MnETurk

From Seshat Data Browser
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Phase I Variables (polity-based)

General variables

♠ RA ♣ Agathe Dupeyron ♥

♠ Original name ♣ Eastern Turk Khaganate ♥

♠ Alternative names ♣ Northern Turk Khaganate ♥

♠ Peak Date ♣ ♥


Temporal bounds

♠ Duration ♣ 583-630 CE ♥ "By 627 internal rebellions and a Tang invasion resulted in the dissolution of the first Turkic polity." [1] c582 CE: "The First Turkic Khaganate officially split into the Western and the Eastern Turkic Khaganate. In the Eastern Turkic Khaganate, the Sogdian language and script was used for chancellery purposes and inscriptions."[2]

♠ Degree of centralization ♣ ♥

♠ Supra-polity relations ♣ alliance ♥ "At other times the Turkic polities were closely allied with either the Sui (A.D. 581-618) or the Tang (A.D. 618-907) dynasty (Sinor 1990)." [3]

Supra-cultural relations

♠ preceding (quasi)polity ♣ First Turk Khaganate ♥
♠ relationship to preceding (quasi)polity ♣ continuity ♥ "By 627 internal rebellions and a Tang invasion resulted in the dissolution of the first Turkic polity." [4] "Tumïn’s brother Ištemi, ruled over the western part of the realm as subordinate kaghan—yabghu or yabghu kaghan—with a winter camp somewhere near Karashahr (Agni). This gradually became the de facto independent realm of the Western Turks, while *Tumïn’s successors reigned over the Türk, or Eastern Turks, and retained the full imperial dignity." [5]
♠ succeeding (quasi)polity ♣ Tang Dynasty ♥
♠ Supracultural entity ♣ ♥
♠ scale of supra-cultural interaction ♣ ♥ km squared.

♠ Capital ♣ none ♥ "There were no major urban centers; in fact, the Turkic general and counselor, Tonyukhukh, is credited with the quote, ‘‘If we build castles and give up our old customs, we shall be vanquished’’ (Tkachev 1987, p. 114). The Turkic leaders took this advice, although there is a report of a settlement built at a place called Dalee (Perlee 1961, p. 47; Rogers et al. 2005, pp. 812-813)." [6]


♠ Language ♣ Old Turkic; Sogdian ♥ "The question may be asked whether all these groups spoke the same language. The Orkhon inscriptions, engraved in the mid eighth century, are certainly Turkic - we refer to their language as Old Turkic, but one may as well call it Türk - and there is no reason to believe that at least the bulk of those who were called Türk used a different language. For example, the Chiu T'ang shu clearly states that the languages spoken by respectively the Eastern and Western Turks are only "slightly different." There is, however, some evidence to show that the Turk state incorporated some non-Turkic peoples whose languages left traces in Turk proper names and even in the vocabulary of Turk." [7] "As witnessed by the Bugut inscription, the role of the Sogdians within the Turk state ensured a prominent status for their language. It is safe to assume that it was widely used in commerce and in other international contacts." [8] c582 CE: "The First Turkic Khaganate officially split into the Western and the Eastern Turkic Khaganate. In the Eastern Turkic Khaganate, the Sogdian language and script was used for chancellery purposes and inscriptions."[9]

General Description

The Orkhon Valley lies either side of the Orkhon River, in north-central Mongolia. For just under a century, between about 550 and 630 CE, it was under the control of a Turkic Khaganate, which split between a Western Khaganate and an Eastern one around 580;[10] the Eastern Khaganate included the Orkhon Valley, though it lasted only a few decades, between succumbing to a combination of internal rebellions and an invasion from Tang China, around 630 CE.[11] Like many of their predecessors in the region, the Turks were nomads: indeed, the Turkic general and counselor, Tonyukhukh, is believed to have once said, "If we build castles and give up our old customs, we shall be vanquished".[12] Both Western and Eastern khaganates were characterised by a four-tiered administrative hierarchy, whose members largely came from the ruling clan.[13] In the East, Sogdian was the language used for administrative purposes.[14]

No population estimates specific to this polity could be found in the literature, though, according to McEvedy and Jones, at that time Mongolia and Siberia together likely had a population of no more than 500,000.[15]

Social Complexity variables

♠ RA ♣ Agathe Dupeyron ♥

Social Scale

♠ Polity territory ♣ [4,500,000-5,000,000] ♥ in squared kilometers.

♠ Polity Population ♣ [400,000-500,000] ♥ People.

According to McEvedy and Jones the areas of Mongolia and Siberia would not have had a population over 500,000.[16]

♠ Population of the largest settlement ♣ ♥ Inhabitants.

Hierarchical Complexity

♠ Settlement hierarchy ♣ [1-2] ♥ levels. Estimate from other, similarly sized/structured settlements in the region and elsewhere


♠ Administrative levels ♣ [4-5] ♥ levels. At least 4 levels.

"Although the two Turk empires are distinct, they are combined here because of similar organization and their spatial and temporal proximity. For both, there were at least four recognized levels in the administrative hierarchy, almost all of whose members came from the ruling Ashina clan." [17]

c582 CE: "The First Turkic Khaganate officially split into the Western and the Eastern Turkic Khaganate. In the Eastern Turkic Khaganate, the Sogdian language and script was used for chancellery purposes and inscriptions."[18]


♠ Religious levels ♣ 2 ♥ levels.

1. Khagan as high priest

2. Ordinary shaman

"At the top, the kaghan ruled by heavenly mandate (kut), embodying and demonstrating heaven’s favor through successful performance of his functions as ruler.77 Prominent among these were ritual functions with shamanic overtones. The kaghan had to maintain control of Mount Ötüken and perform ancestral rites at the sacred sites there." [19]

"Türk religious life, not extensively documented, was based on an ancient complex of beliefs widespread in Inner Asia.84 The term “shamanism,” although conventional, is a misleading name for this belief system. Shamans, male and female, served as religious specialists, who could communicate with the spirit world. They were called on, however, only for exceptional reli- gious or medical needs, not for routine religious practice. Their ability, real or reputed, to divine the future or conjure up storms on the battlefield made their services especially significant for rulers. However, the heroic, ecstatic quest that transformed an individual from sickness and alienation through initiation into a shaman capable of performing such wonders little resembled his or her neighbors’ usual religious observance." [20]

"If there was a difference in spiritual emphases between dynast and ordinary nomad, it took the form of the greater devotion to Tengri, the supreme deity, in the politicized state cult, with the kaghan as high priest." [21]

♠ Military levels ♣ [3-4] ♥ levels.

"Every male was an er, “man” and implicitly “warrior”; every young man had to earn his “warrior name” (er ati) through prowess in battle or the hunt; and an elite male, too, was an er bashi, or commander of so many men.82" [22]

1. Khagan

2. Er Bashi. Commander
3. Officer level (inferred)
4. Er. Individual warrior

Professions

♠ Professional military officers ♣ suspected unknown ♥

♠ Professional soldiers ♣ inferred absent ♥ "Every male was an er, “man” and implicitly “warrior”; every young man had to earn his “warrior name” (er ati) through prowess in battle or the hunt; and an elite male, too, was an er bashi, or commander of so many men." [23]

♠ Professional priesthood ♣ [absent; present] ♥ "The religious beliefs of the Türk focused on a sky god, Tängri, and an earth goddess, Umay.9 Some of the Turks—notably the Western Turks in Tokharistan—converted very early to Buddhism, and it played an impor- tant role among them. Other religions were also influential, particularly Christianity and Manichaeism, which were popular among the Sogdians, close allies of the Türk who were skilled in international trade. Although the Sogdians were a settled, urban people, they were like the Türk in that they also had a Central Eurasian warrior ethos with a pervasive comitatus tradi- tion, and both peoples were intensely interested in trade." [24]

"Türk religious life, not extensively documented, was based on an ancient complex of beliefs widespread in Inner Asia.84 The term “shamanism,” although conventional, is a misleading name for this belief system. Shamans, male and female, served as religious specialists, who could communicate with the spirit world. They were called on, however, only for exceptional reli- gious or medical needs, not for routine religious practice. Their ability, real or reputed, to divine the future or conjure up storms on the battlefield made their services especially significant for rulers. However, the heroic, ecstatic quest that transformed an individual from sickness and alienation through initiation into a shaman capable of performing such wonders little resembled his or her neighbors’ usual religious observance." [25]

Bureaucracy characteristics

♠ Full-time bureaucrats ♣ inferred present ♥ "According to the Chinese chroniclers, there were 28 hereditary ranks or titles in the Turk political system, suggesting a formal bureaucracy but not an entirely centralized administration." [26]

♠ Examination system ♣ suspected unknown ♥

♠ Merit promotion ♣ suspected unknown ♥

♠ Specialized government buildings ♣ suspected unknown ♥ Not mentioned by sources.

Law

♠ Formal legal code ♣ suspected unknown ♥ As much as we know about the governance system is there was probably "a formal bureaucracy but not an entirely centralized administration." [27]

♠ Judges ♣ suspected unknown ♥ As much as we know about the governance system is there was probably "a formal bureaucracy but not an entirely centralized administration." [28]

♠ Courts ♣ suspected unknown ♥ As much as we know about the governance system is there was probably "a formal bureaucracy but not an entirely centralized administration." [29]

♠ Professional Lawyers ♣ suspected unknown ♥

Specialized Buildings: polity owned

♠ irrigation systems ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ drinking water supply systems ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ markets ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ food storage sites ♣ suspected unknown ♥

Transport infrastructure

♠ Roads ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Bridges ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Canals ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Ports ♣ suspected unknown ♥

Special purpose sites

♠ Mines or quarries ♣ inferred present ♥ "In 568 the Greek Zemarkhos, ambassador of Justin II to the Western Turks in Sogdiana, then under Turk rule, met a Turk who offered him iron for sale. The historian Menander, reporting this event, added his own commentary to the effect that it was in this way that the Turks wanted to make it known that they had iron mines. When the famous Chinese Buddhist pilgrim Hsüan-tsang called on one of the rulers of the Western Turks he noticed an iron bedstead in place of the usual wooden one. He found the object so unusual that he deemed it worthy of a mention in his travel account." [30]

Information

Writing System

♠ Mnemonic devices ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Nonwritten records ♣ inferred present ♥ Oral histories inferred present in previous polities.
♠ Written records ♣ present ♥ "The inscriptions of the Orkhon, written in Turk in rune-type characters, contain a number of words not common to Turkic but with parallels in Samoyed or Ugric languages from which, directly or indirectly, they had to be borrowed." [31] "The First Turkic Khaganate officially split into the Western and the Eastern Turkic Khaganate. In the Eastern Turkic Khaganate, the Sogdian language and script was used for chancellery purposes and inscriptions."[32]
♠ Script ♣ present ♥ "The inscriptions of the Orkhon, written in Turk in rune-type characters, contain a number of words not common to Turkic but with parallels in Samoyed or Ugric languages from which, directly or indirectly, they had to be borrowed." [33] "The First Turkic Khaganate officially split into the Western and the Eastern Turkic Khaganate. In the Eastern Turkic Khaganate, the Sogdian language and script was used for chancellery purposes and inscriptions."[34]
♠ Non-phonetic writing ♣ present ♥ "The inscriptions of the Orkhon, written in Turk in rune-type characters, contain a number of words not common to Turkic but with parallels in Samoyed or Ugric languages from which, directly or indirectly, they had to be borrowed." [35] "The First Turkic Khaganate officially split into the Western and the Eastern Turkic Khaganate. In the Eastern Turkic Khaganate, the Sogdian language and script was used for chancellery purposes and inscriptions."[36]
♠ Phonetic alphabetic writing ♣ suspected unknown ♥

Kinds of Written Documents

♠ Lists, tables, and classifications ♣ inferred present ♥ c582 CE: "The First Turkic Khaganate officially split into the Western and the Eastern Turkic Khaganate. In the Eastern Turkic Khaganate, the Sogdian language and script was used for chancellery purposes and inscriptions."[37]
♠ Calendar ♣ inferred present ♥ c582 CE: "The First Turkic Khaganate officially split into the Western and the Eastern Turkic Khaganate. In the Eastern Turkic Khaganate, the Sogdian language and script was used for chancellery purposes and inscriptions."[38]
♠ Sacred Texts ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Religious literature ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Practical literature ♣ inferred present ♥ c582 CE: "The First Turkic Khaganate officially split into the Western and the Eastern Turkic Khaganate. In the Eastern Turkic Khaganate, the Sogdian language and script was used for chancellery purposes and inscriptions."[39]
♠ History ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Philosophy ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Scientific literature ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Fiction ♣ ♥

Money

♠ Articles ♣ present ♥ According to personal communication with N. Kradin. [40]
♠ Tokens ♣ absent ♥ According to personal communication with N. Kradin. [41]
♠ Precious metals ♣ absent ♥ According to personal communication with N. Kradin. [42]
♠ Foreign coins ♣ present ♥ Turks used Sogdian money.[43]
♠ Indigenous coins ♣ absent ♥ According to personal communication with N. Kradin. [44]
♠ Paper currency ♣ absent ♥ According to personal communication with N. Kradin. [45]

Postal System

♠ Couriers ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Postal stations ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ General postal service ♣ suspected unknown ♥

Warfare variables

♠ RA ♣ Agathe Dupeyron ♥

Military Technologies

Military use of Metals

♠ Copper ♣ inferred present ♥ long been in use in the region. Majemir culture from 900 BCE is an example of one of the first iron-using cultures in the Altai region.[46] and by 300 BCE in the Ordos region of Mongolia iron was becoming much more frequently used for weapons and horse fittings. [47]
♠ Bronze ♣ inferred present ♥ long been in use in the region. Majemir culture from 900 BCE is an example of one of the first iron-using cultures in the Altai region.[48] and by 300 BCE in the Ordos region of Mongolia iron was becoming much more frequently used for weapons and horse fittings. [49]
♠ Iron ♣ present ♥ Majemir culture from 900 BCE is an example of one of the first iron-using cultures in the Altai region.[50] and by 300 BCE in the Ordos region of Mongolia iron was becoming much more frequently used for weapons and horse fittings. [51]
♠ Steel ♣ inferred absent ♥ No steel of a high quality until later. By the seventh century the "Sogdians and Turkic peoples "had their own sophisticated metallurgical industries."[52] "The other peoples who were heavily involved with arms production and trade with the Tibetans were the Turkic peoples and especially the Karluks, allies of the Tibetans during the eighth and early ninth centuries ... The Karluks ... were noted by Islamic geographers as producers and exporters of iron artifacts and weapons to Tibet and China."[53]

Projectiles

♠ Javelins ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Atlatl ♣ absent ♥ Weapon of the Americas, highly unlikely to be present here
♠ Slings ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Self bow ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Composite bow ♣ present ♥ "It is no wonder that the skill required to produce steel swords over charcoal fires seemed supernatural. The same could be said for bow makers, who required great time and expertise to make the composite bows, which still set distance records exceeding those of European-style longbows “by humiliating margins.”[54]
♠ Crossbow ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Tension siege engines ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Sling siege engines ♣ absent ♥ First use of the counter-weight trebuchet 1165 CE at Byzantine siege of Zevgminon.[55]
♠ Gunpowder siege artillery ♣ inferred absent ♥ Not in use until much later.
♠ Handheld firearms ♣ absent ♥ "Firearms appeared in Siberia and Mongolia in the 17th century in the form of flintlock rifles. Flintlocks were the only firearms used in most areas until the turn of the 20th century." [56]

Handheld weapons

♠ War clubs ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Battle axes ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Daggers ♣ present ♥ "Among the steppe riders a dagger was typically carried in all periods, and a number of dagger designs are encountered in the archaeological and artistic record." [57]
♠ Swords ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Spears ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Polearms ♣ suspected unknown ♥

Animals used in warfare

♠ Dogs ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Donkeys ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Horses ♣ present ♥ Horses were the means of travel for mobile nomadic warriors since the establishment of cavalry forces by the mid-first millennium BCE
♠ Camels ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Elephants ♣ suspected unknown ♥

Armor

♠ Wood, bark, etc ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Leather, cloth ♣ inferred present ♥ "Shields were known in all periods and, though they are mentioned in the contemporary literature, they only occasionally appear in artistic representations. They were typically made of leather on a reed frame, and a few rare examples survive." [58]
♠ Shields ♣ inferred present ♥ "Shields were known in all periods and, though they are mentioned in the contemporary literature, they only occasionally appear in artistic representations. They were typically made of leather on a reed frame, and a few rare examples survive." [59]
♠ Helmets ♣ inferred present ♥ "Helmets were widely used, although just as much evidence suggests soft, perhaps padded, headgear was also common. All types of helmets typical of the eras in this discussion found expression among the nomads, often with stylistic changes made to suit the tastes of the new nomadic owner. Often, especially among the Turkic and Mongolian tribes, metal helmets had leather neckflaps attached." [60]
♠ Breastplates ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Limb protection ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Chainmail ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Scaled armor ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Laminar armor ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Plate armor ♣ suspected unknown ♥

Naval technology

♠ Small vessels (canoes, etc) ♣ absent ♥ According to personal communication with N. Kradin. [61]
♠ Merchant ships pressed into service ♣ absent ♥ According to personal communication with N. Kradin. [62]
♠ Specialized military vessels ♣ absent ♥ According to personal communication with N. Kradin. [63]

Fortifications

♠ Settlements in a defensive position ♣ absent ♥ According to personal communication with N. Kradin. [64]
♠ Wooden palisades ♣ absent ♥ According to personal communication with N. Kradin. [65]
♠ Earth ramparts ♣ absent ♥ According to personal communication with N. Kradin. [66]
♠ Ditch ♣ absent ♥ According to personal communication with N. Kradin. [67]
♠ Moat ♣ absent ♥ According to personal communication with N. Kradin. [68]
♠ Stone walls (non-mortared) ♣ absent ♥ According to personal communication with N. Kradin. [69]
♠ Stone walls (mortared) ♣ absent ♥ According to personal communication with N. Kradin. [70]
♠ Fortified camps ♣ absent ♥ According to personal communication with N. Kradin. [71]
♠ Complex fortifications ♣ absent ♥ According to personal communication with N. Kradin. [72]
♠ Long walls ♣ suspected unknown ♥ km.
♠ Modern fortifications ♣ absent ♥ According to personal communication with N. Kradin. [73]

Phase II Variables (polity-based)

Institutional Variables

♠ RA ♣ ♥

Limits on Power of the Chief Executive

Power distributed

♠ Constraint on executive by government ♣ ♥
♠ Constraint on executive by non-government ♣ ♥
♠ Impeachment ♣ ♥

Social Mobility

Status

Elite status

♠ elite status is hereditary ♣ present ♥ "at least four recognized levels in the administrative hierarchy, almost all of whose members came from the ruling Ashina clan."[74]

Religion and Normative Ideology

We are interested here in any systems of thought and behavior that can influence people's actions, which we term a Normative Ideology. Normative ideologies are thought-systems concerned with the correct behavior of people, governments/leaders, and other groups (and particularly the relationships between these groups).

Mainly, this will be a religious or ritual system. As usual, when we mention Religious or Ritual System our focus is on the 'official cult', defined the same way as in the Rituals section:

With the official cult we refer to the set of collective religious practices that are most closely associated with legitimation of the power structure (including elites, if any).

However, Normative Ideologies are not restricted to religious/ritual systems. They include other thought systems, such as philosophy or anything that prescribes a particular pattern of behaviour. An example is classical Greek philosophy, such as the works of Plato and Aristotle, who were concerned with correct or moral behaviour and whose thoughts influenced the actual practice of several societies (the empire of Alexander the Great, notably).

♠ RA ♣ Enrico Cioni ♥ The name of the research assistant or associate who coded the data. If more than one RA made a substantial contribution, list all.

Deification of Rulers

(‘gods’ is a shorthand for ‘supernatural agents’)

♠ Rulers are legitimated by gods ♣ present ♥ "Chinese sources and Turk inscriptions show that the Turk rulers constantly orientated themselves towards the east. These rulers would be called 'divine' (or 'celestial', tengri) and designated as 'heaven-like' or 'heaven-created'. Heaven was also credited with giving them their empire. This 'heaven-god' was called 'the Tengri of the Turks'. He was 'high' and 'blue', and gave men strength. Tengri punished with death refusal to obey the legitimate ruler." [75]

♠ Rulers are gods ♣ suspected unknown ♥ Not entirely clear. Baldick writes that "rulers would be called 'divine' (or 'celestial', tengri) and designated as 'heaven-like' or 'heaven-created'", that the ruler was "descended from a wolf", but also that "they [did] not worship and call 'god' anyone except the creator of heaven and earth" [76].

Normative Ideological Aspects of Equity and Prosociality

These codes refer to acts undertaken without direct compulsion from or out of adherence to a religious system (religious aspects of prosociality are coded below)

♠ Ideological reinforcement of equality ♣ present ♥ Buddhism is fundamentally egalitarian: every human being has a potential to achieve what Buddha achieved, regardless of class or ethnicity [77].

♠ Ideological thought equates rulers and commoners ♣ absent ♥ "Chinese sources and Turk inscriptions show that the Turk rulers constantly orientated themselves towards the east. These rulers would be called 'divine' (or 'celestial', tengri) and designated as 'heaven-like' or 'heaven-created'. Heaven was also credited with giving them their empire. This 'heaven-god' was called 'the Tengri of the Turks'. He was 'high' and 'blue', and gave men strength. Tengri punished with death refusal to obey the legitimate ruler." [78]
♠ Ideological thought equates elites and commoners ♣ present ♥ Buddhism is fundamentally egalitarian: every human being has a potential to achieve what Buddha achieved, regardless of class or ethnicity [79].

♠ Ideology reinforces prosociality ♣ present ♥ “The twofold benefit of living a morally good life is linked to a twofold motivation: ‘Protecting oneself, one protects others; protecting others, one protects oneself ’ - just as each acrobat in a balancing act protects his partner by concentrating on himself, and protects himself by concentrating on his partner (see SN 47:19). If we take care of our own spiritual development, we render a service to others; and if we develop love towards others, we thereby also help ourselves. Accordingly, it is explicitly stated, someone who pursues the path of salvation only for his or her own benefit is to be censured, while the one who follows the path for one’s own benefit and for the benefit of others is to be commended (see AN 7:64).” [80] “Three segments of the Noble Eightfold Path (3 - 5) are traditionally subsumed under the principle of morality (śīla): ‘right speech’ (3), ‘right action’ (4) and ‘right livelihood’ (5). [...] ‘Right action’ is explained as abstaining from harming and killing sentient beings - including animals (!), and further as abstaining from ‘taking what is not given’ and from sexual misconduct, which means avoiding sexual relations with women who are still under the protection of their families, or with those who are married, betrothed, or celibate for religious reasons. From monks and nuns complete sexual abstention is demanded. ‘Right livelihood’ means abstaining from those sources of income which involve harming other beings: trading in weapons for instance, or trading in living beings, meat, intoxicants or poison; also included is the avoidance of fraud and avarice.” [81]

♠ production of public goods ♣ present ♥ “Leading a moral life is seen as having a wider social dimension as well. Establishing public parks, constructing bridges, digging wells and providing a residence for the homeless (see SN 1:1:47; similarly Jat 31) - all these are commended.” [82]

Moralizing Supernatural Powers

♠ Moral concern is primary ♣ inferred absent ♥
♠ Moralizing enforcement is certain ♣ present ♥
♠ Moralizing norms are broad ♣ present ♥
♠ Moralizing enforcement is targeted ♣ present ♥
♠ Moralizing enforcement of rulers ♣ present ♥
♠ Moralizing religion adopted by elites ♣ present ♥
♠ Moralizing religion adopted by commoners ♣ inferred absent ♥
♠ Moralizing enforcement in afterlife ♣ present ♥
♠ Moralizing enforcement in this life ♣ present ♥
♠ Moralizing enforcement is agentic ♣ inferred absent ♥

These data were reviewed by expert advisors and consultants. For a detailed description of these data, refer to the relevant Analytic Narratives, reference tables, and acknowledgements page. [83] [84] [85]

References

  1. (Rogers 2012, 226)
  2. (Hosszú 2012, 285)
  3. (Rogers 2012, 226)
  4. (Rogers 2012, 226)
  5. (Beckwith 2009, 115-116)
  6. (Rogers 2012, 226)
  7. (Sinor 1990, 289-290)
  8. (Sinor 1990, 291)
  9. (Hosszú 2012, 285) Hosszú, G. 2012. Heritage of Scribes: The Relation of Rovas Scripts to Eurasian Writing Systems. Rovas Foundation.
  10. (Hosszú 2012, 285)
  11. (Rogers 2012, 226)
  12. (Rogers 2012, 226)
  13. (Rogers 2012, 225)
  14. (Hosszú 2012, 285) Hosszú, G. 2012. Heritage of Scribes: The Relation of Rovas Scripts to Eurasian Writing Systems. Rovas Foundation.
  15. (McEvedy and Jones 1978) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London.
  16. (McEvedy and Jones 1978) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London.
  17. (Rogers 2012, 225)
  18. (Hosszú 2012, 285) Hosszú, G. 2012. Heritage of Scribes: The Relation of Rovas Scripts to Eurasian Writing Systems. Rovas Foundation.
  19. (Findley 2005, 43)
  20. (Findley 2005, 45-47)
  21. (Findley 2005, 48)
  22. (Findley 2005, 45)
  23. (Findley 2005, 45)
  24. (Beckwith 2009, 115)
  25. (Findley 2005, 45-47)
  26. (Rogers 2012, 225)
  27. (Rogers 2012, 225)
  28. (Rogers 2012, 225)
  29. (Rogers 2012, 225)
  30. (Sinor 1990, 296)
  31. (Sinor 1990, 291)
  32. (Hosszú 2012, 285) Hosszú, G. 2012. Heritage of Scribes: The Relation of Rovas Scripts to Eurasian Writing Systems. Rovas Foundation.
  33. (Sinor 1990, 291)
  34. (Hosszú 2012, 285) Hosszú, G. 2012. Heritage of Scribes: The Relation of Rovas Scripts to Eurasian Writing Systems. Rovas Foundation.
  35. (Sinor 1990, 291)
  36. (Hosszú 2012, 285) Hosszú, G. 2012. Heritage of Scribes: The Relation of Rovas Scripts to Eurasian Writing Systems. Rovas Foundation.
  37. (Hosszú 2012, 285) Hosszú, G. 2012. Heritage of Scribes: The Relation of Rovas Scripts to Eurasian Writing Systems. Rovas Foundation.
  38. (Hosszú 2012, 285) Hosszú, G. 2012. Heritage of Scribes: The Relation of Rovas Scripts to Eurasian Writing Systems. Rovas Foundation.
  39. (Hosszú 2012, 285) Hosszú, G. 2012. Heritage of Scribes: The Relation of Rovas Scripts to Eurasian Writing Systems. Rovas Foundation.
  40. (Kradin 2015, personal communication)
  41. (Kradin 2015, personal communication)
  42. (Kradin 2015, personal communication)
  43. (Kradin 2015, personal communication)
  44. (Kradin 2015, personal communication)
  45. (Kradin 2015, personal communication)
  46. (Baumer 2012) Baumer, Christoph. 2012. The History of Central Asia: The Age of the Steppe Warriors. I.B.Tauris. London.
  47. (Di Cosmo 2002, 84) Nicola Di Cosmo. 2002. Ancient China and Its Enemies: The Rise of Nomadic Power in East Asian History. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
  48. (Baumer 2012) Baumer, Christoph. 2012. The History of Central Asia: The Age of the Steppe Warriors. I.B.Tauris. London.
  49. (Di Cosmo 2002, 84) Nicola Di Cosmo. 2002. Ancient China and Its Enemies: The Rise of Nomadic Power in East Asian History. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
  50. (Baumer 2012) Baumer, Christoph. 2012. The History of Central Asia: The Age of the Steppe Warriors. I.B.Tauris. London.
  51. (Di Cosmo 2002, 84) Nicola Di Cosmo. 2002. Ancient China and Its Enemies: The Rise of Nomadic Power in East Asian History. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
  52. (Clarke 2006, 21-22) John Clarke. A History of Ironworking in Tibet: Centers of Production, Styles, and Techniques. Donald J LaRocca. ed. 2006. Warriors of the Himalayas: Rediscovering the Arms and Armor of Tibet. Yale University Press. New Haven.
  53. (Clarke 2006, 22) John Clarke. A History of Ironworking in Tibet: Centers of Production, Styles, and Techniques. Donald J LaRocca. ed. 2006. Warriors of the Himalayas: Rediscovering the Arms and Armor of Tibet. Yale University Press. New Haven.
  54. (Findley 2005, 45)
  55. (Turnball 2002) Turnball, S. 2002. Siege Weapons of the Far East (1): AD 612-1300. Osprey Publishing.
  56. (Atwood 2004, 229)
  57. (Karasulas 2004, 28)
  58. (Karasulas 2004, 29)
  59. (Karasulas 2004, 29)
  60. (Karasulas 2004, 30)
  61. (Kradin 2015, personal communication)
  62. (Kradin 2015, personal communication)
  63. (Kradin 2015, personal communication)
  64. (Kradin 2015, personal communication)
  65. (Kradin 2015, personal communication)
  66. (Kradin 2015, personal communication)
  67. (Kradin 2015, personal communication)
  68. (Kradin 2015, personal communication)
  69. (Kradin 2015, personal communication)
  70. (Kradin 2015, personal communication)
  71. (Kradin 2015, personal communication)
  72. (Kradin 2015, personal communication)
  73. (Kradin 2015, personal communication)
  74. (Rogers 2012, 225)
  75. Baldick, J. 2012. Animal and Shaman: Ancient Religions of Central Asia p. 39. London: I.B. Tauris.
  76. Baldick, J. 2012. Animal and Shaman: Ancient Religions of Central Asia p. 39. London: I.B. Tauris.
  77. Vesna Wallace 2017, pers. comm. to A. Dupeyron and P. Turchin
  78. Baldick, J. 2012. Animal and Shaman: Ancient Religions of Central Asia p. 39. London: I.B. Tauris.
  79. Vesna Wallace 2017, pers. comm. to A. Dupeyron and P. Turchin
  80. Schmidt-Leukel, P. 2006. ‘’Understanding Buddhism’’ p. 63. Edinburgh: Dunedin Academic Press.
  81. Schmidt-Leukel, P. 2006. ‘’Understanding Buddhism’’ p. 64. Edinburgh: Dunedin Academic Press.
  82. Schmidt-Leukel, P. 2006. ‘’Understanding Buddhism’’ p. 65. Edinburgh: Dunedin Academic Press.
  83. http://seshatdatabank.info/databrowser/moralizing-supernatural-punishment-acknowledgements.html
  84. http://seshatdatabank.info/databrowser/moralizing-supernatural-punishment-narratives.html
  85. http://seshatdatabank.info/databrowser/moralizing-supernatural-punishment-nga_tables.html

Beckwith, C. I. 2009. EMPIRES OF THE SILK ROAD: A History of Central Eurasia from the Bronze Age to the Present. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Findley, C. V. 2005. The Turks in World History. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Karasulas, A. 2004. Mounted Archers of the Steppe 600BC-AD1300. Oxford: Osprey.

Rogers, J. D. 2012. Inner Asian States and Empires: Theories and Synthesis. Journal of Archaeological Research 20:205-256

Sinor, D. 1990. The establishment and dissolution of the Türk empire. In D. Sinor (ed.) The Cambridge History of Early Inner Asia, 285-316. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.