HISTORICAL AND ETHNOGRAPHIC IDENTITY OF THE CHUVASH

Anton K. Salmin

DOI: 10.47026/1810-1909-2020-4-139-146

Key words

identity, self-esteem, history, people, ethnonym, ethnogenesis.

Annotation

The article deals with some issues of the ethnicity’s self-preservation in the space-time coordinates of history. Attention is paid to those significant milestones when an ethnic group and its leaders had to make fateful decisions. The author assumes that the concepts of “historical identity” and “ethnic identity” are closely related to the terms “ethnicity” and “ethnic self-awareness”. According to the author, ethnic identity implies the connection of one’s “Ego” and “WE” with one’s history, traditions and language. The article provides a brief analysis to clarify the connection between the history of an ethnic group and its identity. It is emphasized that a person is prone to know the history of his family, birthplace, his nationality, and he is interested in the features of the ethnic group of which he considers himself a part. He wants to get an answer to the questions: who were the historical neighbors, what transformations took place over the past 20 centuries in the history of his ancestors, who they were originally, whether all these components can be reconstructed. For example, the article points out incompatibility of the ethnonym “Bulgar” with the ethnonym “the Sabirs – the Sapirs – the Savirs – the Suvars – the Suvash – the Chuvash” from the etymological point of view. In addition, neither the Bulgars nor the Savirs ever lived in the Asian part of Eurasia. The Sabirs were first mentioned and recorded by Claudius Ptolemy in the Caucasus in the second century. At the very least, we have no facts or other historical and philological grounds to identify the Chuvash as the historical heirs of the Bulgars. The article highly evaluates the historical role and the “female power” of the Savir ruler Boa (rix), as well as calculates the number of the Savir tribe as of the VI century. The Savirs were extremely competent in technical terms when besieging and destroying fortresses. Their ramming tools were popular with both the Persians and the Byzantines. The novelty of the research consists in a concise but systematic analysis of the historical identity of the Chuvash people from ancient times to the present day.

References

1. Arutyunov S.A. Narody i kul‘tury: razvitiye i vzaimodeistviye [Peoples ad cultures: development and interaction]. Moscow, Nauka Publ., 1989.
2. Atnagulov I.R. Struktura nagaibakskikh identichnostei: istoriya i faktory formirovaniya [Structure of Nagaibak’s identities: history and factors of formation]. Ural‘skii istoricheskii vestnik, 2015, no. 2, pp. 133–143.
3. Akhmadov Ya.Z. Nakhoyazychnyye narody Kavkaza v istochnikakh rannesrednevekovogo vremeni (konets IV–VI vv.) [Nakh-speaking peoples of Caucasus in the sources of the early-medieval time (the end of 4^th – 6^th centuries)]. In Istoriya nakhov Perednei Azii, Kavkaza i Chechni [History of the Nakhs of Front Asia, the Caucasus and Chechnya]. Moscow, Litera Publ., 2019, pp. 378–426.
4. Belorussova S.Yu. Nagiabaki: dinamika etnichnosti [Nagaibaks: dynamics of identities]. St. Petersburg, 2019.
5. Besolova Ye.B. O “Slovare leksicheskikh obshchnostei etnokul‘turnogo areala Anatoliya – Kavkaz – Iran” [About “The Dictionary of Lexical Communities of the Ethnocultural Area of Anatolia-Caucasus-Iran”]. Izvestiya Severo-Osetinskogo instituta gumanitarnykh i sotsial‘nykh issledovanii, 2019, no. 33, pp. 146–167.
6. Golovnev A.V. Dreif etnichnosti [The drift of ethnicity]. Ural‘skii istoricheskii vestnik, 2009, no. 4, pp. 46–55.
7. Dimitriyev V.D. Chuvashskii narod v sostave Kazanskogo khanstva: Predystoriya i istoriya [The Chuvash people within Kazan khanate: prehistory and history]. Cheboksary, Chuvash Publishing House, 2014.
8. Evgrafova T.N. K voprosu ob etnokul‘turnoi identifikatsii chuvashskogo naroda [On ethnocultural identification of the Chuvash people]. Nauchno-tekhnicheskiye vedomosti SPbGPU. Gumanitarnyye i obshchestvennyye nauki, 2014, no. 2, pp. 59–65.
9. Zhykh M.I. Ranniye slavyane v Srednem Povolzh‘ye po pis‘mennym i arkheologhicheskim dannym [Early Slavs in the Middle Volga according to written and archeologic data]. Istoricheskii format, 2019, no. 1, pp. 41–59.
10. Salmin A.K. Istoriya chuvashskogo naroda: analiz osnovnykh versii [History of the Chuvash people: analysis of key versions]. SPb.: Nestor-Istoriya, 2017.
11. Salmin A.K. Saviry, bulgary i tyurko-mongoly v istorii chuvashei [Savirs, Bulgars and Turko-Mongols in the history of the Chuvash]. St. Petersburg, Nestor-Istoriya Publ., 2019.
12. Tikhonova N.Ye. Osobennosti identichnostei i mirovozzreniya osnovnykh strat sovremennogo rossiiskogo obshchestva [Peculiarities of identities and world view of the main strata of the modern Russian society]. ir Rossii: Sotsiologhiya. Etnologhiya, 2020, no. 1, pp. 6–30.
13. Shnirel‘man V.A. Etnoghenez i identichnost‘: natsionalisticheskiye mifologhii v sovremennoi Rossii [Ethnogenesis and identity: nationalistic mythologies in modern Russia]. Etnograficheskoye obozreniye, 2003, no. 4, pp. 3–14.
14. Ahlquist Aug. Aus einem Briefe des Candidaten Aug. Ahlquist an Herrn A. Schiefner (Lu le 22 août 1856). In Bulletin de la classe des Sciences historiqes, philologiqes et politiques de lʼ Académie Impériale des Sciences de St.-Petersbourg. 1857. XIV, S. 145-160.
15. Kyrchanoff M.W. Imaging Chuvash historical time: historical continuities and intellectual failures In Tractus aevorum: evolyutsiya sotsiokul‘turnykh i politicheskikh prostranstv, 2017, no. 4(2), pp. 134–155.
16. Prisci Historica. Corpus scriptorum Historiae Byzantinae. Editio emendatior et copiosior, consilio B. G. Niebuhrii C. F. P. I: Dexippi, Eunapii, Petri Patricii, Prisci, Malchi, Menandri, Olympiodori, Candidi, Nonnosi et Theophanis, historiarum reliquiae, Procopii et Prisciani panegyrici, graece et latine. Bonnae: Impensis Ed. Weberi, 1829, pp. 156-229.
17. Procopii Opera omnia. Recognovit Jaecobus Haury. Vol. I: De bellis libri I-IV. Lipsiae: In aedibus B.G. Teubneri, 1905.
18. Ptolemaei Geographia. T. I. Lipsiae: Simptibus et typis Caroli Tauchnitii, 1843.
19. Salmin A. Savirs – Bulgars – Chuvash. Ed. Peter Golden. Saarbrücken, 2014.
20. Stepanov Ts. The Bulgars and the Steppe Empire in the Early Middle Ages: The Problem of the Others. Leiden; Boston, Brill, 2010.
21. Zimonyi I. Medieval Nomads in Eastern Europe: Collected Studies. Bucureşt,Brăila, 2014.

Information about the author

Anton K. Salmin – Doctor of Historical Sciences, Leading Researcher, Peter the Great Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography (Kunstkamera), Russian Academy of Sciences, Russia, St. Petersburg (antsalmin@mail.ru; ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1072-9933).

For citations

Salmin A.K. HISTORICAL AND ETHNOGRAPHIC IDENTITY OF THE CHUVASH. Vestnik Chuvashskogo universiteta, 2020, no. 4, pp. 139–146. DOI: 10.47026/1810-1909-2020-4-139-146 (in Russian).

Download the full article