DOCSLIB.ORG

Political Order in Pre-Modern Eurasia: Imperial Incorporation and the Hereditary Divisional System

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Political Order in Pre-Modern Eurasia: Imperial Incorporation and the Hereditary Divisional System Political Order in Pre-Modern Eurasia: Imperial Incorporation and the Hereditary Divisional System LHAMSUREN MUNKH-ERDENE1 Abstract Comparing the Liao, the Chinggisid and the Qing successive incorporations of Inner Asia, this article is prepared to argue that the hereditary divisional system that these Inner Asian empires employed to incorporate and administer their nomadic population was the engine that generated what scholars see either as ‘tribes’ or ‘aristocratic order’. This divisional system, because of its hereditary membership and rulership, invariably tended to produce autonomous lordships with distinct names and identities unless the central government took measures to curb the tendency. Whenever the central power waned, these divisions emerged as independent powers in themselves and their lords as contenders for the central power. The Chinggisid power structure did not destroy any tribal order; instead, it destroyed and incorporated a variety of former Liao politico-administrative divisions into its own decimally organized minqans and transformed the former Liao divisions into quasi-political named categories of populace, the irgens, stripping them of their own politico-administrative structures. In turn, the Qing, in incorporating Mongolia, divided the remains of the Chinggisid divisions, the tumens¨ and otogs,intokhoshuu and transformed them into quasi-political ayimaqs. Thus, it was the logic of the imperial incorporation and the hereditary divisional system that produced multiple politico-administrative divisions and quasi- political identity categories. Introduction Although many scholars consider the emergence of the Chinggisid power structure to have been a watershed in Eurasian political and social transformation because it appeared to have replaced the region’s ‘tribal’ order with a highly centralised state, some still regard it as a ‘supercomplex chiefdom’.2 Indeed, with the collapse of the Mongol Empire, Eurasia 1Lhamsuren Munkh-Erdene is currently a Humboldt Research Fellow at Max Planck Institute for Social Anthropology. Earlier versions of the article were presented at a conference entitled Mongolia in Anthropological Research: Recent Decades in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia, 19–22 July 2012 and at a roundtable held at the Institute for Advanced Study (IAS), Princeton, New Jersey, USA, 5–8 December, 2012. The article in its present form was drafted when the author was a George Kennan Member at the IAS. The author owes a depth of gratitude to the IAS for its generous support. 2N. Kradin and T. Skrynnikova, “Stateless head: notes on revisionism in the studies of nomadic societies”, Ab Imperio,IV(2009), pp. 117–128. JRAS, Series 3, 26, 4 (2016), pp. 633–655 C The Royal Asiatic Society 2016 doi:10.1017/S1356186316000237 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Athens, on 27 Sep 2021 at 06:56:53, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1356186316000237 634 Lhamsuren Munkh-Erdene is believed by many to have reverted to a ‘tribal’-based social and political order.3 Thus, according to this paradigm, the existence of centralised state remained transient in pre- modern Eurasia, if not entirely elusive, and the ‘tribal’ order remained resilient, if not always dominant. However, David Sneath rejects this paradigm as “colonial-era misrepresentations, rooted in nineteenth century Eurocentric evolutionist theory” and argues that: in Inner Asia many of the forms of power thought to be characteristic of states actually existed independently of the degree of overarching political centralization . The local power relations that since ancient times have made the Inner Asian state possible were reproduced with or without an overarching ruler or central ‘head’ ...Itwasnot‘kinshipsociety’butaristocraticpowerand state-like processes of administration that emerged as the more significant features of the wider organizationoflifeonthesteppe...Thepoliticalrelations of aristocrats determined the size, scale, and degree of centralization of political power . The centralized ‘state’, then, appears as one variant of aristocracy.4 Furthermore, Sneath argues “the recognition that stratification and the state relation are not dependent upon a centralised bureaucratic structure makes it easier to discern the substrata of power, the aristocratic order that lay at the base”.5 Thus, according to Sneath, pre-modern Inner Asian societies were not tribal but aristocratic and, their ‘states’, whether centralised or de-centralised or even ‘headless’, were aristocratic political structures. Thus, Sneath views what many scholars see as the state or the centralised state (such as a Chinggisid political structure) “as a variant of aristocracy”, that is, an aristocratic, probably centralised, state. Although Sneath elaborates very little on the origin, nature and transformation of his aristocratic order, his scheme leaves an impression that aristocracy was always present and it is the aristocracy that produces the centralised state rather than the other way round. However, more conventional scholarship maintains that the “medieval Eurasian nomadic tribe was a political organism open to all who were willing to subordinate themselves to its chief and who shared interests with its tribesmen”.6 Scholars of medieval Mongolia mostly subscribe to this view and Thomas Allsen for instance, writes that: though defined in genealogical terms, the lineage and the tribe were essentially political entities composed of individuals whose ties of blood were more often fictive than real. In the steppe, common political interest was typically translated into the idiom of kinship. Thus, the genealogies 3See for example T. J. Barfield, The Perilous Frontier: Nomadic Empires and China, 221 bc to ad 1757, (Oxford, 1989), and I. Togan, Flexibility and Limitation in Steppe Formations: The Kerait Khanate and Chinggis Khan (Leiden, 1998). 4D. Sneath, The Headless State: Aristocratic Orders, Kinship Society, and the Misrepresentations of Nomadic Inner Asia (New York, 2007). pp. 1–5. 5Ibid., p. 197. 6R. P. Lindner, “What was a nomadic tribe?”, Comparative Studies in Society and History, XXIV, 4 (1982) pp. 689–711. Rudi Lindner extended or rather elaborated Morton Fried’s concept of ‘secondary tribe’ into the world of ‘nomads’. In fact, Fried himself ‘found’ his ‘secondary tribes’ among Eurasian nomads during much of their history, starting from Xiongnu down to the Qing Empire. See M. Fried, The Notion of Tribe.(MenloPark, 1975). p. 72. Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Athens, on 27 Sep 2021 at 06:56:53, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1356186316000237 Political Order in Pre-Modern Eurasia 635 of the medieval Mongols (and other tribal peoples) were ideological statements designed to enhance political unity, not authentic descriptions of biological relationships.7 Similarly, Peter Golden emphatically confirms that “Much of the modern scholarship on the Eurasian nomads long ago recognized that ‘tribe’ and ‘clan’ were complex phenomena, involving the political integration, often unstable, of heterogeneous elements”8, while Thomas Barfield asserts that contrary to his [Sneath’s] assertion that anthropologists remain wedded to a genealogical conical clan model, the more common view is that such Inner Asian confederations were the products of reorganization enforced by division from the top down rather than alliance from the bottom up. It has long been accepted that ‘actual’ kinship relations (based on principles of descent, marriage, or adoption) were evident mostly within smaller units: nuclear families, extended household.9 However,Goldenstillbelievesthat“kinship...clanandtribe...musthavebeenthe building blocks on which later expanded and no longer stricto senso kinship-based political structures were constructed” and maintains “that Sneath’s thesis may be feasible for the late Chinggisid Mongol world”.10 Yet, he does “not find it a useful tool for assessing the pre-Chinggisid steppe polities”.11 Similarly, Barfield not only finds Sneath’s model ‘problematic’ for projection onto the pre-Qing period but also maintains that such “hierarchy was much weaker or non-existent among nomadic pastoral societies” outside of Inner Asia.12 In Barfield’s scheme, the tribal order is indigenous, intrinsic or essential to Eurasia while the state is an exception.13 Thus, Barfield boldly claims that: “The tribal organization never disappeared at the local level”.14 Indeed, scholars who subscribe to the ‘tribal paradigm’ seem to take ‘tribe’ as an essential or natural political organisation of pre-modern nomads, although many still see ‘tribe’ as an extension of kinship organisation. ‘Tribe’ for them is a higher level of kinship incorporation, albeit more complex and more abstract, involving many fictive elements.15 Thus, there was no need to look at the origin or genesis of ‘tribes’. The ‘tribes’ were the essential socio- political units of nomadic Eurasia. Thus, we have two different interpretations of pre-modern Eurasian political structure: tribal non-state and aristocratic state. In this article, however, I would like to look at the origin or genesis of the named categories, that is, the ‘tribes’ or the “aristocracy-led named groups”, as Golden puts it, in order to see whether pre-modern Eurasia’s political order was tribal or aristocratic.16 Thus, 7T. Allsen, “The Rise of the Mongolian Empire and
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Khitans: Corner Stone of the Mongol Empire
    ACTA VIA SERICA Vol. 6, No. 1, June 2021: 141–164 doi: 10.22679/avs.2021.6.1.006 The Khitans: Corner Stone of the Mongol Empire GEORGE LANE* The Khitans were a Turco-Mongol clan who dominated China north of the Yangtze River during the early mediaeval period. They adopted and then adapted many of the cultural traditions of their powerful neighbours to the south, the Song Chinese. However, before their absorption into the Mongol Empire in the late 13th century they proved pivotal, firstly in the eastward expansion of the armies of Chinggis Khan, secondly, in the survival of the Persian heartlands after the Mongol invasions of the 1220s and thirdly, in the revival and integration of the polity of Iran into the Chinggisid Empire. Da Liao, the Khitans, the Qara Khitai, names which have served this clan well, strengthened and invigorated the hosts which harboured them. The Liao willingly assimilated into the Chinggisid Empire of whose formation they had been an integral agent and in doing so they also surrendered their identity but not their history. Recent scholarship is now unearthing and recognising their proud legacy and distinct identity. Michal Biran placed the Khitans irrevocably and centrally in mediaeval Asian history and this study emphasises their role in the establishment of the Mongol Empire. Keywords: Khitans, Liao, Chinggids, Mongols, Ilkhanate * Dr. GEORGE LANE is a Research Associate at the School of History, Religion & Philosophy, SOAS University of London. 142 Acta Via Serica, Vol. 6, No. 1, June 2021 The Khitans: Corner Stone of the Mongol Empire The Turco-Mongol tribe that first settled the lands of northern China, north of the Huai River and adopted and adapted the cultural traditions of their domineering neighbour to the south, has only recently been acknowledged for their importance to the evolution of mediaeval Asian history, due in large part to the work of Michal Biran of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
    [Show full text]
  • The Mongols in Iran
    chapter 10 THE MONGOLS IN IRAN george e. lane Iran was dramatically brought into the Mongol sphere of infl uence toward the end of the second decade of the thirteenth century. As well as the initial traumatic mili- tary incursions, Iran also experienced the start of prolonged martial rule, followed later by the domination and rule of the Mongol Ilkhans. However, what began as a brutal and vindictive invasion and occupation developed into a benign and cultur- ally and economically fl ourishing period of unity and strength. The Mongol period in Iranian history provokes controversy and debate to this day. From the horrors of the initial bloody irruptions, when the fi rst Mongol-led armies rampaged across northern Iran, to the glory days of the Ilkhanate-Yuan axis, when the Mongol- dominated Persian and Chinese courts dazzled the world, the Mongol infl uence on Iran of this turbulent period was profound. The Mongols not only affected Iran and southwestern Asia but they also had a devastating effect on eastern Asia, Europe, and even North Africa. In many parts of the world, the Middle East, Europe, and the Americas in particular, the Mongols’ name has since become synonymous with murder, massacre, and marauding may- hem. They became known as Tatars or Tartars in Europe and Western Asia for two reasons. Firstly, until Genghis Khan destroyed their dominance, the Tatars were the largest and most powerful of the Turco-Mongol tribes. And secondly, in Latin Tartarus meant hell and these tribes were believed to have issued from the depths of Hades. Their advent has been portrayed as a bloody “bolt from the blue” that left a trail of destruction, death, and horrifi ed grief in its wake.
    [Show full text]
  • Pādshāh Khatun
    chapter 14 Pādshāh Khatun An Example of Architectural, Religious, and Literary Patronage in Ilkhanid Iran bruno de nicola In comparison to sedentary societies, women in the Turkic-Mongol nomadic and seminomadic societies showed greater involvement in the political sphere, enjoyed a greater measure of financial autonomy, and generally had the freedom to choose their religious affiliations.1 Some women advanced to positions of immense power and wealth, even appointed as regent-empresses for the entire empire or regional khanates. Such examples included Töregene Khatun (r. 1242–46), Oghul Qaimish (r. 1248–50), and Orghina Khatun (r. 1251–59).2 Other women such as Qutui Khatun (d. 1284) in Mongol-ruled Iran accumulated great wealth from war booty, trade investment, and the allocation of tax revenues from the newly conquered territories.3 Through their unique prominence in the empire’s socio-economic system, elite women had an active role in financially supporting and protecting cultural and religious agents. Our understanding of the impact that Chinggisid women had on the flourishing of cultural life in the empire as a whole, and in the Ilkhanate of greater Iran in particular, remains poor, however. The historical record tells us little about the role that Chinggisid female members played as patrons of religious and cul- tural life, especially when comparted to the relative wealth of references to female influence in the political and economic arenas. However, abundant accounts show that female elite members from the local Turkic-Mongol dynasties who ruled as vassals for the Mongols, or had been incorporated into the ranks of the ruling Chinggisid household 270 Pādshāh Khatun | 271 through marriage, played a pivotal role as cultural and religious patrons.
    [Show full text]
  • Climate in Medieval Central Eurasia
    Climate in Medieval Central Eurasia Thesis Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Henry Misa Graduate Program in History The Ohio State University 2020 Thesis Committee Scott C. Levi, Advisor John L. Brooke 1 Copyrighted by Henry Ray Misa 2020 2 Abstract This thesis argues that the methodology of environmental history, specifically climate history, can help reinterpret the economic and political history of Central Eurasia. The introduction reviews the scholarly fields of Central Eurasian history, Environmental history and, in brief, Central Eurasian Environmental history. Section one introduces the methods of climate history and discusses the broad outlines of Central Eurasian climate in the late Holocene. Section two analyzes the rise of the Khitan and Tangut dynasties in their climatic contexts, demonstrating how they impacted Central Eurasia during this period. Section three discusses the sedentary empires of the Samanid and Ghaznavid dynasties in the context of the Medieval Climate Anomaly. Section four discusses the rise of the first Islamic Turkic empires during the late 10th and 11th century. Section five discusses the Qarakhitai and the Jurchen in the 12th century in the context of the transitional climate regime between the Medieval Quiet Period and the early Little Ice Age. The conclusion summarizes the main findings and their implications for the study of Central Eurasian Climate History. This thesis discusses both long-term and short-term time scales; in many cases small-scale political changes and complexities impacted how the long-term patterns of climate change impacted regional economies.
    [Show full text]
  • The Qarakhanids' Eastern Exchange: Preliminary Notes on the Silk Roads
    THE QARAKHANIDS’ EASTERN EXCHANGE: PRELIMINARY NOTES ON THE SILK ROADS IN THE ELEVENTH AND TWELFTH CENTURIES Michal Biran Despite the recent spike in Silk Road research, the period from the tenth to the twelfth century is often overlooked. Even recent studies, such as Liu Xinru’s “The Silk Road in World History” (2010, 110–111) or Christopher Beckwith’s voluminous “Empires of the Silk Roads” (2008, 165– 175) dedicate only a few pages to this timespan1. Squeezed in between the halcyon days of the Tang-Abbasid exchange and Mongol dominion, encumbered by political fragmentation, and sorely lacking in documentation, the years between the tenth and twelfth centuries indeed con- stitute one of the most neglected periods in the history of the Silk Roads. Common wisdom holds that the collapse of the Tang dynasty in 907, the weakening of the Abbasid Caliphate from the ninth century on, and the downfall of the Uyghur confederation in the mid-800s disrupted trade across the continental Silk Roads. With the land routes largely cut off by hostile states to the north, China re-oriented its foreign commerce to the sea. Maritime trade with Japan, Southeast Asia, and the Indian Ocean basin prospered throughout the Song period. In the process, the ports of Guangzhou and Quanzhou on China’s southern coast became home to large communities of Arab, Persian, Malay, and Tamil traders (von Glahn forthcoming). While the vim of the maritime routes is certainly well-documented, I argue that overland trade and cross-cultural exchanges not only endured throughout this period, but were substan- tial in their own right.
    [Show full text]
  • Nomads and Settlement: New Perspectives in the Archaeology of Mongolia, by Daniel C
    ISSN 2152-7237 (print) ISSN 2153-2060 (online) The Silk Road Volume 8 2010 Contents From the Editor’s Desktop ................................................................... 3 Images from Ancient Iran: Selected Treasures from the National Museum in Tehran. A Photographic Essay ............................................................... 4 Ancient Uighur Mausolea Discovered in Mongolia, by Ayudai Ochir, Tserendorj Odbaatar, Batsuuri Ankhbayar and Lhagwasüren Erdenebold .......................................................................................... 16 The Hydraulic Systems in Turfan (Xinjiang), by Arnaud Bertrand ................................................................................. 27 New Evidence about Composite Bows and Their Arrows in Inner Asia, by Michaela R. Reisinger .......................................................................... 42 An Experiment in Studying the Felt Carpet from Noyon uul by the Method of Polypolarization, by V. E. Kulikov, E. Iu. Mednikova, Iu. I. Elikhina and Sergei S. Miniaev .................... 63 The Old Curiosity Shop in Khotan, by Daniel C. Waugh and Ursula Sims-Williams ................................................. 69 Nomads and Settlement: New Perspectives in the Archaeology of Mongolia, by Daniel C. Waugh ................................................................................ 97 (continued) “The Bridge between Eastern and Western Cultures” Book notices (except as noted, by Daniel C. Waugh) The University of Bonn’s Contributions to Asian Archaeology
    [Show full text]
  • ЗО-3-2019-545-567.Pdf
    ЗОЛОТООРДЫНСКОЕ ОБОЗРЕНИЕ / GOLDEN HORDE REVIEW. 2019, 7 (3) 545 УДК 930:39=512.1"11/15" DOI: 10.22378/2313-6197.2019-7-3.545-567 “NATIONES QUE SE TARTAROS APPELLANT”: AN EXPLORATION OF THE HISTORICAL PROBLEM OF THE USAGE OF THE ETHNONYMS TATAR AND MONGOL IN MEDIEVAL SOURCES Stephen Pow Central European University Budapest, Hungary [email protected] Abstract: Objective: An attempt is made to explain why Mongols were so often re- ferred to as Tatars in thirteenth-century primary sources and to offer a new interpretation of how the usage of both ethnonyms evolved over the course of the Mongol Empire’s expan- sion and dissolution. Research materials: Primary sources were used which originated from Russian, Mon- golian, Latin, Persian, Arabic, Chinese, and Korean authors. The Russian Novgorod and Galicia-Volhynia Chronicles, Secret History of the Mongols, Rashid al-Din, the Yuan Shi, and the Mengda Beilu were the most significant in formulating an argument. Secondary literature by leading figures in the field of Mongol history was consulted. Research results and novelty: The main finding is that the different explanations found in primary source texts composed under Mongol governments for how these names were used in the pre-imperial period and for the double-naming phenomenon seem implausible when compared to the broader body of primary sources whose authors were not directed by an evolving Mongol imperial ideology. Furthermore, the various explanations cannot be combined into some workable model for how the double-naming phenomenon happened in the thirteenth century, since they contradict one another on fundamental issues such as whether Tatars still existed or were an extinct nation.
    [Show full text]
  • 6 X 10.5 Three Line Title.P65
    Cambridge University Press 0521842263 - The Empire of the Qara Khitai in Eurasian History: Between China and the Islamic World Michal Biran Index More information Index Abaoji, Liao Taizu 15, 19, 23, 26, 160, 164 Andkhud¯ 55, 79, 149, 152, 155, 156: battle of Abaqa, Ilkhan 163 65–70, 111, 151–2, 156, 158, 159, 192, ëAbbasids,¯ ëAbbasid¯ caliphate 8, 15, 16, 86, 88, 193, 194 100, 125, 177, 183, 190, 192, 197, 205, Arslan (Saljuq¯ Sultan) 137, 166 207, 215 Arslan Khan, Muh.ammad son of Sulayman¯ See also Caliph; al-Nas¯.ir (Qarakhanid) 34, 39, 140, 146, 169 ëAbd al-ëAz¯ªz b. Burhan¯ al-D¯ªn (Burhanid¯ Arslan Khan Qarluq 74, 75, 81, 149, 193 s.adr)183 atabeg 16, 163, 166 Abensi 57, 110 *Atmatigin (Qara Khitai governor in Bukhara) Abish Khatun 167 120, 127, 180 AbuGh¯ az¯ ¯ª 119, 135 Ats¨ªz(Khwarazm¯ Shah)¯ 16, 42, 44, 45, 49, 51, AbuH¯ . am¯ªd al-Gharnat¯.¯ª see al-Gharnat¯.¯ª 52, 118, 125, 139 Administration: Aurangzeb 207 Qara Khitai 102–28 ëAwf¯ª 9, 34, 109 dual 103, 112–14, 130, 210 ëAyyar¯ Beg 54, 55 Liao 14, 20, 103, 113–14, 130, 210 Ayyubids¯ 8 Mongol 121–2 Saljuq¯ 121, 129–30 Babur 207 Afghans 90 Badakhshan¯ 83 agriculture 54, 115, 135: in Qara Khitai Baghdad 7, 16, 98, 184, 190, 207 realm 135 Baha¯ìal-D¯ªn Sam¯ 65 Aguda (Jin emperor) 20, 21, 23 Baidu, Ilkhan 163 Ah.mad son of ëAbd al-ëAz¯ªz (Burhanid¯ Balas¯ agh¯ un¯ 15, 33, 34, 35, 39, 40, 41, 42, 46, 50, s.adr)180 60, 61, 74, 76, 77, 79, 81, 83, 95, 100, 101, Ah.mad son of H.
    [Show full text]
  • Medieval Long-Wall Construction on the Mongolian Steppe During The
    Antiquity 2020 Vol. 0 (0): 1–18 https://doi.org/10.15184/aqy.2020.51 Research Article Medieval long-wall construction on the Mongolian Steppe during the eleventh to thirteenth centuries AD Gideon Shelach-Lavi1,*, Ido Wachtel2, Dan Golan3, Otgonjargal Batzorig4, Chunag Amartuvshin5, Ronnie Ellenblum6 & William Honeychurch7 1 Department of Asian Studies, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel 2 Institute of Archaeology, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel 3 Independent Researcher 4 Oyu Tolgoi Mines, Inc., Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia 5 Institute of History and Archaeology, Mongolian Academy of Sciences, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia 6 Department of Geography, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel 7 Department of Anthropology, Yale University, New Haven, USA * Author for correspondence: ✉ [email protected] The long walls of China and the Eurasian Steppe are considered to have functioned as either defensive structures against aggressive nomadic tribes, or as ele- ments to control the movement of local nomadic groups following imperialist expansion. This article focuses on a hitherto understudied 737km-long medieval wall running from northern China into north-eastern Mongolia. Built by either the Liao or Jin Dynasties, the wall features numerous auxiliary structures that hint at its function. In research rele- vant to interpreting other Eurasian and global wall- building episodes, the authors employ extensive arch- aeological survey and GIS analysis to understand bet- ter the reasons behind the wall’s construction, as well as its various possible functions. Keywords: China, Mongolia, Liao, Jin, long walls, pastoralism Introduction Periodic construction and use of long (or ‘great’) walls occurred in China from the last cen- turies BC to the seventeenth century AD (Waldron 1990; Jing 2006; Pines 2018).
    [Show full text]
  • History of the World Research
    History of the World Research History of Civilisation Research Notes 200000 - 5500 BCE 5499 - 1000 BCE 999 - 500 BCE 499 - 1 BCE 1 CE - 500 CE 501 CE - 750 CE 751 CE - 1000 1001 - 1250 1251 - 1500 1501 - 1600 1601 - 1700 1701 - 1800 1801 - 1900 1901 - Present References Notes -Prakrit -> Sanskrit (1500-1350 BCE) -6th Dynasty of Egypt -Correct location of Jomon Japan -Correct Japan and New Zealand -Correct location of Donghu -Remove “Armenian” label -Add D’mt -Remove “Canaanite” label -Change Gojoseon -Etruscan conquest of Corsica -322: Southern Greece to Macedonia -Remove “Gujarati” label (to 640) -Genoa to Lombards 651 (not 750) Add “Georgian” label from 1008-1021 -Rasulids should appear in 1228 (not 1245) -Provence to France 1481 (not 1513) -Yedisan to Ottomans in 1527 (not 1580) -Cyprus to Ottoman Empire in 1571 (not 1627) -Inner Norway to sweden in 1648 (not 1721) -N. Russia annexed 1716, Peninsula annexed in 1732, E. Russia annexed 1750 (not 1753) -Scania to Sweden in 1658 (not 1759) -Newfoundland appears in 1841 (not 1870) -Sierra Leone -Kenya -Sao Tome and Principe gain independence in 1975 (not 2016) -Correct Red Turban Rebellion --------- Ab = Abhiras Aby = Abyssinia Agh = Aghlabids Al = Caucasian Albania Ala = Alemania Andh = Andhrabhrtya Arz = Arzawa Arm = Armenia Ash = Ashanti Ask = Assaka Assy/As = Assyria At = Atropatene Aus = Austria Av = Avanti Ayu = Ayutthaya Az = Azerbaijan Bab = Babylon Bami = Bamiyan BCA = British Central Africa Protectorate Bn = Bana BNW = Barotseland Northwest Rhodesia Bo = Bohemia BP = Bechuanaland
    [Show full text]
  • ©Copyright 2012 Chad D. Garcia
    ©Copyright 2012 Chad D. Garcia Horsemen from the Edge of Empire: The Rise of the Jurchen Coalition Chad D. Garcia A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Washington 2012 Reading Committee: Patricia Ebrey, Chair R. Kent Guy Madeleine Yue Dong Program Authorized to Offer Degree: History University of Washington Abstract Horsemen from the Edge of Empire: The Rise of the Jurchen Coalition Chad D. Garcia Chair of the Supervisory Committee: Professor Patricia Ebrey History This dissertation examines the formation and rise of the Jurchen Coalition under the leadership of the Anchuhu Wanyan clan during the late 11 th and early 12 th centuries. The Anchuhu Wanyan utilized their political and geographical position along the periphery of the Liao Dynasty in order to consolidate power among the many Jurchen groups of the northeast. It is well established that the Anchuhu Wanyan served the Liao Dynasty as enforcers of imperial rule within Jurchen territory. However, this role as a policing force for the empire was only part of their success in consolidating power among the other Jurchen tribes of the northeast. The early Anchuhu Wanyan leaders utilized diverse tactics to allow them to maintain a dual-façade as both servants and rivals of the Liao Empire. The expansion of the Jurchen Coalition brought them into conflict with various groups seeking to challenge their power. Many of these early conflicts were with rival Jurchen leaders who would often flee to the Liao Empire for political asylum. However, the Jurchen Coalition also had a major confrontation with the kingdom of Goryeo.
    [Show full text]
  • Qjfic (Цгьап Q\V\[Izat\On of 4\Orthern and Innermost a $'W
    ROMANIAN ACADEMY INSTITUTE OF ARCHAEOLOGY OF IASI> LEONID R. KYZLASOV qJFic (ЦгЬап Q\v\[izat\on of 4\orthern and innermost A $'w (Historicaf and ^rcfmeofogicaf Q^esearcPi E d i t u r a A c a d e m i e i R o m a n e -E d i t u r a I s t r o s Florilegium magistrorum historiae archaeologiaeque Antiqutatis et Medii Aevi Curatores seriei VICTOR SPINEI et IONELCANDEA VII The Urban Civilization of Northern and Innermost Asia Historical and Archaeological Research ROMANIAN ACADEMY INSTITUTE OF ARCHAEOLOGY OF IA§I LEONID R. KYZLASOV The Urban Civilization of Northern and Innermost Asia Historical and Archaeological Research H fu otfj'с / С е . Edited by / Gheorghe POSTICA and Igor KYZLASOV S W -M // ГУК PX "Национальная библиотека им. Н.Г. Доможакова" EDITURA П MUZEUL BRAILEI ACADEMIEI ROMANE EDITURA ISTROS Bucure§ti - Braila 2010 Copyright О 2010, Editura Acadeiniei Romane and Editura Istros a Muzeului Brailei, Igor L. Kyzlasov All right reserved Address: EDITURA ACADEMIEI ROMANE Caleal3 Septembrie. nr. 13, sector 5, 050711, Bucure§ti, Romania Tel. 4021-3188146:4021-3188106; Fax: 4021-3182444 E -mai 1: cdacad@ear. ro Address: EDITURA ISTROS A MUZEULUI BRAILEI PiataTraian, nr. 3, 810153 Braila, Romania Tel./Fax: 0339401002; 0339401003 E-mail: sediu(«jmuzculbrailei.ro Dcscrierea CIP a Bibliotecii Najionale a Romaniei KYZLASOV, LEONID R. The Urban Civilization oF Northern and Innermost Asia. Historical and Archaeological Research / Leonid R. Kyzlasov; cd. by Gheorghe Postica and Igor Kyzlasov. - Bucurc§ti: Editura Acadeiniei Romane; Braila: Editura Istros a Muzeului Brailei. 2010.
    [Show full text]