[en] History

[Xuca]

Hey, enjoy your life, Traveller, and I'll look for some Bozha's books in the library. :go:

[Traveller]

The Bogomils and the official church

Document of the age – Appearance and ideology of the Bogomilism
From “Lecture against the Bogomils” by Presbyter Kozma – ecumenical figure from the second half of the X century

“1… It happened so that in the years of the Orthodox Tsar Petar in the Bulgarian lands appeared a pop [pop – Orthodox priest], by the name Bogomil – it is more correct for him to be called Bogunemil . He was the first to start spreading heresy in the Bulgarian lands. (…)
2… Truly (the heretics) are worse and filthier than the devils. (…) And what do they speak? – That it was not God, who created heaven, nor earth, nor all the visible (things)…
3… (For the Cross.)… Because the Jews crucified the Son of God on it, that’s why the cross is most hateful to God. (…)
4… (For the Eucharist.) The Eucharist is not done by God’s benevolence, neither is it Christ’s body, as you say, but it is just a simple food. (…)
6… (For the clergy.) And why do you say that the Eucharist and the spiritual rituals are not assigned by God and you abuse the priests and all the ecumenical orders by calling the faithful priests blind Pharisees and bark much at them as a dog at a horseman? …
8… (For the Virgin Mary.) …they don’t honour the glorious and pure bogomater, the mother of our Lord Jesus Christ, and many are ill-speaking of her. Their words and vileness can not be written in this book. (…)
17… (For the power.) … By cursing the rich, they teach their own not to obey their masters; they detest the tsar; curse the elders; blame the bolyars [nobles]; they think that hateful to God are those, who serve the tsar and they order every servant not to work for his master…”

===================================

From one side, as a heretical teaching the Bogomilism should be seen as an expression of discontent, caused by the Bulgarian social reality in the X century, and from another – as a product of the influence of three well widespread in Byzantium and the Balkan dualistic teachings – the Manicheanism, the Paulicianism and the Massalianism.
Creator and first propagator of the teaching was pop [Orthodox priest] Bogomil, who lived in the time of Tsar Petar (927-969). The main Bogomil conception was the belief in the existence and action of two powers: the Good – God, and the Evil – the Devil (the Satan). According to the Bogomils the whole visible world and the humans are a creation of the Devil and only the human soul came from God. The battle between these two beginnings would end with a victory of Good and a triumph of the social justice over the Earth. This eschatological conception (a view of the ultimate fate of the Universe) characterizes the Bogomil dualism as moderate and optimistic and differs it from the extreme dualism of the Paulicians.
The social core of the Bogomil teaching is characterized very well by Presbyter Kozma. According to him the Bogomils detested the tsar, cursed and blamed the bolyars and the elders, thought that hateful to God are those, who work for the tsar and they ordered every servant not to serve his master. These views were an expression of an outcry against the social-political order.
The arrows of the Bogomil criticism were aimed also to the official church and the clergy. They denied the Christian dogmas, cults, liturgies and rituals. They harshly blamed the laxity of the numerous clergy and thought of it as an unnecessary mediator between God and man; they declared it a parasitical estate and called its representatives “servants of the Satan”. Completely negative was their attitude towards the symbols and rituals of the official church (the Eucharist, the liturgies, the icons, the holy relics, the cross, the holy baptism, the holy communion etc.) They called the Christian temples crossroads and did their worship in every house or in the open, as they believed that God is everywhere.
From the Holy Scripture they approved only the New Testament, rejected the Old Testament and thought as wrong the life of the Old Testament humanity. They announced themselves against the strong cult towards the Virgin Mary.
By coming from their primary dualistic views, the Bogomils preached for a fight against Evil. They claimed that man should consciously fight with all the temptations of flesh and spare less cares for it and more for his spiritual improvement. They rejected riches and praised poorness; they recommended abstention from lavish food, forbade to drink wine and eat meat; they blamed those, who wore luxurious clothes. The Bogomils were openly against the wars and murders; they believed that no living creature should be killed, except for the snake. They preached asceticism and resignation; they showed negative attitude towards marriage, but thought of the woman as a creature, equal to man.
The followers of the Bogomil teaching were divided to three main categories: “slushateli” [listeners] (this was the biggest part of them), “viarvashti” [believers] (prepared and accepted in the community with a special ritual) and “savarsheni” [perfects] (from their circle were drawn the Bogomil teachers and preachers). The Bogomils called themselves “good Christians” and thought that by way of life and morals they differ themselves from the others. They were organized in “obshtini” [communities] – brotherhoods, at the head of each was an elder called “dedets”. The Bogomil leaders created a substantial by size literature, in which the main cosmogonic, moral-ethic and eschatological beliefs and notions of the teaching were reflected. Closely connected with the Bogomilistic was also the apocryphal literature, which with its simplicity and approachability suited the lower social ranks. Their wide spreading forced the official church to create “Index of the forbidden books”.
The wide spreading of the Bogomilism among the lower clergy, the peasantry and the crafts-men incited anxiety among the representatives of the church. The fight against the heresy initially started with preaching. A bright exposure from the positions of the official dogmatism was “Lecture against the newly arrived Bogomil heresy” by Presbyter Kozma. The exposures and curses (anathemas) of the official church proved to be ineffective; the state power also had to take precautions against the Bogomils. They were put under merciless persecutions by the tsar’s authority, and some were chained and imprisoned.
The Bogomil movement had in its spreading and manifestations its ebbs and flows. If during Samuil’s reign it didn’t show its negative side, during the Byzantine rule it flourished. At the times of Tsar Boril it spread widely, because of which a large anti-Bogomil convict was gathered in Tarnovo in February 1211. Anathematized were the conceptions of the Bogomils and their 13 leaders were condemned.
The Bulgarian realms proved to be small for the Bogomilism. Initially it spread in the Balkan and Asia Minor provinces of the Byzantine Empire. In 1111 in Tsarigrad [Constantinople] was condemned and burned on a stake the Bogomil leader Vasilii Vrach, who before this for 15 years learned the teaching and for more than 40 years preached it in different regions of the empire. In Serbia, Hrvatsko [Croatia] and Bosnia the Bogomilism made its way in the XII century. Its mass spreading in Bosnia led to its transformation to state religion. The heretical teaching found good soil also in Hungary. Except Bogomils these heretics were also called Babuns, Torbeshes, Kudugers, Patarenes. A wide spreading the Bulgarian Bogomilism found in Western Europe. Already in the XI century through Bulgarian settlers it made its way in Italy (where its followers were called Cathars), from there to France (Albigenses and Bougres), in Germany, Flandres and England. For a long time it was spoken everywhere for “the dangerous Bulgarian heresy”. Through the Bogomilism the name of the Bulgarians received wide popularity in whole of Europe and could be valued as a spiritual phenomenon in the middle ages with a universal character.


For more info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bogomils


================================================== ======

This is a part of Lesson XIV from my 11th grade history textbook. All the parts of the lesson are:
1. The Bulgarian archbishopric (Patriarchate)
2. Order and organization
3. Attempts for reform of the monkhood - St. Ivan Rilski († 946)
4. The Bogomils and the official church
5. Isihasm and Varlaamacy
6. Adamacy and heresy of "zhidovstvashtite"

I haven't translated everything from the lesson, as I don't have much free time and I was asked only for the Bogomils. This thing here is relatively short and the other things I have (especially the book) can give much more information about them, but it really is [B]much and I doubt someone would be interested in it (and as I said, I don't have much time to translate such long things). Now I'm "starting" with something about the Macedonian topic and, Xuca, if you're eager to write something - Voivoda Momcilo from the site with the pictures.

[Xuca]

Seems nice, but I'll read it this evening, I'll have more time then...

I see you got interested in Vojvoda Momchilo. He was more a mythical hero, than a real one. You can check the folk poem Wedding of King Vukashin (Zenidba kralja Vukashina), (http://galeb.etf.bg.ac.yu/~jovanm/zenidba_kralja_vukasina.htm) and if you fail to understand the point, I could try to translate it (though I think it will be very hard for me)

[Traveller]

Hey, I gained speed, so here's something more to read about Macedonia (later I might translate another chapter about Samuil):

========================

Bozhidar Dimitrov - "Ten lies of the Macedonism"


Introduction

Every historian, who has finished a book instinctively asks himself the question – what would the people after 100 years say, when they are reading his book. The conceited thought of every author is that his book will be topical even after one hundred years. My case is completely different – I hope that my book will be completely un-topical after a hundred years. Or said otherwise, I hope that the Macedonism as a phenomenon will disappear not after one hundred years, but much earlier.
Because this book will try to tell in a simple for every language the truth of the way, on which the Macedonism is created, i.e. for the one, not having anything in common with the historical science, composition of pure lies, with which the deep antiquity of the Macedonian nation, language and state are enacted. The truth is completely different – the Macedonian nation, language and state are a product of the great-Serbian state-political thought from the end of the XIX and the beginning of the XX century. The theory for them, formulated by the Serbian scholars Novakovic, Tsviic and others, was a fruit of the conclusion that the Bulgarian population in Macedonia, left under the rule of the Ottoman Empire after the creation of the Bulgarian state in 1878, could not be directly serbianized. Novakovic clearly writes: “When we can’t serbianize them, let us at least for the time being tear off this population from the Bulgarian people, creating its illusion that it is a separate nation. If this happens, it will be weak and small and if it enters the borders of Serbia in the future it would easily be serbianized.” Monarchic Yugoslavia, in which, between 1912-1915 and 1918-1941, Vardar Macedonia fell, did not follow the advices of its scholars and declared the Bulgarians in Macedonia to be Serbs and treated them as Serbs. For the disagreeing, of course – bullet, prison, inhuman tortures.
The Serbian communists and their mercenaries in Macedonia came out to be smarter. One year before they came to power /1943/ on a “congress” in the monastery “Prohor Pchinski” in southern Serbia they decreed the establishment of the Macedonian nation, written language and state. After the establishing of the communist regime in the so called New Yugoslavia, in whose borders the territory of Vardar Macedonia was joined, those categories were forced with the power of the totalitarian rule, which lasted 48 years. And because to this power it seemed counterproductive to say wheb and how were the “Macedonian” nation and language created, their history was also invented. Of course, it didn’t start in 1943, but in the deep antiquity, and for that purpose it was stolen from the Greek /for the Antiquity/ and the Bulgarian /for the Middle Ages and the Revival/ past. With the presence of a totalitarian regime, lack of free medias and science, the lies were able to be spread freely and we should admit that today, half a century later, they have a certain success among a considerable part of the population in Macedonia.
The democracy is death for such a notion of the history of the Macedonian lands. Because the lies will one by one be exposed by free medias, freely written scientific studies, monographs, books… Well, because of different reasons this won’t happen immediately. Too many people in the now independent since 1992 state of Macedonia owe their positions in the society and their well-being to the Macedonism and are resisting with all powers against the truth for the history of the Macedonian nation and language. They don’t want to say the simple truth that this is a Serbian state idea, that it was enforced in 1944, supported with repressions until 1992 and with a lot of money after this date.
In one democratic society the national self-determination is a matter of sacred personal right. And because the author of this book is a confident democrat, his purpose is not to destroy the eventual “Macedonian” national identity by readers from Vardar, and even Aegean Macedonia, but only to tell them the history of their lands and origin.




Lie One
“Present day Macedonia and the Macedonian people – descendants of ancient Macedon and the ancient Macedons”

The historical science has since a long time ascertained that the ancient Macedons are a tribe from the Greek ethnical society, whose territory was in the IV century BC in present day Northern Greece. In Vardar Macedonia were living mainly Thracians and Illyrians. Their state is with a monarchic form of government and the rulers and aristocracy are with Greek names. There was already in the Antiquity an argue, which emerged due to political reasons, whether the Macedons are Greeks or not. One thing is clear, that they’re not Slavs, which is the present day population of Macedonia by origin and which came to the Balkans in the VI century AD, i.e. thousand years later. And the political reason, which caused already in the Antiquity argues between the Greek political elite on the question if the Macedons are Greeks, emerges when to the next Macedonian King Philip II came the brilliant idea to unite the separated to hundreds of city-states Greek world into one Greek state formation. Philip and his son Alexander the Great not only succeed in doing this, but also to conquer the territories of almost the whole Balkan Peninsula, Asia Minor, the Middle East. The created huge empire disintegrates after the death of Alexander the Great /323 BC/ to separate kingdoms, as their kings become different generals of Alexander, which became founders of new dynasties. Macedon returns to its previous boundaries and is conquered by the Romans in 167 BC, while the surviving after the bloody wars with Rome population, now as Roman citizens, shares the fate of the ancient peoples of the Balkans – Thracians, Tribals, Illyrians. They are mercilessly swept off by the so called barbaric invasions of Goths, Huns, Avars, Slavs, Bulgars, which attack the Balkan lands between the middle of the III and the middle of the VII century BC, i.e. for 400 years. Every 2 – 3 years the so called barbarians, coming from the present day Russian-Ukrainian and Romanian plains, attack the territories to the south of the Danube, kill the men, kidnap the women and children, drive away huge herds of livestock and other valuable loot, burn and destroy cities and villages. The surviving ancient residents of the ancient provinces Moesia, Thrace and Macedonia flee terrified south to the big and never captured fortified cities of Constantinople and Solun. On their places sometimes settle parts of the invading barbarians, receiving from the Roman authorities the status of foederati /allies/, and after this of Roman subjects. But they are swept off on their own turn from the next barbaric wave.
In the end of the VI century from the documents of the age /administrative acts, chronicles, histories, literature works/ completely disappears the name “Macedonia” and “Macedonians” for marking of events and people in its ancient territory. From the VI to the XVI century “Macedonia” will be called the territory between Odrin and Tsarigrad /Istanbul/. Respectively its population would also be called “Macedonians”. And Macedonia itself or parts of her would be called with other names – Kutmichevitsa, Keramissian fields, tema “Bulgaria”. It’s clear that its surviving ancient population was moved to the fertile fields of present day Eastern Thrace. The authorities of the Eastern Roman Empire /Byzantium/ decided in the VI century that they can’t protect the Macedonian provinces and gathered its population in the wonderful plains under the walls of the imperial capital. Both to protect it in case of barbaric invasions and to feed the capital population of millions in peaceful times. This population, called with the name of the region “Macedonians” is with Greek ethnical consciousness and as Greeks it will populate the region of present day Turkish Thrace /together with Bulgarians and Turks/ until 1922, when it will be deported to the territory of present day Greece.
Such is the ascertained by thousands of European, American, Russian, Bulgarian scholars history and fate of the ancient Macedonian state and the ancient Macedonian people. They have nothing in common with the present day population of Macedonia. This doesn’t hinder the supporters of the Macedonism to announce themselves as direct descendants of the ancient Macedons and to take from them the name of the country and the name of the nation. And the solar symbol on the grave of Tsar Philip of Macedon – the 16 ray star, to declare a coat of arms of the state.
It is true that recently the former President of the Republic Kiro Gligorov announced that the present day Macedonians have nothing in common with their ancient namesakes. Then why did it had to be stolen names and symbols of the ancient Greek history and thus to trouble the international recognition of the new state? The thesis for the ancient origin of the population near Vardar, we should underline, keeps being exploited by influential political and intellectual circles to the west of Gueshevo and therefore Macedonia isn’t recognized under its constitutional name even to this day by the UN. There it figures under the strange name FYROM /Former Yugoslav Republic Of Macedonia/. The world is not as indulgent towards the thefts of history as mother Bulgaria, which was the first to acknowledge Macedonia and even under its constitutional name.

[Xuca]

The first idea of serbiation (or however it's called) came from King Milan Obrenovic, when he had a secret agreement with Austria-Hungary, which stated , among other things, that Serbia will not interfere with rebellions in Bosnia, while Austri-Hungary will support Serbia's expansion towards Macedonia. This was a mistake, and King Milan's friendship with A-H will be fatal, since with the change of dynasty, the relations will change also.

About killing the Bulgarians who didn't want to say that they are Serbs, even a Serb wasn't allowed to say that he's a Serb during King Aleksandar I Karadjordjevic, it was forbiden to say that you are a Serb, Croat, Slovenian, or anything, everybody were Yugoslavs. King Aleksandar wanted to keep Yugoslavia as a whole at any costs, and this was also a fatal mistake, and he was killed because of it by Ustashas.

The comunists were smart, Tito especially, he didn't like the idea of the Serbs dominating Yugoslavia, he made two new republics - Montenegro and Macedonia. With the collapse of Yugoslavia, Macedonia's leaders knew that they are not a nation, so they thought of these 10 lies.

This is just my opinion...



btw. what about Momchilo? did you read it? Did you understand it, and if yes, did you like it?

[Traveller]

First, I want you to know that I'm not implying something. What's past is past.
Second, about Momcilo - well, I started reading it, but honestly I need to put quite an effort to understand it. Maybe you could just paraphrase it? :rolleyes:
Third, here's the thing about Samuil:


Lie Four
The "Macedonian" Tsar Samuil and his "Macedonian" state


According to the Macedonian authors, calling themselves without the slightest grounds historians, after centuries under “Bulgarian slavery” in 971 the Macedonian people rose up in a rebellion against the Bulgarian power under the leadership of Tsar Samuil. After they were liberated from the “Bulgarian slavery” the Macedonians entered into a fierce fight with Byzantium and after a long war “The first Macedonian state” or “Samuil’s state”, as some writers from Skopie call it, died in 1018 under the strikes of the Greeks and their Emperor Basil II Macedonian. Yes, this is the full name of Basil II, because he was born in Eastern Thrace near Adrianople, where before this were settled in the VI century the remnants of the Hellenized ancient Macedonian population.
This is what the Macedonian children are learning in school, this is what is written in the thick “academic” histories of Macedonia and unfortunately this is what the citizens of Macedonia under the age of 60 know for Tsar Samuil. This is since how long the promoted in 1944 lie lasts.
Lie, indeed, and a 100 % one by this. The ethnical origin of Tsar Samuil and the name of the country, which he rules, were never an object of scientific argues in the medievalism /international name for the history of the Middle Ages/. Thousands of scholars from Russia, the USA, England, France, Germany, Serbia always write for the dramatic duel between Bulgaria and Byzantium when it’s about the events on the Balkans in the second half of the X century and the beginning of the XI century. And for the Bulgarian tsars Roman and Samuil, leading Bulgaria in those times.
And this is of course, because all the surviving documents of that age /Greek, Serbian, Bulgarian, Latin, Armenian, Arabian/ speak of a Bulgarian kingdom and the Bulgarian Tsar Samuil. Ten years ago I declared a reward of 100 000 Deutsch Marks to the one, who presents me a document from that age, in which Samuil is announced as Macedonian tsar and his people as “Macedonians”. I’m still waiting. As I’m also waiting for an answer of my invitation to the Macedonian electronic medias to arrange me a dispute-meeting with a Macedonian academic scholar on the question for Samuil’s kingdom. This could never happen due to the simple reason that ten Macedonian academicians, sitting on one side, can’t argue on this question with even one Bulgarian history student. They just won’t have /despite of their number and titles/ even one argument in favour of the Macedonian thesis.
What is the truth about Tsar Samuil? What do the documents say? That in 971 in another Bulgarian-Byzantine war the Bulgarian capital of Preslav is conquered and the Bulgarian Tsar Boris II and his brother Roman were captured. They were taken to Tsarigrad and forced to abdicate. By the medieval laws this meant that the still fighting Bulgarian armies should surrender. But the Bulgarians denied giving up and under the leadership of Samuil, son of one of the ten regional governors, successfully continued the war. Samuil didn’t declare himself as a tsar, because according to the Bulgarian laws, while the tsar is alive /even if he’s captured/, he’s still at the lead of Bulgaria. In 980 Tsar Boris and his brother escaped from captivity, but at the border with Bulgaria Tsar Boris II was killed by “a Bulgarian frontier guard, because he was dressed in Romean clothes”, are writing the medieval chroniclers. According to the Bulgarian laws his brother Roman was crowned Tsar of Bulgaria and resided in Skopie, which became the capital of Bulgaria. In 992 Tsar Roman was captured again by the Byzantines in Skopie and thrown into prison, where he died in 997. And during this period Samuil was only a “Ghulam”, as one medieval Arab chronicler writes, i.e. only a commander of the armed forces of Bulgaria. Only when news reached him that Roman has died in Tsarigrad and hadn’t left any heirs /he was castrated already during his first captivity/, Samuil was crowned as Bulgarian tsar. He chose Ohrid for the capital of Bulgaria. All this shows that Samuil, although having the whole power in the state already in 971 /in his hands was the army/, insisted to show with all of his behaviour that he follows the Bulgarian laws and is a conscientious Bulgarian state employee. Therefore he declared himself Tsar of Bulgaria only in 997 when the Bulgarian laws allowed this act – the old dynasty had no male successors.
Many are the reports that the state ruled by Samuil is Bulgaria, therefore we’ll mention just a few. In Ohrid, and not somewhere else, comes the Bulgarian Patriarch at the time of Samuil from the occupied by the Byzantines Preslav and Ohrid becomes for a long time seat of the Bulgarian Patriarchate. Well, could the capital of the Bulgarian Patriarchate be in the administrative capital of a foreign state. Entirely Bulgar is the administrative terminology of the state – in Ohrid there is a kavkhan, ichirguboil etc. But a lethal strike to the Macedonist thesis for Tsar Samuil was delivered by a most unexpectedly discovered in the city of Bitolia [pr. day Macedonia] in 1956 large inscription over a stone block, which stood as it seems by its content on the entrance of the city walls of medieval Bitolia. The inscription is carved by the order of Tsar Ivan Vladislav, nephew and successor of Tsar Samuil in 1016 /two years after the death of Tsar Samuil/. In this long inscription Tsar Ivan Vladislav speaks of victories and losses in the war with Byzantium and informs us that he’s “Bulgarian by birth”, “Autocrat /tsar/ Bulgarian” and that he built the fortress walls of Bitolia “for the safety of the Bulgarians”. With other words Tsar Ivan Vladislav has explained what’s the nation living in today’s Macedonia in 1016, what he is by “nationality” and tsar of which state is he – Bulgarian, Bulgarian, Bulgaria. I imagine what faces the Macedonian “scholars” made when they heard the news of finding the inscription. That’s why this biggest Slavic inscription ever found in any Slavic state, with the possession of which every world museum would be proud, has since its discovery until now been arrested in the basement of the Bitolia museum, broken to several pieces [Note: Afaik, now it’s exhibited, but with the inscription facing the wall]. This is the scientific consciousness of the Macedonian “historians”.
As a matter of fact some Macedonian historians, obviously feeling some shame /after all in every big Greek city there is a street called Basil the Bulgar-slayer/, call Tsardom Bulgaria and not “Macedonia” “Samuil’s state” by this time. To them we’ll remind that the world practice is that the states be called with the name of the nation, which populates it, not with the names of its first leader. By this logic of the Macedonian scholars today’s Macedonia should be called “Kiro Gligorov’s state”.
And again as a matter of truth we should mention the option of the Macedonist thesis for Tsar Samuil and his kingdom, spreading since the last 5-6 years of the XX century. Obviously realizing that in the conditions of democracy they can’t anymore hide from the society the authentic documents, some Macedonian “historians” admit that Tsar Samuil called himself “Tsar of Bulgaria” and his nation was called “Bulgarian”. But they felt themselves “Macedonians” /interesting how the modern Macedonists have found out this feeling/, while the name “Bulgarians” and “Bulgaria” they usurped, in order to respect their enemies. Because the Bulgarians and Bulgaria were a nation and state in Europe, which became known and gathered fame and respect in the previous centuries.
That Bulgaria in that time /VII – XI century/ was big, strong, respected and inspiring respect among its enemies state is true. It’s also true that the Bulgarians are a famous and respected /and not only in that time/ nation. But it’s also true that if he was “Macedonian” and his people “Macedonians” Tsar Samuil would take their name. Because I should also admit something. Macedonia from the times of Alexander of Macedon is far more famous and glorious than medieval Bulgaria in medieval Europe, where “The Alexandria” /novel for the heroic deeds of the ancient Macedonian king/ was the most read book. And on the whole this thesis is obviously patched up in a hurry. The Macedonian “scholars” hadn’t remembered that “Samuil – the first Macedonia tsar” is declared by them for nothing more than a marauder of names and nations.
Actually doesn’t this particular thesis express subconsciously the marauder’s mentality of a part of the modern Macedonian historical “science”?

[Mircoslavux]

some news from Prague,
by the digging works for a new multifunctional facilities center, remains of historical buildings and palace were found (area about 1.5 ha), the dating comes into roman times,
till and of works - about 4000 boxes of artefacts will be collected...

hm interesting, isn't it?
:go:

[Traveller]

Interesting, Mirco! Do you have some more info and/or pictures?
Btw it reminds me of how they found the Sofia Amphitheatre (the biggest in Eastern Europe) - again during construction work of a hotel building.

P.S. Hey, someone pick something else for translation and in the meantime I'll continue with the Macedonian topic...

[Xuca]

Please continue with the topic :smile:

And I'll soon edit this post to add the Wedding of King Vukashin.

edit:

King Vukashin writes a letter from his city of Skadar on the river Bojana and sends it to the city of Pirlitor on the mountain Durmitor. He says in the letter to Vidosava, Momchilo's wife, what can she possibly do there, in that snow and ice, describes Durmitor and river of Tara very ugly, and asks her to poison Momchiloand comes to him in Skadar. She replies to him that she can't poison him, because he has a sister Jevrosima, who makes his meal, and tastes it before him. His nine brothers and twelwe prvobratuceda (an archaic expresion, I don't know what it means, maybe nephiefs) and they all taste his wine before him. He also has a horse with wings, Jabuchilo, and a sabre with eyes. So he advises Vukashin to raise an army and come to the Lakes, because Momchilo goes hunting every sunday with his nine brothers, twelwe prvobratuceda and forty levera (again, an archaic expresion, probably some kind of soldiers). She will burn the horse's wings and seal the sabre with blood, so Vukashin could kill him.
Vukashin lisened to her, and came with an army, while Vidosava prepared everything. She started crying, and Momchilo asked her why is she crying. She said that everybody is talking about his winged horse, but that she never saw his wings, and that she is very afraid of Momchilo's life. Momchilo than said to her that she go to see the horse in the morning, when he shows his wings. She did it, and when the horse showed his wings, she burnt them. Than she went to the armoury and sealed Momchilo's sabre.
Tomorrow Momchilo went hunting, but when he saw Vukashin's army, he tried to draw his sabre, and realised what Vidosava did. He asked for a sword and said to his brothers that they strike from the sides, and he'll strike in the middle. He was cutting through his enemies like knife through hot butter, but than he saw nine rideless horses. He was overhelmed with pain so he tried to fly off with his hrse, but the horse wouldn't fly. Momchilo asked him what is the matter, and the horse said what Vidosava did. Than Momchilo ran to the city gate, but it was closed. He called for his sister Jevrosima to throw him a rope, but her hair was nailed to the wall. Jevrosima pulled so hard, she teared her hair and throwed a rope to Momchilo. As Momchilo was nearly at the wall, Vidosava came and cut the rope. Momchilo fell down where he was welcomed with spears and swords. Than Momchilo said to Vukashin not to marry Vidosava, as she batrayed him today, she will betray Vukashin tomorrow. He said that he maries his sister Jevrosima, who will be faitfull to him and will birth him a hero like he was.
Vukashin was welcomed by Vidosava and she brought him Momchilo's weapons. But what was reaching Momchilo's knees, rached the ground on Vukashinn. Momchilo's helmet fell on Vukashin's shoulders, a boot could fit two Vukashin's legs, a ring three fingers. Than Vukashin realised, if Vidosava could betray such a hero, she could easyly betray him. He ordered her dismembered, and he married Jevrosima, who gave him two sons, Marko and Andrija, where Marko became a hero like his uncle.



I tried as hard as I could, I hope you'll like it.

[Traveller]

Allright, here's another lecture of Macedonism (btw I see Xuca's posted about the poem, so: thanks! And now you could choose something new from my list and later I'll choose something too):


Lie Two
The "pure Macedonian Slavs" and the "Bugars-Tatars"


According to the ruling thesis for the differences between the present day Macedonians and Bulgarians, the first were by origin some special Slavs, different than those, which settled the lands of today’s Bulgaria and Serbia. They settled the lands of modern Macedonia in the VI century. On top of that, “the different” than the “Macedonian” Slavs /those, who inhabited the lands of present day Bulgaria/ were subdued by the “Bugars”, which were “Tatars”. And although they established the state of Bulgaria in 632, they were assimilated by the Slavs, but left a profound Tataric imprint on the modern Bulgarian nation. So profound that not only ordinary people, deluded by the propaganda of this thesis, but also deputies from the Macedonian parliament, politicians and university professors find it completely appropriate to jump at protest-meetings near our embassy in Skopie and to shout “Bugars-Tatars” and “the Bugars in Africa”. We’ll put aside the racist attitude towards the Tatars – somewhat strange for one tiny Balkan nation. Because the Tatars are also people and have the same right to exist as the Macedonians. Let’s not forget that they are even a more ancient nation – sources show them as an ethnical formation already in the XI-XII century, while the Macedonians exist as an independent national category only since 1944. And they didn’t come in Europe from Africa, but from Asia. But let’s leave aside the obviously wrong information for the Tatars, which the Macedonian children receive – the problems of the education in Skopie are not of interest to us in this case.
The thesis for the pure Slavic origin of the population of present day Macedonia and even from some special Slavs, different than those, which settled in Moesia and Thrace, isn’t supported by not even one documental report from the Middle Ages. The Slavs, which flooded the Eastern and Central part of the Balkan Peninsula in the VI century, killing and chasing away the local ancient population, are from one linguistic group, called by the scientist from the whole world “Bulgarian group”. Byzantium manages to regain control over its Balkan realms, already inhabited by Slavs /including Peloponnesus – the southernmost point of modern Greece/, in the beginning of the VII century, but things change again in 681 when the created in 632 Bulgarian state joins after a war with Byzantium in the same year the territory of Moesia, populated with Slavs, and moves its capital to the settlement of Pliska. Between 681-837 Bulgaria, after a number of successful wars with Byzantium and the Frankish Empire, transforms to a huge state with territory spreading over the lands of whole South-Eastern Europe, including the territory of today’s Macedonia.
The Bulgarians /sometimes called in the science Pra-Bulgars or Proto-Bulgarians/ are not Slavs, neither they are Tatars. They are a highly organized and highly civilized nation from the European race /otherwise they would hardly organize such a strong state in such a disputed region of Europe/. Relatively small by numbers, they become Slavicized in the next 100-150 years amidst the more numerous Slavs, subjects of their state, which still bears their name even today, as the already Slavic by language people, which inherit it. This development of things isn’t a phenomenon in medieval Europe – the Franks, which give their name to France and the French are a Germanic tribe. And the Rus, which create Russia – one unconditionally Slavic state – are a Swedish tribe, which settled itself in Kiev in the VII-VIII century.
But what is going on in this time in Macedonia. Let’s read what has written in his fundamental work “Medieval cities and fortresses in Macedonia”, published in 1997 in Skopie, the professor from the university “Cyril and Methodius” in the same city, the notable Macedonian archaeologist Mikulchik. The book – big, on a good paper with lots of illustrations, for the sake of information is published not with money from Sofia, but of the Macedonian ministries of education and culture and of the Macedonian agency of the “Soros” foundation. By this, it’s published not by the “Bugarash” government of VMRO-DPMNE, but by the purely “Macedonian” government of Branko Carvenkovski.
What has professor Mikulchik determined? Drawing a general conclusion about the results from excavations and drilling in all the 538 old cities and fortresses in Macedonia he reports that obviously the Slavic invaders already in the beginning of the VI century have forced the local ancient population to leave completely Macedonia /we already explained that it’s been moved to present day’s Turkish Thrace/. But the Slavs don’t settle in Vardar Macedonia, professor Mikulchik says. The virgin humus layer over the ancient ruins showed that the high Macedonian mountains and plains of Vardar Macedonia were not “attractive”, as Mikulchik writes, to the northern invaders. That’s why they continued south and settled in today’s Greek coastal lands. For two hundred years, according to Mikulchik, Macedonia was left depopulated. Its first new settlers were the Bulgars of Khan Kuber, son of the founder of Danubian Bulgaria Khan Kubrat. Around 680 together with 60 000 families he left the lands of present day Hungary and along the road Belgrad-Nish-Skopie settled for good in the so called Keramissian fields – these are the Bitolia-Prilep, Ressen, Ohrid and Korcha plains. Byzantine chroniclers and some Bulgarian stone inscriptions around the Madara horseman in today’s north-eastern Bulgaria show that Khan Kuber has also created in today’s southern Macedonia a state called Bulgaria, which in alliance with Bulgaria around the Danube undertook in the VII – the beginning of VIII century common actions against Byzantium. Its actions against Solun were repulsed, but its territorial expansion to the west in the lands of today’s Albania was more than successful – in the vicinity of the village of Vrap was found a large Bulgar treasure, which testifies exactly for this fact.
The second wave of settlers in the depopulated lands of Vardar Macedonia, according to Mikulchik, was again of… Bulgars. They came and settled in Eastern and Northern Macedonia after the successful war of the Bulgarian Khan Krum in Thrace against Byzantium in 811. Professor Mikulchik points out that in the fortresses near Kriva Palanka, Kumanovo, Skopie, Tetovo, Gostivar, Shtip, Strumica are appearing potteries, bronze amulets and belt buckles completely identical with those found in the Bulgarian capital of Pliska. And in the plains nearby Mikulchik notes the fortified with earthwork distinctive Bulgar settlements, called auls. Thus “From Yadran to the Black Sea and from the Danube to the Aegean” to the people living there was given the name “Bulgarians” – concludes Mikulchik. It’s so, this is the historical truth. Even a Bulgarian historian can’t write it more clearly.
Yes, but what comes after all this. Especially if we accept that the Bulgars are Tatars. It comes out that the population of present day Macedonia has a 100% Tataric origin and those, who shout in front of our embassy are with a pure Tataric background.
Don’t worry, brothers Macedonians, you’re not from Tataric origin. The Proto-Bulgars, as the scholars call them /or the Bulgarians, as they called themselves/, as we already said, are considered by the international science to be a highly civilized nation – one of the leading nations in the civilization of the Middle Ages. One French scholar had written that they are the yeast, from which the Slavic dough on the Balkans rises for a state life. So, when Serbs, Croats, Slovenians, Greeks and Albanians offend you by saying that Macedonian is not a nationality, but a profession, you can tell them that Macedonian means first quality Bulgarian.



Edit: Btw, Xuca, prvobratuced is a "first cousin" (първи братовчед), i.e. the children of your aunt and uncle. About "lever" I don't know. We have "dever" (девър), which is the brother of the husband (i.e. only women have devers). We also have a word "levent" (левент), which means "well-built (strong) man". And a nice story btw! :go:

[Xuca]

the masons from the bojna slava forum, if you don't mind.

btw. I saw a book "Rasrbljavanje Crnogoraca" (Расрбљавање Црногораца - Desrbianization of the Montenegrins), and Bozha's book remind me of it, I just read a part, and unfortunately I don't have it...

[Traveller]

The masons from this thread (http://forum.boinaslava.net/showthread.php?t=6594)? Ok, but only to make sure some things: First, this is about the so called masons or free masons (you've heard the conspiracy theories before, right?) and second - it's a discussion thread, not a prepared article. Do you want me to translate the two pages (not earlier than tomorrow) despite of this or...

[Xuca]

I only knew that Tito and Churchill were masons, and that that caused their cooperation, despite Churcill hating comunists, but otherwise I know nothing about them... So, yes, translate it.

[Traveller]

Oh, believe me, it's far more than just Tito and Churchill (I think)! But I'm leaving to lectures after half an hour and I'll be home late, so I'll try to translate everything tomorrow.

[Traveller]

Well, Xuca, I hope you had some nice rest after this reading! And when you have time, maybe you could write something about the greatest of the Balkan heroes, which "resisted the Turks the most fiercely", although he actually died fighting alongside them :wink: - Marko Kraljevic (Krali Marko).

[Traveller]

Bah, I've been gone for a week and still noone has written here since me! Xuca?


P.S. Btw that first forum I've told You about - they re-opened it (from the zero), so I'll add some more topics in the first post!

[Mircoslavux]

finally I have some more info about matthias Czak II, about his family and so on,
so later, I can continue with my novel..
:go:

[Xuca]

@Traveller sorry, I was busy these days, and I just don't feel like translating. End of november and whole december (besides may and june) are the worst months in school...

@Mirco good luck with the novel, if it gets translated to Serbian, I'll buy it.

[Traveller]

So, Mirco, how's it going with your book? When would we be able to buy it (I hope it'll be translated to English)?

Xuca, I know that you're busy, I'm awfully busy myself, and I don't want to pressure you, but just a reminder, so that you don't forget.

And, of course, everyone - feel free to ask me or Xuca for translation! For my part, I'd suggest some of the forum threads I showed (and I'll add some more soon)...

Newest threads from the Hanovete forums (those by Apofis are not discussions, but "reports" with only one post):
"Australopitecus" by Apofis
"Homo Habilis: The Monkey presented as a man" by Apofis
"Homo Rudolfensis: The wrongly put face" by Apofis
"Homo Erectus and then on: Human beings" by Apofis
"The Neanderthals: Big human race" by Apofis
"Homo Sapiens Archaic, Homo Heidelbergensis and the Cromagnon" by Apofis
"The species, which lived in the same time with their ancestors" by Apofis
"The dead-lock of evolution: Walking on two legs" by Apofis
"Khan Asparukh" by Apofis
"Khan Tervel" by Apofis
"Khan Krum" by Apofis
"Kniaz/Tsar Simeon the Great" by Apofis
"Kniaz Alexander Batenberg" by Apofis
"Tsar Ferdinand" by Apofis
"Tsar Boris III" by Apofis
"The Bulgarian Orthodox Church" by Apofis
"National customs" by Apofis
"Kukers" by Apofis
"The Christmas tree" by Apofis
"Rozhdestvo Hristovo (Christmas [Koleda])" by Apofis
"The arts of war of the ancient Bulgars | The archery" by Bloodseeker
"In battle with Byzantium" by Apofis
"Persian kingdom" by darii3

[Traveller]

Btw, Xuca, in one of the threads from the boina slava forum I found one picture (http://ald-bg.narod.ru/materiali/Nesri_hr_armia.JPG), which might be of some interest to you...