What race are Uzbeks? Customs and traditions of Uzbekistan

The glossary didn't fit into one post.

41. Tashkent.

Namaz - see photo No. 2.
Namazgoh - it's even cooler than the Juma Mosque. A country mosque for Friday services in the open air, which was essentially just a canopy over mihrab om (a niche in the wall of the mosque pointing to Mecca, the imam prays in it, standing as if in front of the Muslims “led” by him) and minbar om (pulpit to the right of the mihrab), opening into the steppe.

42. Bukhara.

Nasvay is a “strengthened” chewing tobacco that the whole of Central Asia relies on, and recently brings to us. Locals refer to it as an “energy drink” and chew it, for example, while driving, periodically opening the door and creepily spitting green liquid onto the asphalt. It is no secret that the same substances have different effects on different peoples, and perhaps for the locals this is true, but for the Russians it is already a full-fledged drug. Usually sold in sticks like this. Also in Central Asia they smoke hashish and drink vodka, but beer hasn’t really caught on.

80. Elik-Kala

Yahuda- see Bukharian Jews.

The Uzbeks currently mean a conglomerate of tribes of Turkic origin, with an admixture of Iranian and Mongolian elements, speaking one of the Central Asian Turkic dialects and living in Bukhara (about 1 million, according to Vambery), in Khiva (about 257 thousand, according to Kuznetsov), in Afghan Turkestan (200 thousand, according to Vambery), in the Russian Central Asian possessions (579,740 people, according to Aristov), ​​with a total number of 2,037,240 people, occupying the position of a politically dominant element in these territories since the 16th century.

The very name “Uzbeks” has a political-historical meaning rather than an ethnic one. Uzbek is an ancient proper name, found in monuments of the 12th century, the etymological meaning of which is: true prince. The word “Uzbeks” acquired the meaning of the political name of an entire people in the 14th century, during the reign of the Juchid Uzbek Khan, who stood at the head of the Golden Horde for 30 years and zealously spread Islam among the Turkic tribes subject to him. Those of the latter who accepted Islam have since begun to call themselves, by the name of their khan, Uzbeks, in contrast to both the tribes that remained shamanists and the tribes of the western ulus, the Jaghatais, just as they previously called themselves, after named after the founder of the dynasty, Juchami.

Starting from the second half of the 15th century, the Dzhuchi ulus began to disintegrate; the western part of it completely disappeared, forming the independent khanates and the Kazan khanate, and in the eastern part the Kyrgyz-Kaisachi alliance emerged. After the death of Abul Khair Khan and his sons (in 1465-66), the name of the Uzbeks was preserved only by a few families that remained faithful to their dynasty. The Uzbeks were revived and again began to play a major role when, at the end of the 15th and first quarter of the 16th century, a descendant of Uzbek Khan, the grandson of Abul Khair, Sheibani Khan, united various Turkic tribes around himself and descended from the northern coast Aral Sea and the lower reaches of the Syr Darya to the countries of Transoxania in order to break the power of the Timurids and establish their rule in Bukhara and two other Central Asian khanates.

This entire conglomerate of tribes, in which the Turkic element was mixed with, received the common name “Uzbeks.” In the newly conquered territory, Shebani Khan's army encountered various Turkic tribes that had already settled here, who occupied the position of the ruling class among the original population of the region (of Iranian origin), but who largely mixed with the latter and adopted its culture.

The common political name of these tribes was Jaghatai. At first they treated the Uzbeks with hostility, as barbarian destroyers, but with the establishment of the power of the Shebanids, they began to merge with the victors, forming that mixed population speaking the Jagatai dialect, which to this day in Central Asia is called the Uzbeks. The aborigines of the country of Iranian origin - the Tajiks and Sarts - also underwent the merger process to a significant extent. All this taken together, in connection with the dominant position of the Uzbeks, led to the fact that the name “Uzbeks” began to be called by a variety of nationalities, such as the Kyrgyz, Kara-Kyrgyz, Sarts, Tajiks, and so on.

The extent to which the term “Uzbeks” has lost its purely ethnographic meaning is evident from the fact that not only in official statistics the Uzbeks are classified as Sarts and vice versa, but also in the scientific literature it is proposed to leave the name Sarts altogether, as a separately non-existent people (Lapin), then It is recommended to distinguish Sarts from Uzbeks on such a single, purely social and transitory basis as the loss of features of tribal life (Aristov).

The main characteristic of the Uzbeks must be considered their political position, as is done by Vamberi, who considers as Uzbeks those Turkic tribes that, having arrived in Transoxania with Shebaki Khan, were less likely than others to be mixed with the Sarts and managed to preserve for three last centuries dominant position over other nations. The purest elements of the Uzbeks are concentrated in Khiva, Maimen and Sheriseps. There are fewer of them in Bukhara, even fewer in Kokand. In Khiva, the entire population of the left bank of the Amu Darya, with the exception of a few Sarts, are entirely Uzbeks. In Bukhara, along the banks of the Zeravshan, as well as in the southern and western districts, Uzbeks constitute the predominant agricultural population. And these, however, “pure” Uzbeks, judging by the generic names (at least 90), were made up of the most diverse branches of the Turkic tribe, not to mention other early and later admixtures. Therefore, it is impossible to talk about a single anthropological type of Uzbeks.

In the character of the Uzbeks, the typical features of the Turks are very clearly manifested: solidity, straightforwardness, honesty, lack of fussiness, gloomy heaviness - and at the same time, the instincts of a warrior and a ruler.

The purest type is preserved among the Khivan Uzbeks, who, according to Vambery, are of average height, taller than the Kirghiz, but not as tall and strongly built as. The head is oval in shape, eyes with a longitudinal slit, cheekbones are not very prominent, skin color is lighter than that of Tajiks, hair is more luxuriant than that of Turkmens, and is often dark.

The Bukhara Uzbeks show deeper traces of Aryan mixture (predominant dark hair and skin color), and the Kokand Uzbeks are already difficult to distinguish from the Sarts. 11 Uzbeks of Zeravshan, according to Fedchenko, gave 1664.30 (height) and 83.24 (head index). 33 Uzbeks of Samarkand, according to Uyfalvi - 1678.30 (height) and 84.01 (head index). Uzbeks of Fergana, according to Uyfalvi - 1670.50 (height) and 86.13 (head index).

The vast majority of Uzbeks lead a sedentary lifestyle, engaged primarily in agriculture and having perfectly learned the art of irrigating fields from their cultural predecessors.

There are very few nomadic Uzbeks: in eastern Bukhara and, especially, along the left bank of the Amu Darya, in the Afghan possessions. There are much more semi-nomadic people, who move with their herds from place to place in the summer and stay in permanent winter dwellings (kishlaks) in the winter (mainly in eastern Bukhara), but the transition of these elements to is a matter of the near future. Despite all the similarities between the external life of settled Uzbeks and the Sarts and Tajiks, some differences are also noticeable.

Traditional costume

The clothes of the Uzbeks are made of thicker materials and are not as wide as those of the Tajiks. Instead of a turban, they often wear a high fur hat, wider than that of the Turkmen and lower than that of the Sarts. Women dress in Turkmen style: only the festive headdress goes out of use.

Traditional food

As a farmer, the Uzbek also eats flour foods, but dairy and meat foods, even horse meat, play the same role in the everyday life of the Uzbeks as among the nomads. On the contrary, the table of Sarts and Tajiks is completely alien to him. Among the drinks, Uzbeks drink tea, kurtaba (cheese diluted in water) and ayran; He doesn’t drink kumiss at all.

Traditions and customs

The old habit of living in a tent and in the open air still shows itself today: it is the custom of a sedentary Uzbek to pitch a felt tent in the courtyard of his manor, surrounded by high walls, and often spend the winter in it.

And in social customs, the Uzbeks retained many remnants from the former life of the nomads. Despite the centuries-old influence of Islam, marriages are concluded directly between young people, without the intervention of parents, who participate only in the payment of the dowry, consisting of the traditional 9 heads of livestock. Games, music, competitions and other entertainment accompanying marriage festivities are the same as those of the nomads. Like the latter, an Uzbek woman undergoes violent shaking during childbirth to speed up labor.

The position of women is much better than that of the Sarts and Tajiks; Polygamy occurs only in the upper classes, in Khiva - less often than in Bukhara and Kokand. Family life is distinguished by purity and gentleness of relations, although the patriarchal power of the father is very great (even elderly sons do not allow themselves to sit or speak first in the presence of their father).

Uzbek religion

By religion, the Uzbeks are zealous Muslims, but not nearly as fanatical as their Aryan neighbors. Their cult retains vestiges of ancient Iranian influences. In Khiva, for example, the celebration of Noruz, that is, the spring equinox, is observed as strictly as by the Persians of Iran. Jumping around the fire, paying respect to it in every possible way, treatment with the rays of the setting Sun, and finally, ancient Iranian solar myths - all this testifies to the original presence of the Turks in the territory of the present-day Uzbeks and their communication with the aborigines of Iranian origin.

Invention of the concept of “Uzbeks”
Before the national-state demarcation of Soviet Central Asia, such a people as the Uzbeks did not exist. The settled population that lived in this territory was called the collective term “sart,” which in Persian means “trader.” The word “sart” was found in Plano Carpini in the 13th century. However, the concept of “sart” was not so much ethnic as it reflected the economic and cultural type of the settled population of Central Asia. The Sarts called themselves by the name of the area where they lived: Tashkent, Kokand, Khivan, Bukharan, Samarkand...

In addition to the Sarts, the territory of the future Uzbekistan was inhabited by numerous nomadic Turkic tribes, such as Ming, Yuz, Kyrk, Jalair, Sarai, Kongurat, Alchin, Argun, Naiman, Kipchak, Kalmak, Chakmak, Kyrgyz, Kyrlyk, Turk, Turkmen, Bayaut, Burlan, Shymyrchik, kabasha, nujin, kilechi, kilekesh, buryat, ubryat, kyyat, hytay, kangly, uryuz, dzhunalahi, kuji, kuchi, utarchi, puladchi, dzhyyit, juyut, dzhuldzhut, turmaut, uymaut, arlat, kereit, ongut, tangut, Mangut, Jalaut, Mamasit, Merkit, Burkut, Kiyat, Kuralash, Oglen, Kara, Arab, Ilachi, Juburgan, Kyshlyk, Girey, Datura, Tabyn, Tama, Ramadan, Uyshun, Badai, Hafiz, Uyurji, Jurat, Tatar, Yurga, batash, batash, kauchin, tubay, tilau, kardari, sankhyan, kyrgyn, shirin, oglan, chimbay, charkas, uyghur, anmar, yabu, targyl, turgak, turgan, teit, kohat, fakhir, kujalyk, shuran, deradjat, kimat, Shuja-at, Avgan - a total of 93 clans and tribes. The most powerful tribes were the Datura, Naiman, Kunrat and, of course, the Mangyt.

Average Uzbek

Average Uzbek woman
The Mangyts also included a secular dynasty in the Bukhara Emirate, which in 1756 replaced the Ashtarkhanid dynasty - the former Astrakhan khans and ruled until the capture of Bukhara by the Red Army in 1920. Another powerful tribe was the Mings, who formed the ruling dynasty of the Kokand Khanate in 1709.

Son of the last Bukhara emir, Major of the Red Army Shakhmurad Olimov

The last Emir of Bukhara, Alim Khan, from the Mangyt clan
Since the question of what peoples live in Soviet Turkestan did not have a clear answer, a special Commission was created to study the tribal composition of the population of the USSR and neighboring countries. Summing up the results of its work during 1922-1924, the Commission committed an obvious forgery, passing off representatives of various tribes and clans of Turkic-Mongolian origin as historically non-existent ethnic Uzbeks. The Commission appointed Khiva Karakalpaks, Fergana Kipchaks, Samarkand and Fergana Turks as Uzbeks.

At first, Uzbekistan was the same territorial concept as Dagestan, where more than 40 nationalities live, but over several decades the peoples of Central Turkestan managed to hammer home that they were an Uzbek nation.

In 1924, the population of the central part of Central Asia was given the collective name of Uzbeks in honor of Uzbek Khan, who stood at the head of the Golden Horde in 1313-41 and zealously spread Islam among the Turkic tribes subject to him. It is the rule of Uzbek that is considered Starting point current Uzbek historiography, and some scientists, such as academician Rustam Abdullaev (not to be confused with the famous Moscow proctologist), call the Golden Horde Uzbekistan.

Bukhara zindan
Before the national-state demarcation, the territory of Uzbekistan was part of the Turkestan Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic, the RSFSR, the Bukhara People's Republic Soviet Republic, formed instead of the Bukhara Emirate as a result of the Bukhara operation of the Red Army, and the Khorezm People's Soviet Republic (since October 1923 - Khorezm Soviet Socialist Republic), formed instead of the Khiva Khanate as a result of the Khiva Revolution.

Uzbek customs
Urban Uzbeks are quite normal people. Most of them know Russian, are polite and educated. However, it is not representatives of the Uzbek intelligentsia who go to Russia, but residents of small towns and rural areas, who have a completely different mentality and observe their patriarchal traditions.

It is noteworthy that even in the 21st century, rural Uzbeks have preserved the custom according to which parents find a life partner for a lonely child; personal preferences are strictly secondary. And, since one of the unspoken laws of the Uzbeks is to obey and honor their parents, the son or daughter is forced to meekly agree.

Brides in most regions of Uzbekistan still pay bride price. According to local standards, this is compensation to the girl’s family for her upbringing and for the loss of workers. Often the money that the groom's family gives to the girl's family at the time of the wedding provides for the living of the bride's younger siblings. If, after many years of waving a broom in Russia, they have not been able to save up for the bride price, the bride is simply stolen. The police of Uzbekistan are engaged in the return of the bride only if the parents pay well. But Uzbeks steal brides in other countries too. Thus, in the Osh region of Kyrgyzstan, where many Uzbeks live, a large-scale action against the practice of bride kidnapping was recently held. Activists then came forward with information that every year in Kyrgyzstan over ten thousand girls are forced into marriage, half of such marriages subsequently break up, and there have been cases of suicide of abducted girls. As a result, bride kidnapping in Kyrgyzstan is now equivalent to kidnapping, and this crime is punishable by imprisonment for a period of 5 to 10 years. Often cases of simple rape are passed off as theft of a bride, and sometimes grooms demand a ransom to return the bride home.

Another deep-rooted Uzbek tradition remains pedophilia. The sexual exploitation of boys in Uzbek is called bacha-bozlik Bacha bazi (in Persian - playing with “calves”), and these boys themselves are called bacha.

Before the annexation of these regions to Russia, the Kokands and Bukharans made frequent raids on Kazakh villages and even Russian villages. The main prey during such raids were boys, who were sold into sexual slavery, and when they began to grow beards, they were simply killed.

In Soviet times, Uzbeks were terribly offended by the fact that in the official speeches of the leaders of the USSR the Russian people were called their elder brother. The point is that if for us an older brother is the one who will stand up for you street fight, then among these peoples the elder brother is the one who has you in the anus. The fact is that in their families they have a clear hierarchy - the father can have all the sons, daughters and daughters-in-law, and the older brother can have all the younger brothers and sisters, as well as the wives of the younger brothers. If younger brothers begin to have nephews - children of older brothers, then they are already punished for this, but, as a rule, not much, but still, fearing punishment, such teenagers rape other people's children, for which, however, they can get severe punishment. Therefore, they either rape very young children who cannot complain, or resort to child prostitution.

Bacha from Samarkand
Child prostitution has deep roots in Uzbekistan. The pimps in it are the parents of minor prostitutes and prostitutes, but if a girl can be sold for good, under the guise of being given in marriage, then the boys have to be rented out.

Traditional farming
By the beginning of the 20th century, there were few purely nomadic groups left among the future Uzbeks: most tribes led a semi-sedentary lifestyle, combining cattle breeding with agriculture. However, their way of life and the organization of their everyday life remained connected with the pastoral culture. Home crafts for processing livestock products were preserved: tanning, felting, carpet weaving, patterned weaving from woolen threads.

The main dwelling for cattle breeders was the yurt, but even where permanent houses appeared, it was used as an auxiliary and ritual dwelling.

Uzbek men's and women's clothing consisted of a shirt, wide-legged trousers and a robe (quilted with cotton wool or simply lined). The robe was belted with a sash (or a folded scarf) or worn loose. Sometimes the robe was belted with several scarves at once - the number of scarves corresponded to the number of wives of the owner of the robe. Women wore Chavchan, over which they put a burqa.

Uzbek cuisine is characterized by its diversity. The Uzbek food consists of a large number of various plant, dairy, and meat products. An important place in the diet is occupied by bread baked from wheat, less often from corn and other types of flour in the form of various flatbreads (obi-non, patir and others). Ready-made flour products, including dessert ones, are also common. The range of dishes is varied. Dishes such as Lagman, shurpa and porridges made from rice (shawl) and legumes (mashkichiri) are seasoned with vegetable or cow oil, fermented milk, red and black pepper, various herbs(dill, parsley, cilantro, raikhan, etc.). There are a variety of dairy products - katyk, kaymak, sour cream, cottage cheese, suzma, pishlok, kurt, etc. Meat - lamb, beef, poultry (chicken, etc.), less often horse meat.

Such popular foods as fish, mushrooms and other products occupy a relatively insignificant place in the diet. The favorite dish of Uzbeks is pilaf. Uzbeks also love manta rays.

Uzbek language
The Uzbek language also does not represent something unified. Each of the above tribes spoke its own language or dialect, which even belonged to different linguistic branches of the Turkic languages ​​- Kipchak (which includes Kazakh, Kyrgyz, Bashkir, Nogai, Tatar, Karaite, Karachay-Balkar, Crimean, Urum and Karakalpak), Oguz (which includes Turkish, Turkmen, Gagauz, Afshar and Azerbaijani) and Karluk (Uyghur, Khoton, etc.). At the same time, in the 20s, the Uzbek literary language was artificially created on the basis of the language of the inhabitants of the Fergana Valley. The Ferghana language was taken as a basis not only because it was closest to the extinct Chagatai literary language, in which they wrote in the Timurid era, but also in order to prevent the dominance of the Mangyt language and, accordingly, the Bukharians, who previously had their own statehood. Here it must be said that the Central Asian intelligentsia had previously used mainly the Tajik language, but after that the New Uzbek language was intensively introduced, prudently cleared of many Tajik borrowings. For the same reason, on September 1, 1930, the capital of the Uzbek SSR was moved from Tajik-speaking Samarkand to Turkic-speaking Tashkent. Until now, in Bukhara and Samarkand, the Uzbek intelligentsia prefers to speak Tajik, not caring about all directives. The speakers of this language are not actually Tajiks at all. These are the so-called chalas (literally “neither this nor that”), who are mainly Bukharian Jews who converted to Islam in appearance. They almost completely lost elements of Jewish ritual, and their Jewish origin they hide it carefully.

A rabbi teaches literacy to Bukharian Jewish children.

(excerpt from the new book by academician G. Khidoyatov “Turkic Civilization”)

Uzbeks. Khiva Khan Abdulgazi Khan (1642-1663), who at the same time was a poet and explorer Turkic history, argued that the name “Uzbek” came from the name of the Golden Horde khan Uzbekhan. He wrote: “After the adoption of Islam by Uzbek Khan, everyone began to call his tribe (el) Jochi the people of Uzbek and undoubtedly they will call it that way until the day of judgment.” There is, of course, some truth in this idea. The great glory of Uzbekhan as a leader and sovereign prompted the Turkic tribes to accept his name, which personified power and place in the hierarchy of tribes. But there is another opinion, whose supporters believe that the ethnonym arose as a result of combining two Turkic words “oz”, meaning “himself” and “bek”, commander, i.e. together - he is his own commander. This opinion is difficult to accept, because... There are no such words in any of the ancient Turkic dictionaries, and such a word does not appear. It seems that this interpretation of this ethnonym requires additional study. A whole era of ethnogenesis of a modern fairly large nation of 30 million people, ethnic Uzbeks, who have their own territory, statehood and played a key role in the history of Central Asia, is connected with the correct interpretation of this ethnonym. Z.V. Togan, who is known for his sympathy for the Uzbek people and the Uzbek republic, tried to solve this problem most radically. He pointed out that all 92 Turkic tribes mentioned by ancient sources, as well as Rashid ad-Din and Abulgazi, should be called Uzbeks (toksan ikki kabila ozbak - Z.V. Togan Bugunki Turkili. Turkistan ve Yakin Tarihi. c.1.s.42 Istanbul 1981). Of course, there is some exaggeration in this concept, because... of these 92 tribes at the beginning of the 15th century. two tribes separated under the leadership of Janibek and Kirai (Girey), who united with the Kyrgyz tribes, receiving the name Kyrgyz-Kaisaks, but at the same time there is a large grain of truth. And we should talk first of all about the appearance of the term itself. Z. Togan talked about the ethnic side of the matter; the ethnonym Uzbek itself is no less important for the modern reader, and behind it lies its own complex history.

A thorough study of documents and the latest literature makes it possible to present a more substantiated and closer to reality picture of the appearance of the ethnonym “Uzbek”. From the documents (Len-Pool, Bosworth, Tizenhausen op. cit.) it is clear that the specified term, like the proper name, appears in the capital of the Seljuk Ildegesid dynasty in Tabriz at the beginning of the 13th century.

The Seljuk Empire was a military power, the army that formed the support of the state was commanded by Turkic slaves - the Mamluks. Free men could not be trusted with the highest military positions or with the government of distant provinces; The Seljuks relied more on the loyalty of purchased slaves, raised at court along with the princes and heirs. Each Seljuk sultan had a retinue of Mamluks, brought mostly from Central Asia, bought at slave markets in Khorezm and Bukhara; they occupied the highest government positions and practically the entire army was under their command. As a reward for faithful and diligent service, they were released and often became rulers of provinces and even states. When the Seljuk sultans weakened and the empire began to disintegrate, their Mamluks, who had previously fought for them, became guardians and mentors of the heirs and princes. They were called atabeks. Soon, some teachers, taking advantage of the youth of their charges, gradually took away all power, turned into sovereign rulers of their provinces, and began to enjoy all the prerogatives of power, creating their own dynasties, although they were often legally considered vassals of the previous rulers. In Damascus, for example, the Burids ruled, in Mesopotamia - the Zangids, in Mosul the Mosul dynasty, in Syria - the Syrian, in Kurdistan - the Ertuqids, in Fars - the Salganids, in Luristan - the Khazaraspids

Of all the Atabek states, the Atabeks of Azerbaijan stood out, who were called Ildegizids. They did not rule for so long - from 1136 to 1225, but they left a rather bright and deep mark on history. The founder of the dynasty was Shams et-Din Ildegiz, a Turkic slave from the Kipchak steppes, who was bought by the Seljuk Sultan Masud (1134-1152) in Khorezm. He served at the court of the Sultan and attracted attention with his devotion and good organizational skills. For his faithful service, the Sultan appointed him governor of the province of Azerbaijan, and the capital of his possessions became the city of Tabriz, whose population was completely Turkic. At the same time, he became the atabek of the sultan’s heir, the future Sultan Togrul III (1176-1194). Ildegiz enjoyed the unlimited trust of the Sultan, this allowed him to become the sovereign ruler of the country. He issued orders, distributed land in iqta to his loyal servants and army commanders, and managed the treasury. After his death in 1176. Power was seized by another atabek, Jihan Pakhlavan, also from the ildeghizid family. No one dared to object to the usurpation of power, because he had a huge army, commanded by 70 Mamluks loyal to him, which was located throughout the territory of his possessions.

He managed to establish friendly relations with the Khorezmshahs. This was an important diplomatic step that established allied relations between the atabek and the Khorezmshahs. According to these relations, the Ildegezid state recognized itself as a vassal of the Khorezmshah empire. At the same time, they meant international recognition dynasties. This complex relationship allowed Pakhlavan to achieve high level international rating. He established friendly relations with Khorezmshah Tekesh (1172-1193). There was a lively correspondence and exchange of diplomats between them. All letters were written in the spirit of friendship and cooperation. This character suited both sides. Pakhlavan constantly emphasized his loyalty to the Khorezmshahs, and the Khorezmshahs supported his foreign policy actions as an ally. This allowed Pakhlavan to expand the territory of his state to Asia Minor. Under him, the state of the Ildegezids turned into a powerful power, the most powerful among the states of the Atabeks.

To strengthen his position within the country, Pakhlavan used the religion of Islam. The Persian historian Juzjani paid special attention to this circumstance. “He built,” he wrote, “many madrasahs and mosques” (Zubdat at Tawarikh, p. 239). The Ildegesid state became one of the most religious states in Islam. Leading theologians of Azerbaijan were trained in mosques and madrassas in Tabriz. Pakhlavan dies in 1187. and immediately after the funeral, a struggle for his legacy breaks out between his sons; fate smiled only on the fourth son, born from a concubine, whose name was Uzbek. His real name was Muzaffar et-Din, but the prefix Uzbek (ўzbak) also appeared, and under this name he went down in history and gave the name to the ethnic group of Turks, which then became known as the Uzbeks. The internecine struggle between the heirs of Pakhlavan continued until 1210, when Uzbek won the final victory and became the last atabek of the Ildegizids. They captured Tabriz in 1137 and declared it their capital. Soon the entire north-west of Iran and Iraq were annexed to their possessions; in the north, their borders reached Georgia and Shirvan. The Ildegezids were ethnically associated with the confederation of Turkic tribes of the Kara Koyunly, and came from the Oghuz clan of Ive, located in Khorezm. Ethnically and spiritually they were connected with Khorezm, they had the same Turkic language and this made it easier for them to communicate. This was not surprising in Iran, where even under the Qajars the crown princes did not know Persian and spoke and studied in the Turkic language. For most of their history, the Ildegesides were vassals of the Khorezmshahs. At the same time, they were closely connected with the great Seljuks; they were the educators of the last sultan of the great Seljuks, Toghrul III (1176-1194).

The Uzbek proved himself to be an energetic warrior, a capable military leader and a flexible statesman; in a few years he expanded the borders of his possessions, annexing Isfahan and Hamadan. Iraq was also conquered. As a result, a large state was formed, the borders of which extended from northern India to the Caucasus. He managed to establish independent diplomatic relations with the most powerful Muslim state, Egypt, and become an ally of the Ismailis. Uzbek's successes alarmed the Khorezmshah Ala ut-Din, who decided to force him to be a submissive vassal. Genghis Khan's invasion of his possessions and his death prevented him.

What the father failed to do, his son Khorezmshah Jalal et-Din Manguberdi decided to accomplish. Fleeing from the Mongols, in 1221. he invades the possessions of Uzbek, deciding to create a new state of the Khorezmshahs here. Yesterday's overlord and vassal became enemies. Uzbek, his supporters and subjects desperately defended themselves, but were defeated. The Uzbek was forced to admit vassalage to the new Khorezmshah; on his orders, a khutbah with the name of Jalal et-Din was read in Tabriz, and a coin with his name began to be minted. The truce lasted almost five years, but in 1225. unfolded between them new war. Uzbek was close to victory in 1227. he besieged Tabriz, where the Khorezmshah formed his capital. In the decisive battle that took place, Uzbek again suffers defeat, now final, and is forced to flee. He took refuge in Ganja, where he died in December 1225. All his possessions were declared subject to Jalal et-Din, who ruled them until his death in 1231. He was the last ruler of the Ildegesid state.

Relatives and supporters of Uzbek did not accept the loss of power and state and began to wage a fierce struggle to return to their homeland. As a sign of loyalty to their leader, they began to call themselves Uzbeks. In 1227 under the command of the former commander of the troops, also with the name Uzbek, they besieged Tabriz, where Jalal et-Din settled, but the war ended unsuccessfully for them. They were defeated and were forced to flee to the north of Azerbaijan. In 1228 A new uprising followed, which also ended in the defeat of the Uzbeks. In 1256 The Mongols under the leadership of Hulagu Khan invade Azerbaijan and conquer all of Iran, establishing the power of the Mongol Hulagid dynasty here.

The Uzbek tribe is again forced to retreat. The creation of the Golden Horde provided them with the opportunity to finally find refuge in their native ethnic element. They go to the Golden Horde and join the military formations of Batu Khan, who transfers them to his brother Sheibani as the basis of his own troops. From now on, the tribe began to be called the Uzbeks-Shaybanids. From then on, according to the Persian historian Rozbekhan, three ethnic groups were formed in Dashti Kipchak - Uzbeks-Sheybanids, Uzbeks-Cossacks and Uzbeks-Timurids. The Uzbek Cossacks (in the future Kazakhs) decided to maintain their former nomadic way of life and retired to the steppe. They formed the basis of the future ethnic formation - the Kyrgyz-Kaisaks, from which in the 15th century. Kirghiz and Kazakhs were formed. Of these three groups of Uzbek tribes, only the Shaybanids settled; they occupied a large territory from the Ural mountains to the Volga, forming at the end of the 13th century. Siberian cities of Tyumen, Tura, Tobol. After Timur's death in 1405. a massive organized resettlement of Sheybanid Uzbeks began in Central Asia, which was accompanied by a fierce war that lasted more than a hundred years and ended in their victory. The assimilation of the two branches of the Uzbek people took place painlessly - a common language, a common religion, a common way of life and moral values, turned out to be stronger than the political ambitions and selfish interests of the rulers. American researcher of the history of the Uzbek people, professor at Columbia University E. Allworth noted the amazing similarity in the public consciousness of these groups of the Uzbek people based on the study of the Alpamysh dostan, which was equally popular among both. It reveals the spiritual kinship of those Uzbeks who lived in Central Asia with those who lived in the far north (E. Allworth op.cit. pp..21,37).

The Golden Horde was a huge ethnic cauldron, where a variety of tribes and peoples lived side by side, where various ethnic groups mixed, new ones were created, which acquired different names. The state became cramped, the climate did not allow expanding living space, and some left the Horde and moved to new territories located to the south. Integration processes began to appear in the Golden Horde itself, which led to the consolidation of the Uzbek tribes. It is noted that the Golden Horde already at the beginning of the 14th century. began to be called the “country of the Uzbeks” or the “Uzbek ulus” both in literature and in official documents. This name appears after the adoption of Islam by Uzbek Khan in 1325. Instead of the previous name “Ulus Jochi”, the name “Ulus Uzbek” appears, which is how the country began to be called in official documents. The family name of Uzbek Khan was Sultan Muhammad, but after becoming a khan, he began to be called Uzbek Khan. Undoubtedly, this name reflected the desire of the ruling class to be the leader of a certain leading ethnic group. They were Uzbeks from Tabriz.

The Uzbeks arrived in the Golden Horde around the end of the forties of XIII, i.e. in the last years of the Khanate of Batu Khan. Khan sent them to his brother Sheiban, who, in the place where the city of Tyumen is now located, created an urban settlement, which was intended for his personal military unit, which his brother was supposed to allocate to him. There is a legend about Sheiban’s meeting with his new army. When asked about the name, one of the arrivals answered - Uzbek. Another also answered - Uzbek, the third - the same. Their military leader also answered - Uzbek and to the question - that’s what everyone is called Uzbeks, he simply answered - yes, we are all Uzbeks. Then Sheiban said that in this case he too would become an Uzbek. And since then, the ethnonym Uzbeks appears in the Golden Horde with the definition of Uzbeks-Sheybanids.

The newly arrived Uzbeks were received favorably in the Golden Horde. They already knew about them. Their fame and history preceded them. They were pious, Sunnis, religiously observing all the requirements of the Koran. They had priests who were educated in Khorezm and their own theologians, who played a significant role in the spread of Islam in the Golden Horde.

The Uzbek population grew rapidly, the territory of their residence expanded, and their importance in the political and social life of the country grew. New tribes appeared, which were called Uzbeks, although they had different names. By the middle of the 14th century. there were already 21 of them and they had become a leading ethnic and political force. They lived in compact formations with strong integration tendencies. Islam, common language, spiritual life, way of life, historical traditions united them. The Golden Horde began to be called the “country of the Uzbeks” or the “Uzbek ulus”. This name has migrated to scientific and political literature. The historian H. Shami in his work Zafar-name called the Golden Horde “the region of the Uzbeks”, and called Khan Tuktakiya (1375) nothing more than “the son of King Urus, the Uzbek Khan”

The influence of the Uzbek tribes grew rapidly, and at the same time the influence of the Uzbek tribal elite also grew. Annual congresses of representatives of tribal leaders began to be held, which began to be called “kurultai of the Uzbek sultans.” In that motley ethnic kaleidoscope of the Golden Horde, the Uzbeks stood out for their unity, culture and religion. They were good artisans, cattle breeders, plowmen, distinguished by their hard work and high professionalism. Their spiritual life was inspired by the ideas of Islam. For the Golden Horde khans, Islam became the main means of ideological and political unity of the people of the Golden Horde. The Golden Horde also included part of the Dashti Kipchak with its nomadic freemen, whose behavior was difficult to predict. Only religion could transform them into loyal defenders of the state.

In 1312 Uzbek Khan becomes Khan of the Golden Horde. His real name was Giyas et-Din Muhammad, but his spiritual father blessed him on the khan’s throne with the name Uzbek Khan and under this name he went down in history. This remarkable fact, showing his desire to declare himself simultaneously with the khan title and the right of leader of the Uzbek tribes. The Uzbeks became his main support and pillar of the state. By accepting Islam and carrying out the Islamization of the country, Uzbek Khan had in mind primarily political interests. His personal qualities provided him with high authority in wide circles. the masses. And naturally, among the leaders of the Uzbek aura. Uzbeks stood out among others ethnic groups their culture, way of life, way of thinking and public consciousness. Their devotion to Islam was fanatical, they strictly adhered to all the injunctions of the Koran. The rite of circumcision was obligatory and was carried out festively and solemnly, and the entire ummah was aware of it. Men always had a clean-shaven head. Everyone observed prayer times. The dead were buried strictly according to Muslim regulations; graves were dug only by Muslims in accordance with Muslim rules. The kharaj was paid regularly without any coercion, and the imam of the mosque loudly announced the contribution of each member of the ummah. Everyone gave alms to the dervishes and wanderers and all Quranic holidays were observed. Cattle were slaughtered only in accordance with the requirements of Islamic traditions. All religious holidays were celebrated with special celebration and scope. The most popular of them were Kurban Hayit and Nowruz. On such holidays, the rich and noble organized ulag (goat fighting) with expensive bonuses, and the winners were glorified as bahadurs.

The Sheybanid Uzbeks had their own famous theologians, clergymen and Koran readers. They were taken from house to house, from yurt to yurt, many became members of families in which they taught children. Rich people set up free schools in their homes for the children of their own and neighboring villages. The majority of teachers were brought from Khorezm. They were hired for two or three years and during this time of year they managed to teach children to read the Koran fluently, to know by heart several chapters of this sacred Muslim scripture, to read and write Arabic script, to know and interpret its most important chapters. Thousands of young men who received their primary education in home educational institutions went to Khorezm to complete their studies in the local madrassas and maktabs. They returned to the Golden Horde to educate their fellow citizens and tribesmen. Together with their teachers, they were missionaries of the Turkic civilization.

This cultural and educational Uzbek Khan and his son and heir Jani Bek (1341-1357) actively contributed to the process. With their support, hundreds of mosques, educational institutions, khanqahs, temples, refuges for wandering Sufis were erected in the Golden Horde, grants were distributed for cultural figures who arrived from Khorezm and other cultural Islamic center of Kazan. And it is no coincidence that both were glorified by historians and sung by poets and musicians. The Golden Horde was the brainchild of the Turkic civilization, which transformed the country and its people from a steppe horde into a civilized state.

Over time, the number of tribes living in the territory allocated for the Shaibanids grew. The reforms of Uzbek Khan served as an impetus for integration processes; they created spiritual bonds that helped unite various tribes into a single ethnic community. The next issue of the day was the creation of a confederation of tribes with a single elected khan. Soon history itself provided such an opportunity. In 1395 Timur defeated Khan Tokhtamysh and completely destroyed Sarai Barak and Sarai Batu, practically destroying the Golden Horde as a state. In the territory of the former Horde, unrest, inter-tribal conflicts began, and anarchy swept the steppe. Only the Uzbek tribes maintained unity and cohesion. Among them, the idea of ​​creating an elected government that would develop uniform general rules for the coexistence of tribes is winning. The guarantor of the implementation of such rules, which were called laws (konun), would be khans elected for a certain period at general congresses of tribes (kurultays). Death of Timur in 1405 gave an additional impetus to the integration processes of the Uzbek tribes. After long negotiations and meetings of tribal leaders, they agreed on the election of such a khan.

In March 1428 At the kurultai of the Uzbek sultans in Chimga Tura (now Tyumen), the creation of the Uzbek confederation and the election of a representative of the Sheibanid house Abulkhayir, who was only 16 years old that year, as its khan, were announced. He became the khan of the powerful Uzbek confederation, which already included 25 tribes that declared themselves Uzbeks. Although the very name of the Uzbek state appears in official sources only in 1527. – Uzbekistan, the creation of the Uzbek confederation would rightly be considered the first step towards its creation. Let future researchers figure out what should be considered the beginning of the Uzbek state - 1428, when the creation of the Uzbek confederation was announced, or 1527, when the name of the state - Uzbekistan - appears in the world's international documents.

The confederation had a common territory, a common language, culture, common rules of conduct, and a sovereign with powers, who was called Abulkhayir Khan. He married the daughter of the leader of one of the leading tribes - the Burgut, this guaranteed him powers of power, his support was also three powerful Uzbek tribes - the Mangyts, Mingis and Kongrat, whose support provided him with absolute power in the confederation. These tribes in the future were the creators of three Uzbek states - the Bukhara Emirate - Mangyty, the Kokand Khanate - Mingi and the Khiva Khanate - Congrats, which existed until 1921, until the establishment of Soviet power. Their exodus to Central Asia was reminiscent of the invasion of others ten centuries before them northern peoples to Europe - the Vikings.[

Source - CentralAsia
www.centrasia.ru

News from Muslim republics

After reading this article, it became clear to me that its authors, as they themselves admit, are not experts on the very complex problem of the origin of the Uzbek people. But, as they themselves write, they studied at the history department of the university, but did not find a place for themselves in the academic science of the Republic of Uzbekistan, they did the work available to them in order to earn their bread, and in free time, as patriots of the history of their people, were interested scientific research, publications by different authors. These works, it seems to me, interested them; they were given food to substantiate their ridiculous anti-scientific concept on the issue of the origin of the Uzbek people. The main essence of their concept is that the history of the Uzbek people begins with the penetration of nomadic Uzbeks led by Shaibanikhan into Moveraunnahr from Dashti-Kipchak, thereby they deny historical roots of the Uzbek people, consisting of two multilingual autochthonous ethnic layers and brazenly believe that the history of the peoples of Central Asia before the 15th century is Tajik.

Apparently, they do not represent the full complexity of the problem, like studying the history of the origin of the Uzbek people, the historical roots of which, contrary to the false beliefs of the authors of the article, go back to the era Late Bronze Age, and not to the era of the conquest of Central Asia by nomadic Uzbeks from Dashti-Kipchak.

Ethnically, the Uzbek people are not exclusively Turkic or, as Messrs. Mingbaev and Norbaev suggest to us, Turkified Mongols. In fact, the Uzbek people are an ethnic synthesis of multilingual tribes and peoples, the assimilation of which took place over at least two and a half thousand years1. Later (in 1924), as a result of the Soviet policy, the united Turkic ethnic group of Central Asia was divided into separate national republics. However, long ago (at least in the 11th-12th centuries), our people, which emerged as a Turkic-speaking ethnic group, received the name “Uzbek” on the advice of Russian orientalists.

In the historical past, no ethnic group under the term “Uzbek” existed. The term "Uzbek" first (at the end of the 13th - beginning of the 14th centuries) appeared as a political association of groups of young warriors of the eastern Dashti-Kipchak. Then (in the second half of the XIV-XV centuries) this military-political association of young warriors turned into the name of the population of the entire Dashti-Kipchak region. Now, all nomadic Uzbeks and Turkified Mongol tribal groups began to be called Uzbeks.

Therefore, in eastern written sources of the late Middle Ages, Dashti-Kipchak was mentioned as “Uzbek eli”, “Uzbeklar mamlakati” (“country of the Uzbeks”). The Turks and Turkified Mongols, in connection with the conquests of Genghis Khan and after him, also penetrated into Transoxiana and its environs. But they came here with their tribal names. Because, at that time, in the steppes of Dashti-Kipchak, the term Uzbek (“Uzbek eli”, “Mamlakati Uzbek”) as a popular name had not yet been formed.

As noted above, these terms in Dashti-Kipchak appeared around the middle of the 15th century. Nomadic Uzbeks, led by one of the leaders of Chingizid Shaibanikhan, a graduate of Bukhara madrassas, penetrated our lands as part of 92 tribal groups, took away power from the weakened Timurids and established their own power.

For the sake of fairness, it should be noted that this was just a dynastic change, so a state called Uzbek did not appear in Maverannahr, in the system of local and government departments no fundamental changes have occurred. The country continued to develop intensively in all spheres of life. Especially, under Shaybanid Abdullakhan II, the country developed rapidly in the spheres of economic, cultural, trade relations and monumental construction. Although this development was not truly reflected in Soviet historiography, it was properly reflected only in the historiography of the period of independent Uzbekistan (for example, in volume III of the new edition “History of Uzbekistan”).

Unfortunately, the Shaybanids and their successors, the Ashtarkhanids, were unable to rule the country like Abdulla Khan II. Due to inter-aristocratic intrigues and inter-feudal struggle within the country, the state was artificially divided into three parts (Khiva Khanate, Bukhara Emirate and Kokand Khanate), which were led by the leading tribes of nomadic Uzbeks, after which no khanate was named. Because the main population was not only nomadic Uzbeks, its core consisted of ancient sedentary Turks and Turkified Sarts.

This is historical reality! To abandon it is tantamount to abandoning the past history and the rich cultural heritage created by our ancestors since ancient times. To believe that the history of the Uzbek people begins with the nomadic Shaybanid Uzbeks means that the entire history and ethnocultural heritage created up to that time belongs only to the Tajiks. Therefore this difficult question specialists should and do do it. It’s not for nothing that people say: “chumchuk sўysa ҳam қassob sўysin” - “even a sparrow should be cut by a butcher.”

The authors of the article are offended that we criticize the lack of science in their article. In response, they write that “Askarov and Inamov make a lot of appeals to scientific character and science as such in an attempt to score points under the shadow of beautiful words. But by doing so they expose their irresponsible approach to scientific methodology and historical discipline, hastily forgetting that the platform we have chosen is not a field of academic warfare, but just an online publication, and the format of the article, accordingly, is popular science. In this regard, demanding that we be scientific is tantamount to playing with marked cards. But another question arises - to what extent are Askarov and Inamov themselves faithful to the mythical “scientific”?

From the context it is clear that for them scientificity and academic science are empty chatter, “an attempt to score points under the shadow of beautiful words.” They say that they do not speak in scientific journals, but only in Internet publications, where everything can be published. Therefore, scientific methodology and historical discipline cannot be demanded of them.

If they consider themselves sons of the Uzbek people, and even more so, historians, then they would not be so far from an amateurish approach to their native history and would not come out from such a non-scientific position. After all, in modern world, the Internet is also open to young people. Young people read all sorts of articles and they develop not a scientific, but a methodologically incorrect idea about their native history. University students and college and high school students prefer to read history on the Internet than listen to boring lectures by young teachers who are not yet prepared in theoretical, scientific and methodological terms. Unfortunately, it has become a tradition to officially promote the importance of Internet materials in universities. And we, representatives of the older generation, cannot look at this irresponsibly.

The article we published on the Internet “On the inconsistency of the article “Old problems of new Uzbek historiography” was not written as a response to Mingboev and Norbaev, but was written for young people, so that they would not be mistaken when reading articles by all sorts of amateurs on the history of the origin of the Uzbek people. In the article we wrote about the tasks of historical science, about the role and formation of spiritual culture, about the role of history in the spiritual and moral education of the nation.

And our opponents, in their response article, assessed our opinion as a relic and nothing more than a political instrument, supposedly supposed to serve such abstract goals as “spiritual culture” and “spiritual education of the nation.” They further write that academic science should not be controlled by the state, it should be based on strict, methodologically verified research activities, the results of which should be reflected in scientific articles and monographs, and not be operated by such abstract, non-scientific categories as “continuity”, “spirituality”, "autochthony" and "alienity".

With the exception of phrases such as “academic science should be based on strict, methodologically verified research activities, the results of which should be reflected in scientific articles and monographs,” the judgments of our opponents are fiction and false, and call for distortion of Russian history.

They appeal to educational role pedagogical science. But let’s give one more quote: “there is still a pedagogical historical discipline designed to ensure the loyalty of the population, preserve historical memory and form a single identity. It already tells people who is who, without claiming absolute objectivity, but in its codification it is necessary to take into account the developments academic research." They also perceive the role of historical science in front of society very narrowly, as evidenced by the interpretation of their following statements: “Askarov, in best traditions Soviet science, tries to give the issue a political context, declaring his enemies “pan-Turkists” and “pan-Iranists”;... and accusing constructivists of “calling for inter-ethnic conflicts.” “We state that a historian is not a politician, and if Askarov imagines himself to be a politician , who has the right to tell a multimillion-dollar society how to see its history, it means that he betrayed academic science.”

“Constructivism is not a political ideology, but a theory in the philosophy of science, an alternative to the theory of ethnicity, more modern and widespread throughout the world. Constructivists do not call for interethnic conflicts; on the contrary, studying them, they state that they are not based on some far-fetched "objective ethnic criteria", and social conflict, covered with an ethnic screen. Thus, they prove that ethnicity is a construct that exists only in our heads, it is not an objective reality; that there are no clear boundaries between us;..." "Pan-Turkism and Pan-Iranism are political movements, they do not take into account any historical context, being guided by only the current state of affairs. A scientist should be guided not by political preferences, but by facts."

From the context it is clear where the opponents' ultimate goal leads. No, dear fellows! Firstly, history must serve society and take into account the ethno-political situation that has existed in the region since ancient times; secondly, you have a poor understanding of the ideological essence of Pan-Turkism and Pan-Iranism, which appeared in the first years of Soviet power and became more active in the Turkic-speaking republics after the collapse of the USSR; thirdly, no, dear “philosophers,” modern constructivism, as a philosophical movement, denies the ethnogenetic stage of the history of an ethnos and, as a political instrument, seeks food to incite interethnic contradictions, thereby denying the ethno-forming factors of an ethnos. “We are all,” write the authors of the response article, “first of all people, and only then Uzbeks, Tajiks, Muslims, Christians. This is the theory of scientific liberalism and tolerance, which sharply criticizes the theory of ethnicity, which involves dividing people by ethnicity, race and language signs."

The main goal of the opponents is clear from the context. They state that “we must take the facts from Everyday life and their statement is sufficient; there is no need to scientifically analyze them based on historical scientific methodology. The people themselves select what they need from them; There is no need to promote the education of young people in the spirit of national and ideological spirituality. History should develop precisely on such a theory of liberalism and tolerance." This is clearly open propaganda calling for interethnic hostility, directed against peaceful life in the region, ideological sabotage.

They further write: “Askarov is an archaeologist, not an ethnologist or linguist, and therefore, despite all the official regalia, he is not a recognized authority on issues of ethnogenesis and linguistics.” It’s true, I’m not a linguist, but I’m familiar with the scientific works of linguists and strictly following scientific ethics, I used their developments in writing my works.

The problem of ethnogenesis and ethnic history I have been engaged in the Uzbek people since 1983, published a number of scientific articles in magazines and scientific collections. He published two monographs and organized a number of scientific conferences on the issue at hand. He has made presentations at regional and international conferences. What else do you need, gentlemen!

If you rely on the speech of archaeologist A. Sagdullaev, who in his controversial article (magazine “History of Uzbekistan”, No. 3, 2015) criticizes my work (“Uzbek khalkining kelib chikish tarihi”), then you are mistaken. There is my response to this article in the magazine “History of Uzbekistan” No. 1, 2016, and several positive articles in the republican press. It’s surprising that in your opinion A. Sagdullaev, who has not published a single scientific article in ethnogenesis, a recognized expert on the ethnogenesis of the Uzbeks, but Askarov is the author of a number of scientific articles and two respectable monographs - no! Do you have the slightest human conscience?

As for my second opponent. At the last discussion of my monograph at an extended meeting of the academic council (26.IX.2015) of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Uzbekistan, where historians, archaeologists, ethnographers, ethnologists, source scholars and others participated, the Arabist A. Akhmedov, seeing the mood of the speakers, silently left the meeting room, and 12 days after the academic council, where my work was recommended for publication, he sent an unfounded, intriguing review to the director of the institute and demanded that his review be included in the minutes of the meeting. His review and my response, along with the minutes of the meeting and an official letter from the institute, were sent to the publishing house, where the work was soon published. Here is the face of my second opponent. A. Akhmedov, like A. Sagdullaev, did not publish a single article on the ethnogenesis and ethnic history of the Uzbek people, thereby both of them, out of purely personal hostility towards me, tried to biasedly denigrate my work.

When writing my scientific works, I widely used data from ancient Chinese written sources, thanks to the friendly help of sinologist, prof. A. Khojaeva. He is a renowned scientist of a wide range. There are no written sources other than Chinese on the early history of the Turkic-speaking peoples. And my opponents A. Akhmedov and A. Sagdullaev do not recognize the data of ancient Chinese written sources. This is because the data from ancient Chinese sources does not serve the traditional ideas of Soviet historiography. Therefore, they both look for "dirt under their fingernails" in the work of those who look at history with new perspectives and approaches.

Now, Messrs. Mingbaev and Norbaev, if you are such experts on the history of the Uzbek people, you should not criticize on the Internet, first write and publish a scientific work on the origin of your people! If people accept your conceptual belief, they will definitely thank you.

Usually, new idea, raised in scientific works due to the objective and subjective approach of opponents, is not always perceived immediately, especially when the author has envious people.

In such cases, history amateurs, taking advantage of this, try to show themselves as a critic even of scientists with extensive scientific experience in the field of science. In the role of such parrots here I see Mingbaev and Norbaev.

In my books published in 2007 and 2015. a detailed idea was given of who the Aryans were, who can be called Aryans in ethnic terms, relevant information was given about this, according to which it is substantiated that the Aryan ethnos never existed. Aryans are social phenomenon the development of the nomadic stage of life of the pastoral tribes of the Eurasian steppes, the initiative layer of society, the aristocratic layer of the emerging early class society. They, contrary to historical linguistics and archaeological research, were not native speakers of ancient Iranian languages. According to a comparative scientific analysis of ancient Chinese sources, the language of the Aryans belonged to the proto-Turkic ethnic group. Their migration to the south, starting from the middle of the 2nd millennium BC, is evidenced by archaeological materials, especially from the Central Asian region.

Gentlemen Mingbaev and Norbaev! You have turned into slaves of the great Paniranist V.V. Bartold and his followers. Since you have decided to understand the history of your people, listen more to scientists with rich experience and baggage on the history of your native land. Do not forget the ethnopolitical situation that has existed here since ancient times.

V.V. Bartold is a major and very erudite scientist. However, during his lifetime such branches of historical science as archeology, anthropology, numismatics, ethnology, Turkology were not developed in Central Asia - all of them were in their infancy. Known written sources and rare written finds were considered Iranian-language. Thanks to the reading of authentic numismatic materials by G. Babayarov, M. Iskhakov, Sh. Kamoliddinov, it became known that the Iranian-language reading of numismatic materials by Academician E.V. Rtveladze turned out to be false; most of them were ancient Turkic. If the inscription on the coin did not contain ancient Iranian content, then it was perceived as “unknown writing.”

My opponents, represented by A. Akhmedov and A. Sagdullaev, deny the ethnogenetic aspect of archaeological materials. They believe that the problems of the ethnogenesis of the Uzbeks are studied only on the basis of written sources. There is no data directly related to language in written sources. Therefore, A. Askarov’s involvement of archaeological materials to resolve the issue of the ethnogenesis of the Uzbek people is not acceptable. They unfoundedly seek to convince readers that ceramics and other artifacts material culture one cannot “squeeze out the juice” for ethnogenesis, and one cannot agree with that. Firstly, A. Akhmedov is a mathematician by basic education and is far from history and archeology. Therefore, it is difficult for him to understand the role of archeology in the study of ethnogenesis and ethnic history. Plus, although he is a source scholar, due to personal hostility towards source scholars on ancient Chinese hieroglyphs, he does not want to recognize the adequacy of ancient Chinese written sources.

Although ancient Chinese sources contain materials exposing the whims of A. Akhmedov. For example, in ancient Chinese sources dating back to the 3rd-2nd millennium BC. Turkic tribes Guz are referred to as “hu”, tiek - “di”, rivem - “rung”2. L.N. Gumilov in his work “Hunnu” writes that the ethnonym “Hun” first appears in the history of China in 1764 BC, then the Huns met twice, that is, in 822 and 304 BC.3 Huns as Turkic-speaking tribes recognized in the historiography of the West; secondly, if you delve deeply scientifically into the analysis of archaeological artifacts, you can be convinced that archaeological material also has an ethnogenetic aspect in the history of the ethnos. For example, according to archaeological research, starting from the Bronze Age from northeastern regions From the steppes of Eurasia, proto-Turkic tribes began to intensively penetrate into the regions of Central Asia. Their penetration was constant in the early Iron Age, in antiquity, not to mention the period of the arrival of the Chionites, Kidarites, Hephthalites, and the Turkic Kaganate in the era of early feudalism. These migration processes are well reflected in archaeological materials. Based on the analysis of archaeological materials, we can say which complex belongs to the culture of the sedentary part of the population, and which to the culture of nomads or settling nomads.

In the conditions of Central Asia, based on the analysis of archaeological complexes, funeral rites and religious and spiritual representations of culture bearers, one can unmistakably determine who is an Iranian-speaking Sogdian or Khorezmian, and which culture belongs to the Turkic-speaking population.

In order to come to such conclusions, the researcher must have a large scientific range and a subtle sense of knowledge of the material. In addition, the research archaeologist must rise from the level of an archaeologist to the level of a historian with extensive experience in the historical interpretation of archaeological artifacts.

Unfortunately, many archaeologists remained archaeologists and did not rise to the level of historians. Apparently, archaeologist A. Sagdullaev, judging by his reasoning, where he does not see the ethnogenetic aspect of archaeological materials in the history of the ethnos, remained an archaeologist. If he had been more objective when reading my work, without personal hostility towards me, then he would have understood me correctly. Unfortunately, the problem of the ethnogenesis of the Uzbeks does not interest him; he was brought up in the spirit of Pan-Iranism.

According to the data presented by A. Khojaev, based on deciphering ancient Chinese written sources, in the lower reaches of the Yellow River in the 3rd-2nd millennium BC. there were North Chinese local principalities "Shya" (2205-1766 BC), "Shong" 1766-1122. BC), "Zhou" (1122-771 BC), in the system of government administrations of which chroniclers called "shi" worked. The tasks of these chroniclers included recording events taking place, both within the country and outside. These "shi" also simultaneously left information about neighboring tribes and peoples living to the north, northeast and northwest of them. They mentioned them with disrespectful words, calling them savages and barbarians, who often unexpectedly appeared on foreign lands, trampled sown fields, and carried away women and children on horses. They live in light tents. Their main food is meat and milk. Judging by the description, we are talking about nomadic tribes, from whom, in the conditions of the steppes, mobility and dexterity were required, which is characteristic of the lifestyle of the steppe tribes of Eurasia of the Bronze Age.

From the history of China, the names of some “shi” (Sa Zhe, Rui Sung) have reached us. In the "Great Chinese Hieroglyphic Dictionary" ("Hit tili katta hieroglyphlar lugati"), compiled on the basis of materials from the book of Sima Qiang " Historical monuments"("Tarihiy hotiralar") it is written that on the northwestern border of the North Chinese state "Shya" live the ancestors of the Huns - "hu", "di", "rung". The terms "hu", "di", "rung" in the local in the language they sound like “tiek” (in Chinese “di”, “rivem” in Chinese “rung”), “guz” (in Chinese “hu”). They were the ancestors of the Huns with Chinese names4. Similar information is found in the dictionary “Etymology of Words”. " ("Suzlar etymologiyasi") Xi Yuan5. If "tiek" was the common name of (proto-Turkic - A.A.) related tribes, then "Guz" and "Hun" are separate tribes included in the union of tribes "tiek"6. In the second part ("Khunnlar tazkirasi") of the History of the Khan Dynasty it is written that "in the south there is a Great Khan, and in the north there is a strong "Hu". The historian of the Eastern Han dynasty Zheng Shuang writes that the “hu” are contemporary with the Xiongnu,” that is, the Xiongnu7. According to sinologist A. Khojaev, “di” in Chinese characters also read as "dingling". As the Chinese historian Duan Liangchin emphasizes, the “Guifangs” of the time of the Northern Chinese principality of “Shia”, “Shong”, “Zhou” were the ancestors of “Dingling”8. Another Chinese historian, Lü Simian, writes that “the previously named Dinling (Dingling) tribes now began to be called “Chile”, “Tele”. Now we generally call them “Uyghurs”, and in Western historiography they are called “Türks”9.

Thus, from the above data of Chinese historians and historical dictionaries, based on the analysis of ancient Chinese written sources, we can come to the conclusion that in the north, northeast and northwest ancient Chinese in the III-II millennium BC lived pastoral proto-Turkic tribes, the ancestors of the Huns. It was in these territories of the Eurasian steppes, more precisely in the eastern part of this region, that the nomadic tribes of the Andronovo cultural community spread in the Bronze Age. Consequently, the local nomadic tribes of the Bronze Age - Tiek, Guz, Xiongnu (Hun), Guifang, Dingling and others (in Chinese Hu, Di, Rung, etc.) can be identified with the tribes of the Andronovo cultural community, since the ancient Chinese characterization of the “barbarian” proto-Turkic tribes is fully consistent with the archaeological characteristics and chronology of the Andronovo tribes. After which I got the idea that the speakers of the Andronovo cultural community probably spoke different dialects of the ancient Turkic language, which I propose to call not Turkic, but proto-Turkic.

It is well known that ancient writing, as a vital need, first appeared in the society of sedentary tribes. In it on early stages there was no need for a nomadic society. Therefore, writing appeared among the Turkic-speaking ancestors much later than among the sedentary population.

Although somewhat later, the Turkic-speaking ancestors had writing. For example, the “Issyk script” of the Saka tribes or the “unknown script” of the Yuezhi tribes; samples of the latter were found in more than ten locations. A.S. Omonzholov and other Turkic linguists proved that the “Issyk script” is the earliest example of ancient Turkic writing. It was discovered in the central part of the distribution of the ancient Turkic language. In these areas, carriers of the Andronovo culture are widespread and all its chronological stages are represented.

Unfortunately, in the historiography of the Soviet period, the speakers of the Andronovo and Dandybay-Begazin cultures were considered Iranian-speaking, even the world-famous historian, academician B.G. Gafurov wrote his monumental monograph “Tajiks” (1972 edition) in the spirit of pan-Iranism. A common thread in his work was the idea that the ancient Iranian language penetrated into Central Asia from Eastern Europe during the Bronze Age. In fact, the ancient Iranian language in the Persian world and Central Asia had an autochthonous basis, which was proven by objective facts in my scientific works. This is one of the new provisions that I put forward in the monograph “Uzbek Khalkining Kelib Chikish Tarihi”.

Messrs. Mingbaev and Norbaev, without realizing this, do not hesitate to slander that “A. Askarov preaches anti-scientific concepts, and this is nonsense!”

Usually, in science, new ideas are born in the process of comparing facts, scientific observations and their scientific analysis, and are subject to objective and subjective resistance. However, they should not be feared. Because this is the dialectic of life, without them neither science nor society will develop. Each new idea raised in scientific works, despite objective and subjective assessments, serves as a stimulus for the birth of more and more new works. In this regard, the monograph by A. Askarov is also of great scientific importance. The works of A. Askarov will not be smashed to smithereens in academic science, since the speeches of A. Sagdullaev, Mingbaev and Norbaev are not justified and have already received their assessment. On the contrary, they showed their treacherous face in front of their people.

Your allegorical remark about the anthropological types of each historical root of the ancestors of the Uzbek people is not appropriate, since I relied on the scientific conclusions of anthropologists. And you, based on data obtained from the analysis of an ethnographic group of nomadic Uzbeks, extend this to the entire Uzbek people, and present it as a historical reality.

Famous anthropologists academician V.P. Alekseev, professor L.V. Oshanin, V.V. Ginzburg, T.A. Trofimova, T.K. The Khojoys do not deny the proto-European identity of the Bronze Age proto-Turks. However, starting from the Early Iron Age, due to the penetration into the steppes of Southern Siberia from Far East, carriers of the Karasuk culture, elements of the Mongoloid type with the ancient Turkic language appeared in the Caucasian population of the eastern part of Eurasia. Over time, the Mongoloid trait intensifies and their influx (chionites, kidarites, hephthalites) into Central Asia becomes intense. During the era of the Western Turkic Kaganate, there was not a single region left in Central Asia where the Turks did not penetrate.

In the 8th century The Arabs, in order to stop their influx, built defensive walls around the oases. But the Turkic ethnic layer here was so powerful before that, even under the Samanids, the basis of the army was made up of Turkic ghulams and generals. This meant that the Turkic ethnic layer of the Uzbek people, even under the Samanids, consisted mainly of sedentary Turks speaking Oguz, Karluk-Chigil dialects.

Even the Samanids themselves were from the Fergana Oguzes by origin. A monograph by the famous source scholar Sh. Kamoliddinov entitled “Samanids” was published about this in 2011.

So far no one has disputed the scientific conclusions of L.V. Oshanina, V.V. Ginzburg and T.K. Khojayov that the modern Uzbek people and lowland Tajiks have basically a single anthropological appearance, both of them belong to the “Central Asian interfluve type” of the Greater Indo-European Race.

Indeed, due to the appearance of the Mongoloid Karasuk people in the larger eastern part of the Eurasian steppes and the constant penetration of tribes with Mongoloid features into the regions of Mogolistan, the Dashti-Kipchak nomadic Uzbeks increased Mongoloidism among the Turkic-speaking population. In turn, in connection with the campaigns of Genghis Khan and the Dashti-Kipchak Uzbeks in Central Asia, the Mongoloid type began to predominate in the nomadic and semi-nomadic part of the Uzbek people.

According to the conclusion of anthropologist T.K. Khojayov, starting from the 17th century, the Mongoloid element gradually penetrated into the settled part of the population. The assimilation of different types in the physical appearance of our people continued in some places in subsequent centuries. It `s naturally! But, despite this, the Uzbeks and Tajiks, as representatives of the “Central Asian interfluve type,” remained as before Caucasoid.

Dear opponents! In your conclusions about the anthropological appearance of the Uzbek people, you do not need to rely on an analysis of the anthropology of individual ethnographic groups. Carefully read the works of anthropologists, where they characterize the physical appearance of the entire population. Otherwise, you insult your people with your incorrect anthropological interpretations. You didn’t even hesitate to insult L.V. Oshanin with his absurd conclusions: “Since in the Soviet period the Uzbeks were declared to be the descendants of ancient Iranians, anthropologists such as Oshanin, despite the noticeable Mongoloid characteristics they discovered among the Uzbeks, attributed ancient Iranian origin to the Uzbeks due to established doctrine.” Firstly, Soviet doctrine does not say that the Uzbeks are directly descendants of the ancient Iranians; secondly, L.V. Oshanin also did not write that the Uzbeks in origin go back to the ancient Iranians.

Don’t try to create a false sea out of a drop, don’t draw conclusions from the words of foreigners, they won’t understand the aspirations of our people. Your example, taken from an article by W. Spencer, is based only on a DNA analysis of 366 ethnicos - descendants of nomadic Uzbeks by origin. It is not appropriate here to distribute them as original material to the entire Uzbek people.

Dear Internet readers! Pay attention to what my opponents write: “So far, the only detailed genetic study of Uzbek ethnogenesis was carried out by Wells Spencer in 2001. In this study of Uzbeks10, 366 people from different regions of Uzbekistan are represented.” The authors of this study note that: “Indeed, the genetic distances between the various Uzbek populations scattered throughout Uzbekistan are no greater than the distance between many of them and the Karakalpaks. This suggests that the Karakalpaks and Uzbeks have very similar origins.” To tell the truth, the Karakalpaks are also of Dashti-Kipchak origin, whose facial (physical) appearance belongs to the “South Siberian type,” and the Uzbeks, as noted above, belong to the “Central Asian interfluve type.”

Mingbaev and Norbaev write without shame that “The authors of the article also express their pleasure at the fact that in recent years, in the scientific works of Uzbek scientists, such famous historical figures, like Tomiris, Shirak, Spitamen (against the Persians and Greeks), Mukanna (against the Arabs), Jalaliddin Manguberdy (fought against the Mongol invaders), Amir Temur (liberated from the Mongols), Dukchi Eshan, "Basmachi" and Jadids (against Tsarist Russia) ". "We say: no, not “in recent years.” Another quote from my opponents is indicative: “Tomiris, Shirak, Mukanna, Spitamen, Jalaliddin Manguberds are canonized in official Uzbek historiography in Soviet time, and this is in Once again shows that modern scientists of Uzbekistan were unable to make serious changes in this regard. Tomiris, Shirak, Spitamen, which are conventionally mythologized historical figures, in fact, did not and could not leave any trace in the historical memory of the peoples of modern Central Asia, which were formed thousands of years later. Jalaliddin Manguberdy, although he is a historical character, his true appearance does not correspond to the far-fetched aura of a “patriot” and “fighter” against the Mongols. He was a representative not of the people, but of a specific dynasty, but he thought about the masses in the very last place, which is reflected, for example, in his official biography, and fought against the Mongols for resources, not for homeland. When he lost the territories of his father, then, as befits a nomad, he turned his attention to Iran, the Caucasus and Middle Asia, where he tried to create his own state. But this is not the main thing. The main thing is historical memory. There is not a single legend in the historical memory or folklore of any Central Asian people associated with the named persons. We learned about them in Soviet times - it’s time to admit it.”

Calling the historical figures Tomaris, Spitamen “mythologized conditionally historical persons” or Jalaliddin Manguberdi “a far-fetched patriot and fighter”, as well as a “nomad” does not correspond to historical reality. Carefully read the “father of history” Herodotus and other ancient authors and the monograph of Academician Buniyatov “The State of the Khorezmshakhs”. Remember Jalaliddin's struggle with Genghis Khan's troops at the crossing of the Indus River and Genghis Khan's objective assessment of the heroic actions of Jalaliddin Manguberdi. The ungrateful Mingbaev and Norbaev write without shame that “in the historical memory, in the folklore of not a single Central Asian people, there is not a single legend associated with the named persons.”

In our previous article, we criticized N. Mingbaev and Sh. Norbaev in that they incorrectly believe that the history of the Uzbek people begins with the penetration of nomadic Uzbeks led by Shaibanikhan into Maverannahr from Dashti-Kipchak, thereby denying the historical roots of the Uzbek a people consisting of two multilingual autochthonous ethnic layers and brazenly believe that the history of the peoples of Central Asia until the 15th century is Tajik. In response, they write that “This is a misreading of our views. Uzbek historians are very afraid that they will be deprived of the historical heritage dating back to the period before the 15th century. We do not deny the role of previous peoples, but we emphasize decisive role Sheybanids in the composition of the Uzbek people. Without the Sheibanids, there would be no Uzbeks, there would be no Uzbekistan."

In our previous article we put forward the following thesis: “The science of ethnology determines that the history of the origin of each people consists of three stages. At the first stage, on the basis of economic and cultural ties of tribes and clans living territorially close, speaking different languages ​​and dialects, ethnocultural rapprochement, interpenetration and ethnic mixing, that is, ethnogenetic processes take place. This ethnogenetic process, being a long-term objective historical reality in the history of each people, ultimately ends with the formation of an individual people, therefore, the ethnogenetic process ends with the formation of a people. This means that a people is a product of long-term processes. ethnogenetic processes and a set of ethnic units. The stage of ethnogenesis in the history of a people covers the period from the moment when it began to form as a tribe or nationality."

This scientific and methodological thesis does not suit our opponents and, considering themselves luminaries of methodology, they criticize us with the following phrases: “Such a Soviet understanding of ethnology and ethnogenesis has long since sunk into oblivion. In the process of ethnogenesis there are no objective boundaries; it is impossible to determine where the beginning is and where the end is Soviet science assumed that the socialist nations created in the USSR were the final stage of ethnogenesis. local peoples… ethnic processes occurred with a conscious purpose - for the formation of specific Uzbeks, Tajiks, Kazakhs, etc., who will no longer change, will not disappear, who will last for centuries." Further, continuing, they write: "Such a simplified understanding of ethnogenesis has long been accepted by no one seriously. In ethnogenesis there is no beginning and end, communities appear and disappear, modern ethnic groups are no exception - we will not be surprised if in 500 years new nations will consider us as an “intermediate process” on the path of their formation. Since we know that ethnogenetic processes are not always interconnected, is it necessary to consider the Sogdians, who by chance moved to the Zeravshan Valley three thousand years ago, as our immediate ancestors? Do Americans consider Indians their ancestors, Australians - Aborigines, Russians - Scythians, British - Celts? Moreover, the contribution of the Sogdians, Khorezmians and other eastern Iranians to the ethnogenesis of the Uzbeks is by no means obvious." By this they showed themselves as intriguers in the history of the ethnic group, exposing their illiteracy in history in general.

Apparently, there is no need to further argue with such amateurs as N. Mingbaev and Sh. Norbaev on the complex, centuries-old history of the Uzbek people. I would rather offer my respected Internet readers the following views of my opponents. Let them judge who is right and who is wrong: “Had it not been for the invasion of Genghis Khan, perhaps the Turkic element would not have held out even in the indicated territories of its primary distribution. No matter what “monster” Genghis Khan was, as it is presented in Uzbekistan, from his conquest in Ultimately, the local Persophones suffered more... After the penetration of the “Mongols” into the region, several more areas were subjected to Turkization. Thus, the Chagatai Khan Kebek built the city of Karshi, which became not only the trade and cultural center of Maveraunnahr, but also a support for the Turkic language in Kashkadarya. Khan Khaidu restored the city of Andijan, which became the largest Turkic-speaking settlement in the region. Khorezm was finally Turkified due to the presence there of huge groups of Golden Horde (from the beginning of the 14th century - Uzbek) tribes, primarily the Kungrats... Indeed, still in all these cities and towns. In the villages, with the exception of Margilan and the disappeared Akhsa, the majority are Tajiks. Many Uzbek cities and settlements known in the Fergana Valley today simply did not exist until the 16th century. Namangan was built on the site of Akhsa in the 17th century, Kokand was restored in early XVIII V. from the side of the ancestors of the Uzbek dynasty Ming, Shahri Khan - from the side of Khan Umarsheikh in the first quarter of the 19th century, Fergana - from the side of the Russians called Skobelev "...

“The above facts speak for themselves: firstly, in the Fergana Valley the Turkic element began to dominate only thanks to the resettlement of Uzbek tribes in the 16th-18th centuries, and secondly, almost all the cities and settlements of the Valley, indicated by Babur as Tajik, to this day remain Tajik (except for Margilan), and many large Uzbek cities and towns (with the exception of the very early Turkified Kuva, Osh, Uzgen and Andijan) were created and settled later, i.e. the all-consuming assimilation and Turkization of the Iranian population is nothing more than a scientific myth... .Starting with the conquest of the country by Sheybani Khan, the influx of Uzbeks and the ousting of the Tajik element from the valley parts of the region by the Turkic ones, which did not stop until recently, the Tajiks eventually remained here only in the largest villages, more or less well protected... What is curious is that the Uzbeks settled on the territory of Kokand. began to quickly lose their tribal identity, while in Bukhara, on the contrary, it was preserved even among settled urban groups."...."It is necessary to note another important aspect associated with Khorezm. For many centuries this area was independent and culturally isolated.... At the beginning of the 16th century. Uzbek commanders Ilbars and Beybars, independently of Sheybanikhan, created the Uzbek Khanate of Khiva here... Imagine what would have happened if not Ilbars and Beybars: Khorezm today would be a separate country, whose population would not call themselves Uzbeks, there would be no cultural heritage that has been created in Khorezm by Uzbek dynasties. And traditional arguments, they say, there would not have been the name “Uzbek”, but the people were the same as now - this is an empty shake of the air: there is no single self-name - there is no single nation... Persians and Tajiks speak the same language, but are not one nation.....The nomadic Uzbek tribes, who migrated in huge numbers from Dashty Kipchak, ensured the numerical superiority of the Turkic element in the central and southern regions of Maveraunnahr, in the central and western regions of Fergana... Thanks to the Sheybanids, the Turks turned into a numerically and politically dominant force in the region. If it weren’t for them, in large areas of Uzbekistan until then, mainly Persian speech would have been heard.... A small part of the Turks, who had formed a different identity, became part of the Uzbeks at the beginning of the 20th century.”

At the conclusion of the second part of the response article, N. Mingbaev and Sh. Norbaev denigrated the centuries-old rich history of the Uzbek people and without shame came to the conclusion that “Uzbek historians want to be very ancient, the most ancient in the region. To do this, they need to show themselves as descendants of the ancient Iranian peoples , and thus declare the successors of all states and cultures that existed in Central Asia. In part, this point of view, formed in Soviet times, according to the principle “the most ancient is the greatest,” should, in their idea, be a response to the claims of historians and politicians. neighboring countries, which usually have a nationalistic attitude towards the Uzbeks and try to downplay their role in the history of Central Asia. Thus, they want to get rid of the label of “alien invaders” and show themselves as “local”, “indigenous” and “autochthonous”. USSR. We live in the 21st century. “Autochthony” is neither international nor world law. historical science is not perceived as an argument in such disputes. The deeply nationalistic view that allegedly peoples are “indigenous” and “newcomers” and that only “indigenous” people supposedly have the right to statehood is already considered best case scenario bad manners, at worst - a manifestation of Nazism and fascism."

“Yes, we have problems with neighbors who also claim to be “ancient” and “autochthonous” (especially Tajiks), but we need to stop looking back at our neighbors and coming up with slogans in the form of “you are a fool.” The Uzbek people must have the courage to reconsider their history , let our neighbors follow our example, and if they don’t, it’s their problem. Whoever claims a multi-thousand-year statehood is doomed to shame in the face of the world community. The only direct descendants of the ancient peoples are the Yaghnobis - speakers of the New Sogdian language. Even the Pashtuns and Pamir peoples. - the remains of pre-Tajik Iranian inhabitants, and they are descendants of tribes that moved to the region no earlier than the 2nd-1st centuries BC, and are not related to the ancient Bactrians. And the current Turkic languages ​​came from the language of the Turkic Kaganate - pre-Kaganate Turkic languages, if they existed in our region, they would be very different from modern Uzbek, Kazakh, Turkmen, etc.

“It was not the Uzbeks who became part of the Tajiks or Chagatai, Sogdians or Khorezmians - it was they who became part of the Uzbeks, adopted their identity, their history and culture. Who should be considered their predecessor - the assimilated or the assimilated? Therefore, for the history of the Uzbeks and other peoples of Central Asia, pre-Turkic and the pre-Persian strata have no significance."

"Samarkand was destroyed in early XIII c., rebuilt at the end of the same century, and repopulated. But then it was again destroyed as a result of civil strife in the 18th century. It was rebuilt by the last outstanding statesman of Bukhara - Emir Shahmurad (1785-1800). He ordered the construction of new neighborhoods on the site of the ruins and resettled here the population from 34 Uzbek and Tajik cities and settlements, including Tashkent, Penjikent, Andijan, Zaamin, Yamin, Urgut, Kashgar, Andijan, Urgench, Shakhrisabz, Urmitan, Dakhbid, etc. Mahallas with such names still exist in Samarkand, and the people living in them remember the history of the migration of their ancestors. What does this mean? That the boasting of Uzbek historians regarding the three-thousand-year history of Samarkand is completely inappropriate, for this is actually a city built 200 years ago, inhabited by people from various sides regions that have no genetic, cultural or linguistic relationship to the distant Sogdians, who founded a settlement on these lands called “Samarkand” in the 8th-7th centuries. BC.".

“We also note that the concept we propose fully satisfies the requirements of Askarov, who considers history a source of “spiritual education.” The fact is that the main historical heritage of Uzbekistan - the memorial sights of Tashkent, Khiva, Bukhara, Kokand, Samarkand and Urgench were built overwhelmingly by representatives Uzbek dynasties in the 16th-19th centuries. And what remains of the Sogdians and Khorezmians? A couple of ruins with traces of an undoubtedly outstanding, interesting culture. Yes, Afrosiyab and Tuprakkala are outstanding monuments of antiquity, but, with all due respect, in terms of cultural influence and spiritual significance they cannot compare with the masterpieces of Samarkand, Khiva and Bukhara, and, unlike them, they will never become national symbols. All written culture, literature and historiography in the Turkic language were also created under the Timurids and Uzbeks. What did the Sogdians leave behind? Those numerous manuscripts and fragments that have survived to this day, with all their curiosity, are very far from the masterpieces of the Uyghur Navoi, Barlas Bedil, Yuz Agehi, Ming Nadira, Utarch Sufi Allayar, Chingizid Abulgazy Bahadurkhan, Timurid Babur, Kungrat Feruz."

“In ten years, Sheibanikhan managed to create a large and strong state that covered all the main territories of the Timurids. In fact, he recreated the Timurid empire and placed on the throne the blood Timurid - his uncle Kuchkunchikhan, the grandson of Mirza Ulugbek. His work was continued by such outstanding Sheibanids as Ubaidullakhan and Abdullakhan II Under them, the Shaybanids were considered one of the four largest states in the Muslim world - along with the Ottomans, the Safavids and the Baburids, the Shaybanids were allies of the Ottomans against the Safavids and were actively fighting against them and the Baburids for influence in Khorasan. Without them, our region would have been absorbed by the Safavids. So why shouldn’t we remember and honor the commanders and rulers, without whom we would not exist in our current state, in pursuit of the dubious glory of being the descendants of the Khorezmians, Sogdians or Bactrians, whose vague and not really known history had any impact on us. ?".