SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Hacettepe Üniversitesi Türkiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi / 2019 / Cilt: 0 - Sayı: 30

In-Between Heqin and Gong: Bilateral Relations of the Hun and Han Empires

HEQIN İLE GONG ARASINDA: HUN VE HAN İMPARATORLUKLARININ İKİLİ İLİŞKİLERİ

Gökay YAVRUCUK
Pages
99–125
Publication Date
2022-10-17
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

As a result of their rivalry, a bipolar system emerged where third parties were forced to cooperate, in order to survive.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The Xiongnu and Han empires, founded almost at the same time, survived for four centuries as rivals and counterparts.
📊
Key Findings & Data:However, the success of this strategy depends on the other side’s strength and resistance against pressure.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:As a result of their rivalry, a bipolar system emerged where third parties were forced to cooperate, in order to survive.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The Xiongnu and Han empires, founded almost at the same time, survived for four centuries as rivals and counterparts. Both empires’ ideological framework was centred on the idea of heavenly mandate/world dominance. Their extensive common frontier lines, their ideological foundations and foreign policy ambitions forced them into rivalry. They endeavoured to shape bilateral relations, creating systems that served their own interests and to force them to the adversary. The Xiongnu tried to impose upon the Han, the Heqin a tributary system, whereas the Han strived to enforce the Gong, a system making Xiongnu a tribute-owning vassal. Notwithstanding their efforts, none of these systems offered permanent solution to problems, thus competition continued under all circumstances. Both these empires aimed to wear out their rivals and enact their own interests. However, the success of this strategy depends on the other side’s strength and resistance against pressure. As a result of their rivalry, a bipolar system emerged where third parties were forced to cooperate, in order to survive.

Özet

Hemen hemen aynı anda kurulan ve yıkılan Hun ve Han imparatorlukları 4 asır boyunca birbirinin rakibi ve pek çok açıdan tamamlayıcısı olarak var oldu. Her iki imparatorluğun ideolojisi de tanrısal cihan hâkimiyeti fikri üzerine kurgulanmıştı. Geniş ortak sınırları, ideolojik kurguları ve dış politika hedefleri iki imparatorluğu rekabet etmeye zorluyordu. İkili ilişkileri kendi çıkarlarına göre şekillendiren sistemler yaratmaya ve bu sistemleri karşı tarafa dayatmaya çalıştılar. Hunlar, Han’ın haraç ödediği Heqin’i; Han ise Hunların vassal olarak haraç ödediği gong sistemini hayata geçirmeye gayret etti. Fakat geliştirdikleri hiçbir sistem sorunları kalıcı olarak çözmeye yetmedi ve rekabet her koşulda canlı kaldı. Bu iki imparatorluk rakibini yıpratarak ona çıkarlarını dayatmayı hedefliyordu. Ancak bu stratejinin başarısı karşı tarafın yıpranmayı kaldırabilmesine bağlıydı. Onların rekabetinin etkisiyle iki kutuplu bir siyasal atmosfer oluştu ve üçüncü taraflar varlıklarını korumak için iş birliğini kabullenmek zorunda kaldılar.

🔖

Cite This Article

YAVRUCUK, G. (2022). In-Between Heqin and Gong: Bilateral Relations of the Hun and Han Empires. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Türkiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi, Cilt: 0 - Sayı: 30, 99–125. https://ajindex.com/articles/533507

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Ban Gu. (1988). Han Shu (Han Hanedanı Tarihi). Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju. Barfield, T.J. (1981). The Hsiung-nu Imperial Confederacy: Organization and Foreign Policy. Journal of Asian Studies, 41(1), 45-61.
  2. Barfield, T.J. (2001a). The Shadow Empires: Imperial State Formation Along the Chinese-Nomad Frontier. S.E. Alcock, T.N. D’altroy, K.D. Morrison, C.M. Sinopoli (Ed.). Empires: Perspectives from Archaeology and History içinde (ss. 10-42). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  3. Barfield, T.J. (2001b).
  4. Steppe Empires, China and the Silk Route: Nomads as a Force in International Trade and Politics. A.M. Khazanov, A. Wink (Ed.). Nomads in the Sedentary World içinde (ss. 234-250).
  5. Routledge. Bielenstein, H. (2008). Bureaucracy of Han Times. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  6. Chang, C. (2010). The Rise of the Chinese Empire: Nation, State&Imperialism in Early China ca. 1600- B.C.-A.D. 8 (Volum 1). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
  7. Di Cosmo, N. (2002). Ancient China and Its Enemies: The Rise of Nomadic Power in East Asian History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  8. Di Cosmo, N. (2010). Ancient Inner Asian Nomads-Their Economic Basis and Its Significance in Chinese History. D. Sneath, C. Kaplonski (Ed.). History of Mongolia The Pre-Chinggisid Era Chinggis Khan and the Mongol Empire içinde (C. I, ss. 10-43). Folkestone: Global Oriental. Di Cosmo, N. (2013). Aristocratic Elites in the Xiongnu Empire as Seen from Historical and Archaeological Evidence. V. J. Paul (Ed.). Nomad Aristocrats in a World of Empires içinde (ss. 23-55). Wiesbaden: Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag. Fairbank, J.K. (1968). A Preliminary Framework. J.K. Fairbank (Ed.). The Chinese World Order-Traditional Foreign Relations içinde (ss. 1-20). Harvard: Harvard University Press.
  9. Fairbank, J.K. ve Goldman, M. (2006). China a New History. Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Gumilëv, L. N. (2013). Hunlar. (A. Batur Çev.). Selenge Yayınları.
  10. Khazanov, A. (1994). Nomads and the Outside World. (J. Crookenden Çev.). Wisconsin: The University of Wisconsin Press.
  11. Lewis, M. E. (2007). The Early Chinese Empires Qin and Han. Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
  12. Loewe, M. (2008).
  13. The Former Han Dynasty. D. Twitchett, M. Loewe (Ed.). The Cambridge History of China The Ch’in and Han Empires 221 B.C. to A.D. 220. içinde (C. I, ss. 103-223). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  14. Ma, Y. ve Sun, Y. (2001). The Western Regions under the Hsiung-nu and the Han. A. M. Kh