OUR KNOWLEDGE OF INNER ASIAN WISDOM TRADITIONS before the thirteenth century is scanty indeed. Indigenous sources may be reduced to four: 1. The Orkhon inscriptions, particularly the monuments of Kul-Tagin erected in 732 and of Tonyukuk erected some years earlier (Talat Tekin, 1968). Although it is clear that they reflect a tradition of royal wisdom, it is too early to judge whether this was indigenous or whether it depended on Chinese and/or Iranian models. 2. The Tun-huang and Turfan manuscript fragments. These are of uncertain provenance afid date, though they probably belong to the tenth century. The fragments in runic script were originally published by Thomsen (1912: 215-217) and were recently re-edited by Hamilton and Bazin (1972). The Uighur fragment, consisting of thirteen proverbs actually labeled tirk savi (Turkic proverb), was published by Arat (1936: 53ff; 1965: 272-275). 3. The DTwdn Lugdt at-Turk of Mahmud al-Kasgari. The final redaction of this encyclopedic dictionary, modeled after the Arabic lexicons, was probably made in 1077. It makes clear that the Turks were in possession of a large stock of indigenous proverbs. Ka'sgari cites roughly 270 proverbs, several given in more than one variant; also numerous wisdom verses. The unique manuscript of the DTwdn was published in facsimile (Kasgarr 1941), and is cited below as DLT plus page number (according to that edition) and entry word. (See the forthcoming C7ompendiunm of the Turkic Dialects, ed. and tr. R. Dankoff in collaboration with J. Kelly.) The proverbs were collected by Brockelmann (1920; see also Hommel, 1923) and Birtek (1944); the wisdom verses again by Brockelmann (1924: 34-44). 4. The Qutadgu Bilig by YUsuf Khdss Hajib, of Balasagun, written in 1069-70. This is a long didactic poem in the Mirror-for-Princes genre which combines Turkic Inner Asian with Arabo-Persian Islamic traditions. The text is cited below as KB plus line number according to the critical edition of Arat (YUsuf, 1947). The shorter and later (thirteenth century?) work entitled Atebetiil-hakavik (YUkneki, 1951) is wholly within the Islamic-Iranian framework and so is not considered here, although it does furnish illustrations of the process of transforming proverbs into verses, discussed below (e.g. line 328; cf. DLT 514 qan, 554 yu-). Finally we should mention non-indigenous sources. Both the Chinese and the Arabs tended to belittle the cultural traditions of the Inner Asian peoples, with only occasional and reluctant admission of their sagacity. In the early years of the seventh century, the counsellor P'ei-kii advised the emperor that the Turks were really simple and uncomplicated people, and it would be easy to control them, were it not for the presence among them of malicious and cunning Sogdians who acted as their instructors and guides (Liu, 1958: I, 87; cf. I, 194). The T'ang-shu provides a portrait of the wise Tonyukuk (Liu, 1958: 1, 171 ff.) which nicely parallels the self-portrait in his monument (see below). The ninth century Arab writer al-Jahiz, in the course of an encomium on the Turks, quotes a contemporary of his as saying: And if in their part of the world there had been prophets and wise men in their country, and they had happened to think of such things and had had leisure to attend to them, they would have made you forget the learning of Basra and the wisdom of Greece and the industry of China (Walker, 1915: 676). Despite the implication, at least one Turkic wisdom tradition did enter the mainstream of Arab belles-lettres (Dankoff, 1977).