Talk:Timur
|
|
| Contents |
knowledge presupposed
Quote:
"the capture of towns or villages accompanied, it might be, with destruction of the houses and the massacre of the inhabitants, the battle before Delhi and the easy victory, the triumphal entry into the doomed city, with its outcome of horrors—all these circumstances belong to the annals of India."
This is written like a discussion about things that are already known by the reader, and therefore don't need further explanation. An easy victory before Delhi? In what sense? Didn't they fight? And what about 'the triumphal entry into the doomed city, with its outcome of horrors'; is this assumed to be known by the reader, or doesn't it need further explanation because it belongs 'to the annals of India'?
Spellings
I'm just going to clean up some of the spellings here. Those interested can read my work on Timur, along with the sources for it, at http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1417500 .
Timur versus Timur Lenk
I moved the article back from Timur Lenk: "Lenk" is a not-too-common title, and a derogatory one at that; it means "cripple". He's usually called Timur when he's not called Tamerlane. --Mirv 07:11, 1 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Mongol?
Isn't Timur a Mongol? Or shouldn't he has at least Mongolian blood? Someone should work out his ancestry.
Far as I know, Timur is of Mongol ancestry, who adopted Turkic customs since birth, since the Barlas tribe is heavily influenced by the Turks. Mandel 14:19, 21 May 2004 (UTC)
- We need to "work out" the ancestry of one the most famous rulers in history? Excuse the impolite tone, but I find that odd. Doesn't the first para address ancestry:
- His father Teragai was head of the tribe of Barlas. Great-grandson of Karachar Nevian (minister of Chagatai Khan, son of Genghis Khan, and commander-in-chief of his forces)...
- Or am I missing something?—iFaqeer (Talk to me!)
- Hmm, I would have thought the first paragraph mentioned he was Turkish rather than Mongolian. Or is the two terms interchangeable? Mandel 22:12, Nov 25, 2004 (UTC)
- They are related. The "Turkish" did not exist back then, but evolved from that background. Notice the first line says "Turkic", not "Turkish".—iFaqeer (Talk to me!) 11:07, Nov 26, 2004 (UTC)
- How related are they, racially? How possible is it that any modern-day Turks be mistaken for a Mongolian? Mandel 14:47, Nov 28, 2004 (UTC)
Some sources say Timur claimed to be descended from Genghis Khan, to support his legitimacy. His primary background traceable is to Turkic tribes, but maybe the tribes had ties to Genghis or Genghis' family.
There are many branches of Turkic people, many have Asian background, and all Turkic ancestors shared the nomadic lifestyle of the ancient Mongolians, and other Eurasian tribes.
Other meanings of the word
this is off topic, but 'timur' (non-capital 't') means 'east (direction)' in Indonesian (Malay ?) language, which absorbed numerous words from Arabic. but, i dont know whether it's related to Timurlank. (andi_surya [at] yahoo [dot] kom) 2004/11/23 10:49 (GMT+7)
Questions about his lame foot
The articile here states that Timur's left foot was lame from birth, but the work done on the Everything2.com website [(http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1417500)] states that he was either wounded or deformed in his right leg. Plus he may have had other physical problems as well in his elbow.
Is there a way to know for certain which source is wrong, since apparently his skeletal remains were exhumed not so long ago?
- As the one who wrote the Everything2 article some time ago, I believe the source for that statement was Hookham's Tamburlaine the Conqueror. I don't have it handy, nor do I recall what source it cited, but I do remember that it reported on an examination of his skeleton which ascribed his lameness to injuries rather than congenital defects. —Charles P. (Mirv) 00:13, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
He was lame because because her mother was stabbed when she was pregnant for Timur. He was wounded before birth. His fierce character is explained with this event as he was seeking to fullfil his revenge in his campaigns.
Tamerlane vs. Timur vs. Timur Lenk
I think even Tamerlane was a derogatory name because it derived from Timur Lenk. The name he used, which is known as his full name in Central Asia today is 'Amir Timur/Temur'. This should probably be included in the names list for political correctness.
Death toll
The article ought to say more about the human cost of Timur's empire. The massacres at Baghdad and Delhi are mentioned, but it ought to be said that there were many other massacres, Isfahan, Sabzavar, Siva, Sus, Crimea, Sarai, Syria, and other conquered cities and countries. He wiped out the Christians of Mesopotamia and Central Asia. Estimates of the total dead in his wars and persecutions range from 7 million to 17 million [1] (http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat0.htm#Timur). Worth mentioning. Gdr 20:07, 2005 Mar 22 (UTC)
Trying to write something about the Nestorians I came across information that Timur is the main person responsible for the almost complete annihilation of the Curch of the East. Can anyone comment to that? nl:Gebruiker:Jcwf
- The Catholic Encyclopedia says [2] (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11712a.htm):
- The whole structure of the Nestorian Church, unequal to the trial, crumbled under the persecutions and wars of the Tatars. With Timur-Leng (1379-1405) came their utter ruin. He was a bigoted Moslem, and put to the sword all who did not escape to the recesses of the mountains. Thus did Central Asia, once open to Christian missions, see the utter extermination of the Christians, not a trace of them being left east of the Kurdish Mountains. The Christian faith was thrown back upon its last defenses in the West, where hunted and despised, its feeble remnant of adherents continued to retain, as it were, a death-grip on their churches and worship
- (Clearly not a 100% neutral source, but perhaps still true.) Gdr 20:52, 2005 Apr 14 (UTC)
- Thank you Gdr. It is good enough for me. I'll add a remark to the nl. version of Timur. (and leave it to the locals here to decide what to do). nl:Gebruiker:Jcwf
--Yeah, probably partly true except the emphasis on "bigoted muslim". This is the difference... you can't find in any official islamic resource such a sentence for Hitler: "He was a bigoted Christian." Actually I would expect from the resource above a bit supportive attitude :))), as Timur caused such a big damage in Ottoman Empire, that otherwise it could advance much faster into Europe.
Consistency??
This article uses both Chinggis Khan (once) and Genghis Khan (twice). Both spellings link to Genghis Khan so perhaps it would be best to make them all say "Genghis Khan"? Anichan 17:23, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)