Search Results For
No Results Found!
Maps Search Results
When The Mughal During Akbar III 1948-2012 . . .
This is stated on 'National Geographic The 1980s' .May 1983-August 1986 of this CD-ROM.
Ever intent on conquest," the Moguls amassed a realm of as many as 150 million subjects. Babur hailed from Central Asia, where, unable to pluck the plum of Samarkand, he turned south and from Afghanistan took northern India. His heir, Humayun, lost most footholds but regained a base for his indomitable son Akbar, who ruled from Bengal to the doorstep of Persia. Painting attained unrivaled heights under his successor Jahangir and architecture under Shah Jahan. But hostile forces from the south took their toll on the last Great Mogul, Aurangzeb, who saw inexorable dissolution set in.
1483 Babur is barn in Fergana.
1526 Babur defeats Ibrahim S . . .
CENTRAL ASIA TO During Akbar III 1948-2012 . . .
"An Historical Atlas of Central Asia" written by Yuri Bregel. This is stated on Page no 97 of this book
The republics created during the “national delimitation” of Central Asia, with some later changes (see map 46), existed until the dissolution of the Soviet Union in December 1991.
Among the most dramatic political developments during this period was the forced collectivization carried out from 1930 to 1932, affecting most heavily the Qazaqs, who were subjected at the same time to forced sedentarization. This caused huge losses of livestock (slaughtered by the Qazaq nomads) and a widespread famine; in many regions there were spontaneous rebellions suppressed by Soviet troops, and some 300,000 Qazaqs fled to neighboring countries, primarily China. The Qazaqs lost 85% of their beef cattle, 88% of their horses, 93% of their . . .
THE “NATIONAL D During Akbar III 1948-2012 . . .
"An Historical Atlas of Central Asia" written by Yuri Bregel. This is stated on Page no 95 of this book.
Before the revolution of 1917 the program of the Russian Communists (Bolsheviks) on the nationality question in the Russian Empire included the right of each nation of the empire to self-determination up to and including secession. However, after the revolution and during the Civil War this program evolved away from the right of separation toward the idea of a federation of autonomous republics under one central government. The republics
had to be based on the national principle: each of them had to unite within its borders the population that belonged to the same “nation” defined primarily on the basis of their ethnicity, and especially a common language. The idea of a “nation” was, however, totally alien to Central As . . .
REVOLUTION AND During Abu Said Mirza 1451–1469 . . .
On February 27 (by the Julian calendar, as was used in Russia before 1918; March 11 by the Gregorian calendar) of 1917, as a result of the revolution in St. Petersburg, Tsar Nicholas II abdicated and the Provisional Government came to power in Russia. At first this government left in place the old administration in Turkestan, but in April it replaced it with its own Turkestan Executive Committee. At the same time, following the pattern of European Russia, Soviets (“councils”) of Workers’ and Soldiers’ (but not Peasants’) Deputies were organized in the major cities of Turkestan.
They included representatives of only the non-native population; the native population lacked the political organization to represent its interests adequately. In the 1910s revolutionary propaganda was very strong among the Russian soldiers and rail . . .
WESTERN TURKEST During Akbar III 1948-2012 . . .
At the time of the conquest of the Central Asian khanates (see map 32), Russia began to introduce a new administrative system for the conquered territories. This administration underwent several modifications and received its final form only in 1899. After that time, all territories in Central Asia annexed by Russia during the 19th century were divided among five different jurisdictions. The major part of these annexed territories formed the Governorate-General of Turkestan, with its capital in Tashkent, subdivided into five oblast’s (the map gives their official Russian names): Transcaspian, Sir-Darya, Samarqand, Ferghana, and Semirech’e. The oblast’s of Akmola's and Semipalatinsk formed the Governorate-General of the Steppe, and two oblast’s, of Turgay and Uralsk, were directly subordinate to the Russian minister of the i . . .
MONUMENTS OF IS During Akbar III 1948-2012 . . .
"An Historical Atlas of Central Asia" written by Yuri Bregel. This is stated on Page no 87 of this book.
Aq-Saray Ding: mausoleum, 11th–12th cent.
Astana: mausoleum of Sheykh Mukhtar Vali, end of 13th–14th cent.
Baqïrghan: mausoleum of Hakim Ata and Seyid Ata, 15th cent.(?)
Dev-Kesken: complex (3 mausoleums and mosque), end of 15th–16th cent. (on the site of the city of Vezir)
Hazarasp: Friday mosque, 18th cent.
Imarat Baba: complex (3 mausoleums and mosque) near Qosh-Qupïr, 18th–19th cent.
Ismail Baba: mausoleum in the region of Baghat, 19th cent. (?).
Ism-i Mahmud Ata: complex (mausoleum and mosque)
Khanqa: mosque and khanqah of Sayed Ata, 1766.
Khiva: see city map
– minaret of Outlaugh Timur, between 1321 and 1333
– “mausoleum of Fakhr ad-Din Razi”, 12th cent. (as mausoleum was used from the 16t . . .
KHIVA (CITY) IN During Akbar III 1948-2012 . . .
"An Historical Atlas of Central Asia" written by Yuri Bregel. This is stated on Page no 85 of this book.
A settlement (probably an urban one) existed on the site of Khiva as early as the 4th-3rd centuries B.C : as a city it is first mentioned by Arab geographers of the 10th century. The ancient form of the name was Khivaq, which was still in literary use even in the 19th century, but the form Khiva was registered already in the 10th century.
It was then (as now) at the edge of cultivated land, close to the desert; Khiva was then one of the two cities along the southern rim of the oasis of Khorezm, but the other, Hazar asp, was probably of greater importance. In pre-Mongol times the political and economic centers of Khorezm were on the right bank of the Amu-Darya and in the north. It was only after the decline of these cen . . .
SAMARQAND (CITY During Akbar III 1948-2012 . . .
"An Historical Atlas of Central Asia" written by Yuri Bregel. This is stated on Page no 83 of this book.
Samarqand is the most ancient city of Central Asia; the earliest archeological remains on the territory of the city belong to the 7th century B.C. The city first appears in historical records in the accounts of the campaigns of Alexander the Great (see map 3). Greek authors mention the name of the city as Marikana, which is, presumably, a Greek transcription of the original Sogdiana Samarkand. It was the capital of Sogdiana, and was reportedly
destroyed by Alexander, but then rebuilt. There is almost no information about the subsequent history of the city until the time of the Arab conquest (late 7th-early 8th centuries; see map 8), when it was the residence of a Sogdiana ruler with the title ikhshid. Samarqand was capt . . .
BUKHARA (CITY) During Akbar III 1948-2012 . . .
"An Historical Atlas of Central Asia" written by Yuri Bregel. This is stated on Page no 81 of this book.
A settlement on the present site of the city of Bukhara existed as early as the 4th or 3rd century B.C. Bukhara became one of the chief cities of Soghd, and has remained on the same site down to the present time, despite the destruction caused over the centuries by fires and wars, including the Mongol invasion. Bukhara became especially important in the history of Central Asia from the 9th century, as the capital of the Samanids; later it often competed for prominence with Samarqand, but since the time of Abdallah Khan II (from 1557) and until the Russian conquest it was the capital of the Abulkhayrids and then of the Ashtarkhanids and Manghïts, and it became the largest and most prosperous city of Central A . . .
THE QÏRGHÏZ TRI During Akbar III 1948-2012 . . .
The Qïrghïz as a separate ethnic group were first mentioned under this name and on the territory that they presently occupy at the end of the 15th century. Their previous history and especially their relationship to the Qïrghïz of the Yenisey basin, who formed a powerful nomadic state which destroyed the Uyghur Qaghanate in the 9th century (see map 10), are still a matter of controversy in scholarly literature. Several theories have been offered to explain this relationship, but none of them seems to be definitively proven. The prevailing opinion now is that the Qïrghïz of the TienShan included some nomadic groups that inhabited this region for several centuries, as well as other groups, related to the Yenisey Qïrghïz, who migrated to the south from the Altay region later (the time of this migration is uncertain, but it pro . . .
THE QAZAQ TRIBE During Akbar III 1948-2012 . . .
"An Historical Atlas of Central Asia" written by Yuri Bregel. This is stated on Page no 77 of this book.
The Qazaqs inherited the political and social structure of the nomads of the Dasht-i Qïpchaq, which had existed since the Mongol conquest. At the head of their society were the Jochids, the direct agnatic descendants of the eldest son of Chingis Khan, Jochi; they were called aq söyek, “white bone,” and formed a closed estate that was not part of the Qazaq tribal structure. Only the members of this clan, who had the title of töre or sultan, could be elected as khans, sovereign rulers; they also had other privileges that set them aside from the rest of the Qazaqs. Each zhuz had its own khan, elected by an assembly of the sultans and prominent tribal chieftains, and sometimes there was more than one khan in the same zhuz. . . .
THE TURKMEN TRI During Akbar III 1948-2012 . . .
After the Russian conquest and the division of Central Asia between Russia, China, Iran, and Afghanistan, the areas inhabited by individual Turkmen tribes of Central Asia became generally stable. The map shows the regions inhabited by the Turkmen tribes according to early 20th century surveys and mid-20th century ethnographic data. Turkmens of all tribes preserved a strong sense of their separate tribal identities, which was expressed not
only in various elements of material culture (especially female dress and the ornaments of their famous tribal rugs and other textile products), but also in tribal dialects, which were specific to each major tribe. At the same time the Turkmens were well aware that they had a common origin and belonged to the same people, notwithstanding their tribal differences. Until at least the middl . . .