This is the second part in our series on nomadic
blacksmithing.
Part one dealt with an overview of steppe societies, cities and blacksmithing in general,
so check that out as an important prelude to this.
This time we get specific, looking at the Xiongnu through to the Türkic Khaganates,
and furnaces and sites associated with them, while next week we will look at the Khitans
and Mongols.
As in the previous episode, most examples here are focused on the Mongolian plateau,
Altai Mountains and Southern Siberia/Trans-Baikal region, but will reflect similar conditions
across the Eurasian steppes.
Xiongnu: 8-10
Our story begins with the Xiongnu, generally considered the first nomadic empire.
Ruling from Mongolia into Qazaqstan for an approximately 300 year period, the Xiongnu
were not the first metalworkers of the steppes, but they are perhaps best studied of the early
nomadic production types.
While earlier nomadic peoples like the Scythians had their own bronze production, with the
Xiongnu not only do we have some surviving production sites, but can also see under them
the steady replacement of bronze with iron for tools, weapons and armour.
Though the ancient Chinese writer Sima Qian famously describes the Xiongnu as aimless
wanderers, his description is exaggerated.
There is substantial archaeological evidence for settlements and agriculture in the Xiongnu
period, operating alongside pastoral nomadism.
The Xiongnu had a series of walled settlements within the Mongolian steppe.
These sites are given modern names to identify them, as the original names are unknown.
Khustyn Bulag and Kherlen-Bars 2 are among the most notable ones in Mongolia proper.
These are identified through carbon dating, and discovery of wares and items we associate
with the Xiongnu period, like particular ceramic styles.
The Khustyn Bulag site in Eastern Mongolia is among the largest Xiongnu sites, situated
in a network of fortified and unfortified settlements within a relatively short distance
of each other, with tombs of high-ranking Xiongnu nearby.
Kherlen Bars 2, though a bit farther out, was likely involved in this network.
These sites consist of walls, foundations for large, above ground structures, dug-out
houses, refuse pits, bones of numerous animals and wheat and barley grains.
Khustyn Bulag is also near a number of elite Xiongnu tombs, and had kilns for production
of ceramics and roof tiles.
There is also extensive evidence for local iron-production.
This includes remains of roasting pits for iron ore, clay furnaces for smelting iron,
and slag remains, the waste-product of iron-bloomery smelting.
Stone hammers and anvils have been identified there.
Together these are tell-tale signs that they made their own iron implements, In fact, they
were exporting them, as there is no evidence for onsite refining and forging.
At Khustyn Bulag, the iron-ore was heated into usable iron, and then sent elsewhere
to be turned into a final product by other specialists in the network.
There is also evidence for non-settlement production.
At nomadic campsites associated with the Xiongnu, such as in Mongolia’s Khanui Valley, we
find slag remains from small furnaces in what have been identified as open-air nomadic encampments,
non-urban sites.
Presumably, these were small, perhaps single-use forges made of clay.
They were easy to set up and dissemble as needed.
No swords would be made in them, but they were sufficient for small tools and arrow-heads.
We can imagine families making as much of their materials as possible, going to a dedicated
professional at a larger site only when requiring something far too specific, resource-intensive
and complicated to make themselves.
It seems the Xiongnu state had dedicated production colonies, providing craftsmen with steady
access to ore and fuel to supply the Xiongnu elite with their desired wares, be it jewellery,
tools, weapons or armour.
The furnaces of the Xiongnu have a distinctive oval shape, which appears to accompany their
expansion from eastern Mongolia westwards, helping us identify their sites in southern
Siberia and around Lake Baikal.
In these mineral and fuel-rich northern regions, the Xiongnu brought their furnaces and fortified
settlements, an effort to take control over the local resources and pre existing metal-working
communities.
The Xiongnu-era fortified sites that appear there likely served as frontier outposts and
colonies, protected by stout walls and filled with crafts: evidence exists for copper, bronze,
bone, jewellery production and more at these sites.
Local peoples, or Xiongnu workers from elsewhere, were brought in to make these products to
the specifications of the Xiongnu rulers.
Evidently, the existing population was not keen on the Xiongnu’s imposition and commandeering
of these ore, fuel and human resources, necessitating defensive walls.
Of these, the Ivolga settlement in Buryatia near Ulan-Ude is the most notable, protected
by the Selenga River and four sets of earthen and wooden walls alternating with lines of
ditches.
As many as 3,000 people lived within what was probably a rather cramped environment,
subsisting off of hunting, fishing and local agriculture.
Most buildings were built in a semi-subterranean style, the most common type of non-elite Xiongnu-home
construction in these settlements.
At Ivolga these buildings were wood-framed, with peat and sod walls and a gabled roof.
There were larger mounds that were the base for above-ground wooden buildings, the largest
being a 10x10 metre structure often called a palace.
There are extensive signs of iron, copper and bronze production, with both finished
products, found in some of the many graves in the associated cemetery, as well as slag,
tools and sprue remnants.
Furnaces for smelting and working iron were located towards the centre of the town.
The production here was not in specialized shops, but took place in the residences where
people lived.
Often they show signs of multiple craft productions in the same building, including jewellry,
bone and leather working.
The Ivolga settlement provides one of the best preserved cultural layers from the Xiongnu,
and demonstrates a complex social and economic environment.
It was not unique, but one among several similar Xiongnu sites in relative proximity operating
at the same time and almost certainly in cooperation.
These weren’t for local use, but to be shipped back to the Xiongnu’s elite.
Perhaps not surprisingly, once Xiongnu power waned, these sites were abandoned.
Xianbei: 10
With a renewed unification of the region by the Xianbei around 100 CE, we see a new wave
of these “frontier outpost” sites, serving the same purpose of extraction for the Xianbei
elite.
One of the largest is called Katylyg 5 in the Tuva Republic.
Situated on a natural terrace over the Eerbek River, the Katylyg site was protected by two
rows of walls and ditches.
Inside the walls, the area of the fort was divided into three distinct zones: one dedicated
to smelting, with remnants of nine smelting furnaces and slag; one zone for smithing,
with clay tuyeres and fragments of smithing hearths; and a third zone with pits for preparation
of charcoal.
The smelters here were large, with a working chamber over a metre deep.
A great volume of material was produced.
Over 1050 kg of iron slag was found there, with evidence for additional production of
bronze, bone and leather working.
Chemical analysis of the iron suggests it was sourced from the Khovu-Aksy deposit, about
70 km to the south.
Katylyg represents a great level of sophistication and organization: this was not a few families
contributing, but a mobilization of labour and experience even to produce the fuel to
run the furnaces, let alone anything else.
This was a valuable, well-protected site, whose design shows considerable thought to
specialization and streamlining production, far behind the needs of a community of this
size.
Imagine regular shipments of products and materials from Katylyg to Xianbei nobles,
or for other workers to finish elsewhere.
There must have been an entire network in place to keep Katylyg supplied, not just with
fuel for the fires, but to feed and cloth its workers.
Turkic: 10-12
At these southern Siberian sites, there was a long and robust tradition of iron working
and exploiting rich deposits even before the nomadic empires.
Yet in the post-Xianbei period with the rise of the Türkic Khaganates we see a decline
in metallurgy in southern Siberia that lasted for centuries.
It seems the Göktürks and their successors did not try to establish such colonies, or
redirected labour from Siberia to the Altai mountains and Orkhon Valley, where their capitals
and heart of their empire lie.
The importance of the Altai mountains in particular made them valuable targets fought over by
succeeding polities: the Uighur, Qirghiz, and Kimek.
This was probably an ongoing process accelerated by the Göktürks.
For example, the Kosh-Agach style of furnaces along the Kuektanar River in the southern
Altai are the largest extant furnaces of the region ever found, and were among the largest
in the world at the time.
Some date them to the Türkic Khaganates, or earlier to the Rouran period.
The firing chamber alone was around two metres deep.
To keep such an immense space evenly heated required expert knowledge and considerable
experience, and a huge volume of charcoal.
A number of tuyeres and bellows also helped manage air flow into it.
They were built on the slopes of a river, with a 1.5 metre long channel running out
from it, from which flowed the slag; a 350 kilogram block of slag was found at the bottom
of these furnaces, and reflected the amount produced from a single use.
As they are not found in a cultural layer, suggesting these behemoths were built far
away from settlements.
Due to this, and erosion from the river which destroyed most of them over time, they remain
difficult to date.
We continue to see large urban sites under the Göktürks and their successors.
The Göktürks and the Uighurs had capitals in the Orkhon Valley, in today’s Mongolia,
where the famous Old Turkic Orkhon and Tonyuquq inscriptions are found.
The Uighur Khaganate’s settlement network was particularly impressive, attested well
in textual sources and archaeology.
The most notable is their great capital Ordu-Baliq, the largest in the pre-modern Mongolian plateau
beside Qaraqorum, which itself is only a few kilometres away.
It was protected by tall walls up to 14 metres wide in places, with a great palace for the
Khagan.
An islamic traveller, Tamim ibn Bahr, recorded his impression of the city in the early ninth
century, describing it as densely populated, full of commerce, surrounded by smaller networks
of villages and entered through 12 large, iron gates.
The Uyghur Khaghan lived in a great golden tent on top of the palace, so large a hundred
people could fit in it, shining bright and highly elevated so that it could be seen from
great distance.
And as you should expect by now, we also find the archaeological indication of on-site metal
working, including iron, bronze and copper.
The troops of the Uyghur Khaghan were supposed to have been very well armed and armoured,
as ibn Bahr’s account states.
The population of these Uyghur settlements was, it seems, mostly non-Uyghur; from ibn
Bahr’s observations to Chinese accounts to even the archaeological remains, it is
clear there were substantial numbers of Central Asians, especially Sogdians, and Chinese,
living in these settlements.
We can look at the words of the Uyghur Khans themselves, who leave us inscriptions in the
Sogdian script commemorating their cities.
On the Shine-Usu inscription dating to around 750, it records the statement of the Uighur
Khaghan Eletmish Bilge, stating that he was ordering the construction of the town of Bay-Baliq
along the Selenga River either by, or for, the Chinese and Sogdians.
They brought with them knowledge and techniques from their respective regions, and not surprisingly,
we find their products in both Gokturk and Uighur burials, from jewellery to textiles.
Undoubtedly, they influenced weapons and armour.
For example, let us look at the Shoroon Bumbagar tomb in Bulgan Aimag in northern Mongolia.
This seventh century burial is likely an aristocrat of a Turkic Khaganate, buried with clay figurines,
including these wonderful heavy cavalry figures.
They bear a striking resemblance to Chinese designs of the time, but chemical analysis
indicates they were made from local clay.
Of course, there was a great deal of sharing of military technology, knowledge and troops
between the Tang Dynasty and its Turkic neighbours to the north, but that’s beyond the scope
of this video.
With the Turks we can speak of the cultural importance of the blacksmith.While the metalworker
serves an important function in any society, the blacksmith is associated with the very
origins of the Turkic Khaganate.
Contemporary Chinese accounts like the Zhou-shu report tales of the origins of the Türks:
the most famous has the ruling clan of Türks, the Ashina, spending generations living in
caves, and after their escape, serving as iron-workers for the Rouran Khans.
According to one version of the story, the Turkic leader, Bumin, requested a royal princess
to marry from the Rouran Khan, who rudely responded; “You are my blacksmith slave.
How dare you speak this way?”
This led to a revolt resulting in the overthrow of the Rouran and establishment of the first
Turkic Khaganate.
There have been many ways to interpret the story, with the “generations-in-the-cave”
part sometimes thought to be a reference to mining.
In another account, the Sui-shu, the word Türk meant “helmet,” and was taken because
the Altai Mountains looked like a helmet.
Meanwhile, even a cursory glance at Türkic and Mongolic names reveals an abundance of
fellows named variations of Temür, meaning iron.
Most famous of these were Emir Temür, Tamerlane as he’s often known.
It’s also the root of Chinggis Khan’s birth name, Temüjin, as well as most of his
siblings too.
There are also indications of Turkic Khans taking on ceremonial roles as blacksmiths.
Blacksmiths were sometimes seen as comparable, or even greater than, a shaman; the blacksmith
transformed an element, purifying it in fire, turning earth into iron and tools for war,
a deadly, dangerous and mysterious process.
Mahmud al-Kashgari in the 11th century reported how many Turkic peoples considered iron as
having great power, strong enough that it could be sworn upon when making an oath.
The Zhou-shu speaks of the Turk Khaghans taking part in a ceremony every year, leading the
nobles of the empire to the cave where their ancestors had lived to make sacrifices, or
making sacrifices along a river called Temur; iron.
We will see a continuation of these ceremonies in our next episode on the Mongols.
This concludes our brief survey of iron production in pre-Mongol Empire nomadic states.
The point emphasized here is the continuity of both this metal-working— not just materially
but culturally significant— but also its regular association with urban settlements.
These are not elements isolated to one period, but rather a consistent feature of these Eurasian
societies.
Their level of social, political and economic development is much more complex than common
stereotypes would have you believe, and we will continue this discussion in our next
video, for the Khitan period and Mongol Empire.