|
Post by Anittas on Sept 6, 2011 9:01:44 GMT -5
No, Clement did not invent the Cyrillic alphabet. He was an apprentice to Cyril, who was a Roman Greek. It was he and his brother, Methodius, who invented the alphabet. In fact, you could say that the Proto-Romanians of the time--meaning the Romans roaming the Balkans who spoke Eastern Latin, held the same citizenship as Cyril, so he was our brother, that we love. Since he's not here, you can thank us, instead.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Sept 6, 2011 9:04:27 GMT -5
Pyrro, ioan has this fixation on *dagestan*, he highlights this name in away to portray serbs as *Turkish* like his own people. There is no doubt the BuLgari are a mismash of people....Asparuch was known to be building structures in Turkish style (East Asian).
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Sept 6, 2011 9:05:33 GMT -5
Serbs kings were mentioned first in 9 century. Some 4 centuries after WELL KNOWN Bulgar kanasubigis like Kubrat/Kurt.please man, stop with the usage of CHINESE language... You know very well how incompetent we are with this. play a fair game man... ;D ;D ;D
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Sept 6, 2011 9:06:40 GMT -5
Pyrro, ioan has this fixation on *dagestan*, he highlights this name in away to portray serbs as *Turkish* like his own people. There is no doubt the BuLgari are a mismash of people....Asparuch was known to be building structures in Turkish style (East Asian). man i am so happy you are back.... we have so much more info, that certain mongol persons from here should start worrying!!!
|
|
ivo
Amicus
Posts: 2,712
|
Post by ivo on Sept 6, 2011 9:13:39 GMT -5
I completely agree. It seems some of our neighbors choose to cling on to some "perceived history of greatness" invented in the past 100-200 years. People like Anittas praise their conqueror as if it's some great achievement to have been conquered. And what's even more pathetic is that that conqueror only occupied a small portion of what is present day Romania and it conquered Dacians who are not necessarily the present day Romanians. As Anittas mentioned, they have 'more Slavic blood than us'.
Serbs never had any footing in the lands of what is modern Romania. The only significant Slavic tribe in those lands during those times were the Antes, who were not even purely Slavic. They were a federation of Slavic and Irannic tribes that ended up getting assimilated by the Bulgars between 500-600 AD. From that time on, the only significant influence in the lands of modern day Romania has been by the following peoples in the following order: Bulgarians (First Bulgarian Empire), Magyars, Bulgarians (Second Bulgarian Empire), Cumans, Pechenegs, and Ottomans.
It's good that you admit that.
All citizens of the Bulgarian Empires are to be considered Bulgarians (unless specified otherwise) as they lived for the Bulgarian cause, they fought for the Bulgarian cause, and they died for the Bulgarian cause. Much like Romans are considered Romans, Americans are considered Americans, etc.
Like I said, I know that it is very hard for you to swallow that the mean 'ol Bulgars have shown us a history that is superior to yours. It is because of Bulgaria that you are Christian Orthodox today. It was Bulgaria that had two strong empires, and I'm not even counting Old Great Bulgaria.. your country was nothing but a Bulgarian province.
Actually, I shouldn't even use the term 'country' to define the lands of modern day Romania as Romania is a country that came about in the mid 1800's. There was no such country before that.
Yes yes we got it. The Serbs are almighty beings who are superior to all others. They have no equal. They are the top dogs of the world, always have been always will be, all Slavs are Serbs etc. etc. etc.
Ahh now let's actually see some proper quotations from your sources, 'cuz I don't think you've read a single one. Let's also try to stick to neutral sources. And let's try to avoid deceiving people by posting out of context materials that you yourself are completely unfamiliar with.
Romanians!? These people only came into existence in the 1800's. There were no Romanians prior to that. There have been no references mentioning such a group.
False. Cyril and Methody devised the Glagolitic alphabet. The Cyrillic alphabet has been devised by four of their students, most notably, St. Clement of Ohrid. These four students were Bulgarians and worked under the orders of the Bulgarian Tsar Boris I. They developed the alphabet in the literary school of Preslav, which is where the oldest inscriptions in Cyrillic have been found.
Bwahahaha the statement above is so moronic that it doesn't even deserve a response.
|
|
|
Post by Anittas on Sept 6, 2011 9:18:31 GMT -5
Bulgarians are only superior to rats.
Romanians are mentioned in the 11th century. Romanians founded the Romanian-Bulgarian Empire and your last emperors were Romanian.
You are not Slavic, nor are you Romanian or Thracian. You are Mongoloid. We and the Russians eliberated you. It was a huge mistake. If we had the Turks as our neighbors, things would have been much better.
Romanians were Christinized by the Eastern Roman Empire and the Latin names that we have for God, church and so on is evidence for this.
|
|
ivo
Amicus
Posts: 2,712
|
Post by ivo on Sept 6, 2011 9:29:51 GMT -5
LOL. The correct terminology!? Coming from the person who is talking about an entity that never came into existence.. ie. the notorious "Romanian"-Bulgarian Empire. Hahahhaha what a moron. Do you not realize that the terms Romania and Romanian only came into existence in the 1800's. Any mention of these terms, or a variation of them, before this would have discussed something pertaining to the Roman Empire, and NOT the modern day lands of Romania nor the modern day Romanians.
Again with this "Romanians" bullshit huh. Who exactly were these Romanians and why have we never seen mentions of these people throughout history?
False. First of all, as I've already mentioned, there was no such thing as a Romanian-Bulgarian Empire. The empire you're referring to is known under the name of the Second Bulgarian Empire. The Second Bulgarian Empire only had Wallachia as its province.. Transylvania and Moldavia were not a part of it. However, ALL of modern day Romania was a province within Old Great Bulgaria and later the First Bulgarian Empire.
According to you.
Again with the terminology eh? Wtf is a 'Roman Greek'. You're coming up with your own terminology that is not in line with reality.
False. Cyril and Methody invented the Glagolitic alphabet, not the Cyrillic one.
WOW what a dishonorable mouse. Bro, be proud of your own achievements.. even if they've come late in history. At least they'd be your own. What you're doing is pathetic.
|
|
|
Post by Anittas on Sept 6, 2011 9:35:05 GMT -5
The Romanians are mentioned in the 11th, possible as early as the 10th century. Romanians are mentioned under the name of Romanian in the 16th century, whereas the Land of the Romanians was the name of Wallachia in Romanian, which was founded in 1290/1330.
PS. I have to repeat myself because the Mongoloids cannot comprehend what is being said and explained to them. It's okay ... baby steps....
|
|
|
Post by Anittas on Sept 6, 2011 9:35:33 GMT -5
Wtf is a 'Roman Greek'
Answer: a Romanoi.
|
|
ivo
Amicus
Posts: 2,712
|
Post by ivo on Sept 6, 2011 9:36:47 GMT -5
Yeah we know how you see us. Many haters tend to take a similar perspective. History, however, shows us otherwise.
Lol. Claim that which isn't yours, lie through your teeth, and steal whatever you can. Typical gypsy behaviour. Be proud of your own achievements Gyppooo.
We are Bulgarians. We've proven ourselves worthy in many occasions throughout history in many different aspects of life. The same cannot be said of your people.
Hahahaha that's why your icons bear the Old Bulgarian inscriptions and your people use Bulgarian terminology with regards to church and religious affairs.
|
|
|
Post by Anittas on Sept 6, 2011 9:40:04 GMT -5
"History, however, shows us otherwise."
What does history show you? That you screwed up in your resistance against the Ottomans and couldn't free yourselves? That we had to liberate you? That you got cocky and we occupied your capital? Indeed, history is there for all of this to be verified.
|
|
ivo
Amicus
Posts: 2,712
|
Post by ivo on Sept 6, 2011 9:41:43 GMT -5
Under what name?
You're stretching Gypooo.
This is proper. "Roman Greek" can be easily misconstrued into something that it is not. Though, you seem to prefer these alternative and inaccurate interpretations.
|
|
|
Post by Anittas on Sept 6, 2011 9:47:38 GMT -5
I'm not stretching anything and I am not Gypsy--although I would have been proud to be Gypsy.
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Sept 6, 2011 9:48:04 GMT -5
Aziz, there was no word "Greek" from 300 ad to 1830 ad.
ROMIOI or ROMAIOI was the term used for orthodox greko-phones or vlaho-phones..
it is remarkable how much certain individuals are ready to distort facts just to support only a silly faulty statement or theory of theirs...
of course the new bulgarian history is a *WEALTH* of distortion and fabrications . lol
|
|
|
Post by Anittas on Sept 6, 2011 9:51:03 GMT -5
The reason why I said a Roman Greek was because the Romans of the Eastern Roman Empire consisted of different ethnicities, including Greek, Thracian, Armenian, etc.
|
|
ivo
Amicus
Posts: 2,712
|
Post by ivo on Sept 6, 2011 9:51:41 GMT -5
At that time Bulgaria was at war with Serbia, a Montenegrin contingent, Greece, the Ottoman Empire, and Romania. I would hardly consider your "victory" a victory that deserves any sort of glorification.
It shows me that my people have actually earned our place in the Balkans.
It shows me that my people stood up for what we believe.
It also shows me that I come from a nation that can be proud of who we actually are, rather than desperately clinging on to some fairy tale "history" invented in the 1800's.
And it has taught me to be proud of honorable acts.
Though I wouldn't expect you to understand any of this, as you are a person who prides himself in being conquered. A person who can only pride himself in the achievements of his masters. A person who's got the mentality of a semi-literate dimwit and the heart of a mouse.
|
|
|
Post by Anittas on Sept 6, 2011 9:53:46 GMT -5
You are proud of who you are actually are? Some of you claim Thracian origins, other claim Slavic origin; and the rest claim Iranian or Mongolian origins. You can't agree on your identity. You are a people without a true identity. The only identity you can claim is a mixed one.
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Sept 6, 2011 9:57:11 GMT -5
^^^ Bulgars = "Bostards" of the "Bolkans" united
|
|
ivo
Amicus
Posts: 2,712
|
Post by ivo on Sept 6, 2011 10:06:07 GMT -5
Ahh even further proof of your ignorance. You refer to Cyril and Methody as "Roman Greeks", however, there is no record of their ethnicity. All that is known is that they were citizens of the East Roman Empire. Furthermore, it is assumed that at least one of their parents was a Slav.. possibly both were, who knows. The point is, you're presenting things as if they're clear cut, when in fact we know nothing precise of the ethnicity of the two brothers.
The ethnic groups you've mentioned have all played a role in our ethnogenesis, but our identity remains. We are Bulgarian, much like you're Romanian.
One key difference, however, is that the Romanian identity was forged in the 1800's.
|
|
|
Post by Anittas on Sept 6, 2011 10:25:16 GMT -5
The Romanian identity became clear between the 15th and 16th century. Before that, we still had a Romanian identity, but like most people in the days, the identity belonged to the elite.
There is no clear Bulgarian identity. The Bulgarian identity is fake. The Bulgarians never really existed. The Bulgars did, but they were Asian. Much like the Macedonians--whom you claim belong to your race--you are confused.
|
|