Is the Genghis army list misnamed or is "Ghenghis" correct?
In the Later Asian Period.
I haven't seen that spelling "Ghenghis" before - is it an error or do I need to expand my knowledge (happy to be given some quick info if so... it is not a period I have spent much on at all).
Cheers
Dru
Its a pretty minor variant - I've seen it in a couple of places (don't ask me where though).
IIRC Chingis/Chinggis is closer to the Mongolian in transliteration - but that is probably modern Mongolian no doubt. Genghis I think (but may well be wrong) derives from an Arabic transliteration.
LOL, none are correct of course, only the original Mongolian pronunciation would be.
Dschingis Khan (German) or Dzjengis Khan (Dutch) are maybe closer to the original.
I always find it amusing when names are translated – in this case it is not even a name, just a title.
But there doesn't seem to be any consistency :
Why not speak of Mega Aleksandros instead of Alexander The Great ?
Or Charles the Great instead of Charlemagne, etc
And why is Jan Zizka not John Zizka ?
I could go on and on....
:) :) :)
Greetings from Belgium, where most names and places have 3 official (national) names
(Ghent : Gent or Gand - Liege, Luik, Luttich),
I myself live in Antwerpen (or Antwerp, Anvers, Amberes, Antuérpia,....)
Sure there is many spellings of many names. And many languages. There is also conventions.
My understanding is Genghis is the accepted common convention in English.
I have no idea why anunusual (I haven't even seen it before) spelling is used. Can we fix it when the lists are next updated? Feels like it is either a typo or someone trying to be clever and really not.
Dru
As one committed pedant to another, you should have said '..there are also conventions', conventions being plural, not ..'there is also conventions' :) 8) ::)
I will get my hat.....
Mike