The Ideology Of The Ninth And Tenth Centuries 37
It is generally accepted that the Bulgars came to Europe either slightly
earlier or during the Hunnic invasion. The accounts that mention Bulgars,
Khazars and Barsils in the North Caucasus or along the lower reaches of the
Volga during and after the second century AD (the third to fourth centuries),
are considered untrustworthy by some historians and are even rejected due
to the fact that they stem from later sources.76 Other scientists, however, find
it completely plausible that these accounts reflect the presence of the named
tribes in the indicated region precisely during the second century or the first
several centuries AD. In the second century, Sabirs were also mentioned in
the Northern Cis-Caspian Region.77 It should also be borne in mind that the
earliest accounts of the Huns north of the Caspian Sea date from the second
century.78 Since that was the time when the Late Sarmatian culture began to
develop there, the presence of the Huns is not accepted, as they were Turkic-
speaking,79 which, on the other hand, is not certain. In other words, the
argument of the Turko-lingualism of the Huns is not sufficient to reject the
possibility of their presence in some numbers in the Lower Volga area during
the second century AD. According to M. Artamonov, it is even possible that at
that time some of their troops had reached as far as the Dnieper to the west.80
The Huns are visible in the Dzhetyasar culture as early as the first century AD.
Given the close links between this region and the Northern Caspian Sea coast,
a Hunnic presence there should not be surprising.
We know nothing of the language of any of the tribes mentioned in the
sources from Eastern Europe for the period between the fifth and the seventh
centuries. The theories on the Ugric linguistic affiliation of some of them (e.g.
the Sabirs),81 as well as the existence of a specific Turkic group (the so-called
Oghor or Oghur group),82 which the Bulgars and Khazars were a part of, are
no more than hypothetical. There is no information to support the idea that
76 See for instance Dunlop 1967, 8–9; Artamonov 1962, 115–116; Novosel’tsev 1990, 83–84;
Shapira 2007, 312–315.
77 Stepanov 1999a, 30–31; Magomedov 1994, 24–27; Giuzelev, 1999, 61. On the Sabirs in par-
ticular, see Fedorov and Fedorov 1978, 53.
78 Artamonov 1962, 42; Novosel’tsev 1990, 69–70; Fedorov and Fedorov 1978, 28–29 and
47–48. It is possible that the Huns were confused with the Chionites, but they are associ-
ated mainly with the southern regions of Middle Asia and their presence in the Volga
Region at that time is highly questionable (see Vainberg 1990, 256–257).
79 See for instance Skripkin 1982, 51. See also the discussion on the pages of Rossiiskaia
Arkheologiia: Moshkova 2007; Malashev 2007; Moshkova, Malashev, and Bolelov 2007.
80 Artamonov 1962, 42.
81 Artamonov 1962, 65–66; Novosel’tsev 1990, 81–83; see also Pritsak 1981b, no. 5, 17–30.
82 Golden 1980, 30–34; Novosel’tsev 1990, 85.