CC BY
69
УДК 94(574)
Etno-cultural Distribution of Turkic and Mongolian Tribes between 6th-9th Centuries
Ahmet Tashagil
PhD in History, professor, Chair of Department of History of Yeditepe Univercity. 34755 Turkey Republic, Istanbul, Ata§ehir, Kayi§dagi Caddesi, inönü Mahallesi, Agustos Yerle§imi, 26. Email: atasagil@hotmail.com.
Abstract. The paper presents a detailed ethno-cultural analysis of Turkic and Mongol tribes living between 6-9 centuries in Central Asia. Turkic and Mongol tribes are represented together on the historical scene in the steppes of Central Asia in the X century. They created all kinds of cultural and political relations. The process was so intense that sometimes Turkic tribes mongolized, and Mongolian communities Türkicized. As a result, the sources generally cannot decide for sure whether some tribe was Turkic or Mongolian. They claim that the Turks and the Mongols were the same. This situation makes it impossible to determine the boundary between the two nations. When the Turkic tribe was numerous, the Mongol tribes obeyed, and vice versa. Regardless of their origin, when the great powers broke up, all the tribes of the west and east acted independently. Those who moved to China, settled there, and became Chinese.
Keywords: Turkic tribes; Mongol tribes; ethno-cultural interaction; Turks and Mongols in China.
The Juan-juan state was destroyed by the Turks(Kök-Türks) under Bumin Qagan in 552. Bumin, who received the title Il (Illig) Qagan, founded the Kök-Türk state in the same year (Ta§agil 2002, Р. 16-18). The state became the only dominant force in Central Asia, by spreading from the Black Sea coast to Korea in the form of a tribal confederation within a short time. Soon, Mongol and Manchu tribes also obeyed to this polity (Ta§agil 2002, Р. 19-59; Liu Mau Tsai 1957, Р. 1-15). Qitan (Ch'i-tan), Shih-wei, Hsi and K'u-mo-hsi were the outstanding Mongol and Manchu tribes. Chinese sources give detailed accounts about their situation in the VI-VIII. centuries. Thus, we have very illuminating information about history and culture of contemporary tribes of Turkic and Mongolian origins. Aforementioned Mongolian tribes were included in the Turk (Kök-Türk) Confederation. As the state got weaker in 582, they started to act independently. They even contacted with China and were bounded to that state. They continued this situation of sometimes obeying the Turk (Kök-Türks), sometimes to the Chinese, and sometimes acting independently up to the final collapse of the Turk (Kök-Türk) state in 744. However, this situation was crucial under the Great Uighur Qaganat, too. Mongolian tribes were now under the Uighur Federation (Mackerras 1968; Hamilton 1955, Р. 55).
After the decline of the Uighur Qaganat, which was established in 745, by the Kyrgyz in 840, hegemony in the Orhon region passed over the latter (Ta§agil 2004, Р. 78-81). They, however, could not set up strict dominance, and even could not keep control for a long time. By the coming of the Mongolic Qitans from east in 920's, and invading the region completely, Turkic peoples left the Orhon basin at all. From then on, gravity of Turkic history was in Western Turkistan.
The Qitans moved westward, and founded a state called Karahitay around the Tengri ranges. Turkic tribes living in that region such as Uighur, Kipchak and Qarluq came under their domination (Ta§agil 2001). The Karahitay state became owner of the Karakhanid domain, namely today's Eastern Turkistan and Southern and Eastern Kazakhstan.
During the Chingizid days, there happened dramatic changes. Many Turkic tribes came under Chingiz Khan, who turned his state to a worldwide empire within a very short time. What should be expressed here is that Turkic and Mongolian tribes cohabited in Inner Asia by the time of Chingizids (Mogollarin 1986; Mer^il 2000, р. 29). Populous Turkic tribes like the Kipchaks and Kyrgyz played crucial role in shaping the Mongol Empire. They became even essential elements of the state. Cultural influence of the Uighurs was felt mostly in the central and eastern parts of
the empire. This togetherness was very visible especially in China during the rule of Khubilai Khan (Ogel 1964, P. 79; ).
TURKIC TRIBES:
Toles: By the year 627, other Turkic tribes were living under the Turk(Kok-Turk) rule in a vast region from the east of the Lake Baikal to the north of the Black Sea. These tribes, which were crucial in the state apparatus, were usually called as Toles. Distributed in a wide region in Central Asia, the Toles had more tribes than other neighbours of China had. The view that they were the same as the Kao-ch'e, common name of the tribes living in the same area in the IV-V centuries, seems correct (Eberhard 1942; Istoriya Sibiri 1968, p. 266; Czegledy 1990, P. 57; Christian 1998, P.250-251; Hsue Tsung-cheng 1992, P. 372-373). In short, most of the tribes under the Turk (Kok-Turk) house were known as Toles.
According to sources, the Toles living in Mongolia formed the first group. Here, north of the river Tola is pointed as the first region, where habited the tribes P'u-ku (Bugut)1, T'ung-lo (Tongra), Wei-ho (Mori 1966), Bayirku (Pa-ye-ku) (Chavannes 1941, P. 74, 89),2 and Fu-lo. These five tribes were organized under an erkin (Donuk 1988, P. 15). From 648 on they started to get stronger, and each got its own independent erkin. Besides, some little tribes (urug) such as Meng-ch'en, T'u-jo-ho, Ssu-chie (Izgil) (Mori 1966, P. 43; Eberhard 1942, P. 154), Hun, and Hu-hsie were also living there and had totally 20.000 veterans.
A-tie (Ediz): Chinese sources recorded the Ediz tribe as A-tie. They are mostly mentioned under this title. This tribe is not initially accounted among the Toles. Only one source identifies the He-shih tribe living to the north of Samarqand with the A-tie3. This text relates the He-shih with the A-tie with information not recorded in the list of Toles tribes, who were mentioned in Pei Shih, Suei Shu, and other places. By relying on this account, one can judge that the Ediz (A-tie) tribe lived in the north of the Sir Derya River before 603. Thus, they were within the Western Turk (Kok-Turk) realm. But the situation is very interesting. They are later told to be among the tribes living on the Tola River basin, southeast of the lake Baikal4. In those days, namely before 626, their soldiers numbered 1700. When the Bayirku contacted with China in 627, they also sent their allegiance to China. Name of their country was changed by the Chinese in 648 to be the Chi-t'ien province (chou)5.
Under their leader Chia-t'ie-ssu-t'ai, they escaped from Kapgan (Mo-ch'o), ruler of the Second Turk (Kok-Turk) Empire, in 711, and refuged to the T'ang Empire in China (Ta§agil 1993, P. 67, 68). Kuang-yen and Kuang-chin, possibly his sons, gave successful battles in the name of the Chinese emperor. The latter granted them higher titles, and accepted among his subjects6. After their demise, Chinese chroniclers wrote biographies for them for their services under the T'ang rule7.
Kul Tegin, after fighting with the Oghuz in the city Togu Balik, fought with the Ediz tribe in Koshulgak. Kul Tegin personally quarrelled on his black horse: He lanced a soldier, and beat nine others. The Ediz tribe is said to be annihilated in the Koshulgak battle8. However, likely some of them survived, as Bilge Qagan accounts their name, too, among his subject, when he was enthroned in 7169. Their name occurs also in an inscription found about Cirgak on the Kem?ik River. Owner of the inscription assigned the Ediz clan, the Kabay tribe as treasure-keeper (Orkun 1987, P. 490, 491).
1 This tribe later played important role in establishing the Uighur state. For detail see G. Çandarlioglu, Ötüken Bölgesindeki Büyük Uygur Kaganligi, (istanbul Üniversity, Faculty of Letters, unpublished doctoral dissertation, 1972), p. 2, 15 etc.
2 The Bayirku tribe would play important role especially during the Second Turk (Kök-Türk) state.
3 T'ai-p'ing Huan-yü Chi (TPHYC) 198, p.743.
4 T'ung Tien (TT) 1081a; Wen-hsien T'ung-K'ao (WHTK) 2699b; TPHYC 198, 743.
5 Hsin T'ang Shu (HTS) 217B, p.6143; TT, ibidem.
6 TT, ibidem; HTS 217B, ibidem.
7 HTS 217B, ibidem.
8 Kül Tegin inscription (KT) N 5, 6.
9 Bilge Kagan inscription(BK) E1.
Bayirku: When they were first mentioned in history, the Bayirku were living in the north of the Tola River10. They were recorded in Chinese as Pa-ye-ku/Pa-ye-k'u11.
The Bayirku, who were on the eastern border of the P'u-ku tribe, were also western neighbours of the Mo-ho. Length of their country was 1000 li, and they settled in green steps to the north of the Gobi Desert.
With the weakening of the Eastern Turk (Kok-Turk) state after 625, the Bayirku, who remained independent, sent their allegiance to the Chinese court in 629 together with other tribes like P'u-ku, T'ung-lo, Hsi, and K'u-mo-hsi12. They are not mentioned for 18 years, until the year 647. They should have been bounded to the Sir Tardush, who kept dominance in the Eastern Turk realm.
In 647, their leader Ch'u-li-shih Ilteber obeyed to the T'ang emperor, together with all of his people (Hsue Tsung-cheng 1992, P. 228)13. The emperor organized his tribe as the You-ling military governorship14. He made Ch'u-li-shih Ilteber general of the right protectors, and assigned as military governor15. They, they entered Chinese rule together with other tribes like Izgil, Bugu, and Tongra. However, these tribes rebelled in 656 against Chinese administration. The T'ang emperor sent his general Chang Jen-t'ai onto them; their leader was killed and the uprising was pushed down in a bloody way16.
When the Turk (Kok-Turk) gained independence in 682 under the leadership of Ilterish Qutlug, many tribes including the Bayirku joined them (Ta§agil 1995, P. 232). At the beginning of the 700's, rigid and merciless rule of Kapgan, then qagan of the state, caused other Turkic tribes often to rebel. The Bayirku were among rebels after 710. They and the brothers Bilge and Kul Tegin fought in 710 near the lake Turgi Yargun. Like other tribes, the Bayirku uprising was also due to ruthless administration of Kapgan. Their leader Ulug Erkin was defeated, and escaped with few soldiers (Bazin 1974, P. 226; Kafesoglu 1987, P. 113)17. Kul Tegin rode the horse called Ak Aygir, which he seized from them, in the battle with the Kyrgyz, and the horse was struck on its thigh18. When he was returning after suppressing a Bayirku uprising, Kapgan Qagan was killed in their ambush in a forest (Bazin 1974, P. 234; Liu Mau Tsai 1957, P. 171, 223). Ho Ling-ch'uan, a Chinese statesman, who was there during the operation, brought head of Kapgan to Chinese capital (Ta§agil 1993, P. 70).
Bilge Qagan, while telling about his own activities after he was enthroned in 716, he says that he made an expedition to the north, on the Yir Bayirku country19.
In spite of these activities, the Bayirku could not reach necessary power to set up a political formation. They became independence again in 742, thanks to the weakening of the Second Turk (Kok-Turk) state, and contacted with China20.
The lands where they lived were grasslands with rich herbs. Population of this tribe, whose army is said to be more than 10.000, is estimated about 60.00021. We are informed that they used to breed good horses, and produced high quality iron. The K'ang-kan River was flowing through the Bayirku land. They used to cut pines, kept in the river for three years,22 and erected the timber, which had become greenish and stone-like, where they lived. Their ancestors called these timbers as "K'ang-kan stone" due to name of the river. Some statesmen used to habit near those pines, which used to be their monument after completely stonizing. People used to wear wooden shoes, with which they hunted deer. Traditions of the Bayirku, who had less with agriculture, were
10 TT 1081a; WHTK 2699a; TPHYC 198, 737.
11 HTS 217B, 6139.
12 This account occurs only in HTS 217B, p. 6140.
13 TT 1081a; WHTK 2699a; HTS 217B, p.6140; TPHYC 198, p.737.
14 Tu-tu-fu.
15 Tu-tu.
16 HTS 217B, s.6140.
17 KT E, 34.
18KT E, 35, 36.
19 KT S 4; BK N,3.
20 HTS, ibidem; WHTK 2699a.
21 TPHYC 198, p.737 says 60.000 men.This may be truer.
22 Number of the waiting year is three in HTS 217B, and two in WHTK and TT.
the same as the Töles tribes in much sense. However, there were some little differences in their language23.
Basmil: Chinese transcription of the ethnonym Basmil was Pa-hsi-mi. Another name of their country was Pi-la.
The Basmils are not counted among Töles tribes in 60324. They are told to have lived in the north of Turfan, south of Baikal, and southeast of the Kyrgyz in scattered communities during the Suei dynasty (581-617). They were at 9.000 li (about 4500 km) distance from Tun-huang. Number of their households was then more than 2.00025.
They made first political contacts with China only in 649. They were likely subjects of the Sir Tardush before it. One can estimate this according to their location. Their leader then was Tou-mao Tarkan Fei-lo-ch'a (Chavannes 1941, p. 19; Salman 1991, p. 166). Before that, they were subjects of the Turk (Kök-Türk) qaganat. Bilge Qagan says that he made an expedition onto them when he was 20 years old, that is, 703. Basmil chief Iduk Kut did not pay his tribute, thus Bilge defeated them and made them carry out their responsibilities against the state (Salman 1991, p. 165)26.
Another interesting point is that Chinese sources do not mention them from then on up to the year 742. This means that they had no much military power, and were far from Chinese sight. In that year they were so powerful that they killed Ozmish, the Kök-Türk qagan, in alliance with the Uighurs (Ta§agil 1999, P. 26-29; Sinor 1990, P. 313).
Then, their chief A-shih-na Ho-la became Bilge Qagan27. He sent embassy to China to seek help, and thanked them. Chinese emperor Hsüan-tsung sent him, in turn, violet dress, belt with golden ornamentation, and saddlebag for fish. But he was defeated by Qarluqs and Uighurs just three years later. The Basmil chief, who fled to Turfan after the defeat, then refuged to the Chinese capital Ch'ang-an. T'ang emperor granted him the title of general of the left protectors. His remaining people became Uighur subjects28.
Name of the Basmils occurs five times in the Shine Usu inscription. While Bayan Chor (Mo-yen Ch'o; his other title is «Tengride Bolmi§ il-etmi§ Bilge Kagan»), who became qagan of the Uighurs in 747, was fighting with peoples in west and north, the Basmils became his enemy and moved towards the centre. The qagan could not stop them at the first moment,29 because he was in conflict with the Qarluqs and Türgish in those days30. He defeated them later, possibly after nine months31. Bayan Chor fought them for a second time, and broke their power in great extends32.
Name of the Basmils occurs again in history in the XI. century. They were mentioned two times especially during the Eastern Karakhanids. Ruler of the Eastern Karakhanids, whose name is not known to us, made expedition onto the Basmils and Chomuls, and defeated them33. The second Basmil expedition mentioned by Mahmud of Kashgar was carried out by Arslan Tegin, an outstanding figure of the Karakhanids, in the second half of the same century, with the apply of Muslims for help. By passing first the Ili, and then the Yamar (Emil) river as commandant of an army of 40.000 troops, he marched against non-Muslim army of 700.000 troops under Büge Budra?, one of the leaders of the Yabaku. The latter figure should be over exaggerated. In any case, Arslan Tegin gained a great victory against the Yabaku and Basmils (Pritsak 1955, p. 260; Salman 1991, p. 177, 178) 34. In that age, name of the Basmil tribe occurs in the Ordos-Alashan region in the northwest of China (Togan 1980, p. 144).
The Basmils were strong, healthy and energetic people. Their bravery is expressed.
23 TPHYC 198, p.738; HTS 217B, p.6140.
24 See SS 84, p.1879,1880; PS 99, p.3203-4. See also Ta?agil, Toles..., p.234-244.
25 TT 1083; WHTK 2717c.
26 BK E 25.
27 Use of the name A-shih-na is very interesting. This minds the question of their relation with the Kok-Turk dynasty.
28 HTS 217B, 6143-44; WHTK 2717c.
29 Shine Usu, S,4.
30 Shine Usu S,5.
31 Shine Usu S,7.
32 Shine Usu,S 12, 13, B, 2.
33 Divan-u Lugat'it-Turfc ( DLT), I, p.459.
34 DLT,II, p.312, III, p.356.
They were very skilful in hunting and targeting. As their country was snowy, they made wooden horses, and pursued deer by skiing. Their armours looked like shield with a high head. At its bottom they pasted bristle clothe (made) of horse skin. They put it on snow, and attached to their foots. If downwards, they pursued deer by skiing; if on level terrain, they advanced with help of sticks like a boot; they climbed upwards by using their hands. Hunted deer were taken to home, and eaten. Then, they changed their location; moved to another places. They lived in houses made of beech. Husbands cut their hairs, and bare hats made of bark of beech35.
Ch'i-pi: This tribe appears in history first circa 603. The Ch'i-pi tribe lived in those days in southwest of Hami, north of Karashar, near skirts of the Aktag region of the Tengri ranges. There lived also other tribes such as P'u-lo-chih, I-shih, Su-po, Na-ho, Wu-hu, Ye-shih and Yu-ni-hu. They altogether can mobilize 20.000 soldiers36.
Developments after the year 598, and especially the long-during Turko-Chinese wars, together with efforts of Eastern Turk (Kok-Turk) rulers to get their old power, caused the Suei Empire to incite the Toles tribes to rebel. In consequence, both the Eastern and Western Turk (Kok-Turk) states weakened and lost their rulers. Ch'u-lo emerged as qagan of the Western Kok-Turk state (Ta§agil 2002). However, his merciless administration and heavy taxes caused once calmed Toles tribes to rebel. Especially unjust killing of some tribal chiefs led to uprising (604). The Ch'i-pi were prominent among those tribes. Their leader Ko-leng with the title ilteber defeated Ch'u-lo, and started to rule at the T'an-han (Tafgan) mount, and assumed the title Baga Kagan. This qagan was peerless in bravery, and gained respect of his people. City-states like Karashar, Hami, Turfan obeyed him37.
After him, his son He-li continued to rule. When the Eastern Kok-Turk state declined and the Western Kok-Turk state faced internal turmoil, the Ch'i-pi, making use of this political vacuum, contacted with China in 632. Emperor of the T'ang dynasty settled them in a region between Kan and Liang in Kansu, and their lands were called Yu-hsi province. The Chinese administration kept them politically out of the imperial borders in 653, and their country was made Ho-lan military governorship, which was included in the newly founded Yen-jan grand military governorship, which encompassed Eastern Kok-Turk realm. Their chief Ho-li waged successful wars in the name of China. The Chen-wu region was added to the region ruled by his descendants38.
Fu-lo: This tribe of the Toles lived in the north of the river Tola together with other tribes like Bayirku, Bugu, Tongra, and Wei-ho at the beginning of the 600's, and was ruled by the same erkin39.
Hu-hsie: The Hu-hsie, which were among eastern Toles tribes like the Huns, were within the union having 20.000 soldiers40. After 627, the Hu-hsie were in the north of the Tongra tribe, and had 10.000 troops41. They are said to have composed of two cohabiting tribes, and number of soldiers was 7.00042. When they visited the Chinese court, their lands were divided into provinces and districts (chou, hsien)43.
Hun: One of the little tribes of the easternmost Toles, the Huns were about the Tola river in 603. Other small tribes like Meng-ch'en, T'u-ju-ho, Izgil (Ssu-chie), and Hu-hsie lived near them44. The Huns were southernmost tribe of the Toles. They presented their allegiance to the Chinese emperor in 630 under their leader A-t'an-chih with the title ilteber. The Sir Tardush completely obeyed to China in 647. Their lads were given the name Kao-lan military governorship. Then the country was divided into two as east and
35 TT ibidem; WHTK 2717c.
36 Note 37 and also TPHYC 198, p.742, states that only the Ch'i-pi had 2.000 soldiers. TT 1081b gives the number as 3.000.
37 Pei Shih(PS) ibid; Suei Shu (SS) ibid.
38 HTS 217B, p.6142; WHTK 2699b.
39 PS ibid; SS ibid.
40 PS 99 ibid; SS ibid.
41 HTS 217B, p.6145.
42 TT 1081a; WHTK 2699b.
43 WHTK 2699b.
44 PS 99 p.3303; SS 84, p.1879.
west45.
Meng-ch'en: The Meng-ch'en, T'u-ju-ho, Ssu-chie, Hun, Hu-hsie and others, all from the Töles group, were in urug (clan) state. They lived next to the easternmost group. They had totally 20.000 soldiers46.
Sir (Six Sir): The making of the Sir Tardush group occurred in the way that the Hsie tribe took the Yen-t'o under its domination, and mixed with them. When this tribe got stronger after 627, and became a qaganat recognized by China, many tribes joined them. This tribal confederation was dismembered, when the Sir Tardush were defeated by the Chinese and other tribes in 647. It is likely that this name was in use for a tribal group living about the Tola River during the Second Turk (Kök- Türk) state.
When accounting his subjects at his coronation, Bilge Kagan mentions tribal groups like Six Sir, Nine Oghuz, and Two Ediz47. The word Sir attests five times in the Tonyukuk inscription, in forms like Türk Sir, etc48.
Ssu-chie: The Izgil (Ssu-chie) were one of the urugs of the Töles tribes, which settled around the Tola river ca. 603. They cohabited with tribes like Meng-ch'en, T'u-ju-ho, Hun and Hu-hsie, and had totally 20.000 soldiers49. They joined to China after 647. After that, the Izgil seems in the place of the Sir Tardush. Like many other Turkic tribes, they also contacted with China, and were organized in the Chinese provincial system (Hsüe Tsung-cheng 1992, P. 227, 371-377.)50.
In 715, when the state of Kapgan Qagan was shaken with uprisings, the Izgil also rebelled. Kül Tegin fought them on his horse «Alp Salchi Kir». Bilge and Kül Tegin eventually defeated them. Horse of Kül Tegin died there51.
Tardush: When people were reorganized during the establishment of the Second Kök-Türk Empire, sources mention the Töles and Tardush52. Their mentioning in connection with the reorganization is associated with the very importance of the historical role that they played between 552 and 630. During the Second Kök-Türk Empire, after 682, the Töles were in the east and the Tardush in the west. Thus, we guess them to have settled about the Irtish River53.
In the organization made after Kapgan became Qagan in 692, Bilge was appointed as «shad» of the Tardush54. One of those participating funeral of Kül Tegin in 732 was called Tardush Inanchu Chor55.
Name of the Tardush tribe was indirectly recorded in sources. Tonyukuk, who had made an incursion onto the Kyrgyz in 696-97, remained alone, when Kapgan Qagan returned home because of death of her wife. He advanced towards the Yarish plain in 698, after Inel and Bilge joined him. The name Tardush Shad attests here, in relation with the new appointment by Kapgan56. It is known that the mentioned Tardush was Bilge. After they won the battle, the On Ok (Türgish) people were driven towards Tardush Shad (699)57.
Their name occurs also in the Ihe Hüshotu inscription, erected in 716 on the name of a Turkic noble called Kül Chor. According to it, Kül Chor or Kül Ich Chor was ruler of the Tardush people58.
After Bayan Chor became qagan, he often fought with other tribes to subdue them. After fighting with the Tatars in 749, he sent his two sons as rulers of the Tardush with
45 HTS 217B, p.6141.
46 PS 99 ibid; SS 84, p.1879.
47 BK,E,1.
48 Tonyukuk inscription (T),3,11,60,61,62.
49 PS 99, p.3303; SS 84, p.1879.
50 HTS 217B, p.6146.
51 KT, N, 3, 4.
52 KT, E, 13; BK, E, 12.
53 BK, S,13.
54 KT, E, 17; BK, E, 15.
55 KT, N, 13.
56 T, 31.
57 T, 41.
58 Ihe Hüshotu, E, 14.
the titles yabgu and shad59. The Hoytu Tamir inscriptions are to belong to the Tardush. This inscription tells about success of their ruler titled Kul Chor during the expedition onto Beshbalik60.
Tokuz Oghuz (Nine Oghuz / Chiou-hsing): The concept of Nine Oghuz represents the form of denominating the part of the Toles, who lived about the Tola River and Kerulen, that is, in the eastern part of the Eastern Turk (Kok-Turk) qaganat, after 626, when this state started to weaken. The Nine Oghuz group usually included such tribes as P'u-ku, Hun (Qun), Bayirku (Pa-ye-ku), Tongra (T'ung-lo), Ssu-chie, Ch'i-pi, A-pu-sse, Ku-lun-wu-ku, Ediz (A-tie) (Hamilton 1962, P. 23-63; Mori 1966; Kafesoglu 1987; izgi 1987, P. 13; Ta§agil 1998; Ta§agil 1991, P. 234-243).
We examined these tribes in our study as possible as the sources give information. They contacted with China especially in consequence of the collapse of the Eastern Turk (Kok-Turk qaganat, and received various titles of military governorship (Hamilton 1962, P. 23-63; Mori 1966; izgi 1987, P. 13; Ta§agil 1998).
It was expectable that after the Kok-Turk movement of independence, which started against the Chinese T'ang dynasty in 679, succeeded, they would crash primarily with the Nine Oghuz tribes. Thus, the conflict between the Kok-Turks and the Nine Oghuz was very often.
The rise of the Uighur state from 742 on, Otuken becoming its centre, caused the Nine Oghuz to join them. From then on, they continued their existence as part of the Uighurs (Puleyblank 1956; Hamilton 1955; Mackerras 1968). Just as, the Uighur state is called Nine Oghuz (Tokuz Guz) in Islamic sources for this reason (Minorsky 1948, P. 281; §e§en 1985).
During the rise of the Second Turk (Kok-Turk) state under Qutlug and Tonyukuk, the Chinese contacted with the Qitan, and told that the little Turk (Kok-Turk) people was growing, their qagan and spokesmen were very brave, and they would kill the Chinese and Qitans as long as they exist. Then, they offered alliance. But Tonyukuk had acted before them, and drove his army towards the Otuken region, after passing the Kok Ong River. The Oghuz came across them with an army of 6.000 soldiers from the direction of the Ingek Lake and the Tola River. Tonyukuk had 2.000 troops. However, the Oghuz tasted an enormous defeat (Ta§agil 1995, P. 234-236)61. After that, all of the Oghuz went to subdue Qutlug Qagan.
Bilge Qagan, in his address to the nation, counts the name of nobles and people of the Oghuz among those, who should hear his words62. In his words, the Nine Oghuz were one of the constitutional elements of the Turk (Kok-Turk) state. They later appear among the tribes, with whom Qutlug Qagan fought during the establishment of the Second Kok-Turk state. In this instance, they are mentioned together with the Kyrgyz, Kurikan, Otuz (Thirty) Tatars, Qitans and Tatabi. The interesting point here is that, they are told within the 'bodun' concept, as in their first mention (Hsue Tsung-cheng 1992, P. 226)63. This indicates that the Nine Oghuz people was not composed of one tribe, and lived in a great mass64.
After Bilge Qagan suppressed the Qarluq and Basmil rebellion in 714, the Nine Oghuz, whom he considers of his own people, also became enemy. Bilge Qagan explains this with the sentence «Since jealousy entered their hearts due to the chaos between earth and sky, they became enemy». Bilge fought them four times in a year in Togu Balik, Antargu, the Chush river and Ezgenti Kadiz, and won all battles65. The Nine Oghuz left their lands in 716, and went towards China66.
59 Shine Usu, E, 6, 7.
60 Hoytu Tamir, 3.
61 T, 9.
62 KT, S, 2; BK, E, 1.
63 Tokuz Oguz Budun.
64 KT, E, 14; BK, E, 12.
65 BK, E, 29-31; KT, N, 4.
66 BK, E, 35.
The Ongin inscription, which is thought to belong to a Turkic noble called Tacham, also tells about the Nine Oghuz (Orkun 1987, p. 128-129). State forces conflicted with them, and had them subdued to the state.
The Ihe Hushotu inscription, erected in the name of a Turkic noble called Kul Chor in 716, also mentions the Nine Oghuz. According to the inscription, he fought seven times with the Nine Oghuz67.
The Nine Oghuz conflicted also with Bayan Chor Qagan. The Shine Usu inscription says that Uighurs ruled over the Nine Oghuz for a hundred years68. Bayan Chor Qagan himself gathered all of the Nine Oghuz, during the rise of the Uighur state69. Bayan Chor seems to have fought them in 751, too70. In that instance, the Nine Oghuz living on the Ani River basin allied with the Kyrgyz and Chiks.
Islamic sources also contain information about the Nine Oghuz. For example, they were adjacent to the Kyrgyz in their north, and theirs was the most populous Turkic country according to Hudud al-A'lam. They used to move to convenient lands in summers and winters. There came beautiful musk, black, red and stripy fox leathers, leathers of grey squirrel, sable and other animals, horns, skin of yak from their country. Their most important animals were seeps, horses and cattle. They were the richest of the Turks. Sources mention 17 toponyms belonging to them (Hudud al-Alam 1937, p. 94, 95; Çeçen 1985, P. 61, 62).
To-lan-ke: This tribe does not appear in historical sources before 647. They emerged in that year due to collapse of the polity founded by the Sir Tardush. They lived on the Tola River, and had 10.000 troops. They had never contacted with China, but were recognized by the T'ang empire in 647.
Their ruler (erkin) Mo (bey?) went to the Chinese court together with the Uighurs. They remained within the borders of Yen-jan Tao-tu-fu in accordance with the organization made in Eastern Kok-Turk realm in 650. Title of their chief was «right grand general». After his death, Sai-fu continued military governorship with the title «grand ilteber»71.
Toles (After 682): The Toles are mentioned also among those who participated in founding the Second Turk (Kok-Turk) state. They were then in the east of the centre72. The ethnonym Toles here should be seen not as a general name of the tribal group, but name of a certain group. Thus, we reserved for them another part in this study. According to sentences of Bilge Qagan, the Toles and Tardush peoples were reorganized, and yabgus were sent them as rulers, after the establishment of the Second Kok-Turk state73.
Bayan Chor, who was proper man to exalt the Uighur Empire, begins with the Toles while he counts names of the subdued tribes in the Shine Usu inscription74.
T'u-ju-ho: The T'u-ju-ho, who lived about the Tola River, and who were in urug status, can collect 20.000 soldiers, together with other tribes living near them75.
Tu-po: The Tu-po are also called Tu-p'o. Their land bordered with Hsiao-hai on the north, Kyrgyz on the south, and Uighur in the east. They were divided into three tribes, each of which administrates itself. There was no year or time in their tradition. They built barrack by collecting grasses. They did not know agriculture. There were hundreds of grass kinds in their land. They made meals by collecting their roots. They ate birds, fishes and wild animals. They had clothes made of sable leather and deer skin.
The poor produced clothes from birds they captured. In marriages, the rich used to present horses, and the poor deer skin and roots of grasses.
67 ihe Hushotu, E, 16.
68 Shine Usu N, 3.
69 Shine Usu, N, 5.
70 Shine Usu, E, 10 etc.
71 TT 1081a; WHTK 2699b; HTS 217B, p.6142.
72 BK, S, 13.
73 BK, E, 12.
74 Shine Usu, N, 1.
75 PS 99 ibid; SS 84 ibid.
They put dead men in mountains or on trees within wooden boxes. When burying, they moaned; this tradition is the same as the Turks.
There was no punishment. Those stealing something repaid twofold. In the 21st year of Chen-kuan's rule (648), as the Kurikans visited the Chinese palace, they also sent their embassy and contacted with China76.
Tongra (T'ung-lo): The Tongra tribe is one of the important ones of those enlisted for the events circa 603. They were one of the powerful tribes like P'u-ku, Wei-ho, Bayirku, and Fu-lo living next to the Tola River77. Later, they joined the Sir Tardush.
The Tongras are said to have had the same traditions as the Turks. They were in the north of the Sir Tardush, and east of the To-lan-ko. Their distance to the capital was 17.500 li, and they were in good state. That they are said to have 30.000 soldiers indicates their power. When the Eastern Turk state was about to collapse in 628, they remained free and sent embassy to the Chinese court. Then, they themselves requested to subject to China. For them, the Kuei-lin military governorship was established. Their leader Ilteber Shih-chien Chor was granted the title of left ling grand general, and was appointed as military governor.
When the Second Turk (Kok-Turk) Empire was founded in 682, a fugitive (kurag) from the Oghuz came to Tonyukuk to report that a new qagan was enthroned on the Nine Oghuz, and he sent General Ku to China and an envoy called Tongra Eshim to the Qitans to offer an alliance against the Kok-Turk78. Thus, we deduce that the Tongras were included in the Nine Oghuz in those days.
The Tongras are mentioned in the serial uprisings in 716 against the Second Turk (Kok-Turk) Qaganat. Kul Tegin, after fighting the Qarluqs, Az, Izgil, Nine Oghuz, Ediz, and Oghuz, and suppressing their rebellions one by one, a group of the Tongras killed 10 brave soldiers during funeral of Tonga Tegin79.
Their leader A-pu-sse went to China together with more than 10.000 people in 742. They were settled in Shuo-fang, given a wide terrain for their use, and granted ten thousands of rolls of clothes. The lands in He-ch'u were evacuated due to them. They rebelled after ten years. All their tribesmen crossed the river and returned to the north of the desert. Then, they were defeated by the Uighurs, and their people scattered. A-pu-sse, then refuged to the Qarluqs. Ch'eng-ch'ien-li, special administrator of Pei-t'ing, negotiated with him and convinced to return to China. Finally, he was executed in Chinese capital.
Some times later, when An-lu-shan rebelled, he used their soldiers. A certain man with the title Ye-luo-ho seems to be their leader. As reported, he was fluent and skilful in speech.80.
Wei-ho: To the north of the Tola river were the tribes P'u-ku, T'ung-lo, Wei-ho, Pa-ye-ku and Fu-lo. These were united under one erkin81. This tribe was ancestor of the Uighurs, and this is the first record of them in history.
MONGOLIAN TRIBES: In earlier period, before the X. century, there were many Mongolian tribes in historical spectacle. One can call them as Proto-Mongols. It is possible to have their number reached up to 118 (Eberhard 1942, p. 181-186). Let's examine significant ones of these tribes, which were important for Turkic and Mongolian history.
Hsi: The Hsi, who lived in the Wu-huan mounts, were called K'u-mo-hsi during the Wei dynasty (385-549) and again became Hsi in the T'ang period (618-907). Lifestyles and traditions of the Hsi, who are reported to be a part of the Tung-hu (Tunguz) in olden times, are said to be the same as the Turks. Interestingly, sources express that they used to continuously migrate, and live in felt tents. Besides, they
76 TT 1081a; HTS 217B, p.6144; WHTK 2699a.
77 PS 99, p.3303; SS 84 1879.
78 T,8,9.
79 KT, N,7; BK,E,31.
80 TT 1080c; HTS 217B, s.6140-41; WHTK 2699a; TPHYC198, s.736.
81 PS 99, ayni yer; SS 84, s.1879.
were skilful in hunting, cultivated a kind of millet, and had wooden mortars. Their cups with three legs were of clay, and they had good horses and black sheep. In the To-pa period, some people of the Hsi tribe rose in high ranks. This tribe is pointed out as a branch of the Qitan, when the latter got stronger82.
Qitan: The Qitans appeared in history first time in the second half of the IV. century AD in Southwest Manchuria and Eastern Mongolia. Though they are classified as separate from the K'u-mo-hsi, they are indeed included in the same group. They separated from the latter during the Wei dynasty (385-549). They used to pay horses as tribute. Some of them settled in Kao-li (Korea). Their customs looked like those of the Mo-ho. They had wooden graves (Their graves were on trees). Corps were fired after three years. They beg their dead men for abundance in hunting, etc. They were composed of 72 tribes. They had carts with horses. They emerged from the Tung-hu. Their traditions resembled to Turkic ones. They used to perform magi with a skull of man or wild pig, which were kept in tents, and which helped them. The Qitans used to sacrifice a white horse and black ox for their ancestors before wars or in every spring and fall. According to origins legend of the Qitans, a man riding a greyish horse and a girl in a cart withdrew by dark colour cattle met on the crossroad of two rivers. They got married and became ancestors of eight Qitan tribes83.
K'u-mo-hsi: The K'u-mo-hsi, who appeared in history as a mountaineer tribe in north, were in Southwest Manchuria and Eastern Mongolia in the second half of the IV. century.
According to another source, they were another branch of the Tung-hu Yu-wen. After a heavy defeat before the Hsien-pi, they were separated into five groups as Ju-ho-chu, Mo-ho-fu, Ch'i-ku, Mu-kun, and Shih-te. Their titles are the same as the Turks. They wandered like the Turks. They were good hunters and had carts. They made mush from millet. They were defeated in 388 by the To-pa. They made raids onto the To-pa country in 480 and 490. After the last inroads, trade with them was forbidden. From the next year on, they sent envoys with tributes to the To-pa state84.
Meng-wu: This name points to a part of the crowded Shih-wei tribes during the T'ang dynasty (618-907). This ethnonym is, with great possibility, the first writing of the word Meng-gu, which is Chinese form of Mongol.
Shih-wei: Their country was to the north of the Wu-chih. The Shih-wei are usually thought to be continuation of the Hsien-pi. They were kin with the Qitans, too. They cultivated millet, wheat, and wild grains at most. Sable was too much. They used to live in cities in summers, and migrate in winters. Men had long hairs. They had bows and arcs made of horn. Women tied their hairs. They always put on jackets and pants made of feather of white deer. They produced wine. Red shell, which they put on their necks as in chain form, is symbol of wealth. Southern Shih-wei lived in plains, and withdrew to north in summers. They lived there in houses made on trees, due to mosquitoes and animals. Their dresses were like those of the Qitans. They had ox-wagons. Their residences were like felt wagons of the Turks, but made of straw. The Pen Shih-wei lived in more northern. They cover their houses with bark of beech. Their culture was the same as those of the Northern Shih-wei. In winters they lived in inns. In the northwest were the Great Shih-wei. Their language was like those of the Qitans. They had mourning for three years. They have their graves on trees. Though they married by kidnapping girls, they presented gifts. They bought iron from Korea. Widows never married once again. They dealt with hunting and fishing. They put their dead men on wooden beds, which every village made commonly.
Their relationship with the Qitans is often stressed in sources. There were Shih-wei with Black Carts subjected to the Qitans. They had rafts and booth made of skin.
82 Wei Shu 113; HTS 219; WHTK, 2717c.
83 PS 94, SS 83;TUng Chih 200;Chin Shu 24.
84 Wei Shu 2; Wei Shu 100; PS 94; HTS 217B.
Saddles and bits of their horses are from straw. When they want to sleep, they dig houses in ice, and cover with straw. Women sit while their hands were on their knees. Their country is poor, agriculture brings very little income. They have no sheep, their horses are few. They have much pigs and cattle. Their customs were like those of the Mo-ho. They kidnap girls before engagement. They give cattle and horses as dowry. Women remain with her family until her baby is borne. In winters, the Northern Shih-wei live in inns in mountains. Their cattle often die due to cold weather. They have much deer. They live on hunting. They put on skin dresses. They travel on sticks due to the danger of dropping into holes under snow. They live on mostly hunting sable. Some of them have clothes made of fish skin. They produce boots by covering woods with skin. They mine iron, copper, gold and silver in their country, and know well making tools with iron and copper. Patriarchal hegemony is crucial85.
Chu: The Chu tribe lived in the northeast of the Bayirku. They were 500 li (about 235 km), that is six days far from them. The Chu, whose land is said to have many trees, had no grassland. Their soil had mosses. The Chu tribesmen, who could not breed horses and sheep due to lack of grass, domesticated deer. They used deer in their carts. Three or four men used to drive, or get on those carts. They produced clothes from deer skin. They ate mosses. They built wooden houses, and everybody, whether noble or not, lived there86.
Ch'u-tu-wei: This tribe, about whom the Chinese were first informed during the Suei dynasty (582-617), was to the north of the Shih-wei tribe. Their men were numerous, and clothes were short. They did not bond their hairs, and lived inns digged in soil. There were many pigs. There were no animals like horse and cattle. It is difficult to identify origin of this tribe, but they might be a Mongolian or Turko-Mongolian tribe87.
Wa-chie-tse: In the northeast of the Qitans. They are skilful horsemen. They rode horses without saddle. They use bow very well; they have long bows and arcs.
Wu-liang-hsia: These are the people called His during the Han dynasty, and K'u-mo-hsi in later times. They live in the north of Yu-yang and south of the river Amur. They are to be the Urenhay Mongols88.
In consequence, before-mentioned tribes can be identified as ancestors of the Mongols living today in Mongolia. Though they bear different names, Chinese sources deal with them altogether. The process of writing in sources begins during the Han dynasty, and ends in the T'ang days. Most of the tribes were nomadic, but some of them surely dealt with agriculture. The most widespread profession was breeding cattle and sheep (Eberhard 1942, p. 55-61).
The Shih-wei culture can be identified as basic of the Mongolian culture before the X. century. This is indicator of very dense cultural relations between Turkic and Mongolian tribes. Just as, sources describe Proto-Mongol cultures as resembling to Hun and Kok-Turk ones. We see wagon homes, bows from horn, and ski with flat bottom. Resemblance of titles from many aspects points to Turko-Mongolian affinity. While there are these resemblances and affinities between Turks and Mongols, it does not happen with the Manchu (Tunguz) peoples.
Historical records about the Shih-wei tell much. There were many Shih-wei sub-tribes distributed in accordance with geographical regions. They were separated from each other according to regions. Those living in the north were closer to Siberian cultures. Those living in the south, in turn, were busy with pasturage. The northerners had homes from tree barks, or wagon homes, clothes from leather and fish leather, skis, and other tools. They dealt with agriculture. Basic difference from Turkic tribes was their breeding pigs, and making their graves on trees.
Conclusion: As before stated, Turkic and Mongolian tribes seeming together in
85 PS 94;T'ung Chih 200, SS 84; HTS 219B.
86 HTS 217B, p.6146; WHTK 2699b; TT 1081 b.
87 WHTK 2717c.
88 T'ai-p'ing Yü-lan 1000; HTS 219B.
historical arena of the Central Asian steppes, cohabited by the X. century. They set up all kinds of cultural and political relations. The process was so tense that sometimes Turkic tribes were mongolized, and sometimes Mongolian communities were turkified. As a result, sources mostly could hardly decide whether a certain tribe was Turkic or Mongolic. They claimed Turks and Mongols were the same. This situation makes it impossible to draw a certain border between the two people. When a Turkic tribe established a great state, Mongolian tribes obeyed, and vice versa. Regardless of their origins, when great states dissolved, all tribes in west and east acted independently. Those, who went to China and settled there, shared the same fate, and chinicised.
Эдебиеттер tî3îmî/ Список литературы
1. История Сибири с древнейших времен до наших дней / Под ред. А.П. Окладникова - Т.1. - М., 1968.
2. Bazin L. Les calendriers turcs anciens et medievaux. - Lille, 1974.
3. Chavannes E. Documents sur les Tou-kioue Occidentaux. - Paris, 1941.
4. Chavannes E. Note additionnelle sur l'inscription de Che tcheng // Journal asiatique. - 1909. - T. XIV. - Р. 511-514.
5. Christian D. A History of Russia, Central Asia and Mongolia. - Oxford, 1998.
6. Czegledy K. Turan Kavimlerinin Gôçû/trans.G.Karaagaç - istanbul, 1999.
7. Donuk A. Eski Türk Devletlerinde idari Askeri unvan ve Terimler. - istanbul, 1988.
8. Eberhard W. Çinin Çimal Komçulari. - Ankara, 1942.
9. Hamilton J.R. Les Ouighours à L' epoque des Cinq Dynasties D'apres les Documents Chinois. -Paris, 1955.
10. Hamilton J. Toquz Oguz et On Uygur // Journal Asiatique. - 1962. - vol. CCL. - Р. 23-63;
11. Hsüe Tsung-cheng. T'u-chüe Shih. - Pekin, 1992.
12. Hudud al-Alam. The Regions of the World. / Translated and explained by V. Minorsky. - London, 1937.
13. izgi Ö. Uygurlarin Siyasî ve Kültürel Tarihi. - Ankara: Türk Kültürünü Araçtirma Enstitüsü,1987.
14. Kafesoglu i. Türk Milli Kültürü. - istanbul, 1987.
15. Liu Mau Tsai. Die Chinesischen Nachrichten zur Gesschichte der Ost-Türken (Tu-kue). -Wiesbaden, 1957.
16. Mackerras C. The Uighur Empire According to T'ang Dynastic Histories. - Canberra, 1968.
17. Merçil Е. ilk Müslüman Türk Devletleri. - Ankara 2000.
18. Minorsky V. Tamim ibn Bahr's Journey to the Uyghurs // BSOAS. - 1948.
19. Mogollarin Gizli Tarihi / trans. Ahmet Temir. - Ankara, 1986.
20. Mori M. On the Chi-li-fa(elteber) and Chi-chin of T'ie-le Tribes // Acta Asiatica. - 1966. - № 9.
21. Orkun H.N. Eski Türk Yazitlari. - Ankara, 1987.
22. Ögel B. Sino-Turcica. - Taipei, 1964.
23. Pritsak O. Karahanlilar // islâm Ansiklopedisi. - 1955. - №. 6. - s. 251
24. Puleyblank E.G. Some Remarks on the Tokuzoghuz Problem // Ural-Altaische Jahrbücher - 1956.
25. Salman H. Basmillar ve Beçbalik Bölgesinin Diger kabileleri // Marmara Üniv. Türklük Araçtirmalari Dergisi. - 1991. - № 6.
26. Çeçen R. islam Cografyacilarina Göre Türkler ve Türk Ülkeleri. - Ankara, 1985.
27. Sinor D. The Cambridge History of Inner Asia. - Cambridge, 1990.
28. Taçagil A. Çin Kaynaklarina Göre Eski Türk Boylari. - Ankara, 2004.
29. Taçagil A. Gök-Türkler I. - Ankara, 2002.
30. Taçagil, Gök-Türkler II - Ankara, 1998.
31. Taçagil A. Kutlug Kagan ve II.Gök-Türk Devletinin Kuruluçu // BiR Türk Dünyasi incelemeleri Dergisi. 1995. - № 4. - С. 227-243.
32. Taçagil A. Gök-Türklerin Sonu ve Belgeleri // Belleten. - 1999. - vol. 236.
33. Taçagil A. Kapgan // Belleten. - 1993. - vol. 218.
34. Taçagil А. Karahitay // Türkiye Diyanet Vakfi islam Ansiklopedisi. - Vol..24. - P.415-416.
35. Taçagil A. Töles Boylarinin Cografi Dagilimina Bir Bakiç // Mimar Sinan Üniversitesi Fen-Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi. - 1991. - Aralik. - С. 234-243.
36. Togan Z.V. Umumî Türk Tarihine Giriç. - istanbul, 1980.
References
Bazin 1974 - Bazin, L Les calendriers turcs anciens et medievaux, Lille.
Chavannes 1909 - Chavannes, E 1909, Note additionnelle sur l'inscription de Che tcheng, Journal
asiatique, T. XIV, Р. 511-514. Chavannes 1941 - Chavannes, E 1941, Documents sur les Tou-kioue Occidentaux, Paris,. Christian 1998 - Christian, D 1998, A History of Russia, Central Asia and Mongolia, Oxford.
Czegledy 1990 - Czegledy, K 1999, Turan Kavimlerinin Gögü, trans.G.Karaagag, istanbul. Donuk 1988 - Donuk, A 1988, Eski Türk Devletlerinde idari Askeri unvan ve Terimler, istanbul. Eberhard 1942 - Eberhard, W 1942, Qinin §imal Kom§ulari, Ankara.
Hamilton 1955 - Hamilton, JR 1955, Les Ouighours a L' epoque des Cinq Dynasties D'apres les
Documents Chinois, Paris. Hamilton 1962 - Hamilton, J 1962, Toquz Oguz et On Uygur, Journal Asiatique, vol. CCL, Р. 23-63. Hsüe Tsung-cheng 1992 - Hsüe Tsung-cheng 1992, T'u-chüe Shih, Pekin.
Hudud al-Alam 1937 - Hudud al-Alam 1937, The Regions of the World. Translated and explained by V. Minorsky, London, 1937.
Istoriya Sibiri 1968 - Istoriya Sibiri s drevnejshih vremen do nashih dnej 1968, Pod red. A.P.
Okladnikova, T.1, Moskva. izgi 1987 - izgi, Ö 1987, Uygurlarin Siyasi ve Kültürel Tarihi, Türk Kültürünü Ara§tirma Enstitüsü, Ankara.
Kafesoglu 1987 - Kafesoglu, i 1987 Türk Milli Kültürü, istanbul.
Liu Mau Tsai 1957 - Liu Mau Tsai, 1957, Die Chinesischen Nachrichten zur Gesschichte der OstTürken (Tu-kue), Wiesbaden. Mackerras 1968 - Mackerras, C 1968, The Uighur Empire According to T'ang Dynastic Histories, Canberra.
Mergil 2000 - Mergil, Е 2000, ilk Müslüman Türk Devletleri, Ankara .
Minorsky 1948 - Minorsky, V 1948, Tamim ibn Bahr's Journey to the Uyghurs, BSOAS.
Mogollarin 1986 - Mogollarin Gizli Tarihi 1986 / trans. Ahmet Temir, Ankara.
Mori 1966 - Mori, M 1966, On the Chi-li-fa(elteber) and Chi-chin of T'ie-le Tribes, Acta Asiatica, № 9. Orkun 1987 - Orkun, HN 1987, Eski Türk Yazitlari, Ankara. Ögel 1964 - Ögel, B 1964, Sino-Turcica, Taipei.
Pritsak 1955 - Pritsak, O 1955, Karahanlilar, islam Ansiklopedisi, №. 6., s. 251
Puleyblank 1956 - Puleyblank, EG 1956, Some Remarks on the Tokuzoghuz Problem, Ural-Altaische Jahrbücher.
Salman 1991 - Salman, H 1991, Basmillar ve Be§balik Bölgesinin Diger kabileleri, Marmara Üniv.
Türklük Ara§tirmalari Dergisi, № 6. §e§en 1985 - §e§en, R 1985, islam Cografyacilarina Göre Türkler ve Türk Ülkeleri, Ankara. Sinor 1990 - Sinor, D 1990, The Cambridge History of Inner Asia, Cambridge. Ta§agil 2004 -Ta§agil, A 2004, Qin Kaynaklarina Göre Eski Türk Boylari, Ankara. Ta§agil 2002 - Ta§agil, A 2002, Gök-Türkler I, Ankara, 2002. Ta§agil 1998 - Ta§agil, A 1998, Gök-Türkler II, Ankara, 1998.
Ta§agil 1995 - Ta§agil, A 1995, Kutlug Kagan ve II.Gök-Türk Devletinin Kurulu§u, BiR Türk Dünyasi
incelemeleri Dergisi, № 4, С. 227-243. Ta§agil 1999 - Ta§agil, A 1999, Gök-Türklerin Sonu ve Belgeleri, Belleten, vol. 236. Ta§agil 1993 - Ta§agil, A 1993, Kapgan, Belleten, vol. 218.
Ta§agil 1991 - Ta§agil, A 1991, Töles Boylarinin Cografi Dagilimina Bir Baki§, Mimar Sinan
Üniversitesi Fen-Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, Aralik, С. 234-243, Ta§agil 2001 - Ta§agil, А 2001, Karahitay, Türkiye Diyanet Vakfi islam Ansiklopedisi, Vol.24, P.415-416.
Togan 1980 - Togan, ZV 1980, Umumi Türk Tarihine Giri§, istanbul.
6-9 гасырлардагы турк жэне монгол тайпаларыньщ этномэдени таралулары
Ахмет Ташагил
PhD in History, профессор, Yeditepe Университетшщ тарих кафедрасыныц мецгерушю. 34755 Typk^ Республикасы Стамбул далась. Ata§ehir,Kayi§dagiCaddesi, inönü Mahallesi, AgustosYerle§imi, 26. E-mail: atasagil@hotmail.com.
Тушн. Орталыщ Азиядагы 6-9 гасырларда eмiр сYрген тYркi жэне монгол тайпаларыньщ этномэдени жагдайына деталью талдау усынган. ТYркi жэне монгол тайпалары Х гасырда Орталыщ Азия даласындагы тарих сахнасында бiрге ^арастырылган. Олар мэдени жэне саяси ^арым-^атынастардыц барлыщ тYрлерiн курган. Кейде тYркi халы^тарын монголдандыру жэне монгол ^ауымын тYркiлендiру YPДiсiнщ соншалы^ты ^ар^ынды болгандыгы айтылган. Нэтижесiнде, тYркi немесе монгол руынан шыдандыгына кез жеткiзу мYмкiн емес болган. Олар монголдар мен тYркiлердi бiрдей болды деп мэлiмдейдi. Бул жагдай ею ел арасындагы шекараны аны^тауда мYмкiн емес болып тур. ТYркi тайпалары кеп болган кезде монгол тайпалары керiсiнше мойынсунган. Олардыц шыгу тепне ^арамастан, батысындагы жэне шыгысындагы рулар улы державалармен дербес жумыс ютеген. Кытайга кiм де кiм кешт келсе, сол ^ытайлыщ болган. Туйш сездер: тYркi тайпалары, монгол тайпалары, этно-мэдени жагдай, Кытайдагы тYркiлер мен монголдар.
Этно-культурное распространение тюркских и монгольских племен в 6-9 в.в.
Ахмет Ташагил
PhD in History, профессор, заведующий кафедрой Истории Университета Yeditepe. 34755 Турецкая Республика, г. Стамбул, Ata§ehir, Kayi§dagiCaddesi, inonQ Mahallesi, AgustosYerle§imi, 26. E-mail: atasagil@hotmail.com.
Аннотация. В статье предстален детальный этно-культурный анализ тюркских и монгольских племен, проживавших между 6-9 веками в Центральной Азии. Тюркские и монгольские племена представлены вместе на исторической арене степях Центральной Азии Х века. Они создали все иды культурных и политических отношений. Процесс был настолько напряженным, что иногда тюркские племена монголизировались, а монгольские общины тюркизировались. В результате, источники основном не могут решить наверняка, было ли какое-либо племя тюркским или монгольским. Они утверждали, что тюрки и монголы были одинаковыми. Эта ситуация делает невозможным определить границу между двумя народами. Когда тюркское племя было многочисленным, монгольские племена подчинялись, и наоборот независимо от их происхождения, когда великие державы распадались все племена на западе и востоке действовали самостоятельно те, кто переселился в Китай, поселились там, и стали китайскими. Ключевые слова: тюркские племена; монгольские племена; этнокультурное взаимодействие; тюрки и монголы в Китае.
