Deconstruction of the term Bulgar/B'lgar/Bugar/Voulgar!

[TrueMacedonian]

[TrueMacedonian]

The text above has it all. Bulgarians are born "Peasants" are not interested in anything except for "tilling their land" like "farmers". On the otherhand the "Greeks" are "born politicians and agitators" and the dwellings of "well to do people" belonged to them as well as "warehouses and stores" belong to these "merchants". The Turk is an "eastern genetleman" who the Bulgars fight to overthrow "Moslem Thraldom".

It's all here in this 19th century book. Mackridge, Livianos, Roudometof, etc were all right.

[Bratot]

[TrueMacedonian]

[Serdarot]

...

About the word "Bul-gar";

"Bul" means "to mix, mixing" in Turkish, like the word "Bul-amac" used when you "mix a different ingredients of a meal". OR the word "Bul-andirmak" used when you "mix something in liquid form and cause turmoil in it". "Gar" signifies the darkness or blackness as you said.

here is good place to discuss about Bulgar / B´lgar

take a note, that diferent dialects / languages / cultures, diferent names for other nations / cultures / lands (germania / alemania / nemcija / nemska / germani / alemani / nemci / deutschland / deutschen)

So i am not excluding any reasonable explanation and theory, about many things, the term "Bulgar" included.

The Turks use it as mix-black , mixed with black(s)
We used it as white-black , mixed whites with blacks
the modern Bulgarians are using it without even knowing the ethymology of their etnonim :P

Bul-Gar
B´l-Gar

couse B = V, completely logic

in some scripts to be found as V(o)ulgaroi

The (hi)stories of the B´lgar khAGGAns are not a mistery, almost every detail is well known and documented.

The (hi)story of Aleksander / Iskender, the (hi)story of the Pyramides, the (hi)story of the South-American Civilizations - that is a mistery

i´ll (re)post few pictures later where interesting things about the term can be seen.

edit:

[Onur]

I think i can write a good summary which might be a conclusion to this thread about "Bulgars".



Lets read the findings and comments of Bulgarian Prof. Dr. Plamen S. Tzvetkov;



As you read at the 1st paragraph, earliest(7th AD) Bulgars in the Balkans were Turkish speaking immigrants from the surrounding areas of northern Blacksea. This has been recorded by nearly all civilizations of that time. They started to speak Slavic-like language after 9th AD.





I did a quick research at one of the "Turkish etymological dictionary" web site;
http://www.nisanyansozluk.com/?s=detay&dq=bul*&dt=&dd=&dk=


Summary of result;
The word "Bul-gar";

"Bul" is one of the earliest recorded Turkish verbs which means "to mix, mixing". This verb can be found at "Orkhon script" of 7th AD.


Some of Turkish words which derived from "Bul";

"Bul-amac" : mix a different ingredients of a meal.(Source from 8th AD)

"Bul-gamac" : A type of soup with mixed many ingredients.(Source from 12th AD)

"Bul-andirmak" : mix something in liquid form and cause turmoil in it.(Source from 7th AD)


The word "Gar" means/defines "darkness, blackness"


So, The word "Bulgar" in Turkish means "Something mixed with another darker element"




In early medieval Turkish records, its written like;
"After the death of the Turkic Khagan Attilla of the Huns, all the unified Turkic tribes(which formed an union to create a Turkish Empire and eventually defeat the Roman Empire) of the Hun empire disbanded at 5th century AD. Most of them returned to their homeland of Khazar sea and Attil of Volga river(Today's Ukraine and surroundings) but some of them either stayed at Balkans or came back there after some time. So, this tribe who returned at the Balkans, later called as "Bulgar" by other Turkish tribes because they intermarried with some local people in there like Slavs and all others, they mixed with them and forget/abandoned their culture in the end."



Bulgarian professor also mentions about another Turkish tribe "Cumans"(Greek: Κο(υ)μάνοι, Ko(u)manoi; Hungarian: kun / plural kunok; Turkish: kuman / plural kumanlar; Russian: Polovtsi) as a possible ancestors for Bulgar people;
Because of the savage Mongolian pressure at Eurasia, some Turkish people who lived at the north of blacksea migrated into today's Hungary. They were the "Kipchak" people(The word kipchak means "double knives" in Turkish, which is the representative symbol of their Khagan). Later times, they called as "Cumans"(Kuman in Turkish script) by the other Turkish societies which means "Blondish, fair skinned or haired", because Cumans was mostly blond haired, green-blue eyed people.

This appearance of them also suits to the term "Bulgar" as Blondish Cumans intermarry with darker skinned people.

While the Cumans were gradually absorbed into eastern European populations, their trace can still be found in placenames as widespread as the city of "Kumanovo" in the Northeastern part of the Macedonia; a Slavic village named "Kumanichevo" in the Kostur (Kastoria) district of Greece, which was changed to Lithia after Greece obtained this territory in the 1913 Treaty of Bucharest, "Comăneşti" in Romania, and "Comana" in Dobruja (also Romania).

As the Mongols pushed westwards and devastated their state, most of the Cumans fled to the Bulgarian Empire as they were major military allies. The Bulgarian Tsar Ivan-Asen II settled them in the southern parts of the country, bordering the Latin Empire and the Thessallonikan Despotate. Those territories are present-day Turkish Europe and the Macedonia. The Cumans also settled in Hungary and had their own self-government there in a territory that bore their name, "Kunság", that survived until the 19th century. There, the name of the Cumans (Kun) is still preserved in county names such as "Bács-Kiskun" and "Jász-Nagykun-Szolnok" and town names such as "Kiskunhalas" and "Kunszentmiklós".

The Cumans were organized into four tribes in Hungary: Kolbasz/Olas in the big Cumania around Karcag, and the other three in the lesser Cumania.

Unfortunately, the Cuman Turkish language disappeared from Hungary in the 17th century.

In addition, toponyms of Cuman language origin can be found especially in the Romanian counties of Vaslui and Galaţi, including the names of both counties.

In the countries where the Cumans were assimilated, family surnames derived from the words for "Cuman" (such as coman or kun, "kuman") are not uncommon. Traces of the Cumans are the Bulgarian surnames Kunev or Kumanov (feminine Kuneva, Kumanova), its Macedonian variants Kunevski, Kumanovski (feminine Kumanovska), and the widespread Hungarian surname Kun. This name was also used as a magyarized version of the Jewish-German name Kohn/Cohen, like for the communist leader Béla Kun.

The Cumans appear in Rus culture in the The Tale of Igor's Campaign and are the Rus' military enemies in Alexander Borodin's opera Prince Igor, which features a set of "Polovtsian Dances".

The name Cuman is still the name of several villages in different parts of Turkey, including the Black Sea region.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cumans








Bulgarian Prof. Dr. Plamen S. Tzvetkov gives examples from the modern Bulgarian language and makes comparisons;

So, the question is: were the Proto-Bulgarians Turks? Were the people, led by Asparukh to the Lower Danube, Turkic-speaking? All modern scholars answer positively [1].

The Turkic anthropological type and the Turkicness of the Proto-Bulgarians have not been questioned. The linguistic data in the Namelist of the Bulgarian rulers, in the Byzantine written sources as well as the Proto-Bulgarian stone inscriptions are given as an irrefutable evidence to that. The Turkic names, phrases and words they contain, leave little room for discussion.

1) This view is also supported in the latest academic edition of history of the Bulgarian lands, cf. Istorija pa Bylgarija. T. II. S., 1981, s.60.

Rasho Rashev, Bulgarian archaeologist-scholar.






In the light of these information, Bulgars are a mix of Turkish, Slavic and other Balkan people as their Turkish name describes. They probably didn't select this name for themselves but instead, its given to them by other Turkish tribes of that time.

Also i have to add that the words derived from "Bul" generally signifies as "negative" or "bad" thing. For example if someone puts more than necessary variety of ingredients to a meal while preparing it, we say "Bulamac yaptin" in Turkish, which means "You ruined it" in a short way. These words also regarded as semi-vulgar in Turkish. So, i think Turkish people named them as "Bulgar" in a negative way, because they lost their culture and assimilated by other people either willingly or by force. So, even in medieval times, Bulgars wasn't considered as Turkish people anymore. Also, we cant consider Cumans in Hungary(possibly around %40 of population) today as Turks but they still continue their tradition of horse riding and horseback archery as a sport. They also still have some shamanistic elements in their Christian belief.





Further reading;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgars

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bolgar_language

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Great_Bulgaria

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cumans

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Hungary

http://www.nisanyansozluk.com/?s=detay&dq=bul*&dt=&dd=&dk=

http://www.kroraina.com/bulgar/rashev.html

[Risto the Great]

An interesting post Onur.
Thanks.

How do you equate "Turkic" with "Turkish"? Is there any need to distinguish between the two terms in your mind?

[Onur]

An interesting post Onur.
Thanks.

How do you equate "Turkic" with "Turkish"? Is there any need to distinguish between the two terms in your mind?

Actually, Its quite same thing.

The scholars felt the necessity to use two different word for it. When they say "Turkish" people, they define people at Eurasian section like Balkans, Turkey and maybe Azerbaijan. "Turkic" defines the Turkish speaking people of Caucasus section like Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan etc.

Maybe they felt a need for distinction since its such a vast distance and some of the disparities between them.

Also the people who has been defined as "Turkic" by scholars, living close to China/Mongolia are also genetically mixed with them after the rise of Mongols with Genghis Khan at 13th century AD because Mongols killed half of them and enslaved the rest for like ~100 years. You can define Mongolic genes easily on them from their slight slant-eyes while you normally don't see this eye feature on other Turks. In Turkey today, only few people with Tatar origins have this type of eyes. Stalin of communist Russia forced these Tatar people of Crimea immigrate to Turkey at 20th century.


For the language; Some linguists defines all Turkish based languages with the name "Turkic" and puts all related languages under this main name and places Turkish of Turkey under western dialect branch to it.

In the end, we use same language but different dialects. For example when i speak with a Turk from Balkans, its quite same as modern Turkish and i have zero problem to understand him. If i speak with an Azerbaijani, i can understand %80 of what they say but if its the Turkish of Uzbekistan, i can only understand %50 because they use lots of words, borrowed from Mongolian language.



About "Cuman" Turkish which mentioned in the documents i posted above;
When i read the "Codex Cumanicus" of 11th century AD, i can understand %80 of written text because its the same with western(Eurasian) Turkish dialect of people in Turkey. So they are very close relatives to the current Turkish people of Anatolia and Balkans.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_Cumanicus

[Onur]

Also, we cant consider Cumans in Hungary(possibly around %40 of population) today as Turks but they still continue their tradition of horse riding and horseback archery as a sport. They also still have some shamanistic elements in their Christian belief.

I had this on my youtube favorite videos. Watch this Cuman guy from Hungary. He is shooting arrows like his ancestors did 1000 years ago. Its unbelievable archery skill;

YouTube - Archery Rapid Fire Hun Archery Kassai




YouTube - Kassai Lajos 4th Guinness World record

[Onur]

Bulgars in medieval Jewish sources

The medieval Jewish scholar Joseph ben Gorion lists in his Josippon[1] the ten sons of Togarmah[2] as follows:

1. Kozar (the Khazars)
2. Pacinak (the Pechenegs)
3. Aliqanosz (the Alans)
4. Bulgar (the Bulgars)
5. Ragbiga (Ragbina, Ranbona)
6. Turqi (possibly the Kökturks)
7. Buz (the Oghuz)
8. Zabuk
9. Ungari (either the Hungarians or the Oghurs/Onogurs)
10. Tilmac (Tilmic)."




In the Chronicles of Jerahmeel[3], they are listed as:

1. Cuzar (the Khazars)
2. Pasinaq (the Pechenegs)
3. Alan (the Alans)
4. Bulgar (the Bulgars)
5. Kanbinah
6. Turq (possibly the Kökturks)
7. Buz (the Oghuz)
8. Zakhukh
9. Ugar (either the Hungarians or the Oghurs/Onogurs)
10. Tulmes







Khazar Correspondence[4]
An exchange of letters in the 950's or 960's between Hasdai ibn Shaprut, foreign secretary to the Caliph of Cordoba, and Joseph, King of the Khazars.

King Joseph's Reply;
................
..........
I have a record that although our fathers were few in number, the Holy One blessed be He, gave them strength, power, and might so that they were able to carry on war after war with many nations who were more powerful and numerous than they. By the help of God they drove them out and took possession of their country. Upon some of them they have imposed forced labor even to this very day. The land in which I now live was formerly occupied by the Bulgarians. Our ancestors, the Khazars, came and fought with them, and, although these Bulgarians were as numerous as the sand on the shores of the sea, they could not withstand the Khazars. So they left their country and fled while the Khazars pursued them as far as the Danube River. Up to this very day the Bulgars camp along the Danube and are close to Constantinople. The Khazars have occupied their land up till now.
...................
..........

In the first two Jewish sources, early Bulgars are listed as one of ten main Turkic tribes.

3rd source is a letter of Khazar Khan Joseph to the Caliph of Cordoba. This letter is believed to be written in the 950's or 960's. Khan Joseph explains that how they expelled Bulgars to the Balkans.






References:
1) The chronicle was probably compiled in Hebrew early in the 10th century, by a Jewish native of south Italy. The work is ascribed to a certain Joseph ben Gorion. It is generally held that he was a Jew living in southern Italy in either the ninth or the tenth century.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josippon

2) In the Torah, Togarmah is listed in the genealogy of nations as the son of Gomer, and grandson of Japheth (Gen. 10:3). Traditionally he is regarded as the ancestor of the Turkic-speaking peoples.
http://www.spiritus-temporis.com/togarmah/

3) The Chronicles of Jerahmeel is a voluminous work that draws largely on Pseudo-Philo's earlier history of Biblical events and is of special interest because it includes Hebrew and Aramaic versions of certain deuterocanonical books in the Septuagint. The actual compiler of the chronicles identifies himself as "Eleasar ben Asher the Levite' who, according to Gaster, lived in the Rhineland in the 14th century. This 'Jerahmeel' has since been identified as Jerahmeel ben Solomon, thought to have flourished in Italy around 1150.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronicles_of_Jerahmeel

4) http://www.spiritus-temporis.com/khazars/ ... http://www.spiritus-temporis.com/khazar-correspondence/

[Soldier of Macedon]

I had this on my youtube favorite videos. Watch this Cuman guy from Hungary. He is shooting arrows like his ancestors did 1000 years ago. Its unbelievable archery skill;

YouTube - Archery Rapid Fire Hun Archery Kassai




YouTube - Kassai Lajos 4th Guinness World record

I've seen this before. Incredible precision, and proof that it can still certainly be done.

So, if bows can be as effective (or close to) as firearms, I wonder why none of the groups involved in the 19th century rebellions and revolutions against the Ottomans used them? There were times where Macedonian leaders weren't able to adequately supply their men with the proper arsenal and firearms, perhaps this could have been a useful weapon instead? Just a thought, mainly in relation to the Ilinden Uprising in Krusevo, I am thinking about hundreds of men (archers) in the forests waiting to assault and intercept the oncoming Ottoman army. Sounds a little Robin Hoodish, lol, but, could it have been effective, should proper strategy, stealth and positioning have been applied? I can't see why not.

[Onur]

I've seen this before. Incredible precision, and proof that it can still certainly be done.

So, if bows can be as effective (or close to) as firearms, I wonder why none of the groups involved in the 19th century rebellions and revolutions against the Ottomans used them? There were times where Macedonian leaders weren't able to adequately supply their men with the proper arsenal and firearms, perhaps this couldn't have been a useful weapon instead? Just a thought, mainly in relation to the Ilinden Uprising in Krusevo, I am thinking about hundreds of men (archers) in the forests waiting to assault and intercept the oncoming Ottoman army. Sounds a little Robin Hoodish, lol, but, could it have been effective, should proper strategy, stealth and positioning have been applied? I can't see why not.

This certainly cant be done without years of training. AFAIK, some of these Hungarian(actually the Cumans) archers abandon everything related with modern world. They are riding horse all day long like their ancestors did 1000+ years ago, maybe even practicing shamanism! This precision at archery is the result of all this. So, it cant be done for an ordinary guy with only months of training cuz It requires certain dedication.


Also, this was the secret of Ottoman Empire army for 500+ years. Mehter, the military marching band coordinating 1000s of Janissary infantry and horsemen archers. You know, they were practically unbeatable for centuries. The only considerable rival was Hapsburg army.

[Soldier of Macedon]

Years of practice could have been arranged, had it been considered as an option. I was thinking only the archery and not the horse riding, nevertheless, even on foot, I think we can both agree that they're very effective. Macedonians had dedication, but in some of our latter battles against the Ottomans we lacked proper foresight and innovation (aside from the other obvious strengths of the Ottomans that comes from being the ruling group in the empire).

[Onur]

Years of practice could have been arranged, had it been considered as an option. I was thinking only the archery and not the horse riding, nevertheless, even on foot, I think we can both agree that they're very effective.

Ohhh ok I was talking about horseback archery.

I think regular archery should be much easier than horseback style...and yes, probably it could be very effective `till the technological advancements of 1920s.

[Bratot]

The meaning of the terms "Grecian" and "Bulgarian"

Bulgarian "scientific" methods bring the term "Bulgarian" into generic link not only with the old Bulgarian, but with everything that ever appeared at any time under this name (!?)

For shorter and better review of the use and meaning of the term "Bulgarian" starting from the 10th century and especially during the Turkish domination of the Balkans will consider several referential examples that testify against Bulgarian Nationalist doctrine.

According to the Bulgarian historiography all mentions,and very often wrong, with this name which is for her a fateful moment, that this is them - Bulgarians.

“Bulgarian elite had to invent, elaborate and underpin a myth of common ancestry and made this pedigree putative for the sense of ethnic identification.”
- (Smith, Anthony. "National Identity" published in London 1991, p. 22)

A.Todorov-Balan in his "One Macedonian theory”, book 9-10, Sofia, 1905, 818, states that in the XIX century the Balkan peoples,called the Russian czar -" Bulgarian Tsar "and the Serbian and Russian language - "Bulgarian".

The term "Bulgarian” during the Ottoman rule denoted – a peasant farmer.

While the "Grecian" denoted a person of higher class or merchant.

"During the Ottoman period, therefore, terms like 'Greek' or 'Bulgarian' were not used to designate different ethnic or national groups, but rather broad socio-cultural categories" (Danforth 1995:59)
- (Mirca Madianou , “Mediating the Nation“, p. 30, is Lecturer and Director of Studies in Social and Political Sciences, Lucy Cavendish College, University of Cambridge)

"The term "Bulgarian," which had earlier been used to refer to all the Slavs of the Ottoman Empire (Friedman 1975:84), or as a virtual synonym for "peasant" without any political significance at all came to mean "Bulgarian" in a national sense. "(Wilkinson 1951:149),
- (Loring M. Danforth „The Macedonian Conflict: Ethnic Nationalism in a Transnational World Princeton University Press, 1997, p. 59)

“ For example, in Macedonia, Serbia and Bulgaria, class and ethnicity overlapped, resulting in the utilization of the terms “Serb” and “Bulgar” to denote the peasantry per se. Since most peasants were Slavs and most Slavs were peasants, class distinctions often became ethnic distinctions ( Slijepcevic 1958, 82-96; Kofos 1964; Vermulen 1984; Shashko 1973).
When the Slavs moved into the urban world or became members of the middle classes, they generally shifted their identity to Greek. In Belgrade, for example, Serbian townsmen dressed in the Greek style, the Belgrade newspapers included the rubric Greciia (Greece), and the local Christian “higher strata” were Grecophone until 1840 – according to Stoianovich 1994, 294; and Karanovich 1995, 31.
In Southern Albania and Greece during the late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, thousands of Orthodox Albanians and Vlachs became completely Hellenized ( Skendi 1980, 187-204)”.
- (Victor Roudometof “Nationalism,Orthodoxy, and Globalization”p. 48)


We are witnesses of the phenomenon of “ethnicization” of the religious, social or occupational groups in Balkans, very often these groups were denoted by the names of ethnic communities and they used these names to denote themselves as well.

The term "Grecian" could mean "an Orthodox Christian," but also "reseller" or generally "well situated" citizen. in the same way, "Turk" most marked "Muslim" and "Bulgarian" was a highlight, "villager", with or without an offensive meaning. "Vlach" and marked "shepherd" or "nomads" in general. "Albanian" (arnautin) could be applied to a man from each ethnic group who performed certain military tasks
The term “Grecian” could mean “Orthodox Christian” but also a “city dweller” or gennerally “well to do citizen”. In the same way,”Turk” often meant “Muslim”, with “Bulgarian” to denote a “villager”, with ot without pejorative connotation. “Vlach” could mean “shepherd” or “nomad” in general.”Albanian” (arnautin) could apply to a person of any ethnic origin performing specific military tasks
- (Dēmētrēs Tziovas , „Greece and the Balkans“ p. 43)


According the references of Prof. Keith Brown, “Turk” implied official persona – functionary, “Grecian” meant – merchant, “Bulgarian” – villager, farmer and “Vlach” – shepherd, rancher.
“When the Macedonian peasants use the term Bulgar, they mean by it: 1) people of a simple and hard-working life, 2) the bulk of simple labourers who speak Slavic, in contrast to the non-Slavs, the Greeks and the Turks, who are above this majority and consider them inferior. The first meaning is the main one: the word “Bulgar” denotes in the first case a simple mode of life, work and thought.”
- (Keith Brown, „The Past in Question, modern Macedonia and the Uncertainties of Nation“, p. 59)

Habsburg authorities in Transylvania, tended to call all members of Orthodox merchant companies “Greeks”, irrespective thet they included not only Slavs, Romanians, and Christian Albanians, but also a sprinkle of Armenians and Jews. Western travelers in Macedonia, quickly realized that the term “Bulgarian” was locally used to describe poor Slav peasants.
- (Katerina Zacharia и Dimitris Livianos „ Hellenisms: culture, identity, and ethnicity from antiquity to modernity“, p. 249)

“In Macedonia, as late as the early twentieth century, both “Greeks” and “Bulgarian: denoted professions, the later often being applied to poor, Slavic-speaking, Orthodoc Christian peasants, shepherds, or laborers of lower social status to whom were ascribed a “peasant” culture.”
- ( Peter Mackridge, „Language and National Identity in Greece, 1766 – 1976“)

Trajan Stojanović in his book "Balkan Worlds: The First and Last Europe", p.143 again underlines that the term "Bulgarians" were called the farmers and with "Vlachs" the shepherds.

The Bulgarian member of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences Vasil Drumev wrote: "And we've began to learn Greek, to speak in Greek, to call ourselves Greeks. And there is still among us respected Bulgarians, who are grecoficating, who speak .. in Greek, who hate the Bulgarians.”

K. Irachek in - "History of Bulgarians”, Sofia, 1929, 385-386, says that the citizens for the simple, uneducated provincials (peasants) always used the name - "Bulgarians" by adding the obligatory – thick headed, prick, stumps and other abusive words.

The Traveler Sir John Mandeville, in1357 travelling throught Balkans wrote that Serbia is land of Bougiers, while Blegrade in that time was known by the name “Alba Graeca” and “Alba Bulgarica”.

Simeon Lehaci in his journey memories wrote that all the people in Bosnia speaks in "Bulgarian", and they were "Greeks" in religion.


“All peasants were Macedonians; shepherds were Vlachs; merchants and bureaucrats were Greeks; and the high administrators were Muslims.”- (“Minorities and mother country imagery” By Gerald L. Gold, Memorial University of Newfoundland. Institute of Social and Economic Research, p. 60.)

Prof. Stilpon Kyriakidis in the “Northern ethnological frontiers of Hellenism ", on p.39:
"While at the time of Simeon did not cease to differ Dragovites from Strumianites and generally Sclavinians from Bulgarians, since Samuel the name of Sclavinias completely disappeared, and all Macedonian Slavs are called Bulgarians by the Byzantines and the country that Samuel ruled, that is western and northern Macedonia is called Bulgaria. In this way, we ourselves gave the name Bulgarian to everyone that speaks Slavic ".

The propaganda consisted of introducing among the common Slavic people the world “Bolgar”, as a synonym for “Slavonic Christian”; As this propaganda was so strong, really the word “Bolgar” became a synonym for “Christian that speak Slavonic” in the 19 Cent., but not and nationality.
When bulgarian peasant used to say "we are Bulgars", he meant "we are Christians", i.e. Orthodox (Periodichesko spisanie (Sofia), LXV (1904), p.818)

Another indisputable proof that the “Bulgarian” at that time meant Slav, and then "Bulgarians" thought of themselves as pure Slavs, the same people with the Serbs and the Macedonians and Illyrians (Croats, Slovenes and Montenegrins) presents "The History of Bulgarian people " by Fr. Spiridon of Gabrovo, which in its short history says:

"Bolgarians came into rule in Thrace, Macedonia, Dalmatia, White Sea and the Rome... Illyrians (Serbs and Croats, my note) are called Bolgarians... and from Bolgarians originated the Serbs, and when Alexander took the whole Ilyrian army to conquer of the world ... since then Bolgarians began to call themselves Macedonians and Slavs "
- (Spyridon Yeroschimonach, History in short of Bolgarian Slav nation 1792, tran. B. Hristova, prof. Raikov B., BAK at NB “Ss.Cyril and Methodius ", and" GAL-ICO, Sofia, 1992)

Jordan Hadzhikonstantinov - Dzinot, tells that for him the term Bulgarians means Slavs, so in his "Legend of Thessaloniki," published in 1859 says St. Cyril and Methodius, the apostles of all Bulgarians (Slavs), and in Bulgarians includes the Moravians from Great Moravia and Pannonia (Glasnik drustva srpske slovenosti, VIII, p. 146-147)

Krste Petkov Misirkov explains the concept “Bulgarian”: "The Greeks also did not differ the Slavic nations and all Slavs ... called with the despised name "Bulgarians"
... The Greeks used the name Bulgarian to incarnate in him their contempt for everything Slavic. .. With the name Bulgarians, we Macedonians were christen by the Greeks,as well. But this re-christening was not the only one... “ (Krste Petkov Misirkov "On Macedonian Matters" Preface, Sofia, Printing House of the Liberal Club, 1903).

For Mr. Gennady, Metropolitan of Veles in 19th century ( born in the village Podkozhene, Podgradec) the concept “Bulgarian” is the same with the term Slavs, and he wrote that the Czechs and Slovakians are Bulgarians: “ of Bohemia and Moravia they are all Slavs, pure Bulgarians, our brothers” (Source: Simeon Radev “ Early memories”, titled “Meeting of four Bulgarian bishops” new, revised and expanded edition, edited by Trajan Radev, publishing house “Strelec”, Sofia, 1994)

Macedonian teacher Nikola Pop-Philipov, says that "Bulgarian" language is a general Balkan language (newspaper "Macedonia" Constantinople, April 6, 1868), referring to the Slavic language.

Grigor Prlicev writes in his autobiography: “... the Bulgarian alphabet only to three was known and was called Serbian..” (Grigor Prlicev, Autobigraphy). For him and the Serbians were Bulgarians i.e. Slavs; at that time, only Serbs had reformed and codified Slavic alphabet, and because of it Prlicev says that the Bulgarian (Slavonic) alphabet was called Serbian.

The famous Macedonian textbook writer Dimitar Macedonian sees its people as ancient Macedonians, and in one of his article writes that the ancient Macedonians are not swallowed by the earth, but are pure Slavs: "... Macedonians are not Vlachs or some other nation, but pure Bulgarians (thinking of Slavs) ... therefore you’ll learn that the Macedonians are not lost from the face of the earth, as some allow to say, because, as far as we know, they did not done anything so bad, what should open the earth to swallow them. "(see Makedonia of 16/02/1871).

In its “Brief holy history for the schools in Macedonia (in Macedonian dialect) printed in “ The printing of Macedonia”, Constantinople in 1867, writes:
Q.[Question] Who are those Bulgarians(Slavs), who were baptized in the early first century after Christ’s birth?
A.[Answer] They are Bulgarians who live in Macedonia
Q. From whom are they baptized?
A. The Apostle Paul, who first preached at Philippi and Thessaloniki

It becomes obvious that under the umbrella of the term "Bulgarians" also enter the ancient Macedonians, who were first baptized by the Apostle Paul, whole 5 centuries before the ethnic name "Bulgarians" to appear on the Balkans at all and generally European geographic regions.

Next reference is the book of Mark Mazower “Salonica City of Ghosts” p.249, who writes about the visit of Sir Henry Layards of Thessaloniki, and here’s what he means under these terms:
To be a “Greek” meant to be a “Orthodox Christian” while under the term “Bulgarian” was held to be one of reproach and contempt.

Not last confirmation, but sufficient for completion of this reference overview of the meaning of these terms, according to the book of Nace Dimov “Historical line of Macedonia and Macedonian Slavs” Chapter first p.13-15, from 1913:

”Therefore, in Macedonia there was such a position that the same Macedonian nation was called Grecian, Serbian and Bulgarian, just because one recognizes the Greek patriarch and pray in Greek churches, and another goes into a Slavic church. In each the same towns and villages the priests that receive a salary of Bulgarian Exarchate call themselves Bulgarians, those receiving the salary from the Serbian Diocese called themselves Serb and Macedonian Slav population that goes into one or another school or church calling itself Grecian, Serb or Bulgarian

From all that I expressed I can say that the Macedonians have a hundred percent right to autonomy and not be subjected to fragmentation among Greeks, Serbs and Bulgarians. Regardless of that the Serbian, Greek and Bulgarian government, for extending their boundaries on Macedonian territory, without saving money and exterminating the Macedonians who do not want to call themselves Greek, Serb and Bulgarian and those who do not know how to speak Serbian and Greek.”

http://macedonianspark.com/mk/istorijaideologija/opropaganda/437-2010-10-31-20-28-55