So there were some grievances, but nothing close to the grievances with European powers (baring the Habsburgs, whose total and utter lack of maritime assets prevented them from doing something overly stupid "cough Kaiser Wilhem cough").
Sino Ottoman relations?
- Thread starter Mightypeon
- Start date
- Status
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
turks and chinese have long standing ties going back to the silk route
china is great friend of pakistan and turkey is great friend of pakistan and all share common interests in the region, western countrys will only try to damage relations between eastern nations to hinder our progress
turkey and china have had alot of military co-operation in the past too
china is great friend of pakistan and turkey is great friend of pakistan and all share common interests in the region, western countrys will only try to damage relations between eastern nations to hinder our progress
turkey and china have had alot of military co-operation in the past too
Actually in silk days China mostly dealt with Persia in the forms of Parthians and Sassanids. (After Persia fell to the Umayyads a good portion of Sassanids nobles went to China as refugees made Zoroastrianism became popular for a brief period before Emperor Wuzong destroyed it.) There some relations with the Caliphate, but it isn't as close as Sino-Persian relations. Mongols settled a lot of Arabs and Turks in China as artisan, soldier and administrators, but of course it didn't continue into the Ming dynasty. (In fact the "colored eyes" are often resented by the populaces due to hash Mongolian rule, especially in Southern China.) All this time of course Ottoman hasn't risen yet, and the area we know as Turkey today belongs to the Byzantine Empire.
Afterwards, China lose control of western corridor and with power Oirats tribes and Timurid Empire (later Persian Empire) stand between Ming/Qing and Ottomans there is pretty much no way they would make contact in any meaningful way. After Opium war however, Qing is to busy to keep it empire from European and various rebellion while Ottoman is doing the same thing. During the great game era, Ottoman might be able to exhort some influence. But if you look at the history of place, it pretty much a British and (mostly) Russian game from the Chinese point of view. (i.e. Treaty of Peking, 中俄勘分西北界约记(made possible by Dungan revolt), Samu Sake/萨木萨克 episode) In conclusion, Ottomans and Ming/Qing are simply too far ways and with too many countries in between to have relations in a meaningful way; in later times, any efforts are overshadowed by Russian and British.
Afterwards, China lose control of western corridor and with power Oirats tribes and Timurid Empire (later Persian Empire) stand between Ming/Qing and Ottomans there is pretty much no way they would make contact in any meaningful way. After Opium war however, Qing is to busy to keep it empire from European and various rebellion while Ottoman is doing the same thing. During the great game era, Ottoman might be able to exhort some influence. But if you look at the history of place, it pretty much a British and (mostly) Russian game from the Chinese point of view. (i.e. Treaty of Peking, 中俄勘分西北界约记(made possible by Dungan revolt), Samu Sake/萨木萨克 episode) In conclusion, Ottomans and Ming/Qing are simply too far ways and with too many countries in between to have relations in a meaningful way; in later times, any efforts are overshadowed by Russian and British.
Sino and Turk History to Everyone
Hello, I am a Sino(Chinese), and I can tell everyone about this: Sinos and Turks have been enemies for 4000 years, and any grudge between us is nothing new.
During that time, Sinos are known as "Han", and Turks or Ottomans are known as "Hun".
Hans and Huns were neighbors that time, Huns live in the desert in the West, which people nowadays call it "Turkistan". While Hans live beside the river in the East, which is known as "Yellow Plain" beside "Yellow River", as Hans are known as "Great Yellow Tribes".
The reason it is called Turkistan is because that is actually where Turkish people originated from. The Chinese whose ancestors came from province of Yellow Plain are the real Chinese people, or Han if you prefer the term.
Now you know this, I'll start the history lesson in brief details:
About 4000 years ago, Huns were very considered as powerful tribes because they were brute warriors with strong weapons. Being proud of their warpower, Huns became aggressive and had invaded many tribes. Hans were also one of the most civilized culture during that time, and we were proud of ourselves for that. Therefore, Hans and Huns declared war against each other.
During the war, both Han and Hun warriors lost their location easily. Since we kept moving to different locations in order to change strategies, we tend to forget where were we going. But surprising, Hans won the Huns in the war. The reason was Hans had discovered South-pointer, which the arrow will always point toward south no matter where we bring it. South-pointer was pretty much compass as we had known today. Since Hans discovered South-pointer, we knew our locations better, and we use that advantage to fight wars against Huns, and we won.
As Hans won the war, we took over everything Hun tribes had, and suppress them for thousands of years. The Huns had tried to fought back against us, but we had separated their tribes apart North and South, so they remained weak and could not manage to fight back at all.
The separated Hun tribes in Northern part knew they had no more chance of fighting the Han tribes, so they moved toward the West.
The rumor that I heard was after the Hun tribes (I'll use the term "Turk" now) had moved to the West, they had been invading countries in Middle East and Europe, and eventually overthrew the Roman Empire in some time. We also noticed that Turks had been bullying the weak tribes and stealing foreign women all over the place, invading kingdoms, and committed to mass rape and murder.
I also knew about Vlad III impaled Ottomans in order to defend Wallachia, and many legends related to Ottoman invasions.
I admit that Sino had used cruel punishments to the Turk, but don't forget Turk were also cruel for doing all those stuff that I had mentioned above. Therefore, that makes both Sino and Turk equal, as we had always declared war against each other.
I repeat one more time, Sino and Turk were already enemies for 4000 years, do not think about trying to stop us. It's just too hard.
Hello, I am a Sino(Chinese), and I can tell everyone about this: Sinos and Turks have been enemies for 4000 years, and any grudge between us is nothing new.
During that time, Sinos are known as "Han", and Turks or Ottomans are known as "Hun".
Hans and Huns were neighbors that time, Huns live in the desert in the West, which people nowadays call it "Turkistan". While Hans live beside the river in the East, which is known as "Yellow Plain" beside "Yellow River", as Hans are known as "Great Yellow Tribes".
The reason it is called Turkistan is because that is actually where Turkish people originated from. The Chinese whose ancestors came from province of Yellow Plain are the real Chinese people, or Han if you prefer the term.
Now you know this, I'll start the history lesson in brief details:
About 4000 years ago, Huns were very considered as powerful tribes because they were brute warriors with strong weapons. Being proud of their warpower, Huns became aggressive and had invaded many tribes. Hans were also one of the most civilized culture during that time, and we were proud of ourselves for that. Therefore, Hans and Huns declared war against each other.
During the war, both Han and Hun warriors lost their location easily. Since we kept moving to different locations in order to change strategies, we tend to forget where were we going. But surprising, Hans won the Huns in the war. The reason was Hans had discovered South-pointer, which the arrow will always point toward south no matter where we bring it. South-pointer was pretty much compass as we had known today. Since Hans discovered South-pointer, we knew our locations better, and we use that advantage to fight wars against Huns, and we won.
As Hans won the war, we took over everything Hun tribes had, and suppress them for thousands of years. The Huns had tried to fought back against us, but we had separated their tribes apart North and South, so they remained weak and could not manage to fight back at all.
The separated Hun tribes in Northern part knew they had no more chance of fighting the Han tribes, so they moved toward the West.
The rumor that I heard was after the Hun tribes (I'll use the term "Turk" now) had moved to the West, they had been invading countries in Middle East and Europe, and eventually overthrew the Roman Empire in some time. We also noticed that Turks had been bullying the weak tribes and stealing foreign women all over the place, invading kingdoms, and committed to mass rape and murder.
I also knew about Vlad III impaled Ottomans in order to defend Wallachia, and many legends related to Ottoman invasions.
I admit that Sino had used cruel punishments to the Turk, but don't forget Turk were also cruel for doing all those stuff that I had mentioned above. Therefore, that makes both Sino and Turk equal, as we had always declared war against each other.
I repeat one more time, Sino and Turk were already enemies for 4000 years, do not think about trying to stop us. It's just too hard.
Re: Sino and Turk History to Everyone
My friend... Do you have any references for what you have written? It is totally different from what we have been reading... I don't even know where to begin. Just a few points... the Chinese recorded History started with Shan empire and Zhou empire, the Xia Empire was more or less mythology. And all these didn't really involve the Huns or Turks. Prior to the Xia Empire, there are multiple tribes and I believe they are united by a roving tribes lead by Huang Di (Yellow Emperor). And as all know Shan Empire was conquered by Zhou Empire... at that time the Han dynasty had not even been involved.
After the warring period, Qin had managed to conquered the rest of the states (which most of them are previously states of Zhou), there was no mentioning of the Huns in great deal too... of course there are already the Xiongnu tribes that had been bothering the Qin (even before they unite all the states). And these Xiongnu tribes are the closest thing to the Huns that will eventually defeated the Roman's empire - but seriously there is very limited evidence to whether the Xiongnu was the ancestors or was the actual Huns... what they share was the fact that they are nomadic tribes.
Hans defeated the Xiongnu... but that happen by Han Wudi period.
I think China had most of the time (ancient period) been conquered or united by normadic tribes - yes, even the Qin's started off as nomadic peoples and the Manchus started off as nomadic people, so was the Jin, Khitan, etc. But that was the nature of things, the stronger and wilder ones often conquered the weaker and more civilised civilization.
My friend... Do you have any references for what you have written? It is totally different from what we have been reading... I don't even know where to begin. Just a few points... the Chinese recorded History started with Shan empire and Zhou empire, the Xia Empire was more or less mythology. And all these didn't really involve the Huns or Turks. Prior to the Xia Empire, there are multiple tribes and I believe they are united by a roving tribes lead by Huang Di (Yellow Emperor). And as all know Shan Empire was conquered by Zhou Empire... at that time the Han dynasty had not even been involved.
After the warring period, Qin had managed to conquered the rest of the states (which most of them are previously states of Zhou), there was no mentioning of the Huns in great deal too... of course there are already the Xiongnu tribes that had been bothering the Qin (even before they unite all the states). And these Xiongnu tribes are the closest thing to the Huns that will eventually defeated the Roman's empire - but seriously there is very limited evidence to whether the Xiongnu was the ancestors or was the actual Huns... what they share was the fact that they are nomadic tribes.
Hans defeated the Xiongnu... but that happen by Han Wudi period.
I think China had most of the time (ancient period) been conquered or united by normadic tribes - yes, even the Qin's started off as nomadic peoples and the Manchus started off as nomadic people, so was the Jin, Khitan, etc. But that was the nature of things, the stronger and wilder ones often conquered the weaker and more civilised civilization.
OK Rhino123, thank god you read the actual Chinese history.
If you really read it, then I suppose you know the term "HuaXia" and "XiongNu" very well.
Yes, the term Hans haven't come out during that time, but I just want to make it simple.
I want to make the terms simple, since many terminologies used can be VERY confusing to other people than Chinese.
Yes, Rhino123, we can't say Huns are actually XiongNu, but we can reason out things.
Huns and XiongNu are proto-Turkic tribes. The Turkish people may have many different names in different places, but they do share a close relations together.
Even though there was no evidence, so all I can do was to match the timeline of their movements.
Yes, Rhino123, please check for the movement of XiongNu from China to Europe. You may see some relationships of why I would say XiongNu were Huns.
First, their mainstreams, or their origins were very much the same place.
Second, is XiongNu the Huns? You have to try to match the timeline of their travel. I did found the timeline of their travels very profounding. That's why I assume XiongNu were Huns. Even if you can prove XiongNu were not Huns, that won't make my statement for this topic to be not convincing.
Third, nevertheless, XiongNu were still considered as proto-Turks, so that still explains the relations between Sino and Ottoman. It did not have any irrelevance to this topic.
Lastly, if you found more info, please tell me about it. I am very curious about the truth.
If you really read it, then I suppose you know the term "HuaXia" and "XiongNu" very well.
Yes, the term Hans haven't come out during that time, but I just want to make it simple.
I want to make the terms simple, since many terminologies used can be VERY confusing to other people than Chinese.
Yes, Rhino123, we can't say Huns are actually XiongNu, but we can reason out things.
Huns and XiongNu are proto-Turkic tribes. The Turkish people may have many different names in different places, but they do share a close relations together.
Even though there was no evidence, so all I can do was to match the timeline of their movements.
Yes, Rhino123, please check for the movement of XiongNu from China to Europe. You may see some relationships of why I would say XiongNu were Huns.
First, their mainstreams, or their origins were very much the same place.
Second, is XiongNu the Huns? You have to try to match the timeline of their travel. I did found the timeline of their travels very profounding. That's why I assume XiongNu were Huns. Even if you can prove XiongNu were not Huns, that won't make my statement for this topic to be not convincing.
Third, nevertheless, XiongNu were still considered as proto-Turks, so that still explains the relations between Sino and Ottoman. It did not have any irrelevance to this topic.
Lastly, if you found more info, please tell me about it. I am very curious about the truth.
There have been many nomadic tribes on the Eurasia steppes, from Manchuria to Hungary. They often fought against each other, about cattle of course off which they all lived. Sometimes some formed a coalition, to fight other nomads or to plunder or occupy the agricultural lands mostly to the south, like China and Iran. They were in war craft superior to the settled populations because they lived in the saddle and so were much more mobile than the armies. Besides their work included stealing cattle from other nomads and protecting their cattle from being stolen. They remained superior until the settled people were rich enough to build strong cities, or long walls, or developed a military system like feudalism, as the Iranians did in the 3rd century, or until the development of fire arms.
In the mean times they traded with the agricultural people for things they couldn't make or grow, like weapons and grain, in exchange for animals and animal products. They also worked the Silk route as traders.
A new nomad tribe could appear when the herd belonging to a town lost its town when its agriculture dried out, as happened with towns in Libya in around 300 (?) CE. These tribes were Christian or Jewish and the last of them became Muslim around the year 1000 CE. No doubt Abraham was the leader of the herders of the town of Ur in what is now North Iraq or North Syria or South Turkey, when that area dried out around 2200 BCE. A town with that name is mentioned in the archive of the town of Ebla, that perished about 2000 BCE. ( The Ur of the Chaldeans was in South Iraq and was not hit by the drought.) On the other hand nomadic tribes sometimes perished because in a drought they lost all their cattle, or they were destroyed in war. And others took over an settled country as the Zhou did, and half of the Turkic Bulgars, who settled north of Istanbul (then called Constantinople) and took the language of the local Slavic population.
Were you to travel back in time 2000 years it is unlikely that you'd be able to find one tribe that was to be the ancestor of all Turks, among the ancestors of Avars, Hungarians, Mongols, Tibetans, Tungush, &c and the tribes that didn't seem to be the ancestors of anyone.
In the mean times they traded with the agricultural people for things they couldn't make or grow, like weapons and grain, in exchange for animals and animal products. They also worked the Silk route as traders.
A new nomad tribe could appear when the herd belonging to a town lost its town when its agriculture dried out, as happened with towns in Libya in around 300 (?) CE. These tribes were Christian or Jewish and the last of them became Muslim around the year 1000 CE. No doubt Abraham was the leader of the herders of the town of Ur in what is now North Iraq or North Syria or South Turkey, when that area dried out around 2200 BCE. A town with that name is mentioned in the archive of the town of Ebla, that perished about 2000 BCE. ( The Ur of the Chaldeans was in South Iraq and was not hit by the drought.) On the other hand nomadic tribes sometimes perished because in a drought they lost all their cattle, or they were destroyed in war. And others took over an settled country as the Zhou did, and half of the Turkic Bulgars, who settled north of Istanbul (then called Constantinople) and took the language of the local Slavic population.
Were you to travel back in time 2000 years it is unlikely that you'd be able to find one tribe that was to be the ancestor of all Turks, among the ancestors of Avars, Hungarians, Mongols, Tibetans, Tungush, &c and the tribes that didn't seem to be the ancestors of anyone.
Last edited:
Ok, I really don't get if people can actually prove they are really Turks.
But one thing we all know is, we would not even argue about this if there weren't too much problems that are related to Turkish tribes.
Too much similarity, or else it is no worth arguing about it.
Yes, I can say that people from all over the world hates Turks.
In history, they had invaded many nations and tribes. They had put unreasonable demands on their preys. They tortured their children and prisoners in a very harsh way. They declare war everywhere. They hated all of us. They hate each other. Many of us hated them. They hated being looked down by everyone.
People keep saying hate is a crime. But no, hate is not suppose to be a crime. It is natural to hate, and it is natural to die.
The Sinos are alright with Arabians, but most of them is not OK with Turkish people.
But one thing we all know is, we would not even argue about this if there weren't too much problems that are related to Turkish tribes.
Too much similarity, or else it is no worth arguing about it.
Yes, I can say that people from all over the world hates Turks.
In history, they had invaded many nations and tribes. They had put unreasonable demands on their preys. They tortured their children and prisoners in a very harsh way. They declare war everywhere. They hated all of us. They hate each other. Many of us hated them. They hated being looked down by everyone.
People keep saying hate is a crime. But no, hate is not suppose to be a crime. It is natural to hate, and it is natural to die.
The Sinos are alright with Arabians, but most of them is not OK with Turkish people.
It is not natural to hate..but if you think so..so be it. It is natural to love.
Now on to business...>>> Apparently Revolutionist you've not read the forum rules. The excerpt below is directly from the forum rules.
FORUM RULES: Things to Remember Before Posting, important, please read!
Revolutionist, read the forum rules before you post again.
One last thing...
bd popeye super moderator
- Status