Elmи мяъмуяси

 Gökçe Yükselen Abdurrazak Peler 

432 

prevented any fraction of the dynasty from ascending over others. 

Consequently engagement of different Cuman – Qipchaq groups in the 

internecine strife of the dynasty as allies of the different branches of the 

Rjurikids hampered any centrifugal tendencies among them (Golden 1979-

80: 296).  

In the documents of the Old Rus’ from the second half of the twelfth 

century, a distinction is made between the Cuman – Qipchaqs, who attended 

the conference with the princes of the Kievan and Perejaslav lands, and the 

ones, who did not, naming the latter the Polovci Dikii  ‘Wild Cumans’

32

 

(Pritsak 1967: 1615). Scholars like Pritsak and Golden adopted this term and 

hence invented the name Non-wild Cumans for the former group. Pritsak 

regards the Middle Dnieper and the River Molochna to be the border 

between the two groups (1967: 1615) whereas Golden (1979-80: 297-98) 

notes that the Non-Wild Cumans were based on the Middle and Lower 

Dnieper whilst the ‘wild’ ones were based in the east along the Don and 

Donec’ Rivers, ranging as north as the Rjazan’ Region and to Tmutorokan in 

the south

33

. This classification is a Kiev-centred perspective as the only Rus’ 

faction, which the Wild Cumans did not enter into agreements with was the 

Kievan Princes and they had long and stable alliances with the other groups. 

However, when power in Kiev was seized by any of these groups the 

hostilities did not cease to exist as the Cherny Klobuk Confederation, which 

constituted the main auxiliary force of Kiev was in constant engagement 

with the Wild Cumans (Golden 1979-80: 297). 

                                                                                                                   

(Qay-opa/oba) (Golden 1979-80: 297). Some of the Uzes and Eastern Pecheneg tribes were 

absorbed by the Cuman – Qipchaqs (Rasonyi 1939: 404-05). 

32

 Golden (1979-80: 297) does not dismiss the possibility that this might be the Russian 

translation of a Cuman self designation. He argues that Cumans, who retreated to Georgia 

and the North Caucasian Steppes after their catastrophic defeat by Vladimir Monomax, 

might have used this name as an indication of their defiance of the Kievan Rus’ – Non-wild 

Cuman symbiosis. 

33

 Golden (1979-80: 298) identifies the Non-wild Cumans with “White Cumania” of al-Idrisî 

and with “Comanorum Alborum terra” of the medieval Hungaro-Latin sources, whereas the 

Wild Cumans with the “Black Cumania” of the former and the “Nigrorum Comanorum 

terra” of the latter. Pritsak (1967: 1623), who also touches on the issue of White Cumania, 

states that the tribal group constituting the western part of the general Cuman – Qipchaq 

system was called white  as it was the lower ranking western, i.e. right, wing. 

---

Some Notes on the History, the Culture and the Language of the Medieval Qipchaq - Cuman Turks 

433 

Despite the fact that Cuman – Qipchaqs did not have a centralised state, 

the traditional Turkic bipartite state structure was clearly observable among 

the Non-wild Cumans as they were divided into two groups. Both groups 

were based on the Middle and Lower Dnieper; the Burchevichi / Burchogli 

and the Ulashevichi / Ulashogli on the left bank and the Itogli / Itoba and 

Urusovichi / Urusoba on the right bank

34

 (Golden 1979-80: 297-98). The 

Burchevichi and the Itogli were the two ruling clans of this group, however 

as the Cuman – Qipchaqs had an eastern orientation the one on the left bank, 

i.e. the Burchevichi was ranking higher than the one on the right bank, i.e. 

the Itogli (Pritsak 1967: 1621-22). 

On the other hand the Wild Cumans were closely linked with the house 

of Jurij Dolgorukij, the Ol’govichi and the Davydovichi branches of the 

Rjurikids (Golden 1979-80: 298). The two ruling clans of the Wild Cumans 

were the Ölberli(g) and the Toqsoba, the former being ruled by the House of 

Bonjak / Böñek and the latter by the House of Sharuqanids. In the early 

thirteenth century the Rus’ chronicles describes the Yurgi of the Sharuqanids 

as the greatest of all Cumans and was on the verge of ascending over all 

Cumans, but was killed at the Battle of Kalka, fighting against the invading 

Mongols (Golden 1991: 134). Contrastingly Pritsak (1982: 368-69) notes 

that the Sharuqanids were the ruling clan of the Ölberli / Olperljujevy and 

the Bonjakids of the Qay / Kajepichi (Kaj-opa)

35

. He also reports that the 

‘wild’ and the ‘non-wild’ all Cuman – Qipchaq groups were subject to these 

two supreme dynasties and this dual rule endured until the end of the Cuman 

– Qipchaq history. Therefore Old Rus’ chroniclers reporting from the battle 

fields always recorded two Cuman commanders; in 1174 Konchak 

Sharukanevich and Kobjak Karlyevich, in 1185 Konchak Sharukanevich and 

Koza Burnovich, in 1222 Jutij Konchakovich and Danylo Kobjakovich. 

                                                 

34

 In the Hypatian Chronicle the ones based on the left bank are called the Perejaslav 

Polovtsians as they were bordering the Principality of Perejaslav and the ones on the right 

bank the Russian Polovtsians as they were bordering the Kievan Principality of the Russian 

region (Pritsak 1967: 1615-16). 

35

 Golden (1992: 277-78) claims that the Qay did not join the Qipchaqs and appear to have 

been hostile towards them. He does not accept the connection established by Pritsak (1982: 

335, 338-39) between the Ay-opa and the Kay-opa.  He rather locates them under Rus’ 

service and lists them among the peoples of the Cherny Klobuky (Golden 1979-80: 297). 

---