Relationship bw Bulgar and Iranian Langua

It's Salat in Arabic.

My point was that Turkish, Persian and Arabic words that are common in South Slavic languages are from the Ottomans. I didn't say I was sure, but that is what comes to my mind when i think about the origins of these words.

 

namaz isnt iranian?

 

Originally posted by Afghanan Originally posted by Socrates I can't believe u guys are taking this seriously...Certainly the bulgars as all steppe nomads had some iranian "blood'' and were influenced by iranian to some degree.This doesn't mean they were iranics. Where do you come off to think that I believe they are Iranians?  Bulgarians are a mix of many different peoples, but thei biggest influence today is the Slavs.  I didnt mention anywhere that they are Iranians, I said that Old Bulgar and even Bulgar today has words that are found even in remote peoples (some numbering less than a million) living over 3,000 Miles away in the Pamir Mountains of Afghanistan-Tajikistan-Pakistan.  If u read some objective history books, u'll find that their language was turkic, as well as their appearance, and social stratification. Well if you actually read something on the website, it also makes references to Turkish words used as well. And if u compare polish or russian and especially ucrainian to iranic languages, u'll find many more quite obvious similarities. Many toponymus all over eastern europe are unquestionably of iranian origin. Well I found one similarity talking to my Bulgarian friend.  The name "Vladmir" means King of Cities or King of a territory.  Vlad can be translated to Vilayat (province or territory), and Mir as King.

Vilayet whas used by the ottomans to refer a "province" an example "Arnavut vilayet" wich means "Province/vilayet of albania"

IT HAS NOTHING TODO WITH VLADIMIR!

 

Originally posted by zelda It's Salat in Arabic. My point was that Turkish, Persian and Arabic words that are common in South Slavic languages are from the Ottomans. I didn't say I was sure, but that is what comes to my mind when i think about the origins of these words.

Once again-no it doesn't( at least concerning iranian).There were slavic-iranian close contacts way before ottoman conquest.However, it is true that there is a number of turkish words in south slavic languages...

Originally posted by Socrates Originally posted by Afghanan Where do you come off to think that I believe they are Iranians?  Bulgarians are a mix of many different peoples, but thei biggest influence today is the Slavs.  I didnt mention anywhere that they are Iranians, I said that Old Bulgar and even Bulgar today has words that are found even in remote peoples (some numbering less than a million) living over 3,000 Miles away in the Pamir Mountains of Afghanistan-Tajikistan-Pakistan.  No ,slavic influence is not that significant.They�re mainly of east mediteranian stock.This means that they assimilated the natives, like all south slavs did.As for those ��3000 miles words��-u�ll find a whole heap of them in serbian-and in south-slavic in general.They can be found also in english and other ��western�� languages which makes them ��4000-5000 miles words�� Iranian influence reaches further then bulgaria.Give me some of those commonly used words from afghanistan,tajikistan and pakistan and i�ll find u parallels in serbian. Btw, maybe u don�t know, but slavs lived near and with scythians\sarmatians\alans for more then a millenium.All linguists agree that their influence on slavic languages was significant.Like bog ( in iranian means good, in slavic it means god) or ray �paradise.So, what u need is a more striking iranian\bulgar parallel.Like my examples from serbian (azdaha and urosh)-something unique.

If you actually read the website you would see its not the common words that are that striking, and its not with Persian that the website is trying to make a similarity with, its with remote Eastern Iranian languages of the Pamirs and Hindu Kush Mountains.  They dont speak Persian there.

Actually, i did read it.And it only further confused me.

 

Theres a very easy way to not confuse yourself, and that is to not to make preconcieved notions about a post without even reading the content.  NO where was I trying to say that Bulgarians are Iranians , nor did I have any agenda to prove that. 

 

Well I found one similarity talking to my Bulgarian friend.  The name "Vladmir" means King of Cities or King of a territory.  Vlad can be translated to Vilayat (province or territory), and Mir as King.  You see, this is what happens when u do not have any knowledge of slavic languages and  jump to conclusions.VLADIMIR in russian means the ruler of the world ( MIR means world in russian and some verb form of VLAD means to rule).In serbian (south slavic) Vladimir means something like the one who preserves peace �or the ruler of peace-if u take it by the word (VLADATI-to rule, MIR-peace).Here�s some similar examples: BRANIMIR-( braniti-to defend)-the defender of peace; BORIMIR-the one who fights for peace; RATOMIR-the one who enters in war for peace etc,etc. As u can see, it�s very easy to manipulate linguistics-but only to some extent-any skilled and objective linguist would reject your etymology as false.

That wasnt my etymology that was my friends, so I guess he is wrong.  On a sidenote, wouldnt that make Vlad the Impaler an oxymoron? 

There is another interesting thing also about the name Vladimir.  In Arabic it can be translated to:  Vlad e Mir (Son of the Great/King).

 

 

 

 

If you actually read the website you would see its not the common words that are that striking, and its not with Persian that the website is trying to make a similarity with, its with remote Eastern Iranian languages of the Pamirs and Hindu Kush Mountains.  They dont speak Persian there.

Well,if u tried hard enough, u could find the same parallels between german and those languages u mention-i'd say that's even more striking.

Theres a very easy way to not confuse yourself, and that is to not to make preconcieved notions about a post without even reading the content.  NO where was I trying to say that Bulgarians are Iranians , nor did I have any agenda to prove that.

I was too hasty to make early assumptions...and i understood u when u said so the first time...My posts were aimed more toward that silly (now there's an understatement) bulgarian propaganda so desperate to prove that they weren't turkics-and as u saw for yourself-they are even ready to suggest that medieval historians were conspirators who deliberately portraited them as turkics instead of iranics...when those same historians couldn't care less who they were...they were simply writing of what they saw and of tales they heard... 

That wasnt my etymology that was my friends, so I guess he is wrong.  On a sidenote, wouldnt that make Vlad the Impaler an oxymoron?  There is another interesting thing also about the name Vladimir.  In Arabic it can be translated to:  Vlad e Mir (Son of the Great/King).

Well, i was a bit surprised with your vilayet example...u don't strike me as being that superficial.

On a sidenote, wouldnt that make Vlad the Impaler an oxymoron? 

Well, i don't know his full name...if it's just vlad-then no it wouldn't.Besides, i don't know if it's derived from vladimir- u should ask some romanian guy.

There is another interesting thing also about the name Vladimir.  In Arabic it can be translated to:  Vlad e Mir (Son of the Great/King).

I don't see how that could come to slavic -with ottoman conquest?-but the name is attested as early as early medievals.I think it's more likely to be connected to scandinavian valdimar\valdemar.

It seems south slavic(serbo-croatian at least) is more influenced by iranian then i presumed.It could very well be it's due to scytho-sarmatian close contacts with slavs in general; although, as i said, there are unique examples that could be connected to original serbs and croats...

Zagros also noted similarities in appearance of some kurdish and slavic children...but  he'll explain it a lot better...if he wants to of course...

Edited by Socrates

Sorry that I haven't written here earlier (actually, I forgot about this topic)! And I don't have any time right now too - I'm in lectures in the uni and the assistant's gonna kill me!
Just to note one thing, which Socrates obviously didn't understand (or didn't want to?) - When I was saying that most of the Arab and Armenian chroniclers probably make mistakes, I was ironic. And that's obvious if you have even the least knowledge in this particular thing - most of these chroniclers mention the Bulgars (also eventually the Slavs - Sakaliba?) as different separate people than the Turkic.
Sorry, but I don't have time right now to read more! I hope I'll be able to come by and answer better soon!

II. PROTO-BULGARIAN RUNIC INSCRIPTIONS

1. Historical Data

Thirty years ago there were no reliable data whether the Asparuh Bulgars had their own alphabet. Since then, a multiplicity of inscriptions written in peculiar characters were discovered in the most important areas of the Balkan Peninsula, that were once were settled by them. Some of these inscriptions were carved on the walls of the first Bulgarian capital Pliska, others were discovered in Madara, in the villages of Krepcha (Targovishte district), Ravna (Provadia district), Popina (Silistra district), and Bjala and Asparuhovo (Varna district). Particularly rich are the finds from the village Murfatlar in the Northern Dobrudja. Dozens of inscriptions of this type were found there.

These inscriptions are most common for North East Bulgaria, i.e. exactly in the areas once most densely populated by the Asparuh Bulgars and which in the VIII-IX century formed the central area of the first Proto-Bulgarian Empire. Isolated inscriptions of that type were found outside this territory - for example in the village of Shudikovo (Eastern Serbia) and on the island of Pakujul lui Soare in Romania. Another alphabet bear inscriptions to the south of the Balkans mountains: in the village of Sitova (Plovdiv district), in the city of Parvomai and in the village Krushevo (Demir Hissar district). As this second alphabet is not attested in the earliest Proto-Bulgarian centres one can assume that it was of local importance and was developed parallel to the writing used in the central Bulgarian areas.

The early Middle Ages were a very interesting period in the history of the alphabets. Various alphabets developed at different places of Eastern Europe at that time, some of them later spread at thousands of kilometres by the large migrations of peoples. During this period in in Caucasus and in its bordering areas were developed almost simultaneously quite different alphabets  - the Armenian alphabet, the Georgian alphabet, the alphabet of the Caucasian Albanians, the Alanian and Kassogian alphabets, as well as the special alphabet of the inscription from the ruins of Humarin. In the areas to the north of Romania was developed the writing of the so called Seklers and even later - the special runic letters of the treasure from Nagy Saint Miklos. Far to the east at the same time appeared two other writings - the Manihean alphabet that was characteristic of the former Sogdiana, and even further to the east - the Orchono-Enissean writing which reached the areas next to China.

In this sea of writings it is not easy to determine the exact position of the inscriptions discovered in Pliska, Madara and in other VII-IX c. Bulgarian settlements. That is why in the first decades of their discovery the researchers compared them mechanically with most diverse Alphabets: the Orchono-Enissean Turkic alphabet, the Seklerian one from Hungary, the Gothic runic writing, the inscriptions from the ruins of Humarin, etc. The result of the comparing was that none of them could help in deciphering the inscriptions from Pliska, Madara and Murfatlar.

The concentration of the inscriptions to the areas once settled by the Asparuch Bulgars clearly shows they were left by the founders of the Bulgarian state. This interpretation is confirmed by the fact that the same characters were discovered on the territory of the former Kubrat Bulgaria.

II. PROTO-BULGARIAN RUNIC INSCRIPTIONS

2. Details about the Largest Finding ot Proto-Bulgarian Runic Inscriptions

More than thirty years ago in the small village of Murfatlar (today Bessaraby) in Northern Dobrudja were discovered inscriptions, written in unknown writing - different from the Greek, from the Cyrillic and from the Glagolic alphabet. They came from a former spiritual centre - today lifeless, as attested by the four rock churches. A bronze bronze rosette with fourteen characters of the same unknown writing was discovered almost at the same time in Preslav.

A number of Bulgarian and foreign scholars became immediately interested in the problem. Acad. V. Beshevliev visited the village in Dobrudja and took pictures of large section of the inscriptions there. The Romanian historians Ion Barnia and Pavel Diakonu reported these finds in the magazine "Dacia". The Polish scientist Edward Triarsky undertook the attempt to interpret part of the inscriptions and published a special study over on this question. Thus from a Bulgarian, the problem of the writings in Northern Dobrudja became international, with scholars from several Eastern European countries involved in working on it (see the bibliographical information in Supplements 3, 4, 5).

Notwithstanding the great interest, the interpretation of the writing of Murfatlar proved difficult. So far we could be confident only about the date of the inscriptions. According to opinion of the researchers they were produced during the epoch immediately after the adoption of Christianity in Bulgaria - the end of the IXth and the beginning of the Xth century. The dating is based, first, on the fact that part of the inscriptions were carved on the walls of small rock churches, where inscriptions with Cyrillic letters are also to be found. They were written during the epoch immediately after the christianisation of the Bulgarians  - only this could explain the symbiosis between the two writings. Secondly, the Cyrillic inscriptions from Murfatlar  also contain characters characteristic to the other, non-Cyrillic writing. The "inclusion" of non-Cyrillic letters into the Cyrillic inscriptions took place at the time when the use of Cyrillic was still in its embryonic stage. There is no other reliable explanation for that symbiosis. Both writings were in use at the same time until only one of the them - the Cyrillic writing, continued to exist.

The finds of Murfatlar lead to a still little known period, a period when the Slavic alphabet made its first appearance and when besides it existed other, arrived from elsewhere and already disappeared alphabet. The mixing of Slavic and not Slavic characters in the inscriptions from the old churches in Murfatlar is hardly coincidental, and it would be appropriate to clarify the origin of the already disappeared other writings, in order to reveal clearer the secret of the Slavic alphabet.

Let us look at some interesting examples from Murfatlar, which show the influence of a still unknown writing in an unknown language on the Slavic inscriptions and which in some places lead to mixing of Slavic with non-Slavic words. Here are some special characters, which are appear among the Slavic letters: 

There are two inscriptions, numbered 63 and 63a in the collection of Barnia and Shtefanescu, which are not noticeable by their special letters, but which contain many apparently non-Slavic words, mixed with Slavic words, and which render the text difficult to understand.

First of the inscriptions reads:

ZHUPAN I IMAET GEORGE ONC TEBE TAM ESTEK KRAIN I REZHET,

and the second:

A TONAGN IZ POLOU TUBA OBASA ES APE.

Beside the second inscription, which contains the special words "tongan", "obasa", "es", "ape" and "tuba", is drawn a bird, which, according to the opinion of the previous researcher, was connected to the word "tongan" - meaning most likely "falcon" or "hawk". The inscription will be translated in the sixth paragraph of this section, here we want to lay stress on the strong admixture of non-Slavic characters and words - most probably the result of a Proto-Bulgarian influence. This influence is felt both in the language and in the writing, which although Cyrillic, differs from the Slavic traditions and is in many places is a mixture of Cyrillic and non-Cyrillic characters. How strong was the influence of this factor can be seen from the more than thirty inscriptions, written from the start to the end in specific yet not interpreted characters. They show quite clearly that during the IX-X c. AD a Proto-Bulgarian runic writing was still in use in our lands parallel to the Slavic one. Altogether, the Romanian, Bulgarian and Polish publications about Murfatlar contain 26 inscriptions of this interesting type. The rest are still inaccessible to the Bulgarian researchers, because of the difficulties imposed from the Romanian side. But if even incomplete, the material available allows us to draw a number of important conclusions.

8. The Proto-Bulgarian Inscriptions from Old (Kubrat) Bulgaria and from the area of the Imeon mountains

Of special importance for the correct interpretation of Proto-Bulgarian inscriptions is the fact that similar inscriptions were found in the areas of the former Kubrat Bulgaria. They appear in every big centre, settled by the Proto-Bulgarians, and they cover a large area between the central courses of Don and Kuban rivers. Supplements 4 and 5 contain all finds of this type. Here are some particularly characteristic examples:

 
In the first of the three inscriptions discovered in Sarkel, at the river Don (see Supplement 4, inscription 1), practically all characters have counterparts from the Proto-Bulgarian inscription from Bulgaria. The second character coincides with the Proto-Bulgarian character in the inscriptions from Krepcha and Ravna, the rest are still better known - similar characters frequently occur in the inscriptions from Murfatlar and Pliska. But the most interesting in this inscription is probably the character, which resembles the Cyrillic letter SHT (). It is the earliest example of the use of a character of this type. As the inscriptions from Ukraine and North Caucasus are older than those from Bulgaria, it can be assumed that they represent an archaic version of the Proto-Bulgarian writing. But the history of the Proto-Bulgarian bibliography does not end with these finds from former Kubrat Bulgaria.

A particularly old inscription of this type was discovered near Imeon, it contains only six characters:

Although short this inscription is nevertheless indicative and has priority in the study of the Proto-Bulgarian alphabet. All its characters have parallels both from Kubrat Bulgaria and from the territory of Bulgaria. Especially the first, fourth, fifth and sixth character have close analogies in Kubrat Bulgaria and in our lands. The Proto-Bulgarian alphabet has very old traditions, its old character alphabet is confirmed by the fact that in Kubrat Bulgaria writings of that type are to be found on various articles - weapons, amphorae, water jugs, and even spindles:

The first inscriptions is written in old Bulgarian runic characters, the other one, containing both runic characters (for example the first character) and Greek letters, reads quite clearly: OI ANDET E (see V. Drachuk, On the road of the millennia, Moscow, 1971, S, 223). (The Greek letter H (eta) was read in very early times as E, only later it became to express I. Therefore the inscription  must be read not as OI ANDET I, but OI ANDET E). It can be translated with the help of the eastern Iranian languages as "MY DEAREST THIS SPINDLE". On another spin weight, likewise discovered by V. Drachuk (Op.cit., p. 223), is written with Proto-Bulgarian characters the following expression "OF KUJA THE SPINDLE".

 
It is interesting that the letter ZH ()is written in the same way as in Murfatlar. The letter E is similar to that from Murfatlar as well as to that from the monogram of Kubrat.

These assorted finds point out that the runic writing was used not only in the spiritual but in the everyday life as well. There were other people, besides the priests and the clerks, who knew and used this writing.

. PROTO-BULGARIAN INSCRIPTIONS IN GREEK LETTERS

3. The Golden Cup of Friendship

The inscription from Nagy Saint Miklos is the second largest inscription in the Proto-Bulgarian language with Greek letters. All translation attempts in the past were based on the Turkic languages. Perhaps this was the reason why the inscription remained practically untranslated. It can be safely stated that science paid a very high price for this blind faith - 70 years of arduous research work could not produce a convincing translation. Only a year ago the Turkologist Baichorov rejected all previous translation attempts as completely groundless and tried to arrange the words of the inscription in a completely new pattern which, however, proved likewise little convincing.

The inscription from Nagy Saint Miklos, as well as that from Preslav, mentiones two Proto-Bulgarian dignitaries - BOILA ZOAPAN and BOITAUL ZOAPAN:

BOILA ZOAPAN TESI DUGETOIGI BOITAUL
ZOAPAN TAGROGI ITZIGI TAISI

TAGROGI leads to the Sumerian root DINGIR - God, of which was derived a multiplicity of spiritual terms, including a wish for health (tagra in Pamir) and royal sceptre (takra in Old Syrian) among others. In our case TAGROGI meant most likely an oath, vow. The next word ITZIGI means 'holy' from the ancient root IS, which in many languages (for example in Sanskrit) meant God, light. The Tuvians still call the holy sacrifice IZIK, ISHIG is the sun shine in some Pamirian and Caucasian languages, for the Indo Iranian peoples IS and ISI were words for holiness since earliest times. Therefore, the expression TAGROGI ITSIGI contained a combination of the type TAGAROX ISHIG (sacred vow), developed most likely on Iranian base. The repeated case ending -I is particularly typical for the eastern Iranian and to a certain degree for the Celtic languages.

The last word of the inscription - TAISI, is likewise very characteristic. Nobody tried to interpret this word yet probably because such a word is missing in the Turkic languages. It is, however, still to be found in some Iranian languages, where the epilogue TAISI means "in the name of", "in the honour of", "because of". As an epilogue, the specific expression TAISI is placed after the word it explains. Thus the expression TAGROGI ITSIGI TAISI can be translated as AS A SIGN OF THE SACRED OATH. It is interesting that one finds a similar epilogue in some Caucasian languages, for example in Chechen, where it sounds as "taihe". The whole inscription is translated as:

BOILA ZOAPAN TESI DUGETOIGI
BOITAUL ZOAPAN TAGROGI ITZIGI TAISI

BOILA ZOPAN HAS GIVEN YOU THE CUP
AS A SIGN OF THE SACRED OATH

Here is the explanation of the rest of the words:

BOILA SOAPAN - name and title in nominative. The title is Iranian.
TESI - Iranian (Pamirian) form for the Dative of the word TES (a cup, glass) with the ending I, characteristic for the Pamir languages.
DUGETOIGI=DUGE-TUGI - an eastern Iranian expression derived from the verb DUGE (to give) and the pronominal form TUGE (you). Also possible is the combination DUGE TUK with the suffix for past tense (TUK), which is characteristic for example for the Ishkashimi language in Pamir.
BOITAUL ZOAPAN - construction in nominative.
TAGROGI - Iranian dative of TAGAROH with the ending -I.
ITZIGI - Iranian dative of ISHIG with the ending -I.
TAISI - Iranian epilogue, which means "as a sign of", "because of".

The golden drinking cup with Greek inscription from the gold treasure of Nagy Saint Miklos is a very interesting article in both linguistic and cultural points of view. It was a gift from a Proto-Bulgarian dignitary to another dignitary as a symbol of a sacred oath. In the area the Proto-Bulgarians originate from, there existed a custom known as "fraternization". The main feature of that custom was a sacred drinking vessel, and the blood drops of the fraternizing in it sealed the eternal brotherhood.

All points that the inscription from Nagy Saint-Miklos is connected with such a ritual. There is a sacred oath between two men. On that occasion one gave to the other a golden cup. The cup was connected with the oath, it was a pledge for the oath. The fraternization oath, that age-old custom of our people, was still to be found until the last century under the Bulgarian sky.

The root of this custom goes back into the centuries. It already existed in the Proto-Bulgarian epoch as shown by the find from Nagy Saint Miklos.

. PROTO-BULGARIAN INSCRIPTIONS IN GREEK LETTERS

 

http://www.kroraina.com/pb_lang/index.html