Polovtsy origin of the people. Cumans

Polovtsy (11-13th centuries) are a nomadic people of Turkic origin, who became one of the main serious political opponents of the princes of Ancient Rus'.

At the beginning of the 11th century. The Polovtsians moved out from the Volga region, where they had lived before, towards the Black Sea steppes, displacing the Pecheneg and Torque tribes along the way. After crossing the Dnieper, they reached the lower reaches of the Danube, occupying vast territories of the Great Steppe - from the Danube to the Irtysh. During the same period, the steppes occupied by the Polovtsians began to be called the Polovtsian steppes (in Russian chronicles) and Dasht-i-Kypchak (in the chronicles of other peoples).

Name of the people

The people also have the names “Kipchaks” and “Cumans”. Each term has its own meaning and appeared under special conditions. Thus, the name “Polovtsy”, generally accepted on the territory of Ancient Rus', came from the word “polos”, which means “yellow”, and came into use due to the fact that the early representatives of this people had blond (“yellow”) hair.

The concept of “Kipchak” was first used after a serious internecine war in the 7th century. among the Turkic tribes, when the losing nobility began to call itself “Kipchak” (“ill-fated”). The Polovtsians were called “Cumans” in Byzantine and Western European chronicles.

History of the people

The Polovtsy were an independent people for several centuries, but by the middle of the 13th century. became part of the Golden Horde and assimilated the Tatar-Mongol conquerors, passing on to them part of their culture and their language. Later, on the basis of the Kypchan language (spoken by the Polovtsians), Tatar, Kazakh, Kumyk and many other languages ​​were formed.

The Polovtsians led a life typical of many nomadic peoples. Their main occupation remained cattle breeding. In addition, they were engaged in trade. A little later, the Polovtsians changed their nomadic lifestyle to a more sedentary one; certain parts of the tribe were assigned certain plots of land where people could run their own households.

The Polovtsians were pagans, professed Tangerianism (worship of Tengri Khan, the eternal sunshine of the sky), and worshiped animals (in particular, the wolf was, in the understanding of the Polovtsians, their totem ancestor). In the tribes lived shamans who performed various rituals of worshiping nature and the earth.

Kievan Rus and the Cumans

The Polovtsians are very often mentioned in ancient Russian chronicles, and this is primarily due to their difficult relations with the Russians. Starting from 1061 and until 1210, the Cuman tribes constantly committed cruel acts, plundered villages and tried to seize local territories. In addition to many small raids, one can count about 46 major Cuman raids on Kievan Rus.

The first major battle between the Cumans and the Russians took place on February 2, 1061 near Pereyaslavl, when the Cuman tribe raided Russian territories, burned several fields and plundered the villages located there. The Polovtsians quite often managed to defeat the Russian army. So, in 1068 they defeated Russian army Yaroslavich, and in 1078, during the next battle with the Polovtsian tribes, Prince Izyaslav Yaroslavich died.

The troops of Svyatopolk, Vladimir Monomakh (who later led the all-Russian campaigns of Rus' against the Polovtsians) and Rostislav during the battle in 1093 also fell at the hands of these nomads. In 1094, the Polovtsians went so far as to force Vladimir Monomakh to leave Chernigov. However, the Russian princes constantly organized retaliatory campaigns against the Polovtsians, which sometimes ended quite successfully. In 1096, the Cumans suffered their first defeat in the fight against Kievan Rus. In 1103, they were again defeated by the Russian army under the leadership of Svyatopolk and Vladimir and were forced to leave the previously captured territories and go into service in the Caucasus to the local king.

The Polovtsians were finally defeated in 1111 by Vladimir Monomakh and a Russian army of thousands, which launched a crusade against their longtime opponents and invaders of Russian territories. To avoid final ruin, the Polovtsian tribes were forced to go back across the Danube and into Georgia (the tribe was divided). However, after the death of Vladimir Monomakh, the Polovtsians were able to return again and began to repeat their earlier raids, but very quickly went over to the side of the Russian princes warring among themselves and began to take part in permanent battles on the territory of Rus', supporting one or another prince. Participated in raids on Kyiv.

Another major campaign of the Russian army against the Polovtsy, which was reported in the chronicles, took place in 1185. In the famous work “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” this event is called the massacre of the Polovtsy. Unfortunately, Igor's campaign was unsuccessful. He failed to defeat the Polovtsy, but this battle went down in the chronicles. Some time after this event, the raids began to fade away, the Cumans split up, some of them converted to Christianity and mixed with the local population.

The end of the Cuman tribe

The once strong tribe, which caused a lot of inconvenience to the Russian princes, ceased to exist as an independent and independent people around the middle of the 13th century. The campaigns of the Tatar-Mongol Khan Batu led to the fact that the Cumans actually became part of the Golden Horde and (although they did not lose their culture, but, on the contrary, passed it on) ceased to be independent.

Contents of the article:

Polovtsy (Polovtsians) are a nomadic people who were once considered the most warlike and powerful. The first time we hear about them is in history lessons at school. But the knowledge that a teacher can give within the framework of the program is not enough to understand who they are, these Polovtsians, where they came from and how they influenced the life of Ancient Rus'. Meanwhile, for several centuries they haunted the Kyiv princes.

History of the people, how they came into being

Polovtsy (Polovtsians, Kipchaks, Cumans) are nomadic tribes, the first mention of which dates back to 744. Then the Kipchaks were part of the Kimak Kaganate, ancient state nomads formed on the territory of modern Kazakhstan. The main inhabitants here were the Kimaks, who occupied eastern lands. The lands near the Urals were occupied by the Polovtsians, who were considered relatives of the Kimaks.

By the middle of the 9th century, the Kipchaks achieved superiority over the Kimaks, and by the middle of the 10th century they absorbed them. But the Polovtsians decided not to stop there and by the beginning of the 11th century, thanks to their belligerence, they moved close to the borders of Khorezm (the historical region of the Republic of Uzbekistan).

At that time, the Oghuz (medieval Turkic tribes) lived here, who, due to the invasion, had to move to Central Asia.

By the middle of the 11th century, the Kipchaks submitted to almost the entire territory of Kazakhstan. The western borders of their possessions reached the Volga. Thus, thanks to active nomadic life, raids and the desire to conquer new lands, the once small group of people occupied vast territories and became one of the strongest and richest among the tribes.

Lifestyle and social organization

Their socio-political organization was a typical military-democratic system. The entire people were divided into clans, the names of which were given by the names of their elders. Each clan owned land plots and summer nomadic routes. The heads were the khans, who were also the heads of certain kurens (small divisions of the clan).

The wealth obtained during the campaigns was divided among representatives of the local elite participating in the campaign. Ordinary people, unable to feed themselves, became dependent on the aristocrats. Poor men were engaged in herding livestock, while women served as servants of local khans and their families.

There are still disputes over the appearance of the Polovtsians; the study of the remains continues using modern capabilities. Today scientists have some portrait of these people. It is assumed that they did not belong to the Mongoloid race, but were more like Europeans. The most characteristic feature is blondness and reddishness. Scientists from many countries agree on this.

Independent Chinese experts also describe the Kipchaks as people with blue eyes and “red” hair. There were, of course, dark-haired representatives among them.

War with the Cumans

In the 9th century, the Cumans were allies of the Russian princes. But soon everything changed; at the beginning of the 11th century, Polovtsian troops began to regularly attack the southern regions of Kievan Rus. They plundered houses, took captives, who were then sold into slavery, and took away livestock. Their invasions were always sudden and brutal.

In the middle of the 11th century, the Kipchaks stopped fighting the Russians, as they were busy at war with the steppe tribes. But then they took up their task again:

• In 1061, the Pereyaslavl prince Vsevolod was defeated in a battle with them and Pereyaslavl was completely destroyed by nomads;
• After this, wars with the Polovtsians became regular. In one of the battles in 1078, the Russian prince Izyaslav died;
• In 1093, the army gathered by three princes to fight the enemy was destroyed.

These were difficult times for Rus'. Endless raids on villages ruined the already simple farming of the peasants. Women were taken captive and became servants, children were sold into slavery.

In order to somehow protect the southern borders, the residents began to build fortifications and settle there the Turks, who were the military force of the princes.

Campaign of Seversky Prince Igor

Sometimes Kyiv princes went on an offensive war against the enemy. Such events usually ended in victory and caused great damage to the Kipchaks, briefly cooling their ardor and giving the border villages the opportunity to restore their strength and life.

But there were also unsuccessful campaigns. An example of this is the campaign of Igor Svyatoslavovich in 1185.

Then he, uniting with other princes, went out with an army to the right tributary of the Don. Here they encountered the main forces of the Polovtsians, and a battle ensued. But the enemy’s numerical superiority was so noticeable that the Russians were immediately surrounded. Retreating in this position, they came to the lake. From there, Igor rode to the aid of Prince Vsevolod, but was unable to carry out his plans, as he was captured and many soldiers died.

It all ended with the fact that the Polovtsians were able to destroy the city of Rimov, one of the large ancient cities Kursk region and defeat the Russian army. Prince Igor managed to escape from captivity and returned home.

His son remained in captivity, who returned later, but in order to gain freedom, he had to marry the daughter of a Polovtsian khan.

Polovtsy: who are they now?

On at the moment there is no unambiguous data on the genetic similarity of the Kipchaks with any people living today.

There are small ethnic groups considered to be distant descendants of the Cumans. They are found among:

1. Crimean Tatars;
2. Bashkir;
3. Kazakhov;
4. Nogaitsev;
5. Balkartsev;
6. Altaytsev;
7. Hungarians;
8. Bulgarian;
9. Polyakov;
10. Ukrainians (according to L. Gumilev).

Thus, it becomes clear that the blood of the Polovtsians flows today in many nations. The Russians were no exception, given their rich joint history.

To tell about the life of the Kipchaks in more detail, it is necessary to write more than one book. We touched on its brightest and most important pages. After reading them, you will better understand who they are - the Polovtsians, what they are known for and where they came from.

Video about nomadic peoples

In this video, historian Andrei Prishvin will tell you how the Polovtsians arose on the territory of ancient Rus':

The Polovtsians belonged to the nomadic tribes. According to various sources, they also had other names: Kipchaks and Komans. The Polovtsian people belonged to the Turkic-speaking tribes. At the beginning of the 11th century, they expelled the Pechenegs and Torques from the Black Sea steppes. Then they headed to the Dnieper, and upon reaching the Danube they became the owners of the steppe, which began to be called Polovtsian. The religion of the Polovtsians was Tengriism. This religion is based on the cult of Tengri Khan (the eternal sunshine of the sky).

The daily life of the Polovtsians was practically no different from other tribal peoples. Their main occupation was cattle breeding. By the end of the 11th century, the type of Polovtsian nomadism changed from camp to more modern. Each individual part of the tribe was assigned plots of land for pastures.

Kievan Rus and the Cumans

Starting from 1061 and up to 1210, the Polovtsians made constant raids on Russian lands. The struggle between Rus' and the Polovtsians lasted quite a long time. There were about 46 major raids on Rus', and this does not take into account smaller ones.

The first battle of Rus' with the Cumans was on February 2, 1061 near Pereyaslavl, they burned the surrounding area and robbed the nearest villages. In 1068, the Cumans defeated the troops of the Yaroslavichs, in 1078 Izyaslav Yaroslavich died in a battle with them, in 1093 the Cumans defeated the troops of 3 princes: Svyatopolk, Vladimir Monomakh and Rostislav, and in 1094 they forced Vladimir Monomakh to leave Chernigov. Subsequently, several retaliatory campaigns were made. In 1096, the Polovtsians suffered their first defeat in the fight against Russia. In 1103 they were defeated by Svyatopolk and Vladimir Monomakh, then they served King David the Builder in the Caucasus.

The final defeat of the Cumans by Vladimir Monomakh and a Russian army of thousands occurred as a result of the crusade in 1111. To avoid final destruction, the Polovtsians changed their place of nomadism, moving across the Danube, and most of their troops, along with their families, went to Georgia. All these “all-Russian” campaigns against the Polovtsians were led by Vladimir Monomakh. After his death in 1125, the Cumans took an active part in the internecine wars of the Russian princes, participating in the defeat of Kyiv as allies in 1169 and 1203.

The next campaign against the Polovtsy, also referred to as the massacre of Igor Svyatoslavovich with the Polovtsy, described in “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign,” took place in 1185. This campaign of Igor Svyatoslavovich was an example of one of the unsuccessful ones. After some time, some of the Polovtsians converted to Christianity, and a period of calm began in the Polovtsian raids.

The Polovtsians ceased to exist as an independent, politically developed people after the European campaigns of Batu (1236 - 1242) and made up the majority of the population of the Golden Horde, passing on to them their language, which formed the basis for the formation of other languages ​​(Tatar, Bashkir, Nogai, Kazakh, Karakalpak , Kumyk and others).

... Polovtsian camp. Evening. Cuman girls dance and sing a song in which they compare a flower thirsting for moisture with a girl hoping for a date with her beloved. Khan Konchak offers the captive Prince Igor freedom in exchange for a promise not to raise a sword against him. But Igor honestly says that if the khan lets him go, he will immediately gather his regiments and strike again. Konchak regrets that he and Igor are not allies, and calls the captives and captives to amuse them. The “Polovtsian Dances” scene begins. First, the girls dance and sing (choir “Fly away on the wings of the wind”). The choreographic action is based on the arias of the Polovtsian girl and Konchakovna, which are amazingly beautiful and melodious. Then the general dance of the Polovtsians begins. The action ends with a general climactic dance...

The Polovtsians are mentioned or described in detail in a huge amount of historical literature, from Russian chronicles to Byzantine treatises, in the “Tale of Igor’s Campaign,” by medieval Arab authors and, of course, in detailed (to the extent possible) studies of recent times. I will refer interested readers to the excellent work of S.A. Pletneva “Polovtsy” (ed. “Nauka”, M., 1990) edited by academician B.A. Rybakov, where the author’s preface provides a summary of the most significant studies on this issue. There is no point in retelling them here; the task of this essay is completely different. Namely, using the methods and approaches of DNA genealogy, try to figure it out, or at least outline the outline of a solution to the issue, where do the descendants of the Cumans live now?, in our days, and who were their ancestors, those same Polovtsians, by family affiliation?

History, or more precisely, its perception by the “popular masses,” often turns out to be unfair to certain populations, ethnic groups, super-ethnic groups, and nationalities. Yes, history was not made with white gloves. The Russian princes were indiscriminate (at first glance) in their military alliances with other princes, Russian and non-Russian, and at the head of their troops and often in temporary partnership with other princes, khans, murzas, emirs, kagans and other military leaders laid down a huge number of their own Russians in the name of their military-political goals, as well as just like that, because of family troubles, in the course of revenge for past insults and humiliations, and for many other reasons. The Polovtsians also found themselves in the kaleidoscope of this historical mosaic. They were friends with some Russian princes and were at enmity with others. They formed family ties with the Russian princes, were their fathers-in-law, sons-in-law, fathers and children, died along with Russian troops on the battlefields, fighting side by side, back to back, on the same side, and also against them. In general, like the vast majority of other tribes, ethnic groups, peoples in those days, as, indeed, in any time, right up to the present day.

But if you read epics and chronicles, the Polovtsy turn out to be, on the whole, “enemies of the Russian people,” and sworn enemies at that. What is Tugarin Zmeevich worth... This is a historical figure, the Polovtsian Khan Tugorkan. For the first time, news about him appears in the writings of the Byzantine princess Anna Komnena (1083-1155), granddaughter of Emperor Alexei Komnenos, she calls him Togortak. She described the arrival of Polovtsian troops to the aid of Christian Byzantium against the Pechenegs in the early 1090s. The Pechenegs were defeated by the Cumans, and in 1094, after a series of (unsuccessful) battles with the Cumans, Prince Svyatopolk made peace with them, “ singing his wife, daughter of Tugorkan, Prince of Polovtsian"(Complete collection of Russian chronicles, II, 1962, p. 216). In 1095, a fatal quarrel occurred between the Polovtsians and the Pereyaslavl prince Vladimir Vsevolodich, who ordered the execution of two influential Polovtsian ambassadors who came with a peace offer, and they were killed insidiously, even before the start of negotiations. The war began again, and next year, after an almost two-month siege of Pereyaslavl, under the pressure of troops led by Prince Vladimir " They fled to a foreigner, and their prince Tugorkan was killed and his son, and many other princes fell"(PSRL, II, 1962, p. 222). Svyatopolk found his father-in-law’s body on the battlefield and buried him: “ At dawn, Tugorkana was dead, and he took Svyatopolk, like his father-in-law and enemy, and brought him to Kiev, and buried him at Berestovye».

After 21 years, Vladimir Monomakh married his son Andrei to the granddaughter of Tugorkan. Tugarin, so to speak, our Zmeevich. And George, the future Yuri Dolgoruky, married the daughter of another Polovtsian khan. This is how the Nikon Chronicle tells about slightly earlier events: “ Volodar came from the Polovtsy to Kyiv, forgetting the good deeds of his master, the prince. Vladimir, taught by a demon. Vladimir then went to Pereyaslavtsy on the Danube: and there was great confusion in Kyiv. And Alexander Popovich went out at night to meet them, and killed Volodar and his brother and killed many other Polovtsians, and drove others into the field" Vladimir Monomakh, Volodar Peremyshlsky and Alexander Popovich appear here, speaking in ancient epics under the name Alyosha Popovich (link).

Omitting the subsequent complex history of the relationship between the Russian principalities and the Cumans, who were also different - Don, Dnieper, Bugodnestrovian, Crimean (especially at the end of the 12th century), Lukomorsky (the Lukomorsky Polovtsian association apparently also included the Crimean Cumans), Eastern, Cumans (Western Polovtsians), Cis-Caucasian - let us recall that at the beginning of the 13th century. a relative balance was established between the Russian principalities and the Polovtsian nomads. The Russian princes stopped organizing raids and campaigns on the steppes, and the Polovtsians stopped organizing raids on Russian lands. The last time the Polovtsians approached the walls of Kyiv together with Prince Izyaslav was in 1234. This was after the Battle of Kalka (1223), where the “Tatar-Mongols” defeated the united Russian-Polovtsian troops.

I put “Tatar-Mongols” in quotation marks here because this name is a remake. It is not known whether the Mongols were there at all, and they began to be called Tatars only later. Tatars, as applied to those times, is a purely collective term. It would probably be more correct to call those military formations Turkic, but the majority of the Cumans were also Turkic, so here too there is confusion. The name “Mongols” took root in that context because there was no confusion, since there were no Mongols themselves (except, probably, for a small number, like other minor ethnic groups in that army). So there was no one to confuse with.

But it is worth considering the reasons and nature of the formation of the united Russian-Polovtsian army, because this will complement the picture of the interaction of these two ethnic groups. The fact is that the Polovtsy met the “Mongols” before the Russians, and realized that they had met with a formidable force, accompanied by cunning and deceit. Let us give the floor to the Arab historian Ibn al-Asir (1160-1233), who used the term “Tatars”, or so it was translated into Russian, and he called the Polovtsians by the name “Kipchaks” accepted in Arabic and Persian manuscripts:

« The Tatars moved through these regions, in which there are many peoples, including Allans, Lezgins and (various) Turkic tribes... Attacking the inhabitants of this country, whom they passed by, they arrived at the Allans, a numerous people, to whom news of them had already reached. They (the Allans) used all their efforts, gathered a crowd of Kipchaks and fought with them (the Tatars). Neither side gained the upper hand over the other. Then the Tatars sent to the Kipchaks to say: “We and you are of the same kind, and these Allans are not from yours, so you have no need to help them; your faith is not like their faith, and we promise you that we will not attack you, but will bring you as much money and clothes as you want; leave us with them." The matter was settled between them on the money that they would bring, on clothes, etc.; they (the Tatars) really brought them what was spoken out, and the Kipchaks left them (Allan). Then the Tatars attacked the Allan, massacred them, committed outrages, robbed, took prisoners and went against the Kipchaks, who calmly dispersed on the basis of the peace concluded between them, and learned about them only when they attacked them and invaded their land».

In Russian-language historical literature this is called – in an emotional and artistic way – “the first betrayal of the Polovtsians,” although, unfortunately, there were plenty of similar betrayals in history on all sides. Nevertheless, the Cumans learned their lesson. In addition, the “Tatars” took back everything they had given in the form of a bribe, plus much more.

In this historical evidence, given by an almost contemporary of the events, attention is drawn to the fact that Alans and Polovtsians are “different.” We know that the Cumans were mostly Turkic-speaking, and the Alans were most likely “Iranian-speaking,” that is, speakers of Indo-European languages. Judging by many data, but more often interpretations, both of them took part in the ethnogenesis of a number of Caucasian peoples, and we will return to this later.

So, the “Tatars”, and in fact a united Central Asian Turkic army, not only defeated the Alans and Polovtsians, but occupied their vast pastures, advanced through the Taman Peninsula to the Crimea and began plundering its rich cities. Speaking modern language, major geopolitical changes began to mount. The Polovtsians rushed about the steppe, some went to the Caucasus mountains, some went “to the country of the Russians,” as the ancient Arab historian writes, some went to the Volga or took refuge in the swamps. The chronicle of 1224 reads: “ ...the Polovtsy fled to the Russian land, and the Russian prince said to them: ...if you don’t help us, we will be cut off today, and you will be cut off in the morning"(PSRL, II, 1962, pp. 740-741). At a meeting in Kyiv, the Russian princes and Polovtsian khans decided to meet the “Tatars” in battle. Moreover, “one of the most influential Polovtsians, the “Grand Duke” of Basta, hastily adopted the Christian religion, obviously wanting to demonstrate his complete unity with the Russian princes.” The “Tatars” sent ambassadors to the Russian princes with a proposal not to interfere in the confrontation between the “Tatars” and the Polovtsians, and promised not to touch Russian cities in the event of Russian neutrality. But the princes already knew how the same recent proposal to the Polovtsians from the same “Tatars” ended, and they did not find anything better than to execute the ambassadors.

The result is known. In April 1224, the united Russian and Polovtsian regiments were defeated on the Kalka River. Before this, they destroyed the forward patrols of the “Tatar” troops, commander Ganibek was killed. Let us give the floor again to Ibn al-Asir: “ They (the Tatars) turned back. Then the Russians and Kipchaks had a desire (to attack) them; Believing that they returned out of fear of them and powerlessness to fight them, they diligently began to pursue them. The Tatars did not stop retreating, and they chased after them for 12 days, (but) then the Tatars turned to the Russians and Kipchaks, who noticed them only when they had already stumbled upon them; completely unexpectedly, because they considered themselves safe from the Tatars, being confident in their superiority over them. Before they had time to get ready for battle, they were attacked by the Tatars with significantly superior forces. Both sides fought with incredible tenacity and the battle between them lasted several days.».

Historians note two circumstances (among others, of course). The first is that the Russian and Polovtsian squads fought side by side, next to the regiment of the son of Prince Igor Svyatoslavovich the regiment of the son of Khan Konchak fought, both were killed in the battle - both they and their regiments. The second is that in the end the Polovtsians could not withstand the enemy’s onslaught and fled from the battlefield. And this, according to historians, was one of the main reasons for the defeat. “This is how the second betrayal of the Polovtsians took place,” according to the historian Pletneva.

The next wave of “Tatar-Mongols” that followed a few years later (1228-1229), and seven years later the next one (in which one of the military leaders was Batu Khan, or Batu in Russian literature) actually destroyed the Polovtsians as an ethnic group. Some went to the Caucasus, some to Hungary, Bulgaria, and some to Rus'. Some researchers see the descendants of the Cumans among the Cossacks now living in the south of Russia and Ukraine. After the devastation of the Russian lands, Batu returned to the steppe with an army to finish off the Polovtsians. This was accomplished through the complete and targeted destruction of the Polovtsian aristocracy. As historians note, after this methodically executed operation, from the middle of the 13th century. In the steppes they stopped erecting stone Polovtsian sculptures - there were no customers or performers left.

It should be noted that a certain role in the resettlement of part of the Polovtsians to the Caucasus was played by the Georgian king David the Builder, who sent ambassadors to the Polovtsians with a proposal to resettle the subjects of Khan Atrak. " According to the Georgian chronicle, 40 thousand Polovtsians came with Khan Atrak, including 5 thousand selected fighters" For other reasons, only 5 thousand of those “selected” arrived in Georgia. " David resettled the Cumans who crossed the Daryal along the southern and eastern border and in Kartliya, the population of which was almost completely destroyed during the Seljuk invasions. Khan Atrak became a court favorite. His influence was based not only on the strength of the warriors, but also on family relations with the king: he gave him his daughter Gurandukht in marriage».

As can be seen from the above, it is unlikely that the Polovtsians can be considered only as “cursed Basurmans”, “filthy Polovtsians”, “Polovtsy, like a brood of cheetahs” (The Tale of Igor’s Campaign), which could be addressed in one form or another to any Russian principality, piling up mountains of corpses of his compatriots, although in those days there was no concept of “compatriots”. In fact, at that time there was still no single Russian ethnos, if we understand ethnos (among other definitions) as “a feeling of a common destiny.” The Polovtsians were not only enemies, but also battle brothers of the Russians in numerous battles, and this brotherhood was sealed by the blood shed jointly against a common enemy.

As S.A. writes Pletneva, " Both the Polovtsians and Rus' had many people who knew the language of another people well. Mothers and nannies of Russian princes and boyar children were often Polovtsian: they sang Polovtsian songs to the children, spoke to them in native language. The boys grew up bilingual. It was the same with ordinary people in all principalities bordering the steppe. Thousands of Russians lived in Polovtsian nomads: wives, maids, slaves, captured warriors».

And now it’s time to move on to an additional decoding of the concept of “brotherhood”, which may be unexpected for many. A number of ancient sources, including Byzantine ones, tell of the Cumans as blue-eyed and blond-haired people. Chinese sources called them “yellow-headed,” that is, again, fair-haired - despite the fact that the Chinese are usually black-haired, like most inhabitants of Southeast Asia. Actually, the very Russian word“Polovtsy”, according to a number of researchers, means “yellow-headed”, from the word “polovtsy”. Some researchers associate them with the Dinlings, light-headed Caucasians, and trace their origins back to the second half of the 1st millennium BC, from the Warring States period (480-221 BC) in Northern China, and which later, at the end of the 1st millennium BC, they moved to the steppes of Southern Siberia (for more details, see the new book by Klyosov and Penzev, which will soon be published). They were also called Kimaks, and in the 1st millennium AD. they were Turkic-speaking. The map below shows the migration route of the Kimaks-Dinlins-Kipchak-Cumans during the 1st millennium AD.

So, fair-haired, blue-eyed Caucasians, although there were definitely Mongoloids among them when their ancestors took Mongoloid women as wives. So the general anthropology here may be varied, but it is important to know that there were Caucasians there. Further - more. Archaeological studies of burials have shown that the Kipchak-Cumans laid their dead with their heads to the east and west. This - characteristic feature carriers of haplogroup R1a, that is, the genus R1a - men on the right side (head to the west), women on the left (head to the east), all facing south. This is how the dead were laid out in the burial of R1a carriers in Germany (Eulau), Corded Ware culture, dating back to 4600 years ago; in the burials of the catacomb culture (from the Dniester to the Volga, 2nd millennium BC); parts of the ancient Yamnaya culture (steppe strip from the Urals to the Dniester, 5600-4300 years ago, that is, IV-III millennium BC; early Maykop culture in the foothills of the North Caucasus; Koban culture; in part of the burials of the Karakol archaeological culture of the bronze century (II millennium BC) on the territory of the Altai Mountains (Haak et al, 2008; Klyosov and Penzev, 2014, and references there).

If this is so, then it turns out that the Cumans (or a significant part of them) were of the same clan, R1a, with a significant part of the Russian Slavs, or ethnic Russians (now among the ethnic Russians of the south of Russia - Belgorod, Kursk, Oryol regions - the content of haplogroup R1a reaches 67 %). The language is apparently different, Turkic, but the gender is the same. How did this happen?

Those who are familiar with my publications on DNA genealogy over the past few years know that the carriers of haplogroup R1a, who arrived on the Russian Plain about 5000 years ago from Europe, apparently from the Balkans, dispersed in their part into several migration flows of approximately 4500 years ago. The Rus remained on the Russian Plain, mainly haplogroups R1a-Z280 and R1a-M458 (the latter were formed after the departure of the Aryans, about 4050 years ago), the Aryans of the R1a-Z93 subclade left. Perhaps, along with the Z93 subclade, some of the carriers of the Z280 subclade also left, but they have not yet appeared where the descendants of R1aZ93 mainly live, namely in Southern Siberia, Hindustan, the Iranian Plateau, and the Middle East. Either they (Z280) have not yet been found there in noticeable quantities, or their line was extinguished during the Aryan migrations - or later.

So, those carriers of the Z93 subclade (it can with the same reason be called a haplogroup, these concepts are interchangeable based on the context), who went far to the east, to the Minusinsk Basin, Altai, northern and northwestern China, Mongolia, are known to us now under many names, among which the collective name Scythians is the most common. But it may well include the Dinlins, the Kipchaks, the Polovtsians, and other listed variants of the Polovtsians. The Alans are also generally considered to be Scythians, but their language is different from that of many other Scythians. Judging by the data received, there were Turkic-speaking Scythians, and there were “Iranian-speaking” ones, if we follow the current linguistic classification. It turns out that the speakers of R1a-Z93 went east with their Aryan language, also known as “Indo-European”, also known as “Iranian,” and it was brought to India and Iran. And those who went further east, to Central Asia, switched to Turkic languages. But the male haplogroup, the Y chromosome, remained the same, R1a. Thus, the migration of the Kimaks-Dinlins-Kipchak-Cumans during the 1st millennium AD. from Central Asia to the west, to the southern European steppes, Crimea, and the Black Sea region - this was a return migration of carriers of haplogroup R1a, descendants of the Aryans, to their ancient lands.

How can I check this? In this essay I will focus on that part of the Cumans who migrated to the Caucasus, fleeing the “Tatar-Mongols”, and if the logic of the above is correct, then their modern descendants with a good probability continue to speak Turkic languages ​​and have haplogroup R1a with its subclade Z93 .

And there are such people. These are Karachay-Balkars of the same haplogroup R1a-Z93. They are a third of the entire people, more precisely, their male part.

The Karachais are a Turkic-speaking people of the North Caucasus, they speak the Karachay-Balkar language of the Kipchak group. The number is approximately 230 thousand people, of which approximately 220 thousand live in Russia (mainly in Karachay-Cherkessia, also in Kabardino-Balkaria and the Stavropol Territory), the rest are mainly in Turkey, Syria, the USA, Kyrgyzstan, and Kazakhstan.

The Balkars, who actually represent a single people with the Karachais, number about 150 thousand, of which approximately 113 thousand live in Russia, the rest live in the same place as the Karachais. Historians place the Alans, Bulgars, and Kobans (representatives of the mountainous Koban culture of the Caucasus) as the basis for the origin of the Karachais and Balkars. Some archaeologists attribute the earliest material signs of the Karachay-Balkars to the 13th-14th centuries. AD, that is, approximately 700-800 years ago, although ethnonyms and literary sources make it possible to date back to 4-6 centuries, that is, 1700-1500 years ago. As will be shown below, this is generally consistent with DNA genealogy data.

Let's move on to this data. The figure below shows a tree of 12-marker Karachay-Balkar haplotypes. It generally characterizes the Y-chromosomal structure of the (male) population. It can be seen that even with 12 markers, the tree is quite clearly divided into haplogroups. Overall, the dominant haplogroup is R1a, accounting for 31%. In second place, with a slight lag, is haplogroup G2a, 27%. In third place is haplogroup J (14%), of which almost all haplotypes belong to the J2 subclade (with a bias towards the Balkars). In total, this is almost three quarters of all studied haplotypes.

The remaining haplogroups are E1b (among those tested - all Karachais), I2a (all Karachais, half of them are from one family), Q1a (almost all Balkars), R1b (most Balkars), T (only three of those tested, two from one families) – occupy only a few percent each, in total about a quarter of all studied haplotypes. Often such small - in quantitative terms - formations are mistaken for recent arrivals, but this is far from the case. These may be ancient autochthonous tribes, but they have relatively recently gone through a population bottleneck (pestilence, extermination in wars, etc.), and therefore their numbers are small. This is also studied using DNA genealogy methods, as will be shown below. An example is haplogroup R1b among (mostly) Balkars.

The purpose of this study is to conduct a DNA genealogical analysis of the Karachays and Balkars, and answer two main questions - (1) the origin of the main genera (haplogroups) of the Karachay-Balkar people, namely what Eurasian migrations and when formed the Karachay-Balkar ethnic alloy over time, and (2) when the common ancestors of the most influential (princely) families of the Karachais and Balkars lived, and where they (or their ancestors) could have come to the Caucasus.

A tree of 229 12-marker haplotypes, constructed according to data from the Karachay-Balkarian FTDNA project. Of these, haplogroup R1a – 71 haplotypes, haplogroup G – 62 haplotypes, haplogroup J – 31 haplotypes. These are 31%, 27% and 14%, respectively, for a total of 72%. On the tree there are 145 haplotypes of the Karachais, 64 haplotypes of the Balkars (based on what the people who submitted the haplotype called themselves), and 19 haplotypes related to them, according to those who submitted the haplotypes to the database (from other countries).
Haplogroup R1a
Let's start with the most quantitatively represented haplogroup. Most of them belong to the Z93 subclade of haplogroup R1a. This is the southeastern, Aryan branch of the haplogroup, its carriers passed along the main migration routes of the ancient Aryans - to the south, through the Caucasus to Mesopotamia and further to the Arabian Peninsula (apparently, the Mitannian Aryans of Syria had the same subclade of haplogroup R1a), to the southeast , to Central Asia, and then, like the Avestan Aryans, passed in the middle of the 2nd millennium BC. to the Iranian plateau, to the east and further to India at the same time, in the middle of the 2nd millennium BC, becoming Indo-Aryans, and further to the east, to southern Siberia, becoming the Altai Scythians, during the Pazyryk culture and later. All of them were mainly (but not only) carriers of the R1a-Z93 subclade, like the Karachais and Balkars. The question is - at what stage of history did this subclade become Karachay-Balkar? When? How?

The most obvious answer, to which the first part of this essay leads, is the subclade of the Cumans. The Kipchak-Polovtsians, as part of the Scythian superethnos, brought their subclade R1a-Z93 to the northern Caucasus 750-800 years ago, and their ethnic group eventually took shape into the Karachay-Balkarian ethnos, preserving the Kipchak-Polovtsian language. But one can hardly expect that the common ancestors of the Karachay-Balkars lived only 750-800 years ago. This is just the arrival in the Caucasus, and some DNA lines could actually go from this time. But in general, the common ancestor of those who arrived in the Caucasus could have lived much earlier. In principle, he could have lived as he liked back in time, right up to the time of the Dinlins (in the middle of the 1st millennium BC) and earlier, but experience shows that with long migrations the common ancestor shifts in time to more recent times, and even more so How long it will take depends on a lot of factors. This should be clear.

We will try to get closer to the answers to these questions by constructing a tree of the R1a-Z93 subclade based on the available 285 haplotypes in an extended 67-marker format, among which there are haplotypes of the princely families of the Krymshamkhalovs, Dudovs, Chipchikovs, Kodzhakovs, Temirbulatovs, Karabashevs, Abaevs and others. On the same tree there are numerous haplotypes from the Arab countries of the Middle East, India, as well as Bashkortostan, many European and Asian countries. Some of them are random, isolated, some form quite large groups with ancient common ancestors. This all makes up a system in which the Karachay-Balkarian haplotypes are built, and shows the general connections between populations. The task is to decipher the connections and interpret them correctly.

In the following figure, only the branches of the Bashkirs and Karachay-Balkars are marked; Arabs and Indians occupy many other branches, as do Western Europeans, Russians, Tatars and other carriers of the Z93 subclade. Most of the Karachais, for whom deeper subclades have been identified, belong to the subclade R1a-Z93-L342.2-Z2124Z2123, which, with this spelling, reflects the ancestral chain of tribes, if you call them that. Each tribe below in this chain was formed from the one above it, and dispersed throughout the world. In subclade Z2123, in addition to the Karachais, there are their closest “relatives” in this tribe from Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, Lithuania, Poland, England, Spain, Germany, Iraq, India, Pakistan, UAE, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Bahrain, Qatar, Iran, Yemen, Azerbaijan (see below for the composition of subclade Z2123). It is clear that the subclade formed thousands of years ago, and its descendants dispersed throughout the world, eventually arriving in the Arab countries of the Middle East and significantly multiplying there. The fact is that, according to modern data, the Z93 subclade went southeast from Europe about 5500-5000 years ago, through the Caucasus about 4500-4000 years ago, and through the Middle East about 4000-3500 years ago. But if we take into account the transition of the Cumans to the Caucasus, then this is already 750-800 years ago, after a long migration from Central Asia. So European Z2123 are definitely reverse migrations, or simply consequences of single emigrations. Their presence in India, Pakistan, and Iran is most likely the consequences of sea crossings and short-sea voyages between these regions and the Middle East. Or the consequences of the visits of the Scythians from Central Asia to those lands.

The subclade Z2124, parent to the “Karachay” Z2123, is equally diverse. Its carriers currently live in England, Sweden, Holland, Poland, Hungary, Lithuania, Romania, Russia, Moldova, which in general again shows the direction of the ancient migration of haplogroup R1a-Z93L342.2, the parent of Z2123. It can be seen that it is difficult to find the ancestors of the Karachais in this way, and we will go the other way, see below.

A tree of 285 67-marker haplotypes of the R1a-Z93 haplogroup, built according to the IRAKAZ-2014 database, with the addition of several haplotypes of the Karachay-Balkarian FTDNA project.
Let's look more closely at the Karachay section of the haplotype tree in an enlarged view:

Assignment of haplotypes (names are given as indicated in the Karachay-Balkarian Project and the IRAKAZ-2014 database):

It should be noted that Abaza is a representative of the Abaza people, Yuldash is from Bashkortostan, but according to their haplotypes they are included in the Karachay group. Therefore, it should be recognized that haplotypes here are a more direct characteristic compared to a region or “officially recognized” ethnicity. According to the data shown, the ancestors of one and the other were Karachais, unless this is refuted by deep snips (see below). Not yet.

The selected haplotype numbers and surnames belong to the same branch with the base (ancestral) haplotype, which we will further call the Krymshamkhalov branch:

13 25 15 11 11 14 12 12 10 12 11 29 –15 9 10 11 11 25 14 20 32 12 14 15 16 – 11 12 19 23 17 16 17 19 35 38 13 11 – 11 8 17 17 8 12 10 8 11 10 12 22 22 15 10 12 12 13 8 14 23 21 13 12 11 13 11 11 12 13

All seven haplotypes of the branch had a total of 31 mutations from the specified basic haplotype, which gives 31/7/0.12 = 37 → 38 conditional generations (25 years each), that is, 950 ± 195 years from the common ancestor of the entire branch. This is the 11th century, plus or minus two centuries. Does not contradict Polovtsian times. Here 0.12 is the mutation rate constant for the 67-marker haplotype (in mutations for 25 years), the arrow is the correction for recurrent mutations (Klyosov, 2009). In principle, this time, within the limits of calculation error, corresponds to the time of possible movement of the Polovtsians to the Caucasus from the Crimea or from the Ciscaucasia.

The double branch in the figure above also consists of seven haplotypes. But since its two sub-branches consist of different numbers haplotypes (four and three), then the calculation will have to be carried out separately, since the “weights” of the sub-branches are different. A branch of four haplotypes has a base haplotype

13 25 16 11 11 14 12 12 10 12 11 29 –15 9 10 11 11 25 14 20 32 12 14 15 16 – 11 12 19 24 16 16 17 19 35 39 13 11 – 11 8 17 17 8 12 10 8 11 10 12 22 22 15 10 12 12 13 8 15 23 21 12 12 11 13 11 11 12 13

And it differs from the previous one by only 6 mutations (highlighted). All four haplotypes of the subbranch contain 22 mutations from the base haplotype, which gives 22/4/0.12 = 46 → 48 conditional generations, that is, 1200 ± 280 years from the common ancestor. Six mutations between both basic haplotypes separate their ancestors by 6/0.12 = 50 → 53 conventional generations, that is, by approximately 1325 years, and their the common ancestor lived approximately (1325+1200+950)/2 = 1740 years ago, that is, approximately at the beginning of our era.

A subbranch of three haplotypes does not give good statistics, although 67x3 = 201 alleles can be worked with. The basic haplotype of this subclade is as follows:

13 25 16 11 11 14 12 12 10 12 11 29 –15 9 10 11 11 25 14 20 32 12 14 15 16 – 11 13 19 24 16 16 19 20 36 38 14 11 – 11 8 17 17 8 12 10 8 11 10 12 22 22 15 10 12 12 13 8 14 23 21 12 12 11 13 11 11 12 13

All three haplotypes of the subbranch contain 9 mutations from the base haplotype, which gives 9/3/0.12 = 25 → 26 conditional generations, that is, 650 ± 220 years from the common ancestor. Ten mutations between both basic haplotypes (sub-branches of 3 haplotypes and branches of 7 haplotypes) separate their ancestors by 10/0.12 = 83 → 91 conventional generations, that is, by approximately 2275 years, and their the common ancestor lived approximately (2275+650+950)/2 = 1940 years ago, that is, again around the beginning of our era, given that these estimates have an error of plus or minus two centuries. In general, this does not contradict the estimates given in the introduction to this study.

It is interesting to compare the Karachay R1a haplotypes with the Bashkir ones, since they also belong to the Z93 subclade. Basic haplotype of Bashkir haplotypes

13 24 16 11 11 15 12 12 12 13 11 31 – 15 9 10 11 11 24 14 20 31 12 15 15 15 – 11 12 19 23 16 15 19 20 36 38 14 11 – 11 8 17 17 8 12 10 8 11 10 10 22 22 15 10 12 12 13 8 14 23 21 13 12 11 13 11 11 12 13

It differs very significantly from the Karachays, namely by 20 mutations (noted) compared to the base haplotype of the Krymshamkhalov branch and related ones. The common ancestor of the Bashkir haplotypes lived 1400±200 years ago (96 mutations per 15 haplotypes), but at such a great distance from the Karachai haplotypes (20/0.12 = 167 → 200 conventional generations, that is, approximately 5000 years) their common ancestor lived (5000+950+1400)/2 = 3675 years ago. This - late time Aryan migrations (and their descendants, the early Scythians) across the Russian Plain and Trans-Urals.

Genomic analysis of a representative of the Karachais and Bashkirs showed that they belong to different subclades of the Z93-Z2123 group. It turned out that the Z2123 subclade consists of at least five subclades below, which include representatives of Pakistan (Y2632), India, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka (Y47), India (Y875), Bashkirs and Indians (Y934), and Karachais (YP449). Such an unusual combination of Bashkirs and Indians in one subclade at first glance suggests that the Aryans during their migrations in the 3rd-2nd millennium BC. passed through the territory of present-day Bashkortostan, left there the descendants of the Z93-L342.2-Z2124-Z2125-Z2123-Y934 subclade, and brought it to India. Or it could be the Scythians, descendants of the Aryans. The Karachais are another direction of migration, to the Caucasus, with the formation of the subclade Z93-L342.2-Z2124Z2125-Z2123-YP449. Snip YP449 carries the central haplotype of the Krymshamkhalov branch in the figure above.

Previously, we described the basic haplotype of Arabs of haplogroup R1a, with a common ancestor who lived 4050±500 years ago (Rozhanskii and Klyosov, 2012)

13 25 16 11 11 14 12 12 10 13 11 30 –15 9 10 11 11 24 14 20 32 12 15 15 16 – 11 12 19 23 16 16 18 19 34 38 13 11 – 11 8 17 17 8 11 10 8 11 10 12 22 22 15 10 12 12 13 8 14 23 21 13 12 11 13 11 11 12 13

And another basic Arabic haplotype of the same haplogroup, but of a different branch, with a common ancestor only 1075±150 years ago:

13 25 16 10 11 14 12 12 10 13 11 29 –15 9 10 11 11 24 14 20 33 12 15 15 15 – 12 11 19 23 16 15 16 20 35 37 13 11 – 11 8 17 17 8 11 10 8 11 10 12 22 22 15 10 12 12 13 8 14 23 21 12 12 11 15 11 12 12 13

The first, more ancient one, differs from the basic haplotype of the Krymshamkhalov branch (see above) by only 8 mutations, the second, more recent one - by 20 mutations. For the basic Bashkir haplotype, the difference is also 20 mutations (see above). This already shows that the basic haplotype of the Krymshamkhalovs is closer to the ancient Arab and Bashkir haplotypes (more precisely, to the common ancestors of the ancient Arab and Bashkir haplotypes) than to the relatively recent ones. Let's check it out.

Eight mutations of difference between the two basic 67-marker haplotypes is equivalent to 8/0.12 = 67 → 72 conventional generations (25 years each), that is, approximately 1800 years, which places the common ancestor of the Arab haplotypes and the Krymshamkhalov branch at approximately (1800+4050+950) /2 = 3400 years ago. Around the same time when the common ancestor of the Krymshamkhalov and Bashkir haplotypes lived (approximately 3675 years ago). Twenty mutations difference is equivalent to 20/0.12 = 167 → 200 conventional generations, that is, approximately 5000 years, and the common ancestor of this late Arab branch and the Krymshamkhalov branch lived approximately (5000+1075+950)/2 = 3500 years ago. As we can see, the data converge quite reproducibly, within the limits of calculation error, and show that the Krymshamkhalov branch is unlikely to have originated from Arab ancestors, especially during the period of Islamization, only 1300 years ago. It should be noted that with such long distances in time as 3500-4000 years ago, the calculation error is 10-15%, that is, 4050±500, 3400±400, 3500±400 years ago, that is, all these values ​​overlap within errors. This is due to the fact that the number of mutations in haplotypes is not an absolute and predetermined value, and is subject to small statistical fluctuations, like any statistical value. But, of course, the difference between 3500±400 and 1300±150 years cannot in any way be explained by statistics. These are differences of a different rank.

The remaining two sub-branches in the figure above (at the top) are further away from the ancient Arabic base haplotype, namely by 10 and 12 mutations. But this gives almost the same times to common ancestors within the limits of calculation error - 3760 and 3740 years, respectively. In other words, all Karachay branches identified to date diverge from the same or close ancestors of haplogroup R1a, from which both Bashkir and Arab haplotypes diverge. They did not descend from one another, they simply have common ancient ancestors. So the question of the origin of the Krymshamkhalovs and their Karachai relatives along the branches of haplogroup R1a from the Arabs can be considered closed for now. But origin from the Polovtsians is much more likely.

Since Ashkenazi Jews, according to some assumptions (so far unproven), descended from the Khazars, we will check, just in case, this, at first glance, very strange hypothesis about the possibility of the origin of the Krymshamkhalov branch from the Khazar Jews. The basic haplotype of Jews of haplogroup R1a (the same subclade Z93) with a common ancestor 1300±150 years ago (Rozhanskii and Klyosov, 2012):

13 25 16 10 11 14 12 12 10 13 11 30 - 14 9 11 11 11 24 14 20 30 12 12 15 15 - 11 11 19 23 14 16 19 20 35 38 14 11 - 11 8 17 17 8 12 10 8 11 10 12 22 22 15 10 12 12 14 8 14 23 21 12 12 11 13 10 11 12 13

The difference from the base haplotype of the Krymshamkhalov branch is 22 mutations (equivalent to a distance of 5600 years), which places the common ancestor of Ashkenazi Jews of haplogroup R1a and the Krymshamkhalovs at approximately (5600+1300+950)/2 = 3925 years ago. This is the same common ancestor of the Bashkirs, the Jews, the Arabs, and the Karachais (a branch of the Krymshamkhalovs), who is equidistant in relation to all of them. In all likelihood, this is the ancient Aryan ancestor of haplogroup R1a-Z93, from which came the Scythians of the same haplogroup, and the Arabs, and the Indians, and the Iranians - all this is one common genus, which over the millennia has diverged into branches and fractional subclades-snips. For the Bashkirs this is snip Y934, for the Jews it is Y2630, for the Krymshamkhalov branch it is YP449.

Thus, there are two main methodological ways to show the commonality or difference in DNA genealogical lines - either compare basic haplotypes and calculate the life times of common ancestors, or compare deep SNPs. It’s optimal, of course, to do both, but this is still rare, since there is little data on deep snips. Among the Karachais there is only one representative. But this turned out to be enough to obtain fundamental conclusions.

Now about the Alans. On the one hand, the time of the appearance of the main branches of the Karachais of haplogroup R1a, at the beginning of our era, is consistent with the beginning of the mention of Alan tribes in written sources - namely, from the 1st century AD, and specifically in the Ciscaucasia. If we consider only this evidence, then the issue can be solemnly closed by recognizing the Alans as the direct ancestors of the Karachais. But then it should be recognized that the Ossetians, who have practically no haplogroup R1a, have practically no relation to the Alans, with the exception, perhaps, of their ancient military elite, for whom there is no DNA data. Actually, I have already described this. Further, then it should be recognized that the common ancestor of the Bashkirs and Karachais of haplogroup R1a, dating back approximately 3675 years ago (and snip Z2123), was also the ancestor of the Alans, which is quite simple to recognize, these are all Aryan-Scythian lines, one genus R1a. The identified parallels seem somewhat unexpected, but upon reflection they are quite logical.

It is too early to put an end to these considerations. The problem is that linguists and archaeologists have their own ideas, and a reasonable consensus with DNA genealogy data is necessary. Here the Ossetians sharply fall out of the Alanian concept, their haplogroup is basically two-thirds for the Digorians and three-quarters for the Ironians - this is haplogroup G, apparently unusual for the Scythians, but there is no data for such a definite conclusion yet. There are rather general considerations. According to them, the Alans were unlikely to be the ancestors of the vast majority of today's Ossetians. Most likely, the Polovtsians were not them either, especially since ancient historians make a distinction between the Alans and the Polovtsians. It was noted above historical evidence, how the “Tatars” successfully divided the Cumans and Alans on the basis that they were different, and ultimately defeated both.

On the other hand, haplogroup G is common to Ossetians and a quarter of the Karachay-Balkars, but this is a rather distant relationship, going back thousands of years. There are practically no descendants of the Cumans of haplogroup R1a among the Ossetians. Simply put, Karachay-Balkars and Ossetians are very distant relatives in the male line.

As a result, Alans simply “freeze” in this system. As already noted, judging by the testimony of ancient historians, the Alans and Cumans - different peoples, or different ethnic groups. If both have the main haplogroup R1a, then it should differ in both subclades. At the R1a level they cannot be distinguished. But there is no data on deep subclades among the Karachay-Balkars yet, with the exception of single Z93-L342.2-Z2124-Z2125-Z2123-YP449 (snip YP449 has a carrier of the central haplotype of the Krymshamkhalov branch). If another deep snip of haplogroup R1a is revealed among the Karachay-Balkars, it may relate to the Alans, but this is almost impossible to prove until a DNA analysis of fossil skeletal remains is carried out, for which it has been proven with good reliability that these are Alans or Cumans, or someone then another. There is no such data yet.

Haplogroup G2a
Haplogroup G2a is typical for the northwestern and central Caucasus, and appears in two main subclades - G2a1 and G2a3. Among Ossetians, for example, the first predominates, both among the Ironians and Digorians, and makes up 90% or more of all carriers of haplogroup G. Among Georgians, the share of the second increases to a third of all G carriers, among Abkhazians it is equal, among Circassians and Shapsugs The second subclade predominates (among the Shapsugs it is more than 90%). So the “swing” of these two subclades in the Caucasus reaches almost absolute extreme points.

Among the Karachais and Balkars, the first subclade almost absolutely predominates (90%), as do the Ossetians (to do this, you should look at the tree above, there is a spreading branch G2a1 at the top right, and a small branch G2a3 at the bottom). But it is somewhat different than that of the Ossetians, if we consider the haplotypes, and this leads to the conclusion that the ancestors of the G2a1 haplogroup among the Ossetians and Karachais were different. This is a somewhat unexpected conclusion, but quite reliable. Let's see. Below is the basic haplotype of the G2a1 subclade of Ossetians, its age is only 1375±210 years, approximately the 7th century, plus or minus a couple of centuries:

14 23 15 9 15 17 11 12 11 11 10 28 – 17 9 9 12 11 25 16 21 28 13 13 14 14 – 11 11 19 21 15 15 16 18 37 38 12 9 – 11 8 15 16 8 11 10 8 12 10 12 21 22 14 10 12 12 15 8 13 21 22 15 13 11 13 10 11 11 13

And here is the basic haplotype of the Karachais:

14 22 15 10 15 17 11 12 11 12 10 29 – 17 9 9 11 11 24 16 21 28 13 13 14 14 – 10 10 20 21 15 15 15 18 36 38 11 10 – 11 8 15 16 8 11 10 8 12 10 12 21 22 14 10 12 12 15 8 13 21 22 16 13 11 13 10 11 11 13

The common ancestor with this haplotype lived 3650±510 years ago, that is, much earlier than the common ancestor of the Ossetians. There are 13 mutations between the two basic haplotypes, Karachais and Ossetians, which separates their common ancestors by 13/0.12 = 108 → 121 conventional generations, that is, by approximately 3025 years, and their common ancestor lived (3025+1375+3650)/2 = 4025 years ago. These are the times when carriers of haplogroup G2a arrived in the Caucasus from Europe, which will be discussed below.

Thus, the Karachay and Ossetian genera G2a1 have a common ancestor more than 4 thousand years ago, and since then their DNA lines have only diverged. It is clear that these lines have nothing to do with the Alans; they are much older.

Confirmation of this position can be obtained by comparing the Karachay base haplotype with the base haplotype of haplogroup G2a1 throughout the northwestern and central Caucasus (only 37-marker haplotypes were available):

14 22 15 10 15 17 11 12 11 12 10 29 –17 9 9 11 11 24 16 21 28 13 13 14 14 – 10 10 19 21 15 15 15 18 37 38 11 10

Its common ancestor lived more than 4 thousand years ago, that is, within the margin of error, at the same time when the common ancestor of the Karachay haplotypes of the G2a1 group lived. Perhaps it was the same ancestor. Two difference mutations on 37-marker haplotypes separate common ancestors by only 2/0.09 = 22 conventional generations, that is, by 550 years. Indeed, the common ancestor of the 37-marker haplotype shown above throughout the northwestern and central Caucasus (Ossetians, Shapsugs, Georgians, Circassians, Abkhazians) lived 4875 ± 500 years ago.

Where did haplogroup G2a come from in the Caucasus more than 4 thousand years ago? It appeared, by all indications, from Europe, where they found a number of ancient burials dating back to 5-7 thousand years ago, DNA analysis of which from bone remains showed haplogroup G2a. These burials were in Spain, France, and Germany. By the way, the “ice man Otzi”, killed in the Alpine mountains on the border of Austria and Italy 4550 years ago, also had haplogroup G2a. The study of fossil haplotypes and their modern descendants showed that during the 3rd millennium BC. V Western Europe Almost all haplogroups of “Old Europe” disappeared, namely G2a, E1b-V13, I1, I2, R1a, and they appeared, having all passed the bottlenecks of populations, that is, practically zeroed out, outside Central Europe. R1a fled to the Russian Plain, appearing there approximately 4600 years ago, I1 - to the British Isles, to Scandinavia, to the Russian Plain, I2 - to the Danube and the British Isles, and the same subclade broke into two halves between these territories, E1b - to the Balkans and North Africa. G2a left Europe and, apparently, went through Asia Minor to Anatolia, Iran and the Caucasus. This was in the same 3rd millennium BC.

Why did they all run, or, to put it more neutrally, move such great distances? A clue is given by the fact that it was in the 3rd millennium BC. western and central Europe. They did not flee anywhere, the population bottlenecks did not pass, and they populated Europe very quickly by historical standards, starting 4800 years ago, when the Bell Beaker culture (main haplogroup R1b) began populating Europe from the Pyrenees, and after a few hundred years they were already on territory of modern Germany. As a result of this invasion of Erbins, G2a carriers moved to the Caucasus. This is the story of the appearance of the G2a genus in the Caucasus. The Karachais of this haplogroup have lived on their land since then.

The ancient surnames of the Suyunchevs (Sunshevs), Shakhmanovs, Uruzbievs have haplogroup G2a1. A comparison of their haplotypes showed that they are actually related, although very distant, and their common ancestor lived 3325 ± 1300 years ago. Such a large error in the calculations is due to the fact that all three families identified only 12-marker haplotypes for themselves, and there were seven mutations between them. This already shows that they are by no means closely related to each other, but by and large relatives belonging to one large genus-haplogroup.

Haplogroup J2
This haplogroup is expressed among the Balkars compared to the Karachais. Since it is in this sample of only 27 haplotypes (most of which have only a 12-marker format) from different subclades that have not been identified, DNA analysis can only be very approximate. But since a more detailed DNA genealogical analysis of the haplotypes of the northwestern Caucasus has already been carried out (Klyosov, 2013), and the Karachay-Balkarian haplotypes show the same patterns, general conclusions can be drawn. The share of haplogroup J2 among the Karachay-Balkars is approximately the same as among the Ossetian-Digorians, that is, small, approximately 12%. The origins of these haplotypes are very ancient, with common ancestors around 7 thousand years ago and ancient, and the source of these ancient migrations was in Mesopotamia. This is apparently evidence of ancient Uruk migrations to the Caucasus.

Haplogroup R1b
This haplogroup is rare among the Karachais and Balkars, and it is mainly found among the Balkars. It is noteworthy that almost all R1b haplotypes belong to an unusual group that is not found in Europe, and, apparently, is an archaic vestige of some very ancient common ancestor. Its base haplotype

13 22 14 11 14 15 12 12 13 14 13 32 – 16 9 9 11 11 24 15 19 31 13 15 17 17 – 10 10 20 25 16 17 16 19 34 37 12 10 – 11 8 16 16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 22 23 17 10 12 12 16 8 12 24 20 14 12 11 13 11 11 13 12 (Balkarian)

Extremely different (mutations highlighted) from the most common core European haplotype R1b-P312, with an age of approximately 4200 years ago:

13 24 14 11 11 14 12 12 12 13 13 29 – 17 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 29 15 15 17 17 – 11 11 19 23 15 15 18 17 36 38 12 12 – 11 9 15 1 6 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23 23 16 10 12 12 15 8 12 22 20 13 12 11 13 11 11 12 12 (European, P312)

Between them there are 43 mutations (!), which separates their common ancestors by 43/0.12 = 358 → 546 conventional generations, or approximately 13650 years. The basic haplotype of the Balkars itself is relatively recent, its carrier lived 1300±255 years ago. It is clear that this branch passed the population bottleneck and miraculously survived around the 8th century AD. This places the ancient ancestor of the Balkar (and European) haplotypes at (13650+4200+1300)/2 = 9600 years ago. At that time, haplogroup R1b migrated between the Urals and the Middle Volga, but may have already arrived in the Caucasus. There is practically no data from that time. In any case, this is one of the oldest DNA dates in the Caucasus.

In conclusion, it should be noted that the consideration of the Karachay and Balkar haplotypes and haplogroups from the point of view of DNA genealogy made it possible to identify the ancient migrations of the main clans that make up the Karachay-Balkar people, and to place the origin of a number of ancient princely families in the context of the origin of the Karachay-Balkar people. The data obtained allow us to assume with good reason that a third of the Karachais descended from the Cumans of haplogroup R1a, and to dismiss the Arab origin of the Krymshamkhalov branch. Of course, the results obtained should be carefully discussed together with historians, archaeologists, linguists, and ethnographers in order to reach a certain consensus. So far, representatives of the listed disciplines are far from it, and, perhaps, independent DNA genealogy data will make it possible to shift the current stalemate.

Anatoly A. Klyosov,
Doctor of Chemical Sciences, Professor

Did you like the article? Share the link with your friends!

158 comments: Are the modern descendants of the Polovtsians Karachais and Balkars?

Boudiyan says:

• • Isa says:

    • Alan Parsons says:

      • Valery says:

        Alan Parsons says:

        Alan Parsons says:

        • • Ruslan says:

            • Valery says:

              I. Rozhansky says:

              • Bulat says:

                • I. Rozhansky says:

                  • Bulat says:

                    Bulat says:

                    • Bulat says:

                      Sergey says:

The formation of the Polovtsian ethnos took place according to the same patterns for all peoples of the Middle Ages and antiquity. One of them is that the people who give the name to the entire conglomerate are not always the most numerous in it - due to objective or subjective factors, they are promoted to a leading place in the emerging ethnic massif, becoming its core. The Polovtsy did not come out of nowhere. The first component to join the new ethnic community here was the population that was previously part of the Khazar Kaganate - the Bulgarians and Alans. A more significant role was played by the remnants of the Pecheneg and Guz hordes. This is confirmed by the fact that, firstly, according to anthropology, outwardly the nomads of the 10th-13th centuries were almost no different from the inhabitants of the steppes of the 8th - early 10th centuries, and secondly, an extraordinary variety of funeral rites is recorded in this territory . The custom that came exclusively with the Polovtsians was the construction of sanctuaries dedicated to the cult of male or female ancestors. Thus, from the end of the 10th century, a mixture of three related peoples took place in this region, and a single Turkic-speaking community was formed, but the process was interrupted by the Mongol invasion.

Polovtsians are nomads

The Polovtsians were a classic nomadic pastoral people. The herds included cattle, sheep, and even camels, but the main wealth of the nomad was the horse. Initially, they conducted year-round so-called camp nomadism: finding a place with abundant food for livestock, they located their homes there, and when the food was depleted, they went in search of new territory. At first, the steppe could safely provide for everyone. However, as a result of demographic growth, the transition to more rational farming—seasonal nomadism—has become an urgent task. It involves a clear division of pastures into winter and summer, the folding of territories and routes assigned to each group.

Dynastic marriages

Dynastic marriages have always been a tool of diplomacy. The Polovtsians were no exception here. However, the relationship was not based on parity - Russian princes willingly married the daughters of Polovtsian princes, but did not send their relatives in marriage. An unwritten medieval law was at work here: representatives of the ruling dynasty could only be given as wives to an equal. It is characteristic that the same Svyatopolk married the daughter of Tugorkan, having suffered a crushing defeat from him, that is, being in an obviously weaker position. However, he did not give up his daughter or sister, but took the girl from the steppe himself. Thus, the Polovtsians were recognized as an influential, but not equal force.

But if baptism future wife seemed to be a deed even pleasing to God, then “betrayal” of one’s faith was not possible, which is why the Polovtsian rulers were unable to obtain the marriage of the daughters of Russian princes. There is only one known case when a Russian princess (the widowed mother of Svyatoslav Vladimirovich) married a Polovtsian prince - but for this she had to run away from home.

Be that as it may, by the time of the Mongol invasion, the Russian and Polovtsian aristocracies were closely intertwined with family ties, and the cultures of both peoples were mutually enriched.

The Polovtsians were a weapon in internecine feuds

The Polovtsians were not the first dangerous neighbor of Rus' - the threat from the steppe always accompanied the life of the country. But unlike the Pechenegs, these nomads met not with a single state, but with a group of principalities warring among themselves. At first, the Polovtsian hordes did not strive to conquer Rus', contenting themselves with small raids. It was only when the combined forces of the three princes were defeated on the Lte (Alta) River in 1068 that the power of the new nomadic neighbor became apparent. But the danger was not realized by the rulers - the Polovtsians, always ready for war and robbery, began to be used in the fight against each other. Oleg Svyatoslavich was the first to do this in 1078, bringing the “filthy” to fight Vsevolod Yaroslavich. Subsequently, he repeatedly repeated this “technique” in the internecine struggle, for which he was named the author of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” by Oleg Gorislavich.

But the contradictions between the Russian and Polovtsian princes did not always allow them to unite. Vladimir Monomakh fought particularly actively against the established tradition. In 1103, the Dolob Congress took place, at which Vladimir managed to organize the first expedition into enemy territory. The result was the defeat of the Polovtsian army, which lost not only ordinary soldiers, but also twenty representatives of the highest nobility. The continuation of this policy led to the fact that the Polovtsians were forced to migrate away from the borders of Rus'.

After the death of Vladimir Monomakh, the princes again began to bring the Polovtsians to fight each other, weakening the military and economic potential of the country. In the second half of the century, there was another surge of active confrontation, which was led by Prince Konchak in the steppe. It was to him that Igor Svyatoslavich was captured in 1185, as described in “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign.” In the 1190s, raids became fewer and fewer, and at the beginning of the 13th century, the military activity of the steppe neighbors subsided.

Further development of the relationship was interrupted by the arrival of the Mongols. The southern regions of Rus' were endlessly subjected not only to raids, but also to the “drives” of the Polovtsians, which devastated these lands. After all, even the simple movement of an army of nomads (and there were cases when they went here with their entire household) destroyed crops, the military threat forced traders to choose other paths. Thus, these people contributed a lot to shifting the center of the country’s historical development.

The Polovtsians were friends not only with the Russians, but also with the Georgians

The Polovtsians not only marked their active participation in history in Rus'. Expelled by Vladimir Monomakh from the Seversky Donets, they partially migrated to the Ciscaucasia under the leadership of Prince Atrak. Here Georgia, constantly subject to raids from the mountainous regions of the Caucasus, turned to them for help. Atrak willingly entered the service of King David and even became related to him, giving his daughter in marriage. He did not bring with him the entire horde, but only part of it, which then remained in Georgia.

From the beginning of the 12th century, the Polovtsians actively penetrated into the territory of Bulgaria, which was then under the rule of Byzantium. Here they were engaged in cattle breeding or tried to enter the service of the empire. Apparently, these included Peter and Ivan Aseni, who rebelled against Constantinople. With significant support from the Cuman troops, they managed to defeat Byzantium, and in 1187 the Second Bulgarian Kingdom was founded, with Peter becoming its head.

At the beginning of the 13th century, the influx of Polovtsians into the country intensified, and the eastern branch of the ethnos already participated in it, bringing with them the tradition of stone sculptures. Here, however, they quickly became Christianized and then disappeared among the local population. For Bulgaria, this was not the first experience of “digesting” the Turkic people. Mongol invasion“pushed” the Polovtsians to the west, gradually, from 1228, they moved to Hungary. In 1237, the recently powerful Prince Kotyan turned to the Hungarian king Bela IV. The Hungarian leadership agreed to provide the eastern outskirts of the state, knowing about the strength of Batu’s approaching army.

The Polovtsians roamed the territories allotted to them, causing discontent among neighboring principalities, who were subjected to periodic robberies. Bela's heir Stefan married one of Kotyan's daughters, but then executed his father-in-law under the pretext of treason. This led to the first uprising of freedom-loving settlers. The next revolt of the Polovtsians was caused by an attempt to forcefully Christianize them. Only in the 14th century did they completely settle down, become Catholics and begin to dissolve, although they still retained their military specificity and even in the 19th century they still remembered the prayer “Our Father” in their native language.

We know nothing about whether the Cumans had writing

Our knowledge about the Polovtsians is quite limited due to the fact that this people never created their own written sources. We can see a huge number of stone sculptures, but we will not find any inscriptions there. We get information about this people from their neighbors. Standing apart is the 164-page notebook of the missionary-translator of the late 13th - early 14th centuries “Alfabetum Persicum, Comanicum et Latinum Anonymi...”, better known as the “Codex Cumanicus”. The time of origin of the monument is determined to be the period from 1303 to 1362; the place of writing is called the Crimean city of Kafu (Feodosia). Based on its origin, content, graphic and linguistic features, the dictionary is divided into two parts, Italian and German. The first is written in three columns: Latin words, their translation into Persian and Polovtsian. The German part contains dictionaries, grammar notes, Cuman riddles and Christian texts. The Italian component is more significant for historians, since it reflected the economic needs of communication with the Polovtsians. In it we find words such as “bazaar”, “merchant”, “money changer”, “price”, “coin”, a list of goods and crafts. In addition, it contains words that characterize a person, a city, and nature. The list of Polovtsian titles is of great importance.

Although, apparently, the manuscript was partially rewritten from an earlier original, was not created at once, which is why it is not a “slice” of reality, but still allows us to understand what the Polovtsians were doing, what goods they were interested in, we can see their borrowing of ancient Russian words and, most importantly, reconstruct the hierarchy of their society.

Polovtsian women

A specific feature of the Polovtsian culture were stone statues of ancestors, which are called stone or Polovtsian women. This name appeared because of the emphasized chest, which always hangs over the stomach, which obviously carried a symbolic meaning - feeding the clan. Moreover, a fairly significant percentage of male statues have been recorded that depict their wives with a mustache or even a goatee and at the same time have breasts identical to those of a woman.

The 12th century is the period of the heyday of Polovtsian culture and the mass production of stone statues; faces appear in which the desire for portrait resemblance is noticeable. Making idols from stone was expensive, and less wealthy members of society could only afford wooden figures, which, unfortunately, have not reached us. The statues were placed on the tops of mounds or hills in square or rectangular shrines made of flagstone. Most often, male and female statues—the ancestors of the Kosha—were placed facing east, but there were also sanctuaries with a cluster of figures. At their foot, archaeologists found the bones of rams, and once they discovered the remains of a child. It is obvious that the cult of ancestors played a significant role in the life of the Cumans. For us, the importance of this feature of their culture is that it allows us to clearly determine where the people roamed.

Attitude towards women

In Polovtsian society, women enjoyed considerable freedom, although they had a significant share of household responsibilities. There is a clear gender division of spheres of activity both in crafts and in cattle breeding: women were in charge of goats, sheep and cows, men were in charge of horses and willows. During military campaigns, all concerns about the defense and economic activities of the nomads fell on the shoulders of the weaker sex. Perhaps sometimes they had to become the head of the kosh. At least two female burials were found with staffs made of precious metals, which were symbols of the leader of a larger or smaller association. At the same time, women did not stay away from military affairs. In the era of military democracy, girls took part in general campaigns; the defense of a nomadic camp during the absence of a husband also presupposed the presence of military skills. A stone statue of a heroic girl has reached us. The size of the statue is one and a half to two times larger than the generally accepted one, the chest is “tucked up”, in contrast to the traditional image, covered with elements of armor. She is armed with a saber, a dagger and a quiver of arrows, however, her headdress is undoubtedly female. This type of warrior is reflected in Russian epics under the name Polanitsa.

Where did the Polovtsians go?

No people disappears without a trace. History does not know cases of complete physical extermination of the population by alien invaders. The Polovtsians didn’t go anywhere either. Some of them went to the Danube and even ended up in Egypt, but the bulk remained in their native steppes. For at least a hundred years they maintained their customs, although in a modified form. Apparently, the Mongols forbade the creation of new sanctuaries dedicated to Polovtsian warriors, which led to the emergence of “pit” places of worship. Recesses were dug in a hill or mound, not visible from afar, inside which the pattern of placement of statues, traditional for the previous period, was repeated.

But even with the cessation of this custom, the Polovtsy did not disappear. The Mongols came to the Russian steppes with their families, and did not move as a whole tribe. And the same process happened to them as with the Cumans centuries earlier: having given a name to the new people, they themselves dissolved in it, adopting its language and culture. Thus, the Mongols became a bridge from the modern peoples of Russia to the chronicle Polovtsians.