Battle of Middle Boggy Depot

Page contents not supported in other languages.

Khalkhas participated in the massacre? Provide reliable sources

Khalkhas participated in the massacre? Provide reliable sources. Rajmaan, Remove that claim if you don't have a reliable source. 142.255.6.214 (talk) 04:10, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rajmaan please provide a source or stop making biased edits.74.68.118.112 (talk) 23:51, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The Mongol Banners were created in 1635 and Khalkhas weren't added to them after the annexation of 1691. You can see who were in the Mongol Eight Banners here: https://books.google.com/books?id=EtNVMUx9qIIC&lpg=PA71&dq=mongol%20eightn%20banner&pg=PA71#v=onepage&q=mongol%20eightn%20banner&f=false74.68.118.112 (talk) 00:00, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Philg88 Can you say something on this? Rajmaan is posting very biased contents. Khalkha Mongols weren't included in the banner system nor in the Qing army as a group. The Mongol banners were created in 1636-38 and its members were mostly Inner Mongols and it had few Oirats and Khalkhas. https://books.google.com/books?id=EtNVMUx9qIIC&lpg=PA71&dq=mongol%20eightn%20banner&pg=PA71#v=onepage&q=mongol%20eightn%20banner&f=false Also the Qin army was consisted from Manchu, Han Chinese, Mongols, Xibes, Daurs and Evenks. But he's claiming that they were only Manchus and Mongols (Khalkhas).

Also the source said that "Whenever the officials sent by Dzungars went, the Uighurs had to offer meat, wine and women". https://books.google.com/books?id=AzG5llo3YCMC&lpg=PA199&dq=Masson%20dzungars%20Uighurs&pg=PA196#v=onepage&q=Masson%20dzungars%20Uighurs&f=false But Rajmaan changed it to "The Dzungars used Uyghur women for sex." It gives a very different meaning. This kind of behavior shouldn't be tolerated in wikipedia.

Like any army, the Qing army was in practice multinational. Napoleon's army was made up of Germans, Poles, Italians and French, but we still call it "French", because it fought on behalf of the French Empire. Similarly, the Qing army fought on behalf of a Manchu-ruled nation, so it's reasonable to call it "Manchu",, while specifying the two groups given distinct status in it, Hans and Mongols. We definitely don't need to talk about groups like Evenks, who played a marginal role at best. It would seem odd for the Khalka to have supported the Qing in killing the Dzungars, since until a short time earlier they had also been in revolt against the Qing and the two groups had attempted to ally. i can't find anything on the topic in sources. Specifying the Khalkas seems out of place, Mongols is probably sufficient. I tend to agree with regard to your last point; best to use the source's original wording. Then again, you seem to have deleted any mention of the Dzungars' conquest of the Uighurs, which is weird and to justified, so I'll restore that. Rwenonah (talk) 22:36, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Millward says that the Qing army used against the Dzungars consisted of Manchu Bannermen and Mongols. He did not mention anyone else taking part in the campaign. When Han Green Standard Army soldiers or Han Bannermen were involved in Qing wars, it is specifically mentioned by historians. Han Green Standard Army soldiers are mentioned as participating in the Qing conquest of Tibet (under Han General Yue Zhongqi), Han Green Standard Army soldiers are mentioned as participating in the Qing conquest of Altishahr (Southern Xinjiang), and some Han bannermen (Sun Sike) paricipiated in the Kangxi Emperor's first war against the Dzungars at the Battle of Jao Modo in 1696. I can't find any historians mentioning Han Green Standard Army or Han Bannermen participating in Qianlong's genocide against the Dzungars in the 1750's. Historians only mention Manchu Bannermen and Mongols. Millward also wrote that Uyghurs had to provide their women to the Dzungars.Rajmaan (talk) 00:19, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That's kind of implicit when any group conquered another at virtually any point in history. Why does it deserve special mention here? Rwenonah (talk) 00:34, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Because that is the reason why Uyghurs revolted and joined the Qing. Here it is just mentioned that Uyghurs decided to revolt for absolutely no reason at all.Rajmaan (talk) 00:54, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No ... the source says they revolted because of oppressively heavy taxation, not enforced sexual services. there's a significant difference Rwenonah (talk) 01:50, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Just because his opinions are very biased. Also the Millward said "the Qing forces", not "Manchus and Mongols". https://books.google.com/books?id=8FVsWq31MtMC&lpg=PA92&pg=PA96#v=onepage&q&f=false. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.68.118.112 (talk) 05:27, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
a massive Qing retaliation to resolved the Zunghar problem. Qianlong repeatedly urged his reluctant generals to exterminate all the Zunghars except women, children and the elderly, who were to be enslaved to Manchu and other Mongol banners.
Russian governors in Siberia heard that Manchu troops had massacred men, women, and children, sparing no one.
It only stated that the women, children and elderly were spared to be given to Manchus and Mongol Banners. Nothing else. You are adding your own sentences.

It's already in the article (the background section). Also Mongols and the Mongol Banners aren't same thing. You are trying to make them as one thing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.68.118.112 (talk) 05:48, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

China Marches West by Perdue, a source I rate very highly, speaks only of Qing forces so let's leave it like that.  Philg88 ♦talk 07:03, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

According to American historian Benjamin Levi's book "Qing campaign in Zungharia and resettlement of dispersed Oirats in the Ili region", the Qing government recalled Khalkha soldiers before the genocide due to uprising in Khalkha Mongolia (headed by

Chingünjav) and Southern Mongolia. Southern Mongols uprised against the Qing despite the punishment of Sevdenbaljir by the Qing government. Sevdenbaljir, Chingünjav and Amursana conspired to restore Mongolian independence. Chingünjav#Conspiracy_with_Amursana - "During the 1755 Manchu campaign against the Dzungar Khanate, Chingünjav and Amursana conspired to start a rebellion in autumn of the same year". Following information taken from book "History of Mongolia" (2003, Volume IV, Institute of History Mongolian Academy of Sciences): In the 18th to early 20th century, Khalkha Mongolia governed by four Khan: Tushetu Khan (central wing; the most influential khan), Sesten Khan (eastern wing), Zasagt Khan (western wing) and Sain Noyon Khan (southwestern wing). Chingunjav refused to participate in war against Oirats and he went back to home. Zasagtu Khan Balidir, Tushetu Khan Yampildorj, Setsen Khan Manibadar, Sain Noyon Khan Dechinjav and lord Damran also went back to their home. Revolt supported by II Jebtsundamba Khutuktu (1724-1757) and all of 4 khans and II Jebtsundamba Khutuktu poisoned by the Qing spies. Uprising of all Mongols (Oirats, Khalkhas and Southern Mongols) continued for several years, even after the death of their leaders (1757).

General massacre began after the death of Amursana (1757). Until his death Oirats actively battled and some Qing battalions crushed by the Oirats. Rebellion of Mongols continued for several years (1755-1760), the Qing forces in Khalkha raided by Khalkha Mongolian volunteer soldiers. So there was not active participation of Mongols in the Qing campaign.

"Outlines of Chinese history" by Li, Ung Bing; Whiteside, Joseph: "Insurrectionary Movement among the Khalkhas.— About this time, matters were no less grave to the east of the Altai. The Khalkhas had refused to furnish the necessary quota of men and animals for the postal stages throughout their country and threatened to throw in their lot with the Eleuths. The line of communication between Peking and the seat of war was completely broken. Neither reinforcements nor supplies could be forwarded from Peking, unless they were prepared to fight their way from the Great Wall to the Altai Mountains. - Success of General Chao Hui ; Death of Amusana ; and Massacre of the Eleuths.— It was not until Chao Hui reported that he had seen the dead body of Amursana, that Ch'ien Lung consented to end the campaign in Dzungaria. Then followed a general massacre of the Eleuths".

Also the main force of the Qing campaign was Han Chinese soldiers. China laid claim to the Qing inheritance so it was "Chinese genocide", wasn't it?

China: A New Cultural History, By Cho-yun Hsu, Columbia University Press, Jun 12, 2012 :"In the Qianglong emperor's time (r.1736-1795), the quality of the Manchu banner troops declined because of their overindulgence in the pleasures of life, and the empire had to depend on the Chinese troops of the Green Standard Army as its main fighting force".

User:Rajmaan always try to prove that China and Qing empire are same state. Now, this article needs more corrections. My suggestion, redirect this page to other similar pages. According to Wikipedia rule, similar pages must be merged (or deleted). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.26.193.110 (talk) 10:38, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

First of all there are three different groups of Mongols in the Qing. 1. Eight Banner Mongol commoners from Nurhaci's time before 1636, who lived in Jurchen lands in Jilin and Liaodong, these Mongols always stayed in the Banner system. They are not Chahar and not from Inner Mongolia. These Mongol Bannermen and Han Bannermen are allowed by the Chinese government to classify themselves as Manchu because they were part of the Eight Banners. 2. Chahar Mongols from Inner Mongolia, whose leaders were later enlisted in the Eight Banners in 1636. Chahar Inner Mongols are not the same as the original Mongols in the Eight Banners. And all of these Chahar got out of the Banner system after the Qing fell. Inner Mongols do not claim to be Manchus. 3. Khalkha Mongols in Outer Mongolia who submitted to the Qing after Dzungar Oirats invaded them.
The point of view in China is that the Qianlong Emperor is celebrated in China for conquering Dzungaria and opening up the land to Han settlers, and Amursana is viewed as a traitor in current Chinese historiography, who first betrayed his own people and helped the Qing against the Dzungar leader Dawachi for his own power and when he found that Qianlong wasn't going to make him Khan of the Dzungars, he revolted against the Qing. Manchu people were called 中國之人 or Dulimbai gurun i niyalma in Manchu, so the conquest of Dzungaria is viewed in China as ethnic minority citizens of China helping expand China's borders.
The Khalkha Mongol view, which you are propagating, is that Oirats are Mongols and Amursana is a hero of the Mongol people.
The actors in the Dzungar genocide were Manchu and Mongol. Qianlong ordered Mongols Tsengunjav and Chebudengzhabu to massacre the Dzungars, the Manchu Zhaohui led the campaign. Tsengunjav fought for the Qing against the Dzungars and against Chingujav. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7] [8]
Han Bannermen used gunpowder weapons like cannon and muskets during campaigns and that is why they were called Ujen Coohai. Manchu and Mongol Bannermen served as cavalry and archers. The Qing used cavalry in its war against the Dzungars.
Philg88 It says that the Dzungars had Uyghur women raped in the source- Sometimes they even formed gangs of three or five, or a few dozen, seizing livestock, raping women and plundering property and goods.. I believe I was correct in paraphrasing and summarzing that they used Uyghur women for sex.Rajmaan (talk) 18:34, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia isn't censored. If a reliable source says they gang-raped Uyghur women then that should be reflected in the article and not phrased euphemistically.  Philg88 ♦talk 18:44, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
True ... but nor should that be falsely portrayed as the cause for war when the source clearly identifies the cause as taxation.Rwenonah (talk) 21:51, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't object to posts like "Sometimes they even formed gangs of three or five, or a few dozen, seizing livestock, raping women and plundering property and goods" as long as it has a good source. But Rajmaan changed it to "The Dzungars used Uyghur women for sex." It has a totally different meaning. And the main reasons were heavy tax, expensive gifts(it's been mentioned so many times in the Rajmaan's source, yet he ignored it and focused on sex) and slavery (heavy work). https://books.google.com/books?id=AzG5llo3YCMC&lpg=PA199&dq=Masson%20dzungars%20Uighurs&pg=PA197#v=onepage&q=Masson%20dzungars%20Uighurs&f=false — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.68.118.112 (talk) 01:55, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"During the heyday of the Dzungars, they [the Uighurs] were made to work like slaves, forced to abandon their former dwellings to come to Illi and made to rechannel the water to plant paddy. They served and paid taxes without daring to slacken. For years they have been harbouring hatred!"https://books.google.com/books?id=AzG5llo3YCMC&lpg=PA199&dq=Masson%20dzungars%20Uighurs&pg=PA198#v=onepage&q=Masson%20dzungars%20Uighurs&f=false — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.68.118.112 (talk) 02:08, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is what I wrote The Dzungars had conquered and subjugated the Uyghurs during the Dzungar conquest of Altishahr after being invited by the Afaqi Khoja to invade. They imposed heavy taxes on the Uyghurs and used Uyghur women for sex. This led to uprisings and Uyghur rebels from Turfan and Kumul who were rebelling against Dzungar rule joined the Qing in their war against the Dzungars.Rajmaan (talk) 06:05, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Removed unrelated contents. Read the title. Rajmaan pasting same text in many pages. Stop spamming wikipedia. Cho-yun Hsu say Han Chinese were the main force. But it was Qing campaign so we need to use proper term - Qing.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dzungar genocide. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:54, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Dzungar genocide. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Discussion pertaining to altering the name of the article from Dzungar Genocide to Dzungar Utilitarian Genocide

I'm not particularly sympathetic to the Chinese historical light here, but I think we the editors should be more precise with our phraseology. The simple term genocide betrays a conscious effort on the part of the offending parties to "exterminate" as many people as they can, not merely as a byproduct of a military campaign. That's why historians would consider Caesar's first invasions of Gaul simple mass murder, and his latter reprisals as an honest effort at ethnic extermination. Or why we'd differentiate between the high casualties in the first Roman wars against Israel from the later Bar Kohkba rebellion where they went about exterminating hundreds of Jewish villages. Or even why we should consider Stalin's Holodomor efforts and the Holocaust to be instances of genocide, and not Japan's far bloodier but merely rapacious invasion of China. Intent is important, as it's what differentiates the "utilitarian" deaths of many, from the intentional deaths of many. I just believe we owe historical accuracy to the victims of such atrocities. Abattoir666 (talk) 05:27, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:12, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Numbers

What is the estimate of the actual number of people killed? 109.156.177.94 (talk) 03:19, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Text from another article

The following text is from Taranchi, but isn't about that subject matter. Moving it here. Rather sinophobic Daily Mail style writing, tone needs work. Also anti-Uighur, it seems ...Uighuphobic Leo Breman (talk) 20:23, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]


In 1884 – or, according to some sources,[1] 1882 – the Qing dynasty established Xinjiang ("new frontier") as a province, formally applying to it the political systems of the rest of China and dropping the old names of Zhunbu 準部 (Dzungar region) and Huijiang, "Muslimland."[2][3]

The two separate regions, Dzungaria, known as Zhunbu 準部 (Dzungar region) or Tianshan Beilu 天山北路 (Northern March),[4][5][6] and the Tarim Basin, which had been known as Altishahr, Huibu (Muslim region), Huijiang (Muslim-land) or "Tianshan Nanlu 天山南路 (southern March),[7][8] were combined into a single province called Xinjiang by in 1884.[9] Before this, there was never one administrative unit in which North Xinjiang (Zhunbu) and Southern Xinjiang (Huibu) were integrated together.[10]

A lot of the Han Chinese and Chinese Hui Muslim population who had previously settled northern Xinjiang (Dzungaria) after the Qing genocide of the Dzungars, had died in the Dungan revolt (1862–77). As a result, new Uyghur colonists from Southern Xinjiang (the Tarim Basin) proceeded to settle in the newly empty lands and spread across all of Xinjiang.

The Qing dynasty conquered the Zunghar Khanate in 1759 and thereafter perpetrated wholesale massacres and the Zunghar Genocide on the native Dzungar Oirat Mongol population. The dynasty consolidated their authority by settling Han Chinese, Hui, and Taranchi (Uyghur) emigrants in the Dzungar (Zunghar) lands of Dzungaria, together with a Manchu Qing garrison of Bannermen. The Han, Hui, and Taranchi (Uyghurs) worked as farmers on state farms in the region to supply the Manchu garrison with food. The Qing put the whole region under the rule of a General of Ili , headquartered at the fort of Huiyuan (the so-called "Manchu Kuldja", or Yili), 30 kilometres (19 mi) west of Ghulja (Yining). The Qing Qianlong Emperor conquered the Jungharian (Dzungarian) plateau and the Tarim Basin, bringing the two separate regions, respectively north and south of the Tian Shan mountains, under his rule as Xinjiang.[11] The south was inhabited by Turkic Muslims (Uyghurs) and the north by Junghar Mongols (Dzungars).[12] The Dzungars were also called "Eleuths" or "Kalmyks".

Xinjiang at this time did not exist as one unit. It consisted of the two separate political entities of Dzungaria and the Tarim Basin (Eastern Turkestan).[13][14][15][16] There was the Zhunbu (Dzungar region) and Huibu (Muslim region).[17] Dzungaria or Ili was called Zhunbu 準部 (Dzungar region) Tianshan Beilu 天山北路 (Northern March), "Xinjiang" 新疆 (New Frontier),[4] Dzongarie, Djoongaria,[18] Soungaria,[19][20] or "Kalmykia" (La Kalmouquie in French).[21][22] It was formerly the area of the Zunghar Khanate 準噶爾汗國, the land of the Dzungar Oirat Mongols. The Tarim Basin was known as "Tianshan Nanlu 天山南路 (southern March), Huibu 回部 (Muslim region), Huijiang 回疆 (Muslim frontier), Chinese Turkestan, Kashgaria, Little Bukharia, East Turkestan", and the traditional Uyghur name for it was Altishahr (Uyghur: التى شهر, romanized: Altä-shähär).[7] It was formerly the area of the Eastern Chagatai Khanate 東察合台汗國, land of the Uyghur people before being conquered by the Dzungars. The Chinese Repository said that "Neither the natives nor the Chinese appear to have any general name to designate the Mohammedan colonies. They are called Kashgar, Bokhára, Chinese Turkestan, &c., by foreigners, none of which seem to be very appropriate. They have also been called Jagatai, after a son of Genghis Khan, to whom this country fell as his portion after his father’s death, and be included all the eight Mohammedan cities, with some of the surrounding countries, in one kingdom. It is said to have remained in this family, with some interruptions, until conquered by the Eleuths of Soungaria in 1683."[19][20]

Between Jiayu Guan's west and Urumchi's East, an area of Xiniiang was also designated the Tian Shan Eastern Circuit (天山東路; Tiānshān Dōnglù).[23][24] The three routes that made up Xinjiang were - Tarim Basin (southern route), Dzungaria (northern route), and the Turfan Basin (eastern route with Turfan, Hami, and Urumqi).[25]

The Dzungar (or Zunghar), Oirat Mongols who lived in an area that stretched from the west end of the Great Wall of China to present-day eastern Kazakhstan and from present-day northern Kyrgyzstan to southern Siberia (most of which is located in present-day Xinjiang), were the last nomadic empire to threaten China, which they did from the early 17th century through the middle of the 18th century.[26] After a series of inconclusive military conflicts that started in the 1680s, the Dzungars were subjugated by the Manchu-led Qing dynasty (1644–1911) in the late 1750s. Clarke argued that the Qing campaign in 1757–58 "amounted to the complete destruction of not only the Zunghar state but of the Zunghars as a people."[27] After the Qianlong Emperor led Qing forces to victory over the Zunghar Oirat (Western) Mongols in 1755, he originally was going to split the Zunghar Empire into four tribes headed by four Khans, the Khoit tribe was to have the Zunghar leader Amursana as its Khan. Amursana rejected the Qing arrangement and rebelled since he wanted to be leader of a united Zunghar nation. Qianlong then issued his orders for the genocide and eradication of the entire Zunghar nation and name, Qing Manchu Bannermen and Khalkha (Eastern) Mongols enslaved Zunghar women and children while slaying the other Zunghars.[28]

The Qianlong Emperor issued direct orders for his commanders to "massacre" the Zunghars and "show no mercy", rewards were given to those who carried out the extermination and orders were given for young men to be slaughtered while women were taken as spoils. The Qing extirpated Zunghar identity from the remaining enslaved Zunghar women and children.[29] Orders were given to "completely exterminate the Zunghar tribes, and this successful genocide by the Qing left Zungharia mostly unpopulated and vacant.[30] Qianlong ordered his men to- "Show no mercy at all to these rebels. Only the old and weak should be saved. Our previous campaigns were too lenient."[31] The Qianlong Emperor did not see any conflict between performing genocide on the Zunghars while upholding the peaceful principles of Confucianism, supporting his position by portraying the Zunghars as barbarian and subhuman. Qianlong proclaimed that "To sweep away barbarians is the way to bring stability to the interior.", that the Zunghars "turned their back on civilization.", and that "Heaven supported the emperor." in the destruction of the Zunghars.[32][33] According to the "Encyclopedia of genocide and crimes against humanity, Volume 3", per the United Nations Genocide Convention Article II, Qianlong's actions against the Zunghars constitute genocide, as he massacred the vast majority of the Zunghar population and enslaved or banished the remainder, and had "Zunghar culture" extirpated and destroyed.[34] Qianlong's campaign constituted the "eighteenth-century genocide par excellence."[35]

The Qianlong Emperor moved the remaining Zunghar people to China and ordered the generals to kill all the men in Barkol or Suzhou, and divided their wives and children to Qing soldiers.[36][37] In an account of the war, Qing scholar Wei Yuan, wrote that about 40% of the Zunghar households were killed by smallpox, 20% fled to Russia or the Kazakh Khanate, and 30% were killed by the army, leaving no yurts in an area of several thousands of li except those of the surrendered.[38][39][40][41] Clarke wrote 80%, or between 480,000 and 600,000 people, were killed between 1755 and 1758 in what "amounted to the complete destruction of not only the Zunghar state but of the Zunghars as a people."[38][42] 80% of the Zunghars died in the genocide.[43][27][44] The Zunghar genocide was completed by a combination of a smallpox epidemic and the direct slaughter of Zunghars by Qing forces made out of Manchu Bannermen and (Khalkha) Mongols.[45]

It was not until generations later that Dzungaria rebounded from the destruction and near liquidation of the Zunghars after the mass slayings of nearly a million Zunghars.[46] Historian Peter Perdue has shown that the decimation of the Dzungars was the result of an explicit policy of extermination launched by Qianlong,[38] Perdue attributed the decimation of the Dzungars to a "deliberate use of massacre" and has described it as an "ethnic genocide".[47] Although this "deliberate use of massacre" has been largely ignored by modern scholars,[38] Dr. Mark Levene, a historian whose recent research interests focus on genocide,[48] has stated that the extermination of the Dzungars was "arguably the eighteenth century genocide par excellence."[49] The Dzungar (Zunghar) genocide has been compared to the Qing extermination of the Jinchuan Tibetan people in 1776.[50]

Uyghur aspect

Anti-Zunghar Uyghur rebels from the Turfan and Hami oases had submitted to Qing rule as vassals and requested Qing help for overthrowing Zunghar rule. Uyghur leaders like Emin Khoja were granted titles within the Qing nobility, and these Uyghurs helped supply the Qing military forces during the anti-Zunghar campaign.[51][52][53] The Qing employed Khoja Emin in its campaign against the Zunghars and used him as an intermediary with Muslims from the Tarim Basin to inform them that the Qing were only aiming to kill Oirats (Zunghars) and that they would leave the Muslims alone, and also to convince them to kill the Oirats (Zunghars) themselves and side with the Qing since the Qing noted the Muslims' resentment of their former experience under Zunghar rule at the hands of Tsewang Araptan.[54]

Multi-Ethnic Qing China

The Qing identified their state as "China" (Zhongguo), and referred to it as "Dulimbai Gurun" in Manchu. The Qing equated the lands of the Qing state (including present day Manchuria, Dzungaria in Xinjiang, Mongolia, and other areas as "China") in both the Chinese and Manchu languages, defining China as a multi ethnic state. The Qianlong Emperor explicitly commemorated the Qing conquest of the Zunghars as having added new territory in Xinjiang to "China", defining China as a multi ethnic state, rejecting the idea that China only meant Han areas in "China proper", meaning that according to the Qing, both Han and non-Han peoples were part of "China", which included Xinjiang which the Qing conquered from the Zunghars.[55] After the Qing were done conquering Dzungaria in 1759, they proclaimed that the new land which formerly belonged to the Zunghars, was now absorbed into "China" (Dulimbai Gurun) in a Manchu language memorial.[56][57][58] The Qing expounded on their ideology that they were bringing together the "outer" non-Han Chinese like the Inner Mongols, Eastern Mongols, Oirat Mongols, and Tibetans together with the "inner" Han Chinese, into "one family" united in the Qing state, showing that the diverse subjects of the Qing were all part of one family, the Qing used the phrase "Zhong Wai Yi Jia" 中外一家 or "Nei Wai Yi Jia" 內外一家 ("interior and exterior as one family"), to convey this idea of "unification" of the different peoples.[59] Xinjiang people were not allowed to be called foreigners (yi) under the Qing.[60]

The Qianlong Emperor rejected earlier ideas that only Han could be subjects of China and only Han land could be considered as part of China, instead he redefined China as multiethnic, saying in 1755 that "There exists a view of China (zhongxia), according to which non-Han people cannot become China's subjects and their land cannot be integrated into the territory of China. This does not represent our dynasty's understanding of China, but is instead that of the earlier Han, Tang, Song, and Ming dynasties."[61] The Manchu Qianlong Emperor rejected the views of Han officials who said Xinjiang was not part of China and that he should not conquer it, putting forth the view that China was multiethnic and did not just refer to Han.[62] Han migration to Xinjiang was permitted by the Manchu Qianlong Emperor, who also gave Chinese names to cities to replace their Mongol names, instituting civil service exams in the area, and implementing the county and prefecture Chinese style administrative system, and promoting Han migration to Xinjiang to solidify Qing control was supported by numerous Manchu officials under Qianlong.[63] A proposal was written in The Imperial Gazetteer of the Western Regions (Xiyu tuzhi) to use state-funded schools to promote Confucianism among Muslims in Xinjiang by Fuheng and his team of Manchu officials and the Qianlong Emperor.[64] Confucian names were given to towns and cities in Xinjiang by the Qianlong Emperor, like "Dihua" for Urumqi in 1760 and Changji, Fengqing, Fukang, Huifu, and Suilai for other cities in Xinjiang, Qianlong also implemented Chinese style prefectures, departments, and counties in a portion of the region.[65]

Qing rule

The Qing Qianlong Emperor compared his achievements with that of the Han and Tang ventures into Central Asia.[66] Qianlong's conquest of Xinjiang was driven by his mindfulness of the examples set by the Han and Tang[67] Qing scholars who wrote the official Imperial Qing gazetteer for Xinjiang made frequent references to the Han and Tang era names of the region.[68] The Qing conqueror of Xinjiang, Zhao Hui, is ranked for his achievements with the Tang dynasty General Gao Xianzhi and the Han dynasty Generals Ban Chao and Li Guangli.[69] Both aspects of the Han and Tang models for ruling Xinjiang were adopted by the Qing and the Qing system also superficially resembled that of nomadic powers like the Kara Khitay, but in reality the Qing system was different from that of the nomads, both in terms of territory conquered geographically and their centralized administrative system, resembling a western stye (European and Russian) system of rule.[70] The Qing portrayed their conquest of Xinjiang in officials works as a continuation and restoration of the Han and Tang accomplishments in the region, mentioning the previous achievements of those dynasties.[71] The Qing justified their conquest by claiming that the Han and Tang era borders were being restored,[72] and identifying the Han and Tang's grandeur and authority with the Qing.[73] Many Manchu and Mongol Qing writers who wrote about Xinjiang did so in the Chinese language, from a culturally Chinese point of view.[74] Han and Tang era stories about Xinjiang were recounted and ancient Chinese places names were reused and circulated.[75] Han and Tang era records and accounts of Xinjiang were the only writings on the region available to Qing era Chinese in the 18th century and needed to be replaced with updated accounts by the literati.[12][74]

Consequences of the Genocide in Xinjiang's demographics

The Qing "final solution" of genocide to solve the problem of the Dzungar people, made the Qing sponsored settlement of millions of Han Chinese, Hui, Turkestani Oasis people (Taranchi Uyghurs) and Manchu Bannermen in Dzungaria possible, since the land was now devoid of Dzungars.[38][76] The Dzungarian basin, which used to be inhabited by (Zunghar) Mongols, is currently inhabited by Kazakhs.[77] In northern Xinjiang, the Qing brought in Han, Hui, Uyghur, Xibe, and Kazakh colonists after they exterminated the Zunghar Oirat Mongols in the region, with one third of Xinjiang's total population consisting of Hui and Han in the northern are, while around two thirds were Uyghurs in southern Xinjiang's Tarim Basin.[78] In Dzungaria, the Qing established new cities like Urumqi and Yining.[79] The Qing were the ones who unified Xinjiang and changed its demographic situation.[80]

The depopulation of northern Xinjiang after the Buddhist Öölöd Mongols (Dzungars) were slaughtered, led to the Qing settling Manchu, Sibo (Xibe), Daurs, Solons, Han Chinese, Hui Muslims, and Turkic Muslim Taranchis in the north, with Han Chinese and Hui migrants making up the greatest number of settlers. Since it was the crushing of the Buddhist Öölöd (Dzungars) by the Qing which led to promotion of Islam and the empowerment of the Muslim Begs in southern Xinjiang, and migration of Muslim Taranchis to northern Xinjiang, it was proposed by Henry Schwarz that "the Qing victory was, in a certain sense, a victory for Islam".[81] Xinjiang as a unified, defined geographic identity was created and developed by the Qing. It was the Qing who led to Turkic Muslim power in the region increasing since the Mongol power was crushed by the Qing while Turkic Muslim culture and identity was tolerated or even promoted by the Qing.[82]

The Qing gave the name Xinjiang to Dzungaria after conquering it and wiping out the Dzungars, reshaping it from a steppe grassland into farmland cultivated by Han Chinese farmers, 1 million mu (17,000 acres) were turned from grassland to farmland from 1760-1820 by the new colonies.[83]

Settlement of Dzungaria with Han and Uyghurs

After Qing dynasty defeated the Dzungar Oirat Mongols and exterminated them from their native land of Dzungaria in the genocide, the Qing settled Han, Hui, Manchus, Xibe, and (Uyghurs) from the Tarim Basin, into Dzungaria. Han Chinese criminals and political exiles were exiled to Dzhungaria, such as Lin Zexu. Chinese Hui Muslims and Salar Muslims belonging to banned Sufi orders like the Jahriyya were also exiled to Dzhungaria as well. In the aftermath of the crushing of the 1781 Jahriyya rebellion, Jahriyya adherents were exiled.

The Qing enacted different policies for different areas of Xinjiang. Han and Hui migrants were urged by the Qing government to settled in Dzungaria in northern Xinjiang, while they were not allowed in southern Xinjiang's Tarim Basin oases with the exception of Han and Hui merchants.[84] In areas where more Han Chinese settled like in Dzungaria, the Qing used a Chinese style administrative system.[85]

The Manchu Qing ordered the settlement of thousands of Han Chinese peasants in Xinjiang after 1760, the peasants originally came from Gansu and were given animals, seeds, and tools as they were being settled in the area, for the purpose of making China's rule in the region permanent and a fait accompli.[86]

Kulja (Ghulja) was a key area subjected to the Qing settlement of these different ethnic groups into military colonies.[87] The Manchu garrisons were supplied and supported with grain cultivated by the Han soldiers and East Turkestani (Uyghurs) who were resettled in agricultural colonies in Zungharia.[7]

After a revolt by the Xibe in Qiqihar in 1764, the Qianlong Emperor ordered an 800-man military escort to transfer 18,000 Xibe to the Ili valley of Dzungaria in Xinjiang.[88][89] In Ili, the Xinjiang Xibe built Buddhist monasteries and cultivated vegetables, tobacco, and poppies.[90] One punishment for Bannermen for their misdeeds involved them being exiled to Xinjiang.[91]

In 1765, 300,000 ch'ing of land in Xinjiang were turned into military colonies, as Chinese settlement expanded to keep up with China's population growth.[92]

The Qing resorted to incentives like issuing a subsidy which was paid to Han who were willing to migrate to northwest to Xinjiang, in a 1776 edict.[93][94] There were very little Uyghurs in Urumqi during the Qing dynasty, Urumqi was mostly Han and Hui, and Han and Hui settlers were concentrated in Northern Xinjiang (Beilu aka Dzungaria). Around 155,000 Han and Hui lived in Xinjiang, mostly in Dzungaria around 1803, and around 320,000 Uyghurs, living mostly in Southern Xinjiang (the Tarim Basin), as Han and Hui were allowed to settle in Dzungaria but forbidden to settle in the Tarim, while the small amount of Uyghurs living in Dzungaria and Urumqi was insignificant.[95][96][97] Hans were around one third of Xinjiang's population at 1800, during the time of the Qing Dynasty.[98] Spirits (alcohol) were introduced during the settlement of northern Xinjiang by Han Chinese flooding into the area.[99] The Qing made a special case in allowing northern Xinjiang to be settled by Han, since they usually did not allow frontier regions to be settled by Han migrants. This policy led to 200,000 Han and Hui settlers in northern Xinjiang when the 18th century came to a close, in addition to military colonies settled by Han called Bingtun.[100]

Professor of Chinese and Central Asian History at Georgetown University, James A. Millward wrote that foreigners often mistakenly think that Urumqi was originally a Uyghur city and that the Chinese destroyed its Uyghur character and culture, however, Urumqi was founded as a Chinese city by Han and Hui (Tungans), and it is the Uyghurs who are new to the city.[101][102]

While a few people try to give a misportrayal of the historical Qing situation in light of the contemporary situation in Xinjiang with Han migration, and claim that the Qing settlements and state farms were an anti-Uyghur plot to replace them in their land, Professor James A. Millward pointed out that the Qing agricultural colonies in reality had nothing to do with Uyghur and their land, since the Qing banned settlement of Han in the Uyghur Tarim Basin and in fact directed the Han settlers instead to settle in the non-Uyghur Dzungaria and the new city of Urumqi, so that the state farms which were settled with 155,000 Han Chinese from 1760-1830 were all in Dzungaria and Urumqi, where there was only an insignificant amount of Uyghurs, instead of the Tarim Basin oases.[103]

Han and Hui merchants were initially only allowed to trade in the Tarim Basin, while Han and Hui settlement in the Tarim Basin was banned, until the Muhammad Yusuf Khoja invasion, in 1830 when the Qing rewarded the merchants for fighting off Khoja by allowing them to settle down.[104] Robert Michell noted that as of 1870, there were many Chinese of all occupations living in Dzungaria and they were well settled in the area, while in Turkestan (Tarim Basin) there were only a few Chinese merchants and soldiers in several garrisons among the Muslim population.[13][14]

The Oirat Mongol Kalmyk Khanate was founded in the 17th century with Tibetan Buddhism as its main religion, following the earlier migration of the Oirats from Zungharia through Central Asia to the steppe around the mouth of the Volga River. During the course of the 18th century, they were absorbed by the Russian Empire, which was then expanding to the south and east. The Russian Orthodox church pressured many Kalmyks to adopt Orthodoxy. In the winter of 1770–1771, about 300,000 Kalmyks set out to return to China. Their goal was to retake control of Zungharia from the Qing dynasty of China.[105] Along the way many were attacked and killed by Kazakhs and Kyrgyz, their historical enemies based on intertribal competition for land, and many more died of starvation and disease. After several grueling months of travel, only one-third of the original group reached Zungharia and had no choice but to surrender to the Qing upon arrival.[106] These Kalmyks became known as Oirat Torghut Mongols. After being settled in Qing territory, the Torghuts were coerced by the Qing into giving up their nomadic lifestyle and to take up sedentary agriculture instead as part of a deliberate policy by the Qing to enfeeble them. They proved to be incompetent farmers and they became destitute, selling their children into slavery, engaging in prostitution, and stealing, according to the Manchu Qi-yi-shi.[107][108] Child slaves were in demand on the Central Asian slave market, and Torghut children were sold into this slave trade.[109]


After Xinjiang was converted into a province by the Qing, the provincialisation and reconstruction programs initiated by the Qing resulted in the Chinese government helping Uyghurs migrate from southern Xinjiang to other areas of the province, like the area between Qitai and the capital, which was formerly nearly completely inhabited by Han Chinese, and other areas like Urumqi, Tacheng (Tabarghatai), Yili, Jinghe, Kur Kara Usu, Ruoqiang, Lop Nor, and the Tarim River's lower reaches.[110] It was during Qing times that Uyghurs were settled throughout all of Xinjiang, from their original home cities in the western Tarim Basin. The Qing policies after they created Xinjiang by uniting Zungharia and Altishahr (Tarim Basin) led Uyghurs to believe that the all of Xinjiang province was their homeland, since the annihilation of the Zunghars (Dzungars) by the Qing, populating the Ili valley with Uyghurs from the Tarim Basin, creating one political unit with a single name (Xinjiang) out of the previously separate Zungharia and the Tarim Basin, the war from 1864-1878 which led to the killing of much of the original Han Chinese and Chinese Hui Muslims in Xinjiang, led to areas in Xinjiang with previously had insignificant amounts of Uyghurs, like the southeast, east, and north, to then become settled by Uyghurs who spread through all of Xinjiang from their original home in the southwest area. There was a major and fast growth of the Uyghur population, while the original population of Han Chinese and Hui Muslims from before the war of 155,000 dropped, to the much lower population of 33,114 Tungans (Hui) and 66,000 Han.[111]

A regionalist style nationalism was fostered by the Han Chinese officials who came to rule Xinjiang after its conversion into a province by the Qing, it was from this ideology that the later East Turkestani nationalists appropriated their sense of nationalism centered on Xinjiang as a clearly defined geographic territory.[80]

Mongol Oirat unification efforts

Mongols have at times advocated for the historical Oirat Dzungar Mongol area of Dzungaria in northern Xinjiang, to be annexed to the Mongolian state in the name of Pan-Mongolism.

Legends grew among the remaining Oirats that Amursana had not died after he fled to Russia, but was alive and would return to his people to liberate them from Manchu Qing rule and restore the Oirat nation. Prophecies had been circulating about the return of Amursana and the revival of the Oirats in the Altai region.[112][113] The Oirat Kalmyk Ja Lama claimed to be a grandson of Amursana and then claimed to be a reincarnation of Amursana himself, preaching anti-Manchu propaganda in western Mongolia in the 1890s and calling for the overthrow of the Qing dynasty.[114] Ja Lama was arrested and deported several times. However, he returned to the Oirat Torghuts in Altay (in Dzungaria) in 1910 and in 1912 he helped the Outer Mongolians mount an attack on the last Qing garrison at Khovd, where the Manchu Amban was refusing to leave and fighting the newly declared independent Mongolian state.[115][116][117][118][119][120] The Manchu Qing force was defeated and slaughtered by the Mongols after Khovd fell.[121][122]

Ja Lama told the Oirat remnants in Xinjiang: "I am a mendicant monk from the Russian Tsar's kingdom, but I am born of the great Mongols. My herds are on the Volga river, my water source is the Irtysh. There are many hero warriors with me. I have many riches. Now I have come to meet with you beggars, you remnants of the Oirats, in the time when the war for power begins. Will you support the enemy? My homeland is Altai, Irtysh, Khobuk-sari, Emil, Bortala, Ili, and Alatay. This is the Oirat mother country. By descent, I am the great-grandson of Amursana, the reincarnation of Mahakala, owning the horse Maralbashi. I am he whom they call the hero Dambijantsan. I came to move my pastures back to my own land, to collect my subject households and bondservants, to give favour, and to move freely."[123][124]

Ja Lama built an Oirat fiefdom centered on Kovd,[125] he and fellow Oirats from Altai wanted to emulate the original Oirat empire and build another grand united Oirat nation from the nomads of western China and Mongolia,[126] but was arrested by Russian Cossacks and deported in 1914 on the request of the Mongolian government after the local Mongols complained of his excesses, and out of fear that he would create an Oirat separatist state and divide them from the Khalkha Mongols.[127] Ja Lama returned in 1918 to Mongolia and resumed his activities and supported himself by extorting passing caravans,[128][129][130] but was assassinated in 1922 on the orders of the new Communist Mongolian authorities under Damdin Sükhbaatar.[131][132][133]

The part Buryat Mongol Transbaikalian Cossack Ataman Grigory Semyonov declared a "Great Mongol State" in 1918 and had designs to unify the Oirat Mongol lands, portions of Xinjiang, Transbaikal, Inner Mongolia, Outer Mongolia, Tannu Uriankhai, Khovd, Hu-lun-pei-erh and Tibet into one Mongolian state.[134]

The Buryat Mongol Agvan Dorzhiev tried advocating for Oirat Mongol areas like Tarbagatai, Ili, and Altai to get added to the Outer Mongolian state.[135] Out of concern that China would be provoked, this proposed addition of the Oirat Dzungaria to the new Outer Mongolian state was rejected by the Soviets.[136]

Influence of Soviet Union

Many of the Turkic peoples of the Ili region of Xinjiang had close cultural, political, and economic ties with Russia and then the Soviet Union. Many of them were educated in the Soviet Union and a community of Russian settlers lived in the region. As a result, many of the Turkic rebels fled to the Soviet Union and obtained Soviet assistance in creating the Sinkiang Turkic People's Liberation Committee (STPNLC) in 1943 to revolt against Kuomintang rule during the Ili Rebellion.[137] The pro-Soviet Uyghur who later became leader of the revolt and the Second East Turkestan Republic, Ehmetjan Qasim, was Soviet educated and described as "Stalin's man" and as a "communist-minded progressive".[138]  This article incorporates text from Accounts and papers of the House of Commons, a publication from 1871, now in the public domain in the United States.

References

  1. ^ Mesny (1905), p. 5.
  2. ^ Tyler (2003), p. 61.
  3. ^ 从“斌静案”看清代驻疆官员与新疆的稳定 Archived 2016-04-20 at the Wayback Machine
  4. ^ a b Millward 1998, p. 21.
  5. ^ Millward 2007, p. 97.
  6. ^ Kim 2004, p. 218.
  7. ^ a b c Millward 1998, p. 23.
  8. ^ Kim 2004, p. 15.
  9. ^ Newby 2005, p. 5.
  10. ^ Inner Asia, Volume 4, Issues 1-2 2002, p. 127.
  11. ^ Newby 2005, p. 1.
  12. ^ a b Newby 2005, p. 2.
  13. ^ a b Michell 1870, p. 2.
  14. ^ a b Martin 1847, p. 21.
  15. ^ Fisher 1852, p. 554.
  16. ^ The Encyclopædia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences, and General Literature, Volume 23 1852, p. 681.
  17. ^ Millward 2007, p. 97.
  18. ^ Bulletin de la Section de géographie, Volume 10 1896, p. 122.
  19. ^ a b Bridgman & Williams 1837, p. 273.
  20. ^ a b The Chinese Repository, Volume 5 1837, p. 273.
  21. ^ Mentelle, Edme; Brun, Malte 1804, p. 144.
  22. ^ Mentelle, Edme; Brun, Malte 1804, p. 160.
  23. ^ Millward 1998, p. 24.
  24. ^ Millward 1998, p. 126.
  25. ^ Millward 2007, p. 98.
  26. ^ Chapters 3–7 of Perdue 2005 describe the rise and fall of the Dzungar empire and its relations with other Mongol tribes, the Qing dynasty, and the Russian empire.
  27. ^ a b Clarke 2004, p. 37.
  28. ^ Millward 2007, p. 95.
  29. ^ Crowe 2014, p. 31.
  30. ^ Crowe 2014, p. 32.
  31. ^ Roberts 2011, p. 152.
  32. ^ Nan & Mampilly & Bartoli 2011, p. 219.
  33. ^ Nan & Mampilly & Bartoli 2011, p. 219.
  34. ^ Shelton 2005, p. 1183.
  35. ^ Westad 2012, p. .
  36. ^ 大清高宗純皇帝實錄, 乾隆二十四年
  37. ^ 平定準噶爾方略
  38. ^ a b c d e Perdue 2009, p. 285.
  39. ^ Perdue 2005, p. 285.
  40. ^ Wei Yuan, 聖武記 Military history of the Qing Dynasty, vol.4. “計數十萬戶中，先痘死者十之四，繼竄入俄羅斯哈薩克者十之二，卒殲於大兵者十之三。除婦孺充賞外，至今惟來降受屯之厄鲁特若干戶，編設佐領昂吉，此外數千里間，無瓦剌一氊帳。”
  41. ^ Lattimore 1950, p. 126.
  42. ^ Clarke 2004, p. 37
  43. ^ Powers & Templeman 2012, p. 537.
  44. ^ "Archived copy" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on February 12, 2011. Retrieved 2008-04-10.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
  45. ^ Lorge 2006, p. 165.
  46. ^ Tyler 2004, p. 55.
  47. ^ Perdue 2005, pp. 283-285.
  48. ^ Dr. Mark Levene, Southampton University, see "Areas where I can offer Postgraduate Supervision". Retrieved 2009-02-09.
  49. ^ Moses 2008, p. 188
  50. ^ Theobald 2013, p. 21.
  51. ^ Kim 2008, p. 308
  52. ^ Kim 2008, p. 134
  53. ^ Kim 2008, p. 49
  54. ^ Kim 2008, p. 139.
  55. ^ Zhao 2006, pp. 11,12, 13.
  56. ^ Dunnell 2004, p. 77.
  57. ^ Dunnell 2004, p. 83.
  58. ^ Elliott 2001, p. 503.
  59. ^ Dunnell 2004, pp. 76-77.
  60. ^ Millward 1998, p. 4.
  61. ^ Zhao 2006, p. 4.
  62. ^ Zhao 2006, pp. 11-12.
  63. ^ Zhao 2006, p. 18.
  64. ^ Zhao 2006, p. 19.
  65. ^ Zhao 2006, p. 25.
  66. ^ Millward 1998, p. 25.
  67. ^ Millward 1998, p. 245.
  68. ^ Millward 1998, pp. 20-1.
  69. ^ Millward 2007, p. 356.
  70. ^ Millward 2007, pp. 97-8.
  71. ^ Liu & Faure 1996, p. 68.
  72. ^ Newby 2005, p. 254.
  73. ^ Newby 2005, p. 13.
  74. ^ a b Newby 2005, p. 111.
  75. ^ Newby 2005, p. 112.
  76. ^ Tamm 2013,
  77. ^ Tyler 2004, p. 4.
  78. ^ ed. Starr 2004, p. 243.
  79. ^ Millward 1998, p. 102.
  80. ^ a b Liu & Faure 1996, p. 71.
  81. ^ Liu & Faure 1996, p. 72.
  82. ^ Liu & Faure 1996, p. 76.
  83. ^ Marks 2011, p. 192.
  84. ^ Clarke 2011, p. 20.
  85. ^ Millward 2007, p. 101.
  86. ^ Perdue 1996, p. 773.
  87. ^ Rahul 2000, p. 97.
  88. ^ Gorelova, Liliya. "Past and Present of a Manchu Tribe: The Sibe". In Atabaki, Touraj; O'Kane, John (eds.). Post-Soviet Central Asia. Tauris Academic Studies. pp. 325–327.
  89. ^ Gorelova 2002, p. 37.
  90. ^ Gorelova 2002, p. 37.
  91. ^ Gorelova 2002, p. 37.
  92. ^ Gernet 1996, p. 488.
  93. ^ Debata 2007, p. 59.
  94. ^ Benson 1998, p. 21.
  95. ^ Millward 2007, p. 306.
  96. ^ Parker 2010, p. 140.
  97. ^ Millward 1998, p. 51.
  98. ^ Bovingdon 2010, p. 197
  99. ^ ed. Fairbank 1978, p. 72.
  100. ^ Seymour & Anderson 1999, p. 13.
  101. ^ Millward 1998, p. 133.
  102. ^ Millward 1998, p. 134.
  103. ^ Millward 2007, p. 104.
  104. ^ Millward 2007, p. 113.
  105. ^ The Kalmyk People: A Celebration of History and Culture
  106. ^ History of Kalmykia Archived 2011-07-20 at the Wayback Machine
  107. ^ Dunnell 2004, p. 103.
  108. ^ Millward 1998, p. 139.
  109. ^ Millward 1998, p. 305.
  110. ^ Millward 2007, p. 151.
  111. ^ Millward 2007, p. 152.
  112. ^ Znamenski 2011, pp. 27, 28, 29.
  113. ^ Universität Bonn. Ostasiatische Seminar 1982. p. 164.
  114. ^ Lattimore & Nachukdorji 1955, p. 57.
  115. ^ Croner 2009, p. 11.
  116. ^ Croner 2010, p. 11.
  117. ^ Pegg 2001, p. 268.
  118. ^ ed. Sinor 1990, p. 5.
  119. ^ Baabar 1999, p. 139.
  120. ^ Baabar, Bat-Ėrdėniĭn Baabar 1999, p. 139.
  121. ^ Mongolia Society 1970, p. 17.
  122. ^ Mongolia Society 1970, p. 17.
  123. ^ Perdue 2009, p. 493.
  124. ^ Palmer 2011, p. 59.
  125. ^ Dupree & Naby 1994, p. 55.
  126. ^ Znamenski 2011, p. 40.
  127. ^ Znamenski 2011, p. 41.
  128. ^ Andreyev 2003, p. 139.
  129. ^ Andreyev 2014, p. 285,
  130. ^ Znamenski 2011, p. 138.
  131. ^ Znamenski 2011, p. 141.
  132. ^ Sanders 2010, p. 188.
  133. ^ Morozova 2009, p. 39.
  134. ^ Paine 1996, pp. 316-7.
  135. ^ Andreyev 2014, p. 274.
  136. ^ Andreyev 2014, p. 275.
  137. ^ Forbes 1986, pp.172-173.
  138. ^ Forbes 1986, p. 174

Crimes against humanity category removal

Crimes against humanity is a specific legal concept. In order to be included in the category, the event (s) must have been prosecuted as a crime against humanity, or at a bare minimum be described as such by most reliable sources. Most of the articles that were formerly in this category did not mention crimes against humanity at all, and the inclusion of the category was purely original research. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:49, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Dzungar_genocide