Elmи мяъмуяси
Yüklə 3,47 Mb. Pdf görüntüsü
|
- Bu səhifədəki naviqasiya:
- 4.5. The Mongol Invasion and Destruction
- 4.6. Aftermath of the Mongol Invasion
- 4.6.1. Cuman – Qipchaqs in Hungary
Some Notes on the History, the Culture and the Language of the Medieval Qipchaq - Cuman Turks 437
merchants returning from the Cuman – Qipchaq realm. They surprised Könchäk by an attack and drove him back into the steppe capturing his youngest wife and the Muslim specialist. However, in the aftermath the forces of Igor’ Svjatoslavich, the Ol’govichi prince of Novhorod-Sivers’kyj, were heavily defeated by a massive Cuman – Qipchaq force and the prince himself was captured. Yet Könchäk could not follow up on his victory as there was disagreement on the Cuman – Qipchaq side on where to strike next. It was impossible to agree on a common target as different Cuman – Qipchaq groups had longstanding alliances with various Rus’ princes. After 1180 the Ol’govichi intensified their aggression toward the Cuman – Qipchaqs as the Svjatoslav Vsevolodich was sitting on the Kievan throne (1176-1180, 1181-94). Consequently the Cuman – Qipchaqs changed their allegiance to the House of Monomashich from 1195 helping Rjurik Rostislavich to take Kiev and in 1203 Könchäk and Kobjak’s son Daniil sacked Kiev. Könchäk’s successors Kotjan and Somogur Sutoevichi remained as Rjurik’s allies and became prominent figures in the history of the South-western Rus’ and Hungary (Golden 1979-80: 299-309).
By the time of the Mongol invasions the Ölberli tribe / clan had established itself as the leading tribe of the Cuman – Qipchaqs inhabiting the Volga – Ural mesopotamia (i.e. Eastern Qipchaqs/ Qanglis /? Black Cumania). The first contact between the Ölberli and the Mongol forces was in 1219 when the former provided sanctuary to the Merkit chieftain and army remnants, fleeing from the Mongols. The Ölberli forces were defeated but the Mongols did not remain and returned to their camps (Allsen 1983: 7-9). The Mongols returned in the early years of the twenties of the 13 th
century and defeated joint Rus’ – Cuman-Qipchaq forces at the Battle of Kalka in 1223 38 . Major confrontations occurred between the Mongols and the Eastern Qipchaqs (Qanglis) in the early years of the 1220’s, which resulted in the destruction of many Qipchaqs. Finally the Eastern Qipchaqs
38 Mongol stratagem was able to persuade Cuman – Qipchaqs to break off from their Alan allies. As a result each of them was defeated separately. However the ties between the Rus’ and the Cuman – Qipchaqs were too strong and Mongol proposals were turned down by the Russian princes (Pritsak 1982: 372-73).
Gökçe Yükselen Abdurrazak Peler 438
were captured and they were incorporated into the Mongol armies (Allsen 1983: 10-14) The Mongols renewed their incursions in order to bring the Volga region under control in 1229, causing a panic among the population. The Qipchaqs fled, taking refuge in the Bulghar lands and were followed by the Mongols resulting in the destruction of the Volga Bulghars. However not all of the population fled or submitted to the Mongols, but some of the Eastern Qipchaqs continued to resist under Bachman, an Ölberli notable. Soon Bachman became a symbol of anti-Mongol feelings and were joined by members of other Qipchaq tribes as well as Alans. Bachman remained to be a problem for the Mongols in the steppe until 1236, when he was crushed with the arrival of Mongol reinforcements with the aim of invading the Western Qipchaq lands permanently 39 . In the 1240’s the remaining Qipchaqs under Baltuchaq joined the armies of Mongke in the North Caucasus (Allsen 1983: 15-21) and the Cuman – Qipchaq Confederacy ceased to exist (Pritsak 1982: 373).
Mongol offensives caused a great devastation and chaos in the Volga – Ural region. Scores of the population were either slaughtered or sold into slavery and a great proportion of the remaining inhabitants dispersed in pursuit of refuge (Allsen 1983: 20-21). Karamanlıoğlu (1962: 176) even claims the Mongol campaigns to be the reason for the disappearance of the Cuman – Qipchaqs as a separate people. The only Cuman – Qipchaq group, which was not affected by the disastrous consequences of the Mongol invasion, was the Crimean group as they were already sedentarized. They mingled with the other ethnic groups of the peninsula and turkified them establishing the bulk of the population of the Crimean Khanate (Kurat 1992: 99-100).
39 For detailed information on the defeat and killing of Bachman see Bretschneider 1888: 310- 12. The resistance of Bachman has been immortalised in the Kazan Tatar tale Bačman häm anı ülterü turında xikäya (Bachman and the Tale of his Killing), which is contained by the 17th century Kazan Tatar Daftar-i Čingiz-Nâme (Golden 1986:28-29). Additionally, the Bushman / Busman clan of the Bashkirs can be traced back to the followers of Bachman, who fled north after the death of their leader (Allsen 1983: 21). Some Notes on the History, the Culture and the Language of the Medieval Qipchaq - Cuman Turks 439
4.6.1. Cuman – Qipchaqs in Hungary In the early forties of the thirteenth century a group of Cuman – Qipchaqs 40 under the leadership of Kotjan (Kotjan Sutoevichi of the Rus’ sources) of Terter-oba took refuge in Hungary (Pritsak 1982: 373) 41 . They converted to Christianity and were allowed by the Hungarian king to resettle there. However, this action provoked the Mongols as Kotjan fought against them before he fled and this constituted one of the main objectives of the Mongol campaigns into Hungary (Kurat 1992: 96-97). Rasonyi (1939: 412) reports on a second Cuman – Qipchaq migration into Hungary from the environs of Dniester, which occurred in 1470 during the reign of King Matyas. The Cuman – Qipchaqs adapted to the Hungarian society without a difficulty and subsequently were able to play an important role in the history of the host nation 42 . This rather easy acceptance and adaptation was a result of the nature of nomadic societies, in which bilingualism was not regarded to be a problem 43 (Halasi-Kun 1986: 32). There are two hypotheses on the settlement process of the Cuman – Qipchaqs in Hungary. The first group of scholars believe that in spite of giving up pastoral way of life, traditions of the nomadic winter residence survived until the second half of the 20 th century in Kunsag 44 . On the other
40 According to Kurat (1992: 97) more than 40.000 horsemen. Vasary (2005: 65) repeats the same number as the population of all of the Cuman – Qipchaqs, who took refuge in Hungary. Can we assume that this Cuman – Qipchaq population was made up of males only? 41
42 Cuman - Qipchaqs left everlasting imprints on the Hungarian society with their impact on its leading dynasties and policies. 43 However, religion seems to be a vital criterion in the Hungarian society of the period since asylum was only granted after the Cuman – Qipchaqs converted to Christianity. On the other hand there is no doubt that this conversion was only superficial. In 1278 there was a preparation for a crusade on the Cuman – Qipchaqs of Hungary as they constituted a threat to the Christian identity of Hungary. This preparation forced Cuman – Qipchaq chiefs Uzur, Alpar and Tulun to come to an agreement with King Ladislas IV the Cuman, who was Kotjan’s grandson from his maternal side, on re-organising Cuman – Qipchaq social life. They had to sedentarize and Christianize to a full extend. However, traces of their native religion still existed among them in the 15th century (Rasonyi 1939: 412). 44 The two regions settled by Cuman – Qipchaqs in Hungary are Greater Cumania (Nagykunsag) and Lesser Cumania (Kiskunsag) (Golden 1991: 149). These two regions were situated in the middle of Hungary and constituted one third of the country (Rasonyi 1939: 412).
Yüklə 3,47 Mb. Dostları ilə paylaş:
|