Eastern Europe in the Dark Ages

[Bungus]

I just recieved a book a purchased online, "Moravia Magna: the great moravian empire, its times, life and art". It should be called "The Great Moravia Empire, it's belt-buckles, earings, and two pictures of helmets". It is seriously almost entirely about moravian belt ends, most of it being pictures.
A definative sorce of information about what people were strapping to their waists, but not much else. Sadly, that's the only book I've seen entirely about Great Moravia.

So Vrylakas or anyone else, if you'd like to share any other information, about either Moravia or Bulgarian, feel free..
Also helpful would be any books anyone's discovered about the topic.

 

[fing0lfin]

Well,... if you have some particular questions about Bulgaria, ask them and i will try to answer.

And about the cities..They were built of stone (of course wood and other materials). But in medieval Bulgaria there were many big and fortified cities. Tirnovgrad was called the second Constantinople, and Preslav was called the second Rome by the Franks. Also the Bulgarian literature from this period influented on the literature of East europe and Russia. The official church language is Russia is still the Old-Bulgarian language i think.

 

[Bungus]

In the 9th century, who were the Bulgarians, culturally speaking?
They were originally of turkish origin, but intermingled with the southern slavs and their culture. By the 800's, did they mostly just look like europeans, or western asians? Were they Hellenized? They had a khan until the mid 800's; just how did Khanate and Tsarish Bulgaria differ? (aside from formal switch to Christianity among the royalty. For the past several decades, as I understand, some Bulgarians were converted, much to the dismay of the majority of the ruling class)

 

[fing0lfin]

I will try to answer you in short here. First for the Bulgarian origin..well i personally don't agree that they are from turkic origin. It's just a teory, which many people consider true, because it's the only one they have heard. But i haven't really seen any evindance proving this teory. Have you ?
We can't how exactly looked the Bulgarians. But if we look at the Volga Bulgarians (which are considered to be 'more pure' than us(the Danube Bulgarians)) we will see that they look like europeans.
In the earlier centuries Bulgarians had culture, folklore and customs but they actually didn't affected any other peoples or countries. The real cultural advance was made in 9-10 century. Cyrilus and Metodius made an albhabet for the Bulgarians - the Glagolic alphabet. But soon after this, it was replaced with a new alphabed made by a student of Cyrilus and Metodius - the Cyrilic alphabet(which is now used in Bulgaria, Russia and other countries in the world). The name of the student was Kliment Ohridski. The Bulgarian literature form this period was mainly about the church and the Ortodox christianity. It fast spread over eastern europe and Russia. The Bulgarian literature effected on the literatures of countries like Russia. A number of big Bulgarian cities had large libraries, where valuable books were stored.
When the Bulgarians were converted, there were some families which did not accept the new religion. They were executed. The christianity unified the Bulgarian people. Before the convertion the Bulgarians and the Slavs had different religions.(the Bulgarian religion was a monotheistic one).
Shortly after the convertion, the Khan(later Tsar) who did it became a monk(Tsar Boris I). But his son Boian Rasate seized the throne and tried to turn back the old religions. He was overthrown and blinded. With this the rejection of the Christianity by some people stopped.
The convertion had big diplomatical effect. Bulgaria was no more considered as a 'barbarian state'.
It is interedting to know that many Bulgarian khans were christians, too. But it's considered that it was only formal. When a treaty was signed, the Bulgarian khan had to swear by the Christian custom, and the Christian ruler had to swear by the Bulgarian custom.

P.S. Sorry for the bad English....

 

[Bungus]

Sorry for the bad Bulgarian..

About their Bulgarians' origins, I think its pretty widely accepted that they have roots in central asia. Ever book and website that goes into any detail about the Bulgarians' history states nomadic asian tribes migrated there in the 7th century, and were slavicised over the few hundred years. That their rulers called themselves Khan's seems pretty indicative of their Asian origins.

Do you know about their culture, folklore and customs right before Cyrilus and Metodius visited and Boris converted?

 

[fing0lfin]

About the origin...well it's very large topic and i don't want to start it here. I know that this is written in mosr of the books. But if somebody can give me some proves, not just statements i will be glad to hear him.

I have traveled a lot today and i am little tired but i will try to give you an answer.

Much of our folklore and customs now are actually Bulgarian (proto-bulgarian as some call them)(for me this is a prove that the Bulgarians were not slavicised as it is claimed in most of the books).
I will just write some:
One of them is the nestinarstvo. Men and women(barefoot) dance on embers and fire under the sounds of music. This custom is still alive today.
Other is the martenitci. Every year, on 1 of March we give each other martenici. The martenica is traditionaly made of two threads- one white and one red. It is belived that the martenitcas give you health and strenght. We wear them untill the spring come. Some people belive that this custom is linked with the dead of the Bulgarian Khan Asparuh(who brought the Bulgarians on the lands in which i live now) and the red colour symbolise his blood. Other belive that it has even more ancient roots.

The Bulgarians were warriors. The horse was sacred animal for them. Every man should have at least two horses - one for ploughing and one for war. It was forbidden to use the war horse for ploughing. It is belived that the first three things which the father should teach his children was to ride well, to shoot well and always to say the truth.
There are also some sayings and tales which you can hear now in Bulgaria and they are very ancient.

Actually the customs and folklore didn't changed a lot after the convertion and when Cyrilus and Metodius came.Some of them just christianised(i don't know if this is the excact word...).
For example the nestinarstvo is pagan custom( i mean it exsisted much before the Bulgarians accepted the christianity). But after the convertion it didn't die. You can now see how Bulgarians play this ancient pagan custom holding an icon in their hands. It's really mystic

 

[Favorius]

There used to be a city of Bolgar (or Bulgar) in Modern Russia, which was located north-east of Moscow. Inhabitants of this city were later converted to Islam and prospered with trade but later they were destroyed by some other steppe people(I need help to clarify these). They were the remaining of the Bulgar tribes that choosed to stay. The ones migrated to Balkans were slavicized which is appearently a rule in history (I mean the nomads who migrate and settle among an already settled society adopt their subjects' culture and institutions) and adopted christianity and formed what was to become modern Bulgaria. What I know is the Bulgar city state that was located in Russia is regarded as one of the many Turkish kingdoms that was founded throughout the history.
However when Muslim Turks (Ottomans) capture Modern Bulgaria in 14th century, there was no main similarity between the cultures.

 

[Favorius]

I want to add another note. Eastern Europe during the dark ages continously saw the flow of steppe people from Asia to Europe. Migration of the Huns can be seen as the start of the dark ages and after that Avars, Magyars, Bulgars, Kıpchacks, Kumans all of them being steppe peoples poured into Europe. All of them are converted to Christianity and assimilated into local cultures. I want to note that at the battle of Manzikert(1071), when Turks and Byzantines clash for Anatolia, the mercenaries in the Byzantine army that are originally being steppe peoples (Kumans and Kıpchaks) settled by Byzantines in Balkans, recognized that their opponents were similar to them, coming from the same origins, and they deserted the Byzantines and joined to Turks which was one the reasons for Turkish victory. After the Battle of Manzikert flow of steppe people still continued. History books generally write about destruction of the wealthy Anatolia by the semi-barbaric Turks during the years that followed Turksh victory in Manzikert. Yes, countryside ravaged by the continous chavuchees and raids but hundred-thousands of Turkish people migrated to Anatolia and created a new homeland there. Within two centuries, this new and energetic nation made Anatolia again a center of civilization thanks to the cultural diversity and Byzantine and Muslim heritage from they learned.

 

[Bungus]

Good info, Favorius. I wish I could see some pictures of how the Bulgars live during the early middle ages, like of architecture, custums, dress, battles and what not. Its so easy to find stuff like that on Western European kingdoms, even Muslim lands, but East Europe is tough.

Fing0lfin: If they Bulgarians were never turkish, why did their leaders call themselves "Khans"?

 

[Mîtiu Ioan]

What is somehow amusing is that the first state ever called and recorded as "Romania" appear on south part of the Danube ( ~actual East Bulgaria ? ) somewhere around 1200 ...

Regards all

P.S. : Vrylakas ... so nice to see you again.

 

[fing0lfin]

There used to be a city of Bolgar (or Bulgar) in Modern Russia, which was located north-east of Moscow. Inhabitants of this city were later converted to Islam and prospered with trade but later they were destroyed by some other steppe people(I need help to clarify these). They were the remaining of the Bulgar tribes that choosed to stay. The ones migrated to Balkans were slavicized which is appearently a rule in history (I mean the nomads who migrate and settle among an already settled society adopt their subjects' culture and institutions) and adopted christianity and formed what was to become modern Bulgaria. What I know is the Bulgar city state that was located in Russia is regarded as one of the many Turkish kingdoms that was founded throughout the history.
However when Muslim Turks (Ottomans) capture Modern Bulgaria in 14th century, there was no main similarity between the cultures.

You are talking about the Volga Bulgaria. It was not just a city, but a state. They were not the Bulgarian tribes who decided to stay. They also moved form Velika Bulgaria (an early Bulgarian state). This Bulgarian country was converted in the Islam by the arabs i think. It was later destroyed by the Mongols. The Volga Bulgarians two times stopped the advancing mongols, but on the third they were conquered.

@Bungus- The Britains and the Germans,franks,italians called their rulers kings. Does this mean that they are all anglo-saxons ? But i don't think that many people are interesred in the topic of the Bulgarina origin. If you wish to continue this disccusion we can do it by PM, right ?

 

[lifeaquatic]

A note to the author of this topic:

Dark ages would have been an exceptable term in the 60's, it isn't scholarly anymore. Primarily because research has revealed of late that the period was most certainly not "dark". Its a draconian term and innacurate. Its the middle ages or medieval period, but not the dark ages.

 

[Bungus]

But "Dark ages" sounds much more romantic. Between the late 5th and late 8th centuries Western Europeans weren't exactly living high society. Beside, the aversion to the term seems to largely due to the PC movement anyway.

@fing0lfin: PM is okay, but email would be better. I will get around to researching Bulgarian origins a little more and let you know when I find some more incriminating evidence. But if any third-party posters want to help, I don't think it's too uninteresting or off-topic for this thread.


God, I'm still pissed off about that book..

 

[Plotinus]

I agree that "Dark Ages" is an old-fashioned and pejorative term, but it doesn't refer to the Middle Ages anyway. It was normally used to refer to the period between the fall of Rome and the high Middle Ages, or in other words, the early Middle Ages. Roughly, fifth to ninth centuries. "Dark" was meant to mean that less is known of this period than of those that came before and after it, which is still true. But it was certainly not a very good time to be alive, compared to either imperial or later medieval times.

As for the term "khan", it's worth noting that all these central-Asia-moved-to-eastern-Europe peoples seemed to have rather similar names for their leaders. The Avars were ruled by a qagan, for example.

 

[lifeaquatic]

I agree that "Dark Ages" is an old-fashioned and pejorative term, but it doesn't refer to the Middle Ages anyway. It was normally used to refer to the period between the fall of Rome and the high Middle Ages, or in other words, the early Middle Ages. Roughly, fifth to ninth centuries. "Dark" was meant to mean that less is known of this period than of those that came before and after it, which is still true. But it was certainly not a very good time to be alive, compared to either imperial or later medieval times.

As for the term "khan", it's worth noting that all these central-Asia-moved-to-eastern-Europe peoples seemed to have rather similar names for their leaders. The Avars were ruled by a qagan, for example.

All i know is that the Medieval expert at my University will throw you out of the class if you use the term. Its not well liked by middle ages scholars these days, it seems.

 

[Bungus]

As for the term "khan", it's worth noting that all these central-Asia-moved-to-eastern-Europe peoples seemed to have rather similar names for their leaders. The Avars were ruled by a qagan, for example.

See? Central asian = not European. Bulgarians had to have central asain roots.

 

[fing0lfin]

See? Central asian = not European. Bulgarians had to have central asain roots.

But Central asian is not = turk.

 

[Pokurcz]

Yes it is.

That is why the second largest language of the USSR was a turkish one.

 

[warpus]

A lot of eastern europeans are slow to admit asian/african/middle eastern influences/origins of their peoples.

And I say this as an eastern european.

 

[fing0lfin]

Yes it is.

That is why the second largest language of the USSR was a turkish one.

The Aryans come form there, too. Not only the turkish people.