the ‘outside’ other 35
Th is old “Scythian pattern” was used by all “barbarians” in steppe Eur-
asia. It was not by accident that the treaty between the Bulgar ruler
Tervel (700–721) and the Byzantines signed in 716 A.D. contained
trade clauses which were extremely important for the Bulgars.^72
Sergey Kliashtornyi also insists upon the frequent attempts of the
Turkic khagans to obtain trade permits from the Chinese emperors.
Since the Middle Kingdom always considered the border trade as a
means of political control and pressure on the “barbarians”, practically
this trade represented the emperor’s court monopoly. For that reason,
the almost 200-years-long history of the Turkic khaganates provides
little information about the opening of trade points along the northern
Chinese border.^73
Th ere was one more form of “exchange trade” that resulted from
the Chinese emperors seeking help from “northern barbarians” to deal
with internal unrest.^74 It increased the number of the ‘meeting points’
with Chinese civilization although in general it did not signifi cantly
change the nomad’s notions or prejudices toward China. However,
there were Turks and Uighurs, especially aft er the suppression of the
An Lu-shan rebellion in 763 A.D. that resulted in increasing the Uighur
role in China,^75 who adopted many elements of this sedentary civili-
zation’s lifestyle. Th ese elements mostly represented a good appear-
ance although they contributed to diluting the boundaries between
own and foreign, especially in the khagan’s capital centers. According
to the Chinese, it only led to the undermining of the morality of the
Uighurs: prior to 780 A.D. as the Uighurs had common, simple hab-
its and traditions and for that reason they were unanimous and had
no rivals; from the moment they started receiving rich presents from
T’ang China, the khagan became very proud and built up a palace for
himself and the women in the court began to use make-up and expen-
sive clothes; China suff ered great fi nancial losses trying to pay for these
luxuries of the nomads; however, the morality of the nomads suff ered
(^72) Th eophanes 1960, 285. Also see, Zlatarski 1970, 226–246; Litavrin 1995, 37–44;
Oikonomides 1988, 29–32.
(^73) Kliashtornyi and Sultanov 2000, 84.
(^74) See here n. 69.
(^75) For this rebellion see, Pulleyblank 1955; Mackerras 1990, 317, 330; Th e Cam-
bridge History of China 1979, 455, 472–484. For some interesting parallels in Bulgaria
during the reign of Omurtag see, Stepanov 2003d, 81–93; Stepanov 2005b, 152–161.