The Uzbeks: A Masterpiece on the History of Uzbeks until 90's

[Akhee-Abdullah]

Dear Reader,

Here in front of you, a masterpice article written about the history of the Uzbeks up until the 1990's.

The article is such a masterpiece that it made me to roughly read the article over and over. Tons of information about Uzbeks!!!

Special Requests to: Uzland, Aziz, Wolfman, MUHLIS, Masanori, & Mazlum.

Please read the entire article and share your views with me, since I closely follow your views on many topics.

Much Thanks....


Article is in PDF format...

The Uzbeks

By Mark Dickens

The Rest Is Here (http://www.oxuscom.com/Uzbeks.pdf)


Or Download the PDF file from the attachment...

[Maroon]

May you will find this article interesting as well.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/1502189.stm

[MUHLIS]

I just wanted to have a look at the article, but could not take off my eyes until I finished it.
Well structured article. But what makes this article really interesting and valuable is the neutral position of the author.
Even though some of the arguements in the work were based on subjective opinions (probably due to the lack of access to data and time constraints) they are still credible and make sense.
I can comment about only add one thought. The author suggests that Uzbeks moved to present-day Afghanistan due to Russian expansion and Soviet rule. But from the historical point of view, the northern parts of present-day Afghanistan was motherland for Turks ( I mean present-day Uzbeks) for many yerar. Miranshah the son of Amir Temur and father of Ulugbek was a ruler of Hurasan and he was based in current northern Afghanistan. Alisher Navaiy's birthplace is Hirat, Kamoliddin Behzod was born in this area too. What I want to say is that cultural, historical, and ethnic ties between norther Afghanistan and Turkistan did exist before some people fled there as refugees in the beginning of the last century and Uzbeks (either under the same name or with their preceding name - Turks) were present centuries earlier than the Russian expansion to Central Asia. One of the strongest turkic states (that has straight linkage with present-day Uzbeks and Uyghurs) - the Empire of Sultan Mahmud G'aznaviy started off from the city of Ghazni which is now in precent day Afghanistan.
The paper was written in 1990 and interestingly enough, at the end the author made amasingly accurate conclusion by predicting the collapse of the USSR.
Finally, I can proudly add that I know the author personally and have taken my first serious English language classes from him. We used to have interesting discussions with him and the other friends about history, culture, religion, language, and politics in Turkistan.......

[Destankutluhan]

I heard this book before but did not able to read except some pragraphs, now I read almost half. Off course there are points that we can argue about. May be I'll back after finishing.

In 1990s there were quite some books about Central Asia, Turks and Integration, and/or about Rising Power, the Turks etc., In my personal views, the West suddenly realized the fact that the Central Asian newly independent states has very strong ties with eachother and share common historical, languistic and cultural background. And those signs mostly was pointing out a nation ; The Turks.
They have cearly realized that Turks actually not only in Turkey as they know since hundred years, but in Central Asia too ! ( Siberia too !!). I remember from early 1990s; there were a lot of companies, statemens who was telling Turks in Turkiye that we should act together to enter Central Asian market( business) because we are very good precondition for this etc... We didn't use this oportunity, or they find out that it is better they do themselves, mau be they were right as Turkiye did not orginize well and lost ground in the end. On the other part of the story that the West, Russia and even China suddenly realized that Turks might have different idea then economies, they found out that there were a place called Turkistan and it consist all the Turk States of Central Asia, they found those ideas contrary their aim. After sometime Turkey started to face financial crises, unstable governments, and huge increase in terrorist activities ! In the end Turkiye with full of economic and social problems, fell well behind the other countreies on effecting Central Asia, plus lost considerable ground too.

My another point is that the Turkification of Central Asia not only started in 7th Century, It was well earlier then this date When the Huns are in power before more then 2000 years ago, Central Asia mostly controlled by Turks, from Baikal Lake to Hazar Lake it was under the Turks rule. There are of course some breaks and expansion of other nations but this doesn't necessarily dismiss the fact that Turks were in Central Asia well before.

Again thank you bringing this book to our reading.

Saglicakla,

[bacha]

I love the article :)
It says:
The first layer is comprised of indegenious Iranian population who were subsequently turkified.

And you talk about Turks living thousands of years before on Central Asian soil! I wonder with what eyes you should read an article in order to make such conclusions...

[UzLand]

Неужели Табаки и здесь побывал?:)

[UzLand]

Special Requests to: Uzland, Aziz, Wolfman, MUHLIS, Masanori, & Mazlum.


Give me some time, please, and thanks for the link.

[Destankutluhan]

I love the article :)
It says:
The first layer is comprised of indegenious Iranian population who were subsequently turkified.

And you talk about Turks living thousands of years before on Central Asian soil! I wonder with what eyes you should read an article in order to make such conclusions...


If you read my article carefully you will understand that what I said is my objection about the article.

Please read again, thank you !

So you should accept yourself as a Turk even your grandgrandandgrand fathers were Persian origin ! You are Turkified ! :)

[MUHLIS]

I love the article :)
It says:
The first layer is comprised of indegenious Iranian population who were subsequently turkified.

And you talk about Turks living thousands of years before on Central Asian soil! I wonder with what eyes you should read an article in order to make such conclusions...

East Iranian tribes (please note that it is not a synonim of Tajik, what is Tajik? Tajik is a mixture of Turkic and Iranian people who speaks in Iranian language) were the earliest known ethnic group which inhabited in Central Asia. But this historical fact does not in no ways put Tajiks in the position of "the owner" and Uzbeks "tenant" in Central Asia.
As far as I remember, we had a discussion about similar topic earlier and there I mentioned to you that proto Turks and Turks migrated to Central Asia due to climate changes in Altay and Ural region. The date of first migration of Turks to Central Asia is explained differently by different groups, however, the first migrations occur couple centuries before AD if not more. Moreover, at that time Turks were a nation with its own writing system, its own centralized government and they mastered metalwork. Because their lands became too cold to survive they just had to move to souther lands which basically not owned by any particularly organized government or nation with the exception of small-numbered East Iranian tribes. As you can see, unfortunately (for you), you cannot compare this case with the invasion of Rome by "barbars".
Finally, country is not a seat in a movie theater in Dushanbe or Tashkent where you can say "I sat here first, so its mine, go away!" Country is about what people did for it over the centuries and the Turks-Uzbeks did so much for this land during thousands of years, today, none deserves to claim it as theirs more than Turks-Uzbeks!!!
We recognize that you are different, we respect you, we do not force you to become one of us, we do not take you for an enimy, you deserve to live in this country as much as we deserve, and in turn, you should also recognize and appreciate us and our identity as much as we do yours!!!
YOU will never be respected and tolerated by ANY Uzbek,Turkmen, Kazah, Kirgiz, or Karakalpak if you portray yourself to be better than us on the basis of race, ethnicity, and historical events!!! NEVER!
An attempt for segregation, claiming for racial and cultural superiority will do more harm to your own nation and country than the countries and nations you desire to harm so much!

[bacha]

East Iranian tribes (please note that it is not a synonim of Tajik, what is Tajik? Tajik is a mixture of Turkic and Iranian people who speaks in Iranian language) were the earliest known ethnic group which inhabited in Central Asia. But this historical fact does not in no ways put Tajiks in the position of "the owner" and Uzbeks "tenant" in Central Asia.
As far as I remember, we had a discussion about similar topic earlier and there I mentioned to you that proto Turks and Turks migrated to Central Asia due to climate changes in Altay and Ural region. The date of first migration of Turks to Central Asia is explained differently by different groups, however, the first migrations occur couple centuries before AD if not more. Moreover, at that time Turks were a nation with its own writing system, its own centralized government and they mastered metalwork. Because their lands became too cold to survive they just had to move to souther lands which basically not owned by any particularly organized government or nation with the exception of small-numbered East Iranian tribes. As you can see, unfortunately (for you), you cannot compare this case with the invasion of Rome by "barbars".
Finally, country is not a seat in a movie theater in Dushanbe or Tashkent where you can say "I sat here first, so its mine, go away!" Country is about what people did for it over the centuries and the Turks-Uzbeks did so much for this land during thousands of years, today, none deserves to claim it as theirs more than Turks-Uzbeks!!!
We recognize that you are different, we respect you, we do not force you to become one of us, we do not take you for an enimy, you deserve to live in this country as much as we deserve, and in turn, you should also recognize and appreciate us and our identity as much as we do yours!!!
YOU will never be respected and tolerated by ANY Uzbek,Turkmen, Kazah, Kirgiz, or Karakalpak if you portray yourself to be better than us on the basis of race, ethnicity, and historical events!!! NEVER!
An attempt for segregation, claiming for racial and cultural superiority will do more harm to your own nation and country than the countries and nations you desire to harm so much!
Dear Muhlis
If you have read my post more carefully, you would notice that there was no attempt to show my nation superior to any other, or "desire to harm so much" some turkic countries. Please, do not make up from yourself, or give imaginary addition to my posts, comprehend them as they are without making up stories of your own. Otherwise, you will turn this topic into the one about the funeral of the "Ilhom" theater.

[Aziz]

Thank you brother.
...it is almost 50 pages. I'll take my time reading it.

[Wolfman]

Hurmatli Abdulloh,

bu maqolangiz uchun katta rahmat!

endi man o'zimning firkrlarim bilan o'rtoqlashsam.

Tarix:
meni ajablantirgan narsa, shu bitta maqolar hozirgi O'zbekistonda o'qitilayotgan/yozilayotgan ancha muncha tarix kitoblardan afzal. men azaldan o'zbek xalqining kelib chiqish bo'yicha fikrlarim bilan mainstreamdan ajralib turganman: ya'ni o'zbek xalqining yaxlit emasligi (bu maqolada "layer"-qatlam-qatlam deyilgan, hozirgi tarix kitoblarga qarshi o'laroq, o'zbeklarni bir necha ming yillardan beri O'zb. hududida yashaydi deydigan), uning haqiqiy tili hozirgidan boshqa ekanlig bilan. bu maqolada men o'z fikrlarim tasdig'ini topdim.

muallifning fikrlari faktlar bilan asoslangan.
lekin bir noaniq masalaki, muallif eroniy xalk vakillarining O'rta Osiyoga chetdan kirib kelganligi (Forslar imperiyasi, Doro etc.), asosan shaharlarda yashaganligini, lekin shahardan tashqarida yashaydigan ko'chmanchi xalqlar kim ekanligini e'tirof etmagan.

yana bir kamchilik shundaki, bu barcha ko'pchilik g'arb tarixchilariga xos bo'lsa kerak, Chingizxon davrida yashagan, u bilan kelgan turkiy xalqlarni mongol deb qo'ya qolishadi. lekin tarixiy faktlar buni tasdiqlamaydi. oddiy misol, mo'g'llar va ularga yaqin xalqlar son jihatdan juda kam. agar ular mongol bo'lganlarida, nima uchun o'zbek, tatar yo qozoq tilini tilini mo'g'ulcha so'zlar bosib ketmagan?

Din:
maqolada din, islomdan oldingiz dinlarning xalqimizning urf-odatlarida tutgan orni yaxshi yoritilgan, din va urf-odatlarining boshqa boshqa narsa ekanligi alohida aytib o'tilgan (masalan tumorlar, qabrlarga sig'inish, Allohni qo'yib boshqalarda narsa tilash dindan emasligi ko'rsatib o'tilgan... tasanno!). tasavvufning - shu yerda aytishim kerak - salbiy roli yaxshi yoritilgan. ayniqsa dinning SSSR paytida qanday qilib bosqichma bosqich yo'qotilganining yoritilishi diqqatga sazovor.

Til:
hozirgi "o'zbek" tilinig haqiqiy o'zbek tili emasligi hammaga ham ma'lum bo'masa kerak. ya'ni biz hozir gapirayotga va yozayotgan adabiy til - bu haqiqiy o'zbek tilining (hozirda eski o'zbek tili deb yuritiladi) muallif iborasi bilan aytganda "Tashkent Iranized dialect"idir. ya'ni 1934 yil, eski o'zbek tili yo'qotilib, o'rniga xalqimizga begona, boshqa turkiy tillardan ancha farqli (na qipchoq/qozoqlarga, na o'g'uz/turklarga tortadigan qo'pol bo'lsa ham aytaman soxta) Toshkent lahjasi adabiy til qilib belgilandi. endi tushunganday bo'layapman, nima uchun 1940 yillarni boshiga haqiqiy o'zbek klassik adabiyot vakillari qirg'ini qilinganligiga. maqsad, turkiy SSSR xalqlarini parokanda qilish, ularning bir birini orasini uzish...

boshqa soha ma'lumotlarni maqolada o'qishingiz mumkin... haqqoniy yoritilgan.

Xulosa:

hozirgi o'zbeklar inkubatordan chiqqan, aralash, nomi o'g'irlangan, tili o'zgartirilgan, tarixi o'chirilgan xalq...


Wolf



Dear Reader,

Here in front of you, a masterpice article written about the history of the Uzbeks up until the 1990's.

The article is such a masterpiece that it made me to roughly read the article over and over. Tons of information about Uzbeks!!!

Special Requests to: Uzland, Aziz, Wolfman, MUHLIS, Masanori, & Mazlum.

Please read the entire article and share your views with me, since I closely follow your views on many topics.

Much Thanks....


Article is in PDF format...

The Uzbeks

By Mark Dickens

The Rest Is Here (http://www.oxuscom.com/Uzbeks.pdf)


Or Download the PDF file from the attachment...

[Akhee-Abdullah]

Hurmatli Abdulloh,

bu maqolangiz uchun katta rahmat!

endi man o'zimning firkrlarim bilan o'rtoqlashsam.

Tarix:
meni ajablantirgan narsa, shu bitta maqolar hozirgi O'zbekistonda o'qitilayotgan/yozilayotgan ancha muncha tarix kitoblardan afzal. men azaldan o'zbek xalqining kelib chiqish bo'yicha fikrlarim bilan mainstreamdan ajralib turganman: ya'ni o'zbek xalqining yaxlit emasligi (bu maqolada "layer"-qatlam-qatlam deyilgan, hozirgi tarix kitoblarga qarshi o'laroq, o'zbeklarni bir necha ming yillardan beri O'zb. hududida yashaydi deydigan), uning haqiqiy tili hozirgidan boshqa ekanlig bilan. bu maqolada men o'z fikrlarim tasdig'ini topdim.

muallifning fikrlari faktlar bilan asoslangan.
lekin bir noaniq masalaki, muallif eroniy xalk vakillarining O'rta Osiyoga chetdan kirib kelganligi (Forslar imperiyasi, Doro etc.), asosan shaharlarda yashaganligini, lekin shahardan tashqarida yashaydigan ko'chmanchi xalqlar kim ekanligini e'tirof etmagan.

yana bir kamchilik shundaki, bu barcha ko'pchilik g'arb tarixchilariga xos bo'lsa kerak, Chingizxon davrida yashagan, u bilan kelgan turkiy xalqlarni mongol deb qo'ya qolishadi. lekin tarixiy faktlar buni tasdiqlamaydi. oddiy misol, mo'g'llar va ularga yaqin xalqlar son jihatdan juda kam. agar ular mongol bo'lganlarida, nima uchun o'zbek, tatar yo qozoq tilini tilini mo'g'ulcha so'zlar bosib ketmagan?

Din:
maqolada din, islomdan oldingiz dinlarning xalqimizning urf-odatlarida tutgan orni yaxshi yoritilgan, din va urf-odatlarining boshqa boshqa narsa ekanligi alohida aytib o'tilgan (masalan tumorlar, qabrlarga sig'inish, Allohni qo'yib boshqalarda narsa tilash dindan emasligi ko'rsatib o'tilgan... tasanno!). tasavvufning - shu yerda aytishim kerak - salbiy roli yaxshi yoritilgan. ayniqsa dinning SSSR paytida qanday qilib bosqichma bosqich yo'qotilganining yoritilishi diqqatga sazovor.

Til:
hozirgi "o'zbek" tilinig haqiqiy o'zbek tili emasligi hammaga ham ma'lum bo'masa kerak. ya'ni biz hozir gapirayotga va yozayotgan adabiy til - bu haqiqiy o'zbek tilining (hozirda eski o'zbek tili deb yuritiladi) muallif iborasi bilan aytganda "Tashkent Iranized dialect"idir. ya'ni 1934 yil, eski o'zbek tili yo'qotilib, o'rniga xalqimizga begona, boshqa turkiy tillardan ancha farqli (na qipchoq/qozoqlarga, na o'g'uz/turklarga tortadigan qo'pol bo'lsa ham aytaman soxta) Toshkent lahjasi adabiy til qilib belgilandi. endi tushunganday bo'layapman, nima uchun 1940 yillarni boshiga haqiqiy o'zbek klassik adabiyot vakillari qirg'ini qilinganligiga. maqsad, turkiy SSSR xalqlarini parokanda qilish, ularning bir birini orasini uzish...

boshqa soha ma'lumotlarni maqolada o'qishingiz mumkin... haqqoniy yoritilgan.

Xulosa:

hozirgi o'zbeklar inkubatordan chiqqan, aralash, nomi o'g'irlangan, tili o'zgartirilgan, tarixi o'chirilgan xalq...


Wolf

Assalam alaikum brodarim,

Tasanno!!! Qoyil!!!!!!

Alhamdulillah, men kutgan jawob wa tahlil nihoyat ozini namoyon etdi. Alhamdulillah, bu dunyoda, 99.99% bir xil fikrlaydigan birodarlarim bor ekan, insha'Allah nasib etsa, kurishsak wa otirib bomdodgacha iymonlashsak.

Ya rabbil alamiyn, osha kunlarni tezlashtirgin.

Wassalam alaaikum wa rahamtullah

[Aziz]

I have not read the file completely until now, I have finished only half of it. But there are sentences which I really liked.
Page 17, line 16 "On the contrary, there is a trend, very disturbing for the Soviets, of non-believers and even atheists turning back to Islam once they reach the age of 40-45, a phenomenon which has even been recorded among staunch party members."

Page 21, line 3 "The desire to remove Arabic and Persian loan words, while at the same time promoting "Russian as a second native language" is an obvious attempt to cut off the Uzbeks and othe Central Asians from their natural ties with the rest of the Islamic world and to reorient their cultural allegiance to Russia."

[melo]

Finally, I can proudly add that I know the author personally and have taken my first serious English language classes from him. We used to have interesting discussions with him and the other friends about history, culture, religion, language, and politics in Turkistan.......

Can you give any insight to how the author knew so much about Uzbeks? Obviously he cited all his sources, but I would be interested what connection he had with Uzbek people.

[Masanori]

Maqolaning ijobiy va salbiy tomonlari:

yahshi maqola. Eng muhimi qisqa, lunda va uziga hos tizimga ega. Ijobiy tomoni shundaki, ancha obyektiv asosda yozilgan. Keltirilgan malumotlarning aksariyati aniq faktlarga tayanadi.

Biroq bazi kamchiliklar ham mavjud, aytaylik, muallif tarih va uzbek etnosining shakllanishi masalasini yoritayotganda, arablarni ancha chetga surib quygan. Uzbeklarning ajdodlarini uch asosiy tabaqaga bulgan, biroq ularning ichiga arablarni qushmagan. Vaholanki, aksariyat qismi badaviy jangchi bulgan arablar, Markaziy Osiyoga kelib utroqlashgan va mahalliy qabilalar bilan chatishib ketgan. Fikrimcha Uzbekistonning Janubiy hududlari hamda zarafshon vohasida istoqomat qilayotgan aholining shakllanishida arablarning sezilarli tasiri bulgan.

Maqolaning tarih qismiga aloqador bulimning yana bir kichik kamchiligi shundaki, muallif rus bosqinining Markaziy Osiyo turkiy millatlari uchun vujudga keltirgan qiyinchiliklari haqida suz yuritadiyu, biroq undan oldingi siyosiy vaziyat(uch honlikning uzaro tuhtovsiz jangu jadallari, nizolari)ni umuman tahlil qilmaydi.
Undan tashqari muallif ushbu bulimda jadidlar va muhtoriyatchilar harakati haqida umuman ogiz ochmaydi. Vaholanki, aynan jadidlar faoliyati 19 asr ohirlari va 20 asr boshlarida Markaziy osiyoda halqlari ongi, tafakkuri va madaniyatida ruy bergan keskin uzgarishni tuliq ochib berishga qodir.

Din masalasida ham bazi kamchiliklar yuq emas. Fikrimcha, muallif turli tariqat va oqimlarning ijtimoiy mavqeini oshirib yuborgan, nazarimda, keltirilgan malumotlar real voqelikdan yiroqroq. Umuman olganda esa, 20 asr uzbeklarining din (Islom)ga bulgan munosabati tugri ifodalangan. Yani aksariyat uzbeklarning amalda emas, tilda musulmon ekanligi haqidagi tahlil ancha qoniqarli.

Tilga doir bulimda uzbeklarga sovet hukumati tomonidan rus tilini singdirilishi salbiy bir holatdek tasvirlangan. Undan tashqari, sovet siyosati tasiri natijasi ularoq, uzbek tilining aniq bir tizimga solinishi ham maqolada unchalik ijobiy baholanmaydi.

Talim tizimi maqolada ancha yahshi yoritilgan. Jadidlar va rus-tuzem maktablarining aholi savodhonligini oshirishdagi urni kursatilgan. Faqat yana muallifning sovetlar tomonidan amalga oshirilgan rusiylashtirish siyosati bir oz burttirib yuborilgan.
Maqolada uzbek jamiyatida mavjud konservatizm, iyerarhik boshqaruv tizimi va shunga uhshash boshqa salbiy tomonlar tuliq yorotilgan.

Hulosa qiladigan bulsam, maqola anti sovet ruhida yozilganligi aniq, muallif va yozilgan sana ham shundan dalolat beradi.

Hulosa

Hush, uzbeklar rus bosqini va keyinchalik sovet hokimiyati tufayli nimaga erishdiyu, nimani boy berdi?!
Yutuqlar:

1. Rus bosqini tufayli Markaziy Osiyo halqlarini markazlashgan davlat hokimiyati ostida birlashitirish imkoni vujudga keldi. Bu narsani afsuski usha paytda mahalliy honlarning hech biri amalga oshira olmadi. Tarihiy-siyosiy vaziyat taqozosi bilan Rossiya ham iqtisodiy ham harbiy jihatdan markazlashitirishni amalga oshira oladigan yagona kuch bulib chiqdi. Markalzlashganlikning esa ijobiy tomonlari talaygina. Barqarorlik bir oddiy misol.

2. Sovetlardan oldin Uzbekiston hududida istiqomat qilgan etnik jihatdan juda yaqin turli qabila va uruglarni (uzbek, sart, chiqatoi, uygur) bir etnik nom (uzbek) ostida birlashtirish imkoni vujudga keldi. Bu bosqich uzbekiston hududida bir yahlit millatning vujudga kelish jarayoniga yakunlovchi nuqta quydi. Sovetlarning ana shu siyosati natijasi ularoq, hozirda uzbek millat millat sifatida tuliq shakllandi.

3. Uzbekiston hududida amalda bulgan til tizimlashtirilda, malum grammatik qolipga solindi. Bu esa, uz navbatida butun aholinining savodhonligi oshirish strategiyasini ishlab chiqishda ancha samara berdi. Darsliklar, uquv qullanmalari, gazeta va jurnallar yahlit tizimga ega bulgan tilda nashr etilishi bunga bir misol bulishi mumkin.

4. Rus tilining (u hoh majburan, hoh ihtiyoran bulsin) aholiga singdirilishi, uzbeklar uchun evropa madaniyati bilan tanishishga yul ochib berdi. Tarih taqozosi bilan, usha davrda garb madaniyati sharq madaniyatini saviya jihatidan ancha orqada qoldirgan edi.
5. Talim tizimi rivojlantirildi. Maktablarda nafaqat diniy, balki dunyoviy fanlar ham uqitila boshladi. Oliy uquv yurtlarida davlat iqtisodiyotini kutarishga qodir kadrlar tayyorlandi.

Kamchiliklar:

1. Malum davr mobaynida uzbekiston hududida istiqomat qilgan aholi uzga millatga iqtisodiy va siyosiy jihatdan tobe buldi. Mahalliy feodallarning iqtisodiy mustaqilligi quldan boy berildi.

2. Islom keskin tazyiqqa olindi. Ateistik agitatsiya avj oldi. Natijada aholining dinga bulgan munosabati uzgardi. Odamlarda iymon susaydi.

Biroq,

1. Ozodlik va mustaqillikni yuqotgan oddiy halq emas, hukmdorlar va mahalliy feodallar buldi. Oddiy halq bosqinga kup jihatdan befarq bulgan. sababi honliklar urtasidagi tuhtovsiz nizolar halqni befarq bir ahvolga keltirib quygan edi.
2. Rus bosqinidan avval, Islom dini Markaziy osiyoda mahalliy urf-odatlar bilan aralashgan holda, turli bid`at va hurufotga tula edi. Yetarli darajada defektga uchragan Islomiy aqida endilikda progressiv emas, balki aksincha regressiv funkciyani bajarayotgan edi.

Shunaqa gapla ;)

masa

[Sigma]

Kamchiliklar:

1. Malum davr mobaynida uzbekiston hududida istiqomat qilgan aholi uzga millatga iqtisodiy va siyosiy jihatdan tobe buldi. Mahalliy feodallarning iqtisodiy mustaqilligi quldan boy berildi.

2. Islom keskin tazyiqqa olindi. Ateistik agitatsiya avj oldi. Natijada aholining dinga bulgan munosabati uzgardi. Odamlarda iymon susaydi.

3. Xozirgi zamon O'zbekiston hududi avvalgi honliklarning hududi bilan solishtirganda, hoh u hon hukumati ostida, hoh u qaram/vassal honlik darajasida bolsinkim, ancha kichraytirilgan xolda. Shu tufayli hozirgi kunda Markaziy Osiyoning eng nufusli mamlakati ba'zi bir zarur ma'danlardan bahramand emas, aksincha aholi ko'paygan sari ishlov beriladigan yer miqdori kamayib borajak va ehtimolkim yanada ba'zi ijtimoiy keskin xollarni yuzga keltiradi.

[Masanori]

Til:
hozirgi "o'zbek" tilinig haqiqiy o'zbek tili emasligi hammaga ham ma'lum bo'masa kerak. ya'ni biz hozir gapirayotga va yozayotgan adabiy til - bu haqiqiy o'zbek tilining (hozirda eski o'zbek tili deb yuritiladi) muallif iborasi bilan aytganda "Tashkent Iranized dialect"idir. ya'ni 1934 yil, eski o'zbek tili yo'qotilib, o'rniga xalqimizga begona, boshqa turkiy tillardan ancha farqli (na qipchoq/qozoqlarga, na o'g'uz/turklarga tortadigan qo'pol bo'lsa ham aytaman soxta) Toshkent lahjasi adabiy til qilib belgilandi. endi tushunganday bo'layapman, nima uchun 1940 yillarni boshiga haqiqiy o'zbek klassik adabiyot vakillari qirg'ini qilinganligiga. maqsad, turkiy SSSR xalqlarini parokanda qilish, ularning bir birini orasini uzish...


Xulosa:

hozirgi o'zbeklar inkubatordan chiqqan, aralash, nomi o'g'irlangan, tili o'zgartirilgan, tarixi o'chirilgan xalq...


Wolf

fikrimcha, hozirgi uzbekiston hududida amalda bulgan barcha turkiy lahjalarni birlashtirib, bir tizimga ega tilning vujudga keltirgani uchun sovet hukumatidan minnatdor bulishimiz kerak.

[Kaptan-i Derya]

the first known Turkic khanate that inhabited modern day Uzbekistan and Tajikistan is Aq-Hun khanate, i think they are a very interesting khanate
read further here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Huns

[bacha]

the first known Turkic khanate that inhabited modern day Uzbekistan and Tajikistan is Aq-Hun khanate, i think they are a very interesting khanate
read further here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Huns (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Huns)



My friend the source you brought says the following:
K. Enoki believed them to be an Iranian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_peoples) group, like the Tajiks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tajiks) today, while some of their practices remind us of Khwarezmia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khwarezmia), in which case they may have belonged to other speakers of Indo-European languages (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-European_languages), perhaps the Tocharians (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tocharians). There were various theories about their origins documented by contemporary Chinese chroniclers as with Procopius.

and the following:
The Hephthalites, also known as White Huns, were an Indo-European (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-European) and quite possibly an Eastern Iranian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Iranian) nomadic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nomad) people who lived across western China (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China), Central Asia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Asia), Afghanistan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghanistan), Pakistan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakistan) and northwest India (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India) in the fourth through sixth centuries AD. The term Hephthalite derives from Greek (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_language), supposedly a rendering of Hayathelite (from the term Haital = "Big/Powerful" in the dialect of Bukhara (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bukhara)), the name used by Persian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persian_language) writers to refer to a 6th century (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/6th_century) empire on the northern and eastern periphery of their land. As a group they appear to be distinct from the Huns (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huns) who ravaged Europe in the fourth century (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_century) AD.


I don't get how come you switch everything Persian so easily into Turkic? :P

Anyways, I didn't know that they used to call us(tajiks) white Huns. :)

[Kaptan-i Derya]

Bacha those you post is only synthesis, they havent any sources for that but if you readed further,

In China (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China), they were known as Yanda (厌哒 or 嚈噠), also written Yedaiyiliduo/Yeda/Yeoptal, but are documented as having called themselves Hua or Huer (滑), chroniclers recognising that the Chinese Yoptal terms actually came from the name of the Hua leaders. Peoples with similar ethnicons had been present in Central Eurasia for centuries. The Chinese classic Liang Zhigongtu (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liang_Zhigongtu) describes them as of the same origin as the Hua Country (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huaguo). Yanda has been given various latinised renderings such as "Yeda", although the Korean (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_language) pronunciation "Yeoptal" 엽달 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hangeul) is much more recognisable and is certainly a much more archaic form. The later name Hephthal, which some sources indicate originally applied to one of the 5 Yuezhi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuezhi) families from Kushan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kushan), is supposed to have been a name derived from their ruling élite.
Procopius (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procopius) called them "White Huns" while Simokattes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simokattes) calls them Uar (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uar) (reminiscent of their own self-designation) and identifies them as the "real" Avars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avar) of the east and the true political force behind what he calls the "pseudo" Avars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurasian_Avars) who eventually settled down in Transylvania (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transylvania).
Different spellings include Ephthalite, Epthalite, Ephtalite, Eptalite, Hepthalite, Hephtalite, and Heptalite.
India knew the Hephthalites by the Sanskrit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanskrit) name Hūna (svetahuna i.e. White Huns)(perhaps used originally to refer to the Xiyonites (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huns)?). It has been said that their legendary ancestor was Afrasiabus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afrasiab). Armenian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenia) sources also mention a White Hun origin for the Parthian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parthian) Arsaces (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arsaces). According to Simokattes, Alchoni (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alchoni&action=edit) were also a part of their composition, having united under the Yoptal with the "vulturous" Uar (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uar) around AD 460.

Also i dont know where but i found that Koreans claim that Huns where actually "lost korean tribe" LoL :D

[Madalio'g'li]

hozirgi uzbekiston hududida

O'zbekiston hududida, to'g'ri bo'lsa kerak...Ammo Turkiston hududida?! :shock:
"Bir" har doim afzal...Bu yolg'iz O'zbekiston hudidida bo'lsa ham.:)

dağ>tog'>too ... Turkiyalikman, O'zbeksiz, Kirgizdirlar Vassalom.

Hurmat ila...

[Earth.uz]

Juda qiziqarli maqola. Inglizlar bilan ruslar O'rta Osiyo tarixini ancha yaxshi o'rganishgan. Bu ularning mustamlakachilik siyosatini olib borish uchun kerak albatta. Biroq, turklar, xususan o'zbeklar hech qachon o'zligini yo'qotmagan. Bir muddat zug'um ostida yashagan bo'lsa ham, lekin hamisha kelgindilarni hazm qilib yuborgan.

Mana bu ilmiy-badiiy maqolada qiziqarli tarixiy voqealar tasvirlangan. O'qisangiz afsus qilmaysiz.

Hurmat ila,

Riyoziyotchi

Ўзиз ёздизми ё бошқа биров? Профессионал даражада ёзилмабди, баъзи бир стейтментлада линк йўқ.
90% га ишонмайман.

Умуман оганда қонун чиқди, 10 йил национализмга. Тўғри қилишибди.
Энг олий йўл, мани фикримча - бошқалага "подражать" қимаслик ва ўзимиз бирон нарсага эришиш, фақат национализм йўли билан эмас.