The world famous name Genghis Khan is not really a name - it's a title. After all, khans in Rus' were called military princes. The real name of Genghis Khan is Timur, or Timur Chin (in a distorted pronunciation of Temujin or Temujin). The prefix Genghis denotes rank, position, rank, in other words - rank and title.
Temujin received the high title of a major military leader thanks to his military merits, his desire to support and protect a strong united united Slavic state with a large and reliable army.
The discrepancy between the name Temujin - Temujin is now explained by transcription problems of translations from different foreign languages. Hence the discrepancy in the title: Genghis Khan or Genghis Khan, or Genghis Khan. However, the Russian version of the sound of the name - Timur, which for some reason is least of all used by historians and scientists, does not fit into this system of explanations, as if they do not notice his name. Historians in general have problems with the spelling and pronunciation of the famous names of figures whose life belongs to that period, can be easily explained with the help of false statements that there was no written language in all countries of the world at that time.
And the deliberate distortion of the name of the people "Moguls" and its transformation into "Mongols" cannot be explained by anything other than a large-scale organized system of distortion of the facts of the past.
Genghis Khan. Strong personality in world history
The main source by which historians study the life and personality of Temujin was compiled after his death - "The Secret History". But the reliability of the data is not obvious, although it was from him that classical information about the appearance and character of the ruler of the Mongol tribes was obtained. Genghis Khan had a great gift as a commander, had good organizational skills and self-control; his will was unyielding, his character strong. At the same time, the chroniclers note his generosity and friendliness, which kept his subordinates attached to him. He did not deny himself the joys of life, but was alien to excesses, incompatible with the dignity of a ruler and commander. He lived a long life, retaining his mental abilities and strength of character until his advanced years.
Let historians argue today what letter to write in this or that name, something else is important - Temujin lived a bright, charismatic life, rose to the level of a ruler, played his role in world history. Now he can be condemned or praised - perhaps his actions are worthy of both, a moot point, but it is no longer possible to change something in historical development. But to find the truth among the imposed sea of distortions of real facts is very important, as well as to convict the lie itself.
Disputes about the appearance of Genghis Khan - the field of historians
The only portrait of Genghis Khan (Emperor Taizu) recognized and permitted by historians is kept in Taiwan in the National Taipei Palace Museum.
An interesting portrait of the Mongol ruler has been preserved, which historians obsessively insist on considering the only authentic one. It is kept in the National Museum of Taiwan, in the Taipei Palace. It is prescribed to consider that the portrait (590*470 mm) has survived from the time of the Yuan rulers. However, modern studies of the quality of fabrics and threads have shown that the woven image dates back to 1748. But it was in the 18th century that the global stage of falsification of the history of the whole world, including Russia and China, passed. So this is another falsification of historians.
The exculpatory version says that such images are copyrighted works, and the author has the right to his own vision of the face and character. But the portrait was clearly woven by the hands of a skilled craftswoman, fine lines of wrinkles and folds on the face, hair in a beard and braid are so detailed on it that there is no doubt that a real person is depicted. That's just who? After all, Genghis Khan died in 1227, that is, five centuries before the start of the process of massive falsifications.
Miniature of Marco Polo "The Crowning of Genghis Khan". The great commander is crowned with a crown with trefoils - an attribute of European rulers.
Undoubtedly, historical and cultural heritage has come down to our days since the reign of the Manchus. From the Middle State, they were handed over to the next conquerors and transported to Beijing. The collection contains more than 500 portraits of rulers, their wives, sages and great people of the era. Portraits of eight khans of the Mongol dynasties, seven wives of khans have been identified here. However, again, skeptical scientists have a question of authenticity and reliability - are they the khans, and whose wives?
Chinese hieroglyphic writing was radically "modernized" by several rulers in a row. And who needed such labor costs? All the same figures from the Torah, putting things in order in the annals and destroying the "extra" traces.
During the change of the alphabet, manuscripts were brought from all over the Chinese empire and completely rewritten. And the "outdated" originals were stored in the archive? No, they were simply destroyed as they did not comply with the new rules!
That's where the scope for distortion ...
Is this the Khan, and is it the Khan
Until recently, the drawing was considered "medieval" now - a confirmed fake, one of many claiming that Chigis Khan is a Mongoloid.
There are many similar reproductions of Genghis Khan from different eras and authors. A drawing by an unknown Chinese master, made with ink on silk fabric, is quite common. Here Temujin is depicted in full growth, on his head is a Mongolian hat, in his right hand is a Mongolian bow, behind his back is a quiver with arrows, his left hand lies on the hilt of a saber in a painted scabbard. This is the same typical image of a representative of the Mongolian race.
What did Genghis Khan look like? Other sources
A Chinese drawing from the 13th-15th centuries depicts Genghis Khan falconry. As you can see, Genghis Khan is not a Mongoloid at all! A typical Slav, with a chic beard.
In a Chinese drawing of the 13th-14th centuries, Temujin is depicted hunting with falcons, here the master depicted him as a typical Slav with a thick beard.
No Mongoloid!
M. Polo in the miniature "The Crowning of Genghis Khan" depicts Temujin as a pure Slav. The traveler dressed the entire retinue of the ruler in European clothes, crowning the commander with a crown with trefoils - a clear attribute of European rulers. The sword in the hands of Genghis Khan is truly Russian, heroic.
The ethnic group of the Borjigins has not survived to this day.
The well-known Persian scientist-encyclopedist Rashid ad-Din in the "Collection of Chronicles" presents several images of Genghis Khan with truly Mongolian features. However, a number of historians have proven that the Borjigin tribe, from which Genghis Khan came, have other facial features that are fundamentally different from the Mongoloid group of peoples.
"Borjigin" in translation into Russian means "blue-eyed". The eyes of the ancient Mughal family are "dark blue" or "blue green", the pupil is edged with a brown rim. In this case, all the descendants of the genus should look different, which is not visible in the archive images of the alleged Temujin family that are allowed for general use.
Genghis Khan.
Russian researcher L.N. Gumilyov in the book "Ancient Rus' and the Great Steppe" describes the disappeared ethnic group as follows: "The ancient Mongols were ... a tall, bearded, fair-haired and blue-eyed people ...". Temujin stood out for his tall stature, majestic posture, had a wide forehead, wore a long beard. L.N. Gumilyov brought out the concept of passionarity, and it is to her that he attributes the complete disappearance of small ethnic nationalities, many of which have not survived to this day in their pure form, including the Borjigins
http://ru-an.info/%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B8/%D1%81%D0%BD%D0% B8%D0%BC%D0%B0%D0%B5%D0%BC-%D0%BE%D0%B1%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8 %D1%8F-%D1%81-%D0%BC%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%B3%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%BE-%D1%82%D0%B0%D1% 82%D0%B0%D1%80/
Death of Genghis Khan
Death of Genghis Khan.
Several “plausible” versions were invented, each has its own adherents.
1. From falling from a horse when hunting for wild horses - the official option.
2. From a lightning strike - according to Plano Carpini.
3. From an arrow wound in the knee - according to the story of Marco Polo.
4. From the wound inflicted by the Mongolian beauty Kyurbeldishin-khatun, the Tangut khansha - a Mongolian legend.
One thing is clear - he did not die a natural death, but they tried to hide the true cause of death by launching false versions.
The place of burial is classified. According to legend, the body rests on Mount Burkhan-Khaldun. There are also buried: the youngest son Tului, with children Kublai Khan, Mongke Khan, Arig-Buga and other children. There are no tombstones in the cemetery, so as not to be plundered. The secret place is overgrown with dense forest and is protected from European travelers by the Uryankhai tribes.
Conclusion
It turns out that the Mongol Genghis Khan was a tall, fair-haired Slav with blue eyes !!! These are the Mughals!
In addition to the "official" false evidence recognized by science, there are others that are not noticed by the "luminaries", according to which Timur - Genghis Khan does not look like a Mongoloid at all. Mongoloids have dark eyes, black hair and short stature. No similarity with the Slavic-Aryans. However, it is not customary to talk about such a discrepancy.
After such unexpected results, I want to check how other figures of the Mughal nationality looked like in the era of the three-hundred-year-old Mongol-Tatar yoke.
There is still no reliable information on this issue. Some scientists are of the opinion that he was a Turkicized Aryan, originally from Kashgaria. Other historians are inclined to believe that he was a Mongol.
Confirmation that he was of Turkic origin is the fact that correspondence with the Western kings Genghis Khan was conducted in the Jurassic language, and not in Mongolian. There is also a Chingizite stone, on which an inscription from the time of the great conqueror, also written in Turkic, has been preserved. From this information, scientists conclude that Genghis Khan wrote and spoke in Turkic, therefore, he was a Turk. The children of Genghis Khan were also named in the Turkic manner: Tule, Jochi, Chagatai, Ukitai.
Other historians agree that he did not belong to the Tatar tribe. Unlike the Mongols, the Tatars, as well as their modern descendants, the Buryats, Kalmyks, belonging to the Turks, were his worst enemies. When Genghis Khan was nine years old, the Tatars poisoned his father.
The reason to doubt his Mongolian origin is the description of his appearance: gray-green eyes, red hair. Such features of appearance are unusual for the Mongols, and very different from his fellow tribesmen.
Scientists also do not reject the version that Genghis Khan has Kazakh roots. According to available data, Genghis Khan was born (Temirshin - a marching name from "temirshi" - "blacksmith") was born in 1155 on the territory of modern Mongolia in the kiyat clan (the name of the Kazakh clan). Translated from Kazakh, his name sounds like Shyngyskhan, and means: "shyn" - the highest peak in the mountains, "gys" - a beam. The full name is translated as "high radiant khan." It is also known that the mother of Genghis Khan was also from the Kazakh family.
He received his new name "Genghis Khan" (or Khan of the East) in 1206 during a general meeting of the rulers of cities. Taking into account the fact that such clans as Argyn, Kiyat, Zhalair, Merkit, Kazakhs took part in this meeting, and there was an opinion that Genghis Khan belongs to the Kazakhs. All the tribes described above are Kazakh, of Mongolian origin. The Mongols, at that time, did not live in the territory where Genghis Khan was born.
As confirmation that Genghis Khan was not a Mongol, the head of state never had the title of khan among the Mongols (they have a similar title called kontaishi). And the title of khan was with the Turkic rulers.
The version that Genghis Khan was Chinese seems very interesting. In China, even the mausoleum of Genghis Khan was erected, and he was also included in the list of honorary emperors of China. There is no official evidence that he is of Chinese origin.
“As soon as the question is raised on any website: “Who is Genghis Khan - a Mongol or a Turk?” heated discussions immediately begin. Passions are so heated that people are literally literally tearing each other to pieces. Why do our compatriots react so painfully to this seemingly academic question?
Before answering this, I want to put forward my seditious version of this problem: “whether Genghis Khan is a Mongol or a Turk, he is still the ancestor of the Kazakhs!” Now I will try to substantiate my version.
In my opinion, the process of self-identification of the nation is now underway, in connection with this, many questions arise: who are we, from what roots, why our history has developed in this way ... As is known from the history of Genghis Khan, one of those key figures who played an exceptional role in the formation of the Kazakh nation . According to the ideas existing in historical science, Genghis Khan united the scattered Mongol tribes, and then attacked the neighboring Turkic peoples and subdued them. After that, the united tribes of Mongols and Turks created a powerful empire.
This is where one of the most painful moments for the Kazakh self-consciousness lies: since we consider ourselves descendants of the Turks, the fall of our ancestors under the rule of a few Mongols hits the pride of the current inhabitants of the Kazakh steppes. How so? After all, the Turks have always been distinguished by a warlike disposition. Another V-VI centuries. AD The Turks created one of the largest empires in the history of mankind - the Turkic Khaganate, with an area of 13 million km2. And after that, submit to some Mongols?
Were there in the XII - XIII centuries. Turks and Mongols in the current sense, that is, did such ethnic groups exist? I think this is a very controversial issue. Information about those times is scarce and very contradictory.
But I proceed from the current version, and I admit that "Yes, there were Mongol tribes, and they conquered the Turks." The question immediately arises why the Kazakhs should consider themselves only a Turkic people? Yes, our language has Turkic roots. But, we are only half Turkic. Our second half is Mongolian! We are Turko-Mongols or Mongolo-Turks! We know from history that all Mongolian tribes assimilated with the Turks and adopted the Turkic language. This is a historical fact, whether we like it or not.
We have a strict ban on marriages up to the seventh generation. Therefore, the Turkic and Mongol tribes were forced to move, to mix. In this regard, I will express another seditious idea - every Kazakh, in my opinion, is half Turkic and half Mongol.
This year marks the 550th anniversary of the formation of the Kazakh Khanate. As you know, all the Kazakh khans Chingizids (the founders of the Kazakh khanate Kerey and Zhanibek, Kasym Khan, Khaknazar Khan, Yesim Khan, Tauke Khan, Abylai Khan, etc.) All of them fought to the death for the interests of the Kazakhs, not the Mongols. Without their foresight and skillful policy, incessant struggle, the Kazakh nation would hardly have developed in its current form. Without their fearlessness and purposefulness, organizational abilities, we would not have these boundless territories. Can we reject our great khans on the basis that Mongolian blood flows in their veins. And in general, should we have complexes about the fact that Mongolian blood flows in our veins? It seems to me no, they shouldn't - the Mongols as a nation are no worse than the Turks.
I am writing all this not in the name of leavened patriotism, they say we have such a great ancestor! Genghis Khan is too controversial a ruler. Slaughtered entire nations, destroyed cities. The number of cities only in Kazakhstan in the XIII - XIV centuries. decreased from 220 to 20.
But I think it's not worth reinterpreting our history in the name of current requests. Some historians are trying to prove that Genghis Khan is not a Mongol, but a Turk by origin, thereby justifying us as Turks. And what to do with our Mongolian component?
As our President said, there are no facts in our history that are humiliating for us.”
