# Kremlin / Krim



## perpend

I'm not an etymologist---so I ask those who are. Is "Kremlin" related to "Krim" (Crimea) etymology-wise?


----------



## wandle

I doubt it. 'Kremlin' comes from the Russian 'Kreml', 'Crimea' from Russian 'Krim'.
The rest of the question is about those Russian words.


----------



## morior_invictus

I don't think there is a definite answer to your question, perp, as the origin of both words is disputed but you may ask here: << Thread moved. >>


----------



## CathrineW

"Krym" (synonym - Crimea) stems from the word "Kъырым" (kyrym) of the Crimean Tatar language. "Kъырым" means ditch, rampart, wall, as translated from the Crimean Tatar language. The Crimean Tatar language belongs to the Turkic languages spoken by Turkic peoples in Siberia and Asia.

Crimea was a part of Russia until 1954. In 1954, the First Secretary of the USSR Communist Party, Nikita Khrushchev, gave the Krym as a gift to Ukrainian SSR.


The word "Kremlin" has nothing in common with the word "Krym". We, in Russia, pronounce it as [krym], but not [krim].


----------



## Parla

I have no disagreement with Cathrine, but would just add: From ancient times, what's now called Crimea was occupied by many different peoples; it became part of Russia in 1783 and, as Cathrine says, remained so until 1954. Wikipedia has more about the history, of the place and the name, here.

According to the _American Heritage Dictionary_, the name of the Kremlin stems from an Old Russian word for "separate", which stems in turn from a word meaning "a separate place, a citadel". (Cathrine, do you agree?)

I do think it's interesting that the Crimea is a peninsula so distinctly _separate_ from the mainland.


----------



## CathrineW

<...>



Parla said:


> According to the _American Heritage Dictionary_, the name of the Kremlin stems from an Old Russian word for "separate", which stems in turn from a word meaning "a separate place, a citadel". (Cathrine, do you agree?)


I partly agree with you.

In Russian the word Kremlin is pronounced as Kreml.It is important for understanding of etimology of Kremlin.  

Vladimir Dal, our Russian language lexicographer, compiled the dictionary called "Explanatory Dictionary of the Living Great Russian Language" in which he expressed some views about origin of the word "Kremlin".

According to this dictionary, there are some old Russian words which might underlie the word "Kremlin".

1. Kremnik/krom. Meaning: fortress within a town; battlement which walls the palace (and treasury) off in a town. 

2. Krem. Meaning: the best part of a forest, strong and big timber in coniferous forests.
3. Kremlevnik. Meaning: coniferous forest which borders on the moss moor.


----------



## perpend

Thanks everyone for the input. I'm convinced now that it's just a coincidence that they sound similar.

I particularly appreciate the Russian point of view, Cathrine! I was hoping for that. 

EDIT: Thanks for pointing out that forum, Morior.


----------



## Ben Jamin

Online etymology dictionary gives the following explanation: "Kremlin: 1660s, Cremelena, from Old Russian kremlinu, later kremlin (1796), from kreml' "citadel, fortress," *perhaps of Tartar origin*. Originally the citadel of any Russian city, now especially the one in Moscow. Used metonymically for "government of the U.S.S.R." from 1933. The modern form of the word in English might be via French."

It would be interesting to find out what the origins of *Kremnik*, *Krem *and *Kremlevnik *are. They don't lokk like Slavic words.


----------



## ahvalj

For the etymology of both Russian words for Kremlin, «кремль» and «кром», see the Slavic etymological dictionary https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_7IkEzr9hyJVk95VEpwd1RKSEk/edit?usp=sharing pp. 117–118 for *kremjь and pp. 185–186 for *kroma/kromъ. Not everything is transparent in this Slavic lexical nest, but at least no Turkic connections can be traced.


----------



## Christo Tamarin

About the etymology of Kremlin. It is Slavic. 

The final -n is missing in the Russian form, it first appeared in French, I think.

Kremli town meant the inner part of the town (e.g. Moscow) which was built of stone. The rest of the town was built of wood.

This name, Kremli town, is used for the inner parts of other Russian cities, too. 

A Slavic cognate of Kremli is the Bulgarian word кремък (kremuk) meaning flint.

And, Krim is of Turkic origin, of course, and has nothing in common with Kremlin. Crimea in Turkish:  *Kırım, *in CrimeanTatar: *Qırım.*


----------



## Perseas

Christo Tamarin said:


> And, Krim is of Turkic origin, of course, and has nothing in common with Kremlin. Crimea in Turkish:  *Kırım, *in CrimeanTatar: *Qırım.*


Any chance that Krim's origin is Cimmerians or Kimmerians?


----------



## Maroseika

Christo Tamarin said:


> About the etymology of Kremlin. It is Slavic.
> 
> The final -n is missing in the Russian form, it first appeared in French, I think.



According to Max Vasmer -n is proper Slavic, old form was *кремльнъ, from which it first came to German Kremelin and later in other languages.


As for the Crimea, there are two main versions:
1. Connected with Mongolian *herem *- moat or rampart (around ancient town Old Krym).
This town appeared in the 13th century, when the Crimea was occupied by the tribes of the Golden Horde (mostly Mongolian natives).
2. Connected with Turkic *kyrym *- ditch (referring to the ancient ditch at the Perekop isthmus).

Since the name Crimea appears only in the 13th century, so it hardly has anything to do with Сimerrians.


----------



## ancalimon

In my opinion, the Cimmer probably were Ogurs that were mainly the ancestors of Turkic Bulgarians (before Bulgarians became Slavs) but mostly not the Turkic people that are currently living in Crimea. They are (and were) mostly Turkic speaking Armenians (that have Kipchak origins) and other Caucasians that moved there as far as I know.

Here are some other sources regarding Cimmerians.
http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/tur...riodOfEuropeanHistoryCh1-6CimmerianHunsEn.htm
http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/27_Scythians/ScythianWordListSourcesEn.htm

I think some of these people were called Huns by other people.


----------



## Maroseika

ancalimon said:


> Armenians (that have Kipchak origins)


Excuse me, do you mean that Armenians have Kipchak origin?


----------



## ancalimon

Maroseika said:


> Excuse me, do you mean that Armenians have Kipchak origin?



No. The Armenians that migrated to Ukraine have Kipchak origins and they spoke Turkic. Actually the history of Turks and Armenians goes way back to the times when Christianity first appeared. Of course these things are often disputed and more than usually totally overlooked. For example, when the Armenian alphabet was created, it was created in such a way that it was suitable for reading the Turkic language.

Armenians and Kipchaks formed an alliance agains the Persians during those times.


----------



## Maroseika

ancalimon said:


> For example, when the Armenian alphabet was created, it was created in such a way that it was suitable for reading the Turkic language.



Thanks, now it is more clear.


----------



## ancalimon

Maroseika said:


> Thanks, now it is more clear.



Here's a Turkish article by an Armenian newspaper talking about how Armenian script is the most suitable alphabet for Turkic.
http://www.agos.com.tr/haber.php?seo=turkceye-en-uygun-alfabe-ermenilerinki&haberid=6133

Here is something in Turkish talking about Ukranian Armenians Turks and Armenian script:
http://www.dilarastirmalari.com/files/Dil_Arastirmalari_10_Kasapoglu_Cengel_17_81.pdf


----------



## berndf

ancalimon said:


> For example, when the Armenian alphabet was created, it was created in such a way that it was suitable for reading the Turkic language.
> 
> Armenians and Kipchaks formed an alliance agains the Persians during those times.


Crimean Armenian spoke Turkic, that is undisputed. But to deduce from this that the Armenian alphabet was created many centuries before in order to write Turkic is a bit bold. Anyway, it doesn't matter for the question at hand.


----------



## ancalimon

berndf said:


> Crimean Armenian spoke Turkic, that is undisputed. But to deduce from this that the Armenian alphabet was created many centuries before in order to write Turkic is a bit bold. Anyway, it doesn't matter for the question at hand.



It was not created to write Turkic. It was created for the Armenians in such a way that it was also suitable for Turkic language because Turks and Armenians were very close and in good terms because of religion (First form of Christianity) and common enemy (Persians). That will be all I can say about this subject and I will create another topic if I can find the sources again.

About the topic:

1000 years ago, 2000 years ago and 3000 years ago what was the region which the Rus lived in?


----------



## berndf

ancalimon said:


> It was created for the Armenians in such a way that it was also suitable for Turkic language because Turks and Armenians were very close and in good terms because of religion (First form of Christianity) and common enemy (Persians). That will be all I can say about this subject and I will create another topic if I can find the sources again.


Around 400AD? Nothing like that can be established.



ancalimon said:


> About the topic:
> 
> 1000 years ago, 2000 years ago and 3000 years ago what was the region which the Rus lived in?


Who precisely? The term "Rus" dates from the Viking era. But what does it matter? We all agree that the origin is not Slavic.


----------



## ancalimon

berndf said:


> Around 400AD? Nothing like that can be established.
> 
> Who precisely? The term "Rus" dates from the Viking era. But what does it matter? We all agree that the origin is not Slavic.



I'm talking about the ancestors of original Russians.
I thought we could look at that region and try to look for the word in that region if possible.


----------



## berndf

I see. But again, we all agree the name is not Russian. It is older than Russian settlement of the Crimea.


----------



## Awwal12

ancalimon said:


> About the topic:
> 
> 1000 years ago, 2000 years ago and 3000 years ago what was the region which the Rus lived in?


Till the ~XI century "Rus" used to mean a tribal group of apparently Scandinavian origin (at least it's the most consistent theory) that ruled East Slavic and several Finnic tribes in the Eastern Europe.
If you meant the territory of the modern (European) Russia, Belarus and Ukraine, there are virtually no direct evidence about the time period of 2-3 millennia ago, but good guesses were made basing on archaeological, linguistic and scattered written sources.

2 millennia ago, just before the Gothic conquest, Proto-Slavs apparently inhabited the area somewhere between Polessia, the Carpathian mountains, the Dnieper and the Vistula rivers. 3 millennia ago location of proto-Slavic speaking people cannot be surely defined by linguistic or archaeological means. Some suppose that "Scythian farmers" ~2,5 millennia ago were, in fact, Slavs, but that's basically nothing more than a guess.
2 millennia ago the most part of South European steppes was inhabited by Iranian-speaking nomads and half-nomads, known as Scythians and Sarmathians. 3 millennia ago they shared them with Cimmerians, who were living in the steppes north of the Black Sea.
2 millennia ago there also was a considerable amount of Greek colonies at the Black Sea coast.
3 millennia ago a huge forest area from Prussia and South Lithuania to the upper part of the Don river was inhabited by Baltic-speaking tribes. 2 millennia ago they expanded farther north, up to the modern day Latvia. The eastern border of Baltic tribes shifted periodically due to contacts with the Finnic-speaking neighbours (Baltic-Finnic, Mari- and Mordvin-speaking, precisely). Together Finnic tribes covered the remaining most part of the North-East European forests, except those near the Ural mountains, where Ugric forest hunters lived.
Plus, 2 millennia ago some southern Ugric groups on the Eastern borders of Europe seemingly moved already to the life of nomadic cattle breeders, under Sarmathian influence. 

I must specifically note that Turkic languages were totally unknown in Europe before the early 1st millennium a.d., when first packs of nomads led by Huns began to arrive from South Siberia.


----------



## Awwal12

ancalimon said:


> I'm talking about the ancestors of original Russians.


But what do you mean by "original Russians"?
Around 400 a.d. the _most part_ of ancestors of the modern ethnic Russians spoke various Slavic, Baltic and Finnic languages. For Belarusians it would be Slavic and Baltic, for Ukrainians - Slavic, Turkic and Iranian. (Although Belarusians and Ukrainians didn't exist as separate ethnicities till the New Age, of course.)
And the name "Rus" is, again, not Slavic and has nothing to do with Slavs. Around 400 a.d. that word apparently even didn't exist.


----------

