| The Urheimat of Turks was localized in Asia Minor in vicinity with Ind-Europeans near the Lake Sevan. The Proto-Turkic tribes first arrived in East Europe from the Caucasus (see the map) around 5000 B.C. The graphic model of the Turkic language relationship helps to localize the second Turkic Urheimat on the region between the rivers Dnepr and Don where characteristic bend of the both rivers suggests us how to place the model (see map near).
|
| Graphic model of Turkic language relationship. |
| The map of the Turkic habitats |
| Denotation: Alt - Paternal Language (PL) for South-Altaic, Bulg - PL for Chuvash, Kar - PL for Uzbek and New Uighur, Khakas - PL for Kamasinian, Shorian, North-Altaic, Sari-Uighur, tongue of Chulim Tatars, and Khakassian, Kypch - PL for Kumyk, Karachai, Balkarian, Crimea-Tatar, and Karaim, Kyrg - PL for Kyrghyz, Nog - PL for Kazakh, Karakalpakh, and Nogai, Oguz - PL for Gagauz and the dialects of Balkan Turks, Seljuk - PL for Turkish, Azerbaijani, and south dialect of Crimean Tatars, Tat - PL for Tatar and Bashkir, Tuba - PL for Tuvinian and Karagasian, Turkm - PL for Turkmen, Yakut - PL for Yakut. |
| While searching a place proper for this model, all attempts to place it on the map near Altai region or in Siberia failed. The model can be put only on the region between the rivers Dnepr and Don where characteristic bend of the both rivers suggests us how to place the model (see the map below). Thus, we have the reason to posit that Tutkic Urheimat was not in Altai but in Eastern Europe. Consequently the Proto-Turkic could not descend from a primaeval language called Altaic or Proto-Altaic as Sir Gerard Clauson expressed this though already fifteen years ago .
|
Many known linguistic facts contradict Asian origin of Turks but scholars try to find them whichever explanation if only not refuse conventional views. For example, Sir Gerard Clauson, having examined the common Turkic name kendir for hemp (Cannobis), says:
„Unlikely to have been an indigenous plant in the area originally occupied by the Turks and probably an Indo-European (?Tokharian) l.-w.“
|
|
It seems to be a strange thought considering the currency of this word in Turkic languages and its absolute absence in Indo-European languages. The Turkic languages are characterized by the lack of great diversity between them. This phenomenon is explained by the enough small territory occupied by Turks during forming their particular languages. The exchange with new invented and loan words could embrace large parts of this territory contrary to the Indo-European and Finno-Ugric languages.
|
|
Turks can be associated with the creators of Seredniy Stiğ (Sredniy Stog – in Russian) and Yamna (Pit) cultures which existed in Pontic steppes in the 4th -3rd mill. It is naturally that the idea about the Altai Urheimat of Turks is contradicted by Turkish scholars, among them, e. g. by Osman Karatay (KARATAY OSMAN, 2003-1, KARATAY OSMAN, 2003-2). The papers about European origin of Turks are readily published in Turkey, e.g. about Turkic belonging of some European archaeological cultures (STETSYUK VALENTYN, 2008). The similar ideas have been supported in Europe, in particular, by Italian scholar Mario Alinei. The culture of Seredniy Stih (SS) is characterized by certain mutual features which evidently distinguish it of other cultures of Eastern Europe of that time. The pottery of the culture SS had such peculiarity that fine pounded shells were added to the clay paste used for making pots, basins, bowls, goblets, etc. Pots and bowls had a high neck, reached to 1/3 or 1/4 of the whole height, and the great deal of them was decorated by comb, cord, and prick ornamentation. The sides of vessels were cone-shaped with rounded bottom. Some found artefacts, such as human or animal statuettes were made of clay too.
|
|
The bulk of the Turks in search of new pastures crossed the Volga and moved to steppes of Kazakhstan, and one portion of them moved to the Northern Caucasus, displacing the population of the Maikop culture, which should also move to the left bank of the Volga and move further to the east (see map at right). The further history of Maikopians is considered as a hypothesis in the section "Maykopian enigma".
|
|
