Explorer Plans Hunt For Genghis Khan's Long-Lost Tomb

Velcroman1 writes "The tomb of brutal Mongolian emperor Genghis Khan — the one who created the world's most powerful empire by raiding and invading across Eurasia, not Kirk's nemesis — is a lost treasure archaeologists have sought for years. And one man thinks he knows where it is. Last fall Alan Nichols, the president of The Explorers Club, mapped out possible locations for the tomb of Khan (also known as Chinnggis Qa'an). His hypothesis: Khan's tomb is located in the Liupan Mountains in Northern China, where the emperor who was born in 1162 and is said to have perished from an arrow wound in August 1227. Next fall, Nichols plans the next phase of his research: pinpointing Khan's exact resting place. 'Ghengis Khan's tomb is my obsession,' Nichols, a noted authority on the emperor, said recently. 'I couldn't stop thinking about it. But I'm not happy just reading about it, or knowing about it. I need to have my feet on it.'"

Comments

after all these years

[deodiaus2]

Will it be possible to identify his tomb after all these years? How are we sure that even if we find such an ornately decorated tomb, that Khan is the one buried there, instead of some relative or whatnot. I don't know, but many cultures have superstitions about their corpse in the afterlife, so that might be a motivation to "hide" the real corpse?

Re:after all these years

[avandesande]

Ghengis was known for breaking many Mongol social customs which is one of the reasons he was so successful. The legend goes that in an effort to hide the tomb all of the workers were executed and then the soldiers familiar with the area were killed as well....

Re:after all these years

[TapeCutter]

Yep, they also found King Richard under a car park. Really, if you want a tomb to last you have to go with a pyramid.

Re:after all these years

[TapeCutter]

There' a really good foreign film about his life. He defeats his childhood enemy during a thunderstorm because he is the first Mongol not afraid of lightning and his bravery inspired his soldiers and freaked out the enemy. Later his enemy asks why he (as a Mongol) is not afraid of lightning and he replies "You forced me to live outside as a child". They still have his "royal staff" in a museum somewhere, it's a long pole with rings mounted on it. One tail hair from each horse in his army is tied to the rings, he had enough hair to make the pole look like some sort of shop display for wigs.. It was a far more impressive symbol of power than a jewel encrusted gold stick.

Re:after all these years

[kamapuaa]

Genghis Khan didn't break many social customs. He was a product of his culture, just more successful than others. He wasn't the first to create a Mongol confederation and attempt to take over the known world, his uncle had done the same thing.

The hidden tomb idea is a classic Chinese move (literally). Probably other cultures as well. But not a Mongol custom, which didn't have a large social structure of ditch diggers. He theoretically may have done it, but it seems likely it was just conflated with all the Chinese emperors who did the same thing.

Mongols wouldn't have done a sky burial, where the body is consumed by animals. That's a move of (modern) Tibetan Buddhism, and Genghis Khan was not a Tibetan Buddhist.

It is known that his tribe buried people in unmarked graves, and that this is what Genghis Khan asked for. It's likely what happened to him.

The idea that Genghis Khan came to power because he was the first Mongol not afraid of thunderstorms is infantile.

Fox News "noted authority"

[T.E.D.]

Just because someone at Fox News put "Noted Authority" on the Chiron under a TV guest doesn't mean they know what they are talking about.

I actually did a fair bit of research myself into this a few months back, to answer a question on History.SE. There is indeed a romantic notion of there being some undiscovered tomb with untold wealth in it. Then there's the reality:

• The Mongols didn't bury their dead. They practiced Open-air "burials".

  Depositing the corpse in the steppe was meant to sacrifice it to predatory animals. According to Mongolians this is the last virtous act a person can carry out. This idea is much older than Lamaism and exhibits a really strong shamanistic element of spiritual thought.

• All the assorted legends about where a supposed tomb might be came out of China (not Mongolia, where it happened) about 300 years after the fact, and describe things much closer to Chinese burial practices than Mongolian. In other words, they show all signs of being entirely made up.

Re:Fox News "noted authority"

[ElectricTurtle]

While I'm inclined to agree and think you should be modded up, allow me to play devil's advocate on this. The Great Khan was exposed to a lot of other cultures in his conquests, and it's possible that he might have become enamoured with the more aggrandizing foreign cultural traditions related to death and burial. Alexander the Great certainly succumbed to a great deal of personal syncretism as a result of his exposure to foreign influences in his conquests. Not that this conjecture proves anything, but I think the possibility shouldn't be dismissed until everything has been fully explored.

Re:Fox News "noted authority"

[ElectricTurtle]

I see I wasted my time being civil. Apparently it did not occur to you that there may be as yet undiscovered primary sources (or even contemporary secondary sources) which will not be brought to light without a concerted effort to find them. My earlier reference to Alexander was not wholly sourced in his precedent for syncresis, but also in the loss of his tomb, which was actually a well known tourist destination in the ancient world. Even Alexander's tomb which was known to exist and fairly well recorded in various accounts was lost to history during the religious upheavals between the fall of paganism and the rise of Christianity and Islam in North Africa. Even today the fate of his remains and their attendant monument is widely disputed. However, much of the source material for these investigations was unknown before the last century, and commensurately there may be similar materials contemporary to the Great Khan which have yet to be found or at least yet to be understood.

Re:This is not the tomb you seek!

[Penguinisto]

Dunno - given the sheer number of cultures that the Mongols absorbed, there's likely something in there somewhere (even Orthodox or Nestorian if you want to stay Christian about the artifact in question.)

As a bonus, instead of Nazis**, he could hunt it down before the Japanese Army gets it (given that they started invading China and Mongolia as early as the mid-1930s), or if you want to make minds go 'splodey, get it before the Red Army does, and have it be the (way) earliest bit of Cold War action.

** incidentally, the Nazis did launch a real-world expedition into Tibet and roundabouts looking for the whole racial origin thing, so they'd work as bad guys too, depending on what specific region in Asia we're talking about (though Khan's tomb would likely no longer be of much relevance, methinks.)

Re:What about Jesus's ?

[ShanghaiBill]

The Wikipedia page talks plenty about how convinced scholars are (who have a vested interest in that answer) but doesn't actually cite any evidence

You need to improve your reading comprehension skills. The passage cites a reference to Roman documents that mention the crucifixion of Jesus. What are you expecting? A giant Iridium plated monument that says "Jesus Was Here"? Jesus had a tremendous influence on future generations, but very, very little on his own generation. So there is little contemporaneous evidence, just like there is little direct evidence that 99.99% of any other specific first century individuals existed. But Christianity began to take off when there were still people alive that would have had a memory of him, and there were plenty of opponents of what, at the time, was an extremist cult. Yet none of them denied that he had lived.

There is strong, but not conclusive, evidence that he was a real person. There is no evidence that his existence was fabricated. Many of his disciples were tortured and crucified, yet they refused to denounce him. Why would they do that, for something that (in your opinion) they had made up?