Везде
The Early Estampages of the Tonyukuk Inscription Identified in the Collection of Central Asia and Siberia of the IOM, RAS
Table of contents
Annotation Estimate Publication content
References Comments
Share
QR
Metrics
The Early Estampages of the Tonyukuk Inscription Identified in the Collection of Central Asia and Siberia of the IOM, RAS
Annotation
PII
S086919080020112-0-1
DOI
10.31857/S086919080020112-0
Publication type
Article
Status
Published
Authors
Anna Turanskaya 
ORCID: 0000-0003-4293-5771
Occupation: Project researcher, Institute of Linguistics, RAS
Affiliation: Institute of Linguistics, RAS
Address: Russian Federation, St. Petersburg
Edition
Issue 4
Pages
200-209
Abstract

The Tonyukuk inscription, also known as the Bain Tsokto monument, was discovered by Elizaveta Klementz not far from the city of Urga (modern Ulaanbaatar) in 1897. The text was published two years later by a prominent Russian researcher Wilhelm Radloff. At the same time 17 photographs of estampages were included in the 4th volume of the “Atlas der Alterthümer der Mongolei”. While these photo copies are still frequently mentioned in the multiple publications concerning the Tonyukuk inscription, only a few specialists are aware that the originals are kept in the Collection of Central Asia and Siberia of the IOM, RAS. Moreover 81 estampages were identified as copies of the Tonyukuk inscription during the full-scale inventory of the Collection that took place in 2021. Thanks to recent publications by V. Tishin, it became obvious that eight similar copies of the monument are preserved in the collection of the Academician Obruchev Museum of Local Lore (Kyakhta). This discovery allowed to specify the authorship and dating of the St. Petersburg copies. The Chinese seal preserved on one of the Khyakhta’s estampages suggests that they were produced for the last Qing Amban of Outer Mongolia Sanduo between 1910 and 1911.

Although the monument has been well studied, some of the preserved at the IOM copies seem to be of great value and could be used by turcologists for controversial text fragments clarification. The paper presents acquisition history and brief description (catalogue) of the preserved copies of text.

Keywords
Bain Tsokto monument, Old Turkic inscription, Turkic runic script, W. Radloff, Sanduo’s stampages
Acknowledgment
This work has been supported by the grants the Russian Science Foundation, RSF № 22-28-00348.
Received
29.06.2022
Date of publication
06.09.2022
Number of purchasers
14
Views
199
Readers community rating
0.0 (0 votes)
Cite Download pdf 200 RUB / 1.0 SU

To download PDF you should pay the subscribtion

Full text is available to subscribers only
Subscribe right now
Only article and additional services
Subscription benefits
200 RUB / 1.0 SU
Whole issue and additional services
Subscription benefits
970 RUB / 16.0 SU
All issues and additional services for 2022
Subscription benefits
4365 RUB / 87.0 SU
1

INTRODUCTION

2

The discovery of Old Turkic memorial inscriptions erected in honor of Prince Kül Tegin (684–731) and his older brother Bilge Khagan (683-734) made by Russian traveler and archaeologist Nikolai Yadrintsev in the Kosho Tsaidam valley (Mongolia) in 1889, and decipherment of the Old Turkic runiform script by Vilhelm Thomsen in 1893, initiated a systematic study of the history, language, and culture of the nomadic tribes mentioned in the inscriptions under the name Türk  (𐱅𐰇𐰼𐰰,𐱅𐰇𐰼𐰚).
3 Four years later, in 1897, the voluminous and most completely preserved runiform inscription similar to those already deciphered was discovered in the place Bain Tsokto, between the Nalaikh post-station and the right bank of the Tuul river. The inscription is graven on two pillars that are still standing. The first and larger stone contains lines 1–36, that start on the narrow side turned to the West, and is continued round towards North. The direct continuation in 27 lines (37–62) likewise begins on the West side of the second stone, more weathered than the first one. On both pillars the inscriptions are incised in vertical lines as in the Orkhon inscriptions, but with difference they are read from left to right.
4

These stelae, later known as the Tonyukuk or Bain Tsokto inscriptions, are part of the memorial complex1, that had been erected in honor of Tonyukuk (ca. 646–ca. 726), the chief minister and counselor of three Second Turkic Khaganate rulers, Ilterish Khagan (d. 692), Kapaghan Khagan (ca. 664–716) and Bilge Khagan. The narration in the first person by Tonyukuk allows to specify the authorship and dating of the inscription. It seems to have been incised under the auspices of Tonyukuk between 716 and 719.2 The monument has a special place among the Old Turkic inscriptions in terms of narration of historical events and vocabulary of Old Turkic.

1. The memorial complex consisted of a building with four columns (not preserved by the time of discovery of the monument), two sarcophagi (225×125; 170×170 cm), two stelae (243×64×32; 215×50×28 cm) with inscriptions, eight stone figures, whose heads have been knocked off, and a row of 289 upright flag stones running to the East. The stelae and the larger sarcophagus are still in place.

2. The text describes the military achievements and various merits of Tonyukuk in the formation and expansion of the Second Turkic Khaganate. In all likelihood the inscription was graven before 720, as the struggle against the Basmils is not mentioned [Rykin, Telitsin, 2020, p. 288].
5

THE FIRST ESTAMPAGES OF THE TONYUKUK INSCRIPTION

6 The memorial complex was ‘discovered’3 by Elizaveta Klementz (née Zvereva, 1854–1914) during the expedition to Northern Mongolia on the instructions of the Imperial Botanic Garden. The circumstances related to the monument discovery and the first estampages made by Klementz were described in details by W.W. Radloff in his article “Eine neu aufgefundene alttürkische Inschrift” [Radloff, 1898]. It is also known that a year later, in 1898, on the request of the Imperial Academy of Sciences Yakov Shishmarev, the Consul General in Urga at that time, organized an expedition to Nalaikh and Sharshoroot to make copies and photographs of the runiform inscriptions. 4 The expedition was headed by a little-known photographer Ivan Fedorov, who was in charge of making copies.5
3. First of all, for European academic community. As a Russian researcher Andrei Rudnev justly noted, “Almost all ancient monuments in Mongolia were discovered by chance ... the Mongols jealously protect these relics, which they do not comprehend, but which inspire mystical awe, and only through great diplomatic skill one can make a Mongol to blab out or talk about these monuments”. [Ramstedt, 1914, p. 34].

4. The telegram send by Yakov Shishmarev dated September 29, 1898 is preserved nowadays at St. Petersburg Branch of the Archive of the Russian Academy of Sciences [SPbB ARAS, coll. 142, inv. 1, item 51, f. 43]. For details see [Ivanov, 2016, p. 110].

5. Ivan Fedorov is the most famous and at the same time mysterious photographer, who worked in Mongolia in the second half of the 19th c. The most detailed information about him is presented in the diary of the famous mongolist Aleksei Pozdneev [Pozdneev, 1896, p. XXVIII–XXIX]. For other details concerning his activities in Mongolia see [Ivanov, 2016].
7 The estampages made by Elizaveta Klementz and Ivan Fedorov were used by W.W. Radloff for the first translation of the text. Moreover, the majority of them were published in the 4th volume of the “Atlas der Alterthümer der Mongolei” released in 1899.6
6. This fact is mentioned in the introduction to the edition by W.W. Radloff: “Diese Lieferung des Atlas der Alterthümer der Mongolei enthält auf Tafel CV-CVIII die photographischen Aufnahmen der Grabstätte des Tonjukuk (vergl. Alttürkische Inschriften der Mongolei, Zweite Folge. St. Petersburg, 1899), welche im Auftrage der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften durch gütige Vermitlung des Kaiserlich-russischen General-Konsul’s in Urga von Photographen Fedoroff ausführt worden sind. Auf den Tafeln CIX-CXVI sind die mir vorliegenden Ablatsche der Inschriften reproducirt, welche theils von FrauKlementz theils von Herrn Fedoroff hergestellt sind.” [Atlas 1899].
8 Nowadays these first Tonyukuk inscription estampages are preserved in the Collection of Central Asia and Siberia of the Institute of Oriental manuscript, RAS (St. Petersburg)7. Twenty copies kept under call numbers ЦАС 455–474 could be divided into two sets according to the type of cotton cloth used for their production8. For the estampages with call numbers ЦАС 455, 458, 460, 462, 464, 465, 467, 468, 470, 472, 473, 474 cotton fabric with rather loose texture (threads uneven in thickness, warp threads thicker than weft threads) was used. Moreover, most of these copies (except ЦАС 464, 467, 472, 474) were retouched: the space between the signs was tinted with red ink, while the signs were outlined with white pigment. Other copies were produced with dense cloth (the warp and weft threads are of the same thickness, giving a slight relief of runiform signs).
7. They were identified during the inventory procedures that took place in 2021. The Collection of Central Asia and Siberia is almost unknown to the academic community. It includes 11 sketches and 784 estampages of stelae, cave inscriptions, and other epigraphic monuments of Siberia, Central and Middle Asia. The collection is diversified in terms of dates (from petroglyphs of the Stone and Bronze Ages to the trilingual stele of 1759, erected in honor of the victory of the Manchus on the shore of Lake Issyk-Kul) and languages (epigraphic monuments in eleven languages: ancient Turkic, Arabic, Bulgar-Tatar, Syriac, Manchu, Chinese, Sogdian, Turkic, Tibetan, Mongolian and Sanskrit). The history of this collection, the formation of which was closely related to the activities of prominent Russian explorers of Siberia and Central Asia, archaeologists, linguists and ethnographerы, is still insufficiently studied, and a lot of facts require clarification. The items are preserved under call numbers ‘ЦАС …’.

8. The copies were made according to the technology described by W.W. Radloff. For details see [Radlov, 1893].
9 The comparison of Elizaveta Klementz’ personal letters9 and a few notes written in the margins of the previously mentioned set of mostly retouched estampages allows to identify the very first copies as made in 189710. One should note that the practice of retouching original copies was widespread at the turn of the 19th–20th cc. in general, and frequently used by eminent researchers like W.W. Radloff, in particular. Later, specialists engaged in Turkic studies pointed out that this method of “improving” had only negative consequences: estampages irreversibly lost their value for further study. Thus, Dmitry Nasilov wrote: “... many scholars, and first of all W.W. Radloff, V. Thomsen, H.N. Orkun and even S.E. Malov, used estampages and photographs of the inscriptions before the Orkhon-Yenisei script was completely deciphered. The latter circumstance had a particularly negative effect on the retouching of copies, as random chips or cracks on stone were perceived as a continuation of strokes of runiform letters. These retouched texts were mainly used as a basis for inscriptions reading and transliteration, so errors wandered through the editions and are even found sometimes in the recent publications” [Nasilov, 1974, p. 205].
9. I would like to thank the Minusinsk Local Lore Museum of N. Martyanov for providing photo copies of Elizaveta Klementz’ personal letters and notes.

10. In fairness, it is worth noting that W.W. Radloff used more vague copies for retouching.
10 The list of the first estampages preserved in the collection of the IOM, RAS and concordance with plates in the 4th volume of ‘Atlas’ edition are given below:
11
Description Call number Retouched Atlas
Stele I, western side, lines 1–7 ЦАС 456 — СIX-1
Stele I, western side, lines 1–7 ЦАС 455 V CIX-2
Stele I, southern side, lines 8–17 ЦАС 457 — CX-1
Stele I, southern side, lines 8–17 ЦАС 458 V CX-2
Stele I, eastern side, lines 18–24 ЦАС 459 — CXI-1
Stele I, eastern side, lines 18–24 ЦАС 460 V CXI-2
Stele I, northern side, lines 25–35 ЦАС 461 — CXII-1
Stele I, northern side, lines 25–35 ЦАС 462 V CXII-2
Stele II, western side, lines 36–44 ЦАС 463 — CXIII-1
Stele II, western side, lines 36–44 ЦАС 465 V CXIII-2
Stele II, western side, lines 36–44 ЦАС 464 — —
Stele II, southern side, lines 45–50 ЦАС 466 — CXIV-1
Stele II, southern side, lines 45–50 ЦАС 468 V CXIV-2
Stele II, southern side, lines 45–50 ЦАС 467 — —
Stele II, eastern side, lines 51–58 ЦАС 469 — CXV-1
Stele II, eastern side, lines 51–58 ЦАС 474 — CXV-2
Stele II, eastern side, lines 51–58 ЦАС 470 V CXV-3
Stele II, northern side, lines 59–62 ЦАС 471 — CXVI-1
Stele II, northern side, lines 59–62 ЦАС 473 V CXVI-2
Stele II, northern side, lines 59–62 ЦАС 472 — —
12

SANDUO ESTAMPAGES OF THE TONYUKUK INSCRIPTION

13 Other eighty-one estampages of the Tonyukuk inscription were identified during inventory procedures of the Collection of Central Asia and Siberia in 2021. Nowadays they are preserved under call numbers ЦАС 613–697. These estampages differ significantly: the copies were produced on thin Chinese rice paper. On the tag made of brownish wrapping paper and kept with the estampages nowadays one could read: “III 478 nova. Pamiatnik Tonyukuk (snimki Al’-da) [Monument of Tonyukuk (copies by Al-da)]”.
14 The provenance and acquisition history of these estampages have remained obscure until recently. Thanks to recent publications by Vladimir Tishin [Tishin, 2020; Tishin, 2021] it became obvious that eight similar copies of the Tonyukuk inscription are preserved in the collection of the Academician Obruchev Museum of Local Lore (Kyakhta). According to the note on a fragmentary preserved envelope with the post office seal of the city of Troitskosavsk, “snimki San’-do [copies by Sanduo]” were sent to the the Troitskosavsko-Kyakhta Branch of the Priamursky Department of the Imperial Russian Geographical Society by a famous scholar Władysław Kotwicz in 1913 [Tishin, 2020, p. 72–73].
15 On one of the etampages preserved in Kyakhta one can find a Chinese red seal 三多所拓 (sanduo suo ta) ‘copied by Sanduo’. The seal allows to specify the authorship and dating of the copies. The estampages were most probably made for the last Qing Amban of Outer Mongolia from 1909 to 1911, Sanduo (三多, courtesy name Liuqiao 六橋, 1876 –1941). It is known that Sanduo was appointed as Amban responsible for Tsetsen Khan and Tüsheet Khan aimags on November 26, 1909, and arrived to Urga (modern Ulaanbaatar) in March 1910. On December, 1911, he was forced to flee to China as the Outer Mongolia declare independence. 11
11. For Sanduo life and activities in Mongolia see [Batbayar, 1999, p. 139; Nakami, 2005, p. 356; Onon, Pritchatt, 1989, p. 12–13; Powell, 1925, p. 646].
16 Remembered and frequently criticized for his politics in Outer Mongolia, Sanduo is rarely mentioned as a person who took a deep interest in Mongolian archeology and history. Meanwhile, a Mongol by origin, he was engaged in preservation of the the cultural heritage of the country. Thus, Władysław Kotwicz, head of the archaeological expedition to Mongolia in 1912, noted in his report: “The destruction of the pavilion (of the memorial complex in honor of Prince Kül Tegin) drew attention of the last Manchu Amban in Urga Sanduo. He was an antique-lover, who aimed to copy all epigraphic monuments located in the area under his jurisdiction. To that end, Sanduo sent all over the place the officials, who made estampages for him using traditional Chinese method” [Kotvich, 1914, p. 52].
17 Moreover, Sanduo's estampages, most probably later incorrectly marked as “copies by Al’-da”, are mentioned in one of the Russian Committee for Middle and East Asia Exploration (RCMA) reports from 1913: “A letter dated May 20, from Ts. Zh. Zhamtsarano addressed to the [Committee] chairman, accompanied herewith two parcels, estampages of the Orkhon inscriptions, 49 nos. in total were presented; the estampages were discovered in the pantry of the expelled from Urga Manchu Amban Sanduo. According to W.W. Radloff, these are the estampages of the Tonyukuk inscription” [RCMA, 1913, p. 32].
18 Taking these facts into consideration, one can assume that the estampages made for Amban Sanduo in 1910-1911 were sent to St. Petersburg in 1913 by a Buryat scholar and one of the leading figures in Mongolian politics at that time Jamsrangiin Tseveen (1881–1942). The published RCMA report mentions 49 nos.12 Further research is required to identify the estampages preserved in Collection of Central Asia and Siberia of the IOM (81 items) and the Kyakhta Museum (8 items)13 with the ones mentioned in the RCMA report from 1913.
12. The used ‘№№’ does not allow to assume whether ‘sets’ or ‘items’ were meant. Only a few estampages were numbered.

13. It is also impossible to exclude the possibility that similar copies may be kept in other museums of Siberia.
19 It is known that the Imperial Academy of Sciences considered the “publication of the photographs and estampages made by Władysław Kotwicz, as a continuation of the “Atlas der Alterthümer der Mongolei” published by W.W. Radloff" [RCMA, 1913, p. 32], but due to the Russian revolution of 1917 and the events that followed, these intentions were never translated into reality.
20 The list of the estampages preserved at the IOM, RAS is presented in the table below. All copies are made on Chinese paper and unretouched. The sides of the stelae are marked in the margins by Chinese characters (indicating the cardinal points) and references to the estampages published in ‘Atlas’ are written by unknown person who was probably engaged in sorting the materials later. The notes are given in Chinese and Cyrillic (old orthography is preserved)14.
14. The most recent large reform of the Russian spelling was prepared by Aleksey Shakhmatov and carried out shortly after the 1917 Revolution. The usage of pre-revolutionary orthography allows to assume that the notes were written down on the estampages from 1913 to 1918.
21
Description Call number Dimensions (cm) Notes in the margins
Stele I, western side, lines 1–7 ЦАС 613 231×43 西; № 6; CIX-1
Stele I, western side, lines 1–7 (upper part of the stele) ЦАС 615 163×42 西; № 13; CIX-1
Stele I, western side, lines 1–7 ЦАС 616 229×42 西; № 18; CIX-1
Stele I, western side, lines 1–7 ЦАС 617 229×40 西; 35; CIX-1
Stele I, western side, lines 1–7 ЦАС 648 229×40 西; Радлов; CIX; CIX-1
Stele I, western side, lines 1–7 ЦАС 649 228×42 南西; В. Радлов; CIX; CIX-1
Stele I, western side, lines 1–7 ЦАС 650 228×41 西; В.В. Радлов; CIX; CIX-1
Stele I, western side, lines 1–7 ЦАС 651 226×42 西; В.В. Радлов; 4 в.;CIX; CIX-1
Stele I, western side, lines 1–7 ЦАС 652 226×41 西; Атласъ В.В. Радлова; вып. 4; CIX; CIX; CIX-1
Stele I, western side, lines 1–7 ЦАС 653 224×40 西; Радлов; CIX; CIX-1
Stele I, western side, lines 1–7 (lower part of the stele) ЦАС 614 69×43 № 12; CIX-1
Stele I, southern side, lines 8–17 ЦАС 618 226×52 南; № 4; CX-1
Stele I, southern side, lines 8–17 ЦАС 619 227×48 南; № 8; CX-1
Stele I, southern side, lines 8–17 ЦАС 620 234×52 南; № 16; CX-1
Stele I, southern side, lines 8–17 ЦАС 621 226×52 南; № 20; CX-1
Stele I, southern side, lines 8–17 (lower part of the stele) ЦАС 622 65×56 № 21. CX-1
Stele I, southern side, lines 8–17 ЦАС 623 228×52 南; 33; CX-1
Stele I, southern side, lines 8–17 ЦАС 624 232×51 南; № 34; CX-1
Stele I, southern side, lines 8–17 ЦАС 654 231×51 南; Атласъ В.В. Радлова; 4ый в.; CX; CX; CX-1
Stele I, southern side, lines 8–17 ЦАС 655 227×51 南; Атласъ Радлова; IV; CX; CX-1
Stele I, southern side, lines 8–17 ЦАС 656 227×50.5 南; CX; CX-1
Stele I, southern side, lines 8–17 ЦАС 657 223×50 南; В.В. Радлов; вып. 4; CX; CX-1
Stele I, southern side, lines 8–17 (upper part of the stele) ЦАС 658 176×52 南; В.В. Радловъ; 4 вып.; CX; CX-1
Stele I, southern side, lines 8–17 (upper part of the stele) ЦАС 659 149×49 南; CX; CX-1
Stele I, southern side, lines 8–17 (upper part of the stele) ЦАС 660 89×60 南左; В. Радлов; CX; CX-1.
Stele I, southern side, lines 8–17 (middle part of the stele) ЦАС 663 44×20 CX-1
Stele I, southern side, lines 8–17 (lower part of the stele) ЦАС 661 58×54 CX-1
Stele I, southern side, lines 8–17 (lower part of the stele) ЦАС 662 45×32 CX-1
Stele I, eastern side, lines 18–24 ЦАС 625 226×41 东; № 9; CXI-1
Stele I, eastern side, lines 18–24 ЦАС 626 225×41 东; № 14; CXI-1
Stele I, eastern side, lines 18–24 ЦАС 627 229×42 东; № 19; CXI-1
Stele I, eastern side, lines 18–24 ЦАС 628 225×43 东; 28; CXI-1
Stele I, eastern side, lines 18–24 ЦАС 629 227×40 东; 37; CXI-1
Stele I, eastern side, lines 18–24 ЦАС 664 227×43 东; В.В. Радлов; 4 вып.; CXI; CXI-1
Stele I, eastern side, lines 18–24 ЦАС 665 227×41 东; Атласъ В. В. Радлова; 4ый в.; CXI; CXI-1
Stele I, eastern side, lines 18–24 (upper part of the stele) ЦАС 667 115×44 东; Атласъ В.В. Радлова; 4ый вып.; CXI; CXI-1
Stele I, eastern side, lines 18–24 (lower part of the stele) ЦАС 666 116×42 В.В. Радлов; 4ый; CXI; CXI-1
Stele I, northern side, lines 25–35 ЦАС 630 225×53 北; № 29; CXII-1
Stele I, northern side, lines 25–35 ЦАС 668 239×52 北; CXII; CXII-1
Stele I, northern side, lines 25–35 ЦАС 669 233×52 北; CXII; CXII-1
Stele I, northern side, lines 25–35 ЦАС 670 232×52 北; В.В. Радлов; в. 4; CXII; CXII-1
Stele I, northern side, lines 25–35 ЦАС 671 232×52 北; CXII; CXII-1
Stele I, northern side, lines 25–35 (upper part of the stele) ЦАС 631 96×51 北; 38. CXII-1
Stele I, northern side, lines 25–35 (lower part of the stele) ЦАС 632 143×51 CXII-1
Stele II, western side, lines 36–44 ЦАС 633 184×64 西; № 1; CXIII-1
Stele II, western side, lines 36–44 ЦАС 634 186×65 西; № 5; CXIII-1
Stele II, western side, lines 36–44 ЦАС 635 183×64 西; № 7; CXIII-1
Stele II, western side, lines 36–44 ЦАС 636 182×63 西;36; CXIII-1
Stele II, western side, lines 36–44 ЦАС 672 187×64 西; CXIII; CXIII-1
Stele II, western side, lines 36–44 ЦАС 673 183×63 西; CXIII
Stele II, western side, lines 36–44 (upper part of the stele) ЦАС 674 156×62 西; В. Радлов; CXIII; CXIII-1
Stele II, western side, lines 36–44 (lower part of the stele) ЦАС 637 62×37 41; CXIII-1
Stele II, southern side, lines 45–50 ЦАС 638 184×50 № 2; CXIV-1
Stele II, southern side, lines 45–50 ЦАС 639 186×50 № 11; CXIV-1
Stele II, southern side, lines 45–50 ЦАС 640 183×49 31; CXIV-1
Stele II, southern side, lines 45–50 ЦАС 641 183×49 40; CXIV-1
Stele II, southern side, lines 45–50 ЦАС 675 185×50 CXIV; CXIV-1
Stele II, southern side, lines 45–50 ЦАС 676 183×49 CXIV; CXIV-1
Stele II, southern side, lines 45–50 ЦАС 677 183×49 В.В. Радлов; в. 4.; CXIV; CXIV-1
Stele II, southern side, lines 45–50 ЦАС 678 181×48 CXIV; CXIV-1
Stele II, southern side, lines 45–50 ЦАС 679 180×48 В. Радловъ; в. 4.; CXIV; CXIV-1
Stele II, southern side, lines 45–50 ЦАС 680 177×48 В.В. Радлов; CXIV
Stele II, eastern side, lines 51–58 ЦАС 642 185×63 东; № 3; CXV-1
Stele II, eastern side, lines 51–58 ЦАС 643 178×63 东; 32; CXV-1
Stele II, eastern side, lines 51–58 ЦАС 644 182×63 东; 39; CXV-1
Stele II, eastern side, lines 51–58 ЦАС 645 186×32 № 10. CXVI-1
Stele II, eastern side, lines 51–58 ЦАС 681 185×64 东; CXV; CXV-1
Stele II, eastern side, lines 51–58 ЦАС 682 184×63 东; CXV; CXV-1
Stele II, eastern side, lines 51–58 ЦАС 683 183×63 东; CXV; CXV-1
Stele II, eastern side, lines 51–58 ЦАС 684 180×62 东; CXV; CXV-1
Stele II, eastern side, lines 51–58 ЦАС 685 178×63 东; CXV; CXV-1
Stele II, northern side, lines 59–62 ЦАС 646 191×32 № 15. CXVI-1
Stele II, northern side, lines 59–62 ЦАС 647 191×32 № 17. CXVI-1
Stele II, northern side, lines 59–62 ЦАС 686 190×33 CXVI; CXVI-1
Stele II, northern side, lines 59–62 ЦАС 687 190×32 CXVI; CXVI-1
Stele II, northern side, lines 59–62 ЦАС 688 187×32 CXVI; CXVI-1
Stele II, northern side, lines 59–62 ЦАС 689 186×32 CXVI; CXVI-1
Stele II, northern side, lines 59–62 ЦАС 690 186×32 CXVI; CXVI-1
Stele II, northern side, lines 59–62 ЦАС 691 178×31 北北; CXVI; CXVI-1
Stele II, northern side, lines 59–62 ЦАС 692 173×40 北; CXVI; CXVI-1
Stele II, northern side, lines 59–62 (lower part of the stele) ЦАС 693 45×16 CXVI-1
22

CONCLUSION
23 Since the first edition of the Tonyukuk inscription by W.W. Radloff in 1899, the monument has repeatedly drawn attention of the researchers, who proposed new readings and translations of the text fragments.15 Nowadays the inscription can be considered to be rigorously studied, however discussions concerning interpretation of individual passages are still in place. Taking into consideration the fact that Old Turkic monuments are inevitably suffer gradual destruction due to erosion and environment influences,16 early copies have enduring value.
15. For the study of the inscription, related problems and bibliography during the 20th c. see [Rybatzki 1997; Bazylkhan, 2005, p. 107].

16. The process cannot be stopped by conservation and preservation procedures. See [Bazylkhan 2010].
24 The eighty-one estampages made for Amban Sanduo around 1910 represent the appearance of the Tonyukuk inscription in the state closest to the time of its discovery and could be used as additional sources for clarification of individual text fragments. The significance of the newly identified copies for the text study could not be overestimated, as unlike the first estampages made by Elizaveta Klementz and Ivan Fedorov in 1898-1898 and Gustaf John Ramstedt in 1909,17 they were never published before.18
17. The materials collected by Gustaf John Ramstedt during his field studies in 1909 were published only in 1958 by his student Pentti Aalto [Aalto, 1958].

18. As a result of the precise study of the eight copies preserved in Kyakhta, Vladimir Tishin provided a few examples of discrepancies that could be illuminated by the copies [Tishin, 2020, p. 74–78].
25

Abbreviations
26 Atlas Atlas der Alterthümer der Mongolei
27 Coll. collection (in references to archival materials stands for фонд)
28 inv. inventory (in references to archival materials stands for опись)
29 IOM RASInstitute of Oriental manuscripts of the Russian Academy of Science
30 RCMA Russian Committee for Middle and East Asia Exploration
31 SPbB ARAS St. Petersburg Branch of the Archive of the Russian Academy of Sciences

References

1. Aalto P. Materialien zu den alttürkischen Inschriften der Mongolei, gesammelt von G. J. Ramstedt, J. G. Granö und P. Aalto, bearbeitet und herausgegeben von P. Aalto. Journal de la Société finno-ougrienne. Helsinski: Suomalais-Ugrilaisen Seura, 1958.

2. Atlas der Alterthümer der Mongolei. Im Auftrage der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften hrsg. von Dr. W. Radloff. 4. Lieferung. Taf. CV–CXVIII. Arbeiten der Orchon-Expedition. St. Petersburg: Buchdruckerei der Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1899.

3. Batbayar (Baabar) B. Twentieth Century Mongolia. Cambridge: White Horse Press, 1999.

4. Bazylkhan N. Ancient Turkish inscriptions and monuments (Orkhon, Enisei, Talas). Almaty: Daik-Press, 2005 (in Kazakh).

5. Bazylkhan N. Ancient Turkic written monuments in Mongolia: Problems of scientific cataloguing and museology. Ural-Altaic Studies. 2010. No. 2(3). Pp. 8–9 (in Russian).

6. Ivanov D. Photographs by I.F. Fedorov in the collections of the Peter the Great Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography. Radloff’s Collection. Academic research and museum projects of the MAE RAS in 2014. St. Petersburg, 2016. Pp. 108–110 (in Russian).

7. Kotvich V. Khusho-Tsaidam (with 2 photographs). Proceedings of the Troitskosavsko-Kyakhtinsky Branch of the Priamursk Department of the Imperial Russian Geographical Society. 1912. Vol. 15. Issue 1. St. Petersburg: Senate printing house, 1914. Pp. 40–44 (in Russian).

8. Nasilov D. Some remarks on the reading of the Yenisei inscriptions. Written Monuments of the Orient. Historical and philological studies. Yearbook 1971. Moscow, 1974. Pp. 204–214, 554 (in Russian).

9. Nakami T. Mongolia from eighteenth century to 1919. History of Civilizations of Central Asia. Towards the contemporary period: from the mid-nineteenth to the end of the twentieth century. Ed. by Ch. Adle. Turin: UNESCO. Pp. 347–363.

10. Onon, U., Pritchatt, D. Asia's First Modern Revolution: Mongolia Proclaims Its Independence in 1911. Leiden: Brill, 1989. Pp. 12–13.

11. Pozdneev А. Mongolia and the Mongols. Results of the journey to Mongolia, performed in 1892–1893 by A. Pozdneev. Vol. I. Route diaries, 1892. St. Petersburg: Imperial Russian Geographical Society, 1896 (in Russian).

12. Powell M.C. Who’s who in China. Containing the pictures and biographies of China’s best known political, financial, business and professional men. Ed. by M.C. Powell. Shanghai, 1925.

13. Radloff W.W. Eine neu aufgefundene alttürkische Inschrift. Izvestiia Imperatorskoi Akademii nauk [Proceedings of the Imperial Academy of Sciences]. 1898. January. Vol. 7. No. 1. Pp. 71–76.

14. Radloff W. On the new method of producing estampages of the stone inscriptions. Proceedings of the Oriental section of the Imperial Russian Archaeological Society. Vol. 7. 1892. St. Petersburg, 1893. Pp. 169–181 (in Russian).

15. Ramstedt G.I. Translation of “The Selenge stone”. Proceedings of the Troitskosavsko-Kyakhtinsky Branch of the Priamursk Department of the Imperial Russian Geographical Society. 1912. Vol. 15. Issue 1. St. Petersburg, 1914. Pp. 34–39 (in Russian).

16. RCMA. Proceedings of the Russian Committee for the exploration of Central and Eastern Asia in historical and ethnographic relations. Series 2. No. 2, April, 1913. St. Petersburg, 1913 (in Russian).

17. Rybatzki V. Die Toñuquq-Inschrift. Studia uralo-altaica. 40. Szeged: University of Szeged, 1997.

18. Rykin P., Telitsin N. An Interpretation of Two Personal Names in the Ninth Line of the Tonyukuk Inscription (Toñ S2). Journal of the American Oriental Society. 2020. 140(2). Pp. 287–299.

19. Tishin V. Tońuquq yazıtı’nın yeni keşfedilen bir estampaj kopyası. Tonyukuk Kitabı. Bilge Tonyukuk yazıtı’nın dikilişinin 1300. Yılı UNESCO 2020 Bilge Tonyukuk yılı anısına. İstanbul, 2020. Pp. 67–79 (in Turkish).

20. Tishin V. Analysis of the Previously Unknown Estampage of the Tońuquq Inscription Found in the Kyakhta Museum of Local Lore of Academician V.A. Obruchev. Herald of an Archivist. 2021. No. 1. Pp. 205–217 (in Russian).

Comments

No posts found

Write a review
Translate