Section 2 –
Geographical Background
1. The
Nanshan, the ‘Southern Mountains’ = the modern Qilian shan range which form the
western and southern border of the Gansu corridor, separating China Proper from
Qinghai, traditionally considered part of Tibetan territory. The Qilian range
stretches some 800 kilometres and contains peaks up to 4,000 metres high.
“This is
identified by the Chinese commentators with the Chung-nan shan [Zhong Nanshan].
South of present-day Hsi-an [Xian].” CICA, p. 72, n. 10.
“The Tarim
River, which is in the centre of Eastern Turkestan, was formerly thought to be
the upper course of the Huanghe [or ‘Yellow River’].” Translated and adapted
from Chavannes (1907), p. 168, n. 4.
“Starting
from the Yü-men and Yang barriers there are two routes which lead into the
Western Regions. The one which goes by way of Shan-shan, skirting the northern
edge of the southern mountains and proceeding along the course of the river west
of So-chü [Suoche = Yarkand] is the Southern Route. To the west, the Southern
route crosses the Ts’ung-ling and then leads to the Ta Yüeh-chih [the Kushans]
and An-hsi [Parthia].” CICA: pp. 72-73.
The notice
on the Southern Route in the Hou Hanshu is very similar, but it provides
more details on the latter part of the route following its notice on the kingdom
of Dere – see notes 5.1 and 7.1 below.
The most feared stretches of desert were between Cherchen and Khotan. Not
only was there a lack of water and fodder but also the constant crossing of
sandhills was very tiring for both man and beast.
“The desert itself is quite flat, a
billowing sea of soft yellow sand-dunes 5 to 30 m high. However, in some central
areas, for example in the west of the Keriya River, the dunes can rise to more
than 200 metres high – a tough challenge even for a camel caravan.” Baumer
(2000), p. 2.
“At the site
of Endere, closer to Quemo (Cherchen), Stein discovered a fort and associated
buildings showing occupation by Tibetans in the eighth century.
This next stretch of the highway is
under constant threat from the desert and frequently blocked. Fences of
reed-matting form sand-breaks. Quemo comprises one street only – and no wonder,
since for 145 days a year it is blasted by sands blown by Force 5 winds [19-24
mph or 31-39 kph]. Until the road was completed in the 1960s it took a month’s
journey through 800 kilometres (500 miles) of desert to reach Korla.” Bonavia
(1988), p. 192.
The routes
were frequently changed, often because of political difficulties, but often too,
because of physical conditions. Early snows, landslides and avalanches
frequently forced caravans to take longer, or more difficult routes. Gradual
desiccation of the country in the Tarim Basin has caused long sections of the
Southern Route to be abandoned in historical times. See note 2.4 above.
The Southern Route, as mentioned in the Weilue, must have shifted
to the south through the mountainous lands of unpacified Qiang tribes,
presumably to avoid the harshness of the desert passing, especially during the
very hot summers:
“The
southern one passed from Tun-huang first through the territory of the nomadic Jô
Ch’iang tribe, who grazed in the hills to the south-west, and then reaching the
southern rim of the Tarim Basin about Charklik, led westwards to the Pamirs. A
look at the map shows that the route meant is the one which skirts the high
Āltin-tāgh range,
and still serves as the usual connection between Tun-huang and Charklik during
that part of the year when the shorter desert route is closed by the heat and
the absence of drinkable water. In the autumn of 1907 Rai Ram Singh surveyed it
on his return to Charklik.” Stein (1912), pp. 514-515.
“That ‘the
southern route’ of the Wei lio is identical with the one which still
leads from Tun-huang along the northernmost main range of the K’un-lun, here
known as the Āltin-tāgh, to
Charkhlik and thence through the string of oases in the south of the Tarim Basin
is made certain by the mention of the Jô Ch’iang, a nomadic tribe whose
position in the mountains between Tun-huang and Chü-mo or Charchan is quite
correctly described by the Former Han Annals.” Stein
(1928), p. 418.
“During the
reign-period Yüan-shih [1-5 A.D.] there was a new route in the further
royal kingdom of Chü-shih. This led to the Yü-men barrier from north of
Wu-ch’uan [‘Five Boats’], and the journey was comparatively shorter. Hsü P’u,
the Wu and Chi colonel, wanted to open up this route for use, so as to reduce
the distance by half and to avoid the obstacle of the White Dragon Mounds [on
the route to Loulan].” Hanshu 96B – from CICA, pp. 189-190.
This route
went directly across the desert from the Yumen barrier and was extremely
difficult and dangerous. Both the Suishi
– Memoir on the Western Regions and the Zhoushi – Memoir on the Western Regions,
give similar descriptions of the difficulties of the journey, the necessity of
following the trail of skeletons of men and animals or their droppings, and the
presence of goblins and demons. They both make the point that merchants always
took the route through Hami when it was politically
possible.
Paul Pelliot
(1959), p. 155 points out the fact that this new route avoided Hami (then in the
hands of the Xiongnu) going directly from Kharakhoja to Dunhuang. In fact he
says that this new route “had nothing to do with Qomul [Hami], except to keep
clear of it.”
The
Weilue gives more details on the section between Yumen and
Turfan:
“Heading
northwest from Yumen (‘Jade Gate’) frontier-post, passing through Hengkeng (the
Besh-toghrak
Valley), one avoids the Sanlongsha (‘Three Sand Ridges’) as well as the Longdui
(‘Dragon Dunes’), and emerges to the north of Wuchuan (‘Five Boats’) and arrives
in the territory of Jushi at Gaochang (47 km SE of Turfan), which is the
residence of the Mao (Wu) and Ji Commandants (in charge of the State Farms).
Then it turns to the west and rejoins the Central Route to Quici (Kucha). This
is the New Route.”
The ‘Central
Route’ mentioned in the Weilue led from the Yumen frontier-post through
Shanshan and then headed north, joining the ‘Northern Route’ to Kucha and
Kashgar, as described in the Hou Hanshu.
During the sporadic periods when the Chinese had control of the Hami
oasis between 73 CE
and the middle of the second century, the preferred route would have run via
Hami to both Turfan and the region of Jimasa (that is, Nearer and Further
Jushi). This was by far the shortest and easiest route from Dunhuang, and has
always been the main route, whenever the political situation allowed its use.
“I have
explained elsewhere how this ever-present threat of the Huns [between 121
BCE
and 73 CE]
from across the northernmost T’ien-shan determined the direction of the ‘new
northern route’ [note – this should read, simply, the ‘New Route’] which the
Chinese in A.D. 2 opened from the ancient ‘Jade Gate’ in order to communicate
with ‘Posterior Chü-shih’ or the territory around the present Guchen. To reach
this ground, which, like Turfan immediately to the south, had passed early under
their control, the route via Hami would undoubtedly have been the easiest. Yet
Chinese administrative policy, was always disposed to face physical difficulties
rather than risks from hostile barbarians, kept the new road well away from Hami
and carried it through waterless desert wastes which at least offered protection
from those dreaded nomadic foes.” Stein (1928), pp. 539-540. Also, Chavannes
(1905), pp. 532-535 and 533 note 1. See the note 27.3 below, where there is a
description of another ‘northern route’ from Further Jushi (Jimasa) to the
Wusun.
For
a detailed description of the numismatic evidence for a northern route between
the Black Sea and Central Asia, see: Mielczarek (1997), pp. 131-147.
“On the location of the town of
Guishan, the seat of the royal government of Dayuan, there are five theories.
They are: a) Kokand, b) Ura-tübe, c) Akhsikath, d) Kāsān and e) Khojend. Up to
now, the first three have already been discarded. But which of the last two is
correct has not been determined. I believe that Khojend is better than Kāsān.”
Ibid., p. 69.
He
refers the reader to Kuwabara (1934-2, 3, 4) for critiques of the first three
theories. He then goes on to give his reasons for choosing Khojend. (However,
note that by a slip of the pen he has, in his second point, mistakenly quoted
from Shiji, ch. 123: “Dayuan is
situated more than 2,000 li southwest
of Dayuan….”. This should, of course, read: “Daxia is situated more than 2,000
li southwest of Dayuan….”).
Khojend (ancient Alexandria Escharte or ‘Alexandria the Furthest’; during
Soviet times, Leninabad) is very strategically placed and not only guards the
entrance to the fertile Ferghana Valley, but controls the main trade route from
the east which forks here either southwest towards Samarkand, or north towards
Tashkent.
Yu correctly points out in his point no. 3, that:
“In the Hanshu, Ch. 96A, it is recorded that
“[to the northwest of the state of Xiuxun] is a distance of 920 li [383 km]to the state of Dayuan, and 1,610 li [669 km]to the west, the the Da Yuezhi.” This shows that from Xiuxun to the Da Yuezhi one could go northwest by the roundabout way of Dayuan, but could also go west and reach straight there. The “1,610 li” must have been the distance is one went west to the Da Yuezhi. However, it was mistaken for the distance to the Da Yuezhi from Xiuxun if one went northwest by the roundabout way of Dayuan by the editor of the Hanshu, who, hased on this distance, calculated further the distance from Dayuan to the Da Yuezhi: 1,610 - 920 = 690 li. Thus it can be seen that we cannot decide the location of the town of Jianshi on the basis of the distance from Dayuan to the Da Yuezhi recorded by the Hanshu.” Yu (1998), p. 59.
“In the
mid-second century B.C.
the Yüeh-chih tribes passed southwards through Ferghana and Usrushana, and
subsequently conquered Bactria. It seems likely that the far-flung, wealthy and
densely populated state of Ta-yüan arose about the same time. Much detailed
information about this state is given by the Chinese chronicler Szü-ma
Ch’ien,
who passed through Ta-yüan in
the latter half of the second century B.C.
The name Ta-yüan was used until the second century A.D.,
when it was replaced by Pu-han and Pa-han-na (fifth century A.D.)
–
the Chinese transcriptions of the name ‘Ferghana’. The identification of
Ta-yüan with
Ferghana is firmly established in historical literature.
According to the Chinese sources,
the country had many large and small towns and settlements, numbering over
seventy. The population was 300,000 and the inhabitants had deep-set eyes and
thick beards; they were skilled merchants and held women in high esteem. The
country’s army numbered 60,000 fighting men armed with bows and spears, skilled
in shooting from horseback. It was a land of highly developed agriculture; both
wheat and rice were grown; there were large vineyards, wine was made and stored
for dozens of years, and much mu-su (lucerne) was sown. Particularly
famous were the Ferghana horses, highly prized in neighbouring lands and
especially in China. They were said to ‘sweat blood’ and were considered
‘heavenly’. Emperor Wu-ti was particularly keen to have these blood-sweating
horses. At one time they were worshipped in China and poets wrote odes to
them.
Ta-yüan also
included Khojand and Usrushana. To the north and west it bordered on
K’ang
and to the south on the Yüeh-chih or Kushan possessions. Its capital was the
city of Ershi, identifiable either with the ancient site of Markhamat in
Andizhan District or with Khojand or Ura-Tyube. Its rulers also had a residence
in the city of Yu-chen, possibly present-day Uzgen.” Negmatov (1994), pp.
454-455.
Note that Pulleyblank (1963), p. 120 identifies Ershi with “Nesef, Naskhšab,
present Karchi in Sogdiana. Historical grounds for this identification of the
capital of Ta-yüan which the Chinese besieged and captured in 101 B.C. will be
given elsewhere (Shih chi 123).”
“The
powerful state of Dawan in modern Ferghana was similar to the Yuezhi in custom
and style, according to the description in the History of the Han
Dynasty.27 Dawan was famous for its grape wine and for its horses.
Grape wine might be one of the legacies of Hellenistic influence or
Hellenization of the region before the Tuharan speakers took over. The name
Dawan, as mentioned above, was a variation of Tuharan. The horses of Dawan were
so famous that Wudi sent two major military expeditions to defeat the king and
obtain horses. As for the Yuezhi, who lived further west now, their major
trading item with the Han was probably no longer horses. They now controlled the
resources not only of Central Asia, but also those on the fertile agricultural
land of Bactria, they were not poor nomads in tatters, but rich, proud
horse-riding people skilful at trade.”
27.
Ban Gu, Hanshu (History of the Han Dynasty) (Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju,
1964), 96a/3894.
Liu (2001),
p. 268.
“… probably
concentrated around the Tashkent oasis as you say. They probably had no common
frontier with the Wusun until a bit later when Kangju land became the name of a
much larger and more powerful federation which seems to have included a great
slab of the Massagetans dispersed west and south by the westward migrations
forced by the Xiongnu victories and expansion, as also probably most of the
nomad inhabitants of Kazakhstan displaced westwards at the same time.”
The Shiji chap. 123
says:
“K’ang-chü
is situated two thousand li northwest
of Ta-yüan. Its people likewise are nomads and resemble the Yüeh-chih in their
customs. They have eighty or ninety thousand skilled archer fighters. The
country is small and borders Ta-yüan. It acknowledges nominal sovereignty to the
Yüeh-chih people in the south and the Hsiun-nu people in the east.” Watson
(1961), p. 267.
There seems to have been a considerable expansion of Kangju territory and
population after the time of Zhang Qian’s visit to the region c. 129 BCE.
The Hanshu records that were 120,000
households, 600,000 individuals and 120,000 men able to bear arms (CICA, p. 126). This represents an
increase of their fighting force by at least a third. By this time their
territory had also increased:
“1. In the
Hanshu, Ch. 96 A, it is recorded that “[Wusun adjoins] Dayuan in the
west. In the same book, ch. 70, it is also recorded:
Zhizhi 郅支,
the Chanyu 單于
of the Xiongnu 匈奴,
turned west and went to Kangju, and borrowed troops from Kangju. With troops
[given by Kangju], he attacked Wusun many times and penetrated as far as the
town of Chigu赤谷,
he slaughtered and plundered the people and seized their domestic animals. The
Wusun dared not pursue him. The west of [the date of Wusun] was then weakly
defended, an uninhabited area extending for 1000
li.
This
shows that the town of Chigu, the seat of the royal government of Wusun, which
was situated in the upper reaches of the Narin River, was about 1,000 li [416 km] from the western boundary of
the state. Therefore the natural boundary between Dayuan and Wusun may have been
the Kagart Mountain and Yassi Mountain.
2.
In the Hanshu, Ch. 96A, it is recorded that “[Dayuan adjoins]
Kangju in the north.” Since the metropolitan territory of Kangju lay on the
northern bank of the Syr Darya and its eastern boundary extended as far as the
east of the Talas River, the natural boundary between Dayuan and Kangju may have
been Chatkal-tau and Urtak-tau.” Yu (1998), p. 67.
In
general, I agree with Yu’s analysis here with the rider that, although I have
been unable to locate the “Kagart Mountain and Yassi Mountain”, I believe the
town of Chigu was situated elsewhere (see note 1.60 above). The Chaktal and
Urtak-tau ranges, on the other hand, look like logical
boundaries:
“From the middle of the Alexander
range [now referred to as the Kirghiz Range], in about 74o E., a
chain known as the Talas-tau breaks away from its south flank in a W.S.W.
direction, and from near the western extremity of this latter two parallel
ranges, the Chotkal or Chaktal (14,000 ft.)[ 4,267 m.], and the Alatau, break
away in a south-westerly direction, and running parallel to one another and to
the river Naryn, or upper Syr-darya, terminate at right angles to the middle
Syr-darya, after it has made its sweeping turn to the north-west. The Talas-tau,
sometimes known as the Urtak-tau, while the name of Ala-tao is also extended to
cover it, has an average elevation of 14,000-15,000 ft. [4,267-4,572 m.], but
lifts its snow-capped summits to 15,750 ft. [4,801 m.]; it is crossed by passes
at 8,000-10,650 ft. [2,438-3,246 m.].” Taken from the “1911 Encyclopedia,”
downloaded from: http://17.1911encyclopedia.org/T/TIARA.htm
on 27 April 2003.
I assume that the “uninhabited area extending for 1000 li [416
km],” threatened by the Xiongnu and their Kangju allies, refers to the stretch
of the important northern route between modern Tokmak (to the northwest of
Issyk-kul) as far west as the region of modern Taraz (Dzhambul), to the north of
the Kirghiz Range. This would have allowed the Xiongnu and Kangju to bypass the
Wusun and control the northern route, until the Han defeated Zhizhi in 36
BCE.
These events are described in Hanshu 96A:
“In the east [the inhabitants] were
constrained to serve the Hsiung-nu. In the time of Emperor Hsüan, the Hsiung-nu
became ill-disciplined and disordered, with five Shan-yü contending for
power simultaneously. Han supported the Shan-yü Hu-han-yeh and had him
established; so the Shan-yü Chih-chih, felt offended and put the Han
envoys to death and blocked the way west to K’ang-chü. Later the
protector-general Kan Yen-shou and deputy colonel Ch’en T’ang brought out troops
of the Wu and Chi colonel and of the various states of the Western
Regions. On reaching K’ang-chü he punished the Shan-yü Chih-chih and
exterminated [his line], as is described in the biography of Kan Yen-shou and
Ch’en T’ang. These events occurred in the third year of the reign-period
Chien-chao of Emperor Yüan [36 B.C.].” CICA, p.
126.
Direct
communications were then re-established by the Han with Kangju which, however,
continued to be somewhat unhelpful and disrespectful in spite of sending
hostages to Changan. See CICA, pp. 127-128.
Taishan Yu (1998), pp. 105-107 also does, I think, an excellent job of
identifying the seats of the five “lesser kings” of the Kangju listed in the Hanshu. The identifications are based on the accounts in Xin Tangshu, ch. 221B which make mention
of their earlier names. See also Chavannes (1900), I,
pp.136-147.
“According
to this, of five lesser kings of Kangju, the seats of governments of Ji [Chi], Fumo [Fu-mo], and Suxie [Su-hsieh] were situated at Bokhāra,
Tashkent, Kashania, and Kesh respectively. As mentioned above, these oases had
been subject to Kangju in the Han times. As for “Huoxun” (Khwarizm), the seat of
the royal government of Aojian must have been identical with “Huanquian,” a
small state west of Dayuan, recorded in the Shiji, ch. 123. Khwarizm which lay on
the left bank of the Amu Darya, had once confronted Anxi. In view of its
location, since Sogdiana was subject to Kangju, Huanqian (Huoxun) also was
possibly subject to Kangju. In the Hanshu, ch. 96A, it is recorded that
Anxi adjoined Kangju in the north. As mentioned above, this shows that Anxi
adjoined Sogdiana, a dependency of Kangju, in the middle reaches of the Amu
Darya. As this was so, the relevant records in the Xin Tangshu, ch. 221B, are, generally
speaking, reasonable. It has been suggested that the records are all fantastic
talk. I disagree.” Yu (1998), p. 106.
Again, in the Later Han, we find Kangju taking hostile action against
Chinese expansionism. In the Biography of Ban Chao – see Chavannes (1906), p.
230 – it is said that the Kangju sent troops in 84 CE
to help Kashgar against the Han. Ban Chao was able, however, to bribe the king
of the Yuezhi, who was in the process of making a marriage alliance with the
Kangju, to get the Kangju to desist. Then Ban Chao was able to capture the king
of Kashgar (thus gaining control of the route to the west for a few years).
“The
K’ang-chü were of course an important people in Sogdiana in the Han period. They
later gave their name to Samarkand but in the Former Han period were centred
around Tashkent. The Ch’iang-ch’ü group in the Hsiung-nu were presumably a part
of the K’ang-chü people who had at some time been captured and incorporated by
the Hsiung-nu. Now it happens that Tashkend was later known in China as Shih Kuo
“Stone Country” and people from there who came to China took the surname Shih
“Stone”. Tashkend itself means “Stone City” in Turkish. This is usually
regarded, following Marquart (1901, p. 155), as simply a Turkicization of the
earlier Čāč, but this does not account for the Chinese name which is long before
the region became Turkish.
The K’ang-chü people are usually though of as Iranian but they had close
links with Ta-yüan (= *Taxwār, Tochari) and the Yüeh-chih and they shared the
title hsi-hou = yabgu with the latter and the Wu-sun. It is quite likely
therefore that they too were Tocharian in origin and that they moved into
Sogdiana as part of the same westward movement that brought the Yüeh-chih and
then the Tochari spilling over the Pamirs. In this case we may look in Tocharian
for an interpretation of their name. It happens that there is a word
kāṅka- in Tokharian A about which Sir Harold Bailey has kindly given me
the following note.” [This is followed with Bailey’s rather lengthy note that
can be summed up in his sentence: “The above contexts seem to assure a Tocharian
word kāṅk- meaning “stone”.”] Pulleyblank (1963), p. 247.
“The
most extensive and stable state in the west of this region was K’ang
(the ancient Kangha in the Avesta or K’ang-chü
in the Chinese chronicles). Some scholars believe that the K’ang-chü
state was centred on oases situated between the upper and lower reaches of the
River Syr Darya (Jaxartes), known in ancient times as the River Kanga. During
the early period, the power of the rulers of K’ang-chü extended to the
territories of Transoxiana and the valley of the river Zerafshan, while in the
north there were vassal states, the largest of which was Yen-ts’ai. According to
the Chinese chronicles, by the second century it had been renamed Alania and was
dependent on K’ang-chü. Alania was situated between the Caspian Sea and the Aral
Sea.
A military and
political alliance between the Sarmatian and Alan tribes living between the
lower reaches of the Volga and the Aral Sea was formed under the name of
Yen-ts’ai–Alania.
it consisted mainly of semi-nomadic herdsmen speaking Iranian
languages....
In
K’ang-chü
itself, which lay north-west of Ta-yüan (Ferghana), although there were many
semi-nomadic herdsmen, most of the Iranian-speaking population were reported to
be farmers and craftsmen. The inhabitants of the region were said to lead a
settled life, have towns, cultivate the land and breed livestock. Originally all
the territories were dependent on the great Hsiung-nu power. The sources mention
that in the first century B.C.
dissent among the Hsiung-nu leaders weakened their power and Chih-chih
(56–36
B.C.),
a rebellious shan-yü (ruler) of the Hsiung-nu, sought refuge for a short
time in K’ang-chü
and was killed there. K’ang-chü
is still mentioned in fifth-century sources, but in the sixth century instead of
K’ang-chü
we find five principalities which, as the chronicles stress, were situated in
the ‘former
territories of K’ang-chü’.”
Kyzlasov (1996), pp. 315-316.
Kangju certainly controlled the oasis of Tashkent (which was possibly the
administrative centre of their kingdom) and the middle and lower reaches of the
Syr Darya or Jaxartes (also known in ancient times as the Kanga or the Jayhun)
river, and they almost certainly also had control of the rich grazing lands and
trade routes along the valleys of the Chu and Talas rivers.
Pulleyblank (1963), p. 94 states, on the basis of the account in
Hanshu 96A, that the Kangju had their capital in their summer territory
at Beitian (“ = Bin-kāth, the old name for Tashkend, with Bin < *Bidn through
loss of medial d?”). See also, ibid. p. 247, and CICA, p. 124, n.
299. Exactly where their eastern border with the Wusun was, though,
remains to be discovered.
“The
construction of the Salar-Karasu-Dzhun irrigation system in the second and first
centuries B.C.
gave impetus to the development of the agricultural oasis of ancient Tashkent.
The origin of crop-raising on the territory of the Chirchik-Ahangaran basin
dates back to an earlier period. However, as the Buzgon-tepe, Taukat-tepe,
Kugait, Shash-tepe and other archaeological monuments located in the irrigation
zone of the Salar-Karasu-Dzhun system show, the intensive application of
irrigation in that region and the urbanization of a part of its settled area
began at the dawn of the Christian era. One characteristic feature of the
establishment of the Tashkent agricultural oasis is the fact that all the lands
comprised in it were not brought under cultivation at the same time. Priority
was given to the use of water resources for irrigation areas which were most
favoured by natural conditions and were, for the most part, situated in regions
adjacent to the water supply.” Mukhamedjanov (1996), p. 267.
“It must be
noted, however, that although the inhabitants of Tashkent and Ferghana at that
time followed a settled way of life and were engaged in crop-raising,
livestock-breeding and highly artistic handicraft work, careful study and
analysis of written and material sources indicate that ancient Ta-yüan
(Ferghana) and Chach (Tashkent) were less developed economically than Parthia,
Bactria and Sogdiana.” Mukhamedjanov (1996), p. 277.
It has been suspected for a long time that the Kangju had also conquered
and were in control of ancient Sogdiana during the Kushan period. This now may
be confirmed. The key is in a short passage in the Hou Hanshu on the
kingdom of Liyi, which is said to be dependent on Kangju (see Section
17).
As Professor Enoki (1955), p. 51, and others, have suggested, Liyi
栗弋
is an
obvious error for Suyi
粟弋,
a common Chinese representation of Sogdiana (see Part 12, note 7, below for the
quote from Enoki). The characters li and su are so similar that
they are commonly confused. Chavannes (1907), p. 195, note 1, noticed that the
Tangshu used the form Liyi, but wrongly deduced that this was a
mistake for the Liyi of the Weilue.
Sogdiana included most of the territories between the Jaxartes (Syr
Darya) and the Oxus (Amu Darya) rivers. It was centred in the Zerafshan valley,
which includes the key oases of Samarkand and Bukhara and also controlled the
rich and strategically important centres of Kesh (modern Shakhrisabz) and
Alexandria Eschate (modern Kujand).
“Intensive
trade was also conducted during this period with Han China, which exported silk,
nephrite [jade], lacquerware, hides, iron and nickel. Central Asian merchants
exported glass, precious stones and ornaments to China. Luxury goods were the
main articles of trade, as was usually the case in ancient times. The Sogdians
played an important role in the development of trade links with China. In
Tun-huang (East Turkestan), letters in the Sogdian language have been found
dating back to the early fourth century A.D.
(or to the end of the second century A.D.). One of
them notes that 100 freemen from Samarkand were living in Tun-huang. W. B.
Henning estimates the number of Sogdians (including slaves and their families)
in Tun-huang must have totalled 1,000. Several letters contain information on
merchandise, trade, prices, etc. The Sogdians living in East Turkestan
maintained close contact with their home town in Samarkand.” Mukhamedjanov
(1996), p. 286.
Kangju, therefore, controlled the two major caravan routes from China to
the West: the main “Silk Route” which ran from Kashgar through Ferghana,
Samarkand, and Bukhara before it entered Parthian territory in Merv, or headed
south through Balkh, as well as the important alternative route north of the
Aral and Caspian Seas (thereby avoiding Parthian territory) to their kinsmen,
the Alans, who were in direct contact with the Roman ports on the Black
Sea.
Relations between Kangju and the Kushans were close as evidenced by the
marriage of a Kushan emperor to a Kangju princess in 84 CE.
See the biography of Ban Chao in Hou Hanshu, 77.6 b, Chavannes (1906), p.
230; Zürcher (1968), p. 369.
The Kushans controlled the routes from Balkh to the west, and all the
routes into northern India, and through southern Afghanistan. Therefore, the
middle sections of all the main trade routes between Chinese territory and
India, Parthia, and the Roman Empire were under the control of either the
Kushans or their close allies, the Kangju.
“The nomadic
federation of the K’ang-chü was the second great power after the Yüeh-chih in
Transoxiana. According to the Chinese sources, K’ang-chü lay north-west of
Ta-yüan and west of the Wu-sun, bordering upon the Yüeh-chih to the south. The
territory of the K’ang-chü, therefore, covered the region of the Tashkent oasis
and part of the territory between the Amu Darya and the Syr Darya rivers, with
its heartland along the middle Syr Darya. It seems to have emerged as a powerful
state in the second century B.C. As the historians of Alexander do not refer to
the existence of any political confederation on the Jaxartes (Syr Darya) except
Chorasmia, the K’ang-chü must have appeared a little later. They united a number
of regions which had sedentary, agricultural and nomadic populations.Kyzlasov The K’ang-chü were inevitably
affected by the events of the mid-second century B.C., when the Central Asian
tribes invaded Graeco-Bactria. The migration of the nomadic peoples (the Asii,
Tochari, etc.) to the south altered the balance of power in the valley of the
Syr Darya. Taking advantage of these circumstances, as the Hou Han-shu suggests,
the K’ang-chü subjugated Yen-ts’ai in the region of the Aral Sea, and the still
more remote land of the Yen in the southern Urals. Yen-ts’ai is identified with
the large confederation of Sarmatian tribes led by the Aorsi. Thus, K’ang-chü
established direct contact with the Sarmatian world to the north-west. The
expansion of K’ang-chü in this direction in the first and second centuries A.D.
was occasioned by the rise of the powerful Yüeh-chih confederacy (subsequently
the Kushan Empire) to the south and by the presence in the east of the
formidable Wu-sun state allied with the Hsiung-nu and the Han Empire. The
Chinese sources inform us that K’ang-chü was tributary to the Yüeh-chih in the
south and to the Hsiung-nu in the east. The north-west advance of K’ang-chü and
its conquest of Yen-ts’ai apparently obliged some tribes of the Aorsi, and later
of the Alans, to move west; it may, therefore, be concluded that K’ang-chü
played a major historical role in the initial stages of the Great Migration of
Peoples, which was such an important event in world history. In this way,
K’ang-chü gained control over the northern sector of the international trade
route known as the Northern Route.” Zadneprovskiy (1994), p. 463.
“Undaunted, K’ang-chü continued to pursue an independent policy. It maintained its independence u