’re talking about a kind.