No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Pre-Manichaean Beliefs of the Uyghurs I: Celestial and Natural Cults
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 March 2025
Abstract
The original beliefs of Uyghurs, who were known for their conversions to Manichaeism and Buddhism, have not been examined in detail until now. Uyghur inscriptions as well as Chinese and Islamic sources provide some information regarding these beliefs. Historical sources indicate that they believed in a variety of celestial and natural cults, the most prominent being Täŋri, the god of sky. Cults devoted to other natural and celestial beings included earth, mountains, trees, sun, moon, and fire. The words Täŋri and Täŋrikän were also used for other beings, reflecting flexibility in their beliefs. Although some scholars thought that Buddhism was practiced prior to the official conversion to Manichaeism in the 760s, this article demonstrates that this is hardly the case and shows how these ancient cults survived even after their conversions to major religions.
- Type
- Article
- Information
- Copyright
- © The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the President and Fellows of Harvard College
Footnotes
*
For the second article in this series, see Hayrettin İhsan Erkoç, “Pre-Manichaean Beliefs of the Uyghurs II: Other Religious Elements,” Journal of Religious History 47.4 [2023] 586–603.
References
1 Known in the Chinese sources with a variety of forms such as Yuange 袁紇, Weige 韋紇, Huige 回紇/迴紇, Huigu 回鶻/迴鶻, etc.
2 For an overview of Uyghur history until 840, see Colin Mackerras, The Uighur Empire (744–840) According to the T’ang Dynastic Histories (Canberra: Center of Oriental Studies, The Australian National University, 1968); Colin Mackerras, “The Uighurs,” in The Cambridge History of Early Inner Asia (ed. Denis Sinor; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004) 317–42.
3 There have been many debates regarding how to name the native beliefs of early Turkic peoples, including terms like “Ancient Turkic Religion,” “Ancient Turkic Beliefs,” “Turkic Shamanism,” “Tengrism” (or “Tengriism”) and so on. Getting involved in that matter would highly prolong the length of this article.
4 For the religious history of Uyghurs and how their new religions influenced their cultures, see Yukiyo Kasai, “Uyghur Legitimation and the Role of Buddhism,” in Buddhism in Central Asia I: Patronage, Legitimation, Sacred Space, and Pilgrimage (ed. Carmen Meinert and Henrik Sørensen; Brill: Leiden, 2020) 65, 71–76; Li Tang, A History of Uighur Religious Conversions (5 th–16 th Centuries) (Singapore: Asia Research Institute National University of Singapore, 2005); Münevver Ebru Zeren, “Maniheizm ve Budizm’in Uygurlar’ın Kültür Hayatına Etkileri” (Ph.D. diss., Istanbul University, Institute of Social Sciences, Department of Turkology Studies, 2015); Peter Zieme, Religion und Gesellschaft im Uigurischen Königreich von Qočo. Kolophone und Stifter des alttürkischen buddhistischen Schrifttums aus Zentralasien (Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag, 1992).
5 Özkan İzgi, Uygurların Siyasî ve Kültürel Tarihi (Hukuk Vesikalarına Göre) (Ankara: Türk Kültürünü Araştırma Enstitüsü Yayınları, 1987) 11; Bahaeddin Ögel, Türk Mitolojisi (Kaynakları ve açıklamaları ile destanlar) (2 vols.; Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Yayınları, 1993) 1:73; Münevver Ebru Zeren, “Göktürk ve Uygur Dönemi Yazıtlarında Budizm’in İzleri ve Etkileri,” in Uluslararası Prof. Dr. Halil İnalcık Tarih ve Tarihçilik Sempozyumu: Bildiriler I. Cilt (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Yayınları, 2021) 692. This topic was examined in a previous article (Erkoç, “Pre-Manichaean Beliefs of the Uyghurs II,” 587–589).
6 The etymology of Täŋri has been a matter of debate. While some scholars were of the opinion that it was a pre-Turkic or non-Turkic word (Gerard Clauson, An Etymological Dictionary of Pre-Thirteenth-Century Turkish [Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1972] 523; Gerhard Doerfer, Türkische und mongolische Elemente im Neupersischen, unterbesonderer Berücksichtigung älterer neupersischer Geschichtsquellen, vor allem der Mongolen- und Timuridenzeit [4 vols.; Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner, 1965] §944, 2:577–85; Stefan Georg, “Türkisch/mongolisch tengri ‘Himmel, Gott’ und seine Herkunft,” Studia Etymologica Cracoviensa 6 [2001] 83–100), there have been scholars who also defended a Turkic origin. The hypothesis I am inclined to accept as the most logical explanation belongs to Talat Tekin, who suggested that Täŋri might have been an Old Turkic noun derived from a hypothetical verb *täŋir- with an -i suffix, the former being an earlier form of the attested verb *tägir- meaning “to turn around, to enclose, to surround” (Talat Tekin, Hunların Dili [Ankara: Doruk Yayınları, 1993] 11).
7 Wei Shou 魏收, Weishu 魏書 (Beijing 北京: Zhonghua Shuju 中華書局, 1974); hereafter, WS, appearing in parentheses within the text.
8 Some modern Turkish historians with deep nationalistic and conservative motives attempt to portray the Turkic supreme deity Täŋri as a monotheistic god very similar to Islamic Allāh. However, in the Islamic faith Allāh does not have a wife; contrary to that, there are several examples of Turkic peoples believing that Täŋri was a married deity (Hayrettin İhsan Erkoç, “Türklerin İslâmiyete Geçiş Sürecinde Teŋri ve Allah Algıları,” AÜ DTCF Dergisi 58.1 [2018] 301–26, at 318).
9 Similarly, the Xiongnu and Türks also held massive gatherings where they made sacrifices to Täŋri, other gods, spirits, and their ancestors.
10 The three famous Uyghur inscriptions at Tes, Tariat (Terkh), and Shine Us were erected during the 750s by Täŋridä Bolmïš Il Itmiš Bilgä Qaγan (Bayan Čor; reigned 747–759), the greatest ruler of Orkhon Uyghurs. Being the second ruler of the Uyghur Qaghanate, it was he who conquered most of the nomadic peoples of the Eastern Steppes and transformed this polity into a major steppe empire.
11 Tariat W6 has qan instead of qaγan.
12 For N1 and 3–4, Akio Katayama has separated the expression täŋrim qanïm as two different words and translated it as “My Heaven, my Qan” (Akio Katayama, “Tariat Inscription,” in Provisional Report of Researches on Historical Sites and Inscriptions in Mongolia From 1996 to 1998 (hereafter PRRH) [ed. Takao Moriyasu and Ayudai Ochir; Osaka: SCES, 1999] 168–76, at 170, 172).
13 Although the First QBI is from the period when the Uyghurs had adopted Manichaeism as their official religion, the title Täŋrikän is a pre-Manichaean Uyghur title. In fact, we already see it in the Ongi Inscription of the Türks (E5–6, 8). In his famous eleventh-cent. Turkic-Arabic dictionary Dīwān Luγāt al-Turk, Maḥmūd al-Kāšγarī noted that Täŋrikän meant “a wise man, a pious man” in the dialect of “infidel” Turks (Maḥmūd bin al-ḥusayn bin Muḥammad al-Kāšγarī, Kitāb Dīwān Luγāt al-Turk [Millet Yazma Kütüphanesi, Ali Emîrî Arabî No. 4189, Istanbul] 609, 613; Maḥmūd al-Kāšγarī, Compendium of the Turkic Dialects (Dīwān Luγāt at-Turk) [trans. Robert Dankoff and James Kelly; 3 vols.; Duxbury, MA: Harvard Print Office, 1982–1985] 3:343, 350).
14 The Old Turkic word ülüg normally means “share, part” but it was also used with the meanings “destiny and fate” (Clauson, An Etymological Dictionary, 142).
15 Erhan Aydın, Uygur Yazıtları (Istanbul: Bilge Kültür Sanat, 2018) 81.
16 Hatice Şirin, “Bombogor Inscription: Tombstone of a Turkic Qunčuy (“Princess”),” JRAS (2015) 1–9, at 3.
17 As I have demonstrated in a yet unpublished study of mine, Chinese records about the cult of Täŋri among the Türks are greater in number.
18 The Uyghur concept of qut was examined in a previous article (Erkoç, “Pre-Manichaean Beliefs of the Uyghurs II,” 598–600). The word qut was used in Old Turkic with a variety of meanings such as “favor, fortune, luck, happiness, charisma, health, soul and spirit” (Clauson, An Etymological Dictionary, 594; Jens Wilkens, Handwörterbuch des Altuigurischen. Altuigurisch—Deutsch—Türkisch [Göttingen: Universitätsverlag Göttingen, 2021] 428–29). For the Turkic concept of qut in general, see Alessio Bombaci, “Qutluγ Bolzun!,” UAJ 36 (1965) 284–91; idem, “Qutluγ Bolzun!,” UAJ 38 (1966) 13–43; Clauson, An Etymological Dictionary, 594. For the concept of qut among the Türks and other Turko-Mongol polities, see Hayrettin İhsan Erkoç, “Eski Türklerde Devlet Teşkilâtı (Gök Türk Dönemi)” (M.A. thesis, Hacettepe University, Institute of Social Sciences, Department of History, 2008) 75–79.
19 Erkoç, “Pre-Manichaean Beliefs of the Uyghurs II,” 598.
20 The Ta’ríkh-i-Jahán-gushá of ‘Alá’u ’d-Dín ‘Aṭá Malik-i-Juwayní (Composed in A. H. 658 = A. D. 1260): Part I, Containing the History of Chingíz Khán and His Successors (ed. Mírzá Muḥammad Ibn ʿAbdu’l-Wahháb-i-Qazwíní; Leyden: E. J. Brill, Imprimerie Orientale, 1912) 41.
21 The Ta’ríkh-i-Jahán-gushá, 41. Another version of this legend was recorded in the Uyghur ïduq qut (ruler) Barčuq Art Tigin’s (Ba’ershu A’erte Dejin 巴而朮阿而忒的斤) biography in Yuanshi 元史 (hereafter YS). In this version, the divine light lands on a tree, and five boys are born afterwards, one of them being Bögü Qaγan (Bu[gu] Kehan 不古可罕). However, the qaghan’s acceptance by the people for being sent by God and his God-sent ravens are not mentioned in this version (Song Lian 宋濂, Yuanshi 元史 [Beijing 北京: Zhonghua Shuju 中華書局, 1976] 122.2999).
22 Liu Xu 劉昫, Jiu Tangshu 舊唐書 (Shanghai 上海: Zhonghua Shuju 中華書局, 1975) (hereafter JTS). The part of Xin Tangshu 新唐書 (hereafter XTS) describing this event does not mention the Uyghurs saying that Huai’en was killed by Täŋri (Ouyang Xiu 歐陽修, Xin Tangshu 新唐書 [Shanghai 上海: Zhonghua Shuju 中華書局, 1975] 217A.6120).
23 Jiu Tangshu and Zizhi Tongjian 資治通鑑 (hereafter ZZTJ) tell us that when Bilgä Köl Qaγan (Pijia Que Kehan 毗伽闕可汗; Täŋridä Bolmïš Il Itmiš Bilgä Qaγan) died in 759, he was succeeded by his son Täŋri Qaγan (Dengli Kehan 登里可汗) (JTS 195.5201; Sima Guang 司馬光, Zizhi Tongjian 資治通鑑 [Shanghai 上海: Zhonghua Shuju 中華書局, 1976] 221.7076). He is the famous Bögü Qaγan who is mentioned in these sources with that title (sometimes only as Dengli 登里) a few more times as well (JTS 195.5201–5204; ZZTJ 222.7131, 7141, 226.7282). Jonathan Karam Skaff emphasized that the qaghan was invested with this title by the Tang court (Jonathan Karam Skaff, Sui-Tang China and Its Turko-Mongol Neighbors: Culture, Power, and Connections, 580–800 [New York: Oxford University Press, 2012] 125–26). ZZTJ also notes that the wife of Bögü Qaγan sent from China (who was also the daughter of Huai’en) carried the title Täŋri Qatun (Dengli Kedun 登里可敦) (222.7131). The Soghdian Side of the First Qara Balghasun Inscription mentions Bögü Qaγan with the epithet “god(like) ruler” (βγy ’xšy-wn’k) (No. 6 line 20). Prior to the Uyghurs, the Türks also used Täŋri Qaγan as an imperial title; one of Bilgä Qaγan’s (reigned 716–734) sons and successors carried this title (JTS 194A.5177–5178; XTS 215B.6054; ZZTJ 214.6809, 6844). The usage of this term goes back to the sixth century, as can be seen in the Soghdian side of the bilingual Bugut inscription. Here the expression βγy (“God[like]”) is placed in front of the titles of several early Türk rulers (Yutaka Yoshida and Takao Moriyasu, “Bugut Inscription,” in PRRH [ed. Moriyasu and Ochir], 122–25, at 123–24). Besides calling their qaghans Täŋri (“Heavenly”), the Türks used the formula Täŋri Täg (“God-like”) for them in their inscriptions (for a complete list, see Erhan Aydın, Orhon Yazıtları [Istanbul: Bilge Kültür Sanat, 2017] 169). The Old Turkic title Täŋri Qaγan was also used by Türks, Toquz Oghuz, and other Turkestanis for Chinese emperors during the seventh and eighth cents., recorded in Chinese sources as Tian Kehan 天可汗 (Erkoç, “Eski Türklerde,” 28–29; Skaff, Sui-Tang China, 119–127). This usage was continued by the Uyghurs, as both JTS and XTS note that, during the incident of 765 described above, the Uyghurs called the Chinese emperor Täŋri Qaγan 天可汗 (JTS 195.5205; XTS 217A.6120). These sources contain another example of the usage of this title; when Chinese emissaries visited Täŋridä Bolmïš Il Itmiš Bilgä Qaγan in 759, the qaghan is recorded as having mentioned the Chinese emperor (Tang Suzong 唐肅宗; reigned 756–762) as Täŋri Qaγan 天可汗 (JTS 195.5200; XTS 217A.6116; Skaff, Sui-Tang China, 125, 347). Not surprisingly, the Chinese Side of the First Qara Balghasun Inscription mentions some of the Uyghur rulers with the title Täŋri Qaγan 天可汗 (line 12, 15–18). Quite interestingly, Täŋri is also recorded as an Uyghur toponym in the early fourteenth cent. Persian work Jāmiʿ al-Tavārīχ written by Rašīd al-Dīn Faḍlullāh-i Hamadānī. He devoted a chapter to the Uyghurs, in which a narration about their original homeland in Mongolia is given and two big mountains are mentioned, one of them called Ušqunluq Täŋrim (Rašīd al-Dīn Faḍlullāh-i Hamadānī, Jāmiʿ al-Tavārīχ [ed. Muḥammad Rūšan and Muṣṭafā Mūsavī; 4 vols.; Tahrān: Našr-i Alburz, 1373/1953] 1:138). W. M. Thackston noted that the former word derives from ušqun meaning “rhubarb,” while the latter expression means “my god” (Rashiduddin Fazlullah, Jami‘u’t-Tawarikh: Compendium of Chronicles: A History of the Mongols [trans. W. M. Thackston; 3 vols.; Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1998–1999] 1:75 n. 1). The Türks also used Täŋri as a toponym for a mountain which was also considered the God of Earth (Hayrettin İhsan Erkoç, “Bozkır Halklarında Su Kültü,” in Tarih ve Kültür Penceresinden Su ve Sağlık İlişkisi Uluslararası Sempozyumu Bildirileri—10-11 Haziran 2019, İstanbul [ed. Arın Namal, Hacer Topaktaş Üstüner, and Bożena Płonka Syroka; Istanbul: Beykoz Belediyesi, 2020] 69–108, at 81–82).
24 James Russell Hamilton, Les Ouïghours à l’époque des Cinq dynasties d’après les documents chinois (Paris: Presses universitaires de France, 1955) 139–41; Kasai, “Uyghur Legitimation,” 64–66.
25 Bahaeddin Ögel suggested that the words Bieli 別力 and Da 答 probably represented Bäglig and Taγ respectively, but he could not reconstruct the Turkic form of Boli 跛力 (Bahaeddin Ögel, Sino-Turcica: Çingiz Han’ın Türk Müşavirleri [Istanbul: IQ Kültür Sanat Yayıncılık, 2002] 21 n. 8, 24 n. 8).
26 Ögel, Sino-Turcica, 24 n. 9.
27 In his entry for Täŋri, Kāšγarī gave several different meanings and usages. From his expressions, it is understood that Muslim Turks used this word as the Turkic translation of Allāh. However, he noted that the “infidel” Turks also used Täŋri for “sky” and for “anything that is imposing in their eyes,” “such as a great mountain or tree, and they bow down to such things” (Maḥmūd bin al-ḥusayn bin Muḥammad al-Kāšγarī, Kitāb Dīwān Luγāt al-Turk, 608–609; Maḥmūd al-Kāšγarī, Compendium, 3:342–43). For the Turkic flexibility in the usage of Täŋri with a variety of meanings, see Erkoç, “Türklerin İslâmiyete,” 313–15.
28 Apart from the meaning “to create,” the verb yarat- was also used in Türk and Uyghur inscriptions with the meanings “to make, form and organize” (Aydın, Orhon Yazıtları, 175; idem, Uygur Yazıtları, 194; Talât Tekin, A Grammar of Orkhon Turkic [Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1968] 397).
29 Theophylacti Simocattae Historiarum Libri Octo (ed. Immanuel Bekker; Bonn: E. Weber, 1834) 286; The History of Theophylact Simocatta: An English Translation with Introduction and Notes (trans. Michael Whitby and Mary Whitby; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997) 191.
30 The History of Theophylact Simocatta, 99 n. 47.
31 A point emphasized in a yet unpublished work of mine.
32 Aydın, Orhon Yazıtları, 158; idem, Uygur Yazıtları, 146; Tekin, A Grammar, 344.
33 Jean-Paul Roux, La Religion des Turcs et des Mongols (Paris: Payot, 1984) 106–107.
34 René Giraud, L’Empire des Turcs célestes. Les regnes d’Elterich, Qapghan et Bilgä (680–734). Contribution à l’histoire des Turcs d’Asie Centrale (Paris: Librairie d’Amerique et d’Orient, Adrien-Maisonneuve, 1960) 102; Ahmet Yaşar Ocak, Alevî ve Bektaşî İnançlarının İslâm Öncesi Temelleri (Istanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 2000) 68.
35 The cult of Umay among Turkic peoples is first attested in the Türk inscriptions of the early-eighth cent. Although these sources mention her as one of the assistants of Täŋri in his earthly businesses and stress her feminity, not much is known about her cult during this period, as other Chinese, Byzantine, and Islamic sources do not mention her. Kāšγarī translated Umay as “placenta” and noted a Turkic belief in which Umay was considered a companion of a child in the mother’s womb, and those that worshiped her would have children (Maḥmūd bin al-ḥusayn bin Muḥammad al-Kāšγarī, Kitāb Dīwān Luγāt al-Turk, 74). Umay seems more like a cult associated with women and children, hence it is no surprise that the sedentary neighbors of Turkic peoples did not hear much about her, perhaps because they received most of their information from the male members of Turkic societies.
36 For this cult of the Türks, which seems to be a major collection of animistic cults associated with natural beings, see Erkoç, “Bozkır Halklarında,” 73–85. Just as Täŋri was a more national deity for the Türks, Ïduq Yir Sub was also considered to be a specific Türk set of gods and spirits, as can be seen from the expressions Türük Täŋrisi Türük Ïduq Yiri Subï and Türük Täŋrisi Ïduq Yiri Subï (“Täŋri and Sacred Earth-Water Spirits of the Türks”) found in the Orkhon Inscriptions (BQI E10; KTI E10–11). A similar belief is narrated by Kāšγarī, who mentions provincial and earth genies, called Čïwï, protecting Turkic clans and tribes before they engaged in battles (Maḥmūd bin al-ḥusayn bin Muḥammad al-Kāšγarī, Kitāb Dīwān Luγāt al-Turk, 544).
37 Aydın, Uygur Yazıtları, 35; Takashi Ōsawa, “Tes Inscription,” in PRRH (ed. Moriyasu and Ochir), 158–167, at 159–160.
38 According to the legend one of the trees was called qusuq, a type of tree “shaped like a pine (nāž), whose leaves in winter resemble those of a cypress and whose fruits is like a pignon (jilγūza) both in shape and taste,” while the other one was called toz (The Ta’ríkh-i-Jahán-gushá, 40; ʿAla-ad-Din ʿAta-Malik Juvaini, Genghis Khan: The History of the World Conqueror [trans. J. A. Boyle; Manchester: Unesco Publishing, 1997] 55). J. A. Boyle has explained that the former was the Siberian cedar and the latter was the birch (ʿAla-ad-Din ʿAta-Malik Juvaini, Genghis Khan, 55 n. 13–14).
39 Throughout history, sacred trees and forests played an important role in the beliefs and mythologies of various Turkic peoples.
40 ʿAla-ad-DinʿAta-Malik Juvaini, Genghis Khan, 56 n. 16.
41 A different version of this legend of migration is also narrated by Juvaynī. Here it is told that, after Buqu Xan’s death, one of his sons succeeded him, and eventually the Uyghurs migrated to Bišbalïq after following the cries of animals and children sounding like “Köč! Köč!” (“Migrate! Migrate!”). However, the disasters that befell them after their loss of Qutluγ Taγ are not mentioned in this version nor are any reasons given for their migration (The Ta’ríkh-i-Jahán-gushá, 45).
42 Ögel, Sino-Turcica, 22–23 n. 8, 24 n. 10.
43 As J. A. Boyle pointed out, this place could be Ektag where the Byzantine envoy Zemarchus met with the Türk ruler Istämi/Ištämi Yabγu Qaγan as described by Menander Protector. He considered that Ektag/Aqtaγ probably corresponded to the Tianshan 天山 (ʿAla-ad-Din ʿAta-Malik Juvaini, Genghis Khan, 57 n. 19), known in modern Turkic languages as Tengri Tagh and other similar forms. The same toponym Äk Taγ also appears in the Second Tunyuquq Inscription of the Türks. While describing various groupings of seventh-cent. Turkic tribes called Tiele 鐵勒 (Tägräk; the Uyghurs and other Toquz Oghuz were also members of this tribal union), Chinese sources mention a place in Turkestan called Baishan 白山, literally meaning “White Mountain.” Many studies on Ektag/Äk Taγ/Aqtaγ/Baishan have been conducted by numerous scholars so far; for this mountain and various hypotheses about its location, see Erhan Aydın, Eski Türk Yer Adları (Istanbul: Bilge Kültür Sanat, 2016) 66–71. If Juvaynī’s Aqtaγ is the same mountain as Ektag/Äk Taγ/Baishan in Turkestan, then it is not located in the original Uyghur homeland in Mongolia, so this thirteenth-cent. Uyghur motif of “sacred mountain” must have been formed after their migration to the region following 840.
44 The word baš means “head” in Old Turkic as well as in modern Turkic languages. However, it also has the meaning “mountain top” and “spring, river head,” so different meanings are given by Turkologists to toponyms containing baš. As for the Uyghur inscriptions, Katayama and Takao Moriyasu preferred to translate baš as “river-head” while Aydın chose “mountain top,” which is more likely in my opinion as well (Aydın, Uygur Yazıtları, 44, 57–58; Katayama, “Tariat Inscription,” 169–171; Takao Moriyasu, “Site and Inscription of Šine-Usu,” in PRRH [ed. Moriyasu and Ochir], 177–95, at 179–80, 184). For Aydın’s explanation of the toponym Qan Ïduq Baš, see Uygur Yazıtları, 137; idem, Eski Türk Yer Adları, 86–87. Similar to the Uyghurs, Türk inscriptions also mention several toponyms named Ïduq Baš; for these as well as the debates on whether these are mountain tops or springs and river heads, see Erkoç, “Bozkır Halklarında,” 82–85. The Old Turkic word ïduq derives from the verb ïd- meaning “to relieve, to set free,” and hence it denotes sacred beings that are set free to be dedicated to the gods, thus indicating taboo practices (Erkoç, “Bozkır Halklarında,” 75–77).
45 For S4, which has the word üč (“three”) before it hence pointing to three sacred beings, Moriyasu read ïduq taγ meaning “sacred mountain” (thus “three sacred mountains”), but Aydın’s reading is ıdok t 1t 1ı (Moriyasu, “Site and Inscription,” 180, 184; Aydın, Uygur Yazıtları, 52, 60).
46 During the Mongol period, the Uyghur title Ïduq Qut was transformed into Idiqut. Both Juvaynī and Rašīd al-Dīn have translated Idi Qut/Idiqut into Persian as χudāvand-i davlat (“lord of fortune”) (The Ta’ríkh-i-Jahán-gushá, 32; Rašīd al-Dīn, Jāmiʿ al-Tavārīχ, 1:140). As Boyle noted, Juvaynī seems to have confused the first syllable with Turkic idi meaning “lord, owner,” and “lord of fortune” should have been *Qut Idi (ʿAla-ad-Din ʿAta-Malik Juvaini, Genghis Khan, 44 n. 1). Apparently the same goes for Rašīd al-Dīn.
47 Similarly, the earlier Xiongnu rulers also gave prominence to the left (eastern) direction. Numerous Western Türk coins have images of the sun and the moon, which are connected with their cults according to Emel Esin (Emel Esin, “ ‘KÜN-AY’ [Ay-Yıldız motifinin proto-Türk devirden Hakanlılara kadar ikonografisi],” in VII. Türk Tarih Kongresi—Ankara: 25–29 Eylül 1970—Kongreye Sunulan Bildiriler [2 vols.; Ankara: TTKY, 1972] 1:313–59, at 338–52).
48 He is the one who erected the First QBI. The first fragment from its Turkic side gives his title as Ay Täŋridä Qut Bulmïš Alp Bilgä Täŋri Uyγur Qaγan; although the word in line 2 before Täŋridä is currently not legible due to erosions in the fragment, Moriyasu has determined that it should have been Ay (QBT-I I/I line 2; Aydın, Uygur Yazıtları, 67; Yutaka Yoshida, “Studies of the Karabalgasun Inscription: Edition of the Sogdian Version,” Modern Asian Studies Review 11 [2020/3] 1–139, at 99).
49 Hamilton, Les Ouïghours, 140–41; Kasai, “Uyghur Legitimation,” 64–66.
50 Harun Güngör, “Uygur Kağan Ünvanlarında Kün ve Ay Teñri Kavramlarının Kullanılışı,” in XI. Türk Tarih Kongresi—Ankara: 5-9 Eylül 1990—Kongreye Sunulan Bildiriler (2 vols.; Ankara: TTKY, 1994) 2:511–17.
51 Kasai, “Uyghur Legitimation,” 66.
52 Cults regarding celestial objects can also be observed among numerous steppe peoples like the Massagetae, Xiongnu, Caucasian Huns, Bulghars, Mongols, Altaians, and Siberian shamanists.
53 Erkoç, “Pre-Manichaean Beliefs of the Uyghurs II,” 594.
54 V. Minorsky, “Tamīm ibn Baḥr’s Journey to the Uyghurs,” BSOAS 12.2 (1948) 275–305, at 279, 283.
55 Minorsky, “Tamīm ibn Baḥr’s Journey,” 296.
56 The Türks honored fire, worshiped it, and also considered it as a purifying being, a belief shared by Mongols. Fire-worship is also observed among the Caucasian Huns. This widespread cult is again dealt with in a work of mine awaiting publication.