> *****GK: Has there been any attempt to inform the
> international scholarly community of this esp. via
> conferences? What has been the reaction? Are all
> Bulgarian scholars convinced by the new knowledge? Are
> there serious non-Bulgarian scholars who are? It's
> been ten years you say. Any progress?******
The problem is, as you may imagine, the fact that my country or
language are not particularly popular. I do not consider this to be
a tragedy, but the problem is there are few scholars in the west
who would engage in in-depth studies of the inscriptions. No
one seems to be crazy about Bulgaria right now, so many
scientists would prefer looking at what has already been written
(and you know what has been written). Or they copy from others,
as it usually happens. Yet most of what you already have as
literature on the subject has been written during the Communist
regime. You should at the very least take those texts with a grain
of salt.
It will be a difficult process to try to make scholars interested in
the new findings. Do I need to explain how slowly the wheels of
science sometimes turn? 10 years are not a lot of time, but they
were enough for the Bulgarian scholarly community to be
convinced to its large part. You may see attempts be directed
outside of Bulgaria in the future. Publishing also costs money.
My country is extremely poor, so everything we have to do in any
direction is connected with enormous restrictions in this sense.
>
> Anyone claiming something
> > different should
> > manage to translate the inscriptions using Turkic -
> > I may then be
> > convinced of the opposite.
>
> ******GK: It's not a question of whether you as an
> amateur and enthusiast are convinced, but whether
> serious scholars are. I'm not trying to put you down,
> just pointing out that the opinion of solid
> professionals matters a great deal on such
> issues.*****
Are you assuming Bulgarian scholars are no serious scholars?
So where do you think is the best place to learn about Bulgaria?
I understand your point about getting supposedly unbiased
comments from outside. Yet all comments are biased, since
every scientist tends to hold on to what he thinks he knows and
understands from his field. A dogma is always hard to overturn,
especially if backed by so much past ideology. There will be
bias on all sides.
So while I get your point, I think you are showing a little too much
optimism. And hence my comment about the Turkish theory still
appearing in encyclopaedias 100 years from now. I meant, it
may take so much to correct 100 years of creative writing on the
history and language of Bulgarians. I as a Bulgarian am
concerned - and will do the best I can to correct the mistakes.
That's about all I can do, the rest is your judgement.
Eva