Changing understanding of spatial organization of centers and peripheries in the evolution of Inner Asian political and administrative terminology

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216224%3A14210%2F24%3A00139347" target="_blank" >RIV/00216224:14210/24:00139347 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://calenda.org/1045556?lang=en" target="_blank" >https://calenda.org/1045556?lang=en</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

—

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Changing understanding of spatial organization of centers and peripheries in the evolution of Inner Asian political and administrative terminology

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

This paper focuses on various aspects of spatial organization and spatial perception among particular communities along the Taklamakan Desert with Eastern connections across the Hexi Corridor and Altai Mountains. Especially the tumultuous development with many multi-cultural and multiethnic encounters during the first millennium AD is offering rich data how various communities accommodated their own designation and organizational structure to their particular position in terms of physical geography, relation of neighboring oasis states, powers and cultural traditions. Various languages attest specific cultural understandings before and during the Tang Dynasty: titles of military officers marked by cardinal points related to the position of nearby mountains in Tocharian, westernmost extension of Chinese cultural world in “Western Capital” Xizhou 西州 (= Turfan), which have several later parallels in Mongolian and Manchu administrative units, military titles and general symbolism of cardinal points in the Mongolian tradition. Another traditional Left-Center-Right scale was forming whole empires, administrative units of ruling family members (Xiongnu and all later Turko-Mongolic Empires, e.g. Western and Eastern Turks) or constituted administrative identity of particular areas (Dzungars) as well as identity in diachronic development and in historical sources (Eastern and Western Han / Early and Later Han). Semantic connection of this terminology is representing specific Inner Asian cultural design related to the most sacred power in the center and its hierarchical superiority which nevertheless often did not corresponded to real political power. Also the frequent changes of the location of Inner Asian capital and power center(s) represent specific movement pattern and attest the heritage of ancient non-Chinese pastoral communities contributing to the constitution of the highest layer of Inner Asian imperial culture.

Název v anglickém jazyce

Changing understanding of spatial organization of centers and peripheries in the evolution of Inner Asian political and administrative terminology

Popis výsledku anglicky

This paper focuses on various aspects of spatial organization and spatial perception among particular communities along the Taklamakan Desert with Eastern connections across the Hexi Corridor and Altai Mountains. Especially the tumultuous development with many multi-cultural and multiethnic encounters during the first millennium AD is offering rich data how various communities accommodated their own designation and organizational structure to their particular position in terms of physical geography, relation of neighboring oasis states, powers and cultural traditions. Various languages attest specific cultural understandings before and during the Tang Dynasty: titles of military officers marked by cardinal points related to the position of nearby mountains in Tocharian, westernmost extension of Chinese cultural world in “Western Capital” Xizhou 西州 (= Turfan), which have several later parallels in Mongolian and Manchu administrative units, military titles and general symbolism of cardinal points in the Mongolian tradition. Another traditional Left-Center-Right scale was forming whole empires, administrative units of ruling family members (Xiongnu and all later Turko-Mongolic Empires, e.g. Western and Eastern Turks) or constituted administrative identity of particular areas (Dzungars) as well as identity in diachronic development and in historical sources (Eastern and Western Han / Early and Later Han). Semantic connection of this terminology is representing specific Inner Asian cultural design related to the most sacred power in the center and its hierarchical superiority which nevertheless often did not corresponded to real political power. Also the frequent changes of the location of Inner Asian capital and power center(s) represent specific movement pattern and attest the heritage of ancient non-Chinese pastoral communities contributing to the constitution of the highest layer of Inner Asian imperial culture.

Druh

O - Ostatní výsledky

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

60101 - History (history of science and technology to be 6.3, history of specific sciences to be under the respective headings)

Projekt

Výsledek vznikl pri realizaci vícero projektů. Více informací v záložce Projekty.

Návaznosti

P - Projekt vyzkumu a vyvoje financovany z verejnych zdroju (s odkazem do CEP)

Rok uplatnění

2024

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů