The geographical distribution of the type Δ in this territory, as has been shown, is more intense in Mongolia and Manchuria than in China Proper and Korea. It is fundamental among the Mongols and Manchus and is more numerous on the west than on the east, whence it may be supposed that the present centre of this type must lie somewhere on the west. It may be too, it has no centre at all and is spread in the territory more or less uniformly with other anthropological types. I have supposed it to be connected with the Mongols. In fact this type is common not only among the Mongols proper, but also among the Buriats, Khirgiz, Kalmuks and Yakuts. It is very significant tliat this type is evidently common among the ethnical groups that are speaking the Mongol and Turkic tongues and among the Mongolized Tungus and Southern Tungus —the Manchus, Goldis and other groups of the basin of the Sungari and Amur Rivers.
The above exposed distribution of this type will be intelligible only if the connection of this type with the Turko-Mongols (that I shall abbreviate as Mongols) is admitted. The Mongol movement eastward, northward and southward left the traces of this type among the populations that do not speak now Mongol. In fact the Mongols become many times the rulers of Manchuria and it is even quite possible that they were the original organizers of the North-eastern states. The struggle of the Turko-Mongols and Chinese must probably be referred ro prehistoric times, because during the first millenium B.C. the Chinese were already passively opposing the Turko-Mongol movement and constructed the Great Wall. This struggle must be, of course, preceded by some previous movement — the Turko-Mongols could not become the conquerors of civilized China, if they did not have any military experience and organized army before. Some historians describe the Turko-Mongols as absolutely » barbarous » tribes. This description is taken usually from Chinese sources and is not quite objective. In fact, if the Turko-Mongols were really so barbarous it would not have been necessary to build such a large defensive construction as the Great Wall and to organize an army to stop them. Therefore I think that they were not so «barbarous» and had all the necessary organization to resist the Chinese radiation, but their organization was different from the Chinese system and seemed to the Chinese chronologists «barbarous.»
If the Chinese civilization in Asia is really more ancient than any other, it may be supposed that the Chinese first began their movement in all directions and pushed back the Turko-Mongols and Tungus, but their spreading was opposed by the native populations. The transfer of the Chinese capital from west to east shows the general direction of their movement. They moved, of course, on the line of least resistance — at that time the Northern population became strong enough to oppose the Chinese movement north-ward. This opposition of the Turko-Mongols caused the Mongol movement into Manchuria, where they organized the resistance to the Chinese movement eastward. In fact, Chinese documents refer the Chinese invasion of Manchuria and Korea and growing influence over the local population to the first thousand years B.C., i.e., at the time when the Mongols became very aggressive in the northern and western sections. Then they were obliged to spread their influence eastward with a view to stop the Chinese-movement eastward and during the last two thousand years the Mongols many times took control over Northern China and Korea. It is therefore quite natural that they left some traces on the local population and the type A spread Over the territory of present China, Manchuria and partly Korea.
It might be very probably that the original tongue of the type Δ was not the Mongol. This type is common among the ethnical groups now speaking the Turkic dialects. Besides the Chinese written documents which do not furnish exact linguistical classification there is some historical and ethnographical evidence to support this proposition. The Uigurs in VI-VII centuries had their own alphabet, spoke a Turkic dialect and were organized in a state in the Northern part of Mongolia, which supposes, of course, a long historical development before they became able to organize a civilized state. The Yakuts, who speak a Turkic dialect, moved from their Motherland, somewhere about Lake Baikal, to the Siberian steppes in the North, after the Tungus occupied Siberia, which happened in a very remote time. The Kirgiz and the Yellow Uigurs of Koko-nor also speak Turkic dialects. These facts show that the Turkic dialects occupy now the periphery of the Mongol tongue but in the early time they were spoken by the population of the present Mongolian area.
Thus the alteration of the ethnical control in this part of Asia was so intense that the languages were many times changed, the different types amalgamated, and a series of well organized states arose and fell. Therefore it may be very probable that the leading ethnical groups sometimes spoke Turkic dialects, sometimes Mongol or Tungus dialects, but the type A survived these alternations.
The influence of this type over the Manchus is quite
natural. The Manchus divide themselves into three groups, viz. — Mongol-Manchu,
Ancient Manchus and Modern Manchus, so that thay recognize the Mongol origin of
some clans, though these clans always speak Manchu. The Goldi of Sungari River,
who are considered by the Manchus as Modern Manchus, or «the last
incorporated,» and speak a Manchu dialect, include the type A. They
introduced this type among other Tungus groups, with which they maintain very
close relations. The Dahurs of some uncertain origin, who speak now a Mongol
dialect and were the rulers of Northern China under the name of Khitans or
Cathayans [101] include also the type A and are connected very closely with the
Manchus.
101. Among the Manchu clan names may be noted: Kitan, Tatar, Mongol and some others, which seem to show their close relationship with the tribes of these names.