Turkic Nomads Research Articles

Once again about the helmet with golden notch from the collection of the North Kazakhstan Regional Museum

The article deals with a vintage iron helmet owned by the Northern Kazakhstan Regional Museum (Petropavlovsk, Republic of Kazakhstan). The design and decoration of the helmet are described in detail, the dating and attribution are specified, and photographs of the headpiece are presented for the first time under all main angles. Regarding the material of manufacture of the helmet crown, it belongs to the class of iron (steel), by the construction of the crown – to the section of solid-forged articles, by the shape of the dome – to the hemispherical type. The surface of the hoop and the “box-shaped” visor are covered with inscriptions in Arabic, floral and geometric ornaments reproduced in the technique of gold incision on metal. The inscription on the hoop contains verses 255–257 from the Qur’an, Surah 2 Al-Baqarah “The Cow”, while the one on the “shield” of the visor is a prayer for protection, addressed to caliph ʿAli and known as the “message of peace” recited before a long journey or a difficult and dangerous enterprise, including combat action. During the use of the headpiece, the original pommel was removed and replaced with a slightly convex copper alloy pommel. Typological analysis allows us to date the helmet within the 17th – early 18th century. The item could have been manufactured in Mawara’annahr, Xinjiang, or a certain town on the Syr Darya, for a high-ranking Uzbek, Uyghur, or Kazakh warrior. This definition may explain the combination of a solid crown and a hoop with Arabic inscriptions with a box-type visor typical of helmets worn by Mongolian and Turkic nomads of Central Asia. The closest parallels are found in the museums of Kazakhstan. Judging by the traces of repair and reconstruction, this helmet was used for a long time.

TRANSFORMATION OF NOMADIC EXISTENCE

Annotation. When conducting a study of the national mentality of Kazakhstan, it became necessary to analyze the transformation of the society of the Kazakh people since the formation of the Kazakh Khanate and the modern, independent Republic of Kazakhstan. The determination is made on the basis of the perception of information from the surrounding reality by society. This is the division into auditory and visual (oculocentrism) culture of the Kazakh society. This is confirmed by changes in all forms of culture. The world-setting of the Kazakhs is aimed at contemplating nature, the surrounding reality without changing it, but living with it in complete harmony, respecting and preserving natural resources. Cattle breeding was the main source of livelihood. However, there is a noticeable respect for the animal. We know everything about the culture of Kazakhs from oral folk art. Associations arise primarily related to the nomadic way of life, in unconditional creation of libraries, somehow fixing knowledge. Reflecting on this, there is a need for a return, to the determination of the Turkic culture, to the late and modern, the need to speak about the principle of this division. It should be noted that Kazakh culture, as is clear, did not survive these stages in an instant. This process took place gradually, settling on the subconscious side of the human mind. Listening to being by the Turkic nomads opens before us a whole world full of features associated with the perception of reality, and its no less interesting embodiment in folklore. Key words: oculocentrism, transformations, mentality, visual culture, nomadism, determination.

Седентаризация средневековых кочевников Восточной Европы: понимание и проявление

Research objectives: To demonstrate that, contrary to the opinion of many researchers of the history and culture of nomads during the Middle Ages, sedentarization (the transition from a nomadic to settled lifestyle) was neither an end in itself nor the result of a natural historical development of nomadic societies. Research materials: This study is based on a source analysis of archaeological data, medieval written sources, and the works of travelers of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries who described the lifestyle and mentality of the Turkic and Mongol nomads who lived in the steppes of Eurasia at that time. Results and novelty of the research: Soviet researchers explained the gradual but sequential transition of nomads to a settled lifestyle through the methodology of a three-staged scheme: 1) the tabor stage represented by rare archaeological sites in the steppe; 2) the semi-nomadic stage with the appearance of stationary burial mounds and settlements in the steppe, which marked the places of nomadic wintering; 3) the stage of settlement with the appearance of nomadic burial grounds near cities and the deposition of elements of the material culture of nomads in the cultural layers of medieval cities. However, an in-depth analysis of traces of nomadic culture in the territory of the Bulgar and Golden Horde cities shows that they occupied an extremely insignificant place in the general complex of urban culture. Medieval narrative sources indicate the indifferent attitude of the bulk of nomads to cities. The observations of travelers of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries confirm and supplement the information recorded by medieval authors. Historical, ethnographic, and sociological data of domestic and foreign researchers in the first half of the twentieth century indicate that the sedentarization of Kazakhs, Kalmyks, and Mongols was a consequence of the social policy of the Soviet government, which was interested in establishing strict control over nomads. As such, the author drew the following conclusions: 1) the “first stage of nomadism” was actually the migration of nomads in search of new habitats; 2) the “second stage” was the most natural and the only possible form of existence of nomadic communities in the natural and geographical conditions of the Eurasian steppes (those researchers are correct who thought and still think so); 3) there was no “third stage of nomadism” at all, since nomads cease to be nomads per se after their forced transition to this stage.

Interfaces and Crossroads, Contexts and Communications: Early Medieval Towns in the Syr-Darya Delta (Kazakhstan)

In the late first millennium ad , the Aral Sea region comprised two broad cultural zones: in the south the civilizations of Central Asia, in the north the steppe nomads. On their interface, in the delta of the Syr-Darya, there is an isolated cluster of urban sites, including Dzhankent. Fieldwork results show that in the ninth to eleventh centuries ad this site was a fortified urban settlement, but it had a predecessor from the sixth/seventh century onwards. Urban design and finds indicate close links to the southern civilization of Khwarazm, but also to local populations and Turkic nomads. It is suggested here that Dzhankent may originally have been a Khwarazmian trading post, later serving as nomad winter quarters while continuing as a transhipping point on the crossroads of two important trade routes. Location and functions also raise questions about the application of emporia typologies to this case.

CHARACTERISTIC FEATURES OF MARTIAL ART OF THE OLD TURKIS DURING THE FORMATION PERIOD OF THE FIRST TURKIC KHAGANATE

This article studies and characterizes the principal features of martial arts of the Old Turks during the period, when in the Central Asian historical and cultural region, the Old Turkic state entities were formed, including the most powerful Turkic nomads’ state — the First Turkic Khaganate. The authors analyze the data, contained in the medieval written sources, which mentioned available different types of weapon of the Old Turkic equestrian lightly armed and armored warriors. The historical data show that the Old Turkic archers were accurate bows’ shooters. The Old Turkic warriors used arrows with iron tree-blade and faceted armour-piercing tips; the three-blade arrows were equipped with hollow bone balls and roundish holes. The Old Turkic warriors employed spears, swords, glaives, sabers, and battle-axes for defeating the enemies in close combat. For defence, they used iron armor plates, helmets, and wooden shields. The military science of the Old Turks had a significant impact on development of armament and martial art in Eurasian Steppe nomadic society during the era of the Early Middle Ages. Foreign affairs of the Old Turkic rulers during the existence period of the First Turkic Khaganate was characterized by the commitment to rallying of many nomadic tribes within the unified state. This article aims to identify the characteristic features of the ancient Turks during the formation of the First Turkic Khaganate, which contributed to the unification of most of the nomadic tribes inhabiting the steppe spaces of Inner Asia within a single state formation. Achieving this goal has required using the historical references and the methods of scientific reconstruction of the characteristic features of the martial arts of the Old Turks during the formation period of the first Turkic Khaganate.

ВАРВАРСЬКА ПЕРИФЕРІЯ ВІЗАНТІЙСЬКОЇ ІМПЕРІЇ (ДО ПИТАННЯ ПРО ЕТНОГЕНЕЗ ТЮРКСЬКИХ НАРОДІВ РАННЬОГО СЕРЕДНЬОВІЧЧЯ)

This article describes some of barbarians in the northern periphery of the Byzantine Empire. The barbaric periphery of Byzantium in the early Middle Ages was quite diverse. World historiography is rich in research on Western European barbarians. There are still many questions about the nomadic peoples that appeared at different times on the territory of the Dnieper, the Black Sea and the Danube, and their relations with the Byzantine Empire in the early Middle Ages. Oriental scholars research the northeastern nomads separately, while the medieval Byzantine scholars focus on problems related to the inner life of the Empire. The foreign policy focus is mainly directed at the closer barbarians who established themselves in the territory of the West. However, there are many questions about cooperation between the Turkic nomads and romans during the period of their active contacts. Official diplomatic missions between two civilized worlds, thanks to the sources that describe embassies, allow us to see not only relations between empires, but also some ways of life, social structure and political organization in nomad’s states. In the context of the analysis of active contacts between the romans and the nomads, we turn to the problem of the origin of «barbarians»and their contacts with the Byzantines. The ethnogenesis of some Turkic peoples and their migration from northeast to southwest still raises more questions in the world historiography than answers. Our attempt to understand this situation is based mainly on Roman-Byzantine written evidence. A deliberately chosen analysis of the subjective Byzantine view of the origin of Turkic nomads clarifies some confusing situations regarding the researching of intercivilizational processes in Europe during the last period of the Great Migration.

Три сабли монгольского времени с территории Казахстана

Purpose. The article considers three sabers stored in the Akmola Regional Museum of Local History (inv. No. ГИК 2322/1, ARMLH, Kokshetau, Kazakhstan), National Museum of the Republic of Kazakhstan (inv. No. KRUM 802, NMRK, Nur-Sultan, Kazakhstan) and a private collection. The saber from NMRK was found in a destroyed mound in the Shet District, Karaganda Region (Central Kazakhstan). Results. Total lengths of these sabers are: 90.5, 73.0 and 91 cm (including the blade length – 82.2, 66.3 and 82.2. cm, widths in the area of the ricasso are 3.5, 3.4 and 3.5 cm). All three single-edged blades under consideration have a more or less strong curve. The tip of the saber from the private collection has a rib and double edge clips with long pronounced iron ‘tongues’ welded on to the ricasso of the blade. In two cases the ‘tongues’ are decorated with sharp-angled spikes. A rivet attaching the ‘cheeks’ of the hilt is inserted into the hole of the tang blade that is bent sideward (the saber from the private collection has an S-shaped rivet head). The guard has a characteristic ‘boat-shaped’ design. Based on the typological analysis, it was identified that the samples under consideration differ from traditional sabers of the Turkic nomads of Kazakhstan during the Kimak and Kipchak periods (10th – 12th Centuries). Their closest analogues were found on the territory of Southern Siberia and date back to the 13th – 14th Centuries. It is highly possible that the appearance of sabers of this type on the territory of Northern and Central Kazakhstan were associated with the events of the Mongol invasion in the 13th Century and the inclusion of Eastern Dasht-I Kipchak into the Mongol Empire. Conclusion. It seems that the sabers were forged by masters in Southern Siberia and were then brought to Northern and Central Kazakhstan by the Chingizid troops. The small number of long-bladed weapons of the 13th – 14th centuries found on the territory of Kazakhstan determines high scientific value of the considered sabers.

The Tamga Signs of the Turkic Nomads in the Altai and Semirechye: Comparisons and Identifi cations

This article presents a classifi cation of tamgas on petroglyphs and portable items. Tamgas are signs of group identity used by medieval Turkic nomads inhabiting Southern Siberia, Mongolia, and Kazakhstan. We describe eight groups of tamgas found in the Altai and in Semirechye, and compare them with similar signs from other parts of the region. The mapping of tamgas, including petroglyphic, sphragistic, and others allowed us to assess their date, ethno-political attribution, and migration routes of groups with which they were associated. The comparison of tamgas in the Altai and Semirechye evidences close links between those regions. Whereas certain groups of tamgas (combinations of many varieties) were emblems of major tribal unions, others were supratribal markers of social status, privileged clans, and alliances. Certain emblems were dynastic signs of the ruling elite. Dynastic tamgas of the Yaglakar clan are known from sites such as Syrnakh-Gozy and Kuray I in the Altai. Certain tamgas on coins and petroglyphs in Semirechye are emblems of the 8th and 9th century Karluk rulers of the Altai (Chagyn, Taldura, etc.) and central Mongolia (Shivet ulan). Two groups of tamgas (No. 1 and 3) have many derivatives, marking certain divisions of the Karluk federation. An example of a supratribal emblem is tamga No. 2, which shows little variation despite being found in various contexts across a vast territory.

A Central Asian Helmet from the Northern Kazakhstan Regional Museum

We describe a richly decorated iron helmet owned by the Northern Kazakhstan Regional Museum in Petropavlovsk. It consists of a low solid hemispherical crown, a slightly convex plate, made of copper alloy, with an opening for a (missing) tube in which the plume was inserted, a wide iron hoop, and a bipartite visor of the box type. The two last-named elements are covered with Arabic inscriptions inlaid in gold. Those on the hoop are verses from the Quran 2, 255–257, Al-Baqarah — The Cow. That on the “shield” of the visor is a prayer for protection, known as the “message of peace” read before a long journey or a diffi cult and dangerous enterprise, such as a battle. Such helmets were common in Central Asia between the late 16th and the mid-18th centuries. This specimen was likely manufactured in Mawarannahr, Xinjiang, or some town on the Syr Darya, for a high-ranking Uzbek, Uyghur, or Kazakh warrior. This accounts for the combination of a solid crown and a hoop with Arabic inscriptions with a box-type visor typical of helmets worn by Mongolian and Turkic nomads during the Late Middle Ages and the Early Modern Age. The closest parallels are found in the museums of Kazakhstan. Judging by the traces of repair and reconstruction, this helmet was used for a long time.

Среднеазиатский шлем из Северо-Казахстанского областного историко-краеведческого музея

We describe a richly decorated iron helmet owned by the Northern Kazakhstan Regional Museum in Petropavlovsk. It consists of a low solid hemispherical crown, a slightly convex plate, made of copper alloy, with an opening for a (missing) tube in which the plume was inserted, a wide iron hoop, and a bipartite visor of the box type. The two last-named elements are covered with Arabic inscriptions inlaid in gold. Those on the hoop are verses from the Quran 2, 255–257, Al-Baqarah — The Cow. That on the “shield” of the visor is a prayer for protection, known as the “message of peace” read before a long journey or a diffi cult and dangerous enterprise, such as a battle. Such helmets were common in Central Asia between the late 16th and the mid-18th centuries. This specimen was likely manufactured in Mawarannahr, Xinjiang, or some town on the Syr Darya, for a high-ranking Uzbek, Uyghur, or Kazakh warrior. This accounts for the combination of a solid crown and a hoop with Arabic inscriptions with a box-type visor typical of helmets worn by Mongolian and Turkic nomads during the Late Middle Ages and the Early Modern Age. The closest parallels are found in the museums of Kazakhstan. Judging by the traces of repair and reconstruction, this helmet was used for a long time.

Тамги кочевников тюркской эпохи на Алтае и в Семиречье (опыт сопоставления и идентификации)

Тамги кочевников тюркской эпохи на Алтае и в Семиречье (опыт сопоставления и идентификации)

Outer and Inner Bashkirs in the Arab-Muslim Geographic Tradition

The article analyzes the information of the Arab-Muslim historical-geographical literature of the 10th–13th centuries regarding the settlement of two groups of medieval Bashkirs, called “outer” and “inner”. This classification was introduced into Arab-Muslim literature by the Central Asian geographer Abu Zeid Ahmad Ibn Sahl al-Balkhi (between 850 and 934). The reason for its appearance were the reports about the existence of groups representing different peoples, in particular the Bashkirs and the Bulgars, isolated from each other. This issue was fleetingly touched in the works of Russian and foreign scholars, but did not become a subject of a special study. On the one hand, this was hampered by the influence of the long-obsolete Ugric theory of the Bashkirs’ origin, and on the other hand, by the poor knowledge of the original sources and the lack of integrated approach to their interpretation. As the analysis of sources showed, in the 10th–11th centuries there were simultaneously two groups of Bashkirs – in the Southern Urals and in the Black sea coast. The appearance of the western group of Bashkirs in the southern Russian steppes is connected with the war between two coalitions of the Turkic tribes: the Pechenegs, the Bashkirs, the Yadjnis and the Naukerdes on the one hand, and the Oguzes, the Kimaks, the Karluks and the Khazars – on the other. The first ones were defeated and were forced to migrate from the steppes of the Aral sea region to the Black sea coast at the end of the 9th century. After a 150-year stay in the southern Russian steppes, the Pechenegs and Bashkirs were pushed aside by the next wave of Turkic nomads to the Balkans and further to Hungary. Therefore, the classical school of Arab-Muslim geography, represented by such authors of the 10th century as al-Istakhri and Ibn Haukal, began to call the Western group of Bashkirs “inner” and the South Ural group – “outer”. Similarly, mentioned authors divided the Bulgars into the “inner” and the “outer” ones. The first ones corresponded to the Danube Bulgars, and the second – the Volga ones. This classification was based on the so-called “geographical egocentrism”, according to which close objects were designated as “inner”, and distant as “outer” ones. The 12th-century Arab geographer al-Idrisi extended this classification of peoples, arbitrarily transferring it to the Kumans, Russians and Armenians. As he did not find the Black Sea Bashkirs in the ethnogeography of his time, he similarly transferred that classification to the South Ural Bashkirs. Thus, the division of ethnic groups into “outer” and “inner” ones in his work was only a tribute to the old tradition and did not reflect the real historical picture.

Some remarks on the Turkicisation of the Mongols in post-Mongol Central Asia and the Qipchaq Steppe

The Turkic nomads of the Mongol successor states in Central Asia and the Qipchaq Steppe arose from the merging of various Turkic groups and the Mongols. The former had consisted of heterogeneous elements that did not coalesce into a single entity sharing a common identity and historical consciousness. They thus did not constitute a uniform majority in relation to the more cohesive Mongols. In terms of tribal and genetic compositions, the Turkic nomads of the Mongol successor states were closer to the Mongols than to the pre-Mongol Turkic groups. Naturally, they held on to a predominantly Mongol orientation rather than reverting to pre-Mongol identities.

Иранские шлемы «кула-худ» в комплексе защитного вооружения тюркских кочевников Центральной Азии XVII–XIX вв = Iranskiye shlemy «kula-khud» v komplekse zashchitnogo vooruzheniya tyurkskikh kochevnikov Tsentral'noy Azii XVII–XIX vv

The article considers the topic of the evolution of Iranian „kula-hud” helmets, their construction and decorations system in the perspective of their employment by Turkic nomads of Central Asia. Basing on thorough analyze of the sources it was proved that the „kula-hud” helmet type was created on the foundation of the helmets manufactured from one-piece of metal from Near East in high Middle Ages. „Kula-hud” were originally formed by adding a moveable nasal, two sockets at the temples and a sharp spike at the top of hemispherical body. Chain mail aventail was also added. Early variants of the helmets of this type (proto-kula-hud) can be found as early as 16th century and should be linked with the reform of Iranian protective armament by the first Safavids. In 17th century „kula-hud” helmets were spread widely not only in Iran and India but also in Turkic states of Central Asia. An important factor in popularization of „kula-hud” was its relation with other weaponry (archery, sabers) and the tactics of the peoples of the area. The analyze of „kula-hud” helmets from Central Asia allowed to state that the majority of them are the imports from Iran. Part of the helmets was manufactured by the local masters according to Iranian patterns. The modification of some traditional riveted segmented helmets proves high prestige of Iranian armament among Turkic nomads of the area.

Space and Time as the Fundamental Elements of Kazakh World Image

The purpose of the paper: to reveal the meaning of space and time as basic elements of Kazakh world image; to discover the traditional world view of our ancestors in space and time using scientific approach to national psychology and racial memory of Turkic nomads; to show the social and historical roots of applied art. The article considers space and time not only as the main form of matter’s existence but also as perception of the world, sage reasoning and spiritual feeling. The author states that the notion of space and time is reflected in national applied art and explains the meaning of space and time in Kazakh applied art. DOI: 10.5901/mjss.2015.v6n5s2p127

L’invention de l’Asie centrale. Histoire du concept de la Tartarie à l’Eurasie [Rayon historire de la librarie DROZ] by Svetlana Gorshenina (review)

Reviewed by: L’invention de l’Asie centrale. Histoire du concept de la Tartarie à l’Eurasie [Rayon historire de la librarie DROZ] by Svetlana Gorshenina Anna MATOCHKINA (bio) Svetlana Gorshenina, L’invention de l’Asie centrale. Histoire du concept de la Tartarie à l’Eurasie [Rayon historire de la librarie DROZ] (Geneva: DROZ, 2014). 704pp. ISBN: 978-2-600-01788-6. The Invention of Central Asia: The History of the Concept of Tartary in Eurasia continues the line of inquiry started by Svetlana Gorshenina in her doctoral thesis “From Tartary to Central Asia: The Heart of the Continent in the History of Ideas, Between Cartography and Geopolitics,” and continued in a study of the history of Turkestan from 1860 to 1936 Central Asia: The Invention of Borders and the Russo-Soviet Heritage.1 The new book by Gorshenina is an attempt to reconstruct a genealogy of a modern and purely analytical concept of Central Asia, which gained prominence in academic and then political discourse only in the nineteenth century (P. 21). This complex task required the author to turn to history, geography, and cartography in order to identify the spatial formations (both natural and political) that eventually gave shape to the notion of Central Asia, as well as the terms used throughout time to denote these formations. According to Gorshenina, one category of the regional spatial nomenclature had been inherited from antiquity (e.g., Aria, Bactriana, Sogdiana, Serika) or mythology (referring to the space inhabited by the people of Gog and Magog, or the Turan−Iran opposition). Others referred to linguistic groups of the population (Asia Turkic, Iranian, or Mongolian) and “tribal” (ethnic) territories (Scythia, Tartaria, and Turkestan). Later on, religious and cultural unity acquired a spatial dimension (e.g., the worlds of Muslims, Buddhists, Turks, Iranians, etc.), followed recently by economic notions (the Transcaspian region). Throughout the centuries, the lands of what we call Central Asia today have been conceptualized in geographical (Mawarannahr, Transoxiana, and Zhetysu) or metageographical terms (Middle Asia, Central Asia, Inner Asia, and Highland Asia). Finally, the space was delineated by political and administrative units (Bukhara, Afghan/Russian/Chinese Turkestan, Turkestan General-Governorship, Samarkand region, Uigur autonomous region or Hinjan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and Afghanistan). [End Page 580] Reconstructing the social construction of space, Gorshenina coordinates several levels of discourse: scientific vocabulary, philosophical views, geopolitical programs of political or military expansion, imperialist practices of European nations of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, and public misperceptions formed by the conventions of the time and “national traditions” (P. 33). The scope of the research design predetermined the vast variety of primary sources employed in the study: academic and general interest publications, maps, and documents in several languages from state and private archives in France, Italy, Uzbekistan, and Russia. The clearly structured book is illustrated with excellent cartographic material, which greatly helps readers to follow the author’s argument. The book opens with a survey of the first drawings of the lands of would-be “Central Asia” in the times of the Achaemenid dynasty and Greco-Roman authors, including ancient historians and geographers such as Hecataeus of Miletus, Herodotus, Eratosthenes, Ptolemy, and Ephorus. Of no less importance are the views of Arab and Persian geographers, as they greatly widened the knowledge of the region. On the mental map of Islam, the world is divided into dar al-Islam (the area of Islam) and dar al-Kufr (the area of faithlessness), so the spatial identification of a region starts from ascribing it to one of these categories. Under the Samanid dynasty, which recognized the authority of the Abbasid Caliphate and kept Turkic nomads in check, parts of modern-day Central Asia definitely belonged to the dar al-Islam of the Arab-Muslim world. (Regardless of their religious affiliation, the world of Turkic nomads was perceived as a kingdom of the unfaithful.) The epoch of the Sasanian dynasty was the time of the economic, scientific, and cultural revival, evidence of which can be found in the description of East Iranian regions by Arab writers. Their works used the geographic concept of Mawarannahr – “what (is) beyond the river,” which means the territories on the right bank of the Amu Darya River...

Ottoman Concepts of Empire

Empire was never an important concept in Ottoman politics. This did not stop Ottoman rulers from laying claim to three titles that may be called imperial: halife, hakan, and kayser. Each of these pertains to different translationes imperii, or claims of descent from different empires: the Caliphate, the steppe empires of the Huns, Turks, and Mongols, and the Roman Empire. Each of the three titles was geared toward a specific audience: Muslims, Turkic nomads, and Greek-Orthodox Christians, respectively. In the nineteenth century a new audience emerged as an important source of political legitimacy: European-emergent international society. With it a new political vocabulary was introduced into the Ottoman language. Among those concepts was that of empire, which found its place in Ottoman discourse by connecting it with the existing imperial claims.

Victor Spinei, The Romanians and the Turkic Nomads North of the Danube Delta from the Tenth to the Mid-Thirteenth Century. (East Central and Eastern Europe in the Middle Ages, 450–1450, 6.) Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2009. Pp. xvii, 545; 60 black-and-white figures. $231.

Previous articleNext article No AccessVictor Spinei, The Romanians and the Turkic Nomads North of the Danube Delta from the Tenth to the Mid-Thirteenth Century. (East Central and Eastern Europe in the Middle Ages, 450–1450, 6.) Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2009. Pp. xvii, 545; 60 black-and-white figures. $231.Kiril PetkovKiril PetkovUniversity of Wisconsin, River Falls Search for more articles by this author University of Wisconsin, River FallsPDFPDF PLUSFull Text Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by Speculum Volume 86, Number 2April 2011 The journal of the Medieval Academy of America Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1017/S0038713411000649 Views: 14Total views on this site Copyright © The Medieval Academy of America 2011PDF download Crossref reports no articles citing this article.

Kalmak: The enemy in the Kazak and Kirghiz epic songs

After the formation of the Chagatay and Jochi Uluses the local Mongol nobility was converted to Islam and assimilated by the local Kirghiz and Kipchak Turkic nomads. When these Uluses were disintegrated into smaller hordes (Ozbeg, Nogay, Kazak, Kirghiz, etc.), the Turkic-speaking Muslim nobility ruled the newly-formed new nomadic states. The epic tradition of these nomads underwent fundamental changes, and the heroes of the epic songs became the historical or legendary founders of the tribes. When the Oirat Mongols and Jungars attacked their territories during in 16th–18th centuries the Buddhist Oirats became the major enemies of the Muslim Turks who called them Kalmak . But the meaning of Kalmak is broader in the epic tradition of these Turkic peoples: it can mean Non-Muslim or enemy of all kind. The present article analyses the historical and cultural background of the word Kalmak in written and oral sources.

The Nomads and Ethnopolitical Realities of Trnascaucasia in the 11Th-14Th Centuries

The I Ith 14th centuries constitute the unique period in a millennium-long history of Transcaucasia with the emerging complicated and contradictory relationships between the two worlds: the local agricultural one and the incoming nomadic one. Those relationships embraced the political, economic and cultural domains, they were practically universal. Evidently, an indepth research of this exciting problem is a matter of the future. What I would like to do is to dwell upon the processes and phenomena of the ethnopolitical historv of Transcaucasia that would most convincingly show the effect of the nomadic factor in the fortunes of the region. In the first place, I want to underscore the following crucial fact. In contrast to the neighbouring Iran and Byzantium having had long-time close contacts with the nomadic world, the Transcaucasian countries lacked consistent traditions for contacting the nomads. The Transcaucasian peoples Armenians, Georgians and Caucasian Albanians sporadically contacted the prairie-type nomads of the pre-Caucasus the Huns and Khazars; however, those contacts had a limited nature, embracing mostly military and diplomatic spheres. The matter is that in early Middle Ages, the routes of Western advancement of a number of nomadic peoples were located to the North of the Caspian Sea and the Great Caucasus Range, so that only individual groups of nomads occasionally appeared in the lands of Transcaucasia without settling there. Yet, starting from the I 1th century and throughout the subsequent ages, the nomadic peoples chose the Southern routes for their massive intrusions, resulting in new waves of nomads repetitively invading the Transcaucasia to produce substantial effects upon the course of events in that part of the world. Reports by the Armenian and Georgian authors provide a general picture of the shock that befell the local communities from the massive intrusion of the nomads. The contemporaries were stunned by an alien way of life, military tactics and even by the exterior of the nomads. True, the nomads first penetrated into the lands of Transcaucasta as early as during the political supremacy of the Arabs, but that phenomenon was then limited in scale. Still not the least important is another substantial detail. The Arab nomadism is very different from the Turkic or Mongolian nomadic systems. The Arab nomads used to penetrate into spaces unfit for farming rather than to seize the already used lands. That was in the cities, since the area owned by them outside the cities was insignificant.' In contrast to them, the Turkic nomads and Mongols coming to Transcaucasia from Central Asia had had little to do with land tillers or urban life in their home countries.2 Visible in the 11th 14th centuries was a fundamentally new process with very far-reaching consequences. The Seljuk Turks had initiated a practically unending inflow of the nomadic masses. The Seljuks were followed by the Mongols in the 13th century who were trailed by new Turkic tribes. As became clear later, the westward displacement of the Turkic ethnic masses was an incremental process. It is remarkable that the Armenian and Georgian lands were being invaded not only from the East. Weakening of the Georgian kingdom in the 30s of the 13th century aggravated the vulnerability of its Western boundaries. The second largest ethnic mass of nomads was moved from the South. The nomadic Kurds infiltrated into the Transcaucasian ethnocultural world~as mercenaries, and, as a rule, settled in urban areas. Inter alia, some individual groups of Kurds penetrated into Dvin and Ganja just in this way.3 They continued to maintain contact with their vernacular ethnicity remaining faithful to the traditional ancestral and tribal organization. The Kurdish penetration occurred from Northern Mesopotamia and Upper Syria where the revival of nomadism was conspicuous in the 10th 11th centuries.4 Evidently the nomadic Kurds were in the first place attracted by the