Home
Back
In Russian
Contents Huns
Contents Alans
Contents Scythians
Sources
Roots
Tamgas
Alphabet
Writing
Language
Genetics
Geography
Archeology
Religion
Coins
Wikipedia
Yu.Zuev Ethnic History of Usuns
Yu.Zuev The Strongest Tribe - Ezgil
Yu.Zuev Tamgas of vassal princedoms
Yu.Zuev Ancient Türkic social terms
Yu.Zuev Ancient Türks
Yu.Zuev Seyanto Kaganate and Kimeks
Ogur and Oguz Alan Dateline
Avar Dateline
Besenyo Dateline
Bulgar Dateline
Huns Dateline
Karluk Dateline
Khazar Dateline
Kimak Dateline
Kipchak Dateline
Kyrgyz Dateline
Sabir Dateline
Seyanto Dateline

Yu. A. Zuev
SE-YANTO KAGANATE AND KIMEKS
(Türkic ethnogeography of the Central Asia in the middle of 7th century)

Shygys, 2004, No 1, pp. 11-21, No 2, pp. 3-26
Oriental Studies Institute, Almaty

Introduction

This posting is a tribute to late Prof. Yu. A. Zuev, who passed away on December, 5, 2006. Yu. A. Zuev produced numerous translations of the Chinese annalistic chronicles, intense scientific research of the history, culture, and socio-political life of medieval Türkic and non-Türkic peoples, and made outstanding contributions to Türkology and Iranology. Prof. Yu. A. Zuev specialty was in the ancient Chinese, Middle Chinese, and modern Chinese language, learned under a guru of the Chinese philology S.Ya.Yahontov, that made him a unique expert with a first-hand knowledge of the sources. His superb knowledge of the sources allowed Prof. Yu. A. Zuev to delve into related fields of history and ethnography with unequalled depth and competence.

The subject of Seyanto (Pinyin Ch. Xueyantuo 薛延陀) in historical literature is quite murky, though their historical role is large, and understanding their nature is paramount for understanding of the major historical events. Most of the literature concentrates on locating, reading, and interpretation of the Chinese sources, the rest is addressing Seyanto as a secondary motive supplementary to a main theme, primarily addressing events of their brief rise and fall period. The past century saw an abundance of speculations that better reflected the scholars' inclinations than evidence at hand. Even the name of the people was routinely disfigured: what is the difference between Chinese scholars calling Seyanto in English "Xueyantuo" or a similar spelling nonsense, and the Russian illiterates that calls Chinese :"Kitaiyaytcy"?. Neither deserves a respect.

Seyanto belong to the Tele tribal confederation, and their history is a part and parcel of the Tele people history. By a quirk turn of history, now Tele are generally called Türkic people, and in extreme cases that is reduced to uncouth adjectival "Turks", because they spoke Türkic languages, but it could as well be the other way around, since the Kaganates' Türks were but only one of the offshoots of the primordial Tele ethnic trunk. In his compact article, Yu.Zuev discreetly, masterfully, and steadily de-mystifies peoples and events that even such outstanding historical analyst and synthesizer as L.Gumilev left haphazardly and hazy. In addition to Seyanto and Kimeks listed in the title, Yu.Zuev addresses Yemeks and Shiwei (Chinese:室韦) Tatars, also much affected by speculations and conjectures. Yu.Zuev and L.Gumilev were contemporaries, and we can only be sorry that they have never broken the Soviet mold of clandestine confines, and could not jointly participate and enrich each other in open professional seminars endemic to other, politics-free disciplines. For a general reader, Yu.Zuev elucidates only some murky points of the history, and generally does not directly address neither the mass of fluid speculations, nor the attempts to create and reconstruct the rich history of Seyanto.

* * *.

Translator's notes and explanations, including polygraphic errors and omissions, where embedded in the author's text and not denoted specifically, are shown in blue. Page numbers are shown at the beginning of the page, for ease of navigation page numbers are prefixed with issue number. Translator has added some subdivision headings shown in blue.

Yu.Zuev, like most of his Sinologist predecessors and colleagues, uses intended for Western Sinologists Wade-Giles Romanization system for transliteration of Chinese hieroglyphs. The Hanyu Pinyin (Han Pinyin) was devised for internal use as a unified Romanization system for Standard Mandarin, it is used and taught in China, practically it is the only method presently known in China, for Chinese it has an advantage of suggesting to a Chinese typist in computerized typing a selection of possible phonetic equivalents, and it allows to input Chinese characters with almost no training. For these reasons, Pinyin started its spread into popular publications and Chinese-authored Western publications. For non-Mandarin-speakers, the main advantage of pinyin becomes its disadvantage, they need to learn Mandarin pronunciation of characters before they are able to use Pinyin. For the world outside China, a switch to Mandarin pinyin presents immeasurable difficulties in reading and comprehending revised terminology that conflicts with many kinds of literature in the world lexical body. The ad hoc Pinyin terminology, assembled from diverse past Romanization systems specifically for Chinese internal use, trespasses the modern accepted norms of respecting native terminology, for example it replaces Seyanto used in Turkish and Türkic publications with incomprehensible Xueyantuo, or Sogdian and Greek Huns, and Hunas of Indian publications with another incomprehensible "Ferocious Slaves" Xiongnu. The examples of distortions are uncountable, the well-known Joujans/Jujans become Rourans, Ssu-ma Ch'ien become Sima Qian, Tele become Tiele, and the tasks of Googling and source reference become a worst nightmare. On Google Books, Googling of "Sima Qian" brings up 3,500 book titles, but completely leaves out another 1,500 books with "Ssu-ma Ch'ien" and 700 with other spellings. Outside of direct translation of the Chinese annals, and within the direct translations that use Bernhard Karlgren restoration method (Pinyin is incompatible with Karlgren method), the Han Pinyin does not provide any cognitive advantage, but at the same time it can't be ignored because of its factual impact in the today's computerized world of knowledge.

Some special characters may not display correctly, and are either substituted by Latin letters, or duplicated in Latin letters shown in blue: γuən/guan, with Greek "gamma" rendered as "g", various diacritical "i" rendered as "i", and "ə" and various diacritical "a" rendered as "a". Where it appears that simplification infringes on semantic meaning, the author's transcriptions are reproduced more accurately. Where a better accuracy is needed, the author's diacritical text should be verified in pdf format reproduction. Where the author chose to translate the native place names to Russian, the Translator gives its English translation, for example Türkic "ak" = "kuu" => Russian "beliy" = English "white".

CONTENTs
    2004 Issue No Page
1. THE FIRST NEWS 1 11
2. SILK AND SERINDA COUNTRY 1 13
3. THE TREK TO MONGOLIA 1 14
4. 4. SEVEN LEADERS. PLEIADES 1 15
5. FORGING STATEHOOD 1 19
  WESTERN WING (Tardush) 1 20
  Ashtaks 1 20
  EASTERN WING (Tolis) 2 3
  Yemeks 2 3
  Shiwei-Tatars 2 4
6. RISE AND FALL 2 12
7. CONTINUATION OF HISTORY 2 18
 

Historical outline

2 20
  Bibliography 2 21
Yu. A. Zuev
SE-YANTO KAGANATE AND KIMEKS
(Türkic ethnogeography of the Central Asia in the middle of 7th century)
Shygys, 2004, No 1 pp. 11-21, No 2 pp. 3-26
1-11

At the end of summer in 648 the Türkic cavalry headed by also Türkic commander in Tang's service Sylyg from a tribe Djebshid (Ch. Chjishi Syli), in the Golden Mountains (Ch. Tszin-shan; Altai) inflicted a last defeat to the remains of recently invincible army of Se-yanto Kaganate. The history of the short-lived (only 22 years) Se-yanto state was poorly investigated. Chinese sources contain written records about it. They are isolated digressions in encyclopedias and dynastic histories that will be reviewed in another work of this writer. Exist some partial translations of these records into European languages [1]. With different purposes, the original texts about Se-yanto or existing translations were used in a number of studies, they were used in this article. The article also used testimony of the Byzantine and Muslim authors as a source of paramount importance. The article ethnographic orientation aims to localize the sharply changing territories of moving Se-yanto on the backland of turbulent political and military events that were so rich during the whole seventh century in the history of the Central Asia. Another task is to reveal as far as possible for that remote time the ethnic structure and cosmological beliefs in the Kaganate.

* * *.

2-20

Historical outline

The history of the Se-yanto Kaganate has already been reviewed in a number of studies that were coming from different positions and with different objectives [195].

Translator's Note

Yu. Zuev reference in notes [1] and [195] to Seyanto historiography lists only Bichurin, Chavannes and Liu Mau-tsai as source translators, and Hirth and Klyashtorny as historical scholars. In fact, the list should be extended, to the list should be added Gumilev, who extensively weaved Seyanto's role in the historical events and ethnogenesis of the Türkic peoples, and Duan Lianqin's 1988 work "Xueyantuo During the Period of Sui and Tang" ISBN 7-80546-024-8.

This article mainly offers ethno-geographical interpretation. The tribe Se-yanto at the end of the 6th century resided in the area of Black Irtysh, together with Kibirs they created an Oguz state in the Central Asia, with oasis states Turfan (Ch. Gaochan), Hami (Ch. Iu) and Karashar (Ch.Yantsi) being their tribute-payers. The state did not last for a long time (605-610), and it was in a vassalage dependence from the Western Türkic Kagans.

To free from dependence, the Se-yanto, also known under a name Jeti Eren (Yeti, Dzheti, etc, Eren = Seven Men), numbering 70 thousand people, (ca. 610 AD) trekked (1500 kms to the east, from the forest-steppe strip with the center at the Kara Irtysh, 47N 87E) to the banks of the r. Tola (47.5N 106.5E) in the Northern Mongolia. After a number of convincing victories over the troops of the Eastern Türkic state, the Se-yanto leader Ynan-erkin in 628 received a title Jenchu-Bilge-Kagan (Pearly Wise Kagan), and in 630 transferred the horde court to the Uteken (Khangai/Hangai) mountains (47N 103E) and became the ruler of all lands and tribes that were before under the hand of the Eastern Türkic Kagan. This second Oguz state in the history of the Central Asia was organized by a triad system, it consisted of two wings and a center in Uteken. A head of the western wing (tardush) was Barchak (from that comes the epithet Sir-tardush, "Sirs of the tardush eastern wing" in the Türkic inscriptions), a Kagan son from his main wife; a head of the eastern wing (tolish) was a Kagan son from his second wife Yemek, senior brother of Barchak (It was a Türkic tradition to add a name of the wife's tribe to her name, and then to add the ethnic name of the mother to the names of the sons: Leo the Khazar, Ayar Avar, Asparukh Madjar... and Yemek. This tradition did not apply to the main wife with tamga, the Hatun/Khatun, who could only belong to a single "Hatun's" dynastic tribe of the Kagan/Hatun alliance - Translator's Note). Both were military commanders, Shads, but their ideological and social statuses were unequal. The rivalry and mutual hostility of the brothers probably became the most characteristic traits in the history of the state, and finally were one of the reasons of its destruction. The capital of the Yemek's ulus (province) laid east from Uteken, around the lake-sea Külün (Dalai-nor) and along the banks of the r. Argun. It consisted of Tatar-Oguz Yemek/Kimek tribes. This important conclusion is not principally new. Arguments in its favor were substantiated by S.M.Ahinjanov [196] (Yu.Zuev gives a good-faith credit to S.M.Ahinjanov, whose line of logic and main ethno-linguistical conclusions Yu.Zuev completely dismantles in this article - Translator's Note). They are substantially solid, a failure to take them into account would render the further discussion unproductive. This writer hopes that the new material of written sources cited in the present article will also find its place.
2-21

The death of the Supreme ruler Jenchu-Bilge-Kagan (645), who kept the balance of opposing forces, and the search for a new Great Kagan resulted in a bloody conclusion of the protracted conflict. Yemek was killed right at the funerals of his parent, and his kinfolks, who occupied important posts at the horde court of the deceased, suffered reprisals and fled to the Black Irtysh valley from where began their trek the first Se-yanto. After a short time the new Great ruler Barchak assumed such magnificent titles that they would amply suffice several less vain royals, and suffered a number of defeats from the Tang and Uigurs (Uigurs are another tribal subdivision of the same Tele people, at the time of a lesser status then Seyanto, but with equally strong thirst for independence and aspiration for leadership - Translator's Note). In search for safety, with a handful of horsemen he fled under protection of the judicial tribe Ashtak (Ch. Ashide, tamga ) from which probably and came his mother, but perished in a skirmish with Uigurs. The Kagan clan of the Kaganate has been exterminated, the state was also lost. A few unsuccessful subsequent battles could not change anything any more. The undertaken by the Tang administration division of all Steppe into districts did not leave a place for the main tribes of the defeated Kaganate. A significant part of Yemeks left to Irtysh to the surviving leaders. There began forming a new ethnopolitical community, with its origin in the history of the Se-yanto Kaganate. Therefore the Kimek historical-genealogical legend begins with the words: "the Head (mihtar) of Tatars has died, and left two sons; a senior son seized the kingdom, a younger son began envying his brother; the name of the younger son was Shad... "
1-11

1. THE FIRST NEWS.

Translator's Note

As a preamble to the first news, it should be noted that the Türkic Tele are clearly and consistently identified in the Chinese annals as "Tele ancestors were descendents of the Huns", and "Tele language is similar to the Hun's  language". Any assertion of the opposite, that the Huns were other then Türkic-lingual, is deliberate, patently baseless, and dismissive of the evidence by the contemporaries. That does not disclaim any more that not all tribes in the huge territory of the Hunnish polyethnic state were Türkic than denying that all modern Türkic states, from Turkey in the west to Uiguristan in the east, are not Türkic because they all are polyethnic. Yu.Zuev makes a point of clearly identifying the interchangeability of the terms Tele and Oguz.

Among the Oguz (Ch. Tele) (Modern Chinese Pinyin Tiele 鐵勒 ) tribes up to the middle of the 7th century the Se-yanto tribes were considered to be the "strongest". Describing events in the Türk country that followed immediately after the 581 AD, the author of the "History" composed between 628 and 638, a Byzantian Theophilact Simokatta informs: "Kagan also accomplished another enterprise, and subordinated people of the tribe O (Oguz). That is one of the strongest tribes by virtue of their numerosity and their military exercises in full arms. They live in the east, where flows the river Til which the Türks ordinarily call Black" [2.] "Black Til" is the Black Irtysh (Kara Irtysh). Gardizi wrote "Irtysh is a large river... The river water is black" [3]. In the 7th century Chinese designated it 11804, 419 Ede (< iai-d'iet < Etil) 1 [4] - Etil. Probably, during earlier time the word etil ("river") designated both Irtyshes, the Black (Kara Irtysh) and Blue (Kok Irtysh). But in the 10th (tenth!) century an anonymous Persian author testified that the name "Etil" was retained only for the Blue Irtysh: "Another river Artush (Irtysh) originates in some mountain. It is big water, it is black, good for drinking and pleasant in taste (shirin). It flows between Oguzes and Kimeks, until it reaches a small town Chubin in the Kimek country. Then it runs into the river Atil (Etil)" [5].

1 Here and below the letter "C" designates the large Chinese-Russian dictionary in Russian graphic system / Under ed. of Prof. I.M.Oshanin, Vol. 1-4, Moscow, Ι983-1984. The numbers following letter "C" are dictionary nest numbers; they are followed by Russian transcription of modern phonics of the hieroglyphs from that dictionary. The Latin letters in brackets give their Middle Chinese phonics following Karlgren . Grammata Serica Recensa, Stockholm, 1957.
1-12

The "History of Liang dynasty 502-557" (Nan Liang dynasty/Southern Dynasties) noted that northern neighbors of the state Gaochan (Turfan in the SUAR of CPR) were tribes 10693, 8068 chile (< tiək-lək' < *tegrək) [6]. This name matches the later 11661, 8068 tele (< tiet-lək < *terak), i. e. Oguzes [7]. The subsequent annals inform that directly north (northwest) from Turfan is a picturesque peaked red stone mountain Chishi-shan. 70 li (about 25-30 km) north from it was a mountain C13930, 3267 Tanhan (<tam-γan < *tamγan) - Tamgan, where the snow stays in the summer. On the northern slope of that mountain passed a border with Tele-Oguzes [8]. Outside of the Oguz areas, subordinated to the Türkic Kagan, probably in Dzungaria, were pasturing routs of Warhunits, about whom Theophilact wrote: "At the same time the tribes Tarniah and Kotsagirs (they were from number of Wars and Hunni) fled from the Türks and, having arrived to Europe, joined those Avars who were ruled by [Avar] Kagan. It is said that the tribe Zabender came from War and Hunni. This additional military force that joined Avars was estimated at ten thousand men" [9].

Translator's Note

In the 552 AD, L.Gumilev was placing Wars and Hunni, "pseudo-Avars", in the steppe area north of Aral Sea, with an implication that that was their ancestral territory. Yu. Zuev places in Djungaria Wars and Hunni in the period immediately preceding the Türk's takeover of the Jujan Kaganate in 552, and Seyanto in the period immediately following the Türk's takeover of the Jujan Kaganate. For the history of the Jujan Kaganate, and the Türkic Kaganate advance into Europe, this is a substantial development.

The tribes 419, 8068, 12651 dileer (< d'iet-lək-nzie/*niəg; compare Tarniah) and 3650, 9046 shiban (< ziəp-buıân; compare Zabender) and Kotsagir/*Kochagyr (Ch. 6278, 4297 < kâu-tsia < *qocha) were familiar to Chinese. However, in a first annalistic reference to the Se-yanto tribe they mistook Kara-Irtysh Oguzes and Warhunit tribes for a single group that lived in Dzungaria: "... Southwest from Altai live Se-yanto, Dileer (Tarniah), Shiban (Zabender), Datsi (Tarki) and other [tribes]; they have more than ten thousand troops" [10].

In "Tongdian" ("Collection of the government statutes") after the words "Se-yanto is a Tele (Oguzes) tribe" follows explanation of an unknown early commentator: "In the days of Mujun Tszun (349-370) Shanyu, a leader of Sünnu (Huns) Heloγ Tou (i.e. Alat Tou), in the head of 35 thousand came and submitted to the (dynasty) Early Yan (Syanbi state Former Yan/Sixteen Kingdoms, simplified Chinese 前燕, pinyin: Qinyn, 337-370) 2 [11]. Apparently, the tribe [Yan]to are their descendants. [Yanto] lived intermixed with tribe Se, therefore they are called Se-yanto. Surname [of Kagan clan] Ili-tu. From generation to generation [Se-yanto] were a strong tribe/tszu" [12]. The name of tribe 13865, 4867 hela (< γ-lât < *alat < *ala at "skewbald horse") sometimes is written down with hieroglyphs 13805, 13952 賀賴 helai (γâ-lâ < alai), it is equivalent to 13865, 5807 賀蘭 helan  (< alan~ala "motley, skewbald, mixed") [13]. The quoted comment is taken from the "History of Jin dynasty, 265-420": "[In 357] the Sünnu (Hun) Shanyu Helai Toy led his tribes (bulo) numbering 35 thousand (souls? families?) to submit to Tsekju, [he was] bestowed a title general pacifying the West, Hun of Yunchjun area; settled in the city Pin-shu 3 of the Daitszun district 4" [14]. Helai was one of 19 tribes of the southern Shanyu [15].

.

The reason for double-tiered term Se-yanto is explained by their own historical legend: "They tell themselves that Se-yanto are actually (or: by origin, by their root) a ["royal"] surname Se. In the past they attacked and killed [a leader of] Yanto, and seized a hold of his people, therefore they [began to be called] Se-yanto" [16].

2. The state Early Yan covered territory of the modern provinces Liaoning, Hebei, Shandong, Henan and Shanxi. Its capital was in the city Ye north of the modern district city Linchjan in the Hebei province.
3. The main city of district Pin-shu was west from the modern district city of Gualing (Guiling?) in the Shanxi province.
4. Commandery of district Daitseun was in the city of Puyan 143 li northwest from the modern city Duling (杜陵 ?) in the Hebei province.
1-13

Turfan (Ch. Gaochan) was an important trading and craft center, a transshipment and in many cases terminal point on the northern fork of the Great Silk Road, protected on that section by Oguzes. It was in a vassal dependence on them. In the country was always present a high official of Oguzes; the duty received from the merchant caravans was sent to the ruler of Oguzes. Some local governors wore Türkic attire and did not dare to don any other [17]. As stated above, then the only strong Oguz tribe in this region were Se-yanto.

2. SILK AND SERINDA COUNTRY

From the turn of the eras, the main object of the Chinese export to the Western countries was silk, its price in the western markets was extraordinary high. The manufacturing process of the Chinese silk (from cultivation of silkworms to the silk weaving) was kept in strict secret. But from the first centuries of the new era start coming messages about introduction of silk manufacture in the oasis states of the East Turkestan that were located on the major sections of the East-West trade road, i.e. along the Great Silk Road. These were the states Hami (Ch. Iu), Turfan (Ch. Gaochan), and Karashar (Agni, Ch.Yantsi) [18]. The existence of active trading connections of these states with Iran and Byzantium is evidenced by the significant amount of silver (Sasanid) and golden (Byzantine) coins found in Turfan during archeological studies. The Byzantine coins found in Turkestan are dated by the time of the rule of emperors from Theodosius (480-450) to Justin 2 (565-576) [19]. The Byzantium needs in silk are explained not only by the demands of its own elite and commercial interests of its merchants in subsequent resale. Silk was an attractive equivalent of gold for hiring the heads of the nomadic tribes to participate in incessant wars on the borders, first of all with Persia. In conditions of military necessity, at the court of the emperor Justin I in the year 550 happened a story noted by chroniclers.

Byzantines did not know how the silk was made until a certain Persian came who has brought silkworm eggs in a hollowed staff. From eggs developed worms and were planted on mulberry trees. That story is described in the "Extracts" from Theophan the Byzantine (Theophanes the Confessor) and "Annals" of Zorana (?).

A more detailed and realistic story contains the work of Procopius of Caesarea (ca 536 AD) "Gothic Wars". Two monks "from India" said that they spent many years in the country called Serinda located "north of many Indian tribes". There they precisely learned how to make silk. They said that producers of raw silk are silkworms. It is impossible to bring them alive to Byzantium, but their cocoons (eggs), which the worms produce in great quantity, can be brought, "When they told that, the emperor, promising to bestow on them great favors, convinced them to confirm their story with deeds. Then they went again to Serinda and in 552 brought to Byzantium silkworm cocoons and have done as was said, i.e. to turn cocoons into worms, they fed them with mulberry tree leaves; by that they achieved that later in the Roman land started to be produced raw silk. This is how then the military affairs went on at Romans and Persians, and what happened with silk" [20].

Serinda is not a China, but it also is not India, because it was located "north of many Indian tribes", it is not Middle Asia or the banks of Syr-Darya, where the silk manufacture was not known then yet (otherwise: [21]). A.Stein regarded Serinda to be the ancient civilizations of Eastern Turkestan. His well-known three-volume research work he titled "Serindia" [22], and S.G.Klyashtorny, in his new book "History of Central Asia and monuments of runiform script", placed the story about penetration of the "trading" Sogdian population into Central Asia and China in a paragraph entitled "Periegesa of Serindia" [23].
1-14

The cited material allows to tune up the system of political and other mutual relations of nomads with oasis states. Eastern Turkestan silk producing states Hami (Ch. Iu), Turfan (Ch. Gaochan), and Karashar (Agni, Ch.Yantsi) were in a sphere of vassal dependence from Se-yanto. The most significant was Turfan (Ch. Gaochan) that supported, by virtue of its position along the Great Silk Road, permanent trading links with the countries in the West, including Byzantium, which can be judged by the significant amount of the found sixth century golden Byzantine coins.

By the name of the tribe that controlled this sector of the trading road (Se-yanto < siat an-ian-d'a) the Byzantine writer Procopius of Caesarea called this country Serinda 5 [24]. This identification is appropriate, but the Greek rendition of the two-component name of the tribe leaves an impression of contrivance ("the country between Serika and India").

Translator's Note

Yu. Zuev supports the A. Stein's (1921) and H. W. Haussig's (1953) opinion that "Serindia" is a Greek factitious name for the Seyanto dominion or confederation.

3. TREK TO MONGOLIAIA

By the beginning of the 7th century the Warhunit tribes are not mentioned any more. The Oguz tribes became tribute-payers of the Western Türkic Kagans. The tribute of a dependent head of a nomadic tribe to his suzerain consisted of shipping the trophies seized in military raids against settled agricultural states. In this case tribute included the duties from merchant caravans the Oguzes received from Turfan and forwarded to the Western Türkic Kagan. A failure to send "caravans with tribute" was always threatened by a retaliatory raid of the suzerain. In 605 the Western Türkic Chora-Kagan (Ch. Chulo < tsiwo-la < *Chora) collected the tax beyond any measure; Se-yanto and other tribes were all outraged. Chora became furious. Under a specious cause he invited few hundreds of Oguz leaders and chiefs. He ordered to behead all of them to the last man.

At an immediately assembled kurultai of the rebelling Oguzes installed Gelen from a tribe Kibir (Ch. 8482, 14824 tsibi < kiei-p'iet < *kibir) as a Baga-Kagan under a name Yagmurchyn (Ch. 7453, 7416, 13770 Iuchjen < iak-miut-tsiən < Yaγrnurchin) 5 [25]; his residence was on the northern slopes of the Tamgan mountains. A son of local erkin (or simply: internal erkin; nei sytszin) of the Se-yanto tribe, Yshbara (Ch. 1, 8748, 9107 Ishibo) was installed as a lesser Kagan with a name *Yetir (Ch. 5095, 419 Ege < ia-d'iet < *yetir < *yeti er "seven tribes"); his residence was located north from the Yanmo mountain [26]. No satisfactory identification of the Chinese designation of the C14952, 9176 Yanmo (< 'ien-muât) mountain or mountains was yet found. Tsen Chjunmyan [27], following the W.Tomsen's reading of the Tonyukuk Stella line 26 [28], compares Yanmo with the name of the Ybar mountain pass on the way of the Türkic army to the Yenisei Kyrgyzes in 708 (compare Amanjolov) [29].

Translator's Note

Yu. Zuev does not mention the frequently cited in this article work of S.M.Ahinjanov [196], who substantiated identification of Yanmo mountains with Altai, and Yanmo tribe with people living in Yanmo mountains, and supports L.Hambis and Yu. Zuev identification of Yanmo with Yemeks  [196, p. 46; L.Hambis "Kastim et Ges-Dum", JA, Vol. CCXLVI, 1958, p. 320; Yu. Zuev "From ancient Türkic ethnonymy" // Works of History, Archeology and Ethnography Institute of Kazakh Academy of Sciences, Vol. XV, Alma-Ata, 1962, p.104]. If Yu. Zuev has changed his own 1962 conclusions, this article circumvents the reasons for the change in such major historical identification.

5. In principle, this conclusion belongs to H W.Haussig. The Greek name of the country Σηεινδα he reads Sirinda and correspondingly, the transcription siat ian-d'a he reconstructs as sirinda.
6 The record of 709 has an alternate hieroglyphic rendering of the Kibir tutuk name C3536, 10474, 12466 Emoshi (< ia-muət-sie < yamurchi) - Yamurchy. The word "yagmur" means "rain", the "jagmurchy" means "instigator of rain". Two centuries earlier a Shaman ritual of instigating rain was known in the Urpen (Yueban) state in the territory of modern Tuva. Text about it in N.Ya.Bichurin's translation reads: "Also was said that in their state are such wizards who during Jujan raids could instigate a continuous rain, a strong buran [snowstorm], and even flood. Of the Jujans 2/10 and even 3/10..... (Lacuna)."
1-15

The position of the new Se-yanto state become stronger after a number of defeats by the Western Türkic Chora-Kagan. Se-yanto ruler Yagmurchyn Baga-Kagan gained the hearts of citizens by his excellent human traits, exclusive courage and firmness in business. He achieved that the rulers of the neighboring states began to relate respectfully to the Kaganate. It "completely united" with the Turfan (Ch. Gaochan), Hami (Ch. Iu) and Karashar (Ch.Yantsi) states. Kibir Kaganate also began penetrating the international scene. For example, was recorded a news about Kibir embassy to Chang'an, it presented to the Tang emperor objects of local manufacture . Within the framework of a military accord with emperor, the Kibir Kaganate army in 608 defeated Tuyuyhun tribes. The customs of the population "mostly" were similar with the Türkic customs. The difference was that after a marriage a man until a birth of his child remained in the wife house, and the diseased were buried in coffins. This first Oguz state existed for five years. In the 610, when to the Western Türkic throne was raised Yakui-Kagan (Ch. Egui), both rulers renounced their Kagan ranks [30].

Yakui-Kagan ruled for 7 years (610-617). No records in the sources are known about Se-yanto participation and significant events. Only can be guessed that Yagmurchyn left the political stage in those years, and the district to the north from Tamgan mountains became a residence of the Se-yanto tribal leader Yshbara: "... Uigurs, Bayarku, Edizes, Tongra, Bokuts, and Baisi - all these six tribes living near Utuken mountains, submitted to Shibi-Kagan, and the tribes of the Yshbar-erkin in the Tamgan mountains serve the Yakui-Kagan" [31]. Apparently, this "service" was not heavy, as the successor of Yakui-Kagan, Tong-Yabgu-Kagan (617-630), began his rule by "annexing" (or: "swallowed up"; Ch. bin) with armed hand the Tele/Oguz tribes [32]. It was fraught with a recurrence of still fresh bloody history of execution the Oguz elders. In the 627 Yshbara grandson, Ynan-erkin (Ch. Inan), with his people numbering 70 thousand families (300,000 people) migrated to possessions of the Eastern Türkic El-Kagan (Ch. Seli). His first military action was an attack on the army of Yukuk-Shad (Ch. Yuigu-she), the son of El-Kagan appointed to the post of military commander of all Oguz tribes in the Northern Mongolia. A terrible djut [ice crust], epizootic [mass food poisoning], illnesses and famine of 626-627, internal conflicts and secession from the center by a number of provinces, Yukuk-Shad defeat bled the El-Kagan recently mighty nomadic empire. Ynan with his tribe settled in the valley of r. Tola in Northern Mongolia, and his allies in his struggle against Türks became the Oguz tribes led by an Uigur leader Pusa, who assumed a title kat-elteber (Ch. go-selifa) after a victory over the "one hundred-thousand" army of Yukuk-Shad. This union already fell apart in 629, when (the Seyanto) Ynan-erkin declared himself a Jenchu Bilge-Kagan. The new ruler of Uigurs Tumidu began to be called ulug-elteber (Great Elteber, ca. "Great Chancellor, Great Yabgu") (Ch. hulu-sylifa) (A presence of the Chinese title "sulifa", taken to be Iranian, brought about marvelously romantic ideas about the Iranian origin of the Hunnic Bulgars - Translator's Note). At that stage to the task of final defeat of the First Eastern Türkic state joined the Tang army. In 630 its last El-Kagan ruler was taken in captivity and died after a few years.

4. SEVEN LEADERS. PLEIADES

The Chinese designation for the quantity of Se-yanto people who moved to the east in 627 was "7 van families" (Ch. 6739 van "ten thousand", compare Türk. tümän "ten thousand", i.e. 70,000, "seven tumens"). In 20 years, when Se-yanto Kaganate lived through its last days, and at the hand of the ruler who was seeking safety in flight remained counted soldier troops, was also stated that under his hand was 7 van/tumens (70,000) "plus" [33].
1-16

In other words, the 7 tumens concept was a (conventional) designation for a "strongest of Tele/Oguz" Se-yanto tribe. The nearest analogy to that can serve the conventional septenary system of tribal organization among Tatars of the Inner Mongolia before the semi-historical time. Rashid ad-Din writes "They were seventy thousand dwellings" [34]. The Tatar Khanate in Crimea consisted of two hordes. One of them was called Jedisan. In this two-component word the first component "jedi" means "seven", and "san" means "ten thousand", or simply a parameter of any number. Hence, the combination Jedisan in this case can serve as a designation of a seven-unit conglomerate with the name seven [35]. In the second half of the 18 century about the Jedisan, or Nogai horde between Volga and Ural, was written: "The name Jedisan is not obsolete in this area, it belongs to the powerful Nogai horde proper, which at first had only 7,000 bows (in Tatar a jedi-san), but then strongly multiplied" [36].

In early Türkic states each large tribe was viewed as a military unit and was designated by concept of "10 thousand", "tumen". We shall cite a few confirming examples. A nucleus of the the Western Türkic Kaganate were "ten tribes" (Türk., on oq, Ch. shi sin). This organization is described in the story of the Arabian author: "In one of the days appeared Kagan in the head of ten horsemen, each with a banner. He rose on a precipitous hill overgrown with forest. When the sun ascended, he ordered one of ten to display the banner and to wave it. That has done it, and arrived ten thousands warriors armed from tip to toe, shouting: "Djah! Djah!" And they lined up under the hill all together with their [commander], who announced them before the king, and the king continued to order them all one at a time to display the banners and wag them; and when they did it, arrived ten thousands armed from tip to toe warriors and lined up under the hill, and he kept thinking, until all banners were hung out and a hundred thousand armed from tip to toe people gathered under the hill" [37].

The ethnopolitical skeleton of the Second Uigur Kaganate were tribes on-uyγur "ten (tribes) of Uigurs". The Old Edition of the "History of Tang dynasty" said: "The tribes of Ogya-(Kagan) apparently were called "shi van" "ten tumens" people" [38]. In 840 the Uigur Kagan court was destroyed by the enemy, the Kaganate fell under its attacks, and a part of the population led by Ogya-Kagan carted off from the Northern Mongolia to the Great Chinese Wall. "The army of Ogya-(Kagan) still remained strong. It was called "ten tumens", says the New Edition [39]. Actually it was not hundred-thousands: in five years it was described: "From several tens of thousand people in it remained three thousands" [40]. There are a multitude of similar examples. Their analysis also brought O.Pritsak to the conclusion similar with the one stated above [41].

"Seven tumens", or "70 thousand" Se-yanto is "seven tribes". "The branches of seven surnames/tribes" (tsi-sin chjunlo) of Se-yanto are mentioned in one of the annalistic messages [42]. We shall recall that the "royal surname of Se-yanto confederation was 3962 Se (< siat < *ser).

Translator's Note

Yu. Zuev does not elaborate on the great implications of this tiny morsel. The nomadic tribes of the Sers = Sary = "Pale, Yellow" are known from the most ancient records, and in the territory that extends as far as extend the Eurasian steppes. Their current name is "Kipchaks", etymologically identical with "Sary", meaning "White Sakas". Kipchaks were one of the Tele tribes, and the sources are abundant with references of their pale complexion, light hair, and blue/gray eyes. In addition to endowing many neighboring originally brunette peoples with a sprinkle of light hair, their pale complexion survived till present in the appearance of the Tatars in the Saksin area, former Astrakhan Khanate, and the present Astrakhan Province of the Russian Federation.

Apparently, a part of Se-yanto after the defeat of the Kaganate trekked off to the slopes of Great Khingan and began to be called Shiwei. The Shiwei tribes of Khingan are Tatars [43]. The Tatars-Oguzes were tsi-sin Shiwei "seven-tribe Shiwei", also called Shiwei tsi-sin "Shiwei seven tribes" [44]. Therefore with a maximal attention should be considered the message from the year 732 about the arrival in Chang'an of the great leader (da shoulin) of the "remote barbarians Shiwei" by the name Se/Ser [45].

Translator's Note

Yu. Zuev does not elaborate on the great implications of this tiny tidbit. The nomadic tribes of Shiwei in the literature are depicted as being forever living around Kerulen river in Mongolia, surrounded by the Mongol and Tungus (Ch. Dunhu) tribes, and therefore themselves Mongoloids and Mongolic/Tungus speakers. In reality, a seven-tribe Kipchak Sir-lead Seyanto confederation migrated from the area north of Turfan to the valley of Kerulen river in Mongolia, stayed there for about three generations, was joined by local Tatars, and began to be called a seven-tribe Shiwei by the Chinese, and after a brief stint at leading the takeover of the Türkic Kaganate, had to retreat back to their original mountain valleys north of Turfan. The local Kerulen Tatars, like the visiting Seyanto, belonged to the Tele confederation, but were from its Oguz branch. No doubt that many Seyantos stayed behind in their native mountains, many different tribes joined Seyanto during their hour of glory in Mongolia, and many of them rolled with Seyanto on the way back after Seyanto's demise, again leaving behind tribal splinters both in the Kerulen area, and along their westward return trek.

The Kagan's ten horsemen from the cited Arabic story, and Eshtemi-Kagan's "ten great leaders" (Ch. da shoulin) in the Chinese record of the ancient Türkic legend [46] personified and symbolized army and people of "ten tribes". In precisely the same way the ethnonym jedi er ("seven leading men"), personified in the name of the first Se-yanto Kagan, was a Türkic designation of Se-yanto "seven tribes".
1-17

In the ancient Türkic runiform Ongin inscription (line 5) they are named Yeti Eren "seven leading men": bu tabγachda yiraya ti γ oγuz ara yeti eren yaγi bolmish - "From this [state] Tabgach in the north among strong Oguzes [the people] Yeti Eren was the enemy". The document 1283 of P.Pelliot's Tibetan collection mentioned the people ye-dre (~yedri < yedi eri "men-leaders of seven [tribes]") with translation of this name as "seven tribes": "... Further north live seven tribes Ye-dre. They do not have a common ruler. They constant fight with Hores (Uigurs). Their tents are covered with birch bark. Instead of wine they drink birch sap, which they draw like milk. From the gorge sides the country is especially inviolable" [47].

Translator's Note

Yu. Zuev cites the 1956 work of J. t J. that describes ethnological feature of the Se-Yanto compound as twin ethnical conglomerate, with one component being a typical nomadic cattle-breeding people traveling in nomadic wagons, and the other component being clearly distinct, typical mountain taiga foot hunting people, who covered their yurts with birch bark instead of felt, drunk birch sap instead of kumys, and fought on foot. The all-important marriage and burial traditions also were distinct from the common Türkic traditions. The ethnological descriptions clearly depict a dominating Türkic dynastic tribe Se leading a dependent "budun" people Yanto. The dependent Yanto in the symbiotic alliance may be any traditionally forest people, most likely either Eniseians from the west, speaking Türkic-influenced former Ket language, or Tunguses from the east, speaking Türkic-influenced Tungus or already early Mongolic language. The word "urker" for the moose apparently belongs to the language of forest tribe.

The tradition of ethnic septet (septenary unity) in that part of Asia is known since the times of "white-horsed" and "bald" (i.e. clean-shaven, Moon-headed) Argippeians 7 [48] in the Sayano-Altai in the Herodotus "History" (Book 4, 23-24), and their branch in the Nanshan foothills (CPR, Gansu prov.) - "white-foreheaded" (i.e. clean-shaven, Moon-headed), "white-horsed" (bai ma) and seven-tribal Yuezhi (< *ngiwat-tei < *uti/ati, asi) (Ases).

In the myths of ancient Asians, the Sun received an image of a red/reddish horse able to cover in a day from the dawn to the sunset a huge distance in the sky; the moon was perceived in an image of a white horse covering the same way fromthe sunset till the dawn. The hieroglyphs in the transcription of Yuezhi have semantic meaning: "clan of the Moon", or "Lunar branch". Therefore the tribal septet of the Argippeians and Yuezhis is explained by the seven-night phases of lunar month, noticed still in the Paleolithic days.

But also exists a supporting record. According to the ancient Chinese astrology, these tribes were patronized by a seven-star constellation Pleiades (Taurus) called Mao "Hair of [rain]" (compare Rus. Volosyni "Stars of cattle god Volos (Hair)/Veles"); "In the northwest are peoples Hu, Ma and Yuezhi, who dress in felt and furs, and shoot bows, they represent [the area] of Darkness in; the force in is embodied in planets the Tai-bo (Venus, compare Kaz. Sholpan) and Chang-sin (Merkury; compare anc. Türk. suv yulduz; compare Kaz. Kimi Sholpan). They are fortunetelling reading the stars north from Tian-tsze (Heavenly street; constellation Taurus, Bull) constellation. As a main constellation they hold constellation Mao" [49]. In the constellation Mao (Pleiades) the ancient Chinese saw with naked eyes seven stars, and its folk name was Tsi-tszymei "Seven sisters". In the ancient Greek mythology Pleiades are seven daughters of Atlant (Atlas?) and his wive Pleiona [50].

Among the ancient peoples of Eurasia this group of stars was first of all connected with the concept of a rain and wetness. Its most known Türkic name was Ulker/Urker. In the Mahmud Kashgari work and in the "Collection of annals" by Rashid ad-Din the tribe with the same name is recorded in same list of the Oguz tribes. Analyzing the tamga of that tribe (in the edition and translation of "Collection" by N.I.Berezin), G.N.Potanin noted that "its image represents three sloped lines terminating at the top with a stylized image of stars. To the left of them is an image of a bow. This image coincides with a number of rock drawings" [51]. N.I.Berezin used a manuscript of the composition where the name of the tribe was written with incorrectly marked diacritic above the last letter in the word [..] urkiz. In the published much later critical edition of the Persian text of this composition [52] are noted correct variations [..] urker and [..] urkir, which matches the phonetics recorded by Mahmud Kashgari, Urekir/Urker [53]. The three inclined lines is a slanting rain; the mythological bow is an image of a rising moon (crescent) (for example, tamga of Baiat/Baian/Bayan tribe - Translator's Note).

7. In the ancient Greek language the word Argippei means "white-horsed" (i.e. "with a white-horse")
1-18

In our opinion the image of the tamga can be perceived as an image of Urker on a background of the starry sky and moon. Many works were devoted to the research of the place and significance of the Urker in the astrological ideas of the Türks and in particular of the Kazakhs, to the clarification of the semantics of that term [54]. Conclusions about the meaning of the word "ulker/urker" are diverse. In the Kazakh folklore it had a meaning of "moose".

The former senior sultan of the Bayan-Aul district Musa Chorman, who was collecting ethnographical materials for his nephew Ch.Ch.Valihanov, noted: "In Russian the Urker is Moose, seven stars in one place; in May they disappear and are not be visible for 40 days, after that time they again rise in the east, on the southern side of the so-called Kus djol ("Bird's road"). When Urker ascends, there is always rain and wind; if at that time was plenty of rain, is expected a good year and fattening of the cattle, if not enough - is coming a drought and lack of forage" [55].

Such meaning for the word urker is unique: in a number of Türkic languages (Tuva, Kazakh, Tatar, Khaka, etc.) the moose is called bulan. The legendary Khazarian Kagan who accepted Judaism was called Bulan. P.B.Golden writes about him: "In Türkic languages the meaning of this word is abundantly clear, "moose", "deer". Probably, it is a totemic name. The word bulan should be considered as being Türkic" [56]. In the opinion of W.Bang and A.Gabain, supported by A.M. Scherbak, the word bulan goes back to Ch. 14943, 4151 pao-lin, where the first hieroglyph means "moose" (Alces machis); "mythical unicorn moose", and the second means "unicorn, a fantastic animal; a large deer, a maral". The combination bao-lin (< b'au-lien < *baulän < bolän) served as a a basis for the Türkic bulan [57]. Mahmud Kashgari wrote about a horned animal freely visiting Kypchak settlements and somehow connected with rain/snow. Its horns form an inverted vessel turned to the Sky. In it accumulate rain and snow water. The hinds drink it from the horns of the stags, and the stags drink it from the horns of the hinds. This animal is called bolan/bulan [58].

The Se-yanto ideological symbol with obvious totemic features was balan (compare Chuvash. palan "moose"). In the Chinese records describving the same episode it was transcribed: 10104, 5807 balan (bwat-lan), 1810, 5807 mo-lan (muâ-lân), C1810, 12784 molan (muâ-lân). In 647, in the months immediately following the defeat of Se-yanto from the Tang army, as a token of full submission they sent to the emperor an allegorical symbol - "deer balan; its hide is like of a bull, and the horns, like of a deer 10280 tszya" [59].

Translator's Note

An alternate putative hypothesis connects Seyanto and their Kimek descendents with the Kai tribes, whose tamga and name comes from Mongolic "kai" = "snake" (and corresponding Türkic "gilan/djilan"). By citing a record of different totem among Seyanto, Yu. Zuev discreetly pulls a rug from under that alternative hypothesis based on a main argument of the snake totem [196]. Yu. Zuev also cites a contemporary Chinese source, a Persian author of 10 century, and the linguist Mahmud Kashgari of 11th century that noted that Shiwei Tatars were Oguzes and spoke Türkic language; the alternative hypotheses, however ingrained by centuries of state-led propaganda, need to explain these direct testimonials.

After 647 AD, when one part of the "royal" tribe Se (< siat) in the territory of Northern Mongolia was deprived of the Kagan's rights, and another part turned up on the eastern slopes of the Great Khingan heading the Shiwei-Tatar confederation (see above), the Yanto gained a new political status. Like a number of Oguz tribes, they joined the Second Türkic Kaganate created in 681AD, and began to be called (in the Chinese sources) Tutszue-Yanto (Tujue-Yanto, T'u-küe-Yanto, etc), though in many documents of that time by tradition they are called Se-yanto, creating for the modern researchers an illusion of still existing Kaganate. In 715 a number of Oguz tribes, fleeing from unpredictable and pernicious raids of the growing old suzerain Kapagan-Kagan, trekked away under a Tang protection. Among them were the Türks-Yanto, named in first case Se-yanto, and in the second case Tutszue-Yanto. Their leader, tutuk of the Tarhun (Ch. Dahun) district, had a Tang title "general of military guard of the right side". His name was Balan [60]. If the Urker cult in an image of a moose was real, it has to be concluded that it could only arise among the inhabitants of the forest zone.
1-19

5. FORGING STATEHOOD

Raising Ynan on Kagan throne was done under pressure from the Tang court interested in stripping El-kagan of the rights to the supreme power in the huge region, and also in final dismemberment of the Türkic state, a source of many conflicts on their northern borders. Only in the following 630 year, El-Kagan was routed and taken captive by the Tang. The leadership in Steppe (i.e. in territory of the the Western Türkic Kaganate - Translator's Note) completely passed to Jenchu-Bilge-Kagan. Automatically and legitimately he became a suzerain of all peoples in vassal dependence on the former ruler. The spread of the new state increased as it gained strength. The balance of forces and military-political situation constantly changed. In one or few years the former boundary markers disappeared; instead of them appeared new markers. After the horde court was transferred to Uteken in the year 630, records say, its limits in the north reached Mohe-Tungus tribes. The "Description of the Universe" said that Baisi tribe of the Oguzes in the east neighbored Mohe, "together they were subjects of El-Kagan" [61]. In 6th century a record about Shiwei stated: "No one of nomadic tribal land pastures have a ruler, people are poor and weak, therefore the Türks-Tutszue always ruled them with the help of three tutun-governors" [62]. The same was in the 7th century: "They depend on Türks-Tutszue" [63]. These territories became a part of the new state possessions.

Jenchu Bilge organized successful raids against Türkic Koby-Kagan (Ch. Tszüibi) who settled in the northern part of Altai. "In the east (are tribes) Shiwei. In the west (are) Golden Mountains (Altai), in the south (are) Türks (of Ordos), in the north (is) Baikal (Bei-hai; text wrongly spells Hanhai); this is the former country of Sünnu". He had 200 thousand army. Aiming to strengthen the state structure, he divied Kaganate into two wings, western and eastern, with a center in Uteken. The Shad military commander of the western side (tardush) became his son from senior wife, Barchak (Ch. C10104, 7224 Bachjo < b'wât-tsiak < *barchaq), who already received for his victories in the west a rank of Eshtemi-yabgu (Ch. Shadanmi ehu). He ruled the tribes of Yanto proper, who were pasturing west from Uteken. The annals more often called him Tardu-Shad [64]. The Shad military commander of the eastern side (tolish; etymology: Mahpirov [65]) - became Kagan's senior son from one of the second wives, Yemek (Ch. C11804, 4618 Imou 8 [66] <iai-məu/*məg < *yemäk). Annals usually called him Tulishi (Tolish), though his name Toli-Shad is also known: (Wei Chjen: Tuli-she, Mori: Tölish Shad) [67]. he ruled "mixed tribes" that lived east from Uteken (Khangai foothils).

The hierarchical position of the two brothers was unequal. Contrary to the tradition developed in last centuries BC, according to which only a son of the mother from the eastern (i.e. left, tolish, and "Queen's") wing was rated as the fully rightful successor to the Supreme throne, there the situation was opposite. Yemek not once was reminded of his deficiently noble origin; the source noted that he himself understood the flaw of his status, especially so as his army was incomparably smaller than that of his younger brother.

To sow the grains of future conflict, and with that to weaken the growing power of the state, the Tang emperor granted both brothers a rank of a "lesser Kagan" [68].

8. Instead of Iman. The phonics of the hieroglyph 4618 mou see: Kansi tszydyan, 1958, p. 964 [66].

WESTERN WING (tardush)

The lesser Kagan of the tardush wing ruled the "aboriginal" tribes Yanto. The accomplished by the Tang after the fall of Se-yanto Kaganate and defeat of Koby-Kagan a total "subdivision" of the whole Steppe into districts with indication of the tribal names and their territory almost did not touch Yanto. The reason behind was a mass outpouring from the former territories and a destruction of the ethno-social connections inside the confederation.
1-20

The quartermaster's register of the tamgas that branded horses coming from the vassal tribes for the needs of Tang army (mid 7th century) says: "Yanto horses are like [the horses] of Tongra tribe; they are from a seed of white horses with black manes and gray horses. Nowadays [the tribes] strongly dispersed, a multitude left [to all] four sides, and [remaining] now live north from Uchjou" [69].

Ashtaks

Only the tribe Ashtak remained whole, they did not participate in the bloody internecine events. Being Yuezhis, i.e. the Queen's by origin [70], according to the old matrilineal legal tradition it personified the land and the people. One more circumstance ensured its special position. The Erkin of that tribe hereditary (?) held a "shitszyan" post. The transcription 5320, 11369 shitszyan (< zi-gian) ascends to the Türkic word chiqan (compare Sogd. Shykn) which "in turn transmits a Chinese term 235, 2371 shigu-an (< dzi:-kuân) "judge" (compare Livshits) [71]. In other words, transcribing the word chykan, Chinese have not recognized in it their own term shiguan "judge", and transcribed it with absolutely different hieroglyphs. The Ashtaks were a "judge" tribe. Thus it is pertinently to recall that in the First Türkic Kaganate one of its highest dignitaries from the tribe Ashtak had a post yargan "sheriff" (judicial executor) (Lu Sui (Xu Liu) [72]: 14968, 15496 jehan < nziat-γan < yarγan). Precisely within this tribe sought his last safety Barchak, who usurped the Supreme power during the waning days of the (First Türkic) Kaganate. The arriving Uigurs killed him. In the 647 the tribe Ashtak (Ch. Ashide; Malyavkin [73]: Ashina) was ostensibly relocated to the district Tsilyan [74]. The transcription tsilyan (and its numerous variations) transferred a Yuezhi-Tohar word kiglen "chariot", "cloud chariot of waters and fertility". It was one of the main ideological symbols of the ancient Yuezhi. So were called the mountains (Rihtgofen ridge) in Nanshan system. By it name and in the vicinity of these mountains was created the Tsilyan district. Because of wide spread of Yuezhi tribes or their (at least, ideological) descendants in the Central Asian expanses, existed a number of Tsilyan districts. Which of them was subdivided into the Western and Eastern was probably not clear to the Tang bureaucrats themselves. In the 652 both districts were discontinued [75]. The quartermaster register quoted above was created for practical purposes. Therefore its geographical references for the location of tribe Ashtak (Ashide) can be taken as factual and exact; its mentioning of the Western Tsilyan district allows to date this records by the time prior 652, when it was dispensed with. "The Ashtak horses are of one breed with [the horses of the tribes] Sunun and Chjishi; they are located on northern [slopes] of Inshan mountains, in the northern [part] of the mountain river Kuyan valley, in the Western Tsilyan district" [76].

In the same years the district C8509, 4277 Tsitan < kiei-tân < *ketän (= Kidan = Kithan has been founded? Were Yanto proto-Mongolic Kidans/Kithans? Giving an alternative explanation, J.Zuev does not stop on the strange phonetic concurrence of the name of Kidans and Kitai with the name of administrative district, which usually match the name of the tribe - Translator's Note). "In the first year of the period Yung-huei (2.2.650-26.2.651) the Yanto leaders (shou-lin) who fled earlier asked to return to the Tang state. Emperor Gao-jun re-established again the district Tsitan for their pacification and rendering assistance" [77]. In the 1-st version of New Edition the essence of the episode was altered: "The district Tsitan is established for collecting the Yanto dispersed and fleeing tribes (bulo)" [78]. In both cases the localization of the district is absent. The same, but in another hieroglyphic rendition this name of the district existed at Ediz tribe (Ch. 5042, 8750 阿跌 ade <a < d'iet < ediz) 1453, 2794 Jityan (< kiei-dien < kitan/ketan) [79]; it was located southeast of the Magy-kurgan (Ch. Mohe-kuhan) mountains [80]. In hieroglyphic rendition 7253, 6752 Jedan (< g'iat-tan < ketän) in the 8th century it is found among Türgeshes in the valleys of the r. Chu: "... North from the Suyab city (nowadays fortress Ak-Beshim) flows the river Suyab (r. Chu). 40 li north from the river is a Ketan mountain. Here Kagan of ten [Türgesh] tribes appoints annually the highest officials - junzhan" (Ouyang Xiu , compare.. (Lacuna). The elite of the Edizes and Türgeshes was used to...... (Lacuna)
1-21

(Lacuna)... was htai. A postscript to the Türkic colophon of the sacred Manihean "Book of two fundamentals" (Yki yiltiz nom), intended for Manihean proselytism of among Türgesh "people of ten tribes (on oq)" said that one of its readers (and preachers?) was from the Htai area [82]. A devout Moslem Mahmud Kashgari (11th century) in his "Dictionary" translated the word ketan as "difficulty", but in a usual for him etymological hint gave an idea about its appearance: ketân kördi keragü yüδti "saw it - heaped a tent on the back" [83]. In a number of Türkic languages the word alasha/alacha means not only a "back", but also a "tent" [84]. If such reconstruction would be admitted as acceptable, it can be concluded that in the conditions of nomadic steppe a Manihean sanctuary chapel could be located in a tent. Such conclusion is not new. A similar practice noted Euseus Hieronim in 403 AD: "... Gethic army carries along church tents" [85].

The sources do not mention other Yanto administrative and territorial units established in the middle of the 7th century, i.e. right after the fall of the Kaganate, though Yanto sometimes are named as a military force on the Tang side [86]. In the 680 a certain part of them probably participated in a revolt of the Türkic tribes of the Shanyu viceroy against the Tang [87]. A message of the same year said that "Seyanto Dahun with the others - all [leaders] of five Oguzes with population of 40 thousand families (ca 170,000 people) came and submitted" [88]. The Yanto head (shoulin) Dahun became a tutuk military commander, he was given a rank of the "general of courageous right side guard" [89]. Transcription 11120, 4324 dahun (< d'ât-γüən < tarχun) is a tarhun (variation of the term tarhan). The Tarhun's territory of military commander office (dudu-fu) covered the northern part of the modern Shaanxi province [90]. It can be deduced that 70 years earlier the named "five districts" were a part of the "native" Barchak's Yanto-Tardushes. Their list is given in the 1-st geographical section of the New Edition of the "History of Tang dynasty" which states that the headquarter centre was in Ninsho (modern Uilin district in the Shaanxi province). In addition to the analyzed above Tsitan, it also named districts Guyan, Vutsijo, Gu, and Disu.

1. Transcription C2104, 5026 Guyan (< kuo-yan < *küyän ~*qııyan) and its numerous Early Middle Age variations ascend to the Yuezhi name Kuyan for the White Stream (Milky Way), river (Edzin-gol) and lake/"seas". 2109, 11347 Tszuiyan (< kiwo-ıan < *kuyan) - Kuyan, their main cult. The Chinese translation of this word was C2658, 2690 bai-si "White Torrent/Stream". During the early Türkic time its traces were retained in hydronymy, oronymy, toponymy, and ethnonymy in that part of Asia. Probably in this case the subject is Kuyan/Kuin-Tatars [...], who subsequently lived in the basin of the lake Buir-nor [91].

2. Transcription 6811, 13365, 1821 butsijo (< buo-kiət-nziak < *buqarsiq) reflects the name of tribe the Bukarsyk. Syrian writer Zachariah Ritor mentioned Bagrasik tribe among peoples living in tents. They "subsist on cattle meat and fish, wild animals and weaponry. Inwards from them live Amarzats and people-dogs" [92]. According to the Ancient Türkic Dictionary (p. 125) the word buqarsiq means "plough", "harness".

3. Transcription 7778 gu (< kuət) reflects the name of tribe Küt. In the quoted Uiguro-Tibetan document they are called "small tribe Gud", they live west from seven tribes Ye-dre (< yedi eri) [93]. This name is also listed in the "Family tree of Turkmens", it says "In those days Uzbeks were called Moguls. Came four Moguls and, hired as farm laborers to Hyzyr-chora, they looked after his cattle... All of them grew rich.... And to everyone who asked them: "What people you are?" - they answered: "We are people of Hyzyr-bai". Little by little they began to be called Hyzyr-ili. In Hyzyr-ili was one urug, it was called Kutlar [....] [94] (urug = clan, tribe, subtribe; one urug = only one urug).

4 Transcription C11453, 9140 Disu (< tiei-siwok) does not yet yield to reconstruction.

(Continuation in the following issue.)

Yu. A. Zuev
KAGANATE SE-YANTO AND KIMEKS
(Türkic ethnogeography of the Central Asia in the middle of the 7th century)
Shygys, 2004, No 2 pp 3-26

Continued from No 1 (2004)
2-3

EASTERN WING.

Yemeks

The name of a senior son from one of the Kagan second wives was Yemek. For the first time this name (Personified ethnonym) in the form 6998, 408 Imo (<imək < *yimäk) is mentioned at the beginning of a new era. A Chinese spouse of their state judge from the tribe Süibu (< siu-puk) called Un in the local language of the northern Sünnu was called "Lady Yimek" (Imo-tszuitsy) [95]. In 64 AD were planned a conclusion of a peace treaty and opening of trade between the northern Sünnu and Han. The northern Shanyu "has sent a governor (wan) Imo-Tszy for trade with the Han merchants..." [96]. Transcription 6968, 8428 imo (<i-mâk) reflected the initial term *yimäk, the word 1898 tszy means "riches" (equivalent to the Türkic  "Bei, Bai, Bek, Beg", usually translated as "Prince").

The first Chinese account about Yemeks (Ch. C1088, 8444 yanmo < iäm-mâk < yemâk), belonging to the beginning of the 7th century , gives a title of their leader yanmo-nyan-dolu-tsue-sytszin. The word C14646 nyan (< niem) is a transcription of a Sogdian term nam (n'm) "name", "by name". It betrays that this information was recorded from the words of a Sogdian. That makes it precious, because Sogdian merchants were main functionaries on the uncountable roads and footpaths of the Great Silk Road that wove the whole continent. They knew the real ethnography of the region, not just a hearsay. The transcription 1652, 13660 dolu (< tuət-liuk) reflects the Türkic term turuq "pure", as a rule peculiar to a religious, mainly Manichean sphere. The combination of hieroglyphs 5785, 8716, 3234 tsue sytszin was a usual transcription of a Türkic title kül/köl-erkin [97]. In the reconstructed form the Chinese record can be read: yemak-nam turuq kül-erkin "Turuk kul-erkin, called Yemek".

The fragment of this message in the "Primary turtle" (Tsefu yuan gui [Primary turtle of royal library]) begins with the words: "The tribe (bulo) of the Turuk kul-erkin, called Yemek, and also Keshtim tribe (kyshtym = a dependent, vassal tribe among Tele; i.e. Yemeks and a tribe of their Vassals - Translator's Note) (Ch. keshidan, T. Ges-Dum [98]) - both (in the text: together) are located east from [the country of the] Skewbald/Motley horses (tribe Ala - at/Alat)..." [99]. The extensive ranges of the country of the Skewbald/Motley horses in Siberia extended from east to west for a month of travel (ca. 1000 kms - Translator's Note), from south to north - for 50 days of travel (ca. 1500 kms - Translator's Note). A road (from Sogd?) to that country passed through "five territories of the large tribes Tutszue-Türks", where is easy to discern the territories of five tribes of the right wing (Ch. Nushibi) of the the Western Türkic Kaganate. It fell in 656. But the same text mentioned Türgeshes (Tutsishi), whose state was created in the same lands in 699. Hence, the text vas compiled from records of different times. A quotation from the "Arch of statutes" ("Arch of statutes of the government"): "In 30 days of travel south (ca. 1000 km) from the country of Skewbald horses (Alats/Boma) (they) come to Türgeshes. In another 30 days of travel (east) (they) arrive to Turuk kul-erkin called Yemek. In another 8 days of travel (east) (they) come to Keshtims. Of them, the Skewbald Horses and Yemeks do not breed cows, sheep, or other domesticated cattle. Their wedding customs are identical with the Türkic customs..." [100]. It should be kept in mind that the Yenisei Kyrgyzes were southern neighbours of the country of Skewbald horses (Alats) [101]. Thus, the Yemeks of this message wound up in the east of the countries of Skewbald horses (Alats) and Yenisei Kyrgyzes, and of Uteken (Khangai foothils) (47N 103E).

Translator's Note

thnology.

Ethnological feature of Yemeks and Alats, but not their subjects kyshtyms, are identical with Türkic, they breed horses and do not keep other domesticated cattle, and their marriage traditions are identical with Türkic, and thus are different from the Yanto traditions of forest tribes.

Geography.

Since the location of Türgeshes is well established (they populated Jeti-su), the eastern-most Keshtims were located 750 km west of Uteken:
Alats (54N 78E) + 1000 km south =>
Türgeshes in Jeti-su (45N 78E) + 1000 km east =>
Yemeks (48N 90E) + 250 km east =>
Keshtims (48N 93E) + another 750 km east =>
Uteken (47N 103E)

Translation

This travel guide translation differs from the translation given by Yu.Zuev in his "From ancient Türkic ethnonymy" // Works of History, Archeology and Ethnography Institute of Kazakh Academy of Sciences, Vol. XV, Alma-Ata, 1962, pp.105-106, which in the description of the third leg of the trip reads "In another 30 days of travel (direction is not given) (they) arrive to Yanmo". The unexplained difference between reading "Yanmo" and  "Turuk kul-erkin called Yemek" is puzzling, do the sources belong to different editions, different compilations, or these are different readings of the same source? Can  Yanmo of 1962 be another proof of its equivalency with Yanmo of 2004, and where Turuk kul-erkin comes from if it was not in the 1962 text? These translations are different at a crucial juncture.

2-4

Shiwei-Tatars

The description of the eastern wing of Se-yanto Kaganate includes mentioned in the chronicle among others a reference point "In the north [is] the river Tszuilun" [102]. In the opinion of the Chinese scientist of the 19th century Din Tsyan, it is not a "river" and not a "mountain" (stated in different editions), but a known lake (bo) Tszuilun [103]. Transcription 13757, 6237 (with graphic variations) Tszuilun (< kiu-liuen < *külün) - Kulun (Külün) was also better preserved in other texts. A geographical work of Tszya Dan (730-805) said: "There is a lake Tszuilun. The [tribes] living around this lake, all of them are Shiwei" [104.] Another message said "Now the most western of Shiwei, who border with Uigurs, is the tribe 7696, 14346, 3007 Usugu (< uo-suo-kuo). They live southwest from the lake Tszuishu (should be: Tszuilun)" [105]. Considering that in the archaic text insert about Tatars (see below) Rashid ad-Din locates in this area a tribe with a Mongolian (Kidan?) designation Usugu-Mangun (River Manguses), the third hieroglyph of the Chinese transcription (3007 gu) can be taken as a slack depiction of a more complex hieroglyph 3019 ty (< d'uo) and to read the whole transcription Usutu (< uo-suo-d'uo < *usutu). The tribes Shiwei and Khangai tribes were Tatars [106]. They were Tatars-Oguzes. A contemporary Chinese source called them "Kulun Oguzes" (Ch. 5973, 6238, 433, 5973, 14585 gulun ugus < kuət-liuen 'uk-kuət-si < *külün oγuz [107]). A Persian author of 10 century (Persian geography) considered Tatars to be Oguzes [108]. Mahmud Kashgari (11th century) called the Tatars as one of the Türkic peoples [109].

The lake Kulun is a modern lake Kulun/Hulun, alternatively Dalai-nor, in the Autonomous Region Inner Mongolia of the CPR (49N, 117E). Its tributary is a largest river of Mongolia Kerulen/Keluren (valley length 1264 km). During tropical rain seasons and high waters the Dalai-nor through a Muddy Trough becomes a second source of the r. Argun (the first source is r. Hailar), on the Dalai-nor bank, as a memory of a remote past, stands a small town Shiwei. Dalai-nor is a largest lake, its valley during some periods could reach 75-100 kilometers. The Mongolian word dalai (compare Türk. talui) means "sea".

This area, populated in the Early Middle Age by Tatar-Oguzes tribes, was known for the mining of silver. A Yuezhi "Tocharian" designation of silver/whiteness was arki (dialect A), arkwi (dialect B). That terminology was retained in the areal toponymy until the 13th century. Especially well known was a silver source carrying a certain sacral importance with a Tocharo-Türkic name Arkui/Alkui-bulak (Ch. Alehui-bulahe; compare arkwi) 1. The "Secret legend of Mongols" ( 129, 141) said, in particular, that in 1201 there, at the confluence of the rivers Argun and Kan was held a kurultai of the tribes of a "white rank" for the erection to the Gurkhanship of a leader from the tribe Djadaran, with swearing to him of an oath of loyalty. Shortly mentioning that, Rashid ad-Din introduces into the text a story about Tatars, not connected with the previous narration. Despite of a presence of several features characteristic for the end of the 12th century, its events can be confidently dated by the time right after the destruction of the Second Uigur Kaganate, departure of a part of its population under a protection of the city-state Kangju (*Kanka-dih; here: *Kan-katy) in the Shiwei country, and establishments in its western part ("seven Shiwei tribes"!) of a Kirgiz suzerainty. A few names contained in the short story are distorted.

1. A direct analogy to this is found in the SUAR territory (Eastern Turkestan) of the of CPR. During the early Türkic time the spurs of Tien Shan between the Tocharian princedoms Kucha and Argi (Yantsi, Karashar) had a name Arkui or Argu "Silvery". In Türkic they were called Kumush-tag "Silver mountains" and Ai-kumush-tag "Lunar-silver mountains", in Chinese In-shan "Silver mountains". Near Karashar was a miracle spring Argai-bulak. N.Ya.Bichurin wrote about Tien Shan: "Actually the Heavenly mountains range begins in the Kashgar district from Argu-togo on the north-eastern side of the Kara-kul. Chinese also called this ridge White Mountains Bai Shan [110].
2-5

The names are reconstructed by juxtaposition of different Djami at-tavarih manuscripts and drawing on other sources in another work of this author. "...They lived along the lower courses of the rivers. At the confluence of these rivers is formed the river Ergune (i.e. Argun) (51N, 120E). This river is extremely large. Along it lives one Mongolian tribe called Usutu-Mangun. The borders [of its location] now adjoin (lacuna in the text; a surmised Chinese primary source says "with Uigurs"; see above). That river is near a city called *Kankati, and it stands in a place where it merges with the river Kam (Gam, Kan, Ch. Gen-he) (51N, 121E). This city belongs to the land of Kyrkyzes. It is stated that this river flows to one area neighboring with a sea. Silver (nakre) there is everywhere. The names of that area are Alakchin, Laktan, Munggu (Münggü) and Keluren. It is said that all horses there are skewbald (ala); each horse is strong like a four-year-old camel. There all tools and utensils are from silver" [111].

Almost three century ago the traces of Kankati city and well have were found by G.F.Miller, the author of a fundamental work "History of Siberia". In 1735 from the results of his travel across Siberia and r. Argun he wrote a detailed article "Ancient monuments in Selengin and Narechin districts". Miller wrote "12 versts (versta = 1.06 km, 12 versts = 13 km) downstream from the city Tsuruhaitu river Gan runs into Argun, from the same side river Haul runs into Argun. The terrain between them is flat. The only small mountain towers at identical distance from both rivers, 10 versts (11 km) from Argun. On the southern sole of this mountain are remains of fortification, the most prominent among other monuments of antiquity in those places. Fortification is surrounded by a bulwark (of human height) encircling a quadrangular space for approximately 300 sajen (sajen = 1.76 m, 300 sajen = 530 m), and a moat. In the middle of each bulwark line are gates that can be approached not directly, but sideways, because they are protected by a semicircular embankment which on the other side joins the wall. On the corners are projections similar to bastions. The sides of bulwark match geographical directions. In the middle of the space protected by the mentioned bulwark is other quadrangular bulwark identical with the first in height, 80 sajen (140 m) long from north to south, and 40 sajen (70 m) wide from east to west. Above the fortification constructed another fortification like a citadel. A half of the space occupied by this citadel, toward the north and on higher ground, is similar to a cross of identical height set in a base. Not far from external eastern bulwark is a pit that looks like a long-ago caved-in well. Apparently, there once was a plentiful spring which does not exist now" [112].

The presence of Mongol-speaking (Kidan-speaking) tribes in the huge polyethnic Shiwei massif is known [113].

In any case, their influence on Oguz masses existed, it was significant in scope. One of "names" of the Munggu area was "Silver". In the nominal form this word sounds Münggür/Müngür. It was a calque of the Türkic Kumush/Gumush (kümüsh/gümüsh) with the same meaning. All three forms coexisted, which is explained by the ethno-linguistic situation in that region. The Persian anonymous Geography of 982 AD and the Arabic work of 1120 AD the tribe Kumush ([...]; in the text [...]) is listed second in the defective list of Khingan belt tribes ("on the left from Chin-China in toward summer sunrise", i.e. in northeast, "between the Chin and Hirhizes" [114]. The Chinese chroniclers knew a "tribe at Gumush (Ch. Humusy) mountain (or: in mountains)", the "vassal tribes living near Gumush mountain (or: in mountains)" [115]. For the river Argun/Argunia such name in the Chinese documents was not yet found. It can only be limited to the assumption that its name Ärgänä (Rashid ad-Din: [...]; Van Govei: E-er-gu-na) ascends to the Tohc. ärkinnä "silverish", "whiteness".
2-6

In the 1125 the tribe Gumush participated in a kurultai of the nomadic tribes that were supporting Karakytai Elui Dashi in his self-exile in the Jeti-su [116]. In the "History of Tang dynasty" this tribe is called Münggür/Müngür (Ch. 9583, 12508 menu < mung-nguət < *münggür/müngür; in the Old Edition a typo: 9583, 13300 menva) 2. On the northern bank (of the Kam river?) is designated Laktan tribe (Ch. 2288, 18 lotan < lâk-tân < laqtan): "The pasturing ranges of Great Shiwei [on both sides] adjoin the river Shitszyan (Argun). This river emanates from the lake Tszuilun (Külün) and flows to the east. South from the river (right bank) lives tribe Müngür, and to the north from it (left bank) lives tribe Laktan" [119].

For the Muslim writers all territories of that area in the 9-10 centuries were "Terra Incognita". The state changed after creation of the Kidan (Kytan, Kytai, Khitan) state (907-1125) in the territory of Manchuria. Relaying the news about peoples of the Far East, Baikal and eastern part of the Central Asia, the greatest scientist of the East Biruni used questionnaire data received, in particular, during a stay in Gazna of the Kidan embassy [120]. In the work "The Remaining Signs of Past Centuries" he writes about a well in Silver mountain Müngür: "... And similar to that lake [Sabzarud] is a fresh water spring (or: a well) in the Kimek country in the mountain called Müngür. In size it is equal to a shield, its water surface is level with edges. When a whole army drinks from it, the level does not go down even a finger. Near that spring is a stone, on it are traces of a foot, palms with fingers, and knees of a person who knelt there, trace of the feet of a child, and traces of the donkey hoofs. The Türks- Guzzes venerate these traces when they see them" [121]. We shall note at once that the trace of a kneeling man means his death. Such a conclusion is proved by the material stated below.

The quoted lines are a mnemonic formula of an expanded plot on Kimeks (Yemeks). an animal in it betrays that it is a myth. It features a child and a dying old man - so, it is a genealogical myth. A common refrain in the formula is a footprint.

As a cult element, a "trace of a deity" is inherent in the majority of Eastern Asian religions. The infantile age of the divine personality suggests his future might on a cosmic scale, and a trace left by him can be to interpreted as a mythological center of the world "the world axis", correlated with the idea of the World Tree around which are grouped events of the Creation epoch.

But in some cases a divine footprint left by walking on the land deity foretells his mortality, because the place of a god is in the heavens. In ancient Indian "Mahabharata" an expression "touching the earth with foot" is equivalent to a concept "mortal" [122]. In the Oguz myth, a son of Kun-khan Deb-Yakui falls from a horse to the ground, and breaks his hip, from which he dies [123.] "My death will come from under my hoofs", - tells to a solar hero Soslan his magic horse in the Nart epos. "And my death can only come from under my legs", - answers him Soslan [124]. In a Kazakh heroic epos "Koblandy-batyr" at mature age receives an injury a magic horse Buryl, who accidentally touched ground immediately after his birth.

The same contrasting duplex nature of totally opposing functions comprises the image of a mythological donkey. Northwestern Africa is considered to be the area of original domestication of donkey.

2. Frequently the transcription menu is considered to be a first written mentioning of the ethnonym Mongol and of the Mongol people in this area [117]. The term menu-münggür may be related to the term Mongol that appeared much later. Compare Men-gu-yu-mu [118]: "Dada (Tatars) were struggling with Jinians (i.e. with the Chjurchjen state Tszin) (Jurchen/Kidan/Kithai state Jin 11151234), [they] adopted name Men-gu "silver" for their House". But ethnically, the tribes Münggür/Müngür and Mongol are not identical. The question of the origin of the ethnonym Mongol and Chingiz-khan "golden clan" Kyiyan/Kyiyat is not resolved yet, and demands a thorough research free from emotional biases.
2-7

The mytho-poetical image of a donkey developed in Egypt in the 4th millennium BC. There, the donkey was one of the forms of a solar deity (in aspect of a growing rising sun), but at the same time it was connected with an image of a god of foreign countries (Desert) Seth, who in sculpture plastic art and drawings was depicted with a long, thin trunk and a donkey head. In that image of a god of foreign countries Seth was saving the solar god Ra from a dragon Apop. But at the same time he became a killer of a deity Osiris, of dying and resurrected nature [125]. In ancient Hettic tradition the Donkey was as a symbol of fertility with which was linked the fertility (prolificacy) of the Woman-Queen who bore into the world a multitude of children.

The inclined to murder Donkey was held as a sacred animal in ancient Phrygia. The mythological king Midas was a consort of the Mother of gods, the goddesses of fertility Cybele. About king Midas is known a historical joke relayed by an ancient author. For unfair justice the god gave Midas donkey ears, which Midas had to hide under Phrygian hood. A barber of Midas, having seen the ears and tormented by a secret which on a pain of death could not be disclosed, has dug up a hole in the ground and whispered there: "King Midas has donkey ears!" 3 - and filled the hole. In that place grew reeds and they whispered the secret to the whole world [127].

Detour

Variations of that legend endure in the mythology of Türkic and Mongolian peoples. In the Buryat and Mongolian legends (in two Eldjigen, Durbut and Darhat) Donkey the murderer unintentionally becomes a brother of a young barber who, unable to keep the fateful secret of donkey ears, tells it into a mouse den, a tree or a reeds, thence it becomes a public knowledge [128]. Most fully this storyline is represented in the Kirgiz legend about the origin of the Issyk-kul lake in the record of Ch.Ch.Valihanov.a volume

Once long ago, the place where now splash waves of Issyk-kul was a plain, on it was a city with a well in the middle. An old childless khan ruled it. The grief of the ailing old man was inconsolable, and he turned to the god Kok-Tanry (dialectal for Tengri) with the prayer to grant him any offspring, even a donkey. God heard his prayer. Once a young wife of the khan during a walk met a handsome donkey and paid him such close attention that after a due number of months she awarded khan with a baby son. Heeding the prayer of the old man, Almighty endowed the khan's successor with a long, like a pipe, "jaw" and donkey ears. The child grew up, and after the death of the old man he himself became a khan. He was clever and fair, but his desire to hide from everybody his donkey origin extracted high price from the local residents. Each time when the khan had to shave his august head, he called a new barber, because all previous ones were sent to the other world right after completion of shaving procedure, and for ever carried away with themselves the secret of donkey ears. Many years have passed, many people have already been executed. when the lot fell on one young man. The young man quickly and artfully shaved the head of the ruler, and the khan liked so much that he spared the barber life. He even appointed him a vizier with a condition of non-divulgence the secret entrusted to him. They became friends and brothers, ate and drank from the same dish. But in unlimited pride of his exclusive position the silly vizier once publicly hollered that the khan has donkey ears. He immediately was sentenced to beheading, but saved himself with a hasty flight to the mountains.

3. It is accepted that the Türkic term eshgäk ~ eshyäk ~ eshäk (with normal transition of the Türk.-sh- to Mong. -l-: elyig, elyigen) "donkey" ascends to the ancient Egyptian form shk "donkey" [126]. The presence in Türkic languages of this term presupposes its migration together with the designated animal and attributes connected to it from the ancient Near-Asian areal to the areas of the Central and Eastern Asia where, according to zoopaleontology, the donkey is relatively late phenomenon.
2-8

Wandering in the mountains, the exile strongly longed after his former life, and the well with a golden cover from which he once was drinking sweet water. Once at night he secretly made his way to the well, removed cover, and prayed: "Send a punishment on this infidel!" A column began of water sprung from the well to the sky, and in a single night flooded the whole plain. The population left to other places, and in clear weather the ruins of the city are visible till now at the bottom of Issyk-kul [129].

With the traits of the same binary function the Donkey appears in the ancient Greek and ancient Roman rituals. In ancient India he was a deity of death, in that embodiment the ancient Indian Donkey was close to the image of Yama, the ruler of the kingdom of deceased ancestors, and in competitions he even was stronger than Yama.

In ancient Persia the interest to examined Kankati area, connected with the name of Yama, appeared because in the believes of the Persians precisely there was one of fortifications (dei), Kang, of the popular among them epic hero Siyavush (A. Siyavarshan "Black Man"). Biruni wrote about this area: "Yama-koti, as mention Yakub [ibn Tarik] and al-Fazari, was located in such place where in the sea is a city called Tara (< Middle Pers. tandra, tara "black" city of Siyavush name? - Yu. Z.). Because koti means "castle", and Yama is angel of death, this word projects an idea about Kang-diz, about which Persians tell that Keikaus, or Djam, built Kang-diz in the most remote east, beyond a sea. Following on the tracks of the Türkic Afrasiab, Keihusrau (Kay Khosrow) crossed the sea to Kang-diz, and went to where he lead a hermit life and abandoned his empire (which points to Kang-diz), because in Persian the word diz means "castle". Abu Mashar al-Balhi composed a geographical compendium with Kang-diz as on a zero longitude, or a first meriadian" [130].

For the ethno-geography of that area is important a Chinese travel guide of the end of the 8th century with a list of points on a stage road from a fortress Middle Shousyan to the Uigur court and further on. During Tang dynasty (618-907) to counteract the Türks were built three fortress cities with the name Shousyan. They were located on the left (northern) bank of r. Huang He along its northern bend. The Western Shousyan was at western Se corner, Eastern Shousyan was at eastern corner, and Middle Shousyan was between them. The distance between them was about 100 km [131]. The road from Middle Shousyan went northeast through a valley of a mountain river Huian on the northern slope of Inshan. Bypassing the Gobi desert from the east, it went north along the western slopes of Great Khingan. It is impossible to identify now the names of specific points on this long road. But approximately in the middle are the names: "... Lake Dadan, [then] lake Ema and Kehan spring..." [132]. Dadan is a transcription of the word Tatar [133]. In all probability, the Tatar lake is Bui-nor lake south from Dalai-nor (118E, 48N). Transcription 11120, 7903 Ema (< ai-ma) is a lake Yama. The combination Kehan was a transcription of the title Kagan. Reconstruction reads: "... The Tatar lake (Bui-nor), [then] Yama (Dalai-nor) lake and the Kagan spring...". However reckoning the quoted record of Biruni about the fortress Yama-koti, i.e. Kang-diz (Kankati at the confluence of the rivers Argun and Kan by the spring Arkui-bulak) suggests a mistake in the Chinese text and the corrected reading: "Kagan lake and Yama spring". In the "Shahname" the Turanian ruler Afrasiab, who killed Siyavush, tries to save himself from the revenge for his deed. He is going to hide in Gangdej, the city of killed Siyavush. The road there runs across Dalai-nor, named here Zereh-sea, and the river Yrgun named here Kimak-river. The Siyavush death revenges his son Kay Khosrow. Afrasiab sends him a message:

"... I'll leave you my land, and crown, and flag,
And'll bolt beyond the river Kimak,
In distant Gangdej I'll stand, and then
You and your goons are scarce to dab me".
2-9

Kay Khosrow reflects: "Our enemy've crossed the Zereh-sea, in Gangdej've taken stand... Further'n further shall I lead my troops, to the very bank of the Kimak-river" [134].

Back to the last detail in the Kimek myth according to Biruni, the inexhaustible spring. Standing alone, it symbolizes a unity of all the world waters. The water motive is an invariable companion of the twin myth. The mother of twins Yama and Yami was a water goddess Aniya Yosha. In ancient Greece was believed that the mother of dioscuri twins was a daughter of the sea god Glavk (daughter Glaucia [Γλαυκη], father river-god Scamander, no relation to dioscuri; dioscuri Castor and Pollux, or Polydeuces, sons of Zeus and Leda, or alternatively sons of Tyndareus, king of Lacedaemon, and Leda - check here - Translator's Note). A wife of a river deity was a mother of Romul and Rem (the river deity being a stepfather). A beautiful Europe who gave birth to Minos and Adamantis Radamantis was considered to be a daughter of Ocean [135]. The Twin-water motive is one of determining motives in the Nart epos of the Ossetians (and the Nart epos of every other major and minor Caucasus people). In the Nart epos, Uryzmag and Hamyts, born by the daughter of a sea king, ask their mother a question: "Whence are we from, disclose! Why we live with you under water?" [136]. In Ulcha legends at the Lower Amur a woman Water tigress (Temu duse) bore twins, a boy and a girl. She threw them in the river. In the river waters they grow as people, and after maturing and coming onshore, become a husband and wife [137]. In a Karakalpak poem "Shariyar" newborn twins, brother and sister, are thrown in the water. They safely stay under water, grow up in it, and leave into the world of the people [138].

That is the picture of the Kimek genealogical myth's fragments, in combination and individually, in the collage on a stone at the Silver spring near the Kankati city on the Silver mountain. It is a generalized image of an "angel of death" Yama. In ancient India it is the ruler of the kingdom of deceased ancestors Yama with his twin sister, beloved spouse Yami. Their pairing is also present in the very name Yama (yama; A. yəma "two twins", "pair", "duo"). In a hymn "Yama and Yami" [139], concerned of progeny, Yami tries to induce the brother to an incest and marriage. She invokes as witnesses the Sky and the Earth, married and with the same twinned relationship: "... Because still in the womb, the progenitor created us two spouses!" They do marry and become primogenitors of the mankind. Yama was a mortal Primogenitor, but Yami was born a goddess and was immortal. The time came, and Yama died. Yami was shedding tears all the day long. "How can I not to cry?! He died only today!" - she tell the gods. And in those remote times was one continuous day, the night did not exist yet. "Its not good, she will flood us with the rivers of her tears", - decided the gods. Also they created night. And night has passed. As it is peculiar to many beauties also today, on the next morning Yami absolutely forgot about her beloved. The Indian epos says that under a name Kalaratri she soon chose Heti for a spouse, and gave birth to rakshases. These terrible and merciless creations were destined to guard the primordial waters [140].

The connection of goddess Yami (Kalaratri) with rakshases has a direct relation to the theme. In the quoted story of Rashid ad-Din the inhabitants in the lake Dalai-nor area and r. Argun are named in Mongolian Usutu Manguses - "River Manguses". The Central Asian Mangus displays a certain similarity with the image of Vritra in ancient India who "conjoins the waters" and Slavic "cattle god" Volos (Hair), an opponent of Thunder-storm. He was visualized as a devil, hellion, water gost, a patron (god) of river, and corresponded with septa-constellation Pleiades/Volosynya (Slavic fem. pers. noun derivative from a noun: Hair - Volos => Hair woman - Volos woman) [141]. Under the influence of the Tibetan and Indian mythologies, the term Mangus began to be replaced with srin-po and rakshas. One of the main traits of the rakshas was abduction of women [142].

In the ancient Türkic genealogical myth a co-ruling dynastic (Katun) tribe was Aji or Ashtak (< Middle Pers. azdahak < A. azi dahaka "Snake", "Fiery Snake", "Dragon"). Their ancestors were thought to be Sea/lake Spirit (Dragon) and his daughter (Dragonness) with the same names [143] (what same names? Aji or Ashtak, or Dragon and Dragonness?). Probably, the term Aji was ingrained in the name of the Kara-irtysh Kimek tribe ([...]; in the text [...]) "dragons". In the Uryanhai (Tuvinian) language it endured in the form adza "evil spirit" [144].
2-10

In their historical genealogical legend discussed below, the river dragon kidnaps from the banks of Irtysh a spouse of the Kimek ruler, and carries her away under water. On the surface of water remained floating only one hair, a general distinct marker of the dragon of waters. The hair speaks to the ruler with human voice: "It is me, your wife Hatun". And that discloses the principal matter: she is a she-dragon. During millenniums of the Dragon myth existence, because of Dragon's secretiveness and unpredictability of his actions, in the mythology of many peoples the image of the Dragon received peculiarly negative connotation. The Dragon has not deserved that.

Initially, the Dragon was a bearer of life, one of the most beneficial figures in the history of mankind. In an ancient Indian myth the king of gods inhabiting the heaven Indra in grave fight with his vajra (thunderbolt) breaks up a cliff of dragon Vritra and releases enclosed by it waters and golden-horned cows (i.e. the Sun). This beautiful plot is a mythologized coitus between men and women for a birth of a child. Here the dragon Vritra is not an enemy of Indra, but his contrasting partner in the act of Creation.

The ideological center of the Sünnu in Mongolia was a Dragon sanctuary (Yu.Zuev is using a Russian version "kapische" of the Türkic word with connotation "encapsulated") near which lived the clan of empress. After becoming pregnant, the Sünnu Queen sets out on pilgrimage to the Dragon's dam on r. Huang He for a blessing; the Dragon comes in an image of a fish, and predicts a royal future to her child. A She-Dragon in an image of a she-wolf rears the newborn Usun Primogenitor with her milk. She also rears the ancestors of the Türks. Having accepted an image of a phallus (his arms and legs were chopped off), he marries her. Cloistered in a cave of ancestors (it is a maternal bosom of the great Mother - Earth), she gives birth to ten boys who started ten Türkic tribes (termed On-Oguzes). According to another mytho-genealogical version, the ruler of a cave of Türkic ancestors was dragon Ashtak.

The ancient Dragon also harbors many other kind features. They were analyzed in Ya.V.Chesnov's detailed work (1986). And from the cited examples definitely transpires that the Dragon is a generalized mythological image of a Woman - giver of live, goddess of fertility and prolificacy. In view of the stated, the "abduction of women" by the Dragon or Water God looks as fulfilling of his essence by his female substance [145].

So, Yama was "the first who died", he was a king of the world of ancestors. For his many virtues, in particular for his just judgment, he was raised to a status of a god. He has red clothing, and in his hands he carries a noose which in due time he casts on every living. His possessions are in the south. On the border of these possessions stand two four-eyed dogs, who determine a further fate of the souls of the diseased.

In the Persian world, to the Yama and Yami correspond Yima and his twin sister and beloved spouse Yimak. This pair was also held as primogenitors of the mankind, and Yima also was mortal. After Yima commited an offence, he lost his regal charisma (farra), it flew away from him embodied as a bird. The duality of his image is reflected in a story of Yima's flight beyond the Ming (Chinese) sea (Dalai-nor lake), where he was sawn in half. Prior to the "king of the golden age" Yima, in the ancient Persia of the mythological epoch dominated Yama, who had many features of his ancient Indian namesake.

And Yama is noted in the territory of the Inner Mongolia under a name Yama-Kagan (Tib. Ya-ma-kha-gan). That creates an impression that in the Uiguro-Tibetan document No 1283 from the P.Pelliot's Tibetan fund another name for Yama was Kara Kanglyg (Tib. Ga-ra-gan-lig, compare: Kang-dih), and one more name was Yama-Müngün "Yama Silver" (Tib. Ja-ma-mo-nan). That allows to locate his location in the Kang of the Silver country. He is not subjected to the laws of death, therefore he did not have a tomb or a burial (i.e. he was a god). The solar (i.e. southern) slope of the Yama valley was the like that of the other sovereigns. He had a rope with which he was going to hang a dog. He was represented by two journeyers and a maiden.
2-11

The idea of paired relationship is present in the story about Yemeks in the Persian version of the "Oguz - name": "After Dib-Yavkui-khan has been a padishah for some years, Ad.n.i.k.mam (Laktan?) began to be hostile with him, and the inhabitants of that country became insubordinate. That vilaiet was on the eastern side, and it was called Yemekan (Yemeks). They were people of such remarkable force that two men of theirs it could stand against ten men from other tribes" [146]. In the historical genealogical legend of the Irtysh Kimeks in the composition "Zajn al.ahbar" of Gardizi their story begins with a struggle of two brothers, who probably gave rise to the tribes Imi and Imek (compare: Yima and Yimak). The very rhyming of these names obviously points to their relationship. The younger was called Shad. Inseparable next to him is a third character, kanizak, a "favourite young maid" who actively engages together with the Shad, and in a key moment she replaces him. Not the Shad, but kanizak orders seven newcomer Kimek tribes to stay on the banks of Irtysh. Not alone, but together with kanizak the Shad performs the man's work, hunting animals. When is disclosed that kanizak is a she-dragon, his wife Hatun, floating as a hair on the surface of the water, the Shad, not afraid of a dragon, himself enters the water and takes this hair, i.e communes to the image of she-dragon. They both are like one person. The Shad is not quite a brother; he sooner is a sister-spouse in a man's appearance. In other words, in the mythological subtext of the historical story about the brothers Imi and Imek is enshrouded an unforgotten theme about Yima and his sister - spouse Yimak. The echoes of that phenomenon can be heard in the "History of Northern dynasties" in the message that in Persia they "marry own sisters" [147].

Finishing the excursion about the eastern wing of the Se-yanto Kaganate, we shall recall the message of the Arabic author of the Yakut's (1179-1229) "Dictionary of the countries" There, the mythological king of the Türks-Kimeks hands his son a bow and arrows. He banishes his son from his house and sends him to foreign lands [148].

6. RISE AND FALL

Ynan received the Kagan's throne and investiture with the name Jenchu Bilge in many respects due to a military support and diplomacy of the Tang court, and to the end of his days (645) he remained loyal to his benefactor. The documents did not note his military actions in the southern direction. Only briefly are mentioned his tribute-paying and political embassies to Chang'an in 630, 631, 632 (three times) 635, 637, 638, 639 [149]. In other directions the new Kaganate was active in its military expansion. In 629 Se-yanto leader headed a revolt of the Oguz tribes against Türkic (Ashina) domination. The rebels crushed a huge army of the Ashina's Yukuk-Shad. Longer then others resisted them the riders of an Ashinian titled "Shad, expanding [borders of the state]" (Ch. 1787, 10496). A son of Chora-Kagan with the remains of his detachments fled to the west and established a base in the Kehan-futu under Beshbalyk. Gathering a significant army, in two years he managed to deceitfully capture a half of the territory and population of the Western Türkic Kaganate. But the desire for revenge did not leave him, and soon he again sent cavalry to the Northern Mongolia, but suffered again a severe defeat. In the sources he is better known under names Dubu-Kagan and Ashina-Sheer [150].

From the first till last days in the short life of the Se-yanto Kaganate a constant opposing force remained a group of Türkic tribes headed by Ashinian 4297, 4508 Tszuibi (< kiwo-byi < *qobi) - Koby, a son of Shibi-Kagan and a relative of El-Kagan. The information on the beginning of his political life in Old and New Editions of the "History of Tang dynasty" is different. The author of the Old Edition, following the text of the "Arch of statutes" (the "Arch of statutes of the government") [151], informs: "Tszuibi-Kagan was from a separate tribe of the Türks, also from the Ashina clan. He hereditary was a lesser Kagan, his horde court was in the northern part of the Golden mountains (Altai).
2-12

After the defeat of El-Kagan, the tribes of Northern steppe wanted to Koby-Kagan a supreme (Ch. qa "big", "great") Kagan. But the [supreme] Kagan became the [leader] of Se-yanto, and then Koby could not be supreme any more; together with his tribe he submitted to the [leader] of [Se]-yanto. He (Koby-Kagan) was brave and far-sighted, people obeyed him willingly. That infuriated the [leader] of [Se]-yanto, who conceived to kill him. Koby secretly learned about his plan and hid in a former residence [of the Türks]. That country lays 10 thousand li (5,000 km) from the capital [of the Middle Kingdom, i.e. from Chang'an]. He had a 30 thousand battle-ready army. He proclaimed himself Ich Koby-Kagan (Ch. Ichju Tszuibi). Karluks in the west, Kyrgyzes (tszegu) in the north, all of them submitted to him".

The quote from the text in the New Edition reads: "Koby was also from Ashina clan among the tribes of Tuli-[Kagan]. His name is Hubo; he was a hereditary lesser Kagan. After the defeat of El-Kagan the tribes wanted to install him as common sovereign (gun tszun-chjan) over them. But by that time the Se-yanto [leader] has already received the title of [supreme] Kagan, and [Koby] submitted to him. By his character he was quiet and resolute, clever and sagacious; people were very devoted to him. It was dangerous to the [Se]-yanto [leader], who decided to kill [Koby]. Therefore [Koby] fled with his people. They were closely pursued by few thousands riders, but unsuccessfully. He vanished in northern part of the Golden mountains (i.e. Altai), where mountains on three sides are steep cliffs, and only on one side can a wagon or a rider to pass. There the lands are fertile, flat and wide. He occupied them and declared himself Ich Koby-Kagan. Those lands are 10 thousand li from Chang'an. In the west are Karluks, in the north are Kyrgyzes, he has subdued them both. He frequently left (the limits of his country), and heisted cattle from [Se]-yanto.

The message of the Old Edition contains important indication that the struggle went for the possession the supreme power in the Steppe. The words about relocation of the Koby-Kagan Türks "to the former lands" are broadened in the New Edition: "... where mountains on three sides are steep cliffs, and only on one side can a wagon or a rider to pass. There the lands are fertile, flat and wide." The subject is a "cave of ancestors", as it is depicted in the "History of Chou (Zhou/Chou) dynasty, 557-581". "In the mountains is a cave, and in a cave is a plain, overgrown with rich grass for few hundred li in circumference. On all four sides of the cave stand mountains. There she-wolf cloistered and gave birth to ten boys who, upon maturity, married, and all had children..." [152]. The residence of Koby-Kagan "in the northern part of the Golden mountains" is believed to be a valley of the r. Kobdo (48N, 92E) [153].

River Kobdo-Gol

This reference point (irrespective of its real or hypothetical reconstructed localization) was not permanent: before trekking away to Altai, the tribes of Koby-Kagan were a part of Tuli-Kagan province in the southeast part of the modern Mongolia. After the fall of Se-yanto Kaganate they re-trekked back and stopped on the northern slopes of Inshan, south from the Gobi desert.

True to the traditional policy "destroy barbarians with hands of barbarians", the Tang court supported Se-yanto military actions directed on destruction of the First Türkic Kaganate by all means, and joined as their ally. With the growth of the new state the Tang court gradually changed position, turning from an ally to opponent, and the yesterday's enemy (Ashina Türks) became its assistant in the opposition to the new state. In 639, from the Türkic tribes pasturing in Ordos, who submitted in 630, the court would create a puppet Kaganate, led by an emperor's favorite Ashina Türk Ermi-Nizuk-Ilbir (Ch. Imi- Nishu-Ilibi), who received a Chinese name Li Symo. This mercenary formation was concocted to become in two years (641) a barrier between the former allies. To strengthen and activate the military opposition to the Se-yanto detachments, the "Kaganate" was relocated to the left bank of the r. Huang He northern bend and to the northern slopes of Inshan. But the result turned out to be the opposite: a significant part of its Türkic population left to Se-yanto. In three years (644) the "Kaganate" without population has dissolved, and Li Symo was joined to the bodyguard corps of the Tang emperor [154].
2-13

The whole history of the "strongest" among Oguzes Se-yanto tribe 4 , that became a dynastic tribe, is filled with a continuous fierce struggle against the dynastic tribe of the eastern and western Türks Ashina. Short pauses only prepared for a continued war. With such opposition could not come a thought of neither a union, nor resistance to any other tribal confederations or states. The combination Tujue (Tu-kue, Tujue, etc) Yanto used in the annals [157] is not Türks and Yanto, but Yanto in the polyethnic Türkic Kaganate. The same applies to the Oguz by the origin Ediz tribe (Ch. Ade, Sele, Aede), a part of which was annexed by the Second Türkic Kaganate and was called Tujue-Sede "Türkic Edizes" [158]. With adoption of Manichaeism they began to be called arslan-Edizes (Ch. asilan sede) and Ashtaks (Ch. Ashide). They constituted the Katun/Queen (Hatun/Queen) fraction in the dynastic coalition of the Second Türkic Kaganate. In the text of the stela dedicated to the representative of that fraction chancellor Tonyukuk (line 3, etc.) they are called Türk-sher "Türkic shers", but not the "Türks and shers", because also existed other shers, for example, sher-Karluks (Ch. shi-Gelolu (Karluks)) [159], or arslan-Karluks [160] 5.

With Se-yanto freed of the Western Türkic dependence, their trekking to the east, and the creation of Se-yanto Kaganate, the western Kagans lost an important source of tribute payments, discussed above. Hoping to return what he lost, Sir-Yabgu-Kagan (Ch. 4224, 8908, 10308 sy e-hu < si-iəp-γuo) at the end of the 631 undertook a large campaign against Se-yanto. The army of just created Kaganate that learned the taste of victory completely defeated the invaders [161]. In the appraisal of that event consider one detail. The title of the defeated Kagan was Sir-Yabgu. The same title had the first Kagan of the western Türks Eshtemi 6, who headed ten great commanders and had a hundred-thousand army. He completely subdued the barbarous states of the Western territory (in Chinese lingo), and himself declared himself a Kagan, and named his tribes "ten surnames" [164]. A carrier of this title (Sir-Yabgu) also became Barchak, who also arrogated to himself the name Ashtami 7. The adoption by the Oguz ruler of a title (and) a name of one of the founders of the Türkic statehood is explained not only by ambition. It is a first attempt to create a new genealogical myth justifying imperial plans of the Se-yanto Kagans.

4. The Se-yanto tribe kagan clan was 1, 4873, 1652 Ilido (< iet-lyi-tuət < *El-tut, literally: hold state; its Russian calque was a name Derji-krai [l55]. Probably, transcriptional variation of the combination el-tut was 14035, 1652 sedo (< γiet-tuət < *el-tut) - el-tut (in the title "Tengri El-Tutiysh-Alp-Kulug..."). The chronicler explained that a combination se-do (el-tut) is the same as performance of ritual 250, 10806 "she-tszi" ("altar and millet") as a symbolic sacrifice of grain cereals to gods - to the defenders of the country [156].
5. In the Manichaean religious doctrine an earthly man has a tripartite nature: mortal corporal flesh, Light soul and a spirit of Darkness, a dark beginning. In the earthly man the particles of Light are in captivity of the forces of Darkness, a king of which - is a Dragon (Middle Pers. jdhk, Türk. Ashtak) with a head of a Lion (Middle Pers. sher/shir, T. arslan). A man is akin to biped demons of the Smoke world (which is an antipode of Air), a first of the five elements of Darkness; sometimes even was said that a man is created by Princes of Smoke.
6. About Eshtemi see: Chavannes [162], etc. Attempt of analysis of the term [163].
7. Ashtamy Ch. 6336, 7029, 6630 Shadomi (<sa-tâ-myie - shatami < *ashtami) - Ashtamy, compare - Toh. Ashtami, Sanskr. Ashtami, the "eighth day of a half moon" [165]. Apparently, this term belongs to the Buddhist layer in the eastern Manichaeism. In the Turfan Manichean texts Mani himself is called "Mani-Buddha", "Buddha of Light", "God Buddha", "incomparable and perfect Buddha". Together with penetration of a part of Buddhist ritual or its designation the Buddhist lexicon (Tocharian, Sanskrit, middle Persian and Sogdian) also has penetrated into Manichaeism. Probably, the same also happened with an important Buddhist monastic ceremony of confession and purification, regularly performed on the eighth (Ashtami) and fourteenth days of each half moon month. In the eastern Manichaeism, the ashtami could be a designation for the rite of repentance, about which the Türkic prayer text "Huastuanift" said: "In every day of the god of Moon (Asmussen: every Monday) to free from our sins and our defects before the god, the gospel, and before pure clergy, was necessary to repent" [166].
2-14

A record of winter of 637 tells about Barchak arrival to the Tang capital, he is called Tardu-Shad, selibi [167]. The word 14035, 4873, 14824 selibi (< γiet-lyi-b'it < *yelber) - yelbir is not a name. Yelbir is a term for a special supernatural force, with which a shaman receives a professional gift, it is a magic and sacral combined force of the spirits-assistants of the shaman, concentrated in his person, an intrinsic image of the shaman. Frequently a ruler of a tribal confederation or a Kaganate simultaneously was also a shaman-yelbir, yelbi. This encountered in a context of the Se-yanto history term yelbir can be taken as one of numerous cases when it was included in a general title of ancient Türkic rulers. A Shaman ritual peacefully co-existed with Manichaeism, adopted by Se-yanto elite. That can be appreciated by the Kagan title Jenchu-Bilge. The word yenchu (jenchu) means "pearl(s)". Pearl(s) was a standard of light and purity to which aspires a soul of a good Manichaean. The word bilgä means "wise", "wise man" (bilga bilig - "wisdom", "knowledge of highest truth"). This is an eternal integral property inherent to light beings, it is a knowledge of the true doctrine (i.e. Mani teaching). The first task that sin makes after penetrating , a man's soul is to remove his wisdom. As far as can be judged from the written sources, in the titulature of the Türkic high elite such Manichean terms did not appear till 629 AD, when Ynan-erkin accepted Kaganship. That is also evidenced by the existence of the Türko-Manichean term Ashtak that became a name of a separate tribe in the Kaganate. The "Tang's review" depicted the tribe Yanto tamga as a circle of the full moon [168]. In the Manichean rites the Moon held an important place. On the Moon is located a dwelling of gods-purifiers of live Soul. On the Moon the souls of righteous people are cleared of everything corporeal. The Moon is the first gates of life. A typical and distinctive feature of the archeological monument Ungetu in the Northern Mongolia, attributed to Jenchu-Bilge-Kagan, are granite sculptures of people with arms bent in elbows and crossed on the chest (Fig. 1), they are similar with modeled human figures on an astodan (receptacle for bones, ossuary) from Taraz (Fig. 2) and in a scene from Manichean monastery life on a terracotta fragment from Taraz (Fig. 3) [169].

Fig. 1 Fig. 2 Fig. 3

The distinction and the reason of Manichaeism endurance was that it absorbed in its doctrine all rational from the local cults. For the Türks in the eastern part of the Central Asia it became a part of the Shaman religion (Yu.Zuev repeats the high-handed terminology adopted still in the imperial times of the 18-19th cc., when Tengianism was either unknown, or dismissed and labeled with derogatory notions like paganism and shamanism by religiously Christian scholars working in a country with enforced highly politicized state religion. To call Tengianism "shamanism" is no different than to derogate Catholicism with "papism", Islam with "mohameddanism", Judaism with "rabbinism", or allude to Christian communion as "eating the flesh of their god", etc. The Slavic "znakhar", the English "healer" and "healing relics" qualify as much to serve as euphemisms for Christianity as "shaman" qualify for Tengianism - Translator's Note). The Türkic Manichaeism dressed up in Shaman clothes. An external display of that particular process became the appearance of Shaman-Manihean compounds in the titles of Türkic rulers. In the same title could be included the Shaman terms yelbir, yelbi next to the Manichean jenchu "pearl" and turuk (turuq) "pure". Two Western Türkic rulers from different times had identical title-name Yelbi-Turuk. A son of Aru-Kagan (Ch. Helu) in the the Western Türkic Kaganate was Yelbir-tardu, at enthronization he received a name Jenchu-Yabgu-Kagan. In the Se-yanto Kaganate Tardu-shad-yelbir was a son of Jenchu-Bilge-Kagan.
2-15

From the very beginning the mutual relation of the Kaganate and Tang state were equal. Their alliance was directed toward destruction of the Eastern Türkic state. With its fall, after a forceful relocation of a number of subjugated Türkic tribes to Ordos, and their assignment to the Tang military service, the need for such union apparently disappeared: the objective has been achieved and the need was exhausted. But the danger kept soaring in the air, now it was the increased power of Se-yanto Kaganate, the ruler of which held himself equal with the Son of the Sky, and did not display inferiority even before the envoys of the Son of the Sky. The union was still needed, but now also for the containment of the growing expansionistic imperial ideology in the expanded Se-yanto Kaganate According to the steppe common law, Se-yanto could not invade other's territories first, i.e. receive the greatest trophies. The object of their aspirations was the rich Turfan (Ch. Gaochan), which just recently paid to the Se-yanto elite a magnificent tribute.
2-16

By the 639 AD Turfan (Ch. Gaochan) was under domination of the Western Türkic Kagans. The oasis states Iu (Hami) and Yantsi (Karashar) submitted to them . For a few years the merchant caravans traveling on this branch of the Silk Road from the western countries were stopped in Turfan. The same fate applied to the caravan merchants from Tang to the west. The major sector of the road ceased to function, and the Tang began preparations for a retaliatory military expedition to the Turfan. Se-yanto volunteered to participate in it. Jenchu-Bilge asked for the ally's consent to be a "leader", i.e. a vanguard (and enter Turfan first). The Emperor (Taizong 太宗 626-649 [Li Shimin 李世民 599-649]), expecting that in a struggle for such choice morsel the Western Türkic and the Central Asian rulers interested in the same would not spare any price, and would succed in assembling an efficient army to break Se-yanto detachments, gave his consent. Taizong sent to Jenchu-Bilge a palace representative, ostensibly to discuss with him details of the operation. Simultaneously, Taizong sent another official to Turfan (Ch. Gaochan) to warn about forthcoming Se-yanto attack, whom he ostensibly condemns. He prepared a trap for his ally [170].

Without announcement about termination of allied relations, the Tang court takes steps to create in the Ordos territory of a puppet Türkic quasi-Kaganate led by Ashinian Ermi-nizuk-yelbir-Kagan mentioned above. Se-yanto reacted to that. The tribes of this quasi-Kaganate were located in the lands inside the northern bend of Huang He, north from the r. Bodao 8 [171]. In winners (Se-yanto) they still saw ruthless enemy, and consequently did not even dare to show up beyond the line of fortifications. They did not justify their assignment, and that brought about an active interference by the Tang court. Emperor Taizong sent to Jenchu-Bilge a dignitary with a letter containing direct threat, and constraining the southern limits of the Kagan by the northern edge of Gobi [172]; the text is placed on the same pages of both editions of the "History of Tang dynasty". The Kagan's answer is cited in N.Ya.Bichurin's translation: "The Son of the Sky directed us to not attack each other. I accept his decree with a bow. But the Türkic people are drunk, restless and volatile. Until they perished, they slaughtered the inhabitants of the Middle Kingdom as hemp. The emperor, after destructing their empire, should have taken their tribes in bondage, to compensate for the loss of Than House subjects, but they were kept like sons... It is very clear that it is impossible to trust them. In the future, if they make disorders, let the emperor permit me to exterminate them" [173].

From the Se-yanto Kaganate dynastic point of view, the victory over the Eastern Türkic Kaganate led by tribe Ashina cannot be held final if in Ordos exist a Türkic Kaganate headed by representatives of the same tribe. In the 641 it was relocated to the left bank of Huang He. That action of the Tang court was met with silent hostility by Se-yanto, which was replaced with other feelings with a news that emperor Taizong with a large retinue and a part of the army, including border detachments, set out for sacrifices at the Tai Shan mountain in Shandong province. The border was left bare, the relocated Kaganate remained without a Tang protection. A joint 200,000-strong Oguz army, which included assemblages from tribes Tongra, Bokut, Uigur, and also Mohe, Si, and others, under command of Barchak immediately moved south. Ermi-nizuk-Yelbir hid behind the Great wall, but towards Se-yanto army already marched detachments from the neighboring garrisons. The numerous battles of Se-yanto nomads with Türkic and Han detachments came to an end with the winter of 641 battle on the banks of the r. Nochjen 400 li northwest from the old city Unchjun.

8 River Bodao (僰道 ?) (alt. - Henhe and Mangan-shui) (present pinyin: Wei He 渭河, 36N, 104E - 34N, 110E ?) flowed in Bodao north from a city Guihua-chen (or Guisui-syan) in former province Suyuan, CPR [171] (essentially, this definition of the quasi-Kaganate location allocates to them the whole inner area of the Huan He northern bend, not just today's Ordos area. A better delimiter seems to be the line of Late Antique fortifications - Translator's Note).

Ordos fortifications

2-17

Describing that battle, the chroniclers emphasize that Se-yanto did not know mounted fight, they battled as an infantry, and always were coming out winners. This time the tested battle technique did not help, Se-yanto suffered a bad defeat [174]. As noted the best expert on the Chinese texts about Türks Se Tszunchjen, it was the beginning of a fall of the Se-yanto Kaganate [175]. Jenchu-Bilge apologized for the events, and asked emperor to establish marriage relations with the Chinese imperial court. Tai-tszun (pinyin: Taizong) agreed give him a Princess, but soon retracted his decision. The relations between two former allies were souring by day. But in 645 Jenchu died, and both of his sons took advantage of that to put an end to their tense mutual relations.

Right at the funeral of his father, Barchak killed Yemek and declared himself a Supreme Kagan with a title the El-Kurshi-Ser-Ashtamy (Ch. Seli-Tszuilishi-se-shadomi). According to the chronicler, he executed many nobles who were serving in the deceased's Horde posts. Undoubtedly, they were representatives of the Yemek fraction of the dynasty. As a result of the erupted civil war, Barchak ended up alone, he fled with a handful of supporters to Ashtaks (Hatun/Queen fraction in the dynastic coalition of the future Second Türkic Kaganate) and soon was killed. The Kagan's clan of the state was destroyed, and people numbering 50-60 thousand fled to the Western territory (as it was defined in Chinese lingo) [176]. Further, it said that another son of Jenchu-Bilge (also from his second wife from the Yemek fraction?) by a name Dumochjin set out to lead his people numbering 70 thousand to the west, to the "former lands" (Dzungaria), but was defeated in Uteken (i.e. anywhere between the "Khangai Range of Central Mongolia to the Sayan Mountains of Tuva, at the centre of which is the Orkhon Valley"). These "former lands" were the banks of Irtysh, whence Se-yanto began their way to Mongolia. Yemeks/Kimeks now become the carriers of the ethno-state tradition of the Se-yanto Kaganate. Calling them Se-yanto, the source informs that in 648 AD they battled Tang troops in Altai.

Translator's Note

Yu.Zuev is gently transitioning from Chinese Yemeks to Arabo-Persian Kimeks, without stopping on the philology of that transition, which obviously lies outside of his focus. The commonality of the events, traditions, mythology, social terminology, locations, etc. clearly testify that these two terms in different languages are two independent renditions of the the same Türkic term, they probably may also reflect linguistic peculiarities of different Türkic dialects and languages. The scholars, that did not recognize the similarity of the terms, over time produced various scenarios distinguished by a common trait of disconnect, when either Seyanto descendents melt away into incognizance, or the Kimek ancestors arrive from the unknown depths. The confusion did not come unwarranted, until recently the Kimek history had fragmentary character of compilations from Arabo-Persian manuscripts detached their historical background, while the Seyanto brief appearance and sudden disappearance at the Chinese borders left only a bright but short-lived trek on the periphery of the Chinese world.

7. CONTINUATION OF THE HISTORY

By a rare luck, in a work of a Persian author of the 11th century Gardizi "Ornament of news" (Abu Sa'id Gardizi, "Zajn al-ahbar") we find an immediate continuation of the Se-yanto Kaganate history, represented by its Yemek (eastern) wing. In the story about Kimeks, Gardizi ascends to the corresponding section in the long lost composition of a founder of the Arabic scientific prose, Persian by origin, Ibn al-Mukaffa (720-737) "Fourth part of the world". Already in the 8th century started translation from Persian to Arabic of a significant part of the world literature masterpieces. Fair or not, all writers of Persian origin who converted to Islam were accused in Manichaean sympathies. A respected scientist and translator Ibn al-Mukaffa was destined for an awful end; a provincial governor who was his personal enemy ordered to have him burnt after terrible tortures [178]. The Persian source, which Ibn al-Mukaffa used for the Arabic translation, was written in the second half of the 7th century, soon after Kimeks' arrival in the Black Irtysh valley, back to the former residence of Se-yanto. It is a historical story dressed in a form of a twin myth, in which instead of twins Yima and Yimak clearly act two brothers Imi and Imek. Their names are laid incorporated in the names of the first two Kimek tribes, which was already noted in scientific literature.

A direct heritage of Se-yanto Kaganate can be seen in the social nomenclature of the Irtysh Kimeks.

1. Shad. "The sons and younger brothers [of Kagan] in charge of military affairs the Türks called Shad" [179]. By a definition of the modern scientists, Shad is a "head of an army", sü bashı [180]. This title carried both sons of Ynan-Kagan, Barchak and Yemek. In the Gardizi story Shad is a name of the main Kimek hero in the legend.
2-18

2. . The New Edition tells about introduction of this title in the Türkic domain: "From that time when emperor Tai-tszun (pinyin: Taizong) (626-649) pacified Tutszue-Türks (630), vassals (fan) in the northwest, and also barbarians (man-i) in the southeast, all of them submitted little by little (shao-shao). Then for these tribes began to be established districts (chjou) and counties (syan). For large tribes were established directorates dudu (dudu-fu). The leaders of these tribes were appointed as military commanders - dudu, and civil leaders were tsyshi. These posts were handed down by by heredity" [181]. In China this term was introduces in 222 AD, and it meant control over military affairs of one or several districts. Subsequently it became an anachronism, but in the 624 it came into circulation again [182]. In the nomadic society possession of the title Tutuk meant a special weight and significance of its carrier. In the 13th century among the Tatar tribes in a great respect was held a tribe Tutukly'ut Tatar [183]. The ending -ut is a Mongolian plural formant. The component -ly is a Türkic affix of possession agglutinated to an initial base. The word Tutukly means "[we/they are] having tutuk [as a military commander]". After a fall of Se-yanto Kaganate, Se-yanto tribes were reconstituted as Dahun dudu-fu "military commandery of tarhun-tutuk". The term 3498, 2777 dudu (< tuo-tuok) was reflected in documents in various languages: Sogd. ώttk, tώtώk'n, Khot.-S. tuttu, ttattaha, ttattaht, Tib. to-tog [184]. On the Türkic linguistic soil in folk etymology it was perceived as a derivative of a verb tut - "to hold, "to seize". In the Kimek legend the Shad "entered water and seized the hair". After that "the Shad was nicknamed tutuk". This episode allows to precisely determine the Türkic vocalization of the word tutuk.

3. Yabgu. In the Han hieroglyphic record 5651, 8697 sihou (< *xiəp-g'u < yabγu) this term for the first time was noted in the title of the second position in the developing state Asman (Ch. Usun, pinyin Wusun) Butszu-sihou, who was a representative of the Queen's Yuezhi fraction in the ruling dynasty in the first half of the 2nd century BC. In the 11th BC in Han captivity fell a Sünnu Yuezhian subject who held a post of "chancellor" (syan) in Sünnu state, and had a title sihou (yabgu). After four years he managed to come back. The Shanyu retained his title and the post of the "second [after Shanyu] rank in the state" [185].

F.Hirth, who for the first time established relationship of the transcription and the real term, juxtaposed yabgu with the title yavugo on the Yuezhi-Kushan coins from Kabulistan [186] (Reference to F.Hirth 1899). As is commonly thought, the word yavuqa can be explained from the Persian languages; it ascends to yam and literally means "leading" [197] (Reference to H.W.Bailey 1958). The Middle Chinese transcription of the term yabgu was 8908, 10308 ehu (< iäp-γu < ybγu). Sometimes the carrier of this title was a second after Kagan person in the state, which for example follows from the victorious words in the ancient Türkic inscription: qaγanin jab[γu] sın adın anta äürtüm - "There I killed their Kagan, Yabgu and Shad" [187]. The Western Türkic Kaganate was headed by Yabgu-Kagans. The leaders of nomadic tribal confederations (for example, Karluh southwest from Altai, Oguz on Lower Syr-darya) of the pre-state level were Yabgu. The title Sir-Yabgu (Ch. sy-ehu) had Tardu-Shad Barchak, the head of the western wing of Se-yanto Kaganate.

The Kimek legend in the Gardizi text is followed with a later period travel guide to the Kimeks' country and its description. It ends with the words: "Their head (ra'is) carries title *Yemek-Yabgu 9.

9. Compare: Martinez [188]: "(y)in-al yabğ-u" (or "n-al-bayğ-u" pro. Bem-al-biğ-u).
2-19

... One more comment. In the history of the Se-yanto state a bloody conflict between brothers happened right after the death of their father Jenchu Bilge-Kagan. Barchak killed his senior brother Yemek, a Shad of the eastern wing. He subjected to execution many (Yemek) nobles serving at the horde court of his father, replacing them with his kinfolks. "The nobles lost tranquility". Apparently, that explains the flight of the Yemek horde to Irtysh.

To comply with the rules of the twin myth, a fugitive becomes, in the following below citation of the legend, a younger brother himself, who only made attempt on the life of the senior brother. The mass migration of the Yemek tribes (who at the time of migration were individual tribes, with their individual names, politically organized as an eastern wing of the Seyanto Kaganate headed by Shad Yemek, and at the time of migration could not yet carry a collective name "Yemeks") called "born Tatars" (muvalladdan Tataran) (i.e. "Tatars proper"), happened after a few years, after a final defeat of the Kaganate. They left to come under protection of the Western Türkic Kagan. Already in the 656, inform the annals, a son-in-law of the Western Türkic Aru-Kagan (Ch. Helu), whose horde court was then on the banks of the r. Talas (tributary of Blue Irtysh), was 5714, 10167 yan-cho (< iäm-tsüär < yam-chor) [189]. Chor is a widely spread Türkic title. The term Yam (Djam) is Yama [190]. From the valley of the r. Argun in the Inner Mongolia the cult of Yama came to the banks of Irtysh. It existed there for a long time under the names Nama (~Yama) and Yime (in combination Shal-Yime, where the Shal is a Tibetan loanword meaning a "lord of the deceased"). One of the Altai parables recorded by W.W.Radloff relayed a request to Shal-Yime to take under his protection those who take intoxicated drinks, and also deceased small children, foals, heifers and lambs. A Finnish scientist U.Harva wrote "Thus, Shal-Yime is an angel-protector (patron spirit) of not only deceased, but also small children" [191].

Here is a quote from the text of the legend in W.W.Bartold's Russian translation. "The origin of Kimaks is this. The chief of Tatars died and left two sons; a senior son took hold of the kingdom, the younger son began envying the senior brother; the name of the younger was Shad, he has made attempt on the life of the senior brother, but it was unsuccessful; afraid for himself, he took with himself a slave-mistress (kanizak), fled from the brother and arrived to a place with a large river, a lot of trees and abundance of game; there he put up a tent and settled down. Every day this man and slave girl left hunting together, ate meat of game and made themselves clothes of sable fur, squirrels and ermines. After that to them came seven their Tatar relatives: Imi, Imek, Tatar, Bayander, Kipchak, Lanikaz (?) and Adjlad (?). These people grazed the herds of their masters; in those places where [before] were herds, no pastures remained; looking for grasses, they came to that side where Shad was. Seeing them, the slave girl came out and said: "Irtysh", i.e. "stop "; from that the river received its name Irtysh. Seeing that slave girl, everybody stopped and set up tents. The Shad, upon his return, brought along a large trophy from the hunt and treated them; they remained there till the winter snowfall, they could not return back; there was plenty of grass, and they spent there the whole winter. When the land redecorated and snow thawed, they sent a man to the Tatar camp to bring a news about that tribe. He came there, and saw that the whole area was devastated and devoid of the population: an enemy came and plundered and slaughtered all people. The remains of the tribe came down to this man from the mountains; he told his friends about the position of the Shad; all of them set out to Irtysh. Arriving there, they greeted the Shad as a chief, and began to render him honors. Other people, upon hearing this news, also began coming [there]; 700 people gathered. For a long time they remained in Shad service; when they multiplied, they scattered in mountains and formed seven tribes, called after seven men. All these Kimaks are distinguished by angry nature, thriftiness, and inhospitality.

The Shad once stood on the bank of Irtysh with his people; a voice was heard: "Shad, have you seen me in the water?" The Shad saw nothing, except for a hair floating on the water surface; he tied down his horse, enterd the water and seized the hair; it turned out that that was his wife Hatun. He asked her: "How did you fall?" She answered: "A Crocodile (nehang; river dragon. - Yu. Z.) seized me from the bank of the river". (Kimaks render respect to this river, revere it, worship it and say: "The River is a God of Kimaks".) The Shad was given a nickname Tutuk..." [192].
2-20

The echoes of this myth survived in Altai down to the new time. A similar theme was recorded at the end of the 18th century. by P.S.Pallas in a village Naushir near r. Yus. Pallas wrote "Tatars who live in this place do not recognize people from whom they come as their ancestors. They say that in this country lived two brothers, of which one with his people has dug a lot of gold and silver from the mountains. Another brother was rich with people and cattle. The last so frequently expropriated the treasures found by the first brother and disturbed him that he at last resorted to ask for help the Chinese ruler, who gave him and his people land laying in the east" [193].

The memory of Silver country (Kumush) and Kang-dej fortress was imprinted in Altai in the name of the Kumysh volost (Russian pronunciation of the Türkic  word "ulus" = "subdivision") and the Altai seok ("bone", i.e. clan) Kondosh. According to one of the 19th century censuses, in the Kuznetsk district was a volost Kumysh, also called Kondosh. About seok Kondosh exists a legend. "One of the girls from seok Kondosh gave birth to a child whose father she could not name. The child was given a name of the mother's seok" [194].

There is plenty of similar folkloric evidence (for example, an image of the Yabak-Yemek on a hungry skewbald horse in the Altai as a memory of the Silver country along the river Argun, where all horses skewbald, etc.).

* * *.

Historical outline

The history of the Se-yanto Kaganate has already been reviewed in a number of studies that were coming from different positions and with different objectives [195].

Translator's Note

Yu. Zuev reference in notes [1] and [195] to Seyanto historiography lists only Bichurin, Chavannes and Liu Mau-tsai as source translators, and Hirth and Klyashtorny as historical scholars. In fact, the list should be extended, to the list should be added Gumilev, who extensively weaved Seyanto's role in the historical events and ethnogenesis of the Türkic peoples, and Duan Lianqin's 1988 work "Xueyantuo During the Period of Sui and Tang" ISBN 7-80546-024-8.

This article mainly offers ethno-geographical interpretation. The tribe Se-yanto at the end of the 6th century resided in the area of Black Irtysh, together with Kibirs they created an Oguz state in the Central Asia with oasis states Turfan (Ch. Gaochan), Hami (Ch. Iu) and Karashar (Ch.Yantsi) their tribute-payers. The state did not last for a long time (605-610), and it was in a vassalage dependence from the Western Türkic Kagans.

To free from dependence, the Se-yanto, also known under a name Jeti Eren (Yeti, Dzheti, etc, Eren = Seven Men), numbering 70 thousand people, (ca. 610 AD) trekked (1500 km to the east, from the forest-steppe strip with the center at the Kara Irtysh, 47N 87E) to the banks of the r. Tola (47.5N 106.5E) in the Northern Mongolia. After a number of convincing victories over the troops of the Eastern Türkic state, the Se-yanto leader Ynan-erkin in 628 received a title Jenchu-Bilge-Kagan (Pearly Wise Kagan), and in 630 transferred the horde court to the Uteken (Khangai/Hangai) mountains (47N 103E) and became the ruler of all lands and tribes that were before under the hand of the Eastern Türkic Kagan. This second Oguz state in the history of the Central Asia was organized by a triade system, it consisted of two wings and a center in Uteken. A head of the western wing (tardush) was Barchak, a Kagan son from his main wife; a head of the eastern wing (tolish) was a Kagan son from his second wife Yemek, senior brother of Barchak (It was a Türkic tradition to add a name of the wife's tribe to her name, and then to add the ethnic name of the mother to the names of the sons: Leo the Khazar, Ayar Avar, Asparukh Madjar... and Yemek. This tradition did not apply to the main wife with tamga, the Hatun/Khatun, who could only belong to a single "Hatun's" dynastic tribe of the Kagan/Hatun alliance - Translator's Note). Both were military commanders, Shads, but their ideological and social statuses were unequal. The rivalry and mutual hostility of the brothers probably became the most characteristic traits in the history of the state, and finally were one of the reasons of its destruction. The of the Yemek's ulus (province) laid east from Uteken, around the lake-sea Külün (Dalai-nor) and along the banks of the r. Argun. It consisted of Tatar-Oguz Yemek/Kimek tribes. This important conclusion is not principally new. Arguments in its favor were substantiated by S.M.Ahinjanov [196]. They are substantially solid, a failure to take them into account would render the further discussion unproductive. This writer hopes that the new material of written sources cited in the present article will also find its place.
2-21

The death of the Supreme ruler Jenchu-Bilge-Kagan (645), who kept the balance of opposing forces, and the search for a new Great Kagan resulted in a bloody conclusion of the protracted conflict. Yemek was killed right at the funerals of his parent, and his kinfolks, who occupied important posts at the horde court of the deceased, suffered reprisals and fled to the Black Irtysh valley from where began their trek the first Se-yanto. After a short time the new Great ruler Barchak assumed such magnificent titles that they would amply suffice several less vain royals, and suffered a number of defeats from the Tang and Uigurs (Uigurs are another tribal subdivision of the same Tele people, at the time of a lesser status then Seyanto, but with equally strong thirst for independence and aspiration for leadership - Translator's Note). In search for safety, with a handful of horsemen he fled under protection of the judicial tribe Ashtak (Ch. Ashide, tamga ) from which probably and came his mother, but perished in a skirmish with Uigurs. The Kagan clan of the Kaganate has been exterminated, the state was also lost. A few unsuccessful subsequent battles could not change anything any more. The undertaken by the Tang administration division of all Steppe into districts did not leave a place for the main tribes of the defeated Kaganate. A significant part of Yemeks left to Irtysh to the surviving leaders. There began forming a new ethnopolitical community, with its origin in the history of the Se-yanto Kaganate. Therefore the Kimek historical-genealogical legend begins with the words: "the Head (mihtar) of Tatars has died, and left two sons; a senior son seized the kingdom, a younger son began envying his brother; the name of the younger son was Shad... "

Bibliography

2-21

1. Bichurin N.Ya. (Iakinf), Collection of information on peoples in Central Asia in ancient times, Moscow-Leningrad, 1950, vol. 1-2. Moscow-Leningrad, 1950-1953. p. 339-343;
Chavannes Ed. Documents sur les Tou-kue (Turcs) Occidentaux . St. Pb., 1903. p. 94-96;
Liu Mau-tsai. Die chinesisehen Nachrichtcn zur Gesch.chte der Ost-Tiirken (T'u-kue.) lid. 1-2. Wiesbaden, 1958. p. 354-358.
2. Haussig H W. Theophylakt's Exkurs uber die skyihischen Vülker / "Byzantion." 1953. p. 283, 287;
Theophilact Simokatta, History / Transl. S.P.Kondratiev. M., 1957. p. 166.
3. Bartold W.W. Extractions from Gardizi composition "Zajn al-ahbar"//Collection of Works, vol. 8. Moscow-Leningrad, 1973, p. 45. (Abu Sa'id Gardizi, "Zajn al-ahbar", "Ornament of news")
4. Large Chinese-Russian dictionary in Russian graphic system / Under ed. prof. I.M.Oshanin. vol. 1-4. Moscow, 1983-1984;
Kolgren . Grammata Serica Recensa. Stokholm. 1957.
5. Minorsky V. I. Hudud al-Alam "The regions of the World". A Persian geography 372 A. H. - 982 A. D. London. 1937, p. 75.
6. Yao Silian (姚思廉), Chen shu (陳書) (History of Chen dynasty. 557-589) / Series "Bo-na" Peking, 1958. Ch. 54;
Fyan Batszan, et al. Lidaj getszu chjuantszi hujbjan (Joined edition of "Narrations" about various peoples by texts of dynastic histories, Vol. 2. Ch. 2. Peking: "Chjunhua", 1958. p. 1705.
7. Hamilton J. Toquz-Oghuz et On-Uyghur // Journal Asiatique. 1962. No 250. p. 25-26.
8. Wei Shou (魏收). Wei shu (魏書) (History of the state Wei, Toba-Wei) / Series "Bo-na" Ch. 101. Peking, 1958. p. 1317, l. 236;
Li Yanshou (李延壽). Bei shu (北史) (History of Northern dynasties) / Series "Bo-na" Ch. 97, Peking, 1958. p. 1289, l. 8;
Wei Zheng et al. Sui shu (History of Sui dynasty) // Series "Bo-na", Ch. 83. Peking, 1958. With 826, l 7;
Bretsehneider E. Mediaeval studies from the Eastern Asiatic Sources St. Pb.. 1888. p. 189.
9. Haussig H. W. Op. cit. (Theophylakt's Exkurs... 1953), p. 284-285, 289;
Theophilact Simokatta. p. 161.
10. Wei Zheng (魏徵) et al. Sui shu (隋書), Ch. 84. p. 840, l. 18.
11. Taskin V.S. Materials on history of nomadic tribes in China 3rd-5th centuries. Issue 3. Mujuny, Moscow, 1992, p. 82.
12. Du You, Tongdian ("Collection of the government statutes") // Series "Shi Tup", Ch. 199;
Tsen Chju(n)mian. Tutszue tszi shi (Collection of materials on a history Tutszue-Türks). Peking, 1958. p. 695, 697.
13. Bazin L. Recherehes sur les parlers That (5-e icl apres J. C.) // T'o-ung Pao. Vol. 39. livres 1-5. Leiden, 1950. p. 252-254, 290-291;
Yao Weiyuan, Bei chao hu sin kao (Research about barbarous surnames of Northern dynasties epoch). Peking, 1958. p. 32-38.
14. Fang Xuanling (房玄齡), Tszin shu (Jin Shu 晉書) (History of Tszin dynasty) (Jin Dynasty, 265-420)/ Series "Bo-na" Ch. 110. p. 752. l. 5~. Peking, 1958.
15. Fang Xuanling, Tszin shu (Jin Shu) (History of Tszin dynasty) (Jin Dynasty, 265-420), Ch. 97. p. 666, l. 116.
16. Lu Sui (Xu Liu 劉昫). Tszju Tang shu ( Jiu Tang shu, Chiu Tang shu 唐書) (History of Tang dynasty, 618-907). Old Edition // Series "Bo-na" Ch. 199. p. 1493, l. 1. Peking, 1958.
17. Li Yan-shou. Bei shi (History of Northern dynasties) / Series "Bo-na" Ch. 97. p. 129. l. 11, Peking. 1958.;
Wei Zheng et al. [Sui shu (History of Sui dynasty)], Ch., 93. p. 826, l. 8.
18. Lubo-Lesnichenko E. I. Great Silk Road / East Turkestan in antiquity and early middle age (sketch of history), Moscow, 1988, p. 384-386
19. (Lacuna)
2-22
20. Destunis S. Byzantine historians. SPb, 1860. p. 493;
Chavannes Ed. Documents sur les T'ou-kiue (Turcs) Occidenlaux. St. Pb., 1903. p. 233n.;
Procopius of Caesarea, Gothic Wars, Moscow, 1950. p. 41;
Lubo-Lesnichenko Ε I. Ibid. p. 384-387.
21. Pigulevskaya N.V. Byzantine diplomacy and trade in silk / Byzantine chronometer. Vol. 1 (26). p. 208;
Haussig Η W. Op. cit. (Theophylakt's Exkurs... 1953), p. 342 and a trace.
22. Stein A. Serindia. Vols. 1-3. Oxford, 1921.
23. Klyashtorny S.G. History of Central Asia and runiform script monuments. SPb., 2003. p. 144-145.
24. Haussig H. W. Op. cit. (Theophylakt's Exkurs... 1953), p. 342.
25. Wang Tsingjo (Wang Tao), et al., Tsefu yuan gui (Primary turtle of royal library/ Arcane Essentials from the Imperial Library), vol. 1-12.974. Peking, 1960. p. 11444, l. 166; [Waitai miyao (外台秘要/外臺秘要) (Arcane Essentials from the Imperial Library) by Wang Tao (王焘/王燾)]
Li Yan-shou. [Bei shi (History of Northern dynasties)], Ch. 97. p. 293, l. 156;
Bichurin I.Ya. (Iakiif) Ibid. vol. 2. M. - L, 1950-1953. p. 200.
26 Ibid.;
Se Tszunchjen (Xue Zongzheng 薛宗正). Tutszue shi (History of Tutszue (突厥史)-Türks). Peking, 1992. p 373-374.
27. Tsen Chjunmyan. Ibid. [Tutszue tszi shi (Collection of materials on a history Tutszue-Türks)], p. 679, 1010.
28. Thomsen V. Altiürkische İnschriften aus der Mongolei // ZDMG. Bd. 78.1924-1925. S. 166.
29. Amanjolov A.S. History and theory of Ancient Türkic script. Almaty, 2003. p. 182.
30. Wei Zheng et al. [Sui shu (History of Sui dynasty)], Ch. 84. p. 840, l. 19;
Yan Yanshou. Ch. 99. p. 1325, l. 20;
Se Tszunchjen. Ibid. [Tutszue shi (History of Tutszue-Türks)], p. 374.
31. Tsen Chjunmyan. Ibid. [Tutszue tszi shi (Collection of materials on a history Tutszue-Türks)], p. 998.
32. Lu Sui. Ibid. [Lu Sui (Xu Liu). Tszju Tang shu (Jiu Tang shu, Chiu Tang shu) (History of Tang dynasty, 618-907), Old Edition], Ch. 1946. p. 1145, l. 2.
33. Lu Sui (Xu Liu). Ibid. Ch. 1996. p. 1495, l. 4.
34. Rashid ad-Din Fazlallah. Djami 'at-tavarih. vol. 1. Ch. 1. Critical text A.A. Romaskevich, A.A.Hetagurov, A.A.Ali-Zade. Moscow, 1965. p. 159.
35. Kotwicz W. Contribution a l'histolre de l'zi Centrale / Rocznik Orientalisticzny, XV (1939-1949). Krakow, 1949. p. 178.
36. Tunmann. Crimean Khanate. Simferopol, Tavria, 1991. p. 49.
37. Asadov F.M. Arabic sources about Türks in Early Middle Ages. Baku, 1993. p. 44.
38. Lu Sui. Ibid. [Lu Sui (Xu Liu). Tszju Tang shu (Jiu Tang shu, Chiu Tang shu) (History of Tang dynasty, 618-907), Old Edition], Ch. 195. p. 1455, l. 136.
39. Ouyang Xiu (歐陽修). Xin Tang shu (新唐書) (History of Tang dynasty. New Edition) / Series "Bo-na" Peking 1958. Ch. 2176. p. 1526, l. 26.
40 Malyavkin A.G. Materials on history of Uigurs in 11th-12th century. Novosibirsk, 1974. p. 30.
41. Pritsak . Old Türkic regnal names in the Chinese sources // Journal of Turkish studies. Vol. 5.1985, p. 208,
42. Ouyang Xiu . [Xin Tang shu (History of Tang dynasty. New Edition)], Ch. 99. p. 934, l. 36.
43. Chen Dechji, Tsu Maosen, Din Govan, Shi Ikui (Song Lian 宋濂 ?). Yuan chao shi (元史) (History of Yuan dynasty). vol. 1. Peking, 1986. p. 4-5.
44. Ouyang Xiu . [Xin Tang shu (History of Tang dynasty. New Edition)], Ch. 2176, p. 1527, l, 36;
Lu Sui. Ibid. [Lu Sui (Xu Liu). Tszju Tang shu (Jiu Tang shu, Chiu Tang shu) (History of Tang dynasty, 618-907), Old Edition], Ch. 195. p. 1455, l, 14.
45. Wang Tsingjo (Wang Tao). [Tsefu yuan gui (the Primary turtle of royal library)] , Ch. 975. p. 11454, l. 13.
46. Lu Sui. Ibid. [Lu Sui (Xu Liu). Tszju Tang shu (Jiu Tang shu, Chiu Tang shu) (History of Tang dynasty, 618-907), Old Edition], Ch. 1945. p. 1446, l, 55;
Chavannes Ed. Ibid. p. 38,
47. t J. Reconnaissance en Haute Asie septentrionale par cinq envoyés ouïgours au 8-e siecle // JA. Vol. 254.2.1956. p. 146.
48. Dvoretsky I. Kh. Ancient Greek-Russian Dictionary. Μ., 1958. p. 229.
49. Syma Tsyan (Sima Qian). Shi tszi (Historical notes) / Series "Bo-na" Peking, 1958. Ch. 27. p. 437-438 l. 406-41.
50. Vyatkin R.V. Historical notes. Moscow, 1986. p. 149, 270.
51. Potanin G.N. Hunting beliefs and ceremonies of Altaians and Türks // Culture and literature of the East. Book 5. Baku, 1929. p. 190,
52. Rashid ad-Din, Fazlallah. Ibid. p. 123.
53. Mahmud Kashgari. Turky suzlar devoni (Devon ligotit turk) (Divan lugat at-Türk). vol. 1. Tashkent, I960. p. 90.
54. Abishev X. Elemetggy astronomies and weather in oral national creativity of Kazakhs. Alma-Ata, 1949. p. 18-23;
Sevortyan E.V. Etymological dictionary of Türkic languages. (Common-Türkic and inter-Türkic bases on vowels). Moscow, 1974. p. 430-431;
Nikonov V. A. Geographic names of the Milky Way / Onomastics of the East. Moscow, 1980. p. 296;
Alimbai P., Mukanov M Argynbaev. Where leads Kusjoly? / Türkic world, 1999. No 1-2;
Clouson G. Turkish and Mongolian horses; an etymological stady / Central Asiatic journal. Vol. 10. No. 3-4, 1965. p. 363.
55. Kazakh folklore in collection of G. Η. Potanin. Archival materials and publications / Chief ed. Smirnova N. P. Alma-Ata, 1972. p. 59.
56. Golden P.B. Khazar studies. An historico-philological inquiry into the origins of the Khazars. Budapest 1980. p. 169-171.
2-23
57. Bang W., Gabain A. Aus buddistische Schriftcn. Tiirkische Turfantexte V // Sitzunqberichte der Pteussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Phil.-hist. Kl. Berlin, 1931. S. 27;
Scherbak . M. Inscription in ancient Uigur language from Mongolia // EV 14. Moscow-Leningrad, 1961. p. 141-142.
58. Mahmud Kashgari. Ibid. p. 391.
59. Wang Pu. Tang huei yao (Summary review of Tang dynasty, 618-907). Shanghai, 1958, Ch. 100. p. 1739;
Wang Tsingjo (Wang Tao), etc. Ibid, [Tsefu yuan gui (the Primary turtle of royal library)] , Ch. 970. p. 11400, l. 126;
Ue Shi. Tai-pin huanui tszi (Description of the world made during the Tai-pin sin-go period, 976-983; Encyclopedia) Ch. 198;
Tsen Chjunmyan. Ibid. [Tutszue tszi shi (Collection of materials on a history Tutszue-Türks)], p. 699;
Shefer E. Peaches of Samarkand. ook about foreign wonders in Tang empire / Transl. fr. English. L.N.Menshirov. Moscow, 1981. p. 127
Hirth F. Nachworte zur Inschrift des Tonjukuk. Beitriige zur Geschichte der Ost-Türken im 7. und 8 lahrhunder nach chinesischen Quellen // Alttürkischer i İnschriften der Monqolei Ζ F StPb 1899 S. 140.
60. Wang Tsingjo (Wang Tao). Ibid. [Tsefu yuan gui (Primary turtle of royal library)] , Ch. 974. p. 11444, l. 186; p. 11446, l. 196;
Tsen Chjunmyan. Ibid., [Tutszue tszi shi (Collection of materials on a history Tutszue-Türks)], p. 392, 408;
Hirth F. Nachworte zur Inschrift des Tojukuk // ATIM, 2. Folge St. Pb 1899, p. 140.
61. Ue Shi. Ibid. [Tai-pin huanui tszi (Description of the world made during the Tai-pin sin-go period, 976-983; Encyclopedia)], Ch. 198;
Kuner N.V. Chinese records about peoples of Southern Siberia, Central Asia, and Far East. Moscow, 1961, p. 50.
62. Wei Zheng et al. [Sui shu (History of Sui dynasty)], Ch. 84. p. 841, l. 20.
63. Lu Sui. Ibid. [Lu Sui (Xu Liu). Tszju Tang shu (Jiu Tang shu, Chiu Tang shu) (History of Tang dynasty, 618-907), Old Edition], Ch. 1996. p. 1497, l. 96;
Ouyang Xiu . [Xin Tang shu (History of Tang dynasty. New Edition)], Ch. 219. p. 1539, l. bv.
64. Mori Macao. Kodai Toruko mshshzoku si Kenku (Research about ancient Türks), vol. 1-2. Tokyo. 1992. vol. 1. p. 819.
65. Mahhpirov V.U. Names of remote ancestors. Almaty, 1997. p. 77.
66. Kang Hsi tszydyan (Hieroglyphic dictionary of Chinese language compiled in Kang Hsi period). Peking, 1958. p. 964.
67. Wei Zheng et al. [Sui shu (History of Sui dynasty)], Ch. 51. p. 587, l. 36;
Mori M. Ibid. p. 819.
68. Se Tszunchjen. Ibid. [Tutszue shi (History of Tutszue-Türks)], p. 388-389
69. Wang Pu. [Tang huej jao (Summary review of Tang dynasty, 618-907)] , Ch. 72. p. 1306.
70. Zuev Yu.A. Early Türks: Essays on history and ideology. Almaty : Dajk-Press, 2002.
71. Livshits V.A. Juridical documents and letters // Sogdian documents from mountain Mug. Issue 2. Moscow, 1962. p. 101.
72. Lu Sui. Ibid. [Lu Sui (Xu Liu). Tszju Tang shu (Jiu Tang shu, Chiu Tang shu) (History of Tang dynasty, 618-907), Old Edition], Ch. 194. p. 1436, l. 2.
73. Malyavkin A.G. Historical geography of the Central Asia. Novosibirsk, 1981 p. 103
74. Ouyang Xiu . [Xin Tang shu (History of Tang dynasty. New Edition)], Ch. 106. p. 370, l. 46; Ch. 217, p. 1521, l. 2.
75. Ibid. Ch. 436, p. 228, l, 2.
76. Wang Pu. [Tang huej jao (Summary review of Tang dynasty, 618-907)] , Ch. 72. p. 1307
77. Lu Sui. Ibid. [Lu Sui (Xu Liu). Tszju Tang shu (Jiu Tang shu, Chiu Tang shu) (History of Tang dynasty, 618-907), Old Edition], Ch. 1996, p. 1495, l. 46
78. Ouyang Xiu . [Xin Tang shu (History of Tang dynasty. New Edition)], Ch. 436. p. 298, l. 2
79. Ibid. Ch. 195. p. 1449, l, 1-2.
80. Wang Pu. [Tang huej jao (Summary review of Tang dynasty, 618-907)] , Ch. 72. p. 130; KT 48.
81. Ouyang Xiu . [Xin Tang shu (History of Tang dynasty. New Edition)], Ch. 436, p. 305, l. 16-í;
Lubo-Lesnichenko E.I. Ibid., p. 115
82. Le g A. Türkische Manii haica aus Chotscho 1 / Spachuibscnschaftliche Ergebnisse der Dcutschen Turfan-Forschung. Bd. 1. Leipzig, 1972. S. 419;
Zuev Yu.A. Ibid. [Early Türks: Essays on history and ideology], p. 203-205
83. Mahmud Kashgari. Ibid. p. 384, 418.
84. Sevortyan E.V. Etymological dictionary of Türkic languages (Common Türkic and intra-Türkic roots with vowels). Moscow, 1974. p. 130-132, 136-137.
85. Ieronim Evsevy. Letters // the Bulletin of an ancient history. No 4.1949. p. 229.
86. Ouyang Xiu. [Xin Tang shu (History of Tang dynasty. New Edition)], Ch. 219. p. 1539. l. 5.
87. Ibid. Ch. 2156. p. 1502, l. 106;
Liu Mau-tsai. Die chinesischen Nachrichten zur Geschichte der Ost-Türken (T'u-küe) Wiesbaden. 1958. p. 24.
88. Tsen Chjunmyan. Ibid. [Tutszue tszi shi (Collection of materials on a history Tutszue-Türks)], p. 299.
89. Wang Tsingjo (Wang Tao). [Tsefu yuan gui (the Primary turtle of royal library)] , Ch. 974, p. 11444, l. 166;
Tsen Chjunmyan. Ibid. [Tutszue tszi shi (Collection of materials on a history Tutszue-Türks)], p. 392.
90. Malyavkin A.G. Historical geography of Central Asia. Novosibirsk, 1981. p. 95.
91. Rashid ad-Din, Fazlallah. Ibid. p. 144.
92. Pigulevskaya N.V. Syrian sources on history of USSR peoples. Moscow-Leningrad. 1941. p. 165. About people-dogs see:
Zuev Yu.A. The strongest tribe / Historical and cultural Interrelations of Iran and Dasht-i the Kipchak in 13-18 cc, Almaty. 2004. p. 35-43.
93 t J. Reconnaissance en Haute Asie septentrionale par cinq envoyés ouïgours au 8-e siecle // JA. Vol. 254.2.1956. p. 146;
Moriyasu T. La nouvelle interpretation des mots Hoet Ho-yo-hor dans le manuscript Pelliot 1283 // Acta Orientalia Hungancae. vol. 34 (1980). Fasc. 1-3 p. 178
94. Kononov A. H. Family tree of Turkmens. Composition of Abu-l-Gazi, Khiva khan, Moscow-Leningrad, 1958, p. 76
2-24
95. Ban Gu (班固). Han shu (漢書) (History of Han dynasty, 206. BC - 24 AD) / Series "Bo-na", Peking, 1958. Ch. 946. p. 1141, l. 26.
96. Fan E (范曄). Hou Han shu (後漢書). (History of Late Han dynasty, 25-220) / Series "Bo-na", Peking, 1958. Ch. 89. p. 1330, l. 146.
97. Kononov A. N. Ibid. p. 99-100.
98. Hambis L. Kâitim et Ges-Dum // Jornal Asiatique. vol. 246.1958. p. 313-320.
99. Wang Tsingjo (Wang Tao). [Tsefu yuan gui (the Primary turtle of royal library)] , Ch. 961. p. 11312, l. 23b.
100. Du You, Tongdian ("Collection of the government statutes") // Series "Shi Tup", Ch. 200. L. 10-11b;
Tsen Chjunmyan. Ibid. [Tutszue tszi shi (Collection of materials on a history Tutszue-Türks)], p. 761-765;
Senga T. A. T'ung-tien hiradâsi a közer-Eurasiai nepekröl / A honfolal âskor Yrott Forrasai. Balassi klado. Budapest, 1996. p. 37-39;
Senga T. Megjegyzesek kimekek törzssövctscgcnek kialakulâsâhar / Aniik tanul manyok 1 (Studia Antiqua). XLI. Kötet 1-2 szram. Akdemiai kiado. Budapest, 1997. p. 175-192.
101. Wang Tsingjo (Wang Tao). [Tsefu yuan gui (the Primary turtle of royal library)] , Ch. 961. p. 11312, l. 23.
102. Ouyang Xiu . [Xin Tang shu (History of Tang dynasty. New Edition)], Ch. 2156. p. 1527, l. 46, line 2;
Liu Mau-tsai. Op. cit. [Die chinesischen Nachrichten zur Geschichte der Ost-Türken (T'u-kiüe) Wiesbaden], p. 355.
103. Differently: Tsen Chjunmyan. Ibid. [Tutszue tszi shi (Collection of materials on a history Tutszue-Türks)], p. 766-770;
Liu Mau-tsai the Decree soch. [Die chinesischen Nachrichten zur Geschichte der Ost-Türken (T'u-kiüe) Wiesbaden], p. 722
104. Ouyang Xiu. [Xin Tang shu (History of Tang dynasty. New Edition)], Ch. 436. p. 305, l. 16.
105. Lu Sui. Ibid. [Lu Sui (Xu Liu). Tszju Tang shu (Jiu Tang shu, Chiu Tang shu) (History of Tang dynasty, 618-907), Old Edition], Ch. 1996. p. 1497, l. 96.
106. Chen Dechji, Tsu Maosen, Din Govan, Shi Ikui. Yuan chao shi (History of Yuan dynasty). vol. 1. Peking, 1986. p. 4-5.
107. Tsen Chjunmyan. Ibid. [Tutszue tszi shi (Collection of materials on a history Tutszue-Türks)], p. 712;
Liu Mau-tsai. Ibid. [Die chinesischen Nachrichten zur Geschichte der Ost-Türken (T'u-kiüe) Wiesbaden], R. 592;
Compare: Wang Pu. [Tang huej jao (Summary review of Tang dynasty, 618-907)] , Ch. 98,1 p. 1744.
108. Minorsky V. I. Hudud al-Alam "The regions of the World". A Persian geography 372 A. H. - 982 A. D. London. 1937. p. 94.
109. Mahmud Koshgari. Ibid. p. 389,
Klyashtorny S.G., Sultanov T.I. States and peoples of Euroasian steppes. Antiquity and Middle Ages. 2nd print, SPb., 2004. p. 140-144.
110. Hui-li. The life of Hsuan-tsang, the Tripitaka-master ofthe Great Tzu En Monastery. Transl. by Li Yung-hsi. Peking, 1959. p. 36, 37;
Hamilton J. R. Autour du manuscrit Stael-Holstein // Tuong Pao I Vol. 46 (1958). Livre 1-2. C.140-141;
Men-gu-u-mu-tszi. Note on Mongolian pasturing routs// Notes IRGO, ethnography branch. vol. 24. SPb., 1895.
111. Zuev Yu.A. Ibid. [The strongest tribe / Historical and cultural Interrelations of Iran and Dasht-i the Kipchak in 13-18 cc], p. 107-108.
112. Miller G. F. History of Siberia. vol. 1. Moscow-Leningrad, 1937. p. 514-516.
113. Ratchevsky . Les Che-i uei etaienl - ils des Mongols? / Melanges Sinologiqucs. Paris, 1966.
114. Minorsky V. Op. cit. p. 84, 228;
Minorsky V. Sharaf az-Zarmm Tahir Marvazi on China, the Turks and India. London, 1942. p. 26, 85.
115. Tomo (Toktoghan 脫脫). Liao shi (遼史). (History of Liao dynasty, 907-1125) // Series "Bo-na" Peking, 1958. Ch. 2. p. 23, l. 5; Ch. 36. p. 164, l. 106; Ch. 46, p. 257, l. 316; Ch. 69. p. 365, l. 36; p. 375; l. 26b.
116. Ibid. Ch. 30. p. 136, l. 5,
117. Ralchnevsky R. Ibid. p. 228;
Hambis L. L'histoire des Mongols avant Gengis-khan // Central Asiatic journal. Vol. 14 (1970). p. 126;
Serruys H. Monghol: Mogol and Manghus: Magus/Acta Orientalia Hungaicae. vol. 36, fasc. 1-3.1982. p. 475;
Chen Dechji, Tsu Maosen, Din Govan, Shi Ikui. Yuan chao shi (History of Yuan dynasty). vol. 1. Peking, 1986. p. 6-7.
118. Men-gu-u-mu-tszi. Ibid. p. 324-325.
119. Ouyang Xiu . Ibid. [Xin Tang shu (History of Tang dynasty. New Edition)], Ch. 219. p. 1540, l. 7.
120. Agadjanov S.G. Essays on Oguz and Turkmen history of Central Asia of 9th-13th centuries. Ashkhabad, 1969. p. 23.
121. Biruni Abu Reihan. Vestiges of the Past // Selected works, vol. 1. Tashkent, 1957. p. 270.
122. Stratanovich G.G. Folk beliefs of Indochina. Moscow, 1978. p. 149;
Evsukov V.V., Commissarov S.A. Bronze model of a chariot of Chuntsu epoch in light of the comparative analysis/New in archeology of China. Novosibirsk, 1984. p. 58-59;
Lvov E.L., Oktyabrskaya I.V., Sagalaev A.M., Usmanov M.S. Traditional beliefs of Türks of Southern Siberia (Man and Society). Novosibirsk, 1989. p. 111-112.
123. Rashid ad-Din Fazlallah. Oguz - name / Transl. fr. Pers., intro.., comm., notes and indexes by R.M.Shukurova. Baku, 1987. p. 69.
124. Dumezil G. Osetian epos and mythology. Moscow, 1976, p. 80;
Abaev V.I. Scythian life and Zoroaster reform / Selected works. Religion. Folklore. Literature. Vladikavkaz. 1990. p. 25..
125. Rubinshtein Ya. Ch. Seth // Myths of nations of the world. vol. 2. Moscow, 1992. p. 442.
126. Gamkrelidze T.V., Ivanov V.V. Indo-European language and Indo-Europeans. Reconstruction, historical-typological analysis of parent language and proto-culture. vol. 2. Tbilisi, 1984. p. 564
2-25
127. Toporov V.I. Donkey // Myths of nations of the world. vol. 2. Moscow, 1992. p. 264-265;
Botvinik M.Ya. Midas // Myths of nations of the world. vol. 2. Moscow, 1990. p. 149-150;
Gamkrelidze T.V., Ivanov V.V. Ibid. p. 562-564
128. Potanin G.I. Essays on Northwestern Mongolia. Issue 4. SPb., 1883. p. 254-255, 293-298, 818, 851
129. Valihanov Ch.Ch. Coll. of works in 5 volumes,. vol. 2. Alma-Ata, 1985. p. 269-271.
130. Abu Rejhan Biruni India // Selected compositions. vol. 2. Tashkent, 1963. p. 278.
131. Mackerras . The Uigur empire (744-840.) Canberra. 1968. p. 16;
Malyavkin A.G. Historical geography of the Central Asia. Novosibirsk, 1981. p. 271
132. Ouyang Xiu . Ibid. [Xin Tang shu (History of Tang dynasty. New Edition)], Ch. 43. p. 304, l. 15.
133. Men-da bei-mu. A full description of the Mongolo-Tatar / Facsimile, transl. fr. Chinese, intro., comm, and appendixes by N. Ts. Munkuev. Moscow, 1975. p. 90-91;
Pelliot P. A propos des Comans. Journal Asiatique 15, April - June, 1920
134. Firdousi. Shahname. vol. 1. From the legend about Rositem battle with Kagan of the Chin to the reign of Lohrasp / Transl. by Ts. Banu-Lahuti. Moscow, 1965. p. 417, 449.
135. Shternberg L Ya. Primeval religion in view of ethnography. Leningrad, 1936. p. 83, 86
136. Narts / Epos of Ossetic people. Moscow, 1957. p. 84.
137. Smolyak A.V. Shaman: the person, functions, beliefs (Peoples of the Lower Amur). Moscow, 1991, p. 78-79
138. Legend about Shariyar. Karakalpak national poem. Nukus, 1971. p. 135.
139. Rigveda X. 10
140. Erman V.G., Temkin E.I. Myths of ancient India. Moscow, 1975. p. 76, 227.
141. Ivanov V.V., Toporov V.N. Research in the field of Slavic antique. Lexical and phraseological problems of text reconstruction, Moscow, 1974.
142. Nekludov S. Yu. Mangus // Myths of nations of the world. vol. 2. Moscow, 1992. p. 99-100;
Griner P.A. Yama // Myths of nations of the world. vol. 2. Moscow, 1992. p. 366-367;
Serruys H. Monghol: Moral and Mangrus; Marus // Acta Orientalia Hungaricae. vol. 36. F. 1-3.1982. p. 480-482.
143. Zuev Yu.A. Ibid. [The strongest tribe / Historical and cultural Interrelations of Iran and Dasht-i the Kipchak in 13-18 cc], p. 225-228.
144. Potanin . Η. Ibid. p. 63,
145. Chesnov Ya.V. Dragon - a metaphor of an external world / Myths, cults, ceremonies of peoples of foreign Asia. Moscow, 1986. p. 59-72. See also:
Ahinjanov S.M. Kipchaks in history of medieval Kazakhstan. Alma-Ata, 1989. p. 98.
146. Rashid ad-Din Ibid. p. 69.
147. Li Yan-shou. Ibid. [Bei shi (History Northern dynasties)], Ch. 97. p. 1294, l. 176.
148. Marquart J. Skizzen zür geschichtlichcn Vtflkerkundc von Miltelasien und Sibirien / Ostasiasche Zeitschrifi, 1919/1920.8. p. 293.
149. Wang Tsingjo (Wang Tao). [Tsefu yuan gui (the Primary turtle of royal library)] , Ch. 970;
Du You, Tongdian ("Collection of the government statutes") // Series "Shi Tup", Ch. 199.
150. Lu Sui. Ibid. [Lu Sui (Xu Liu). Tszju Tang shu (Jiu Tang shu, Chiu Tang shu) (History of Tang dynasty, 618-907), Old Edition], Ch. 109. p. 902-903, l. 1-3;
Ouyang Xiu. [Xin Tang shu (History of Tang dynasty. New Edition)], Ch. 110. p. 990, l. 2b-3a
Liu (Mau-tsai). Ibid. [Die chinesischen Nachrichten zur Geschichte der Ost-Türken (T'u-kiüe) Wiesbaden], p. 263-265.
151. Du You, Tongdian ("Collection of the government statutes") // Series "Shi Tup", Ch. 198.
152. Linhu Defen (令狐德棻). Chjou shu (Zhou 周書) (History of Chjou (Zhou/Chou) dynasty). "Bo-na". Peking, 1958], Ch. 50. p. 424, l. 2;
Bichurin N.Ya. Ibid. vol. 1. p. 221,
153. Grumm-Grjimailo G. E. The western Mongolia and Uryanhai territory. vol. 2. ., 1926. p. 283-284;
Potapov L.P. Etnical structure and origin of Altaians.Leningrad, 1969. p. 165.
154. Ouyang Xiu. [Xin Tang shu (History of Tang dynasty. New Edition)], Ch. 215. p. 1501-1502, l. 8-9.
155. Golden P. . Türkic Calques in Mediaeval Eastern Slavic / Journal of Turkish Studies, 8. Cambridge, MA. p. 107
156. Lu Sui. Ibid. [Lu Sui (Xu Liu). Tszju Tang shu (Jiu Tang shu, Chiu Tang shu) (History of Tang dynasty, 618-907), Old Edition], Ch. 195 p. 1452, l. 7a.
157. Ouyang Xiu. [Xin Tang shu (History of Tang dynasty. New Edition)], Ch. 221 p. 1558, l. 7b
158. Lu Sui. Ibid. [Lu Sui (Xu Liu). Tszju Tang shu (Jiu Tang shu, Chiu Tang shu) (History of Tang dynasty, 618-907), Old Edition], Ch. 93. p. 814, l. 9;
Wang Tsingjo (Wang Tao). Ibid. [Tsefu yuan gui (the Primary turtle of royal library)], Ch. 366. p. 4358, l. 16.
159. Wang Tsingjo (Wang Tao). Ibid. [Tsefu yuan gui (the Primary turtle of royal library)], Ch. 656. p. 7858, l. 170.
160. Alt. Klyashtorny S.G. History of Central Asia and runiform script monuments. SPb., 2003. p. 301-312.
161. Ouyang Xiu . [Xin Tang shu (History of Tang dynasty. New Edition)], Ch. 2156. p. 1506. l. 4;
Bichurin N.Ya. Ibid., vol. 1. p. 285.
162. Chavannes Ed. Documents sur les T'ou-kiue (Turcs) Occidentaux, St Pb., 1903. p. 23, 33, 47, 72, 219-200.
163. Ligeti L. Mots de civilisation de ut Asie en transcription chinoise / Acta Orientallia Hungaricae. vol. 1. 1950. Fasc. 1, p. 149
Pulleyblank E. Consonantal system of Old Chinese // Asia Major. 1962 Pt 1, p. 70;
Gumilev L. N. Ancient Türks. Moscow, 1967. p. 34.
164. Lu Sui. Ibid. [Lu Sui (Xu Liu). Tszju Tang shu (Jiu Tang shu, Chiu Tang shu) (History of Tang dynasty, 618-907), Old Edition], Ch. 1946 p. 1446 l. 56;
Syma Guan. Ibid. [Shychji tuntszyan (General review assisting management)], Ch. 200. p. 6301.
165. Poucha P. Theatres linguae Tocharicae dialect A. Ynacnptiones linguae Tocharicae. Pt. 2. Praha, 1955. p. 12.
l66. Dmitrieva L.N. Huastuanift. Introduction, text, translation / Turkological studies, Moscow-Leningrad, 1963, p. 225, 231
2-26
167. Wang Tsingjo (Wang Tao). [Tsefu yuan gui (the Primary turtle of royal library)] , Ch. 970. p. 11398, l. 86.
168. Wan Pu (Wan-pu). [Tang huei yao (Summary review of Tang dynasty, 618-907)], Ch. 42. p. 1306.
169. Voitov V. E. Stone sculptures from Ungetu / Central Asia. New monuments of writing and art. Moscow, 1987.;
Mayashi Toshio. Stone Statues in Mongolia // Bulletin of the National Museum of Ethnology. Vol. 21. No 1.1996. p. 276-279;
Rempel L.I. Necropolis of ancient Taraz 88 // Brief notes of History of Material Culture Institute. Issue 69. 1957;
Senigova T.I. Questions of ideology and cults of the Jeti-su / New in archeology of Kazakhstan. Alma-Ata, 1968.
Klyashtorny S. Manichaean Monasteries in the Land of Arghu / Studia Manichaica. Berlin-Brandenburgische Akademie der Wissenschaften. Berkhie und Abhand lungen. Sonoterban 4. Berlin. Akademie-Verlag, 2000.
170. Syma Guan. [Shychji tuntszyan (General review assisting management)], Leningrad, 195. p. 61-6147;
Lu Sui. Ibid. [Lu Sui (Xu Liu). Tszju Tang shu (Jiu Tang shu, Chiu Tang shu) (History of Tang dynasty, 618-907), Old Edition], Ch. 198. p. 1479, l. 46;
Ouyang Xiu . [Xin Tang shu (History of Tang dynasty. New Edition)], Ch. 221. p. 1550, l. 46;
Chavannes Ed. Op. cit. p. 105.
171. Liu Mau-tsai. Die chineschen Nachriohten zur Geschichte der Ost-Türken (T'u-küe.) Wiesbaden, 1958. p. 527, 540.
172. Lu Sui. Ibid. [Lu Sui (Xu Liu). Tszju Tang shu (Jiu Tang shu, Chiu Tang shu) (History of Tang dynasty, 618-907), Old Edition], Ch. 194. p. 1439, l. 8;
Ouyang Xiu. [Xin Tang shu (History of Tang dynasty. New Edition)], Ch. 215. p. 1501-1502, l. 8b-9a;
Liu (Mau-tsai.) [Die chinesischen Nachrichten zur Geschichte der Ost-Türken (T'u-kiüe) Wiesbaden], pp. 152-153, 204.
173. Bichurin N.Ya. Ibid. p. 262.
174. Lu Sui. Ibid. [Lu Sui (Xu Liu). Tszju Tang shu (Jiu Tang shu, Chiu Tang shu) (History of Tang dynasty, 618-907), Old Edition], Ch. 3. p. 36, l. 76;
Ouyang Xiu . [Xin Tang shu (History of Tang dynasty. New Edition)], Ch. 2. p. 28, l. 96; Ch. 2176. p. 1528, l. 5;
Syma Guan. [Shychji tuntszyan (General review assisting management)], Ch. 196. p. 6170-6172;
Liu (Mau-tsai) Op. cit. [Die chinesischen Nachrichten zur Geschichte der Ost-Türken (T'u-kiüe) Wiesbaden], p. 242-243, 355-356.
175. Se Tszunchjen. Tutszue shi (History of Tutszue-Türks). Peking, 1992. p. 399.
176. Lu Sui. Ibid. [Lu Sui (Xu Liu). Tszju Tang shu (Jiu Tang shu, Chiu Tang shu) (History of Tang dynasty, 618-907), Old Edition], Ch. 1996. p. 1494, l. 36.
177. Ibid. L. 7.
178. Czeglidy . Gârdizi on the history of Central Asia (745-780) // Ada Orientalia Hungaricae. vol. 228-1973. Fasc. 3, p. 260-261, 267;
Videngren G. Mani and Manichaeism. SPb., 2001. p. 139, 188-189, 191.
179. Syma Guyan. Shychji tuntszyan (General review assisting management), Shanghai, 1957. Ch. 194. p. 6118.
180. Ögei . Über die alttürkischc Schad (Sii-Baschi)-Würde // Central Asiatic Journal. Vol. 7, No 1, 1963.
181. Ouyang Xiu. [Xin Tang shu (History of Tang dynasty. New Edition)], Ch. 436. p. 297, l. 1.
182. Eczedy . Old Turcic Titles of Chinese Origin // Acta Orientalia Himgarica. vol. 18.1965;
Malyavkin A.G. Ibid. p. 341-342.
183. Rashid ad-Din. Ibid. p. 164.
184. Eczedy Y. Op. cit. p. 84-86;
Tsen Chjunmyan. Ibid. [Tutszue tszi shi (Collection of materials on a history Tutszue-Türks)], p. 250.
185. Zuev Yu.A. Ibid. [The strongest tribe / Historical and cultural Interrelations of Iran and Dasht-i the Kipchak in 13-18 cc], p. 20-32.
186. Hirth F. Op. cit. S. 48-50.
187. BK, 28. (?)
188. Martinez A. P. Gadizi's two chapters on the Turks // Archivum Eurasua Medii Aevi. Vol. 2, (1982.) p. 123.
189. Wang Tsingjo (Wang Tao). [Tsefu yuan gui (the Primary turtle of royal library)] , Ch. 986. p. 11577, l. 5-b;
Chavannes Ed. Notes additionelles sur les T'ou-kiue (Turcs) Occidental / T'oung Pao. Vol. 5.1904. p. 20.
190. Bang W., Gabain A. Analytischer Indsx zu den flinf ersten Stiickcn der Tiirkischc Turfan-Texte / Sitzungbenchie der Preussigchen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Phil-hist. Kl. 17-22. Berlin, 1931. p. 54.
191. Harva U. Die religiiisen Vorstellungen der altaischen Völker. Parvoo: Helsinki. 1938. C. 135.
192. Bartold W.W. Ibid. p. 26-27, 43-44;
Martinez A. P. Gardizi's two chapters on the Turks // Archivum Eurasua Mcdi Acvi. Vol. 2.1982. p. 120-121.
193. Pallas P.S. Travel to different provinces of the Russian state. Ch. 3. first half. SPb., 1788. p. 452-453.
194. Potapov L.P.Etnical structure and an origin of Altaians. ., 1969. p. 174.
195. Hirth F. Nochworte zur Inschrift des Tonjukuk / Alttiirkischen Inschriften der Mongolei Zweite, Folge. St. PB. 1899;
Klyashtorny S.G. Kipchaks in runiform texts / Turcologica 1986. To 80 years of academician A.I.Kononov. Leningrad, 1986;
Klyashtorny S.G. History of the Central Asia and runiform script monuments. SPb., 2003.
196. Ahinjanov S.M. Ibid. [Kipchaks in history of medieval Kazakhstan], p. 98 and on.
197. Bailey H. W. Languages of the Saka / Handbuch der Orientalistik. 4, 1, Leipzig-Küln, 1958. p. 136.

Home
Back
In Russian
Contents Huns
Contents Alans
Contents Scythians
Sources
Roots
Tamgas
Alphabet
Writing
Language
Genetics
Geography
Archeology
Religion
Coins
Wikipedia
Yu.Zuev Ethnic History of Usuns
Yu.Zuev The Strongest Tribe - Ezgil
Yu.Zuev Tamgas of vassal princedoms
Yu.Zuev Ancient Türkic social terms
Yu.Zuev Ancient Türks
Yu.Zuev Seyanto Kaganate and Kimeks
Ogur and Oguz Alan Dateline
Avar Dateline
Besenyo Dateline
Bulgar Dateline
Huns Dateline
Karluk Dateline
Khazar Dateline
Kimak Dateline
Kipchak Dateline
Kyrgyz Dateline
Sabir Dateline
Seyanto Dateline
Yu.Zuev  2004
5/9/09 TürkicWorld
@Mail.ru