Ogur and Oguz
Ethnic Affiliation Scythians
Scythians and their descendents
|Yu. N. Drozdov
Türkic-lingual Period Of European History
Moscow, Yaroslavl, “Letter", 2011, ISBN 978-5-904729-20-2
Chapter 14. On Christianity
|Preface ¤ Chapter 1.6 ¤ / ¤ / ¤ Chapter 14|
http://books. google. com/books?id=Prd4Ij5HGLQC (2nd ed. , 2011)
The early Christian history supplied galore of materials for generations of scholars mostly focused on the me-world of sanctioned Christianity and Western European history. With that, heavy layers of materials were left undisturbed, leaving gaping holes in numerous disciplines from theology to linguistics, heavily loaded with “origin unknown” and accelerated glosses across inhospitable cracks. A glance at the map readily shows the extent of the terra untouchable, the early Christian territories are but islands surrounded by the lands of Scythian and Sarmatian nomadic tribes interspersed with islets of sedentary agriculturists. The cultural and technological inheritance left by the nomadic people is indelible, its distinct traits are detectable from social organization and etiology to religious traces and material innovations brought over from the lands totally unknown.
The offered citation from the work of Yu.N. Drozdov attempts to sort out through the void left by studies, Eurocentric in general and “Western Civilization” in particular, that leave huge gaps unfilled for centuries. Scientific advances in European and religious history largely increased the gap, advancing both the civic national and Church versions of the European history, and bringing to the surface numerous conflicts that remain institutionally avoided. Numerous disciplines push scholars' ingenuity, forcing development of theoretical scenarios that explain observations without demolishing the established version. Much of the data does not fit readily into instituted models, attracting unscholarly excursions into inhospitable territories, raising problems of fundamental character, which in humanities tend to remain peacefully coexisting with the historical mythology of the day.
It may be taken as given that not all etymologies suggested by Yu. N. Drozdov hold the water, and will be properly discarded. No research gets it on the first attempt, and many explorations conclude with substituting one dead end for another, but the ball is rolling, and the wind has changed. The value of the undertaking is not in the few questionable etymologies, but in historical analysis supported by a mass of convincing etymologies. The history of the Catholic Churches propagates an idea that monotheism, dubbed Arianism and Bogomilism among other monikers, sprang onto innocent Catholic Churches from nowhere. As is frequently in history, it was the opposite, the Church militant and victorious for a moment gained power, and sprang on peoples whose religion conflicted with its dogmas by accessibility, simplicity, and aversion to religious intermediaries.
Page numbers are shown at the beginning of the page. Posting notes and explanations, added to the text of the author are shown in (blue italics) in parentheses and in blue boxes, or highlighted by blue headers.
Yu. N. Drozdov
Türkic-lingual Period Of European History
Chapter 14. On Christianity
The Christian religion began taking shape two thousand years ago. Naturally, its religious and church terminology reflects ethno-linguistic mileiu where it formed. And that terminology would have remained the same across preaching languages and language of canonical religious texts. Otherwise, eventually religion would experience significant distortion and lose its original identity. It is believed that Christianity was born in Jewish milieu. But all Scripture texts (I.e. New Testament), beginning with the earliest, come only in the ancient Greek language. Naturally, the Greek could not be a source for these texts and, consequently, the Christian religious terminology was not Greek. But most significantly, the terminology can't be derived from the ancient Hebrew language. This suggests that the linguistic mileiu where Christianity was formed as a religion was not Greek and was not Jewish.
According to the Gospel, after resurrection and ascension of Jesus Christ, all twelve Apostles dispersed throughout the world, “proclaiming repentance and forgiveness of sins for those who would believe in His Holy Name". 1051 In that, indeed, was the main mission of the Apostles. In the places of their preaching started forming communities of those who repented, and having had believed in the bright Name of Jesus Christ, were waiting for forgiveness of their sins. According to a legend, it supposedly was Antiochia the members of these communities started to be named Christians. Over time, this name extended to all members of those communities, regardless of their geographic location.
According to modern understanding, in the Jesus' homeland very few were His followers. "The most significant Christian communities were formed outside of it (Jesus' homeland), first of all in Syria and Asia Minor ... By the middle of the 1st c. Christian communities formed in the cities of Asia Minor and Greece. From there, missionaries were sent to other areas, quite early Christianity emerged in Egypt, especially in Alexandria...” 1052 And of course, these communities primarily formed in the places where Apostles were sent to. All twelve Apostles went to preaching missions to various countries and regions, which included: Eastern Europe (Scythia), /541/ Asia Minor, Syria, Greece and Rome. Precisely in those regions was born the early Christianity. On these territories is reported the following: "And having risen up, the Apostles threw cast lots, who goes to where to and to what people carry salvation. And Peter had the land of circumcised, James and John received the eastern lands, Philip received the cities of Samaria and Asia, Bartholomew received Albanopolis, Matthew received Parthia and the city Mirmnida (?), Thomas received Greater Armenia and Indian country, Levi and Thaddeus Beronikida (?), Simon the Zealot (Simon the Canaanite) received Barbaria (Not Scythia: “In Jesus Christ there is neither barbarian nor Scythian” [Col 3:11]). Along with all others Andrew also cast lots, he received Bithynia, Lacedaemon (Sparta), and Achaia". 1053
But other sources indicate somewhat different names of territories divided among the Apostles. For example, the bishop Eusebius of Caesarea in Palestine says: “...of the holy Apostles and disciples of our Savior, who settled in the whole world. Thomas, as legend has it, received Parthia, Andrew received Scythia, John received Asia ....” 1054 St. Hippolytus, telling “abot 12 Apostles, where each of them preached and where he died,” said: “Andrew, who preached Scythians and Thracians, was crucified in the Achaean Patras on an oleaster tree, and was buried right there.” 1055
The land of Scythians and Thracians?
Later in the areas where Apostles went to emerged Christian communities. It should be emphasized that none of the Apostles ever visited either the Central nor the Western Europe. During the first centuries AD the Christian communities in the visited regions were very small. And to the Central and Western Europe, Christianity came mostly from the Eastern Europe, where it appeared in the first apostolic times.
The Christian communities formed initially were not a unified community. In
this respect, I.S. Sventsitsky noted: “When we say “the Christians of the first centuries of our era” we
must realize that this term is generic, it covers a variety of groups with their theology,
their holy books, rituals, etc. A common feature of these groups was that they revered
Jesus Christ as the mediator between people and God, although notions about His nature were very
different”. 1056 The issue of the nature of God at that time was transformed into
question of a symbol of creed. On that issue were at least two main views. A part of the
bishops and theologians accepted as a symbol of faith a position where God the
Father, God the Son, and Holy Spirit are one God in consubstantial Trinity. A Alexandria
Arius at the beginning of thee 4th c. held a different view,
according to which God is one and all things were created by Him, and Jesus Christ was also
created. The proponents of this view on the creed started to be called
(by the Church) Arians, and the theological thought - Arianism. The Christianity was split into two
parts, supporters of Arius and his opponents.
In order to find a compromise and end the schism in Christianity /542/, the Roman Emperor Constantine in 325 AD convened in the city Nicaea a First Ecumenical Council ("Ecumenical” = “Worldwide"). Naturally, at the Council was also present an East European bishop called Theophilus: “Among the fathers of the cathedral were a Persian John, and a Gothic Bishop Theophilus ...". 1057 In the cathedral documents he was called Scythian bishop and Gothic bishop. By decision of the Council of Nicaea the Consubstantial Trinity was adopted as a symbol of faith (credo), and the Arius proposal was rejected, condemned, and proclaimed heresy. However, the majority of dioceses on the ground probably did not agree with the decision. In this connection historian D. Belikov noted: “Arianism, condemned at the first “Worldwide” (Ecumenical) council, through cunning and perseverance of its main representatives, started to come alive soon after the council.
And when the heresy found its defense and protection in the Emperors Constantius and Valens, it acquired, at least in the Eastern Empire, the status of the dominating religion. Arians occupied nearly all more or less important bishoprics, most of the secular superiors were Arians, in general the cities of East were full of Arians." 1058 But the Eastern adherents of Christianity, that is the Goths, continued adhering to the Nicene Creed and did not become Arians. However, the subsequent course of historical events forced a part of Goths to change this decision. A Constantinople lawyer Socrates the Scholastic described in his “Ecclesiastical History” events that allegedly led Goths to convert to Christianity at the time of Emperor Valens, who ruled from 364 to 378. He said that during a military conflict between two Gothic rulers Atanarih and Fritingern the last turned to the emperor Valens with a request for military assistance. Valens gave support to the Fritingern army. Then Socrates writes: “ Beyond Ister, they won a victory over Atanarih and turned enemies to flight. That led to adoption of Christianity by many barbarians. For Fritingern, in gratitude for the help, adopted the faith of the Emperor, and coaxed to the same his subject barbarians. Therefore later the majority of the Goths adhere to Arianism, having accepted it for the sake of the emperor.
At the same time the Gothic Bishop Ulfilaila invented Gothic alphabet, and translating Holy Scripture to Gothic, prepared barbarians for the study of the divine verbs. When Ulfila taught the Christian faith not only to the Fritingern subjects, but also the barbarians subject to Atanarih, then Athanaric, seeing it as a distortion of the religion of the ancestors, subjected to punishment many who have adopted Christianity, so that barbarians adhering to Arianism then become martyrs". 1059
In that report, three points draw attention. First. From the context, before the events Goths were not Christians. That seems strange and suspicious: after all, Socrates was of course familiar with documents of the 325 Nicaean Council, with signature of the Gothic bishop Theophilus. Second. Due to the efforts of Bishop Ulfila, all Gothic tribes switched to Arianism, not only those on the right bank of Danube. Third. It is unlikely that all Gothic barbarians became Christians only out of gratitude to the Emperor Valens. Something is clearly wrong.
From other sources can be reckoned that the events unfolded somewhat
differently from Socrates description. In the second half of the 4th c. Huns started
attacking Goths in the north, and a part of Atanarih subject Goths decided to seek
refuge in the territory of the Roman Empire. Ammianus Marcellinus
described these events: “Therefore, most of the people who left Atanarih because of lack of
provision were looking for a place remote from any rumors of the
barbarians, and after many meetings on how to choose a place for settlement, decided that
the Thrace would be a perfectly suitable refuge for two reasons; firstly becauseit has
extremely fertile soil, and secondly, the strong flow of Ister separates it from the
fields already open ...for the thunderbolts of the alien Mars. The same have also
decided the others, like at the general
assembly. So, led by Alaviv they occupied the Danubian bank, and having sent envoys to
Valens, humbly asked to take them, promising to live quietly and to provide assistance as
the circumstances required.” 1060 The Emperor Valens allowed Goths
to cross Danube
and settle in Thrace. Among these settlers also was the bishop of the Gothic Diocese
Ulfila. For the Gothic migrants in religious terms has developed a rather difficult situation.
half a century ago, in 325 at the Council of Nicaea the Gothic or Scythian (which are the same)
Bishop Theophilus signed documents condemning Arianism. And after Arianism has once again
revived in the empire, probably the Gothic diocese was not affected
(Probably Ulfila's signature did not affect Goths either, it only obligated Ulfila to
preach to his flock that instead of Almighty they need to appeal to divine Christ, a
dubious proposition). But the Goths
who settled in the Danube in the territory of the Roman Empire faced a choice: either
they had to accept Arianism, revived in the empire, or they found themselves in hostile religious environment
(This supposition is based on a premise of people bound in
sedentary settlements and subject to coerced worship, which conflicts with the known
Gothic enology. Dispersed population tending to their herds does not fall into category
of coerced worship). And they took the first option (This
supposition is based on a premise of the masses of Goths having already switched from
their monotheistic religion to the Trinity religion, a dubious proposition). An important if not decisive
role was played by their bishop Ulfila, who headed the embassy of the Goths that asked Emperor
Valens to allow them to settle in the empire.
Here is what a Constantinople lawyer Hermia Sozomen wrote about these events in his “Ecclesiastical History": “At the head of this embassy was the bishop of Gothic people Ulfila ... I think, however, that this fact alone (a gratitude for the support of Emperor Valens in fight against Atanarih - Yu.D.) /544/ not was the reason that until now the whole Gothic tribe adheres to the Arian belief: after all Ulfila, who then was their priest, at first in no way departed from the Catholic Church ... But when he came back to Constantinople, it is said that he has entered into a discussion on dogmas with the followers of the Arian heresy, and having received a promise of help with the emperor in the affairs of his embassy if he would believe the same with him, he under influence of the need or having recognized it better to to think that way about God, entered in communion with the Arians, and tore himself and all his people from the Catholic Church ... This is the reason why almost all the barbarians inhabiting Ister keep to the Arianism.” 1061 This report confirms that the Goths were forced to adopt Arianism (Like changing hats. In exchange for abandoning future personal reincarnations and eternal cycle of life, they've got what? A promise to intercede with an Emperor? Would you exchange your eternal salvation for a promise to intercede or anything else short of immediate threat to your life? And if you did, how sincere you would keep it?). And it is also noted that all Gothic tribes became Arians, not just those that have moved to the right bank of the Danube. This corresponds with the Socrates' message.
A few years after these events in the history of the Christian Church of the Roman Empire occurred events that dramatically changed its fate. In 379 the Roman emperor Gratian appointed as an August (his co-ruler) a chief of the Roman army Theodosius. Under an influence of Arianism's opponents, sometime in 380 the Emperor Theodosius issued an edict, a legislative act, which stated:
“We desire that all people, ruled by our mercifulness and moderation, firmly held the religion which St. Peter taught the Romans, which was faithfully preserved by tradition and which is now professed by the priest Damas and Alexandrian bishop Peter, a man of apostolic holiness. According to the teachings of the Apostles and the rules of the Gospel we will believe in one divinity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, with equal greatness uniting in the blessed Trinity.
The followers of this doctrine we permit to take the name of Catholic Christians
(Christianorum Catholicorum), and all others we hold to be cockamamie madmen, brand them
with ignominious name of heretics (haeretici dogmatis), and declare that their gatherings
should not arrogate the honorary name of Churches (Ecclesiarum). In addition to
the sentence of divine justice, they should expect severe penalties, which our power also
may like to impose on
Thus, the Catholicism in the Christian religion was introduced by a personal edict (a secular legislative act) of the Roman emperor, without any discussion and without any religious and moral argumentation. In 381 was convened a Second Ecumenical Council, where has been restored and supplemented the Nicene symbol of faith (Nicene Creed), and all dissenters were condemned. But the Christians of the Scythian tribes, in particular the Goths and kindred peoples, not subjects of the Roman Empire, /545/ had not changed their symbol of faith and remained faithful to Arianism. So, Constantine Porphyrogenitus wrote: “At that time the Goths and other numeous nations lived in the most northern regions up to the Danube. Particularly noteworthy of them are the Goths, Visigoths, Vandals, and Gepids, except in name no different from each other, and speaking the same language. They all profess the craze of Arius. At time of Arcadius and Honorius, having crossed Danube, they settled in the land of the Romans. And the Gepids, from which later descended Longivards and Avars, occupied lands in the districts of Singidon and Sermius. The Visigoths, who devastated Rome with Alaric, went to Gaul and took possession of its population. And the Goths, who at first possessed Pannonia, after 19 years in the reign of Theodosius Junior, after his permission settled the lands of Thrace, and after spending 58 years in Thrace, under a leadership of their patrician and consul Fevderic, with permission of Zinon, seized the western kingdom (Western Roman Empire). As for the Vandals, they united with Alans and Germanic tribes, now called Franks, and having crossed the Rhine under the Godigiskl leadership, settled in Spain...” 1063 This message implies that Christianity in the form of Arianism was brought over to the Central and Western Europe by the Goths and their kindred tribes, who settled there from the beginning of the 5th c. In other words, the Christianity to the Central and Western Europe had been brought from the Eastern Europe by the Scythian tribes only in the 5th c.
It should be noted that the Catholicism was initially introduced within the Roman Empire by piecemeal. Here's what noted on this D. Belikov: “Coming from Thessaloniki (where Theodosius signed his edict on introduction of Catholicism - Yu.D.) to Constantinople, the emperor demanded that the local Arianist archbishop Demophyl chose one option: either to embrace the belief in consubstantiality, or retire from the archbishop chair (This is beyond unimaginable: “I demand you to believe”! To today's ears it phonemes incomprehensible, the best that could have been demanded was to pretend to believe. That's what happen to you if you are raised with the army discipline).
Demofil preferred the latter, and immediately, by the will of the King, his post was taken by St. Gregory Nazianzen. Then followed orders to take churches away from the Arians, into exclusive possession of the Orthodox (Catholic - Yu.D.) denomination, first only in the capital city, and soon thereafter in all other cities and provinces of the East (Eastern Roman Empire, Byzantine). The convened in 381 Second Ecumenical ("Worldwide") Council, having solemnly restored and complemented the Nicene Creed, declared anathema on all obstinating in disagreement with the truth. The actions of the secular government in respect to heretics were reinforced afterwards. Stricter regulations confirmed the former edicts regarding the transfer to the Orthodox (Catholics - Yu.D.) of the churches, and was forbidden to the “Arians, Eunomians (Anomeans) and Aetians” to build and open new churches or houses of worship, on pain of forfeiture of both the buildings and land belonging to private individuals and estates, wherever such illegal buildings would be found" 1064. Thus, the Catholicism was introduced by administrative feat at first only in the Eastern Roman Empire.
The linguistic, and consequently the ethnic milieu where Christianity formed can fairly safely be determined by examining semantics of the original, reliably Christian, names and terms.
The first Christian communities outside of Palestine were established in Syria, Asia Minor, Scythia, Greece, and in Alexandria. In that regard, I.S. Sventsitsky noted: “It seems that already in the 1st c. in some communities were elders-presbyters; their functions, as can be judged from the fragmentary data, were organizational and economic: they distributed aid, collected contributions, visited the sick and prisoners. The presbyters were elected by communities, and inaugurate by the most revered preachers (Apostles). In the Acts of the Apostles and Epistles of Paul presbyters are also called bishops... Till some time these were not different positions, just the supervision over the inner life was one of the elders' functions.” 1065 From the above description follows that from the 1st c. in the Christian communities presbyter and bishop were names for elected official, whose responsibility was organizational and economic functions. And at the time they were not clergymen yet.
The semantic and etymological analysis of the words 'presbyter' and 'bishop' shows that they both are typical, somewhat distorted Türkic words. The word 'presbyter' can be parsed into its constituent parts as follows: pr-es-vit-er (With some gentle accent). The first component pr is a non-vowelized phonetic version of the word bar 'is, is there'. The second component es is a distortion of the word ys 'smoke, soot'. The third component vit is a Latin pronunciation of the word bit 'face'. The last component er is a phonetic version of the word er 'man, male'. The original title of this position was barysbiter with semantics 'man with sooty face'.
The word 'episcope' can be parsed into its component parts as follows: ep-is-kopp. The first component ep is a phonetic variant of the ancient Türkic word eb (əb) 'house, lager'. The second component is is, a Latin pronunciation of the ancient Türkic word ys 'smoke, soot'. The last component kop is an ancient Türkic word kop 'rise, exalt'. The original title of this post was ebyskop with semantics 'rising smoke of house' or 'smoke rising above house'.
The semantics of these two names allows to understand the following. The names 'presbyter' and (not the) 'episcope' came from the pre-Christian religious-conceptual traditions, /547/ which were associated with reverence to fire, widespread at many ancient European nations. The responsibility of the host at first may have included only starting and maintenance of the fire, that is “smoke rising above house'. After prolonged stay at an open fire, the face of the host was of course covered with soot, becoming 'smoky', and he was called barysbitir. Somewhat similar functions relating to the maintenance of fire also performed the episcope. Over time, presbyters and episcopes apparently carried other household duties related to the religious activities. And when the first Christians began forming communities, the community members involved in administrative activities were traditionally called presbyters and episcopes. But since both these names addressed the same duties, eventually survived only one, the episcope, which later acquired new content and meaning.
Incidentally, the name of the ancient Egyptian Christian community, 'Copts', also ascends to the Old Türkic word kop. Into its constituent parts the word 'Copts' is divided as follows: kop-ty. The first component kop in this context can be translated as 'rise', the second part ty is here an affix of tribal marker. The semantics of the names Copts would be “sublime tribe".
Disciples of Jesus Christ were called Apostles (Disciples of Jesus Christ
were called disciples. Apostle was the name for traveling proselytizing missionaries). This is a slightly distorted
Türkic word which can be parsed into its component parts as follows: ap-os-tol.
The first component ap is a corruption of the ancient Türkic word eb (əb)
'house, lager’. The second component os is a somewhat distorted word ys 'smoke, soot'.
The last component tol ascends to the root of the verb tolurga 'fill up, fill'.
The original name was ebystol with semantics '(someone) filling house with smoke'. Again,
this name ascends to the ancient reverence to fire, to the pre-Christian religious
beliefs. It is easy to see that the names ebystol (Apostle) and ebyskop (episcope)
close semantics. This suggests that in the original, the original meaning of these words
might even be synonymous (The similarity is deceptive, episcope
is a Greek word). Incidentally, in the modern Balkar language the word 'Apostle'
form abystol, and in the Khakas language the word abys means 'clergy, priest".
I.S. Sventsitsky, who studied the inner life of the Christian communities in the mid-first century,
noted: “Community meals (potlucks) apparently were a main component of the
Christian assemblies... The Christians, surrounded by pagan customs, filled the community meal
with new meaning, turning it into a rite of Eucharist (Thanksgiving, a word that also existed
in the pagan lexicon), breaking of bread and wine, like they also filled with new
meanings the concept of gospel and ekklesia.” 1066
This fragment contains three Christian Church's terms: Eucharist, Gospel, and ecclesia.
it should be noted that all these terms existed “in the pagan lexicon".
In other words, they were borrowed from the pre-Christian religion. The word 'Eucharistia'
(in Greek transcription ευχάριστία) can
be parsed into its component parts as follows:
eu-charis-t-ia (Considering that the Greek eucharist
means “thank you, thanks”, etymologizing eucharist is as productive as etymologizing
Germanic “thank you”, Slavic “spasibo”, or Romance “gracias” and “merci”). The first component
eu is an ancient Türkic word ev (əv) 'home, premises'.
And the second component
charis is obviously quite distorted in the Greek transcription
Türkic word with three phonemes substituted. The Türkic language has phonemes that do not exist in Greek.
In particular, these are [k],
[y] [sh]. Usually, in the Greek transcription as a rule they were replaced with the
phonemes [x], [i] [s]. And in this case, these three phonemes are present in this
word. Therefore, retracing substitution of the phonemes allows to understand that
the distorted formant
charis in Türkic may correspond to the
original ancient Türkic word qarïš (karysh). This polysemantic word
has the meanings:
Now, regarding the possible semantics of the word 'Christian'. This word, according to the text of the “Acts of the Apostles” of the New Testament (Acts 11:26), first came into use in the 1st c. to refer to the supporters of the new faith in the city of Antioch. However, neither the ancient nor the modern written sources have convincing materials on the semantics and etymology of the term. In Greek, this word has the form Χριστιανοί, and in Latin Christianorum. /549/ In the considered above word 'Eucharist' draws attention the formant charis, which corresponded to an equivalent Türkic-lingual qarïš (karysh) with the above meanings. Treated as a separate word, in Greek transcription it could be written without a vowel in the first syllable - 'Χριστ' or in Latin transcription 'Christ'. And in combination with anti formant, which is a distorted Türkic word en 'category, genus', this term will receive a form of 'Christian' or 'Κristian'. Accordingly, in the original Türkic version this word can correspond a version karyshtyen with semantics 'differing tribe'. Can't be excluded other semantical versions within the above listed meanings for karysh.
Some ancient European tribes had two names, one name was ethnonym, and the other name was given to the tribe by their religious beliefs. Sometimes the religious-conceptual name solidified as an ethnonym. And in this connection, the endonym of one of Türkic Christian nations is of interest.
In the Itil arrea in Tatarstan, is a home to a small indigenous Türkic-lingual people who profess Christianity from the earliest times. The endonym of this nation is Kerəshen, and the Russians call them Kryashens. It is presumed that 'Kryashen' is a corruption of Kerəshen, which in Russian means 'baptized' or 'christened'. The word Kerəshen can be parsed into its component parts as follows: kerəsh-en. It is likely that the first component kerəsh may be a phonetic variation of the ancient Türkic word qarïš (karysh) with the above meanings. The second component en is 'clan' or 'lineage'. Accordingly, the original form of this etnic name could be karyshen with semantics 'outstanding tribe' or 'tribe of gathering (people)'. Apparently, grammatically and semantically the word Karyshen ascends to the word Karyshtyen, which is the original version of the Türkic word, recorded in the Roman script as 'Christian', and in the Greek as 'Χριστιανοί'. The presence of the affix -ty (-ti) does not essentially change the semantics of the word. It seems that the ethnonym Kerəshen or 'Kryashen' ultimately ascends to the word 'Christian'. Thus, the endonym Kerəshen probably ascends to the notion of 'Christian' and not 'baptized'.
Now we turn to the name of Jesus Christ (Χριστός ~ Khristos ). It is not possible to establish the time of appearance of this name from the written sources yet. It is clear that this happened after the emergence of the name 'Christians' and it could not happened in his lifetime. In Latin transcription the name has a form Iesu Christi, and in Greek Ίησούς Χριστος.
The first part of the name Iesu or Ίησούς in Russian has the form 'Iesu'. That word is parsed into its constituent parts as follows: Ie-su. /550/ The component Ie in this context is the phonetic variant of the ancient Türkic word Ijä (Iyə) 'Lord, Almighty'. The second component su is a third person possessive affix singular. In the literal sense of the word, Iyəsu means 'Lord, somebody's Lord'. The second part of the name Christi or Χριστος is a Latin, and respectively the ancient Greek transcription of the ancient Türkic word qarïštï (karyshty) 'distinct' or 'gathering'. The original form of the name was Iyəsu Karyshty with semantics 'Lord of distinct (people)' or 'Lord of gathering (people)'. It should be noted that the ancient word iyə (s) 'owner, lord' was used only as a name for divine patrons (Greek Gods, Christian anthropomorphic saints, Tengrian Alps = protecting angels innately non-anthropomorphic, but able to adopt earthly anthropomorphic appearance). But before Christianity, it was never a name for the Almighty God (The name Tengri = Heaven retained its original name for the Almighty in all Türkic languages independently of conversion to Islam, Christianities sanctioned and persecuted, Buddhism, etc.)
The composition of the Bible, the main books of Christians, has four Gospels (Greek Euangelion, Latin Evangelium, fr. Greek eu- “good", -angelion “message"). Into its constituent parts the word 'Euangelion' can be parsed as follows: Eu-angel-ion. The first component eu is an ancient Türkic word ev (əv) 'home, premises'. The second component angel is the word angly (in non-Türkic pronunciation 'angly'), which in this context should be translated as 'wise' (in this sense the word is used in modern Karachai language). The last component ion in this case is an ancient Türkic word ijä (iye) 'master, lord' in relation to God. The original name had the term Evanglyie with semantics 'House of wise Lord' or 'Receptacle of wise Lord'. But a somewhat different semantics may have eisted. The ancient Türkic word ev (əv) in a figurative sense also means 'part of the heaven'. Then the word Evanglyie in this case may have with semantics 'Heaven of wise Lord'.
From the contents of the Emperor Theodosius edict follows that gatherings of Catholic
Christians were called Ecclesiarum. All people who at that time were under the rule of Constantinople automatically became
Catholics (Too bad Theodosius did not order them to become butterflies,
all Romans would instantaneously become flying Romans), and their meetings were called ἐκκλησία 'ecclesia'. Over time, these people
switched to European inflected languages (I.e. Indo-European), but the name
survived, with some distortions due to phonetic features of each language. Thus, in French the
word became eglise, in Spanish Iglesia, in Welsh eglwys.
The word 'ecclesia' was borrowed from the ancient Greek, where it had the following meanings: a place or premises for meetings, assembly, popular assembly, general assembly. Originally, the word had nothing to do with religion, and its semantics is not traceable from the Greek language. But it seems it is derivable from the ancient Türkic. /551/ The word can be parsed into its component parts as follows: ek-kles-ia. The first component ek is somewhat distorted word ak 'bright, white'. The second component kles probably is a distorted ancient Türkic word qal¿siz (kalysiz), which means “complete, absolute". The last component ia in this case probably has with semantics 'household, territory, place'. The original name could have a form akkalysiziya with semantics 'brightest area' or 'brightest place'.
After introduction of Catholicism a part of the Christians remained Arians, and called their religious meetings differently, because according to the edict of Theodosius “their gatherings should not arrogate the honorary name of Churches (Ecclesiarum)” (Too bad Theodosius did not order them to call mammas papas, all Roman mamas would instanteneously become papas). The actual name of the religious meetings can be guessed by analyzing terms related to the Russian concept of 'church' in the languages of some European nations, whose ancestors remained Arians. Table 43 shows terms in seven European languages.
Transcription of these versions requires some
explanation. All versions in the third column, with the exception of Russian,
are distorted records in Latin lettering of the same Türkic word. It is evident that
the Russian version is very similar to Czech (Slavic) cirkev, where the initial letter
stands for a phoneme [ts] rather than [k]. So, instead of 'kirkev' or 'kerkev'
comes out 'tserkov'
(cf. Kimbrs - Tsimbrs). In English version the letter combination ch now reads like
Ch in Charlie. But in ancient times, this combination in Türkic words denoted the Türkic phoneme [q]. Accordingly, the word
church sounded like 'kurk' or 'kirk'.
The parsing analysis indicates that the first component the considered term is an ancient Türkic word kir 'enter'. /552/ The second component in the first five versions is obviously a somewhat distorted word ka, while in the last two versions it is a corruption of the word kyu. In Türkic language they both mean 'light' (Like in Scythian Kau-kas for Caucasus, “White Rockies", with kas = rocks). The formant ka is a phonetic version of the word kyu. Thus, among the Christian nations of the Arian faith in the Türkic-lingual period of their history, the religious gatherings became known as a kirka or c kirkyu with possible semantics of 'light entry'. Since that time, the name has changed very little. In Russian, the parish ("neighbor", from Gr. para- “near” + oikos “house") over time probably acquired the semantics of the concept 'coming, entry' (Russian parish = “prihod” = 'coming').
The edict of Emperor Theodosius has several key terms which semantics is of particular interest. The followers of the Nicene Creed, who “firmly held the religion which St.. Peter preached” he commanded to call “Catholic Christians" (Christianorum Catholicorum), and to call “all others” heretics. The word 'Catholic' is a corruption of thr Türkic word which is parsed into its component parts as follows: the katho-lik. The first component katho is the word katy where, as is usual in such cases, the Türkic phoneme [y] is substituted in the Latin with the phoneme [o]. The word katy in Türkic means 'solid, strong'. The second component -lyk is an affix. The original name was katylyk with semantics 'firm (community)'. That was a self-appellative of the Arianism's opponents who held fast to the Nicene Creed.
According to the Emperor Theodosius' edict , the word 'heretic' (αἱρετικός) was a “shameful name". That word is parsed into its constituent parts as follows: eret-ik. The first component eret probably ascends to the root of the verb eretergə, which in particular translates as 'dissolve, melt'. The second component ik is a distorted version of the formative affix ək. The original form of this name was eretək with semantics 'seducer, libertine'.
The concept of 'God' the Catholics is defined by Türkic word Dəү 'great' or De¢ 'Giant, Colossus'. In Latin transcription the word received the form Deo, and in Greek Θηoξ. And the Eastern European (Scythian) tribes converted to Christianity by the Apostle Andrew probably defined the concept of 'God' with the word Kot 'Spirit' (in mythical sense of the word). From this name, the converted tribes received the name Kotts or 'Gotts' ('Goths').
Later, when the Goths migrated into Central and Western Europe and settled there, some peoples retained the term Kot with that semantics even after they switched to the present European languages. Naturally, the term eventually was adapted to the phonetic features of each language. For example, in German it received a form Gott, in English God, in Danish Gud, in Norwegian gud /553/, in Swedish gud. But in the Slavic languages, the notion somehow was determined by the word 'God', which apparently ascends to Türkic Böək 'Great'.
Catholics define concept of 'holy' with the Türkic word san, which literally means 'respect'. With added affix of possession ty, this word should be translated as 'having sanctity' (Literally, “respected”). In Latin transcription, this term has the form santa.
The titles of the upper hierarchy of the Christian Church were formalized by the Ecumenical Council: "Consistent with interpretation of the rule 28 of the 4th Ecumenical Council (451), the bishop of Constantinople had titles οίκουμενικός (oíkoumenikos = ecumenical, universal) and παναγιότατος (panagiótatos = Holiness), but none of them were used. These titles were used by others, Constantinople patriarch's subordinates. For example, Herman II (1222 - 1240)with a residence in Nicaea was called οίκουμενικός πατριάρχης (oíkoumenikos patriarchis = ecumenical Patriarch) in the letter of the Navpakt Metropolitan John Apokavka". 10677 Can be made an attempt to derive semantics of the titles in the church hierarchy mentioned in the above citation.
In Russian, the word Οίκουμενικός should have a form of 'oykumenik'. The word is parsed into its component parts oy-ku-men-(n)ik. The first component is a somewhat distorted Türkic word öy 'home, homy'. The second component ku is a phonetic version of the word kyu 'light'. The third component men literally means 'I', but in this context the word may have with semantics 'man'. The last component (n)ik is an ancient Türkic word nik 'beneficial, good' with the initial n probably merged with the finite n of the previous component. The original form of the word was öykumennik with semantics 'good (people) of houses of enlightened people'. (Possibly, in ancient times the word nik could have somewhat different semantics). It is quite clear that the word 'Oikumena' (Greek - οίκουμενη; Turk. - Öykumen) literally means 'house of enlightened people’ (Like English “light”, the Türkic ak/ku = “light, white” is very polysemantic, including “noble, aristocratic, east, facing east” and a number of other meanings. The same with öy “home, homey”, thus reconstruction leads to a range of possibilities).
In Russian, the word Παναγιότατος
would take the form of 'panagiotat'.
That word is parsed into its constituent parts as follows: pan-ag-iot-at. The first component
pan or ban is a phonetic version of the word 'I', which in this context may
have with semantics 'man'. The second component ag is an ancient Türkic word
aγ 'climb, rise’. The third component iot is the word yot, which in this context
literally means 'greedy'. The last component at should likely be translated as
'name'. The original form of the title was panagyotat with possible with semantics
'man called to insatiably raise (faith)’ or 'people called to constantly raise (faith)'.
It was already shown that the word 'patriarch' can be parsed into its component parts as follows: patr-i-arch. The first component patr is a phonetic version of the word batyr, which in antiquity in particular had the with semantics 'father', and in this context 'Holy Father'. The second component i seems to be the affix y. The last component arch is a somewhat distorted Türkic word argy 'remote', which in the church terminology meant a functionary of a higher rank. The original name was batyryargy with semantics 'distant Holy Father' or 'supreme Holy Father'.
It should be noted that the generalized name 'hierarch' is a Türkic word. That word is parsed into its constituent parts as follows: ie-r-arch. The first component ie is clearly traced to the Old Türkic word ijä (iye or ie) 'master, lord' in relation to God. The second component r is the word ar 'man, male' in a non-vowelized version. The last component arch is identical to the previous case (argy 'remote'~ higher rank). The original form of the word was iearargy with semantics 'upper chief man' or 'senior chief man'.
The head cover of the Orthodox patriarch is called 'kukol' (Eng. cowl, Gr. κουκούλα~ koukoula). That word is parsed into its constituent parts as follows: kuk-ol. The first component kuk is Türkic kük word 'heaven, heavenly'. The second component ol is slightly distorted word oly 'venerable, respected'. The original form of this name was kükoly with the possible with semantics 'heavenly reverence' (Cowl - O.E. cugele, L. cucullus “hood, cowl,” of uncertain origin).
The archbishop who headed the Roman Catholic Church, since the 5th c. was called Pope, although officially this title has never been instituted. In a slightly different phonetical version, this religious term existed among the European Türkic nations since ancient times. Thus, Herodotus wrote: “In Scythian language Hestia is called Thabit, Zeus (and, in my opinion, entirely correctly) is called Papey...” 1068 A Christian theologian of the 2nd c. Origen stated: “Although the Scythians say that Pappai is a god standing above all, we are not to agree with them: although we recognize a standing above all God, but do not calling this God with proper name, Pappai, as is the tradition with Scythians who received in possession the desert.. and their people... and their language...” 1069 The Lavrentiev Chronicle called the Roman Pope about the same were using the ancient Scythians: “...behold also heard Roman Papej...” 1070 In the modern Balkar the word babas (phonetic version papas) means 'priest, father (appellation to the priest)' (Gr. πάππας (pappas), a child's word for father. No even feeble attempt to eymologize, what language the child was born into: of uncertain origin).
A bishop is in charge of a territory called eparchia (ἐπαρχία
~diocese) in church-religious sense. That
word is parsed into its constituent parts as follows: ep-arch-ia. The first component
ep is the ancient Türkic word eb (əb) ‘house, lager’. The second component
arch is the word argy 'distant'. The third component ia in this case could mean 'Lord's'. The original word was
ebargyiya with semantics 'Lord's distant places' (No even
feeble attempt to etymologize: of uncertain origin).
Christians have a Church’s punishment called έπιτιμία (epitimia) ‘penance’. That word is parsed into its constituent parts as follows: ep-it-im-ia. The first component ep is eb (əb) ‘house, lager’. The second component the it literally means 'meat', and a third component im means 'magic spell, conjuration'. The last component ia in this case means 'Lord'. The original name of this punishment was ebitimiya with semantics 'camp with Lord's spell on meat', i.e. the camp where is forbidden to eat meat. In ancient times that was a religious punishment (Presumanbly in nomadic animal husbandry societies that lived on meat and kumis; for the grain-eating agriculturists that would not be a punishment).
In the Catholic Church, from the 5th to 9th c., the clerics holding permanent positions in certain parish churches were called cardinals. But then, their status has suddenly changed, and they were raised to the very top of the Catholic hierarchy. Perhaps the nature of their work was in high demand at the top. The word 'cardinal' can be parsed into its component parts as follows: car-din-al. The first component kar ascends to the root of the verb kararga 'look'. The second component din in a literal translation from Türkic means 'religion, faith'. The last component al is 'front, first'. The semantics of the name cardinal comes out 'first overseer of faith' (Of unknown origin, but with plenty of cognates in Latin with semantics of “pivot, pivotal”: cardo (gen. cardinis) “shaft, axle, door hinge”, cardinalis “principal, chief, essential”, a Türkic root for 'look' or compound 'look-faith' for cardo seems to be a long shot).
A priest's deputy on certain issues in Catholic churches is called vicar. The word 'vicar' is parsed into its component parts as follows: vik-ap. The first component vik is a Latin rendition of the Türkic word bik 'lock, latch'. The second component ap is one of the phonetic variants of the word 'man, male'. The original name was bikar with semantics 'gatekeeper' or 'man locking (the door)'. Perhaps that was reference to the door of the temple (Latin vicis “turn, change, exchange, substitution" > vicarius “substitute, deputy", with Germanic cognates in O.N. vikja “bend, turn"; Swed. viker "willow twig, wand"; Ger. wechsel “change").
The people professing non-Christian persuasion in Latin were called paganus. In Latin this word means “rural, rustic, simple, uneducated". In fact, it is not Latin, but a Türkic word, with the base form 'pagan'. Into its constituent parts it is divided as follows: pag-an. The first component pag is a phonetic version of the formant bug that ascends to the verb bagarga with meanings 'foretelling, divine'. The second component an is a somewhat distorted word en 'category, genus'. The original form of the word was bagen with semantics 'foretelling category' (soothsayers). This suggests that at the spreading of Christianity in the Apennines, the villagers were not accepting that teaching, remaining committed to their ancient, based on divination religion. Therefore, Christians called them 'soothsayers'. Over time, the semantics of this moniker expanded, /556/ and with the word paganus (bagen) started to be called not only the adherents of the ancient religion based on divination, but in the figurative sense the entire rural population.
According to modern concepts, Jesus Christ and His disciples were ethnically Arameans and of course spoke Aramaic. In resspect to that language I.S. Sventsitsky notes the following: “Among the eastern possessions of Rome a special position occupied Palestine, the area here the teaching of Jesus Christ was born ... The Palestine population was ethnically very diverse and spoke different languages: the majority Aramaic, one of the western-Semitic languages that by that time have become a spoken language in many areas of Asia Minor." 1071 Nevertheless, the word 'Arameans' or 'Arameys' is very resemblant of the Türkic-lingual. It can be parsed into its component parts as follows: ara-mey. The first component ara in literal translation means 'middle, center'. The second component mey (y as y in key) is a somewhat distorted word myiy ((y as i in sit, i as I in India: my-ih-y) 'brain, mind, intellect'. The original form of this ethnic name could be aramyiy with semantics 'central smart'.
There is another moment that attracts attention in the same respect. I.S. Sventsitsky states: “Because the sole place of Yahweh worship was the Jerusalem temple, synagogues were the meeting place for the religious Jews throughout the whole of Palestine and beyond ... there were read the Pentateuch Hole Scripture and books of Prophets, delivered sermons and conducted prayers. Because the spoken language was Aramaic, next to the reader usually stood “tolmach” (interpreter), who translated from Hebrew to Aramaic (so it was natural for Jesus to quote the Bible in Aramaic).” 1072 From that citation first of all follows that Jesus did not understand Hebrew, and secondly, for translation from Hebrew he needed not just a translator, but specifically an interpreter. But the word “tolmach” (interpreter) is a somewhat distorted Türkic word tylmach 'translator'. Such term is usually used when it comes to translation from Türkic or to Türkic. In other cases, that man is simply called a translator. But here the citation is specifically about an interpreter.
Then the Bible was translated for Jesus from ancient Hebrew
to Türkic, and Jesus quoted Bible in Türkic: otherwise why on earth he would needed
the services of a “tolmach” (interpreter). There is still another fact indicating that in
antiquity the Arameans were probably Türkic-lingual people.
In 1875 was discovered a monument of early Christian literature from the turn of the 1st and the 2nd centuries, called “Didache” or “Teaching of Twelve Apostles". That monument has texts of several prayers, including a text of the prayer “Our Father". /557/ With regard to that prayer I.S. Sventsitsky states: “The above prayer is characteristic only for this monument: apparently, the prayers varied from community to community. That prayer has an Aramaic phrase - the Lord has come (maran ata) and proclaimed Hosanna to the God of David". 1073 Here, of course, of interest is the 'Aramaic phrase' “maran ata". It is in fact a Türkic phrase. The first word “maran” has a very slight distortion. It can be parsed into its component parts as follows: mar-an. The first component mar is the ancient Türkic word mar, translated as 'mentor, religious teacher'. The second component is a somewhat distorted affix yn. The original form of the word was maryn. The second word ata in this sentence literally means 'father'. The Türkic-lingual phrase maryn ata can be translated as 'father teaching faith' or 'father-faith tutor'. But there is more.
An impression is being made that the title of the monument, “Didache", is a somewhat distorted ancient Türkic word. That word is parsed into its constituent parts as follows: dida-he. The first component dida is probably the ancient Türkic dedä (dedə) 'father', and the second component he is a somewhat distorted adjectival affix γ¿ (gy). The initial Türkic form of the name probably was Dedäγ¿ (Dedəgy) with a literal translation of 'fatherly' or 'paternal'.
The Biblical names are Adam and Eve are also Türkic.
In the modern Tatar language they have the form of Adam belən Hava, and in Balkar Adam blu Ha¢a. The word adam in Türkic literally means 'man', and the word hava or ha¢a means 'air'. So, 'Adam and Eve' means 'Man and Air'. Perhaps in ancient times the word hava or ha¢a also had some different semantics.
Interestingly, the name of the city Jerusalem appear to have Türkic roots. In
ancient Greek the word took the form of Ίεροσολύμοίς.
This name can be parsed into its component parts as follows: Ie-rus-alim. The first component
ie is certainly a Türkic word that can be translated in this context as 'possession'. The second
component rus is probably somewhat distorted word ras 'rightful, truthful'. The
last component alim is an ancient Türkic word alim 'learned'. The original
form of the name of the city was Ierasalim with a literal translation 'Possession of
truthful scholar'. Possibly, in the past the semantics of the name
was a bit different: 'Possession of righteous teacher'.
Now about Christianity in the Russian ethnic territory. The fact that Christianity has existed in that ethnic territory from apostolic times was stated in the first publicly accessible essay on ancient Rus (Or Russia?) history, the “Kiev synopsis": “It is well known to every wake, for before Vladimir the Ruses (Or Russians?) also christened in some countries. /558/ First christened Sloveno-Rus (Or Russiaan?) people still from St. Apostole Andrew the Firstcalled. Because he hath come to the hills of Kiev and blessed them and erected a cross on them, how above described, at that time many people living there taught of the Christian faith and christened, as many chroniclers, best of all as Reverend St Nestor of the Caves testifies. Also in the Novgorod the Great, coming from Kiev, many to the faith of Christ converted, and by Holy christening enlightened. Also the Rus (Or Russiaan?) chronicler gives in his chronology, as also the high and holy Apostle Paul taught and preached the Christ gospel in Mysia and Illyricum, as written also in the Acts; and Misiya and Illyricum are Slav's lands. Then the Holy Apostle Paul sent to the Slavs also his disciple Andronicus, one of seventy Apostles, to teach and christen in Illyricum and Mysia. He was in Bulgars, Bosnia, and Moravia, then went to the Pani or Pannonia as a Bishop.” 1074 There, the population of Kiev and Novgorod regions at the time of St. Andrew is called “Sloveno-Rus (Or Russian?) people". But direct and indirect evidence of different sources in the 1st c. AD in these regions did not record Slovenes and Ruses.
So, originally Christianity spread there among some other local peoples. And there is more. The
above citation states that on the christening of the Dnieper population “best of all as Reverend St Nestor
of the Caves testifies". However, the commonly known today texts of the Russian
(Or Slavic? Or Rus?) chronicles have a message about St. Andrew
visit to the Dnieper and Ilmen area: “Ondrei studied in Sinop
and coming to Korsun (Chersinesus) saw that Korsun is near Dnieper
estuary; and wanted to go to Rome, and entered the Dnieper estuary from there went
upstream by the Dnieper
river; and happened to come and stay in the mountains on a birch tree, and
having raised in the morning said to his pupils: “Do you see these mountains,
how on these mountains will shine the grace of God; will stans a large city, God will
many churches"; and ascending these mountains blessed and erected cross; and
prayed to the God and descended from that mountain, and came to be there Kiev; and went
up by the Dnieper
and came to Slaves where today is Novgorod; and saw there local people; what are their customs and
how they wash and steamed; and they amazed him, and
went tp Vikings; and came to Rome and told how he taught and what he saw..."
this report describes only the fact of Apostle's Andrew travel and says nothing about the
Acts of the Apostle and the purpose of his pilgrimage. But
the goal of all Apostles has
always been the one and the same, preaching of Christianity and conversion of the local
population to Christianity. Therefore, doubtlessly this message should have a
recorded fragment indicating the purpose of the Apostle St. Andrew pilgrimage, a
christening of the local people. But in the publications of the chronicle that reached
us this fragment is missing. So then, it was eviscerated from there sometime after the
Many Western medieval authors wrote on the existence of Christianity in the ethnic territory
of Russia from apostolic times. Thus, Johann Fabri in his published in 1525 treatise “Religion of the
Muscovites” wrote: “But most importantly, they hold Christian faith (Confess Christian faith, initially inducted by the
Apostle Andrew), which they claim was initially proclaimed to them by the Holy Apostle
Andrew, the brother of Simon Peter. Everything that was under Constantine the Great by 318
bishops in 318 in Nicaea, a city in Bithynia, at the first Council of Nicaea, and
everything authorized and proclaimed by Basil the Great and St. Chrysostom, they revere as sacred, immutable, and pure, that
from that, like from the gospel of Christ, to this day none of them were allowed to
deviate even an inch. And such is their humility that everything once established by
the holy fathers at the councils, no one would ever dare to question (With what kind of
reverence they honor what was establised by the fathers, and hold it sacred). So,
with greater constancy of soul than many of our people, they are firm in the first faith his successors
andthe Holy Fathers soaked by them with breast milk".
1076 Sigismund von Herberstein also wrote: “The Russians openly boast
in their annals, that before
Vladimir and Olga, the Russian land received christening and blessing from the Christ's Apostle
Andrew, who, in their testimony, came from Greece to the esttuary of Borisphen
(Borisphen is a Greek record of Türkic name Burichai for Dnieper
from Herodotus time), sailed up
the river to the mountains, where there is Kyiv now, and there baptized and blessed the land.
He erected there a cross and prophesied that the place will be a great grace of God, with
many Christian churches. Then from there he got to the very source of Borisphen, at a large
lake Wolok (Volok from Slavic “voloch” meaning “to drag”, a reference to dragging boats across Gorodok/Nevel watershed, 55°N 33.5°E) and the River
Lowat down to the lake Ilmen, thence along the
river Wolchow (Volkhov), which flows from the lake, arriving in Novgorod, then by the same
river he reached Lake Ladoga and Neva River, and then the sea,
which they call the Viking (Varyag), and we the German, and
passing between Finland (Winlandia)
and Livonia, reached Rome. Finally, in the Peloponnese, he was crucified for Christ by Ag
Antipater. So say their chronicles.”
1077 Here Sigismund von Herberstein clearly states that
"the Russians openly boast in their annals” of their christening by the Apostle Andrew.
Tsar Ivan the Terrible, in a conversation about religion with the papal legate Antonio Possevino said: “We have from the very foundation of the Christian Church accepted the Christian faith, when the Apostle Peter's brother Andrew came to our lands, then went to Rome, and later, when Vladimir turned to faith, religion was spread even wider. /560/ So in Muscovy we got Christian faith at the same time as you did in Italy. And we keep it clean, while in the Roman faith are 70 faiths, and in that you are my witness, Anthony, you told me this in Staritsa.” 1078 This fragment contains a principle statement expressed by Ivan the Terrible “...and later, when Vladimir turned to faith, religion was spread even wider.” From that follows that Vladimir solely “turned to the faith” that already existed in his land, and he never was a founder of Christianity in the Russian ethnic territory.
In 1633 - 1634 Adam Olearius visited Muscovy as part of the German Embassy. At the end of his journey he published notes, where in particular was reported this: “In their chronicle, they (Russians - Yu.D.) write that Christian faith penetrated into Russia still in thye apostolic times. As if the Apostle Andrew from Greece, sailing up the river Borisfen or Dnieper, passed through Lake Ladoga to Novgorod, there preached the gospel of Christ and established the true worship and build churches and monasteries. After a long time, however, with many wars with Tatars and Gentiles, the true Christian faith in Russia was mostly suppressed and extinguished, and just the opposite, was introduced paganism and idolatry; so it was up to the time of the Grand Duke Volodimer, who also was once a pagan". 1079 And this again states that “in their chronicle, they write” about their christening by the Apostle Andrew. This once again confirms the fact that, at least after 1634, the message of the first apostolic christening of the ancient population in Russian ethnic territory was eviscerated from the chronicles.
A Norse geographical essay “What lands lie in the world” has such message: “In that part of the world is Europe, and the easternmost part of it is Great Svitod. There came to christen Apostle Philip.” 1080 As was shown above, the Great Svitod is the Lower Scythia. So, the local population of that region also was christened by Apostle Philip in the 1st c. Unfortunately, no additional information about acts of this Apostle came to light. And it is not clear, in what part of the Eastern Europe the Apostle Philip was teaching. But even this brief message of the Scandinavian source provides sufficient grounds to hold as credible the fact of Eastern European (Scythian) people conversion to Christianity.
The tribes of the Northern Caucasus were also converted to Christianity. On the North
Caucasus Alans' belonging to Christianity, in the 13th c. directly
pointed Guillaume de Rubruck: “On the eve of Pentecost came to us Alans, who are
there Ass (Ases), the Christians of the Greek rite,
who have Greek letters and
/561/ Greek priests.” 1081
This is also evidenced by the preservation by their descendants of the
ancient traditional Christian calendar.
Direct descendants of the Alans are Karachaians and Balkars. Although the term 'Alan' was not an ethnonym, butt a general appellative for a large group of tribes, the modern Balkars and Karachaians from time immemorial in communications between themselves call each other Alans. These two peoples, like some other Eastern European nations, have preserved their ancient Türkic language. But they have not preserved their ancient Christian religion. At a time when the North Caucasus was conquered by the Kipchak Khanate (Orig.: Golden Horde), the Karachaians, Balkars, and some other people had to accept Islam, which they profess to date. And yet, the Balkars and Karachaians still have preserved their pre-Islamic calendar, which is called traditional. 1082 It is quite possible that it was an ancient pan-Christian calendar of the Eastern Europe's peoples.
In that calendar the month of January is called in Türkic Bashil ai (Aka spelled ay in English) with semantics 'leading month'. February is called Bairam ai, which means 'festivity month'. But the name of the month of March was associated with a Christian religious ceremony. This month is called in Türkic A¢uznu art ayy (Orig.: à¢óçíó àë àéû = ai-uznu al ai-y, with y as i in sit), which can be translated as 'month before breaking fast'. April, respectively, is called A¢uznu art ayy, which means 'month after breaking fast'. It is quite clear that these names are associated with the Lent before Easter, which fall on April. The name of the month of May Hychaman ai was associated with the end of the spring field work. On that occasion everywhere were baked special cakes, called hychaman hychyla (Hallah? Sounds suspiciously homophonic). And one of the names of the month of June was Nikkol ai, which in Türkic means 'month of elder man'. After all, Nikolai (Nicholas) originally is not a name, it is a Türkic word literally meaning 'ancient, old'. Apparently, the month was named in honor of St. Nicholas, or more correctly in honor of holy Elder (I.e. Nicholas) Wonderworker. Another summer month of July is called in honor of the Prophet Elijah, Elijah ah. Incidentally, the word elijah in Balkar also means 'lightning bolt'. The month of August is called Kyrkar ai, literally translated from Türkic as 'month of forty men'. Perhaps the name of that month is after the martyrs of Sebaste forty. September in the traditional calendar of the Balkars and Karachaians is Kyrka¢uz ai, which can be translated as 'month of forty breaking fast'. It is difficult to tell why this month bore that name. In any case, the connection of the name with Christianity is obvious. The next month October in the calendar is called et yiyk ai (Orig.: ýò ûéûêú àé = et yiyk ai, with y as i in sit and i as Y in York), which literally means 'month of meat week'. This name is pointing to the fact that according to the Christian canons, for one week in this month /562/ meat could be used daily. In other weeks that was not allowed. And November had twio names: kach ai, which means 'month of christening' and abystol ai - 'Apostlic month'.
From these two names is can be understood that Apostle St. Andrew christened people in the month of November. Therefore, in the people's calendar the month of christening was named after the event. And that the Apostle Andrew christened the local people is clear from the title of the next month. December has three names: Andreyich ai, Endre¢yuk ai, abystolu art aiy. The first two names are phonetic variations of the name 'Andrew'. In Türkic, these two versions of the month mean 'death of Andrew month'. The third version of the name translates as 'death of Apostle month'. The meaning of all these names is quite transparent - December named in memory of the fact that this month was martyred Apostle Andrew. Apparently, the considered calendar came from a group of Eastern European nations that tied their baptism directly to the Apostle Andrew. It is unlikely that this could be a fiction, because such an event for all people is the life-changing, and there can not be any place for fiction.
Christianity was also widespread, at least until the Middle Ages, among the peoples of the Itil and Kama. Early medieval Arab and Persian writers repeatedly pointed to that. For example, according to Ibn Khordadbeh, the Rus merchants arriving in Baghdad “are posing as Christians and pay jizya".
The subject here is clearly of Upper Kama Ruses. Further, al-Istahri pointed out that “the internal Bulgars are Christians". It meant the Volga Bulgars. Al-Masudi, describing the tribes of al-Sakaliba, said: “The Slavs are divided into many nations, some of whom are Christians. ... They have many cities, also churches where they hung bells wich they strike with a hammer, just as our Christians strike board with a wooden mallet". 1083 Here, a few moments attract attention. First, all that al-Masudi wrote not later than 920 - 950, i.e. before, per the official version, the Kiev prince Volodimer adopted Christianity.
Secondly, the subject here are the al-Sakaliba people somewhere in the north-eastern region of the future Rus, not the Slavs of Kiev. Thirdly, in the described period al-Sakaliba already had many cities and churches with bells, indicating a long Christian tradition of that nation. Not to be ruled out that Christianity of the Bulgars and al-Sakaliba ascends to the Apostle Philip missionary days in those parts. After all, if his mission was unsuccessful, he is unlikely to be remembered centuries later.
Thus, there is reason to believe that Christianity in
/563/ Eastern Europe, including the
Kama and Itil regions, first appeared in the early apostolic times, that is in the 1st c.
However, the Rus (I.e. Slavic) chronicles and a number of other sources testify that Christianity in the Russian ethnic territory, specifically in the Middle Dnieper, appeared sometime around 988 (Slavic annals have both tracks, the 988 christening in Kyiv, and pre-Rus Khazar Kyiv with gates, churches, and residencies, but propaganda machine of both Church and state accentuated only the Rus events). It is believed that the “baptizer of Rus' was the prince of Kiev, Vladimir, who converted to Christianity in the Crimea in the Byzantine colony Chersonesus, from an ordinary Greek priest. Here's how it is related in the Lavrentiev Chronicle: “The Korsun (Chersonesus) bishop with Tsar's (Byzantine Emperor) priests, announcing, baptized Vladimir. And when he laid his hand on him, that immediately regained his sight. And Vladimir, having felt the sudden healing of his, glorified God: “Now I know the true God”. Many of his retainers, seeing that, converted. He converted in the Church of St. Basil, that church stands in the Korsun (Chersonesus) city in the middle of the town, where Korsunians gather for trade". This point of view on the “christening of Rus' is adopted both by the modern historical science (Following the tradition of official Tzar's history), and the Russian Orthodox Church. Moreover, in the Russian Federation in honor of this event at the state level and by lagislation is instituted Memorial Day of “Holy Apostolitic-like St. Vladimir".
That day, July 28, is titled “Day of Rus' christening". But in substance, historical sources indicate that in the 988 was christen not the “Rus” (not the entire population of the Russian ethnic territory), but “Ruses", that is the pagan Ruses, who just over a hundred years beforehand migrated to the Middle Dnieper area. They adopted the Byzantine branch of Christianity ("Greek rite"). And the local population that adopted Christianity as early as the apostolic times probably professed a form of early Christianity, which was later named the Old Believers' branch, Old Faith, or ancient Orthodoxy.
Summing up the evidence on the spread of Christianity in the Russian ethnic territory, the following can be noted. According to fairly numerous historical sources, Christianity in that area appeared in the 1st c. AD and was brought there by the Apostle Andrew, and probably by Philip. At that time, Ruses or Slavs did not exist there, and to Christianity were converted the local Scythian (Türkic) peoples. /564/ It was the early Christianity. In the 5th c. in the Ilmen area and in the Itil-Oka interfluve appeared southern Slavs, who probably were Christians. The time of arrival of another group of Slavs to the Middle Dnieper and Oka River basin is not clear. But they were not Christians at that time. The Ruses reappeared again in the Ilmen area in the middle of the 9th c. From there they reached the Middle Dnieper, according to the Rus chronicles still being “pagans”. In 988 they converted to the Byzantine branch of Christianity, in time making it a state religion. And from that time on the (geographically) Russian ethnic soil existed two branches of Christianity, the Byzantine and early Christian branches (The influence of Greek clergy before the 17th c. coup was sporadic and minimal, the religion of the land was solely early Christian). The first was the official, the second was informal and persecuted. However, despite centuries of persecution, few Old Believer Christian communities have survived to this day. It is in that branch of Christianity where are found its most ancient traditions, dating back to the apostolic times.
Briefly summing up the above review of Christianity, the following can be noted. All above evidence indicates that as a religion the early Christianity was formed in Türkic-lingual environment. But then arises a question - in what ethnic territory it took place, and why all early Christian documents known at the present time are written in ancient Greek? Based on the above rather limited information the following preliminary scenarios can be suggested. Apparently, the source areas in forming Christian terminology were Asia Minor, Syria, and possibly Northern Egypt. It was there where originated most of early Christian communities, and it is there that the first theological centers arose later. At the beginning of the first centuries AD the language of the local population in these areas remained mostly Türkic, and the elite also used the ancient Greek (Greek laguage was ). A part of the indigenous population in these territories could have languages other than Türkic, but they were not dominant among the Christians. Christian communities appeared in the local milieu of common people, so the terminology evolved in that environment. Originally, it was borrowed from the preceding pre-Christian religion (Tengriism). But some of it was shaping an anew. in these areas, Of course, the service at that time was conducted in Türkic language. But at the end of the 4th c., in its approach to the nature of God the Christianity split into two divisions, supporters of teachings of the Alexandrian Bishop Arius and his opponents. Ultimately, by the end of the 4th c. in the territory of the Roman Empire the dominant position occupied Arius opponents, and their branch of Christianity received a name of /565/ Catholic; by an order of Emperor Theodosius I “”having gathered, bishops determined that the beliefs of the Nicaean Council remained dominanting, and all heresies were subjected to prohibition” 1085. Initially, the Roman Catholicism spread in the Eastern Empire, where along with the Türkic language the Greek also held a sway. Thus, all people professing Arianism automatically became heretics. It was probably at that time that the worship in Türkic language was forbidden across the Roman Empire.
However, in the “barbarian” ethnic territorires, located north of Danube and in Spain, the Arianism (Tengriism) has survived, it was preached in Türkic. In other words, Türkic language became associated with the heretical Arianism (Tengriism). Consequently, the worship in the Eastern Empire was transferred to Greek, and all Türkic written sources, including those of non-Christian content, were to be destroyed as heretical.
That was probably the period when the whole Scripture was translated into Greek. Butcertainly can't be excluded that the Greek diaspora could have Christian texts translated from Türkic to Greek much earlier. After Catholicism at the end of the 4th c. also spread to the Western Empire, on the orders of Pope Damasus I the Bible was translated in Rome into Latin, and probably all services were transferred into Latin. However, in the official version translation of the Bible into Latin was made from Greek. And the translation was done by Eusebius Sophronius Hieronymus (ca. 347-420), known as Blessed.
At that time, in the territories of the “barbarian” states Arianism (Tengriism) continued to dominate, and the liturgical language naturally was the Türkic (Scythian peoples did not use neither Latin nor Greek). Somewhere by the 9 - 10th cc. the former barbaric states of Western and Central Europe that were confessing Arianism (Tengriism), were forced to accept Catholicism under an active pressure of Vatican, with the Latin liturgical language. But before that, the vernacular and liturgical language of the Western, Central, and Eastern Europe was mainly Türkic, associated, naturally, with heresy. And the Catholic Church dealt with heretics very cruelly. Apparently, to eradicate Arianism (Tengriism) and other non-Catholic faiths in the “barbarian” Europe was established Inquisition. Therefore, the Türkic part of the European population in the former barbarian states, in fear of an all-powerful Catholic Church of Rome, probably was switching from their native language to the inflectional languages of the indigenous population.
Naturally, all Türkic written records had to be destroyed. Probably, in that period was destroyed,
/566/ the bulk of European written historical records. But
apparently, some of them were first translated into Latin and Greek. Only these written historical monuments
have preserved to this day.
How these processes went on in the Russian ethnic territoryis not clear yet, because of complete lack of information. However, the influence of the church on these processes is undisputable, for at that time existed no alternative mechanism for influencing the the minds of great population masses. The only fact that is confirmed by reliable data is a complete absence of Old Russian language in the Christian worship across the entire Russian ethnic territory: “The Russian liturgy is borrowed from the Greek Church and is writen in the Slavic language, which for the Russians is as understanddible as the Latin for papists (Roman Catholics)". 1086 Matthew Mehovsky about that language had spoken more distinctly: “In Russian churches during worship the reading and singing are in Serbian, that is in the Slavic language". 1087 It should be noted here that the “Serbian", or more precisely the South Slavic language was spoken by the population of Volga - Klyasma interfluvial (Here the term Volga stands in its modern Russian designation, historical Oka - Klyasma interfluvial, where Oka stands for Ak Idel or Agidel), and possibly Ilmen area, where in the 5th c. AD migrated the tribes of the South Slavs from Dalmatia. Judging by the written sources, for that period of time in the Middle Dnieper area that language is not attested.
Thus, the analyzed evidence suggests that the terminology of early Christianity formed in
the Türkic milieu, probably in the territories of the Asia Minor, Syria, and possibly in
Egypt. In the Türkic language likely also have been written all of the first texts of
the Christian Scriptures. The translation of these texts from the ancient Türkic language
and then to Latin, probably occurred at the end of the 4th c., after Catholicism gained a dominance in the Roman Empire.
The Türkic-lingual texts of the Scripture seem to have been
exterminated during Inquisition as written in the language of heretics.
1052. Sventsitsky JS The first Christians and the Roman Empire. M., 2003. p. 103.
1053. Ibid. C. 329.
1054. VDI, 1948, No 3. P. 219.
1055. VDI, 1948, No 2. C. 306.
1056. Sventsitsky JS The first Christians and the Roman Empire. M., 2003. p. 182-183.
1057. Bolotov VV, Lectures on the history of the ancient church. M., 1994, T. IV. P. 240.
1058. Belikov D. Christianity in Goths. Kazan, 1887, vol. I. , P. 96.
1059. VDI, 1948, No 3. C. 289.
1060. VDI, 1949, No 3. p. 306, 307.
1061. VDI, 1948, No 3 p. 307.
1062. Belikov D. Christianity in Goths. Kazan, 1887, vol. I. C. 124.
1063. Constantine Bagryanorodsky. On the control of the empire. M., 1991. Pp. 93.
1064. Belikov D. Christianity among Goths. Kazan, 1887, vol. I. P. 125.
1065. Sventsitsky JS The first Christians and the Roman Empire. M., 2003. C. 156.
1066. Ibid. C. 123.
1067. Nicholas nomadic. Schism of 1054 and the East-West relations / / early feudal Slavic states and peoples. Sofia. 1991. , P. 102.
1068. Herodotus. History, Vol. IV, 1972, sec. 59.
1069. VDI, 1948, No 2. P. 299.
1070. Lavrentiev Chronicle. M., 2001. , P. 27.
1071. Sventsitsky JS The first Christians and the Roman Empire. M., 2003. Pp. 46, 49.
1072. Ibid. Pp. 79, 80.
1073. Ibid. , P. 158.
1074. The dream of Russian unity. Synopsis of Kiev (1674). M., 2006. P. 106.
1075. Lavrentiev Chronicle. M., 2001. Pp. 8, 9.
1076. A Treatise of Johann Fabri “Religion Muscovites” / / Russia and Germany. M., 1998. No. 1. p. 20-21.
1077. Sigismund Herberstein. Notes on Muscovy. M., 1988. Pp. 88 - 89.
1078. A. Possevino. Historical essays on Russia in XVI. M. 1983. , P. 79.
1079. Adam Oleary. Description of Muscovy / / Russia of the X8th c. Memories of foreigners. Smolensk, 2003. C. 438.
1080. Melnikova EA Norse geographical works. M., 1986. , P. 65.
1081. J. Del Piano Carpini. History mogalov. Guillaume de Rubruck. Journey to the East. The Book of Marco Polo. M., 1997. , P. 104.
1082. Karachay-Balkar-Russian dictionary / ed. ER Tenisheva, H. I. Suyuncheva, M., 1989. C. 805.
1083. Harkavy J. A. Legend of Muslim writers of the Slavs and Russian. St Petersburg. , 1870. P. 125.
1084. Lavrentiev Chronicle. L., 1926-1928. PSRL. T. 1. AS 78.79.
1085. Ecclesiastical History of Sozomen Ermiya Salamis. St Petersburg. 1851. C. 490.
1086. Composition of Samuel Collins, who spent nine years at Moscow Court as a physician of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich / / Reading in Imperial Society of Russian History and Antiquities. M. 1846. P. 1.
1087. Mehovsky Matthew. Treatise on two Sarmatias. Moscow - Leningrad 1936. , P. 98.
Ogur and Oguz
Ethnic Affiliation Scythians
Scythians and their descendents