Uzbeks are a Turkic-speaking people, the main and indigenous population of Uzbekistan. This is the largest ethnic group in terms of population in Central Asia. There are about 30 million Uzbeks living in the world. The ancient ancestors of the people are the Sako-Massaget tribes, Sogdians, Bactrians, Fergana and Khorezmians, who gradually began to unite in the period from the 10th to the 15th centuries. As a result, between the 11th and 13th centuries, there was a mixture of ancient Turkic tribes with the ancient Iranian population.

Where live

Almost 27 million Uzbeks live in Uzbekistan. Of these, 48% live in rural areas. A large number of representatives of this people have long settled in northern Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan and Kyrgyzstan. Labor migrants Uzbeks work in Russia, Turkey, the USA, Ukraine and the EU countries where they have founded communities.

Name

The ethnonym “Uzbek” is translated as “free man” and “master of himself.” Some historians believe that the ethnonym arose on behalf of the khan of the Turkic-Mongol state Golden Horde Khan Uzbek, who ruled in 1312-1340.

Story

It is believed that there are 92 clans (tribes) of Uzbeks that became part of the future Uzbek nation. There is a legend that says that 92 people went to Medina and there participated in the war of the Prophet Muhammad against the infidels. These people were converted to Islam, and it is believed that the tribes of the Uzbeks, who were also called “Ilatiya,” originated from them.

To date, the existence of 18 of the lists of 92 Uzbek tribes is known, and all of them were compiled in Transoxiana, the oases of the Central Asian interfluve. The earliest list was compiled in the 14th century, the latest in the 20th century.

From the analysis of all the lists, it should be noted that the main part of them begins with the names of three tribes:

1. kyrks
2. mingi

There was also a Deshtikipchak Uyshun (Uysun) Uzbek tribe, whose origins originate from the nomadic Usun tribe. Groups of the Uysun tribe are known in the Samarkand and Tashkent oases. Uzbeks consider it the most ancient of all 92 Uzbek tribes.

Anthropologist K. Kuhn testifies that modern Uzbeks are a heterogeneous ethnic group in racial terms. Among them there are representatives of mixed to varying degrees, strongly Mongoloid and extremely Caucasian individuals.

Language

Uzbek is part of the Turkic group of languages ​​and, together with Uyghur, belongs to the Karluk languages. The Karluk group was formed from ancient Turkic language 7th-10th centuries, which was based on the runic alphabet. Since the 9th century, due to the spread and strengthening of Islam, the Arabic alphabet began to spread among the Uzbeks. The Uzbek language was based on the Arabic alphabet until 1928. From 1928 to 1940, the Latin alphabet began to be used instead, which by 1940 was replaced by the Cyrillic alphabet. In 1992, the Latin alphabet was reintroduced in Uzbekistan. Some groups of Uzbeks are bilingual, for example, many of those living in Afghanistan speak Dari.

The modern Uzbek language has a complex structure of dialects. There are 4 main groups of dialects:

• North Uzbek
• South Uzbek
• Oghuz
• Kipchak dialects

Religion

The Uzbeks are Muslims and have retained vestiges of ancient Iranian influences in their cult. Noruz (Navruz) - the spring equinox - is strictly celebrated. They respect fire very much and believe in healing with the rays of the setting sun.

Food

Uzbek cuisine is diverse, influenced by the nomadic and sedentary lifestyle of the people. The dishes are known and popular all over the world: lagman, pilaf, manti. In Uzbekistan, these dishes are prepared with some peculiarities. The people also have their own original dishes that are not prepared anywhere else. Uzbek cuisine has its own traditions. Pork is not eaten in any form; this meat is prohibited for religious reasons. All food is divided into two types: harom and halol. Important Limitations in time and order of food intake exist during the holy month of Ramadan and the fasting associated with it.

Uzbeks respect bread very much; flatbreads are placed on the table only “face” up. At feasts, only an even number of flatbreads are placed on the table; odd numbers are served for mourning events. The breaking of the cake is a sign of the beginning of the meal. Usually this is done by an older or younger family member, but only with permission. The oldest person at the table should start the meal first, and only after him everyone else. Disobeying this rule is considered ignorance.

For weddings, various holidays and funerals, pilaf is a must. Cooking begins at night, and the dish is served to the table early in the morning. To this day, Uzbeks eat pilaf with their hands. It's not difficult, but requires some skill.

Ancient traditions are associated with the preparation of a dish that has no analogues in the cuisines of other nations - “sumalak”. It should be cooked in early spring, before sowing begins. This dish is often prepared during the Navruz holiday, right on the streets in large cauldrons. The consistency of sumalak is similar to jam. Uzbeks consider it very useful for the stomach and immunity.

For pilaf, only yellow carrots are used, mainly the mushak variety. In Uzbek families, cooking is considered a male activity. Often men take on all the cooking responsibilities in the house. Cooking pilaf containing 100 or more kilograms of rice is trusted only to a man. Professional male cooks are called “oshpaz”. The Uzbek diet includes meat dishes, soups, confectionery and bakery products, salads, and drinks. Main meat dishes are prepared by frying and are high in calories. Cottonseed oil, fat tail fat, butter, herbs and spices are widely used in cooking.

Various flat cakes, oatmeal, bugirsok koloboks, and brushwood are prepared from the dough. Among the popular confectionery shops are nisholda - a white sweet similar to jam, Uzbek sugar novvot (also navat), candy caramel parvarda, halva and liquid flour halva holvaitar. Drinks, curd mass, dried balls with spices - kurutob - are made from milk. Salads are prepared from fresh vegetables and seasoned with oil. The meat is used to make sausages and delicacies.

Character

Uzbeks are honest, straightforward and united people, they lack gloom and fussiness, but at the same time they have the instincts of a ruler and a warrior.

Appearance

The head is usually oval, the eyes have a longitudinal slit, and the cheekbones do not protrude much. Hair color is often dark.

Cloth

The national costume of the Uzbeks was created in ancient times and is worn by representatives of the people to this day. In each region, the national costume has its own characteristics and differences.

The men's suit consists of:

1. different styles of shirts
2. robe
3. camisole
4. belts
5. pants,
6. leather boots
7. headdress - skullcap or turban.

In everyday life, the male part of the population wore a shirt, which used to be below the knees, then became shorter, to the middle of the thighs. Shirt collars were sewn in two styles. In the Fergana and Tashkent regions, men wore an open shirt - a yacht. It was sewn from cotton fabric. The edges of the gate were sometimes trimmed with jiyak braid. Aristocrats and clergy wore shirts only with a horizontal collar. At the beginning of the 20th century, boys and older men wore guppich shirts quilted with cotton wool. In everyday life, men wore pants without pockets, slits or buttons. They were wide at the top and tapered at the bottom, reaching to the ankles.

The outerwear was a robe. Depending on the weather, they wore robes with lining and cotton wool. Vertical cuts were made on both sides of the floors. The floors, collar, sleeve edges and hem were trimmed with narrow braided braid or fabric strip. Two ties were embroidered on the chest. The clothes of the nobility and emir were decorated with gold embroidery. In everyday life, men wore a hat, skull cap and turban on their heads.

The male population of the lowland oases wore soft boots with leather shoes without backs. The Uzbek nobility wore ceremonial boots made of green shagreen with an elegant heel, beveled to the middle of the sole, for equestrian rides. Such shoes allowed the rider to deftly stay in the stirrups.

Women's traditional dance costume consists of:

1. robe
2. dresses
3. bloomer
4. burqa or headscarf
5. skullcaps
6. shoes.

Silver or gold jewelry was a mandatory addition to any clothing. All women wore them, regardless of age.

As outer casual clothing, they wore a camisole or robe with an open and wide collar, the sides of which almost did not meet. The sleeves are looser and shorter than those of a men's robe. Women from the Samarkand and Bukhara oases often wore long rumcha robes, loosely fitting to the waist. Mursak robe is a specific outerwear for women. It is swinging, tunic-shaped, without a collar. They sewed it in such a way that when worn, its floors overlapped each other. They made the mursak long, reaching to the ground, quilted with cotton wool and lined. The floors, bottom of sleeves and collars were trimmed with woven braid.

Women began to wear camisoles only in the second half of the 19th century. It was sewn to fit slightly at the waist, with narrow and short sleeves, a turn-down collar and a cut-out armhole. At the same time, Uzbek women began to wear short sleeveless nimcha vests.

In everyday life, the head was covered with a scarf, often with two at once. One was thrown over the head, the second was folded diagonally and worn as a headband. In the 19th century, they wore a scarf with an opening for the face, and a peshona rumol scarf was tied on the forehead. The burqa was gradually replaced after the struggle carried out in the 20th century Soviet power with remnants. Skullcaps are still worn by women and young girls today. They are usually decorated with bright embroidery and beads. Women's main footwear was mules.

Life

The majority of Uzbeks lead a sedentary lifestyle and are mainly engaged in agriculture. There are especially many nomadic Uzbeks in eastern Bukhara, along the left bank of the Amu Darya, in the Afghan possessions. Even more are semi-nomadic, who move with herds from place to place in the summer, and return to permanent homes in the winter.

The religion of the Uzbeks is Islam, so they allowed polygamy, which was especially prevalent among the feudal aristocracy and the wealthy. Emirs and khans had entire harems. Uzbeks lived in large patriarchal families, which included several generations of relatives. Gradually, families began to separate, the sons lived separately after the death of their father, the eldest sons got married and left, the youngest remained with his parents and received an inheritance.

In the family, everyone is obliged to listen to the elder and obey him; the position of women used to be degraded, and the younger ones were obliged to listen to the elders in everything. Only the eldest always controlled the family's income, despite the fact that everyone in the family worked. Women obeyed the eldest in the family, who distributed housework among them, picked cotton, spun, raised silkworms, and cleaned kurak.

Housing

The regions of Uzbekistan differed in climatic conditions, as a result of which local folk architecture developed. The main architects were the architects of Bukhara, Khiva, Fergana and Shakhrisabz, who to this day have preserved the features of construction and structures, decoration, layouts, and architectural styles. Earthquakes often occurred in the Fergana Valley, so houses there were built with double frames; due to the abundance of rain, clay pellets (lumbaz) up to 50 cm thick were placed on the roofs. There were no earthquakes in Khorezm, and houses there were built with pakhsa walls and one frame, the thickness of the lamp base on the roofs was 15 cm. In different areas, housing is varied in its own way, but general principles of architecture also exist.

In old settlements, houses were built without windows and surrounded by adobe walls. The windows of the dwellings and outbuildings faced only the courtyard. The streets between them were crooked and narrow. The houses of wealthier people were divided into an inner half - ichkari - for children and women, and tashkari. This part was furnished more richly and beautifully; guests were welcomed here. Usually all the middle classes had a guest room; the poor did not have one.

The layout of the house of most families, which depended on the number of its members, included an ivan - a canopy, a barnyard, a utility room and a toilet located in the yard. In Bukhara, houses were usually built of two and three floors. Every part of the land was used rationally by the Uzbeks. In Bukhara and Tashkent, almost 90% of the sites were subject to constant reconstruction and additions.

Culture

Uzbekistan has its own national sports:

• Uzbek national wrestling kurash;
• goat fighting (fight between horsemen for the carcass of a goat) kupkari, or ulak;
• type of horse racing poiga (type of Uzbek equestrian sport).

The people's oral tradition is very original and rich. folk art, which includes the following genres:

• sayings
• proverbs
• jokes
• fairy tales
• lyrical songs

All folklore genres reflect the culture and life of the people, brotherhood, the fight against evil, patriotism and hatred of the enemy. The most popular and beloved among Uzbeks are the epic works of “worthy”, the bearers of which are the folk storytellers Bakhgiya and Gioir. Many of the works have survived to this day.

From musical instruments Most Popular:

• doira
• rubab
• sarnai
• tanbur
• dutar
• kairak
• gijak
• karnai
• koshnay
• setar
• nagora
• balaban

Traditions

Uzbeks are very hospitable people, this is one of characteristic features Uzbekistan. How the host received the guest is valued more than the wealth of the table and the wealth of the family. Not accepting a guest means disgracing your family, clan, village and mahalla (neighbourhood).

Guests are always greeted at the gates of the house, the men are greeted by the hand and asked how they are and how they are doing. Women are greeted with a slight bow, the right hand should be on the heart.

Guests are invited into the house and seated in the most honorable place at the table - dastarkhan. By old custom women and men sit at different tables. The head of the family himself seats the guests at the table. It is customary to plant the most respected ones far from the entrance.

Every meal at the table begins and ends with tea. The owner himself pours the drink. The more honorable the guest, the less tea you need to pour into his cup of tea. This custom is explained as follows: the more often the guest turns to the owner for more, the better. This is a sign of respect for the home. If there is tea left at the bottom of the guest's bowl, the hostess pours it out and refills the bowl. First, pastries, sweets, nuts, dried fruits, vegetables, fruits are served on the table, then snacks and at the end the festive dish - pilaf.

Previously, it was not customary for girls and boys in Uzbekistan to choose a partner for themselves; their relatives did this. Today this custom has been partially preserved, but most people already choose a couple for themselves. But, just as before, matchmakers and the bride’s neighbors come to the potential bride’s house early in the morning. If the groom's parents agree, the ceremony of “breaking the cake” is performed, after which the girl is already considered engaged. The wedding day is set, the bride's parents give gifts to the groom's relatives.

The brightest and most magnificent rite of the Uzbek people is the wedding (nikoh-tui). A wedding in every family is the most important event, which is celebrated noisily and richly, with a large number of guests. All relatives, distant and close, neighbors and friends are invited.

The wedding ceremony begins early in the morning with the guests being treated to festive pilaf in the bride's and groom's houses. Then the groom arrives at the bride's house in the company of friends, dancers and musicians. Bride in white wedding dress is waiting for him in a separate room, where only the mullah’s attorneys can enter. They take her consent to the marriage and read the wedding prayer Nikoh, which concludes the marriage between the young people.

After the bride says goodbye to her home and parents, the groom's friends take the dowry and load it. Everyone leaves, the bride is accompanied by friends and relatives who sing farewell songs.

The bride is greeted at the groom's house by women who sing traditional wedding songs. A white path (payandoz) leads to the door of the house, along which the bride enters her new home. She bows before the door and is showered with money, flowers and sweets so that her life will be rich, beautiful and sweet.

The wedding celebration begins, which can last several days. After the wedding, the groom escorts his young wife to their new room, where she is met and changed by a yanga - a close friend or relative of the bride. Then the groom comes into the room and buys the bride from her. Afterwards the newlyweds are left alone. Early in the morning, the day after the celebration, the final ritual of “kelin salom” or greeting of the bride is performed. The young wife bows low from the waist and greets the groom's parents, relatives and guests. They give her gifts and congratulate her.

In Uzbekistan, a mandatory ritual of circumcision for all boys is carried out - khatna-kilish. Parents prepare for this from the very birth of the child, sewing festive clothes, bed linen and blankets. The ceremony is performed when the boy turns 3, 5, 7 or 9 years old, very rarely at 11-12 years old.

At the beginning, the Koran is read in the presence of the imam, elders and close male relatives, and the child is blessed. The boy is dressed with gifts brought by neighbors and relatives. Sometimes they are mounted on a foal as a sign that the boy is becoming a man. Afterwards, the “tahurar” ritual is performed, during which women place blankets and pillows on the chest. It all ends with the traditional treat of everyone to pilaf.

The formation of the language of any people is directly related to the history of the origin and formation of the speakers of this language. Therefore, the study of the Uzbek language is unthinkable without the joint efforts of historians, ethnographers, linguists, archaeologists and representatives of other related sciences.

Iranian, Greek, Roman, Chinese, Turkic, Arabic and Persian written sources can serve as historical materials (Avesta 1st millennium BC, Achaemenid inscriptions on stone, clay, leather, papyrus, works of Herodotus V century BC, Ctesias and XephonI century BC, PtolemyII century BC), as well as materials from some archaeological excavations, dialectological materials . The most ancient written monuments date back only to the beginning of the 5th century. n. e.

It is known that in the VIII-II centuries. BC e. Central Asia was inhabited by Scythians (according to Greek sources), or Sakas (according to Persian sources), Massagetae and Sogdians, Khorezmians and other ethnic groups. Thus, in the lower reaches of the Amu Darya and Syr Darya (Trans-Caspian Plain) lived the Massagetae, and the territory of Kazakhstan, the southern and eastern parts of Central Asia (up to Altai) was inhabited by the Sakas, the oases of Tashkent and Khorezm, as well as the Fergana Valley and most of the territory of SogdianaTurkic-speaking ethnic groups (Kanguys, or Kangliytsy), part of which formed the state of Kangkha, or Kangyuy (from the 2nd century BC to the 1st century AD). The conquest of Central Asia by Alexander the Great (329×327 BC) and 150 years of Greco-Macedonian rule did not affect the ethnic composition and language of the local population.

The next layer in the process of formation of the Uzbek people were the Turkic ethnic groups that came from the east: the Yue-Chhi (or Kushans, or Tochars III, II centuries BC) and the Huns (II-IV centuries), as well as tribes Hephthalites (V-VI centuries). The Kushans formed their own state, and the Hephthalites formed theirs. At the head of the Kushan kingdom was the Guishuan (Kushan) clan. The kingdom occupied Central Asia, part of India, and Afghanistan. The entry into the Kushan kingdom of Khorezm, Sogd and Chach is unknown. Written sources note that these tribes (or tribal associations) were Turkic-speaking. The ethnic composition of the Hephthalites is unknown, but their family relations with the Huns are indicated. O. I. Smirnova’s study of Sogdian coins from Pyadzhikent convincingly proves that many representatives of the dynasty that reigned in Sogd were from Turkic tribes 1.

In the VI-VIII centuries. Various Turkic clans and tribes penetrated into the territory of present-day Uzbekistan from Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Semirechye and other neighboring regions, which were subsequently assimilated by the local population. VI-VII centuries can be defined as the period of the Turkic Khaganate, whose territory included Central and Central Asia. As is known, the Turkic Khaganate was subsequently, in 588, divided into the eastern (center: Mongolia) and western (center: Semirechye) kaganates. The Western Kaganate was inhabited by clan and tribal associations of Karluks, Khaladks, Kanglys, Turgeshs, Chigils and Oghuzs. Subsequently, the Oguzes separated from this association and formed their own state. The Uyghurs dominated the Eastern Kaganate at that time. In 745, the Turkic Khaganate was conquered by the Uyghurs, after which the Uyghur state was formed, which existed until 840. Then it was overthrown by the Khakassians (Kyrgyz). This led to the fact that some of the Uyghurs united with the Karluks, some moved to Tibet, while the rest remained in Altai and mixed with other clans of the Turkic ethnic group.

At the beginning of the 8th century. Central Asia is conquered by the Arabs. During the time of Arab rule, the Sogds lived in Bukhara, Samarkand, Karshi, Shakhrisabz, and the Karluks lived in the Fergana oasis. Other Turkic tribes, such as the Turgesh, were nomads and occupied a vast territory of Central Asia and present-day Kazakhstan. The historian Tabari points out that the leaders of the Sogdians were Turks.

In Central Asia in the 9th and 10th centuries. Samanids dominate2. During this period, Arabic functioned as the language of office and scientific works. The spoken, everyday language was the language of various Turkic tribes. B X

XI centuries power passes to the Karakhanids. In the middle of the 11th century. The Karakhanid state was divided into eastern (with its center in Balasagun, then Kashgar) and western (with its center in Uzgend, then Samarkand). The territory of the eastern state consisted of Eastern Turkestan, Semirechye, Shash, Fergana, ancient Sogdiana, the territory of the western stateAfghanistan, Northern Iran. At the same time, the Ghaznavid state was formed in Khorasan (Ghazn) in 977, which existed until 1040, after which it was conquered by the Turkmen Seljuk clans (the first half of the 11th and the beginning of the 12th century).

The founder of the Ghaznavid state was Mahmud Ghaznavy. The territory of the Ghaznavids occupied the space from Northern India to the southern coast of the Caspian Sea (Afghanistan and Northern Iran). Khorezm, due to its geographical location, was not part of either the Karakhanid or Ghaznavid states. However, in 1017 Ghaznavy captured Khorezm.

The Karakhanid state was founded by clan associations of Karluks, Yagmas and Chigils. With its division, the connection between Transoxiana and East Turkestan and Semirechye was weakened.

Historians believe that “it would be wrong” to contrast Maverannahr, as a Sogdian-sedentary world, with Semirechye, as a Turkic-nomadic world 3. According to sources, until the 11th century. in Maverannahr and Semirechye the main and leading Turkic tribes were. The settlement of more and more Turkic tribes strengthened the position and language of the Turkic tribes inhabiting this territory.

From the 8th century in Fergana the main, defining tribe were the Karluks, in Shashe the Oghuz. The Sogdians, occupying small territories within the Turkic tribes, gradually lost their ethnic isolation, as the Sogdians married the daughters of the Turks or, conversely, married their daughters to the Turks. The Sogdians gradually lost their language, replacing it with Turkic 4.

In the XXI centuries. the bulk of the Oguzes lived in the lower Syr Darya, then they moved to the territory of present-day Turkmenistan. In Semirechyefrom the Talas valley to. Eastern Turkestan was dominated by the Karluks, then the Chigils and Yagmas came there. They settled in the northeast of Lake Issyk-Kul and in Eastern Turkestan. As for the Turgesh (or Tukhsi and Argu), they settled in the southwestern part of Semirechye. M. Kashgarsky believes that the language of the Turgesh (Tukhsi and Argu) is mixed with Sogdian. Apparently, the mutual influence of these tribes was strong.

IN beginning of XII V. Central Asia was captured by the Karakitai, who came from the East. There is no consensus on the ethnic composition of the Karakitais: some consider them tribes of Tungus origin, others of Mongolian origin. They left no traces either in ethnic composition or in linguistic terms. Having defeated Sultan Sanjar (Seljukids) and Mahmud (Karakhanids), they limited themselves to receiving tribute.

From the end of the 12th to the beginning of the 13th century. The Khorezm state was gaining strength. The peoples of Central Asia from the first half of the 13th century. (i.e. from 1219) until the second half of the 14th century. (1370) were dominated by the Mongols; from the second half of the 14th century. power passed into the hands of the Timurids, who ruled until the second half of the 15th century. It should be emphasized that the Arabs, Persians, Mongols, who were the rulers of states in Central Asia in those historical periods, were unable to have any impact on the ethnic composition of the local population and their language, although, as already mentioned, the Arabic and Persian languages ​​in those years were recognized as the languages ​​of office and science.

After the collapse of the Golden Horde (beginning of the 14th century), as well as with the decomposition of the Timurid state (second half of the 15th century) as a result of internecine wars in the eastern part of Desht-i-Kipchak, which stretched from the Volga in the East to the northern side of the Syr Darya River (where included the territory of modern Kazakhstan and Southwestern Siberia), the state of nomadic Uzbeks was formed (20s of the 15th century). The founder of this state was the grandfather of Muhammad Sheybani KhanAbulkhair Khan 5, who overthrew the power of the Timurids. Sheybani Khan, continuing his conquests, began to own the territory from the Syr Darya to Afghanistan.

The disintegration of the state of the Shaybanids (then the successors of his family, the Ashtarkhanids) began under Khan Ubaydullah II (1702-1711). Fergana gradually became isolated, then Khorezm, Balkh, and Bukhara. After the short reign of Nadir Shah (1740-1747), three states were formed in Central Asia: in Bukhara (mainly from the Mangit tribes), in Khiva (from the Kungrat tribes), in Kokand (from the Ming tribes).

During this period, the main everyday language was Uzbek. Literary and scientific works were written in Uzbek, and the Tajik language was adopted in the office. In Samarkand and Bukhara they spoke Tajik and Uzbek.

In general, the Turkic-Mongol tribes that wandered in the second half of the 14th century. in the eastern part of Desht-i-Kipchak, were called Uzbeks, and their territory was the land of the Uzbeks. After their conquest in the first half of the 15th century. Maverannahr, the local population also began to be called Uzbeks.

As a proper name, the anthroponym “Uzbek” is found in the works of Nisaviy Juvaini and Rashidad-din (XIII century). Rashidad-din writes that the prince Uzbek was the son of Mingkudar, the grandson of Bukal, the seventh son of Jochi. It should be noted that Uzbek Khan was the khan of the Golden Horde and the nomadic Uzbeks were not his subjects. There were also other individuals named Uzbek who lived before Uzbek Khan. In particular, this name was borne by one of the Azerbaijani atabeks from the Ildeznd dynasty (1210-1225) and one of the emirs of the Khorezm Shah Muhammad (1200-1220).

It should be noted that the ancient clans of the Sakas, Massagets, Sogdians, Khorezmians and Turks, as well as other ethnic groups that joined them somewhat later, formed the basis for the formation of the Uzbeks, Kazakhs, Kyrgyz, Karakalpaks, Uighurs and other Turkic peoples, and also participated in the formation of the neighboring Tajik people.

It should be taken into account that the same clans and tribes could have participated in the formation of different Turkic peoples. For example, among the Uzbek and Kazakh peoples there are clans of Kipchaks, Jalairs, Naimans, and Katagans. Therefore, the fact of the presence in the Uzbek and Kazakh languages ​​of common phenomena inherent in the languages ​​of the above-mentioned genera should not be considered as a product of the relationship between the Uzbek and Kazakh languages ​​of a later time.

Summarizing what has been said, we can conclude that the dominance of the ancient Turks in Central Asia covers the 5th-10th centuries, during this period power was concentrated in the hands of the Tukyu Kaganate (V-VIII centuries), the Kaganate of the Turks of Central Asia (552-745), the Uyghur Kaganate (740840), Uyghur state (until the 10th century). Frequent changes of power did not lead to any changes in the ethnic composition of the Turkic population, which then lived over a very large territory (in Central Asia, southern Siberia, Kazakhstan, Central Asia, East Turkestan, etc.): language, customs, the clothing, culture and other components of the Turkic ethnic groups continued to remain very similar.

As a rule, each khaganate consisted of certain ethnic groups, and each ethnic group was called by the name of the most privileged clan or tribe, although it included many other clans and tribes. For example, the Karluk ethnic group included, in addition to the Karluks themselves, Chigils (mainly in Maverannahr) and Yagma (in the territories from the Ili River basin to Kashgar). Before merging with the Karluks, the Yagma clan was part of the Tugiaguz (Tukkiz-Oguz) ethnic group. The same picture is observed within the Uyghur ethnic group. For example, from the Uyghur ethnic group not only modern Uyghurs were formed, but also Uzbeks, Kazakhs, Kyrgyz, etc. The same can be said about written monuments. For example, written monuments, conventionally called Uyghur, relate to the history of the formation of not only Uyghur, but also other modern Turkic languages, whose speakers were part of the ancient Uyghur ethnic association.

By the 11th century. In Central Asia, Kazakhstan and Western Siberia, large Turkic unions were formed: Oguzes in the south of Asia, Karluks and Uighurs in the east, Kipchaks in the west and northeast. Of course, this division is conditional, since each of them united dozens of small ethnic groups.

Depending on which clan found itself in the position of dominant in a given period, the state language was determined. As a rule, the language of the more privileged dominant clan or tribe begins to perform the functions of a written and national language, and the languages ​​of other clans, finding themselves in the position of dialects and patois, find use in spoken language.

During the period of dominance of any of the above states (Kangyuis, Kushans, Hephthalites, Karakhanids, Turkic Khaganate, etc.), the process of uniting various ethnic groups and bringing their languages ​​closer together was simultaneously underway. This led to the formation and spread of a national language, as well as its adoption by various ethnic groups.

Language of written monuments of the 6th and 10th centuries. characterized by relative homogeneity, although at this time, as already mentioned, there were frequent changes in power and dominance of one kind or another.

It was noted above that the dominant position in a particular kaganate (state) was, as a rule, occupied by one of the clans or an association of a group of clans. Thus, in the Kushan state, the dominant position was occupied by the Kushans and Kangyu (or Kangli), in the Western Turkic Khaganate the Karluks, Kangli, Turgesh, Chigils and Uighurs predominated (the main ones among them were the Karluks), and in the Karakhanid state the leading position was occupied by the Karluks, Chigils and Uyghurs 7.

M. Kashgarsky at one time distinguished between the Kipchak, Oguz and Uyghur languages. M. Kashgarsky considered Oghuz, as well as the languages ​​of the Yagma and Tukhsi clans, to be the most “elegant” language of that time. However, in his opinion, the most “correct” (i.e. literary) language is still the Khakani language (according to Barthold, this is the language of the Yagma tribe).

During the period of Mongol rule in Central Asia, the Mongolian language and its culture did not have a serious influence on the local Turkic languages ​​and their culture. On the contrary, some Mongol clans (Barlas, Jalairs, Kungrats, etc.) were assimilated by Turkic clans.

Thus, it is impossible to identify the modern Uzbek people only with the Uzbek tribes, which in the 14th century. were part of various states that existed for a long time in Central Asia.

The formation of the Uzbek people was based on many ancient ethnic groups of Central Asia: the Sakas, Massagets, Kanguians, Sogdians, Khorezmians and the Turkic clans and tribes that subsequently joined them. The process of formation of the Uzbek people began in the 11th century. and by the 14th century. was largely completed. Around this time, the ethnonym “Uzbek” was assigned to him. A small number of Uzbek tribes that came from Desht-i-Kipchak were only the last component of the Uzbek people 8.

The formation of the Uzbek language dates back to this time, the 14th century. The dialect composition of the modern language indicates a complex historical path, which was done by the Uzbek language, formed on the basis of the Samarkand-Bukhara, Tashkent, Fergana and Khorezm groups of dialects, reflecting the Karluk-Uighur, Oghuz and Kipchak linguistic features 9.

The main sources for determining the periodization of the history of the Uzbek language should include, first of all, written monuments written on the basis of the Turkic-runic, Uighur and Sogdian scripts, very similar to each other, although found over a vast territory in Mongolia, the oases of Turfan, Eastern Turkestan, Eastern Siberia, Central Asia, Kazakhstan, Altai, Khakassia, Tuva, Buryatia, and in 1979 in Hungary in the village of St. Nicholas. However, the languages ​​of the monuments written from the 12th to the 14th centuries have significant differences among themselves: in some, new Karluk-Uyghur features predominate, in others, Oguz, in others, Kipchak. Since the end of the 14th century. the linguistic features of written monuments again acquire a general character and differ little from each other. This, of course, reflects the role of socio-political factors of the time: the formation of a centralized state, as a rule, led to the unification of peoples and the convergence of their languages ​​(i.e., integration), and the fragmentation of the state led to the separation of peoples and the strengthening of the role of local dialects.

Classification and periodization proposed by individual researchers of the history of Turkic (and Uzbek) languages ​​(S. E. Malov, A. N. Samoilovich, A. N. Kononov, A. M. Shcherbak, N. A. Baskakov, A. K. Borovkov , A. von Haben, etc.), reflect one side of the issue.

Based on data from the history of the formation of the Uzbek people and analysis of the language of existing written monuments, the following five layers can be distinguished in the process of formation of the Uzbek language, each of which is characterized by its own phonetic, lexical and grammatical features:

1. The oldest Turkic language is a language that developed from ancient times before the formation of Turkic. Kaganate (i.e. until the 4th century). Written monuments characterizing the language of that time have not yet been discovered, which determines the conventionality of the time boundaries of its formation. The languages ​​of the ancient Sakas, Massagetae, Sogdians, Kanguys and other ethnic groups of that period are the fundamental basis for the formation of the modern Turkic languages ​​of Central Asia and Kazakhstan, including the modern Uzbek language.

2. Ancient Turkic language (VI-X centuries). Monuments of this period are written in Runic, Uyghur, Sogdian, Manichaean and Brahman (Brahmi) scripts. They were found on stones (for example, Orkhon-Yenisei inscriptions), leather or special paper (found in Turfan), etc. All monuments were created during the period of the Turkic and Uyghur Khaganates and the Kyrgyz state.

The language of the Orkhon-Yenisei inscriptions (VI-X centuries) is a fully formed literary written language with its own specific phonetic and grammatical features, with its own grammatical and stylistic norms. Therefore, there is every reason to believe that this language and its written form were formed not during the period of writing the monuments, but much earlier. This linguistic tradition, grammatical and stylistic norms can also be traced in the Turfan, Uyghur written monuments of the 8th-13th centuries, in the monuments of the Karakhanid period of the 10th-11th centuries. etc.10 Thus, the language of the Orkhon-Yenisei and Turfan texts, apparently, was common language for all Turkic ethnic groups.

3. Old Turkic language (XI-XIV centuries). During the period of its formation, Uzbek, Kazakh, Kyrgyz, Turkmen, Karakalpak and other Turkic languages ​​were formed. A. M. Shcherbak calls the Turkic language of this period, in contrast to the Oguz and Kipchak languages, the language of East Turkestan11.

Such famous works as “Kutadgu bilig”, “Divanu lugat-it-turk”, “Khibat-ul-hakayik”, “Tefsir”, “Oguz-name”, “Kisa-ul-anbiye” were written in the Old Turkic language. Written in a written literary language, they nevertheless carry within themselves the linguistic characteristics of various ethnic groups. For example, in Kutadgu bilig Karluk language features predominate, in Oguz-name Kipchak (to a lesser extent Kangly and Karluk) linguistic features. And the language Khibat-ul-khakayik is something between the Old Turkic and Old Uzbek languages.

4. Old Uzbek language (XIV–first half of the 19th century). At the beginning of the 14th century. The Uzbek language began to function independently. This can already be seen in the works of the poets Sakkaki, Lutfi, Durbek, written in the 14th century, in which the linguistic features of the Karluk-Uyghur groups that took part in the formation of the Uzbek people are increasingly evident. At the same time, in the language of “Mukhabbat-name” and “Taashshuk-name” we find some features of the Oghuz, and in “Khosrav va Shirin” of the Kipchak languages. In the language of the works of A. Navoi and M. Babur, such dialect elements are almost absent.

It is interesting to note that the works of Lutfi, Sak-kaki, Durbek and others, written in early periods functioning of the Old Uzbek language, more reflect the features of the living spoken language of the Uzbeks. This language is well understood by our contemporaries. Alisher Navoi in his works improved this literary language, enriching it with Arabic and Perso-Tajik language means. As a result, a unique written literary language was formed, which for several centuries served as a model and standard for writers and poets. Only in the XVII-XVIII centuries. in the works of Turda, Abdulgazy and Gulkhani, this literary written language was somewhat simplified and closer to the living spoken language.

5. New Uzbek language (from the second half of the 19th century). From the second half of the 19th century. A literary written language began to take shape, reflecting all the features of the living spoken Uzbek language. This process was expressed in a departure from the traditions of the old Uzbek literary language, in the rejection of archaic forms and constructions, in its rapprochement with the living common language. This process became especially intensified in the 1920s. of our century.

The phonetic structure of the modern Uzbek language is based on the Tashkent dialect, and the morphological structure is based on Fergana.

1 See: History of the Uzbek SSR. Tashkent, 1967. T. 4. P. 200.

2 Saman, the ancestor of the Samanids, a feudal lord from Balkhau, according to some sources, from the outskirts of Samarkand, was the governor of Caliph Tahir Ibn Husain, who in 821 was appointed governor of Khorasan, which included Transoxiana. In 888, Ismail from the Samanid dynasty became the sovereign ruler of Transoxiana and Eastern Iran.

3 History of the Uzbek SSR. T. 1. P. 346.

4 See: History of the Uzbek SSR. T. 1. P. 348. The same process took place in Khorezm, where the settlement of the nomadic Oguzes and Kipchaks, according to V.V. Bartold, “ended in the 13th century. almost complete Turkification of the Khorezm language that was here (p. 498).

5 The tribes of Sheybani, the grandson of Genghis Khan, were assimilated by local Turkic tribes; adopted their language and customs, and underwent changes in their ethnic composition. The Uzbek tribes were also not united; they were formed from various ancient tribes of the Sakas, Massagetae, Huns and other Turkic tribes and from the Mongols.

6 According to Ibn Muhanna, a special linguistic treatise was compiled in the Kangla language.

7 M. Kashgarsky confirms the localization of the Turkic tribes mentioned by ancient authors. See: Divan lugat-it-turk. Tashkent, 1960. T. 4. P. 64.

8 See: History of the Uzbek SSR. T. 1. P. 501507.

9 Reshetov V.V. Uzbek language. Tashkent, 1959. P. 2851; Shcherbak A. M. A grammatical sketch of Turkestan. M.; L., 1961.

10 See: Shcherbak A. M. Grammar of the Old Uzbek language, M.;

L., 1962. P. 222243.

11 Ibid. P. 10.

comments powered by

National composition and population of Uzbekistan

Uzbekistan is a multinational country. Here you live among dozens of nationalities and nationalities, among which they live in the Central Asian region: Uzbeks, Karakalpaks, Tajiks, Turkmens, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Ujguri, Dungani; Western and Eastern Slavs: Russians, Ukrainians, Belarusians, Poles; many Koreans, Iranians, Armenians, Georgians, Azerbaijanis, Tatars, Bashkirs, Germans, Jews, Lithuanians, Greeks, Turks and many other peoples represented their diaspora in Uzbekistan.

This ethnic diversity is due to various historical events.

Many representatives of the indigenous peoples of the Union republics in the USSR were evacuated to Uzbekistan during World War II (Russians, Tatars, Armenians, Belarusians, Ukrainians, Germans, Jews, etc.).

Representatives of individual nations were deported from their places permanent residence during the years of Stalinist repression (Koreans, Crimean Tatars, Czechs and others). And the world began to experience significant migration, especially for young people who participated in large-scale construction projects and projects to acquire and develop new lands that remained there in residential areas.

Uzbekistan is the most populous country in Central Asia, and its population ranks third among the CIS countries and is second only to Russia and Ukraine.

The population of Uzbekistan exceeds 31.5 million people.

Source of Uzbekistan

people (from January 1, 2016). Approximately 80% of the current Uzbek-Uzbek population and more than 10% are representatives of other Central Asian countries (4.5% - Tajikistan, 2.5% - Kazakhstan, 2% - Karakalpak, 1% - Kyrgyzstan and Turkmenistan, and others).

One of the largest ethnic minorities are Russians and others Slavic peoples (10%).

Uzbek people are of Turkish origin. In an anthropological sense, this is a question of people of mixed ethnogenesis with Caucasian and Mongoloid components. The formation of the Uzbek nation is closely connected with the ancient peoples of Central Asia - the Sogdians, Bactrians, Saka-Massagets and other tribes of the century settled Central Asian Mesopotamia and its neighboring areas.

However, the name - Uzbeks - was founded only at the end of the 15th-16th centuries. Today Uzbekistan is the main population of Uzbekistan. Many from Uzbekistan also live in the neighboring republics of Central Asia, Afghanistan, and CIS countries. According to recognition, modern Uzbeks are Sunni Muslims.

The official language of Uzbekistan and the language of interethnic communication is Uzbek. However, the majority of the population can speak Russian.

In some areas, for example, in Samarkand and Bukhara, the Tajik population speaks.

Due to the hot and dry climate of the predominantly mountainous and desert provinces of Uzbekistan, residents settle randomly in the territory.

The population is mainly concentrated in oases. In the desert areas of the country, population density is very low. For example, in Karakalpakstan and Navoi there are only 7-9 inhabitants per square kilometer of territory, and in the most densely populated region of Uzbekistan - Fergana - about 500 people per square kilometer.

This is the highest population density not only among the CIS countries, but also among the highest in the world.

The process of urbanization has led to an increase in the number of cities and an increase in the urban population in Uzbekistan. Today, more than 42% of the population lives in the cities of Uzbekistan.

The largest city in Uzbekistan is Tashkent, the capital of the country with a population of over 2 million people. There are many industrial enterprises in the republic in Tashkent; here is the administrative and business center of the country, offices of large companies, theaters, museums, parks and much more.

Other major cities of Uzbekistan are Samarkand, Bukhara, Khiva, Andijan, Fergana, Navoi, Almalyk, Angren, Zarafshan and Chirchik.

Uzbek families usually have many children, especially in rural areas: the average size in Uzbekistan is 5-6 people. In accordance with the centuries-old traditions and spirit of the Uzbek people, the family in Uzbekistan has been and remains one of the most important life priorities of modern society.

Features of the national Uzbek mentality You came to Uzbekistan due to fate or circumstances. On site you can appreciate how colorful this country is with a rich history. In order to avoid getting into trouble abroad, you need to know and take into account certain characteristics of national traditions and the character of Uzbeks. The foundations of society and family are determined by the rules of Islam. Every divine Uzbek must respect his basic commandments: the severity of the holy month of Ramadan, obligatory daily prayer, the ban on alcohol and cigarettes. At the same time, Uzbeks are not religious fanatics. They are characterized by religious tolerance. However, everyone follows a dress code. IN modern cities There are no strict prohibitions on clothing requirements, but it is better to cut off short wings or shorts, a deep open necklace. This especially needs to be remembered in rural areas, where they are more conservative. You can prove in Uzbekistan that everyone knows each other. This is partly true. Until now, the tradition of “Mahalla” has developed in the state. Firstly, it brings together close relatives and relatives. It often even includes a village and even surrounding areas. Mahala serves for mutual assistance. All members of this community are required to respect and observe the same equality. In modern Uzbekistan, the ancient hierarchy of society and family is still respected. For example, it is better to visually show it to the family. Members of the youth unconditionally obey the family leader and the elders in their old age. Uzbeks are noble people of the Turkish peoples, and Sartas are businessmen of Central Asia A special role is reserved for women. She is respected as the mother of her children and the wife of the head of the house, and at the same time she must obey and listen to her husband. It's better to call a meeting place for business partners in Chaikhona, where you can talk about personal things or things that appear over a cup of tea (not just one) in a simple democratic environment. Uzbekistan is famous for its tea tradition. It begins and ends with every celebration or conversation. Be careful! By the way, the owner of the house poured the tea, you can determine his attitude towards the one who came. You may hear from Uzbeks as a joke: do you respect or not? After you answer yes, you are surprised that your master poured very small tea. This is a feature of the national Uzbek tea party. It turned out that the dear guests of the tea house would contact the additional owner several times as little as possible. Conversely, unwanted guests, first fill the cup to the brim. You will be happy in any country if you respect and respect your traditions! Download dle 12.1 The Legend of Voluntary Slavery

Uzbekistan (21.1 million people, 2004) lives in Uzbekistan (2.556 million), Tajikistan (937,000), Kyrgyzstan (660,000), Kazakhstan (370,000), Turkmenistan (243,000).

IN Russian Federation there are 289,000 Uzbeks (2010). Total number There are about 25 million Uzbeks in the world. They speak Uzbek. They believe that Uzbeks are Sunni Muslims.

The ancient Uzbek ancestors were Sogty, Khorezmians, Bactrians, Ferghanas and the Sako-Massaget tribe. From the beginning of our era, the penetration of certain groups of Turkish-speaking tribes into Central Asia began. This process intensified from the second half of the 6th century, starting with the entry of Central Asia into the Turkish Kaganate.

During the Karachan state (11th-12th centuries), communication completed the main stage of ethnogenesis of the local residents who speak siding. The ethnonym "Uzbeks" appeared later, after the assimilation of the nomadic Deshitikpak Uzbeks, who arrived in Central Asia in the late 15th and 16th centuries under the leadership of Sheybani Khan.

Until the beginning of the 20th century, the process of consolidation of the Uzbek people was not completed: it consisted of three great ethnographic groups.

One of them is the settled population of oases, devoid of tribal divisions; The main activities were irrigation agriculture, crafts and trade. The second group is the descendants of Turkish tribes who have preserved half of their nomadic life (mainly engaged in sheep breeding) and tribal traditions (Karluka tribe, Barakla). Most of them were saved by the smug "Turk".

Who is older: Uzbeks or Tajiks

The appearance of some ethnographic groups of Uzbeks (especially in the inhabited part of Khorezm) is associated with medieval rags. The third group consisted of the descendants of the Uzbek tribes Deshtikipchak 15-16. Century. Most of the nomadic tribes of Uzbekistan named the names of peoples and tribes known in the Middle Ages (Kipchak, Naiman, Kangli, Hit, Kungrat, Mangyt).

The transition to established nomadic Uzbek tribes, which began in the 16th and 17th centuries, essentially ended at the beginning of the 20th century. Some of them joined the sedentary population of Tirkots, most of whom retained traces of nomadic life and tribal tradition, as well as features of their dialects.

Uzbeks were engaged in agriculture, but one of the main professions in animal husbandry and ladder is animal husbandry with the annual maintenance of livestock for feed.

In 1924, as a result of the demarcation of the national state, the Uzbek SSR was created in the USSR. At that time, the name Uzbek was created for its general population.

religion

Different religions had a great influence on the population living on the territory of modern Uzbekistan. Today, representatives of many religious communities live in Uzbekistan. Despite nationality and ethnicity, religion binds the population of cities and states; it is the driving force for the development of culture and science.

The majority of citizens of modern Uzbekistan are Sunni Muslims.

These include Uzbeks, Tajiks, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmens, Tatars, etc. Islam accounts for 88% of the total population.

Source of Uzbekistan

Orthodox Christians make up 9% of the population.

Religion in Uzbekistan

There are 16 religious denominations and 2,222 religious organizations officially registered in Uzbekistan. Of these: 2042 are Muslim organizations, 164 are Christian, 8 are Jewish, 6 are Baha’is, 1 is a Krishna organization and 1 is a Buddhist.

After the declaration of independence, the state passed a law "On freedom of conscience and religious organizations». Based on this law, adopted in 1991, a citizen of Uzbekistan, regardless of nationality, can fully practice their religion and pilgrimage.

The law provides that registered religious organizations have the same status, and the state does not interfere in their activities.

They have the opportunity to create their own buildings, places of worship, property and money.

In 1998 it was approved a new version Law on Freedom of Conscience and Religious Organization and made some adjustments regarding the registration and activities of religious organizations. Citizens of Uzbekistan who have received appropriate spiritual education have the right to lead the organization.

The law respects citizens' beliefs.

Every year in Uzbekistan they celebrate Kurban Khait, Easter, and Peisa. Kurbanhat and Ramadan Hayit are officially considered free in the country.

After the adoption of the Law on Religion, the Koran, Old and New Testaments were published in Uzbekistan. Old mosques and new ones have been restored. In the regions were opened Christian churches, Buddhist temple, synagogues, etc.

Religion

Various religions had a great influence on the population living on the territory of modern Uzbekistan. To this day, representatives of many religious communities coexist peacefully in Uzbekistan.

Regardless of nationality and ethnicity, religion connected the populations of cities and countries and was the engine of the development of culture and science.

The majority of citizens of modern Uzbekistan are Sunni Muslims.

The most beautiful Uzbeks (25 photos)

These include Uzbeks, Tajiks, Kazakhs, Kyrgyz, Turkmens, Tatars, etc. Islam is practiced by 88% of the total population. Orthodox Christians make up 9% of the population.

Religion in Uzbekistan

There are 16 confessions and 2,222 religious organizations officially registered in Uzbekistan. Of which: 2042 are Muslim organizations, 164 are Christian, 8 are Jewish, 6 are Baha’is, 1 Hare Krishna organization and 1 Buddhist.

After the declaration of independence, the state adopted a law “On freedom of conscience and religious organizations.” Based on this law, adopted in 1991, a citizen of Uzbekistan, regardless of nationality, can fully practice their religion, as well as make a pilgrimage.

The law stipulates that registered religious organizations have the same status; the State does not interfere in their activities.

They are given the opportunity to own buildings, religious objects, property and funds.

In 1998, a new version of the Law “On Freedom of Conscience and Religious Organizations” was approved, which included some adjustments regarding issues of registration and activities of religious organizations.

Citizens of the Republic of Uzbekistan who have received proper spiritual education have the right to lead organizations.

Legislation respects the religion of citizens.

Every year in Uzbekistan Kurban Khait, Easter, and Passover are celebrated. Kurban Khait and Ramadan Khait are officially considered public holidays in the country.

After the adoption of the law on religions, the Koran, Old and New Testaments were published in Uzbek.

Old mosques were restored, and new ones were erected. Christian temples, a Buddhist temple, synagogues, etc. were opened in regional cities.

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 were engaged in work available to them in order to earn their bread, and in their free time, as patriots of the history of their people, they were interested in scientific research, publications by various 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 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 century) 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, therefore a state called Uzbek did not appear in Maverannahr, and no fundamental changes took place in the system of local and state administration. 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! Refusing it is tantamount to refusing past history and the richest 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 site chosen us - 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 - how true are Askarov and Inamov themselves 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 the modern world, the Internet is 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 the educational role of 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 the best traditions of Soviet science, tries to give the issue a political context, declaring his enemies “pan-Turkists” and “pan-Turkists”;... and accusing constructivists of "calling for interethnic 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, then he has 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”, but a social conflict covered by 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 only by 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 according to ethnicity, race and language signs."

The main goal of the opponents is clear from the context. They state that “it is necessary to take facts from everyday life and their statement is enough; there is no need to scientifically analyze them on the basis of historical scientific methodology. The people themselves select what they need from them; There is no need to promote the education of youth 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 working with the Uzbek people since 1983, and have 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 is surprising that, in your opinion, A. Sagdullaev, who has not published a single scientific article on ethnogenesis, is a recognized expert on the ethnogenesis of the Uzbeks, but Askarov, the author of a number of scientific articles and two respectable monographs, is not! 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 with the minutes of the meeting with official letter The institute was transferred 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, a 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, amateurs of history, taking advantage of this, try to show themselves as a critic even of scientists with great 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. The Aryans are a social phenomenon in the development of the nomadic stage of life of the pastoral tribes of the Eurasian steppes, an initiative layer of society, an 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 The Huns are recognized as Turkic-speaking tribes 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, proto-Turkic tribes began to intensively penetrate from the northeastern regions of the Eurasian steppes 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're talking about 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" ("Hitoy tili katta hieroglyphlar lugati"), compiled on the basis of materials from Sima Qiang's book "Historical Monuments" ("Tarihiy Hotiralar"), it is written that the ancestors of the Huns live on the northwestern border of the North Chinese state "Shya". - “hu”, “di”, “rung”. The terms “hu”, “di”, “rung” in the local language 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”) by 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 the Great Khan, and in the north there is a strong "Hu". The historian of the Eastern Khan Dynasty Zheng Shuang writes that the "Hu" are contemporary with the Xiongnu", that is, the Xiongnu7. According to sinologist A. Khodjaev "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 “Uighurs”, and in Western historiography they are called “Turkic”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 of the ancient Chinese in the 3rd-2nd 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 common knowledge 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 writing” 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, in connection with the penetration of the Karasuk culture into the steppes of Southern Siberia from the Far East, elements of the Mongoloid type with the ancient Turkic language appeared in the Caucasoid 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 the lowland Tajiks have basically the same anthropological appearance, both of them belong to the “type of Central Asian interfluve” 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. Khodjayov, 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 that in recent years in the scientific works of Uzbek scientists such famous historical figures as 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 were canonized in official Uzbek historiography in Soviet times, and this once again shows that modern scientists of Uzbekistan were unable to make serious changes in this regard. Tomiris, Shirak , Spitamen, who are mythologized conditionally 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 one. the halo of a “patriot” and a “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 the sake of resources, not his 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 historical heritage dating back to the period before the 15th century. We do not deny the role of previous peoples, but we emphasize the decisive role of the Shaybanids in the formation 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 the ethnogenesis of local peoples... ethnic processes took place with a conscious purpose - for the formation of specific Uzbeks, Tajiks, Kazakhs, etc., who will no longer change, will not disappear, who - on. century." Further, continuing, they write: “Such a simplified understanding of ethnogenesis has not been taken seriously by anyone for a long time. 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 accidentally moved to the Zeravshan Valley three thousand years ago, as our direct ancestors? Do Americans consider the Indians their ancestors? Australians - the aborigines, Russians - the Scythians, the British - the Celts? Moreover, the contribution of the Sogdians, Khorezmians and other eastern Iranians to the ethnogenesis of the Uzbeks is by no means obvious." In this way they showed themselves as intriguers in the history of the ethnic group and exposed 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 at the beginning of the 18th century. from the side of the ancestors of the Uzbek Ming dynasty, Shakhri 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 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 the numerically and politically dominant force of 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 the descendants of the ancient Iranian peoples, and thus declare themselves 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 from neighboring countries, who usually have a nationalistic attitude towards the Uzbeks and try to belittle their role in the history of the Middle East. Asia. Thus, they want to get rid of the label “alien invaders” and show themselves as “local”, “indigenous” and “autochthonous”. historical science is not perceived as an argument in such disputes. The deeply nationalistic view that supposedly peoples are “indigenous” and “newcomers” and that only “indigenous” people have the right to statehood is already considered at best 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 follow, it’s their problem. Whoever claims multi-thousand-year statehood is doomed to shame in the face of the world community. ancient peoples are Yaghnobis - native speakers of the New Sogdian language. Even the Pashtuns and Pamir peoples are the remnants 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 - the pre-Kaganate Turkic languages, if they existed in our region, would be very different from modern Uzbek, Kazakh, Turkmen, etc.

“It was not the Uzbeks who became part of the Tajiks or Chagatais, 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 at the beginning of the 13th century, 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 people living in them remember the history of the migration of their ancestors. What does this mean? That the boasting of Uzbek historians about the three-thousand-year history of Samarkand is completely inappropriate, because this is actually a city built 200 years ago. , inhabited by people from various parts of the region who 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, curious culture. Yes, Afrosiyab and Tuprakkala are outstanding monuments of antiquity, but, with all due respect, they are in terms of cultural influence and spiritual significance. cannot compare with the masterpieces of Samarkand, Khiva and Bukhara, and, unlike them, 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? Numerous manuscripts and fragments that have survived to this day, for all their curiosity, are very far from the masterpieces of the Uyghur Navoi, Barlas Bedil, Yuz Agehi, Minga 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 waged an active struggle 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, vague and not really. famous story which did not affect us in any way?

(d. 1188) in his Book of Edification; describing the events that took place in Iran under the Seljukids, the author notes that one of the leaders of the troops of the ruler of Hamadan Bursuk in - gg. was the “emir of the troops” Uzbek - the ruler of Mosul.

According to Rashid ad Din, the last representative of the Ildegizid dynasty who ruled in Tabriz was named Uzbek Muzaffar (—).

Uzbek Khan, namely in the 60s of the 14th century, the ethnonym “Uzbek” became a collective name for the entire Turkic-Mongolian population of eastern Desht-i-Kipchak.

The Uzbek historian Ermatov M. suggested that the word Uzbek was derived from the name of the Turkic tribe Uzes.

By the end of the 14th century, on the territory of eastern Desht-i-Kipchak, an alliance of nomadic Mongol-Turkic tribes adhering to the foundations of Uzbek Khan, nicknamed “Uzbeks” for this, was formed. It was first mentioned in Persian sources in connection with the description of the struggle between Urus Khan (-) and his opponent Tokhtamysh.

Much later than the end of the reign of Uzbek Khan, namely in the 60s of the 14th century, the ethnonym “Uzbek” became a collective name for the entire Turkic-Mongolian population of eastern Dasht-i-Kipchak.

• According to the scientist G.V. Vernadsky, the term Uzbek was one of the self-names of “free people”. He suggests that the term Uzbeks was used as a self-name for united “free people” of various occupations, languages, faiths and origins. In his work “Mongols and Rus'” he wrote: “according to Paul Pelio, the name Uzbek (Özbäg) means “master of oneself” (maître de sa personne), that is, “free man.” Uzbek as a name for a nation would then mean “nation of free people” "The same opinion is shared by P.S. Savelyev, who wrote about the Bukhara Uzbeks in the 1830s, who believed that the name Uzbek means “his own master.”
  Russian researcher N. Khanykov (Description of the Bukhara Khanate. St. Petersburg, 1843.) notes that the residents of Bukhara were proud of their belonging to the “Uzbek people.” The same author uses the term “Uzbekistan” in relation to the entire territory of the Bukhara Emirate and adjacent territories subject to the Uzbek rulers. To this we can add that no one imposed this ethnonym on the Uzbeks living in Xinjiang, Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Kazakhstan and other states of Central Asia, as well as in countries further afield, but nevertheless, guided by their self-awareness, they consider themselves specifically by the Uzbeks, considering this ethnonym to be synonymous with the word “Turkistanlyk”, and sometimes “Bukharalyk”.

  None of the other Turkic languages ​​is as close to the language of Alisher Navoi and Babur as Uzbek, which, therefore, is the only successor of the Chagatai-Turkic language. In this regard, the position of the Jadids, who in Soviet times were accused of preaching pan-Turkism, also being called pan-Islamists, deserves attention again.

  The Jadids, in contrast to the national communists and Bolsheviks, in our opinion, were at that time the only political force that expressed the true interests of the local population of Central Asia (both Turkic-speaking and Persian-speaking) and advocated the formation of a united Turkestan, under which they meant both the area of ​​distribution of the Chagatai-Turkic language and the territory of the peoples of this region.

  Thus, the Jadids advocated the formation of a state whose national symbols would correspond, firstly, to historical realities, and secondly, to the interests and self-awareness of all layers of Turkestan society. Language, as is known, is one of the main criteria in determining the national identity of a particular people.

  The modern Uzbek language, along with the closely related ancient Uyghur, is one of the languages ​​that find the closest analogies and correspondences in the language of Mahmud Kashgari, Yusuf Balasaguni and the Turkic-language works of the 16th - 13th centuries. The basis of this language, as well as Uyghur, is the Karluk dialect of the Turkic language, which is one of the most ancient written Turkic languages ​​and was used as a literary language not only by the settled Turkic population of Central Asia, but also by nomads.

  The available complex of historical data allows us to assert that the formation of the closely related peoples of the Uzbeks and Uyghurs, who are carriers of the most ancient forms of the literary Turkic language and continuers of the settled agricultural traditions of the ancient Turks, was basically completed in the 11th century, when the Karluk-Turkic language acquired the status of the state language Karakhanid Khaganate, and the political boundaries of the domination of the Karluk Turks, who considered themselves the descendants of the ancient Turks of Central Asia, were restored within the boundaries of historical Turkestan, which meant the entire territory of Central Asia.

  The Dashti-Kipchak Uzbeks also adopted this language after they became familiar with the ancient and rich culture of the Turks of Central Asia. Political unification The Uzbeks themselves were formed from more than 90 clans belonging to the most diverse Turkic tribes and peoples, not to mention other earlier and later admixtures. Therefore, their anthropological type was completely different, which contributed to the rapid assimilation of most of them with the local Turkic-speaking population of Central Asia. (See: Encyclopedic Dictionary / ed. F.A. Brockhaus and I.A. Efron. Volume XXXIV. St. Petersburg, 1902. P. 608 - 609), as a result of which their unification within the framework of a new state formation was the dictate of the time ( Moreover, such centralized state formations existed in Central Asia in the relatively not so distant past - we mean the states of the Shaibanids and Ashtarkhanids). The only question was which of the proposed names should be given to this association: Turkestan or Uzbekistan? In the history of the Turkic peoples, recorded in the written tradition of other peoples, the names of many Turkic peoples were very often associated with political entities in which the transfer of the ethnonym of the dominant tribe or people to all other tribes and peoples subject to their authority was widely practiced.

  For example, the ethnonym Turk or Turk was originally the self-name of a separate tribe, and in VI. V. after the formation of the Turkic Kaganate, it began to apply to all tribes and peoples who spoke closely related languages. In the same way, after the formation of the Shaybanid state, in the European tradition, the ethnonym Uzbek began to spread to other Turkic and non-Turkic peoples of Central Asia.

  The Bolsheviks, on the one hand, fearing the spread of pan-Turkist sentiments and the threat of strengthening the idea of ​​a united Turkestan, and on the other, trying to create discord between representatives of different peoples who had previously lived as part of the Uzbek states, chose the second. In this regard, it should be recalled that the Jadids considered the ethnonym Uzbek as a synonym for the ethnonym Turk.

  It seems to us that this understanding of historical terminology is not without foundation and is confirmed by data from individual sources. A clear example of this is geographic map Central Asia, compiled in 1735 by the Dutch cartographer A. Maas, in which the entire territory of Central Asia, known in written sources of earlier times as "Turkestan", is designated under the name "Uzbek". Thus, the word “Uzbek” really acts as a synonym and successor to the names “Turk” and “Turkestan”, to which there are direct indications from sources.

  Thus, Mahmud ibn Wali (XVII century) writes that “The country of Turkestan, both in ancient times and subsequently, was a yurt and the habitat of the descendants of Tur ibn Yafas..., the people of this country (i.e. Turan and Turkestan in the meaning Central Asia) in each era had a special name and nickname. Thus, from the time of Tur ibn Yafas until the appearance of Mogul Khan, the inhabitants of this country were called Turks. After Mogul Khan came to power, the name Mogul was attached to all the tribes that lived in this country. After the raising of the sovereign banner of Uzbek Khan in the first half of the 14th century, to this day the inhabitants of this country are called Uzbeks. However, in distant countries, as before, all inhabitants of Turan are called Turks (N. Lubin, W. Fierman, Uzbeks, Encyclopedia of. World Cultures, volume VI, Russia and Eurasia/China, Boston, Massachusetts: G.K. Hail & Co., 1994, p.

  In the Encyclopedia of World Culture recently published in the USA, the authors of which can hardly be accused of biased opinions, the Uzbeks are characterized precisely as the descendants of the ancient Turks of Central Asia, and the toponym “Uzbekistan” is considered as the legal successor of the historical name of the entire Central Asian region - “Turkestan”.

  In the light of these data, it seems to us that when studying the issues of ethnogenesis and ethnic history of the Uzbek people, one should, first of all, proceed from the fact that the initial basis of its ethnogenesis is the local autochthonous settled-agricultural Turkic-speaking substrate of Central Asia, which subsequently repeatedly included includes both neighboring and alien Persian-speaking and Turkic-speaking ethnic components. Secondly, the real self-name of the Uzbeks, in our opinion, should be considered as a synonym and legal successor of the word “Turk”, since both of these terms have a collective meaning and their origin is associated with the emergence of specific state entities- in one case the Turkic Kaganate, and in the other - the Shaybanid state.

  Consequently, the toponym “Uzbekistan”, regardless of its current borders, should be considered as a synonym and legal successor ancient name Central Asia "Turkestan" (It should be especially emphasized that on the general map of Asia in medieval times, exhibited at the National Museum of Iranian History in Tehran, the territory between the rivers Jayhun (Amu Darya) and Saihun (Syr Darya), i.e. the territory of modern Uzbekistan, is indicated precisely called "Turkestan". This is of great importance for us, since this map reflects the official position of Iran on certain issues of history).

  Here, however, a caveat should be made that the term “Turkestan” should be understood in at least two senses - narrow and broad. If the conditional borders of “Turkestan” in the narrow sense (in the understanding of the Jadids) correspond to the territory of the Central Asian interfluve, then “Turkestan” in the broad sense includes the entire territory of Central Asia (including Southern Kazakhstan, Semirechye, Northern Afghanistan and North-Eastern Khorasan), and even more in a broader sense - all territories inhabited by Turkic-speaking peoples (including Eastern Turkestan, part of Western Siberia, the Volga region, the Urals, Altai, etc.).

  The name “Uzbekistan” should be considered precisely as a synonym and successor to the ancient name “Turkestan”, recorded in written sources, primarily because the Central Asian interfluve, firstly, is one of the areas of original habitation of Turkic-speaking peoples in ancient times, and -secondly, the cradle of the settled agricultural and urban culture of the ancient Turks.

  It is traditionally believed that there are 92 clans and tribes of nomadic Uzbeks

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, the descendant of Uzbek Khan, the grandson of Abul Khair, Sheybani Khan, united various Turkic tribes around himself and descended from the northern coast of the Aral Sea and the lower reaches of the Syr Darya to the countries of Transoxania 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 scientific literature it is sometimes 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 maintain a dominant position over others over the last three centuries nationalities. 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, engaging primarily in agriculture and having perfectly mastered 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 has an effect: it is the custom of a sedentary Uzbek to pitch a felt tent in the yard of his surrounded high walls manor and often spend the winter there.

And in social customs, the Uzbeks retained many remnants from old life 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 relationships, 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 are 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.