The genuine appearance and essence of Chinghiz Khan, the real History of the Tatars, of many Turkic peoples and Russians: First of all it must be said, that in official history there are many falsifications and slanders about the ‘Tatars - wild nomads’ etc., which were written by pro-Chinese, Persian, also both Russian tsars Romanovs and Bolshevik ideologists. However primarily we should know the truth about the meaning of the names ‘Mongol’ and ‘Tatar’ (‘Tartar’) in the medieval Eurasia: According to many medieval sources, the name ‘Mongol’ until the 17th-18th centuries meant belonging to a political community, and was not the ethnic name. While ‘‘the name ‘Tatar’ was ‘the name of the own ethnos (nation) of Chinghiz Khan'. Also ‘…Chinghiz Khan and his people did not speak the language, which we now call the ‘Mongolian’…’’ (an academician-orientalist V.P.Vasiliev, 19th century). This confirmed by many little known data. So in fact Chinghiz Khan was from among the medieval Tatars and the outstanding and progressive leader of the Turkic peoples. About the real faith of Chinghiz Khan and his native people: for example, the Turkish traveler Celebi (17th century) wrote the following from the words of Tatar alims (scientists): ‘It is proved that Chinghiz Khan was a Muslim, and the Tatars professed Islam already during the life of the Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon Him)’. Also, as Tatar alims told Chelebi, Chingiz Khan had been buried in the Volga region, not far from the city of Astrakhan. Moreover, there is a lot of data about this, hidden from us. It is worth saying that according to many little-known data, the ancient and medieval Tatars were a very developed people both in spiritual and material aspects. It was the medieval Tatars who created the first Constitution of Eurasia, which was called in Tatar ‘Great Yasu’ (‘Yasu’ in Tatar means 'Scripture'). But with time many of their descendants became spiritually disabled and forgot invaluable doctrine and covenants of the creators of Great Yasu... So that the Tatars of Chinghiz Khan - medieval Tatars - were one of the Turkic nations, whose descendants now live in many of the fraternal Turkic peoples of Eurasia - among Tatars, Kazakhs, Bashkirs, Uighurs, and many others. And few people know that the ethnos of medieval Tatars, which stopped the expansion of the Persians and the Chinese to the West of the World in Medieval centuries, is still alive. Despite to the politicians of the tsars Romanovs tsars and Bolsheviks dictators, which had divided and scattered this ethnos to different nations... About everything above mentioned and a lot of the true history of the Tatars and other fraternal Turkic peoples, that was hidden from us, had been written, in detail and proved, in the book ‘Forgotten Heritage of Tatars’ - it is one of books by an independent historian Gali Yenikey, translated in Engilsh. There are a lot of previously little-known historical facts, as well as 16 maps and illustrations in this book. This e-book (in English language) you can easily find in the Internet here: www.kobo.com/ebook/forgotten-heritage-of-tatars-1 or here: payhip.com/b/Xujb
On the cover of this book you can see the true appearance of Chinghiz Khan. It is his lifetime portrait. In the ancient Tatar historical source ‘About the clan of Chinghiz Khan’ its author gave the words of the mother of Chinghiz Khan: ‘My son Chinghiz looks like this: he has a golden bushy beard, he wears a white fur coat and rides on a white horse’. As we can see, the portrait of an unknown medieval artist in many ways corresponds to the words of the mother of the Hero, which have come down to us in this ancient Tatar epic. Therefore, this portrait, which corresponds to the information of the Tatar source and to data from other sources, we believe, the most reliably transmits the appearance of Chinghiz Khan...’. And here's another interesting thing: We can't keep silent that some 'very important' official historians try to retell the content (or rather, the concept) of the works of the independent historian Gali Yenikey (Yenikeiev). But they conceal where the information was by them taken from. However it turned out they were unsuccessful and confused - this official historians, apparently, do not dare to show the real history of the Tatars, being afraid of their ‘scientific chiefs’. But not only this - see the portrait of Chingiz Khan - see on the 7th minute of the video of the Institute of history of the Academy of Sciences of Tatarstan (Russia): ruclips.net/video/3WqB71gs5bc/видео.html - also this portrait is shown there both before and after. This portrait is reconstruction, which made by Yenikeiev on the basis of a lifetime portrait of Chingiz Khan and of information from the medieval Tatar Dastan (epic) 'About the Origin of Ciingiz Khan', as well as from other historical sources. This portrait was used by authors of the video without Yenikeiev's permission and without telling where the portrait came from. This portrait is published on the cover of G. R. Yenikeiev's book ‘Forgotten heritage of the Tatars’: see: payhip.com/b/Xujb For the first time this portrait was published on the cover of the third book by G. R. Yenikeiev ‘In the footsteps of the black legend’ (published in 2009), see its electronic version: payhip.com/b/DNdC This ‘creativity’ of the official historians is called among the decent people as plagiarism - that is, as theft.
Since it's the first you've heard about Vlad the impaler (dracula) I'll recommend the video from TBV knowledge and truth about this topic. It's very informative. And the speaker in the video didn't mentioned why that queen was called bloody queen. It's because she used to take bath in blood of young maidens. She believed it kept her beautiful. And she's the same Mary that people call when they do the "Bloody Mary" thing to call ghosts 😂
This is fake. She didn't do that and she's called Bloody Mary because she killed a lot of Protestants but she was Catholic. You are confusing Mary I with Elizabeth Báthory. In reality, Mary didn't kill that many people. Elizabeth I and their father, Henry VIII, killed even more.
@@icechoc Alright, you're right about Elizabeth 1,she was the blood countess and please don't say that much people.. It's irky.. I mean that was a lot of people man, anything else seems like counting chickens...
@@mussharatnaaz1325 - Comprehension is a valuable thing. Read my next sentence after I said that. Obviously a comparison to Henry VIII and Elizabeth I.
@@mussharatnaaz1325 - Henry VIII's children are Mary I (oldest), Elizabeth I (middle) and Edward VI (youngest). Henry VIII was a horrible man and Elizabeth killed many Catholics, including her own cousin.
I like the channel you were watching but this video does have a lot of wrong information. Nero killed himself because a rebellion (bagavat) broke out against him and he knew he was going to be killed so he killed himself. They should have given more information about Stalin. He was awful. Queen Mary I didn't become queen after her father died. Her brother did manage to become king but not for long as he died. Then she became queen. She should not be on the list. There are far worse rulers than her. I'm not saying she was good but it's just Protestants and men never liked her and made her look worse than she actually was. Her husband is the main reason for all the deaths, not her. She got blamed because she's the woman. Her father was way worse and her sister was bad too. Not going to lie but Dracula should be lower down on the list. Just because he killed Ottoman soldiers doesn't mean he's one of the worst. The Ottomans were not innocent. Also, Mehmed II didn't kill Vlad. He wasn't there when Vlad died. And the drinking blood thing is just made up rumours. Timur should be on the list. He was worse than Mary and Dracula put together.
Tum log muslim ko khush karne ke liye bismillah rehman rahim kar rahe ho,,kya pakistani muslim RUclipsR Indian viewer ke liye hai shree ram se start karega,,toh phir tum kyo karte ho
Masha Allah 😢😢😢
Humen Apke sare videos Bhot ache lgte Hai ❤️❤️❤️
MASHA ALLAH
The genuine appearance and essence of Chinghiz Khan, the real History of the Tatars, of many Turkic peoples and Russians:
First of all it must be said, that in official history there are many falsifications and slanders about the ‘Tatars - wild nomads’ etc., which were written by pro-Chinese, Persian, also both Russian tsars Romanovs and Bolshevik ideologists.
However primarily we should know the truth about the meaning of the names ‘Mongol’ and ‘Tatar’ (‘Tartar’) in the medieval Eurasia:
According to many medieval sources, the name ‘Mongol’ until the 17th-18th centuries meant belonging to a political community, and was not the ethnic name. While ‘‘the name ‘Tatar’ was ‘the name of the own ethnos (nation) of Chinghiz Khan'. Also ‘…Chinghiz Khan and his people did not speak the language, which we now call the ‘Mongolian’…’’ (an academician-orientalist V.P.Vasiliev, 19th century). This confirmed by many little known data. So in fact Chinghiz Khan was from among the medieval Tatars and the outstanding and progressive leader of the Turkic peoples.
About the real faith of Chinghiz Khan and his native people: for example, the Turkish traveler Celebi (17th century) wrote the following from the words of Tatar alims (scientists): ‘It is proved that Chinghiz Khan was a Muslim, and the Tatars professed Islam already during the life of the Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon Him)’.
Also, as Tatar alims told Chelebi, Chingiz Khan had been buried in the Volga region, not far from the city of Astrakhan. Moreover, there is a lot of data about this, hidden from us.
It is worth saying that according to many little-known data, the ancient and medieval Tatars were a very developed people both in spiritual and material aspects. It was the medieval Tatars who created the first Constitution of Eurasia, which was called in Tatar ‘Great Yasu’ (‘Yasu’ in Tatar means 'Scripture').
But with time many of their descendants became spiritually disabled and forgot invaluable doctrine and covenants of the creators of Great Yasu...
So that the Tatars of Chinghiz Khan - medieval Tatars - were one of the Turkic nations, whose descendants now live in many of the fraternal Turkic peoples of Eurasia - among Tatars, Kazakhs, Bashkirs, Uighurs, and many others.
And few people know that the ethnos of medieval Tatars, which stopped the expansion of the Persians and the Chinese to the West of the World in Medieval centuries, is still alive. Despite to the politicians of the tsars Romanovs tsars and Bolsheviks dictators, which had divided and scattered this ethnos to different nations...
About everything above mentioned and a lot of the true history of the Tatars and other fraternal Turkic peoples, that was hidden from us, had been written, in detail and proved, in the book ‘Forgotten Heritage of Tatars’ - it is one of books by an independent historian Gali Yenikey, translated in Engilsh.
There are a lot of previously little-known historical facts, as well as 16 maps and illustrations in this book. This e-book (in English language) you can easily find in the Internet here: www.kobo.com/ebook/forgotten-heritage-of-tatars-1 or here: payhip.com/b/Xujb
On the cover of this book you can see the true appearance of Chinghiz Khan. It is his lifetime portrait. In the ancient Tatar historical source ‘About the clan of Chinghiz Khan’ its author gave the words of the mother of Chinghiz Khan: ‘My son Chinghiz looks like this: he has a golden bushy beard, he wears a white fur coat and rides on a white horse’. As we can see, the portrait of an unknown medieval artist in many ways corresponds to the words of the mother of the Hero, which have come down to us in this ancient Tatar epic. Therefore, this portrait, which corresponds to the information of the Tatar source and to data from other sources, we believe, the most reliably transmits the appearance of Chinghiz Khan...’.
And here's another interesting thing:
We can't keep silent that some 'very important' official historians try to retell the content (or rather, the concept) of the works of the independent historian Gali Yenikey (Yenikeiev). But they conceal where the information was by them taken from. However it turned out they were unsuccessful and confused - this official historians, apparently, do not dare to show the real history of the Tatars, being afraid of their ‘scientific chiefs’.
But not only this - see the portrait of Chingiz Khan - see on the 7th minute of the video of the Institute of history of the Academy of Sciences of Tatarstan (Russia): ruclips.net/video/3WqB71gs5bc/видео.html - also this portrait is shown there both before and after.
This portrait is reconstruction, which made by Yenikeiev on the basis of a lifetime portrait of Chingiz Khan and of information from the medieval Tatar Dastan (epic) 'About the Origin of Ciingiz Khan', as well as from other historical sources.
This portrait was used by authors of the video without Yenikeiev's permission and without telling where the portrait came from. This portrait is published on the cover of G. R. Yenikeiev's book ‘Forgotten heritage of the Tatars’: see: payhip.com/b/Xujb
For the first time this portrait was published on the cover of the third book by G. R. Yenikeiev ‘In the footsteps of the black legend’ (published in 2009), see its electronic version: payhip.com/b/DNdC
This ‘creativity’ of the official historians is called among the decent people as plagiarism - that is, as theft.
Mashallah ❣️👍❣️ Best' reaction
Masah Allah
MAshA ALLAH😍
NYC
ApNe PhiR Se DupAta HatA DiyA Ap AChi LAgti HO SisteR
..good... conten....
Good 👍👍
nice bro
Bagdad kabse duniya ka sabse Devlop sahar ho gya india sone kichidiya thi
Duniya ki sabse badi library Nalda hai
Kilji ne 1200 me hi library jala di thi. 100000 se bhi jyada kitabe jal Gaye thi
Walekumassalaam bro n sister Allah apko hidayet de
Turkish movie delilir main aap "bracula" ka cherector dekh sakty hain
Please RH Network ki Dracula ki history p react kare. Pleaaaaaaaase ☺️🙏🙏
Since it's the first you've heard about Vlad the impaler (dracula) I'll recommend the video from TBV knowledge and truth about this topic. It's very informative.
And the speaker in the video didn't mentioned why that queen was called bloody queen. It's because she used to take bath in blood of young maidens. She believed it kept her beautiful. And she's the same Mary that people call when they do the "Bloody Mary" thing to call ghosts 😂
This is fake. She didn't do that and she's called Bloody Mary because she killed a lot of Protestants but she was Catholic. You are confusing Mary I with Elizabeth Báthory.
In reality, Mary didn't kill that many people. Elizabeth I and their father, Henry VIII, killed even more.
@@icechoc Alright, you're right about Elizabeth 1,she was the blood countess and please don't say that much people.. It's irky.. I mean that was a lot of people man, anything else seems like counting chickens...
@@mussharatnaaz1325 - Comprehension is a valuable thing. Read my next sentence after I said that. Obviously a comparison to Henry VIII and Elizabeth I.
@@icechoc Who's father are you talking about in the first comment? I didn't get something right there. Who were the children of Henry VIII?
@@mussharatnaaz1325 - Henry VIII's children are Mary I (oldest), Elizabeth I (middle) and Edward VI (youngest).
Henry VIII was a horrible man and Elizabeth killed many Catholics, including her own cousin.
Please reaction on ertugrul Teri mitti please today reaction and reply
Tum vdeo banana chhior do
Helo bro plz jawab dena
I like the channel you were watching but this video does have a lot of wrong information.
Nero killed himself because a rebellion (bagavat) broke out against him and he knew he was going to be killed so he killed himself.
They should have given more information about Stalin. He was awful.
Queen Mary I didn't become queen after her father died. Her brother did manage to become king but not for long as he died. Then she became queen. She should not be on the list. There are far worse rulers than her. I'm not saying she was good but it's just Protestants and men never liked her and made her look worse than she actually was. Her husband is the main reason for all the deaths, not her. She got blamed because she's the woman. Her father was way worse and her sister was bad too.
Not going to lie but Dracula should be lower down on the list. Just because he killed Ottoman soldiers doesn't mean he's one of the worst. The Ottomans were not innocent. Also, Mehmed II didn't kill Vlad. He wasn't there when Vlad died. And the drinking blood thing is just made up rumours.
Timur should be on the list. He was worse than Mary and Dracula put together.
Helo plz sir
Tum log sirf rupee ke leye vdeo banate ho
Tum log muslim ko khush karne ke liye bismillah rehman rahim kar rahe ho,,kya pakistani muslim RUclipsR Indian viewer ke liye hai shree ram se start karega,,toh phir tum kyo karte ho
bhai bismillah rehman rahim means in the name of God, the merciful and compassionate.