From: "Stephan Nikolov" Subject: Re: Caucasoid Turks/Bulgars Date: 03 Apr 1999 00:00:00 GMT Message-ID: <7e5m18$9fp$1@news.ox.ac.uk> References: <369E3BE1.5C45@sbu.ac.uk> <77li2j$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$4iq@cpca3.uea.ac.uk> <3744d12a.1873763068@news.wxs.nl> <796m95$eq2@cpca3.uea.ac.uk> <375c0ea6.1954957123@news.wxs.nl> <79fo99$qkl@cpca3.uea.ac.uk> <36effb24.440413110@news.yale.edu> <7cp58m$2de@cpca3.uea.ac.uk> <36fac983.6248364@news.yale.edu> <3701ad7a.22810790@news.yale.edu> <3701ae58.23032248@news.yale.edu> <37029532.69064369@news.yale.edu> <370296ad.69443734@news.yale.edu> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@ox.ac.uk X-Trace: news.ox.ac.uk 923163496 9721 163.1.171.102 (3 Apr 1999 18:18:16 GMT) Organization: Ste Peter's College, Oxford NNTP-Posting-Date: 3 Apr 1999 18:18:16 GMT Newsgroups: sci.archaeology,sci.anthropology,sci.lang Cluster User wrote in message <370296ad.69443734@news.yale.edu>... >> >> >>> >>>if this name is discussed in an another article I would be interested >>>(and I'll keep looking for one). >>> >> >> >>this is what I received from vassil karloukovski: >> >>========================================= >> >> >> ... for me there is still a problem. I don't know (and >>cannot check from here) what is the basis of this Dobrev's claim >>that car Roman was also called Shishman. If Dobrev relies on one >>recently disclosed stone inscription of car Samuil from Voden/Edessa >>in Western Macedonia, then this X c. Shishman is unreliable. >> >>In the inscription he (Samuil) says that he was a "grandson of the old >> >>Shishman, the kavgan of the inhabitants of T@rnovo". It is thought to >>be a fake!, produced in the XIX c. and it contains a lot of > >well, that solves the problem! > >>inconsistencies with the modern views on the Bulg. history: "kavgan"?, >>T@rnovo? (T@rnovo became capital only in the XII-th c., in the Second >>Bulg. Kingdom!; Pliska and Preslav were the capitals of the first >>kingdom). The director of the Bulg. National museum of history also >>rejected the authenticity of the Voden inscription on the basis that >>Shishman was a XII-XIII c. Kuman name... > >I can understand his objections. it's not an oghuric word. > >perhaps upon hearing an objection on linguistic grounds, dobrev came >up with an alternate hypothesis. as I had mentioned this involves in >part another oghuric word (from chuvash). oghuric has /l/ for common >turkic /sh/, but invented a secondary /sh/ from the palatoization of >/s/ (as does mongol). > > >> >>You (or I) could ask Stephan Nikolov whether the existance of this >>Roman Shishman is confirmed by other accounts. >> >> >>Regards, >>Vassil Shishman ..... I would opt for Cumanian transmission of the name in Bulgaria. The "Shishman" theory appears in Bulgarian historiography in the 18 c., (btw, at the same time with the "tatar" and the "Vallachian" theories of the origin of the Bulgars). The Voden inscription is made by someone who knew Baronius through Paisii and the historical writings from the beginning of the 19 c. Baronius himself a good Catholic, opted for Vallachian origin and possibly forged the Shishmanid origin through the Assenids to Samuel and Romanus. The Assenids claimed Simeon, Peter, and Samuel their ancestors (Kalojan to pope Innocent III). The Second Bulgarian empire historiography does not explicitly separate the family of Samuel from that of Simeon -- Peter -- Roman. However Roman appears in a copuple of sources with a double name Roman - Simeon (after both his grandfathers). I believe this is a possible Note that by no means Roman would have been made tsar of Bulgaria. A castrate can not be ruler, and there is a evidence that Roman handed over Serdica to Basil II in 1001 -- the time when Samuel was clearly titled "Tsar". It is possible that the Shishmans, a noble family (of Cumanian and Vallachian origins? that emerges in the souces of the second half of the 13 c), might have claimed origin from Roman -- Simeon to justify their claims on the Bulgar throne in the 14th c. vis-a-vis the Byzantine Assenids. SN