Mambetov K.S.

Assoc. prof. Kozha Akhmet Yessevi IKTU

Mambetova M.K.

Assoc. prof. Al-Farabi KazNU,

Iskakova G.N.

Senior lecturer Al-Farabi KazNU,

Kazakhstan

TURKSTAN – THE HOMELAND OF TURKIC COUNTRIES

Abstract

The article is devoted to the study of the history and present condition of the Turkic countries. The achievements of the Turkic people during all periods are described and some peculiarities of the leading tribes and countries are analysed. The opinions of the scientists studying the nomadic tribal relations in the early period of feudalism of Turks are considered.

Keywords: Turkic country, tribes, statehood, Turkstan, Kazakh ethnos.

Introduction

One of the peculiarities of Turkic countries in the history is the idea of forming “World State”. The limit of governing of Turkic countries may be explained through the concept world ruling. The word in the Oguz Kagan dastan “our roof is Firmament, flag is sun” displays the exact meaning of the notion world state. If we study deeper this definition expalining the concept Turkic country in a right way, Turkic countries gave all people living in the places which were conquered by the Turkic countries on the way of ruling the whole world the right from religous, cultural, economic and social point. So Turks didn’t isolate the other societies which accepted the place where they lived as their homeland, which lived with them together from their nations. It means that all places conquered in the meaning of world state of Turks was their homeland. İt’s shown in the examples of tribes and Turkish (turs) who spoke Iranian and who lived hand-in-hand during the hundred years in Turan. Of course there were strained realtions because of the religion between them. The inhabitants of Turan adhered the traditional faith and Iranians were thefollowers of Zoroaster. So Iran and Zoroaster divided [1, 57-58]. Turkic kagans took under patronage the Sogdys speaking Iranian who inhabited the cities (Zhetisu, Eastern Turkistan) along the Great Silk Way, that’s why all of them became Turks then. This case is closely connected with the policy of the present President N.A. Nazarbayev, his policy directed towards improvement of the unity and solidarity of people of Kazakhstan where representatives of many nations live.

The aim of the article

is to research the history and national statehood of the Turkic countries, which is called Turkstan and analyse the works of different scientists studying this issue.

The main material

It's correct to search for the history of the ancient Kazakh statehood in these places. As N.A. Nazarbayev said Turkstan is the birthplace of national statehood of Kazakh people. But their roots are deeper, in the history of thousands years. It's possible to speak about the interrelation of the contemporary Kazakh ethnos, its statehood with turkic countries founded in ancient times. This issue needs deep and serious study. We decided to investigate one of the mentioned works.

The above mentioned issues raised on the basis of the texts, extracts taken from the part “Introduction” of the book “The history of Turkic people” (Turkstan, 2004) the main author of which is S. Abusharip [2].

One of the types of social organization of the definite period is state. It unites in one system the most significant sides of the social life. The formation of the state generated from the necessity of socializing the public planning, coercion, regulation, division and other beginnings.

We should consider Statehood in relation with the place where it located, chronological measure, the ethnics forming it, the names of rulers and leaders, the ethnic-cultural signs. The nature of statehood is defined with the having the external borders, its relations with other states. It’s important to define the main economic-cultural centre of the region. Of course, it mustn’t be denied the influence of the migration processes. These factors were displayed in the governmental structure of the ancient Turkic countries. The ancestors of Kazakhs inhabited settled and nomadically the places where the Turks lived, developed the agriculture and cattle breeding. They built the constructions and towns. They also had their own handicraft. It’s known that religious belief formed with the emergence of the state.

It’s possible to define statehood according to the language and culture of the inhabitants speaking one or several languages in the state. The names of ethnic groups are important, but they can be changed into the general tribal, state names. Sometimes the borders of the tribal unions lived in ancient time were not exact and changed very quickly. It’s famous that the state institutions in Turkic associations were not developed in some periods. We can see all signs of the medieval state which had the whole culture and territory and centralized government in Turan empires B.C., Turkic kagans of CE. The fact that Turkic embassadors took the road to Byzantium can be a proof for it. There the contracts were done on behalf of Turkic Kagan.

The issue of state always took an important role in world outlook system of early Turks. They treated it as a power providing the life of people. According to the opinion of Turks ruining of state is a great emergence situation, Turkic people thought that only in case of building a state it would be possible to have a normal life. The idea of forming a state and keeping its unity built the basis of official ideology.

V.V. Bartold knew Afrasiab not as a lord of mystical Turan, but as the leader of Turkic tribes[3]. According to Tabari one of the sons of Afrasiab Tuj owned the land of «as-sin» (chinese), Khazar and Turks (Akhunov A.M. Ethnonym «as-sakaliba» in the treatise « Та'рих аррусул ва-л-мулук арабского историка ат-Табари ») [4, p. 27-42]. The Scythian statehood was formed by Nomads from Central Asia in Small Asia (BC VII century). The emergence of Scythian statehood was connected with migration processes, the nomadising of nomadic and half-nomadic tribes to long distances. It means nomadic khanate, Kazakh khanate are the heirs of Turkic khanate, associations. The ethnic fundament of modern Kazakh people was formed by turks of Turkic khanates, Golden (White, Blue) Horde. Certainly first ethnic substrate was formed according to the writings of O. Smagulov, the locals of Caucasoid shape in Bronze Age and Saxon period. There were more ethnic groups as kimak-kypshak, karlyk, kanly, uisin and others of Age before Golden Horde in Kazakh ethnogenesis. It’s known that its ethnocultural and ethnopolitical influence on Kazakhs was huge. So it’s necessary to define the initial periods of ethnogenesis and ethnopolitical history of Kazakh people. It means that we must give an answer to the question which period they might be.

A lot of centuries interconnected divide Turan age, periods before Scythians or Scythian (saxon) or Hun, then uisin-kanly and kushan-eftalit, ashin-turkic periods. In our opinion in the complex of these periods it’s possible to find the traces of Kazakh nature which is considered as a part of super ethnos called Turkic.

The tradition of dividing the formed in Europe history into ancient, medieval periods and New period coincides with the development experience of people inhabiting European continent. Some authors think that it is right to consider early Turkic history as the earliest, early, medieval periods and modern age.

Another research group wrote there were more nomadic tribal relations in the early period of feudalism of Turks [1, p. 81]. It was said that the development level of their material-spiritual culture was much lower than vassal society according to all parameters. This group of researchers in world practice considered the measure of feudal society related to land cultivation, settled life. In our opinion it would be resultive to explain the peculiarities of social realtions development in the history of Turks on the basis of geopolitical and natural events. Certainly, genesis of feudalistic relations of Khaganates, the peculiarities of utilizing the land, direction of religion towards forming state ideology influences on the traditions and world outlook of people. All these facts may complicate the definition of stages of nomadic Turkic civilization evolution. In the result of separation of the researchers the life style of Turks from settled agriculture not only Scythians, but also Huns are not intended to be included in the circle of Turks. In this case the early chronology of our country would remain untouched. We can say that Kazakh people are the successor of the whole state inhabited on the territory of Kazakhstan and in the neighbouring area. Nevertheless researching the geographical borders in the early periods of the history of Kazakh people’s statehood is not still on the appropriate and satisfied level.

The household cultural types of the life of Kazakh before the XX century cannot be defined as «pure nomadic» or «pure settled». It’s possible to come to conclusion that two different household cultural type appeared in the Kazakh steppe. They include steppe nomadism and oase grain grower and urbanites. Without the interrelation of two types of HCT it will be difficult understand the mentality (peculiarity) of Kazakh culture. In comparison with homogeneity and uniformity multilevelness of the environment and social community are advantageous for culture.

Conclusion

According to the social views of the past the power of state, the condition of society mostly depend on the dynasty of rulers or personality and activity of the individual rulers. In some periods of history states were not organized, formed on the dynastic or territorial principles, they were not called as people, nation. That's why some researchers connect the beginning of our statehood only with the period of emergence of the name Kazakh (as Kazakh khanate). This concept was not proved. What century did Kazakh state appear in? We want to say answering the questions as what levels it passed is considered one of the most topical issues standing before historians which need solution nowadays.

References

1. Gumilev L.N. Century around Caspian. M.,1993. – p. 57-58.

2. Abusharip S. The history of Turkic people. Turkstan, 2004

3. Avesto. –Tekhron, 1991, 1-2 p.; Firdausi А. Republic of Iran-Islam: Каtre publishing house, 1999, 1367-p.; Bartold V.V., P.1-9. М., 1963. –74 p.; Abusharip S. Afrasiab. –Turkistan: «Turan», 2004.

4. Bartold V.V. Soch. – М.; «Nauka», 1966. – P.ІІ. – ch.1.– p. 66.