Hulbuk

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hulbuk ( Tajik Ҳулбук , Russian Хулбук ) was a medieval city on the site of today's village of Kurbon Shahid (Курбон ШаШид, also Pingan ) in the Tajik province of Khatlon . From the 9th century to the beginning of the 11th century, Hulbuk was under the supremacy of the Samanids and from 1024 under the Ghaznavids the capital of the province of Chuttal (Khuttalan) and was one of the largest cities in Central Asia . In 1064 the Seljuks put down an uprising and destroyed the city, which was abandoned in the 12th century.

In the citadel from 1953 to 1991 and again since 2003 several, up to the 5th / 6th Construction phases of a palace complex, including a mosque and stately residential buildings, dating back to the 19th century. The 70 hectare urban living area around the citadel hill has only been explored to a limited extent, but since 2004 the citadel wall, which has largely disappeared, has been reconstructed according to its presumed former shape.

Reconstructed enclosure wall of the citadel. Southwest facing side

location

Coordinates: 37 ° 46 ′ 44 ″  N , 69 ° 33 ′ 20 ″  E

Map: Tajikistan
marker
Hulbuk
Magnify-clip.png
Tajikistan

Kurbon Shahid is located in the ( nohija ) Wose (Восеъ) district around 175 kilometers southeast of the state capital, Dushanbe . The highway A385 leads via Wahdat past Norak through Danghara and reaches Kurbon Shahid almost 60 kilometers afterwards. The next, somewhat larger district capital, Wose, follows eight kilometers to the east. The city of Kulob is another 19 kilometers east of Wose . The A385 turns six kilometers west of Kurbon Shahid to the south to the small town of Farchor (Parkhar) on the Pandsch River , which forms the border with Afghanistan for a long distance . Directly in the village, a side road branches off to some villages in a hilly area to the north.

The eastern part of Chatlon Province is mostly mountainous with some fertile valley plains in between. The Kizilsu has its source in the Wachsch Mountains in the northeast, which are over 3000 meters high, flows past the southern edge of the town and flows into the Pandsch after 25 kilometers. Kurbon Shahid is about 480 meters above sea level in the seven kilometers wide river plain at this point; the hills in the north form the foothills of the Wachsch Mountains with a height of about 1000 meters. The treeless hills, covered only with grass, serve as pastureland, while cotton, wheat and maize are mainly grown on the irrigated fields of the plain. To the south-east you can see the 1334 meter high salt mountain Chodscha Moomin, six kilometers away, which Marco Polo (1254–1324) already described and which, according to estimates, contains over 30 billion tons of salt.

In 1932 a railway line from the Uzbek city of Termiz to Qurghonteppa was completed. Its continuation from Qurghonteppa via Kurbon Shahid and Wose to Kulob was put into operation in 1956. It is used to transport cotton and salt from this region.

Residential houses on the thoroughfare opposite the citadel

In the Middle Ages, Hulbuk belonged to the province of Chuttal within the area called Transoxania in antiquity and mā warāʾan-nahr by the Arabs in the Middle Ages . Chuttal lay - as the geographical names indicate - beyond (north) the ancient Oxus (today Amudarja , in this area Pandsch), bounded in the west along the Wachsch by the provinces Wachsch and Kubodijon, after which the today's cities Wachsch and Kubodijon are named, northwest of Chaghaniyan and to the east of Darwos (Darvaz). At times, Chuttal's sphere of influence extended from the valley of the Kizilsu to the valley of the Wachsch. During the rule of the Mongols and Timurids , Chuttal was famous for horse breeding and the manufacture of horse saddles. The province name Chuttal was given up in the 16th century in favor of Kulob, as today's eastern district is called.

The province of Wachsch with the capital Chelawerd, which existed until the 8th century (today's name of the settlement hill Kafirkala , in Kolkhozobod ), was politically connected to Chuttal. From the 10th century, another place in the province of Wachsch Chelawerd was called (Khelaverd, Halaward, later Lagman), it was located in what is now the village of Uzun near Kolkhozobod. The town of Lewkand (today Wachsch, west of Hulbuk) was a day's journey northeast of Halaward. Munk (now Chowaling, Khovaling) could be reached in two day trips from Hulbuk to the northeast. Hulbuk was not on a trade route, but was connected to the large market towns of Balkh (in northern Afghanistan) and Tirmidh ( Termiz in Uzbekistan). The distance on the old trade routes to Balch was 250 kilometers via Tirmidh. From Balkh the road followed the Amu Darya to the northwest to Amul ( Turkmenabat in Turkmenistan) and there turned in a northerly direction to Bukhara . There was a connection coming from Merw via Balch, which led east to the historical Darwos province and through Berg-Badakhshan to China. Other goods came from Abbasid Iraq .

history

Chuttal belonged to the Hephthalite sphere of influence in the 6th century . The local rulers carried the Persian title chuttal-shah or sher-i chuttal . The conquest of the ancient region of Bactria by the Muslim Umayyads began in the middle of the 7th century with a campaign to Tirmidh, in 654 they reached Sogdia and in 675/676 they conquered Chuttal. Arab authors called the area of ​​what is now northern Afghanistan, south-east Uzbekistan and south-west Tajikistan, Tocharistan . In 681 an Arab general wintered for the first time with his troops north of the Oxus. During this time there was resistance from the local rulers of Chuttal on several occasions. The Chuttal Empire, which had issued its own coins since the late Hephtalites, had a more powerful army than Badhghis further south (see Badghis Province in northern Afghanistan), which submitted to the Arabs early on. As at-Tabarī reports, the princes of Chuttal, Bukhara and Chaghaniyan joined forces with Tarkan Nizak, the Turkic ruler of Tocharistan, in a counterattack on the Umayyads in Tirmidh. In 726 the Umayyads conquered Chuttal including Hulbuk and beyond Transoxania up to the border on Syr Darya in the Fergana valley . They achieved supremacy without completely taking control of the areas where many Turks lived. At-Tabarī names a number of local rulers (Arabic hereditary title mālik , plural mulūk , "king") in Chuttal until the year 750/751, when the governor of Balch, Abū Dāwūd Chālid ibn Ibrāhīm, had the ruler removed from Hulbuk. He first fled to a Turkish region and later to China. There are no sources on Hulbuk from the middle of the 8th to the middle of the 9th century.

From 850 the Samanids ruled western Transoxania from the Ferghana Valley via Samarqand to Herat , while Chuttal was controlled in the 9th and 10th centuries by the short-lived Banijurid dynasty, presumably from Iran, about whose rulers little is known, especially from coin finds is. The area of ​​Andarab (now a district in the province of Baglan ) south of the Amu Darya , as well as the neighboring areas of Taloqan , Balch and Panjshir , also belonged to their sphere of influence, as stated by name on silver coins . From the beginning to the middle of the 10th century, the Banijurids themselves were vassals of the Samanids, but obviously with a special status, as they minted their own coins and did not pay taxes. As a reaction to an uprising of the Chaghaniyan in league with the Banijurids, the Samanid ruler Nuh ibn Nasr (r. 943-954) burned the palace of the Chaghaniyan in 948 and probably also destroyed the first palace of the Banijurids in 200 kilometers away Hulbuk. A layer of fire can be fixed to a terminus ante quem from the middle of the 10th century through ceramic finds and further limited to the three decades before 930 through coins.

After the dissolution of the Emirate of the Samanids, the Ghaznavids conquered Chuttal in 1024 under Sultan Mahmud of Ghazni (r. 997-1030). The Ismaili poet Nāsir-i Chusrau (1004-1072 / 78) wrote that Mahmud trampled the prince of Chuttal with his war elephant. However, the Banijurid family seems to have survived the conquest and the fire and to have continued to exist under the Ghaznavids until the first quarter of the 11th century, as coin finds show. A sister Mahmud of Ghaznis was married to a governor of Hulbuk, which speaks for a special status of the family under the Ghaznavids.

Since the Abbasid period (from 750), religious education became an independent discipline. According to the Persian historian Abu'l-Fadl Bayhaqī (995-1077) there were over 20 madrasas in Chuttal in the 11th century , while in Balch there are said to have been several hundred for comparison. Of these, only Chodscha Mahschad south of Shahritus remained in the Chuttal region , if only as a monument.

Chuttal was of strategic importance for the early Ghaznavids as a buffer zone to the Turkic Karakhanids in the north. The Karakhanid ruler Ali-Tegin (ruled 1020-1034) also claimed the area. No local ruling family in Hulbuk is known by name for the 11th century; Chuttal was administered directly by Ghaznavid rulers. Local emirs are only mentioned under the Turkish Seljuks . In 1064 an emir of Chuttal attempted an uprising against Alp Arslan , whereupon the Seljuks besieged Hulbuk and killed the emir. A little later, the Qarakhanid ruler Böritigin (ruled 1052-1068) defeated the provinces of Chuttal, Saghaniyan and Wachsch. The Hulbuk Citadel was destroyed in these attacks between 1064 and 1068. Even if no later archaeological evidence is available, the outer districts are likely to have been inhabited for a while. The city was abandoned in the 12th century, possibly because the water channels from the mountains were buried, among other things. In the second half of the 12th century Chuttal probably belonged to the Ghurids (or, according to a coin find dated 1199/1200, to the Qarakhanids) and at the beginning of the 13th century became one of the small principalities that remained after the collapse of this empire.

Research history

Reconstruction of the eastern perimeter wall, at the end of 2014. Behind the missing section, the raised southern palace area can be seen.

The first test excavations in the citadel and other places in the Kulab region were carried out in 1953 by the Tajik archaeologist Boris A. Litvinsky together with his wife Elena Davidovich. Litvinsky's pupil was Erkinoj Guliamova, who was in charge from the second excavation campaign in 1957. Until 1978, a Tajik-Russian team led by Erkinoj Guliamova was digging in the citadel. Guliamova published annual labor reports in Russian between 1956 and 1987. In the 1980s, the architect Vladimir Bazhutin († 1999) was added, who made the plans for the entire complex and reconstructed the building ornamentation with drawings. The main excavator Guliamova continued her research until 1991.

Independently of this, AM Belenitskii and Boris A. Litvinskij undertook historical studies on the Banijurids and their rule in Hulbuk. Between 2003 and 2006, excavations of the Institute of History, Ethnography and Archeology of the Tajik Academy of Sciences took place under the direction of Yusuf (Yakubovich) Yakubov. Until 2009, investigations focused on the citadel. Pierre Siméon then also included the surrounding historical city area ( schahriston ) in his considerations. In 2008 he published a two-volume dissertation on ceramics by Hulbuk. Despite numerous individual publications, there was no comprehensive study until 2006. On the occasion of the 2700th anniversary of the alleged founding of the city of Kulob, from which many members of the government come, major events were held nationwide to commemorate national history. In this context, two books on the citadel of Hulbuk were published, which play a special role in the state's culture of remembrance: on the one hand, a posthumously published work by Sergei Khmelnitskii (1925–2003) in Russian, which summarizes the architectural results of Vladimir Bazhutin, and on the other Another is a popular work in Tajik by Iusuf Iakubov, who has been in charge of the archaeological site since 2000.

The anniversary program also includes the reconstruction of the previously partially restored surrounding wall, which has been completely new since 2005. The work is still ongoing (2014). The wall, which was built with bricks and an additional concrete frame on the east side, is intended to convey the impression of historical size and is not an exact reconstruction of the original. In 2013, a museum building was opened opposite the citadel, in which some of the ceramic finds are housed. The remaining objects were taken to the Archaeological Museum in Dushanbe and some to the Hermitage in Saint Petersburg.

During stratigraphic studies of the sequence of layers in the area of ​​the palace, which took place between 2006 and 2010, it turned out that the previous dating of the stucco fragments did not match the new results. Since then, three previously unrecognized early styles have been assumed for the stucco finds. Two styles therefore belong to the time of the Hephthalites in the 5th / 6th centuries. Century and the third Turkic style in the 6th / 7th centuries. Century.

investment

A large, almost square square in the middle divided the citadel into a north and a slightly raised south half. To the south was the palace, in which the administration was housed and which had a ceremonial function. Its largest room was a mosque. The northern half was practically completely built over with living quarters for the royal family.

city

A medieval Islamic city consisted of the citadel (Persian dis ), a usually walled lower residential city ( schahriston ) and outer residential districts ( rabad ). The city area ( schahriston ) of Hulbuk, which reached in the east as far as Kizilsu, is estimated to be 70 hectares due to the widely scattered pot shards, glassware and metal objects, the entire city could have covered up to 280 hectares. The citadel on the southwestern edge of the inner city is oriented in north-south direction, it forms a rectangle 170 meters in length and 60 meters in width. The citadel is surrounded on all sides by houses of the modern village. The thoroughfare leads directly on the south and east side and the railway line 200 meters away on the north side. In the area of ​​the presumed city area, graves about 300 meters east of the citadel and two other tombs one kilometer west were identified, as well as a place with clay kilns, a glass blowing workshop and a brick factory. In addition, there is a bathhouse and a mausoleum, which have so far been little investigated.

The graves to the east were discovered by workers when the village school was being built. They found a building with one meter thick walls and an area of ​​13.5 × 8 meters. The building had two burial chambers with several graves, each with a semicircular mihrāb oriented to the southwest (direction of prayer Qibla ) . The up to one meter high walls made of ten to 15 rows of burnt bricks end in one level, the higher wall parts were probably made of adobe bricks and the rooms were covered with a perishable material. Cantilever vaults made from fired bricks have been preserved from the western grave structures . The entrance is made of bricks laid radially (lengthways) that meet at right angles in the arched arch, forming a herringbone pattern. A forerunner of such a vault construction made of mud bricks was preserved at the Sogdian palace ruins in Tschilchudschra .

Citadel Wall

Reconstructed portal in the middle of the west side

According to excavation finds, the settlement hill ( Tepe ) of the citadel was already settled in the Bronze Age. The southern third of the citadel is the highest part and is 15 meters above the outer ground level, the northern part is ten meters above. Most of the visible structures come from the reconstruction at the beginning of the 11th century. The mud brick walls were originally plastered with clay. Repairs to the surrounding walls were rammed ( pachsa executed), a mixture of clay and straw.

The monumental portal in the middle of the west side is 13 meters high and 8.5 meters wide. It belonged to the later construction phase, the entrance to the first citadel was on the narrow north side. According to the reconstruction drawing by Bazhutin, the portal could be reached via a staircase with two three steps and a platform in between. The gate is framed by pillars that support a high pointed arch. The arch reconstructed on site is higher than in the drawing of Bazhutin. The wall surface to the rectangular outer frame fills a diagonal swastika pattern. The frame contains the throne verse from the 2nd sura of the Koran in Kufi . The portal bears a certain resemblance to the preserved portal of the Rabati Malik, a caravanserai from the 11th century between Bukhara and Samarqand.

At the site of the reconstructed western perimeter wall, a 71 meter long wall that was 0.8 to three meters high was uncovered between 1985 and 1989. In the rubble, stucco friezes emerged, some of which were decorated with animal figures and inscriptions in blooming kufi. A special feature of the western perimeter wall are two semicircular buttresses south of the portal ten meters apart, which taper conically towards the top. The four corners were reinforced by round bastions four to six meters in diameter. During excavations in 2004, a two-meter-wide wall made of rammed earth and adobe bricks was discovered 20 meters in front of the portal, which was traceable over a length of twelve meters. It could have been a front wall to protect the portal or a part of the palace from the first phase of construction.

Little of the original enclosing wall on the east side was left during the first excavations. Presumably this area was damaged when the road was built in the first half of the 20th century. The reconstruction on the occasion of the 2700th anniversary took place without prior systematic investigation of the subsoil and without the preservation of the original wall remains.

First palace

Palace to the south. Entrance in the middle

The first palace, which existed from around 800 to 950, was discovered during test excavations in the southern half in the area of ​​the second palace. The remains of a square building with an external length of 35 meters and round towers at all four corners were uncovered. In the middle was an inner courtyard paved with fired bricks, which, according to Vladimir Bazhutin's floor plan, was surrounded by 19 rooms and entered through a gate in the middle of the north side. The walls of the courtyard were decorated with moldings made of fired bricks and with stucco up to ten centimeters thick. The rooms were presented with colonnades on all four sides , the roof of which rested on wooden pillars. The floor plan essentially follows the plan of the Umayyad palace Dār al-Imāra of Afrasiab (Samarqand), which was built as the governor's house between the 740s and 770s. The pot shards with a greenish-metallic glaze found in rooms 3 and 6 enable the time when the palace was taken over by Muslim rulers in the middle of the 8th century. Coins suitable for dating from this period have not been found; the oldest coins date from 937. The palace was probably destroyed around 948.

Second palace

South palace. Looking east

As early as 1953, the excavators recognized a building complex with several rooms in the southern half of the citadel, which opened up to a common corridor 30 meters long and 3.75 meters wide, running in north-south direction. In 1957 this area was further excavated. Some of the walls were covered with up to 25 layers of clay plaster, and there were stucco remnants in relief on the floor. Above the floor of the first palace there was a second floor level 20-45 centimeters higher, each with remains of stucco. This is an indication of two phases of construction. The second palace was built on the platform-turned rubble of the burned down first palace and existed from the 970s to the 1060s. During this time the palace complex was rebuilt several times.

From the middle south side of the central square, the corridor led south past four rooms on each side, which could have served as living and ceremonial rooms. A square building with 2 and 2.5 meter thick walls was connected to the corridor on the south side. The corridor was probably covered by a barrel vault, the other rooms had flat roofs supported by support pillars. The walls were decorated with stucco on the wall of Ivan found themselves painting residues. The architecture of the palace shows similarities with buildings in the Ghaznavid fortress Laschkari Bazar on the Helmand River in southern Afghanistan. There, too, the rooms of the south palace were accessible via a long central corridor and were lined up according to their function. Other similarities concern the arrangement of the rooms around the central courtyard and the design of a small mosque.

Clay pipes were laid in the floors through which water vapor flowed to heat the rooms. Drinking water was first piped from a spring twelve kilometers away into a cistern and from there distributed through pipes throughout the palace complex. Rubbish was thrown into a hole in the floor on the west side, and it got outside through a pipe, where servants removed it.

mosque

The largest room in the palace was a mosque with a side length of 15 × 15 meters, which was entered from the east through a door in an iwan. The walls were decorated with extraordinary stucco. The lower wall areas consisted of 1 × 2 meter large stucco fields, which contained stylized plants and animal figures, especially goats, cats and parrots, framed by rods of pearl and lettering. According to the remains preserved from the south wall, there were circular floral shapes above, which were surrounded by a rectangle made of geometric braided patterns. The upper wall area was divided by three arches, each filled with three 0.8 meter wide and 1.5 meter high, ornamental pointed arch fields. In between stood slender columns with animal figure capitals, on a preserved capital the broad faces represent wild cats.

There are two phases of construction of the mosque. The original space was divided into nine segments by four central square pillars one meter thick. According to the reconstruction drawing , the clear width of 3.5 meters between the pillars and the walls was spanned by belt arches that supported domes. Mosques with similar floor plans from this period were - as the most important example in the Persian cultural area - the No Gumbad mosque ("nine domes") in Balch from the 9th century, the Chor Sutun -Mischee in Termiz (10th century) and the Digaron mosque in the village of Hazara near Bukhara (early 11th century at the latest). The No Gumbad mosque in Central Asia was a model for this type of mosque, which was still used in the 11th century in the mosque of Laschkari Bazar.

The wall design shows style elements from the second half of the 10th century, that is, the position of the outer walls of the first mosque, which was destroyed around 948, was retained during its reconstruction. Instead of the four central pillars, ten pillars erected in a square in the middle supported the roof, which was now covered differently, possibly with a wooden beam construction that formed a central dome. In the southwest of the mosque, the foundation of a minaret was exposed. The function of the mosque is unclear. It could have been more than just a private prayer room for the ruling Chuttal family. Due to its splendid design, it could also function as a princely reception hall.

Living area in the north

Bathroom in the northern living area
Floor covering made of square tiles

The central courtyard was paved with fired bricks in a circle. It was excavated in 1964. The living quarters of the royal family in the northern half consisted of at least four buildings, each with an iwan and a courtyard, three of the buildings were oriented towards a large hexagonal water basin. In the houses there were water pipes made of clay pipes and basins set in a cross shape in the floor. The mud brick walls, plastered with clay, were one to two meters thick, and square baked bricks lay on the floors. In a large room in the southwest corner, fragments of a wall painting have been preserved showing a young soldier in an orange and red robe against a blue and white background, holding a black staff in his raised right hand. 31 silver coins were recovered from one place in one room. The buildings all seem to have been erected at the same time, as there were no signs of any beginnings or restoration. Overall, the remains of the wall and the floors reveal a luxurious interior and a carefully crafted execution.

Five rooms that were excavated in 1982 and 1983 on the west side of the citadel belonged to a common courtyard with an ivan. The paintings on the south wall of the Ivan show a veiled woman sitting on the floor framed by a pointed arcade and playing a long-necked lute ( tar ). Above it were ribbons of inscription in various types of kufi, painted white and yellow with black lines over a blue-green background.

About 70 rooms belonged to the area of ​​the harem , most of them measuring only about 1.5 × 1.5 meters. Unusual fire pits were surrounded by a circle of seating. They are interpreted as fire rituals originating from Zoroastrianism , because the local population still practiced this religion in early Islamic times. The pre-Islamic tradition also includes the animal figures depicted on the wall paintings and the motif of the swastika above the portal with an ancient Asian origin.

Early Islamic wall paintings from the 8th to 13th centuries are known from only a few places in Central Asia and the Iranian highlands . Besides Hulbuk, these are only Nischapur , Laschkari Bazar and possibly Rey . In addition, there are the Karakhanid wall paintings discovered in the year 2000 in the citadel of Samarqand (late 12th to early 13th century).

Finds

The ceramic finds from the first palace up to the middle of the 10th century and from the later second palace differ significantly from each other. Monochrome and polychrome , glossy glazed ceramics, presumably imported from southern Basra , only appeared in the layer of the first palace. From Samarqand and Nischapur comes a ceramic produced from the middle of the 9th century to the 11th century with Arabic script, which contains proverbs and blessings and which is called Samanid epigraphic pottery ("Samanid epigraphic pottery"). This was one of the first decorative styles known as Islamic, which was widespread in eastern Iran and Central Asia and also occurred in variations in Hulbuk.

The polychrome painted ceramic from the second palace comes exclusively from regional production. A possible place of manufacture is a kiln that was excavated in the town of Hulbuk. Bottles, plates and bracelets made of glass were found. Two pressed glass vessels from the old palace are decorated with animal figures. The fragments of a glass vessel, the diameter of which was 48 centimeters, show galloping horses. With the other glass vessel with a diameter of 10.5 centimeters and a height of 5 centimeters, a mythical animal can be seen on the underside.

The objects made of soapstone include saucepans of various sizes and a massive rectangular censer with a handle. Another bronze censer in the shape of a lynx was found in a suburb ( rabad ) northeast of the citadel. The hinged neck is connected by a hinge to the body as in contemporary objects from the southern region of Khorasan is the case. Bronze tongs also refer to trade relations with Khorasan. The special features also include 20 large, complete and eight fragmentary chess pieces made of ivory and three lion figurines. The lion was a protective symbol of the Samanids.

literature

Web links

Commons : Hulbuk  - collection of images, videos and audio files

Individual evidence

  1. Khatlon . ( Memento of the original from December 13, 2014 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was automatically inserted and not yet checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. Tourism Authority of Tajikistan @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.visittajikistan.tj
  2. ^ MV Hambly: Road vs. Rail. A Note on Transport Development in Tadzhikistan. In: Soviet Studies, Vol. 19, No. January 3 , 1968, pp. 421-425, here pp. 422f
  3. ^ Boris A. Litvinsky: The Hephthalite Empire . In: Boris A. Litvinsky (Ed.): History , p. 146
  4. Clifford Edmund Bosworth: Lot valley. In: Encyclopædia Iranica
  5. ^ Vasily Vladimirovich Barthold : Turkestan Down to the Mongol Invasion. Second edition . Messrs. Luzac and Company, London 1958, p. 69
  6. Pierre Siméon: Hulbuk , 2012, pp. 389f, 407
  7. ^ Boris A. Litvinsky, MH Zamir Safi: The Later Hephthalites in Central Asia . In: Boris A. Litvinsky (Ed.): History, p. 177
  8. Étienne de La Vaissière : Sogdian Traders. A history . ( Handbook of Oriental Studies . 8th section: Central Asia , Volume 10) Brill, Leiden / Boston 2005, pp. 265f
  9. ^ J. Harmatta, Boris A. Litvinsky: Tokharistan and Gandhara under Western Turk rule (650-750) . In: Boris A. Litvinsky (Ed.): History , p. 382
  10. See: Vladimir N. Nastich: A Survey of the Abbasid Copper Coinage of Transoxania .
  11. Jere J. Bacharach: Andarāb and the Banījurīds . In: Afghanistan Journal , Vol. 3, Heft 4, 1976, pp. 147-150
  12. Michael Fedorov: New Data on the Appanage Rulers of Khuttalān and Wakhsh . In: Iran, Vol. 44, 2006, pp. 197–206, here p. 201
  13. Pierre Siméon: Hulbuk , 2012, pp. 388–390
  14. AK Mirbabaev, P. Zieme and Wang Furen: The development of Education: Maktab, Madrasa, Science and Pedagogy. In: CE Bosworth, MS Asimo (Ed.): History of Civilizations of Central Asia. The age of achievement: AD 750 to the end of the fifteenth century. Volume IV. (Multiple History Series) UNESCO Publishing, Paris 2000, p. 39
  15. Pierre Siméon: Hulbuk, 2012, p. 401
  16. Michael Fedorov: New Data on the Appanage Rulers of Khuttalān and Wakhsh, 2006, p. 202
  17. CE Bosworth: Ḵhuttalān . In: The Encyclopaedia of Islam , p. 76
  18. Nasiba S. Baimatowa: The Composition of Kūfī Inscriptions in Transitional and Early-Islamic Architecture of North Khurāsān, 2013, p. 381
  19. Pierre Siméon: Étude du matériel céramique de Hulbuk (Mā warā'al-nahr-Khuttal), de la conquête arabe jusqu'au milieu du XIe siècle (90 / 712–441 / 1050): contribution à l'étude de la céramique islamique d'Asie centrale. Université Panthéon-Sorbonne, Paris 2008
  20. Nasiba S. Baimatowa: The Composition of Kūfī Inscriptions in Transitional and Early-Islamic Architecture of North Khurāsān, 2013, pp. 382f
  21. Pierre Siméon: Hulbuk, 2012, p. 390f, illustration p. 393
  22. Pierre Siméon: Hulbuk, 2012, p. 397
  23. ^ Ayşe Esra Şirin: Identity in Transition: Eighth Century Sogdian Architecture. In: Tarih, Edition 2, Boğaziçi Üniversitesi, Istanbul 2010, pp. 48–68, Dār al-Imāra plan: p. 58
  24. Pierre Siméon: Hulbuk, 2012, p. 389f
  25. Pierre Siméon: Hulbuk, 2012, pp. 397-401
  26. ^ Masjid-i No Gumbad . ArchNet (Photos)
  27. Pierre Siméon: Hulbuk, 2012, pp. 402–404
  28. Pierre Siméon: Hulbuk , 2012, pp. 404-406
  29. Yury Karev: Qarakhanid Wall Paintings in the Citadel of Samarkand: First Report and Preliminary Observations. In: Muqarnas, Vol. 22 , 2005, pp. 45–84, here p. 46
  30. Christina M. Henshaw: Early Islamic Ceramics and Glazes of Akhsiket, Uzbekistan . (Dissertation) University College London, 2010, p. 67
  31. Pierre Siméon: Hulbuk, 2012, pp. 407-415