The Xiongnu, Rouran, Gokturks, Qara Khitai, Mongols, Oirats
They ruled insanely large empires for thousands of years, terrorized everyone from the chinese to the romans and in between. Now it seems like there is just the irrelevant Stans, and "sick man" moslem Turkey.
Where did it all go wrong?
...
...
Small population
Cannons and railroads crushed all their advantages once and for all. Those who didn't assimilate were pushed back by expanding settled cultures who could now sustain large populations deeper into the steppe while also scattering the largest tribal forces they could possibly muster with ease.
This also we as a whole people the turkics declined since the ottoman empire went to shit.
They got eternally btfo by Russia and the Chinks
>mongols
>Turkic
>Oirats
>Qara Khitai
>Xiongnu
>Turkic
Xiongnu were proto-mongols with minor Turkic players
Rouran are eastern branch of Xiongnu, once again proto-mongols
Gokturks come from a small blacksmith tribe within the Rouran->Xiongnu and are the origins of the "turkic" identity.
Qara Khitai are Khitan and are proto-mongol.
Mongols are not turkic
Oirats are mongols.
1/6 are "turkic" proper.
So the proper thread should be "Why aren't the Mongolian people a major player anymore?" Mainly because they had a key advantage pre-gunpowder weapons. Horses/Archery were key. They were largely negated by guns and cars/rails. Also policies executed around 18th-19th century against these mongolian tribes were largely responsible for putting an end to them permanently. Policy of extermination by the Russians and the Qing.
welp im a dumbass
what about the huns. were they turkic or mongol?
Oh boy you just opened a can of worms
mostly turkic and finno-ugric
Huns are combination of regional indo-european, turkic, and finno-ugric tribal groups.
However the leadership is mongols as they originally are Xiongnu remnants that migrated west. Atilla is a mongolian. His death probably meant the last of the Xiongnu group in the west were thinned out as they intermarried/mixed with the locals too much.
Soon wh*Te boy
soon we will rise
soon we will unite with Africa and conquer the world
Don't listen to everything that guy says.
Xiongnu was a mix of turkics and mongols but the gokturks are where the whole turkic identity separated itself from the join turko-mongolian one which was still strong in the east.
He really did
This
They ruled an insanely large empire, this is true. However, that insanely large area was comprised almost entirely of grass that probably had a population on par with France at the time. Seriously. What kind of usable (in ancient times) goods come from central asia?
They were only relevant as long as the horse was the fastest mode of transportation
Off topic, but this would make an excellent Total War or Paradox Game campaign map. A Total War revolving around Genghis Khan and his immediate successors would definitely suit it, although I would stretch it as far west as Hungary and Egypt.
...
gunpowder made the horse-archer a thing of the past.
Most scholars think that Xiongnu was Proto-Turkic and Rouran was Proto-Mongolic, also Huns spread Indo-European Y-DNA which Turkics have an abundance of but Mongols mostly lack
...
>However the leadership is mongols as they originally are Xiongnu remnants that migrated west. Atilla is a mongolian. His death probably meant the last of the Xiongnu group in the west were thinned out as they intermarried/mixed with the locals too much.
We literally have no idea who the Huns were because the Roman records for them were lost.
The Seljuk and the Mughals used gun powder to build their empires
>Seriously. What kind of usable (in ancient times) goods come from central asia?
Only the motherfucking SILK ROAD user.
Silk road was the panama canal of the ancient times, only way more important since the suez canal didnt exist yet so the only way to get goods from china to europe and vice versa was thru land.
>Seljuk
>Gunpowder
You mean Ottomans?
There's one description of stills by that Roman diplomat which describing a flat nosed East Asian Mongol.
Hard head, small eyes, flat nose, short
These are not info European or turkic man's description. It's a Mongol description
>Most scholars think that Xiongnu
No they don't. There have been dozens of tombs found all over Mongolia. 90% of them are proto-mongols. A tombs of king has been examined and its found to be proto-mongols. There is a elite graveyard where there was a indo-european was found.
Rouran are proto-mongols because they are Xiongnu remnants.
Turks looked the same as Mongols before mixing with Caucasoids. Gokturk prince Kul Tegin is represented with mongoloid features on his statue.
Xiongnu were haplogroup Q and N, with some R1a and C3. All of those (with the exception of the last one) are more closely associated with Turkics than Mongols.