Talk:Eurasian Avars/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Hua and Uar

Would it be a good idea to combine the Hua & Uar & Avar pages together? User:Zestauferov

I don't think so. While the Hua and the Uar were likely absorbed into the Avar confederacy, they did possess a separate existence long before then and so deserve their own headings. The reference to them in this article should suffice. Ddama

Dubiosities

Many things stated in this article seem rather dubious to me. For example: "Their relation to the Hephthalite has been demonstrated."

The demonstration of an Avar relationship to the Hephthalites is a widespread notion due to deductions made from the documentations of early greek writers like Simokattes, Procopius, Menanda etc. here are just a few sites from the internet it took me about 5 seconds to find these and there are plenty more. www.silk-road.com/artl/heph.shtml members.tripod.com/great-bulgaria/Central-Asian-Nomads-Unite/ origins.html members.tripod.com/great-bulgaria/Central-Asian-Nomads-Unite/ origins.html basically anyone who can be considered to know a fair iota about the Avars knows about this connection. User:Zestauferov

Also, the statements about 'Hebrews'

off the top of my head have a look at A. Scheiber "Jewish inscriptions in Hungary from the 3rd Century to 1686" (1983) or many things from Jewish Studies journals like V.L.Vikhnovich "From the Jordan to the Dneiper" from Jewish Studies 31 (1991). User:Zestauferov

and 'Mongolian skeletons'

try Istvan Erdelyi's "Kabari (Kavari) v Karpatskom Basseyne" specifically page 179 from Sovietskaya Archeologiya 4 (1983) User:Zestauferov

... Basically what this article lacks is any factual back up. A paper trail.

!!

I would never rest on a few choice linguistic simularities as a back-bone of an argument. R.L. Trask, a Historical Linguist, has shown that any list of simular words between different ethnolinguistic groups may exist purely due to coincidence (he uses a list of Hawaiian and Greek words to demonstrate this).

what point relevant to the article are you making here please? User:Zestauferov

And where is the information about the skeletons from?

see above User:Zestauferov

How does one define 'Mongolian'?

It is another way of saying "Aboriginal Siberian Type" as in similar to those people from (surprise, surprise) Mongolia! It is a politer phraseology than refering to Mongoloid which is fading out of use these days along with dated terms like Negroid (except apparently people like you!) User:Zestauferov

And how were the skeletons identified as Avars?

now you are just being silly but see below and read the papers suggested above for specialist info (or email me for a reading list on dating archeaological finds and the related problems).User:Zestauferov

Central Asia today is peopled by groups of varyingly mixed ancestry--one can see it plainly.

that is a typical ethnocentric statement. In fact Central asia is still inhabited by the same physical type that has been there for centuries (except for a few tens of million more Europeans thanks to Russia). Their "obviously much mixed physical types" is the original out of which distilled "East European Types" "Iranian Types", "Pamir Types" "Chinese Types" etc.. User:Zestauferov

It would seem more likely that any 'Avar skeletons' would bare both European and Asian (or, Caucasoid and Mongoloid, if you prefer) features.

to be sure the carpathian basin has a huge variety of skulls burried scattered about it I don't think anyone is disputing that fact. The info in the article is relevant only to the Avar area which later became the Kabar domain where Mongolian Type skeletons appear in the more noble graves dated to the Avar period. User:Zestauferov

Honestly, this article smells abit of crack-pot history. No offense, of course.

actually I am offended and maybe it is just you are the wrong person in line this week but I am sick and tired of poorly-read individuals (not even with enough knowledge to call themselves amateurs) criticizing scholarly efforts from people who really do try hard and do well on this site simply because the info is of a higher callibre than that which you can read in the most popular encyclopaedias. The most sickening thing is people like you think if it has not been written about IN ENGLISH it does not exist at all (an example from earlier this month is even having English-only-speakers telling Jews we must be Judaean and not a Benjaminite or even Hebrew just because that word is not used to describe ethnic Jews in english! Now how is that for an example of imperialism in language?) Well let me tell anyone reading this something. The original articles you can read here at wiki have been composed free-of-charge by people who love their subjects rather than by general researchers gathering info on topics they have been given with no enthusiasm for finding all the perameters of the topic who get a monthly paycheck whether they do a good job or not! All they have to worry about is whether the format is correct, the paragraphs read easily, the spelling is standard et.. The days of high quality research for encyclopaedias even for renouned companies like Brittanica are even getting distant. Just compare the wealth of info and objectivity on a topic like Scythians from a 1952 version with the bare (usually erroneous) fact pompous style of a modern version and you can see what I mean. User:Zestauferov

I personally am not learned enough in the realm of the Avars.

THAT my friend is very obvious! User:Zestauferov

It is for that reason, in fact, that I came upon this article. I'd love for the author (Zestauferov?) to prove him(/her)self. I am open-minded. I just need credible evidence. Peace. User:D.E. Cottrell

And peace be with you also I should I suppose thank you for editing your words from saying that it stank to saying it smelt a little, but the first thing you wrote stung a little. I am willing to edit the anger out of this post if you appologise and re-work your original question to a more honest inquisitive style and not let so much of your "White Hun" fascist agenda come out. If you are not of the latter then you ought to be aware that the field I focus on is full of them and their latent ideas. The fact is this, The vast majority of Europeans do NOT preserve the original physical features of any Hunnic ancestors they may possess. This does not mean we might not descend from them, even 100 times over, it just means that we are very mixed and no nation can claim pure descent from another and the best we might say could sound something like "Central Eurasians is that they are descended from Central Eurasians". We can at least be proud of our ancestry if we feel the nomad inside (though it probably has more to do with one's psychologocal than genetic background) and if we feel like it refresh the Central Eurasian bloodline by moving to central Eurasia and starting a family with someone from there. I will re-vamp the entire article to make it more readable, categorized and less meandering. I will have no hard feelings if you do not and lets edit this talk later to make it less personal and more useful. After you appologise you can edit my text and I will edit yours so that the useful info remains and the pointless jabs dissappear. User:Zestauferov

__ To speak colloqially: dude, chill! Yowza. I had no idea I'd get this kind of rise out of you. I never intended to insult you. I wanted your sources and I commend you for producing the paper trial you lacked. White Hun fascist agenda!? I have no idea what that's about. I never said Huns were 'White,' nor am I a fascist. If you knew me, you'd laugh at such a statement. How is it ethnocentric to call Central Asia mixed? Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza in Genes, Peoples, and Languages (2000) did not use genetic data from Central Asia for that reason. Saka intermarried with Turks. How is that not mixed? And yes, I accept the fact that nomadic populations had an impact in Europe. However, the extent to which that occurred is up for debate. As a general rule, pastoralist societies have smaller populations than agricultural ones. The main mode of subsistance, and I doubt I need to tell you this, of Europe for thousands of years before the Huns was agriculture. The logical conclusion of this would be that Huns (and Magyars, Avars, et cetera) had a limited genetic impact. I believe Sforza's results are that (in Hungarians) a 10% 'asiatic' genetic component (though I may be remembering the results for Finns). This goes with what you said, that no nation can claim a pure heritage. Such claims are dangerous, ignorant conveniances. When I wrote Negroid and Mongoloid I did not write out of belief in racial classification. I attempted to understand your classification. I personally do not buy into racial concepts. Speaking in ethnic terms is a bit more accurate, but even then, as we can see so clearly here, there is confusion and the potential for useless conflict. I understand you were angry, and I apologize for making you that way. No hard feelings. D.E. Cottrell 09:06, 11 Jan 2004 (UTC)

This article would benefit from discussion of the nature of the links between the Juan-Juan federation and the Avars, as this remains a topic of academic interest. Also, the Kabars are recorded in all of the primary sources as tribes of Khazar Turk federation who joined the proto-Magyars during their migrations from the Ukranian steppes to the Danubian steppes. I suggest that a more appropriate place for them is as a subheading in the Khazar article and/or as a sub-sub-heading in the Origins section of the Magyar article, which needs much work. Ddama

Avars should become a disambiguation page

There are the Avars which are the nomadic tribes that this article is about, and there are the Avars which are the predominant inhabitants of Dagestan, numbering 501,000. I suggest that this should become a disambiguation page, because on the List of ethnic groups page, it mentions Avars as the Dagestani type, but it goes to this page. Dagestan

This article is about the same Avars that live in Dagestan. The article even mentions Dagestan. Isomorphic 02:32, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I vote in favor of disambiguation. It is unlikely that the modern Caucasian Avars are descended from the ancient European Avars. Even the current Avar article, which includes some questionable theories, mentions this:

A connection between the European Avars and the Caucasian Avar and Kabard is severely questioned

The Right Thing To Do is to have separate articles with each including a section that a minority opinion believes that a connection exists. Ddama

Exactly. Besdies, the famous Muslim leader Imam Shamil was a Dagestani Avar. He was not a European Avar. Dagestan

So... what are we going to do about it? If no one replies, I will take matters into my own hands. Most of the people agree anyway. Dagestan

The section "Classical sources" would be improved by relating it directly to some classical sources. Wetman 22:35, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Some additional facts

I do not feel competent enough to edit the Avar page, but here is a couple of facts that can be included:

567-568 is when Avars permamently moved to Pannonia.

Before Longobards moved from Pannonia fearing Avars they together were fighting against Gepids, another Germanic tribe, which was completely destroyed. (Gepid page in Wiki mentions their destruction by Avars in 567).

Avar raids on Byzantium helped/allowed Slavic settlement of Balkans. (Slavs were used as infantry in Avar army).

After years of wars with Franks Avars were finally defeated in 803.


Legacy

I edited the Legacy section, which non sequitor claimed that both the Avars and Huns first introduced stirrups to Europe.

Rulers

Where is this kings' list from? It appears to confuse Eurasian Avars and Caucasian Avars. Also the allegations of Khazar involvement of AVar politics is not supported by any source I know. Please provide citations.

Avars ethnicity

Are the Avars Germanic?

Noone knows. The latest Britannica says: "of undetermined ethnicity". I suppose our article should be purged of unverified speculations. --Ghirla -трёп- 18:30, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Avar language?

Is there any information as to which language the ancient Avars spoke?--Johannes Rohr 15:54, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

No. --Ghirla -трёп- 16:04, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, however, there is an article in the German section, de:Altawarische Sprache which claims i.a. that ancient Avaric was a Turkic language, closely related to the Hunnic language, written in a Turkic runic script, in something called "Talas style" and that the name of the language would have been "Avar tila" in ancient Avaric. I wonder what to make out of this, and would be grateful for a second opinion. --89.50.36.122 12:54, 22 March 2006 (UTC) (Whoops, was I logged off?) --Johannes Rohr 13:39, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Spoof. There is no substantial record of the Avar language to draw a conclusion as to its character. Ditto about the Hunnic. --Ghirla -трёп- 12:57, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. Can you tell me, to your knowledge, which kind of record does exist? --Johannes Rohr 13:41, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Eurasian Avars in Daghestan

Omeljan Pritsak about Caucasian Avars in Daghestan:

Omeljan Pritsak Proto-Mongols in Khazarian Transcaucasia

It used to be considered that the Mongols appeared in history at the turn of the 12th century as Chingiz Khan formed his empire. Now we know with the help of the analysis of the Chinese sources that the Proto-Mongols were one of the key players in the struggle for hegemony in the "northern lands" of the Eurasian steppe. The Chinese sources call them "Eastern Barbarians" (Tung-hu); their opponents were dubbed the Hsiung-nu. As to the Tung-hu, they were divided into the Wu-huan and Hsien-pi. Among the Hsien-pi, the main role was played by the K'u-mo and Hsi, and also a new political organization formed by the northern Chinese imperial dynasty, the T'o-po. The name of the K'u-mo Sinologists have reconstructed as *Ku-mak and the Hsi as Qay. On the northern Caucasus, which was the border zone between the Sassanids (and latter the Islamic Caliphate) and the Khazar Kaganate at the time of its flower, we find the same Proto-Mongol structures that we find on the northeastern Chinese border. The main role there was played by the "true Avars" (*Ahwar /Wuhuan), the *Sebirs (Hsien-pi), the K'u-mo and the *Qay+lan/Qay+dag (Hsi). The author was able to locate more than 30 Proto-Mongolian etymons in medieval sources of Byzantino-Arabo-Iranian, Armenian, Syrian and Georgian origin. Of them 12 are from the language of the Qay, 8 from the Sebirs, 6 from the Avars, and 2 from the K'u-mo. http://ssvit.iatp.org.ua/sum/sum96~1.htm Nordkaukasier 80.237.10.233 20:36, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search Please refrain from adding nonsense to Wikipedia, as you did to Talk:Eurasian Avars. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Fang Aili 說嗎? 18:36, 25 March 2006 (UTC)


"Nonsense to Wikipedia"? Avars or Caucasian Avars are a modern people of Caucasus, mainly of Dagestan, in which they are the predominant group. The Capital City of Caucasian Avars is Khunzakh which means "At The Huns" or "The City of Huns". http://www.circassiancanada.com/ing/04_daghestan/05_history/da_caucasian_avars.htm

OR OMELJAN PRITSAK IS NONSENS FOR WIKIPEDIA? 80.237.10.233 22:24, 25 March 2006 (UTC) 80.237.10.233 22:31, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Removed for discussion

I have had to remove the following from the page in order to highlight a point for discussion.

- known as Zhuan Zhuan to the Chinese[1]
Like the later Mongols and Qitan, the Avars belonged to the Śyän-bi tribal confederation, and are "without doubt the first Mongolian tribe to be historically attested"[1]
  1. ^ a b K.H. Menges, "Altaic people", Encyclopaedia Iranica, v, p. 908-912, Online Edition (LINK)

The problem is that the European Avars have never been directly connected with the Rouran and the matter is highly complicated. Please read up on the story of Sarosios for further clarification, and the story of the Asian Avars, only to which the lower reference quoted above applies. Kaz 22:50, 11 September 2006 (UTC) I had a personal message from User:Tajik and so I think I need to re-iterate that the matter is highly complicated and ask those involved to read the material with precision and critical engagement in order to avoid mis-reportage in future.Kaz 16:36, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

While we are discussing, how about removing the Avar kings list and the Anthropological origins section for discussion too?Kaz 10:06, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

screw u

Anthropology of Pseudo-Avars

About Avarian (Pseudo-Avarian) anthropology:"Liptak (1955) went into the details of Avar Period’santhropology in his candidate degree thesis.He stated his opinion that archeological chronology system was simply wrong.According to Liptak, too much cemeteries were dated for the 8th century and too few for the 7th and the 9th centuries.He pointed out as an obvious contradiction the fact, that 7th century, early Avar anthropological material was almost exclusively Europid, while grave-goods indicated Middleand Central Asian parallels. On the other hand there were cemeteries dated for the 8th century that contained Mongoloid elements among others. The attire and armament introduced by the Avars was rapidly adapted by other ethnic groups, it became the general fashion of the region in the 7th century.Therefore the separation of autochton elements was (and is)simply impossible by archeological means. That is why Liptak strongly emphasized that to talk of Avar Period population makes much more sense than to stick with the phrases of “the Avars” and of “Avar population”... Liptak outlined his view that the gracile Mediterranean type was autochton, while the brachycran Europid types were partly typical of the local inhabitants,partly they migrated to the Central Danubian Basin with the Avars. He found the origin of Cromagnoids, Nordoids and large stature Mediterraneans uncertain, and he indicated migration as the probable reason of their emergence. Liptak mentioned the Asiatic origin of Mongolid and Mongoloid population elements, but he did not go into the details of any closer relationship or parallel. Liptak analysed the Avar Period population of the Danube-Tisza midland region and stated that 80% of them was of Europid character.He separated narrow-faced dolichomorph types (Nordoid, Mediterranean) in 38%, broad-faced Cromagnoid types (A and B) in 22.6%, and brachycran forms(Pamirian, Dinarian, Near Eastern and short-headed individualsof undefined origin) in 17.1%... He found the tall stature, dolichomorph, narrow-faced variation (its frequency was 22%) non-homogenous. Liptk put the northern (Nordic) and tall Mediterraneans under this heading.He separated two regional varieties, a western(Atlanto-) Mediterranean one and an eastern or Indo-Iranian one...Liptak considered the gracile Mediterranean (Ibero-Cromagnoid types Insular) type the most significant component of the Avar Period population. The that were classified the descendants of the Upper-Palaeolithic Cromagnon race were rated important components of the Avar Period population by Liptak. He added that these types kept their significance in the Arpadian Age as well. The author put Pamirian (Pamiro-Ferganian), Dinarian, Alpine and Near Eastern (Armenoid types under the heading of brachycran) elements... Their presence was insignificant in the Avar Period. Liptak paid the most attention to the Turanid (South-Siberian)and to the Ural types from the Europo-Mongoloids. Noneof the two had much significance in the Avar Period, but they were dominant among the conquering Hungarians. Liptak identified and described in detail three kinds among the Mongoloids of the Avar Period: the Northern-Chinese(Chinid), the Central Asian Mongol and the palaeo-Siberian types. He considered the two later types the keycomponents of Avar Period Mongolids...Liptak voted for the dual origin theory when studying the ethnogenesis of the Avars.He called true-born (pure blooded)Avar (Varchonite) those small series which were characterized by Mongolid and Mongoloid features. According to Liptak’s opinion the progenitors of the Vachonite originated from beyond Lake Baykal,and they migrated into Southern- Central Asia only sometime later.From there they were forced out by the Turkis hpeoples, and so they escaped into the Central Danubian Basin.There were series with acomparatively high ratio of the Iranian type (Kiskoros-Varos alatt,Alattyan).Liptak named them ones with Hephtalite origin because he considered the Indo-Iranian Mediterranean type a significant ethnical component of the Hephtalites. This type could be traced back as far as Central Asia (Liptak1983)". Volume 44(1-4):87-94, 2000 Acta Biologica Szegediensis http://www.sci.u-szeged.hu/ABS. Erzsébet Fóthi. Anthropological conclusions of the study of Roman and Migration periods Acta Biol Szeged 2000, 44:87-94 Abstract PDF. SYMPOSIUM Department of Anthropology, Hungarian Natural History Museum, Budapest,Hungary Anthropological conclusions of the study of Roman and Migration periods. Erzsebet Fothi.--Awarenstuermer 15:52, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

about Hurrian type

"Armenoid" type in the middle of Eurasian Avars is Hurrian type. Armenoids and Kurds are typical Hurrians (for anthropology). Armenoid racial type= Hurrian type. Cromagnon (Proto-Nordic) race: German, Skandinavian, Tokhars, Old-Caucasion type of Balkano-Caucasians, Old-Dinlings and others). Brachikephales: Balkano-Caucasians (or Celtic or Pamirian-Alpic), Dolichokephales: Medditeran (Iranians,Pushtuns and others). Pamirians are brachicephal Europoids (Mountain Tadjiks)--Awarenstuermer 16:14, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Pseudo-Avars

Please stop moving the page and rep[lacing references without discussion. `'mikka (t) 02:58, 1 October 2006 (UTC)