Mongolic Studies

Коллективная монография посвящена исследованию этнокультурных процессов эпохи средневековья в Байкальском регионе. Рассматривая эту территорию расширительно - в рамках Предбайкалья, Забайкалья и Кругобайкалья, авторы определяют ее как историческую зону пограничья ранних тюрко-монгольско-самодийско-тунгусско-палеоазиатских контактов и на этом фоне основное внимание уделяют проблемам этногенеза и этнической истории бурят и якутов. Предпринята попытка исследователей разных научных школ осмыслить общие генетические корни и глубинные основы культуры этносов-предков, подробнее изучить поздние этноэволюционные процессы и исторические судьбы этих народов в местах их современного проживания. Читатель заметит новизну методологического видения рассматриваемых проблем и оригинальную интерпретацию вопросов этно- и культурогенеза. Издание предназначено археологам, этнологам, историкам, востоковедам, краеведам и всем, кто интересуется историей народов Центральной Азии и Восточной Сибири.

This article continues the series of the works devoted to the study of ethnic composition of the Buryat and
Khamnigan departments in 19th century. One of the self-government bodies of indigenous of the Transbaikalia in the 19th
century was the Urulginskaya Steppe Duma, the main population of which was the “Tungus of Manchu tribe”, as the
Russian administration called them. The Ongotson indigenous council was the southwestern outskirts of the Urulga
Steppe duma. In the 19th century, in the literature, the population of this council, like most of the population of Urulga
Steppe Duma, was called “Horse Tungus”. The basis of the ethnic composition of the Ongotson Khamnigans was represented
by Sartuls, Sarduls, Bakhashils, Lunikers and Chimchagits. The largest unit was the Sartuls – immigrants from
Central Asia, who settled in Mongolia, mainly in the west of Khalkha. A part of the Sartuls in the east (in the Setsen-khan
aimag, on the borderlands of Mongolia and Manchuria, in Jarut, Yekhe and Khada), became involved in the ethnic composition
of both the Mongols and Manchus. From here, probably, take roots of both the Sartuls and Sarduls of Onon
region. It was the Sartuls who had a key influence on the linguistic and confessional affiliation of all Ongotson Khamnigans.
The ethnonym Bakhashil < Vakasil < Vakaroi indicates the participation of “Reindeer Tungus” (Evenks) in the
formation of groups of “Horse Tungus” (Solon). The spread of the ethnonym Vakarai and its other phonetic variants
indicates a wide area of its distribution in the Evenks environment. However, the existing hypotheses admit its origin in
the Manchu-Tungusic, Yukaghir and Turkic environment, of which the first two are preferable. The ethnonym Chimchigit
< Chimchagir may have Tungus-Manchurian and Mongolian roots. Lunikir is found in Transbaikalia, Mongolia and
Barga, which reflects the long-term contacts of its carriers in this region. The origin of this ethnonym is unclear, although
it has a form close to the Tungus languages. The discovered connections with Mongolia, Manchuria and vast expanses of
Eastern Siberia and Amgun region reflect the crossroads of the migration routes of Mongols and Manchu-Tungusic both
in Transbaikalia, and specifically in the Onon region. This significantly expands the research area into ethnic history not
only of the Khamnigans, but also wider than the Mongolian and Manchu-Tungusic linguistic groups. A detailed map of
the settlement of Ongotson Khamnigans, based on the census tables, was compiled.

Introduction. This article under takes a study of the clan name Shoshoolog (Šošōlog) in the context of ethnogenesis and ethnic history of the Mongolic and Turkic peoples of Inner Asia and Siberia. New historical and ethnographical data, including the evidence of ethnonymics as a part of the ethnic history of the Mongolic and Turkic peoples of the region will contribute to the knowledge of the migration and settlement history of the Shoshoolog people. The study aims at examining the etymology of the term šošōloγ, the area where it wasspread and theways of itsspread. Data and methods. The authors have taken into account written documents, ethnographical and folklore sources that contained references to the ethnonym in question. The written sources of the period between the seventeenth and nineteenth centuries, mainly in Russian, such as Cossacks’ otpiski (reports), and, more recent, travel and census reports, contain various forms of the ethnonym, often incorrectly spelled but still of interest as evidence pointing at the settlement areas of the ethnic group, as well as a source for linguistic speculation. The ethnographical sources include references to the ethnic group in question based on the legends and sagas shedding light on the people’s origin and settlement patterns both in the Baikal area and in Mongolia. The folklore texts written down by N. N. Poppe, S. P. Baldaev, etc. Include the stories of the Shoshoolog as a Buryat clan with a strong Shamanic background, as well as various forms of the ethnonym. Granted the available knowledge of the historical patterns in the language evolution, the orthographical forms of the ethnonym contained in different records were used as the data for further phonetical reconstructions and localizations of the ethnonym’s phonetic shape in terms of chronological and geographical dimensions. This data, alongside other material on the ethnonymics and onomastics of Mongolic and Turkic peoples, contributes to the linguistic part of the database in the field. Conclusions. A comparative analysis of ethnonymic evidence contained in a variety of sources examined resulted in phonetic reconstructions of the ethnonym under study to finally shed new light on its etymology, as well as to project further developments of its phonetic shape.