From: cluster.user@yale.edu (Cluster User)
Subject: Re: Caucasoid Turks/Bulgars
Date: 01 Feb 1999 00:00:00 GMT
Message-ID: <36b61035.22226830@news.yale.edu>
References: <369E3BE1.5C45@sbu.ac.uk> <77li2j$qi0$1@whisper.globalserve.net> <369F52FE.2B6@sbu.ac.uk> <77rc86$auj$1@brokaw.wa.com> <36A444B3.F3B70F1C@alum.mit.edu.-> <7827sb$269$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <36A52D70.9E372DD2@alum.mit.edu.-> <36A556AB.9927BD29@montclair.edu> <36a63533.58309714@news.yale.edu> <7866ud$i9m$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <36cdb21e.883120019@news.wxs.nl> <36A7FCC8.79790A6B@earthlink.net> <36d77e23.1000882888@news.wxs.nl> <36a8d455.81661202@news.yale.edu> <78pl3c$84o@cpca3.uea.ac.uk> <36b0dc2f.3434839@news.yale.edu> <78v30o$vl6@cpca3.uea.ac.uk> <36b34d7c.60430113@news.yale.edu> <794e84$4iq@cpca3.uea.ac.uk>
Organization: Yale University
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology,sci.anthropology,sci.lang

On 1 Feb 1999 14:37:56 GMT, e.karloukovski@uea.ac.uk (Vassil
Karloukovski) wrote:

>In article <36b34d7c.60430113@news.yale.edu>, cluster.user@yale.edu says...
>>On 30 Jan 1999 13:55:36 GMT, e.karloukovski@uea.ac.uk (Vassil Karloukovski) wrote:
>
>...
>>>If Dobrev is to be believed, a number of agricultural and other terms in
>>>Mari have Pamirian parallels but these words are not found in the other
>>>Finno-Ugrian languages. So he identifies them as loanwords from the language
>>>of the original Volga Bulgars. Another problem with the Chuvash being equated
>>
>>an iranic substratum for chuvash and the volga-bolgar inscriptions is
>>not denied. however, an -r turkic migration into the region has to be
>>accounted for and there are other reasons for believing such a
>>presence in the kuban region. furthermore, we know the volga bolgars
>>became muslim and we have such a muslim languange in the inscriptions,
>>with chuvash its nearest modern representative and both are -r turkic.
>
>
>I couldn't deny that but the question is how relevant are these rather late 

they show that the -r turkic component of the volga bulgars, which
seems to be old,  was important enough as to establish itself as their
dominant local langauge.

>(XIth c. AD, pre-Mongol, or even post-Mongol (?)) examples of 'volga bolgaric'

the linguistic material brought by the mongols is different.

>to the earlier proto-bulgaric language. The evidence for an iranian influence 
>on the Mari agricultural terminology is massive. It would be too far-fetched 
>to suppose they were transmitted by some -r turkic migration as almost all of
>the Mari words for the cereals and other cultures have (specifically) pamirian 
>cognates:
>
> culture     Mari          Pamirian 
>
> wheat      shidan       zindan, shedim  (Shugnani, Sarikoli)  vs. the old iranian GANTUMA
> barley     shozh        chushch         (Shugnani, Sarikoli)  vs. the old iranian KASAKA
> rye        urzha        jurzhājn - millet (Shugnani, Sarikoli)
> hemp       kāne         kām             (Ishkashimi, Wakhi)  
> flax       jeten/kheten ketenek
> pepper     purājs       murch           (Shugnani, Sarikoli) 
> peppermint purtnājk     pudina          (Ishkashimi, Wakhi)
> wallnut    puksh        khuvz, fuvz     (Shugnani, Sarikoli)
> dock       cikura       shukri, shiiko
> sorrel     shinchalash  shilka      
> pumpkin    kavun        kafu, kadu      (Shugnani, Sarikoli)
> mulberry   tut          tut             (Ishkashimi, Wakhi)
> peas       kushsho      krosh
>
> ploughing   kuralash     kuram - Tadzhik
> bread       s(h)ājkār    zegar, zgara - Pashto, 
> ...
>
>>>to Volga Bolgaric is the presence of the sound Z in many of the oldest Bulgar 
>>>names - ZIEZI, ZENTI, ANZI, ZERA, IZOT, while in Chuvash ZIEZI, for example, 
>>>would sound as SIESI (and in Mari it would sound as SHIESHI). 
>
>>chuvash has a number of late developments. the language of the danube
>>bolgars may be a different matter. 
>
>
>There are bulgar names with Z from the time before the migration to the Balkans. For 
>example, the mid-VIth century khan Zabergan, a leader of the kutrigurs north of the 
>Sea of Azov. And it was exactly the kutrigurs who migrated to Volga. Besides, the
>name of Ziezi in the latin chronograph of 354 AD, is probably much older and doesn't 
>refer to the bulgars in Europe at all. In this chronograph Ziezi, the progenitor of 
>the bulgars, is listed at the end of a list of names of progenitors of various middle-
>eastern peoples, after a certain "Evilat, from whom are the gymnosophists (i.e. the 
>indian brahmans)". 
>(see http://members.xoom.com/alexvolk/stam/latin_chron.html for the full text)
>Even if we accept that "Ziezi ex quo vulgares" was included additionally and that the 
>earliest version of the chronograph contained the expression "all of whom are bactrians 
>(hi omnes bactriani)" instead, still, it is quite indicative that the name of the bulgars
>appears next to those of the bactrians, parthians, hyrcanians, armenians, etc.
>
>
>Regards,
>Vassil Karloukovski
>