▁from . ▁R unc iman ▁considered ▁Av it oh ol ▁to ▁be ▁a ▁distant ▁myth ological ▁ancest or . ▁Ivan ▁B ili ar sky ▁cons iders ▁that ▁both ▁Av it oh ol ▁and ▁Ir nik ▁were ▁only ▁myth ic ▁figures ▁of ▁the ▁historical ▁personal ities . ▁According ▁to ▁him ▁the ▁Nom inal ia ▁shows ▁that ▁the ▁cl an ▁memory ▁and ▁gene al ogy ▁important ▁to ▁Central ▁Asian ▁pe op les ▁was ▁like wise ▁significant ▁to ▁the ▁Bulg ars , ▁as ▁well ▁the ▁cosm ological ▁understanding ▁of ▁the ▁history , ▁as ▁the ▁Av it oh ol ▁and ▁Ir nik ▁were ▁mentioned ▁in ▁the ▁category ▁of ▁the ▁cre ator ▁and ▁founder , ▁the ▁myth ological ▁divine ▁ancest or - cre ator ▁represented ▁in ▁the ▁re inc arn ation ▁of ▁the ▁cultural ▁hero ▁within ▁time ▁cycles . ▁Jean ▁W ▁Sed lar ▁considered ▁the ▁Att ila ▁connection ▁just ly ▁doubt ful , ▁and ▁argued ▁the ▁possibility ▁of ▁a ▁ste ppe ▁dynast y ▁which ▁produced ▁H unn ic ▁r ul ers ▁like ▁Att ila ▁may ▁have ▁also ▁produced ▁r ul ers ▁for ▁the ▁Bulg ars . ▁ ▁The ▁second ▁listed ▁r uler ▁is ▁Ir nik , ▁who ▁lived ▁ 1 5 0 ▁years ▁and ▁also ▁desc ended ▁from ▁the ▁D ulo ▁cl an . ▁It ▁is ▁generally ▁considered ▁that ▁in ▁the ▁Nom inal ia ▁under ▁Ir nik ▁was ▁considered ▁the ▁third ▁son ▁of ▁Att ila , ▁Er nak . ▁Vas il ▁Z lat ar ski ▁thought ▁the ▁identification ▁between ▁Ir nik ▁and ▁Er nak ▁point less , ▁and