Dulo
The Dulo clan was the primary ruling lineage of the Bulgars, a Turkic-speaking semi-nomadic warrior group active in the Pontic-Caspian steppe from the 5th to 7th centuries, from which the khans who unified the tribes and established early Bulgarian polities descended.[1] According to the Nominalia of the Bulgarian Khans, an 11th-century manuscript compiling earlier oral and written traditions, the clan's recorded rulers began with Avitohol, who purportedly reigned for 300 years starting around 165 CE, followed by figures like Ernak, linked to Hunnic heritage, and extended through Bezmer to the 8th century.[2] This lineage produced Khan Kubrat, who around 630–635 CE consolidated disparate Bulgar tribes into Old Great Bulgaria, a short-lived confederation in the region of modern Ukraine and southern Russia that resisted Khazar expansion before fragmenting after his death circa 665 CE.[3] Kubrat's son Asparuh led a branch of the Dulo-led Bulgars southward, crossing the Danube around 680 CE to defeat Byzantine forces and found the core of the First Bulgarian Empire in the Balkans, marking the clan's pivotal role in transitioning from steppe nomadism to sedentary state-building amid Slavic and Byzantine interactions.[4] Subsequent Dulo khans, including Tervel (r. circa 700–721 CE), who aided Emperor Justinian II in reclaiming Constantinople in 705 CE and received the title caesar, exemplified the clan's military prowess and diplomatic leverage, though internal strife and clan rivalries contributed to its decline by the mid-8th century under rulers like Sevar and Kormesiy, after which the Ukil clan ascended.[4] The Dulo era defined early Bulgar identity through conquests that integrated Turkic elites with local populations, laying foundations for Bulgaria's enduring ethnogenesis despite debates over the clan's precise Central Asian or Hunnic-Iranian origins rooted in limited archaeological and textual evidence.[1]Origins and Early History
Turkic and Proto-Bulgar Roots
The Dulo clan constituted the paramount ruling lineage among the Proto-Bulgars, a confederation of Turkic-speaking nomadic tribes active in the Pontic-Caspian steppes from approximately the 5th to 7th centuries CE. These Proto-Bulgars, also known as Onogur-Bulgars, derived their ethnonym from Turkic tribal amalgamations, with "Bulgar" likely stemming from the Oghuric Turkic verb *bulģa- meaning "to stir" or "to mix," reflecting their role in coalescing diverse steppe groups into military unions.[5] The clan's preeminence is evidenced by its leadership in tribal hierarchies, where Dulo khans commanded alliances of seven major clans, employing Turkic titles like qan (ruler) and tengrist rituals tied to steppe nomadism.[6] Linguistic and onomastic data firmly anchor the Dulo clan's Turkic roots, with the name itself potentially deriving from the Dulu (or Tele/Dulu) branch of the Western Turkic tribal confederation, which dominated the Altai and Central Asian steppes before expanding westward around 552–603 CE under the Ashina dynasty. This connection aligns with Chinese Tang dynasty annals (e.g., Sui Shu and Tong Dian), which describe Buluoji (Proto-Bulgars) as a splinter group from the Tiele Turks, exhibiting shared runiform script, tamgas (tribal seals depicting arrows or bows), and equestrian warfare tactics characteristic of Turkic khaganates.[5] Although some 20th-century scholarship, influenced by Slavic nationalist paradigms, posited Indo-European or Caucasian origins to minimize foreign elements in Bulgar ethnogenesis, archaeological finds like the Madara Rider relief and comparative onomastics (e.g., parallels with Sabir and Kutrigur names) corroborate the Turkic matrix, as the Oghuric language persisted in Bulgar inscriptions until the 10th century.[7] The Proto-Bulgar social structure under Dulo hegemony mirrored broader Turkic confederative models, featuring a sacral kingship where the khan mediated between earthly clans and sky god Tengri, supported by begs (nobles) from subordinate tribes like the Utigurs and Kutrigurs. Genetic studies of steppe kurgans from the 6th century, revealing East Eurasian haplogroups (e.g., Q and N) alongside R1a, further indicate admixture but primacy of Turkic steppe pastoralist lineages over putative local substrates.[8] This framework enabled Dulo-led expansions, from alliances with the Avar Khaganate circa 560 CE to the consolidation of power north of the Black Sea by the early 600s, setting the stage for state formation amid pressures from Khazar and Byzantine forces.[6]Connections to Huns and the Western Turkic Khaganate
The Dulo clan's purported connections to the Huns stem primarily from the Nominalia of the Bulgarian Khans, a medieval Bulgarian inscription listing the early rulers of the clan. It begins with Avitohol, who reigned for 300 years, followed by his son Irnik, who ruled for 150 years, both belonging to the Dulo lineage.[2] Historians frequently identify Irnik with Ernak (or Hernac), the youngest son of Attila the Hun, as documented in Priscus's accounts of the Hunnic court around 448 AD, suggesting the Dulo elites positioned themselves as heirs to the Hunnic royal tradition amid the fragmentation of Attila's empire after 453 AD.[9] This genealogical claim reflects the multi-ethnic steppe confederations where Bulgar tribes, incorporating Hunnic remnants, maintained leadership continuity in the Pontic-Caspian region during the 5th–6th centuries.[10] Western Latin sources from the period often used "Huns" and "Bulgars" interchangeably, indicating perceived ethnic or political overlap in late Hunnic and early Bulgar entities, though modern scholarship cautions that such equations may arise from Byzantine and Roman annalistic simplifications rather than precise ethnogenesis.[10] Archaeological evidence from kurgans in the Kuban and Don regions attributes elite burials with Hunnic-style cauldrons and weapons to proto-Bulgar groups, supporting cultural persistence from Hunnic times, but lacks direct inscriptional proof tying Dulo specifically to Attila's immediate successors.[11] The Dulo clan's ties to the Western Turkic Khaganate (c. 581–659 AD) are inferred from onomastic and structural parallels with the Duolu, the eastern (left-wing) tribal federation of five tribes settled east of the Chu River in the khaganate's core territories.[12] The similarity between "Dulo" and "Duolu" has led scholars to hypothesize that the Proto-Bulgar Dulo emerged from or allied with these Turkic nomadic groups, whose tamghas (tribal symbols) and runic inscriptions exhibit affinities with later Bulgar artifacts.[13] As vassals or semi-autonomous entities within the khaganate's expansive network, Bulgar tribes under Dulo influence participated in the Turkic migrations and wars against the Sassanids and Byzantines in the 6th century. Kubrat's establishment of Old Great Bulgaria c. 632 AD occurred in the Pontic steppes shortly after the Western Turkic Khaganate's internal divisions and defeats by the Tang Dynasty in 657 AD, allowing Dulo-led groups to assert independence from Khazar and Avar overlords while retaining Turkic administrative titles like "khan" and "boila."[11] This transition highlights the Dulo clan's adaptability within successive steppe hegemonies, from Hunnic collapse to Turkic dominance, though direct archival evidence of Dulo participation in khaganate politics remains elusive, relying instead on Chinese annals and Armenian chronicles describing Bulgar auxiliaries.[8] The clan's Turkic aristocratic origins, as opposed to purely Hunnic, are affirmed by linguistic analyses of Bulgar names and titles, privileging Central Asian steppe etymologies over earlier Indo-European substrates.[11]Key Historical Sources and Research
Primary Sources like Nominalia of the Bulgarian Khans
The Nominalia of the Bulgarian Khans serves as the primary indigenous source documenting the Dulo clan's role in early Bulgar leadership, listing rulers alongside their clan affiliations, approximate reign lengths, and cyclical calendar notations from a 12-year animal cycle. Preserved in an 11th-century Church Slavonic manuscript, the text begins with the legendary Avitohol of the Dulo clan, attributed a 300-year lifespan, followed by his son Irnik with a 15-year reign, marking the clan's foundational mythical and early historical figures. Subsequent Dulo rulers include Kubrat (Kuvert), credited with a 60-year tenure and the unification of tribes into Old Great Bulgaria around 632, as well as Asparuh, Tervel, and Sevar, the latter reigning 15 years until circa 738 before the clan's deposition. [14] [2] While the Nominalia provides the only direct attribution of these figures to the Dulo clan, its compilation centuries after the events introduces potential legendary accretions in the pre-7th-century entries, though the later reigns align with external records. Byzantine chroniclers offer corroborative contemporary accounts of Dulo-period events without clan specifics; Theophanes the Confessor's Chronographia (early 9th century, drawing on 8th-century sources) describes Kubrat as the "lord of the Onogundur Huns," baptized during Emperor Heraclius's reign (circa 619–632), who established a vast steppe confederation extending from the Black Sea to the Caucasus before its dissolution after his death around 665 amid Khazar incursions. Theophanes further details Asparuh, identified as Kubrat's son, leading a Bulgar host across the Danube circa 679–680, defeating Emperor Constantine IV's forces at Ongal, and securing a treaty recognizing Bulgar control south of the river by 681. [15] Patriarch Nikephoros I's Breviarium (circa 806–815) echoes these narratives, portraying Kubrat as ruler of the "great city Phanagoria" and Asparuh's migration as a consequence of Khazar pressure, emphasizing the Bulgars' martial prowess and territorial gains against Byzantine defenses. These Greek sources, written closer to the 7th-century events, prioritize imperial perspectives and omit internal Bulgar genealogy, yet their factual alignment with the Nominalia's ruler sequence—such as Kubrat's alliance with Byzantium and Asparuh's Danube crossing—lends empirical weight to the Dulo succession despite the indigenous text's later origin. No archaeological inscriptions directly name the Dulo clan, but tamga symbols resembling a trident, associated with Dulo heraldry, appear on 7th–8th-century Bulgar artifacts, indirectly supporting the dynastic continuity described. [16]Modern Scholarly Interpretations
Modern scholars generally regard the Dulo clan as the foundational ruling dynasty of the Proto-Bulgars, with its prominence attested in the Nominalia of the Bulgarian Khans, a medieval list compiling rulers, clans, and reign durations in a cyclical calendar system.[17] This document, surviving in 15th–16th-century copies, spans the Dulo era from Avitohol (associated with 165 years of rule) through figures like Irnik and Kurt, totaling over 500 years until the clan's decline around 766 AD.[17] Interpretations emphasize its role in constructing dynastic legitimacy by invoking legendary ancestries, potentially linking to Hunnic nobility to bolster claims of imperial continuity, though its late composition raises questions of historical accuracy versus propagandistic myth-making.[17] Debates center on the clan's ethnic origins, traditionally tied to Turkic steppe nomads due to linguistic evidence in Bulgar titles and tribal confederations like the Onogurs, but increasingly challenged by archaeological and genetic data.[10] A 2020 study in the Papers of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences analyzes burial sites and ancient DNA from the Pontic-Caspian region, concluding that Proto-Bulgarians, including Dulo elites, exhibit a mixed Ciscaucasian profile blending Late Sarmatian (Iranian nomadic) elements with older Caucasian populations akin to Alans, rather than dominant East Asian markers expected from pure Turkic migration models.[18] This suggests a heterogeneous elite adopting Turkic speech and customs through interactions in the Western Turkic Khaganate, with Dulo tamghas (heraldic signs) functioning as ownership markers of steppe nomadic tradition, not exclusively Turkic.[19] Hunnic connections remain a focal point, with scholars like Bálint Kerényi reconstructing continuity from post-Attila Hunnic remnants in the Black Sea steppes to early Bulgar polities, citing the Nominalia's explicit Dulo-Ernac (Attila's son) lineage and sources like Jordanes' Getica for Hunnic regrouping after 455 AD.[10] However, identifications such as Avitohol with Attila are rejected by figures like Vasil Zlatarski, who view them as retrospective fabrications, while Irnik's equation with Ernac garners broader support based on name parallels and chronological fit around 400–450 AD.[17] Minority views, informed by genetics showing predominant Western Eurasian haplogroups in modern Bulgarians, propose Gothic or Indo-European substrates over Asian steppe influxes, though these lack consensus amid evidence of Turkic onomastics and khaganate ties.[20] Overall, causal analyses prioritize elite-driven ethnogenesis, where Dulo rulers synthesized diverse tribal loyalties under a nomadic imperial framework, enabling state formation like Kubrat's Old Great Bulgaria circa 632–665 AD.[10]Prominent Rulers and Dynastic Role
Avitohol, Irnik, and Pre-Kubrat Figures (circa 400–600 AD)
Avitohol, the inaugural ruler named in the Nominalia of the Bulgarian Khans, is attributed a reign of 300 years within the Dulo clan, commencing in the calendrical cycle denoted as dilom tvirem.[2] This document, a medieval Bulgar compilation preserved in Church Slavonic, employs exaggerated chronologies typical of dynastic genealogies aimed at legitimizing authority through mythic antiquity.[21] Historians including Josef Marquart have hypothesized Avitohol's equivalence to Attila the Hun (r. circa 434–453 AD), positing that the Dulo clan's preeminence emerged from Hunnic imperial structures in the Pontic-Caspian steppes, where Attila commanded a multi-ethnic confederation including proto-Turkic and Iranic elements.[21] Such linkages rely on phonetic resemblances (Avitohol ≈ Attila) and the clan's purported continuity into Bulgar polities, though direct evidence remains absent, with the Nominalia's composition likely postdating these events by centuries and reflecting retrospective Hunnic heritage claims.[20] Irnik succeeds Avitohol in the Nominalia, assigned a 150-year rule under the same Dulo affiliation and cycle year, underscoring a narrative of unbroken paternal lineage.[2] Academic consensus, drawing from Priscus of Panium's 5th-century accounts, identifies Irnik with Ernak (or Hernac), Attila's youngest son, who circa 469 AD received territorial concessions near the Sea of Azov from Byzantine Emperor Zeno and led Kutrigur-related Hunnic factions amid the empire's fragmentation post-453.[22] Ernak's activities align with the Nominalia's temporal framework, as post-Attilan Hunnic survivors coalesced into Onogur and Kutrigur groups ancestral to Bulgar identity, evidenced by shared onomastics and steppe political patterns.[20] This identification, advanced by scholars like Klaproth and Zeuss in the 19th century, supports Dulo's role in bridging Hunnic dissolution to proto-Bulgar consolidation, though reliant on fragmentary Byzantine records and prone to interpretive bias favoring Turkic continuity over alternative Iranic or mixed origins.[23] These pre-Kubrat figures encapsulate the Dulo clan's formative era amid 5th–6th-century migrations, where Hunnic remnants under leaders like Ernak navigated Avar incursions and Byzantine diplomacy, fostering tribal alliances in the North Pontic region.[22] Archaeological correlates, such as Sabir culture artifacts (circa 500–600 AD) bearing wolf motifs akin to Dulo heraldry, suggest martial elite continuity, yet textual sparsity limits verification beyond onomastic conjecture.[20] By circa 600 AD, as Kubrat unified disparate clans into Old Great Bulgaria, Avitohol and Irnik symbolized foundational sovereignty, their legacies invoked in later khanal inscriptions to assert imperial precedence over Slavic or Avar rivals.[24]Kubrat and the Establishment of Old Great Bulgaria (circa 632–665 AD)
Kubrat, identified in the Nominalia of the Bulgarian Khans as Kurt of the Dulo clan, founded Old Great Bulgaria circa 632 AD through the unification of disparate Bulgar tribes in the Pontic-Caspian steppe.[25] This confederation primarily encompassed the Onogundurs (Unogonduri), Kutrigurs, and Utigurs—proto-Turkic nomadic groups previously fragmented under Avar and Western Turkic influences—along with allied elements such as Altyn-Ola and other Turkic tribes.[26] The Nominalia attributes to him a reign of 60 years, though this figure likely incorporates legendary extensions, as Byzantine chronicles align his active rule with events from the 630s onward.[25] The state's territory extended from the Kuban River eastward to the Donets and Dnieper rivers, encompassing the Taman Peninsula, southern Ukraine, and coasts of the Black Sea and Sea of Azov, with Phanagoria serving as the primary center.[25] Byzantine historian Theophanes the Confessor describes Kubrat as "king of the Onogundur Huns," highlighting his leadership over this Onogundur core while noting alliances against common foes like the Avars. Patriarch Nikephoros I similarly refers to him as "lord of the Onugundur," underscoring his consolidation of authority independent of prior overlords following the Western Turkic Khaganate's collapse around 630 AD.[26] This unification marked the first structured Bulgar polity, fostering military strength through tribal levy systems and steppe cavalry tactics. Kubrat maintained diplomatic ties with the Byzantine Empire, receiving the title of patrician from Emperor Heraclius circa 635 AD in recognition of mutual interests against Persian and Avar threats.[25] Archaeological evidence, including the Pereshchepina treasure discovered in 1912—comprising gold vessels, weapons, and inscriptions—supports Kubrat's burial there and attests to the state's wealth from trade routes and tribute, though attribution relies on contextual grave goods rather than direct epigraphy.[26] His rule endured until circa 665 AD, after which Khazar incursions fragmented the realm among his five sons: Batbayan (who submitted to the Khazars), Kotrag (migrating Volga-ward), Kuber (to Pannonia), Altsek (to Thrace), and Asparuh (to the Danube).[25] Byzantine sources, while primary, reflect imperial perspectives that emphasize Kubrat's subordination to Heraclius, potentially understating internal Bulgar dynamics derived from first-principles of steppe confederation politics.