Shamsiddin Kamoliddin Ancient Turkic Toponyms of the Middle Asia 1 Shamsiddin Kamoliddin ANCIENT TURKIC TOPONYMS OF THE MIDDLE ASIA Ancient Turkic Place-Names in Ancient and Early Medieval Sources LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing 2 Impressum/Imprint (nur für Deutschland/only for Germany) Bibliografische information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek: Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Daten sin dim Internet über http://dnb.d-nb.de abrufbar. Alle im diesem Buch genannten Marken und Produktnamen unterliegen warenzeichen-, marken- oder patentrechtlichem Schutz bzw. sind Warenzeichen oder eingetragene Warenzeichen der jeweiligen Inhaber. Die Wiedergabe von Marken, Produktnamen Gebrauchsnamen, Handelsnamen, Warenbezeichnungen u.s.w. in diesem Werk berechtigt auch ohne besondere Kennzeichnung nicht zu der Annahme, dass solche Namen im Sinne der Warenzeichen- und Markenschutzgesetzgebung als frei zu betrachten wären und daher von jedermann benutzt warden dürften. Coverblind: www.ingimage.com Verlag: LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing GmbH & Co. KG Dudweiler Landstr. 99, 66123 Saarbrücken, Deutschland Telefon +49 681 3720-310, Telefax +49 681 3720-3109 Email: [email protected] Herstellung in Deutschland: Schaltungsdienst Lange o.H.G., Berlin Books on Demand GmbH, Norderstedt Reha GmbH, Saarbrücken Amazon Distribution GmbH, Leipzig ISBN: 978-3-8383-9828-0 Imprint (only for USA, GB) Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek: The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available in the Internet at http://dnb.d-nb.de Any brand names and product names mentioned in this book are subject to trademark, brand or patent protection and are trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective holders. The use of brand names, product names, common names, trade names , product descriptions etc. even without a particular marking in this works is in no way to be construed to mean that such names may be regarded as unrestricted in respect of trademark and brand protection legislation and could thus be used by anyone. Coverimage: www.ingimage.com Publisher: LAP Lambert Academic Publishing GmbH & Co. KG Dudweiler Landstr. 99, 66123 Saarbrücken, Germany Telefon +49 681 3720-310, Telefax +49 681 3720-3109 Email: [email protected] Printed in the U.S.A. Printed in the U.K. by (see last page) ISBN: 978-3-8383-9828-0 Copyright © 2010 by the author and LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing GmbH & Co. KG and licensors All rights reserved. Saarbrücken 2010 3 Kamoliddin S.S.Ancient Türkic Toponyms of the Middle Asia (Turkic Place-Names in Ancient and Early Medieval Sources). In this book the ancient Türkic toponyms of Middle Asia is investigated according to early medieval textual sources of the 7th – the beginning of 13th century on Arabian, Persian, Türkic and other languages. In addition to the written sources, in work are also used materials of medieval numismatics and epigraphics. The book will present interest for historians, philologists, orientalists and türkologists, and also for everyone who is interested in an ancient and medieval history of Middle Asia. © Shamsiddin Sirojiddin ogly Kamoliddin 4 CONTENTS Introduction P a r t 1. Physico-Geographical toponyms Macrotoponyms Hydronyms Oponyms Part 2. Types of Türkic toponyms Ethnotoponyms Anthropotoponyms Calques Hibrid toponyms Türkic topoformants Affixes P a r t 3. Northern Turkistan Yeti-su Syr-Darya basin Cach Farghana Khorezm P a r t 4. Central Turkistan Ustrushana Northern Sogd Western Sogd Eastern Sogd South Sogd P a r t 5. Southern Turkistan Northern Tokharistan South Tokharistan 5 Khurasan Conclusion Rezume Literature Abbreviations Proper names Place names Ethnonyms 6 INTRODUCTION Toponymic science firmly learned that territory of this or that people both in the present, and in the past can be determined with the help of toponymic areals [Ageeva 1979: 74]. Toponyms are an extremely valuable source, a kind of “language of the land”, it gives frequently more for the solution of ethnogenetical problems than tens of fortresses or burials, than the inadequate and confused testimony of ancient and medieval authors, than studies of revered researchers. In the “language of the land” the ancient natives of territory had left stronger historical trace than great commanders who chiseled stone inscriptions. “Language of the land” does not allow falsification. Geographical names are a type of documentary source inherently similar to archeological materials not dated and not deformed by time [Murzaev 1982: 43-44]. However, archeological monuments are unfortunately mute: disclosing the material culture and even social relations of the past, they are silent about the languages of the founders of these cultures [Nikonov 1978: 88]. Like archeology, toponyms have a number of layers belonging to different periods of time. Determining the language of ancient names is not an easy task. A historian studying historical toponyms should treat with care the results of works of even recognized authorities in the linguistics, and should involve whenever possible all complex of the available historical and geographical data [Ageeva 1979: 73, 76]. Many place names recorded in the sources as Greco-Roman and Chinese names in the base have Eastern Iranian or Türkic origin. The toponyms given in the Chinese sources usually are calques or equivalents of the local Türkic or Iranian-lingual names [Umurzakov 1978: 54-55]. Precise etymologizing of these names demands from researcher even greater scrupulousness and all-round analysis. Any place name exists not only from the moment of its recording in the sources. Hundreds, and maybe thousands years before the recording it could have been in the oral speech. Besides, far from all ancient toponyms were recorded in the written sources [Karaev 1985: 27]. One of the most ancient toponyms are the names of Iranian origin that survived in the territory of the Middle Asia1 everywhere, both in the Turan plains, and in the Pamir mountains, but much less of them are in the mountain the areas of the Inner Tian- Shan, in the Yeti-su and the steppe areas of Kazakhstan. However, it is impossible to assert that the Iranian names are the most ancient in the region [Karaev 1991: 130]. There is a number of toponyms that can’t be 1 Under the term “Middle Asia” we mean territory of the natural physical geographical Turkistan region limited in the west by the east the bank of Caspian Sea, in the north including Aral-Irtysh watershed, in the east – Tian-Shan, Pamir and Alai mountains, and in the south – Hindukush and Kopet Dagh mountains [Musketov 1915: 15]. In politico-administrative relation this term includes Uzbekistan, Tadjikistan, Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan, northern part of Afghanistan and a southern part of Kazakhstan. 7 positively attributed to establish their linguistic association2. In the southern zone of the northern hemisphere the initial toponyms began forming tens of thousand years ago [Koraev 1980: 16]. Is not also entirely true that only Iranists-Islamists are studying the historical geography of the Early Islamic period in the Middle Asia [Lurie 2004: 29]. Certainly, the toponymy is, first of all, a linguistic science. However it does not belong to the linguists only [Lurie 2004: 29]. Etymologizing toponyms, alongside with the linguistic analysis, requires a study of the history, areal geography, and also specifics of the vision of localities and geographical conditions by the native speaking people. Solely linguistic approach, without taking into account historical and geographical data not always results in reliable ethymology [Musaev 1984: 198]. And in antiquity, and Middle Ages, like today, the toponyms was a research object of not only linguists, but also historians and geographers. The materials of archeologicalal results do not allow to connect directly the Middle Asian civilization that arose in the 1st millenium BC with the cultures of the Bronze Age in the same territory. The most ancient pre-Indo-Iranian cultures in the Middle Asian interfluvial could be created by a traibal society and not necessarily connected with more complex forms of the social structure [Zeimal 1987: 152]. It is known that since the 5th – 4th milleniums BC, settled agricultural-cattle breeding communities with rudimentary proto-city cultures developed in the south of the Middle Asia, i. e. long before the coming of the Indo- Arian tribes [Masson 1984: 59-60]. Who were the founders of these most ancient cultures of the Middle Asia is not established till now. Supposedly, before the Indoarian occupation of the Middle Asia in the middle or the second half of the 2nd millenium BC, its southern areas were peopled by carriers of the Dravidian languages [Winters 1990: 120- 144]3. The newest toponymic and linguistic research allow to posit that in the 2nd millenium BC carriers of the Dravidian languages were in immediate contact with the carriers of proto-Türkic languages [Musaev 1984: 148-153], however their connections were severed by the invasion of the Indoarian newcomers [Iskhakov 1999: 251-255]. In some Türkic languages in the European part of Russia (Bulgarian, Khazarian, Chuvash), Siberia (Yakut) and the Far East survived the traces of the proto-Türkic language widespread in the most ancient times in the southern part of the Middle Asia. These relicts point to the presence in the 2 Among these are