| Jakov |
quote: Originally posted by IYI-jorovelev
quote: Originally posted by Jakov
quote: Originally posted by Jakov
Сите племиња кои меѓусебно биле слични, по јазик, ги нарекувала со името на најголемото и најмоќното племе.Ова е инаку римска традиција.
Znachi ne sme bili malka orda? Malka ne ste bile ama ORDA, ste bile [quote]Originally posted by Jakov особено што колку што сите знаеме првото востание на Самуил и неговите браќа кое го водеше татко им беше против бугарската држава.
E te za tova iskam izvor. Kolko bitki i kade e vodil Samuil sreshtu bulgari? Vizantijcite kazvat vostanie zashtoto sled pobedata im sa imali Bulgaria za svoia teritoria. Za teh Samuil e buntovnik. Vo vizantijskite hroniki nad risunkite na dvete vojski pishe BULGAROI i ROMANOI. ROMANOI, zashtoto nema vizantijci. Za ikonite ako ne beha srbite, shteshe da se chete tova koeto e bilo napisano. No ima mesta deto sa propusnali da popravat. So zdrave.
Boris and Roman(sons of the Tsar Peter of the Bulgarians), were immediately dispatched to Bulgaria when it became known in Constantinople that the sons of one powerful komes, David, Moses, Aaron and Samuel, were openly preparing for revolt and uprising and that they had already achieved a measure of success. The two brothers were preserving their father’s empire and to keep the komes from making any further advance. In other words, these two Byzantine clients the support of the Byzantine court, were supposed to protect the one Bulgarian state against which komites had arisen in an attempt to secede. The komites, however, were successful in their efforts which could not be reserved even by Svyatoslav`s second incursion into Bulgaria in the summer of 969.
“Samuel and his State” S.Antoljak 1985 Please see: John Skylidzes chronicles Leo the Deacon Byzantine sources.... Etc etc etc....
|
| StanislavStanev |
Hallow there, Jakov!
Do you sincerely believe a Yugoslav of Croatian origin like prof. Stjepan Antoljak you just quoted, a lecturer at the University of Skopje those days, is an unbiased author should it come to the identity of Samuil and the state he ruled over? I wouldn't bet on him...
The following is an article by Ivan Mihajlov which deals with the inconsistencies in Anatoljak's theses. Do note all the Croatian historians before the age of Tito had assumed a stance quite different to his. im_statii/im_s3.html
But I am not finishd yet. Let me present a load of non-Bulgarian references, both medieval and modern, attesting to the real character of Samuil's kingdom:
Michael Psellus: Chronographia halsall/basis/psellus-chrono00.html "...only remained for him to prove his own noble descent, in order to become the acknowledged leader of the Bulgarians. (It was their custom to recognize as leaders of the nation only men of royal blood.) Knowing this to be the national custom, he proceeded to trace his descent from the famous Samuel and his brother Aaron, who had ruled the whole nation as kings a short time before..."
Anna Comnena: The Alexiad: Complete Text halsall/basis/AnnaComnena-Alexiad00.html "...But from the time that Mocrus, King of the Bulgarians, and his descendants, and finally Samuel, the last of the Bulgarian dynasty ..."
JOHN SKYLITZES, SYNOPSIS HISTORION The Battle of Kleidion, 29 July 1014 paulstephenson/trans/scyl1.html "...The emperor did not relent, but every year he marched into Bulgaria and laid waste and ravaged all before him. Samuel was not able to resist openly, nor to face the emperor in open warfare, so, weakened from all sides, he came down from his lofty lair to fortify the entrance to Bulgaria with ditches and fences..."
CHRONICLE OF THE PRIEST OF DUKLJA (Ljetopis' Popa Dukljanina) Partial Translation by Paul Stephenson paulstephenson/trans/lpd1.html "...Tugemir succeeded to the kingdom. Having taken a wife he sired a son whom he named Chvalimir. At that time, among the race of Bulgars, a certain Samuel commanded that he be called emperor, fought many battles with the Greeks, and drove them completely from Bulgaria. During his reign the Greeks did not dare approach that land..."
THE LEGEND OF BASIL THE BULGAR-SLAYER Paul Stephenson, Department of History, University of Wisconsin - Madison, and Dumbarton paulstephenson/research/bulgarslayer.html “…The study begins with an analysis of Basil's achievement in the Balkans. It re-evaluates Basil's wars, suggests that he was as much peacemaker as warmonger, and that it was never his intention to eliminate the independent medieval realm of Bulgaria (not Macedonia)…”
Oscar Halecki, History of East Central Europe PART II - THE MEDIEVAL TRADITION 4 THE HERITAGE OF THE TENTH CENTURY THE WESTERN SLAVS halecki/4.htm “…After invasions by Magyars and Pechenegs, the main eastern part of the country, with its brilliant capital at Preslav, became a battlefield between the Greeks and the Russian Varangians whom Byzantium under Emperor Nicephorus Phocas used against the Bulgarians, only to defeat them in 972 under John I Tsimisces. The result was the occupation of Eastern Bulgaria by the Greeks. A new leader, King Samuel, however, appeared in the western part of the country. He resumed Simeon’s struggle against the empire and opposed it for more than thirty years. That long Greek-Bulgarian war is one of the decisive events in the history of the Balkan Peninsula. It might even be interpreted as the beginning of the disintegration of Eastern Christian society, and it indeed proved the impossibility of reconciling the imperial idea with the free development of the various nations which had settled south of the Danube. In its first phase it was a defensive war of Byzantium against Samuel’s invasions which reached the Adriatic and the Aegean seas. But Bulgaria paid a heavy price for these renewed imperial ambitions. Emperor Basil II, called the “killer of the Bulgarians,” in 1014 finally inflicted upon them a crushing defeat, and Samuel himself died when thousands of captives were sent back to him with their eyes gouged. Such cruelty of course exasperated the Bulgarians
|