Home
Back
In Russian
Contents Huns

Contents Kangars
Sources
Roots
Writing
Language
Religion
Genetics
Geography
Archeology
Coins
Wikipedia
Yu.Zuev Ethnic History of Usuns
Yu.Zuev Early Türks: Essays of history
Yu.Zuev The Strongest Tribe - Ezgil
Yu.Zuev Tamgas of vassal Princedoms
Yu.Zuev Ancient Türkic social terms
Yu.Zuev Seyanto Kaganate and Kimeks
Besenyos, 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
Kangars
R.A. Abdumanapov
QUESTION ON THE ORIGIN OF KIRGIZ TRIBE KANGDY
Published in the collection: Bulletin of Tomsk Polytechnical University. Thematical issue “Siberia in the Euroasian space“. Under editorship of . L.I.Sherstova, Tomsk, Publishing house TPU, 2002 - Issue 7 - P. 3-19
 

Links

http://www.lib.tpu.ru/fulltext/v/Bulletin_TPU/2002/v305/i7/02.pdf
http://www.Kyrgyz.ru/?page=150
author:manap(at)mail.ru

Introduction

For the historiographical tidbits on the names Kangyui/Kanju, Kangar,  Kangaras, Kangly, and Kangls, jump to the bottom of the posting.

Rustam Abdumanapov glosses over the Kangars' ancient period, and concentrates his attention on the later period, a precious achievement that fills in a major gap. For the ancient period, he readily accepts the 20th c. idea about ethnical equivalency of the sedentary population of the Middle Asia oases and the surrounding horse pastoralists of the steppe, a thesis based on the assumptions, nationalistic attitudes and politicized science, and not supported by firm facts of archeology, ethnology, and biology, which are slowly seeping in to be analyzed by unbiased scholars. Possibly, the author must be mindful of the powers to be and his future. From what we know, the idea that Ahaemenids managed to introduce a foreign to them Persian language into the mobile steppes of the Middle Asia and South Siberia is a very long shot; both the Masguts/Massagets and Bashkorts/Bashkirs appear in history as indigenous people of the Middle Asia steppes and they affiliated respectively with the Huns and Kipchaks, who do not pretend to any Arianism and Persianity. The portion of those impoverished and displaced people that gave up the freedom of the steppes and joined the settled Sogdian population, to guard them and eventually get involved in the artisan trades, brought enough linguistic influence to be easily detected by the modern scholars. If the Kangar's kins Masguts could naturally ally with the Caucasian Huns, so the eastern Kangars could naturally ally with the Eastern Huns, as the history tells us. The Masguts/Massagets, Huns, Bashkorts/Bashkirs, and every other steppe tribe always displayed a tint of Mongoloidness, in contrast with the purebred Mediterranian Persians, who also absorbed their share of the mounted Türkic mercenaries to fight for them, and whose language was mutually incomprehensible with their Sogdian sedentary neighbors; between Persians and mounted Türks they always had the Sogdians with the Türkic as a second language, who were a buffer between those pretentious Persian dikhans and the indigenous inhabitants of the land. The situation is somewhat analogous to the America of the 18th c., if not for the genocide of the 1860-1900's, a cool 25% of the today's Americans would be indigenous population, but the Persians, unlike the Chinese, did not have the same firepower or the resolve as had the American colonists, so most of the steppe people survived, and carried their languages into the new alliances.

* * *

The posting's notes and explanations, added to the text of the author and not noted specially, are shown in blue italics in parentheses (). On-line article has no pagination. To avoid possible terminological confusion, the Russian version retains all author's terms either in the text, or in additional parentheses ().

R.A. Abdumanapov
QUESTION ON THE ORIGIN OF KIRGIZ TRIBE KANGDY

A study of clan and tribal system is a major component in the reconstruction of ethnogenesis mak-up of Kyrgyzes. Accurate identification of the origin of individual tribes and clans allows to note milestones and stages of an ethnos. At the same time, a study of the participation in the ethnogenesis of other components like separate tribes, clans and associations, along with the language, archeological, and anthropological data allows to determine the ethnic nucleus of the Kyrgyzes. The people of the Kirgiz tribe Kangdy now live in Leilek, Bishkek (Frunze of Soviet time), and Nookat districts of the Osh province, partially in the Bazar-Kurgan and Suzak districts of the Djalal-Abad province, and in the neighboring Uzbekistan [1] (The Stalinist administrative division of the Turkistan in the 1930's was to cut across as many ethic groups and nations as possible).

The earliest mentioning of the tribe Kangdy we find in the first hand-written genealogicalal list of the Kirgiz tribes “Madjmu at-Tavarih“ by Saif ad-Din Ahsikenti. This list is dated by the end of the 15th-the beginning of the 16th cc., and it tells about legendary ancestors of the Kirgiz tribes. According to the list, a primogenitor of the tribe is considered to be a certain Kangdy, a son of Salus-bek Bulgachi. He is an ancestor of the branch “Ichkilik“, i.e. “Inner“ [2], which along with a “right“ and a “left“ wings constitute a ternary structure of theKyrgyzes political organization.

Especially important appears the moment that according to the modern genealogical lists the tribe Kangdy belongs to the branch “Ichkilik“ [3]. This certainly confirms the deep traditional character of the Kyrgyz genealogical schemes. The name of the tribe and the name of the Kangdy ancestor identifies his doubtless connection with people/tribe Kangly/Kanly (Kangars), well known in the Medieval Asia. The relationship of the ethnonyms Kangdy and Kangly (Kangars) objectively reflects the features of the Kirgiz language in particular, and of the Kypchak group of languages in general (where the modern Kirgiz language belongs). An example can be the Kirgiz word “kanduu“ - “bloody“ of which the Uzbek (Karluk) equivalent is pronounced “konli“.

Who are these Kangdy/Kangly (Kangars)? The S.G.Klyashtorny's research reveals a most ancient ethnonymic tradition, which roots reach the days of Avesta, the cycle of myths various by origin and contents, legends and religious instructions of Iranian-lingual tribes in Middle Asia and Eastern Persia in the 2nd-1st millennia BC. Avesta for the first time mentioned the Kanga (Kangha), a capital of the legendary Turan [4]. The mentioning of Kanga (Kanghi) is also met at Firdousi, who used the archaic toponymic and ethnonymic nomenclature of Avesta, and placed Kang - the capital of Turan beyond Syr-Darya, northeast from the river [5]. Comparing name of this hydronym recorded by Ibn Hordadbeh as the “Kangar river“ with the record of the ancient Türkic runiform inscriptions about the Kangaras capital [6] Kangu Tarban, and also considering information of the Chinese historical annals on the state Kangyui (Kangju/Kangar) with mentioning in Avesta and “Shahname“, S.G.Klyashtorny came to a conclusion about the existence in the Middle Syr-Darya area of an ancient ethnonymic traditions. Is traceable a transformation of the toponym/ethnonim/oronim name with a common base: Kangha-Kang-Kangju-Kangu Tarban-Kangar-Kengeres [7].

One of the earliest news about the Kangar (Kangyui/Kangju) are notes of the Chinese traveler Chjan Tsyan (pyn. Zhang Qian) who visited Kangar state in the 2nd century BC. Chinese authors write about it as a large state populated by nomadic tribes, but who also have cities. The power of the Kangar (pyn. Kangju) possessor reached the northern coast of the Caspian sea, where was located its dependent state Yantsai, a union of Sarmato-Alanian tribes, whose pasturing routs were between Aral and lower course of Itil/Volga. In addition, the forest tribes of Urals, Yan, paid the Kangar (Kangyui/Kangju) a tribute with furs. The sources note: “Kangju Kingdom. The winter court of the ruler is in the Leyueni land, in. the Bityan city, which stands 12,300 li (3,100-4,100 km) from Chanan (34.3°N 109°E). Kangar does not revere the “spirit“ (deity? Dun-hu, the Mongols?). To [Le] Yueni seven days of horse ride, to the summer residence of the ruler in Fannei 9,104 li (2,300-3,000 km). [Population consists of] 120 thousand households, 600 thousand mouths, and 120 thousand of selected troops. To to the Dun-hu court in the east 5500 li. In customs Kangar is identical with Great Yueji (Tochars). In the east Kangar is closely associated with the Sunnu (Huns)[8]. In those days, the customs and clothing of Kangarians (Kangjuans) in the descriptions of the Chinese sources did not differ from that of the Sarmatians and Alans [9] , i.e. were not different from the circle of related Northern Iranian cattle breeding tribes.

A.M.Mandelshtam suggested that Kangarians (Kangjuans) were lineal descendants of the local Saka tribes [10]. In the L.A.Borovkova's opinion, Kangarians (Kangjuans) by appearance, customs and clothing were similar to the Davans (Ferganians), who in the description of “Shi tszy“ (“Shiji/Shi-chi“) and “Han shu“ were Caucasoids, lived a settled life and were engaged in agriculture. She suggested that Kangarians (Kangjuans) by the 4th century AD switched to a settled life and at the same time were engaged in nomadic cattle husbandry [11]. The power of their state can be attested by the fact that Kangarians (Kangjuans) sat the officials of the Han empire below the Usun ambassadors [12].

From the beginning of our era, the Kangar (Kangyui/Kangju) found itself involved in the events of dismembering the Hunnu (Huns) state. A final episode was the events of the 91 AD, when happened an actual destruction of the northern Hunnu (Huns) power, a flight of Shanyu Chjichji (pyn. Zhizhi) to the Kangar (Kangyui/Kangju) in the west. A few thousand of the Shanyu subjects came to the state, and taking into account the version about the Türkic-linguality of the Hunnu (Huns), it is possible to assume that that migration served as a beginning of a gradual Turkification of the Kangar (Kangyui/Kangju) possession. It is known that the Kangar (Kangyui/Kangju) ruler settled Shanyu and his people on the river Ili, gave him his daughter as wife, and a part of the army. After analysis of the Chinese sources, L.A.Borovkova came to a conclusion that the border between Kangar (Kangyui/Kangju) and the Usun state in 1st c. AD passed in the territories a little east from the lake Issyk-kul [13]

In the middle of the 5th century we observe a westward migration from the east, from the Western Siberia and modern Kazakhstan steppes of the Türkic-speaking Ogur tribes (On-Ogurs, Sary-Ogurs) led by Savirs, in the opinion of Peter Golden, they were a part of Tele tribal confederation, and before trekking lived in the territories between the river Ili, Western Tien Shan and Western Siberia areas [14]. These migrations should have also impacted the Kangar (Kangyui/Kangju) tribes, which from that time gradually started Türkification.

In 554 AD to the lands of Kangarians (Kangjuans) streamed from the east the “Tugyu“ (Ashina) Türks pursuing remains of crushed earlier Jujans (Juan-Juan, Rouran). In 555 AD the army of the Türkic Istemi-Kagan reached the “Western Sea“, in the L.N.Gumilev's opinion based on the statement of Firdousi, the Aral Sea [15]. The Kangar (Kangyui/Kangju) tribes, most likely, submitted to the “Tugyu“ (Ashina) Türks, because there is no evidence of a war with them. As those rendering resistance are only mentioned the Aral Chionites (Sarmato-Alans) (in reality, Chionits are the same branch of the Huns as were the Türks, but Chionits were located on the west fringes of the Hunnia), Vars and Ugrs [16], who earlier were paying tribute to the Kangar (Kangyui/Kangju). In any case, the “Tugyu“ (Ashina) Türks, who engaged at that time into a great war with Hephtalites, had to “pacify“ the peoples who found themselves now being within the limits of Kaganate. The further fate of the Kangarians (Kangjuans) was connected with the Türkic states. After disintegration of the united Kaganate of “Tugyu“ (Ashina) Türks in the 604 AD, the Kangar (Kangyui/Kangju) tribes and their subjects in the agricultural oases and cities found themselves under a rule of the Western Kagans. The center of their possessions, according to the ancient Türkic epitaphs, was the city of Kangu-Tarban, and to the “Tugyu“ (Ashina) Türks they were known under a name Kengereses. As the S.G.Klyashtorny's research has shown, the city of Kangu Tarban is mentioned by the Persian and Arabic sources under the names Tarbad-Tarband-Turarband-Otrar (Turkestan, 42.8°N 68.3°) [17]. Apparently, the dependent position of the Kengereses had sufficiently comfortable forms, otherwise it would be difficult to explain the twice repeated flight of the Western Türkic Kagan to their lands at about 630 AD [18].

Some groups of the Kengeres population also fell within the limits of the Eastern Türkic Kaganate. That is demonstrated by the fact that Kengeres nobility occupied in the “Tugyu“ (Ashina) Türks state fairly high positions. It is known that the embassy sent in 618 by the Eastern Türkic Shibi-Kagan to China was headed by a certain Tegin Kan-he-li. The name of the head of the embassy, in Yu.A.Zuev's opinion, is correctly read as “Kangarlyg“, moreover, the section “Tamgas of the horses from vassal princedoms“ in the work 9th century “Tanhuiyao“, mentioned the kan-he-li people, whose name is also reconstructed as Kangar [19]. Apparently, being a vassal tribe of the Eastern “Tugyu“ (Ashina) Türks, they were pasturing near the Kagan court.

The resettlement of considerable masses of the Türkic tribes could not avoid affecting the linguistic situation in the Kangars/Kengereses possessions. Türkification of the Middle Syr-Daryai areas could not be everywhere and quick. It may be assumed that at first the linguistic assimilation happened with the nomadic Kangars who have already united around themselves some Türkic tribes. The process of linguistic change for the sedentary oases in the lands of the “ancient Kangar (Kangyui/Kangju)“ was sufficiently lengthy. The researcher S.G.Klyashtorny found evidence that some Kangar descendants in the 11th century had a so-called “mixed Khorezmian-Badjanak (Besenyo)“ language [20] (i.e. this is how Biruni, writing in the 11th century, defined Kangar language, irrespective of S.G.Klyashtorny and not for “some descendants“. Kangars' language was Sogdian-influenced Türkic. The linguistic situation in the Kangar state was historically layered: nomadic Kangars spoke their Sogdian-influenced Ogur Türkic, the languages in the sedentary oases were Sogdian, Türkic, and their mixture intrinsic for bilingualism in closed quarters).

The nomadic Kangars united some Türkic tribes, mostly the Badjinak (Besenyo), and that horde began to be called Badjinak (Besenyo). Therefore subsequently, already on the Byzantium borders, the Greeks recorded a self-name “Kangar“ only for three Badjinak (Besenyo) tribes. Constantine Porphyrogenitus described the Badjinaks (Besenyo) in the eastern European steppes during a middle of the 10th century: “It should be known, that Pachinaks are also called Kangar, but not all of them, but the people of three fems: Iavdiirti, Kuartsitsur and Havuksingila, as more courageous and noble than the others: for that is a meaning of the nickname Kangar“ [21]. From that follows that the Badjinak (Besenyo) horde was ruled by Kangar clans. In the opinion of a number of researchers, the ethnonym Badjinak (Besenyo) ascends to a name of one of the Saka tribes, Pasiks-Pasians, mentioned by Strabo among the nomads who at about 130 BC crushed the Greek-Bactrian kingdom [22] (since the majority of the scientists agree that “Pasians“ is simply a misread scribal typo, the underlining tribe is that of the “Ases, or Asiani“ completely unrelated to the Sakas). In the opinion of P.Pelliot, Badjinaks (Besenyo) under a name Pei-ju, in the 7th century are mentioned, along with Ogurs and Alans, in the Chinese annals “Sui-shu“, in the section about the Tele tribal confederation [23]. In the 8th century, Badjinaks (Besenyo) of the Middle Syr-Darya are mentioned in the form Pe-cha-nag in a Tibetan translation of the Uigur text describing the northern peoples [24] (Taking for accurate the etymology of Badjinak as “In-laws“, the Badjinaks were an Oguz-speaking Tele tribe, otherwise known under generic “Oguses“, taken by the Ogur-speaking Kangars as matrimonial partners, in-laws, and that union lasted for at least 4 centuries, from the 7th to 11th cc.

The Ogur group in certain conditions characteristically uses “r“ instead of “s“, and “dj“ instead of “y“ , a “dj“-dialect (Ogur: djulan, Djaik) vs. Oguz group: “z“, “y“, “i“, (Oguz: yilan, Yaik); the Ogur word-initial alveolar “dj“ (“zh“) where other mainstream languages, usually termed “common Türkic“ or “Türki“, have “y“ (“j“) is classified as South Kipchak: Altai, Chagatai, Karakalpak, Karluk-Uygur (Karakhanid), Kazakh, Khalai, Kyrgyz, Uygur, Uzbek. This is also a property of the Hun language, which also demonstrates its belonging to the “m“ side of the “m/b“ divide, typical among some southern Türks: Saklan belt, Balkars (“m“ magadir, Malkar) vs. (“b“ bagadir, Balkar); these alternations are completely transparent for the native speakers).

As a result of the fall of the Western Türkic Kaganate, the Badjinaks (Besenyo) gained a certain independence. However their position at that time is difficult to call stable, and if the war of 711-712 with Turgeshes [25] was, most likely, of a local character, the subsequent standoff against penetration of the Karluks and Oguzes, and later also Kimak tribes into their region (i.e Kangar ancestral lands, as described in the annals of the Antique Time) acquired a tenor of a struggle for survival. Al-Masudi mentions that in the 9th century went on a severe struggle “between these four tribes: Badjanak, Badjan, Badjagard and Naukerde, and Oguzes, Karluks and Kimaks“ [26]. The unequal war against Oguzes, Karluks, and Kimaks forced an outward migration in the 9th century of the main portion of thr Badjinak (Besenyo) tribes to the west [27] (In the pastoral nomadic societies, this outward migration has a peculiar leap-frog character: as the outer-most pastures on one side are forcefully annexed by the pastoral neighbors on that side, the displaced part of the people moves across the pastures belonging to their tribal confederation, and settles, with or without a violent conflict, on the fringes on the opposite end of the confederation lands. That process of a roving migration, extended in time and space, brings about new alliances between the newcomers and the original owners of the pastures, on both ends of the domain, creating new compositions in the political, genetical, and linguistic fields).

The review of the historical fates of the Badjinaks (Besenyo) who left to the west and who literally crushed the Khazar Kaganate is beyond the scope of this article, we are interested in the part that remained in the Middle Asia. These Badjinaks (Besenyo) were incorporated into the Oguz tribal union, the new owners of the Middle Syr-Darya. The assimilation by the Oguzes of the Badjinaks (Besenyo) was fairly fast, already from the end of the 9th century the Badjinaks (Besenyo) are not mentioned by any source, while their relatives in the basin of Emba - Yaik were mentioned separately from Oguzes even in the 10th century [28]. Thus a part of Badjinaks (Besenyo) was completely assimilated by the Oguzes, which is demonstrated by the listing of the legendary Oguz tribes (no wonder, they were of the same root, the Oguzes proper and the Oguz Badjinaks, it is like “assimilation“ of Verona by the Garibaldi's Milan). In accordance with Mahmud Kashgari [29] (11th century) and Rashid a ad-Din [30] (13th century), the left wing of Oguzes, “uch-uks“ (“three arrows“, i.e. a union of three tribes) included a tribe “Bichine/Bedjene“. At the same time, a group of the Badjinak (Besenyo) tribes annexed by the Oguzes, apparently the Kangar clans, also retained their former name, Hangakishi. Al-Idrisi (12th century) writes: “It is a very large lake... It has plenty of fish, a main food for that people... It has many pastures and fertile places belonging to Hangakishes. They are a kind of Oguzes who always carry weapons, they are excessively cautious and courageous in relation to the neighboring kinds of Türks“ [31]. In that name is reflected their ancient ethnonym “Kang“ in the form “Kanga-kishi“ - “Kanga people“.

Badjinaks (Besenyo), together with Oguz tribes, were part of the Syr-Darya Yabgu state (Oguz Il; in the east it reached Issyk Kul, 42.5°N 77.5°E, and Almalyk/Olmaliq, 41°N 69.6°E, in the south to Sairam/Sayram 42.3°N 69.8°E, lake Sayram 44.6°N 81.2°E, in the west the city of Yangikent, 46°N 61°E, which stands at the mouth of the river Syr (Syr-darya), and to the Kara-Kum 41.4°N 60.4°E, 40.3°N 58.4°E), with the center in the city of Yangikent [32] (Djanikand, Yenikent, Yanikand = New City, also Ar. al-Kariya al-Hadisa and Pers. Deh-i Hay, present Jankent). The legend recited by Rashid ad- Din belongs to that historical period of the Oguz-Badjinak (Besenyo) tribes (13th century): “Kanly. At the same time as Oguz fought with his father, uncles, brothers and nephews, raided and plundered their countries, from all his people all those of his relatives who joined him and stood with him, of their own wits they built carriages s and loaded them with [everything] stolen, the others loaded the booty on animals. [Carriages in Türkic are called “Kanly“], for that reason they are called with a name Kanly. All Kanly branches [come] from their offsprings. However, Allah knows better!“ [33]. A similar legend in the Chinese annals “Yuan shi“ (14th century) found by the research of A.S.Kadyrbaev: “Kangly (Kanli) is what during the Han epoch (206 BC - 220 AD) was called Gaoche-go, the country of high vehicles“ [34] (Gaoche are also identified in the Chinese annals as Tele/Chile, i.e with Oguzes).

In the beginning of the 11th century in huge open spaces of the steppe corridor from Mongolia to Europe unfolded events fateful not only for Asia, but they also determined the future of Europe also. Large movements of the nomadic tribes occurred in the extensive steppe space from Ob and Irtysh to Aral and Caspian Seas. The chain of shifts of the large nomadic masses eventually also affected the possessions of the Syr-Darya Oguzes, where lived Badjinaks (Besenyo). The whirlpool bourls of the migrations caused by those events affected Kypchaks, who bordered on the Oguzes of Aral and Northern Caspian, and till that time had peaceful relations with them. Under a pressure of nomads from the east, Kypchaks gradually seized the lands of the Oguzes, who fragmented into a number of groups. These events are reflected in the messages of the Armenian chronicler Matfei of Edessa, who wrote that in the middle of the 11th century people Otts (snakes) defeated a tribe Hardesh (red-haired), who fell on Uzes (Oguzes) and Badjinaks (Besenyo , and together with them advanced to the limits of Byzantium [35]. The greater part of Oguzes leaves to the Lower Volga region, N.Pontic steppes, and to the Balkans, another part leaves to Maverannahr and Khorasan, to their kindred Seldjuk tribes [36].

In the K.I.Petrov's opinion, the advance of the Kimak-Kypchak tribes in the southern direction began accepting a regular character from the end of the 10th - the beginnings of the 11th century, and in days of Mukaddasi (980's) they already pastured in the lower course of the Syr-Darya [37]. At about 1030 the Kypchak tribes appeared on the borders of Horezm (Khwarezm) , Horezmshah Altuntash (1017-1032) wrote about them: “In addition, last night came a letter from hodja Ahmed, a son of Abd-as-Samad, kedhudai (?; khudai is “lord“ and “Almighty God“) that Kechats, Djigraks and Hifchaks are brooding because of my absence, some troubles may befall ... “ [38].

The Oguzes and Badjinaks (Besenyo) who fell under the power of Kypchaks were incorporated into the Kypchak the tribal union. From that time, the middle of the 11th century,begins the process of their gradual assimilation. S.P.Tolstov was a first to note the connection of the Kypchak tribe Kangly with the Kangars/Badjinaks (Besenyo). He came to a conclusion about reformulation of the name Kangar into Kangly as a result of assimilation by the Kypchaks of a part of the Oguz-Badjinak (Besenyo) tribes [39].

In the opinion of S.G.Klyashtorny, an acceptance of that name at first by the Kypchak nobility expressed their desire to link themselves with the ancient genealogical tradition of the captured territories, first of all along Syr-Darya, and thus to legitimize the rights on power over these areas [40]. That was also reflected by the expert on Türkic languages Mahmud Kashgari, who wrote that “the Kangly are one of the great people of Kypchaks“ [41]. The Muslim authors of the 12th - beginning of the 13th centuries use the names Kypchaks and Kangly (Kangars) as synonyms [42]. Later, in the 12th century we encounter the Kangarogly (Kangar-ogly = descendants of Kangars. A.R.) among the tribes of the Kypchak confederation at an-Nuveiri, ibn-Haldun [43] and Rukn ad-Din Beibars [44]. (Fortunately, we do not need any convoluted explanations for esteemed Kangars to be one of the great people of Kypchaks; Kypchaks absorbed, i.e. annexed neighboring territories for their own herds, and the locals, be it Oguzes, Kangars, or less powerful Kipchaks or Kimeks, had a decision to make, to remain in place under a dominance of their new masters to use wasteland pastures, or leave for better pastures and alliances. Those who remained received various statuses, depending on their strength, pedigree, and accommodation to the new conditions, which may include their fighting abilities, weapons manufacturing abilities, acceptance of a secondary status for formerly ruling tribes, marriage alliances, selection to be a matrimonial partner, and many others. The impetus for legitimatization may conceptually be among these factors, but with all other circumstances, it is a mere slim chance. That Kypchaks and Kangars were used as synonyms only indicates that they are synonymous, of the same root, and the depiction of Kypchaks and Kangars as incompatible opposites is incorrect. From the description of the Middle Age Kypchaks and the Kypchak confederation we know that under the name Kypchak stand a number of very different tribes, many of them have a pedigree of antiquity and royalty, and that may be a psychological reason why the Kypchak confederation had such a difficult time to consolidate under a single dominating rule.)

According to S.M.Ahindjanov's research, before the Mongolian invasion the Kangly (Kangars) tribe predominantly lived in the Kypchak's Sygnak possession, in the summer they pastured along Irtysh, and in the winter they retired to the valleys of Syr-Darya, Chu and Talas. The messages about pasturing routs of the Kangly in the headwaters of Irtysh, neighboring with Naimans, are also found in Rashid ad-Din [45]. The historian Khan Abulgazi cites an interesting information: “The Kangly (Kangars) lived with Turkomans, crossing to the area of Turkmens, they have settled on the banks of the Issyk-kul, Djuda and Telesha, there they lived for many years“ [46]. S.M.Ahindjanov justly notes that Abulgazi calls the “Türkmens“ not the Turkmens, but Karluks. This message is very important for us, it positions the Kangly (Kangars) pasturing routs near Issyk-kul, on the lands congruous or contiguous with the modern location of the Kirgiz tribe Kangdy. It is known that the Karluk tribes have trekked to the Jeti-su and to the Issyk-kul in the 8th century, after a series of unsuccessful wars with Uigurs (at least linguistically, Karluks and Uigurs are closely related, being splinters of a single linguistic root). Under their power also fell the former capital KanguTarban/Otrar of the Kengereses. It is known that in 812 near Otrar the Arabian armies of Fadl ben Sahla crushed the Karluk Djabgu, who hid in the country of Kimaks (Kimeks) [47]. of environment, In the O.Prittsak's opinion, precisely from the Karluk tribes at the end of the 9th and the beginning of the 10th centuries descended the dynasty of the Karahanid state, whose Khans in the end of the 10th - 11th centuries captured the Jeti-su, Central Tien Shan, Fergana, and then also occupied Maverannahr [48].

By the 12th century the power of the Karahanid Khans gradually waned. As informs Djuveini, “the possessor of Balasagun ... now is not strong and not powerful. The Karluks and the Kangly (Kangars) Türks not only do not trouble themselves with fidelity to him and annoy him by raiding his subjects, plundering cattle and property“ [49]. The bolstering of the former vassals was immediately reflected in the sphere of foreign affairs: according to the Chinese annals “Tszin shi“ (Jin Shu 晉書) (12th century), Kangly (Kangars) envoys were received by the Chjurchjen (Jurchen, a branch of Manchu, Tungusic people) imperial court [50]. In the 12th century the trobled mutual relations of the Karahanid Khans and Kangly (Kangars) became so aggravated that driven to despair, and not able to repulse the Kangly (Kangars) attacks, the ruler of Balasagun turned for help to the Kara-Kytais (Kidans) (Kitans). The ruler of Kara-Kytais was not slow to take advantage of the Karahanid Khan offer, and “...Gurkhan ascended the Balasagun throne. From the descendant of Afrosiab he removed the title of the Khan, giving him a title Ilek-Turkmen.. .. When some time has passed, and his people settled and their cattle gained weight, he subjugated Kangly under his power“ [51] (“descendant of Afrosiab“ in a figurative sense, Afrosiab was definitely not connected with Karluk Karakhanids; the part “siab/siyab“ in his name points to a connection with Siyavush, an ancient king and dynastic line of the ancient Turan, the Siyavarshan of the Avestan and Pehlevi myths; the story of Siyavush is terminologically and geographically analyzed in Yu.Zuev, 2004, “Seyanto“). However, the Kangly (Kangars) recognition of the Kara-Kytai authority most likely, was short-lived. The records of the Chinese annals tell that Kangly (Kangars) had close relations with Horezm (Khwarezm). Generally, the Kypchak tribes, including Kangly (Kangars), played an exclusive role in Horezm (Khwarezm). That can explain the believed to be erroneous Djuvejni statement about the origin of Terken-hatun, the mother of the last Horezmshah Muhammad, from the Kypchak tribe Kangly (Kangars) [52]. Moreover, the Kangly (Kangars) also held connections with the Middle Asian states. It is known a close, and possibly also a genetic, connection of Kangly (Kangars) with Kerait ulus of Togrul-khan (Kerait Wan-khan - A.R.), who occupied the lands in the area of the river Tola (modern Tuul), the middle course of Orkhon, and the basin of the river Ongin (modern Egiin) in the Northern Mongolia. Members of Kangly (Kangars) nobility, for example, the mentioned in the “Yuan-shi“ certain Kairanbai served at the court of the Kerait Khans, and a Chinese composition “Menuer-shitszy“ (unofficial history of the Yuan, the Chinese code name for the Chingizid Mongols, Mengwuer shiji/shi-chi蒙兀兒史記, Historical Record of the Mongols by Tu Ji 屠寄 ) writes directly about their kinship: “Keraits were ancestors of the Kangly (Kangars). The western (branch) were called Kangly (Kangars), the eastern (branch were called) Keraits“ [53] (Chinese testimony is upside down, Kangars in the historical literature are about 2 millennia older then Keraits, but again in the literature Keraits are held as a Mongolian tribe, which would imply that a Kangar tribe joined a Mongol confederation sometime in the Late Antique-Early Middle Age time, and by the time when they encountered Kangars during Chingizid period, they were already undistinguishable from the Mongols).

In days of the Mongolian expansion a part of Kangly (Kangars) resisted the Chingis-khan's tumens. In “Yuan-shi“ we read a biography of a Kangly (Kangar) Asan-buka: “...From the very beginning of the Mongolian state, at the time when Taitszu (Chingis-khan) was crushing Kangly (Kangars), his grandmother became a widow... A disorder reigned in the (Kangly) (Kangar) country, the family was ruined “ [54]. Rubruk passed the ruined Kangly (Kangars) steppes east of the river Ural: “Before, there were certain Comans (Kypchaks), called Cangle“ [55]. About the conquest of the Kangly (Kangars) lands by the Mongols also tells the “Secret legend“: “... As Subeetai-Baatur met a strong resistance on the part of those peoples and cities, which conquest was entrusted to him still during the Chingishan time, namely the peoples Kanlin, Kibchaut, Bachjigit, Orosut, Asut, Sesut, Machjar, Keshimir, Sergesut, Bular, Kelet, and also the cities beyond the plentiful waters of the rivers Adil and Chjayah...“ [56]. The mentioning of the Kangly (Kangar)-Kanlin along with Kypchaks, who in those days were quite a numerous tribe, speaks about the importance of in the steppe hierarchy of the Mongolian time. Another part of the Kangly (Kangar) tribe recognized the authority of Chingis-khan, and participated in their campaigns in the west, in the Mongolian army is mentioned a possessor of Almalyk, a Kangly (Kangar) Soknak-Tegin. A certain Aibai of the Kangly (Kangars), under command of Subudai-bagatur, participated in the campaign against Kypchaks, a Kangly (Kangar) Aibobayaut participated in the campaign in the south, a Kangly (Kangar) Haidu was in the army of Munke-khan, etc. [57]. Later, along with Karluks and Kypchaks, the Kangly (Kangars) were a part of special military contingents of the empire. In the 1286 on an order of Khubilai-khan in the empire were formed guards divisions of Kypchaks and Kangly (Kangars) [58]. In the 1308 the Kypchak guards was divided into the guards of a right and a left wing, and in the 1310 they were reformed and boosted by additional contingents of the troops of the Kangly (Kangar) guards. Interestingly, all Kangly (Kangars) soldiers that were serving in other armed services were drawn for the service in the guards [59].

The Mongolian conquest resulted in significant changes in the ethnopolitical situation in the huge space from China to Europe. In the whirlpool of relocations, both violent and forced, and voluntary (within the Mongolian hordes) there also were the Kangly (Kangars). The parts of the Kangly (Kangars) tribe reached Europe with the nomadic hordes [60]. At the same tome, the members of this tribe also remained pasturing in the former lands along Syr-Darya and in the Tien Shan.

As was noted by Ì.Tynyshpaev, in the days of Timur the Kangly (Kangars) lived between the rivers Syr-Darya and Talas [61]. To that time can be attributed the Kazakh legend explaining the ethnonym Kangly from the “folk“ etymology point of view: “The name of the Kangly (Kangars) people, being very ancient, but it has gained a honor and glory only from the Timur's time, and it happened in this way: after a severe fight, Timur saw a bloodied horseman, and asked “Who is this Kanly? “. On which followed an answer “It is your Kangly (Kangar) slave“ [62].

After the formation of the Moghulistan state, the Kangly (Kangars) became a part of Moghuls. And in the Moghulistan appeared another name for Kangly (Kangars), Bekchik, named after one of the leaders of the Kangly (Kangar) aimak, a certain merchant Bekchik, who had rendered a help to Togluk-Timur on his way from a Dohtui tribe to Aksu, to the emir Puladchi. In accordance with “Tarihi Rashidi“, after a death of Weis-khan in the 1428, the “Bekchiks“ left Isan-buga (their Khan), and their leader Mir Hakk-Berdi Bekchik settled in the Koi-Sui on the Yssyk-kul, posted his people on an island, and started attacking Sairam (aka Sayram, “White Town“, a key fortress 10 km east of Chimkent, 42.5°N 70°E ) and Turkestan (ancient Otrar). Most likely V.P.Yudin is right, believing that the name Bekchik existed only among the Moghul rulers, and the “people masses continued to use the ancient name“ [63]. The Bekchiks are mentioned in the list of the tribal subdivisions in the army of the Sultan Said-khan. In the subsequent time, their representatives were active in the whole of the Moghulia. In the opinion of V.P.Yudin, Moghuls spoke a Türkic language of the Kypchak type, close to the Kazakh and Kirgiz languages [64] , which is intrinsically not surprising. As was described above, in the formation of Kangly (Kangars) an essential role was played by the Kypchak tribes. Subsequently, after the disintegration of Moghulistan, the Kangly (Kangars) Moghuls became a part of Kazakhs. The Kazakh tribe Kanly belongs to the Senior Juz (Uly Juz, i.e. Great Union, the oldest and most historically prominent of the three Juzes, which also includes the most ancient Türkic tribes of Usuns-Uysyns, Chuban/Yueban Huns-Suans, Chuy Huns-Dulats, Jalair/Djalair Uigurs) and lives in the southern part of the Kazakhstan [65], in the former lands of their Kangar ancestors. Together with the tribe Dulat they constitute an overwhelming majority of the Juz population.

About the question of the time when the tribe Kangdy joined the Kirgiz people. The clan and tribal listing for Kyrgyzes in the “Madjmu at-Tavarih“ indicates that this tribe was a part of Kyrgyzes not later than the 15th century, i.e. before they recognized the authority of the Moghul Khans. About it also tells the fact that the clan Kan (“Kan“ is a base of the term “Kanly“, where “ly“ is a suffix. A.R.) is found among the linguistically closest to the Kyrgyzes [66] nation of Southern Altaians [67]. These facts allow to presume that the tribe Kangdy was a part of Kyrgyzes in the days before the 15th century, when Kyrgyzes and Southern Altaians were a single community. In our opinion, this community occupied the southern slopes of the Great Altai (including the modern Russian and Mongolian Altai), Irtysh basin, and the lands of the northern Dzungaria. In the Irtysh basin under the year 1407 are mentioned Kyrgyzes in connection with a campaign against them of the the Kipchak Khanate (Altyn Horde) Pulad-khan. Mahmud ibn-Vali writes about it: “Charging with the protection of the Irtysh basin the emirs of the tribe Bahrin, the road for Kyrgyzes was completely blocked“ [68]. Subsequently, possibly because of the Oirat internecine conflict in the first half of the 15th century [69], Kyrgyzes were forced to abandon those lands and to trek to the south, to the Jeti-su and Eastern Turkestan. That is mentioned under the year 1770 in the Chinese annals “Siui chji“ (maybe “Xiui chji“, “Description of the Western Lands“; this is a copy of a Chinese rendition of the diplomnatic exchanges with the “Western States“, a manuscript apparently not published in China; from the collection of the Russian/USSR/Russian State Library, now known as “Lenin library“, link. Description: A small publication of G.P.Suprunenko “Some information of the 18th century Chinese sources on Kirgizes“. 9th scientific conference “Society and state in China“: Theses and reports. Ìoscow, 1978, Part 2, p. 39, No 43. On the base of manuscripts from file 274, No 287, 289 “Siui chji“ and “ Hoitszyan chji“ she raised a question about Kirgizes in the Dzungar Khanate; a majority of the Middle Asian scientists hold an opinion that as a result of invasion of the Dzhungars, the Kirgizes and Kazakhs completely trekked out from the their lands; See also: Hafizova K. Sh. Manuscripts about Tarbagatai in K.A.Skachkov's collection // Theses of Reports, 15th scientific conference “Society and state in China“. Ìoscow, 1984, Part 2, p. 168-173): “about 330 years ago (about 1440. R.A.), a part of Kyrgyzes, fleeing from the disorders, fled and found a shelter in the Tien Shan mountains“ [70].

We already mentioned the information of Rashid ad-Din about nomadic Kangly (Kangars) in 13th century in the headwaters of the Irtysh, in the neighbourhood of Naimans (Naimans, or Keraits, may be a branch of the Kangars, incorrectly attributed to the Mongols). These Kangly/Kangdy also were a part of the Kirgiz people.

LITERATURE:

[1] The subject is specifically about the members of the Kirgiz tribe Kangdy. Among the Uzbek people the related tribe is called Kanly or Kangly.
[2] “Madjmu at-Tavarih“ // Materials on history of Kirgizes and Kirgizia, Moscow, Science, 1973, Issue 1, p. 200-215
[3] Attokurov S. Kyrgyz sanjyrasy, Bishkek: Kyrgyzstan, 1995, p. 205-208; Esenkan Tyoryokan uulu. Kyrgyzdyn kyskacha sanjyrasy, Bishkek: Uchkun, 1995, p. 165; Kyrgyz sanjyrasy, Bishkek: Arym, 1991, p. 22;
[4] Klyashtorny S.G. Ancient Türkic runiform monuments, Moscow, Science, 1964, p. 169
[5] Ibid., p. 166
[6] Klyashtorny S.G. accepts identification of Kengereses with the Kangar-Badjinaks, first suggested by J. Marquart
[7] Klyashtorny S.G. Ancient Türkic runiform monuments, p. 161-179
[8] Borovkova L.A. Kingdoms of the “western territory“ in the 2nd-1st centuries BC (Eastern Turkestan and Central Asia in “Shi tszi“ è “Han shu“), Moscow, Oriental Studies Institute of the Russian Academy of Science, 2001, p. 293
[9] Bichurin N.Ya. Collection of information on peoples in Central Asia in ancient times, Moscow, Science, 1950, vol. II, p. 229
[10] Mandelshtam A.M. Eastern aspects of early nomads history in Central Asia and Kazakhstan. // Brief messages of Archeology Institute, Moscow, Science, 1978, issue 154, p. 23
[11] Borovkova L.A. Kingdoms of the “western territory“, p. 312
[12] Nusupbekov A.N., Kumekov B.E. Sociopolitical, ethnic and cultural processes in Southern Kazakhstan. // Works of Kaz. SSR Academy of Sciences, 1959vol. 1, p. 40
[13] Borovkova L.A. Kingdoms of the “western territory“, p. 301
[14] Peter B. Golden. Peoples of the south Russian steppes. // Cambridge history of early Inner Asia. From earliest times to the rise of the Mongols, Cambridge, 1990, p.257
[15] Gumilev L.N. Ancient Türks, Moscow, Science, 1967, p. 34-35
[16] Ibid., p. 35
[17] Klyashtorny S.G. Kangar ethno-toponymy in Orkhon texts // Soviet ethnography, 1951, No 3, p. 55-59
[18] Aristov N.A. Notess on ethnic structure of Türkic tribes and nations and data on their number // Olden Time Alive, 1876, issue 3-4, p. 303
[19] Zuev Yu.A. “Tamgas of the horses from vassal princedoms“ (Translation of 8-10 c. Chinese composition Tang Huiyao, vol. 3, chapter (tszüan) 72, p. 1305-1308)// Works of History, Archeology, and Ethnography Institute, Kazakh SSR Academy of Sciences, Alma-Ata, 1960, vol. 8, p. 127
[20] Klyashtorny S.G. Ancient Türkic runiform monuments, p. 174-175
[21] Pletneva S.A. Kypchaks, Moscow, Science, 1990, p. 16
[22] Ibid., p. 177
[23] Citation of Peter B. Golden, Peoples of south Russian steppes. // Cambridge history of early Inner Asia. From earliest times to the rise of Mongols, Cambridge, 1990, p.271
[24] Ibid., p.271
[25] Gumilev L.N. Ancient Türks, Moscow, p. 266
[26] Ahinjanov S.M. Kypchaks in the history of medieval Kazakhstan, Alma-Ata: Gylym, 1995, p. 158
[27] It should be noted that migration of Kangar-Kengeres tribal groups to the west started long before the 9th century. In the opinion of Klyashtorny S.G., the first people of these tribes appeared in the areas of Caucasus and Eastern Europe as early as the 1-4th centuries AD, Klyashtorny S.G. Ancient Türkic runiform monuments, Moscow, Science, 1964, p. 175-177
[28] Klyashtorny S.G. Ancient Türkic runiform monuments, p. 178
[29] Ahinjanov S.M.Kypchaks in the history of medieval Kazakhstan, p. 159
[30] Rashid-ad-din. Collection of annals, Moscow-Leningrad, USSR Academy of Sciences, 1952, vol. 1, Book 1, p. 89
[31] Klyashtorny S.G. Ancient Türkic runiform monuments, p. 178
[32] Agadjanov S.G. Seldjukid State and Middle Asia in the 9-12th centuries, Moscow, Science, 1991, p. 19-26
[33] Rashid-ad-din. Collection of annals, Moscow-Leningrad, Publishing house Academy of Sciences the USSR, 1952, vol. 1, Book 1, p. 84
[34] Kadyrbaev A.Sh. Türks and Iranians in China and Central Asia in 13-14th centuries, Alma-Ata: Gylym, 1990, p. 21
[35] Ahinjanov S.M. Kypchaks in the history of medieval Kazakhstan, p. 186-187
[36] Agadjanov S.G. Seldjukid State and Middle Asia in the 9-12th centuries, p. 68-69
[37] Petrov K.I. Kirgiz-Kypchak relations // News of Kirg. SSR Academy of Sciences, 1961, vol. 3, issue 2, p. 89
[38] Abu-l-Fazl Beihaki. History of Masud 1030-1041. Introductory article, translation and notes by A.K.Arends, Tashkent, Science, 1962, p. 104
[39] Tolstov S.P.Cities of Guzes // Soviet ethnography, 1947, No 3, p. 101
[40] Klyashtorny S.G. Kangar ethno-toponymy, p. 63; also, Ancient Türkic runiform monuments, p. 178-179
[41] Kashgari M. Devonu lugotit turk, Toshkent, 1963, vol. 3, p. 379, citation in Kadyrbaev A.Sh. Türks and Iranians, p. 20
[42] Kadyrbaev A.Sh. Türks and Iranians, p. 20
[43] Tizengauzen V.G. Collection of the materials belonging to the history of Golden Horde, SPb., 1884, vol. 1, p. 539-541
[44] Aristov N.A. Notess on ethnic structure of Türkic tribes and nations and data on their number // Olden Time Alive, 1876, issue 3-4, p. 367
[45] Rashid-ad-Din. Collection of annals, p. 136-137
[46] Ahindjanov S.M. Kypchaks in the history of medieval Kazakhstan, p. 239
[47] Mihailova A.I. New epigraphic data on history of Middle Asia in 9th century // Epigraphica of East, 1951, No 5, p. 256
[48] Pritsak O. Von den Karluk zu den Karachaniden, Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenlandischen Gesellschaft. Leipzig, Bd.101 (N.F. Bd.26), 1951, Crted by: History of Kirgiz SSR, Frunze, Kyrgyzstan, 1984, vol. 1, p. 290
[49] Ahinjanov S.M. Kypchaks in the history of medieval Kazakhstan, p. 239-240
[50] Kadyrbaev A.Sh. Türks and Iranians, p. 22
[51] Ahinjanov S.M. Kypchaks in the history of medieval Kazakhstan, p. 240
[52] The remark of Djuvejni is considered to be incorrect, because other sources, for example an-Nasavi, descend Terken-hatun from the Kypchak tribe Baiat or Yemek. See comments of Z.M.Buniyatova to chapter 9 of the an-Nasavi work. Shihab-ad-Din Muhammad an-Nasavi. Sirat as-sultan Djalal ad-Din Mankburny, Moscow, Eastern Literature, 1996, p. 302; In accordance with Djuzdjani, Terken-hatun was a daughter of Kypchak Khan Akran and she brought to Horezm (Khwarezm) a number of Türkic tribes - Urans, Karluks, Ugraks, and Haladjes, see Buniyatov Z.M., State of Horezmshahs Anushteginids, Moscow, Science, 1986, p. 62
[53] Kadyrbaev A.Sh. Türks and Iranians, p. 35-36
[54] Ibid., p. 44
[55] Petrov K.I. Kyrgyz-Kypchak relations, p. 90
[56] Secret Legend of Mongols, Ulan Ude, Buryat, 1990, p. 138
[57] Kadyrbaev A.Sh. Türks and Iranians, p. 45-46
[58] Ibid., p. 97
[59] Ibid., p. 111
[60] The tribe Kanly is mentioned among the Kypchak tribes that setlled in Hungary and now they constitute a separate ethnographic group Palocz, Ishtvan Mandoki, Kypchaktar // Kyrgyz madaniyaty, No 51, December, 21, 1989, p. 14
[61] Tynyshpaev M. Materials on the history of the Kirgiz-Kazak people, Tashkent, 1925, p. 6-7
[62] Tale about Hazryati-Ismail-Ata, B.m., 1901, p. 30
[63] V.P.Yudin. Clan and tribal composition of Moghulistan and Moghulia Moghuls, and their ethnic connections with Kazakh and other peoples // News of Kaz. SSR Academy of Sciences, 1965, No3, p. 53
[64] Ibid., p. 59
[65] Shejire. Kazaktyn ru-taipalyk kurylysy, Almaty: Rauan, 1991, p. 13
[66] Yunusaliev B.M. Question of formation of Kirgiz common language // Works of IYL Kirg. SSR Academy of Sciences, 1956, Issue 6, p. 25-38
[67] Radlov W.W. From Siberia, Moscow, Science, 1989, p. 95
[68] Mahmud ibn-Vali. Bahr al-Asrar. FB-337, l. 25-b-26-a / translation by Mokeev À., Cited by: History of Kirgiz SSR, Frunze, Kyrgyzstan, 1984, vol. 1, From most ancient times to the middle of the 19th century, p. 431
[69] Zlatkin I.Ya. History of the Dzungar Khanate (1635 - 1758), Moscow, Science, 1964, p. 47
[70] “Sijuj chji“ (“Description of the Western territory“), Book 1, p. 18 / Translation by Suprunenko G.P., Cited by: History of Kirgiz SSR, Frunze, Kyrgyzstan, 1984, vol. I, From most ancient times to the middle of the 19th century, p. 431

Additional tidbits

Kangar, Kangha, Kangyui/Kanju, Kengeres/Kangaras ( ), Kangaruls, Kangarly, Kanguly, Kangly, Kangdy, Kangit/Kangut are variations of the name of the same people, or peoples and tribes with common roots and origin, during different times and locations. The Kangly name in “Yuan-shi“, in “Yuan-chao-mi-shi“, in “Gin-shi“ is depicted by different characters. In the Türkic tradition, the invention of a wheel is attributed to the the Kangly-Kangars-Kengers. At the same time, the history attributes the invention of the wheel to the Sumerians, whose self-name was Kengier. The wheel in the Türkic legend is called “Kangly“.

From ancient times the Kangly/Kangars existed in India (Kangra area), and in the Caucasus, where used to exist a Kangark union. The tamgas in the Caucasian union Kankark (and a province with the same name) identified tribes Bayandur , Bechene , and Chepni . The Armenian sources date the Kangark area to the time prior to the AD epoch, though the Armenian historians are shy to discuss the ancient Türks mentioned in the Armenian chronicles. Bashkirs have a large tribe of Kangly. Masudi wrote about related peoples Bashnyak (Besenyo/Badjinak), Badjny, Bashkort, Naukert that left the Kangar country when they lost a war against a coalition of Kimaks, Oguzes, Karluks and Khazars. After the defeat, they left to the west and northwest. The Kangars left a rich trace in toponymy, especially dense in the Syr-darya basin.

Jean Pierre Abel Remusat (1788-1832) translated the name Khang-kui as “dwelling of the Khang“ (demeure des Khang). He noted that during the dynasties Sui (581–618) and Tang (618–907) the name Khang-kui served to denote the Kangly country. (Jean Pierre Abel Remusat, “Recherthes sur les langues Turtares“, Paris, 1820, vol.1, p.315).

In the opinion of Neumann (1793-1870), a true name of the people whom the Chinese called Kangyui/Kanju and Kangly and depicted by a range of different characters, is Hangar (Changar), because the Osmanli Turks then were still calling the Türks and Mongols of the Middle Asia by the name Hangars, and this same name in Constantine Porphyrogennetos was given to the most brave among the Badjinaks/Besenyos (Karl Friedrich Neumann “Die völker des südlichen Russlands in ihrer gechichtlichen entwickelung“, 1847, p.111).

The following are excerpts from the “Yuan shi“ on Kangars, in Emil Bretschneider (1833-1901, “Mediaeval Researches From Eastern Asiatic Sources“, v.1, 1887, re-published in 2001 p.302:

Ch. 136 (cxxxvi), a biography of A-sha-bu-hua, who was a prince of the ruling family Kang-li. It states that that when Chingiz khan ravaged the Kang-li country, its rulker died, and left a widow that belonged to the tribe Shen-mie Gu-ma-li. Because of her ruin, for a  long time she could not leave the country. Later, however, through some maraculous assistance, she unexpectedly received richly loaded camels. Consequently, she went withtwo sons Kyu-lyu and Ya-ya to the residence of the emperor, and after two years came back, leaving her sons with O-go-tai. Thirteen years later, she again came to the “Mongolian“ court in Ho-lin (Karakorum) to see her sons, who were with the emperor Meng-ko (footnote 737 - Her adventures served as a material for a Chinese drama). A-sha-bu-hua, in whose biography these details were found, was a grandson of that lady and a son of Ya-ya. A-sha-bu-hua was a general in the Kubilai army, he died in 1301. His son To-to was a prominent officer of Kubilai bodyguards. He was bestowed a title Young chung wang. His son Te - mu-r-ta-shi was a minister of the last “Mongolian“ emperor Shun ti. His biography is in Ch. 140 (cxl). Ya-ya also left a son by the name Ua-to-man (Osman).

Ch. 123 Ai-mo belonged to the tribe Ba-du Kang-li. He accompanied Su-bu-tai noion when he waged a war against Kin-cha (Kipchaks). His son Je-su-tai-r distinguished himself at a capture of the Chinese province Fu-kien, and in the expedition to Dji-pen (Japan). He died in 1288.

Ch. 133 Je-su-de-r, a son of Ai-bo Bo-ya-vu (note 738, Under Bo-ya-vu probably should be understood Bayauts. It was, according to the Muslim authors (reference to d'Osson, 197) a name of one of the Kankly branches, to which belonged the Turhan hatun, a mother of Mohammed, the Shah of Horezm (Khwarezm). In the Horezm were many Kanglys when the “Mongols“ invaded that country the first time).

Ch. 134 Tu-hu-lu, in the Kubilai service was his ninth son A-li-ta-shi, who was a grandson of the Kang-li prince I-na.

Ch. 134 In the same chapter is a biography of Ua-lo-sze (footnote 739, The name of this man is depicted by the same Chinese hieroglyphs which in Yuan shi is depicted the name of the Rus), who was a secretary of Kubilai's successor. His father Ming-li Te-mu-r headed the same office during Kubilai, and his grandfather Hai-du served in the army of the Mangu khan. His great-grandfather Ha-shi Bo-yao (see the footnote 738  on Bayauts) surrendered in the old times to the “Mongols“, and was appointed a head of the herds that belonged to the Kubilai mother. A son of Ua-lo-sze, King-tung, who served at the last “Mongolian“ emperor Shun ti, has a separate biography in the Ch. 142 (cxlii).

Ch. 135 Ta-li-chi served at Kubilai, his father Ye-li-li-bo surrendered to Chingiz. Ibid.: Ming-an, also a Kangly, in service of Kubilai.

Ch. 205 (ccv) Under a heading “Villain Officers“ we find a biography of the Kangly Ha-ma.

The following are excerpts about the Kangyui/Kanju and Kangls from the N.A.Aristov's fundamental work “Usuns and Kyrgyzes or Kara-Kyrgyzes“ (S.-Peterburg, 1893, page 122-123):

“ … when Tu-kue (Türks) subjugated Kangls, the Idanians (Hephtalites) had, after a short resistance, to submit to them also. The forces of the  Idanians (Hephtalites), already without a support from Kangju nomads, have weakened so much that Vahram-Chubin (Bahram) at the end of the 6th century could take Balkh and devastate Kushan lands even north of the Amu Darya. After that, it was already easy for the Turks to become full masters of the Maverannahr. The ease of the submission to the Tu-kue (Türks) by the Kangju nomads depended, probably, from their tribal kinship with the Turks. If to trust the similarity of the names, the Kangjuans were undoubtedly the ancestors of Kangls, a Türkic tribe the remains of which until now exist among the clans of Kazakhs and Uzbeks. The Kangjuans, subjugated by  Tu-kue (Türks), fell then in the 8th century under the rule of the Karlyk (Karluk) khans, and re-appear on the pages of the history under a name of Kangls only in the beginning of the 12th century, when one of the weakened Karlyk (Karluk) ileks, not having forces to tame the attacks of the Kangls on his lands at the piedmont of the  Aleksander ridge (later successfully again renamed to Lenin, Stalin, or the like, mountains, following the Aleksander example), called to his aid a Karakidan Gurkhan. In the beginning of the 13th century the Kangly made a main body of the Sultan  Muhammed Harezmshah's armies, who were defending unsuccessfully Otrar, Samarkand and Harezm from the Mongols. The Badjinaks/Besenyo, Uzes (Guzes), Comans (Kypchaks), Kipchaks - all these, probably, are only clans and divisions of the Kangls, advancing to the west and to the south from the Kangju steppe.“

Wilhelm Schott (1802-1889) identified the Kangls with Kangars and with Kangjuans of the Han. Agreeing with the first, Bretschneider noted that the depiction was by different Chinese characters (Bretschneider, Notices, 1876, p.76), and the Kangls name  in “Yuan-shi“, in “Yuan-chao-mi-shi“, in “Gin-shi“ is represented by different characters, and Bretschneider recognized that all these depictions are for the same Kangly name (Bretschneider, Notices, 1876, ðð.73, 74 on).

Home
Back
In Russian
Contents Huns

Contents Kangar
Sources
Roots
Writing
Language
Religion
Genetics
Geography
Archeology
Coins
Wikipedia
Yu.Zuev Ethnic History of Usuns
Yu.Zuev Early Türks: Essays of history
Yu.Zuev The Strongest Tribe - Ezgil
Yu.Zuev Tamgas of vassal Princedoms
Yu.Zuev Ancient Türkic social terms
Yu.Zuev Seyanto Kaganate and Kimeks
Besenyos, 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
Ðåéòèíã@Mail.ru
12/25/2009