Bulgarian origins

 

Edited by londoner_gb - 07-Oct-2007 at 16:50

Originally posted by Anton Originally posted by londoner_gb   Do You believe they should proudly declare:"  I directly descend from the Valiant Spartacus, the Divine Orfeus and the Golden Mouthed Homer?  I await for Your replies   Everybody having roots in Balkans can say so.

 

Edited by londoner_gb - 06-Oct-2007 at 00:32

From Coon's Book Races of Europe


Bulgaria

East of the Illyrians and north of the Macedonians lived, in classical times, the Thracians. Their territory reached beyond the Danube on the north to the border of Scythian country, and on the east to the Black Sea. In the period of their greatest power, between 450 and 300 B.C., they were a numerous and important people; Herodotus called them the most numerous west of India. The southern Thracians were more or less Hellenized culturally, the northern ones in later times were Romanized, and were also influenced by the settkment of Goths among them. The invasions of the South Slavs, however, put an end to what remained of their ethnic identity.

The Thracians are introduced here, at this late date, because they were not discussed in Chapter VI, along with the other Indo-European-speaking peoples of the Iron Age. The reason for this omission is that no skeletal material worthy of mention has been described which can be associated with them. A single skull which was probably Thracian, however, was dolichocephalic and leptorrhine. 132 Classical descriptions of Thracians make them tall, powerful, and apparently fair. As such they fit into the general scheme of the Iron Age Indo-European-speaking peoples.

Bulgaria was once Thracian country; a few centuries after its Romanization, it was submerged by a Slavic invasion, the advance guard of the movement which brought Slavic speech into Bulgaria. This Slavic invasion, which resulted in a permanent settlement of the country, was followed by a further invasion of still heathen Sarmatian tribe-the Bulgarians. The subsequent history of Bulgaria was the opposite to that of Hungary; the Bulgars, who had left their eastern Russian home before the rise of the Bolgar Empire, kept their  name, but gave up their language, in favor of the speech of their Slavic predecessors. Whereas the Magyars became Catholics, the Bulgars adopted Orthodox Christianity The next invaders of Bulgaria of importance were the Ottoman Turks, who took over the fertile Danubian farm lands, and settled  colonies of Asiatic Turks on them. .

Since the war, many of the Turkish peasants have left Bulgaria, and many of the Cherkesses as well. There are still islands of these people throughout the country, but especially in the eastern lowlands, and there are minor colonies of Greeks and of Rumanians. To the west, the Bulgarians occupy the greater part of Yugoslavian Macedonia, and border in this neighborhood on the Albanians. To the south, they extend to the head of the Aegean, where their settlements are interspersed with those of Turks and Greeks. Most of the Bulgarians are still Orthodox Christians, but a large minority, especially in Macedonia, is Moslem.

The stature of the Bulgarians varies regionally from 166 cm. to 186 cm.; 133 the tallest are found in Macedonia, and also in the very northeastern part of Bulgaria. There is a strong social segregation on the basis of stature; students at the Sofia Military Academy had, in 1906, a mean stature of 171.5 cm.; 134 other socially selected samples rise to 170 cm. The Bulgar colonists who live in the Crimea have a mean of 169 cm., those in the Rumanian Dobruja, 167 cm. The mean cephalic index of over 5000 Bulgarian soldiers is 79.6; this varies within the kingdom of Bulgaria from 80.8 in the north, to 79.9 in the southwest, and 78.2 in the south. Christian Bulgars of Macedonia have a mean of 83.3, in the region of Monastir this rises to 85; Moslem Bulgars are less brachycephalic, with a mean of 80.5, while in the neighborhood of Salonika small local samples of Bulgars are actually dolichocephalic, with a mean of 76.4, and in the neighborhood of Adrianople in Turkish Thrace, the mean is only 78.3. Bulgarian �migr�s in the Crimea have a mean of 78.7.

Thus within the Bulgarian people there is a strong tendency toward dolichocephaly, strong enough to impress mesocephaly upon the nation as a whole. The strongest expression of this tendency is found in the southern part of the kingdom, and beyond Bulgarian territory proper. True brachycephals are found only among the Macedonian Bulgars who live in close contact with Albanians.

Explanation:
(Type he is talking about is Pondids also called eastern Meds and Atlanto-Mediterraneans, as most of Thracians were type, which has mainly dolichocephaly (state of being facially 'longheaded' such as Mediterraneans or simply Meds and Nordics). Dolichocephaly is not a norm for neither Turkics (Turanid type), Slavs (neodanubians) or Ugroginns (Lagodans) who are mainly facially 'wideheaded' or brahicephalic). The Mediterranean element is strongest (clearly Thracian element which is related to Aegean Greeks) in southern Bulgaria which is the same region where helenistic Thracians resided.

Text continues:
The Bulgarians of the kingdom have heads of moderate size, with a mean length of about 189 mm. and a breadth of 150 mm.; they are comparable in this respect to the longer-headed Greeks. Their faces, however, are narrower than those of most Balkan peoples; the minimum frontal mean is 105 mm., the bizygomatic 139 mm., and the bigonial 108 mm. As with the Greeks, the jaw is wider than the forehead, but both widths are much narrower than with the latter. The face height, 121 mm., is moderate, the facial index, 87, mesoprosopic. On the other hand the upper facial index, 55, is relatively high. The ratio between the two facial indices assumes a Mediterranean position. The nasal diameters, 55 mm. by 36 mm., yield a moderately leptorrhine index, 65.

Explanation:
Clearly mainly Mediterranean people reside in Bulgaria
Text:
So far, the metrical position of the main group of Bulgarians is that of a moderately tall-statured Mediterranean group, with the addition of some brachycephalizing agent in a minor numerical position. The pigmentation of the Bulgars, while lighter than that of the Greeks, is predominantly dark. About 25 per cent have pure dark eyes, about 15 per cent light and light-mixed; the remaining majority are dark or evenly mixed. The head hair is dark brown or very dark reddish brown in almost the entire group; even among children, definitely blond combinations of hair, eye, and skin color do not exceed 10 per cent of the whole. Among adults light head hair is rare. The beard, however, shows the same tendency to disproportionate lightness found among Albanians, Montenegrins, and Cretans, but not among Greeks; the brunet colors found in about 90 per cent of the head hair occurs in only 50 per cent of the beards. Medium and light brown beards account for most of the rest. There is a notable absence of ash-blondism in this group.


Text:
Most of the Bulgars have straight nasal profiles; concave forms are found principally in the northwest, adjoining Serbian territory, where they amount to 12 per cent. Convexity is rare among all Bulgarians, but least so in Macedonia. The snubbed tip so characteristic of northern and eastern Slavs is by no means unknown among them, but is in the minority.

Text:
The Bulgarians are a composite people, with the following racial elements easily discernible:

(a) a medium to tall-statured Atlanto-Mediterranean;
(b) a partially blond Neo-Danubian, of typical snub-nosed form;
(c) a Nordic;
(d) a Dinaric, with the usual Alpine corollary;
(e) a brachycephalic central Asiatic
The basic element is the Atlanto-Mediterranean, which probably goes back to the Neolithic; the Neo-Danubian is probably of both Slavic and Ugrian introduction, although some of it may be older; the Nordic may be of several origins, including Thracian; the Dinaric is simply the result of Bulgarian admixture with local elements in Macedonia; the Turkic is found mostly in eastern Bulgaria, and then among townsmen and shepherds rather than among agriculturalists. Of these varied elements, the first two are the most important, and the first more than the second. The presence of a strongly entrenched Atlanto-Mediterranean population of Neolithic date in all of the lowland Balkans south and east of the Iron Gate is becoming increasingly evident. In Bulgaria it is geographically most concentrated along the southern ethnic periphery, and among Bulgarian colonies abroad, as in the Crimea.

Explanation:
Above part is the most important part of the text. It clearly states that the major population is Atlanto-Mediterraneans (descendents of hellenistic Thracians, centered in southern Bulgaria, both then and now). Neodanubian is slavic. Alpine is associated with Dorian Greeks (as is to lesser extent Dinaric) and also later on Celts. Dinaric is associated with mainly Illyrians. Turanids (a brachycephalic central Asiatic is associated with  Turkic minorities (N.E. Bulgaria). Nordic is most likely of Nordic origin (Germanic invasion impact) (Coon is pronordicist, the book is written in 1939, and states that original Greeks (who are NOT the same as todays Greeks), Illyrians and Thracians were all Nordics which is the only inaccurate part. Truth is that in 13 cen. Bc there was a Nordic movement of Hollstat type, pure Nordics, that originated from todays Sweden in Balkans, other then that is specualation). Conclusion is that people in hellenistic Thrace, byzantine preslavic Thrace and afterwards are mainly of the same type.

_____________

Racial Classification partly based on Coons book.

Bulgaria = 60% East Mediterranean ( mainly hellenistic Thracians ), 15% Alpine ( UP, Celtic impact? ) , 15% Dinaric , 5% Turanid ( NE Bulgaria, remains of semioriental Turkic colonists ), 5% Nordish ( Germanic invasion impact ) = 60% Med. / 15% Dinarik / 15% UP / 5% T / 5% N



Note 1: I believe that Coon's classification for Bulgaria would be something like the numbers bellow;
- East Mediterranean 60% (Thracians)
- Neodanubian 20% (Slavs)
- Dinaric 10% (Illyrians)
- Nordic 5% (Scandinavians)
- Turanid 5% (Turkic colonists)

Note 2: Considering there is a Alpine presence in Bulgaria and that some antropologists group them in the same category (both brahicephals of similar stature and similar facial configuration) I would say that Slavic Neodanubians cannt be more then 10% if even that much.


Edited by londoner_gb - 07-Oct-2007 at 14:42

Originally posted by Desperado  Probably all that's left from the culture of the thracians is in the bulgarian folklore.

This poll is bull.  Why are the BULGARS not even mentioned if you are talking about Bulgarians.  I mean, come on!

Originally posted by akritas I vote...None of the choices above.  People who are not racially related cannot become nationally related. People, however, who are racially related can change national consciousness and become worst enemies. Actually in the Balkan all the nations try to find connections with the ancient civilizations via the  amalgamation theory and the model of weak people being absorbed by the "strong" Slavic (or any other) people. The amalgamation theory is based on serious historical and technical errors.

Originally posted by akritas nobody of the mentioned scholars support the amalgamation theory !!! If you have something diffrent just post the name of the book, chapter and page. I like to see Jirecek or Gimbutas "quotes' for the Thracian ancestry of the Bulgarian nation.!!

As I see not a single reference as about your claims!!!

Edited by akritas - 06-Oct-2007 at 20:30

Originally posted by akritas     One another example, is the  important methodological historical error,  is the extension in place and time of a locally restricted group of people, i.e., Slavomacedonians, and how difficult it is to extrapolate from a relatively small area (FYROM) the entire historic Macedonia through the centuries