Sorry, the links I posted are not active. I don't know why. But You can see the report about the genetic structure about the bulgarian people on the previous page, and also any information in the net about the haplogroup J2b1 which is an eastern mediteranean extremely old haplogroup (according to the thracians and proto-thracian/pellasgian population, but not slavic or turkic. The high persentage of these group in the teritory of a modern Turkey is explained with frigian and lidian, and may be hittitian population in Anatolia. this haplogroup is not typical for the turkic nations.). In the genetic datebase of modern bulgarian nation the turanian genus is only about 5 %, and the slavic - just 14,7 %. Easterm mediteranean element is presented by more than 60 %. You can also search for bulgarian folk-music, if You wish. It preserved very archaic elements (as a combination of characteristic rhythms and harmonies), non tipiccal for the slavic or turkic folk music , except some which they accept by us, or some extremely ancient universal motives. I will post again more information, but unfortunately now I am too busy. See You again.
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.
(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.
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)
When the Genetic science speaks, even the Gods keep silence. And the next time when You wish to talk to me, better try to learn something, then to debate remark spiteful and self-reliant. Because You just think You have some knowledge about us, but this is illusion. If You have some interest I can tell You an information about the deep antiquity, which You can not find in any manuals, encyclopaedias and textbooks, and not even Wiky. This information can turn your views and knowledge about the ancient times at whole. But this is if You really want to learn something, not just to show in the net how educated (and stupid) You are. The choice is yours...
You seem to have constructed an alternate reality, it seems you've actually convinced yourself into believing you are correct while everybody else is wrong. You have the audacity to call well respected historians and scholors idiots while self-proclaiming yourself as the expert in this field.
All your posts fail to change;
- Bulgars were according to most historians Turkic and spoke a Turkic language
- Modern-day Bulgarians speak Slavic not Bulgar
- Modern-day Bulgarians have little in common with Bulgars other than the Bulgar identity
What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine
Your the one who tried to convince me modern day Bulgarians retained no heritage from the Bulgars. I call Bulgarians Bulgars and you have a problem, I say Bulgarians arn't Bulgars like you wanted and you still have a problem.
Why don't you explain the situation fully.
Edited by Bulldog - 23-Mar-2008 at 18:15
What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine
1.Did the Turkish shamans/priests ever been called "Kolobar/Kolobri"? NO. In contrast bulgarian and thracian was called "kolobar". 2.Every pictures and finding skulls of the early medieval bulgarians shows us typical europoids. All known early turks was belonging to the mixed race with high percentage of mongoloid race. 3.The most discovered proto-bulgarian words have no turkish relation. This which are related, have their analogs also to ancient middle east and sarmatian languages. 4.The kingdom of Balhara/Bahlika/Balhika/Bactria is mentioned ever since "Vedas", "Mahabharata", "Puranas", "Upanishades", "Bagavadgita", "Panchatantra" and etc. In the scientiest's opinion the evidences in "Mahabharata" are between 13th and 8th century B.C. 5.Ib'n Fadlan calls the Volga-Bulgars "sakaliba", which meens "from the saka people". This was happened in the beginning of 10th century before the turkic settlements. He describe this people as tall people with a scrub beard, very non typical to the early turks. He described also the different turkic tribes in the Middle Asia and Bashkortostan. The cotrast is obvious. 6.The early Armenian sources also distinguished proto-bulgarians from the turkic tribes. 7.The finds of our material culture between 5th and 9th century are also different than the turkic, even we also was in the Great Khaganat and lived for a time in the steppes. 8.The official titles of our kings was "Kanasubigi" NOT "Khan". We also had title "Rih/ Rig/ Rugh", which is "Rex" and it is indo-aryan title. Have ypu ever "Rig"-s??? 9.The mediteranean phisical type was wide-spread in Thracian, Cimmerian and Tocharian, which is one of the most complicated problems in today's anthropologicall science. The presence of this type of 60% in today's Bulgarian people, as the very small percentage of the turanic and slavic types, make your contentions too difficult to prove. 10.if You don't know well the bulgarian language and all its dialect, please, don't tell me we speak a slavic language. In the same way I can tell You the turkish speak chinese, using your method. 11.We have (in the medieval proto-bulgarian language also) too big relations with the languages of thracians and tocharians. Of cource the slavic people also have not less relations with this ancient people, and this is normal. 12.Our grammar is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT then the slavic and turkic grammars. In cotrast of lexic, which is possible to change relatively fast. For changing of the grammar is needed thousand of years. The bulgarian grammar is almost the same with the thracian one. After more than 1500 years. 13.There is no sure evidence that the proto-bulgarians was a turkic tribe. Just suppositions, based on the hypothesis that the proto-bulgarians was huns. This is no proved. 14. The origin of the huns is not proved. It is more Uralic, than Altaic. 15.this respected historians and scholars you quoted are obsolete, or unknowing well the bulgarian history and origin. There is new researches (not by bulgarian scientists), which confirm the non altaic origin of the proto-bulgarians. Some of this scientists are prominent altaists. 16.Yes I am an expert in this field, because I investigate this problem more than 20 years. Did some of your scholars (non-bulgarian) did it? Or You self? 17.To solve this problem is need to know not only Bulgarian history and language, but also the origin and history of many more nations. and also ethnography, anthropology, titular onomastic and many more sciences. Do You know all of this to came here to discuss with me about MY ORIGIN??? 18.Don't You realize the repeating of the mantra "The proto-bulgarians was turks, but today's bulgarians are slavs." can not change the truth? 19.You better search for the origin of the today's turks in Republic of Turkey, because the genetic studies shows, You are much more closer to us, then to the turkic nations in the Middle Asia (almost NO RELATIONS). There is a very good researches about the genetic origin of the population in Republic of Turkey, You just can see that. Who was Your grandfather (maybe some miserable child, taken from his parents for the "eni-cheri corps)? Who was Your grandmother (maybe some miserable girl taken to the "harem" to attend the biological needs to some "bei")? Where are You from? Are You a mongoloid? What kind of turk are You, if You are not mongoloid? Because the early turks was mongoloids, and I was seen hundreds of pictures, miniatures, gravures and etc. of turks, even to the middle of 15th century when you came in the Balkan peninsula, and all of them shows mongoloid type. JUST AFTER THAT YOU WAS MIXING WITH US AND ANOTHER BALKANIC NATIONS, AS ALSO PERSIANS AND KURDS, AND BECAME AN EUROPOID PEOPLE. 20. I never said all this scientists , which was wrote about the bulgarian origin are idiots. A lot of them was very knowledgeable and deserving people. Just the information they had then was not much. I suspect there's another idiots here.
Dear Balkh_Arian, please cool down. Don't forget that is just a discussion, don't take it so seriously. We don't want to have personal attacks, subsequent closing of the thread and banning.
My point of view is this: I came here to exchange the historiographical information, and I said some things I know, because i supposed that can be interesting for somebody, provided that this information is not well known. Nobody is obliged to have an interest about the bulgarian story and origin. It is O.K. But when to all my posting is answered with one and the same mantra including meanings "You - the bulgarian was lost your identity, culture and language (You can check previous messages), I became angry, because there was not any arguments. Just a mantra which purpose is to make me humiliated. I don't think it is necessary to use this methods. If somebody don't like the bulgarian history he is not oblige to reed this tread. There is another themes also. But they are here only to irritate me and to discredit my version. And that can enrage anybody. Sorry again!
Your the one who tried to convince me modern day Bulgarians retained no heritage from the Bulgars. I call Bulgarians Bulgars and you have a problem, I say Bulgarians arn't Bulgars like you wanted and you still have a problem.
Why don't you explain the situation fully.
Yes, an Turks are not Ottomans then. You have the same problem.
Bahlika (बाह्लिक) finds mention in Atharvaveda, Mahabharata, Ramayana, Puranas, Vartikka of Katyayana, Brhatsamhita, Amarkosha etc and in the ancient Inscriptions. The inhabitants of Bahlika were known as the Bahlikas. The other variations of Bahlika are Bahli, Balhika, Vahlika, Valhika, Bahlava, Bahlam/Bahlim, Bahlayana and Bahluva etc.
According to the Bhuvanakosha section of the Puranas, Bahlika was a Janapada located in the Udichya (Uttarapatha) division [1].
Some hymns of Atharvaveda invoke the fever to go to the Gandharis,
Mahavrsas (a tribe of Punjab), Mujavants and, further off, to the
Bahlikas. Since Mujavant is the name of a hill (and a people) located
in Hindukush/Pamir[2], therefore, the Bahlikas must lie beyond the Hindukush ranges.
Atharvaveda-Parisista juxtaposes the Vedic Bahlikas with the Kambojas (i.e. Kamboja-Bahlika--)[3].
Besides Atharvaveda Parisista, several other ancient texts also associate the Bahlikas with the Kambojas.
According to Dr S. K. Chaterjee, the Bahlika-Kamboja is a familiar group in the Mahabharata. Modern Balkh, the ancient Bahlika, though one of the most ancient Aryan countries, has now become Turkish in speech. [10].
Besides Kambojas, Atharvaveda-Parisista also associates the Vedic Bahlikas with the Sakas, Yavanas and Tusharas (Saka-Yavana-Tukhara-Vahlikaishcha) [11].
The fact that Puranic evidence locates the Bahlikas in Uttarapatha and further the close association of the Bahlikas with the Kambojas as well as with Tusharas, Sakas and Yavanas
in the Atharvaveda Parisista and in some other ancient sources suggests
that the Bahlikas were located as a close neighbor to the Tusharas, Sakas, Yavanas and the Kambojas etc. Since the Kambojas were located in Badakshan and Pamirs, the Tusharas on the north of Pamirs and the Sakas on the river Jaxartes and beyond, the Bahlikas or Bahlams, as neighbors to these people should be placed in Bactria.
The Mehrauli Iron Inscriptions of King Chandra (4th c AD) also make mention of Bahlikas as living on the west side of the Indus River. After crossing the seven mouths of the Indus, King Chandra is stated to have defeated the Bahlikas [12].
These above several references attest that the Bahlikas were
originally located beyond the seven mouths of river Indus in the
country of Bactria and the land was watered by the river Oxus. But later, a section of these people had moved from Balkh to Punjab while still others appear to have moved to south-western India as neighbors to the Saurashtras and Abhiras of Sauviras.
Salya, the king of Madra referred to in the Mahabharata has been called a Bahlika Pungava i.e foremost among the Bahlikas [13].
Princess Madri from the Madra Royal Family has also been referred to as Bahliki i.e princess of Bahlika clan[14].
In the digvijay expedition of PandavaArjuna, there is a reference to a people called Bahlikas whom Arjuna had to fight with [15]. They are stated to be located on the southern side of Kashmir as neighbors to the Ursa and Sinhapura kingdoms[16].
A passage in Ramayana attests that on the way from Ayodhya to Kekaya,
one had to pass through the country of Bahlikas, located somewhere in
Punjab. This shows that ancient Bahlikas had moved to and planted a
settlement in Punjab too [17]. This is also verified from the epic Mahabharata.
This shows that there was yet another Bahlika country besides the one located in Bactria.
Dr P. E. Pargiter points out that there was also another Bahlika
settlement in the plains of Punjab alongside or south of Madradesa [18].
A third settlement of the Bahlikas is attssted in western India as neighbors to the Saurashtras. Ramayana refers to (Saurashtrans.bahlikan.chandrachitranstathaivacha). There is also a similar expression in the Padama Purana i.e. (Surashtransa.bahlika.ssudrabhirastathaivacha). These ancient references attest that the Bahlikas were living as neighbors to the Saurashtras and the Abhiras. According to the Puranas, a branch of this people ruled in Vindhyas[19].
The Baraca of the Periplus is taken to be the same as the Bahlika of the Sanskrit texts [20]. Puranas attest that a branch of the Bahlikas ruled near Vindhyas[21].
According to the Puranic traditions, Dhrshta was one of the nine sons of Manu. From him came a number of clans called Dharshtakas who were reckoned as Kshatriyas. According to Shiva Purana the Dharshtaka princes became rulers of Bahlika.
Satapatha Brahamana knows of a king named Bahlika Pratipeya whom it calls Kauravya (=Kaurava) [22]. It has been pointed out that this Kaurava king is identical with Bahlika Pratipeya of Mahabharata[23].
According to Mahabharata evidence, the king of Bahlika was present at Syamantapanchaka at Kurukshetra on the occasion of a solar eclipse.
The people of Balhika had presented to Yudhisthira as a tribute ten thousand asses (donkeys), numerous blankets
of woollen texture, numerous skins of the Ranku deer, clothes
manufactured from jute and woven with the threads spun by insects. And
they also gave thousands of other clothes possessing the colour of the lotus, soft sheep-skins by thousands, sharp and long swords and scimitars, and hatchets and fine-edged battle-axes, perfumes and gems of various kinds (2.50)
The King of Bahlika presented to Yudhishtra a golden chariot yoked with four white Kamboja studs at the time of Rajsuya ceremony (2.53.5).
Karna had fought with and vanquished Bahlikas along with the Kambojas of Rajpura, the Amvashthas, the Videhas, and the Gandharvas, the fierce Kiratas of the fastness of Himavat, the Utpalas, the Mekalas, the Paundras, the Kalingas, the Andhras, the Nishadas and the Trigartas (7.4.5-6).
King Bahlika had participated in the Kurukshetra War. Mahabharata calls him a mighty (mahabali) king [24]. Along with his son Somadatta and grandson Bhurisravas, King Bahlika had participated in the Mahabharata war with one Askshauhini (division) army of Bahlika soldiers and had sided with the Kauravas against the Pandavas.
Bahlika and his grandson Bhurisrava were amongst the eleven
distinguished Generals or Senapatis of the Kaurava army appointed by Duryodhana[25].
The Ramayana seems to localize the Uttarakurus in Bahlika country [26].
According to it, Ila, son of Parjapati Karddama, king of Bahli
(Bahlika) country, gave up Bahli in favor of his son Sasabindu and
founded the city of Pratisthana in Madhydesa. The princes of the Aila dynasty (which is also the dynasty of Kurus) have been called Karddameya [27]. The Karddameyas obtained their names from river Kardama in Persia and therefore, their homeland is identified with Bahlika or Bactria[28]. This indicates that Bahlika or Bactria was the original home of the Kuru clans.
Vatsyayana in his Kamasutra
records a peculiar custom prevalent among the Bahlikas i.e several
young men marry a single woman in Bahlika country and in Strirajya [29]. It is a well known fact that Pandavas (i.e. Kurus) were married to one women, Draupadi. This again implies that the Kurus were originally a people of Bahlika which was identical with Uttarakuru (Dr M. R. Singh). Since Uttarakuru of the Aitareya Brahmana is said to lie beyond Himalaya, the Bahlika or Bactria is also beyond Hindukush (i.e. Himalayan range).
Besides the Kurus, the Madras were also originally a people living in/around Bahlika as is suggested by Vamsa Brahamana[30] of the Sama Veda which text refers to one Madragara Shaungayani as a teacher of Aupamanyava Kamboja. Dr Zimmer as well as authors of Vedic Index postulate a possible connection between the IranianUttaramadras and the Kambojas. Both these people were close neighbors in the north-western part of ancient India [31].
According to Jean Przylusky, the Bahlika (Balkh) was an Iranian
settlement of the Madras who were known as Bahlika-Uttaramadras [32].
This suggests that in the remote antiquity (Vedic age), the (Iranian settlement of) the Madras was located in parts of Bahlika (Bactria)--the western parts of the Oxus country. These Madras were, in fact, the Uttaramadras of the Aitareya Brahmana (VIII/14) [34]. However, in 4th c BC, this Bahlika/Bactria came under Yavana/Greek political control and thus the land started to be referenced as Bahlika-Yavana in some of ancient Sanskrit texts.
Thus, the foregoing discussion suggests that the Uttarakurus, Uttaramadras and Kambojas--
all were located beyond the Himalaya/Hindukush ranges. Probably, the
Uttarakurus were located in the northern parts of Bahlika, the
Uttaramadras were in the southern parts of it and the Kambojas (=Parama
Kambojas) were to the east of Bahlika, in the Transoxiana
region. The ancient Bahlika appears to have spanned a large expanse of
territory. The commentator of Harsha-Carita of Bana Bhatta also defines
the Kambojas as Kambojah-Bahlika-Desajah i.e the Kambojas
originated in/belonged to Bahlika. Thus, it seems likely that in the
remote antiquity, the ancestors of the Uttarakurus, Uttaramadras and
the Parama Kambojas were one people or otherwise were closely allied and had lived in/around Bahlika (Bactria).
Amarkosha makes references to the Saffron of Bahlika and Kashmira countries [35]. Similar reference to Bahlika saffron has also been noticed in the fourth century AD Raghuvamsa play of poet Kalidasa. Raghuvamas states that saffron got adhered to Raghu's horses which they had to shed off by rolling on the banks of Oxus before Raghu undertook to attack the forces of the Hunas and the Kambojas located on either side of Oxus [36].
Kavyamimamsa of Rajshekhar (10th c AD) lists the Bahlikas
with the Sakas, Tusharas, Vokanas, Hunas, Kambojas, Pahlavas, Tangana,
Turukshas, etc. and states them as the tribes located in the Uttarapatha division. [37]
The Buddhist play Mudrarakshas of Visakhadutta as well as the Jaina works Parisishtaparvan refers to Chandragupta's alliance with Himalayan king Parvatka. The Himalyan alliance gave Chandragupta a composite army made up of the Yavanas, Kambojas, Sakas, Kiratas, Parasikas and Bahlikas as stated in the Mudra-rakashas [38].
The Bahlikas have been equated to Mlechchas in the later Brahmanical literature. There is a distinct prophetic statement in the Mahabharata that the mlechcha kings of Sakas, Yavanas, Kambojas, Bahlikas etc will rule unrighteously in Kali yuga. (3.188.34-36).[39]
Like Kamboja, Bahlika region was famous for its horses. They were used by kings in wars.
Vasudeva Krishna gave unto Arjuna hundreds of thousands of draft horses from the country of the Balhikas as his sister, Subhadras excellent dower. (1,223)
Bahlika breed of horses were one among the type of horses employed in Kurukshetra war. Many steeds of the Vanayu, the hilly, the Kamboja, and the Balhika
breeds, with tails and ears and eyes motionless and fixed, possessed of
great speed, well-trained, and ridden by accomplished warriors armed
with swords and lances, were seen (7,34).
Bhagiratha gave away a hundred thousand horses of the Balhika breed, all white of complexion, adorned with garlands of gold. (13,103).
Dhritarashtra
wished to give sixteen cars made of gold, each drawn by four excellent
and well-adorned steeds of uniform colour and of the Bahlika breed to Vasudeva Krishna who came to talk to him on behalf of the Pandavas (5,86).
Brahamanda Purana refers to the horses from Bahlika [40]. Similarly, ValmikiRamayana refers to the horses of Bahlika, Kamboja and Vanayu countries as of excellent breed [41]. Upamitibhavaprapanchakatha singles out horses from Bahlika and those from Kamboja and Turuksha as the best[42]. The Abhidhanaratanamala also mentions examples of excellent horses from Bahlika, Persia, Kamboja, Vanayu, Sindhu and the land bordering on Sindhu [43].
^
Vedic Index, I, p 84-85, 138; India as Known to Panini, 1953, p 50, Dr
Aggarwal; Some Kshatriya Tribes, p 232, Dr B. C. Law; Indian as Known
to Panini, p 50; Geographical Data in Early Puranas, pp 65, 164, Dr M.
R. Singh.
^
The Udumbras, Journal Asiatique, 1926, p 11, Jean Przylusky, showing
that Bahlika (Balkh) was an Iranian settlement of the Madras who were
known as Bahlika-Uttaramadras; Op cit., p 50, Dr Aggarwal; op cit., pp
65, 164, Dr M. R. Singh
^
History and Culture of Indian People, Age of Imperial Kanauj, p 57, Dr
Pusalkar and Dr Majumdar; also: Ancient India, 1956, pp 141-142, Dr R.
K. Mukerjee; Political and Social Movements in Ancient Panjab, 1964, p
202, Dr Buddha Parkash; The Culture and Art of India, p 1959, p 91;
Comprehensive History of Ancient India, Vol II, 1957, p 4, Dr K. A. N.
Sastri
Original text from Mudrarakshasa in Sanskrit:
asti tava Shaka-Yavana-Kirata-Kamboja-Parsika-Bahlika parbhutibhih
< id="search" name="search" title="Search Wikipedia alt-shift-f" ="f" value="" ="text">
< name="go" ="search" id="searchGo" value="Go" title="Go to a page with exact name if one exists" ="submit">
< name="fulltext" ="search" id="mw-search" value="Search" title="Search the wiki for text" ="submit">
Balkh-Aryan, there is really no point to copy paste wiki articles. You can just paste the link preferably with short description what is it about and how it support your ideas ;)
I personally do not see how is it related to history of Bulgaria apart from similarity of names.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum