Bun-Turks (Bunturks) — in ancient Georgian sources, they are referred to as one of the oldest inhabitants of Transcaucasia.
"Leonti Mroveli. Kartlis Tskhovreba":
"The Conversion of Georgia":
[1] The Chaldeans — a tribe of Semitic origin. The last ruling dynasty in independent Babylonia, as is known, was precisely Chaldean (626-539 BC). In this case, however, it probably refers not to Babylonia of the New Kingdom period, but to the Achaemenid state. The Achaemenids, having defeated the Chaldean dynasty of Babylon, were at one time called Chaldean rather than Persian kings. That the Chaldeans mentioned in the "Conversion of Georgia" refer to the Persians is also clearly seen from the context — after all, contemporary with Alexander the Great, it was Achaemenid Persia that had political significance in the world. Very noteworthy in this regard are the observations of K. S. Kekelidze, who noted that in the monuments of ancient Georgian literature, ancient Iran is often mentioned as the country of the Babylonians or Chaldeans; this, according to the scholar, is quite logical if one considers that the country of the Chaldeans was also part of Persia (Kekelidze K. S. Notes from the history of ancient Georgian literature: Itrudzhan. — In: Studies on the history of ancient Georgian literature, I, Tb., 1956, p. 269, in Georgian).
[2] Considering the Chaldeans to be Babylonians, E. S. Takayshvili understood "honni" as "huriani" (the ancient Georgian name for Jews) and connected the fact noted in the "Conversion of Georgia" with the resettlement of Jews by the Babylonian king of the Chaldean dynasty, Nebuchadnezzar II (640-562 BC). Based on this understanding, he interpreted the ancient Georgian word "gamoskhuli" — "separated" (see Abuladze I. V. Dictionary of the Ancient Georgian Language, p. 45) as "exiled". But such an interpretation of the text seems to us incorrect. Firstly, E. S. Takayshvili, without justification, as already noted in the specialized literature (see Janashia S. N. The most ancient national information about the place of the original habitation of the Georgians. — Works, vol. II, Tb., 1952, p. 42), believed that in the original a titlo was omitted above the word "honni" and read this word as "huriani". Besides, this passage refers to a fact contemporary with Alexander the Great, i.e., which took place several centuries after Nebuchadnezzar II's capture of Jerusalem and the resettlement of the Jews from there. S. N. Janashia understood "honni" as Huns, considering this an anachronism. However, there is no reason to attribute such a gross error to the author of the "Conversion of Georgia". At the current stage of research, the question of the identification of this ethnonym, apparently, to avoid error, is best left open.
Comments:
It is believed that the ethnonym "Bun-Turks" is a compound, where the word "bun" is a definition by which the author of the "Conversion of Georgia" wanted to emphasize the non-identity of the Turks who lived in Georgia during the time of Alexander the Great with the Turks contemporary to the author. The word "bun" is interpreted differently. E. S. Takayshvili, for example, believed that Bun-Turks (he wrote Bunturks) are Turkic spearmen, since, according to the scholar, "bun" is an Armenian word meaning the handle of a spear (see p. 1, 2, note 2). In modern specialized literature, preference is given to the interpretation proposed by M. Brosset, according to which the indicated ethnonym should be understood as "indigenous, true Turks" (Brosset M. Histoire de la Gèorgie, I partie, 1849, p. 30-33; see also Melikishvili G. A. On the history of ancient Georgia. — Tb., 1959, p. 125; he also, Bun-Turks. — Georgian Soviet Encyclopedia, vol. 2, p. 572; Janashia N. S. On the sources of the "Life of the Georgian Kings". — In: Historical and source studies essays, — Tb., 1986, p. 96, note 10, in Georgian). The word "bun" in addition to the indicated meaning also has the meaning of "sedentary" — mkvidri (see Abuladze I. V. Dictionary of the Ancient Georgian Language. — Tb., 1973, p. 37). For this case, it is precisely this meaning that seems most appropriate. Firstly, according to the context, the Bun-Turks are indeed sedentary — they live in cities. In addition, in the second half of the 5th century, when the "Conversion of Georgia" was compiled, Turkic tribes could mostly have been known as nomads (see Eremeev D. E. Ethnogenesis of the Turks. — M., 1971). Consequently, the definition "bun" as an explanation to the ethnonym "Turks" for the contemporaries of the author of the "Conversion of Georgia" was indeed necessary. For completeness of information about the Bun-Turks, one can also refer to the work of M. Seidov "An attempt at etymological analysis of the word Bunturki/Buntürki" (Reports of the Academy of Sciences of the Azerbaijan SSR. 1969, vol. XXV, No. 8, pp. 91-93), in which the word "bun" is connected with Turkic languages and the ethnonym as a whole is interpreted as "Turkic tribe".
There are several interpretations of the term "Bunturks":
The most ancient Georgian chronicle "Moktsevai Kartlisai" (written in the mid-7th century, edited in the 9th century) is the first to mention the "fierce tribes of the Bun-Turks, who lived along the course of the Kura River, in four cities with their suburbs," narrating events of the 4th-3rd centuries BC on the territory of Georgia and adjacent regions of the South Caucasus [5]. Similar information is found in the chronicle "Kartlis Tskhovreba" by Leonti Mroveli (11th century) [6]. Givi Tsulaya believes that the term "Bunturks" was used as a derogatory term to characterize the population of Kartli of the pre-Hellenistic period, as well as for the Kipchaks [7]. M. S. Chkhartishvili suggested that the ethnonym "Bun-Turks" is a compound, where the word "bun" is a definition by which the author of the "Conversion of Georgia" wanted to emphasize the non-identity of the Turks who lived in Georgia during the time of Alexander the Great with the Turks contemporary to the author [8].
[1] Takayshvili E. S. Sources of Georgian chronicles, pp. 1-2
[2] Brosset M. Histoire de la Georgie, I partie, SPb., 1849, p. p. 30-33
[3] Marr N. Ya. Hippolytus. Interpretation of the Song of Songs. SPb., 1901; pp. I-XII
[4]
[5] Moktsevai Kartlisai (The Conversion of Georgia. // Translation from Ancient Georgian by E. S. Takayshvili)
[6] Leonti Mroveli. Life of the Kartlian Kings.
[7] Mroveli Leonti. Life of the Kartlian Kings. M., 1979. (Preface and notes by G. V. Tsulaya)
[8] The Conversion of Georgia (comments by M. S. Chkhartishvili). Tbilisi, 1989
"Leonti Mroveli. Kartlis Tskhovreba":
Researcher Jost Gippert in "Bun-Turks in Ancient Georgia. Jost Gippert, Frankfurt 2007" argues that the texts of Leonti Mroveli rely heavily on some medieval legends about Alexander the Great that have come down to us from Greek, Armenian, and Syrian sources. In particular, one Christian legend states: "Alexander asked, 'What peoples live in the mountains on which we look and who are their kings?' The locals answered, 'They are Huns. Their kings are sons of Japheth — Gog, Magog, and Nâwâl [possibly Tubal]'." This parallel directly suggests that the name "Bun-Turks" came from "Huns" through the substitution of h for b, if the Syriac ܐƀƌܗܘ = hun-āyē from the Christian legend is taken as a basis. The same would be true for Greek if bun- is reflected in Greek as οὗνν (oúnn) — modern Greek for Huns.
In the Greek version of the above-described Syriac legend, Jost Gippert also finds confirmation of the belonging of the northern kings to the descendants of Japheth, but without mentioning the Bun-Turks. At the same time, it speaks of the Turks, through whom Alexander passed after building the wall. The author also admits that the transition from bun to hun is very difficult to motivate phonetically and suggests the possibility of an uncertain paleographic confusion, possibly related to the spelling in Asomtavruli, in which the letters <b> and <h> are sufficiently similar to be confused in calligraphic writing - (Ⴁ against Ⴠ).
The second problem. In the "Conversion of Georgia" (4th century), which was later used by Leonti Mroveli in the 11th century, both hon-ni and bun-turkni are already mentioned. E. S. Takayshvili understood "honni" as "huriani" — an abbreviation from ჰურიანნი (hurianni) Georgian ჰურიანი (huriani) — Jews. And since Georgian Jews are considered to have come from Babylon (Bielmeier, 1990, also connects Zanavi with the Old Testament Jewish toponym zānūḥ — Zanoah), this version looks quite substantial, except for the difference in 'nn'.
On the other hand, this explanation also works poorly for the dative plural of 'honta', which appears at the end of the passage, since the corresponding form for huria- would be huriata, without n at all. But at the same time, there is no doubt that in Old Georgian hon- denotes "Huns". In the "Martyrdom of Shushanik, 5th century" the hon- people are opponents of the governor (ṗiṭiaxši, vitaxa) of Kartli:
For Jost Gippert there is no doubt that these are the same Huns ("Huns") as the hon- from "History of Armenia. Agathangelos. 4th century":
In the ancient Armenian translations of Georgian chronicles "Abuladze I.V. Ancient Armenian translation of Georgian historical chronicles ('Kartlis Tskhovreba'). Tbilisi. 1953" in passages concerning the 11th-12th centuries of the life of David the Builder and his wife Gurandukht it is said:
Equating hon- and kiwčʽał- (Kipchak), the Armenian source differs significantly from the Georgian version in the chapter on David the Builder, which uses only q̇ivčaq- (Kipchak). Considering that in both sources, the information about David and Gurandukht is preceded by a comparison of David with Alexander, it can be stated that these are identical passages, and they both rely on the Christian legend about Alexander mentioned above.
This assumption implies the subsequent distortion and/or incorrect use of the combination of the terms "Huns," "Bun," and "Turks" in subsequent chronicle works based on the "Conversion of Georgia." All this may have contributed to the emergence of the popular etymology connecting bun- with the concept of 'indigenous'. At the same time, in the Shatberd version of the "Conversion of Georgia," the interpretation of the term hun- can be attributed to another source, namely the simultaneous existence of hon-, *hun- and hune- 'horse', which could have led to the confusion that arose. For example, the text on the destruction of Jerusalem in 614 by Antiochus Strategos (7th century), in the passage about the drowning Pharaoh's troops, mistakenly indicates 'honebi' instead of 'huneebi' (horses).
Further, the author states that he does not see convincing evidence of the possibility of the simultaneous presence of Bun-Hun-Turks and Alexander the Great in the Caucasus and believes that the time of the merging of these stories occurred no earlier than 515-628, during the time of the actual appearance of the Huns and Khazars in the Caucasus, and this is also confirmed by the Syriac "Christian Legend." The anachronism identified by the researcher turns out not to be the only one in Leonti Mroveli. Unlike the "Conversion of Georgia," Mroveli begins his chronicle from times much earlier than the time of Alexander the Great. After speculations about the origin of the Caucasian peoples from Targamos (biblical Togarmah, grandson of Japheth), he begins to describe in detail the pre-Hellenistic times, and in this context, he turns out to be the first to mention the Turks. Here he refers to a Persian source, apparently meaning not Turks, but Turanians in the Persian tradition, and the narrative of those events itself abounds in anachronisms, which allowed researcher Jost Gippert to conclude that the works of Leonti Mroveli and the "Conversion of Georgia" have no historical value for the pre-Christian period. Nevertheless, the generalization of Huns, Turk-Turanians, Khazars, and Kipchaks, as well as some other data on the 1st millennium, turned out to be useful.
Sources:
The Conversion of Georgia. Translation from Ancient Georgian by E. S. Takayshvili. Tbilisi, 1989
Kartlis Tskhovreba. Leonti Mroveli. Tbilisi, 2008
Bun-Turks in Ancient Georgia. Jost Gippert, Frankfurt 2007
"Leonti Mroveli. Kartlis Tskhovreba":
"When King Alexander [Alexander the Great, 356-323 BC] put the descendants of Lot [Lot — a biblical figure] to flight and drove them to the northern country, then [he] first saw the fierce tribes of the Bun-Turks [see Comments], who lived along the course of the Kura in four cities with their suburbs. [They were]: the cities of Sarkine, Kaspi, Urbnisi and Odzrakhe, and their fortresses. Alexander was amazed and learned that they were descendants of the Jebusites [The Jebusite tribe is mentioned in the Bible. The ethnonym goes back to the name of the progenitor of the tribe, Jebus]. They ate everything living and had no graves — they devoured the dead. Being [then] unable to fight them, the king withdrew ..."
"The Conversion of Georgia":
"Then [during the reign of Alexander] a warlike tribe of Hons [1], which had separated from the Chaldeans [2], arrived and asked the ruler of the Bun-Turks for a place [under the condition of paying] tribute, and they settled in Zanavi ..."
[1] The Chaldeans — a tribe of Semitic origin. The last ruling dynasty in independent Babylonia, as is known, was precisely Chaldean (626-539 BC). In this case, however, it probably refers not to Babylonia of the New Kingdom period, but to the Achaemenid state. The Achaemenids, having defeated the Chaldean dynasty of Babylon, were at one time called Chaldean rather than Persian kings. That the Chaldeans mentioned in the "Conversion of Georgia" refer to the Persians is also clearly seen from the context — after all, contemporary with Alexander the Great, it was Achaemenid Persia that had political significance in the world. Very noteworthy in this regard are the observations of K. S. Kekelidze, who noted that in the monuments of ancient Georgian literature, ancient Iran is often mentioned as the country of the Babylonians or Chaldeans; this, according to the scholar, is quite logical if one considers that the country of the Chaldeans was also part of Persia (Kekelidze K. S. Notes from the history of ancient Georgian literature: Itrudzhan. — In: Studies on the history of ancient Georgian literature, I, Tb., 1956, p. 269, in Georgian).
[2] Considering the Chaldeans to be Babylonians, E. S. Takayshvili understood "honni" as "huriani" (the ancient Georgian name for Jews) and connected the fact noted in the "Conversion of Georgia" with the resettlement of Jews by the Babylonian king of the Chaldean dynasty, Nebuchadnezzar II (640-562 BC). Based on this understanding, he interpreted the ancient Georgian word "gamoskhuli" — "separated" (see Abuladze I. V. Dictionary of the Ancient Georgian Language, p. 45) as "exiled". But such an interpretation of the text seems to us incorrect. Firstly, E. S. Takayshvili, without justification, as already noted in the specialized literature (see Janashia S. N. The most ancient national information about the place of the original habitation of the Georgians. — Works, vol. II, Tb., 1952, p. 42), believed that in the original a titlo was omitted above the word "honni" and read this word as "huriani". Besides, this passage refers to a fact contemporary with Alexander the Great, i.e., which took place several centuries after Nebuchadnezzar II's capture of Jerusalem and the resettlement of the Jews from there. S. N. Janashia understood "honni" as Huns, considering this an anachronism. However, there is no reason to attribute such a gross error to the author of the "Conversion of Georgia". At the current stage of research, the question of the identification of this ethnonym, apparently, to avoid error, is best left open.
Comments:
It is believed that the ethnonym "Bun-Turks" is a compound, where the word "bun" is a definition by which the author of the "Conversion of Georgia" wanted to emphasize the non-identity of the Turks who lived in Georgia during the time of Alexander the Great with the Turks contemporary to the author. The word "bun" is interpreted differently. E. S. Takayshvili, for example, believed that Bun-Turks (he wrote Bunturks) are Turkic spearmen, since, according to the scholar, "bun" is an Armenian word meaning the handle of a spear (see p. 1, 2, note 2). In modern specialized literature, preference is given to the interpretation proposed by M. Brosset, according to which the indicated ethnonym should be understood as "indigenous, true Turks" (Brosset M. Histoire de la Gèorgie, I partie, 1849, p. 30-33; see also Melikishvili G. A. On the history of ancient Georgia. — Tb., 1959, p. 125; he also, Bun-Turks. — Georgian Soviet Encyclopedia, vol. 2, p. 572; Janashia N. S. On the sources of the "Life of the Georgian Kings". — In: Historical and source studies essays, — Tb., 1986, p. 96, note 10, in Georgian). The word "bun" in addition to the indicated meaning also has the meaning of "sedentary" — mkvidri (see Abuladze I. V. Dictionary of the Ancient Georgian Language. — Tb., 1973, p. 37). For this case, it is precisely this meaning that seems most appropriate. Firstly, according to the context, the Bun-Turks are indeed sedentary — they live in cities. In addition, in the second half of the 5th century, when the "Conversion of Georgia" was compiled, Turkic tribes could mostly have been known as nomads (see Eremeev D. E. Ethnogenesis of the Turks. — M., 1971). Consequently, the definition "bun" as an explanation to the ethnonym "Turks" for the contemporaries of the author of the "Conversion of Georgia" was indeed necessary. For completeness of information about the Bun-Turks, one can also refer to the work of M. Seidov "An attempt at etymological analysis of the word Bunturki/Buntürki" (Reports of the Academy of Sciences of the Azerbaijan SSR. 1969, vol. XXV, No. 8, pp. 91-93), in which the word "bun" is connected with Turkic languages and the ethnonym as a whole is interpreted as "Turkic tribe".
There are several interpretations of the term "Bunturks":
- E. S. Takayshvili, referring to the dictionaries of S. S. Orbeliani and D. Chubinov, considered this term a borrowing from Armenian: bun — "spear handle", hence bun-turks — "Turks-spearmen" [1];
- M. I. Brosset translated this word as turk-primitif [2];
- N. Ya. Marr explains that the word bun, borrowed in Georgian (as well as in Armenian) from Persian, means "indigenous", hence bun-turks — "indigenous, genuine Turks" [3]. This point of view is also supported by other authors [4].
The most ancient Georgian chronicle "Moktsevai Kartlisai" (written in the mid-7th century, edited in the 9th century) is the first to mention the "fierce tribes of the Bun-Turks, who lived along the course of the Kura River, in four cities with their suburbs," narrating events of the 4th-3rd centuries BC on the territory of Georgia and adjacent regions of the South Caucasus [5]. Similar information is found in the chronicle "Kartlis Tskhovreba" by Leonti Mroveli (11th century) [6]. Givi Tsulaya believes that the term "Bunturks" was used as a derogatory term to characterize the population of Kartli of the pre-Hellenistic period, as well as for the Kipchaks [7]. M. S. Chkhartishvili suggested that the ethnonym "Bun-Turks" is a compound, where the word "bun" is a definition by which the author of the "Conversion of Georgia" wanted to emphasize the non-identity of the Turks who lived in Georgia during the time of Alexander the Great with the Turks contemporary to the author [8].
[1] Takayshvili E. S. Sources of Georgian chronicles, pp. 1-2
[2] Brosset M. Histoire de la Georgie, I partie, SPb., 1849, p. p. 30-33
[3] Marr N. Ya. Hippolytus. Interpretation of the Song of Songs. SPb., 1901; pp. I-XII
[4]
- Abuladze I. V. Dictionary of the Ancient Georgian Language. Tbilisi, 1973, p. 37;
- Andronikashvili M. K. Essays on Iranian-Georgian linguistic interrelations, vol. I. Tbilisi, 1966, p. 187, 198 (in Georgian);
- Melikishvili G. A. On the history of ancient Georgia. — Tb., 1959, p. 125;
- Melikishvili G. A. Bun-Turks. // Georgian Soviet Encyclopedia, vol. 2, p. 572;
- Janashia N. S. On the sources of the "Life of the Georgian Kings". // In: Historical and source studies essays, — Tb., 1986, p. 96, note 10, in Georgian;
[5] Moktsevai Kartlisai (The Conversion of Georgia. // Translation from Ancient Georgian by E. S. Takayshvili)
[6] Leonti Mroveli. Life of the Kartlian Kings.
[7] Mroveli Leonti. Life of the Kartlian Kings. M., 1979. (Preface and notes by G. V. Tsulaya)
[8] The Conversion of Georgia (comments by M. S. Chkhartishvili). Tbilisi, 1989
"Leonti Mroveli. Kartlis Tskhovreba":
"... seeing this fierce pagan people, whom we call Bun-Turks and Kipchaks, Alexander, who settled by the river (Kura) ..."
Researcher Jost Gippert in "Bun-Turks in Ancient Georgia. Jost Gippert, Frankfurt 2007" argues that the texts of Leonti Mroveli rely heavily on some medieval legends about Alexander the Great that have come down to us from Greek, Armenian, and Syrian sources. In particular, one Christian legend states: "Alexander asked, 'What peoples live in the mountains on which we look and who are their kings?' The locals answered, 'They are Huns. Their kings are sons of Japheth — Gog, Magog, and Nâwâl [possibly Tubal]'." This parallel directly suggests that the name "Bun-Turks" came from "Huns" through the substitution of h for b, if the Syriac ܐƀƌܗܘ = hun-āyē from the Christian legend is taken as a basis. The same would be true for Greek if bun- is reflected in Greek as οὗνν (oúnn) — modern Greek for Huns.
In the Greek version of the above-described Syriac legend, Jost Gippert also finds confirmation of the belonging of the northern kings to the descendants of Japheth, but without mentioning the Bun-Turks. At the same time, it speaks of the Turks, through whom Alexander passed after building the wall. The author also admits that the transition from bun to hun is very difficult to motivate phonetically and suggests the possibility of an uncertain paleographic confusion, possibly related to the spelling in Asomtavruli, in which the letters <b> and <h> are sufficiently similar to be confused in calligraphic writing - (Ⴁ against Ⴠ).
The second problem. In the "Conversion of Georgia" (4th century), which was later used by Leonti Mroveli in the 11th century, both hon-ni and bun-turkni are already mentioned. E. S. Takayshvili understood "honni" as "huriani" — an abbreviation from ჰურიანნი (hurianni) Georgian ჰურიანი (huriani) — Jews. And since Georgian Jews are considered to have come from Babylon (Bielmeier, 1990, also connects Zanavi with the Old Testament Jewish toponym zānūḥ — Zanoah), this version looks quite substantial, except for the difference in 'nn'.
On the other hand, this explanation also works poorly for the dative plural of 'honta', which appears at the end of the passage, since the corresponding form for huria- would be huriata, without n at all. But at the same time, there is no doubt that in Old Georgian hon- denotes "Huns". In the "Martyrdom of Shushanik, 5th century" the hon- people are opponents of the governor (ṗiṭiaxši, vitaxa) of Kartli:
"... Do you know, priest, that I am going to war against the Huns? ..."
For Jost Gippert there is no doubt that these are the same Huns ("Huns") as the hon- from "History of Armenia. Agathangelos. 4th century":
... Khosrov again began to gather regiments and form an army: he gathered the Albanian and Iberian troops, opened the gates of the Alans and Chora Pahak, let in the troops of the Huns [Honacʽ] and began to raid Persia ...
In the ancient Armenian translations of Georgian chronicles "Abuladze I.V. Ancient Armenian translation of Georgian historical chronicles ('Kartlis Tskhovreba'). Tbilisi. 1953" in passages concerning the 11th-12th centuries of the life of David the Builder and his wife Gurandukht it is said:
"Ew kin nora Gorandowxt dowstr ēr Kiwčʽałacʽ glxaworin, aysinkʽn Honacʽ Atʽrakay" — And his [David's] wife Gurandukht was the daughter of Atrak — the ruler of the Kipchaks, i.e., the Huns
Equating hon- and kiwčʽał- (Kipchak), the Armenian source differs significantly from the Georgian version in the chapter on David the Builder, which uses only q̇ivčaq- (Kipchak). Considering that in both sources, the information about David and Gurandukht is preceded by a comparison of David with Alexander, it can be stated that these are identical passages, and they both rely on the Christian legend about Alexander mentioned above.
This assumption implies the subsequent distortion and/or incorrect use of the combination of the terms "Huns," "Bun," and "Turks" in subsequent chronicle works based on the "Conversion of Georgia." All this may have contributed to the emergence of the popular etymology connecting bun- with the concept of 'indigenous'. At the same time, in the Shatberd version of the "Conversion of Georgia," the interpretation of the term hun- can be attributed to another source, namely the simultaneous existence of hon-, *hun- and hune- 'horse', which could have led to the confusion that arose. For example, the text on the destruction of Jerusalem in 614 by Antiochus Strategos (7th century), in the passage about the drowning Pharaoh's troops, mistakenly indicates 'honebi' instead of 'huneebi' (horses).
Further, the author states that he does not see convincing evidence of the possibility of the simultaneous presence of Bun-Hun-Turks and Alexander the Great in the Caucasus and believes that the time of the merging of these stories occurred no earlier than 515-628, during the time of the actual appearance of the Huns and Khazars in the Caucasus, and this is also confirmed by the Syriac "Christian Legend." The anachronism identified by the researcher turns out not to be the only one in Leonti Mroveli. Unlike the "Conversion of Georgia," Mroveli begins his chronicle from times much earlier than the time of Alexander the Great. After speculations about the origin of the Caucasian peoples from Targamos (biblical Togarmah, grandson of Japheth), he begins to describe in detail the pre-Hellenistic times, and in this context, he turns out to be the first to mention the Turks. Here he refers to a Persian source, apparently meaning not Turks, but Turanians in the Persian tradition, and the narrative of those events itself abounds in anachronisms, which allowed researcher Jost Gippert to conclude that the works of Leonti Mroveli and the "Conversion of Georgia" have no historical value for the pre-Christian period. Nevertheless, the generalization of Huns, Turk-Turanians, Khazars, and Kipchaks, as well as some other data on the 1st millennium, turned out to be useful.
Sources:
The Conversion of Georgia. Translation from Ancient Georgian by E. S. Takayshvili. Tbilisi, 1989
Kartlis Tskhovreba. Leonti Mroveli. Tbilisi, 2008
Bun-Turks in Ancient Georgia. Jost Gippert, Frankfurt 2007
ИСТОРИЯ ГРУЗИИ. ТБИЛИСИ 1962