From: cluster.user@yale.edu (Cluster User) Subject: Re: Caucasoid Turks/Bulgars Date: 07 Apr 1999 00:00:00 GMT Message-ID: <370bed32.25832084@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$4iq@cpca3.uea.ac.uk> <3744d12a.1873763068@news.wxs.nl> <796m95$eq2@cpca3.uea.ac.uk> <375c0ea6.1954957123@news.wxs.nl> <79fo99$qkl@cpca3.uea.ac.uk> <370296ad.69443734@news.yale.edu> <7dvofs$ai0@cpca3.uea.ac.uk> <370a6f59.1892451@news.yale.edu> <7efi7l$trh$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> Organization: Yale University Newsgroups: sci.archaeology,sci.anthropology,sci.lang On Wed, 07 Apr 1999 12:14:49 GMT, e.karloukovski@uea.ac.uk wrote: >In article <370a6f59.1892451@news.yale.edu>, cluster.user@yale.edu (Cluster >User) wrote: >> vassil karloukovski communicated to me: >> >> >Has anybody linked the khazars on the Caspian with the Khazars in Central >> >> I don't think so. haza:ra is with an h- not x- (i.e. /kh/). in persian >> haza:r means "1000" in new persian (haza:ra:n would be a plural, i.e. >> a collective). it is thought to be a translation of turco-mongol >> mi*ng* (1000), a unit of turco-mongol military organisation. they are >> tradionally the remnants of mongol soldiers, but actually numerous >> mongol and turkic tribes seem to have been settled in their region. >> >> >Afghanistan? The latter is regarded as mongol legacy but couldn't they be >> >there earlier. Their mongoloidity should be an argument, the bulgars also >> >> but it's in asia, their traits could have come from many sources! >> >> >had similar traits. BTW, there is also a town in the Merv oasis, called >> >Burdzhan-(something). >> >> ??? >> >> an important pashto speaking tribe is the abda:l (later bestowed with >> a different name in honor of dynastic origins).abda:l is traditionally >> associated with a man with the dervish rank. nevertheless abdal is >> common among turkmens in anatolia, and in the taurus people otherwise >> known as gypsies are locally called by that name. so soem scholars >> have associated them with the hephthalites. >> > >No, I meant that "burdzhan" was an arabic name for the bulgars. Thus this *dzh* represents arabic jim which can be read as g in dialects. final -r is known to become -n in arabic in such syllables, as in corsair becoming qurSa:n (I don't know if it is purely phonetic or the desire to put it into a word pattern more familiar to arabic). as this refered to the danube bulghars, it could well be that /gh/ had lost its deep velar quality, thus the arabs didn't use /gh/, i.e. *gh*ayn. alternatively they simply heard the name from greeks and slavs, it may have been force of habit using jim for greek g, or again these sources didn't pronounce it with a deep velar quality. >town of Burzan-dzhirt (today - Bursan-dzhirt) in the oasis of Merv could be when you take the above into account the similarity is considerably less. "dzhirt" may be an arabization of of a persian -gird, -gerd. >translated as "bulgarian town". This fits to the account of Al-Bakuvi that >the bulgars (burdzhans) inhabited (before their migration?) fertile southern >fields "where there were a lot of grape, figs and plums" [R. Kuzev, >Proishozhdenie bashkir, M., 1974, 35-36]. the northern shore of the black sea has a surprisingly balmy climate, I am told by people who went there and this may be an exageration of this. > >The point was that some islamic authors connect the bulgars and the khazars >but say their language wasn't either turkic or persian. The persian At-Tabari >wrote in 915 that in 556-571 the turkuts occupied the eastern Northern >Caucasus by defeating the khazars and the people "b-n-dzh-r" (belendzher, the >pahlavi form of "bulgar" according to V. Gening and A. Khalikov). The danube >bulgars are called "burdzhan" by Al-Fazari (772/73 AD). Al-Masudi (20-30's of >the X c.) calls the volga bulgars "burdzhans", and the danube - "bulgars". He I understand the general habit was the reverse. perhaps he got them mixed up. >describes as turkic the nogays, the pechenegs, the badzhards (bashkirs), but >not the bulgars. Ibn-Fadlan (921-922) says that the language of the volga >bulgars didn't resemble either turkic or slavic, while Istahri, Haukal, Bekri >and Jakut find similarities between the khazar and bulgar l-s, but say they >didn't resemble either turkic or persian. > > >Another account mentioning tribal names similar to "khazar", "bulgar" is >provided in one late "Chronicle" of Shah-Mahmud Churas [M., 1976]. The work >was composed in 1676/77 and described the mongol state in Jarkand, created in >1514. The region of Kashgar, Jangi-Hissar, Aksu, and Khotan there was called >"Little Bukharia". In their advance against Bolor and Badahshan the mongols >had to fight certain "(k)hazareans". The hazareans finally acknowledged the these may represent the hazaras, (1000's) and persian (and arabic script) distinguishes between /h/ and /x/ (i.e. /*kh*/). >mongol supremacy in the fortress of Sarikol, while the local tribe of >"bulgachi" was executed. -chi is rare in a tribal name, but iti si the well known suffix of trades and habitual actions. the word would make sense if the verb bulgha= was intended, i.e. "those who mix things up" while bulghar might have meant "mixed tribes". > >Al-Biruni (973-1048), however, thinks that the language of the volga bulgars >was a mixture of khazar and turkic. > > >VK > >-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- >http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own