 |
The Kalmyk American Society
A home for Kalmyk people from around the world
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Census Bureau: What is your ancestry or ethnic origin? |
| Kalmyk |
|
50% |
[ 1 ] |
| Mongolian |
|
50% |
[ 1 ] |
| Other |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 2 |
|
| Author |
Message |
The Ultimate Lurker
Guest
|
 Posted: Sun Jan 21, 2007 4:03 pm Post subject: U.S. Census Bureau Questionnaire |
 |
|
| I've gotten my Census Bureau Questionnaire. I think it's instrusive, but I'll submit it anyway. Just out of curiousity, are Kalmyks reporting themselves as such, or as Mongolians? I've chosen to report myself as Kalmyk to differentiate myself from the Mongolian immigrant community, which has grown tremendously over the last decade. Of course, I'm referring to legal resident aliens. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Altai
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Posts: 20
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 5:33 am Post subject: Re: U.S. Census Bureau Questionnaire |
|
|
How to answer the Questionnaire is really personnal choice, depending on one's own preference. But whoever Kalmyks want to be it does not matter, any other historical sourse, genetical science points out that Kalmyks are Mongol descendants. Note Kalmyks are not Mongolians (as Mongolian is from state of Mongolia), but Mongol descendants.
Kalmyks are certainly Mongol descendants. I am Torgut Mongol.
Beginning of XVII century, under pressure of Halh Mongols Altan Khan
4 Oirat Mongol clan ( Torgut, Dörbet, Khoshut and Olöt (Choros) were struggling among themselves.
Kho Orlök, tayishi of the Torguts, and Dalai Batur, tayishi of a small group of Dörböts, led their people westward at the beginning of the 17th century (1616 ). By some accounts this move was precipitated by internal divisions or by the Khoshot tribe; other historians believe it more likely the migrating clans were seeking pastureland for their herds, scarce in the Central Asian highlands. Part of the Khoshot and Ölöt tribes would join the migration almost a century later.
Although the Oirats could not assert this claim prior to the mid-17th century, they did in fact have a close connection to Chingis Khan by virtue of the fact that Chingis Khan's brother, Khasar, was in command of the Khoshut tribe
The Kalmyk migration had reached as far as the steppes of southeast Europe by 1630.
Almost 400 years isolated development resulted non-mongol identity- Kalmyk -name from their enemies muslim Kyrgyz, Kazakhs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalmyks#Treatment_as_Non-Mongols
| Quote: | From Oirat to Kalmyk
Historically, the West Mongolian tribes identified themselves by their respective tribal names. In the 15th century, the four major West Mongolian tribes formed an alliance, adopting "Dörben Oirat" as their collective name. After the alliance dissolved, the West Mongolian tribes were simply called "Oirat." In the early 17th century, a second great Oirat State emerged, called the Dzungar Empire. While the Dzungars (initially Olöt, Dörbet and Khoit tribes) were establishing their empire in Western Inner Asia, the Khoshuts were establishing the Khoshut Khanate in Tibet, protecting the Gelugpa sect from its enemies, and the Torghuts formed the Kalmyk Khanate in the lower Volga region.
Sometime after encamping, the Oirats began to identify themselves as "Kalmyk." This named was supposedly given to them by their Muslim neighbors and later used by the Russians to describe them. The Oirats used this name in their dealings with outsiders, viz., their Russian and Muslim neighbors. But, they continued to refer to themselves by their tribal, clan, or other internal affiliations.
The name Kalmyk, however, wasn't immediately accepted by all of the Oirat tribes in the lower Volga region. As late as 1761, the Khoshut and Dzungars (refugees from the Manchu Empire) referred to themselves and the Torghuts exclusively as Oirats. The Torghuts, by contrast, used the name Kalmyk for themselves as well as the Khoshut and Dzungars.
Generally, European scholars have identified all West Mongolians collectively as Kalmyks, regardless of their location (Ramstedt, 1935: v-vi). Such scholars (e.g. Sebastian Muenster) have relied on Muslim sources who traditionally used the word Kalmyk to describe the West Mongolians in a derogatory manner. But the West Mongolians of China and Mongolia have regarded that name as a term of abuse (Haslund, 1935:214-215). Instead, they use the name Oirat or the go by their respective tribal names, e.g., Khoshut, Dörbet, Olot, Torghut, Khoit, Bayid, Mingat, etc. (Anuchin, 1914:57).
Over time, the descendants of the Oirat migrants in the lower Volga region embraced the name Kalmyk, irrespective of their locations, viz., Astrakhan, the Don Cossack region, Orenburg, Stavropol, the Terek and the Urals. Another generally accepted name is Ulan Zalata or the "red buttoned ones" (Adelman, 1960:6). |
Genetic evidence for the Mongolian ancestry of Kalmyks
http://www.eva.mpg.de/genetics/pdf/kalmyks.pdf
_________________
Thanks |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Ultimate Lurker
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 27, 2007 11:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
How to answer the Questionnaire is really personnal choice, depending on one's own preference. But whoever Kalmyks want to be it does not matter, any other historical sourse, genetical science points out that Kalmyks are Mongol descendants. Note Kalmyks are not Mongolians (as Mongolian is from state of Mongolia), but Mongol descendants.
|
The poll wasn’t designed to ascertain the citizenship status of Kalmyks. That answer is already known and actually is a separate Census question. The issue I contemplated is how Kalmyks plan to report their ethnic origin on the Census: Kalmyk or Mongolian. That’s pretty simple and straightforward.
With respect to the genetic analysis of Kalmyks, I believe the conclusion of the scientific community is that substantive differences between Kalmyks and Mongolians proper (Khalkha) do not exist. That tells me that the issue the scientists were looking at isn't whether Kalmyks are the descendants of Mongols (we don't need science to prove that) but rather whether the Kalmyk people intermarried to a substantial extent with their Christian and Muslim neighbors. The fact that we didn’t assimilate in large numbers can probably be attributed to the hard work of the Kalmyk Buddhist clergy who kept our cultural identity and uniqueness intact.
| Quote: |
Almost 400 years isolated development resulted non-mongol identity- Kalmyk -name from their enemies muslim Kyrgyz, Kazakhs.
|
By the same token, I can argue that your 300 years under Chinese and Russian occupation disqualifies you as a Mongol as well.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
How many Torguts live in Mongolia? Did your ancestors once live in Russia only to return to Dzungaria in 1771? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
admin
Site Admin
Joined: 09 Oct 2006
Posts: 17
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 04, 2007 12:40 am Post subject: Topic Split |
|
|
| As this discussion was drifting rather far from the original topic, I split it, and moved the rest to Kalmyk History and Culture, where the history discussion can continue. Discussion about the census form can continue here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Altai
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Posts: 20
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2007 2:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="The Ultimate Lurker"] | Quote: |
By the same token, I can argue that your 300 years under Chinese and Russian occupation disqualifies you as a Mongol as well.
|
This is also one of your illogical post
Vietnam was 1000 years under China in ancient time, they are stil Vietnamese
Korea was also under heavy influence of China for centuries, they are still Koreans.
Bulgaria and Armernia were almost 500 years under Ottoman Turks. they are still Bulgarians and Armenians.
History is full of such list
_________________
Thanks |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Ultimate Lurker
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2007 4:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="Altai"] | The Ultimate Lurker wrote: | | Quote: |
By the same token, I can argue that your 300 years under Chinese and Russian occupation disqualifies you as a Mongol as well.
|
This is also one of your illogical post
Vietnam was 1000 years under China in ancient time, they are stil Vietnamese
Korea was also under heavy influence of China for centuries, they are still Koreans.
Bulgaria and Armernia were almost 500 years under Ottoman Turks. they are still Bulgarians and Armenians.
History is full of such list |
Other than the Armenians and the Kurds, please name the native people of Anatolia prior to its conquer by the Ottoman Turks. Why did these people disappear?
Conversely, why didn't the Greeks, Bulgarians, Armenians and Kurds disappear as a people? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Ultimate Lurker
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2007 10:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Altai wrote: |
Almost 400 years isolated development resulted non-mongol identity- Kalmyk -name from their enemies muslim Kyrgyz, Kazakhs.
|
| The Ultimate Lurker wrote: |
By the same token, I can argue that your 300 years under Chinese and Russian occupation disqualifies you as a Mongol as well.
|
| Altai wrote: |
This is also one of your illogical post...
|
Actually, my post makes more sense than yours.
On the one hand, you appear to be arguing that Kalmyks developed a non-Mongol identity due to their isolation. If Kalmyks were isolated as you so stated, then there would not have been any external factors influencing them, other than the environment, viz., their need for water and grass, and a non-Mongol identity would not have developed . So, your statement contradicts itself.
If you're arguing that our Kalmyk name is not of Mongolian origin, then so what. The name Mongol was given to the Altaic tribes of present day eastern Mongolia by the Chinese more than 1,000 ago.
Lastly, if close interaction occurs between unrelated people over a long period of time, then both groups will have influenced each other in one way or another. Your Torguts were under Qing rule since their return to China in 1771. As the Mongols fought for independence from China, your Torgut Prince Palta sided with the Chinese nationalists. He apparently was not a good Mongol but a very good Chinese national. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sanj
Joined: 15 Jun 2007
Posts: 35
Location: hen medne
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 10:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The Ultimate Lurker wrote: | | I've gotten my Census Bureau Questionnaire. I think it's instrusive, but I'll submit it anyway. Just out of curiousity, are Kalmyks reporting themselves as such, or as Mongolians? I've chosen to report myself as Kalmyk to differentiate myself from the Mongolian immigrant community, which has grown tremendously over the last decade. Of course, I'm referring to legal resident aliens. |
it is not mistake. i dubbed message in nearby theme
modern kalmyks is part of oyrad-mongols.
oyrad-mongol in one's part is piece of mongols (as halha-mongols, buryad-mongols, uvur-mongol etc.)
the name "kalmyk" descended from t:urk word with root "kal", that mean remainder (residue, remnant; vestige; remains).
selfname of kalmyks was oyirad (in todo bichig) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sanj
Joined: 15 Jun 2007
Posts: 35
Location: hen medne
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powred by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
