Comments on: Political Legitimacy on the Mongolian Steppe

By: Konstantin

Konstantin — Sat, 27 May 2006 03:23:03 +0000

A interesting theme. I’ll take a look. I have studid M. Weber and maybe I can say to anything useful about the mechanisms of legitimation.
I haven’t found in your bibliography S. N. Eisenstand. It’s strange, becouse he is a great specialist in the theme of legitimacy of empires.

I’ll send a full comment later.

By: The Agonist

The Agonist — Mon, 01 May 2006 23:51:43 +0000

Tentative China Itinerary…

Here’s a tentative itinerary of our China trip:
Arrive in Beijing May 5 and immediately fly to Xi’an.
I’ll head up for a day or two to the Ordos loop for some research and then we’ll make our way from Xi’an west to Kashgar over the next week and…

By: Nathan

Nathan — Tue, 18 Apr 2006 00:32:49 +0000

That’s almost what I wrote it on.

By: Zachary

Zachary — Tue, 18 Apr 2006 00:28:10 +0000

Interesting paper. Very similar to one of my own recent papers on models of state formation among the pre-Mongol steppe peoples.

By: Luke

Luke — Wed, 12 Apr 2006 15:04:36 +0000

yeah good stuff. “Khar” is indeed black in Mongolian, and Khaan in original Mongol bichig is the same, “Khagan” or Qagan. oh the small world of turkic languages and people, got to love it!

I have some super secret paper ideas on Mongolia if you ever want to try and publish something with me…..

By: Nathan

Nathan — Wed, 12 Apr 2006 08:12:38 +0000

I didn’t really pick one particular language to translate tengri from, but rather kind of lumped different meanings into one. I’ve been told it can be used for “God” in modern Kirghiz, so obviously I didn’t use that meaning. But as far as I understand it, it’s a somewhat fluid concept across time and social classes, so it’s really hard to nail down.

I didn’t know the difference between “aa” and “a” in Mongolian. I used “khan” for the Mongol rulers because it’s a more commongly known term and “qaghan” for Turkic rulers. Were I to spell that in the modern Uzbek alphabet, I think it’d be qag’an, which I’d probably pronounce as qaan.

Unfortunately, I can’t remember the translation for “Qaraqorum.” I could look it up. I know that the first part of the word, in its many variants (“qora” in Uzbek), means “black.” I’m fairly confident that names using it are Turkic, though I admit I don’t know my Mongol colors.

I didn’t compare on the last part. It’d be interesting. My sense is that one needed a shaman, at least at some point, to claim Tengri’s mandate.

By: Luke

Luke — Wed, 12 Apr 2006 07:56:45 +0000

how did you decide which language to translate “tengri” from? Also When refering to Chinggis, most people will use the “aa” for khan, aa’s for the “great khaan” one “a” for lesser khans. Also what translation are you using for “qaraquram”? All I know is the Mongolian which writes it as one word, but if it is from a different language, that is cool.

Did you compare mandate’s from Tengri with any of the use of shaman’s?

Cool paper.

By: The Conjecturer » Decent History

The Conjecturer » Decent History — Tue, 11 Apr 2006 17:20:08 +0000

[...] I am well aware of the extremely limited appeal of this, but Nathan of Registan.net has posted his term paper on the history of political legitimacy in Mongolia. If you have a passing interest in this stuff, which I do, I recommend it. [...]

By: Nathan

Nathan — Tue, 11 Apr 2006 13:51:25 +0000

I’ll have you know it got an A+ from a notoriously tough grader!

By: Peter

Peter — Tue, 11 Apr 2006 11:27:01 +0000

C+