Quote:I was just explaining the guy where everyone stands and I don't think I got you wrong.
Well said..since when do you represent everyone?? Even ppl otside illyria forums?! Go ahead, send the guy a pm and explain what he should write from now on.
Quote:We have a progress. Just months ago there were 10 000 Bulgars. Good.
Never said such a thing.. probably someone else was telling you that. But 150-200 000 is the max reasonable.
RuseBG Senior Moderator
Posts: 9735
(10/2/07 10:19 pm)
Re: On the Greek position about Macedonia?
Quote:since when do you represent everyone??
If I explained wrong, you can complain. If not, what are you moaning about?
Quote:Go ahead, send the guy a pm and explain what he should write from now on.
That's horsecrap. You won't accuse me of not letting anyone express his opinion, will you?
Quote:Never said such a thing..
Are you sure? Do you want me to check some of the old topics?
Quote:But 150-200 000 is the max reasonable.
It's fine with me. Especially when considering the almost unexistant local population. That said, if we consider them your Thracians, of course.
londonergb Registered User
Posts: 27
(10/2/07 10:23 pm)
Re: On the Greek position about Macedonia?
The thracian connection is definitely being accentuated upon nowadays...
Recently I was watching a documentary on one of the British channels about the gladiators in Rome and guess how the Thracian gladiator was mentioned?-he was declared bulgarian The same outfit as shown in Rhezus's pic in the "origins of bulgarians" topic.
I am quite interested in the DNA analyses as well although I doubt that the guys properly interpret and decipher what they see.. What is Your opinion on that? For example take the supposesd 5% turanian blood in our veins..Its being declared the proto-bulgar element...Couldnt it be of some other origin for example?Edited by: londonergb at: 10/2/07 10:30 pm
RuseBG Senior Moderator
Posts: 9738
(10/2/07 10:29 pm)
Re: On the Greek position about Macedonia?
Quote:Recently I was watching a documentary on one of the British channels about the gladiators in Rome and guess how the Thracian gladiator was mentioned?-he was declared bulgarian
This is really sad. Why should a British channel claim something that Rhezus should have done years ago, following his endless Thracian claims?! Rhezus, shame on you!!!
Quote:For example take the supposesd 5% turanian blood in our veins..Its being declared the proto-bulgar element...Qouldnt it be of some other origin for example?
This is another huge crap. If I may add, it is found (according to these wankers' analyses) in Northern Bulgaria only. As if there were no Bulgars in the Sothern part.
What can I comment?! It is so pathetic...
londonergb Registered User
Posts: 28
(10/2/07 10:33 pm)
Re: On the Greek position about Macedonia?
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For example take the supposesd 5% turanian blood in our veins..Its being declared the proto-bulgar element...Qouldnt it be of some other origin for example?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is another huge crap. If I may add, it is found (according to these wankers' analyses) in Northern Bulgaria only. As if there were no Bulgars in the Sothern part.
What can I comment?! It is so pathetic...
----------------------------------------
- That was my point..I presonally will interpret this turanian element as Ottoman turkish and considering the heavy Ottoman colonisation in the BG North-East its easily explainable...
Edited by: londonergb at: 10/2/07 10:34 pm
RuseBG Senior Moderator
Posts: 9739
(10/2/07 10:39 pm)
Re: On the Greek position about Macedonia?
I don't think so. There is a Turkish element in Southern Bulgaria as well. Why then it is not mentioned in this remarkable study?
londonergb Registered User
Posts: 29
(10/2/07 11:10 pm)
Re: On the Greek position about Macedonia?
If we take the Gagauz az an example as a christian turkic group because of their religion they are more keen to intermix with their bulgarian neighbours rather than with the muslim turks...this could be a plausible explanation of the more turanic blood in the veins of North-eastern bulgarians/Gagauzi are mainly in the Varna region / even my parents when they talk about the varnenci they always call them "gagauzi" .. as the Sofianci -shopi etc...
Re: On the Greek position about Macedonia?
The Gagauzi are the Turkic-speaking population with lowest mongoloid genes.
londonergb Registered User
Posts: 30
(10/3/07 12:51 am)
Re: On the Greek position about Macedonia?
Do You know of any sources about the DNA results on Bulgaria.I read a small article in a BG newspaper but that was all...Something was mentioned also in the forums but without specifying the sources
londonergb Registered User
Posts: 31
(10/3/07 1:02 am)
Re: On the Greek position about Macedonia?
Just as a curios fact ,did You know that in the French "Robert"
enciclopedia /edition1956/we Bulgarians are declared as belonging to the "yellow" race?!..together with hungarians and finns btw... also recently the semitic peoples are considered white...so are the populations in north africa and middle east white or yellow?!
Edited by: londonergb at: 10/3/07 1:22 am
Re: On the Greek position about Macedonia?
londonergb
Quote:Recently I was watching a documentary on one of the British channels about the gladiators in Rome and guess how the Thracian gladiator was mentioned?-he was declared bulgarian The same outfit as shown in Rhezus's pic in the "origins of bulgarians" topic.
There are many examples and descriptions about how Thracians were in their appearance. Several modern historians say that Thracians did not vanish or die - they still exist in their own lands..
Ruse:
Quote:This is really sad. Why should a British channel claim something that Rhezus should have done years ago, following his endless Thracian claims?! Rhezus, shame on you!!!
Ruse, stop hiding the truth about steppe Bulgars, please! Nobody believe to such crazy theories. Bulgars have clearly prooved what their real origin was. There are obvious facts.. As mentionned - their turkic speech, titles (khans), names, calendar etc. They've been having Bolgar states in the the steppes before and as a fact.. only part of them settled in Thrace. Another fact is that they first moved into Moesia (Northern BG). It's impossible to prove the opposite. The whole World knows that - no one would believe to any new theories.
The truth is to come out soon - at least from the thousands of Thracian tombs spread throughout our country. And Ruse, I hope you can swallow that - all is coming out, soon or later.
Ruse:
Quote:There is a Turkish element in Southern Bulgaria as well. Why then it is not mentioned in this remarkable study?
Because that "turkish element" is simply not turkic - but thracian!
Bulgarian ethnic turks do look thracian - not turkic!!
Edlund:
Quote:The Gagauzi are the Turkic-speaking population with lowest mongoloid genes.
Exactly Edlund - Turkish speaking, but not Turkic ppl!!
Edited by: Rhezus at: 10/3/07 2:21 am
Quote:Do You know of any sources about the DNA results on Bulgaria.
There are DNA results, the question is only how to interprete them. One thing is sure - Bulgarians are closer genetically to their neighbours Romanians and Greeks than to other Slavic people like Czechs, Ukrainians and the others. And there are no doubts that significant part of our genes is from people, who lived on the Balkans many thousands of years ago.
Quote:Just as a curios fact ,did You know that in the French "Robert"
enciclopedia /edition1956/we Bulgarians are declared as belonging to the "yellow" race?!..together with hungarians and finns btw... also recently the semitic peoples are considered white...so are the populations in north africa and middle east white or yellow?!
I doubt it that an encyclopedia uses the term "yellow race". "White" and "yellow" are very relative terms and are not used by scientists.
Re: On the Greek position about Macedonia?
one possible theory i've heard about our origin is that we stem from the same branch of peoples as the fins.
all that matters is 'Ziezi, ex que Vulgares"
yea...i tapped that
Re: On the Greek position about Macedonia?
The person who wrote 'Ziezi, ex que Vulgares" is the biggest clown on Earth.. His theories are SO absurd.
RuseBG Senior Moderator
Posts: 9742
(10/3/07 9:12 am)
Re: On the Greek position about Macedonia?
He is quite an ancient author, Rhezus
Why do you describe him as an idiot
londonergb Registered User
Posts: 32
(10/3/07 1:32 pm)
Re: On the Greek position about Macedonia?
-----------------------------------
''Londonergb, to make things clearer for you, I'll let you know that Rhezus, unlike the rest of us, claims that we are mainly Thracians with a very little Bulgar blood.
I am tired of that dispute but I will never agree with his view on Macedonians, because we are the same people, and his position sounds like a national treason. Exactly like the communists but with the Thracian implication that makes the -difference according to him. ''
------------------------
- Not really, because the Paeonians were in the biggest part of the territory of present day Rep of Macedonia and were a Thracian tribe!
Regardless of wich theory is correct-the mainly proto-bulgar or the mainly thracian or mainly slavic descent ,in every case we come to be derived from the same stock...Even if all theories are partially correct which is my opinion the result still remains the same...
Edited by: londonergb at: 10/3/07 2:37 pm
Quote:Not really, because the Paeonians were in the biggest part of the territory of present day Rep of Macedonia and were a Thracian tribe!
Correct, Macos have nothing against when you point the Thracian connection. They simply do not want to identify themselves as steppe bulgars, they stick to the idea of being local ppl - non Bulgars.
The number of rays on their country shield are the lokal tribes. They are more councious about the local origin than we are!
RuseBG Senior Moderator
Posts: 9748
(10/3/07 3:27 pm)
Re: On the Greek position about Macedonia?
I do like Rhezus to show me the exact location of those places where all locals were hidden when Kuber arrived with his Bulgars and settled in an almost depopulated area.
Thanks in advance.
And I will not even comment on Rhezus' explanation about their flag. It is utter nonsense.
Quote:I do like Rhezus to show me the exact location of those places where all locals were hidden when Kuber arrived with his Bulgars and settled in an almost depopulated area.
The problem is that Kubrat or Asparukh did not arrive in a depupulated area. There were at least 2.5 million local ppl here and they did not welcomed the arriving Bulgars with aplauses. Bulgars came, plundering and setting on fire towns and villages. I think you should get yorself a better information about that - definately not from the historians you like.
Quote:And I will not even comment on Rhezus' explanation about their flag. It is utter nonsense.
You think you know better, yeah.. Macedonians are steppe Bulgars, righ!Edited by: Rhezus at: 10/3/07 4:13 pm
The same outfit as shown in Rhezus's pic in the "origins of bulgarians" topic.
yea...i tapped that 
Email This To a Friend
Topic Commands
Click to receive email notification of replies 
Click to stop receiving email notification of replies