Talk:Golden Horde

  1. Home
  2. Wiki

1953 source

[edit]

A good portion of this article is based solely on a work from 1953, which reflects the prejudices and biases of the time. Surely there’s newer sources? Volunteer Marek 04:48, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Umm… do I really need to go through and tag everything with “better source needed”? Volunteer Marek 05:12, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, Vernadsky is often no longer a reliable source on the history of Eastern Europe. I've been reading some Janet Martin, Charles J. Halperin and Serhii Plokhy, amongst others, who seem much more balanced and up to date. At the moment I'm trying to find more information about the taxation system/practices of the Golden Horde towards the Rus' principalities. Both Ukrainian and Russian national(ist) interpretations at times seem to want to have it both ways: the Mongol-Tatar "yoke" didn't really impact this or that principality (such as Vladimir-Suzdal, Muscovy, but also Galicia-Volhynia), but simultaneously said prince was given the privilege to collecting the Golden Horde's taxes "in all of Rus', therefore" they had the best claim to the title of "Grand Prince of all (Kyivan) Rus'." I don't think they can have their cake and eat it, too. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 08:05, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This has nothing to with Golden Horde

[edit]

Golden Horde was formed in 1240's or 1259 by Batu Khan, in todays Europe to Kazakhstan. While the Golden family was from Mongolia was from 1180's to 1210.Gemmaso (talk) 09:12, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the genetic study because there is no correlation. The word Golden in Golden Horde is already explained, and it has nothing to do with Golden family from Mongolia. The appellation "Golden" is said to have been inspired by the golden color of the tents the Mongols lived in during wartime, or an actual golden tent used by Batu Khan or by Uzbek Khan,[11] or to have been bestowed by the Slavic tributaries to describe the great wealth of the khan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gemmaso (talk • contribs) 14:50, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It it not even sure if Batu Khan is paternally related to Genghis Khan. Regardless, it makes no sense for the user:Hunan201p to make a fake correlation when Golden family and Golden Horde mean two different things. Also geographically, Golden Horde bodies are located is in Kazakhstan to Europe while bodies of Golden family is located from Mongolia.Gemmaso (talk) 15:52, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The 2016 genetic study is suggesting that it was Mongol soldiers and their slave women. Given that all the Mongols even in the early 1200's were already over 85% (many even 92-100%) East Eurasian, you could even say they looked just like any other East Eurasian population who carried East Eurasian haplogroups...." The authors observed a special link between haplogroup R1b-M343 and the populations residing in the former territory of the Golden Horde, noting a high frequency of R1b-M343 among populations such as the Hazara, as well as Bashkirs and Eastern Russian Tatars.[160][161] "

The author is basically claiming ancient population of Iran, Tatarstan did not have haplogroup R1b before spread of Mongol soldier. Apparently East Asian appearance carriers of R1b intermixing with native women of Iran and Tarstanstan, or Baskhir women is the reason why they have R1b ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gemmaso (talk • contribs) 19:59, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The 2016 talvan bodies genetic study edited on Golden Horde

[edit]

I change my mind, it does make mention of Golden Horde but indirectly and is a hypothesis. I still think it shouldn't be in Golden Horde.

However, somethings that were left out (deliberately or not)

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5023095/

" All physical anthropological parameters indicate that the skulls of the Tavan Tolgoi graves were all anthropologically Mongoloid

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5023095/

"Additionally, Tavan Tolgoi bodies may have been the product of marriages between the lineage of Genghis Khan's Borjigin clan and the lineage of either the Ongud or Hongirad clans, indicating that these individuals were members of Genghis Khan's immediate family or his close relatives."

These should be included. Gemmaso (talk) 16:40, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the most important source for the R1b Golden family.

"The 2016 is only a hypothesis and it says " Considering the historical, archaeological, physical anthropological, and molecular archaeological evidence obtained, it seems most likely that the Tavan Tolgoi bodies are members of Genghis Khan’s Golden family, including the lineage of bekis, Genghis Khan’s female lineage, and their female successors who controlled Eastern Mongolia in the early Mongolian era instead of guregens of the Ongud clan, or the lineage of khans, Genghis Khan’s male lineage, who married females of the Hongirad clan, including Genghis Khan’s grandmother, mother, chief wife, and some daughters-in-law. "
The author suggest that it is the female lineage of Genghis Khan that is related to Tavan Tolgoi golden family is related. This should be edited if we are to include this 2016 genetic study but so far Hunan201p is preventing me, or failed to respond, failed to reply to me (even after I send a message on talk page) . Someone should edit if it gets remove without proper explanation."Gemmaso (talk) 21:31, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Read very carefully. The authors suggest that that the Tavan Tolgoi bodies represent either bekis or Genghis Khan's male lineage. Not marriages to Ongud.

it seems most likely that the Tavan Tolgoi bodies are members of Genghis Khan’s Golden family, including the lineage of bekis, Genghis Khan’s female lineage, and their female successors who controlled Eastern Mongolia in the early Mongolian era 'instead of guregens of the Ongud clan, or' the lineage of khans, Genghis Khan’s male lineage, who married females of the Hongirad clan

Physical evidence for their Borjigin affiliation is provided throughout the article. The Golden Family is of course related to the Golden Horde; the Golden Horde elite are descended from them. - Hunan201p (talk) 21:38, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, but you must acknowledge there is a problem with the way it's edited. It says this " The authors proposed that R1b may be the patrilineal lineage of Genghis Khan, and that the R1b-carrying Tavan Tolgoi specimens were the descendants of prior mixed marriages between West Eurasian migrants and women indigenous to the Mongolian plateau.
Yet it makes no mention that the Golden family being only maternally related. The problem is the way you edited make it seem that the Golden family can only be paternally related with Genghis Khan with the proposed R1b.
Golden Horde and Golden family, related? What a bold claim. Sure if it's female lineage but claiming the paternal lineage is related is essentially claiming that the Genghis Khan male lineage is R1b and all the Khans, not to mention Batu Khan founder of the Golden Horde was suspected by Genghis Khan not to be his child, but a product of other male who impregenated Borte when she he was held captive as a slave.

Gemmaso (talk) 22:25, 26 February 2023 (UTC) @Hunan201p: This really sounds silly. I still can't get the connection. Beshogur (talk) 15:42, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Edits done by @Pervezmusk.:

[edit]

Also Ilkhanate, Chagatai Khanate.

First your dates listing are problematic. Did those states suddenly become "functionally independent sovereign state" in 1260? You have to provide, where exactly the source state that Golden Horde was a "functionally independent sovereign state" and suddenly turned into "Great Horde"? I don't even know what this means. Great Horde is the period of Golden Horde, losing almost all areas except the steppes around Don and Volga. Also it was discussed on Talk:Great Horde that 1459 isn't the date of the establishment of the Great Horde, but rather 15th century as whole, without a precise date.

Also what about the gaps? It should be 1242–1259 and 1259–1458 for example, as well as using small text on the infobox. This is disruptive editing and WP:OR. Beshogur (talk) 17:15, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pervezmusk seems like a really stubborn problem editor. However, I am noticing a problem with the stable version of the article, which gives an SFN citing Halperin (1987) for the date of 1242-1502. There is nothing on page 78 of Halperin (1987) about dates. Most reliable sources give a date of 1227-1502 (see for example Encyclopedia Britannica). - Hunan201p (talk) 18:56, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Halperin (1987) stood for a while, so that doesn't mention any date at all? Beshogur (talk) 20:26, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Some scholars say 1221 as well, some mention 1241. It seems like there is not fixed establishment date. Beshogur (talk) 20:30, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ya unfortunately it looks like the longstanding version was just using failure-to-verify. I don't know how this happened and it doesn't really matter; in any case it's clear that Pervezmusk is unjustifiably edit warring. The article should reflect what the majority of sources say, perhaps with a "sources vary" disclaimer. - Hunan201p (talk) 22:48, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Hunan201p: how do you propose to change the date? 13th century–1502 or a certain date–1502? Beshogur (talk) 10:51, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your words. But the division of the Mongol Empire it is written after 1259 the western part of Khanate does not recognise Kublai khan as their king Pervezmusk. (talk) 13:53, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Who says that, Pervezmusk? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 23:43, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fedor

[edit]

who is fedor? Gediminas did not have such a brother. 88.223.213.190 (talk) 20:57, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Flag of the Golden Horde

[edit]

Please leave it on the article. I would greatly appreciate it. TJ Kreen (talk) 23:44, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is not just "left" on the article if there is no support for it. This source finds that it was probably just the conventional flag design used in Europe to depict the area of the Horde. If you can find reliable sources which argue that this flag was the actual flag of the Golden Horde, let me know. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:45, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thank you for helping me understand. TJ Kreen (talk) 17:59, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I know I'm quite late to this conversation but I believe that in this case, use of that flag my be warranted in the infobox. several different primary sources like the Catalan Atlas and a 1339 map by Angelino Dulcert and use that flag or a flag like it to represent the golden horde specifically and apparently those maps got quite a bit right about the golden horde and this very similar symbol appears on some golden horde Coinage. though I'm not 100% convinced the flag was used, to me it seem that it at least deserved to be in the infobox, perhaps with a disclaimer stating that it is not directly said to by the flag of the golden horde by any mongol sources PharaohCrab (talk) 19:02, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Adding the Mongol name for Golden Horde

[edit]

Golden Horde was a state established by Mongols, with mongol chingisids as a ruling class. Therefore, I believe it is necessary to add the mongol name for golden horde. MongolWikipedian (talk) 08:19, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Then why have you been adding the modern Mongolian language name for the Horde? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:05, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Golden Horde isn't the original name. Beshogur (talk) 13:31, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Name

[edit]

May I ask why the name 'Golden Horde' is used for the article? 'Golden Horde' was not the name of the state; this name started being used 63 years after the Golden Horde had collapsed Ömereditss (talk) 15:36, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:COMMONNAME. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:05, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Conventional long name

[edit]
@AirshipJungleman29: regarding conventional long name. There are other examples on the wiki too. For example Byzantine Empire, Mughal Empire wouldn't apply since those are not really the names that those states used. Look up at the countries today existing. We don't use common name on the infobox, but official names. In this case Great State is the closest "official" name since the Golden Horde was an exonym. Beshogur (talk) 16:33, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Beshogur, Template:Infobox country indicates that the parameter is to be used for the "Full name in English" for former countries. I don't really get your argument, as both Byzantine Empire and Mughal Empire use exonyms for the conventional long name parameter. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:45, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It says Formal or official full name of the country in English. This entry should not be enclosed in brackets. please stop. Beshogur (talk) 20:51, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You are looking at the section titled "Country or territory"; please instead refer to "Former country" Beshogur. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:53, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
They're basically the same. This page doesn't even use "former country". Also Soviet Union is a former country as well using a different name. What's your argument? Beshogur (talk) 20:56, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"They're basically the same." What is? "This page doesn't even use "former country"." Yes... {{Infobox country}} and {{Infobox former country}} are the same. "Also Soviet Union is a former country as well using a different name. What's your argument?" WP:WAX—you previously brought up Byzantine Empire and Mughal Empire and now ignore them? Soviet Union had an official English name, which neither this, Byzantine Empire and Mughal Empire had. Do you wan to put in a request for a WP:3O? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:01, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Byzantine Empire isn't even a proper terminology, it's a continuation of the Roman Empire. Mughal Empire isn't even what they called themselves (personally I don't even know what they call themselves, the article doesn't even tell anything). But the Mongols had their own name, like the Golden Horde. Not really "official" but what they called them in their edicts. That parameter is for the English translation of the official name, not for common name. Beshogur (talk) 21:05, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Asking third opinion on this is ok. It should be about the "conventional long name". Beshogur (talk) 21:08, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Precisely. Neither Byzantine Empire or Mughal Empire called themselves Byzantine or Mughals (instead using "Romania" and "Hindustan") but the former are what the conventional_long_name parameter uses, because, to repeat what Template:Infobox country says, it is the "Full name in English". ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:12, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Actually look at TemplateData. But if you'll be happy, I'll revert for you. But if you can make a sort of rfc, it's better. Beshogur (talk) 21:21, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@AirshipJungleman29: I still expect you do that tbh. Beshogur (talk) 00:29, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It seems rare to actually use the term "Great State" in English. Most references just present it as a translation of Ulug Ulus (like we do). Since it is not commonly used, it would be confusing to put it in the infobox. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 06:47, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well it's not saying comon name, but conventional long name. It's not my problem if the comon name section doesn't work. Beshogur (talk) 12:56, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:21, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Founded in 1225? Why?

[edit]

So far, I've seen sources say that the Golden Horde as a state was founded somewhere in 1240, 1241 or 1242. The short description states: 1242–1502 Turkicized Mongol khanate}. Why, then, is it claimed that the Khanate of the Golden Horde was established in 1225? No source is provided for this date anywhere. People seem to assume that just because the White Horde was established as a "wing" in 1225, and would later become part of the Sarai-based state known as "the Golden Horde", this means "the Golden Horde" was also established in 1225. I don't think it works like that, though. The White Horde and the Blue Horde should be understood more as military formations than as states. At the same time, sources tend to be very vague about when the supposed foundation of "the Golden Horde" did take place. For one thing, all sources seem to agree that its first capital city was Sarai (city), but some also seem to claim that Batu Khan / "the Golden Horde" founded Sarai, e.g. Halperin 1987: Such ad administration could not operate on horseback. Using labor and artisans conscripted from peripheral areas like Russia [sic; should read Rus'] and the Volga Bolgar Khwarizmian territories, the Horde founded new cities like Sarai in its heartland, the lower Volga.

Taken literally, this suggests that there must already have been a "Golden Horde" before the city of Sarai was founded, and it already had the Lower Volga as its "heartland" at the time of Sarai's founding. In practice, though, Halperin regards 1240 as the year when the Golden Horde began controlling "Russia" (read: Rus'): With the Mongol conquest began that period of Russian history known as the "Tatar Yoke". THe Mongol successor state to the vast empire of Chingis Khan, the Golden Horde, ruled over Russia [sic; should read Rus'] from 1240 to 1480. As can be seen in the example above, the 1237–1240 invasion and conquest is consistently called "Mongol", and not associated with "Golden Horde"; that only came after this invasion and conquest.

The same goes for Mongol invasion of Volga Bulgaria (dated as: 1223 (first), 1229–1230 (second), and 1236 AD (third): the article consistently says that this that and the other thing later became known as / part of the Golden Horde. Ergo, it wasn't yet known as / part of "the Golden Horde" in 1236 and some years after.

Janet L. B. Martin (2007) implies that the Golden Horde was established some time after September 1242, when the Mongol conquests in Europe halted because word had reached Batu that great khan Ogedei had died in December 1241 and a qurultai had to be held to choose a successor, after which Batu built his capital city of Sarai [on the lower Volga], and from there began to consolidate Mongol authority over the territories of Juchi's ulus. However, this is again somewhat ambigious, as it suggests Jochi's ulus already existed by 1242, and just needed a capital for its administration. Yaroslav II of Vladimir may have visited Batu at this new city as early as 1243. At any rate, nobody is suggesting anything close to a state administration existing as early as 1225. There was a military apparatus led by Batu, to be sure, but dating the Golden Horde as a state as far back as 1225 is stretching credibility and certainly seems to be WP:SYNTH/WP:OR. If we place the start at 1240, that would be acceptable as well, but somewhere in the early 1240s, not the 1220s or 1230s. NLeeuw (talk) 18:04, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bánlaky
PS: According to File:Európai tatárjárás (1235-1242).jpg by Hungarian military historian hu:József Bánlaky (modernised version File:Európai tatárjárás (1235-1242).png), the lower Volga region was where Batu stayed 1238 és 1239 nyarán és 1243-tól kezdve állandóan (in the summers of 1238 and 1239 and permanently from 1243 onwards.) So it wasn't a permanent base yet in the late 1230s, but only a summer camp of sorts. Yet, this may be what Halperin means by the "heartland" of the Golden Horde: a base from which to raid surrounding lands and to return to in order to store loot and restock food and equipment etc. until Batu decided in late 1242 or early 1243 to found the city of Sarai there as the capital of a more sedentary, state administration. That would only push the foundation back to 1238 at most, however, and it says "Batu Khan", not "Golden Horde". The state is not just anywhere where Batu breathed. As Halperin remarked: Such an administration could not operate on horseback. So I'm still more inclined to go with 1243 than 1238 if I had to choose.
I'm bringing all this up because I'm working on User:Nederlandse Leeuw/involvingGH, a list of wars and battles involving the Golden Horde (working title), based on all articles stored in Category:Wars involving the Golden Horde, :Category:Battles involving the Golden Horde, and related categories, including in other languages. Some of them, for example, claim that the First Mongol invasion of Poland (from late 1240 to 1241) already "involved the Golden Horde". Well, what if there was no proper state that can be called "the Golden Horde" until 1242 or 1243? Then "involving" the GH in an earlier event is anachronistic and WP:OR. It's not just that every battle Batu participated in also automatically "involved" the GH. We gotta draw the line somewhere. But where? NLeeuw (talk) 20:00, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No, we don't have to draw the line anywhere. This sort of exclusionary thinking is what comes of working too much with categories and ignoring the actual facts.
The Jochid Ulus—the territory allocated to Jochi—was established prior to 1207. Jochi was expected to act independently in expanding his territory but was nonetheless subject to his father Genghis Khan. Upon Jochi's death in the mid-1220s, the ulus was allocated to Jochi's younger son Batu. Batu had similar responsibilities at first and his territory was dramatically enlarged by the invasion of Europe, which all Chinggisid branches participated in. His power sharply increased during Torogene's interregnum; by the late-1240s he was de facto independent, although still nominally subject to Qaraqorum—upon Batu's death, Möngke re-instituted the tax collection tribute on the ulus that had been allowed to lapse because of Batu's seniority and power. Möngke also confirmed the succession of Batu's initial successor Sartaq. It was only with Berke's accession, to the disapproval of Qaraqorum but also its inability—due to the Toluid Civil War—to do anything about it, that "formation of an autonomous political body" became truly possible. Some authors have called Möngke Temür the first ruler of the ulus to verge upon independence.
So given all that, where do you "draw the line"? 1207? 1225? 1240? 1246? 1248? 1251? 1255? 1257? 1266? 1280? Or do you just accept that categories are intrinsically terrible at encompassing complicated situations, and give up trying to organise something fairly useless anyway so you can return to actually improving the encyclopedia? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:14, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, those are all good points. Because a category or list isn't like Schrödinger's cat that can both simultaneously contain and not contain articles A, B and C, we've got to make a choice. Then I'm just pragmatically going with the year 1242. The List of battles of the Mongol invasion of Kievan Rus' ends in 1241, the Timeline of the Golden Horde starts in 1242, so my list of wars and battles involving the Golden Horde will also start in 1242. I'll point anyone who disagrees to this talk page section. That will be that. Good day, NLeeuw (talk) 07:11, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]