|
Post by terroreign on Dec 9, 2010 3:55:29 GMT -5
Khan Boris of Bulgaria is widely seen by Bulgarians as a powerful and successful ruler, expanding the Bulgarian empire's borders and uniting the people. However what many do not mention, are the amount and level of crimes against humanity this man carried out! Boris was the heir of the prestigious "Dulo" dynasty, a dynasty which ruled Bulgaria for hundreds of years and was Pagan speaking Turkic Bulgarian, tracing origin back to the Volga Bulgars. For about 10 years he ruled Bulgaria, facing many problems with the Byzantines and Franks. After being defeated by the Serbs, and invaded by the Byzantine Empire, the Khan decided to abandon his heritage and convert to Christianity in 864. Khan Boris set up a Bulgarian church and started mass conversions of the Bulgar people. The Bulgarian elite and commonfolk held steadfast in their traditions and opposed such an abandonment of their culture in turn for a mirror image of Byzantine's. In response to disagreement, Boris was a diplomat about it. He captured 52 noblemen, and executed them one by one, along with their families. Boris made it law to be a Christian in his realm, and murdered anyone who dare to hold on to their ancestor's religion. Boris's own son, Vladimir-Rasate, was against such cultural-treason and led a rebellion against his father's disgraceful ways. He was captured and blinded by Boris, then thrown into a dungeon for the rest of his life. The slavic language was declared as official in Bulgaria in 893, anyone who spoke in the Bulgar language was executed, and before retiring Boris warned his heir, his son Simeon I, that he too would be blinded if he went against his policies. Khan Boris used ethnic cleansing, intense censorship, and inquisitions to turn his ancestral state into something it never was. He disgraced everything his ancestors fought for, and in turn created the culturally-conflicted people that are the Bulgarians today. If Khan Boris was alive today, he would be worse than Hitler, and die in the prisons of the Hague tribunal. Yet, this is who Bulgarians consider their greatest hero.
|
|
|
Post by Novus Dis on Dec 9, 2010 4:33:02 GMT -5
What are you going to do? Dusan is considered the greatest ruler among Serbs despite the fact that he did nothing permanent for Serbdom.
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Dec 9, 2010 4:45:02 GMT -5
Grizi jeziku bre! nije ti pao na pamet Dusanovu Zakoniku? Predhodnik savremenog srpskog ustava, kuku boze
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Dec 9, 2010 5:00:29 GMT -5
da, Dusanov Zakon je bio izvanredan. PS nisam znao da CrnaGorci kazu "bre". lol
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Dec 9, 2010 6:01:50 GMT -5
^Ne kazu uglavnom, nego terazijski Crnogorci tu rijec upotrebjlavaju
|
|
ioan
Amicus
Posts: 4,162
|
Post by ioan on Dec 9, 2010 9:27:36 GMT -5
Obviously its an article biased towards Boris. Khan Boris of Bulgaria is widely seen by Bulgarians as a powerful and successful ruler, expanding the Bulgarian empire's borders and uniting the people. However what many do not mention, are the amount and level of crimes against humanity this man carried out! Its Knyaz, not Khan, at least according to the sources. How can he trace his origin to the Volga Bulgars? Volga Bulgars were small group that went to Volga FROM OLD GREAT BULGARIA, as did the Danube Bulgars with Asparuch. When they went to Volga they met and mixed with Turkic and Ugro-finnic tribes and started to became totally different people from the Danube Bulgars, that mixed with Slavs and Thracians. Or rather it was a clever decision because all European states at this pont (mid 9 century) were christian and didnt treat Bulgaria as equal and didnt felt obliged to respect the contracts with it. No proof for other rebelion except the 52 nobles. So the rebelion of the common folk is pure speculation. Christianisation was probably were big in Bulgaria: there are proofs that relatives of the supremes rules of Bulgaria were christians (Omurtags son Zvinica for example). there are no sources about this part. no sources about that too. pure assumptions. no proofs about that too. We cant assume that the killing of 52 noble familes was Bulgar ethnic cleansing, because we dont know their number. Except that it was not an act against the nobles being Bulgar, but against their will to become christians. He might have used barbaric and unhuman methods but his rule had lasting influence on Bulgaria: he made us christian, he was the first ruler to announce slavic as official and he was the first ruler that sponsored slavic literature. He must be a saint in Serbia just because of those things.
|
|
ivo
Amicus
Posts: 2,712
|
Post by ivo on Dec 9, 2010 11:51:00 GMT -5
This statement is rather clueless. No point in getting into it, but how can he trace his origins to the Volga Bulgars when both the Volga Bulgars and the Danube Bulgars descend from the Bulgars of Old Great Bulgaria!? That’s like saying that you descend from your brother, rather than your father.. rather moronic if you ask me.
LOL talk about simplicity. The main reason why Boris converted to Christianity was to gain international credibility over Europe. It was nothing but a political move, and he was evaluating offers from the West as well.. what is modern day Germany.
Is this what makes him like Hitler? Anyhow, this fact about the 52 noblemen and their families is not really verified.. though, he most probably had to kill people that opposed him. The opposition was probably significant, so there could truth to this statement. Anyway, this is nothing new. It’s a regular occurrence throughout history in many different countries.. those who oppose the ruler usually die a horrible death, if they are unable to dethrone him that is.
Slavic was made official, it was a political move. Regarding the ancient Bulgar language, and having people who spoke it executed.. I haven’t read about. Though, if you have more information on this topic, I’d be very interested in reading more. So if you do, please post some more details.
It is true that he had to make some tough decisions. It is also true that some may not have been the best choices, but given the circumstances he did what he thought was best for the future of Bulgaria. Regardless of whether his decisions were right or wrong, Bulgaria had two great empires with a very rich history of pride and glory.
This is nothing but a BS statement. Complete BS. Any cultural conflicts that may exist (even though, I don’t think they do) in Bulgaria today are recent occurrences, I’d say from about the time Bulgaria became a communist country. Before that, especially during the late 1800’s and early 1900’s the Bulgarian everything was perfect.. even with the fact that we were still struggling for our freedom. Starting with WWI the ancient Bulgars were emphasized in Bulgaria as the main ethnic component of our history, however, after WWII when Bulgaria became communist only the Slavic component was emphasized.. while the Bulgars were overlooked just by saying that there was some 20,000 of them who got assimilated into the sea of Balkan Slavs, which was not the case.
LOL
It’s hard to say who was/is Bulgaria’s greatest hero as we have quite a few who have given everything for Bulgaria and the Bulgarian people. Tsar Boris I was a great ruler and he is indeed one of Bulgaria’s greatest heroes. Hell, not only does have great and rather significant military achievements but his cultural innovations are also very important. He’s the one that contracted St. Clement of Ohrid in the development of a new alphabet (ie. the Cyrillic alphabet) that was used to translate Greek and Latin into Old Bulgarian (ie. Old Church Slavonic).
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Dec 9, 2010 13:15:49 GMT -5
ha ha, it seems we need an anti-Asen, posting random accusations against the Bulgars. That will keep them busy inside their penalty area.... Good job Krivo!
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Dec 9, 2010 20:42:00 GMT -5
"Its Knyaz, not Khan, at least according to the sources."
Pfft LMAO, his Turkish Ioan, hence the Khan!.
Its no secret his Turkish Ioan and his origins were from Volga BuLgarska. Today the Chuvashi people called their language BULGARIAN, just like your Gaugazi in BuLgarska.
I thought the info from Krivo was actually very accurate.
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Dec 9, 2010 23:20:32 GMT -5
Obviously its an article biased towards Boris. Khan Boris of Bulgaria is widely seen by Bulgarians as a powerful and successful ruler, expanding the Bulgarian empire's borders and uniting the people. However what many do not mention, are the amount and level of crimes against humanity this man carried out! Its Knyaz, not Khan, at least according to the sources. books.google.com/books?id=WlpPjOlVzQwC&pg=PA179&dq=khan+boris&hl=en&ei=9Z0BTaP_C4aBlAeht8zZCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCMQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=khan%20boris&f=falseUntil his baptism he was known as "Khan". Yeah I meant Great Bulgaria, point is - direct lineage of pure Turkic Bulgars. "the Dulo, was the most prominent and descended from the rulers of Great Bulgaria, a state founded by Asparukh's father on the steppes of Ukraine." books.google.com/books?id=b5vHRWp8yqEC&pg=PA1474&dq=dulo+great+bulgaria&hl=en&ei=hKEBTdKJD4-p8AbvuPXoAg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCYQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=dulo%20great%20bulgaria&f=falseAlso "In 893 Bris came out of his cell to rally an army to depose and blind his own son, Vladimir, and give the throne to his third son, Symeon I; according to the almost contemporary chronicle of the Regino of Prum, Boris overthrew and mutilated Vladimir because he wanted to restore the old religion." books.google.com/books?id=3cBjc6QCBXkC&printsec=frontcover&dq=grand+strategy+of+byzantine+empire&hl=en&ei=ZKoBTbK9MIH98AaO2qH3Ag&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCkQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false"...and Boris placed his third son, Simeon I of Bulgaria on the throne, threatening him with the same fate if he too apostatized." Your culture and dignity for acceptance into the popular club "After quelling the pagan revolt under his son Vladimir in 893, Boris finally retreated to his monastery, leaving his son Symeon as tsar." Every historian agrees on the massacre of the Boyars. "The rebellion of the Bulgarian nobles against Boris/Michael, which has always been interpreted in the framework of a permanent conflict between a traditional proto-Bulgarian ruling class and Christian Slavs" books.google.com/books?id=3oCI8BVxcB8C&pg=PA621&dq=bulgaria+pagan+revolt&hl=en&ei=laQBTeuGJcG78gaui_3oAg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCMQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=bulgaria%20pagan%20revolt&f=falseA lie. It's been established very long ago. Encyclopedia Britannica: "After the baptism he took the Christian name Michael, his family and the nobles who supported his policy were baptized one night in secret by a Byzantine bishop and priests who had been sent to Pliska the Bulgarian capital. There was serious opposition by both the nobility and the common people to Boris' attempt to enforce mass Baptism. A pagan rebellion broke out, and Boris retaliated by executing 52 boyars, together with their families." books.google.com/books?ei=w6UBTfuzEIP88AadpciEBQ&ct=result&id=YZhXAAAAMAAJ&dq=52+boyars+bulgaria&q=52+boyars+#search_anchorBesides the rebellion (which both nobles and commonfolk participated and undoubtedly were slaughtered), the execution of the 52 boyars and there families was a huge massacre. Given that each boyar had a family (wife and 3-4 kids at least in that time), we're looking at upwards of 208 men, women and children! Yeah but Boris wasn't a slav, neither were any Bulgars. This what he did was not only a violation of human rights, but an unnatural, and twisted way to deeply compromise one's own heritage and traditional values/identity, for political gains. Reminds me of countries today bending over for America to get in it's good graces, and get a couple table scraps. Shameless...
|
|
|
Post by dusko1 on Dec 10, 2010 0:31:59 GMT -5
If you look at that picture of Khan Boris it looks like he's holding a dildo.
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Dec 10, 2010 2:54:00 GMT -5
^^^^ LMAO!!! dirty mind you have bro!
|
|
|
Post by rusebg on Dec 10, 2010 7:33:30 GMT -5
Of all people, you Serbs should be the last one to comment shyte on Boris. He gave you an alphabet, after all. Show some gratitude. He also converted quite a big part of the existing Serbian population to Christianity. Not that those Serbs really wanted it, they were simply Bulgarian subjects. As for the 52 Boyars - they were not that much, Krivo, a relatively small percentage of the ruling Bulgar aristocracy, spread throughout the huge territory Bulgaria had at this time.
|
|
ioan
Amicus
Posts: 4,162
|
Post by ioan on Dec 10, 2010 9:06:44 GMT -5
Until his baptism he was known as "Khan". The only title known LIKE INDEED FOUND ON INSCRIPTIONS that the pagan Bulgar rulers used was kanasubigi. How do u know for sure they were pure Turkic? Its still a teory. The blinding of VLADIMIR is well known: however there are no proofs he was in prison FOR LIFE. How do you know what our culture was. The Thracian, Slav, Bulgar elements were all under strong byzantine influence and influenced each other and fusioned and the resullt was very influencial cuture that played big part in the culture of Serbia, Russia, Romania. Also, coming from a Serb to tell a Bulgarian that has lost his culture??? When the biggest cultural elements in your culture are also foreign: Byzantine and Bulgarian. You OBVIOUSLY DONT READ WHAT I WRITE. I never disputed the massacre of the boyars. I disputed other of your teories like: a) that there are other rebelions, like rebelions of the common folk, while there are no sources about other riots; b) that the masacre was bulgar genocide - we dont know if the boyars were only bulgars, we know for sure there were slavs in high administrational positions since krum, we dont know the total number of the bulgars so we cant assume they were 52 families etc...
|
|
wbb
Moderator
Posts: 733
|
Post by wbb on Dec 10, 2010 12:53:59 GMT -5
And the Serbs were known as saqaliba (slaves) to arabs, so what the bloody difference you gonna make? wat da fuk? Chuvashi and Gaguazi are Turks, you retards and they most definately not Bulgarians but Oghuric Turks, the ancestor of Hungarians. Bulgarians are not Turks, but Bulgarians, only Bulgars were Turks but they differ from todays Bulgarians. Use your logic. It's the same thing if when reffering Serbians with Siberians. Do you seriously have any tollerance with other people's Christian orthodoxy? honestly? I think it's you that is holding a dildo right now and i can see from the net that you are playing with yourself on your filthy arse. ;D
|
|
|
Post by tsompanos on Dec 10, 2010 13:44:17 GMT -5
Obviously its an article biased towards Boris. Khan Boris of Bulgaria is widely seen by Bulgarians as a powerful and successful ruler, expanding the Bulgarian empire's borders and uniting the people. However what many do not mention, are the amount and level of crimes against humanity this man carried out! Its Knyaz, not Khan, at least according to the sources. How can he trace his origin to the Volga Bulgars? Volga Bulgars were small group that went to Volga FROM OLD GREAT BULGARIA, as did the Danube Bulgars with Asparuch. When they went to Volga they met and mixed with Turkic and Ugro-finnic tribes and started to became totally different people from the Danube Bulgars, that mixed with Slavs and Thracians. So the bulgarians met people in north of the danube the year 800 who called themselfs thracians , or is this just more bulgarian fairytales i wonder?
|
|
ivo
Amicus
Posts: 2,712
|
Post by ivo on Dec 10, 2010 14:19:18 GMT -5
Wbb, personally I think that the ancient Bulgars are the dominant ethnic element in the modern day Bulgarian ethnos.. though, I think that whether the Bulgars or the Slavs contributed more or less is irrelevant. There were also many other tribes that were assimilated into the Bulgarian ethnos, including Cumans, Vlachs, Jews, Armenians etc.
Regarding the Chuvashi (along with the Tatars, the Kazan Tatars in particular).. it seems they are Bulgars who had assimilated local Turkic groups, mainly the Kipchaks. So I guess, the simplest way to look at it is that the Volga Bulgars are a mix of Bulgars and Turkic tribes while the Danube Bulgars are a mix of Bulgars and Slavs.
The irony of it all is that when Bulgaria was under Ottoman rule, the Muslim Turks had more respect for the Bulgarian Churches in comparison to the Serbs. When the Serbs occupied Macedonia, the use of the Bulgarian language (including all Macedonian dialects) was forbidden, and if spoken in public, it was an offence punishable by prison, beatings, destruction of property, and in some cases murder.
Anyhow, when the Serbs occupied Macedonia they either destroyed Bulgarian churches or took them over and forcefully made them in to Serbian ones. This is something the Turks didn’t do, or at least, they didn’t do it on such a large scale as the Serbs. So this whole supposed or perceived “Slavic Orthodox Brotherhood” that I’ve heard about here and there is complete BS.
Tsompanos, relax a little bit. The Thracian element is the least emphasized, and possibly the smallest contributing ethnic element to the modern Bulgarian ethnos of the main three (Bulgars, Slavs, Thracians). Actually, by the time the Bulgars had assimilated the Balkan Slavs, the Balkan Slavs had already Slavicized all or at least most of the Thracians that were in the region.
Anyway, I’ve said it before; I think the strongest claim to any of the ancient ethnicities would have to be that of the Albanians to the Illyrians. We, of course, have similar claims coming from practically all Balkan nations.. but much like the Ancient Macedonian claims, Ancient Greek claims, Ancient Dacian claims, and Ancient Thracian claims.. I don’t think there’s much validity behind those. Sure there’s probably some ancient blood in all of us, but to think that the modern day Greeks are the same as the Ancient Greeks or that today’s Macedonians are the same as the Ancient Macedonians is absurd.
|
|
wbb
Moderator
Posts: 733
|
Post by wbb on Dec 11, 2010 0:15:24 GMT -5
The Serbs are sound like very extremely intollerant to me, no doubt about that.
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Dec 11, 2010 0:42:33 GMT -5
^Not nearly as intolerant as Khan Boris was to his Turkic ancestors
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Dec 11, 2010 2:48:43 GMT -5
So the bulgarians met people in north of the danube the year 800 who called themselfs thracians , or is this just more bulgarian fairytales i wonder? Tsompane adelfe mou, When someone is dealing with Bulgo affairs, fabrications and myths is the norm.
|
|