Page numbers, where shown, indicate pages in the book publication. The offered unedited translation of the printed edition contains typos and misspellings, for which I apologize and intend to correct them with time.
If you need a little help with linguistic glossary, click here.
quasi-Cyrillic "ъ" ( ' - stop-guttural consonant ) with " ' ", like in "sъkъd" => "S'k'd"
quasi-Cyrillic "н1" ( n + guttural consonant "g") with "ng", like in "дин1гезе" => "Dinggeze"
In the Scytho-Sarmatian history are buried powerful ethnic roots of the Türks of the 1st millennium BC, the history that in the official historical science is recognized as a part of the Indo-European history, and, in particular, as a history of Indo-Iranians. For over last hundreds years the scientists offer every possible justifications in favor of the Persian-linguality of the Scythians and Sarmatians. In those regions where the Scythians-Sarmatians were located more compactly, the Türks were proclaimed to be later newcomers. Especially it relates to the Eastern Europe, where ostensibly the first Türks came only in the 4th century AD under the name of the Huns, after they were replaced by the newcomer Avars, and the Avars were replaced by the Türks. Until their arrival in the Eastern Europe ostensibly lived the Persian-linguality, and in forested zone Finno-Ugrian tribes. This viewpoint was included in the school and university programs, it is reflected in the textbooks and instruction books, and therefore no young scientist would dare to touch the Scytho-Türkic problem. Our research, with the results stated in this chapter, to some extent would be an exception of that tradition.
Before proceeding to a question of the ethnic affiliation of the Scythians and Sarmatians, should be invoked the most general information about them.
Information about the Scythians can be collected from various sources. The most full and a reliable source is the fourth book of "History" by Herodotus, written by him in Greek language in the middle of the 5th century BC. As additions, may be used also other Greek sources, especially the works of Hippocrates (5th-4th centuries BC), Xenophon (5th-4th centuries BC), Polibius (2nd century BC), Strabo (1st century BC), Ptolemy (2nd century AD), etc. Here in this book the ethnonym Scyth (s'k'd') is used in two meanings: in a narrow and a wide. In the narrow sense the "Scyth" is their own endoethnonym for one of the tribes which succeeded in dominating, in a wide sense it included all tribes of their confederation. P.F.Sum wrote exactly that: the Scythians succeeded in taking over the others, and then their ethnonym gradually also became a general ethnonym for the subordinated tribes. For example, these two senses, narrow and wide, has the ethnonym Russian: the peoples of Russia as a whole are called abroad "Russian"; but when the subject is about particular peoples or languages of the peoples in Russia, then the ethnonym Russian is used in a narrow sense: in that sense the Ukrainians, Tatars and other non-Russians are not included any more. And so the ethnonym Scythian was applied by the Greek historians both in a narrow, and in a wide senses.
Later the ethnonym Scyth began to be used more often only in a wide sense, and it meant a presence in their association of many independent peoples with their own ethnonyms. The Royal Scythians, Scythians-plowmen, Scythians-farmers, Scythians-nomads were different.
Per the first legend cited by Herodotus about the origin of the Scythians, it was believed that their primogenitor was Targitai, he had three sons: Lipoksai, Arpoksai and the youngest Koloksai. All the tribes descending from these brothers are called Skolots, i.e. Royal. The Hellenes called them Scyths [Herodotus, 1972, B.4 paragraph 6]. Herodotus informs further that "Persians called all Scythians Sacae... Sacae, or Scyths, carried on their heads tall stiff caps rising to a point" [Ibid. B.7 paragraph 64].
By the other Greek sources, in the 3rd century BC and until the 4th century AD the place of the Scythians take the Sarmatians, who descend, apparently, from the Sauromatians, who were the neighbors of the Scythians still in the 8th century BC. According to Herodotus, then the "Sauromatians spoke in Scythian, but have never talked it correctly" [ Ibid. B.4, paragraph 117].
In the Persian (since 1934 - Iranian) sources the Scythians were really called Sakаs. The main Persian source is the documentary inscriptions of the Persian king Darius I (6th-5th centuries BC), cut on the rocks in the Nakshi-Rustem and Behistun gorges in the ancient Persian language. From this inscription, taken together with other Persian sources, the following Sakas can be distinguished: Sakas tigrahauda (with pointed hats), Sakas haumavarga (apparently, Amürgian Scythians of Herodotus) (Amyrgian Scythians, Herodotus 7.64 - Translator's Note), Sakas tiay-para-daraya (overseas), Sakas tiay-para-sugda (located beyond Sogdiana).
The Persian source devoted to the malik Xerx (5th century BC), gives information about the Sakas haumavarga, Sakas tigrahauda and about the skudra (also spelled Ichkudra, Chkudra). The last corresponded to the Sakas overseas, located to the north of Black Sea (i.e. Chdar-Bulgars - Translator's Note).
The Assyrian sources written still in the 7th century BC talk about Cymmers (Gimmers) and about Ashguzes. Heeding the cuneiform texts, we shall see that these Ashguzes/Ishguzes correspond to the Scythians of the Greek sources [ Durmush, 1993, 26].
In the Chinese sources is information about the Central Asian Scythians, called by the Chinese with an ethnonym Says, read by the scientists as Stsu/Su/Sa"i/Sse/Se. Considering that in the ancient Chinese manuscripts is also the ethnonym Sak, it is easy to guess that the Says is the Chinese pronunciation of the word Sak. The Western Turkistan Sakas are called by the Chinese as Say Wang, i.e. Royal Sakas [Ibid. 27-28].
From the written sources and archeological excavations scientists established extensive territories of Eurasia where lived the Scythians (Sakas, Ishguzes, Says): from the Danube to the western borders of China, including the Eastern Turkestan (so called Sintszyan). This territory is usually divided into three regions.
The first region is from the northwest of China to the Caspian Sea. There lived Sakas tigrahauda and Sakas haumavarga. Some Greek geographers call the Sakas of this region "Massagets". In the sources are especially noted the Sakas who lived beyond the the Sogdiana or in Fergana .
The second region is from the Caspian Sea to the coast of Danube where lived the Scythians called in the Persian sources Overseas Sakas. Avccording to Herodotus, there lived various tribes of the Scythians, including the Scythians-plowmen, Scythians-farmers, Royal Scythians, Taures , and Melanhlens who were speaking in a dialect of the language of the Scythians.
The third region is the Near East, where, according to the Greek sources, the Scythians penetrated in a pursuit of the Cimmerians. In spite of the fact that the Scythians reached Egypt, Syria and Palestine, per the archeological data, they mainly lived in the Eastern Anatolia [Durmush, 1993, 37].
38. Reliability of the ancient sources about Scythians.
Of all the sources about Scythians-Sarmatians the most ancient are Greek, Persian, Assyrian and Chinese. But the scientists are not unanimous in their reliability. The ancient Greek sources are subjected to a severe criticism, especially the works of Herodotus, which underlay almost all research about the Scythians.
He was sharply criticized beginning from the ancient authors, who accused him in injustice and bad faith. Later the "dainty critics portrayed him as in diligent, but not discrimatory compiler, as simply an inequitable author who was intentionally misleading the reader by stories about his imaginary travels" [Boruhovich V.G., 1972, 496]. At the end of the 19th century in the European science came a break in respect to Herodotus and reliability of his compositions. There was a restoration of his reputation as a truthful and diligent author and researcher [Ibid. 497]. But it was not a full reabilitation of the Herodotus and ancient Greek historians' reputation . Even now are conductedon disputes about the reliability of the ancient sources, including the Scythians among the disputed subjects.
There is an opinion that ancient Greek sources did not exist at all, ostensibly they were forged by the Middle Age authors to supply, for a big money, the historians with necessary information. Those who deal with the problems of the Scythians cant pay ignore the arguments of the supporters of this viewpoint. What are they?
A known historian, a honorary academician N.Morozov, studying the general history of the mankind, noticed that the ancient history, reconstructed on the basis of the analysis of the ancient Greek sources, reminds the medieval history. Starting from that finding he suggested that the sources called the ancient Greek writings, probably, are composed in the Middle Ages. Learning of that opinion, a doctor of physical and mathematical sciences, the winner of the Lenin premium professor M.Postnikov created a special commission where, in addition to himself, he included two other doctors of sciences, with a view of finding out the concordance of the historical facts in the antiquity and in the Middle Ages and the reliability of the ancient Greek sources. Having analysed the available facts with a matematiko-statistical method, the commission came to a conclusion that the ancient sources were forged for sale to the historians only in the Middle Ages.
The results of the analysis were published in 1982 by M.Postnikov in the jornal "Technology and science" (No 7) under the name "Greatest falsification in the history". In the opinion of the author, firstly, none of the ancient sources has reached us in the original form, and there are only their variations copied in the 10th-13th centuries. Now it is impossible to establish precisely, whether they were copied from the ancient sources or were forged later. Secondly, the ancient written sources, if they were not periodically copied, could not reach us, and in the 6th-9th centuries there were no competent people (monks), capable of copying them. Hence, during that period, even if the ancient sources existed, logically, they should have disappeared. Thirdly, the ancient Greek written sources are written in the stilistically well polished literary language, and with the absence of the paper, without a constant usage, the literary language could not be improved to a level of the language of the ancient Greek sources. Fourthly, the M.Postnikov's commission had multiple ostensibly ancient Greek works forged in the Middle Ages. From all these facts M.Postnikov comes to a conclusion that the ancient Greek sources about the Scythians, probably, also were composed in the Middle Ages by the history falsifiers for the mercantile ends.
Those historians who are studying the ancient period based on the Greek sources try to not admit this criticism, for to prove the opposite is very difficult.
In our opinion, the following reasons do not allow accepting M.Postnikov's idea.
First, some common moments in the ancient and medieval history cannot be a basis for the statement that the ancient Greek sources are ostensibly forged in the Middle Ages. Some historical events can be edrepeat with minor changes during the various periods of the history. If there were no such common moments and repetitions, we would not study the history to understand the modern conditions of the human society and to project the prospects of its development.
Secondly, M.Postnikov's argument, that in the 6th-the 9th centuries were no monks capable of copying the manuscripts, is not too convincing. As is known, each people which has their writing always also had the writing experts.
Thirdly, even if to presume that the ancient Greek sources were made only in the Middle Ages, we should take into account that the people of the Middle Ages knew about the ancient period more than our contemporaries. The events of the ancient period could be preserved to some extent in their memory, in the sources which used the medieval lovers of the history.
For the Türkologists also exists another aspect of the question. Based on the tendentious study of the ancient Greek sources was formulated the viewpoint, according to which in Europe in the antiquity were no Türks at all, the first Türks started penetrating there ostensibly only in the 3rd-4th centuries AD. Even to check the reliability of this account, the Türkologists should study the ancient Greek sources.
Thus, we do not have sufficient reasons to abandon the evidence of the ancient sources.
About the reliability of the ancient sources exists still another viewpoint, according to which these sources are written not in a Middle Ages, but in the antiquity, but written by the inequitable people, by those bent on composing various historical fables. Against such a viewpoint the expert on the works of Herodotus, V.G.Boruhovich, resolutely opposes. In his opinion, the historical information of Herodotus is confirmed by the modern archeological and linguistical research [Boruhovich V.G., 1972, 480-486]. However he himself, falling into the believing of some conclusions of the Indo-Iranists' research, starts reproaching Herodotus for him "not knowing the Persian language which is witnessed by his fantastic explanations of the Persian proper names" [Boruhovich V.G., 1972, 482]. The author had so much believed the statements of Indo-Iranists about the Persian-speaking of the Scythians that he had excluded even a possibility of the etymological explanation of the Scythian words on the basis of other languages, for example, of the Türkic.
In our opinion, a study of the ancient sources should be done with objectivity, then they can provide very valuable information about the ancient history of many peoples. We believe that they also can underlay the study of the ancient history of the Türks and the Scythian problem.
The best information about Scythians and Sarmatians was given by Herodotus. He was born in approximately 490-480 BC in the city of Halikarnass, which ruins are in the Türkish city of Bodrum in Asia Minor. Herodotus actively participates in the political fight against the tyranny of the Halikarnass, and therefore had to leave his native place. He visited some regions of Asia Minor, Babylonia, Egypt, Balkan countries, in the Greek colonies of the N. Pontic, etc., observing everywhere the life of the population and the rulers, noting down down the ethnographical features, myths and some language morsels of the peoples.
Consequently, Herodotus created a work about the war between the Greeks and Persians, and about participation in it of other peoples occupying periphery of Greece and Persia and even of the countries next to them. Later this work of Herodotus was released under the name "History", all nine sections of which are titled with the names of nine gods, the keepers of poetry, art and science in the Greek mythology. The fourth section of the book, devoted to the description of the struggle of the Scythians against the Persian conquerors, was named Melpomene, the name of the goddess of tragedy. It should be recognized that this name was not given accidentally, but with a view of the struggle of the Scythians against the Persian and Greek colonizers, who brought a tragedy to the Scythia.
According to Herodotus (i.e. the version he believes is most realistic - Translator's Note), the Scythians lived in Asia for a very long time. When the Massagets pushed them out by a military force, they moved to the Cimmerian lands. With approach of the numerous Scythians, the Cimmerians, not willing to fight them, abandoned their native land, the N.Pontic [Herodotus, 4, 11]. And just because the Cimmerians lived there earlier, in the Scythian lands are Cimmerian fortifications and Cimmerian crossings; there is also a province by the name Cimmeria, and the so-called Cimmerian Bospor. It is also known that the Scythians in a pursuit of the Cimmerians went astray and intruded the land of the Medes [Herodotus, 4, 12].
For the destruction of the Medes' state, the Persian King Darius in 512 BC declared a war against Scythia. Herodotus describes in detail the episodes of this war, the successful military actions of the Scythians and the failures of the Persian army, which before that successfully fought in other regions.
Herodotus gives three versions about the origin of the Scythians.
Scythians were the masters of Asia. One thousand years ago before the attack of Darius, i.e. approximately in the 1500 BC, the first inhabitant of the ostensibly uninhabited country was Targitai. His parents were god Zeus (Jove in G. Rawlinson translation - Translator's Note) and the daughter of the river Borysthenes (present Dnieper, Rus. rendition Borisfen). Targitaia had three sons: Lipoksai, Arpoksai and Koloksai. During the reign of their father Targitai in the Scythian land have fallen from the sky the gold subjects: a plough, a yoke, a poleaxe and a bowl. The first approached to these things the senior brother Lipoksai, he wanted to lift them, but the gold inflamed. Then the middle brother Arpoksai came to them, but the gold inflamed again. But when the younger brother Koloksai approached, the flame went down, and he took the gold to his house. Therefore the elders agreed to give the throne to the youngest [Herodotus, 4, 5]. From Lipoksai came the Scythian tribe called Auhats, from Arpoksaia came tribes of Katiars and Traspes (aka Traspians - Translator's Note), and from Koloksai came the tribe of Paralates. All tribes together are called Scoloti, i.e. Royal. The Hellenes call them Scythians (Rus. Skify) [Herodotus, 4, 6].
Scythians tell about the northern countries neiboring them like this: it is impossible to see anything in these countries, and it is impossible to penetrate there because of the flying feathers, i.e. apparently, snow flakes [Herodotus, 4, 7].
Under a second version, the Scythians lived in the country with a constant bad weather and cold.
Hercules, a son of god Zeus and Alkmena, driving the Geryon's bulls, a tri-headed giant, arrived to an uninhabited then country of cold and bad weather (now occupied by Scythians ). He drew a pork skin about him (lion skin in G. Rawlinson translation - Translator's Note), fell asleep, and at that time his horses disappeared [Herodotus, 4, 8]. Upon awakening, the Hercules traced all the country and finally arrived in the land by the name Gilea ("the Woodland" in G. Rawlinson translation - Translator's Note), i.e. in the Scythian area by the estuary of modern Dnestr (Akkerman Liman - Translator's Note). Here in a cave he found a certain creature, a half-maiden, half-snake. Seeing her, Hercules asked if she saw his lost horses. In reply the snake woman said, that she has the horses, but she would not return them until Hercules took her for his mistress. After satisfaction of her request the snake woman returned the horses. She gave birth to three sons and asked Hercules what she should do with them. Hercules replied: "When you see that the sons have grown up, better di like this: see, who of them can string my bow and fasten this belt as I am telling you, and leave him to live here. Those who could not do it, send to the foreign lands" [Herodotus, 4, 9]. Then Hercules left.
When the children have grown, their mother gave them the names Agathyr (Gr. Agathyros, Rus. Agafirs), Gelon (Yilan) and Scyth. Then, remembering the advice of Hercules, she did as he ordered. Only the youngest son, Scyth, succeded in accopmplishing the task, and he remained in the country. From this Scyth, the son of Hercules, came all the Scythian kings [Herodotus, 4, 10]. Agathyr became the primogenitor of the Agathyrs (Rus. Agafirsy), and Gelon of the Gelons.
There is still a third legend, we relayed its contents in the beginning of this paragraph. Herodotus notes that he most of all trusts that version.
Applying the ethnonym Scythian in its narrow sense, Herodotus notes that behind the river Tanais (Donets) (?, accepted reading for Tanais is Don - Translator's Note) are not the Scythian territories, but the first land possessions there belong to Sauromats. Next to Sauromats are the Budins, whose grounds are covered with dense forests [Herodotus, 4, 21]. Applying the word Scyths in a general nominal sense, Herodotus further in the east and in the north lists the following Scythian tribes: Tissagets (Rus. sometimes Fissagety), Iirks, Argippeis. The Scythians proper, when they come to Argippeis, negotiate with them with a help of seven interpreters in seven languages. Behind the Argippeis are Issedons, to the north of the Issedons are Arimaspes (one-eyed, or rather people with half closed eyes) and the gryphons guarding gold [Herodotus, 4, 21-27], far by the sea live Hyperboreans (supercold).
On the banks od the Ister (Danube) closer to the Pontus (Black Sea) live Traks (Thracians, Rus. Frakiytsy), a part of them have ethnonyms Skirmiad, Nipsei and Get. The Gets are the bravest and honest among the Traks [Herodotus, 4, 93]. Taures live in the highlands, along the Danube are located Akathirs, Neures, Androphags (Devouring Men), Melanhlens (Black Coats).
Herodotus emphasizes that Androphags and Melanhlens are not Scythians. But they with all other peoples helped Scythians in defeating the attacks of Darius [Herodotus, 4, 102].
Next to the Sauromats are Amazons, whom the Scythians call eorpata (killing their husbands).
The languages and other ethnic features for the above Scythian (in a broad sense of this word) tribes will be covered below.
The general name Skythy in the 3rd century BC is gradually replaced with the ethnonym Sarmat, which historically ascends to the name Sauromat. This word in its turn in the 1st century BC yields to the ethnonym Alan or As which in the Herodotus works are not mentioned yet.
40. Brief historiography of the Scythian studies in the general history.
The Russian historians very early started to be interested in the Scythians and Sarmatians from the Greek sources. In the 2nd half of the 17th century initially from the German, and then directly from the Greek to Russian is translated the Herodotus work "History", which draws the attention of the Russian historian Andrey Lyzlov, who perfectly knew the Russian and western historical works. He was also familiar with the Türkic world, for he had translated into the Russian the book of S.Starovolsky "Court of Turkish Caesar", published in the 1649 in Krakow in the Polish language. In the 1692 Andrey Lyzlov finished his work "Scythian history" which remained in manuscripts. In the 1776 a part, and in the 1787 a complete work was published by a known public figure and writer N.I.Novikov.
In his work A.Lyzlov initially proves his thesis that the Türks (in his terminology: Tatars and Turks) descend from the Scythians. In the subsequent sections of the "Scythian history" the author relays the history of the mutual relations of the European peoples and Russians with the Tatars and Turks, i.e. the descendants of the Scythians [Lyzlov А., 1787]. The historiograph of the "History" of Herodotus, A.A.Neihardt, concludes from that that the "title 'Scythian history'", thus, turned out to be rather conditional" [Neihardt A.A., 1982, 9]. But another Scythian expert, S.A.Semenov-Zuser, rates the A.Lyzlov's work "the first known to us composition in the national literature" [Semenov-Zuser S.A., 1947, 11].
In the beginning of the 18th century the interest to the Scythians grows. At the request of Peter I, who was interested in the problems of the origin of the Slavs, a Viennese scientist G.V.Leibnits starts to study vigorously the history of the Slavs, and in one of his letters in the 1708 he writes: "Under the Sarmatians I mean all the Slavic tribes which the ancients called Sarmatians before the name of Slavyans or Slavs began to be known" [Leibnits G.V., 1873, 211].
Later to the problem of the Scythians-Sarmatians turned Gotlib Zigfrid Bayer, invited from the Germany in the 1725 to the Petersburg Academy of sciences. He reasons like this: the Scythians are newcomer from the Asia, and the Slavs are autochtonous, therefore the Scythians can't be counted as Slavs. In his opinion, the descendants of the Scythians were Finns, Livs, Ests [Neihardt A.A., 1982, 12].
The Russian historian of the 18th century, V.N.Tatishchev, considers the word Scyth as a collective name. He writes: "... In the name Scyth many different peoples, like the Slavs, Sarmatians and Turks, Mongaly or moreover, all eastern-northern territory of Asia and Europe, including Germans, Persia and China were included, and this name, seemingly, at about the 10-th century after the Christ died out, when came a more distinct knowledge about the peoples, however those peoples did not disappear, but somewhere under other names have remained till now... For the Europeans in the third on the ten century after the Christ the name of Tatars has become famous, and both these instead of the Scyth began to be used" [Tatishchev V.N., 1962, 232-233].
M.V.Lomonosov believed that from the Scythians came the Finns, and from the Sarmatians came the Slavs [Neihardt A.A., 1982, 17-18].
At the end of the 18th century the history of the Scythians starts to interest N.M.Karamzin, and he expresses an idea that all peoples of Eurasia in the days of Herodotus were called by the collective ethnonyms Scythian and Sarmatian [Karamzin N.M., 1818, 5-12].
In the 19th century the archeological excavations enable scientists to assert that Herodotus and other ancient Greek historians correctly reflected the history of the peoples of the Eurasia. Were published translations into Russian of the compositions of Herodotus and other Greek historians. Were created conditions for a wide study of the ancient history of the territory.
In the 1838 the academician E.I.Eihvald, who earlier worked in the Kazan and Vilno universities, conducts a research of the "History" of Herodotus, and from it he tries to recreate the history of the Slavs, Finns, Türks and Mongols. He comes to a conclusion, that the Scythians were not a uniform people, that under the name of the Scythians were meant all those peoples who and now live in the so-called Scythian territories [Eihvald E.I., 1838, vol. 27].
In the first half of the 19th century P.F.Sum, who studied the problems of an origin of many peoples, states an idea, that the Scythians, Sarmatians and Alans are replaced by the same Türkic tribes of Huns, that the ethnonym Sarmat is formed from the Türkic word sar "yellow, reddish " and designates "reddish people" [Sum P.F., 1846, 3, 15]. The German historian B.G.Nibur counts the Scythians as Mongols, in which classification then were also included the Türks [Nibur B.G., 1847]. In second half of the century, and namely in the 1870, A.D.Mordtman in the Leipzig releases his work about the cuneiform writings and asserts that the Scythians spoke the Türkic language, which then was in a process of branching off from the Uralo-Altai family [Mordtman A.D., 1870, 66-77].
In his work published in the 1837 in Munich, C. Zeiss begins a new stage in the study of the Scythian history. For the first time he identified Scythians with the Persian-lingual tribes. In supprt of this opinion testify, in his assumption, the religion, the location of the Iranians, and the common Scythian and Persian words [Dovatur A.I., 1982, 47].
Another German scientist C.Noimann in the 1855, from the same attributes of the religion and language, asserts that the Scythians were Türks, and the Sarmatians were Slavs [Ibid. 50].
P.I.Shafarik considers Scythians to be Mongols in which classification then were also included the Türks; the Sarmatians are Persians; Budins and Neuri are Slavs [Shafarik P.I., 1948; Dovatur A.I., 1982, 48].
In the 60es of the 19th century K.Müllenhoff performs an analysis of the Scythian and Sarmatian words from the viewpoint of the Indo-European languages, and comes to a conclusion that the Scythians were basically Persian-linguality, that earlier the Persian-lingual tribes lived far to the north of Persia, their remnants were now the Ossetians [Dovatur A.I., 1982, 53].
After K.Müllenhoff, the Scytho-Iranian theory attracted many linguists and historians, who find additional materials in its favor. Apparently, this theory became attractive, also because that it enabled to expand the ancestral home of the Indo-European peoples. A very characteristic feature of the scientists of this direction was their unanimity against dissenters, they very sharply criticized them, even counted them as illiterate, insignificant scientists, which demonstrated the impotency of the supporters of the Scytho-Iranian theory.
But despite of it, there were the scientists who criticized the Scytho-Iranian theory and were proving the Türkic-speaking of the Scythians and Sarmatians. Sometimes were emerging the scientists not at all from the Türkic world, who from an unexpected side were proving the Türkic-speaking of the Scythians and Sarmatians. For example, in 1904 O.Franke publishes a book in German about the contribution of the Chinese sources to the knowledge of the Türks and the Scythians of the Central Asia, in which he recognizes the Scythians of the Central Asia as Türks [Durmush, 1993, 17].
41. Brief historiography of the Scythian studies in the Türkology.
It is remarkable that all the Türkologists who accessed the Scythian materials and studied them themselves, inevitably recognize the Türkic-speaking of the main body of the Scythians and Sarmatians, and prove it by the linguistical, ethnological, mythological, and archeological data.
So, in the 1880 the Hungarian Türkologist Geza Kuun in his work "Code Cumanikus" on the basis of incontestable facts proves the Türkic-speaking of the Scythians [Kuun, 1881, LVII-LVIII].
About the Türkic-speaking of the Scythians, Sakas and Sarmatians confidently reasons Hasan Gata al-Gabashi. In the 1909 he publishes a special book about the history of the Türkic tribes, in which he considers as finally resolved the question about the Türkic ethnic roots of the Scythians [Gabashi H.G., 1909, 54].
A known Tatarian historian Hadi Atlasi in his book "History of Siberia" writes generally: "The regions called by the ancient Greeks Scithia coincide with the Turkestan, which is the country of the sedentiary Türks, called by the Iranians 'Turanom' " [Atlasi X., 1993, 21].
The Turco-Tatar scientist Sadri Maksudi Arsal, who graduated the Sorbonna university in France, who knew the main European languages, who received eastern education during his youth in Kazan, while studying the history of the state and jurisdiction of the Türkic peoples was inherently drown into the problems of the ethnic roots of Scythians and, analysing the factual materials, comes to a conclusion about the Türkic-speaking of the most of the Scythians [Arsal, 1930, 8].
The most famous historian of the Türks, Zaki Validi Togan, based on the analysis of the newly found materials, proves the Türkic-speaking of the Scythians [Validi A.-Z., 1981, 34].
The daughter of a known Tataro-Turkish scientist Sadri Maksudi Adilya Ayda, after studying the Türkic ethnic roots of Türks-Ethrusks, finds their similarity with the Scythians and reports it in the world congress of the Türkic historians [Adilya Ayda, 1979, 287-292]. We can't mistrust the conclusions of Adilya Ayda, for she graduated the Sorbonna university in France, and perfectly knew many Romance, German and Türkic languages.
The (Russian - Translator's Note) official historical science attributes the Scythians-Sakas-Sarmats to the Persian-linguality peoples, therefore during the Soviet time the historians-Türkologists did not dare to touch the problems of the Türko-Scythians. But despite of it, some Türkologists bravely stated the Türkic-speaking of the Scythians. So, the Kazakh scientists considered the Scythians to be ancestors of Kazakhs [Amanjolov A.C., 1971; Suleymenov О., 1975; Akishev K.A., 1978].
The works of O.Suleymenov's should be noted separately. In his book "Az and I" bears the concept that the bulk of the Scythians, who in the 8th-4th centuries BC occupied huge territories, should be Türks [Suleymenov О., 1975, 269-270]. The publishing of his work in time coincided with the period of organizing of the "struggle" against "extending" the history of the small nations into the past. Therefore even while the book was subjected to severe criticism by the the (Russian again! - Translator's Note) "academic" scientists, it has done its job: the scientists-Türkologists not only gave a support to O.Suleymenov's opinions, but even developed them. I also had to take part in these disputes, for the materials I collected for almost 20 years were prompting that it was time to raise the question in another way about the ethnic composition of the Scythians. In my book which was published in 1977 I was giving the grounds for the Türkic-speaking of the bulk of the Scythians, Sarmatians, Kushans, Tochars, Usuns [Zakiev M.Z., 1977, 27-44].
In the 1986 the Caucasologists (Sorry for the word, it is not my fault - Translator's Note) I.M.Miziev and K.T.Laipanov from the study of the linguistic, archeological, ethnological data proved the Türkic-speaking of the most of the Scythians-Sarmatians and Alans [Miziev I.M., 1986, 35-56, 123-138; Miziev I.M., 1990, 51-72; Laipanov K.T., Miziev I.M., 1993, 45-86].
In the 1993 a Türkish scientist Ilhami Durmush published a monograph "Iskitler Sakalar" (Scythians. Sakas ) in which, based on the analysis of the linguistical, archeological, ethnological data he incontestably proved the Türkic-speaking of the Scythians (Sakas ) [Durmush I., 1993].
Studying the ethnic roots of the Bulgaro-Tatars, M.Zakiev retrospectively reached the Scythians-Sarmatians, and has written a special work "Scytho-Sarmatian roots of the Tatar People" [Zakiev М., 1995а, 37-58].
In the last years in the Türkology appeared other works where the Scytho-Iranian concept was rejected and the Scytho-Türkic concept is defended . Of them is significant the research of Firidun Agasyoglu, where on the basis of the linguistical data the Scytho-Türkic concept is confirmed [Firidun Agasyoglu, 2000, 77-133].
We are far from the idea that all Türkologists are supporters of the Scytho-Türkic concept. It is protected and developed by those who specifically deal with this problem. The Türkologists who themselves did study the Scythian problem, repeat "solidly" the statements of the supporters of the Scytho-Iranian concept, and besides it, even try to find new data to confirm the Scytho-Iranian theory. T.M.Garipov and R.G.Kuzeev, believing that in the territory of Bashkiria earlier lived the Scythians-Iranians, give ostensibly Iranian words recorded in this territory. In their opinion, the Iranian words are: sèrmèsèn, sèrmèt, ablay, abray, kapa, kapkan, kapka, kapsyk, sak, sakmar, kirtè, etc. [Garipov T.M., Kuzeev R.G., 1988, 15]. The imitation of the authorities Indo-Europeists is also seen in the works of other Türkologists.
42. General defects of the Scytho-Iranian theory.
The theory about exclusive Persian-linguality of all the tribes united by a general term Scythians, seemed plausible when the Iranists carried out the etymological research of the Scythian written monuments only on the basis of selection of the words (ethnonyms) of the unequivocally Iranian roots. However, the circle of the researchers of these monuments was extending. To the research also joined and non-Iranists, and in particular, the Türkologists and other linguists. Into the scientific sphere were entered the words with nom-Iranian roots, especially with the Türkic roots, which testified to the inclusion in the Scythian federation of the Türkic-speaking tribes. And then the first defect of this theory rang a bell, in the form of the prejudiced statements about the unequivocal Persian-linguality of all the Scythians.
The second defect of the Scytho-Iranian theory is that the conclusions of the Iranists about exclusive Persian-linguality of the Scythians were uncritically adopted by the historians of the Indo-European direction and were spread over all the tribes and peoples of the Scytho-Sarmatian area. In the historical science appeared an assertion that this area was populated by exclusively Persian-lingual tribes. The archeologists, many of whom fell to the artifice of the Iranists, in turn, were declaring the archeological cultures of the Scyerstho-Sarmatian areal belonging to the Persian-lingual tribes. It came to a vicious circle: the archeologists, guided by the opinion of the linguists, attribute the archeological cultures of the Scythian and Sarmatian period to the Persian-lingual tribes, and the linguists-Iranists for the confirmation of their theory cite the conclusions of the archeologists.
It is completely clear, that the ethnic composition of the Scythians and Sarmatians can be established only by integration of all the information form the linguistical, mythological, ethnological, archeological data, and the study of the sources data. And the recognition of the Scythians and Sarmatians to be Persian-lingual only on the basis of the isolated linguistical data would be unobjective.
It is also difficult to trust the opinion of some linguists and historians who assert that in such extensive region of Eurasia under a general name of Scythians and Sarmatians (jumping ahead, also under the ethnonym Alans/Ases) during a thousand years before our era and a thousand years more during our era lived the ancestors of the Ossetians, and in the beginning of the 2nd millennium AD they extraordinary quickly shrank (or adopted Türkic language) and remained in a tiny quantity only in the Caucasus.
Such image of the historical process in Eurasia does not sustain any criticism. If in such extensive region of Eurasia during not less than two thousand years lived the Persian-lingual Ossetians, than, naturally, on the "arrival" of the Huns they, on one hand, could not suddenly completely disappear or with a lightening speed reincarnate into Türks, and on another hand, the Türks also could not have already created in the 6th century AD the first in the Eurasia empire with the most extensive territory from the Manchuria to the Adriatic sea, if they did not live in these regions earlier.
Should not be also forgotten that the portraying of this ancient population as Persian-lingual contradicts the information of the ancient historians about the multi-linguality of the Scythians and Sarmatians, and is not supported by the evidence of the toponymy of the above named extensive regions.
If the Scythians and Sarmatians were Persian-lingual, then the Assyrian, Greek, Roman, Chinese etc. ancient historians could not fail to address it, in fact they knew well both the Persians, and the Scythians-Sarmatians. In the descriptions of these peoples they necessarily would somehow note the similarity or affinity of the Persian and the "Scythian" languages. But we do not find even a hint on it in the ancient writers. At the same time there are many cases of identification of the Scythians, Sarmatians and Alans with various Türkic-speaking tribes.
Finally, if in the extensive territories of Eurasia under a general name Scythia and Sarmatia lived only the Persian-lingual tribes, from where then did suddenly appear the Slavic, Türkic, Finno-Ugric nations. It remains to only ask an ironical question: maybe, they "fell from the space"?!
We can only regret that the discussed above studies of the Iranists border on tendentiousness and artificiality.
At the same time many scientists even before the emergence of the Scytho-Persian concept asserted and nowadays are proving, that between the Scythians, Sarmatians and Alans, in addition to the Persian-lingual tribes, were the Slavic, Finno-Ugric and Mongolian, that in the extensive territories of Eurasia under a general name of the Scythians, Sarmatians, Alans (Ases) long before our era lived the ancestors of the Türkic peoples. However, since the 11th century, since the beginning of the crusades, the areas of the settlement of the Türks narrowed a little.
43. Some arguments of the Scytho-Iranian theory.
Here we want to show that the assorted Scythian words, which the Iranists consider Persian, can be better interpreted from the viewpoint of the presence in them of the Türkic roots and affixes.
As we have already said, the establishment of the Scytho-Iranian theory begins with the "finding" of the Persian roots in those words which were preserved in the various sources as Cimmerian, Scythian and Sarmatian. This etymological research was started by K.Müllenhoff, and continued by Vs. Miller and M.Fasmer. After them the Scytho-Iranian theory for the official historical science becomes axiomatic.
During the Soviet time in the Scythian etymology from the viewpoint of Ossetian language was persistently and purposefully working V.I.Abaev, who had thought up a special Scythian or Scytho-Sarmatian language in the system of the Indo-European family of languages. In his work "Dictionary of Scythian words" the 353 Scythian words, recorded in the sources, with the phonetical transformations change into ancient Ossetian lexical units [Abaev V.I., 1949, 151-195].
Before starting the analysis of the V.I.Abaev's etymologies, note his statement about value of his research: "I subjected to the analysis the undoubtedly Iranian elements and I hope, that it puts the end to superficial and irresponsible speculations on the Scythian material, which do not have anything common with a science" [Abaev V.I., 1949, 148]. When a scientist with such a zeal attacks the potential opponents, it already tells about the weakness of his position. The V.I.Abaev's etymologies really suffer with the absence of a system and many semantic discrepancies.
As his predecessors in the Scytho-Iranian etymology, V.I.Abaev starts with personal names of the ancestor of the Scythians Targitai and his sons Lipoksai, Arpoksai, Koloksai.
The name Targitai, in the opinion of the supporters of the Scytho-Iranian theory, consist of two parts: darga and tava; in the ancient Persian darga "long" or "sharp", tava " power, force", Targitai is thus 'Longostrong or Arrowstrong' [Abaev V.I., 1949, 163; Miller Vs., 1887, 127].
From the positions of the Türkic language the word Targitai consists from targy or taryg - Old Türkic 'farmer' and soy~toy - Türk. - 'clan'; as a whole it is 'Clan or Ancestor of the Farmers'. Besides, the name Targitai is met not only in Herodotus, it also appears with Avars as a Türkic name. Theophilact Simocatta (the historian of the 7 c.) informs, 'Targitiy is an outstanding man in the Avar tribe' [Simocatta Th., 1957, 35]. Menandr the Byzantian informs that in 568 the Avar leader Bayan has sent Targitai to Baselius requesting a concession [Byzantian Historians, 1861, 392]. In 565 Avars sent the same Targitai as an ambassador to Byzantium [Ibis, 418]. In the 2 c. Polien informs that Scythians, living at Meotian (Azov) Sea, had a famous woman named Tirgatao [Latyshev S.V., 1893, 567]. Hence, these Scythians were also Türkic speaking.
Let us compare it with the Türkic etymology. Türk. soi 'clan, family, relatives, ancestors, generation, offspring, stock, origin'; ak 'white, noble, rich'; aksoi 'a noble, rich clan; sacred clan, forefather' etc. For Türkic peoples the names with an element soi is a usual phenomenon: Aksoi, Paksoi, Koksoi. The first part is lip~lipo~lep is 'border'. As a whole, Lipoksai 'Sacred Clan with (or Protecting) Borders, i.e. its Country'.
Let us compare it with the Türkic etymology. We already know about the second part: aksoy 'a sacred clan, noble clan'. The first part - arpa 'barley, grain, product'; arpalyk 'possession of land'; Arpaksai 'Head of a Clan Possessing Land, Territory, or Clan of the Farmers'.
From the viewpoint of the Türkic language Koloksai can historically go back to a combination of words kuly-ak-say "clan with pure, sacred hands". Kuly-ak-say can easily change to Koloksai. Another possible Türkic etymology is : the second part of a word Kolaksai - aksai 'a noble, sacred clan'; the first part - kola-kala 'city, capital'; it could be borrowed from the Arabic still then when the Subar Türks lived on the left bank of the Tiger. The Kolaksai 'Noble, Sacred Clan Of a (Protecting) Capital, Country'.
Let us consider the system in the Türkic etymology of the names of the father and his three sons. Targitai 'Farmers Noble Clan', Lipoksai 'Border Protecting Noble Clan', Arpoksai 'Protecting Possessions Noble Clan'; Kolaksai 'Protecting Capital (i.e. Kingdom) Noble Clan' or "Clan with Noble Arm". The last, the younger son, as relayed by Herodotus, accepts the kingdom from his father after he brought home the golden tools fallen from the sky: the plough, yoke, hatchet, and cup [Herodotus, 1972, B. 4, 5].
Let's bring a few more facts proving ostensibly an unconditional Persian-linguality of the Scythians, but at the same time bearing the Scytho-Türkic traits.
Ababa (Hababa) is the name of the mother of the Roman emperor Maximin, she was, apparently, an Alanian. Thinking that Alans are Persian-lingual, Abaev etymologies this word thus: Iran. khi 'good, kind'; vab 'to weave'; thus, Khivaba 'Good Weaver'. In Türkic ab 'hunt', eb~ev 'home', aba 'father, mother, sister', Ababa 'Mother Of Hunt or Mother Of House', i.e. 'Fairy' in a good sense.
Sagadar, per Abaev: saka- + - dar 'having deers' is the name of a tribe near Danube [Abaev V.I., 1949, 179]. In Türkic: saga is a Türkic ethnonym, -dar-lar is the plural affix; Sagadar is 'Sags'.
Pantikapa (Herodotus 4.4.18,19 passim, Panticapes) is a name of a river in Scythia, maybe, of the Kerch strait, and also of the city built in the 4th century BC in the place of the present Kerch. Per Abaev, here panti is in Avestian "way", kapa "fish", as a whole "fish way" [Abaev V.I., 1949, 175]. Any river, any channel is always a fish way, therefore the semantics "fish way" is hardly suitable here. In the Türkic the word pantikapa/pontikapey consist of two parts: pont is the ancient name of the Black Sea. This word is formed per Türkic model from the ancient Türkic root bun "broth, soup, meal" with an affix of possession -ly/-ty. The bunty > ponty means "victual", i.e. "feeding, feeder". The second root kapa is Türkic kapag/kapa "gate", as a whole it is "Gate to Pontus or Pontus Gate". This semantics in addition is confirmed by that in the place of the Panticapaeum ruins was built the city Kerch, which name came from the other Türkic word keresh/kerech with a meaning "gate, entrance, passage" .
All the Scythian words collected by V.I.Abaev in his "Dictionary of Scythian words", could be, thus, re-etymologized from the viewpoint of those languages whose carriers lived and live now in the so-called Scythian regions. Rather, it has to be done, and with subsequent comparison of the results of the Persian, Türkic, Slavic and Finno-Ugric etymological studies. Only after this would be possible to definitely tell what ethnoses lived under the general names of initially Cimmerian, and then Scythians, Sarmatians, Alans-Ases. As the comparisons above of the Persian etymologies with the Türkic have shown, the Scythians most likely were not Persians, or among them were very few Persian-lingual; they were mainly Türks, and also Slavs, and Finno-Ugrians, for the last also have not fallen from the sky, and lived in their (ancient "Scythian") regions since the most ancient times.
44. Ethnic composition of Scythians from etymology of the Scythian ethnonyms Scyth, Ishguza, Skolot, Sarmatian, Agathyr, Gelon, Saka.
The Scythians consisted of many tribes and nations whose ethnonyms are conditionally called Scythian. To extract from these ethnonyms their ethnogenetical information, they should be subjected to the etymological, semantical, and historical analysis.
We have cited above the second legend about the origin of the Scythians. In this legend the Hercules, driving the Geryon's bulls, arrived to an uninhabited country. In a cave he found a certain creature, a half-maiden, half-snake, and he had to take her for his mistress. From them were born three sons. She named them Agathyr, Gelon (Yylan) and Scyth (skydy/skide).
The younger son is Skyde, from there comes the ethnonym Skyde, which in the West-European languages has taken the the form Scyth, in Russian turned into Scyf, where last sound f represents the interdental ð (th), written in Old Russian through q. For a Türkologist is not difficult to see in the ending part of the word Skyde the Türkic affix -de, which has the following phonetic versions: -de/-dy/-te/-ty/-le/-ly/-dyк (-дак) /-deck (-dèk)/-tyк (-tak)/-tek (-tèk)/-luk (-lak)/-lek (-lèk). This affix of possession is frequently used in the Türkic ethnonyms: Kazanly~Kazanlyk "citizen of Kazan", asty~astyk "ostyak" (ancestors of Perm Tatars), Buharlyk "Sibir Buharian", Karluk "Karluks", Kubandy "Kumandians", Shalkanduu "Chalkanian", etc.
In the ethnonym Skyde is used the suffix -de, but in the Türko-Sogdian coins it has the form -dk (-dek) or -lk (-lek) [Smirnova O.I., 1981, 249-255]. Other versions of the affix of possession are -ly/-dy/-lyк/-tyк, etc. Earlier we suggested, that Skydy or Skidy are the people who have something. But what? The first part of the ethnonym Skide should tell about it, i.e. ski/eske/eshke/yshky which, apparently, ascends to the Türkic yshky "knife", in the Tatar yshky "scraper". Skide (in Russian Scyf) is "man with a knife " [Zakiev M.Z., 1986, 35, 37, 38].
But systematic study of the Türkic ethnonyms brought us to the idea that the root sky historically ascends to the ethnonym Saka. With the affix it becomes Sakady or Sakaly "people consolidated with Sakas " or " people that includes Sakas". Sakady gradually could phonetically change: Sakady > S'kady > S'k'dy > Sk'dy. This ethnonym with the affix -ly is found in the sources as a name of one of the components of the Volga Tatars in the 10th century [Bartold V.V., vol. 8, 545].
In the Assyrian documents the Scythians under the name Asguz~Ishkuza~Ishguza are recorded in the 7th century BC. This ethnonym also can be a phonetical variation of the ethnonym Skid: in fact in the Türkic dialects the sound interchange s-sh, d-z, i-u is usual: Skide ~ Iskidy ~ Iskuzy ~ Ishkuzy. Once again this proves, that in words Skide and Ishkuzy the word-formation affix is same: -de/-ze. Naturally, there are also other Türkic etymologies of the word Ishkuzy [Zakiev M.Z., 1995, 23, 40-41].
Skolot is the endoethnonym of the Scythians, its etymology could not be explained by the Iranian languages. In Türkic Skolot consists of a part Sak > Sko plus -lo/-ly, the affix of possession, -t/-ta is a plural index. In the common Türkic it is -tar/-lar, in the Karachay-Balkarian it is -ta/-la. Skolo is Sakaly > Skoly "people with Sakas", Skolota > Skolot is the same word, but in plural: Sakalylar > Skolotar > Skolot. Skolot, apparently, had survived in Balkarian language as shylty with a meaning "nobles, upper caste" [Miziev I.M., 1986, 48].
Alongside with the ethnonym Scyth, Herodotus also gives the ethnonym Sauromat, for a nation related with the Scythians. Later its changed form Sarmat began to be used instead of the Scyth. Per Abaev, the Sauromat/Sarmat is an Ossetian word with a meaning "black-armed or dark-armed" [Abaev V.I., 1949, 184]. To call someone black-armed, next to them should be some others, for example, red-armed or white-armed. Therefore the Abaev's etymology is not convincing at all. In Türkic sarma is "bags of calf pelt with hair outward". In the ears, sown to the top edge of such a bag, was threaded a horsehair rope with which the sarma was tied to a saddle. In it were transported bagged provisions [Economy, 1979, 142]. The Sarma-ty/sarma-ly is "person with sarma". The word Sarmat sometimes link also to with the word sary "yellow".
The first son of Hercules is Agathyr, or more correctly, Agathyros. Here the -os is the Greek ending of a name; ir is "man, person, people"; agad/agas/agach is "tree, forest" (interdental d/t was written in Russian with q and was reduced to f: Theodor-Feodor, Skyth-Skif, Agathyr-Agafir, etc.). Agathyr is "Forest People" or "People with tree totem". Later, we meet this ethnonym in forms Akatsir/Agach Eri in the same sense. With the same semantics in the Türkic language we also have the ethnonym Mishèr (Mishè-èr) "Forest People" or "People with tree totem". This word as the ethnonym of one of the components of the Tatar people reached us as Mishèr and Majgar.
The middle son of Hercules is Gelon, from here comes the ethnonym Gelon. Recall in the analysis that the Türkic sound yo/y in the Greek converts to g, it is not difficult in the Greek pronunciation Gelon to see the Türkic yoylan/yylan (pronounced yo-ii-lan/y-ii-lan - Translator's Note) "snake". This would be a natural name for the son of the half-snake mother.
The supporters of the Scytho-Iranian theory for the proof of their correctness frequently use the etymology of the ethnonym Sak or Saka, with which the Persians designated Scythians. In the V.I.Abaev's opinion, the ancient Persian word Saka is ostensibly a totem with a meaning "deer" [Abaev V.I., 1949, 179]. The Ossetian sag "deer" from saks "branch, stump, deer horn, branching horned". As many historians think, the Sak is a name of one of the Scythian tribes which was accepted by the Persians as an ethnonym for all Scythians. None of the ancient authors notes a meaning of the ethnonym Sak/Saka in the sense "deer", and Stephan the Byzantian informs that "Saka is a people, so are called the Scythians of the "amour" because they have invented it" [Latyshev V.V., 1893, 265]. Here the word Saka approaches the Türkic sak/sagy "defense, protection, cautious". Besides, it should be noted that in the Türkic sagdak "quiver", i.e. "case for the protection weapons". Sagay is the ethnonym of a Türkic people between Altai and Yenisei, they are a part of the Khakass people, Saka (Saha) is the ethnonym of the Yakuts. The word Sak/Saka is a part of a compound ethnonym Sakar (Sak-ar or Saka-ar "Saka's people") by which a significant part of the Turkmen is designated in the form Sakar Türkmenleri [Begliev A.-N., 2000, 32-38, 59-63, 155-162]. The Türkic-speaking of the Sakas is proved by many researchers of the history of the Türkic peoples and their neighbors [Karatay О., 2000, 21-26]. Thus, Sagay (Sak/Saka) is the Türkic word, which had transfered into the ethnonym of one of the Scythian tribes, and it was accepted by the Persians as their general ethnonym.
45. Ethnic composition of Scythians from etymology of ethnonyms Kaspi, Traspi, Argippei, Iirk, Melanhlen, Katiar, Paralat, Massaget related to the, Scythians.
The scientists who deem all Scythians to be Persian-lingual, who came up with a unitary Scythian language of the ostensibly the Persian group, channel all ethnonyms somehow connected with the Scythians to the Persian words. The ancient Greeks called Scythians a number of peoples, noting their multi-linguality. In our opinion, among them were many Türkic-speaking tribes and peoples. That can be seen from the etymology of their ethnonyms.
Let's first turn the attention to the ethnonyms formed from the Türkic primary ethnonym bi (phonetic variations: pi, pey, bey, bay, bèk) "rich, noble". In the process of growing and resettlements to various regions the Bi tribes acquired features peculiar to them, and the terms for these features started to serve as a definition of the basic ethnonym Bi. So, the Bies living in the mountains (kas), began to be called Kaspi. The ethnonym of this people became the name of the sea (Caspian Sea).
The ancient Greek historians, including Herodotus, list the people Kaspi together with Horasmians, Parthys (Parthians), Sogdys and Sakas, point to their settlement region near the Caspian Sea. Strabo (beginning of the 1st c. AD) notes that the name of the Caspian Sea comes from the name of the tribes living by its coast (Strabo 11.2.15 - Translator's Note), and adds that these Kaspi had already dissolved among other tribes (Strabo 11.4.5 - Translator's Note), they do not exist in pure state [Dovatur A.I., 1982, 196].
Some scientists attribute Kaspi people to the Ibero-Caucasians, in particular to the Caucasian Albanians (Albanians also were Türks. - M.Z.) and Medes. They did not even think about their Türkic-speaking, for the traditional historical science believed that the Türks came to the Eastern Europe only in the 4th century AD.
Per Herodotus' information, from Arpoksai, the middle son of Targitai, came the Scythian tribes with ethnonyms Katiar and Traspi (Latinized Catiari and Traspians - Translator's Note) [Herodotus B. 4, 6]. Some scientists the ethnonym Traspi deduced from the Persian aspa "horse", but could not decipher the first part tr. There is only a suggestion that ostensibly it ascends to the Caucasian languages [Dovatur A.I., 1982, 209]. In our opinion, the word Traspi is an initial Türkic ethnonym Pi (Bey, Bi), in front of it as its definition is used the ethnonym Tras, which consists of an initial Türkic ethnonym As with a definition tr, which historically ascends to Tuar "Mountain People": Tu-ar-as > Taras > Tras.
Argippei/argypi, per Herodotus, is the ethnonym of the tribes located in the foothills of the high mountains. Precisely for this reason the scientists were locating them near the Uralian, Caucasian, Altai or Carpathian mountains. There is a more justified opinion that the Argippeis lived in the Southern Ural and took part in the formation of the Bashkir people.
The etymology of the ethnonym Argippei was elucidated in many ways. Some think that the ethnonym Argippei is formed as a result of translation into the Greek language of two words from another language, the semantics of which coincides with semantics of the Greek argo "fast boat" and gippei "horse", then the Argippei is "fastohorsed" (This would not fall under the Ockham's Razor, would it? - Translator's Note) [Comments to the "History" of Herodotus, 1972, 551]. Assuming that this ethnonym has arose as a result of translation from another language into the Greek, one more interpretation can be raised. If the soldiers of the local Türks (like, the ancestors of the Bashkirs) while acquainting with the Greeks visitors called themselves irat "soldier, defender of the country", they could answer a Greeks' question of with the translation of ar/ir "men", at "horse", and the Greeks (or Herodotus personally) could note down its half-translation Irgippei > Argippei (This example shows that if there is an objective to achieve, anything can be explained away, but it is clear that this scenario also does not fall under the Ockham's Razor - Translator's Note).
In the ethnonym Argippei most likely can be discerned the primary Türkic ethnonym Pi (Bey) with a definition argy "that side", "distant". Argypi is "Beis on that side (of the river or mountains)". The Türkic-speaking of Argippeis is additionally proved by the name of the tree whose fruits are edible, which they call pontik, the fruits' juice they call ashi. These two words are certainly Türkic (see para. 47).
Per Herodotus' information, near Argippei lived the tribes carrying ethnonym Iirk. The Türkologists consider this ethnonym to be a distorted variation of the word Türk. The Finno-Ugric scientists tried etimologise it on the basis of their native language. But so far nobody could give it neither a Türkic, nor a Finno-Ugrian etymology [Dovatur A.I., 1982, 247]. We think that the ethnonym Iirk is formed on the basis of the ethnonym erk (from erkek) "men, people" with a definition iyi (iyè, iði/) (iði=ithi? - Translator's Note) "good, great, rich, owner". Iirk is "good, great people, rich owners". Iirk is a synonym to the ethnonym Bilèr (Baylar, Bièr, Biger).
Hekateus (Hekateus of Milett, 517 BC- Translator's Note) classes Melanhlens as not Scythian, and Herodotus as Scythian people. But all ancient writers noted them to be near the Royal Scythians, Gelons, Budins and Androfags, and located them in the east of the Dnepr and Azov Sea.
Scientists are almost unanimous that the ethnonym Melanhlen was formed as a result of a translation of the ethnonym in another language into the Greek language, for in the Greek it means "Black Coats". It was suggested that the sedentary Melanhlens could be ancestors of the Slavs in black caftans, or of the Finno-Ugrians also in black coats or with black headdresses [Dovatur A.I., 1982, 352].
Nobody thought of a Türkic origin of the Greek word Melanhlen, because of the circulated opinion that the Türks, first, were ostensibly only the nomads, and second, that in the Eastern Europe till the 4th century AD were no Türks. But we know now that the Türks were not only, and also not so much, the nomads, and they lived long before our era in the Europe. Therefore we can assert without any hurdles that the Greek word Melanhlen could be a translation of the Türkic ethnonym Karakalpak "Black Hat". Without knowing precisely the Greek equivalents for the words hat and coat, the Türks could only tell the Greeks about clothing.
The Scythian ethnonyms Paralat and Katiar also can be analysed from the viewpoint of the uniquely Türkic words. The ethnonym Paralat is comprised of the primary ethnonym Paraly > Parly> Parthy " possessive, wealth", the affix -t ascends to an affix -ta/-la (in Karachaevo-Balkarian), -tar/-lar (in common Türkic). The Paralat means Türkic Paralyta > Parlylar> Parthylar (See Statistical Linguistics page, taking the form Parly/Parthy and calculating the probability that this phonetical combination would accidentally meet the semantics of the Türkic "Royal, possessor, wealth" would be in the order of 1/50,000 X 1/100, or one in 5,000,000. Here we have a blessing of having the semantics of "Paralat = Royal" noted by the Greek sources. The chances that this word would independently emerge in, say, Persian language, are astronomically small, in the order of 1/1,000,000,000,000, and in fact: it did not - Translator's Note).
The name Katiar is based on the primary ethnonym ar "people, men", which has accepted a definition katy "firm, independent", katiar are "Independent People".
The etnonym Massaget is etymologized in a number of ways. In the traditional historical science prevails the opinion that the Massaget means "Great Gets", there were also suggestions that the Massaget is in Persian "fisheaters" (Pers. masya "fish"). Many are inclined to parse the word Massaget as Mas-sakata or Mas-saka, which means "Great (big) Saka Horde" or "Great Sakas", meaning under the Sakas a Persian-lingual people [Dovatur A.I., 1982, 183].
The Massagets should not be confused with the Thyssagets (Rus. Fissagety). The Massagets, located in the Central Asia, were the neighbors of the Horasmis (Kwarezmians) and Tochars, in their confederation were also the peoples: Apasiak, Attasi, Augasi, Derbik (Apasiacae, Attasii, ?, Derbices in Strabo 11.8.8 - Translator's Note) [Dovatur A.I., 1982, 182].
There are also weighty arguments to count Massagets as Türks.
First, the neighbors of the Massagets by the name Horasm (Huarasm "My Suaras"), Tochar (Dag-ar "Mountain People") and their subjects in the confederation by the name Apasiak (Apa-Sak "Senior Sakas"), Attasi (Atty-As "horsed Ases"), Augasi (Awag-As "Capricious Ases"), Derbik (Dar-bek "Decisive, Comradely Beks"), most likely, were Türkic-speaking, therefore some historians link Massagets with the ancestors of the Turkmen.
The composite word Massaget in the Türkic model can be parsed into parts as mas-saga-ta, where the root is Saka, the initial Türkic ethnonym, mas or mach is the Türkic word with the meaning "happiness, matching, similar", -ta is the plural index (-tar/-lar). The Massaget means "Happy Sakas".
46. Ethnic composition of the Scythians from etymology of the ethnonyms Taur (Tochar/Togar/Tagarma) and Angareon.
As also all other ethnonyms of Scythian time, the word Taur (Tochar, Dogarma) in the traditional historical science are recognized as Persian, and consequently their etymology was attempted to be built on the basis of the Persian languages. But so far it was almost without results.
The ethnonyms Taur, Tagar, Tochar, Tagarma represent the phonetic variations of the same word. They consist of the same Türkic elements: tau/tav/dag/tag "mountain, woody mountain, tree" and er "people, men"; the Taur is "Mountain People".
Taures were included into the Scythian federation. When the Scythians needed to repel the attack of the Darius' hordes, they gathered for a meeting "the kings of Taures, Agathyrs (truer, Agach eri. - M.Z.), Neuri, Androphags, Melanhlens, Gelons, Budins and Sauromats" [Herodotus, 1972, B. 4, 102. If these tribes were Persian-lingual, they would not fight the Persian-lingual hordes of Darius, and Darius would not pursue his relatives with the same Iranian deity and language. There are reasons to consider that these Scythians were basically Türkic-speaking.
Taures lived in Taurika. Herodotus lists this territory as primeval Skithia, a mountainous country which begins at the Istr (Danube) estuary and extends to the Kerch strait [Herodotus, 1972, IV, 99]. Strabon calls the Crimean peninsula Taurian and Scythian [Latyshev V.V., 1893, 122]. Taures are the distant ancestors of the Crimean Tatars.
In the sources are cases of the explanation of the origin of the ethnonym Taur from the Türkic word tuar "animals". For example, Eustafius (12th century AD) writes that "the tribe of Taures has received is name, is told, from the ox animal" [Ibid. 1995]. It is, most likely, a folk etymology.
Tochars are a Türkic people that lived in the 3rd-2nd millenniums BC in the Eastern Europe, then their presence is noted in the Middle and Central Asia; Ptolemy in the 2nd century AD places the Togars (Tochars) in the Western Europe near Dacia (Ptolemy ......? - Translator's Note) [Latyshev V.V., 1893, 232].
It is important to note, that to the ancient Tochars the German Indo-Europeists assigned a peculiar Iranian language. The matter is that at the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th centuries in the oases of the Eastern Turkistan (so called Sintszyan) were found monuments in a special western- Iranian dialect. The German Türkologist in their translation from the Sanskrit text to Uigur found, that the translation was done not directly from Sanskrit, but through Tohri. On the basis of that message, the other German scientists named these Persian texts "Tocharian". "They linked the Uigur word "tohri" with the name of the "Tochars" people, who were witnessed by the ancients as living in Bactria... The term "Tocharian language" is lingering until now, despite strong protests of many scientists" [Krauze В., 1959, 41, 44]. Here is evident at once the break in the logic: the Uigur text does not say that Tohri/Tochars spoke Persian, most likely they were Türks, if the Uigurs took advantage of their language. Besides, we know that Tochars in the Central Asia in antiquity were closely connected with the Sako-Massagets, who in the 5th-7th centuries are known as Türkic nations among the Türkic Ephtalites and other Türks. M.Kashgarly the Togars (Tochars) also lists as Türks. The root of the word "Tocharistan has survived in the topo- and ethnonymy of the Uzbeks and Kazakhs" [Tolstova L.C., 1978, 10]. The Tochars actively participated in forming the Uzbeks. Such a people as Tochars, greatly widespread (from the Eastern Europe to the Central Asia), could not have gone Turkisized so expeditiously, most likely the Tochars from the very beginning were Türks.
Ethnonymycally, the biblical Togars (Togarma) and Scythian Taures are close to Tochars. In the Bible (Genesis) is stated that from the son of Japheth, Gomer, were born three sons: Ashkenaz, Riphath and Togarmah (spelled Dogarma by the author - Translator's Note)(Ch. 10). This chapter of the Bible is written way before our era. Later, Dogarma-Togarmah becomes a usual ethnonym for the Türks in the Hebrew language. The Khazars, who accepted the Judaism religion, also were called Togarmah. In this ethnonym is clearly outstanding the part Togar/Tochar with the meaning "Mountain or Forest People" and the part -ma, a plural affix of the Hebrew language. Just the fact that the Jews called the Türks by the ethnonym Togarmah way before our era tells about the presence of the Türks in the Near East and in the Europe since the most ancient times.
"[8.98] Meanwhile, Xerxes, though engaged in this way, sent off a messenger to carry intelligence of his misfortune to Persia. [8.98] Nothing mortal travels so fast as these Persian messengers. The entire plan is a Persian invention; and this is the method of it. Along the whole line of road there are men (they say) stationed with horses, in number equal to the number of days which the journey takes, allowing a man and horse to each day; and these men will not be hindered from accomplishing at their best speed the distance which they have to go, either by snow, or rain, or heat, or by the darkness of night. The first rider delivers his despatch to the second and the second passes it to the third; and so it is borne from hand to hand along the whole line, like the light in the torch-race, which the Greeks celebrate to Vulcan. The Persians give the riding post in this manner, the name of "Angarum" (spelled "Angareyon" by the author - Translator's Note)".
In the footnote of the book the commentators of the Herodotus "History" give this word the following explanation: angareyon (from Pers. hangar) means "royal courier".
Hence, the Persians used this word in the form hangar-Kangar. And the Kangar is the most ancient ethnonym of Besenyos (Badjinaks); the word Kangar also was the endoethnonym at Sumerians (Sumers). For many years for the Persians the postal service was served by the Kangars, therefore they had the endoethnonym Kangars attain the meaning of "royal courier". We note a similar phenomenon at the same Persians and Turks also with the ethnonym Tatar. For them the Tatars also for many years served as fast couriers, therefore their ethnonym started to be applied also in the sense "courier". Thus, in the 19th century. L.Z.Budagov in his "Comparative dictionary of the Turkish-Tatar adverbs" (vol. 1) wrote: "...The Tatarin going fast as a wind (at the courts of Turkey and, in particular, Persia, the Tatars were famous for their knowledge of different countries and, consequently, they served in the position of couriers, fast walkers)" [Budagov L.Z., 1869, 329]. For this reason both ethnonyms, Hangar and Tatar, were used in the sense "courier like a wind". This system of postal service about which writes Herodotus was for the first time organized by the Türks, it also had taken root in the Western Asia, and the Russians also used the services of the Türks-couriers.
The ethnonym Kangar consists of the basic part ar "people, men" and the definition kang which was used in the sense "cart", the Kangar are "People on Wagons". The definition kang can also ascend to the Türkic word qаn "father" from which also come the word Khan, qangĝiru "restless" or "stupified". From this is possible to conclude that Qangar (Kangar) also has a meaning "People responsible as fathers", "People like fathers, like Khans", "Possessing People".
The shown etymologies of the Scythian words and ethnonyms, the cases of their preservation among the Türkic peoples show that among Scythians, certainly, were also the Türkic tribes. Therefore the widespread in the official historical science opinion that ostensibly there was one Scythian language, which belonged to the Persian group and that the first Türks came to Europe only in the 4th century AD under the ethnonym Huns, and that the Turkization of the Itil region and Urals began only in the 4th or the 7th centuries AD , - all this, naturally, does not match the reality.
47. Ethnic composition of the Scythians by Scythian words with etymologies given in the ancient sources.
In ancient sources we are finding the meanings of some Scythian words, sometimes there are attempts to etymologize them. However the comments of the ancient sources frequently do not give in to be explained from the viewpoint of the Iranian languages. Then the Iranists just save the face and simply declare that the ancient Greek historians, including Herodotus, ostensibly did not know the Scythian language. Here is a paradox for you: the contemporaries of the Scythians, who communicated with them directly, did not have an idea about the character of the Scythian language, but our contemporaries-scientists present it precisely!! Thus, recognizing Herodotus as an outstanding historian and ethnographer, they consider him to be a frivolous linguist [Boruhovich V.G., 1972, 482, 493]. There is no doubt that if the Herodotus' etymologies were subjected to the study from the viewpoint of polyethnicity of the Scythian tribes, the scientific diligence of Herodotus, and the soundness of his linguistic descriptions of the Scythian peoples, would surely prove to be true.
Now we shall review some Herodotus' etymologies of the Scythian words, which do not find confirmation from the viewpoint of the Iranian languages. So, Herodotus writes that the Scythians call the Amazons eorpata, which in Hellenic means "husband killers": in fact eor means "husband", and pata means "to kill" [Herodotus, 1972, B. 4, 110]. Here is observed a rather transparent Türkic etymology: eor/ir/er 'husband', pata/eata/wata "breaks, beats, kills". As a whole, eorpata in this sense coincides with the Türkic ervata "kills husband". (See Statistical Linguistics page, taking the form "ervata" and calculating the probability that this phonetical combination would accidentally meet the semantics of the Türkic "kills husband" would be in the order of 1/400,000 X 1/100, or one in 40,000,000. The chances that this word would independently emerge in, say, Persian language, are astronomically small, in the order of 1/1,600,000,000,000,000, and in fact, it did not - Translator's Note).
Herodotus talks of Argrippeis, mentioning that they eat tree fruits. The name of the tree with fruits used for food is pontik. A ripe fruit is squeezed through a fabric, and the extracted black juice is called ashi. They lick this juice and drink it mixed with milk. From the thick of ashi they prepare bread [Herodotus, 1972, IV, 23]. Many historians identify Argrippeas with Bashkirs. It is quite probable.
It was not also accidental that the master of the Scythian world was called Atei "daddy" [Alekseev A.Ü., Murzin V.Ü., Polle Р., 137].
So, the Scythian words which were subjected to the etymological and semantic analysis by the ancient authors coincide with their Türkic etymologies. (And now comes a final whammy: To find the probability of two independent events, their individual probabilities are multiplied, etc. To find the probability of accidental coincidence of all 7 above words with known recorded etymology, their individual probabilities are to be multiplied. Skipping the arithmetics, here is the result for the probability of chance occurrence for these words: 1.2 X 1050, or 12 followed by 49 zeroes. The probability that these 7 words belong to the Türkic language is 1 - 1.2 X 1050, or 0.999999(total 49 nines and the last one is 8). In other words, their belonging to the Türkic language is a fact.
48. Ethnic composition of the Scythians and Sarmatians from the archeological, ethnological, religious-mythological and artistic data.
We already stated that any ethnogenetical theory should be based on the integration of the linguistical, archeological, ethnological, religious-mythological and artistic research. In this work more attention was given to the linguistical facts, for the Scytho-Iranian theory is based primarily on them.
Who seriously studied the problems of the Scythians, surely noted that by the ethnographic features (including archeological, religious-mythological and artistic) the Scythians and Sarmatians are the ancestors of the Türkic-speaking peoples. As an archeologist and ethnographer, I.M.Miziev has correctly noted, the Scythians from are investigated from different directions fairly in detail, there are substantial works, but there is no thorough research on their household culture. "Probably, this circumstance is explained by, he writes, that with the first touch to the family life, utensils, food of the Scythians the developed stereotype breaks, and erupt the "scissors" between their Iranian language and the obvious Türko-Mongolian life and traditional culture" [Miziev I.M., 1990, 66]. In his opinion, the archeological cultures (Pit Grave, Timber, Scythian and Türko-Mongolian) also have a continuous genetic connection and relatedness, which is admitted by almost all archeological science.
15) Cleaning ceremonies after the funeral of the diseased, i.e. so-called Scytho-Türkic baths with incense of the seeds of the hemp heated on the rocks.
Thus, "the whole complex of the Scythian funeral ceremony (kurgan barrow, funeral log-sarcophagus, burial of horses, funeral timber chambers) and of the household culture (milking mares, the use of horsemeat, koumiss for food and so forth) were preserved without a break down to our days in the traditional culture of the Türko-Mongolian peoples" [Miziev I.M., 1990, 66-71].
The practice of naming the tribes with the totem names (Acathyr "Forest or Tree People", Gelon "snake", Taur "Mountain or Forest People", etc.) and the obviously Türkic words for the names of various deities demonstrate the religious-mythological continuity of the Scythians and the Türks. So, Herodotus writes: "In the Scythian language Gestia is called Tabiti, Zeus (and, in my opinion, absolutely correctly) is called Papei, Geia is called Api, Apollo is called Goitosir, the Heavenly Aphrodite is called Argimpasa, Poseidon is called Fagimasad. Scythians do not have a custom of erecting effigies, altars and temples to the gods, except for Ares" [Herodotus,B. 4, 59].
Considering the Scytho-Türkic continuity in the field of art, on the foreground comes out the so-called "Animal Art" style. This style is undoubtedly Scythian, but the scientists, coming from a postulate about the obligatory nomadic character of the Scythians, assert that all "animal" art of the Scythians was created not by the Scythians (the nomads ostensibly are not capable of it), but by the Greek artizans. That is another error. Not all Scythians were nomads, and they esteemed animals, wild life, plants, and birds as their totems, and always tried to portray them in various ways. And that Scythian tradition has passed over to the Türkic tribes.
49. Do the ancient sources confirm the Persian-linguality of Scythians?
Above, on the basis of the analysis of the linguistical, religious-mythological, ethnological, archeological and artistic material, we tried to prove the Türkic-speaking of the main body of the Scythians and Sarmatians. Left out one very important argument to confirm the ethnic composition of the Scythians and Sarmatians. It is the opinion of the ancient historians, the authors of the ancient sources. Do the ancient sources and their authors confirm the Persian-linguality of the Scythians and Sarmatians? One matter is when the modern historians and linguists deduce from the ancient sources their opinion, and completely another matter is the opinion of the ancients, the contemporaries of the Scythians.
From the very beginning it should be recalled that the ancient authors believed and wrote about the differently linguality of the Cimmerians, Scythians and Sarmatians. Therefore the Iranists cannot base on them their conclusions about a uniform Scythian language, especially so for the Indo-Iranian type.
Almost all ancient authors who left information about Cimmerians, Scythians and Sarmatians, knew very well the Persians, and never confused them with Scythians, and did not note their languistic affinity.
Thus, after a close and objective study of the ancient sources it becomes completely clear, that among the Cimmerians, Scythians and Sarmatians least of all were the Persian-lingual peoples. This conclusion was also made by some linguists. For example, T.A.Degtereva expresses an opinion that thr antique writers, including the observant and careful in his work historian as was Herodotus, nowhere is even a hint that the Scytho-Sarmatian language (and the numerous Scythian tribes spoke one language) had any similarity to the language of the population of the Ahaemenid Persia, while the role of Persia in the life of the ancient civilized states at that time was so significant that the ancient authors should have an idea, a personal one or by hearsay, about the language of the people of that country; someway the similarity between the Persian and Scythian languages would have been noticed by them in the same way as they found the similarity between the Scythian and Sarmatian languages. However it did not happen, by virtue of which we envisage that the common Scythian language was not Persian [Degtereva T.A., 1962, 171]. Asserting, however, that ostensibly the Sakas and Alans spoke the languages of the Iranian group, T.A.Degtereva at this question remained a captive of the Indo-Iranists. In fact, the ancient authors knew well the Sakas, and the Alans, and the Persians, and nevertheless, not one of them gave even a hint about the affinity of the Saka, Alanian and Persian languages. We did not find it anywhere, and therefore we can tell with confidence that the Saka, and the Alanian languages had no affinity with the Persian, and especially not with the Ossetian language.
The ancient authors, never and nowhere mentioning the ethnic affinity of the Scythians and Iranians, however, repeatedly stated about the Türkic-speaking of the Scythians (the discourse about that is in the following paragraph).
It should be also noted that Herodotus gives detailed information about the long war of the Persians against the Scythians. If the Scythians were Perso-speaking, and shared the common deity, the Persians would hardly wage a long and determined war against the Scythians. In that tense situation someone from the Scythians, or from the Persians would not have held back an argument of their ethnic unity, but nothing close to such information is recorded in the ancient sources.
It should be noted also that according to the ancient sources, the Cimmerians, Scythians and Sarmatians occupied a huge territory: they lived in the the Western Asia, and in the Central Asia, and in the Caucasus, and in the Eastern Europe, and in the Western Siberia and Kazakhstan. They were observed in the northwest of China, in the Northern India, in the Far East, in Far East Siberia, etc.
If the Scythians were Persian-lingual Ossetians, how would they almost suddenly have disappeared from those regions, and remained only in the Caucasus (in a tiny-teeny enclave the size of a medium-sized county - Translator's Note). How other peoples, including Türks, managed to occupy these huge territories so perfectly imperceptibly?
Sometimes some peoples violently occupy the territories of the others. But then the former people in that territory has remaining toponyms, hydronyms. Why in the huge territory of the Eurasia, where the Scythians (ostensibly Ossetians) lived earlier, not preserved any Ossetian toponyms and hydronyms?
Therefore, the Scythians were not Persians-Ossetians. The theory about the Persian-linguality of the Scythians (Cimmerians and Sarmatians) does not sustain any criticism. Not accidentally, Herodotus in his linguistical records does not give any example benefiting the supporters of the Scytho-Iranian concept. The ancient sources do not confirm a universal Persian-linguality of of the Scythians.
50. Do the ancient sources confirm the Türkic-speaking of the Scythians?
The most reliable sources for defining the ethnos of the Scythians are the opinions of their contemporaries, who knew them not indirectly, but directly.
On the basis of the study the opinions of the ancient and other materials, L.A.Elnitsky comes to a conclusion that the Udes, who lived in the 3rd millennium BC were ethnically connected with the Caspian Udes, the later Uzes and Dais, Se, Unu, recorded in the sources during the 2nd-1st millenniums BC, and are directly connected with the Saies and Huns who were living in the beginning of the new era in the Eastern and Western Europe up to the borders of the Northern Italy [Elnitsky L.A., 1977, 4]. The ethnonyms Day/Say (Saka) and Hun are the names of the Türkic peoples.
The historians who were living in time are much closer to the Scythians and Sarmatians quite often identified them with the Türkic tribes. So, Philostorgy (4 c. AD) noted, that "these Huns are probably those people whom the ancients called Neuri", i.e. the Scythians [Latyshev V.V., 1900, 74].
Theophan the Byzantian (5th century AD) believes that the Huns are Scythians. He writes: "Meanwhile the Scyth Atilla, son Omnudiy, a person brave and proud, removed his senior brother Vdela, and assumed to himself the authority above the Scythians, who are called also Unns, and attacked the Thrace" [Theophan the Byzantian, 1884, 81]. On the other hand, he attributes the Türks to to the Massagets: "East from Tanaid live Türks, in antiquity called Massagets. The Persians in their language call them Kermihions" [Byzantian historians, 1861, 492]. In this record of Theophan an attention deserves that he also knew well the Massagets (one of the Scythian tribes), and the Persians. If the Scythians-Massagets spoke Persian, he would surely note that circumstance. But Theophan the Massagets identifies with the Türks, instead of the Persians.
In second half of the 5th century Zosimus expresses some confidence that the Unns are the Royal Scythians [Latyshev V.V., 1900, 800].
In the 6th century Menandr the Byzantian writes that the "Türks, in antiquity called Sakas, sent to Justian an embassy with peace proposals" [Byzantian historians, SPb., 1861, 375], and under the Scythian language he means the "Türkic barbaric language" [Ibid. 376]. In another place Menandr the Byzantian writes: "...So all the Scythians from the tribes of the so-called Türks gathered up to a hundred and six persons" [Ibid. 417].
Procopius Caesarian (the 6th century AD) one of the Scythian tribes, Amazons, identifies with the Huns and Sabirs [Procopius Caesarian, 1950, 381]. He also under Cimmerians means the Türks-Huns, Utigurs, Kutrigurs: "This "bog" is flowing into in Eucsin Pontus. Peoples who live there, in antiquity were called Cimmerians, now they are called Utigurs" [Procopius Caesarian, 1950, 384-385].
Theophylact Simocatta (the 7th century AD) notes that east Scythians are usually called Türks: "Expelled from his empire, he (Hosrov, Chosroes) left Ctesiphon and, crossing the river Tiger, was hesitating, not knowing what he should do, since ones advised him to head to the east Scythians, whom we have got used to call Türks, and the others to flee to the Caucasian or Atropean mountains, and there to save his life" [Simokatta Th., 1957, 106].
Theophan the Confessor (the 8th century AD) under the name Khazars means the Scythians: "This year Basileus Leon married his son Constantin to the daughter of the Hagan, the ruler of the Scythians, converting her to Christianity and renaming her Irina" (before christening her name was Chichak, i.e "Flower") [Chichurov I.S., 1980, 68].
Is also worthy the message of the "Tale of Bygone Years" (12nd century AD) that Scythians, Khazars and Bulgars are the same people: "When the Slavs, as we already said, lived near Danube, came from the Scythians, i.e. the Khazars, so-called Bulgars and settled along the Danube" [Tale of Bygone Years, 28].
Above we already mentioned that in the initial Russian history the Scythians and Sarmatians were Türks, for example, A.Lyzlov, V.N.Tatishchev, etc. This view initially also had the western historians. So, the English historian of 19th century. V.Mitford in the "History of Greece" writes: "In the world there are places whose inhabitants differ strongly from the other people in the customs and the way of life. Of them should be noted a nation called Scythes by the Greeks, and by the contemporaries Tatars" [Mitford В., 1838, 419]. Here it should be noted, that then in the West under Tatars were understood almost all eastern peoples, but the proper Tatars were nevertheless considered the Muslim Türks.
In the middle of the 19th century the Russian historians and geographers are convinced that the Scythians were Türkic-speaking. So, R.Latama in the 1854 in the Bulletin of the Russian Geographical Society wrote: "The Türkic origin of the Scythians now... does not require extra proofs" [Latama Р., 1854, 45].
In other words, some of the European scientists considered the Scythians as solely Türkic-speaking, they created the Scytho-Türkic theory, while the others adhered to the Scytho-Iranian theory.
In our opinion, neither one is completely right. The Cimmerians, Scythians, Sarmatians, certainly, were poly-ethnical, among them were the ancestors of those peoples who now occupy the so-called ancient Scythian territory, the Eastern Europe, Siberia (except for the Far East), Kazakhstan, Middle, Central and Asia Minor. Among all the peoples of this extensive region a significant place occupy the Türks. Besides, the Türks preserved more of the Scythian ethnological, mythological and linguistical traces. All this incontestably proves that among the ancient Cimmerians, Scythians, Sarmatians were many more Türks, than the ancestors of the Slavs and Finno-Ugrians. But whether there were in their body the Persian-lingual Ossetians remains a big question.