Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-gtxcr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T19:04:35.311Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Bombogor Inscription: Tombstone of a Turkic Qunčuy (“Princess”)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 November 2015

HATICE ŞIRIN
HATICE ŞIRIN*
Affiliation:
Ege University, Faculty of Letters, Depatment of Turkish Language and Literature, Bornova-Izmir/TURKEY, hatice.sirin.user@ege.edu.tr, hatice101@yahoo.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Turkic Runic inscriptions, discovered in Mongolia during the second half of the 20th century and especially in the last decade, are remarkable. The Bombogor, consisting of five-lines, is one of them. This article is an attempt to re-read the mentioned inscription which was first published by Ts. Battulga. According to my proposed reading, the text was written on a tombstone which was erected in honour of a Turkish qunčuy (“princess”) who might have been married into the Karluk tribe.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society , Volume 26 , Issue 3 , July 2016 , pp. 365 - 373
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Asiatic Society 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alyılmaz, C., “Moğolistan’da Eski Türk Kültür ve Medeniyetine Ait Bazı Eserler ve Bulundukları Yerler”, Atatürk Üniversitesi Türkiyat Araştırmaları Enstitüsü Dergisi, 21, (Erzurum, 2003), pp. 181–199.Google Scholar
Battulga, Ts., Mongolın Runi Biçgiin Dursgaluud. Corpus Scriptorum, (Ulaanbaatar, 2005).Google Scholar
Battulga, Ts., “Bömbögöriyn Biçees”, Mongol Sudlal, XXVI, (Ulaanbaatar, 2006) pp. 26–30.Google Scholar
Clauson, Sir G., An Etymological Dictionary of Pre-Thirteenth-Century Turkish (Oxford, 1972).Google Scholar
Divanü Lûgat-it-Türk I-IV , translated by B. Atalay, (Ankara, 1998–1999).Google Scholar
Erdal, M., A Grammar of Old Turkic, (Leiden, 2004).Google Scholar
Golden, P. B., Türk Halkları Tarihine Giriş, translated by O. Karatay, (Ankara, 2002).Google Scholar
Kafesoğlu, İ., Türk Milli Kültürü, (İstanbul, 1995).Google Scholar
Kempf, B., “Old-Turkic Runiform Inscriptions in Mongolia: An Overview”, in Turkic Languages 8, (Wiesbaden, 2004), pp. 41–51.Google Scholar
Klimkeit, H. J., “Das Weiterleben manichäischer Erzählstoffe im Islam”, in Studia Manichaica. IV. Internationaler Kongreß zum Manichäismus, Berlin, 14.– 18. Juli 1997, (ed.) Emmerick, R. E., Sundermann, W., Zieme, P., (Berlin, 2000), pp. 366–373.Google Scholar
Mert, O., “Öngöt Mezar Külliyesi ve Külliyede Bulunan Damgalar”, Atatürk Üniversitesi Türkiyat Araştırmaları Enstitüsü Dergisi, 36, (Erzurum, 2008), pp. 281–305.Google Scholar
Nadeljaev, V. M., “Drevnetjurkskaja nadpis’ Hovd-somona MNR”, in Bronzovıj i jeleznıj vek Sibirii, (Novosibirsk, 1974), pp. 136–166.Google Scholar
Nadeljaev, V. M. et al. red, Drevnetjurkskij slovar’, (Leningrad, 1969).Google Scholar
Özertural, Z., Der uigurische Manichäismus. Neubearbeitung von Texten aus Manichaica I und III von Albert v. Le Coq, (Wiesbaden, 2008).Google Scholar
Rybatzki, V., “Titles of Türk and Uigur Rulers in the Old Turkic Inscriptions”, Central Asiatic Journal, Vol. 44/2, (Wiesbaden, 2000), pp. 205–292.Google Scholar
Rybatzki, V., Die Personennamen und Titel der mittelmongolischen Dokumente, Eine lexikalische Untersuchung, (Helsinki, 2006).Google Scholar
Sertkaya, O. F., “Göktürk (Runik) Harfli Yazıtların Envanter, Alfabe ve Bibliyografya Problemleri Üzerine”, Dil Araştırmaları, 2, (Ankara, 2008), pp. 7–34.Google Scholar
Suzuki, K., “Newly Found Turkic Inscription from Bömbögör: On the Conflict for the Hegemony in Mongolia from the Qarluqs’ Viewpoint”, in New Trends in Studies on Liao, Jin and Xi-Xia (3), (eds) Arakawa, S., Takai, Y., Watanabe, K., (Tokyo, 2010), pp. 1–30.Google Scholar
User, H. Şirin, Köktürk ve Ötüken Uygur Kağanlığı Yazıtları. Söz Varlığı İncelemesi, (Konya, 2009).Google Scholar
Taşağıl, A., Göktürkler III, (Ankara, 2004).Google Scholar
Tezcan, S., “Etimoloji Önerileri” in III. Uluslararası Türkiyat Araştırmaları Sempozyumu, 26–29 Mayıs 2010, Bildiriler Kitabı, (Ankara, 2010), pp. 819–829.Google Scholar
Van Tongerloo, A., “A Nobleman in Trouble or the Consequences of Drunkenness”, in Literarische Stoffe und ihre Gestaltung in mitteliranischer Zeit. Kolloquium anlässlich des 70. Geburtstages von Werner Sundermann, (ed.) Durkin-Meisterernst, D., Reck, C.; Weber, D., (Wiesbaden, 2009), pp. 287–30.Google Scholar
Tseveendorj, D., Batbold, N., Enhtör, A., Bazargür, D. (2004): Govi-altay, Bayanhöngör aymgiyn zarim nutagt hiysennarheologiyiyn sudalgaa (ur’dçilsan ür düngees). Arheologiyn sudalgaa, Tomus II (XXII), Fasc. 1–23, Ulaanbaatar, pp. 5–17.Google Scholar
Zieme, P., (2008): Abschied vom alttürkischen Witwenkleid. Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, Volume 61 (3), pp. 359–364.Google Scholar