ed ▁in ▁the ▁periods ▁of ▁anti - T urk ish ▁sentiment ▁in ▁Bulg aria , ▁and ▁is ▁ide olog ically ▁motiv ated . ▁As ▁such ▁the ▁proto - B ul gar ▁language ▁ ▁( of ▁the ▁group ▁which ▁established ▁the ▁state ▁of ▁Bulg aria ), ▁was ▁claimed ▁to ▁be ▁of ▁Iran ian ▁language ▁although ▁it ▁is ▁generally ▁accepted ▁it ▁was ▁Turk ic ▁of ▁O gh ur ic ▁branch ▁and ▁related ▁to ▁modern ▁Ch uv ash . ▁ ▁Aleks and ar ▁Bur mov ▁noted ▁that ▁the ▁medieval ▁writers ▁under ▁various ▁names ▁mentioned ▁H uns ▁and ▁Bulg ars , ▁and ▁some ▁authors ▁mentioned ▁them ▁as ▁separate ▁eth nic ▁categories . ▁The ▁cases ▁of ▁mixing ▁information ▁for ▁Bulg ars ▁and ▁H uns ▁in ▁some ▁authors , ▁as ▁well ▁as ▁possible ▁rapp ro ch ement ▁of ▁the ▁names ▁Av it oh ol ▁- ▁Att ila ▁and ▁Ir nik ▁- ▁Er nak , ▁do ▁not ▁give ▁reason ▁to ▁draw ▁a ▁line ▁of ▁equality ▁between ▁the ▁two ▁eth nic ▁groups . ▁According ▁to ▁Bur mov ▁there ▁is ▁no ▁historical ▁evidence ▁that ▁the ▁Bulg ars ▁and ▁H uns ▁lived ▁in ▁the ▁same ▁territory . ▁Bur mov , ▁Peter ▁B . ▁Golden , ▁Gy ula ▁N ém eth ▁and ▁Pan os ▁Soph oul is ▁concluded ▁that ▁claim ing ▁of ▁Att il id ▁descent ▁shows ▁the ▁inter ming ling ▁of ▁European ▁H uns ▁elements ▁with ▁newly ▁arrived ▁O ğ ur ic ▁Turk ic ▁groups , ▁as ▁the ▁number ▁of ▁evidence ▁of ▁lingu istic , ▁eth n ographic ▁and ▁so cio - polit