Who are the Kipchaks and why were they called so?
The term «Polovtsians» and the corresponding historical designation of the Kipchak people, who inhabited the lands from the Volga to the Danube, is a fundamental postulate in Russian and Soviet historiography. Under this generalizing term «Kipchaks» the Western Volga Kipchaks were understood. The term is generally accepted, but it is the term itself that is the problem. Artificial terminology gives rise to the «Polovtsian» problem of «error in the subject» and breeds errors in historiographical research. Incorrect initial data, especially in the methodology of the question in the term, generates the falsity of the whole historiographical concept, the whole system of views in relation to the phenomenon under study.
What do we know about the so-called «Kipchaks». This is a historical people, whose proper name is «Kypchaks». The chronicle of its national, political and cultural life is documented in the history of Eurasia on the giant expanses from Siberia to Tien Shan, from Samarkand and Mangyshlak to Volga and Bulgar, and, in the perspective of our study: from the Volga through the Dnieper to the Balkans and the Danube. Its history is recorded on many tablets. In many authentic chronicles this historical people is called by its own name «Kypchak».
And only in the «Western Volga» sources this historical people invented an artificial name «Kipchaks». And, what is even worse, the whole Soviet historiography proceeds from the artificial name of the people. This newfangled term in itself means initial falsification and misleads us about the role of the Kipchaks in Eurasian history. It detaches the «Kipchaks» from the Great Kypchak world.
In its real history, the Kipchak people themselves never called themselves «Kipchaks». Thus, the term «Kipchaks» is wrong from the beginning, because it is historically unreliable. This foreign-language name is an alien «invention».
The problem is not only that the term is artificial and even far-fetched, but that it is as if it is generally accepted. That is, this term itself is a problem, because it sets a methodologically wrong angle of understanding the history of the Turks of Eurasia. And this alien name became a generalizing characteristic of the Western Kipchaks in Russian, Soviet and post-Soviet historiography. Unfortunately, until the historiographic school itself changes, we will have to use it.
So who are they — «Polovtsians» from alien annals! The answer is one: they are Kipchaks. And then there is only one historical question: who are «Polovtsians» among Kipchaks, and even more precisely, from what kind of tribe they are!
Polovtsian color — sars
So, «Kipchaks» is an artificial external term for ethnic Kipchaks in a foreign historical record. But we will have to use it in order to convey to the readers a true understanding of the role of the «western» Kipchaks for the history of Eastern Europe. Well, as for our research proper, the designation of the Western Volga Kipchaks by the name «Polovtsians» is convenient for its «color characteristic» for the study of the phenomenon of Kipchak colors. And for the study of the Western Kipchaks this term as if historically distinguishes their annals from the history of the rest of the Kipchak world, the primordial homeland and primary basis of which were Kazakhstan, Siberia, Bashkiria.
Let us look at the Sary-Kypchaks we are looking for through the Cumans. Here we inevitably return to their «color connection» with the Don Cossacks. We focus on the name of the first Don ataman mentioned by M. Karamzin: «their leader Saryazman».
Undoubtedly, the ataman and the Kypchak clan are connected by the color characteristic «sary» — yellow, red, and finally, in the Turkic context — «gold».
However, Sary-Azman is the name of one person, it sounded in the history much later than the clan name Sary-Kypchaks, who originally inhabited the Podone region. This «yellow» clan we are looking for is recorded before the ataman, and more importantly, this clan name denotes not just a historical person, but a whole historical and ethno-cultural phenomenon.
In search of the «yellow genus» we inevitably turn to the study of the traditional version of the word «Cumans», put forward by A. Kunik as early as 1875. Kunik back in 1875.
Academic linguistic fantasy
А. Kunik correctly translates the word «sary» as «yellow». Of course, this translation of the color adjective is unconditional. And it would seem that this explanation is the simplest, without unnecessary details and therefore in its own way beautiful and quite complete. And the most interesting thing is that it seems to be confirmed by chronicles.
But there is a dilemma: «sary»-yellow is an adjective and without a noun it has no subject. That is, the self-name of the Kypchak people is calcified as the adjective «yellow», but where have you seen such a thing: a color without an object, or the people «yellow»! Besides, the simple translation of the word «sary» as the color «yellow» is the imposition of an alien, and not even ethnographic, but simply speculative hypothesis in relation to a completely different culture of tribal names. Thus, Kunik’s translation has nothing to do with the actual meaning of the word according to the Turkic cultural tradition, from which the term «sary» originated.
Nevertheless, Kunik’s version is recognized as «traditional» and even sort of classical. It states: the term «Cumans» is explained through the word «polovy». And the word «chaff» means the color «iz yolta-white, yellowish». And supposedly, since straw in Church Slavonic is «plava», and straw is «plavy», the term polovets is the color of straw. And everything seems to be very similar, especially since there are also Slavic words «polovy», «plavý» and «plowy», which also mean straw color.
But for some reason these words are found only in three modern Slavic languages: Russian, Czech and Polish, that is, they are not found in other Slavic languages. Besides, Poles and especially Czechs did not communicate with «Polovtsians», i.e. they have no ethnic context. And as a remark, why tie words from modern vocabulary to medieval Polovtsians, who have not heard such Slavic words!
Nevertheless, this classical version is allegedly confirmed by the fact that in German and Armenian chronicles the Kipchaks were called «falb» and «khardesh», which again allegedly means the same «pale yellow, straw-yellow color». But even these versions are in question, since modern source study reveals more and more uncritical borrowings of different chroniclers from each other, without reference to the author.
Besides, the «traditional» version clearly ignores other etymological meanings of the word, «chaff», which denotes not yellow, but dirty-gray color. But this meaning does not fit into the «Procrustean bed» and therefore it was simply «forgotten» to be mentioned.
So, for the generally recognized explanation of the term is given out some simple muddling or, simply put, a commonplace «fortune-telling on cards». That is, we are talking about «playing with terms». And here we see academically «sanctified», but the most ordinary linguofricacy, it is not a classic!
Nevertheless, many gurus of Kipchak studies agreed that the Kipchaks are some «light-yellow», but still people. And although archaeologists and anthropologists fiercely (and the latter — with a smirk) opposed such profanation of their objective data, the gurus agreed on yellowness! The opponents said that it was unbelievable for them that the Kipchaks were Caucasoid blondes. Even statues testified in favor of archaeologists-anthropologists: all Kypchak statues of Balbals are purest Asians. All objective data indicated that the whole people from Asia could not be blondes, but the gurus stood on their own! Well, they should not give up their dissertations….
Together, this gave rise to such a distortion of historical understanding in the minds of many peoples. Following these distortions, some ultra-historians agreed (supporting the «classics») even to the fact that the Kipchaks were yellow-faced! This is how the academic misconception of «yellow hairs» multiplies errors of understanding of certain «yellow faces» on the part of adepts of different Zen-jandexes …
Note that the question is not even about the color of hair, who will look at it in battle under helmets. In modern historical innovations, it is the yellowness of the skin that is at issue. It is by skin color: «yellow», «yellowish», — decided the «classics», although the medieval chroniclers called to witnesses did not yet know about the racial theory. We now know that the yellow race is a conventional term, that yellow skin color does not exist in nature. But it was «retrospectively» and «backwardly minded» by the gurus. And what did they and their ultras come up with?!
The Yellow Apocalypse
As a result of the apparent victory of the academic weight of the authorities and their ultra-worshipers in the public consciousness, a hallucinatory picture of yellow «historical oil» is obtained. A nation of terrifying apocalyptic-looking people with hair and faces yellower than yellow is galloping across the field and across Europe.
It is comparable to the scene of the dead attacking from «Game of Thrones». But here the picture is even more terrible — those were white, though dead, and these are alive, but jaundiced «yellow-white»! And they have been jumping for weeks! In general, not a people, but «the scourge of God», worse than Attila!
To complete their oily picture, the supporters of the pseudo-«classical version» cite as a final argument the fact that the Turks themselves called the Kipchaks Sary-Kypchaks, i.e. the same yellow Kipchaks. The picture is also strange, because all Kipchaks were of the same anthropological type of natives of Asia and did not divide each other by the color of skin or hair. And since besides Sara-Kypchaks there were also Kara-Kypchaks (literally: «black Kypchaks»), the «classics» have an apocalypse of yellow-black color. From their picture it turns out that after the «yellow-faced» yellow-faced Kipchaks there are also black-faced Kipchaks of the Negroid type! A complete and absolute historical «curtain»!
This «curtain» fell over the Kipchak history due to the fact that foreigners, alien to Turkic ethnography, tried to interpret the self-name of the people through their foreign cultural ideas. Foreign historiographers invented an exo-ethnonym, i.e. a foreign interpretation of the name of the Sary-Kypchaks. Indeed, the proper name of one of the Kipchak tribes was «Sary» — literally «yellow». But not yellow-faced and yellow-haired, which contradicts the general physiognomy of the Kipchak people.
If the Sary-Kypchaks were yellow-faced or at least yellow-haired, their contemporaries would have left us a complete description: this is the people who appeared, all with yellow hair. But there is no such total testimony. And the monks would not have been afraid to indicate at least retrospectively about the yellow-hairedness of the Kipchaks. After all, Jordan was not afraid to describe Attila from a racial position: big-headed, swarthy, with small eyes, flattened nose and sparse hair, stocky and squat. He is the same typical steppe Asian, which is depicted in ancient Turkic statues of kultegin, Kimak and Kypchak balbalas, Seljuk statues and miniatures…. Well, thank God, you will say, that at least not Chinese, which is so afraid of the collective West. To historical happiness of Europe, Attila was not Chinese. Yes, his words made Europe shudder, some of which was under his direct rule from Pannonia. And it was characteristic Asian not Chinese, but Turanian South-Siberian ethnotype. Well could not follow such obviously Mongoloid character to appear from the depths of Asia certain «blue-eyed blondes», almost not albinos!
Thus, the Kipchaks were typical Mongoloids, as they should be by right to be born in deep Asia. That is a fact. And the only prejudice here is the one that fed Europe out of its fear of formidable Asian conquerors. And also, well, late imperial Europe, which had already established colonies in Asia, could not imagine that such «yellow people» would smash them to smithereens. And then came the synergy of fairy tales. Because of their prejudice to Mongoloids- savages, they almost created Vikings out of Polovtsians as a portrait of Kipchaks, who in reality were perfect Asians.
We will leave the completion of the analysis of these and other classical formulas of Kypchak studies for later, and while we will express our version that the Sary-Kypchaks had some clear and «factual» difference from other Kypchak tribes. And, most likely, they differed from other Kipchaks by yellow (golden) color of banners, the color of which the enemies could see from afar!
These banners had to be if not brightly saturated «izzhelta-yellow», then «izzhelta-white» color, faded in the steppe sun… These yellow banners were the color of fear before the horse-machine, and later became the color of historiographical tales and historical prejudices….