[https://www.britannica.com/topic/Bulgar](https://www.britannica.com/topic/Bulgar)
“many scholars, including linguists, had posited that the Bulgars were derived from a Turkic tribe of Central Asia”
[https://www.britannica.com/place/Bolgary](https://www.britannica.com/place/Bolgary)
“The ruins of medieval Bolgary are near the present village of Bolgary, Tatarstan republic”
[https://www.britannica.com/topic/Bolgar-Turkic-language](https://www.britannica.com/topic/Bolgar-Turkic-language)
“Historically, they split into two types early on, Common Turkic and Bolgar Turkic.”
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgar_language](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgar_language)
“Bulgar is an extinct Oghur Turkic language which was spoken by the Bulgars”
11 comments
Bulgars=/=Bulgarians. I already explained it on the mkd sub, at least take the effort to read it.
go away monkeydonian
>Macedonian roots, what they are and are not is only for Macedonians to say, it is none of your fucking concern.
>
>You can admit your tatar turko mongol roots.
A more interesting question is why you are offended by your roots. https://sbornikstrumski.com/makedonski-dejtzi-za-makedonskia-narod/
Bulgarians are not strong enough to handle the truth
Why you get offended about your Bulgarian origin?
(I expect an answer.)
Because in Bulgarian Turkic=Turkish. The truth is the difference between the first and second is at least a millennia.
Tatars have nothing in common with Danube Bulgaria. They conquered Volga Bulgaria and renamed it to Tatarstan. That’s where the retarded NM trolls take it from.
Lmao at linking the Eternal Anglo’s bible as proof.
Anyways, two reasons: 1. It’s not factual, it is one of a few suggested theories, we just don’t know; 2. Bulgarians today are turkophobic because if the Ottoman rule, and don’t want to associate with a turkic language (Turkish and turkic are used interchangeably here).
And on Reddit specifically, because Vardar Bulgars are paid by Volga Bulgars to call Danube Bulgars “tatars” as a means of invalidating territorial claims in historic Macedonia.
We aren’t offended. We know this from school. We also have the intellect to understand basic concepts, written in official sources: Bulgarians =/= Bulgars, Bulgars = Turkic (with disputable Iranian influence), Bulgars =/= Tatars (a different group, different language).
Question is, [why are you](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuber)? Why are you denying your Turkic ancestors? You embraced the [Hunza tribe from Pakistan](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MevIanmZhck), why are you so scared of your own “Tataro-Turkic” (or whatever they call it in North FYROM) genes? You even have a town named after Turkic Cumans.
​
>According to DNA data for 17 Y-chromosomal STR loci in Macedonians, the Macedonian population has the lowest genetic distance against the Bulgarian population (0.0815)
*Jakovski; et al. (2011). “Genetic data for 17 Y-chromosomal STR loci in Macedonians in the Republic of Macedonia”. Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 5 (4): e108–e111*
Oh, dear! Your own scholars! Your own people! They are Bulgarian chauvinists too!
Why deny it further? Name it “Tatardonija” and be done with the naming disputes. Greece won’t touch your name with a ten foot pole after that, guaranteed.
Because the Tatars came to Volga long after an old separate branch of the Bulgars first migrated there on the 7th century. Bulgars and Tatars have different languages (totally different branch of Turkic), different genes and culture. Also, the Bulgars were a hunnic tribe and that’s about as much as we know. The huns had a massive federation that included Indo-aryan tribes, Turkic tribes but also slavs and germanics. Moreover, modern Bulgarians do not carry more central Asian DNA than countries like Croatia and Czech republic so it is highly unlikely that the Bulgars were ‘Mongols’ (whatever the heck you mean by that). By the way do you know who Kuber is and do you know about the Bulgar settlements in modern day North Macedonia?
That’s a fairly weak trolling attempt. First, no one cares. Second, don’t post your sources when attempting to troll, it’s just sad. The quote from above but in it’s entirety.
“Although many scholars, including linguists, had posited that the Bulgars were derived from a Turkic tribe of Central Asia (perhaps with Iranian elements), modern genetic research points to an affiliation with western Eurasian and European populations.”
To answer your question simply – it is widely accepted by lots of Bulgarians that our country was founded with the help of the Bulgars and that’s how it got its name. Some people say they were of Turkic origin and that is also accepted as a probable theory. HOWEVER that tribe was not very numerous – they were no more than 100 000 people. Compare that to the much more numerous slavs which were already present on these lands. Simply put – the Bulgars were more than likely assimilated by the Slavic tribes and that’s also suggested by a genetic study: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3590186/. In this very link there is also this statement: “Leading turkologists do not consider proto-Bulgarians a Turkic people, as also attested by the adoption of distinctive calendar systems by the two groups.”. So, it really is not certain what the origin of these Bulgar people was – it could have been turkic, could’ve been something else. So, the statement that Bulgarians have a Tukric origin is up for debate. As for acceptance, the Turkic/Central Asian theory is taught in History classes in Bulgaria and it is what I have been taught as well – it is widely accepted as a logical theory. And notice that I’m saying THEORY – which is very different from a FACT. And when certain people call modern day Bulgarians Tatars, Mongols, Huns, Turks or whatever – it is simply a logical fallacy, for modern day Bulgarians share little to no DNA with those groups. I hope this clears things up a but for you. If you have any further questions – be sure to ask! I really love having these types of discussions!