How far did the Gokturks territory expand?

[H. İhsan Erkoç]

(originially posted by BK at September 22, 2004)
----

How far did the gokturk khanate expand, do any of you havea map, didn't it expand into Khazar 8 (ukrian) in the west and till mancuria in the west ,


----------------


(originially posted by me at September 22, 2004)
----

You can't find an online map of the greatest extent of the Tujue (Türük/Gök Türk) empire, the ones you can find show their extent during the early 7th century.

At their peak, the Tujue ruled all the lands between Crimea, Âzarbaijân, Khorâsân, Central Afghanistân, Kashmir, Tibet, the Chinese Great Wall, Central Manchuria and of course the Siberian forests. This would include Inner & Outer Mongolia, Jungaria, Southern Yenisei Basin, Semirechie, Transoxiana, Tianshan, Tarim Basin, Northern Afghanistân and the Kazak-Caspian Steppes.


----------------

originially posted by karakhan at September 24, 2004)
----

I found this Turkish map



but it seems very exaggerated. I strongly doubt the Gok Turks controlled Korea and went to Sakhalin Island.

I also found this one



It does not extend into Sakhalin Island or Korea but some how I think it is bit exaggerated too.



I think that one is the most accurate one, it may not load so if not try here

abuss.narod.ru/Biblio/Maps/map70.gif


----------------


(originially posted by me at September 24, 2004)
----

Yes, the last map is the most accurate yet it still doesn't show the largest extent. Rather, it's the early 7th century form of the Gök Türk empire (though it should have expanded into Âzarbaijân).

[Boorchi Noyan]

I don't think that the last one is the most accurate. What about the Kazakh Steppes, Siberia, Kirgyz Lands, Oyrat?? No, I think it is the least accurate one...

[aca]

All maps which could be found on the net, in my oppinion, are very much inaccurate because they are based on subjective presumptions of people who made them. For example, according to most maps of Gok Turk kaganate produced in Turkey, their empire extended much further than available historical records can prove. It is hardly unlikely that the Gok Turk kaganate ever reached regions north of Lake Baykal, as well as whole Manchuria and territories north of Kazakhstan steppes.
However, there are some maps made by the Russians, which can be accepted as fairly accurate. Here I would mention the one showing the rout of Zemarkh's envoys. Although I consider this map too strict in concern to historical records (it doesn't include certain guessings which can be made by reading histoical sources), I still think that it is the most accurate one.

I'll try to find it again and post a link so that the others too can see it.

[aca]

Even better map can be found on perso.orange.fr/steppeasia/images/tujue2.jpg

[H. İhsan Erkoç]

The Westernmost borders of the empire are well known. They include Eastern Crimea, Tbilisi (capttured in 627), Azerbaijan and Herat. However, Western Turk (Tujue) rule was concentrated more on Transoxiana, Yedisu and the Tarim Basin, so it was an empire of Turkistân.

[aca]

I think we have to be very cautious when we say that the westernmost borders of the Gok Turk empire reached Crimea, Georgia and Azerbaijan. If Turks did invade those regions, it doesn't mean that they kept them under control. You have alredy mentioned the conquest of Tbilisi in 627. But why then Menandros, describing Zemarkh's return to Byzantium in 571, mentions that "Sarodios the King of Alans wouldn't let armed Turks who were escorting Zemarkh to pass trough his territory"?
Indeed, Turks invaded the Crimean Peninsula short after Istemi-kagans death, but afther that they are not to be mentioned in relation to that region any more.

We can also look at the Kul-tigin's inscription - the part that describes peoples who came to pay homage at the Bumin and Istemi kagan burial ceremonies. The westernmost tribe mentioned there is Onok (ten tribes - living in western Turkistan), but we know that further to the west lived other turkic tribes (like Kuturghurs, Uturghurs, Bulgars, Sabirs and so on). Why weren't they mentioned in Orkhon iscriptions? Insted they mention the people of Bukhara and Tokharistan, indicating the course of Turkic expansion in that time.

So my conclusion is that the borders of the Gok Turk kaganate are most precisely shown on the map I placed link for.

[H. İhsan Erkoç]

aca said:

I think we have to be very cautious when we say that the westernmost borders of the Gok Turk empire reached Crimea, Georgia and Azerbaijan. If Turks did invade those regions, it doesn't mean that they kept them under control. You have alredy mentioned the conquest of Tbilisi in 627. But why then Menandros, describing Zemarkh's return to Byzantium in 701, mentions that "Sarodios the King of Alans wouldn't let armed Turks who were escorting Zemarkh to pass trough his territory"?
Indeed, Turks invaded the Crimean Peninsula short after Istemi-kagans death, but afther that they are not to be mentioned in relation to that region any more.

Well that was the largest extent of the empire, not the empire's borders all throughout it's life Indeed, the Western Turks campaigned in Western Caspia only a few times, not much.

aca said:

We can also look at the Kul-tigin's inscription - the part that describes peoples who came to pay homage at the Bumin and Istemi kagan burial ceremonies. The westernmost tribe mentioned there is Onok (ten tribes - living in western Turkistan), but we know that further to the west lived other turkic tribes (like Kuturghurs, Uturghurs, Bulgars, Sabirs and so on). Why weren't they mentioned in Orkhon iscriptions? Insted they mention the people of Bukhara and Tokharistan, indicating the course of Turkic expansion in that time.

Ah my dear friend, you are confusing the two different Yogh descriptions. Avar (Apar) and Roman/Byzantine (Purum) delegates are mentioned among the delegates who joined the Yogh of Bumïn Qaghan (or perhaps, that of Mugan Qaghan as Mugan Qaghan was a much more well known and a longer lasting ruler) in the mid-6th century. The delegates you listed are the ones who joined Köl Tigin's Yogh in 731.

[BAWIR$AQ]

AFAIK, the most believed territory of the First Turkic empire was from Manchuria on the east to Kerch in Black Sea on the west, and Amu-Daria river on the south.


This is the map from Lev Gumilev's book "Ancient Turks" (Drevnie tyurki), where he transliterates Chinese name "Tujue" as an original "Türküt".

gumilevica.kulichki.net/maps/ot2.gif

[BAWIR$AQ]

admin said:

I think that one is the most accurate one, it may not load so if not try here

abuss.narod.ru/Biblio/Maps/map70.gif

" most accurate "?

Excuse me, but what kind of evidence supports that the ancient Uyghurs ruled over all these lands to Volga river?

[BAWIR$AQ]

aca said:

I think we have to be very cautious when we say that the westernmost borders of the Gok Turk empire reached Crimea, Georgia and Azerbaijan. If Turks did invade those regions, it doesn't mean that they kept them under control.

Indeed, Turks invaded the Crimean Peninsula short after Istemi-kagans death, but afther that they are not to be mentioned in relation to that region any more.

Khazar qaghanate is closely tied to the Turkic qaghanate. Khazars inherited a lot from the ancient Turks in military, political system.

There's also a strong opinion among scholars that Khazars were ruled by the Ashina dynasty, the traditional Turkic qaghanate rulers.

We can also look at the Kul-tigin's inscription - the part that describes peoples who came to pay homage at the Bumin and Istemi kagan burial ceremonies. The westernmost tribe mentioned there is Onok (ten tribes - living in western Turkistan), but we know that further to the west lived other turkic tribes (like Kuturghurs, Uturghurs, Bulgars, Sabirs and so on). Why weren't they mentioned in Orkhon iscriptions? Insted they mention the people of Bukhara and Tokharistan, indicating the course of Turkic expansion in that time.

Please, do not confuse the Second Turkic qaghanate of Kultegin and Bilge with the First Turkic qaghanate of Bumin and Istemi. They are two separeted political and historical entities, that are seperated by the empire's breakoff and disunity.

[BAWIR$AQ]

Map by Wikipedia admin Briangotts:



Map of the Western (purple) and Eastern (blue) Gokturk khaganates at their height, c. 600 CE.

Lighter areas show direct rule; darker areas show sphere of influence.

[aca]

Maybe I wasn't clear enough. My poent was that even in the description of Bumin-kagan's and Istemi-kagan's (those two are mentioned - not Mugan-kagan) burial ceremonies there was no trace of western Turkic tribes like Kuturghurs, Uturghurs, Bulgars, Sabirs etc. Indeed Avars were mentioned, but don't forget that, at the time of Bumin-kagan's death they still lived in Asian steppes (according to Evagrios), and were insubordinate to the Turks. That's why later Turkic kagans were mad at Byzantines reproaching them for helping Avars to stay out of their control.

In concern to Istemi-kagan, during whose time of rule the Western Gok Turk kaganate was at it's peak, we can conclude that his power in the west reached maybe as far as Volga River, otherwise the King of Alans wouldn't dare to stop his envoys from passing trough. After Istemi-kagan's death Tardu was active mostly in the East, fighting insubordinate khans, so in his time the borders of the Western Turkic kaganate were even smaller.

For example, if Batu-khan's hordes did invade Europe, and reached as far as Germany, it doesn't mean that the borders of his domain extended all the way to Germany. The poent is that the nomadic empires' borders extended only to those regions inhabited by their own tribes, but their hordes could invade much further territories.

In concer to Eastern Turkistan - The Chinese pilgrim Hsuan-tsang on his way to Bukhara (629-644) visited Eastern Turkistan and left us a colorful description of it's petty kingdoms (Kucha, Karashahr, Turfan, Khotan, Kashgar etc.) ruled by domestic dynasties of Indo-European origins, and totaly won over to Buddhism. This indicates that those petty kingdoms were separate domains and were not included in borders of Western Turkic kaganate (although they were obligated to send them tribute) Just to remind you that the same pilgrim notes: "He (Tung-yabgu - the ruler of the western Turks d. 630) held hegemony over the western lands. Never had the barbarians of the west been so powerful, and yet those petty kingdoms remained independant"

[aca]

bawirsaq said:

Map by Wikipedia admin Briangotts:



Map of the Western (purple) and Eastern (blue) Gokturk khaganates at their height, c. 600 CE.

Lighter areas show direct rule; darker areas show sphere of influence.

The only thig that this map shows us is the unbelievable imagination of the man who made it. According to what sources did he come to a conclusion that the Gok Turk kaganate had an influence on numerous forest peoples of Siberia? Just look at that northern border! It reaches as far as half of of Siberia!

Imagine a nomadic Turks riding their horses trough those wild thick forests and expanding their influence to nothing. Even today that area is inhabited by one man per hudred square kms in average. ;D

[H. İhsan Erkoç]

I liked this discussion

" most accurate "?

Excuse me, but what kind of evidence supports that the ancient Uyghurs ruled over all these lands to Volga river?

The link is broken so I do not know which map is that

Khazar qaghanate is closely tied to the Turkic qaghanate. Khazars inherited a lot from the ancient Turks in military, political system.

There's also a strong opinion among scholars that Khazars were ruled by the Ashina dynasty, the traditional Turkic qaghanate rulers.

But it was a separate qaghanate, like the Türgish Qaghanate of the On Oq.

Map of the Western (purple) and Eastern (blue) Gokturk khaganates at their height, c. 600 CE.

Lighter areas show direct rule; darker areas show sphere of influence.

This map is highly inaccurate. It does not include Ötüken, the sacred center of the Blue Turks ;D

Correct me if I am wrong, but the realm of the Eastern Turk Qaghanate did not expand west of the Altais that much (only a few times).

In concern to Istemi-kagan, during whose time of rule the Western Gok Turk kaganate was at it's peak, we can conclude that his power in the west reached maybe as far as Volga River, otherwise the King of Alans wouldn't dare to stop his envoys from passing trough. After Istemi-kagan's death Tardu was active mostly in the East, fighting insubordinate khans, so in his time the borders of the Western Turkic kaganate were even smaller.

If I remember correctly, it was him who sent an army to Crimea to punish the Romans for their help to the Avars.

In concer to Eastern Turkistan - The Chinese pilgrim Hsuan-tsang on his way to Bukhara (629-644) visited Eastern Turkistan and left us a colorful description of it's petty kingdoms (Kucha, Karashahr, Turfan, Khotan, Kashgar etc.) ruled by domestic dynasties of Indo-European origins, and totaly won over to Buddhism. This indicates that those petty kingdoms were separate domains and were not included in borders of Western Turkic kaganate (although they were obligated to send them tribute) Just to remind you that the same pilgrim notes: "He (Tung-yabgu - the ruler of the western Turks d. 630) held hegemony over the western lands. Never had the barbarians of the west been so powerful, and yet those petty kingdoms remained independant"

Well the same goes for Transoxiana too. Bukhârâ, Samarqand (Soghd), Usrûshâna, Shâsh (Tashkend), Khuttal, Khwarazm, Tokharistân, etc were ruled by semi-independent dynasties of Turkic and Iranic origin. They were vallas of the Western Turk qaghans. The area under direct Western Turk control was only Yedisu. But this does not prevent us from saying that Transoxiana was under Western Turk rule. Like how Crimea, Wallakhia, Moldavia and Hijaz were during the Ottoman period.

[aca]

"If I remember correctly, it was him who sent an army to Crimea to punish the Romans for their help to the Avars."

Yes, you are right. The Turks attacked Hersones and few more settlemants there, but like many other nomads, after plundering them they returned back to Asia. So, they didn't stay there to rule the region.

"Like how Crimea, Wallakhia, Moldavia and Hijaz were during the Ottoman period."

I wouldn't compare the Ottomans and Gok Turks because they had totaly difernt way of life and political organizatin, as well as a different army organization (The Ottomans had stationed garrisons: the Gok Turks were nomads). But since you have alredy mentioned that, the petty kingdoms of Eastern Turkistan I would rather compare with the position of Austria to Ottoman Empire. Austria also payd tribute to the Ottomans, but was completely indipendant from them. Ottomans wouldn't wage war against their own territories, but they did wage war against Austria, as well as Gok Turks on the cities of Eastern Turkistan.

I think that the vassals of Gok Turks were paying them tribute for protection and to be left alone, not to be their guardians!