What is it about?
This paper attempts to give new explanation for the ethnonyms bẄklI and čẄlgl (or čẄlgIl) occurring in the Old Turkic inscriptions of Kül Tegin and Bilgä Kagan. After a thorough survey of former research the author comes to the conclusion that the two names must be treated separately, both indicating a separate country. bẄklI, as was correctly supposed formerly, is undoubtedly identical with Goguryeo, a Korean state of the period. čẄlgl (or čẄlgIl) must be read as Čülüg el which may be a Turkic name for the Chinese state of Northern Zhou of Tuoba origin.
Featured Image
Why is it important?
Before the author, all of the researchers overlooked that there were two Tabgač states in northern China in the early years of the Turkic Kaganate. For the first time the author found out the following things: (1) čẄlgl (or čẄlgIl) must be read as Čülüg el which may be a Turkic name for the Chinese state of Northern Zhou of Tuoba origin. (2) Tabgač refers to the Northern Qi state of Tuoba origin.
Perspectives
It is certainly inaccurate to translate Tabgač, in a simpflified manner, as ‘China’ or ‘the Chinese’ as most researchers have done until now. Čülüg el and Tabgač were two separate Chinese states of the period. Therefore, the historical presentation in connection with the Orkhon Turkic Inscriptions should be corrected according to this article.
Yong-Sŏng Li
Seoul National University
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: On čẄlgl (or čẄlgIl) in the Kül Tegin and Bilgä Kagan inscriptions, Acta Orientalia, December 2017, Akademiai Kiado,
DOI: 10.1556/062.2017.70.4.2.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
