Talk:Burial place of Genghis Khan

Death High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Mongols High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mongols, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mongol culture, history, language, and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MongolsWikipedia:WikiProject MongolsTemplate:WikiProject MongolsMongols articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archaeology Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

History Low‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Middle Ages Low‑importance

	Middle Ages portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from Burial place of Genghis Khan appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 9 October 2006. The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that according to Mongolian folklore, the escort that buried Genghis Khan committed suicide to make his grave impossible to find?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2006/October.

Wikipedia

Dab,

as you have a google account, you may check this and this. We may add Ratchnevsky's book to references. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 14:23, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

yes, well done! dab (ᛏ) 12:40, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Folklore

Um, how does the referenceless "folklore" explain the claims about the river diversion and the horses trampling when everyone involved or in contact with the funeral procession was supposed to have been killed or suicided? Bwithh 19:33, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it really doesn't. This is one of the problems with "folklore", "legends", and the like. It is true that this story is part of folklore. What is not evident is whether this folklore has any factual basis. If it does not, then it is debatable whether it is encyclopedic, as it is not verifiable. Rlquall 22:01, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The theory of relativity is not verifiable, either. Please consider prodding the article. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 06:26, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you know actually, it is very verifiable that the theory of relativity is an important theory[1]. And I never suggested prodding this article, so I'm not sure what's with that sarcastic comment Bwithh 10:57, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

https://thedailyguardian.com/genghis-khans-tomb-bolsters-mystery-of-his-timeless-legacy/ here it states Genghis Khan´s tomb has been discovered 89.114.69.147 (talk) 06:46, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

these are two variants. (1) gallopping over the grave and (2) diverting a river over it. I have read (1) offwiki but not (2). Obviously both (1) and (2) should be sourced. As for "how can anyone even know" (apart from that it doesn't matter if it's logical as long as we can establish it is folklore), how about the funeral train telling beforehand what they were going to do? "goodbye, we'll go and bury the Khan in a secret place and then kill ourselves"? I see nothing impossible about such a scenario. dab (ᛏ) 08:43, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

well okay thanks. I wondered if the there was an explanation in the folklore... didn't say that it was impossible Bwithh 10:59, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another poorly written garbagy article about Mongols with footnotes that lead to articles that don't even discuss what they are supposed to be proof of...... One day I'm going to actually make an account and rewrite all the Mongol articles because this is just sad. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.173.101.236 (talk) 06:26, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Khan Khan Genghis Khan killed by Multan Rana

Genghis Khan was killed by Rana Jashraj[[2]][[3]]Bhavinkundaliya (talk) 14:25, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Probably, not there looking for the tomb of Genghis Khan - that's it, and can not find. Very most likely, it is in other part of Eurasia. However, like most of the descendants of his own people, living now among the Bashkirs, Kazakhs, Tatars, Uighurs and other Turkic peoples, related to them. There are many data confirms this, for example: ""...Learning about the religious beliefs of the Tatar khan... Abu Bakr said: "Not to be circumcised and not to go to Hajj is not the obstacles in order to be a faithful and true monotheist. Agreeing with the necessary regulations of Islam, the Tatar Khan became a believer, he is our brother in faith! Go back to him, give him this letter and tell him our greetings. ... But having arrived in Kazan, Muaz learned that Chingiz Khan left for Astrakhan. Muaz is immediately went to Astrakhan. There he was informed that Chingiz Khan recently died and was buried (there)" (Evliya Celebi)"". (from the book "Forgotten Heritage of Tatars", by Galy Yenikeyev). See on Smashwords company website: http://www.smashwords.com/books/view/175211 Antonio von Horde (talk) 19:39, 6 January 2013 (UTC) Antonio von Horde (talk) 19:40, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Historical Accounts: "An Arrow To The Knee"? Really? Citation Needed

Historical Accounts: "An Arrow To The Knee"? Really? Citation Needed. 198.111.164.158 (talk) 23:17, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Archeologists claim they've found the tomb

Öndörkhaan| Construction workers employed in road building near the Onon River in the Khentii province of Mongolia, have discovered a mass grave containing the remains of many dozens of human corpses lying upon a large rudimentary stone structure. Forensic experts and archaeologists were called on the site, which was revealed to be a Mongolian royal tomb from the 13th century that the scientists believe to be Genghis Khan’s.

<ref>http://worldnewsdailyreport.com/mongolia-archaeologists-unearth-tomb-of-genghis-khan/ </ref> Darci (talk) 06:57, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

World News Daily? LOLDgndenver (talk) 14:25, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The claim has reappeared in thuylien (2 August 2022). "Mongolia: Archaeologists Unearth Tomb Of Genghis Khan". inloc.info. Archived from the original on 4 August 2022.. Note that the information is a rehash of the above information. There are two images in the article that were reused from elsewhere. The Skeletons are from a Viking grave unearthed in 2010[4] and a supposed image from inside the tomb is actually of a Chinese tomb discovered in 2013[5].--Auric talk 12:21, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I tried the worldnewsdailyreport link and got a message that it's unreachable. The thuylien (inloc.info) link above is to the wayback machine, so you can read it, but the original is unreachable. However the story is showing up on other sites. I've found it at Radio Free Europe: Mongolia: Archaeologists Say They May Have Found Genghis Khan Burial Site. And at the what looks like a legitimate news site from India called The Daily Guardian: Genghis Khan’s tomb bolsters mystery of his timeless legacy. I don't know for sure because it doesn't have an "About Us" link. It's also on a wacky UFO site called alienstar.net: Archaeologists Uηearth the Tomb of Geηghis Khaη iη Moηgolia - Revealed. (That site replaces the n character with the greek lower case eta character, 0x03b7, which guarantees its articles won't be found by search engines. I don't know how I found it.)

I'm not clear on why this story isn't getting picked up on more legitimate news sites. Until it does, we should hold off on putting it in the article. —MiguelMunoz (talk) 00:38, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This story has appeared also in 2022 on this site Archaeologists Unearth Tomb Of Genghis Khan. A reference could be included to make clear none of the content of this article has been substantiated or linked to a reliable source, and it's very likely it has been fully invented to attract clicks on advertising financed sites Jmdwp (talk) 15:22, 27 February 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Sources for future article expansion

Xinhua (27 Dec 2006), "Ancient Fresco May Show Genghis Khan Funeral", Official site, Beijing: China Internet Information Center{{citation}}: CS1 maint: ref duplicates default (link).

even discrediting the claim that it is Genghis himself in the art, it's still useful to discuss the rituals that would have surrounded the burial. — LlywelynII 07:04, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Jesuits?!?

The article contains the following uncited claim: "In a 15th-century account of a French Jesuit, he found a reference to an early battle where Genghis Khan, at the time still known as Temüjin, won a decisive victory." As the Society of Jesus was not founded until the 16th century, one can only conclude that either the date or the order of this mysterious French priest have been mistaken, or that the entire claim is nonsense. 78.147.196.171 (talk) 14:58, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]