• This topic has 6 voices and 22 replies.
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 24 total)
  • Author
  • #347201


    On one Russian talk-show labelled as “Bulgaria between west and Russia”
    a Bulgarian participant Dmitri Gachev stated that Bulgaria controlled
    Crimea for 300 years.I
    can’t find anything on the web about Bulgaria controlling Crimea
    for 300 years. Gachev also made a joke because Russia controlled Crimea for 150 only, thefore 2/3 of Crimea should belong to Bulgaria. 
    this true about Bulgaria controlling Crimea or the guy has was not

    in Russian . Begin listening at 15
    th minute.






    I can’t find any information about Old Great Bulgaria controlling Crimea in wiki article either.



    The guy in the show made another factual error stating a Bulgarian Kiprian born in Велико Търново was patriarch of Moscow. He was patriarch of small Rus (western Ukraine and south-western Polesie of Belarus) and Lithuania (Belarus & eastern Lithuania).



    Well, that’s as close as it got.



    Old Great Bulgaria was not a Slavic state, but a Turkic proto-Bulgar state. I don’t think modern Bulgaria can claim continuity from this state, unless they claim to be direct descendants of Turkic Bulgars.



    Bulgars were rulers among elite. If the state was Christian speaking Slavic, then Bulgarians can claim continuity.



    The state was Turkic speaking and religion was Tengrism



    We can claim continuity with whatever we want. The wiki is a little overzealous in describing them as tengrists, though. It’s an assumption based on the assumption that they were turkic.

    We also claim continuity with the guys that went to the Volga and Italy. It’s all holy bulgarian land which will be united with the fatherland one day. Pannonia, too. Only then can we think about annexing the Crimea to correct the unfortunate mistake of some dude on a russian TV show.



    So that’s where those nebulous theories came from :mrgreen: 



    Actually, I recently mentioned St. Kiprian somewhere around here and his title is indeed Metropolitan of Kiev and All Rus, with a titular residence in Moscow, so the guy wasn’t exactly wrong. You’re probably thinking of his nephew Grigoriy Tsamblak, who was indeed metropolitan only in Lithuania.

    As for Crimea – only OGB controlled parts of it and OGB lasted for less than half a century, so about that he was definitely wrong. Bulgar (not to be confused with Bulgarian) tribes might have lived in the northern parts of the peninsula for a while longer, but again nowhere as near as three centuries. He might be confusing Crimea with the Transcaucasian lands between the Caspian and Black seas, which were “controlled” for around the same time.

    @”Rex Hatson” Do you happen to have any arguments about your thesis? Historians from all over the world would be thrilled to find any hard evidence on the language and religion of the early Bulgars, considering nothing has actually survived, besides speculation.



    It’s not ”my” thesis. 




    Ah, yes, it’s the outdated communist dogma. Still no solid arguments in its favour whatsoever.



    @NikeBG He be jelly of our culture



    Yes, Mongols were strong empire building people. Nothing to be ashamed of.

    @NikeBG what are the other arguments? Any evidence to back them up?

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 24 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.


7 User(s) Online Join Server
  • m1tric
  • Симеон
  • Das Rheinenfuchs
  • Shvo
  • vibehours 4 days
  • Lyutenitsa™