|
Post by depletedreasons on Jun 4, 2008 5:02:52 GMT -5
antropological type of the bulgarians was more european than asiatic-just like today ---so here u r wrong again Let us examine at the Cumans... The Cumanians were originally Asian pastoral nomads who in the 13th century migrated to Hungary. We have examined mitochondrial DNA from members of the earliest Cumanian population in Hungary from two archeologically well-documented excavations and from 74 modern Hungarians from different rural locations in Hungary. Haplogroups were defined based on HVS I sequences and examinations of haplogroup-associated polymorphic sites of the protein coding region and of HVS II. To exclude contamination, some ancient DNA samples were cloned. A database was created from previously published mtDNA HVS I sequences (representing 2,615 individuals from different Asian and European populations) and 74 modem Hungarian sequences from the present study. This database was used to determine the relationships between the ancient Cumanians, modern Hungarians, and Eurasian populations and to estimate the genetic distances between these populations. We attempted to deduce the genetic trace of the migration of Cumanians. This study is the first ancient DNA characterization of an eastern pastoral nomad population that migrated into Europe. The results indicate that, while still possessing a Central Asian steppe culture, the Cumanians received a large admixture of maternal genes from more westerly populations before arriving in Hungary. A similar dilution of genetic, but not cultural, factors may have accompanied the settlement of other Asian nomads in Europe.It should be noted that those Cumans were the ones who took shelter in Hungary after the Mongol Invasion. Interestingly, those Cuman Turks had DNAs that are closely related to the "westerly populations". In Russian, there is good explanation to that Eurocentric myth claiming Mongoloid ancestry of the Turks: If you scratch a Russian, you find a Tatar.
|
|
|
Post by chalkedon on Jun 4, 2008 5:24:06 GMT -5
^^^ Hey Jan...pls be aware that DNA testing is not perfect and extremely flawed. It doesnt give you the whole picture at all. It still too early to base decisions on DNA testing. As far as ancestry is concerned...
|
|
|
Post by chalkedon on Jun 4, 2008 5:26:09 GMT -5
" By the way, Bolgar and Turk are the same " - Jan
Haha...now you sound like us Greeks. Macedonian - Greek the same....
A little hypocritical, arent we Jan ?
|
|
|
Post by Edlund on Jun 4, 2008 5:43:50 GMT -5
DNA testing has proved that even the Turks are not Turkish by origin. They are much less mongoloid than Turkmen or Kazakh or Uzbeks or Kyrgyz or other Turkic-speaking people.
The least mongoloid Turkic-speaking population is that of the Gagauz from Bulgaria.
Therefore we should make a distinction between Turkic as a linguistic group and Turkish as ethnicity.
The same should be taken into consideration about the term "Slavic". The different peoples, who speak Slavic languages, are different genetically. And "Slavic" is a linguistical group, not a term for ethnic or racial origin.
|
|
|
Post by besarab on Jun 4, 2008 6:04:11 GMT -5
all right-so you are a turk and nothing else. you were so predictable and easy for disclosure now be so kind not to call bulgarians -turks.although with same ancestry,our two people[bg and volga bg] had entirely different development for last 1400 years.we are not same people now.. by the way i ve heard many bulgarians from volga bulgaria to express theyr great love to russia ,and havent heard even one to glorify turkey. turkey is not a nation but a genetic soup and modern turks are predominantly armenoids.....
|
|
|
Post by jerryspringer on Jun 4, 2008 6:13:14 GMT -5
If Bulgar is a word of Slavic origin, how do you then explain the Turkic tribe called Bolgar?
|
|
|
Post by chalkedon on Jun 4, 2008 6:13:14 GMT -5
and greeks ^^^ muslim greeks that was a stupid exchange done back then....it should of been based on nationality and NOT on religion. That was our downfall....but turkey insisted, and we went along w/ it
|
|
|
Post by Edlund on Jun 4, 2008 6:25:30 GMT -5
If Bulgar is a word of Slavic origin, how do you then explain the Turkic tribe called Bolgar? There is no Turkic tribe Bolgar. The "Balkars" from the Kabardino-Balkar Republic actually call themselves "Malkar" or something like this - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kabardino-BalkariaThe fact is, that the first consonant of their ethnonym is "M". Our Turkish friend is from Istanbul and doesn't know this.
|
|
|
Post by depletedreasons on Jun 4, 2008 6:43:35 GMT -5
The Balkars (Karachay-Balkar: sg. малкъар - malqar, pl. малкъарла - malqarla) are a Turkic people of the Caucasus region, the titular population of Kabardino-Balkaria. Their Karachay-Balkar language is of the Ponto-Caspian subgroup of the Northwestern (Kypchak) group of Turkic languages. Related to Crimean Tatar and Kumyk. There is also an opinion that the Balkars are remnants of a branch of the Bulgar tribe that moved into the Caucasus after the westward movement of the Hunnish wave at the beginning of the 4th century AD.[citation needed] About 105,000 (2002) Balkars live in the Russian republic of Kabardino-Balkaria. The term Balkar is said to be derived from Bolgar or Bulgar, the Balkars supposedly being Bulgars who lived in Onoghur and Great Bulgaria and who remained in the Caucasus as the others migrated to the Balkans and Middle Volga. In 1944, Stalin accused the Balkars of Kabardino-Balkaria of collaborating with Nazi Germany and deported the entire population. The territory was renamed the Kabardin ASSR until 1957, when the Balkar population was allowed to return and its name was restored. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balkars
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Jun 4, 2008 7:01:25 GMT -5
"In 19th century this myth was used by Serbian nationalists to prove that the people of Macedonia are not Bulgarians by origin, but only by consciousness. The people from Macedonia might be saying that they are Bulgarians, but they are wrong, because the Bulgarians were Asians etc."
C'mon Edlund, every historian will tell you that the Bulgar came from the far east, lets be really honest. It doesn't mean that when they settled and absorbed slavs of the Balkans they were 100% mongol, in fact they were in the minority. As l have said, l believe the modern balkan Bulgaria is mainly decendant from ancient local Romanized Thracians + Slavs that was finally influenced by a ruling class of Bulgars.
|
|
|
Post by depletedreasons on Jun 4, 2008 7:19:30 GMT -5
Great Malkar (Great Balkaria) According to Khazars themselves, as well as the scientists, experts in Khazar history, and Byzantine and Oriental authors, Khazars and Bulgarians were practically the same people and spoke one language. Medieval texts say that there were four kins of Caucasian or Kuban Bulgarians: Kupi-Bulgarians, Duchi-Bulgarians, Oghondor-Bulgarians, Chdar-Bulgarians. Noting that ancient Turk tribes often called themselves by the names of the rivers, scientists see the reflection of this tradition in these names too. But the guesses do not usually go beyond that one should mean Kuban Bulgarians under Kupi-Bulgarians, and there is no convincing explanation for the remaining terms. We suppose that Oghondor-Bulgarians were some Turk tribes living on the river Orkhon and later assimilated by Bulgarians. Duchi-Bulgarians are read by some authors as Kuchi-Bulgarians. In this case their name means the Turk tribes living on rivers Ku (Swan) and Chu. It might be the tribes Ku-kishi and Chu-kishi, i. e. "people from Ku and Chu".
Some authors relate the name of Bulgarian tribe "Utigor" to the ethnonym of Digorians, who, by the words of Oriental scientists Rashid ad-Din and Makhmud of Kashgar, were a branch of Oguz Turks. In the "tsocking" dialect of Karachai-Balkarians and Digor languages, the word Chdar would sound as Tsdar (or Star, Stur). But this word means "big" (as in the name of a Digor settlement "Stur-Digora"--Big Digora). So, the name Chdar-Bulgaria must means "Bulgaria Major", which is equivalent to "Ullu Malkar", i. e. Great Malkar (Great Balkaria). www.karachai.com/chapt5.html
|
|
|
Post by blagun on Jun 4, 2008 7:36:10 GMT -5
Karachai fairytales SoT? ------------------------------------------
Novi Pazar-in fact you won't find any historian to claim Bulgars came from the Far East as you say-where-from Japan,the Koreas,Kamchatka or East Siberia?!?There are assumptions that they migrated from Central Asia(the area from Iran to the West Altai mountains you know;) ) but not nearly to enough data to pinpoint a more accurate location.So please people- there is so little data and so many many if's,probably's and so on...,so don't speak about Bulgars with such certainty,as if you were there and spoke with them in personal!!!
|
|
|
Post by Edlund on Jun 4, 2008 7:38:06 GMT -5
"In 19th century this myth was used by Serbian nationalists to prove that the people of Macedonia are not Bulgarians by origin, but only by consciousness. The people from Macedonia might be saying that they are Bulgarians, but they are wrong, because the Bulgarians were Asians etc." C'mon Edlund, every historian will tell you that the Bulgar came from the far east, lets be really honest. Today every historian who has studied the subject wouldn't say "far east". There is absolutely no data about Bulgarians living east of Volga, and Volga is in Europe. The Volga Bulgarians were first mentioned in 10th century, while those south of Danube - in 6th century. You calculate who was where first. And this myth was really used for such goals by Serbian politicians/historians. I don't blame them, they didn't invented it, they were just using it. It's normal.
|
|
Rhezus
Moderator
DERZA STURIA TRAUS
Posts: 1,674
|
Post by Rhezus on Jun 4, 2008 16:55:05 GMT -5
That's correct, Novi.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Jun 4, 2008 20:20:04 GMT -5
"And this myth was really used for such goals by Serbian politicians/historians. I don't blame them, they didn't invented it, they were just using it. It's normal."
I don't know why your scapegoating the Serbs here. Did the Bulgars speak an IE lanuage in the beginning, and did they originate like the Turks, Huns etc... near the Altai mountains near mongolia.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Jun 4, 2008 20:22:11 GMT -5
"That's correct, Novi." Even DNA will prove that Balkan Bulgaria is mainly descendant from local populations.
|
|
|
Post by besarab on Jun 5, 2008 0:38:33 GMT -5
this myth was really used for such goals by Serbian politicians/historians ofcourse every ,,scientific''theoryes corresponde with the political ambitions of today.in 18 and 19 cent. our serbian friends invented,or adopted series of ,,indogenous''theoryes in order to debulgarize first kosovo and then macedonia.but i wouldnt say that those theoryes use to help them so much.bulgarian polititians and king ferdinand helped them more
|
|
|
Post by Edlund on Jun 5, 2008 2:53:08 GMT -5
I said I don't blame them, but you obviously have problems with assimilating information.
What do you call "the beginning", Einstein? When God created Heaven and the Earth?
No. If they did, prove it to me.
|
|
|
Post by Edlund on Jun 5, 2008 3:32:54 GMT -5
Novi Pazar, here is that Milos Milojevic has written in 1872: Èç „ÎÄËÎÌÖÈ ÈÑÒÎÐÈJÅ ÑÐÁÀ È ÑÐÏÑÊÈÕ-JÃÎÑËÀÂÅÍÑÊÈÕ-ÇÅÌÀËÜÀ Ó ÒÓÐÑÊÎJ È ÀÓÑÒÐÈJÈ." Áåîãðàä 1872 ñ.65 ... Êîãàòî áúëãàðèòå ñå êðúñòèõà, ñ êðúùåíèåòî ñè ïðèåõà ñòàðîñðúáñêàòà ïèñìåíîñò è åçèê è çàïî÷íàõà äà ñå ñëèâàò â íàðîäíîñòòà íà òåçè ñðúáñêè ïëåìåíà, êîèòî ïîêîðèõà àâàðèòå è ìîíãîëîôèíèòå áúëãàðè. ... Êàêâî ïðåäñòàâëÿâàò, êîè ñà, êàêâè ñà è îòêúäå ñà äîøëè áúëãàðèòå â òàçè ÷èñòî ñðúáñêà çåìÿ íèå êàçàõìå ïî-ãîðå, à è ñåãà ïîâòàðÿìå: ÷å ñà ìîíãîëñêî èëè õóíñêî ïëåìå, êàêòî è àâàðèòå, ìàäæàðèòå, òóðöèòå, ïå÷åíåçèòå è äðóãèòå èì ñðîäíè áðàòÿ.ñ. 78 Ñèìåóí, êîéòî å íàé-èçâåñòíàòà è íàé-ñâåòëàòà ëè÷íîñò â áúëãàðñêàòà äúðæàâà èëè îò õðèñòèÿíñòâîòî ñðåä áúëãàðî-ñðúáñêèÿ íàðîä. Òîé íàêàðà âñè÷êè áúëãàðè äà ïðèåìàò ñ õðèñòèÿíñòâîòî ñòàðî-ñðúáñêèÿ åçèê, òàêà ìàëêîòî îñòàíàëè áúëãàðè å òðÿáâàëî äà ñå ñëåÿò â íàðîäíîñòòà ñðúáñêà, à êîéòî èñêà è ñëàâÿíñêà. ñ.79 ... Ñëåä ñìúðòòà íà Ñèìåóí è íà Ïåòúð, à è íà áúëãàðèòå, îíåçè òàòàðñêîòóðñêè îðäè ñúâñåì èç÷åçíàõà, òå èç÷åçíàõà îò ëèöåòî íà èñòèíñêàòà è åäèííàòà ñðúáñêà çåìÿ. Çà òîâà òðÿáâà äà áëàãîäàðèì êàêòî íà ìàäæàðèòå, ïå÷åíåçèòå è íà äðóãè, à îñîáåíî íà Ñâåòîñëàâ ðóñêèÿ âëàäåòåë, êîéòî êàòî ïîêîðè Áúëãàðèÿ ñúñ ñâîÿòà âîéñêà, èçòðåáâàøå â íåÿ ìîíãîëñêàòà ðàñà. www.promacedonia.org/srbi/miloevich.htmlIt seems to me that he was a historian of your rank.
|
|
|
Post by besarab on Jun 5, 2008 4:19:58 GMT -5
äà äîáðå å è îíçè ëúæå òðàê äà âèäè íà êîãî òî÷íî ñëóæè-çíàå èëè íå
|
|