Yemek
| History of the Turkic peoplespre–14th century |
|---|
 |
TheYemekorKimekwere aTurkictribe[1]constituting theKimek-Kipchak confederation,whose other six constituent tribes, according toAbu Said Gardizi(d. 1061), were theImur(orImi),Tatars,Bayandur,Kipchaks,Lanikaz,andAjlad.[2]
Ethnonym
[edit]Minorsky,citing Marquart, Barthold, Semenov and other sources, proposes that the nameKīmāk(pronouncedKimäk) is derived fromIki-Imäk,"the two Imäk", probably referring to the first two clans (ĪmīandĪmāk) of the federation.[3]
On the other hand,Pritsakattempted to connect the Kimek with the Proto-MongolicKumoof theKumo Xiconfederation ( kho mạc hề;Middle Chinese:kʰuoH-mɑk̚-ɦei; *qu(o)mâġ-ġay,from *quo"yellowish" plus denominal suffix *-mAk); Golden judges Pritsak's reconstruction "highly problematic", as Pritsak did not explain howQuomâġmight have producedKimek;still, Golden considers the connection with the Proto-Mongolic world seriously.[4]
Mahmud al-Kashgaridoes not mention any Kimek, butYamāk;Kashgari further remarked thatKara-Khanidslike him considered Yemeks to be "a tribe of the Kipchaks", though contemporary Kipchaks considered themselves a different party.[5][6][7]The ethnonymYemäkmight have been transcribed in the mid 7th century by Chinese authors as muối mạcYánmò<Middle Chinese*jiäm-mâk,[8]referring aTielegroup who initially inhabited northwestern Mongolia before migrating to north ofAltay MountainsandIrtyshzone.[9][10][a]
Initially, Golden (1992:202, 227, 263) accepted the identification of Kimeks with Imeks/Yimeks/Yemeks, because the /k/ > ∅, resulting inKimek>İmek,was indeed attested in several Medieval Kipchak dialects; Golden also thought Yemeks unlikely to be muối mạc *jiäm-mâk>Yánmòin Chinese source.[13]However, Golden later changed his mind, reasoning that, as the Medieval Kipchak dialectal sound-change /k/ > ∅ had not yet happened in the mid-7th centuryOld Turkic,the identification of Yemeks with Kimeks is disputed. As a result, Golden (2002:660-665) later abandons the Kimeks > Yemeks identification and becomes more amenable to the identification of muối mạc Yánmò with Yemeks, by scholars such as Hambis,Zuev,and Kumekov, cited in Golden (1992:202).[14]According to Tishin (2018), Yemeks were simply the most important of the seven constituent tribes whose representatives met at theIrtyshvalley, where the diverse Kimek tribal union emerged, as related byGardizi.[15]
History
[edit]In theWestern Turkic KhaganatetwoChuy tribes,Chumukun and Chuban, occupied a privileged position of being voting members of the confederation's Onoq elite,[16]while theChuyueand Chumi tribes did not. A part of the Chuyue tribe intermixed with theGöktürks' remnants and formed a tribe calledShatuo,which lived in southernDzungaria,to the west ofLake Barkol.[17]The Shatuo separated from the Chuyue in the middle of the 7th century. (Another component of the Chuyue, the Chigil, were still listed in censuses taken in Tsarist Russia and the early decades of the Soviet Union.)
After the disintegration in 743 AD of the Western Turkic Kaganate, a part of the Chuy tribes remained in its successor, theUyghur Kaganate(740-840), and another part retained their independence.[18]During theUyghurperiod, the Chuy tribes consolidated into the nucleus of the tribes known asKimaksin the Arab and Persian sources.[19]Lev Gumilyovassociated oneDuoluChuy tribe,ChumukunChỗ mộc côn (< *čomuqun"immersed in water, drowned" )[20]with the Kimeks as both coincidentally occupied the same territory, i.e.Semirechye,and that Chumukun were known only to Chinese and Kimek only to Persians and Arabs.[21][22]The head of the Kimek confederation was titledShadTutuq,"Prince Governor"[23](tutukbeing fromMiddle Chinesetuo-tuokĐô đốc "military governor" );[24]as well asYinal Yabghu,according to Gardizi.[25]By the middle of the eighth century, the Kimeks occupied territory between theUral RiverandEmba River,and from theAral seaandCaspiansteppes, to the Zhetysu area.
Kimek Khanate
[edit]After the 840 AD breakup of the Uyghur Khaganate, the Yemeks headed a new political tribal union, creating a new Kimek state.Abu Said Gardizi(d. 1061) wrote that the Kimak federation consisted of seven tribes: Yemeks (Ar.Yamāk<MTrk*Yemǟkor *(Y)imēk),Eymür,Tatars,Bayandur,Kipchak,LanikazandAjlad.Later, an expanded Kimek Kaganate partially controlled the territories of theOguz,Kangly,andBagjanaktribes, and in the west bordered theKhazarandBulgarterritories. The Kimaks led a semi-settled life, as theHudūdmentioned a town named *Yimäkiya(>Yamakkiyya> ms.Namakiyya); while the Kipchaks, in some customs, resembled the contemporary Oghuzes, who were nomadic herders.[26][27]
In the beginning of the eleventh century the Kipchak Khanlyk moved west, occupying lands that had earlier belonged to the Oguz. After seizing the Oguz lands, the Kipchaks grew considerably stronger, and the Kimeks became dependents of the Kipchaks. The fall of the Kimek Kaganate in the middle of the 11th century was caused by the migration of Central Asian Mongolian-speaking nomads, displaced by the Mongolian-speakingKhitanstate ofLiao,which formed in 916 AD in Northern China. The Khitan nomads occupied the Kimek and Kipchak lands west of the Irtysh. In the eleventh to twelfth centuries a Mongol-speakingNaimantribe displaced the Kimeks and Kipchaks from the Mongolian Altai and Upper Irtysh as it moved west.
Between the ninth and thirteenth centuries Kimek tribes were nomadizing in the steppes of the modernAstrakhan Oblastof Russia. A portion of the Kimeks that left theOb-Irtyshinterfluvial region joined the Kipchak confederation that survived until the Mongol invasion, and later united with theNogaiconfederation of the Kipchak descendants. The last organized tribes of the Nogai in Russian sources were dispersed with the Russian construction ofzasekabulwarks in theDonand Volga regions in the 17th-18th centuries, which separated the cattle breeding populations from their summer pastures. Another part of the Nogai were deported from theBudjaksteppes after Russian conquest of Western Ukraine and Moldova in the eighteenth and early nineteenth century.
Ethnolinguistic Belonging
[edit]According to C. E. Bosworth (2007)[28]and R. Turaeva (2015) the Kimek tribe wasTurkic.[29]
According to R. Preucel and S. Mrozowki (2010)[30]and S. Divitçioğlu (2010),[31]the Kimek tribe wasTungusic.
Josef Markwart proposed that Kimeks were TurkicizedTatars,who were related to thepara-Mongolic-speakingTatabï, known to Chinese asKumo Xi.[32]
Sümer associates the Kimeks with the Chiks[33](who were mentioned inTang Huiyao[34][35]andBilge Qaghaninscription[36]); however, Golden sees little evidence for this.[37]
Legacy
[edit]According to Golden (1992), the Quns and Śari (whom Czeglédy (1949:47-48,50) identifies withYellow Uyghurs[38]) were possibly induced into the Kimek union or took over said union and absorbed the Kimek. As a result, the Kipchaks presumably replaced the Kimeks as the union's dominant group, while the Quns gained ascendancy over the westernmost tribes and becameQuman(though difficulties remain with the Qun-Cuman link and how Qun became Cuman, e.g.qun+man"the real Quns"? > *qumman>quman?). Kimeks were still represented amongst the Cuman–Kipchaksas Yimek ~ Yemek (Old East Slavic:Polovtsi Yemiakove).[39]
The majority of researchers (Bakikhanov, S.A. Tokarev, A.I. Tamay, S. Sh. Gadzhieva) derive the name "Kumyk" from aTurkicethnonymKimak,or from another name forKipchaks—Cuman.[40]
Genetics
[edit]A genetic study published inNaturein May 2018 examined the remains of Kimek male buried inPavlodar Region,Kazakhstan ca. 1350 AD.[41][42]He was found to be carrying the paternal haplogroupR1b1b[43]and the maternalhaplogroup A.[44]It was noted that he was not found to have "elevatedEast Asianancestry ".[45]
See also
[edit]- Kipchak people
- Kipchaks in Georgia
- History of Kyrgyzstan
- History of Kazakhstan
- History of the central steppe
- History of Mongolia
- History of China
Notes
[edit]References
[edit]- ^Maħmūd al-Kašğari. "Dīwān Luğāt al-Turk". Edited & translated byRobert Dankoffin collaboration with James Kelly. In Sources of Oriental Languages and Literature. (1982). Part I. p. 82-83
- ^Minorsky, V. (1937) "Commentary" on "§18. The Kimäk" inḤudūd al'Ālam.Translated and Explained by V. Minorsky. p. 304-305
- ^Minorsky, V. (1937) "Commentary" on "§18. The Kimäk" inḤudūd al'Ālam.Translated and Explained by V. Minorsky. p. 304-305
- ^Golden (1992). p. 202
- ^Maħmūd al-Kašğari. "Dīwān Luğāt al-Turk". Edited & translated by Robert Dankoff in collaboration with James Kelly. In Sources of Oriental Languages and Literature. (1982). Part II. p. 161
- ^Minorsky (1937) p. 305
- ^Golden, Peter B. "Qıpčaq" inTurcology and LinguisticsHacettepe University, Ankara (2014). p. 188
- ^Kumekov, B.E. (1972) "Gosudarstvo kimakov IX-XI vv. po arabskim istočnikam" Alma-Ata. p. 40, 45; cited in Golden (1992) p. 202, n. 84
- ^Golden, Peter B. (2017) "Qıpčak" inTurcology and Linguistics.p. 187
- ^Tongdian,Vol. 200
- ^"Tonyukuk Inscriptions", line 26,textatTürik Bitig
- ^Zuev Yu.A. "Xueyantuo Khaganate and Kimeks. ([A Contribution] to Turkic ethnogeography of Central Asia in the middle of 7th century)" inShygys,Oriental Studies Institute, Almaty (2004). part 1. page 14
- ^Peter B. Golden (1992).An Introduction to the History of the Turkic People.O. Harrassowitz. p. 202.
- ^Golden, P.B. (2002) “Notes on the Qïpchaq Tribes: Kimeks and Yemeks”, inThe Turks,I,p. 662
- ^Tishin, V.V (2018). [ "Kimäk and Chù-mù-kūn ( chỗ mộc côn ): Notes on an Identification"https://doi.org/10.17746/1563-0110.2018.46.3.107-113] p. 111
- ^Tongdian,vol. 199
- ^Gumilev, L.N. "Ancient Turks", Moscow,Science,1967, Ch.20http://gumilevica.kulichki.net/OT/ot20.htm
- ^Faizrakhmanov, G. "Ancient Turks in Siberia and Central Asia"
- ^S.A. Pletneva, "Kipchaks", p.26
- ^Tishin, V.V (2018). [ "Kimäk and Chù-mù-kūn ( chỗ mộc côn ): Notes on an Identification"https://doi.org/10.17746/1563-0110.2018.46.3.107-113]. p. 107-113
- ^Gumilyov, L. (2009)Searches for an Imaginary Kingdom: The Legend of the Kingdom of Prester Johnch. 14(in English; translated by R.E.F. Smith)
- ^Gumilyov, L.N.Drevnie tyurki(1993:380-381). Moscow: Klyshnikov, Komarov i K°. p. cited in Tishin, V.V (2018). [ "Kimäk and Chù-mù-kūn ( chỗ mộc côn ): Notes on an Identification"https://doi.org/10.17746/1563-0110.2018.46.3.107-113] p. 107, 111
- ^Faizrakhmanov, G. "Ancient Turks in Sibiria and Central Asia"
- ^Ecsedy, H. (1965) “Old Turkic Titles of Chinese Origin”, inActa Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae,volume 18, issue 1/2, Akadémiai Kiadó, p. 84 of pp. 83-91
- ^Golden (1992) p. 203
- ^Hudūd al-'Ālam"Sections 18, 19, 21" Translated and Explained by V. Minorsky (1937). p. 99-101
- ^Minorsky, V.F. (1937) Commentary onHudūd al-'Ālamon "Sections 18 & 19" p. 304-312, 315-317
- ^Clifford Edmund Bosworth (2007).The Turks in the Early Islamic World.Ashgate.ISBN978-0-86078-719-8.
Kimak - well-known Turkic tribe
- ^Rano Turaeva (19 November 2015).Migration and Identity in Central Asia: The Uzbek Experience.Routledge. pp. 37–.ISBN978-1-317-43007-0.
- ^Preucel, Robert; Mrozowski, Stephen (May 10, 2010).Contemporary Archaeology in Theory: The New Pragmatism(2nd ed.). Wiley-Blackwell. p. 296.ISBN978-1405158329.
- ^Divitçioğlu, Sencer (2010).Sekiz Türk Boyu Üzerine Gözlemler.Topkapı/İstanbul: Türkiye İş Bankası - Kultur Yayinlari. pp. 87–88.ISBN978-605-360-098-5.
- ^Golden, P.B. (2002) p. 662
- ^Sümer, F. (1980)Oğuzlar3rd rev. ed. p.31, citedin Golden (1992) p. 202, n. 78
- ^Tang Huiyao,Vol. 72"XíchMã. Cùng Hồi Hột ( khế ) bật dư không hồn đồng loại. Ấn hành. "tr." Horse of theChiks,same stock asUyghurs',(Qi)bis', Yumei-Huns'.Tamga(resembles) (character) hành. "(in Chinese)
- ^Zuev, Yu.Horses Tamgas from Vassal Princedoms (Translation of Chinese composition "Tanghuiyao" of 8-10th centuries),Kazakh SSR Academy of Sciences, Alma-Ata, 1960, p. 98, 113 of 93-139 (in Russian)
- ^"Bilge Qaghan inscription"line 26. atTürik Bitig
- ^Giolden (1992). p. 202
- ^Czeglédy, K. (1949): "A kunok eredetéről" MNy, XLV, pp. 47-48. 50 of pp. 43-50. cited in Golden, P. B. (1992) An Introduction to the History of the Turkic Peoples. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz. p. 276, fn.
- ^Golden, P.B. (1992)An Introduction to the History of the Turkic peoples,276-279
- ^Агеева, Р. А. (2000).Какого мы роду-племени? Народы России: имена и судьбы. Словарь-справочник.Academia. pp.190–191.ISBN5-87444-033-X.
- ^Damgaard et al. 2018,Supplementary Table 2, Row 61.
- ^Damgaard et al. 2018,Supplementary Information, pp. 113-114.
- ^Damgaard et al. 2018,Supplementary Table 9, Row 43.
- ^Damgaard et al. 2018,Supplementary Table 8, Row 129.
- ^Damgaard et al. 2018,p. 3. "Only one sample here represents Kimak nomads, and it does not show elevated East Asian ancestry."
Sources
[edit]- Agajanov, S. G. (1992)."The States of the Oghuz, the Kimek and the Kipchak".History of Civilizations of Central Asia, Volume IV: The Age of Achievement AD 750 to the End of the Fifteenth Century.Motilal Banarsidass. pp. 61–76.ISBN978-81-208-1595-7.
- Damgaard, P. B.; et al. (May 9, 2018)."137 ancient human genomes from across the Eurasian steppes".Nature.557(7705).Nature Research:369–373.Bibcode:2018Natur.557..369D.doi:10.1038/s41586-018-0094-2.hdl:1887/3202709.PMID29743675.S2CID13670282.RetrievedApril 11,2020.
- Faizrakhmanov G., "Ancient Turks in Sibiria and Central Asia" Kazan, 'Master Lain', 2000,ISBN5-93139-069-3
- Gumilev L.N., "Ancient Turks", Moscow, 'Science', 1967
- Gumilev L.N., "Hunnu in China", Moscow, 'Science', 1974
- Kimball L., "The Vanished Kimak Empire", Western Washington U., 1994
- Pletneva S.A., "Kipchaks", Moscow, 'Science', 1990,ISBN5-02-009542-7
