- This topic has 166 replies, 17 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 11 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I tend to agree with ivkhan here. Do the Irish and Scottish still cling to their ancient Celtic roots? They most certainly do!
The Celts were Druids weren't they? The Irish are Catholic Christians (and many Protestant). But anyway my point is culture and societies change so rapidly, it is unwise to attach modern societies to groups that existed hundreds or over a thousand years ago. Too much chronological dissonance and too many variables to take into account. You have demographic migrations, ethnic assimilations, political upheavals, and so forth that totally transform a people into something new. The Bulgars of old are not necessarily the Bulgarians of today.
I was talking more about language and culture and whatnot. Yes modern civilizations are different, sometimes, well often, completely different than their ancestors, but still, many of them identify with their ancient roots. I don't know if this is what you're talking about here, but the Irish almost lost their language and culture because of the Brits, until their war of independence.
The only ethnic group that I can think of that can actually lay a legitimate claim to the distant past would be the Jews of today with their Hebrew ancestors. Still there are massive differences and even this point can and is debated.
Muslims and Hindus are religious categories and not ethnicities. The Chinese cannot identify with the Mongolians and the Japanese well I'm not sure here, perhaps.
Jews are a religious category too. Ethnically, they are Middle Eastern. Maybe I'm wrong here, but if ethnicity is how a group identifies with each other then isn't religion, culture, geographic region, etc. all parts or sub-categories of ethnicity?
Actually “Jew” in its modern connotation is ethnic as the term “Hebrew” is no longer used. The Jews are unique in this case.
The Celts were Druids weren't they? The Irish are Catholic Christians (and many Protestant). But anyway my point is culture and societies change so rapidly, it is unwise to attach modern societies to groups that existed hundreds or over a thousand years ago. Too much chronological dissonance and too many variables to take into account. You have demographic migrations, ethnic assimilations, political upheavals, and so forth that totally transform a people into something new. The Bulgars of old are not necessarily the Bulgarians of today.
This identifying of the peoples with the religions etc. is not correctly and dangerous. It reveals the possessing plans of the autocrats. This plans exist still from ancient times to nowadays. I have written in my article, that Bizantinium empire had begun a process of assimilation on the slav people by imposing of the Christianity and only the creating and existing of the bulgarian state prevented this assimilation. This is not only a contribution, this is literally a saving of the slav people. Now, if there were not bulgarians, serbians, chroatians etc could not be. Who knows, under this possessing plans could be not only the slav peoples. This is a fact, which proofs what I have written, that Bulgarian state, wich was located just between the two empires ? Franc and Bizantium empires, prevented their possessing plans. This is not only a contribution, too. This is literally a saving. This is not a propaganda, this is only a showing of the facts. You can speak what you want, but the facts exist. About the topic ? What is left from our ancestors? Many things. The roots, the base of the language in many cases, ofcorse not in every case, some cultural features and etc., and the most important thing, wich proofs, that the blood could not be a water, the genetic and anthropological investigations, wich shows our origin, in spit of the mixings. The Humanity is managed to prevents the cultural, language and other varieties on the earth. This is our biggest wealth and we have to keep it. This, what is of the biggest extent different from our ancestors, is the mind. If this mind is changed in one good meaning, the future will show. But we have to recognize the big deeds of our ancestors.
This identifying of the peoples with the religions etc. is not correctly and dangerous. It reveals the possessing plans of the autocrats. This plans exist still from ancient times to nowadays. I have written in my article, that Bizantinium empire had begun a process of assimilation on the slav people by imposing of the Christianity and only the creating and existing of the bulgarian state prevented this assimilation. This is not only a contribution, this is literally a saving of the slav people. Now, if there were not bulgarians, serbians, chroatians etc could not be. Who knows, under this possessing plans could be not only the slav peoples. This is a fact, which proofs what I have written, that Bulgarian state, wich was located just between the two empires ? Franc and Bizantium empires, prevented their possessing plans. This is not only a contribution, too. This is literally a saving. This is not a propaganda, this is only a showing of the facts. You can speak what you want, but the facts exist. About the topic ? What is left from our ancestors? Many things. The roots, the base of the language in many cases, ofcorse not in every case, some cultural features and etc., and the most important thing, wich proofs, that the blood could not be a water, the genetic and anthropological investigations, wich shows our origin, in spit of the mixings. The Humanity is managed to prevents the cultural, language and other varieties on the earth. This is our biggest wealth and we have to keep it. This, what is of the biggest extent different from our ancestors, is the mind. If this mind is changed in one good meaning, the future will show. But we have to recognize the big deeds of our ancestors.
Huh ??? What does this rant mean? I would debate if I could figure out what your point here is supposed to eb.
What is left from our ancestors? Many things. The roots, the base of the language in many cases, ofcorse not in every case, some cultural features and etc., and the most important thing, wich proofs, that the blood could not be a water, the genetic and anthropological investigations, wich shows our origin, in spit of the mixings.
I think this is his point, which I whole-heartedly agree with.However, this I don't agree with:
The Humanity is managed to prevents the cultural, language and other varieties on the earth.
I think it's the opposite. Cultures have shared, mixed, and integrated over time. Sometimes forcefully and sometimes not forcefully.Not sure what is meant by "managed."
This identifying of the peoples with the religions etc. is not correctly and dangerous. It reveals the possessing plans of the autocrats. This plans exist still from ancient times to nowadays. I have written in my article, that Bizantinium empire had begun a process of assimilation on the slav people by imposing of the Christianity and only the creating and existing of the bulgarian state prevented this assimilation. This is not only a contribution, this is literally a saving of the slav people. Now, if there were not bulgarians, serbians, chroatians etc could not be. Who knows, under this possessing plans could be not only the slav peoples. This is a fact, which proofs what I have written, that Bulgarian state, wich was located just between the two empires ? Franc and Bizantium empires, prevented their possessing plans. This is not only a contribution, too. This is literally a saving. This is not a propaganda, this is only a showing of the facts. You can speak what you want, but the facts exist. About the topic ? What is left from our ancestors? Many things. The roots, the base of the language in many cases, ofcorse not in every case, some cultural features and etc., and the most important thing, wich proofs, that the blood could not be a water, the genetic and anthropological investigations, wich shows our origin, in spit of the mixings. The Humanity is managed to prevents the cultural, language and other varieties on the earth. This is our biggest wealth and we have to keep it. This, what is of the biggest extent different from our ancestors, is the mind. If this mind is changed in one good meaning, the future will show. But we have to recognize the big deeds of our ancestors.
Huh ??? What does this rant mean? I would debate if I could figure out what your point here is supposed to eb.
This is not a rant! You deliberately speak in this way, because the facts are not comfortable for you. My point here is not supposed to ebb, and on contrary my point here, evidently, clears the truth. I have told - you can speak what you want, but the facts exist and to refute me, you have to delete the existing of bulgarian state in the middle ages. It is imposible.
This is not a rant! You deliberately speak in this way, because the facts are not comfortable for you. My point here is not supposed to ebb, and on contrary my point here, evidently, clears the truth. I have told - you can speak what you want, but the facts exist and to refute me, you have to delete the existing of bulgarian state in the middle ages. It is imposible.
Which Facts exactly, have I found uncomfortable? That the Bulgarians saved Europe is an opinion not a fact. It appears to me that this point is where our disagreement lies. I think the only facts I find you to be in error on is that it was Kormesiy and not Tervel who was the king of the Bulgarians at the lifting of the Second Siege of Konstantinople, and the numbers of the Arab troops at the siege. I think we pretty agree on the rest of the facts at issue. Where we differ is our interpretation. Barring some revelation from you I don't see myself changing my interpretation of events for the reasons I have previously stated.
