Tenger Khan- Borrowing titles from other Civilizations and Inventing RoyalTitles

Aug 2016
10
Turkey
Do you know of cases in history where one Emperor/Ruler invented a new title for himself or adopted a Title from another Culture?

Examples would be Tenger Khan adopted by Taizong of Tang and Mahmud of Ghazni taking the Title Sultan

(visual shouting removed by moderator.)


"I'm sorry, but you appear to be under the delusion that we are actually having a debate.
Your cute little summary might have even made sense if it weren't for the fact that
you had no idea what my points even are. Since you are just making strawmans that
has nothing to do with my comment, I'll humor you by actually trying to respond
to your utter obfuscation."

Just what I was expecting, I read and made you do what I wanted you to do rather well, don't you think? No need to get so worked up, my friend, this
is just two people having fun talking about history, aren't we? haha

"Before we cover how genetics work, lets focus on how your reading comprehension
should work; starting from the fact that you misread "generic" for "genetic"
and continued with this comedy even when I pointed it out to you in the last post. "

Well then, Excuse me for my lacking abilities when it comes to reading comprehension, English is not my native language and it has only been two years since I started learning,
I'm bound to make a few mistakes here and there. Was it worth pointing out that I confused generic with genetic? Hm, I'd say no to that. lol
By the way, You still haven't proven the Ottomans were more Caucasoid than Mongoloid as far as I can remember whereas I have made my case, not that you actually cared to read or examine my sources haha

"The specific characteristic of Mongoloids include epicanthic folds (epicanthus) and
sinodonty. However, neither by themselves are exclusively "Mongoloid genes" and
you see native Americans as well as some South Asians having such characteristic
as well."
- It's funny that you thought Native Americans aren't part of the Mongoloid group. Made a mistake there, didn't you?

" Now mr. genetics expert, point out just where I said epicanthic fold and
sinodonty aren't genotypes. Let me help you, I didn't. This is what I actually said:
"There is no such thing as a Mongoloid gene, only different phenotype characteristics
which we generically group together "

This is what I said in response: There is, not as a term, but it certainly does
exist 100%. Phenotypical racial characetristics such as epicanthic folds and sinodonty are expressed by
the genotype. Conclusion: The Mongoloid genotype does exist and it is also
used by forensic analysts to this day.

"Epicanthus fold and sinodonty are both genotypes, but Mongoloid isn't. "

Epicanthus fold and sinodonty are phenotypes, not genotypes. You're welcome, my friend. Haha
When did I say Mongoloid was a genotype? I said Mongoloid is a racial classification
whose ethnic groups share relatively recent common ancestors, blood groups,
haplogroups and other genetic components and characteristics thus we can conclude that
the Mongoloid race is distinct from the other large racial categories.

"The former two aren't Mongoloid genes, for the simple reason they exist in
non-Mongoloid people as well; there are Romanians and southern Indians with
Epicanthus folds, and they aren't Mongoloid. "

Deep set eyes, prominent brow ridges and aquiline noses are all features of Caucasoid populations.
They exist to a high degree among Austronesians, Ainu and Native Americans. I'm fairly certain a regular human being with a working set of eyes would not confuse a Pueblo Native American with a Danish/Romanian Blonde or a Javanese Indonesian with a Person from Kerala.
It's not a huge surprise that East Asian Americans are playing Native Americans in movies.
Or the fact that Manipur banned all Hindu entertainment, instead opting for Hallyu and Chinese dramas.
Let's also not forget that Alberto Fujimori(and his daughter), a second generation Japanese, became the president of Peru, a pardo country known for its love of East Asian entertainment among the young generation and their disdain for the Spanish faces on Peruvian national TV.
Many Caucasoid people assume Takeshi Kaneshiro, Hiroshi Abe and Pham Anh Tuan are mixed. They aren't.

" Well, you are confirming the fact that you do have trouble reading terms correctly.
I said South Asians, not South East Asians, who are obviously Mongoloids."

Hm, I think you should learn to contextualize. Maybe you're doing this on purpose
and taking my texts apart to prove to yourself that you are in fact in some
kind of superior position, but every single historum member reading this
little conversation of ours realizes just what it is you're attempting, they
aren't stupid, you know. How sad.
Either that or you have trouble comprehending English.
I added sundadont(among many others) to your list of phenotypical characteristics of
Mongoloid peoples. I didn't even relate it to whatever you said about South
Asians having similar features(which in any case they do not).

"No it doesn't, and if you insist, give me the genetic code for it and you might even get the nobel price in physiology."

Mongoloid is a racial classification
whose ethnic groups share relatively recent common ancestors, blood groups,
haplogroups and other genetic components and characteristics thus we can conclude that
the Mongoloid race is distinct from the other large racial categories = Mongoloid genes. Voila, monsieur.

"And notice how you actually use the pass tense with the Native Americans being classified as Mongoloids,[...]"

Where did I use PAST tense? I wrote:"Genetically, Native Americans (who are also considered to be part of the Mongoloid racial category which is a scientific term still used in forensics, I may add) cluster much more closely with East Asians/Central Asians/South East Asian/Siberians/North East Indians(are these the South Asians you're referring to? Well, they are Mongoloid, not Indo-Aryan)/Pacific Islanders/Merina people of Madagascar than they do with Caucasoid populations, which makes sense considering the fact that they have relatively recent common ancestors."
I think you're inventing stuff so that you can get your flawed little arguments in.

"the reason that many do not do that anymore is precisely because the classification is subjective and context dependent. "

It's not subjective at all. There is an objective list of phenotypical Mongoloid characteristics and the Native Americans meet all conditions. Little to no facial or body hair, fewer sweat pores, shorter arms and legs, larger cranial capacity, epicanthic folds, little limb fat, relatively higher torso fat, thick straigt black hair of round crosssection, protruding cheekbones, higher bone density, cross...cross...cross...

"Anthropological classifications aren't based on scientific classification of genes, this is basics."

Why would they be? Anthropology is its own scientific field. Not that interfield studies don't occur.
"There is general agreement among anthropologists that the source populations for the migration into the Americas originated from an area somewhere east of the Yenisei River. The common occurrence of the mtDNA Haplogroups A, B, C, and D among eastern Asian and Amerindian populations has long been recognized, along with the presence of Haplogroup X.[27] As a whole, the greatest frequency of the four Amerindian associated haplogroups occurs in the Altai-Baikal region of southern Siberia.[28] Some subclades of C and D closer to the Amerindian subclades occur among Mongolian, Amur, Japanese, Korean, and Ainu populations.[27][29]" Enjoy.

"Speaking of opening a new tab and reading up whatnot, I suggest you open an introductory work to modern anthropology. Phrenology has long been regarded as obsolete and a pseudoscience for decades, yet you seem to be oblivious to this fact. "

This is not phrenology, this is professional phorensics, my friend. Open a new tab, look it up.

"Racial classifications are subjective; subjective does not mean I can say whatever I want, it simply mean the boundary between races are fluid and not blocked by genetic barriers."

Racial classifications aren't subjective. Otherwise Ainu would be classified as Caucasoids. People didn't just put this ethnic group in this racial category, just because. We have critera.
Well, wasn't that a revelation to me, no wonder we can all procreate with one another, the epiphany. Fluid boundaries and no genetic barriers, I'll remember that, changed my life just now.

"There are still standards for classification, just like the term "Chinese" is subjective, but you cannot just choose some random African from Africa and call him "Chinese" because it is subjective."

Suddenly it's not quite as subjective anymore, suddenly there are standards and criteria. Nice revision. Thumps up.
Anecdote: a female Somalian descendant of a crew member of Zheng He's treasure fleet considered herself to be Chinese(and Somalian of course).

"What their origins are is irrelevant to the fact that some of them listed, including the Ottomans, aren't ruled by Mongoloids "

You always say "some of them" but you can't give me any specifics, can you?
Ertugrul was a Mongoloid Turkmen from Kyrgystan/ South East Turkmenistan. His son was born
to a Turkoman woman. His name was Osman. He was the founder of the Ottoman Empire.
His son and the 2nd ruler of the Ottoman Empire was born to another Turkoman woman.
He went on to make Murad II with a Byzantine woman. A later descendant and ruler, Murad II
had a Turkic Mongoloid Dulkadir mother and 3 of his 4 consorts were Turkic Mongoloid as well. Suleyman the
Magnificient had a Turkic Mongoloid mother who was the daughter of Menli Giray, a
son of Haci Giray, who himself was a direct Genghisid descendant.
The one being argumentative is you. I'm just correcting you. With grace and elegance. Raining down on the consciously misinformed like a hail of glorious supreme intelligence.

"I mentioned them to prove the fact that not all Turkic speakers and their empires were Mongoloids, is this too difficult to understand? Other than occupying space, your spams have no relevance to my point."

I have provided pictures of sipahis and beyliks and akincis and rulers and historic records from both the Seljuk and the Early Ottoman period. I will be glad to provide you with many more sources, but you'd most likely not even bother to open any of the links, so I'll leave it be until someone interested comes along.
You have done nothing, provided nothing to prove that Turks were not Mongoloid, which seems to be your stance on this topic.

"I wasn't talking about the Tang dynasty. "

Yes, very convenient. Leaving out the people who first recorded the Turks in history as Tujue.

"Considering I was comparing the Persians and Uzbeks (including their Central Asian ancestors), this should be self evident. You would have known that if you knew a thing about primary Chinese sources. All northern and westerners were called Hu during Song times, and the Semu people during the Yuan, which included both huihui (central asian Turkic speakers) and Persians were called Hu as well. Zhu Yuanzhang also passed a decree banning the Semu and Mongols from intermarriage and called them all Hu; ”辫发椎髻、胡服、胡语、胡姓一切禁止“
"the hu clothing, hu languages, and hu surnames are now all banned" (Ming Taizu Shilu)"

Yes, completely irrelevant to our discussion about Turks. You diverge more from the topic than I ever have, my friend. Orkhon inscriptions forever.
Sorry to tell you but the Hu were never Turkic or Persian. They were proto- Mongolic, Sino- Tibetan/Tibeto- Burman, Yeniseian and all other kinds of proto- Indigenous ethnic groups of China. Never Turkic though.
There were Zhuzhu Huihui(Jews), Luoli Huihui(Gypsies) and all kinds of other Huihui. Huihui was not just a term for central asian turkic speakers, it's the predecessor of the term Hui(Muslim Chinese) which encompasses all Muslims in China. Most Muslim Turkic speakers during Yuan times conveniently called themselves Khwarezmians or Kashgari.
The Semu were a caste/class of people who made up a small part of Chinese society and were grouped together because they came from west of China(further away from China than the earlier Western Protectorate regions and medieval Gansu- many of them also worked for the Yuan dynasty's administration and military) and unfamiliar(basically all people who were not Han Chinese or Mongol, or had not had their own states and kingdoms in China proper and Korea), not an ethnic category. The term included Nestorian Christians, Jews, Muslims, Arabs and Persians, Alans, Buddhist Uyghurs, Tibetans, Tanguts, Turks, all kinds of different ethnic groups. The Yuan also put Jurchens, Koreans and Yunnan people together because they were seen as part of China Proper even though they are of completely different cultural, linguistic and ethnic make. They also seprated Northern Han Chinese and Southern Han Chinese for some reason.
After the Yuan Dynasty, Semu came to encompass Arabs and Persians only. In 1376 a Chinese merchant named Lin Nu married a Semu girl from Ormuz in Persia and brought her back with him to Fujian. Confucian philosopher Li Zhi was their descendant. She was a Semu, Turks - not so much.
Lan Yu, a Muslim Hui general of Ming founder Zhu Yuanzhang, was never referred to as a Semu in any historical record.
Zhengde Emperor's Uyghur concubines were never referred to as Semu.

"I've already said the Gokturks were Mongoloid in my last post (and I've seen Kul Tigin's stone head myself in Mongolia for your information):"

Ok, now do me a favor and look at original paintings from the Seljuk period, the Ottoman period and the Bahri Mamluk period and see for yourself. Maybe go there in person, so you are even more convinced if that's how it works for you.

"Just because the original Turks were Mongoloid does not mean all Turkic speakers are."

Like, I'm sorry to tell you, but even Egyptians, Persians and Turkish people acknowledge the fact that they the Turks who ruled Islamic Empires were Mongoloid people. They learn it in school actually.
I never said all Turkic speakers are Mongoloids. Didn't you read my paragraph about Tajiks and modern Turkish people and Turkification? You have a selective brain, it seems.

"Are you just trying to be argumentative for argument's sake or are you really having problems reading English, because you make no sense whatsoever. This thread has never been about the 13th century, it is about the greatest period in history, which mean history in general and the Tang certainly fits this criteria. Whether it exist in the 13th century is irrelevant to this thread. "

This thread is not about "the greatest period history which means history in general and the Tang certainly fits this criteria".
I'll say it once again. This thread is about "The greatest period in history FOR THE MONGOLOID MAN". He thinks the 13th century is the greatest period in history FOR THE MONGOLOID MAN. Do you understand?
If you have problems comprehending basic English, I would recommend getting help asap.
The Tang dynasty wasn't relevant to the thread in the first place, why are you bringing it up?
 

civfanatic

Ad Honorem
Oct 2012
3,318
Des Moines, Iowa
The Kushana emperors, who ruled modern-day Afghanistan, Pakistan, and much of North India, called themselves "Kaisara" after the Roman title "Caesar." The Kushanas also used the title "Shahanoshaho" which was the Bactrian variant of the Iranian title of "Shahanshah," used by the Sassanian emperors of Persia. Various Indian kings, such as Chandragupta I (founder of the Gupta empire), used the title "maharajadhiraja" (great king of kings) which was a calque of the Iranic title "Shahanshah."

In medieval times, several Hindu rulers adopted Islamicate titles in addition to Indic titles. For example, the Telugu king Musunuri Prola in the 14th century adopted the title "Andhra-Suratrana" which means "Sultan of Andhra." The word "suratrana" was the Indian rendering of the Islamic title of "Sultan." Many of the Vijayanagara emperors of South India, including Krishna Raya, also used the title "Suratrana" in the form "Hindu-raya Suratrana" (Sultan over Hindu kings).
 
May 2009
1,345
The most obvious example would be Genghis Khan. As far as anyone can tell that wasn't an existing title, and seems to be invented. Scholars can't even agree 100% on what the "Genghis" part means. This wasnt unusual for central Asia, though. There were all sorts of khans. Gurkhans, darkhans, yellow khans, wang khans, ilkhans, etc. The logic behind the title was probably that Genghis Khan was on such a lofty level as a ruler that he needed a totally new, lofty-sounding name.
 
Last edited:
Aug 2016
10
Turkey
The most obvious example would be Genghis Khan. As far as anyone can tell that wasn't an existing title, and seems to be invented. Scholars can't even agree 100% on what the "Genghis" part means. This wasnt unusual for central Asia, though. There were all sorts of khans. Gurkhans, darkhans, yellow khans, wang khans, ilkhans, etc. The logic behind the title was probably that Genghis Khan was on such a lofty level as a ruler that he needed a totally new, lofty-sounding name.
what a gentleman, this sir genghis
 
Feb 2013
1,283
Second City
The most obvious example would be Genghis Khan. As far as anyone can tell that wasn't an existing title, and seems to be invented. Scholars can't even agree 100% on what the "Genghis" part means. This wasnt unusual for central Asia, though. There were all sorts of khans. Gurkhans, darkhans, yellow khans, wang khans, ilkhans, etc. The logic behind the title was probably that Genghis Khan was on such a lofty level as a ruler that he needed a totally new, lofty-sounding name.
This excerpt from Christopher Beckwith's Empires of the Silk Road (Princeton University Press, 2009) may help shed some light:

The title Chinggis Khan (traditionally, ‘Genghis Khan’, ‘Jenghiz Khan’, etc.) is believed to mean ‘Oceanic [universal] Ruler’. This follows Ramstedt and Pelliot (cited by de Rachewiltz 2004: 460), who take Chinggis [čigis] to be a loanword from Turkic teiz (Middle Mongol tegis ‘sea’ in the Secret History) ‘sea, ocean’ or a dialect form of it. The vowel of the first syllable reflects a Mongol dialect in which Turkic -e- shifted to -i- as it did in the borrowing of Turkic tegin ‘prince’ as *tigin, which became Mongol čigin, or alternately, the form čigis derives from a Turkic dialect that already had -i- in the first syllable. The title must have been carefully chosen with a view to other rival rulers past and present. Recently it has been proposed that čigis here is an adjective meaning ‘fierce, hard, tough’, and Temüjin’s title means ‘Fierce Ruler’. This idea has been adopted by several prominent scholars; see the discussion and references in de Rachewiltz (2004: 460). Nevertheless, I find it difficult to accept. Traditional Central Eurasian titles make reference to celestial origins, heavenly mandates, universal rulership, and so forth; Chinggis and his heirs are famous for their explicit belief in these ideas. As noted previously, the title given Temüjin’s rival Jamuqa, Gür Khan, means ‘Universal Ruler’, and the same title was taken by Temüjin’s rival Küchlüg when he seized power in the Central Asian realm of the Kara Khitai (q.v. Biran 2005), where it had been the title of the rulers since its foundation. It is highly unlikely that Temüjin, who was or intended to be a much greater Central Eurasian ruler than Jamuqa or Küchlüg had ever been, could have taken a less magnificent title. The equation of ‘oceanic’ with ‘universal’ would seem to be supported by the Mongols’ later bestowal of the title Dalai Lama ‘Ocean Lama’, that is, ‘Universal Lama’, on the head of the Dgelugspa sect of Tibetan Buddhism, to which they had just converted. Moreover, the legend of the Mongols’ wolf and doe progenitors crossing the Tegis ‘ocean’ or ‘sea’ to reach the safe new land where they gave birth to the first Mongols was surely known to all. The name Chinggis Khan thus identified Temüjin with the very beginnings of the Mongol nation.

p. 83
 
Last edited:
May 2009
1,345
Yeah that seems to be the main theory. The title definitely had some spiritual significance because it was suggested by a shaman.
 

Ficino

Ad Honorem
Apr 2012
7,024
Romania
"The former two aren't Mongoloid genes, for the simple reason they exist in non-Mongoloid people as well; there are Romanians and southern Indians with Epicanthus folds, and they aren't Mongoloid. "
Perhaps it is meant Roma (i.e. Gypsies), not Romanians, as Romanians don't have epicanthic fold. Yes, there are Gypsies who have it, but that is because they are mixed with Mongoloids, many of them are born with the Mongolian spot too.