| Revision as of 04:54, 1 June 2016 view source95.129.41.121 (talk) Undid revision 723124711 by Ebyabe (talk)← Previous edit |
Revision as of 05:45, 1 June 2016 view source Doug Weller (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Oversighters, Administrators263,867 editsm Reverted 1 edit by 95.129.41.121 (talk) to last revision by Ebyabe. (TW)Next edit → |
| Line 11: |
Line 11: |
|
|
|
|
|
{{Talk:Bulgars/GA1}} |
|
{{Talk:Bulgars/GA1}} |
|
|
|
|
== New section should be added == |
|
|
|
|
|
THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION MUST BE ON the ARTICLE : |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
==ORIGIN OF BULGARS== |
|
|
The origin of the '''Bulgars''' and their homeland are still subjects of research generating many hypothesis and violent disputes. Bulgars, also called Bulgarians, were one of the three ethnic ancestors of modern ] (the other two were ] and ]). They were mentioned for the first time in 354 AD by ] as people living north of the Caucasus mountain and west of the Volga River. About 370 AD they invaded Europe with the ] , and retreating with the Huns about 460 AD they resettled in the area north and east of the Sea of Azov.<ref>http://www.britannica.com/topic/Bulgar</ref><ref>http://www.bulgaria-embassy.org/history_of_bulgaria.htm#THE%20BULGARIANS</ref><ref>http://www.historyfiles.co.uk/KingListsEurope/BarbarianHuns.htm</ref> |
|
|
|
|
|
==Who were the Bulgars?== |
|
|
] |
|
|
'''Bulgar Vund''' or '''Utigur''' (vh'ndur, Vanand) is the name used by historians and geographers like ], ] and later by ], ], and ] in the 6th century to refer the eastern branch of the Hunno-] who were the successors of the Hunnic empire along the coasts of the ] in ].<ref>"The Huns, Rome and the Birth of Europe", 2013, Hyun Jin Kim, page 57: "After a period of chaos following Attila's death, dualism again reasserted itself in the succession of Dengitzik and Ernak (west and east respectively). The successor to the Hunnic Empire in the east, or rather probably the coninuation, also featured two wings, the Kutrigurs(west) and the Utigurs(east), ruled presumably by Ernak's descendants.", https://books.google.hr/books?id=jCpncXFzoFgC&q=utigurs#v=snippet&q=utigurs&f=false</ref><ref>Byzantium: The Imperial Centuries, Romilly James, page 45 : " The Bulgarians seem to have been in origin Huns, who may well have formed part, and survived as a rump, of the hordes of Attila in the fifth century. ... the so called Onogur Bulgarians are found in large numbers somewhere between the Kuban and the Volga rivers..." https://books.google.hr/books?id=O5JqH_NXQBsC&pg=PA45&dq=onogur&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CDAQ6AEwBDgoahUKEwistou42ZPJAhWGWiwKHUbUDxI#v=onepage&q=onogur&f=false</ref><ref>"The Empire of the Steppes", René Grousset, page 79: " Other Hun clans survived north of the Black Sea in two hordes : the Kutrigur Huns, who led a nomadic life northwest of the of Azov and the Utigur or Utrigur Huns, whose haunts were by the mouth of the Don."</ref><ref>The Cambridge Medieval History, volumes 1-5, " ... Kotrigur and Utigur Huns...", https://books.google.bg/books?id=9lHeh36S8ooC&pg=PT582&dq=utigur&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CBwQ6AEwADgeahUKEwid_pDUkpbJAhUBCBoKHQ0XB1M#v=onepage&q=utigur&f=false </ref><ref>Justinian and the Later Roman Empire, John W. Barker, (1966, University of Wisconsin press) page 199: " ...Utigur Huns...", |
|
|
https://books.google.bg/books?id=LiJljEXvwAoC&pg=PA199&dq=utigur&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CEQQ6AEwBzgeahUKEwid_pDUkpbJAhUBCBoKHQ0XB1M#v=onepage&q=utigur&f=false</ref> The late antique historians use the names of ], ], ] and ] as interchangeable terms,<ref>"The Huns, Rome and the Birth of Europe", Hyun Jin Kim, page 256: " Thus in our sources the names Kutrigur, Bulgar and Hun are used interchangeably and refer in all probability not to separate groups but one group.", https://books.google.hr/books?id=jCpncXFzoFgC&q=utigurs#v=snippet&q=utigurs&f=false</ref><ref>Cafer Saatchi , Early Mediaeval identity of the Bulgarians, page 3 : " The early Byzantine texts use the names of Huns, Bulgarians, Kutrigurs and Utrigurs as interchangeable terms. There the Bulgarians are represented as identical, they are a part of Huns or at least have something common with them. The khans Avtiochol and Irnik, listed in the Nominalia of the Bulgarian khans today are identified with Attila and Ernach.", http://www.academia.edu/10894065/Early_Mediaeval_identity_of_the_Bulgarians</ref><ref>Classification of the Hunno-Bulgarian Loan-Words in Slavic, Antoaneta Granberg, Introduction : " (2) the data are insufficient to clearly distinguish Huns, Avars and Bulgars one from another;" https://www.academia.edu/683028/Classification_of_the_Hunno-Bulgarian_Loan-Words_in_Slavonic</ref><ref>"SOME REMARKS ON THE CHINESE "BULGAR"", 2004, SANPING CHEN: " In fact contemporary European sources kept equating the Bulgars with the Huns. At the very least, the Hun-Bulgar connection was much more tangible than the Hun-Xiongnu identification. " http://www.bulgari-istoria-2010.com/booksBG/Sanping_Chen_SOME_REMARKS_ON_THE_CHINESE_BULGARIAN.pdf</ref><ref>"History of the Later Roman Empire", J.B. Bury: " '''<nowiki>The Kotrigurs, who were a branch of the Hunnic race, occupied the steppes of South Russia, from the Don to the Dniester, and were probably closely allied to the Bulgarians or Onogundurs — the descendants of Attila's Huns — who had their homes in Bessarabia and Walachia. They were a formidable people and Justinian had long ago taken precautions to keep them in check, in case they should threaten to attack the Empire, though it was probably for the Roman cities of the Crimea, Cherson and Bosporus, that he feared, rather than for the Danubian provinces. As his policy on the Danube was to use the Lombards as a check on the Gepids, so his policy in Scythia was to use another Hunnic people, the Utigurs, as a check on the Kotrigurs. The Utigurs lived beyond the Don, on the east of the Sea of Azov, and Justinian cultivated their friendship by yearly gifts. ", http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/secondary/BURLAT/20*.html#ref39 </nowiki>'''</ref><ref>Encyclopedia of the Byzantine Empire, Jennifer Lawler, " Utigurs - Hunnic tribe that lived on the east steppes of Don, related to the Bulgars", стр. 296 https://books.google.hr/books?id=sEWeCQAAQBAJ&pg=PA296&dq=utigurs&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCcQ6AEwAjgUahUKEwi427LD25zHAhVEECwKHc3wDFQ#v=onepag e&q=utigurs&f=false</ref><ref>"Great Walls and Linear Barriers", Peter Spring, " In 460 the Huns split into the Onogurs, Utigurs and Kotrigurs.", стр. 199 https://books.google.hr/books?id=OfmxBgAAQBAJ&pg=PA199&dq=utigurs&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCEQ6AEwATgoahUKEwia2MPL75zHAhVEhywKHcRYDHg#v=onepage&q=utigurs&f=false</ref><ref>"A history of the First Bulgarian Empire", "Book I THE CHILDREN OF THE HUNS " ''Steven Runciman''''',''' ''стр. 5, "'' On Attila’s death, his empire crumbled. His people, who had probably been only a conglomeration of kindred tribes that he had welded together, divided again into these tribes; and each went its own way. One of these tribes was soon to be known as the Bulgars.'''"''' http://www.promacedonia.org/en/sr/sr_1_1.htm</ref><ref>The Huns of Justinian: Byzantium, Utigur and Kutrigur, Joseph Ricci (2013) http://connection.ebscohost.com/c/articles/94441061/huns-justinian-byzantium-utigur-kutrigur</ref> thus prompting some modern historians to coin the term Hunno-Bulgars.<ref>Pritsak, 1982: pages: 435, 448-449</ref><ref>История на българската държава през средните векове, Том I. История на Първото българско царство. Част I. Епоха на хуно-българското надмощие, Васил Н. Златарски </ref> According to ], ] and ] Utigurs and their relatives ] were ], they were dressed in the same way and had the same language.<ref>O. Maenchen-Helfen, The World of the Huns, page 378 : " In one instance we are explicitly told that the Kutrigur and Utigur, called Huns by Procopius, Agathias, and Menander, were of the same stock, dressed in the same way, and had the same language. ", http://www.kroraina.com/huns/mh/mh_1.html</ref><ref>"The Hunno-Bulgarian Language, 2008, Antoaneta Granberg, Göteborg University: " The Hunno-Bulgarian language was formed on the Northern and Western borders of China in the 3rd-5th c. BC. The analysis of the loan-words in Slavonic language shows the presence of direct influences of various language-families: Turkic, Mongolian, Chinese and Iranian. The Huns and Proto-Bulgarians spoke the same language, different from all other "barbarian" languages. When Turkic tribes appeared at the borders of the Chinese empire in the 6th c., the Huns and Proto-Bulgarians were no longer there. It is important to note that Turkic does contain Hunno-Bulgarian loans, but that these were received through Chinese intermediary, e.g. Hunnic ch’eng-li ‘sky, heaven’ was borrowed from Chinese as tängri in Turkic. The Hunno-Bulgarian language exhibits non-Turkic and non-Altaic features. Altaic has no initial consonant clusters, while Hunno-Bulgarian does. Unlike Turkic and Mongolian, Hunno-Bulgarian language has no initial dental or velar spirants. Unlike Turkic, it has initial voiced b-: bagatur (a title), boyla (a title). Unlike Turkic, Hunno-Bulgarian has initial n-, which is also encountered in Mongolian: Negun, Nebul (proper names). In sum, Hunno-Bulgarian language has no consistent set of features that unite it with either Turkic or Mongolian. Neither can it be related to Sino-Tibetian languages, because it obviously has no monosyllabic word structure.", http://www.centralasien.dk/joomla/images/journal/DSCA2008.pd</ref> ], ] and ] were in all likelihood identical with the Bulgars.<ref>The Huns, Rome and the Birth of Europe, Hyun Jin Kim, (2013, Cambridge University Press) page 141: "Utigurs, Kutrigurs and Onogurs were in all likelihood identical with the Bulgars", https://books.google.hr/books?id=jCpncXFzoFgC&q=utigurs#v=snippet&q=utigurs&f=false</ref><ref>The Age of Justinian, J. A. S. Evans, (1996) page 91: "... Utigur or Onogur Bulgars", https://books.google.hr/books?id=jjSDAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA91&dq=onogur+utigur&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi2uvnJvvbKAhUBWhQKHWHOB-MQ6AEITjAJ#v=onepage&q=onogur%20utigur&f=false</ref><ref>Justinian, John Moorhead, 1994, Taylor&Francis, https://books.google.hr/books?id=aacuAgAAQBAJ&pg=PT180&dq=utigur&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj2tIS7yvbKAhWKPxQKHf-bD7M4ChDoAQhPMAk#v=onepage&q=utigur&f=false</ref><ref>Byzantium in the Seventh Century, J. F. Haldon, page 47 : "...the Onogur Huns or Bulgars...", https://books.google.co.il/books?id=pSHmT1G_5T0C&pg=PA47&dq=onogur&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=hun&f=false</ref><ref>Early Medieval Europe, Roger Collins, (1991) page 206: "...Utigur and Kutrigur Bulgars... ", https://books.google.bg/books?id=ZukcBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA206&dq=utigur&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CEYQ6AEwCDgUahUKEwjDt-3RkZbJAhUBVxoKHW-tBaQ#v=onepage&q=utigur&f=false</ref><ref>The Cambridge History of Greek and Roman Warfare, Volume 2, Philip Sabin, Hans van Wees, Michael Whitby, pages 240,248: " Utigur Bulgars", https://books.google.bg/books?id=4aX-W6AVNv8C&pg=PA606&dq=utigur&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CFAQ6AEwCTgeahUKEwid_pDUkpbJAhUBCBoKHQ0XB1M#v=onepage&q=utigur&f=false</ref><ref>Armies of the Dark Ages, Ian Heath, ( 1979), page 53: " The Onogurs appeared after the disintegration of the Hunnic empire,...The Onogur tribes toghether with the Kutrigur and Utigur Huns, ....Once independent they adopted the name Bulgar...", https://books.google.bg/books?id=qKdkCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA53&dq=utigur&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CC8Q6AEwBDhuahUKEwj7-an4lZbJAhUBgBoKHT4fD4M#v=onepage&q=utigur&f=false</ref> Many historians consider Utigurs and Kutrigurs as successors of the Hunnic empire in the east, on the territory of modern-day Ukraine, where the Huns retreated after the death of ].<ref>The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Volume 4, Edward Gibbon, page 537: " And both Procopius and Agathias represent Kotrigurs and Utigurs as tribes of Huns. There can be no doubt Kutrigurs, Utigurs and Bulgars belong to the same race as the Huns of Attila and spoke tongues closely related, - were in fact Huns. They had all been under Attila's dominion", https://books.google.bg/books?id=j83oF6YQI68C&dq=utigurs&q=utigurs#v=snippet&q=utigurs&f=false</ref><ref>"The Huns, Rome and the Birth of Europe", 2013, Hyun Jin Kim, https://books.google.bg/books?id=fX8YAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA9&source=gbs_toc_r&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=utigurs&f=false, page 57, page 138, page 140-141, page 254 : " That the Utigurs and Kutrigurs formed the two main wings of the same steppe confederacy is proved by the foundation legend told by Procopius regarding the ethnogenesis of the two tribal groupings. He states that before the formation of both entities power in the steppe was concentrated in the hands of a single ruler ( presumably he is referring here to Ernak, son of Attila ), who then divided the power/empire between his two sons called Utigur and Kutrigur "</ref><ref>Justinian and Theodora, Robert Browning, page 160 : "The Huns of Attila, and their descendants the Bulgars, the Kutrigurs and the Utigurs, were pastoral peoples of the steppe and semi-desert lands of central Asia, who had been driven westwards in search of new pastures by a combination of factors. The progressive desiccation of their ancient home, and in particular of the Tarim Basin, reduced the grazing land available. ", https://books.google.bg/books?id=gOIMSWMtow0C&pg=PA158&dq=utigurs&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCwQ6AEwAzgKahUKEwiRrunKvo7HAhWrF9sKHSH-A6o#v=onepage&q=utigurs&f=false</ref> ] mentioned an Utigur leader in the latter 6th century called ].<ref>Menandri Fragmenta. Excerpta de legationibus. - Ed. C. de Boor. Berolini, 1903, p. 170</ref> Later these ] of the Eurasian steppes had come under the control of the ] and were also known as ''']'''.<ref>Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, |
|
|
1971, Volume 3, page 459 : "... Utigur and Unnugari are used as common synonyms for the same tribe. Again, the Unnugari are also called Unugunduri and Unungunduri.", https://books.google.bg/books?id=m_6zAAAAIAAJ&q=utigurs&dq=utigurs&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y</ref> In the early 7th century, Khan ] of the ] was "ruler of the Unogundurs" and the founder of ].<ref>Nisephorus Patriarcha. Breviarium. Ed. C. de Boor, p. 24</ref><ref>The Early Medieval Balkans, John Van Antwerp Fine, The University of Michigan Press (2000), page 66: " Meanwhile in the Steppes and the region around the sea of Azov dwelled the Onogur Bulgars. They were seminomadic,ethnically mixed people under a Bulgar chief. According to their traditions their ruling family, known as the house of Dulo, was descended from Attila the Hun. Though the scholars have advanced many theories, the origin and meaning of the name Dulo remain obscure. In 635 the Onogur chief Kovrat led a revolt against the Avars which succeeded in driving them from his land and putting an end to Avar suzerainty over the Onogurs", https://books.google.hr/books?id=Y0NBxG9Id58C&pg=PA66&dq=onogur&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CB8Q6AEwATgoahUKEwistou42ZPJAhWGWiwKHUbUDxI#v=onepage&q=onogur&f=false</ref><ref>Bulgarian Centuries, Volume 1, https://books.google.com/books?id=NeIVAQAAMAAJ&q=kubrat+dulo&dq=kubrat+dulo&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjGnJab6fnKAhUH6Q4KHfNIBeg4FBDoAQgcMAA</ref> |
|
|
|
|
|
The ] ancestors of the Utigurs represented the Pontic-Kuban part of the ], and were ruled by descendants of ] through his son ], named ] in the ].<ref>Otto Maenchen-Helfen, The World of the Huns, стр. 415 : "Ernak has often been identified with Ирникь in the Bulgarian Princes' List." https://books.google.bg/books?id=CrUdgzSICxcC&pg=PA415&dq=Ernak&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Ernak&f=false</ref><ref> Runciman (Book I THE CHILDREN OF THE HUNS) 1930, p. 4: "Attila was proudly called cousin, if not grandfather, by them all. Of all these claims, it seems that the Bulgars’ is the best justified; the blood of the Scourge of God flows now in the valleys of the Balkans, diluted by time and the pastoral Slavs." http://www.promacedonia.org/en/sr/</ref><ref>"The Huns, Rome and the Birth of Europe", 2013, Hyun Jin Kim, page 140 :" The same is likely to have been the case among the Utigurs and Kutrigurs who under Attilid rule had even more justification for claiming the imperial mantle of the Huns of Europe.", https://books.google.hr/books?id=jCpncXFzoFgC&q=utigurs#v=snippet&q=utigurs&f=false</ref> |
|
|
|
|
|
==Who were the Huns?== |
|
|
|
|
|
Roman historians ](317-390), ](370-404), and later ](500-560) called the ] Massagetae.<ref>"The World of the Huns", Otto Maenchen-Helfen, page 4:"But considering that Themistius, Claudian, and later Procopius called the Huns Massagetae,..."</ref> The Huns were called Massagetae also by ](340-397), ](310-394), ](373–414), ](465-535), ](500-565), ](6th century) and others. Alexander Cunningham, B.S. Dahiya(1980, 23) and Edgar Knobloch(2001, 15) identify Massagetae with the Great ]: '''Da Yuezhi -> Ta-Yue-ti'''(Great Lunar Race) '''-> Ta-Gweti -> Massa-Getae'''. Dahiya wrote about the Massagetae and Thyssagetae : "These ] people had two divisions, the Ta-Yue-Che and Siao-Yue-Che, exactly corresponding to the Massagetae and Thyssagetae of Herodotus ... " (Dahiya 1980, 23). Thyssagetae, who are known as the Lesser Getae, correspond with the Xiao Yuezhi, meaning Lesser Yuezhi.<ref>SINO-PLATONIC PAPERS, Number 127 October, 2003, page 22-24, http://www.sino-platonic.org/complete/spp127_getes.pdf</ref> ] and ] also supported this identification and wrote in their book : |
|
|
|
|
|
" Da (Greater) Yuezhi or in the earlier pronunciation d'ad-ngiwat-tieg, has been seen to equate with the Massagetae who occupied the oases and steppelands of West Central Asia in the time of Herodotus; here Massa renders an Iranian word for "Great," hence "Great Getae."... " <ref>Mallory, J. P.; Mair, Victor H. (2000), The Tarim Mummies: Ancient China and the Mystery of the Earliest Peoples from the West, London: Thames & Hudson. pages 98-99</ref> |
|
|
|
|
|
==Utigurs - etymology and origin== |
|
|
] |
|
|
] |
|
|
], ] and some modern ]n scholars identify the Bulgar Utigurs as one of the tribes of the ].<ref>Yu. A. Zuev, EARLY TURKS: ESSAYS on HISTORY and IDEOLOGY, p.38 and p.62 : " The Utigurs of Menandr are Uti, associated with Aorses of the Pliny "Natural history" (VI, 39). The word Uti was a real proto-type of a transcription Uechji < ngiwat-tie < uti (Pulleyblank, 1966, p. 18) "</ref><ref>http://www.protobulgarians.com/Kniga%20AtStamatov/Prarodina.htm</ref><ref>http://www.bulgari-istoria-2010.com/booksBG/P_Golijski_Tarim_i_Baktria.pdf</ref> According to ] and ] the Utigurs of Menandr are Uti, and the word Uti was a real proto-type of a transcription ] < Uechji < ngiwat-tie < uti.<ref>Pulleyblank, 1966, p. 18</ref> |
|
|
|
|
|
Cranial vault modification is a deliberate and permanent altering of head shape during infancy. It is unique, however, among body modifications in that it is an irreversible act performed by adults on children. The head shape cannot be altered in adulthood since adult cranial bones have fused together and are no longer malleable. The practice therefore reflects an investment of time and effort by parents and is a sign of an ascribed identity. Artificial cranial deformation is a valuable cultural artifact for tracing the Huns and Bulgars back in time. According to Otto Maenchen-Helfen the artificially deformed skulls in proto-Bulgarian graves cannot be seperated from those in the graves of the Sarmatized Turks or Turkicized Sarmatians of the post-Attilanic graves in the South Russian steppes.<ref>The World of the Huns, Otto Maenchen-Helfen, page 443, https://books.google.hr/books?id=CrUdgzSICxcC&q=dulo#v=onepage&q=dulo&f=false</ref> The ] and proto-Bulgarians practiced ]<ref>Paleoneurosurgical aspects of Proto-Bulgarian circular type of artificial skull deformations, Journal of Neurosurgery, http://thejns.org/doi/abs/10.3171/2010.9.FOCUS10193</ref> and its circular type can be used to trace the route that the Huns took from north China to the Central Asian steppes and subsequently to the southern Russian steppes. Circular modification appeared for the first time in Central Asia in the last centuries BC as an ethnic attribute of the early Huns. The distribution of the skulls parallels the movement of the Huns.<ref>Tracing Huns from East to West, L.T. Yablonsky, Cranial vault modification and foreign expansion, http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/65_Craniology/YablonskyTracingHunsEn.htm</ref><ref>Khodjaiov 1966; Ginzburg & Trofimova 1972; Tur 1996</ref> The people who practiced annular artificial cranial deformation in Central Asia were ]/Kushans.<ref>The Cambridge History of Early Inner Asia, Volume 1, Denis Sinor, стр. 172: "A striking resemblance may also be noted in the deformed heads of the early Yueh-chih and Hephthalites kings on their coinage",https://books.google.bg/books?id=ST6TRNuWmHsC&printsec=frontcover&dq=cranial+deformation+Yueh-Chih&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjApt2UmLrMAhWM8RQKHdvQBr04ChDoAQg9MAc#v=onepage&q=Yueh%20Chih&f=false</ref><ref>"The Kushan civilization", Buddha Rashmi Mani, page 5: "A particular intra-cranial investigation relates to an annular artificial head deformation (macrocephalic), evident on the skulls of diverse racial groups being a characteristic feature traceable on several figures of Kushan kings on coins.", https://books.google.bg/books?id=J_YtAAAAMAAJ&q=kushan+deformation&dq=kushan+deformation&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y</ref> |
|
|
<ref>The Huns, Rome and the Birth of Europe, Hyun Jin Kim,page 33</ref><ref>http://www.dandebat.dk/eng-dan11.htm</ref> The migration of the Yuezhi started from North China during 2BC, it is well documented<ref>http://www.transoxiana.org/Eran/Articles/benjamin.html</ref> and their movement parallels the distribution of the artificially deformed skulls. According to ] some of their groups migrated far to the west and were present in the steppes north of the Caucasus and on the shores of the Black Sea as early as 1st century BC.<ref>The Yüeh-Chih Problem Re-Examined, Otto Maenchen-Helfen, Journal of the American Oriental Society Vol. 65, No. 2 page 81 http://www.jstor.org/stable/593930?seq=11#page_scan_tab_contents .</ref> |
|
|
|
|
|
The spread of the custom of cranial deformation from Central Asia to Europe occurred in 6 phases and the distribution of the skulls parallel the movement of the ]. Modern taxonomic analysis of the artificially deformed crania from 5th–6th Century AD (Hun-Germanic Period) found in Northeastern Hungary showed that none of them have any Mongoloid features and all the skulls belong to the Europid "great race" but further identification was impossible.<ref>Artificially Deformed Crania From the Hun-Germanic Period (5th–6th Century AD) in Northeastern Hungary, Mónika Molnár, M.S.; István János, Ph.D.; László Szűcs, M.S.; László Szathmáry, C.Sc., http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/823134_4</ref> |
|
|
|
|
|
The Huns, Bulgars and part of the Yuezhi share some common burial practices as the narrow burial pits, pits with a niche and the northern orientation of the burials.<ref> "Khazaria in the Ninth and Tenth Centuries", Boris Zhivkov , page 30, https://books.google.bg/books?id=7Du2CAAAQBAJ&pg=PA30&dq=yuezhi+deformation&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CDAQ6AEwA2oVChMI1qLS7L71xwIVBLgaCh0FjwTZ#v=onepage&q=yuezhi%20deformation&f=false </ref> |
|
|
|
|
|
The clothes of the Yuezhi depicted on Bactrian Embroidery<ref>Yuezhi on Bactrian Embroidery from Textiles Found at Noyon uul, Mongolia Sergey A. Yatsenko Russian State University for the Humanities, Moscow, page 41, paragraph 2 : " The basic color gamma of the depictions is a combination of red/rose and white, which is characteristic for the Bactrian Yuezhi. Furthermore, there is a definite symmetry of these two basic colors. Thus, if an individual has a red caftan, then his shoes are also red but he has white trousers and a |
|
|
white belt, and, on the other hand, if he has a white caftan and shoes, the |
|
|
trousers and belt are red.", http://www.silkroadfoundation.org/newsletter/vol10/srjournal_v10.pdf </ref> are almost identical to the traditional Bulgarian costumes made nowadays.<ref>http://www.shevitsa.com/</ref> |
|
|
|
|
|
The recurve bow, the weapon that gave the ] military advantage over the ], was brought to Bactria by Yuezhi around 130 BC <ref>Senior, R. Indo-Scythian Coins and History,London, 2001, p.xxvii</ref> |
|
|
|
|
|
==Genetic research== |
|
|
|
|
|
Although many scholars had posited that the Bulgars were Turkic tribes of Central Asia, modern genetic research points to an affiliation with European and western Eurasian populations.<ref>http://global.britannica.com/topic/Bulgar</ref> The phylogenetic analysis of ancient DNA samples shows that mtDNA haplogroups can be classified as European and Western Eurasian and suggest a Western Eurasian matrilineal origin for proto-Bulgarians as well as a genetic similarity between proto- and modern Bulgarians.<ref>"Mitochondrial DNA Suggests a Western Eurasian origin for Ancient (Proto-) Bulgarians", D. V. Nesheva, S. Karachanak-Yankova, M. Lari, Y. Yordanov, A. Galabov, D. Caramelli, D. Toncheva, http://digitalcommons.wayne.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1069&context=humbiol_preprints</ref> The Y-Chromosome genetic tests suggest that a common paternal ancestry between the proto-Bulgarians and the Altaic and Central Asian Turkic-speaking populations either did not exist or was negligible.<ref>"Y-Chromosome Diversity in Modern Bulgarians: New Clues about Their Ancestry", Sena Karachanak et.al., http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0056779 </ref> |
|
|
|
|
|
==Genetic research: Tarim Basin - Bulgaria== |
|
|
] |
|
|
] |
|
|
The origins of Tocharians and Tocharian related Yuezhi is controversial topic. Nevertheless, certain facts emerge. Usually they are assumed to have spoken Tocharian language, but Tocharian is first attested in the 8th c. AD, or about 3 thousand years after the earliest appearance of Caucasoids in the region of Tarim Basin and Xinjiang, North China. Positing linguistic continuity is not an appropriate default position when direct evidence is absent. There is evidence that Caucasoid population in Tarim Basin were already mixed with Mongoloids as early as the early Bronze Age (at least in their mtDNA).<ref>http://bmcbiol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1741-7007-8-15</ref> This reduces our confidence that they spoke an Indo-European language. An attempt to discover the origin of the Tocharians was made by a careful sorting of Y-chromosome lineages in the present-day Uyghur population of Xinjiang that is assumed to have absorbed the pre-Turkic inhabitants of the region. By removing Eurasian lineages that are likely to be associated with the Xiongnu, Mongols, Uyghur, and non-Tocharian sources (such as Iranians, or various Silk Road outliers), the phylogeographic analysis leaves three candidate haplogroups : J2-M172, R1a1a-M17, R1b-M343 (and its main R-M269 clade).<ref>http://dienekes.blogspot.bg/2011/05/on-tocharian-origins.html</ref> About 80% of the total genetic variation in modern Bulgarians falls within haplogroups J-M172, R-M17 and R-M269, E-M35, I-M170.<ref>http://www.abstractsonline.com/Plan/ViewAbstract.aspx?sKey=006d5e3a-ea14-49ff-9b39-f0a042d39185&cKey=bfc88c56-5e93-4ee2-89e6-c3ab1bd25f5c&mKey=%7BDFC2C4B1-FBCD-433D-86DD-B15521A77070%7D</ref> Because the haplogroups E-M35 and I-M170 are indigenous for the Balkan Peninsula prior to the arrival of the Bulgars, this leads to the conclusion that there is an isomorphic correspondence between the haplogroups that can be associated with Tocharian related Yuezhi and the haplogroups that can be associated with the proto-Bulgarians (Bulgars). The conclusion correlates with the historical data that modern Bulgarians have three ethnic ancestors - Bulgars, Slavs and Thracians. |
|
|
|
|
|
==Who really were the Yuezhi ?== |
|
|
] |
|
|
] |
|
|
] |
|
|
They were recorded by the Chinese during the period of Warring States (495-221 B. C.) as nomadic people living in the the lands of the Western Region, specifically around Dunhuang and Guazhou. The Yuezhi had occupied Dunhuang district and became very strong nation in the Northwest China. Han Shu further records: " The Great Yuezhi was a nomadic horde. They moved about following their cattle, and had the same customs as those of the Xiongnu. As their soldiers numbered more than hundred thousand, they were strong and despised the Xiongnu. In the past, they lived in the region between Dunhuang and Qilian (south of Hexi Corridor)" The Yuezhi was so powerful that the Xiongnu monarch Touman even sent his eldest son Modu as a hostage to the Yuezhi. The Yuezhi often attacked their neighbour the Wusun to acquire slaves and pasture lands. Wusun originally lived together with the Yuezhi in the region between Dunhuang and Qilian Mountain. The Yuezhi attacked the Wusuns, killed their monarch Nandoumi and took his territory. The son of Nandoumi, Kunmo fled to the Xiongnu and was brought up by the Xiongnu monarch. |
|
|
Gradually the Xiongnu grew stronger and war broke out between them and the Yuezhi. There were at least four wars between the Yuezhi and Xiongnu according to the Chinese accounts. The first war broke out during the reign of the Xiongnu monarch Touman (who died in 209 B.C) who suddenly attacked the Yuezhi. The Yuezhi wanted to kill Modu, the son of Touman kept as a hostage to them, but Modu stole a good horse from them and managed to escape to his country. It appears that the Xiongnu did not defeat the Yuezhi in this first war. |
|
|
The second war took place in the 7th year of Modu era (203 B.C.). From this war, a large area of the territory originally belonging to the Yuezhi was seized by the Xiongnu and the hegemony of the Yuezhi started to shake. The third war probably was at 176 BC (or shortly before that) and the Yuezhi were badly defeated. The forth war was during the the period of Xiongnu monarch Laoshang (174 BC-166 BC) and was a disaster for the Yuezhi, their king was killed and a drinking cup was made out of his skull. Probably around 165 BC the majority of the Yuezhi migrated from the Tarim basin westward to Fergana. They finally settled in Transoxiana and Bactria.<ref>The Yuezhi and Dunhuang, http://www.eurasianhistory.com/data/articles/l01/2024.html#_ednref5</ref><ref>Selections from the Han Narrative Histories, Ta Yue-she (Massagetae), https://depts.washington.edu/silkroad/texts/hantxt1.html#contents</ref> |
|
|
It is hard to say if the Yuezhi (Yue-Chi) should be included in any of the recognized divisions of Turanian tribes such as Turks or Huns. Nothing whatever is known of their original language. Judging by the physical type represented on the Kushan's coins the Yue-Chi type is Turkish rather than Mongol or Ugro-Finnic. Some authorities think that the name Turushka or Turukha sometimes applied to them by Indian writers is another evidence of the connexion with the Turks. But the national existence and name of the Turks seem to date from the 5th century A.D., so that it is an anachronism to speak of the Yue-Chi as a division of them. The Yue-Chi and Turks, however, may both represent parallel developments of similar or even originally identical tribes. Some authors consider that the Yue-Chi are the same as the Getae and that the original form of the name was Ytit or Get, which is also supposed to appear in the Indian Jat.<ref>http://www.theodora.com/encyclopedia/y/yuechi.html</ref> |
|
|
|
|
|
According to Hyun Jin Kim the nomadic Yuezhi possessed political institutions that closely resemble the Xiongnu and later Hunnic models. The Chinese refer to the five xihou or Lords of the Yuezhi who rule the five tribes of their imperial confederation. According to Pulleyblank the Yuezhi were Indo-Europeans and they spoke a Tocharian type language.<ref>THE PEOPLES OF THE STEPPE FRONTIER IN EARLY CHINESE SOURCES, Edwin G. Pulleyblank, University of British Columbia, (1999), Summary, page 35</ref> The title xihou corresponds in the pronunciation to what would later become the Turkic title yubgu. This originally Yuezhi royal title appears on the coins of their rulers as IAPGU/yavuga<ref>"The Huns, Rome and the Birth of Europe", (2013, Cambridge University Press), Hyun Jin Kim</ref> and it came to the Xiongnu from the Yuezhi.<ref>Turks and Iranians: Aspects of Turk and Khazaro-IranianInteraction, Peter B. Golden, page 17, footnote 89, http://www.academia.edu/12349727/Turks_and_Iranians_An_historical_Sketch_in_Turkic-Iranian_Contact_Areas._Historical_and_Linguistic_Aspects_edited_by_Lars_Johanson_and_Christiane_Bulut_Wiesbaden_Harrassowitz_2006_17-38</ref> Among the Turks, the title yabgu gained a new lease of life. In the Turkish inscriptions of Mongolia, it refers to a noble ranking immediately after the qagan.<ref>http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/jabguya</ref> Kuyan/gayan was a "common Uechji" symbol for a terrestrial embodiment for the Moon and Milky Way.<ref>Yu. A. Zuev, EARLY TURKS: ESSAYS on HISTORY and IDEOLOGY, page 39, http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/29Huns/Zuev/ZuevEarly1En.htm</ref> |
|
|
|
|
|
==Language== |
|
|
|
|
|
] in his notable study "The Hunnic Language of the Attila Clan" (1982) <ref>http://projects.iq.harvard.edu/files/huri/files/vvi_n4_dec1982.pdf</ref> analyzed the 33 survived Hunnic personal names and concluded that the language of the Bulgars was Hunnic language: |
|
|
# '''Danube-Bulgarian was a Hunnic language''' page (444) |
|
|
# Danube-Bulgarian had the suffix /mA/, with the same meaning as the Middle Turkic suffix /mAt/ 'the greatest among' (page 433) |
|
|
# In the Hunno-Bulgarian languages /r/ within a consonantic cluster tends to disappear (page 435) |
|
|
# In Hunno-Bulgarian there was also a tendency toward the develop ment of di > ti > ći (page 436) |
|
|
# In the Hunno-Bulgarian there was vocalic metathesis bli- < *bil (page 443) |
|
|
# There was initially a g- in the Hunno-Bulgarian languages (page 449) |
|
|
# One of the typical features of the Hunno-Bulgarian linguistic group is a cluster in the word initial position. (page 460) |
|
|
# Hunnic (language) shared rhotacism with Mongolian, Old Bulgarian, and Chuvash. (page 470) |
|
|
According to Pritsak the language was between Turkic and Mongolian, probably closer to Turkic. |
|
|
|
|
|
According to Antoaneta Granberg "the Hunno-Bulgarian language was formed on the Northern and Western borders of China in the 3rd-5th c. BC.<ref>The Hunno-Bulgarian Language, Antoaneta Granberg, http://www.centralasien.dk/joomla/images/journal/DSCA2008.pdf |
|
|
</ref> The analysis of the loan-words in Slavonic language shows the presence of direct influences of various language-families:<ref>https://www.academia.edu/683028/Classification_of_the_Hunno-Bulgarian_Loan-Words_in_Slavonic</ref> Turkic, Mongolian, Chinese and Iranian. The Huns and Proto-Bulgarians spoke the same language, different from all other “barbarian” languages. When Turkic tribes appeared at the borders of the Chinese empire in the 6th c., the Huns and Proto-Bulgarians were no longer there.<ref>Pulleyblank 1963: 239-265</ref> It is important to note that Turkic does contain Hunno-Bulgarian loans, but that these were received through Chinese intermediary, e.g. Hunnic ch’eng-li ‘sky, heaven’ was borrowed from Chinese as tängri in Turkic<ref>Pulleyblank 1963:240</ref> The Hunno-Bulgarian language exhibits non-Turkic and non-Altaic features. Altaic has no initial consonant clusters, while Hunno-Bulgarian does. Unlike Turkic and Mongolian, Hunno-Bulgarian language has no initial dental or velar spirants. Unlike Turkic, it has initial voiced b-: bagatur (a title), boyla (a title). Unlike Turkic, Hunno-Bulgarian has initial n-, which is also encountered in Mongolian: Negun, Nebul (proper names). In sum, Antoaneta Granberg concludes that Hunno-Bulgarian language has no consistent set of features that unite it with either Turkic or Mongolian. Neither can it be related to Sino-Tibetian languages, because it obviously has no monosyllabic word structure." |
|
|
|
|
|
Assuming that the connection Yuezhi->Hunno-Bulgars was substantiated enough we can try to find explanation in the preserved data about the language of Yuezhi/Kushans and see if we can find some correspondence. Some scholars have explained the words connecting the '''Yuezhi''' 月氏 or the Kushans as |
|
|
coming from the '''Turkic''' languages, thus concluding that the language of the Kushans was from the Türkic language branch. this theory is inadequate. In the Zhoushu 周書, ch. 50, it is recorded that: “The ancestors came from the state of Suo 索.”34 It has been suggested that “Suo索” is a transcription of “Sacae.” In other words, it may be possible that the ancestors of the Türks originally were kin of the Sacae. If this is true, it would not be difficult to understand why some words and titles connected with the Yuezhi 月氏 or the Kushans can be explaned by the Türkic languages. In the Rājataraṅgiṇī (I, 170) there is a reference to the fact that the Türkic ruler in Gandhāra claimed his ancestor was Kaniṣka, and maybe this is not merely boasting. Other scholars have judged that the language of the '''Kushans''' was the '''Iranian''' language. This theory is also inadequate, for the following reasons. First, they were a branch of the Sacae, a tribal union composed of at least four tribes, i.e., Asii, Gasiani, Tochari and Sacarauli. Of these there were some tribes who spoke the Iranian language, but also some who spoke Indo-European languages other than the Iranian language, e.g., the Tochari. Next, the tribes that spoke Tokharian were in close contact with the tribes that spoke the Iranian language, and the words connected to them that can be explained with Iranian possibly originally were Tokharian.<ref>http://sino-platonic.org/complete/spp212_kushan_guishuang.pdf page 15</ref> |
|
|
|
|
|
] included the '''Yuezhi''' (Uechji) among the tribes of early Turks. He wrote that " in the Northern Caucasus they spoke East - '''Iranian''' language, and in the Kangju they spoke in '''Türkic'''."<ref>Zuev, Early Turks, http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/29Huns/Zuev/ZuevEarly6En.htm, page 153</ref> His sketches about early Türkic tribes and state type confederations showed that "ideological views coincide in many respects and have a common foundation, which ascends to the last centuries BCE. Such foundation was the pantheon of the ancient confederations of Uechji (Yuezhi) and Kangars that left a trace in the ideological complexes of Ashtak Türks, Oguzes, Kypchaks, Az-kishes, Kimeks, Kangly, etc. Certain features of it still are in the folklore of the modern Türkic peoples. The tradition of the ideological continuity is permeating the history of these peoples from extreme antiquity until the new time."<ref>http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/29Huns/Zuev/ZuevEarly6En.htm, page 178 </ref> Probably one of the most striking customs was the custom of the population to completely shave their heads. "The seven-tribe Uechji -"Tochars” were “White-headed” i.e. with completely shaven heads. "Bold-headness" was equivalent to Moon-headness."<ref>http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/29Huns/Zuev/ZuevEarly2En.htm, page 71</ref> Remember that the word Yuezhi is a Chinese exonym, formed from the characters yuè (月) "moon" and shì (氏) "clan" - hence they shaved their heads to resemble the Moon. We are not surprised to discover the same custom among the rulers of Bulgarian ] : "These five princes ruled the kingdom over the other side of the Danube for 515 years with '''shaven heads''' and after that came to this side of the Danube Asparuh knyaz and until now (rules)."<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/Nominalia_of_the_Bulgarian_khans</ref> |
|
|
|
|
|
==The House of Dulo== |
|
|
The house of Dulo (also known as Dulo clan) was the ruling dynasty of early Bulgars. Though the scholars have advanced many theories, the origin of Dulo clan and meaning of the name Dulo remain obscure: ""According to their traditions their ruling family, known as the house of Dulo, was descended from Attila the Hun."<ref>The Early Medieval Balkans: A Critical Survey from the Sixth to the Late Twelfth Century, John Van Antwerp Fine, University of Michigan Press(2000), p. 66: "According to their traditions their ruling family, known as the house of Dulo, was descended from Attila the Hun. Though the scholars have advanced many theories, the origin and meaning of the name Dulo remain obscure." https://books.google.bg/books?redir_esc=y&id=Y0NBxG9Id58C&q=dulo#v=snippet&q=dulo&f=false</ref> Many scholars agree that the dynasty has Hunnic origin, the first two names in the Nominalia of Bulgarian khans are actually Attila and his third son Ernak.<ref>Early Mediaeval identity of the Bulgarians, Cafer Saatchi, page 3: "The khans Avtiochol and Irnik, listed in the Nominalia of the Bulgarian khans today are identified with Attila and Ernach.", http://www.academia.edu/10894065/Early_Mediaeval_identity_of_the_Bulgarians</ref><ref>The World of the Huns, Otto Maenchen-Helfen, p. 415: "Ernak has often been identified with Ирникь in the Bulgarian Princes' List.", https://books.google.bg/books?id=CrUdgzSICxcC&printsec=frontcover&dq=The+World+of+the+Huns%22,+Otto+Maenchen-Helfen&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiI_LSi06LMAhUoS5oKHQn1A0sQ6AEIGzAA#v=snippet&q=bulgarian&f=false</ref><ref>The Bulgarians: from pagan times to the Ottoman conquest, David Marshall Lang, p. 49: "... and was the last of the great house of Dulo to occupy the throne, with him died out the lineage of Attila the Hun" https://books.google.bg/books?id=8EppAAAAMAAJ&dq=The+Bulgarians%3A+from+pagan+times+to+the+Ottoman+conquest+David+Marshall+Lang&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=dulo</ref><ref>The Tale of the Prophet Isaiah: The Destiny and Meanings of an Apocryphal Text, Ivan Biliarsky, р. 255: "Among historians, there is almost unanimity they were Attila, the ruler of the Huns, and his son Ernach.", https://books.google.hr/books?id=mbevAAAAQBAJ&q=dulo#v=snippet&q=dulo&f=false</ref> According to Steven Runciman, given all the historical circumstances and striking resemblance to the names Irnik and Ernak would be unnecessary hypercritical not trace the Bulgarian royal dynasty to myself Attila.<ref>A history of the First Bulgarian Empire, Steven Runciman, Appendix III, р. 280: "Under these circumstances, especially considering the remarkable similarity of the names, it is surely unnecessarily hypercritical to refuse to identify Irnik with Ernach, and not to trace the Bulgar royal line from Attila.", http://www.promacedonia.org/en/sr/sr_app3.htm</ref> According to one hypothesis name Dulo is distorted form of the name of Attila.<ref>Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, Volume 11, р. 228, https://books.google.bg/books?id=SO2zAAAAIAAJ&q=dulo+attila&dq=dulo+attila&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y</ref> Omeljan Pritsak connects Dulo name with the name of the ruling dynasty Xiongnu Tu-ko (EMC d'uo'klo) by suggesting that the name Vihtun from the List of Bulgarian khans e Xiongnu emperor himself Modun.<ref>The Huns, Rome and the Birth of Europe, Hyun Jin Kim, р. 59, https://books.google.bg/books?id=jCpncXFzoFgC&pg=PR1&lpg=PR1&dq=The+Huns,+Rome+and+the+Birth+of+Europe,+Hyun+Jin+Kim&source=bl&ots=aQ-k_oBl-I&sig=bMI_jWIOu7DtwP8VqKox1YEkmEw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjkw42I8bPMAhWpQJoKHRDdA3sQ6AEIUTAJ#v=onepage&q=dulo&f=false</ref> |
|
|
|
|
|
==The Huns - a second look== |
|
|
] in his famous monograph "The world of the Huns" wrote that we know virtually nothing about the Indo-European languages spoken on the west-north borders of China. All we know of the language of the Huns are names. The tribal names appear to be of Turkish origin. The personal names fall into 3 general categories: 1) Turkish 2) Iranian 3) of unknown origin ( we don't count here apparently Germanic names whose origin is obvious) Examples of such names (concerning the Bulgar branch of the Huns) are : |
|
|
|
|
|
Zabergan - Kutrigur Hun - Ζαβεργάν; Persian |
|
|
|
|
|
Sandilch - Utigur Hun - Σάνδιλ; Turkic |
|
|
|
|
|
Asparuch- Utigur ruler, founder of Danube Bulgaria - probably Iranian ( Maenchen-Helfen, page 384) |
|
|
|
|
|
Careful consideration of the above information shows that there is correspondence between the possible language of the Yuezhi and the possible language of the European Huns. Unfortunately we have to compare one unknown language to another unknown language - a quite formidable task. Anyway certain facts emerge - both languages exhibit features from Turkic and Iranian languages. We shouldn't forget that according to Pritsak many names appear to be Mongolian. The idea that Bulgar/Yuezhi tribes were dragged into Europe by a small Xiongnu fragment migrating to West has a long history behind. Pulleyblank, despite the fact that he concluded for various reasons it was very unlikely that the Xiongnu language was Turkic or Mongolian or any form of Altaic, assumed it as a plausible idea. According to Pulleyblank, who identifies the Utigur Huns with the Yuezhi, European Huns comprised two groups of tribes with different ethnic affinities and the ruling group that bore the name Hun was directly connected with the Northern Xiongnu.<ref>THE PEOPLES OF THE STEPPE FRONTIER IN EARLY CHINESE SOURCES, Edwin G. Pulleyblank, University of British Columbia, (1999), page 37: "... there is almost certainly a lineal connection between the Northern Xiongnu |
|
|
who moved westward out of contact with the Chinese in the second century and the Huns who later appeared in Eastern Europe. Apart from the ruling group that bore the name Hun, however, the European Huns undoubtedly included other tribes with |
|
|
different ethnic affinities...", page 49 : " (1) that for various reasons it was very unlikely that the Xiongnu language was Turkic or Mongolian or any form of Altaic, (2) that there might be validity in the suggestion of Louis Ligeti that the Xiongnu language was related to Ket and other now extinct Yeniseian languages of Siberia, (3) that the Xiongnu language had bequeathed a number of important culture words to the later Turkic and Mongolian steppe empires, including Turkish tängri, Mongolian tenggeri ‘heaven’ and titles such as tarqan and tegin and kaghan"</ref> Historical data deny this ( and similar to it) idea. It is much more natural to assume that Yuezhi had a lot of Mongolian borrowings into their language from the very beginning ( the Tarim basin population had Mongoloid admixture from the early Bronze age). Recent studies show that the populations of the Tarim Basin used many different languages and writing systems, 17 languages in 24 different scripts are documented and among them are Old Turkic, Mongolian and Persian.<ref> The Languages and Writing Systems of the Tarim Basin, Matthew Anderson, SINO-PLATONIC PAPERS, 2012, page 5 : http://www.sino-platonic.org/complete/spp228_silk_roads.pdf </ref> According to some researchers in modern Bulgarian language there are many words of Tocharian origin.<ref>https://www.academia.edu/4965415/%D0%A2%D0%9E%D0%A5%D0%90%D0%A0%D0%9E-%D0%91%D0%AA%D0%9B%D0%93%D0%90%D0%A0%D0%A1%D0%9A%D0%98_%D0%95%D0%97%D0%98%D0%9A%D0%9E%D0%92%D0%98_%D0%9F%D0%90%D0%A0%D0%90%D0%9B%D0%95%D0%9B%D0%98</ref> |
|
|
|
|
|
==Conclusions== |
|
|
|
|
|
Absence of information about historical migration of Xiongnu-Huns to the west before the end of the 4th century AD, and existence of the "Hun" population on the eastern fringes of Europe in the 3rd century and earlier, lead to the conclusion that in the composition of the western Huns participated other tribes, and first of all Yuezhi. |
|
|
|
|
|
==History== |
|
|
|
|
|
According to Procopius, there was a nation of Huns living to the east of the Sea of Azov and north of the Caucasus, the king of these Huns had two sons, Kutigur and Utigur. The king referred by Procopius is most probably Ernak, the third son of Attila. After the death of the king, the two sons divided the people into two tribes. Analyzing the chronicles of the antique historians ] concludes that the name Bulgar was used for both tribes, but in 6th century the tribal names were preferred by the Eastern Roman Empire due to the different policy it had toward these two tribes.<ref>Васил Н. Златарски |
|
|
История на Първото българско Царство, page 75</ref> In the middle of 6th century the Emperor ], being attacked by the Kutrigurs under their leader Chinialus, bribed their relatives the Utigurs led by ] to attacked the Kutrigurs in the rear. The resulting internecine war between the two tribes weakened them and made them vulnerable to the Avar attack shortly after that.<ref>The Huns, Rome and the Birth of Europe, Hyun Jin Kim,page 142, https://books.google.bg/books?id=jCpncXFzoFgC&pg=PA132&dq=Utigur+attila&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CB8Q6AEwAGoVChMIs9-UmKyQxwIVBKJyCh0V0wQM#v=onepage&q=Sandilch%20&f=false</ref> |
|
|
|
|
|
By 568CE some Kutrigurs groups came under the control of the ] who were migrating to Pannonia and was also known as Avars. The eastern Bulgar groups along the northern coasts of the Black sea, the Utigurs, were conquered by the ] (who were violently opposed to the ]).{{sfn|Runciman (Book I)|1930|p=10}} Due to civil war the Western Turks retreated back into Asia no later than 583 CE according to Zlatarski. |
|
|
|
|
|
Kubrat's Utigurs defeated the Avars in alliance with ] and reunited the Utigurs and Kutrigurs into a single Crimean Bulgar confederation in Patria Onoguria renamed as "]" |
|
|
|
|
|
After Kubrat's death in 665AD, his empire was divided<ref>Runciman, Book I, The Children of the Huns, page 16-17</ref> when his appointed heir Batbayan submitted to the Khazars of Kubrat's second son ] who settled Batbayan's army at the confluence of the ] and ] rivers where they founded a Khanate known as ].<ref>Heritage of Scribes: The Relation of Rovas Scripts to Eurasian Writing Systems, Gábor Hosszú, Rovas Foundation, 2012, ISBN 9638843748, </ref> |
|
|
|
|
|
Other sons of Kubrat carried the Utigur name to the Danube and ] by April 677. Some submitted to a restored Avar Kaghan, while others rebelled moving south to the ]n plain under the leadership of ]'s Uncle, ] in alliance with Khan Asparukh's Utigurs<ref>national Historical and Archeological Reserve Madara, Sofia 2009, Pecham valdex, p.26</ref> who successfully occupied the southern banks of the Danube following the ]. Kuber's Utigurs displaced some of the populations that had already settled in the region of Macedonia, and intermingled with the populations that remained. Following the Battle of Ongal, Asparukh settled a portion of the Utigur Bulgars in ], to establish the state which would become modern ]. In the 8th century, the Kuber Bulgars merged with ]'s Bulgars who had by the late 7th century already taken both sides of the ]. |
|
OK. I don't know who else to suggest. The article needs more than a simple copy edit, it needs a complete rewrite to make the issues clearer - Eric Corbett could have done that. I can see that you fully understand the topic, and are an appropriate person to bring knowledge to the article; what is needed, however, is someone skilled in communication and with a good command of the English language, who also has an affinity or interest in the topic and is prepared to work with you. Unless you have a solution in mind, I will close this review in the next 24 hours. When the language and clarity issues have been resolved you can nominate again. SilkTork 15:10, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
