Re: Asen bros' (was: Yers)

> Exactly. The name was Bulgarized. That's the point. Normally, the
> name should remain "Niketas" even in Cyrillic transliteration, not
> to be modified. H[N]KETAC.

Come on, Marcus, you definitely know this is not the first time it
happens, so why should it be so dramatic.

>
> > I thought it was anyway clear which historian I mean.
>
> Of course. That's not bad sign for your spelling but for Dimitrov,
> the guy who wrote the book.

You are not right. Many names get changed between languages and they
will often be substituted by similar names in the own language. This
is very typical in Slavic languages. You are now blaming the whole
community of Bulgarian historians of having bulgarized Nicetas. This
is just being too picky to be of any actual importance.

>
> >> For example, Bulgarian historians do not mention usually the
> >> important Vlach element in the state lead by "imperator omnium
> >> Bulgarorum et Blachorum".
> >
> > The first time I hear this. Is this also from Honiat/Choniates?
>
> No, it's from Kalojan's own wisdom.

Oh, so you mean the way Kalojan named himself? Okay, now I know what
you are talking about. But I don't think it gets interpreted this way
by Bulgarian historians. And anyway, I suggest you check your
knowledge against some people who are actually able to object to what
you are saying. Try the Faculty of History at Sofia University.

Just as it is easy for a man to beat a woman, it is easy for someone
to appear knowledgaeble before an amateur. Btw, as an amateur, I
would still be interested in watching the debate.

Eva