No Mongols means No Tatars?

[Tupiniquim]

I have this question because the languages spoken by the tatars are from the Cuman-Kipchak branch that originated from the old cuman confederation that existed in the Eurasian Steppe before the arrival of the Mongols, but independent Tatar states started to exist only after the arrival of the Mongols.

the existence of the tatars depend on the mongols or it’s just dependent of the existence of the Cumans?

 

[alexmilman]

I have this question because the languages spoken by the tatars are from the Cuman-Kipchak branch that originated from the old cuman confederation that existed in the Eurasian Steppe before the arrival of the Mongols, but independent Tatar states started to exist only after the arrival of the Mongols.

the existence of the tatars depend on the mongols or it’s just dependent of the existence of the Cumans?

It is quite possible that sooner or later the Polovtsy would create some kind of a state instead of the nomadic confederations. What is less clear is if, in the absence of the Mongols, they’d create a sedentary component which became quite important for the OTL Tatars and their culture.

 

[Gwyain]

It depends some on precisely what Tatars your talking about. The Crimean and Volga Tatars aren't fundamentally that different from their Cuman and Volga Bulgar ancestors, so I'd say those two exist independent of the Mongols. The other Tatars I think don't exist in a recognizable form without the Mongols though.