From: cluster.user@yale.edu (Cluster User) Subject: Re: Caucasoid Turks/Bulgars Date: 30 Apr 1999 00:00:00 GMT Message-ID: <372a2082.1678673@news.yale.edu> References: <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$qkl@cpca3.uea.ac.uk> <371e5362.14471999@news.yale.edu> <7fs1j8$brv@cpca3.uea.ac.uk> <3722705D.B10E96BA@montclair.edu> <37228395.105363334@news.yale.edu> <7g2adc$qkv$1@news.ox.ac.uk> <3724c639.8283551@news.yale.edu> <372792ce.17040963@news.yale.edu> <3728f548.21087652@news.yale.edu> <372a059b.1677401@news.yale.edu> Organization: Yale University Newsgroups: sci.archaeology,sci.anthropology,sci.lang On Fri, 30 Apr 1999 19:35:09 GMT, cluster.user@yale.edu (Cluster User) wrote: >I recieved the following reply from Stephan Nikolov > >================================== > >Cluster User wrote in message <3728f548.21087652@news.yale.edu>... >>from vassil's web page, dobrev has: >> >>>The determination of exact meaning of the term >>>ELEM (tenth) and its derivation ENIALEM (or ENIELEM) - >>>eleventh, was very important for the solution of another >>>mystery of the Nominalia. The Chatalar inscription >>>from Omurtag says that it was made in the year >>>SIGOR ELEM (written with Greek letters), i.e. in the year of >>>the bull and the month ELEM. The Turkologists mistranslated >>>SIGOR ELEM as the year of the bull, the first >>>month - the first month of the bull corresponded >>>to January of 821 AD; at the same time the inscription in >>>Greek read that it was made in September of 821 >>>(the 15th Byzantine indict began in September 821). The >>>Greek date clearly showed that ELEM was not the first >>>month and the solution of the mystery was quite simple >>>- SIGOR, that is - SHEGOR ELEM, was October 821 >>>and that is exactly the second month of the Byzantine >>>15th indict. >> >>I have some questions concerning this. >> >>1. "september" is reinterpreted as "october." is it the first or >>second month of the byzantine indict? (I gather the byzantine indict >>starts in september). >> > >Depends on the case. Still in the beginning of the ninth century, the >both chronologies were used -- the september one and the march one. >But the more popular one was the september one. > there is still soem confusion with dobrev making the inscription correspond to october a few lines later! > >>2. why should the bulghars use a chronology out of synch with the >>byzantines, at least the chronology in the insciption) and instead use >>the familiar roman chronology (beginning january) which I gather was in all fairness, dobrev might very well have in mind the saka calender which has a refernce to january thus: (from vassil's earlier post) ==================================================== From e.karloukovski@uea.ac.uk Sat Mar 20 06:40:14 1999 Newsgroups: sci.archaeology,sci.anthropology,sci.lang Subject: Re: Caucasoid Turks/Bulgars From: e.karloukovski@uea.ac.uk (Vassil Karloukovski) Date: 20 Mar 1999 11:40:14 GMT {snipped} The saka's cyclic calculations were also based on the year governed by Aquarius. [The starting year of the bulgar calendar was also probably was that of somor (mouse), as the turkic s@chkan and the chinese shu were, and they correspond to Aquarius too.] Dobrev further remarks that the year somor occurred when Jupiter was in Aquarius, but you touched a problem I was reluctant to go into. The saka era started in March 78 AD (Aries) but Al-Biruni's formula [1] makes it clear that one should go 2.2 years back to January (sun in Aquarius!) 76 AD (Jupiter in Aquarius!) (76 AD was also the year of the mouse) and from there - start calculating which constellation would govern in a given year. Today the winter solstice is in the beginning of Sagittarius, but it was in Aquarius between 2500 BC and 300 BC (the precession phenomenon you mentioned). {snipped} ==================================================== >>more common in the west (corresponding to the western or western part >>of the roman empire). >> > >The Chatalar inscription follows the system of dating accepted by the >imperial chancelary in Constantinople already in the 6th century. It >is obvious that Omurtag was following the Byzantine mode of >representation (see the title, the calcatio, the wish for a hundred >years of life, God mentioned, etc. -- even the lions mentioned in the >inscriprion might have been the lions taken at the devastation of the >suburbs of Constantinople under Krum). I do not see the deal >of the indiction dating. > >>3. the "turkic" interpretation on the other hand would be consistent >>with the greek inscription. >>concerning this. this last line is a typo. > > >Would you explain. I somewhat fail to understand you. > the byzantine date is the first month of the year. the bulghar inscription reads "elem," which can be interpreted within turkic to mean "first" as well. from what you say in response to (2), it would not be surprising that the bulghar calender - at least when they settled in the danube region - would have the same newyear's day as the byzantine one. >SN > > >