Home
Back
In Russian
Contents Huns
Contents Türkic languages
Datelines
Sources
Roots
Tamgas
Alphabet
Writing
Language
Genetics
Geography
Archeology
Religion
Coins
Wikipedia
Ogur and Oguz
Alans and Ases
E.Pulleyblank Eastern Hun Language
O.Pritsak Onomasticon of Western Huns
W.B.Henning Xiongnu are Huns
L.Gumilev Language of Huns
Kisamov N. Hunnic Oracle Phrase
Tekin T. Hsiung-Nu Language
Vovin A Hsiung-Nu Language
Taskin V. Hsiung-Nu Language
Doerfer G. On Hunnic and Turkic (snippets)
Gmyrya L. Caspian Huns
Alan Dateline
Avar Dateline
Besenyo Dateline
Bulgar Dateline
Huns Dateline
Karluk Dateline
Kimak Dateline
Kipchak Dateline
Khazar Dateline
Kyrgyz Dateline
Sabir Dateline
Seyanto Dateline
The Hun language
  V.S. Taskin (1917-1995)
USSR Academy of Sciences, Institute of Oriental Studies
MATERIALS ON THE HISTORY OF NOMADIC PEOPLES IN CHINA
3 - 5 cc. AD
Issue 2
Jie (Jie Huns 羯 匈奴)

Moscow, Oriental Literature, 1990, Print 1000 copies, ISBN 5-02-016543-3

 

Links

http://www.i-u.ru/biblio/archive/sima_2/12.aspx (Biography, in Russian, find on page )

Posting Introduction

The following citation from the V.S. Taskin's translation of the Chinese annals related to the nomadic people in and around China addresses specifically the linguistic portion attested by the only surviving Hunnic phrase. The phrase is cited and analyzed in the Introduction section of the 1990 publication focused on the Jie tribe. Of the two aspects, the language and the relationship between the Huns and Jie (in English gee-eh),  V.S. Taskin started with the definition of who Jie are, and then proceeds with their phrase, citing the previous scholarship by reference. For the purposes of this posting, the sequence is reversed, first is given the linguistic portion, and then the analysis of the Jie, where is a wide consensus that Jie were one of the 18 Hunnic tribes and spoke the Hunnic language. V.S. Taskin concludes the analysis of the Jie name with a statement that Jie is only a geographical definition, not a self-name of the nomadic union. However, since the Chinese used Jie as a name of the tribal union, it is apparent that with time the geographical definition attained a political semantics. The pre-Hunnic ancestry of the Jie lacks any annalistic information, and all scholarly suggestions are purely speculative, including the suggestion, based on the phonetical reconstruction of their ancient Chinese pronunciation as Kiat, that Jie were a splinter of the Türkic pre-historic dynastic tribe known in the earliest historical records as Kai in the east and Gilan in the west.

For expanded reading of the Hunnic phrase refer to Hunnic Oracle Phrase

Hunnic lexicon
Phonetic records from Chinese annals
Hunnic Türkic Chinese In Source English Russian

Comments

qy köle, kul qy   slave  
qylu köle, kul qylu   slave  
Jükü Ükü Tuqi 屠耆 Wise (adj)  
Tuqi Toghri Tuqi 屠耆 Wise, Virtuous (adj) , Shiratori version
Ulu(g) Ulug Yuli, Luli 谷蠡 Great (adj) Hung. Gyula
Tengri Tengri *T(r)engri 腾格里 Heaven  
Yui

Ui/Uy(gur)

Yui   Ui(gur) ()  
abti atti Yanchjy   wife  
tehi teke tehi   mount (n, riding horse)  

sü (pin. xiù)   army  
-chi -či -zhī (pin.)   Turk. affix

.

 
tilì tilek

ti lì

  wish (v)  
-gan -gan -gang (pin.)   Turk. affix .  
Pugu Pugu Pugu   Turk. title (Bull) . ()  
-gyu -yu/-gyu -qu (pin.)   Turk. affix

.

 
tutan tutar

tu dng

  capture  
-dan -dan/-tan -dang (pin.)   Turk. affix

.

 
tarhan tarhan danhu/shanyu 單于 Turk. title .  
tümen tümen touman/tumen 頭曼 Turk. title, 10,000 . , 10,000  
Olugbender Ulug bender - - Great dome (yurt frame) () Hunnic city (Caucasus)
Balanjar bülün jar

-

- Guard (army) headquarter () Hunnic city (Caucasus)
balan bülün - - Guard (military) , Hunnic city (Caucasus)
jar jar - -

head (headquarter)

() Hunnic city (Caucasus)
olug ulug lulu - Great (adj) Hunnic city (Caucasus)
bender bender - - frame  (yurt) () Hunnic city (Caucasus)
Semender

Çəməndədir

- -     Hunnic city (Caucasus)
sagdak sagaidak sagdak -

boot quiver

()

Ligeti
strava ystrau - - funeral feast Karaim pronunciation
kamon       barley drink, medos ,  
             

The posting's notes and explanations, added to the text of the author and not noted specially, are shown in (blue italics) in parentheses and in blue boxes. Page numbers are shown at the beginning of the page in blue.

V.S. Taskin
MATERIALS ON THE HISTORY OF NOMADIC PEOPLES IN CHINA
3 - 5 cc. AD
Issue 2
Jie
(Jie Huns 羯 匈奴)

8

INTRODUCTION

It is hardly necessary to cite other numerous examples that prove that the Chinese held Jie as the Huns, but we can not bypass one very important linguistic evidence which helps to identify ethnicity of the Jie themselves, and of the Huns to which they belonged. It is a phrase, uttered in the Jie language by a native of India, Buddhist monk Fotu Den (Buttocho 佛図澄, pinyin: Fu Tucheng; WadeGiles: Fu T'u-ch'eng,  ca. 235-348), who served for Shi Le and was spreading Buddhism in China. This only phrase in the Hun language that reached us has meanings of its words and a general  translation.

In 328 sparked a war between Shi Le and Liu Yao, the Emperor of the Former Zhao dynasty. Defeating the Shi Le army at Gao-Hou, Liu Yao came to Luoyang, and besieged a town Tszinyon near the Gao-Hou. Shi Le wanted to come to the Luoyang aid, but high officials were persuading him not to do that.
8

Then Shi Le turned for advice to Fotu Den, who said in the Jie language, referring to the sound of the pagoda bells (presumably, the transcription is correctly adjusted to the phonetics of the 4th c. AD):

Orig.: English


Süčy tiligan
Pugu qüitudan
..

According to the explanations, süčy means army; tiligan is send, move; pugu is Hu's title that Liu Yao had, and qüytudan is seize, catch. And is given a translation of the whole phrase: Move the troops, will catch Liu Yao [20, Ch. 95, pp. 12-b-13-a (20. Fang Xuanling. Jin-shu (History of Jin Dynasty). Peking, Bo-na, 1958)].

As I.N Shervashidze pointed out, [3, p. 3-9 (3. Shervashidze I.N. Verb forms in the language of the Turkic runiform inscriptions. Tbilisi, 1986)], there are three major attempts to interpret the text, all based on the assumption of its Turkic origin (V.S. Taskin is citing the previous scholarship by reference, the contents of the references are compiled in the following table)

Hunnic in Chinese script
 秀支  替戾剛 ,  僕谷  劬禿當
Translations
秀支
Süčy

Army
替戾剛
tiligan

go out
僕谷
Pugu (Liu Yao's rank)

Liu Yao's rank
劬禿當
qüitudan

capture
Ramstedt, 1922 Bazin, 1948 Von Gabain, 1949 I.N.Shervashidze, 1986
Sükâ tal'iğan
bügüg tutan!
Süg tâgti idqan
boquγı tutqan!
Särig tilitgan
buγuγ kötüzkan
Sükâ tol'iqtin
buγuγ qodigo(d)tin
Go with a war
[and] captured bügü!
Send an army to attack
[and] capture the commander!
You'd put forth the army,
 you'd take the deer
You came to the army
Deposed buγuγ

As can be seen, each interpreter has good reasons to link the two phrases uttered by Fotu Den with the ancient Türkic language (it works).
9

Hunnic words, transliterated in V.S.Taskin Cyrillic rendition, in Pinyin format  converted from V.S.Taskin Cyrillic rendition to Pinyin format, and in modern TurkicEnglish transcription:

Transliterations
Cyrillic (V.S.Taskin) Pinyin format (V.S.Taskin) English

Xiù zhī Tì lì gāng
Pú gǔ Qú tū dāng
Süčy tiligan
Pugu qüi tudan

The phrase is concise and even in modern Türkic is readily recognizable. Semantically, it may sound obsolete, some expressions are not in common use any more, but the grammar is perfectly intact, and since we can easily catch the phrase The zex would have xyzed the door wide with only literary familiarity with Mr. Zex and the xyz action, so the whole phrase sounds to the Türkic speaker undoubtedly natural If you do this, you' d get that:

Chinese annals' phonetization and translation
Annalitic phrase
in Unicode 秀支 , 軍也 o 替戾剛 , 出也 o 僕谷 , 劉曜胡位也 o 劬禿當 , 捉也
Romanized Mandarin Xiù zhī , jūn yě o Tì lì gāng , chū yě o Pú gǔ , Púgǔ Liúyào hú wèi yě o Qú tū dāng zhuō yě
Translated Mandarin Xiù zhī , Army have o Tì lì gāng , Out of have o Pú gǔ , Púgǔ Liúyào Hu rank have o Qú tū dāng catch have

The Hunnic phrase with Türkic and English rendition is:

Chinese 秀支 替戾剛 , 僕谷劬 禿當
Romanized Mandarin Xiù zhī Tì lì gāng Púgǔ qú Tū dāng
English Phonetization Sü chi Ti li gang Pugu chu Tu dang
Chinese to English Army go out Pugu'd be capture(ed)
Türkic Süči (Süchi) tiligan Pugu'yu tutar
Türkic to English Army-man would go Pugu (he) would (be) capture(ed)
Comment -či (= chi/ji) - std. occupational affix -gan - past participle, 3ps, perfect tense verbal affix -'yu - future conditional verbal transitive affix capture in 3rd person future tense ablative ending, passive voice

In modern Turkish, the second line of the phrase is practically the same:

English Modern Turkish Translation fr Turkish
Süčy tiligan
Pugu'qüi tudan
Süčy tiligan
Pugu'yu tutar
Army Commander would go
(He) would capture Pugu

From the comparison, it is clear that Ramstedt and Bazin were closest in their reconstructions, they correctly parsed the phrase, but Ramstedt erred in not replacing the Chinese symbol (n) with (r) for the verb tutar = seize, capture, and both failed to use the standard Türkic future conditional transitive affix 'yu ('gyu in the Hunnic Ogur dialect). It can't be excluded that 1,700 years ago the modern form of the verb tutar = seize, capture had in fact the root tutan. This is supported by the rhyme tiligan - tudan in the poem, that definitely made it memorable and remembered. Since the word tutan in Chinese records is a hapax, that can't be proved or disproved, but a systematic comparison of all 35+ Türkic languages, plus the Türkic relicts in the modern and oldest known forms of this word in the Eurasian languages with known layer of the Türkic ancient words may point to a most likely original form.

Any linguist would observe the amazing continuity of the vocabulary and grammatical affixes:
Su = army
-či = noun-derivational affix to form profession or occupation
tilek = to wish (ref. Old Türkic Dictionary, 1969, Leningrad, Science, p. 560)
-gan = past participle, 3rd person singular, perfect tense verbal affix
Pugu = 1. Türkic title/rank, with few interpretations, one is historically attested Pugu = Bull; 2. a homophonic pug/buk is also excrement, poop, shit
-'yu /-'gyu = future conditional verbal transitive affix
tutar = 1. capture in 3rd person future tense; 2. quyut  = to scare, to spook, quitudan - scare out of. Mahmud Kashgary cites an example  Ol atig quiutti = He scared a horse (Mahmud Kashgari, 1960. Turky suzlar devoni (Devon lugotit turk), Tashkent, vol. 2, p. 326).
-dan / -tan = locative directional verbal affix from, out of (Russ. ) (ref. Old Türkic Dictionary, 1969, Leningrad, Science, p. 664)

The Modern Turkish replaced the verb tiligan (tiligar) with a different root, çık, the only substantial modification in the 2,000-year old phrase. Other than that, each grammatical form and each word is known from the new and old Türkic dictionaries, and from the common speech..

Most interesting is the homophonic message of the poem, completely missed by the non-Türkic-speaking investigators, the ancient Chinese as well as the modern scholars. Pugu is not only a title/rank of Liu Yao, pug/buk is also poop. In Türkic tilek (Turkish dilek, ref. Old Türkic Dictionary, 1969, Leningrad, Science, p. 560) is to wish, with affix -gan it becomes tiligan = having wished (past participle, 3rd person singular, perfect tense, ref. Mahmud Kashgari, 1960. Turky suzlar devoni (Devon lugotit turk). vol. 1, p.412. Tashkent.), Süčy tiligan = Army commander has wished (Russian ).

Pugu qüitudan has 2 homophonic forms:
1. Literally: Pugu'yu tutar = (He) would capture Pugu
2. Figuratively: Pug quitudan = scared his poop (akin to English idioms scared his ass, or closer scared shit out of him). This form originates in a Türkic proverb [Do not try to scare me], scare your own poop

Thus, the poem relays three messages:
First and foremost, it translates the sacred toll of the bells into the human language, reflecting the bells' rhythm and rime;
Secondly, it says that the bells are urging on:
Army commander would go
(He) would capture Pugu;

Thirdly, it says that the bells are reassuring:
Army commander has wished
(And) scared the poop out of Pugu

And finally, melodically the verse follows a five-syllable metrical pattern, or pentameter, typical for the Türkic ancient poetry (Khatipov Gosman, Shigyr tozeleshe, Tatar Publishing, Kazan 1975,. pp. 108-135)

Analysis 2010 A. Mukhamadiev

9

* * *

5

INTRODUCTION

On the Jie ethnogenesis

This issue assembled materials relating to the nomadic tribe Jie (羯). They are selected from the History of Jin dynasty (Jin-shu 晉書), the authorship of which is attributed to the Tang Emperor Tai Zong (626-649), in reality it was written by a group of authors headed by a high official Fang Xuanling (房玄齡, 578-648).

What kind of people were Jie, and what was their ethnic origin? The question is not hollow, since the Soviet historical literature has no clear answer. M.V. Krukov, not touching on the Jie ethnogenesis, only noted briefly: Most of the modern researchers believe that the Jie are from the territory of Middle Asia; to the Central China Plain they came together with the Huns [2, p. 72], he also stresses: In the process of Migration of Peoples to the territory of the Northern China in addition to the Huns, Syanbi (pl. Syanbis, like kiwi ~ kiwis), Qiangs (Kians, Tibetans, or Kian-Tibetan dual exogamy marital couple) and Di (pl. Dis, like kiwi ~ kiwis) also happen to come the Jie (pl. Jies, like tui  ~  tuis, die  ~  dies), natives of the Western Region [2, p. 256].

L.N.Gumilev addressed Jie in more detail, although basically referring to E. Chavannes: Another large tribe were Jielu, who lived on the banks of the river Hey-shui. That tribe was formed of the Huns' slaves, freed by the disintegration of the Hunnic society (25-85 AD). Their main occupations were animal husbandry and hunting. They are not identical with the tribes in the West, who belonged to Beibi (Syanbi). They are not of a single race, among them were Tunhu (Mongols) and Dinlins (Tele, aka Ch. Di) and Qiangs (Kians, Tibetans), who lived with them. And that is because originally, they were the slaves of the Huns [1, p. 28].

Based on that evidence, L.N.Gumilev mistook Jielu for an ethnonym, and states that the word, supposedly pronounced qul and in the modern Turkic languages it means slave, in the 6th-8th cc. it had a very different meaning: alien or submitting to foreign state, without any shade of personal bondage.

Identification of the Jielu, or quls with Jie is clearly erroneous and apparently is due to the misreading the French transcription in the works of the Western authors. In the works of L.N.Gumilev such occasions are not uncommon. So, he reads Sima Chjie [1, p. 51] instead of Sima Chi, Li Kung [1, p. 57] instead Lu Kung, Wan Dun [1, p. 73] instead of Wan Dung, etc. Similarly, in our case E.Chavannes is not talking about the Jie, but about the tsy, or tszylu, about whom the sources provide information.
6

In the History of Southern Qi dynasty (Nan Qi-shu 南齊書) we find: Henans belong to the Hun group. During the Han dynasty in the era of Jian-wu rule (26-56 AD), several thousand of the Huns male and female slaves from different [ethnic] groups fled and hid in the Lianzhou area. In the language of the barbarians the slaves are called qy or alternatively qylu (19, Ch. 59, p. 4-a]. Further, it says that the Henans lived to the north-west of Yizhou area, in the Lianzhou region, they were living of the nomadic pastoralism, and were subjects of Tuyuhuns, whose rulers since the Song dynasty (宋朝 420-479) received appointments and titles from the Chinese Court.

Comparing Nan Qi-shu with the stipulations of L.N.Gumilev, it turns out that tsy, or tszylu (qy, or qylu) is not an ethnonym, but the words that in the language of the barbarians mean slave. And an ethnonym  is the word Henan (literally, living south of the river [Huanhe]), that arose from the fact that the escaped Huns' slaves settled on the lands south of the river Huanhe. The sources do not mention any evidence of Henans' involvement in the events that took place in the northern China during the Former and Later Zhao dynasties.

It should be noted that the historical sources are not uniform in covering the ethnic origin of the Henans. According to the Nan Qi shu, Henans included various ethnic groups, among which a most numerous was apparently the Hun group, which gave a reason to attribute all of them to the Huns. At the same time, the History of Southern Dynasties (Nan shi 南史) attributes the Henan rulers to the Syanbis: The ancestors of the Henan rulers come from Syanbi clan Mujun (aka Murong; Murong is a pinyin version of the Syanbi clan Mujun/Muyun). In the past, the Mujun chief Ylogan had two sons, the eldest called Tuyuhun was born of a concubine, and the youngest called [Mujun] Gui was born of his lawful wife. After the Ylogan death, Mujun Gui inherited the throne. Wishing to secede from Mujun Gui, Tuyuhun moved west to Shanlun, crossed Fuhan, went into the south-western part of Lianzhou, and came to the river Chishui, where he began to live. Those lands are located to the south of the river [Huang He], so he adopted the name of the place as the title [Henan-wan] [12, Ch. 79, p. 9-a]. Apparently, the Henans, composed of different ethnic groups, were too weak, so the author of the Nan-shi calls their rulers Syanbis, meaning Tuyuhun and his descendants (Syanbi was a Mongol tribe that in the 3rd c. BC escaped Hun's control, and consequently retained their original culture until they conquered a significant number of the Huns in 160 AD. After that, under a common name Syanbi must be discriminated the Mongol Syanbis and the Türkic Syanbis. The tribe Toba was a Türkic Syanbi tribe [ref. P.Budberg, L.Bazin, and V.P.Yudin]).

According to numerous direct and indirect evidence, Jie were a community that owned one of the Huns' 19 pastoral routs, they were a splinter from the parental tribe Qianqui (orig: , also spelled Kangqu) that owned a pastoral rout mentioned in the Jin-shu among the 19 Huns' pastoral rout communities that lived in the Chinese territory (i.e. inside the border walls or fortified lines; the Qianqui is a transcription that may be a derivative of Kang/Kangar Kyankyui Kyangaoi Qiang Qu, Kian ~ Kiat ~ Gilyan ) [20, Ch. 97, p. 11-b].
7

The ethnonym Qianqui (also spelled Kangqu) can be thought of as associated with the name of Qianqui, a Shanuy of the Southern Huns, who held this post from 179 to 188 AD [21, Ch. 89, pp. 32-a - 32-b]. The Wei-shu says: Ancestors of Shi Le belonged to a separate Huns' pastoral rout, dispersed in the Shendan district, in the Usyan county, in the Qeshi area, after the name of which they started to be called Qeshi Hus (pl. of Hu) [7, Ch. 95, p. 9-a]. Consequently, the ethnonym Jie is associated with the name of the Qeshi area (modern Yuyshe county in the Shanxi province) (Jinzhong Shi, Yuci 榆次区 district), and thus the Jie is only a geographical definition, not a self-name of the nomadic union.

V.S. Taskin supplied the following notes on the origin of Jie and etymology of their name:

149

FAN XUANLING, History of Jin Dynasty, ch. 104

Shi Le. Part 1 Complete text

1. Wei-shu states that Shi Le had a child name Pule [7, Ch. 95, p. 9-a]. The last name Shi and first name Le were given to Shi Le by Shi Ji Sang (汲桑), and quite possibly the name Le was derived from the last syllable of the child name Pule.

2. Jie, or Kaishi (orig.: , or ) is the name of a location inhabited by one of Hun nomads. After the location, the Chinese started calling the nomads of that pastoral rout community Tsze's (Jie) Hus (Huns), and thus Tsze (Jie) is not a self-name of the nomadic pastoral rout community [7, Chap. 95, pp. 9-a]. The main town Usyan of the county was 30 li north-west of the modern county town Yuyshe in Shanxi province [15, p. 516].

3. Apparently, the subject is the pastoral rout of the southern Hun Shanuy Tsyantszyuy (Qiangqu 羌渠, Kyankyui, Kyangaoi, Qiang Qu; orig.: ), about whom is known the following: In the second year [of Kuang-ho rule era, 179 AD] the head of bodyguard guards Zhang Xu quarrelled with Shanuy Huchjen, killed him, and on his own, without Emperor's sanction, raised to the Shanuy throne a right Sian-Wang (aka Xian-Wang) Tsyantszyuy (Qiangqu). Since Zhang Xu executed Shanuy without permission of the Emperor, he was taken to the capital in a cage and handed over to the chief of the judicial department, who sentenced him to death (This is one of the testimonies that associate  pin. Jie 羯 people with the Kiyan tribe, as a splinter of the Kiyans. The Kians (Huyans) were an ancient Hun's maternal dynastic tribe. Kians are also listed as one of the 12 or 15 Tele tribes. As a Hunnic and Türkic dynastic tribe the Kiyans are known throughout the Ancient and Middle Age history).

Shanuy Tsyantszyuy (Qiangqu) ascended the throne in the second year of Kuen-ho reign era (179 AD). In the fourth year of the Zhong-ping reign era (187 AD) a former governor of the Zhongshan district Zhang Shun raised a revolt, headed Syanbis, and began raiding the border districts. The Emperor Ling Di ordered the Southern Huns to send troops, to jointly punish the rebels with Liu Yu, a governor of Yuchzhou province. Shanuy sent to Yuchzhou cavalry led by left Sian-Wang (Xian-Wang). But his people were afraid that the Shanuy would be sending troops without an end, and so in the fifth year [of Chjun-pin rule era, 188 AD] the right pastoral rout community Ilo, various Huns' pastoral rout communities in the Syuchu county, pastoral rout community Baymatun, and others, more than 100 thousand people, rebelled and killed the Shanuy (Chinese annalistic explanation is suspicious, more likely the reason for the revolt was the discontent with the Chinese policy of divide and rule; the Syanbi tribes headed by the local Hun ruler may have had legitimate, in the eyes of the Huns, reasons for uprising, may have been a kindered Hun horde, like Toba, within the Syanbi confederation, and may have had marital or other kindred links with the Southern Hun hordes. The were afraid of being ordered around by the Chinese as a reason for the revolt may be a less immediate motive for the uprising. In the Hun's eyes Kyankyui was illigitimate Shanyu from a maternal, and not a paternal dynastic line, installed by allien ruler).

Shanuy Tsyantszyuy (Qiangqu) remained on the throne for ten years, after him the throne ascended his son Yuyfulo, who had a post of right Sian-Wang [21, Chap. 89, pp. 32-a-32-b].

The translation of the same segment by N.Bichurin is here, page 146 (200 PDF). V.S. Taskin was apparently using a Russian rendition of the pinyin vocalization of the princely title as Sian-Wang (pin. Xian-Wang, orig.: -, Ch. Wise Prince), which N.Bichurin vocalized Chjuki-Prince (pin. Tuqi Prince 贤王, Hunnic Wise Prince with Chinese character for Prince), in the Chinese form of ca 1825. It is clear that the Ming phonetic form Chjuki is vocalized in contemporary Mandarin as Tuqi. The vocalization Chjuki matches the Chinese translation of the title, wise, which is Ükü in the Oguz Türkic, and should have sounded Jükü in the Ogur Türkic (jo dialect).

N.Bichurin vocalized the name of the Shanuy as Kyankyui (Qiangqu 羌渠), which consists of two parts, Kyank + Yui, Kian being an old maternal dynastic tribe of the Eastern Huns, with Chinese prosthetic -ng, or with applied Türkic possessive affix -k, which produce as nominal adjective Kian's, and Yui stands for the tribal name of Uigurs. That is confirmed by the fact that Kyankyui was a Right Chjuki-Prince (Ch. Tuqi-Prince, Turk. Juku-Prince), not eligible for succession as being descended from the maternal side of the dynastic union, which was variously given in Chinese rendition as Hui/Sui/Yui. In the Türkic succession tradition, Kyankyui is an usurper. Apparently, that tradition was well known to the Chinese, who repeatedly violated it to seed a discords among the Southern Huns and other nomads. Once at the helm, Kyankyui appointed his son a Left Chjuki/Wise-Prince, making him a lawful successor in an outward accordance with the succession tradition, but in fact creating an usurper dynasty.

Pule, rechristened Shi Le, was an extract from the Hunnic maternal dynastic tribe of Kian Uigurs, which gave the name to the home base of their pastoral rout, Kian, possibly with an archaic Türkic and now Mongolian plural affix -ty, by the Chinese it was rendered  羯  ~ Kiat, pinyin Jie, Russian Tsze. The chances that Kiat has any relation with the Kets or with the Kangars are nil, both conjectures clearly contradict the story given in the Chinese annals, and may only refer to the remote pre-historic period for which no records exist.

Relationship between Qiangs and Huns

Sometime in the 1st millennium BC, the horse pastoralists of the Taklamakan and Turfan steppes adjacent to the Tibetan Plateau encountered a loose assembly of Tibeto-Burman tribes, allied with them, and established marital unions. It is possible that the Kiyan Huns inserted themselves into the Tibetan Plateau in their expansion from the Middle Asian steppes. The conglomerate later received a name Qiang from the neighboring Chinese principalities, and that name was canonized in the Chinese annals for the next millennium, exactly like other Chinese designations of the non-Chinese people. In the Hunnic context, that name was recorded in the form Kian, Kiyan, Huyan as the old maternal dynastic tribe of the Eastern Huns, later supplanted by the Hui/Sui/Yui tribe. The politonym Qiang remained a foreign designation for the Tibetans, while for the Huns it was an ingenious name of one of their tribes. The situation is quite similar with the names of Ruses, Bulgars, Bosnians, Croats, Hungarians, and French.

The part of the Tibetan history associated with outlying nomadic alliances escaped the Tibetan folklore, and is known only from the Chinese sources. In the pre-7th c. AD, the Tibetan history is limited to the central Tibetan people, and the role of the nomadic horse husbandry tribes is only detected in the distinct genetical input of the Middle Asian pastoralists and in the distinct complement of innovations brought by the nomads into the life of sedentary river valley farmers. It is likely that the the two societies in the alliance coexisted without much intermixing, retaining their respective languages and ethnological distinctions, except that the ruling nomads introduced much of their etiology and religious concepts to the Tibetan-lingual farming society. The mutual parallels between the early Tibetan and early Türkic ethnologies are distinct and numerous.

In the 4th c. AD, when the Huns were still retaining their leadership position, Qiangs were a loose collection of the dependent tribes, playing a background subsidiary role in the steppe events. In the revolutionary events of the 4th-6th cc. AD, their status has transformed to autonomous, and at times independent position. In the 7th c. AD they already were a major player on the Far Eastern scene, unified into a distinct Tibetan-lingual state with a residual complement of the indigenous Huns, but with unmistakably Hunnic cavalry and warfare.

The events of the 4th c. AD still see Qiangs as a Hunnic tribe under Kiyan rule, with a Tibetan twist. The Chinese historiography makes a clear distinction between Qiangs and Tibetans. The historical origins of the Qiangs and Tibetans is perhaps best defined by the Professor Fei Xiaotong:

Even if the Qiang people might not be regarded as the main source of the Tibetan people, it is undoubtedly that the Qiang people played a certain role in the formation of Tibetan race. (Fei Xiaotong, The Pluralistic and Unified Structure of Chinese Ethnic Groups, p. 28, Central Ethnic University Publishing, 1999)

The Chinese historians also noted a change in the Tibeto-Burman physique at the beginning of our era, probably caused less by admixture and direct injection of divergent genes then by the dietary changes that brought about meat and dairy into the grain staple of the farmers (Qingying Chen, Tibetan history, 2003, China Intercontinental Press, ISBN 7-5085-0234-5, p. 6).

The sources usually call the Huns Hus (sing. Hun ~ Hu). Still Jia Yi (201 -169 BC) in his treatise On the errors of the Qin house wrote about the Qin Emperor Shi-Huang: He sent Meng Tian to the north to build the Great Wall, and hold firmly the lines along it. [Meng Tian] pushed the Huns out for 700-plus li, after which the Hus no longer dared to come down to the south to graze their horses there, and their soldiers did not dare to tension their bows to avenge the insults [18, Ch. 6, p. 44-a]. It is clear that for Jia Yi the Hus and the Huns are one and the same people. In 89 BC Shanuy Hulugu, having won a great victory over the Han troops, sent to the Emperor Wu an ambassador with a letter stating: In the south is the great state of Han, in the north lay the powerful Hus [4, Sec. 94-a, l. 29-b], i.e., he himself called the Huns Hus. Since Jies are Huns, the Jin shu ordinarily calls them Hu, and only in rare cases they appear under the name Jie.

In particular, when Shi Le was a boy engaged in street vending in Luoyang, he was standing and whistling by the city wall, when a Jin high official Wang Yan saw him and, startled by his appearance, said: In my opinion, the voice and the look of this Hu's milk-sucker ... display his extraordinary ambitions. Zhang Bing, a closest ally of Shi Le, was saying about him: I've seen a lot of military commanders, but only with this Hu can a great cause be successfully completed.

It is hardly necessary to cite other numerous examples that prove that the Chinese held Jie as the Huns, but we can not bypass one very important linguistic evidence which helps to identify ethnicity of the Jie themselves, and of the Huns to which they belonged. It is a phrase, uttered in the Jie language by a native of India, Buddhist monk Fotu Den, who served for Shi Le and was spreading Buddhism in China. This only phrase in the Hun language that reached us has meanings of its words and a general  translation.

8

 
Home
Back
In Russian
Contents Huns
Contents Türkic languages
Datelines
Sources
Roots
Tamgas
Alphabet
Writing
Language
Genetics
Geography
Archeology
Religion
Coins
Wikipedia
Ogur and Oguz
Alans and Ases
E.Pulleyblank Eastern Hun Language
O.Pritsak Onomasticon of Western Huns
W.B.Henning Xiongnu are Huns
L.Gumilev Language of Huns
Kisamov N. Hunnic Oracle Phrase
Tekin T. Hsiung-Nu Language
Vovin A Hsiung-Nu Language
Taskin V. Hsiung-Nu Language
Doerfer G. On Hunnic and Turkic (snippets)
Gmyrya L. Caspian Huns
Alan Dateline
Avar Dateline
Besenyo Dateline
Bulgar Dateline
Huns Dateline
Karluk Dateline
Kimak Dateline
Kipchak Dateline
Khazar Dateline
Kyrgyz Dateline
Sabir Dateline
Seyanto Dateline
8/12/2011
8/12/2011TürkicWorld
@Mail.ru