A Newly Found Old Turkic Inscription from Yamaan Us

Abstract

It was in 2015 that the new Old Türkic runic inscription was found at the territory Mongolian People’s Republic, on Khanan Khad rock (Hovd aimag, Altai somon), as a result of the work of Buyantsk Russian-Mongolian archaeological expedition. Archaeologists have discovered and documented two textual fragments in Old Turkic runic characters. In 2016 drawings and photographs of the text were published. First Old Turkic Inscription was found in the Khanan Khad rock in 1973 by Mongolian turkologist M. Shinekhüü and then it was published and translated by Soviet scientists E. R. Tenishev and E. A. Novgorodova in 1983. Since then, the published text had been reread by some scholars who suggested to see here not one but two or even three different inscriptions. In 2008, Mongolian archaeologists found new three inscriptions in the area, later published in an attempt to read and translate. In all the catalogues in recent publications one can find six inscriptions from the Yaman Us area. Thus, the inscription found by Russian and Mongolian archaeologists in 2015 should be viewed as the seventh inscription from the area. Purpose . To translate the text on the newly found inscription and to offer an interpretation based on the material published by Russian and Mongolian archaeologists. Results . The clear representation of characters of Old Turkic writing makes it possible to identify them and, thereafter, read the text without difficulty. The two fragments found were identified by the author as a single line of text, that was the following (1) qonoq ( a ) rč ( ï ) γ ( a ) t ( ï ) p ( a ) γ ( ï ) r ( ï ) γ r¹ ? (2) t ( a ) rq ( ï ) n ču a? translated as “(1) Throwing a saddle-bag of a guest, (2) let’s remove a weight!”. Conclusion . The content of the inscription gives the reason to view the text as an indirect evidence of existence of a certain community located at the territory of the Khanan Khad rock. Naturally, it may be either a greeting, parting words or a warning. But it is impossible, according to the author, to date the inscription and interpret it in wide historical context because of lapidarity of inscriptions as a whole. The most interesting material is presented by tamga sign attested. The important fact is of the identity of the tamga sign of the inscription examined with another one attested near inscriptions found in the area. Any conclusion regarding dating based on the attempts of paleographical analysis is unsatisfactory because the relations between the various forms of runic characters really are unclear. For example, there are, at least, two different points of view on the relationship of various forms of signs of Old Turkic Writing, belonging to I. V. Kormushin and I. L. Kyzlasov, which contradict each other. But the lexicon of the texts presents interesting material to serve as an argument for those who date the inscriptions as belonging to relatively later times. So, the lexeme t² MČn², found in the firstly-discovered Yamaan Us inscription, may be read as t ( ä ) mč ( i ) n or t ( ä ) m ( i ) č ( i ) n ; it is a personal name and its etymology cannot be traced on the basis of Turkic lexical material.