KIEVAN RUS and MONGOL INVASION

[Nick_B74]

Hello dear friends.*I'm really waiting the kinda final version of mod you're creating, thank you for the great job you're doing!!! *I'm not a historical scientist, but I'm very interested in history and i want to share this information with you my comrads!*
I wanted to translate the info, *I'm going to give you, *from russian to english but eventually I've found this text already written by another person im english. Would you be so kind to spend less than 10 minutes to have read that.
The link give has GREAT information about Mongols invasion with proofs related on real documentation. And that person says good words, that "don't be surprised and don't deny it immediately"*
[emoji106] So that's the idea for the mod you guys are creating.
Thank you and inform me if i may help you somehow?

https://www.quora.com/Is-Mongol-Empi...n-a-true-story

Отправлено с моего HTC6535LVW через Tapatalk

[Dontfearme22]

Hello dear friends.*I'm really waiting the kinda final version of mod you're creating, thank you for the great job you're doing!!! *I'm not a historical scientist, but I'm very interested in history and i want to share this information with you my comrads!*
I wanted to translate the info, *I'm going to give you, *from russian to english but eventually I've found this text already written by another person im english. Would you be so kind to spend less than 10 minutes to have read that.
The link give has GREAT information about Mongols invasion with proofs related on real documentation. And that person says good words, that "don't be surprised and don't deny it immediately"*
[emoji106] So that's the idea for the mod you guys are creating.
Thank you and inform me if i may help you somehow?

https://www.quora.com/Is-Mongol-Empi...n-a-true-story

Отправлено с моего HTC6535LVW через Tapatalk

I am the developer in charge of the Ilkhanate and Golden Horde and this post you provided was.....unique to put it lightly. My initial guess as to the crux of it, is that the author of this thinks Tartary and the Mongol Empire are entirely different things, when Tartary was a geographic and ethnic distinction that was just how medieval Europeans referred to that area. There was Muskovite Tartary i.e. the Russian and Ukrainian steppe, probably what the author meant by that supposed "big Russian empire" but that doesn't mean there was a bordered state called "Muscovite Tartary", it was a region. I think all the misconceptions of this post are due to a misunderstanding of how Europeans talked about geography and peoples. Even then, you would need to prove Tartary was a state that considered itself as such with a defined political identity, and then that the Mongols as a foreign people conquered it and subsumed it. You can't just say, 'well, there is this place on medieval maps that isn't the mainstream name for the nation that is said currently to be there so they must be entirely different political states'. That is just multiple leaps of logic.

Its like, when medieval authors refer to "Christendom", we know that was a geographic, ethnic and religious area and not some sort of unified state called Christendom. Same thing with Tartary.

In the artwork referenced showing Mongols as European, that was just because in those days European artists portrayed foreigners styled as conventionalized 'foreigners', or just as Europeans. Its like, when medieval European artists portrayed elephants:


That doesn't mean until the renaissance elephants had clawed feet and tusks, they just were portrayed that way. You have to remember, many of these chroniclers would have never seen a Mongol first-hand, only through description.

As for the rest of the points, the author provides no evidence or sourcing whatsoever. He mentions Rashid al-Din but actually doesn't provide the quote to back that specific point up. Honestly, it gives off hints of just vague Russian nationalism without any strong factual sources.

[Nick_B74]

I am the developer in charge of the Ilkhanate and Golden Horde and this post you provided was.....unique to put it lightly. My initial guess as to the crux of it, is that the author of this thinks Tartary and the Mongol Empire are entirely different things, when Tartary was a geographic and ethnic distinction that was just how medieval Europeans referred to that area. There was Muskovite Tartary i.e. the Russian and Ukrainian steppe, probably what the author meant by that supposed "big Russian empire" but that doesn't mean there was a bordered state called "Muscovite Tartary", it was a region. I think all the misconceptions of this post are due to a misunderstanding of how Europeans talked about geography and peoples. Even then, you would need to prove Tartary was a state that considered itself as such with a defined political identity, and then that the Mongols as a foreign people conquered it and subsumed it. You can't just say, 'well, there is this place on medieval maps that isn't the mainstream name for the nation that is said currently to be there so they must be entirely different political states'. That is just multiple leaps of logic.

Its like, when medieval authors refer to "Christendom", we know that was a geographic, ethnic and religious area and not some sort of unified state called Christendom. Same thing with Tartary.

In the artwork referenced showing Mongols as European, that was just because in those days European artists portrayed foreigners styled as conventionalized 'foreigners', or just as Europeans. Its like, when medieval European artists portrayed elephants:


That doesn't mean until the renaissance elephants had clawed feet and tusks, they just were portrayed that way. You have to remember, many of these chroniclers would have never seen a Mongol first-hand, only through description.

As for the rest of the points, the author provides no evidence or sourcing whatsoever. He mentions Rashid al-Din but actually doesn't provide the quote to back that specific point up. Honestly, it gives off hints of just vague Russian nationalism without any strong factual sources.

Proofs: Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. III, Edinburgh, 1771, page 887"TARTARY, a vast country in the northern parts of Asia, bounded by Siberia on the north and west: this is called Great Tartary. The Tartars who lie south of Muscovy and Siberia, are those of Astracan, Circassia, and Dagistan, situated north-west of the Caspian-sea; the Calmuc Tartars, who lie between Siberia and the Caspian-sea; the Usbec Tartars and Moguls, who lie north of Persia and India; and lastly, those of Tibet, who lie north-west of China."


Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. III, Edinburgh, 1771, page 572
"SCYTHIA, the northern parts of Europe and Asia were anciently so called, which afterwards obtained the name of Tartary."


Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. II, Edinburgh, 1771, page 56
"CHAM, or Khan, a word of much the same import with king in English : It is the title of the sovereign princes of Tartary, and is likewise applied to the principal noblemen in Persia."

Historical textbook (1659) by Denis Pétau a.k.a. Dionisius Petavius:It says the following:
"TARTARIA, (known of old by the name of Scythia, from their first king Scythu; and who were at first called Magogius, from Magog, Japhet's son, whose prosterity its inhabitants were) is called by the inhabitants Mongul, but Tartaria from the river Tartar, watering a great part of it. It is a great Empire, (not yielding to any other in largeneffe of Countries, but to the King of Spain's Dominions; whom also it exceeds, in that it is all united by some bond: whereas the other are very much disjoined) extending 5400 miles from East to West, and 3600 from North to South; to that the great Cham or Emperour hereof, hath many great Realms and Provinces under him, containing a great number of good Towns."

1 - Above was the proofs from the books.

2 - Check this interactive maps online

http://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/serv...iew.search.url

http://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/detail/RUMSEY~8~1~25562~1040005:L-Asie-1-?showTipAdvancedSearch=false&showShareIIIFLink=true&showTip=false&helpUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fdoc.lunaimaging.com%2Fdisplay%2FV72D%2FLUNA%2BViewer%23LUNAViewer-LUNAViewer&title=Search+Results%3A+List_No+equal+to+%274614.021%27&fullTextSearchChecked=&advancedSearchUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fdoc.lunaimaging.com%2Fdisplay%2FV72D%2FSearching%23Searching-Searching&thumbnailViewUrlKey=link.view.search.url


PS
Honestly, it gives off hints of just vague Russian nationalism without any strong factual sources.

Looking at the maps of french,german, british and etc authors it shouldn't give you any idea of russian nationalism. By the way good to know for you, we live among hundreds of another nations Bashkires, Tatars, Burats,Yakuts, Chuvashes, Vhechens, Dagestans etc etc etc

[Dontfearme22]

Proofs: Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. III, Edinburgh, 1771, page 887"TARTARY, a vast country in the northern parts of Asia, bounded by Siberia on the north and west: this is called Great Tartary. The Tartars who lie south of Muscovy and Siberia, are those of Astracan, Circassia, and Dagistan, situated north-west of the Caspian-sea; the Calmuc Tartars, who lie between Siberia and the Caspian-sea; the Usbec Tartars and Moguls, who lie north of Persia and India; and lastly, those of Tibet, who lie north-west of China."


Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. III, Edinburgh, 1771, page 572
"SCYTHIA, the northern parts of Europe and Asia were anciently so called, which afterwards obtained the name of Tartary."


Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. II, Edinburgh, 1771, page 56
"CHAM, or Khan, a word of much the same import with king in English : It is the title of the sovereign princes of Tartary, and is likewise applied to the principal noblemen in Persia."

Historical textbook (1659) by Denis Pétau a.k.a. Dionisius Petavius:It says the following:
"TARTARIA, (known of old by the name of Scythia, from their first king Scythu; and who were at first called Magogius, from Magog, Japhet's son, whose prosterity its inhabitants were) is called by the inhabitants Mongul, but Tartaria from the river Tartar, watering a great part of it. It is a great Empire, (not yielding to any other in largeneffe of Countries, but to the King of Spain's Dominions; whom also it exceeds, in that it is all united by some bond: whereas the other are very much disjoined) extending 5400 miles from East to West, and 3600 from North to South; to that the great Cham or Emperour hereof, hath many great Realms and Provinces under him, containing a great number of good Towns."

1 - Above was the proofs from the books.

2 - Check this interactive maps online

http://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/serv...iew.search.url

http://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/detail/RUMSEY~8~1~25562~1040005:L-Asie-1-?showTipAdvancedSearch=false&showShareIIIFLink=true&showTip=false&helpUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fdoc.lunaimaging.com%2Fdisplay%2FV72D%2FLUNA%2BViewer%23LUNAViewer-LUNAViewer&title=Search+Results%3A+List_No+equal+to+%274614.021%27&fullTextSearchChecked=&advancedSearchUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fdoc.lunaimaging.com%2Fdisplay%2FV72D%2FSearching%23Searching-Searching&thumbnailViewUrlKey=link.view.search.url


PS
Honestly, it gives off hints of just vague Russian nationalism without any strong factual sources.

Looking at the maps of french,german, british and etc authors it shouldn't give you any idea of russian nationalism. By the way good to know for you, we live among hundreds of another nations Bashkires, Tatars, Burats,Yakuts, Chuvashes, Vhechens, Dagestans etc etc etc

That is what I mean though, Tartary was the area that included the Mongol Empire. Its all semantics. It was also a way for Europeans to refer to the Mongols i.e. Great Tartary. It wasn't some hidden Asian empire conquered by the Mongols, it was the geographic area (corresponding vaguely to Scythia) that when basically unified under the Mongols became Great Tartary i.e.--> The Mongol Empire. You can't take these sources or even the names at face value or else you will be looking for Prester John in the Third India of Ethiopia.

Honestly, its hard for me to explain the specifics here because I personally am not 100% a expert on historical European names for Asian peoples, but I can say that the general point of the article is pretty incorrect. The Mongol Empire very much did exist and you can't dismiss the entirety of artifacts dating to the Yuan Dynasty, the Chagatai Khanate, the Golden Horde, the Ilkhanate and every single period source talking about Genghis Khan and his descendants just because there is this confusion about terminology in some European sources(which aren't even medieval, 1771 is not medieval).

[Nick_B74]

*According to the official history, Mongols raped Russian women during the alleged 250 year enslavement. However, there are no Asian genetics in the Russian population (wikipedia - Russians - genetics). This radically contradicts with the official version. The official history doesn't offer any sort of explanation. History has shown that when one race is subjugated by another, the races mix. Afroamerican and Mestizo are good examples.
*Most Russian monasteries (wikipedia - list of Russian monasteries) were built during the alleged enslavement. The monasteries were often big and rich constructions. No state of that time was able to achieve something like that, especially not an enslaved one.
* The biggest empire in human history left virtually no remains. Not one archeologic, genetic, linguistic or any kind of empirical evidence.
* Modern day Mongolia shows absolutely no signs of its alleged imperial past. Actually, when Mongols were told about Genghis Khan in the 19th century, their jaws dropped. Rashid-al-Din, the Persian historian, wrote that Genghis Khan’s children were born with gray-blue eyes and blond hair.

Furthermore,
at first the Horde is considering as the many nationalities army, as we can also see now, that all nations are in one army. And to contain an army, government needs money for food for soldiers and horses, the weapons etc, where to take this money? I guess from people by taxes, so that was "yarlik" that Knyazs paid to a Horde. So logically it looks like this, otherwise where to take the money if none has it? go and conquer some another city/country etc. By the way, who had experience of being good horse archer ofcourse steeppe people bashkirs, tatars (they have asiatic faces) and the rest are others, so it makes sense.

The helmet of Aleksandr Nevski with arabic letters, look absolutely weird!

Also their armor looks similar

PS
looks like it was a civil war, between christian army and paganism army, so concluding it i can say that christian faith was always against old faith, against scintists, against healers and also against paganism. So logicaly if there was a lot of people burnt in all around Europe, what was in Rus' then....?
My opinion, you as developer would need to consider this info, and of course you can not accept it completely, because its just an option/opinion, but you still can consider and create the BLAST mod.

[Dontfearme22]

*According to the official history, Mongols raped Russian women during the alleged 250 year enslavement. However, there are no Asian genetics in the Russian population (wikipedia - Russians - genetics). This radically contradicts with the official version. The official history doesn't offer any sort of explanation. History has shown that when one race is subjugated by another, the races mix. Afroamerican and Mestizo are good examples.
*Most Russian monasteries (wikipedia - list of Russian monasteries) were built during the alleged enslavement. The monasteries were often big and rich constructions. No state of that time was able to achieve something like that, especially not an enslaved one.
* The biggest empire in human history left virtually no remains. Not one archeologic, genetic, linguistic or any kind of empirical evidence.
* Modern day Mongolia shows absolutely no signs of its alleged imperial past. Actually, when Mongols were told about Genghis Khan in the 19th century, their jaws dropped. Rashid-al-Din, the Persian historian, wrote that Genghis Khan’s children were born with gray-blue eyes and blond hair.

Furthermore,
at first the Horde is considering as the many nationalities army, as we can also see now, that all nations are in one army. And to contain an army, government needs money for food for soldiers and horses, the weapons etc, where to take this money? I guess from people by taxes, so that was "yarlik" that Knyazs paid to a Horde. So logically it looks like this, otherwise where to take the money if none has it? go and conquer some another city/country etc. By the way, who had experience of being good horse archer ofcourse steeppe people bashkirs, tatars (they have asiatic faces) and the rest are others, so it makes sense.

The helmet of Aleksandr Nevski with arabic letters, look absolutely weird!

Also their armor looks similar

PS
looks like it was a civil war, between christian army and paganism army, so concluding it i can say that christian faith was always against old faith, against scintists, against healers and also against paganism. So logicaly if there was a lot of people burnt in all around Europe, what was in Rus' then....?
My opinion, you as developer would need to consider this info, and of course you can not accept it completely, because its just an option/opinion, but you still can consider and create the BLAST mod.

I am not going to argue the last part of your post because honestly, and this is probably just because I don't understand the text well, I don't know what point you are trying to make.

For the first part, again no sources. Pointing vaguely to Wikipedia articles doesn't count, and I did try to follow up on that. There is no Wikipedia page for Russian genetics specifically (though it might be a different language) although I did some side research and genetically, there seems to be a small amount of Mongolian genetics (0.7%) in the Russian population. I also found sources that said Genghis Khans specific genetic marker was not in actual 'Russian' Russians, just Kazakhs, Buryats and so forth. You really shouldn't compare the racial mixing of the Americas to the Golden Horde in Russia because in the Americas there was large scale, intensive colonization and subsequent migration to a territory as well as a serious shrinking of native, pure bloodlines through disease and warfare which led to a large percentage of mixed race peoples leftover. Even then, different areas behaved differently. When the Spanish had large migration to Latin America you have large mestizo populations while in a lot of British North America there isn't much. Or, the French fur traders intermarried with natives to form the Metis while later colonists didn't, and remained more solidly European.

With the Golden Horde, the Mongols did what they did in China-take over the upper layers of government and extract tribute. There was no attempt to my knowledge, to thoroughly colonize Russia which would have led to a large percentage of mixed race Russians. That .7 percent of Mongolic genes then, seems to make sense for just isolated incidents of wartime rape lingering to the modern era(there are about 6-7 centuries of gene drift and flow between then and now anyways). It wasn't racial subjugation whatever that means, but a cultural and political one.

Remember as well, many historic buildings are restored multiple times. Very rarely actually, is a building unchanged from when it was originally constructed say in the 1300's to now. You make the assumption no state could have constructed those monasteries in that period without any actual evidence. I actually looked up some specific monasteries, like the Danilov monastery and a glance at information from its official website says it was restored and destroyed multiple times since its founding by Alexander Nevskys son in 1282.

Saying the biggest empire in history left no evidence is just....you have to prove that every single artifact, text, building, site from every single Mongol Successor Kingdom is fake, and that for starters, the entire city of Karakorum at Erdene Zuu Monastery in Mongolia isn't well, real. Don't forget to dispute the entirety, every word, of the Secret History of the Mongols and Rashid al-Dins whole corpus of work, who ironically is mentioned later in the article. Also, every artifact anywere in Eurasia conventionally linked to the 'Mongol Empire'. Its like trying to prove Charlemagne didn't exist, or the Abbasids were really a entirely politically different state and all their evidence is misread. Its gargantuan. The conventional narrative of history exists because it is the most widely agreed upon view of history in that time. Now, that narrative is very often incorrect-but there are scales of error and it is one thing to argue for say, a misunderstanding of Mongol trade relationships with the Mamluk Sultanate, and another to say just the entire Mongol Empire either didn't exist, or is something totally different. That margin for error also, gets smaller the closer you get to the present era. Its a lot harder to make big narrative-shifting statements about events in the 1300s AD than 1300s BC as a general rule(and I should know, my other mod was Age of Bronze)

The last point has no evidence backing it whatsoever. I did do some reading from Rashid al-Din in the Taʾrīkh-ī Ghazānī, the part that mentions Genghis Khans life and I found no reference to the appearance of his sons that corroborates what you are saying.

I have considered this info but its just, I can't use info that isn't properly sourced. The article you linked was built on misconceptions and loaded with statements that weren't backed up by accurate period data, and I can't use articles like that. Its just the way I have chosen to work on the Mongols.


Sources:

https://www.sciencedaily.com/release...0519131507.htm

http://msdm.ru/eng/index.htm

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2253976/

http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/001...6/108630Eb.pdf

[Nick_B74]

I am not going to argue the last part of your post because honestly, and this is probably just because I don't understand the text well, I don't know what point you are trying to make.

For the first part, again no sources. Pointing vaguely to Wikipedia articles doesn't count, and I did try to follow up on that. There is no Wikipedia page for Russian genetics specifically (though it might be a different language) although I did some side research and genetically, there seems to be a small amount of Mongolian genetics (0.7%) in the Russian population. I also found sources that said Genghis Khans specific genetic marker was not in actual 'Russian' Russians, just Kazakhs, Buryats and so forth. You really shouldn't compare the racial mixing of the Americas to the Golden Horde in Russia because in the Americas there was large scale, intensive colonization and subsequent migration to a territory as well as a serious shrinking of native, pure bloodlines through disease and warfare which led to a large percentage of mixed race peoples leftover. Even then, different areas behaved differently. When the Spanish had large migration to Latin America you have large mestizo populations while in a lot of British North America there isn't much. Or, the French fur traders intermarried with natives to form the Metis while later colonists didn't, and remained more solidly European.

With the Golden Horde, the Mongols did what they did in China-take over the upper layers of government and extract tribute. There was no attempt to my knowledge, to thoroughly colonize Russia which would have led to a large percentage of mixed race Russians. That .7 percent of Mongolic genes then, seems to make sense for just isolated incidents of wartime rape lingering to the modern era(there are about 6-7 centuries of gene drift and flow between then and now anyways). It wasn't racial subjugation whatever that means, but a cultural and political one.

Remember as well, many historic buildings are restored multiple times. Very rarely actually, is a building unchanged from when it was originally constructed say in the 1300's to now. You make the assumption no state could have constructed those monasteries in that period without any actual evidence. I actually looked up some specific monasteries, like the Danilov monastery and a glance at information from its official website says it was restored and destroyed multiple times since its founding by Alexander Nevskys son in 1282.

Saying the biggest empire in history left no evidence is just....you have to prove that every single artifact, text, building, site from every single Mongol Successor Kingdom is fake, and that for starters, the entire city of Karakorum at Erdene Zuu Monastery in Mongolia isn't well, real. Don't forget to dispute the entirety, every word, of the Secret History of the Mongols and Rashid al-Dins whole corpus of work, who ironically is mentioned later in the article. Also, every artifact anywere in Eurasia conventionally linked to the 'Mongol Empire'. Its like trying to prove Charlemagne didn't exist, or the Abbasids were really a entirely politically different state and all their evidence is misread. Its gargantuan. The conventional narrative of history exists because it is the most widely agreed upon view of history in that time. Now, that narrative is very often incorrect-but there are scales of error and it is one thing to argue for say, a misunderstanding of Mongol trade relationships with the Mamluk Sultanate, and another to say just the entire Mongol Empire either didn't exist, or is something totally different. That margin for error also, gets smaller the closer you get to the present era. Its a lot harder to make big narrative-shifting statements about events in the 1300s AD than 1300s BC as a general rule(and I should know, my other mod was Age of Bronze)

The last point has no evidence backing it whatsoever. I did do some reading from Rashid al-Din in the Taʾrīkh-ī Ghazānī, the part that mentions Genghis Khans life and I found no reference to the appearance of his sons that corroborates what you are saying.

I have considered this info but its just, I can't use info that isn't properly sourced. The article you linked was built on misconceptions and loaded with statements that weren't backed up by accurate period data, and I can't use articles like that. Its just the way I have chosen to work on the Mongols.


Sources:

https://www.sciencedaily.com/release...0519131507.htm

http://msdm.ru/eng/index.htm

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2253976/

http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/001...6/108630Eb.pdf

If there's no proofs of NOT existing invasion, where're the proofs and document that it existed, where are all documents for over than 200 years in mongol language There's none has been saved? And people forgot that language and there's no mongol race living neither in Kiev, Ryazan, Pskov,Moskow? Comparing to another countries which were invaded or colonized people at first there's invaders temples and people speaking the language of invaders/colonizators Algeria-They still speak french, Canada,Quebec-French, South America-portugeese and spanish, India-English and Hindi, Philipins-philippin language and spanish, Australia-english. Then why 70-80% in russia has their first russian language and another 20-30% has their tatar, bashkir, yakut first language and russian second. Why dont the biggest part of people 70-80% in russia hasnt their first mongol language, if the mongols were here over than 200years? Because there's no profs of existing the Tatar-Mongol Invasion from Mongolia.Only the history book which has been created in 17 century, by pro-west Romanov dynasty and written by german scintists, nothing else. That's why i want to say that you can consider more info about it, and create really good and interesting mod to play! Thank you

[Nick_B74]

For sure we can say that the Mongol-Tatar invasion didnt have any, absolutely none connection to the mongolia country and mongol nation now.

[Danishmend]

* The biggest empire in human history left virtually no remains. Not one archeologic, genetic, linguistic or any kind of empirical evidence.

Of course they did, don't be ridiculous. Modern Kazakhs, Uzbeks, Nogais and Crimean Tatars are a result of Mongol tribes merging with Turkic Kipchaks/Cumans (and Turkic Karluks, in the case of Uzbeks), they emerged as nations after the Mongol Invasion. Maybe more than half of modern Kazakh tribes are originally Mongolian (Naiman, Dughlat, Jalayir, Kerait, Manghud, Onggirat etc).

The Uzbek nation began taking shape during Timur's reign, Timur was from a Turkified Mongol clan, named Barlas. The amalgam of Turkic Karluk and Mongol tribes gave rise to what is now Uzbek nation.

Mangıt (Manghud) is a well known Mongol tribe for instance and they contributed to the formation of Crimean Tatars.

[Danishmend]

The Mongol Invasion of West Eurasia is very well documented, the OP is beyond ridiculous.

The entire article/post was garbage, especially this part made me laugh.



Medieval paintings/miniatures usually cannot be a reference. Most of them were painted long after the events/battles. You can see Asian looking Persians in Persian miniature art for example, even the Arabian figures were portrayed as Asian looking in Persian miniatures.

This is how European portrayed Mongols and Mamluks (Battle of Wadi al-Khazandar). Look at their faces and armors/clothings.
Mongols (left) don't look Mongolian in any sense (except for their composite bows maybe), Mamluks (right) on the other hand look stereotypical "Saracen" although they were recruited from the Kipchak tribes occupying north of the Black Sea.

[KAM 2150]

That last post about comparing invading army that was minority on conquered region to full on colonization (in case of Algeria just few decades ago) and how it impacts language is what brings a smile to my face for the rest of they day.

[Nick_B74]

That last post about comparing invading army that was minority on conquered region to full on colonization (in case of Algeria just few decades ago) and how it impacts language is what brings a smile to my face for the rest of they day.

It makes me smile when people don't read or don't want to apply the whole information from post/text, i wrote several examples and you picked just one. Might i mistaken about Algeria, but look to anothers [emoji6]

Отправлено с моего HTC6535LVW через Tapatalk

[Nick_B74]

That last post about comparing invading army that was minority on conquered region to full on colonization (in case of Algeria just few decades ago) and how it impacts language is what brings a smile to my face for the rest of they day.

Read this

http://survincity.com/2013/08/that-c...mongol-yoke-2/

Отправлено с моего HTC6535LVW через Tapatalk

[Nick_B74]

Open this detailed map, very interesting and there you will definitely see where were MOGULS AND TARTARS
http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.gmd/g7270.mf000003
Also there's different armor and clothes those persons has. So far as i know, the army recruited soldiers from different areas with their individual and specific clothes and armors.

As we can see people has a little difderece in their clothes.
So what a want to say is there never was Mongol invasion in our today's understanding "wild asian people from Mongolia side collected huge army and moved over than 5000km to the north and attacked ancient Rus in winter"

Отправлено с моего HTC6535LVW через Tapatalk

[Nick_B74]

Have you all ever heard about slavic calendar which has been changed by Petr The great in 1 century to gregorian calendar? Check this :
http://survincity.com/2011/01/old-slavic-calendars/

Отправлено с моего HTC6535LVW через Tapatalk

[Nick_B74]

There was no such thing as the Tartar and Mongol invasion followed by over two centuries of yoke and slavery, because the so-called "Tartars and Mongols" were the actual ancestors of the modern Russians, living in a bilingual state with Turkic spoken as freely as Russian. So, Russia and Turkey once formed parts of the same empire. This ancient Russian state was governed by a double structure of civil and military authorities and the hordes were actually professional armies with a tradition of lifelong conscription (the recruitment being the so-called "blood tax"). The Mongol "invasions" were punitive operations against the regions of the empire that attempted tax evasion. Tamerlane was probably a Russian warlord.

Official Russian history is a blatant forgery concocted by a host of German scholars brought to Russia to legitimize the usurping Romanov dynasty (1613-1917).

Отправлено с моего HTC6535LVW через Tapatalk

[warman222]

Oh my goodness I'm gone one day and this happens. Can you please stop making threads about this? Your opinions are dully noted, nothing more to say.