Who were the Bulgurs?

>>70447434
They came from the steppes with a prayer from Tengri.
Related to the Avars, Magyars and other Turkic peoples.
Modern Bulgarians might have some of them, people close by too.
They were all castrated, blinded or killed by Basil "the Bulgar Slayer" II the Macedonian

>>70447434

dude, we post here all the fucking time

File: map 3.jpg (36KB, 700x462px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 700x462px

>>70447434
We are Indo-Iranian people. we came from this area - modern afghanistan-tajikistan-uzbekistan

>>70447434
there are several theories
but

oldest claim: "balhara" was supposedly a country in ~modern afghanistan. they are older than alexander the great and were famous for their medicine and other things, we don't really know how they disappeared
proofs are: geography, traditions, words, etc. this claim is considered legitimate by our official historians but most foreigners don't buy it and neither do many bulgarians

accepted claim:
- the bulgars were a tribe which was formed by a relative of attila the hun
proofs: rock carvings in volga bulgaria naming our rulers
- the tribe was made up of turkic people (who were local) and cimmerians (utigurs / kutigurs), and others. when they allied they called themselves onogurs and later formed "great old" bulgaria (called so by the east romans) in ~crimea.
proofs for turkic: another rock carving in modern day bulgaria where it is said our ruler made a sacrifice to -damaged- (interpreted as tangra)

great old bulgaria was destoryed by the khazars and the bulgars split into several tribes (led by rulers sons), the main were created "volga" bulgaria and "danube" bulgaria (river names)
volga allied the turkic people, became muslims and traders, were occupied the khazars for a while and invaded by mongols later. eventually joining russia. today some peoples in the russia identify as decedents of the bulgars (chuvashi, etc. mind you the tatars are NOT)
danube allied the local slavs (the seven slavic tribes) and fought the east romans. eventually fell to the turks

today we consider ourselves slavic (tho part of it may be due to communist propaganda). some claim we are most related to thracians because of hapso-groups. (tho part of it may be due to pro-european propaganda)

>>70447880
also proofs for turkic and not balhara: supposedly "bulgar" or smth means "troublemaker" in some turkic language or smth. therefor it would just be what they called themselves

proofs for not a random tribe: the east romans describe "great old" bulgaria had stone cities / walls which was impressive to them (btw they took rulers kids in constantinopole to educate them (defense / trade deals), so it is believed that the monarchy was likely christian even back then (tho some of it may be due to christian propaganda))

either way, regardless if they were nomadic to begin with, the bulgars were deff forced into being nomadic, and they then proceeded to settle down everywhere they went

>>70447523
>>70447584
>>70447880
>>70448004
Interesting.
So to put it simply its similar to that of Hungrary and Huns?

Land area of consisting East Europe, Central Asia and Middle-East got some interesting history and groups of people.

>>70448135
>Hungrary
kind of, except hungary managed to keep their language

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Migration_Period

btw as to why hungarians aren't known as "magyars":
The ethnonym "Ungri" is the Latinized form of Medieval Greek "Oungroi" ("Οὔγγροι"). According to an explanation, the Greek name was borrowed from Proto-Slavic "Ǫgǔri" ("Ѫгъpи"), which was in turn borrowed from Oghur-Turkic "On-Ogur" (meaning "ten [tribes of the] Ogurs"), the collective name for the tribes which later joined the Bulgar tribal confederacy that ruled the eastern parts of Hungary after the Avars. The Hungarians probably belonged to the Onogur tribal alliance and it is very possible that they became its ethnic majority.[4][10]

>>70448135
Yeah, the Indo Iranians in central Asia are the most interesting. Sadly they all got KHAN'D or Slavicised

File: Old_Great_Bulgaria_and_migration_of_Bulgarians.png (639KB, 2180x1430px) Image search: [Google]

639KB, 2180x1430px

>>70447880
>>70448135

The bulgars may also have always been a group of many different tribes. But they were definitely not nomadic savages. Kubrat grew up in Constantinople or was educated there and was most likely christian.

>>70447434
They are trash like you.

File: 484152_535121623177544_1146171197_n.jpg (291KB, 960x768px) Image search: [Google]

291KB, 960x768px

>>70447434
>Do their descendents still exist?
Bulgarians are their descendants.

Many Volga Tatars also claim descent or at least partial Bulgar heritage.

Some also claim the Chuvash are their descendants and there are theories that their languae is either directly descended from Bulgar or is at least related to both Bulgar and Hunnic.