Volga". A new people, emerging from Asia and partly conquering, partly pushing the Bulgarians to the west or back to their ancestral homelands, were the Khazars. This happened approximately in the UP century, although the first movement of the Bulgarians, as we said, dates back to the \ century, & In the half of the UT century they fell under the rule of the Avars for some time). Having established the Khazars along the banks of the Volga, Lon and Kasshishkato and the Seas of Azov, part of the Bulgarians who remained in their ifots, along the banks of the Volga and Kama, went a completely separate historical path, and never again restored any connection with their brothers who settled on Dunaf. Which tribe the Bulgarian people belong to is still not completely clear in science. NF some scholars consider them to be a people of chudecato, i.e., of Fineco-Ugrecato origin 6). Finally, I know that the Bulgarians are the people of a Turkic tribe 8). Business in
[fragment illegible in the scan of the first edition]
2) ZySheg. Metochae roriogish, Reeg. 1774, u. I, R. 504-5.
3) Plaesh, b. 502-3.
[fragment illegible in the scan of the first edition]
5) MouePez Appa]ez des voises, 1850. P.:
[fragment illegible in the scan of the first edition]
7) 5. Ouago. Oe Vshcheahogat ibtogishaie ogheshe ze az alidi158 t. Oogra& 1853. Si. especially with 80 pages and dalfe. Grigoriev also seems to be in the same mood: “Russia and Asia,” pp. 94-99. Recently, Mr. Ilovaisy appeared as a strong defender of the Slavic origin of the Bulgarians in “Search for the Origins of Rus',” p. 167 et seq.
8) Kunik. First, in the third appendix to Dorn’s work “Kasshi” pp. 385-7, note, and then in the search for “On the kinship of the Hagan-Bulgars with the Chuvash
I. oo. A.
The fact is that we have relatively little data to address this issue. Some of the Middle Ages writers are unclear, and the reports of the Arabs, who, as we will see below, not only traveled to Bulgaria and the Khazars, but lived there, are full of contradictions. Thus, the ambassador of Caliph Muktedir, Ibn Fotslan, who personally visited Bulgaria in 922, called the Bulgarians Slavs *). According to another Arabic account, the Bulgarian Botomolites, who arrived soon after the Bulgarians accepted the Mathematical faith in Mecca, when asked about their origin, answered that they descended from the Sifshan race of Turks and Slavs 2). The famous Arab traveler, Al-Masudi, traveled to Khazarsho in the 10th century. and therefore, having the opportunity to personally observe the Bulgarians, who settled Itil, the capital of the Khazars, for trade, considers them a people of a Turkic tribe 3). Another well-known Arab tourist and scholar, writer of the 20th half of the 10th century, Ibi-Taukal, expresses himself very darkly, saying that “the language of the Bulgars is “common with the language of the Khozars.”).The question of what language the Khazars spoke can hardly be considered settled at the present time, which we will discuss below. True, in According to the order of the scientists, the remains of the Boltar language are called topographical, with proper and common nouns. In addition, an interesting monument has survived - the name book of the 00.4 Arski princes, in which there are colorful phrases in an unknown language 5). Analysis of the names of the Bulgarian princes and other words mentioned here has led some scientists to the conclusion that the Bulgarians were the people of the Turkic tribe 6), but even here there is disagreement among me: some consider the current Chuvash language to be ancient Bulgarian, but in modern times it has significantly changed, others deny any similarity between these two according to the Slavic-Bulgarian name,” in the appendix to “Izvfsti Al-Bekri and other authors about Rus' and the Slavs” St. Petersburg. 1878 Vashb6hu. Or. sy.
[fragment illegible in the scan of the first edition]
2) R'OVzzop. 1e8 rep!ez Chi Salsase. Rags. 1828. b. 216.
3) Khvolzon. From Ibn-Dast. St. Petersburg 1869 p. 81.
4) Garkavi. Said by Muslim writers. St. Petersburg 1870 p. 219.
5) Open with Popov. Not having a “review” of chronographs at hand, we present two phrases from the “Name Book” according to Ilovaisky’s “Search for the Beginnings of Rus'”, p. 219, irim: “Avitohol zhil lBt 300. Rod was doulo to him, and lBt was dilom to him tvirem... Esperih prince 60 and one ‘lZto; genus was doulo to him, and lVt to him vereenalem“... etc.
8) See Kunika, Vamberi, and here, it seems, Berezin is inclined to become $: “Bulgar on the Volga” in “Scholarly Notes of the Kazan University” 1852 book. Ш, p. 74.