State institutions of the Siberian khanate in archaeological materials

Siberian Turkic-Tatar state formations left a rather bright trace in the history of the region in the second half of the II millennium AD. Particularly should be noted Siberian Khanate, whose borders occupied almost all forest-steppe and southern taiga zones of Western Siberia. Khan Kuchum, who became its leader, had a serious influence on the Central Asian-Siberian political arena. At present, the entire history of these state formations is based mainly on written sources. Unfortunately, the documents do not give a complete description of these states - we do not know their borders and infrastructure, the symbols of the state, there are no markers that would allow scientists to link the famous archaeological complexes with specific khanates. Presented in this article research is devoted to revealing markers of state institutes of khanates in available archaeological materials. The presence of such symbols of the state will allow structuring the archaeological complexes as territorially so as chronologically. In this article two directions of search for these markers are highlighted - archaeological complexes that were founded or created by the central government and carried a specific state burden and personal items that played a status value for their owners. In the first case, I single out the border towns built by Khan Kuchum to protect the borders of his khanate on the southern border of the Barabinsk forest-steppe and on the border of the eastern Irtysh valley in Tara Irtysh area. These towns stand out from other fortified complexes by strategical location, fortification having European and Central Asian features, dwellings and supply system (according to osteological materials). Among the state complexes, I include cult places built by Khan Kuchum as part of the spread of the Muslim religion - Astana. These sites began to play not only the role of new religious centers, but also symbolized the central government and became places where many local disputes and problems were solved. I consider weapons, armor and rings to personal items. We know a certain significance of armor and weapons for state leaders of that time. We know what importance was attached to Yermak’s armor by the Tatar people. The museums keep the helmets of military leaders, for example, the helmet of Eligey. In the materials of Tatar burial grounds of the 16-17 cc. we find burials with rich armor (Okunevo VII) or weapons (Bergamak 2). Special importance had the rings, the signposts of which depicted horsemen with weapons or mythological creatures. My research shows the prospects of using archaeological materials for a deeper characterization of the Siberian Turkic-Tatar state formations and provides an opportunity for further search for their symbols.

Keywords

Authors

References