Macedonian Truth Forum

Macedonian Truth Forum (http://www.macedoniantruth.org/forum/index.php)
-   Macedonian History (http://www.macedoniantruth.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=5)
-   -   Tsar Samoil and the Archbishopric of Ohrid in Macedonia (http://www.macedoniantruth.org/forum/showthread.php?t=879)

Bill77 11-21-2009 10:58 PM

[QUOTE=George S.;27572]Ohridski there is a connection between Bulgarians & Macedonians & it's called zilch,zero connection.We have no connection.Did you know there's no such thing as bulgarian it doesn't exist.THe Bulgarians are descended from the Tartars,they adopted the Macedonian language & customs.The rest is propaganda.You have no idea what you have been talking about.Bulgaria had a pretence to take the whole of Macedonia It probably still does.It is harbouring irrendentist ideals.There is absolutely no connection between Tartars & Macedonians.It's like chalk & chesse.Stop sking silly questions we have seen the bullshit that went on under bulgarian propaganda.Bulgaria have allways stated that Macedonians are Bulgarians,Greece has stated Macedonians don't exist Greece is MacedoniaTHey can't make up their mind.The only connection is the crap propaganda you beleive that there is some kind of connection,you'll beleive that incessantly.Real Bulgaria does not exist it was wiped off thousands of years & then the Tartars came they are similar to the MONGOLS who adopted THE MACEDONIAN language,customs,Macedonian heroes,music,dancing,they try to say everything is Bulgarian which we know IS FALSE.[/QUOTE]Spot on George. What gets me is these people have no idea of there own Back ground and yet they claim they are masters of ours.

TrueMacedonian 11-22-2009 12:33 AM

[QUOTE]This is a rather ignorant response. An ethnic Canadian is any person who feels as such, thatís that.[/QUOTE]

No it's not ignorant. It's the Truth.

[QUOTE]Rum or Romaeoi is a term that may be used synonymously to Greek.[/QUOTE]

Really? This is the introduction to Mark Mazower's book 'The Balkans'.

[IMG]http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s43/truemacedonian/Miscellanius%20Mak%20Stuff/mazowerintro-1.png[/IMG]

Now where does this state that this was an exclusive term to modern "greeks"?

[QUOTE]Greek Millet = Rum Millet[/QUOTE]

Apparently you have revealed yourself too early imposter hellene. This modern "greek" scholar says differently from what you claim;

[url]http://www.macedoniantruth.org/forum/showthread.php?t=1593[/url]

[QUOTE]I think you misunderstand. I believe that Macedonian is an ethnicity separate from the Bulgarian, Serbian, and Greek ones. But from what Iíve read, there is some sort of connection between Macedonians and Bulgarians that didnít exist between Macedonians and Serbs or Greeks. I donít understand why youíd call me a racist based on what Iíve said. If you are a little more objective we may indeed be able to have a proper discussion.[/QUOTE]

Why would we want to continue a discussion with someone who is uneducated in simple Balkan history? You not proved yourself to be an imposter but you also proved yourself to be unworthy of further discussion. To call yourself an "ethnic Canadian" is just stupidity kid.

ohridski 11-24-2009 11:44 AM

[quote] Ohridski there is a connection between Bulgarians & Macedonians & it's called zilch,zero connection.We have no connection.Did you know there's no such thing as bulgarian it doesn't exist.THe Bulgarians are descended from the Tartars,they adopted the Macedonian language & customs.The rest is propaganda.You have no idea what you have been talking about.Bulgaria had a pretence to take the whole of Macedonia It probably still does.It is harbouring irrendentist ideals.There is absolutely no connection between Tartars & Macedonians.It's like chalk & chesse.Stop sking silly questions we have seen the bullshit that went on under bulgarian propaganda.Bulgaria have allways stated that Macedonians are Bulgarians,Greece has stated Macedonians don't exist Greece is MacedoniaTHey can't make up their mind.The only connection is the crap propaganda you beleive that there is some kind of connection,you'll beleive that incessantly.Real Bulgaria does not exist it was wiped off thousands of years & then the Tartars came they are similar to the MONGOLS who adopted THE MACEDONIAN language,customs,Macedonian heroes,music,dancing,they try to say everything is Bulgarian which we know IS FALSE.[/quote]
So how could there be no connection, you just said that the ĎBulgarians adopted the Macedonian language, customs, Macedonian heroes, musc, dancingí!? Doesnít that mean there is a connection? History shows us that all great nations took pride in spreading their own culture, language, etc. to others. I don't understand why you are so negative.
[quote] refer me to the contemporary or medieval source that states Samuel's birthplace,[/quote]
Sumuelís empire was fairly large and from what I know it was referred to as the First Bulgarian Empire. I havenít come across any sources that refer to him as Macedonian. Even if they were, Iím not sure how much help theyíd be in determining the personís ethnicity. The Macedonian dynasty in the Byzantium, for example, was actually ethnic Armenians from Macedonia.
[quote] Is that it, just one example? That's some connection, you made it sound like there were thousands.[/quote]
There arenít a thousand Macedonian heroes either. The point is, that most are shared between Macedonia and Bulgaria.
[quote] Yet, even since the early 19th century Macedonians have been telling Bulgars that despite our similarities we are different ethnicities and we want our own.[/quote]
Yes 'Macedonian' is a different ethnicity than 'Bulgarian', today. But, as Iíve mentioned before, I think the differences are mostly political.
[quote] You are alluding to the Macedonian revolutionaries and Macedonians in general as having a 'connection' to the Bulgars, and you are doing your utmost to keep the significance on that point. [/quote]
All Iím saying is that things arenít as black and white as you claim. The revolutionaries you speak of have at one point or another identified as both Macedonian and Bulgarian, thatís why they are shared national heroes. You make it seem as if itís wrong, and the way that you choose to omit certain facts only speaks of a person who is ignorant of the truth or is trying really hard to create a new truth based on fiction.
[quote] Again, why are these 'connections' so important to you? What's next, the proposal of union? Would you be in support of such an idea?[/quote]
I think that such a union would be pointless, considering the EU. All of Europe is going towards a union composed of all European nations. So technically, when Macedonia and the remaining non-EU states join they will all be in a union with Bulgaria and the rest of the EU members.
[quote] Where do I claim that which you quote, in the way you just wrote above? Were Bulgarians as evil an enemy for the Macedonians? Absolutely. You seem to keep suggesting that by the 1900's the Bulgars weren't doing anything untoward in respect to Macedonia and the Macedonians, yet, in 1903, Krste Misirkov wrote the following:[/quote]
I asked what the Ďevilí things are that Bulgarians have done to Macedonians in comparison to Serbs and Greeks. I havenít read about any anti-Macedonian actions, murder, rape, etc. from the Bulgarian side in the early 1900's.

And, Iím not quite sure that you are all that familiar with Misirovís work. He was both a proud Macedonian and a proud Bulgarian, or at least he identified himself as such. From what Iíve read, his works were modified during the time of Yugoslavia to support Titoís initiative in creating a new Macedonian state that would include Aegean Macedonia so that Yugoslavia would have access to sea in the south.

Most members here, from what I've read so far, seem to lack objectivity. It's unfortunate, as I don't think that the lack of objectivity is productive.

Bratot 11-24-2009 12:46 PM

[QUOTE=ohridski;27748]I asked what the Ďevilí things are that Bulgarians have done to Macedonians in comparison to Serbs and Greeks. [B]I havenít read about any anti-Macedonian actions, murder, rape, etc[/B]. from the Bulgarian side in the early 1900's.

.[/QUOTE]


You lil scum.. you are still here?

You haven't read huh?

[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJahM4ya9hU]YouTube - Bulgarian Terror Part I[/url]

[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lURlUrahbrg]YouTube - Bulgaria Terror Part II[/url]

[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SacYDODbP3w]YouTube - Bulgarian Terror Part III[/url]

[IMG]http://i1.tinypic.com/2441wro.jpg[/IMG]

[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wg8WwMlxz-k]YouTube - –ú–į–ļ–Ķ–ī–ĺ–Ĺ—Ā–ļ–ł —Ö–Ķ—Ä–ĺ–ł –ļ–ĺ–ł –∑–į–≥–ł–Ĺ–į–į –≤–ĺ –í—ā–ĺ—Ä–į—ā–į —Ā–≤–Ķ—ā—Ā–ļ–į –≤–ĺ—ė–Ĺ–į[/url]



ďМинистър-Председател Д-р С. Данев:

Имам чест да ви съобщя за сведение, че Министерският съвет, в заседанието си от оная вечер реши да се разтурят всички македоно-одрински организации, комитети и т. н. Относително лицата, които, като членове на тези комитети, са се провинили в конкретни престъпни деяния, ще има думата, когато му дойде редът, съдебната власт....ď



" Војната што ја води бугарската буржоазија не е за никакво обединување на бугарското племе, туку за бугарска хегемонија на Балканот, поточно, да завладее со местата кои и се неопходни на бугарската буржоазија да излезе иа големите воденн патешта и на Егејского Море ... Ако сте убедени, господа пратеници, дека во Добруџа живеат Бугари, дека во Поморавјето еле во Македонија живеат Бугари, дека во Серес, Драма и Кавала се Бугари, тогаш зошто се плашите од формулата што ја предлага рускиот мир - "мир без анексија, без обештетување, со право иа нациите на самоопределување". [COLOR="Red"][B]Ако сте убедени дека во некои од овие места има Бугари, нека се спроведе референдум н ќе видме што ќе каже тој. ...Зошто кревате врева? Значи не сте сигурни[/B][/COLOR]. Значи има нешто што ве возбудува. Има некои области кои се завладеани од вас, кои ако се подложат на референдум ќе ви се извлечат од рацете..."

(Орде Ивановски, "[U]Искажувања на Димитар Благоев за народноста на Македонците пред бугарскиот парламент во [B]1917[/B] година[/U]". Современост, Скопје, јануари, 1967, стр. 77ó81).

Risto the Great 11-24-2009 04:37 PM

[QUOTE=ohridski;27748]There arenít a thousand Macedonian heroes either. The point is, that most are shared between Macedonia and Bulgaria.[/QUOTE]

[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greatest_Bulgarians[/url]

Even with the Bulgarian mind-meld that has been going on for the last 100 years, you will find a few Macedonians scattered here and there amongst this group. I find their inclusion ridiculous but, then again, Greeks still celebrate Alexander the Great as well. Go figure.

TrueMacedonian 11-24-2009 07:16 PM

ohridski said
[QUOTE]I asked what the Ďevilí things are that Bulgarians have done to Macedonians in comparison to Serbs and Greeks. I havenít read about any anti-Macedonian actions, murder, rape, etc. from the Bulgarian side in the early 1900's.

And, Iím not quite sure that you are all that familiar with Misirovís work. He was both a proud Macedonian and a proud Bulgarian, or at least he identified himself as such. From what Iíve read, his works were modified during the time of Yugoslavia to support Titoís initiative in creating a new Macedonian state that would include Aegean Macedonia so that Yugoslavia would have access to sea in the south.

[B]Most members here, from what I've read so far, seem to lack objectivity. It's unfortunate, as I don't think that the lack of objectivity is productive.[/B][/QUOTE]

I think what you lack are the sources from which you claim you have,,,imposter hellene. I've returned your questions with answers, not just from me, but from scholarly sources. You seem to be peddling an agenda on here so this will be the last time I respond to you. Ask you a question and you slime around it with more BS. Typical imposter hellene tactics.

TrueMacedonian 11-24-2009 07:32 PM

[QUOTE=TrueMacedonian;27462]So I guess now would be a good time to ask if in 1767 when the Ohrid Archbishopric was abolished was it to Hellenize the population in Macedonia?[/QUOTE]

Back to the original point of this topic. Was the Ohrid Archbishopric abolished in 1767 so as to Hellenize the population in Macedonia?

I know many people, scholars, and Macedonians say that this is the case. That in 1767 the Patriarch in Constantinople wanted to "Hellenize" the Macedonians. Does anybody see the problem here? I actually see it and I am sorry to say actually used to believe that this was the case.

George S. 11-24-2009 07:53 PM

You are right on that one TM but i think some people have sick minds they want to go against the evidence &say otherwise.Both sidesGreek & BUlgarian are as guilty as hell trying to write propaganda crap.They are trying to lie that Macedonians are Bulgarian or Bulgarians are Macedonian they tried different things it hasn't worked to their advantage.Today they are peddling so much lies & bullshit they beleive it as truth.You got brainwashed people like Ohridski who is a Bulgarofile who has jackshit as evidence.It all defies logic how can one race of people share another race of people & have any connections pure & utter crap.The only way is if you spread FALSE PROPAGANDA.Ohridski e GOLEM LAZGO ne e Ohriganec E BULGARIN.Ohridski isa a BUlgarian !!LIAR !

ohridski 11-28-2009 07:16 PM

[quote] It all defies logic how can one race of people share another race of people & have any connections pure & utter crap.[/quote]
Ok so it is confirmed then, you must be confused.

In a previous post you wrote:

[quote] Ohridski there is a connection between Bulgarians & Macedonians & it's called zilch,zero connection.We have no connection.Did you know there's no such thing as bulgarian it doesn't exist.THe Bulgarians are descended from the Tartars,they adopted the Macedonian language & customs.The rest is propaganda.You have no idea what you have been talking about.Bulgaria had a pretence to take the whole of Macedonia It probably still does.It is harbouring irrendentist ideals.There is absolutely no connection between Tartars & Macedonians.It's like chalk & chesse.Stop sking silly questions we have seen the bullshit that went on under bulgarian propaganda.Bulgaria have allways stated that Macedonians are Bulgarians,Greece has stated Macedonians don't exist Greece is MacedoniaTHey can't make up their mind.The only connection is the crap propaganda you beleive that there is some kind of connection,you'll beleive that incessantly.Real Bulgaria does not exist it was wiped off thousands of years & then the Tartars came they are similar to the MONGOLS who adopted THE MACEDONIAN language,customs,Macedonian heroes,music,dancing,they try to say everything is Bulgarian which we know IS FALSE.[/quote]

To which I responded:

[quote] So how could there be no connection, you just said that the ĎBulgarians adopted the Macedonian language, customs, Macedonian heroes, musc, dancingí!? Doesnít that mean there is a connection? History shows us that all great nations took pride in spreading their own culture, language, etc. to others. I don't understand why you are so negative.[/quote]
So first you talk about Bulgarians adopting the Macedonian culture, language, traditions etc. and now you are saying that Ďany connection is utter crapí!?

The members on this forum are rather hilarious, I mean, some of my friends who also come from Balkan countries told me that thereíd be no objectivity on an ultra nationalistic and propaganda filled forum such as this. Itís unfortunate, but the high level of ignorance is rather entertaining. The typical response of a person who lacks knowledge or canít think for him/herself is to resort to personal attacks, accusations, or insults. Itís funny, but being on this forum among individuals such as yourselves makes me feel even more Canadian. Itís the attitude displayed by some of the members here that has made Macedonia, and the rest of the Balkan countries, into poor, crime infested shitholes.

George S. 11-28-2009 08:47 PM

hOridski(Bulgarian) what connection do you have with bulgaria because you assume that there must be a connection.So if that's the case you are the connection,the missing link in the equation.Speaking Macedonian Or Bulgarian or Greek or english does not make the person the country person.Also exhibiting a behaviour does not make them the persons country.I'll let you work it out i don't think it's too hard unless you lost your marbles.We know who we are we are Macedonian,I speak Macedonian,if you are not happy with that then you are not welcome on this forum & you should say you don't respect us.

Big Bad Sven 11-28-2009 10:48 PM

On the subject of Macedonians being the ďSame peopleĒ as Bulgarian slavs because their language is almost the ďsameĒ Ė people seem to forget that in the Balkans that the Croatian and Serbian language is more similar to each other then Macedonian and Bulgarian. Yet both serbs and croats are seen as a separate and unique people, and have separate and unique languages and cultures.
Czech and Slovak languages are almost identical and perhaps even more closer then Macedonian and Bulgarian.
Swedish, Danish and Norwegian is said to be mutually intelligible and these people have no problems understanding each other. Im not to sure if they are as close as serbo-croat or Macedonian-bulgarian.

Anyway I have to laugh when ever cyber bulgars start preaching about how Macedonians and Bulgarians are the same people Ė yet they forget about the facts such as the Bulgarian army killing Jane Sandenski, working with Serbia and Grease in defeating Macedonian freedom fighters in the 20s-30s and of coarse the war crimes that the nazi Bulgarian slavs committed towards the Macedonians in Vardar and Agean Macedonia.

Big Bad Sven 11-28-2009 11:02 PM

[QUOTE=ohridski;27748]

Sumuelís empire was fairly large and from what I know it was referred to as the First Bulgarian Empire. I havenít come across any sources that refer to him as Macedonian. Even if they were, Iím not sure how much help theyíd be in determining the personís ethnicity. The Macedonian dynasty in the Byzantium, for example, was actually ethnic Armenians from Macedonia.

There arenít a thousand Macedonian heroes either. The point is, that most are shared between Macedonia and Bulgaria.

[/QUOTE]


You are not looking hard enough, or have your head buried in the sand, there are numerous historians that call Samuels Empire as a macedonian Empire.

Kosovo was to remain under Bulgarian or Macedonian rulers until 1014-18, when the army of the Macedonian-based Tsar Samuel died, his empire broke up, and Byzantine power was fully re-established by a strong and decisive Emperor, Basil 'the Bulgar-killer'. For nearly two centuries after that, Kosovo would stay under Byzantine rule.

Noel Malcolm
Kosovo, a short history
Chapter 2


The oldest dated Slavic text is a gravestone inscription erected by Tsar Samuel of Macedonia in 993.

[url]http://www.utexas.edu/cola/depts/lrc/eieol/ocsol-0-X.html[/url]


Under the third Tsar, Samuel, the eastern provinces were lost, but the Empire remained firmly seated in the west, with its capital at Ochrida, where it maintained its independence till 1018. It was thus definitely a Macedonian state, and Ochrida acquired in the tradition of the Macedonian Slavs a sentimental prestige which it still retains.

Macedonia: Its Races and Their Future
H. Brailsford
Page 96


The slav speaking empire of Tsar Samuil, he whose ruined fortress dominates the hills overlooking the town and the lake, was the prototypical Macedonian state, emerging for a fleeting historical moment between the alternating yokes of the Bulgars and Byzantines.

Salonica Terminus
Fred A. Reed
Page 190



And in regards to Bulgarian slavs having the same heroes as macedonians - well its not just bulgarian slavs that claim (im not using the word "share" as you do) macedonian heroes.

Albanians claim Pitu Guli as a albanian hero. Pitu Guli is also claimed by macedonians and Bulgarians.
Krale Marko claimed by macedonians,serbs and Bulgarians.
And finally the most famous people from macedonia - Alexander the Great and Philip of Macedon, they are claimed by Bulgarian slavs, "greeks", albanians and even serbs at one stage.

Macedonia does not "share" its heroes with modern bulgaria. Bulgarian slavs CLAIM and STEAL macedonian heroes and its rich history - just like the other looser neighboring countries that border macedonia.

Soldier of Macedon 11-29-2009 01:43 AM

[QUOTE]The point is, that most are shared between Macedonia and Bulgaria.[/QUOTE]
And I asked you to name which one’s are from Bulgaria, all you could come up with was Samuel, I then asked you to refer me to a contemporary or medieval source that states Samuel’s birthplace – You came up with the following:
[QUOTE]I haven’t come across any sources that refer to him as Macedonian.[/QUOTE]
That wasn't the question. If Samuel was from Bulgaria, as you seem to think but can't prove, then why would he ensure that all of the important elements of his state remain in Macedonia? You can't give any answer apart from some propagandist piece of Bulgarian garbage.
[QUOTE]Yes 'Macedonian' is a different ethnicity than 'Bulgarian', today. But, as I’ve mentioned before, I think the differences are mostly political.[/QUOTE]
Macedonians have always been a different ethnicity from Bulgarians, and the differences are much deeper than just political. There are historical, linguistic, geographic and cultural circumstances that you choose to ignore, and then accuse others here of being ingorant when you do so. Stop contradicting yourself.
[QUOTE]And, I’m not quite sure that you are all that familiar with Misirov’s work. He was both a proud Macedonian and a proud Bulgarian, or at least he identified himself as such.[/QUOTE]
Misirkov clearly states that Bulgaria is Macedonia's greatest demon, in complete contrast to your silly assertion. Again, important circumstances and factors are being ignored by yourself, which renders all of your arguments flawed. The use of the 'Bulgarian' name by Macedonians was [I]political[/I], same with other terms such as 'Greek', the people that these 'Bulgarians' from Macedonia considered their historical ancestors are all from Macedonian regions, not Bulgaria, and would not be considered as ancestry from actual Bulgars from Bulgaria.
[QUOTE]From what I’ve read, his works were modified during the time of Yugoslavia to support Tito’s initiative in creating a new Macedonian state that would include Aegean Macedonia so that Yugoslavia would have access to sea in the south.[/QUOTE]
Wow, that must have been some reading. Would you care to enlighten us here with any proof to that assertion, or is this another one of those displays of 'objectivity' from you that we all seem to be lacking here?
[QUOTE="Big Bad Sven"]Macedonia does not "share" its heroes with modern bulgaria. Bulgarian slavs CLAIM and STEAL macedonian heroes and its rich history[/QUOTE]
Exactly. Who knows, maybe ohridski can erect a statue in Macedonia of some real Bulgars like Asparuk and Omurtag saddling one of those donkeys from the Volga river, to give his veiled idiocy some credibility, he can even call it "ohridski and the broke back bulgars", lol.

Bratot 11-29-2009 09:14 AM

[IMG]http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/3740/patriarhiaohriddrmap11.jpg[/IMG]

Bratot 11-29-2009 10:28 AM

Bulgarian church doesn't exist in 976 when Samoil restored Ochrid Archybishopy on the basis of Justiniana Prima and after obtaining the Pope's blessing, Samuel promoted the Macedonian Church to the rank of a patriarchate.

[B]Bulgarian church was abolished in 971![/B]

[QUOTE]През 972 г. император Йоан Цимисхи [B]унищожава [/B]политическата и църковна независимост на Източното българско царство.

Църковен Вестник, Издание на Българската Православна Църква, Година 103, брой 9 и 10, София, 1-30 май 2003, наслов “Българските патриарси през Средновековието” Александра КАРАМИХАЛЕВА)[/QUOTE]

Pelister 12-03-2009 02:27 AM

[QUOTE=Soldier of Macedon;8299]The Archbishopric of Ohrid in Macedonia reached the level of Patriarchate briefly during the reign of Samuel's Empire, after which it was demoted in rank to an Archbishopric by Basil (II) the Macedonian Emperor of East Rome.

It retained special rights and autonomy, and Basil even selected a Macedonian called Jovan from Debar to be the first Archbishop. Unfortunately, for a period afterwards all subsequent bishops were Greek-speakers, although, this never discouraged the local Macedonians from considering it their mother church. In reality, its degree of freedom could be interpreted as being of 'Patriarch' status as it was virtually independent and nearly always supported by much of the population in the Macedonian region during times of revolt and statehood, some outstanding instances being that of Tsar Samuel, King Marko and Metropolitan Theodosius.

The freedom of the Archbishopric of Ohrid in Macedonia and its willingness to stand behind local rulers, as did the population from the Macedonian region, demonstrates the importance of this institution for us as Macedonians.[/QUOTE]

I think so too. It drew its base from Macedonians.

And whether it was at times dominated by Greek-speakers, or was a "Patriarch" did not carry the same connotations it does in modern time.

The "nationalism" of the modern Church was not around then. Sure there was politics within the Church and its denominations, and jostling for position in terms of langauge, but as (the late) N.Oikonomides has shown in his essay "Levels of Literacy on Mt.Athos" the Churches were filled with native Macedonian-speakers, learning to scribe both in Greek and in Macedonian, even in the Greek-speaking monastic institutions.

sonne 12-04-2009 09:42 PM

here 1 more truth how Samoil wass nothing else besides Macedonian :

[url]http://mn.mk/aktuelno/882-Makedonskiot-Car-dusan---kako-trn-vo-oko[/url]

Soldier of Macedon 12-05-2009 12:16 AM

Welcome Sonne, thanks for the link, but I think it is more in relation to Dusan than Samuel, it looks like the same article that was recently posted by Bratot in this thread:

[url]http://www.macedoniantruth.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2247[/url]

Soldier of Macedon 12-07-2009 03:05 AM

[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolaos_Oikonomides[/url]
[QUOTE]Besides the Listes de prťsťance, [B][U]his major works include seven volumes of the Archives de l' Athos, a multi-volume work of the documents of the monasteries of Mount Athos began by paul lemerle[/U][/B], as well as significant work on study and itemization of the extensive Dumbarton Oaks collection of Byzantine seals.[/QUOTE]
Pelister, I take it this is the fellow you are referring to. Can we get our hands on his sources to look more into these sections that you have cited concerning the Macedonian language in Athos?

Here is something more about him.

[url]http://www.makedonija.info/ancient.html[/url]
[QUOTE]Those historical testimonies are strengthened by the information of N.Oikonomides about the existence of more then 5,000 writings in Macedonian, collected within the frames of the Greek program KERA, but not published in order not to be of use to the "State of Skopje", referring to the Republic of Macedonia. Oikonomides fully denied allegations of the scientists, that written material in Macedonian had not been preserved. Since they write about the Macedonians and their language, and define their ethnic affiliation, they had to take into consideration the serious rebuke and indications of N. Oikonomides (N. Oikonomodes, Book Review, History Department, University of Chicago, 1988, p. 121-6). By the way, only as information and without any suggestion let it be known that at his first visit to Greece after this was published, Mr. Oikonomides died suddenly, and the Greek authorities explained that as alcohol abuse.[/QUOTE]

[url]http://www.jstor.org/pss/2851567[/url]
[URL=http://img132.imageshack.us/i/oikon.png/][IMG]http://img132.imageshack.us/img132/4936/oikon.png[/IMG][/URL]

TrueMacedonian 03-14-2010 05:54 PM

William Miller and Tsar Samoil's empire (1896)
 
[IMG]http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s43/truemacedonian/Miscellanius%20Mak%20Stuff/miller.png[/IMG]
[IMG]http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s43/truemacedonian/Miscellanius%20Mak%20Stuff/miller152.png[/IMG]

[url]http://catalogue.nla.gov.au/Record/2541070[/url]

TrueMacedonian 03-14-2010 05:58 PM

I didn't know whether to post this here or in the 'Exposing lies' section because rumor has it Macedonians started spreading this evil lie with Tito in the 1940's. Guess someone should take away Tito's damned time machine already. He's [email protected]%king everything up lol.

osiris 03-14-2010 06:29 PM

another great post by true mak the scourge of the wannabbe propagandists.

Soldier of Macedon 03-14-2010 11:00 PM

Good source, well done TM.

Balanced 03-14-2010 11:01 PM

Very interesting, but it seems he is trying to establish a connection between the name of the empire and the identity of the persons in the empire, which we already know in itself is a fallacy. What are your thoughts?

Soldier of Macedon 03-14-2010 11:14 PM

Macedonians were the core population in Samuel's Empire, where is the fallacy?

Balanced 03-14-2010 11:24 PM

He is identifying "Bulgarian" in an ethnic sense instead of an empirical name.

Soldier of Macedon 03-14-2010 11:30 PM

Both Macedonian and Bulgarian look like geographic references to me, what gives you the impression that it is in relation to ethnicity?

Soldier of Macedon 05-04-2010 04:45 AM

Does Greece still have the remains of Tsar Samoil?
 
There was talk at one stage that the Greeks were going to exchange Samoil's remains for texts from the Bulgars, but I haven't noticed anything since. If anybody has further information on the issue, please share it.

Macedonia should urge Greece (who I suspect still has them) to return the remains of Samoil back to where his capital and castle ruins are located, in Macedonia.

Soldier of Macedon 07-06-2010 12:46 AM

Anybody think that our government will ever make this request?

Rogi 07-06-2010 01:02 AM

Not likely. Unless Pasko Kuzman does it without asking for permission first.

Prolet 07-06-2010 01:09 AM

Thats a good qeustion SOM

I dont see how the Greeks will be cooperating, now that Operation Falanga has been a big success so far i think the very least they should do is to give it a try. The Greeks have made similar requests to the British for some of their artifacts so lets see how this will unfold.

Volk 07-06-2010 01:55 AM

I was under the assumption that the greeks already made some sort of exchange with bulgaria with Samoils remains...

Soldier of Macedon 07-08-2010 12:33 AM

I think there was talk of it, but I haven't seen any reports to confirm. Perhaps they've taken their discussions 'underground' so Macedonia doesn't become involved.

Dimko-piperkata 07-25-2010 12:53 PM

Цар Самоил во 973 година подарил завеса со ли&
 
[quote][I]Со брат му Арон отишол на дворот на германскиот цар да му го честита Велигден и да побара политичка поддршка. Како што доликува на гостин, веројатно, како подарок му однел нешто, а домаќинот, исто така, му возвратил. Имено, во музејот во Вирцбург се чува една свилена завеса, на која е претставен орелскиот лет на Александар Македонски. На завесата е претставен Александар кому два орли (христијански симбол) на главата му ставаат златна круна со три крста! Не знаеме дали таа била подарокот за германскиот цар, но би можеле да претпоставиме![/I]
[img]http://www.vecer.com.mk/WBStorage/Articles/F15523D5E957B94CB6EDD9B1D96362E2.jpg[/img]
[B]
Како одговарате на тврдењата дека Самоил не бил македонски цар?[/B]
[U]Милан:[/U] Секогаш некој ќе се најде од различни мотиви да негира нешто. Слично како и денес со правото на користењето на името Македонија и референцата ФИРОМ, под која сме заведени во ОН. И тогаш политиката ги мешала своите прсти. Точно е дека цар Самоил на надгробната плоча од 993 година, во сеќавање на неговите родители и брат му Давид, се нарекува само "роб божји", никако поинаку. Друго е прашањето како и зошто современите византиски и латински извори го нарекуваат Самоила и неговите поданици. Но ако се има предвид дека освен во Византија, традицијата на Царство постоела единствено во Бугарија до 971 година, сосема е нормално Самоил да претендира на узурпација на царската титула на пропаднатото Царство, бидејќи тоа било признаено од Византија, а современите извори да го нарекуваат по името на државата. Од етничка гледна точка која била неважна во Средниот век, во науката се смета дека бил од ерменско потекло или припаѓал на благородничкиот род на македонската склавинија Берзитија. Во модерната историографија, со исклучок на Бугарската, прифатено е дека Самоил формирал нова држава и црква - Преспанско-Охридската Архиепископија-Патријаршија, чиј центар се наоѓал во Македонија, во Преспа и Охрид, а државата почнувајќи Г. Острогорски, се нарекува македонска, Самоил македонски цар и т.н. Еден современик, потенцирал дека Самоил владеел со областите на Македонците (Лав Ѓакон), друг (Житието на св. Трифун) дека "некој Самоил долго време бил во бунт против римскиот цар Василиј... и во таа тиранска побуна ги ограбувал и опустошувал областите на Бугарија, Македонија и некои градови на Далмација", а трет документ од 18 век Самоила го нарекува "словенски цар". Но независно од тоа, за нас Македонците битен е фактот дека на државно-правната традиција на Македонското (Самоиловото) средновековно царство, се повикувале востаниците на Петар Делјан и Ѓорѓи Војтех. Што е уште поважно, во преродбенско-илинденскиот и постилинденскиот период, македонските интелектуалци во заложбите за создавање на македонска држава, цар Самоил го доживувале како македонски цар. Поедноставно кажано, историјата треба да се толкува, а не да и робува на фактите.
Во новата книга "Скопје и скопската област во Средниот век (од ВИ ЏИВ век)" во издание на Македонска реч, пишувате дека крал Марко никогаш и никаде не се нарекува српски крал или крал на Србите, како што вообичаено во еден период од своето владеење се нарекувал неговиот татко Волкашин, како и двајцата на црковен план ја имале поддршката за кралство од

[B]Охридската архиепископија. Можете ли да потенцирате повеќе факти околу овие прашања?[/B]
[U]Милан: [/U]Токму така. Имено, кралот Димитрија Волкашин (1365-1371), основачот на македонската владетелска династија Волкашин со центар во Прилеп, од македонското благородништво со политички притисок се издигнува за крал и совладетел на српскиот цар Урош Петти (1355-1371). Во почетокот на совладетелството (1365/66) тактизира, издава повелби и монети од кои се гледа дека го почитува совладетелскиот статус. Набрзо го игнорира српскиот цар, работи на зацврстувањето на својата власт и се конфронтира со него. Есента 1369 година по победата над силите на српскиот цар на Косово Поле, кралот Волкашин го заробува царот. Независното владеење го започнува со потврдување на меѓународни договори (трговски привилегии на дубровчаните). На манастирот Св. Димитрија во с. Сушица му подарува преубав бронзен лустер (полиелеј) на кој е истакнат новиот статус: "Во Христа Бога благоверен крал Волкашин", а својот син Марко го прогласува за совладетел - млад крал. По смртта на Волкашин престолот го наследува кралот Марко, кој набрзо за свој совладетел го прогласува брата си Андрејаш. Како наследник на династијата Волкашин, со престолнина во Прилеп, како и татко му, црковната поддршка ја имал во лицето на Охридската архиепископија. Кралот Марко на фреските на кои е претставен и на монетите се потпишува едноставно: "Во Христа Бога благоверен крал Марко" или "Во Христа Бога верен крал Марко" со што се дистанцира од српската држава. Неговиот совладетел Андрејаш во повелбата испишана во олтарот на црквата "Св. Андреја" на реката Треска се потпишал како млад крал ("кралевиќ Андреаш"), а слично се потпишувал и на монетите. Целосниот раскин на кралот Марко со Пеќката патријаршија и Немањиќката династија, за разлика од постепеното осамостојување на неговиот татко, најилустративно е потенцирано од неговото и на неговите архиереи отсуство на црковно-државниот собор во Пеќ 1375 година, при изборот на новиот српски патријарх.

[B]Тврдите дека на минијатурите кои ги пронајдовте во ракописот на историчарот Јован Скилица (11 или 12 век) е насликан единствениот автентичен лик на цар Самоил. Можете ли да ни објасните повеќе околу тоа?[/B]
[U]Милан:[/U] Сосема случајно при подготвувањето на монографијата Великаните на македонскиот среден век, во т.н. Мадридскиот ракопис на илустрираната историја на Јован Скилица, на минијатурата под наслов "Самоил ја венчава ќерка си за заробениот Ашот" го открив ликот на цар Самоил. На минијатурата е претставен чинот на венчавањето во црквата "Св. Ахил" во Преспа, настан кој се случил во 998 година. Претставен е архиепископот-патријархот Филип како ги венчава младенците - Мирослава и Ашот и царското семејство. Во групата мажи кои присуствуваат на чинот претставен е царот Самоил во цел раст, а од натписот над неговата глава дознаваме дека тоа е Самоил. Него го гледаме како висок човек, со руса коса на главата и уредна брада, а од лицето му се чита израз на одлучност и бескомпромисност. Согласно византискиот став на непризнавање на неговата царска титула, Самоил не е претставен со царска круна, туку со свечена црвена благородничка капа. Со царска круна Самоил е претставен на минијатурата од Скопје, во која покрај византиската учествувала унгарска војска предводена од кралот Стефан. Историската позадина на оваа минијатура е раскинувањето на бракот на Г. Радомир со унгарската принцеза, поради унгарско-византиското приближување, на што македонскиот владетелски двор реагирал со нејзино протерување, иако таа била бремена. Ловенскиот превод на Манасиевиот летопис од 14 век, кога за ослабената Византија ова прашање не било веќе актуелно. Би сакал да нагласам дека открив уште еден лик на Самоил и неговиот син Гаврил Радомир. Имено, се работи за унгарска минијатура од 14 век. На неа е претставен историски настан од 1002/3 година, битката на Вардар кај Скопје, во која покрај византиската учествувала унгарска војска предводена од кралот Стефан.

[B]Во стари документи е запишано: "За време на словенската опсада на Солун 586 г., 'оние што го опсадуваа беа по број рамни на песокот' во однос на 'собраните Македонци ... и Тесалијци и Ахајци'", како што пишува авторот на Чудата на св. Димитриј Солунски. Како ја објаснувате оваа реченица од 586 година? [/B]
[U]Милан:[/U] Овој податок како и многу други најилустративно потврдува дека Македонците опстојале во периодот на Римското владеење. Македонија како римска провинција постоела долго време, со менување на нејзините граници. Иако ја изгубила државноста, како што мудро забележала Ф. Папазоглу, Македонците го задржале својот јазик, вовеле своја македонска ера на броење на годините за да ја сочуваат својата посебност. Наспроти верувањата во 19 и половината на 20 век дека Македонците со вклопувањето во Римската империја се романизирале, ваквите тези во современата наука се аргументирано отфрлени. Меѓудругото, и овој како и многу други податоци од средновековни извори, потврдуваат дека Македонците успешно ја пребродиле словенската колонизација и позитивно влијаеле на создавањето на македонската етничка свест.
Пред научната јавност се имате претставено и со труд за Свети Климент. Можете ли да споменете некој ретко објавуван или релативно непознат куриозитет од неговиот живот и дело?
Милан: Мојот научен придонес за Свети Климент покрај веќе познатите детали за него, од византиски автор (Јован Скилица) го потврдив неговото присуство во имињата на македонското царско семејство. Имено, шестиот син, од 12. деца на македонскиот цар Јован Владислав се викал Климент. Ова потврдува дека култот на Свети Климент бил особено почитуван на македонскиот владетелски двор и е важен аргумент за канонизацијата на Свети Климент во почетокот на 11. век. Не само тоа, меѓудругото овој податок може да ги разјасни мотивите и времето на преместувањето на црковната столица од Преспа во Охрид и неговото издигнување како патрон на Патријаршијата.

[B]Пред неколку години имате изјавено: "Констатацијата дека сме македонски Словени би подразбирало дека ние денес како Македонци со словенски јазик имаме полно право на историско наследство на античка Македонија и на историјата на македонскиот народ и дека во тоа треба да се гледа континуитет и симбиоза во етногенезата на античките Македонци и Словените. Постепено, во Средниот век се наметнува името Македонија за земјата и Македонци за населението." Како го дообјаснувате овој став?[/B]
[U]Милан: [/U]Како и кај сите народи така и кај Македонците низ вековите имало различни влијанија од народите и културите кои дошле во допир со Македонците. Но да се разбереме, Александар Трети Македонски со Империјата која ја создал позитивно влијаел на ширење на брендот Македонија - Македонец. Редица римски императори го имитирале ликот и делото кое го создал тој - Обединета и универзална Империја. Во периодот на раното христијанство, кога се размислувало која личност да се почитува, како создател на единствена екумена, меѓу личностите кои доаѓале предвид да бидат почитувани, имало предлог тоа да биде Александар Македонски. Да се разбереме, Словените кои дојдоа од зад "Карпатите", не го донесоа името Македонија или Македонците. Тие нив или него го затекнаа. Културно-историското наследство на Македонците благодарение на Александар Трети остави траен и неизбришлив печат во светската цивилизација. Во науката е потврдено, дека Македонците имале дијаметрално различен етнички и културен и јазичен белег од Хелените, или ако сакате Грците. Доблеста на Александар во создавањето на светската Империја е што тој хеленскиот јазик и култура ги прифатил и ставил на преден план. Бидејќи веќе рековме дека античкото наследство на Македонците по следот на околностите ни припаѓа нам, пред се, поради брендот Македонија и Македонци, а потоа и на светската цивилизациска баштина, како универзална придобивка. Со етничките промени кои се случиле во 6. и 7. век, со доаѓањето на Словените сосема природно староседелците (Македонците) како популација со повисоко ниво на култура (пред се, христијанството) позитивно влијаела на дојденците-варвари. Треба да се има предвид дека словенската колонизација била поизразена во Солунското Поле, поради привлечноста на богатиот Солун. Словенизацијата на другите делови на Македонија се одвива во различно време и со различно темпо. Како што има бројни случаи во светот така и кај нас дошло до постепена симбиоза помеѓу Македонците (староседелците - помалубројни) и дојденците - Словените (-помногубројни). Постепено низ Средниот век името Македонија за земјата и Македонци за етносот преовладало. Истиот процес се случувал и со јазикот. Јазикот врз словенска основа и име постепено се модифицирал во македонски јазик врз словенска основа, каков што се изучува и е познат денес во светот. Друго е прашањето за свеста, дали сме антички или словенски Македонци. Тоа е прашање на култура или индивидуална свест, во кое никој нема право да се меша или сугерира. Во таа смисла еден пример: Самоил во 973 година со брат му Арон отишол на дворот на германскиот цар да му го честита Велигден и да побара политичка поддршка. Како што доликува на гостин, веројатно, како подарок му однел нешто, а домаќинот, исто така, му возвратил. Имено, во музејот во Вирцбург се чува една свилена завеса на која е претставен орелскиот лет на Александар Македонски. На завесата е претставен Александар кому два орла (христијански симбол) на главата му ставаат златна круна со три крста! Не знаеме дали таа била подарокот за германскиот цар, но би можеле да претпоставиме!
[IMG]http://www.vecer.com.mk/WBStorage/Articles/350A52E0CCBE2D43AAB656476DFE96F1.jpg[/IMG][/quote]
[url]http://www.vecer.com.mk/default.asp?ItemID=5D8AA283608AD249B8F2117C9ED68D6C[/url]

TrueMacedonian 07-27-2010 04:15 PM

Medieval Descendency
 
There's alot of interesting things that we can examine about the claims some medieval figures made about themselves. I would like to start with the Comnenus Dynasty. Here is something from Anna Comnenus' 'The Alexaid' - [url]http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/AnnaComnena-Alexiad02.html[/url]

[QUOTE]THE ALEXIAD OF ANNA COMNENA

BOOK II.

The Revolt of the Comneni

[44]

I We must refer the reader who wishes to know the place and lineage from which Alexius sprang, to my Caesar's history, and thence he can also extract information about the Emperor Nicephorus Botaniates.

Now Manuel was the elder brother of Isaac and Alexius and in fact, the first-begotten of all the children descended through John Comnenus from my paternal grandfather. He was general in sole command over the whole of Asia to which the former emperor, Romanus Diogenes, had appointed him, whereas the principality of Antioch had elected Isaac by lot as their Duke; these two had fought in many wars and battles, and many trophies too they had erected over their opponents. And after these my father Alexius was promoted to be General-in-Chief, and dispatched against Ursel by Michael Ducas, the reigning emperor.

Later on the Emperor Nicephorus also observed his expertness in warfare and heard how, while serving under his brother Isaac in the East, he had taken part in many contests anęd proved himself valiant beyond his years, and when he considered the manner in which Alexius had worsted Ursel, he made just as conspicuous a favourite of him as he did of Isaac. He took the two brothers to his heart and looked upon them with joy, sometimes even inviting them to share his table. This enkindled the envy of others against them and most especially that of the two aforementioned Slavonic barbarians, Borilus and Germanus. For seeing the Emperor's goodwill towards the brothers and that the latter remained unharmed by the darts that malice hurled at them, they were consumed with wrath. As the Emperor saw that Alexius although his beard was as yet scarce grown was held in high repute by all, he appointed him absolute General of the West and honoured him with the rank of Proedros. Of all the trophies which he set up throughout the West also and of the various rebels he conquered and brought as captives [45] to the Emperor sufficient has been said already. But these doings did not please those two slaves but rather fanned the flames of their envy; They went about growling and purposing evil against them in their hearts, and told the King many tales in confidence and others in public or suborned others to tell him, for their desire was, no matter by what means, to get these brothers out of the way. In this distressing situation the Comneni judged it prudent to cultivate the officers of the women's apartments and through them to win in still greater measure the Queen's affection. For the brothers were charming men and able with their varied wiles to soften even a heart of stone. Isaac could do this the more easily as the Queen some time before had chosen him to marry her own cousin; he was a perfect gentleman both in word and deed and most like my own father. But since his own affairs had prospered so well, he took much thought for his brother Alexius, and as the latter had formerly helped him with all his power in arranging his marriage, so he in his turn now desired to see Alexius stand high in the Queen's favour. It is said that the friends Orestes and Pylades had such a deep love for each other that in time of battle either would be quite indifferent to his own foes but would ward off those who attacked his friend, and either would offer his own breast to receive the darts thrown at the other. Exactly the same phenomenon could be witnessed in the case of these two. For either brother tried to anticipate the other's dangers; and whatever prizes and honours one gained, in short the good fortune of the one, the other considered his own, and vice versa, such close affection bound them to each other. By the help of heaven, Isaac's interests had been thus secured; and after no long interval the officials of the women's apartments lent a willing ear to Isaac's suggestion that the queen should adopt Alexius. The Queen listened to them; and the two brothers came to the palace on an appointed day, and then she adopted Alexius according to the ritual prescribed from of old for such cases. Thus for the future the Great Domestic of the Western armies was relieved of a great anxiety. Thenceforth they both visited the palace very often and after paying their respects to the Emperor and staying with him a little they went in to the Queen. All this still further inflamed the envy of others against them, as the Comneni were often assured, and consequently they lived in fear of being caught in their enemies' snares. As they had no protector, they cast about for a means by which, [46] with God's help, they might ensure safety for themselves. After revolving many plans with their mother and examining various schemes at various times they discovered one path which as far as man can judge, might lead to safety. This was to approach the Queen when some plausible reason offered, and tell her their secret. Yet they kept their plan under water and did not reveal their whole design to anyone, but like fishermen they were careful not to frighten away their prey. They intended, indeed, to run away but had been afraid to tell the Queen this, lest she might disclose their intentions to the emperor prematurely in her anxiety for the two parties, to wit, her husband and the brothers. After having settled on this plan, they turned their attention elsewhere for they were adepts in making full use of any opportunities that might occur.

II The Emperor was now too old to have expectations of a son and as he dreaded the inevitable stroke of death, he began to consider the question of his successor. At that time there was at court a certain Synadenus of Eastern origin and illustrious descent, fair of face, of profound intellect, courageous in battle, verging on young manhood, and above all akin to the emperor by race. In preference to all others the Emperor thought of leaving him as successor to the Empire, giving him the kingdom as his ancestral portion, so to speak, and in this he was ill-advised. For he would have ensured perfect safety and also regarded justice by bequeathing the imperial power to the Queen's son, Constantine; as the portion rightly accruing to him, as it were, through his grandfather and father, and this would have increased the Queen's confidence in him and gained her goodwill. However, the old man failed to see that he was arranging matters in a way which was not only unjust but also disastrous, and was begetting troubles for himself. The Queen heard whispers of this and was very sad as she foresaw danger to her son; but though she was despondent she did not openly voice her grief to anyone. This did not escape the notice of the Comneni and they determined, if they could find the opportunity they-sought to approach the Queen. Their mother furnished Isaac with a pretext for a conversation with the Queen, and his brother Alexius went with him. When they were admitted to the Queen Isaac said; "Lady, we do not behold you in the same health as heretofore, but you seem worried and obsessed by unbearable thoughts and without the courage to reveal your secret to anybody." However, she would not speak out for [47] some time, but sighing deeply replied: "It is not right to question those who live away from home, for that in itself is sufficient source of grief to them. But as for myself, alas! what sorrows have come upon me, one after the other, and how many more methinks are in store for me shortly." The brothers stood aloof and added no more words, but with eyes cast down and both hands covered, stood a minute plunged in thought and then made their usual obeisance and departed home in deep distress. The next day they came again to talk to her, and seeing that she looked at them more cheerfully than the day before, they both went close up to her and said: "You are our mistress and we are your most devoted slaves, ready to die, if need be, for our Queen. And do not let any consideration unnerve you and lead you to indecision." Upon these words they gave the Queen an oath and after freeing themselves from all suspicion they easily guessed her secret, for they were sharp-witted, shrewd, and expert in divining from a few words a man's deeply hidden and hitherto unexpressed opinion. Straightway they associated themselves still more closely with the Queen and making their goodwill clear to her by many proofs they promised they would bravely assist her in any undertaking to which she summoned them. "Rejoice with them that rejoice and weep with them that weep," [Rom 12:15] that is indeed the apostolic injunction, and this they willingly observed. [B][U]They asked the Queen to count them as her countrymen and intimates as they were sprung from the same stock as she was;[/B][/U] and one thing more they urged - that she should not hesitate to divulge it to them immediately if either she, or the Emperor, got wind of a plot being formed against them by their rivals, and thus save them from unconsciously falling into their enemies' snares. This favour they asked and begged her be of good cheer, saying that with God's help they would gladly bring adequate help and as far as depended on them, her son Constantine should not be ousted from the empire. And they insisted too in ratifying their agreement by oaths, for there was no time to lose because of their jealous opponents. So the brothers were relieved of a great anxiety and recovered" their spirits and from now on showed a cheerful countenance" in their conversations with the Emperor. They were both, but Alexius more especially, practised in concealing a secret intention and a deeply laid plan by external pretences. But as the burning envy of others was now growing into a mighty fire, and nothing of what was said against them to the Emperor [48] was any longer concealed from them owing to the agreement (with the Queen), they recognized that those two all-influential slaves were scheming to get them out of the way; consequently they no longer went together to the palace as had been their custom, but singly, on alternate days. This was a wise and Palamedean precaution to prevent their both perhaps falling into the barbarians' snares at the same time, for if only one were caught by the intrigues of those all-powerful Scythians, the other could escape. Such then was their precaution. However, matters turned out for the brothers very differently from what they had feared, for they anticipated their rivals in the race for power, as my story, starting from this point, will show very clearly.[/QUOTE]

The Empress was Maria of Alania.

[B]However, Maria of Alania (qv), who figures so prominently in Anna Komnene's (qv) Alexiad, was actually [U]Georgian.[/U][/B]

Historical dictionary of Byzantium By John Hutchins Rosser page 11.

So if we go by the words of Anna Comnenus' Alexiad both the Comnenus brothers are claiming to have 'sprung' from the same stock as the Queen.

TrueMacedonian 07-27-2010 04:20 PM

It gets more interesting.

The mother of Anna Comnenus was Irene Ducas. Irene Ducas' mother was Maria of Bulgaria. Maria of Bulgaria's Grandfather was Ivan Vladislav who was the son of Aron who was the brother of Tsar Samuel.

TrueMacedonian 07-27-2010 04:33 PM

And from Comnenus we move to the Paeleologus Dynasty;

[IMG]http://i754.photobucket.com/albums/xx190/TM2_album/Macedonians/Byzantine%20Empire%20Maks/Alexiad86.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://i754.photobucket.com/albums/xx190/TM2_album/Macedonians/Byzantine%20Empire%20Maks/Alexiad87.jpg[/IMG]

The Alexiad by Anna Comnenus

Maria of Bulgaria had another daughter, Anna Ducas, who married George Paeleologus.

Homer MakeDonski 07-28-2010 02:18 PM

Наспроти овие моронски објаснувања од редовите на официјалните џабелебарошки историчари на Македонија , или оние објаснувања од типот “како е можно и поради што Словените го славеле Царот на оној народ што тие го завладеале и му извршиле геноцид откако се населиле на територијата на Македонија во 6 век од нашата ера’’ напишани од магистри по историја , во еден од минатогодишните броеви на неделникот Фокус ...
Ваму се работи за нешто многу силно...

Сведоштво,многу јако сведоштво.

Една слика 1000 книги оспорува
-оние за т.н. словенско поткло
-оние за т.н. бугарско потекло
-оние за непостоечката симбиоза

[IMG]http://www.vecer.com.mk/WBStorage/Articles/F15523D5E957B94CB6EDD9B1D96362E2.jpg[/IMG]

Знаме, а не завеса(според Фокус) кое што македонскиот Цар Самуил го подарил како Велигденски поклон на царот германски Оттон III
Артефакт од 10-от век ,што вреди постојано да се прикажува и кој сам за себе вели


[SIZE="5"][COLOR="Red"]СТОП ЗА[/COLOR][COLOR="Black"] т.н.словенизација[/COLOR][COLOR="Red"] на МАКЕДОНИЈА [/COLOR][/SIZE]

Eddie_rebel 07-29-2010 11:34 AM

Овој мотив - Александар поткренат во небото од орли (грифини) е доста чест во западна Европа, по таписерии, рељефи... не би ме зачудило и да не е подарок од Самуил.

[quote]Самоил во 973 година со брат му Арон отишол на дворот на германскиот цар да му го честита Велигден и да побара политичка поддршка. Како што доликува на гостин, веројатно, како подарок му однел нешто, а домаќинот, исто така, му возвратил. Имено, во музејот во Вирцбург се чува една свилена завеса на која е претставен орелскиот лет на Александар Македонски. На завесата е претставен Александар кому два орла (христијански симбол) на главата му ставаат златна круна со три крста! Не знаеме дали таа била подарокот за германскиот цар, но би можеле да претпоставиме![/quote]

Да не бидам погрешно сфатен, ама требаат докази.

Homer MakeDonski 08-07-2010 08:25 AM

Еве уште нешто Еди брате ,што оди во прилог на зацврстување на она што го имам пишано претходно.
Од артефактите пронајдени во Преспа и упокојувалиштето на ,последниот од нашите македонски цареви, Македонецот Самуил,неговиот саркофаг и деталите од неговата посмртна одора.

[IMG]http://www.promacedonia.com/im3/im_123_278.jpg[/IMG]

Сл. 123. Св. Ахил, Преспа, саркофаг Г: наметката на царот Самуил со царски симболи — детал (по Н. Муцопулос)

деталите говорат дека ништо не треба да се додаде .
Поздрав

[URL="http://forum.kajgana.com/showthread.php?52400-%D0%9F%D1%82%D0%B8%D1%86%D0%B8%D1%82%D0%B5-%D0%B3%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B1%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%B2%D0%BA%D0%B8-%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%B1%D0%BE%D0%BB-%D0%B2%D0%BE-%D0%BC%D0%B0%D0%BA%D0%B5%D0%B4%D0%BE%D0%BD%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B0-%D0%B8%D1%81%D1%82%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B8%D1%98%D0%B0"]извор[/URL]


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:36 AM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Macedonian Truth Organisation