Overview of Sarmatian chronology
Ogur and Oguz
M.Bashtu "Shan Kyzy Dastany"
Kul Gali "Book of Huns"
Kul Gali "Tale of Joseph"
Kul Ashraf "Letter to Turkish Sultan"
|Djagfar Tarihi Preface Ě Chapters 1-5 Ě Chapters 6-10 Ě Chapters 11-15 Ě Chapters 16-20 Ě Chapters 21-25 and Ghazi-Baradj Ě Appendix|
|Djagfar Tarihi Contents Ě Volume 1 Ě Volume 1 Appendix Ě Volume 2 Ě Volume 3|
|Volume 3 Contents|
|Fargat Nurutdinov||DJAGFAR TARIHI publication story||pp. 6-10|
|Fargat Nurutdinov||Timing of the Kazan city foundation||pp. 11-15|
|Fargat Nurutdinov||Bulgarian Khans of all dynasties||pp. 81-103|
|Fargat Nurutdinov||Tore (Tengrianism)||pp. 110-124|
|Fargat Nurutdinov ?||Ukrainian Troy||pp. 129-141|
|Fargat Nurutdinov||How and when got to Kazan a Czech coin of the 10th c.||pp. 141-144|
|Fargat Nurutdinov||Unknown Mokhammediyar||pp. 145-156|
|Fargat Nurutdinov||Oldest History of Trident||pp. 157-166|
|Fargat Nurutdinov||Miniatures from the Djagfar Tarihi Annals||pp. 171-177|
|Kul Gali||HON KITABY A few advices for travelers to Tubdjak||pp. 16-30|
|Kul Gali||HON KITABY Description of Saksin||pp. 31-58|
|Kul Gali||HON KITABY Brief about Bulgaro-Kipchak relations||pp. 64-75|
|Kul Gali||HON KITABY Fragments||pp. 62-63|
|Kul Gali||Brief about Yar Chally||p. 169|
|Kultasi||Kazan History||pp. 60-62|
|Bakhshi Iman||Brief about Bulgarian Viziers||pp. 75-80|
|Bakhshi Iman||Fragments of ôDjagfar Tarihiô||pp. 59-60|
|Reykhan Bulgari||Flowers of the Kipchak Fields||pp. 103-106|
|Gazi Baba||Brief about Bulgarian Heraldry||p. 107|
|Gazi Baba||Bulgarian Calendars Tore and Kam-Boyans||pp. 108-109|
|Gazi Baba||Alphabet of Danube Bulgars||p.125|
|Gazi Baba||Batyr Djilan and Karamats (Sacred Groves, Temple)||pp. 126-128|
¤ţ šÓ ÔŰňÝŔ■ ÓÔ˛ţÓ Ŕ ŔšńÓ˛ňŰ ďÓŃÓ˛Ó ├ÓßńˇŰ-ŇÓýŔ˛ţÔŔ¸Ó ═ˇˇ˛ńŔÝţÔÓ, ţÝ šÓ´Ŕ˝ÓŰ Űň˛ţ´Ŕ˝Ýţň ˝ţńňŠÓÝŔň ˛ţýÓ 3 ŕÓŕ ŕţÝ˝´ňŕ˛. ¤ţ šÓ ÔŰňÝŔ■ ď.═ˇˇ˛ńŔÝţÔÓ, ŕţÝ˝´ňŕ˛ ŔšŰÓŃÓŰ Űň˛ţ´Ŕ˝Ýˇ■ ŔÝ˘ţýÓ÷Ŕ■ ˝ÔţńÓ ô─ŠÓŃ˘Ó ĎÓŔ§Ŕô Ŕš ´ţ§Ŕ¨ňÝÝţŃţ ţŔŃŔÝÓŰÓ ´ňňÔţńÓ ˝ÔţńÓ. ¤ţ šÓ ÔŰňÝŔ■, Ôţ Ôňý ˇ¸ňßű Ô Ó˝´ŔÓÝ˛ˇň ╚▀╦╚ ╩ď└═ ĐĐĐđ (╚Ý˝˛Ŕ˛ˇ˛ ▀šűŕÓ Ŕ ╦Ŕ˛ňÓ˛ˇű ╩ÓšÓÝ˝ŕţŃţ ˘ŔŰŔÓŰÓ └ŕÓńňýŔŔ ÝÓˇŕ ĐĐĐđ), ď. ═ˇˇ˛ńŔÝţÔ ´ű˛ÓŰ˝ ţŃÓÝŔšţÔÓ˛Ř ´ˇßŰŔŕÓ÷Ŕ■ ´ňňÔţńÓ Űň˛ţ´Ŕ˝ňÚ, Ýţ ´ŔÔňŰţ ř˛ţ ŕ ´ţ˛ŔÔţ´ţŰţŠÝţýˇ ňšˇŰŘ˛Ó˛ˇ, Ô 1982 Ńţńˇ Ô˝ň ßŰţŕÝţ˛ű ˝ ˛ňŕ˝˛ţý ´ňňÔţńÓ ═ŔŃýÓ˛ˇŰŰŔÝÓ ßűŰŔ ´ţ§Ŕ¨ňÝű ˝ ńÓ¸Ŕ ňŃţ ţ˛÷Ó. Ë ď.═ˇˇ˛ńŔÝţÔÓ ˝ţ§ÓÝŔŰÓ˝Ř ˛ţŰŘŕţ ¸Ó˝˛Ř ´ňňÔţńÓ ô─ŠÓŃ˘ÓÓô ŕţ˛ţÓ ÝÓ§ţńŔŰÓ˝Ř Ô ňŃţ ╩ÓšÓÝ˝ŕţý ńţýň, ÔŔńŔýţ, ÝŔŕÓŕŔň ˝ţ§ÓÝŔÔ°Ŕň˝ šÓ´Ŕ˝Ŕ Ýň ßűŰŔ ˝ţß˝˛ÔňÝÝűýŔ ´ňňÔţńÓýŔ ═ŔŃýÓ˛ˇŰŰŔÝÓ. Ďňý Ýň ýňÝňň, ď. ═ˇˇ˛ńŔÝţÔ ˇŕÓšűÔÓň˛ Ô ˛ňŕ˝˛ň ¸˛ţ Ýňŕţ˛ţűň ¸Ó˝˛Ŕ - ř˛ţ ţŔŃŔÝÓŰŘÝűÚ ´ňňÔţń ═ŔŃýÓ˛ˇŰŰŔÝÓ.
═ţýňÓ ˝˛ÓÝŔ÷ ţ˛Ýţ˝ ˛˝ ŕ ˝ţţ˛Ôň˛˝˛Ôˇ■¨ňÚ ŕÝŔŠÝţÚ ´ˇßŰŔŕÓ÷ŔŔ. ¤ňńŰÓŃÓňýÓ ŕţ´Ŕ ´ň¸Ó˛ÝţŃţ ŔšńÓÝŔ Ýň ßűŰÓ ńţŰŠÝűý ţßÓšţý ´ţÔňňÝÓ, Ŕ ˝ţńňŠŔ˛ ţ´ň¸Ó˛ŕŔ Ŕ ţ°ŔßŕŔ šÓ ŕţ˛ţűň ŔšÔŔÝ ■˝Ř Ŕ ÝÓýňňÝ ˝ţ ÔňýňÝňý Ŕ˝´ÓÔŔ˛Ř. ─ţ ˛ň§ ´ţ, ´ţ˝˛ŔÝŃ ńÓň˛ ´ţÝ ˛Ŕň ţß ţß¨ňý ˝ţńňŠÓÝŔŔ Ŕ ńň˛ÓŰŘÝţ˝˛Ŕ Űň˛ţ´Ŕ˝Ŕ.
¤ţ ˝ÝňÝŔ ôýű°ŕţÚ ˝Ôň§ˇô Ô ţ˝ÝţÔÝţý ˝Űňńˇ■˛ ţ´ňńňŰňÝŔ ý ╦ň˛ţ´Ŕ˝Ŕ Ŕ ´ňń˝˛ÓÔŰ ■˛ ÔšŃŰ ńű ňň ÓÔ˛ţţÔ; ŕţ˛ţűň ýţŃˇ˛ ţ˛ŰŔ¸Ó˛Ř˝ ţ˛ ŔšÔň˝˛Ýű§ ŔŰŔ ´ŔÝ ˛ű§ Ô¸ňÓ ŔńňÚ. ╬ÝŔ ÔŰ ■˛˝ Űˇ¸°ŔýŔ ŔÝ˛ň´ň˛Ó÷Ŕ ýŔ Ŕ Ýňŕţ˛ţűň Ŕš ÝŔ§ ýţŃˇ˛ ßű˛Ř Ýň´ÓÔŔŰŘÝű Ŕš-šÓ Ýň´ÓÔŔŰŘÝţÚ ŔÝ˛ň´ň˛Ó÷ŔŔ ˛ňŕ˝˛Ó ´ňňÔţń¸Ŕŕţý. ¤ňňÔţń¸Ŕŕ Űň˛ţ´Ŕ˝Ŕ ˝ Ď■ŕŔ ÝÓ đˇ˝˝ŕŔÚ ţ˝˛ÓÔŔŰ ýÝţŠň˝˛Ôţ Ď■ŕŔšýţÔ Ô ˝Ôţňý ´ňňÔţńň, Ŕ ţÝŔ ˝ţ§ÓÝňÝű Ô └ÝŃŰŔÚ˝ŕţý ´ňňÔţńň, ˝ ´ţ ˝ÝňÝŔ ýŔ ôýű°ŕţÚ ˝Ôň§ˇô Ńńň ÔţšýţŠÝţ, ŔŰŔ ´ţ ˝ÝňÝŔ ýŔ ţ˛ýň¸ňÝÝűýŔ ŃţŰˇßűý. ─Ó˛ű Ô šÓŃţŰţÔŕÓ§ ŃŰÓÔ ńţßÓÔŰňÝű ´Ŕ ´ňňÔţńň ÝÓ └ÝŃŰŔÚ˝ŕŔÚ; Ŕ ÔŰ ■˛˝ Ýň˛ţ¸ÝűýŔ ŔÝńŔŕÓ˛ţÓýŔ ţ´Ŕ˝űÔÓňýţŃţ ´ňŔţńÓ. ¤ţ ˝ÝňÝŔ ´ňňÔţń¸ŔŕÓ ÝÓ └ÝŃŰŔÚ˝ŕŔÚ ÔűńňŰňÝű ŃţŰˇßűýŔ Ŕ˛ÓŰŔŕÓýŔ.
STRUCTURE OF THE ôNIGMATULLIN'S TEXTô
2. Introduction article and notes Bahshi Imana (1680)
3. Book Kul Gali ôthe Hon of a Kitabyô (1242)
4. Book Musy Ibn Halilja ôData on cities, menzels and roads of the Bulgarian State, useful to those who goes on them...ô (1460th) with postscripts of Ibragim Bahshi,
5. The annals of the Gazi-Baradjôthe Gazi-Baradj Tarihiô (1246)
6. A note of the Gazi-Baba ôthe Biography of the Gazi-Baradjô (1262Ń.)
7. The book of sheikh Mohammed - Aminaôthe Just way, or Pious acts of Bulgarian sheikhsô (1483)
8. Annals Mohammedjara of the Bu-Yurganôthe Kazan Tarihiôorôthe Bu-Yurgan of a Kitabyô (1551)
9. Annals Tahtagula ôShahri the Gazan dastanyô
10. Annals Ish~Mohammeda ô Sheikh - Gali a Kitaby ô (1605)
11, the Annals It is hard (Tuk) Mohammed (17 century)
12. Annals Ahmetzyana Kultasi (18 century)
13. Notes and postscripts of owners of manuscript Karashevyh (18-19 centuries), using this annals Sajfetdina and dr.istochnikov.
Conclusion about a degree of reliability of messages of Bahshi Iman annalistic collection ôDjagfar Tarihiô
Kazan is the only large city in the world which does not have an established date of its foundation. Almost everyone of the tens of the authors who wrote about Kazan gave completely different dates of the foundation for that city.
A necessity arose recently to expose the most reliable date of the foundation and the history of the Kazan city, caused by a drive to solodify the sovereignty of the republic, raised the interest to the collection of the Bahshi Iman medieval Bulgarian annals ôDjagfar Tarihiô (1680). It is understandable: this collection is a unique monument telling in enough detail about the emergence and the medieval history of the Kazan city.
The fate of the annals manuscript is dramatic and in general looks like follows. Initially, most likely, it was kept in the office of the Bulgarian national-liberation revolt leader in the 1681-1684 seid Djagfar, and after the crush of the insurgents it could hidden in a secluded place by somebody of the Djagfar's followers, or it came into the hands of the participants in the retaliatory expeditions (ôService Tatarsô). Among the earliest owners of the collection is mentioned a family of Kultasi or Kultari (Bahshi Iman, Djagfar Tarihi, vol. 2. Orenburg, 1994, page 125,133,141-142, etc.). On the boundary of the 18th-19th centuries as testify the postscripts to the text in the collection, an owner of the ôDjagfar Tarihiô manuscript becomes a Kryashen (i.e. Christian Tatars - Translator's Note) Karashev family, who lived in the city of Kazan (one of the Karashev's postscripts is dated by 1837. Bakhshi Iman. Djagfar Tarihi, Vol. 1 Orenburg, 1994, page 387). As testifies Kaüm Nasyri-Bulgari, for the Kryashens the ancient Bulgarian books were as sacred as for the Moslems. He tells that one Kryashen had three chests of the ancient Bulgarian books (see Kaüm Nasyri. Selected Works. Kazan, 1977, page 67).
In the middle of the 19th century the collection manuscript, probably, was purchased by the Kazan community of the Itil Bulgars-Vaisovies (they were called by the surname of the head of that community, Bagautdin Vaisov). I make this conclusion from the following.
First, at that time only the Bulgars-Vaisovies were actively collecting the ancient
Bulgarian books and have created a library in the Kazan. This library has been
ravaged in the 1884 by the Russian authorities (D.Minullin. From
the history of the Tatar education.-Tatarstan, N 7-8, 1995, page 30).
Secondly, a rendering of a fragment from the collection manuscript, the record of the owner of the collection Ahmetzyan Kultasi about the djurs (combatants) of the Bulgarian Kan Altynbek Alan, has been published in an article ôThe Descendants of the Bulgarsô (Red Tataria, June, 22, 1927) as a legend of the Bulgars-Vaisovies. The same article tells that many Vaisovan documents burned up in a fire in the village Kudash in the 1887. Evidently, the Vaisovies could save the ôDjagfar Tarihiô manuscript in the 1884, and also in the 1887.
Thirdly, my parental great-grandfather, Bayram-Gali Nigmatullin, also was a Vaisovan, exiled by the Russian authorities at the end of the 19th century to Siberia, and resurfaced in the end in the city of Kyzylyar - Petropavlovsk (Kazakhstan). Probably, someone from his comrades-Vaisovans (in total were exiled then about 300 families of Bulgars-Vaisovans), or he himself moved the manuscript of the ôDjagfar Tarihiô from the Kazan province to Petropavlovsk. The son of Bayram-Gali was Muhammed-Karim (1883-1961), my grandfather, and my uncle Ibragim was a son of Mohammed-Karim.
Thus, the path of the manuscript collection in the 19th century looks like this: The house of Karashev - library of Vaisovies in Kazan (before the pogrom of the 1884) - a house of a Vaisovan (possibly, in the village Kudash) who hid the saved manuscript at his place - the house of the exiled Bulgar-Vaisovan in Petropavlovsk (from the end of the 19th century).
As we see, the collection manuscript for a long time was in the hands of Kryashens in the beginning , and then in the hands of the Vaisovies, who lived separately enough from the Russians and the Tatars, and this explains how it did not become an object of science in the 19th - the beginning of the 20th century.
And in 1930es, when the mass destruction of the Arabographic literature in
the USSR spread on a wholesale scale (started at the end of the 1920es), my uncle Ibragim
Nigmatullin (1916-1941) made a record of the text of the ôDjagfar Tarihiô
manuscript in Russian language, undoubtedly for save the text. About that time the
National Poet of Dagestan Rasul Gamzatov writes:ô...There were years when the Arabian language
was declared a
bourgeois vestige. Have suffered the people who read and wrote in Arabic, and
have suffered also. Were lost whole libraries collected with the great efforts...ô (R.Gamzatov. My Dagestan. ╠.,
1972, page 415). In the 1939 the operatives of the People's
Commissariat of Internal Affairs in the Petropavlovsk, who received a ôsignalô (snitch rat) (ôdonosô
is one of the most popular Russian words, but I have a problem finding a popular
English equivalent - Translator's Note) that
in the Nigmatgullin family are kept ancient manuscripts, summoned my uncle ôfor
But, the family legend tells, the manuscript collection in the 1930es was not
held in the Nigmatullin
family, and after he gave his ôevidenceô I.Nigmatullin was released.
It attests that the Cheka security officers either have already located the ôunlawful manuscriptô, or
believed that it was destroyed (the custodians of the
manuscript could bury it, destroy, etc., and a search by the Cheka security officers
would have given nothing).
In the 1941 I.Nigmatullin vanished missing in action during the WWII (Great Patriotic War in Russian - Translator's Note). The copy of the manuscript collection text, made by I.Nigmatullin (ôNigmatullin's textô), was secretly stored from that time (together with other belongings of my uncle) by his mother, my grandmother Latyfa-apa, until 1966, when she has shown me the I.Nigmatullin's archive for the first time.
In that archive in one bundle were ordinary school notebooks with the texts of the ôDjagfar Tarihiô, poem of Michael-Shamsi Bashtu ôShan kyzy dastanyô (882) and the tales ôBaradj dastanyô (15th century) in Russian. In the 1976, Latyfa-apa died, and according to her will, the I.Nigmatullin's archive has been handed to me.
At the end of 1970es, being a post-graduate student in the IYaLI KFAN USSR (Institute of Language and Literature of the Kazan Branch of the USSR Academy of Sciences - Translator's Note), I used the information from the ôDjagfar Tarihiô in my dissertation, and besides I made a few reports about this monument at the seminars of the post-graduate students and of the whole collective of the Institute. But the administration of the Istitute forbade me to use the information of the ôDjagfar Tarihiô, prompting me in the beginning of the 1980es to write a letter to the USSR AofS with a request for an opportunity to publish the ôDjagfar Tarihiô. Soon after that, in the 1982, some ôunknownsô robbed the summer residence of my father G-H.N. Nurutdinov in the town Observatory, but they stolen only all notebooks of I.Nigmatullin with the text of the collection. It was known that I live and keep the uncle's notebooks in the summer cabin (my father in the 1982 was very sick, and I had to help him). I retained only a part of the ôDjagfar Tarihiô text, which I have had time to copy, and a few of my articles, where were used some records of the collection (these materials were fortunately in the Kazan.
Most of these surviving materials I managed to prepare, in the 1990-1993, for publication, which was done in the 1994 in Orenburg as a two-volume edition (see Bakhshi Iman. Djagfar Tarihi, Vol 1 and 2. Orenburg, 1994; abreviated below ôDTô).
But before, in 1989-1990, I gave the text of the collection and its written
monuments (ôShan kyzy dastanyô, ôBaradj dastanyô)
to the scientific and culture specialists. In the 1991 in Turkey and in the Ukraine
was published the text of the Michael-Shamsi Bashtu poem ôShan kyzy dastanyô,
in the 1991-1992 in the Orenburg was published the text of the ôBaradj dastanyô
legend. During the
1990-1991 a number of Turkish, Ukrainian and Kazan scientists brought out
information of the ôDjagfar Tarihiô into the scientific circulation. Of the Kazan scientists, the
first was the Architecture Ph.D. N.Kh.Khalitov (see N.Halitov
Architecture of the Kazan mosques. Kazan 1991, and the numerous articles), a
professor of the Kazan State Architectural - Construction Academy I.N.Agisheva
(see I.N.Agisheva. Emergence of the Kazan city and its development up to the 1552. Tatarstan, No 11-12, 1995,
and other articles), a dean of
the National History faculty of the Kazan State Pedagogical University O.L.Malysheva
(see O.L.Malysheva. During pagan era.-Tarstan, No 11-12, 1995 and other articles), etc.
As seen, since I brought it from the Petropavpovsk to Kazan, the text of the ôDjagfar Tarihiô collection was never a secret for the scientists . But, as usual, appeared people who questioned the reliability of the ôDjagfar Tarihiô. These ôskepticsô were: B.F.Sultanbekov (an expert in the field of the Marxism-Leninism philosophy), M.I.Akhmetzyanov, Kh.Ü.Minnegulov, N.G.Üzeev (all three are philologists of the Kipchak Khanaate time), M.A.Ushanov (Kipchak Khanaate belletrist), A.G.Muhamadeev (numismatist - fiction writer), D.I.Ishakov (Kipchak Khanaate ethnographer ), R.G.Fakhrutdinov (Kipchak Khanaate archeologist). However, ôDjagfar Tarihiô is a Bulgarian source, and its study naturally demands a special preparation in the Bulgarology area (science studying the history and culture of the Bulgars), and the ôscepticsô are all Kipchak Khanaate specialists (scientists studying the history of the Mongolian empire tribes and its uluses-hordes). A difference between the Bulgarology and Kipchak Khanaate studies is not smaller, than between the Bulgarian and Mongolian languages. Not being the experts, as we can see, the ôskepticsô, without any analysis of the ôDjagfar Tarihiô data, declared globally that the collection is... a fake. Such inconsiderate attitude toward a historical source met a sharp condemnation by the outstanding scientists. So, the academician I.R.Tagirov noted: ôOne of the dispute problems is the origin of the Türkic peoples. .. There are many mysteries... Lately were advanced not a few... materials toward the solution. In this case I mean what is known to us as the creation of Shamsi Bashtu,ôDjagfar Tarihiô (ôHistory by Djagfarô). In our science is a tendency of unequivocal outright denial of these works from the point of their reliability and objectivity. But I realize that outright denial is not right, for such fine creations cannot arise in an empty place and, especially, as a contemporary falsification. If these is falsification, who are their ingenious creators? Nobody can name themô (I.R.Tagirov Science and sovereignty of the Tatarstan.-ôAbu Gali Sinaô, Tatarstan, No 9-10, 1995, p.8).
To that we shall add, that search (ôby the skepticsô) of some ôinfallibleô historical sources is absurd, since those
simply do not exist in the nature. Any sources, any annals are to some extent subjective, and this
or that historic fact is established on the basis of the comparative analysis of
the most different and independent historical sources. In any source, in any
annals are mistakes and other errors. Nevertheless the historians use these
sources. Remember that in the 19th century Russian
declared the ôStory of Bygone Yearsô and the ôRus Truthô,
the main sources on the history of Russia, to be dubious, but however these
till now remain the main Russian sources (A.M.Saharov. A historiography of the
history of the USSR. ╠.,
1978, page 108). And how many time the scientists-ôskepticsô declared
the ôTale about Igor's campainô a fake!
And what? This work remains the base of the Russian literature.
And what write the Kazan scientists who already investigated the character and the degree of reliability of the data in the ôDjagfar Tarihiô collection.
N.Kh.Khalitov, starting the analysis of the records in the ôDjagfar Tarihiô, noted:ô One of the most mysterious and intriguing sources...is the not yet published hand-written collection of the Bulgarian annalsô... ôHistory of Djagfarô (ôDjagfar Tarihiô in Russian translation), a manuscript of which is in personal possession of the historian F.G.Nurutdinov and in preparation for publication. It contains quite a number if information about the mosques and other buildings in the Bulgarian cities..., which the manuscript owner has kindly allowed to me to use in this work. These information requirea a most serious study and analysis, and until their confirmation by the archeological or other materials, it can be considered to be legendary. A similar publication of the legendary siurces was repeatedly attempted by the past researchers. Among them can be named the works of P.E.Zarinsky, N.F.Katanova, S.Mardjani, K.Nasyri's, and others.ô (N.Khalitov. Cited work, page 8). In his later works N.Kh.Khalitov repeatedly notes that the last discoveries of the archeologists and architects confirm the information from the ôDjagfar Tarihiô Annals. For example, citing the conclusion of the specialists about the beginning of the Cathedral Mosque in the Bolgar city in the 1230-1260, N.Kh.Khalitov writes: ôDo not also conflict with the cited dating the dating and information given in the Djagfar Tarihi...ô (N.Khalitov, Main Mosque of the Golden Horde? - Tatarstan, N 7-8, 1995, page 80). Discussing the research of the same Cathedral Mosque, N.Kh.Khalitov emphasizes: ôPer the study of S.Aydarov, at the end of the 13th century the building has been capitally reconstructed. ôDjagfar Tarihiô confirms: ôDuring Emir Mohammed-Alame (1293-1307) the mosque was given the present form, and it received a nameô Ismaildan Djamiô (Ibid, page 80), etc.
I.N.Agisheva, who uses the data of the ôDjagfar Tarihiô for a number of
years to reconstruct the look of the medieval Kazan, gives such
a conclusion about this source: ô ôDjagfar Tarihiô Annals gives a bright
and colorful picture of the emergence amd development of our city, its life and
the culture of the citizens. Many moments of its spatial - planning features and
architecture, described in the Annals, are confirmed by the known annals,
iconographic and archive materials, and the results of the historico-archeological, town-planning and
architectural research, by the city and its environs geomorphology dataô
(I.N.Agisheva. Cited work., page 62).
The Collection is a complex enough composition. Bakhshi Iman, as it is already visible from a cursory review the collection text, joined in a single work very different in the style, scientific level and a degree of reliability Bulgarian Annals of the 9th-17th centuries. That he had them by his hand we can't doubt: the leading Russian publicist of the 16th c. priest Ivan Glazatyi, who worked in the 1564-1565 with the Bulgarian annals while writing his ôKazan Historyô (this work is also called ôHistory of the Kazan kingdomô and ôKazan Chroniclerô) writes: ôAbout the foundation of the Kazan kingdom, at what time or how it came about, I did not find in the Rus annals, but saw a little in the Kazanian annals (Kazan History, -For Russian Land, 1991, p150) This statement sweeps completely aside the assertions of some historians about a total destruction of all Bulgarian annals during the storm of the Kazan by the Ivan IV armies in the 1552.
The data of the ôDjagfar Tarihiô Annals gives a testimony that already in the 1003-1004 in the territory of the Kazan existed a settlement Bish-Balta (Bish-Baltavar). This same information points that in 1103 Kazan became a real city (DT, Vol. 1, page 118), when the Bulgarian Prince Shamgun Sham-Sain (Shamgun-Sain) were established in the territory of the present center of the republic capital were established three fortifications (ôÜgary Kermanô in the place of the present Kremlin, ôKalganô to the south of it by the Lenin streetô, both on the Bogyltau hill, and ôAbikyulô - in the lowlands near the present parks Black Lake and Lenin Garden), united in one city Uchel - ôThree Citiesô (ôuchô is three, ôelô is city, fortification, country, territory, province). In the 1220, as tells the ôDjagfar Tarihiô, Uchel received the name of the Bulgarian supreme commander Gazan, which later in the folk vernacular obtained the form Kazan -ôKazan' ô in Russian (DT, Vol. 1, page 156). In the 1361, as tells the ôDjagfar Tarihiô, Kazan again is renamed to Bolgar al-Djadid (DT, Vol. 1, page 211), and in the 1431 it returns the name Kazan - Kazan' (DT, Vol. 1, page 233). Besides that, ôDjagfar Tarihiô describes Kazan in detail.
Many messages of the ôDjagfar Tarihiô Óßabout the foundation and early history of the Kazan are supported by the records of the Rus sources, first of all by the annals. We shall cite only some of these records.
1). ôDjagfar Tarihiô informs about the foundation and the early history of the city of Kazan by the (future Kan) Shamgun-Sain. Ivan Glazatyi, the author of the ôKazan History ô (1565), writes that the founder of the Kazan city was ôtsarô Sain the Bolgarian (ôKazan Historyô. M. - L, 1954, page 47; further on - KH).
2). In accordance with the ôDjagfar Tarihiô, the city Bolgar in the
1028-1183 was officially calle Ibragim. i,e ôBryahimô, ôBryagovô by
Ruses (DT, Vol. 1, page 109, 142), and was a possession of Shamgun-Sain. Ivan
Glazatyi also writes, that ôSain the Bulgarianô
arrived to the place of the future Kazan from the city ôBryagovô (KH,
3). Ivan Glazatyi writes, that during the establishment of Kazan near it lived refugees from the Rostov area of Russia, who did not want to accept Christianity, and who were remembering their Rostov origin. The antichristian revolt in the Rostov land, noted by the Rus chroniclers, happened only once, and it is dated by 1071 (PRSL, Vol. 1. L., 1926-1928, page 175-179; PRSL, Vol. 2. SPb, 1908, page 164-168, etc.) (PRSL is Russian abbreviated transcription for the ôTale of the Bygone Yearsô aka ôRussian primary Chronocleô - Translator's Note).
This message indirectly confirms that the city of Kazan was established in 1103, surely the migrants still could remember their Rostov origin in the 1103, more than 32 years after their flight from the ôRostovshchinaô (in 1071) (ôRostovshchinaô is ôusuryô in Russian, ôrostô is ôgainô, a reminder that Djir lands were loaned, together with their Türkic inhabitants, to the Rus prince for an annual payment of ôgainô - ôrostô, whish, in turn, was collected from the population - Translator's Note).
4).ôDjagfar Tarihiô testifies, that right after the establishment of the Uchel-Kazan in the 1103, flared a Three-year Bulgaro-Rus war, which ended after a campaign by the Bulgars to the Balyn-Suzdal (DT, Vol. 1, page 118). Ivan Glazatyi confirms that right after building of the Kazan the Bulgarian ôtsarô started Bulgaro-Rus war which lasted ôthree summers(years)ô -i.e.ô three yearsô (KH, page 48). Elementary calculation show that if Uchel - Kazan was established in the 1103, the Three-year war took place in the 1104-1107. Others Russian chronists note that the seige of Suzdal by the Bulgars was in the 1107 (PRSL, Vol. 33. L., 1977, page 40), which coincides with the chronology of the ôDjagfar Tarihiô.
5). Ivan Glazatyi directly points in his ôKazan Historyô that Kazan during the first stage of its existence (even at the end of the 12th century) was not yet called Kazan and gives one of the Bulgarian names of the early Kazan - ôSainô (KH, page 47).ôDjagfar Tarihiô confirms this name, it contains a message about a Sainian moat, separating Ügary Kerman from the other part of Uchel (DT, Vol. 1, page 118).
6). The existence of the initial name of the Kazan, ôUchelô, is indirectly proved by the Ivan Glazatyi's remark that Kazan was established in the border zone of three lands: Bulgarian, Vyatka and Perm, and in fact the ôUchelô can be also translated to Russian as ôThree landsô (KH, page 47).
7). The existence of the initial name of the Kazan,ôUchelô, is
proved also that as established by A.H.Halikov, the Rus chroniclers
mentioned Kazan under the 1205 under its Mari name ôHomolaô (see A.H.Halikov,
Time, place of emergence and the name of the Kazan city, - From the history of
the culture and life of the Tatar people and its ancestors. Kazan, 1976), and
the ôKomolaô (ôHomolaô is the Russian form for the Mari name ôKomolaô)
in the Mari means ôThree (kom) Cities (ola)ô.
8) The existence of the initial name of the Kazan,ôUchelô, is proved also by the message in the Rus annals that the Suzdal prince Andrey Bogolyubsky, before taking of the city Bryahimov-Bryagov (Ibragim - Bolgar) in the 1164, burned ô3 citiesô (PRSL, Vol. 1, SPb., 1846, page 150). As is known, the Rus troops were extremely seldom could take the well fortified Bulgarian cities, and if it really happened, they mentioned these cities by their names. Therefore just to imagine that Andrey Bogolyubsky took at once three different Bulgarian cities is impossible. Besides, on the way to the city Bolgar, from r. Sura to the r. Itil (the Rus armies always moved along this way to the center of the Bulgaria), in the middle of the 12th century were no cities except the Uchel, which Andrey Bogolyubsky (as informs the ôDjagfar Tarihiô) burned on the way to the Bolgar - Bryahimov (DT, Vol. 1, page 131). All this forces a recognition that the ô3 citiesô in the annals is the Rus translation of the name Uchel - ôThree Citiesô.
9). The existence of the initial name of the Kazan, ôUchelô, and the message of the ôDjagfar Tarihiô about the establishment of the Uchel-Kazan in the 1103 is directly proved by the messages of Rus annals about the attack of the Novgorod prince Mstislav against ôOchelaô in the 1111 (see S.M.Soloviev, History of the Russian State from the avcientest times, Book 1, ╠, p. 680), and about the attack of the Suzdal Prince Svyatoslav against the Itil city Oshel in the 1220 (PRSL, Vol. 1. SPb, 1846, page 188, etc.). That the ôOchelaô and ôOshelô are the Uchel - Kazan is proved by the following. In all the Itil did not exist, except for the Uchel, a city with a name even vaguely similar to the ôOchelaô and ôOshelô of the annals. In the ôDjagfar Tarihiô these attacks are described as the raids of the Rus Princes against the Uchel - Kazan (DT, Vol. 1, page 72, 153-155). That the Rus chroniclers distorted the name Uchel is not surprising. The distortion of the Bulgarian names is emblematic for the Rus annals. So, the Northern Rus chronicler in one message (about attack against Uchel in the 1220) managed to distort the name of Uchel twice: in the beginning he called Uchel ôOshlyavaô, and then he called Uchel ôOshelô (PRSL, Vol 33. l., 1977, Page 61-62).
Besides, one Russian chronicler, whose data are used by V.N.Tatishchev for the description of the Suzdal attack in the 1220 against the Uchel (he calls Uchelô ôAshlaô), calls the Uchelian prince ôUgrianô (V.N.Tatishchev, Russian History, Vol 4. M.-L., 1964, page 357). The word ôUgrianô here is obviously a deformed rendition of the Kazan Kremlin name, the residences of the Kazan Beks (Princes) ôÜgary Kermanô (ôUgrianô is a distortion of the ôÜgaryô), and this also confirms that messages about Oshel (Ochela, Oshyava, Ashel) belong to the Uchel-Kazan.
10). The existence of the name ôÜgary Kermanô in the Kazan Kremlin, given
only in the ôDjagfar Tarihiô, is proved directly by Ivan Glazatyi who calls
the Kazan Kremlin (ôKremlô means fortress in Tatar -
Translator's Note) ôVyshgorodô (ôÜgary Kermanô means
precisely ôUpper Cityô, i.e. ôVyshgorodô in the Old Rusian) in the description of
the storm of the Kazan by Ivan IV armies in the 1552: ô And the Kazanians
run up to the Vyshgorod and did not have time to lock it up; they
come running into the Khan's court and in the Khan's palace and fought Russians
with rocks, and clubs, and facing lumber...ô (Kazan History. -For the Russian
Land. Chelyabinsk, 1991, Page 288).
11). The Russian annals also confirm the message of the ôDjagfar Tarihiô about the renaming Uchel to Gazan (╩ÓzÓÝ) in the 1220 and renaming Kazan to Bolgar al-Djadid. So, the Rus Nikonov annals under the 1229 year notes: ôThe Bolgars, called Kazanes, sent to the great Knyaz Üry Vsevolodovich (to ask) for peaceô - ôThe Bulgars called Kazanes, sent ambassadors to the great Knyaz Üry Vsevolodovich to negotiate peaceô (PRSL, Vol. 10. M., 1965, page 98). Under the 1376 the Nikonov annals inform about the campaign of the Russian Princes ô (against) Bolgars,called Kazan...ô -ô(against) Bolgar as Kazan is called ...ô (PRSL, Ď.11. ╠., 1965, page 25).
12). Ivan Glazatyi directly iindicates that the city Kazan was founded before 1164, because in that year ôBryagovô was destroyed and seized to exist, and Sain the Bulgarian came to establish the Kazan city from the city of Bryagov that was still existing.(KH page 48).
To that we shall add that the limestone wall of the 12th century Kazan, found during the excavation of the 1977-1978 in the Kazan Kremlin, reminds very much (in the opinion of the archeologist A.H.Halikov) the limestone wall of the Novgorod Ladoga fortress of the 1114 (see History of Kazan, Book 1. Kazan, 1988, page 16-17). How not to recollect in respect with the date of the 1114 the date of the establishment of the Kazan of the ôDjagfar Tarihiô, 1103, and the year of the attack on the Uchel by the Novgorod prince - the year 1111 !
We could continue this list of concurrences of the ôDjagfar Tarihiô data and the data of the Russian annals, but we think, the above is quite enough material for this statement: the data of the ôDjagfar Tarihiô about the establishment (in 1103) and the early history of the Kazan city are confirmed directly and indirectly by a number of messages in the Russian annals, and this translates them into a historic fact.
As to the date of the ô1177ô, advanced as a foundation date of the Kazan city by some scientists, it not only is not supported by any of the known historical sources, but it also contradicts all the historical data. As is known, the Ivan Glazatyi original work is lost, and we have several copies of his history. The date ô1177ô is shown only in one of the copies of the ôKazan Historyô, and in the other copy of the same ôKazan Historyô is another date of the ôfoundation of the Kazanô, 1172 (PRSL, Vol. 19. SPb., 1903, page 10). But the date ô1172ô relates to the history of the Kazan, it is known by both the Russian and the Bulgarian sources, as a date of the attack by the Suzdal army of the Prince Mstislav (who was acting under an order of Andrey Bogoljubsky) against Bulgaria (PRSL, Vol. 1. SPb., 1846, page 55) and Uchel (DT, Vol. 1, page 132-133).
And the date ô1177ô by is not known either the Bulgarian, nor by the Russian annals. It came about because of the existing in the Rus various calendaric systems (the difference between them varied from 1 up to 5 and even 10 years!), by addition by the copyist to real date ô1172ô of additional five years, i.e. the date is artificial. So the artificial date of ô1177ô cannot be accepted as real.
But the date ô1172ô is also not the year stated by Ivan Glazatyi as date of the foundation of Kazan. In fact, Glazatyi himself, as we remember, cited the data of the foundation of Kazan by Sain before 1164 (see item 12 of this work), and consequently in no way could he write about the erection by Sain of the Bulgarian Kazan in the 1172 (and even the more so in the 1177).
The Glazatyi's date of ô1172ô could only refer to the sentense ôAnd then the same Great Prince (Andrey Bogolyubsky - F.N.) foughtô (KH, page 48), since the campaign of 1164 ended with the capture of Bryagov, and ôthenô (later) the Suzdal army of Andrey could only fight with the Bulgars in 1172 (Andrey did not organize other campaigns to Bulgaria, and in the 1174 he was killed by conspirators).
Evidently, the date of ô1172ô is mentioned in the original of the ôKazan Historyô in this way: ôAnd later the same Great Prince fought in the year 6680 (1172)ô, but after the loss of the original of the Glazatyi's work (and, with that, of the original date for the foundation of Kazan), it has been changed by the latest copyists into date of the foundation of Kazan (and later it was also is altered to the ô1177ô!).
So, the whole complex of the Russian historical materials we reviewed testifies to the reliability of only one known to the science dates of the Kazan foundation, 1103 stated in the Collection.
Historian - Bulgarologist
Nurutdinov Fargat Gabdul-Hamitovich
Omelian Pritsak, Ukrainian academician
A possible Bulgaro-Tatar fake ? (pp. 37-47).
In 1990 in Kazan appeared a publication of an epic poem (ôShan qizi dastaniô), claiming to be a Russian version of the lost Old Volga-Bulgar original. According to the editor, F. Nurutdinov, the epos was reduced to writing in A.D. 882; the original was supposedly written in the Arabic script in the so-called ôTurkiô language by a Mikail Bashtu b. Shams Tabir. As corroboration for the existence of the otherwise unknown poet, the editor uses some supposed data from Ibn Fadlan's ôRisaleô (922) and two stanzas from Kashgar Makhmud (ca. 1070). However, an existence of an Islamic epic poem in Bulgar vernacular in 881 was impossible. First, the Volga-Bulgars accepted Islam only ca. 900, and secondly, the ôTuridô literary language came into being at the court of the Karakhanids in Central Asia around 1060-1070. The present writer questions the authenticity of the ôShan qizi dastani.ô
Overview of Sarmatian chronology
Ogur and Oguz
M.Bashtu "Shan Kyzy Dastany"
Kul Gali Biography
Kul Gali "Book of Huns"
Kul Gali "Tale of Joseph"
Kul Ashraf "Letter to Turkish Sultan"
|ęTurkicWorld 2003 2005|