ATTENTION: 1. Any and all hate speech will be deleted. 2. This is considered "official history" based on mainly non-Balkan historians. 3. "Turkic" refers to nomadic tribes from the Eurasian steppes that spoke Turkic languages - NOT Turkish from Turkey. 4. There is no concrete evidence of significant Thracian influence in the Bulgarian ethnogenesis although undoubtedly Bulgarians or at least the local Slavs absorbed the remaining Thracians which influenced the grammar of the Bulgarian language making it more similar to Albanian than to other Slavic languages, the so-called "Balkan sprachbund".
Listen Kosovo-Albanian piece of political disaster. WE ARE NOT TURKIC we do not have MONGOLIAN eyes for god's sake, cant you understand it once and for all?!?! We got less than 1 % Turkic features....stop this nonsense now! This is insulting us, is this the way you are making a diplomacy?! I can call you negros or asians or indians or even aborigens if that's gonna make you fill better, and make me feel equal. Are you okay with that, negro? NO YOU ARE NOT! That is why you must STOP THIS!
@@СтоянНенов-у8ы Прав си само не обиждай сърбите, те са наши братя въпреки всичко което са ни правили на нас и ние на тях. Тези са платени от Албания, а Албания е платена от Америка....толкова е просто, че няма на къде!
@@thomaszioudros181 This is the propaganda, greek dude. The propaganda starts many centuries ago, but today's propaganda comes from the decision that we were Tataric people, so we could easely be assimilated by Russia, although we gave BIRTH to them, by giving them our civilization that is why we are brothers with russians and all so called "slavic" tribes, which comes as a word from the Russian Queen or Tsarina Ekaterina, who is actually GERMAN WOMAN! Second this propaganda is making other nations open to take our lands that is why it is a propagand. The truth is we are here from the whole beginning....we just spread ourselves across the Black Sea, due to the invasion of the Roman empire. I REALLY don't wanna teach you history, you are already brain washed by the official history which is a DOCTRINE, NOT A HISTORY! The people who command the financial world today, give the order what history, to whom should be given. They could invent ANYTHING in ANYONE's history. And this here is just a small part of it. The propaganda ofcourse is not obvious it is entertwined or implemented, injected into the truth and real events, so you could easely believe the lies. Everything else is a bullshit. And ONE HUMONGOUS LIE is such as that we are turkic AKA we are mongol or stretched eyes, yellow or dark yellow skinned and small....which is a HUGE LIE! The average bulgarin was and still is mostly brightly brown haired or just brown haired, white but not pale skinned with anthropomorphic features of the modern european men! Our genes gave birth to much of Europe modern men, our culture, language, believes, our WHOLE civilization gave birth to the Eastern Europe aswell with the so called "Eastern Roman Empire Christianity Civilization" - we were rivals, and we did privail. THAT IS WHY today I understand very easely, lots of words, habits and way of life of most of slavic countries today in whole Eastern Europe! That is so extremely simple, and when we put to the test our genome......dude we own this place.....we EARNED by winning battles this land and even more on the Balkan Peninsula, but we just had the worst leaders for the last 100 years....so, don't tell me "official history" stuff, this is so ridiculous I can't even stand this pathetic video! IT insults my pride, my dignity, my honour and my people!
1.Bulgaria was never a vassal of the serbian state. 2. Took over 50 years of constant war for Bulgaria to be conquered by the ottomans 3. serbia was fully conquered by Bulgaria in 10th century by Simeon. The population was resettled in moesia. 4. The battle of Velbuzhd only lead to macedonia being conquered not whole of Bulgaria. The army of Dusan was repulsed and peace treaty signed soon after. 5. many uprisings in 16, 17, 18th centuries during Ottoman times. Not just 19th century like portrayed. Veliko Turnov uprising, Chiprovtsi uprising are just among some of them 6. the slavic population in Macedonia in 19th century was not mixed. the slavs identified as bulgarian. that can easily be seen in third party sources including the Ottoman census and french, german and russian sources. One of them is the Carnegie report published in 1914. There is absolutely no debate over this now. 7. serb chetniks did not exist in macedonia. that is absurd. 8. Bulgaria doesn't turn on Serbia and Greece after first balkan war. Serbia and Greece turn on Bulgaria. Serbia makes a secret pact with Greece to partition Macedonia in violation of the agreement it had with Bulgaria. After serbia occupies Macedonia ethnic cleansing and repressions begins soon after. This is well documented in the Carnegie Report of 1914. Bulgaria has no choice but to wage war as the serbs were intransigent. 9. Bulgaria does not become a republic after Ferdinand's abdication. His son Boris III is next in line. That is absurd. 10. Communists only took power due to soviet actions. The communists were not popular in Bulgaria. In fact Boris III was likely the most popular monarch in Europe. The communists executed politicians not because of "war crimes" but for the usual trumped up charges of being "enemies of the people". these are just some of the inacuracies. I mean seriously where did you get this info?
What do you mean there was no Serbian chetniks in Macedonia? Search about Serbian Chetnik Organizations which operated mostly in Vardar region from 1903-1908, and later during the Balkan wars and WW1.
Всъщност сме били.. макар и да сме горди не може да отречем че голяма част от историята ни е прекарана или във васалство (това не означава робство.. гугълни го ако искаш) или РОБСТВО... Византийско, Османско.. След освобождението сме управлявани от руска администрация (това донякъде е васалство)... като цяло не сме много специални.. единствено 681-1018 (първа българска империя) са ни великите години...
@_ Bulgarian Mapper _ ahh.. If you try to imagine history nowadays you'll see it all so crazy.. There's a Serbian I talkred with and she told me, neighboring countries with serbia hate each other like albania.
Ivan Alexander was not a serbian vassal. Ivan Stefan was a serbian protege and he ruled Bulgaria for 8 months only, But then the Bulgarian boyars dethroned him. There comes Ivan Alexander, who has a peaceful relationship with Ivan Dusan, but not аs his vassal.
Funny how you mention some insignificant, inconsequential losses to Serbia during Boris I Michael, but never mention that his son Simeon conquers ALL of Serbia? That's a bit strange lmao. Simeon first installs a vassal on the Serbian throne and later just outright takes everything under his own scepter. You called this 9:45 "bulk of the Serbian territories" bulk is a funny word for ALL of them, but OK. No hate to Serbia - they had a glorious and mighty Empire under Dushan as well, but this video is insane.
Pretty good video about Bulgaria from a Serbian perspective! However, the ancient Bulgars (Proto--Bulgars) were not a Turkic (Turanid) tribe. Studies by leading historians, anthropologists, linguists, archeologists, and geneticists since the 1980's have discarded the old belief about their Turkic origin. The Bulgarian Empire was founded in 627 A.D. in what is today the south of European Russia. Another (Volga) Bulgarian state was set up in 675 A.D. in the east of what today is known as European Russia. It was destroyed by the Mongols in the 1240's. Balkan (Danubian) Bulgaria was founded in 681 A.D. The modern Balkan Bulgarians are chiefly the descendants of Slavs, Thracians, and Proto--Bulgars. Only 0.5% of their genes can be traced to East Asia. For Eastern and Central Europe, the average of the same (Mongoloid) genes is about 1.5%. Also, following the battle of Velbuzhd in 1330, Serbian influence in Bulgaria lasted only for a couple of years. BTW, the mother and the wife of the most prominent Serbian king, Stephen Dushan, were Bulgarian princesses. Greetings to all TRUTH--LOVERS from an American descendant of Bulgarians from Aegean Macedonia and Pirot!
Pan-Turkic Nationalist the evidence is compelling. It is called genetics. The Turkic people are Mongolians with Asian genetics. Bulgarians are with Indo European genetics. I have never seen Asian looking Bulgarians in Bulgaria.
@Pan-Turkic Nationalist There is no proto-Bulgars , the name is Bolgar here you go buddy spisanie8.bg/рубрики/история/2252-какво-все-пак-е-това-bolgar.html (4th to 5th century,Vinica,Macedonia) bg.wikipedia.org/wiki/Файл:Bolgari_sclavi_teracota_Vinitza_FYROM.jpg use google translate if you dont know bulgarian. Capital of danube Bulgaria is pliska, hmmm i think that is in the so-called slavic language?(but there was no slavs in the balkan during Constantine between 306 and 337 AD(his rule).Here is a text that literaly states that Pliska was done by Constantine , www.documentacatholicaomnia.eu/20vs/203_CSHB/1828-1897,_CSHB,_15_Georgius_Codinus_Excerpta_de_Antiquitatibus_Cpolitanis_[Bekkeri_Editio],_GR.pdf (page 43) picture for quicker: imgur.com/a/lLeY2BI All this nonsence proto-bulgars is Russian ,Austro-Hungarian , German falsification , they never proved tangra, Khans(not a single fucking document or artifact to proved it yet they teach us this shit), or anything asian ever.
@Pan-Turkic Nationalist The Bulgars had nothing in common with the turkic tribes besides some cultural and genetic influence. Here the largest genetic and anthropological study on those so called Bulgars and the Modern Bulgarians yet The research has been approved by the Ethics Committee for Clinical Experimentation of the University of Pavia, Board minutes of the 5th of October 2010. Geographical and genealogy information were ascertained by interview after having obtained their written informed consent. Reasearch: We found that 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%. Principal Component analyses group Bulgarians with European populations, apart from Central Asian Turkic-speaking groups and South Western Asia populations. Within the country, the genetic variation is structured in Western, Central and Eastern Bulgaria indicating that the Balkan Mountains have been permeable to human movements. The lineage analysis provided the following interesting results: (i) R-L23* is present in Eastern Bulgaria since the post glacial period; (ii) haplogroup E-V13 has a Mesolithic age in Bulgaria from where it expanded after the arrival of farming; (iii) haplogroup J-M241 probably reflects the Neolithic westward expansion of farmers from the earliest sites along the Black Sea. *On the whole, in light of the most recent historical studies, which indicate a substantial proto-Bulgarian input to the contemporary Bulgarian people, our data suggest that a common paternal ancestry between the proto-Bulgarians and the Altaic and Central Asian Turkic-speaking populations either did not exist or was negligible* . Read the full research www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3590186/
I AGREE! Greetings from an American descendant of ethnic Bulgarians from Aegean Macedonia and Pirot! No more fighting between Orthodox Christian and Slavic brothers!
The Macedonians who are separate people to the Greeks during and before Alexanders time, during the Roman Empire when Greeks joined Romans to fight against the Macedonians, and as a result during bible times separate lands and people as mentioned in the bible... they’re the same Macedonians (who were not Greek) that were already in the Balkans before these Bulgars came strolling down to the Balkans. The Macedonian Cyrillic alphabet was developed in Solun/Thessaloniki by Macedonians during the beginning of the Macedonian dynasty of the Byzantine empire. If you look at the Bulgarian empires, at no time did they ever control Solun/Thessaloniki. Also history records that during tsar Samuels Macedonian kingdom from Skopje then Prespa and Ohrid, during that time the Bulgarians and their empire was defeated and under Byzantine control, so tsar Samuels “Macedonian” kingdom could not have been Bulgarian.
@@WatchmanofMKDN The Cyrillic alphabet was created in Bulgaria in the city of Preslav, look it up: "Preslav Literary School". It is a Bulgarian alphabet devised by Bulgarian monks. And i m speaking facts here that anyone can look up on the internet and learn for himself. Those Bulgarian monks such as Naum and Clement were students of Sts.Cyril and Methdius and have traveled with them on their journy to Great Moravia.
Bularians in America, come home! america and the west is about to become a titanic. Come home and be safe!!! America is not for Bulgarians!!! dont beslaves to a murderer america that screws everything and everyone she comes in contact with. You will be homeless and jobless ! you will be replaced by robots leaving you a slave to murdering USA
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”.
Nice Turkish propaganda. Now let's use some real sources: 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%...".
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.
Turkish lies and misinformation. 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%...".
Nice Turkish propaganda. Now let's use some real sources: 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%...".
Mihail Nikoloff Maybe not back then but post WWll Serbians were encouraged to move to Macedonia and marry Macedonians, obviously this would bring them closer with Serbia and further away from Bulgaria (Tito's object was to suppress the Bulgarian influence in Macedonia and eradicate Bulgarian national chauvinism)... anyway greetings from Australia:)
Mihail Nikoloff Etnik Bulgaria are Turcik people!!! Macedonians are not Bulgars!!!! Stop laying ,Ancient Serbs are INDIGINUS PEOPLE OF Balkans!!!! People of Macedonia are Slavic and ancient!!!!!
Mihail Nikoloff hahahaha Serbia and Greece (allied) both worked towards suppressing the Bulgarian character in Macedonia, the funny thing is "Macedonia" was used as a weapon to achieve this, now it's biting them back in the ass (especially Greece)...no negativity but I'm not sure how Bulgarians could ever mend friendship with either Serbia or Greece, both these idiotic states divided the Bulgarian people and turned them away from one another! (it's almost like an outside force telling you to hate your brother or sister)
Личи си че е правено от сърбин. Всяка втора дума е за Сърбия, сякаш е имала кой знае каква роля за средновековна България. Други епизоди са направо пропуснати за сметка на сърбия това сърбия онова.
@@Todor-BG Нещо не ти разбрах тезата. Аз понеже съм бил корав трябва да направя нещо за което теб те е страх или..? Или е опит за ирония, с арнаутите си и отричаш престъпленията им?
@@Todor-BG чак се дразниш че не съм им написал правилно името. Сложил си си българско знаме на профила, едно време знаеш ли как са наричали българите които са с рязаните ислямистити, с арнаутите. Ти с тях ли си, арнаутски гювендия ли си?
I believe Bulgars are Scythian in origin, therefore they can not be of Turkic or Chinese origin. In modern times they may have intermingled with some of the Turkic tribes (Ottamans after the rise of Islam , i.e 7th century AD) who now occupy the country of Turkey. Please provide genetic proof about your allegation that Bulgars are of Chinese or Turkic extraction prior to 7th century AD.
There are a lot of unknown thing about Bulgarian history. Such as the origin of our people. Bulgars are not turkic: Bulgarians don't have turkic ethnic traits, nor do our ancestors if u take a look at paintings from the 9th century for example. Recent nonpolitical genetic studies dismissed the turkic theory completely.
Amen Brother, Bulgarians were Sarmatians They worshiped the Iranian Rider God Siavush Read the work of our scholar Dr. Zhivko Voynikov on the Bulgarian god Siavush/SIva Bog
@@petertodorov9540 I've read multiple books on the topic and all say a different thing. How do u know your book is true lol Stefan Tsanev's book, Gancho Tsenov's books ect.
@@petertodorov9540 but one thing is clear. Genetic research says it all. I can send u the video if u want. Genetic research completely debunked the turkic origin theory.
@@georgimihalkov9678 Send me the links Brother, The problem with the Thracian/Autochthonous theory is that it doesn't explain the Volga Bulgarians And the Bulgarians of Vund in Armenia and the Caucasus from the 1st century AD spoken about in Armenian sources Also all the names of the Bulgarian Bats and Kanasubigis are Iranian
Ruling dynasties of Bulgaria had all non-Slavic origins Let’s look at them Dulo dynasty = Turkic Bulgar origin Krum’s dynasty = Turkic Bulgar origin Cometopuli dynasty = Armenian origin Asenid dynasty = Turkic Cuman origin Sratsimir dynasty= Turkic Cuman origin Shishman dynasty= Turkic Cuman origin Terter dynasty= Turkic Cuman origin Battenberg dynasty= Germanic German origin House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha-Koháry= Germanic Frank origin History of Bulgaria is undoubtedly the most powerful history in Balkans but their rulers were not even Slavic Bulgarians…
Nice Turkish propaganda. Now let's use some real sources: 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%...".
Of course, it is obvious when you see a blond guy with blu eyes, the present prime minister of Bulgaria, you are sure to see a real Mongolian, ha ha ha.
this video is so made by a serb most of the facts are not right and its said as serbia was “stronger” and looks like they beated us at wars while irl it was the opposite
15:55 “... stage an uprising in 1876 ... resulting in an independent ... state in 1878 ...”. Wrong! After brutal suppression of the 1876 uprising by the Turks, the Russo-Turkish war of 1877-78 resulted in the establishment of a Bulgarian state.
This video is a perfect example of disinformation: presentation of facts, interpreted in a way that makes them honest lies. At the end he literally said that the Soviet Union collapsed in 1981! And this is about as punctual as he gets!
I'm a Serbian nationalist (as if it isn't obvious), but I would like to see your evidence for Macedonia being mixed Serbo-Bulgarian and not 100% Bulgarian.
@Znik yеs 10% еthnic sеrbs livе in macеdonia. But thе ancеstors of еvеryonе who considers himsеlf a "macеdonian" usеd to consider thеmselvеs Bulgarians. Thе makеdonist propaganda was pushеd only to еthnic Bulgarians in order to dеstory their Bulgarian identity
+Bulgarian empire mapping The Mijak and Brsjak tribes in FYROM are ethnically Serbian and their territories are historically almost 1/2 of FYROM And the communist propaganda also oppressed many ethnic Serbs in macedonia so today many of them say they are "Macedonians" and make a fake "macedonian church" from the Serbian church
@@historyrhymes1701 Tito's propaganda was pushed to everyone (besides the Albanians) in Macedonia. Also, as a side note, Macedonian is just a highly differing dialect of Bulgarian (same with the made-up language of the Montenegrins). The more nationalistic Macedonians just abused the fact that dialect was so differing to make it a language. It wouldn't be so hard. After all, Tito invented Montenegrin despite it not exactly being a dialect. Anyways, Bulgaria tried to re-introduce Bulgarian into Macedonia and that failed. The nationalists just had to abuse the newly created Macedonian language and produce outrage amongst its speakers (those who do not believe it's a dialect) against Bulgaria. And they did. Now they had their ethnicity, so that Tito could abuse it later on.
I am sorry but Serbia wasnt more than tribal dependent principality before the 1200s when the the kingdom was established. The Bulgarian empire was 15 times larger than it. And those "tartar" Bulgarians wеre 10 times more civilized than the slavs. Type "Pliska" and "Preslav" and you ll see that these people had stone cities way before the other slavs. Even the Byzantines called The first Bulgarian state "Great old Bulgaria.
In short, it is hard to think of any other ethnolinguistic entity in history that conquered so vast a territory and founded so many empires and states, also contributing to world civilizations. The history of the Turkic peoples was an important factor in world history for more than a millennium until the emergence of Europe as the world's dominant power. What happened in the Turkic world often affected the history of China, Central Asia, the Middle East, South Asia, and Europe. One may also argue that world history began with the "Turko-Mongol" empire created by Chinggis Khan. In the contemporary world, Turkic-speaking nations form six states (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan, and Turkey/Türkiye) and several "autonomous" units in Russia (the republics of Chuvash, Tatarstan, Bashkortostan, Altai, Khakassia, Tuva, and Sakha) and China (the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region). Turkic peoples also reside as minority groups in several other countries, including Mongolia and Iran, among others. It would therefore be difficult to acquire a comprehensive understanding of world history as well as our present world without studying the history of the Turkic peoples.
Nice Turkish propaganda. Now let's use some real sources: 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%...".
The South Slavic tribal groups moved south and southwest from their Pripet homeland, eventually entering the Byzantine-controlled Balkan Peninsula as either allies of or refugees from the invading Turkic Avars during the second half of the sixth century. Their search for a new, permanent homeland proved successful. Today their descendants solidly inhabit virtually all of the northwestern, central, and southeastern regions of the Balkans. Turks comprise a third ethnic component of the Balkan population. Although today numerically small-a little over 1 million people (about 2 percent of the total population) they have played a role in shaping the history of the Balkans far beyond their numbers. In late antiquity the rolling plains of the Danube and Prut rivers in the Balkans' northeast served Turkic tribes from the Eurasian steppes as an open door into the heart of the peninsula and the riches of the Eastern Roman Empire. Huns and related tribes swept through the Balkans in the fifth and sixth centuries, followed by the Avars and their allies in the sixth and seventh. Among these latter were the Bulgars, who established a state south of the Danube. Unlike the Avars, whose settlements in the Balkans proved transitory, the Bulgar state persisted in the face of concerted Byzantine pressures. By the ninth century the Bulgars were challenging the Byzantine Empire for political hegemony in the Balkans, but by that time they also were well on the way toward ethnic assimilation into their Slavic-speaking subject population. The conversion of the Turkic Bulgar ruling elite to Orthodox Chris-tianity at midcentury opened the gate to their rapid and total Slavic assimilation. Within a hundred years of the Bulgar conversion, most traces of their Turkic origins had disappeared, except for their name-the Bulgars had been transformed into Slavic Bulgarians Oğuz, Pecheneg, and Cuman Turkic tribes appeared in the Balkans between the ninth and eleventh centuries. Most of them eventually suffered an ethnic fate similar to the Bulgars and left little lasting impression, although the Gagauz Turks of Bessarabia, a region lying east of the Prut River (now known as Moldova), and some Turks living today in the eastern Balkans may be direct ethnic descendants of those medieval Turkic interlopers. Additionally, the Ottoman Turks' five-century rule over most of the Balkans established numerous scattered enclaves of Turkish- speaking groups throughout much of the southern portion of the peninsula, with a heavy concentration in the southeastern region of ancient Thrace.
Nice Turkish propaganda. Now let's use some real sources: 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%...".
Slavic civilization was removed from their land by the ghots. In the 3-5 century in the territory of today Romania-ucraine reigned the goths and created with the grabbed/exploited slavic women a slavic nation with the gothic paternal decendance. Many goths with their slavic children were pushed by the huns, entered the balcans (many kept to stay under the hunic control and became sclavens on the Greek map of 6th century). This moment is very well documented in the Greek chronicles. The Greeks provided a territory for the goths, and there are only the understanding and questioning how the slavs appeared. There is a complete anomaly that the specific slavic genetic R is so low in balcans, but so high the gothic one, but the historical events explane that. From that periode, the name of the exploited nation brought the meaning of "slave" for germans or "sclavens" for Greeks or "serb/serf" (servant) for latins. The exploitation of slavs by the goths was extremely wild. They sold the thousands at constantinipol and thousands exploited for themselves.
BONESAW IS READY they were not Turkic at all Bulgars were predominately Turkicized Iranic Samartians and Alans. It seems the Bulgars predominated the Central Asian Iranic Caucasoid type with a small mongoloid admixture of possibly 3 to 4 % on average with a few or minority being more Mongoloid than the average especially with the males. They were almost physically indistinguishable from the Samaritans and Pamiri Tajiks 😂🤣🤣🤣🤣 historians of Bulgarians origin saying this 🤣😂🤣🤣 ANTHROPOLOGICAL STUDY OF MEDIAEVAL CEMETERIES NO. 1 AND NO. 3 NEAR DEVNYA (BULGARIA) P. BOEV, L. KAVGAZOVA and D. PIPERKOVA North-Iranic racial types, characteristic for the Alanians, have been found. This shows that at Devnya were present besides proto-Bulgarians are Alano-Sarmatians whose mixed breeding had already started. 🤣😂🤣😂😂🤣😂🤣🤣 END OF ARGUMENT 🤣😂😂 thank you to Bulgarians historians to make your history weak again the Turkic origin of Bulgars has been dead since more 20 years now 😂😂🤣🤣🤣
3:15 Actually Tervel was apparently Christian. Kubrat was definitely Christian as he was baptized in Constantinople. This was all documented by Byzantine historians. It stands to reason that Asparukh was Christian as well being his son and passed this on. In those days they probably were not very open with their Christianity as the bulgars were tengrists and a leader proclaiming himself to be a Christian would probably not be a great political move.
What tengrism man? Here is a icon whit Bolgar on it and a cristian cross on top spisanie8.bg/рубрики/наука/2138-болгар-болгар.html 200 years min, up to 300, before Danube Bulgaria where do you see tengrism son? You read it in wiki? must be bulletproof then. They never provided enything to prove tengrism just opions used as facts.
THE VOLGA BULGAR AMIRATE:TURKIC EXPANSION NORTH OF THE STEPPE. In the aftermath of the Hunnic invasion, various Turkic peoples known as Bulgars entered the south Russian steppe from Kazakhstan. Noonan, T. (2000). European Russia, c. 500-c. 1050. In T. Reuter (Ed.), The New Cambridge Medieval History (The New Cambridge Medieval History, pp. 485-513). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CHOL9780521364478.020 A variety of Slavic, and according to some scholars, Bulgar-Turkic peoples gained political significance in the Carpathian basin. Several Slavic dukes, who were at the same time Frankish clients and leaders of war bands, emerged over separate principalities. Berend, N., Urbańczyk, P., & Wiszewski, P. (2013). The history of the region and the question of origins. In Central Europe in the High Middle Ages: Bohemia, Hungary and Poland, c.900-c.1300 (Cambridge Medieval Textbooks, pp. 40-109). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511813795.002 For that time,too,the Bulgarians,originally Turkic invaders of the Balkans from Asia via the north of the Black sea in the late seventh century,had become completely assimilated to the Slav majority. For that time,to the, RUSSIAN: A LINGUISTIC INTRODUCTION. Paul Cubberley. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2002. pp.6 They colonised areas of the eastern Balkans and in the seventh century other Slav tribes combined with the Proto-Bulgars, a group of Turkic origin, to launch a fresh assault into the Balkans. *Crampton, R. (2005). THE BULGARIAN LANDS FROM PREHISTORY TO THE ARRIVAL OF THE BULGARIANS. In A Concise History of Bulgaria (Cambridge Concise Histories, pp. 1-8). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.* We know that the Avars,whose great days were long past by 700,were subject to a khagan,because a Frankish source was under the imperssion that such was the ruler’s name.Asparuch,ruler of the Bulgars,another Turkic people that had established itself south of the Danube by 700,must also have been a ‘khan’,to judge by inscriptions of his successors. Fouracre, P. (Ed.). (2005). The New Cambridge Medieval History (The New Cambridge Medieval History). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press pp.572. doi:10.1017/CHOL9780521362917 This ruling elite dominated a large state.While precise boundaries are unclear,Volga Bulgaria included substantial Finnic and Ugrian areas north of the Volga,a large part of modern Bashkiria to the east,much of the Volga region south of the Bulgar territory itself,and the lands of the Finns and east Slavs to the west perhaps as far as the Oka River.Volga Bulgaria was a multhiethnic state,with large numbers of Turkic Bulgars and Bashkirs,a variety of Finnic and Ugrian peoples,and many east Slavs. Reuter, T. (Ed.). (2000). The New Cambridge Medieval History (The New Cambridge Medieval History). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp.574 doi:10.1017/CHOL9780521364478 Bulgaria at this time had acquired some traits typical of a barbarian state,because the bellicose tribe of the Bulgars had imported the Turkic traditions of the great steppe into the Balkans. The Old Testament in Byzantium Edited by Paul Magdalino Robert S. Nelson Washington, D.C. :Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection : Distributed by Harvard University Press, c2010. pp. 255 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. Bowersock, Glen W. & al. Late Antiquity: A Guide to the Postclassical World pp.354 Harvard University Press, 1999. ISBN 0-674-51173-5.
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
Ciril and Metodi did not create the cirilic alphabet. They created glagolica and this is what you show in the video. The so called cirilic was created by Kliment under the order of the bulgarian tzar. Therefore it is not correct to be called cirilic. This is official history.
@Delaram Salmassi Lol old Bulgaria is Turkic not Iranic... Nowadays Bulgarian people just mixing with slavs, but they ancestors tatars, Turks, Mongols,
1. The Bulgars were confederation of numerous tribes with mixed origin, but with predominant Iranian ethnic element. The Proto-Bulgarians as inhabitants of the lands north of the Caucasus in the 2nd century are mentioned by the Armenian historian Movses Khorenatsi. In his History of Armenia, written in the 80's of the 5th century AD, he speaks about two migrations of Proto-Bulgarians from Caucasus to Armenia. The Bulgars lived amongst Scythian tribes for centuries before coming to the Balkans. However, Turkic elements could also be found due to the influence of the Göktürks and the Avars in Pannonia. If we assume that the Avars were Turkic, of course. 2. The names of many of the rulers and aristocrats of Old Great Bulgaria and the First Bulgarian Empire are of Iranian origin. Names such as Sinnion, Zabergan, Kubrat, Asparukh, Kardam, Omurtag, Boris, Rasate, etc., does not have Turkic analogues. The last pagan ruler of Bulgaria was literally called Persian/Presian. 3. The language of the Bulgars is largely unknown, since not enough words are being preserved. The Volga Bulgars were conquered by the Mongols and assimilated into their culture. The modern Chuvash language has a lot of components to it and its related to the Bulgar language only in theory. The Chuvash people are most likely to be descendants of the Turkic Sabir tribes mixed with local Finno-Ugric populations. Instead of looking for the origin of the Bulgars in Chuvashia, you should search in what is now Kabardino-Balkaria, Georgia, Armenia, Chechnya and in the Caucasus in general. 4. There is NO historical source or evidence of Tengrism in Bulgaria. Simple as that. 5. Modern researchers with historical and archeological background (Todor Chobanov for example) see resemblance between the monumental pagan temples in Bulgaria (Madara, Pliska, Preslav, etc.) and the Persian ''Fire temples'' - the place of worship for the followers of Zoroastrianism. The Proto-Bulgarian construction tradition and pagan temples have their roots and most accurate analogues in the Caucasus. There is also a resemblance between the Madara Horseman relief and the Sasanian rock reliefs, like the one in Rag-i-Bibi for example. After the Baptism (864), the pagan temples were destroyed and Christian temples were built on the their foundations. 6. The ruler of Old Great Bulgaria (Kubrat/Kurt) and his uncle (Organa/Organ) were Christians. Kubrat's grandson Tervel was also Christian. Even before them, Grod, a Proto-Bulgarian ruler of the Kutrigurs who around 528 C.E. converted to Christianity and tried to spread it amongst his people, was overthrown because of it, similarity to what happened to Enravota in 833 C.E., which became Bulgaria's first saint. 7. The Bulgars in the Balkans were not just ''assimilated''. Knyaz Boris I and his boyars chose a new language and religion that will unite and strengthen the Empire further more. That's why he ordered the creation of the Cyrillic alphabet and converted to Christianity.
Turkic languages were spoken by the warrior *aristocracy of the Hunnic, Avar, and Bulgar khaganates, coexisting with the Indo-European tongue of their subjects. In the Bulgar khaganate, *inscriptions were written in Greek using Greek characters or in the Bulgar language using Greek or runic characters. Oliver Nicholson, The Oxford Dictionary of Late Antiquity, Oxford University Press, 2018, ISBN 0192562460, p. 200 The greatest obstacle to the empire's revival was the presence to the south ofthe Danube of the Bulgar khaganate with its capital at Pliska and a southern frontier in the Hebros/Maritza valley only three days march from Constantinople. In 780 the Bulgar state had survived in close proximity to Byzantium for almost a century, taking advantage of the empire's internal problems and wars against the Arabs, and this survival had hardened it into an extremely tough political entity. Its Turkic ruling elite combined the military ferocity of the steppe people they had been with the agricultural resource base of the Slav peasantry they dominated and with the skills of civilization acquired from Greek traders, captives, and defectors. Mango, Cyril A. 2002. The Oxford history of Byzantium. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p.172 For a long time, the Bulgharian state retained a Turkic organisation, which gradually adopted elements borrowed from Byzantium. Some of the titles have still not been deciphered, but kavhan, boy/a, khan, kolovur, bagatur, tarkhan and sampsi are Turkic in origin, or were at least used by Turkic peoples. In the meantime, the leading Turkic class gradually diminished, and became assimilated in to the Slav population. By the end of the 7th century, bilinguality was wide spread. Omurtag's three sons (also) had Slavonic names (Vovin. Zvinitsa and Malamir). The linguistic effect of Turkic-Slav coexistence is also reflected in inscriptions. Among the titles of court office bearers was, för example, the ichirgu boy/a, the 'internal boyla' of which parallels are attested in Turkic sources of Central Asia. From a Cyrillic inscription of around 969 it is known that at the end ofthe era this would be approximately uttered as chregubilya. The second element of the title is the origin of the Hungarian name Béla, used by several kings of the Árpád dynasty. R., 1999. Hungarians and Europe in the early Middle Ages. Budapest: Central European University Press, p.228. At some point during the second half of the early eleventh century, after living for a long time among Turkic populations and studying their languages and traditions, Mahmud al-Kashghari produced a well-documented work about the "Turks." According to him, only the Qirqiz, the Qipchaq, the Oghuz and five other tribes spoke a pure Turkic language, while the languages of the Bulgars, Suvars and Pech enegs Bačänäk), while undoubtedly Turkic, had been altered by foreign influences. Mahmud al-Kashgari believed that initially there were very few differences between all those languages, all phonetical." He saw the linguistic fragmentation as a natural phenomenon, given the vast area, between the Byzantine and the Chinese frontiers, in which those peoples lived. Spinei, V., 2009. The Romanians and the Turkic nomads north of the Danube Delta from the tenth to the mid-thirteenth century. Leiden: Brill, pp.181, 182.
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.
@@BGBolyar Thank you for the great post Brother We all know Bulgarians are of Sarmatian/Iranian origin The Turkic theory is a compete fake The Ashina dynasty is an Iranic dynasty Their first Turkic dynasty is not even Turkic🤣🤣🤣🤣
There are so many inaccuracies here it begs the question where did you get the facts from? Michael Shishman was not beheaded on the battle field. That is so uncommon especially during late middle ages. Christian armies never did that. They would capture the leader. In this situation that is exactly what happened. "The Emperor himself was badly wounded, his horse killed under him and was captured by the oncoming enemy soldiers. He was taken to the Serbian camp where he probably expired from his wounds on the fourth day of his captivity, on 31 July." Maybe do some fact-checking before you produce videos like this.
15:05 - After the Battle of Velbazhd, Bulgaria lost the battle but retained its sovereignty and it NEVER became a vassal of the serbs (Unlike Serbia which was twice conquered and incorporated into the Bulgarian Empires). - However Bulgaria was unable to halt the serbian advance into Macedonia (the first time serbs entered macedonia was in 12th century) and they conquered some lands from the Bulgarians and the Byzantines. - That's about it. The Serbs overexaggerate their little "empire" way too much, which lasted only 25 years. - Not to mention Tsar Dushan's mother was a Bulgarian princess and his father had Bulgarian roots as well. He was crowned emperor by the Bulgarian patriarch in Skopjie. We can say Dusan was a Southslavic common king, not just serbian.
Agree. But the same thing can be said also about Samuil. Back then ethnic identities were not that well defined and distinctive. Greek speaking population was confronted with Slavic one, and occasionally some steppe raiders would enter the picture, but the distinction as strong as we hold it today has been made much later.
0:45 WRONG never let a balkan person make a video about bulgaria... they only talk trash because they know how greatful and good we are we are NOT TURKS WE ARE BULGARIANS NOTHING ELSE WE ARE ONE OF THE FIRST NATIONS
At the time,the new Khazar qaganate was expanding westward,squeezing out the Onogurs,or Bulghars as they begin to be named. One of the Kuvrat’s sons,the Asparuch (Asparux,Isperih) now celebrated as the founder of Bulgaria,forcibly crossed to the Danube arpund 679 to occupy imperial territory Moesia after defeating the forces of Constantine IV (668-685). The event is recorded in the preserved text of a Hebrew letter of a Khazar qahan,who wrote that the Vununtur(=Onogurs=Bulghars) has fled across the Duna,the Danube. Even if numerous for the steppe,Asparuch’s pastoralist warriors and their families were of necessity relatively few as compared to the agricultural Slav population that lived south of the Danube,and thus the Turkic-speaking Bulghars were assimilated linguistically by the Slav majority to form the medieval and modern Bulgarians. This particular ethnogenesis occuree gradually over a period of more than two centuries: there was the Turkic qan (or khan) Krum (803-814),Qan Omurtag (814-831),Qan Perssian (836-852),then the wan who converted Boris I (852-889);then came Tsar Symeon (893-923), Tsar Peter I (927-970),and so on.But this transformation of Turkic shamanists into Slavic Christians did nothing to diminish the warlike character of the empire’s new neighbours. Because even warlike neighbours can be useful at times,the relations between the empire and the new Bulghar qaganate encompassed every possible variation,from intimate allience to all out-war,as exemplified by the career of the Bulghar qan or khan Tervel (or Tarvel-Terbelis in our Greek sources),the successor and probably son of Asparukh who ruled for some twenty-one years within the period 695-721,extant chronologies being inconsistent. “Bulghars and Bulgarians.” The Grand Strategy of the Byzantine Empire, by EDWARD N. LUTTWAK, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts; London, England, 2009, pp. 173 The strategic and economic importance of this juncture is clear: in an age when much long-distance travel was by water, the confluence of the Volga and Kama rivers provided a three-way maritime link between Europe, the Near East, and East Asia. The Turkic Bulgars were among the first to benefit “THE KAZAN SCHOOL.” Russian Orientalism: Asia in the Russian Mind from Peter the Great to the Emigration, by David Schimmelpenninck Van der Oye, Yale University Press, New Haven; London, 2010, pp. 93-121. The confluence of the Volga and Kama rivers, to the east, was inhabited by the Bulgars, a Turkic people, and the southeastern steppes by the Khazars, another Turkic people who had formed a strong state in the seventh century, barring alike the westward movement of other nomadic tribes “Russian Expansion in Kievan Times.” Eastward to Empire: Exploration and Conquest on the Russian Open Frontier to 1750, by George V. Lantzeff and Richard A. Pierce, McGill-Queen's University Press, MONTREAL; LONDON, 1973, pp. 21-30. The Bul- gars, a Turkic people, unlike the Slavic Croats and Serbs, moved south ofthe Danube in 679 and soon created a state, in which the numerically small Proto- Bulgarelement in due course became completely assimilated with the Slavic majority “Antecedents and Antipodes.” The National Question in Yugoslavia: Origins, History, Politics, by IVO BANAC, Cornell University Press, Ithaca; London, 1984, pp. 21-140. The word boyar is of Turkic origin, introduced into the Balkan Peninsula by the Bulgars in the 7th century. As the Turkic -speaking Bulgar conquerors became Slavicized, they joined with the Slavic clan chiefs
“Nobles and Landholders.” East Central Europe in the Middle Ages, 1000-1500, by JEAN W. SEDLAR, University of Washington Press, Seattle; London, 1994, pp. 58-83. " Bulgar " originally designated a Turkic -speaking people; now it designates the Slavic-speaking people who assimilated them. “National Symbols and the International Recognition of the Republic of Macedonia.” The Macedonian Conflict: Ethnic Nationalism in a Transnational World, by Loring M. Danforth, Princeton University Press, PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY, 1995, pp. 142-184.
@@Nomadicenjoyer31 Coward, Did you know that the Uighurs are Turkic? They are suffering now not 1000 years ago What have you done to help them? th-cam.com/video/e6bPGl10Cts/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=BBCNews
The Bulgars (also Bulghars, Bulgari, Bolgars, Bolghars, Bolgari,[1] Proto-Bulgarians[2]) were Turkic semi-nomadic warrior tribes that flourished in the Pontic-Caspian steppe and the Volga region during the 7th century. They became known as nomadic equestrians in the Volga-Ural region, but some researchers say that their ethnic roots can be traced to Central Asia.[3] During their westward migration across the Eurasian steppe, the Bulgar tribes absorbed other ethnic groups and cultural influences in a process of ethnogenesis, including Indo-European, Finno-Ugric and Hunnic tribes.[4][5][6][7][8][9] Modern genetic research on Central Asian Turkic people and ethnic groups related to the Bulgars points to an affiliation with Western Eurasian populations.[9][10][11] The Bulgars spoke a Turkic language, i.e. Bulgar language of Oghuric branch.[12] They preserved the military titles, organization and customs of Eurasian steppes,[13] as well as pagan shamanism and belief in the sky deity Tangra.[14] The Bulgars became semi-sedentary during the 7th century in the Pontic-Caspian steppe, establishing the polity of Old Great Bulgariac. 635, which was absorbed by the Khazar Empire in 668 AD. In c. 679, Khan Asparukh conquered Scythia Minor, opening access to Moesia, and established the First Bulgarian Empire, where the Bulgars became a political and military elite. They merged subsequently with established Byzantine populations,[15][16] as well as with previously settled Slavic tribes, and were eventually Slavicized, thus forming the ancestors of modern Bulgarians.[17] The remaining Pontic Bulgars migrated in the 7th century to the Volga River, where they founded the Volga Bulgaria; they preserved their identity well into the 13th century.[12] The Volga Tatars and Chuvash people claim to have originated from the Volga Bulgars.[12][18]
Turkish -90% mixed genetics ,first name of their state Roman Sultanate ,created by Rome ,the word Turk banned of use up ro the end of Ottoman Empire . So clearly we can see that Turkish STOLE IDENTITY OF TURKICS . Turkics- from 70 up to 95% european genetcis ,europeans that speak in twisted mongolic language ,nothing in common with Turkish people .
@@mymailkz What? the scyths are turkic? lmao, you fools do you even know what scythia means in what you call slavic? It means its a place where you can move around,roam wander aka nomadia. www.dict.com/bulgarian-english/скитам
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 Without PRIMARY SOURCES your Turkic theory is just fantasy like a Disney movie 1. Give PRIMARY SOURCES that show Tengrinism in Bulgaria🤣 2. Give PRIMARY SOURCES that show the name Bulgarian comes from Bulgamak😂
Nice Turkish propaganda. Now let's use some real sources: 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%...".
So whithout putting any speculations I would like to ask the creator several questions and make some notes for everybody watching! I will try to keep it as short as possible! I know that it is hard to learn all of the history of any country but this is no excuse to be ignorant when you are claiming to have made a "History of *insert coutry name here*" 1.The Turkic origin of Bulgarians was disproved by not only Bulgarians themselves but also many other countries historical institutes. The name "Bulgars" does mean mixed people and this is most likely becasue Bulgars which are proven to be of Iranian heritage and have mixed with Turkic tribes because of the migrations to Europe. When studies of the genes of the Bulgarians were conducted it was concluded that Bulgarians have many mixed genes (Tharacian, Iranaian and Slavic being dominant and the "Mongol" or Turkic ganes are below 5-10% which according to scientists is and i quote "insignificant" (Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_studies_on_Bulgarians) 2. There is a theory that Attila the Hun was from the Dulo dynasty making him the first known Bulgarian "Khan" or "Kniaz" depending on which theory you belive. The supposed evidence is from: (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominalia_of_the_Bulgarian_khans) 3. What was the status of Slavs in the Bulgarian Empire? There is no sure answer the subject is very disputed but the most beliavable theory and with most evidence was that Slavs were Bulgarian subjects but in very liberal way. Slavs were not enslaved nor persecuted. They had significant autonomy which made them stick to their allience with the Bulgars against the Romans and other Slavic tribes. (I couldnt find any information in English so no Source sorry) 4. What is Wallachia? Untill the fall of the First Bulgarian Empire is a Bulgarian region with a majority Bulgar people and a significant population of Avars and other small nomadic tribes. So Bulgaria falls and instability in the Roman Empire makes it easy for other tribes to settle there (like Cumans, Pechenegs, Uzi ect...). After the creation of the Second Bulgarian Empire the region of Wallachia was very important for the defence of Bulgaria. The many raiding tribes made this region vital for the survival of the Bulgarian state so Bulgarian rulers decided that it would best if the title of Wallachia came with some level of autonomy. Why? Because it would be easyer for the Voivodes to defend their lands if they collected their own tax and had their own seperate levy. And this is why after the fall of Bulgaria to the Ottomans Bulgarians fled to Wallacia mostly - Because they knew that this was a frindly and welcoming brother state. Some of the first Bulgarian revolutionary organistaions were created in Wallachia for the same reasons. (Source: Niketas Choniates's chronicle, The works of Abulfeda, Ibn Khaldun as well as many other you are free to find and read) 5. Why did you miss to mention the Bulgaro-Serbian war? You know the war that the Serbians started with no real justifications? Very convinient for you if I might say! (Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbo-Bulgarian_War) 6. And here we go the Balkan wars... Very disputed question BUT again as if on purpose you DID NOT mention one very important detail. The agreement between Bulgaria and Serbia that Serbia broke! Very shortened version source will be below for detailed history! - For those who do not know Bulgars and Serbs had agreed before the war how to split Macedonia. Quote - "When Bulgaria called upon Serbia to honor the pre-war agreement over northern Macedonia, the Serbs, displeased at the Great Powers' requiring them to give up their gains in northern Albania, adamantly refused to alienate any more territory. The developments essentially ended the Serbo-Bulgarian alliance and made a future war between the two countries inevitable. Soon thereafter, minor clashes broke out along the borders of the occupation zones with the Bulgarians against the Serbs and the Greeks. Responding to the perceived Bulgarian threat, Serbia started negotiations with Greece, which also had reasons to be concerned about Bulgarian intentions." (Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Balkan_War) 7.The last point in my argument is not really needed but I just wanted to point out what good neighbours Romanians were. They would not fight against a common enemy (the Turks) but they would invade Bulgarian lands with no opposing army there and maybe make a few massacres here and there. And if you ever wandered this is why Bulgarians in general do not like them. So this was a long comment but I if we exclude my last point no feelings were put in it. I do not condone violence in the Balkans! Some of my best frinds were Serbians and Croats when I was working abroad. The Balkans have 2 choices: Either unite no matter how difficult and long process it is or keep hate and arguing untill someone else comes to enslave us all again. We were weakest when we were devided and fighting amongst ourslves. Love to all Balkan nations!!!
Andon Irenchev where exacly do they say that attila was a dulo because after reading it all i couldnt find anything about it (or im just retarded and misses it)
bulgars and proto-bulgarians were turkic semi nomadic warriors, learn history before your mouth Bulgars (< Turkic bulgha- ‘to mix, stir up, disturb’, i.e. ‘rebels’) A Turkic tribal union of the Pontic steppes that gave rise to two important states: Danubian-Balkan Bulgaria (First Bulgarian Empire, 681-1018) and Volga Bulgaria (early 10th century-1241). They derived from Oghuric-Turkic tribes, driven westward from Mongolia and south Siberia to the Pontic steppes in successive waves by turmoil associated with the Xiongnu (late 3rd cent. ... ... www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780198662778.001.0001/acref-9780198662778-e-820
The Volga Bulgars were a Turkic-speaking people who established the second Muslim state in Europe (after the Emirate of Córdoba) in the early fourth/tenth century and ruled over extensive lands and a wide array of people around the middle Volga and Kama Rivers between the second/ninth and early seventh/thirteenth centuries. The Bulgars acted as middlemen between Central Asian merchants and the Rus, and the northern, mainly Finno-Ugric tribes whose main trading commodity was fur, which was greatly valued as a luxury item throughout the Islamic world. *Mako, Gerald. “The Conversion of the Volga Bulgars: Aḥmad b. Faḍlān b. Al-ʿAbbās b. Rāshid b. Ḥammād (Fl. Fourth/Tenth Century).” Conversion to Islam in the Premodern Age: A Sourcebook, edited by Nimrod Hurvitz et al., 1st ed., University of California Press, Oakland, California, 2020, pp. 156-159.* The period is marked by the migration of the final “permanent residents” of the Balkan Peninsula to the region: these were, most important-because eventually most numerous-the Slavs, but also the Turks (first Bulgars and then Ottomans) *Wachtel, Andrew. “Early Balkan Everyday Life.” Everyday Life in the Balkans, edited by DAVID W. MONTGOMERY, Indiana University Press, Bloomington, Indiana, 2019, pp. 9-21.* The Samara is the last westward migrations and military campaigns of, first, the significant tributary of the Volga; past the Samara, the rivers Turkic-speaking Bulgars *Mochalov, Oleg D., et al. “Historic Records of the Economy and Ethnic History of the Samara Region.” A Bronze Age Landscape in the Russian Steppes: The Samara Valley Project, edited by Oleg D. Mochalov et al., Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press at UCLA, 2016, pp. 63-70.* The Volga Bulgars , a settled Turkic people, were a society that practiced Islam on the Eurasian steppe *“Siberia in Eurasian Context.” The Merchants of Siberia: Trade in Early Modern Eurasia, by Erika Monahan, 1st ed., Cornell University Press, 2016, pp. 71-104.* The Turkic Bulgars were among the first to benefit from the region’s commercial advantages by settling it in the fifth century c.e. and found- ing the city of Bolgar *“THE KAZAN SCHOOL.” Russian Orientalism: Asia in the Russian Mind from Peter the Great to the Emigration, by David Schimmelpenninck Van der Oye, Yale University Press, New Haven; London, 2010, pp. 93-121.* The confluence of the Volga and Kama rivers, to the east, was inhabited by the Bulgars, a Turkic people, and the southeastern steppes by the Khazars, another Turkic people who had formed a strong state in the seventh century, *“Russian Expansion in Kievan Times.” Eastward to Empire: Exploration and Conquest on the Russian Open Frontier to 1750, by George V. Lantzeff and Richard A. Pierce, McGill-Queen's University Press, MONTREAL; LONDON, 1973, pp. 21-30.* The Huns of the Western Steppe appear to have formed an element of the later Danubian Bulgars, a Turkic people who, under Asparukh, moved into the Balkans in 680 and founded *“The Age of Attila the Hun.” Empires of the Silk Road: A History of Central Eurasia from the Bronze Age to the Present, by CHRISTOPHER I. BECKWITH, Princeton University Press, Princeton; Oxford, 2009, pp. 93-111.* In the mid- ninth century Khan Boris ruled a pagan Bulgaria that was composed of both Turkic Bulgars and Slavs. *“The Micro-Christendom of Rus'.” Reimagining Europe, by Christian Raffensperger, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts; London, England, 2012, pp. 136-185.* the Turkic -speaking Volga- Kama Bulgars *“Muslims in Europe: Precedent and Present.” Muslims of Europe: The 'Other' Europeans, by H. A. Hellyer, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh, 2009, pp. 101-120.* the Bulgars( Turkic speakers who invaded the Balkans in the seventh century) *“Round Two: The Rise and Spread of Agricultural Societies.” The Next World War: Tribes, Cities, Nations, and Ecological Decline, by ROY WOODBRIDGE, University of Toronto Press, 2004, pp. 49-58.* served as the secretary of an embassy sent by the Caliph al- Muqtadir to the king of the Turkish Bulgars then living on the lower reaches of the Volga River north of the Caspian Sea. *“THE BIG CHILL.” Cotton, Climate, and Camels in Early Islamic Iran: A Moment in World History, by Richard W. Bulliet, Columbia University Press, NEW YORK, 2009, pp. 69-95.*
Turkic -speaking Bulgars into the region now known as Bulgaria failed to alter its predominantly Slavic char- acter. The Bulgar ruling class eventually abandoned its Thrkic language and adopted Slavic so completely that no trace of Turkicspeech patterns can be found in any Old Slavic texts. *“Languages and Literatures.” East Central Europe in the Middle Ages, 1000-1500, by JEAN W. SEDLAR, University of Washington Press, Seattle; London, 1994, pp. 421-457.* Byzantine power was challenged by Thrkic-speaking Bulgars from the Ukrainian steppe who carved out a tribal state from the empire's Balkan lands. *“Foreign Affairs.” East Central Europe in the Middle Ages, 1000-1500, by JEAN W. SEDLAR, University of Washington Press, Seattle; London, 1994, pp. 362-400.* When the Turkic -speaking Bulgars first occupied their present *“Nobles and Landholders.” East Central Europe in the Middle Ages, 1000-1500, by JEAN W. SEDLAR, University of Washington Press, Seattle; London, 1994, pp. 58-83.* and with the Turkic people, the Bulgars , on the east bank of the Volga. *“Conclusions.” Eastward to Empire: Exploration and Conquest on the Russian Open Frontier to 1750, by George V. Lantzeff and Richard A. Pierce, McGill-Queen's University Press, MONTREAL; LONDON, 1973, pp. 221-230.* alleged to be constructions of the Turkic Bulgars , are notable. *Pundeff, Marin. “Bulgarian Historiography, 1942-1958.” The American Historical Review, vol. 66, no. 3, 1961, pp. 682-693.* They colonised areas of the eastern Balkans and in the seventh century other Slav tribes combined with the Proto-Bulgars, a group of Turkic origin, to launch a fresh assault into the Balkans. *Crampton, R. (2005). THE BULGARIAN LANDS FROM PREHISTORY TO THE ARRIVAL OF THE BULGARIANS. In A Concise History of Bulgaria (Cambridge Concise Histories, pp. 1-8). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.* In my lecture I emphasised the fact that the ear liest written record the of the Bulghar- Turkic sound shift к > / could be traced even in the early Turkic loan-words of the Hungarian language. Róna-Tas, András. “WHERE WAS KHUVRAT'S BULGHARIA?” Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, vol. 53, no. 1/2, 2000, pp. 1-22. followed by the Avars (Turki invaders of sixth to eighth centuries AD who were eventually evicte from Hungary by Charlemagne), the Bulgars ( Turkic speakers who invaded the Balkans in the seventh century) “Round Two: The Rise and Spread of Agricultural Societies.” The Next World War: Tribes, Cities, Nations, and Ecological Decline, by ROY WOODBRIDGE, University of Toronto Press, 2004, pp. 49-58. Bulgars (Turkic bulgha-'to mix, stir up, disturb', i.e. 'rebels') A Turkic tribal union of the Pontic steppes that gave rise to two important states: Danubian Balkan Bulgaria (First Bulgarian Empire, 681-1018) and Volga Bulgaria (early 10th century-1241). They derived from Oghuric-Turkic tribes, driven westward from Mongolia and south Siberia to the Pontic steppes in successive waves by turmoil associated with the Xiungnu and subsequently by warfare between the Rouran/Avar and northern Wei states. in Oliver Nicholson, The Oxford Dictionary of Late Antiquity, Oxford University Press, 2018, ISBN 0192562460, p. 271..
Several researchers, including Peter B. Golden,[29] H. W. Haussig,[30] S. G. Klyashtorny,[31][32] Carter V. Findley,[33] D. G. Savinov,[34] B. A. Muratov,[35] S. P. Guschin,[36] and András Róna-Tas[37] have posited that the term Ashina is from the Iranian Saka or possibly from the Wusun.[38] Carter V. Findley assumes that the name "Ashina" comes from one of the Saka languages of central Asia and means "blue" (which translates to Proto-Turkic *kȫk, whence Old Turkic 𐰚𐰇𐰚 kök, and same in all Modern Turkic languages). The color blue is identified with the east, so that Göktürk, another name for the Turkic empire, meant the "Turks of the East"; meanwhile, Peter Benjamin Golden favours a more limited denotation of Göktürks as denoting only the Eastern Turks.[39][40] This idea is seconded by Hungarian researcher András Róna-Tas, who finds it plausible "that we are dealing with a royal family and clan of Saka origin".[41] Findley also said that the term böri, used to identify the ruler's retinue as 'wolves', probably also derived from one of the Iranian languages.[42] H. W. Haussig and S. G. Kljyashtorny suggest an association between the name and the compound "kindred of Ashin" ahşaẽna (in Old Persian). This is so even in East Turkestan; then the desired form would be in the Sogdian 'xs' yn' k (-әhšēnē) "blue, dark"; Khotan-Saka (Brahmi) āşşeiņa (-āşşena) "blue", where a long -ā- emerged as development ahş-> āşş-; in Tocharian A āśna- "blue, dark" (from Khotan-Saka and Sogdian). There is a textual support for this version in the ancient runic inscriptions of the Turks. In the large Orkhon inscriptions, in the story of the first Kagan, people living in the newly created empire are named "kök türk" (translated as "Celestial Turks"). Without touching the numerous interpretations "kök" may have in this combination, note its perfect semantic match with the reconstructed value of the name "Ashina". An explicit semantic calque suggests knowledge of its original meaning and foreign origin, which is compatible with the multi-ethnic, multi-cultural nature of the First Turkic Khaganate, which entailed the loss, however, of the popularity of "national character", in the words of L. Bazin, as was the political and cultural environment of the Otuken regime in the era of Bilge Qaghan.[citation needed] The name "Ashina" was recorded in ancient Muslim chronicles in these forms: Aś(i)nas (al-Tabari), Ānsa (Hudud al-'Alam), Śaba (Ibn Khordadbeh), Śana, Śaya (Al-Masudi).[43][44] Based on Chinese sources' testament that the Ashina, upon becoming the head of Göktürks, exhibited a tuğ banner with a wolf head over their gate in reminiscence of its origins,[45][46][47] the name "Ashina" is translated by some researchers as "wolf", cf. Tuoba 叱奴 *čino, Middle Mongol činua, Khalkha čono.[48][49] However, Golden contends that derivation from Mongolic is mistaken.[50]
Davis (2008:39) translates Ouyang Xiu's statement "當是時，西突厥有鐵勒，延陀、阿史那之類為最大" into "Among the Tie'le tribes of Western Tujue, at the time, the Yantuo and Ashina were the largest subgroups".
@@petertodorov1792 May God Almighty bless you my dear Aryan/Iranian brother and may God bless all our Aryan/Iranian people. Brother do you know who build the Buddha statues in Afghanistan and Pakistan? Was it the Iranians who build the Buddha statues in nowadays Afghanistan and Pakistan? Afghanistan and Pakistan were also a part of The Median - Achaemenid Empire!
Old Great Bulgaria or Great Bulgaria (Byzantine Greek: Παλαιά Μεγάλη Βουλγαρία, Palaiá Megálē Voulgaría), also often known by the Latin names Magna Bulgaria[3] and Patria Onoguria ("Onogur land"),[4] was a 7th-century state formed by the Onogur Bulgars on the western Pontic-Caspian steppe (modern southern Ukraine and southwest Russia).[5] Great Bulgaria was originally centered between the Dniester and lower Volga. 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] Both names are best explained as corresponding to Onogundur, an old name in Greek sources for the Bulgars. www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/khazars 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.
Serbia never played an important factor in the Middle Ages. The only significant forces then were Byzantium, Bulgaria and the Arab invasions. Whatever you say about Bulgaria is irrelevant to the facts - BULGARIA WAS A GREAT EMPIRE AND POWER.
@@papazataklaattiranimam , Ancient (proto-) Bulgarians have long been thought of as a Turkic population. However, evidence found in the past three decades shows that this is not the case. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26416319/
@@sonyastefanova5785 you sent unreliable cherrypicking source from bulgarian nationalist what we call pseduo-science. Population genetic analysis indicated that Conquerors had closest connection to the Onogur-Bulgar ancestors of Volga Tatars. Neparáczki, E., Maróti, Z., Kalmár, T. et al. Y-chromosome haplogroups from Hun, Avar and conquering Hungarian period nomadic people of the Carpathian Basin. Sci Rep 9, 16569 (2019). Thus supporting the view that Tatars may be descendents of ancient Bulgars. Suslova TA, Burmistrova AL, Chernova MS, Khromova EB, Lupar EI, Timofeeva SV, Devald IV, Vavilov MN, Darke C. HLA gene and haplotype frequencies in Russians, Bashkirs and Tatars, living in the Chelyabinsk Region (Russian South Urals). Int J Immunogenet. 2012 Oct;39(5):394-408. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-313X.2012.01117.x. Epub 2012 Apr 20. PMID: 22520580. Onogur-Bulgars had been part of the Hunnic people, and after the death of Attila’s son Irnik, European Hun remains fused with the Onogurs. Mitogenomic data indicate admixture components of Central-Inner Asian and Srubnaya origin in the conquering Hungarians Neparáczki E, Maróti Z, Kalmár T, Kocsy K, Maár K, et al. (2018) Mitogenomic data indicate admixture components of Central-Inner Asian and Srubnaya origin in the conquering Hungarians. PLOS ONE 13(10): e0205920. However, given the common Turkic genetic background of the Bulgars and Khazars, these ethnicities may be difficult to tell apart either archaeologically or genetically. Mikheyev, Alexander & Qiu, Lijun & Zarubin, A. & Moshkov, Nikita & Orlov, Yuri & Chartier, Duane & Faleeva, T. & Kornienko, Igor & Klyuchnikov, Vladimir & Batieva, Elena & Tatarinova, Tatiana. (2019). Diverse genetic origins of medieval steppe nomad conquerors. 10.1101/2019.12.15.876912. The Volga Tatars live in the central and eastern parts of European Russia and in western Siberia. They are the descendants of the Bulgar and Kipchak Turkic tribes who inhabited the western wing of the Mongol Empire, the area of the middle Volga River. Malyarchuk B, Derenko M, Denisova G, Kravtsova O. Mitogenomic diversity in Tatars from the Volga-Ural region of Russia. Mol Biol Evol. 2010 Oct;27(10):2220-6. doi: 10.1093/molbev/msq065. Epub 2010 May 10. PMID: 20457583. Science, 14 February 2014, Vol. 343 no. 6172, p. 751, A Genetic Atlas of Human Admixture History, Garrett Hellenthal at al.: " CIs. for the admixture time(s) overlap but predate the Mongol empire, with estimates from 440 to 1080 CE (Fig.3.) In each population, one source group has at least some ancestry related to Northeast Asians, with ~2 to 4% of these groups total ancestry linking directly to East Asia. This signal might correspond to a small genetic legacy from invasions of peoples from the Asian steppes (e.g., the Huns, Magyars, and Bulgars) during the first millennium CE." Around 4% of Bulgarian genes are derived outside of Europe and the Middle East or are of undetermined origin (by 858 CE), of which 2.3% are from Northeast Asia and correspond to Asian tribes such as Bulgars,[13] a consistent very low frequency for Eastern Europe as far as Uralic-speaking Hungarians.
@@papazataklaattiranimam , I will point out two or two factors that refute the theory that Asparuhov's Bulgarians are Turks - the Bulgarians had a distinctive feature that no other ethnic group has - incredible battle bows. Ours was shorter and more convenient for shooting than the horse, in addition, it could shoot up to 12 arrows in one minute, while the Byzantine emergency shooters gave only 5 - 7. The technology for making Bulgarian bows was kept secret, as and the composition of the binder resins and adhesives that imparted the specific properties of the weapon. Many neighboring peoples of the Bulgarians - Chinese, Mongols, Turks and Slavs tried to copy this type, but the Bulgarian models remained unsurpassed. It was these bows and the original cavalry tactics that allowed the Bulgarians to rule vast territories, to defeat armies of Chinese, Mongols, Turks, Arabs, Byzantines and Slavs larger than them. Second - the Bulgarians were extremely tall. The physical type of the ancient Bulgarians (proto-Bulgarians) has long been no secret, as archeological excavations in the necropolises (cemeteries) in Northeastern Bulgaria have shown that the height of the skeletons is 175-180 cm. This is a high growth even for modern people, and in the Middle for centuries the Bulgarians looked like giants. Because the average height in Europe and the Middle East was 155-160 cm. An Arab geographer from this era wrote: "Bulgarians are giants, ten of our fighters can not beat a Bulgarian in hand-to-hand combat." The skeleton of Tsar Kaloyan proves that he was 2 meters tall and had no Mongoloid features.The Bulgarians were a numerous people and settled everywhere - Tatarstan, Chuvashia, Kabardino, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, claiming to be descendants of the ancient Bulgarians. Sources of European origin also point to the relocation of proto-Bulgarian groups to Bavaria, Lombardy, and Hungary. You know that name - Bolkar Dagh. There were Bulgarians there too who later converted to Islam like the Bulgarians in Volga Bulgaria.
@@petertodorov9540 God bless our Aryan/Iranian people. I am so proud to know the noble and beautiful Bulgarian people are Aryans/Iranians! May God almighty bring us together.
Oh my goodness! This is half bullshit and half misinformation... Please take this down, my heart can't take it! It is too much to start fixing what was said wrong! From the wrong "turkic" origin, through the ridiculous statements of what and when we have lost and don't get me started on the Cyrillic alphabet thing...all the way till the end, this is a very very inaccurate representation!
Not true ! 100% fake history! Turkics are Bulgarians ,not the other way around ,also Turk is a modern term . Turkics have from 60 up to 90% european genetics . So ,they are from Europe and just one of the many Bulgarian branches . Do not confuse Turkish with Turkics . Turkish are 90% mixed genetics . This video is not accurate .
@@delaramsalmassi4063 In Iran there is the name Siavush Siavush is a hero in Firdausi's great Poem Shahnameh Siavush was an important god to the Ossetians , Bulgarians and Persians. Siavush is horse riding god of the morning light , Truth and Rightiousness In Bulgaria he was called Siva. He became a folk hero when Bulgaria became Christian and he became associated with St George We still have his festival in Bulgaria It is called the Surva festival
@@petertodorov1792 Why are the pan - Turks always saying Bulgars and Bulgarians are Turkic people? I believe Bulgars and Bulgarians are an Aryan/Iranic/Iranian people. And I would love to read the text or article which says Bulgars and Bulgarians are Iranic people. And in fact I just found out that the Turkic Peoples of all Central Asia and China were originally Iranic Peoples who just mixed up with the Mongolians very much.
Both first and second Bulgarian monarchy are Turks origin(Bulgars and Cumans) the ruling class of bulgaria was always turk long before Ottomans I think bulgarians shouldn’t believe their government’s propaganda about turks(anti turkism and anti ottomanism)
WE ARE BULGARIANS NOTHING ELSE WE ARE ONE OF THE FIRST NATIONSWE ARE BULGARIANS NOTHING ELSE WE ARE ONE OF THE FIRST NATIONSWE ARE BULGARIANS NOTHING ELSE WE ARE ONE OF THE FIRST NATIONS
@@biscolataman Zonja Fatlinda Islami You are not a Turk so why do you pretend to be a Turk? You are a 12 year old Albanian girl who lives with her parents in Gostivar
The Bulgars were turkic? What an idiotic claim. Turk my ass. Zabergan-an iranic indoeuropean name (Simmilar to Kardirigan- a persian general.) Malamir - onother iranic name, an ancient iranian city used to carry the exact same name- now known as Izeh.) Boris (Bogoris) meaning Godlike in old iranic. Asparukh( Isperih ) an old iranic name still used in Armenia and Iran (Comming from Aspa ( horse in old Sarmatian and iranic languages and speh meaning riding) Kubrat ( kurt) Old avestian iranic name meaning whole or finished) The name system of a nation is an important sign of its ethnic character, religion and cultural history. For example, what names did the early Turks care (by L. Gummiov) - Tardu Hugan, Turum Khan, Buhman, Ishumi, Kara Isik Khan, Kushu, Yandy, Arslan, Buri Khan, Kara Churin Turk, Bokke, Tardous, Apa, Kul Tugin, Bilge Khan and others. None of these most common and important Turk names, nor the most important Turkic titles (kagan, yaugu, shad) are found in the Proto-Bulgarians The Proto-bulgarian names were much different and nearly all of indo-european origin -Krum, Persian, Kardam, Telerig, Sondoque (Sonchonka and three or four variants) Bogoris, Malamer, Ermi-Hermiar, Chakka-Chakarar, Kuwi, Kwiwari, Duar, Kuchiri, Vokil, Dulo, Vichtun, three proto-Bulgarians - Kodomer, Asverg and Kubert. in 818, Karan, Karrnatha, Ostro (Ostromer, Ostrse), Dox, Labas, Rassate, Stasis, Hunol, Sonmer, Israles, Iratos, Ich, Pok, Zermo, Oksi, Shun -Oxonos ), Cordel, Bali, Boril, (O) Negounon, Elemag, Arah, Dristar, three bulgar nobles - Kodomer, Asverg and Kubert, killed in a battle with the Byzantines during Omurtag in 818, Karan, Carnota, Ostro, Ostros, Docs, Labas, Rasate, Stasis, Hunol, Sonmer, , Shun-Oxon, Original, Boril, , Oregon, Toctus, Tsok, Zikos, Zent, Irratas, Corsus, Krakra, Neubul, Tyrdin- Tarridin, Sursubul, Mokros, Perina, Akum, Levota , Altzeg, and others.
The video was good, but still there are а few things that could be discussed. Firstly, the christinization of any country was hardly anything more than a simple way of integration in the international diplomacy at the time. I don’t think that the wars fought between Bulgaria, Serbia and Byzantium around 850s did have any impact on Boris’s decision. Secondly, Bulgaria was never a Serbian vassal. Otherwise, it could be paradoxical for Stefan Dusan to seek for the Bulgarian patriarch’s support during the establishment of the Empire in 1346. Dusan himself was of Bulgarian origin and his direction of expansion was never towards Bulgaria respectively. We shall not forget that Bulgaria allied itself with the Nazis only after it ensured that Yugoslavia would be part of the same alliance. The government in Sofia didn’t want to risk a similar situation as that in the Great War in which Bulgaria had to fight a war on two fronts. What wasn’t planned at all, was Dusan Simovic’s coup which made Yugoslavia came out of the Tripartite pact. The rest is history. And a final note: The communist regime in Bulgaria didn’t end in 1981, but in 1991 when the country was proclaimed a Republic. But yeah, thanks for the impartial video and I wish you all the best!
I am ethnic Bulgarian and gave sample to have my genes investigated. So they say that I am mostly “Balkan” (probably Thracian) with a pinch of east Europe and Siberia as well as west Africa and Italy. I don’t see myself as a person in anyway connected with that story of an Asian tribe ...,
@@petertodorov1792 Thank you very much my Dear Aryan/Iranian brother. I speak to Afghans and they say they don’t want Afghanistan to reunite with Iran when Afghans are Aryan/Iranic/Iranian people!
The Turkic languages are clearly interrelated, showing close similarities in phonology, morphology, and syntax. Historically, they split into two types early on, Common Turkic and Bolgar Turkic. The language of the Proto-Bolgars, reportedly similar to the Khazar language, belonged to the latter type. Its only modern representative is Chuvash, which originated in Volga Bolgarian and exhibits archaic features.
The Turkic languages are clearly interrelated, showing close similarities in phonology, morphology, and syntax. Historically, they split into two types early on, Common Turkic and Bolgar Turkic. The language of the Proto-Bolgars, reportedly similar to the Khazar language, belonged to the latter type. Its only modern representative is Chuvash, which originated in Volga Bolgarian and exhibits archaic features. The Proto-Bulgarians had a somewhat eventful history prior to their arrival on the Balkan Peninsula. The earliest written sources indicate that they inhabited the region to the north of the Caucasus in the 4th century A.D. and had close contact with the Georgians and Armenians. They belonged to the Turkic ethno-linguistic group and their language resembled that of the Huns, Khazars, Avars and other tribes. (How the bulgarian state was founded-Dimiter Angelov) The Oghur, or Onogur or Ogur[3] languages (also known as Bulgar, Pre-Proto-Bulgar,[4]or Lir-Turkic and r-Turkic), are a branch of the Turkic language family. The only extant member of the group is the Chuvash language. The first to branch off from the Turkic family, the Oghur languages show significant divergence from other Turkic languages, which all share a later common ancestor. Languages from this family were spoken in some nomadic tribal confederations, such as those of the Onogurs or Ogurs, Bulgars, and Khazars.[5]Some scholars consider Hunnic a similar language[6] and refer to this extended grouping as Hunno-Proto-Bulgarian.[7] The only surviving language from this linguistic group is believed to be Chuvash.Omeljan Pritsak in his study "The Hunnic Language of the Attila Clan" (1982)[10] concluded that the language of the Bulgars was from the family of the Hunnic languages, as he calls the Oghur languages.[11] According to Antoaneta Granberg : " the data is insufficient to clearly distinguish Huns, Avars and Bulgars one from another" - introduction, the second paragraph Bolgars are still Turk in Volga region.Mahmud al kashgari wrote bulgar language in his diwan lughat al turk before 1000 years. Even ilovelanguages made video about bulgar language(volga bulgar poet from Diwan Lughat al Turk)
@Peter Todorov You know nothing. Erdoğan trolls don't even move a finger Turkish being. He has Gergoian origin and nothing Turkish about him. He does his best to destrot the Turkish character of our country. And he only pays his trolls for supporting his rulement on social media and video channels like this. Not in your state history books but in every neutral scientific history books you will find the above sentences about Bulgarian history.
WE ARE BULGARIANS NOTHING ELSE WE ARE ONE OF THE FIRST NATIONSWE ARE BULGARIANS NOTHING ELSE WE ARE ONE OF THE FIRST NATIONSWE ARE BULGARIANS NOTHING ELSE WE ARE ONE OF THE FIRST NATIONS
At some point during the second half of the early eleventh century, after living for a long time among Turkic populations and studying their languages and traditions, Mahmud al-Kashghari produced a well-documented work about the "Turks." According to him, only the Qirqiz, the Qipchaq, the Oghuz and five other tribes spoke a pure Turkic language, while the languages of the Bulgars, Suvars and Pech enegs Bačänäk), while undoubtedly Turkic, had been altered by foreign influences. Mahmud al-Kashgari believed that initially there were very few differences between all those languages, all phonetical." He saw the linguistic fragmentation as a natural phenomenon, given the vast area, between the Byzantine and the Chinese frontiers, in which those peoples lived. Spinei, V., 2009. The Romanians and the Turkic nomads north of the Danube Delta from the tenth to the mid-thirteenth century. Leiden: Brill, pp.181, 182. At the beginning of the 600s, the Oghur population regained independence under the leadership of the Bulghar tribes. The Bulghars are mentioned nearly everywhere, together with, or as identical to, the Onoghundurs. Theophanes simply calls the Bulghars Unnoghundur-Bulghar, and Porphyrogenitus also writes that the Bulghars "used to" call themselves Onoghundur. Armenian sources mention them under the name Olhontor Bulkar and later Vlendur Bulkar. The name is written in the Hudud al-alam as Vunundur, by Masudi as Wulundur, in a letter by the Khazar khaghan Joseph as Vununtur. These forms are the only basis for explaining the Hungarian name for the Balkan Bulghars, Nandur, and later Nándor. R., 1999. Hungarians and Europe in the early Middle Ages. Budapest: Central European University Press, p.215.
Hanim Yes Vanandor or Nandor is the same But not Onogur Totally different Onogur are one of the founding people of the Hungarians You see the Hungarians make a distinction between the Bulgarians/Vanandors/Olhontors/Unogundors and the Onogurs 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Nice Turkish propaganda. Now let's use some real sources: 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%...".
Peter Todorov Huns or Bulgars were Turkic peoples of Oghur branch according to most expert scholars *Although in the past the Huns are thought to have been Mongolian emigrants, it is far more likely that they were of Turkic origin. This point has been repeated by thousands of historians, sinologists, turcologists, altaistics, and other researchers. Let me try to state how this idea began with Sinology researchers.[1] *Maenchen-Helfen (1973), 386-9, also thinks that these names are the Germanic or Germanicized names of Turkic Huns.[2] *The language of the Huns has always been classified in the Turkic linguistic family.[3] *In the 5th century A . D . the Danube Slavs had lived in symbiosis with the Turkic Huns[4] *One of the first and most ferocious of such Asiatic (Turkic) peoples were the Huns.[5] *A large number of many different Turkic tribes were called Huns.[6] *It is conceivable that the Huns (Ephthalites), who irrupted into Central Asia in the early fifth century, were Turkic.[7] *Probably a substantial group of Hunnish peoples spoke some form of Turkic, a subfamily of the Altaic languages.[8] *Danube used by a large number of Turkic peoples - including Huns, Avars,Bulgars,Cumans.[9] * Among them, the Vandals were East Germanic, the Suevi or 'Swabians' were Central Germanic, the Huns were Turkic, and the Alans were Iranic (like the modern Ossetians).[10] *Also, with the various Turkic tribes on the west; especially with the Huns.[11] *Historic Turkic kingdoms (the earliest being the Great Hun Empire from 200 B.C., which stretched from Siberia to Tibet,and the last being the Ottoman Empire founded in A.D. 1299),hinting at a racial side to Turkish identity.[12] *By the fifth century, the last of the Tocharians was driven from the region by nomadic Huns, possibly the earliest of many subsequent waves of Tur- kic invaders in Central Asia.[13] *Who are the Turkic Peoples? This great family of peoples includes the Huns,Khazars,Avars and Bulgar-Turks of former times.[14] *The principal invaders in the north were no longer the Turkic Xiongnu[15] *Horses were vital to maintaining Han military strength against the increasing nomadic incur. sions from the Turkic Xiongnu tribal armies along the northern borders and in the northwest.[16] *The constant incursions in the Han's northern and northwestern frontiers by the Turkic nomads known as Xiongnu (the Huns) necessitated Han military expeditions across the Pamirs into Central Asia.[17] * By the 5th century many of the troops were barbarian foederation of Germanic, Turkic (“Huns and "Bulgars), and, perhaps, “Slavic origins [18] * The fact that the Bulgars of Asparukh - whom we considered descendants of the Huns led by Irnikh -were Turks.[19] *While the Hun hords of Attila that tried to conquer Europe were surely Proto-Türks.[20] Sources: *1- The Origins of the Huns-The History Files *2-The Huns, Rome and the Birth of Europe(Cambridge University Press)-Page 177 *3-Russian Translation Series of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology 1964 (Harvard University Press) *4-Among the People, Native Yugoslav Ethnography: Selected 1982(Michigan University Press) *5-Byzantium: Church, Society, and Civilization Seen Through Contemporary Eyes(University of Chicago Press)-Page 332 *6-Eurasian Studies Yearbook Volume 74 Eurolingua, 2002 *7-Islamic Peoples Of The Soviet Un-Page 384 *8-The Saga of the Volsungs: The Norse Epic of Sigurd the Dragon Slayer(University of California Press)-Page 15 *9-The Early Medieval Balkans: A Critical Survey from the Sixth to the Late Twelth Century(University of Michigan Press)-Page 25 *10-Vanished Kingdoms: The Rise and Fall of States and Nations *11-China ancient and modern-Page-55 *12-Turkey: What Everyone Needs to Know®(Oxford University Press) *13-Ethnic Groups of North, East, and Central Asia: An Encyclopedia-Page 251 *14-Oxford Symposium on Food & Cookery, 1989: Staplefoods : Proceedings *15-China: A New History, Second Enlarged Edition(Harvard University Press)-Page 73 *16-Monks and Merchants: Silk Road Treasures from Northwest China ; Gansu and Ningxia, 4th - 7th Century ; [on the Occasion of the Exhibition "Monks and Merchants: Silk Road Treasures from Northwest China", Organized by the Asia Society Museum, New York, October 13, 2001 - January 6, 2002 ...] *17-The Harvard Dictionary of Music-Page 261 *18- The Oxford Dictionary of Late Antiquity-Page 1346 *19- The Cambridge History of Early Inner Asia Volume 1-Page 202 *20-China Knowledge-Xiongnu
Peter Todorov The Huns were a confederation of Eurasian tribes, especially Turkic ones, from the Steppes of Central Asia. www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Hunnic_Empire Even the language spoken by the Huns is in dispute, though most experts believe they were of Turkish speech. www.britannica.com/place/the-Steppe/New-barbarian-incursions
Although in the past the Huns are thought to have been Mongolian emigrants, it is far more likely that they were of Turkic origin. This point has been repeated by thousands of historians, sinologists, turcologists, altaistics, and other researchers. www.historyfiles.co.uk/FeaturesEurope/BarbarianHuns01.htm The roots of anti-Turkism can be traced back to the arrival of the Huns in Europe.[10] While the ethnic background of the Huns is a matter of dispute among historians, they are widely believed to have been of Turkic origin,[11] and their invasion inspired fear among Europeans. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Turkism A member of a nomadic tribe, the Huns, most likely of Turkic origin, which invaded Europe in the fourth century from Central Asia. en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/Hun Learning and teaching of Hun’s history, as part of the Turkic world has a great theoretical and practical significance in university education. Huns belonged to the Turkic-speaking tribes. www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877042813029820/pdf?md5=847f9260d999ae4caaf591a81d60972e&pid=1-s2.0-S1877042813029820-main.pdf&_valck=1 The Huns, who, later on, bore the name of 'Turks,' natives of a country situated on the. crossasia-repository.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/3333/1/Modi_History%20of%20the%20Huns.pdf Huns (Οὐ̑ννοι), an Asian (possibly Turkic) people that appears in Roman sources beginning with Ammianus Marcellinus; it is generally accepted ... www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780195046526.001.0001/acref-9780195046526-e-2370 They are thought to be a Turkic people descended from the Xiongnu tribes, who first appeared as a tribal confederation on the northern frontier of China in the late third century BC. www.encyclopedia.com/history/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/hunnic-empire Hepthalites(White Huns,Abdelai,Hayatila,Hua) Inner Asian 'Hunnic' group (or rather dynasty), perhaps of Turkic origin. www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780198662778.001.0001/acref-9780198662778-e-2200 During the mid-fifth century, mass southward migration of a Turkic tribe from Central Asia known as the Hephthalites (also called Huna or White Huns) invaded Sassanian lands and created a new kingdom (or khanate) that centered on Afghanistan. www.cemml.colostate.edu/cultural/09476/afgh02-09enl.html Caucasus as the first Turkic peoples (Avars, Bulgars, Huns, Khazars, Pechenegs) arrived. www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Exile The language of the European Huns is sometimes referred to as a Bulghar Turkic variety in general linguistic literature, but caution is needed in establishing its affiliations. The predominant part of the Xiongnu population is likely to have spoken Turkic (Late Proto-Turkic, to be more precise). www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/4CBA0E2CB74C8093EC1CA38C95067D55/S2513843X20000183a_hi.pdf/_div_class__title__Early_nomads_of_the_Eastern_Steppe_and_their_tentative_connections_in_the_West__div_.pdf Some scholars think they were a Turkic tribe descended from the Xiongnu, a group of pastoral nomads who unified much of Asia during the late third and early second centuries B.C. www.nationalgeographic.com/culture/people/reference/who-were-ruthless-warriors-behind-attila-hun/ Turkic Speaking Huns books.google.com.tr/books?id=YKPaLi1d1O4C&pg=PA6&dq=&hl=tr&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjO4tibh5HpAhWKw6YKHaKtA_UQ6AEINDAC#v=onepage&q=&f=false (Oxford University Press) Compare Chinese tu-kin, recorded from c. 177 B.C.E. as the name of a people living south of the Altai Mountains (identified by some with the Huns). www.etymonline.com/word/turk Agathias calls them Onogur Huns (3.5.6, Frendo (1975), 72). About 370 A . D . the Germanic - speaking Goths , who had originated in Scandinavia , were driven to the west by the largely Turkic - speaking Huns from the east .[1] *1-The Encyclopedia Americana www.thefreedictionary.com/Hun www.etymonline.com/search?q=hun projects.iq.harvard.edu/files/huri/files/vvi_n4_dec1982.pdf scourgeofgodblog.files.wordpress.com/2016/12/the-huns-hyun-jin-kim.pdf abload.de/img/123copy43kp9.png?fbclid=IwAR00r6fZsB8cUvgZDRslbcfDAawDgjii6td8_8HXaQnCHbWjGfXzOE5pvKI The steppes north of the Black Sea were under the control of nomads, Huns, and Bulgars, primarily Turkic-speaking although with an Ugric minority. The troops were barbarian foederati of Germanic, Turkic ( Huns and Bulgars ), and, perhaps, Slavic origins. www.oxfordreference.com/search?q=Huns+and+Bulgars&searchBtn=Search&isQuickSearch=true
They colonised areas of the eastern Balkans and in the seventh century other Slav tribes combined with the Proto-Bulgars, a group of Turkic origin, to launch a fresh assault into the Balkans.
@@Nomadicenjoyerplus Zonja Fatlinda Islami You are not a Turk so why do you pretend to be a Turk? You are a 12 year old Albanian girl who lives with her parents in Gostivar
@@petertodorov9540 Love to our Aryan/Iranian Bulgarian brothers and sisters. God bless our Aryan/Iranian people and hugs and kisses to all our Aryan/Iranian people. Wish we could unite ALL Aryan/Iranian people into one country called The Median - Achaemenid Empire!
Todays bulgarians (the correct name is bolg-arians of Asparukh\Isperikh) are mostly thracians with very few bolgarian blood, speaking mostly so called "slavic" language. Do not forget that there is a small group of bolgarians (descendants of Alzek) in todays Italy (Chille di Bolgeria), which have mixed with italians (latin speaking). Do not forget that there are three autonomous republics in todays Russia, who also claim they have the right to name themselves bolgarians (on the Bolga\Volga river region), who speak mostly turkic language (not slavic, not latin) A total of five. Five brothers... separated. Also do not forget that Romanians spoke bolgarian and bolgarian was an official language till a century and a half ago. Romania is a romanised name for the thracian tribes of Dacia (Daki), Vlakhia (Vlakhi) and others up to Belarus and Hung-aria (Hungary). Since ancienet times Bolg-arians and Hung-arians have had common destiny although different by language and settlement. Also all russians and so called ukrainians (a mix of russian\polish\cossac\khazar\etc.) are very close to bolgarians: historically and culturally. Bolgarians gave the alphabet, religion, some cultural traditions and are still present in Ukraine and Russia.
Mate, I really enjoyed and learn 🇧🇬Bulgarian history !! The entire. Balkan history is 😜crazy ..😂😂 At least between. 🇷🇴Romania and. 🇧🇬Bulgaria we have the. Danube river so most of the time was peace between Us!! 😇😇. Now we really help eachother ...🍻cheers from. 🇷🇴Romania
The word BULGAR means MİXER.........because , the Türkish verb BULGAMAK means TO MİX......if so, BULG AR : MİXER.........final AR means PERSON or PEOPLE.......BULGAR : person or people who mix .........in TÜRKİC LANGUAGE, of course.........+++++ just like AVAR, SADAGAR, HAZAR, KABAR,SUVAR, GUJAR Türks...........
With regard to topology, the obtained tree divides the modern Turkic languages into six principal sub-branches (in the order of their divergence): Bulgharic, North Siberian, South Siberian, Khalaj-Salar, Oghuz, and Kipchak-Karluk (‘Macro-Kipchak’). The time-depth of the Turkic family on the maximum credibility tree is estimated to be around 2,066 years BP (median height of the node), with a 95% highest posterior density between 1,517 and 2,755 years BP. The topology and the age of the obtained tree are discussed in further detail in Section 6. The early split between the Bulgharic branch and the Common Turkic languages shapes the Turkic language family as a clear-cut binary structure. This agrees with most of the previous classifications of the Turkic language family, whether they are based on the historical-comparative or lexicostatistic approaches (Tekin 1990: 16; Menges 1995: 60-1; Johanson 1998: 81-3; Dybo 2006: 766-817, 2013: 18; Mudrak 2009: 172-79). Alexander Savelyev, Martine Robbeets, Bayesian phylolinguistics infers the internal structure and the time-depth of the Turkic language family, Journal of Language Evolution, Volume 5, Issue 1, January 2020, Pages 39-53
Every single medieval source mentions the state as Bulgaria. The oficial language of the state and the language of the clergy (church) was the Bulgarian Language. The majority in the empire , most of the nobility and the petty nobility spoke Bulgarian and identified as Bulgarians. The theory about a mediavel vlacho-bulgarian state is beleaved only in Romania en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Bulgarian_Empire Ofcource the fact that the vlachs did play an important role in the second Bulgarian empire is undeniable as the first rulers of the state were probably partly vlach, however they still were crowned as tsars of Bulgaria and claimed descent from the the Krum and Cometopouli dynasties of the first Bulgarian empire. The Cumans too played probably as an important role as the vlachs as what is written in the sources about most of the Battles in which the second Bulgarian empire participated is that the Bulgarian army was made of about 60-70% Bulgarians and almost always about 10-20% Cuman mercenaries. And sometimes vlachs, however they are not mentioned really often. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Adrianople_(1205)
@@historyrhymes1701 .....and to ad a few words, if I may there are more than one OFFICIAL letters in Vatican's archives stating very clearly : Rex Bvlgarorvm Rex Blachorvm!(Kaloyan,Ioanitsa) It doesn't take rocket scientist to see, and to find out WHY, firstly (as a status) is mentioned "Bvlgarorvm"(Bulgarorum) and SECONDARY is "Blachorvm"(Vlahorum). 🙄🤔🤯😉
As the number of evidence of linguistic, ethnographic and socio-political nature show that Bulgars belonged to the group of Turkic peoples.[36][24][26][30] The Bulgars (also Bolgars or proto-Bulgarians[40]) were a semi-nomadic people of Turkic descent, originally from Central Asia, who from the 2nd century onwards dwelled in the steppes north of the Caucasus and around the banks of river Volga (then Itil). en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Bulgaria Bulgars (< Turkic bulgha- ‘to mix, stir up, disturb’, i.e. ‘rebels’) A Turkic tribal union of the Pontic steppes that gave rise to two important states: Danubian-Balkan Bulgaria (First Bulgarian Empire, 681-1018) and Volga Bulgaria (early 10th century-1241). They derived from Oghuric-Turkic tribes, driven westward from Mongolia and south Siberia to the Pontic steppes in successive waves by turmoil associated with the Xiongnu (late 3rd cent. ... ... www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780198662778.001.0001/acref-9780198662778-e-820 Many Slavic tribes lived within the boundaries of the state, together with the proto-Bulgarians, a tribe of Turkic origin that had settled in the Balkan Peninsula at the end of the 7th century. www.britannica.com/biography/Boris-I The Bulgars were a Turkic tribal confederation that gave rise to the Balkan Bulgar and Volga Bulgar states.The ethynonym derives from the Turkish bulgha-,”to stir,mix,disturb,confuse.” books.google.com.tr/books?id=c788wWR_bLwC&pg=PA354&redir_esc=y&hl=tr#v=onepage&q=Bulgars&f=false (Harvard University Press) The Volga Bulgars, a Turkish tribe then living on the east bank of the Volga River, ... the laws of Islam to the Bulgars, who had recently converted to the religion. www.bookrags.com/research/ahmad-ibn-fadlan-ued/#gsc.tab=0
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%...".
I agree. Not sure why people keep spreading that. People want to put down Bulgarians and claim they are Turks when they have nothing in common with Turks. I think only thing is, Turks may have some Slavic influence knowing they brought tons of people from Slavic lands to modern day Turkey who then mixed with the ME people, East Asians, and some North Africans. So we can say modern day Turks have been influenced by Slavs. Some Bulgarians may have influence from Greeks, Latins (Romanians and Italians) and some from native people who lived here from long ago such as Thracians ect. To me Bulgarians are Slavs just like Croatians, Slovenians, Bosnians, Serbs, Montenegrins ect. No different. Kind of sad Serbian channel is spreading this false narrative.
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. Bowersock, Glen W. & al. Late Antiquity: A Guide to the Postclassical World pp.354 Harvard University Press, 1999. ISBN 0-674-51173-5.
Bulgars (< Turkic bulgha- ‘to mix, stir up, disturb’, i.e. ‘rebels’) A Turkic tribal union of the Pontic steppes that gave rise to two important states: Danubian-Balkan Bulgaria (First Bulgarian Empire, 681-1018) and Volga Bulgaria (early 10th century-1241). They derived from Oghuric-Turkic tribes, driven westward from Mongolia and south Siberia to the Pontic steppes in successive waves by turmoil associated with the Xiongnu (late 3rd cent. ... ... www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780198662778.001.0001/acref-9780198662778-e-820 Kubrat (Gk. Kobratos, called Kurt in the Slavo-Turko-Bulgar Imennik or Name-List of Khans, 20, derived from Turkic quvrat ‘to bring together’) Ruler of the *Onoghurs (Ononghundur) *Bulgars (c.605-42/65?). *John of *Nikiu (120, 47) reports that he became a Christian in ... ... www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780198662778.001.0001/acref-9780198662778-e-2674 Utrigurs (Utighurs) Oghur-Bulghar Turkic group, located south-east of the Don River, near the Sea of Azov, and traditional enemies of the related ... ... www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780198662778.001.0001/acref-9780198662778-e-4918 Bolgar, Tatarstan/Russia (Bulgar, Bulgar al-Cadid, Kuybyshev) By the 15th century it was known as Bulgar al-Cadid ‘New Bulgar’ after the Turkic-speaking Volga Bulgars. www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780191905636.001.0001/acref-9780191905636-e-8397 Bulgars, Turkic, also Proto-Bulgarians, Pra-Bulgarians, a pastoral people, originally living in Central Asia. Swept westward in the great movement of steppe peoples ... www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780195046526.001.0001/acref-9780195046526-e-0850 Kuvrat (Κοβρα̑τος, according to Moravcsik, Byzantinoturcica 2:161f), khan of the Onogur Bulgars; died after 642. Patr. Nikephoros I mentions his revolt against the Avars and alliance with Herakleios; Kuvrat was granted ... www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803100045529 Kubrat , of the royal Duloclan, ‘lord of the Ononghundur-Bulgars and Kotrags [Kutrigurs?]’ www.oxfordreference.com/search?q=Dulo+clan&searchBtn=Search&isQuickSearch=true The Volga Tatars live in the central and eastern parts of European Russia and in western Siberia. They are the descendants of the Bulgar and Kipchak Turkic tribes who inhabited the western wing of the Mongol Empire, the area of the middle Volga River. academic.oup.com/mbe/article/27/10/2220/963437 Chuvash is the sole living representative of the Bulgharic branch, one of the two principal branches of the Turkic family. oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/mobile/view/10.1093/oso/9780198804628.001.0001/oso-9780198804628-chapter-28 Many Slavic tribes lived within the boundaries of the state, together with the proto-Bulgarians, a tribe of Turkic origin that had settled in the Balkan Peninsula at the end of the 7th century. www.britannica.com/biography/Boris-I The language of the European Huns is sometimes referred to as a Bulghar Turkic variety in general linguistic literature, but caution is needed in establishing its affiliations. www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/4CBA0E2CB74C8093EC1CA38C95067D55/S2513843X20000183a_hi.pdf/_div_class__title__Early_nomads_of_the_Eastern_Steppe_and_their_tentative_connections_in_the_West__div_.pdf In the Hunno-Bulgarian languages /r/ within a consonantic cluster tends to disappear projects.iq.harvard.edu/files/huri/files/vvi_n4_dec1982.pdf The Bulgars were a Turkic tribal confederation that gave rise to the Balkan Bulgar and Volga Bulgar states.The ethynonym derives from the Turkish bulgha-,”to stir,mix,disturb,confuse.” books.google.com.tr/books?id=c788wWR_bLwC&pg=PA354&redir_esc=y&hl=tr#v=onepage&q=Bulgars&f=false (Harvard University Press) Turkish tribes who founded a kingdom (9th-12th century) in the region between the Volga and the Kama. www.larousse.fr/encyclopedie/divers/Bulgares_de_la_Volga_et_de_la_Kama/110545 The Bulgars,,Turkish people who were formed on the Don. www.universalis.fr/recherche/l/1/napp/23625 Although the Bulgars were originally a Turkic-speaking people from Asia, they merged with the Slavic tribes whom they conquered in the 7th cent. www.infoplease.com/encyclopedia/arts/language/linguistics/bulgarian-language The Volga Bulgars, a Turkish tribe then living on the east bank of the Volga River, ... the laws of Islam to the Bulgars, who had recently converted to the religion. www.bookrags.com/research/ahmad-ibn-fadlan-ued/#gsc.tab=0
Eastern Bulgars , Bulgars Ancient Turkic people originating in the region n and e of the Black Sea. www.encyclopedia.com/environment/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/balkan-states Volga Bulgaria was a northeastern European Turkic state that formed during the 9th century and continued into the first four decades of the 13th century. www.readcube.com/articles/10.1002/9781118455074.wbeoe009
Population genetic analysis indicated that Conquerors had closest connection to the Onogur-Bulgar ancestors of Volga Tatars. www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-53105-5 hizliresim.com/stAHqu (Bulgar genetic proximity) Thus supporting the view that Tatars may be descendents of ancient Bulgars. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22520580/ Onogur-Bulgars had been part of the Hunnic people, and after the death of Attila’s son Irnik, European Hun remains fused with the Onogurs. www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/250688v1.full However, given the common Turkic genetic background of the Bulgars and Khazars, these ethnicities may be difficult to tell apart either archaeologically or genetically. www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2019.12.15.876912v1.full.pdf Most Tatars trace their descent to Volga Bulgars, a medieval Turkic people who have inhabited the Middle Volga and lower Kama region. online.ucpress.edu/search-results?page=1&q=Bulgars from the fifth century BC, well before Bulgars (a Turkic tribe) or Slavs online.ucpress.edu/search-results?q=Bulgars%20a%20tribe&fl_SiteID=1&qb={%22q%22:%22Bulgars%20a%20tribe%22}&page=1 Population genetic results indicate that they had closest connection to the Onogur-Bulgar ancestors of Volga Tatars. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6193700/ Population genetic results indicate that they had closest connection to the Onogur-Bulgar ancestors of Volga Tatars. journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0205920&type=printable Onogur-Bulgars had been part of the Hunnic people, and after the death of Attila’s son Irnik, European Hun remains fused with the Onogurs. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6193700/ Around 4% of Bulgarian genes are derived outside of Europe and the Middle East or are of undetermined origin (by 858 CE), of which 2.3% are from Northeast Asia and correspond to Asian tribes such as Bulgars,[13] a consistent very low frequency for Eastern Europe as far as Uralic-speaking Hungarians. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_studies_on_Bulgarians Science, 14 February 2014, Vol. 343 no. 6172, p. 751, A Genetic Atlas of Human Admixture History, Garrett Hellenthal at al.: " CIs. for the admixture time(s) overlap but predate the Mongol empire, with estimates from 440 to 1080 CE (Fig.3.) In each population, one source group has at least some ancestry related to Northeast Asians, with ~2 to 4% of these groups total ancestry linking directly to East Asia. This signal might correspond to a small genetic legacy from invasions of peoples from the Asian steppes (e.g., the Huns, Magyars, and Bulgars) during the first millennium CE." www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4209567/figure/F3/
@@pompacitokmakci Fatlinda Islami You are not a Turk so why do you pretend to be a Turk? You are a 12 year old Albanian girl who lives with her mommy in Gostivar
Are you trying to say that the Bulgarians are thracians ? You started like the Macedonians to claim false history. Bulgarians are Turks.Only Mongols and Turks have Khans. They were nomads ,Horse riders.
@@BGBodybilding what is the difference and who says it ? And please give some world known evidences not some self pro claim , theoretic thinking of a Bulgarian professor with diploma from БАН .It's becoming embarrassing .Bulgars are turkic- mongilian tribes.
@@papazataklaattiranimam NONSENSE 1. Give PRIMARY SOURCES that show the name Bulgarian comes from bulgamak? 2.Give PRIMARY SOURCES that show tengrinism in Bulgaria
At the time,the new Khazar qaganate was expanding westward,squeezing out the Onogurs,or Bulghars as they begin to be named. One of the Kuvrat’s sons,the Asparuch (Asparux,Isperih) now celebrated as the founder of Bulgaria,forcibly crossed to the Danube arpund 679 to occupy imperial territory Moesia after defeating the forces of Constantine IV (668-685). The event is recorded in the preserved text of a Hebrew letter of a Khazar qahan,who wrote that the Vununtur(=Onogurs=Bulghars) has fled across the Duna,the Danube. Even if numerous for the steppe,Asparuch’s pastoralist warriors and their families were of necessity relatively few as compared to the agricultural Slav population that lived south of the Danube,and thus the Turkic-speaking Bulghars were assimilated linguistically by the Slav majority to form the medieval and modern Bulgarians. This particular ethnogenesis occuree gradually over a period of more than two centuries: there was the Turkic qan (or khan) Krum (803-814),Qan Omurtag (814-831),Qan Perssian (836-852),then the wan who converted Boris I (852-889);then came Tsar Symeon (893-923), Tsar Peter I (927-970),and so on.But this transformation of Turkic shamanists into Slavic Christians did nothing to diminish the warlike character of the empire’s new neighbours. Because even warlike neighbours can be useful at times,the relations between the empire and the new Bulghar qaganate encompassed every possible variation,from intimate allience to all out-war,as exemplified by the career of the Bulghar qan or khan Tervel (or Tarvel-Terbelis in our Greek sources),the successor and probably son of Asparukh who ruled for some twenty-one years within the period 695-721,extant chronologies being inconsistent. “Bulghars and Bulgarians.” The Grand Strategy of the Byzantine Empire, by EDWARD N. LUTTWAK, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts; London, England, 2009, pp. 173 The strategic and economic importance of this juncture is clear: in an age when much long-distance travel was by water, the confluence of the Volga and Kama rivers provided a three-way maritime link between Europe, the Near East, and East Asia. The Turkic Bulgars were among the first to benefit “THE KAZAN SCHOOL.” Russian Orientalism: Asia in the Russian Mind from Peter the Great to the Emigration, by David Schimmelpenninck Van der Oye, Yale University Press, New Haven; London, 2010, pp. 93-121. The confluence of the Volga and Kama rivers, to the east, was inhabited by the Bulgars, a Turkic people, and the southeastern steppes by the Khazars, another Turkic people who had formed a strong state in the seventh century, barring alike the westward movement of other nomadic tribes “Russian Expansion in Kievan Times.” Eastward to Empire: Exploration and Conquest on the Russian Open Frontier to 1750, by George V. Lantzeff and Richard A. Pierce, McGill-Queen's University Press, MONTREAL; LONDON, 1973, pp. 21-30. The Bul- gars, a Turkic people, unlike the Slavic Croats and Serbs, moved south ofthe Danube in 679 and soon created a state, in which the numerically small Proto- Bulgarelement in due course became completely assimilated with the Slavic majority “Antecedents and Antipodes.” The National Question in Yugoslavia: Origins, History, Politics, by IVO BANAC, Cornell University Press, Ithaca; London, 1984, pp. 21-140. The word boyar is of Turkic origin, introduced into the Balkan Peninsula by the Bulgars in the 7th century. As the Turkic -speaking Bulgar conquerors became Slavicized, they joined with the Slavic clan chiefs
“Nobles and Landholders.” East Central Europe in the Middle Ages, 1000-1500, by JEAN W. SEDLAR, University of Washington Press, Seattle; London, 1994, pp. 58-83. " Bulgar " originally designated a Turkic -speaking people; now it designates the Slavic-speaking people who assimilated them. “National Symbols and the International Recognition of the Republic of Macedonia.” The Macedonian Conflict: Ethnic Nationalism in a Transnational World, by Loring M. Danforth, Princeton University Press, PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY, 1995, pp. 142-184.
No !!!!! BULGAR PEOPLE ARE OGHUR TURKS TURKISH PEOPLE ARE OGHUZ TURKS KAZAKH PEOPLE ARE KIPTCHAK TURKS ETC. TURK COUNTRYS = 🇰🇿🇹🇲🇰🇬🇦🇿🇹🇷🇺🇿 AND SLAVIFIED TURK COUNTRYS = 🇧🇬🇲🇰 AND MOST TURK POPULATION = 🇷🇺🇨🇳🇦🇫🇹🇯🇮🇷ETC.
Bulgars a race of people related to scythians or medens-persians spoke an indo european dialect and settled what's was known back then by greeks and romans alike as ancient thrace and today modern day bulgaria, turks -mongols came about 7-800 years ago and understandably influenced bulgars later on in time, threcians-bulgars same race culture different times scales, george soros schools of science and history for the ages of 6-7 year old's is baring fruits.
Bulgars (< Turkic bulgha- ‘to mix, stir up, disturb’, i.e. ‘rebels’) A Turkic tribal union of the Pontic steppes that gave rise to two important states: Danubian-Balkan Bulgaria (First Bulgarian Empire, 681-1018) and Volga Bulgaria (early 10th century-1241). They derived from Oghuric-Turkic tribes, driven westward from Mongolia and south Siberia to the Pontic steppes in successive waves by turmoil associated with the Xiongnu (late 3rd cent. ... ... www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780198662778.001.0001/acref-9780198662778-e-820 Kubrat (Gk. Kobratos, called Kurt in the Slavo-Turko-Bulgar Imennik or Name-List of Khans, 20, derived from Turkic quvrat ‘to bring together’) Ruler of the *Onoghurs (Ononghundur) *Bulgars (c.605-42/65?). *John of *Nikiu (120, 47) reports that he became a Christian in ... ... www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780198662778.001.0001/acref-9780198662778-e-2674 Utrigurs (Utighurs) Oghur-Bulghar Turkic group, located south-east of the Don River, near the Sea of Azov, and traditional enemies of the related ... ... www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780198662778.001.0001/acref-9780198662778-e-4918 Bolgar, Tatarstan/Russia (Bulgar, Bulgar al-Cadid, Kuybyshev) By the 15th century it was known as Bulgar al-Cadid ‘New Bulgar’ after the Turkic-speaking Volga Bulgars. www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780191905636.001.0001/acref-9780191905636-e-8397 Bulgars, Turkic, also Proto-Bulgarians, Pra-Bulgarians, a pastoral people, originally living in Central Asia. Swept westward in the great movement of steppe peoples ... www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780195046526.001.0001/acref-9780195046526-e-0850 Kuvrat (Κοβρα̑τος, according to Moravcsik, Byzantinoturcica 2:161f), khan of the Onogur Bulgars; died after 642. Patr. Nikephoros I mentions his revolt against the Avars and alliance with Herakleios; Kuvrat was granted ... www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803100045529 Kubrat , of the royal Duloclan, ‘lord of the Ononghundur-Bulgars and Kotrags [Kutrigurs?]’ www.oxfordreference.com/search?q=Dulo+clan&searchBtn=Search&isQuickSearch=true Originally Asiatic nomads who inhabited the shores of the Black Sea at the end of the 5th century ad but after ad 679 they crossed the Danube and founded a state in the old province of Moesia. www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803095534628 www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780199534043.001.0001/acref-9780199534043-e-582 The Volga Tatars live in the central and eastern parts of European Russia and in western Siberia. They are the descendants of the Bulgar and Kipchak Turkic tribes who inhabited the western wing of the Mongol Empire, the area of the middle Volga River. academic.oup.com/mbe/article/27/10/2220/963437 Chuvash is the sole living representative of the Bulgharic branch, one of the two principal branches of the Turkic family. oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/mobile/view/10.1093/oso/9780198804628.001.0001/oso-9780198804628-chapter-28 Many Slavic tribes lived within the boundaries of the state, together with the proto-Bulgarians, a tribe of Turkic origin that had settled in the Balkan Peninsula at the end of the 7th century. www.britannica.com/biography/Boris-I The language of the European Huns is sometimes referred to as a Bulghar Turkic variety in general linguistic literature, but caution is needed in establishing its affiliations. www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/4CBA0E2CB74C8093EC1CA38C95067D55/S2513843X20000183a_hi.pdf/_div_class__title__Early_nomads_of_the_Eastern_Steppe_and_their_tentative_connections_in_the_West__div_.pdf In the Hunno-Bulgarian languages /r/ within a consonantic cluster tends to disappear projects.iq.harvard.edu/files/huri/files/vvi_n4_dec1982.pdf An earlier date for the separation of proto-Turkic, preceding 209 BC would support the identification of Xiongnu language with proto-Bulgharic or one of its subgroups, while a later date of separation would make its association with proto-Turkic more plausible. academic.oup.com/jole/article-pdf/5/1/39/32972809/lzz010.pdf The Bulgars were a Turkic tribal confederation that gave rise to the Balkan Bulgar and Volga Bulgar states.The ethynonym derives from the Turkish bulgha-,”to stir,mix,disturb,confuse.” books.google.com.tr/books?id=c788wWR_bLwC&pg=PA354&redir_esc=y&hl=tr#v=onepage&q=Bulgars&f=false (Harvard University Press) Turkish tribes who founded a kingdom (9th-12th century) in the region between the Volga and the Kama. www.larousse.fr/encyclopedie/divers/Bulgares_de_la_Volga_et_de_la_Kama/110545 The Bulgars,,Turkish people who were formed on the Don. www.universalis.fr/recherche/l/1/napp/23625 Although the Bulgars were originally a Turkic-speaking people from Asia, they merged with the Slavic tribes whom they conquered in the 7th cent. www.infoplease.com/encyclopedia/arts/language/linguistics/bulgarian-language
@@ЕлицаЕнева-ж3о yes according to some bulgarian kids😹😹 Bulgars (< Turkic bulgha- ‘to mix, stir up, disturb’, i.e. ‘rebels’) A Turkic tribal union of the Pontic steppes that gave rise to two important states: Danubian-Balkan Bulgaria (First Bulgarian Empire, 681-1018) and Volga Bulgaria (early 10th century-1241). They derived from Oghuric-Turkic tribes, driven westward from Mongolia and south Siberia to the Pontic steppes in successive waves by turmoil associated with the Xiongnu (late 3rd cent. ... ... www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780198662778.001.0001/acref-9780198662778-e-820 Kubrat (Gk. Kobratos, called Kurt in the Slavo-Turko-Bulgar Imennik or Name-List of Khans, 20, derived from Turkic quvrat ‘to bring together’) Ruler of the *Onoghurs (Ononghundur) *Bulgars (c.605-42/65?). *John of *Nikiu (120, 47) reports that he became a Christian in ... ... www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780198662778.001.0001/acref-9780198662778-e-2674 Utrigurs (Utighurs) Oghur-Bulghar Turkic group, located south-east of the Don River, near the Sea of Azov, and traditional enemies of the related ... ... www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780198662778.001.0001/acref-9780198662778-e-4918 Bolgar, Tatarstan/Russia (Bulgar, Bulgar al-Cadid, Kuybyshev) By the 15th century it was known as Bulgar al-Cadid ‘New Bulgar’ after the Turkic-speaking Volga Bulgars. www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780191905636.001.0001/acref-9780191905636-e-8397 Bulgars, Turkic, also Proto-Bulgarians, Pra-Bulgarians, a pastoral people, originally living in Central Asia. Swept westward in the great movement of steppe peoples ... www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780195046526.001.0001/acref-9780195046526-e-0850 Kuvrat (Κοβρα̑τος, according to Moravcsik, Byzantinoturcica 2:161f), khan of the Onogur Bulgars; died after 642. Patr. Nikephoros I mentions his revolt against the Avars and alliance with Herakleios; Kuvrat was granted ... www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803100045529 Kubrat , of the royal Duloclan, ‘lord of the Ononghundur-Bulgars and Kotrags [Kutrigurs?]’ www.oxfordreference.com/search?q=Dulo+clan&searchBtn=Search&isQuickSearch=true Originally Asiatic nomads who inhabited the shores of the Black Sea at the end of the 5th century ad but after ad 679 they crossed the Danube and founded a state in the old province of Moesia. www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803095534628 www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780199534043.001.0001/acref-9780199534043-e-582 The Volga Tatars live in the central and eastern parts of European Russia and in western Siberia. They are the descendants of the Bulgar and Kipchak Turkic tribes who inhabited the western wing of the Mongol Empire, the area of the middle Volga River. academic.oup.com/mbe/article/27/10/2220/963437 Chuvash is the sole living representative of the Bulgharic branch, one of the two principal branches of the Turkic family. oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/mobile/view/10.1093/oso/9780198804628.001.0001/oso-9780198804628-chapter-28 Many Slavic tribes lived within the boundaries of the state, together with the proto-Bulgarians, a tribe of Turkic origin that had settled in the Balkan Peninsula at the end of the 7th century. www.britannica.com/biography/Boris-I The language of the European Huns is sometimes referred to as a Bulghar Turkic variety in general linguistic literature, but caution is needed in establishing its affiliations. www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/4CBA0E2CB74C8093EC1CA38C95067D55/S2513843X20000183a_hi.pdf/_div_class__title__Early_nomads_of_the_Eastern_Steppe_and_their_tentative_connections_in_the_West__div_.pdf In the Hunno-Bulgarian languages /r/ within a consonantic cluster tends to disappear projects.iq.harvard.edu/files/huri/files/vvi_n4_dec1982.pdf An earlier date for the separation of proto-Turkic, preceding 209 BC would support the identification of Xiongnu language with proto-Bulgharic or one of its subgroups, while a later date of separation would make its association with proto-Turkic more plausible. academic.oup.com/jole/article-pdf/5/1/39/32972809/lzz010.pdf The Bulgars were a Turkic tribal confederation that gave rise to the Balkan Bulgar and Volga Bulgar states.The ethynonym derives from the Turkish bulgha-,”to stir,mix,disturb,confuse.” books.google.com.tr/books?id=c788wWR_bLwC&pg=PA354&redir_esc=y&hl=tr#v=onepage&q=Bulgars&f=false (Harvard University Press) Turkish tribes who founded a kingdom (9th-12th century) in the region between the Volga and the Kama. www.larousse.fr/encyclopedie/divers/Bulgares_de_la_Volga_et_de_la_Kama/110545 The Bulgars,,Turkish people who were formed on the Don. www.universalis.fr/recherche/l/1/napp/23625 Although the Bulgars were originally a Turkic-speaking people from Asia, they merged with the Slavic tribes whom they conquered in the 7th cent. www.infoplease.com/encyclopedia/arts/language/linguistics/bulgarian-language
The kirghiz Turks are described as Red headed and green eyed. www.britannica.com/topic/Kyrgyz-people And the Kypchaks and Cumans Turks are blondes. Looks like I destroyed you theory. lol Also Turks are described by Mongols,Chinese,Indian and Byzantium sources as a mixed race people. Ironically the Turkic and Mongolic word for Mixed is Bolgak and the term for mixed person/tribe is Bolgar/Balkar. You might even want to check out Modern Mongolia's Bolgan province and Bolgan city. Or the mongolian tribe Bulguud...lol
As a consequence, groups of the Cumans and the Tatars settled and mingled with the local population in various regions of the Balkans. The Cumans were the founders of three successive Bulgarian dynasties (Asenids, Terterids and Shishmanids) and the Wallachian dynasty (Basarabids). They also played an active role in Byzantium, Hungary and Serbia, with Cuman immigrants being integrated into each country's elite. Vásáry, I. (2005). Cumans and Tatars: Oriental Military in the Pre-Ottoman Balkans, 1185-1365. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511496622 The name of the dynasty comes from one of the brothers, namely Asen I. The etymology is most likely of Cuman Turkic origin, derived from "esen" which meant "safe, sound, healthy" and the Belgun nickname seems to be derived from Turkic "bilgün", which meant "wise". Further support to this connection can be found in the charters of the Great Lavra of Mt. Athos from the end of the 12th century, which mention the monastery's problems with some of the Cuman stratiotes, where "Asen" is listed as the name of one of those Cumans. Other study shows that the only name that makes sense is änish ("descent") and the word can be found almost exclusively in the languages of the Kıpçak Turks..
Nice Turkish propaganda. Now let's use some real sources: 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%...".
ATTENTION:
1. Any and all hate speech will be deleted.
2. This is considered "official history" based on mainly non-Balkan historians.
3. "Turkic" refers to nomadic tribes from the Eurasian steppes that spoke Turkic languages - NOT Turkish from Turkey.
4. There is no concrete evidence of significant Thracian influence in the Bulgarian ethnogenesis although undoubtedly Bulgarians or at least the local Slavs absorbed the remaining Thracians which influenced the grammar of the Bulgarian language making it more similar to Albanian than to other Slavic languages, the so-called "Balkan sprachbund".
И вие сте Балканци, така че можеш да се прибавиш и себе си към тюрките, щом твърдиш така. Кой ти позволи да ни диктуваш собственната ни история.
Listen Kosovo-Albanian piece of political disaster. WE ARE NOT TURKIC we do not have MONGOLIAN eyes for god's sake, cant you understand it once and for all?!?! We got less than 1 % Turkic features....stop this nonsense now! This is insulting us, is this the way you are making a diplomacy?! I can call you negros or asians or indians or even aborigens if that's gonna make you fill better, and make me feel equal. Are you okay with that, negro? NO YOU ARE NOT! That is why you must STOP THIS!
@@СтоянНенов-у8ы Прав си само не обиждай сърбите, те са наши братя въпреки всичко което са ни правили на нас и ние на тях. Тези са платени от Албания, а Албания е платена от Америка....толкова е просто, че няма на къде!
@@aleksandars.4690 The documentary says Turkic tribes and it is written history right mate study history not propaganda
@@thomaszioudros181 This is the propaganda, greek dude. The propaganda starts many centuries ago, but today's propaganda comes from the decision that we were Tataric people, so we could easely be assimilated by Russia, although we gave BIRTH to them, by giving them our civilization that is why we are brothers with russians and all so called "slavic" tribes, which comes as a word from the Russian Queen or Tsarina Ekaterina, who is actually GERMAN WOMAN! Second this propaganda is making other nations open to take our lands that is why it is a propagand. The truth is we are here from the whole beginning....we just spread ourselves across the Black Sea, due to the invasion of the Roman empire. I REALLY don't wanna teach you history, you are already brain washed by the official history which is a DOCTRINE, NOT A HISTORY! The people who command the financial world today, give the order what history, to whom should be given. They could invent ANYTHING in ANYONE's history. And this here is just a small part of it. The propaganda ofcourse is not obvious it is entertwined or implemented, injected
into the truth and real events, so you could easely believe the lies. Everything else is a bullshit. And ONE HUMONGOUS LIE is such as that we are turkic AKA we are mongol or stretched eyes, yellow or dark yellow skinned and small....which is a HUGE LIE! The average bulgarin was and still is mostly brightly brown haired or just brown haired, white but not pale skinned with anthropomorphic features of the modern european men! Our genes gave birth to much of Europe modern men, our culture, language, believes, our WHOLE civilization gave birth to the Eastern Europe aswell with the so called "Eastern Roman Empire Christianity Civilization" - we were rivals, and we did privail. THAT IS WHY today I understand very easely, lots of words, habits and way of life of most of slavic countries today in whole Eastern Europe! That is so extremely simple, and when we put to the test our genome......dude we own this place.....we EARNED by winning battles this land and even more on the Balkan Peninsula, but we just had the worst leaders for the last 100 years....so, don't tell me "official history" stuff, this is so ridiculous I can't even stand this pathetic video! IT insults my pride, my dignity, my honour and my people!
1.Bulgaria was never a vassal of the serbian state.
2. Took over 50 years of constant war for Bulgaria to be conquered by the ottomans
3. serbia was fully conquered by Bulgaria in 10th century by Simeon. The population was resettled in moesia.
4. The battle of Velbuzhd only lead to macedonia being conquered not whole of Bulgaria. The army of Dusan was repulsed and peace treaty signed soon after.
5. many uprisings in 16, 17, 18th centuries during Ottoman times. Not just 19th century like portrayed. Veliko Turnov uprising, Chiprovtsi uprising are just among some of them
6. the slavic population in Macedonia in 19th century was not mixed. the slavs identified as bulgarian. that can easily be seen in third party sources including the Ottoman census and french, german and russian sources. One of them is the Carnegie report published in 1914. There is absolutely no debate over this now.
7. serb chetniks did not exist in macedonia. that is absurd.
8. Bulgaria doesn't turn on Serbia and Greece after first balkan war. Serbia and Greece turn on Bulgaria. Serbia makes a secret pact with Greece to partition Macedonia in violation of the agreement it had with Bulgaria. After serbia occupies Macedonia ethnic cleansing and repressions begins soon after. This is well documented in the Carnegie Report of 1914. Bulgaria has no choice but to wage war as the serbs were intransigent.
9. Bulgaria does not become a republic after Ferdinand's abdication. His son Boris III is next in line. That is absurd.
10. Communists only took power due to soviet actions. The communists were not popular in Bulgaria. In fact Boris III was likely the most popular monarch in Europe. The communists executed politicians not because of "war crimes" but for the usual trumped up charges of being "enemies of the people".
these are just some of the inacuracies. I mean seriously where did you get this info?
Can't you feel the serbian infiriority complex and racism in the channel ?
@@allsource1998 it's ok. they get brainwashed from the time they are kids about history. they read their own version created for serbians.
@@thatisme3thatisme38 and we all laugh at them as well.
What do you mean there was no Serbian chetniks in Macedonia? Search about Serbian Chetnik Organizations which operated mostly in Vardar region from 1903-1908, and later during the Balkan wars and WW1.
@@Akcija1930 yes and? We are discussing 1885 here. And no chetniks come even later than 08. They come after serv occupation of macedonia.
Greetings from Bulgaria :)
Bulgaria has never been a vassal of Serbia and the Golden Horde...
We were a tatar vassal between 1285-1299 but we were never a Serbian vassal
За кратък период сме васал на Златната орда, дори ни слагат монголец за цар.
Всъщност сме били.. макар и да сме горди не може да отречем че голяма част от историята ни е прекарана или във васалство (това не означава робство.. гугълни го ако искаш) или РОБСТВО... Византийско, Османско.. След освобождението сме управлявани от руска администрация (това донякъде е васалство)... като цяло не сме много специални.. единствено 681-1018 (първа българска империя) са ни великите години...
You literally had a bulgarian dynasty called terter(terteroba- which means tartar clan in cuman turkic) lmao
Kama Jiu-jitsu I think 2 of them were Tatars
I like how this video makes it seem like we've lost every battle when to be honest we've won almost every battle
Ahhh lill Tim you lost
So, Bulgaria and Serbia hate each other?
@Ilir Cami 😂
@_ Bulgarian Mapper _ ahh.. If you try to imagine history nowadays you'll see it all so crazy.. There's a Serbian I talkred with and she told me, neighboring countries with serbia hate each other like albania.
@@justinvillar7008 Thanks to Russian geopolitical agenda through
to the Tito!
Ivan Alexander was not a serbian vassal. Ivan Stefan was a serbian protege and he ruled Bulgaria for 8 months only, But then the Bulgarian boyars dethroned him. There comes Ivan Alexander, who has a peaceful relationship with Ivan Dusan, but not аs his vassal.
It is a Serbian propaganda mate ,of course based on hate against Bulgarians .
Serbian is a diagnose !
th-cam.com/video/k_z3atEpytw/w-d-xo.html
Funny how you mention some insignificant, inconsequential losses to Serbia during Boris I Michael, but never mention that his son Simeon conquers ALL of Serbia? That's a bit strange lmao. Simeon first installs a vassal on the Serbian throne and later just outright takes everything under his own scepter. You called this 9:45 "bulk of the Serbian territories" bulk is a funny word for ALL of them, but OK. No hate to Serbia - they had a glorious and mighty Empire under Dushan as well, but this video is insane.
not to mention he totally depopulates serbia. all the serbs were resettled in moesia and the few that escaped this ran to what is now bosnia.
Dushan was half bulgarian himself. The servs never like to mention this. He owes his title of tsar to his bulgarian royal lineage.
This channel is actually racist channel focused hiddenlly against Bulgarians.
@@thatisme3thatisme38 serbians are also Bulgarians ,do not get over wet
@@allsource1998 lol. Not quite
Pretty good video about Bulgaria from a Serbian perspective! However, the ancient Bulgars (Proto--Bulgars) were not a Turkic (Turanid) tribe. Studies by leading historians, anthropologists, linguists, archeologists, and geneticists since the 1980's have discarded the old belief about their Turkic origin. The Bulgarian Empire was founded in 627 A.D. in what is today the south of European Russia. Another (Volga) Bulgarian state was set up in 675 A.D. in the east of what today is known as European Russia. It was destroyed by the Mongols in the 1240's. Balkan (Danubian) Bulgaria was founded in 681 A.D. The modern Balkan Bulgarians are chiefly the descendants of Slavs, Thracians, and Proto--Bulgars. Only 0.5% of their genes can be traced to East Asia. For Eastern and Central Europe, the average of the same (Mongoloid) genes is about 1.5%. Also, following the battle of Velbuzhd in 1330, Serbian influence in Bulgaria lasted only for a couple of years. BTW, the mother and the wife of the most prominent Serbian king, Stephen Dushan, were Bulgarian princesses. Greetings to all TRUTH--LOVERS from an American descendant of Bulgarians from Aegean Macedonia and Pirot!
Pan-Turkic Nationalist the evidence is compelling. It is called genetics. The Turkic people are Mongolians with Asian genetics. Bulgarians are with Indo European genetics. I have never seen Asian looking Bulgarians in Bulgaria.
@Pan-Turkic Nationalist There is no proto-Bulgars , the name is Bolgar here you go buddy spisanie8.bg/рубрики/история/2252-какво-все-пак-е-това-bolgar.html (4th to 5th century,Vinica,Macedonia) bg.wikipedia.org/wiki/Файл:Bolgari_sclavi_teracota_Vinitza_FYROM.jpg
use google translate if you dont know bulgarian. Capital of danube Bulgaria is pliska, hmmm i think that is in the so-called slavic language?(but there was no slavs in the balkan during Constantine between 306 and 337 AD(his rule).Here is a text that literaly states that Pliska was done by Constantine , www.documentacatholicaomnia.eu/20vs/203_CSHB/1828-1897,_CSHB,_15_Georgius_Codinus_Excerpta_de_Antiquitatibus_Cpolitanis_[Bekkeri_Editio],_GR.pdf (page 43) picture for quicker: imgur.com/a/lLeY2BI
All this nonsence proto-bulgars is Russian ,Austro-Hungarian , German falsification , they never proved tangra, Khans(not a single fucking document or artifact to proved it yet they teach us this shit), or anything asian ever.
He didnt say bulgars were turkic but the word bulgars's origin.
Finally someone else said something important instead of lies of Serbian perspective. It looks like Serbian history is more messed up than ours. :D
@Pan-Turkic Nationalist
The Bulgars had nothing in common with the turkic tribes besides some cultural and genetic influence. Here the largest genetic and anthropological study on those so called Bulgars and the Modern Bulgarians yet
The research has been approved by the Ethics Committee for Clinical Experimentation of the University of Pavia, Board minutes of the 5th of October 2010. Geographical and genealogy information were ascertained by interview after having obtained their written informed consent.
Reasearch:
We found that 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%. Principal Component analyses group Bulgarians with European populations, apart from Central Asian Turkic-speaking groups and South Western Asia populations. Within the country, the genetic variation is structured in Western, Central and Eastern Bulgaria indicating that the Balkan Mountains have been permeable to human movements. The lineage analysis provided the following interesting results: (i) R-L23* is present in Eastern Bulgaria since the post glacial period; (ii) haplogroup E-V13 has a Mesolithic age in Bulgaria from where it expanded after the arrival of farming; (iii) haplogroup J-M241 probably reflects the Neolithic westward expansion of farmers from the earliest sites along the Black Sea.
*On the whole, in light of the most recent historical studies, which indicate a substantial proto-Bulgarian input to the contemporary Bulgarian people, our data suggest that a common paternal ancestry between the proto-Bulgarians and the Altaic and Central Asian Turkic-speaking populations either did not exist or was negligible* .
Read the full research
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3590186/
We will never forget history.. But.. Bulgarians and Serbs should never fight again, long live our friendship!
Nino Jevtic we need to sort our country’s out together we can kill the mafia together
I AGREE! Greetings from an American descendant of ethnic Bulgarians from Aegean Macedonia and Pirot! No more fighting between Orthodox Christian and Slavic brothers!
@Golden brother YES!
The Macedonians who are separate people to the Greeks during and before Alexanders time, during the Roman Empire when Greeks joined Romans to fight against the Macedonians, and as a result during bible times separate lands and people as mentioned in the bible... they’re the same Macedonians (who were not Greek) that were already in the Balkans before these Bulgars came strolling down to the Balkans.
The Macedonian Cyrillic alphabet was developed in Solun/Thessaloniki by Macedonians during the beginning of the Macedonian dynasty of the Byzantine empire. If you look at the Bulgarian empires, at no time did they ever control Solun/Thessaloniki.
Also history records that during tsar Samuels Macedonian kingdom from Skopje then Prespa and Ohrid, during that time the Bulgarians and their empire was defeated and under Byzantine control, so tsar Samuels “Macedonian” kingdom could not have been Bulgarian.
@@WatchmanofMKDN
The Cyrillic alphabet was created in Bulgaria in the city of Preslav, look it up: "Preslav Literary School". It is a Bulgarian alphabet devised by Bulgarian monks. And i m speaking facts here that anyone can look up on the internet and learn for himself. Those Bulgarian monks such as Naum and Clement were students of Sts.Cyril and Methdius and have traveled with them on their journy to Great Moravia.
Ah Serbs, you never fail to dissapoint me.
😂
Well Slavic language is sister language of turkic languages
@@youknowmyfirstlastname3206 Bullshit!
@@youknowmyfirstlastname3206 they don't have any relation believe me
@@kila200 you don't have any relation ,pal
Turkish are not Turkics but stole that identity
When did Gypsies come to Bulgaria,15th century or something?
Yes, with the Ottomans.
@@Rai-Bulgaria They came earlier
Kubrat: tells his sons that they must stick together in order to prevail.
His sons: let's split up gang!
Can’t wait to visit Bulgaria 🇧🇬 in September! Greetings from Los Angeles California 👋🏼
you will visit a beautiful country :)
Raul, US is a sinking ship. leave the US and don't look back!
Bularians in America, come home! america and the west is about to become a titanic. Come home and be safe!!! America is not for Bulgarians!!! dont beslaves to a murderer america that screws everything and everyone she comes in contact with. You will be homeless and jobless ! you will be replaced by robots leaving you a slave to murdering USA
Can't wait to visit California, greetings from Bulgaria:)
@@georgimavrodinov4500 DONT BOTHER.
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
Your moving to Germany shows that you’re anti Turkish
You can’t stand living with your own people
Nice Turkish propaganda. Now let's use some real sources:
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%...".
What nonsense - "In 1919 Bulgaria was declared a republic"?
Serbian channel,don't you know that serbian is a diagnose ?
@@allsource1998then don't come to eat our food.
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.
Turkish lies and misinformation.
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%...".
Nice Turkish propaganda. Now let's use some real sources:
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%...".
16:45 Macedonians were ethnic Bulgarians, not mix of serbs and bulgarians.
no
Mihail Nikoloff Maybe not back then but post WWll Serbians were encouraged to move to Macedonia and marry Macedonians, obviously this would bring them closer with Serbia and further away from Bulgaria (Tito's object was to suppress the Bulgarian influence in Macedonia and eradicate Bulgarian national chauvinism)... anyway greetings from Australia:)
Mihail Nikoloff Etnik Bulgaria are Turcik people!!!
Macedonians are not Bulgars!!!!
Stop laying ,Ancient Serbs are INDIGINUS PEOPLE OF Balkans!!!!
People of Macedonia are Slavic and ancient!!!!!
Mihail Nikoloff hahahaha Serbia and Greece (allied) both worked towards suppressing the Bulgarian character in Macedonia, the funny thing is "Macedonia" was used as a weapon to achieve this, now it's biting them back in the ass (especially Greece)...no negativity but I'm not sure how Bulgarians could ever mend friendship with either Serbia or Greece, both these idiotic states divided the Bulgarian people and turned them away from one another! (it's almost like an outside force telling you to hate your brother or sister)
Mihail Nikoloff BULGAR came from Turkmenistan!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Личи си че е правено от сърбин. Всяка втора дума е за Сърбия, сякаш е имала кой знае каква роля за средновековна България. Други епизоди са направо пропуснати за сметка на сърбия това сърбия онова.
@@Todor-BG Нещо не ти разбрах тезата. Аз понеже съм бил корав трябва да направя нещо за което теб те е страх или..? Или е опит за ирония, с арнаутите си и отричаш престъпленията им?
@@Todor-BG чак се дразниш че не съм им написал правилно името. Сложил си си българско знаме на профила, едно време знаеш ли как са наричали българите които са с рязаните ислямистити, с арнаутите. Ти с тях ли си, арнаутски гювендия ли си?
Peter Urilski Romania is Hungary!
@@The.steppenWolf Много си забавен. Айде лягай си
канала се казва
KosovoReport, естествено че е правен от сърби
Kliment and Naum were already IN Bulgaria. Boris didn't need to invite them INTO Bulgaria. That is utter nonsense.
It is a serbian hate propaganda and disinformation
I believe Bulgars are Scythian in origin, therefore they can not be of Turkic or Chinese origin. In modern times they may have intermingled with some of the Turkic tribes (Ottamans after the rise of Islam , i.e 7th century AD) who now occupy the country of Turkey.
Please provide genetic proof about your allegation that Bulgars are of Chinese or Turkic extraction prior to 7th century AD.
@SRkr Ayyr
No my friend Bulgarians are not and never were Turkic
Bulgarians have only 2% Turkic genetics
@SRkr Ayyr
Nope ,
Bulgarians are not Turkic and never were.
Bulgarians have 2% Turkic genetics
Genetics doesn't lie
Bulgarians never used the title Khan but used Kanasubigi
Khan is a Yeniseian title
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khan_(title)#cite_note-vov-7
@@petertodorov1792 So Bulgarians are Iranic by origin?
COMPLETE NONSENSE. Propaganda at its best!
It’s the truth
Video is legit imo
There are a lot of unknown thing about Bulgarian history.
Such as the origin of our people.
Bulgars are not turkic:
Bulgarians don't have turkic ethnic traits, nor do our ancestors if u take a look at paintings from the 9th century for example.
Recent nonpolitical genetic studies dismissed the turkic theory completely.
Amen Brother,
Bulgarians were Sarmatians
They worshiped the Iranian Rider God Siavush
Read the work of our scholar Dr. Zhivko Voynikov on the Bulgarian god Siavush/SIva Bog
Fun Fact: Nobody is interested in Bulgarian historical revisionism
@@petertodorov9540 I've read multiple books on the topic and all say a different thing. How do u know your book is true lol
Stefan Tsanev's book, Gancho Tsenov's books ect.
@@petertodorov9540 but one thing is clear.
Genetic research says it all. I can send u the video if u want.
Genetic research completely debunked the turkic origin theory.
@@georgimihalkov9678
Send me the links Brother,
The problem with the Thracian/Autochthonous theory is that it doesn't explain the Volga Bulgarians
And the Bulgarians of Vund in Armenia and the Caucasus from the 1st century AD spoken about in
Armenian sources
Also all the names of the Bulgarian Bats and Kanasubigis are Iranian
Ruling dynasties of Bulgaria had all non-Slavic origins
Let’s look at them
Dulo dynasty = Turkic Bulgar origin
Krum’s dynasty = Turkic Bulgar origin
Cometopuli dynasty = Armenian origin
Asenid dynasty = Turkic Cuman origin
Sratsimir dynasty= Turkic Cuman origin
Shishman dynasty= Turkic Cuman origin
Terter dynasty= Turkic Cuman origin
Battenberg dynasty= Germanic German origin
House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha-Koháry= Germanic Frank origin
History of Bulgaria is undoubtedly the most powerful history in Balkans but their rulers were not even Slavic Bulgarians…
Hanim
Bulgarians are as Turkic as your Caliph Erdogan is🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Nice Turkish propaganda. Now let's use some real sources:
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%...".
Bulgarians have Tatar origin,no?
NO
Yes.
No
Bulgarians have Slavic ancestry whereas Bulgars had Turkic
Of course, it is obvious when you see a blond guy with blu eyes, the present prime minister of Bulgaria, you are sure to see a real Mongolian, ha ha ha.
this video is so made by a serb most of
the facts are not right and its said as serbia was “stronger” and looks like they beated us at wars while irl it was the opposite
@@HomoUniverzalis wdym
@@HomoUniverzalis no only one won by serbia the rest by us
Заради загубата в Сърбия ли сме приели християнството :D :D :D
По леко с лъжите
Абе, нали трябва да кажат, че сме кенеф и да излъжат...
Само върху смотаните загуби са се фокусирали.
Видя се докаде се докараха накрая с лъжите си. Изгубиха даже собствените си земи и всички ги заплюха
vas bugarski jezik je iskvareni srpski jezik.
@@gfdfgaadfgadfg2309 Пиеш ли си хапчетата редовно изкривен
:D :D :D
@@peterurilski714 razumeo si sta sam rekao,to je vazno :D
15:55 “... stage an uprising in 1876 ... resulting in an independent ... state in 1878 ...”. Wrong! After brutal suppression of the 1876 uprising by the Turks, the Russo-Turkish war of 1877-78 resulted in the establishment of a Bulgarian state.
This video is a perfect example of disinformation: presentation of facts, interpreted in a way that makes them honest lies. At the end he literally said that the Soviet Union collapsed in 1981! And this is about as punctual as he gets!
It is made by The next serbian
This channel is runned by serbian nationalists. So you can imagine how incorrect it’s content are.
I'm a Serbian nationalist (as if it isn't obvious), but I would like to see your evidence for Macedonia being mixed Serbo-Bulgarian and not 100% Bulgarian.
The Serb Nationalist macedonia was always mixed, many Old Serbian churches built there
@Znik yеs 10% еthnic sеrbs livе in macеdonia. But thе ancеstors of еvеryonе who considers himsеlf a "macеdonian" usеd to consider thеmselvеs Bulgarians. Thе makеdonist propaganda was pushеd only to еthnic Bulgarians in order to dеstory their Bulgarian identity
+Bulgarian empire mapping The Mijak and Brsjak tribes in FYROM are ethnically Serbian and their territories are historically almost 1/2 of FYROM
And the communist propaganda also oppressed many ethnic Serbs in macedonia so today many of them say they are "Macedonians" and make a fake "macedonian church" from the Serbian church
@@historyrhymes1701 Tito's propaganda was pushed to everyone (besides the Albanians) in Macedonia.
Also, as a side note, Macedonian is just a highly differing dialect of Bulgarian (same with the made-up language of the Montenegrins). The more nationalistic Macedonians just abused the fact that dialect was so differing to make it a language. It wouldn't be so hard. After all, Tito invented Montenegrin despite it not exactly being a dialect.
Anyways, Bulgaria tried to re-introduce Bulgarian into Macedonia and that failed. The nationalists just had to abuse the newly created Macedonian language and produce outrage amongst its speakers (those who do not believe it's a dialect) against Bulgaria. And they did. Now they had their ethnicity, so that Tito could abuse it later on.
I am sorry but Serbia wasnt more than tribal dependent principality before the 1200s when the the kingdom was established. The Bulgarian empire was 15 times larger than it. And those "tartar" Bulgarians wеre 10 times more civilized than the slavs. Type "Pliska" and "Preslav" and you ll see that these people had stone cities way before the other slavs. Even the Byzantines called The first Bulgarian state "Great old Bulgaria.
What is this noncces?!
Most of this is a Serbian propaganda!
In short, it is hard to think of any other ethnolinguistic entity in history that conquered so vast a territory and founded so many empires and states, also contributing to world civilizations. The history of the Turkic peoples was an important factor in world history for more than a millennium until the emergence of Europe as the world's dominant power. What happened in the Turkic world often affected the history of China, Central Asia, the Middle East, South Asia, and Europe. One may also argue that world history began with the "Turko-Mongol" empire created by Chinggis Khan. In the contemporary world, Turkic-speaking nations form six states (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan, and Turkey/Türkiye) and several "autonomous" units in Russia (the republics of Chuvash, Tatarstan, Bashkortostan, Altai, Khakassia, Tuva, and Sakha) and China (the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region). Turkic peoples also reside as minority groups in several other countries, including Mongolia and Iran, among others. It would therefore be difficult to acquire a comprehensive understanding of world history as well as our present world without studying the history of the Turkic peoples.
bro I find your comment everywhere
Nice Turkish propaganda. Now let's use some real sources:
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%...".
What a digusting video and people who made it.
The South Slavic tribal groups moved south and southwest from their Pripet homeland, eventually entering the Byzantine-controlled Balkan Peninsula as either allies of or refugees from the invading Turkic Avars during the second half of the sixth century. Their search for a new, permanent homeland proved successful. Today their descendants solidly inhabit virtually all of the northwestern, central, and southeastern regions of the Balkans.
Turks comprise a third ethnic component of the Balkan population. Although today numerically small-a little over 1 million people (about 2 percent of the total population) they have played a role in shaping the history of the Balkans far beyond their numbers.
In late antiquity the rolling plains of the Danube and Prut rivers in the Balkans' northeast served Turkic tribes from the Eurasian steppes as an open door into the heart of the peninsula and the riches of the Eastern Roman Empire. Huns and related tribes swept through the Balkans in the fifth and sixth centuries, followed by the Avars and their allies in the sixth and seventh. Among these latter were the Bulgars, who established a state south of the Danube. Unlike the Avars, whose settlements in the Balkans proved transitory, the Bulgar state persisted in the face of concerted Byzantine pressures. By the ninth century the Bulgars were challenging the Byzantine Empire for political hegemony in the Balkans, but by that time they also were well on the way toward ethnic assimilation into their Slavic-speaking subject population. The conversion of the Turkic Bulgar ruling elite to Orthodox Chris-tianity at midcentury opened the gate to their rapid and total Slavic assimilation. Within a hundred years of the Bulgar conversion, most traces of their Turkic origins had disappeared, except for their name-the Bulgars had been transformed into Slavic Bulgarians
Oğuz, Pecheneg, and Cuman Turkic tribes appeared in the Balkans between the ninth and eleventh centuries. Most of them eventually suffered an ethnic fate similar to the Bulgars and left little lasting impression, although the Gagauz Turks of Bessarabia, a region lying east of the Prut River (now known as Moldova), and some Turks living today in the eastern Balkans may be direct ethnic descendants of those medieval Turkic interlopers. Additionally, the Ottoman Turks' five-century rule over most of the Balkans established numerous scattered enclaves of Turkish- speaking groups throughout much of the southern portion of the peninsula, with a heavy concentration in the southeastern region of ancient Thrace.
Nice Turkish propaganda. Now let's use some real sources:
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%...".
Slavic civilization was removed from their land by the ghots. In the 3-5 century in the territory of today Romania-ucraine reigned the goths and created with the grabbed/exploited slavic women a slavic nation with the gothic paternal decendance. Many goths with their slavic children were pushed by the huns, entered the balcans (many kept to stay under the hunic control and became sclavens on the Greek map of 6th century). This moment is very well documented in the Greek chronicles. The Greeks provided a territory for the goths, and there are only the understanding and questioning how the slavs appeared. There is a complete anomaly that the specific slavic genetic R is so low in balcans, but so high the gothic one, but the historical events explane that.
From that periode, the name of the exploited nation brought the meaning of "slave" for germans or "sclavens" for Greeks or "serb/serf" (servant) for latins. The exploitation of slavs by the goths was extremely wild. They sold the thousands at constantinipol and thousands exploited for themselves.
"2. This is considered "official history" based on mainly non-Balkan historians. "
What about non-balkan DNA research? Less than 1% Turkic DNA ?
Because you are Slavs, not Bulgars which are Turkic. You are Slavised like Tatars, Bashkirs and so on.
You guys used to be turks nowadays both ethnically and culturally more slavic
savaş alpay Bulgars were 3 to 4 % Turkic by genetics 🤣🤣🤣🤣
@@yaqubleis6311 this is what it is today not it was in yesterday. Slavs are not Bulgars. Real Bulgars are Turks.
BONESAW IS READY they were not Turkic at all Bulgars were predominately Turkicized Iranic Samartians and Alans. It seems the Bulgars predominated the Central Asian Iranic Caucasoid type with a small mongoloid admixture of possibly 3 to 4 % on average with a few or minority being more Mongoloid than the average especially with the males. They were almost physically indistinguishable from the Samaritans and Pamiri Tajiks 😂🤣🤣🤣🤣 historians of Bulgarians origin saying this 🤣😂🤣🤣 ANTHROPOLOGICAL STUDY OF MEDIAEVAL CEMETERIES NO. 1 AND NO. 3 NEAR DEVNYA (BULGARIA)
P. BOEV, L. KAVGAZOVA and D. PIPERKOVA
North-Iranic racial types, characteristic for the Alanians, have been found. This shows that at Devnya were present besides proto-Bulgarians are Alano-Sarmatians whose mixed breeding had already started. 🤣😂🤣😂😂🤣😂🤣🤣 END OF ARGUMENT 🤣😂😂 thank you to Bulgarians historians to make your history weak again the Turkic origin of Bulgars has been dead since more 20 years now 😂😂🤣🤣🤣
3:15 Actually Tervel was apparently Christian. Kubrat was definitely Christian as he was baptized in Constantinople. This was all documented by Byzantine historians. It stands to reason that Asparukh was Christian as well being his son and passed this on. In those days they probably were not very open with their Christianity as the bulgars were tengrists and a leader proclaiming himself to be a Christian would probably not be a great political move.
What tengrism man? Here is a icon whit Bolgar on it and a cristian cross on top spisanie8.bg/рубрики/наука/2138-болгар-болгар.html 200 years min, up to 300, before Danube Bulgaria where do you see tengrism son? You read it in wiki? must be bulletproof then. They never provided enything to prove tengrism just opions used as facts.
Kubrat was Tengrist
THE VOLGA BULGAR AMIRATE:TURKIC EXPANSION NORTH OF THE STEPPE. In the aftermath of the Hunnic invasion, various Turkic peoples known as Bulgars entered the south Russian steppe from Kazakhstan.
Noonan, T. (2000). European Russia, c. 500-c. 1050. In T. Reuter (Ed.), The New Cambridge Medieval History (The New Cambridge Medieval History, pp. 485-513). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CHOL9780521364478.020
A variety of Slavic, and according to some scholars, Bulgar-Turkic peoples gained political significance in the Carpathian basin. Several Slavic dukes, who were at the same time Frankish clients and leaders of war bands, emerged over separate principalities.
Berend, N., Urbańczyk, P., & Wiszewski, P. (2013). The history of the region and the question of origins. In Central Europe in the High Middle Ages: Bohemia, Hungary and Poland, c.900-c.1300 (Cambridge Medieval Textbooks, pp. 40-109). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511813795.002
For that time,too,the Bulgarians,originally Turkic invaders of the Balkans from Asia via the north of the Black sea in the late seventh century,had become completely assimilated to the Slav majority.
For that time,to the,
RUSSIAN: A LINGUISTIC INTRODUCTION. Paul Cubberley. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2002. pp.6
They colonised areas of the eastern Balkans and in the seventh century other Slav tribes combined with the Proto-Bulgars, a group of Turkic origin, to launch a fresh assault into the Balkans.
*Crampton, R. (2005). THE BULGARIAN LANDS FROM PREHISTORY TO THE ARRIVAL OF THE BULGARIANS. In A Concise History of Bulgaria (Cambridge Concise Histories, pp. 1-8). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.*
We know that the Avars,whose great days were long past by 700,were subject to a khagan,because a Frankish source was under the imperssion that such was the ruler’s name.Asparuch,ruler of the Bulgars,another Turkic people that had established itself south of the Danube by 700,must also have been a ‘khan’,to judge by inscriptions of his successors.
Fouracre, P. (Ed.). (2005). The New Cambridge Medieval History (The New Cambridge Medieval History). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press pp.572. doi:10.1017/CHOL9780521362917
This ruling elite dominated a large state.While precise boundaries are unclear,Volga Bulgaria included substantial Finnic and Ugrian areas north of the Volga,a large part of modern Bashkiria to the east,much of the Volga region south of the Bulgar territory itself,and the lands of the Finns and east Slavs to the west perhaps as far as the Oka River.Volga Bulgaria was a multhiethnic state,with large numbers of Turkic Bulgars and Bashkirs,a variety of Finnic and Ugrian peoples,and many east Slavs.
Reuter, T. (Ed.). (2000). The New Cambridge Medieval History (The New Cambridge Medieval History). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp.574 doi:10.1017/CHOL9780521364478
Bulgaria at this time had acquired some traits typical of a barbarian state,because the bellicose tribe of the Bulgars had imported the Turkic traditions of the great steppe into the Balkans.
The Old Testament in Byzantium Edited by Paul Magdalino Robert S. Nelson Washington, D.C. :Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection : Distributed by Harvard University Press, c2010. pp. 255
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.
Bowersock, Glen W. & al. Late Antiquity: A Guide to the Postclassical World pp.354 Harvard University Press, 1999. ISBN 0-674-51173-5.
@@Nomadicenjoyer31
Why does Turkey betray the Uighurs?
@@petertodorov9540
www.voanews.com/east-asia-pacific/turkey-cracks-down-uighur-protesters-after-china-complains
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
Ciril and Metodi did not create the cirilic alphabet. They created glagolica and this is what you show in the video. The so called cirilic was created by Kliment under the order of the bulgarian tzar. Therefore it is not correct to be called cirilic. This is official history.
The maker of this video is a wanna be a Bulgarian he has a Serbian inferiority complex.
long live Bulgaria!
@@HomoUniverzalis No what ?
@@HomoUniverzalis Serboslavia is no more.
Even Montenegro did not want to be with you serbs
@Delaram Salmassi Lol old Bulgaria is Turkic not Iranic... Nowadays Bulgarian people just mixing with slavs, but they ancestors tatars, Turks, Mongols,
@Delaram Salmassi wtf? Dude don't talk with me pls
@@emrebayram1778 WE ARE BULGARIANS NOTHING ELSE WE ARE ONE OF THE FIRST NATIONS WE WERE NEVER TATARS
1. The Bulgars were confederation of numerous tribes with mixed origin, but with predominant Iranian ethnic element. The Proto-Bulgarians as inhabitants of the lands north of the Caucasus in the 2nd century are mentioned by the Armenian historian Movses Khorenatsi. In his History of Armenia, written in the 80's of the 5th century AD, he speaks about two migrations of Proto-Bulgarians from Caucasus to Armenia. The Bulgars lived amongst Scythian tribes for centuries before coming to the Balkans. However, Turkic elements could also be found due to the influence of the Göktürks and the Avars in Pannonia. If we assume that the Avars were Turkic, of course.
2. The names of many of the rulers and aristocrats of Old Great Bulgaria and the First Bulgarian Empire are of Iranian origin. Names such as Sinnion, Zabergan, Kubrat, Asparukh, Kardam, Omurtag, Boris, Rasate, etc., does not have Turkic analogues. The last pagan ruler of Bulgaria was literally called Persian/Presian.
3. The language of the Bulgars is largely unknown, since not enough words are being preserved. The Volga Bulgars were conquered by the Mongols and assimilated into their culture. The modern Chuvash language has a lot of components to it and its related to the Bulgar language only in theory. The Chuvash people are most likely to be descendants of the Turkic Sabir tribes mixed with local Finno-Ugric populations. Instead of looking for the origin of the Bulgars in Chuvashia, you should search in what is now Kabardino-Balkaria, Georgia, Armenia, Chechnya and in the Caucasus in general.
4. There is NO historical source or evidence of Tengrism in Bulgaria. Simple as that.
5. Modern researchers with historical and archeological background (Todor Chobanov for example) see resemblance between the monumental pagan temples in Bulgaria (Madara, Pliska, Preslav, etc.) and the Persian ''Fire temples'' - the place of worship for the followers of Zoroastrianism. The Proto-Bulgarian construction tradition and pagan temples have their roots and most accurate analogues in the Caucasus. There is also a resemblance between the Madara Horseman relief and the Sasanian rock reliefs, like the one in Rag-i-Bibi for example. After the Baptism (864), the pagan temples were destroyed and Christian temples were built on the their foundations.
6. The ruler of Old Great Bulgaria (Kubrat/Kurt) and his uncle (Organa/Organ) were Christians. Kubrat's grandson Tervel was also Christian. Even before them, Grod, a Proto-Bulgarian ruler of the Kutrigurs who around 528 C.E. converted to Christianity and tried to spread it amongst his people, was overthrown because of it, similarity to what happened to Enravota in 833 C.E., which became Bulgaria's first saint.
7. The Bulgars in the Balkans were not just ''assimilated''. Knyaz Boris I and his boyars chose a new language and religion that will unite and strengthen the Empire further more. That's why he ordered the creation of the Cyrillic alphabet and converted to Christianity.
Turkic languages were spoken by the warrior *aristocracy of the Hunnic, Avar, and Bulgar khaganates, coexisting with the Indo-European tongue of their subjects.
In the Bulgar khaganate, *inscriptions were written in Greek using Greek characters or in the Bulgar language using Greek or runic characters.
Oliver Nicholson, The Oxford Dictionary of Late Antiquity, Oxford University Press, 2018, ISBN 0192562460, p. 200
The greatest obstacle to the empire's revival was the presence to the south ofthe Danube of the Bulgar khaganate with its capital at Pliska and a southern frontier in the Hebros/Maritza valley only three days march from Constantinople. In 780 the Bulgar state had survived in close proximity to Byzantium for almost a century, taking advantage of the empire's internal problems and wars against the Arabs, and this survival had hardened it into an extremely tough political entity. Its Turkic ruling elite combined the military ferocity of the steppe people they had been with the agricultural resource base of the Slav peasantry they dominated and with the skills of civilization acquired from Greek traders, captives, and defectors.
Mango, Cyril A. 2002. The Oxford history of Byzantium. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p.172
For a long time, the Bulgharian state retained a Turkic organisation, which gradually adopted elements borrowed from Byzantium. Some of the titles have still not been deciphered, but kavhan, boy/a, khan, kolovur, bagatur, tarkhan and sampsi are Turkic in origin, or were at least used by Turkic peoples.
In the meantime, the leading Turkic class gradually diminished, and became assimilated in to the Slav population. By the end of the 7th century, bilinguality was wide spread. Omurtag's three sons (also) had Slavonic names (Vovin. Zvinitsa and Malamir). The linguistic effect of Turkic-Slav coexistence is also reflected in inscriptions.
Among the titles of court office bearers was, för example, the ichirgu boy/a, the 'internal boyla' of which parallels are attested in Turkic sources of Central Asia. From a Cyrillic inscription of around 969 it is known that at the end ofthe era this would be approximately uttered as chregubilya. The second element of the title is the origin of the Hungarian name Béla, used by several kings of the Árpád dynasty.
R., 1999. Hungarians and Europe in the early Middle Ages. Budapest: Central European University Press, p.228.
At some point during the second half of the early eleventh century, after living for a long time among Turkic populations and studying their languages and traditions, Mahmud al-Kashghari produced a well-documented work about the "Turks." According to him, only the Qirqiz, the Qipchaq, the Oghuz and five other tribes spoke a pure Turkic language, while the languages of the Bulgars, Suvars and Pech enegs Bačänäk), while undoubtedly Turkic, had been altered by foreign influences. Mahmud al-Kashgari believed that initially there were very few differences between all those languages, all phonetical." He saw the linguistic fragmentation as a natural phenomenon, given the vast area, between the Byzantine and the Chinese frontiers, in which those peoples lived.
Spinei, V., 2009. The Romanians and the Turkic nomads north of the Danube Delta from the tenth to the mid-thirteenth century. Leiden: Brill, pp.181, 182.
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.
@@papazataklaattiranimam 🤡🤡🤡
@@papazataklaattiranimam
ABSOLUTE NONSENSE
I have been to Madara
There is no Tangra to be read in the inscription
Have you been to Madara?
I doubt it
@@BGBolyar
Thank you for the great post Brother
We all know Bulgarians are of Sarmatian/Iranian origin
The Turkic theory is a compete fake
The Ashina dynasty is an Iranic dynasty
Their first Turkic dynasty is not even Turkic🤣🤣🤣🤣
Great history but very poor country.
There are so many inaccuracies here it begs the question where did you get the facts from?
Michael Shishman was not beheaded on the battle field. That is so uncommon especially during late middle ages. Christian armies never did that. They would capture the leader.
In this situation that is exactly what happened.
"The Emperor himself was badly wounded, his horse killed under him and was captured by the oncoming enemy soldiers. He was taken to the Serbian camp where he probably expired from his wounds on the fourth day of his captivity, on 31 July."
Maybe do some fact-checking before you produce videos like this.
He is just a Serbian lier
Got his facts from Crusader Kings
@@TwistedAlphonso1 lmao
15:05
- After the Battle of Velbazhd, Bulgaria lost the battle but retained its sovereignty and it NEVER became a vassal of the serbs (Unlike Serbia which was twice conquered and incorporated into the Bulgarian Empires).
- However Bulgaria was unable to halt the serbian advance into Macedonia (the first time serbs entered macedonia was in 12th century) and they conquered some lands from the Bulgarians and the Byzantines.
- That's about it. The Serbs overexaggerate their little "empire" way too much, which lasted only 25 years.
- Not to mention Tsar Dushan's mother was a Bulgarian princess and his father had Bulgarian roots as well. He was crowned emperor by the Bulgarian patriarch in Skopjie. We can say Dusan was a Southslavic common king, not just serbian.
Agree. But the same thing can be said also about Samuil. Back then ethnic identities were not that well defined and distinctive. Greek speaking population was confronted with Slavic one, and occasionally some steppe raiders would enter the picture, but the distinction as strong as we hold it today has been made much later.
@Golden brother He was crowned by Bulgarian patriarch of Tarnovo.
@Serbon Yeah, that's only in Serbian historiography. Bulgaria remained independent with its own emperor.
th-cam.com/video/WrwIdi6DYY0/w-d-xo.html
His mother was more Greek than Bulgarian lmao
0:45 WRONG never let a balkan person make a video about bulgaria... they only talk trash because they know how greatful and good we are we are NOT TURKS WE ARE BULGARIANS NOTHING ELSE WE ARE ONE OF THE FIRST NATIONS
At the time,the new Khazar qaganate was expanding westward,squeezing out the Onogurs,or Bulghars as they begin to be named. One of the Kuvrat’s sons,the Asparuch (Asparux,Isperih) now celebrated as the founder of Bulgaria,forcibly crossed to the Danube arpund 679 to occupy imperial territory Moesia after defeating the forces of Constantine IV (668-685). The event is recorded in the preserved text of a Hebrew letter of a Khazar qahan,who wrote that the Vununtur(=Onogurs=Bulghars) has fled across the Duna,the Danube. Even if numerous for the steppe,Asparuch’s pastoralist warriors and their families were of necessity relatively few as compared to the agricultural Slav population that lived south of the Danube,and thus the Turkic-speaking Bulghars were assimilated linguistically by the Slav majority to form the medieval and modern Bulgarians. This particular ethnogenesis occuree gradually over a period of more than two centuries: there was the Turkic qan (or khan) Krum (803-814),Qan Omurtag (814-831),Qan Perssian (836-852),then the wan who converted Boris I (852-889);then came Tsar Symeon (893-923), Tsar Peter I (927-970),and so on.But this transformation of Turkic shamanists into Slavic Christians did nothing to diminish the warlike character of the empire’s new neighbours. Because even warlike neighbours can be useful at times,the relations between the empire and the new Bulghar qaganate encompassed every possible variation,from intimate allience to all out-war,as exemplified by the career of the Bulghar qan or khan Tervel (or Tarvel-Terbelis in our Greek sources),the successor and probably son of Asparukh who ruled for some twenty-one years within the period 695-721,extant chronologies being inconsistent.
“Bulghars and Bulgarians.” The Grand Strategy of the Byzantine Empire, by EDWARD N. LUTTWAK, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts; London, England, 2009, pp. 173
The strategic and economic importance of this juncture is clear: in an age when much long-distance travel was by water, the confluence of the Volga and Kama rivers provided a three-way maritime link between Europe, the Near East, and East Asia. The Turkic Bulgars were among the first to benefit
“THE KAZAN SCHOOL.” Russian Orientalism: Asia in the Russian Mind from Peter the Great to the Emigration, by David Schimmelpenninck Van der Oye, Yale University Press, New Haven; London, 2010, pp. 93-121.
The confluence of the Volga and Kama rivers, to the east, was inhabited by the Bulgars, a Turkic
people, and the southeastern steppes by the Khazars, another Turkic people who had formed a strong state in the seventh century, barring alike the westward movement of other nomadic tribes
“Russian Expansion in Kievan Times.” Eastward to Empire: Exploration and Conquest on the Russian Open Frontier to 1750, by George V. Lantzeff and Richard A. Pierce, McGill-Queen's University Press, MONTREAL; LONDON, 1973, pp. 21-30.
The Bul- gars, a Turkic people, unlike the Slavic Croats and Serbs, moved south ofthe Danube in 679 and soon created a state, in which the numerically small Proto- Bulgarelement in due course became completely assimilated with the Slavic majority
“Antecedents and Antipodes.” The National Question in Yugoslavia: Origins, History, Politics, by IVO BANAC, Cornell University Press, Ithaca; London, 1984, pp. 21-140.
The word boyar is of Turkic origin, introduced into the Balkan Peninsula by the Bulgars in the 7th century. As the Turkic -speaking Bulgar conquerors became Slavicized, they joined with the Slavic clan chiefs
“Nobles and Landholders.” East Central Europe in the Middle Ages, 1000-1500, by JEAN W. SEDLAR, University of Washington Press, Seattle; London, 1994, pp. 58-83.
" Bulgar " originally designated a Turkic -speaking people; now it designates the Slavic-speaking people who assimilated them.
“National Symbols and the International Recognition of the Republic of Macedonia.” The Macedonian Conflict: Ethnic Nationalism in a Transnational World, by Loring M. Danforth, Princeton University Press, PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY, 1995, pp. 142-184.
@@Nomadicenjoyer31
Coward,
Did you know that the Uighurs are Turkic?
They are suffering now not 1000 years ago
What have you done to help them?
th-cam.com/video/e6bPGl10Cts/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=BBCNews
@@petertodorov9540
www.voanews.com/east-asia-pacific/turkey-cracks-down-uighur-protesters-after-china-complains
The Bulgars (also Bulghars, Bulgari, Bolgars, Bolghars, Bolgari,[1] Proto-Bulgarians[2]) were Turkic semi-nomadic warrior tribes that flourished in the Pontic-Caspian steppe and the Volga region during the 7th century. They became known as nomadic equestrians in the Volga-Ural region, but some researchers say that their ethnic roots can be traced to Central Asia.[3] During their westward migration across the Eurasian steppe, the Bulgar tribes absorbed other ethnic groups and cultural influences in a process of ethnogenesis, including Indo-European, Finno-Ugric and Hunnic tribes.[4][5][6][7][8][9] Modern genetic research on Central Asian Turkic people and ethnic groups related to the Bulgars points to an affiliation with Western Eurasian populations.[9][10][11] The Bulgars spoke a Turkic language, i.e. Bulgar language of Oghuric branch.[12] They preserved the military titles, organization and customs of Eurasian steppes,[13] as well as pagan shamanism and belief in the sky deity Tangra.[14]
The Bulgars became semi-sedentary during the 7th century in the Pontic-Caspian steppe, establishing the polity of Old Great Bulgariac. 635, which was absorbed by the Khazar Empire in 668 AD.
In c. 679, Khan Asparukh conquered Scythia Minor, opening access to Moesia, and established the First Bulgarian Empire, where the Bulgars became a political and military elite. They merged subsequently with established Byzantine populations,[15][16] as well as with previously settled Slavic tribes, and were eventually Slavicized, thus forming the ancestors of modern Bulgarians.[17]
The remaining Pontic Bulgars migrated in the 7th century to the Volga River, where they founded the Volga Bulgaria; they preserved their identity well into the 13th century.[12] The Volga Tatars and Chuvash people claim to have originated from the Volga Bulgars.[12][18]
Why does Turkey betray the Uighurs?
@@petertodorov9540
th-cam.com/video/dTiw8gEWGao/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=WION
Turkish -90% mixed genetics ,first name of their state Roman Sultanate ,created by Rome ,the word Turk banned of use up ro the end of Ottoman Empire .
So clearly we can see that Turkish STOLE IDENTITY OF TURKICS .
Turkics- from 70 up to 95% european genetcis ,europeans that speak in twisted mongolic language ,nothing in common with Turkish people .
I heard some Bulgarians claiming Spartacus was Bulgarian,I couldn't stop laughing.
I heard some Albanians that they claim Jesus was Albanian.
Trouble in Europe > Turk > Troubles in Europe
I cant understand how Bulgar is a turkish word when Bulgarians used this name before even turkey was a thing
It is not turkish, it is turkic.
H Λ Я Я I S there’s a big difference in modern day country turkey and Turkic tribes...
Turkic tribles are very old and rise from Central Asia area a couple of thousand years ago.
Its not turkish, its turkic. For example hunns, kipchaks and scyths were turkic tribes.
@@mymailkz What? the scyths are turkic? lmao, you fools do you even know what scythia means in what you call slavic? It means its a place where you can move around,roam wander aka nomadia. www.dict.com/bulgarian-english/скитам
Bulgarian empires were of Turkic origin from Bulgars and Cumans
BRO ,WE TURKS WILL TAKE BACK BULGARIA BECAUSE WE HAVE ERDOGAN ATATURK
ERDOGAN =GLORY OF THE TURKS
WE ARE BULGARIANS NOTHING ELSE WE ARE ONE OF THE FIRST NATIONSWE ARE BULGARIANS NOTHING ELSE WE ARE ONE OF THE FIRST NATIONS
@@moeharvard Nigga, grow a foreskin.
Poor country yet living of EU money.
fakedonian
How about your pathetic country
You don't produce anything but hatred of your neighbors
THAT VIDEO IS FULL OF LIES!
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
Without PRIMARY SOURCES your Turkic theory is just fantasy like a Disney movie
1. Give PRIMARY SOURCES that show Tengrinism in Bulgaria🤣
2. Give PRIMARY SOURCES that show the name Bulgarian comes from Bulgamak😂
Nice Turkish propaganda. Now let's use some real sources:
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%...".
So whithout putting any speculations I would like to ask the creator several questions and make some notes for everybody watching! I will try to keep it as short as possible!
I know that it is hard to learn all of the history of any country but this is no excuse to be ignorant when you are claiming to have made a "History of *insert coutry name here*"
1.The Turkic origin of Bulgarians was disproved by not only Bulgarians themselves but also many other countries historical institutes. The name "Bulgars" does mean mixed people and this is most likely becasue Bulgars which are proven to be of Iranian heritage and have mixed with Turkic tribes because of the migrations to Europe. When studies of the genes of the Bulgarians were conducted it was concluded that Bulgarians have many mixed genes (Tharacian, Iranaian and Slavic being dominant and the "Mongol" or Turkic ganes are below 5-10% which according to scientists is and i quote "insignificant"
(Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_studies_on_Bulgarians)
2. There is a theory that Attila the Hun was from the Dulo dynasty making him the first known Bulgarian "Khan" or "Kniaz" depending on which theory you belive. The supposed evidence is from:
(en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominalia_of_the_Bulgarian_khans)
3. What was the status of Slavs in the Bulgarian Empire? There is no sure answer the subject is very disputed but the most beliavable theory and with most evidence was that Slavs were Bulgarian subjects but in very liberal way. Slavs were not enslaved nor persecuted. They had significant autonomy which made them stick to their allience with the Bulgars against the Romans and other Slavic tribes.
(I couldnt find any information in English so no Source sorry)
4. What is Wallachia? Untill the fall of the First Bulgarian Empire is a Bulgarian region with a majority Bulgar people and a significant population of Avars and other small nomadic tribes. So Bulgaria falls and instability in the Roman Empire makes it easy for other tribes to settle there (like Cumans, Pechenegs, Uzi ect...). After the creation of the Second Bulgarian Empire the region of Wallachia was very important for the defence of Bulgaria. The many raiding tribes made this region vital for the survival of the Bulgarian state so Bulgarian rulers decided that it would best if the title of Wallachia came with some level of autonomy. Why? Because it would be easyer for the Voivodes to defend their lands if they collected their own tax and had their own seperate levy. And this is why after the fall of Bulgaria to the Ottomans Bulgarians fled to Wallacia mostly - Because they knew that this was a frindly and welcoming brother state. Some of the first Bulgarian revolutionary organistaions were created in Wallachia for the same reasons.
(Source: Niketas Choniates's chronicle, The works of Abulfeda, Ibn Khaldun as well as many other you are free to find and read)
5. Why did you miss to mention the Bulgaro-Serbian war? You know the war that the Serbians started with no real justifications? Very convinient for you if I might say!
(Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbo-Bulgarian_War)
6. And here we go the Balkan wars... Very disputed question BUT again as if on purpose you DID NOT mention one very important detail. The agreement between Bulgaria and Serbia that Serbia broke! Very shortened version source will be below for detailed history! - For those who do not know Bulgars and Serbs had agreed before the war how to split Macedonia. Quote - "When Bulgaria called upon Serbia to honor the pre-war agreement over northern Macedonia, the Serbs, displeased at the Great Powers' requiring them to give up their gains in northern Albania, adamantly refused to alienate any more territory. The developments essentially ended the Serbo-Bulgarian alliance and made a future war between the two countries inevitable. Soon thereafter, minor clashes broke out along the borders of the occupation zones with the Bulgarians against the Serbs and the Greeks. Responding to the perceived Bulgarian threat, Serbia started negotiations with Greece, which also had reasons to be concerned about Bulgarian intentions."
(Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Balkan_War)
7.The last point in my argument is not really needed but I just wanted to point out what good neighbours Romanians were. They would not fight against a common enemy (the Turks) but they would invade Bulgarian lands with no opposing army there and maybe make a few massacres here and there. And if you ever wandered this is why Bulgarians in general do not like them.
So this was a long comment but I if we exclude my last point no feelings were put in it. I do not condone violence in the Balkans! Some of my best frinds were Serbians and Croats when I was working abroad. The Balkans have 2 choices: Either unite no matter how difficult and long process it is or keep hate and arguing untill someone else comes to enslave us all again. We were weakest when we were devided and fighting amongst ourslves. Love to all Balkan nations!!!
Andon Irenchev where exacly do they say that attila was a dulo because after reading it all i couldnt find anything about it (or im just retarded and misses it)
bulgars and proto-bulgarians were turkic semi nomadic warriors, learn history before your mouth
Bulgars (< Turkic bulgha- ‘to mix, stir up, disturb’, i.e. ‘rebels’)
A Turkic tribal union of the Pontic steppes that gave rise to two important states: Danubian-Balkan Bulgaria (First Bulgarian Empire, 681-1018) and Volga Bulgaria (early 10th century-1241). They derived from Oghuric-Turkic tribes, driven westward from Mongolia and south Siberia to the Pontic steppes in successive waves by turmoil associated with the Xiongnu (late 3rd cent. ... ...
www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780198662778.001.0001/acref-9780198662778-e-820
Fatlinda Islami
You are not a Turk so why do you pretend to be a Turk
You are a 12 yr old Albanian girl who lives with your mommy in Gostivar
@@Email5507
NONSENSE
1. Give PRIMARY SOURCES that show the name Bulgarian comes from bulgamak?
2.Give PEIMARY SOURCES that show tengrinism in Bulgaria
Poor and nothing can change that.😂😂😂😂
fakedonian
Imagine how pathetic your little life is just motivated and inspired to hate
WE ARE BULGARIANS NOTHING ELSE WE ARE ONE OF THE FIRST NATIONS
The Volga Bulgars were a Turkic-speaking people who established the second Muslim state in Europe (after the Emirate of Córdoba) in the early fourth/tenth century and ruled over extensive lands and a wide array of people around the middle Volga and Kama Rivers between the second/ninth and early seventh/thirteenth centuries. The Bulgars acted as middlemen between Central Asian merchants and the Rus, and the northern, mainly Finno-Ugric tribes whose main trading commodity was fur, which was greatly valued as a luxury item throughout the Islamic world.
*Mako, Gerald. “The Conversion of the Volga Bulgars: Aḥmad b. Faḍlān b. Al-ʿAbbās b. Rāshid b. Ḥammād (Fl. Fourth/Tenth Century).” Conversion to Islam in the Premodern Age: A Sourcebook, edited by Nimrod Hurvitz et al., 1st ed., University of California Press, Oakland, California, 2020, pp. 156-159.*
The period is marked by the migration of the final “permanent residents” of the Balkan Peninsula to the region: these were, most important-because eventually most numerous-the Slavs, but also the Turks (first Bulgars and then Ottomans)
*Wachtel, Andrew. “Early Balkan Everyday Life.” Everyday Life in the Balkans, edited by DAVID W. MONTGOMERY, Indiana University Press, Bloomington, Indiana, 2019, pp. 9-21.*
The Samara is the last westward migrations and military campaigns of, first, the significant tributary of the Volga; past the Samara, the rivers Turkic-speaking Bulgars
*Mochalov, Oleg D., et al. “Historic Records of the Economy and Ethnic History of the Samara Region.” A Bronze Age Landscape in the Russian Steppes: The Samara Valley Project, edited by Oleg D. Mochalov et al., Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press at UCLA, 2016, pp. 63-70.*
The Volga Bulgars , a settled Turkic people, were a society that practiced Islam on the Eurasian steppe
*“Siberia in Eurasian Context.” The Merchants of Siberia: Trade in Early Modern Eurasia, by Erika Monahan, 1st ed., Cornell University Press, 2016, pp. 71-104.*
The Turkic Bulgars were among the first to benefit from the region’s commercial advantages by settling it in the fifth century c.e. and found- ing the city of Bolgar
*“THE KAZAN SCHOOL.” Russian Orientalism: Asia in the Russian Mind from Peter the Great to the Emigration, by David Schimmelpenninck Van der Oye, Yale University Press, New Haven; London, 2010, pp. 93-121.*
The confluence of the Volga and Kama rivers, to the east, was inhabited by the Bulgars, a Turkic people, and the southeastern steppes by the Khazars, another Turkic people who had formed a strong state in the seventh century,
*“Russian Expansion in Kievan Times.” Eastward to Empire: Exploration and Conquest on the Russian Open Frontier to 1750, by George V. Lantzeff and Richard A. Pierce, McGill-Queen's University Press, MONTREAL; LONDON, 1973, pp. 21-30.*
The Huns of the Western Steppe appear to have formed an element of the later Danubian Bulgars, a Turkic people who, under Asparukh, moved into the Balkans in 680 and founded
*“The Age of Attila the Hun.” Empires of the Silk Road: A History of Central Eurasia from the Bronze Age to the Present, by CHRISTOPHER I. BECKWITH, Princeton University Press, Princeton; Oxford, 2009, pp. 93-111.*
In the mid- ninth century Khan Boris ruled a pagan Bulgaria that was composed of both Turkic Bulgars and Slavs.
*“The Micro-Christendom of Rus'.” Reimagining Europe, by Christian Raffensperger, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts; London, England, 2012, pp. 136-185.*
the Turkic -speaking Volga- Kama Bulgars
*“Muslims in Europe: Precedent and Present.” Muslims of Europe: The 'Other' Europeans, by H. A. Hellyer, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh, 2009, pp. 101-120.*
the Bulgars( Turkic speakers who invaded the Balkans in the seventh century)
*“Round Two: The Rise and Spread of Agricultural Societies.” The Next World War: Tribes, Cities, Nations, and Ecological Decline, by ROY WOODBRIDGE, University of Toronto Press, 2004, pp. 49-58.*
served as the secretary of an embassy sent by the Caliph al- Muqtadir to the king of the Turkish Bulgars then living on the lower reaches of the Volga River north of the Caspian Sea.
*“THE BIG CHILL.” Cotton, Climate, and Camels in Early Islamic Iran: A Moment in World History, by Richard W. Bulliet, Columbia University Press, NEW YORK, 2009, pp. 69-95.*
Turkic -speaking Bulgars into the region now known as Bulgaria failed to alter its predominantly Slavic char- acter. The Bulgar ruling class eventually abandoned its Thrkic language and adopted Slavic so completely that no trace of Turkicspeech patterns can be found in any Old Slavic texts.
*“Languages and Literatures.” East Central Europe in the Middle Ages, 1000-1500, by JEAN W. SEDLAR, University of Washington Press, Seattle; London, 1994, pp. 421-457.*
Byzantine power was challenged by Thrkic-speaking Bulgars from the Ukrainian steppe who carved out a tribal state from the empire's Balkan lands.
*“Foreign Affairs.” East Central Europe in the Middle Ages, 1000-1500, by JEAN W. SEDLAR, University of Washington Press, Seattle; London, 1994, pp. 362-400.*
When the Turkic -speaking Bulgars first occupied their present
*“Nobles and Landholders.” East Central Europe in the Middle Ages, 1000-1500, by JEAN W. SEDLAR, University of Washington Press, Seattle; London, 1994, pp. 58-83.*
and with the Turkic people, the Bulgars , on the east bank of the Volga.
*“Conclusions.” Eastward to Empire: Exploration and Conquest on the Russian Open Frontier to 1750, by George V. Lantzeff and Richard A. Pierce, McGill-Queen's University Press, MONTREAL; LONDON, 1973, pp. 221-230.*
alleged to be constructions of the Turkic Bulgars , are notable.
*Pundeff, Marin. “Bulgarian Historiography, 1942-1958.” The American Historical Review, vol. 66, no. 3, 1961, pp. 682-693.*
They colonised areas of the eastern Balkans and in the seventh century other Slav tribes combined with the Proto-Bulgars, a group of Turkic origin, to launch a fresh assault into the Balkans.
*Crampton, R. (2005). THE BULGARIAN LANDS FROM PREHISTORY TO THE ARRIVAL OF THE BULGARIANS. In A Concise History of Bulgaria (Cambridge Concise Histories, pp. 1-8). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.*
In my lecture I emphasised the fact that the ear liest written record the of the Bulghar- Turkic sound shift к > / could be traced even in the early Turkic loan-words of the Hungarian language.
Róna-Tas, András. “WHERE WAS KHUVRAT'S BULGHARIA?” Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, vol. 53, no. 1/2, 2000, pp. 1-22.
followed by the Avars (Turki invaders of sixth to eighth centuries AD who were eventually evicte from Hungary by Charlemagne), the Bulgars ( Turkic speakers who invaded the Balkans in the seventh century)
“Round Two: The Rise and Spread of Agricultural Societies.” The Next World War: Tribes, Cities, Nations, and Ecological Decline, by ROY WOODBRIDGE, University of Toronto Press, 2004, pp. 49-58.
Bulgars (Turkic bulgha-'to mix, stir up, disturb', i.e. 'rebels') A Turkic tribal union of the Pontic steppes that gave rise to two important states: Danubian Balkan Bulgaria (First Bulgarian Empire, 681-1018) and Volga Bulgaria (early 10th century-1241). They derived from Oghuric-Turkic tribes, driven westward from Mongolia and south Siberia to the Pontic steppes in successive waves by turmoil associated with the Xiungnu and subsequently by warfare between the Rouran/Avar and northern Wei states. in Oliver Nicholson, The Oxford Dictionary of Late Antiquity, Oxford University Press, 2018, ISBN 0192562460, p. 271..
@@Nomadicenjoyerplus
Fatlinda Islami
What does this have to do with a 12 year old Albanian girl like you who lives with her parents in Gostivar?
@@petertodorov9540
th-cam.com/video/2doYxUe3ilg/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=Dookumoftherookbrook
Several researchers, including Peter B. Golden,[29] H. W. Haussig,[30] S. G. Klyashtorny,[31][32] Carter V. Findley,[33] D. G. Savinov,[34] B. A. Muratov,[35] S. P. Guschin,[36] and András Róna-Tas[37] have posited that the term Ashina is from the Iranian Saka or possibly from the Wusun.[38]
Carter V. Findley assumes that the name "Ashina" comes from one of the Saka languages of central Asia and means "blue" (which translates to Proto-Turkic *kȫk, whence Old Turkic 𐰚𐰇𐰚 kök, and same in all Modern Turkic languages). The color blue is identified with the east, so that Göktürk, another name for the Turkic empire, meant the "Turks of the East"; meanwhile, Peter Benjamin Golden favours a more limited denotation of Göktürks as denoting only the Eastern Turks.[39][40] This idea is seconded by Hungarian researcher András Róna-Tas, who finds it plausible "that we are dealing with a royal family and clan of Saka origin".[41] Findley also said that the term böri, used to identify the ruler's retinue as 'wolves', probably also derived from one of the Iranian languages.[42]
H. W. Haussig and S. G. Kljyashtorny suggest an association between the name and the compound "kindred of Ashin" ahşaẽna (in Old Persian). This is so even in East Turkestan; then the desired form would be in the Sogdian 'xs' yn' k (-әhšēnē) "blue, dark"; Khotan-Saka (Brahmi) āşşeiņa (-āşşena) "blue", where a long -ā- emerged as development ahş-> āşş-; in Tocharian A āśna- "blue, dark" (from Khotan-Saka and Sogdian). There is a textual support for this version in the ancient runic inscriptions of the Turks.
In the large Orkhon inscriptions, in the story of the first Kagan, people living in the newly created empire are named "kök türk" (translated as "Celestial Turks"). Without touching the numerous interpretations "kök" may have in this combination, note its perfect semantic match with the reconstructed value of the name "Ashina". An explicit semantic calque suggests knowledge of its original meaning and foreign origin, which is compatible with the multi-ethnic, multi-cultural nature of the First Turkic Khaganate, which entailed the loss, however, of the popularity of "national character", in the words of L. Bazin, as was the political and cultural environment of the Otuken regime in the era of Bilge Qaghan.[citation needed]
The name "Ashina" was recorded in ancient Muslim chronicles in these forms: Aś(i)nas (al-Tabari), Ānsa (Hudud al-'Alam), Śaba (Ibn Khordadbeh), Śana, Śaya (Al-Masudi).[43][44] Based on Chinese sources' testament that the Ashina, upon becoming the head of Göktürks, exhibited a tuğ banner with a wolf head over their gate in reminiscence of its origins,[45][46][47] the name "Ashina" is translated by some researchers as "wolf", cf. Tuoba 叱奴 *čino, Middle Mongol činua, Khalkha čono.[48][49] However, Golden contends that derivation from Mongolic is mistaken.[50]
Davis (2008:39) translates Ouyang Xiu's statement "當是時，西突厥有鐵勒，延陀、阿史那之類為最大" into "Among the Tie'le tribes of Western Tujue, at the time, the Yantuo and Ashina were the largest subgroups".
The “TERM” Ashina😂 not tribe itself
Hanim
Ashina is an Iranic name NOT turkic
@@petertodorov1792 May God Almighty bless you my dear Aryan/Iranian brother and may God bless all our Aryan/Iranian people. Brother do you know who build the Buddha statues in Afghanistan and Pakistan? Was it the Iranians who build the Buddha statues in nowadays Afghanistan and Pakistan? Afghanistan and Pakistan were also a part of The Median - Achaemenid Empire!
@@petertodorov1792 By the way my dear brother did you call Gæbrias because he so much wish to talk with you?
Probably they teach him bulgars accepted christianity due to defeat of bulgars by serbs. It was normal in national propaganda before.
Old Great Bulgaria or Great Bulgaria (Byzantine Greek: Παλαιά Μεγάλη Βουλγαρία, Palaiá Megálē Voulgaría), also often known by the Latin names Magna Bulgaria[3] and Patria Onoguria ("Onogur land"),[4] was a 7th-century state formed by the Onogur Bulgars on the western Pontic-Caspian steppe (modern southern Ukraine and southwest Russia).[5] Great Bulgaria was originally centered between the Dniester and lower Volga.
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]
Both names are best explained as corresponding to Onogundur, an old name in Greek sources for the Bulgars.
www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/khazars
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.
Why does Turkey betray the Uighurs?
th-cam.com/video/gJqHD05ZSfY/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=WION
Serbia never played an important factor in the Middle Ages. The only significant forces then were Byzantium, Bulgaria and the Arab invasions. Whatever you say about Bulgaria is irrelevant to the facts - BULGARIA WAS A GREAT EMPIRE AND POWER.
Bulgaria was superpower empire because of Turkic Bulgar Warrior rulers not because of natives.
At least they had Serbian rulers
@@papazataklaattiranimam , Ancient (proto-) Bulgarians have long been thought of as a Turkic population. However, evidence found in the past three decades shows that this is not the case. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26416319/
@@sonyastefanova5785 you sent unreliable cherrypicking source from bulgarian nationalist what we call pseduo-science.
Population genetic analysis indicated that Conquerors had closest connection to the Onogur-Bulgar ancestors of Volga Tatars.
Neparáczki, E., Maróti, Z., Kalmár, T. et al. Y-chromosome haplogroups from Hun, Avar and conquering Hungarian period nomadic people of the Carpathian Basin. Sci Rep 9, 16569 (2019).
Thus supporting the view that Tatars may be descendents of ancient Bulgars.
Suslova TA, Burmistrova AL, Chernova MS, Khromova EB, Lupar EI, Timofeeva SV, Devald IV, Vavilov MN, Darke C. HLA gene and haplotype frequencies in Russians, Bashkirs and Tatars, living in the Chelyabinsk Region (Russian South Urals). Int J Immunogenet. 2012 Oct;39(5):394-408. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-313X.2012.01117.x. Epub 2012 Apr 20. PMID: 22520580.
Onogur-Bulgars had been part of the Hunnic people, and after the death of Attila’s son Irnik, European Hun remains fused with the Onogurs.
Mitogenomic data indicate admixture components of Central-Inner Asian and Srubnaya origin in the conquering Hungarians
Neparáczki E, Maróti Z, Kalmár T, Kocsy K, Maár K, et al. (2018) Mitogenomic data indicate admixture components of Central-Inner Asian and Srubnaya origin in the conquering Hungarians. PLOS ONE 13(10): e0205920.
However, given the common Turkic genetic background of the Bulgars and Khazars, these ethnicities may be difficult to tell apart either archaeologically or genetically.
Mikheyev, Alexander & Qiu, Lijun & Zarubin, A. & Moshkov, Nikita & Orlov, Yuri & Chartier, Duane & Faleeva, T. & Kornienko, Igor & Klyuchnikov, Vladimir & Batieva, Elena & Tatarinova, Tatiana. (2019). Diverse genetic origins of medieval steppe nomad conquerors. 10.1101/2019.12.15.876912.
The Volga Tatars live in the central and eastern parts of European Russia and in western Siberia. They are the descendants of the Bulgar and Kipchak Turkic tribes who inhabited the western wing of the Mongol Empire, the area of the middle Volga River.
Malyarchuk B, Derenko M, Denisova G, Kravtsova O. Mitogenomic diversity in Tatars from the Volga-Ural region of Russia. Mol Biol Evol. 2010 Oct;27(10):2220-6. doi: 10.1093/molbev/msq065. Epub 2010 May 10. PMID: 20457583.
Science, 14 February 2014, Vol. 343 no. 6172, p. 751, A Genetic Atlas of Human Admixture History, Garrett Hellenthal at al.: " CIs. for the admixture time(s) overlap but predate the Mongol empire, with estimates from 440 to 1080 CE (Fig.3.) In each population, one source group has at least some ancestry related to Northeast Asians, with ~2 to 4% of these groups total ancestry linking directly to East Asia. This signal might correspond to a small genetic legacy from invasions of peoples from the Asian steppes (e.g., the Huns, Magyars, and Bulgars) during the first millennium CE."
Around 4% of Bulgarian genes are derived outside of Europe and the Middle East or are of undetermined origin (by 858 CE), of which 2.3% are from Northeast Asia and correspond to Asian tribes such as Bulgars,[13] a consistent very low frequency for Eastern Europe as far as Uralic-speaking Hungarians.
@@papazataklaattiranimam , I will point out two or two factors that refute the theory that Asparuhov's Bulgarians are Turks - the Bulgarians had a distinctive feature that no other ethnic group has - incredible battle bows. Ours was shorter and more convenient for shooting than the horse, in addition, it could shoot up to 12 arrows in one minute, while the Byzantine emergency shooters gave only 5 - 7. The technology for making Bulgarian bows was kept secret, as and the composition of the binder resins and adhesives that imparted the specific properties of the weapon. Many neighboring peoples of the Bulgarians - Chinese, Mongols, Turks and Slavs tried to copy this type, but the Bulgarian models remained unsurpassed.
It was these bows and the original cavalry tactics that allowed the Bulgarians to rule vast territories, to defeat armies of Chinese, Mongols, Turks, Arabs, Byzantines and Slavs larger than them.
Second - the Bulgarians were extremely tall. The physical type of the ancient Bulgarians (proto-Bulgarians) has long been no secret, as archeological excavations in the necropolises (cemeteries) in Northeastern Bulgaria have shown that the height of the skeletons is 175-180 cm. This is a high growth even for modern people, and in the Middle for centuries the Bulgarians looked like giants. Because the average height in Europe and the Middle East was 155-160 cm. An Arab geographer from this era wrote: "Bulgarians are giants, ten of our fighters can not beat a Bulgarian in hand-to-hand combat." The skeleton of Tsar Kaloyan proves that he was 2 meters tall and had no Mongoloid features.The Bulgarians were a numerous people and settled everywhere - Tatarstan, Chuvashia, Kabardino, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, claiming to be descendants of the ancient Bulgarians. Sources of European origin also point to the relocation of proto-Bulgarian groups to Bavaria, Lombardy, and Hungary. You know that name - Bolkar Dagh. There were Bulgarians there too who later converted to Islam like the Bulgarians in Volga Bulgaria.
Real and Reliable Informations👍👍👍
Thank you
@@Crxyzen1
Why does Turkey betray the Uighurs?
th-cam.com/video/gJqHD05ZSfY/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=WION
@@petertodorov9540 God bless our Aryan/Iranian people. I am so proud to know the noble and beautiful Bulgarian people are Aryans/Iranians! May God almighty bring us together.
Oh my goodness! This is half bullshit and half misinformation... Please take this down, my heart can't take it! It is too much to start fixing what was said wrong! From the wrong "turkic" origin, through the ridiculous statements of what and when we have lost and don't get me started on the Cyrillic alphabet thing...all the way till the end, this is a very very inaccurate representation!
Not true !
100% fake history!
Turkics are Bulgarians ,not the other way around ,also Turk is a modern term .
Turkics have from 60 up to 90% european genetics .
So ,they are from Europe and just one of the many Bulgarian branches .
Do not confuse Turkish with Turkics .
Turkish are 90% mixed genetics .
This video is not accurate .
Bulgars of Bulgaria have an identity crisis now.
Your mother has an identity crisis, you bitch. Bulgarians are the oldest nation on the Balkans our identity is based on real history unlike yours.
@@mihailnikoloff2554 even balkan name is turkish lk aslkdklasfklakfakfklaf
th-cam.com/video/dTiw8gEWGao/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=WION
@@petertodorov1792 Well said my dear Bulgarian brother. I wish we could unite all our Aryan/Iranic/Iranian Peoples into one country!
"In 1941 WWII starts". Well, even on the map in your video it starts earlier than '41...
BULGARIA=GREAT INDOEUROPEAN HISTORY
Dear Peter Todorov are you 100 procent sure if Bulgarians are an Iranic/Iranian people because I believe Bulgarians are 100 procent an Iranian people?
@@delaramsalmassi4063
Dear Delaram
I will prove that we Bulgarians are Iranic
I will send you a long text
@@delaramsalmassi4063
In Iran there is the name Siavush
Siavush is a hero in Firdausi's great Poem Shahnameh
Siavush was an important god to the Ossetians , Bulgarians and Persians.
Siavush is horse riding god of the morning light , Truth and Rightiousness
In Bulgaria he was called Siva.
He became a folk hero when Bulgaria became Christian and he became associated with St George
We still have his festival in Bulgaria
It is called the Surva festival
@@petertodorov1792 Thank you very very much. I would love to read the text which says Bulgarians are an Iranic people. My dear brother.
@@petertodorov1792 Why are the pan - Turks always saying Bulgars and Bulgarians are Turkic people? I believe Bulgars and Bulgarians are an Aryan/Iranic/Iranian people. And I would love to read the text or article which says Bulgars and Bulgarians are Iranic people. And in fact I just found out that the Turkic Peoples of all Central Asia and China were originally Iranic Peoples who just mixed up with the Mongolians very much.
Both first and second Bulgarian monarchy are Turks origin(Bulgars and Cumans) the ruling class of bulgaria was always turk long before Ottomans
I think bulgarians shouldn’t believe their government’s propaganda about turks(anti turkism and anti ottomanism)
Sword of Erdogan
You are right
The Greatest Turkic Khaganate is
THE ERDOGAN KHAGANATE
WE ARE BULGARIANS NOTHING ELSE WE ARE ONE OF THE FIRST NATIONSWE ARE BULGARIANS NOTHING ELSE WE ARE ONE OF THE FIRST NATIONSWE ARE BULGARIANS NOTHING ELSE WE ARE ONE OF THE FIRST NATIONS
great video
:)
@@Crxyzen1 normal aga disslike olması :D
@@Crxyzen1 bulgarlar kudurmuş😹😹 sahte tarih değil ya işlerine gelmedi tabii
@@biscolataman
Zonja Fatlinda Islami
You are not a Turk so why do you pretend to be a Turk?
You are a 12 year old Albanian girl who lives with her parents in Gostivar
@@petertodorov9540
www.voanews.com/east-asia-pacific/turkey-cracks-down-uighur-protesters-after-china-complainswww.voanews.com/east-asia-pacific/turkey-cracks-down-uighur-protesters-after-china-complain
The Bulgars were turkic? What an idiotic claim. Turk my ass.
Zabergan-an iranic indoeuropean name
(Simmilar to Kardirigan- a persian general.)
Malamir - onother iranic name, an ancient iranian city used to carry the exact same
name- now known as Izeh.)
Boris (Bogoris) meaning Godlike in old iranic.
Asparukh( Isperih ) an old iranic name still used in Armenia and Iran
(Comming from Aspa ( horse in old Sarmatian and iranic languages and speh meaning riding)
Kubrat ( kurt)
Old avestian iranic name meaning whole or finished)
The
name system of a nation is an important sign of its ethnic character, religion and cultural history. For example, what names did the early Turks care (by L. Gummiov) - Tardu Hugan, Turum Khan, Buhman, Ishumi, Kara Isik Khan, Kushu, Yandy, Arslan, Buri Khan, Kara Churin Turk, Bokke, Tardous, Apa, Kul Tugin, Bilge Khan and others.
None of these most common and important Turk names, nor the most important Turkic titles (kagan, yaugu, shad) are found in the Proto-Bulgarians
The Proto-bulgarian names were much different and nearly all of indo-european origin
-Krum, Persian, Kardam, Telerig, Sondoque (Sonchonka and three or four variants) Bogoris, Malamer, Ermi-Hermiar, Chakka-Chakarar, Kuwi, Kwiwari, Duar, Kuchiri, Vokil, Dulo, Vichtun, three proto-Bulgarians - Kodomer, Asverg and Kubert. in 818, Karan, Karrnatha, Ostro (Ostromer, Ostrse), Dox, Labas, Rassate, Stasis, Hunol, Sonmer, Israles, Iratos, Ich, Pok, Zermo, Oksi, Shun -Oxonos ), Cordel, Bali, Boril, (O) Negounon, Elemag, Arah, Dristar, three bulgar nobles
- Kodomer, Asverg and Kubert, killed in a battle with the Byzantines during Omurtag in 818, Karan, Carnota, Ostro, Ostros, Docs, Labas, Rasate, Stasis, Hunol, Sonmer, , Shun-Oxon, Original, Boril, , Oregon, Toctus, Tsok, Zikos, Zent, Irratas, Corsus, Krakra, Neubul, Tyrdin- Tarridin, Sursubul, Mokros, Perina, Akum, Levota , Altzeg, and others.
The video was good, but still there are а few things that could be discussed.
Firstly, the christinization of any country was hardly anything more than a simple way of integration in the international diplomacy at the time. I don’t think that the wars fought between Bulgaria, Serbia and Byzantium around 850s did have any impact on Boris’s decision.
Secondly, Bulgaria was never a Serbian vassal. Otherwise, it could be paradoxical for Stefan Dusan to seek for the Bulgarian patriarch’s support during the establishment of the Empire in 1346. Dusan himself was of Bulgarian origin and his direction of expansion was never towards Bulgaria respectively.
We shall not forget that Bulgaria allied itself with the Nazis only after it ensured that Yugoslavia would be part of the same alliance. The government in Sofia didn’t want to risk a similar situation as that in the Great War in which Bulgaria had to fight a war on two fronts. What wasn’t planned at all, was Dusan Simovic’s coup which made Yugoslavia came out of the Tripartite pact. The rest is history.
And a final note: The communist regime in Bulgaria didn’t end in 1981, but in 1991 when the country was proclaimed a Republic.
But yeah, thanks for the impartial video and I wish you all the best!
I am ethnic Bulgarian and gave sample to have my genes investigated. So they say that I am mostly “Balkan” (probably Thracian) with a pinch of east Europe and Siberia as well as west Africa and Italy. I don’t see myself as a person in anyway connected with that story of an Asian tribe ...,
siberia is the homeland of Turks.... Turks immigrated from Siberia to other places like Turkic Bulgar tribes...
Dimitar Dimitrakov The Bulgar name is turkic from Mongolia and Central Asia, if you are not connected then you are just a Slav, or Serb.
@@yome7580
Nonsense,
Bulgarians are not and never were Turkic
Bulgarians have only 2% Turkic genetics
@@petertodorov1792 Bulgarians are an Iranic people right? And the Bulgars were an Iranic people?
@@petertodorov1792 Thank you very much my Dear Aryan/Iranian brother. I speak to Afghans and they say they don’t want Afghanistan to reunite with Iran when Afghans are Aryan/Iranic/Iranian people!
Thank you for doing this.
WHERE ARE YOU FROM DUMB ASS.
The Turkic languages are clearly interrelated, showing close similarities in phonology, morphology, and syntax. Historically, they split into two types early on, Common Turkic and Bolgar Turkic. The language of the Proto-Bolgars, reportedly similar to the Khazar language, belonged to the latter type. Its only modern representative is Chuvash, which originated in Volga Bolgarian and exhibits archaic features.
WE ARE NOT TURKS WE ARE BULGARIANS NOT ANYBODY ELSE!!!
@@Crxyzen1
Why does Turkey betray the Uighurs?
@@petertodorov9540
th-cam.com/video/dTiw8gEWGao/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=WION
Bulgarians were Iranopersian people not Turkic
@@hristoivanov8665 Bulgars were Turkic and Bulgarians are Traco-slavs
The Turkic languages are clearly interrelated, showing close similarities in phonology, morphology, and syntax. Historically, they split into two types early on, Common Turkic and Bolgar Turkic. The language of the Proto-Bolgars, reportedly similar to the Khazar language, belonged to the latter type. Its only modern representative is Chuvash, which originated in Volga Bolgarian and exhibits archaic features.
The Proto-Bulgarians had a somewhat eventful history prior to their arrival on the Balkan Peninsula. The earliest written sources indicate that they inhabited the region to the north of the Caucasus in the 4th century A.D. and had close contact with the Georgians and Armenians. They belonged to the Turkic ethno-linguistic group and their language resembled that of the Huns, Khazars, Avars and other tribes.
(How the bulgarian state was founded-Dimiter Angelov)
The Oghur, or Onogur or Ogur[3] languages (also known as Bulgar, Pre-Proto-Bulgar,[4]or Lir-Turkic and r-Turkic), are a branch of the Turkic language family. The only extant member of the group is the Chuvash language. The first to branch off from the Turkic family, the Oghur languages show significant divergence from other Turkic languages, which all share a later common ancestor. Languages from this family were spoken in some nomadic tribal confederations, such as those of the Onogurs or Ogurs, Bulgars, and Khazars.[5]Some scholars consider Hunnic a similar language[6] and refer to this extended grouping as Hunno-Proto-Bulgarian.[7]
The only surviving language from this linguistic group is believed to be Chuvash.Omeljan Pritsak in his study "The Hunnic Language of the Attila Clan" (1982)[10] concluded that the language of the Bulgars was from the family of the Hunnic languages, as he calls the Oghur languages.[11]
According to Antoaneta Granberg : " the data is insufficient to clearly distinguish Huns, Avars and Bulgars one from another" - introduction, the second paragraph
Bolgars are still Turk in Volga region.Mahmud al kashgari wrote bulgar language in his diwan lughat al turk before 1000 years.
Even ilovelanguages made video about bulgar language(volga bulgar poet from Diwan Lughat al Turk)
@Peter Todorov You know nothing. Erdoğan trolls don't even move a finger Turkish being. He has Gergoian origin and nothing Turkish about him. He does his best to destrot the Turkish character of our country. And he only pays his trolls for supporting his rulement on social media and video channels like this. Not in your state history books but in every neutral scientific history books you will find the above sentences about Bulgarian history.
WE ARE BULGARIANS NOTHING ELSE WE ARE ONE OF THE FIRST NATIONSWE ARE BULGARIANS NOTHING ELSE WE ARE ONE OF THE FIRST NATIONSWE ARE BULGARIANS NOTHING ELSE WE ARE ONE OF THE FIRST NATIONS
@@kaloyanpalikov7734 Bulgarians are only 1150 years old😂😂
@@Crxyzen1
Why does Turkey betray the Uighurs?
@@petertodorov9540
th-cam.com/video/dTiw8gEWGao/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=WION
At some point during the second half of the early eleventh century, after living for a long time among Turkic populations and studying their languages and traditions, Mahmud al-Kashghari produced a well-documented work about the "Turks." According to him, only the Qirqiz, the Qipchaq, the Oghuz and five other tribes spoke a pure Turkic language, while the languages of the Bulgars, Suvars and Pech enegs Bačänäk), while undoubtedly Turkic, had been altered by foreign influences. Mahmud al-Kashgari believed that initially there were very few differences between all those languages, all phonetical." He saw the linguistic fragmentation as a natural phenomenon, given the vast area, between the Byzantine and the Chinese frontiers, in which those peoples lived.
Spinei, V., 2009. The Romanians and the Turkic nomads north of the Danube Delta from the tenth to the mid-thirteenth century. Leiden: Brill, pp.181, 182.
At the beginning of the 600s, the Oghur population regained independence under the leadership of the Bulghar tribes. The Bulghars are mentioned nearly everywhere, together with, or as identical to, the Onoghundurs. Theophanes simply calls the Bulghars Unnoghundur-Bulghar, and Porphyrogenitus also writes that the Bulghars "used to" call themselves Onoghundur. Armenian sources mention them under the name Olhontor Bulkar and later Vlendur Bulkar. The name is written in the Hudud al-alam as Vunundur, by Masudi as Wulundur, in a letter by the Khazar khaghan Joseph as Vununtur. These forms are the only basis for explaining the Hungarian name for the Balkan Bulghars, Nandur, and later Nándor.
R., 1999. Hungarians and Europe in the early Middle Ages. Budapest: Central European University Press, p.215.
Hanim
Yes Vanandor or Nandor is the same
But not Onogur
Totally different
Onogur are one of the founding people of the Hungarians
You see the Hungarians make a distinction between the Bulgarians/Vanandors/Olhontors/Unogundors and the Onogurs
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Nice Turkish propaganda. Now let's use some real sources:
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%...".
Hunno-Bulgars😍😍😍
Semi Nomadic Turkic Warriors👊👊👊
Peter Todorov
Huns or Bulgars were Turkic peoples of Oghur branch according to most expert scholars
*Although in the past the Huns are thought to have been Mongolian emigrants, it is far more likely that they were of Turkic origin. This point has been repeated by thousands of historians, sinologists, turcologists, altaistics, and other researchers. Let me try to state how this idea began with Sinology researchers.[1]
*Maenchen-Helfen (1973), 386-9, also thinks that these names are the Germanic or Germanicized names of Turkic Huns.[2]
*The language of the Huns has always been classified in the Turkic linguistic family.[3]
*In the 5th century A . D . the Danube Slavs had lived in symbiosis with the Turkic Huns[4]
*One of the first and most ferocious of such Asiatic (Turkic) peoples were the Huns.[5]
*A large number of many different Turkic tribes were called Huns.[6]
*It is conceivable that the Huns (Ephthalites), who irrupted into Central Asia in the early fifth century, were Turkic.[7]
*Probably a substantial group of Hunnish peoples spoke some form of Turkic, a subfamily of the Altaic languages.[8]
*Danube used by a large number of Turkic peoples - including Huns, Avars,Bulgars,Cumans.[9]
* Among them, the Vandals were East Germanic, the Suevi or 'Swabians' were Central Germanic, the Huns were Turkic, and the Alans were Iranic (like the modern Ossetians).[10]
*Also, with the various Turkic tribes on the west; especially with the Huns.[11]
*Historic Turkic kingdoms (the earliest being the Great Hun Empire from 200 B.C., which stretched from Siberia to Tibet,and the last being the Ottoman Empire founded in A.D. 1299),hinting at a racial side to Turkish identity.[12]
*By the fifth century, the last of the Tocharians was driven from the region by nomadic Huns, possibly the earliest of many subsequent waves of Tur- kic invaders in Central Asia.[13]
*Who are the Turkic Peoples?
This great family of peoples includes the Huns,Khazars,Avars and Bulgar-Turks of former times.[14]
*The principal invaders in the north were no longer the Turkic Xiongnu[15]
*Horses were vital to maintaining Han military strength against the increasing nomadic incur. sions from the Turkic Xiongnu tribal armies along the northern borders and in the northwest.[16]
*The constant incursions in the Han's northern and northwestern frontiers by the Turkic nomads known as Xiongnu (the Huns) necessitated Han military expeditions across the Pamirs into Central Asia.[17]
* By the 5th century many of the troops were barbarian foederation of Germanic, Turkic (“Huns and "Bulgars), and, perhaps, “Slavic origins [18]
* The fact that the Bulgars of Asparukh - whom we considered descendants of the Huns led by Irnikh -were Turks.[19]
*While the Hun hords of Attila that tried to conquer Europe were surely Proto-Türks.[20]
Sources:
*1- The Origins of the Huns-The History Files
*2-The Huns, Rome and the Birth of Europe(Cambridge University Press)-Page 177
*3-Russian Translation Series of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology 1964
(Harvard University Press)
*4-Among the People, Native Yugoslav Ethnography: Selected 1982(Michigan University Press)
*5-Byzantium: Church, Society, and Civilization Seen Through Contemporary Eyes(University of Chicago Press)-Page 332
*6-Eurasian Studies Yearbook Volume 74 Eurolingua, 2002
*7-Islamic Peoples Of The Soviet Un-Page 384
*8-The Saga of the Volsungs: The Norse Epic of Sigurd the Dragon Slayer(University of California Press)-Page 15
*9-The Early Medieval Balkans: A Critical Survey from the Sixth to the Late Twelth Century(University of Michigan Press)-Page 25
*10-Vanished Kingdoms: The Rise and Fall of States and Nations
*11-China ancient and modern-Page-55
*12-Turkey: What Everyone Needs to Know®(Oxford University Press)
*13-Ethnic Groups of North, East, and Central Asia: An Encyclopedia-Page 251
*14-Oxford Symposium on Food & Cookery, 1989: Staplefoods : Proceedings
*15-China: A New History, Second Enlarged Edition(Harvard University Press)-Page 73
*16-Monks and Merchants: Silk Road Treasures from Northwest China ; Gansu and Ningxia, 4th - 7th Century ; [on the Occasion of the Exhibition "Monks and Merchants: Silk Road Treasures from Northwest China", Organized by the Asia Society Museum, New York, October 13, 2001 - January 6, 2002 ...]
*17-The Harvard Dictionary of Music-Page 261
*18- The Oxford Dictionary of Late Antiquity-Page 1346
*19- The Cambridge History of Early Inner Asia Volume 1-Page 202
*20-China Knowledge-Xiongnu
Peter Todorov
Huns were Turanid Turkic peoples
Distance to: Hun_Tian_Shan:DA80
0.05533515 Bashkir:BAS-120
0.05990198 Tatar_Siberian:STA-126
0.06118980 Bashkir:BAS-029
0.06465388 Bashkir:BAS-091
0.06518414 Bashkir:BAS-046
Distance to: Hun_Tian_Shan:DA74
0.04317297 Tatar_Siberian:STA-126
0.04340329 Bashkir:BAS-029
0.04508405 Bashkir:BAS-034
0.04571997 Bashkir:BAS-005
0.04634817 Bashkir:bashkir3
Distance to: Hun_Tian_Shan:DA73
0.04519389 Bashkir:BAS-120
0.04615025 Tatar_Siberian:STA-126
0.04817514 Bashkir:BAS-046
0.04964376 Bashkir:BAS-091
0.05188906 Bashkir:BAS-006
Distance to: Hun_Tian_Shan:DA72
0.04298365 Bashkir:BAS-120
0.05147676 Bashkir:bashkir9
0.05193652 Tatar_Siberian:STA-126
0.05398420 Bashkir:BAS-091
0.05418873 Bashkir:BAS-096
Distance to: Hun_Tian_Shan:DA69
0.06131625 Uzbek:495_R02C02
0.06246982 Turkmen:TUR013
0.06295519 Bashkir:bashkir9
0.06305724 Bashkir:BAS-120
0.06540455 Uzbek:495_R01C01
Distance to: Hun_Tian_Shan:DA66
0.04941760 Tatar_Siberian:STA-112
0.04992166 Bashkir:BAS-034
0.05030198 Bashkir:BAS-005
0.05069029 Bashkir:BAS-046
0.05109507 Tatar_Siberian:STA-126
Distance to: Hun_Tian_Shan:DA65
0.06441883 Bashkir:bashkir8
0.06454222 Tatar_Siberian:STA-126
0.06584960 Bashkir:BAS-034
0.06666736 Bashkir:BAS-120
0.06779641 Nogai:NOG-125
Distance to: Hun_Tian_Shan:DA54
0.04048207 Bashkir:BAS-005
0.04305749 Bashkir:bashkir3
0.04403622 Bashkir:BAS-034
0.04726006 Bashkir:BAS-029
0.04823834 Bashkir:bashkir8
Distance to: Hun_Tian_Shan:DA52
0.05372036 Bashkir:BAS-120
0.05740290 Tatar_Siberian:STA-126
0.05805683 Bashkir:BAS-029
0.06147907 Bashkir:BAS-091
0.06291138 Tatar_Siberian:STA-112
Peter Todorov
The Huns were a confederation of Eurasian tribes, especially Turkic ones, from the Steppes of Central Asia.
www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Hunnic_Empire
Even the language spoken by the Huns is in dispute, though most experts believe they were of Turkish speech.
www.britannica.com/place/the-Steppe/New-barbarian-incursions
Although in the past the Huns are thought to have been Mongolian emigrants, it is far more likely that they were of Turkic origin. This point has been repeated by thousands of historians, sinologists, turcologists, altaistics, and other researchers.
www.historyfiles.co.uk/FeaturesEurope/BarbarianHuns01.htm
The roots of anti-Turkism can be traced back to the arrival of the Huns in Europe.[10] While the ethnic background of the Huns is a matter of dispute among historians, they are widely believed to have been of Turkic origin,[11] and their invasion inspired fear among Europeans.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Turkism
A member of a nomadic tribe, the Huns, most likely of Turkic origin, which invaded Europe in the fourth century from Central Asia.
en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/Hun
Learning and teaching of Hun’s history, as part of the Turkic world has a great theoretical and practical significance in university education. Huns belonged to the Turkic-speaking tribes.
www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877042813029820/pdf?md5=847f9260d999ae4caaf591a81d60972e&pid=1-s2.0-S1877042813029820-main.pdf&_valck=1
The Huns, who, later on, bore the name of 'Turks,' natives of a country situated on the.
crossasia-repository.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/3333/1/Modi_History%20of%20the%20Huns.pdf
Huns (Οὐ̑ννοι), an Asian (possibly Turkic) people that appears in Roman sources beginning with Ammianus Marcellinus; it is generally accepted ...
www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780195046526.001.0001/acref-9780195046526-e-2370
They are thought to be a Turkic people descended from the Xiongnu tribes, who first appeared as a tribal confederation on the northern frontier of China in the late third century BC.
www.encyclopedia.com/history/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/hunnic-empire
Hepthalites(White Huns,Abdelai,Hayatila,Hua)
Inner Asian 'Hunnic' group (or rather dynasty), perhaps of Turkic origin.
www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780198662778.001.0001/acref-9780198662778-e-2200
During the mid-fifth century, mass southward migration of a Turkic tribe from Central Asia known as the Hephthalites (also called Huna or White Huns) invaded Sassanian lands and created a new kingdom (or khanate) that centered on Afghanistan.
www.cemml.colostate.edu/cultural/09476/afgh02-09enl.html
Caucasus as the first Turkic peoples (Avars, Bulgars, Huns, Khazars, Pechenegs) arrived.
www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Exile
The language of the European Huns is sometimes referred to as a Bulghar Turkic variety in general linguistic literature, but caution is needed in establishing its affiliations.
The predominant part of the Xiongnu population is likely to have spoken Turkic (Late Proto-Turkic, to be more precise).
www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/4CBA0E2CB74C8093EC1CA38C95067D55/S2513843X20000183a_hi.pdf/_div_class__title__Early_nomads_of_the_Eastern_Steppe_and_their_tentative_connections_in_the_West__div_.pdf
Some scholars think they were a Turkic tribe descended from the Xiongnu, a group of pastoral nomads who unified much of Asia during the late third and early second centuries B.C.
www.nationalgeographic.com/culture/people/reference/who-were-ruthless-warriors-behind-attila-hun/
Turkic Speaking Huns
books.google.com.tr/books?id=YKPaLi1d1O4C&pg=PA6&dq=&hl=tr&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjO4tibh5HpAhWKw6YKHaKtA_UQ6AEINDAC#v=onepage&q=&f=false (Oxford University Press)
Compare Chinese tu-kin, recorded from c. 177 B.C.E. as the name of a people living south of the Altai Mountains (identified by some with the Huns).
www.etymonline.com/word/turk
Agathias calls them Onogur Huns (3.5.6, Frendo (1975), 72).
About 370 A . D . the Germanic - speaking Goths , who had originated in Scandinavia , were driven to the west by the largely Turkic - speaking Huns from the east .[1]
*1-The Encyclopedia Americana
www.thefreedictionary.com/Hun
www.etymonline.com/search?q=hun
projects.iq.harvard.edu/files/huri/files/vvi_n4_dec1982.pdf
scourgeofgodblog.files.wordpress.com/2016/12/the-huns-hyun-jin-kim.pdf
abload.de/img/123copy43kp9.png?fbclid=IwAR00r6fZsB8cUvgZDRslbcfDAawDgjii6td8_8HXaQnCHbWjGfXzOE5pvKI
The steppes north of the Black Sea were under the control of nomads, Huns, and Bulgars, primarily Turkic-speaking although with an Ugric minority.
The troops were barbarian foederati of Germanic, Turkic ( Huns and Bulgars ), and, perhaps, Slavic origins.
www.oxfordreference.com/search?q=Huns+and+Bulgars&searchBtn=Search&isQuickSearch=true
Peter Todorov
All Roman historians called both Huns and Bulgars as Onogurs😀😀
If you don’t say they were panturks or liers😂😂
bulgars admit their turkic origin more than huns
They colonised areas of the eastern Balkans and in the seventh century other Slav tribes combined with the Proto-Bulgars, a group of Turkic origin, to launch a fresh assault into the Balkans.
nope we didnt assult we created a country of liberal people and we didnt betray anybody :)
Turk is not Turcie Turcie Osmano Arab halifate Osmano Turcie DNI Greek,Armenian,Kurds ,This is Osman Turcie asemile Armenian Greek,Kurds!
@@ПетърПетров-п4х stfu brainless
@@Nomadicenjoyerplus
Zonja Fatlinda Islami
You are not a Turk so why do you pretend to be a Turk?
You are a 12 year old Albanian girl who lives with her parents in Gostivar
@@petertodorov9540
th-cam.com/video/2doYxUe3ilg/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=Dookumoftherookbrook
Serbia was 5 times under Bulgarian rule !
553 Dislikes = 550 Bulgarians!!!
Pseudo history lovers=Bulgarians
@@Crxyzen1 🤣🤣🤣
@@Crxyzen1 Your funny dream version
@@OrthodoxBulgaria Bulgars’ Turkness comes from historical facts and academic reality not from fringe/based bulgarian historians🤣🤣
@@biscolataman In your dreams🤣
Bulgarians are slavic but bulgars are Turkic
Why does Turkey betray the Uighurs?
www.voanews.com/east-asia-pacific/turkey-cracks-down-uighur-protesters-after-china-complains
@@petertodorov9540 Love to our Aryan/Iranian Bulgarian brothers and sisters. God bless our Aryan/Iranian people and hugs and kisses to all our Aryan/Iranian people. Wish we could unite ALL Aryan/Iranian people into one country called The Median - Achaemenid Empire!
Todays bulgarians (the correct name is bolg-arians of Asparukh\Isperikh) are mostly thracians with very few bolgarian blood, speaking mostly so called "slavic" language.
Do not forget that there is a small group of bolgarians (descendants of Alzek) in todays Italy (Chille di Bolgeria), which have mixed with italians (latin speaking).
Do not forget that there are three autonomous republics in todays Russia, who also claim they have the right to name themselves bolgarians (on the Bolga\Volga river region), who speak mostly turkic language (not slavic, not latin)
A total of five. Five brothers... separated.
Also do not forget that Romanians spoke bolgarian and bolgarian was an official language till a century and a half ago.
Romania is a romanised name for the thracian tribes of Dacia (Daki), Vlakhia (Vlakhi) and others up to Belarus and Hung-aria (Hungary).
Since ancienet times Bolg-arians and Hung-arians have had common destiny although different by language and settlement.
Also all russians and so called ukrainians (a mix of russian\polish\cossac\khazar\etc.) are very close to bolgarians: historically and culturally.
Bolgarians gave the alphabet, religion, some cultural traditions and are still present in Ukraine and Russia.
Mate, I really enjoyed and learn 🇧🇬Bulgarian history !! The entire. Balkan history is 😜crazy ..😂😂 At least between. 🇷🇴Romania and. 🇧🇬Bulgaria we have the. Danube river so most of the time was peace between Us!! 😇😇. Now we really help eachother ...🍻cheers from. 🇷🇴Romania
The word BULGAR means MİXER.........because , the Türkish verb BULGAMAK means TO MİX......if so, BULG AR : MİXER.........final AR means PERSON or PEOPLE.......BULGAR : person or people who mix .........in TÜRKİC LANGUAGE, of course.........+++++ just like AVAR, SADAGAR, HAZAR, KABAR,SUVAR, GUJAR Türks...........
The name bolgar has nothing to do with arians lmao. Bolgar is the word ian means people of. Like russian meaning people of rus
With regard to topology, the obtained tree divides the modern Turkic languages into six principal sub-branches (in the order of their divergence): Bulgharic, North Siberian, South Siberian, Khalaj-Salar, Oghuz, and Kipchak-Karluk (‘Macro-Kipchak’). The time-depth of the Turkic family on the maximum credibility tree is estimated to be around 2,066 years BP (median height of the node), with a 95% highest posterior density between 1,517 and 2,755 years BP. The topology and the age of the obtained tree are discussed in further detail in Section 6.
The early split between the Bulgharic branch and the Common Turkic languages shapes the Turkic language family as a clear-cut binary structure. This agrees with most of the previous classifications of the Turkic language family, whether they are based on the historical-comparative or lexicostatistic approaches (Tekin 1990: 16; Menges 1995: 60-1; Johanson 1998: 81-3; Dybo 2006: 766-817, 2013: 18; Mudrak 2009: 172-79).
Alexander Savelyev, Martine Robbeets, Bayesian phylolinguistics infers the internal structure and the time-depth of the Turkic language family, Journal of Language Evolution, Volume 5, Issue 1, January 2020, Pages 39-53
@@kila200 Bulgurians are trying to change history lmao
Where is the Serbo-Bulgarian war🤨🤨
1885?
I'm from Bulgaria
@@mariastaneva193 честито
conveniently omitted. they are not too proud of it :)))
@@HomoUniverzalis Not a point in Serbia's favor.
Asan was vlah (romanian) and make a great kingdom: Vlaho-Bulgarian Tzarat! We have common hero!
Bulgaria and Serbia are great!
Greeting from Romania!
Yes Romania and Bulgaria strong in 1185
there is no kingom vlaho bulgarian there is only bulgaria kingom, vlaho bulgarian kingom is only in romanian historical book and no one in eny other
Asan was a kumano-bulgarian!His brother Kaloian write a letter to the pope in wich he writes that his ansestors were tsar Simeon and Samuil.
Every single medieval source mentions the state as Bulgaria. The oficial language of the state and the language of the clergy (church) was the Bulgarian Language. The majority in the empire , most of the nobility and the petty nobility spoke Bulgarian and identified as Bulgarians. The theory about a mediavel vlacho-bulgarian state is beleaved only in Romania
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Bulgarian_Empire
Ofcource
the fact that the vlachs did play an important role in the second Bulgarian empire is undeniable as the first rulers of the state were probably partly vlach, however they still were crowned as tsars of Bulgaria and claimed descent from the the Krum and Cometopouli dynasties of the first Bulgarian empire.
The Cumans too played probably as an important role as the vlachs as what is written in the sources about most of the Battles in which the second Bulgarian empire participated is that the Bulgarian army was made of about 60-70% Bulgarians and almost always about 10-20% Cuman mercenaries. And sometimes vlachs, however they are not mentioned really often.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Adrianople_(1205)
@@historyrhymes1701 .....and to ad a few words, if I may there are more than one OFFICIAL letters in Vatican's archives stating very clearly :
Rex Bvlgarorvm Rex Blachorvm!(Kaloyan,Ioanitsa)
It doesn't take rocket scientist to see, and to find out WHY, firstly (as a status) is mentioned "Bvlgarorvm"(Bulgarorum) and SECONDARY is "Blachorvm"(Vlahorum).
🙄🤔🤯😉
Nice Turk tribe Bulgars 😍😍😍
As the number of evidence of linguistic, ethnographic and socio-political nature show that Bulgars belonged to the group of Turkic peoples.[36][24][26][30]
The Bulgars (also Bolgars or proto-Bulgarians[40]) were a semi-nomadic people of Turkic descent, originally from Central Asia, who from the 2nd century onwards dwelled in the steppes north of the Caucasus and around the banks of river Volga (then Itil).
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Bulgaria
Bulgars (< Turkic bulgha- ‘to mix, stir up, disturb’, i.e. ‘rebels’)
A Turkic tribal union of the Pontic steppes that gave rise to two important states: Danubian-Balkan Bulgaria (First Bulgarian Empire, 681-1018) and Volga Bulgaria (early 10th century-1241). They derived from Oghuric-Turkic tribes, driven westward from Mongolia and south Siberia to the Pontic steppes in successive waves by turmoil associated with the Xiongnu (late 3rd cent. ... ...
www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780198662778.001.0001/acref-9780198662778-e-820
Many Slavic tribes lived within the boundaries of the state, together with the proto-Bulgarians, a tribe of Turkic origin that had settled in the Balkan Peninsula at the end of the 7th century.
www.britannica.com/biography/Boris-I
The Bulgars were a Turkic tribal confederation that gave rise to the Balkan Bulgar and Volga Bulgar states.The ethynonym derives from the Turkish bulgha-,”to stir,mix,disturb,confuse.”
books.google.com.tr/books?id=c788wWR_bLwC&pg=PA354&redir_esc=y&hl=tr#v=onepage&q=Bulgars&f=false (Harvard University Press)
The Volga Bulgars, a Turkish tribe then living on the east bank of the Volga River, ... the laws of Islam to the Bulgars, who had recently converted to the religion.
www.bookrags.com/research/ahmad-ibn-fadlan-ued/#gsc.tab=0
Eastern Bulgars , Bulgars Ancient Turkic people originating in the region n and e of the Black Sea.
www.encyclopedia.com/environment/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/balkan-states
Volga Bulgaria was a northeastern European Turkic state that formed during the 9th century and continued into the first four decades of the 13th century.
www.readcube.com/articles/10.1002/9781118455074.wbeoe009
www.infoplease.com/encyclopedia/social-science/cultures/other/bulgars-eastern
referenceworks.brillonline.com/entries/encyclopedia-of-slavic-languages-and-linguistics-online/*-COM_031941
referenceworks.brillonline.com/entries/encyclopaedia-of-islam-3/bulghars-COM_23726
www.thefreedictionary.com/Proto-Bulgar+languages
encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/Bolgars
xn--80ad7bbk5c.xn--p1ai/en/content/brief-history-suvar-bulgars
bulgarizdat.ru/index.php/book1/article1-1
Bulgars, Eastern bŭl´gärz, -gərz [key], Turkic-speaking people, who possessed a powerful state (10th-14th cent.) at the confluence of the Volga and the Kama, E European Russia.
The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, 6th ed. Copyright © 2012, Columbia University Press.
(Cambridge University Press)
books.google.com.tr/books?id=Ylz4fe7757cC&pg=PA8&lpg=PA8&dq=proto+bulgars&source=bl&ots=vvGsuu2J3g&sig=ACfU3U2YuPKKdgVQKhoUi2fyDiC99n4N_Q&hl=tr&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiRqIaDlNvmAhWM-yoKHW38DDI4FBDoATAAegQIBRAB#v=onepage&q=proto%20bulgars&f=false
Population genetic analysis indicated that Conquerors had closest connection to the Onogur-Bulgar ancestors of Volga Tatars.
www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-53105-5
hizliresim.com/stAHqu (Bulgar genetic proximity)
Thus supporting the view that Tatars may be descendents of ancient Bulgars.
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22520580/
Onogur-Bulgars had been part of the Hunnic people, and after the death of Attila’s son Irnik, European Hun remains fused with the Onogurs.
www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/250688v1.full
However, given the common Turkic genetic background of the Bulgars and Khazars, these ethnicities may be difficult to tell apart either archaeologically or genetically.
www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2019.12.15.876912v1.full.pdf
Most Tatars trace their descent to Volga Bulgars, a medieval Turkic people who have inhabited the Middle Volga and lower Kama region.
online.ucpress.edu/search-results?page=1&q=Bulgars
Caucasus as the first Turkic peoples (Avars, Bulgars, Huns, Khazars, Pechenegs) arrived.
www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Exile
www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.2307/2849381?journalCode=spc
www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.2307/2853091?journalCode=spc
brill.com/view/book/edcoll/9789047423560/Bej.9789004163898.i-492_006.xml
The Turkic languages are clearly interrelated, showing close similarities in phonology, morphology, and syntax. Historically, they split into two types early on, Common Turkic and Bolgar Turkic. The language of the Proto-Bolgars, reportedly similar to the Khazar language, belonged to the latter type. Its only modern representative is Chuvash, which originated in Volga Bolgarian and exhibits archaic features.
www.britannica.com/topic/Turkic-languages
According to Antoaneta Granberg : " the data is insufficient to clearly distinguish Huns, Avars and Bulgars one from another" - introduction, the second paragraph :
www.academia.edu/683028/Classification_of_the_Hunno-Bulgarian_Loan-Words_in_Slavonic
Both names are best explained as corresponding to Onogundur, an old name in Greek sources for the Bulgars. www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/khazars
www.yourdictionary.com/bulgar
whc.unesco.org/en/list/981/
www.academia.edu/1902427/The_Islamization_of_the_Volga_Bulghars_A_Question_Reconsidered
More Sources:
1drv.ms/w/s!ArU3juYblIHghhn2C4hh-bLC8FRi
@Peter Todorov what ? Bulgars origin isTurkic people.No iranic.You panslavist .You Turk.Welcome
@@Crxyzen1 yeni hesap kurdu banlanıp🤣
@@papazataklaattiranimam
Why does Turkey betray the Uighurs?
@@metehanzincirci4790
th-cam.com/video/gJqHD05ZSfY/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=WION
Peter todorov’s 15 iq comments😂
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%...".
Bulgarians have nothing to do with the Turk tribes stop miss informing people mate .
I agree. Not sure why people keep spreading that. People want to put down Bulgarians and claim they are Turks when they have nothing in common with Turks. I think only thing is, Turks may have some Slavic influence knowing they brought tons of people from Slavic lands to modern day Turkey who then mixed with the ME people, East Asians, and some North Africans. So we can say modern day Turks have been influenced by Slavs. Some Bulgarians may have influence from Greeks, Latins (Romanians and Italians) and some from native people who lived here from long ago such as Thracians ect. To me Bulgarians are Slavs just like Croatians, Slovenians, Bosnians, Serbs, Montenegrins ect. No different. Kind of sad Serbian channel is spreading this false narrative.
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.
Bowersock, Glen W. & al. Late Antiquity: A Guide to the Postclassical World pp.354 Harvard University Press, 1999. ISBN 0-674-51173-5.
You should read history before publishing and also put some sources.
Huns and Bulgars are Turkish tribes from Oghur Turks and also their languages :)
turkish tribe in 6th century :)? attaturk wasnt born there turifiled greek :)
@@Crxyzen1
Why does Turkey betray the Uighurs?
th-cam.com/video/gJqHD05ZSfY/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=WION
Best history video on youtube,my MAN
Lethean
Btw,it is a Serbian Channel and Serbians are mostly anti turkists🤣🤣
But some kids said this video is pan turkist🤣🤣
NOPE COMPLETE LIES WRITTEN BY A SERB WHY ARE YOU SO OBSECED WITH US
@@Crxyzen1
Why does Turkey betray the Uighurs?
www.voanews.com/east-asia-pacific/turkey-cracks-down-uighur-protesters-after-china-complains
@Lethean
Panturk coward
Why did you betray and abandon the Uighurs
I was wondering why this was so inaccurate, but then I realised this isn't an Albanian account this is a Serbian one in Kosovo
th-cam.com/video/k_z3atEpytw/w-d-xo.html
We aren’t Turks and we aren’t form Turkish origin we was under Turkish slavery
Bella Dimova but love chalga Kuchek and kiofte and kebeche rakia perde chickmije charshaf muhabet marhmuluk
Nothin Turkish there
Aide
Kumshija
Bash taman bakshhish
the Turkish propaganda on play :) Dont hide the truth :)
Don't get me wrong i respect the beautiful work
Bulgars (< Turkic bulgha- ‘to mix, stir up, disturb’, i.e. ‘rebels’)
A Turkic tribal union of the Pontic steppes that gave rise to two important states: Danubian-Balkan Bulgaria (First Bulgarian Empire, 681-1018) and Volga Bulgaria (early 10th century-1241). They derived from Oghuric-Turkic tribes, driven westward from Mongolia and south Siberia to the Pontic steppes in successive waves by turmoil associated with the Xiongnu (late 3rd cent. ... ...
www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780198662778.001.0001/acref-9780198662778-e-820
Kubrat (Gk. Kobratos, called Kurt in the Slavo-Turko-Bulgar Imennik or Name-List of Khans, 20, derived from Turkic quvrat ‘to bring together’)
Ruler of the *Onoghurs (Ononghundur) *Bulgars (c.605-42/65?). *John of *Nikiu (120, 47) reports that he became a Christian in ... ...
www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780198662778.001.0001/acref-9780198662778-e-2674
Utrigurs (Utighurs)
Oghur-Bulghar Turkic group, located south-east of the Don River, near the Sea of Azov, and traditional enemies of the related ... ...
www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780198662778.001.0001/acref-9780198662778-e-4918
Bolgar, Tatarstan/Russia (Bulgar, Bulgar al-Cadid, Kuybyshev)
By the 15th century it was known as Bulgar al-Cadid ‘New Bulgar’ after the Turkic-speaking Volga Bulgars.
www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780191905636.001.0001/acref-9780191905636-e-8397
Bulgars, Turkic,
also Proto-Bulgarians, Pra-Bulgarians, a pastoral people, originally living in Central Asia. Swept westward in the great movement of steppe peoples ...
www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780195046526.001.0001/acref-9780195046526-e-0850
Kuvrat
(Κοβρα̑τος, according to Moravcsik, Byzantinoturcica 2:161f), khan of the Onogur Bulgars; died after 642. Patr. Nikephoros I mentions his revolt against the Avars and alliance with Herakleios; Kuvrat was granted ...
www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803100045529
Kubrat , of the royal Duloclan, ‘lord of the Ononghundur-Bulgars and Kotrags [Kutrigurs?]’
www.oxfordreference.com/search?q=Dulo+clan&searchBtn=Search&isQuickSearch=true
The Volga Tatars live in the central and eastern parts of European Russia and in western Siberia. They are the descendants of the Bulgar and Kipchak Turkic tribes who inhabited the western wing of the Mongol Empire, the area of the middle Volga River.
academic.oup.com/mbe/article/27/10/2220/963437
Chuvash is the sole living representative of the Bulgharic branch, one of the two principal branches of the Turkic family.
oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/mobile/view/10.1093/oso/9780198804628.001.0001/oso-9780198804628-chapter-28
Many Slavic tribes lived within the boundaries of the state, together with the proto-Bulgarians, a tribe of Turkic origin that had settled in the Balkan Peninsula at the end of the 7th century.
www.britannica.com/biography/Boris-I
The language of the European Huns is sometimes referred to as a Bulghar Turkic variety in general linguistic literature, but caution is needed in establishing its affiliations.
www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/4CBA0E2CB74C8093EC1CA38C95067D55/S2513843X20000183a_hi.pdf/_div_class__title__Early_nomads_of_the_Eastern_Steppe_and_their_tentative_connections_in_the_West__div_.pdf
In the Hunno-Bulgarian languages /r/ within a consonantic cluster
tends to disappear
projects.iq.harvard.edu/files/huri/files/vvi_n4_dec1982.pdf
The Bulgars were a Turkic tribal confederation that gave rise to the Balkan Bulgar and Volga Bulgar states.The ethynonym derives from the Turkish bulgha-,”to stir,mix,disturb,confuse.”
books.google.com.tr/books?id=c788wWR_bLwC&pg=PA354&redir_esc=y&hl=tr#v=onepage&q=Bulgars&f=false (Harvard University Press)
Turkish tribes who founded a kingdom (9th-12th century) in the region between the Volga and the Kama.
www.larousse.fr/encyclopedie/divers/Bulgares_de_la_Volga_et_de_la_Kama/110545
The Bulgars,,Turkish people who were formed on the Don.
www.universalis.fr/recherche/l/1/napp/23625
Although the Bulgars were originally a Turkic-speaking people from Asia, they merged with the Slavic tribes whom they conquered in the 7th cent.
www.infoplease.com/encyclopedia/arts/language/linguistics/bulgarian-language
The Volga Bulgars, a Turkish tribe then living on the east bank of the Volga River, ... the laws of Islam to the Bulgars, who had recently converted to the religion.
www.bookrags.com/research/ahmad-ibn-fadlan-ued/#gsc.tab=0
Eastern Bulgars , Bulgars Ancient Turkic people originating in the region n and e of the Black Sea.
www.encyclopedia.com/environment/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/balkan-states
Volga Bulgaria was a northeastern European Turkic state that formed during the 9th century and continued into the first four decades of the 13th century.
www.readcube.com/articles/10.1002/9781118455074.wbeoe009
Population genetic analysis indicated that Conquerors had closest connection to the Onogur-Bulgar ancestors of Volga Tatars.
www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-53105-5
hizliresim.com/stAHqu (Bulgar genetic proximity)
Thus supporting the view that Tatars may be descendents of ancient Bulgars.
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22520580/
Onogur-Bulgars had been part of the Hunnic people, and after the death of Attila’s son Irnik, European Hun remains fused with the Onogurs.
www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/250688v1.full
However, given the common Turkic genetic background of the Bulgars and Khazars, these ethnicities may be difficult to tell apart either archaeologically or genetically.
www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2019.12.15.876912v1.full.pdf
Most Tatars trace their descent to Volga Bulgars, a medieval Turkic people who have inhabited the Middle Volga and lower Kama region.
online.ucpress.edu/search-results?page=1&q=Bulgars
from the fifth century BC, well before Bulgars (a Turkic tribe) or Slavs
online.ucpress.edu/search-results?q=Bulgars%20a%20tribe&fl_SiteID=1&qb={%22q%22:%22Bulgars%20a%20tribe%22}&page=1
Population genetic results indicate that they had closest connection to the Onogur-Bulgar ancestors of Volga Tatars.
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6193700/
Population genetic results indicate that they had closest connection to the Onogur-Bulgar ancestors of Volga Tatars.
journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0205920&type=printable
Onogur-Bulgars had been part of the Hunnic people, and after the death of Attila’s son Irnik, European Hun remains fused with the Onogurs.
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6193700/
Around 4% of Bulgarian genes are derived outside of Europe and the Middle East or are of undetermined origin (by 858 CE), of which 2.3% are from Northeast Asia and correspond to Asian tribes such as Bulgars,[13] a consistent very low frequency for Eastern Europe as far as Uralic-speaking Hungarians.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_studies_on_Bulgarians
Science, 14 February 2014, Vol. 343 no. 6172, p. 751, A Genetic Atlas of Human Admixture History, Garrett Hellenthal at al.: " CIs. for the admixture time(s) overlap but predate the Mongol empire, with estimates from 440 to 1080 CE (Fig.3.) In each population, one source group has at least some ancestry related to Northeast Asians, with ~2 to 4% of these groups total ancestry linking directly to East Asia. This signal might correspond to a small genetic legacy from invasions of peoples from the Asian steppes (e.g., the Huns, Magyars, and Bulgars) during the first millennium CE."
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4209567/figure/F3/
@Peter Todorov я ми прати фейса да я видя
@@pompacitokmakci
Fatlinda Islami
You are not a Turk so why do you pretend to be a Turk?
You are a 12 year old Albanian girl who lives with her mommy in Gostivar
Bulgarians are oldest native ppl on Balkans and Europe. They were ancient Thracians-Pelasgians. Period.
Are you trying to say that the Bulgarians are thracians ? You started like the Macedonians to claim false history. Bulgarians are Turks.Only Mongols and Turks have Khans. They were nomads ,Horse riders.
So the Greeks aren’t older?
This is a well know fact slavs became prominent in the Balkans in the 6th century...
there is a difference between a han and a khanaz ubigi @@yuksi22
@@BGBodybilding what is the difference and who says it ?
And please give some world known evidences not some self pro claim , theoretic thinking of a Bulgarian professor with diploma from БАН .It's becoming embarrassing .Bulgars are turkic- mongilian tribes.
Ok,so they are not Turks but Turkish,what difference?
Turkic*
@@papazataklaattiranimam
NONSENSE
1. Give PRIMARY SOURCES that show the name Bulgarian comes from bulgamak?
2.Give PRIMARY SOURCES that show tengrinism in Bulgaria
very wrong, specially about language
50%Tatar 50%Mongol
And poor!
@@pol-henridimanche207 Cope
FC BULLSHEET
5:19 Temple to Tangra? Source?
At the time,the new Khazar qaganate was expanding westward,squeezing out the Onogurs,or Bulghars as they begin to be named. One of the Kuvrat’s sons,the Asparuch (Asparux,Isperih) now celebrated as the founder of Bulgaria,forcibly crossed to the Danube arpund 679 to occupy imperial territory Moesia after defeating the forces of Constantine IV (668-685). The event is recorded in the preserved text of a Hebrew letter of a Khazar qahan,who wrote that the Vununtur(=Onogurs=Bulghars) has fled across the Duna,the Danube. Even if numerous for the steppe,Asparuch’s pastoralist warriors and their families were of necessity relatively few as compared to the agricultural Slav population that lived south of the Danube,and thus the Turkic-speaking Bulghars were assimilated linguistically by the Slav majority to form the medieval and modern Bulgarians. This particular ethnogenesis occuree gradually over a period of more than two centuries: there was the Turkic qan (or khan) Krum (803-814),Qan Omurtag (814-831),Qan Perssian (836-852),then the wan who converted Boris I (852-889);then came Tsar Symeon (893-923), Tsar Peter I (927-970),and so on.But this transformation of Turkic shamanists into Slavic Christians did nothing to diminish the warlike character of the empire’s new neighbours. Because even warlike neighbours can be useful at times,the relations between the empire and the new Bulghar qaganate encompassed every possible variation,from intimate allience to all out-war,as exemplified by the career of the Bulghar qan or khan Tervel (or Tarvel-Terbelis in our Greek sources),the successor and probably son of Asparukh who ruled for some twenty-one years within the period 695-721,extant chronologies being inconsistent.
“Bulghars and Bulgarians.” The Grand Strategy of the Byzantine Empire, by EDWARD N. LUTTWAK, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts; London, England, 2009, pp. 173
The strategic and economic importance of this juncture is clear: in an age when much long-distance travel was by water, the confluence of the Volga and Kama rivers provided a three-way maritime link between Europe, the Near East, and East Asia. The Turkic Bulgars were among the first to benefit
“THE KAZAN SCHOOL.” Russian Orientalism: Asia in the Russian Mind from Peter the Great to the Emigration, by David Schimmelpenninck Van der Oye, Yale University Press, New Haven; London, 2010, pp. 93-121.
The confluence of the Volga and Kama rivers, to the east, was inhabited by the Bulgars, a Turkic
people, and the southeastern steppes by the Khazars, another Turkic people who had formed a strong state in the seventh century, barring alike the westward movement of other nomadic tribes
“Russian Expansion in Kievan Times.” Eastward to Empire: Exploration and Conquest on the Russian Open Frontier to 1750, by George V. Lantzeff and Richard A. Pierce, McGill-Queen's University Press, MONTREAL; LONDON, 1973, pp. 21-30.
The Bul- gars, a Turkic people, unlike the Slavic Croats and Serbs, moved south ofthe Danube in 679 and soon created a state, in which the numerically small Proto- Bulgarelement in due course became completely assimilated with the Slavic majority
“Antecedents and Antipodes.” The National Question in Yugoslavia: Origins, History, Politics, by IVO BANAC, Cornell University Press, Ithaca; London, 1984, pp. 21-140.
The word boyar is of Turkic origin, introduced into the Balkan Peninsula by the Bulgars in the 7th century. As the Turkic -speaking Bulgar conquerors became Slavicized, they joined with the Slavic clan chiefs
“Nobles and Landholders.” East Central Europe in the Middle Ages, 1000-1500, by JEAN W. SEDLAR, University of Washington Press, Seattle; London, 1994, pp. 58-83.
" Bulgar " originally designated a Turkic -speaking people; now it designates the Slavic-speaking people who assimilated them.
“National Symbols and the International Recognition of the Republic of Macedonia.” The Macedonian Conflict: Ethnic Nationalism in a Transnational World, by Loring M. Danforth, Princeton University Press, PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY, 1995, pp. 142-184.
There are many sources
@@Nomadicenjoyer31 don't spread lies thank you
Bulgars are Turks🇹🇷🇹🇷🇹🇷🇹🇷🇹🇷
No !!!!!
BULGAR PEOPLE ARE OGHUR TURKS
TURKISH PEOPLE ARE OGHUZ TURKS
KAZAKH PEOPLE ARE KIPTCHAK TURKS
ETC. TURK COUNTRYS = 🇰🇿🇹🇲🇰🇬🇦🇿🇹🇷🇺🇿 AND SLAVIFIED TURK COUNTRYS = 🇧🇬🇲🇰 AND MOST TURK POPULATION = 🇷🇺🇨🇳🇦🇫🇹🇯🇮🇷ETC.
Bulgars a race of people related to scythians or medens-persians spoke an indo european dialect and settled what's was known back then by greeks and romans alike as ancient thrace and today modern day bulgaria, turks -mongols came about 7-800 years ago and understandably influenced bulgars later on in time, threcians-bulgars same race culture different times scales,
george soros schools of science and history for the ages of 6-7 year old's is baring fruits.
YES!!!!!
bulgars spoke turkic language related to chuvash learn history before your mouth you propogandist.
Hahahahahahahahahaha
Bulgars (< Turkic bulgha- ‘to mix, stir up, disturb’, i.e. ‘rebels’)
A Turkic tribal union of the Pontic steppes that gave rise to two important states: Danubian-Balkan Bulgaria (First Bulgarian Empire, 681-1018) and Volga Bulgaria (early 10th century-1241). They derived from Oghuric-Turkic tribes, driven westward from Mongolia and south Siberia to the Pontic steppes in successive waves by turmoil associated with the Xiongnu (late 3rd cent. ... ...
www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780198662778.001.0001/acref-9780198662778-e-820
Kubrat (Gk. Kobratos, called Kurt in the Slavo-Turko-Bulgar Imennik or Name-List of Khans, 20, derived from Turkic quvrat ‘to bring together’)
Ruler of the *Onoghurs (Ononghundur) *Bulgars (c.605-42/65?). *John of *Nikiu (120, 47) reports that he became a Christian in ... ...
www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780198662778.001.0001/acref-9780198662778-e-2674
Utrigurs (Utighurs)
Oghur-Bulghar Turkic group, located south-east of the Don River, near the Sea of Azov, and traditional enemies of the related ... ...
www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780198662778.001.0001/acref-9780198662778-e-4918
Bolgar, Tatarstan/Russia (Bulgar, Bulgar al-Cadid, Kuybyshev)
By the 15th century it was known as Bulgar al-Cadid ‘New Bulgar’ after the Turkic-speaking Volga Bulgars.
www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780191905636.001.0001/acref-9780191905636-e-8397
Bulgars, Turkic,
also Proto-Bulgarians, Pra-Bulgarians, a pastoral people, originally living in Central Asia. Swept westward in the great movement of steppe peoples ...
www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780195046526.001.0001/acref-9780195046526-e-0850
Kuvrat
(Κοβρα̑τος, according to Moravcsik, Byzantinoturcica 2:161f), khan of the Onogur Bulgars; died after 642. Patr. Nikephoros I mentions his revolt against the Avars and alliance with Herakleios; Kuvrat was granted ...
www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803100045529
Kubrat , of the royal Duloclan, ‘lord of the Ononghundur-Bulgars and Kotrags [Kutrigurs?]’
www.oxfordreference.com/search?q=Dulo+clan&searchBtn=Search&isQuickSearch=true
Originally Asiatic nomads who inhabited the shores of the Black Sea at the end of the 5th century ad but after ad 679 they crossed the Danube and founded a state in the old province of Moesia.
www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803095534628
www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780199534043.001.0001/acref-9780199534043-e-582
The Volga Tatars live in the central and eastern parts of European Russia and in western Siberia. They are the descendants of the Bulgar and Kipchak Turkic tribes who inhabited the western wing of the Mongol Empire, the area of the middle Volga River.
academic.oup.com/mbe/article/27/10/2220/963437
Chuvash is the sole living representative of the Bulgharic branch, one of the two principal branches of the Turkic family.
oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/mobile/view/10.1093/oso/9780198804628.001.0001/oso-9780198804628-chapter-28
Many Slavic tribes lived within the boundaries of the state, together with the proto-Bulgarians, a tribe of Turkic origin that had settled in the Balkan Peninsula at the end of the 7th century.
www.britannica.com/biography/Boris-I
The language of the European Huns is sometimes referred to as a Bulghar Turkic variety in general linguistic literature, but caution is needed in establishing its affiliations.
www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/4CBA0E2CB74C8093EC1CA38C95067D55/S2513843X20000183a_hi.pdf/_div_class__title__Early_nomads_of_the_Eastern_Steppe_and_their_tentative_connections_in_the_West__div_.pdf
In the Hunno-Bulgarian languages /r/ within a consonantic cluster
tends to disappear
projects.iq.harvard.edu/files/huri/files/vvi_n4_dec1982.pdf
An earlier date for the separation of proto-Turkic, preceding 209 BC would support the identification of Xiongnu language with proto-Bulgharic or one of its subgroups, while a later date of separation would make its association with proto-Turkic more plausible.
academic.oup.com/jole/article-pdf/5/1/39/32972809/lzz010.pdf
The Bulgars were a Turkic tribal confederation that gave rise to the Balkan Bulgar and Volga Bulgar states.The ethynonym derives from the Turkish bulgha-,”to stir,mix,disturb,confuse.”
books.google.com.tr/books?id=c788wWR_bLwC&pg=PA354&redir_esc=y&hl=tr#v=onepage&q=Bulgars&f=false (Harvard University Press)
Turkish tribes who founded a kingdom (9th-12th century) in the region between the Volga and the Kama.
www.larousse.fr/encyclopedie/divers/Bulgares_de_la_Volga_et_de_la_Kama/110545
The Bulgars,,Turkish people who were formed on the Don.
www.universalis.fr/recherche/l/1/napp/23625
Although the Bulgars were originally a Turkic-speaking people from Asia, they merged with the Slavic tribes whom they conquered in the 7th cent.
www.infoplease.com/encyclopedia/arts/language/linguistics/bulgarian-language
@@ЕлицаЕнева-ж3о yes according to some bulgarian kids😹😹
Bulgars (< Turkic bulgha- ‘to mix, stir up, disturb’, i.e. ‘rebels’)
A Turkic tribal union of the Pontic steppes that gave rise to two important states: Danubian-Balkan Bulgaria (First Bulgarian Empire, 681-1018) and Volga Bulgaria (early 10th century-1241). They derived from Oghuric-Turkic tribes, driven westward from Mongolia and south Siberia to the Pontic steppes in successive waves by turmoil associated with the Xiongnu (late 3rd cent. ... ...
www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780198662778.001.0001/acref-9780198662778-e-820
Kubrat (Gk. Kobratos, called Kurt in the Slavo-Turko-Bulgar Imennik or Name-List of Khans, 20, derived from Turkic quvrat ‘to bring together’)
Ruler of the *Onoghurs (Ononghundur) *Bulgars (c.605-42/65?). *John of *Nikiu (120, 47) reports that he became a Christian in ... ...
www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780198662778.001.0001/acref-9780198662778-e-2674
Utrigurs (Utighurs)
Oghur-Bulghar Turkic group, located south-east of the Don River, near the Sea of Azov, and traditional enemies of the related ... ...
www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780198662778.001.0001/acref-9780198662778-e-4918
Bolgar, Tatarstan/Russia (Bulgar, Bulgar al-Cadid, Kuybyshev)
By the 15th century it was known as Bulgar al-Cadid ‘New Bulgar’ after the Turkic-speaking Volga Bulgars.
www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780191905636.001.0001/acref-9780191905636-e-8397
Bulgars, Turkic,
also Proto-Bulgarians, Pra-Bulgarians, a pastoral people, originally living in Central Asia. Swept westward in the great movement of steppe peoples ...
www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780195046526.001.0001/acref-9780195046526-e-0850
Kuvrat
(Κοβρα̑τος, according to Moravcsik, Byzantinoturcica 2:161f), khan of the Onogur Bulgars; died after 642. Patr. Nikephoros I mentions his revolt against the Avars and alliance with Herakleios; Kuvrat was granted ...
www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803100045529
Kubrat , of the royal Duloclan, ‘lord of the Ononghundur-Bulgars and Kotrags [Kutrigurs?]’
www.oxfordreference.com/search?q=Dulo+clan&searchBtn=Search&isQuickSearch=true
Originally Asiatic nomads who inhabited the shores of the Black Sea at the end of the 5th century ad but after ad 679 they crossed the Danube and founded a state in the old province of Moesia.
www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803095534628
www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780199534043.001.0001/acref-9780199534043-e-582
The Volga Tatars live in the central and eastern parts of European Russia and in western Siberia. They are the descendants of the Bulgar and Kipchak Turkic tribes who inhabited the western wing of the Mongol Empire, the area of the middle Volga River.
academic.oup.com/mbe/article/27/10/2220/963437
Chuvash is the sole living representative of the Bulgharic branch, one of the two principal branches of the Turkic family.
oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/mobile/view/10.1093/oso/9780198804628.001.0001/oso-9780198804628-chapter-28
Many Slavic tribes lived within the boundaries of the state, together with the proto-Bulgarians, a tribe of Turkic origin that had settled in the Balkan Peninsula at the end of the 7th century.
www.britannica.com/biography/Boris-I
The language of the European Huns is sometimes referred to as a Bulghar Turkic variety in general linguistic literature, but caution is needed in establishing its affiliations.
www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/4CBA0E2CB74C8093EC1CA38C95067D55/S2513843X20000183a_hi.pdf/_div_class__title__Early_nomads_of_the_Eastern_Steppe_and_their_tentative_connections_in_the_West__div_.pdf
In the Hunno-Bulgarian languages /r/ within a consonantic cluster
tends to disappear
projects.iq.harvard.edu/files/huri/files/vvi_n4_dec1982.pdf
An earlier date for the separation of proto-Turkic, preceding 209 BC would support the identification of Xiongnu language with proto-Bulgharic or one of its subgroups, while a later date of separation would make its association with proto-Turkic more plausible.
academic.oup.com/jole/article-pdf/5/1/39/32972809/lzz010.pdf
The Bulgars were a Turkic tribal confederation that gave rise to the Balkan Bulgar and Volga Bulgar states.The ethynonym derives from the Turkish bulgha-,”to stir,mix,disturb,confuse.”
books.google.com.tr/books?id=c788wWR_bLwC&pg=PA354&redir_esc=y&hl=tr#v=onepage&q=Bulgars&f=false (Harvard University Press)
Turkish tribes who founded a kingdom (9th-12th century) in the region between the Volga and the Kama.
www.larousse.fr/encyclopedie/divers/Bulgares_de_la_Volga_et_de_la_Kama/110545
The Bulgars,,Turkish people who were formed on the Don.
www.universalis.fr/recherche/l/1/napp/23625
Although the Bulgars were originally a Turkic-speaking people from Asia, they merged with the Slavic tribes whom they conquered in the 7th cent.
www.infoplease.com/encyclopedia/arts/language/linguistics/bulgarian-language
All of those who says bulgarians were tatars or whatever, just see the wall painting in 3.27 with all the red haired guys.
The kirghiz Turks are described as Red headed and green eyed.
www.britannica.com/topic/Kyrgyz-people
And the Kypchaks and Cumans Turks are blondes.
Looks like I destroyed you theory. lol
Also Turks are described by Mongols,Chinese,Indian and Byzantium sources as a mixed race people.
Ironically the Turkic and Mongolic word for Mixed is Bolgak and the term for mixed person/tribe is Bolgar/Balkar.
You might even want to check out Modern Mongolia's Bolgan province and Bolgan city.
Or the mongolian tribe Bulguud...lol
@@mongolchiuud8931
Turkified
Репортвайте видеото и ще изтрием лъжата
Toi e Srb bahahahah
As a consequence, groups of the Cumans and the Tatars settled and mingled with the local population in various regions of the Balkans. The Cumans were the founders of three successive Bulgarian dynasties (Asenids, Terterids and Shishmanids) and the Wallachian dynasty (Basarabids). They also played an active role in Byzantium, Hungary and Serbia, with Cuman immigrants being integrated into each country's elite.
Vásáry, I. (2005). Cumans and Tatars: Oriental Military in the Pre-Ottoman Balkans, 1185-1365. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511496622
The name of the dynasty comes from one of the brothers, namely Asen I. The etymology is most likely of Cuman Turkic origin, derived from "esen" which meant "safe, sound, healthy" and the Belgun nickname seems to be derived from Turkic "bilgün", which meant "wise". Further support to this connection can be found in the charters of the Great Lavra of Mt. Athos from the end of the 12th century, which mention the monastery's problems with some of the Cuman stratiotes, where "Asen" is listed as the name of one of those Cumans.
Other study shows that the only name that makes sense is änish ("descent") and the word can be found almost exclusively in the languages of the Kıpçak Turks..
I like the Cumans
They helped Bulgaria against the Byzantines
Nice Turkish propaganda. Now let's use some real sources:
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%...".