The History of the Bulgars: Every Year

Learn the history of the Bulgars, a Turkic people who are ancestors of today's Bulgarian and Chuvash peoples. This video is the first of three videos about the history of Bulgaria.

00:00 Intro
00:04 Bulgars
00:18 Old Great Bulgaria
00:51 Bulgar migrations
00:57 First Bulgarian Empire
02:29 Volga Bulgaria
03:59 End credits

[nenenindonu]

There's even a concept called 'Hunno-Bulgarian' no doubt that Bulgars were direct successors of Attila's former realm as all Oghur tribes were ; Akatziri, Onogur, Utigur, Kutrigur, Saragur, Bulgar, Sabir.

[nenenindonu]

Bulgars who migrated to the Volga became Muslims and remained Turks and Bulgars who migrated to the Danube/modern Bulgaria became Christians losing their Turkic identity for Slavic in the late 800's

[papazataklaattiranimam]

There are two direct references to Tangra as a Bulgar deity in the sources. One is found in an Ottoman manuscript where it is stated that the name of god in Bulgarian was “Tängri” (Bułghar dilindžä Tängri der).201 The other is in a badly-damaged inscription (carved on a marble column) which commemorates a sacrifice made by Omurtag“to the god Tangra” (κὲ ἐπύησ]εν θυσ[ήαν ἠς τὸν θεὸ]ν Ταγγραν).202 The inscription was found at the rocky cliff of Madara, a site that is commonly associated with the Tangra cult. It is worth remarking that according to ancient Inner Asian religious traditions, the favour of heaven had to manifest itself in the possession of “sacred mountains”. There the qaghan was thought to be closer to Tängri; he could therefore conduct “privileged conversations with him” and receive or transmit his orders.203 It is not unlikely that the site of Madara played a similar role in Bulgaria.204 To be sure, below the relief of the horseman archaeolo gists unearthed the foundations of a complex comprising of what seems to have been a pagan shrine (built on top of a three-aisled church dated to the sixth and seventh centuries), as well as a building with three divisions, which has been interpreted as a dwelling Amongst other things, it has been sug gested that the latter was a kind of private quarter for the ruler from which he seems to have directed the cult of Tangra, the ceremonial sacrifices and. quite possibly, the collective prayers.
While Tangra is very likely to have been worshiped by certain Bulgar groups/clans before their migration to the Balkans, his promotion to the supreme god of the elite and. in a sense, the official religion of the Proto bulgarian state coincides in time with the gradual centralization of political power, a process that is rightly connected with Krum's and Omurtag's reigns in the early ninth century. Indeed, the ideology associated with the wor ship of Tangra was bound to enhance monarchical rulership. Just as Tangra was the supreme celestial being, the khan-his reflection-was regarded as rightfully the sole sovereign on earth or, at any rate. in the Bulgar state (an idea which finds clear expression in Omurtag's building inscription from Catalar). The ideology of a strong, divinely-sanctioned leadership clearly bears much of the credit for the survival of the khanate during this period. The certainties which this system of beliefs and values presented to the warrior aristocracy, if not to the entire population, the aura of sanctity surrounding the ruler, the awareness of heavenly support granted to military undertakings (an awareness reinforced through the regular performance of religious ritu als and ceremonials while on campaign)." all immeasurably strengthened the unity of the state and the political will of its subjects to survive.
Another factor operative in the transition to Tangrist henotheism at this time may have been the fear of Byzantine imperialism. Foreign influences, as scholars have long pointed out, often paved the way for the adoption of a more sophisticated faith among nomads. However, this was rarely the reli gion of their imperial neighbours, for such a course invariably implied sub mission to the authority of the rulers of these states." The Bulgars, realizing that conversion to Islam or Judaism was not a viable option, and mindful of the influence the Byzantine Church could exercise on the khan's Christian subjects, had little choice but to promote Tangra as their supreme deity." It is important to emphasize that the late eighth/early ninth century marked the period of transition to henotheism only for the upper strata of the Bulgar society. Vigorous polytheism and totemism (i.e. the existence of an intimate, "mystical" relationship between a group or an individual and a natural object), both of which were incapable of furnishing a principle of spiritual (and political) unity, proved to be persistent and strong among the masses." This is also true of shamanism, a complex belief system espe cially common in Central and Inner Asian societies, but also discernible in the khanate in the pre-conversion period. Shamanism has been defined by anthropologists as a technique of ecstasy. By mastering this technique and reaching a state of trance the shaman was able to mediate between the world of humans and that of spirits. He thus functioned as a magician, prophet and healer who, among other things, had to "descend to the underworld" to find and bring back a sick person's soul. Given that most aspects of daily life in Eurasia were directly linked with the spiritual world-for instance. the life-supporting economic activities, from hunting to husbandry to agri culture, were thought to be protected by spirits-the role of the shaman was bound to be extremely important." Before we proceed any further, a piece of essential explanation: shaman ism has been a popular subject of accounts and research since the early eighteenth century. Although it is correctly believed that the shaman's technique of ecstasy and mode of operation are basically uniform through out Central and Inner Asia, it is impossible to construct a uniform model of shamanism as an institution. Further (and partly as a result of the above). it would be perilous to equate the modern "ethnographic shaman" with the religious specialists noted among historical Eurasian peoples. In this light. any attempt to investigate the development of this phenomenon in medieval steppe-nomad societies, including Bulgaria, is bound to be inconclusive. We have only fleeting glimpses of Bulgar shamanism in our sources.

Sophoulis, P., 2011. Byzantium and Bulgaria, 775-831. Leiden: Brill, pp.84, 85, 86, 87.

[papazataklaattiranimam]

Sample From Bulgar Language:

Etil suwı aka turur
Kaya tübi kaka turur
Balık telim baka turur
Kölün takı küşerür

In Turkish:

İtil suyu akar durur
Kaya dibini oyar durur
Bütün balıklar baka durur
Gölü bile taşırırlar

In English:

Volga water is flowing
He carves the bottom of the rock
All the fish keep looking
They carry the lake

[BanJanuka]

"Oh boy, what an interesting video! I sure hope the people commenting are intelligent, objective and respectful!"

[papazataklaattiranimam]

Later Byzantine scholars implied that the Bulgars had previously been known as the Onogurs (Onoğur). Agathon wrote about the "nation of Onogur Bulğars"], Nikephoros I stated that Kubrat was lord of the Onogundurs, Theophanes referred to them as Onogundur Bulgars and Constantine VII remarked that the Bulgars formerly called themselves Onogundurs. Variations of the name include Onoguri, Onoghuri, Onghur, Ongur, Onghuri, Onguri, Onogundur, Unogundur, and Unokundur. There are several theories about the origin of the name Onogur. In some Turkic languages on means "10" and ğur "arrow"; and "ten arrows" might imply a federation of ten tribes, i.e. the Western Turkic Khaganate. Within the Turkic languages, "z" sounds in the easternmost languages tend to have become "r" in the westernmost Turkic languages; therefore, the ethnonym Oghuz may be the source of Oghur; that is, on Oğur would mean "ten clans of Oghuz".


Old Great Bulgaria (Magna Bulgaria[29]), also known as Onoghundur–Bulgars state, or Patria Onoguria in the Ravenna Cosmography.[30][31][20] Constantine VII (mid-10th century) remarked that the Bulgars formerly called themselves Onogundurs.[32]

We have two kinds of records of this Volga - Bulgarian language : Mahmūd alKāšyari's sporadic descriptions of the eleventh century, and the tomb inscriptions of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries . Some examples from the latter are shown on Table 4 ( p . 392 ), where three kinds of reconstruction for the Volga - Bulgarian – by J. Benzing, 19 N. Poppe, 20 and myself21 – are given . I hypothesize that the Volga - Bulgars who migrated in the seventh century from the south to the Volga - Kama district were a nation related to, but different from, the Chuvash ( who were presumably aboriginal there in the seventh century ), and that the languages of the two nations were also similar, but distinct .

Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute, 1980 Harvard Ukrainian Studies, Volume 3-4 pp. 390

[azuragi]

Russia & Turkey : how tf you ended up ther-
Volga bulgaria & Bulgaria : *yes*

[papazataklaattiranimam]

The Bulgars were a Turkic tribal confederation that gave rise to the Balkan Bulgar and Volga Bulgar states. The ethnonym derives from the Turkish bulgha-, "to stir, mix, disturb, confuse." The confederation appears to have taken shape among Oghur tribes in the Kazakh steppes following the migrations that were touched off by movements of the Hsiung-nu. Later Byzantine sources (Agathon, Nicephorus Patriarchus, Theophanes) closely associate or identify the Bulgars with the Onoghurs, who were enemies of Sassanid Iran in the late 4th century. When or how this connection developed is unclear. If we discount several (most probably) anachronistic notices on the Bulgars in Moses Kliorenats'i (Moses of Chorene), the earliest references to them are perhaps to be found in an anonymous Latin chronograph of 354: "Vulgares." They are absent from Priscus's account of the migration, ca. 463, of the Oghuric Turks into the Pontic steppes, but by 480 they are noted under their own name as allies of Constantinople against the Ostrogoths. Amity with Byzantium was short-lived. By 489 the Bulgars had initiated a series of raids on Byzantine Balkan possessions. Their habitat, at this stage, appears to have been in the eastern Pontic steppes stretch-ing into the Azov region and North Caucasus. It is here that Jordanes and Pseudo-Zacharius Ithetor place them in the mid-6th century. Shortly afterward, they were overrun and subjugated by the Avars and then the Turks. When Turk rule weakened, sometime after 600, the Avars appear to have reestablished some control over the region. It was against Avar rule that the Bulgars-under their leader Qubrat, whom Heraclius had been cultivating for some rime (he and his uncle were baptized in Constantinople to 619)—revolted ca. 631-632 and founded the Onoghundur-Bulgar state. Some time after Qubrat's death (660s), this Pontic - Maeotun Bulgaria, whose Balkan descendents would also claim Attilid origins, came into conflict with the Khazar khaganate, successor to the Turk empire in western Eurasia. The Khazars emerged victorious from the contest, and parts of the Bulgar union broke up and migrated. One grouping under Asperukh in 679 crossed the Danube into Moesia and, having subjugated a local Slavic confederatton, there laid the foundation for the Balkan Bulgarian state. Yet other groups joined the Avar state in Pannonia (where some would prove to be rebellious subjects or took up restience in Italy around the five Rasennate cities, to live as Byzantine subjects.The other Bulgars either remained in the Pontic steppe zone the (the “Black Bulgars” of Byzantine and Rus’ sources) or later migrated (perhaps as early as the mid-7th century or as late as the mid-8th to early 9th century) to the middle Volga region, giving rise there to the Volga Bulgarian state, which remained, however a vassal of the Khazars. Balkan Bulgaria soon became an important element in Byzantine politics, on occasion supporting contestants to the throne and also helping to defeat the Arab attack on Constantinople of 717-18.The iconoclastic Emperor Constantine (741-775) began a series of wars against them that remained a constant theme of Byzantine-Bulgarian relations until the destruction of the first Bulgarian empire by Basil II (976-1025).In 864 the Bulgarian king Boris, outmaneuvered by Constantinople, converted to Christianity. Thereafter, the Turkic Bulgars underwent Slavicization, and Balkan Bulgaria became one of the centers of medieval Slavic. The Volga Bulgars, however, converted to Islam in the early 10th century and created a highly sophisticated, urbane, mercantile Muslim society that, after stout resistance, was conquered by the Mongols in the early 13th century.

[papazataklaattiranimam]

However, until 997, Turkic Bulgars ruled the First Bulgarian Empire. I wish you had shown it to the end.

[BakhosVillager]

This is the best video in the world! 🌎

[papazataklaattiranimam]

Classification
The dynamic history of the Turkic-speaking peoples makes it difficult to set up a classification of modem Turkic languages that combines geographic and genetic criteria. The following rough scheme represents an attempt to combine the current area distribution with genetic and typological features. It primarily distinguishes six branches, some of heterogeneous origin:
1 A southwestem (SW) branch, Oghuz Turkic
2 A northwestem (NW) branch, Kipchak Turkic;
3 A southeastem (SE) branch, Uyghur Turkic;
4 A northeastem (NE) branch, Siberian Turkic;
5 Chuvash, representing Oghur or Bulghar Turkic;
6 Khalaj, representing Arghu Turkic.

Prevailing opinion is that the language of the text is a Turkic language Deliyannis, Deborah (2019). Fifty Early Medieval Things. Cornell University Press. p. 171. Helimski 2000, p. 45. This interpretation was sharply criticized by Vilhelm Thomsen and Gyula Németh, who showed that the language of the inscription cannot be Greek, but an old Turkic language. Thomsen 1918, pp. 17-18. Göbl & Róna-Tas 1995, pp. 17-18. Today almost all scholars share the view that the text was written in a Turkic language Alemany 2009, p. 5. Róna-Tas 1999, pp. 131-132. Göbl & Róna-Tas 1995, pp. 18-19. It has been often compared with the Turkic Bulgar language of the First Bulgarian Empire, [34][7][29] attested on several 8th-9th century inscriptions found in north-eastern Bulgaria and written in Greek letters.[47] It is generally agreed that the first word is the Turkic title buyla or boyla (also spelled boila[50]) which is attested on several Old Turkic and Danube Bulgar inscriptions[51][52] and also mentioned by some 9th and 10th centuries Byzantine authors.[51][53] Butaul is usually read as a personal name.[2][54][55] It may be interpreted as "son of Buta" with the final -ul being a development of the Turkic oğul = "son".[54][55] This etymology was challenged based on the observation that according to the predominant model of construction of Turkic patronymics, the possessive forms oğlu or oğli are expected.[54][56] Based on the names attested on Old Turkic inscriptions, Erdal posited the reading But Aul.[54] The title Boila is predecessor or old form of the title Bolyar (the Bulgarian word for Boyar). Boila was a title worn by some of the Bulgar aristocrats (mostly of regional governors and noble warriors) in the First Bulgarian Empire (681–1018). The plural form of boila ("noble"), bolyare is attested in Bulgar inscriptions[2][3] Boila (Old Bulgarian: бꙑлꙗ; Bulgarian: боила; Greek: βοιλα; Old Turkic: 𐰉𐰆𐰖𐰞𐰀‎, romanized: Boyla) was a title worn by some of the Bulgar and Göktürk aristocrats (mostly of regional governors and noble warriors) in the First Bulgarian Empire (681-1018) and Second Turkic Khaganate (682-744).[1] For the linguists, the title "Boila" is the predecessor or an old form of the title "Bolyar". The Boil(a)s were two types: internal ("great") and external ("small"). The internal Boil(a)s were governors of the Comitates (administrative regions). Most of the popular linguists believe that "Boila" has old-Turkic origin and the meaning of the word can be translated as "noble". The Ichirgu-boila or Chargobilya (Greek: ητζιργου βοιλα; Old Bulgarian: чрьгѹбꙑлꙗ, [1] Bulgarian: Ичиргу боила) was a high-ranking official in the First Bulgarian Empire. He was the commander of the garrison of the capital and was the third most important person in the state after the ruler and the Kavkhan. In peace-time the ichirgu-boila had diplomatic functions. According to some data the ichirgu-boila personally commanded a squad of 400 heavy cavalrymen.
According to Veselin Besheliev the word "ichirgu" was of Turkic-Altay origin and meant "internal".[2]
One funeral inscription found during excavation works in Preslav talks about the ichirgu-boila Mostich who served under the Emperors Simeon I the Great (893-927) and Peter I (927-969). An unknown ichirgu-boila is mentioned in the Philippi Inscription dating from the reign of Khan Presian I.

[geomapper]

Какие классные водохранилища умели строить булгары тысячу лет назад 😄

[atkatk]

Bulgarian nationalists







😲

[papazataklaattiranimam]

Turkic and Jewish genealogical myths recorded by King Joseph and Sefer Yosippon identified Khazar as the "brother" of other Turkic tribes like the Bulgars and Sabirs (see below). Syriac legends said that the ancestor of the Khazars was named "Khazarig, " the brother of "Bulgarios." Most scholars believe that these legends have a historical basis and that the Khazars were indeed closely related to Turkic tribes such as the Bulgars and Bashkirs.

[akata]

Now is the moment when Tatarstan Chuvashia broke away from russian federation and created again Volga Bulgaria 😀

[papazataklaattiranimam]

Nikov is the first Bulgarian historian to pay special attention to, and attri bute great significance to, the Turkic components in the Bulgarian ethnogen esis (i.e., after the Bulgars) and among the ruling aristocracy. He elaborated on the issue of the "Turkic element's" influence upon Bulgarian history in a 1928 unpublished manuscript (delivered as a public lecture). Nikov began with the following policy-setting statement:

There is no period in our history on which the Turkic element did not exert its strongest influence and did not leave the deepest traces in the development of our people. [...] None of the Balkan peoples has experi enced the Turkic influence so strongly as our people,

The Turkic pressure began from Central Asia and had two directions to the northwest through southern Russia, and to the southwest through Persia and Asia Minor. The Bulgarian state was founded due to one of the Turkic peoples, the Bulgars, who themselves joined a number of Turkic tribal alliances (of Huns, Kutrigurs, Utigurs, Avars, and Khazars). During Byzantine rule, the Turkic Pechenegs and Uz came from the north; many of them crossed the Danube and were assimilated by the Bulgarian people. Then came the Cumans, without whose decisive help the uprising of Asenevtsi would hardly have succeeded. Thus, just as the First Bulgarian Kingdom was founded with the help of the Turkic Bulgars, the Second Kingdom was founded with "the decisive collabora tion of the Turkic Cumans."129 Not only did Cumans settle south of the Danube and become assimilated and absorbed by the Slavic-Bulgarian people, but they were also of great significance politically in the Second Kingdom, whose dynas ties all had Cuman blood in them. There were also many Bulgarian boyars of Cuman origin, including Balic in Dobrudzha. It could even be said that the Cumans acquired a dominant position in the political life of the state. 130 There followed the influence of the Mongol Tartars, who even supplied one Bulgarian king, Chaka. But of greatest importance were the Ottoman and Seljuk Turks, who conquered the Balkans from Asia Minor. Concerning the Cumans, Nikov considers the "transfusion of blood" from Turkic "elements" an asset, a means of rejuvenating and strengthening the "race" and enhancing the vitality of the Bulgarian people (in contrast with the conquering Turks).

[bhema]

We didnt see the black bulgars of Batbayan, the Kuber bulgars, and the Alcek bulgars.

[АлександърГрозданов-дм]

Names like Asparukh, Krum, Presian are found a lot in Armenia, even the Armenians have a Tsar with this name, there is no document or inscription anywhere that says that the Bulgarians believed in Tangra, this is also a fiction

[grechgrech]

great information i sometimes thought bulgarians are fully turks but the fact that chuvash were volga bulgars are awesome

[papazataklaattiranimam]

Nikephoros I stated that Kubrat was lord of the Onogundurs, Theophanes referred to them as Onogundur Bulgars and Constantine VIIremarked that the Bulgars formerly called themselves Onogundurs. Variations of the name include Onoguri, Onoghuri, Onghur, Ongur, Onghuri, Onguri, Onogundur, Unogundur, and Unokundur.