[tied] Re: Yers

George, my general suggestion is we out this offlist. A few
comments below.

> *****GK: This culture was Slavic-speaking, not
> Proto-Bulgar, at the time of Bogoris/Boris and Simeon.
> And I'm sure the Macedonians (and others) would have
> something to say about part of it.*****

We also have something to say about the Macedonians *wink*

But I also think the population was mostly Slavic-speaking, and
Bulgarian. It did not suddenly get chemically transformed into
Slavs.

> *****GK: Slavs and Bulgarians are indeed mentioned
> separately in the sources until the mid-9th c. After
> the catastrophic implosion of the proto-Bulgars, the
> meaning of "Bulgar" shifted: it now referred primarily
> to the Slavic-speaking majority of the state.

Which has a bit dark complexion.

All this

> is elementary, Eva, and will not be countermanded by
> misguided patriotism.*****

I don't know about patriotism, George. I know only that people do
not vaporise. So logically, I cannot agree with you.

> *****GK: This is correct. Only the time frame needs to
> be elucidated. The Turko-Bulgarian tribes which
> remained under Khazar suzerainty and co-existed with
> the Alans in Eastern Ukraine were certainly no longer
> as "nomadic" as their predecessors.*****

I think you must be guided by patriotism now.

>
> (GS)Methinks he means Asen bros. (Ivan, Peter and
> Yannis "the> Handsome").
> (Eva)So they are supposed to be Vlasi? I have never
> heard such a theory.
>
> *****GK: It's obviously time you did (:=))****

It is an interesting theory :-)

Eva