Authors: Christopher I. Beckwith
Tags: #History, #General, #Asia, #Europe, #Eastern, #Central Asia
Empires of the Silk Road: A History of Central Eurasia From the Bronze Age to the Present (24 page)
Partly as a result of the Hsien-pei expansion, and partly due to Chinese pressure under the rule of Wang Mang (r.
AD
9–23), some of the Puyo-Koguryo began migrating into Liao-tung, where their Hui-Mo (or Hui and Mo) or Yemaek relatives had already moved by about 100
BC
, at which time they are mentioned in the
Shih chi
as living in the region of Liao-tung and Ch’ao-hsien (then southeastern Manchuria).
38
They formed three kingdoms, the Koguryo Kingdom in southern Manchuria from the Liao River to the Yalu River, the Puyo Kingdom
39
in south-central Manchuria north of the Koguryo, and the Hui-Mo or Yemaek Kingdom
40
along the eastern coast of the Korean Peninsula, extending southward as far as the Korean-speaking realm of Chin Han in the southeastern corner of the peninsula. Although the Puyo-Koguryo dynasties were repeatedly disrupted, particularly by the Chinese and the Hsien-pei, their peoples remained firmly established in these locations.
Classical Central Eurasia
The golden age of Classical Antiquity in the West and the East had already passed before the Roman Empire conquered most of the Mediterranean littoral and began moving into the hinterland, and before the Chinese Empire similarly conquered the area to a great distance outward in all directions from the capital. The Classical tradition remained strong in the two empires, and in both of them that meant expansion to the greatest extent possible. Yet, although they did succeed in attaining their main goal—significantly greater expanse of territory—their infrastructure was physically unable to hold it beyond a certain point.
At first, the Classical empires’ relentless one-track-mind approach to Central Eurasian polities—divide, invade, and destroy—was successful. The Romans conquered deep into largely Germanic western Central Eurasia along a line running through the middle of Western Europe from the North Sea to the Black Sea. They sowed division and created weakness very effectively among those peoples they could not directly control. The Chinese were even more successful. Not only did they acquire and maintain fairly secure access halfway across Central Asia, despite their failure to completely eliminate Hsiung-nu suzerainty there (fortunately for the Central Eurasian economy), they also succeeded in dividing the Hsiung-nu into two hostile states: a southern realm, which was almost completely beholden to China, and a northern realm, which lasted only a few decades after the split. The long-lasting Southern Hsiung-nu state, though increasingly controlled by the Chinese over time, effectively kept northern China away from the Mongolic Hsien-pei, who replaced the Northern Hsiung-nu as rulers of the Eastern Steppe.
The aggressive foreign policy successes of the Chinese and Roman empires ultimately had disastrous consequences. The partial closing of the frontier to trade by both empires, and their destabilization of Central Eurasia by their incessant attacks, resulted in internecine war in the region. The serious decline in Silk Road commerce that followed—observable in the shrinkage of the areal extent of Central Asian cities—may have been one of the causes of the long-lasting recession that eventually brought about the collapse of both the Western Roman Empire and the Eastern Han Empire (and its eventual successor the Chin Dynasty), and with them the end of Classical civilization.
41
1
James (2001: 18–22). Britain was later largely conquered by his nominal great-grandson Claudius in
AD
43.
2
James (2001: 18).
3
Mattingly (1970: 113); cf. Hutton (1970: 152–153). See the discussion above in the prologue.
4
See Beckwith (forthcoming-a).
5
Scherman (1987: 102–103) notes that when most Franks had adopted the Roman fashion of short hair, members of the Merovingian royal family kept the old tradition of wearing their hair long and loose, and they took good care of it. The Turks and other Central Eurasians further to the east also wore their hair long, but (if later tradition reflects the earlier period correctly) in braids. The earliest remark on the Turks in a Greek text is an uncomplimentary remark of Agathias (Keydell 1967: 13) on their hair—“unkempt, dry and dirty and tied up in an unsightly knot” (Frendo 1975: 11)—in comparison with the beautiful hair of the Frankish kings, which the Greek writer greatly admired. It seems French stylistic elegance has a long tradition.
6
The cloisonné pieces are believed to be Byzantine in style. The tomb was discovered at Tournai, Belgium, in 1643 and has recently been reexcavated (Kazanski 2000). A photograph of one of the horse burials is available at
http://www.ru.nl/ahc/vg/html/vg 000153.htm
. Cf. Brulet (1997).
7
The problem of the date of the pre-Germanic migration into Europe has so far defied all attempts at solution, despite frequent declarations to the contrary. See
chapter 1
, and cf. the careful, balanced treatment by Adams
(EIEC
218–223).
8
On their names and early history, see Golden (2006).
9
Melyukova (1990: 113).
10
Lehmann (2006). On Dacia and the Roman conquest there, see endnote
54
.
11
Bachrach (1973). The name
Lancelot
and the story of the sword in the stone, among other elements of the story, are widely thought to be Alan in origin and to have modern reflexes in the language and folklore of the Ossetians, the Alans’ modern descendants in the Caucasus region (Anderson 2004: 13 et seq.; Colarusso 2002; cf. Littleton and Malcor 1994).
12
Ammianus says that Ermanaric, the king of the Ostrogoths, then committed suicide in or about 375 “rather than lead his own people into bondage to the Huns” (Burns 1980: 35).
13
Sinor (1990c).
14
His Central Asian wife Roxana (Roxane) gave birth to a son in August 323
BC
—too late for the succession struggle, because Alexander had died on June 10, 323.
15
Bivar (1983a: 28–29, 98).
16
According to Chinese sources, the Yüeh-chih (*Tok
w
ar) attacked the Saka
(śaka
in Indian sources) living near the Issyk Kul in 160
BC
. In 128, when Chang Ch’ien was in the area, the Tokharians were based between Samarkand and the Oxus River, having already subdued Bactria. The Parthians are known in Chinese sources as An-hsi
NMan
ânxî,
from MChi *ansik (Pul. 24, 330), from OChi *ansək or *arśək according to the usual reconstruction (Sta. 577, 552), but probably rather from OChi *arśək, that is, *arśək, a perfect transcription of the Parthian form of the dynastic name Aršak (written ‘ršk).
17
The Central Eurasian practice of shooting backward at one’s pursuers while in flight on horse back.
18
This is the modern Mandarin Chinese pronunciation of the characters used to transcribe the foreign people’s name; for the reconstruction *Tok
w
ar, see
appendix B
.
19
See
appendix B
.
20
The *Aśvin, according to all accounts, invaded Jungharia to attack the *Tok
w
ar living in the former territory of the Sakas (cf. Bivar 1983b: 192). After their victory, the *Aśvin settled there themselves. That means they arrived in Jungharia after the *Tok
w
ar,
pace
Christian (1998: 210) and many others.
21
The Saka, or Saka, people then began their long migration that ended with their conquest of northern India, where they are also known as the Indo-Scythians.
22
The name is recorded in early Arabic accounts as
“Tukhâristân,
representing a foreign Tukhâristân or Tokhâristân, in which the earlier syllable [k
w
ar] ~ [x
w
ar] has become [xa:r].
23
This is the Old Uighur form of the name; in Old Tibetan it is written
Guzan,
pronounced [küsan] or [küsän]. There is still a town between Kucha and Kashgar named Küsen.
24
Yü (1986: 458 n. 260).
25
Loewe (1986: 164), Yü (1967: 135–136).
26
For a translation of the
Shih chi
version, see Watson (1961, II: 155 et seq.). The
Shih chi
is dated earlier than the
Han shu,
but it has been demonstrated that both histories draw on the same archival material, so that the
Han shu
does not always simply copy the
Shih chi.
The fame of the
Shih chi
among Chinese is due not so much to the fact that it was the first “modern” history written in what had just become standard Classical Chinese, but rather to its literary style.
27
HS
(94a: 3743); cf. Watson (1961, II: 155). Note the explicit reference to armor.
28
Watson (1961, II: 170). The eunuch goes on to urge the Hsiung-nu to spurn the foreign imports in favor of homely but sturdy, healthy local Hsiung-nu products and thus to stay independent of the Chinese. This dialogue would seem to betray Chinese prejudices about trade, as well as ignorance of its central importance to Central Eurasians such as the Hsiung-nu. In view of the similar statements in the Old Turkic inscription of Toñukuk, however, they may represent a traditional conservative current of thought within Central Eurasian states.
29
Watson (1961, II: 183).
30
The reconstruction of the Hsiung-nu title for their ruler,
Chan-yü,
traditionally read
Shan-yü,
is uncertain; see endnote
7
.
31
Watson (1961, II: 177–178). On the mistranslation of Chinese words for foreigners as “barbarians,” see the epilogue.
32
Also, during Chinese civil wars, Central Eurasians living near the northern frontier of China often fought as mercenaries or allies of one or another Chinese faction.
33
Yü (1986: 389).
34
Yü (1986: 404–405).
35
Yü (1990: 148–149).
36
According to the account
(HS
99: 4130), the Chinese had wanted to force the Koguryo to attack the Hsiung-nu, but they refused. When the governor of Liao-hsi murdered the Koguryo ruler, the people “rebelled” against the Chinese and escaped from the governor by riding out into the steppe. From that point on, they began moving into Liao-tung and southern Manchuria. This account is the earliest historical notice of the Koguryo. The putatively earlier geographical evidence placing them near Korea is part of a later textual addition dating to the first century
AD
(Beckwith 2007a: 33–34 n. 12), which was perhaps intended to glorify the conquests of Emperor Wu.
37
The Koguryo elite warriors referred to in the sources were probably the king’s comitatus; unfortunately, the sources are unclear on this point. However, the Japanese warriors who fought in the wars of the Three Kingdoms period on the Korean Peninsula acquired the full Central Eurasian Culture Complex, including the comitatus, and brought it with them when they returned to Japan, so the Puyo-Koguryo peoples from whom it is agreed they learned it must have had the comitatus themselves.
38
They are mentioned in the chapter on the Hsiung-nu as well as in the “neutral” context of the chapter on commerce, “the Money-makers” (Watson 1961, II: 163, 185, 487).
39
See Byington (2003).
40
See Beckwith (2007a, 2006e, 2005a). ‘Yemaek’ is the Sino-Korean reading of the same characters.
41
The following Central Eurasian migration covered not only the colonized Central Eurasian areas but even the peripheral states’ homeland regions. In the Roman Empire, that meant not only Gaul, much of Germania, and Dacia, but virtually all of Western Europe south of Scandinavia, and even across the Mediterranean to North Africa. In China, the migration covered the colonized former Central Eurasian territories of the Ordos and Shensi, northern Shansi, and southern Manchuria, as well as some of the traditionally Chinese areas south of the eastern bend of the Yellow River and the dynastic home of the Chou, Ch’in, and Han dynasties in or around Ch’ang-an in the Kuan-chung region of the Wei River valley.
