The Ideology Of The Ninth And Tenth Centuries 27
presence of Ugrians in the Cis-Ural Region before and during the Hunnic inva-
sion of Europe, and the connection to the Bulgars and the Khazars as well is
supported only by assumptions.
The Sarmatian influence on Bulgar culture brings up the question whether
the Bulgarian ethnogenesis is not a result from the intermingling of local tribes
and incomers after the Hunnic invasion. According to some scholars, the influ-
ence of the Alans (often depicted as the sole descendants of the Sarmatians
after the fourth century), who lived alongside or together with the Bulgars for
several centuries, is crucial. The Sarmatians are thus considered a homogenic
European ethnic group (at least from the third century BC onwards) and the
changes in their culture are thought to be the result of their internal develop-
ment rather than caused by an influx of new tribes from Asia. In O. Bubenok’s
opinion, a part of the Sarmato-Alanian tribes continued to lead a nomadic life-
style in the steppes of Southeast Europe even after the Hunnic invasion. The
material culture of the steppe population during the Early Middle Ages speaks
in favor of this.42 O. Bubenok assumes that the steppe version of the Saltovo
culture, characterized by the custom of burying the dead not in catacombs, but
in pits, belonged to the Yases (Ases), which were mentioned in sources from
the tenth to the thirteenth century. Since this version of the Saltovo culture is
defined as Bulgar (of the “Turkic-speaking Bulgars”), O. Bubenok presumes an
influx of Iranians (Sarmatians) in the Bulgar ethnic community. Quite unex-
pectedly, O. Bubenok then argues that Sarmatians and Bulgars inhabited the
steppes near the Don and the Sea of Azov during the Early Middle Ages, though
it is not quite clear how exactly they can be distinguished from each other.
He bases his assertion on the pit burials, which were widespread before the
Huns came to Eastern Europe. Moreover, since there were no analogues to the
Saltovo culture monuments in Central Asia and the sources did not mention
Bulgars in this region, the Bulgar ethnos must have been formed in Eastern
inscriptions, which has not yet been established—Author’s note. See Kyzlasov 2000)
of the bearers of the Saltovo culture in its evident genetic ties with the culture of the
Iranian-speaking Alanian population of the Eastern European steppes during the first
centuries AD can most probably be explained by the fact that the Iranian-speaking tribes
in these parts were partially absorbed by the Turks [.. .] The result of this mixing in the
Eastern European steppes was the emergence of Turkic-speaking Bulgar tribes, a part
of which were the Khazars [.. .] Sarmato-Alanian tribes, whose physical and cultural
descendants to a certain extent were the bearers of the Saltovo culture” (Artamonov 1958,
47 and 64–65). It is not clear what caused this evolution in Artamonov’s views, reflected
most clearly in his summarizing work from 1962. It can be assumed that it was a result of
the political interference in the studies on Khazaria in the early 1950s.
42 Bubenok 1997, 17–20.