[restabs text=”More” tabcolor=”#dd9933″ tabheadcolor=”#1e73be”]
[restab title=”RESUME” active=”active”]

This is a conceptual work which represents a new vision for history studying of the Eastern Europe steppes nomadic peoples and its bordering areas too. Therefore it is very important for understanding the processes taking place in the world of the steppe tribes in the early Middle Ages as well as in the preceding period the Migration Epoch headed by the Huns. It is consolidated the main achievements of the author’s research in the article. Thus there is a new concept which is also proposed to change our approach to the history and outlook of the early nomads. Becides that it’s given a lot of new facts of the Bulgarian history and their related tribes. It is advanced the opinion that the establishment of the Khazar khanate ascendency of the in Eastern Europe is not historical regularity. The Khazars were able to create their powerful state only after the decline of previous nomadic empire in Eastern Europe – Great Bulgaria. The only prince was Kubrat (630-660 y.y.). The Bulgarian nation created some independent states on the edge of steppe region after the state separation and the defeat from the Khazar in 660-670 yy. AD. The strongest of them were Danubian Bolgaria and Volgarian Bulgaria (it’s modern Tatarstan in Russia). The ethnic Bulgarians – Black Bulgars and the ancestors of the Balkars in the Black Sea Coast and Northwest Caucasus, Burdjans (Burgans, Burgars, Burugunds?) and Bungars (Huns-Haylandurs?) on the Lower Volga and Northern Dagestan who staying in the steppes were forced to submit to the victorious Khazars. The Khazars rising, in the author’s opinion, was connected with the fact they headed the resistance of all the Ciscaucasian tribes from Arabs in 652/3 year. Bulgars (Burdjans) were protected only themselves from Arabs. The Bulgar ethnonym was used by the various nomadic tribes of Eastern Europe, who used it for the self-name, but in many variations. The author identifies several options of pronunciation and interpretation of those syllables, which the Bulgars ethnonym is consisted of. In his opinion the oldest pronunciation was the form “Bungar.” It is closed to the Turkic language similaring to Chuvashian and was assigned to the Northern Dagestan Bulgars (in the “kingdom of the Huns”), the Arab authors used the form “Bundzhar” or “B-n-djer”. The variation of the ethnonym known to us as “Burgar” could arised from the mixing of Iranian nomadic and semi-sedentary population Ciscaucasia ethnonyms – Burdjans (Burgans, Bulkans?), who came perhaps from the East Caspian or the Pamir region. Thus it is called the original Bulgars representatives of military units and whole tribes who were on the Hun’s service. The source of the military force were mongol-speaking peoples at first Syanbi and then nomadic Turks, Ugrians (Magyars) and Iranians (Maskuts, Burdjans, Alans). Becides that the author compares the names but not nations – Bulgars (i.e. Bungars) and Mongols (Mongors, Mungals). It is also compared such terms as Hun-Bulgarians and Tatar-Mongols in the Eastern Europe steppes history. The ruling Bulgarian clan Dulo author derived from the name of the river Tola (Tuul) in Mongolia, where previously there were power center of Нunnu and the leaders of the western Huns, respectively. It didn’t have formed a common language among the Bulgars in the entire area of Eastern Europe. The language of the ruling elite was ancient Turkic the same as Chuvashian. However, the Bulgarians who settled on the Danube, saved and used many Iranian, and perhaps even Tocharian words. It is noted by the modern researchers from Bolgaria.[/restab]

[restab title=”ABOUT AUTHOR“]

FINNIK S.V. – Kharkiv National University named after V.N. Karazin (Ukraine).[/restab]

[restab title=”FULL TEXT“]DOWNLOAD.[/restab][/restabs]