The Surname "Khan"

[Nirvana]

I believe that the term "Khan" is of Altaic origins. Many Muslims of
the sub-continent have this surname. Genghis Khan (born Timujin) was
later named this, and he was of Altaic-descent (Altaic = Mongolic
languages and all Turkic languages). Finally, there is an area of
Egypt where the Altaics ruled for some time in the past simply called
"Khan" these days.

Therefore, I believe that the surname "Khan" is of Altaic origins, and
possibly brought to the subcontinent by the Altaic rulers (such as the
Lodhi dynasty, Tamerlane, the Mughals, or the Turkish Sultanates).

[Yusuf B Gursey]

In sci.lang Nirvana <***@yahoo.com> wrote in <***@posting.google.com>:

this was discussed in considerable detail in sci.lang (and cross posted
groups) before.

: I believe that the term "Khan" is of Altaic origins. Many Muslims of

yes. it's etymology is a matter of debate or obscure, but it developed
amongst turko-mongol steppe empires, possibly xiong-nu.

: the sub-continent have this surname. Genghis Khan (born Timujin) was
: later named this, and he was of Altaic-descent (Altaic = Mongolic

he was a mongol, and as a speaker of mongolian he spoke an "altaic"
language.

: languages and all Turkic languages). Finally, there is an area of
: Egypt where the Altaics ruled for some time in the past simply called
: "Khan" these days.

: Therefore, I believe that the surname "Khan" is of Altaic origins, and
: possibly brought to the subcontinent by the Altaic rulers (such as the
: Lodhi dynasty, Tamerlane, the Mughals, or the Turkish Sultanates).

the title spread during the mongol and post-mongol periods. under the
mongols only descendants of chinggis could use it.

[Yusuf B Gursey]

In sci.lang Jacques Guy <***@alphalink.com.au> wrote in <***@alphalink.com.au>:
: Yusuf B Gursey wrote:

:> yes. it's etymology is a matter of debate or obscure, but it developed
:> amongst turko-mongol steppe empires, possibly xiong-nu.

: I used to have a very old grammar of the Ordoss dialect, which
: went yukue fumei (the book). But I vividly remember that the word was
: [xaxan].

the "long form" was qa*gh*an (perhaps *xagan) "emperor" and generally that
was above a xan "king" but qa*gh*an became qa'an in middle mongolian and
became merged with xan as xa:n later. the etymological relationship
between the "long forms" vs. "short forms", appearing occassionaly in some
other "altaic" titles is not really known.

in the mongol empire, there was one supreme qa'an (residing first in
mongolia, then peking - xanbalIq in turkic: the Khan's City or Khan-City)
but other chingisids were called Khan.

in the ottoman empire, the Sultan had "xa:n" (Khan) attached to his name
(or his patronymic), but so did his vassal, the Crimean Khan (who was a
chingisid). however, only the Sultan was refered to as the xa:qa:n
(originally for *xa:ga:n in arabic script, the original intention was
probably the voiced pronounciation of /q/ but this was forgotten). in the
"altaic" tradition titles were "cumulative". the ottomans justifed
themselves as Khans by invoking their leadership of the turkmen qayI
tribe, which was supposed to be very noble.

chinggis himself appears as "xa:n" in a persian language (with mongol
loanwords) inscription on transoxanian coins.

Timur didn't call himself "khan" (he wasn;t a chinggisid) and maintained a
chinggisid figurehead Mahmud Khan on the throne. but in an ottoman coin
of Mehmed I (nominally his vassal for a while) his name appears with that
of " Mehmed Khan " as "Timur Khan " (actually the turkish pronounciation "
Demir Xan " is used timur / ti:mu:r actually = te.mu"r in persian based
orthogrpahy ; e. = closed e).

Nadir Shah of Iran (an eastern turk) used Shah, Sultan , Khakan and Qa'an
(!)

[Nirvana]

Yusuf:

You said that Timur wasn't a Chinggisid. Are you implying that he
wasn't an Altaic speaker? Furthermore, you say that Nadir Shah was an
Eastern Turk. Are you sure he wasn't an Iranian-speaker? Are you
implying that he was an Altaic-speaker?

Post by Yusuf B Gursey
Timur didn't call himself "khan" (he wasn;t a chinggisid) and maintained a
chinggisid figurehead Mahmud Khan on the throne. but in an ottoman coin
of Mehmed I (nominally his vassal for a while) his name appears with that
of " Mehmed Khan " as "Timur Khan " (actually the turkish pronounciation "
Demir Xan " is used timur / ti:mu:r actually = te.mu"r in persian based
orthogrpahy ; e. = closed e).
Nadir Shah of Iran (an eastern turk) used Shah, Sultan , Khakan and Qa'an
(!)

[Yusuf B Gursey]

In sci.lang Nirvana <***@yahoo.com> wrote in <***@posting.google.com>:
: Yusuf:

: You said that Timur wasn't a Chinggisid. Are you implying that he
: wasn't an Altaic speaker? Furthermore, you say that Nadir Shah was an

why should that mean "not speaking an altaic language". a chinggisid just
means tracing one's ancestry through the male line to chinngis khan. it's
not linguistic. there are literally millions of non-chingisids speaking an
"altaic" language, and perhaps some chingisids now speaking non-altaic
languages (There was artticle in NYT Science "Genghiz Khan's Y -
chromosome, alledged to be very widespread).

Timur came from the Barlas tribe of Mongols, tracing his ancestors to a
common ancestor with chinggis. he also married a chingisid princess and
became a "royal son-in-law". however, he was not a descendant of
chinggis, his tribe was quite turkified (and islamized) by then, and his
profficiency in mongolian is a matter of debate. his principal language
was eastern turkic and was profficient in persian as well.

: Eastern Turk. Are you sure he wasn't an Iranian-speaker? Are you
: implying that he was an Altaic-speaker?

pigeon-holing people into "Altaic" or "Iranian" won't get you anywhere.
these terms belong to the study of language *groups*, not individuals.

Nadir Shah (born Nadir-qulI Afshari ; qulI "servant of" being turkic) was
from the Afshar tribe of turkmens in Khorasan (the well known tribe
spreads elsewhere). that doesn't mean he wasn't highly profficient in
persian as well. Afghans constitued an important base of his support.

:> Timur didn't call himself "khan" (he wasn;t a chinggisid) and maintained a
:> chinggisid figurehead Mahmud Khan on the throne. but in an ottoman coin
:> of Mehmed I (nominally his vassal for a while) his name appears with that
:> of " Mehmed Khan " as "Timur Khan " (actually the turkish pronounciation "
:> Demir Xan " is used timur / ti:mu:r actually = te.mu"r in persian based
:> orthogrpahy ; e. = closed e).
:>
:> Nadir Shah of Iran (an eastern turk) used Shah, Sultan , Khakan and Qa'an
:> (!)

[Yusuf B Gursey]

In sci.lang Jacques Guy <***@alphalink.com.au> wrote in <***@alphalink.com.au>:

thanks.

: I have nothing more to add. I was only reminiscing. That grammar
: of Ordoss must have been printed in the early 1900's. The
: author was a priest (a Jesuit?). I had found it in the used
: book section of an academic bookshop in my home town, Nantes,
: shortly before the death of my father (1956). There was also
: a handbook of written Chinese meant for French public
: servants in China. I remember one sentence, in the
: transcription system of the Ecole Fran�aise d'Extr�me-Orient:
: yu yeou yu san "I have an umbrella". All those lovely
: books were lost when my mother died shortly after I
: migrated to Australia. I am still sore about it.

[Stevapalooza]

Yeah, Khan is the Mongol derivitive of the Turkic Khagan. It was first
used by the Juan-Juan, the Mongol-speaking tribe that replaced the
Hsiung-nu as the lords of Central Asia.

[harmony]

it actually came from the jewish name "kahn".

Post by Stevapalooza
Yeah, Khan is the Mongol derivitive of the Turkic Khagan. It was first
used by the Juan-Juan, the Mongol-speaking tribe that replaced the
Hsiung-nu as the lords of Central Asia.

[Lynn K. Circle]

Post by harmony
it actually came from the jewish name "kahn".

Post by Stevapalooza
Yeah, Khan is the Mongol derivitive of the Turkic Khagan. It was first
used by the Juan-Juan, the Mongol-speaking tribe that replaced the
Hsiung-nu as the lords of Central Asia.

Oh, you mean old Gengis and Kublai were actually Jewish Rabbis?

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Lynn K. Circle

Post by harmony
it actually came from the jewish name "kahn".

Post by Stevapalooza
Yeah, Khan is the Mongol derivitive of the Turkic Khagan. It was first
used by the Juan-Juan, the Mongol-speaking tribe that replaced the
Hsiung-nu as the lords of Central Asia.

Oh, you mean old Gengis and Kublai were actually Jewish Rabbis?

What other kind of rabbi is there?

[Gary Vellenzer]

In article <***@worldnet.att.net>, ***@worldnet.att.net
says...

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Lynn K. Circle

Post by harmony
it actually came from the jewish name "kahn".

Post by Stevapalooza
Yeah, Khan is the Mongol derivitive of the Turkic Khagan. It was first
used by the Juan-Juan, the Mongol-speaking tribe that replaced the
Hsiung-nu as the lords of Central Asia.

Oh, you mean old Gengis and Kublai were actually Jewish Rabbis?

What other kind of rabbi is there?

Well, in the New York police department, for example, mentors are
traditionally called "rabbis".

Gary

[Tilly]

Post by Peter T. Daniels
What other kind of rabbi is there?

None other than imposters.
Tilly

--
***@hotmail.com

[Baadai]

Post by harmony
it actually came from the jewish name "kahn".

Post by Stevapalooza
Yeah, Khan is the Mongol derivitive of the Turkic Khagan. It was first
used by the Juan-Juan, the Mongol-speaking tribe that replaced the
Hsiung-nu as the lords of Central Asia.

That is an insult. Only jews can talk that kind of nonsense.