TheBulaqs[a] were aTurkic tribe known mainly fromArabic sources, originating from theLop Nor region. They were a core part of theKarluk confederacy located in theAltai Mountains. Many of them migrated to theSouthern Ural, into the neighbourhood of theVolga Bulgars andMagna HungariaHungarians. Eventually, they were conquered by theTsardom of Russia in the late 16th century, whom their last record is from.
According to a hypothesis, many of them settled in theBalkans and theCarpathian Basin with theBulgars, another Turkic nation. Certain medieval writers, most notablyAnonymus,Simon of Kéza andWilliam of Rubruck wrote about a people of this name.
According to the dictionary ofMahmud al-Kashgari, their name, Bulaq, means "broad-backed horse"[1]
Károly Czeglédy andLajos Ligeti deciphered the ethnonym from the Chinese sources (Old Chinesemiə̯u-lâkMiddle Chinesebu-lâk>Arabicbulaq) asmou-lo 謀落 ormou-la 謀剌.Omeljan Pritsak came to the same conclusion without referring to the previous scholar's works.[2][3][4] As alreadyGyula Németh noted, themi̯əu-lôk[5] ormiə̯u-lâk ~bulaq is etymologically related to the colour of horses which was a usual tribal designation on the steppe.[2][6]
Dezső Pais states that the name originates from the Turkicbalxu, (bal ("slice")+-ku or-xu suffix) meaning "branch" or "part". This was adopted by the Slavs asblach (singular) andblasi (plural).[7] TurkologistLászló Rásonyi dismisses this claim and notes that Bulaq meant "white-piebald" horse in someTurkic languages and inMongolian, while inChagatai, "white-legged horse".[1][8]
The people formed in theLop Nor region, from where they migrated away aroundyear zero due todesertification.[9] The Chinese and Arab manuscripts mentioned the tribal names of theKarluks. According to the Chinese sources, the Bulaqs were one of the three core tribes of the Karluk confederation who lived in theAltai Mountains and were among theWestern Turkic troops who were defeated in theTang campaigns against the Western Turks in 650.[2][5][10] In 657 CE, theTang dynasty set up aYinshan dudufu (district/prefecture;Yinshan mean "the dark mountain", Ildikó Ecsedy considers northern slopes ofTarbagatai Mountains[2]) for the Bulaqs. The other two tribes also received separate prefectures with their chiefs appointed as governors.[11][12] Between 690s and 718 the three tribes allied themselves with theGöktürks (Second Turkic Khaganate) or Tang dynasty, while in 718 were conquered byBilge Khagan and the Tang-aligned chiefs were replaced. Between mid-6th and mid-7th century the Karluk tribes migrated between Mongolian plateau, Altai, and regions south and west, depending on the political-diplomatic orientations of the Karlukyabgu. By 766 they were in possession of the cities ofSuyab andTalas (inArabic record:T. w. l. s., inChinese:To-lo-se[6]) around which formedKarluk yabghu (756–940) andKara-Khanid Khanate (840–1212).[5][10]
The later Arabic sources, likeSharaf al-Zaman al-Marwazi depicted a union of nine tribes, including the Bulaq (bdw,bwâwî),Hudud al-'Alam noted that theblâq were one of theYagma constituent components, "mixed with theToquz Oghuz", whileAl-Kashgari in his 11th century workDīwān Lughāt al-Turk among the listed Turkic tribes mentionedBulaq andElke/Älkä Bulaq.[5][13] According to him, the Bulaqs became captives of theKipchaks, but later regained their independence and thus came to be called with the former name.[14][15] According to Rásonyi the name should be spelled asÄrkä Bulaq.[1]
According to Lajos Tardy the nameIvlach andIvlat, mentioned by ArchbishopJohannes de Galonifontibus in 1404, refers to William of Rubruck's account,[16] which István Ferenczi related to the Bulaqs.[17] Ferenczi argued that the records of slave sales fromKaffa also suggest that the word "Ivlach" denotes the Bulaqs, as well theAulâq people, mentioned byAbu al-Ghazi Bahadur with theRussians,Hungarians andBashkirs.[17][18] ThecartographersJohannes Schöner (1523) andPierre Desceliers (1553) located theBlaci people north of theCaspian Sea.[17] Rásonyi located Magna Blacia,Magna Bulgaria andMagna Hungaria as neighboringBashkiria, based on missionaries' works from the Middle Ages. The Bulaqs are mentioned for the last time shortly after their conquest by the Russians in 1592. They lived in modern-dayTomsk Oblast, east of theBashkirs and theUrals.[1]
According to the accounts ofWilliam of Rubruck andRoger Bacon, during theHuns migration to Europe "also came the Blacs, theBulgars and theVandals. For from thatGreater Bulgaria come the Bulgars, who are beyond theDanube nearConstantinople. And near the land of Pascatir (Magna Hungaria i.e. somewhere around theUral Mountains and theVolga River from where came the Huns) are the Iliac (Blachi from greater Blachia, from which came the Blachi in the landAssani between Constantinople and Bulgaria and lesser Hungary[19]), which is the same word as Blac but theTatars do not know how to pronounce (the letter) B, and from them come those who are in the land ofAssan. They call both of them Iliac, the former and the latter".[19][20]
The remark bySimon of Kéza from his workGesta Hunnorum et Hungarorum about theSzékelys living in the mountains which they shared with the Vlachs, where mingled with them, and adopted their alphabet,[21] sparked a controversy about theOld Hungarian script (Rovás), while other scholars noticed that Simon did distinguish betweenUlahis[22] (Vlachs) andBlackis and identified theBlacki people with the Bulaqs.[1][23] Moreover, theOld Hungarian script is deemed as related to theOld Turkic script by linguists.[24]Johannes de Thurocz, in his workChronica Hungarorum called the alphabet of the Székelys "Scythian letters".[25] Prominent Hungarian linguist,Gyula Németh notes in his workA magyar rovásírás that the writings found in theTalas river valley show close similarity.[26]
A diploma ofKing Andrew II and a letter ofPope Innocent III, both written in 1222, mention the "land of the Blacs" (Terra Blacorum) between theOlt and theCarpathians. In 1223, another diploma of the king "exempts from the Blacs" (exempta de Blaccis) and gifts part of this land to theOrder of the Cictercians.[24][27][28] The document provides details of the territory, no toponyms mentioned originate from theRomanian language.[24]Snorri Sturluson, medievalIcelandic historian, writing about the campaign ofAlexios I Komnenos against thePechenegs, mentionedBlokumannaland in 1122.Pritsak identifies this people with theCumans,[29] while Ervin Láczay believes that Sturluson referred to the "forest of the Blacs and Pechenegs" (silvam Blacorum et Bissenorum), to which theTransylvanian Saxons were given access in 1224.[24][27] On a Varangian runestone inGotland, theBlakumen (people) is mentioned.[24]
The first historian to distinguish them wasLászló Réthy (Anonymus az erdélyi oláhokról, 1880). After analyzing dozens of medieval records of Vlachs, (e.g.Anna Komnene who wrotenomadibus, quos Vlachos vulgari lingua vocare solen, "nomads whom common people call Vlachs") he concludes that the Vlach ethonym was used to designate not just theRomanians, but all transhumance populations, including theBulgarians who he connects Anonymus'blachii andNestor'sВлахом to.[30][31]Géza Nagy continues his theory, saying that the possible early name of the Bulgarians,alogo ("great", seeAlogobotur), was confused by documenters.[32] FrenchsinologistPaul Pelliot also tried to prove that theIllac andLac recorded byMarco Polo,William of Rubruck andRoger Bacon aren't identical with theUlac (Vlach).[33]
Anonymus writes about the Blacs "the inhabitants of the land, seeing the death of their lord, giving the right hand of their own free will chose to themselves as lord Tuhutum, father of Horca, and in that place which is called Esculeu, they confirmed their pledge with an oath...".[34] This conforms the Turkic custom, but would've been impossible for the Vlachs.[1]
The archaeological finds confirm the analysis of Transylvanian river names, the Hungarians who settled inTransylvania during the 10th century encountered with a small Turkic group in the southeast, nearKüküllő andOlt rivers.[35] László Rásonyi, after protractedly analyzing Transylvanian toponyms and personal names, found the linguistic evidence to prove Bulaq presence there sufficient.[1]
Anonymus mentions the Blacs and Bulgars with a conjunction (Bulgarii et Blachii), indicating that they are relatives. The Bulaqs and Bulgars are both Turkic peoples.[36]
György Bodor says that diplomas verify that in 1225 the Transylvanian Bulaqs, along with many other border guarding peoples were annexed by theSzékely seats and assimilated.[37]
György Györffy wrote in his workAz Árpád-kori Magyarország Történeti Földrajza. Vol. II. that "regarding theBlak ethnicity, Mongol sources can be brought up to testify that they talk about the TurkicBlak,Ulaq element".[38]
According to Romanian historianVictor Spinei, beside the etymological and historical differences between the termsBlaci and Bulaqs, there is not a single historical or archaeological indication for a possible Bulaqs migration towards theCarpathian-Balkan area. Also, it is impossible to explain how such insignificant population was unassimilated for several centuries far from the place of origin.[39] László Makkai wrote that although "there has been some speculation that Anonymus' Blaks were the Turkic people who are mentioned in medieval sources as bearing the same name and living east of the Carpathians, but this hypothesis does not bear the test of scholarly scrutiny".[40] István Vásáry noted that Rásonyi tried to prove theBlaci of Transylvania were not the Vlachs, but Turkic peopleBulaqs who were confused with the Vlachs. He said that "in the case of the termBlaci, we cannot but conclude that it was used to designate the Vlakhs".[41]