The article is devoted to the study of the composition of the ancient Turkic community. The main focus is on the analysis of social terminology found in the monuments of ancient Turkic runic writing. The author comes to the conclusion that, despite the fact that the primary level of the ancient Turkic community consisted of units resembling family-related groups, the nature of intra-communal relations was not related by blood, but by territorial basis. Thus, the ancient Turkic community did not differ from the typical community of nomadic societies.

Key words: Turks, Kyrkyzy, community, monuments of ancient Turkic runic writing.

The community as an economic and social unit among the ancient Turks has not yet become the object of special research. Both the economic functions and the composition of the ancient Turkic community remain undisclosed. Among nomads, the minimal community is represented by unstable family-related groups formed from several, usually related or unrelated, but united on the basis of common interests of mutual assistance and labor cooperation of families [Masanov, 1995, p.134-141; Khazanov, 2002, p. 229, 238, 244].

To study the ancient Turkic community, we have information about the Orkhon and Yenisei Turks, which should be used cautiously, since if the former are known to have been nomads, then the economic and cultural type of the latter (Kyrkyz) is unknown. it cannot yet be considered to be accurately established (see, for example, [Khudyakov, 1984]).

Let us turn to a fragment from Chinese sources describing the funeral of a Turk. Bichurin's translation of a fragment from " Xin Tang Shu "states that the funeral of a Turk is attended by his" sons, grandsons and relatives of both sexes " (Bichurin, 1950, p.230). Translated by S. Julien, "Wei shu" means " ses fils, ses neveux, ses parents des deux sexes "("his sons, his grandsons, his parents of both sexes") [Julien, 1864, p. 333], in "Sui shu" - "ses parents et ses proches" ("his parents and relatives") [Julien, 1864, p. 352]. E. H. Parker's translations are most accurate: in "Zhou Shu" - "descendants and various relatives and dependants of both sexes" ("descendants and various relatives and subordinates of both sexes") [Parker, 1899, p. 122], in "Bei shi" - " descendants, relatives and dependants of both sexes"("descendants, relatives and subordinates of both sexes") [Parker, 1900, p. 166], in "Sui Shu" - "familiares (), relatives and dependants" ("family members, relatives and subordinates") [Parker, 1900, p. 1]. 171; see also: Parker, 1900, p. 173, n. 124]. Liu Maotsai, respectively "Alle Kinder und Kindeskinder, männliche und weibliche Verwandte" ("all children and children of children, male and female relatives") [Liu Maotsai, 1958, p. 9], "all children and children of children, male and female relatives of the deceased" ("Zhou shu") [Liu Maotsai, 2002, p. 21], " Seine familienangehärigen und Verwandten "("his family members and relatives") [Liu Maotsai, 1958, p. 42]," his family members and relatives "("Sui shu") [Liu Maocai, 2002, p. 23]. A. Tashagil translated the corresponding passage in "Tun dian": "ogullari, torunlari bütün akrabalari kadin-erkek hepsi" ("sons, grandsons [and] all relatives of men and women") [Taşağil, 2003, p. 98], in " Tse- fu yuan-gui": "ogullari torunlari ve bütün akrabalari kadin-erkek hepsi" ("sons, grandsons and all relatives of men and women") [Taşağil, 2003, p. 112].

page 43
In fact, in the original text of Zhou Shu it is written: ji sun ji zhu qin shu nan niu ge (Zhou shu, ts. 50, p. 5a), i.e. letters, "[from] children, grandchildren and various related categories of men and women each", in Sui Shu: jia ren jin shu do (ts. 84, p. 2b) - "family members [and] various relatives [by blood] are many". I. Echedi believed that in the text "Zhou shu" the character ji separates family members (extended) and relatives, which seems to be confirmed by the text "Sui Shu" where the combination jia ren jin shu , according to the researcher, referred to "the household's family members "(members of one family household) [Ecsedy, 1977, p. 11]. It is most likely that the Chinese source outlines precisely the circle of members of one family-related group (Abramzon, 1973, p. 297).

In this regard, line 3 of the monument with the Uyuk-Turan River is interesting: qanïm tölbäri qara bodun külüg qadašïm esizim ičičim er üküš er oylan er küdägülärim qïz kelinlärim bökmädim (E-3, 6) 1, where you should pay attention to the combination of oylan er küdägülärim qïz kelinlärim. This construction is translated by all scientists differently. Thus, in V. V. Radlov's "... den Soldaten (Jünglingen), Helden, meinen Schweigersöhnen, Töchtern und Schweigertöchtern " ("...soldiers (young men), heroes, my sons-in-law, daughters, and daughters-in-law") (cit. по: [Vámbéry, 1898, S. 92]), у Х. Н. Оркуна - "...er; genç adamlar, güveğilerim kiz (ve ?) gelinlerim... " ("...men; young people, my sons-in-law, daughters (and?) daughters-in-law...") [Orkun, 1994, p. 450], in A. N. Bernshtam - "... all men, sons and sons-in-law, daughters-in-law... " [Bernshtam, 1946, p. 155], at S. E. Malov -"...my folk heroes, many husbands, soldiers and my sons-in-law, my young girls... "[Malov, 1952, p. 19], in I. V. Kormushin - "... young soldiers, my sons-in-law, my daughters-in-law... " [Kormushin, 1997, p. 193; Kormushin, 2008, p. 94]. I tried to see plural affixes in place of the lexeme eg [Vámbéry, 1898, p. 92]. According to A. N. Kononov, in combination wither oylan the first lexeme is a special word denoting gender, so the whole combination should be translated "male offspring" [Kononov, 1980, p. 163], and regarding er küdägülärim qïz kelinlärim, he suggested that eg and qïz in this case can play the role of determinants [Kononov, 1980, p. 145, note 4]. In the original, each lexeme is separated by a word separator: [Orkun, 1994, p. 450; Malov, 1952, p. 19; Vasiliev, 1983, p. 15 (transliteration), 59 (drawing), 84 (photography); Kormushin, 1997, p.192; Kormushin, 2008, p. 93]. There is no eg token before oylan, it refers to the previous construction, just as the eg following oylan does not refer to the next küdägülärim. A better translation would be: "... young soldiers, [my] sons-in-law, daughters and [my] daughters-in-law...".

Before the categories listed here are qanïm tölbäri qara bodun külüg qadašïm esizim ičičim er ükü šer, i.e. khan, ordinary tölbäri people, famous persons of the qadaš-ym category, then uncles and older brothers, numerous warriors. The esiz-im service afterlog separates two groups of objects that the memorialist says goodbye to (i.e., the one in whose memory the monument was created): the first group includes those who are above or equal to him in status (khan, people, famous qadas), and the second group includes relatives.

The term qadaš is not found in Orkhon monuments, although it is recorded in later Uyghur texts. Mahmud Kashgarli's qaδaš 'kardeş gibi yakin olan hisim' ('like a brother, close relative') [Divanü..., 1985, I, s. 369], 'close relative' [Mahmud al-Kashgari, 2005, p. 351], 'a close relative, like a brother' [Mahmud al-Kashgari, 2010, p.308], similar form in "Kutadgu bilig" Ancient Turkic Dictionary, 1969, p. 404]. In most modern Turkic languages, it is represented in zna-

1 For the word tölbäri , see [Potapov, 1972]. U. T. Tekin groundlessly Töl Böri [Tekin, 2006, p. 232]. Compare böri in other Yenisei (E-11,6; E-12, 1; E-98, 4) and Orkhon texts (KTb, 12 = BK, X, 11).

page 44
chenii 'brother' [Radlov, 1899, stb. 202]. Kh. N.Orkun translated it as 'hisim, akraba' ('kindred, relative') [Orkun, 1994, s. 832]. According to A. N. Bernshtam, this is the name given to members of the community (Bernshtam, 1946, p. 111). He literally translated the term as 'accomplice', raising it to qat 'side, side' and aš 'comrades', and believed that these were dependent people of the protestant [Bernstam, 1946, p. 119, 126, 155, 160]. A. von Gaben translated it as ' Verwandter durch Heirat, Freund, Bruder ' ('relative by marriage, friend, brother') [Gabain, 1950, p. 325, 63], S.E. Malov-as 'comrade, native' [Malov, 1951, p. 409]. A. M. Shcherbak translated it as 'relative, relative, representative of the same family' [Shcherbak, 1964, p. 146], later based on the use of the term in modern Turkic languages - 'relative, brother' [Shcherbak, 1997, p.36]. In the" Old Turkic Dictionary "I. V. Kormushin translated this term in the Yenisei texts as "kinsman, relative, native, native", in later monuments- "brother" [Old Turkic Dictionary, 1969, p. 401]. J. Clawson gives the meaning of 'member of the same family, kinsman', adding that "sometimes used more vaguely for' neighbor, comrade, friend '" ("sometimes used more widely for ' neighbor, comrade, friend' "), for the Yenisei monuments, he suggests the interpretation of ' kinsfolk, fellow, clansmen '('relatives, accomplices, clan members') [Clauson, 1972, p. 607]. W. Johansen supports the second meaning [Johansen, 1994, p. 75]. A. N. Kononov translated qadaš as 'relative' [Kononov, 1980, p. 87]. T. Tekin translates ' akraba, arkadaş, yoldaş ('relative, friend, associate') [Tekin, 2003, p. 245]. I. L. Kyzlasov believes that this term was used to refer to each other as fellow soldiers, representatives of the same generation [Kyzlasov, 1994, p. 245]. 85-86]. In recent works, I. V. Kormushin cautiously points out that qada š, apparently, originally denoted relatives of both sexes from the father's family [Kormushin, 1997, p.194, 195]. Some authors refer the term to the lexeme *qa - 'family' < kit. jia id. [Gabain, 1950, p. 63; Kononov, 1980, p. 99, note 68; Tekin, 2003, p. 81], others suggest etymologizing from qat [Radloff, 1897, p. 54-55; Doerfer, 1967, S. 566] 2. Cf. later qa qadaš 'relatives' [Old Turkic Dictionary, 1969, p. 399; Clauson, 1972, p. 578], which seems to be represented in the Yenisei inscriptions only once in the Kyzyl-Chira monument in the conjugated form qayadaš-ym (E-43, 1) 'relative, kinsman' [Orkun, 1994, p. 489, 490; Malov, 1952, p. 73, 74; Drevnetyurkskiy slovar', 1969, p. 405; Tekin, 2003, p. 245; Kormushin, 2008, p. 132, 133]. In general, the term qadaš is used in a wide variety of situations. Along with him in the Yenisei inscriptions appear older and younger relatives, eči and ini, respectively. Beg calls his EG's qadaš-ym (E-10, 2).Another memorialist pronounces külüg qadaš-ym '[my] glorious comrades' (E-3, 6). In the Cha-Hol monument, X is mentioned in the case form bäg-imkä qadaš-ymqa '[my] beg [and] [my] comrades' (E-22, 2). In the Bai-Bulun II monument, jüz qadaš-yma 'one hundred [my] comrades' (E-49, 1), in the Tuva text tört qadaš- ym 'four [my] comrades' (E-50, 3). In the Begre monument, the enumeration goes first to qadaš-ym, then to qunčuj (E-11, 1), in the monument to D. The above is a combination of qunčuj-ym qadaš-ym (E-25, 1). H. N. Orkun translated 'prensesim, arkadaş im ' ('my princess, my comrade') [Orkun, 1994, p. 514], S. E. Malov translated 'with my princesses and my comrades' [Malov, 1952, p. 46]. According to I. V. Kormushin, the expression should be translated as 'my spouses, my associates' [Kormushin, 1997, p. 38]. In the Altyn-KльL II monument, the terms are written in reverse: qadaš - yma qunčuj-yma (E-29, 5). The last combination is X. N. Orkun translated 'arkadaşimdan, prensesim-den' ('[from] my comrades, [from] my princesses') [Orkun, 1994, s. 514], S. E. Malov 'from

2 Compare V. V. Radlov's version of kadash 'die gemeinsame Gefährte' < kada + äš [Radloff, 1897, S. 54]. The etymology of Mahmud Kashgarli from qa 'vessel' + affl. - daš, where the vessel figuratively implies the mother's womb, seems to be more folk [ Divanyu ... 1985, I, s. 407; Mahmud al-Kashgari, 2005, p. 383; Mahmud al-Qashgarru. 2010, p. 335].

page 45
friends (better than female friends?) and princesses '[Malov, 1952, p. 56], S. G. Klyashtorny translates as' princess friends ' [Klyashtorny, 1976, p.262; Klyashtorny, 2006, p. 337]. I. V. Kormushin does not read the first word [Kormushin, 1997, p. 71]. The determinative quj-da that precedes a combination in the text indicates that it is not a combination of homogeneous terms, but is a case of a prepositional adjacent definition (Kononov, 1980, p.214).

There are also interesting expressions eš-ym qadaš-ym (E-18, 4) and eš-ym qadaš-larïm (E-16, 2), the latter of which represents the only case of using the term qadas in the plural, and eš in both - 'friend, friend, associate' [Ancient- Turkic dictionary, 1969, p. 184-185; Clauson, 1972, p. 253-254]. Perhaps the same term is mentioned in the thirteenth inscription of the Talas River: i š qulï(a) siz özüm (a) " O his companions and servants! O you, my blood ones! " (Tal-13, 2) [Dzhumagulov, 1982, p. 20]. Mahmud Kashgarli's meaning here is 'eş, arkadaş' ('friend, comrade') [Divanü... 1985, I, s. 61], 'comrade' [Makhmud al-Kashgari, 2005, p. 85; Makhmud al-Kashgaruvv, 2010, p. 89]. K. M. Musaev suggests a possible connection of the term with *eš 'to be the same' [Comparative historical grammar..., 1997, p. 314 Comparative historical grammar..., 2006, p. 519]. G. F. Blagova thinks that" in the period of primitive social relations "the term eš denoted" persons connected by ties of kinship as part of one ancestral group", but later it began to be used in the meaning of "companion", "companion" [Comparative historical Grammar..., 1997, p. 660].

It is interesting to note the combination jüz ïnal qadaš-ïm (E-65, 2) found in the text of Kara-Bulun I. Inal, according to Mahmud Kashgarli, " who has a khatun mother, a father from ordinary people, all young people are given a name "[Divanyu ... 1985, I, s. 122; Mahmud al-Kashgari, 2005, p. 151; Mahmud al-Kashgari, 2010, p.142-143]. Most likely, this word means people of noble origin (cf.: [Old Turkic Dictionary, 1969, p. 209, 218]). I. V. Kormushin translated it as 'high-born comrades' [Kormushin, 1997, p. 143]. In the Cha-Hol text, xiannal appears as part of the title (E-23, 2). This name is known in Talas (Tal, 9, 2) [Dzhumagulov, 1962, p. 20] and in Uyghur Buddhist texts [Zieme, 1978, p. 72-73]. A. von Gabain translates as 'minister', 'hohem Beamtentitel' ('minister', 'high official rank') [Gabain, 1950, S. 72, 309].

Thus, qadaš has no definite meaning, although it clearly hints at the conditional equality of those in relation to whom it is used, and the memorialist. Apparently, it is a general designation of the entourage of a protestant, which can include both relatives of varying degrees of kinship, and comrades for whom there is a specific term eš. In other words, qadaš are most likely members of the same memorial tribal group, neighbors, accomplices.

Therefore, it is preferable to translate line 3 of the text of the Uyuk-Turan as " [my] khan, tлlbриri (?) the common people, the glorious [my] accomplices (or comrades), ah, [my] uncles [and older brothers], numerous warriors, young warriors, [my] sons-in-law, daughters and [my] daughters-in-law..."

The term kin is used in conjunction with qada š in the Yenisei monuments. In the Turkic languages, the forms of kcnp with "feminine" meanings are not fixed. In 1964, A. M. Shcherbak corrected the reading of k'nim to K'nim ' for line 5 of the Kyzyl-Chiraa II monument (see [Malov, 1952, p. 80]), specifically noting its unusual character [Shcherbak, 1964, p.142, 146]. He translated the expression kadashim kinimӓ as 'my relatives and female relatives' [Shcherbak, 1964, p. 142]. In this form, the monument was published by D. D. Vasiliev [Vasiliev, 1983, p. 31 (transliteration), 68 (drawing), 109 (photo)]. According to I. V. Kormushin, who carefully studied the paleography of the Yenisei inscriptions (Kormushin, 2008, p. 281-282; Kormushin, 1997, p. 194), in fact, this term should be read there as kin-im and not kun-im , as previously thought (monuments E-3, 1, E-11, 6, E-45, 7) [Orkun, 1994, s. 449, 482; Malov, 1952, pp. 16-17, 31, 81-82; Vasiliev, 1983,

page 46
p. 15,59, 112 (E-3, 1), 20, 61, 92 (E-mail address-11, 6), 31,69, 109 (E-45, 7)]. Cf. Clauson, reading ekin [Clauson, 1972, p. 109]. Compare T. Tekin's ken, kin ' akraba '(relative) [Tekin, 2003, p. 247]. Compare Herbis-baara and Elegest 1 ken-imä (E-10, 12; E-59, 8) [Kormushin, 1997, p. 246, 236]; compare: [Vasiliev, 1983, p. 18 (transliteration), 60 (drawing), 89 (photography), 34 (transliteration), 71 (drawing), 112 (photography); Tekin, 2003, p. 162]. It is characteristic that in the text of Herbis-baara, the line above shows the form kin-im with the sign (E-59, 7) [Kormushin, 2008, p.246].

I. V. Kormushin points out that in the Yenisei texts the term kin is used for female relatives, although initially, it may have marked maternal relatives. According to the scientist [Kormushin, 1997, p. 195-196], the term etymologically goes back to kin 'womb; female genitalia' [Old Turkic Dictionary, 1969, p. 307]. See also: kindik 'navel' [Old Turkic Dictionary, 1969, p. 308]. In another work, he proposed a different etymology of the word, explaining it as a form of the term kelin (kelin 'bride' > kenni 'his bride'), modified due to the peculiarities of the Tuvan language (the letter-i - in the middle of the word is reduced, resulting in assimilation: kinim < *kinnim). The semantics of the term is reduced to the meaning of 'a relative, a woman accepted into our family by marriage' [Kormushin, 2008, p. 281-283]. Cf. forms are also found in Salar [Li Yong-Song, 1999, p. 248] and Chuvash [Doerfer, 1967, p.656-657] languages.

Line 7 of the Herbis-baara inscription contains rich information on the composition of the Yenisei (Kyrkyz?) communities: urï qadašïm üč kinim qïz qadašïm üč jenčï (E-59, 7) [Kormushin, 2008, p. 246] "my accomplices of the male offspring, my three relatives (?), my relatives of the female offspring, three concubines". Here, kin-im is placed before qïz qadaš-ym, which generally confirms their higher value (close relationship?). for memorialist, but lower than urï qadaš-ïm. A. M. Shcherbak believed that urï qadaš means 'male relatives of the younger generation' [Old Turkic Dictionary, 1969, p. 614], and qïz qadaš means 'sister' [Shcherbak, 1997, p.36]. If this is the case, then the sisters were actually less socially significant at that time, apparently having gone to someone else's family, than the women who were accepted into the family.

I. V. Kormushin believes that in general qadaš should be translated as 'half-blood relative, kinsman' [Kormushin, 2008, p. 279]. However, according to his observations, the term appears in two meanings in the Yenisei texts: (1) only males of this genus; (2) a fairly large group of relatives. The scientist believes that initially the term was used within a large archaic family, which included members of different generations, then with a reduction in the number of persons included in the family, it passed to brothers, especially since there was no generalizing term for this concept in the Turkic language [Kormushin, 2008, pp. 280-281]. The combination kin qadaš should be considered as an extended community of relatives, supplemented by female relatives.

It will be possible to say whether this opinion of I. V. Kormushin is justified only after the economic and cultural type of the population of the Kyrkyz Khaganate is determined. In relation to nomads, firstly, there can be no question of any large family, and secondly, there can be no evolution of forms of family-related organization. For example, Kumandins were not nomads, and both small and large families were common among them, passing into patriarchal-family communities (Satlaev, 1975).

The terms kin and qadaš are used together in different order: both kin-im qadaš-ym (E-3, 1), kin-imä qadaš-yma (E-11, 5), and qadaš-yma kin-imä (E-10, 12; E-45, 7), qadaš-ym kin-imä (E-44, 4). One of the monuments says bodun-yma kin-ima qadaš-yma "[from] [my] people, [my] women, [my] comrades " (E-11: 5). In the Kezheelig-Hovu monument, the hero of the monument says goodbye to his friends as follows: qadaš-yma kin-imä esiz-imä oylan-ym esiz-imä "[my] comrades [and] [my] women, sorry, [my] children, sorry" (E-45, 7). Exclusively based on the oppositions of qadaš; and kin can be assumed that it is both-

page 47
he was looking for female accomplices. An indirect confirmation of this assumption is the presence in line 7 of the Herbis-baara inscription of the combination urï qadaš-ym and qïz qadaš-ym (E-59, 7), which, apparently, in combination with certain determinants denoted 'brothers' and 'sisters'3.

Given that the lieutenant is saying goodbye to qadaš and kin, it is only natural to assume that they were present at his funeral. From the point of view of the nomadic community, the circle of participants in funeral and memorial ceremonies included only members of the community - a family-related group.

The term uja (Tal-2, 5; Tal-13, 3) is found in Talas inscriptions (Orkun, 1994, p. 326, 327; Malov, 1959, p. 60, 61; Dzhumagulov, 1982, p. 20), which in later monuments means 'brother, relative', ' bird's nest the nest' [Divanyu ... 1985, I, p. 85; Orkun, 1994, p. 877; Gabain, 1950, p. 248; Malov, 1952, p. 111; Old Turkic Dictionary, 1969, p. 607; Shcherbak, 1997, 38; Tekin, 2003, p. 257; Mahmud al-Kashgari, 2005, p. 117; Mahmud al-Qashgarh, 2010, p. 116]. Apparently, it is also found in the Yenisei monument Chaa-Khol III: elig ujamya adïrïldïm "[from] fifty relatives [I] separated" (E-15,3) [Orkun, 1994, s. 117, 118; Malov, 1952, p. 37, 38], as well as in the text Altyn- KльL I (E-28, 3) [Orkun, 1994, p. 511,512; Malov, 1952, p. 53; Klyashtorny, 1976, p. 261; Klyashtorny, 2006, p. 335, 336; Kormushin, 1997, p. 80]. Cf. the combination in the verse quoted in Mahmud Kashgarli and others kadaş ' brother '[Divanü ... 1985, I, s. 86; Mahmud al-Kashgari, 2005, p. 118; Mahmud al-Qashgari, 2010, p. 117], where the first lexeme plays the role of a determinative, which proves the general meaning of the second as a designation of an accomplice. Cf.:' relatives' [Drevnetyurkskiy slovar', 1969, p.607].

The term adaš (E-11, 9) is found in the Yenisei inscriptions [Malov, 1952, p. 31, 32; Kormushin, 1997, p. 272, 273] ~ adas (E-26, 11) [Orkun, 1994, p. 545; Malov, 1952, p. 50; Kormushin, 1997, p. 20] 'friend, friend, comrade' [Drevnetyurkskiy slovar', 1969, p. 9; Tekin, 2003, p. 237; Kormushin, 2008, p. 287]. I. L. Kyzlasov considers adaš, as well as e š, to be the name of warriors of their peers ("friends") [Kyzlasov, 1994, p. 86]. The context of later Buddhist monuments allows us to interpret the term in the sense of 'spouse', i.e. ' companion (of life ?)' [Zieme, 1992, S. 309]. Mahmud Kashgarli has 'friend, friend' [Divan ... 1985, I, p. 61; Orkun, 1994, p. 511; Mahmud al-Kashgari, 2005, p. 14; Mahmud al-Kashgarli, 2010, p. 99]. Cf. also 'kardeş, kardeş edinilmiş olan' ('a brother who became a brother') [Ata, 2000, p. 71]. In Kutadgu Bilig, the proverb adaš edgü bolsa bu boldï qadaš is quoted: "a friend, when he is good, becomes a native" (Old Turkic Dictionary, 1969, p. 9). From its context, it would follow that adaš was further away than qadaš. But it should be emphasized that the source was created in the environment of settled Turks, where the semantics of many terms were reinterpreted in connection with the conditions of their everyday life. Both terms are also found in the Huastuanift, a monument translated into the Turkic language in the eighth century and written in Uyghur script: adas (adaš?) sada, qadas (qadaš) sadaq (Chuast., 90), in the context translated by S. E. Malov as 'friends and comrades' [Malov, 1951, p. 112, 118, 122]. M. Dobrovitsch is inclined to consider š by name as ' blood relatives '('vérrokon') [Dobrovits, 2004, p. 65]. However, it is the primary position of the term adaš that allows us to think about its greater meaning than qadaš.

According to G. Vambéry, adaş ' Altersgenosse '('coeval'), originally 'Namensgenosse' ('namesake') < at 'Name '('name') and taš 'Gefährte' ('satellite') [Vámbéry, 1898, P. 100]. Cf. V. V. Radlov variant atash 'die Nammensgefährte' ('namesake') < at + äš [Radloff, 1897, p. 54]. Cf. Clauson addaş 'fellow clansman' < a: t ' clan (rather than personal) name '[Clauson,

3 I touched upon this aspect in my report "On the correlation of the terms oyl and urÏ in the monuments of ancient Turkic runic writing", delivered at the conference " The phenomenon of socialization in ethnic culture "(XI St. Petersburg Ethnographic Readings) 07.12.2013.

page 48
1972, p. 72], in T. Tekin adaş < atdaş [Tekin, 1976, p. 284]. See, however, the objections of E. V. Sevortyan, who pointed out the semantic groundlessness of the development of the meaning of 'comrade by name' > 'comrade', 'friend' [Sevortyan, 1974, p. 204].

In this light, the observations of I. V. Kormushin, who found in the Yenisei epitaphs an indication of the existence of twinning among the Kyrkyzs, are important [Kormushin, 2008, p. 20]. In the text of Begre, the combination antlïγ adaš-ïm 'comrades bound by an oath (twin brothers)occurs', which are contrasted with antsïz-da edgü eš-im '[my] good comrades, not bound by an oath ' (E-11, 11). Cf. in Kutadgu bilig andlïy 'sworn, sworn' (see: Old Turkic Dictionary, 1969, p. 46]). Cf. also The ancient Mongols have the anda institute [Kradin and Skrynnikova, 2006, p. 176]. You can draw on the materials of the Ochura/Achura monument, where they are contrasted with eg adašïŋïz '[your] eras-adashi' and eg edgüsiz '[your] eras not connected by good [relations]' (E-26, 15) 4.

Paired burials of warriors (Savinov, 1982, p. 120), as well as paired stone sculptures depicting warriors placed within the same fence (Kubarev, 1984, p. 85, 212, Table XXXIII), may indicate the presence of the institute of twinning among the ancient Turks. The upper date of the Uzuntal complex can be attributed to the tenth century [Kubarev, 1978, pp. 93-94; Savinov, 1982, p. 117], and the time of construction of the paired cenotaph is dated approximately to the period of the Uyghur wars with the Kyrkyzs [Savinov, 1982, p.120].

Twinning in the steppe consists in the possibility to stay at each other's houses, take on the necessary things and cattle to hold [Grodekov, 1889, p. 40-41]. The Oghuz epic reflects the tradition that took place in the life of close friends to become related, concluding marriages between children [Korogly, 1975, p. 67]. In our case, this phenomenon can be considered as a certain indicator of the nature, but not the level of development of society.

In the same context, another term is interesting. In the text of Baryk I, it seems that the term qonum occurs [E-5, 1] [Kormushin, 1997, pp. 210-211], possibly close to the word qonum recorded by Mahmud Kashgarli 'close kinsman, tribesman' [Old Turkic Dictionary, 1969, p. 455]. Cf. qon - 'settle down, settle down, choose a place of residence' [Old Turkic Dictionary, 1969, p. 455] and qonšï-qošnï 'neighbor' [Ancient Turkic Dictionary, 1969, p. 455], found in both forms by Mahmud Kashgarli [Divany... 1985, I, s. 435; Mahmud al-Kashgari, 2005, p. 407; Mahmud al-Qashgar, 2010, p. 355; Old Turkic Dictionary, 1969, p. 460, 461], and in the second, koshny 'neighbor', by Yusuf Balasaguni [Radlov, 1899, stb. 644], with the usual metathesis nš~šn [Kononov, 1980, p. 72], with the primary form qonšï [Clauson, 1972, p. 640]. Cf. tatarsk. koshna ' neighbor, neighbor; cohabitant '[Radlov, 1899, stb. 643], East.- Turk. koshna~koshni 'neighbor' [Radlov, 1899, stb. 644]. According to A. N. Samoilovich [Samoilovich, 2005, p. 311], the term goes back to qon- 'to stop for the night during the journey, to make a stop during nomadism, to sit temporarily or permanently' [Radlov, 1899, stb. 531-535]. However, in addition to the meaning of 'neighbor' in the Kazakh language, the original term in the corresponding consu clause has the meanings 'a person living in an aul under the protection or handouts of the rich' and 'a poor man' (Radlov, 1899, stb. 525). Semantic evolution here takes into account social processes.

The considered terminology of the Yenisei texts indicates the territorial nature of the Kyrkyz community ties. You can arrange the terms considered in the following order, based on the degree of proximity to the memorialist: urï qadaš and qïz qadaš - brothers and sisters, antlïγ adaš-brothers, adaš, eš ~ friends, qadaš and kin~ken-members of the same community, neighbors, qoŋïm-tribal neighbors (?).

If we again refer to the fragment about the funeral of the Turk, then after describing the people gathered, Chinese chroniclers write:: "On this day, both men and women in

4 O. N. Tun's opinion about similar root bases in the Khosho-Tsaydam texts (Tuna, 1988, p. 68-69) seems to be incorrect.

page 49
if a man likes a girl, then on his return to the house he sends her to woo him, and her parents rarely refuse" [Bichurin, 1950, p. 230; Julien, 1864, p. 352; Parker, 1899, p. 122; Parker, 1900, p. 166; Liu Mau-tsai, 1958, S. 10; Liu Maocai, 2002, p. 21; Taşağil, 2003, s. 98, 113; Lin Gan, 2000, s. 361]. Apparently, this marriage was made within one related group. However, it is difficult to judge the degree of prevalence of this phenomenon.

In the Yenisei monuments there are two terms properties. The term küdägü (E-3, 6) 'son-in-law '(Gabain, 1950, p. 317; Old Turkic Dictionary, 1969, p. 324; Shcherbak, 1997, p. 37) is undoubtedly etymologically related to the words küdän 'guest' recorded in later monuments, which had an earlier meaning of ' son-inlaw'('son-in-law') in the sense of 'daughter's husband' ('daughter's husband') [Clauson, 1972, p. 703], küdün 'feast' and küδän 'wedding night '(see: [Old Turkic Dictionary, 1969, p. 324]). According to K. M. Musaev, the term can go back to the basis of *küj - ~*küd - [Comparative Historical grammar..., 1997, p. 298]. Probably, it is connected with k üδ - 'to protect, guard, look after', 'to guard, graze' [Old Turkic Dictionary, 1969, p. 324]. According to A.V. Dybo, the Proto-Turkic phonetic form looked like *küδeγü [Comparative historical Grammar..., 2006, p. 33]. One way or another, here one can see a reflection of the well-known custom among nomads, when the son-in-law lived in the camp of his father-in-law and worked on his farm, which is recorded among the Tele tribes [Bichurin, 1950, p.215; Materials..., 1984, p. 268, 401, note. 14; Pulleyblank, 1990, p. 24].

Another term is qadïn 'relative from the side of the husband and wife' [Shcherbak, 1997, p. 37; Comparative historical grammar..., 1997, p. 309] or' father-in-law '(E-17, 2) [Old Turkic Dictionary, 1969, p. 402-403; Kormushin, 1997, p. 156]. Cf.. in A. von Gabain ' Schwiegervater '('father-in-law') [Gabain, 1950, P. 325]. Any of the values can be primary (Clauson, 1972, p. 602). According to K. M. Musaev, the term had the original form * qaj ï n and could be associated with *qatiïn (> qatun) [Comparative Historical grammar..., 1997, p. 309] and, accordingly, with qat- 'to mix' [Old Turkic Dictionary, 1969, p.432]. Mahmud Kashgarli's kadhin means 'kayin, dünür, hisim' (brother-in-law, matchmaker, relative) [Divanü ... 1985, 1, p. 403], 'relatives on the wife's side' [Mahmud al-Kashgari, 2005, p. 380], 'wife's father, father-in-law; male relatives by marriage'[Old Turkic Dictionary, 1969, p. 439], 'male relatives by marriage' [Mahmud al-Qashgar, 2010, p. 332], but he also has an interesting proverb: qadaš tämiš qajmaduq, qaδïn tämiš qajmïš "said: a relative [came] - [no one] responded; said: [came] relatives by marriage (father-in-law, brother - in-law) - responded immediately", which he explains: "It is used as advice to the groom to show respect for relatives by marriage" (cit. according to: [Makhmud al-Qashgaru, 2010, p. 332]; compare: [Divanyu ... 1985, I, s. 403; Makhmud al-Kashgari, 2005, p. 380; Old Turkic Dictionary, 1969, p. 404]). This is an important indication that in-laws were not traditionally included in the qadaš category.

In the text of Chaa-Hol V, after the father-in-law (qadïn-ym), for whom the lieutenant died (qadïn-ym üčüp öldi-m), eči-m jurč-ym (E-17, 2) is mentioned [Malov, 1952, p. 39; Kormushin, 1997, p. 156; Kormushin, 2008, p. 109], where the second () means relatives on the wife's side [Kormushin, 2008, p. 287; Kormushin, 1997, p. 156; Old Turkic Dictionary, 1969, p.282]. According to Mahmud Kashgarli, this term refers to the younger brother of his wife [Divanyu ... 1985, III, s. 7; Mahmud al-Kashgari, 2005, p. 745; Gömeç, 2002, s. 142], i.e. brother-in-law J. J. Klawson defines as ' one's wife's younger brother; younger brother-in-law ' ('younger brother of someone's wife; younger brother-in-law') [Clauson, 1972, p. 958]. Judging by the materials of the South Siberian Turkic languages and the Yakut language [Li Yong-Song, 1999, p. 286-287], it is the meaning of the younger brother of the wife that should be considered the main one. It is possible that Memorial had no older relatives closer than ecc 'elder brother' (?), and was under the care of qadïn.

page 50
The term jorčïn found in Kul-Tegin's text (KTb, 31) has not yet received a clear interpretation. If we proceed from the interpretation of the last two characters as an affix, the graphic designation of the vowel may indicate the presence of an accusative affix of the person-possessive declension of the 3rd person [Levin, 2006, p. 23]. Therefore, this word can be considered as a kinship term [Orkun, 1994, s. 44, 897; Giraud, 1960, p. 81; Tekin, 1968, p. 268, 408; Tekin, 1998, s. 47, 116; Tekin, 2003, s. 260] or derived from the verb jorï- [Melioransky, 1899, p. 120] 5. Cf.: jor (; ï)č ' Trabanten (?)'('sputnik (?)') [Gabain, 1950, p. 356], jorchyn 2 'leaders' [Maloe, 1951, p. 40], but it is possible that this is a personal name [Melioransky, 1899, p.120; Giraud, 1960, p. 82; Old Turkic Dictionary, 1969, p. 44, 239].

Thus, on the basis of the Turkic material, we can talk about intra-group marriages, and among the Kyrkyzs - about intergroup marriages, although according to the same sources, the Turks and the Kyrkyzs had a similar system of social relations.

In general, it can be stated that the structure of the community built on the basis of the analysis of the terminology of the Yenisei runic texts fully corresponds to the ideas about the nature of the nomadic community. The terminology of the Yenisei monuments allows us to distinguish several categories of members of the community, depending on their degree of proximity to the memorialist, among which there are both direct blood relatives, brothers and sisters, and persons who apparently were not closely related to the memorialist, but sometimes recorded in the category of his 'friends'. The institution of twinning, which was particularly important in nomadic societies, is also highlighted.

MONUMENT CIPHERS

BK, X - large inscription of the Bilge Kagan stele.

E - Yenisei inscriptions.

KTB - a large inscription of the Kul Tegin stele.

Tal-Talas inscriptions.

list of literature

Abramzon S. M. Forms of the family among the pre-Turkic and Turkic tribes of Southern Siberia, Semirechye and Tien-Shan in antiquity and the Middle Ages. 1972. In memory of P. M. Melioransky, Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1973.
Bernshtam A. N. Socio-economic structure of the Orkhon-Yenisei Turks of the VI-VIII centuries. Vostochno-tyurkskiy kaganat i kirghizi [The Eastern Turkic Khaganate and the Kyrgyz], Moscow: AS SSSR, 1946 (Proceedings of the Institute of Oriental Studies. T. XLV).

Bichurin N. Ya. [Iakinf]. Sobranie informatsii o narodakh, obitavshikh v Srednoi Azii v drevni vremeni [Collection of information about the peoples who lived in Central Asia in ancient times].

Vasiliev D. D. Korpus tyurkskikh runicheskikh pamyatnikov basseyna Yenisei [The corpus of Turkic runic monuments of the Yenisei basin].
Grodekov N. I. Kirghizs and karakirgizs of the Syr-Darya region. Vol. 1. Yuridicheskiy byt. Tashkent: Typo-lithography of S. I. Lekhtin, 1889.

Dzhumagulov Ch. Epigraphy of Kyrgyzstan. Issue 1. Frunze: Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 1963.

Dzhumagulov Ch. Epigraphy of Kyrgyzstan. Issue 2. Frunze: Ilim, 1982.

Ancient Turkic Dictionary / Edited by V. M. Nadelyaev, D. M. Nasilov, E. R. Tenishev, and A. M. Shcherbak.

Klyashtorny S. G. Pamyatniki drevnetyurkskoy pis'mosti i etnokul'turnaya istoriya Tsentral'noi Azii [Monuments of ancient Turkic writing and ethno-cultural history of Central Asia].
Klyashtorny S. G. Stelae Zolotogo ozero (k datirovke eniseyskikh runicheskikh pamyatnikov) [Stelae of the Golden Lake (on dating of the Yenisei Runic monuments)]. To the seventieth anniversary of Academician A. P. Kononov, Nauka Publ., 1976.

Kononov A. N. Grammatika yazyka tyurkskikh runicheskikh pamyatnikov VII-IX vv [Grammar of the language of the Turkic runic monuments of the VII-IX centuries].

Kormushin I. V. The Turkic Yenisei epitaphs. Texts and Research, Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1997.

Kormushin I. V. Tyurkskiye eniseyskiye epitafii: grammatika, tekstologiya [Turkic Yenisei Epitaphs: Grammar, Textology]. Moscow: Nauka Publ., 2008.

5 See the opinion of W. Bang, who considered joryč to be a word for 'Fussarmee, Infanterie' [Bang, 1898, p. 38].

page 51
Korogly Kh. Oguz epos (comparative analysis) // Typology of the national ethnos, Moscow: Nauka, 1975.

Kradin N. N., Skrynnikova T. D. Empires of Genghis Khan, Moscow: East Lit., 2006.
Kubarev V. D. Drevnstyurkskiy pominal'nyi kompleks na Gyor-You [The Ancient Turkic memorial complex on Gyor-You]. Novosibirsk: Nauka Publ., 1978.

Kubarev V. D. Ancient Turkic sculptures of Altai. Novosibirsk: Nauka Publ., 1984.

Materialy k rannoy istorii tyurkov [Materials on the early history of the Turks]. The oldest information about the army // Russian archeology. 1996. N 3.

Levin G. G. Graficheskie i orthograficheskie osobennosti runicheskikh tekstov orkhonskikh pamyatnikov [Graphic and orthographic features of runic texts of Orkhon monuments]. 2006. N 4.

Liu Maocai. Information about ancient Turks in medieval Chinese sources. Translated by V. N. Dobzhanskaya and L. N. Ermolenko. D. D. Vasiliev] / / Bulletin of the Society of Orientalists. Appendix 1. Moscow: IV RAS, 2002.

Malov S. E. Eniseyskaya pisisnost ' tyurkov: Teksty i perevody [The Yenisei script of the Turks: Texts and Translations]. Moscow: AN SSSR, 1952.

Malov S. E. Pamyatniki drevnetyurkskoy pis'mosti Monoglii i Kirghizii [Monuments of ancient Turkic writing in Mongolia and Kyrgyzstan].
Malov S. E. Monuments of ancient Turkic writing. Texts and Research, Moscow: AN SSSR Publ., 1951.
Masanov N. E. Nomadic civilization of the Kazakhs: fundamentals of life of nomadic society. Almaty: Sotsinvest; Moscow: Horizont Publ., 1995.

Materials on the history of ancient nomadic peoples of the Donghu group. [with kit. and comments by V. S. Taskin, Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1984.

Mahmoud al-Kashgari. Divan Lugat at-Turk / Transl., preface. and comments by Z.-A. M. Auezova. Almaty: Daik-Prsss Publ., 2005.

Mahmud al-Qashgarh. Dūvān Lugāt at-Turk (Svod tyurkskikh slov) / Translated from Arabic by A. R. Rustamov; edited by I. V. Kormushin. Note by I. V. Kormushin, E. A. Potseluyevsky, and A. R. Rustamov. Vol. 1. Moscow: Vostochny lit., 2010 (Pamyatniki pismennosti Vostoka. Issue CXXVIII).

Melioransky P. M. Monument in honor of Kul-Tegin. With two tables of inscriptions // Notes of the Eastern Branch of the Russian Archaeological Society. 1899. Vol. XII. Issues II-III.

Potapov L. P. Tulbery eniseyskikh runicheskikh napisisey [Tulbery of the Yenisei runic inscriptions]. 1971. In memory of V. V. Radlov, Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1972.

Radlov V. V. Opyt slovarya tyurkskikh narechiy [The experience of the dictionary of Turkic adverbs]. Vol. II. Ch. 1. SPb.: Tip. Imi. Academy of Sciences, 1899.

Samoilovich A. N. Bogatyi i bedny v tyurkskikh yazykakh [Rich and Poor in the Turkic languages]. Philology. Runika, Moscow: Vostochny lit., 2005.
Savinov D. G. Drevnetyurkskie kurgany Uzuntala [Ancient Turkic kurgans of Uzuntala]. Novosibirsk: Nauka Publ., 1982.

Satlaev F. A. Rural community of Kumandins in the second half of the XIX - first quarter of the XX century. Sotsial'naya istoriya narodov Azii [Social History of the peoples of Asia], Moscow: Nauka, 1975.
Sevortyan E. V. Etymological dictionary of the Turkic languages (Common Turkic and inter-Turkic bases on vowels). Moscow: Nauka, 1974.

Comparative historical grammar of the Turkic languages. Lexika / Ed. by E. R. Tenishev, Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1997.

Comparative historical grammar of the Turkic languages. The Proto-Turkic language is the basis. Picture of the world of the Pratyurk ethnos according to the language data / Ed. by E. R. Tenishev, A.V. Dybo. Moscow: Nauka, 2006.

Khazanov A.M. Social history of the Scythians. The main problems of development of the ancient nomads of the Eurasian steppes. M.: Nauka, 1975.

Khazanov A.M. Kochevniki i vneshnyj mir [Nomads and the external world]. Almaty: Daik-Press, 2002.

Khudyakov Yu. S. On the economic and cultural type of the Yenisei Kyrgyz in the Middle Ages // Ethnography of the peoples of Siberia. Novosibirsk: Nauka Publ., 1984.

Shcherbak A.M. Pamyatniki runicheskogo pisma eniseyskikh tyurok [Monuments of Runic writing of the Yenisei Turks]. 1964. N 4.

Shcherbak A.M. Rannie tyurksko-mongol'skie yazykovye svyazi (VIII-XIV centuries) [Early Turkic-Mongolian language relations (VIII-XIV centuries)].
Ata A. Derleme Sözlüğü'nde Geçen En Eski Türkçe Kelimeler I // Türkoloji. 2000. Cilt XIII. Nu. 1. Dil ve Edebiyat Derneği Yayinlar.

Bang W. Zur Enklärung der köktürkischen lnschriften // Weiner Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morgenlandes. 1898. Bd. XII.

Clauson G. An Etymological Dictionary of Pre-Thirteenth-Century Turkish. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1972.

Dobrovits M. Hatalom és törzsi rendszer a második türk kaganátusban // Publicationes Universitatis Miskolciensis. Sectio Philosophica. 2004. T. 9. Fase. 3.

Doerfer G. Türkische und mongolische Elemente im Neupersischen. Bd. III: Türkische Elemente im Neupersi-schen. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1967 (Veröffentlichungen der Orientalischen Komission, Bd. XX).

Divanü Lûgat-it-Türk ve Tercümesi / Çev. B. Atalay. Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basimcvi, 1985. Cilt I-III,

Ecsedy I. Tribe and Empire, Tribe and Society in the Turk Age // Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae. 1977. T. XXXI. Fase. 1.

Gabain A. (von) Alttürkische Grammatik, Mil Bibliographic, Lesestücken und Wörlerverzeichnis, auch Neutürkisch, Mil vier Schrifttafeln und siehen Schriftprohen. 2. verbesserte Auflage. Leipzig: Otto Harbassowitz,

page 52
1950 (Porta Linguarum Orientalium, Sammlung von Lehrbüchern für das Studium der orientalischen Sprachen, herausgegeben von Richard Hartmann, XXIII).

Giraud R. L'Empire des Tures Célestes. Les régnes d'Elterich, Qapghan el Bilgä (680-734). Contribution à I'histoire des Tures d'Asie Centrale. Illustré de 4 cartes en hors texte. P.: Librairie d'Amerique et d'Orient Adrien-Maisonneuve, 1960.

Gömeç S. Divanü Lügati't-Türk'te Akrabalik Bildiren Terimler// Tarih Araştirmalari. 2002. Cilt 20. Sayi 32/6.

Johansen U. El und bodun // Memoriae Munusculum. Gedenkband für Annemarie v. Gabain / Hg. K. Röhrbom ve W. Veenker. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1994 (Veröffentlichungen der Societas Uralo-Altaica 39).

Julien S. Documents historiqucs sur les Tou-kiue (Tures) // Journal Asiatique. 1864. Ser. 6. Vol. III.

Li Yong-Song. Turk Dillerinde Akrabalik Adlari. istanbul: Simurg, 1999.

Lin Gan. Göktürklerde Gelenekler ve Dini Inançlar // Türk Dünyasi Incelemeleri Dergisi. 2000. Sayi IV.

Liu Mau-tsai. Die chinesischen Nachrichten zur Geschiehte der Ost-Türken (T'u-küe). I. Buch: Texte Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1958. (Göttinger asiatische Forschungen: Monographienreihe zur Geschiehte, Sprache u. Literatur d. Völker Süd-, Ost- u. Zentralasiens, Bd. 10).

Orkun H. N. Eski Türkyazillari. 3. bk. Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 1994 (Türk Dil Kurumu Yayinlan 529).

Parker E. H. The Early Turks (From the CHOU SHU) // The China Review. 1899. Vol. 24. N 3.

Parker E. H. The Early Turks (From the PEI SHI and the SUI SHU) // The China Review. 1900. Vol. 24. N 4.

Pullуyblank E. G. The "High Carts": a Turkish Speaking People before the Türks // Asia Major (Third Series). 1990. Vol. 3. Pt. 1.

Radloff W. Die Alttürkischen Inschriften der Mongolei. Neue Folge. Nebst einer Abhandlung von W. Barthold: Die Historische Bedeutung der alttürkischen Inschriften. St. Petersburg: Kaiserliche Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1897.

Taşağil A. Gök-Türkler I. 2. bk. Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 2003 (Türk Tarih Kurumu Yayinlan VII. Dizi -Sayi 1601).

Taşağil A. Gök-Türkler III. Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 2004 (Türk Tarih Kurumu Yaymlan VII. Dizi -Sayi 160b).

TekinT. A Grammar of Orkhon Turkic. Bloomington; The Hague: Mouton & Co, 1968 (Indiana University Publications. Uralic and Altaic Series. Vol. 69).

Tekin T. E. V Sevortyan. Etimologiçeskiy Slovar' Tyurkskih Yazikov (Obşçelyurkskiye i Mejtyurkskiye Osnovi na Glasniye) // Türk Dili Araştirmalari Yilhği Belleten 1975 - 1976. Ankara, 1976.

Tekin T. Eski Türk yazitlarinda yanliş yorumlanan bir kelime üzerine // Turkish Studies. 2006. Vol. 1/2.

Tekin T. Orhon Türkçesi Grameri. 2. bk. Istanbul, 2003 (Türk Dilleri Araştirmalari Dizisi. 9).

Tckin T. Orhon Yazitlari Kül Tigin, Bilge Kağan, Tunyukuk. 2. bk. Istanbul: Simurg, 1998.

Tuna O. N. Bazi imlâ Gelenekleri Bunlann Metin Incelemelerindeki Önemi ve Orhon Yazitlan'nda Birkaç Açiklama // Türk Dili Araştirmalari Yilhği, Belleten 1957. 2. bk. Ankara, 1988.

Vámbéry H. Noten zu den alttürkischen Inschriften der Mongolei und Sibiriens // Mémories de la Société Finno-ougrienne. 1898. Vol. XII.

Zieme P. Materialien zum Uigurischen Onomasticon I // Türk Dili Araştirmalari Yilhği, Belleten 1977. Ankara, 1978.

Zieme P. Some Remarks on Old Turkish Words for "Wife" [="Kadin" Için Kullanilan Eski Türkçe Kelimeler Üzerine Bazi Düş&#252;nceler] // Türk Dili Araştirmalari Yilhği, Belleten 1987. Ankara, 1992.

page 53

Permanent link to this publication: