Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

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

samzenpus posted about 8 months ago | from the awesome-digs dept.

Science 243

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.'"

cancel ×

243 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

This is not the tomb you seek! (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45456161)

*gestures*

Re:This is not the tomb you seek! (2)

bob_super (3391281) | about 8 months ago | (#45456317)

Wrong Harrison Ford franchise
Considering the size of his empire, I'm surprised there hasn't been an Indiana Jones (let's say a fourth movie, since the third was really good) about preventing the Nazis from finding it.

Re:This is not the tomb you seek! (4, Insightful)

Sique (173459) | about 8 months ago | (#45456447)

Probably because everything Indiana Jones seeks for has religious motives (and I include the aliens in the fourth one into religion) and magical powers. Gengis Khan instead is mainly a historical and political person. If there are any religious connotations around him, then they are without any real relevance to us. Gengis Khan might play a role in shamanistic rituals for mongolian tribes, but the main intended audience of Indiana Jones movies are not mongolians.

Re: This is not the tomb you seek! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45456463)

The Shadow (1995) begs to differ.

Re: This is not the tomb you seek! (1)

Sique (173459) | about 8 months ago | (#45456843)

The Shadow does not in any way implore Gengis Khan as a plot vehicle or a religious symbol.

Re: This is not the tomb you seek! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45456923)

Wrong. Lurk moar.

I was speaking of the movie.

Quote : Cranston is challenged by Shiwan Khan (John Lone), another student of the Tulku who possesses even sharper powers, but had successfully resisted redemption and hence had stayed evil. Khan is the last descendant of Genghis Khan and plans to fulfill his ancestor's goal of world domination. He offers Cranston an alliance, sensing that bloodlust and a thirst for power still exist in his heart,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shadow_(1994_film)

Re:This is not the tomb you seek! (4, Interesting)

Penguinisto (415985) | about 8 months ago | (#45456561)

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:This is not the tomb you seek! (0)

Sique (173459) | about 8 months ago | (#45457069)

I don't think you really understood what I meant.

Of course we can construct some religious importance into Gengis Khan even for Westerners, but in general, there is none right now, quite different from the Ark of the Covenant or the Chalice of the Last Supper. You don't need any lenghty explanation (to us iudaeo-christian westerners) why those two objects could have world threatening magical powers. And aliens with supernatural abilities are a wellknown plot vehicle anyway, so no need to construct something new in the fourth movie either. The three crystals in the Temple of Doom were not hunted for by Nazis, making this movie quite different to the three others. In this movie, the power of the artifact is confined to the environment of the village and the Temple, which plays down on the magical abilities and thus saves the movie from a lengthy explanation of the importance of the artifact.

So either Indiana Jones and the Skull of the Khan is more like Temple of Doom (no Nazis, no World Domination from access to the Artifact), or it would be quite different from the current movie plots.

Re:This is not the tomb you seek! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45457019)

I don't know; if warehouse 13 had been allowed to continue they may have eventually found that "Genghis Khan's sword" was an artifact...

Re: This is not the tomb you seek! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45456455)

you cheat dr jones

after all these years (4, Interesting)

deodiaus2 (980169) | about 8 months ago | (#45456199)

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 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45456211)

Would it matter?

Re:after all these years (4, Insightful)

fredrated (639554) | about 8 months ago | (#45456245)

Phillip of Macedon's tomb was found and identified. Science can do amazing things.

Re:after all these years (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45456459)

http://archive.archaeology.org/online/features/macedon/

Re:after all these years (2)

fredrated (639554) | about 8 months ago | (#45456629)

Thanks for the update; since determined it wasn't Phillip after all.

Re:after all these years (5, Funny)

Anne_Nonymous (313852) | about 8 months ago | (#45456377)

If the remains are genetically related to half of Eurasia, it's the real Genghis.

Re:after all these years (3, Informative)

tibit (1762298) | about 8 months ago | (#45456685)

We may not be able to identify his tomb, but sure as heck we can identify his ancestors [radiolab.org] ! It so happens that this guy had about half a thousand children that have descendants that survive today. Rape and pillage he did, allrighty. There's more than ten million of those descendants alive today, by the way. Genetics for the win, I say.

Joke all you want (5, Insightful)

Dareth (47614) | about 8 months ago | (#45456779)

Joke all you want, but according to a Darwinian fitness perspective he was one of the most successful humans to have ever lived.

Re:Joke all you want (4, Funny)

VortexCortex (1117377) | about 8 months ago | (#45456887)

I used to be a Darwinian champion like you,
Then I took an arrow in the knee.
-- Chinnggis Qa'an

Re:after all these years (4, Informative)

Rinikusu (28164) | about 8 months ago | (#45456823)

Khan has a unique genetic marker that could be identified in a DNA test: http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/11/science/a-prolific-genghis-khan-it-seems-helped-people-the-world.html [nytimes.com]

That would at least narrow him down to his family, if found.

I always thought, though, that Genghis chose a "true" Mongol's burial: dragged on a pallet up a mountain, left where his body slid off the pallet and then fair game for all the critters of the wild to pick clean...

I couldn't stop thinking about it. (1)

ColdWetDog (752185) | about 8 months ago | (#45456209)

"But I'm not happy just reading about it, or knowing about it. I need to have my feet on it.'"

Sounds liike somebody needs to double up on their meds.

Better Living Through Chemistry

Re:I couldn't stop thinking about it. (1)

operagost (62405) | about 8 months ago | (#45456259)

Wow... so the term "lab rat" is quite apt.

Archaeologists are a bit more hands-on.

What about Jesus's ? (0)

deodiaus2 (980169) | about 8 months ago | (#45456221)

Next story, some Jewish archaeologist will claim to have found Jesus's body!

Re:What about Jesus's ? (0)

i kan reed (749298) | about 8 months ago | (#45456247)

1. Don't be dumb, it'd be bones if anything.
2. Bogus religious related "finds"(that duplicate previous bogus religious related finds) happen basically every few months.

Re:What about Jesus's ? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45456297)

Genghis Khan existed. Jesus not.

That's the difference.

Re:What about Jesus's ? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45456329)

Virtually all historians, whether Christian, atheist or of some other religion, hold that a man Jesus existed, even if his biography is just so much myth accreted around the historical figure.

Re:What about Jesus's ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45456363)

Yes, my plumber next door Jesus Hernandez is a man named Jesus.

Life of Brian, anyone?

Re:What about Jesus's ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45456627)

He wasn't a messiah, just a very naughty boy.

Re: What about Jesus's ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45456741)

NO ONE is a messiah.

Re:What about Jesus's ? (2, Informative)

TechyImmigrant (175943) | about 8 months ago | (#45456417)

>Virtually all historians, whether Christian, atheist or of some other religion, hold that a man Jesus existed, even if his biography is just so much myth accreted around the historical figure.

All the honest ones are clear that there is no direct evidence and many of the myths clearly relate to different people at different times. There have been many people names Jesus. With high probability, there has never been magic Jesus, born of a virgin, 2000 years ago, who could perform miracles.

Re:What about Jesus's ? (1)

Archangel Michael (180766) | about 8 months ago | (#45456477)

And to think, this imaginary person will have a greater effect on Mankind than you'll ever have. That is the true power of magic!

Re:What about Jesus's ? (2)

TechyImmigrant (175943) | about 8 months ago | (#45456709)

Actually it is the response of people to other people that has had a great effect.

At least I can claim to have done less damage. Yet.

Re:What about Jesus's ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45456481)

He was my gardener.

Re:What about Jesus's ? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45456337)

>Genghis Khan existed. Jesus not.

Jesus is everywhere, tending gardens across the United States. Cash only.

Re:What about Jesus's ? (2, Insightful)

aristotle-dude (626586) | about 8 months ago | (#45456359)

Genghis Khan existed. Jesus not.

That's the difference.

Repeating a fallacy often does not make it true.

Very few reputable scholar who have no axe to grind dispute that there was a historical Jesus figure.

If I had a dime for every time I saw the same thing stated verbatim, I would be a very rich man.

Re:What about Jesus's ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45456841)

Very few reputable scholar who have no axe to grind dispute that there was a historical Jesus figure.

Very few reputable scholars would bother on that topic at all; they have better things to do then butt heads with butt heads.

Re:What about Jesus's ? (4, Informative)

ShanghaiBill (739463) | about 8 months ago | (#45456391)

Genghis Khan existed. Jesus not.

There is strong evidence [wikipedia.org] that Jesus existed. He may not have been divine, but he was almost certainly a real person.

Re:What about Jesus's ? (3, Insightful)

TechyImmigrant (175943) | about 8 months ago | (#45456439)

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. It doesn't pass the sniff test.
 

Re:What about Jesus's ? (1)

RenderSeven (938535) | about 8 months ago | (#45456533)

There are too many gaps in the historical record for him to be made up. If he was fiction there would be better records.

Re:What about Jesus's ? (1)

TechyImmigrant (175943) | about 8 months ago | (#45456727)

I'm not sure which logical fallacy that one falls into. Maybe we need a new one.
    The fallacy of the missing documentation.
It could work for software too.

Re:What about Jesus's ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45456943)

There are too many gaps in the historical record for him to be made up.

I'm not sure which logical fallacy that one falls into.

Works for macro-evolution too.

Re:What about Jesus's ? (4, Informative)

alexander_686 (957440) | about 8 months ago | (#45456649)

The guy cited the wrong source. Here is a better one:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sources_for_the_Historicity_of_Jesus [wikipedia.org]

Basically what it boils down to is that there are multiple independent sources attesting to his existence.
See Q Source and the Gospel of Mark. Or the Gospel of Thomas. Those are the 2 big ones I can think of. I will grant you that they were oral traditions before being written traditions. I will grant you that there are differences and contradictions between the various sources. But the differences are consistent with the way that oral history spreads.

Re:What about Jesus's ? (4, Interesting)

ShanghaiBill (739463) | about 8 months ago | (#45456659)

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?

Re:What about Jesus's ? (2)

higuita (129722) | about 8 months ago | (#45456911)

You know, it's always hard to prove things, just by accounting other people stories. To really prove something you have to show evidences!

Now prove that Genghis Kahn existed!!! It's not easy, and remember that he is +1000 years more recent.
Lets do the opposite... prove that Hercules/ Héracles didn't exist.

when all you have are stories, it's very hard to prove anything. Yes, you can prove some events, but what come first, the event or the story/person?

by the way, do you really exist? are you sure!! prove it!! -> cogito ergo sum [wikipedia.org] :D

Re:What about Jesus's ? (3, Funny)

bitt3n (941736) | about 8 months ago | (#45456667)

Genghis Khan existed. Jesus not.

There is strong evidence [wikipedia.org] that Jesus existed. He may not have been divine, but he was almost certainly a real person.

Imagine if Jesus had hooked Genghis up with his breakthrough water-walking technology. Khan could have taken over the entire world. 100% of the earth's population would be related to him, rather than 10% of Asia or whatever it is. You couldn't ask a girl out without then discovering she's some distant relative. Earth would become Planet Redneck.

Re:What about Jesus's ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45456395)

Wikipedia:

Virtually all modern scholars of antiquity agree that a historical Jesus existed.

Where's your evidence that he didn't? You are either trolling or dumb.

Re: What about Jesus's ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45456571)

Yes. Some insignificant farm boy whose mother lied about her adultery (and who got away with it) probably existed somewhere in the Judea/Palestine area.

It's probably the longest running joke ever.

Joseph : "Darling, why are you pregnant? You had headache since month!"

Maria : "Well Joseph" *blushes, thinks quickly* "there was that light...and...and he said lie down...and he is divine....and. Well our baby will be a god"

Joseph. "Awesome. Well done"

Maria "...."

Christianity. The only religion to be founded on either rape or adultery. And a big lie. And condemns both as sins.

Re:What about Jesus's ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45456611)

Virtually all modern scholars of antiquity agree that pink unicorns existed.

Where's your evidence that they didn't? You are either trolling or dumb.

FTFY

Re:What about Jesus's ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45456679)

I was trying to find out who these "all modern scholars of antiquity" were and found out they were just 4 questionable citations on a wiki page....

Re:What about Jesus's ? (1)

TechyImmigrant (175943) | about 8 months ago | (#45456813)

That's the way it is.

Most historians have more important things to deal with, like, for example: history.

There is a vanishingly small proportion of historians who run around arguing about the evidence for the New Testament Jesus, and they write an awful lot about very weak secondary sources.

What about the US empire? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45456389)

The US government is the largest, most powerful, most expensive, most far-reaching government in world history, with military bases in some 150 countries around the world. Excuse me if I'm having difficulty understanding how Smalltime Khan's empire is bigger than the US government's -- by ANY measure.

Re:What about the US empire? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45456529)

Largest: He took over Russia and China. Russia is bigger then the US.

Most Expensive: doubtful, as he had most of the world's wealth at the time

most far-reaching government: Yeah, with space travel the US has this one.

with military bases in some 150 countries around the world He had bases in exactly one country. That was his. And if they rebelled, he murdered everyone. Everyone.

He was also carbon neutral:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1350272/Genghis-Khan-killed-people-forests-grew-carbon-levels-dropped.html

Re:What about the US empire? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45456623)

That's not even the right empire to compare Gengis to. The British Empire was far larger, with everything completely under its control. The sun *still* has not set on it, since maybe sometime in the 17th or 18th century

Re:What about the US empire? (1)

ElectricTurtle (1171201) | about 8 months ago | (#45456791)

Empire and Commonwealth are not the same. Whatever nominal fealty the Australians and Canadians claim to honor, that rubber hasn't met the road since WW2. How many Australian and Canadian military units assisted in the Fawklands War? Zero.

Re:What about the US empire? (1)

nogginthenog (582552) | about 8 months ago | (#45456895)

Anonymous Coward is not talking about the Commonwealth: http://what-if.xkcd.com/48/ [xkcd.com]

Re:What about the US empire? (4, Informative)

SecurityTheatre (2427858) | about 8 months ago | (#45457087)

While the thrust of the military power of the British empire is truly not what it was, he is accurate in saying that "the sun never sets". :-)

Nobody really refers to it as an "empire" anymore, but in addition to Britain and Northern Ireland, the U.K. still controls territories including "Gibraltar, Bermuda, numerous Caribbean islands, Ascension, St. Helena, Tristan da Cunha, the Falkland Islands, and South Georgia." Some have argued that the sun finally set over the empire after the handover of Hong Kong in 1997. But some argue this view ignores two tiny but crucial territories which bridge the gab: the Pitcairn Islands in the South Pacific and the British Indian Ocean Territory -- also known as the Chagos Islands, where Britain and the United States maintain a joint military facility at Diego Garcia. The question is "on midwinter's day in the southern hemisphere, does the sun set over Pitcairn before it rises over Diego Garcia?"

Here's what Peter Hammond's calculations found:
---
[The] results allow for the refraction of the sun's rays when it is close to the horizon. They indicate that, on 21st June, the sun rises over Diego Garcia at 01:22 hrs GMT, more than half an hour before it sets over Pitcairn at 01:59 hrs GMT.
Thanks to Diego Garcia (uninhabited except temporarily by various U.K. and U.S. military personnel) and to Pitcairn (population now about 50), the British Empire appears safe from sunsets for the time being.
---

Re:What about the US empire? (3, Informative)

tibit (1762298) | about 8 months ago | (#45456743)

LOL, Genghis Khan has way more up his sleeve than you give him credit for. Show me a U.S. president that had about a thousand 1st-generation descendants. 800 years later - today - Genghis has about 15 million descendants. This is based on hard science genetic testing, not historic record, by the way. An average male person living 800 years ago has a bit above 500 descendants living today.

Re:What about the US empire? (1)

alexander_686 (957440) | about 8 months ago | (#45456787)

Do you consider power to a absolute or relative measure? If absolute one might be able to make the argument that Luxemburg was more power.

If we are talking about relative, we are talking about one small tribe that was able to conquer Russia, China, raid Poland at will, etc. Nobody ever even came close at being able to match Khan’s army.

Will the Host Country Cooperate? (2)

Yahooti (3401115) | about 8 months ago | (#45456227)

Perhaps China has ideas of it own on this subject. I'd think they would want to do this search themselves.

Re:Will the Host Country Cooperate? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45456313)

I'm sure China would be more than happy to allow the person to locate the tomb... Being able to take back anything of value from the dig would be a different story whatsoever.

Countries are very possessive of historical artifacts, and any deals tend to go out the window when they get found.

Re:Will the Host Country Cooperate? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45456543)

If this goes anywhere but Mongolia, the Mongolians will probably invade China. I say this as a Mongolian.

Explorers Club? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45456253)

Sounds like a branch of the Super Adventure Club. Hope the head explorer William P. Phinehas has been finally expelled.

Obligatory... (1)

the_skywise (189793) | about 8 months ago | (#45456327)

http://www.khaaan.com/ [khaaan.com]

(Dopey Stupid slashdot filter kept blocking me from just typing it out... "too many caps makes it look like you're yelling" O'RLY?!)

obligatory star trek reference (-1, Redundant)

schneidafunk (795759) | about 8 months ago | (#45456341)

KHAAN! [geeksarewired.com]

" I need to have my feet on it."..... (1)

ClassicASP (1791116) | about 8 months ago | (#45456343)

(Indiana Jones voice) That's usually when the ground falls out from underneath your feet.

Re:" I need to have my feet on it."..... (1)

oodaloop (1229816) | about 8 months ago | (#45456367)

And 'X' never marks the spot.

Re:" I need to have my feet on it."..... (1)

the_skywise (189793) | about 8 months ago | (#45456397)

But have ye found the tapestries?!

Re:" I need to have my feet on it."..... (1)

VortexCortex (1117377) | about 8 months ago | (#45456915)

I'm not saying it was aliens... ...but it was totally aliens.

Damnit Spielberg, This isn't the History Channel!

Khan the great lover (1)

schneidafunk (795759) | about 8 months ago | (#45456373)

Random fact, Khan has 16 million descendants [nationalgeographic.com] .

Re:Khan the great lover (1)

TechyImmigrant (175943) | about 8 months ago | (#45456451)

He lived well.

Re:Khan the great lover (2)

ElectricTurtle (1171201) | about 8 months ago | (#45456589)

I don't think 'lover' is the best descriptor of the man's behavior in conquered lands. He's basically history's most "successful" rapist.

Re:Khan the great lover (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45456871)

He's basically history's most "successful" rapist.

I wonder if that means there are 16million people who are genetically predisposed to rape [nytimes.com] ?

Re:Khan the great lover (1)

ElectricTurtle (1171201) | about 8 months ago | (#45456949)

Straight people have gay offspring and vice versa. Genes do not fatalistically determine what people consciously do, they only increase probabilities, and then only slightly.

Re:Khan the great lover (1)

higuita (129722) | about 8 months ago | (#45456995)

Actually he didn't need that... as the chief of a huge empire, many girls/women/families wanted to be connect to him, specially with kids, in hope to increase their power or guarantee the safety of their bloodlines

I used to be an adventurer like you (2)

themushroom (197365) | about 8 months ago | (#45456425)

until I took an arrow to the chest. (MongoliaRim)

Not the cricketer either, then? (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | about 8 months ago | (#45456469)

the one who created the world's most powerful empire by raiding and invading across Eurasia, not Kirk's nemesis

Thanks for pointing that out.

I thought it was already found (1)

canadiannomad (1745008) | about 8 months ago | (#45456511)

I'm certain the discovery was chronicled in the book "Treasure Of Khan" where Dirk Pitt ... oh wait ;)

tr (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45456527)

Not to be confused, the birthplace is in (outer) Mongolia, Khentii province, not in Liupan Mountains in Northern China.
Also note that Northern China mentioned here is probably referring to inner Mongolia.

The Explorers Club, I had no idea (2)

BringsApples (3418089) | about 8 months ago | (#45456547)

From their page:

Founded in New York City in 1904, The Explorers Club promotes the scientific exploration of land, sea, air, and space by supporting research and education in the physical, natural and biological sciences. The Club’s members have been responsible for an illustrious series of famous firsts: First to the North Pole, first to the South Pole, first to the summit of Mount Everest, first to the deepest point in the ocean, first to the surface of the moon—all accomplished by our members.

Please, NO, NO, NO! (2)

Wdi (142463) | about 8 months ago | (#45456551)

That guy is a rich retired lawyer, not an archeologist or historian. See his profile at

http://www.explorers.org/index.php/about/explorers_club_president

There are zero indications in the linked article that they plan to include any professionals on their expedition, and in his portrait there is no record that he has ever teamed up with such on previous endeavors. Looting or just damaging a tomb of this importance by amateurs, should it be found, would be an enormous cultural loss. A painstaking archeological dig would probably take 20 years and proceed with extreme caution. These guys do not look like they have the patience - to me they certainly look like they would prefer instant gratification and fame by brandishing a few choice artefacts from the tomb if they can find it.

Fox News "noted authority" (5, Interesting)

T.E.D. (34228) | about 8 months ago | (#45456557)

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 [stackexchange.com] . 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" [fu-berlin.de] .

    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" (4, Interesting)

ElectricTurtle (1171201) | about 8 months ago | (#45456687)

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" (2)

ColdWetDog (752185) | about 8 months ago | (#45456825)

That, and his followers may have decided that since he was such an important personage, that having random crows nibble him to nothingness wasn't all that great of an idea. Some faction of his followers had to take the reigns of command and they may have felt that having an interred burial ground more advantageous.

Re:Fox News "noted authority" (1)

oldhack (1037484) | about 8 months ago | (#45456997)

Yeah, funerals after all are for the living, not the dead.

Re:Fox News "noted authority" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45457043)

Jengis picked which of his sons would succeed him (Ogedei) and the succession was more or less unopposed. The real succession crisis didn't happen until Ogedei kicked the bucket.

Re:Fox News "noted authority" (0)

T.E.D. (34228) | about 8 months ago | (#45456863)

but I think the possibility shouldn't be dismissed until everything has been fully explored.

A great idea! I'll tell you what: Just to make things interesting, I'll add a story I heard about Genghis Khan being buried on the moon by passing aliens who were impressed with his military prowress. Its first attestation is today, 800 years after the fact, from someone who wasn't Mongolian. But my story is hardly much less credible than a couple first noted half as many years after the fact from someone else who wasn't Mongolian. So while we are "not dismissing anything until everything has been fully explored", let's not forget to include a mission to the moon.

Re:Fox News "noted authority" (3, Interesting)

ElectricTurtle (1171201) | about 8 months ago | (#45457119)

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:Fox News "noted authority" (4, Funny)

amicusNYCL (1538833) | about 8 months ago | (#45456979)

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.

That's just wrong, Fox doesn't lie. Just look at this paragraph:

Nichols now believes the Luipan Mountains that rise above the grasslands are the final resting place of the famed emperor, a short flight north of Hong Kong, near the Yellow River, off the coast of the Pacific Ocean.

That's completely accurate. The site is only about 1,000 miles north of Hong Kong, which is about the same as the short flight from Miami to New York. And it's only about 575 miles from the Pacific Ocean, which is definitely "off the coast" of it. It's not "on the coast", right? So it must be off the coast.

Gold. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45456605)

I am not sure of medieval Mongolian burial customs, but at the time he was probably the richest person in the world. Did they bury valuables with the dead at that time? There may be valuable artifacts at the site. It was also said that they killed everyone who worked on the tombs to keep them from talking, and then all the soldiers that killed them.

Considering how much havoc Gengis Khan (1)

Flavianoep (1404029) | about 8 months ago | (#45456631)

has brought to the world, it would be a good idea that some try to find his tomb and make sure he's dead.

Re:Considering how much havoc Gengis Khan (1)

higuita (129722) | about 8 months ago | (#45457075)

No, no, to revive him... let him kill all those politics!!! Peace at last!!

If you agree to be conquered by him, Genghis Khan were a very good ruler, usually much better than the one they removed... just don't try to resist him or disobey to what was agreed, as he most likely would totally destroy everyone (and everything) that you one day touched, if not all your country, just to be sure!!

Star Trek II re-subtitled... (1)

almitydave (2452422) | about 8 months ago | (#45456681)

So now Kirk yells, "Qa'aa'aa'aa'aa'aa'aa'aa'aa'aa'aa'an!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

I have to say it.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45456689)

KHAAANNNN!!!!

Qa'an (1)

RoccamOccam (953524) | about 8 months ago | (#45456785)

Honest question: why the apostrophe in the name?

Re:Qa'an (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45456897)

Honest question: why the apostrophe in the name?

Likely to indicate a difference in meaning or pronunciation that is significant/recognizable to readers of languages other than english that yet may be written in the roman character set.

One theory (1)

Provocateur (133110) | about 8 months ago | (#45456795)

One theory is that the abominable snowman is Genghis Khan. They have never been seen together ever. Genghis Khan is immortal but to ensure his survival, he chooses to hide from humans including paparazzi. How did the creature become abominable anyway One is not born like that; it takes hard work.

Re:One theory (1)

VortexCortex (1117377) | about 8 months ago | (#45457009)

Fun fact: While touring the snowcapped mountains of Asia, Ghengis Khan sprang forth fully formed from Chuck Norris's midriff; He was indeed born the abdominal snowman.

Does it exist? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45456861)

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.

Is it not possible it just doesn't exist?
Perhaps on his death bed he told someone to say he was buried somewhere fantastic, and then just give him a viking funeral, just to troll the people of the future.

Dr. Jones! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45456965)

Why was this tomb not saught after by one of the various fictional tomb raiders, it sounds perfect! Much better than bizarre South American aliens.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>