Part one
ORIGIN OF TÜRKS
Scytho-Sarmatian ethnic roots of Türks37. General information.
In the Scytho-Sarmatian history are buried powerful ethnic roots of
the Türks of the 1st millennium BC, the history that in the official
historical science is
recognized as a part of the Indo-European history, and, in particular, as a history of Indo-Iranians.
For over last hundreds years
the scientists offer every possible justifications in favor of the
Persian-linguality of
the Scythians and Sarmatians. In those regions where the Scythians-Sarmatians were
located more compactly, the Türks were proclaimed to be later newcomers. Especially it
relates to the Eastern Europe, where ostensibly the first Türks came only
in the 4th century AD under the name of the Huns, after they were
replaced by the newcomer Avars,
and the Avars were replaced by the Türks. Until their arrival in the Eastern Europe
ostensibly lived the Persian-linguality, and in forested zone Finno-Ugrian tribes.
This viewpoint was included in the school and university programs, it is
reflected in the textbooks and instruction books, and therefore no young scientist
would dare to touch the Scytho-Türkic problem. Our research, with the results stated in this chapter, to some extent
would be an exception of that tradition.
Before proceeding to a question of the ethnic affiliation of
the Scythians and Sarmatians, should be invoked the most general information
about them.
Information about the Scythians can be collected from various sources. The most full
and a reliable source is the
fourth book of "History"
by Herodotus, written
by him in Greek language in the middle of the 5th century BC. As additions, may
be used also other Greek sources, especially the works of Hippocrates
(5th-4th centuries BC), Xenophon (5th-4th centuries BC), Polibius (2nd century BC),
Strabo (1st
century BC),
Ptolemy (2nd century AD),
etc. Here in this book the ethnonym Scyth (s'k'd') is used in two
meanings: in a narrow
and a wide. In the narrow sense the "Scyth" is their own endoethnonym for one of the tribes which
succeeded
in dominating, in a wide sense it included all tribes of their
confederation. P.F.Sum wrote exactly that: the Scythians succeeded in taking over
the
others, and then their ethnonym gradually also became a general ethnonym for
the subordinated tribes. For example, these two senses, narrow and wide, has the ethnonym
Russian: the peoples of Russia as a whole are called abroad "Russian";
but when the subject is about particular peoples or languages of the peoples in Russia, then
the ethnonym Russian
is used in a narrow sense: in that sense the Ukrainians, Tatars and
other non-Russians are not included any more. And so the ethnonym
Scythian was applied by the Greek historians both in a narrow, and in a
wide senses.
Later the ethnonym Scyth began to be used more often only in
a wide sense,
and it meant a presence in their association of many independent peoples with
their own ethnonyms. The Royal Scythians, Scythians-plowmen, Scythians-farmers,
Scythians-nomads were different.
Per the first legend cited by Herodotus about the origin of
the Scythians,
it was believed that their primogenitor was Targitai, he had three sons: Lipoksai, Arpoksai and the youngest Koloksai. All
the tribes
descending from these brothers are called Skolots, i.e. Royal. The Hellenes called them Scyths [Herodotus, 1972,
B.4 paragraph 6].
Herodotus informs further that "Persians called all Scythians Sacae...
Sacae, or Scyths, carried on their heads tall stiff caps rising to a point" [Ibid. B.7 paragraph 64].
By the other Greek sources, in the 3rd century BC and until the
4th century AD the place of the Scythians take the Sarmatians, who
descend, apparently, from
the Sauromatians, who were the neighbors of the Scythians still in the 8th century BC.
According to Herodotus, then the "Sauromatians spoke in Scythian, but have never talked it correctly" [
Ibid.
B.4, paragraph 117].
In the Persian (since 1934 - Iranian) sources
the Scythians were really called Sakаs. The main
Persian source is the documentary inscriptions of the Persian king Darius I (6th-5th centuries BC), cut on
the rocks in the Nakshi-Rustem and
Behistun gorges in
the ancient Persian language. From this inscription, taken together with other Persian
sources, the following Sakas can be distinguished: Sakas tigrahauda (with
pointed hats), Sakas haumavarga (apparently, Amürgian Scythians of Herodotus) (Amyrgian Scythians, Herodotus 7.64
- Translator's Note), Sakas tiay-para-daraya (overseas),
Sakas tiay-para-sugda (located
beyond Sogdiana).
The Persian source devoted to the malik Xerx (5th century BC),
gives information about the
Sakas haumavarga, Sakas tigrahauda and about the skudra (also
spelled Ichkudra, Chkudra). The last corresponded to the Sakas overseas,
located to the north of Black Sea (i.e. Chdar-Bulgars -
Translator's Note).
The Assyrian sources written still in the 7th century BC talk about Cymmers (Gimmers) and about
Ashguzes. Heeding the cuneiform texts, we shall see that these Ashguzes/Ishguzes
correspond to the Scythians of the Greek sources [
Durmush, 1993, 26].
In the Chinese sources is information about the Central Asian Scythians,
called by the Chinese with an ethnonym Says, read by the scientists as
Stsu/Su/Sa"i/Sse/Se. Considering that in the ancient Chinese manuscripts
is also the ethnonym Sak, it is easy to guess that the Says is the Chinese
pronunciation of the word Sak. The Western Turkistan Sakas are called by
the Chinese
as Say Wang, i.e. Royal Sakas [Ibid. 27-28].
From the written sources and archeological excavations scientists established extensive territories of Eurasia where
lived the Scythians (Sakas, Ishguzes,
Says): from the Danube to the western borders of China, including the Eastern Turkestan (so
called Sintszyan). This territory is usually divided into three regions.
The first region is from the northwest of China to the Caspian Sea. There lived Sakas tigrahauda
and Sakas haumavarga. Some Greek geographers call the Sakas of this region
"Massagets". In the sources are especially noted the Sakas who lived beyond
the the Sogdiana or in Fergana .
The second region is from the Caspian Sea to the coast of Danube where lived the Scythians
called in the Persian sources Overseas Sakas. Avccording to
Herodotus, there lived various tribes of the Scythians, including the Scythians-plowmen, Scythians-farmers,
Royal Scythians, Taures , and Melanhlens who were speaking in a dialect of
the language of the Scythians.
The third region is the Near East, where, according to the Greek sources,
the Scythians
penetrated in a pursuit of the Cimmerians. In spite of the fact that the Scythians reached Egypt, Syria and Palestine,
per the archeological data, they mainly lived in the Eastern Anatolia [Durmush, 1993, 37].
38. Reliability of the ancient sources about Scythians.
Of all the
sources about Scythians-Sarmatians the most ancient are Greek, Persian,
Assyrian and Chinese. But the scientists are not unanimous in their reliability.
The ancient Greek sources are subjected to a severe criticism, especially the works of
Herodotus, which underlay almost all research about the Scythians.
He was sharply criticized beginning from the ancient authors,
who accused him in injustice
and bad faith. Later the "dainty critics portrayed him as in
diligent, but not discrimatory compiler, as simply an inequitable author
who was intentionally misleading the reader by stories about his imaginary travels"
[Boruhovich V.G., 1972, 496]. At the end of the 19th century in the European science
came a break in respect to Herodotus and reliability of
his compositions. There was a restoration of his reputation as a truthful
and diligent author and researcher [Ibid. 497]. But it was not a full
reabilitation of the Herodotus and ancient Greek historians' reputation . Even
now are conductedon
disputes about the reliability of the ancient sources, including the Scythians
among the disputed subjects.
There is an opinion that ancient Greek sources did not exist
at all, ostensibly they were forged by the Middle Age authors to supply, for a
big money, the historians with necessary information. Those who deal with the problems of
the Scythians cant pay ignore the arguments of the supporters of this viewpoint. What
are they?
A known historian, a honorary academician N.Morozov, studying
the general
history of the mankind, noticed that the ancient history, reconstructed on the
basis of the analysis of the ancient Greek sources, reminds the medieval history.
Starting from that finding he suggested that the sources called the ancient
Greek writings, probably, are composed in the Middle Ages. Learning of that opinion,
a doctor of physical and mathematical sciences, the winner of the Lenin
premium professor M.Postnikov created a special commission where, in addition to
himself, he included two other doctors of sciences, with a view of finding out
the concordance of
the historical facts in the antiquity and in the Middle Ages and the reliability of
the ancient Greek
sources. Having analysed the available
facts with a matematiko-statistical method, the commission came to a
conclusion that the ancient sources were forged for sale to the historians only
in the Middle Ages.
The results of the analysis were published in 1982 by M.Postnikov in
the jornal "Technology and science" (No 7) under the name
"Greatest falsification in the history". In the opinion of the author, firstly,
none of
the ancient sources has reached us in the original form, and there are only their
variations copied in the 10th-13th centuries. Now it is impossible to establish
precisely, whether they were copied from the ancient sources or were forged later. Secondly,
the ancient written sources, if they were not periodically copied, could not reach us,
and in the 6th-9th centuries there were no competent people (monks), capable of
copying them. Hence, during that period, even if the ancient sources existed, logically,
they should have disappeared. Thirdly, the ancient Greek written sources are written
in
the stilistically well polished literary language, and with the absence of
the paper, without a constant usage, the literary language could not be improved to a level of
the language of the ancient Greek sources. Fourthly, the M.Postnikov's commission had
multiple ostensibly ancient
Greek works forged in the Middle
Ages. From all these facts M.Postnikov comes to a conclusion that the ancient
Greek sources about the Scythians, probably, also were composed in the Middle Ages by
the history falsifiers for the mercantile ends.
Those historians who are studying the ancient period based on the Greek sources
try to not admit this criticism, for to prove the opposite is very
difficult.
In our opinion, the following reasons do not allow accepting M.Postnikov's
idea.
First, some common moments in the ancient and medieval history cannot be
a
basis for the statement that the ancient Greek sources are ostensibly forged in
the Middle Ages. Some historical events can be edrepeat with minor changes during the
various periods of the history. If there were no such common moments and
repetitions, we would not study the history to understand the modern
conditions of the human society and to project the prospects of its
development.
Secondly, M.Postnikov's argument, that in the 6th-the 9th centuries were no monks capable of copying
the manuscripts, is not too convincing. As is known, each people which has
their writing always also had the writing experts.
Thirdly, even if to presume that the ancient Greek sources were made only in
the Middle
Ages, we should take into account that the people of the Middle Ages knew about the
ancient period more than our contemporaries. The events of the ancient period could
be preserved to some extent in their memory, in the sources which used the medieval
lovers
of the history.
For the Türkologists also exists another aspect of the question.
Based on the
tendentious study of the ancient Greek sources was formulated the viewpoint, according to which
in Europe
in the antiquity were no Türks at all, the first Türks
started penetrating there ostensibly only in the 3rd-4th centuries AD. Even to
check the reliability of this account, the Türkologists should study the ancient
Greek sources.
Thus, we do not have sufficient reasons to abandon the evidence of
the ancient
sources.
About the reliability of the ancient sources exists still another
viewpoint, according to which these sources are written not in a Middle
Ages, but in the antiquity, but written by the inequitable people, by
those bent on composing various historical fables. Against such a
viewpoint the expert on the works of Herodotus, V.G.Boruhovich,
resolutely opposes. In his opinion, the historical information of
Herodotus is confirmed by the modern archeological and linguistical
research [Boruhovich V.G., 1972, 480-486]. However he himself, falling
into the believing of some conclusions of the Indo-Iranists' research,
starts reproaching Herodotus for him "not knowing the Persian language
which is witnessed by his fantastic explanations of the Persian proper
names" [Boruhovich V.G., 1972, 482]. The author had so much believed
the statements of Indo-Iranists about the Persian-speaking of the
Scythians that he had excluded even a possibility of the etymological
explanation of the Scythian words on the basis of other languages, for
example, of the Türkic.
In our opinion, a study of the ancient sources should be done
with objectivity, then they can provide very valuable information about the ancient history
of many peoples. We believe that they also can underlay the study of
the ancient history of the Türks and the Scythian problem.
39. Herodotus about Scythians.
The best information about Scythians and
Sarmatians was given by Herodotus. He was born in approximately 490-480 BC in the city of
Halikarnass, which ruins are in the Türkish city of
Bodrum in Asia Minor. Herodotus actively participates in the political
fight against the tyranny of the Halikarnass, and therefore had to
leave his native place. He visited some regions of Asia Minor,
Babylonia, Egypt, Balkan countries, in the Greek colonies of the N. Pontic, etc.,
observing everywhere the life of the
population and the rulers, noting down down the ethnographical features, myths and some
language morsels of the peoples.
Consequently, Herodotus created a work about the war between
the Greeks and Persians, and
about participation in it of other peoples occupying periphery of Greece
and Persia and even of the countries next to them. Later this work of Herodotus was
released under the name "History", all nine sections of which are
titled with the names of nine gods, the keepers of poetry, art and science in the Greek
mythology. The fourth section of the book, devoted to the description of the struggle
of the Scythians against the Persian conquerors, was named Melpomene, the
name of the goddess of tragedy. It should be recognized that this name was not given
accidentally, but with a view of the struggle of the Scythians
against the
Persian and Greek colonizers, who brought a tragedy to the Scythia.
According to Herodotus (i.e. the
version he believes is most realistic
- Translator's Note), the Scythians lived in Asia for a very long time. When
the Massagets pushed them out by a military force, they moved to the Cimmerian
lands. With approach of the numerous Scythians, the
Cimmerians, not willing to fight them, abandoned their
native land, the N.Pontic [Herodotus, 4, 11]. And just because the Cimmerians
lived there earlier, in the Scythian lands are Cimmerian fortifications
and Cimmerian crossings; there is also a province by the name Cimmeria, and the so-called
Cimmerian Bospor. It is also known that the Scythians in a pursuit of the Cimmerians
went astray and intruded the land of the Medes [Herodotus, 4, 12].
For the destruction of the Medes' state, the Persian King Darius in 512
BC
declared a war against Scythia. Herodotus describes in detail the episodes of this
war, the successful military actions of the Scythians and the failures of the Persian army,
which before that successfully fought in other regions.
Herodotus gives three versions about the origin of the Scythians.
Scythians were the masters of Asia. One thousand years ago before
the attack of Darius,
i.e. approximately in the 1500 BC, the first inhabitant of the ostensibly uninhabited
country was Targitai. His parents were god Zeus
(Jove in G. Rawlinson translation
- Translator's Note) and the daughter of the river
Borysthenes (present Dnieper, Rus. rendition Borisfen).
Targitaia had three sons: Lipoksai, Arpoksai
and Koloksai. During the reign of their father Targitai in the Scythian land
have fallen
from the sky the gold subjects: a plough, a yoke, a poleaxe and a bowl.
The first approached to these things the senior brother Lipoksai, he wanted to
lift them, but the gold inflamed. Then the middle brother Arpoksai came to
them, but the gold inflamed again. But when the younger brother Koloksai
approached, the flame went down, and he took the
gold to his house. Therefore the elders agreed to give the throne to the youngest [Herodotus,
4, 5]. From Lipoksai came the Scythian tribe called Auhats, from Arpoksaia
came tribes of Katiars and Traspes (aka
Traspians
- Translator's Note), and from Koloksai
came the tribe of Paralates. All tribes together are called Scoloti, i.e.
Royal.
The Hellenes call them Scythians (Rus. Skify) [Herodotus, 4, 6].
Scythians tell about the northern countries neiboring them
like this: it is impossible to see anything in these countries, and it is impossible to penetrate
there because of
the flying feathers, i.e. apparently, snow flakes [Herodotus, 4, 7].
Under a second version, the Scythians lived in the country
with a constant bad weather and cold.
Hercules, a son of god Zeus and Alkmena, driving the Geryon's bulls,
a tri-headed giant, arrived to an uninhabited then country of cold and
bad weather (now occupied by Scythians ). He drew a pork skin about him
(lion skin in G. Rawlinson translation
- Translator's Note), fell asleep, and at that time his horses disappeared [Herodotus,
4, 8]. Upon awakening, the Hercules traced all the country and
finally arrived in the land by the name Gilea ("the
Woodland" in G. Rawlinson translation
- Translator's Note), i.e. in the Scythian area by the estuary of
modern Dnestr (Akkerman Liman
- Translator's Note). Here in a cave he found a certain creature, a
half-maiden,
half-snake. Seeing her, Hercules asked if she saw his lost horses. In reply the
snake woman said,
that she has the horses, but she would not return them until Hercules took her
for his mistress. After satisfaction of her request the snake woman returned the
horses. She gave birth to three sons and asked Hercules what she should do with
them. Hercules replied: "When you see that the sons have grown up, better
di like this: see, who of them can string my bow and fasten this belt as I am
telling you, and leave him to live here. Those who could not do it, send to the foreign lands"
[Herodotus, 4, 9]. Then Hercules left.
When the children have grown, their mother gave them the names
Agathyr (Gr. Agathyros,
Rus. Agafirs), Gelon (Yilan) and Scyth. Then, remembering
the advice of Hercules, she did as he ordered. Only the youngest
son, Scyth, succeded in accopmplishing the task, and he remained in
the country. From this Scyth, the son of Hercules, came
all the Scythian kings [Herodotus, 4, 10]. Agathyr became the primogenitor of
the Agathyrs (Rus.
Agafirsy), and Gelon of the Gelons.
There is still a third legend, we relayed its contents in the beginning of
this paragraph. Herodotus notes that he most of all trusts that
version.
Applying the ethnonym Scythian in its narrow sense, Herodotus
notes
that behind the river Tanais (Donets) (?, accepted
reading for Tanais is Don
- Translator's Note) are not the Scythian territories, but the
first land possessions there belong to Sauromats. Next to Sauromats are
the Budins,
whose grounds are covered with dense forests [Herodotus, 4, 21]. Applying the word
Scyths in a general nominal sense, Herodotus further in the east and in the
north lists the following Scythian tribes: Tissagets (Rus. sometimes
Fissagety), Iirks, Argippeis. The Scythians proper, when they come to
Argippeis, negotiate with them with a help of seven interpreters in seven languages.
Behind the Argippeis are Issedons, to the north of the Issedons are Arimaspes (one-eyed,
or rather people with half closed eyes) and the gryphons guarding gold
[Herodotus, 4, 21-27], far by the sea live Hyperboreans (supercold).
On the banks od the Ister (Danube) closer to the Pontus (Black Sea) live
Traks (Thracians, Rus.
Frakiytsy), a part of them have ethnonyms Skirmiad, Nipsei and
Get. The Gets are
the bravest and honest among the Traks [Herodotus, 4, 93]. Taures live in
the highlands, along the
Danube are located Akathirs, Neures, Androphags (Devouring Men), Melanhlens (Black
Coats).
Herodotus emphasizes that Androphags and Melanhlens are not
Scythians. But they with all other peoples helped Scythians in defeating the
attacks of Darius [Herodotus, 4, 102].
Next to the Sauromats are Amazons, whom the Scythians
call eorpata (killing their husbands).
The languages and other ethnic features for the above Scythian (in a broad sense
of this word)
tribes will be covered below.
The general name Skythy in the 3rd century BC is gradually replaced
with the ethnonym Sarmat, which historically ascends to the name
Sauromat.
This word in its turn in the 1st century BC yields to the ethnonym Alan or
As which in the Herodotus works are not mentioned yet.
40. Brief historiography of the Scythian studies in the general history.
The Russian historians very early started to be interested in
the Scythians
and Sarmatians from the Greek sources. In the 2nd half of the 17th century initially
from the German, and then directly from the Greek to Russian is translated
the Herodotus work "History", which draws the attention of the Russian historian Andrey
Lyzlov, who perfectly knew the Russian and western historical works. He was also familiar with the Türkic world, for
he had translated into the Russian the book of S.Starovolsky "Court
of Turkish Caesar", published in the 1649 in Krakow in the Polish language.
In the 1692 Andrey
Lyzlov finished his work "Scythian history" which remained in
manuscripts. In the 1776 a part, and in the 1787 a complete work was published by
a known public figure and writer N.I.Novikov.
In his work A.Lyzlov initially proves his thesis that the Türks (in his
terminology: Tatars and Turks) descend from the Scythians. In the subsequent sections
of the "Scythian history" the author relays the history of the mutual relations of
the European peoples and Russians with the Tatars and Turks, i.e. the descendants of
the Scythians [Lyzlov А., 1787]. The historiograph of the "History" of Herodotus, A.A.Neihardt,
concludes
from that that the "title 'Scythian history'", thus, turned out to be rather
conditional" [Neihardt A.A., 1982, 9]. But another Scythian expert,
S.A.Semenov-Zuser, rates the A.Lyzlov's work
"the first known to us composition in the
national literature" [Semenov-Zuser S.A., 1947, 11].
In the beginning of the 18th century the interest to the Scythians grows. At the request of
Peter I, who was interested in the problems of the origin of the Slavs, a Viennese scientist
G.V.Leibnits starts to study vigorously the history of the Slavs, and in one
of his letters in the 1708 he writes: "Under the Sarmatians I mean all the Slavic
tribes which the ancients called Sarmatians before the name of Slavyans or Slavs began
to be known" [Leibnits G.V., 1873, 211].
Later to the problem of the Scythians-Sarmatians turned Gotlib Zigfrid Bayer, invited from
the Germany in the 1725 to the Petersburg Academy of sciences. He reasons like
this: the Scythians are newcomer from the Asia, and the Slavs are autochtonous,
therefore the Scythians can't be counted as Slavs. In his opinion,
the descendants of the Scythians were Finns, Livs, Ests [Neihardt A.A., 1982, 12].
The Russian historian of the 18th century, V.N.Tatishchev, considers
the
word Scyth as a collective name. He writes: "... In the name Scyth many different peoples,
like the Slavs, Sarmatians and Turks, Mongaly or
moreover, all eastern-northern territory of Asia and Europe, including Germans, Persia
and China were included, and this name, seemingly, at about the 10-th century after the Christ died
out, when came a more distinct knowledge about the peoples, however those
peoples did not disappear, but somewhere under other names have
remained till now... For the Europeans in the third on the ten century after the Christ the name
of Tatars
has become famous, and both these instead of the Scyth began to be used"
[Tatishchev V.N., 1962, 232-233].
M.V.Lomonosov believed that from the Scythians came the Finns, and from
the Sarmatians came the Slavs
[Neihardt A.A., 1982, 17-18].
At the end of the 18th century the history of the Scythians starts to interest
N.M.Karamzin, and he expresses an idea that all peoples of Eurasia in the days of Herodotus
were called by the collective ethnonyms Scythian and Sarmatian
[Karamzin N.M., 1818, 5-12].
In the 19th century the archeological excavations enable scientists to assert
that Herodotus and other ancient Greek historians correctly reflected the history of
the peoples of the Eurasia. Were published translations into Russian of the compositions of
Herodotus and other Greek historians. Were created conditions for a wide study
of the
ancient history of the territory.
In the 1838 the academician E.I.Eihvald, who earlier worked in
the Kazan and Vilno universities, conducts a research of the "History" of Herodotus, and
from
it he tries to recreate the history of the Slavs, Finns, Türks and Mongols.
He
comes to a conclusion, that the Scythians were not a uniform people, that under
the name of the Scythians were meant all those peoples who and now live in the so-called Scythian
territories [Eihvald E.I., 1838, vol. 27].
In the first half of the 19th century P.F.Sum, who studied
the problems of an origin
of many peoples, states an idea, that the Scythians, Sarmatians and Alans are
replaced by the same Türkic tribes of Huns, that the ethnonym Sarmat is
formed from the Türkic word sar "yellow, reddish " and designates "reddish people" [Sum P.F., 1846, 3, 15].
The German historian B.G.Nibur counts the Scythians as Mongols,
in which classification then were also included the Türks [Nibur B.G., 1847]. In second half
of the century, and namely in the 1870, A.D.Mordtman in the Leipzig releases his work
about the cuneiform writings and asserts that the Scythians spoke the Türkic
language, which then was in a process of branching off from the Uralo-Altai family
[Mordtman A.D., 1870, 66-77].
In his work published in the 1837 in Munich, C. Zeiss begins a new stage in
the study of the
Scythian history. For the first time he identified Scythians with
the Persian-lingual tribes. In supprt of this opinion testify, in his
assumption, the religion, the location of the Iranians, and the common Scythian and Persian words
[Dovatur A.I., 1982, 47].
Another German scientist C.Noimann in the 1855, from the same attributes of
the religion and language, asserts that the Scythians were Türks, and the
Sarmatians were Slavs [Ibid. 50].
P.I.Shafarik considers Scythians to be Mongols
in which classification then were also included the Türks; the Sarmatians are Persians;
Budins and Neuri are Slavs [Shafarik P.I., 1948;
Dovatur A.I., 1982, 48].
In the 60es of the 19th century K.Müllenhoff
performs an analysis of
the Scythian and Sarmatian words from the viewpoint of the Indo-European languages,
and comes to a conclusion that the Scythians were basically Persian-linguality, that
earlier the Persian-lingual tribes lived far to the north of Persia, their
remnants
were now the Ossetians [Dovatur A.I., 1982, 53].
After K.Müllenhoff, the Scytho-Iranian theory attracted many linguists and
historians, who find additional materials in its favor. Apparently, this
theory became attractive, also because that it enabled to
expand the ancestral home of the Indo-European peoples. A very characteristic feature of
the scientists of this direction was their unanimity against dissenters, they
very sharply criticized them, even counted them as illiterate, insignificant
scientists, which demonstrated the impotency of the supporters of the Scytho-Iranian theory.
But despite of it, there were the scientists who criticized the Scytho-Iranian
theory and were proving the Türkic-speaking of the Scythians and Sarmatians. Sometimes
were emerging the scientists not at all from the Türkic world, who from an unexpected
side were proving the Türkic-speaking of the Scythians and Sarmatians. For example, in 1904
O.Franke publishes a book in German about the contribution of the
Chinese sources to the knowledge of the Türks and the Scythians of the Central Asia, in which
he recognizes the Scythians of the Central Asia as Türks [Durmush, 1993, 17].
41. Brief historiography of the Scythian studies in
the Türkology.
It is remarkable that all
the Türkologists who accessed the Scythian materials and studied them
themselves,
inevitably recognize the Türkic-speaking of the main body of the Scythians and
Sarmatians, and prove it by the linguistical, ethnological, mythological, and
archeological
data.
So, in the 1880 the Hungarian Türkologist Geza Kuun in
his work "Code Cumanikus" on the basis of incontestable facts proves
the Türkic-speaking of the Scythians
[Kuun, 1881, LVII-LVIII].
About the Türkic-speaking of the Scythians, Sakas and Sarmatians confidently
reasons Hasan
Gata al-Gabashi. In the 1909 he publishes a special book about the history
of the Türkic tribes, in which he considers as finally resolved the question
about the Türkic ethnic
roots of the Scythians [Gabashi H.G., 1909, 54].
A known Tatarian historian Hadi Atlasi in his book "History of Siberia" writes
generally: "The regions called by the ancient Greeks Scithia coincide with
the Turkestan, which is the country of the sedentiary Türks, called by the Iranians
'Turanom' " [Atlasi
X., 1993, 21].
The Turco-Tatar scientist Sadri Maksudi Arsal, who graduated the Sorbonna university
in France, who knew the main European languages, who received eastern education
during his youth in
Kazan, while studying the history of the state and jurisdiction of the Türkic peoples
was inherently drown into the problems of the ethnic roots of
Scythians and, analysing the factual materials, comes to a conclusion about the
Türkic-speaking of the most of the Scythians [Arsal, 1930, 8].
The most famous historian of the Türks, Zaki Validi Togan, based on the
analysis of the newly found materials, proves the Türkic-speaking of the Scythians
[Validi A.-Z., 1981, 34].
The daughter of a known Tataro-Turkish scientist Sadri Maksudi Adilya Ayda,
after
studying the Türkic ethnic roots of Türks-Ethrusks, finds their similarity
with the
Scythians and reports it in the world congress of the Türkic historians [Adilya
Ayda, 1979, 287-292]. We can't mistrust the conclusions of Adilya Ayda, for she
graduated the Sorbonna university
in France, and perfectly knew many Romance, German
and Türkic languages.
The (Russian
- Translator's Note) official historical science attributes the Scythians-Sakas-Sarmats to
the Persian-linguality peoples, therefore during the Soviet time the historians-Türkologists
did not dare to touch the problems of the Türko-Scythians. But despite of it,
some Türkologists bravely stated the Türkic-speaking of the Scythians. So, the Kazakh
scientists considered the Scythians to be ancestors of Kazakhs [Amanjolov A.C.,
1971; Suleymenov О., 1975; Akishev K.A., 1978].
The works of O.Suleymenov's should be noted separately. In his book "Az
and I" bears the concept that the bulk of the Scythians, who in the 8th-4th
centuries BC occupied huge territories, should be Türks [Suleymenov О., 1975, 269-270]. The
publishing of his
work in time coincided with the period of organizing of the "struggle"
against "extending" the history of the small nations into the past. Therefore
even while the book was subjected to severe criticism by the the (Russian
again!
- Translator's Note) "academic"
scientists, it has done its job: the scientists-Türkologists not only
gave a support to O.Suleymenov's opinions, but even developed them.
I also had to take part in these disputes, for the materials I collected for almost 20 years
were prompting that it was time to raise the question in another way about the ethnic composition of
the Scythians. In my book which was published in 1977 I
was giving the grounds for the Türkic-speaking of the bulk of the Scythians,
Sarmatians, Kushans, Tochars, Usuns [Zakiev M.Z., 1977, 27-44].
In the 1986 the Caucasologists (Sorry for the word,
it is not my fault
- Translator's Note) I.M.Miziev and K.T.Laipanov from the study of the
linguistic, archeological, ethnological data proved the Türkic-speaking of the
most of the Scythians-Sarmatians and Alans [Miziev I.M., 1986, 35-56,
123-138; Miziev I.M., 1990, 51-72;
Laipanov K.T., Miziev I.M., 1993, 45-86].
In the 1993 a Türkish scientist Ilhami Durmush published a monograph "Iskitler Sakalar" (Scythians. Sakas ) in which, based
on the
analysis of the linguistical, archeological, ethnological data he incontestably
proved the Türkic-speaking of the Scythians (Sakas ) [Durmush I., 1993].
Studying the ethnic roots of the Bulgaro-Tatars, M.Zakiev retrospectively reached
the Scythians-Sarmatians, and has written a special work "Scytho-Sarmatian
roots of the Tatar People" [Zakiev М., 1995а, 37-58].
In the last years in the Türkology appeared other works where the Scytho-Iranian
concept was rejected and the Scytho-Türkic concept is defended . Of them is
significant the research of Firidun Agasyoglu, where on the basis of the linguistical data the Scytho-Türkic
concept is confirmed [Firidun Agasyoglu, 2000, 77-133].
We are far from the idea that all Türkologists are supporters of the Scytho-Türkic concept.
It is protected and developed by those who specifically deal with this
problem. The Türkologists who themselves did study the Scythian problem, repeat
"solidly" the statements of the supporters of the Scytho-Iranian
concept, and besides it, even try to find new data to confirm the Scytho-Iranian theory. T.M.Garipov and R.G.Kuzeev,
believing that in the territory
of Bashkiria earlier lived the Scythians-Iranians, give ostensibly Iranian words recorded in this
territory. In their opinion, the Iranian words are: sèrmèsèn, sèrmèt, ablay, abray, kapa,
kapkan, kapka, kapsyk, sak, sakmar, kirtè, etc.
[Garipov T.M., Kuzeev R.G., 1988, 15]. The imitation of the authorities Indo-Europeists is
also seen in the works of other Türkologists.
42. General defects of the Scytho-Iranian theory.
The theory about exclusive Persian-linguality of all the tribes united by a general
term Scythians, seemed
plausible when the Iranists carried out the etymological research of the Scythian
written monuments only on the basis of selection of the words (ethnonyms) of
the unequivocally Iranian roots. However, the circle of the researchers of these
monuments was extending. To the research also joined and non-Iranists, and in particular,
the Türkologists and other linguists. Into the scientific sphere were
entered the words with nom-Iranian roots, especially with the Türkic roots,
which testified to the inclusion in the Scythian federation of the Türkic-speaking tribes.
And then the first
defect of this theory rang a bell, in the form of the prejudiced statements about
the unequivocal Persian-linguality of all the Scythians.
The second defect of the Scytho-Iranian theory is that the conclusions of
the Iranists about exclusive Persian-linguality of the Scythians were
uncritically adopted by the historians of the Indo-European direction and
were
spread over all the tribes and peoples of the Scytho-Sarmatian area. In the historical
science appeared an assertion that this area was populated by exclusively
Persian-lingual tribes. The archeologists, many of whom fell to the artifice of
the Iranists, in turn, were declaring the archeological cultures of the Scyerstho-Sarmatian areal
belonging to the Persian-lingual tribes. It came to a vicious circle:
the archeologists, guided by the opinion of the linguists, attribute the
archeological cultures
of the Scythian and Sarmatian period to the Persian-lingual tribes, and
the linguists-Iranists for the confirmation of their theory cite the conclusions of
the archeologists.
It is completely clear, that the ethnic composition of the Scythians and Sarmatians can be
established only by integration of all the information form the linguistical, mythological,
ethnological, archeological data, and the study of the sources data. And the recognition of
the Scythians and Sarmatians to be Persian-lingual only on the basis of the
isolated linguistical data would be unobjective.
It is also difficult to trust the opinion of some linguists and historians
who assert that in such extensive region of Eurasia under a
general name of Scythians and Sarmatians (jumping ahead, also
under the ethnonym Alans/Ases) during a thousand years before our era and
a
thousand years more during our era lived the ancestors of the Ossetians, and in the beginning of
the 2nd millennium AD they extraordinary quickly shrank (or adopted Türkic
language) and remained in a tiny quantity only in the Caucasus.
Such image of the historical process in Eurasia does not sustain any
criticism. If in such extensive region of Eurasia during not less than two thousand
years lived the Persian-lingual Ossetians, than, naturally, on the "arrival"
of the Huns they, on
one hand, could not suddenly completely disappear or with a lightening speed
reincarnate into Türks, and on
another hand, the Türks also could not have already created in the 6th century
AD the first in the Eurasia empire with the most extensive territory from the Manchuria
to the Adriatic sea, if they did not live in these regions earlier.
Should not be also forgotten that the portraying of this ancient population
as Persian-lingual contradicts the information of the ancient historians about
the
multi-linguality of the Scythians and Sarmatians, and is not supported by the
evidence of the toponymy of the above named extensive regions.
If the Scythians and Sarmatians were Persian-lingual, then the Assyrian, Greek, Roman, Chinese
etc. ancient historians could not fail to address it, in fact they knew well both
the Persians, and the Scythians-Sarmatians. In the descriptions of
these peoples they necessarily would somehow note the similarity or affinity of the
Persian and the "Scythian" languages. But we do not find even a hint
on it in the ancient writers. At the same time there are many cases of identification of
the Scythians, Sarmatians and Alans with various Türkic-speaking tribes.
Finally, if in the extensive territories of Eurasia under a general name
Scythia and Sarmatia lived only the Persian-lingual tribes, from where then did suddenly
appear the Slavic,
Türkic, Finno-Ugric nations. It remains to only ask an
ironical question: maybe, they "fell from the space"?!
We can only regret that the discussed above studies of the Iranists border on
tendentiousness and artificiality.
At the same time many scientists even before the emergence of the Scytho-Persian concept asserted and nowadays
are proving, that between the Scythians,
Sarmatians and Alans, in addition to the Persian-lingual tribes, were the Slavic,
Finno-Ugric and Mongolian, that in the extensive territories of Eurasia under a
general name of the Scythians, Sarmatians, Alans (Ases) long before our era lived
the ancestors of the Türkic peoples. However, since the 11th century, since
the beginning of the crusades, the areas of the settlement of the Türks narrowed a little.
43. Some arguments of the Scytho-Iranian theory.
Here we want to show that the assorted Scythian words, which the Iranists consider Persian, can be better
interpreted from the viewpoint of the presence in them of the Türkic roots and affixes.
As we have already said, the establishment of the Scytho-Iranian theory begins with
the "finding" of the Persian roots in those words which were preserved in
the various sources as Cimmerian, Scythian and Sarmatian. This etymological
research was started by K.Müllenhoff, and continued by Vs. Miller and M.Fasmer. After
them the Scytho-Iranian theory for the official historical science becomes axiomatic.
During the Soviet time in the Scythian etymology from the viewpoint of Ossetian language was persistently and
purposefully working V.I.Abaev, who had thought up a special Scythian or Scytho-Sarmatian
language in the system of the Indo-European family of languages. In his work "Dictionary of Scythian words"
the 353 Scythian words, recorded in the sources, with the phonetical transformations change into
ancient Ossetian lexical units [Abaev V.I., 1949, 151-195].
Before starting the analysis of the V.I.Abaev's etymologies, note his statement about
value of his research: "I subjected to
the analysis the undoubtedly Iranian elements and I hope, that it puts the end to
superficial and irresponsible speculations on the Scythian material, which do not have
anything common with a science" [Abaev V.I., 1949, 148]. When a scientist
with such a zeal attacks the potential opponents, it already tells about
the weakness of his position. The V.I.Abaev's etymologies really suffer
with the absence of a system and many semantic discrepancies.
As his predecessors in the Scytho-Iranian etymology, V.I.Abaev
starts with personal names of the ancestor of the Scythians Targitai and his
sons Lipoksai, Arpoksai, Koloksai.
The name Targitai, in the opinion of the supporters of the Scytho-Iranian theory, consist of two parts:
darga and tava; in the ancient Persian darga "long" or "sharp",
tava " power, force", Targitai is thus ‘Longostrong or
Arrowstrong’ [Abaev V.I., 1949, 163; Miller Vs., 1887, 127].
From the positions of the Türkic language the word
Targitai consists from targy or taryg - Old Türkic
‘farmer’ and soy~toy - Türk. - ‘clan’; as a whole it is ‘Clan or Ancestor
of the Farmers’. Besides, the name Targitai is met not only in Herodotus, it
also appears with Avars as a Türkic name. Theophilact Simocatta (the historian
of the 7 c.) informs, ‘Targitiy is an outstanding man in the Avar tribe’ [Simocatta
Th., 1957, 35]. Menandr the Byzantian informs that in 568 the Avar leader Bayan
has sent Targitai to Baselius requesting a concession [Byzantian
Historians, 1861, 392]. In 565 Avars sent the same Targitai as an ambassador
to Byzantium [Ibis, 418]. In the 2 c. Polien informs
that Scythians, living at Meotian (Azov) Sea, had a famous woman named Tirgatao
[Latyshev S.V., 1893, 567]. Hence, these Scythians were
also Türkic speaking.
Lipoksai is a senior son of Targitai. The etymology for this word Abaev
borrows from Fasmer. The second part, in his opinion, consists of a root
ksaia~khsai ‘to shine, to sparkle, to dominate’, Ossetian. - ‘queen, dawn’;
the first part is not clear, there can be a distortion instead of Khoraksais:
compare Old Iran. hvar-xsaita ‘sun’, Pers. Xorsed [Abaev
V.I., 1949, 189].
Let us compare it with the
Türkic etymology. Türk. soi ‘clan, family, relatives, ancestors,
generation, offspring, stock, origin’; ak ‘white, noble, rich’; aksoi
‘a noble, rich clan; sacred clan, forefather’ etc. For Türkic peoples the names
with an element soi is a usual phenomenon: Aksoi, Paksoi, Koksoi.
The first part is lip~lipo~lep is ‘border’. As a whole, Lipoksai
‘Sacred Clan with (or Protecting) Borders, i.e. its Country’.
Arpoksai is a middle son of Targitai. The first part Abaev at once
transforms in apra and ‘water’ and deduces from the Iranian roots ap
‘water’ and Ossetian ra, arf ‘deep’; apra ‘water depth’; ksaia
‘possessor’; apra-ksaia ‘Possessor Of Waters’ [Abaev
V.I., 1949, 189].
Let us compare it with the
Türkic etymology. We already know about the second part: aksoy ‘a sacred
clan, noble clan’. The first part - arpa ‘barley, grain, product‘;
arpalyk ‘possession of land’; Arpaksai ‘Head of a Clan Possessing
Land, Territory, or Clan of the Farmers’.
Kolaksai is a younger son of Targitai. Per Fasmer and Abaev, the second
part ksaia ‘shine, sparkle, dominate’, in Ossetian khsart ‘valour’,
khsin ‘princess’, khsed ‘dawn’ etc.; the first part is not clear, maybe,
it is a distortion instead of Khoraksais, compare Old. Iran.
khvar-khshaita ‘sun’ [Abaev V.I., 1949, 189]. The
supporters of the Scytho-Iranian theory sometimes lead this name to the phonetic
form of Persian Skolakhshaia and announce Kolaksai as a king of
the Persian clan Skol (Skolot) ~ Scythians [Dovatur
A.I., 1982, 207-208].
From the viewpoint of the
Türkic language Koloksai can historically go back
to a combination of words kuly-ak-say "clan with pure, sacred
hands". Kuly-ak-say can easily change to Koloksai. Another
possible Türkic
etymology is : the second part of a word Kolaksai - aksai ‘a noble,
sacred clan’; the first part - kola-kala ‘city, capital’; it could be
borrowed from the Arabic still then when the Subar Türks lived on the left bank of
the Tiger. The Kolaksai
‘Noble, Sacred Clan Of a (Protecting) Capital, Country’.
If we arrange in order the
Iranian etymologies for the names of the father Targitai and his three sons
Lipoksai, Arpoksai and Kolaksai, we receive: Targitai ‘Longostrong’,
Lipoksai ‘Shine Of The Sun’, Arpoksai ‘ ‘Possessor Of Waters ‘,
Kolaksai ‘ Shine Of The Sun or Skolakhshaia’. There is no etymological,
semantical and lexico-structural system.
Let us consider the system in
the Türkic etymology of the names of the father and his three sons. Targitai
‘Farmers Noble Clan’, Lipoksai ‘Border Protecting Noble Clan’,
Arpoksai ‘Protecting Possessions Noble Clan’; Kolaksai ‘Protecting
Capital (i.e. Kingdom) Noble Clan’ or "Clan with Noble Arm". The last, the younger son, as relayed by
Herodotus, accepts the kingdom from his father after he brought home the golden
tools fallen from the sky: the plough, yoke, hatchet, and cup [Herodotus,
1972, B. 4, 5].Let's bring a few more facts proving
ostensibly an unconditional Persian-linguality of the Scythians, but at the same time
bearing the Scytho-Türkic traits.
Ababa (Hababa) is the name of the mother of the Roman emperor Maximin, she
was, apparently, an Alanian. Thinking that Alans are Persian-lingual, Abaev
etymologies this word thus: Iran. khi ‘good, kind’; vab ‘to weave’; thus,
Khivaba ‘Good Weaver’. In Türkic ab ‘hunt’, eb~ev ‘home’,
aba ‘father, mother,
sister’, Ababa ‘Mother Of Hunt or Mother Of House’, i.e. ‘Fairy’ in a good
sense.
Sagadar, per Abaev: saka- + - dar ‘having deers’ is the name of a tribe near
Danube [Abaev V.I., 1949, 179]. In Türkic: saga is a Türkic ethnonym,
-dar-lar is
the plural affix; Sagadar is ‘Sags’.
Pantikapa is a name of a river in Scythia, maybe, of the Kerch strait, and
also of
the city built in the 4th century BC in the place of the present Kerch. Per Abaev, here
panti is in Avestian "way", kapa "fish", as a whole "fish way" [Abaev V.I., 1949, 175]. Any river, any
channel is always a fish way, therefore the semantics "fish way" is hardly
suitable here. In the Türkic the
word pantikapa/pontikapey consist of two parts: pont is the ancient name of
the Black Sea. This word is formed per Türkic model from the ancient Türkic root
bun
"broth, soup, meal" with an affix of possession -ly/-ty. The
bunty > ponty means "victual", i.e. "feeding, feeder". The second root kapa is Türkic
kapag/kapa
"gate", as a whole it is "Gate to Pontus or Pontus Gate". This semantics
in addition is confirmed by that in the place of the Panticapaeum ruins was
built the
city Kerch, which name came from the other Türkic word keresh/kerech
with a meaning "gate, entrance, passage" .
All the Scythian words collected by V.I.Abaev in his "Dictionary of
Scythian words", could be, thus, re-etymologized from the
viewpoint of those languages whose carriers lived and live now in the so-called
Scythian regions. Rather, it has to be done, and with subsequent comparison of
the results of the Persian, Türkic, Slavic and Finno-Ugric
etymological studies. Only after this would be possible to
definitely tell what ethnoses lived under the general names of initially Cimmerian,
and then Scythians, Sarmatians, Alans-Ases. As the comparisons above of the
Persian etymologies with the Türkic have shown, the Scythians most likely were not
Persians, or among them were very few Persian-lingual; they were mainly
Türks, and also Slavs, and Finno-Ugrians, for the last also have not
fallen from the sky, and lived in their (ancient "Scythian") regions since
the most ancient times.
44. Ethnic composition of Scythians from etymology of the Scythian ethnonyms
Scyth, Ishguza, Skolot, Sarmatian, Agathyr, Gelon, Saka.
The Scythians consisted of many tribes and nations whose ethnonyms are conditionally
called Scythian. To extract from these ethnonyms their ethnogenetical information,
they should be subjected to the etymological, semantical, and historical analysis.
We have cited above the second legend about the origin of
the Scythians. In this
legend the Hercules, driving the Geryon's bulls, arrived to
an uninhabited
country. In a cave he found a certain creature, a half-maiden,
half-snake, and he had to take her for his mistress.
From them were born three sons. She named them Agathyr, Gelon (Yylan) and
Scyth
(skydy/skide).
The younger son is Skyde, from there comes the ethnonym Skyde, which in the
West-European languages has taken the the form Scyth, in Russian turned into Scyf, where last sound f represents
the interdental ð (th), written in Old
Russian through
q. For a Türkologist is not
difficult to see in the ending part of the word Skyde the Türkic affix
-de, which has the following
phonetic versions: -de/-dy/-te/-ty/-le/-ly/-dyк (-дак) /-deck (-dèk)/-tyк
(-tak)/-tek (-tèk)/-luk (-lak)/-lek (-lèk). This affix of possession is
frequently used in the Türkic ethnonyms: Kazanly~Kazanlyk "citizen of Kazan",
asty~astyk "ostyak" (ancestors of Perm Tatars), Buharlyk "Sibir
Buharian", Karluk "Karluks", Kubandy "Kumandians", Shalkanduu "Chalkanian", etc.
In the ethnonym Skyde is used the suffix -de, but in the Türko-Sogdian
coins it has the form -dk (-dek) or -lk (-lek) [Smirnova O.I., 1981,
249-255]. Other versions of the affix of possession are -ly/-dy/-lyк/-tyк, etc. Earlier
we suggested, that Skydy or Skidy are the people who have something. But what?
The first part of the ethnonym Skide should tell about it, i.e.
ski/eske/eshke/yshky which, apparently, ascends to the Türkic yshky "knife", in
the Tatar yshky "scraper". Skide (in Russian Scyf) is "man with a
knife " [Zakiev M.Z., 1986, 35, 37, 38].
But systematic study of the Türkic ethnonyms brought us to the idea that
the root
sky historically ascends to the ethnonym Saka. With the affix
it becomes Sakady or Sakaly "people consolidated with Sakas "
or " people that includes Sakas". Sakady gradually could phonetically change:
Sakady > S'kady >
S'k'dy > Sk'dy. This ethnonym with the affix -ly is found in the sources as
a name of one of the components of the Volga Tatars in the 10th century [Bartold V.V.,
vol. 8, 545].
In the Assyrian documents the Scythians under the name Asguz~Ishkuza~Ishguza are recorded in
the 7th century BC. This ethnonym also can be a phonetical variation of the
ethnonym
Skid: in fact in the Türkic dialects the sound interchange s-sh, d-z, i-u is usual:
Skide ~ Iskidy ~ Iskuzy ~ Ishkuzy. Once again this proves, that in words
Skide and
Ishkuzy the word-formation affix is same: -de/-ze. Naturally, there are also other
Türkic etymologies of the word Ishkuzy [Zakiev M.Z., 1995, 23, 40-41].
Skolot is the endoethnonym of the Scythians, its etymology could not be explained by
the Iranian languages. In Türkic Skolot consists of a part Sak >
Sko plus -lo/-ly, the affix of possession, -t/-ta is a plural
index. In the common Türkic it is -tar/-lar, in the Karachay-Balkarian it
is -ta/-la. Skolo is Sakaly > Skoly
"people with Sakas", Skolota > Skolot is the same word, but in plural:
Sakalylar > Skolotar > Skolot. Skolot, apparently, had
survived in Balkarian
language as shylty with a meaning "nobles, upper caste" [Miziev
I.M., 1986, 48].
Alongside with the ethnonym Scyth, Herodotus also gives the ethnonym
Sauromat, for a nation related with the Scythians. Later its changed
form Sarmat began to be used instead of the Scyth. Per Abaev,
the Sauromat/Sarmat is an Ossetian word with a meaning "black-armed or
dark-armed" [Abaev V.I., 1949, 184]. To call someone black-armed, next to
them
should be some others, for example, red-armed or white-armed. Therefore the
Abaev's etymology is not convincing at all. In Türkic sarma is "bags
of calf pelt with hair outward". In the ears, sown to the top edge of
such a bag, was threaded a horsehair rope with which the sarma was tied to a
saddle. In it were transported bagged provisions [Economy, 1979, 142]. The Sarma-ty/sarma-ly is "person with sarma".
The word Sarmat sometimes link also to with the word sary "yellow".
The first son of Hercules is Agathyr, or more correctly, Agathyros. Here
the -os is the
Greek ending of a name; ir is "man, person, people"; agad/agas/agach
is "tree, forest" (interdental d/t was written in Russian with q and was
reduced to f: Theodor-Feodor, Skyth-Skif, Agathyr-Agafir, etc.).
Agathyr is "Forest People" or "People with tree totem".
Later, we meet this ethnonym in forms Akatsir/Agach Eri in the same sense. With
the same semantics in the Türkic language we also have the ethnonym Mishèr (Mishè-èr)
"Forest People" or "People with tree totem". This word as the ethnonym of one
of the components of the Tatar people reached us as Mishèr and
Majgar.
The middle son of Hercules is Gelon, from here comes the ethnonym Gelon.
Recall in the analysis that the Türkic sound yo/y in the Greek
converts to g, it is not difficult in the Greek pronunciation Gelon
to see the Türkic
yoylan/yylan (pronounced yo-ii-lan/y-ii-lan -
Translator's Note) "snake". This would be a natural name
for the son of the half-snake mother.
The supporters of the Scytho-Iranian theory for the proof of their correctness
frequently use the etymology of the ethnonym Sak or Saka, with which
the Persians designated
Scythians. In the V.I.Abaev's opinion, the ancient Persian word Saka is
ostensibly a totem with a meaning "deer" [Abaev V.I., 1949, 179]. The Ossetian
sag "deer" from saks "branch, stump, deer horn, branching horned". As many
historians think, the Sak is a name of one of the Scythian tribes which
was accepted
by the Persians as an ethnonym for all Scythians. None of the ancient authors
notes a meaning of the ethnonym Sak/Saka in the sense "deer", and Stephan
the Byzantian
informs that "Saka is a people, so are called the Scythians of the "amour" because they
have invented it" [Latyshev V.V., 1893, 265]. Here the word Saka
approaches the Türkic sak/sagy "defense, protection, cautious".
Besides, it should be noted that in the Türkic sagdak "quiver",
i.e. "case for the protection weapons". Sagay is the ethnonym of a Türkic
people between Altai and Yenisei, they are a part of the Khakass people, Saka
(Saha) is the ethnonym
of the Yakuts. The word Sak/Saka is a part of a compound ethnonym Sakar (Sak-ar or
Saka-ar "Saka's people") by which a significant part of the
Turkmen is designated in the form Sakar Türkmenleri [Begliev A.-N., 2000, 32-38, 59-63,
155-162]. The Türkic-speaking of the Sakas is proved by many researchers of
the history
of the Türkic peoples and their neighbors [Karatay О., 2000, 21-26]. Thus,
Sagay
(Sak/Saka) is the Türkic word, which had transfered into the ethnonym of one of
the Scythian tribes, and it was accepted by the Persians as their general ethnonym.
45. Ethnic composition of Scythians from etymology of ethnonyms Kaspi,
Traspi, Argippei, Iirk, Melanhlen, Katiar, Paralat, Massaget related to the, Scythians.
The scientists who deem all Scythians
to be Persian-lingual,
who came up with a unitary Scythian language of the ostensibly the Persian group,
channel all ethnonyms
somehow connected with the Scythians to the Persian words. The ancient Greeks
called
Scythians a number of peoples, noting their multi-linguality. In our
opinion, among them were many Türkic-speaking tribes and peoples. That can
be seen from the etymology of their ethnonyms.
Let's first turn the attention to the ethnonyms formed from the
Türkic primary ethnonym bi (phonetic variations: pi, pey, bey, bay,
bèk) "rich,
noble". In the process of growing and resettlements to various regions the
Bi tribes acquired features peculiar to them, and the terms for these features started to serve
as a definition of the basic ethnonym Bi. So, the Bies living in
the mountains
(kas), began to be called Kaspi. The ethnonym of this people became
the name
of the sea (Caspian Sea).
The ancient Greek historians, including Herodotus, list the people Kaspi
together with Horasmians, Parthys (Parthians), Sogdys and Sakas, point to their
settlement region near the Caspian Sea. Strabo (beginning of the 1st c. AD)
notes that
the name of the Caspian Sea comes from the name of the tribes living by its coast (Strabo 11.2.15 - Translator's Note),
and adds that these Kaspi had already dissolved among other tribes (Strabo 11.4.5 - Translator's Note),
they do not exist in pure state [Dovatur A.I., 1982, 196].
Some scientists attribute Kaspi people to the Ibero-Caucasians, in particular to the
Caucasian Albanians (Albanians also were Türks. - M.Z.) and Medes. They did
not even think about their
Türkic-speaking, for the traditional historical science believed that the Türks came
to the Eastern Europe only in the 4th century AD.
Per Herodotus' information, from Arpoksai, the middle son of Targitai,
came the Scythian tribes with ethnonyms Katiar and Traspi
(Latinized Catiari and Traspians - Translator's Note)
[Herodotus B. 4, 6]. Some scientists the ethnonym Traspi deduced from the Persian aspa "horse", but
could not decipher the first part tr. There is only a suggestion that ostensibly it
ascends to the Caucasian languages [Dovatur A.I., 1982, 209]. In
our opinion, the word Traspi is an initial Türkic ethnonym Pi (Bey,
Bi), in front of it as its definition is used the ethnonym Tras, which
consists of an initial Türkic ethnonym As with a definition tr, which historically ascends to
Tuar "Mountain People": Tu-ar-as > Taras > Tras.
Argippei/argypi, per Herodotus, is the ethnonym of the tribes located in the
foothills of the high mountains. Precisely for this reason the scientists were locating them
near the Uralian, Caucasian, Altai or Carpathian mountains. There is a more
justified opinion that the Argippeis lived in the Southern Ural and took part in
the formation of the Bashkir people.
The etymology of the ethnonym Argippei was elucidated in many ways.
Some think that the ethnonym Argippei is formed as a result of translation into the Greek language of two
words from another language, the semantics of which coincides with semantics of the Greek
argo "fast boat" and gippei "horse", then the
Argippei is "fastohorsed" (This would
not fall under the Ockham's Razor, would it? - Translator's Note) [Comments
to the "History" of Herodotus, 1972, 551]. Assuming that this ethnonym
has arose as a result of translation from another language into the
Greek, one more interpretation can be raised. If the soldiers of the
local Türks (like, the ancestors of the Bashkirs) while acquainting
with the Greeks visitors called themselves irat "soldier, defender of the country", they could answer
a Greeks' question of with the translation of ar/ir "men", at "horse", and
the Greeks (or Herodotus personally) could note down its half-translation Irgippei >
Argippei (This example shows that if there is an
objective to achieve, anything can be explained away, but it is clear that this
scenario also does not fall under the Ockham's Razor - Translator's Note).
In the ethnonym Argippei most likely can be discerned the
primary Türkic ethnonym Pi (Bey) with a definition argy "that side", "distant".
Argypi is "Beis on that side (of the river or mountains)". The Türkic-speaking of Argippeis is
additionally proved by the name of the tree whose fruits are edible, which they call pontik,
the fruits' juice they call ashi. These two words are certainly Türkic (see
para. 47).
Per Herodotus' information, near Argippei lived the tribes carrying ethnonym
Iirk. The Türkologists consider this ethnonym to be a distorted variation of
the
word Türk. The Finno-Ugric scientists tried etimologise it on the
basis of their native language. But so far nobody could give it neither
a Türkic, nor a Finno-Ugrian etymology [Dovatur A.I., 1982, 247]. We think that
the ethnonym Iirk is formed on the basis of the ethnonym erk (from
erkek) "men,
people" with a definition iyi (iyè,
iði/) (iði=ithi? - Translator's Note)
"good, great, rich, owner". Iirk is "good, great people, rich owners".
Iirk is a synonym to the ethnonym Bilèr
(Baylar, Bièr, Biger).
Hekateus (Hekateus of Milett, 517 BC- Translator's Note)
classes Melanhlens as not Scythian, and Herodotus as Scythian people.
But all ancient writers noted them to be near the Royal Scythians, Gelons,
Budins and Androfags, and located them in the east of the Dnepr and Azov Sea.
Scientists are almost unanimous that the ethnonym Melanhlen was formed as a
result of a translation of the ethnonym in another language into the Greek language, for
in the Greek it means "Black Coats". It was suggested that the
sedentary Melanhlens could be ancestors of the Slavs in black caftans, or of the Finno-Ugrians also
in black coats or with black headdresses [Dovatur A.I., 1982, 352].
Nobody thought of a Türkic origin of the Greek word Melanhlen,
because of the circulated opinion that the Türks, first, were ostensibly only
the nomads, and second, that in the Eastern Europe till the 4th century AD were no Türks. But we know
now that the Türks were not only, and also not so much, the nomads, and they lived long
before our era in the Europe. Therefore we can assert without any hurdles that the
Greek word Melanhlen could be a translation of the Türkic ethnonym Karakalpak "Black
Hat". Without knowing precisely the Greek equivalents for the words hat and
coat, the Türks could only tell the Greeks about clothing.
The Scythian ethnonyms Paralat and Katiar also can be analysed from the viewpoint of
the uniquely Türkic words. The ethnonym Paralat is comprised of the primary
ethnonym Paraly > Parly> Parthy " possessive, wealth", the affix
-t ascends to an affix -ta/-la (in Karachaevo-Balkarian), -tar/-lar (in common Türkic).
The Paralat means Türkic Paralyta > Parlylar> Parthylar
(See
Statistical Linguistics page,
taking the form Parly/Parthy and calculating the probability that this
phonetical combination would accidentally meet the semantics of the Türkic "Royal,
possessor, wealth" would be in the order of 1/50,000 X 1/100, or one in 5,000,000.
Here we have a blessing of having the semantics of "Paralat = Royal" noted by
the Greek sources. The chances that this word would independently emerge in,
say, Persian language, are astronomically small, in the order of
1/1,000,000,000,000, and in fact: it did not - Translator's Note).
The name Katiar is based on the primary ethnonym ar "people, men", which has
accepted a definition katy "firm, independent", katiar
are "Independent People".
The etnonym Massaget is etymologized in a number of ways. In the traditional
historical science prevails the opinion that the Massaget means "Great
Gets", there were
also suggestions that the Massaget is in Persian "fisheaters" (Pers.
masya
"fish"). Many are inclined to parse the word Massaget as
Mas-sakata or Mas-saka, which means "Great (big) Saka
Horde" or "Great Sakas", meaning under the Sakas a Persian-lingual people [Dovatur A.I., 1982, 183].
The
Massagets should not be confused with the Thyssagets (Rus. Fissagety). The
Massagets, located in the Central Asia, were the neighbors of the Horasmis (Kwarezmians) and
Tochars, in their confederation were also the peoples: Apasiak, Attasi, Augasi,
Derbik (Apasiacae, Attasii, ?, Derbices in
Strabo 11.8.8 - Translator's Note) [Dovatur A.I., 1982, 182].
There are also weighty arguments to count Massagets as Türks.
First, the neighbors of the Massagets by the name Horasm (Huarasm "My
Suaras"), Tochar
(Dag-ar "Mountain People") and their subjects in the confederation by
the name Apasiak (Apa-Sak "Senior Sakas"), Attasi (Atty-As "horsed Ases"),
Augasi (Awag-As "Capricious Ases"), Derbik (Dar-bek "Decisive,
Comradely Beks"), most likely, were Türkic-speaking, therefore some
historians link Massagets with the ancestors of the Turkmen.
The composite word Massaget in the Türkic model can be parsed
into
parts as mas-saga-ta, where the root is Saka, the initial Türkic ethnonym,
mas or
mach is the Türkic word with the meaning "happiness,
matching, similar", -ta is the plural index (-tar/-lar). The
Massaget means "Happy Sakas".
46. Ethnic composition of the Scythians from etymology of the ethnonyms Taur
(Tochar/Togar/Tagarma) and Angareon.
As also all other ethnonyms of Scythian
time, the word Taur (Tochar, Dogarma) in the traditional historical science are
recognized as Persian, and consequently their etymology was attempted to be built on the basis
of the Persian languages. But so far it was almost without results.
The ethnonyms Taur, Tagar, Tochar, Tagarma represent the phonetic variations of the
same word. They consist of the same Türkic elements: tau/tav/dag/tag "mountain, woody mountain, tree" and
er "people, men"; the Taur is "Mountain People".
Taures were included into the Scythian federation. When the Scythians needed to
repel the attack of the Darius' hordes, they gathered for a meeting "the
kings of Taures,
Agathyrs (truer, Agach eri. - M.Z.), Neuri, Androphags,
Melanhlens, Gelons, Budins and Sauromats" [Herodotus, 1972, B. 4, 102. If
these tribes were Persian-lingual, they would not fight the
Persian-lingual
hordes of Darius, and Darius would not pursue his relatives with the same Iranian
deity and language. There are reasons to consider that these
Scythians were basically Türkic-speaking.
Taures lived in Taurika. Herodotus lists this territory as primeval
Skithia, a mountainous country which begins at the Istr (Danube)
estuary and extends to the Kerch strait [Herodotus, 1972, IV, 99].
Strabon calls the Crimean peninsula Taurian and Scythian [Latyshev
V.V., 1893, 122]. Taures are the distant ancestors of the Crimean
Tatars.
In the sources are cases of the explanation of the origin of the ethnonym Taur from
the Türkic word tuar "animals". For example, Eustafius (12th
century AD)
writes that "the tribe of Taures has received is name, is told, from
the ox animal" [Ibid. 1995]. It is, most likely, a folk etymology.
Tochars are a Türkic people that lived in the 3rd-2nd millenniums BC in the
Eastern Europe,
then their presence is noted in the Middle and Central Asia; Ptolemy in the 2nd
century AD places the Togars (Tochars) in the Western Europe near Dacia
(Ptolemy
......? - Translator's Note) [Latyshev
V.V., 1893, 232].
It is important to note, that to the ancient Tochars the German Indo-Europeists
assigned a peculiar
Iranian language. The matter is that at the end of the 19th and the
beginning of the 20th centuries in the oases of the Eastern Turkistan (so called
Sintszyan) were found monuments in a special western-
Iranian dialect. The German Türkologist in their translation
from the Sanskrit text to Uigur found, that the translation was done not directly
from Sanskrit, but through Tohri. On the basis of that message,
the other German scientists named these Persian texts "Tocharian".
"They
linked the Uigur word "tohri" with the name of the "Tochars"
people, who were witnessed by the ancients as living in Bactria... The term
"Tocharian language” is lingering until now, despite strong protests of many scientists" [Krauze В., 1959, 41,
44]. Here is evident at once the break in the logic: the Uigur text does not
say that Tohri/Tochars spoke Persian, most likely they were Türks, if
the Uigurs
took advantage of their language. Besides, we know that Tochars in the Central
Asia in antiquity were closely connected with the Sako-Massagets, who in the
5th-7th
centuries are known as Türkic nations among the Türkic Ephtalites and other Türks. M.Kashgarly
the Togars (Tochars) also lists as Türks. The root of the word "Tocharistan
has survived in the topo- and ethnonymy of the Uzbeks and Kazakhs" [Tolstova
L.C., 1978, 10]. The Tochars actively participated in forming the Uzbeks.
Such a people as Tochars, greatly widespread (from the Eastern
Europe
to the Central Asia), could not have gone Turkisized so expeditiously, most likely
the Tochars from the very beginning were Türks.
Ethnonymycally, the biblical Togars (Togarma) and Scythian Taures
are close to Tochars.
In the Bible (Genesis) is stated that from the son of Japheth, Gomer, were born
three sons: Ashkenaz, Riphath and Togarmah
(spelled Dogarma by the author - Translator's Note)(Ch. 10). This chapter of the Bible
is written way before our era. Later, Dogarma-Togarmah becomes a usual ethnonym
for the Türks in the Hebrew language. The Khazars, who accepted the Judaism
religion, also were called Togarmah. In this ethnonym is clearly
outstanding the part Togar/Tochar with the meaning "Mountain or
Forest People" and the part -ma, a plural affix of the Hebrew
language. Just the fact that the Jews called the Türks by the ethnonym
Togarmah way before our era tells
about the presence of the Türks in the Near East and in the Europe since the most ancient
times.
Herodotus also has an ethnonym Angareon. In the eighth book of the "Histories"
(paragraph 98) he writes:
"[8.98] Meanwhile, Xerxes, though engaged in
this way, sent off a messenger to carry intelligence of his misfortune to
Persia. [8.98] Nothing mortal travels so fast as these Persian messengers. The
entire plan is a Persian invention; and this is the method of it. Along the
whole line of road there are men (they say) stationed with horses, in number
equal to the number of days which the journey takes, allowing a man and horse to
each day; and these men will not be hindered from accomplishing at their best
speed the distance which they have to go, either by snow, or rain, or heat, or
by the darkness of night. The first rider delivers his despatch to the second
and the second passes it to the third; and so it is borne from hand to hand
along the whole line, like the light in the torch-race, which the Greeks
celebrate to Vulcan. The Persians give the riding post in this manner, the name
of "Angarum" (spelled "Angareyon" by the author - Translator's Note)".
In the footnote of the book the commentators of the Herodotus "History"
give this word the following explanation: angareyon (from
Pers. hangar) means "royal courier".
Hence, the Persians used this word in the form hangar-Kangar. And
the Kangar is the most ancient ethnonym of Besenyos (Badjinaks); the word
Kangar also was
the endoethnonym at Sumerians (Sumers). For many years for the Persians the
postal service was served by the Kangars, therefore they had the endoethnonym Kangars
attain the meaning of "royal courier". We note a similar phenomenon at the same Persians and Turks
also with the ethnonym Tatar. For them the Tatars also for many years served as fast couriers, therefore their ethnonym started to be applied
also in the sense "courier".
Thus, in the 19th century. L.Z.Budagov in his "Comparative dictionary of the
Turkish-Tatar adverbs" (vol. 1) wrote: "...The Tatarin going fast as a wind
(at the courts of Turkey and, in particular, Persia, the Tatars were famous for
their knowledge of different countries and, consequently, they served in the position of
couriers, fast walkers)" [Budagov L.Z., 1869, 329]. For this reason both ethnonyms,
Hangar and Tatar, were used in the sense "courier like a wind". This
system of postal service about which writes Herodotus was for the first time organized by
the Türks, it also had taken root in the Western Asia, and the Russians
also used the services of the Türks-couriers.
The ethnonym Kangar consists of the basic part ar "people, men" and
the definition kang which was used in the sense "cart", the Kangar are "People on Wagons".
The definition kang can also ascend to the Türkic word qаn "father" from which
also come the word Khan, qangĝiru "restless" or "stupified".
From this is possible to conclude that Qangar (Kangar) also has a
meaning "People responsible as fathers", "People like fathers,
like Khans", "Possessing People".
The shown etymologies of the Scythian words and ethnonyms, the cases of their
preservation among the Türkic peoples show that among Scythians, certainly, were also
the Türkic tribes. Therefore the widespread in the official
historical science opinion that ostensibly there was one Scythian language, which
belonged to the Persian group and that the first Türks came to Europe only
in the 4th century AD under the ethnonym Huns, and that the Turkization
of the Itil region and
Urals began only in the 4th or the 7th centuries AD , - all this, naturally, does not
match the reality.
47. Ethnic composition of the Scythians by Scythian words
with etymologies given in the ancient sources.
In ancient sources we are finding the meanings of some Scythian
words, sometimes there are attempts to etymologize them. However the comments of
the ancient sources frequently do not give in to be explained from the viewpoint of the
Iranian languages. Then the Iranists just save the face and simply declare
that the ancient Greek historians, including Herodotus, ostensibly did not know
the Scythian language. Here is a paradox for you: the contemporaries of the Scythians, who
communicated with them directly, did not have an idea about the character of the Scythian language,
but
our contemporaries-scientists present it precisely!! Thus, recognizing Herodotus
as an outstanding historian and ethnographer, they consider him to be a
frivolous linguist [Boruhovich V.G., 1972, 482, 493]. There is no doubt that if
the Herodotus' etymologies were subjected to the study from the viewpoint of polyethnicity
of the Scythian tribes, the scientific diligence of Herodotus, and the soundness of his linguistic
descriptions of the Scythian peoples, would surely prove to be true.
Now we shall review some Herodotus' etymologies of the Scythian
words, which do not find confirmation from the viewpoint of the Iranian
languages. So, Herodotus writes that the Scythians call the Amazons eorpata,
which in Hellenic means "husband killers": in fact eor means "husband", and
pata means "to kill" [Herodotus,
1972, B. 4, 110]. Here is observed a rather transparent Türkic etymology:
eor/ir/er ‘husband’, pata/eata/wata "breaks, beats, kills". As a
whole, eorpata in this sense coincides with the Türkic ervata
"kills husband". (See
Statistical Linguistics
page, taking the form "ervata" and calculating the probability that
this phonetical combination would accidentally meet the semantics of
the Türkic "kills husband" would be in the order of 1/400,000 X 1/100,
or one in 40,000,000. The chances that this word would independently
emerge in, say, Persian language, are astronomically small, in the
order of 1/1,600,000,000,000,000, and in fact, it did not -
Translator's Note).
Herodotus informs that Scythian word enarei means ‘womanlike man’ [Ibis,
B. 4, 67]. And the Greek doctor Hippocrates (5 c. BC) explains, that
"between Scythians there are many eunuchs, they are engaged in female works and
speak like women; such men are called enarei" [Latyshev V.V., 1893, 63].
V.I.Abaev gives this word a Persian etymology: Pers. a "not, without",
nar "man", and a-nar-ia "not a man, halfman" [Abaev V.I., 1949]. This
word almost coincides with the Türkish ineir-anair, that is translated,
as in Herodotus, "womanlike man".
(Taking the form "a-nar" and calculating the probability that this
phonetical combination would accidentally meet the semantics of the
Türkic "eunuch" would be in the order of 1/5,000 X 1/100, or one in
500,000. The chances that this word would independently emerge in, say,
Persian language, are extremely small, in the order of
1/25,000,000,000, and the fact that it did indicates a borrowing or
Turco-Persian common linguistical genesis - Translator's Note)
Per Herodotus, the Scythian word arimaspi means ‘one eyed people’.
Scythian arima "one", and spu "eye" [Herodotus,
1972, IV, 27]. Assuming that one eyed people meant half closed eyes, then
arima can be determined as Türkic iarym "half, semi", and spu/sepi
"slightly open eye". Thus, Scythian arimaspi and Türkic iarymsepi
"half blind, half open, half sighted" almost coincide.
(Taking the form "arima-spu" and calculating the probability that this
phonetical combination would accidentally meet the semantics of the Türkic "half
eyed" would be in the order of 1/50,000 X 1/600 X 1/100, or one in
30,000,000. The chances that this word would independently emerge in, say,
Persian language, are astronomically small, in the order of 1/900,000,000,000,000, and in fact,
it did not - Translator's Note)
Herodotus connects the city Kizik with festival [Herodotus,
IV, 76]. This city, located on the Asian coast of the Sea of Marmara, later
began to be called Tamashalyk, which means "show". The same meaning is
transferred by a Türkic word kizik/kyzyk "interesting, funny,
fascinating".
(Taking the form "kizik" and calculating the probability that this
phonetical combination would accidentally meet the semantics of the
Türkic "show" would be in the order of 1/50,000 X 1/100, or one in
50,000,000. The chances that this word would independently emerge in,
say, Persian language, are astronomically small, in the order of
1/25,000,000,000,000, and in fact, it did not - Translator's Note)
Herodotus talks of
Argrippeis, mentioning that they eat tree fruits. The name of the tree with
fruits used for food is pontik. A ripe fruit is squeezed through a
fabric, and the extracted black juice is called ashi. They lick this
juice and drink it mixed with milk. From the thick of ashi they prepare
bread [Herodotus,
1972, IV, 23]. Many historians identify Argrippeas with Bashkirs. It
is quite probable.
The words pontik and
askhi can be etymologized as pontik < bun-tek < bun-lyk,
where the Old Türkic word bun is "soup, meal", and pontik means
ingredients for soup; and as ashi-asgy, i.e. suitable for food (as/ash
‘food’). The Türks today are in fact making from the ashi dried pulp a
pastille.
(Leaving alone the semantically disconnected "pontik", and taking
the form "ashi", calculating the probability that this phonetical
combination would accidentally meet the semantics of the Türkic "ashi"
would be in the order of 1/5,000 X 1/100, or one in 500,000. That would
be a much too conservative estimate, since the probability of a
complete semantical match should be equal to one over the number of
total words in the dictionary, let's say 4,000, and then the
probability of coincidence is closer to 1/5,000 X 1/4,000, or
1/20,000,000 - Translator's Note)
It was not also accidental that the master of the Scythian world was called Atei "daddy"
[Alekseev A.Ü., Murzin V.Ü.,
Polle Р., 137].
The etymology of the Scythian words Kaukas (Caucasus) is interesting.
The first part kau/kyu in Türkic means "grayish-
yellowish-white", it is used in the
ethnonym of a Kyuchak/Kyfchak/Kypchak/Kyu-kiji, etc.; kyu is "swan". That in
the word Caucas kau/kyu expresses the meaning "whiteness" is proved by the other Scythian name for the
Caucasus, Kroukas. Plinius Secundus (1st century AD) writes that Scythians called the
Caucasian mountains by the name Kroukas, i.e. "snow-white"(Plinius Sec. Liber VI.xix.50
- Translator's Note) [Latyshev V.V., 1896, 185]. In Türkic kyrau
is "frost, icing, snow". The second part of the words Kaukas and
Kroukas is kas, it means "rock, rocky mountain, cliff".
Compare this: in the Altai language kaskak is "steep slope, versant",
common Altaic kad/kaz is "rock, cliff". S.P.Tolstov as an epigraph to the first chapter "Wall in
a desert" of his book "Ancient Khoresm" cites the words of Yakut:
"Kas - in the language of the inhabitants of Khoresm is a wall in a desert,
surrounded by nothing" [Tolstov S.P., 1948, 11].
(Leaving alone the semantically disconnected "Kaukas", for which
the ancient etymology is not available, and taking the form "Kroukas", calculating the probability that this
phonetical combination would accidentally meet the semantics of the Türkic "Snow
Mountain" would be in the order of 1/400,000 X 1/100, or one in
40,000,000.
Here we have a blessing of having the semantics of "Kroukas= Snow Mountain" noted by
the Greek source. The chances that this word would independently emerge in,
say, Persian language, are astronomically small, in the order of
1/1,600,000,000,000,000, and in fact, it surely did not - Translator's Note)
So, the Scythian words which were subjected to the etymological and semantic analysis
by the ancient authors coincide with their Türkic etymologies.
(And now comes a final whammy: To find the
probability of two independent events, their individual probabilities
are multiplied, etc. To find the probability of accidental coincidence
of all 7 above words with known recorded etymology, their individual
probabilities are to be multiplied. Skipping the arithmetics, here is
the result for the probability of chance occurrence for these words:
1.2 X 1050, or 12 followed by 49
zeroes. The probability that these 7 words belong to the Türkic language is 1 -
1.2 X 1050, or 0.999999(total 49 nines and the last one is 8).
In other words, their belonging to the Türkic language is a fact.
The reader should note the crystal clean
etymology of Prof. M.Zakiev, as compared with the V.I.Abaev's work,
there are no machinations with phonetics, no drawing on a spectrum of
languages from Avestan to German to Greek to Indian to Iranian to
Latvian to Lithuanian to Ossetian to Persian to Russian, no drawing on
a spectrum of words with unknown and most likely flawed etymology in
these languages, no heavy reliance on the Digorian language with a
substantial Türkic substrate to be misrepresented as certifiably IE
language, and no state enforcement machinery to impose the results of
the work: the work speaks for itself - Translator's Note)
48. Ethnic composition of the Scythians and Sarmatians from the archeological,
ethnological, religious-mythological and artistic data.
We already stated
that any ethnogenetical theory should be based on the integration of the linguistical,
archeological, ethnological, religious-mythological and artistic research.
In this work more attention was given to the linguistical facts, for the
Scytho-Iranian theory is based primarily on them.
Who seriously studied the problems of the Scythians, surely noted
that by the ethnographic features (including archeological, religious-mythological and
artistic) the Scythians and Sarmatians are the ancestors of
the Türkic-speaking peoples. As an archeologist and ethnographer, I.M.Miziev has
correctly noted, the Scythians from are investigated from different directions
fairly in
detail, there are substantial works, but there is no thorough research on their
household culture. "Probably, this circumstance is explained by, he
writes, that with the first touch to the family life, utensils, food of the Scythians
the developed stereotype breaks, and erupt the "scissors" between their Iranian
language and the obvious Türko-Mongolian life and traditional culture"
[Miziev I.M., 1990, 66]. In his opinion,
the
archeological
cultures (Pit Grave, Timber, Scythian and Türko-Mongolian) also have
a continuous genetic connection and relatedness, which is admitted by almost all
archeological science.
Analyzing the archeological and modern materials, the works of other scientists, I.M.Miziev
specifically unfolds 15 Scytho-Türkic arheological and ethnological
parallels:
1)
Method of milking mares with a help of a bone tubule like a flute;
2)
Method of cooking meat in stomachs of animals;
3) In the first legend about
the origin of the Scythians during the Targitai reign to the Scythian ground from the
sky fall gold subjects: a plough, a yoke, a poleaxe and a bowl [Herodotus, B. 4, 5] which coincide with
the Balkarian names of
constellations;
4) Scythian method of a fortune-telling on willow rods and
5) Scythian method of a fortune-telling on linden loofah were both preserved at Balkarians;
6) Method of forming kurgans (barrows - Translator's
Note) (even the word "kurgan" is the Türkic "structure");
7) Custom of sending almost the herds of horses
with the diseased;
8) Use of felt;
9) Method of manufacturing of the shields;
10) Method of scalping the enemies;
11) Practice of embalming the bodies of the diseased;
12) Funeral ceremony, i.e. the practice of carrying the body of the diseased leader
from one tribe to another, and of burying together with the diseased of his horses or
their parts;
13) Presence of the funeral timber chambers covered with timber logs;
14) Burial of the diseased in special wells-sarcophagi hollowed from
large logs;
15) Cleaning ceremonies after the funeral of the diseased, i.e.
so-called Scytho-Türkic baths with incense of the seeds of the hemp
heated on the rocks.
Thus, "the whole complex of the Scythian funeral ceremony (kurgan barrow,
funeral log-sarcophagus, burial of horses, funeral timber chambers) and
of the household culture (milking mares, the use of horsemeat, koumiss for food and so
forth) were preserved without a break down to our days in the traditional culture of
the Türko-Mongolian peoples" [Miziev I.M., 1990, 66-71].
The practice of naming the tribes with the totem names (Acathyr
"Forest or Tree People", Gelon "snake", Taur "Mountain or
Forest People",
etc.) and the obviously Türkic words for the names of various deities
demonstrate the religious-mythological continuity of the Scythians and the Türks. So, Herodotus writes: "In
the Scythian language Gestia is called Tabiti, Zeus (and, in my opinion,
absolutely correctly) is called Papei, Geia is called Api, Apollo is called Goitosir, the Heavenly
Aphrodite is called Argimpasa,
Poseidon is called Fagimasad. Scythians do not have a custom of erecting
effigies, altars and
temples to the gods, except for Ares" [Herodotus,B. 4, 59].
Hestia is the goddess of a home hearth, in the Scythian Tabiti,
the word consists of tap "serve, find", iti/ithi "god, great", as a whole
it is "goddess of care , i.e. of home hearth".
(Refer to Zaur Gasanov "Royal Scythians", NY, 2002, 7.1.1 for a 5 page detail analysis of the name
Tabiti,
and commensurate analyses for other deities-
Translator's Note)
Zeus is the Supreme God, King and father of Gods and people, in the
Scythian Papei,
in Türkic babai "primogenitor". (Of the
extant 13 main Türkic languages, 8 have a non-palatalized form "babai", 3 have a
palatalized form "papai": Alataic, Chuvash, and Khakassian. This difference not
only gives a flavor to the palatalized dialect described by Herodotus, but also
brings a question, if Herodotus' source was a Greek, equipped with both "p" and
"b", or a Persian who distorted "b" into palatalized "p"-
Translator's Note)
Gaia is a personification of the Earth, She bore Uranus (Sky),
Mountains, Pontus (Sea); Gaia in the Scythian is Api, in Türkic
Èbi "primogenitoress".(Türkic
"apa" has a connotation "senior female relative" -
Translator's Note)
Apollo is the Sun god, in Türkic Oetosyr, from apparent Türkic
Yèytös-er/
Djèytös-er where the first part means "summertime", the second
is "Man, People". (The word "Oetosyr", for
which Prof. M.Zakiev gives 2 forms, one of "yoking" dialect, and another from "djoking"
dialect, also gives a flavor to the Scythian "yoking" dialect described by
Herodotus -
Translator's Note)
Aphrodite is a goddess of love and beauty, in the Scythian Argimpasa
(spelled Artimpasa in Herodotus' translation -
Translator's Note), where
argym/argim id "my beauty" plus psak "wreath, flowers", as a
whole it is "my flower beauty". (Here the
Greek pantheon and the Scythian pantheon did not gibe, the Scythian pantheon did
not have a matching "love Goddess", so integral to the Greek Culture, and
instead we hear a ring of a Scythian courting vocabulary -
Translator's Note)
Poseidon is a god of the sea, water; in the Scythian Thagimasad,
(spelled Thamimasad in Herodotus' translation -
Translator's Note), in the Karachaevo-Balkarian language Fukmashak or
Pukmashak, the god of
water, rain, weather disasters [Laipanov K.T., Miziev I.M., 1993, 60]. There
is another version that Thagimasad is a horseman god, some researchers
connect him with a winged horse [Dovatur A.I., 1982, 298]. The Türks payed a great importance to the horses firmly
set on their feet, who were a reliable support under any circumstances, tayanych. The word
tayanych "support" is formed from the word tay
"fall, slip", from it forms the
participle taymas "not slippable". The Türkic y
(like in York -
Translator's Note) the Greeks pronounced as g, from here comes
tagmas/tagymas/tagimas, and plus the at "horse". Tagymasat/Tagimasad in Türkic
is "not fallable horse", maybe, a "winged horse " which does not
stand on the ground,
compare with tayak, tayanych "support". (Here the
Greek and Scythian pantheons did not gibe, the steppe-dwelling Scythians did
not have a matching "Sea God", and
instead we hear a ring of a land marvel, a 1000 li horse -
Translator's Note)
Ares (Mars) is a god of war, apparently, this word was borrowed from
the Scythian language, in the Karachaevo-Balkarian it is Oriy, a god of
war [Laipanov K.T., Miziev I.M.,
1993, 60]. Probably, this god, as the most important, was linked to
the possessions and fertility, and the word is a truncated variation of the Türkic Yersu
"Earth-Water". (Here the
Greek and Scythian pantheons did not gibe, the Scythians did
not have a specialized "War God", and Yer-Su, a protector of earthly
activities, is a good substitute -
Translator's Note)
Considering the Scytho-Türkic continuity in the field of art, on the foreground
comes out the so-called "Animal Art" style. This style is undoubtedly Scythian, but
the scientists, coming from a postulate about the obligatory nomadic character of
the Scythians, assert that all "animal" art of the Scythians was created not by
the Scythians (the nomads ostensibly are not capable of it), but by the Greek
artizans. That is another error. Not all Scythians were nomads, and they esteemed animals,
wild life,
plants, and birds as their totems, and always tried to portray them in various ways.
And that Scythian tradition has passed over to the Türkic tribes.
When the Türkologists make such conclusions, it is possible to view
them with some suspicion about their tendentiousness. Therefore in
conclusion I cite the statements of another non-Türkologist Scytholog.
Thus, L.A.Elnitsky, on the basis of a global analysis of the Scythian
materials comes to the following conclusions: "It would be deemed, in
addition, that it is possible to talk about the Iranizm of the
Cimmerians and Scythians only with a reference to some part of the
tribes which had these collective names"; and further on: "The vestiges
of the Scythian culture for a long time remained in the culture of the
Türko-Mongolian (and in a smaller measure, Slavic and Finno-Ugric)
peoples" [Elnitsky L.A., 1977, 241, 243].
(Refer to William Culican "The Medes and Persians", London, 1965,
for a detail analysis of the origins of the Scythian art. Even though W. Culican
innocently calls a number of people speaking agglutinating languages
Indo-Europeans, the factual material is prominent and self-explanatory -
Translator's Note)
49. Do the ancient sources confirm the Persian-linguality of Scythians?
Above, on the basis of the analysis of the linguistical, religious-mythological,
ethnological, archeological and artistic material, we tried to prove the
Türkic-speaking
of the main body of the Scythians and Sarmatians. Left out one very important
argument to confirm the ethnic composition of the Scythians and Sarmatians. It
is the opinion of the ancient historians, the authors of the ancient sources. Do the ancient
sources and their authors confirm the Persian-linguality of the Scythians and
Sarmatians? One matter is when the modern historians and linguists deduce from
the ancient sources their opinion, and completely another matter is the opinion of the ancients,
the contemporaries of the Scythians.
From the very beginning it should be recalled that the ancient authors believed
and wrote about the differently linguality of the Cimmerians, Scythians and Sarmatians. Therefore
the Iranists cannot base on them their conclusions about a uniform Scythian language, especially
so for the Indo-Iranian type.
Almost all ancient authors who left information about Cimmerians,
Scythians and Sarmatians, knew very well the Persians, and never confused them
with Scythians, and did not note their languistic affinity.
Thus, after a close and objective study of the ancient sources it
becomes completely clear, that among the Cimmerians, Scythians and Sarmatians least
of all were the Persian-lingual peoples. This conclusion was also made by some linguists.
For example, T.A.Degtereva expresses an opinion that thr antique writers, including
the observant and careful in his work historian as was Herodotus, nowhere
is even a hint that the Scytho-Sarmatian language (and the numerous Scythian
tribes spoke one language) had any similarity to the language of the population
of the Ahaemenid Persia, while the role of Persia in the life of the ancient civilized
states at that time was so significant that the ancient authors should have
an idea, a personal one or by hearsay, about the language of the people of that
country; someway the similarity between the Persian and Scythian languages would
have been noticed by them in the same way as they found the similarity between the Scythian and
Sarmatian languages. However it did not happen, by virtue of which we envisage
that the common Scythian language was not Persian [Degtereva T.A., 1962, 171].
Asserting, however, that ostensibly the Sakas and Alans spoke the languages
of the Iranian group, T.A.Degtereva at this question remained a captive of the Indo-Iranists. In fact,
the ancient authors knew well the Sakas, and
the Alans, and the Persians, and nevertheless, not one of them gave even a hint
about the affinity of the Saka, Alanian and Persian languages. We did not find it anywhere,
and therefore we can tell with confidence that the Saka, and the Alanian languages had
no affinity with the Persian, and especially not with the Ossetian language.
The ancient authors, never and nowhere mentioning the ethnic affinity of the Scythians and
Iranians, however, repeatedly stated about the Türkic-speaking of the
Scythians (the discourse about that is in the following paragraph).
It should be also noted that Herodotus gives detailed information about the
long war of the Persians against the Scythians. If the Scythians were Perso-speaking,
and shared the common deity, the Persians would hardly wage a long and
determined war against the Scythians. In that tense situation someone from the Scythians, or from
the Persians would not have held back an argument of their ethnic unity, but
nothing close to such information is recorded in the ancient sources.
It should be noted also that according to the ancient sources,
the Cimmerians, Scythians and Sarmatians occupied a huge territory: they lived in
the the Western Asia, and in the Central Asia, and in the Caucasus, and in the Eastern
Europe, and in the Western Siberia and Kazakhstan. They were observed in the northwest of
China, in the Northern India, in the Far East, in Far East Siberia, etc.
If the Scythians were Persian-lingual Ossetians, how would they almost suddenly
have disappeared from those regions, and remained only in the Caucasus
(in a tiny-teeny enclave the size of a medium-sized
county - Translator's Note). How other peoples, including Türks, managed to occupy these huge territories so
perfectly imperceptibly?
Sometimes some peoples violently occupy the territories
of the others. But then the former people in that territory has remaining toponyms,
hydronyms. Why in the huge territory of the Eurasia, where the Scythians
(ostensibly Ossetians) lived earlier, not preserved any Ossetian toponyms and
hydronyms?
Therefore, the Scythians were not Persians-Ossetians. The theory about the
Persian-linguality of the Scythians (Cimmerians and Sarmatians) does not sustain any criticism. Not
accidentally, Herodotus in his linguistical records does not give any example
benefiting the supporters of the Scytho-Iranian concept. The ancient sources do
not confirm a universal Persian-linguality of of the Scythians.
50. Do the ancient sources confirm the Türkic-speaking of the Scythians?
The most reliable sources for defining the ethnos of the Scythians are the opinions of their contemporaries,
who knew them not indirectly, but directly.
On the basis of the study the opinions of the ancient and other materials, L.A.Elnitsky
comes to a conclusion that the Udes, who lived in the 3rd millennium BC
were ethnically connected with the Caspian Udes, the later Uzes and
Dais, Se, Unu, recorded in the sources during the 2nd-1st millenniums BC, and are directly connected
with the Saies and Huns who were living in the beginning of the new era in
the Eastern and Western Europe up to the borders of the Northern Italy [Elnitsky L.A., 1977, 4]. The
ethnonyms Day/Say (Saka) and Hun are the names of the Türkic peoples.
The historians who were living in time are much closer to the Scythians and
Sarmatians quite often identified them with the Türkic tribes. So, Philostorgy (4 c. AD) noted,
that "these Huns are probably those people whom the ancients called Neuri", i.e.
the Scythians [Latyshev V.V., 1900, 74].
Theophan the Byzantian (5th century AD) believes that the Huns are
Scythians. He writes: "Meanwhile the Scyth Atilla, son Omnudiy, a person brave and proud,
removed his senior brother Vdela, and assumed to himself
the authority above the Scythians, who are called also Unns, and attacked the
Thrace" [Theophan the Byzantian, 1884, 81]. On the other hand, he attributes the Türks to
to the Massagets: "East from Tanaid live Türks, in antiquity
called Massagets. The Persians in their language call them Kermihions" [Byzantian
historians, 1861, 492]. In this record of Theophan an attention deserves
that he also knew well the Massagets (one of the Scythian tribes), and the Persians. If
the Scythians-Massagets spoke Persian, he would surely note that circumstance.
But Theophan the Massagets identifies with the Türks, instead of
the Persians.
In second half of the 5th century Zosimus expresses some confidence that the
Unns are the Royal Scythians [Latyshev V.V., 1900, 800].
In the 6th century Menandr the Byzantian writes that the "Türks, in antiquity
called Sakas, sent to Justian an embassy with peace
proposals" [Byzantian historians, SPb., 1861, 375], and under the Scythian language he
means the "Türkic barbaric language" [Ibid. 376]. In another
place Menandr the Byzantian writes: "...So all the Scythians from the tribes of
the so-called Türks gathered up to a hundred and six persons" [Ibid.
417].
Procopius Caesarian (the 6th century AD) one of the Scythian tribes,
Amazons, identifies
with the Huns and Sabirs [Procopius Caesarian, 1950, 381]. He also under
Cimmerians means the Türks-Huns, Utigurs, Kutrigurs: "This "bog" is
flowing
into in Eucsin Pontus. Peoples who live there, in antiquity were called
Cimmerians, now they are called Utigurs" [Procopius Caesarian, 1950, 384-385].
Agathius (the 6th century AD) calls the Huns near the Sea of Azov the Scythians [Agathius, 1953, 148].
(Agathiae Historiarum libri V. - Ed. L. Dindorf. HGM, 1871
- Translator's Note)
Theophylact Simocatta (the 7th century AD) notes that east Scythians are usually
called
Türks:
"Expelled from his empire, he (Hosrov, Chosroes) left Ctesiphon and,
crossing the river Tiger, was hesitating, not knowing what he should do, since ones advised him to
head to the east Scythians,
whom we have got used to call Türks, and the others to flee to the Caucasian
or Atropean mountains, and there to save his life" [Simokatta Th., 1957, 106].
Theophan the Confessor (the 8th century AD) under the name Khazars means
the Scythians: "This year Basileus Leon married his son Constantin to the daughter
of the Hagan, the ruler of the Scythians, converting her to Christianity and
renaming her Irina" (before christening her name was Chichak, i.e "Flower") [Chichurov
I.S., 1980, 68].
Is also worthy the message of the "Tale of Bygone Years" (12nd century
AD) that
Scythians, Khazars and Bulgars are the same people: "When the Slavs, as we already
said, lived near Danube, came from the Scythians, i.e. the Khazars, so-called Bulgars
and settled along the Danube" [Tale of Bygone Years, 28].
Above we already mentioned that in the initial Russian history the Scythians and
Sarmatians were Türks, for example, A.Lyzlov, V.N.Tatishchev, etc. This view
initially also had the western historians. So, the English
historian of 19th century. V.Mitford in the "History of Greece" writes: "In
the world there are places whose inhabitants differ strongly from the other people
in the customs and the way of life. Of them should be noted a nation
called Scythes by the Greeks, and by the contemporaries Tatars" [Mitford В.,
1838, 419]. Here it should be noted, that then in the West under Tatars were understood almost all eastern peoples, but the
proper Tatars were
nevertheless considered the Muslim Türks.
In the middle of the 19th century the
Russian historians and geographers are convinced that the Scythians were Türkic-speaking. So, R.Latama in
the 1854 in the Bulletin of
the Russian Geographical Society wrote: "The Türkic origin of the Scythians now...
does
not require extra proofs" [Latama Р., 1854, 45].
In other words, some of the European scientists considered the Scythians as
solely
Türkic-speaking, they created the Scytho-Türkic theory, while
the others adhered to
the Scytho-Iranian theory.
In our opinion, neither one is completely right. The Cimmerians, Scythians,
Sarmatians, certainly, were poly-ethnical, among them were the ancestors of
those peoples who now occupy the so-called ancient Scythian territory, the
Eastern Europe, Siberia (except for the Far East), Kazakhstan, Middle, Central
and Asia Minor. Among all the peoples of this extensive region a significant place
occupy the Türks. Besides, the Türks preserved more of the Scythian ethnological, mythological and linguistical
traces. All this incontestably proves that among
the ancient Cimmerians, Scythians, Sarmatians were many more Türks, than
the ancestors
of the Slavs and Finno-Ugrians. But whether there were in their body the
Persian-lingual Ossetians remains a big question.