loony loony 19 56 2002-04-14T17:31:00Z 2002-10-09T04:29:00Z 2 540 3078 Home sweet Home 25 6 3780 9.3821
Home
Back
In Russian
Codex of Inscriptions Index
Alphabet Index
Sources
Roots
Alphabet
Writing
Language
Religion
Genetics
Geography
Archeology
Religion
Coins
Wikipedia
Hunnic Writing
Turanian Writing
Ogur and Oguz Alan Dateline
Avar Dateline
Besenyo Dateline
Bulgar Dateline
Huns Dateline
Karluk Dateline
Khazar Dateline
Kimak Dateline
Kipchak Dateline
Kyrgyz Dateline
Sabir Dateline
Seyanto Dateline

Türkic Scripts - Codex of Inscriptions

Türkic Runiform Inscriptions

Codex of Inscriptions - Listing

Paleography of 8 Türkic Alphabets
Codex of Inscriptions-Euro Asiatic Group
Codex of Inscriptions-Euro Asiatic- Don
Codex of Inscriptions-Euro Asiatic- Kuban
Codex of Inscriptions-Euro Asiatic-Balkaria
Codex of Inscriptions-Euro Asiatic- S. Enisei
Codex of Inscriptions-Euro Asiatic- Achiktash
Codex of Inscriptions-Euro Asiatic- Isfar
Nagy-Szent-Miklos Inscriptions
Scythian Inscriptions
Issyk Scythian Inscription
Bulgarian Inscriptions
Inscriptions in Balkaria - As language
S.Caucasus Inscriptions in Azerbaijan
Unattributed (or misattributed) Inscriptions
Oldest Known Alphabet Manuscripts
Primitive Norse Futhark

Introduction

Türkic letters represent phono-syllabic writing testifying to the Türkic long tradition of such writing. The Türkic alphabet is extremely conservative, it did not have any essential transformations and could be only completely replaced only with other kinds of writing. The earliest authentic Türkic  Hunnic writing comes from the 5th century (see Diggizikh Dish). They are in the writings of  Zachri Rithor.

 The Chinese annals tell of  the Türkic writing much earlier: "Kangüy (Kangly) people write across" in the horizontal lines, comparing it with the Chinese tradition of the vertical writing. The testimony does not specify what script was used, but tells us that in the Khoresm, called in the Avesta "Kangha", already existed a tradition of writing.

Fakhr ad-Din Mubarak-shakh (12 century) writes in detail about the Türkic writing: " One branch of Khazars writes from right to left, letters are not connected, there are 28 letters".

Until recently almost all Türkologists, studying the Türkic script, adhered to the point of view  that the Türkic alphabet was uniform, both in the East and in the West, with only minor divergences. For the first time J.Nemeth questioned this point of view while attempting to decode the inscriptions on the Nagy Sen Miclosh vessels. Doubts increased after a find in the Talas (Kirghizia) of the Alanian sticks with the Türkic writings. The important argument for the substantial differences are the Old Türkic inscriptions found in the Khumar Citadel and the identical "Saltovo-Mayak" inscriptions near the river Don. The Türkic language of inscriptions and their dating by 7-10th c. are based on the official (and erroneous) promulgation of the absence of the Türkis in the Northern Pontic during the earlier period, contrary to the evidence of the contemporaries.

S.Ya.Baychorov scrupulously decoded more than 30 North Caucasian inscriptions, with the drawings, photos, inscriptions, transcription and translations of the texts . The author also decoded the Danube and Volga-Don texts, with a careful comparative analysis. The Volga-Don, Danube and North Caucasian inscription monuments are written on one dialect. (Dj/Z and I/D). Some features indicate their affinity to the Kipchak-Karluk group of the Türkic languages. However, the majority of the features of the language coincides with the features of the Bulgar-Khazar language. (Baichorov S.Ya. Old Türkic runic monuments of the Europe. Stavropol, 1989). J.Nemeth and S.E.Malov belived that the development of the alphabet was in the conditions of the separated Eastern and Western versions of the Türkic writing, which, naturally, caused a formation of small variations. The Türkic writing was introduced to Caucasus by the Huns.

 To create an "Atlas of Orhon monuments", and to create a complete "Codex of Ancient Türkic Inscriptions", for restoration of the Ancient Türkic writing is not enough to know the Ancient Türkic language, it is also necessary to know the languages of the modern Türkic peoples, the descendants of the ancient Türks. For example, like such strong scientists as G.Aydarov and A.Amanjolov. However, the (Russian national-chauvinistic and) totalitarian ideology did not allow to involve any scientific representatives of the Türkic peoples. On the USSR side, the study of the inscriptions is headed by a scientist S.G.Klyashtorny, who does not know any Türkic language, or ethnography, or ethnic culture of the Türks, who knows only the Ancient Turkic graphics and who is reading with a dictionary. He did not have methodology or practical experience necessary for the study of the epygraphics.

The study ended up with a number of articles by S.G.Klyashtorny, with a low level of the scientific analysis, with dubious assumptions, even though it is absolutely easy to see the connection of the Ancient Türkic culture with the TurkicWorld. So, because of the poisoned by the totalitarian regime Institute of Oriental studies USSR AN was lost an opportunity to create an "Atlas of Orhon monuments".

I.L Kyzlasov in his book Writings Of Eurasian Steppes assembled a Codex of Inscriptions. The Euro Asiatic group, per I.L Kyzlasov, includes Don, Kuban, S. Enisei, Achiktash, and Isfar scripts. 

I.L. Kyzlasov Introduction

 Inscriptions are grouped alphabetically and are indexed with letter indicating the title of the alphabet, and the number showing the sequential order of the monument as they were found and introduced to the science. Inscriptions are shown as drawings. Missing are images for the majority of the Khumarian texts, because we did not study the originals, the published photos are small, and the published drawings are not sufficiently precise. Some monuments are shown on photos. All of them are produced in the Hermitage, except D 20 and K 11, furnished by S.A. Pletneva and A.F. Kochkina, and also SY 11, made by the author. The list shows only the publications of photos or author's copies of the originals, the re-publishings of other researchers are not listed, since they can not serve as reliable sources for study. Separately are given the pertinent brief description, history of finding and study for each written monument.

Scythian Poetry

Zaur Gasanov Scythian Poetry

Additional Literature

Amanjolov A.C., 1971. Runic-like inscription from the Saka burial place near Alma-Ata // Bulletin AS Kazakh. SSR.-No. 12.
Bader O.N., Smirnov A.P., 1954. "Post-Kama silver" of the first centuries of our era. Bartym finds. M.
Baichorov S.Ya., 1977. Ancient Türkic inscriptions in the Northern Caucasian area . M.
Baichorov S.Ya., 1989. Ancient Türkic runic monuments of the Europe. Stavropol.
Kalinin N.F., 1960. Bulgaro-Tatar epygraphics album in 3 parts. Kazan: Library KFAN of Russia. Fund of Kalinin.
Klyashtorny S.G., 1964. Ancient Türkic runic monuments. M.
Klyashtorny S.G., 1986. Kipchaks in the runic monuments // Turcology. For the 80-anniversary Acad. A.N.Kononova. L.
Kondratiev V.G., 1973. The relation of Orhon-Enisei monuments writings'  language to the language of the ancient Uigur monuments // Soviet Türkology. No. 3.
Kononov A.N., 1980. Grammar of the Türkic runic monuments language of the 7th-9th centuries. L.
Kuznetsov V.A., 1963. Inscriptions of the Khumarian fortress // Soviet Arheology. No. 1.
Latypov F., 1994. Pra-TurkicWorld: inscriptions on the stones of Perugia // Argamak. No. 7. Naberejnye Chelny
Malov S.E., 1951. Monuments of the ancient Türkic inscriptions. Texts and research. M.  L.

 
Home
Back
In Russian
Codex of Inscriptions Index
Alphabet Index
Sources
Roots
Alphabet
Writing
Language
Religion
Genetics
Geography
Archeology
Religion
Coins
Wikipedia
Hunnic Writing
Turanian Writing
Ogur and Oguz Alan Dateline
Avar Dateline
Besenyo Dateline
Bulgar Dateline
Huns Dateline
Karluk Dateline
Khazar Dateline
Kimak Dateline
Kipchak Dateline
Kyrgyz Dateline
Sabir Dateline
Seyanto Dateline
10/23/2004 TurkicWorld
@Mail.ru