Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
bg_turk
Sultan
Joined: 28-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2347
|
Quote Reply
Topic: Relationship bw Bulgar and Iranian Langua Posted: 13-May-2006 at 10:00 |
Originally posted by Zagros
Ezhdeha means dragon in Persian. Th zh sound being equivalent to the J in French "Jaques", I don't believe the sound exists in Turkish, correct me if I am wrong. |
In fact it does and it is written in the same exact way - "j".
The english "j" - is spelled as "c".
|
|
|
Socrates
Baron
Joined: 12-Nov-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 416
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 17-May-2006 at 07:53 |
Originally posted by tsar
Socrates mate ...... the bulgarians do not have much to do with mediteranian people who were already living there. In south eastern and eastern bulgaria yeh there might be more mediteranian influence.
But amongst the Bulgarians the dominant gene is EU7 ..... Germany has the largest percentage of EU7 (37.5%).... and clearly influence in germany is not mediteranian .......the that suggests that serbs, bulgarians, croats are more arayan than slavic which i dont beleive .....
we also have 12% of the HG3 wchich is most comman in poland.
we dont even look mediteranian,mediteranians have darker skin than us. |
I dont know exactly what EU7 is its a different mark then HG-I think its some sort of combination- but I dont know the detailsHowever, I know that germans are 40 % (more or less) HG1 which is native to europe (dating back to paleolithic) which means its not brought by IEs and theyre about 30 % HG3 which is IE marker. Your aryan marker is HG3 according to that, serbs and bulgarians are only about 10-20 % - the greatest european aryans being the poles with 50 %.And aryan is not the same as indo-european aryans are indo-iranians (subgroup of IE) it referes to the people speaking persian, pashto, sanskrit etc. The term was used to label white race by some 19th century racists and later was adopted by the nazisSo however do you look at it, germans are not aryans- linguistically, genetically, or in any other aspect.
And the bulgarians also have about 20 % of HG 21 and qbout 10 % of HG 9 which are common in mediteranian countries but its present almost in all european countries like in holland, france, italy, germany,england, chech republicWe serbs have got about 15 % of HG 21 and about 5 % of HG 9Anyway, all this means practically nothing, as I said earlier. I mean, if someone is HG1 he could be turkish, norwegian, lithuanian, frenchJust because two people have, lets say about 60 % of genes in common, it doesnt mean that they share the same or even similar appearance
And this is rather confusing:
that suggests that serbs, bulgarians, croats are more arayan than slavic
It seems like youre under the influence of nazi propaganda...aryan (indo-european) marker is probably HG3-which is found in the highest frequencies at poles, russians, white russians, czechs, slovenians...its not exclusively german and it didnt originate from them.
Btw, mediteranians dont have to be darker.They can even be blond.Besides, Coon says that atlanto - mediteranian subrace is significant in bulgaria.These are examples of atl-med:
http://www.snpa.nordish.net/troeplate24.htm
http://www.snpa.nordish.net/troeplate23.htm
|
"It's better to be a billionair for a lifetime then to live in poverty for a week"
Bob Rock
|
|
Zagros
Emperor
Suspended
Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 17-May-2006 at 08:42 |
Originally posted by bg_turk
Originally posted by Zagros
Ezhdeha means dragon in Persian. Th zh sound being equivalent to the J in French "Jaques", I don't believe the sound exists in Turkish, correct me if I am wrong. |
In fact it does and it is written in the same exact way - "j".
The english "j" - is spelled as "c". |
I of the c/j sound, it is not the like zh which I am speaking of, that is why I made the distinction by citing the pronunciation of "Jaques", the J in "Jaques" does not make the j/c sound.
|
|
Bulldog
Caliph
Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 18-May-2006 at 10:20 |
Apparently there are a million Turks in Bulgaria, are these descendants of the Central Asian Bulgar's?
|
What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine
|
|
barbar
General
retired AE Moderator
Joined: 10-Aug-2005
Location: Italy
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 781
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 18-May-2006 at 12:19 |
I think they are the ottoman decendants (migrants). Central Asian Bulghars had already integrated into Slavian stock by then.
|
Either make a history or become a history.
|
|
blue
Janissary
Joined: 02-Jan-2006
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 28
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 18-May-2006 at 13:26 |
Originally posted by Bulldog
Apparently there are a million Turks in Bulgaria, are these descendants of the Central Asian Bulgar's? |
Well the number of Turks in Bulgaria according to the 2001 census is around 747000
They are descendants of the ottoman migrants that had setteled in the Balkans.
|
|
tsar
Samurai
Suspended
Joined: 12-May-2006
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 132
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-May-2006 at 20:11 |
Originally posted by socrates
I dont know exactly what EU7 is its a different mark then HG-I think its some sort of combination- but I dont know the detailsHowever, I know that germans are 40 % (more or less) HG1 which is native to europe (dating back to paleolithic) which means its not brought by IEs and theyre about 30 % HG3 which is IE marker. Your aryan marker is HG3 according to that, serbs and bulgarians are only about 10-20 % - the greatest european aryans being the poles with 50 %.And aryan is not the same as indo-european aryans are indo-iranians (subgroup of IE) it referes to the people speaking persian, pashto, sanskrit etc. The term was used to label white race by some 19th century racists and later was adopted by the nazisSo however do you look at it, germans are not aryans- linguistically, genetically, or in any other aspect.
And the bulgarians also have about 20 % of HG 21 and qbout 10 % of HG 9 which are common in mediteranian countries but its present almost in all european countries like in holland, france, italy, germany,england, chech republicWe serbs have got about 15 % of HG 21 and about 5 % of HG 9Anyway, all this means practically nothing, as I said earlier. I mean, if someone is HG1 he could be turkish, norwegian, lithuanian, frenchJust because two people have, lets say about 60 % of genes in common, it doesnt mean that they share the same or even similar appearance
And this is rather confusing:
that suggests that serbs, bulgarians, croats are more arayan than slavic
It seems like youre under the influence of nazi propaganda...aryan (indo-european) marker is probably HG3-which is found in the highest frequencies at poles, russians, white russians, czechs, slovenians...its not exclusively german and it didnt originate from them.
Btw, mediteranians dont have to be darker.They can even be blond.Besides, Coon says that atlanto - mediteranian subrace is significant in bulgaria.These are examples of atl-med:
http://www.snpa.nordish.net/troeplate24.htm
http://www.snpa.nordish.net/troeplate23.htm
|
The whole population needs to be tested to find out what we really are
And yeh I didnt know what i was typing when i said mediteranean are darker people ...... LOL
Edited by tsar - 19-May-2006 at 20:13
|
|
tsar
Samurai
Suspended
Joined: 12-May-2006
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 132
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-May-2006 at 20:15 |
Originally posted by Bulldog
Apparently there are a million Turks in Bulgaria, are these descendants of the Central Asian Bulgar's? |
Ottoman descendants mate ottoman
|
|
Anton
Caliph
Joined: 23-Jun-2006
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2888
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 27-Jun-2006 at 09:25 |
Originally posted by tsar
Originally posted by the Bulgarian
I don't know why blue and Bulgarian Soldja insist so much on not having anything to do with the Volga Bulgars as if they were ashamed of it. What's the matter with you two, they are owr relatives, grandsons and granddaughters of owr own grandfathers - the Bulgars. Which clearly makes them family, well at least genetically. On the other hand we haven't interacted with them for 1300 years and owr cultures are totally different. But still, we have common blood running through owr veins. |
Why be ashamed of the Volga Bulgars and Bulgars, they were great people, great warriors. They were also taller than Europeans wen they came, their average height was 175m and were physically very strong. While the rest of Europeans measured an average height of 160m
Little is left of our Bulgar ancestors in the Bulgarian population today though. |
I also don't understand why should we be ashamed of Volga Bulgars. But their Turk origins are also questioned nowadays. For example I remember that they were called Sacalibi (Slavs) by Ibn Fadlan who was there. And thus, they could be something different at the beggining and then were turkisized like Balcan Bulgarians slavisized
Edited by Anton - 27-Jun-2006 at 09:25
|
|
Bulldog
Caliph
Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 27-Jun-2006 at 10:49 |
You should read Ibn Fadlan a bit closer because such a confusion is not made.
Bulgarians should be proud of Volga Bulgars, its where their name derives from for goodness sake, you cannot deny history just because you don't like to admit the ancestors of your nation's name were Turkic. Let's face it that's the only problem you have with it, if they were Slav's you'd be singing out loud with pride about the Volga Bulgars
|
What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine
|
|
Anton
Caliph
Joined: 23-Jun-2006
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2888
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 27-Jun-2006 at 11:29 |
Originally posted by Bulldog
Bulgarians should be proud of Volga Bulgars, its where their name derives from for goodness sake, you cannot deny history just because you don't like to admit the ancestors of your nation's name were Turkic. Let's face it that's the only problem you have with it, if they were Slav's you'd be singing out loud with pride about the Volga Bulgars |
It seems, buddy, that you knows better what we think and what we like :) We singing out loud with pride about the Volga Bulgars for a long time, you just missed this.
Edited by Anton - 27-Jun-2006 at 18:43
|
|
NikeBG
Colonel
Joined: 04-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 529
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 15-Jul-2006 at 05:40 |
Oh, hot-doggie, you're back? Or I'm back actually. Just for a short visit...
Btw, you're right - Anton should've read Ibn Fadlan more thoroughly!
Indeed he mentions the Sakaliba, which some reseachers connect with the
Slavs. But he mentions the Bulgars separately from them, just as he
mention the Turkic people separately from the Bulgars.
And we do feel proud with our distant cousins. Distant, because, after
all, we were Slavicized and they haven't. Although we're all using our
alphabet!
But we don't speak so much about them, as (alas) our information about
them is pretty scarce. Those Russians are still calling them Tatars and
till the recent past they wouldn't let any word about them reach us!
But now we're ready to make up for the lost time...
Oh, and the name Bulgars doesn't derive from Volga, which was called
Itil back then. And, afaik, neither does the name Volga derive from
Bulgar, although that might actually be just Russian information...
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 06-Jan-2009 at 11:28 |
Good topic.
Btw, you're right - Anton should've read Ibn Fadlan more thoroughly!
Indeed he mentions the Sakaliba, which some reseachers connect with the
Slavs.
|
|