By Megan Snyder<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Women’s political role in early Eurasian nomadic cultures is not well documented yet clearly played a vital part in power dynamics between nomadic groups and their sedentary neighbors. The Hsiung-nu and the Turks who inhabited the Eurasian steppe from the 3rd<\/sup> Century BC to the late 1st<\/sup> Century AD repeatedly used political marriages to cement alliances, as a reward for submitting to them, and a benefit for loyal vassals. However, the primary and secondary sources placing importance on this practice do not examine what kind of political power the women involved may or may not be able to exert. These princess brides are described as political pawns without any influence. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The\nHsiung-nu utilized two main political policies commonly referred to as \u2018Outer\nFrontier\u2019 and \u2018Inner Frontier.\u2019[1]<\/sup><\/a>\nOne of the critical\naspects of the Outer Frontier policy was raiding sedentary people and then\ncreating treaties with sedentary people such as the Han dynasty. These treaties\nwere very similar to a bribery scheme. The Han would send silks, grain, wine,\nand other luxury goods along with princesses of the Han dynasty as brides to\nthe Hsiung-nu. In exchange, the Hsiung-nu would promise not to raid Han\nsettlements. These treaties are called Heqin,<\/em> referring to the concept\nof creating peace through kinship and marriage.[2]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n These\npolitical kin-ship alliances combined with threats of violence and military\nsuperiority proved to be effective ways of exerting power externally for the\nHsiung-nu as a part of their outer frontier policy. Later in the origin story\nof the First Turkic Empire, demanding a princess for a bride is viewed as\ndemanding to be a political equal.[3]<\/sup><\/a>\nThe Han dynasty is agreeing to share the \u201cMandate of Heaven\u201d or \u201cSon of Heaven\u201d\nwith the Hsiung-nu rulers by agreeing to marry their princesses to the Shan-y\u00fc.[4]<\/sup><\/a>\nThe acceptance of another ruler mandated by heaven cannot be understated. The\nhistorian Thomas Barfield frames the practice of the Heqin <\/em>treaties as\npurely economical and does not discuss how marrying Han princesses reinforces\nthe theological concept of the Hsiung-nu being \u2018co-mandates of heaven.[5]<\/a>\u2019 The Hsiung-nu successfully intimidated the\nHan dynasty into sending the tribute and sending royal princesses to marry the\nHsiung-nu rulers, thereby establishing themselves as co-rulers to the Han.[6]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n Ssu-ma Ch\u2019ien\u2019s\nwritings help understand the role of women in the Heqin<\/em> political\ntreaties. However, these women’s names are not included, and we are confronted\nwith the fact that the author is a male in a patriarchal society and not a\nmember of the nomadic group. Ssu-ma did have access to letters written by Han\ndynasty princesses who married Hsiung-nu men. These letters include complaints\nabout the way the Hsiung-nu live, however, but it doesn\u2019t appear that Ssu-ma\ndiscussed these women as having any political power of their own.[7]<\/sup><\/a>\n<\/p>\n\n\n\n The\nHsiung-nu also used royal brides and wives as a way to reward and bribe\nloyalty. Ssu-ma notes how a Hsiung-nu lesser noble who had gone to the side of\nthe Han was captured and surrendered to the Shan-y\u00fc.\nAs a reward for his full surrender, the noble was granted a rank and the\nShan-y\u00fc\u2019s own sister as a bride. Ssu-ma does not explain the full reasoning\nbehind this reward. However, it seems it may have been a bit of a bribe to\nconvince the noble to reveal all he knew about the Han, as the noble \u201cbegan to\nplot with him[the Shan-y\u00fc] against the Han.\u201d[8]<\/sup><\/a>\n<\/p>\n\n\n\n In\nanother instance, a captured Han general was granted the daughter of the\nShan-y\u00fc as a wife.[9]<\/sup><\/a>\nThe political reasoning behind this decision is again not explained; however, Ssu-ma\nimplies this was to bribe the general\u2019s loyalty. This appears to be a common\npractice by the Hsiung-nu to reward or bribe surrendered or captured enemies\nwith politically advantageous marriages. However, this practice was not always\nsuccessful in securing loyalty. One such instance involved a Han envoy held\nhostage by the Hsiung-nu; he ultimately fled with his Hsiung-nu wife and child\nto another nomadic state.[10]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n The Turkic\nEmpires also utilized political marriages to exert power in a different way than\nthe Hsiung-nu. The First Turkic Empire employed\npolitical marriages to secure foreign support, while the Second Turkic empire\nused political weddings to confirm other nomadic groups’ submission to the\nempire. Kin-ship ties may also have played a role in internal politics during\nthe Second Turkic Empire’s succession challenges.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The\nFirst Turkic Empire’s origin story involves the founder of the empire, Tumin,\ndemanding a princess for a bride from the Joujan ruler. Tumin was rebutted and\ncalled a slave. In response, Tumin sought a marriage alliance with the Northern\nWei and attacked the Joujan. Interestingly, this account names the princess,\nCh’ang-Ioh of Wei, and tells how she was \u201c\u2026styled \u2026 [as] Khatun\u2026.\u201d[11]<\/sup><\/a>\nHowever, nothing else about her is discussed; it is not even clear if she was\nthe only wife of Tumin. Tumin used this external political relationship,\ncemented by marriage, to further his political goals at home by garnering\nforeign military support.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The\ntitle of Khatun or Katun and how the word is used in primary sources suggest\nthe title bearer may be more than just the Kagan’s wife. The way the word is\nused suggests she may function as a queen or queen mother.[12]<\/sup><\/a>\nIf this indeed so, what kind of political power does she have, if any at all?\nInterestingly, the sources examined for this paper did not discuss this title\nand its political importance as many male titles were examined, such as the\ntitle Sir Yabghu Qaghan<\/em>.[13]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n During\nthe Second Turkic Empire, it was common for the Kagan to give close female\nrelatives in marriage to rival groups that had recently accepted Turkic rule.\nThe Turks employed royal brides in a similar fashion to the Hsiung-nu marrying\nHan captives to Hsiung-nu women. Bilga Kagan established kinship ties by\nmarrying his son to a T\u00fcrgis princess, marrying his daughter to the T\u00fcrgis\nkagan, and his sister to the Kirgiz kagan. After describing these marriage\nalliances, Bilg\u00e4 Kagan states on his stelae inscription, \u201cI made the proud\n(enemies) bow and the powerful kneel.\u201d[14]<\/sup><\/a>\nThis language suggests that these marriage alliances are not to establish\nexternal treaties but to solidify the submission of the Kirgiz and T\u00fcrgis to\nTurkic rule. As such, they can be considered a part of internal imperial\npolitics. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Like\nthe Hsiung-nu, not every marriage bought loyalty. A member of the Az people,\nBars Beg, was married to the Kagan\u2019s niece. Bars Beg betrayed the\nA-shih-na dynasty and was killed as punishment.[15]<\/sup><\/a>\nThis suggests marrying a member of the dynasty is a great honor and betraying\nthat honor is extremely dangerous. Additionally, being married to a royal\nfamily member is not a guarantee against retaliation for betrayal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This\nparadox makes the case of Tonyukuk more interesting. Tonyukuk backed the wrong\nside of a succession dispute. As a result, all the supporters of the rival\nsuccessor were killed, save Tonyukuk. Tonyukuk was spared because his daughter\nwas married to Bilg\u00e4 Kagan.[16]<\/sup><\/a>\nThis is interesting because Tonyukuk\u2019s survival is stated in a Chinese\nsource and the writer’s motivations are unclear. However, it is interesting to\nnote that in Tonyukuk\u2019s inscription for a never-used tomb,\nhe does not mention that his daughter is married to the Kagan.[17]<\/sup><\/a>\nThe tomb was created in anticipation of his death before regaining the Kagan\u2019s favor.[18]<\/sup><\/a>\nThe inscription is an argument that Tonyukuk served his kagans and the Turks\nwell and can be read as an attempt to win back the Kagan\u2019s favor or at least salvage his own\nmemory. It is unclear as to why Tonyukuk did not attempt to leverage his\ndaughter\u2019s marriage to Bilg\u00e4 Kagan in the\ninscription. <\/p>\n\n\n\n In\naddition, we do not know if Tonyukuk\u2019s daughter asked for mercy on her\nfather\u2019s behalf or for him to be reinstated.\nIt is also unclear if she would have had the political authority to do so. Once\nagain, the sources do not discuss her political role further than being a wife\nand daughter. Did the Kagan let his father-in-law live as a show of respect for\nhis wife and kinship ties or as an acknowledgment of political ties?\nPresumably, other Turkic sources detailing these events once existed; however,\ntoday, we only have the inscription.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 In conclusion, the Hsiung-nu and Turkic nomadic groups used political marriages in different ways to cement kin-ship ties with enemies and allies externally and as rewards internally for loyal vassals.\u00a0 The royal brides that solidified the Hsiung-nu and Hans\u2019 Heqin<\/em> treaties and politically tied subject nomadic tribes to the Turkic empires were essential to internal and external politics. However, sources do not reveal whether these brides held any political power of their own or much about them other than being royal brides sent to secure political alliances.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [1]<\/sup><\/a> Daniel Prior, \u201cModule 7.1\u201d (lecture, Miami University, Oxford, OH, March 11, 2021). Thomas J Barfield, The Perilous Frontier: Nomadic Empires and China, (<\/em>Cambridge MA & Oxford UK: Blackwell, 1989), 46.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [2]<\/sup><\/a> Peter Golden, Central Asia in <\/em>World\nHistory<\/em> (Oxford: Oxford University Press,\n2011), 27-28.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [3]<\/sup><\/a> David C. Wright ed., Peoples of the Steppe: Historical\nsources on the pastoral nomads of Eurasi<\/em>a (Needham Heights, MA: Simon and\nSchuster, 1998), 79.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [4]<\/sup><\/a> Golden, Central Asia in <\/em>World\nHistory<\/em>, 27-28.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [5]<\/a> Barfield, The Perilous Frontier: Nomadic Empires and China, <\/em>46-49.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [6]<\/sup><\/a> Prior, \u201cModule 7.1\u201d lecture.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [7]<\/sup><\/a> Golden, Central Asia in <\/em>World\nHistory<\/em>, 28. Ssu-ma Ch\u2019ien, Records of the\nGreat Historian, <\/em>trans. Burton Watson. (New York & London: Columbia\nUniversity Press, 1961).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [8]<\/sup><\/a> Ssu-ma Ch\u2019ien, Records of the Great Historian<\/em>, 180.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [9]<\/sup><\/a> Ssu-ma, Records of the Great Historian,<\/em> 191.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [10]<\/sup><\/a> Golden, Central Asia in World History<\/em>, 29.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [11]<\/sup><\/a> Wright, Peoples of the Steppe: Historical sources on the\npastoral nomads of Eurasi<\/em>a, 79. Michael R. Drompp,\n\u201cImperial State Formation in Inner Asia: The Early Turkic Empires (6th to 9th\nCenturies),\u201d Acta Orientalia\nAcademiae Scientiarum Hung<\/em> <\/em>58 (2005): 103.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [12]<\/sup><\/a> Tal\u00e2t Tekin, A Grammar of Orkhon Turkic<\/em> (Bloomington:\nIndiana University, 1968), 271.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [13]<\/sup><\/a> Golden, Central Asia in <\/em>World\nHistory<\/em>, 38.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [14]<\/sup><\/a> Tekin, A Grammar of Orkhon Turkic<\/em>, 280.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [15]<\/sup><\/a> Tekin, A Grammar of Orkhon Turkic<\/em>, 266.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [16]<\/sup><\/a> Liu Mau-tsai, Die Chinesischen Nachrichten zur\nGeschichte der Ost-T<\/em>\u00fcrken (T<\/em>\u2019<\/em>u-k\u00fce) <\/em>\u2018The Chinese Reports on the History of the Eastern T\u00fcrks\u2019\nChinese Historical Writing on the Second\nT\u00fcrk Empire, (Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1958), vol. 1,\n2.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [17]<\/sup><\/a> Tekin, A Grammar of Orkhon Turkic<\/em>, 283-290.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [18]<\/sup><\/a> Daniel Prior, \u201cModule 10.1\u201d (lecture, Miami University, Oxford, OH, April 6, 2021).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" By Megan Snyder Women’s political role in early Eurasian nomadic cultures is not well documented yet clearly played a vital part in power dynamics between nomadic groups and their sedentary neighbors. The Hsiung-nu and the Turks who inhabited the Eurasian … Continue reading
Megan Snyder is a junior majoring in History. This essay was written for Dr. Daniel Prior\u2019s \u201cEurasian Nomads and History\u201d class.
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n