Talk:Sabir people

Sabirs, Sumerians, etc.

This statement was posted to the article. I removed it because argument does not belong in an article.

Reply to the previous statement: The connection between Sabirs/Hun/Magyars with ancient Sumerians and Mitanni (Subartu) is not based on etymologies, but on cultural features. In any case, language is relevant since the Sumerian records were deciphered taking Hungarian as the closest tongue of reference.

Please provide citations to legitimate scholarly publications. The Sumerian language article doesn't even mention Hungarian. I have heard a theory that Sumerian may possibly be somehow related to the Uralic languages but that is a far cry from the above. In any event there is no evidence that the Sabirs were linguistically related to the Hungarians except in a distant way. --Briangotts 02:03, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Briangotts, what exactly do you mean by "there is no evidence that the Sabirs were linguistically related to the Hungarians except in a distant way"? Are they or are they not related? Because if they were, they would obviously be related in a distant way, since they would be separated by hundreds of years in the case of Sabirs, and thousands of years in the case of Subarians. The Question 11:22, 10 Dec 2005 (UTC)

removed per WP:FRINGE

Russian historian Lev Gumilev believed that Slavic tribe Severians, inhabitants of Siverian Principality of Kievan Rus and later Russian and Ukrainian ethnic group named Sevryuki had inherited their name from Sabirs. Gumilev pointed that Sevryuki were different from other Russians and Ukrainians until 17th century and there are still some towns with similar names as Novhorod-Siverskyi.

Gumilev agreed with those who thought that Sabirs were some part of the Huns but insisted that they were probably not of Turkic but of Ugric origin. He quotes Russian historians Y.Fedorov and G.Fedorov (First Turkic Peoples at North Caucasus, Moscow, 1978, pages 149, 154-155, Russian) and writes that Savirs "are commonly counted with Hunnic tribes" but were largely assimilated with local tribes. "Their leader held the title of Elteber (Russian: "эльтебер") and was a vassal of Khazar kagan".

• I think that removal of this part is wrong. Gumilev's point of views shouldn't be marked as fringe theory. It is discussed by respected historians, it apeeared in different books, as though it is not now an officialy recognized theory. I included some quotes from his books to show it's not my original reserch. Rules of Wikipedia state that ideas which are of borderline or minimal notability may be documented in Wikipedia, but should not be given undue weight. This idea is notavle in Russian history as though it is not mainstream. Voropaev 13:23, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

References

Confusion continues

There are at least five different versions of the origin of half nomandic Sabirs. The most reliable pays attention to their original "Urheimat" in Pamir area and later advance from northern Caucasus to present day area between Don (Tona) and Dnjepr (Dinjeper) where they were mixed with Itil Bolghars c. 550-650 AD. They received also cultural influence of Valgia (Volga) Finno Ugric peoples especially from Burttas and Maris. Their name was changed to Suvars and they settled to area of Simbir / Sembrir (Uljanov) where they received even more influence of Finno Ugrian "Imenkomas" (the original inhabitants of the area) of the Samaniland which might be one of Magyar tribes or descendants of Jäämis (Jems) or Komi-morts from Great Perma. Their leaders become known as Ilteber or in Tatar Jiltavar (Russificaned to Elteber). It might be of interest to notice that Ilteber Almis, the son of Selkei, appear in both Bolghar and Magyar sources in addition to Abassi Caliph Muktedir Billah´s ancient library in Baghdad and Kipchak Tatar folk tales under his Mussulmanni (Bisserman / Vissermanni) name Emir Cafer Bin Abdullah as reported by Ibn Fadlah. He was the richest man in Roshland (Orus). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.112.187.107 (talk) 02:21, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Fabrication of sources for WP:FRINGE purposes

As with Subartu, there is serious misrepresentation of sources going on here, and it's obviously deliberate. In particular, note Hirabutor's clam that they are adding "D. Christian original words" [1] when Christian does not say what is attributed to him - he doesn't mention Subartu at all. This has been pointed out by other editors as well. Ergative rlt (talk) 20:26, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

To be specific - here is what Christian says in the source:

The name 'Sabir', has been linked with some scholars with the name, 'Siberia' (where it may have been an alternative name for the Ugrian-speaking MansiVogul) or even with the far-eastern Hsien-Pi.

And what Hirabutor claims are Christian's "original words":

The name Sabir, closely related to the Magyars, may dates back to the kingdom of Subartu, which some scholars have linked with the name Sib-Ir ("sleeping land") where it may have been an alternative name for the Ugrian-speaking Mansi/Vogul and which David Christian has linked with the far Eastern Hsien-pi.

The Gelb quote about Dhorme is also misrepresented: both authors are talking about contemporaries and neighbors of the Sumerians, Akkadians and so forth, and how the name might appear in altered form in Herodotus, Apollonius, and other later writers. It was nothing whatsoever to do with the Turkic Sabir, who postdate these authors by many centuries. Ergative rlt (talk) 05:03, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

I have corrected the point regarding D. Christian, sorry again. This was the original text 1. Concerning Dhorme, he clearly comments on the connection between the Sabiroi of the classical sources and the Subars of the bronze age. I can not imagine how anyone can interpret sth. different. - Hirabutor (talk) 10:34, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

This is another example of direct quotes getting fudged up and synthesized to try to make your point that differs somewhat from what the scholars' actual point was. However we must take academic integrity so very seriously here that I have seen editors banned for doing this repeatedly and chronically. So I would advise you to become less sloppy in your research, and read up on our cornerstone policies. 71.246.148.246 (talk) 11:35, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

The problem is that you have to provide a source which should demonstrate that gr. Sabiroi is not turk. Sabir. This is not only near to impossible but also testifies a hypocritical intending. - Hirabutor (talk) 13:34, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Not that the recent IPs will care, but for anyone else:

• The current bit of material relating the Sabir to Subartu was inserted by indef blocked editor Kaz, engaging in blatant falsification of an already existing source (Christian). It was reinstated by Tirgil34 sockpuppet Hirabutor. The IPs, by adding this yet again, are continuing in this grand tradition of source fabrication.
• Dhorme is at best an instance of an idea given undue weight - his now more than century-old idea is given a passing mention by Gelb, who crucially does not support it. Dhorme is also cited as though his paper is being cited directly, when Hirabutor and others clearly know it only through Gelb. The Sabir/Subartu notion is now pure fringe, found in Turkish and Hungarian nationalist pseudohistory, not in professional works on history or linguistics.
• To add the Subartu claim, the edits remove the appropriately sourced claim that Sabir may be related to Siberia, part of the falsification noted above.
• The bit containing "sleeping land" is from Lewy's article in The Cambridge Ancient History, which says nothing about the Sabir (again, falsification of sources) and which is being tied to this article under the assumption that Sabir and Subartu are connected (original research).
• The spurious claims of my being a sockpuppet are a clear tell that at least one IP is another instance of Tirgil34, who also made these claims. If anyone thinks I'm a sock, please take it up at WP:SPI. Ergative rlt (talk) 15:51, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Edit warring

Ergative rlt, your reasoning sounds totally made up to me and your behavior is very tipical for [Wikipedia:DGAF|WP:DGAF] and [Wikipedia:DENY|WP:DENY] if you ask me. --91.56.242.72 (talk) 05:04, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Where did Sabirs come from? POV issue

In truth, no one knows. But there are two opinions. One is that they came from the north east. The other is that they came from the south (modern day Azerbaijan). Sadly this article does not present a balanced discussion of the different theories and instead takes a Siberian origin bias. Bulgarios (talk) 16:12, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Maybe there are three opinions, that they came more from the south from the so-called former Mesopotamia area, however, this is not rendered scholarly as the first two. About the other issue, then I will unlink it, since sooner or later a disambiguation alert would come, and in order to avoid later false linking this is the best solution I think.(KIENGIR (talk) 23:32, 6 December 2018 (UTC))

Chuvash Etimology

According to the version of the Chuvash Bashkirs together with the Chuvash (Ogurs - Bulgars) came to the Volga together. The word "five" in the Volga Bulgarian language is found on the epitaph of the Volga Bulgarians in the text as: "tarikha şeti şur byul şol" — "the length of the seven hundred and fifth year" — where the بول "bul" is "five". Nowadays, in the modern Chuvash language, which is a continuation of the Volga Bulgarian language, the word five is still written as "pil", unlike the typically Turkic "bish", this is due to Chuvash Lambdaism.

In the Chuvash language , the Turkic Š turns into L: qyš < hĕl - winter.

One of the rules states that the sound T, standing at the end of a borrowed word, falls out in Chuvash, for example: friend — dust — tus, cross — krest — hĕres, etc.

Bash kort ~ Bül okar < Five ogurs.

bas. Baškir < chv.Bulogar < Bulgar

Ogur ~ Ökör < Ox, Bull

Oguz ~ Öküz < Ox, Bull

Hungarian Ökör in Chuvash Vogor [wǝgǝr] - rotacism.

Ökör < Öküz = Ox, Bull

Ogur < Oguz = Ox, Bull

See the picture "arrival of the Hungarians" where harnessed oxen drag a yurt on wheels. One yurt with oxen is one tribe: Árpád's wife on Feszty's panorama (Arrival of the Hungarians), oil on canvas.

Ökör < Öküz = Savir (Arabic names Taurus)

In the 19th century, the Kazakhs used the names of the zodiac constellations in Arabic as the names of the months:

SAVVA THE BIG (1803-04) was captured by the Kazakhs Kishi Zhuz of the Tileu tribe.

The second - April, they have "Saur", i.e. "bull"; in this month there is also a holiday called Saban Tue.

Modern names of the months in Uighur:

April - Savir - Taurus

Karakalpak official and traditional names of the months:

April' - Sa'wir - Taurus

They correspond to the Arabic names of the constellations:

Aprel' - Sa'wir - - Taurus

In Ottoman the constellations were called:

Bull - Sevr - Taurus

From Arabic: Suvar - Savir - Taurus, Bull.

- Onogurs -

On ogur < All this goes back to the Chuvash "Von vogor" dial. "Vun văkăr" and the Hungarian "On ökör" - Ten oxen.

Hungarians < Hun ogar ians

văkăr - ökör - Ogur - Ugrian - Ugrians

on ökör - vun văkăr - vungar - Hungarian

Closest to the Chuvash "Vun văkăr" is the Belarusian "Vugorats" and the Slovenian "Vogr".

old rus. оугринъ, ukr. угорець, belor. вугорац, old slav. ѫгринъ, ѫгре, serb. у̀гар, у̀гра, у̀грин, bolg. унгарци, sloven. vogr, vogrin, chez. uher, slovakia. uhor, polend. węgier, węgrzyn, lit. veñgras.

In European languages it has the form lat. Ungari, Ungri, grec. Οὑγγρικός, Οὖγγροι, france. hongroi(s), deut. Ungar(n), engl. Hungarian(s), shved. ungrare.

Among the Greeks, this form was mentioned in the forms: "ono gundur" and "hunu gundur". From Chinese "gundur" this 公牛 - gōng niú - Ox, Bull. china - Hun gōng niú - ten bulls.

Onogur > Hun ogar > Hungar ~ Hun ökör ~ cv. Wun wăkăr ~ ten ox (bulls).The self-name of the Hungarians "magyars", which is translated from the Chuvash "măkăr" - "horn" perhaps in ancient Hungarian it sounded like "mökör".

The very first mention of the Bulgarians was at the beginning of the 3rd century and appear in Chinese chronicles in the form: "the five parts of xiongnu" (hunnu, huns), when General Cao Cao (died 216) of the Wei Empire ruled. The etymology of the ethnonym Bulgar was given more than a hundred years ago by the Hungarian linguist Munkachi Bernat: Bulgar — "five Ugrians".

Bulgars - Bul ökör - five oghur tribes: Bül ökör (gr. Βούλγαροι)

Onogur - On ökör - Ten oxen (tribes)

Saragur - Šar ökör - White oxen (tribes)

Kutrigur - Kotrag ökör - Oxen of Kotrag (tribes)

Utigur - Utti ökör - Oxen of Utty (tribes)

Further V.N. Tatishchev writes:

"Their own name (Bulgars), according to Karpein, is seen as Bilirs, and the Tatars call them Bulir. These Bulgarians among the Russians were divided in two: upper and lower." The Tatars themselves called the Bulgars - Bilirs. And only the Chuvashs have a division into Riding (Virial) and Lower (Anatri).

Chuvash dialects:

Riding dialect / cv.Turi jal ("sound prevails О") — upstream of the Sura;

Lover dialect / cv. Anatri jal ("sound prevails U") is downstream of the Sura.

Von < Vun - Ten

"The remaining Bulgarian peoples of the Chuvash"; “The Volga Bulgarians speak the same language as the Hungarians and the Danube Bulgarians from the same descendants” - Tatishchev V.N. Russian History. — M.; L., 1962.

Down the Volga River, the Chuvash, the ancient Bulgarians, filled the entire county of Kazan and Simbirsk— Tatishchev V. N. History of Russia. — M.; L., 1962. - T. I. - S. 252.

Chuvash, Bulgarian people, near Kazan - Tatishchev V.N. History of Russia. — M.; L., 1962. - T. I. - S. 426.

Down the Kama lived Bilyars, or Bulgarians, and Cholmats (Cholman - the name of the Kama River in Chuvash) ... now the remnants of their Chuvash, who are enough down the Volga - Tatishchev V. N. History of Russia. — M.; L., 1962. - T. I. - S. 428.

The remaining Bulgarian peoples of the Chuvash - Tatishchev V.N. History of Russia. — M.; L., 1964. - T. IV. - S. 411.

200 years later, in 1863, the Tatar scholar Hussein Feyzhanov published an article "Three gravestone Bulgarian inscriptions", in which he presented to the scientific community the results of deciphering the Bulgarian epitaphs in Chuvash words.

Of the 400 found epitaphs of the Volga Bolgars, 90% of them are written in the Chuvash language in Arabic script; 5 pieces are Armenian epitaphs.

Mishars and Magyars.

Information about the ancestral home of the Magyars. In later descriptions than the reports of Richard and Julian, they are recorded in the chronicles of Magister Akosh and Shimon Kezai, interesting data were reflected there than from the Hungarian anonymous, so they did not borrow information from him. According to these chroniclers, the giant Menroth entered the land of Evliath and married Enet. She gave birth to Hunor and Magor (Ogurs and Magyars). Their descendants inhabited the region of Persia, Hungarians were similar in body and color to the Huns, and Hungarians and Huns differed in language like Saxons and Thuringians. Hunor and Magor (Ogurs and Magyars) hunted and, chasing a deer, came to the swamps of Meotida, where they stayed for several years. In the sixth year they came across the children of Belar and took them away with them. Among the prisoners were two daughters of the Alan Prince Dula (a kind of Bulgarians). From the marriage of these women with Hunor and Magor (Ogurs and Magyres / ökör and mökör), according to the version of Magister Akosh and Shimon Kezai, Hungarians (Vunogurs) originated. The Byzantine emperor and historian Konstantin Porphyrogenitus pointed out that the Hungarians had several ancestral homelands, and called them Turks (Turks). The first ancestral homeland was localized by him in a mysterious country where they lived next to the Khazars. The relatives of the Hungarians were called Savarts-asfals (savirs in the Caspian steppes of Dagestan). Obviously, the Byzantine historian considered the Hungarians as part of the nomadic world. He said that the Hungarians lived for some time next to the Khazars. Etelkez (Idel, Atal) was the land to which they migrated together with the Kavars after the civil war in the Khazar khaganate. They only knew that somewhere in the east there is a country Paskatir (Bashkir) - the homeland of the eastern Hungarians. According to Shimon Kezai and Magister Akosh, the ancestral homeland of the Hungarians, Scythia was divided into Bashkiria, Dentia (Decia) and Magoria (the land of the Magyar Hungarians). The Hungarian Franciscan Yoganka characterized the Baskards as Muslims. Richard reported that pagan Hungarians lived near the Bulgar. It was stated that Richard found the eastern Hungarians in two days' march from the country of the Volga Bulgars. The country of these Hungarians was found by Hungarian Dominicans thanks to a woman from eastern Hungarians who married Bulgarin and lived in her husband's homeland. Having met the preachers, she showed them the way. Anninsky mistakenly reported that this country was located on Ak-Ideli. The river mentioned by Richard can be identified with the "White River" in Ufa.

Julian reported that the Mongols had conquered "Great Hungary". At the same time, part of the pagan Hungarians migrated to the right bank of the Volga. It was pointed out that four Dominican monks were ahead of Julian. Eastern Hungarians fled from the Mongols and were ready to convert to Catholicism, just to get to Hungary. The Prince of Suzdal forbade the Dominicans to preach Catholicism among these pagan Hungarians. Catholic monks were expelled by him. It is said that then they approached the city of Recess and got into the country of the Morducans (Mordvins), where one of the princes of that land submitted to the Tatars. On this leg of the journey, Julian joined them. Two monks wanted to reach the land of the Tatars through the country of the Morducans (Mordvins), but their further fate is unknown. Two other monks and Julian sent an interpreter ahead of them, but he was killed by the Morducans (Mordvins). The prince of the Mordukans, who submitted to the Mongols, was Kanazor Mokshan, and it was probably the Mokshans who killed the interpreter (chilheçĕ - translator).

Richard reported that Ungaria Maior was located near Magna Bulgaria (Volga Bulgaria). He also pointed out that the land of the pagan Hungarians began from the Itil River (Volga). The "Macharat" from the "Secret Legend of the Mongols" were probably the eastern Hungarians of the Volga-Ural region. A. Rona-Tash believes that the Hungarians came to the Volga-Kama region together with the Ogurs-Bulgars (Chuvash). The researcher considers the Don-Kuban interfluve to be the region from which Hungarians migrated to Etelkez (Idel-Volga). Similar hypotheses were proposed by L. Bendefi and I. Bob. So, L. Bendefi considered it possible to assume that the land of the Hungarians before moving to Etelkez was the steppes of the North Caucasus, and associated with them Majar on Kum. As for I. Bob's hypothesis, the researcher associated the presence of Hungarians to the north of the Caucasus with the Onogurs (vun văgăr - on ogor), who, in his opinion, were part of the Hungarian-Bulgarian confederation of tribes. The Bulgarian part of the confederation was called the Ugrians (Ogur - văkăr), and the Hungarian part — the Magyars (mishar - măgăr). . . . Kuzeyev considered part of the Volga-Ural region, which stretched from the Volga to the Bugulma Upland inclusive, to be the territory of settlement of Hungarians. E. Kazakov localizes the meeting place of Hungarian Dominicans with pagan Hungarians on the Zai River near Nizhnekamsk. He believes that Julian's Hungarians were the population of the Chiyalik culture. He localized the country of Julian's Hungarians in the country of Paskatir in the south of Tatarstan and in the north of Bashkortostan. Richard and Julian reported that they understood the pagan Hungarians without an interpreter.

D. Nemet, G. Kun, D. Mesharos identified the Magyars with the ancestors of the Mishars. I. Erdely and L. Ligetti identified Hungarians with the ethnonyms Mishari and Mozhary. P. Golden, referring to I. Bob, believes that the Hungarians (Magyars) began to be called "Ugrians" after they merged with the Onogurs in the Eastern European steppes (Vungars - vun văkăr - won ogur - on ogor).

There is a hypothesis that Mishare (Meschera) is the kypchakized Magyars on the Volga (now they are called ancient Hungarians) lived for a long time in the Middle Volga region. These were the ancient Hungarian tribes who did not move to the west at the beginning of the IX century, but remained in the Volga-Ural region. Some of them, under the pressure of the Pechenegs, migrated to the area of the Kama and Zaya basins. At some time their habitation was in the area of modern Ufa and they became neighbors of the Bashkirs and gradually Turkized during the Golden Horde. Assimilated with the local population and mixed with the Turkic tribes, especially with the Kipchak, Meshchersky Yurt, Mohshi Ulus, Uvek, etc. were formed, to be more precise, they are now Kipchakized and now they are often called "Ufa Tatars". In the documents of the XIV—XV centuries, Mishars are called "meshcheryaks", and in the later XVI—XVII centuries — under the general name "Tatars".

" Those who have become rich have become more rich, those who have become Russian have become Russian, and those who have become rich have no signs of anything of their own. They live in villages in well-arranged houses on the Russian model; they dress exactly like Tatars…They also zealously practice the Mohammedan religion, strictly follow all the laws of Mahomet."— Mordvins, Mescheryaks and Teptyari, N.A. Alexandrova., Moscow, 1900.

The Meschera tribe converted to Islam, began to profess and teach the scriptures in the Tatar (Kipchak) language, from this they became Tatars in the Kasimov Khanate and turned into modern Mishars.

The well-known researcher of history Mishar Galimzhan Orlov, generalizing these hypotheses, wrote:

...the Mishari Tatars are a complex ethnocomplex formed mainly before the end of the XVI century within Meschera, Mordovia, Nizhny Novgorod Volga region. The ancient Kipchak layer is distinguished in it, the Bulgarian, Majaro-Burtas, Nogai components participate. The ancestors of the kicking group of Tatars-Mishars (Kadomsko-Sergachskaya) were the Majars (Mozhars, Mochars), who lived next to the Bulgars, scattered in many areas of the Volga region, the Pre-Caucasus. During the period of Mongol-Tatar domination, they find themselves in the upper reaches of the Sura (Zolotarevsky burial ground in the Penza region, the cities of Uvek, Narovchat). Some of them end up in Meshchera (Kadom). The ancestors of the choking group (Temnikovskaya) were Western Kipchaks-Cumans from the lower reaches of the Volga. Adolsin Pattarsen (talk) 01:49, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

good! Dog Nogai (talk) 00:55, 31 October 2023 (UTC)