|
Post by nomadi on Mar 27, 2009 19:08:45 GMT 3
Kok Turks ( Ashinas) were Turk or Mongol?
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Mar 27, 2009 21:52:15 GMT 3
Of course Turk.
|
|
|
Post by nomadi on Mar 29, 2009 17:07:46 GMT 3
Some Mongols says " Ashinas Mongol origin "
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Mar 29, 2009 20:55:09 GMT 3
It's their own idiocity, ignorancy or stupid nationalism.
|
|
|
Post by Subu'atai on Sept 1, 2009 23:22:12 GMT 3
Actually the Mongolian idea of Ashina being of Mongol origin actually comes from L.N. Gumilev. YES the very same Russian turkologist that ended up causing a lot of confusion as well in regards to the Xiongnu Turk-or-Mongol question! LOL ;D
This situation is actually very similar to the Kazakh claim that the Mongol Empire was Turkic. But just as the Gokturks stamped their Turkic identity with the Oghuz monuments, identified themselves as Turks, the Mongols stamped their Mongol identity with the Secret History and the seal of the Mongol Uls, identified themselves as Mongols, etc etc...
Yet Kazakhs claim Mongols, Mongols claim Kokturks, etc etc Personally I consider this rather weird
|
|
|
Post by nomadi on Sept 2, 2009 14:49:29 GMT 3
I think Roman Empire were Mongolic hehehehe
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Sept 2, 2009 17:39:01 GMT 3
Yes, the reason why I don't like Gumilëv's Drevnie Tjurki Древне Тюрки (Ancient Turks - hope I wrote the book's title correct) is because of his weird theory linking the Ashina to the Serbi (Xianbei) people.
|
|
|
Post by Kilij Arslan on Jan 21, 2010 3:49:16 GMT 3
Andrzej Michałek wrote that Ashina clan originaly was from Northern Liang (i.e. Xiong Nu, as Turk as they can be). Was he right? (And then of course he depicts them venturing to Altai and ruling over the Tuque living there, creating some heavy cavalry with the iron from the mountains and so on).
|
|
|
Post by ceonni on Jan 21, 2010 11:37:19 GMT 3
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Jan 21, 2010 14:14:54 GMT 3
Andrzej Michałek wrote that Ashina clan originaly was from Northern Liang (i.e. Xiong Nu, as Turk as they can be). Was he right? (And then of course he depicts them venturing to Altai and ruling over the Tuque living there, creating some heavy cavalry with the iron from the mountains and so on). According to Sui-shu 隋書, Tong-dian 通典, Ce-fu Yuan-gui 冊府元龜 and Wen-xian Tong-kao 文献通考, the ancestors of the Tu-jue 突厥 (Gokturks) were from the "Mixed Foreigners (Za Hu 雜胡)" living in the Ping-liang 平凉 region of Gan-su 甘肅. Their surname was A-shi-na 阿史那. When the Tabghach (Wei 魏) emperor Tai-wu 太武 (reigned 424-452) defeated Ju-qu Mu-jian 沮渠牧犍 (son of Ju-qu Meng-xun 沮渠蒙遜 who ruled the Hunnic state of Northern Liang 北凉 between 401-433), their chieftain A-shi-na took refuge to the Rou-ran 柔然 with five hundred families and these became the Tu-jue (Wei-shu 魏書 and Zi-zhi Tong-jian 資治通鑒 give the date of Tai-wu's campaign against Ju-qu Mu-jian as 439).
|
|
|
Post by Kilij Arslan on Jan 21, 2010 19:21:08 GMT 3
Wow! Thank you very much for the exhaustive answer, mighty Qaġan (BTW: this forum kicks asses and leaves cities in flames You can't imagine how glad I am that it exists, not only can I find and verify historical info, but also see for myself all those opinions that the forum members might sometimes express, and 'mentality' of modern steppe people is not something you might easily get to know while living in Warsaw
|
|
|
Post by ceonni on Jan 22, 2010 0:42:34 GMT 3
Pingliang Zahu means the Ashinas might have been at the very earliest point, an East Iranian, or Saka-Sogdian ethnic group much like the Kushans, who also hailed from Gansu. Later when Ashina fled the Wei attack on Turpan's Northern Liang (the Juqu Kings), they seemed to have established in Turpan. I am wondering if the native population of Turpan Tocharian or Saka-Sogdian. Maybe the early followers of the Ashinas were both Tocharian and Saka-Sogdian. And could be what "Zahu" (mixed Sogdians) means. Northern Liang's Juqu Huns cannot be native to Turpan or Pingliang (Gansu). Great Hunnish hordes like the Liu, Helian, were establishing states all around Northern Shaanxi and Hexi (West of Huanghe). These Huns were considered to be of noble blood and would not be called Zahu (Mixed Huns or Mixed Soghdians). Juqu Mengxun first supported the ethnic Han military commander Duan Ye into establishing Northern Liang. He later usurped the kingdom. These military commanders are not native chieftains of the Pingliang region. Pingliang still seemed to be supporting an East Iranian population much akin to the Kushans, Yuezhi (Jati in Punjabi), Afghans. Turkic languages took over the East Iranic Gobis in much the same way Mongolic languages took over the Turkic Mongolian Steppes. Andrzej Michałek wrote that Ashina clan originaly was from Northern Liang (i.e. Xiong Nu, as Turk as they can be). Was he right? (And then of course he depicts them venturing to Altai and ruling over the Tuque living there, creating some heavy cavalry with the iron from the mountains and so on). According to Sui-shu 隋書, Tong-dian 通典, Ce-fu Yuan-gui 冊府元龜 and Wen-xian Tong-kao 文献通考, the ancestors of the Tu-jue 突厥 (Gokturks) were from the "Mixed Foreigners (Za Hu 雜胡)" living in the Ping-liang 平凉 region of Gan-su 甘肅. Their surname was A-shi-na 阿史那. When the Tabghach (Wei 魏) emperor Tai-wu 太武 (reigned 424-452) defeated Ju-qu Mu-jian 沮渠牧犍 (son of Ju-qu Meng-xun 沮渠蒙遜 who ruled the Hunnic state of Northern Liang 北凉 between 401-433), their chieftain A-shi-na took refuge to the Rou-ran 柔然 with five hundredd families and these became the Tu-jue (Wei-shu 魏書 and Zi-zhi Tong-jian 資治通鑒 give the date of Tai-wu's campaign against Ju-qu Mu-jian as 439).
|
|
|
Post by Subu'atai on Jan 22, 2010 17:19:56 GMT 3
Meh, I'm done with this Turk or Mongol business.
Kok TURKS are either... A) Turk B) Mongol In 6 months, even my baby daughter is prolly able to answer that question
But if you, OP, is confused about the whole Turco-Mongol thing, just use the term Altaic. Or if you wish to be even more controversial - Turanian.
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Jan 22, 2010 20:21:54 GMT 3
You're welcome Thanx a lot During that time, the Chinese used "Hu" for many different peoples, including both Iranic, Tokharian and Turkic, so this means that not all "Hu" mentioned in Chinese sources were automatically Indo-European. The earliest Gokturks might have got some Indo-European admixture but what is clear that they had cultural contacts with them even before when they established their empire in 552. While non-Gokturk Turkic peoples used rather very few non-Turkic loanwords, the Gokturks had plenty of them, borrowed from Soghdian, Sanskrit, Chinese and maybe even from Tokharian and Khwarazmian. By the way, the natives of Turfan were Tokharians, not Saka. The Saka lived mostly in and around Khotan; the rest of Tarim Basin city-states had Tokharian populations while the countryside was inhabited at least partially by Turkic nomads (as far as I know). Yes, the Huns were not natives of Gansu nor Turfan. Indeed.
|
|
|
Post by ceonni on Jan 22, 2010 23:47:31 GMT 3
My opinion is: The core of the Gokturk ruling class was: of Gansu and Turpan Indo-European origin, thus explaining the Caucasoid and Blonde features of early Gokturk rulers.
The Otuken Gokturk State spoke a Turkic lingua-franca of steppes peoples of the time, which was not particularly close to the Bulgaric-Oghuric dialect that the Huns spoke in this region in previous centuries. Also spoke this Turkic lingua-franca was several Mongolic Xianbei tribes including the dominant Tabgach.
The Mongolic Clan of Tabgach mustered a large federation that was linguistically Turkic in character, but formed of variously Mongolic and Turkic elements. Part of the Clan of Tabgach also migrated into North Shaanxi Huns and became the ruler of these Huns through the subclan of Helian. Much later during the Tang Dynasty even the Xixia Tanguts, a Qiangic people, was also ruled by the Tabgach clan. This shows the Tabgach, though of Mongolic origin, does not necessarily adhere to their original Mongolic dialect.
The Gokturks were NOT Mongolic at all. They were not Mongolic at any point in history. Although the later Genghiz Khan may be of Gokturk-Uyghur origin. But Genghiz Khan's clan certainly migrated into the Mongolic Taychiuds and became Mongolian-speaking.
The Gokturks and the Tabgach were of very different origins, although they spoke a common Turkic language, or very closely related non-Oghuric dialects, which later became the ancestor of the Central Turkic Branches. The Gokturks were not Mongolic at all, even though they were once subjects of the Mongolic cousins of the Tabgach, the Rouran (basically the same tribe as the Tabgach, except they were of lower class and remained in the steppes). The Rouran under the Yukuk (Yujiuju) Khans, may have retained largely the Mongolic dialect, and absorbed tribes that were not Turkic, but rather Tungusic or Koreic. This gives the Rouran federation a rather different character than that of the Tabgach, even though the Yukuk and the Tabgach were originally of the same tribe.
The Gokturk federation maintained strong ties with sedentary Iranic elements. This Turkic-Iranic dual nature of the culture was inherited by the Uyghurs who basically took over the Gokturks' federation. During the Tang, a Uyghur diplomatic mission was once asked by the Tang court to "take with it all the Soghdian merchants of Chang'an", assuming Soghdian immigrants to be Uyghur subjects. However there was a sharp distinction between the "stuckup" and non-commercial Uyghurs and the roudy city-dwelling Soghdian merchants. As a result this diplomatic mission was delayed at the Tang-Uyghur border, where the Soghdians trashed the fields of Tang farmers. The new Uyghur Khan, unwilling to take these Soghdians into Uyghur territories, ordered the Uyghur diplomatic mission to slaughter the more numerous Soghdians.
After the Soghdians pleaded the Tang for help retaliate against the Uyghurs, the Tang commander conspired with the court and proposed that: "The Uyghurs are but a few. The Soghdians are the most numerous and unruly element that everyone hates. Why not take advantage of their internal strife and get rid of them all?" The Tang court gave tacit permission to the commander, and later he rounded up and slaughtered both the Uyghur diplomatic mission and the Soghdian merchants at the border.
However, this didn't change the Uyghur Empire's nature as a half-Turkic, half-"Tatic" (considering both Iranic and Tocharic peoples as "Tats") culture. This culminated with the Uyghur Empire's adoption of the Soghdian religion Manichaeism as state religion and its diplomatic stance to protect Manichaeians of all nationalities all the way down to the Yangtze city of Hangzhou.
The Gokturks being of Iranic origin is perhaps the reason why Nowruz is now a pan-Turkic festival.
|
|