# Kujula Kadphises



## Skatinginbc

What is the etymology of Kujula, the appellation of the first Kushan emperor?  It is also written _Kujul_ in Kharoṣṭhi script and _Ko__ž__oulo _in Greek script.  Chinese transliteration for Kujula Kadphises is 丘就卻 (Mandarin _Qiujiuque_), where 丘就*_khǝwʒǝwh_ seems to represent _Kujula_ and 卻 *_khak _Kadphises.  Sims-Williams (1998:89) reconstructed 丘就卻 as *_khuw-dzuw-khiak_ and proposed that it is a name derived from *_kujukk_ (Chor. _kwzy_- ‘to ask, request’, Khot. _kū__ś_- ‘to seek’) with a Sogdian hypocoristic suffix -_kk_.  I'm not totally convinced because I haven't figured out how his theory could explain the /l/ in the Kharosthi script and in the Greek script.  Anyone can help me out with that or offer a better theory?


----------



## fdb

The names of the Kushan kings, and indeed the name Kushan itself, do not seem to be Bactrian or any other Iranian language, but presumably come from the original language of the royal clan, whatever that might have been.

By the way: the kings of France right up until the end of the monarchy had Germanic names (Louis, Charles, Henri etc.), as did their country (France), although they had for a long time been thoroughly Romanized monolingual speakers of French.


----------



## ancalimon

fdb said:


> The names of the Kushan kings, and indeed the name Kushan itself, do not seem to be Bactrian or any other Iranian language, but presumably come from the original language of the royal clan, whatever that might have been.
> 
> By the way: the kings of France right up until the end of the monarchy had Germanic names (Louis, Charles, Henri etc.), as did their country (France), although they had for a long time been thoroughly Romanized monolingual speakers of French.



In Turkey, we know Kanishka as Erke Han (a masculine given name) and many assume Kushans as a Turkic country.

In my opinion the Kushans were the medium between Turkic people and Persian people.


----------



## fdb

ancalimon said:


> and many assume Kushans as a Turkic country.



wrongly.


----------



## ancalimon

fdb said:


> wrongly.



I would agree that it's not certain. But to refuse the idea is what is wrong in my opinion. The thing is, there certainly is some connection between Turks and Kushans.


----------



## fdb

At the time of Kanishka the Turks were living in North-Eastern China.


----------



## ancalimon

fdb said:


> At the time of Kanishka the Turks were living in North-Eastern China.



No. The Turks and Proto Turks were living all around Asia most of them being nomadic. It was a necessity for them to wander around  until they found places to settle on. We can find many tamgas and kurgans left by them.

One such research about Turkic tamgas was done by Servet Somuncuoğlu. You should research his work (it's great and very detailed) if you are interested.
http://www.abebooks.co.uk/servlet/B...8&searchurl=an=servet+somuncuoglu&bsi=0&ds=30


For example the Shahis were Kushans with Turkic origin led by a Turkic prince.

Or, for example in this coin,  I can read the Turkic word "tegin" meaning "prince" from left to right, the last three tamgas. 
http://www.cngcoins.com/photos/big/91000455.jpg

Clearly there is a great deal of Persian-Greek-Indian influence on Kushans.  But also Turkic.


----------



## Wolverine9

It's hypothesized that the Kushans may have been of Tocharian origin.  The Tocharians were an IE people that inhabited NW China, the region now known as Xinjiang.  Names of the Kushan emperors may have originated from the Tocharian language.


----------



## ancalimon

Wolverine9 said:


> It's hypothesized that the Kushans may have been of Tocharian origin.  The Tocharians were an IE people that inhabited NW China, the region now known as Xinjiang.  Names of the Kushan emperors may have originated from the Tocharian language.



Well... There certainly must have been Indo-European speaking people among them. But that does not make them Indo-European speaking as a whole.


----------



## Wolverine9

"Tocharian" refers to an IE speaking people.  Whether there were other ethnic groups living in Xinjiang is of course unknown, but they wouldn't be labelled "Tocharian."


----------



## Skatinginbc

It is beyond doubt that the Yuezhi migrated to Bactria and took it from the hand of Greeks.  The Yuezhi was a confederacy probably consisting of mixed tribes.  Take the US as an example.  Should we say Americans are Turkish because there are American citizens of a Turkish ethnicity?  Or should we describe Americans as Indo-European because the overwhelming majority speak English?  Perhaps, the better description is none of the above though I would accept the second one in certain contexts.    
I think it is wrong to say there were no Turks nor Qiangs (Tibetans) nor Sogdians nor other Iranians in the Yuezhi confederacy.  But it is the Tocharian language that had left linguistic traces both in their homeland where they were dislodged by the Xiongnu, and in Kushan kings' names (e.g., Tocharian suffix -ske).


----------



## Wolverine9

^ I meant that the Kushans were _originally _Tocharian (in an ethno-linguistic sense), particularly the Kushan royalty, based on the royal and tribal names.  They may have of course mixed with other ethnicities, incorporated them into their tribes, and undergone cultural change along the way.  By the time they settled in Afghanistan, they had adopted the Bactrian language and the original Tocharian element of their tribes could have been small.


----------



## ancalimon

Wolverine9 said:


> "Tocharian" refers to an IE speaking people.   Whether there were other ethnic groups living in Xinjiang is of course  unknown, but they wouldn't be labelled "Tocharian."



They would be labeled as Tocharian if Indo-European speaking people were in power. Think of how everybody living in Ottoman Empire were called Ottoman. Were Greeks Turkic speaking?



Skatinginbc said:


> It is beyond doubt that the Yuezhi migrated to Bactria and took it from the hand of Greeks.  The Yuezhi was a confederacy probably consisting of mixed tribes.  Take the US as an example.  Should we say Americans are Turkish because there are American citizens of a Turkish ethnicity?  Or should we describe Americans as Indo-European because the overwhelming majority speak English?  Perhaps, the better description is none of the above though I would accept the second one in certain contexts.
> I think it is wrong to say there were no Turks nor Qiangs (Tibetans) nor Sogdians nor other Iranians in the Yuezhi confederacy.  But it is the Tocharian language that had left linguistic traces both in their homeland where they were dislodged by the Xiongnu, and in Kushan kings' names (e.g., Tocharian suffix -ske).



On the contrary, calling all those people as Tocharians is like calling Native Americans in America as originally Indo-European speaking. Tocharian is attested arround 8th century. I guess they had writing by the time they got there and their alphabet was modified to suit the local language and most probably the tamgas. That is approximately 3000 years after people that were probably what we would call "more Caucasoid Turkic people" lived there. The closest people to those are Turkish people and Northern Iran Turks. (there is approximately 35 million Turks in Northern Iran). So the most probable thing to happen there is that Turkic got replaced by Tocharian only to get rereplaced by Turkic once again. Most probably the Turks there migrated in large numbers to West and after a while other Turks repopulated the geography. It's perfectly reasonable to assume a settled Ogur presence going back 3000 years before the Tocharian language is first attested. It's even more reasonable to assume that there were Turks that wrote in Turkic using Tocharian alphabet; thus I can read the Turkic word for "prince" on that coin.

What I wonder most is when the toponym "Tarim" is first attested

..

So in my opinion, we definitely should be looking for Turkic roots for some Kushan words.


----------



## Skatinginbc

ancalimon said:


> Tocharian is attested arround 8th century....


That  the discovered Tocharian documents date back to the period between the  6th and the 8th century does not prove that the Tocharian language did  not exist before that.  Evidence: 1) We can infer a Tocharian stratum  from the Kharosthi documents of the 3rd century CE from Kroran, 2) Greco-Roman geographers (e.g., Ptolemy) of the 2nd CE recorded Mt. Thaguron and Thogara (Tokhara) as toponyms in Gansu (Yuezhi homeland where they were dislodged by the Xiongnu). 


ancalimon said:


> So the most probable thing to happen there is that Turkic got replaced  by Tocharian only to get rereplaced by Turkic once again.


Erm,  it is possible but depends on specific locations (i.e., Not all  Tocharian territories were taken from Turks).  The town Thogara in  Gansu, for instance, was probably the home of Qiang people as evidenced  by the name of its major river that was attested very very early in  Chinese records and could be traced to the Qiangic language.  Some part  of the Turpan Depression might have been inhabited by Altaic people  before Tocharians moved in.  Again, it is just a possibility.   


ancalimon said:


> What I wonder most is when the toponym "Tarim" is first attested.


The  name 塔里木盆地 (Tarim Basin) seems to be a late product.  I guess probably sometime between late 19th and  early 20th century.  Given China's close contact with people of Tarim  Basin, I doubt it could have existed long before that and yet Chinese  never had a transliteration for it until recently (at least not to my knowledge.  I will keep searching Chinese records.  If I find it, I will let you know).


ancalimon said:


> for example in this coin,  I can read the  Turkic word "tegin" meaning "prince" from left to right, the last three  tamgas.
> http://www.cngcoins.com/photos/big/91000455.jpg


I don't know what you meant.  This is what I read: 
 Obverse: ϸaonanoϸaoo...ohϸki Koϸano (i.e, Shaonanshao Kuvishka Koshano)  
Reverse: MAAChNO
  Translation: 
King of Kings Kuvishka Kushan.  
Mahasena

Which  part is the "three tamgas" you were talking about?  How about the rest  of the inscriptions?  Can you decipher them with Turkic as well?


----------



## Treaty

ancalimon said:


> In Turkey, we know Kanishka as Erke Han (a masculine given name) and many assume Kushans as a Turkic country.



Turkish "Erke Han", in this context, seems to be constructed from Kanerkes (the Greek version of Kanishka) in order to support the Turkish hypothesis of Kushan origin.



ancalimon said:


> That is approximately 3000 years after people that were probably what we would call "more Caucasoid Turkic people" lived there. The closest people to those are Turkish people and Northern Iran Turks. (there is approximately 35 million Turks in Northern Iran)
> ...
> thus I can read the Turkic word for "prince" on that coin.



I don't think there is evidence for presence of Turkic or East Asian people in the northwest of Iran and Anatolia prior to 7th century. The people of the northwest of Iran used to speak Azari, an extinct Iraninan language (seemingly close to extant Tati and Talish). By the way, the Turkish-speaking population of Iran is about 25% of total (~19M). 

I'm not sure if tamgas prove anything about a Turkic origin unless they represent a Turkic word phonetically. Some similar tamgas were used by non-Turkic people (like Sarmatians) at least since 1st century. Anyway, I'm also curious to know where "tegin" is on that coin.


----------



## ancalimon

Treaty said:


> Turkish "Erke Han", in this context, seems to be constructed from Kanerkes (the Greek version of Kanishka) in order to support the Turkish hypothesis of Kushan origin.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think there is evidence for presence of Turkic or East Asian people in the northwest of Iran and Anatolia prior to 7th century. The people of the northwest of Iran used to speak Azari, an extinct Iraninan language (seemingly close to extant Tati and Talish). By the way, the Turkish-speaking population of Iran is about 25% of total (~19M).
> 
> I'm not sure if tamgas prove anything about a Turkic origin unless they represent a Turkic word phonetically. Some similar tamgas were used by non-Turkic people (like Sarmatians) at least since 1st century. Anyway, I'm also curious to know where "tegin" is on that coin.



http://i620.photobucket.com/albums/tt286/ancalimonungol/Tur/tigin_zps3ef892b9.jpg

The first letter does not exist in Turkic.  The second letter could be A.  The third letter exist in Turkic; it's IQ.  The fourth letter exists in Turkic; it's AN.

The picture I have is a bit different than that picture I posted. It must be a different coin.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...hasenaHuvishka.jpg/603px-MahasenaHuvishka.jpg

http://i620.photobucket.com/albums/tt286/ancalimonungol/Tur/kushancoin_zps285a4229.jpg


----------



## Treaty

ancalimon said:


> The first letter does not exist in Turkic.  The second letter could be A.  The third letter exist in Turkic; it's IQ.  The fourth letter exists in Turkic; it's AN.
> 
> The picture I have is a bit different than that picture I posted. It must be a different coin.



There is some problem loading links. Would you please check them?


----------



## fdb

The link in no. 7 works. The inscription on this well-known coin is in Bactrian, not Turkish, as Skating has noted. The king depicted on it is Huvishka (Οοηϸκι, the first letter is just to the left of the crown).


----------



## Skatinginbc

ancalimon said:


> The first letter does not exist in Turkic.


That should speak volumes. 
Let's examine the following hypotheses about the language on the coin: 
1) in a mysterious Turkic language as suggested by the last three letters, which sound like Turkish "tegin". 
2) in a mysterious Greek language as suggested by the first two letters, which seem to represent "mom" or "mother" in Greek. 
3) in a mysterious Chinese language as suggested by the last letter /o/,  which looks like an egg and the Chinese characters are known to make use  of pictograms.
4) in the Kushan language with a Turkic loanword "tegin". 
5) in the Kushan language without a Turkic element. 

#1, #2, and #3 basically answer nothing.  "I don't know" is what "mysterious" actually means.    
#4 entails an additional hypothesis concerning why there is no space or  word-divider between "tegin" and the rest.  If it is a compound word, what does it mean?  Again, it  leads to another "mysterious" element. 
I prefer #5).  It is the simplest and most obvious answer.  Not only is   it able to explain the entire text on the coin, but it can also  consistently  explain other Kushan coins.


ancalimon said:


> So in my opinion, we definitely should be looking for Turkic roots for some Kushan words.


I actually agree with you.  Although Old Turkic is attested later around the 7th century, it didn't burst out of nowhere.  I never intend to exclude the possibility of an Altaic element.  It just happens that it hasn't been able to offer a satisfactory explanation for the limited words that I studied.  One of those days we may eventually find one.  And I always welcome and appreciate your input.  Without input from Turkic experts, we may never find one.


----------



## ancalimon

Skatinginbc said:


> That should speak volumes.
> Let's examine the following hypotheses about the language on the coin:
> 1) in a mysterious Turkic language as suggested by the last three letters, which sound like Turkish "tegin".
> 2) in a mysterious Greek language as suggested by the first two letters, which seem to represent "mom" or "mother" in Greek.
> 3) in a mysterious Chinese language as suggested by the last letter /o/,  which looks like an egg and the Chinese characters are known to make use  of pictograms.
> 4) in the Kushan language with a Turkic loanword "tegin".
> 5) in the Kushan language without a Turkic element.
> 
> #1, #2, and #3 basically answer nothing.  "I don't know" is what "mysterious" actually means.
> #4 entails an additional hypothesis concerning why there is no space or  word-divider between "tegin" and the rest.  If it is a compound word, what does it mean?  Again, it  leads to another "mysterious" element.
> I prefer #5).  It is the simplest and most obvious answer.  Not only is   it able to explain the entire text on the coin, but it can also  consistently  explain other Kushan coins.
> 
> I actually agree with you.  Although Old Turkic is attested later around the 7th century, it didn't burst out of nowhere.  I never intend to exclude the possibility of an Altaic element.  It just happens that it hasn't been able to offer a satisfactory explanation for the limited words that I studied.  One of those days we may eventually find one.  And I always welcome and appreciate your input.  Without input from Turkic experts, we may never find one.



We can see examples of "tegin" used connected to the word before it.

For example "Kültegin" meaning "prince of the lake" or something like "the great prince"...  The thing to mote here is that "tegin" probably was more of a given name than a title.

If I assume that the first letter is an H and not an M, that would make the word something like Haqan Teqin.  Hakan is the Persianized form of Khagan. (Khan of Khans)




fdb said:


> At the time of Kanishka the Turks were living in North-Eastern China.



I think I need to talk about this so that there are no misunderstandings to why I think it's wrong to assume this.

Turks were definitely not only living near North Eastern China during those times.  We know of a Byzantine historian Prokopios talking about Sabars living around North of Black Sea and Caucasus. He says that these barbarians were highly advanced people and built unimaginable machines for as far as the human memory can remember, and neither Persian speaking people nor Roman people could match them or copy them technologically. They were there in 5th century together with Onogurs. Their name means "the ones that turned to a different direction" or "the ones that deviated, changed religion, turned atheists, etc". These Sabars can be followed back to Siberia. They migrated very early in history to Caucasus and the lands surrounding it. They lived side by side with OnOgurs (Hungarians), Finnish people, Armenians and Kangars. (I think the Kangars were probably remnants of Sumerians that migrated to Mesopotamia much earlier) They are most probably the Turks that gave Turkic and at least some Hungarian loanwords to Sumerian. The Turkic words were shown by Osman Nedim Tuna. (The Hungarians also must have contacts with them when they were living near each other so it is highly possible that there were many direct borrowings between Hungarian and Sumerian as well) They are most probably those people speaking what is called Proto-Tigris and highly possibly related with Hurrians.

I think Turkic speaking people be it Caucasian or Mongolid in appearance were there in India by the time writing was there. They are most probably the ones that are called children of Naga. Most probably because they believed that humans came to earth from the inside of a serpent or maybe because of their shamanistic, animistic beliefs. The Turks are the yavana or kshatria together with the Greeks. We can not know for certain but I guess the origin of Turks and the Greeks could really be close to each other. Both are said to be descendents of Tur. (of course if we were to take mythology seriously. But it's there nevertheless and it's not a tale.  Just exaggerated history)


----------



## Skatinginbc

ancalimon said:


> If I assume that the first letter is an H and not an M, that would make the word something like Haqan Teqin.  Hakan is the Persianized form of Khagan. (Khan of Khans)


Then we have to answer more questions about consistency: 1) Are all words on the coin in Turkic tamgas?  Or only the last three letters?  Or only on one side of the coin?  2) Can this pattern be observed in other Kushan coins as well?  3) What's the advantage of this hypothesis over the conventional Bactrian interpreation, which is capable of explaining all coins without having to deal with exceptions or inconsistency?


ancalimon said:


> Sabars...They were there in 5th century together with Onogurs.


I believe fdb meant the time of Kanishka(early 2nd century), and I'm afraid Sabars hadn't migrated to the west by that time (http://www.tedaproject.com/EN/dosya/2-5944/h/an-outline-of-2000-years-of-turkish-history.pdf).


----------



## Treaty

ancalimon said:


> Turks were definitely not only living near North Eastern China during those times.  We know of a Byzantine historian Prokopios talking about Sabars living around North of Black Sea and Caucasus. ...



Procopius lived in 6th century, 500 years after Kushan establishment. At  early Kushan time (1st c.), north of Black sea was under the control of  Sarmatians. 



ancalimon said:


> They are most probably the Turks that gave Turkic and at least some Hungarian loanwords to Sumerian. The Turkic words were shown by Osman Nedim Tuna....



Based on what I've seen, Tuna's work doesn't  explain why the basic vocabulary (of numbers, family members, body and  nature) are not similar in the two languages. Usually, these words are preserved in a language over time. In addition, some of his etymologies may not  be correct: _nurum _is Akkadian(?), _copan_ and _kurgan _can be Iranian, _m _in_ men_ seems to be influenced by Persian.



ancalimon said:


> ... The Turks are the yavana or kshatria together with the Greeks. We can not know for certain but I guess the origin of Turks and the Greeks could really be close to each other. Both are said to be descendents of Tur. (of course if we were to take mythology seriously. But it's there nevertheless and it's not a tale.  Just exaggerated history) ....



There  is no genuine myth that relates Tur to Turks. This association appeared  when Persia was seriously threatened by Turkic people in mid-Sassanid  period (and later, when Turks gained control of Khwarezm and Khorasan).  The terms "yavana" and "yauna" seems to be appeared after Cyrus  conquered Lydia and encountered "Ionian" Greeks. However, later it was  applied for non-Iranian invaders from [north]west (Greek, Bactrians,  Arabs). Kshatriya were the highest rank of Indo-Iranian people who ruled  other castes (Persian _shah _[king] is derived from this word). None of them are even remotely close to Turkic people.

Of  course, there is a possibility that all those people (Altaic, Uralic,  Asianic, ...) were originated in a single location (let's say Caucasus)  but this was probably in a very early time (or even before language). It  will be very difficult to find any trace in any known languages. However,  genetic studies do not support such a hypothesis for near past (10K  years).


----------



## fdb

ancalimon said:


> ......Hungarian loanwords to Sumerian....



This is where the discussion takes leave of reality and slides into the mire of nationalistic fantasy.


----------



## ancalimon

Treaty said:


> Turkish "Erke Han", in this context, seems to be constructed from Kanerkes (the Greek version of Kanishka) in order to support the Turkish hypothesis of Kushan origin.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think there is evidence for presence of Turkic or East Asian people in the northwest of Iran and Anatolia prior to 7th century. The people of the northwest of Iran used to speak Azari, an extinct Iraninan language (seemingly close to extant Tati and Talish). By the way, the Turkish-speaking population of Iran is about 25% of total (~19M).
> 
> I'm not sure if tamgas prove anything about a Turkic origin unless they represent a Turkic word phonetically. Some similar tamgas were used by non-Turkic people (like Sarmatians) at least since 1st century. Anyway, I'm also curious to know where "tegin" is on that coin.



He was known as "Erke" and that's not related to Greek construction of the word. That's what he was called by Turks claiming to be the descendant of Kushans.

The only Tamgas used among Sarmatians were Turkic tamgas used by Turks. If another person is using these tamgas, that would mean that person had become a Turk.
http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/23Avars/AvarEthnonymEn.htm
http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/btn_Archeology/KushansYuezhiEn.htm

http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/27_Scythians/OssetianLanguageAbaev.htm


> Can you declare a language that does not have any grammatical, phonetical, or  morphological connection with any and all members of the Indo-European family to be an  Indo-European language? Can you declare a language that has only a sprinкle of the  occupier or Lingua Franca language to be that language? One can, if he operates in the  Stalinist Russia and is doing a Stalinist science. But what you would do when the dictator is  gone, a sembalance of fresh air blows around you, but you spent 40 years proving the  unprovable? Would you rescind your 40 years worth of muddying around, if you are an honest  man, and admit that you were forced into slave performance? Or like Vasiliy Ivanovich Abaev  (who in reality is no Vasiliy, no Ivanovich, and even not Abaev, but that is a separate  story) continue pushing pseudo-science and insist on life-long fabrication? Abaev  did just that, fooling uncountable masses and not a few scholars. A whole Scytho-Iranian  theory is supported by the work the most debilitating excerpts of which are laid out  below for public view.



See this site: http://scythianss.blogspot.com/

Also, in 2002, there were approximately 25million Turks living in Iran. 42% of total population. That would mean approximately 30million today. I would add another 5 million hiding it, that are afraid of Iranian government since Turks are persecuted since times of Hitler and Stalin.

http://www.aslanyurdum.tripod.com/s...lderfiles/iran_tuklerinin_kimlik_meselesi.pdf

...

Returning to subject, there are also Turks (Ogurs) in Mahabharata. Specifically Uturgurs. They are talked about as Uttarakuru.  I think they are regarded as some kind of teachers that though things to Indians. They probably lived in Bactria.

I don't know about the etymology of the word though.


----------



## Treaty

ancalimon said:


> He was known as "Erke" and that's not  related to Greek construction of the word. That's what he was called by  Turks claiming to be the descendant of Kushans.


I  would like to see a source about the existence of "Erke han" in Turkic  mythology/folklore. I couldn't find any reliable source about him  (either mythical or historical, except a certain Erke at time of  Genghis Khan). The fact that searching "Erke *K*han" or "*K*han  Erke" doesn't result in any credible link, makes me think the name is a  recent invention of Turkish scholars (who write /x/ with *h*). Of course, I don't know Turkish so maybe I've missed many sources. If so, please correct me.



> The only Tamgas used among Sarmatians were Turkic tamgas used by Turks.  If another person is using these tamgas, that would mean that person had  become a Turk.


Well, Sarmatians belong to a period earlier than mentioned records or evidences for Turks. I'm afraid it is  not easy to say which tamga is Turkic and which is not, for that period.


> Returning to subject, there are also Turks (Ogurs) in Mahabharata. Specifically Uturgurs. They are talked about as Uttarakuru.  I think they are regarded as some kind of teachers that though things to Indians. They probably lived in Bactria.


Uturgur (along with Cuturgur) sounds to be something related to western Hun war of succession (in 5th or 6th century CE). _Uttar _in Sanskrit/Hindi means "north". Basically, _uttarakuru _means northern Kuru (whatever it is). 


> Also, in 2002, there were approximately 25million Turks living in Iran.  42% of total population. That would mean approximately 30million today.


 My figure 19M is from CIA's factbook. You can also calculate the population  of provinces with considerable Turkish speakers: 
East and West  Azarbaijan, Ardabil, Zanjan, Qazvin and Tehran/Alborz (together about  25M people). 
You should consider that the last three (16M) are mainly  non-Turkish. West Az. also has a significant Kurdish population. You can  add 3M (Turkmen, Qashqai, and Turks in other regions):
9M (mainly Turkish prov.) + 7M (half- Turkish prov.) + 3M (other) ~ 19M (25%).


> I  would add another 5 million hiding it, that are afraid of Iranian  government since Turks are persecuted since times of Hitler and Stalin.


Consider that there are Turkish  media (books, newspaper) and even some presidential and parliamentary  candidates speak Turkish in their campaigns when they address a Turkish  population. In fact, it has been the propaganda of the state  to recognise a multi-ethnical Iran (to reduce separatist/sectarian  sensations). 
Anyway, what you refer as "hiding their identity" was a result of some vulgar street jokes which  targeted a wide range of people including some Persians as well (same as  English people might have joked about Welsh, Scottish or Irish people).  Fortunately, these type of joking is already vanishing. Anyway, this "hiding" only happened in places with Turkish minority and was practiced by a small portion of them (Besides, some of those jokes were made by Turks themselves).
And what you state as "since time of Stalin" may refer to aftermath of Soviet withdrawl from Iran and inspired leftist/separatist Pishevari movement that started a controversial war with the state. It made the state more sensitive to pro-Turkish activities (with leftist tendencies) for a while but it didn't cause prosecution of someone for being Turk or speaking Turkish.


----------



## Wolverine9

The current Ayatollah of Iran is also Turkic (Azerbaijani).

Getting back on topic, besides the Tocharians and Turks, which other cultures are likely possibilities for the origin of Kushan royal names?


----------



## Skatinginbc

Wolverine9 said:


> Getting back on topic, besides the Tocharians and Turks, which other cultures are likely possibilities for the origin of Kushan royal names?


Whoever destroyed the ancient Greek city in Aï-Khanoum before Yuezhi moved their capital to Bactria is the candidate (In other words, Kambojas and other Indo-Iranian tribes that roamed in Badakhshan at that time).  The Kushan was originally one of Yuezhi's princedoms that cover mainly the areas of Badakhshan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

By the way, Bazodeo (Βαζοδηο), the name of a Kushan king reigning from ca. 190 to ca. 230, does not sound like Tocharian at all.  His Indic name Vasudeva of course sounds Indic (_vásu_ "good" + _deva_ "deity").  His Chinese name 波調 *_pā__-dhiēw_, compared to the other two, is actually the one that sounds more like Tocharian.  If we insist that it is Tocharian and take the clues from (1)  /*p-/ in Chinese, (2) /-a-/ in Chinese, Bactrian, and Indic, and (3) a sibilant in Bactrian and Indic (Note: It is not unusual that a foreign coda would be missing in Chinese transliteration), we can easily think of TchA _pās_- 'guard, protect' (< PTch *_pāsk_-'guard, protect, behave morally'; TchB -_pāṣṣätte_, a derivative of *_pāsk_-).  But does the king really have a Tocharian name while Bazodeo and Vasudeva are merely his sound-alike nativized names?  I doubt it.  If anyone can reconstruct a Kamboja name for Bazodeo, I would take the Kamboja reconstruction over the Tocharian one for this particular name.


----------



## ancalimon

Treaty said:


> I  would like to see a source about the existence of "Erke han" in Turkic  mythology/folklore. I couldn't find any reliable source about him  (either mythical or historical, except a certain Erke at time of  Genghis Khan). The fact that searching "Erke *K*han" or "*K*han  Erke" doesn't result in any credible link, makes me think the name is a  recent invention of Turkish scholars (who write /x/ with *h*). Of course, I don't know Turkish so maybe I've missed many sources. If so, please correct me.



http://encyclopediaindica.com/index.php?title=Kanishka

Rajatarangini talks about the three kings as Turkic.



> *KANISHKA* “Hushka, Jushka, Kanishka.” These are the names recorded  in the Raja Tarangini of three great Turushka, that is Turk or Tatar,  kings, who were of the Buddhist religion. It may, perhaps, be taken for  granted that Hushka and Jushka come in their natural succession, for the  names might be transposed without detriment to the metre; but the short  syllable of the name Kanishka is required where it stands by the rules  of prosody, so that the position of the name in the verse is not  decisive of his place in the succession of kings. Nothing is known of  Jushka beyond the simple recital of his name as above quoted, but the  names of Kanishka and Hushka (or Huvishka) have been found in  inscriptions and upon coins, showing that their dominions were of  considerable extent in Northern India, and that they were, as the Raja  Tarangini represents, great supporters of the Buddhist religion. The  name of Kanishka has been found in inscriptions at Mathura, Manikyala,  Bhawalpur, and Zeda, while his name appears on the corrupt Greek coins  as Kenerki. Huvishka’s name has been found at Mathura and on a metal  vase from Wardak in Afghanistan; on the coins his name is represented as  Oerki. Kanishka preceded Huvishka, and it is certain that their reigns  covered a period of fifty-one years, and probably more. The time at  which they reigned seems to have been just before the Christian era. A  Roman coin of the date 3.3 B.C. was found in the tope of Manikyala,  which was built by Kanishka.



I don't think there is anything wrong with the Greek coins. That would mean the Greeks were able to pronounce the name correctly.

One other thing: I don't think they were Buddhists as in what we understand from the word Buddhist today.  Spreading the monotheistic panantheism (Tengrism) is alien to Turkic culture. (while for example Ghengis Khan who was not a Turk himself had no trouble killing anyone that did not believe in a single God) It's not something that can be spread. It's seen as something that can be realized.  On the other hand, Khanishka who was a Turushka hurts other people that do not think like them. They force this idea on people. It would mean his people had a corrupted idea of Tengrism. His people (not the Kushans themselves.  They were most probably what I would call Indo-Turks) were probably Turks in the past but somehow changed religions and Turks no longer wanted them to be called Turks (it was common among Turkic people). Maybe Tochar itself was a Turkic word which was related with  "tokar" meaning "bald people" or maybe even "teker" meaning people that understand nothing. People that are in vain (regarding the philosophy of God).  (er - ar - ur & ez - az - uz were plural suffixes in Turkic)..  Or maybe it had a positive meaning; Togru ~ Togri :  upright, straigt, just.

http://books.google.com.tr/books?id...Q6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=kanishka turushka&f=false

Here it talks about Huska and Jushka being subordinates.


----------



## Treaty

ancalimon said:


> http://encyclopediaindica.com/index.php?title=Kanishka
> Rajatarangini talks about the three kings as Turkic.



It should be analysed by experts in Indian history to find how old the word "turushka" is. However, as far as I saw, the word "turushka" is not older than 9th century when Turkish+Muslim people (mainly Ghaznavids) sacked Kashmir and India. Kushanians also attacked India from the same region 800 year earlier. It is not unlikely to confuse between them ten centuries later in the time of Rajatarangini's writing, considering their similar cruelty and geographic origin. 



> I don't think there is anything wrong with the Greek coins. That would  mean the Greeks were able to pronounce the name correctly.


They are not Greek coins. They are Bactrian/Kushanian coins using a version of Greek alphabet. In fact, the Greek probably had difficulty in pronouncing some names. There was no "sh" in Greek alphabet of Greece at that time. That was why Kushanians added letter *ϸ *(sh) to original Greek alphabet. Interestingly, *ϸ* is visually close to Greek letter *ρ* (r).


----------



## ancalimon

Isn't Turushka in Rigveda?

Also, I don't think a nation would confuse nations because they are both cruel.


----------



## Treaty

ancalimon said:


> Isn't Turushka in Rigveda?
> 
> Also, I don't think a nation would confuse nations because they are both cruel.



I couldn't find it. There was no result in a Rig Veda search website. Also there was no useful result in Google ("turushka"+"rig veda"). Maybe the spelling is different.


----------



## Wolverine9

The label _turushka-_ or _turashka-_ "Turk" is only about a thousand years old and in addition to being applied retroactively to the Kushans and Scythians, it was also applied retroactively to the Romans since the Turks conquered much of the eastern parts of the Roman empire.  

A Turkic origin for either the Kushans, Scythians, or Tocharians (not the same as Uyghurs) is unlikely IMO.  And it should go without saying that a Turkic origin for the Romans is absolutely impossible.


----------

