Talk:History of Tibet

Wheels

I read that prior to 20th century (?) wheel vehicles were forbidden in Tibet, formally because of offending the Dharma wheel. Actually, wheels may not have been very useful in such a mountainous place. Is it true? I suppose that Lamas have changed their opinion by now.

The Proto-Tibetans

What about the Qiang / Ch'iang / K'iang tribes? Can't we say that they were the Proto-Tibetans?

What about the Quanrong people and Di (ethnic group)? (Weren't they the Proto-Tibetans?)

What about Tibet-Burma, Tibet-Bhutan connections... Where did the Tibeto-Burman languages come from?

& no mention of Former Qin (351-394), Later Qin (384-417) (Can't we say that they were Qiang-Chinese states?); Later Liang (386-403)(Di-Chinese state), Western Xia (Xi Xia / Tangut), Tuyuhun Kingdom (Xianbei-Tibetan state); weren't they the Tibetans?

- Here I'm talking about "the Greater Tibet" (Tibet and parts of Sichuan, Qinghai, Gansu, Yunnan). Who were living in these lands during the Qin Dynasty? Weren't they the Proto-Tibetans? Böri (talk) 15:24, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

I suggest that you read Christopher Beckwith's dissertation, which discusses all extant sources for the history of Tibet before 650. He also disproves the identification with Qiang, with the possible exception of the Fa Qiang. Here is the citation

Beckwith, Christopher I. (1977). A Study of the Early Medieval Chinese, Latin, and Tibetan Historical Sources on Pre-Imperial Tibet. Indiana University PhD Dissertation.

I would be happy to help you find it.Tibetologist (talk) 22:36, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. No, I didn't read Beckwith. I asked many questions... This site tells more about the Qiang people: http://www.imperialchina.org/Tibetan.html Böri (talk) 10:35, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Qiang people again

in French: Les Chinois mentionnent les Tibétains, auxquels ils donnent le nom de Kiang ou de Si-Kiang (Kiang occidentaux), depuis le règne d'Ou-Ouang 1122-1116 av. J.-C.). / Kiang = Qiang & Si-Kiang = Xi Qiang

from this site: http://www.cosmovisions.com/ChronoTibet.htm

also from internet: Tibetan History begins with the incursions of Tibetan K'iang in Central China when Buddha was living in India, / It is said there that the T'u-fan people originated from the K'iang, / in language at least, to the Tibetans: the Ch'iang (K'iang), / The Tibetan used to be called Ch'iang / Originally, the Tibetan people, made up of the Ch'iang tribes / the northeast Tibetan dialects of the Ch'iang Tibetan tribes ... etc. Böri (talk) 15:17, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

One can find many things on the Internet. I think you should read more widely on the issue, particularly Beckwith's dissertation, with an open mind. You could also read van Schaik's, Kapstein's, or Stein's history books which will not support this view. Furthermore, it is simply a methodological issue. How is it that one can identify a pre-literate people mentioned Chinese historical sources with the Tibetans? What evidence would constitute proofs of such an identification? Tibetologist (talk) 16:21, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

"One can find many things on the Internet." = Of course... but were they all wrong? Böri (talk) 08:54, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

I have suggested many things to read and will be surprized if you think the prehistorical Tibetans can be glibly identified with the Qiang after you have read them. If you have not read them further discussion is pointless. (Although you could take a crack at the methodological point.) Tibetologist (talk) 22:27, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

What about Sikkim?

Weren't most of them the Tibetans?

What about this map? Tibeto-Burman languages (in orange)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:South_Asian_Language_Families.jpg Böri (talk) 13:03, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

What is the question exactly? The ruling class of Sikkim was Bhotia, a Tibetan speaking ethnicity. They are still around but have lost prominence since the annexation by India. See History of Sikkim. Incidentally, a new book about the history of Sikkim just came out by Saul Mullard, printed by Brill. Tibetologist (talk) 22:25, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Maybe you mean were the pre-historic Sikkimese Qiang? I don't think anyone has ever suggested that. If you mean were the pre-historic Sikkimese Tibetan, this is simply false. They were Lepcha. Tibetologist (talk) 22:30, 14 November 2011 (UTC)