DOCSLIB.ORG

Kara-Khitan Khanate (Western Liao)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Kara-Khitan Khanate (Western Liao) 1 Kara-Khitan Khanate domain, Turks (Uyghurs included), Iranians, Mongols, and a few Han Chinese. While most (Western Liao) of the populace was sedentary and Muslim, there was an appreciable nomadic component MICHAL BIRAN (led by the Khitans themselves) as well as The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel flourishing Buddhist, Nestorian, and Jewish The Kara-Khitan Khanate ruled in Central communities. Asia (1124–1218) up to the Mongol conquest. The most striking characteristic of the The multicultural empire combined Chinese, Kara-Khitans is that they retained their Inner-Asian, and Islamic elements, a blend Chinese trappings (symbols of rulership and that served as a precedent for Mongol rule. vassalage; Chinese language) even in Central Due to the lack of internal sources, the history Asia. These were retained because they of this polity must be culled from a variety of contributed to the legitimation of the dynasty Chinese, Persian, and Arabic sources written among its diverse subjects, including their mainly by its neighbors, combined with very substantial Muslim population, among few archaeological findings. which China was closely associated with The dynasty was established by Liao fugi- notions of grandeur and prestige. Moreover, tives who escaped from north China when the institutional means embedded in the Chi- – the Liao dynasty (907–1125) was overthrown nese Liao tradition, such as the elevated posi- by the Manchurian Jurchens. Led by a Khitan tion of the emperor and the nomination of prince, Yelü Dashi, they chose to migrate successors, helped in overcoming one of the – westwards, hoping to return subsequently most pressing problems in nomadic states and restore the Liao in its former domains. succession struggles. In a little more than a decade Dashi set up Despite the retaining of the dynasty’s name a new empire in Central Asia that was known and the Liao Chinese trappings – as well as there as the Kara-Khitan (Qara Khitai; Khi- the Khitan identity makers, such as language, tan: the Liao Khitans, not the Black Khitans scripts, shamanic rituals, nomadic way of life, as previously thought – see Kane 2015) and and the high position of women (two out of in China as Xi Liao – the Western Liao. the dynasty’s five emperors were women, The dynasty persisted for nearly ninety years, who ruled in their own right!) – Kara-Khitan and was finally vanquished by the Mongols rule was quite different from the original Liao in 1218. version, mainly in its lesser degree of central- At its height, after concluding their con- ism: most of the Kara-Khitan realm was quests in 1142, the Kara-Khitan empire administrated indirectly and in a rather mini- stretched from the Oxus River in Uzbekistan malistic way: the local dynasties – most to the Altai Mountains on the Chinese– important among them the Eastern and Mongolian border, and until 1175, even fur- Western Karakhanids and the Gaochang ther east into the Naiman and the Yenisei Uyghurs – mainly maintained their rulers, Kirghiz territories. The multi-ethnic empire titles, and armies and no permanent Kara- included, besides the Khitans, who consti- Khitan army was stationed in the subject tuted but a small minority in their own territories. The subject kingdoms and tribes The Encyclopedia of Empire, First Edition. Edited by John M. MacKenzie. © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Published 2016 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. DOI: 10.1002/9781118455074.wbeoe157 2 were expected to provide annual taxes and escaped from Chinggis Khan into the Gür- send auxiliary troops when required. In some khan’s court. The latter – threatened by the rise cases the Kara-Khitans stationed commis- of his former vassal the Khwarazm shah and – sioners (Persian: shih˙ na, Chinese: shaojian) the turmoil in Mongolia welcomed Güchü- in the subject territories to supervise the lüg, and gave him his daughter in marriage. tax payments, but other regions (e.g., the In 1211, however, Güchülüg usurped the vassal Khwarazm) were only expected to throne, enforced an anti-Islamic policy, and submit annual tribute to the Kara-Khitan eventually brought the Mongol troops to Cen- emissaries or directly to their court. The tral Asia. In 1218 Chinggis Khan’s generals multi-ethnic and multilingual administration killed Güchülüg and annexed the Kara-Khitan also included Turkic and Persian elements, realm into the Mongol Empire. A scion of the such as the use of Turkic and Persian lan- royal family, Baraq Hajib, later established a guages and titles side by side with Chinese successor Muslim state in Kirman, in southern and Khitan. Even the ruler’s title, Gürkhan Iran. The Kara-Khitan of Kirman persisted for (universal khan), was a hybrid Khitan–Turkic nearly another century (1222–1307), as a title. Despite this, and in sharp contrast to vassal of the Mongols and then the Ilkhans, both their predecessors and their successors who eventually subjugated the province to in Central Asia, throughout their rule the their direct rule. Kara-Khitan subjects, espe- Kara-Khitans did not embrace Islam, the cially Muslims and Uyghurs, played important dominant religion in their new environment. roles in the Mongol Empire, and the shihna Instead they constructed their identity and was a precedent for the Mongol governors legitimacy on the combination of the com- (darughachi). mon nomadic political tradition and the pres- tige of China in Muslim Central Asia. SEE ALSO: Karakhanid Khanate; Khitan (Liao) Most of the Kara-Khitan period was an era Empire; Khwarazmian Empire; Mongol of relative stability and prosperity as well as Empire, Great of growing urbanization in Central Asia, despite the rulers’ nomadism. This, combined REFERENCE with the Kara-Khitans’ broad religious toler- ance, their shrewd use of their Chinese and Kane, D. 2015. “The Great Central Liao Kitan ” nomadic cultural capital, and their mostly State. Journal of Song-Yuan Studies, 43 (special indirect rule, enabled harmonious relations issue). between the Muslim subjects and their infidel rulers and prompted thriving intellectual FURTHER READING activity, both religious and scientific. By the Biran, M. 2005. The Qara Khitai Empire in Eura- late 12th century, however, this balance began sian History: Between China and the Islamic to change due to the weakening of the Western World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Liao royal house and external upheavals. In Wei Liangtao. 2010. Kalahan wang chao shi, Xi 1208 the Naiman prince Güchülüg (Kuchlug) Liao shi. Beijing: Renmin chubanshe..
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]
  • TURKIC POLITICAL HISTORY Early Postclassical (Pre-Islamic) Period
    HUMANITIES INSTITUTE Richard Dietrich, Ph.D. TURKIC POLITICAL HISTORY Early Postclassical (Pre-Islamic) Period Contents Part I : Overview Part II : Government Part III : Military OVERVIEW The First Türk Empire (552-630) The earliest mention of the Türks is found in 6th century Chinese sources in reference to the establishment of the first Türk empire. In Chinese sources they are called T’u-chüeh (突厥, pinyin Tūjué, and probably pronounced tʰuot-küot in Middle Chinese), but refer to themselves in the 7th - 8th century Orkhon inscriptions written in Old Turkic as Türük (��ఇ఼�� ) or Kök Türük (�� �ఇ �� :�� �ఇ �఼ �� ). In 552 the Türks emerged as a political power on the eastern steppe when, under the leadership of Bumin (T’u-men in the Chinese sources) from the Ashina clan of the Gök Türks, they revolted against and overthrew the Juan-juan Empire (pinyin Róurán) that had been the most significant power in that region for the previous century and a half. After defeating the Juan-juan and taking their territories, Bumin took the title of kaghan, supreme leader, while his brother Istemi (also Istämi or Ishtemi, r. 552-576) became the yabghu, a title indicating his subordinate status. Bumin was the senior leader, ruling the eastern territories of the empire, while Istemi ruled the western territories. Bumin died in 553, was briefly followed by his son followed by his son Kuo-lo (Qara?), and then by another of his sons, Muhan (or Muqan, r. 553-572). In the following decades Istemi and Muhan extended their rule over the Kitan in Manchuria, the Kirghiz tribes in the Yenisei region, and destroyed the Hephthalite Empire in a joint effort with the Sasanians.
    [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]
  • Inner Asian States and Empires: Theories and Synthesis
    J Archaeol Res DOI 10.1007/s10814-011-9053-2 Inner Asian States and Empires: Theories and Synthesis J. Daniel Rogers Ó Springer Science+Business Media, LLC (outside the USA) 2011 Abstract By 200 B.C. a series of expansive polities emerged in Inner Asia that would dominate the history of this region and, at times, a very large portion of Eurasia for the next 2,000 years. The pastoralist polities originating in the steppes have typically been described in world history as ephemeral or derivative of the earlier sedentary agricultural states of China. These polities, however, emerged from local traditions of mobility, multiresource pastoralism, and distributed forms of hierarchy and administrative control that represent important alternative path- ways in the comparative study of early states and empires. The review of evidence from 15 polities illustrates long traditions of political and administrative organi- zation that derive from the steppe, with Bronze Age origins well before 200 B.C. Pastoralist economies from the steppe innovated new forms of political organization and were as capable as those based on agricultural production of supporting the development of complex societies. Keywords Empires Á States Á Inner Asia Á Pastoralism Introduction The early states and empires of Inner Asia played a pivotal role in Eurasian history, with legacies still evident today. Yet, in spite of more than 100 years of scholarly contributions, the region remains a relatively unknown heartland (Di Cosmo 1994; Hanks 2010; Lattimore 1940; Mackinder 1904). As pivotal as the history of Inner Asia is in its own right, it also holds special significance for how we interpret complex societies on a global basis.
    [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]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Alien Rule Liao, Jin, and Yuan Dynasties 907-1368
    Alien Rule Liao, Jin, and Yuan Dynasties 907-1368 Alien Rule The Song dynasty defeated by the Mongols in 1276. Alien Rule Mongolian Steppe Alien Rule Khitan were the first major nomadic tribe with which China had to deal. Abaoji created the Liao dynasty. The Jurchens lead by Aguda founded the Jin dynasty, ousted the Khitans and then went after the Song dynasty. Chinggis Khan unites the Mongol tribes, and then he goes off to conquer the world. Alien Rule Expansion of Liao Dynasty 907 to 960 Alien Rule Examples of Mongol warriors Alien Rule Chinggis Khan (ca. 1162-1227) was extremely aggressive in making war with massive areas surrounding Mongolia. You would be given an option to be with him or else…. It is estimated that nearly 20 million Asian share Chinggis’ Y-chromosome pattern because of his alleged policy of impregnating of conquered women. Two interviews with people looking for Chinggis Khan’s burial site: •http://www.wolverton- mountain.com/interviews/people/woods.htm •http://www.wolverton- mountain.com/interviews/people/maury__kratvitz.htm Chinggis Khan Alien Rule Khubilai named his dynasty, Yuan. He succeeded in conquering the Song dynasty with the help of a massive river siege. Khubilai Khan Alien Rule Life in China Under Alien Rule • Mongols didn’t force a new culture on the Chinese. It was a laissez faire attitude paralleling the way the north dealt with new ideas. • However, life for the ordinary peasant was often harsh—especially taxes. • Massive inflation resulted. • On the brighter side, the Mongols reunited the north and south. • The Mongol societal caste system was very elaborate with each level treated differently than the ones above or below.
    [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]
  • The Jin Revisited: New Assessment of Jurchen Emperors 345
    7KH-LQ5HYLVLWHG1HZ$VVHVVPHQWRI-XUFKHQ(PSHURUV -XOLD6FKQHLGHU Journal of Song-Yuan Studies, Volume 41, 2011, pp. 343-404 (Article) 3XEOLVKHGE\7KH6RFLHW\IRU6RQJ<XDQDQG&RQTXHVW'\QDVW\ 6WXGLHV DOI: 10.1353/sys.2011.0030 For additional information about this article http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/sys/summary/v041/41.schneider.html Access provided by Universiteit Gent (6 Mar 2015 14:53 GMT) The Jin Revisited: N e w A s s e s s m e n t o f J u r c h e n E m p e r o r s Julia Schneider ghent university In scholarship specializing in the Jurchen (Nüzhen 女真 or Nüzhi 女 直)1 Jin dynasty (1115–1234), the prevailing trend is to draw certain lines be- tween the imperial reign times. The earlier Jin emperors beginning with the second, Taizong 太宗 (r. 1123–1134),2 Xizong 熙宗 (r. 1135–50)3 and Hai ling wang 海陵王 (r. 1150–61)4 are labelled as ‘sinicized’ emperors.5 The fifth, Shizong 世宗 (r. 1161–89),6 is seen as the emperor who tried to resist this sinicization by initiating a Jurchen ‘revival’ or ‘nativistic movement.’7 However, . 1 In modern academic literature the Chinese name of the Jurchen is mostly given as Nüzhen, but in older sources like the Jinshi Nüzhi is used more often. 2. Jurchen name Wuqimai 吳乞買. 3. Jurchen name Digunai 迪古乃. 4. Jurchen name Hela 合剌. 5. A family tree of the Jurchen emperors appears at the end of this article. 6. Jurchen name Wulu 烏祿. 7. The term ‘nativist movement’ is also used.
    [Show full text]