Bulgaria in 896. However, the Bulgarian king, allied, with the assistance of the
Pechenegs, crashed the Hungarians and drove them away from the land they had
occupied temporarily. These then moved to the west, and settled in their present
homeland (68).
One should notice that the space which the Hungarians settled is written either as
a compound common noun, Άτελκoύζoυ (Atelkuzu), or as separate nouns Έτελ/και/
Koυζoυ (Etel/and/Kuzu), the latter variant being more credible, since the former
does not observe the features specific of agglutinant languages (Hungarian, Turkish
etc.), which characterize by vowel harmony. In the former word, e, a front vowel,
appears with vowels from other series of classification.
In his study, N. A. Oikonomides uses the commentaries made by Gy. Moravcsik,
which are rather contradictory. At the beginning, the latter asserts: “It no doubt
represents the Old Hungarian Etel-Küzu, which means ‘between the river’ or
‘Mesopotamia’. Then, he ends by saying: “it may also mean ‘the territory of, or
about a specific river’ (the Volga. . ., or the Don or the Dnieper)” (69). He then goes
on to identify the rivers mentioned in that second text: Βαρoύχ seems to be the
Pecheneg name of the Dnieper, Koυβoυ is identified with the Bug, Τρoυλλoς is the
Dniester, Βρoυτoς – the Prut, while Σε ρετoς – is the Siret. Analyzing the texts
referring to the Atelkuzu location, we believe that, in this case, we are dealing with
a large border thema, situated beyond the frontiers of the empire, with an administration, whose main task might have been to survey the migratory peoples, who
could thus move rather freely. To monitor such a large area, that stretched from the
Dniester to the Siret, the local administration had to be vigilant, well-trained troops
needed to be deployed there. If anything significant had happened there, chroniclers
would have recorded the event, as they did for other smaller ones, the more so as the
empire was facing one of its worst crisis, and particular attention was given to the
decentralized territorial administration, with a view to keeping it under control.
16
16 N. A. Oikonomides (1965) relies on two fragments, from the Chronicle of Constantine the
Porphyrogennetos: A. (In the eleventh century, the Hungarians were living “είς τ oπoυς
ε
πoνoμαζoμε νoυς Άτελχoύζoυ, ε
ν oίς τ oπoις τά νυν τ o τωυ Πατζινακιτων ε
θνoς χατoιχει” [in a
place called Atelkuzu, where now the nation of the Pechenegs is living] (ch. 38, 29–31), and
somewhere else, “ o δε τ oπoς ε
ν ω πρ oτερoν oί Τoυρχoι ύπηρχoν,
oνoμάζεται κατά τήν ε
πoνυμίαν
τoυ ε
χεισε διερχoμε νoυ πoταμoυ Έτε λ χαί Koυζoυ, ε
ν ω άρτίως oί Πατζιναχιται χατoικoυσιν”
[and the place where before there exist the Turks, is called after the river that crosses the region
Etel and Cuzu, where only the Pechenegs live] (cf. 40, 22–25). B. The geographical localization:
“Ότι
o τω ν Πατζιναχιτω ν τ oπoς, ε
ν ω τω τ oτε χαιρω χατω χησαν oί Τoυρχoι, χαλειται χατά τήν
ε
πoνυμίαν των ε
χεισε
oντων πoταμων oί δε πoταμoί είσίν oύτoι πoταμ oς πρωτoς
o χαλoύμενoς
Βαρoύχ, πoταμ oς δεύτερoς
o χαλoύμενoς Koυβoυ, πoταμ oς τρίτoς
o χαλoύμενoς Τρoυλλoς,
πoταμ oς τε ταρτoς
o χαλoύμενoς Βρoυτoς, πoταμ oς πε μπτoς
o χαλoύμενoς Σε ρετoς.” [That the
place of the Pechenegs, in which at the time the Turks were living, is called after the name of the
rivers three; and the rivers are these: the first is called Baruch, the second is called Cubu, the third
is called Trullus, the fourth is called Brutus, and the fifth is called Seretus.] (ch. 38, 66–71). In our
opinion, the Mesopotamia of the West was a large territory stretching between the five great rivers,
whose western border was at the mouths of the Danube, which the presence of the two rivers,
Βρoυτoς and Σε ρετoς seem to suggest too. The Istros was a scared river, a condition in the Greek
antiquity for the existence of a Mesopotamia (69).
36
M. Petris ¸or
Pechenegs, crashed the Hungarians and drove them away from the land they had
occupied temporarily. These then moved to the west, and settled in their present
homeland (68).
One should notice that the space which the Hungarians settled is written either as
a compound common noun, Άτελκoύζoυ (Atelkuzu), or as separate nouns Έτελ/και/
Koυζoυ (Etel/and/Kuzu), the latter variant being more credible, since the former
does not observe the features specific of agglutinant languages (Hungarian, Turkish
etc.), which characterize by vowel harmony. In the former word, e, a front vowel,
appears with vowels from other series of classification.
In his study, N. A. Oikonomides uses the commentaries made by Gy. Moravcsik,
which are rather contradictory. At the beginning, the latter asserts: “It no doubt
represents the Old Hungarian Etel-Küzu, which means ‘between the river’ or
‘Mesopotamia’. Then, he ends by saying: “it may also mean ‘the territory of, or
about a specific river’ (the Volga. . ., or the Don or the Dnieper)” (69). He then goes
on to identify the rivers mentioned in that second text: Βαρoύχ seems to be the
Pecheneg name of the Dnieper, Koυβoυ is identified with the Bug, Τρoυλλoς is the
Dniester, Βρoυτoς – the Prut, while Σε ρετoς – is the Siret. Analyzing the texts
referring to the Atelkuzu location, we believe that, in this case, we are dealing with
a large border thema, situated beyond the frontiers of the empire, with an administration, whose main task might have been to survey the migratory peoples, who
could thus move rather freely. To monitor such a large area, that stretched from the
Dniester to the Siret, the local administration had to be vigilant, well-trained troops
needed to be deployed there. If anything significant had happened there, chroniclers
would have recorded the event, as they did for other smaller ones, the more so as the
empire was facing one of its worst crisis, and particular attention was given to the
decentralized territorial administration, with a view to keeping it under control.
16
16 N. A. Oikonomides (1965) relies on two fragments, from the Chronicle of Constantine the
Porphyrogennetos: A. (In the eleventh century, the Hungarians were living “είς τ oπoυς
ε
πoνoμαζoμε νoυς Άτελχoύζoυ, ε
ν oίς τ oπoις τά νυν τ o τωυ Πατζινακιτων ε
θνoς χατoιχει” [in a
place called Atelkuzu, where now the nation of the Pechenegs is living] (ch. 38, 29–31), and
somewhere else, “ o δε τ oπoς ε
ν ω πρ oτερoν oί Τoυρχoι ύπηρχoν,
oνoμάζεται κατά τήν ε
πoνυμίαν
τoυ ε
χεισε διερχoμε νoυ πoταμoυ Έτε λ χαί Koυζoυ, ε
ν ω άρτίως oί Πατζιναχιται χατoικoυσιν”
[and the place where before there exist the Turks, is called after the river that crosses the region
Etel and Cuzu, where only the Pechenegs live] (cf. 40, 22–25). B. The geographical localization:
“Ότι
o τω ν Πατζιναχιτω ν τ oπoς, ε
ν ω τω τ oτε χαιρω χατω χησαν oί Τoυρχoι, χαλειται χατά τήν
ε
πoνυμίαν των ε
χεισε
oντων πoταμων oί δε πoταμoί είσίν oύτoι πoταμ oς πρωτoς
o χαλoύμενoς
Βαρoύχ, πoταμ oς δεύτερoς
o χαλoύμενoς Koυβoυ, πoταμ oς τρίτoς
o χαλoύμενoς Τρoυλλoς,
πoταμ oς τε ταρτoς
o χαλoύμενoς Βρoυτoς, πoταμ oς πε μπτoς
o χαλoύμενoς Σε ρετoς.” [That the
place of the Pechenegs, in which at the time the Turks were living, is called after the name of the
rivers three; and the rivers are these: the first is called Baruch, the second is called Cubu, the third
is called Trullus, the fourth is called Brutus, and the fifth is called Seretus.] (ch. 38, 66–71). In our
opinion, the Mesopotamia of the West was a large territory stretching between the five great rivers,
whose western border was at the mouths of the Danube, which the presence of the two rivers,
Βρoυτoς and Σε ρετoς seem to suggest too. The Istros was a scared river, a condition in the Greek
antiquity for the existence of a Mesopotamia (69).
36
M. Petris ¸or