AD ALTA
JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH
formed and continuing to develop anthroponym corps, on the
one hand, and the ability to reflect on the name, choose it for the
newborn, and then vary its naming, on the other, determine the
angle of viewing anthroponyms as existing “outside of a man”
and “inside of a man”. But only in recent years have
anthroponyms been considered from the point of view of
identifying the actual perception of the name of a member of a
particular linguocultural community. Naming semantics is
almost independent of language differences. At the moment,
many of the mentioned anthroponyms function in the names of
the Turkic peoples, which is explained either by the genetic
affinity of the ancient tribes or by prolonged contacting, which,
perhaps, determines the common anthroponymic vocabulary.
(15)
Having studied their anthroponymic systems, one can distinguish
three layers of anthroponyms. The first layer is the names
inherited from the ancient Türkic and medieval Kipchak
ethnonyms and anthroponyms. The second stratum is the names
of the Islamic period, which were developed in the New Turkic
era. The third layer of names is the names borrowed from the
anthroponymycon of the nations which contacted with each
other. At different stages of the evolution of society, its own
anthroponymic system functioned. Names are created based on a
language. So, on the basis of the ancient Türkic language, there
existed an ancient Türkic, ancient Kipchak anthroponymic
system. The formation and development of the anthroponymic
system are associated with the cultural traditions of the Turks,
Kipchaks, Bulgarians, Uigurs, Karluks. Tribal names, ethno-
anthroponyms of the Türks allowed determining the language-
basis of anthroponymic systems. In the Middle Turkic period
(10th – 15th centuries), tribes and clans merged, leading to the
formation of a single spiritual and material culture and what
caused the functioning in the nominal of Turkic anthroponyms
of various origins. The Turkification and the adoption of Islam
by the Golden Horde also greatly influenced the anthroposystem
of the Turks. The Middle Turk period can be divided into three
chronological stages: the Bulgarian stage (X – XIII centuries) as
the pre-Golden Horde period, the Golden Horde stage (XIII –
XV centuries) and the Late Golden Horde stage or the Tatar-
Khan period (middle XV - XVI centuries). The names of the
Turks in this period is characterized by the presence of
anthroponyms of common Turk and Arab origin. The
penetration of Muslim names occurred for several centuries. The
reason for this is the confrontation of the local paganism of the
new religion. (16)
3 Results and Discussion
Regarding the etymologies of the Turkic names mentioned in the
annals, there are significant developments of P. Goldan, N.
Baskakov, and O. Pritsak. Among the names of the most famous
Kipchaks were Sharukan, Otrok (Slavicization of Turk. Äträk),
Könčäk, Köpek), Kurya (Slavicization of Turk. Kürä, Kür er),
Boniak (Slavicization of Turk. Bögnäk), Beðlük, Köten,
Bashkord, Hzak or Koza (Slavicization, Turkic variants Qoza,
Qozy), Urusoba, Altunopa, Tugorkan (in the Byzantine
chronicles Tugortaq, Turk. Togri-Tarxan, Tugar-tegin),
Аепа,
Акуш (Aq-quš), Koban (latinization Guban, Turk. Kopan,
Qaban). The name Köten (Lat. Kuthen, Turk. Kötän) was
distributed as a name in the Mahmud al-Kashgari dictionary and
there is also a reason to derive the etymology of the name from
the ancient Türkic verb Quta. Urus-opa, Altun-opa, Arslan-opa,
Qitan-opa, Jenger-oba/
Čengir-apa/Čenegir-apa/Čengir-pa, Qay-
opa, It-oðli, Itlär, Qitan were names and ethnonyms. In general,
there were were twenty-eight Kipchak ethnonyms.
The names of the Otrok and Boniak (this form is close to the
Uyghur name Bögnäk) were also among the Oguzes, and Kurya
(Kürä, Kür er) was also the name of the Pechenegs. The
etymology of this name was also in Mahmud al-Kashgari.
Regarding the origin of the name Sharukan, the researchers
attributed to him the Proto-Mongolic (Širaqan), Bulgarian
(Šarakan), Turkic (Sazaðan) or Alanian (Šaraðan) occurrence.
Such names as Sugur, Samur, Taš, Bilge-tegin, Bašqurt, Saqal
had common Turkic etymologies. The name Sdwak generally
had an Iranian etymology (Sädäwäk).
Among other Kipchak leaders there were Azyðly, Aqysapa,
Aqlan, Baraq, Bildüz, Bakmiš/Baxmyš, Boluš, Berkapa,
Girgin/Kirgin/Kürgen, Jaksyn/Jyksyn, Eltut, Köksüz,
QoldačI,
Tatur, Turundaj,
Čuða, Qorqut, Qunuj, Kičik, Koräs, Kündädžik,
Osuluq, Sütemir, Santüz, Sawuk, Sarysan, Sürmär/ Sürbär, Taz,
Taryq.
Hungarian chronicles and documents, as well as Kypchak
anthroponymy in Hungary, contain rich material for research.
The code of Kipchak names and ethnonyms was summarized in
L. Rashonyi’s essay on Kypchak anthroponymy. The names are
mentioned in the chronicles such as Aquš (Aq-Quš), Bortz
(
Borč), Memborch (Men-Borč), Kuthen (Turk. Kötän), Uzur,
Alpra (Turk. Alpar, Albugra), Kemeneche (Turk.
Kämänče),
Oldamur (Turk. Altimir), Zeyhan, Keyran, Parabuch, Buthemer.
Among the names of lesser-known Kipchaks are Aboska (Turk.
Abušqa), Atlabarz (Alt
ї-bars), Backholda (Turk. Badžqoldї),
Baramuk (Baramuq), Beke (Beki), Biter, Buzkan (Buzðan),
Chybuk (Turk.
Čilbuk), Chakan (тюрк. Čaqan), Kachman
(
Qačman), Kaplan, Koncha (Turk.Qonšї), Michi, Menk, Mordar
(
тюрк. Murdar), Aydua (Turk. Ay Doða), Kopulch, Kupchech,
Tastra (Turk. Taš-Tura),
Тolon (Turk. Tolun), Тarzuk (Turk.
Torsuk), Turtule (Turk. Tört-el), Manthula, Kumcheg (Küncheg).
Turtule (Tört-el) and Kumcheg (Kuncheg); these are names and
ethnonyms. For the names, Zeyhan, Uzur, Mantula, Parabuch,
Buthemer, Menk, Michi, Kopulch no reliable Turkic
etymologies were found. For many names, L. Rashonyi found
etymologies in “Codex Cumanicus”.
Excerpts of the Kipchak language were recorded in the Mahmud
al-Kashgari Dictionary “Vault of the Turkic Language”. The
same is characteristic of the Oghuz language of the 10th – 11th
centuries, for which the only source is the information of
Mahmud al-Kashgari. This scientist, when presenting language
material, compared Oguz and Kipchak languages with
Karakhanid language. It was indicated how to pronounce the
word Oguz, and how to pronounce in the Kipchak language.
Anna Komnina also pointed to the ethnic affinity between the
Pechenegs and Kipchaks. She reported that Kipchaks and
Pechenegs spoke in the same language. Mikhail Syriysky
considered the Kipchaks one of the three parts of the Turks who
settled in the 10th – 11th centuries. The same Mahmud al-
Kashgari noted that the languages of the Bulgars, Suvars,
Badjanak (Pechenegs) are Türkic, but different from those of the
Kypchaks and Oguzes. Paying attention to these data, we should
note that in order to understand, the Kipchaks should have
spoken in the Oguz language (well, of course, they also owned
their own). This assumption is not improbable, since the
Pechenegs and Oguzes have been neighbors for several
centuries, and the Pechenegs should have known their language.
(17)
According to Mahmud al-Kashgari, the languages of Yagma and
Tukhsi were close to Oguz. That is, the Kipchaks and Oguzes
had a lot in common with the peoples of the era of the ancient
Turkic kaganats (the royal family of yagma came from Tokuz-
Oguz, and the Tukhs are descendants of Turgeshes. Turgeshes
were also called decadal Turks, referring to their continuity from
the Western Turkic Kaganate). It is possible to assume that for
Central Asia, the Oguz language was a kind of lingua franca. It
should be noted that during the Kipchak conquest, the Kipchaks
conquered many Oguz tribes and included them in their
composition.
Thus, we concluded that the language of the Kipchaks of the pre-
Mongol period was closer to the Oguz language than the modern
Kipchak languages. These languages can be considered ancient
Turkic. The Kipchak language was more archaic than the Turkic
“Codex Cumanicus”. The dictionary of Mahmud al-Kashgari is
almost the only monument where the Kipchak vocabulary of the
XI century is recorded. In addition, the monuments of the
Kipchak language are the names of the Kipchak leaders, which
are recorded in narrative sources from different countries. (18)
This study is one of the studies that ground the analysis of the
- 17 -