From: george knysh
Message: 23061
Date: 2003-06-11
> > > GK: This culture was Slavic-speaking, notMacedonians
> > 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.
>
>(EVa) We also have something to say about the
> *wink******GK: Explain your *wink*. I wouldn't want to
>*****GK: What does chemistry have to do with
> But I also think the population was mostly
> Slavic-speaking, and
> Bulgarian. It did not suddenly get chemically
> transformed into
> Slavs.
>*****GK: Are you "colour conscious" Eva? ******
>
> > 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.
>******GK: People do not vaporise, but they do
> 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: Rather by the results of archaeological
>
> > 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.
>*****GK: Perhaps George Stana, Marius, or Alex will
> >
> > (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 (:=))****
>
> (Eva)It is an interesting theory :-)
>__________________________________
>
>