There's even a concept called 'Hunno-Bulgarian' no doubt that Bulgars were direct successors of Attila's former realm as all Oghur tribes were ; Akatziri, Onogur, Utigur, Kutrigur, Saragur, Bulgar, Sabir.
@@nenenindonu I am not sure about avars but weren't sabirs also one of the Oghuric entities that have managed to establish european hunnic empire and avars can be white huns who migrated to eastern / central europe.
Bulgars who migrated to the Volga became Muslims and remained Turks and Bulgars who migrated to the Danube/modern Bulgaria became Christians losing their Turkic identity for Slavic in the late 800's
There are two direct references to Tangra as a Bulgar deity in the sources. One is found in an Ottoman manuscript where it is stated that the name of god in Bulgarian was “Tängri” (Bułghar dilindžä Tängri der).201 The other is in a badly-damaged inscription (carved on a marble column) which commemorates a sacrifice made by Omurtag“to the god Tangra” (κὲ ἐπύησ]εν θυσ[ήαν ἠς τὸν θεὸ]ν Ταγγραν).202 The inscription was found at the rocky cliff of Madara, a site that is commonly associated with the Tangra cult. It is worth remarking that according to ancient Inner Asian religious traditions, the favour of heaven had to manifest itself in the possession of “sacred mountains”. There the qaghan was thought to be closer to Tängri; he could therefore conduct “privileged conversations with him” and receive or transmit his orders.203 It is not unlikely that the site of Madara played a similar role in Bulgaria.204 To be sure, below the relief of the horseman archaeolo gists unearthed the foundations of a complex comprising of what seems to have been a pagan shrine (built on top of a three-aisled church dated to the sixth and seventh centuries), as well as a building with three divisions, which has been interpreted as a dwelling Amongst other things, it has been sug gested that the latter was a kind of private quarter for the ruler from which he seems to have directed the cult of Tangra, the ceremonial sacrifices and. quite possibly, the collective prayers. While Tangra is very likely to have been worshiped by certain Bulgar groups/clans before their migration to the Balkans, his promotion to the supreme god of the elite and. in a sense, the official religion of the Proto bulgarian state coincides in time with the gradual centralization of political power, a process that is rightly connected with Krum's and Omurtag's reigns in the early ninth century. Indeed, the ideology associated with the wor ship of Tangra was bound to enhance monarchical rulership. Just as Tangra was the supreme celestial being, the khan-his reflection-was regarded as rightfully the sole sovereign on earth or, at any rate. in the Bulgar state (an idea which finds clear expression in Omurtag's building inscription from Catalar). The ideology of a strong, divinely-sanctioned leadership clearly bears much of the credit for the survival of the khanate during this period. The certainties which this system of beliefs and values presented to the warrior aristocracy, if not to the entire population, the aura of sanctity surrounding the ruler, the awareness of heavenly support granted to military undertakings (an awareness reinforced through the regular performance of religious ritu als and ceremonials while on campaign)." all immeasurably strengthened the unity of the state and the political will of its subjects to survive. Another factor operative in the transition to Tangrist henotheism at this time may have been the fear of Byzantine imperialism. Foreign influences, as scholars have long pointed out, often paved the way for the adoption of a more sophisticated faith among nomads. However, this was rarely the reli gion of their imperial neighbours, for such a course invariably implied sub mission to the authority of the rulers of these states." The Bulgars, realizing that conversion to Islam or Judaism was not a viable option, and mindful of the influence the Byzantine Church could exercise on the khan's Christian subjects, had little choice but to promote Tangra as their supreme deity." It is important to emphasize that the late eighth/early ninth century marked the period of transition to henotheism only for the upper strata of the Bulgar society. Vigorous polytheism and totemism (i.e. the existence of an intimate, "mystical" relationship between a group or an individual and a natural object), both of which were incapable of furnishing a principle of spiritual (and political) unity, proved to be persistent and strong among the masses." This is also true of shamanism, a complex belief system espe cially common in Central and Inner Asian societies, but also discernible in the khanate in the pre-conversion period. Shamanism has been defined by anthropologists as a technique of ecstasy. By mastering this technique and reaching a state of trance the shaman was able to mediate between the world of humans and that of spirits. He thus functioned as a magician, prophet and healer who, among other things, had to "descend to the underworld" to find and bring back a sick person's soul. Given that most aspects of daily life in Eurasia were directly linked with the spiritual world-for instance. the life-supporting economic activities, from hunting to husbandry to agri culture, were thought to be protected by spirits-the role of the shaman was bound to be extremely important." Before we proceed any further, a piece of essential explanation: shaman ism has been a popular subject of accounts and research since the early eighteenth century. Although it is correctly believed that the shaman's technique of ecstasy and mode of operation are basically uniform through out Central and Inner Asia, it is impossible to construct a uniform model of shamanism as an institution. Further (and partly as a result of the above). it would be perilous to equate the modern "ethnographic shaman" with the religious specialists noted among historical Eurasian peoples. In this light. any attempt to investigate the development of this phenomenon in medieval steppe-nomad societies, including Bulgaria, is bound to be inconclusive. We have only fleeting glimpses of Bulgar shamanism in our sources. Sophoulis, P., 2011. Byzantium and Bulgaria, 775-831. Leiden: Brill, pp.84, 85, 86, 87.
Hanim I have been to Madara I have read the inscriptions There is no tengri, tangra , or tarzan to be read You have not been to Madara That's why you know nothing 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Bulgarians are not Turks or Slavs, the Slavs accept the Bulgarian alphabet and culture, there were no Turks before the 18th century. Where were the Turks when Bulgaria bordered the Roman Empire. There were artifacts somewhere about Turkish kings and the Turkish state before the Ottoman Empire, which is a mixture of many tribes from Anatolia, the Huns are from Bulgarian tribes.
Later Byzantine scholars implied that the Bulgars had previously been known as the Onogurs (Onoğur). Agathon wrote about the "nation of Onogur Bulğars"],Nikephoros I stated that Kubrat was lord of the Onogundurs, Theophanes referred to them as Onogundur Bulgars and Constantine VII remarked that the Bulgars formerly called themselves Onogundurs. Variations of the name include Onoguri, Onoghuri, Onghur, Ongur, Onghuri, Onguri, Onogundur, Unogundur, and Unokundur. There are several theories about the origin of the name Onogur. In some Turkic languages on means "10" and ğur "arrow"; and "ten arrows" might imply a federation of ten tribes, i.e. the Western Turkic Khaganate. Within the Turkic languages, "z" sounds in the easternmost languages tend to have become "r" in the westernmost Turkic languages; therefore, the ethnonym Oghuz may be the source of Oghur; that is, on Oğur would mean "ten clans of Oghuz". Old Great Bulgaria (Magna Bulgaria[29]), also known as Onoghundur-Bulgars state, or Patria Onoguria in the Ravenna Cosmography.[30][31][20] Constantine VII (mid-10th century) remarked that the Bulgars formerly called themselves Onogundurs.[32] We have two kinds of records of this Volga - Bulgarian language : Mahmūd alKāšyari's sporadic descriptions of the eleventh century , and the tomb inscriptions of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries . Some examples from the latter are shown on Table 4 ( p . 392 ) , where three kinds of reconstruction for the Volga - Bulgarian - by J. Benzing , 19 N. Poppe , 20 and myself21 - are given . I hypothesize that the Volga - Bulgars who migrated in the seventh century from the south to the Volga - Kama district were a nation related to , but different from , the Chuvash ( who were presumably aboriginal there in the seventh century ) , and that the languages of the two nations were also similar , but distinct . Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute, 1980 Harvard Ukrainian Studies, Volume 3-4 pp. 390
Sample From Bulgar Language: Etil suwı aka turur Kaya tübi kaka turur Balık telim baka turur Kölün takı küşerür In Turkish: İtil suyu akar durur Kaya dibini oyar durur Bütün balıklar baka durur Gölü bile taşırırlar In English: Volga water is flowing He carves the bottom of the rock All the fish keep looking They carry the lake
@@niksmaithy6929 Yep these do not apply to todays bulgarians. valid for Volga Bulgars(Chuvashs) and Danube Bulgars. These people are from the Oghur of the Turks and are the founders of almost all Bulgar states you can see until the 13th century
The Bulgars were a Turkic tribal confederation that gave rise to the Balkan Bulgar and Volga Bulgar states. The ethnonym derives from the Turkish bulgha-, "to stir, mix, disturb, confuse." The confederation appears to have taken shape among Oghur tribes in the Kazakh steppes following the migrations that were touched off by movements of the Hsiung-nu. Later Byzantine sources (Agathon, Nicephorus Patriarchus, Theophanes) closely associate or identify the Bulgars with the Onoghurs, who were enemies of Sassanid Iran in the late 4th century. When or how this connection developed is unclear. If we discount several (most probably) anachronistic notices on the Bulgars in Moses Kliorenats'i (Moses of Chorene), the earliest references to them are perhaps to be found in an anonymous Latin chronograph of 354: "Vulgares." They are absent from Priscus's account of the migration, ca. 463, of the Oghuric Turks into the Pontic steppes, but by 480 they are noted under their own name as allies of Constantinople against the Ostrogoths. Amity with Byzantium was short-lived. By 489 the Bulgars had initiated a series of raids on Byzantine Balkan possessions. Their habitat, at this stage, appears to have been in the eastern Pontic steppes stretch-ing into the Azov region and North Caucasus. It is here that Jordanes and Pseudo-Zacharius Ithetor place them in the mid-6th century. Shortly afterward, they were overrun and subjugated by the Avars and then the Turks. When Turk rule weakened, sometime after 600, the Avars appear to have reestablished some control over the region. It was against Avar rule that the Bulgars-under their leader Qubrat, whom Heraclius had been cultivating for some rime (he and his uncle were baptized in Constantinople to 619)-revolted ca. 631-632 and founded the Onoghundur-Bulgar state. Some time after Qubrat's death (660s), this Pontic - Maeotun Bulgaria, whose Balkan descendents would also claim Attilid origins, came into conflict with the Khazar khaganate, successor to the Turk empire in western Eurasia. The Khazars emerged victorious from the contest, and parts of the Bulgar union broke up and migrated. One grouping under Asperukh in 679 crossed the Danube into Moesia and, having subjugated a local Slavic confederatton, there laid the foundation for the Balkan Bulgarian state. Yet other groups joined the Avar state in Pannonia (where some would prove to be rebellious subjects or took up restience in Italy around the five Rasennate cities, to live as Byzantine subjects.The other Bulgars either remained in the Pontic steppe zone the (the “Black Bulgars” of Byzantine and Rus’ sources) or later migrated (perhaps as early as the mid-7th century or as late as the mid-8th to early 9th century) to the middle Volga region, giving rise there to the Volga Bulgarian state, which remained, however a vassal of the Khazars. Balkan Bulgaria soon became an important element in Byzantine politics, on occasion supporting contestants to the throne and also helping to defeat the Arab attack on Constantinople of 717-18.The iconoclastic Emperor Constantine (741-775) began a series of wars against them that remained a constant theme of Byzantine-Bulgarian relations until the destruction of the first Bulgarian empire by Basil II (976-1025).In 864 the Bulgarian king Boris, outmaneuvered by Constantinople, converted to Christianity. Thereafter, the Turkic Bulgars underwent Slavicization, and Balkan Bulgaria became one of the centers of medieval Slavic. The Volga Bulgars, however, converted to Islam in the early 10th century and created a highly sophisticated, urbane, mercantile Muslim society that, after stout resistance, was conquered by the Mongols in the early 13th century.
bulgars and bulgarians are not the same thing The Bulgarians are not the descendants of the Volga, but the descendants of the Slavs who ruled them. At that time, Slavs settled in this geography. Volgas came in the 7th century. 1. The Bulgarian Empire was founded by the Slavs and ruled by the Turks, and the Slavs assimilated the people. Bulgarians took their name from proto Bulgarians, but they took their ethnic origins from Thracians and Slavs. If you want to see Tatars today, go to Russia, maybe there are still unassimilated brothers there.
@wratch all this people are turkolised skythians their original language was Iranic even the xiongu empire kan motun has Indo-European features in Chinese sources he has red hair like skythians and tocharians no mongoloids may with a bit Turkic influence but not turkic nation we come from bactria persia no altai mountains!!!
@wratch haha bulgars are mentioned from 2.500 b.c in bactria learn history even iranian historians say we are skythians no turks indian historians mentioned us too at this period!!!
@wratch volga bulgars, chuvash,bashkir are Bulgarian tribes the sons of khan kubrat learn history cumans has no history bulgars are the greatest nation in the steppes!
Don't be so sure, In 864 When Michael I converted His state to Christianity, he killed all Bulgar elite families, 52 Bulgar clans, only his son Vladimir I try to save the turkic Heritage, After him, all, Simeon the great, Petar I, Boris II, Roman. Didn't care ab turkic atuff, they speak Slavic, And work for Slavic cause
@@papazataklaattiranimam John Zonaras: ''Paeonians - Latins or Thracian people of Macedonia. These are so-called Paeonians. Paeonians were Bulgarians. " - Johannes Tzetza: ''Pyros and Akamas (native) of the Thracian Hellespont, Maronietza Evfimos son of Treziius, Pirehmie, who was of the Paeonians they were all from the Bulgarians, from those of the river Axios, also called Vardar'' (see photo with Greek text). XI century - ''Bulgarians who are named Thracians according to the previous (old) monuments'' - „Hinc iter aggressi per fines Vulgariorum, quos vocitant Thracas, ut habent monumenta priorum“ - Fulcher of Chartres, a French priest, (a description of the first crusade in 1096) III-IV century - Mavro Orbin cites evidence of Marcus Aurelius Kasiodor that Bulgarians fought with the Romans about 390 AD. - Cassiodorus writes that the Bulgarians are old Moesian or Illyrian people - Ennodius Ticinensis (473-524, Bishop, court historian of the Gothic King Theodoric) indicate that Bulgarians are old Moesian and Illyrian people. - 4th century map (see photo) by St. Jerome (331-420) - Mesia hec & Vulgaria (Misia here and Bulgaria). It is composed by even older maps - Bishop Eusebius of Caesarea (270 to 33, called the "father of church history." The map is preserved in a copy of the 12th century. letopisec.blog.bg/photos/1232...4_vek22222.jpg I-II century -Flavius Josephus writes ''Dacians called Bulgarians'' In addition: - Ravennatis Anоnymi Cosmographia: „Inter vero Tratiam vel Macedoniam et Mysiam inferiorem modo Bulgari habitant, qui ex super scripta maiore Scythia egressi sunt.”
Classification The dynamic history of the Turkic-speaking peoples makes it difficult to set up a classification of modem Turkic languages that combines geographic and genetic criteria. The following rough scheme represents an attempt to combine the current area distribution with genetic and typological features. It primarily distinguishes six branches, some of heterogeneous origin: 1 A southwestem (SW) branch, Oghuz Turkic 2 A northwestem (NW) branch, Kipchak Turkic; 3 A southeastem (SE) branch, Uyghur Turkic; 4 A northeastem (NE) branch, Siberian Turkic; 5 Chuvash, representing Oghur or Bulghar Turkic; 6 Khalaj, representing Arghu Turkic. Prevailing opinion is that the language of the text is a Turkic language Deliyannis, Deborah (2019). Fifty Early Medieval Things. Cornell University Press. p. 171. Helimski 2000, p. 45. This interpretation was sharply criticized by Vilhelm Thomsen and Gyula Németh, who showed that the language of the inscription cannot be Greek, but an old Turkic language. Thomsen 1918, pp. 17-18. Göbl & Róna-Tas 1995, pp. 17-18. Today almost all scholars share the view that the text was written in a Turkic language Alemany 2009, p. 5. Róna-Tas 1999, pp. 131-132. Göbl & Róna-Tas 1995, pp. 18-19. It has been often compared with the Turkic Bulgar language of the First Bulgarian Empire,[34][7][29] attested on several 8th-9th century inscriptions found in north-eastern Bulgaria and written in Greek letters.[47] It is generally agreed that the first word is the Turkic title buyla or boyla (also spelled boila[50]) which is attested on several Old Turkic and Danube Bulgar inscriptions[51][52] and also mentioned by some 9th and 10th centuries Byzantine authors.[51][53] Butaul is usually read as a personal name.[2][54][55] It may be interpreted as "son of Buta" with the final -ul being a development of the Turkic oğul = "son".[54][55] This etymology was challenged based on the observation that according to the predominant model of construction of Turkic patronymics, the possessive forms oğlu or oğli are expected.[54][56] Based on the names attested on Old Turkic inscriptions, Erdal posited the reading But Aul.[54] The title Boila is predecessor or old form of the title Bolyar (the Bulgarian word for Boyar). Boila was a title worn by some of the Bulgar aristocrats (mostly of regional governors and noble warriors) in the First Bulgarian Empire (681-1018). The plural form of boila ("noble"), bolyare is attested in Bulgar inscriptions[2][3] Boila (Old Bulgarian: бꙑлꙗ; Bulgarian: боила; Greek: βοιλα; Old Turkic: 𐰉𐰆𐰖𐰞𐰀, romanized: Boyla) was a title worn by some of the Bulgar and Göktürk aristocrats (mostly of regional governors and noble warriors) in the First Bulgarian Empire (681-1018) and Second Turkic Khaganate (682-744).[1] For the linguists, the title "Boila" is the predecessor or an old form of the title "Bolyar". The Boil(a)s were two types: internal ("great") and external ("small"). The internal Boil(a)s were governors of the Comitates (administrative regions). Most of the popular linguists believe that "Boila" has old-Turkic origin and the meaning of the word can be translated as "noble". The Ichirgu-boila or Chargobilya (Greek: ητζιργου βοιλα; Old Bulgarian: чрьгѹбꙑлꙗ,[1] Bulgarian: Ичиргу боила) was a high-ranking official in the First Bulgarian Empire. He was the commander of the garrison of the capital and was the third most important person in the state after the ruler and the Kavkhan. In peace-time the ichirgu-boila had diplomatic functions. According to some data the ichirgu-boila personally commanded a squad of 400 heavy cavalrymen. According to Veselin Besheliev the word "ichirgu" was of Turkic-Altay origin and meant "internal".[2] One funeral inscription found during excavation works in Preslav talks about the ichirgu-boila Mostich who served under the Emperors Simeon I the Great (893-927) and Peter I (927-969). An unknown ichirgu-boila is mentioned in the Philippi Inscription dating from the reign of Khan Presian I.
Nikov is the first Bulgarian historian to pay special attention to, and attri bute great significance to, the Turkic components in the Bulgarian ethnogen esis (i.e., after the Bulgars) and among the ruling aristocracy. He elaborated on the issue of the "Turkic element's" influence upon Bulgarian history in a 1928 unpublished manuscript (delivered as a public lecture). Nikov began with the following policy-setting statement: There is no period in our history on which the Turkic element did not exert its strongest influence and did not leave the deepest traces in the development of our people. [...] None of the Balkan peoples has experi enced the Turkic influence so strongly as our people, The Turkic pressure began from Central Asia and had two directions to the northwest through southern Russia, and to the southwest through Persia and Asia Minor. The Bulgarian state was founded due to one of the Turkic peoples, the Bulgars, who themselves joined a number of Turkic tribal alliances (of Huns, Kutrigurs, Utigurs, Avars, and Khazars). During Byzantine rule, the Turkic Pechenegs and Uz came from the north; many of them crossed the Danube and were assimilated by the Bulgarian people. Then came the Cumans, without whose decisive help the uprising of Asenevtsi would hardly have succeeded. Thus, just as the First Bulgarian Kingdom was founded with the help of the Turkic Bulgars, the Second Kingdom was founded with "the decisive collabora tion of the Turkic Cumans."129 Not only did Cumans settle south of the Danube and become assimilated and absorbed by the Slavic-Bulgarian people, but they were also of great significance politically in the Second Kingdom, whose dynas ties all had Cuman blood in them. There were also many Bulgarian boyars of Cuman origin, including Balic in Dobrudzha. It could even be said that the Cumans acquired a dominant position in the political life of the state. 130 There followed the influence of the Mongol Tartars, who even supplied one Bulgarian king, Chaka. But of greatest importance were the Ottoman and Seljuk Turks, who conquered the Balkans from Asia Minor. Concerning the Cumans, Nikov considers the "transfusion of blood" from Turkic "elements" an asset, a means of rejuvenating and strengthening the "race" and enhancing the vitality of the Bulgarian people (in contrast with the conquering Turks).
Hanim You still don’t have any PRIMARY SOURCES to prove any Turkic theory This is why present day Bulgarian scholars reject the Turkic theory Soon other scholars will reject the Turkic theory as well And it will only be taught in Turkish universities 😂😂😂😂
Lying Turkish troll. National Library of Medicine (US Government) - "...the Y-chromosome gene pool in modern Bulgarians is primarily represented by Western Eurasian haplogroups with ∼ 40% belonging to haplogroups E-V13 and I-M423, and 20% to R-M17. Haplogroups common in the Middle East (J and G) and in South Western Asia (R-L23*) occur at frequencies of 19% and 5%, respectively. Haplogroups C, N and Q, distinctive for Altaic and Central Asian Turkic-speaking populations, occur at the negligible frequency of only 1.5%...".
Nonsense Bulgarians we’re never Turkic 1.Give PRIMARY SOURCES that show Tengrinism in Bulgaria 2 Give PRIMARY SOURCES that show the name Bulgarian comes from Bulgamak
Turkic and Jewish genealogical myths recorded by King Joseph and Sefer Yosippon identified Khazar as the "brother" of other Turkic tribes like the Bulgars and Sabirs (see below). Syriac legends said that the ancestor of the Khazars was named "Khazarig," the brother of "Bulgarios." Most scholars believe that these legends have a historical basis and that the Khazars were indeed closely related to Turkic tribes such as the Bulgars and Bashkirs.
If i have Bulgar blood then Bulgaria is my country i am ancestor of mercenaries of Byzantine Empire my ancestors resemble the Altay people who were Huns i sympathize with the Bulgarians my uncle is Bulgarian Slavic Mongoloid Siberian and West Eurasian
Nikephoros I stated that Kubrat was lord of the Onogundurs, Theophanes referred to them as Onogundur Bulgars and Constantine VIIremarked that the Bulgars formerly called themselves Onogundurs. Variations of the name include Onoguri, Onoghuri, Onghur, Ongur, Onghuri, Onguri, Onogundur, Unogundur, and Unokundur.
@@petertodorov9540 Anatolian Turks are a mixture of indigenous Anatolians and medieval Turkic societies Is the person you refer to as a Georgian Recep Tayyip Erdoğan? I don't support him
@@atkatk9355 we know that we are not turkic. Bulgars and bulgarians is the same. The term slavs was invented in the 19th century. We are proud of our dna but it is not turkic nor slavic
@AAliBli The whole world knows about the imperialist Turkish political ideology (so-called Neo-Ottomanism) and its ambitions to assimilate Greece, Cyprus, Armenia and Bulgaria. "Novel analyses of proto-Bulgarians epigraphic monuments, especially, of the major historical inscription - “the List of the Bulgarian Monarchs” - have revealed that the proto-Bulgarian language did not belong to the Turkic linguistic family. Therefore, leading turkologists [14]-[16] do not consider proto-Bulgarians a Turkic people, as also attested by the adoption of distinctive calendar systems by the two groups" "Y-Chromosome Diversity in Modern Bulgarians: New Clues about Their Ancestry", Sena Karachanak, Viola Grugni, Simona Fornarino, Desislava Nesheva, Nadia Al-Zahery, Vincenza Battaglia, Valeria Carossa, Yordan Yordanov, Antonio Torroni, Angel S. Galabov, Draga Toncheva and Ornella Semino, 2013.
@AAliBli I just gave you real academia sources. You, on the other hand, gave me nothing but Turkish propaganda that was debunked by the modern DNA analysis. You are a Turk spreading misinformation under a video about Bulgaria and you have the audacity to tell me that the Turks don't have any Neo-Ottoman policy!?! Tell me how many Turkic people named Asparuh, Kubrat, Krum, Omurtag, Boris, Samuil, Tervel, Kardam you know? These names are Bulgarian, not Turkic. The Bulgar tribe was Proto-Ukrainian from Zaporozhie. Asparuh and his father Kubrat were buried in their homeland Ukraine. Pictures of their graves are all over the internet.
@@bartoszszczepaniak169 Brother, Ossetian is the closest language to ancient Bulgarian Please read Dr. Zhivko Voynikov's "Who are the Ancient Bulgarians or ProtoBulgarians"
Bro, cool video! Can you make video about map history of Odrysian kingdom? It's a real Balkan country founded by one of the greatest people on the world- Thracians! Teres the Great was a warrior that creat a country of Odrysians and become odrysian king that conquer many territories! Can you make video about map history of Odrysian kingdom?
Despite more than five hundred years of Turkish rule, the majority of present-day Bulgarians demonise and reject “non-Bulgarian” - that is, Turkish, Muslim, or Roma - influences in their history and culture. While the Bulgarian government’s harshest policies of ethnic cleansing concluded with the fall of communism, this exclusivist narrative of Bulgarian national history nevertheless continues to discriminate against such communities. Bulgaria, since both its ancient and modern beginnings, has been invariably a multiethnic, mainly Slavic and Turkic, polity. School textbooks in Bulgaria lavish much attention on the ancient Bulgars, who in the Middle Ages founded several Bulgarias from the Volga to Italy, including the surviving one in the Balkans. However, the teaching materials employed in Bulgarian schools prefer to dub these Turkic-speaking Bulgars as “Bulgarians” (or sometimes “Proto-Bulgarians”), so that in Bulgarian vocabulary no distinction is maintained between Turkic Bulgars and Slavophone Bulgarians. In the Bulgarian language the same term “Bulgarians” (Българи Bılgari) is used for referring to these two different ethnic groups, thus suggesting - falsely - full historic and demographic continuity between both. Unsurprisingly after this kind of mis-education, most Bulgarians now see the ancient Bulgars as their “Slavic-speaking ancestors”.
Lying Turkish troll. National Library of Medicine (US Government) - "...the Y-chromosome gene pool in modern Bulgarians is primarily represented by Western Eurasian haplogroups with ∼ 40% belonging to haplogroups E-V13 and I-M423, and 20% to R-M17. Haplogroups common in the Middle East (J and G) and in South Western Asia (R-L23*) occur at frequencies of 19% and 5%, respectively. Haplogroups C, N and Q, distinctive for Altaic and Central Asian Turkic-speaking populations, occur at the negligible frequency of only 1.5%...".
The Bulgars are known as Pra-Bulgari (Proto-Bulgarians) in Bulgaria, yes. Modern Danube Bulgarians are a mix of Slavs, Thracians, Bulgars and other Turks, as well as Finno-Ugrics and Iranians, some Caucasian and German DNA too.
The great Persian Scientist Abu Zayd al-Balkhi 850-934 AD Says that the Bulgarians worshipped the god EDFU and his idol FA In the same text he says the Turks worship Bir Tengri Al-Balkhi clearly makes a distiction between the Bulgarians and the Turks M. Tahir , Le livre de la creation de el-Balhi , Paris , 1899 , v.IV ,56
Dragon Historian You are a joke Bulgarians are not first recorded in 480AD They are in Armenian Sources from the 1st century AD Movses Khorenatsi History of Armenians from 482 AD "In his days (Arshak) there had been great turmoil in the chain of the great mountain of Kawkas, in the country of the Bulghars and many of them.........came to our country and lived for a long time under the Kol , a fertile land abundant in bread" (Movses Khorenatsi Book II History of the Armenians) Also the Chronography of 354AD speaks of Ziezi ,of whom the Bulgarians Go and educate yourself before you write nonsense
I have to say that the Phanagoria despite being suggested to be the capital of Old Bulgaria by some roman chronicles, most likely was not. Since archeological evidence doesn't show bulgarian settlement there. It was instead a small trading city populated by jews. Most likely the capital of Old Bulgaria was Malaya Pereshchepina since in that location was found the grave of Kubrat.
@@petertodorov1792 Nikov is the first Bulgarian historian to pay special attention to, and attri bute great significance to, the Turkic components in the Bulgarian ethnogen esis (i.e., after the Bulgars) and among the ruling aristocracy. He elaborated on the issue of the "Turkic element's" influence upon Bulgarian history in a 1928 unpublished manuscript (delivered as a public lecture). Nikov began with the following policy-setting statement: There is no period in our history on which the Turkic element did not exert its strongest influence and did not leave the deepest traces in the development of our people. [...] None of the Balkan peoples has experi enced the Turkic influence so strongly as our people, The Turkic pressure began from Central Asia and had two directions to the northwest through southern Russia, and to the southwest through Persia and Asia Minor. The Bulgarian state was founded due to one of the Turkic peoples, the Bulgars, who themselves joined a number of Turkic tribal alliances (of Huns, Kutrigurs, Utigurs, Avars, and Khazars). During Byzantine rule, the Turkic Pechenegs and Uz came from the north; many of them crossed the Danube and were assimilated by the Bulgarian people. Then came the Cumans, without whose decisive help the uprising of Asenevtsi would hardly have succeeded. Thus, just as the First Bulgarian Kingdom was founded with the help of the Turkic Bulgars, the Second Kingdom was founded with "the decisive collabora tion of the Turkic Cumans."129 Not only did Cumans settle south of the Danube and become assimilated and absorbed by the Slavic-Bulgarian people, but they were also of great significance politically in the Second Kingdom, whose dynas ties all had Cuman blood in them. There were also many Bulgarian boyars of Cuman origin, including Balic in Dobrudzha. It could even be said that the Cumans acquired a dominant position in the political life of the state. 130 There followed the influence of the Mongol Tartars, who even supplied one Bulgarian king, Chaka. But of greatest importance were the Ottoman and Seljuk Turks, who conquered the Balkans from Asia Minor. Concerning the Cumans, Nikov considers the "transfusion of blood" from Turkic "elements" an asset, a means of rejuvenating and strengthening the "race" and enhancing the vitality of the Bulgarian people (in contrast with the conquering Turks).
@@papazataklaattiranimam Hanim Bulgarians are Iranic ASPARUKH IS AN IRANIAN NAME Asparukh Gender Male Origin Word/name Iranian Meaning Possessor of Shining Horses (aspa + rauk) Horse-souled (aspa + rah) Asparukh is a Middle Iranian male name,[1] attested in ancient Georgia and early medieval Bulgaria. It is a compound with the two elements: "aspa" (horse) and "rauk" (shine), meaning "he who has shining horses".[2] Some other researchers claim that the name is derived from "aspa" (horse)
@@papazataklaattiranimam People of Ohrid used to worship the Bulgarian/East Iranian Rider God Siavush Siavush was worshiped in the Surva festival on the winter Solstice But Siavush's worship was Slavisized to Siva Bog and Christianized to St George and celebrated on St Basils day All this is recorded by Bulgarian writer Georgi Rakovsi
Khazars were an Oghur Turkic tribe they adopted Judaism as state religion thereby becoming the only Judaist empire in history. Jewish is an ethno-religious identity so the Khazars were Judaist Turks not Jewish Turks
@@화이팅-t2q They had a good number of Jewish refugees who influenced them, but the main reason was political since they used Judaism to avoid pressure from other Abrahamic religion based neighboring empires like the Christian Romans and Muslim Abbasids
@@nenenindonu alot of Hollywood 's Russian Jews today look very Asiatic. Case in point: Joseph Gordon Levy and Roseanne. Another one I can think of is Rachel from S Club 7 (whom I used to think was Filipino!)
@@화이팅-t2q the Khazarian Turkic Jews were caught in a conflict between Christians and Muslims about to battle in a war in the Caucaus mountains. In order to avoid a war, these Khazarian Turkic peoples converted to Judaism. Many of today's Israelis are of Khazarian origin rather than Ashkenazi Jews (real semites). This is what I gather
ASPARUKH IS AN IRANIAN NAME Asparukh Gender Male Origin Word/name Iranian Meaning Possessor of Shining Horses (aspa + rauk) Asparukh is a Middle Iranian male name,[1] attested in ancient Georgia and early medieval Bulgaria. It is a compound with the two elements: "aspa" (horse) and "rauk" (shine), meaning "he who has shining horses".[2] Some other researchers claim that the name is derived from "aspa" (horse) The two historically attested persons bearing this name are: Asparukh of Iberia, a viceroy of Armazi in Iberia (Georgia), contemporary of the Roman emperor Hadrian (117-138 AD).
So? İranic and Chinese is civilization language for Asian people. Chek the Sultanate of Rum. Their name are Iranic but They are not etnicilhly Iranian. (Kayhusrav I,Kaykubad I,). Look like this example. Asparukh and him tribe's from Turkic Onogurs
The great Persian scientist Abu Zayd al-Balkhi 850-934 AD Says that Bulgarians worshipped the god EDFU and his idol FA In the same text he says the Turks worshipped BIr Tengri He clearly distinguishes between Bulgarians and Turks M . Tahir, Le livre de la creation de el-Balhi, Paris , 1899 ,v. IV, 56 Look panturks no tengri in Bulgaria
Bulgarians trace their ancestry and derive their name from the Bulgars, a Turkic people that ruled over the South Slavic populations in the region south of the Dan- ube River during the Middle Ages. A unique Bulgarian identity emerged from the cultural fusion of the Bulgars with the ancient Thracian tribes and the Slavic peoples of the area. For centuries, the Bulgarians lived under Turkish domination until the tide turned during World War II, and Bulgaria became an ally of the Soviet Union and part of its "Eastern bloc." Since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, Bulgaria has embraced democ- racy and acceded to the European Union in 2007.
the answer is NO they are not, Modern Bulgarians doesn't share any genetic lines with Bulgars, Bulgars were semi nomadic Turkic people, Bulgarians are Slavic nation formed after union of Slavic tribes in the land of Modern Bulgaria, and by the fact that Bulgars ruled them, they accepted they name, but in his language, from ethnonym Bulgars they created Bulgarians
@@mustafapetrovoglu1673 Beter logic than panturk fantasy We are Asparuhks Bulgarians If not then answer my Questions How can a tiny group of Asparukhs Bulgarians 1. Defeat the entire Byzantine Army 2. How can they defeat the Avars 3.How could they hold off the expanding Khazars 4. How could they defeat the Ummayads 5. How could they dominate the entire Balkan peninsula for over 300 years
@@petertodorov1792 easy answer, only severians give 30,000k warriors, there's more, SEVEN slavic tribes, soo if one tribe can give 30k warriors, 8 tribes can give many times more than 30k
First Attila is not from Dulo clan. He is the Huns clan. Bulgarians clan Dulo leader is Avitohol and after him is Irnik. This is from bulgarians noun. Stop slandering. This is not serious
The theory that the Bulgarians were nomads and Turks is, to put it mildly, idiotic! There are no nomads that are. If there was a country wherever they went, if they had cities and fortresses, there is no Khan title among the Bulgarians КАНАС
@@BanJanuka Probably I have seen the conparison myself a few years ago as I wanted to feel how might a macedonian feel but the problem is with a profile like IMAM's. He makes everytnig about Turkiye and it's people like the represent the rest which they cant really suggest as it's not right at least for Bulgaria. The family gorup is turkic and thye are one big part of it as the bulgars were, bulgars came 800 years before what turks would call their own state. Those 800 years are strict heresy to suggest they are to be a pride for Turkiye and turks as this is his tone. With Macedonians, they just deny the whole thing, this is no dialogue and there is more data/ documents and artifacts as it was quite recent. We don't stop them to be something new as this is normal to happen in different ages of history but its rude/stupid and unfair to deny what we were together and downgrade what we did for them and make us evil.
Names like Asparukh, Krum, Presian are found a lot in Armenia, even the Armenians have a Tsar with this name, there is no document or inscription anywhere that says that the Bulgarians believed in Tangra, this is also a fiction
In Eurasia, two races meet, the white man and the Chinese, the rest are a mixture of these.Kina built a museum in honor of the Hungarians,they know that they are Scythians, Huns.The remains of a white man are renamed.language and religion were changed due to external influences, e.g. Mongol invasion.At the end of the Parthian Empire, they founded two cities, Hungarian and Bulgarian, crossing the Caucasus.The 8th century Hungarian king list is the same as the Bulgarian one, etc.Hungarians, Bulgarians are not Turks.However, the Seljuks were Hungarians,that is why there are many similar Hungarian words in the Turkish language.Hungarian history begins with King Nimród's twin sons Hunor and Magor marrying King Alan's daughters.
KRUM is an IRANIAN name It means Fearsome and Thunderbolt just like KRUM was Sogdian----GRM------Fearsome Avestan----GRAMA--Fearsome Wakhi-------GRIM/GROM---Thunderbolt Pashtun------GRUMB-----------Thunderbolt Baluchi--------GRUND-----------Thunderbolt Modern Bulgarian----GRUM---Thunderbolt B. Rastorguevia.John Adelman.Dictionary of Iranian Languages Vol,III (f-h),pgs 284-285. E. Steblin-Kamenski. Etymological Dictionary of The Wakhi Language. St. Petersburg .1990.,page.183. The name KRUM is transcribed as KRUM in Greek , Cyrillic , and Glagolithic
@@AAlFASA KUBRAT IS AN IRANIAN NAME KUBRAT is an IRANIAN name Armenian sources show the name as HUBRAAT and HUDBAD Byzantine sources report the Persian name HUBRIADAN Ossetians have the name HUBAD today Persian--HUB---Good Deed Sogdian -HUB--Good Deed Modern Bulgarian HUBAV ---Handsome ,other Slavic languages do NOT have this word Avestan--RATA---Gift Modern Bulgarian --RATUVAM---To Desire, Other Slavic languages do not have this word HUB + RAT= CREATOR OF GOOD V. Raztorguevia. John Adelman. Etymological Dictionary of Iranian Languages. Vol-3(f-h) Moscow. 2007.,page416. V. E. Abaev. Historical-Etymological Dictionary of The Ossetian Language. Vol--2, L-R, , pgs.339-340 D. N. MacKenzie-A Concise Pahlavi Dictionary . Oxford University Press. 1986., p. 70. Theofilact Simokatta. History Ferdinand Justi. Iranisches Namenbuch. Marburg. 1895., p.176 E. Gaglioti. Ossetian Family Names and Personal Names.Tskhinvali.2007., pgs.100-101.
@@petertodorov1792 Kurt = Kubrat ''Wolf''. The word that still exists in Turkish. Dulo's Turkish ''Tuğluk'' Tuğ is the symbol of Turkish rulers and is found in all Turkish leaders in history without exception. (In Turkey, it is seen as a first or surname. ) They believed in God, whom they called "Tangra", which the ancient Turks called "Tengri" and today's Turks called "Tanrı". The Byzantines, where the first Bulgarians lived, called them "Onglos". This is a claim that strengthens the fact that Bulgarians are the same as Onogur (Onugur) Turks. Bulgarians also used the IYI symbol, which was seen in the Seljuks and Ottomans. It resembles most of the symbols of Turkish tribes. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oghuz_Turks
@@petertodorov1792 Brother, you do not like Turks because of the Last Turkish Empire, I understand that, but please do not steal the history of my nation. Even if you steal, Turkish history is the greatest history of the world in terms of warfare .
@@AAlFASA NONSENSE We have Great Kubrat's VERY OWN SIGNET RING with the inscription BAT XOBRATY PATRIKIOS- To BAT XOBRAT the Patrician 1. BAT is and Iranian title 2. Patrician is a Roman title given only to Christians --which proves that Kubrat was a Christian 3.In Bulgarian we have the word HUB which means good or handsome and RATUVAM wich means to desire
Stop spreading those Turkish lies. Below you will find real data that has not been altered by the Turkish government or the Turkish online trolls: US National Library of Medicine - "...the Y-chromosome gene pool in modern Bulgarians is primarily represented by Western Eurasian haplogroups with ∼ 40% belonging to haplogroups E-V13 and I-M423, and 20% to R-M17. Haplogroups common in the Middle East (J and G) and in South Western Asia (R-L23*) occur at frequencies of 19% and 5%, respectively. Haplogroups C, N and Q, distinctive for Altaic and Central Asian Turkic-speaking populations, occur at the negligible frequency of only 1.5%...". Novinite website - "Groundbreaking DNA research spanning Bulgaria, North Macedonia, Serbia, Romania, Albania, and Greece has unveiled striking revelations about the genetic makeup of Balkan populations. The study, conducted collaboratively by scientists from Serbia, Spain, and the US, sheds light on the prevalence of Slavic genes in the region. According to the findings reported by the Serbian Tanjug, Bulgarians, Romanians, and Croats exhibit the highest concentration of Slavic genes, ranging between 50% to 60%. Conversely, Greeks demonstrate the lowest presence of Slavic genetic heritage, measuring between 4% to 20%.".
Serbs bulgars so called macedon hrvats boshjaks were in principle all Turkish tribes after they arrived in Balkan became slavic turks only boshjaks hold their religion while others slavs became Turkish orthodox even today you can find a lot bulgars who speak Turkish very well and kyrylic the true natives are only Illiryans Albanians lived in ancient pellaz ILLIRYA Stil today after 3000+ years even Magyars today Hungarian are not natives but mixed up with Turks tribes mongols name atila the hun says it all after learning all this about slavic immigrants Turkish tribes I should learn about Romanians have they connection with Dacian or not where are they they are different because they didn’t speak kyrylic language like others Turkish slav tribes serbs bulgars etc
Stop lying, troll. National Library of Medicine (US Government) - "...the Y-chromosome gene pool in modern Bulgarians is primarily represented by Western Eurasian haplogroups with ∼ 40% belonging to haplogroups E-V13 and I-M423, and 20% to R-M17. Haplogroups common in the Middle East (J and G) and in South Western Asia (R-L23*) occur at frequencies of 19% and 5%, respectively. Haplogroups C, N and Q, distinctive for Altaic and Central Asian Turkic-speaking populations, occur at the negligible frequency of only 1.5%...".
The Khazars spoke an Oghur Turkic language whereas the modern Kazakh language is of the Kipchak branch. Obviously historically it was a broad continuum that would flow into each other though. If you just mean the sound of the names, the etymology of the word Khazar isn't known.
BULGARs were OGUR TÜRKs : ON OGUR ( 10 Ogurs ) , SAR OGUR ( Yellow Ogurs ) , UTRİGUR ( 30 Ogurs ) , KUTRİGUR ( Rabies or Bald Ogurs ) Bulgars............. No doubt...............in Türkiye , we are OGUZ Türks................ OGUR or OGUZ , it doesnt matter................Both are TÜRKs..................
@@petertodorov1792no, this is true history. Can Modern Bulgarian understood real Bulgar language. It is similar at how Modern Macedonian claim Macedonian name. Both Bulgaria and Macedonia should be renamed to Slavonia and their languages are called Slavonic. No Bulgar and Macedon anymore, that's not your identity.
There is a Name List of the Bulgarian princes, non-Bhanivs, there is no Khan title among the Bulgarians, there is KANA or Kan and it is placed before the name of the ruler, not after it like among the Turks! 1223 Bulgarians stop the Golden Horde
A medallion of Kanas U Bigi Omurtag was discovered in Bulgaria, on which he is depicted with a cross, he was a Christian as well as Kubrat, who has the title "Patricius" and this title is given only to Christians!
We, the bulgarian, are from indo-european origin. The genetic tests show that we are more than 99% in common with the other europeans and other white nations from Asia (from Asia doesn't necessarily mean that every nation is turkic or mongolic). Also, there are many historical descriptions of the ancient bulgarians, made by the iranians (to whom we have much in common), armenians and romans that describes our ancestors as white people, with beautiful clear faces, exactly the same as those of other europeans. 🇧🇬❤️🦁❤IYI
@@papazataklaattiranimamwhy are you so passionate about Bulgarians?Bulgarian wife left you,and took your money?You were rape in Bulgarian jail? By the way modern Turkish people and turks from central Asia are not the same.
According to Prof. Raymond Detrez, who is a specialist in Bulgarian history and language, such views are based on anti-Turkish sentiments and in serious scholarly circles it is well known that the Bulgar language was a Turkic one: Developing cultural identity in the Balkans: convergence vs divergence, Raymond Detrez, Pieter Plas, Peter Lang, 2005, p. 29
ASPARUKH IS AN IRANIAN NAME Asparukh Gender Male Origin Word/name Iranian Meaning Possessor of Shining Horses (aspa + rauk) Asparukh is a Middle Iranian male name,[1] attested in ancient Georgia and early medieval Bulgaria. It is a compound with the two elements: "aspa" (horse) and "rauk" (shine), meaning "he who has shining horses".[2] Some other researchers claim that the name is derived from "aspa" (horse) The two historically attested persons bearing this name are: Asparukh of Iberia, a viceroy of Armazi in Iberia (Georgia), contemporary of the Roman emperor Hadrian (117-138 AD). Asparukh of Bulgaria, founder of the First Bulgarian Empire in the 680s. References Hyun Jin Kim (2013). The Huns, Rome and the Birth of Europe. Cambridge University Press. p. 168. ISBN 9781107009066. Encyclopedia Iranica online: Asparukh a Middle Iranian proper name attested in ancient Georgia and early medieval Bulgaria. Bŭlgarski etimologichen rechnik, tom 1, Institut za bŭlgarski ezik (Bŭlgarska akademia na naukite) Vladimir Ivanov Georgiev, 1962, p.18.
However the linguistic impact of the Iranian world on the Turkic Bulgars is indisputable. For instance the name of the founder of Danubian Bulgaria was Asparukh, which is old Iranian in origin: "The Huns, Rome and the Birth of Europe", Hyun Jin Kim, Cambridge University Press, 2013,, p. 68.
@@papazataklaattiranimam Hanim If almost all the names of First Kingdom leaders is Iranian , How can they be Turkic then?🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
@@petertodorov1792 According to Prof. Raymond Detrez, who is a specialist in Bulgarian history and language, such views are based on anti-Turkish sentiments and in serious scholarly circles it is well known that the Bulgar language was a Turkic one: Developing cultural identity in the Balkans: convergence vs divergence, Raymond Detrez, Pieter Plas, Peter Lang, 2005, p. 29
Little corect son Attlila Ernac created empire first Old Great Bulgaria have 1/2or 1/3 part from Area Hunic Empire.Real Old Great Bulgaria 🇧🇬 Conquest for Turik Haganate in 6 century 😉
@@berkates6990the demography changed, when Slavs migrated and needed to plow and serve the Bulğar Turk nobles. But it was the same how Roman lost to Germans. The difference was those Germans adopted Roman culture, but those Bulğar Turks assimilated to Slav despite they were the noble. Thankfully, Ottoman made the Greeks and Armenians became Turks instead. So it was cultural changing.
@@papazataklaattiranimam Modern bulgarian genetics = slavic, thracian, dacian, greek, turkish, gypsy Ancient bulgar genetics = turkic, mongolic, uralic, iranic
BORIS IS AN IRANIAN NAME We find it around the eastern Black Sea in Greek inscriptions of Sarmatian names such as BORIS from Gorgipia And BORASPIS from Tanais Sarmatian/Alan---BOHRIS Persian----------------BOHORIS Contemporary personal names in Ossetian---BURA, BURAEX, BURISHKA, BORSI, Contemporary family names in Ossetian--------BORSATAE, BORSITAE ProtoIranian---BAURA---Blonde Iranian------------BOR-------Blonde Ossetian --------BORXAELAE--Blonde V.I. Abaev." Historical/Etymological Dictionary of The Ossetian Language". Vol 1. 1989 Z. Gaglioti. "Ossetian Family and Personal Names."Tskhinvali, 2007., p.91 B. Rastorguev, Adelman, "EtymologicalDictionary of Iranian Language". Vol 2. 2003 .p152
There is no document from ancient or medieval authors in which it is claimed that the Bulgarians are Turks, although the Byzantine chroniclers say that the peoples inhabiting the Volga are Turks, yes, but the weak ones are also Turks😂
Bulgarians are not Turks or Slavs, the Slavs accept the Bulgarian alphabet and culture, there were no Turks before the 18th century. Where were the Turks when Bulgaria bordered the Roman Empire. There were artifacts somewhere about Turkish kings and the Turkish state before the Ottoman Empire, which is a mixture of many tribes from Anatolia, the Huns are from Bulgarian tribes.
There's even a concept called 'Hunno-Bulgarian' no doubt that Bulgars were direct successors of Attila's former realm as all Oghur tribes were ; Akatziri, Onogur, Utigur, Kutrigur, Saragur, Bulgar, Sabir.
Khazars and Avars were Oghuric too or i am wrong?
@@yenidenturktarihtezi Yep they were 2 of the 4 Oghuric entities that have managed to establish an empire (Huns, Avars, Bulgars, Khazars)
@@nenenindonu Khazar Khagans were descendants of Ashina clan. Directly descendants of the rulers of western Turkic khaganate (Gokturks)
@@nenenindonu I am not sure about avars but weren't sabirs also one of the Oghuric entities that have managed to establish european hunnic empire and avars can be white huns who migrated to eastern / central europe.
Huns actually are not one tribe. Huns are confederation of tribes. Bulgars, Alans and many many more. 🙂
Bulgars who migrated to the Volga became Muslims and remained Turks and Bulgars who migrated to the Danube/modern Bulgaria became Christians losing their Turkic identity for Slavic in the late 800's
Islam is very important for Turks
Ya boş yapmayın silin şunu aq
@@AkıncıV2 mal
but the chuvash are now christians too
so today's Bulgarians have almost no Turkic blood right?
There are two direct references to Tangra as a Bulgar deity in the sources. One is found in an Ottoman manuscript where it is stated that the name of god in Bulgarian was “Tängri” (Bułghar dilindžä Tängri der).201 The other is in a badly-damaged inscription (carved on a marble column) which commemorates a sacrifice made by Omurtag“to the god Tangra” (κὲ ἐπύησ]εν θυσ[ήαν ἠς τὸν θεὸ]ν Ταγγραν).202 The inscription was found at the rocky cliff of Madara, a site that is commonly associated with the Tangra cult. It is worth remarking that according to ancient Inner Asian religious traditions, the favour of heaven had to manifest itself in the possession of “sacred mountains”. There the qaghan was thought to be closer to Tängri; he could therefore conduct “privileged conversations with him” and receive or transmit his orders.203 It is not unlikely that the site of Madara played a similar role in Bulgaria.204 To be sure, below the relief of the horseman archaeolo gists unearthed the foundations of a complex comprising of what seems to have been a pagan shrine (built on top of a three-aisled church dated to the sixth and seventh centuries), as well as a building with three divisions, which has been interpreted as a dwelling Amongst other things, it has been sug gested that the latter was a kind of private quarter for the ruler from which he seems to have directed the cult of Tangra, the ceremonial sacrifices and. quite possibly, the collective prayers.
While Tangra is very likely to have been worshiped by certain Bulgar groups/clans before their migration to the Balkans, his promotion to the supreme god of the elite and. in a sense, the official religion of the Proto bulgarian state coincides in time with the gradual centralization of political power, a process that is rightly connected with Krum's and Omurtag's reigns in the early ninth century. Indeed, the ideology associated with the wor ship of Tangra was bound to enhance monarchical rulership. Just as Tangra was the supreme celestial being, the khan-his reflection-was regarded as rightfully the sole sovereign on earth or, at any rate. in the Bulgar state (an idea which finds clear expression in Omurtag's building inscription from Catalar). The ideology of a strong, divinely-sanctioned leadership clearly bears much of the credit for the survival of the khanate during this period. The certainties which this system of beliefs and values presented to the warrior aristocracy, if not to the entire population, the aura of sanctity surrounding the ruler, the awareness of heavenly support granted to military undertakings (an awareness reinforced through the regular performance of religious ritu als and ceremonials while on campaign)." all immeasurably strengthened the unity of the state and the political will of its subjects to survive.
Another factor operative in the transition to Tangrist henotheism at this time may have been the fear of Byzantine imperialism. Foreign influences, as scholars have long pointed out, often paved the way for the adoption of a more sophisticated faith among nomads. However, this was rarely the reli gion of their imperial neighbours, for such a course invariably implied sub mission to the authority of the rulers of these states." The Bulgars, realizing that conversion to Islam or Judaism was not a viable option, and mindful of the influence the Byzantine Church could exercise on the khan's Christian subjects, had little choice but to promote Tangra as their supreme deity." It is important to emphasize that the late eighth/early ninth century marked the period of transition to henotheism only for the upper strata of the Bulgar society. Vigorous polytheism and totemism (i.e. the existence of an intimate, "mystical" relationship between a group or an individual and a natural object), both of which were incapable of furnishing a principle of spiritual (and political) unity, proved to be persistent and strong among the masses." This is also true of shamanism, a complex belief system espe cially common in Central and Inner Asian societies, but also discernible in the khanate in the pre-conversion period. Shamanism has been defined by anthropologists as a technique of ecstasy. By mastering this technique and reaching a state of trance the shaman was able to mediate between the world of humans and that of spirits. He thus functioned as a magician, prophet and healer who, among other things, had to "descend to the underworld" to find and bring back a sick person's soul. Given that most aspects of daily life in Eurasia were directly linked with the spiritual world-for instance. the life-supporting economic activities, from hunting to husbandry to agri culture, were thought to be protected by spirits-the role of the shaman was bound to be extremely important." Before we proceed any further, a piece of essential explanation: shaman ism has been a popular subject of accounts and research since the early eighteenth century. Although it is correctly believed that the shaman's technique of ecstasy and mode of operation are basically uniform through out Central and Inner Asia, it is impossible to construct a uniform model of shamanism as an institution. Further (and partly as a result of the above). it would be perilous to equate the modern "ethnographic shaman" with the religious specialists noted among historical Eurasian peoples. In this light. any attempt to investigate the development of this phenomenon in medieval steppe-nomad societies, including Bulgaria, is bound to be inconclusive. We have only fleeting glimpses of Bulgar shamanism in our sources.
Sophoulis, P., 2011. Byzantium and Bulgaria, 775-831. Leiden: Brill, pp.84, 85, 86, 87.
Hanim
I have been to Madara
I have read the inscriptions
There is no tengri, tangra , or tarzan to be read
You have not been to Madara
That's why you know nothing
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Bro wrote a whole paragraph 💀🙏
Thanks for copying form Wikipedia, as if I could not go there are read for myslef.
Bulgarians are not Turks or Slavs, the Slavs accept the Bulgarian alphabet and culture, there were no Turks before the 18th century. Where were the Turks when Bulgaria bordered the Roman Empire. There were artifacts somewhere about Turkish kings and the Turkish state before the Ottoman Empire, which is a mixture of many tribes from Anatolia, the Huns are from Bulgarian tribes.
@@ДженкаПавлова huns and bulgars is turkic
"Oh boy, what an interesting video! I sure hope the people commenting are intelligent, objective and respectful!"
Later Byzantine scholars implied that the Bulgars had previously been known as the Onogurs (Onoğur). Agathon wrote about the "nation of Onogur Bulğars"],Nikephoros I stated that Kubrat was lord of the Onogundurs, Theophanes referred to them as Onogundur Bulgars and Constantine VII remarked that the Bulgars formerly called themselves Onogundurs. Variations of the name include Onoguri, Onoghuri, Onghur, Ongur, Onghuri, Onguri, Onogundur, Unogundur, and Unokundur. There are several theories about the origin of the name Onogur. In some Turkic languages on means "10" and ğur "arrow"; and "ten arrows" might imply a federation of ten tribes, i.e. the Western Turkic Khaganate. Within the Turkic languages, "z" sounds in the easternmost languages tend to have become "r" in the westernmost Turkic languages; therefore, the ethnonym Oghuz may be the source of Oghur; that is, on Oğur would mean "ten clans of Oghuz".
Old Great Bulgaria (Magna Bulgaria[29]), also known as Onoghundur-Bulgars state, or Patria Onoguria in the Ravenna Cosmography.[30][31][20] Constantine VII (mid-10th century) remarked that the Bulgars formerly called themselves Onogundurs.[32]
We have two kinds of records of this Volga - Bulgarian language : Mahmūd alKāšyari's sporadic descriptions of the eleventh century , and the tomb inscriptions of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries . Some examples from the latter are shown on Table 4 ( p . 392 ) , where three kinds of reconstruction for the Volga - Bulgarian - by J. Benzing , 19 N. Poppe , 20 and myself21 - are given . I hypothesize that the Volga - Bulgars who migrated in the seventh century from the south to the Volga - Kama district were a nation related to , but different from , the Chuvash ( who were presumably aboriginal there in the seventh century ) , and that the languages of the two nations were also similar , but distinct .
Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute, 1980 Harvard Ukrainian Studies, Volume 3-4 pp. 390
🤓
Who asked
@@Massimiliano567 ur defending him because you are one too, nerd🤓
Wait aren't you an albanian from gostivar?
@@Kristian.Stankov 🐰
Sample From Bulgar Language:
Etil suwı aka turur
Kaya tübi kaka turur
Balık telim baka turur
Kölün takı küşerür
In Turkish:
İtil suyu akar durur
Kaya dibini oyar durur
Bütün balıklar baka durur
Gölü bile taşırırlar
In English:
Volga water is flowing
He carves the bottom of the rock
All the fish keep looking
They carry the lake
Omg the translation translated "Kaya tübi kaka turur" into "Rock tube poops" LOL
Albanian pan turk from gostivar
How come you decipher the ancient scripture and professional researchers can't?
is this the true language for the bulgarians? And not the slavic bulgarian language of today??
@@niksmaithy6929 Yep these do not apply to todays bulgarians. valid for Volga Bulgars(Chuvashs) and Danube Bulgars. These people are from the Oghur of the Turks and are the founders of almost all Bulgar states you can see until the 13th century
The Bulgars were a Turkic tribal confederation that gave rise to the Balkan Bulgar and Volga Bulgar states. The ethnonym derives from the Turkish bulgha-, "to stir, mix, disturb, confuse." The confederation appears to have taken shape among Oghur tribes in the Kazakh steppes following the migrations that were touched off by movements of the Hsiung-nu. Later Byzantine sources (Agathon, Nicephorus Patriarchus, Theophanes) closely associate or identify the Bulgars with the Onoghurs, who were enemies of Sassanid Iran in the late 4th century. When or how this connection developed is unclear. If we discount several (most probably) anachronistic notices on the Bulgars in Moses Kliorenats'i (Moses of Chorene), the earliest references to them are perhaps to be found in an anonymous Latin chronograph of 354: "Vulgares." They are absent from Priscus's account of the migration, ca. 463, of the Oghuric Turks into the Pontic steppes, but by 480 they are noted under their own name as allies of Constantinople against the Ostrogoths. Amity with Byzantium was short-lived. By 489 the Bulgars had initiated a series of raids on Byzantine Balkan possessions. Their habitat, at this stage, appears to have been in the eastern Pontic steppes stretch-ing into the Azov region and North Caucasus. It is here that Jordanes and Pseudo-Zacharius Ithetor place them in the mid-6th century. Shortly afterward, they were overrun and subjugated by the Avars and then the Turks. When Turk rule weakened, sometime after 600, the Avars appear to have reestablished some control over the region. It was against Avar rule that the Bulgars-under their leader Qubrat, whom Heraclius had been cultivating for some rime (he and his uncle were baptized in Constantinople to 619)-revolted ca. 631-632 and founded the Onoghundur-Bulgar state. Some time after Qubrat's death (660s), this Pontic - Maeotun Bulgaria, whose Balkan descendents would also claim Attilid origins, came into conflict with the Khazar khaganate, successor to the Turk empire in western Eurasia. The Khazars emerged victorious from the contest, and parts of the Bulgar union broke up and migrated. One grouping under Asperukh in 679 crossed the Danube into Moesia and, having subjugated a local Slavic confederatton, there laid the foundation for the Balkan Bulgarian state. Yet other groups joined the Avar state in Pannonia (where some would prove to be rebellious subjects or took up restience in Italy around the five Rasennate cities, to live as Byzantine subjects.The other Bulgars either remained in the Pontic steppe zone the (the “Black Bulgars” of Byzantine and Rus’ sources) or later migrated (perhaps as early as the mid-7th century or as late as the mid-8th to early 9th century) to the middle Volga region, giving rise there to the Volga Bulgarian state, which remained, however a vassal of the Khazars. Balkan Bulgaria soon became an important element in Byzantine politics, on occasion supporting contestants to the throne and also helping to defeat the Arab attack on Constantinople of 717-18.The iconoclastic Emperor Constantine (741-775) began a series of wars against them that remained a constant theme of Byzantine-Bulgarian relations until the destruction of the first Bulgarian empire by Basil II (976-1025).In 864 the Bulgarian king Boris, outmaneuvered by Constantinople, converted to Christianity. Thereafter, the Turkic Bulgars underwent Slavicization, and Balkan Bulgaria became one of the centers of medieval Slavic. The Volga Bulgars, however, converted to Islam in the early 10th century and created a highly sophisticated, urbane, mercantile Muslim society that, after stout resistance, was conquered by the Mongols in the early 13th century.
bulgars and bulgarians are not the same thing The Bulgarians are not the descendants of the Volga, but the descendants of the Slavs who ruled them. At that time, Slavs settled in this geography. Volgas came in the 7th century. 1. The Bulgarian Empire was founded by the Slavs and ruled by the Turks, and the Slavs assimilated the people. Bulgarians took their name from proto Bulgarians, but they took their ethnic origins from Thracians and Slavs. If you want to see Tatars today, go to Russia, maybe there are still unassimilated brothers there.
@@Furlaaaz dont bother, this guy has a brain aneurysm he literally just spams the same stuff in almost every video about medieval bulgaria
@@FurlaaazThe bulgarian empire were founded by turks and ruled by them
@@tearet741 no lol
@@tearet741 you say bulgari(an) not bulgar
Very interesting stuff
Hej!
Great Turkic Warriors 😼
yes, the chuvash and tatar are our cousins
Greatness Come with Islam
@@محمديونس-7 nope.
@@محمديونس-7 Krum, Tervel and Simeon who were great warriors were not Muslims
@@papazataklaattiranimam
But they are in the Hell
Какие классные водохранилища умели строить булгары тысячу лет назад 😄
Yes bulgars and Varangians create the Russian nation 😂
@wratch all this people are turkolised skythians their original language was Iranic even the xiongu empire kan motun has Indo-European features in Chinese sources he has red hair like skythians and tocharians no mongoloids may with a bit Turkic influence but not turkic nation we come from bactria persia no altai mountains!!!
@wratch haha bulgars are mentioned from 2.500 b.c in bactria learn history even iranian historians say we are skythians no turks indian historians mentioned us too at this period!!!
@wratch volga bulgars, chuvash,bashkir are Bulgarian tribes the sons of khan kubrat learn history cumans has no history bulgars are the greatest nation in the steppes!
@wratch in bactria 2.500b.c and in xiongu empire 165b.c is free 🆓
However, until 997, Turkic Bulgars ruled the First Bulgarian Empire. I wish you had shown it to the end.
Hanim
Bulgarians never Turkic
Bulgarians have only 2% turkic genetics
@@petertodorov9540 Bulgarians are Slavic people with Early European Farmer genetics who took their name from Turkic peoples😂 what an identity crisis
Don't be so sure, In 864 When Michael I converted His state to Christianity, he killed all Bulgar elite families, 52 Bulgar clans, only his son Vladimir I try to save the turkic Heritage, After him, all, Simeon the great, Petar I, Boris II, Roman. Didn't care ab turkic atuff, they speak Slavic, And work for Slavic cause
Your right except for the Turkic thing
Bulgarians we’re never Turkic
Bulgarians have only 2% Turkic genetics
@@papazataklaattiranimam
John Zonaras: ''Paeonians - Latins or Thracian people of Macedonia. These are so-called Paeonians. Paeonians were Bulgarians. "
- Johannes Tzetza: ''Pyros and Akamas (native) of the Thracian Hellespont, Maronietza Evfimos son of Treziius, Pirehmie, who was of the Paeonians they were all from the Bulgarians, from those of the river Axios, also called Vardar'' (see photo with Greek text).
XI century
- ''Bulgarians who are named Thracians according to the previous (old) monuments'' - „Hinc iter aggressi per fines Vulgariorum, quos vocitant Thracas, ut habent monumenta priorum“ - Fulcher of Chartres, a French priest, (a description of the first crusade in 1096)
III-IV century
- Mavro Orbin cites evidence of Marcus Aurelius Kasiodor that Bulgarians fought with the Romans about 390 AD.
- Cassiodorus writes that the Bulgarians are old Moesian or Illyrian people
- Ennodius Ticinensis (473-524, Bishop, court historian of the Gothic King Theodoric) indicate that Bulgarians are old Moesian and Illyrian people.
- 4th century map (see photo) by St. Jerome (331-420) - Mesia hec & Vulgaria (Misia here and Bulgaria). It is composed by even older maps - Bishop Eusebius of Caesarea (270 to 33, called the "father of church history." The map is preserved in a copy of the 12th century. letopisec.blog.bg/photos/1232...4_vek22222.jpg
I-II century
-Flavius Josephus writes ''Dacians called Bulgarians''
In addition:
- Ravennatis Anоnymi Cosmographia: „Inter vero Tratiam vel Macedoniam et Mysiam inferiorem modo Bulgari habitant, qui ex super scripta maiore Scythia egressi sunt.”
Russia & Turkey : how tf you ended up ther-
Volga bulgaria & Bulgaria : *yes*
Classification
The dynamic history of the Turkic-speaking peoples makes it difficult to set up a classification of modem Turkic languages that combines geographic and genetic criteria. The following rough scheme represents an attempt to combine the current area distribution with genetic and typological features. It primarily distinguishes six branches, some of heterogeneous origin:
1 A southwestem (SW) branch, Oghuz Turkic
2 A northwestem (NW) branch, Kipchak Turkic;
3 A southeastem (SE) branch, Uyghur Turkic;
4 A northeastem (NE) branch, Siberian Turkic;
5 Chuvash, representing Oghur or Bulghar Turkic;
6 Khalaj, representing Arghu Turkic.
Prevailing opinion is that the language of the text is a Turkic language Deliyannis, Deborah (2019). Fifty Early Medieval Things. Cornell University Press. p. 171. Helimski 2000, p. 45. This interpretation was sharply criticized by Vilhelm Thomsen and Gyula Németh, who showed that the language of the inscription cannot be Greek, but an old Turkic language. Thomsen 1918, pp. 17-18. Göbl & Róna-Tas 1995, pp. 17-18. Today almost all scholars share the view that the text was written in a Turkic language Alemany 2009, p. 5. Róna-Tas 1999, pp. 131-132. Göbl & Róna-Tas 1995, pp. 18-19. It has been often compared with the Turkic Bulgar language of the First Bulgarian Empire,[34][7][29] attested on several 8th-9th century inscriptions found in north-eastern Bulgaria and written in Greek letters.[47] It is generally agreed that the first word is the Turkic title buyla or boyla (also spelled boila[50]) which is attested on several Old Turkic and Danube Bulgar inscriptions[51][52] and also mentioned by some 9th and 10th centuries Byzantine authors.[51][53] Butaul is usually read as a personal name.[2][54][55] It may be interpreted as "son of Buta" with the final -ul being a development of the Turkic oğul = "son".[54][55] This etymology was challenged based on the observation that according to the predominant model of construction of Turkic patronymics, the possessive forms oğlu or oğli are expected.[54][56] Based on the names attested on Old Turkic inscriptions, Erdal posited the reading But Aul.[54] The title Boila is predecessor or old form of the title Bolyar (the Bulgarian word for Boyar). Boila was a title worn by some of the Bulgar aristocrats (mostly of regional governors and noble warriors) in the First Bulgarian Empire (681-1018). The plural form of boila ("noble"), bolyare is attested in Bulgar inscriptions[2][3] Boila (Old Bulgarian: бꙑлꙗ; Bulgarian: боила; Greek: βοιλα; Old Turkic: 𐰉𐰆𐰖𐰞𐰀, romanized: Boyla) was a title worn by some of the Bulgar and Göktürk aristocrats (mostly of regional governors and noble warriors) in the First Bulgarian Empire (681-1018) and Second Turkic Khaganate (682-744).[1] For the linguists, the title "Boila" is the predecessor or an old form of the title "Bolyar". The Boil(a)s were two types: internal ("great") and external ("small"). The internal Boil(a)s were governors of the Comitates (administrative regions). Most of the popular linguists believe that "Boila" has old-Turkic origin and the meaning of the word can be translated as "noble". The Ichirgu-boila or Chargobilya (Greek: ητζιργου βοιλα; Old Bulgarian: чрьгѹбꙑлꙗ,[1] Bulgarian: Ичиргу боила) was a high-ranking official in the First Bulgarian Empire. He was the commander of the garrison of the capital and was the third most important person in the state after the ruler and the Kavkhan. In peace-time the ichirgu-boila had diplomatic functions. According to some data the ichirgu-boila personally commanded a squad of 400 heavy cavalrymen.
According to Veselin Besheliev the word "ichirgu" was of Turkic-Altay origin and meant "internal".[2]
One funeral inscription found during excavation works in Preslav talks about the ichirgu-boila Mostich who served under the Emperors Simeon I the Great (893-927) and Peter I (927-969). An unknown ichirgu-boila is mentioned in the Philippi Inscription dating from the reign of Khan Presian I.
Pan turk albanian
@@Kristian.Stankov
No Brother
PanTurk Turkish lady in Germany
Simeon wasn't even an emperor, check your facts :)
@@Orthosaur7532 The title Tsar (Цар) means emperor.
@@bartoszszczepaniak169 It comes from Ceaser
Nikov is the first Bulgarian historian to pay special attention to, and attri bute great significance to, the Turkic components in the Bulgarian ethnogen esis (i.e., after the Bulgars) and among the ruling aristocracy. He elaborated on the issue of the "Turkic element's" influence upon Bulgarian history in a 1928 unpublished manuscript (delivered as a public lecture). Nikov began with the following policy-setting statement:
There is no period in our history on which the Turkic element did not exert its strongest influence and did not leave the deepest traces in the development of our people. [...] None of the Balkan peoples has experi enced the Turkic influence so strongly as our people,
The Turkic pressure began from Central Asia and had two directions to the northwest through southern Russia, and to the southwest through Persia and Asia Minor. The Bulgarian state was founded due to one of the Turkic peoples, the Bulgars, who themselves joined a number of Turkic tribal alliances (of Huns, Kutrigurs, Utigurs, Avars, and Khazars). During Byzantine rule, the Turkic Pechenegs and Uz came from the north; many of them crossed the Danube and were assimilated by the Bulgarian people. Then came the Cumans, without whose decisive help the uprising of Asenevtsi would hardly have succeeded. Thus, just as the First Bulgarian Kingdom was founded with the help of the Turkic Bulgars, the Second Kingdom was founded with "the decisive collabora tion of the Turkic Cumans."129 Not only did Cumans settle south of the Danube and become assimilated and absorbed by the Slavic-Bulgarian people, but they were also of great significance politically in the Second Kingdom, whose dynas ties all had Cuman blood in them. There were also many Bulgarian boyars of Cuman origin, including Balic in Dobrudzha. It could even be said that the Cumans acquired a dominant position in the political life of the state. 130 There followed the influence of the Mongol Tartars, who even supplied one Bulgarian king, Chaka. But of greatest importance were the Ottoman and Seljuk Turks, who conquered the Balkans from Asia Minor. Concerning the Cumans, Nikov considers the "transfusion of blood" from Turkic "elements" an asset, a means of rejuvenating and strengthening the "race" and enhancing the vitality of the Bulgarian people (in contrast with the conquering Turks).
Hanim
You still don’t have any PRIMARY SOURCES to prove any Turkic theory
This is why present day Bulgarian scholars reject the Turkic theory
Soon other scholars will reject the Turkic theory as well
And it will only be taught in Turkish universities 😂😂😂😂
Lying Turkish troll.
National Library of Medicine (US Government) - "...the Y-chromosome gene pool in modern Bulgarians is primarily represented by Western Eurasian haplogroups with ∼ 40% belonging to haplogroups E-V13 and I-M423, and 20% to R-M17. Haplogroups common in the Middle East (J and G) and in South Western Asia (R-L23*) occur at frequencies of 19% and 5%, respectively. Haplogroups C, N and Q, distinctive for Altaic and Central Asian Turkic-speaking populations, occur at the negligible frequency of only 1.5%...".
This is the best video in the world! 🌎
언제나 좋은 영상 감사합니다!
Why do you support the Ukrainians, do you love your sisters from Father Japheth?
@@عليياسر-ذ5ب I love them ❤️
@@울라지미르레닌 Do you love your Chinese, Japanese, Persian, Indian and European brothers? You are from the same father
@@عليياسر-ذ5ب yeah
@@عليياسر-ذ5ب And I love you too
LONG LIVE Bulgaria 🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🦁
Real Bulgaria is Tatarstan
Wannabe Bulgaria🇧🇬
@@yenidenturktarihtezi at least there was something like civilization on the Danube🌝
@@yenidenturktarihtezi
Hanim
You are a wannabe Turk
You are realy a Greko/Armenian hybrid ruled by a Georgian Khalife
@@yenidenturktarihtezi Real Bulgarias are Bulgaria and Chuvashia
Tatarstan is a tatar semi-republic😁
@@bulgariannationalist1637 yes TURKIC CIVILIZATION 💪
Can you make video about map history of Odrysian kingdom?
great information i sometimes thought bulgarians are fully turks but the fact that chuvash were volga bulgars are awesome
-_- always time turks chuvashs
We are not turks
@@nicksterbg3733 Not anymore at least 😂
@@nicksterbg3733 We are not said You are Turkic,dude. The Old Bolgars are Turkic. Not same.
Nonsense
Bulgarians we’re never Turkic
1.Give PRIMARY SOURCES that show Tengrinism in Bulgaria
2 Give PRIMARY SOURCES that show the name Bulgarian comes from Bulgamak
Wow good🙌
Turkic and Jewish genealogical myths recorded by King Joseph and Sefer Yosippon identified Khazar as the "brother" of other Turkic tribes like the Bulgars and Sabirs (see below). Syriac legends said that the ancestor of the Khazars was named "Khazarig," the brother of "Bulgarios." Most scholars believe that these legends have a historical basis and that the Khazars were indeed closely related to Turkic tribes such as the Bulgars and Bashkirs.
Hanim
Michael the Syrian NEVER calls Bulgarians turks
Michael the Syrian calls Bulgarians SCYTHIANS
@@petertodorov1792 he actually called them Hunno Bulgars
@@papazataklaattiranimam
Hanim
Show the PRIMARY SOURCES then if you dare
If i have Bulgar blood then Bulgaria is my country i am ancestor of mercenaries of Byzantine Empire my ancestors resemble the Altay people who were Huns i sympathize with the Bulgarians my uncle is Bulgarian Slavic Mongoloid Siberian and West Eurasian
We didnt see the black bulgars of Batbayan, the Kuber bulgars, and the Alcek bulgars.
Wow this is such amazing history 😮
Why didn't you mention the Caucasus Bulgar(Mulkar)?
서방의 터키족은 사실 코커서스 스키타이 유목민이고, 실제 터키는 퉁그스계열 아시아인. 몽골친척.
@@KrMorgan12 oga boga
Nikephoros I stated that Kubrat was lord of the Onogundurs, Theophanes referred to them as Onogundur Bulgars and Constantine VIIremarked that the Bulgars formerly called themselves Onogundurs. Variations of the name include Onoguri, Onoghuri, Onghur, Ongur, Onghuri, Onguri, Onogundur, Unogundur, and Unokundur.
Aga seni neden tüm mapping videolarının altında görüyorum
Yes Nikephoros says king of onugundur huns
modern genetic evidence says bulgars were not turkic
@@jedip6327 It's also funny that the pan-Bulgarians wrote the article you believe in.
Hanim
Why are there only 2% Turkic genetics in Bulgarians ?😂
Now is the moment when Tatarstan Chuvashia broke away from russian federation and created again Volga Bulgaria 😀
Not gonna happen
Especially when the Donbass and Lugansk just joined Russia
I had no idea that the descendants of Volga Bulgars were Chuvash. I thought they were the Tatars. You learn sumn new everyday.
Volga Tatars = Kipchak+Bulgars
Chuvash = Sabirs
Hanim
Sabirs=Chuvash
Tatars= kipchaks
Bulgarians =Sarmatians
Osmanli Turks = Greko/Armenians
Interesting,nice video 👍
Bulgarian nationalists
😲
@@muxanerenaslan7642 Yes, but Bulgarian nationalists do not know this distinction.
@@atkatk9355
Hanim
There are only Bulgarians
But you are a Greko/Armenian mix ruled by a Georgian Caliph
@@petertodorov9540 What a farce you are talking about
@@petertodorov9540
Anatolian Turks are a mixture of indigenous Anatolians and medieval Turkic societies
Is the person you refer to as a Georgian Recep Tayyip Erdoğan?
I don't support him
@@atkatk9355 we know that we are not turkic. Bulgars and bulgarians is the same. The term slavs was invented in the 19th century. We are proud of our dna but it is not turkic nor slavic
cool good job bro i got to say i love it
I wonder what contemporary Bulgaria would be like if its turkic identity was not diluted by slavization
The Bulgar tribe has nothing in common with the Turkic ethnicity. It's just a propaganda coming from Turkey.
@AAliBli The whole world knows about the imperialist Turkish political ideology (so-called Neo-Ottomanism) and its ambitions to assimilate Greece, Cyprus, Armenia and Bulgaria.
"Novel analyses of proto-Bulgarians epigraphic monuments, especially, of the major historical inscription - “the List of the Bulgarian Monarchs” - have revealed that the proto-Bulgarian language did not belong to the Turkic linguistic family. Therefore, leading turkologists [14]-[16] do not consider proto-Bulgarians a Turkic people, as also attested by the adoption of distinctive calendar systems by the two groups" "Y-Chromosome Diversity in Modern Bulgarians: New Clues about Their Ancestry", Sena Karachanak, Viola Grugni, Simona Fornarino, Desislava Nesheva, Nadia Al-Zahery, Vincenza Battaglia, Valeria Carossa, Yordan Yordanov, Antonio Torroni, Angel S. Galabov, Draga Toncheva and Ornella Semino, 2013.
@AAliBli I just gave you real academia sources. You, on the other hand, gave me nothing but Turkish propaganda that was debunked by the modern DNA analysis.
You are a Turk spreading misinformation under a video about Bulgaria and you have the audacity to tell me that the Turks don't have any Neo-Ottoman policy!?!
Tell me how many Turkic people named Asparuh, Kubrat, Krum, Omurtag, Boris, Samuil, Tervel, Kardam you know? These names are Bulgarian, not Turkic.
The Bulgar tribe was Proto-Ukrainian from Zaporozhie. Asparuh and his father Kubrat were buried in their homeland Ukraine. Pictures of their graves are all over the internet.
They would speak Alanic. Bulgars, for the love of God, weren't Turkic.
@@bartoszszczepaniak169
Brother,
Ossetian is the closest language to ancient Bulgarian
Please read Dr. Zhivko Voynikov's "Who are the Ancient Bulgarians or ProtoBulgarians"
Top 5 Bulgars:
1-Simeon I the Great
2-Krum Khan the Fearsome
3-Tervel Khan
4-Asparukh Khan
5-Ghabdula Chelbir
Prawdziwe
Top 5 dumb people:
1 - PAPAZA TAKLA ATTIRAN İMAM
2 - Osman
3 - Murad
4 - Genghis Khan
5 - Mehmed the conqueror
they weren't khans.They were kanas-ubigi.
@@Orthosaur7532Bulgars are Turkic😂
@@dragonvasilfire243kanasubigi = Khan and Subegi(Leader of the Army)
very much appreciated video!
Turkic history is the best date
Best history la date değil😅
@@papazataklaattiranimam
No Turkics in this video except pseudoturks in the comments
No Turkics in this video except for
Pseudo Turks in the comments
Turks were still in Africa when Bulgars had a calendar (Before 7531 years) :)
@@Orthosaur7532nice joke
Where I can find first song? I can see the title in video, but can't find anything about it anywhere.
It's available for $5 on pond5.com.
Bro, cool video! Can you make video about map history of Odrysian kingdom?
It's a real Balkan country founded by one of the greatest people on the world- Thracians!
Teres the Great was a warrior that creat a country of Odrysians and become odrysian king that conquer many territories!
Can you make video about map history of Odrysian kingdom?
Despite more than five hundred years of Turkish rule, the majority of present-day Bulgarians demonise and reject “non-Bulgarian” - that is, Turkish, Muslim, or Roma - influences in their history and culture. While the Bulgarian government’s harshest policies of ethnic cleansing concluded with the fall of communism, this exclusivist narrative of Bulgarian national history nevertheless continues to discriminate against such communities.
Bulgaria, since both its ancient and modern beginnings, has been invariably a multiethnic, mainly Slavic and Turkic, polity. School textbooks in Bulgaria lavish much attention on the ancient Bulgars, who in the Middle Ages founded several Bulgarias from the Volga to Italy, including the surviving one in the Balkans. However, the teaching materials employed in Bulgarian schools prefer to dub these Turkic-speaking Bulgars as “Bulgarians” (or sometimes “Proto-Bulgarians”), so that in Bulgarian vocabulary no distinction is maintained between Turkic Bulgars and Slavophone Bulgarians. In the Bulgarian language the same term “Bulgarians” (Българи Bılgari) is used for referring to these two different ethnic groups, thus suggesting - falsely - full historic and demographic continuity between both. Unsurprisingly after this kind of mis-education, most Bulgarians now see the ancient Bulgars as their “Slavic-speaking ancestors”.
Hanim
Bulgarians reject the Turkic theory because there are ZERO PRIMARY SOURCES to support it🤣🤣
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Lying Turkish troll.
National Library of Medicine (US Government) - "...the Y-chromosome gene pool in modern Bulgarians is primarily represented by Western Eurasian haplogroups with ∼ 40% belonging to haplogroups E-V13 and I-M423, and 20% to R-M17. Haplogroups common in the Middle East (J and G) and in South Western Asia (R-L23*) occur at frequencies of 19% and 5%, respectively. Haplogroups C, N and Q, distinctive for Altaic and Central Asian Turkic-speaking populations, occur at the negligible frequency of only 1.5%...".
The Bulgars are known as Pra-Bulgari (Proto-Bulgarians) in Bulgaria, yes. Modern Danube Bulgarians are a mix of Slavs, Thracians, Bulgars and other Turks, as well as Finno-Ugrics and Iranians, some Caucasian and German DNA too.
Kuber's Bulgars had a short-lived state in modern-day Macedonia.
Brother
We should put a statue of Kuber in Skopje Central Plaza
Wouldn't the fakedonians love it
next time you could make the history of milan in all the years
The great Persian Scientist Abu Zayd al-Balkhi 850-934 AD
Says that the Bulgarians worshipped the god EDFU and his idol FA
In the same text he says the Turks worship Bir Tengri
Al-Balkhi clearly makes a distiction between the Bulgarians and the Turks
M. Tahir , Le livre de la creation de el-Balhi , Paris , 1899 , v.IV ,56
🤲🏿🤲🏿🤲🏿
Yavroom
You don’t need to take my word
Look up the source yourself
Dragon Historian
You are a joke
Bulgarians are not first recorded in 480AD
They are in Armenian Sources from the 1st century AD
Movses Khorenatsi History of Armenians from 482 AD
"In his days (Arshak) there had been great turmoil in the chain of the great mountain of Kawkas, in the country
of the Bulghars and many of them.........came to our country and lived for a long time under the Kol , a fertile land abundant in bread"
(Movses Khorenatsi Book II History of the Armenians)
Also the Chronography of 354AD speaks of Ziezi ,of whom the Bulgarians
Go and educate yourself before you write nonsense
You are a joke
@@yenidenturktarihtezi
Yavroom
Because of your pathological ignorance
I am educating you for free
I LOVE Armenians!
Nice
I have to say that the Phanagoria despite being suggested to be the capital of Old Bulgaria by some roman chronicles, most likely was not. Since archeological evidence doesn't show bulgarian settlement there. It was instead a small trading city populated by jews. Most likely the capital of Old Bulgaria was Malaya Pereshchepina since in that location was found the grave of Kubrat.
The only thing i can say is that primary sorces disprove the theory that bulgars were turkic.
For some reason I can't take Bulgarians seriously :D
@@papazataklaattiranimam
Because you are NOT a true scholar but a propagandist
@@petertodorov1792 The names of first bulgar khans are clearly Turkic.
@@olbw5
NONSENSE
The names are IRANIAN
And Bulgarians never used the title Khan but used the title BAT
And Krum took the Avar title KANASUBIGI
@@petertodorov1792 linguistic is a science, your opinion have no value.
Balkar people of Caucasus claim origin from Bulgars.
Karachay balkars claim that they were Alans
Alans and Bulgarians had the same script called the Kuban or Alano/Bulgarian script.
Look up the work of Professor G. Turchaninov
@@petertodorov1792 bulgurian historians yarraqovs
@@petertodorov1792
Nikov is the first Bulgarian historian to pay special attention to, and attri bute great significance to, the Turkic components in the Bulgarian ethnogen esis (i.e., after the Bulgars) and among the ruling aristocracy. He elaborated on the issue of the "Turkic element's" influence upon Bulgarian history in a 1928 unpublished manuscript (delivered as a public lecture). Nikov began with the following policy-setting statement:
There is no period in our history on which the Turkic element did not exert its strongest influence and did not leave the deepest traces in the development of our people. [...] None of the Balkan peoples has experi enced the Turkic influence so strongly as our people,
The Turkic pressure began from Central Asia and had two directions to the northwest through southern Russia, and to the southwest through Persia and Asia Minor. The Bulgarian state was founded due to one of the Turkic peoples, the Bulgars, who themselves joined a number of Turkic tribal alliances (of Huns, Kutrigurs, Utigurs, Avars, and Khazars). During Byzantine rule, the Turkic Pechenegs and Uz came from the north; many of them crossed the Danube and were assimilated by the Bulgarian people. Then came the Cumans, without whose decisive help the uprising of Asenevtsi would hardly have succeeded. Thus, just as the First Bulgarian Kingdom was founded with the help of the Turkic Bulgars, the Second Kingdom was founded with "the decisive collabora tion of the Turkic Cumans."129 Not only did Cumans settle south of the Danube and become assimilated and absorbed by the Slavic-Bulgarian people, but they were also of great significance politically in the Second Kingdom, whose dynas ties all had Cuman blood in them. There were also many Bulgarian boyars of Cuman origin, including Balic in Dobrudzha. It could even be said that the Cumans acquired a dominant position in the political life of the state. 130 There followed the influence of the Mongol Tartars, who even supplied one Bulgarian king, Chaka. But of greatest importance were the Ottoman and Seljuk Turks, who conquered the Balkans from Asia Minor. Concerning the Cumans, Nikov considers the "transfusion of blood" from Turkic "elements" an asset, a means of rejuvenating and strengthening the "race" and enhancing the vitality of the Bulgarian people (in contrast with the conquering Turks).
Balkars are Kipchaks not Bulgars
PUTIN: Oh!! It is Rus Crimea. Bulgaria is also Russian territory.
TURKİC BULGARS 😍😍😍😍
🥰🥰🥰
@@papazataklaattiranimam
Hanim
Bulgarians are Iranic
ASPARUKH IS AN IRANIAN NAME
Asparukh
Gender Male
Origin
Word/name Iranian
Meaning
Possessor of Shining Horses (aspa + rauk)
Horse-souled (aspa + rah)
Asparukh is a Middle Iranian male name,[1] attested in ancient Georgia and early medieval Bulgaria. It is a compound with the two elements: "aspa" (horse) and "rauk" (shine), meaning "he who has shining horses".[2] Some other researchers claim that the name is derived from "aspa" (horse)
@@petertodorov9540 Northern Macedonians are Hellenic people who got Bulgurianized😂😂😂
@@papazataklaattiranimam
People of Ohrid used to worship the Bulgarian/East Iranian Rider God Siavush
Siavush was worshiped in the Surva festival on the winter Solstice
But Siavush's worship was Slavisized to Siva Bog and Christianized to St George and celebrated on St Basils day
All this is recorded by Bulgarian writer Georgi Rakovsi
@@petertodorov1792 🤲🏿🤲🏿🤲🏿
Who are the Khazars? Do they belong to common turkic or the Oghuric branch? And who were the Jewish Turks?
Khazars were an Oghur Turkic tribe they adopted Judaism as state religion thereby becoming the only Judaist empire in history. Jewish is an ethno-religious identity so the Khazars were Judaist Turks not Jewish Turks
@@nenenindonu
why did they adopt jewdaism?
@@화이팅-t2q They had a good number of Jewish refugees who influenced them, but the main reason was political since they used Judaism to avoid pressure from other Abrahamic religion based neighboring empires like the Christian Romans and Muslim Abbasids
@@nenenindonu alot of Hollywood 's Russian Jews today look very Asiatic. Case in point: Joseph Gordon Levy and Roseanne. Another one I can think of is Rachel from S Club 7 (whom I used to think was Filipino!)
@@화이팅-t2q the Khazarian Turkic Jews were caught in a conflict between Christians and Muslims about to battle in a war in the Caucaus mountains. In order to avoid a war, these Khazarian Turkic peoples converted to Judaism. Many of today's Israelis are of Khazarian origin rather than Ashkenazi Jews (real semites). This is what I gather
ASPARUKH IS AN IRANIAN NAME
Asparukh
Gender Male
Origin
Word/name Iranian
Meaning
Possessor of Shining Horses (aspa + rauk)
Asparukh is a Middle Iranian male name,[1] attested in ancient Georgia and early medieval Bulgaria. It is a compound with the two elements: "aspa" (horse) and "rauk" (shine), meaning "he who has shining horses".[2] Some other researchers claim that the name is derived from "aspa" (horse)
The two historically attested persons bearing this name are:
Asparukh of Iberia, a viceroy of Armazi in Iberia (Georgia), contemporary of the Roman emperor Hadrian (117-138 AD).
Because Bulgaria started from Asia
So? İranic and Chinese is civilization language for Asian people. Chek the Sultanate of Rum. Their name are Iranic but They are not etnicilhly Iranian. (Kayhusrav I,Kaykubad I,). Look like this example. Asparukh and him tribe's from Turkic Onogurs
No matter how hard you pray to tengri
You will never find any primary sources to prove a Turkic origin
@@petertodorov1792 Your comment's so fucking ridiculous
@@petertodorov1792 All historians knows Bulgars are Turkic. Dulo clan a Noble family from Western Gokturks.
The great Persian scientist Abu Zayd al-Balkhi 850-934 AD
Says that Bulgarians worshipped the god
EDFU and his idol FA
In the same text he says the Turks worshipped BIr Tengri
He clearly distinguishes between Bulgarians and Turks
M . Tahir, Le livre de la creation de el-Balhi, Paris , 1899 ,v. IV, 56
Look panturks no tengri in Bulgaria
Bulgarians trace their ancestry and derive their name from the Bulgars, a Turkic people that ruled over the South Slavic populations in the region south of the Dan- ube River during the Middle Ages. A unique Bulgarian identity emerged from the cultural fusion of the Bulgars with the ancient Thracian tribes and the Slavic peoples of the area. For centuries, the Bulgarians lived under Turkish domination until the tide turned during World War II, and Bulgaria became an ally of the Soviet Union and part of its "Eastern bloc." Since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, Bulgaria has embraced democ- racy and acceded to the European Union in 2007.
NONSENSE
Give PRIMARY SOURCES that show the name Bulgarian comes from bulgamak
@@petertodorov1792 stop crying lol bulgars were turkic, doesn't matter how hard you cry it not gonna make them non-turkic lol 🤣🤣
Yavroom
No matter how hard you pray to Tengri
You will never find any PRIMARY SOURCES to prove a Turkic origin🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣
Get a life, I see you in every comment Section Spamming Wikipedia Articles about how every Historical Figure was actually Turkic, it's really pathetic
@@petertodorov1792etymology???? 🧐🧐
So Modern Bulgarian and Chuvash are related??
Not related, but they have a shared history.
According to you north macedonians were ancient macedonians or what ???
the answer is NO they are not, Modern Bulgarians doesn't share any genetic lines with Bulgars, Bulgars were semi nomadic Turkic people, Bulgarians are Slavic nation formed after union of Slavic tribes in the land of Modern Bulgaria, and by the fact that Bulgars ruled them, they accepted they name, but in his language, from ethnonym Bulgars they created Bulgarians
Dear Lady /Hanim
Bulgarians have only 2% Turkic genetics
So logically their origin is NOT Turkic
@@mustafapetrovoglu1673 that is not true.
브금 알수있을까여
Do full version of history of Bulgaria 🇧🇬
@@muxanerenaslan7642
Wrong Hanim
There is only Bulgarians
You Turks are a Greko/Armenian Mix ruled by a Georgian Caliph
@@petertodorov9540 kiddish arguments
@@petertodorov9540 and the Modern Macedonians is Ancient Macedonians bc there's only Macedonians, good logic
@@mustafapetrovoglu1673
Beter logic than panturk fantasy
We are Asparuhks Bulgarians
If not then answer my Questions
How can a tiny group of Asparukhs Bulgarians
1. Defeat the entire Byzantine Army
2. How can they defeat the Avars
3.How could they hold off the expanding Khazars
4. How could they defeat the Ummayads
5. How could they dominate the entire Balkan peninsula for over 300 years
@@petertodorov1792 easy answer, only severians give 30,000k warriors, there's more, SEVEN slavic tribes, soo if one tribe can give 30k warriors, 8 tribes can give many times more than 30k
I live in bulgaria and i speak bulgarian and English
Good video, but unfortunate how the Black Bulgars of the Azov Region have been left out
They were vassals of the khazars
this countries were turkic. in second video, probably this dude will show slavic bulgaria.
First Attila is not from Dulo clan. He is the Huns clan.
Bulgarians clan Dulo leader is Avitohol and after him is Irnik. This is from bulgarians noun.
Stop slandering. This is not serious
Irmik you say oh irmik tatlısı :)
Probably my favorite Turkic tribe. Unfortunately only Chuvash remains. 😕
What about the Bulgars of Vand or nothern italy etc.
Good question
He didn’t do his homework
Hetmans map is 100% better
niiice
I wonder, if they knew of the others existence and what they thought about the other.
They probably lost contact when they left the azov sea region.
The theory that the Bulgarians were nomads and Turks is, to put it mildly, idiotic! There are no nomads that are. If there was a country wherever they went, if they had cities and fortresses, there is no Khan title among the Bulgarians КАНАС
Videos like this one are PAPAZA TAKLA ATTIRAN İMAM's wet dreams he cant stop spamming at all.
(Being a nuisance in every video about Bulgaria)
Macedonians 🤝 Attiran Imam.
@@BanJanuka Probably I have seen the conparison myself a few years ago as I wanted to feel how might a macedonian feel but the problem is with a profile like IMAM's. He makes everytnig about Turkiye and it's people like the represent the rest which they cant really suggest as it's not right at least for Bulgaria. The family gorup is turkic and thye are one big part of it as the bulgars were, bulgars came 800 years before what turks would call their own state. Those 800 years are strict heresy to suggest they are to be a pride for Turkiye and turks as this is his tone. With Macedonians, they just deny the whole thing, this is no dialogue and there is more data/ documents and artifacts as it was quite recent. We don't stop them to be something new as this is normal to happen in different ages of history but its rude/stupid and unfair to deny what we were together and downgrade what we did for them and make us evil.
@@BanJanuka Sorry for the mistakes in the writing but I think it still could be understood. I just wrote it too fast.
@@vasil.kamdzhalovPeter todorov or whatever his name is, is the worst
Names like Asparukh, Krum, Presian are found a lot in Armenia, even the Armenians have a Tsar with this name, there is no document or inscription anywhere that says that the Bulgarians believed in Tangra, this is also a fiction
Bulgaria won with Turkey in 1912-1913💪💪
Nonsense Bulgarians we’re never Turkic
If they were you should be able to give PRIMARY SOURCES to show Bulgarians were Turkic
In Eurasia, two races meet, the white man and the Chinese, the rest are a mixture of these.Kina built a museum in honor of the Hungarians,they know that they are Scythians, Huns.The remains of a white man are renamed.language and religion were changed due to external influences, e.g. Mongol invasion.At the end of the Parthian Empire, they founded two cities, Hungarian and Bulgarian, crossing the Caucasus.The 8th century Hungarian king list is the same as the Bulgarian one, etc.Hungarians, Bulgarians are not Turks.However, the Seljuks were Hungarians,that is why there are many similar Hungarian words in the Turkish language.Hungarian history begins with King Nimród's twin sons Hunor and Magor marrying King Alan's daughters.
Yes Brother,
The Hungarian Legend of the Miraculous Hind
@@petertodorov1792 bulgars are turkic
@@dakataprokemalmodern Turkish people and Turkic from central Asia are not the same.Bulgarians are not Turkic. It's DNA proven.
Please call it as Altay. Do not call Chinese. Because the source of the people were in Altay and Tibetan Plateau.
KRUM is an IRANIAN name
It means Fearsome and Thunderbolt just like KRUM was
Sogdian----GRM------Fearsome
Avestan----GRAMA--Fearsome
Wakhi-------GRIM/GROM---Thunderbolt
Pashtun------GRUMB-----------Thunderbolt
Baluchi--------GRUND-----------Thunderbolt
Modern Bulgarian----GRUM---Thunderbolt
B. Rastorguevia.John Adelman.Dictionary of Iranian Languages Vol,III (f-h),pgs 284-285.
E. Steblin-Kamenski. Etymological Dictionary of The Wakhi Language.
St. Petersburg .1990.,page.183.
The name KRUM is transcribed as KRUM in Greek , Cyrillic , and Glagolithic
so? Kubrat, Batbayan turkic?
@@AAlFASA
KUBRAT IS AN IRANIAN NAME
KUBRAT is an IRANIAN name
Armenian sources show the name as HUBRAAT and HUDBAD
Byzantine sources report the Persian name HUBRIADAN
Ossetians have the name HUBAD today
Persian--HUB---Good Deed
Sogdian -HUB--Good Deed
Modern Bulgarian HUBAV ---Handsome ,other Slavic languages do NOT have this word
Avestan--RATA---Gift
Modern Bulgarian --RATUVAM---To Desire, Other Slavic languages do not have this word
HUB + RAT= CREATOR OF GOOD
V. Raztorguevia. John Adelman. Etymological Dictionary of Iranian Languages. Vol-3(f-h) Moscow. 2007.,page416.
V. E. Abaev. Historical-Etymological Dictionary of The Ossetian Language. Vol--2, L-R, , pgs.339-340
D. N. MacKenzie-A Concise Pahlavi Dictionary . Oxford University Press. 1986., p. 70.
Theofilact Simokatta. History
Ferdinand Justi. Iranisches Namenbuch. Marburg. 1895., p.176
E. Gaglioti. Ossetian Family Names and Personal Names.Tskhinvali.2007., pgs.100-101.
@@petertodorov1792 Kurt = Kubrat ''Wolf''. The word that still exists in Turkish. Dulo's Turkish ''Tuğluk'' Tuğ is the symbol of Turkish rulers and is found in all Turkish leaders in history without exception. (In Turkey, it is seen as a first or surname.
) They believed in God, whom they called "Tangra", which the ancient Turks called "Tengri" and today's Turks called "Tanrı". The Byzantines, where the first Bulgarians lived, called them "Onglos". This is a claim that strengthens the fact that Bulgarians are the same as Onogur (Onugur) Turks. Bulgarians also used the IYI symbol, which was seen in the Seljuks and Ottomans. It resembles most of the symbols of Turkish tribes. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oghuz_Turks
.
@@petertodorov1792 Brother, you do not like Turks because of the Last Turkish Empire, I understand that, but please do not steal the history of my nation. Even if you steal, Turkish history is the greatest history of the world in terms of warfare
.
@@AAlFASA
NONSENSE
We have Great Kubrat's VERY OWN SIGNET RING with the inscription
BAT XOBRATY PATRIKIOS- To BAT XOBRAT the Patrician
1. BAT is and Iranian title
2. Patrician is a Roman title given only to Christians --which proves that Kubrat was a Christian
3.In Bulgarian we have the word HUB which means good or handsome
and RATUVAM wich means to desire
At last bulgars accept their faith that they are from Asia and turk tribes why others slavs serbs and macedon didn’t accept facts
Stop spreading those Turkish lies.
Below you will find real data that has not been altered by the Turkish government or the Turkish online trolls:
US National Library of Medicine - "...the Y-chromosome gene pool in modern Bulgarians is primarily represented by Western Eurasian haplogroups with ∼ 40% belonging to haplogroups E-V13 and I-M423, and 20% to R-M17. Haplogroups common in the Middle East (J and G) and in South Western Asia (R-L23*) occur at frequencies of 19% and 5%, respectively. Haplogroups C, N and Q, distinctive for Altaic and Central Asian Turkic-speaking populations, occur at the negligible frequency of only 1.5%...".
Novinite website - "Groundbreaking DNA research spanning Bulgaria, North Macedonia, Serbia, Romania, Albania, and Greece has unveiled striking revelations about the genetic makeup of Balkan populations. The study, conducted collaboratively by scientists from Serbia, Spain, and the US, sheds light on the prevalence of Slavic genes in the region. According to the findings reported by the Serbian Tanjug, Bulgarians, Romanians, and Croats exhibit the highest concentration of Slavic genes, ranging between 50% to 60%. Conversely, Greeks demonstrate the lowest presence of Slavic genetic heritage, measuring between 4% to 20%.".
Old church slavonic is actually old bulgarian
Serbs bulgars so called macedon hrvats boshjaks were in principle all Turkish tribes after they arrived in Balkan became slavic turks only boshjaks hold their religion while others slavs became Turkish orthodox even today you can find a lot bulgars who speak Turkish very well and kyrylic the true natives are only Illiryans Albanians lived in ancient pellaz ILLIRYA Stil today after 3000+ years even Magyars today Hungarian are not natives but mixed up with Turks tribes mongols name atila the hun says it all after learning all this about slavic immigrants Turkish tribes I should learn about Romanians have they connection with Dacian or not where are they they are different because they didn’t speak kyrylic language like others Turkish slav tribes serbs bulgars etc
Stop lying, troll.
National Library of Medicine (US Government) - "...the Y-chromosome gene pool in modern Bulgarians is primarily represented by Western Eurasian haplogroups with ∼ 40% belonging to haplogroups E-V13 and I-M423, and 20% to R-M17. Haplogroups common in the Middle East (J and G) and in South Western Asia (R-L23*) occur at frequencies of 19% and 5%, respectively. Haplogroups C, N and Q, distinctive for Altaic and Central Asian Turkic-speaking populations, occur at the negligible frequency of only 1.5%...".
0:40 Bulgars were pushed to the west by Khzars in the 7th century?! I have no idea about Khzar history. Are these Khzars founders of Kazakhstan?
Khazars, Bulgars, Kazakhs are all Turkic peoples
@@papazataklaattiranimam +
The Khazars spoke an Oghur Turkic language whereas the modern Kazakh language is of the Kipchak branch. Obviously historically it was a broad continuum that would flow into each other though. If you just mean the sound of the names, the etymology of the word Khazar isn't known.
Khazars we’re Altaized by the Sabir/Suvar people
@@petertodorov1792вы кумык?
BULGARs were OGUR TÜRKs : ON OGUR ( 10 Ogurs ) , SAR OGUR ( Yellow Ogurs ) , UTRİGUR ( 30 Ogurs ) , KUTRİGUR ( Rabies or Bald Ogurs ) Bulgars............. No doubt...............in Türkiye , we are OGUZ Türks................ OGUR or OGUZ , it doesnt matter................Both are TÜRKs..................
JESUS CHRIST , PROPHET MUHAMMAD , PROPHET MOSES
ALL OGHUR TURKS
@@petertodorov1792no, this is true history. Can Modern Bulgarian understood real Bulgar language. It is similar at how Modern Macedonian claim Macedonian name. Both Bulgaria and Macedonia should be renamed to Slavonia and their languages are called Slavonic. No Bulgar and Macedon anymore, that's not your identity.
There is a Name List of the Bulgarian princes, non-Bhanivs, there is no Khan title among the Bulgarians, there is KANA or Kan and it is placed before the name of the ruler, not after it like among the Turks! 1223 Bulgarians stop the Golden Horde
Wow
A medallion of Kanas U Bigi Omurtag was discovered in Bulgaria, on which he is depicted with a cross, he was a Christian as well as Kubrat, who has the title "Patricius" and this title is given only to Christians!
We, the bulgarian, are from indo-european origin. The genetic tests show that we are more than 99% in common with the other europeans and other white nations from Asia (from Asia doesn't necessarily mean that every nation is turkic or mongolic). Also, there are many historical descriptions of the ancient bulgarians, made by the iranians (to whom we have much in common), armenians and romans that describes our ancestors as white people, with beautiful clear faces, exactly the same as those of other europeans.
🇧🇬❤️🦁❤IYI
Yes it's true. The original "Bulgarians" disappeared into the Slavic sea and left only their ethnonym
Least inaccurate Bulgurian information
@@papazataklaattiranimamwhy are you so passionate about Bulgarians?Bulgarian wife left you,and took your money?You were rape in Bulgarian jail?
By the way modern Turkish people and turks from central Asia are not the same.
Lol😅 "IYI " Turkic symbol
@@stefanstamatov7725you slavization 😅
nowadays Kazan/Volga Tatars are Bulgars who mixed with some kipchaks
Turkic 🇲🇳
Khazar Khaganate 🇰🇿💪
Khazars = 🇮🇱
@@xanshen9011 Israel Amindi Kyz, who is not afraid
Nope it's not Kazakh, Kazahk people are Kipchak turks, Khazars are Oghurs, decendants from Kazarig-Bulgar/huns
@@mustafapetrovoglu1673Hazarlarin yönetici kismi Bati Göktürklerinden
@@yenidenturktarihtezi no one speak about The ruling Elite of Khazars
Bulgars arent turkic people, otherwise good video
According to Prof. Raymond Detrez, who is a specialist in Bulgarian history and language, such views are based on anti-Turkish sentiments and in serious scholarly circles it is well known that the Bulgar language was a Turkic one: Developing cultural identity in the Balkans: convergence vs divergence, Raymond Detrez, Pieter Plas, Peter Lang, 2005, p. 29
@@papazataklaattiranimam
Hanim
NO Bulgarians believe in the FAKE turkic theory😂😂
Benim bir sırp tarihci arkadaşim vardı kendilerini slav olarak görüyorlardı ama bulgarları ise slav degil tatar olarak görüyordu.
ASPARUKH IS AN IRANIAN NAME
Asparukh
Gender Male
Origin
Word/name Iranian
Meaning
Possessor of Shining Horses (aspa + rauk)
Asparukh is a Middle Iranian male name,[1] attested in ancient Georgia and early medieval Bulgaria. It is a compound with the two elements: "aspa" (horse) and "rauk" (shine), meaning "he who has shining horses".[2] Some other researchers claim that the name is derived from "aspa" (horse)
The two historically attested persons bearing this name are:
Asparukh of Iberia, a viceroy of Armazi in Iberia (Georgia), contemporary of the Roman emperor Hadrian (117-138 AD).
Asparukh of Bulgaria, founder of the First Bulgarian Empire in the 680s.
References
Hyun Jin Kim (2013). The Huns, Rome and the Birth of Europe. Cambridge University Press. p. 168. ISBN 9781107009066.
Encyclopedia Iranica online: Asparukh a Middle Iranian proper name attested in ancient Georgia and early medieval Bulgaria.
Bŭlgarski etimologichen rechnik, tom 1, Institut za bŭlgarski ezik (Bŭlgarska akademia na naukite) Vladimir Ivanov Georgiev, 1962, p.18.
However the linguistic impact of the Iranian world on the Turkic Bulgars is indisputable. For instance the name of the founder of Danubian Bulgaria was Asparukh, which is old Iranian in origin: "The Huns, Rome and the Birth of Europe", Hyun Jin Kim, Cambridge University Press, 2013,, p. 68.
@@papazataklaattiranimam
Hanim
If almost all the names of First Kingdom leaders is Iranian , How can they be Turkic then?🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
@@petertodorov1792 According to Prof. Raymond Detrez, who is a specialist in Bulgarian history and language, such views are based on anti-Turkish sentiments and in serious scholarly circles it is well known that the Bulgar language was a Turkic one: Developing cultural identity in the Balkans: convergence vs divergence, Raymond Detrez, Pieter Plas, Peter Lang, 2005, p. 29
@@papazataklaattiranimam
Hanim
That's right NO Bulgarian believes the FAKE turkic theory🤣🤣🤣🤣
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
İsim iranli diye kökeni iranlı deyil ESKİ BULGARLAR TÜRKTÜ
Little corect son Attlila Ernac created empire first Old Great Bulgaria have 1/2or 1/3 part from Area Hunic Empire.Real Old Great Bulgaria 🇧🇬 Conquest for Turik Haganate in 6 century 😉
Is bulgar turks or slavs
anient bulgars were turkic, people from modern day Bulgaria intermixed with locals and became slavic
@@jakdasjefferson3894 so a turks that speak slavic
they have turk mix but not turk ultimately turks went there and been assimilated they cant evaporate
its kinda like the franks in france. they were germanic ruling over gallo-roman people but then eventually everyone in france spoke romance
@@jakdasjefferson3894 Not true.
I have no life The Crimean khangante did not have all of Crimea WHAT IS LIFE
Last Bulgarian empire 1396 till resurfacing in 1878
The rulers of second bulgarian empire were cumans not bulgars
@@yenidenturktarihtezi not all, Smilets dynasty, Constantine Tih, Ivaylo, Rostislav Mihailovic, Yakov Svietoslav are slavs/Bulgarians,Russians
Not 1396, 1422. Търновско царство.
So bulgarians are accually turk so can you call some bulgarian slavs or other minoritys bulgars ?
The ancient Bulgars were indeed Ogur Turks, but the current ones are full-fledged Slavs + Thracians
@@emmetshtainakov9796 thx for ur opinion
@@berkates6990the demography changed, when Slavs migrated and needed to plow and serve the Bulğar Turk nobles. But it was the same how Roman lost to Germans. The difference was those Germans adopted Roman culture, but those Bulğar Turks assimilated to Slav despite they were the noble. Thankfully, Ottoman made the Greeks and Armenians became Turks instead. So it was cultural changing.
Soon...
👍👍
The Bulgars weren’t Turkic.
Then what were they
@@xanshen9011 Bulgurians think Bulgarians are Bulgars are exactly same🐰
@@papazataklaattiranimam The bulgarians are barely bulgar in origin. Modern bulgarians are more turkish if anything lol
@@xanshen9011 Bulgarians are Slavic peoples but Bulgars are Turkic peoples
@@papazataklaattiranimam Modern bulgarian genetics = slavic, thracian, dacian, greek, turkish, gypsy
Ancient bulgar genetics = turkic, mongolic, uralic, iranic
BORIS IS AN IRANIAN NAME
We find it around the eastern Black Sea in Greek inscriptions of Sarmatian names such as BORIS from Gorgipia
And BORASPIS from Tanais
Sarmatian/Alan---BOHRIS
Persian----------------BOHORIS
Contemporary personal names in Ossetian---BURA, BURAEX, BURISHKA, BORSI,
Contemporary family names in Ossetian--------BORSATAE, BORSITAE
ProtoIranian---BAURA---Blonde
Iranian------------BOR-------Blonde
Ossetian --------BORXAELAE--Blonde
V.I. Abaev." Historical/Etymological Dictionary of The Ossetian Language". Vol 1. 1989
Z. Gaglioti. "Ossetian Family and Personal Names."Tskhinvali, 2007., p.91
B. Rastorguev, Adelman, "EtymologicalDictionary of Iranian Language". Vol 2. 2003 .p152
Blaga/blessed/Aria-Blaga Aria=Blagaria.
Volga bulgaria wasn't slavic
Никакой Казани в Волжской Болгарии не было!
ㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋ 불가르가 터키니 이란이니 재밌네 부여인이 중동인으로 둔갑되는 신기한 국뽕 현상
history of warsaw please
Ironic that in both Bulgarias, eventually Slavs came out on top.
According to who exactly.
@@khanusmagnus577 history
There is no document from ancient or medieval authors in which it is claimed that the Bulgarians are Turks, although the Byzantine chroniclers say that the peoples inhabiting the Volga are Turks, yes, but the weak ones are also Turks😂
Bulgarians are not Turks or Slavs, the Slavs accept the Bulgarian alphabet and culture, there were no Turks before the 18th century. Where were the Turks when Bulgaria bordered the Roman Empire. There were artifacts somewhere about Turkish kings and the Turkish state before the Ottoman Empire, which is a mixture of many tribes from Anatolia, the Huns are from Bulgarian tribes.
You are so funny
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 WTF least ignorant slavic slave bulgarian who adopted the name of his Turkic masters, the Bulgars😂
Bro's living in another reality