Ariane Chanturia’s dictionary of the Georgian language offers a tantalizing entry: turkva (თურქვა), meaning “swearing,” derived from the root turk-. This discovery prompts a profound question: which came first—the concept of “swearing” or the ethnonym “Turk”? The answer, as uncovered by the Between Two Iberias project, challenges conventional historical narratives and unveils a Kartvelian lens through which to view the origins of one of the ancient world’s most enigmatic terms.
Let us first address the phonetics of turkva. If Turk were a borrowed word from Turkic languages, as traditional scholarship often assumes, we would expect it to be rendered in Georgian with the unaspirated consonants ტ (t) and კ (k), reflecting the phonetic norms of Turkic languages, which lack aspirated sounds. Instead, turkva employs the aspirated თ (t’) and ქ (k’), letters specific to Kartvelian phonology that carry a breathy quality. This choice is significant—why use aspirated consonants for a foreign word unless the root itself is native to Kartvelian speech, shaped by its unique phonetic system? The presence of თ and ქ suggests that turk- may not be a borrowing at all, but a Kartvelian root with a deeper, indigenous meaning.
This hypothesis gains traction when we explore an alternative etymology for turkva. Chanturia’s dictionary includes the interjection ture (თურე), meaning “of course not!”—a term synonymous with expressions like nutu (ნუთუ) and gana (განა), often used to convey disbelief or refusal. Such interjections are a natural fit for the dynamics of swearing, which frequently begins with a rejection or denial. Could turkva, meaning “swearing,” derive from ture, evolving into the root turk- as a marker of abrasive dialogue? If so, turk- is not a foreign import but a purely Kartvelian construct, rooted in the expressive fabric of the language. This interpretation delivers a seismic blow to historical assumptions: the so-called “Mongolian Turks” dissolve into a linguistic mirage, their ethnonym potentially a Kartvelian invention rather than a marker of Turkic origin.
The intrigue deepens with an alternative meaning for turki (თურქი), traditionally understood as “Turks.” Beyond its possible connection to turkva (“swearing”), turki may carry an entirely different sense: “relative.” In Georgian, the word turi (თური) means “relative,” a term of kinship that resonates with the Kartvelian emphasis on familial bonds. The Laz people, who are part of the Kartvelian family, share historical ties with the regions often associated with “Turks,” suggesting that turki might originally have denoted a kinship group within the Kartvelian sphere. The phonetic similarity between turi and turki is striking, but the final ქ in turki requires explanation.
Here, the Megrelian dictionary of Otari Kajaia provides a crucial insight. Kajaia identifies -ქ as a Megrelian suffix marking the ergative case, known as the მოთხრობითი ბრუნვის ნიშანი (“narrative case marker”). In this light, turki (თურქი) can be deconstructed as turi (თური) plus the ergative -ქ, where turi means “relative.” As Edemi Izoria has noted, this interpretation aligns with Kartvelian morphology, transforming turki from an ethnonym into a grammatical form denoting agency or association within a familial context. Thus, the “Turks” of ancient texts may not refer to a foreign people but to a Kartvelian kinship group, their name a reflection of internal linguistic structures rather than an external identity.
This reinterpretation extends far beyond the Caucasus, reaching as far as the United States, where the term turk was historically used to refer to people of Irish descent—an appellation often labeled “of unknown origin” in etymological records. Yet, the origin is far from unknown when viewed through a Kartvelian lens. On Ptolemy’s ancient map, Ireland is named Iverni, a clear echo of the Kartvelian root iber/ivar, which defines the Iberians of both the Caucasus and the Jezreel Valley. The Iverni were likely a Kartvelian-speaking people, their name a marker of their linguistic heritage. In this context, the American turk as a term for the Irish aligns perfectly with the Kartvelian turi (“relative”), suggesting that the Irish were perceived as “relatives” within a broader Kartvelian diaspora—a linguistic thread that stretches across millennia and continents.
The implications of this etymology are profound. If turk- is a Kartvelian root, meaning either “swearing” (via ture) or “relative” (via turi), then the historical narrative of the “Turks” as a Turkic people must be reevaluated. The Kartvelian languages, with their deep roots and global reach, offer a new framework for understanding ancient ethnonyms, revealing connections that traditional scholarship has overlooked. From the Caucasus to Ireland, the word turk emerges not as a foreign import but as a Kartvelian legacy, a testament to the enduring influence of this linguistic family on the world stage. As we continue our Kartvelology journey, let this reinterpretation inspire us to question the origins of the names that define our past, seeking truth in the ancient echoes of Kartvelian speech.
0 Comments