ISSN (E): 2181-4570 ResearchBib Impact Factor: 6,4 / 2023 SJIF 2024 = 5.073/Volume-2,Issue-10
38
ANALYSIS OF DATA ON ECONOMIC LIFE OF KARAKALPAKS
Ibodullayeva Sabina Hamid qizi
E- mail:
sabinaibodullayeva1110@gmail.com
Tel : +998936857755
Abstract:
In this article, I tried to highlight some important aspects of the social
relations of the Karakalpak people, especially animal husbandry and home crafts.
Key words:
Nation, people, diaspora, ethnogenesis, Oasis, territory, culture,
social life, political changes, dynasty, ruling class,
According to the received historical data, at the end of the 16th and 18th
centuries, the majority of Karakalpaks lived in the middle and lower reaches of the
Syrdarya. The Karakalpaks of Syrdarya lived under the Kazakhs in the 17th century
and until the middle of the 18th century, and their political and economic situation
depended on the Kazakh khans. But it differs strongly from the Kazakhs in terms of
economic management. Kazakhs were engaged in nomadic cattle breeding, while
Karakalpaks had a semi-nomadic lifestyle and engaged in animal husbandry, farming
and fishing.
The natural conditions of the area where the Karakalpaks live are also
whimsical, so the Karakalpaks living in these conditions, unlike the Kazakhs, did not
have the opportunity to engage only in cattle breeding or farming. Their natural
geographical conditions allow for the development of farming, fishing and animal
husbandry in a complex manner in these lands.
1
Karakalpaks living in the Lower
Syrdarya, Kuvondarya, and Jana-Darya valleys were engaged in farming. Grain
farming was well developed in the Karakalpaks, and the grain they grew not only
satisfied their own needs, they exchanged grain with Kazakhs for cattle. Another
group of Karakalpaks engaged in cattle breeding. There was also a difference between
1
Толстов
С.П.
Города
гузов.
СЭ.
1947.
№3,
с.100
ISSN (E): 2181-4570 ResearchBib Impact Factor: 6,4 / 2023 SJIF 2024 = 5.073/Volume-2,Issue-10
39
their husbandry and Kazakh husbandry. Cattle breeding of Kazakhs requires moving
in all four seasons of the year. Karakalpaks were only engaged in ungulates. If they
grazed in the summer in the meadows, fodder would be prepared for the winter. This
connected animal husbandry with agriculture. In turn, cattle were used for tillage.
The fishing Karakalpaks exchanged fish for grain with the farming
Karakalpaks. Such a complex management of their economy is also reflected in folk
proverbs: "Ush ay saun, ush ay kaun, ush ay kabagym, ush ay shabagym ayteo'ir
tirishim etiremiz". Trade plays an important role in the life of Karakalpaks. They
exchanged grain for livestock with Kazakhs. Karakalpak merchants acted as brokers
between Bukhara and Kazakh khans. They also traded with the Uzbeks of the island
and Khiva, while Karakalpak merchants were also in Russian cities. According to
some Russian sources, in the 30s of the 18th century, they themselves took lead and
made bullets from it. They also prepared gunpowder to sell to Kazakhs.
Even after the Karakalpak people moved to the territory of Khorezm, they
drained the barren dry and marshy lands where they were located, made irrigation
canals, built dams and other water facilities, and agriculture developed as the main
branch of the Karakalpak economy.
2
As we said above, the three oases of Kallikul, Kushkhana Tov and Kegeili are
formed on the left bank of the Amudarya below the channels of Lavzon, Chonlibosuv,
Shumonoy, Kiyotzhorgan. On the right bank of the Amudarya, to the west-north of
the present Chimboy, in the vicinity of the former Uzbek farming district, Karaboyli,
the Kushkhanatov oasis was created, which is irrigated by the water of the Karaboyli,
a natural branch of the Amudarya. Its water comes from Churtonboy, Eshon, Arziboy,
Tillaboy, Biyjon, Elgeldijob and other streams A.V. According to Kaulbarsi, the
Kushkhanatov lowland was considered a dark, bloody, Kipchak district of northern
Khorezm in the 1930s and 1950s.
At the end of the 19th century, the Kegaili oasis became a large agricultural
district in northern Khorezm.
The dependence of the Karakalpaks on the Khanate of Khiva, which is
considered one of the largest feudal states of Central Asia, forced them to follow the
economic and political system of the Khanate. Their agrarian relations have changed.
2
Жданко
Т.А.
Очерки
исторической
этнографии
каракалпаков.
Ленинград.
1950,
с.18
-19
ISSN (E): 2181-4570 ResearchBib Impact Factor: 6,4 / 2023 SJIF 2024 = 5.073/Volume-2,Issue-10
40
S.K. In the 20-60s of the 19th century, Kamalov put an end to the wars between
peoples with the centralization of power by the Khiva Khans in the socio-economic
system of the Karakalpaks, the development of irrigation works and agriculture,
especially their (Korakalpaks) neighborhood with the Uzbeks - Khorezm people, who
have been engaged in agriculture since ancient times, immediately destroyed the land
at that time. It led to the development of agriculture.
3
Feudal land ownership in the Karakalpaks is closely related to the feudal land
ownership of Central Asian khanates, mainly Khiva Khanate, which ruled in the 19th
and early 20th centuries. Russian scientists and travelers - N.N. Muravev, M.I. Ivanin,
G.I. Danilevsky, Ya. Kilevein, A.L. Coon, L.F. Some information is given in the
works and memoirs of Kostenko, N.I.Veselovsky, Girshfeld and M.N.Galkin,
O.Shkapsky, V.Lobachevsky, A.V.Kaulbars.
However, since those authors were officials of tsarist Russia, representatives
of the bourgeois class, their writings were of a tendentious nature. Historians and
orientalists have studied the history of Khiva Khanate socio-economic and political
history, including important issues such as feudal state structure and land ownership.
The well-known orientalist historian Professor P.P. Ivanov, Academician of the
USSR Academy of Sciences M.Y. The companions found the archive of the Khans
of Khiva, and based on the materials in it, they created important works that broadly
covered the above issues.
In fact, in the 19th century, there was only a book by O. Shkapsky entitled
"Essays of Amudarya" about land ownership and land tax in the Khiva Khanate. This
book is characterized by rich factual materials. O.Shkapskyi gave extensive
information about the Amudarya section, especially the geographical location of
Shorokhan section, natural conditions, agricultural works, farming tools, irrigation
facilities.
4
He explains that land ownership in Shorokhan section consisted of
kingdom (state), private property and foundation. At the same time, he explained the
land ownership and tax system in the entire Khiva Khanate. Shkapsky briefly
describes the plight of farmers in the Amudarya region. However, despite the
importance of that work, due to the presence of deficiencies in the issues raised in it,
3
Камалов
С.К
.
Каракалпаки
в
ХVIII
-XIX
веках.
Ташкент,
1968,
с.132
4
Жалилов
О.
XIX-
ХХ
аср
бошларидаги
қорақалпоқ
тарихидан
Фан.
Т.,
1985, 20
б.
ISSN (E): 2181-4570 ResearchBib Impact Factor: 6,4 / 2023 SJIF 2024 = 5.073/Volume-2,Issue-10
41
the issue of feudal land ownership in Khiva Khanate and Karakalpaks was not
resolved conclusively in the work. About Shkapsky's book, every researcher who has
read M. Y. Yoldoshev's works can see its shortcomings. In particular, although he
divides the ownership of land in the Shorokhan section into three, but in explaining
them, he mixes royal (state) land with property-land. Property divides land into
freehold and deeded property, depending on whether or not the tax is levied.
Titled property is the property of individuals who have a title issued by the
state for private ownership of land.
Labeled property owners did not pay taxes. Otom Mulk was in the hands of the
khan's neighbors, big officials, who, although considered excellent, paid a small tax
in comparison to her husband.
In general, the tax collected from the owners of the Otoi property was very
little, but in some places they were exempt from the tax, he notes. According to
Shkapsky's information, landowners were generally exempted from taxation
the conclusion follows. Even the land that Shkapsky considered to be the
property of the nobles had a label about its ownership in the galas (the khan's
neighbors or officials). Tax-exempt personal property is similar to title property in
this respect. Therefore, the presence or absence of a label cannot be the basis for
dividing the property into categories as shown by Shkapsky.
According to the archive materials, relatives of the khan, high-ranking
officials, some priests, soldiers who served the khan (cavalry soldiers, some persons)
were exempted from taxes.
5
He had special labels about him. Such persons are called label holders. The
land owned by them is not labeled property, it is either private property land, or state
land, or else it is considered as waqf land.
6
The information provided by P.P. Ivanov about agrarian relations in the Khiva
Khanate is significant. He is the first to come to the conclusion that the Khans of
Khiva had their own private lands, and he proved his opinion on the basis of the
Documents of the Khiva Khans Archive. P.P. Ivanov wrote in his article "Thus, our
document characterizes the ownership of clan land among the Karakalpak people in
5
Йўлдошев
М.Ю.
Материалы
по
истории
каракалпаков//
Общественные
науки
в
Ўзбекистана
1965
№1,
62-65
б.
6
Иванов
П.
Очерки
истории
каракалпаков//Материалы
по
истории
каракалпаков.
Москва
-
Ленинград,
1935,
с.37
ISSN (E): 2181-4570 ResearchBib Impact Factor: 6,4 / 2023 SJIF 2024 = 5.073/Volume-2,Issue-10
42
one of the most important districts of the Amudarya delta," and in his article "New
information about the Karakalpaks" he wrote, "The agrarian character of the Uzbeks
of Khiva and other Central Asian districts" studying their relations, we see that there
was a form of a clan-community, like among the Karakalpaks. However, this
difference is that this form of land ownership almost disappeared in Uzbek districts
at the beginning of the 19th century, giving way to official, large landowners or state
ownership. In the districts of Karakalpak, clan-communal land ownership was
preserved in one form or another until the beginning of the second half of the 19th
century. In the middle of the 19th century, the ownership rights of the tribal clan
community to the land and pastures consisted only of fake formalities, and in practice
all the cultivated fields were owned by the feudal clan chiefs.
These data are valuable data for characterizing land ownership in the Khanate
of Khiva, including Karakalpaks.
In the Khanate of Khiva, there were three different forms of feudal oppression:
material, natural and coercive. Material oppression includes the land tax known as
"solgit" and the property and livestock tax known as "zakat". Property tax was
imposed on ordinary peasants as well as large and medium-sized landowners. Tax
payers were divided into three different categories: those who owned more than ten
tons of land had to pay three golds, those who owned up to ten tons of land had to
pay two golds, those who owned up to five tons of land had to pay one gold. At the
same time, great nobles and religious leader
The Karakalpaks used to pay zakat in addition to the harvest. It consisted of
five golds for forty camels, horses, and cattle, and 10 abbos (one abbos is equal to 25
silver coins) for forty sheep. Owners of large livestock used to trick the poor to
transfer most of the zakat. Karakalpaks engaged in farming in Khanate lands paid two
bushels of grain from 4-5 bushels of grain collected regardless of the size of the land,
which was considered a natural tax. In addition to the above taxes, Karakalpak
landowners collected "usir" (a part of the harvest) from local religious leaders, and a
separate tax "tunupuli" (toll for wood) for benefiting from forests.
The entire burden of taxes falls on the shoulders of hard-working Karakalpaks,
nobles and religious leaders are exempt from taxes.
7
7
Иванов
П.
Архив
хивинских:
ханов.
Ленинград,
1940,
с.142
ISSN (E): 2181-4570 ResearchBib Impact Factor: 6,4 / 2023 SJIF 2024 = 5.073/Volume-2,Issue-10
43
Karakalpaks were also involved in forced labor (digging ditches in the khanate,
adjusting bridges, adjusting and adjusting dams on the Amudarya, etc.). Each
householder had to earn 12 days per worker per year. Workers who adjust bridges are
called "bridgemen", and those who clean canals are called "diggers". 27,079 people
were involved in this work in one year, 6,000 of them were from Karakalpaks.
Another feudal obligation was that the people of Karakalpak had to feed 12,000
serfs serving in the khan's army. This cost them 100-140 thousand gold in 1874. In
wars, Karakalpak military detachments were led by biys, batirs and centurions.
During the war, they received 4 times more than during the peace due to the increase
in the taxes of Karakalpak workers. Khan officials "qushbegi" and "mektar" were
engaged in tax collection. Qushbegis from Karakalpaks on the left bank, and
mekhtars from the right banks collected taxes. They were not rewarded by the Khan
of Khiva for this service. During the collection of taxes, they tried to justify
themselves with various evils and lived at the expense of them. Tax collectors took
bribes. Elders were exempted from paying taxes by giving bribes to beys and fathers,
and fathers and fathers to beklarbegi, qushbegi, and mekhtars, in exchange for which
the share of the tax they had to pay was borne by the working population.
Zakat was collected by "tax collectors" and 10% of the collected tax was kept
by the khan. Judges also participated in collecting zakat. The "mushrif" taught the
grain tax. The grain collected by them was given to qushbegi and mekhtars, and they
delivered it to the khan's palace. The forced labor tax was controlled by the kushbegi
and mekhtars, especially cleaning the canals was very difficult, as a result of which
people fell ill. For every event held by the khanate, the biy and fathers paid bribes to
the khan. This was collected from ordinary workers. The addition of such levies on
top of the already collected taxes was a double exploitation of the Mekhnatkas (by
the Khans of Khiva and by their own feudal lords), which made them even more
angry.
REFERENCES :
1.
Ilniyazovich, S. F. (2024). Historiography of Various Expeditions and their
Results in the Regions Inhabited by Karakalpaks in the First Half of the 20th
Century.
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF INNOVATION IN NONFORMAL
ISSN (E): 2181-4570 ResearchBib Impact Factor: 6,4 / 2023 SJIF 2024 = 5.073/Volume-2,Issue-10
44
EDUCATION
,
4
(9),
159–165.
Retrieved
from
http://www.inovatus.es/index.php/ejine/article/view/4062
2.
Sayfutdinov , F. . (2024). ILLUMINATION OF THE SPIRITUAL LIFE OF
THE KARAKALPAK PEOPLE IN RESEARCH.
Journal of Universal
Science Research
,
2
(5), 441–452. Retrieved from
https://inlibrary.uz/index.php/universal-scientific-
research/article/view/34891
3.
Sayfutdinov Feruz Ilniyoz o’g’li. (2023). XIX ASRDA XONLIKLARNING
O‘ZARO SAVDO MUNOSABATLARI.
JOURNAL OF SCIENCE,
RESEARCH AND TEACHING
,
2
(8), 111–114. Retrieved from
http://jsrt.innovascience.uz/index.php/jsrt/article/view/284
4.
Sayfutdinov, F. (2024). HISTORIOGRAPHY OF INFORMATION
ABOUT THE POPULATION OF THE ZARAFSHAN OASIS. (20TH
CENTURY).
Modern Science and Research
,
3
(2), 911–914. Retrieved from
https://inlibrary.uz/index.php/science-research/article/view/29503
5.
Sayfutdinov, F. (2023). ILLUMINATION OF KARAKALPAK PEOPLE
IN ETHNOGRAPHIC STUDIES.
Modern Science and Research
,
2
(12),
910–917. Retrieved from https://inlibrary.uz/index.php/science-
research/article/view/27281
6.
Sayfutdinov Feruz Ilniyozovich, . (2023). STUDY OF THE
KARAKALPAK PEOPLE IN ETHNOLOGICAL SCIENTIFIC WORKS
HISTORY .
International Journal Of History And Political Sciences
,
3
(12),
61–68. https://doi.org/10.37547/ijhps/Volume03Issue12-11
7.
Sayfutdinov , F. (2024). ETHNIC COMPOSITION OF THE ZARAFSHAN
OASIS (2ND HALF OF THE 20TH CENTURY).
Modern Science and
Research
,
3
(1),
577–581.
Retrieved
from
https://inlibrary.uz/index.php/science-research/article/view/28335
8.
Ilniyoz o’g’li, S. F. (2023). XIX ASRDA XONLIKLARNING O ‘ZARO
SAVDO MUNOSABATLARI. JOURNAL OF SCIENCE, RESEARCH
AND TEACHING, 2 (8), 111–114.
ISSN (E): 2181-4570 ResearchBib Impact Factor: 6,4 / 2023 SJIF 2024 = 5.073/Volume-2,Issue-10
45
9.
Sayfutdinov,
F.
(2023).
THE
IMPORTANCE
OF
DIGITAL
TECHNOLOGY IN TEACHING HISTORY.
Modern Science and
Research
,
2
(10),
719–723.
Retrieved
from
https://inlibrary.uz/index.php/science-research/article/view/24678
10.
Sayfutdinov Feruz Ilniyazovich, . (2023). USING GIS SOFTWARE AND
THE IMPORTANCE OF DIGITAL HISTORY IN THE STUDY OF
HISTORY .
International Journal Of History And Political Sciences
,
3
(10),
31–33.
https://doi.org/10.37547/ijhps/Volume03Issue10-06
11.
Sayfutdinov, F. (2023). ANALYSIS OF DATA ON LAND OWNERSHIP
AND LIVESTOCK FARMING OF KARAKALPAKS.
Modern Science and
Research
,
2
(10),
650–657.
Retrieved
from
https://inlibrary.uz/index.php/science-research/article/view/25727
12.
Sayfutdinov Feruz Ilniyozovich, . (2023). LAND OWNERSHIP
RELATIONS
BASED
ON
THE
NATIONAL
ECONOMY
OF
KARAKALPAK.
International Journal Of Literature And Languages
,
3
(11),
20–27. https://doi.org/10.37547/ijll/Volume03Issue11-04
