The Concept behind the Term “Tatars” in Medieval Arabic Writings of the 13th–15th centuries

Full Text

The high level and encyclopedism of Arabic culture made Arabic-language works a significant body of sources on many aspects of medieval history. The importance of using Arabic sources when studying the history of medieval Tatars is emphasized by the fact that during the 13th–15th centuries, there were intensive ties between the Inner Asian the Muslim worlds. As a result of these relations and constant exchanges, an extensive set of documents was formed: chronicle collections, documents of diplomatic correspondence, etc. The ties of the Muslim world with the Chingizids, in particular with the Golden Horde, were also reflected in the notes of Arab merchants, travelers, and in the works of cartographers. These ties formed ideas regarding the Tatars and their states, rulers, culture, religion and language.

The most significant set of information about the medieval Tatars preserved in Arabic sources is found in the works of authors of the Mamluk era. When describing the medieval Tatars, in particular the Tatars of the Golden Horde, they used information from chroniclers, ambassadors, merchants, as well as information originating from informants who came from the Golden Horde itself. Many of the authors were witnesses to the events that took place during that period since they themselves were representatives of the Mamluk administration, or servants of the Sultan's chancery. Such authors include Emir Kusun, Artamysh as-Siyasa, Seif Sarai, and others.

A significant drawback in the practice of working with accessible translations of Arabic sources on the history of the medieval Tatars, particularly the Golden Horde, is that they all, as a rule, were not used in their entirety, but fragmentarily, often without taking into account the context, without taking into account the place, and often without referring to the particular author's sources of information, even in cases where they could be determined. In addition, most often modern historians use the works of Arabic authors not in the original, but in translations that are not always successfully rendered, something which significantly reduces the ability of researchers to resolve such issues as the chronological sequence of events, the attribution of toponyms mentioned in the source, and the precise interpretation of various terms employed in the texts, etc.

In Arabic-language sources of the early 13th century, the designation of "Tatars" began to be used in connection with the military campaigns of the Chingizids against the Khorezm state and subsequently against Baghdad. Medieval European authors (the work Chronica Majora of Matthew of Paris) and Arab chroniclers both compared the Mongol-Tatars with the barbarian people of Gog and Magog (Ibn Asir, Ibn Hadid), and associated them with the “Scourge of God” as a prelude to one of the signs of the end of the world.

Ibn Asir (1160–1233/34) defined the Tatars as: “a large Turkic tribe, whose habitat is the Tamgaj Mountains, near China; between them and the Muslim countries there is more than 6 months’ journey” [1, p. 143].

Ibn Abi Hadid, referred to Masudi and his «The Meadows of Gold», but did not claim their connection with the Turks: "Indeed, we have searched a lot in the chronicles and reliable books regarding their people. We have found nothing about the origin of this people... And this people was from the outskirts of the regions of the East, from the mountains of "Tamgaj" [located] on the border with China and between them and between the Muslim regions such as that of Maverannahr, which is more than six months' journey"[8, p.381].

Abu Shama al-Maqdisi, discussing the raids of the Tatars (Hulagu’s army) on the lands of Sham (modern Syria) used the term “Tatars” in his chronicles in relation to the Hulagu army, and called the ruler of the Mongol Empire, Munke, “the great khan of the Tatars” [10, p. 225].

Thus, in the 13th-century works that we have presented, the marker “Tatars” was used much more often than “Mongols” in relation to the Chinggisid rulers and their army. However, none of the authors bothered to explain the term and look for its origins; perhaps the term “Mongols” was not widely used at that time, unlike “Tatars”, and the former may have been used in a narrow circle of the Chinggisid elite.

D.M. Timokhin, having analyzed the use of the terms “Tatars” and “Mongols” in Muslim sources of the 13th century, noted that “in the earliest texts, the authors use exclusively the concept of ‘Tatars’ in relation to the Mongol conquerors... The first use of two concepts simultaneously, “Mongols” and “Tatars”, can be noted in the work of Sibt ibn al-Jawzi” [12, p. 130].

Thus, A.V. Kozhushko, in his study “Ethnonymy of the Mongols in the Works of Arab Historians and Encyclopedists of the 13th-15th Centuries”, established the goal of investigating the features of the display, application, and meaning of variations of the ethnonym “Mongol” found in the works of Arab historians and encyclopedists of the 13th–15th centuries. However, the examples given by the author exclusively reference the Tatars, thus proving that the use of the term “Tatars” was the primary and natural usage in the contemporary society: “Having analyzed the data on the Mongols found in the works of the earliest Arab authors – the above-mentioned Ibn al-Athir, Yaqut, and an-Nasawi, we discovered that these authors use only the term “at-tatar” (i.e. Tatars) to designate the Mongols and never mention the ethnonym Mongol.” [6, p. 30].

It follows from this that the term “Tatars” was used in the 13th century due to the fact that even at that point in time, the Tatars were authoritarian and widely known throughout the world. The historian Rashid ad-Din saw the reason for such popularity of their name lying in the fact that the Tatars occupied their special position within nomadic society: “Because of [their] extraordinary greatness and honorable position, other Turkic clans, with [all] the differences in their ranks and names, became known by their name, and all were called Tatars. And those various clans believed their greatness and dignity in the fact that they related themselves to them and became known by their name…” [7, p. 236].

In the Muslim East, the political situation was not stable; by the 11th century, the Arab Caliphate had practically lost its position as a powerful and consolidating state, although the ideological unity of the Muslim world under the rule of the Caliph was still recognized.

However, after the rise of the Mamluk Sultanate¹, the role of protector of the entire Muslim world passed to Egypt. The rulers of the Sultanate, the Mamluks, mostly came from Turkic tribes and in the history the 13th-14th centuries (the reign of the Bahri Mamluks), the period is called the reign of the Turkic sultans. The fair "Turks" did not fit into the concept of the enemies of the "Tatars". And since the Mamluks more often had to engage in military clashes with the Hulaguids-Tatars, they often became confused about the adaptation of this term to the Golden Horde Tatars, with whom close diplomatic relations were established during the reign of the Mamluk Sultan of Turkic origin, Baybars I [3; 9; 13; 14], and increasingly began to refer to them using the name of the ruler – the people of Berke, the ambassadors of Berke, etc.

This tradition was presented mainly in annalistic works. At the same time, it was found that the rulers of the Golden Horde were also called Tatars. For example, Ibn ‘Abd az-Zahir called Berke, “the great Tatar king” [11, p. 55].

However, later, during the reign of Sultan al-Mansur Qalawun in Egypt, in the writings of court chroniclers, the rulers and elite of the Golden Horde were called “Berkovichs”, and the inhabitants of the country were called “Kipchaks”. Perhaps this shift in attitude originated from the Sultan himself who was a Kipchak by origin.

Shihabetdin al-‘Umari tried to understand why the “Kipchaks” had become “Tatars” in his work “Al-masalik al-absar fi mamalik al-amsar” / “Paths of Views on States with Large Cities” and stated:

"In ancient times, this state was the country of the Kipchaks, but when the Tatars took over, the Kipchaks became their subjects. Then they (the Tatars) mixed with them (the Kipchaks), and the land prevailed over their (the Tatars') natural and racial qualities, and they all became exactly the Kipchaks, as if they were of the same race (with them), because the Mongols (and Tatars) settled on the land of the Kipchaks, married them, and remained to live in their (Kipchak) lands" [11, p. 235]. The Mamluk chronicler Rukn ad-Din Baybars initially called the ruler of Berke “the Tatar king” [11, p. 98], and in relation to Mengu Timur, who came to power after Berke, he specified “the Tatar sovereign in the Northern countries” [11, p. 103]. However, Rukn ad-din Baybars copied most of the information from Ibn ‘Abd az-Zahir, since, being a military man, he often spent his time on campaigns. Records from his words were made by his assistant, the Coptic scribe Ibn Kabar².

At the beginning of the 14th century, as a result of the strengthening diplomatic ties between Mamluk Egypt and the Golden Horde against the backdrop of the Islamization of the latter ulus and the rise to power of the protege of the Muslim party, Uzbek Khan, interest in describing the events that took place in the Golden Horde was renewed. One of the important written sources of that period is the work of An-Nuwayri, the author of the encyclopedia, “Nihayat al-arab fi funun al-adab” / “The Limit of Desire Regarding the Disciplines of Adab”. Despite the abstract title, half of it is devoted to a historical section.

An-Nuwayri was close to the Mamluk Sultan Nasir Muhammad (1310–41), holding government positions in Egypt and Syria. An-Nuwayri himself carried out the task of recording history from the 12th century to the mid-14th century (1331). An-Nuwayri calls the Golden Horde the land of "Turks and Kipchaks" located in the "northern countries” and calls the ruler "the ruler of Sarai and the Kipchak lands" and "the Tatar sovereign in the Northern lands" [11, p. 98]. The name of the state from the name of one of the rulers, "the kingdom of Berke", "the house of Berke", "the kingdom of Uzbek" etc., was increasingly being used in everyday life. An-Nuwayri wrote that the lands of the Turks were similar to India in terms of abundance of natural resources, and their peculiarity was that “everyone who lives on their land is filled with joy and happiness, and even if [in the lands of the Turks] a person dies, his relatives do not experience grief and sorrow, as with other peoples” [4, p. 308 ]. An-Nuwayri does not try to use the term “Tatar” on every occasion, but he associates Genghis Khan and his state with the Tatars: “The state of Genghis Khan is the state of the Tatars, and they are called Tatars and their [Tatars] kinship with Genghis Khan Timuchin... And they lived in the kingdom of China and the kingdom of Chin, in their language this country is called Chin. It is surrounded by impassable mountains and wide freshwater rivers flow through it...” [4, p. 309].

Later authors of the 14th–15th centuries, Ibn Khaldun and al-Maqrizi, tried to understand the kinship of the Tatars with the Turks. Ibn Khaldun, referring to earlier genealogies, wrote that the ancestors of the Turks were the sons of Noah, and the Toguzguzes were one of their numerous [Turkish] clans; the Tatars and Khitai belong to the Toguzguzes” [5, vol. 2, p. 11]. He emphasized again that the Tatars originated from among the Turkic clans: “This people appeared from the Turkic clan in 610 from the Tamgaj Mountains near China… and their ruler was Chingiz Khan Timudjin [5, vol. 3, p. 359].

As for Genghis Khan, he wrote: “This Sultan, Genghis Khan, he is the Sultan of the Tatars of that era, then the Mongols, one of their [Tatar] people”. [5, vol. 5, p. 582]. In another section of text about the wars with the Khitai, Ibn Khaldun writes that the Tatars refused to fight with their ruler Kushly Khan, but then another group of Tatars, who are known as the Mongols, went to war with him, and their ruler was Genghis Khan [5, vol. 5, p. 126].

Al-Maqrizi's information about the origin of the Tatars is very fragmentary and often confused; he mentioned the Tatars among the clans that are part of the larger Turkic group. He also localized the Tatars' residence in the vicinity of the Khitai: "The Khitai and Tatars lived between Turkestan and the borders of China". Al-Maqrizi calls Ong Khan (Wang Khan), the ruler of the Kereids, the ruler of the Tatars, and after Chingiz Khan defeated Ong Khan's army, Chingiz Khan received the title of ruler of all the Tatars: "He [Temuchin] served Ong Khan, the ruler of the Tatars, and even distinguished himself with him [in the service]. Then [Ong Khan] began to disrespect him, and [Chingiz Khan] fled, and Ong [the Khan] sent after him, and he [Chingiz Khan] fought with him, defeated him, and captured what he had. And [he became] powerful and united with him and submitted to him two great Mongolian tribes: Ubrat and Tankurat. He [Genghis Khan] fought with Ong and killed him and became the ruler of all the Tatars" [2, p. 502]. Al-Maqrizi got his impression about Genghis Khan as the ruler of the Tatars from Ibn Khaldun, who also used the term "Tatars" in relation to other Chingizids, the only difference being the spelling of the term itself. Ibn Khaldun wrote "Tatars" with "ت", and Makrizi exclusively with ط. It is possible to assume that medieval Arab authors began to record this marker after the arrival of the Tatar clans under the leadership of Genghis Khan and to use the term "Tatars" everywhere, although the use of the term "Mongols" was preserved, but was evidently employed much less often.

In the works of subsequent authors, the inhabitants of the Golden Horde are increasingly called "Turks" and "Kipchaks", but the rulers of the Golden Horde are still called "Tatar kings", and the highest dignitaries "Tatar emirs" (Ibn Dukmak, Al-Maqrizi). Ibn Arabshah already called Toktamysh the Sultan of Dasht and Turkestan.

At the beginning of the 15th century, Badr ad-Din al-Ayni called the rulers of the Ulus of Jochi "rulers in the Northern countries and the Turkic and Kipchak lands"; "the Tatar king in the Northern countries"; "sovereigns of the Northern Kingdom"; "sovereigns of Dasht"; and "sovereigns of the Dasht lands". Al-Jannabi, an author of the 16th century, no longer used the term "Tatars" in relation to the rulers of the Golden Horde but rather called them rulers of "Dasht" or "Dasht-Kipchak".

Thus, from the 13th century the term "Tatar" became quite firmly entrenched in the minds of medieval Arab chroniclers. This term subsequently began to appear in the public life of the Mamluk Sultanate of Egypt where the phrases "Tatar caftan" and fabric called "tatariyat" began to come into use. The term also became entrenched in the names of the ruling elite: the daughter of the Egyptian Sultan Muhammad an-Nasir was called at-Tatar al-Hijaziyya, and one of the Mamluk sultans bore the name az-Zahir Sayf ad-din Tatar.

¹ The Mamluk Sultanate was a medieval feudal state in the Middle East that existed from 1250 to 1517. The sultanate was formed as a result of the seizure of power in Cairo by the Mamluks, who overthrew the Ayyubid dynasty.

² Ibn Kabar (Shams al-Rimasa Abu al-Barakat ibn Kabar, d. 1324) was a Coptic Christian and the author of an ecclesiastical encyclopedia known as the Mishbah al-zulma wa-idah. He was secretary to the Mamluk emir, Baybars al-Mansuri, and is believed to have edited the latter's Zubdat al-fikra fi tarikh al-hijra (The Cream of Thought in Islamic History). He was ordained a priest in 1300 under the name Barsoum and took up his post at the Mu'allaqa (an ancient Coptic church in Cairo). A number of his rhymed Arabic sermons have survived. He had to flee persecution of the Christians in 1321 and died shortly thereafter.

About the authors

Elmira G. Sayfetdinova

Author for correspondence.
Email: аdulya2@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-7138-1256
ResearcherId: K-2746-2017

Cand. Sci. (History), Senior Research Fellow of the Usmanov Center for Research on the Golden Horde and Tatar Khanates

References

Supplementary files

Acknowledgments: The author expresses his sincere gratitude for the scientific editing of the article to Stephen Pow.