The Modern Kyrgyz: Who They Are?

I would like to advise Nusupov and other like-minded historians to carefully study the book «Search for an imaginary kingdom» by L. Gumilev (page 66), another book by the same author with the title «The end and the new beginning», p.117, as well as the book «Kyrgyz jana Kyrgyzstan Tarihi boyuncha tandalma emgekter», written by S. M. Abramzon14 (pp. 437—438) as well as the works of N. Y. Bichurin.

All these sources clearly show that the Khitan were close relatives of the Kyrgyz. From 704 to 756 AD, the representatives of the Kyrgyz Kytai tribe, more precisely, the Tordosh subtribe, together with other Kyrgyz clans created the great Central Asian state of Tordosh. It controlled areas including such cities as Shasha (Tashkent), Turpan, Beshbalyk, and Jeti-Suu and its capital was the city of Suyab (according with China chronicles, Kyrgyz named it as Ak-Beshim), based close to today’s city of Tokmok in modern Kyrgystan).

The Tordosh state was ruled by the following Khans:

Uchilik, the first king of Tordosh, 699 – 706 AD);

Soge, 706 – 711 AD;

Jen, 711 – 715 AD;

Suluk, 715 – 738 AD;

Kutcha, 738 – 739 AD;

Baga Tarchan, 739 – 742 AD;

Bilge, 742 – 753 AD;

Tenir-Ylmysh, 753 – 756 AD

This state or empire, as it should more aptly be described, maintained close relationships with the Tang empire. This was no coincidence, for the Tang empire was founded by the Kyrgyz Kytai tribe, a fact that I have covered in previous works, based on the research done by L. Gumilev, S. M. Abramzona and other prominent historians and authors.

In recent years, our Kazakh relatives have made considerable efforts in order to prove that the Tordosh state belonged to the Kazakh tribe. However, you will not find any solid evidence for this in historical documents, moreover the Kazakh Sanzhyra does not make any reference to the Tordosh tribe. A growing number of historians have moreover claimed that the Tordosh state was founded by Semites. They suggested that the use of a variant of the modern Turkish term «Turk» – «Turuk» in Kyrgyz, which refers to the practice of circumcision – implied that Tordosh rose under the influence of Arab, Persian kings, who embraced Islam.

However, this is not true, because in that time the eight Kyrgyz subtribes of the Kitay had not yet been Islamized but were adherents of Tengirism.

Let me also briefly mention the historic battle which took place between the adherents of Tengrianism and the Kyrgyz Muslims and the Arabs who came to aid of the latter in 751 AD, in Talas. The Kyrgyz Muslims were also supported by the Turuk-Karluk who originated from the Uighurs, while the Tengrists received assistance from the soldiers of the Tang empire, who were led by the Khitan. The battle ended after the two sides reached a peace agreement. For further information, I recommend L. Gumilev’s book15 «The end and new beginning,» p. 98.

When the Western Liao Empire, ruled by Ye-lu Dashi, was defeated by the Manchurians in 1125, Ye-lu Dashi moved to Central Asia, where he restored his kingdom. During that time some parts of Kyrgyz had started to mix with the Arabs, Persians, Tajiks, Uighurs which produced such tribes as the Kandy, Kipchak, Teyit, Boston, and Doolos, who converted to Islam. Due to the fact that their foreskin was circumcised, they were called Turuk, or Turks.

(see Shakarim Kudaiberdi uulu16«Turk Kyrgyz Kozack Hem Handarov shezhiresi», pp. 74, L.Gumilev «Search for an imaginary kingdom», p. 6, S. M. Abramzon «Kyrgyz jana Kyrgyzstan Tarihi boyuncha tandalma emgekter», p. 32 333.)

The tribe called Doolos (Telenguts) originated from the Kalmaks, according to several historical sources. In the world history they are known as Sart-Kalmak. The basic of Kalmaks were the Uighurs (see Shaakarim Kudaiberdiev uluu17, Kenesh Zhusupov «Kyrgyzdar,» Bahadur Khan Abulgazi bin Arab Muhammeddin book «Tїrk sanzhyrasy», page 28.

Another big clash between the left wing of the Kyrgyz, the Tengrists, and the Kyrgyz-Turuks and Arabs took place in 1141 near Samarkand. This time, the Turuks were defeated. Historians have explained the outcome of the battle as a result of the assistance the Kyrgyz tribe of the Khitan received from Manchuria as well as the Khitan from the Qing Empire («Materials on the history of Kyrgyz and Kyrgyzstan», 76)18

The following emperors of Western Liao ruled the valley of the Ili and Syr Darya:

Ye-lu Dashi, 1125/1128 – 1143

Tabuyn, 1143 – 1151

Ile (Che-lu-gu), 1151 – 1161 or 1155

Basagan (Bu-sо-chuan), 1161/55 – 1169 or 1177

Julku (Ji-lu-gu), 1169/78 – 1213

Kuchlug, 1211/1213 – 1218

Kuchlug was a representative of the Naiman tribe, which was one of the larger clans of the Kytai, according to L. Gumilev. Kuchlug had escaped from the rule of Genghis Khan and hid among the relatives in Western Liao. He married the daughter of Karahan (Gurkhan) Zhulku, before killing Karahan and establishing himself as new ruler. Since Kuchlug himself was member of the Kytai tribe and married to the Khitan princess, the Khitans accepted him as their own king. But after a short time in 1218 when Genghis Khan and his soldiers joined forces with West Liao, Kuchlug was removed from office and executed.

I would also like draw your attention to the fact that in the bloody war between the Kyrgyz and the Zhungars (Kalmaks) in the seventeenth century, the Qin empire of China also came to the aid of the Kyrgyz. Their help played a crucial role in defeating the Zhungars, but after victory had been achieved they returned back to China. Consider this carefully: The Qin warriors came to the land of the Kyrgyz, defeated and expelled the Oirats, and then withdrew, leaving the Kyrgyz in peace. How was this possible? Alternatively, they could have stayed there, taking the best land as the winners. Events can be plausibly explained by the fact that the Kytais (Khitans) of China were the same tribe as the people of Western Liao. They intervened to help their relatives who were ruled by the Kokand Khanate.

You can find further information on this subject in the book «Some questions of the origins of certain major Kirgiz tribal divisions residing in the Jalal-Abad region», M. T. Aytbaev19 (Academy of Sciences of the Kyrgyz SSR, Institute of History, 1960.).

Since I started to publish materials about the Khitans, some of our citizens expressed their discontent, arguing that I too exaggerated their role and importance. One day my friend and colleague from the tribe of the Sayak told me that I was wrong to delve so deeply into the history of the Kyrgyz nation and the Kyrgyz tribes. I told him that it would be nice if he too could also become involved in that process. My tribe gave the name to the country and nation which now has a population of 1.3 billion people. Why they did not call themselves Sayaks?20 Is this remarkable fact not worth of our deep respect? He pondered the question and eventually agreed with me.

As part of their colonial policy, the Russians undertook considerable efforts to persuade uprooted members of the Kyrgyz people to distort many pages of our ancient history and to rewrite and edit the Sanzhyra according to their will. Even today, some Kyrgyz are actively engaged in activities which continue to belittle our history and culture. There is only one way out of this impasse which is the purification the Kyrgyz people on the basis of a firm tribal system of government, respect for the traditions of the Tengrists, and thus, a process of purification from the bottom-up and vice versa. The Kyrgyz can only be truly united by the revival of Kyrgyz tribalism. It is the only way to create a common spirit and a strong state, which does not allow any distortion of the historical truth, corruption and sale of lands, resources and our nation’s spiritual heritage.

By the way, the dividing of the Kyrgyz nation into three wings is a flawed approach. In my book I cited evidence which proves that the tribe of the Sarybagysh was referred to as the Naiman and the Naiman in turn are the part of the Khitan. It is well known that the Adigine, Tagay and Mungush (Minkush) lived in the fifteenth century. And what was before, who were the forefathers of those who claimed to be the founders of the left and right wing of modern Kyrgyz nation?

There can be only one answer: all these clans and tribes originated from the famous old Khitan, as has been explained by S.M. Abramzon and the Kazakh historian Kalibek Danyarov (see «History of the Fatherland», 2000, Almaty, p. 209).

The so-called Ak Uul originated from the Dinlins, the famous ancient people, whose emergence has been situated in the matriarchy era around 8000 BC. From the Dinlins originated the Kyrgyz tribe of the Saruu and the Finno-Ugric peoples.

The origins of the Adigine, Tagay and Min-Kush can be traced backed to the Khitan, known as the people of Kun (Hun). The Huns may have stimulated the Great Migration and spawned such great warriors as Manas, Adyl (Attila), Genghis-Khan.

Generally, the so-called children of the Tagay bey, except for the Sayak and Asyk, originate from the old Kytai. The Asyk tribe, according to Abromzon «Кыргыз жана Кыргызстан тарыхы боюнча тандалма эмгектер» (page 30) goes back to the old Kytai (Tordosh), but according to another version, its roots can be linked to the Persians and Alan.

As for the tribes of the Bargy, Konurat, Katagan, Baaryn, Naiman, Kereit, Merke, Kodogochu and Zhoru, they all originate from the Khitan, as well as the Car Bagis, Bagis, Boke, Arys Bagis, and the Chon Bagis (see K. Daniyarov «The history of the fatherland», p. 210)

If we turn to the Kalmaks, we find that their representatives integrated into many Kyrgyz tribes, particluarly among the Sarybagysh, Solto, Tynymseit, Sayak, Kushchi, Saruu, Kytai, Avaat and others. Such deliveries from the Left wing, as Kytai (Khitan), Saruu, Zhetigen (mangyt), Toboy have belonged to the ancient tribes. The Saruu originated from the Dinlin and Kytai, Zhetigen, Toboy – to the people Kun (Hun), as I described in my work devoted to the study of the history and origins of the Kytai tribe.

Примечания