Search Results
Apart from the Edige epic, the story of Čora Batir is the best-known and most popular Nogay epic of Kipchak origin. Since the first publication of a version by the Russian Turcologist, I. Berezin (1862), a large number of variants, among them Nogay, Crimean and Dobrudjan Tatar, Kazak, Karakalpak, Kazan Tatar, Bashkir and Karachay-Balkar versions, have cropped up and been brought to light. An early variant of the epic was recorded by the Hungarian Turcologist, Ignác Kúnos, but it has remained in manuscript. He collected his material from Crimean Tatar informants in a Russian prisoner-of-war camp near Esztergom (Hungary) in 1915. The present work, published for the first time in print, contains the original Crimean Tatar text and its translation, supplied with an introductory study and annotations. The main value of the epic variant recorded by Kúnos lies in that its content and plot show close relationship with the earliest recorded Nogay texts.
The Crimean Tatars who acted as Ottoman reinforcements on the Hungarian front during the 16th and 17th centuries had the task of making attacks and incursions on their enemy’s borders. The Turkish and Tatar sources hardly make any reference to the tools they had at their disposal and to how they collected information about the lands they had to attack and the armies they were likely to encounter. From the little evidence that we have one can only presume that the Tatars got their information directly from the theatre of war by forcing people of the conquered territories to spy and make guidance for the Tatar army. The knowledge that we present here has been gained from a report of 15 September 1663 made on the basis of the testimony of a captured spy working for the Tatars. From his testimony it becomes evident that the Tatars had an extensive spying network which had been organised by a German soldier in their pay, and that the Tatars paid the spies for their service and also rewarded them with a portion of their spoils. The captured spy’s testimony refers not only to the 1663 Ottoman campaign but also provides answer for an old historiographical problem. The Turkish traveller Evliya Çelebi reported on what he knew about the Tatars’ incursions and while doing so he attempted to give information on similar activities in far away territories like Brandenburg, Holland and even Sweden. Researchers agree that Evliya Çelebi never actually visited these countries, but one can suppose that he gleaned information from discussions with spies who worked for the Ottomans and Tatars.
2010 . Język krymskotatarski [Crimean Tatar] . Warszawa : Wydawnictwo Akademickie Dialog . Jankowski, Henryk, Gulayhan Aqtay, Dorota Cegiołka, Tülay Çulha and Michał Neméth
The article analyses the development of Crimean studies from the end of the 18th century until today. It is only after the Russian annexation of the Crimea that the scholars started seriously studying the Crimean peninsula, its history, ethnography, geography, and other disciplines. At the end of the 18th and early 19th centuries the historico-ethnographic information was collected largely by state officials and travelling scientists of non-Russian origin. In the first half of the 19th century the Crimea was already studied by professional ethnographers and historians; it is in this period that the museums of antiquities were established in Kerch and Theodosia. A major wave of interest in the Crimea in Russia and in Europe took place as a consequence of the Crimean war in the 1850s. In the second half of the 19th century the Crimea continued to be studied by professional scholars; a special organisation TUAK was established to control the state of the Crimean antiquities. The study of the Crimea by Soviet scholars folded in the 1930s with the Stalinist purges of “bourgeois nationalists” in science. The period of the 1930s–1980s was characterised by stagnation in Crimean studies. The renaissance of the study of the Crimea began at the end of the 1980s; it coincides with the breakup of the Soviet Union and the establishment of the Autonomous Republic of the Crimea in 1991.
Crimean Tatars were detained in a prison camp near Hungarian town Eszetrgom during World War I. Ignác Kúnos collected rich linguistic and folkrol data from them. The paper publishes a selection of this material. The texts four liners and parts from longer poems recall their grievance due to solder's life, war and camp life.
In the titulature, the Crimean Khans have particularly emphasized their Chinggisid origins as a proof of their legitimacy. Yasa [Chinggisid Law] and töre [tradition] also played a crucial role in domestic affairs. The political institutions and customs developed by Chinggis Khan continued to exist in the successor Khanates. The practice of demanding luxury goods as tribute from the subject peoples for the consumption of the ruling elite was one of them. In this article, I will first show that the tiş [tusk] was a developed version of the tribute dedicated for the consumption of ruling elite. Second, I will try to show why tiş should be considered as a tribute contrary to the Russian claim that it was a gift and its significance for the Crimean Tatars. Finally, I will demonstrate how the socio-political developments in the Crimean Tatar society like the growing influence of the karaçis and the service mirzas was reflected in the tiş defters [books].
Abstract
The article examines the history of the trade in Polish slaves and captives in the Tatar and Ottoman Crimea in the seventeenth century on the basis of hitherto unknown archival evidence and rare printed sources. After the capture an average Polish slave of simple origin was transported to the Crimea, where he had been sold on the local slave markets. Unless he had some special qualifications, a slave usually had to fulfil agricultural duties and do heavy manual work. The slaves usually had some limited free time and could attend Catholic services in the churches of the Crimea's large urban centres. Rich Polish captives were treated in accordance with their high social status and were ransomed for a considerable redemption fee. Important role in ransoming such rich captives was played by Jewish, Tatar and Armenian merchants.
Linguistic Peculiarities of 17th Century Crimean Tatar Letters Addressed to Princes of Transylvania . AOH Vol. 29 , No. 2 , pp. 213 – 224 . Jankowski , H. ( 1992
://www.nbuv.gov.ua/portal/soc_gum/naukma/Soc/2002_20/04_sereda_vv.pdf , accessed 10/12/2011 Sevel, O. (2009): A krími tatár kérdés: politika, jogalkalmazás és retorika [Crimean Tatars: Politics, Rights and Rhetoric]. In: Fedinec, C. — Szereda, V. (eds
instituty . Muzafarov , Refik & Nüzhet Muzafarov 2018 . Kırım Tatar Türkçesi-Türkiye Türkçesi-Rusça Sözlük [Crimean Tatar Turkish-Turkish-Russian Dictionary] . Trans. Nariman Seyityahya . Ankara : Türk Dil Kurumu Yayınları . Necip , Emir
