ISSN: 0898-6827
      A   A   C   A   R     B   U   L   L   E   T   I   N
       of the Association for the Advancement of Central Asian Research, Inc.
 Editor: H. B. PAKSOY                  Vol. II No. 3  Fall 1989
       EDITORIAL ADDRESS: Box 1011  Rocky Hill, CT 06067
INSTITUTIONAL  MEMBERS:  Program  on Nationality  and  Siberian
Studies,  W. Averell Harriman  Institute for Advanced  Study of
the Soviet Union, COLUMBIA  U.; Mir Ali Shir Navai  Seminar for
Central Asian Languages and Cultures, UCLA; Program for Turkish
Studies,  UCLA;  The   Central  Asian  Foundation,   WISCONSIN;
Committee  on Inner  Asian  and  Altaic  Studies,  HARVARD  U.;
Research   Institute  for  Inner  Asian  Studies,  INDIANA  U.;
Department   of  Russian  and  East  European  Studies,  U.  of
MINNESOTA;  The National Council  for Soviet and  East European
                         IN THIS ISSUE
--  Muhammad Ali         "Let Us Learn Our Heritage"
--  Kahar Barat          "Discovery of History: The Burial Site
                         of Kashgarli Mahmud"
--  News of the Profession
--  Richard N. Frye      "Ecology and Empire: A Symposium"
--  Book Reviews
INDIVIDUAL  MEMBERSHIP  IN AACAR  is  available  to individuals
through  the payment  of tax-deductible,  annual  dues covering
January  1 -  December  31,  includes  subscriptions  to  AACAR
BULLETIN  (twice annually)  and,  by  arrangement, CENTRAL  AND
INNER ASIAN STUDIES, an independent journal. Send your check or
money order (no cash, please) for  $25.00 (US funds only), made
to  AACAR, Prof.  Audrey L.  ALTSTADT,  Treasurer, c/o  History
Department, CCSU, 1615 Stanley Street, New Britain, CT 06050.
All  institutions  are  encouraged  to  provide  related  news,
funding, support and employment  announcements for inclusion in
AACAR   BULLETIN.   ADVERTISEMENTS   from  publishing   houses,
booksellers, applicable  service providers will  be considered.
Please contact the Editor for rates with proposed copy.
All information reported is believed to  be correct at the time
of publication. AACAR BULLETIN suggests that readers verify the
events  and particulars  of  an  announcement  with  the  named
organizers  and contacts, and  regrets that AACAR  BULLETIN can
assume   no   responsibility  for   cancellations,  amendments,
postponements or the like. AACAR BULLETIN reserves the right to
edit  any  material  submitted  for  space  considerations.  As
customary, inclusion of an event  or item in an issue  does not
AACAR  BULLETIN           Fall 1989
necessarily imply endorsement  by AACAR BULLETIN, AACAR  or its
Officers. All opinions expressed are those of their authors.
AACAR  is a  non-profit, non-political,  scholarly association,
incorporated  in  the State  of  Connecticut,  Headquartered at
Department of  History, Central  Connecticut State  University,
1615  Stanley  Street, New  Britain,  CT 06050.  AACAR BULLETIN
gratefully acknowledges  the subvention received from  the CCSU
toward the publication of this issue.
AACAR  is  a tax-exempt,  publicly  supported organization,  as
defined under section  501(c)(3) of the Internal  Revenue Code.
Therefore,  all membership  dues, grants,  contributions, gifts
and donations made to AACAR are tax-deductible.
When contacting the named organizations and persons, it will be
greatly  appreciated   if  the   source,  AACAR  BULLETIN,   is
AACAR  BULLETIN           Fall 1989
AACAR BULLETIN  is published  with funding  derived from  AACAR
Membership dues, and  the mailing subvention provided  by CCSU.
Therefore,  readers  of  AACAR BULLETIN  should  be  aware that
courtesy copies cannot be provided indefinitely. We urge you to
send in your Membership checks at your earliest convenience, to
ensure uninterrupted  delivery. To  become a  Member of  AACAR,
please see  the front  page for details.  Paid-up members  will
receive election ballots this fall.
The Internal Revenue  Service has  ruled that AACAR  is a  tax-
exempt,  publicly  supported  organization,  as  defined  under
section 501(c)(3) of the Internal  Revenue Code. Therefore, all
membership  dues, grants,  contributions,  gifts and  donations
made to AACAR are tax-deductible.
       LET US LEARN OUR INHERITANCE: Get to Know Yourself
                          Muhammad Ali
[The following is an adaptation of a treatise serialized in two
consecutive issues  of Yash  Leninchi (Young  Leninist), during
August 1988. A recent traveller to the Uzbek SSR kindly brought
this piece to the attention of AACAR BULLETIN. Even in the year
of 1989, not every  publication printed in the USSR  is allowed
to leave the boundaries of the Soviet Union. Similarly, foreign
subscriptions for many a journal  and newspaper are unavailable
through any  outlet. Yash  Leninchi falls  into that  category.
Therefore, and in view of the language of publication, it seems
certain  that  this  essay  was  intended solely  for  domestic
consumption.  It  is worded  very  carefully,  in a  spirit  of
reforming the existing  system, to expand  to the Uzbeks  those
freedoms currently enjoyed by other nationalities of the USSR.
     The editors of Yash Leninchi provide information about the
author of "Get to know Yourself":
     "Uzbekistan  Lenin  Komsomol,  and  KK  [Karakalpak]  ASSR
     Berdak State  Prize Laureate,  poet Muhammad  Ali is  well
     known  to the readership.  He is one of  our poets who has
     contributed to our literature on historical topics. He has
     dastans entitled Mashrab, Gumbazdagi Nur, and his books on
     revolutionary  historical  topics Kadimgi  Koshuklar, Baki
     D nya are  renowned. Today you  will read  another of  his
     historical essays."
This piece (completed July, 1988) may be construed as an effort
by M. Ali to write, or at least facilitate the construction of,
the true history of Central Asia for  the masses in an era when
the  Soviet leadership  is  pledging not  to  leave any  "blank
spots" in history.  The result  is a product  quite apart  from
those  works  which  are  designed  and  propagated  under  the
auspices  of the  Soviet  Party apparatus  -- according  to the
AACAR  BULLETIN           Fall 1989
dictates of the  CPSU organs, a process  extensively documented
by Professors Wayne Vucinich and C. E. Black.
     It  must  be  observed  that  true history  writing  under
various  disguises, despite  official sanctions to  quell those
efforts, is not at all a new phenomenon  in Central Asia. Since
the  early  1970s,  long predating  the  Gorbachev's "openness"
campaign, quite a  few works have been produced  and published.
There are, in  fact, too many to mention in this limited space.
One of the important aspects of the particular piece at hand is
that it does  not employ disguises  (e.g yarn; short story;  or
fiction genres), which were liberally used in earlier works  of
this type  expounding the same  themes: for example  by Alishir
Ibadin in his "Sun is  also Fire" printed in the  Uzbek journal
G listan (No. 9,  1980). "Sun is  also Fire" has been  analyzed
elsewhere by  H. B. Paksoy,  with a  detailed introduction  and
critical apparatus.
     Moreover, efforts to identify  and disseminate information
concerning the true "roots" of Central  Asians can be traced to
two previous  "waves" of  native Central  Asian leadership:  1)
1920-1939 period,  which was  suppressed through the  Stalinist
liquidations, 2) and  even an earlier  era, the second half  of
the 19th century.  Examples from both of  these periods survive
in abundance, in  Central Asian dialects, published  in Central
Asian cities, in three alphabets.
     A  final point concerns  the definition and  the nature of
"identity," historical or contemporary. There is ample evidence
in recorded history that Central  Asians had their own formulas
for  defining,  safeguarding  and,  when  necessary,  staunchly
defending their  collective identities going back  centuries --
if not millenia. As  a result, it becomes necessary  that those
means employed by  the Central Asians  be studied on their  own
terms, rather than attempting to fit them into models developed
to  study  other manifestations  of "nation"  and "nationalism"
elsewhere. Along those lines,  it should be noted that  the so-
called "pan-Turanianism," or "pan-Turkism" was developed not in
Central Asia, but in  Europe, as a side-show to the "Great Game
in Asia." The  Game formed  one of the  integral components  of
"balance of power"  struggles of European politics  during 19th
and early 20th centuries, and in  part sought to impede Russian
advance towards British India. Professor Edward Ingram has been
studying the Great Game in Asia in his works.
     Annotations  are  provided  in  square  brackets "[]",  to
render 'navigational  aids' for  the non-historian  reader. The
author's style, punctuation,  and the  use of parentheses  pair
"()" and ellipses are preserved to  the extent possible. M. Ali
includes  excerpts  from  original  works,  to  illuminate  his
arguments.  Where  feasible,   English  translations  of   such
quotations  are  substituted  from  existing  works,  indicated
     Recently  two   authors,  G.  Borovik   and  A.  Mikhailov
participated  in the  Central television's  "Position" program,
AACAR  BULLETIN           Fall 1989
and discussed the proposition that old monuments of the ancient
cities of Bukhara and  Samarkand have no connection (!)  to the
Uzbek people... This certainly  begs the question: if they  are
not related  to the  Uzbek people,  to whom  are they  related?
Arabs? Mongols? Russians? These types of questions cause one to
think, taxing the  imagination. Seeking justice is  a difficult
endeavor, however, the struggle for truth is both necessary and
an obligation.
                      The Ancient Setting
     The land between the two great rivers of Central Asia, Amu
Darya  and Syr  Darya, was known  to the ancients  as Turan [W.
Bartold, Turkestan Down  to the Mongol Invasion.  London, 1977,
Fourth  Ed.  P.64.  Russian original  was  published  in 1900].
Later, it became known as Turkistan,  and after the invasion of
the Arabs, Maveraunnehr.  In the ancient  Turk language [In  no
Turk  dialect  exists  a  distinction   such  as  "Turkic"  and
"Turkish."  That   delineation  was  introduced   into  Western
languages and  Russian during the 19th century],  the Syr Darya
was known as Enchioghuz, the Amu  Darya as  k z [Ox]. [Kasgarli
Mahmut, Diwan Lugat  at T rk  (DLT) (completed c.1070),  Editio
Princeps by Kilisli  Rifat, 3 Vols. Istanbul,  1917-19. English
Translation by R. Dankoff with J. Kelly as Compendium of Turkic
Dialects 3 Vols.  Cambridge, MA.,  1982-84. P.42]. Also,  there
are suggestions that "Enchioghuz" is related to "Enchi k z." It
is also  thought that  this is  a derivative  of "Ikinci   k z"
[Second Ox].  Greek troops  entered and  occupied Central  Asia
under the command of  Alexander in 329 BC. At  that time, Greek
historians recorded in  transcription that the river  was named
 k z in the Turk language.  Consequently, in Europe, this river
became known as Oxus.  The 19th century Hungarian  historian A.
Vambery wrote a book about his visit to our  homeland under the
title  Travels  to  Transoxiana   [Vambery  was  the   original
articulator of the "Pan-Turanian" notion, a  political position
of the  European players  of the  "Great Game  in Asia," was  a
Jewish-Hungarian  professor  of  Oriental  Languages,  wrote  a
series of books.  E.g: Travels in  Central Asia. London,  1865;
Sketches   of  Central  Asia.  London,  1868;  Das  T rkenvolk.
Leipzig, 1885.  The first  one of  these is  cited by  Bartold.
Documents located  in the Public Records Office-London indicate
that Vambery was in the British service]. This testifies to the
fact that the land in question was known as Turan.
     In  Firdawsi's  Shahnama  [Theodor  N ldeke, Tr.,  Bombay,
1930,  written in the  ca. 11th century,  it is based  on older
oral tradition], there  is plenty of information  about ancient
Turan. This world renown poet wrote  about the Iranians and the
Turanians  with affection,  in  detail;  including  the  fights
between the Iranian  king Kavus  and his predecessor  Keyhusrev
and  the  Turanian  king   Afrasiyab;  Rustam  dastan;  Suhrab,
Siyavush  dastans; the  story  of Afrasiyab's  daughter Manija,
putting down their  relations on  paper, from various  aspects.
AACAR  BULLETIN           Fall 1989
When referring to Turan, and  its inhabitants, Turks, the  poet
uses  such  terms  as the  "Men  of  Turan,"  "Land of  Turan,"
"Turanian troops;" "Inhabitants of Turan;"  "Men of the Turks;"
"Land of the Turan;" "Turk  Cavalry;" "Offspring of the Turks;"
the  Business  of the  Turks;" "Maidens  of Turan;"  "Heroes of
Turan." These clear gleanings of that author provides us with a
good picture. [The author provides examples from Shahnama.]
     One of the prominent personages  mentioned in Shahnama, as
Afrasiyab, the ruler of Turan, is Alp Ertunga, styled Tunga Alp
Er  in  other  sources.  The   great  scholar  Mahmud  Kashgari
[Kashgarli Mahmut], who explained the term "Turan" in his Diwan
Lugat at-T rk, writes: "Tunga - A creature of the tiger family.
It  is the  one  that  kills the  elephant.  This  is its  root
meaning; however, this word has remained with the Turks and its
meaning persists among them. It is often used as a title, thus:
King Afrasiyab, chief  of the Turks,  had the title 'Tunga  Alp
Er' meaning 'A  man, a warrior, as  strong as a  tiger.'" [DLT,
P.605]. Also, our  great poet Yusuf  Has Hajib, in his  Kutadgu
Bilig [(KB) Written  in 11th c.  by Balasagunlu Yusuf --  Khass
Hajib= Grand Chamberlain -- translated as Wisdom of Royal Glory
by  R.  Dankoff.  Chicago,  1983]  describes Afrasiyab  in  the
following words: "If you observe well  you will notice that the
Turkish princes are  the finest in  the world. And among  these
Turkish princes the one of outstanding fame and glory was Tonga
Alp Er.  He was  the choicest  of men,  distinguished by  great
wisdom and virtues  manifold. What  a choice and  manly man  he
was, a clever  man indeed--he devoured  this world entire!  The
Iranians call him Afrasiyab,  the same who seized and  pillaged
their realm." [KB, L.276]
     [M.  Ali provides  quotations referring to  Turkistan from
Alishir  Navai's  Tarih-i  M lk-i  Ajam,  written  after  1485.
Reportedly of Uyghur descent, Navai (1441-1501) was the premier
literati and statesman of his time, wrote voluminously and with
apparent ease  in Chaghatay, a  Turk dialect, and  Persian, and
concomitantly was the long-time serving 'prime minister' of the
Timurid Huseyin Baykara  (r. 1469-1506) of Herat  and Khorasan.
Much of his writings remain untranslated.  In 1500,  zbeks -- a
newly constituted confederation  on the  historical pattern  of
previous Turk confederations  --  of Shibani  (a.k.a. Shaybani)
Khan  entered Transoxiana and Shibani Khan  declared the end of
the  Timurids. Shibani himself fell in battle in 1510, fighting
against the Safavids  (dynasty r. 1501-1736) of Shah Ismail (r.
1501-1524). Shah Ismail  was in return defeated  by the Ottoman
Sultan  Selim I (r.  1512-1520) at Chaldiran,  in 1514. Shibani
and  zbeks also fought Babur -- see below -- which are detailed
in his Baburnama.  Babur sought  and received the  aid of  Shah
Ismail and his kizilbash Safavids.]
AACAR  BULLETIN           Fall 1989
     The observations of Mahmud Kashgari require a closer look.
Explaining the  word "Kent" (city), he wrote:  "Among the Oghuz
and those  who associate  with them,  it means  town among  the
Turks. The chief  city of Ferghana  is called  z Kent,  meaning
'city of our souls.'  Samiz Kent meaning 'fat city,'  is called
thus because of its great size;  it is, in Persian, Samarkand."
[DLT,   P.173]   In   explaining  Afrasiyab's   daughter   Koz,
interesting information is  provided: "Name of the  daughter of
Afrasiyab. She  is the one  who built  the city of  Kazvin. The
root  form of this  is; 'kaz oyni,'  meaning 'Kaz's playground'
since she used to live there and  play. For this reason some of
the Turks reckon Kazvin  within the borders of the  Turk lands.
Also the  city of Qum, since: Qum is  in Turkic 'sand' and this
daughter  of  Afrasiyab used  to  hunt there  and  frequent it.
Others of them reckon (the borders) from Marv as-Shahijan since
her father: Tonga  Alp Er--who is Afrasiyab--built the  city of
Marv, three  hundred years  after Tamhurat  built the  citadel.
Some  of them  reckon all  of Transoxiana as  part of  the Turk
lands, and in the first place:  Yarkand (Baykand). This used to
be called  Dizruin, meaning  (in  Persian) 'city  or castle  of
brass'  because  of  its  strength.  It  is near  the  city  of
Bukhara." [DLT, P.509]
     Specifically about the ruler of Turan, Afrasiyab, there is
interesting  information  in  Samariya   by  the  19th  century
Samarkand  historian Abu Tahirhoja. This historian explains the
origin  of  the name  Samar:  "the  name  of  a Turk  Khan,  he
established  this  kishlak  (winter  quarters)."  The   Russian
orientalist W. Bartold, in his Turkistanin Madani Hayati Tarihi
[Russian original  was published in 1918. The  same argument is
also  in  Turkestan,  P.64.]  wrote:  "The region  between  the
nomadic Turk empire  and the Sasanid dynasty's  state is termed
Amu Darya. For  the Iranians,  the lands beyond  Amu Darya  was
known as Turkistan, meaning, the land of the Turks."
     The  lesson  to  be  derived  from  these  examples:  when
referring to  Turks living  in Turan,  or Turkistan, the  Turks
thus referenced  are not only  Uzbeks. I also  include Kirghiz,
Kazakh, Turkmens.  The  great tribes  of  the Turks  have  been
domiciled  in  this   region,  and   called  their  own   lands
"Turkistan." In various eras, from the northeast, numerous Turk
tribes--there are 92 (!) such tribes  in the composition of the
Uzbeks--arrived,   augmented,   influenced  and   elevated  the
population... [Z.  V.  Togan,  in  his T rkili  T rkistan    --
Istanbul, 1981, originally written during the 1920s -- provides
lists of the tribes composing various confederations, including
the  Uzbeks].  This  historical   current  continued  for  many
centuries. [The author writes as  if he agrees with R.  N. Frye
and A. M. Sayili, "The Turks in Khurasan and Transoxania at the
Time of the Arab Conquest," The Moslem World XXXV, 1945.]
     At this point, it is necessary to reflect on one point. To
the  land  between  the  two  rivers,   the  ancient  Turan  or
Turkistan,  without  regard  to  the  historical  evidence, the
contemporary  historians  refer   with  its  Arab  designation,
AACAR  BULLETIN           Fall 1989
"Maveraunnehr"--  first  of all,  this  does not  designate any
country-- it is  also contrary to  historical evidence. In  his
collected scholarly works, the great historian Bartold, regards
this land as "Turkistan" and considers  all the events it, from
the ancient to contemporary, with that designation.
              Two Maidens wearing satin waistcoats
     A look at  the history of the Uzbeks tells  us that theirs
is closely related to the sister Tajik peoples. Their lives and
histories are intertwined  with each other,  having contributed
enormously to  the world  civilization. The  friendship of  the
Uzbeks and  the Tajiks  is an  amazing event,  the likeness  of
which is not observed  elsewhere. Uzbek is a member of the Turk
languages, whereas  Tajik belongs to the  Indo-European. Though
their languages have different origins,  in every other quarter
they share similarities. Because, their life-styles, tradition-
ceremonies, hospitalities,  culinary arts  are  the same.  They
intermarry, wear the same clothes, their tastes complement each
other.  It  is not  so  easy  to determine  which  maiden, both
wearing satin  waistcoats, is Uzbek or Tajik, speaking in their
own  tongues, nor  does  it ever  occur  to  anyone to  try  to
ascertain. Likewise, it  is noteworthy  that their arts,  music
are common, especially their "shashmakam." [This is a  style of
melodic tonality, contour and pattern. Traditionally, each such
"key"  and  pattern, which  number in  the  dozens, is  given a
name.] The melodies of the Tajiks and the  Uzbeks are very much
intermingled, and is difficult to separate, just like trying to
sort  the maidens.  While on the  topic, the  great Abdurrahman
Jami [d.1492, Persian,  friend and  eminent fellow literati  of
Navai], in his treatise dedicated to music, classifies the Turk
rhythmic patterns  under four:  "Turki asli  jedid, Turki  asli
kadim, Turki hafif,  Turki sarilar." If the  Persian-Tajik poet
looked at the  Uzbek music, the  Uzbek poet Alishir Navai  [see
above] wrote the Furs Salotini. [No  reference to this title is
found in the  available Navaiana.]  These examples display  how
the two people's histories, lives and cultures  are so entirely
combined.   Though   their  languages   are   different,  their
similarities are truly amazing.
     In the  days old, it  was said that  the Persian mind  was
suited to the  pen, and the mind  of the Turk  possessed sword-
sharp [native] intelligence. The nature of the Persians exhibit
passion  toward  knowledge,  they wrote  the  history  of their
homeland, created  discourses. Today we  read those  treatises,
become more familiar  with world  history and appreciate  them.
They applied themselves to the affairs of state in the palaces,
served as the  scribes, artists. They distinguished  themselves
by producing  books on advice (Kabusnama, Chahar Makala and the
like), [the first one is by Iskandar Kai Ka'us, tr. R.  Levy, A
Mirror for Princes.  London, 1951; the  second by Nizami  Arudi
Samarkandi, tr.  E. Browne.  London, 1921]  which is  naturally
related to  the secrets  of their involvements.  The factor  in
AACAR  BULLETIN           Fall 1989
keeping language in demand-- is invention, constant activity of
enlightened  pen  in all  fields  of knowledge  and literature.
Hudaynamak, Shahristanhoy  Iran (unfortunately, these  two rare
books  did not  come down  to  us, but  we know  them  from the
writings  of  Firdawsi and  Tabari), Shahnama,  Siyasatnama and
Gulistan and many  other books were  born to this world  by the
endeavors of the men of pen.  [Siyasatnama was written by Nizam
al-Mulk  (d.  1092), 'prime  minister'  to Alparslan  (r. 1063-
1072), and his  son Malik  Shah (r. 1072-1092)  of the  Seljuks
(dynasty r. 1040-1156), tr. H. Darke  The Book of Government or
Rules for  Kings. London,  1960.  As for  "Gulistan": too  many
books  are either  entitled  or  include  this  word  in  their
appellation  to  be  readily  identifiable  without  additional
     The sword-sharp minded Turks were not usually found in the
cities,  but  mainly  preferred  to   reside  in  the  kishlaks
[wintering quarters],  summer pastures  and steppes.  Thus they
became the  vanguards in battlefields,  and fell upon  them the
duty and  the primacy  of the sword.  The renowned fame  of the
Turk troops is  thus. They were at  the head of the  state, and
Turkistan was ruled by  Turk dynasties from the fifth  century.
The majority of  the Iranian rulers-- Seljuks  [followed by the
Khwarazm-Shahs  1156-1230],  Gaznavids   [994-1186],  Safavids,
Halokuiy [sic - Kara- or Akkoyunlu? Latter ruled  1449-78, both
are  tribal   confederations  related  to   the  Oghuz/Seljuk],
Nadirshah  Afshar  [1730s-1747; the  Afshar  tribe has  been in
existence before and remained viable after], Kajars [1794-1925]
are  members  of  the  Turk  families.  For these  reasons,  in
contrast to the Iranians, Turks did not become acquainted  well
with the pen but followed the path of the sword.
     "The political primacy  of the Turks in  present Turkistan
was established in  the 6th c."  writes W. Bartold  [Turkestan,
P.186]. The invading  Arabs arrived  in this land,  and in  the
first place, fought against the Turks, because they constituted
the major power. The  Sogdians in the Zarafshan valley  and the
Khorazmians along the Amu  Darya did not pose a  serious threat
to the invaders. The sizeable  influence of Turk Hakans  [Khans
of the Turk Empire before 8th c.], and their troops were facing
Iran  and  Byzantium in  the  West,  the Chinese  in  the East.
Naturally, without  the Turks  losing their  power, it  was not
possible for the Arabs to subdue  Turkistan. Arabs defeated the
Turks in a  battle along the Syr Darya during  the third decade
of the 7th c. After this loss, the Turk lands were  broken into
pieces.   Arab   established  rule,   Arabic   language  gained
influence. In this language the affairs were conducted, volumes
were  penned,  representatives  of civilized  peoples  produced
poetry and universal works in Arabic.
     Thus, prior to our present era,  Arabic should have gained
primacy,  but it  did  not, and  instead Persian  began gaining
influence. The Badawis [i.e. Arabs]  accepted this language and
AACAR  BULLETIN           Fall 1989
began to contribute to its development more  than the Persians.
During this period, there were large migrations from Iran  into
Turkistan. That  is why, as noted above, Mahmud Kashgari wrote:
"...after the  arrival of  Persians, these  cities became  more
Iranized," which indicates that  this scholar was aware  of the
settlement policies. As a result madrasas of the  Persian style
began to be built in Turkistan, Persian language and literature
traditions became  important. With  the rise  of the  Samanids,
this development reached  its zenith, and Persian  was elevated
to the  status of the language of state. Bartold wrote: "During
the 10th c.  the refined  language of the  educated strata  was
differentiated  from Iranian,  and we  know that from  poets of
Turkistan  origin such  as Rudaki  who held  a highly  esteemed
position among the Perians." Then, it  became necessary for the
population to know  Persian well, as  the affairs of state  and
education in the  madrasas were  conducted with it.  Naturally,
scholarship,  history  and  literature were  produced  in  that
language. The knowledge of this  language became a necessity of
life for  the Turks,  thus they not  only learned it,  but also
began to produce works in it. At  the time, it was difficult to
encounter  a Turk  who did  not know Persian-Tajik.  Many Turks
fell under  the influence  of this  state language,  aspired to
secure pecuniary  interest through  state sponsored  positions,
and went about speaking Persian. They even were  afflicted with
the malady of forgetting their mother-tongue.
     That  current continued at length.  We learn this from the
writings of Alishir Navai, recorded five centuries prior to our
present  time:  "...  witty  and  elegant  Turk  youths  busied
themselves  with  making poetic  pronouncements,  in Persian...
This passion,  born among the  people, did not  manifest itself
wisely or intelligently in their native language...."
     "Turk  ulus" [usually rendered "nation"], the poet states,
"should  express their passions in their  own language," and he
gave the reason: "[Otherwise]  comprehension may be  channelled
into this course, and in  time, may be found inclined  to stay,
and  perhaps  [become]  powerless  to  leave that  domain."  Of
course, time and practice are capable of deeply influencing the
mind, and  render reversal difficult. The mind  comes under the
influence of time and  practice, in other words, the  power and
force  of  tradition  constitute  an  enduring set  of  values.
Customs  remain   alive  and   their  rules   do  not   change.
Accordingly,   these  practices  were   not  altered,  and  the
influence of Persian-Tajik  language in  the 20th c.  Turkistan
still continues. Among all Turk and Uzbek peoples, the language
of state was Persian-Tajik, even  within the political entities
of  Timur  [properly,  Tem r,  a Barlas  Turk,  founder  of the
Timurid empire, r.  1369-1405], Ulugbek [Tem r's grandson,  who
ruled  Samarkand  and environs,  d.  1449, author  of principal
astronomical and mathematical works which were  translated into
Latin beginning with 16th c. and printed] and Bab r [1483-1530,
founder  of  the   Moghul  empire  in  India,   another  direct
descendent  of Tem r,  an  accomplished  author in  Chaghatay],
AACAR  BULLETIN           Fall 1989
affairs of state  were conducted  in that langauge,  historical
treatises,  literature   were  created   and  became   popular.
Consequently,  the  "witty  and  elegant"  youths of  the  Turk
nation-- their poets  and scholars, historians, in  addition to
their  own  language, were  capable  of creating  works  in the
Persian-Tajik langauage.
     As alluded to above, the works of those poets and scholars
who did  not write  in the  influential language  did not  gain
following. That, in turn, cast doubts on ability and talent. It
is  possible  to  provide  many examples  on  the  influence of
tradition.  Historical  works,  names  of  dastans  (here  also
related to the  Persian-Tajik literature), poetry in  the genre
of  hamse,  were produced  in  Arabic: Hamse,  Lujjat-ul asrar,
Mantik-ut tayr,  Hazayin-ul  maani, Mahbub-ul  kulub, etc.  The
name of  the work devoted  to the  sum total of  Turk language,
Diwan Lugat  at-T rk ...  is Arabic!  Muhakamat ul-Lugateyn  --
Arabic! [Despite its title, this  influential treatise by Navai
--  on the comparison of Turk and Persian languages -- in which
Navai staunchly  defends "Turki,"  was written  in Turki,  also
termed  Chaghatay in  that  era.  It  is available  in  English
translation, by R. Devereux].  A principal of the Golden  Horde
in the Syr Darya  region, Muhammadhoja (XIV c.), wrote  to poet
Khwarazmi:  "In  the depths  of  your heart,  you  possess many
pearls/ on earth, you  wrote Persian dastans/ I wish  you would
utilize our language/  to produce a  monument in my court  this
     Khwarazmi later  wrote his famous Muhabbatnama dastan. The
poet  was not able  to break out  of the mold,  and despite the
invitation to "create a work in our language" [i.e.  Chaghatay-
Turki], he composed  portions of  it in Persian-Tajik...  Yusuf
Amiri  (XV  c.) named  the chapters  of  his dastan  Dahnama in
Persian-Tajik. About the  Bang va  chagir munazarasi, the  poet
said:  "I  constructed  it using  Turk  vocabulary  and Persian
style..." In the work, poems in Turk and Persian are mixed.  We
also observe  this in  Yakini's Ok  ve yay munazarasi.  Ulugbek
wrote the introduction to Zijji Kuragsni in Persian, translated
it  into  Arabic.  Alisher  Navai   wrote  diwans  in  Persian.
Baburnama [memoires  of the  above refrenced  Babur, translated
into English at the turn of the 20th c.] contains  many Persian
poems and  rubai. Muhammad Yakub  Chingi (XVII c.)  compiled an
Uzbek-Persian/Tajik   dictionary,   with  an   introduction  in
Persian. Nadira wrote a diwan in Persian-Tajik...
     If we were  to continue  in this  vein, we  would have  to
mention all  of the  representatives of  the Uzbek  literature.
Pahlavan Mahmud,  Husrav Dehlavi  (in his  Urdu language  diwan
Gurrat-ul  kamal,  the  poet writes:  "I  am  of  the Turks  of
India..." indicating that he is a Turk. In his book Hindustanin
keshf  edilishi, J.  Nehru wrote:  "...the most famous  work on
India in this era is  by a Turk living in the XIV century, Amir
Husrev").  Jelaleddin  Rumi [b.  in Balkh 1207,  lived in  Asia
Minor, d. 1273 in Konya, then in the domains of the Seljuks and
their successor principalities,  now in  the central plains  of
AACAR  BULLETIN           Fall 1989
the  Turkish  Republic],   Mirza  Abulkadir  Bedil,  Zebunnisa,
Gulbeden are  among the  "witty  and elegant  Turk youths"  who
composed works in Persian-Tajik. In doing so, they were largely
adhering  to  the aforementioned  traditions.  Abu Nasr  Farabi
[Turk  philosopher,  d. 950?]  wrote poems  in Persian,  two of
which are  extant.  His  utilization  of Persian  ought  to  be
considered an "expediency of the times."
     To derive a  lesson: Therefore,  in considering the  poets
and  scholars  who  have produced  works  utilizing  Arabic and
Persian-Tajik, before labelling  them to  belonging to this  or
that people,  of course  we must  consider the  effects of  the
tradition. Passing judgement  on their pedigree based  on their
choice of language  will not  be correct. Because,  if we  look
closer,  they  turn  out to  be  the  representatives of  other
nations. There is fairness...
                         The Headwaters
     Recently,  renowned film-director  Latif Fayziev  spoke on
television   regarding   movies  connected   to   our  history.
Discussion turned  to the slavery  of the stagnant  years [this
appears to be a new standard  reference to the Brezhnev reign].
The occasion was  thus. The  Director was  working with  Indian
firms on a movie about Babur. (In this regard, it is helpful to
remember the words of  Rajiv Gandhi, the Prime Minister  of the
Indian  Republic.   In  his   book  Hindistanin   Keshfedilishi
[Discovery  of  India]  Moscow:  Khudozhestvennaia  literatura,
1987. In it, R. Gandhi  published "Sovet kitabhanlariga maktub"
[Letter to the Soviet Booklovers], in which he said:  "Ulugbek,
a  descendent  of  Timur, astronomer  and  ruler  of Samarkand,
utilized the works of Indian mathematicians. Babur, young jigit
of  Ferghana,  the  fearless  commander  and  cultured  author,
founded our Moghul Empire in Ganges valley, and began referring
to  himself as an Indian.") [In Baburnama, Babur's own comments
might suggest  otherwise.] However,  we were  not permitted  to
produce that movie. The same director  intended to make a movie
about Chingiz [d. 1227]. Again, no permission...
     Recently, one of the Moscow  newspapers announced that the
Kirghiz film-director  T. Okeav  is making  the movie  "Chingiz
Khan,"  in  collaboration  with  an  USA  firm.  The  movie  is
scheduled for production,  both for  the TV (8  parts) and  the
screen (4 parts), for  two years... We were not  permitted. Our
aforementioned   film-director  wished   to   make  the   movie
"Samarkandnama." Scenes involving Mukanna, Temur, Spitomin were
to be included,  but... Once again, no  permission! The project
about Omar Khayyam died...
     One must  wonder. Should  not  even the  smallest word  be
allowed  about  the  reasons!  The  framework of  these  movies
embrace the distant past  of the peoples of Central  Asia. Were
the permissions denied  because they pertain to  the historical
past of  the people,  or were  there other  reasons, the  film-
director did not indicate.
AACAR  BULLETIN           Fall 1989
     It is regrettable.  There are also  those who look at  our
history with sophistry.  One example. Professor M.  Vahabov, in
his article "O pravde--tol'ko pravdu"  (Pravda Vostoka, 21 June
1988), wrote  that Timur  is being  idealized, but  he did  not
support his argument  with a  serious fact.  Whatever facts  he
cited, they  are devoid of  substance. An earnest  and truthful
reconstruction  of the activities of a historical person is not
idealization,  but   a  necessity.  Not  fully   detailing  the
narration  would  be a  falsification  of history...  Let alone
idealization, he is to be disgraced!  It is a humanitarian duty
to write history. But  the professor is correct in  one aspect:
It  is not  essential  to idealize  Timur,  it is  unnecessary.
Timur-- world conqueror,  established an empire with  the force
of sword, oppressive ruler,  a typical sovereign of  the middle
ages...  But, describing  Timur  only in  those terms  would of
course be  a subjective historical  treatment. Samarkand, known
as one  of the  magnificent cities  of the  world, the  Ulugbek
observatory,  "Zijji  Kuragani," the  works  of Alisher  Navai,
Baburnama,  have  elevated the  classical  Uzbek  literature to
exalted  heights...  Whether  we  like  it  or  not,  these are
connected  to the  Timurid  period, and  we  cannot deny  these
historical  facts.  Consequently,  the  Timurid  period  is  an
inseparable portion of the history of  our homeland, and of the
     Timur and  his period  must be  weighed on  the scales  of
justice  by  our historians  and  written accordingly,  and the
resulting  revelations   taught  to   our  youngsters   openly.
Otherwise, if a  blind spot is  created, his name removed  from
the  books  and  papers,  does  not  that  create  a defective,
counterproductive and  alluring attraction? The  truth must  be
addressed  by  its own  name,  and  idealization is  not  being
defended here. White is white, black is black. Time has come to
write them  by their names.  As W.  Bartold said,  if the  past
experts  were  proved  correct [their  information  verified --
Bartold   vehemently   advocated   approaching    the   sources
critically], than it is easier to see the truth.
     Karl Marx spoke  of Timur's activities, stated  that Timur
strengthened the role  of the ruler,  updated the laws then  in
force, and these precautions  appear in direct contrast to  the
harshness  of  his  military  campaigns.  [Bartold  often  took
exception to the  writings of Marx.  Reportedly, on one  public
occasion, when queried  as to what  Marx would have said  about
the topic on which  he was lecturing, Bartold replied:  'I know
of  no   Orientalist  named  Marx.'   Continued  opposition  to
Bolshevik  historiography  landed Bartold  in  Baku as  a quiet
internal exile,  where he  died in  1930, at the  age of  61.].
"While  pondering  those  specialist   accounts  detailing  the
historical services rendered by individuals -- said V. I. Lenin
-- the  fact that  they may  provide more  truthful views  than
those demanded by the present is not always considered, despite
their closeness  to the events,  and even the  possibility that
they may bring  fresher views  on the issue  compared to  their
AACAR  BULLETIN           Fall 1989
predecessors might have been overlooked."  [If anyone can trace
the original, the Editor  shall be pleased to hear  from them].
When  evaluating our  history and  the known personages  in it,
especially commenting on  the matter of Timur,  it is necessary
for us to keep im mind the Marxist-Leninist precepts.
     Naturally, elocutionary works on the most profound periods
of our history are rather scarce. The reason for that is, under
various excuses, those who produce works on  the topic practice
[self] censorship, holding  back information. We do  recall the
"Navai," "Yuldizli tunlar" novels. Our  historians, who have to
show  activity,  ought  to  write  research  on  those  periods
according  to  tested  concepts. Moreover,  since  we  write so
little about our own history, it is necessary to translate into
our  language  those works  already  existing.  As  we did  not
perform our own work, we should  gratefully recall the names of
a group of  renown Russian Orientalists. Their  services to the
history of our  people are priceless. These  scholars certainly
are  in no  need of  our praises  [i.e. they  are already  well
known], but for  our own information  we need to be  acquainted
with them...
     Vasilii Vladimirovich Bartold (1869-1930) [Wilhelm Bartold
descended from a German family settled in the  Russian Empire].
Out of his 685 works of this Great Russian Orientalist, 320 are
devoted to the history of Central  Asia. He participated in the
establishment  of  the  Central  Asian  State  University.  His
writing   of  history   grounded  on   voluminous  [historical]
manuscripts has created an important event. Consider a sampling
of his works dedicated to the history of Uzbekistan: "Turkistan
at the time  of the Mongol  Invasion" [see above], "Sources  on
the previous channels and  beds of the Aral Sea from  the early
times to the XVII century,"  "Irrigation History of Turkistan,"
"Ulugbek  and his Era,"  "Cotton planting in  Central Asia from
the earliest  times to  the arrival  of the Russians,"  "Twelve
lectures on the history of the  Turkic people in Central Asia,"
"Mir Alisher [Navai]  and political  life," "Burial of  Timur,"
"History of the  Turk-Mongol Peoples," "History of  the Central
Asian Civilization,"  "History  of  Turkistan,"  "The  people's
movement in Samarkand during 1365"...   [Bartold's sochnineniia
was published as a large multi-volume  set in Moscow, over much
of the  1960s and 1970s].  All these works,  without exception,
detail our past  and history. Reading  and learning them is  as
necessary as water  and air. Unfortunately,  at this time,  the
majority of those works are not available in Uzbek! This is the
importance we have attached to our  beloved history and to that
great  scholar!  On the  other hand,  the  said works  had been
translated into  other  languages.  For  example,  "Ulugbek..."
Turkish (1930), German (1936), English (1958),  Persian (1958);
"Mir Alisher..." German (1933), Turkish (1937), English (1962).
This ought to be a lesson to us.
AACAR  BULLETIN           Fall 1989
     If the "Mir Alisher [Navai] and political life" were to be
issued in Uzbek  on the  550th birth anniversary  of the  great
poet, it  would have  been an  opportunity to  comply with  the
wishes of  the great scholar,  for he  desired his works  to be
translated into Uzbek. Similarly, "Ulugbek and his times" ought
to be translated  and published by 1994, to be a present to the
600th anniversary of this great astronomer's birth. Naming of a
corner  in Tashkent to honor  Bartold's services to our history
and people  would also  speak of  our regard  for this  Russian
scholar and the Russian people.
     Vasilii   Lavrentievich   Viatkin   (1869-1932),  renowned
archeologist, professor. In  1913 he  excavated the "fresco  of
Afrasiyab wall."  During 1908-1909, he unearthed and identified
the outstanding historical monument of  our people, the Ulugbek
observatory,   which  had   been   buried.   He  proposed,   in
Turkestanskie vedemosti newspaper, that a  statue of Ulugbek be
erected  in Samarkand. We should  not forget that this proposal
was made in a  colonized country of the Tsarist  Russia. "Mirza
Ulugbek and his  observatory in  Samarkand," "Old Monuments  of
Samarkand,"  "Afrasiyab  --  the  ancient  Samarkand  setting,"
"Ancient  Samarkand architecture" occupy  an important place in
the understanding of the history of Samarkand. He also arranged
for the  publication of  "Uzbek language  textbook for  Russian
schools"  (1923)   and  "Persian  language  textbook."   It  is
necessary to know the works of Viatkin in Uzbek, for it  is not
sufficient to have them only in Russian.
     Alexandr Iur'ievich Iakubovskii (1886-1953), famous Soviet
Orientalist. This  scholar  has many  works on  the history  of
Uzbekistan. The opportunity to collect and publish them both in
Uzbek and in Russian presents itself.  His works such as "About
the  ethnogenesis of  the Uzbek  people," "Mukanna  kuzgoloni,"
"Timur.  An  experiment  in  characterization,"  "X-XV  century
Central  Asian  feudal society  and  commercial  relations with
Eastern  Europe" provide  us  with  contemporary  and  relevant
information. It is  requisite that "Navai  and Attar" of E.  E.
Bertels [a high level functionary  in the Oriental Institute in
Moscow during 1930s-1950s, charged with managing the history of
the  "Soviet East"], as  well as his monograph  on Navai; A. A.
Semenov's articles  devoted to  our history  be translated  and
published in Uzbek. Azerbaijan scholar  Ziya Buniatov's [Bunyat
oglu -- the present  Director of the Oriental Institute  of the
Azarbaijan Academy  of  Sciences] historical  monograph on  the
Khwarazm Shah ought to be appreciated.
     Alas,  the  works cited  are but  only  a sampling  on our
history  and  literature  penned by  world  renowned  scholars.
Another point. We  could ask  why are the  historical-scholarly
works are printed so  scarcely in Uzbek, and the works of Uzbek
scholars generally not published (Y. Gulamov's Kwarazm history,
M. Yoldashev's Khiva state archives are exceptions). Indeed, we
may wonder what  our students  and those among  us who  believe
themselves  to be  educated  know, who  are  familiar with  the
histories of Jan Gus [perhaps, the reference is to Johannes Hus
AACAR  BULLETIN           Fall 1989
von Husinetz, 1374-1415, Bohemian religious reformer], and Ivan
Bolotnikov.  We are  astonished to discover  that they  are not
acquainted with Mahmud Tabari [Muhammad bin Jarir at-Tabari, d.
923. His works were translated into Western languages beginning
1879, and published  from 1901 on].  V. O. Kliuchevskii  stated
that  general history cannot be known  without the knowledge of
the local history.
     We do not  know our own  history well.  This is almost  an
axiomatic statement. The most deplorable aspect is that we  are
not being  encouraged to learn and know our history. Sufficient
effort is  not being expended  to train specialists  in various
eras of our history,  nor is proper use made of  those we have.
Training  of talented  textualists,  capable  of analyzing  old
manuscripts  is  neglected.  These  trends  must  be  reversed.
Recently  a  Society  of  Historians  was  established  in  our
republic. We hope that this  organization will work to evaluate
the facts and disseminate the results, rather than falling into
atrophy once again. While  we thirst to be acquainted  with our
beloved  history,  to  solve its  many  mysteries  by utilizing
historiographical methods, we primarily view the dereliction of
the Uzbek SSR  Academy of  Sciences and  scholars therein  with
contrition. In the past, the  name of the Uzbek SSR  Academy of
Sciences vice-president E.  Yusupov's name has  been abundantly
visible in  the  press,  and he  also  repeatedly  appeared  on
televison and radio.  His sincere  statements on the  questions
concerning  the  life of  our  republic  -- be  it  on economy,
philosophy,  ecology,   sometimes  on   history,  problems   of
preservation of heritage and civilization -- are an example. He
speaks  especially  about  turning  the   economy  in  the  new
direction,  and  also  on  the  success of  preparing  national
workers and cadres. In  order to produce more cotton,  the main
endeavor ought to  be in knowing cotton  cultivation, generally
the new national  laborer cadres should  be channelled in  that
direction. Along  the same  lines, groups  of laborers  brought
from the central  raions to work  in the industrial plants  and
factories.  The  scholar believes  that  serious steps  must be
taken to prepare national laborers and cadres.
     These are the choices of the established scholar of social
sciences in our Academy.  We are entitled to  require solutions
to the problems of our republic from those sciences. Presently,
the results are nothing to be proud of.
     Restructuring efforts  are passing and  lamentably we  are
not benefiting from  this auspicious current to  strengthen our
scientific-scholarly  endeavors  in a  timely  manner. At  this
point it occurs  to me  there is  a question that  ought to  be
addressed by our academy  and history scholars -- the  question
of the  Uzbek people's  ethnogenesis, and  the the  creation of
their history.
     It requires collective labor to document the  ethnogenesis
(meaning  the  formation)  of  a  people.  To  understand  this
AACAR  BULLETIN           Fall 1989
synthesized movement,  it  is necessary  to invoke  the aid  of
branches  of   knowledge  such   as  archeology,   ethnography,
linguistics,  and history.  Investigation  of  eras and  social
pressures  are made  with inevitable  accompanying assumptions,
instead of learning  the ethnic history  well and studying  the
history of peoples. The knowledge of  the arrival of the people
[on the  scene of  history], their identity,  the streams  from
which they flowed to form the [vast] rivers, the whereabouts of
those mountain ranges  giving birth to those  cascading streams
is the main objective, rather than sitting  on the shore of the
river  pinning  your  hopes on  it.  Ethnogenesis  and people's
ethnic  history  is   the  beginning  of  history.   Currently,
precisely this  history is  not studied...  It is  necessary to
state,  for  the purposes  of comparison,  that the  history of
ethnogenesis is being researched among the sister Tajik, Tatar,
Bashkurt peoples.
      Considering the importance of the topic, the Presidium of
the Uzbek Academy of  Sciences, at the beginning of  the 1980s,
passed  a  resolution  for  the  study  of the  Uzbek  people's
ethnogenesis. Those who  heard it, wondered with  amazement. An
unoffical   consultative  group   was   established,  and   the
corresponding  member  of  the Uzbek  SSR  Academy  of Sciences
Ahmadali Askarov (now he  is a full Academician)  was appointed
as  the  supervisor. [Presently,  Academician  A. Askarov  is a
Vice-President   of   the  UzSSR   Academy   of  Sciences.   An
archeologist  by  training,  he  oversees  most of  the  social
science departments,  including history].  To this group,  more
than twenty history  scholars were summoned. But,  nothing went
beyond the words,  the decision  remained on paper.  It is  now
clear that  the effort  was not taken  up with a  serious hand.
However, during 1986,  a book entitled Materials  Pertaining to
the  Ethnic  History  of  the  Peoples   of  Central  Asia  was
published,  containing scholarly  reports  [doklady] of  eleven
authors. The curious thing is,  despite the Academy Presidium's
decision to create an ethnic history,  it was not undertaken in
a scholarly manner. Secondly, no  practical aid was rendered to
the  group, the attendant  needs of the  summoned scholars were
not  taken  into consideration,  in  truth they  were  not even
gathered  in one  place... The  leadership of the  Academy, who
think  the  human  factor  is   dry  words,  according  to  the
inclination of the  stagnant years,  ought to  take the  matter
seriously.  However  we  do  have   capable  scholars  who  can
undertake  the task-- A. Askarov, R. Mukiminova, B. Ahmedov, K.
Shaniyazov... The lethargy may be  perpetuated. It is necessary
speedily  to undertake  the study  of the  ethnogenesis of  the
Uzbek people, their dawn! So far,  no words have appeared about
the history of our people. If we  knew our history well, we can
respond to those claims  that the ancient treasures of  Bukhara
and Samarkand have no relation to the Uzbek people, showing how
illogical they are.
AACAR  BULLETIN           Fall 1989
"Granted, each individual may be  proud of being the  offspring
of a  particular people,  praising  that fact  to the  heavens,
experience the  accompanying pride,  it is  no  harm" --  wrote
Valentin  Rasputin in  his  article 'Knowing  one's  self as  a
citizen' (Pravda, 24  July 1988).  "All may be  proud of  their
origins...  Armenian - of being an  Armenian, Estonian -- being
an Estonian, Jew -- being Jewish, Buriat -- being a Buriat. Now
permit the Russians to  become a member of this  'free friendly
family.'  They  have  also somewhat  contributed  to  the world
culture and civilization..."
     With pleasure,  I wished to convey these  sincere words of
the Russian author to the esteem of my Uzbek people.
                            *  *  *
                          Kahar Barat
[Kashgarli Mahmud  is the author of Divan  Lugat it-T rk (DLT),
completed ca.  1077 AD. This  unique MSS was  discovered during
the First World  War in Istanbul,  and the Editio Princeps  was
made by Kilisli Rifat (1917-1919). DLT has been translated into
English,  with  an  extensive  critical  apparatus,  by  Robert
Dankoff, in  collaboration with  James Kelly,  under the  title
Compendium of the  Turkic Dialects, 3  Vols., (Number 7 in  the
series: Sources of Oriental Languages and Literatures, S. Tekin
& G. A. Tekin, Eds.: Harvard University  Printing Office, 1982-
1985  [available through:  Tekin, P. O.  Box 1447,  Duxbury MA,
02332). Since its discovery during the First World War, the DLT
continues  universally and  fundamentally to  influence Central
Asian  studies.  As  very  little  was  known  about  Kashgarli
Mahmud's era,  the events outlined  below are most  welcome for
the  recovery  of  history.  Broadly  viewed, that  period  was
distinguished by struggles for the mastery of Central Asia with
the  Karakhanids  in the  East,  Seljuks  in the  West  and the
Ghaznavids in the center,  in the area from the  Altai mountain
range to the Oxus river. The news of the discovery of Kashgarli
Mahmud's burial site appeared in the People's Republic of China
(PRC)  media.  This   communication  presents   a  summary   of
information from modern Uyghur sources. Mr. Barat is a doctoral
student  at  Harvard  University,  Inner  Asian  and  Altaistic
Studies program.]
     After  word emerged  that work  on the  Uyghur edition  of
Divan Lugat it-T rk  had begun in Xinjiang,  Kashgarli Mahmud's
name enjoyed a resurgence of popularity among the Uyghurs. When
the  news  of this  effort  became  public, it  was  heard that
Kashgarli Mahmud's  burial site was  located in the  village of
Opal, 45 kms.  west of Kashgar.  In 1981, A. Rozi  reported the
discovery. (In DLT, the name of this village is spelled "'Bul,"
and  is called  by Kashgarli  Mahmud,  "one of  our homelands."
AACAR  BULLETIN           Fall 1989
Dankoff notes that the spelling could  have been "abul." In the
Masnawi Shirip MSS [see below], this name is spelled as "Uyfal"
or  "Oyfal." In the Arabic script, the  letters `b' 'y' and `p'
are distinguished from one another by  one, two and three dots,
respectively, below the line.)
     Details of Kashgarli  Mahmud's life are scant.  O. Pritsak
suggested that Mahmud was a student of Husayn ibn Muhammad, who
was the  eldest son  of Muhammad  ibn Yusuf  and  was mayor  of
Barsgan; and that Mahmud fled from a court revolt in Kashgar to
Baghdad.  (O.   Pritsak,  "Mahmud  Kasgari   Kimdir?"  T rkiyat
Mecmuasi  X.  Istanbul, 1953.  Reprinted  in the  same author's
Studies in Medieval Eurasian History [London: Variorum, 1981]).
     During December  1982, the editors  of the Uyghur  DLT, I.
Muti'i  and  M.  Osmanov,  went  to  Opal  to  investigate  the
authenticity of  the reports.  Muti'i and  Osmanov organized  a
forum to collect  the recollections of the local  populace. The
people called the site  "Hazrati Molla Mazari," and spoke  of a
Tazkire  (written history  of the  shrine) which  was in  their
possession until 1956, and contained the name Mahmud bin Husayn
-- as Kashgarli Mahmud signed his name in the DLT.
     The shrine  has been  cared for  by  a Sheykh  (hereditary
caretaker)  family,  and  they had  a  Tazkire  of  it, but  it
"disappeared in the hands of  archaeologists," stated people at
the forum. "In  1956, Ismail Ibrahim  (from Opal), now head  of
the cultural office  of Kashgar Kona-Shahar, obtained  the book
from  a man  named Mahammat  Congsa and  gave it  to Yusup  Beg
Mukhlisov." I.  Ibrahim and Y.  Mukhlisov were both  working in
the Xinjiang museum at that  time. After that, Mukhlisov  moved
to the USSR.  In his  notebook of  1957, which is  kept in  the
Xinjiang Museum,  I. Ibrahim recorded  the shrines in  the Opal
area and he wrote  "Hazreti Mollam, name Kashgari, died  in 477
Hegira."  In  1981, A.  Rozi wrote,  "The book  named Tazkira'i
Hazrati Molla  was written in  1791 by  the historian  Muhammat
Abdul-Ali from Kashgar."
     Before  it  was given  away,  the  Tazkira  was  a  sacred
possession of the Sheykh family and local people. The people at
the forum made many statements to Muti'i and Osmanov from their
memory,  all  of these  testimonies seem  to  have come  from a
single source  and it  is hard  to imagine  that the  villagers
could have  made it  up. Their  interviews have  been published
[and are quoted here from Uygur  sources]. Among the interviews
was one which  states "Fifty years ago, I saw  a document about
that shrine from past Sheykhs. It  was copied from the original
document of 'Hazreti Mollam' because while Badawlat (Yaqup Beg)
was mayor of Kashgar, he collected  all shrine documents in the
Kashgar area. The preface of  the document of 'Hazreti  Mollam'
read  something  like  this:  'I  am  Hazreti  Mollam,  Mawlana
Shamsaddin Allam Mahmudiya.  I have donated my  ...Patman land.
After  I  die, if  some  of  my descendants  become  Sheykh and
Mutawalla to my shrine, with permission, they must till my land
without selling it, without making  their own property, without
inheriting  it,  [they can]  make  [or  use?] ...  oq  [unit of
AACAR  BULLETIN           Fall 1989
measure] with  grains, the  Sheykh can use  ... oq  of it,  the
Mutawalla can use ...  oq of it, use ... oq  for repairs, spend
for the visitors from many places.'"
     The  information from  these statements is,  as suggested,
consistent,  and  may  be summarized  as  follows:  (1) Hazreti
Molla's  name  was Mahmud  ibn  Husayn al-Kashgari,  his father
Husayn  was  mayor of  Barsgan  with  the title  Amri  Sab; his
mother, Bubi Rabiya  (or Bubi Rabiya Basri), was an intelligent
woman; (2) Mahmud went to Iraq  and Iran to study; he travelled
through the dangerous pass "Muq  Yolu;" (3) After he  returned,
Mahmud or  his student killed  a beast and Mahmud  taught for 8
years as a Mudderis. He died in 477 A.H. at the age of 97.
     Muti'i  and  Osmanov  also  discovered  during  this  trip
another hamlet  nearby, with  the name  of S sar  Agzi. It  had
originally been called Azikh. Azikh is  recorded in DLT as "the
name  of  one  of  our  villages."    According  to  the  local
citizenry, the name change took place  between 100 to 150 years
ago, after a flood.  In an interview, Dawut Zumun, age 90, from
S sar Aghzi  < Azikh,  stated: "My father  died in 1952  at age
110. My grandfather's name was Kanji Ghojikam. The former  name
of the hamlet  was Azikh. Later  on it  was inundated by  flood
waters from S sar Aghzi which left behind sand, so the name was
changed to 'Qumbagh.'  [Qum means  sand in  Turkish.] 'When  we
were growing up,  it was Qumbagh,' my father told me. Now it is
called S sar Aghzi."
     A short time  later, on  January 6, 1983,  an 80  year-old
man, an intellectual,  Emir Husayn Qazi Akhun  brought out from
his home an old written document,  a book titled Masnawi Sirip.
It contains an inscription written in 1252 Hegira which  states
that this book  is dedicated to  the shrine. The importance  of
this inscription lies in the fact that the full name and titled
of the person in the shrine is indicated -- it is the same name
and  title  listed  in  DLT  and  matches  the  claims  of  the
     "On Rajab 14, 1252, the  ox year (October 25, 1836  of the
Common Era), I, the qadi of Kashgar court which was established
on the basis  of the law, Molla  Sadiq Alam bin Shah  Ala, have
signed my seal  as a document  for this: in  my healthy age  of
114, with my  love of and  interest in knowledge,  and with  my
polite  manner, I  have dedicated  forever and  I have  donated
perpetually my book which is the source of wisdom, replete with
the  knowledge,  six  booklets  bound  together in  one  cover,
written with embellishments by the careful pen on the pages, my
expansive property, bought  with gold, to the shrine of Hazreti
Mawlam Sams al-Addin Chin Sahibi Qalam Mahmud al-Kashgari which
is  buried above  the pure spring,  on the hillside  of Opal in
     "I hope writers  and scholars who sit at the  stage of the
shrine  of  Shams  al-Addin  Husayn  Sahibi  Qalam  Mahmud  al-
Kashgari, who sit  around the  S z k Bulag  (the pure  spring),
read this book, pray  to Sahibi Qalam Hazreti Mawlam  Shams al-
Addin Husayn  Mahmud al-Kashgari;  and teach  knowledge to  the
AACAR  BULLETIN           Fall 1989
Muslim  people  and our  descendants  and nations,  making them
superior in quality and excellence. I have appointed my leading
student Molla Heyit Khalpat ibn Molla Ewaz to be the manager of
it. I, Molla Sadiq Alam, have signed my seal below...
     "Witnesses  of  the  truth  of  my statement  are  Ulama-i
Muddaris al-Nazar Akhunum,  Secretary-General Molla  Abdurrahim
Nizari and  secretary  Navruz, secretary  Turdus, Turdi  Shaykh
Akhunum, Molla Gojilaq, Zayidin Qorulbagi from Opal."
     In  June  1983,  a united  archaeological  group  from the
autonomous regional bureau  of cultural relics and  the Kashgar
regional  bureau  went to  Opal  and made  further excavations.
According  to their  report,  the  shrine  is  located  at  the
latitude 37 degrees, 30' 75" north and longitude 50 degrees 18'
39" east. Some pieces  of wood were sent for carbon dating. The
expedition found  many pre-Islamic relics, including  pieces of
Buddhist sculptures and hundreds of Sanskrit pages from Hazreti
Molla Hill. Hazreti  Molla Hill had been a flourishing Buddhist
culture   site  before  Islam.  Local  people  frequently  find
Buddhist sculptures, figures,  jars, etc.  One villager,  Qasim
Qazi Akhun remembered:  "On the hill,  there is an  underground
cave  named  'Toqquz  Qaznaq' ('Nine  caverns'),  when  we were
school children, we  used to  climb the Mazar  and play  there,
entering  through  the top  hole and  getting out  from another
entrance."  (Kashgar Adabiyati 1983, I, p.  9) Forty years ago,
Qadir  Haji, from  the nearest  Mollam  Beghi village,  and his
father Zordun  Akhun, dug up a  room by the hillside,  and when
they opened the  door they found  a big Buddhist copper  statue
weighing  25-30 kg. On  a shelf on  the left wall,  there was a
thick  book  which they  believed  was written  in "Mongolian."
Qadir Haji kept the book until the Cultural Revolution and then
hid the book  when he was accused  but now he can  not remember
where he hid it. (Mahammat Zumum Sidiq, 1983, p.5)
     Wei Liang-tao in pursuing his research on the Qarakhanids,
had  travelled to Hazreti  Molla Mazar and  reported that there
was a  stone inscription on the  shrine. In his  book Sketch of
the History of the Qarakhanids (1983), he stated, "According to
comrade Li Kai, the great  writer's inscription was found  here
during the Great  Cultural Revolution, but  soon after that  is
was moved  to  a new  county cement  plant and  was  used as  a
foundation stone, and now it is difficult to find it again."
     The  discovery of  Kashgarli Mahmud's  tomb  produced much
excitement.  The journal Kashgar  Adabiyati dedicated its first
issue  of  1984  to  this  topic. Kashgar  Uyghur  publications
published a collection Mahmud Kashgari. The government declared
it  a  protected cultural  site and  set  aside 50,000  Yuan to
rebuild it.
     According to the available materials and despite the seven
century gap  in evidence, the person mentioned by the villagers
is apparently Mahmud al-Kashgari, the author of Divan Lugat it-
Turk. Even if  this is not  a genuine shrine,  it may still  be
true that  it was the  source of another  copy of DLT  that was
subsequently lost.
AACAR  BULLETIN           Fall 1989
     In DLT, it is  recorded that the  writing of the book  was
begun in  the beginning of the Hegira Jumada I, 464 (January 25
-  February 23,  1072). We  are told  that Mahmud  died  in 477
Hegira at age 97.  Calculating on that basis, Mahmud  began his
book  at  age 82.  He was  born  in 380  Hegira (March  31 990-
February  991)  and  thus the  year  1990  will  be the  1000th
anniversary of his birth.
                     NEWS OF THE PROFESSION
AACAR BULLETIN  is published  with funding  derived from  AACAR
Membership dues, and  the mailing subvention provided  by CCSU.
Therefore,  readers  of  AACAR BULLETIN  should  be  aware that
courtesy copies cannot be provided indefinitely. We urge you to
send in your Membership checks at your earliest convenience, to
ensure uninterrupted  delivery. To  become a  Member of  AACAR,
please see  the front  page for  details. Paid-up members  will
receive election ballots this fall.
The Internal Revenue  Service has  ruled that AACAR  is a  tax-
exempt,  publicly  supported  organization,  as  defined  under
section 501(c)(3) of the Internal  Revenue Code. Therefore, all
membership  dues,  grants, contributions,  gifts  and donations
made to AACAR are tax-deductible.
contents of  this very  issue of  the AACAR  BULLETIN was  lost
during the final stage of  preparation. The backup copies  were
also  found  to  have  been  corrupted  by  a  directly related
malfunction.  Consequently, reconstruction  of  this issue  was
undertaken  from tertiary  sources.  However,  majority of  the
material  under  the  section  NEWS  OF  THE  PROFESSION,  i.e.
segments  on News of Scholars, their  research; news of related
Scholarly Associations; Journals; Publishers; Booksellers; past
conferences (including  full  lists of  participants and  their
paper topics), adding  up to  approximately twelve more  pages,
were  found  to  be  unreconstructable.  All  such  items  will
continue to be included in the  future issues. In the meantime,
necessary  steps  have been  taken  and all  defective hardware
replaced  to  prevent  similar occurrences  in  the  future. We
regret the delay in the record.
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA, Department of  Russian & East European
Studies  (Professor Thomas  NOONAN,  Chair), has  established a
program  in  Soviet  Central  Asian  Studies.  The  Program  is
directed  by Professor Iraj  BASHIRI, and,  in addition  to two
years  of  Persian Language,  includes  the  following courses:
Readings in Tajik;  Soviet Central Asian Cultural  Sphere (Fall
Term);  Islam  in the  USSR;  Introduction  to the  Culture  of
Afghanistan; Fiction:  Iran and  Soviet Central  Asia; Medieval
Sages: Iran and Soviet Central Asia; The Nomads of the Southern
Russia from the Scythians to the Mongols.
AACAR  BULLETIN           Fall 1989
The  W. Averell  Harriman Institute for  Advanced Study  of the
Soviet Union  of the  COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY  has established  the
Nationality and  Siberian Studies  Program.  Directed by  Prof.
Alexander J. MOTYL,  the Program  Secretary is Charles  FURTADO
Jr., an  advanced graduate student.  The Program also  issues a
Newsletter. Contact: Room 1319, International Affairs Building,
Columbia University, NY NY 10027. 212/280-4668 & 212/854-4668.
The Nationality and Siberian Studies Program of  the W. Averell
Harriman  Institute  for Advanced  Study  of the  Soviet Union,
COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  has  joined  AACAR  as  an  Institutional
Member. We extend our warm collegial welcome.
Urgash DOWLATI  (whose name  in Chinese  transcription is  Wuer
Kaixi), the Uyghur pro-democracy student leader, has managed to
leave PRC despite  being on the "most wanted list" encompassing
21  activists,  and  arrived in  Paris.  Various  US newspapers
indicated  that  during August  he  was in  Chicago, addressing
supporters of  the pro-democracy  movement at  a public  rally.
Reportedly, he  has been  offered a  four  year scholarship  at
Harvard. Urgash  DOWLATI has reached world-wide  prominence due
to his spirited televised dialogue with  the PRC Prime Minister
Li Peng during May 1989.
EVOLUTION OF THE OLD WORLD"  was held at the Center for  Visual
Anthropology, University  of Southern California,  Los Angeles,
3-5 February 1989. The Symposium was dedicated to the memory of
Nobel Laureate  Prof. Richard Feynman  (Physics--Cal. Tech), in
recognition  of  his life-time  interest  in the  Central Asian
Region of Tuva,  its people, and  Kizil, the principal city  in
the area.
     Richard N. FRYE (Agha Khan Professor of Iranian Studies --
 Harvard) kindly provided the following precis.
     "The date of horse riding as  opposed to the use of horses
to pull chariots or  carts was a much discussed  subject during
the symposium. From  the Vedas as  well as archeology it  seems
that the  Indo-Iranians in  their expansion  to the  south rode
chariots and did not use horses  for riding. Horse riding seems
to have been required for the  control of large herds of cattle
or sheep, which is essential for nomadism. Litvinsky defended a
date for the extensive use of  horse riding by nomads beginning
in the ninth century B.C.  while Vainshtein proposed the middle
of the  second millennium B. C.  The date is  important for the
time of Zoroaster among  other reasons, for trying to  secure a
firm  date.It  is a  subject  still  in much  dispute  but with
indications pointing towards the later  rather than the earlier
     Dating was also the subject of  several papers on the site
of Pazaryk, and the  fourth century B. C. proposed  by Rubinson
AACAR  BULLETIN           Fall 1989
was seconded by Jacobson, who convincingly argued  that most if
not all  objects from the graves were  manufactured locally and
not imported  from Iran.  The Achaemenid  motifs,  e.g. on  the
famous carpet, reveal the synthetic properties of later nomadic
art, borrowing from Greek, Iranian and  other arts, as compared
with the earlier, indigenous animal  styles. The attribution of
the  origin  of the  'animal style'  to  China or  Luristan was
attacked by several participants.
     Vasiliev reported continuing work on a three volume corpus
of  Old Turkish (runic)  inscriptions, one  volume of  which is
already published in Moscow, while the others will be published
in Leningrad and Budapest respectively.  He also suggested that
the many inscriptions found on stone statues (balbals) were for
the most part inscribed later than  the carving and erection of
the statues.  His work of  searching for  more inscriptions  is
     Much of the  program was devoted to  prehistoric questions
of alimentation of ancient peoples and  the use of animals. For
example,  it seems that  sheep originally  had smooth  skin and
only  in  the  middle  of  the  fourth millennium  B.  C.  were
domesticated sheep raised for  their wool as well as  for food.
Wooly sheep were  a development of cross  breeding according to
Barber.  Also the change  to an Iron  Age in which  shears were
invented  changed  the  method of  securing  sheep's  wool from
combing and plucking to cutting.  Many such technical questions
were discussed.
     Lawergren  reconstructed  the harp  found  in a  kurgan in
Pazaryk in a model, but Basilov proposed another reconstruction
as a two  stringed instrument  played with a  bow. Whether  bow
instruments were known at  that early time was hotly  discussed
and  the most  favored  position was  that  the instrument  was
indeed a harp.
     For  details  of  publication of  the  papers,  Prof. Gary
SEAMAN of the Anthropology Department of USC may be consulted."
SMITHSONIAN  INSTITUTION will  be  hosting a  symposium "RULERS
November  16-17  1989.  Organized by  Gary  SEAMAN,  Center for
Visual  Anthropology, University  of Southern  California, with
the assistance of Edmund  WORTHY, Smithsonian Institution,  the
symposium focuses on the processes of  geopolitical interaction
and cultural evolution of Central Asia and surrounding regions.
     The symposium complements the  exhibition "Nomads: Masters
of the Eurasian  Steppe", organized by the  Academy of Sciences
of the USSR, in conjunction with  the Natural History Museum of
Los Angeles County.  This exhibition concludes  its US tour  at
the Smithsonian's National Museum of  Natural History, where it
will be on view November 17, 1989 through February 18, 1990.
     The participating US scholars and  their paper topics are:
Thomas BARFIELD  (Boston  U)  "Inner  Asia and  the  Cycles  of
Nomadic  Power;" Michael  DROMPP (Rhodes  Coll.) "Supernumerary
AACAR  BULLETIN           Fall 1989
Sovereigns:  Superfluity  and  Mutability in  the  Elite  Power
Structure  of  the Early  Turks;"  Peter GOLDEN  (Rutgers) "The
Qipchaks  of   Medieval  Eurasia:   An  Example   of  Stateless
Adaptation on  the Steppe;"  Ruth DUNNELL  (Kenyon Coll.)  "The
Fall of Xia: Sino-Steppe Relations in the Late Twelfth to Early
Thirteenth Centuries;"  Thomas  ALLSEN  (Trenton  State  Coll.)
"Changing Forms  of  Legitimation in  Mongol  Iran;"  Elizabeth
Endicott-West (Harvard)  "Aspects of Khitan Liao  and Mongolian
Yuan Imperial Rule: A Comparative Perspective."
     Subject to  final confirmation,  the Soviet  delegation is
likely to be  composed of the  following individuals: Y.  LUBO-
LESNICHENKO (Hermitage  Museum-Leningrad); Lorissa  PAVLINSKAYA
(Institute of Ethnography, Academy  of Sciences of the USSR   -
Leningrad); Evgenii  KYCHANOV (Oriental  Institute, Academy  of
Sciences of the USSR-Leningrad);  German FEODOROV-DAVYDOV (U of
Moscow);  Natalia  ZHUKOVSKAIAI   (Institute  of   Ethnography,
Academy of Sciences  of the USSR); Lorissa LEVINA (Institute of
Ethnography,   Academy  of   Sciences  of  the   USSR);  Galina
LEBEDINSKAYA (Institute of Ethnography, Academy  of Sciences of
the USSR); K. A. AKISHEV (Institute of History, Archeology  and
Ethnography, Academy of  Sciences of Kazakh SSR,  Alma-Ata); O.
B. NAUMOVA (Institute  of Ethnography,  Academy of Sciences  of
the USSR); V. N. BASILOV (Institute  of Ethnography, Academy of
Sciences of the USSR).
     For registration information and further details about the
symposium,  which  is free  and  open  to  the  public,  please
     Office  of Conference Services,  Room 3123, Ripley Center,
Smithsonian Institution, Washington DC 20560.
TRANSITION: IRAN IN THE  15TH CENTURY" will be held  during the
23rd annual conference  of the Middle East  Studies Association
of North  America at  the Sheraton Centre  in Toronto,  Canada,
November 15-18, 1989.  It follows the exhibition of Timurid and
T rkmen  art, "Timur  and  the Princely  Vision,"  held at  the
Sackler Gallery of the Smithsonian  Institution and at the  Los
Angeles County  Museum of Art. It features  ten academic panels
on various aspects of Timurid  and T rkmen history, literature,
culture,  art  and   architecture,  and  will  bring   together
specialists from the US, Canada, Europe, the USSR, Japan, China
and Turkey. For  details, contact the co-organizers:  Dr. Maria
SUBTELNY, Dept. of Middle East & ISlamic Studies, University of
Toronto, Toronto, Canada  M5S 1A1; or, Dr. Lisa GOLOMBEK, Royal
Ontario Museum,  100 Queen's  Park Cres.,  Toronto, Canada  M5S
2C6. Registration for the Symposium should be  done through the
MESA Secretariat, Department of Oriental Studies, University of
Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721.
will be held October 24-26, 1989  at the North Academic Center,
City  College  of the  City  University  of  New York.  Jointly
AACAR  BULLETIN           Fall 1989
sponsored  by Institute  of Muslim  Minority Affairs  (London);
Division of Humanities at CCNY; The Simon H. Rifkind Center for
the  Humanities; Association  for  the  Study of  Nationalities
(USSR   and  Eastern   Europe),  the   conference  Organization
Committee comprises: co-chairmen Dr. Syed  Z. ABEDIN (Director,
IMMA,  P. O.  Box  8856, Jeddah,  Saudi  Arabia-21492) and  Dr.
Michael  RYWKIN (Chairman, ASN,  Russian Area  Studies Program,
CCNY, NY 10031).  Members of the  Organizing Committee are  Dr.
Henry HUTTENBACH  (Editor, Nationalities Papers,  Department of
History, CCNY,  NY  10031), Dr.  Sharifa  M. ZAWAWI  (Dept.  of
Classics,  CCNY,  10031) and  Dr.  Hamid ISMAIL  (Business Mgr.
JIMMA, 46  Goodge Str. London  W1P 1FJ, UK).  Thirteen sessions
are indicated, each consisting of three to five papers.
                          BOOK REVIEWS
A History  of the  Seljuks: Ibrahim  Kafesoglu's Interpretation
and the Resulting  Controversy, translated, edited and  with an
introduction  by  Gary  Leiser.  Southern  Illinois  University
Press, 1988. (P. O. Box 3697  Carbondale, IL 62902). Hardcover,
     Embarking on research  in the Seljuk  era long has been  a
dauntingly formidable  undertaking for the Western  scholar who
possesses a less-than-perfect knowledge of Turkish and the many
other  languages  that  embrace  critically  important  primary
sources. The period  has remained obscured, and  scholarship on
it  inadequate.  Gary  Leiser  performs  a series  of  valuable
services in this publication which are certain to encourage the
advance of scholarly research on the Seljuks.
     Leiser begins  by providing the first  English translation
of Ibrahim Kafesoglu's  article on the  Seljuks as it  appeared
between 1964 and 1965 in the  Islam Ansiklopedisi (IA). For all
who have waded through the dense  Turkish of the original, this
eminently  clear  translation comes  like  a gift  from heaven.
Leiser  suggests that  Kafesoglu's  packed, disconnected  prose
style  may  be  partially  responsible  for the  confusion  and
misinterpretation that have followed.
     The publication of this article invited a biting attack by
Osman Turan,  another of  Turkey's leading  authorities on  the
Seljuks.  Turan maintains  that his  book,  Sel uklular Tarihi,
which  was the original article manuscript  he submitted to the
IA, was wilfully borrowed by  Kafesoglu, the replacement author
of the article for the IA.  Turan dismisses Kafesoglu as merely
a narrator,  incapable of  profound scientific  research or  of
solving  important historical  problems. One telling  detail of
the  absurdity of  the attacks is  that Turan  blasts Kafesoglu
both for plagiarizing him and for NOT plagiarizing him!
      Leiser  gives  helpful  biographical information  on  the
three main characters involved  in this controversy, Kafesoglu,
Turan  and  Professor  Ahmet Ates,  director  of  the editorial
committee of the IA. He then  proceeds to translate the initial
AACAR  BULLETIN           Fall 1989
critique by Turan as it appeared in  Belleten 29 (1965):639-60,
and the  rebuttals from  Ates,  replying in  the same  journal,
Belleten 30 (1966):459-66, and Kafesoglu,  in the same edition,
467-79. Ates stands firmly in support of Kafesoglu, bitter that
the editorial integrity of the IA was brought into question.
     All  three articles  are  unfortunate personal  vendettas,
partially  inspired by professional  jealousy. Prestige  was at
stake for the  scholar who won  the privilege of authoring  the
Seljuks article for the IA. And  in the case of Turan, it  must
be recalled  that his  political activities  had alienated  him
from scholarly circles and he was looking at the  IA article as
a means  to re-establish his  credentials in academia.  What is
important  to  the   reader  is   not  this  oftentimes   petty
backbiting, but  rather the  more fundamental  question of  the
accuracy  of the  article for  ongoing scholarship.  Apparently
Kafesoglu intended to  make some  corrections and revisions  in
the  English translation  of his  article, but  he  died before
completing that task. With the other  two men also passed away,
the   personalities   involved  in   the  controversy   can  be
downplayed, and the next generation of Seljuk scholars can  get
on with the research challenge at hand.
     Leiser   makes  no   attempt  to   resolve  the   swirling
accusations  of  plagiarism  and  shoddy  scholarship,  nor has
anyone  else yet  taken on that  task. He has  made a Herculean
effort to accurately  translate the article and  its footnotes,
as well as the exceptions and counter-exceptions, thus enabling
all future researchers looking at the Seljuks to now begin from
the same body of knowledge.
     Ironically, both  Turan and Kafesoglu actually  ascribe to
very  similar  interpretations  of  Seljuk  history.  That   is
important; their feud much less so.  Leiser's book helps to put
all of this in perspective. In addition to the translations, he
also includes an extraordinarily useful bibliography of primary
sources  for  the history  of the  Seljuks  as well  as revised
genealogical  charts  for  the period.  Gary  Leiser  has taken
Seljuk scholarship an important  step forward, hopefully laying
to rest  a divisive controversy, and  leading the way to  a new
era of serious, collaborative Seljuk scholarship.
                                                  Nancy S. Pyle
                                             Harvard University
Philip A.  Bayer, The Evolution  of the  Soviet General  Staff,
1917-1941.  New York:  Garland Publishing,  1987. (136  Madison
Ave., NY NY 10016).
     Philip Bayer asserts in his recent study  that "the Soviet
General  Staff  evolved   into  the  most  important   military
institution" of the USSR.  This conclusion is not new  but does
serve to emphasize the need for additional study of the general
staff  if  scholars  are  to  better understand  the  formative
experience  of the Red Army  and the forces  that shaped it. To
date,  the  most comprehensive  work  on  the  subject is  John
AACAR  BULLETIN           Fall 1989
Erickson's  The  Soviet   High  Command:  A  Military-Political
History  1918-1941  (London:  Macmillan,  1962).  (A  reprinted
edition  by Westview  Press appeared  in 1984.) In  contrast to
Erickson's  broad  approach,  Bayer  frames  his  investigation
around  three  core questions.  First, to  what extent  did the
Soviet  General Staff reflect the influence  of the tsarist and
traditional German General Staffs? Second, what  importance did
the general staff assume in Soviet politics and society? Third,
what was the  influence of  leading Red Army  theorists on  the
structure and functions of the general staff?
     The formative stages  of the early  Red Army Staff  occupy
two full chapters of  Bayer's analysis and justifiably so.  The
creation of  the Red Army amidst the maelstrom of civil war and
the  disintegration  of the  old  Russian Empire  constitutes a
remarkable episode  in military  history. With  scant practical
experience in  either governmental or  military affairs, Lenin,
Trotsky and their Bolshevik comrades struggled in 1918 to forge
an army and consolidate their tenuous grip on power. The crisis
brought on by war demanded  the adoption of such  ideologically
distasteful but pragmatically essential measures  as the use of
the former  tsarist officers,  who were  subsequently known  as
"military specialists"  or voenspetsy. Many of  the voenspetsy,
such as A.  A. Svechin or B.  M. Shaposhnikov, went on  to play
vital roles after the civil war  in the development of military
doctrine and institutions in the Soviet Union.
     Bayer briefly considers  the collective  influence of  the
voenspetsy and in a subsequent chapter discusses Shaposhnikov's
theories at some length. Extensive research remains  to be done
on the voenspetsy,  entailing both a  deeper analysis of  their
intellectual experiences in the Imperial  Army and their common
political battle for  professional preeminence in the  Red Army
during the 1920s  and 1930s.  Since the  appearance of  Bayer's
work,  the  Soviet  scholar  A.  G.  Kavtaradze  has written  a
pioneering  study, Voennye  spetsialisty na  sluzhbe Respubliki
Sovetov  1917-1920  gg.  (Moscow:  Nauka,  1988), in  which  he
identifies    leading    voenspetsy    and   documents    their
representation  among commanders  in  the Workers-Peasants  Red
Army (RKKA). Although he does not  trace the career patterns of
such officers, Kavtaradze  has nevertheless  opened a path  for
further investigation. Certainly, for example, a closer look at
the careers of officers  who served in Central Asia  before and
after the revolution would  enrich our knowledge of the  way in
which  such  experience  shaped specific  aspects  of  military
doctrine or the employment of non-Russians  in units of the Red
Army. Substantial evidence exists that Red Army officers looked
to  prerevolutionary  experience  for guidance  concerning  the
campaigns against the  Basmachis and the Central  Asian theatre
was  an  occasional  topic  of  analysis  in  the  professional
literature of the 1930s.
     Closer scrutiny of  the careers of  the Red Army  officers
need not be confined to voenspetsy. M. V. Frunze's short tenure
as commander of  the Turkestan front  in 1920, during which  he
AACAR  BULLETIN           Fall 1989
revamped  the regional  military  organization, received  brief
treatment  in M.  A. Gareev's M.  V. Frunze--  Voennyi teoretik
(Moscow: Voenizdat,  1985). By 1922, using a pragmatic blend of
force, propaganda and  expedient concessions (often temporary),
the  Reds  had weathered  the worst  of Basmachi  resistance in
Central  Asia.  Before   his  sudden  death  in   1925,  Frunze
propounded his  central  theory of  unified military  doctrine,
which stressed the  function of social, economic  and political
factors in the generation of military power, and briefly served
as Commissar of War.
      Bayer does not purport to discuss the backgrounds of  the
voenspetsy;  nor  does  he  attempt   to  assess  the  military
experience  in  specific  theatres.  Rather,  he  confines  his
analysis of the roots  of the Soviet General Staff to a concise
examination of  the  German  General  Staff and,  to  a  lesser
degree, its counterpart in Imperial  Russia. Using Bronsart von
Schellendorff's nineteenth-century treatise, The  Duties of the
General  Staff,  as his  point  of departure,  Bayer identifies
similarities  in  the  structure and  functions  of  the Soviet
General  Staff  with  the  German  model.  A  more  substantial
critique of  the tsarist  general staff,  based on  use of  the
professional literature  of the  Imperial Russian  Army of  the
late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, would have given
this  discussion  greater  depth  but   its  absence  does  not
seriously detract from his general  line of argument. Following
the  merger  of the  Civil  War Field  Staff,  which supervised
military  operations,  and  the   Main  Staff,  which   oversaw
administration and recruitment, the new Red Army  Staff came to
resemble the German Staff of World War I.
     One  source  of  this similarity  was  the  close military
association between the  Soviet Union and Germany  from 1922 to
1933,  during  which time  leading  Soviet theorists  made good
professional use of the opportunity to exchange ideas. In 1927,
Shaposhnikov  published his seminal work Mozg armii in which he
advanced the case  for a powerful  general staff. Although  the
importance of  the Soviet  General Staff,  as reflected  in the
prestige  of the  General  Staff Academy,  reached considerable
proportions, it did not, however,  match its traditional German
counterpart in  political influence.  Bayer pointedly  observes
that Stalin  appointed four Chiefs  of Staff during  the period
from  1933  to 1941.  Indeed,  the general  staff  remained, if
anything, a pawn in the political struggles of the Soviet state
from the attack  on Trotsky in 1923  through the purges of  the
army in  the late  1930s. Bayer  quite properly concludes  that
"The Soviet General Staff did not become a significant force in
politics or society between 1917 and 1941."
     In  sum, Bayer's  study is based  upon solid  research and
reaches  sober,  well-supported   conclusions.  Although   many
findings are  not entirely new,  Bayer has rendered  a valuable
service  by   providing  a  readable,  informed   synthesis  of
available knowledge  on the Soviet  General Staff. He  has done
AACAR  BULLETIN           Fall 1989
this within a logical historical framework  and has laid a firm
foundation for future scholarship.
                                              Robert F. Baumann
                                       Combat Studies Institute
                      US Army Command and General Staff College
Elizabeth  Endicott-West,   Mongolian  Rule  in   China:  Local
Administration in  the Y an Dynasty. Harvard  University Press,
1989. (79 Garden Str. Cambridge, MA 02138).
     The Research in Mongolian history  of the Y an period done
by Elizabeth Endicott-West might be the  first work with an in-
depth analysis  of Mongolian rule  over China through  the Y an
regional  local  administration.  Her  book  not  only contains
excellent research in the aforementioned  area, but it provides
successful  "revisionist"  explanations  for  many  traditional
viewpoints. For scholars  and researchers in Mongolian  or Y an
history, her work contributes valuable information.
     At the beginning  she states,  "Neither China or  Mongolia
emerged from the  Y an Dynasty unchanged by  their century-long
interaction.  Chinese  notions  of  rule  and  governance  were
greatly  altered  by  over  one   hundred  years  of  Mongolian
overlordship. Similarly,  one  hundred  years  of  exposure  to
Chinese  culture  and  immersion  in  the day-to-day  tasks  of
governing a large  sedentary empire could not  but have altered
Mongolian concepts  of  rulership." (P.1)  She  continues,  "By
investigating  the  details  of Y an  civilian  bureaucracy  in
action, we  may then  seek to  define the  nature of  Mongolian
concepts of rule and  how those concepts were reflected  in the
practical running of  a large  sedentary bureaucracy. In  fact,
only by  studying government  at the  local level  can we  with
reasonable   confidence  tackle   the  difficult   question  of
centralization,   systematization,   and    effective   control
questions  historians  of the  Y an  have long  been debating."
(P.2)   Following   this  approach,   Endicott-West  identifies
darughachi  as  the  key institution  of  Y an-Mongolian  local
administration, and  using it as the central focus she develops
a good analysis.
     The  author   searched  from  the  period  of  non-Chinese
dynasties   of  conquest  to   the  darughachi,  attempting  to
determine the origin  of the Y an local administration  and the
situation of darughachi. She discovered that the cause for "the
duplication and redundancy function  and responsibilities...and
the unprecedented  and complex  nature  of Y an  regional-local
government"  (P.11)  was   "a  strategy  of  a   government  of
occupation on foreign soil." (P.14)  Using this information she
outlines  a  very  detailed  description  and analysis  of  the
functions of the darughachi. She addresses the nationalities of
the darughachi  by illustrating  the legal  limitations of  the
Mongols and of the Central and Western Asians. She surveyed the
AACAR  BULLETIN           Fall 1989
available numbers of darughachi and suggests the actual Chinese
outnumbered the Mongols and the Central and Western Asians. She
also  compares the  functions of  the darughachi in  Y an China
with those of the Golden Horde and Il-Khanids, and she explains
the differences between  the appointment and assignment  of the
darughachi in the regular local government bureaucracy and that
of the appanages (t'ou-hsia or fen-ti). In every discussion she
uses original materials.  For example, to support  her opinions
she cites  the Ta-Y an sheng-cheng  kuo-ch'ao tien-chang  (Y an
tien-chang)  and  the  T'ung-chin   t'iao-ko,  which  are  very
difficult to read and translate. She also uses many collections
of  the  Y an  Chinese literati  and  scholarly  officials. The
translation  of  these  materials  and  notes  exemplifies  her
diligence and enthusiasm for her work.
     In her discussion  of the  appointment of the  darughachi,
she  analyzes the factors causing the Y an rulers' abolition of
the  examination system  -- Chinese  traditional entrance  into
imperial bureaucracy -- and its impact and the Y an practice of
hereditary   system  for   appointments.   She  suggests   that
negligence or  the lack  of understanding  of Confucianism  and
fewer appointments of scholarly officials were some of the main
reasons for the failure of Mongolian  rule in China. She points
out  that the  non-centralized  nature of  Y an  regional-local
government derived from Mongolian socio-political tradition and
practice.  The creation  of the Y an  collective responsibility
and decision making,  such as the importance of the institution
of  the  office conference  (y an  -tso)  was a  result  of the
traditional  Mongolian kurultai  institution.  In the  chapters
discussing  the  darughachi  of  the  appanages,  Endicott-West
provides a detailed analysis of the conflict between the khans'
court  and  the imperial  princes or  the  feudal lords  of the
appanages. And, she  points out  that this conflict  originated
from the  Mongolian tradition  wherein "the  family member  was
entitled to share  (khubi) and that was a  concept to a nomadic
culture." (P.90)
     In  short,  the author  of  this  book tries  to  reach an
explanation  for  the   phenomenal  Mongolian  tradition.  Many
scholars have been disadvantaged by  using the Chinese sources,
because   when   they  looked   into   the  Mongolian   Chinese
interaction, their opinions were unavoidably  influenced by the
negative view of  the Chinese.  The Chinese historical  records
always attempted to avoid recognizing anything not derived from
the  Chinese  tradition,   which  is  why  the   "Monograph  of
Punishment" in  the Y an-shih  says, "at  the beginning of  the
dynasty there  was no  legal institution."  (P.102) It  clearly
shows  that the  Mongolian institutions established  before the
Y an dynasty were thoroughly ignored.
     As a critic, I must point out two printing errors: on page
83, line 8 "chia" in  yu-ken-chia Se-mu--jen should be "chiao;"
on page 139, note 20, "lkueh"  in ching-lkueh an-fu shih should
be "lueh."
AACAR  BULLETIN           Fall 1989
     The  depth  of  this book  is  admirable.  It  is a  great
contribution  to scholars  who  are  eager  to study  the  Y an
regional-local  administration that  had  great  impact on  the
interaction between the Mongols and  Chinese and their history.
Nevertheless,  because  of  its academic  nature,  it  might be
difficult for amateur scholars to enjoy.
                                                 Sechin Jagchid
                                       Brigham Young University
Hasan  Javadi, Satire  in Persian  Literature. Rutherford,  NJ:
Farleigh Dickinson University  Press, 1988. (440  Forsgate Dr.,
Cranbury, NJ 08512). 333 Pp. Hardcover, $39.50.
     Satire, in its broadest sense, has  always been present in
Persian  literature, but  it reached  its greatest  development
during  times  of  political  or   social  transition  such  as
revolutions. Persian  satire has  its own  particular qualities
and while it  shares technical  terminology with other  Islamic
literatures, it  develops in  its own way  as an aspect  of the
Persian sense of humor  and idea of what situations  are funny.
Javadi  distinguishes among hajv  "invective, or  lampoon," the
opposite of panegyric, usually  directed against an individual;
hazl,  a  humorous  poetic  genre,  often dealing  with  sexual
subjects, and  tanz, a term which has been adopted to cover the
former  types  as well  as  more  modern forms  of  satire. The
greater part of satirical writing in Persian is in poetry. Thus
Persian  satire  is fairly  culture-bound  and does  not always
translate well.  Nevertheless,  it can  still  be an  index  to
certain aspects of Persian  culture, and for this reason  it is
important for students  of Iran, or of  satire, to be  aware of
its nature,  form, and  subjects, as  well as  its history.  In
these respects, Hasan Javadi  has done a favor for  students of
Persian literature and cultural history.
     The author states clearly that it was not his intention to
develop a theory of  Persian satire, but to survey  the history
of it in its various forms and stages. The present book is thus
a large  collection  of examples  of various  kinds of  Persian
satire, drawn from  all periods  but with the  emphasis on  the
past one  hundred years. This  emphasis coincides more  or less
with the development of printing in Iran and the movements that
led to the Constitutional and  Islamic revolutions. During this
period Persian satire was particularly rich and varied, and the
possibility of wide distribution through  print, in addition to
the  social  and  political  ferment   of  the  times,  greatly
encouraged satirical writing. It should  not be surprising that
the Turkish speakers of Azerbaijan, who were deeply involved in
the Constitutional movement, were vigorous satirists, and it is
to the author's credit that he gives many examples of satirical
writing that while culturally Persian, were written in Turkish.
This is one of the few works that makes explicit  the extensive
contribution  of  writers of  Turkish  to the  Persian literary
scene of the twentieth century.
AACAR  BULLETIN           Fall 1989
     Many subjects of satire are surveyed by Javadi, as well as
the numerous  situations that  gave  rise to  it. For  example,
there are chapters  on satire  and religion, political  satire,
and satire and women. Satire in various literary genres such as
fiction, drama, and journalism is  also reported. Sometimes the
author's examples wander  away from satire into  general social
criticism,  blurring the distinction  between what is satirical
and what is  simply critical. Numerous examples  are translated
into English. A particularly  useful aspect of the book  is the
many illustrations drawn from  satirical publications from 1906
to 1980. These are often unsophisticated artistically, but have
a  direct  appeal  as  caricatures  of  individuals  or  social
situations.  There is  an extensive  bibliography  of satirical
journals in Persian and Azeri Turkish.
     Unfortunately  the book  suffers from  many misprints  and
typographical  errors  that should  be  corrected. In  spite of
this, Satire in  Persian Literature  is a welcome  contribution
and will be used by students of the cultural history of Iran as
well as by those  interested in Persian culture. It  could also
be a stimulus  to further  research on the  specific nature  of
Persian satire.
                                        William L. Hanaway, Jr.
                                     University of Pennsylvania
James A. McHenry,  Jr., The Uneasy Partnership,  1919-1939: The
Political  and Diplomatic  Interaction  Between Great  Britain,
Turkey, and the Turkish  Cypriot Community. Garland Publishing,
1987. (see above).
     This is a highly competent work  of scholarship covering a
chapter in Cyprus's troubled  past which has thus far  not been
adequately studied -- namely the period during which the island
was occupied by Great Britain.
     Although the author is interested  primarily in the inter-
war years, he does an excellent job of analyzing British policy
toward  Cyprus  from the  mid-1800s on.  He  shows us  that the
British occupation of the  island was an integral part  of what
Rudyard Kipling  dubbed the  "Great Game,"  or rivalry  between
Russia and Great  Britain for  control of the  Middle East  and
Central   Asia.   In   the   post-Napoleonic   era,  when   the
Mediterranean sea became  the lifeline  of the British  empire,
the British government became increasingly concerned about  its
safety and  dreaded more  than anything  else the  intrusion of
Russia into the  vital waterway.  Yet the opening  of a  window
upon the Mediterranean was one of  the primary goals of Russian
foreign  policy. To  achieve  their aim,  the  Russians had  to
destroy the Ottoman empire and  capture the Straits. Therefore,
the British were determined to bolster the "sick man of Europe"
by every means possible.
AACAR  BULLETIN           Fall 1989
     The British had  hoped that the  Treaty of Paris of  1856,
which had  concluded the Crimean War, had put an end to Russian
aggressiveness  against the  Ottoman empire  and established  a
kind of  balance of strength in  the Black Sea region.  But the
Russian invasion of 1877 showed this  to have been mere wishful
thinking, and represented a major threat to British hegemony in
the eastern Mediterranean,  for, according  to the San  Stefano
Treaty of  March 1878,  the new  Russian satellite of  Bulgaria
stretched all the way to the Aegean sea. Britain joined Austria
(which  was  also threatened  by  Russian penetration  into the
Balkans) into asking  for a  pan-European conference to  settle
the "Eastern  Question." At  this conference,  the Congress  of
Berlin of July 1878, a new  balance of strength was established
according to which  Bulgaria was shorn  of its Aegean  littoral
and Russia, Great Britain and Austria all got some territory at
the expense  of  Turkey. The  Russians  were awarded  Kars  and
Ardahan, the Austrians  were allowed  to administer Bosnia  and
Herzegovina, and the British were allowed to administer Cyprus.
The British  were able  to gain the  approval of the  Porte for
their occupation  of Cyprus  by  arguing that  the presence  of
British troops on the  island would act as a  deterrent against
any further Russian  encroachment in  Anatolia, but, in  truth,
the Turks were left with little choice as to the outcome of the
negotiations, for they did not want to antagonize the British.
     For  the British, the occupation of Cyprus served not only
as a warning to  the Russians but also as a  base from which to
protect  the   recently  completed  Suez  Canal.  However,  the
occupation of Egypt  in 1882  enabled the British  to give  the
canal more  direct supervision,  thus decreasing  the strategic
importance of Cyprus. The island became even more of a military
and diplomatic backwater as  the focus of the Great  Game moved
to Central Asia, where Russia challenged British authority more
directly by threatening India itself.
     In the end, although the British transformed Cyprus into a
crown colony in November 1914, the only viable reason for their
continued  presence on  the  island was  to  prevent any  other
nation from  seizing it, thereby  threatening British interests
in the eastern Mediterranean. In the words of Dr. McHenry, "the
island took on the status of a low-value poker chip which could
neither be cashed in nor played to any significant advantage."
     Because of its  declining importance to them,  the British
increasingly  neglected  the  island, and  the  welfare  of its
inhabitants  suffered  accordingly.  This  had  the  result  of
intensifying the clamor  of the Greek  Cypriots for enosis,  or
union with Greece. But Greek  nationalism on Cyprus constituted
a major threat to  the Turkish Cypriot community, for  it aimed
at the local Hellenization  of the island. In order  to protect
their culture and, indeed,  their very existence as a  separate
community, the Turkish Cypriots turned to  Turkish nationalism.
This presented Atat rk with  a complicated problem, for  he had
specifically excluded  Cyprus from those  territories which  he
claimed as belonging to the Turkish nation, and he was eager to
AACAR  BULLETIN           Fall 1989
maintain  cordial relations  with the  British government.  He,
therefore, adopted what  Dr. McHenry calls a  "two-tier policy"
towards Cyprus: on one  hand, he urged the  British to stay  in
Cyprus  (for  he was  afraid that  they  would surrender  it to
Greece),  and,  on   the  other,  he  challenged   the  British
authorities over specific bureaucratic abuses committed by them
to  discourage  the  Turkish  Cypriots  from openly  advocating
Kemalist reforms.
     Dr. McHenry has made extensive  use of Turkish and Turkish
Cypriot sources, and, in his analysis  of the Cyprus problem as
it existed  during the  days of  the British  Raj, he  displays
commendable objectivity.  This is  definitely one  of the  most
significant works about Cyprus to be published in recent years.
                                                Pierre Oberling
                                                 Hunter College
Afghanistan; The Great  Game Revisited,  (Rosanne Klass,  Ed.),
New York:  Freedom House, 1987. (48  E 21st Str., NY  NY 10010)
510 Pp. $19.95 ppr, $29.95 cloth.
The  thirteen  essays  in  this  volume  pack  quite  a  punch.
Sometimes  emotional but  never  sentimental, the  contributors
provide stunning evidence  and close  argument that the  Soviet
invasion of Afghanistan in 1979  and subsequent occupation were
not a result of misjudgment  or response to threat, nor is  the
war costly to the Soviets. Rather, Soviet  policies and actions
have   been  and   are   deliberate   and  carefully   planned.
Contributors  emphasize the  "long-range  nature of  the Soviet
threat"  (p.64,  Leon  Poullada),  continuities  of  goals  and
policies  between  imperial Russia  and  the USSR,  and between
current policies in  Afghanistan (and Soviet Central  Asia) and
long-range  global   economic  plans  or   geopolitical  and/or
military  strategy. Afghanistan, furthermore,  is shown to bear
the financial burden for its own destruction.
Several contributions cover internal  Afghan matters, including
a detailed  profile of  Resistance groups,  as  well as  Soviet
policies.  Most  of the  contributions  represent a  summary or
update  of  these writers'  earlier  works in  their respective
fields, but even  when no new ground is broken, it is useful to
have  the  material,  with notes  and  cross-references  in one
volume. The volume provides 140 pages of appendices including a
chronology,  a   glossary,  "who's   who,"  and   an  annotated
Certainly, the  volume is  misnamed. The  Great Game,  to be  a
"game"  at all,  must  have at  least  two players,  relatively
equally matched, who  manipulate "pieces" on the  "game board."
In the 19th  century, the Anglo-Russian competition  in Central
Asia fulfilled  these requirements. (One should  consult Edward
AACAR  BULLETIN           Fall 1989
Ingram's  fine monographs on  the Great  Game for  detailed and
sophisticated  discussion.) Since  the  British left  India, as
several contributors to this volume acknowledge, there has been
no other "player" to take the  place of the English in opposing
Russian expansion southward. This volume is thus, in some sense
and  despite  hopeful   words  about  "the  West"   aiding  the
Resistance,  about the  victory of  the  Russian player  in the
absence of determined and consistent opposition from an "equal"
Among the finest  essays in this  volume was the discussion  of
Soviet  exploitation  of Afghan  mineral  resources by  John F.
Shroder and Abdul Tawan Assifi  which demonstrates, inter alia,
that the USSR has used its below-market payments for Afghan gas
to finance their occupation of Afghanistan. This theme  is also
taken up in a strong piece by M. Siddieq Noorzoy who  makes use
of trade information and other economic data to illustrate that
the Soviets sell  the Afghans the very  military equipment that
is used to enforce Soviet  occupation. These items "include  of
course the aircraft  which bomb and strafe  Afghan villages..."
(p. 81)
Frederick Barth's contribution on the "Cultural Wellsprings  of
Resistance" might  well be a  "yardstick" by  which to  measure
many claims about Afghan society  and the Resistance, including
some essays in  this volume. At  a time when most  commentators
and analysts are content  to use Islam as the  sole explanation
for the nature of  Afghan society, the basis of  Resistance and
other phenomena in Afghanistan (or in Iran, Soviet Central Asia
and  so on),  Prof. Barth  provides insight into  Afghan values
apart from the Islamic (without discounting Islam) and provides
a picture of how the Afghans see themselves.
Unfortunately, this book is marred by several shortcomings from
simple  factual errors  to a  casual treatment  of  history and
confusion  in the  meaning  and usage  of  key terms  including
"nation," "ethnic group," "modern(ization),"  "developed." Both
the "Chronology  of Afghan History" (Appendix II)  and Prof. A.
Rasul   Amin's   useful   and   interesting   article   suggest
(respectively, pp. 372-3;  326) that Timur was  a Mongol, which
he was not, or  identify him and the cultural  contributions of
his descendants as exclusively Persian. Timur was a Turk of the
Barlas clan.  The forces  he led were  largely Turkish,  though
there were Mongol  elements interspersed. The languages  of his
own  court  and  that  of  his  successors  included  Chaghatay
(Turkish) as  well  as Persian.  Babur, founder  of the  Moghul
dynasty and  a direct  descendant of  Timur, harbored  enormous
disdain  for  Mongols,  though his  Indian  subjects mistakenly
called him "Mogul" (presumably because he arrived from the same
direction whence the Mongols issued).
AACAR  BULLETIN           Fall 1989
Several   contributions  to   the   book  include   "historical
background"  sections   even  by  people   whose  training  and
strengths lie  elsewhere. The use of this phrase, common though
it may be, suggests  that any references to the  past establish
an  adequate  historical framework  within which  to understand
events.  In view  of the harsh  words which  Ms. Klass,  in her
introductory  chapter, uses for  "those completely  ignorant of
the history of  Afghan-Soviet relations" (p.6), one  might have
expected her to see that her own house was in order. Ambassador
Poullada uses the  term "manifest destiny" to  describe Russian
expansion  (p.38) as if there were  a valid parallel to be made
with US history --  a popular but extremely misleading  notion.
Prof. Noorzoy states,  "It is well  known, of course, that  the
USSR is a  monolithic state,"  (p.72) a claim  over which  most
Soviet specialists have been arguing for decades. Most worrying
in  this  regard  is  Yosef   Bodansky's  article  because  his
imprecise and  misleading "historical"  references pervade  the
entire article and detract from  his very valuable presentation
of Soviet military doctrine and practice (which one wishes were
more precisely  referenced; his  allusion to "Russian  language
sources  available   only   to  the   specialist"   is   hardly
satisfactory since so  many such  specialists are reading  this
volume). Mr. Bodansky repeats the cliche  "Tatar Yoke" not less
than  four  times  and refers  interchangeably  to  this "Tatar
Yoke",  the Mongol conquests and "a thousand years" of Russian-
Muslim contact -- which he claims  was "mostly hostile" -- (pp.
230, 233, 246)  as though the  Turco-Mongol troops of Batu  had
been Muslim. He refers to  the "beginning of Russian  expansion
into the Muslim territories in the early 18th century"  (p.233)
apparently forgetting the conquest  of the Volga in the  1550s.
He refers  to "traditional  Russian operational  art [of  war]"
(p.250)  though  he had  already established  that it  had been
adopted  from the  Tatars  (p.246). Certainly  this is  not the
place  for a  reevaluation of  Tatar-Russian  or Muslim-Russian
relations,   but  the  historical   picture  that   emerges  is
remarkably similar to  official Soviet portrayals and  would be
best omitted.
With the  much touted,  always  impending, "Soviet  withdrawal"
from  Afghanistan,  does   this  book  retain  its   relevance?
Emphatically so. Several contributions provide a firm basis for
evaluating a military withdrawal, should it come, and show that
Soviet control  remains tight.  Sadly, military  withdrawal may
signal the  success  of  the Soviet  program  rather  than  its
                                             Audrey L. Altstadt
                       Connecticut State University-New Britain

This counter has been placed here on 31 March 1999