CC BY
29
YflK 904(517.3)
NEW CULT-CULTURAL INTERPRETATION ON A PASSAGE OF ORKHON TEXT INCLUDING THE IRON AND THE TREE IN THE OTUKEN FOREST MOUNTAINS
From of the 13th line, Southern side of Kol Tigin Inscription
Takashi OSAWA
Osaka University, Japan
Preface
As you know, Two Orkhon steles have built in the Khoshotsaidam steppe in the Arkhangai province, Mongolia in the 732 and 735 years (Map. 1).
Map.1: Orhon inscription of the Khoshotsaidam Valley (By T. OSAWA)
In Orkhon Text, terms such as the earth of Otuken {Otuken yer) / the Otuken Forest Mountains (Otuken y'is) are descripted as the sacred Mountains among the Old Turkic Qaghanate as the political, commercial and cultural center (Yamada 1950; Mori 1958, 1961,1992). Until today a large of scholars have been interpreted on the basis of the Expedition photographs of a Finnish Scholar O.A. Heikel and the estampaji of a Russian scholar W.W. Radloff's Atlas and other many colleagues, however, it still seems even now there are several problematic interpretation. Relation to this, recently I have noticed there is a special usage in the 13 th line of the Southern side in the Kol Tigin Inscription (Fig1: Right). This passage has the most important significance that relates to the place where Bilge Qaghan established Kol Tigin stele (Bangu tas). As long as I know, many researchers have read this part in different ways. But until now anyone has not solved this passage. As the result of my investigation, this passage has a close relation to the Iron and tree.
So In this presentation, I would like to analyze this passage and resolve the passage on the basis of the new investigation of the several old estampaji and my recent fieldworks from the philological and historical points of views.
Fig. 1. Chinese text in the western side (Left) and the Runic text in the southern side (Right) of the Kol Tigin Inscription, Kharakhorin, Arkhangaiprovince, Mongolia (Taken by T. OSAWA in 2007).
1. New establishment of the passage in the 13th line of the Kol Tigin stele
For example, according to Radloff 1894, 36-37, he read this passage as follows: (13) T W oq T D m: Y Q oq: r s r : m T Q a : r i g y r t i : i r s r nc a : r g y r t i : b ng g u T a s: T oq i T D m : b i t i d m: toqi'tdi'm: yaquq: arsar matiqa arig yarta arsarinca arig arita bangu tas toqi'tdi'm:
According to Thomsen 2002, 170-171, he read this passage as follows1:
(13) T oq T D m : B W r g r s r : nc T Q a : r i g y r t i : i r s r Lt : l g y r t I : b ng g u T s : T oq T D m:
Toqitdim bu arig arsar, [.]tqa arig yarta irsar anca arig yarta bangu tas toqitdim,
According to Malov 1951: 28-29 , he read this passage as follows:
T oq i T D m : B.: r s r : m T q a : r i g y r t i : i r s r nc a : r g y r t a : b ng g u T s : T oq i T D m : b i t i d m :
Toqitdim (bu arig) arsar amtiqa arig yirta irsar (all times: arsar) anca arig yirta bangu tas toqi'tdi'm:
According to Orkun 1936, 28-29, he read this passage as follows:
T W oq i T D m : B W [r i g] : r s r : m T Q a : r i g y r t a : i r s r nc a : r g y r t i: b ng u T a : T oq i T D m :
Tokitdim bu [erig] erser,. t. ka erig yerte irser anca erig yerte bengu tas tokitdim.
According to Tekin1988, 6-7, he read this passage as follows:
T oq i T D m : Y [G] oq i : r s r : nc T K i : r i g y r t a : i r s r nc a : r g y r t a : b ng u T s : T oq i T d m.
tokitdim: y[ag]uk el : erser : anca taki : erig yerte : irser anca : erig yerte : bengu tas : toqitdim.
As you know, this passage has been very problematic and as long as we know, it is remain as uncertain place. So I reinvestigated on the basis of an estampaji that have been held in KYOTO University with help of Prof. Dr. SUGIYA-MA Masaaki in 2006. It is likely that this is one of the most oldest estampaji, because Since Radloffs Orkhon exped i-tion, inside headstone of gu ku te qin shi pi>, there are a line of Chinese inscription such as
that had been carved by a Manchurian administrative officerH#Sanduo on his visiting here and construct a building for protect the inscription in la^H^ (1911 AD.) year, and in the Runic side of the East side, there is a Chinese inscription such as that means that in August
1911, an administrative officer WMChinyi of the Qing Dynasty came here as an ambassador and passed and investigated this stone. However, in the east side of estampaji of KYOTO University, there is a Chinese inscription in the West side, but is not a Chinese inscription in East side. The same feature can be confirmed also by estampaji and the photographs of O. A. Heikel's Orkhon Expedition 1890 of Finland [Bichees 2: 25, 136; OSAWA 2007: 30-31]. So on the basis of this estampaji, we looked after the track of Old Runic scripts and then we constructed the real shape of the very problematic characters of Kol Tigin stele.
1 In this case, from the eighth to eleventh runic scripts must be mistakenly shown, so I changed transliteration according to his transcription.
57
Photo 1. The first part of the 13th line, Southern side, Kol Tigin Inscription. From estampaji of KYOTO University [DKT].
Photo 2: The continuing part of the 13th line Southern side Kol Tigin Inscription. From estampaji of KYOTO University [DKT].
Photo 3: The continuing part of the 13th line Southern side Kol Tigin Inscription. From estampaji of KYOTO University [DKT].
Now I would like to confirm some scripts of my transliteration according to our estampaji of 2007 by Bichees 2 in the following;
V^j t'i« v
v.
'j^-t i* :
■ » ¿'-J ' ' №
i A .. Vjii . ---ii 'Vft^'i
fir
r^iEE!
- A « '.
M * '«ML ¿A^r -r; • ..SB;/',„
\ . a
rmt: mDTIqT
aKTO: rsr: rmt : mD T
if
"V 'it.
' .J?*». 4M |¿A» •
V ' ~ \ -''' ' -
rygir: aKTO : rsr
• V » V ' r - Ui '*•** v - "'•A.»« J' K* «c t
III': PMm V ^ • \\ ■ 1&U fife
r: 1: atrygir: aK
V f ■ V«* ■ * J . ■*
i , » . * ' » * •• * %1 ~ 4 ' im
^ V v. ^ ** ^ ' "V iK V^fv- J V
i • V " ,A *
ry: gri : rsr: 1 : at
mditib : mDT
Photo 4. First parts of the 13 th line of Southern side of Kol Tigin, From Japanese and Mongolian International Joint Expedition
2007 under Bichees 2, Archives.
In photograph above mentioned, I showed only problematic places that the Japanese and Mongolian Joint members took in Kol Tigin stele in August 2007. From this our new reading is to be confirmed. Moreover, I tried to confirm my reading from the estampaji in the TOYO BUNKO of National Diet Library of TOKYO in 2010. From
these, we can propose new reading on this problematic passage as follows:
(13) ) T oq i T D m : t m r r s r : W T Q a : r i g y r t a : i : r s r a r g y r t a : b ng g u T s : T oq i T D m :
toqitdim : tamir arsar : otqa : arig yirta : i : arsar arig yirta : bangu tas : toqitdim :
[Translation]
I carved (inscription). In the place that is enough strong to be bear the fire as if it is iron, and in the place where is enough strong as if it is tree, I carved inscription.
If my translation is true, what does this passage mean? At this present, this expression means that the Orkhon Steppe is very strong fortress by attacking enemy. This may be explained from the viewpoint of military defense, however, as long as we know, we cannot suppose that the Orkhon Steppe is natural stronghold such as Istanbul. But this region can be regarded as political center for nomad tribes in Mongolia. From this view, it is noteworthy to pay attention to two elements such as iron and tree.
2. The importance of the Iron and Tree in the Orkhon Valley in the Hangai Mountains
In this passage, it is of importance to describing the name of iron materials and tree (wood). Because these two materials are abundant in these area, i.e. the steppe region and mountains around the Orkhon, Ikh-Tamir, Khanui. Khunui, Tuula etc.
For example, Ikh-Tamir region is shown as being abundant area from the general material maps [MOAMZ 2009].
102° E lOA'E
Map 2: Place of Iron producing (X) near the Koshotsaidam Steppe along the Orhon and the Tamir Rivers (By T. OSAWA)
And according to information of a Japanese archeological colleague T. SASADA, some points near the Orkhon and Ikh-Tamir Rivers has a vein of iron. Especiallyin recent years, we came across new evidence of the iron production in the region near the Karakorum city and Khoshotsuaidam steppe along the Orhon River (Pohl et al 2012). As you know, there are forest regions in the northern side of the Khangai Mountains. Maybe nomad peoples have used these tree for constructing the fence named 'cit' in Old Turkic around the Qaghan's military camp, i.e., Ordu in old Turkic. This can be supported by the contexts of the Old Runic texts from the 1 -2nd lines of the Western side oin Tariat(Terkhin) Inscription and the 8-9th lines of the Eastern side in Shine-Usu Inscription [MORIYASU & OCHIR 1999: 27, 169-170,184]. This view can be also supported by the Old Chinese Chronology of the Tang dynasty on the Old Kirghiz Qaghanate:
iwrne^w^, mms, mrn&rn, t^mm^m.
(Qirghiz Qaghan) Are placed his capital in the Qingshan Mountain - Kogmen yis-, and constructed the fence in the place of substituted the wall, constructed his tent with connecting the felt, and he told himself *iltemis1 and he ordered his subjects dwell in the small tent. (Xintangshu -217,on the Qirhgiz: 6148).
From this, we can understand that Are Qaghan of Qirgiz Qaghanate became strong and moved his capital from the steppe between Minishinsk basin and the Abakan River to the southern area where was located in the Steppe between the Ulug-Kem and Kemchik River near the Qing Mountains around 840 AD. And according to Japanese historian H.MATSUDA, the Qing Mountains can be attested with the Tannu uul Mountains. In this, it is remarkable that Qirghiz Qaghan newly constricted the fence(^W), this means that he constructed the cit, and they might be wooden fence, not metal stakes. So tree of our problematic places can also used as defense of Turkic Qaghan's capital in the Otüken yer.
Now let us consider the iron and fire in the problematic passage again. As well known, iron has been used as weapon of battle as recorded in Suishu-84 Tujue as follows:
^ñ^, p, n, m.
[(Among Tujue peoples) there were bows made of born, whistling arrows, armors, a kind of rider's lances, sabres and swords.]
1 Thisoriginal Chineseletters was^fti miteshi, however, in this order, we cannot reconstruct as Turkic title, so now I regarded that this order is mistakenly written fromft^itemisi that can be reconstructed as Old Turkic title among tribal or kaghan's title 'iltemis' that originally means 'gathering the peoples'.
* .«& iW JW IVirJ .Vtupimi* 111 M.ra*ul»t Iii Ycwr I
fC*fct&Tr*f 75- flitffn K^itf.irt AjiiO, .VC JM /4«! f/jn 6(j/imjn ken, i/k rirrfu/ f/.ut,.*
Pftoiog/dpb 75- $n\att metal piece found rn Öi/rp AcTtjo VC /fmrh. /W pi.in «jiwrrv
f-otogtaf 7b- tdg^n Ajnti, /^oiair A-i p/jn Ajresini^ ¿M/Zurun nretaf oA «cu
Phctin&raph 7(r- Met.it jrrrjw /mad frtund in Bitgr Kti.tfx frenc/i. p/an stftiittf.
So, from this problematic text, iron may symbolize iron sword, iron spear, iron arrow etc, and iron goods of horse. So the description of iron may remind us of strong protective base camp against the enemies. In fact, when TiKA and Mongolian Archaeology Institute did excavate the Bilge Qaghan's site, they found some fingertips of iron arrows and a part of spear from the mound [TiKA 2002: Photographs 75, 76].
And 1957 year, when L. Jisl and Ser-Odzhab excavated the mound of Kol Tigin Site, it seems that fingertips of spear were excavated, but until now we cannot confirm this materials [Cf. Jisl 1960, 1960a, 1997].
F
ft
Iron products excavated from the Köl Tigin Site in 1957, Mongolian Historical Museum (Taken by T. OSAWA in 2008).
According to L. Jisl, on the territory of the Orkhon Türks one lance was found in a sarcophagus at Bayand a-vaan-Aman in Mongolia [Jisl 1997: 21]. Besides, we know that Chinese sources mention long riders' lances as another Türk weapon and swords. The worriers wore daggers on their bel t. Protective equipment included helmets and during attackes they were said to be wearing armor plate vests. And archaeological finds in Türk graves have confirmed the Chinese data on Türks' whistling arrows and give a concrete idea of these. The points of these battle arrows were made of iron. They were heavy and make up of three blades with holes in them. As confirmed in an engraving at Sulek of Khakassia, we can see the battle engravings with made of iron lance, which was a type adapted for piercing armor.
But only from this fact, we cannot say that Old Turkic peoples product iron goods such as iron swords, iron spear and iron goods, because until now there are no tracks such as smithy from the Orkhon Steppe around Ötüken y'is. In spite of this situation, I am convincing that archaeological materials corresponding to smithy will be excavated from Old Turkic sites around Ikh-Tamir regions in future, because there are a good vein of iron in the Mongolian map, and a coal works can be confirmed in Ikh-Tamir som along the Xoit-Tamir River nowadays1.
3. Ötüken y'is / Ötüken yer as mithological meaning among Old Türks
In the following, I would like to analysis problematic passage of the 13 th line of South side in Köl Tigin stele, and in my view, this passage can be also considered, not from military and political points of views, from the viewpoints of their traditional cult and believe among Old Turkic peoples.
In my view, this passage reflects the influence of the shamanistic world view. As many ethnographical researchers pointed out, from viewpoints of Turkic folklore, iron and tree are very essential existence among Shamanism. For example, iron has very importance to nomad peoples not only for producing the weapons, but also for protect the evil spirits. For example, according to Menandoros protectus, a Byzatine ambassador Zemarchos, on the way to Sirjiboulos of Western Türks, he experienced in Sogdiana (or Sogdian colony of Central Asia) in 568 AD. as follows: When Zemarchus and his companions had completed a journey of many days, then entered the land of the Sogdians. At this point they dismounted from their horces, and certain Turks, who had apparently been ordered to do this, offered them iron for sale, the purpose of which, I think, was to demonstrate that they had iron mines. For it is said that amongst them iron is not easily obtained. Thus one can assume that they made this demonstrations to imply that they possessed land that contained iron (Blockley 1985: 116-118).
From this description, we understand that iron is precious materials and Türks was proud of their hierarchy and show their higher way of life to Byzantine ambassador while Türks would like to pure the evil spirits of foreign peoples. This passage is also the same works as follows:
Ceratain others of their own tribe appeared, who, they said, were exorcisers of ill-omened things, and they came up to Zemarchus and his companions. They took al of the baggage that they were carrying and placed it on the ground. Then they set fire to branches of the frankincense tree, chanted some barbarous words in their Scythian tongue, making noise with bells and drums, waved above the baggage the frankincense boughs as they were crackling with the flames, and, falling into a frenzy and acting like madmen, supposed that they were driving away evil spirits. For in this way some men were thought to be averters of and guardians against evil. When they had chased away the evil beings, as they thought that by this means they had purified themselves also (Blockley 1985: 118-119).
From this passage, we can clearly understand that Shamans of Old Türks performed the ceremony for going to the typical Shmanistic trans condition (Kamraniye) with fire in order to perish away the evil spirits. Former passage and this one of Menader Protectus indicates us that Old Türks had a custom of avoiding the evil spirits that Greek Orthdox believers such Zemarchus brought from the foreign world with iron or fire. And for who entered into the Old Türks country, he could not help pass over the fire and pure his mind.
As we know, iron has close relations with Shamanism among Eurasian nomad peoples since Xiong-nu (Xwn) periods in Eurasia2. As Dr. Jean-Paul Roux cited in his work, in Yakut proverb, there is a phrase such as "Demirciler ve shamanlar ayni yuvadan cikmadir"(Smith and Shaman are born from the same home).
To this, according to J. Roux's view, purification by fire and shamanism are also very close relation (Roux 1994: 63-64).
Especially the very idiomatic expression such as tämir ärsär : otqa : ärig yirta in Orkhon Turkic indicates that Old Turkic peoples product iron goods as ancestor of Tujue served as smith under the Rouran Qaghanate in Zhoushu-50 or Suishu-84. But from this passage, we should not touch the mythology, but it makes us regard the Orkhon Steppe as being defended by shamanistic power, i.e., iron power. In my view, this passage can emphasis the existence of shamanisit-ic power in the Orkhon Steppe including Ötüken yer and is to be similar expressions of bängü yir, i.e, eternal place.
I think that there is no more saying on the importance of iron and tree (tree of life) in the world under the Shamanism. And it is recognized that the higher Mountains was important role in their Shamanistic World, and this can be regarded as the center of the World.
1 On 8th, August 2010, our Japan and Mongol expedition members could cinfirm coal works under the rock hill on the way in the Ikh-Tamir som.
2 This view was already suposed by H. Altheim1952: 127.
According to these views, expression including iron and tree in passage, 13th line South side, the Köl Tigin stele can be assume that the Ötüken yer including the Ötüken yis has been strong fence to protect the evil spirits and tree also was regarded as the fence such as 'cit aroung the Qaghan's camp and his mausoleum of their ancestors. Conclusions.
As I mentioned above, it seems undoubted that the Orkhon Steppe of Ötüken yer is of importance and of value from the strategic point of view, however, for enthronement of Great Qaghan, this place is regarded as sacred place to his getting shamanistic power, i.e., qut, 'fortune, charisma' from the Tängri-God. At that situation, Qaghan can become the Great Shaman and ruler on the spirit over the world. A passage of the 13 th line of South side of Köl Tigin Inscription, this demonstrates that they were smith and might have smithy anywhere in the Orkhon Steppe, but from this, we cannot conclude that they produced the iron goods in the Orkhon steppe until now. At this present, in my view this term should be analysis as another expression of the term iduq 'sacred, soul' or bängü 'eternal'.
Abbreviations
ATIM =W. W. Radloff, Die alttürkischen Inschriften der Mongolei. St. Petersburg, 1. Lieferung 1894 (Repr. Osnabrück 1987.) Atlas =Radloff, W. Atlas Drevnostei Mongolii Trudy Orkhonskoi Ekspeditsii, (Atlas der. Alterthümer der Mongolei. Arbeiten der Orchon-Expedition. 1. Lieferung 1892; 2. Lieferung 1893; 3. Lieferung 1896; 4. Lieferung 1899), Sankt-Peterburg.
Bichees 2 = Т. Осава, К. cy3y™, Р. Менхтулга (eds.), Бичээс II, 2006 оноос 2008 оны Монгол улс дахь ТYргийн бичээс ба эртний дурсга-лыг судлах экспедицийн илтгэл, Улаанбаатар, 2009.
DTS=B.M. Наделяев, etc. (Ed.), Древнетюркскии словарь. Ленинград 1969.
DKT=Dai kentooshi ten 2010 = Nara national Museum (ed.), Dai kentooshio ten (Exibition catalogue on The Great Japanese Ambassador to Tang dynasty), Nara national Museum 2010.
DT = V. M. Nadelyaev and el., Drevnetyurkskij Slovar', Reningrad 1969. ED = G.Clauson, An Etymological Dictionary of Pre-Thirteenth-Century Turkish. Oxford 1972. GOT = T. Tekin, A Grammar of Orkhon Turkic, Bloomington, Indiana 1968. MNTSD =Mongol Nutag Dakhi Tüükh Soelin Dursgal. Ulaanbaatar 1991.
Moriyasu & Ochir = MORIYASU, T. and A. Ochir (ed.), Mongoru Koku Genzon Iseki Hibun Chösa Kenkyü Hökoku, Osaka University, Chuo Yürashia Gaku Kenkyükai (In Japanese), (Provisional Report of Researches on Historical Sites and Inscriptions in Mongolia from 1996 to 1998). Osaka University, The Society of Central Eurasian Studies 1999.
TIKA 2002 = Mogolistan 'daki TürkAnitlari Projesi 2000yili galismalan, Ankara 2002. MOAMZ=Mongol Opni Ashiigt Maltmalin Zurag, 2009, Ulaanbaatar.
SS=Sui shu (Chronicle of the Sui dynasty, 581-617), 85 juan, by Wei Zheng (580-643) and others, completed in 636 and 656, Zhong hua shu ju, Beijing 1973.
TD= Tong Dien (Comprehensive History of Regulations) 200 juan by Do You(735-812), 5 vols., Zhong hua shu ju, Beijing 1988. ZS=Zhou-shu (Chronicle of the Zhou dynasty, 557-581), 50 juan, by Ling hu de fen (583-666) and others, completed in 628, Zhong hua shu ju, Beijing 1971.
Bibliography
1. Altheim, H. (1952) Attila et les Huns, Paris.
2. Blockley, R. C. (1985) The History of Menander the guardsman, Liverpool.
3. Bäng, M. (1925) Turkologische briefe aus dem Berliner Uigarischen Institute. Zweiter Brief: Uzuntonluy-die Krone der Scöpfung. Ungarische Jahrbücher 5.
4. Bombaci, A., (1965) Qutluy bolzun!, Ural-Altaishe Yahrbücher 36, pp. 284-291.
5. Cen Zhongmian (1939) Wai meng yu dou djin kao, Li shiyuyanyanjiuji 8/3, pp.357-369.
6. Ergun, P. TürkKültüründe AgagKültü, Atatürk Kültür Merkezi Ba§kanligi Yayinlari, Ankara.
7. Esin, E. (2004) OrtaAsya'dan Osmanlya TürkSanatinda ikonografik motifler, Kabalci, Istanbul.
8. Jisl, L. (1960) Vorbericht über die archäologische Erforshunh des Kül-tegin-Denkmals dirch die tschechoslowakische-mongolische Expedition des Jahres 1958, Ural Artaische Jahr bücher 32-1/2, pp. 65-77.
9. Jisl, L. (1960a) Vyzkum külteginova pamatniku v mongolske lidove republice, Archeoloqicke Rozhledy, 12-1, pp. 64, 86-115.
10. Jisl, L. (1961) Wie sahen die alten Türken aus, Ural Altaishe Jaharbücher 40/3-4, pp. 181-199.
11. Jisl, L. (1963) Kül-Tegin anitnda 1958'de yapilan arkeoloji ara§tirmalanni sonujlan, Belleten 28, pp.387-410.
12. Jisl, L. (1997) The Orkhon Türks and problems of the archaeology of the sacred Eastern Türk Kaghanate, Annals of NaprstekMuseum Praha 18, pp. 1-11 + many plates.
13. Karlgren, B. (1972) GrammataSericaRecensa, Stockholm (Orig. 1957).
14. Kormushin, I. V. (1997) Tyurkskie Eniseiskie Epitafii, Moskva.
15. MATSUDA, H. (1970) Kodai Tianshan no Rekishi Chirigakuteki Kenkyuu, Wasedasyuppanbu (The geographical and historical studies on the Tianshan Regions) (in Japanese), Tokyo.
16. Michel and Mary Whitby. (1986) The History of The Theophylact Simocatta, An English Translation with Introduction and Notes, Oxford.
17. MORI, M. (1958) Enisei cyuruku no il~äl ni tsuite (On the term il / äl in Yenise Türks) (In Japanese), KODAIGAKU 7-2, pp. 115-139.
18. MORI, M. (1967) Kodai toruko minzokushi no kenkyuu I (Eski Türklerin tarih ara§tirmalari I), (in Japanese), Tokyo, Yamakawashuppansha.
19. MORI, M. (1981) "The Tu-chüeh Concept of Sovereign", Acta Asiatica, No. 41, pp.41-75.
20. MORI, M. (1992) Kodai toruko minzokushi no kenkyuu II (Eski Türklerin tarih ara§tirmalari II), (in Japanese), Tokyo, Yamakawashuppansha.
21. MORI, M. (1997) Kodai toruko minzokushi no kenkyuu III (Eski Türklerin tarih ara§tirmalari III), (in Japanese), Tokyo, Yamakawashuppansha.
22. ÖSAWA, T. (2003). Aspects of the cult and culture of Tengri upon the ancient Turkic inscriptions of the Yenisei Basin, Tengri Ordo Foundation, The 1st International Scientific Conference <Tangrianity is the worldview of the Altaic people>, 10-13th November 2003, (Collection ofpapers in Russian and English languages), Abstract. pp. 45-50, Beshkek, Kyrgyz Republic.
23. ÖSAWA, T. (2006) On the belief and worship toward the sacred Mountains in Old Turkic Peoples, (Ed. Barbala, K) Proceeding of the 49th PIAC, 30 July, 2006, Berlin (Forthcoming).
24. ÖSAWA, T. (2003). Kinnen-ni Okeru Biruge Kagan iseki no Hakkutsuchoosa to Kameishi, Hibun no Hooi kara mita Taitou kankei (The archaeological excavation of the Bilge Kaghan site in recent years and the political relations between the Old Turkic Kaghanate and the Tang Dynasty) (In Japanese), Shihoo 39, Hokkaidoo daigaku Tooyooshi Danwakai, Sapporo, pp.14-38.
25. Ögel, B. (1971) TürkMitolojisi II, Milli Egtim Basimevi, Istanbul.
26. Pohl, E., Mönkhbayar, Ahrens,B.,Frank, K.,Linzen, S., Osinska, A.,Shfler,T.,Schneider, M.,
27. (2012) Production Sites in Karakorum and its Environment: A new Archaelogical Project in the Orkhon Valley, Mongolia, Silkroad 10, pp.49-65.
28. Roux, J. P., Türklerin ve Mogollarin Eski Dini, Istanbul.
29. Roux, J.P. (1999) Altay Türklerinde Ölüm, Kabalci yayinevi, Istanbul.
30. Radloff, V.V. (1894) Die Alttürkischen Inschriften der Mongoleri, I. Lieferung, St. Petersburg.
31. SHIRATORI, K. Tooko minzoku koo (On the history of eastern barbarian peoples) (in Japanese), SHIGAKUZassi 23-2.
32. Tadinova, R. (2006) The Early Turkic Vocaburary of Funeral Rites. Kinship in the Altaic World, Proceeding of the 48th PIAC (ed. Boikova. V. Rybakov, B.), Wiesbaden, pp.311-319.
33. Tekin, T. (1988a) Orhon Yazitlari, TDK, Ankara.
34. Tekin, T. (2003) Orhon Türkgesi Grameri, TDAD 9, Istanbul
35. Thomsen, V. (1924) Alttürkische Inschrift der Deutchen Morgenländischen Gesellscaft 78.
36. Thomsen, V. (2002) Orhon Yaiitlari Arastirmalari, TDK, Ankara (org. 1896)..
37. YAMADA, N. (1950) Tyuruku no Seizan Utyukenzan [The sacred Ötükän Mountain] (in Japanese), The Belleten of The Liberal Arts Faculty, Shizuoka University [Series A: Human Science] No.1, Japan, pp. 65-74.
© Osawa Takashi, 2015
УДК 904(517.3)
НОВАЯ КУЛЬТУРНО-КУЛЬТОВАЯ ИНТЕРПРЕТАЦИЯ ОТРЫВКА ИЗ ТЕКСТА ОРХОНСКОЙ КУЛЬТУРЫ, ВКЛЮЧАЮЩАЯ ПОНЯТИЯ ЖЕЛЕЗО И ДЕРЕВО ПО ОТНОШЕНИЮ К ЛЕСАМ И ГОРАМ МЕСТНОСТИ ОТЮКЕН (ИЗ 13-Й СТРОКИ ЮЖНОЙ СТОРОНЫ НАДПИСИ
В ЧЕСТЬ КЮЛЬ-ТЕГИНА) *
Такаши Осава
Университет г. Осака, Япония
Статья посвящена изучению надписи известной древнетюркской стелы в честь одного из выдающихся полководцев Второго тюркского каганата. Стела была установлена в VIII веке в долине реки Орхон на территории современного аймака Архангай Монголии. Статья вводит в научный оборот фрагмент, вероятно, одного из наиболее ранних эстампов этой стелы из архива Университета Киото. На основе изучения этих эстампов, изготовленных, предположительно, в начале XX века, а также на основе собственного изучения стелы в её нынешнем состоянии автор предлагает новое прочтение фрагмента надписи, ранее остававшегося не вполне ясным, и его историческую интерпретацию.
Ключевые слова: древнетюркская письменность, стела, эстамп, фрагмент надписи, историческая интерпретация, Монголия, Орхон, Кюль-тегин.
Введение. Как известно, в Хошотсайдамской степи (в другой транслитерации - Кошо-цайдамской) провинции Архангай в Монголии в 732-735 годы были воздвигнуты две Орхонские стелы (карта 1)
Карта 1. Орхонская надпись в долине Хошотсайдам (Т. Осава)
