No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
On the origins and emergence of the Qaŋlï Turks
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 06 September 2023
Abstract
The Qaŋlï (Qangli) Turks were a numerous people, active in Eurasia in the twelfth to thirteenth centuries, but their ultimate origins remain a matter of debate. Often considered by modern scholars to be a part of the Kipchaks (Cumans), others have different opinions. One of these links them to cart-riding early medieval Turkic tribes called Tägräks, known in Chinese sources as Tiele 鐵勒, among other forms. This article examines the earliest possible (eighth-century) references to the Qaŋlïs in the historical sources, and points to the potential links between them and various tribes seen among Turko-Mongol groupings of the ninth to tenth centuries mentioned in the Chinese sources, such as the Black Carts (Heichezi 黑車子). Another aspect that this article focuses on is how both historical and mythological texts of the Mongol period show the Qaŋlïs to be a people distinct from the Kipchaks. Ultimately, this study, which is based on both historical sources and modern research, proposes to locate the origins of the Qaŋlï Turks among Tägräk tribes.
- Type
- Article
- Information
- Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies , Volume 86 , Issue 3 , October 2023 , pp. 485 - 503
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of SOAS University of London
References
1 For a detailed analysis of this ethnonym and the various grammatical issues related to it, see Histoire des campagnes de Gengis-Khan: Cheng-wou ts'in-tcheng lou: Tome I, (trans) Paul Pelliot and Louis Hambis (Leiden, 1951) (hereafter Histoire des campagnes), 113–14.
2 For the Qaŋlï Turks in general, see Bosworth, C.E., “Ḳanghli”, in Bosworth, C.E., van Donzel, E., Lewis, B. and Pellat, Ch. (eds), The Encyclopaedia of Islam, new ed. (Leiden, 1997), IV, 542Google Scholar; Asuman Dilek, “XI.–XIII. Yüzyıllarda Harezm Bölgesinde Türk Boyları’ndan Kanglılar”, MA thesis, Marmara Üniversitesi, 1994; Histoire des campagnes, 112–16; J. Marquart, “Über das Volkstum der Komanen”, Osttürkische Dialektstudien. Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen, Philologische-Historische Klasse, Neue Folge, XIII/1, 1914, 25–238, at 163–72; Pylypčuk, Ja. V., “Kangly: Pytannaja etnopolityčnoï istoriï”, Sxodoznavstvo 67, 2014, 64–78Google Scholar; Togan, İsenbike, “İdil-Ural Bölgesinde Kanglılar ve Kanglı Türkey Köyü”, in Kemaloğlu, İlyas (ed.), İdil-Ural Tarihi Sempozyumu (Ankara, 10–12 Ekim 2011) (Ankara, 2015), I, 41–59Google Scholar, at 41–54; Yorulmaz, Osman, Geçmişten Günümüze Kanglı Türkleri (İstanbul, 2012)Google Scholar; Plano Carpinili Johannes, Tatarlar Olarak Andığımız Moğolların Tarihi: Bir Papalık Elçisinin Moğolistan Seyahatı ve Gözlemleri (1245–1247), (trans.) Altay Tayfun Özcan (İstanbul, 2022), 88. I am grateful to İlyas Kemaloğlu for helping me acquire Togan's paper.
3 Starting from the Xiongnu 匈奴 period, in Chinese sources these tribes were called a variety of names. Known during the Xiongnu period as Dingling 丁零/丁令/丁靈, they were called Gaoche 高車 (High Carts), Dili 狄歷 and Chile 勑勒/敕勒 during the Tabghach (Tuoba 拓跋/拓拔/托跋) period, associated with the Chi Di 赤狄 (Red Di) of the Antiquity. During the Türk (Tujue 突厥, Köktürk) period, they were known as Tele 特勒, Tiele 鐵勒 and Jiuxing 九姓 (literally “Nine Surnames”, meaning “Nine Tribes”, the Toquz Oghuz of Old Turkic inscriptions). Excluding the latter, these names seem to reflect the numerous Chinese pronunciations of the same ethnonym. Although there are several different opinions on the Old Turkic reconstruction of these names, the one I tend to agree with is that reflected in *Tägräk, meaning “Wheel”, referring to their nomadic lifestyle on carts. Rather than being a homogeneous group, the Tägräk tribal union seems to have included different numbers of tribes over time. The name seems to have become a general term used for almost all Eurasian nomadic peoples, including those of non-Turkic, primarily Iranic, stock. For an evaluation of these terms, including a comprehensive bibliography of academic works on these tribes, see Erkoç, Hayrettin İhsan, “Tiele 鐵勒 ve Töliş I”, in Özer, Osman (ed.), Prof. Dr. Zafer Önler ARMAĞANI (Ankara, 2019), 395–455Google Scholar; Erkoç, Hayrettin İhsan, “Tiele 鐵勒 ve Töliş II”, in İskefiyeli, Zeynep and Çelik, Muhammed Bilal (eds), Türkistan'dan Anadolu'ya Tarihin İzinde–Prof. Dr. Mehmet Alpargu'ya Armağan (Ankara, 2020), I, 30–71Google Scholar.
4 Dilek, “XI.–XIII”, 12–14; Bolat Kumekov, “Kıpçak Hanlığı”, in Hasan Celâl Güzel, Kemal Çiçek and Salim Koca (eds), Türkler, (trans.) Aydos Şalbayev (Ankara, 2002), II, 784; Marquart, “Über das Volkstum der Komanen”, 168; Togan, “İdil-Ural Bölgesinde”, 42–3; Yorulmaz, Geçmişten Günümüze Kanglı Türkleri, 25–76, 179–82.
5 During the Han Dynasty period, the Kingdom of Kangju was located to the north of the Jaxartes, and stretched to the Aral. Ekrem and Kljaštornyj have argued that this kingdom corresponds to the toponym Kängü Tarban and the Kängäräs tribe mentioned in the later Turkic inscriptions. They have also stated that this tribe continued as the Kangar tribe of Pechenegs and that it is possible that the origins of the Pechenegs may go back to the Kingdom of Kangju: Nuraniye Hidayet Ekrem, “Çin Elçisi Chang Ch'ien’in Seyahatnamesine Göre Orta Asya'daki Etnik Gruplar”, PhD thesis, Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, 1998, 161–3; S.G. Klyaştornıy, “Orhon Âbidelerinde Kengü’nün Kavmî-Yer Adı (Etno-Toponimiği)”, (trans. İsmail Kaynak), Belleten XVIII/69, 1954, 89–104; Kljaštornyj, S.G., Drevnetjurkskie runičeskie pamjatniki kak istočnik po istorii Srednej Azii (Moscow, 1964), 155–78Google Scholar.
6 Esin, Emel, İslâmiyetten Önceki Türk Kültür Târîhi ve İslâma Giriş (İstanbul, 1978), 8Google Scholar, 25, 27–8, 186; Aksoy, Mustafa, “Damga (Tamga) Kavramı Bağlamında, Oğuz Damgaları mı, Türk Damgaları mı?”, in Gündüz, Tufan and Cengiz, Mikail (eds), Oğuzlar: Dilleri, Tarihleri ve Kültürleri – 5. Uluslararası Türkiyat Araştırmaları Sempozyumu Bildirileri (Ankara, 2015), 413–30Google Scholar, at 417, 419; Histoire des campagnes, 114; Kırilen, Gürhan, Göktürklerden Önce Türkler (Ankara, 2015), 45Google Scholar; Klyaştornıy, “Orhon Âbidelerinde Kengü’nün”, 103–04; Kljaštornyj, Drevnetjurkskie runičeskie pamjatniki, 155–78; Marquart, “Über das Volkstum der Komanen”, 78, 168–9; Ahmet Taşağıl, Kök Tengri'nin Çocukları (Avrasya Bozkırlarında İslâm Öncesi Türk Tarihi) (İstanbul, 2013), 105–16; Ahmet Taşağıl, “Oğuzların Tarih Sahnesine Çıkışı Hakkında”, in Gündüz and Cengiz (eds), Oğuzlar, 21–30, at 22, 29; Taşağıl, Ahmet, Bozkırın Kağanlıkları: Hunlar, Tabgaçlar, Göktürkler, Uygurlar (İstanbul, 2018), 87Google Scholar, 90, 204; Togan, “İdil-Ural Bölgesinde”, 41–54.
7 Dilek, “XI.–XIII”, 14; Yorulmaz, Geçmişten Günümüze Kanglı Türkleri, 30, 48–9, 63, 88, 93–4, 97, 99. Although Dilek was inclined to see the origins of Qaŋlïs among the Gaoche, she was ultimately of the opinion that they were a branch of the Kipchaks: Dilek, “XI.–XIII”, 14–19.
8 Kumekov, “Kıpçak Hanlığı”, 784; Yorulmaz, Geçmişten Günümüze Kanglı Türkleri, 50.
9 BPN, lines 50–60, Pelliot tibétain 1283, Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris (http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b8305761g); Venturi, Federica, “An Old Tibetan document on the Uighurs: a new translation and interpretation”, Journal of Asian History 42/1, 2008, 16Google Scholar, 1–35, at 27–8.
10 Bacot, Jacques, “Reconnaissance en Haute Asie Septentrionale par cinq envoyés Ouigours au VIIIe siècle”, Journal Asiatique 244, 1956, 137–53Google Scholar, at 152.
11 Gérard Clauson, “À propos du manuscrit Pelliot tibétain 1283”, Journal Asiatique 245, 1957, 11–24, at 14–23; Takao Moriyasu, “La nouvelle interprétation des mots Hor et Ho-yo-hor dans le manuscrit Pelliot tibétain 1283”, Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 34/1-3, 1980, 171–84, at 175–82; Tezcan, Semih, “VIII. Yüzyıldan Kalma 1283 Numaralı Tibetçe El Yazmasında Geçen Türkçe Adlar Üzerine”, in I. Türk Dili Bilimsel Kurultayına Sunular Bildiriler (Ankara, 27–29 eylül 1972) (Ankara, 1975), 299–307Google Scholar, at 301–04; Venturi, “An old Tibetan document”, 28.
12 Yorulmaz, Geçmişten Günümüze, 69–70.
13 Hayrettin İhsan Erkoç, “Eski Türklerde Devlet Teşkilâtı (Gök Türk Dönemi)”, MA thesis, Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Tarih Anabilim Dalı, 2008, 79–83.
14 Takao Moriyasu, “New developments in the history of East Uighur Manichaeism”, Open Theology 1, 2015, 316–33, at 323–4.
15 Pu, Wang 王溥, THY (Shanghai, 1955), 72.1308Google Scholar.
16 William H. Baxter, “An etymological dictionary of common Chinese characters [preliminary draft of 28 October 2000]”, 48, 71, 80; W. South Coblin, “A compendium of phonetics in northwest Chinese”, Journal of Chinese Linguistics Monograph Series 7, 1994, 1–504, at 226, 308, 380; Bernhard Karlgren, Grammata Serica Recensa (The Museum of Far Eastern Antiquities, Bulletin, Stockholm) 29, 1957, 93, 141, 199; Kroll, P.W., A Student's Dictionary of Classical and Medieval Chinese (Leiden/Boston, 2017), 156, 237, 262CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Pulleyblank, Edwin G., Lexicon of Reconstructed Pronunciation in Early Middle Chinese, Late Middle Chinese, and Early Mandarin (Vancouver, 1991), 123Google Scholar, 171, 188; Schuessler, Axel, Minimal Old Chinese and Later Han Chinese: A Companion to Grammata Serica Recensa (Honolulu, 2009), 77Google Scholar, 230, 280.
17 Ju. A. Zuev, “Tamgi lošadej iz vassal'nyx knjažestv (Perevod iz kitajskogo sočinenija VIII–X vv. Tanhujjao, t. III, tszjuan’ 72, str. 1305–1308)”, in Novye materialy po drevnej i srednevekovoj istorii Kazaxstana (Trudy instituta istorii, arxeologii i étnografii) (Alma-Ata, 1960), 93–140, at 101, 127.
18 The sentence in JTS's Account of the Türks is as follows: “Shibi qian qi Teqin Kangshaoli deng xian ma qian pi” 始畢遣其特勤康稍利等獻馬千匹 (Shibi sent his Tigin Kangshaoli and others, offering a thousand horses). From here, it is understood that the title should actually be Kangshaoli Tigin. Liu Xu 劉昫, JTS (Shanghai, 1975), 194A.5153.
19 THY 94.1687; Zuev, “Tamgi lošadej”, 127. Zuev also remarked that this information is available in the records of the eighth month of the year 618 in JTS's Imperial Annals of Gaozu 高祖, and it is referred to in 4.109 of a work whose title he wrote as Tanšu binčži cjan-čžén (Tangshu bingzhi qiang-zheng). I could not find the source Zuev mentioned. The Imperial Annals of Gaozu in JTS's ZHSJ edition does not contain any such information in the records of the year 618.
20 In TD's Shanghai Shangwu Yin Shuguan 上海商務印書館 edition printed in 1935 and used by Taşağıl, 197.1069b, this title is written as Kangli 康利. Taşağıl noted that this is an abbreviation and that its correct form is K'ang-ch'iao-li (Kangqiaoli). Indeed, this title is given as Kangshaoli 康稍利 in TD's ZHSJ edition I use: Du You 杜佑, TD (Beijing 北京, 1996), 197.5407.
21 Wang Qinruo 王欽若, CFYG (Beijing, 1994), 973.11431b; Wen Daya 溫大雅, Da Tang Chuangye Qijuzhu 大唐創業起居注 (Shanghai, 1983), 1.10–11, 13–14, 2.30; JTS 57.2292; TD 197.5407; Ouyang Xiu 歐陽修, XTS (Shanghai, 1975), 215A.6028; Sima Guang 司馬光, ZZTJ (Shanghai, 1976), 184.5740, 5749. Liu Wenjing's biography in XTS contains no information regarding Kangshaoli Tigin: XTS 88.3733–3736. There are different opinions regarding the reading and etymology of the title Kangshaoli. Liu read this title as K'ang-schao-li (Kangshaoli): Liu Mau-tsai, Die chinesischen Nachrichten zur Geschichte der Ost-Türken (T'u-küe), 2 vols (Wiesbaden, 1958), II, 783. Cen thought that the Shaoli in this title is the transcription of Surika, the Sanskrit form of the name Soghd: Cen Zhongmian, 芩仲勉, Tujue Jishi 突厥集史, 2 vols (Beijing, 1958), II, 1134. As I mentioned above, Zuev claimed that this title is an equivalent of Qaŋlï: Zuev, “Tamgi lošadejiz vassal'nyx knjažestv”, 127. Taşağıl gave the name Kangshaoli as K'ang-ch'iao-li (Kangqiaoli): Ahmet Taşağıl, Gök-Türkler, I, II, III (Ankara, 2014), 82–3, 123, 145, 210–11, 217, 452–3. The reason for this reading is that in Chinese, the character 鞘 can be read both as qiao and shao. Accepting the title in question as a name, Togan et al. read it as K'ang-shao-li (Kangshaoli): Togan, İsenbike, Kara, Gülnar and Baysal, Cahide, Çin Kaynaklarında Türkler: Eski T'ang Tarihi (Chiu T'ang-shu) 194a: “Türkler” Bölümü: Açıklamalı Metin Neşri (Ankara, 2006), 4, 88–9Google Scholar, 351. Relying on the fact that the character Kang 康 seen in this title is used in the Chinese sources mostly for Soghdian names, they thought that this name could be Soghdian. However, according to them, the existence of a relationship between the word kangşarlı (qaŋšarlï) meaning “pointed” or “aquiline nose” in New Uyghur and this name is also open to debate. Togan et al., Çin Kaynaklarında Türkler, 88–9.
22 Zuev, “Tamgi lošadejiz vassal'nyx knjažestv”, 127, 140.
23 Erkoç, Eski Türklerde Devlet Teşkilâtı (Gök Türk Dönemi), 128–43.
24 Taşağıl, Göktürkler, 217; Togan et al., Çin Kaynaklarında Türkler, 88.
25 Li Deyu 李德裕, HCYPJ. Qinding Siku Quanshu Huiyao 欽定四庫全書薈要, 366 (Changchun 長春, 2005), 5.10a; Tsai Wen-shen, Li Tê-yü’nün Mektuplarına Göre Uygurlar (840–900), PhD thesis, Taipei, 1967, 56. For the identification of the “Black Carts” (Heichezi) with BPN's Ga ra gang lig, see also Cimo 茨默 (Peter Zieme), “Youguan Monijiao Kaijiao Huigu de Yi Jian Xin Shiliao 有關摩尼教開教回鶻的一件新史料”, Dunhuangxue Jikan 敦煌學輯刊 3, 2009, 1–7; Moriyasu Takao 森安孝夫, Tōzai Uiguru to Chūō Yūrashia 東西ウイグルと中央ユーラシア (Nagoya 名古屋, 2015), 58, 546; Zhong Han 鍾焓, “Heichezi Shiwei Wenti Chongkao 黑車子室韋問題重考”, Xibei Minzu Yanjiu 西北民族研究 2, 2000, 186–92.
26 CFYG 980.11517a–11518b; HCYPJ 6.4b, 8a–9a; JTS 18A.594–595, 195.5214–5215, 180.4678; XTS 212.5981, 217B.6131–6133, 6150; ZZTJ 247.7973–7974, 7985, 7999, 248.8015, 8025–8026, 8032; Ahmet Taşağıl, Eski Türk Boyları–Çin Kaynaklarına Göre- (M.Ö. III–M.S. X. Asır) (İstanbul, 2017), 97–101; Tsai, Li Tê-yü’nün Mektuplarına Göre Uygurlar, 48–50, 235. The Black Carts are defined once in JTS and XTS as a “tribe” or “tribes” (bu 部), while as a “clan” or “clans” (zu 族) once in ZZTJ (JTS 180.4678; XTS 212.5981; ZZTJ 247.7973). The title carried by Ögä Qaghan prior to his rulership is given as Tele Wujie 特勒烏介 in JTS, Wujie Tele 烏介特勒 in XTS and Wuxi Tele 烏希特勒 in ZZTJ (JTS 195.5213; XTS 217B.6131; ZZTJ 246.7949). Since the pre-qaghanal title of a qaghan was different from his qaghanal title among the early Turkic peoples, perhaps the form in ZZTJ could be the correct one. The Wujie 烏介 seen among the title Tigin in JTS and XTS looks similar to the Wuxi 烏希 in ZZTJ; perhaps it is the case that there is some confusion among the sources here. Hence, Tsai pointed out this situation and noted that the form in JTS is wrong, while Ögä Qaghan's title prior to his rulership should have been Wuxi Tigin: Tsai, Li Tê-yü’nün Mektuplarına Göre Uygurlar, 75. There are also conflicting records in the sources about where and by whom this ruler was killed. It is written in JTS's Account of the Uyghurs that the qaghan was killed in the Altai Mountains (Jinshan 金山) by Yiyin Chor (Yiyin Chuo 逸隱啜). However, according to XTS's Account of the Uyghurs, the qaghan was murdered by the Black Carts, with whom he had taken refuge. The information in JTS is repeated in the ZZTJ, but where this information is given, a note explains that the qaghan was killed after he had taken refuge with the Black Carts. The title carried by Ögä Qaghan's successor before he became ruler is given as Tele Enian 特勒遏捻 in JTS and ZZTJ, while as Enian Tele 遏捻特勒 in XTS (JTS 195.5215; XTS 217B.6133; ZZTJ 248.8025). The character nian 捻 seen in this title can also be read in Chinese as nie. Thus, this title is given as Ngo-nie (Enie) by Hamilton, O-nieh (Enie) by Tsai, O-nie (Enie) by Taşağıl and E-nie by Drompp: Michael R. Drompp, Tang China and the Collapse of the Uighur Empire: A Documentary History (Leiden, Boston, 2005), 155; Hamilton, James Russell, Les Ouïghours à l’époque des Cinq dynasties d'après les documents chinois (Paris, 1955), 142, 189Google Scholar; Taşağıl, Eski Türk Boyları–Çin Kaynaklarına Göre-, 100, 204; Tsai, Li Tê-yü’nün Mektuplarına Göre Uygurlar, 49, 185–6, 220. Tsai remarked that the information in XTS regarding Ögä Qaghan's murder by the Black Carts is wrong, and he has accepted the records in other sources that he was murdered by Yiyin Chor as correct: Tsai, Li Tê-yü’nün Mektuplarına Göre Uygurlar, 192. However, Drompp supports an opposite view. According to him, because Ögä Qaghan had taken refuge with the Black Carts, who were a Shirvi grouping, the record about him being killed by Yiyin Chor in the far west Altais must be wrong. As the qaghan's grouping took refuge with the Qai after his death, this Uyghur grouping still must have been located in the east at that time. Drompp, Tang China, 155. It is recorded in Zhang Zhongwu's 張仲武 biographies in JTS and XTS that Ögä Qaghan wanted to flee to Kängü 康居 following his defeat and thus he took refuge with the Black Carts: JTS 180.4678; XTS 212.5981.
27 CFYG 980.11518a; HCYPJ 6.9a; JTS 180.4678, 195.5215; XTS 212.5981. Drompp is of the opinion that the information given in the Biographies of Zhang Zhongwu regarding the qaghan's flight to Kängü is wrong: Drompp, Tang China, 117.
28 For the Black Carts living in the Khingan Mountains, see also Drompp, Tang China, 217.
29 JTS 18B.640; ZZTJ 249.8066; Tsai, Li Tê-yü’nün Mektuplarına Göre Uygurlar, 197.
30 Ye Longli 葉隆禮, QDGZ (n.p., 1933) (accessed through http://taiwanebook.ncl.edu.tw/en/book/NCL-001685037/reader), 25.321-322; Ouyang Xiu 歐陽修, Xin Wudaishi 新五代史 (Shanghai, 1974), 73.907.
31 Hejie 和解 was one of the Shirvi tribes (bu 部/buluo 部落): JTS 199B.5357-5358; XTS 219.6177.
32 ZZTJ 247.7973. For the part of the Account of the Uyghurs in JTS where this incident is narrated, see 195.5214-5215. According to this source, Ögä Qaghan was killed in the Altai Mountains by Yiyin Chor following the formation of the aforementioned alliance (195.5215). According to Tsai, the record in JTS stating that Ögä Qaghan took refuge with the Shirvi after his defeat is wrong and that the qaghan took refuge with the Heichezi is narrated in other sources: Tsai, Li Tê-yü’nün Mektuplarına Göre Uygurlar, 192. However, as understood from the record in JTS, Ögä Qaghan first formed an alliance with the Shirvi and attacked You Prefecture, and he was murdered by Yiyin Chor in the Altai Mountains after his defeat. The fact that You Prefecture is close to Shirvi lands and that Ögä Qaghan's troops surrendered to the Chinese at You Prefecture after the defeat demonstrate that this information is correct. It is understood that the qaghan must have taken refuge with the Black Carts while planning to flee westwards after these developments. The fact that his people took refuge with the Qai and Shirvi indicates that these Black Carts were living in the east. As already mentioned above, it is the case that there might have been more than one Black Cart grouping. For discussions about this issue, see also Drompp, Tang China, 156. Drompp thought that the information given about the qaghan's desire to take refuge with the Dingling was not a realistic expression, that this is rhetoric to demonstrate a parallel between him and Zhizhi Chanyu, and that it was actually the Kyrgyz that were meant here: Drompp, Tang China, 192.
33 脫脫, Tuotuo, LS (Beijing, 1974), 1.2-4Google ScholarPubMed, 69.1077, 73.1220; Karl A. Wittfogel and Fêng Chia-shêng, History of Chinese Society Liao (907–1125) (Philadelphia, 1961), 573–4.
34 LS 4.44, 48, 54, 56, 69.1084, 1086; Wittfogel-Fêng, History of Chinese Society Liao, 320, 349.
35 LS 36.429.
36 LS 46.758.
37 Gülçin Çandarlıoğlu, Sarı Uygurlar ve Kansu Bölgesi Kabileleri (9.-11. Asırlar) (İstanbul, 2004), 17; Wittfogel and Fêng, History of Chinese Society Liao, 106.
38 Wittfogel and Fêng, History of Chinese Society Liao, 160–1.
39 Çandarlıoğlu, Sarı Uygurlar, 16–17.
40 Taşağıl, Eski Türk Boyları–Çin Kaynaklarına Göre-, 98; Tsai, Li Tê-yü’nün Mektuplarına Göre Uygurlar, 75. Here the character zi 子 is used as a diminutive, so it is sufficient to render Heichezi simply as “Black Carts”.
41 Drompp, Tang China, 105, 114, 116, 148, 217.
42 Drompp, Tang China, 217.
43 JTS 199B.5357-5358; TD 200.5487-5488; THY 96.1720-1722; XTS 219.6176-6177. Drompp also pointed out that the Black Carts are not mentioned in the lists of Shirvi tribes in these sources: Drompp, Tang China, 156. In THY's Account of the Shirvi, it is remarked that the Shirvi ride carts drawn by oxen (niuche 牛車) and that these are similar to the felt carts (zhanche 氈車) of the Türks 突厥. It is also recorded in XTS's Account of the Shirvi that the Shirvi ride carts drawn by oxen. The QDGZ's Account of the Shirvi remarks that the Shirvi's carts drawn by oxen are similar to felt carts, but it is seen that the name Tujue 突厥 (Türk) is not written here, perhaps forgotten (QDGZ 26.328; THY 96.1721; XTS 219.6176).
44 Ḥudūd al-ʿĀlam, ‘The Regions of the World’: A Persian Geography 372 A.H.–982 A.D., (trans. V. Minorsky) (London, 1970), 94–101.
45 Zhang Guangda 張廣達 and Rong Xinjiang 榮新江, “Youguan Xizhou Huigu de Yi Pian Dunhuang Hanwen Wenxian 有關西州回鶻的一篇敦煌漢文文獻: S6551 Jiang Jingwen de Lishixue Yanjiu S6551 讲经文的历史学研究”, Beijing Daxue Xuebao 北京大學學報 1989/2, 26–38, at 26.
46 Maḥmūd bin al-Ḥusayn bin Muḥammad al-Kāšγarī, Kitāb Dīwān Luγāt al-Turk, Millet Yazma Kütüphanesi, AEA 4189, 20–21; Maḥmūd al-Kāšγarī, Compendium of the Turkic Dialects (Dīwān Luγāt at-Turk) (trans Robert Dankoff and James Kelly), 3 vols (Duxbury, 1982, 1984, 1985), I: 1984, 82.
47 Yorulmaz, Geçmişten Günümüze Kanglı Türkleri, 39–42.
48 AEA 4189, 609; al-Kāšγarī, Compendium of the Turkic Dialects, II, 343. Pelliot and Hambis considered Qaŋlï given as an anthroponym to be a mistake by Maḥmūd, suggesting that an ethnonym was meant here: Histoire des campagnes, 112–13.
49 Yorulmaz, Geçmişten Günümüze Kanglı Türkleri, 39–42.
50 Peng Daya 彭大雅, HDSL (Liu Jing Kan Congshu 六經堪叢書, 1927), 11a–b.
51 Çandarlıoğlu, Sarı Uygurlar, 25–6.
52 Çandarlıoğlu, Sarı Uygurlar, 29–30.
53 Ögel, Bahaeddin, Sino-Turcica: Çingiz Han’ın Türk Müşavirleri (İstanbul, 2002), 245–74Google Scholar; Yorulmaz, Geçmişten Günümüze Kanglı Türkleri, 50–1, 69–77, 143–8. Pelliot and Hambis noted that the Qaŋlïs were mentioned in the Chinese sources even before the Mongol period. For example, according to the biography of Zhange Hannu 粘割韓奴 in Jinshi 金史, the chieftain of the Qaŋlï tribe (Kangli bu 康里部), named Bögü (Bogu 孛古), renounced his loyalty to the Qara Khitans and submitted to the Jin Dynasty of the Jurchens as their vassal between 1161 and 1189. Tuotuo 脫脫, Jinshi 金史 (Beijing, 1975), 121.2637; Histoire des campagnes, 116. Although the geographic location of these Qaŋlïs is not given, they must have been close to China.
54 Song Lian 宋濂, YS (Beijing, 1976), 123.3039, 130.3163, 133.3238, 134.3251, 3263, 135.3275, 3281, 136.3295, 3299, 138.3321, 142.3398, 205.4581; Ögel, Sino-Turcica, 245, 249–50, 257, 263, 265, 267–8, 270, 272–4.
55 YS 136.3295; Ögel, Sino-Turcica, 245, 248.
56 YS 136.3296, 138.3321; Ögel, Sino-Turcica, 247, 250.
57 YS 130.3163; Ögel, Sino-Turcica, 257, 260; Yorulmaz, Geçmişten Günümüze Kanglı Türkleri, 52. Marquart thought that a simple semantic connection between the terms “High Cart” and “Qaŋlï” is not enough to prove that the latter descended from the former: Marquart, “Über das Volkstum der Komanen”, 169. Agreeing with him, Pelliot and Hambis noted that stating the usage of the ethnonym “High Carts” during the Han period is an anachronism, as this name was not in use yet. They also stated that this expression in YS is not sufficient to prove that the Qaŋlïs of the tenth to thirteenth centuries were the descendants of ancient High Carts: Histoire des campagnes, 114. As Pelliot and Hambis already mentioned, the Qaŋlïs are also found in YS as Kangli 康禮. This form of the ethnonym is in a passage regarding Qaŋlï Guards (Kangli Wei 康禮衞) serving in the Mongol armies of China (YS 99.2528; Histoire des campagnes, 114).
58 YS 121.2976, 122.3008; Histoire des campagnes, 115. It is noted in YS that Hangjin 杭斤 is a different translation of Kangli 康里 (YS 122.3018).
59 YS 120.2970.
60 HDSL 11a.
61 HDSL 11b.
62 The Secret History of the Mongols [SHM], (trans.) Igor de Rachewiltz, 2 vols (Leiden, 2004), I, 126. While listing the regions inhabited by the Naimans, Rašīd al-Dīn Faḍlullāh-i Hamadānī stated in his Jāmiʿ al-Tavārīχ that they lived at Kök Irtysh together with the Qaŋlïs: Rašīd al-Dīn Faḍlullāh-i Hamadānī, Jāmiʿ al-Tavārīχ, (eds) Muḥammad Rūšan and Muṣṭafā Mūsavī, 4 vols (Tahrān, 1373), I, 126; Fazlullah, Rashiduddin, Jami‘u't-Tawarikh: Compendium of Chronicles: A History of the Mongols (trans. W. M. Thackston), 3 vols (Harvard, 1998–1999), I: 1998Google Scholar, 68.
63 The Secret History of the Mongols, I, 194, 201. See also Histoire des campagnes, 114.
64 The Secret History of the Mongols, I, 205. See also Histoire des campagnes, 114.
65 Ioannes de Plano Carpini 7.3. See also Plano Carpinili Johannes, Tatarlar Olarak Andığımız Moğolların Tarihi, 88; Beazley, C. Raymond (ed.), The Texts and Versions of John de Plano Carpini and William de Rubruquis as Printed for the First Time by Hakluyt in 1598 Together With Some Shorter Pieces (London, 1903), 68Google Scholar; Histoire des campagnes, 114; Marquart, “Über das Volkstum der Komanen”, 79.
66 C. de Bridia section 34. See also C. de Bridia, “The Tartar relation”, in The Vinland Map and the Tartar Relation, (trans.) George D. Painter (New Haven, 1966), 19–106, at 85–6.
67 C. de Bridia section 20. See also de Bridia, “The Tartar relation”, 72–3. Painter erroneously matched the Qaŋlïs with Pechenegs: de Bridia, “The Tartar relation”, 72. The same error was made by some scholars in the nineteenth century as well, and Marquart demonstrated that this was wrong: Marquart, “Über das Volkstum der Komanen”, 79, 168.
68 C. de Bridia section 25. See also de Bridia, “The Tartar relation”, 78–9.
69 Ioannes de Plano Carpini 9.5. See also Plano Carpinili Johannes, Tatarlar Olarak Andığımız Moğolların Tarihi, 112; Beazley (ed.), The Texts and Versions of John de Plano Carpini and William de Rubruquis, 74, 96–7, 132–3.
70 Willelmus de Rubruc 18.4. See also Michel, Francisque and Wright, Thomas, “Voyage en Orient du Frère Guillaume de Rubruk”, in d'Avezac-Macaya, M.A.P. (ed.), Recueil de Voyages et de Mémoires, (Paris, 1839), IVGoogle Scholar, 205–396, at 265; Beazley (ed.), The Texts and Versions of John de Plano Carpini and William de Rubruquis, 170, 216; Peter Jackson and David Morgan (eds), The Mission of Friar William of Rubruck: His Journey to the Court of the Great Khan Möngke 1253–1255, (trans.) Peter Jackson (London, 1990), 128; Marquart, “Über das Volkstum der Komanen”, 79; Histoire des campagnes, 113. The information regarding Cuman being the other name for the Qaŋlïs does not exist in Hakluyt's edition and translation. Here, it is only recorded that a people named Qaŋlïs lived in the aforementioned region prior to the Mongols. This information about Cuman being the other name of the Qaŋlïs is in William's Latin edition by Michel-Wright, and it must also be in Van den Wyngaert's edition used by Jackson which I could not access.
71 Willelmus de Rubruc 20.7. See also Michel and Wright, “Voyage en Orient du Frère Guillaume de Rubruk”, 274; Beazley (ed.), The Texts and Versions of John de Plano Carpini and William de Rubruquis, 174, 222; Jackson and Morgan (eds), The Mission of Friar William of Rubruquis, 137. Yorulmaz also mentioned the records about the Qaŋlïs and Cumans seen in John of Plano Carpini, Benedykt Polak (Benedictus Polonus) and William of Rubruck: Yorulmaz, Geçmişten Günümüze Kanglı Türkleri, 85–6.
72 The reading qaŋa and Qaŋaluγ belongs to Ağca; Danka reads them as qanq˚ and qanq˚luɣ.
73 This name corresponds to the plural form of Jurčen (Jurchen).
74 Supplément turc 1001, lines 257–88, Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris (https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b84150175.image); Ağca, Ferruh, Uygur Harfli Oğuz Kağan Destanı: Metin-Aktarma-Notlar-Dizin-Tıpkıbasım (Ankara, 2019), 121Google Scholar, 123, 125, 127; Danka, Balázs, The ‘Pagan’ Oɣuz-nāmä: A Philological and Linguistic Analysis (Wiesbaden, 2019), 109–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
75 Fazlullah, Jami‘u't-Tawarikh, I, 30. For the text's Persian edition, see Hamadānī, Jāmiʿ al-Tavārīχ, I, 52–3. For Togan's Turkish translation, see Oğuz Destanı: Reşideddin Oğuznâmesi, Tercüme ve Tahlili, (trans.) A. Zeki Velidî Togan (İstanbul, 1972), 20. Barmaqlïγ Čosun Billig, who is mentioned in the Uyghur script version of Legend of Oghuz Qaghan, can also be seen in Togan's translation of Rašīd al-Dīn. According to this narrative, when Oghuz Khan reached Darband on the Caspian coast during a campaign, he loaded the booty he had acquired through the campaign on carts and had it sent home. The commander of Qaŋlï unit who transferred the booty was this aforementioned person (Oğuz Destanı, 27–8).
76 This is my English translation based on Kargı Ölmez's edition. Ebulgazi Bahadır Han, Şecere-i Terākime (Türkmenlerin Soykütüğü), (ed.) Zuhal Kargı Ölmez (Ankara, 1996), 237–8.
77 Supplément turc 1001, lines 201, 214, 246, 255, 286–287; Ağca, Uygur Harfli Oğuz Kağan Destanı, 109, 111, 119, 121, 127; Danka, The ‘Pagan’ Oɣuz-nāmä, 97, 99, 107, 109, 115. Contrary to Rašīd al-Dīn and Abū al-Γāzī, the Uyghurs are not counted in this list. However, according to the legend, Oghuz Qaghan described himself as the qaghan of the Uyghurs (Uyγur-nïŋ qaγanï). Supplément turc 1001, line 106; Ağca, Uygur Harfli Oğuz Kağan Destanı, 87; Danka, The ‘Pagan’ Oɣuz-nāmä, 75. For me, the reason for the lack of Uyghur among the people given names by Oghuz Qaghan in the Uyghur script version of the legend might be because of this. Besides, Slav is not listed among the people bestowed with names by Oghuz Khan in the legend's Islamic versions. According to Abū al-Γāzī, Saqlap is one of the eight sons of Yāfäs (Japheth) son of Nūḥ (Noah), and the brother of Türk: Ebulgazi Bahadır Han, Şecere-i Terākime, 118, 234.
78 Oğuz Destanı, 20, 26, 45–7; Hamadānī, Jāmiʿ al-Tavārīχ, I, 52–4; Fazlullah, Jami‘u't-Tawarikh, I, 30–1.
79 Hamadānī, Jāmiʿ al-Tavārīχ, I, 40; Fazlullah, Jami‘u't-Tawarikh, I, 24.
80 Hamadānī, Jāmiʿ al-Tavārīχ, I, 42, 48; Fazlullah, Jami‘u't-Tawarikh, I, 25, 27. The Aghachäris are not mentioned in the second place where Rašīd al-Dīn gave this information.
81 Han, Şecere-i Terākime, 129, 132, 134, 139, 141, 237–8, 240–1.