592

 TRIBES OF CENTRAL ASIA TILL XIV.CENTURY

We put the reviews of main nations Turks, Mongols and Tatars of Turkistan, briefly with main highlights. The most effective tribes in the past till XIV.Century at mentioned Turkistan area has been listed and explained with their contribution, their influential territories, their core characteristics. We did not write all political history of tribes but the remarkable details and informations.
This thesis contains scientific attraction points such as importance of cashmere fabric, sticky rice, Denisova Cave with evidences. For fabric of cashmere, a new hypothesis has been put by us for the first time in literature for scientific discussions.
We asked the goal driven questions too when necessary. We displayed some new opinions with indirect but strong indicative evidences in front of eyes. Likewise as our opinion about the founder tribe of Turkish Karakhanid State. Or like a clue for what could have had happened to main population of ancient Kirghiz masses.
At last, we brang a new methodology to understand the Turkistan tribes more clearly in a different way of analyze based on correct historical datas which we believed would be very efficent for researchers which is a first at academy. A separate section had been allocated for specially prepared tables and graphs by us in order to analysis better the tribes with an holistic view.
Of course our main purpose was to try to comprehend the functioning of Turks’ unique magnificent tribe system.Our target is to bring a vision to future works.
Anahtar Kelimeler : Tribe, Clan, Tribes, Turkish Tribe System, Tribe system, Migrations, Migration of tribes, Turks, Tatars, Mongols, Kirghiz, Ting-ling, Toles, Turgis, Oghuz, Kipchak, Damga, Tamga, Tamgas, Cashmere, Fabric of Cashmere, Rice, Sticky rice, Amur, Navigation at Turks, Homo Denisovan, Denisova cave.
iii
ÖZET
Türkistan'ın başlıca milletleri olan Türkler, Moğollar ve Tatarların incelemelerini kısaca ana hatlarıyla ortaya koyuyoruz. Söz konusu Türkistan sahasında XIV.yüzyıla kadar geçmişte en etkin olan kavimler, katkıları, nüfuz ettikleri topraklar, çekirdek özellikleri ile listelenmiş ve açıklanmıştır. Boyların tüm siyasi tarihini değil, dikkat çekici detayları ve bilgileri yazdık.
Bu tez, kaşmir kumaşının önemi, yapışkan prinç, Denisova Mağarası gibi bazı bilimsel cazibe noktalarını kanıtlarla içermektedir. Kaşmir kumaşı için literatürde ilk defa bilimsel tartışmalar için tarafımızdan yeni bir hipotez ortaya atılmıştır.
Gerektiğinde hedefe yönelik sorular da sorduk. Bazı yeni görüşleri dolaylı ama güçlü belirleyici delillerle gözler önüne serdik. Türk Karahanlı Devleti’nin kurucu boyu hakkındaki görüşümüz gibi. Ya da eski Kirgiz kitlelerinin ana nüfusuna ne olmuş olabileceğine dair bir ipucu gibi.
Son olarak, akademide bir ilk olan araştırmacılar için çok faydalı olacağına inandığımız, doğru tarihsel verilere dayalı farklı bir analizle Türkistan boylarını daha net anlamak için yeni bir metodoloji getirdik. Boyları bütüncül bir bakış açısı ile daha iyi çözümlemek için tarafımızca özel olarak hazırlanmış tablo ve grafikler için ayrı bir bölüm ayırdık.
Tabii ki asıl gayemiz Türklerin eşsiz muhteşem boy sisteminin işleyişini kavramaya çalışmaktır. Amacımız gelecekteki çalışmalara bir vizyon kazandırmaktır.
Anahtar Kelimeler : Boy, Klan, Boylar, Türk Boy Sistemi, Boy sistemi, Göçler, Kavimler Göçü, Türkler, Tatarlar, Moğollar, Kırgız, Ting-ling, Töles, Oğuz, Kıpçak, Damga, Tamga, Tamgalar, Kaşmir, Kaşmir kumaşı, Pirinç, Yapışkan prinç, Amur, Türklerde gemicilik, Homo Denisovan, Denisova mağarası.
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I

v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PLAGIARISM ................................................................................................................................ i
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................... ii
ÖZET .......................................................................................................................................... iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................................. iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS.................................................................................................................. v
LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................................... vii
LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................................... viii
1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 1
2. GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION ............................................................................................. 4
3. MAIN NATIONS OF CENTRAL ASIA TILL XIV. CENTURY .................................................... 19
3.1. Turks .............................................................................................................................. 19
3.1.1. Asian Hun Empire ................................................................................................... 28
3.1.2. Gok-Turk Empire .................................................................................................... 32
3.1.3. Uyghur States ......................................................................................................... 35
3.2. Mongols ........................................................................................................................ 38
3.3. Tatars ............................................................................................................................ 44
4. TRIBES OF CENTRAL ASIA TILL XIV.CENTURY ................................................................... 53
4.1. A-shih-na & A-shih-te .................................................................................................... 53
4.2. Ting-ling ......................................................................................................................... 55
4.3. Wusun ........................................................................................................................... 58
4.4. Hsien-pi ......................................................................................................................... 60
4.5. Kao-ch’e ........................................................................................................................ 63
4.6. Toles .............................................................................................................................. 65
4.7. Karluk ............................................................................................................................ 69
4.8. Oghuz ............................................................................................................................ 78
4.9. Kipchak .......................................................................................................................... 88
4.10. Nayman ....................................................................................................................... 93
4.11. Nine Tatars & Thirty Tatars ......................................................................................... 95
4.12. Kirghiz .......................................................................................................................... 97
4.13. Turgis ......................................................................................................................... 105
4.14. Sha-t’o ....................................................................................................................... 113
4.15. Sir Tardus .................................................................................................................. 115
vi
4.16. Hsi&K’u-mo-hsi ......................................................................................................... 118
4.17. Ogur .......................................................................................................................... 123
4.18. Pecheneg ................................................................................................................... 125
4.19. Nine Oghuz ................................................................................................................ 130
4.20. Basmil ........................................................................................................................ 133
4.21. Argın .......................................................................................................................... 135
4.22. Bayırku ...................................................................................................................... 136
4.23. Sabar ......................................................................................................................... 137
4.24. Merkit ........................................................................................................................ 138
4.25. Celayir ....................................................................................................................... 139
4.26. Uyghur ....................................................................................................................... 140
4.27. Tolengut .................................................................................................................... 143
4.28. Yagma ........................................................................................................................ 143
4.29. Yaglakar ..................................................................................................................... 145
4.30. Shih-wei..................................................................................................................... 145
4.31. Kurikan ...................................................................................................................... 146
4.32. Other Tribes Mentioned at Sources .......................................................................... 147
5. TRIBE TAMGAS AND ARCHEOLOGICAL FINDINGS .......................................................... 148
6. CHINESE REPORTS AND SOME INSTRUMENTS OF CHINESE TO WITHSTAND AGAINST TRIBE SYSTEM ........................................................................................................................ 158
7. PRINCIPALS AND ADVANTAGES OF TRIBAL ORGANIZATION ......................................... 162
7.1. Migration of Tribes ..................................................................................................... 174
8. HOLISTIC VIEW ANALYSIS ............................................................................................... 181
9. CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................. 194
REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................... 196
Appendix A ............................................................................................................................. 207
vii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Chart Based on Professions ......................................................................... 182
Table 2. Chart Based on Army Manpower ................................................................ 184
Table 3. Chart Based on Linked Tribe ....................................................................... 185
Table 4. Chart Based on Sovereignty&Confederation Sta. ...................................... 186
Table 5. Chart Based on Early Period Empires&States ............................................. 187
Table 6. Chart Based on Late Period Empires&States ............................................ 188
Table 7. Chart Based on Second Late Period Empires&Sta. ..................................... 189
viii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Sculptures as panorama view of the funeral found at Gok-Turk Khagan's Kurgan at Shivet Ulan Central Mongolia .................................................................... 43
Figure 2. Mo-ho and Shih-weiy towns near Argun River ........................................... 49
Figure 3. Mo-ho and Shih-weiy towns near Argun River ........................................... 50
Figure 4. Musk Deer .................................................................................................... 52
Figure 5. Stone monuments holding bowl belonging to Kipchak ............................... 91
Figure 6. Inscription of “İh biçigt” ............................................................................ 151
Figure 7. Ahmet TAŞAĞIL with Bumbugur Inscription at Bayanhongor province Mongolia .................................................................................................................... 152
Figure 8. Obelisk with tamgas - Shivat Ulan Site ...................................................... 153
Figure 9. Lion monument - Shivat Ulan Site ............................................................. 154
Figure 10. Lion monument with A-shih-na dynasty tamga- Shivat Ulan Site........... 155
Figure 11. Omega type historical structures -Balasagun site .................................... 156
Figure 12. Tamgas of Oghuz Tribes .......................................................................... 157
Figure 13. Graph Based on Main Territory&General Area ....................................... 190
Figure 14. Graph Based on Second Territory&General Area .................................... 191
Figure 15. Graph Based on Third Territory&General Area ..................................... 192
Figure 16. Graph Based on Forth Territory&General Area ....................................... 193
1
1. INTRODUCTION
The foundation of the most important states at Central Asia in history, were depending on firm but also flexible tribal organizations. Moreover, the transformation periods to become strong well known long living nations in Central Asia also are related very much with this complicated unique tribal structures.
Our aim hereby is to gain a different point of view about Turkistan with other nomadic and semi-nomadic tribes for the history researchers and to reveal the key role and importance of that tribes for Central Asia as well as world history.
Turk empires and states owe their sustainability till today to the network kind tribal bond designs which were metaphorically sort of water molecules which could create an ice, water or vapour when needed. The splendid structure deserves to be investigated well from scientists. For this purpose, we tried to understand the core characteristics of tribes in the light of historical events by evaluating the findings. We would ask the questions about the tribes as follows: What were their contribution? What are the most effective tribes in the past till XIV.Century at Turkistan area? Which territories did they live on and control? What did they do and achieve in general in terms of political, economic, cultural history? So forth. By the help of related answers, the unique tribe system of these nations would rise to the surface in front of the historians. We used every kind of historical literature and sources such as scientific books and articles. On the other hand, the scientific books directly related with our subject was very limited. At that point, we evaluated especially studies with ancient chinese historical records in the foreground. Moreover, we consulted to seminars and documentaries in order to support the our remarks.
2
We reach to same or new ideas and interpretations by using a different examination method for the tribes which had not been done before. Plus, we tried to gian a new perspective. Therefore, at any time researchers could benefit hereby thesis’s new methodology in order to come up to new scientific arguments. In other words, our goal was to use a different analyze method to this matter in order to enable a platform to new ideas and brainstorming for historians. A separate section had been allocated for specially prepared tables and graphs by us in order to understand better the tribes with an holistic view.
Another contribution of hereby thesis is seeking answers to the still lasting mysteries of ancient Turkistan's historical fate's determinants. To do so, namely we declared direct or indirect evidences to strengthen our hypothesises, in front of curious and careful researchers. Likewise as our opinion about the founder tribe of Turkish Karakhanid State. Or like a clue for what could have had happened to main population of ancient Kirghiz masses. This thesis contains scientific attraction points such as importance of cashmere fabric, sticky rice, Denisova Cave with evidences. For fabric of cashmere, a new hypothesis has been put by us for the first time in literature for scientific discussions. We are not claiming any judgements but we are aiming to open new historical arguments. With our new findings, we enriched the content of our work to open some new scientific researches at their history and to figure out the answers about still unsolved chronic problems.
We are not explaining all political history of tribes. Political history was detailed already with very precious historical works at the rich Turkish literature. And we would not analyze all the tribes lived at Central Asia. But we are going to exhibit the most important ones by filtering from a sensitive eye with together our findings during our investigation.
3
The scope of our work are not covering later that fourteenth century due to the fact that the Mongol-Turk empire was already on the historical arena on the mentioned decades, namely tribes fullfilled their mission in Turkistan.
Additionally, academic readers would find an unorthodox Geography part with powerful elements, prepared by us for the purpose to show their effect to the fate of nations. We recognize some vital issues of the geography having a very critical role but not in sight very much. We would focus these mentioned issues.
We would describe initially and briefly Turks, Mongols and Tatars; as they were the basic nations of nomads at the mentioned geography within these centuries. Then, we would briefly take into thirty one titles about different tribes and confederations without any order to enable an objective look. We would look into also the tamga findings which were the codes of tribal relations so forth. The function of tamgas exhibited well to the academic readers. We would analyze old chinese views and responds about the tribes of northern nations. Chinese policies against tribes explained based with strong historical sources. We are going to put the main characteristics of tribal social life which was the skeleton of tribe system. Principalities and advantages of this unique tribe system detaily examined in a separate section. Thereafter, we are going to bring a new alternative examination methodology at the final section as we mentioned above.
In consequence, this thesis would function as a good planned template to start and implement new investigations. Therefore, we came up with a worthy original analyze to the ancient Turkistan’s unique magnificent tribe design for the beginning of a long scientific journey.
4
2. GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
Central Asia today is such a very large part of world with area of thirteen million square kilometers which almost sixteen pieces of phsical map of Turkey could fit into its prevalent territory in terms of square kilometer. In this day and this age, the area’s borders are defined as beginning from Caspian Sea till to the Eastern Turkistan to China’s western side.Siberia is located on the north. Iran and Tajikistan as well as Afghanistantogether are located below the region. On the other hand in historic point of view and as subject to hereby thesis; the area consist of also Baikal Lake, today’s Mongolia till Khingan mountains at the east, Inner Mongolia, some other parts of Siberia such as Yenisey Basin, East and West Turkistan together, as well. In fact, this vast lands’ actual name called as Turkistan at the oldest historic writings, due to the fact that the area is motherland of Turkish nation (Taşağıl, 2017, p.165; Ardel, 1964 , p.112). From Togan’s point of view, Turk’s homeland was also Central Asia but in particular Tengri Mountains and Aral Lake (Togan, 2019, p.11).Therefore, from an historian eye and for all usage too Turkistan name would be much more better and more inclusive. From now on, hereby thesis we sometimes prefer also to use Turkistan instead of Central Asia. So, the mentioned Turkistan areas wereextending up to almost twenty million sqm. Hindu kush mountains and Tibet can be counted as southern frontiers. Northern Siberia can be counted as nothernst limits. Eastward furthest limits of area could reach to Khingan mountains, Manchuria and Korea. Western furthest extent can be Mangyshlak, eastern of Caspian sea. Besides, at Orkhun Insciriptionsfrom directly Bilge Khagan’s words at Kül Tigin monument’s eastern side, this mentioned borders were clearly defined more or less same as Turks’ homeland Turkistan by saying from Kadırgan mountains (Khingan) till Demir Kapı (Iron door) (Aydın, 2019, p.51). We
5
understand from Bilge Khagan's words that Turks had been outspread from Kadırgan mountains to Demir Kapı, already (Aydın, 2019, p.51-52). Indeed, best geographic explanation of Turkistan was done by Bilge Khagan himself at ancient texts of mentioned world legacy masterpiece. It is crucial to state that; Silk Road and Fur Road were main famous trade routes which are passing directly from this very large zone of the Asia.
The region has got a variety of deserts and almost infinite pastoral grasslands, mountains, lakes, volcanoes; within containing a rich wild life. Some areas are very cold throughout the year such as Mongolia and Baikal Lake.Some areas are snowfield in a significant time of year. The ice covered rivers on winters is a matter of climate fact at Central Asia as well as having a distinctive importance for the fate of nations in history. With the help of this climate event some rivers would be passable by large armies of nomads several times especially Turks on winters, unlike summers. Turk Mukan Khagan’s (A.D.553-572) army once had managed to passed frozen yellow river of China by laying felt carpets on the sliding ices in their return way from the campaign according to Taşağıl’s informations (Taşağıl, 2019, p.30). Caravans, merchant trains were passing frozen Syr Darya at winters by the help of this geographical event (Sümer, 1999, p.63). Most of all, migration of masses of tribes happened more easier and effective at frozen rivers with easy passage of horses. On the other hand from the Mongols angle, from Temir’s transcriptions E.Haenisch remarks that: “Mongols make war on summer or autumn due to the fact that the horses had been fed well. Because of hard cold and thick snow, animals get weaker at winter and become useless at springs” (Temir, 2019, p.223). Therefore, in this case Turkish armies were more operative on winters than Mongols as seen at above mentioned Mukan Khagan’s army. Lakes and rivers have been being fed by
6
melted snows on summers. Northern Siberia is full of Tayga named intense forests.Mongolia, also homeland of ancient Turks, has a granite and basalt type stones at its lands as well as forests at some parts but consist of often large wider steppes. Continental climate is the main weather in Mongolia. For instance Anatolia, another homeland of Turks, has the lands usually suitable for farming and with a little expense farmers even can obtain water from ground by drilling digs the ground around thirty or forty meters deep. However, in Mongolia there is no opportunity to reach to water cause the country has lack of underground waters (Taşağıl, 2018, min.32). On the other hand, the raining rate is luckily sufficient enough for grasslands (Taşağıl, 2018, min.32). Because, rain is always vital for this country.
A spectacular characterisctic of Mongolia’s lands isloess. Loess on soils which is typical for Mongolia, have been covering also China’s territories. This kind of soil is filling also rivers of which are carried by wind. By this means it is enriching the soil with its high mineral content. Yet, it could affect the river transport negative(Eberhard, 2019, p.2-3). Loess indeed created by the dried grasses of steppe areas on summer, naturally enriched by useful components for agriculture. Steppe lands grasses are flourishing again on spring as well as becoming fertile for animal breeding (Ardel, 1964, p.121). Togan emphasizes that the loess intense territories had a high density of populations relatively in comparison with steppe areas at Central Asia (Togan, 2019, p.675).
Hence, Turkistan is a very large part of the world with very long rivers, river basins and distinctive lakes. Very majestic chain of mountains are existing inside mentioned area consisting of some significant mounts and these heights are also natural remarkable landmarks of the region which have productive plateaus within.
7
Main geographical elements of Turkistanfrom a historical point of view are:
Main Rivers: Orkhun, Selenge, Tula, Tamır, Kerulen, Onon, Irtysh, Dark Irtysh, Ongin, Lena, Angora, Yenisey, Obi, Syr Darya and Amu Darya,Argun, Amur, Kem, Urungu, Ili, Chu, Talas, Narın, Tobol, Isim.
At that point, to say from our eye; an important geological element was slightly a little bit stayed behind from the perspective of scientists for the economic life of Turks and nothern nomadic civilizations with compared to others written above. From the rivers angle; as known as very well; all antique age civilizations had been formed nearby a very long rivers such as Nile, Ren, and the ones at Indus valley with Mesopotamia zone. Because river sides are very suitable for agriculture, have very valuble source of water, are very good for transportation of goods to the ports at shoresides; as a result of that alot of old towns and economy had been flourished side by side along these long waters. Weather is relatively fine according to other regions of earth at riversides.
Here namely, China was slightly more lucky at antique ages due to the fact China has got not one but two in total of this kind mentioned rivers belonging to its lands. Both northern and southern Chinas have one of above mentioned very long efficient rivers in. These are The Yellow River(Huang He) and The Yang Tse River. China got advantage of both of these rivers always by useing them as transportation (Eberhard, 2019, p.5). Furthermore China also sometimes had changed the direction of water flow in accordance with the benefits of related Chinese dynasty and due to the location their capital city at related historical period. Also they had made various agricultural and rice farming so forth. Thus there are existing two very vital long rivers at the Chinese lands.
8
The thing is, here if China used these rivers very much for transportation at medieval, when remembering that Uyghurs was very active inside Tang’s China; It was almost impossible for Turks to not to know this river trade routes in China. Uyghurs were holding some considerable part of trade during Tang dynasty times, afterall (Eberhard, 2019, p. 206, p.214-215). Uyghur army entered to Chinese Lo-yang city once a upon a time (Eberhard, 2019, p.212). So we think that at least Uyghur merchants who were authorised officially from Tang itself to trade in Chinese cities, should be aware of trade routes at the rivers. We would like to emphasise that; Turks and other nomadic nations also have a river in their lands as efficient as others at China and Turks most probably used that river for trade and for carrying goods and food. Some part of economy also maybe were depending to this river transport along the riverside and maybe agricultural trade had developed rather than animal breeding among Turks along this mentioned riverside. We would like to subject Amur hereby, and would like to underline the importance of Amur River a bit more. What we would like to tell that, Amur was very strategic and maybe as important as Otuken territory for the nomadic tribes. Our hypothesis is based on to the idea that Amur could be the hearth of transportation at early times for Turks and Tatars. Cause, there was no reason for Turks and other nomadic nations also not benefiting from Amur River, same like Chinese did for Yellow River and Yangtze River. Turks perhaps founded permanent settlements around it and had operated the river for shipments of every kind of goods. Amur should be crucial at shortage times especially considering animal losses within the hard weather times, at north.
The Amur River and The Argun River are together forming a network of a complex river system lasting thousands of kilometers covering Eastward China and Mongolia. Therefore, we need to include to our hypothesis also The River Argun.
9
Perhaps, they knew very well Pacific ocean streams and were using winds. Perhaps, there were also another trade route at ancient times origined from China, passing from Pacific ocean and entering to Amur Delta through Tatar strait as well as ongoing its way from Amur River till to the end of Argun River. After that the nomadic merchants were loading the goods and had headed towards to Otukent the holy and official capital of Turks by camels or carts. We think that this function of the Amur River could be really possible for Turks and Tatars. Ocean streams and ocean winds could enable a sea route headed to Amur Delta from Eastern China Sea (Nan Hai) from Korea strait to Japan sea. Furthermore, we know two historical event about the mentioned Chinese rivers. One is the bombarmend threat done by English navy to Nankin at 1841. This shows us how deep Yang Tse is that; even a battleship can float (Eberhard, 2019, p.316). The other is Chinese constructed canals in order to conjunction Yang tse and Yellow river (Huang He) during Sui dynasty reign for the shipments (Eberhard, 2019, p.194). Eberhard informs that there were evidence about the existence of boats which could carry 800 tones of goods (Eberhard, 2019, p.194).
Moreover, where did the Mongols get the confidence of navigation for a great navy to their two times Japan campaigns from the ocean way?
There are a lot of records at old Islamic sources about using river transport and ship using of Turks. Besides, almost all cities and vast lands at Transoxania was full of water canals linked with rivers used for every kind of usage such as irrigation, drinking water, supply and people transport so forth (Şeşen, 2020,p.217-218, p.223-224). Oghuzes were transporting food by ships to their capital Yenikent (Sümer, 1997, p.63). Lets see below some examples of Şeşen’s transcriptions:
10
Muhammed el Avfi’s Cevamiu’l-hikayat: “Story: As they say: One person from Kirghizes made a small ship. He boarded it and drives into river. He continued in the river in order to arrive the end of the river and see the exit way” “He came back and found his ship. He boarded it and returned. Again he took the same way to inside his tribe” (Şeşen, 2020, p.95).
İdrisi’s Nüzhetü’l-müştak fi ihtiraki’l-afak: “Demuriye was a crowded city of prosperous among Kimek cities. From Demuriye till Seraves at northeast destination was two konaks among the Kimek settlements and villages.”(Şeşen, 2020, p.106-107),“Demuriye and Seraves cities were on the shore of Şerya river. This is a slow flowing river with richly full with water. In this river, ships are going and returning between up and down” (Şeşen, 2020, p.106-107), “There are ships at Dehrat carrying people and loads” (Şeşen, 2020, p.106-107).On the other hand, Şeşen puts a reserve to İdrisi’s records related about the necessity of careful evaluation, because of some possible fictions (Şeşen, 2020, p.23).
İbn Havkal’s Suretü’l-arz: “Ships come to Hocende the way from Şaş.” “From this river to Karyetülhadise(Yeniköy), supplies are carried when there is peace with Turks and Muslims. There are muslims in Karyetülhadise. The matter of fact that this is capital of Oghuzes.” “Aftermath, there is Hive canal.From this canal which is bigger than Kenderan-haş canal, the ships are functioning to Hive” (Şeşen, 2020, p.170).
İbn Khordadbeh’s el-Mesalik ve’l-memalik: “There are big ships functioning from Turkish realm till China.”(Şeşen, 2020, p.182).
At that point, as Amur River was very far to Islamic lands and could most probably out of focus for Chinese envoys in comparison with central Mongolia; we
11
do not have any sources about Amur's ship transportation. However, we think that northern nations were dealing with ship transportation at Amur River and even Pacific Ocean. We are going to come to Amur River topic again at further sections of this hereby thesis.
According to Taşağıl, Tamir river probably was the heart of Otuken - the holy capital city of ancient Turks (Taşağıl, 2019, min.1). Tamir which is one of the branches of Orkhun River, has alot of fertile water arms within(Taşağıl, 2019, min.1). Due to Davletşin’s informings from N.Ya. Biçurin, A.M. Belenitskiy, İ.B.Bentoviç and O.G.Bolşakov with respect to Chinese historical sources: “Tuku, as always, following fifth month, gather nearby Tamir river and offer sacrifice to Sky. They cut lots of rams and horses.” (Davletşin, 2013, p.9).
Main Deserts : Gobi, Taklamakan, Kobbe, Kumdag, Alashan, Ordos, Jungaria Gobi.
Main Lakes : Balkhash, Baikal, Aral Sea, Issık, Lop Nor, Khövsgöl.
Main Steppes : If we consider a part of Eurasia from Ukraina till Tuva; the steppe lands which are without forest, ground grass areas are around 2,5 million sqm (Ardel, 1964, p.121). Steppes were very vital for animal breeding for ancient semi-nomadic nations. Our focus is in sense of Central Asia steppes, at the westest point begins from Kazakhstan lands of Caspian Sea, south of Ural mountains. Briefly vast steppes are Kazakhstan steppes, Kirghiz steppes, western Siberia steppes, southern Siberia Minusinsk steppes, Central Mongolia, Inner Mongolia steppes and Ordos. In this case, we face an almost continuous steppe zone all over Eurasia which created a very efficient living environment as well as high mobility for the brave adventurous nomadic riders. This mentioned vast unlimited integrated steppes of Central Asia and northeastward of Europe had helped the happening of migration of tribes.
12
Main Waterfalls : Orkhun.
Main Basins, Valleysand the most efficient sub-regions for agriculture: Orkhun, Yenisey, Tarim, Jungaria, Fergana, Irtysh, Ili and Chu, Talas, Transoxania, Zeravshan, Turpan region, Kansu (Gansu) region and Kansu’s passage.
Main Mountains: Altai Mountains, Khangai, Sayan (Kögmen), Tengri Mountains (Tien Shan), Kunlun, Khentii, Yablonovy, Abakan, Tannu Ola, Khingan (Kadırgan), Tarbagatay, Pamir, Altun.
When we look into Turkistan in particular Mongolia and northern lands such as Siberia; the very important detection about geography is about lack of rice farming. This could seem maybe not important for one hundred year period. But from a general perspective eye to history, if a millennium period have been thought, the opinions definitely would change. Because these kind of small geographical advantages could create big consequences in long term. This agri product mainly produced at southern China. Rice was sort of geographic agricultural element flourishing heavilyonly in southern China far away from not only Inner Mongolia and Mongolia, but also from northern China like today’s Beijing and the Great Wall of China (Eberhard, 2019, p.7, p.262).
Rice, especially brown rice is a kind of nutrition rich from vitamin B types, carbohydrates plus even some protein. The rice enables easy high energy and vitamin.So basically it was very practical food for a marching army in a long campaign. Because, it is very easy to carry nearby for a single soldier. Furthermore, it is very easy to make a mush from rice by just adding some water as well as waiting for a little while. By this practical way, that would be easy to make rice eatable.Therefore, when we think about every single soldier could carry around five
13
kgs of rice, that means ten days of food. Plus as mentioned they could easily made it ready to eat with mixing it with water and thus to feed large armies would not be a big matter for China.Ofcourse, Chinese army usually used transport carts as well for their food inventory. So this amount should be more higher. Turks and Mongols marched lots of times to China and passed the borders. But these campaigns took place generally at northern China so they could not reach to big rice stocks of Chinese dynasties. Instead of rice Turks and Mongols had a great number of sheeps, goats and cows. Although, Asian Huns, Gok-Turks, Mongols defeated lots of times Chinese armies and had reached to almost all regions of northern China, even invaded capital city; they could not stayed longer and had to turn back due to fact that food shortages based on bad weather conditions. In fact, meat is more stronger nutrition than rice. Perhaps, northern nations' armies men’s power were more that Chinese just because of more meat. They were already carrying “Kurut” named a kind of dry milk (Togan, 2019, p.34). However, you could not supply meat forever. You needed to hunt. But would hunting be enough to feed a very large army? So Turks and Mongols brought within along their animal herds to overcome food problem. But this time because of bad weather conditions, the animals often were perished in most of the military campaigns causing to stop successful operations. On the other hand, another solution could be wheat. Nevertheless, the plunders of food in particular wheat from residential areas would not be sufficient due to the fact it was almost impossible to be mobile with a wheat mill. Hence, wheat could never replace rice. As we mentioned before, when in a millennium time period, this had became an amazing advantage.
In order to show the importancy of rice, lets look into some trade records from Hun’s era below:
14
 According to the treaty between Huns and Chinese Han dynasty at B.C.138; China was obliged to deliver rice to Huns every year as tribute (İzgi, 2017, p.99).
 Around B.C.51 Huns took around 34.000hu rice from Chinese by exchanging their own products (İzgi, 2017, p.101).
 As of A.D.50 Huns this time took 25.000hu rice from Chinese (İzgi, 2017, p.103).
1 hu of rice equaled to 72,5kg as measurement unit during Han dynasty times (İzgi, 2017, p.101). Today’s modern shipment vehicles' the trailers have the capacity of 20 tons each, so 34.000hu equals to around 125 trailer. Even today this means a very huge shipment filo for logistic companies. So the question is; How did Huns carry that huge amount of rice? As we mentioned above that Eberhard informs that there were evidence about the existence of boats which could carry 800 tones of goods (Eberhard, 2019, p.194).
The semi-nomadic nations' armies at Central Asia were moving with their animal herds together to supply the army. For instance, Tonyukuk's army had together at least thirty thousand pieces of a herd that consisting various animals, once (Taşağıl, 2019, p.337). From Yıldırım's transcription; once, General Tao Yung had reported to T’o-pa emperor about northern Ti tribes as “when warfare occurred, entire families come with their animals” (Yıldırım, 2015, p.25). This record confirms also this above mentioned matter of fact. China in general altered the steppes to farming lands, from the times of antique world (Eberhard, 2019, p.38). As a result of this most probably, to move inside China should not be easy because of limited grass steppe areas, despite the fact that northern armies sometimes plundered livestock. Apparently same general was aware of the crucial need of grasslands for nomadic
15
armies as he reported also as “They will return back when they run out of grasses” (Yıldırım, 2015, p.27). Even supposing the northern armies found easily steppes, the routes of the armies should not be flexible due to the necessity of following the lines of grasslands issue. Hence, this could affect the efficiency of military campaigns in long term. Thus Chinese armies could be more flexible cause their armies’ food supply was depending on rice as well as they used carts and less cavalry. Namely, by rice on the contrary to norhtern steppe nations, Chinese armies had not got any obligation about routes. Chinese armies could move to anywhere they want, gather at any point whereever they want coming from different destinations, could move to across ways, could move from even desert, even they could march from top of the Great Wall of China. The Great Wall of china was most probably not only for a protection fortification but a well protectable transportation way. Turks named The Great Wall as Burkurka (Sümer, 1999, p.28). On the other hand, Chinese aware that northern nations' armies were following specific routes with respect to water sources and grasslands (Mori, 1978, p.213; Onat, Orsoy,&Ercilasun, 2020, p.1). At chinese historical sources there was a record that “They move by following water and grasslands” (Onat et. al.,2020, p.1, p.8). The necessity of tracking grassland ways during military campaigns were possibly diminishing sudden raid probability and should have created a disadvantage for nomadic army forces due to the fact that Chinese generals could take precautions in advance by this route pre-knowledge.
With respect to Onat, Ersoy and Ercilasun's transcriptions on Han Shu; on the report of general Yen Yu to emperor Wang Mang, there was phrases about rice as: “Spending four seasons of time by eating roasted rice and water could cause illnesses on the army.For that reason, at the reign of previous dynasty; the assaults to Huns were not passing 100 days”(Onat et. al.,2020, p.1, p.87). That evaluation of
16
Yen Yu had stated very clear that, sometimes Chinese armies could eat only rice due to circumstances. In addition, we understand from mentioned phrases that with rice an army could be able to be supplied efficiently about 100 days. This shows us how rice was a critical food for Chinese armies. Another record about rice was again from General Tiao Yung’s report like he adviced as “Command norhern barracks as to plow the fields. Aftermath, farm and harvest rice and despatch them to six garrisons” (Yıldırım, 2015, p.28).
Furthermore for Turks, rice should be a very rare unique food could be found only at special feasts. To Chinese buddhist cleric Hüen-Chang for instance, had been offered a rice paste while his visit to Tong Yabgu in Suyab city at the date A.D.630 (Sümer, 2019, p.13-14). Gok-Turks attacked to Chinese frontiers at A.D.847 in order to plunder rice stocks (Tasagil, 219, p.386). Further at Mongol times for example, one of six administrative responsibilities of Cagadai, the son of Cenghis Khan’s, was to manage rice warehouse , during Ogedei reign (A.D. 1229 – 1241) (Temir, 2019, p.244). We know also that during An Lu Shan rebellion; Chinese supplied their allie, Uyghur army with also rice (Ögel, 1951, p.367). At Hun era; the Chinese origined high ranked Hun government official Chung-hang Yüeh asked from chinese envoy as “As long as Han’s shipments of silk fabric, rice and yeast to Huns have high quality…”(Onat et. al.,2020, p.1, p.19).
Basically, another vital contribution of rice for Chinese as a remarkable advantage was not only food, but more importantly was ground sticky rice flour. Sticky rice mortar named rice flour has usually been used for centuries at Chinese constructions from tombs, pagodas till buildings (Li, Zhang, 2018, p.503, p.504).During Tang dynasty (A.D. 618-907), sticky rice mortar was very common used material for constructions likewise being at Song (A.D. 960-1279) and Ming
17
(A.D. 1368-1644) the next well known dynasties (Li, Zhang, 2018, p.508). By adding certain ratio of sticky rice to the formulation of mortar, the durability of historical constructions increased seriously at China (Li, Zhang, 2018, p.508). Moreover, There are still a mystery about other usage areas of this material as mortar type as well as details such as first application, first timeframe of this amazing invention(Li, Zhang, 2018, p.504). What well known about sticky rice additive makes lime and sand mixture much more gained protection from weather exposure(Otero, Charola,&Starinieri, 2019, p.10217). That was the secret of Chinese structures and maybe other artifacts as well. Furthermore, we remember also from the historical sources that Chinese were occasionaly dealing with reparing of the parts of Great Wall while preparing against northern nations that. The point is, they were prefer to repair them instead of starting to build the walls newly.
The bottom line is, China used rice as a trade and diplomacy tool in order to apply its policies. Rice also explains the reason of very high population of Chinese which would be very decisive for the growth of China for centuries with compared to Turkistan lands. Everything was hard such as to govern them as Mongols did during Yuan dynasty. Everything was hard with this high population nor govern them neither make wars. Like Mongols did by special laws during Yuan dynasty.By rice, China's population increase year by year and life conditions become better. As we mentioned above China have two very long rivers inside its lands one in north other in south that independently a big advantage from every kind of evaluation.
Climate condinitions are better at Chinese lands and to live at norhern regions of Central Asia is very hard. So the human lifetime was lesser both for semi-nomad khagans and his people because of illnesses relatively to China. This effects of course the politics of governements. Thus, to choose a new ruler was of itself was a
18
big matter for northern nations. Long living life and long term duties actually equals to big experience about the related duty at ancient times. Unfortunately, geography was a disadvantage for northern Central Asia regions because of hard weather conditions leading to illnesses and starvations when compared with China. This disadvantage shortened the lifetime of khagans, leaders, generals, high ranked officers so forth. Reigning durations has been affected very negatively. This created lack of experience on new rulers. There were exceptions. Bilge Tonyukuk was an exception. But these exceptions were very rare. When we look to life time of Chinese Er-shih general Li-Kuang-li in particular, four or even maybe five Ch’an-yu had changed at Hun throne (Onat et. al.,2020, p.33-41). Think about how this mentioned chinese general in such a long duty time gained experience about military campaign. Another example was Emperor Hsüan-tsung from Tang’s China whom his reign was overy forty years (Taşağıl, 2020, p.45).
19
3. MAIN NATIONS OF CENTRAL ASIA TILL XIV. CENTURY
3.1. Turks
As of 2008, new discoveries have been reached at researches about ancient human species’ genomes on paleontology science which made devastating changes. Homo neandarthalensis named as neandathal in popular culture was a different Homo species contemporary with Homo sapiens. Till 2008, general opinion had been accepted by scientists that Homo neandarthalensis and Homo sapiens could not breed when interbred. On the contrary to that belief later after detailed examinations on ancient genoms ıt is proved that if Homo neandarthelansis and Homo sapiens in reality that could breed new generations when have interbreeding together (Max Planck researcher Svante Paabo, 2019, min.3-4). Therefore, the evidences showed that the neanderthalensis genome are still existing side by side with sapiens genomes today and living. That have been found also that some genetic illnesses and some genetic strengths could come from this neanderthal genome. On the other hand, the ratio of how much genome can a modern human being have is changeable due to ethnic relativity, environmental conditions, living space etc (Max Planck researcher Svante Paabo, 2019).
But however; not only Homo neandarhelansis genomes are still existing, also another Homo species genoms which were lost thousands years ago are still living inside modern humans dna. This species is Homo denisovans (Max Planck researcher Svante Paabo, 2019, min.6-7).
According to the paleontologists, the Homo denisovans merely; had been lived in a cave found nearby Gorno Altaisk, near to the capital city of autonomous
20
Gorno Altai republic in Russia tens of thousands years ago (Max Planck researcher Svante Paabo, 2019, min.6-7; Heuristic, 2018).
This place is a well known paleoanthropological pre-historic attraction point also for Altai Autonomous Republic called as Denisova Cave (Heuristic, 2018). Findings in that cave could show us that there are some remainders about old Turkish cultures because of the regional location.
The thing is; Taşağıl’s works on Chinese historical sources of T’ung-Tien and Ts’e-Fuyüan-Kui revealed that totally three times a phrase was recorded about Turks as “first cave they emerged” (Taşağıl, 2019, p.119, p.129, p.137). These records are mentioning about a routine annually done holy sacrifice ceremony. In addition, two of this three records are adressing the ancient lands of Wusuns’ also nearby the cave issue in the same paragraph about the core territory of Western Gok-Turks (Taşağıl, 2019, p.129, p.137). So, unavoidably we need to ask the following questions: Could this holy first cave related also with Denisova Cave symbolically or Is it exactly the same cave? In both cases of then could denisovans be the ancestors of proto-Turks? Could ancient genomes of proto-Turks and Homo denisovans' genomes match? If the location of the ceremonial is exactly the Denisova Cave then could the center of ancient lands of Wu-suns should be Altai Mountains near Gorno-Altai? Related with this, also could main center of Western Gok-Turks are Altai Mountains as well? Could earliest Turks had emerged after those denisovans mixed with Mongoloid inhabitants at Mongolia, right after their spreading from Altais to Mongolia?
Although there are still arguments about some of them, the earliest communities at vast central Turkistan lands with respect to Chinese sources thinked
21
as linked with Turks; were Ti as Red Ti and White Ti, Jung(Rung), Su (Saka); as well as apart from chinese sources also Scythian people (Togan, 2019, p.23, p.36, p.565, p.599-600; Şeşen, 2020, p.9). İzgi states that; Ti, Jung, Hu, Scythian, Saka were the general names that had a character of including very big masses of tribes all (İzgi, 2017, p.159). Ti was a joint of two chinese symbols meaning of dog and fire (Onat et. al.,2020, p.100). İzgi says that Chinese were calling group from Tibetans as Ti too, which creates a misleading (İzgi, 2017, p.153).The dog originated Ti people were in fact these Tibetans Ti groups from the eye of Chinese (İzgi, 2017, p.153). In reference to Davletşin here, red dog cult had been counted by Kirghiz groups as their ancestor(Davletşin, 2019, p.17). Hence, Ti, Red Ti tribes and Red Dog cult should be looked into all together. Plus, we know from Taşağıl’s words; Bilge Khagan's own words were telling directly that “Tibetans were dog originated” (Taşağıl, 2019, p.398).İzgi adds that Tibetan Ti people were resident at Ssu-chu’an that to match with Huns and Uyghurs impossible (İzgi, 2017, p.153). On the other hand the fact was some northern tribes of China was called as Ti so at Chinese sources, like mentioned Tibetian group. Those northern Ti groups were representing Hsiung-nu (Huns) at the same sources (İzgi, 2017, p.153). According to Togan’s statements from Grum-Grimaylo; Huns were called as Shan Jung meaning as mountain Jungs (Togan, 2019, p.567). Jung and Ti was also resident around the lands of Yellow River (Onat et. al.,2020, p.3; Togan, 2019, p.565). First historical informations about Ti tribes dated as B.C.1328 (Togan, 2019, p.566). They spreaded to Turkistan and Mongolia around B.C.V.Century (Togan, 2019, p.566, p.568). Tung-hu groups were counted together with Jungs at chinese source, Han Shu(Onat et. al.,2020, p.4). Again from the records at Han Shu, Huns’ envoy delegation had been leaded by a T’i ruler Tu-li-hu-tz’u in once (Onat et. al.,2020, p.50). On the other hand, Mo and
22
Hu groups were northern tribes from the eye of chinese at that ages and “Hu Mo” was a name for Mo them all (Onat et. al.,2020, p.106). Hu also was used to define Huns at mentioned Han Shu source (Onat et. al.,2020, p.106). According to Yıldırım, ancient chinese were saying Hu for northern area’s inhabitants as well as those at Turkistan (Yıldırım, 2015, p.54). Yıldırım evaluated the hu word for the chinese phrases Ting-ling Hu and Tung-hu, in light of this perspective (Yıldırım, 2015, p.54). Tung-hu was probably related with eastward located tribes from chinese eyes because of equaling to eastern Hu in terms of meaning due to Yıldırım’s remarks (Yıldırım, 2015, p.55). However, Clauson transcripted Tung-hu as “Western barbarians” (Clauson, 2017, p.31). Interestingly west and east were opposite transcriptions but both considered for Tung-hu separately by mentioned above scientists. Here, we need to underline that we never accept such a definition as barbarians.
We wanted to point the “Hu Mo” tribes here in order to open a scientific page to “Mo ho” tribe name mentioned at the below Tatar section just for a brainstorming. Besides according to researchers; Chinese's target by naming Hu was actually; Huns for northern areas, proto-Mongols for northeast areas, Tibetans for southwest areas (İzgi, 2017, P.154). Namely, proto-Mongol relation here with Hu statement, supports our opinion about with Moho link probability of Hu, also. Some records at Han Shu were also mentioning about a “Man” tribe for about foreigners from ancient Chinese perspective (Onat et. al.,2020, p.45, p.97).
Thereafter at Huns age; Kirghizes, Ting-lings, Wusuns, Ogurs were the ancient Turks altogether with Huns.
23
First Turkish tribes who were seen in China was during Chou dynasty (B.C. 1150-256). A Tibetian tribe called Ch’ünag-jung marched towards China and defeated the emperor. That was dated around B.C.771. These were actually moving together with plenty of tribes including Turks (Eberhard, 2019, p.39). After last Chou emperor at China left the throne on behalf of Ch’ins, the next following centuries foreigners rather than Chinese would be seen very active inside new Ch’in dynasty like Yo Yü, a well known minister. These foreigners were Turks and Tibetans. Moreover, first relations with eastern Turkistan and China had begun at Ch’in period by the help of developed trade at Kansu corridor (Eberhard, 2019, p.77-78). First horses also had come to China at Chou era with Chou Turks (Togan, 2019, p.15). Another point for Chou dynasty's Turk origin, as Togan informs from G.Haloun’s words, was the sameness of family tree system with Turks (Togan, 2019, p.15) Plus, some significant scientists’ analyzes from Togan's reviews about first iron usages in China, showed that this implementation had been done too by Chou Turks during above mentioned era (Togan, 2019, p.30).
Turks are the general national name of all living tribes beginning from early Asia Huns’ era which are under same ancestry family with same spiritual and material cultural elements as well as having almost same language till today. Gok-Turk confederation of these tribes all together was the first state having the name Turk as a state organization (Taşağıl, 2019, p.1). “Turk” name was coming from power and strength notions (Taşağıl, 2012, p.467). In general, we can count also religious conformity however religion sense of belonging was not a main factor to call a person or tribe as Turk. Still, believing to one single God is almost a common sacred thought for Turkish folks if we put a religion lens on to all history of Turks. Besides, all Turks except rare groups accepted Islam since X.Century (Şeşen, 2020,
24
p.10). At antique ages, Afanasievo culture was the oldest cultural era known for Turks due to archeological findings. The cultural eras original to Turks were in accordance, Anav (B.C.4000), Afanasievo (B.C.2500-1700), Andronovo (B.C.1700-1200), Karasuk (B.C. 1200-700), Tagar (B.C.700-100). Jade stone (Yeşimtaşı) rings was one of the important evidences for detection of Andornova culture on findings (Ögel, 2020, p.26). During Karasuk cultural era, around Yenisey also there were tents with carts (Ögel, 2020, p.31).
“Turk” name describing a nation has been represented at Tonyukuk monument at Mongolia dated A.D.725 (Aydın, 2019, p.104). In runic letters Turk phrase is very significant on the text of Tonyukuk monument. This is a big proof and legacy showing to be one of the oldest nations of world history. Tonyukuk was addressing the Turkish nation, 1296 years ago from today.
Eberhard’s opinion is; around the years three thousand B.C., proto-Turkish culture was the most powerful one among other human cultures at northern China whom were dealing with animal husbandry (Eberhard, 2019, p.18). What Eberhard mentioned was in fact Afanasievo culture (B.C.3300-1700).
Turks first homeland and location was Siberia at ancient times (Taşağıl, 2019, p.23). Abakan, Tuva as well as Minusinsk regions were their main locations (Taşağıl, 1999, p.136).
Turks had a very developed cultural life beyond its era at antique ages with no systematic signs of human sacrificing. But there are clear historical evidences about Chinese who were contemporary with Turks, did so (Eberhard, 2019, p.61). However, with respect to Kurtoğlu’s informing from J.P.Roux; in a short period of ancient Turk’s history; the custom of wife sacrificing had been seen when a man
25
buried, in order to not to leave him alone at his life after death (Kurtoğlu, 2019, p.87). This short term implementation had been stopped generally due to fact that when the children’s hard life without any parents were being considered except a few tribes (Kurtoğlu, 2019, p.87). Even so human sacrificeing was not a subject for old Turks except this possible rare examples. These were also not systematic things already. Ancient Turks was organized under a well developed tribe system. A supreme clergy class was not an element in social order for Turkish life (Ahmetbeyoğlu, 2020, p.30). Nor clergy neither privileged classes were existing at ancient Turks' social order (Ahmetbeyoğlu, 2020, p.30).
Ancient Turkish musical instrument kopuz has been evaluated as the ancestor of modern violin from some scientist's eye together with Mongol’s musical instrument morin huur (Golden, 2014, p.23).
Ancient Turks were experts about iron mining. Iron was a revolution about not only weapon technology but also for plow kind tools for farming (Eberhard, 2019, p.54). China had been using plow since mid first thousand B.C. (Eberhard, 2019, p.54). Togan’s statements referring Radloff are that first oldest ages of iron should be related with a horse rider nation which was possibly Turk (Togan, 2019, p.593). İbn Khordadbeh informs a detail about the Uyghur city that it has twelve iron doors (Şeşen, 2020, p.181). Turks were even using petrol and hard coal, in Fergana and Şaş regions of Transoxania, with respect to Islamic sources from Şeşen’s transcriptions (Şeşen, 2020, p.29). They were skillful merchants and misk, livestock , horses, fur, wool, mammoth teeth, whale teeth were their main trading goods (Şeşen, 2020, p.29). They established rooted very improved settlements with a live social life at Transoxania.
26
Ancient Turks were one of the oldest nations having well developed alphabet system. Turks had used lots of varieties of alphabets along their history (Şirin, 2020, p.7). Even, they are the only nation who had changed such a significant amount of alphabet at entire history of mankind as Şirin stated (Şirin, 2020, p.7). There were several reasons of this phenomenon in terms economic, social and religious (Şirin, 2020, p.9). Ancient Turks had also prepared template tools in order to compare alphabeths among new and other previous ones they used when they had passed to a new alphabet (Şirin, 2020, p.42).
According to Golden: “Ancient Turks were the master of first international empire from Manchuria till Black Sea by the help of their establishment of a great trade network which enabled the exchange of goods and ideas” (Golden, 2014, p.85). This mentioned first international empire was Gok-Turk empire.
Today, from modern life perspective, the sufficient way of to be a member of Turkish nation for anybody is defined like feel theirselves as Turks. This definiton would be fair enough with together of course to deep love to old Turkish tribes of whom founded countless states and empires with carrying high characteristics evaluating for hundreds years. “How happy is the one who says i am a Turk” is a Mustafa Kemal Atatürk's very well known word who was the father of Turks and founder of modern Republic of Turkey, a worldwide famous genius character as a statesman , military man and scientist.
In old ages to medieval, to be organized and reorganized ability as tribes is only special behavior for Turkish nation and probably we could count Mongols too because of their very close tribal system to Turks’. As the main subject to hereby thesis we will analyse this rigid but also flexible structure in detail.
27
From iron craftsmanship till to horse breeding and initial applications of right of private property, Turks had implemented critical contributions to human civilization (Taşağıl, 2019). The sovereingner’s properties on the other hand, because of belonging to also all Turk citizens at ancient Turks, had been exhibiting us a very unique social structure by combining positive sides of today’s modern life’s socioeconomic systems (Taşağıl, 2019, min.1:11). Carpets was a part of Turkish life of which knotted weave carpet type such as historical Pazırık carpet is counted as gift to mankind by Turks (Bozkurt, 1997, p.253-254). Uyghur Turks had got the knowhow of how to print by wood print technique which was one of the oldest versions of press printing (Esin, 1983, p.139).Uyghurs used their own developed letter press technique. (Esin, 1983, p.139). They printed books (Esin, 1983, p.139).
Apart from these; management and secure of silk road for hundreds of years by Turks in itself; was a fabulous contribution to mankind civilization history. In other words old Turks had ensured sustainability of healthy alive trade for centuries.
When we look to Turkish history, we will observe that they had established 123 states within a wide variety of different regions with all having original features (Taşağıl, 2019, min.45). For pre-Islamic period some mightiest of them are below in accordance:
28
3.1.1. Asian Hun Empire
When we look into Hun Empire’s structure; three bigger Turk tribes who were widely penetrated to Central Asia steppes were the main actors. These were Ting-lings, Ogurs and Kirghiz communities (Taşağil, 2015, p.22). Hun Empire was the first state founded at northern grasslands of Central Asia (Mori, 1978, p.210). Huns for the first time gathered all steppe tribes under a confederation of tribe union directly we learned from Mau-tun’s own words (Ögel, 2020, p.43). Asian Hun empire prolonged about seven hundred years. Wusuns were at west, Kirghiz(Chien-k’un) were northwest, Ting-ling were northeast near Baikal Lake, Hsien-pi and Wu-huan were at east on their own mountains; and at center Huns were located by controling above mentioned tribes them all as great tribal confederation during Han dynasty (B.C.206-A.D.220) (Onat et. al.,2020, mapIV).
Furthest borders of Hun communities' influential zone was a quite large area that began from Asia Yellow River till Europe Ren River (Czegledy, 1998, p.65). By comparing different historical comtemporary country’s sources depending on above mentioned large penatration area, Czegledy’s opinion is: Huns could have used generally “hyon(o)” name or a similiar version in order to name themselves (Czegledy, 1998, p.65). Czegledy emphasised the almost homogeneity of common closer comments of Hun name in a wide range of languages till China to Roman territories, at the ancient world which were used to define Hun nomadic communities (Czegledy, 1998, p.65).
Ch’an-yu was the title of Hun rulers. The Hun people also called their leaders as “Ch’eng-li Ku-t’u Ch’an-yü” (Onat et. al.,2020, p.7). According to Onat, Orsoy
29
and Ercilasun, the Ku-t’u word could be related with Kut title at thereafter Turk ruler names (Onat et. al.,2020, p.108). Hence, from our eye this is one of the many evidences of Turkish identity of Huns.
Power of Turkish tribes had reached to the top level during Han dynasty at China resulting foundation of first great tribal confederation of Turks at north. That was Asian Hun empire under the leadership of To’u-man. This empire was one of the long lasting states of Turks had been prolonged seven hundred years. They would influence whole geograpy of Central Asia, also China and Europe deeply at following centuries. They were expert about horse riding. These unknown warrior riders would shock China with their high fighting capacity. Apparently, they were very good about some old mapping techniques which was a big advantage at the vast lands of Turkistan. They had very developed sides inside their state organization enabling well management of tax collections and population censuses. Within Mao-tun’s (Mete) reign (B.C. 209-174) they had brought a new army model which had been taken by Cenghis even after one thousand year later. With the help of that army, Mao-tun once almost managed to eliminate Kao-tsu named Liu Pang the founder of Han dynasty. At last for a while later Kao-tsu had been forced to make an agreement with Huns costing delivery of variety of tributes to them every year. Plus, He organized a wedding with Mao-tun to guarantee his agreement (Onat et. al.,2020, p.1, p.8, p.10-14).
Huns were putting continuous pressure to Kansu area and threatening benefits of China from trade point of view. On the other hand Chinese were changing the steppes to farmlands when they invaded an area. So the situation was two sided for the benefits. Because of diminishing of steppes, northern Turkish clans should have to march inside Chinese borders in order to survive.
30
After the reign of Chan-yu Kün-çin, as of B.C.126 conflict for throne started up among dynasty members. Hence, the next decades the stability of management lost along the empire (Ahmetbeyoğlu, 2007, p.5-6). B.C.121 was a treshold for Huns because of the lost of trade route at Kansu till Kashgar towards China (Ahmetbeyoğlu, 2007, p.6).
As of B.C.71 Huns defeated Wusuns in order to reestablish the control of tribes. But on the way of return, a catastrophe occured because of the heavy snow, so ninety percent of Hun troops as well as livestock, all died (Ahmetbeyoğlu, 2007, p.8). Starvation happened next years due to grasshopper problem all over the lands (Ahmetbeyoğlu, 2007, p.8). These geographical troubles effected empire very much.
As of B.C.54 Hun empire splitted into two between the supporters of China dominion and independent sovereignty (Ahmetbeyoğlu, 2007, p.9). One of many heroic personalities of Turkish history emerged during that period, Chichi Khagan (B.C.54-36). He objected to Chinese dominion and took his bonded tribes and founded a new Hun state around Issık lake along Talas river. Golden tells this event as a migration movement to Syr-Darya (Golden, 2014, p.59). Chichi also established a stationary capital state with city walls in the contrary to Turkish life style. Taşağıl’s opinion is this change was astrategic mistake maybe (Taşağıl, 2019, min.39). Although he got a lot of achievements in his reign like widened the lands as well as tieing vast majority of Turkish tribes such as Wusun, Kirghiz, Ogurs, Ting-lings again; to prevent Chinese army was impossible in fact with a defend position in a settled city. At last, Chinese army entered to the capital. Chichi defended the city to his last breath with a ceaseless heroic effort with other Huns together. But this event ended the western Hun state (B.C. 36) (Ahmetbeyoğlu, 2007, p.9-10). Chinese army of seventy thousand troops was outnumbered by seriously far in comparison
31
with Huns (Taşağıl, 2019, min.39). Chichi indeed won bright victories such as dominating Kirghiz tribes, Ting-lings and Wusuns, in a very short time at his effective period (Czegledy, 1998, p.38)
During Chinese emperor Wang Mang reign (A.D.8-22); because of his socialist seeming but in fact oppositely resulted policies, economy had been weakened all over China. However, Huns could not take advantage of this opportunity for a general assault to China. Yet, they had got control more then before on eastern Turkistan. A.D.45 a sharp famine occured. As consiquence, Huns lost most of their animals. Therefore, they also lost their power. From now on northern Huns could not resist anymore to Hsien-Pi and Wu-huan clans. As southern Huns dissolved inside Chinese people and lost their culture (Eberhard, 2019, p.104-107). As of A.D.89 Huns lost control towards China on Eastern Turkistan (Eberhard, 2019, p.109). A.D.87-93 and A.D.155 were the dates of Wu-huan and Hsien-Pi pressure on Huns; which created a periodical migration waves (Golden, 2014, p.59).
Lately Han dynasty; General Ts’ao Ts’ao got the government at China by the help of Hun clans and soon afterwards Wei dynasty was established (Eberhard, 2019, p.111-112).
Based on Sogdian letters, Czegledy mentioned about an event that, Huns had invaded a central capital chinese city Lo-yang at A.D.311 (Czegledy, 1998, p.65). Thereafter some decades, A.D.350 was a critical date in terms of Hun movements to west; that was related about one of the biggest migration of masses (Czegledy, 1998, p.48).
32
3.1.2. Gok-Turk Empire
The nucleus and early period of this state was Turk Khaganate. Turk Kahaganate established by Tumen(Bumin)Khagan at Altai Mountains. They were very talentfull about iron mining. The state lived two hundred years and control almost the whole asia continent from Azov Sea to Kamchatka region. They had very intense relations with China in terms of trade and diplomacy but also with continuous wars. They cooperated with Sogdian folk for trade, administration subjects and diplomatic ıssues. They from time to time manage to dominate Chinese dynasties even sometimes being the decision maker about the Chinese throne (Taşağıl, 2019). The wars mostly took place in Chinese lands and cities which is actually an important indicator for history showing the strongness of the state. Because, to make the wars at oppononents lands means to protect your own lands fromdamages and harms as well as preventing to lose regions on, even the contrary to gain new lands and products from the enemy territories. Gok-Turks managed this very well. This was a splendid success despite the fact that their less population. As mentioned above, most of the wars had been taking place inside Chinese lands. That shows us the balance of power was generaly on the side of Gok-Turks. Chinese armies had never managed to reach Otuken region during Gok-Turk era. On the contrary Turks had entered lots of times to Chinese central cities (Taşağıl, 2019).
At both first and second Gok-Turk states’ era , even though China was living its strongest times ever as Sui dynasty (A.D.580-618) united all China and as later on Tang dynasty (A.D.618-907) became the most powerful dynasty; the furthest borders
33
of Gok-Turks’s influental territories was almost all Central Asia, plus even till Byzantium (Taşağıl, 2019).
The foundation of Khitan Empire at northern China had to be postphoned three centuries because of Gok-Turk reign (İsakov, 2017, p.24). Khitans also were vassals to Gok-Turks (Taşağıl, 2019, p.274).
But most of all, the splendid incident of Gok-Turk era was no doubt the inscriptions they left to Turkish nation, counted as one of the priceless values of world inheritance in consensus by turkcologists. Orkhun Monuments of Gok-Turks are the masterpieces of cultural inheritance of the world and Turkish history discovered by Thompsen at 1893. Also mentioned masterpieces are the evidences of the level of Turk’s developed alphabet system. Runik was Gok-Turks’ way of writing (Şirin, 2020, p.25-26). Runik means as secretive or mysterious and this alphabet style based on the carving, writing or drawing on to the rocks, woods and metals (Şirin, 2020, p.21). Şirin also remarks as writings were the coded way of communications for the oracles, fortune tellers, magicians so forth among eachother, generally (Şirin, 2020, p.21). Şirin thinks that this could be another purpose of writing additionally to linguistics and Şirin named this as "Kült yazısı" (Şirin, 2020, p.21). Then, in old times perhaps alphabets has a mission of password kind usage purpose in order to not to be understood easily by enemy nations. For that reason maybe to solve old alphabets were a tough subject for scientists. Nevertheless, Şirin remarks also the rulers of Gok-Turks were inviting their folks to read the inscriptions himselves directly in order to learn the advises (Şirin, 2020, p.37). Şirin evaluated this as an evidence of Gok-Turk societies’ literate ability too, in parallel with their rulers (Şirin, 2020, p.37). Şirin states about Gok-Turks’ high literate rate due to the crowded mass of Orkhun Inscriptions reader community by putting L.Gumilyev’s
34
confirmation (Şirin, 2020, p.38). From Şirin's point of view “Bitiglig” which was known as the place of correspondencies at Gok-Turks; could be a sign of archive implementations too (Şirin, 2020, p.39).
According to findings at Talas valley, Gok-Turks were writing wooden inscriptions most probably in order to use for far correspondence which could also be carried easily (Ögel, 2020, p.202). These wooden writings included tips about mappings such as routes, ways, problems on the ways (Ögel, 2020, p.202). They also wrote on fixed trees (Ögel, 2020, p.202). These trees could function as milestones or so forth in purpose for informings to other Gok-Turk riders of whom only could understand the alphabet. So, these were in some way cryptic writings. Talas valley was the home land of Nu-shih-pi tribes from Ten Arrows (Ögel, 2020, p.203). Another Central Asia state using wood of trees for recording was Juan Juans (Yıldırım, 2015, p.56). Juan Juans wrote on wood instead of book writing (Yıldırım, 2015, p.56). We know also that diplomatic correspondence was done with portable wooden letters between Huns and Han dynasty (Onat et. al.,2020, p.17).
Armor is a distinctive dress of a Gok-Turk warrior (Taşağıl, 2019, p.118). Isbara Khagan had got a golden armor (Taşağıl, 2019, p.51). We understand that they had got the know-how of to produce weightless durable iron or golden armor. Apparently, Gok-Turks were beyond their era about that craftsmanship.
35
3.1.3. Uyghur States
Uyghurs had founded numerous states at Turkistan lands as well as at holy Otuken region. As Taşağıl stated that Uyghurs could be counted inside the most effective three tribes of Turks overall general Turkish history (Tasağıl, 2019, min.36). Of course they deserved that place with their achievements especially at cultural sites as craftsmanship, arts. From their miniatures, books till bezeliks, they left deep traces in world and Turkish history. They also became an unignorable vital part of bright ages of The Mongol Empire and other successor Mongol states with their high and irreplaceable support on diplomacy, law and state administrative areas. Besides also they founded great independent states and longlasting settlements such as Ordu-balıq at pre-Mongol period.
At the earliest news from historical sources for an Uyghur State refer the date B.C.176 that was related about the Hun invasion operated towards an Uyghur State at the lands between Altais and Issık Lake (Esin, 1983, p.132). They had moved together with Basmils and Karluks whereas revolting against weakened second Gok-Turk state (Çandarlıoğlu, 2012, p.242). According to Esin as a holy area for all Turks at ancient times, controlling Otuken was naturally a confirmation of being the leader among all Turkish tribes at Central Asia (Esin, 1983, p.132). Through the detection by Esin, Kut was being taken from Otuken itself by the state founder tribe (Esin, 1983, p.132). So, we understand that the belief of taking hallowed Kut among Turks in order to get the blessed ruling right, was the reason of the holiness character of Otuken. Therefore, Uyghurs' real emerging existence for an organisation of state was the moment when they entered to Otuken territory at A.D.745 right after
36
defeating Basmils. The founder of state was Kutlug Bilge Kül Khagan (A.D.745 – 747). His successor was Moyençor and his era was one of the brightest times of new state (A.D.747 – 758). Uyghurs were such powerful that they managed to get regular tributes from Tang dynasty (Taşağıl, 2020, p.14).
Firstly they had founded Uyghur State by taking over second Gok-Turk state right after defeating Basmils they occupied the Otuken which showed all other Turks that now the strongest tribe was their’s. They built up a new settlement as their capital, named the city Ordu-baliq. Mongols called this city as Karabalisagun (Sümer, 2019, p.3). This city was the first city founded by a ruler ownself among Turks. This ruler was Moyençor (Sümer, 2019, p.29).
At A.D.762 Uyghurs accepted Maniheizm as their formal religon (Şirin, 2020, p.40). Upon that date, Maniheists Sogdians got influence inside state (Şirin, 2020, p.44). Another result of this event was the acceptance of Mani alphabet to which was important in light of first example of accepting an alphabet by the effect of a religon among Turks (Şirin, 2020, p.40, p.43).
Also another remarkable historical note is Khitans too accepted willingly Uyghur sovereignity till A.D.840 (İsakov, 2017, p.25).
A.D. 839 was a very hard year for Uyghurs because of heavy weather conditions as well as illnesses and starvation (Sümer, 2019, p.33). Just one year later, as of A.D.840, when Kirghizes had striked to Otuken and annihilated Uyghur State, Uyghurs had to migrate to southwards towards Turkistan. They established a new state at Kao-ch’ang. In view of İzgi, this was the beginning of improvement of Uyghur civilization which lived its top era at XI. and XII. Centuries (İzgi, 2017, p.85).Uyghurs would protect their states till Mongol sovereignty. Later they would
37
be the most important actor of new emerged Great Mongol Empire with respect to administrative branches.
Uyghurs left us three very important inscriptions as legacy called as Taryat (A.D.753), Karabalisagun and Şine-Usu (A.D.760) which are informing very valuable events.
Uyghurs were expert merchantmants and used money at their trade transactions as well as consuming luxury goods (Taşağıl, 2020, p.18). Uyghurs had got a developed financial debit system such as implementing regular interest rates (Taşağıl, 2020, p.23).
Uyghurs used in general very clever diplomacy during especially at Turpan Uyghurs' era that we called it soft power. They were very skillful diplomats to get results about their political benefits.By this ability, Uyghurs achieved to put very best relations with Khitans, Karakhitaies and Great Mongol Empire. Even, Uyghurs managed to get some very valuable governmental positions in these mentioned states. Karakhitaies too adopted the Mani religion (Togan, 2019, p.59). If we make a brainstorming here, Uyghurs might have used their soft power in order to persuade Khitans for an assault towards Kirghiz state at Otuken. Uyghurs might have uses their statuses in the Khitan state to do that. Could the Maniheist Identity of Uyghurs and adoption of Maniheizm by Karakhitaies be coincidence or the result of Uyghurs’s soft power in the state? Besides, we understood from Barthold's statements from Reşidüddin that Uyghurs could manage to control their diplomacy also among Kubilai and Kaydu struggle very balanced which is an another example of their effective soft power (Barthold, 2019, p.156).
38
3.2. Mongols
At the old times as of B.C.209, tribes of Tung-hu people are known generally as the earliest proto-Mongols (İsakov, 2017, p.18). For same period of time other proto-Mongol tribe was Hsien-pi (İsakov, 2017, p.20). According to Fu Ch’ien at second Han dynasty; from Onat, Orsoy and Ercilasun work on Han Shu; “Tung-hu people were the ancestors of Wu-huans of which them all called thereafter as Hsien-pi” (Onat et. al.,2020, p.106). But mentioned scientists also put their objections as; "Tung-hu were separate group emerged from same origin from same Wu-huan and Hsien-pi mountains by basing on other more later sources" (Onat et. al.,2020, p.106). İzgi counts Tung-hu as Tunguz people living at Manchuria territories dealing with pig farming (İzgi, 2017, p.155). On the other hand İzgi also mentioned about Tung-hu tribesmen from Mongols too, contemporary with Huns on the same explanations(İzgi, 2017, p.155). Yıldırım objects to Tunguz and Tung-hu link because of weak evidences while mentioning the ideas about their half blood Hun and Hsien-pi origin (Yıldırım, 2015, p.55, p.101). Yıldırım also transmitted from Ligeti that after the war between Asian Huns and Tung-hu, Wu-huan and Hsien-pi groups emerged from Tung-hu (Yıldırım, 2015, p.101). Clauson too does not agree to the opinions about Tung-Hu and Tungus sameness (Clauson, 2017, p.31).
When we look into “Secret History of Mongols” written at A.D.1240 during Mongol tribes’ general assembly, we would clearly see that Mongols themselves had linked their nation’s origin to a clan which had got significant “Black Carts” (Temir, 2019, p.4). According to this anonymous original priceless history book that luckily survived at Chinese library at A.D. 1440, the woman Alan-ho who was from that
39
clan having black wagons, was the very first human mother of whole mongol tribes (Temir, 2019, p.5). We could observe from a moral at the above mentioned Mongolian manuscript that Alan-ho was such truly important figure for Mongols. With respect to this moral consisting of Alan-ho’s words to her five children, the main ideology was being formed for all Mongol tribes. In other words the tribal solidarity was emphasised strongly by her below advice to her children. From Temir’s transfer Alan-ho advised to her children that:
“My five children; You all were born from my single body. If you move separately like the five arrows did shortly before you would be broken from everybody easily. But if you would be together like five arrows tied, who can harm to you?” (Temir, 2019, p.8)
Again from Temir’s statements: “Just before that advice, she gave five arrows to her five children and asked them to break the arrows. The children all broke their own arrow very easily. After that this time she tied the five arrows together in one bunch and asked again to them to break the bunch one by one. Her five children tried in accordance to break the this bunch of arrows. But, none of them managed to break it” (Temir, 2019, p.7). This moral is a magnificent description to show the benefit of being united for tribes.
As we know a very important occuring event of at Turkish history was On-Ok (Ten Arrow) named new clan organization which had established near the Ili River. Besides apparently, we should ask ourselves here that it seems like whether Alan-ho treated likely at that mentioned above moral lesson by remembering well hereby On-Ok (Ten Arrow) event even after around six hundred years passed over. Because, every group each took for themselves one arrow in order to represent their
40
tribe at that event which was in fact a the new arising of Oghuz Turks after the fall of first Gok-Turk State. This arrows showed for sure the symbol of reuniting not only for Turks but also for Mongols. So apparently we are understanding from the words of Alan-ho, the mother of Mongols that, this above mentioned vital movement of Turkish tribes remained deeply in the memory of all Turkistan tribes in particular Mongols as a fundamental philospy.
Mongols homeland was Khentii Mountains owning the source of three very long rivers, Onon, Kherlen and Tula. As usual to other nomadic nations at Central Asia, they have similar legend emerging mit for their ancestry from a gray wolf and a deer (Temir, 2019, p.1).
Mongol name is coming from Mengu tribe (Togan,1985, p.95). Mengu was a sub-tribe of Shi-wei. Shi-weies were inhabitants ofthe river Amur (Togan,1985, p.95). Shi-weies was very crowded (Togan,1985, p.95). We understand from the words of Togan that, Mengu tribe was coming forward day by day among other tribes tied to Shi-weies. Because as Togan indicated, on twelfth century they pushed Jurchen masses from northern areas of Amur by invading 27 castles (Togan,1985, p.96). On the other hand, Mengu people was separeted into two and Cenghis was from Yenisey Mengus (Togan,1985, p.96). These two groups of Mengus behaved differently as alliances between Tatar and Jurchen tribes (Togan,1985, p.96).As seen these events had occured very soon before emergence of Mongol tribal confederation. Tatars and Jurchens were neighbours at the mentioned lands meanwhile.
Mongols who are one of the core nations of Central Asia contemporary with Turks; had put an unforgettable milestone to world history, with their devastating
41
military force which composed of heavily Turkish groups of highly diciplened armies, cavalry abilities as well as intelligent war strategies much beyond its era .Mongol States also had a tribal organization behind their strongness like Turks. But also many thanks to last milleniums’s expreienced Turkish states which knows very well how to build politic and economic relations with China and their developed well expreienced semi-nomadic Turkish armies by continious wars taking place far before Mongol age. Moreover, Uyghur Turks had became the backbone of diplomacy, law and governmental works of the Great Mongol State by holding administirative positions with their higher ranks that they wrote the Mongol laws as well. According to Taşağıl Cenghis’es ancestorscould have a relation with Sha-t’o Turks (Taşağıl, 2020, min.15). Therefore they were close relatives with Turks in terms of not only nomadic life culture but also ancestry. Turks, Tatars and other Mongoloid tribes all together were united by Cenghis Khagan as of the date of A.D.1206 (Temir, 2019, p.281).
When we look deeply to Mongol tribal structures, resembles with the ones of Turks is astonishing.Also from the religion point of view; we know that after he rescued himself from the intense chase of Merkits, Temujin (Cenghis Khagan) greeted sun by kneeling down nine times towards it (Temir, 2019, p.41). Asian Hun Turk emperor was called as Ch’an-yu. Ch’an-yu had been greeting sun by kotowing to it at mornings. Moreover, all Turk society at Huns’ era was greeting sun as an early religious rituel by forming a line together right just before sunrise (Davletşin, 2013, p.4). Old Turks was always considering sun’s movements at their ceremonials. During the accession to the throne of khagan, as a ceremonial habit, khagans had been lifted up by nobles and rotated together in accordance with sun’s movement nine times(Davletşin, 2013, p.6). Nine times like Temujin did. Therefore, we need to
42
note this behavior of belief also as one of the common spiritual cultural points for both Turks and Mongols in order to understand their very close proto relative connections.
We have an idea related with Mongols that we want to put in our hereby thesis for the purpose of bringing to debate. Our idea is basically about Mongolian army at XIII.Century and later. Without any definite evidence but being with a high probability from our eye which we would explain the reasons shortly after here that; the big success behind Mongolian army was depending on a special material.A material which is very much light, very protective, also could be beneficial for horses; enabled Mongol armies fast motion at very cold steppe lands. Such a material that, it diminishes the effect of cold conditions of continental climate resulting 24 hours continuous riding ability to Mongols. In our opinion, the secret of Mongol army was Cashmere. Cashmere, because it is very much light so easy to carry as an underwear, outer suit, blanket and even a horse dress. It is magnificent for autumn and winter use. It is more lighter and softer than other wools (Doğan, 2014, p.23). If we think about how heavy a wool blanket or fur dress was, we could realize it can not be such a rapid army at the cold territories with wool dresses. On the other hand, silk and linen are very light organic clothes but are not suitable for winter use. Cashmere was such a sort of material that a person can wear it on spring as well because of its breathing nature. And also very practical for underwears and stockings cause no itchy allergies can happen on skin as wools make sometimes. Cashmere is an only unique wool that it can be weared directly to body. Also it prevents to sweat. Cashmere can be obtained from only a special goat called “Capra Hircus” living above 5000m heights generally at Mongolia, Iran, Afghanistan and
43
Himalayas (Doğan, 2014, p.21). Cashmere is the inner layer of outer wool just specially of Capra Hircus (Doğan, 2014, p.21).
Besides, Mongols could perhaps have learned the cashmere from Turks. There is a possibility about that. Because when we looked to the archeological findings from ancient Turks, we would see some dresses of horseriders looking like cashemere. Most of all, Capra Hircus is a goat and A-shih-na dynasty’s tamga was a goat as well. Then, why ancient Turks gave such a big importance to the goat animal? Could the answer be fabric of cashmere?
Figure1
Sculptures as panorama view of the funeral found at Gok-Turk Khagan's Kurgan at Shivet Ulan (Şivet Ulan) Central Mongolia.
Note.Archaeological excavations&findings and photo: Ahmet TAŞAĞIL, Karjaubay SARTKOJAULİ, Cantegin QARJAUBAYULİ, Ayudain OÇİR, L.ERDENEBOL.
Introduced at TV program “Tarihin Arka Odası” 3.Nov.2012 by Ahmet TAŞAĞIL and Cantegin QARJAUBAYULİ.
44
By Taşağıl, A. , Qarjaubayuli C.. (2012, November 3).Tarihin Arka Odası-Ahmet Taşağıl (Sun. Murat Bardakçı) [Video]. Habertürk [YouTube channel]. YouTube.
Taşağıl mentinoned about cashmere as an in high demand export good of modern Mongolia today (Taşağıl, 2017, p.89). Cashmere could have been known as Chi fabric by ancient Chinese in parallel with Ögel’s transcription (Ögel, 1951, p.368). Uyghur forces had been obtained some Chi fabric from Chinese most probably as a tribute, after An Lu Shan rebellion (Ögel, 1951, p.368). As İsakov states from Rubruck’s informations that, Mongols had cashmere caps on summers (İsakov, 2017, p.211). So that, that is very clear that cashmere was a well known natural fabric at ancient times. Therefore, our hereby hypothesis about cashmere's role at ancient Mongol armies deserves to be investigated more deeply.
We would like to inform about an anectode hereby for Mongols also from Togan's statements that; In ancient Mongol culture, There was a tradition that, when the moment mothers had given birth to, were give the name of a first seen item's by her, as a name to her new born baby (Togan, 2019, p.632). Therefore, we can picture on our minds the historical Mongol names, from this point of view too.
3.3. Tatars
Ancient Central Asia Tatars are still a big question mark for historian scientists. Tatars who were old and crowded nation of Central Asia, are still a mystery because of very limited information about their origin and relations with other nations. Tatar origin tribes could be both fathers of Turks and Mongols according to Taşağıl's evaluations which is under hypothesis level at the momentduring the preparation of hereby thesis (Taşağıl, 2017, min.2).
45
According to İzgi's quotes from Chinese ambassador Wang Yen-te’s itinerary, during Tang reign, Tatars were vassal to Uyghurs (İzgi, 2017, p.216-217). Ögel is also confirming that same information; “once they were serving to Uyghurs as being their shepherds” (Ögel, 2017, p.51). After date A.D.840 which was a crucial date for Uyghurs that they had lost their lands to Kirghizes, conditions supposed to be changed also for Tatars normally. Once upon time they had warfare with Khitans after Uyghurs left their lands. Tatars had perhaps earned their independence as well due to further events. From that view, A.D.841 year as a beginning year pointed by İzgi in light of Tatar clan name used by chinese people, gains meaning for our evaluation (İzgi, 2017, p.216-218).
With respect toYıldırım, Merkits could be Tatar origined (Yıldırım, 2012, p.183). Yıldırım have been depending his this opinion to a govermental title at Mancu dynasty by making a junctionto Mo-ho name (Yıldırım, 2012, p.183-184). Mo-hos which were an ancient tribe, considered as they could be fathers of Tatars (Ögel, 1974, p.54). Yes indeed, Chinese called proto-Tatars as Mo-hos before A.D.841 (İzgi, 2017, p.217). They were resident at same lands but were known as Mo-hos (İzgi, 2017, p.217). Nevertheless, unless the contrary has been proved fully, they have been continuing to be known as just proto-Mongols for the time being.
Yıldırım’s claim is:”Mu-ku-lü=Bükri=Bökül=Bökli=Mukri=Mucri=MoHe” (Yıldırım, 2015, p.106). The Mukri tribes here actually also were related with T’an-t’an name according to Yıldırım (Yıldırım, 2015, p.107). The thing is that; Yıldırım also says that T’an-t’an name was coming from a kind of tree (Yıldırım, 2015, p.107). Thus Yıldırım transmitted from Atanıyazov that Agaceri tribe and the above mentioned Mukri tribes could have relation (Yıldırım, 2015, p.107-108). Ağaç means tree in Turkish. According to Şeşen’s statements; as of VII.Century; Turkish
46
tribes of Agaceri, Col and Yazar named had already reached till to Taberistan, Curcan and along Azerbaijan (Şeşen, 2020, p.11). Then, could Tatars moved to west much more earlier than the Mongol empire age under the groups of Agaceri tribe? Actually, Agaceri tribe had been evaluated as Oghuz as well (Sümer, 1988, p.460). Yıldırım wrote as one of the meanings of Tatar name could equal to Agaceri (Yıldırım, 2015, p.108). Therefore, here things are getting complicated. For the moment, Agaceri tribe could be a key in order to understand Tatars due to above explanations.
If we continue to our analyze from Mo-ho tribes again; Mo-ho was same as Baga name (Taşağıl, 2019, p.60). Proto-Mohos were Su-shen and I-Iou (Yıldırım, 2012, p.180). Tatars’ and Jurchens’ mutual ancestors were Mohos (Yıldırım, 2015, p.101). Yıldırım puts an idea about Su-shen that the founder of Juan Juan dynasty could be from Su-shens (Yıldırım, 2015, p.101). In such a way that, meanwhile Tabgach forces were marching to Su-shen's, most probably the mentioned person could also have been captured (Yıldırım, 2015, p.101). This man was bald and he had lost his memory (Yıldırım, 2015, p.101). In consequence, Juan Juans and Tatars could have a link through Su-shen clan.
There had been classified four main groups as Tatars as follows below;
 According to Ögel, Onguth was Tatars and called as Pai Ta-ta which means “White Tatars” (Ögel, 2017, p.55). White Tatars had the tradition of cutting their face at their burial customs (Ögel, 2017, p.55). As we know, Gok-Turks were used to cut their faces at their funerals in order to show their mourning in order to mix tears with blood by blood crying (Taşağıl, 2019, p.118). Ögel paid attention to
47
this mutual tradition of White-Tatars and Gok-Turks (Ögel, 2017, p.55). This was such a deep emotional custom of ancient Turks. Interestingly, we see here that White Tatars had also same ceremonial behaviour.
 Another sub-wing of Tatars were Hei Ta-ta which means Black Tatars or Tatars with Black cart (İzgi, 2017, p.220).
 Sheng Tata – Wild Tatars(İzgi, 2017, p.220).
 Shui Ta-ta whichmeans Water Tatars (İzgi, 2017, p.220). Togan indicates that these were a group from proto-Mongol Shih-wei clans who was living like Turks (Togan, 1985, p.95). Togan also states that Mengu tribe was inside these mentioned Shih-wei groups too, as thereafter Mengu would known as Mongol directly (Togan, 1985, p.95).
Nine Tatars living together with Uyghurs could be Turks according to Ögel (Ögel, 2017, p.51).
There is an important historical event that Tatars cooperated with Chinese and at the year A.D.1164 (Kalkan, 1996, p.393). Mongols had been defeated nearby to Buyr Nur lake. Aftermath, they had killed the father of Cenghis Khagan (Kalkan, 1996, p.393). For that reason further years Cenghis Khagan with the ambition of revenge marched towards them several times at the dates of between A.D.1202-1206. Eventually, he fully took control on them all. One important consequence was; another migration of Tatars. As we remember a big Tatar migration happened after Kirghiz victory on Uyghurs at the date of A.D.840 (Kalkan, 1996, p.393).
48
As the tribe Mo-ho was one of the oldest tribes which has been evaluated as proto-Tatar. Therefore, the living zone of Mo-ho tribe would be very important to understand the ancient Tatars’ main territories. Also tribe Shih-wei was another contemporary tribe evaluated as proto-Mongols. Both tribes settled at the eastern part of Mongolia at Chinese border inside today's Chinese lands. Historians think that they were living near Buyr Nur and Huun Nur lakes.
On the other hand we find two interesting map during our investigations. At the Grosser welt atlas, published in Köln Germany, there are two small towns represented as the names Mo-ho and Shih-weiy at two different sections. Right near to Argın river at the end parts of big Amur River. The questionsare, are really today these tribe names existing there as town names? If the answer is yes, then it is worth to investigate deeper cause our idea is as Amur River was a active trade route functioning transportation of goods by river at old times. Tatars might had been controlling the trade and with their cart maybe they were carrying the goods inside to Otuken. Even perhaps, Otuken’s center could be a little bit more eastward then the historians think today (Herder, 1990,p.143,p.150).
49
Figure2
Mo-ho and Shih-weiy towns near Argun River.
Note.Herder, V., (1990),Grosser Welt Atlas. Naumann&Göbel Verlagsgesellschaft (Dağ. Hürriyet), Köln.
50
Figure 3
Mo-ho and Shih-weiy towns near Argun River.
Note.Herder, V., (1990),Grosser Welt Atlas. Naumann&Göbel Verlagsgesellschaft (Dağ. Hürriyet), Köln.
Musk of Tatars. As we know from Togan's statement that home of Black Tatars were Golden Mountains where they had organized raids to Kansu Uyghurs from that spot (Togan, 1985, p.99). Golden Mountains could be “Chin-shan” which was in fact Altai Mountains (Taşağıl, 2019, p.356; Parker, 1896, p.444). Parker mentioned about another spot questionable as well nearby to Chinese frontier for this most probably celestial Turkish homeland Golden mountains (Parker, 1896, p.444). On the other hand more possible alternative is the chain of mountains called "Altun Dağları" could be also Togan’s Golden Mountains reference. Because Altun Dağları are located just south of Eastern Turkistan beginning from southeast of Hotan lying down to till Tun-huang (Herder, 1990, p.149). Also, Ardel mentioned about Golden
51
Mountains below Taklamakan desert from south (Ardel, 1964, p.128). Tun-huang is the starting town of Kansu passage so it is the door of Kansu. Moreover, Togan informed If Black Tatars had marched to Kansu Uyghurs several times from Golden Mountains, then this Altun Dağları should have been their home. Togan was telling these informations from Hoten files in the form of which verifies once again this mentioned above Altun Dağları(Togan, 1985, p.99). The thing is here, according to Togan’s statements we are understanding that Black Tatars were trading a merchandise called “Tatars' Musk”, which is named misk in Turkish (Togan, 1985, p.99).
According to official web site of Turkish Language Establishment dictionary; “misk is a special substance found under the skin of a sort of antelope living higher mountains of Asia with a beautiful smell that is synonymous with “mis” ” (Heuristic,t.y.,par.1). Therefore we could say that today’s Turkish modern idiom “mis gibi kokmak” was basically originated from misk which namely actually means smells like mis by referencing the beautiful smell of misk. Besides, at Bilge Khagan insciription, the silk fabric with misk smell particularly had been mentioned (Aydın, 2019, p.78). So, in this case the misk should have been used also to give a nice smell on some silk fabrics as a natural perfume at ancient times
52
Figure 4
Musk Deer.
Note. By Tibet Nature Environmental Conservation Network: Environment and Development Desk, DIIR, CTA. (2014). Musk Deer.
http://tibetnature.net/en/musk-deer/
Musk Deer species are Moschus berezovskii, Moschus fuscus, Moscus sifanicus, Moschus chrysogaster leucogaster, Moschus chrysogaster crysogaster, living at heights of Tibet, Kansu as well as other Chinese provinces (Environment and Development Desk, DIIR, CTA, 2014, par.1).
As Golden's remarks how close Turks and Iranians folks based on following phrases in Divanı Lugati't-Turk: “Nor like there can not be a börk without a head, neither a Turk without a Tat”; he also stated the word “Tat” was for Iranians as an entitle used by Turks (Golden, 2014, p.39). However, even if Sümer considers same Iranian folks possibility; Sümer also wrote that the word Tat was used for Uyghurs by Karakhanids too (Sümer,2019, p.37). In this case, as we mentioned above that when we concern the fact of Uyghurs and Tatars were living together nestedly; could the Turks at Divanı Lugati't-Turk's mentioned above phrase be Uyghur Turks? And could Tats be Tatars? Yıldırım transmitted from Yeremeyev that; Tatar was evolved
53
from Tat word which meant stranger (Yıldırım, 2015, p.91-92). As a matter of fact that also tat word got the same meaning by time (Yıldırım, 2015, p.91-92).
4.TRIBES OF CENTRAL ASIA TILL XIV.CENTURY
4.1. A-shih-na & A-shih-te
A-shih-na tribe was the most strongest tribe of the Turkish people for the Turkistan regions around the centuries A.D.VI., VII., VIII.. The name of tribe is depending to a folkloric Turkish legend of a female wolf based theme. This tribe was the backbone of Gok-Turk state as well (Taşağıl, 2019, p.13). A-shih-te was also another Turkish tribe that was relative with A-shih-na. Famous historical characters such as Tonyukuk and An-lu-shan were originally from A-shih-te tribe(Taşağıl, 2019, p.335; Eberhard, 2019, p.211). These both tribes together very soon dominated the Otuken territory in the center of Mongolia and gather all Turkish folks under one banner. One impressive example out of many of their tight family relation happened at A.D.679. Two ranked Gok-Turk named A-shih-te Feng-chih and A-shih-te Wen-fu recognized A-shih-na Ni-shu-fu to be the leader of war of independence against Tangs (Taşağıl, 2019, p.273). Taşağıl states that : “First job they did was to find a khagan from Gok-Turk dynasty” (Taşağıl, 2019, p.273). In other words, A-shih-te leaders were leaving the khagan position to A-shih-na tribe which was an example of organic bond of either mentioned tribes. Finally, Gok-Turks won their independence under the leadership of A-shih-na Kutlug (Taşağıl, 2019, p.222-223). As seen tribe names were also a title infront of the names of Turkish nobles. Like A-shih-na-tien (Tardu), A-shih-na She-er, A-shih-na Ho-lu, Mukan Khagan’s daughter princess A-shih-na (A-shih-na-hou) are some of the
54
remarkable example names (Taşağıl, 2019, p.147, p.265, p.283, p.31, p.177). Even we could observe tribe names as title on a different tribe member’s name. An apparent example for this, is the name of famous historical person A-shih-na Ho-la Bilge Khagan who was actually a Basmil clan ruler (Taşağıl, 2018, p.70).
A-shih-na tribe based itself to a mythological legend as of the people of the tribe born from a female wolf. If we look to chinese version from Taşağıl’s informing: “a sudden raid had been done to A-shih-na clan from a neigbour state. Every A-shih-na individuals had been killed except one little child. The enemy forces caught him but did not kill him. They cut the arms and legs of him and left him into a swamp. The child had been found by a female wolf. The wolf looked after him very well. The wolf would have ten children from him later on. These ten children got married when they had grown up and got different family names for themselves. So according to the legend, the A-shih-na name was one of these names. The ancestors of A-shih-na got crowded with new generations and learned ironworking.” (Taşağıl, 2019, p.13-14).
A-shih-te tribesmen had been additional respected from Turks for their wisdomrelatively among other tribes. We could figure out this determination from Taşağıl’s informations. At these historical events, A-shih-te people were generally at strategic positions among Gok-Turks who can influence decision maker rulers (Taşağıl, 2019, p.335).
Interestingly, from Taşağıl’s statements, there was the ruler entitled as A-se-na who was the ruler of Fergana lands during chaotic period of Gok-Turks after A.D.649 (Taşağıl, 2019, p.293). The thing is, Taşağıl translated the title of the ruler as A-se-na, not A-shih-na (Taşağıl, 2019, p.293). However, he remarked that
55
Chavannes translated the title as A-shih-na (Taşağıl, 2019, p.293). His reign was after Tong Yabgu period and after Bagatur Khagan's assault to Fergana.
Chinese were paying attention to A-shih-na tribe particularly because of A-shih-na name's charismatic influence on other Turks tribes. For that reason, they tried to manipulate the Gok-Turk nobles of A-shih-na titled, in order to change their side. They gave some Chinese ranks to them. A remarkable example of this sort of Chinese tactic was A-shih-na Ssu-mo Chia-pi Tegin (Taşağıl, 2019, p.94). He was the step uncle of İl Khagan (Taşağıl, 2019, p.94). A-shih-na Ssu-mo had been persuaded by Chinese and eventually became a Tang officer (Taşağıl, 2019, p.94, p.102). He could not promoted to Şad position because of his Sogdian resemblance rather than Turks (Taşağıl, 2019, p.94). Tang's Chinese gave him some special ranks such as “prince of Ho-shun” (Taşağıl, 2019, p.94). He and his powerful A-shih-na title had been used by Tang to establish a vassal Gok-Turk state in order to balance other Gok-Turk tribes in China upon uprising of Chie-shih-shuai (Taşağıl, 2019, p.315). Another examples were A-shih-na Mi-she and A-shih-na Pu-chen who were from İstemi's direct further generation successors, were given very important Chinese official titles and positions (Taşağıl, 2019, p.287). Even, A-shih-na Pu-chen became, on behalf of Tang, the leader of five clans of Nu-shih-pi from Ten Arrow tribe organisation (After A.D.650) (Taşağıl, 2019, p.287).
4.2. Ting-ling
With due to scientific estimations they were always existing at Central Asia lands from the beginning of earliest periods of ancient history. Ting-lings were quite old and widely penetrated to Central Asia that Aristov remarks confidently that for the oldest archeological findings about evey kind of valuable metalic objects found
56
at ancient tombs and all the remains of early oldest mines should be related just only with Ting-lings (Aristov, 2014, p.77). Clauson transmitted from Pulleybank that t’ieh-le name which was a Turkish tribal union could have been produced from Ting-ling word (Clauson, 2017, p.32). The ancestors of Ting-lings have been estimated as the Ti tribes at the earliest times (Togan, 2019, p.566). First historical informations about Ti tribes dated as B.C.1328 as mentioned above (Togan, 2019, p.566). While, the last source of informing about Ting-lings dated from A.D.II.Century about a defeat of them towards Hsien-Pi (Aristov, 2014, p.72). What definitely known is they were one of the backbones of Asian Hun Empire (Taşağıl, 2015, p.22). They were living very large area covering from Baikal Lake to Yenisey Basin, from Irtysh River, some groups spreaded to Kazakhstan, others moved even to Yellow River in China. They were very crowded with a large population and was always resident at these areas from the very old times. Czegledy divides them into three in terms of their living environment namely in the way as; nothern Mongolia around Baikal, Irtysh River lands and from Gobi desert till yellow river frontiers of China (Czegledy, 1998, p.21). They were in fact proto Kao-ch’e and proto-Toleses (Taşağıl, 2018, p.24). Some hypothesises say that they were coming from Karasuk Culture around B.C XII – VII.Centuries (Taşağıl, 2018, p.20). Togan’s statements from Eberhard that; the Red-Ti tribes cover also Kao-ch’e groups with under Dili name. And those Dili tribes and Ting-lings had the same language (Togan, 2019, p.567). Hence, they accepted Hun governance without any resistance in times accordance with around strong Hun emperor Mo-tun’s coronation times during second half of B.C.III.Century.
With respect to Aristov's opinion, all Kirghiz Turks are originally mixed with Ting-lings at old times (Aristov, 2014, p.80). According to Taşağıl, Ting-lings were
57
a main mass clan population consisting a lot of tribes in (Taşağıl, 2015, p.22). In other words, Ting-lings were the body of tribe system.
According to Togan, The Ting-lings from Selenge region were the ancestors of Uyghurs (Togan, 2019, p.566). On the other hand İzgi objects to this idea as mentioned above that like; Uyghurs and Ting-lings can not be related due to the dog meaning of Ti name cause dog originated tribes were actually Tibetans, from Chinese point (İzgi, 2017, p.153). And those Ti Tibetans were resident not at Selenge but Ssu-ch’uan (İzgi, 2017, p.153).
Again from Togan’s statements from Grum-Grjimaylu; Ting-lings were the ancestors of Kipchaks as well (Togan, 2019, p.567). Furthermore, Taşağıl counts Ogurs and Ting-lings together as same tribes (Taşağıl, 2018, p.25; Taşağıl, 1999, p.136). Significant mass of Ting-lings migrated to different sides of Asia including southern Kazakhstan as of forth century in part of migration of massed (Czegledy, 1998, p.117).
At Yıldırım's notes about Juan Juan’s Tou-lun’s period we observe that Yıldırım mentioned Kao-ch’e and Ting-lings separately in different historical events (Yıldırım, 2015, p.34). Yıldırım was telling about A-fu-chih-lo’s independence attempt by describing his tribes as Kao-ch’e during A.D.492 (Yıldırım, 2015, p.34). Nonetheless, Yıldırım also mentioned about a campaign of Ting-ling forces towards Juan Juans by emphasising Ting-Lings or Kao-ch’e, at the same year (Yıldırım, 2015, p.34). Namely, Yıldırım used “Or” conjuction (Yıldırım, 2015, p.34). So, he counted both tribe confederation names as same for the same communities. But however, the interesting thing is while Yıldırım was transmitting those mentioned historical events, he preferred one of the Ting-ling and Kao-ch’e names to another
58
relatively more in particular to the event (Yıldırım, 2015, p.34). Thus, we could say Ting-ling name also was still alive and well during Juan Juan period. Yıldırım stated as that Ting-lings compelled Juan Juan's to withdraw from their lands to south (Yıldırım, 2015, p.34). Yıldırım also informed about Ting-lings' furthest borders of influential zone was almost till to I-chou at southward Yellow River (Yıldırım, 2015, p.34). So, Ting-lings were also a threat for Tabgach state during those years. Yıldırım wrote as “Ting-lings were acting as they were the only dominion power at the region” (Yıldırım, 2015, p.34).
If we suppose a metaphor, Ting-lings functioned like dark energy’s character at space in terms of astrophysics which means that they were everywhere which Turks were. They were one of the main community of important Turkish tribes. They acted like the tissue of the organs of Turkistan.
4.3. Wusun
At the earliest times, their rulers’ title was “Bay” (Togan, 2019, p.29).
They were close resident with Saka communities once upon a time around Tengri Mountains (Togan, 2019, p.41). Czegledy pointed Barkol lake as well as westward of Kuca as their homelands (Czegledy, 1998, p.119). In this case, these both regions were in hinterland of Wusun goups around Tengri Mountains.
Wusuns were one of the ancient and biggest core tribes of Central Asia contemporary with Asian Huns. They have a wolf mit like the other Turkish tribes in their foundation legend at the beginning of their history (Taşağıl, 2018, p.30). Osawa wrote based on Şıratorı’s analyze that Wusuns were Turk originally (Osawa, 2009, p.2376).
59
Wusuns accepted Hun emperor Mo-Tun’s dominion most probably willingly (Taşağıl, 2018, p.32). At that period of history, serious migration of Wusuns as well as Yüe-cis happened towards Fergana from Tengri Mountains (Ögel, 2020, p.181). In fact, they had supported Asian Huns against Yüe-cis as of BC.162 (Golden, 2014, p.55). Wusuns took control of western Tengri Mountains (Czegledy, 1998, p.31). Aftermath Yüe-ci masses had been pushed till Afghanistan (Golden, 2014, p.55). Yüe-ci masses also were known as Tohars simultaneously with their migrations at historical sources (Czegledy, 1998, p.33). Therefore, Yue-ci and Tohar people were same. Wusuns also willingly abandoned the Kansu corridor to Huns and withdrawed to Ili Basin (Golden, 2014, p.55). Ili Basin was one of their homeland (Ögel, 2020, p.204). They were settled near Issık Lake during coming of Huns (Taşağıl, 2018, p.136). We need to note also, inhabitant Wusuns at Western Tengri Mountains thereafter were effected also by Chichi’s storm and had lost the warfare against Chichi Khagan (Czegledy, 1998, p.38).
With respect to Togan’s review; the city of Chinese version Chigu, or Yavgu at Kasgari, was Wusun capital near Barsgan (Togan, 2019, p.41, p.606). According to Taşağıl the name of the city was “Ch’ihku ch’eng” which means “city of crimson valley” (Taşağıl, 1999, p.136). Wusuns had two sub-clans located at the mountains of Fergana called as İğrek and Çiğrek, of which one of them had links with İkires(İğreç) Mongol tribe during Cenghis era (Togan, 2019, p.638).
Wusuns were vassal to Huns and Hsien-pis respectively (Togan, 2019, p.42). They entered to Hephthalite dominion more later period (Togan, 2019, p.42). Aftermath, they were one of the core tribes of Western Gok-Turks (Togan, 2019, p.638).
60
Chinese Chang Ch’ien tried to persuade Wusuns for alliance with Han dynasty as of B.C.115 (Golden, 2014, p.57). Wusuns wisely managed the relations with both super powers of the age at that period of time. Even, Wusun ruler arranged his marriages with princesses from either powers too, Huns and Han dynasty (Golden, 2014, p.57). Wusuns turned against to Huns at last once the chinese messenger bring the chinese emperors alliance requests with literally plenty of expensive presents including a lot of silk fabric.
4.4. Hsien-pi
They were proto-Mongols. According to Clauson, Hsien-Pi groups had emerged from the remainders of war lost Tung-hu forces against Huns (Clauson, 2017, p.31). Even, later those remainders had controlled “hun-yü, ch’ü-she, ting-ling, ko-k’un, hsin-li” them all at probably north of Gobi desert (Clauson, 2017, p.31-32). Around A.D.45 Hsien-Pi groups was inhabiting eastern part of Hun (Hsiung-nu) Empire. Their first living zone was between Mongolia and Manchyria at beyondeastward sides of eastern Central Asia as well as Mongolia (Eberhard, 2019, p.107). During his reign (A.D.150-180), their ruler Tan Şi-huay(Tanshihaye) controlled lands around Tengri Mountains on behalf of Hsien-pi people (Czegledy, 1998, p.46). Tanshihaye was their leader while Hsien-pi tribes got stronger (İsakov, 2017, p.19). He died at A.D.180 (Clauson, 2017, p.34). Hsien-pi people gained the ability fishing from lakes and rivers under his teachment (Clauson, 2017, p.34). Therefore another food supply source had been utilized for northern nations of Turkistan at Hsien-pi period.
61
Hsien-pi tribes controled Mongolia between A.D.266-394 (Togan, 2019, p.41). They played an important role during last Chao dynasty and put an end to this dynasty (A.D.349) (Eberhard, 2019, p.146). They had a very strong assembly during A.D.III. Century of which controlled Kao-ch’e tribes as well (Taşağıl, 2018, p.43). From political point of view; Hsien-pi tribes are being evaluated as successors of Hun Turks (Sümer, 2019, p.10).
On the other hand, Hsien-pi clans had never managed to found a effective well organized political state due to some reasons waiting still to be revealed. However, They were very active over all Turkistan as well as Ordos steppes. From İsakov’s view, the states they founded were Ch’ien Yen, Hou Yen, His Yen, Nan Yen, Hsi Ch’in, Nan Liang (İsakov, 2017, p.19). They got military duties inside Tabgach-Toba Turkish origined Chinese State. Two main sub-clans were the groups of Hsien-pi masses as Mu-jung and Yü-wen (Eberhard, 2019, p.136). According to İsakov other significant sub-tribes of them are To-Pa, Tuan, T’u Pa, C’i Fu (İsakov, 2017, p.19). Here the thing is, Clauson wrote as To-p’a Tabgach people were Hsien-pi origined (Clauson, 2017, p.32). So, İsakov’s To-pa informing above here matches with Clauson’s opinion. Yet, Eberhard counted To-pa’s main clan as Turk (Eberhard, 2019, p.136). Thus, Hsien-pi people possibly had covered large Turk groups.
As of A.D.280 China relatively united by one of the states founded during the chaotic period (A.D.220 – A.D.589) after fall of Han dynasty. The same year would be the date of China’s new general disarmament policy. According to Eberhard; one of the several purposes of disarmament could be to prevent the coin absence at the market by making new metal coins by collecting metals as well as melting the gathered weapons (Eberhard, 2019, p.134). But the Chinese soldiers prefered to sell
62
their weapons to Huns and Hsien-pis along lands at north instead of delivering. Thus, Hsien-pi people obtained modern weapons as well as getting their necessary agriproducts by new Chinese farmer settlers at north. So that the management of China lost military power at the center. As a result of that Mu-jung Hsen-pi clan’s forces invaded Beijing at A.D. 282. Yet A.D.289 they accepted Chinese dominion. Yü-wen Hsien-Pi clan was located at southern Manchuria (Eberhard, 2019, p.134-135-136).
Czegledy connected the big tribal motions lived at Turkistan at A.D.350 with the results of the collapse of Hsein-pi tribal confederation (Czegledy, 1998, p.76-77). From his eye, upon the mentioned collapse, the migrations of Toleses also had begun (Czegledy, 1998, p.77).
First Yen dynasty was founded by Mu-hung Hsien-pis and sovereigned between A.D.352-370 (Eberhard, 2019, p.147). Then after Fu Chien period of China, The Next Yen dynasty of Hsien-pi people which had prolonged twenty five years, had been founded at Hopei province (A.D.384-409) (Eberhard, 2019, p.149-150).
Very similar like Turks, Hsien-pi system was also based on left and right wings organization for government. Huns and Hsien-pis had same systematic structures in such a way that, there was a center of the state with left and right management wings (İsakov, 2017, p.19).
Hsien-pi’s main homeland was today’s China's Jehol province territories as well as Shansi province (İsakov, 2017, p.20). As seen above chronologic events, between A.D. II.Century and IV.Century, they were very active at Gobi desert lands and frontiers of China(Czegledy, 1998, p.116). They had kinship connection with Wu-Huan, Mu-huan, Yun-wei and Tuang tribes. With respect to İsakov also Tu-yü-
63
hun tribe was actually Hsien-pi (İsakov, 2017, p.20). Their successors were Shih-wei communities (İsakov, 2017, p.30).
Some scientists think that Ting-lings and Kirghiz tribes were allies against Hsien-pi forces at Minusinsk region of South Siberia (İsakov, 2017, p.32). Even, others counted Kirghiz and Ting-lings as same during this defend warfare (İsakov, 2017, p.32).
Barthold claimed, Hsien-Pi people were definitely Turkish originated (Barthold, 2019, p.17). Barthold supported his this idea with Pelliot’s informing about an historical dictionary book belonged to Hsien Pi tribesmen which was indeed written in Turkish (Barthold, 2019, p.17).
4.5. Kao-ch’e
One of the important Turkish tribes contemporary with Turkish origined Chinese dynasty Tabgach State, Akhuns(Hephthalites) and Proto-Mongol Juan Juan State. At early period, as of second century A.D. Kao-ch’e or in other words Kangli tribe emerged instead of Ting-lings. This was a general name of a tribal union of succesor clan masses of Ting-lings (Taşağıl, 2015, p.22).
Their era was full of chaos and continuous wars towards above mentioned states. These states also were at unfinishing wars each other that caused Kao-ch’e tribes to struggle between them all.Kao-ch’es were very crowded and owned a lot of grassland animals and horses.Historians think that their tribal ancestors were Ting-lings, plus their grandsons were Töles tribes. Therefore, all these there tribes are linked eachother. Although on some specific times they had managed to control some fertile lands and some sub-tribes of them could make state like organizations,
64
they could never able to found a real state. However this tribe can counted as a confederation due to the fact that it had got lots of powerful sub-tribes such as Fu-fu-lo, Yüan-Ho, Wu-pin and Hu-lü (Taşağıl, 2018, p.41-47). The name “Kao-ch’e” actually means high wheeled carts (Taşağıl, 2018, p.43).They known as also “Kangli” that could be “Kağnı” in modern Turkish language meaning cows with wagons in order to carry heavy loads (Aristov, 2014, p.23). On the other hand Batur remarks that, some evaluations points out to “anglı” word for the meaning of Kangli which means intelligent(akıllı) in Turkish (Aristov, 2014, p.23). According to Taşağıl, proto-Uyghurs were one of the sub-clans of Kao-ch’e tribes (Taşağıl, 2019, min.21). Taşağıl’s opinion is Yüan-ho clan was the ancestor tribe of Uyghurs (Taşağıl, 2017, min.25).
Actually, the word turmoil would be a good definition to understand their history in terms of throne competitions, plus wars. Wars, especially had done with Juan Juans. On the other hand, relations with China later on relatively were quite well on the contrary.
Fu-Tu, ruler of Juan Juans had been killed during war by Kao-ch’es. Later on Juan Juan took their revenge by brutally killing Kao-ch’es sovereign Mi-wu-t’u (Taşağıl, 2018, p.52).
At least some Juan Juan and Kao-ch’e warfares were actually a plan of Tabgachs in order to ensure the safety of borders against nomads (Yıldırım, 2015, p.43). We understand this very clear from Yıldırım’s transcription, at the words of Liang-chou Governer Yüan Fan (Yıldırım, 2015, p.43). Fan pointed to Pian Chuang for the maker of this plan (Yıldırım, 2015, p.43). Taşağıl transcripted P’ien-chiang as “wing general” (Taşağıl, 2019, p.185).
65
The ongoing turmoil was valid both for north and south parts of the lands. At south, Whitehuns (Hephthalites, Akhuns) continuous press made them withdraw. As a result of that they lost the control of silk road. The north, Juan Juans often were marching in and forceing them to defend their lands.
Whitehuns (The Hephthalites) has been brought into question that they could have Kao-ch’e roots (Taşağıl, 2018, p.43).
Again, we see a legendary wolf mit for their arising period as usual for Turks.
If Kangli people got victory, they cut the captured prisoner’s hairs (Yıldırım, 2015, p.65).
4.6. Toles
Czegledy claimed that the earliest intrinsic Turkish speaking confederation was Toleses themselves (Czegledy, 1998, p.25). He counted Uyghur, Oghuz as well as Ogurs as under Toles confederation (Czegledy, 1998, p.25). Czegledy implied Nine Oghuz most probably while writing as Oghuz.
Likewise very similiar to the Huns and Ting-lings relationship; Toleses integrated in inside of Gok-Turk State very much. As being one of the main actors of Gok-Turks’ unique tribal composition, Toleses were supporting the state first of all with their high population. Furthermore, their ability about agriculture around Kao-chang for sure also was a big contribution to Gok-Turks in general (Taşağıl, 2015, p.59). Even, Toleses were ruled by Gok-Turk dynasty member tigins who were carrying şad or yabgu titles (Sümer, 1999, p.21). Toleses were the successors of Kao-ch’e tribal confederation after A.D.534 (Taşağıl, 2015, p.22). The date A.D.627 was a treshold fort hem cause as of this date they left their place to Nine Oghuz as well as being a single sub-tribe (Taşağıl, 2015, p.24). Toleses were widely penetrate
66
to lands of Turkistan; mainly Tola(Tula) river, Hami Turpan territory, southwest of Altais, north of Transoxania, Mangyshlak region and some part of Deşt-i Kipchak steppes (Taşağıl, 2015, p.23). Thirtyseven sub-tribes were bonded to Toles tribe confederation before A.D.627 including Bugu, Bayırku, Tongra, İzgil, Sir Tardus so forth (Taşağıl, 2015, p.23). Czegledy divided Toles groups into three; the central Toles tribes were located at north of Transoxania, Mongolia was the residence of their eastern wing; north of Black sea as well as Caucasia was the general residence of the west wing (Czegledy, 1998, p.87). Those western groups were actually part of Khazar state, which would be also independent Ogurs about five decades long, at future (Czegledy, 1998, p.87-88). Plus, depending on Czegledy's opinion about the independence of those mentioned Ogur groups from Khazars; we need to evaluate this half century prolonged Ogur situation in fact together with the Toles uprising took place inside Gok-Turk state at eastward of Turkistan (Czegledy, 1998, p.88). The eastern part of Toleses were consist of especially from heavily active Nine Oghuz tribes as well as nine of Uyghur tribes them all (Czegledy, 1998, p.112). Thus, as Czegledy confirmed also Ogurs were the western side of this huge Toles tribal confederation (Czegledy, 1998, p.112).
Clauson clamied that to match the t’ieh-li and Toles names eachother can not be done (Clauson, 2017, p.37). Because according to Clauson, Toles and Tardus groups were sub-clans of Hsieh Yen-t’o. Hsieh Yen-t’o was a significant group under t’ieh-li confederation at seventh century (Clauson, 2017, p.37). So for Clauson’s viewpoint, T’iehli, in other words Ting-ling was a big confederation but Toleses were not a confederation but a sub-clan (Clauson, 2017, p.37).
Since Bumin Khagan founder of Turkish Khaganate at Altais, as soon as ensured the Toleses’ forces to enter to his army, he marched to Juan Juans for a
67
while later with using this opportunity. The campaign was a total success for Gok-Turks and finished the Mongol Juan Juan sovereignty in Central Asia once and for all.Hence, we need to take into consideration the high quantity Toles soldiers embedded to Bumin’s forces about this result (Taşağıl, 2020, p.30-31). However, Juan Juan state was also based on a Toles tribe which was “He-t’u-lin” (Yıldırım, 2015, p.11). Yıldırım think that Juan Juans should be considered as Turk origined (Yıldırım, 2015, p.12). From our eye; one important evidence also hidden about Juan Juans' Turk origin in Taşağıl’s statements. That was about Juan Juans' custom of drink from killed enemy ruler’s skull. Taşağıl wrote as the skull of Kao-ch’e ruler Mi-wu-t’u was used for drink cup by Juan Juans (Taşağıl, 2018, p.52). Ancient Turks generally had this custom. Asian Hun Ch’an-yu Lao-shang (B.C.174-161) once made a Turkish traditional contract (and içmek) with chinese delegation by drinking a special drink together from inside the Yüeh-chih leader’s skull (Onat et. al.,2020, p.59). Byzantium emperor I.Nikephoros’s(A.D.802-811) fate was same hundreds of years later because of Bulgars (Yucel & Ilgın, 2020, min.42-43). Again centuries later at A.D.972 famous Russian Knez Svyatoslav's skull also became a drink bowl on Pecheneg feasts (Kurat, 2019, p.51-52).
Sub-tribes of Toleses such as Sir Tardus, Bugut, Bayırku would have a key role on the fate of primary Turkish states like Uyghur State. For instance, impact of Toles rebellions could not be ignored on slowly weakining of Eastern Gok-Turk State. Aydın mentioned about “Altı Bag Bodun” found in Yenisey inscriptions existing at the age of Ch’u-lo Khagan (Aydın, 2011, p.397-398). Altı Bag Bodun means a tribe confederation of six tribes. Aydin thinks that these six tribes could be Toleses who were resident at Yenisey Basin (Aydın, 2011, p.398). On the other hand from İsakov’ work, we know that after Mongol’s invaded Kirghiz lands, they
68
divided Yenisey into six administrations called as “altı bag” (İsakov, 2017, p.79). Bag phrase could mean also “Bey” in Turkish representing the leadership for tribes (Taşağıl, 2020, p.203). From İsakov statements; at Haya Bajı inscriptions there is a sentence as “Ben yüce altı bağlı Keştim halkından” about Kıştım clan tied to Kirghizes (İsakov, 2017, p.79).
So, they acted during the foundation and the fell of either first and second Gok-Turk states, and this acts showing us how important they were.
The Toles tribe organizastion of Turks also would become very active with high population with powerful political effect. They would be one of the determiners of wars, alliances or disagreements from political perspective. These tribes even sometimes behaved independently from the main and holy center of Gok-Turk empire and contacted to Chinese.
In fact Toleses were one of the biggest Turkish clan organisations. Under Toles name, for instance Sir Tardus tribe would control shortly the Turk lands but with full authorizes these lands of the tribes as well as holding the trade routes, collecting taxes.Sir Tardus got control occasionaly of other clans P’u Ku (Bugu/Bugut), Hsi, Tonra (Tung-lo), Ediz(A-tie), Bayırku, Uyghur as well.
Other Toleses are ;
Hsi and K’u-mo-hsi both are deep-rooted Mongolian blood clans which were vassal to Gok-Turks long time. However, they also often moved together with Töles tribes when the times they had exit from Gok-Turk confederation.
As we mentioned above; a Toles tribe He-t’u-lin had got a big role during foundation of Juan Juan state (Yıldırım, 2015, p.74-75). Because at first, fugitive
69
Juan Juan groups had been gathered under this Toles sub-clan (Yıldırım, 2015, p.74-75).
According to Aydın’s observations and transcriptions, we could see Toles name three times at Yenisey inscriptions, as follows ;
“Inscription Abakan (E 48), 7: tölis bilge atam ben altı y1ėgirmi yaşım a almış kunçuyumuz bökmedi begiçim ‘(Ben) Tölis Bilge Atam(’ım). On altı yaşımda aldığımız eşimiz doymadı beyciğim’. English translation : I am Tölis Bilge Atam. At sixteen age married spouse I miss, my dear ruler.
Inscription Tuva G (E 55), 3: konçgar (koçŋar?) tölis tirig ‘(Ben) Konçgar (Koçngar) Tölis Tirig(’im)’. English translation : I am Koçngar Tölis Tirig.
Inscription Eerbek I (E 147), 3: oglan atım yėrlig çor teŋri ėlimde tegzinmişim tölis alp t’arkan atımka bökmedim ‘Çocukluk adım Yerlig Çor(’dur). Kutsal yurdumda dolaşıp durmuşum. Tölis Alp Tarkan adıma doymadım’. English translation : My childhood name is Yerlig Çor. I had wandered around at my sacred homeland. I adore my name of Tölis Alp Tarkan” (Aydın, 2011, p.400).
4.7. Karluk
Karluks were recorded as Ko-lo-lu or Ho-lo-lu at Chinese historical records (Taşağıl, 2018, p.175; Sümer, 2019, p.44). Şeşen informs that “Kasgari called them as Yabagu” (Şeşen, 2020, p.26). However, Sümer wrote estimatations of some philologists about Yabagu that seemed like Yer Bayırku while writing about the war of Yabagu with Karakhanids at XI. Century (Sümer, 1999, p.27). So, Yabaku tribe's origin is still a mystery because of insufficient evidence.
70
Hududu’l-alem noted that their rulers’ title were “yabgu” or “cabgu” (Şeşen, 2020, p.70). Some Islamic sources informed about Karluks as nine tribes (Şeşen, 2020, p.26). Once upon a time Karluks were tied to Gok-Turks. While they were a part of Gok-Turk confederation, ilteber was their chief’s degree in terms of state positions, not yabgu (Sümer, 1999, p.33). There are different opinions about their origin. But three Karluk sub-tribes was inside Basmil confederation which consisted of totally forty tribes (Aristov, 2014, p.127). During Gok-Turk era, they were settled around Dark Irtysh River (Sümer, 2019, p.44). As of seperation of Gok-Turks into two, they occasionaly contributed to rebellion acts or prefered to tie to first or another due to the fact of changeable influency by time or power balance of both Gok-Turk states. For instance, Karluks became a part of the rebellion of tribes who were against Tong Yabgu, a very capable high officer of Western-Gok-Turks, who was killed during this rebellion (Salman, 1981, p.171-172). Generally, Karluks heavily chosed to remain with Western Gok-Turk state at the end although some of them passed to eastern state of Gok-Turks as well as accepting dominion of Chinese Tang dynasty (Salman, 1981, p.172).The ones stayed with Western Gok-Turks had marched to Chinese lands at A.D.652 of which they together managed to get some achievements at King-Ling, Yen and Pu-Lei territories of China (Salman, 1981, p.173).
Later on, there came a chaotic period after A.D.657 for the Turkish tribes in general. Karluks could not remain out of it and after the fell of Western Gok-Turks their lands had been invaded by Chinese whom used the advantage of that chaos which the Turks in.
After the independence war conducted by Kutlug Khagan, II.Gok-Turk State had been founded.Historians are accepting Karluks as again within Turk
71
confederation during that second era of Gok-Turks (Salman, 1981, p.176). During the reign of Kapgan (The Conqueror) Khagan (A.D.692-716) at the II. Gok-Turk State's, endless unrest of Karluks started up inside the mentioned second state and a lot of wars took place till Bilge Khagan’s very succesful reign. Nevertheless, right after the tragic death of Bilge, the state weakened day by day resulting the big uprisings of strong Turkish tribes Uyghur, Basmıl together which were supported by Karluks as well. The consequence of this riot, Gok-Turks lost control at Otuken the holy seen capital of Turks to Uyghurs. Pritsak connects the rise of Karluks with the fell of Gok-Turks and Turgises (Pritsak, 1996, p.5-6). In accordance with tribe system, when Basmils took control at Otuken the wings of the new administration had been appointed naturally to their Uyghur and Karluk partners as right and left yabgu positions (Pritsak, 1996, p.6). Karluks had taken the right side yabgu position (Pritsak, 1996, p.6). For a very short time later as known, Uyghurs this time got control from Basmils at Otuken with the help of Karluks. At that point, Pritsak states that; according to the hierarchical self-executing design of the Altai states' characteristic, the left yabgu should rise to the great Khagan position (Pritsak, 1996, p.6). Taşağıl too, confirms mentioned organisational supremacy (Taşağıl, 2018, p.35). Thus, the right Karluk yabgu became the left in accordance with steppe tribe confederational pattern (Pritsak, 1996, p.6). From our eye, this situation was the self-operating of tribe system.
One of the highlights of Karluk history is Talas war doneat A.D.751 between Arab armies and Chinese forces facing close to city of Talas. Ziyad İbn Salih was the commander of Abbasids and Kao-Sien-Çi was the commander of Chinese army (Sümer, 2019, p.45). Karluks at first who were in side Chinese army changed their side and the fate of war ended with a clear victory against Chinese (Salman, 1981,
72
p.191).The results of this war from the Arab side angle, was spectacular. First of all, Arabs had literally settled Islam, to all Transoxania from now on (Golden, 2014, p.102). Secondly, Arabs strengthened their control on Sogdian regions as well as creating a Sogdian migration towards Eastern Turkistan (Golden, 2014, p.102). The results of Talas war from Turks angle, still today, Talas war have been evaluated as a symbol of start for the acceptance progress of Islam among Turkish tribes next incoming centuries. This was a turning point for Karluks in particular also cause the bright ages of them had begun. Although they lost the war two times against Uyghurs, as of A.D.754 right after Talas war, Karluks found an empty zone around Issık lake that enable them to found a state-like powerful political structure. But exact location is still unknown (Sümer, 2009, p.46). Most of all as of Talas war, Tang’s China left silk road to Turks to a large extend (Taşağıl, 2020, p.43). Karluks took control of Tokmak (Suyab) as of A.D.766 (Barthold, 2019, p.223). They got the control at Talas city also (Sümer, 2019, P.46). Later on they captured Kasgar city as well as also entering the productive Fergana lands. At Hududu’l-alem (A.D.886), there was a Karluk mountain mentioned inside Fergana area of Transoxania (Şeşen, 2020, p.64-65). Then at A.D.791 they cooperated with Tibetians and got the city of Beshbalik from Uyghurs (Salman, 1981, p.189). In fact, as of VIII.Century Karluks got the control of significant part of the trade route of muslims which acted like also a passage till southern Siberia as well as reaching to Kirghiz communities (Barthold, 2019, p.34). Generally, as Sümer says “In order to travel at Turk realm, every muslim Merchant should have had a Turk friend or partner.” (Sümer, 1999, p.80).
Golden states that: “As of A.D.840 after the collapse of first Uyghur State, Karluks declared their ruler as the “Khagan of Khagans” as well as claiming him as the “Başbuğ” of all Turks” (Golden, 2014, p.107). As of A.D.893, around fifteen
73
thousand of Karluks including wife of their ruler had been captured by Samanid invaders (Golden, 2014, p.111-112).
According to Sümer, 200.000 Yagma, Karluk, Cigil, Tohsi tents; namely such a large amount of population, had accepted Islam all together as of A.D.960 (Sümer, 2007, p.326). Apparently, there could be Samanid effect as well about this move.
Karluks can be counted as not only a major Turkish tribe but also a big tribal confederation with containing many sub-tribes in. Karluks always behaved in accordance with their benefits and knew how when to make alliances or when to make war. They did not hesitate to make war if necessary as historical events showing us this as a typical characteristics of Turkish tribes. Karluks spread to very vast areas at Turkistan such as they had been seen at from Transoxania till Toharistan territories. Dark Irtysh River was another region they settled as mentioned above (Sümer, 2019, p.44). Aristov claimed that their homeland was Altais due to fact that one of the branches of river Caris named as Karluk (Aristov, 2014, p.42). They got intense contact with from Turgis tribes to Uyghurs, from Chinese to Arabs in their long tribal life as well as getting touch with Tibetians. They had a very key role during the foundation of Uyghur State, Karakhanid Turkish state and the acceptance of Islam for Turks. We need to understand well about Karluks catalytic role inside other influential Turkish tribes such as Oghuzes and Nine Oghuzes. Moreover, we would like to remind here that they put pressure on Turgis tribes of which lead them to migrate to Transoxania. This movements would be a crucial event for the foundation of the next generation Turkish empires (Taşağıl, 2015, p.27).
74
Karluks had role as well on the reason of Katvan war consequented the collapse of Seljuk empire. Within XII. Century, Karluks were struggling with Mahmud Khan’s authority. Karakhanid Mahmud Khan was already tied to Sultan Sanjar of Seljuks. Naturally, he asked help from Sanjar. Sanjar accumulated a large army and marched. But Karluks was accompanied by Kara-khitai. Hence, warfare at Katvan grassland was a catastrophe for Sultan Sanjar. He withdrew to Tirmiz. But more than that Seljuk supremacy was over once and for all (Barthold, 2019, p.342).
During establishment steps of Khwarazm Shah state, Karluks were fighting with Kara-khitai intensely. Khwarazm used this situation to dominate Transoxania (Barthold, 2019, p.348). Barthold said from El-Katibü’s-Semerkandi that, there was a talented Karluk cavalary named Ayyar Beg who uprised against Kilic Tamgac Khan at second half of twelfth century (Barthold, 2019, p.351).
According to Sümer’s informings from İbn Hurdadbih’s Hududu’l-alem, there was a wealthy village called Mirki or Birki coexisted by three Karluk clan's inhabitants in dealing with trade. Those Karluks consisted of Bistan, Hyam and Beris sub-clans (Sümer, 2019, p.59). Mirki was between Chu river and Talas river (Sümer, 2019, map). Mirki settlement had been lost by Karluks to Samanid forces at tenth century (Sümer, 2019, p.62). On the other hand seven different sub-tribes of Karluks was implementing their salt supply from a salt lake (Sümer, 2019, p.59). Although, it was very far from main Karluk lands, can this mentioned salt lake Lop Nor? Lop Nor is a salt lake located eastward Tarim Basin. Hududu’l-alem stated about a lake as the seven Karluk tribes’ main salt supply area, which was called as Tuz-kul nearby Tuzun-garc (Şeşen, 2020, p.70). On the other hand Muhammed el-Avfi remarked as salt was not available at the lands of nine tribes of Karluks, therefore they imported salt from merchants (Şeşen, 2020, p.95). Same Avfi told that Karluks
75
were eating preserve of dried meat called pastrami (Şeşen, 2020, p.95). So we understand that Karluks probably were using salt abundantly to make pastramis. Because, salt is the main item in order to preserve dry meat. Camgar was another Karluk village (Sümer, 2019, p.60). An other point of Sümer from same mentioned historical source was that, Karluks had around fifteen settlements at tenth century (Sümer, 2019, p.61).
There was an interesting very rare event happened in sense of Karluks in comparison with other Turkish tribes as Sümer confirms that. This event was the suicide of a Karluk Khagan himself. His purpose was to deliver the throne to his son before probability to be killed by Kara-khitan ruler Gurhan. Sümer marked the city Kayalık as the center of those Karluks at the beginning of thirteenth century just before Mongol conquerors came in particular for this event. Their khagan was Arslan who had suicided. Later on Karluk communities around Kayalık and Almalık cities accepted willingly Mongol sovereignty. Even, Sugnak Tigin from Karluks became groom of Cenghiz's son Cuci (Sümer, 2019, p.68-70). Another suicide event took place during Hun era at Turks as of B.C.58. At that time’s Chan-yu had a very strict personality and got the throne with force. He could not gain the respect of society. At last he had to commit suicide because of civil disorder (Ahmetbeyoğlu, 2007, p.8). Chan-yu Wo-yen chu-ti suicided as as of B.C.58 (Mori, 1978, p.218).
When they migrated to Chu valley, Karluks were living semi-nomadic by moving from winter living zones towards to summer living zones in continuous every year. These lands were very fertile as well as having alot of river basins. Therefore, Karluks did not see any reason to migrate once again to west. Also by the efect of intense Sogdian relations, Karluks established fixed settlements. There are evindences showing some Karluks dealing with farming at these towns (Ögel, 2020,
76
p.340). Talas city was a center known as “Karluk kapısı (Door of Karluks)” (Ögel, 2020, p.321). The muslim inhabitants of city were generally merchants and this was the last point of strong Islamic culture. Taraz (or Talas city) was called as “Medinetüttüccar” by Harizmi with respect to Şeşen’s statements. Therefore, after passing through Talas as a door, non-muslim Karluk towns were begining as a border, before the acceptance of İslam (Ögel, 2020, p.321-322). In towns at Chu valley of Karluks, Turks and Sogdians lived together in peace. Chu vallley's location was on the trade routes. And Sogdians were dealing with trade convoys (Ögel, 2020, p.339). Aspara, Mirki, Külan, Kayında, Şiş-Tübe, Nuzhet, Ak-tepe, Cul, Sukuluk, Sarıg were some important cities located at Chu valley after second half of VIII.Century till to the reign of Karakhanids (Ögel, 2020, p.341,p.344, p.346). Burana and Balasagun (Kuz-Ordu) were the core cities of Karakhanids nearer to Issık lake close to Tokmak (Ögel, 2020, p.348).
By time, cultures at Chu valley and Tengri Mountains replaced by Islamic ınfluenced new culteral items. And animal figures changed into directly animal shaped items.For instance, the “Ördek (duck)” figure bowl findings were very good example about this change (Ögel, 2020, p.324-325). Ögel paid attention to point that, in modern Turkey, people still are calling duck shaped bowls as “Ördek” (Ögel, 2020, p.325). Hence, Karakhanid culture was the successor of Karluk culture on the mentioned territories (Ögel, 2020, p.331).
Thereafter, upon Karakhitaies arrived to Chu valley, for a while later Chu valley lost its bright old times (Ögel, 2020, p.340). Balasagun remained as the center of Karakhitaies (Ögel, 2020, p.348). A.D.1135 was the year, this time Karluks migrated and were really settled at Transoxania with big masses because of Kara-khitais (Sümer, 2019, p.67).
77
Elder Karluks were called as “Kül-irkin” with respect to Kasgari’s Divanı Lugat-it Turk (Şeşen, 2020, p.34).
Sub-tribes of Karluks;
Cigils : Cigils were one of the greatest sub-tribes (Oymak) of Karluks till XI. century (Sümer, 2019, p.54). They had special Turkish tents called Alacık (Sümer, 2019, p.71). Their main lands were around Issık Lake, Ili River Basin, Transoxania. They were neighbours with Tohsi (Toksu) as well. Warfare with Oghuz tribes was never finished (Taşağıl, 2018, p.75).
Despite the fact that Karakhanid’s army was based on Cigils, Cigils changed side on behalf of Seljuks (Barthold, 2019, p.332). Sources tell about a Cigil ruler Aynü’d-devle who uprised to Seljuks (Barthold, 2019, p.332). He tried to give the authority to Kashgar Khan’s brother (Barthold, 2019, p.332). However Kashar Khan had already accepted Meliksah sovereign (Barthold, 2019, p.332). Apparently that was a strategic mistake ended by his execution (Barthold, 2019, p.332).
According to Barthold’s informings from Kasgari: "all Turks among the realm from Amu Darya to China were known as Cigil by Oghuz people" (Barthold, 2019, p.60).
Bay-cigir : Bay-cigir of Celayir Mongol tribe showed also from Karluks in terms of their Cikir origin by Aristov (Aristov, 2014, p.12).
Tohsi (Toksu) : They were neighbours with Cigils at east, Karluks at north, Kirghizes at west; by holding a productive territory of misks and fur products within upon side of Cigils’ lands (Sümer, 2019, p.72). They controlled one of the biggest centers of Turks, the Tokmak city. They could reach to twenty thousands armed men (Sümer, 2019, p.73). Togan wrote that Tohsi communuties could have participated
78
mass migrations of Turks to western lands due to the fact that the settlements of Tukhsiyancket and Tukhsici within Semerkant hinterland (Togan, 2019, p.72, p.644). Tohsi people like Yagma groups, were speaking the most real Turkish language (Sümer, 1997, p.46). This was Hakani dialect (Sümer, 1997, p.46).
4.8. Oghuz
As Taşağıl says “Kipchaks were the beginning, Oghuzes were the consequence” from the understanding perspective of old Turkish history in terms of tribes (Taşağıl, 2015, p.21).
Clauson have an astonishing claim as Oghuz name’s chinese version was infact “wu-huan” (Clauson, 2017, p.32). Although Clauson admitted that he could not prove his this hypothesis, wu-huan – oghuz relation could have lead us to Tung-hu – Turk sameness from his perspective and comment(Clauson, 2017, p.32).
Oghuzes were crystal clear very influential Turkish tribe confederation with respect to great achievements they got in history. Oghuz name represents “tribes” as meaning (Taşağıl, 2019, min.2, min.7; Dobrovits, 2004, p.257). On some old Turk’s inscriptions and sources such as Uybat IV, the word “Okuz” could be commented as “Oghuz” (Aydın, 2011, p.399). It is possible. According to Aydın’s transcription, at the mentioned inscription there is a phrase as “ok’uz alpın” which could mean “Oğuz? Hero” (Aydın, 2011, p.399). Probably near to Tula river, there was a city called Toğu Balık (Sümer, 2019, p.9). From Bilge Khagan’s inscription, the phrase Togla Ögüz was the Tula river (Sümer, 2019, p.10). At this locations the wars with Oghuz tribe took place during Bilge’s reign (A.D. 716-734) (Sümer, 2019, p.9-10). However, Togu Balık was described as the place of warfare with Nine Oghuz tribes at Kül Tigin inscription, not Oghuz (Aydın, 2019, p.65). From that point of view,
79
does the word Ögüz mean Oghuz? Even, then could Oghuz mean river? Another example for a river name was Tavuşkan Ögüz mentioned by Sümer from Mahmud Kasgari (Sümer, 2019, p.61). Furthermore, Pristak’s informs from Mahmud Kasgari that Öküz word meant as “unique river” (Pritsak, 1996, p.3). Pritsak's opinion about the initial Oghuz name reading of the early period between VI.and VIII.Centuries was in fact a political concept (Pritsak, 1996, p.2). And at first again for Pristak:“by own naturally gaining sense, Oghuz could mean as “human, people, fellow citizens”” (Pritsak, 1996, p.2). Sümer thinks that the most possible idea was the “okuz” which means “arrows (oklar)” (Sümer, 2007, p.325). Sümer put the argument of softening of “k” letter to “g” letter in general usage at daily Turkish language for Okuz word becoming as Oguz, by supporting his idea with the Turkish words “çok+uz = Çoğuz and Yok+uz = Yoğuz” (Sümer, 1999, p.20). Besides, Sümer was thinking also arrow pharase in "Oghuz" word could represent also clans (Oymak) (Sümer, 1999, p.20). But Sümer could not be sure about it and saw the solely arrow meaning of Ok more possible due to the fact that clan was not a common accepted other meaning for Ok in all of Turks, but only for Western Gok-Turks (Sümer, 1999, p.20). Taşağıl confirmed the direct meaning of Oghuz as “tribes” with the phrases “nine tribes” “ten tribes” from chinese historical sources, and this scientific subject has been solved for the time being with the most tengible evidence (Taşağıl, 2019, min.2, min.7).
As Pritsak informs from Mahmud Kasgari that, Kasgari mentioned Oghuzs as Turkmen likewise he did for Karluks. However, again in view of Pritsak, same Kasgari matched the language of Oghuz with Kipchaks rather than Karluks (Pritsak, 1996, p.5). They were speaking with Western Gok-Turks’ dialect (Sümer, 1999, p.46).
80
Şeşen’s evaluated them as: “Oghuzes were the most crowded Turk community who had spread over the vastest lands among Turk tribes” (Şeşen, 2020, p.27).
The backbone of Oghuz were clearly Turgis tribes of which originated from “On Ok” named Turkish tribal alliance(Taşağıl, 2015, p.24). The decades of first half of seventh century with a consensus of turkologists have been being considered as a milestone for Turkish history. According to Taşağıl, events at A.D.627 was a milestone threshold about the new Oghuz name’s appearance among Turks (Taşağıl, 2019, min.9). From Taşağıl’s work, A.D.627 was for Tola “Chiou-hsing/Nine-Oghuz” tribe name’s first appearance and A.D.634 was for “Shih-hsing/Ten arrows” first appearance at Turkistan's history (Taşağıl, 2015, p.29). At that second mentioned date, the tribes gathered near Ili River at Kazakhstan and formed a new organisation called “On Ok(Ten arrow)”. That shows us very well the transformation ability of Turkish tribes in order to survive. Oghuz tribesmen at earlier periods counted as a part of Nu-şe-pi side of Ten Arrows (Sümer, 2019, p.50).
There are a lot of historical events subjected Oghuzes at ancient Turkish states chronology. Oghuzs had participated in second Gok-Turk state around A.D.691 after a civil war (Taşağıl, 2015, p.26). Interesting part is, Oghuz and Nine Oghuz were allies against Gok-Turks meanwhile this uprising but different confederations (Taşağıl, 2015, p.26). Oghuzs were also unpleased from Kapgan Khagan’s tough management especially at the last years of his reign. Later on, another civil war took place inside Turkish tribes and Oghuzs lost the war against Gok-Turk confederation leaded by Bilge and Kul Tegin brothers (Taşağıl, 2015, p.26).
81
Turgis tribes had already moved to Transoxania. They had been known as Oghuzs after as mentioned above. Later on, Oghuzs arrived to eastern part of Caspian sea till Mangyshlak (Taşağıl, 2015, p.27). Plus, eastern parts of Syr Darya became their native land. Pritsak writes that; this mentioned migration of Oghuz happened synchronized upon the arrival of Karluks to Balasagun and Talas territories (Pritsak, 1996, p.6). His informings from Islamic sources points out the years AD.775-785 or at least definitely A.D.820 for Oghuz migration motion to Syr Darya (Pritsak, 1996, p.6). On the otherhand, Taşağıl’s idea is that these lands already belonged to Turgises. Taşağıl says, there was be a migration movement towards Syr Darya after Karluks came, but however as of A.D.603 there were already Toles inhabitants around Syr Darya evolving to Oghuzes (Taşağıl, 2015, p.27). Thus, Taşağıl underlines that the attitude of "Oghuzes were the successors of Turgises" would be a better historical evaluation (Taşağıl, 2018, p.113). Furthermore, as mentioned on Tatar section above, we understand from Şeşen’s words that as of VII.Century; Turkish tribes of Agaceri, Col and Yazar named had already reached till to Taberistan, Curcan and along Azerbaijan (Şeşen, 2020, p.11). Agaceri tribe for instance counted as Oghuz origined as we mentioned before (Sümer, 1988, p.460). Şeşen’s statements from Hududu’l-alemof Minorsk’s transcription defines the lands of Oghuz tribes as, north of Aral lake along 40(120 mile) fersah and influential perimeter area was 300(900mile) fersah (Şeşen, 2020, p.64). Again at mentioned above masterpiece Hududu’l-alemthere was a boundaries described territory called as “Guz (Oghuz) desert” (Şeşen, 2020, p.65). This region’s name was Karakum (Sümer, 1999, p.64).
As we mentioned above after Karluks took the left yabgu position in accordance with tribe system at A.D.745, Pritsak asks a question as : “Who became
82
the right yabgu position?” (Pritsak, 1996, p.6). The right yabgu position has been left empty by Karluks so it was needed to be assigned with another tribe due to the hierarchy. Pritsak thinks that Oghuz yabgu could assigned as the right side yabgu naturally itself at that years during Uyghur State because of yabgu title used only by Karluks and Oghuzs as of X.Century (Pritsak, 1996, p.6).
Pritsak also descovered a new title called as “Paygu” with together “Yabgu” used for clan leaders (Pritsak, 1996, p.8). Paygu had a similar meaning like Tuğrul and Çağrı names which was related with raptor birds (Pritsak, 1996, p.8). On the other hand, Barthold says a Turkish writing type was called as Peygu which is known as Hatt-ı Peygevi at nineteenth century (Barthold, 2019, p.71). Plus, Barthold underlined that this Peygu name was a different adaptation of Yabgu title (Barthold, 2019, p.71).
We are seeing a significant Oghuz state called Oghuz Yabgu (A.D.750-1055). Pritsak defines the Oghuz Yabgu state as an empire for few times (Pritsak, 1996, p.3). We too agree this designation. Oghuz Yabgu's lands were such a big realm that same Pristak compared the size of the state with Germany’s area at the beginning of XX.Century by underlining similarity (Pritsak, 1996, p.3). Northern territories of Aral lake belonged to mentioned state as of X.Century. Kimek Turks were at north. Karluk Turks were at east. Hazar Turks at west. Samanid State and Khwarazmstates were other neighbours. They controlled some parts of Syr Darya river (Pritsak, 1996, p.3). Sümer states that, once an Oghuz Yabgu lost his life during warfare with Karluks (Sümer, 2007, p.327). Oghuz main center for winter accommodations was Yenikent capital with integrated Cankent settlements (Pritsak, 1996, p.3). There are evidences of transactions about monetise circulation at IV.Century at this Oghuz center (Sümer,1999, p.67). Yenikent was located nearby to
83
Syr Darya and founded by directly Oghuz Han’s himself according to Turkish legends (Sümer, 2019, p.78, p.87). Plus, the city Cend was one of core centers during Seljuk reign as well (Pritsak, 1996, p.3). They became partners once upon with Samanid state in order to march to Karakhanid territories (Sümer, 2007, p.326). The incoming years a huge mass of tribes left the Oghuzs and gathered under Seljuk banner. The next development as known well was the foundation of Great Seljuk Empire. This great migration movement had been taken place at almost entire XI.Century.
The fell of Oghuz Yabgu state mainly related with Kipchaks penetration to all over western Eurasia as well as emerging of Seljuks (Pritsak, 1996, p.7). Seljuks took control of the city Cend initially(Pritsak, 1996, p.7). Pritsak thinks that these two remarkable simultaneous events did not happen by coincidence at the same time interval.And both were directly related with the fell of Oghuz Yabgu State (Pritsak, 1996, p.7). Briefly, the Oghuz Yabgu State had collapsed at the years, as of from A.D.985 and more or less A.D.1000s in paralel to above mentioned events (Taşağıl, 2018, p.114).
As of A.D.1153, Seljuk Sultan Sanjar(A.D.1117-1157) made a big mistake that would cause an uprising resulted as a catastrophe for himself, and assigned Iranian tax collectors over Oghuz clans (Barthold, 2019, p.345). From Kazvini’s records at Şeşen’s transcription, Oghuz ruler Tuti Bek killed the Iranian tax collector but Sultan marched with his army in respond (Şeşen, 2020, p.149). Sultan Sanjar lost the war (Şeşen, 2020, p.149). In consequence, Oghuz tribesmen took Sultan as a prisoner and captured him three years long alongside theirselves (Barthold, 2019, p.345). These above mentioned Oghuzes were christians with respect to same Kazvini’s informations (Şeşen, 2020, p.149). Christianity of Oghuzes could depend
84
till en the end of VIII.Century (Şirin, 2020, p.72). Şirin states form A.von Gabain that: “in a Latin source dated around A.D.780, a Turk ruler was asking to found an eparchy at his lands from I.Timotheus of patriarch of Nasturi” (Şirin, 2020, p.71). However, due to Şirin's evaluation we understood that Oghuz was only a probability among arguments about the tribe of related Turkish ruler’s connection (Şirin, 2020, p.72). Additionaly according to Şirin’s statements, the religious identity of Oghuz Yabgu at the last decades of VIII.Century is still mistery due to very limited sources (Şirin, 2020, p.72). On the other hand, Barthold says Oghuz people’s christianity relation depended on Khwarazm christian inhabitants by underlining Khwarazms’ sect was orthodox(Barthold, 2019, p.85). Therefore Barthold says Oghuz were not inside Nasturi sect unlike above mentioned Latin source's subject Turkish ruler's request (Barthold, 2019, p.85). Sultan Sanjar somehow rescued from captivity situation by one of his commander and died at the age of seventy one at the city Merv at A.D.1157 (Barthold, 2019, p.345-346). So, Oghuz communities was without question very influential at Khorasan and Transoxania. They even retained Sultan Sanjar for three years. Apparently Oghuzes was not accepting Iranians as a government officer figure upon them (Barthold, 2019, p.345). Meanwhile these period after Sultan Sanjar’s rescue and gaining his authority again, Atsız b. Muhammed (A.D.1127-1156) who was accepted as founder of Khwarazm Shah State by Barthold, wrote a diplomatic letter to Oghuz ruler Tuti-beg (Barthold, 2019, p.346). The goal of the letter briefly was to invite Oghuz tribes to obedience to Seljuk Empire (Barthold, 2019, p.345-346). But the highlight is here Barthold evaluates the manner of the letter as one of the best examples of orientalist diplomacy (Barthold, 2019, p.346). Atsız was from Beğdeli clan of Oghuz tribes
85
(Togan, 2019, p.59). Perhaps, that Oghuz roots of him, influenced positively the effect of letter.
Togan's evaluated that Oghuz Kayi and Kay (Urenkhay) were the same tribes(Togan, 2019, s.722). Şeşen underlined that the Oghuz Kayi tribe and Kay tribe are not same based on Kasgari’s words (Şeşen, 2020, p.26).
At Mahmud Kasgari 's masterpiece Dîvânı Lugâti't-Turk; The word “Oba” meant tribe at Oghuz language as well as the word “kend” meant village (Şeşen, 2020, p.34-35). Oghuz tribes were listed at the same mentioned masterpiece from Şeşen’s statements as below : “Kınık, Kıyığ, Bayındır, Yıpa, Salgur, Afşar, Begtili, Bekdüz, Bayat, Yazgır, Eymür, Karabülük, Alkabülük, İğder, Yüdeğir, Tutirgar, Ulayunduluğ, Tüker, Becenek, Çavuldur, Çepni, Çarukluğ” (Şeşen, 2020, p.34). Becenek sub-tribe would most probably consist of from the remainders of previous Pecheneg inhabitants before the happening of their mandatory migrations because of Oghuz arrivals (Sümer, 1999, p.66). Thus, the ones who stayed, formed a new sub-tribe in order to participate new conquerors. This event by itself shows us the sociocultural unity of Turk tribes. Reşidüddin mentioned the two big tribal arms of Oghuz masses as, Bozoks (Gray-arrows) and Ucoks (Three-arrows) (Şeşen, 2020, p.152). So at Şeşen’s statements about Reşidüddin records these mentioned Oghuz two main subsections consisted of following tribes: “Bozoks: Kayi, Bayat, Karaveli, Kara-iveli, Yazur, Döğer, Durderga, Yaparlı, Avşar, Kırık, Bağdili, Kargın. Ucoks: Bayındır, Biçne, Çavuldur, Çipni, Salur, İymür, Alayünteki, Örgiz, Bükdüz, Yive, Kınık.” (Şeşen, 2020, p.152). Sümer remarks that, Çarukluğ at Divanı Lügati't Turk’s list above corresponded to possibly Yaparlı at Reşidüddin’s (Sümer, 2007, 329). Sümer adds that, Kızık(Kırık at above list) and Kargın at Reşidüddin’s list should correspond to Kasgari’s Halac tribes (Sümer, 2007, 329). Another thing is;
86
Sümer was almost sure about these two wings “Boz Ok”(Gray Arrows) and “Üç Ok”(Three Arrows) of Oghuzes took their names as a legacy from On-Ok (Ten Arrow) tribal confederation (Sümer, 1999, p.45).
Based on Reşidüddin, Sümer says Yabgu titled Oghuz rulers were originally from the Sub-tribes Kayi, Yazır, Avşar, Eymür(İymür above) (Sümer, 2007, p.329). In the sense of a historical timeframe; Sümer states that the Seljuk dynasty founded after the acceptance of Islam by emphasising originally being Kınık from the above list (Sümer, 2007, p.328-329). We did not see necessary to mention other biggest Turkish dynasties' Oghuz origin as well in hereby thesis, as we focused on Turkistan area. But in order to emphasise roots of Kayi from chinese sources as well, we need to underline the “Ch’i yen-t’e” word from Eberhard’s transcription at Hsin Yüan-shih for Kayi tribe (Eberhard, 1944, p.568).
Sümer thinks that Oghuzes had accepted Islam mostly at X.Century (Sümer, 2007, p.326-327). Thereafter Turkmen name to Oghuz people in general was given by other muslims (Sümer, 2007, p.327). Pritsak's opinion is that, the process of accepting Islam by Seljuk Oghuzes most probably should be fullfilled as of A.D.992 (Pritsak, 1996, p.8). Again, for Sümer’s eye, trade with muslims had a big role about Oghuzes islamisation process (Sümer, 2007, p.327). As we mentioned above before, Sümer underlines “In order to travel at Turk realm, every muslim merchant should have had a Turk friend or partner.” (Sümer, 1999, p.80).
After acceptance of Islam, Oghuzes abandoned their horse meat food culture to a large extent (Sümer, 2007, p.326). On the other hand Tutmaç(Sulu mantı) was their famous food (Sümer, 2007, p.326). Oghuzes and Karluks had been suplying sheeps to Transoxania as well as Khorasan (Sümer, 2007, p.326).
87
They built permanent settlements like the cities Otrar, Cend, Yenikent, Savran (Sabran), Sütkent, Suğnak (Sığnak), Karnak, Karaçuk(Farab) (Sümer, 2007, p.326). Otrar’s exact location was near Aris river delta on Syr Darya (Czegledy, 1998, p.109). Otrar’s other names were “Tarband” and previously “Kangü-Tarban” (Czegledy, 1998, p.109). Osawa thinks about Kangü-Tarban could be the next name of Dayuan dudufu at Kanjie Cheng city at Tang’s historical records (Osawa, 2009, p.2377). Even, according to Osawa with lesser probability, this name could have had relation with Kangaras at Orkhun Inscriptions which we mentioned at Pecheneg section (Osawa, 2009, p.2377).
Oghuzes had controlled peninsula of Siyahkuh at Caspian Sea which is lately known as Mangyshlak (Sümer, 2007, p.325-326). The Islamic historical sources mentioned a few times that the lost drifted trade ships to this peninsula were thereby captured and plundered by Oghuz inhabitants (Şeşen, 2020, p.154, p.162). As of XII.Century, Barçın Khatun founded another city called as Barçınlığ Kend on behalf of Oghuzes of whom her clan Salur was linked to Oghuz confederation (Sümer, 2019, p.91). The next century, the main Oghuz cities around Syr Darya was: “Yeni Kend, Cend, Ribatat, Aşnas, Barçınlığ Kend, Öz Kend, Sabran, Karaçuk, Suğnak, Karnak, Yesi, Süt Kend” (Sümer, 2019, p.91). To evaluate the locations of these cities by considering the water flow direction of Syr Darya is important (Sümer, 1999, p.71). Obviously, there was a serious architectural mind behind this location plans that calculated every comfort and parameters of an urban zone in the vast Transoxania realm.Besides acceptance of Islam was driving motivation to live in permanent settlements for Oghuz groups (Sümer, 1999, p.71). Current Iranian residents at majority of those settlements as well as still nomadic Oghuz groups at country sides formed a spontaneous wonderful original balance for vivid city life
88
with big markets. Oghuzes and Karluks were supplying meat to Transoxania and Khorasan areas (Sümer, 1999, p.73). Felt fabric of Oghuzes was always in demand for those mentioned areas in general as well as muslim domains (Sümer, 1999, p.73). When we think about the hinterlands of those two very large parts of Asian continent, the tonnage size of the above kind of trade should be beyond imagination.
Likewise, They had an intense relations with Karluks. Their existences and settlements at Transoxania functioned like a central gathering homeland bases for their further migration movements to inner Khorasan, Middle East, Anatolia, Northern Africa, Eastern Europe. Dynamizm created by Oguz tribes were such brilliant that they were became the nucleus of Seljuk and Ottoman empires (Şeşen, 2020, p.27).
4.9. Kipchak
The name of this very important Turkish tribe was known as Kıfcak before the reign of Mongols (Sümer, 2019, p.55). Kıbcak style became afterwards (Sümer, 2019, p.55). Polovest was an Old Russian name used instead of Kipchak name (Barthold, 2019, p.94). Kuman name defined Kipchaks for Western Europeans (Barthold, 2019, p.94).
According to the legend of Oghuz Khagan from Gunduz’s statements:
“Wife of the one of the soldiers of Oghuz was pregnant and her husband had been killed at war. During that war the woman’s birth giving time became closer. There was a tree with an empty interior right that area. The woman entered inside the tree and gave the birth. The child had been brought nearby to Oghuz and the situation had been told to him. Then, Oghuz gave the child “Kipchak” name. “Kipchak” means “Shell” and in Turkish it is called to the trees having interiors
89
being carved. According to other Turks belief, the Kipchak tribes are origined from that child” (Gündüz, 2019, p.72).
Although there was no phrase about Kipchak name on Orkhun Inscriptions, historians detected that they were a Turkish tribe inside western side of Gok-Turks at ancient times. They were counted inside Kimek clans and their initially corehomelands were near Irtysh River before they moved to Isim and Tobol valleys as well as southern Ural mountains (Yücel, 2002, p.420). Şeşen too; counts Kipchaks a part of Kimek groups (Şeşen, 2020, p.26). Also again when looked from Şeşen’s transcriptions Hududu'l-alem pointed out to Kimeks for Kipchak’s origin (Şeşen, 2020, p.73). Barthold wrote as Kipchaks were an arm of Kimek tribes who were inhabitants around Irtysh River (Barthold, 2019, p.48).
As of second half of XI.Century, Kipchaks was the significant part of one of the biggests of migration of masses in history by covering the steppes of western Eurasia (Pritsak, 1996, p.9). Barthold’s opinion points out to a boost of Kipchak population nearby Irtysh lands; which was behind their motion(Barthold, 2019, p.92).Oghuz Steppes were known as Deşt-i Kipchak from now on (Pritsak, 1996, p.9). Therefore, they filled the empty zones with together Kangli people aftermath Pecheneg tribesmen left (Barthold, 2019, p.94). These sort of vast steppes enabled steppe nations to move faster with horses due to the fact that flat characteristics of steppes. Turks and Mongols were experts on horse riding. Therefore, both fertile in terms of rich endemic grasslands and lack of roughness situation of Deşt-i Kipchak's nature; gave the opportunity to migrate and raid as fast as possible to Kipchaks, Pechenegs and other Turkish and Mongol tribes. Khitans had started the flame at eastern Turkistan (Pritsak, 1996, p.10). According to Pritsak, the rest of motions developed as Kayi tribe of Oghuz moved Kuns, Kuns moved Sarı(Yellow) tribe,
90
thereafter Sarı(Yellow) tribe pushed Turkmen-Oghuz and came to Pecheneg lands.(Pritsak, 1996, p.10). Kuns were actually the remainders of Asian Huns after almost a milenium later (Clauson, 2017, p.26). These mentioned Sarı(Yellow) tribe was originally Kipchaks (Pritsak, 1996, p.10). Pritsak wrote also that the sarı represents “sarı soluk” (Pritsak, 1996, p.10). Therefore, this Sarı(Yellow) soluk probably about the sallow color of skin related about ethnic appearance of some of Kipchaks. Kipchaks ended Kimek Khaganate as well at the mentioned century (Golden, 2014, p.108). At peace times with Oghuzes, Kipchaks movements to their winter settlements from northern lands were dependent along Oghuz lands only possible upon their passage permission (Sümer, 2007, p.327).
The most strongest period of Kipchak Turks were XII.Century. This century also their most productive times for their tangible cultural elements, especially the human monuments. These humans are holding a bowl in line to the belly part in front of the monument which are still a mystery in terms of their meaning (Davletşin, 2013, p.73).
91
Figure 5
Stone monuments holding bowl belonging to Kipchak(Davletşin, 2013, p.455).
Note. By Davletşin, G., (2013), Türk Tatar Kültür Tarihi, (Çev. Albina Tuzlu),Türk Tarih Kurumu Yayınları, Ankara
Interestingly, the figures of Kirghiz stone sculptures found around Yenisey territory are also holding bowls with their both hands (Ögel, 2020, p.174). One of the unsolved problems of ancient Turkish history is what could have happened indeed to Kirghiz masses in history so that they have very less population today?Can the answer lie here above mentioned stone sculptures? Could Kipchaks have been an arm of Kirghizes? Could Kipchak tribes have emerged within Kirghiz groups? As
92
we mentioned above, Khitans had started a big migration. From that angle; Khitans most probably pushed Kirghiz people as of A.D.924. So we need to ask above questions in light of this migration motions. As we wrote above Sarı tribe was Kipchak in fact (Pritsak, 1996, p.10). So if Kipchaks counted as the main actor of the migration movement of Khitans started, then could that above mentioned Sarı (Yellow) tribe become Kirghiz and Kipchak tribesmen both at the same time? Because if we ask the same question that we mentioned above by including Khitans in, then,the unanswered question about Kirghiz people become as, where did main masses of Kirghiz people go when Khitans invaded Otuken?
According to Davletşin, because some male monuments have breasts like women’s, Kipchaks might have tried to put men’s missing part by imaging distinctly apparent breasts (Davletşin, 2013, p.75). With Davletşin's evaluation :“Kipchaks probably tried to emphasise patriarchalism relatively more fertile” (Davletşin, 2013, p.75).
Kipchaks were giving names of dogs to their children like the names of some Kipchak leaders. For instance, they used “Kobyak” meaning male dog and “Konçak” meaning female dog. “Kançık” name which exists in today’s Turkish language in Turkey as well , was the old usage of “Konçak” at Tataric language . Tatars still have got used to pronunciate as “encek” this word in Tataric (Davletşin, 2013, p.77).
Center of Kipchaks at Transoxania was the city Sığnak or as local pronunciation Sağanak which was around onehundredforty km far from Oghuz city Otrar(Barthold, 2019, p.199). Inhabitants of Sığnak was non-muslıms (Barthold,
93
2019, p.199). Of course that was fine reason for Khwarazm Shahs in order to march towards Kipchaks (Barthold, 2019, p.345).
4.10. Nayman
Naymans were one of the main tribes having a very important role during Cenghis Khagan’s childhood as well as the throughout founding process of Great Mongol Empire. They were living very close with Mongols. They were involved almost all events happened at the development of Cenghis reign form the beginning of XIII.Century. Aristov states that Naymans were the most powerful tribe throughout Mongolia right before Cenghis era (Aristov, 2014, p.52). Aristov also think that, Naymans were mongolized Turks likewise Onguts, Celayirs and Keraits (Aristov, 2014, p.53). Aristov underlined his idea again as Naymans were always Turks as origin (Aristov, 2014, p.122). According to İnan’s statement from Howorth the names of Nayman rulers were Turkish such as “İnanç Bilge Buka” (İnan, 1960, p.539). Furthermore İnan states from Murayama that the name of Nayman emissary “Torbitas” mentioned at Secret History of Mongols means in fact “Türbe Taşı”(İnan, 1960, p.542).
Reşidüddin listed Naymans as a Turkish tribe (Şeşen, 2020, p.152).
Due to Aristov’s opinion, the name of Nayman could be related with the Nayma river which is a branch of Katun river (Aristov, 2014, p.122). Barthold says, the word Nayman meant as the number eight at mongolian by linking this also to the sub-clan number of Naymans (Barthold, 2019, p.100).
Their main lands were the regions between Hanghai mountains and Altais (Temir, 2019, p.271). This vast land covers Tamir and Orkhun Rivers as well as till Irtysh River (Aristov, 2014, p.52).
94
Firstly, they had participated to the assembly of tribes who declared Camuha as Gur-han. And they cooperated with Camuha against Cenghis (Temir, 2019, p.70). As indicated at the records on Secret History of Mongols, the tribes under Camuha’s rule were all believing supernatural powers of somebodies from chiefs. Such as Buyiruh-han from Naymans (Temir, 2019, p.71). According to legendary description of the real historical event about the war between the mentioned famous personalities above; Buyiur-han and Huduha made it rain with magic. But the magic went out of control because of wrongly reversed storm. Eventually, all clanic groups moving with Camuha broke down and most of tribesmen went different ways. And Camuha had to withdraw with the men remained with him (Temir, 2019, p.71).
We could understand how closer relations Mongols and Naymans had directly from Camuha’s words at Temir’s statement; “Emissaries had contacted with Naymans on behalf of my friend Temucin since old times” (Temir, 2019, p.85). Actually, Camuha often used this diplomatic relations with Naymans as a propaganda against Cenghis in order to collect most of Mongol tribes to his side.
Temir also states that, Naymans’ people used Uyghur alphabet for the first time among other tribes (Temir, 2019, p.277).
Christianity was quite prevalied also among Naymans like Keraites (Davletşin, 2013, p.204). However, İnan claimed that this Christianity character of them remained unfulfilled cause they were ongoing to obey to their old rituals as giving Nayman Gurbesu’s shamanist sacrament as a clear example from Secret History of Mongols (İnan, 1960, p.540).
95
One very dramatic event was; Onghan the ruler of Keraits, the old allie of Cenghis who turned against him later; was killed by a Nayman watchman who did not recognize him despite fact that his all tries (Temir, 2019, p.110).
Cenghis Khagan’s tactic for defeating Naymans was ordering of his every soldier to make five differet fire in order to show themselves more crowded. And this tactic worked as made Nayman superiors confused very much by leading them to argue in themselves. That clearly led them demotivated before the war (Temir, 2019, p.116). Hence, Cenghis Khagan overcame Naymans once again in front of Altais and tied them to his Mongol confederation once and for all (A.D.1204) (Temir, 2019, p.277). Some of Naymans migrated to west and these ones later would participate to Golden Horde State (Aristov, 2014, p.64).
Later on, during Kubilai Khagan’s period; they would be a part of both Kubilai’s and Kaydu’s armies at the wars between them (Aristov, 2014, p.55).
4.11. Nine Tatars & Thirty Tatars
İsakov informs from E.Avirmed that after Gok-Turks put an end to Juan Juan state, most of the population entered to control of Turks (İsakov, 2017, p.23). From that moment with respect to same mentioned informings of İsakov, Juan Juan communities perhaps could had been referred as Nine Tatar or Thirty Tatars by Gok-Turks (İsakov, 2017, p.23). However, Yıldırım considers Nine Tatar and Thirty Tatar both were Shih-wei, in fact (Yıldırım, 2015, p.95). This situation reveals a very rare coincidence in terms of mathematics. We know that Nine Tatars and Nine Oghuzes made alliances in the past (Sümer, 1999, p.37). We know also Shih-weicould have got 25 tribes (Yıldırım, 2015, p.89). Then, If we take into account also 30 Tatars too, Shih-wei tribes totaly were between 25 and 30 clans as a
96
confederation most probably. Taşağıl writes the interesting coincidence of nine Uyghur tribes of Uyghurs inside the Nine Oghuzes because of the nine number (Taşağıl, 2020, p.26). Therefore, lets make a simple calculation by adding 9 Uyghurs, 9 Oghuz and 9 Tatars together which makes 27 tribes of a confederation.If we think 9 Uyghurs not 9 sub-clans but 10; by 10 Uyghurs then our confederation makes 28 tribes (Sümer, 1999, p.42). As we mentioned above Shih-wei were around between 25 or 30 tribes due to the fact that 30 Tatars could be Shih-wei. Now from that simple equation; 30 Tatars or Shih-wei tribes were covering those 27 or 28 tribes which were Uyghurs, Tatars and Oghuzes (Toleses) as mathematically. From that viewpoint, could Shih-wei have been re-organized under ninefold systematicaly, by with three new tribes, Uyghur, Tatars, Oghuzes(Toleses)?
Togan counts Kıyat tribe as under Nine Tatar confederation during Cenghis era (Togan, 2019, p.638) Eberhard’s transcription from Chinese sources for Kayi tribe points out to Kıyat phrase due to the Chinese word Ch’i yen-t’e (Eberhard, 1944, p.568) Cenghis’s origin was also from Kıyat’s sub-clan Börçegin (Börü-Tegin) (Temir, 2019, p.13, p.20, p.269, p.271; Togan, 2019, p.66, p.638). According to Togan the Nine Tatar sub-clans were “Urianghay, Kıyat, Kongrat, Uysun (Wusun), Bayaut, Nüküz (Öngüz), Önggüt, Kingüt” during Mongol era as well as Suldus and İğreç(İkires) (Togan, 2019, p.638, p.641). And from Togan’s perspective all of them were Turks (Togan, 2019, p.638-639).
Nine Tatars entered to Kansu area temporary on X.Century (Togan, 2019, p.639). On the other hand, Togan adressed their homeland as the mountains inside the Dunhuang, Lop Nor, Altun mountains Hami rectangle (Togan, 2019, p.639). As we mentioned above on Tatars section of hereby thesis, these Nine Black Tatars
97
were trading Tatar Miski product (Togan, 2019, p.639). Tusmet city was the trade center of them south of Lop Nor Lake (Togan, 2019, p.639).
4.12. Kirghiz
Kirghiz tribe are the ancientiest Turks we know, whom were contemporary together with Ting-lings at Hun empire times (İsakov, 2017, p.9). Their khagan was Tsigu (İsakov, 2017, p.10). Initial homeland of Kirghiz communities have been estimated as Northeast Mongolia. Later on, according to scientists they migrated to Yenisey territory afterwards due to fact that Huns' expansiveness (İsakov, 2017, p.11) (Clauson, 2017, p.32). Some others scientists says this migration took place much more later that, they could effected from Juan-Juan and Kao-ch’e warfares, then moved to Yenisey (İsakov, 2017, p.13). Whileas Gok-Turk times Kem river was an important center for Kirghiz and Gok-Turk interaction (Ögel, 2020, p.211). Tannu-ola mountains functioned as separator borders to enter Kirghiz lands. Naturally, Yenisey Kirghiz people could easily reach to Altai mountains and so Karluks (Ögel, 2020, p.211). While, Sir Tardus clans were inhabitants of Sayan Mountains (Ögel, 2020, p.211).
White duck or due to interpretation white swan; was the spiritual mythological cult of Kirghiz people, who were one of the ancients tribes of Turks, perhaps even the oldest one (Taşağıl, 2019, p.14; Aristov, 2014, p.18). Because in view of Aristov, They likelihood were closely related with earliest known people groups of Altais known as So tribes, living north of mentioned chain mountains. These So tribes later would be divided into four branches namely first clan was Ku, second clan was Kirghiz, forth clan was Turks. The third branch migrated to nearby Chu (Çu) River (likelihood near Katun river) (Aristov, 2014, p.21). As we
98
referenced from Davletşin before; red dog cult had been counted by Kirghiz groups as their ancestor (Davletşin, 2019, p.17).
Aristov stated that at the present time Turkish people who are living near Lebeda River (close to Biya river near Gorno-Altaysk), defining themselves as “ku-kişi” which means “kuğu-kişi” cause again Aristov noted that; “ku” equals to Turkish word “kuğu”(Aristov, 2014, p.20). From Barthold’s informing, “Kien-Kun” word meets Kirghiz name at chinese sources (Barthold, 2019, p.25). Clauson wrote ko-k’un name too for the previous old version of Kirghiz name (Clauson, 2017, p.32). Thereafter during Turk reign, “Hakas” word occured from chinese people in order to name Yenisey Kirghiz people (Barthold, 2019, p.25).
According to the legend from Taşağil’s statements:
“Ni-shih-tou got married with daughters of winter soul and summer soul. He had power of summoning wind and rain to the service of state. He had four children from one of these women. Later on one of his childs turned into a white duck. His title was Ch’ü-ku which means Kirghiz.” (Taşağıl, 2019, p.14).
Therefore, Kem river, Abakan river, southeast of Çulim river, western sides of Yenisey river and western Sayan Mountains were their early core country (Taşağıl, 2019, p.14; Aristov, 2014, p.21-p.101). They surely had been at Yenisey. Because as being Haya-Baji inscription, which itself one of two hundred Yenisey inscriptions, whereon exist a significant “Kirghiz” name, is in fact an evidence (Aydin, 2011, p.398). Directly from Aydın’s transcription at the line 24 on mentioned inscription “[kır]kız kanı bitimişin ‘(Inscription) Kirghiz Khagan’s dictated” (Aydin, 2011, p.398). On the other hand, according to Czegledy, as of B.C.first century they were residency near to Irtysh River (Czegledy, 1998, p.109).
99
Afterwards they had moved to Yenisey Basin (Czegledy, 1998, p.109). Therefore, we could mention about an emigration of Kirghiz groups towards Yenisey from Irtysh at very early times.
Furthermore; in view of Aristov; the five Nu-shih-pi tribes were Black-Kirghiz tribe (Aristov, 2014, p.43-44). As it is well known Nu-shih-pi was the right side of On-ok (Ten Arrow) tribal union. Because of Kirghiz groups had been living already at western Tien-Shan (Tengri Mountains), after two centuries passed over fall of Wusuns on the same area; Gok-Turks most probably named them as Nu-shih-pi (Aristov, 2014, p.44). Plus, at the dates before common era; Black-Kirghiz community was living at the vast area between Sayan(Kögmen) Mountains and Tien-Shan (Tengri Mountains)(Aristov, 2014, p.98). Arsitov added that Black-Kirghiz people have protected their tribe structure till present modern days(Aristov, 2014, p.155). Abdumanapov quoted from A.N. Bernştam that; three big migrations movements towards to Tien-Shan (Tengri Mountains) could be thinked for Yenisey Kirghiz tribes beginning from Hun era and the last movement of them for their main groups was happened at Mongol empire times. Cause, Huns invaded the lands between Yenisey Kirghiz tribes and the Kirghiz living already at Tien-Shan. So at first by Huns, they had been divided into two(Abdumanapov, 2014, p.319-320).
The chiefs were called as A-jo and the public as Karaburun (Ögel, 2020, p.212). Gok-Turk insciriptions states their leader as khagan likewise done for Turgis rulers; of which this the most higher Turkish rank could be a sign about their level of power (Sümer, 1999, p.21, p.25). Or Gok-Turks targeted a nuanced political utmost respect to them by using khagan title, for the sake of unity of Turk confederation.
100
They became a part of Gok-Turk confederation by accepting Mukan Khagan’s domination, most probably voluntarily (Taşağıl, 2019, p.226).
During the chaotic “interregnum (fetret)” era of Gok-Turks, Kirghiz groups at first participated to the clans of Tou-lu Khagan for a while after the On-Ok (Ten Arrow) tribes founded near Ili River (A.D.638) (Taşağıl, 2019, p.279). Later, Kirghiz went with after Ch’e-pi Khagan near Altais (Taşağıl, 2019, p.315). But at last they tried to contact with Tang dynasty by sending some own typical goods. Then, their ruler Shih-po-ch’u-a-chien had been honoured by Tang emperor himself by a special show on behalf of him. After that, Kirghiz tribes tied to Chinese emperor (A.D. 648) (Taşağıl, 2019, p.260).
When Kapgan was the khagan of second Gok-Turk State, Bilge and Kül Tigin brothers were bright commanders of the Turkish army. At the date A.D.710 they defeated Kirghiz rebels at Songa forest nearby Kögmen (Sayan) Mountains with a sudden raid (Taşağıl, 2019, p.357-p.362).
With respect to Aristov because of Ting-lings' homeland was directly related with also north of Kirghiz steppes; proto-Kirghiz people were revealed at the beginning by mixing with Ting-lings and Turkish clans at region (Aristov, 2014, p.80). However, in this comment Aristov showed Ting-lings different from proto-Turks, in fact they were already Turks, as already Batur criticized this at the preface of his translation version of Aristov’s work (Aristov, 2014, p.11). Without any strong evidence, in his work Aristov kept his idea about Ting-lings by saying Ting-lings subjected to Turkification policy several times at early times (Aristov, 2014, p.11-p.99-p.101). But, Batur says on his preface Turkification was never a policy for Turks which was proved lots of times in history, by supporting his this argument
101
with Tuna Bulgars’ process of becoming slavic by time (Aristov, 2014, p.11). We definitely think so same with Batur. Taşağıl wrote that Kirghiz (Ke-k’un) were one of the main tribes bonded to Asian Hun Empire (Taşağıl, 2015, p.22).
On the other hand, As Aristov informed from the original records of history of Tang dynasty; there was a community named as Po-ma. This clan had piebald horses. This Po-ma and Kirghiz people was hostiles. Aristov also indicated that their language was different from Kirghiz people as well as saying they were descendants of eastern Ting-lings. He puts his opinion due to their main lands and their physical resemblances with Kirghizes (Aristov, 2014, p.74-75). İsakov also remarks the physical resemblance subject by also writing their languages was different whereas informing from Chinese historian Du Yu (İsakov, 2017, p.17). Therefore, İsakov puts his idea that, the Yenisey Kirghiz culture had also effected from Po-mas (İsakov, 2017, p.18).
As of A.D.840 Kirghiz tribe founded Kirghiz Khanate right after they fulfilled the invasion of Uyghur lands by occupying Uyghur capital Ordu-balık. The title of their khagans was “İnal” (Abdumanapov, 2014, p.325). In view of İzgi, in respect of losing the control of Otuken to Khitans because of Kirghiz’s could not stand long at mentioned region, this event could be a matter of criticise for Kirghizes in General Turkish History namely (İzgi, 2017, p.311).
Due to Abdumanapov’s informing from G.Y. Grumm-Grjimaylo; Barga from Bürüts was a huge sub-clan from Kirghiz tribes living near Oyrats. Oyrats were calling Kirghiz peoples also as Bürüts (Abdumanapov, 2014, p.319). İsakov's opinion is; Bürüt was the name used by Oyrats in order to separate and define the neighbour Kirghiz tribesmen, who were not Oyrat (İsakov, 2017, p.115). In view of
102
İsakov, Bürüt meant to be as "sinner, not from us, stranger" or in Turkish “burulmuş kimseler” (İsakov, 2017, p.115). He most probably meant as resentful by the word burulmuş; with reference to Türk Dil Kurumu dictionary. Truly, the word burulmuş and Burut or Bürüt words are very similiar. Manas legend too mentions about Burut. According to Manas legend, Chinese and Kalmuks called Kirghiz people as Burut (İsakov, 2017, p.113). We know Oyrats and Kalmuks were same tribes (İsakov, 2017, p.104). Togan showed Oyrats as Uyrats by saying that, they were indeed Uyghurs (Togan, 2019, s.673). Togan underlines that Uyrats were The Uyghurs becoming Mongolian by time (Togan, 2019, s.132).İsakov refers from Grumm-Grjimaylo as well by writing; Barguts or Buryats were instrumental during emerging of Kirghiz society (İsakov, 2017, p.113). But İsakov matches also ancestor’s of Bargut people, with Bayırku (İsakov, 2017, p.100). In that case, we would like to ask that, is Bayırku tribe ancestor of Buryats?
High quality of magnetic iron was typical to Minusinsk Tuba Ozneçannaya region (Ögel, 2020, p.223). There were iron ore pits belonging to Kirghiz people at southern Siberia. So they were transforming iron (Ögel, 2020, p.222-223). They were producing plows, sickles, shovels like farming tools from iron (Ögel, 2020, p.226). Kirghiz people was expert about iron mining. Even the reason of Issık Lake’s Mongol name Temurtu-Nor was a result of observation in fact of Mongols about Kirghiz society’s this ability at the mentioned region. Because Temurtu-Nor means “Lake with irons” at Mongolian language (Taşağıl, 1999, p.136). Issık Lake subjected to also Kirghiz epics such as Karahanoğlu Almanbet as well as famous epic of Manas (Taşağıl, 1999, p.136). İsakov thinks that Kirghizs might deal with arms trade as well due to the fact that findings on the mines at Yenisey Basin matching with the ones with southern Siberia. He is adding that Kirghizs were
103
making foreign trade including both import and export transactions (İsakov, 2017, p.142-143). They were trading furs as well to Islamic lands (Ögel, 2020, p.212). Kirghizs were dealing with iron trading. Kirghiz tribesmen were reseraching mines generally right after finishing of rain (Ögel, 2020, p.212). Gok-Turks had been supplying harder mine in order to produce weapons from Kirghiz (Ögel, 2020, p.212). Kirghizs also had a misk merchandise like Tatars (İsakov, 2017, p.143). Kirghiz people used a kind of special wheat mill useable by feet (Ögel, 2020, p.212). In addition, Kirghizs used wooden armors similar with the Japan ones mounted with ring links, and wooden shields (Ögel, 2020, p.212, p.224). Even the horses were covered with such wooden armors (Ögel, 2020, p.224). They also put wooden sheep sculptures inside their kurgan graves (Ögel, 2020, p.216). The eastern neighbour tribes were skiing with wooden skis. Because of these wooden skis, Chinese were called these tribes as wooden horse Gok-Turks (Ögel, 2020, p.213).
In burial customs of old Kirghiz people; they had not been cutting their faces as Gok-Turks did (Ögel, 2020, p.89). Cremate of deads were seen in their burial customs (Ögel, 2020, p.89). Hududu’l-alem had been confirming also this mentioned cremate rituel as well as worship of fire (Şeşen, 2020, p.69). Gerdizi too mentioned about cremation ceremony (Şeşen, 2020, p.81). The only Turkish tribe who were cremating of their deads was Kirghiz tribe (Taşağıl, 2018, p.102; Sümer, 1999, p.47).
Taşağıl asks that, why their population is very less at today’s world based on what happened to Kirghiz people in history (Taşağıl, 2019, min.2, min.7). According to Sümer when Khitans invaded Otuken and drived Kirghizes as of A.D.924, some masses of Kirghiz tribesmen could have migrated to the western Turkistan lands (Sümer, 2019, p.74). As we know from Secret History of Mongols as of A.D. 1207
104
other Kirghiz communites were resident around Yenisey River. These ones accepted Mongol sovereignty after Cuci’s march to these regions (Temir, 2019, p.160). Furthermore, Kirghiz communities had been forced to migrate from Yenisey Basin to Manchuria during Kublai’s reign in accordance with Yuan policy towards them (İsakov, 2017, p.90).
Today, the remaining Kirghiz people at Yenisey Basin are known as Hakas, too (Taşağil, 2015, p.21)
Questions of why Kirghiz tribes left Otuken territory to Khitan Liao Empire as of A.D.924 and what happened really when Khitans came; are a historical problem still in mystery. Our opinion is, Turpan Uyghurs who established strong relations with Khitans, used a soft power diplomacy that we mentioned before. Plus, some Uyhgur people who were active at inner Khitan government, could have coordinated Turpan Uyghurs interests with Khitan high ranked layer. Both Uyghur diplomatic involvements could persuade Khitans to march to Otuken towards Kirghiz State. Because, actually indeed Khitans had no reason for such a military action to Orkhun territories.
As of XIII.Century, Mongol union was achieved all over Mongolia. Kirghiz lands were the address for the fugitives from the Cenghiz confederation. Bargut city was one of the Kirghiz settlements suitable for those fugitives in order to escape (İsakov, 2017, p.75).
According to İsakov Kirghiz tribes had the same wing structure generally seen at tribe system of Turks from tribes to empires. Their rulers named as “İnal” (İsakov, 2017, p.75). There were left and right rulers tied to central main ruler (İsakov, 2017, p.75). During Cuci’s campaign to northern forest folks, Kirghiz ruler
105
İnal accepted Mongol sovereignty willingly by presenting tributes to Cuci with respect to Secret History of Mongols written at A.D.1240 (Temir, 2019, p.160). Cenghiz’s son and successor Ogeday Khagan’s forth wife Tzilitsi-hutei was a Kirghiz woman (İsakov, 2017, p.83).
Thereafter the next decades as of A.D.1289, the supporter tribes of Kaydu against Kublai was Oyrat, Kirghiz, Kipchak and Kangli. However, Kaydu lost the war (İsakov, 2017, p.89). Later on by Kipchak Tutuk’s help Kublai defeated Kirghiz forces once and for all and tied to Yuan dynasty (İsakov, 2017, p.89-90). Above mentioned organized migration events of Kirghiz people was related about Kaydu struggle and Kublai’s Kipchak commander Tutuk according to İsakov (İsakov, 2017, p.92).
4.13. Turgis
Turgis name covered Turks as meaning in the age of its dominance (Taşağıl, 2019, min.5). Turgises were in fact proto-Oghuz Turkish groups as Oghuz tribal confederation counted as their successors in general in Turkish history. They were also a part of On-Ok (Ten Arrow) organization founded by Oghuz tribesmen by being inside the five tribes of Tou-lou side (Salman, 1989, p.66). As Sümer informed from Ghavannes; Tu-K’i-Şe tribe name from Ten Arrows were Turgises (Sümer, 2019, p.22). Sümer wrote the Tu-K’i-Şe’s two arm as So-ko Mo-ho and A-li-şe (Sümer, 1999, p.29). So, we see the Mo-ho name here again. Sümer concluded as Nu-Şe-Pi not five buy three tribes by underlining A-si-kie and Koşu organised twicely (Sümer, 1999, p.30). Because A-si-kie and Koşu organised twicely under same clan (Sümer, 1999, p.30). And those three Nu-Şe-Pi was actually Üç Ok in
106
Turkish representing three arrows (Sümer, 1999, p.30). As we wrote at Oghuz section,Sümer very confidently thinks that two wings “Boz Ok”(Gray Arrows) and “Üç Ok”(Three Arrow) of Transoxania Oghuzes took their names as a legacy from On-Ok (Ten Arrow) tribal confederation (Sümer, 1999, p.45). We learned from the sources that the well known Seljuk leaders Arslan Yabgu and Tuğrul Bey were carrying three arrows, as a sign for authority among Seljuks (Sümer, 1999, p.94). On the other hand Taşağıl counts Turgis as main big mass of a tribal confederation during Gok-Turk empire era, spread to large territories (Taşağıl, 2015, p.22). Ten Arrow tribes were a result of weakened Gok-Turks after unstopped uprisings. This reorganization at western provinces was actually a defend mechanizm of Turkish tribes in order to survive. Later, Ten Arrows turned into Turgisses (Taşağıl, 2015, p.24-25). As Togan informs from İdrisi, Turgis people were called as “Intrinsical Turk” by İdrisi himself (Togan, 2019, p.592). Bilge Khagan remarked at Kül Tigin Inscription that “on ok oğlum turgeş kaganta makaraç tamgaçı oguz bilge tamgaçı kelti” (Aydın, 2019, p.68). Tamgacı was a profession at old Turks due to the fact that “the person who was dealing with damgas called as Tamgacı” (Halaçoğlu, 1993, p.455). The mentioned phrase is related about two Turgis tamgacı people who participated to funeral of Kül Tegin (Aydin, 2019, p.68). Thereafter the funereal, according to Kül Tigin insciription, building up the monunemtal tomb site works had started up (Aydin, 2019, p.69). From our eyes the questions here were; what was the purpose of these Turgis people who specialised in particular about tamga?Did this Turgis people carved the tamgas on the inscriptions? If yes, then also could Turgis people’s originally A-shih-na as well? As known, ancestors of Ten Arrow (On Ok) tribes were İstemi Khagan’s communities in fact and İstemi marched west with Ten Arrow masses (Sümer, 1999, p.30). Those were original Gok-Turks which Bilge
107
Khagan said “Türkümüz ve Budunumuz” (Sümer, 1999, p.30). Those were Turgises indeed (Sümer, 1999, p.30).
Once upon a time they were one of the main Turkish clans that contributed to Gok-Turk State confederation. Turgises were participated to the alliance of Uyghur, Karluk and Basmil tribes who had been revolted together against Gok-Turks during fell of first state (İzgi, 2017, p.245). They would cooperate with Kirghizes and Chinese later during Kapgan Khagan’s reign on second state of Gok-Turks once again (A.D. 696) (Taşağıl, 2018, p.143). As of A.D.699 Ten Arrow tribes were fully under control of Turgises. U-Çe-Le, brother of Sou-Ko was the leader meanwhile (Sümer, 2019, p.20-21). “Baga Tarkan” was U-Çe-Le’s title name (Ögel, 2020, p.198). At the same year, Turgisses became a part of Gok-Turk confederation (Taşağıl, 2019, p.361). Throughout the years after A.D.704 four Chinese garrisons besieged by Turgis army but Chinese persuaded Karluks to fight with them without interfering any. Chinese administiators prefered to wait in order to lead Turks to make war each other (Taşağıl, 2018, p.145). Wu-chih-le was one of the most successful khagans of Turgisses who founded twenty governships all over his lands covering even Beshbalik (Taşağıl, 2018, p.145). He surely was a serious candidate to the throne of Western Gok-Turks. Empress Wu of Tang had to contact with him because of increasing Kapgan Khagan danger. Hence, Wu-chih-le got an important Chinese offical title from her at A.D.706. Later on, he died (Taşağıl, 2018, p.145). Even though Turgis army was almost one hundred thousand men, they got a heavy defeat when Gok-Turk army came near Urungu lake at Tonyukuk and İnel’s command. That was a milestone for second Gok-Turk state. Results of this war was such important that Gok-Turks furthest extend borders reached to Transoxania. Plus,
108
On-Ok(Ten arrow) tribes had been tied to confederation immediately afterwards (Taşağıl, 2018, p.143; Taşağıl, 2019, p.361).
Another event took place at A.D.708. Successor of Wu-chih-le (U-Çe-le) was Suo-ke. Suo-ke’sambassador, was greeted by a gorgeous ceremony at Chinese palace. But Suo-ke and his commander Kül Çor Chung-chie somehow fell out with each other. Although Suo-ke reported his complain about him to Chinese palace, Chung-chie found himself strong supporters such as Feng-Chia pin and Tsung Ch’u-k’o the prime minister. Despite the fact that they revolt together against him, Suo-ke defeated them. Then, his brother Che-nu marched to Chinese borders and got some achievements. Later on, he demanded from emperor to be killed of the prime minister Tsung Ch’u-k’o (Taşağıl, 2018, p.146). Then, this time Suo-ke and his brother Che-nu broke up. Ch’u-k’o contacted with the strong khagan of second Gok-Turk state, Kapgan and asked alliance. Kapgan first eliminated Suo-ke by attacking with his army and capturing him. Hence, from Taşağıl’s informings: “If you together can not manage as brothers, how you will stay loyal to me?” said Kapgan and both killed by Kapgan Khagan at A.D.710 (Taşağıl, 2018, p.146). As of A.D.711 they lost once again the war at the same location after the sudden assault of Bilge and Kül Tigin’s army. Remaining Black Turgises had been tracked by Kül Tigin till Syr Darya River areas and had been defeated there (Taşağıl, 2018, p.147).
Turgises played also very big role in Turkistan while muslim Arabs were marching along Khorasan and beyond. Turks had known with Islam more closer, during the long wars with Arab forces. That mostly was occured in the reign of Sou-lu Khagan. Sou-lu’s army reaced to two hundred thousand men after A.D.715. Turgises implemented an alliance with Tibetans as well as Arabic rebels towards to muslim threat coming over Khorasan (Golden, 2014, p.101). Sou-lu had defended
109
Transoxania heroically against Arabs. Arabs called him surely with awe as “Ebu Muzahim”. According to Barthold “Ebu Muzahim means kinda struggle maker or annoyingly challenger.” (Barthold, 2019, p.210). Emperor of China paid tribute to him and organized a strategic marriage likewise the wed of Sou-lu to a refugee’s daughter from A-shih-na tribe (Taşağıl, 2018, p.147). Tokmak town had been captured by Sou-lu Khagan then. Tokmak was capital of Turgises once called as “Suyab” (Taşağıl, 2018, p.88). However, Suyab had been damaged by Chinese at A.D. 748 (Barthold, 2019, p.526). Later on, Karluks took control at Suyab at A.D.766 (Barthold, 2019, p.223). Hududu’l-alem counts Suyab as well while informing about Tuhsı settlements (Şeşen, 2020, p.71). According to Taşağıl’s statements from İbn Khordadbeh “Medinet-i Hakan-ı Türgiş” was the city called namely Ordu defined as “thirteenth Konak” (Taşağıl, 2018, p.151). Konak should doubtless be the general name for the accommodation stations at that age, in Turkish. On the other hand, it was also a unit of distance measurement. One konak was namely three fersah equaling to nine miles (Şeşen, 2020, p.7). Suyab was the fifteenth konak (Taşağıl, 2018, p.151). We understand here that this was a route heading from Turkistan to Transoxania. And this route possibly was filled with mentioned konaks respectively for the passengers to stay and rest on their way.From Sümer’s perspective, Turgis khagans could be pioneers on about ruling their folks from inside of settlements among others Turkish rulers (Sümer, 2019, p.21).
Two main branches of Turgis groups were Yellow Turgises and Black Turgises. Yellow ones were resident at the city Suyab (Sümer, 1999. P.31). The Black Turgises took Talas as center (Sümer, 1999. P.31).
Turgis tribes were holding strategic silk road during second Gok-Turk State on behalf of Otuken. At Sou-lou Khagan reign (A.D. 716-737) Turgis tribe had lived
110
its strongest period. Sou-lou declared independence at A.D.717. Thereafter, they set Balasagun as their capital (Taşağıl, 2019, p.366). Sou-lu Khagan had been killed right after a backgammon play, by his opponent Baga Tarkan Kül-Çor at A.D.737 as Golden informs from Taberi (Golden, 2014, p.101). As far as we know Balasagun was a very central city of Turks at Turkistan around Chu (Çu) river which the exact location of it can not be detected yet (Konukçu, 1992, p.1; Şalekenov &Genov, 2006, p.VII). On the other hand according to Taşağıl, city was located on the north west of Talas river(Taşağıl, 2019, p.366). Although Konukçu says as it is generally accepted that the city was today’s Ak-peşin (Konukçu, 1992, p.1), Akpeşin was a small town at old times so has low probability to be such a big central capital for a major state like Western Gok-Turk like Balasagun (Şalekenov & Genov, 2006, p. VIII).. The ancient remainders of medieveal city Aktöbe territory on the other hand have been thought as Balasagun. Because, the findings of old coins looks likes the ones of Turgisses’ had at ancient days as the centre of the coins have a square type holes in the middle (Şalekenov &Genov, 2006, p.VIII). Besides, Aktöbe’s place was at Chu Valley likewise Balasagun. The features of investigated remaining city walls looks like Balasagun’s walls (Şalekenov & Genov, 2006, p. VI). Balasagun was also became the capital of Karluks when they came (A.D. 776-775) (Taşağıl, 2018, p.88). But Turgis people were still inhabitants of the city. And the archeological findings as mentioned above showed their strong traces. Later on Karakhitaies would invade the city and stayed almost one century there. Sümer believed that Balasağun name was linked with the Turkish title Sağun (Sümer, 2019, p.67).
As we learned from Şeşen’s statements from Yakut el-Hamevi; another event occured during Sou-lu’s reign was the caliphate’s invitation of Turgises to Islam, possibly direclty to khagan himself; decades before Turk Itil Bulgars’ Islam
111
acceptence at A.D.922; before even Talas warfare (Şeşen, 2020, p.14-15). However, the invitation had been rejected by Turgis khagan, because of in case of the possibility of increasing risk of life maintenance for his soldiers (Şeşen, 2020, p.14-15).
Some Turgis coins found among as in terms of written in Sogdian language, but pronounced as Turkish (Ögel, 2020, p.197). This interesting findings shows how lived together with Turgises and Sogds in peace. Plus, some Turgis coins have khagan name on as well as tamgas like Ten Arrow tribal tamga (Ögel, 2020, p.198). Turgis khagans had instructed to write in Sogdian on coins (Ögel, 2020, p.340). These coins looks like chinese type as shape (Ögel, 2020, p.348).
According to Sümer, Sou-lo was resident at the settlement Nevaket westward of Tokmak(Suyab) and Ordu cities , around 348 km to Tokmak (Sümer, 2019, p.63, p.65, map).
After the death of Sou-lou Khagan, the civil war flared up among Ten Arrow tribes. China used the opportunity and supported Baga Tarkan who was the Çor of Ç’u Mu-Koen clan from Ten Arrows (Sümer, 2019, p.22). Further decades, Turgises was remained divided as Yellow Turgises and Dark Turgises of which could not manage to unite once again. In addition they fully controlled On-Ok(Ten Arrow) around A.D.744 under İl Etmiş Kutlug Bilge (Salman, 1989, p.64). But this time with the support of Chinese (Sümer, 2019, p.22). Later on, Talas war happened at A.D. 751. Hence, Karluks invaded the Suyab city and finalized Turgis era at A.D.766 (Sümer, 2019, p.23).
Turgis tribes migrated with crowded masses towards western Turkistan because of China’s proceedings at Turpan as of A.D. 640. The thing is they got
112
crowded day by day as some other Turkish tribes also participated to them naturally by their own selves. This event shows us very good of refreshment capacity and solidarity of Turks in terms of tribes. When the population and influence of Turgis tribe increased, other clans came under their rulership sooner or later. As flexible characteristic of tribe system of migrant-settler or in other words semi-nomadic Turks; enabled this.
As of A.D. 766 Turgis left his title to Oghuz name and became Oghuz tribe. According to Taşağıl, this vital transformation happens simultaneously with the emerging of Uyghur State at A.D.745 (Taşağıl, 2015, p.26). Oghuz tribe had became the nucleus of glorious empires of Turks at west of Eurasia. Oghuz-Turgis Turks were also an important driving masses of well-known migration of tribes beginning of IX.Century with together Kipchaks and Pechenegs. They had forced Pecheneg tribes to move towards west and some of Turgises arrived to Dnieper river (Aristov, 2014, p.49).
Aristov stated that, Avar Turks could be Turgis origined or they could be closer to them. He based his opinion to the fact that Chinese called them as “u-a-la” which meant transcription of Avar taken from Manchu’s historical records. He also showed the Turkish envoy’s words to emperor Justin as an evidence as he was informing about escaping twenty thousand people of Avars (A.D.568). He made a link between these Avars and some arms of Turgises who rejected to enter Turk confederation unlike others by saying their probability of sameness (Aristov, 2014, p.58).
113
Turgises had got a sub-clan named as Mo-ho (Salman, 1989 ,p.67). Notable that we again meet with Mo-ho name here as we explained this significant tribe at Tatar section.
4.14. Sha-t’o
They were the successor’s of Ch’u-yüe’s living in the lands of Western Gok-Turk State (Taşağıl, 2018, p.120). Sha-t’o means in fact a pile of sand (Taşağıl, 2018, p.121). The reason of the tribe’s name’s relation with sand was their vast sandy living zone during civil wars at Western Turk lands (Taşağıl, 2018, p.121). Another core clans of Sha-t’o’s was So-ko linked with Turgises (Eberhard, 1947, p.16). As we wrote above, Turgises had got another sub-clan named as Mo-ho (Salman, 1989 ,p.67). So, there could be a Mo-ho and So-ko close link.
Due to Tasağıl’s portraiture and his “east of Barköl” description, this sandy region could be southeast of Jungaria Gobi desert (Taşağıl, 2018, p.121).
After A.D.659, Ch’u-yüe’s accepted Chinese Tang’s dominion. Then, They cooperated with Chinese armies against other Turkish tribes (Taşağıl, 2018, p.121).
Due to Aristov, as of A.D.794 they immigrated near to Tibetians because of Uyghur’s pressure. Later on, Tibetians and Sha-t’o’s together would capture Beshbalik (Aristov, 2014, p.144).
Sha-t’o’s were very skillful warriors. But they used this advantage to cooperate with Chinese governers at Tang dynasty. They helped Tang very much by joining to Uyghur Turks forces in order to stop the An-lu-shan’s rebellion act threating Tang’s throne (Eberhard, 1947, p.16).
114
In reference to Aydın, Cumul sub-tribe of Sha-t’o could possibly be “Kumul” (Aydin, 2011, p.398). The word “kum” means sand in Turkish (Aydin, 2011, p.398). Cumul is most probably in chinese ch’ou-mi (Taşağıl, 2018, p.120). As mentioned above Sha-t’o means in fact a pile of sand. So, Aydın is making a connection with the tribe name Kumul and the word Kum with respect to meaning of Sha-t’o (Aydin, 2011, p.398). Aydın is informing also from Gömeç that Kümül name’s origin is Cumul (Aydin, 2011, p.398). The thing is Kümül was an ancient Turkish tribe’s name discovered on the texts of some Yenisey inscriptions (Aydin, 2011, p.398). Kumul name and the city of Hami could have a relation too (Aydin, 2011, p.398). So from the investigation point of view of Sha-t’o tribe, we need to look into also the phrases Kum, Kümül, Kum, Hami, so forth. This analyze should be both from etymological and geographical perspective. Sümer mentioned about five villages located nearby Koçu (Kao-Ç’ang) (Sümer, 2019, p.43). The name of one of those was Comulkeş. Sümer underlined that this name could be related with Turk Comul tribe (Sümer, 2019, p.43). Beshbalik was another one (Sümer, 2019, p.43). Uyghurs settled to Beshbalik after A.D.840 (Sümer, 2019, p.43). On the other hand Hami was another Uyghur town (Sümer, 2019, p.43). As mentioned above, the ancient name of Hami was Kumul. Therefore, Cumul sub-tribe of Sha-t’o should somehow had relation with Uyghurs as well.
Togan’s informations from Hotan documents tells us, these Cumuls was indeed Black Tatar (Togan, 1985, s.99). Black Tatars were Tatars with black carts as metioned above at Tatar section. On the other hand, Taşağıl has an hypothesis that Cenghiz Khagan’s origin could be Sha-t’o Turk (Taşağıl, 2019, min. 27).
Sha-t’os succeeded to govern China after Tang dynasty till A.D.950 with their three different dynasties (Taşağıl, 2018, p.124). Their ruler Li-ko-yong and his
115
successors were semi-independent governors sitting around Shansi province of China till Khitans came (Togan, 2019, p.56). On the same century, they entered Kansu area as well (Togan, 2019, p.639). Togan also points to Kokonor Lake (Ch’ing Hai) for their domain on X.Century (Togan, 2019, p.640). Thereafter, upon next decades Tangut groups reached along these areas (Togan, 2019, p.640). Togan mentions migration of Sha’t’o and Black Tatar tribes whileas these years (Togan, 2019, p.640).
According to Şeşen’s informings from M.Kemal Özergin that; Sul(Desert) Turks living at Tabaristan and Curcan were Chou originated. Şeşen also mentioned about that two different Chou states were Sha-t’o by saying Sha-t’o meant as desert from Özergin (Şeşen, 2020, p.11). First state lived between B.C.10-247. The next one was known as Northern Chou which lived between A.D.550-586 (Şeşen, 2020,p.11). We can say for the second one’s periond contemporary with Mukan, Taspar and Isbara Gok-Turk Khagans' reigns (Taşağıl, 2019, p.23-44). Mukan, especially managed to dominate diplomatically Chou and Chi states both in his era (Taşağıl, 2019, p.27-28). Briefy, the matter is; Şeşen also writes two different migration movements of Sha-t’o masses, who were a part of these mentioned states, till to Curcan lands (Şeşen, 2020,p.11). So, Sha-t’o tribes were a part of migration of masses too.
4.15. Sir Tardus
Sayan (Kögmen) mountains was their residential zone (Ögel, 2020, p.212). Tardus tribe has occasionally been mentioned side by side with Toles confederation like "Tardus and Toles" inside the texts, at historical sources. Sümer emphasised similar attentive care of A-shih-na dynasty and Uyghur sovereigns to the both tribes
116
(Sümer, 1999, p.21, p.42). Tardus tribesmen were ruled by Gok-Turk dynasty member tigins who were carrying şad or yabgu titles just like Toleses (Sümer, 1999, p.21). Sümer defined either tribe as “budun” (Sümer, 1999, p.21).
İl Khagan’s hard nature in his court and his some strategic mistakes increased the problems despite the fact that the army was gaining progress. Moreover, Turkish tribes became unpleased about his extra interest about Sogdians’ opinions. Chinese Chao-Te-Yen who was earning positions near khagan very fastly was an another reason for this unpleasement. Plus, the bad weather conditions caused starvation. In adition to these when İl Khagan could not manage the politics well with Tang dynasty also, Eastern Gok-Turk State lost power very much and collapse had began. Rebellion had started already because of high taxes inside Toleses. While the fell of Eastern Gok-Turk State (A.D.626-634), Turkish lands were stayed in turmoil. At that point most of the Turkish tribes gathered under the banner of Sir Tardus tribe (Taşağıl, 2018, p.97, p.99, p.100, p.231).
Otuken territory again was the holy center of Turks with the Sir Tarduses’ leadership. However, Sir Tardus leader İ-nan Khagan tried to contact with Chinese emperor and enabled their well treatment by emissary T’ung Tegin. So the new state in fact was autarchy tied to Chinese emperor (Taşağıl, 2018, pp.99-100).
Once they were not a very big power. But they had a potential. Sir Tardus clan rised among other Toles tribes. In fact, Sir and Tardus both was separate clans in earlier. Later on Sirs had taken Tardus people within their public and therefore they joined together (Taşağıl, 2018, p.248).
After the death of İ-nan, his successors could not protect the unity of tribes. As of A.D.646 Uyghurs defeated Sir Tarduses with the leadership of their ruler T’u-
117
mi-tu (Ögel, 1951, p.361). Ögel remarked that this success happened by the coalition of all tribes against them (Ögel, 1951, p.361). Hence, the Sir Tardus state collapsed (A.D.647).
Till A.D.647 they resisted to Chinese policies and slightly protect Otuken semi-independently (Taşağıl, 2018, p.222). For sure, that status at that problematic times was a successfor Turks and Mongolsas delaying Tang’s penetration to the mentioned area.
Aydın underlined that, later on as of second half of seventh century, Tardus communities might have joined to Kirghiz Turks due to the fact that envoy of Kirghiz people was Tardus Inancu Cor at Kul Tegin's funereal (Aydin, 2011, p.398). Maybe, they had migrated to west from Otuken to along Yenisey too. As Aydın continues to his words by emphasising Tardus people were resident along Irtysh River on mentioned decades (Aydin, 2011, p.398). We find traces of İnanç title also at Seljuk Turks. Yusuf, son of Musa, grandson of Seljuck, was carrying “İnanç Beygu” title (Sümer, 1999, p.102). İnanç, İ-nan, Inancu names were common titles among Toles and Oghuz tribes as seen.
What we know is from Taşağıl’s statement, Bilge Khagan’s previous position at the state was “Şad”. He got an important responsibility on his shoulders at his fourteenth age by becoming “Şad”. The year was A.D.697, right the beginning of the reign of Kapgan Khagan, Bilge brought to the Şad duty upon Tardus tribesmen (Taşağıl, 2019, p.361). For sure, he gained also administrative experiences by managing such a strong tribe. Nineteen years of experience he gained (Sümer, 1999, p.25). By this experince on Tardus society, Bilge's khanate era was really an
118
achievement not only wars but mainly on diplomacy side that we think this was the result of his long managing background with Tardus.
Togan counts five Tardus tribes as Sikar-Tugara, Eyabör, Çarıg, Yabütkar and Yalpagut (Alpagut) (Togan, 2019, p.609). Their leader’s name was Tugara (Togan, 2019, p.610). Togan makes a link between the names of Tugara, Tohar and Toharistan as well (Togan, 2019, p.610).
4.16. Hsi&K’u-mo-hsi
They had been referred as Tatabi at Gok-Turk inscriptions (İsakov, 2017, p.25). They could have link with Wu-huans or even they could be successors of them (İsakov, 2017, p.25). İsakov’s statements from Taşağıl focuses their Tung-hu origin (İsakov, 2017, p.25).
From Togan's determinations; Hsi and K’u-mo-hsi were divided to two resident locations at ancient times. The first wing was called “Urenkhay” living at Yenisey Basin (Togan, 1985, p.95). According to Temir, Urenkhay or Urianghai was living north of Tannu Ola Mountains (Temir, 2019, p.273). So, Hsi was proto-Urenkhay. The thing is we know from Secret History of Mongols that Camuha, the famous rival of Cenghis, was Urenkhay originated. Therefore If Togan is right, then we can say Hsi tribesmen were ancestors of Camuha’s tribe (Temir, 2019, p.12). Even again from the records at Secret History of Mongolsthe mighty general of Cenghis, Subutai was from Urienghais also but he moved with Cenghis while the tribes were gathering near him (Temir, 2019, p.12). So, Subutai had got too a link with Hsi community. Another information about Urienghais came from Aristov based to Chinese sources. Aristov counted them with twelve Toles sub-tribe as of fifth and sixth century with respect to Chinese sources (Aristov, 2014, p.37-38).
119
Eberhard’s informs that; Togan was thinking that Urenkhay(kay) and Kayi tribe were same (Eberhard, 1944, p.568). Urenkhay meant as “beyaz kay (white kay)” in Turkish (Togan, 2019, p.639).
The second wing was a part of Shi-wei tribe around Amur River (Togan, 1985, p.95-96). Some sources counted K’u-mo-hsi as one arm of the rest of Hsien-pi tribes (Eberhard, 1944, p.569). Hsi language was very similiar with Shi-wei’s one (Eberhard, 1944, p.570). Besides by furthering this; at the same time, their language was entirely one-to-one with Khitan language (Eberhard, 1944, p.570).
Hsi means “West” as destination in Chinese language (Taşağıl, 2019, p.12). As a tribe name Hsi meant “slave” (Eberhard, 1944, p.568).
As of A.D.200 some historical datas pointed out a Pu-Hsi tribe resident around Honan province (Eberhard, 1944, p.569). According to Eberhard; Pu-Hsi meant as “Hsi people making war by foot” (Eberhard, 1944, p.569). So, our idea is; this meaning defines that Hsi tribesmen were infantries. This is quite interesting. In that case, we need to review Hsi tribesmen culture in terms of horse breeding, horse riding so forth. Hsi people were dealing with pig farming as well (Eberhard, 1944, p.570).
Nearby A.D.500 A-hui sub-tribe was one of significant tribes of K’u-mo-hsi (Eberhard, 1944, p.570). However there is no other information about them rather than their tribute shipments to Tabgach(Tuoba) State till A.D.532 (Eberhard, 1944, p.570). During A.D.550 there were five sub-clans of Hsi tribe as; “Ju-ho-chı, Mo-ho-fu, Ch’i-ku, Mu-k’un and Shih-te” (Eberhard, 1944, p.571). Eberhard mentioned about the probability of this Hsi tribe could be related with a Bagatur (Eberhard,
120
1944, p.571). According to Taşağıl, Mo-ho-fu meant as “Bagatur” (Taşağıl, 2019, p.117).
They had settled eastern part of Gok-Turk State (Taşağıl, 2019, p.47). They were counted inside the proto-Mongol tribes together with Ch’i-tans (Khitans). They were a part of semi-nomadic Turk confederation during the Gok-Turk states from the beginning of Mukan Khagan’s era (A.D.553-572) (Taşağıl, 2019, p.47). Taşağıl’s opinion is İstemi Khagan could have also joined to the campaign towards to proto-Mongol tribes with together Mukan (Taşağıl, 2019, p.25). However, in some cases they had been contacted with Chinese emissaries independently (Taşağıl, 2019, p.47). For sure, Chinese should aware of their forceful capacity. On the other hand, they had not attempted to revolt unless they felt theirselves under danger at the last points of civil wars or turmoil times. Except one attempt during Bilge’s reign was a Chinese conspiracy. In other words, yes they sometimes revolted to the state but had been forced to do that because of conditions. An example for this kinda necessity to revolt perhaps, was the one at Tardu Khagan’s fell at A.D.603 (Taşağıl, 2019, p.73).
We understand that they had quite impressive number of troops from Taşağil’s statements of an important wing of the mighty army of Ch’u-lo Khagan (A.D.619-621) was consisted of completely only from Hsi, K’u-mo-hsi and Ch’i-tan tribes. These tribesmen were under T’u-li Şad’s command, son of previous Khagan Shih-pi (Taşağıl, 2019, p.87, p.93). In general T’u-li’s duty at Gok-Turk's govermental organisation during İl Khagan reign was to be the chief of Mongol tribes. The thing is, he applied a high tax policy. As consequence the unrest at Mongols would come up soon (Taşağıl, 2019, p.234).
121
As of A.D.628 they had revolted once again and defeated T’u-li Khagan’s forces. This event triggered the fell of I. Gok-Turk state and resulted at last for emperor T’ai-Tsung to break the agreement with İl Khagan (A.D.621-630). As of A.D.629 K’u-mo-hsi initally accepted Tang’s dominion (Taşağıl, 2019, p.101). Aftermath when emperor T’ai-tsung called İ-nan Khagan as Bilge, Hsi tribes participated willingly to Sir Tardus İ-nan Khagan (Taşağıl, 2019, pp.98-99).
As Taşağıl informs from Chinese records that during Kapgan Khagan’s reign (A.D.692-716); Mongols including Hsi tribe, accepted his hegemony. But again Taşağıl informs that; historical China sources has differences eachother (Taşağıl, 2019, p.358). For instance, At the Hsin Tang Shu which was a 225 volumes of historical annual fulfiled at A.D.1060, Kapgan used force in order to control Hsi people (Taşağıl, 2019, p.5, p.358). In addition as of A.D.710, Li Ta-fu was their ruler who presented tribute to Tang dynasty (Eberhard, 1944, p.572). Li title was originally chinese etymologically (Eberhard, 1944, p.572). Li Ta-fu killed by Khitans during warfare (Eberhard, 1944, p.572).
During the foundation of Uyghur State, some Hsi tribesmen had already joined to famous rebel commander An Lu-shan’s army (İsakov, 2017, p.26). We know from Eberhard that An Lu-shan had won victory towards Khitan as of A.D.744 with an army of 150.000 men (Eberhard, 2019, p.211). As of A.D.788 they made an alliance with Shih-wei tribesmen against China (Eberhard, 1944, p.573). Hsi and Shih-wei together again were at war with China at A.D.795 (Eberhard, 1944, p.573). At A.D.806 their leader was possibly So-ti who visited Chinese palace (Eberhard, 1944, p.573).
122
Hsi tribe took a clear defeat from Khitans as of A.D.885 and was sent to P’i-p‘a river (Eberhard, 1944, p.573).
The very remarkable news from Hsi tribe was about their emissary sending at A.D.925 together with Gok-Turks to China after the collapse of Tang dynasty whileas five dynasty time (Taşağıl, 2019, p.386). We understand that Gok-Turks were still active during X.Century.
Khitan-Liao empire had owned a position called Hsi-Wang-fu at its state organisation which meant officer of Hsi Kingdom, whom was responsible for the governing of the six Hsi tribes as Yao-li, Po-te, Ao-li, Mei-chih, Ch’u-li, To-kui (Eberhard, 1944, p.575). Furthermore, there was an individual Hsi clan independent from this mentioned six tribes called Ch’ü-t’e Ao-Wie-Hsi tied to Ch’ü-t’e sub-clan of Khitans (Eberhard, 1944, p.576). İ-shih Ao-wei-Hsi another Hsi tribe tied to İ-shih sub-clan of Khitans (Eberhard, 1944, p.577). On the other hand, we are familiar with İ-shih tribe name from Toles confederation as an interesting coincidence (Taşağıl, 2019, p.249). T’u-lu, Nieh-li and Ao-wei were other Hsi tribes during under Khitan dominion (Eberhard, 1944, p.577).
Hsi tribesmen had got different type of carts special to theirselves which could be distinguished (Eberhard, 1944, p.580).
Some Hsi tribesmen participated to Karakhitaiestate as well (Eberhard, 1944, p.582). Thereafter, some Hsi people migrated to west before and after the collapse of Karakhitaies (Eberhard, 1944, p.582).
As we mentioned above at Toles section, those mongolian blood clans were vassal to Gok-Turks long time. However, They also often moved together with Toles tribes when the times they had exit from Gok-Turk confederation. When II.Gok-
123
Turk State was in one of its strongest times with Bilge Khagan, Chinese managed to persuade Hsi groups in order to pull them from the Turk confederation. We understand that they somehow achieved that by sending Chinese princesses. Because According to Taşağıl, Bilge himself were talking about Hsi's and Ch'itan's (Khitan) marriage requests as well as saying well accepted by Tang (Taşağıl, 2019, p.5, p.398).
Aftermath, Hsi groups were very active inside Khitan-Liao empire and Karakhitaiestate respectively at all kind positions and social classes from duties in palace till slavery (Eberhard, 1944, p.583-584).
One important remark for old Mongolian tribes that; the only Turkish title was seen solely at K’u-mo-hsi tribe as “erkin(szu-chin)” (Yıldırım, 2015, p.74). All five tribes of K’u-mo-hsi sub-tribes had been leaded by an erkin as title of head of clan (Yıldırım, 2015, p.89).
4.17. Ogur
With respect to Czegledy’s statement: “most of the researchers think the Ogur name as the “Bulgar” version of Oghuz name” (Czegledy, 1998, p.89). Czegledy also evaluated as the possibility of a relation between Uyghur (Uygur) name’s “gur” syllable and O-gur’s “gur” syllable (Czegledy, 1998, p.89).
According to Taşağıl Ogurs possibly was the most crowded Turkish tribal confederation (Taşağıl, 2019, Section 6 min.19). Taşağıl draws attention to “Ho-chie” tribe could have being intrinsicals of Ogurs (Taşağıl, 2018, p.28). Ogurs were the western wing of Oghuz tribal confederation and close to them like brothers (Ahmetbeyoğlu, 2011, p.2). According to Czegledy, the western wing was in fact Toles originated (Czegledy, 1998, p.25). Czegledy defended his idea of Toles-Ogur
124
link basing on to a “Vu-ho” name among in other Toles names found at chinese historical sources (Czegledy, 1998, p.25, p.88). Czegledy acknowledged like; “Yüan-ho” chinese word at chinese sources also was representing Ogurs as Ongur form as well as Tileo-Toleses (Czegledy, 1998, p.88). Ogurs , too were a confederation of clans itself. Onogur or 10 Ogur, Bittigur or 5 Ogur, Altziogur or 6 Ogur, Sattagur or 7 Ogur, Kutrigur or 9 Ogur, Utrirgur or 30 Ogur were basic sub-tribes of Ogur budun (Ahmetbeyoğlu, 2011, p.2). They were one of the core founder tribes of Asian Hun Empire. They were resident around Tarbagatay territory during Hun era (Ahmetbeyoğlu, 2007, p.9). According to Taşağıl, Ogur means tribes (Taşağıl, 2019, sec.6 min .20).
They were the backbone of Asian Huns with together Ting-lings and later on participated to European Huns (Taşağıl, 2015, p.22; Taşağıl, 2018, p.28). They were part of one of the most important migration movements of Turks at earlier period.This mass migration movement leaded to foundation of Atilla’s Hun empire which was an evidence of how migration ability vital for semi-nomadic Turkish tribes. According to Togan, Oghuz, Ogur, Kipchak and Kangli tribes all together were the part of this migration movement to western lands (Togan, 2019, p.45). Alongside this migration, Togan says that remaining tribes at Turkistan were Nine Oghuz, Onogur, Kay and Kun(Hun) (Togan, 2019, p.45). The thing is, Togan counted Onogur as OnUyghur (Ten Uyghur) (Togan, 2019, p.45). Golden dated this migration of Toleses and Ogurs at around A.D.460 (Golden, 2014, p.68). Czegledy underlines that all the Europe arrived Ogur tribes were beforehand a part of Ting-ling, Toles, and thereafter Kao-ch’e confederations, in respectively (Czegledy, 1998, p.98). Czegledy added that those tribes all participated the migration movements as of A.D.350 towards southern Kazakhstan (Czegledy, 1998, p.97-98).
125
As of A.D.461-465 Sabars drived them till the western sides of Ural Mountains (Taşağıl, 2018, p.27). They had migrated till northern sides of Black Sea bypassing Deşt-i Kipchak fertile plain territories (Taşağıl, 2018, p.28). They were such crowded and effective that from Ahmetbeyoğlu’s transcriptions; Priscus showed the start of this migration motions of large masses of them was actually related with the march of Griffons to Avars, the mithyological raptorial birds (Ahmetbeyoğlu, 2011, p.2).
They were also ancestors of Bulgars (Taşağıl, 2018, p.28). They were the founder of the Great Bulgar and Tuna Bulgar Turkish states both (Ahmetbeyoğlu, 2011, p.18).
Czegledy informs about an Ogur city based on Theophylaktos Simokattes, called Bakath (Czegledy, 1998, p.76). This Bakath had lived a catastrophic earthquake event and had been ruined (Czegledy, 1998, p.76). Bakath was a Sogdian name (Czegledy, 1998, p.76). Therefore, from Czegledy's perspective with this reason, the estimated location of the city should be near to Sogdian borders of Ogurs around mid-Syr Darya river (Czegledy, 1998, p.76).
4.18. Pecheneg
One of the most capable Turkish tribes at acient times from the migration point of view. Without doubt Pecheneg masses brang dynamizm to the big migration of tribes happened at IX.Century. They first moved to Syr Darya when Karluks penetrated around Issık lake. Later on, Oguz tribes’ motion would force them again to move to this time western sides of Idıl river. Kurat made an estimation about the date of İdil(Volga) passage as A.D.860-880 (Kurat, 2019, p.45). They had implemented to a lot of event at the north of Black Sea right on Deşt-i Kipchak area
126
such as besieging Kiev city. However Western Idil(Volga) sides would stay beyond Turkistan area so this was not the matter of hereby thesis. Hence, we would not inform details about these remarkable events. Else, their impact on Russian history in itself is a core historical topic.
Even though, Pecheneg name had not been mentioned on the Orkhun Inscriptions ever, they had tied to Western Gok-Turks (Sümer, 1995, p.61). According to Kurat, this well known Turkish tribe was linked to Oghuz confederation under the Western Gok-Turks (Kurat, 2019, p.44). On the other hand, Taşağıl think that the event of On-Ok (Ten Arrow) tribal structure was the birth of Pecheneg history as well (Taşağıl, 2018, p.119). Barthold also thinks that there is a likelihood of the separation of Pechenegs from Oghuzes much more early before their main migration movement (Barthold, 2019, p.84). As Sümer’s statements from Kurat, “Çoban” title was used by some Pecheneg rulers. Plus, one of the sub-tribes of Pechenegs had the name of Bula Çoban and Pechenegs had Çor titles as well (Sümer, 2019, p.49). Sümer’s point was some of the tribes under ten tribes of Ten Arrows has the titles Ç’u-pan. And the title Çor was common an all of them (Sümer, 2019, p.49). From our eye, this an important link about to investigate Pecheneg origin from linguistic angle. According to Sümer, They were definetely a part of Nu-şe-pi side of Ten Arrows (Sümer, 2109, p.51). However, according to Taşağıl; the right side of Ten Arrows who were above mentioned Nu-şe-pi, was splitted into five “erkin” titled leaders, but not the “çor” titled leaders (Taşağıl, 2015, p.25). Yıldırım wrote as Çor meant as warrior (Yıldırım, 2015, p.87). Yıldırım also remarked that, Çor was a title at the five Tu-lo tribes from Ten Arrows (Yıldırım, 2015, p.87). Therefore, we could understand as unlike Nu-şe-pi but Tu-lo tribe from Yıldırım's words. So, these makes a dilemma here about the linguistic link of Sümer.
127
They were described as “Turk Pechenegs” and “Hazar Pechenegs” in Hududu’l-alem (Şeşen, 2020, p.66).
Their homelands could be at Issık and Balkhash lakes which covering also Ili River Basin. Even, they could be together with Turgises before Karluk invasion at the mentioned area (Kurat, 2019, p.44). Sümer also referred lands around Aral lake, down of Syr Darya and eastern Caspian Sea as their living zone (Sümer, 1995, p.61). Osawa transmits from Pelliot’s work on the document Pelliot Tibetian 1283 in the way that “Be-ça-nag” were living between Altai and Tarbagatay mountains (Osawa, 2009, p.2376). As mentioned above they had been drived by Oghuz groups from the lands around Syr Darya lately of VIII.Century (Sümer, 1995, p.61). Oghuzes were calling Pechenegs as “Tüylü Köpek” by mockingly which means in Turkish, dog with feathers, along these years (Golden, 2014, p.107).
Kurat emphasized that they had been organized under “Uruğ” system (Kurat, 2019, p.55). Uruğ meant in fact the mini confederation of families. When uruğs confederated then a body of clan could be embodied (Taşağıl, 2020, p.202). So, Pechenegs were a very good of example of thousand year’s unique survive existance way of the old Turkistan nations namely Turks, Mongols and Tatars had. In other words Pechenegs owned a rigid but also flexible complicated tribe system.
Currently, it is a question mark how much of Pechenegs had been organized like this type at their early periods at Turkistan with respect to Uruğ structuring. Still, Kurat estimated that three main Uruğs could be in the foreground. As Kurat's guess was that these uruğs were Erdim(Erdem), Çur, Yula that could be existed under one name together as "Kangar” (Kurat, 2019, p.55). The reason of this special name for those three Uruğs in fact was to be understood as the sign of nobility
128
among Pechenegs with respect to other Uruğs (Taşağıl, 2018, p.119; Kurat, 2019, p.55). On the contrary of the name Pecheneg, “Kangar” name could be in the Kül Tigin inscription. Sümer indicated that the name “Keneres” had been thought as Kangar. But Sümer also added the probability of Keneres as becoming a name of a place (Sümer, 1995, p.61). Furthermore, Togan underlined the connection of Pecheneg tribe Kenger and as would be Kengeras, in other words Kenger-As or upper mentioned Keneres written at Gok-Turk inscriptions (Togan, 2019, p.52). This could be happened around central Syr Darya as Togan thinked. Togan told that this As tribesmen would be “As-kişi” paralel with kişi (Person) word in Turkish. As-kişi became Ezgiş in time (Togan, 2019, p.610). So, as Togan writes, those As people were in fact Ezgiş tribe of Turks who could have possibly joined to Kenger groups (Togan, 2019, p.51-52). Togan showed as originally Iranian the As tribe as well as remarking that they became thereafter Turkish among Turks(Togan, 2019, p.610). Taşağıl thinks, Ezgiş clan could be inside On-ok (Ten Arrow) tribal confederation (Taşağıl, 2018, p.76). Togan also thinked so (Togan, 2019, p.52). Besides, Şeşen’s transcriptions from Biruni revealed as; Alans and above mentioned As clan groups were living mainly at Oghuz desert by having a mixed Turkish language of Pecheneg and Oghuz dialect (Şeşen, 2020, p.26). Even, Kurat evaluates Alans and As as same tribes (Kurat,2019, p.15-16). On the other hand, Taşağıl counts an Alan tribe under Toleses at the regions of eastern Black Sea and northern parts of Khorasan (Taşağıl, 2015, p.23). Şirin’s statements however from E.Tryjarski remarks that Alans were Iranian origined as well as using sometimes Gok-Turk alphabet (Sirin, 2020, p.33).
From Osawa’a viewpoint, during XIII.Century the Kangli tribes who were inhabitants at the western land of Issık Lake till to the Urals were linked to “Kangü”
129
“Kangaras” or not,is still a historical mystery (Osawa, 2009, p.2377). Yet, Osawa thinks that the kenkaras pharase on the Tes inscripton descovered near Tez river (Tesiyn gol) could have related with Kangli Turks (Osawa, 2009, p.2380-2382). According to Osawa the city “Gonyüe” was the city of Kangli people which was taken by Uyghur commander Borun on behalf of Tang at the date of A.D.651 after the warfare with A-shih-na Helu (Osawa, 2009, p.2382). Those people could be Kangaras (Osawa, 2009, p.2382). Therefore if this information will be proved later, due to Osawa’s perspective we understood that then Pecheneg and Kangli relation should be much more beyond the today’s scientific knowledges (Osawa, 2009, p.2385). As we mentioned before, Otrar’s other names were “Tarband” and previously “Kangü-Tarban” (Czegledy, 1998, p.109). Osawa, with lesser probability, paid attention to this name could have had relation with Kangaras at Orkhun Inscriptions (Osawa, 2009, p.2377). In this case, Otrar city, Kangli tribes, Pecheneg tribes, Kangü civilization and the Kangaras could have had a relations all together. We would like to ask that did Pecheneg nobles were chosen due to their Kangli kinship?
Uruğ leaders were called as “Basbug” at Pechenegs. According to Kurat, Basbug was the authority about the things related with migration (Kurat, 2019, p.57). Very similiar with Gok-Turks, the nephews of basbug could be predecessor candidates upon death of him (Kurat, 2019, p.57).
“Baranta” was always a risk for nomadic or semi-nomadic tribes on steppes. So, Pechenegs instinctively took the precautions of "baranta" by applying their own natural born tribe network as a legacy from their Gok-Turk origin with very strict discipline. Every tribesmen was expert about horseriding as well as having military competency. Everybody should have obeyed without question the orders of
130
the leaders of family leaders, oymak leaders and finally uruğ leaders. In order to protect the society with owned the herds of animals, adhering to tribe system was a must (Kurat, 2019, p.58). In fact baranta was an application inside töre laws if there was an unfair situation (Donuk, 1992, p.64-65). Baranta was a right to plunder under to balance unfair circumstances for a tribe (Donuk, 1992, p.64-65).
Due to the fact that they were relatives with theirTurkish rulers, Kurat also thought the sameness possibility of the Turkish family term “bacanak” with the name Pecheneg (Peçenek) (Kurat, 2019, p.55).
According to Said El Mağribi(A.D.1214-1286) at Şeşen’s transcriptions; "Pechenegs were cremating of their dead" (Şeşen, 2020, p.200). However, there is a discrepancy here between Islamic sources and Chinese sources.Cause, the only Turkish tribe who was cremating of their deads was Kirghiz tribe (Taşağıl, 2018, p.102) (Sümer, 1997, p.47).
Why Pechenegs did not have a state ever? Why did not they attempt to found one even they owned sufficient infostructure? These are the deep questions in front of historians. What we know is that, Pechenegs has put their sign on the large areas of Eurasia with their very long history full of a lot of adventures.
4.19. Nine Oghuz
“Tokuz oguz bodun kentü bodunum” phrases were written at Kül Tigin Inscription on the north side (Aydın, 2019, p.65). The meaning is from Aydın’s transcriptions; “Nine Oghuz folk was my ownself folk” (Aydın, 2019, p.65). Nine Oghuz groups; without any chief or rank between, were under khagan’s command during Gok-Turk domain (Sümer, 1999, p.33). In other words, neither yagbu and şad
131
nor ilteber were controlling these nine tribes, khagan directly was responsible himself.
A.D.627 Toleses evolved to Nine Oghuz confederation (Taşağıl, 2015, p.24). Thereafter, Nine Oghuz groups contributed to Sir Tardus organisation (Taşağıl, 2020, p.26). According to Taşağıl’s informations, core Nine Oghuz tribes were: “Bugu(Pu-ku), Hun, Bayırku, Tongra (T’ung-lo), Ss-chie (İzgil), Ch’i-pi, A-pu-sse, Ku-lun-wu-ku, A-tie (Ediz)” (Taşağıl, 2020, p.26).
First action of Kutlug was to dominate Nine Oghuz tribes just at the beginning of independence war of Gok-Turks after fifty years of turmoil period. This was such a critical and strategic movement that Kutlug got morale, supplies and extra armed men (A.D.682) (Taşağıl, 2019, p.327). Therefore, we can see the importance of Nine Oghuz just merely even from this historical event. Sümer wrote about Baz Khagan as the ruler of Oghuzes (Nine Oghuz) who ordered to build a balbal scultpture on behalf of Kutlug (Sümer, 1999, p.33). This event should be investigated with an scientific eye due to fact at Nine Oghuzes already accepted Gok-Turk dominion as well as also losing most of the wars while forming of second Turk confederation. Furthermore, from Tekin’s evaluation Baz Khagan means “vassal khagan” due to the fact that old Turkish “baz” word means “vassal, dependent” (Tekin, p.394). There is a dilemma here with the nature of balbal custom.Under these circumstances as much as Baz (vassal) Khagan had a Gok-Turk khagan's balbal it is also very interesting how he owned the balbal of especially Kutlug Khagan. Another historical question in order to brainstorm that matter is how Kutlug Khagan died at the date of A.D.691?
132
On the other hand, from muslims perspective Uyghurs were Nine Oghuz (Sümer, 2019, p.31). But, from Sümer’s informations from Hudud’l-alem; Uyghurs again called as Nine Oghuz. However, Oghuz were told as separately from Nine Oghuz on the mentioned historical masterpiece (Sümer, 2019, p.40). Tatars were counted as within Nine Oghuz on the same historical source (Sümer, 2019, p.41). The thing is, Nine Oghuz tribes were the major population of first Uyghur State (Taşağıl, 2015, p.21). Even whileas reign of Kül Bilge, his son and successor Moyençor assigned to basbug (başbuğ) rank to Nine Oghuz communities (Sümer, 2007, p.325). It seems very similar with Gok-Turk Bilge Khagan's background as he was şad of Tardus tribes. In other words, we understand Moyençor thus gained management experience by governing nine tribes of Nine Oghuz. So, candidates of throne most probably were learning to handle every kind of management issue at Turk states in advance. Moreover, supports of Nine Oghuzes to Uyghurs brang a big advantage to new Uyghur State versus other biggest powers Basmils and Karluks (Taşağıl, 2020, p.13).
As we wrote before Toles clans from Tola river called as Nine Oghuz as of A.D.627 (Taşağıl, 2015, p.24). Sümer points out that Nine Oghuz people were resident at Tola river’s twisting part while heading of basin to north (Sümer, 2007, p.325). A.D.626 was the year of uprising of tribes resident at Tola river because of high tax policy of T’u-li at Eastern Gok-Turk State (Taşağıl, 2019, p.231). Those becoming Nine Oghuz tribes were; Bugu, Hun, Bayırku, Tongra, İzgil, Ch’i-pi, A-pu-sse, Ku-lun-wu-ku, Ediz (Taşağıl, 2015, p.24). This new organization was indeed a survival response of semi-nomadic tribal steppe life. They reorganized as Nine Oghuz union at the chaotic period of Eastern Gok-Turks and survived.
133
Nine Oghuz and next chronologically more older Oghuz tribes were different Turkish tribes. Dialect of their language was for instance, different (Pritsak, 1996, p.2). But Sümer says Oghuz tribe mentioned on Gok-Turk inscriptions were actually Nine Oghuz based on again inscriptions (Sümer, 2007, p.325). So Sümer counts early period of Oghuz tribe within together Nine Oghuz sub-clans with respect to Gok-Turk inscriptions (Sümer, 2007, p.325).
4.20. Basmil
Sümer stated that Bilge Khagan defined this Turkish tribe as “oğuşum budun” meaning my relatives (Sümer, 2014, p.11). On the other hand, at Aydın’s transcriptions the same phrase was written for Basmil Idok Kut, but not for all Basmil tribes (Aydin, 2019, p.89). Whether for only ruler of Basmil’s or all Basmil tribe; this words of Bilge Khagan were a clear evidence of tribal close ties. So, Basmils were counted directly from the core oğuş of khagan's himself by Bilge. This definition is very important in view of Basmil and A-shih-na relation.
Sümer also added that they were inhabitants of the city Beshbalik as of eighth century (Sümer, 2014, p.11).
Basmils were resident very far away from the center of Tang dynasty. Baikal Lake’s northern areas were their main homelands. He-man-t’o was their chief at Altaies and he sent his son as an emissary to Tang’s emperor T’ai-tsung. From that moment, China established Hsin-li province in order to include the land’s of He-man-t’o’s to its country. A.D.649 was the year (Taşağıl, 2019, p.260, p.272). According to Taşağıl’s informations from Tang’s historical sources of Chiu Tang Shu and Hsin Tang Shu He-man-t’o was the son of Ch’e-pi (Taşağıl, 2019, p.272). But again according to Taşağıl’s comparisons from T’ung Tien, he was in fact the
134
grandson of Ch’e-pi (Taşağıl, 2019, p.301). T’ung Tien was relatively more earlier source than the other above mentioned ones (Taşağıl, 2019, p.4). On the other hand the thing is; we understand that He-man-t’o actually was origined from A-shih-na tribe. A-shih-na Hola Bilge would be another further khagan of Basmils could be related with A-shih-na dynasty after Basmils revolt against II.Gok-Turk State (Taşağıl, 2019, p.70).
Due to the fact that after Uyghurs took control of central Otuken at A.D.745, Basmils was disappeared from Turkistan history. Aristov put an idea as, the reason of that was the tribe name Basmil's could had evoluted to a new name which was “Argın” by underlining that Argın means hybrid (Aristov, 2014, p.126). Aristov had showed “Basmül” word at Byzantium 's language that meant hybrid also. Arsitov underlined that Byzantium took this “Basmül” word from Gok-Turks without loosing its meaning at Central Turkistan (Aristov, 2014, p.127).
The next decades Uyghurs would found a state at Kao-ch’ang known as İdikut. İzgi remarked to that idikut title in order to take attention to Basmil root (İzgi,2017, p.130, p.271). Truly, once one of the Basmil khagan’s title was Idık Kut (Taşağıl, 2019, p.362). Very interesting that one of the sources of Tamir River’s had been known as Iduk Bas (Taşağıl, 2019, p.362).
According to Aristov, The Chu tribes of Sha-t’o Turks were actually cooperated with Basmils once since Basmils were resident at Beshbalik as of A.D.720 (Aristov, 2014, p.144). Therefore, there could have been said that there existed a Basmil confederation at the mentioned year. Beshbalik name came from “five cities” as meaning (Barthold, 2019, p.29). Barthold pointed the “Guçen” region as the exact location of Beshbalik city at eastward of eastern Turkistan (Barthold,
135
2019, p.29). From Aristov’s eye, when Uyghurs took control of Otuken and Basmils disappeared; Sha-t’o clan came up from whom did not accept Uyghur dominion from remaining parts of some masses of above mentioned Chu tribes (Aristov, 2014, p.144). The question is, could have Sha-t’o Turks form Chu tribes been a sub-tribe of Basmils?
Aristov opinion about Basmils was actually they were consisted of tribesmen from different descents. He showed Uyghur Karabalisagun Inscription as an evidence to his hypothesis. According to Aristov, on above mentioned inscription’s chinese part; Basmils consisted of totaly forthy sub-tribes including nine Uyghur tribe and three Karluk tribe (Aristov, 2014, p.127). Besides, Barthold states from European source of Du Cange, the meaning of Basmil name was “mixed originated person” (Barthold, 2019, p.29).
4.21. Argın
Aristov counted Argın tribe together with Nayman and Keraits at XIII.Century by noticing that they were Turks (Aristov, 2014, p.113). As Aristov informed from Yuan-shi, Argın tribe was classified in second of four list with together Kipchak, Kangli, Tangut, Ongut, Nayman in terms of tribes under Mongol Empire (Aristov, 2014, p.124). Aristov came to the outcome that Arguns (Argıns) were existing during Mongol era based on this historic registry. In accordance Aristov located them to the west of Naymans as an estimation in his mind (Aristov, 2014, p.124). Furthermore, Aristov put an idea that, Argın tribesmen had joined willingly to Cenghis Khagan due to the fact that there were no informations about them on the most ancient Mongol historical sources (Aristov, 2014, p.124). But the
136
most important and astonishing remark of Arsitov with Argın was; they were Basmil tribe directly itself on VII. and VIII.Century(Aristov, 2014, p.126).
According to Kasgari, the name of the domain from İsbicab till Balasagun was Argu (Şeşen, 2020, p.34).
Argın word means as hybrid(Aristov, 2014, p.127).
4.22. Bayırku
Eastern of them Pu-ku from the Toleses had settled. They were counted under Toles organisation as well. Even maybe they were quite active with respect to other Toleses. Taşağıl states that their lands were approximately 500 km widht (Taşağıl, 2018, p.67). From Taşağıl’s informing at T’ung Tien there is a record that they were living in prosperity in terms of wealth (Taşağıl, 2018, p.159). As we mentioned before above that İsakov refers from Grumm-Grjimaylo by writing; Barguts or Buryats were instrumental during emerging of Kirghiz society (İsakov, 2017, p.113). On the other hand, İsakov matches also ancestor’s of Bargut people, with Bayırku (İsakov, 2017, p.100). We would like to remind our question then here once again about, is Bayırku tribe the ancestor of Buryats?
Upon A.D.629 likewise Mongol tribes mentioned above, Bayırku groups applied to Tang’s China in order to accept their dominion with together proto-Mongol tribes as well as P’u-ku tribe so forth (Taşağıl, 2018, p.67). Because Eastern Gok-Turk State was losing its authority continuously at these years.
There was most probably a Sir Tardus’s ruling period for Bayırku tribe between A.D.629 till A.D.647 (Taşağıl, 2018, p.67). Later on they fully entered to Tang’s control.
137
As of A.D.682 new state of Turks emerged after Gok-Turks won a serie of wars against Tang dynasty with the leadership of Kutlug Khagan. Hence, second Gok-Turk State had been founded (Taşağıl, 2018, p.68). This were the moment again the tribal system of northern nations operated once again. Dozens of tribes came and willingly tied to second Turk confederation. Bayırku was one of them.
On the other hand unfortunately Bayırku name would be remembered with a tragic event in general Turkish history due to the fact that they ambushed one of the mightiest and the most successful khaganes, Kapgan. After twenty four years of generally succesful reign, Kapgan was killed with Bayırku hands. And a Chinese agent took his head in order to bring to center of China (Taşağıl, 2018, p.359-360).
During the fell of second Gok-Turk state, as İzgi indicates that; ledding by Uyghurs the tribes such as Uyghur, Ediz, Bayırku, P’u-ku, Tongra had been re-organised (İzgi, 2017, p,245). As we see here, when one of leading tribe weakened, other one would emerge sooner or later. This was the nature of tribal system.
According to Taşağıl's statements; they were good at tree craftsmanship. They were very good horse riders and iron miners. They were also shoemakers for shoes for ice walking purpose. Furthermore, They had been hunting deers (Taşağıl, 2018, p.69). Their ruler’s title was “Uluğ İrkin” (Sümer, 1999, p.21). They got nine sub-clans (Sümer, 1999, p.26).
4.23. Sabar
Although the very limited informations about Sabars, they left really great influences on culturel site such as the origin of general geographical name “Siberia” (Taşağıl, 2018, p.29). Additionaly, for significant amount of the Asian regions in Western Siberia had been origined from Sabars in terms of designations. At the
138
present time, around Tobols province some location designations look like very much to old Sabar names (Taşağıl, 2018, p.29).
Upon the migration of Huns at A.D.350, Sabars passed to the newly empty remained areas of Ili River as well as Jungaria (Czegledy, 1998, p.79).
Beginning from A.D.461, Sabars' had an remarkable emigration story which starting their intial movements reasoned by Juan Juan raids as well as ending with their pressure on Ogur masses (Taşağıl, 2018, p.29). As a result of that they arrived to the lands nearer to Tobol and Isim waters at eastern of south Urals (Taşağıl, 2018, p.29). Then, Avars pushed them till Caucasus. Later on, they had participated to western side of Gok-Turk State. Finally, They mixed with and became nucleus of Hazar Khanate’s (Taşağıl, 2018, p.29).
Sabars might have function whileas Western Gok-Turks marching to Kerc Strait. At least we clearly know that Sabars were one of the reasons of this mentioned military move (Taşağıl, 2019, p.41).
Sabars were known as best armor producers with the reputation of a sort of famous “Kubeçi (Zırıhgeran)” armor (Togan, 2019, p.31, p.595).
They had two important sub-clans called as Balangar and Semender (Czegledy, 1998, p.115).
4.24. Merkit
Merkits had a role while Cenghis Khagan’s emerging to the stage of history likehood the other tribes Naymans, Keraits, Tatars and so forth. Cenghis’es father Yesugai-bagatur had kidnapped Ho’elun who was the wife of Merkit Çiledu. In return, Merkits had captured the wife of Cenghis untill Cenghis rescued her (Temir,
139
2019, p.276). Merkits were always in fight with Cenghis and his tribesmen at the beginning. Merkits tried their last resistance with joining to Camuha’s forces. But at last they shared the same fate with Naymans. Last of the Merkit princes catched and killed at A.D.1205 (Temir, 2019, p.276). The people of Merkits entered to Mongol semi-nomadic confederation once and for all.
4.25. Celayir
Celayir was one of the most common dominant tribe of Mongols at XIII.Century. However, there still are strong arguments ongoing about their Turkish origin. Togan counted them as white Tatars (Togan, 1985, p.99).
There are countless records at Secret History of Mongols related their own high willingness in order to participate to Mongol confederation and Cenghis Khagan’s authority. According to Temir’s transcription right after the moment of Mongol rulers deciding to separate their ways with Camuha both in reality but also ironicaly fundamentally, they realized when the sunrised that some Celayir tribesmen had in fact followed them same as by walking all the night. This legendary moment was the covered confirmation of Mongol dominion as the leader of all tribes on behalf of Celayir (Temir, 2019, p.54).
Celayirs were such important on Mongol tribal system that they had got higher ranks relatively compared to others in the confederation. Arhai-hasar was Celayir origined person who was a major in the army as well as his Cenghis'es emissary duty in particular (Temir, 2019, p.254). Bala, Cebke and Buha were other majors in the army from Celayir tribe (Temir, 2019, p.151, p.230, p.254). At Cenghis’es army, there were ninty five majors responsible each for commading of one thousand men. Even this information shows us how important a rank of major
140
was for Mongols. Plus, Cenghis himself was thanking to the founders of the Mongol nation by promoting them to the rank of majör (Temir, 2019, p.134). Cenghis also assigned Celayir majors to the personal service of his son and brother (Temir, 2019, p.162). We understand that Celayirs were extra trustable and exclusive on Cenghis’es eye among even these totaly ninty five Mongol elite commanders.
On the other hand, Muhali from Celayir tribe was a major as well (Temir, 2019, p.237). Cebke was uncle of Muhali (Temir, 2019, p.66). But he was more than a major. He was one of the four bahadır of Cenghis. Furthermore, during Cenghis’es seven years long western campaign Muhali was remained at center of state with full power as representing Cenghis. Meanwhile he was also assigned top responsible for ongoing military operation at Korea (Temir, 2019, p.141, p.237). This interpretation would not have been exaggerated: Muhali was perhaps the most reliable fellow of Cenghis whom was a Celayir man.
4.26. Uyghur
Uyghurs were one of the most important active tribes of Turks that we also told a lot about them hereby thesis in various topics. Therefore, this part we did not see any reason to repeat the same informations. However we would like to put some remarkable highlights in particular about them here by with a different Uyghur chapter.
Uyghurs wereone of the most oldest Turkish tribes cause they had been detected inside Kangli tribes (Taşağıl, 2020, p.7). That means they were the part of huge Kangli confederation (Taşağıl, 2020, p.11). During that period of old Turks, Uyghurs first entity were knows as Yüan-ho (Taşağıl, 2020, p.27). When we look over to Turkistan tribes lifespan, the dates A.D.534 and A.D.627 were thresholds of
141
serious evolutions in parallel with tribe system (Taşağıl, 2020, p.11). At A.D.534 Kangli confederation evolved to Toleses (Taşağıl, 2020, p.11). Then as of A.D.605 Yüan-ho became Wei-ho within Toles confederation (Taşağıl, 2020, p.27). Thereafter at A.D. 627 around one century passed Toleses evolved to Nine Oghuz confederation (Taşağıl, 2015, p.24). Upon arise of Sir Tarduses, fate of Uyghurs and Nine Oghuz tribes connected much more tighter than ever.Also another remarkable information from Uyghurs was they had got a woman ruler named as Pi-li-tu more than fiftheen years between A.D.664-A.D.680 (Taşağıl, 2020, p.28). This was a great example of place and influence of women at higher ranks at Turks. Uyghurs were inside Gok-Turk confederation naturally as other Turkish tribes did at first. But actually they were also a confederation with the assemble of clans under their rule.
Uyghurs were defined as Hui-ho at Chinese sources (Ögel, 1951, p.363). Taşağıl also detected Wei-ho as mentioned above and Wei-wu-er (Taşağıl, 2020, p.25). When Uyghur State founded at Otuken territory at A.D.745, all other Turkish tribes accepted willingly their leadership (Ögel, 1951, p.364). Ögel was informing that information from Karabalisagun Inscription directly (Ögel, 1951, p.364). From our eye, this a very clear evidence of how tribe system of Turkish nations functioning when it is necessary.
Turgis tribe controlled On-Ok(Ten Arrow) around A.D.744 under İl Etmiş Kutlug Bilge (Salman, 1989, p.64). We understand from the title İl Etmiş that obviously Turgis leader’s reputation was the state founder. The matter of fact that at the same years another Turkish state arised. That state was Uyghur State. And the founder of this state was Kutlug Bilge Kül Khagan (Taşağıl, 2020, p.32). And the thing is here, from Taşağıl’s transcriptions at chinese sources, he was ruling ten tribes (Taşağıl, 2020, p.31-32). Those were most probably Ten Uyghurs (Taşağıl,
142
2020, p.32). However, what if those were not Ten Uyghurs but instead Ten Arrows. Because Ten Arrows also consisted of ten tribes. In addition, both leades reputations were state founder leader. Plus, their name also same Kutlug. Furthermore, they both were pinpoint contemporary which was as of A.D.744. Therefore could these both important rulers be same person? In other words, could Kutlug Bilge Kül Khagan and İl Etmiş Kutlug Bilge be the same person? Because, Uyghurs also became dominion naturally at Turgis lands as soon as they got control of Mongolia due to fact of legacy of Gok-Turk Empire. Thus, TenArrows literally should tied to Otuken and sources could imply indeed same person very naturally.
Uyghurs were counted in fact as one of the nine of Nine Oghuz tribes (Ögel, 1951, p.377). But also totally all Nine Oghuz were Uyghurs in fact (Ögel, 1951, p.377). Aristov leads with his comment us to ask a very remarkable question that: why at Orkhon inscriptions there is no Uyghur subject existing but Nine Oghuz did (Aristov, 2014, p.39). Aristov's explanation is like; because most probably they were same (Aristov, 2014, p.39). As mentioned above on Nine Oghuz section, Nine Oghuz tribes were the major population of first Uyghur State (Taşağıl, 2015, p.21).
Briefly, according to Togan, Uyghurs were inside Nine Oghuz tribes. But Uyghurs themselves had got nine tribes also calles as Nine Oghuz (Togan, 2019, p.620). In reference to Taşağıl, those nine tribes were: “Yaglakar, Hu-tu-ku, Hu (Chiou-lo-wu=Kürebir), Küremür, Mo-ko-hsi-chi (Bagasıgır), A-wu-ch’e (Ebirçeg veya Abırçak), Hu-wus-su, Yo-wu-ku (Yagmurkar), Hsi-ye-wu (Ayavire/Ayabire = Ayamur/Aymur)” (Taşağıl, 2020, p.26).
143
A.D.840 first after the fell of first Uyghur State, some Uyghur tribesmen migrated to Tarim Basin as well as joining later on to Karakhanid State (Taşağıl, 2015, p.21). Some moved to fertile Kansu region (Taşağıl, 2015, p.21).
Southern limits of their influence zone at Turkistan in their long life more or less were detected by researchers. Nevertheless, the northern furthest frontiers of Uyghurs cultural, and political domain have not been detected well yet (Taşağıl, 2020, p.138).
4.27. Tolengut
In reference to Togan, Tolengut as word meaning represents slave (Togan, 1985, p.99). As Togan informed that, Tolenguts have survived till twentieth century with their Turkish language (Togan, 1985, p.99). Tolenguts still today exist with protecting their Turkish life styles as we learned from Taşağıl's informations about them at Ulagan Gorno-Altaysk (Taşağıl, 2017, p.51, p.53). According to Aristov, the Tolengut name originated from Tele when removing the last short suffix “it” (Aristov, 2017, p.97). In other words we can say as Toles based on Aristov’s this remark. This suffix was coming from Mongolian in fact (Aristov, 2017, p.97). So the Tele-ut name became Tolengut by time.
4.28. Yagma
Due to estimations, Yagmas arrived to northwestern sides of Taklamakan desert southern areas of Narin river about second half of ninth century (Sümer, 2019, p.54, map). They were neigbours of Caruk Turks. They could have ties with Bulak tribe as well (Sümer, 2019, p.54-55). Sümer had claimed that Karakhanid dynasty origin was depending on Yagma Turks based on to the khagan title of their ruler Bugra (Sümer, 2019, p.56). Sümer did not stay there either, by saying Karluks did
144
not found Karakhanid State. His opinion was that, Yagmas founded mentioned Turkish state (Sümer, 2019, p.74). Yagma’s dynasty root was from originally Uyghurs (Sümer, 2019, p.74). Barthold wrote as also Nine Oghuz with together Uyghurs instead of only Uyghurs about Yagma people’s origin (Barthold, 2019, p.60).
Sümer also maked a link between the names Black Yagmas and Turkish Kara word which means black from the name Karakhanid. Plus, Sümer also draw attention onto the close location of Kashgar city and Yagma lands (Sümer, 2019, p.76). So, all signs for Sümer shows us the relation with Yagma tribe and Turkish Karakhanid State. Sümer underlined that the title khagan was a unique title seen common at Karakhanids and Yagmas (Sümer, 2019, p.76). Barthold says, Kasgar had been belonged to Yagma tribe (Barthold, 2019, p.60).
Hududu’l-alem tells us for about Yagmas that their high fur production level but less farmings (Şeşen, 2020, p.68). He also informs from some rumors that Yagmas could possibly had 1700 sub-clans (Şeşen, 2020, p.68). Plus, he gave “bulak” clan name living inside Uyghur confederation as being from Yagmas intrinsically (Şeşen, 2020, p.68).
Yagmas had been speaking the most real Turkish language (Sümer, 1999, p.46). This type of Turkish had been known as Hakani dialect (Sümer, 1999, p.46). Sümer was amazed about this Hakani dialect sameness with Tohsi tribe due to the fact that both tribes originally different (Sümer, 1999, p.46). Yagmas were from Uyghurs. However, Tohsi were Karluk (Sümer, 1999, p.51). Then, Sümer asks rightly, how did they speak same dialect (Sümer, 1999, p.51)? We ask the same question.
145
4.29. Yaglakar
Yaglakar tribe was the tribe of main Uyghur ruler dynasty’s family tribe (Clauson, 2017, p.38). In Chinese sources Yao-lo-ko word represented Yaglakar tribe (Ögel, 1951, p.362). Yaglakar governing control had ended as of A.D.795 on Uyghur State (İsakov, 2017, p.17). The next ruler was from Ediz tribe (Taşağıl, 2020, p.15). That meant that Nine Oghuz tribesmen got control the management of the state at that moment. As seems that; due to the apparent lack of experience right after this Yaglakars' withdrawal event, new rulers could not protect stability of state on the next decades.
Togan counts Yaglakar under Toles confederation as five Toleses. Some of these tribes were Yaglakar, Busgut, Kürabör, Korbar (Togan, 2019, p.609). Clauson had transmitted from Stael-Hoelstein that as of A.D.925 Yaglakars was the dominion clan of Toles tribe (Clauson, 2017, p.38). Moreover Clauson paid attention to the obtaining again their influential administrative place of Turk tribes in light of joining to an another confederation fromthis Yaglakar example (Clauson, 2017, p.38). No doubt that was an ability of Turk tribe system.
4.30. Shih-wei
Their homeland was south territories of Amur River (İsakov, 2017, p.29). They were residential at the North of Khitans during Gok-Turk era by having five sub-clans as Shih-wei, North Shih-wei, Po Shih-wei, Şen-mo-ta Shih-wei, Big Shih-wei (İsakov, 2017, p.30). In reference to Yıldırım here; also Shih-wei could have got 25 tribes (Yıldırım, 2015, p.89).
Proto-Mongol Tung-hu has a mass of Hei-ch’e-tze Shih-wei of meaning Black carts' Shih-wei who were successors of Ting-lings (İsakov, 2017, p.30).
146
İsakov remarks from Taskin’s transcriptions on Chinese sources that: “Shih-wei were an arm of Khitans. Most probably was Ting-ling blood” (İsakov, 2017, p.54).
Salon tribe was close resident with Shih-wei along Khingan (Kadırgan) Mountains (İsakov, 2017, p.54). Salon and Shih-wei tribes mentioned together at Manas legend as well (İsakov, 2017, p.55). At Manas legend, they have been referred as a mongolian speak folk such as Salon, Kithay and Tırgoot (İsakov, 2017, p.56). Shih-wei people mixed with Khitan population as of IX.Century (İsakov, 2017, p.56).
4.31. Kurikan
Furi and Kuri were the other names of this tribe (Sümer, 1999, p.27).
Kurikans were one of the most mentioned tribes at Gok-Turk inscriptions. At Kül Tigin inscription, they had been mentioned as “Üç Kurıkan” by most probably emphasising three sub-clans of Kurikan tribe in the phrases related about the participant to the funereal ceremony of founder Khagan of Gok-Turks (Aydın, 2019, p.52). Sümer thinks three Kurikans were in fact Mongol originally (Sümer, 1999, p.27). They were residential at western lands of Baikal Lake (Ögel, 2020, p.205). Their territories were reaching to old Yakut Turks, in other words Sahas’ lands at the northest (Ögel, 2020, p.205). So, according to Ögel, they were a cultural transitive actor among all Turkish tribes by being right at the middle between the lands from Altais and Sayans till Yakut regions (Ögel, 2020, p.205).
They had been owning wonderful special horses (Ögel, 2020, p.205). The manes of the horses were typical unique shaped like the ones of Huns’, Kirghizes’ and Gok-Turks’ (Ögel, 2020, p.205). They also were mounting the same horse three people of together sometimes (Ögel, 2020, p.206). They also were riding on endemic
147
reindeer (Ögel, 2020, p.206). They left a lot of valuable rock paintings to us about to understand their cultures. On these paintings, there were carts pulled by horses, in line (Ögel, 2020, p.206). Ögel matched these carts with Kao-ch’e’s carts (Ögel, 2020, p.207). In other words, with Kangli tribes. They were taming dogs and were using sleds with dogs (Ögel, 2020, p.207). They had boats for rivers, and tents similar with the Hun ones (Ögel, 2020, p.207). Furthermore, As understood from Ögel’s statements; apparently they were skillful about lasso rope tool, making use of not only for horses and deer, but also for human (Ögel, 2020, p.207-208). They were also skillful hunters (Ögel, 2020, p.208).
4.32. Other Tribes Mentioned at Sources
Kerait, Kimek, Mo-ho, Tangut, Oyrat, Kongrat, Ezgis, Caruk (Sümer, 1999, p.31), Tarbin, Ograk (Sümer, 1999, p.31), Barulas (Mongol) (Temir, 2019, p.269), Bulak (Elke Bulak), Meng-wu-Chu-Wa-chie-tse as İsakov transmits from Taşağıl by saying Meng-wus and Shih-weis could have link (İsakov, 2017, p.21,p.23), Tatabi, Kıştıms and Tummats (İsakov, 2017, p.80-81), Tikins (İsakov, 2017, P.71), Tu-hun (Taşağıl, 2019, p.386), Baarin (Mongol) (Temir, 2019, p.269), Hsi-ju (Onat et. al.,2020, p.49, p.120), Ku-hsi (Onat et. al.,2020, p.51), Hsi Hou (Onat et. al.,2020, p.60), Igrek (Togan, 2019, p.41), Cigrek (Togan, 2019, p.41).
148
5. TRIBE TAMGAS AND ARCHEOLOGICAL FINDINGS
Tamgas were basically specific characters authentic to steppe lands of which some distinctive special symbols mainly used by every clan to understand the other clans' possesions namely to enable recognization by other clans in order to identify the goods, livestock, tents, carts, coins, weapons, tribesmen, horses, so forth. Tamgas in fact were the items of tribe system at steppe lands in order to set the daily life. Besides tamgas were the items of unwritten code of laws of contracts at steppe lands during establishment of states as well as in tribe relations. These unique symbols represent alot to us to understand nomadic and semi-nomadic ancient history of Turkistan. They are very remarkable part of tengible cultural elements. By that, they tell political history to us. Furthermore their clear places on almost every kind of archeological remains opens a way of reading Central Asia nation’s spiritual culture. So thanks to tamgas as they gave us so much information about finding traces of old Turks, Mongols and Tatars. Tamgas were perfect solutions of lining borders of every kind of political, economic, cultural, social relations and contracts for tribes at all.
As we mentioned before Tamgacı was a profession at old Turks due to the fact that “the person who was dealing with damgas called as Tamgacı” (Halaçoğlu, 1993, p.455). Also we mentioned before about two Turgis tamgacı people who participated to funeral of Kul Tegin (Aydin, 2019, p.68). With the purpose of paying attention to A-shih-na and Turgis relation in terms of tamgas; we would like to emphasis again this historical event once again hereby.
Şirin states that, “Aristov and Mallitskiy claimed that Gok-Turk writing emerged from Turkish tamgas” (Şirin, 2020, p.30). Şirin added also Sokolov’s hypothesis as; “Gok-Turk writings was a mixture of Arami writing and tamgas”
149
(Şirin, 2020, p.30). Besides, Aydın also remarks same important judgement of Aristov and Malliotakis above mentioned common evaluation; namely based on runik alphabeth’s origin could have influenced from tamgas (Aydın, 2019, p.20). Moreover an Uyghur originated tamgacı person was the Uyghur alphabet teacher of Cenghis Khagan (Barthold, 2019, p.105). Apparently, tamgas had such a revolutionary big role on the develop of ancient Turkish written language.
We understand from Rogozhinskys’s and Cheremisin’s words especially for tamgas on immovable objects versions that tamgas have been acting like the password codes of history for researchers in sense of detection of furthest extent of frontiers of ancient Turkistan tribes, clans, nations for instance (Rogozhinsky & Cheremisin, 2019, p.49, p.51). From Arhangai to Yenisey as well as till Chu valley; if when Yaglakar tribe's tamga was tracked; their sign could have been observed on the archeological findings and monuments of which makes Uyghur territories apparent to us (Rogozhinsky & Cheremisin, 2019, p.51). Plus, again according to analyze of same mentioned researchers, we can track traces of migrations habits of the tribes as well (Rogozhinsky & Cheremisin, 2019, p.49).
Şeşen’s statements’s from Mahmud Kasgari’s Divanı Lugati't-Turkat Oghuzes every tribe had its own tamgas on their livestock and they were recognizing themselves by those tamgas (Şeşen, 2020, p.34).
There was tax called as “Tamga” during Yuan Mongol era known as “damga vergisi” in Turkish, taken from merchants (İsakov, 2017, p.149). What was the reason of the name of this tax as “Tamga”? Halaçoğlu remarks based on Yenisey inscriptions that at Kirghiz communities, there was a “tamgalık yılkı” words related with a taxation period (Halaçoğlu, 1993, p.454).
150
Historians today can able to detect whether a tribe Turk or Mongol by tamgas at old times. Or Mongolization among old Turks in history can be detectable as well by same way (Taşağıl, 2020, min.16).
In view of medieval times at Central Asia region for in particular Altais, Mongolia and Kazakhstan totally fifty different tamgas had been detected with some versions in each (Rogozhinsky & Cheremisin, 2019, p.49).
Lets look to the significant tamga symbols per some tribes below;
 From Dobrovits’ work;
A-shih-na 
A-shih-te 
(Dobrovits, 2014, p.258)
Dobrovits pointed out to a very important remark that as a dynasty A-shih-na has a different tamga rather than as its own tribe's tamga (Dobrovits, 2014, p.258);
A-shih-na dynasty  A-shih-na tribe  (Dobrovits, 2014, p.258).
Aydın remarks that at Ongi inscription, there two A-shih-na tamgas together were stated as of one looks like snake (Aydın, 2019, p.120). Namely, we understand that in this case both above tamgas were carved on Ongi inscription.
 From Battulga’s findings below; we see a very clear tamga of A-shih-na dynasty (Battulga, 2001, p.58). This inscription had been discovered at “İh biçigt” at Gobi-Ugtaal province of Mongolia (Battulga, 2001, p.48). The exiciting thing is there is also Tonyukuk monument’s tamga and one of the most common tamgas of
151
Turks hook tamga all together side by side standing (Battulga, 2001, p.48). What could that those tamgas together symbolising? What is the thousand year’s mystic message? We know that Tonyukuk was on duty with a very strong position during three mighty khagans of Gok-Turks: Kutlug, Kapgan, Bilge. What could hook tamga mean? Because, below we see that one tamga is A-shih-na and if we assume one tamga is related with A-shih-te in light of founder tribes; there should have been another clan as important as these two founder tribes as well with its hook tamga.
Figure 6
Inscription of “İh biçigt” (Battulga, 2001, p.58).
Note. By Battulga, T., (2001), Moğolistan’da Yeni Bulunan Göktürk Yazıtlarıi,Türk Dil Kurumu Türk Dili Araştırmaları Yıllığı-Belleten 2000, 786, 47-58.
 From Rogozhinsky’s and Cheremisin’s work;
Yaglakar dynasty  (Rogozhinsky & Cheremisin, 2019, p.49, p.50).
152
 Basmil tribe 
Taşağıl had introduced a very important archeological finding to the world of science containing Basmil tribes’ tamgas (Miras Coğrafyalar Belgeseli, 2019, Section 4 min.9-11). According to Taşağıl, this inscription was erected on behalf of memory of a Turkish princess around A.D.734-735 on the spot she passed away at northern Gobi Desert. These Tamgas are tamgas of Basmil tribes. Tasagil emphasised that this represents us the high value of women at old Turks’ (Miras Coğrafyalar Belgeseli, 2019, Section 4 min.10).
Figure 7
Ahmet TAŞAĞIL with Bumbugur Inscription at Bayanhongor province Mongolia.
Note. By Miras Coğrafyalar 4. Bölüm. (2019, March 27).TRT Avaz [YouTube channel]. (Dan. Ahmet Taşağıl). YouTube.
153
 Shivat Ulan Site 
The evidence of one of the greatest semi-nomad coalitons in history. The stone document of the renewedly arise of Gok-Turks. The function of Tamgas as a tribal contract.
Figure 8
Obelisk with tamgas - Shivat Ulan Site
Photo by N. Bazylkhan (Rogozhinsky & Cheremisin, 2019, p.57).
Note. By Rogozhinsky, A. & Cheremisin, D.V., (2019), The Tamga Signs of the Turkic Nomads in the Altai and Semirechye: Comparisons and Identifications,
154
Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia, 47. 48-59. 10.17746/1563-0102.2019.47.2.048-059. https://www.researchgate.net/
Figure 9
Lion monument - Shivat Ulan Site
Note. By Zaman Yolcusu. (2019, September 25).Türklerin İzinde/Göktürklerin İlk Tapınağı(Sun. Ahmet Yeşiltepe)[Video]. Ntv[YouTube channel].YouTube.
155
Figure 10
Lion monument with A-shih-na dynasty tamga - Shivat Ulan Site
Note. By Zaman Yolcusu. (2019, September 25).Türklerin İzinde/Göktürklerin İlk Tapınağı(Sun. Ahmet Yeşiltepe)[Video]. Ntv[YouTube channel].YouTube.
 Balasagun Site 
Tamgas are separated into two from a general accepted scientific view. Those two different tamga observations were immovable and portable type archeological objects such as petroglyphs, temple buildings, coins, items of horses so forth (Rogozhinsky & Cheremisin, 2019, p.49). However, apparently here below there was another historical archeological source of Tamgas; which are constructions of tamga architectures directly itself. This below omega type constructive structures are located at the center of Balasagun (Zaman Yolcusu Belgeseli, 2017). From our eye, those structures could most probably be tamgas. The most important thing is; we
156
think based on this evidence that; the founder tribe of Karakhanid State, could be the tribe who had omega tamga. In other words, which had the tribes of Karluk, Cigil, Yagma or Tohsi, used omega tamga? Once we detect this, we will no doubt reach to an very clear outcome about the founder tribe of Karakhanid State.
Figure 11
Omega type historical structures – Balasagun site
Note. By Zaman Yolcusu. (2019, July 10), Türklerin İzinde/Kasgar ve Balasagun(Sun. Ahmet Yeşiltepe)[Video]. Ntv[YouTube channel].YouTube.
Kirghiz tribe According to İsakov's informings of from the Kirghiz historian Attokurov the Kirghiz state tamga was: (İsakov, 2017, p.18).
157
 Oghuz confederation 
Figure 12
Tamgas of Oghuz Tribes
Note. From the classification of Halaçoğlu based on Mahmud Kasgari and Residuddin: (Halaçoğlu, 1993, p.454). By Halaçoğlu, Y., (1993), Damga Maddesi, TDV İslam Ansiklopedisi.
https://cdn2.islamansiklopedisi.org.tr/dosya/8/C08003199.pdf
158
6. CHINESE REPORTS AND SOME INSTRUMENTS OF CHINESE TO WITHSTAND AGAINST TRIBE SYSTEM
Actually Chinese were aware of power of tribal structures of northern nations very well.
Chinese dynasties always sent emissaries to neighbourhood countries and northern Central Asia to make alliances, to understand well their opponent states, to understand the cultures and life styles, to learn their skills, to collect all kind of informations and for spying purposes in general.
China naturally had some advantages at its own. China used very well all these advantages in order to manage to divide tribe system.
One of the instruments was ofcourse silk. China used silk product very well during implementing its strategies on northern nations as this is an unique fabric only could found in China at old times. Silk is very less weight and carried very easily but very expensive so to carry an expensive good such so easily brings a lot of advantages to China. Golden defines the status of silk at ancient times for Central Asia as an “international currency”as well as emphasising silk’s diplomatic role (Golden, 2014, p.70). Golden underlined also: “Turks’ became unique silk traders by the training of Sogdians” (Golden, 2014, p.70). Therefore, Turks and Sogdians had needed silk in order to trade at silk road. China was the main supplier. Turks and the Sogdians were the traders (Golden, 2014, p.70). China used this advantage. For that reason, there are some stories at history about several attempts for leaking silk cocoon from China to outwards, in order to cultivate silk out of China (Golden, 2014, p.90).
159
Another effective instrument for Chinese was marriages. Chinese dynasties had prefered to utilize from marriages to strengthen diplomatic relations with nomadic nothern nations and by this expected to apply its strategies in order to operate their long term disruptive plans, towards tribes. Ho-ch’in named mentioned application was done between Han dynasty and Huns many times (Onat et. al.,2020). From Onat, Orsoy and Ercilasun's statements; Ho means peace and harmony, ch'in means kinship (Onat et. al.,2020, p.110). Ho-ch’in agreement became a way of Chinese dynasties in general to implement their political targets. The Han emperor Wu-ti for instance arranged a marriage of a chinese princess with Wusun king in purpose to break Hun and Wusun alliance (Onat et. al.,2020, p.31). Seven of thirteen Uyghur khagans got married with Chinese women (Taşağıl, 2020, p.138).
One interesting historical event related with Huns showing Chinese behaviours about their engagements against other neighbour state parties in the sense of honesty was about a painting done by artist Mao. Mao was drawing women’s portraits living in palace for the purpose of emperor’s selection of his partner at that moment. The thing is, he was not doing this job without a bribe. Once a woman naming Wang did not pay anything to Mao for her picture. Mao got furious and made her portrait ugly on the picture so she were unable to be an option for the emperor. Consequently when Huns had demanded a Chinese princess for marriage, emperor of China decided to send Wang to them cause she was already ugly due to the picture. But in reality, they sent a pretty woman to Huns cause Wang actually quite beautiful unlike emperor’s misleaded opnion which had been understood too late (Eberhard, 2019, p.118).
As we mentioned in detail at geography section of hereby our thesis, rice was another instrument. Here is one of the reports of a Chinese emissary coming back
160
from Gok-Turk lands from Taşağıl’s statements: “Northern foreigners’ nations strength can be learned in line with their livestock numbers. At the moment at Gok-Turk animals are weak, the society starving, this shows us the fell of state would be soon, therefore within three years Gok-Turk state would fall.” (Tasagil, 2019, p.98).
China dynasties had occasionally tried to analyze tribe system of Turks to solve their abilities. They tried to put agents inside Turks to understand the tribes better.
The Chinese emissary Chang Sun Sheng was reporting to the emperor of China that, “The tribes in Gok-Turk lands are out of order at the moment and if Chi-min Khagan had been sent to his own lands the tribes for sure gather under his leadership” (Taşağıl, 2019, p.70). That is very clear that Chang Sun Sheng was aware of very well the importance of the system and organization behind Gok-Turk state depending on these tribes.
Ögel commented as that, when Uyghur’s accepted Chinese sovereignity during T’u-mi-tu’s rule, thus Chinese reorganized Uyghur clans into eleven separate governerships, Chinese considered the structure of Uyghur’s tribe organisation (A.D.646) (Ögel, 1951, p.362).
Holding hostage was a general implementation for Han dynasty. Chinese demands frequently some important figures from Huns in order to hold them in palace as a guarantee (İzgi, 2017, p.103; Onat et. al.,2020, p.71, p.94). Also Huns responded as withholding some envoy delegations as well as generals so forth (Onat et. al.,2020, p.32, p.41). This method applied from both sides to diminish commercial concerns and to secure peace treaties. Forthcoming new merchandises had been arriving with a new hostage and the previous hostage had been returning
161
with Chinese goods to Huns (İzgi, 2017, p.103). Of course, there were some political targets about holding hostages. Emperor Wang mang had executed the hostage of Huns; who were also the son of Ch’an-yu (Onat et. al.,2020, p.88, p.95).
Chinese dynasties from time to time established big trade market places in order to take attention of northern semi-nomadic nations at the borders. Those markets had been closed or opened due to Chinese strategy (Golden, 2014, p.35). Golden thinks that by doing that the goal of Chinese were to control nomad nations’ behaviours by the help of trade centers (Golden, 2014, p.35).
162
7. PRINCIPALS AND ADVANTAGES OF TRIBAL ORGANIZATION
When we look in particular to Turks, Mongols and Tatars in Turkistan during medieval, primarily we would definetly observe their ability to survive from generation to generation. Plus, they also protect their tengible and spirutual cultural characteristics. Moreover, they developed their cultures and spread it to all over the Asia continend and then influenced Europe. These mentioned nations above has changed the World history.
At that point lets look to the words of Colin Mcevedy about Turk conquests at historical world’s stage till XV.Century as follows “If we consider that the age’s population trends were opposite; that was a very important success” he says while describing Turkish groups' achievements; by using very logical parameter such as population disadvantage (Mcevedy, 2018, p.10). Sure, he was right and Taşağıl is giving the tribe system as answer by underlining that this system had enabled Turks to spread all over the lands from Korea to Central Europe, Egypt till India. (Taşağıl, 2018, min.10). These words are crystal clear that the reason behind is that; the unique the only of its kind this healthy tribal organizations. Let's see Tonyukuk words to understand the ratio of populations with China from Sümer’s statements: “We are one percent of Chinese” he says while opposing to construct permanent settlements (Sümer, 2019, p.7). Tonyukuk's magnificent analyze reveals us, tribe system was the answer for being able to survive due to the fact that this unbalanced difference of populations. As Aristov stated that the old Turkish states that core nucleus of a Turkish state is the strongest tribe of which rulling all other tribes that the leader gathers all relatives of his own tribe around by granting them with
163
important positions of the state. Also he underlined that to be a part of tribe is the most important subject for a nomad in his/her life (Aristov, 2014, p.26).
Great empires of Central Asia nations was depending on rigid confederations consisting of a lot of tribes and their sub-tribes. Welfare gained only by the cooperation of tribes in eachother. When this network succeeded well, then the state very soon could become world’s strongest as we mentioned hereby the examples. Such as Kapgan’s main policy was to embed the tribes back into his state from Chinese control and he achieved that (Taşağıl, 2019, p.346-347). Once he achieved this, Gok-Turks lived one of its brightest eras. Kapgan Khagan knew very well the importance of tribe system.
Especially for Turks; tribal organization was by itself a network widely penetrated to whole realm of domain covering all tribes with their sub-tribes. Skeleton of state had been installing on that firm structure. The Turkish community was depending on social mechanism consisting of Ogus (Oğuş), Urug (Uruğ), Boy, Bodun (Budun) and İl (Taşağıl, 2020, p.202). According to Taşağıl; Ogus was family, Urug was the union of families, Boy was the entire tribe itself, Bodun was the union of tribes and il was the state or empire (Taşağıl, 2020, p.202). Bey or Beg was the leader of tribe for Turks in general (Taşağıl, 2020, p.202). Sümer explains “il” also as extra “el” by showing “Oğuz eli” as an example (Sümer, 2007, p.329). For Sümer, il or el was representing the ethical and political unions of tribes (Sümer, 2007, p.329). In addition, Sümer emphasises additionally that the word also had begun to represent either the folk and the country (Sümer, 2007, p.329). Therefore, Oğuz eli meant also the domains of Oghuz's realm. Again Sümer says tribes were consisting of union of oymak or oba named sub units (Sümer, 2007, p.329). Thus, Urug and Oymak(Oba) had the same organizational function. But, as we mentioned
164
at Oghuz section above before; from Şeşen’s transcriptions; at Mahmud Kasgari 's masterpiece Divanı Lugati't-Turk; the word “Oba” meant tribe at Oghuz language as well as the word “kend” meant village (Şeşen, 2020, p.34-35). From Ahmetbeyoğlu’s statements that; “İl was consisting of four core factors: Oksızlık (independency), Uluş (country), Kün (folk), Töre (Law)” (Ahmetbeyoğlu, 2020, p.30). In compliance with Ahmetbeyoğlu; Turks whose self-sustaining had existed with an organized tribal structure, was regulating life and the state with Töre (Ahmetbeyoğlu, 2020, p.30). According to Ahmetbeyoğlu’s informings from Divanı Lugati't-Turk; “Töre was unwritten law” and “İl could leave but Töre stays” (Ahmetbeyoğlu, 2020, p.42). Namely, Töre could not be destroyable. It was a deep secretive power of Turkish tribes. Töre was sort of obstacle in order to balance khagan’s authority. Balanced justice setup for both khagan and Turkish community by the help of Töre, had managed to stop system's creating dictators (Ahmetbeyoğlu, 2020, p.39). Töre could be updated as well due to new circumstances. But also it has very definite rules (Ahmetbeyoğlu, 2020, p.42). Sustainability of state was in accordance with Töre’s adoption (Ahmetbeyoğlu, 2020, p.42).
According to Golden, every person of the same tribe were depending their origin to a common imaginary ancestor (Golden, 2014, p.36). However when a bodun is concerned, this time all the belonging tribes were linking themselves to another common outer ancestor (Golden, 2014, p.36). In this case, tribes were organizing under a system of a cult ancestores subsets. In other words, the tribes had the ability to build up imaginary spiritual but tight networks.
The smallest structure of tribes were families which were oguş as we mentioned above. There were unwritten code of laws regulating oguş lifes based on customs and traditions (Kurtoğlu, 2019, p.1). The semi-nomadic states of Turks left
165
these unwritten laws independently which caused a standardized oguş code of laws over all Turk communities (Kurtoğlu, 2019, p.1). As a result of that, we can say that every oguş and uruğ were independent at inner relations but tied to great khagan Ch’an-yu of the state on their foreign relations. To join to annual population census of people and livestock for all tied nomadic tribes was an example of a generally central state supremacy (Golden, 2014, p.58). Golden also confirms this autonomous independency while defining Huns as an imperial confederation of bodun and tribes (Golden, 2014, p.58). This situation no doubt would create a happy national social structure by sort of management initiative at their daily lives under state protection. At ancient Turks, every oğuş member had been gaining a different title due to her/his kinship position in the family (Kurtoğlu, 2019, p.9). Although kinships had consisted of by real blood ties, inter uruğs and inter tribal kinships were implemented by drinking blood of eachothers' members (Kurtoğlu, 2019, p.10). The reason of this application was indeed to strengthen inter tribal relations with other tribes by establishing artificial kinship (Kurtoğlu, 2019, p.10). So, all these rules were serving to design a big rigid but also flexible clan network.
Basic advantages of this above mentioned unique tribal structure were briefly; first of all a healthy tribe coalition could produce very large armies in a very short time, had ability to migrate, had ability to spread around and later regroup again, had ability to found bigger states even empires.
Lets understand the tribe system from Taşağıl’s analyze from his words directly as :
“From current main mass of community one tribe strengented, bonded other tribes to itself and become political establishment. This is the style of foundation of
166
steppe Turkish states. The main mass of population on the other hand continues to live itself. Here, this mentioned main mass was the group of tribes” (Taşağıl, 2015, p.22). According to Taşağıl, Ting-Ling, Ogur, Kao-ch’e-Kangli, Töles before A.D.627, Türgis, Nine Oghuz, Karluk, Kipchak were the main inclusive mass of tribe groups for medieval Turkish states and empires (Taşağıl, 2015, p.22).
Clauson compared the structure of tribal organisations to the toys in the kindergarden (Clauson, 2017, p.26). Accordingly, every toy group is a different crowded oğuş or a clan itself. At first the name of source tribe was same with its founder’s name. Source tribes would get bigger in time and at last would split into smaller clans. Every new tribe would gain a new name for itself and eventually the old source tribe’s name would cover them all (Clauson, 2017, p.26). From our eye, this definition indeed the way of becoming a confederation for the lifespan of tribes. Clauson continues by stating later on, as soon as the political systems developed at the next pages of the history calendar, also those source tribes turned into dynasties (Clauson, 2017, p.26). Then Clauson gives the example of in stead of an untidy kindergarden room with toys, all toys were tidied under a toy group. So, this core toy group was the dynasty (Clauson, 2017, p.26). Hence, all toys could be gathered again and again under different toy groups while tidying untidy kindergarden rooms (Clauson, 2017, p.26). So, we see here that reformable character of toy groups had been matched with tribe system by Clauson very wisely (Clauson, 2017, p.26).
According to Kurtoğlu, when population increased clans had the ability to divide into more smaller units in order to maintain easy movement (Kurtoğlu, 2019, p.13). Therefore we see here that while bonding with other tribes and growing to a state organisation also at the same time tribes had being divided to smaller units within its systematic. In other words, tribe system itself enabled healty growing by
167
tolerating increased population with new mentioned above tribe units such as Uruğ. Besides, the last son of an oğuş had to stay always with his core family even he got married (Kurtoğlu, 2019, p.12, p.32). Kurtoğlu states that sustainability of families would be implemented by this (Kurtoğlu, 2019, p.12). Namely, this custom would preserve core oğuş as well from disappearance by the help of new members while new oğuş forms emerging.
Togan’s comment about the decades after the fell of Gok-Turk state is “As of A.D.745 after the fell of Gok-Turk state, the dominion was not a different thing of passing to same dynasty’s other arm based on Nine Oghuz Uyghur tribes” (Togan, 2019, p.55). Actually, Togan was describing by his above words exactly functioning of tribe system.
Because we described baranta named steppe’s unwritten law before at Pecheneg section, we would not mention again here. But baranta was another life ordering rule, for tribes at steppes. Baranta was only an important small part of mentioned above Töre.
Adoption was another positive systematic application to improve family ties between semi-nomadic tribes. Additionally, increasing population and strengthening own tribe were other purposes (Kurtoğlu, 2019, p.33). In other words, adoption of children was a way of enabling sustainable new human resource. To do so, the origin of adopted child should not be from in of the tribe but entirely out of the tribe (Kurtoğlu, 2019, p.33). We met with plenty of examples of adoption in historical sources about deep rooted nations and semi-nomadic tribes of Turkistan. As seen at Secret History of Mongols; Cenghis’s mother Ho’elun had four adopted childs from other kindred tribes whom strengthened Mongolian and Turkish tribal relations
168
while Cenghis was founding his state. These children were Borohul-noyan (Curin origined), Guçu (Merkit origined), Kokoçu (Tayciyut Besut origined) and Şigikan-hutuhu (Tatar origined) (Temir, 2019, p.52, p.54, P.64-65, p.67-68). From time to time all got very crucial responsibilities among Mongol organization. İsakov informs from Kirghiz genealogical records that Konurat was an adopted child to whom gained his right to have an emerging new clan (İsakov, 2017, p.59). Kongrat tribes' establisment mit was depending on that story. Other version for Kongrat clans legendary story from İsakov statements about Kongrats was: Konurat ruler Sarıbiy had gave his grandchild adobted to Kirghiz Khagan.This event leaded an allience between nineteen tribes of Kongrats and Kirghizs. İsakov remarked that “Kirghiz and Konurat kindredship was a result of adoption” (İsakov, 2017, p.59). Adopted children were counted as essential as other children in terms of family membership (Kurtoğlu, 2019, p.33). Adopted children could be chosen as khagan when there weren't any other sufficient candidate (Kurtoğlu, 2019, p.33). Uyghurs adopted always boys due to the fact that their requirement at the jobs about muscle strength (Kurtoğlu, 2019, p.36). On the contrary Kirghiz tribes were adopting also girls (Kurtoğlu, 2019, p.36).
Inter-tribal marriages was a method to manage the tribes itselfs for khagan in the tribe system. Ogeday’s way to manage his tribes for instance this kind of intertribal marriages (İsakov, 2017, p.83). He married the women from his underneath tribes (İsakov, 2017, p.83). Namely, step parent, step sister and step brother also a way in order to build up new social nets between clans and sub-clans in purpose to improve basic society of the nation (budun).
Exogamic marriages which is to marry from outer breed tribes, was the main method for Turkish tribes (Kurtoğlu, 2019, p.49). The other tribes to marry for
169
dynasty members of Huns for instance were detected beforehand already (Kurtoğlu, 2019, p.49). Kurtoğlu underlines that: “The purpose of exogamy is not to marry with the society of other states. But everybody should marry from the own states’ society but with another tribe’s person outer than its own” (Kurtoğlu, 2019, p.50). New kinship relations with other tribes also prevented from plundering from each other and enabled to gain new allie towards others (Kurtoğlu, 2019, p.51). In other words this was a natural protection agains baranta application. Kirghiz tribes in particular occasionally had been organizing another new marriage additional to current one in the same family in order to become reciprocally co-in-laws more than other Turkish tribes (Kurtoğlu, 2019, p.66). “Kayçı kuda” was the name of this application (Kurtoğlu, 2019, p.66).
Czegledy emphasised to kinship names such as groom, uncle at the titles at nomadic tribal management layers that indicating relativeness with hegemon master tribe; of which these had been got by vassal tribes’ rulers in order to also have ultimately nobility(Czegledy, 1998, p.66).
Leviratus application was a custom at steppe culture for nomadic states. There was similar traditional application at Huns that every man could marry with their step mothers or wives of their brothers upon death of husbands (Mori, 1978, p.210). According to Mori, Leviratus was a way of establishing strong ties between families and Ch’an-yuesused this custom to obtain long lasting ties (Mori, 1978, p.210). Plus, by the help of this mentioned custom, the return to previous tribes of the newly being widowed women had beed prevented, in order to not to break unwritten alliences and mutual cooperations between the tribes (Kurtoğlu, 2019, p.91). Therefore, levirat was a vital custom in order to survive at tough steppe conditions. Furthermore, a natural consequence of leviratus, there became no
170
widows in ancient Turks social life (Kurtoğlu, 2019, p.92). Sümer highlights a levirat marriage example about Oghuz ruler Etrek with his step mother after his father passed away from İbn Fadlan’s travels (Sümer, 1999, p.75). Same Etrek and Idil Bulgarian Turk Khagan Almuş were also relatives due to the fact that Etrek’s wife was Almuş’s daughter (Sumer, 1999, p.83). When Tuğrul’s father passed away, his uncle married with his mother and they had a son (Sumer, 1999, p.102). İbrahim Yınal was born who was the ruler of some masses of Seljuk Oghuzes (Sumer, 1999, p.102).
Sororat, on the other hand, while another similar custom to Levirate, basically was the marriage of the person with the sister of wife upon death of his wife (Kurtoğlu, 2019, p.98). So, this time men did not stay widow and breaking the ties between tribes (in other words oguses (families)) prevented once again (Kurtoğlu, 2019, p.98). However, Kurtoğlu adds that: “it was not a societal duty unlike Leviratus as well as being done totaly willingly” (Kurtoğlu, 2019, p.98). We understand from Kurtoğlu’s words that, Sororat had more flexible character in comparison with Leviratus in terms of Töre’s applications.
24 numeral of kind of administrative sections, positions, regions or likewise statetal duties could be seen on Turkish tribe systems. There are a lot of examples of such 24 numeral network at tribe system. For instance Huns had 24 important executive chiefs (Başbuğ in Turkish) (Mori, 1978, p.212). Moreover Golden says those 24 chiefs were leading again 24 more beg (bey) which were manageing a siginificant military power of ten thousand men each (Golden, 2014, p.58). Hence, as seen here 24 to the 24 consecutive important positions had been authorized sequencly at Huns.Taşağıl’sstatements from Camiü’t-tevarih revealed that Oghuzes had 24 sub-tribes tied to confederation (Taşağıl, 2018, p.114). Sümer also counts
171
Oghuz tribes as 24 based on mentioned masterpiece of Reşidüddin’s (Sümer, 2007, p.329). Interestingly, Karakhitaie State(A.D.1130-1211) established on 24 tribe including one Hsi tribe in, as well (Eberhard, 1944, p.582). Togan says, Huns, Gok-Turks, Hazars and Mongols, Timurs had 4 and 24 numeric type structures (Togan, 2019, p.109). Togan also informs from a Greek legend that Scythian ruler Skilur had 24 sons and he gave one arrow to all his sons in order to show them unbreakable character of the arrows when bonded (Togan, 2019, p.109). Shih-wei tribe from Mongols had consisted of not 24 like above mentioned tribes but 25 sub-clans as an interesting coincidence (Yıldırım, 2015, p.89).
At steppe life from tribes point of view, every oğuş should train their children well and every tribe should train soldiers like at Huns. Dicipline was everyting (Ögel, 2020, p.46). According to Golden, livestock job for nomads of Central Asia was like a family company (Golden, 2014, p.32). Golden remarks that; to manage a one hundred animals of a herd required most probably a family consisted of five people in average. When the herds became bigger then four or five families gathered and lived together (Golden, 2014, p.32). For extra help, other relatives joined to this network (Golden, 2014, p.32).
Hierarchical design of tribe system was another original feature for nations at Turkistan. Left and right side of states control different tribes as well as center of state did. For instance all great empires of Turks in history installed the state on that setup of left and right wing structure. Ten Arrow tribes organized as left and right. Huns were, too. Gok-Turks had left and right şads. And so forth Turk states and tribes. As we understand from chinese sources, for instance Huns were a very developed left and right state organization functioning very well (Onat et. al.,2020, p.8). The head of left and right wings in the organisation were very determinative in
172
some critical situations with their initiative driving skills. As a remarkable example, right side commander (Sağ bilge beyi) had caused the suicide of Wo-yen-ch’ü-ti Ch’an-yu by responding to very negatively to his help request (Onat et. al.,2020, p.52). By this, a tyrannic unapproved ruler had been eliminated, for the sake of Hun society's fate. Togan mentioned that the left and right wing design was still existing and applied by Bayırku tribe as well as Toles and Tardus structures during even Kansu Uyghur’s era (Togan, 2019, p.620). Togan also defines Toles and Tardus structures as organisations rather than tribes (Togan, 2019, p.620).
Cultural union of Turkish tribes was one of the most important adhesives bond among the Turk nation’s tribes all over Turkistan, functioning as binders.Togan had put in his famous work Umumi Türk Tarihine Giriş, Turkish poem writer Alişir Nevayi’s (A.D.1441-1501) phrases too which is in our opinion showing mentioned cultural bond, very well to in front of us like: “Whether Turkish nation is one tribe, or hundred, and or thousand tribes; definetely all of them are mine. Without any army sent, I took all Turks from along all China realm till Khorasan under my imperial order…” (Togan, 2019, p.84). He continues to his words by explaining his above statements' real implication as in the way that we would understand like as follows; he actually achieved this by his poems, not with any imperial order and Turks gave their heart to his poems, as well as sacrificing even their lifes (Togan, 2019, p.84). That is a very wonderful example of how the tribes unite with their common cultural elements.
Tribes were able to establish strong trade networks due to the fact that they all specialized either common or also different kind of goods trading. That was occured by the help of tribal life. On the other hand, plundering was feeding
173
economy due the matter of fact of “Plundering was the necessitation of steppe life” as Şeşen says (Şeşen, 2020, p.29).
Interregnum (fetret) periods of Turkish states deserves to be looked into from tribe system perspective due to fact that Turks managed to restore always order after those depressed decades. In light of lexical meaning, “Interregnum (fetret)” word meets to “weakness” or “the time period without any prophet or sultan between two prophets or sultans” or “the time gap between two period” or “darkness, time of spiritual crisis” so forth (Heuristic,t.y.,par.1). In fact interregnum periods were labour pains of new emerging state even empire by the help of tribe system. Although interregnum periods seems like negative times for Turks, actually they were defense mechanisms of Turkish tribes. As a part of Taşağıl’s constituent analysis about Gok-Turk empire as a model for Turk states, Taşağıl also wrote a separate section named as “Interregnum (fetret) period” for Gok-Turks at his masterpiece (Taşağıl, 2019, p.219). At those pages we learn every detail of the interregnum period that Gok-Turks entered which resulted with a new second state as powerful as the first one. Here, It seems very clearly that Turk tribes united once again under A-shih-na tribe. Energy for an independence war had been achieved with this tribal integration. Furthermore, On Ok (Ten Arrow) gathering is another contemporary survival respond and reorganisation. In chronogically, Anatolian Seljuk State, Ottoman Empire after Ankara war at A.D.1402 as well as Turkish war of indepence under the command of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk were all spectacular examples of interregnum times and awakening of Turkish nation.
174
7.1. Migration of Tribes
Eurasia history had witnessed to many large and small migration movements of Turkistan’s steppe nations. As we mentioned before, unlimited integrated steppes of Central Asia and northeastward of Europe had helped the happening of migration of tribes. Some of these migration movements were such important that had changed the fate of world history. Big masses of populations migrated to new lands from their regions, many others reached to fertile lands, some states collapse and some arised, new lands met with new cultures. Migrations took place more than a millennium range of space in a time period of long menkind history’s calendar. Historians have several ideas about the reasons of the Altai and Mongolia originated nations migrations. Of course, Turkish tribes were the main actors of migrations as well as having their big roles during to foundation of rooted steppe empires. According to Pritsak, generally the reason behind the motivation of migration of tribes was the collapse of a great steppe empire (Pritsak, 1996, p.93). From an angle Pritsak was right. Because for example; Yue-chis had collapsed because of Huns and were pushed till Afghanistan by time. But from a different viewpoint, the reason of migration was not the collapse, but the emerge of a great steppe empire, Asian Hun Turks (Golden, 2014, p52, p.55). For instance Kirghiz possibly migrated to Yenisey territory afterwards due to fact that Huns' pressure during Mao-tun era (Clauson, 2017, p.32). Thus, as of B.C., first biggest migrations movements had begun and even caused the fall of Macedonians' remainder state which was Greco-Baktria (Golden, 2014, p.51-52). Later on Chichi Khagan’s movement to Syr Darya also was counted as a migration by Golden (Golden, 2014, p.59). But Golden also based this migration of Chichi Khagan's clans to the Chinese pressure on them, of which we did not agree (Golden, 2014, p.59). Because first of all the main reason was Chichi’s
175
objection to his brother’s policies and the general conflict with him. Secondly, Chichi defended his lands heroically against Chinese without any withdrawing and lost his life with together his men during the resistance. Collapses of First and Second Gok-Turk states also caused great migration movements of masses towards west (Taşağıl, 2020, p.12-13).
At that point, we do not agree to the ideas that were depending the reason of northern nations’ migrations to the Chinese pressures. Because the withdrawals of Turks against Chinese were tactical military decisions in general but not strategic withdrawals in order to abandon literally any territory. They protected their lands by withdrawing if it was needed and collect power to march again. Turk-Chinese struggles was around two thousand years prolonged which finalized at Mongol Turk empire founded at Orkhun- Khentii area. Successor of Great Mogol Turk Empire, Yuan Mongol dynasty controlled later on, city of Beijing.
Migrations were depending on very variety of reasons indeed. According to Yucel for instance, infestations of grasshoppers were a potent cause to change the living zones at Turkistan (Yucel, 2020, min.4-5). Indeed, grasshoppers were a trouble during Hun era (Ahmetbeyoğlu, 2007, p.8).
As we mentioned above sections, as of A.D.87-93 and A.D.155 Wu-huan and Hsien-Pi clans put pressure on Huns; which created a periodical migration waves (Golden, 2014, p.59). Therefore Golden confirmed Pritsak's above evaluation like: “The collapse of Asian Huns caused the first migration wave towards west” (Golden, 2014, p.64).
A.D.350 was a historical turning point in terms of full of actions as Kangkü dominion had been finished, Huns moved towards norhern Black sea and then
176
Europe, as well as Hephthalite White Hun masses also had migrated from Kazakhstan (Czegledy, 1998, p.21). Then, the empty vast lands of Kazakhstan has been fulfilled by Irtysh Ting-ling masses (Czegledy, 1998, p.21). This situation indeed shows us a typical behaviour of nomadic tribes and intrinsic unique nature of habitual migrated nomad nations which was not to leave an empty grassland areas by controlling the newly left territories. So a tribe by tribe, layer slips took place during migrations in order to create new living zones for increased populations. By this case cultures of mankind had chances to touch each other. An important strategy of big tribal confederations during their migrations emerged the intelligent plan behind their every move; which was to leave some own sub-clans behind at their previous territories to guarantee to return in case of unmanagement of occupation of new territories (Czegledy, 1998, p.28). In the contrary case which was mostly happened, the remainder sub-clans would join with new invader nomad nations incoming to their empty lands which would feed the backbones of tribal organisations with new human sources with every kind of cultural integration (Czegledy, 1998, p.28). Yıldırım paid attention to two unsuccessful migration attempts of Tabgach T'o-pa Turks which took place during the decades of A.D. first and second centuries (Yıldırım, 2015, p.97). These were happened at the reigns of emperors T’ui-yin and Lin (Yıldırım, 2015, p.97). Failure was a reality and possibility at such a risky social drive for nations’ fate as well as taking this high risk was a very brave decision for the rulers. Yucel emphaises that to explore the potential new land in advance was a necessity of last confirmation to move (Yucel, 2020, min.6). Therefore, pioneers had been sent to the lands in order to collect information (Yucel, 2020, min.6). Yucel says Turkish migrations were planned movements (Yucel, 2020, min.6). Migrations
177
were implemented with such detailed investigations in all its aspects in order to minimize risks.
Later on, another wave of nomadic migration triggered to west because of Juan-Juan and Tabgach wars of which main actor was Toles tribes as of A.D.460 (Golden, 2014, p.68). In other words, These tribes were Turkish Kangli tribes (Togan, 2019, p.45). Golden and Togan both say that also Ogurs was moving to west together with them (Golden, 2014, p.68; Togan, 2019, p.45).
From our perspective, when looking into historical milestones at Turkistan, control of Otuken territory and loss of Otuken to another Turkish tribe was sort of a trigger for Turks, to migrate. Because,VIII.Century, Uyghurs took control at Otuken, afterwards Karluks moved to seven waters, Chu and Talas areas. Thereafter Karluks and Turgis-Oghuz masses migrated to Transoxania. Sümer is linking of that mentioned Oghuz migration upon the arrival of Karluks to Western Gok-Turk's regions, as well as pointing out the possible date approximately A.D.775-785 (Sümer, 2007, p.325). Goldens notices as; this mentioned chain reaction of migrations were the core reason of ethnically Turkish structure of Turkistan of today’s times (Golden, 2014, p.108). As of A.D.840 Kirghiz entered Otuken and this time Uyghurs moved to south to Turpan and Kansu regions. Later on, Khitans (A.D.916-1125) took control of Otuken and Kirghiz groups leaded another motion among tribes (A.D.924). Therefore, control of quite fertile Otuken was one of the main reasons for migration of semi-nomadic masses. On the other hand Khitans applied high taxes and a tough management over the tribes of which Golden thinks this policies created migration of some Turkish tribes (Golden, 2014, p.84).
178
Şirin's point of view about Uyghurs' migration motion after A.D.840 was in fact an eagerness of them for marching to heart of trade route (Şirin, 2020, p.52). Thus, we can also count motivation of trade route control as an additional reason for migrations. At that point, by the way, Golden mentioned about another contribution of nomads to world history from our eye that he says “Great steppe nomads had protected mentioned important trade routes” (Golden, 1914, p.36).
As we mentioned before; Barthold’s opinion points out to a boost of Kipchak population nearby Irtysh lands; which was behind their motion (Barthold, 2019, p.92).
Meanwhile these events, some Kirghiz groups migrated along to Irtysh River as well as Tengri Mountains from Yenisey region (Togan, 2019, p.136). Pechenegs passed to Desth-i Kipchak lands from Aral Sea (Togan, 2019, p.136). As of decades of XI.Century, Urenkhay groups migrated also to Tengri Mountains as well as Oghuzes moved to Eastern Europe, Khorasan and Persia (Togan, 2019, p.136). Togan thinks all these migration movements were related with narrowing steppe lands due to increased populations (Togan, 2019, p.136). At that point Golden thinks about a domino effect behind as a trigger to migrations, because of the civil struggles among tribes on steppe lands (Golden, 2014, p.34). Yucel also counted discrepancies among Turkistan semi-nomadic tribes during distrubiton of grassland territories, as an economical intiator factor in order to migrate (Yucel, 2020, min.4). The migration routes had belonged to a tribe or budun in terms of domain property, says Golden (Golden, 2024, p.34).
Lets look to Avfi’s Cevamiu’l-hikayat from Şeşen’s statments in order to understand in light of Islamic sources about migration of Turkish masses:
179
“And there is a community from Turks that they are called “Kun”(Hun). These were in fact resident at Fena domain. They left this place because of less grasslands as well as small areal size. They moved again and again, drived a tribe named as Kay and settled to their lands. Kays arrived to Sarı lands and settled. Sarı’s folk moved to Turkmens domains and settled upon. And Guzan (Oghuzes) arrived to Pechenegs’ lands at Armenia sea(Black Sea) coast.” (Şeşen, 2020, p.94).
As we mentioned above A.D.1135 was the year, also Karluks migrated and were really settled at Transoxiana with big masses because of Karakhitaies(Sümer, 2019, p.67).
Golden’s idea about the core dynamism behind the age of migrations, was the horsepower (Golden, 2014, p.30). Golden also underlines that nomads were indeed the mainly utilizers of the horsepower at the world of mentioned ages among other mankind (Golden, 2014, p.30). Sümer underlines the mobility potential of nomad Turks which enables positively their survival at hard conditions with respect to permanent sedentaries (Sümer, 1999, p.14). So, we need to consider the vital role of horses about mass of migrations. Without horses and even horse carts maybe, migrations could not be done. Moreover, Golden thinks that there is a sensitively organized plan about detecting the migrations routes in general (Golden, 2014, p.32).
When the historical calender had indicated the beginning of thirteenth century, the Mongol conquerors cause another big wave of migrations this time from Transoxania to Khorasan and deeper Anatolia. These new settlers were Oghuz-Turkmen tribes. Anatolia was already homeland of Turks for decades, but also had welcomed these new Oghuz Turkmen adventurers. Most of those communities took risk of migration by abandoning their lands at Turkistan as an preemptive survive
180
respond, before Mongols came (Sümer, 1999, p.5-6). Because of the initiative usage as well as a tactical survival movement, this Oghuz migrations deserves already interest of researchers. But also results of this risky decision was spectacular. This was such an effective Turk movement because of its refill capacity into Minor Asia deeply with an unspoiled fresh Turkish population as well as their rich culture. We should not forget also Khorasan and Azerbaijan in this analyze (Sümer, 1999, p.5). Sümer took into consideration also the probability of one of the Turk clan within, becoming near future's Ottoman dynasty in light of these Turkmen arrivals (Sümer, 1999, p.5). Namely, Sümer says Ottomans could came as of the Mongol era, much more later the Seljuk Turk’s Malazgirt Victory.
181
8. HOLISTIC VIEWANALYSIS
Below all table and graphs had been prepared by us by collecting all the datas from the following sources:
Taşağıl, A., (2018), Eski Türk Boyları Çin Kaynaklarına Göre.
Taşağıl, A., (2019), Gök-Türkler I, II, III.
Halac tribe normally out of our thesis focused region. But we took into consideration in order to not to spoil wholeness.
The aim of below chart and graphs is to focus on the lines above. Each line with its color represent a tribe of Turkistan. Upon a general view to the distribution of all lines due to the subject of the chart; we can practically comprehend the general behaviour of all tribes together within it about its subject. The intense parts in terms of lines again would give us an idea. Bald parts, in other words the parts without lines, give us another idea. Namely, the distribution of lines per parts with respect to the chart's subject would open a scientific window. Therefore, we hope those charts would draw a general idea in historians minds.
182
Table 1
Chart Based on Professions
183
When we look into the chart above, we see that there was a tremendous division of professions among tribes although not every of them contemporary at the same period. This wonderful harmony shows us how the tribes became professional on different jobs in order to support main khanate in terms of trade, taxes, horse power, products so forth. Furthermore, system was a supply chain management among the tribes by the help of common language. Above we see that Kirghiz tribe had a key role in this mentioned chain. Kirghiz people could be the brain of communication, cooperation and coordination. Animal breeding, hunting, agriculture and horse riding were the most common professions among tribes with respect to above our chart.
184
Table 2
Chart Based on Army Manpower
185
Table 3
Chart Based on Linked Tribe
186
Table 4
Chart Based on Sovereignty&Confederation Status
187
Table 5
Chart Based on Early Period Empires&States
188
Table 6
Chart Based on Late Period Empires&States
189
Table 7
Chart Based on Second Late Period Empires&States
190
Figure 13
Graph Based on Main Territory&General Area
191
Figure 14
Graph Based on Second Territory&General Area
192
Figure 15
Graph Based on Third Territory&General Area
193
Figure 16
Graph Based on Forth Territory&General Area
194
9. CONCLUSION
Turk Tribe System was beyond its era and original.
Tribal networks of Turks and Mongols was their immune system just like at an organism. Greatest empires of world such as Asian Hun, Gok-Turk, Mongol, Seljuk, Ottoman empires as well as tens of states owe their presence at history to their tribal type self characteristic. Besides, in order to understand well the Great Mongol Empire of which was the most expand empire with deep longlasting effects in whole world history; we need to realize that there was again an entire tribe organization behind. Plus, the empire was carrying the fundemantal effects of the one thousand five hundred years which had been lived in Central Asia before it was founded. One thousand five hundred years belonging to the Turks full of valuable experiences in such a whole time period with China, in terms of diplomacy, struggles, wars, trade so forth. These altogether’s consequence was the Great Mongol Empire’s born.
Thus, The Mongol Empire established and raised on a ready tribe systematic.
There was not any privileged class developed in the society such as clergy at Turks, Mongols and Tatars which could spoil the equitable share of national sources. That was because of tribal organisation special to those nations. This system offered a fair life for all members of tribes as well as respectful community relations. As a result of that matter of facts; belongingness to the origin of these cultures have survived since thousand of years.
From China perspective when we look to old Turks and Mongols; all efforts of China in spite of with its high population and other tools mentioned hereby our thesis, China could never manage to fullfill all its plans and never manage to control
195
fully the northern nations. On the contrary the war with Turks and Mongols took place in generally Chinese lands. In addition, Chinese armies had struggled to pass large deserts such as Ordos and Gobi and mountains and could never manage to fully control Otuken once at medieval. Nevertheless, Uyghur army entered to Tang capital for instance. Moreover, Mongols governed a big part of China. This matter of facts are alone sort of indicators about advantages of tribal structure effecting side of balance of powers.
Consequently, Turkistan’s natural evolved tribes were the basic essences of todays modern Turk and Mongol nations. In other words, tribes till XIV.Century at Turkistan were an ontological existential reason for the nations which enabled them to leave deep traces to mankind cultures.
196
REFERENCES
Abdumanapov, R., (2014), Kırgızların Kökeni Meselesi, (Çev. D. Ahsen Batur), Türk Halklarının Etnik Yapısı,Selenge Yayınları, İstanbul.
Abramzon S. M.,(1978), Family-Group, Family, and Individual Property Categories among Nomads, The Nomadic alternative:modes and models of interaction in the African-Asian deserts and steppes,(W. Weissleder (ed.)), World Anthropology Moutun Publishers TheHague,Paris/179–188. https://books.google.com.tr/books?hl=tr&lr=&id=JRyqfpi5BKcC&oi=fnd&pg=PA179&dq=saul+abramzon&ots=5gDtMiySrK&sig=l3GEeoMqvmY4RJCU9IaEqeHwXq0&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=saul%20abramzon&f=false
Ahmetbeyoglu, A.,(2007), Hun Devletlerinin Kuruluş ve Çöküş Süreçleri, Sakarya Üniversitesi Kuruluş ve Çöküş Süreçlerinde Türk Devletleri Sempozyumu Bildirileri, 52, 1-19.
Ahmetbeyoglu, A., (2011), Bulgarları Oluşturan Boylardan Kutrigurlar ve Utigurlar, Tarih Dergisi, 51, 1-19.
Ahmetbeyoglu, A.,(2020), Eski Türklerde Kut ve Töre Bağlamında Hükümranlığın Hududları, Tarih Dergisi - Turkish Journal of History, 71, 29-50.
Ardel, A., (1964), Orta Asya Coğrafyasına Toplu Bakış, Türk Kültürü Araştırmaları, 1, 111-132.
Aristov,N. A., (2014), Türk Halklarının Etnik Yapısı, (Çev. D. Ahsen Batur),Selenge Yayınları, İstanbul.
197
Aydın, E., (2011), Yenisey Yazıtlarında Geçen Türk Boyları Üzerine Notlar, Turkish Studies 6/1, 395-402.
Aydın, E., (2019), Orhun Yazıtları, Bilge Kültür Sanat Yayınları, İstanbul.
Barthold, V.V., (2019), Orta Asya Türk Tarihi Hakkında Dersler, (Çev. Ragıp Hulusi Özdem),(Hz. Kazım Yaşar Kopraman, İsmail Aka),Türk Tarih Kurumu Yayınları, Ankara.
Barthold, V.V., (2019), Moğol İstilasına Kadar Türkistan, (Çev. Hakkı Dursun Yıldız),Kronik Kitap, İstanbul.
Battulga, T., (2001), Moğolistan’da Yeni Bulunan Göktürk Yazıtlarıi,Türk Dil Kurumu Türk Dili Araştırmaları Yıllığı-Belleten 2000, 786, 47-58.
Bozkurt, N., (1997), Halı Maddesi, TDV İslam Ansiklopedisi.
https://islamansiklopedisi.org.tr/hali--halicilik
Clauson, S.G., (2017), Türkçe-Moğolca Çalışmaları (Çev. Fatma Kömürcü), Türk Dil Kurumu Yayınları, Ankara.
Czegledy, K., (1998), Bozkır Kavimlerinin Doğudan Batıya Göçleri, (Çev. Erdal Çoban),Özne Yayınları, İstanbul.
Çandarlıoğlu, G., (2012), Uygurlar Maddesi, TDV İslam Ansiklopedisi.
https://cdn2.islamansiklopedisi.org.tr/dosya/42/C42013636.pdf
Davletşin, G., (2013), Türk Tatar Kültür Tarihi, (Çev. Albina Tuzlu),Türk Tarih Kurumu Yayınları, Ankara.
Dobrovits, M., (2004), The Thirty Tribes of the Turks. Acta Orientalia Scientiarum, Hungary, 57, 257-262. https://www.researchgate.net/
198
Doğan, S. D., (2014), Kaşmir Örme Kumaşların Isıl Konfor Özellikleri, T.C. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Giyim Endüstrisi ve Giyim Sanatları Eğitimi Ana Bililm Dalı Giyim Sanatları Eğitimi Bilim Dalı, Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi.
Eberhard, W., (1944), Kay’lar Kabilesi Hakkında Sinolojik Mülahazalar, Türk Tarih Kurumu Belleten, 32, 567-588.
Eberhard, W., (1947), Şato Türklerinin Kültür Tarihine Dair Notlar, Türk Tarih Kurumu Belleten, 41, 15-26.
Eberhard, W., (2019), Çin Tarihi, Türk Tarih Kurumu Yayınları, Ankara.
Environment and Development Desk, DIIR, CTA., (2014). Musk Deer. Retrieved September 17, 2021, from http://tibetnature.net/en/musk-deer/
Esin, E., (1983),Uygur Sanatı, (Düz. Tek-Esin Vakfı), Türk Ansiklopedisi, 33/265, 131-141.
http://tekesin.org.tr/uygur-sanati/
Golden, P.B., (2014), Dünya Tarihinde Orta Asya, (Çev. Yahya Kemal Taştan), Ötüken Neşriyat, İstanbul.
Gündüz, T., (2019), Oğuz Kağan Destanı, Yeditepe Yayınevi, İstanbul.
Haenisch E. tr. & Kozin S. tr. & Moğolca Aslı., (2019) (Çev. Ahmet Temir), Moğolların Gizli Tarihi,Türk Tarih Kurumu Yayınları, Ankara.
Halaçoğlu, Y., (1993), Damga Maddesi, TDV İslam Ansiklopedisi.
https://cdn2.islamansiklopedisi.org.tr/dosya/8/C08003199.pdf
Harari, Y.N., (2016), Hayvanlardan Tanrılara Sapiens (Çev. Ertuğrul Genç),Kolektif Kitap Yayınları, İstanbul.
199
Herder, V., (1990), Grosser Welt Atlas. Naumann&Göbel Verlagsgesellschaft (Dağ. Hürriyet), Köln.
Heuristic., (t.y.), Silk and Cashmere içinde. Retrieved September 17, 2021, from https://www.silkandcashmere.com/kasmirimiz
Heuristic., (t.y.), Türk Dil Kurumu online dictionary içinde.
https://www.sozluk.gov.tr
Heuristic., (t.y.), Luggat Osmanlıca Türkçe Sözlük online dictionary içinde.
https://www.luggat.com/index.php#ceviri
Heuristic., (2018), Denisova Cave, Encyclopaedia Britannicaiçinde. Retrieved September 17, 2021, from https://www.britannica.com/place/Denisova-Cave
İsakov, A., (2017), Kırgız-Moğol İlişkileri (IX.-XV. Yüzyıllar), Türk Tarih Kurumu Yayınları, Ankara .
İnan, A., (1960), Nayman Boyunun Soyu Meselesi, Türk Tarih Kurumu Belleten, 96, 543-545.
İzgi, Ö., (2017), Orta Asya Türk Tarihi Araştırmaları, Türk Tarih Kurumu Yayınları, Ankara .
Kalkan, M., (1996), Türk-Moğol Kavimleri Arasında Tatarlar ve Menşei Meselesi,Türk Kültürünü Araştırma Enstitüsü,393, 11-18.
Konukçu, E., (1992), Balasagun Maddesi, TDV İslam Ansiklopedisi.
https://cdn.islamansiklopedisi.org.tr/dosya/5/C05001766.pdf
Kurat, A.N., (2019), IV - XVIII. Yüzyıllarda Karadeniz Kuzeyindeki Türk Kavimleri ve Devletleri, Türk Tarih Kurumu Yayınları, Ankara.
Kurtoğlu, Y., (2019), Eski Orta Asya Türk Devletleri’nde Aile, Türk Tarih Kurumu Yayınları, Ankara.
200
Laszlo, F., (1950), Dokuz Oğuzlar ve Gök Türkler (Çev. Hasan Eren), Türk Tarih Kurumu Belleten, 53, 37-43.
Li J. & Zhang B., (2018), Why Ancient Chinese People Like To Use Organic-Inorganic Composite Mortars? Application History and Reasons of Organic-Inorganic Mortars in Ancient Chinese Buildings,Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory(2019) 26:502–536 Springer Science+Business Media LLC part of Springer Nature 2018. https://www.researchgate.net/
Max Planck researcher Svante Paabo. (2019, September 12). Pioneer of paleogenetics [Video].MaxPlanckSociety [YouTube channel]. YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJLI3N5dovw
Mcevedy, C., (2018), İlkçağ Tarih Atlası, (Çev. Ayşen Anadol),Sabancı Üniversitesi, İstanbul.
Mcevedy, C., (2019), Modernçağ Tarih Atlası,(Çev. Ayşen Anadol),Sabancı Üniversitesi, İstanbul.
Migala J., (2019), A Comprehensive Guide to Rice: Nutrition Facts, How Brown Compares With WhiteHow to Prepare It and More, (Rev. Lynn Grieger). Retrieved September 17, 2021, from https://www.everydayhealth.com/diet-nutrition/diet/rice-nutrition-facts-how-brown-compares-white-how-prepare-it-more/
Miras Coğrafyalar 1. Bölüm. (2019, March 27).TRT Avaz [YouTube channel](Dan. Ahmet Taşağıl). YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7o8mk2-DSco&t=518s
Miras Coğrafyalar 2. Bölüm. (2019, March 27).TRT Avaz [YouTube channel] (Dan. Ahmet Taşağıl). YouTube.
201
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYa3lXU6rvs&t=1008s
Miras Coğrafyalar 3. Bölüm. (2019, March 27).TRT Avaz [YouTube channel].(Dan. Ahmet Taşağıl). YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RRzOKrp3aqs&t=961s
Miras Coğrafyalar 4. Bölüm. (2019, March 27).TRT Avaz [YouTube channel].(Dan. Ahmet Taşağıl). YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7dhD7LGlTs&t=658s
Miras Coğrafyalar 5. Bölüm. (2019, March 27).TRT Avaz [YouTube channel].(Dan. Ahmet Taşağıl). YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ux4pO1zbk6Y&t=603s
Mori, M., (1978), Kuzey Asya Bozkır Devletlerinin Teşkilatı,Tarih Enstitüsü Dergisi, 9, 209-225.
Onat A. &OrsoyS.&Ercilasun K., (2020), Han Hanedanı Tarihi Hisung-Nu (Hun) Monografisi, Türk Tarih Kurumu Yayınları, Ankara.
Osawa, T., (2009), Göktürk Kağanlığı Dönemindeki Kanglilerin Oturduğu Yer ve Siyasi Hareket Üzerine – MS.7. Asırdaki Çince Kaynağına Göre,6.Uluslararası Türk Kültürü Kongresi Bildirileri, Atatürk Kültür Merkezi Başkanlığı Yayınları, 382, 2375-2388.
Otero J. & Charola A.E. & Starinieri V., (2019), Sticky rice-nanolime as a consolidation treatment for lime mortars, J Mater Sci 54:10217-10237 Springer Nature. https://www.researchgate.net/
Ögel, B., (1951), Şine Usu Yazıtının Tarihi Önemi, Türk Tarih Kurumu Belleten, 59, 361-379.
202
Ögel, B., (1974), İslam Ansiklopedisi "Tatar" Maddesi, M.E.B. Milli Eğitim Basımevi, İstanbul.
Ögel, B., (2020), İslamiyetten Önce Türk Kültür Tarihi,Türk Tarih Kurumu Yayınları, Ankara.
Parker, E.H., (1896), The Origin of the Turks, The English Historical Review, 11, 431-435.
https://archive.org/details/OriginsOfTheTurks/page/n15/mode/2up
Pritsak, O., (1996), Oğuz Yabgu Devletinin Yıkılışı (Çev. Eşref Bengi Özbilen), Türk Dünyası Araştırmaları, 104, 93-102.
Rogozhinsky, A. & Cheremisin, D.V., (2019), The Tamga Signs of the Turkic Nomads in the Altai and Semirechye: Comparisons and Identifications, Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia, 47. 48-59. 10.17746/1563-0102.2019.47.2.048-059. https://www.researchgate.net/
Salman, H., (1981), VII ve X. Asırlar Arasında Önemli Türk Boylarından Karluklar ve Karluk Devleti, Türk Dünyası Araştırmaları Dergisi, 15, 169-205.
Salman, H., (1989), Sarı ve Kara Türgişler Meselesi, Türk Dünyası Araştırmaları Dergisi, 61, 61-70.
Sümer, F., (1988),Ağaçeriler Maddesi, TDV İslam Ansiklopedisi.
https://cdn2.islamansiklopedisi.org.tr/dosya/1/C01000484.pdf
Sümer, F., (1995), Peçenekler IX.-XII. Yüzyıllarda Yaşamış Ünlü Bir Türk Eli, Türk Dünyası Araştırmaları Dergisi, 94, 61-67.
Sümer, F., (1999), Oğuzlar (Türkmenler),Türk Dünyası Araştırmaları Vakfı,İstanbul..
Sümer, F., (2007), Oğuzlar Maddesi, TDV İslam Ansiklopedisi.
https://cdn2.islamansiklopedisi.org.tr/dosya/33/C33010931.pdf
Sümer, F., (2019), Eski Türklerde Şehircilik, Türk Tarih Kurumu Yayınları, Ankara.
203
Şalekenov, V., Genov, A.N.O./metin, Bozer, R./resim ve altyazılar,(2006),Ortaçağ’da Aktöbe, XXVIII. Dizi, (2),Türk Tarih Kurumu Yayınları, Ankara.
Şeşen, R., (2020), İslam Coğrafyacılarına Göre Türkler ve Türk Ülkeleri, Bilge Kültür Sanat, İstanbul.
Şirin, H., (2020), Başlangıcından Günümüze Türk Yazı Sistemleri,Bilge Kültür Sanat Yayınları, İstanbul.
Taşağıl, A., (1999) Isık Göl Maddesi, TDV İslam Ansiklopedisi.
https://cdn.islamansiklopedisi.org.tr/dosya/19/C19006307.pdf
Taşağıl, A. , Qarjaubayuli C.. (2012, November 3).Tarihin Arka Odası-Ahmet Taşağıl (Sun. Murat Bardakçı) [Video]. Habertürk [YouTube channel]. YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tR3iFMkyp9w&t=2092s.
Taşağıl, A., (2012), Türk Maddesi, TDV İslam Ansiklopedisi.
https://cdn2.islamansiklopedisi.org.tr/dosya/41/C41015612.pdf
Taşağıl, A., (2015), Oğuzların Tarih Sahnesine Çıkışı Hakkında, Oğuzlar: Dilleri, Tarihleri ve Kültürleri 5. Uluslararası Türkiyat Araştırmaları Sempozyumu Bildirileri, Ankara.
Taşağıl, A., (2017), Gökbörü'nün İzinde. Kronik Kitap, İstanbul.
Taşağıl, A.(2017, March 6), Gerçek Erken Türk Tarihi [Video].Türk Balıkadamlar Kulübü[YouTube channel].YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0mQcljtK270&t=3205s.
Taşağıl, A., (2017, November 7), Öteki Gündem Programı 7 Kasım 2017 (Prof.Dr.Ahmet Taşağıl)(Sun. Cansu Canan) [Video]. Habertürk TV [YouTube channel]. YouTube.
204
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1d38i7GowY&t=4351s
Taşağıl, A., (2018), Eski Türk Boyları Çin Kaynaklarına Göre, Bilge Kültür Sanat Yayınları, İstanbul.
Taşağıl, A.. (2018, October 23), Altaylar’dan Tuna’ya: Türk’ün İzinde (1.Konferans)[Video]. Zeytinburnu Kültür Sanat[YouTube channel].YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oASUsbdDFpE&t=5s
Taşağıl, A.. (2018, November 15), Altaylar’dan Tuna’ya: Türk’ün İzinde (2.Konferans)[Video]. Zeytinburnu Kültür Sanat[YouTube channel].YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nt8eNUpI9Do&t=1591s
Taşağıl, A.. (2019, March 25), Altaylar’dan Tuna’ya: Türk’ün İzinde (6.Konferans) [Video]. Zeytinburnu Kültür Sanat[YouTube channel].YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDDqxUHQrNA&t=1072s
Taşağıl, A., (2019),Gök-Türkler I, II, III, Türk Tarih Kurumu Yayınları, Ankara.
Taşağıl, A.. (2019, March 15).Ahmet Taşağıl Ötüken Neresidir?[Video].Prof.Dr.Ahmet Taşağıl [YouTube channel].YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0NwrtAWM2E
Taşağıl, A.. (2019, June 15). Ahmet Taşağıl“Oğuzlar” 627 Yılı Türk Tarihi İçin Neden Önemli[Video].Prof.Dr.Ahmet Taşağıl[YouTube channel].YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AumgUs9HZvU&t=205s
Taşağıl, A..(2019, May 16).Yaşayan En Eski Türk Boyu: Kırgızlar[Video].Prof.Dr.Ahmet Taşağıl [YouTube channel].YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXNDc6HjXF0&t=3s
205
Taşağıl, A.. (2019, December 11).Tarih Söyleşileri Programı Prof.Dr.Ahmet Taşağıl 40.Bölüm(Sun. Dr.Coşkun Yılmaz) [Video].TRT2 [YouTube channel].YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRFvKfkQLPs
Taşağıl, A.. (2020, February 3). Soru-Cevap 5 Ayaz-Ata Moğollar Türk müdür?.[Video].Prof.Dr.Ahmet Taşağıl [YouTube channel].YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gSjpJr-WsVw
Taşağıl, A., (2020), Avrasya Bozkırlarında Eski Türk Uygarlığı, İnsanın Tarih Yolculuğu Kitabı, Yeditepe Üniversitesi Yayınevi,İstanbul, 196-216.
Taşağıl, A., (2020), Uygurlar,Bilge Kültür Sanat Yayınları, İstanbul.
Taşağıl, A., (2021, May 7).Prof. Dr. Ahmet Taşağıl ile Arazi Eve Sığar: Moğolistan Arazisi CK[Video].Marmara Coğrafya Kulübü[YouTube channel].YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLEND9migH4
Tekin, T., (1988), Tes Yazıtı Hakkında Dokuz Not (Çev. Ülkü Çelik), Türk Tarih Kurumu Belleten, 53, 37-43.
Togan, A. Z., (1985), Cengiz'in Soyu ve Kendisine Yakın Kabileler,Erdem Dergisi, 5(14), 389-398.
https://dergipark.org.tr/en/search?q=talat+tekin+tes&section=articles
Togan, A.Z., (2019), Umumi Türk Tarihine Giriş, Türkiye İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları, İstanbul.
Yıldırım, K., (2012), Tatar Adının Kökeni Üzerine, İstanbul Üni. Türkiyat Enstitüsü Türkiyat Mecmuası, 22, 171-190.
Yıldırım, K., (2015), Bozkırın Yitik Çocukları Juan-Juan’lar, Yeditepe Yayınevi, İstanbul.
206
Yücel, M.U., (2002), Kıpçaklar Maddesi, TDV İslam Ansiklopedisi.
https://cdn.islamansiklopedisi.org.tr/dosya/25/C25023953.pdf
Yucel, M.U., Ilgın, F.A.. (2020).Dârülfünûn Dersleri - 25.Ders - Tanrı’nın Kılıcı Attila’dan Bozkırın Başbuğu Konçak’a [Video].İ.Ü. Edebiyat Fakültesi[YouTube channel].YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7UTDsZ1PgU
Zaman Yolcusu. (2019, September 25).Türklerin İzinde/Göktürklerin İlk Tapınağı(Sun. Ahmet Yeşiltepe)[Video]. Ntv[YouTube channel].YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhvaWtD2SJ4&t=997s
Zaman Yolcusu. (2019, July 10), Türklerin İzinde/Kasgar ve Balasagun(Sun. Ahmet Yeşiltepe)[Video]. Ntv[YouTube channel].YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqoJ-PQbEqw&t=712s
207
Appendix A: Transcript of the reference: Max Planck researcher Svante Paabo. (2019, September 12). Pioneer of
paleogenetics [Video]. MaxPlanckSociety [YouTube channel]. YouTube. Between min. [5:48]–[6:37]:
Narrator:
An important clue was found in the Denisova cave in Siberia a sensational find of historic proportions
S. Paabo:
We were extremely lucky the Russian archaeologists provided us with a small finger bone when we sequenced its genome we were surprised to find it was neither Homo sapiens nor Neanderthal it was something else altogether only very distantly related to the Neanderthals we now know that this species we named Denisova man contributed its genes to the people living in asia today especially along the Pacific