Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

The History of Bulgaria

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 29>
Author
Balkh-Aryan View Drop Down
Earl
Earl
Avatar

Joined: 12-Mar-2008
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 256
  Quote Balkh-Aryan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: The History of Bulgaria
    Posted: 20-Mar-2008 at 16:15
If You have no arguments except to repeate again and again "bulgars was a turcik tribe", You better stop. The chuvash people was our neighbours and friends, but they never been bulgarians. Today's bulgars in Tatarstan are these, who succeed to keep their own name (in wrong fonetic version), but lost their language, not us. Between 10th and 13th century A.D. they was so strongly turkisied, because of a lot of kipchak and oghuz settlements, so they became a minority in their own country. They wrote their own about this events in "Jagfar tarihi" if You ever read this amazing medieval book. So, in some point of view, they are bulgarians (half geneticly, but not linguistically) and turks meanwhile. They wish too much to prove that proto-bulgarian language was a turcik one, so they can not realize they disprove this version in their own books. By the way Ib'n Fadlan wrotes who they are, before the turcik settlements. So, learn more and then talk. Yes, the khazars spoke a similar language, but the ordinary people, not the turkish aristokracy in the Kaganat. because the ordinary people in the Kaganat was from sarmato-caucasian origin. There's a lot of studies about the genetic origin of the khazarians. This origin appears to the caucasian kassogi mixed with sarmatians. the turcik was just a ruling class. Moreover that the most of population in the Kaganat was native bulgarians. Learn more and stop to repeat nonsenses.
By the way, I have nothing against the turks. I have friends turks and they are very nice people. But it is not a reason to change the historical and ethnographical facts.
Be healthy!
Todor Panayotov/Balkh-Aryan
P.S. Why nobody of you, guys, not dare to sign with his own name??? Are you afraid of something/ somebody? If You have a knowledge to prove your vision, do it as a man. Not behind a nick-names.

UPDATE YOUR KNOWLEDGE
Back to Top
Sarmat View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 31-May-2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3113
  Quote Sarmat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Mar-2008 at 16:36
What are you arguments?
Saying that some Slavic words are not Slavic but Sumerian etc. you want to prove that Bulgarians were not Turkic?
 
Now you started to cite Jagfar tarihi, which is a forgery not taken seriously by any respected historian; but you are even not familiar enough with this fake "source" which contrary to your assertion calls proto Bulgars Turkic.
 
IMO you would have more credibility by citing Lord of the Rings rather than Jagfar tarihi and similar stuff.
 
Remain healthy and succesful !
Σαυρομάτης
Back to Top
Balkh-Aryan View Drop Down
Earl
Earl
Avatar

Joined: 12-Mar-2008
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 256
  Quote Balkh-Aryan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Mar-2008 at 16:52
Sarmat 12, please, don't radiculate me!
I just wrote some of our terms for bloodship. As I wrote THERE IS NOT MUCH SLAVIC TERMS LIKE THIS. I did't said there's not at whole. But You've got to admit that the most of this terms are not slavic and not turcik. Am I right or not? So, where do they came from?
About Shumer, it's not very difficult for the most of nations if they investigate carefully their origin to goes back to Shumer. It is not so difficult as it seams to you. By the way, if You need to go earlier than Shumer - please, for example the most of european neolitic cultures are earlier than shumerian. But it is very unsure to recognize some ethnos in their face, because there is no written documents.
I see here some pan-slavic and pan-turanic mania, to fabricate slavish and turcik tribes, even there is not that kind of tribes. So, may be Irish and Bavarian are turcik too??? Because, not me, but they wrote in their ancient and early medieval chronicles about the people called "Fir (the tribe) Bolg" and "Balger", which was migrated from the Middle East  at the time of the persian king Kirus the Great, and crossing the continent goes, one part - to bavaria, and another to southern Galia, Belgica and the isle of Ireland. Is this funny? Pleace, be serious! If You don't wanna learn something don't  pull another people. This is infantile. Wish You well!
Balkh-Aryan

UPDATE YOUR KNOWLEDGE
Back to Top
Balkh-Aryan View Drop Down
Earl
Earl
Avatar

Joined: 12-Mar-2008
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 256
  Quote Balkh-Aryan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Mar-2008 at 17:34
Originally posted by Sarmat12

Nonsense. In fact some of the name you posted are Slavic: Tudor, Soian, Yavor, Grod, Zapryan, Penko etc. all these are Slavic names, why do you have to go to India and Shumer?
 
In Russian there are: brat, matka, sestra, shurin, dever, deda (grandfather) etc. Don't make this ridiculous conclusions by attributing Slavic word to Ancient Shumer etc.
 
May be you should look for the origins of Bulgarians in the outer space perhaps they are even more Ancient than Shumer Thumbs%20Down
 
Be healthy!

Of course, you have some. As an indoeuropean nation you should have some of them. But all the similarities between us are in result exactly of these origin. But, don't tell me, please this are slavic words, because this words are in use also in Pamir and Caucas by people which never been slavic. And this terms are in use from the deep antiquity., when the slavic group of the indoeuropean race wasn't formed yet. You may say, "Thank You" for example, about we give you our cultural heritage, as we told you "Thank You" about the liberation in 1878. (Never mind of the political ignorants in our and your country, which was in conflict.) But I know very well You will never do it. Why? Why You need to produce us turks (and because there is no kind of turkish origin in today's bulgarian people, this is a very good explaination to steal our culture, which you know very well to who's people belongs.) or slavs, if it is easy visible we are not any kind of this? I understand, is is very uncomfortable for the Great Russians to explain how  they  became a civilized people  because  of the acceptation of christianity  from (today's)  small Bulgaria. You should be the first and the best, and You need to  reject any information which  is possible to deny this version. I am really sorry about our dissolved connections, but if you want to have friends, you must respect them, never mind how large is their country today.
UPDATE YOUR KNOWLEDGE
Back to Top
Bulldog View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800
  Quote Bulldog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Mar-2008 at 18:33
Balkh-Aryan
There's no turkish or altaic correspondences, parities and counterparts.
 
Modern day Bulgarian is not a Turkic language, why would it have any Turkic or Altaic grammar...
 
 
Balkh-Aryan
Not much slavish too.
 
Shocked
Are you joking? you cannot be serious, for somebody claiming to have studied Bulgarians for how ever many year you have to state Bulgarian has not much to do with Slavic is preposterous.
 
 
 

Bulgarian (Български)

Bulgarian is a Southern Slavic language with about 12 million speakers mainly in Bulgaria, but also in Ukraine, Macedonia, Serbia, Turkey, Greece, Romania, Canada, USA, Australia, Germany and Spain. Bulgarian is mutually intelligible with Macedonian, and fairly closely related to Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian and Slovenian.

 
Bulgarian is a Slavic language, not Iranic, Akkadian, Sumerian or Turkic.
 
 
Balkh-Aryan
There's not from where to come.
Guys, You've got to realize at last, that the bulgarian question is one of the most complicated problems in the historiography and ethnology, before to talk so surely.
 
Do you actually believe this?
 
Balkh-Aryan
If You have no arguments except to repeate again and again "bulgars was a turcik tribe", You better stop
 
Then would you care to proove otherwise.
 
Balkh-Aryan
The chuvash people was our neighbours and friends, but they never been bulgarians. Today's bulgars in Tatarstan are these, who succeed to keep their own name (in wrong fonetic version), but lost their language, not us.
 
Our neighbours and friends?
 
So your claiming modern day Bulgarians are Bulgars?
 
Then you claim Tatars lost their language...has it not occured to you that modern day Bulgarians are not speaking Bulgar.
 
 
Balkh-Aryan
Between 10th and 13th century A.D. they was so strongly turkisied, because of a lot of kipchak and oghuz settlements, so they became a minority in their own country.
 
Are you trying to re-write history.
 
The Volga Bulgar Empire was Turkic way before the 10-13th century A.D and the period your referring to was when the region was over-run by the Mongols.
 
 
Balkh-Aryan
They wrote their own about this events in "Jagfar tarihi" if You ever read this amazing medieval book. So, in some point of view, they are bulgarians (half geneticly, but not linguistically) and turks meanwhile.
 
 
Bulgarians of Bulgaria are not Bulgars you don't speak the Bulgar language, have no Bulgar heritage or socio-cultural factors.
 
Please explain what is left of the Bulgars in Bulgaria other than the identity Bulgar-ian.
 
Balkh-Aryan
I see here some pan-slavic and pan-turanic mania
 
I'm just seeing paranoia.
      What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine

Back to Top
Balkh-Aryan View Drop Down
Earl
Earl
Avatar

Joined: 12-Mar-2008
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 256
  Quote Balkh-Aryan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Mar-2008 at 18:35
I realize, as a moderator You are able to restrict my access to this forum and I apologize  about my expression, because I am not here to hurt anybody, but You really made me angry, men. If You decide to do it You will have one knowledgeable man less in the forum, just because I have a different point of view. But if You decide to give me answers, please make it seriously with no radiculation. If You don't accept "Jagfar Tarihi" as a historical source (I agree there is problems with this), You should reject all the sources which are late copies, but not the original. I was use "Jagfar Tarihi" just as a contra argument to the Volga-Bularia teory of the turcik origin of proto-bulgarians, because it is their own book (or creture of F. Nurutdinov, which is most unlikely). I know the book very well. I have it. And I know that in the book is written that bulgars are turks. But it is later. In the beginning, in the "gazi Baraj tarihi", when is quoted "Kadi Kitabi" of seid Jakub and "Hazar tarihi" of Abdullah Ib'n Michail Bashtu is written about the roots and origin of the bulgarian people and in the text these roots according to the cimmerians and massagetae. Isn't it so? And just a lot of time after that comes the huns. Isn't it so? Well who of us don't know well "jagfar Tarihi" (never mind is it a real source or not) me or You? And I have also a lot of sources that You maybe never hear about. So, when You dispute with me,please, be a little bit more accurate and don't ridiculate me. I was watching with a great interest your dispute with barbar. The talking was in high professional level. If You can keep these level now I will be grateful to You. If I don't know something I am not shame to ask about it. If You don't know something, You can ask too, and it will not undermine your authority, I assure You. Because there's no human been who knows everything. That's all.
Be healthy!
Todor Panayotov/Balkh-Aryan
UPDATE YOUR KNOWLEDGE
Back to Top
Sarmat View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 31-May-2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3113
  Quote Sarmat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Mar-2008 at 18:46
Ok, sorry Balkh-Aryan, I might be a little tired of disputing this similar topic again and again. I won't ridicule you any more.
 
Just wanted to add about Jagfar Tarihi. It's another extreme in this context "Pan-Turkic" extreme. They guys simply meant that cimmerican and massagetaes were in fact Turks. Hope you understand what I mean.
 
Thank you
Σαυρομάτης
Back to Top
Balkh-Aryan View Drop Down
Earl
Earl
Avatar

Joined: 12-Mar-2008
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 256
  Quote Balkh-Aryan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Mar-2008 at 20:27
uuuuuuuuuuf! Bulldog, I am so tired to explain one and the same things again and again.
O.K the situation at whole is this:
I the lexical fond:
  1. about 50 % of the words in modern (literary) bulgarian language have slavic parities or counterparts
  2. the rest about 50 % have no parities or counterparts with the slavic languages
  3. and no parities or counterparts with the altaic languages, not only with the turcik
  4. some of these words (in the literary language) have great similarities with the thracian language or/and the scyto-sarmatian and tocharian language (the literari and mostly the dialects); (the slavic languages also have this ralations or some of them);(in other point of view the altaic language also have some scitho-sarmatian influence )
  5. in the modern bulgarian language there is some words (may be about 100) with osmano-turkish, but not old turcik origin, which are in use predominantly in jargons
  6. the old altaic influence in our lexical fond is presented of about 20 words which have predominantly origin by the time of the Great Khaganat and kiptchak's origin too
  7. if these words was a native proto-bulgarian, from where is comming these about 50 % which are not slavic, altaic or thracian kind, but have there high relativities with the east-iranian languages?
II the grammar:
  1. of cource, if today's bulgarian language is a slavic one, it should not have an altaic grammar, but it have a completely different grammar than the slavic languages and this grammar is not altaic. So where does it come from?
  2. grammatically our language (especially the literary one) have much relativities to the ancient thracian (as in lexical fond), but this is a little bit strange, because the thracians was a substrat, conquered (?) by the bulgarian superstrat. 
  3. If the superstrat was assimilated by the substrat, why the superstrat (east iranian bulgarians), still exist in a very high persentage? Why their language is not an official one?
  6. It is absolutely clear that this today's literary language is unnatural in contrast with the dialects (not at whole), so how the thracians rise from the death? How their language became an official if there is no thracians, but the iranian bulgarians exist  very obviously?
  4. the dialects (which suppose to be the real living language) shows much more relativities to the scitho-sarmatian, and especially to the tocharian language. So how they became dialects, but not an official language?
III the anthropology:
 
1. the ancient and modern bulgarians shows the one and the same anthropological look. These look is a tippical mezocephalic and a little bit dolihocephalic.
  2. the thracians shows the same look.
  3. the tocharians also.
  4. the slavic population  is  a mostly  dolihocephallic air
  5. the altaic is mostly brahycephallic air (except the dinlins, for whom is not proven they was altaic population,  linguistically of course, geographicaly they was)
IV DNA Researches:
 
1. the modern bulgarian population shows about 38 % relativies with the local ethnical groups, as greeks, romanians and albanians, which shows the most of bulgarians are probably autochtonic population.
  2. the ancestors of the tocharians in the modern uygurs (speeking an altaic language), tajiks and etc. as also the population in the altai region (where was the dinlins) shows extremely percentage of R1a (which is a tippical for the eastern/"satem" group of indo-aryan nations) in contrast of modern turks from republic of Turkey
   ...and many more questions. I don't think that is necessary to have a controversy here, we just disputing. Isn't it? But try to look a little bit more seriously for that what I am telling You. It is not a result of my own imagination, but of gathered information from a lot of sources of a different kind. I understand many people will dislike this information, but the science is not what we like, but what is truth. Isn't it? I also can't  find answers to some questions, and that's why I write here. You can check this information before to ridiculate me. But, of course it is much more easier to leg and jeer at somebody. Do You really sure You know everything? Because I know very well all this sites and the official version you show me to prove me I am wrong. But yet, Why don't You check the possibility if I am not wrong? So, what will happened after all, if you will find that I am wright?
O.K., may be I am a paranoid man. Is it more important than the truth? Just check.
Todor Panayotov/Balkh-Aryan
UPDATE YOUR KNOWLEDGE
Back to Top
Sarmat View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 31-May-2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3113
  Quote Sarmat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Mar-2008 at 20:56
Wiki says that Bulgarian lexis is overwhelmongly Slavic with only very slight influence of Bulgar language:
 
 
 
Native lexical items

Around three-quarters of the word-stock in the standard, academy dictionaries of Bulgarian, consists of native lexical items. Some 2,000 of these items are directly inherited from proto-Slavonic through Old and Middle Bulgarian. These include much of the most common and basic vocabulary of the language, for example body parts (bulg.: ръка hand) or cardinal numbers (bulg.: две two). The number of words derived from the direct reflexes of proto-Slavonic is more than 20 times greater, accounting for more than 40,000 entries (for example, ръчен manual; двуместен double-place).

The old Bulgar language has otherwise left but only slight traces in Modern Bulgarian. Apart from a small corpus of proper names (for example, Борис Boris; Крум Krum) and military and administrative titles from the time of the First Bulgarian Empire, only a handful of other Bulgar words has survived in Modern Bulgarian. Words which are considered to be almost certainly of Bulgar origin are, for example: бъбрек kidney, бисер pearl, кумир idol, чертог castle. Some of these words even spread to other Slavic languages through Old Church Slavonic.

[edit] Patterns of borrowing

As of the beginning of the 1960s, loanwords stood for some 25% of the word-stock of the standard dictionary of Bulgarian. The two most important sources of borrowing were Latin and Medieval and Modern Greek, each accounting for around one-fourth of all borrowings. French and Turkish (along with Arab and Persian) had a weight each of around 15%, whereas loanwords from Russian accounted for 10% of the borrowings. Lesser but still significant influence was exerted by Italian, German and English.

Peculiarities of Bulgarian grammar are simply expalained by the infulences of other Balkan languages and the existence of Balkan language union:
 
 

Bulgarian grammar is the grammar of the Bulgarian language. The Bulgarian language is a South Slavic language that also is one of the members of the Balkan sprachbund. As such, it shares several grammatical innovations with the other southwest Balkan languages that set it apart from other Slavic languages. These include a sharp reduction in noun inflections; most Bulgarian nouns and adjectives are inflected for number and gender, but have lost noun cases. Bulgarian also has a suffixed definite article, while most other Slavic languages have no definite article at all. Bulgarian has also lost the verb infinitive, while otherwise preserving most of the complexities of the Old Bulgarian verb conjugation system, and has further developed the proto-Slavic verb system to add verb forms to express nonwitnessed, retold, and doubtful (irrealis) actions.

Bulgarian is a part of the Balkan linguistic union, which also includes Greek, Macedonian, Romanian, Albanian and Torlakian dialect of the Serbian language. Most of these languages share some of the above-mentioned characteristics.

Σαυρομάτης
Back to Top
Balkh-Aryan View Drop Down
Earl
Earl
Avatar

Joined: 12-Mar-2008
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 256
  Quote Balkh-Aryan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Mar-2008 at 20:58
Thank You, Sarmat12. I can understand You. I have had the same problems. "Jagfar Tarihi" was not a pan-turkistic source. They was tried to make it. From the other point of view, which is more important - the political result or the truth? You must know "Jagfar Tarihi" was written and rewritten and expanded again and again for a long time. So, it is unusable for the political aims, but it is valuable in an ethnographic and cultural aspect. That's why don't reject it at whole. There is a lot of information (I wrote yet), which is very uncomfortable for the pan-turkists, so it is a sure indicator this book is not just a false. And after all I think mister Farghat Nurutdinov (sorry, Farghat, I just reed some your book, which in my opinion is bla-bla, not  well grounded with facts, only your myths and presumptions. As a bulgarian I have a claim to know better than you who am I actually. That what is sure is the bulgarians never been turks, but you may be are. It is your right.) is not so smart to create a book like this. If he really did it, he is genius and he is able to rewrite the Holy Koran or the Bible. Good luck! 
UPDATE YOUR KNOWLEDGE
Back to Top
Balkh-Aryan View Drop Down
Earl
Earl
Avatar

Joined: 12-Mar-2008
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 256
  Quote Balkh-Aryan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Mar-2008 at 22:09
Originally posted by Sarmat12

Wiki says that Bulgarian lexis is overwhelmongly Slavic with only very slight influence of Bulgar language:
 
 
 
Native lexical items

Around three-quarters of the word-stock in the standard, academy dictionaries of Bulgarian, consists of native lexical items. Some 2,000 of these items are directly inherited from proto-Slavonic through Old and Middle Bulgarian. These include much of the most common and basic vocabulary of the language, for example body parts (bulg.: ръка hand) or cardinal numbers (bulg.: две two). The number of words derived from the direct reflexes of proto-Slavonic is more than 20 times greater, accounting for more than 40,000 entries (for example, ръчен manual; двуместен double-place).

The old Bulgar language has otherwise left but only slight traces in Modern Bulgarian. Apart from a small corpus of proper names (for example, Борис Boris; Крум Krum) and military and administrative titles from the time of the First Bulgarian Empire, only a handful of other Bulgar words has survived in Modern Bulgarian. Words which are considered to be almost certainly of Bulgar origin are, for example: бъбрек kidney, бисер pearl, кумир idol, чертог castle. Some of these words even spread to other Slavic languages through Old Church Slavonic.

[edit] Patterns of borrowing

As of the beginning of the 1960s, loanwords stood for some 25% of the word-stock of the standard dictionary of Bulgarian. The two most important sources of borrowing were Latin and Medieval and Modern Greek, each accounting for around one-fourth of all borrowings. French and Turkish (along with Arab and Persian) had a weight each of around 15%, whereas loanwords from Russian accounted for 10% of the borrowings. Lesser but still significant influence was exerted by Italian, German and English.

Peculiarities of Bulgarian grammar are simply expalained by the infulences of other Balkan languages and the existence of Balkan language union:
 
 

Bulgarian grammar is the grammar of the Bulgarian language. The Bulgarian language is a South Slavic language that also is one of the members of the Balkan sprachbund. As such, it shares several grammatical innovations with the other southwest Balkan languages that set it apart from other Slavic languages. These include a sharp reduction in noun inflections; most Bulgarian nouns and adjectives are inflected for number and gender, but have lost noun cases. Bulgarian also has a suffixed definite article, while most other Slavic languages have no definite article at all. Bulgarian has also lost the verb infinitive, while otherwise preserving most of the complexities of the Old Bulgarian verb conjugation system, and has further developed the proto-Slavic verb system to add verb forms to express nonwitnessed, retold, and doubtful (irrealis) actions.

Bulgarian is a part of the Balkan linguistic union, which also includes Greek, Macedonian, Romanian, Albanian and Torlakian dialect of the Serbian language. Most of these languages share some of the above-mentioned characteristics.


Yes I know all of this, but as I say it is not very correct. For example the quoted as proto-bulgarian words have a different origin.
the quoted words:
1."бъбрек" is a turcik, but not a proto-bulgarian word
2."бисер" is probably altaic, but not a proto-bulgarian too
3. "кумир" has a very old origin which acording to the akkadian "gumirtu' with the same meaning
4. "чертог" is a bulgarian word, which have no a good relations to the altaic languages
5. "ръка" is a slavic word in bulgarian language, but do you know the word "кунка" which is a dialect tippical bulgarian word, with no acordings to the slavic or turcik languages
outher examples:
1. usually the slavic people says "нога, ноги" in bulgarian language there's a form "крак", крака", which is not altaic and definetely not a slavic one
2. the bulgarian words "зид', "шар", "книга","кюпе"(др.бълг.),"чуванчия"(др.бълг.), "къща","кошара","сокачия"(др.бълг.),"хонсар"(др.бълг.),"саракт"(др.бълг.),"тортуна"(др.бълг.), "шегор"(др.бълг.),"вер"(др.бълг.),"имен"(др.бълг.),"теку"(др.бълг.),"така"(др.бълг.),"катър"(др.бълг.),"тох"(др.бълг.),"какай"(др.бълг.),"шиле","ас"(др.бълг.),"угар","кумир","Капище"(др.бълг.),"субиги"..according  directly to Shumer and Akkad.
O.K. let them alone (the shumerian and akkadian). They are tired yet of different relations with turks, georgians, basks and who else not. We have a lot of ralations with the celts, which I will not qoute here, even the dictionary is here in my hand. What about that kind of words like: "чучулига", "минзухар", "пафти", "гургулица", "синигер" and really many many other (find some book of prof. Petar Dobrev, published in the net, You will see much more than I can tell You now).
The macedonian language is not a serbish, but bulgarian dialect. this questian is definated of you politicaly, but not linguisticaly. any linguist can tell you about that.
the old church Slavonic was at first the old Church Bulgarian. So you can look for bulgarian words in your own language before to seek slavic words in the bulgarian language. Smile
the foreign words and influences in the bulgarian language are well known and easy to sence (I mean The greek, latin, turkish, french, german, english and etc.).That's why this a lot of words which are not slavic or turcik can't be explain fith this sort. the grammar is very coservative thing and it need thousends of years to change, because this is the model/a structure of thinking to any national or ethnical group. it doesn't work. The lexic is changing easy for a short time, but grammar needs much more time. It is funny to read a different foreigners writting about our language, but they never know it really, just use a manuals. This is the same if i give to you a wonderful atlas for human anatomy and You try to operate someone with its help. Isn't it funny? LOL
UPDATE YOUR KNOWLEDGE
Back to Top
Balkh-Aryan View Drop Down
Earl
Earl
Avatar

Joined: 12-Mar-2008
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 256
  Quote Balkh-Aryan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Mar-2008 at 22:51
I'd like to see some linguist (but well-known every bulgarian dialects) to stand here and to say "Guys, the bulgarian language is a slavic language." I don't believe that will ever happen if this man realy knows our language. You just have no idea how different are these language one to another, even they have some analogies and similarities. Yes we have a lot of slavic words. do You ever admit the possibility your own and the rest of the slavic languages to received the half of their lexical fond from the bulgarians? What do you know about us except the ordinary textbook information? Do you know we had our common state (under bulgarian rule) and live together between the end of 5th century and the middle of 6th century and again between 626 and 680 A.D. (the time 559 -626 was the time of the avars, which had no demographic, cultural, iconomic and etc. potential enough to survive longer.)?
Do you know how many bulgarian books and priests comes to Russia? Do You ever here about akademic Lihachev, which is a russian and described a medieval Bulgaria as "The state of spirit"? All this theory about the turco-slavic bulgarians doesn't work. Yes we took a part in the Great Khaganat. Nobody ask us do we wont that or not. And it falls. Before to determinate the bulgarian history and origin, look in your own history for bulgarian contributions and influences and You will find they are not a small number. May be you should dislike this, but You will become a little bit more educated, about your own roots.
Have a nice day! Thumbs%20Up
Todor Panayotov/Balkh-Aryan
UPDATE YOUR KNOWLEDGE
Back to Top
Anton View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph


Joined: 23-Jun-2006
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2888
  Quote Anton Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Mar-2008 at 23:07
Ancient Bulgar ethnicity topic starts to be as boring as ethnicity of Alexander. The truth is as usuall somewhere in between. Not only Bulgars had both features -- of upcoming Turkic tribes and rest of Sarmats but they were also mixed with Slavs in the north of Danube and all sorts of different Byzantine nations enslaved during raids in Byzantium.
.
Back to Top
Balkh-Aryan View Drop Down
Earl
Earl
Avatar

Joined: 12-Mar-2008
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 256
  Quote Balkh-Aryan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Mar-2008 at 00:05
Here is some link to Prof. Petar Dobrav works: http://www.salagram.net/VWHEurope.html
http://members.tripod.com/~Groznijat/pb_lang/index.html
http://www.protobulgarians.com/Statii%20ot%20drugi%20avtori/Petar%20Dobrev%20-%20prabaalgars
http://bg.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%98%D0%BC%D0%B5%D0%BE%D0%BD
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgars
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominalia_of_the_Bulgarian_khans
http://www.answers.com/topic/bulgars
http://www.hindunet.com/forum/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=47349&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1
http://panbulgar.16.forumer.com/viewtopic.php?t=3

I post here some more links to works of our historian prof. Petar Dobrev. I don't know are this materials good or bad, but as I know his works it should be O.K. You can see What I mean, because My knowledge and the point of view is a little bit different than his, but it doesn't matter. You can find here what you don't want to believe by my words. As you wish .
Todor Panayotov/Balkh-Aryan
UPDATE YOUR KNOWLEDGE
Back to Top
Balkh-Aryan View Drop Down
Earl
Earl
Avatar

Joined: 12-Mar-2008
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 256
  Quote Balkh-Aryan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Mar-2008 at 02:04
Smile Well, friends, it is really funny but I am standing here alone with a lot of sources against two of the most popular and powerful theories about the origin of the proto-bulgarians in 20th century. And all the people in this forum wants to deny me. Isn't it funny they still can not do it? And I believe the most of You will agree step by step what I am talking about here. You throw at me a lot of your sources which are known to me from a long time, and I feel my self just as the spartian king Leonidus at the Thermopili pass. Smile Because the knowledge is not locked in the textbooks, but it is a condition of mind. Why ask the Bishop if the pope is around...the source of knowledge that is the ancient books and chronics, because the contemporaries of the events supposed to be much more informed than today's professors about the past. I left with the imression that a lot of this "scientists" are not very educated and their diplomas was just a regrettable misunderstanding in their life. Unfortunately all of us was teach by them. So, should we trust them to the end of the way? Until we realize we was mislead? You decide. I did it before a lot of time. Thumbs%20Up
Todor Panayotov/Balkh-Aryan   
UPDATE YOUR KNOWLEDGE
Back to Top
Balkh-Aryan View Drop Down
Earl
Earl
Avatar

Joined: 12-Mar-2008
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 256
  Quote Balkh-Aryan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Mar-2008 at 09:42
The relations between the easter branch of Indo-aryans can be presented for example like this:
 1.slavs                ABCDEFGHIJ
 2.dako-gets          BCDEFGHIJK
 3.thracians              CDEFGHIJKL
 4.cimmerians             DEFGHIJKLM
 5.tocharians                 EFGHIJKLMN
 6.balkh-aryans               FGHIJKLMNO
 7 sarmatians                    GHIJKLMNOP
 8 scithians                          HIJKLMNOPQ
 9. parthians                          IJKLMNOPQL
10.medians                             JKLMNOPQLR
11.persians                              KLMNOPQLRS
So, the genetic relations beetween the slavs and the proto-bulgarians is:"FGHIJ", which is 5 of 10, and it is not a small number. (Well I agree, the slavs have a higher relations with the thracians, than the bulgarians, but we have a higher relations with the cimmerians, than the slavs.) So it is more than the relations between the proto-bulgarians a the turcik tribes, which is for example 2-3 of 10. The scythians and sarmations heve a relations with proto-turks for example 4-5 of 10, and this is a really a high persentage, for people from two different language's families. be happy!
Todor Panayotov/Balkh-Aryan
UPDATE YOUR KNOWLEDGE
Back to Top
Balkh-Aryan View Drop Down
Earl
Earl
Avatar

Joined: 12-Mar-2008
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 256
  Quote Balkh-Aryan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Mar-2008 at 09:50
This example is not an absolute it is just an example. Because I choose 10 letters as easier, is received a result where is no relations between the slavs and the persians, which is not true. You can use this table with more letters, maybe 20 or more. Smile
Todor Panayotov/Balkh-Aryan
UPDATE YOUR KNOWLEDGE
Back to Top
Balkh-Aryan View Drop Down
Earl
Earl
Avatar

Joined: 12-Mar-2008
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 256
  Quote Balkh-Aryan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Mar-2008 at 10:07
The Idea was to show You where the balkh-aryans was in the indo-aryan family. Here is another one shows the relation with the proto-turks. And don't  forget it is just an example.
 1.slavs                 ABCDEFGHIJ
 2.dako-getians      BCDEFGHIJK
 3.thracians               CDEFGHIJKL
 4.cimmerians              DEFGHIJKLM
 5.tocharians                  EFGHIJKLMN
 6.balkh-aryans                FGHIJKLMNO
 7.sarmatians                     GHIJKLMNOP
 8.scythians                          HIJKLMNOPQ
 9.dinlins                                 IJKLMNOPQL
10.huns                                    JKLMNOPQLR
11.proto-turks                            KLMNOPQLRS
I have no claim this table is showing the truth absolutely, more over, the most of these questions are in discus still. I for my own view am not sure there is a very high relations between the dinlins, (for example) and the proto-turks, because of extremely big differences in anthropologycal aspect. Have a nice day!
Todor Panayotov/Balkh-Aryan
UPDATE YOUR KNOWLEDGE
Back to Top
Chilbudios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 11-May-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1900
  Quote Chilbudios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Mar-2008 at 11:39
1. usually the slavic people says "нога, ноги" in bulgarian language there's a form "крак", крака", which is not altaic and definetely not a slavic one
2. the bulgarian words "зид', "шар", "книга","кюпе"(др.бълг.),"чуванчия"(др.бълг.), "къща","кошара","сокачия"(др.бълг.),"хонсар"(др.бълг.),"саракт"(др.бълг.),"тортуна"(др.бълг.), "шегор"(др.бълг.),"вер"(др.бълг.),"имен"(др.бълг.),"теку"(др.бълг.),"така"(др.бълг.),"катър"(др.бълг.),"тох"(др.бълг.),"какай"(др.бълг.),"шиле","ас"(др.бълг.),"угар","кумир","Капище"(др.бълг.),"субиги"..according  directly to Shumer and Akkad.
I am not very knowledgeable in Bulgarian, but from the little I know this seems to be an exaggeration. "Zid" (wall) corresponds to a pan-IE root, existent in other Slavic languages, too. "Koshara" is also pan-Slavic. On other sites I've noticed other words claimed to be proto-Bulgar or whatever but which were present in several other Balkan languages. Here (http://www.kroraina.com/b_lang/ ) Dobrev claims "vatra" to be a proto-Bulgar word, but I know for sure it exists in Romanian and Albanian too with similar meanings (fireplace, the center of the house or of the village), therefore it's more likely a pan-Balkanic word, probably from one of the ancient Balkanic languages. Dobrev amazingly suggests "pita" to be a proto-Bulgar word, a well-known pan-Balkanic term. Do you imagine the Bulgars riding the Balkans sharing the horseback with a hot oven baking pita LOL

Edited by Chilbudios - 21-Mar-2008 at 11:43
Back to Top
Balkh-Aryan View Drop Down
Earl
Earl
Avatar

Joined: 12-Mar-2008
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 256
  Quote Balkh-Aryan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Mar-2008 at 23:27

Две гаплогруппы (E3b1a2-V13 и J2b1-M102) после нескольких последних исследований (Кручиани, 2007) гипотетически можно считать, что в древности могли составлять единую племенную группу, или несколько племен сконцентрированных в районе современной Албании и на территории древних Иллирии и части Фракии. Их пиковые частоты именно там. E3b1a2 в Алабани (Косово) имеет частоту около 32% (и с некторым понижением в Македонии - 18%), а J2b1 в Албании - 17%. Области с пониженными частотами - Македония, Болгария также связана с фракийскими племенами и подвергалась многочисленным вторжениям, вытеснениям со стороны готов, аваров и гунов. Процент J2b1 также достаточно высок в турецкой части Фракии. Можно предположить, что J2b1 гипотетически является "прото-фракийской генетической подписью", вто время как E3b1a2 можно назвать "илирский". Известно также, что население Фракии по сути были смесью из иллирийских и фракийских племен и составляли частью смесь более ранних ИЕ-племен с изрядной примесью местных мирных автохтонных племенных групп. К этим группам, по-моему и относились упомянутые выше гаплогруппы, которые внесли свой веский вклад в генофонд вновь образованных племен. На их долю приходится не меньше половины.

Asen Zlatev1, Milena Ivanova2, Snejina Michailova2, Anastasia Mihaylova2 and Elissaveta Naumova2

(1) University Hospital Alexandrovska, 1 Georgy Sofiisky Street, Sofia, 1431, Bulgaria
(2) Central Laboratory of Clinical Immunology, University Hospital Alexandrovska, 1 Georgy Sofiisky Street, Sofia, 1431, Bulgaria

Received: 15 November 2006 Accepted: 5 May 2007 Published online: 2 June 2007

Abstract Recently Bulgarian Bone Marrow Donors Registry (BBMDR) has been established and since August 2005 it has been a member of Bone Marrow Donors Worldwide. Currently the number of healthy donors included in the BBMDR is relatively low. All donors included in the BBMDR are typed for HLA-A, -B, -DRB loci. Phylogenetic analysis based on HLA allele frequencies shows that Bulgarians were characterized with closest genetic similarity to Macedonians, Greeks, Romanians, Cretans and Sardinians in comparison to the other European and Mediterranean populations. On the contrary the second largest ethnic minoritythe Roma were the closest to the other Roma populations and North Indians. These differences were due to the predominance of alleles and haplotypes that are specific for the Asian and the other Roma populations. These specific genetic profiles in the Bulgarian ethnic minorities justify the need of an adequate representation of minorities in BBMDR. Future directions for BBMDR development are discussed, including an increase of the total number of donors and these for ethnic minorities, as well the enhancement of the level of resolution of the HLA typing for the donors in the registry.
Keywords Bulgarian Bone Marrow Donor Registry - Bulgarians - HLA alleles - HLA haplotypes - Roma
HLA polymorphism in Bulgarians defined by high-resolution typing methods in comparison with other populations.

Ivanova M, Rozemuller E, Tyufekchiev N, Michailova A, Tilanus M, Naumova E.

Central Laboratory of Clinical Immunology, Medical University, Sofia, Bulgaria.

In the present study we analyzed for the first time HLA class I and class II polymorphisms defined by high-resolution typing methods in the Bulgarian population. Comparisons with other populations of common historical background were performed. Most HLA-A, -B, -DRB alleles and haplotypes observed in the Bulgarian population are also common in Europe. Alleles and haplotypes considered as Mediterranean are relatively frequent in the Bulgarian population. Observation of Oriental alleles confirms the contribution of Asians to the genetic diversity of Bulgarians. The use of high-resolution typing methods allowed to identify allele variants rare for Europeans that were correlated to specific population groups. Phylogenetic and correspondence analyses showed that Bulgarians are more closely related to Macedonians, Greeks, and Romanians than to other European populations and Middle Eastern people living near the Mediterranean. The HLA-A,-B,-DRB1 allele and haplotype diversity defined by high-resolution DNA methods confirm that the Bulgarian population is characterized by features of southern European anthropological type with some influence of additional ethnic groups. Implementation of high-resolution typing methods allows a significantly wider spectrum of HLA variation to be detected, including rare alleles and haplotypes, and further clarifies the origin of Bulgarians.

PMID: 12542743 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

Division of Clinical and Transplantation Immunology, Medical University, Sofia, Bulgaria.

We describe for the first time the use of PCR based techniques to analyze the MHC class II polymorphism of the Bulgarian population. The present study provides the HLA-DRB, DQB1 allele frequencies in 116 Bulgarian individuals and DQA1 alleles frequencies in 100 subjects. DNA from these individuals was typed for DRB and DQB1 typed by the PCR-Allele Specific Amplification (PCR-ASA) method and DQA1 by PCR followed by hybridization using Sequence Specific Oligonucleotides (PCR-SSO). Allele and haplotype frequencies and linkage disequilibria are computed by the standard methods used for the XIth International Histocompatibility Workshop. The highest frequencies are 0.159, 0.109 and 0.085 for DRB1*1101, DRB1*1601 and DRB1*1301 respectively. Among the eight DQA1 alleles detected, DQA1*0501 (0.344) is found to be much more frequent than the two most frequent alleles DQA1*0102 (0.225) and DQA1*0101 (0.151). Twelve DQB1 alleles are found and three of them, DQB1*0301 (0.280), DQB1*0502 (0.153) and DQB1*0201 (0.133) showed the highest frequencies. The haplotype DRB1*1101-DQA1*0501-DQB1*0301 (0.079) predominate clearly, followed by DRB1*1601-DQA1*0102-DDQB1*0502 (0.055) and DRB1*0101-DQA1*0101-DQB1*0501. These results indicate that the Bulgarian population is characterized by features representative of the European anthropological type with a substantial contribution from the Southern Belt of Europe. The frequency of the proposed Slavic Haplogroup R1a1 ranges to only 14.7% in
Bulgaria.

Bulgarians:

- East Mediterranean 60% (източносредиземноморски тип - траки)
- Neodanubian 20% (новодунавски тип - славяни*)
- Dinaric 10% (тип динарик - илири)
- Nordic 5% (нордически тип - скандинавци) 
- Turanid 5% (туранид - тюрки)

Any comments?
UPDATE YOUR KNOWLEDGE
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 29>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.078 seconds.