Papers by Георги В . Владимиров
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Пензенский археологический сборник, 2023
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Сб. "Проф. д-р Борис Борисов - ученици и приятели", 2023
„BULGARS“, „SLAVS“ AND „THRACIANS“ IN THE SECOND BULGARIAN KINGDOM: NOTES ON THE (OVER) INTERPRET... more „BULGARS“, „SLAVS“ AND „THRACIANS“ IN THE SECOND BULGARIAN KINGDOM: NOTES ON THE (OVER) INTERPRETATION OF ANTHROPOLOGICAL DATA FROM MEDIEVAL BULGARIAN NECROPOLISES
The author examines data from anthropological studies of medieval Bulgarian necropolises from 11th – 14th centuries focusing on their interpretation. It is wide spread the idea of the three-component composition of Medieval Bulgarian Population including remains of Romanized Thracians, Slavs and the Bulgars of Asparuh. With certain reservations, this research paradigm could be considered true for the first centuries of the existence of Danubian Bulgaria. Subsequently, there was a period of active demographic dynamics, being the penetration of external ethnic elements a result of various historical circumstances – migration and settlement of late nomads with a wide variety of their ethnic composition. This fact, however, is forgotten or ignored, while the aforementioned three-component scheme is overexposed forward in time (mainly in the field of anthropology), which leads to strange conclusions without benefit for the scientific research. For example, the presence of Mongoloid features in recorded craniological series from 11th – 14th centuries is unambiguously associated only with Bulgars, while the artificial skull deformities, as well as healing or symbolic trepanations are defined as reminiscences of pre-Christian usual practices, brought by the Asparuh’s Bulgars. Based on data from the necropolises of Shumen fortress, Kabile, Drustar, Bozhenishki Urvich Fortress, Pernik and Pliska it is accepted the idea that the role of the Thracian and Slav components of the population in the Second Bulgarian Kingdom is exaggerated. In conclusion it is recommended anthropological conclusions to be concrete, relevant to the historical period they refer to as well as to the historical written and archaeological data on the demographic changes in the respective territories. Such interdisciplinary approach would make the historiographical interpretation objective and would avoid hypothesis presenting the ethnic view of the Bulgarian lands in the period 11th – 14th centuries as unnecessarily archaic.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Пензенский археологический сборник, 2022
Once again on the topic for ethnocultural parallels between Danube Bulgarians and Volga Bulgarian... more Once again on the topic for ethnocultural parallels between Danube Bulgarians and Volga Bulgarians
The paper reviews published ethnographic studies on the similarities in the habits and folkloric traditions of ethnographic groups from the regions of Lower Danube and Middle Volga, often defined as ‘ethnocultural parallels between Danube Bulgarians and Volga Bulgarians’. Traditionally they consider data collected among the so called Kapantzi in Northeast Bulgaria and among the Volga Chuvash being the similar features given to their common origin from the times of Old Great Bulgaria (7th century). The author suggests an alternative interpretation of these ‘parallels’, namely introduced habits, part of the late nomads’ culture (11th – 14th centuries), who settled down in both regions, and he provides ethnographic and anthropological evidence for his hypothesis. In conclusion he admits that study of the medieval cultures of Danube Bulgarians and Volga Bulgarians must be as concrete as possible, consistent with available written, archaeological, ethnographic and anthropological material. Attempts for comparative analysis should not be limited to specific ethnographic groups and syncretic cultural influences of geopolitical nature – local environment, secondary ethnic waves etc. – must be considered.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Povolzhskaya Arkheologiya (The Volga River Region Archaeology)
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Сб. Добруджа, Том 32, 2017
SOME NOTES ON THE NECROPOLISES NEAR YANTRA VILLAGE, GORNA ORYAHOVITSA DISTRICT
The text addresse... more SOME NOTES ON THE NECROPOLISES NEAR YANTRA VILLAGE, GORNA ORYAHOVITSA DISTRICT
The text addresses two necropolises near Yantra village, close to the town of Gorna Oryahovitsa, Veliko Tarnovo region, discovered and explored in the late 1980s and early 1990s. The necropolises are from 14th century. Common picture of both necropolises discover heterogeneous burial culture with specifics of the grave inventory out of the traditionally Christian ones. In several graves presence of charcoal and lime, bones of livestock and fish, shells of clams and snails, question mark shaped earrings, over 300 Bulgarian, Byzantine, Serbian, Tatar and other coins have been registered.
The necropolises near Yantra village are not a separate phenomenon among the burial complexes from the period of Second Bulgarian Kingdom. Undoubtedly the population representing the burial culture from these necropolises belongs to the so called in the Byzantine sources „mixed Barbarians“, among whom there are Jasses–Alanes as well, according to the author. Whether it is a mixture of local population and migrants, trying to escape from the invading Mongols, whether they are descendants of the population moved in 13th century from the Hungarian Kingdom population (Cumans and Jasses), whether they are migrants from the Nogay’s ulus, disintegrated in the beginning of 14th century, or refugees from the ‘Black Death‘, overtaking the Golden Horde in the middle of the same period we can only assume. It seems that the whole 14th century is marked by the active influx of diverse population, mainly through the depopulated Dobrudzha corridor – a process which could be considered as a reason for the centrifugal forces in medieval Bulgaria, which permanently fragment its territory and facilitate its Ottoman conquest. Having said that, burial monuments of Second Bulgarian Kingdom and the inventory found in them, mainly those in North and North-Eastern Bulgaria, should be considered in the context of overall dynamic in its variability and strong as impact cultural picture of PAX NOMADICA, and (hypo)theses of Byzantine influences should be applied concretely, out of the globalizing cliches of Byzantine cultural domination in the Balkans in the Middle Ages.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Сб. СЪВРЕМЕННИ ПРЕДИЗВИКАТЕЛСТВА ПРЕД НАУКАТА, изд. Съюз на учените в България, 2012
THE THEME OF VOLGA BULGARIA – CHALLENGE FOR CONTEMPORARY BULGARIAN HISTORY SCIENCE
The text pr... more THE THEME OF VOLGA BULGARIA – CHALLENGE FOR CONTEMPORARY BULGARIAN HISTORY SCIENCE
The text presents challenges in researching of history of Volga Bulgaria in Bulgarian historiography. The collision between traditional science and so-called 'folk-history' in the Volga Bulgarian's field are presented and analyzed. Recommendations about legitimation of the topic in academic society are offered. Necessity of precise definition of criteria for authenticity as a measure against falsification and commercialization of the theme are emphasized.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
"Археология евразийских степей", 2021
'Notes on the ethnic appearance of medieval Danube Bulgaria (12th - 14th century) according to ar... more 'Notes on the ethnic appearance of medieval Danube Bulgaria (12th - 14th century) according to archeological and anthropological data'
The article presents dynamics in the ethnic and cultural picture of Bulgarian lands in 12th - 14th century with emphasis on the late nomads' role in those processes. Archeological traces from newly arrived ethnic groups, that settled in these lands in the considered chronological period, have been presented in brief. Attention has been paid to certain little-known anthropological data which additionally light on these migration waves. Conclusion has been drawn on the necessity of complex approach in the studies of the late Bulgarian Middle Ages through attraction and interpretation of maximum amount of scientific evidences of historical, archeological and anthropological origin.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Сп. "Наука", 2011
ONE EXAMPLE FROM THE ARCHTECTURAL HISTORY OF THE VOLGA BULGARIA
The article is on the unconsid... more ONE EXAMPLE FROM THE ARCHTECTURAL HISTORY OF THE VOLGA BULGARIA
The article is on the unconsidered in our medievalism issue about the representative architecture in the Volga Bulgaria, the monumental luxury construction in Bolghar in the times of the Golden Horde, the attempts it to be defined and recognized as archaic analog of the past monuments of the pagan Danubian Bulgaria. Different examples from written and archeological sources are given. The approved concept is that the analytical approach should reflect as a priority on the variety, stemming from context, confession and historical events rather than on the intentionally postulated unity based on common origin and other non-scientific comparisons.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Thracia XVII
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Сб. "Понятия, ценности, промени. Историята: време и реалности", 2006
THE TARKHANNY YARLYK (EDICT) BY KHAN SAHIB-GIREY AS A SOURCE ABOUT JURIDICAL CULTURE OF KAZAN KHA... more THE TARKHANNY YARLYK (EDICT) BY KHAN SAHIB-GIREY AS A SOURCE ABOUT JURIDICAL CULTURE OF KAZAN KHANATE
The paper presented and analyzed information about the juridical culture of the Kazan Khanate, contains in concrete document – the tarkhanny yarlyk (edict) by khan Sahib-Girey from 1523. Administrative posts and taxes functioned in Khanate and their possible analogs and archetypes are commented. It reached the conclusion that Kazan juridical culture is a result of combination of traditions, followed from Volga Bulgaria and Golden Horde.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Сп. "История", 2002
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Сп. "Българска историческа библиотека", 2000
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Сп. "Български език и литература", 2000
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Сп. "История", 1997
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Сп. "Епохи", 2001
Punishment 'Blinding" in Medieval Culture
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Сб. "История, общество, религия", 2003
The article presents the spiritual processes at the time of the Bulgarian khan Omurtag (814-831).... more The article presents the spiritual processes at the time of the Bulgarian khan Omurtag (814-831). The technical term Cold war illustrates the conflict between the Bulgarian and Byzantine cultural models and the creation of the outside symbolical borders of the first model. The real expressions of this conflict in Medieval Bulgaria are examined. The main conclusion is that Danube Bulgaria at the time of khan Omurtag was an equal side in the cultural discourse in European South-East.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Сб. "Историкии", 2012
THE ‘DJAGFAR TARIKHY’ PHENOMENON: ABOUT ‘PRODUCING OF AUHTORITIES’ ON THE VOLGA BULGARIA ISSUE IN... more THE ‘DJAGFAR TARIKHY’ PHENOMENON: ABOUT ‘PRODUCING OF AUHTORITIES’ ON THE VOLGA BULGARIA ISSUE IN THE HISTORIOGRAPHY AND OUT OF IT
The article considers one problematic text on the Volga Bulgaria issue and the early history of the Bulgars as a whole. It is about the so called ‘Djagfar Tarikhy’ annals (‘History of Djagfar’), firstly published in a Russian newspaper ‘Bulgar al-Djadid’. Arguments of leading world researchers are presented within a discussion on its authenticity. The author outlines several problems and puts questions to the historiography regarding one future productive debate on the trends for contemporary historical knowledge and the challenges that it faces as a support of identity.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
"Българите в Австрия", 2008
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
"Българите в Австрия", 2008
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Uploads
Papers by Георги В . Владимиров
The author examines data from anthropological studies of medieval Bulgarian necropolises from 11th – 14th centuries focusing on their interpretation. It is wide spread the idea of the three-component composition of Medieval Bulgarian Population including remains of Romanized Thracians, Slavs and the Bulgars of Asparuh. With certain reservations, this research paradigm could be considered true for the first centuries of the existence of Danubian Bulgaria. Subsequently, there was a period of active demographic dynamics, being the penetration of external ethnic elements a result of various historical circumstances – migration and settlement of late nomads with a wide variety of their ethnic composition. This fact, however, is forgotten or ignored, while the aforementioned three-component scheme is overexposed forward in time (mainly in the field of anthropology), which leads to strange conclusions without benefit for the scientific research. For example, the presence of Mongoloid features in recorded craniological series from 11th – 14th centuries is unambiguously associated only with Bulgars, while the artificial skull deformities, as well as healing or symbolic trepanations are defined as reminiscences of pre-Christian usual practices, brought by the Asparuh’s Bulgars. Based on data from the necropolises of Shumen fortress, Kabile, Drustar, Bozhenishki Urvich Fortress, Pernik and Pliska it is accepted the idea that the role of the Thracian and Slav components of the population in the Second Bulgarian Kingdom is exaggerated. In conclusion it is recommended anthropological conclusions to be concrete, relevant to the historical period they refer to as well as to the historical written and archaeological data on the demographic changes in the respective territories. Such interdisciplinary approach would make the historiographical interpretation objective and would avoid hypothesis presenting the ethnic view of the Bulgarian lands in the period 11th – 14th centuries as unnecessarily archaic.
The paper reviews published ethnographic studies on the similarities in the habits and folkloric traditions of ethnographic groups from the regions of Lower Danube and Middle Volga, often defined as ‘ethnocultural parallels between Danube Bulgarians and Volga Bulgarians’. Traditionally they consider data collected among the so called Kapantzi in Northeast Bulgaria and among the Volga Chuvash being the similar features given to their common origin from the times of Old Great Bulgaria (7th century). The author suggests an alternative interpretation of these ‘parallels’, namely introduced habits, part of the late nomads’ culture (11th – 14th centuries), who settled down in both regions, and he provides ethnographic and anthropological evidence for his hypothesis. In conclusion he admits that study of the medieval cultures of Danube Bulgarians and Volga Bulgarians must be as concrete as possible, consistent with available written, archaeological, ethnographic and anthropological material. Attempts for comparative analysis should not be limited to specific ethnographic groups and syncretic cultural influences of geopolitical nature – local environment, secondary ethnic waves etc. – must be considered.
The text addresses two necropolises near Yantra village, close to the town of Gorna Oryahovitsa, Veliko Tarnovo region, discovered and explored in the late 1980s and early 1990s. The necropolises are from 14th century. Common picture of both necropolises discover heterogeneous burial culture with specifics of the grave inventory out of the traditionally Christian ones. In several graves presence of charcoal and lime, bones of livestock and fish, shells of clams and snails, question mark shaped earrings, over 300 Bulgarian, Byzantine, Serbian, Tatar and other coins have been registered.
The necropolises near Yantra village are not a separate phenomenon among the burial complexes from the period of Second Bulgarian Kingdom. Undoubtedly the population representing the burial culture from these necropolises belongs to the so called in the Byzantine sources „mixed Barbarians“, among whom there are Jasses–Alanes as well, according to the author. Whether it is a mixture of local population and migrants, trying to escape from the invading Mongols, whether they are descendants of the population moved in 13th century from the Hungarian Kingdom population (Cumans and Jasses), whether they are migrants from the Nogay’s ulus, disintegrated in the beginning of 14th century, or refugees from the ‘Black Death‘, overtaking the Golden Horde in the middle of the same period we can only assume. It seems that the whole 14th century is marked by the active influx of diverse population, mainly through the depopulated Dobrudzha corridor – a process which could be considered as a reason for the centrifugal forces in medieval Bulgaria, which permanently fragment its territory and facilitate its Ottoman conquest. Having said that, burial monuments of Second Bulgarian Kingdom and the inventory found in them, mainly those in North and North-Eastern Bulgaria, should be considered in the context of overall dynamic in its variability and strong as impact cultural picture of PAX NOMADICA, and (hypo)theses of Byzantine influences should be applied concretely, out of the globalizing cliches of Byzantine cultural domination in the Balkans in the Middle Ages.
The text presents challenges in researching of history of Volga Bulgaria in Bulgarian historiography. The collision between traditional science and so-called 'folk-history' in the Volga Bulgarian's field are presented and analyzed. Recommendations about legitimation of the topic in academic society are offered. Necessity of precise definition of criteria for authenticity as a measure against falsification and commercialization of the theme are emphasized.
The article presents dynamics in the ethnic and cultural picture of Bulgarian lands in 12th - 14th century with emphasis on the late nomads' role in those processes. Archeological traces from newly arrived ethnic groups, that settled in these lands in the considered chronological period, have been presented in brief. Attention has been paid to certain little-known anthropological data which additionally light on these migration waves. Conclusion has been drawn on the necessity of complex approach in the studies of the late Bulgarian Middle Ages through attraction and interpretation of maximum amount of scientific evidences of historical, archeological and anthropological origin.
The article is on the unconsidered in our medievalism issue about the representative architecture in the Volga Bulgaria, the monumental luxury construction in Bolghar in the times of the Golden Horde, the attempts it to be defined and recognized as archaic analog of the past monuments of the pagan Danubian Bulgaria. Different examples from written and archeological sources are given. The approved concept is that the analytical approach should reflect as a priority on the variety, stemming from context, confession and historical events rather than on the intentionally postulated unity based on common origin and other non-scientific comparisons.
The paper presented and analyzed information about the juridical culture of the Kazan Khanate, contains in concrete document – the tarkhanny yarlyk (edict) by khan Sahib-Girey from 1523. Administrative posts and taxes functioned in Khanate and their possible analogs and archetypes are commented. It reached the conclusion that Kazan juridical culture is a result of combination of traditions, followed from Volga Bulgaria and Golden Horde.
The article considers one problematic text on the Volga Bulgaria issue and the early history of the Bulgars as a whole. It is about the so called ‘Djagfar Tarikhy’ annals (‘History of Djagfar’), firstly published in a Russian newspaper ‘Bulgar al-Djadid’. Arguments of leading world researchers are presented within a discussion on its authenticity. The author outlines several problems and puts questions to the historiography regarding one future productive debate on the trends for contemporary historical knowledge and the challenges that it faces as a support of identity.
The author examines data from anthropological studies of medieval Bulgarian necropolises from 11th – 14th centuries focusing on their interpretation. It is wide spread the idea of the three-component composition of Medieval Bulgarian Population including remains of Romanized Thracians, Slavs and the Bulgars of Asparuh. With certain reservations, this research paradigm could be considered true for the first centuries of the existence of Danubian Bulgaria. Subsequently, there was a period of active demographic dynamics, being the penetration of external ethnic elements a result of various historical circumstances – migration and settlement of late nomads with a wide variety of their ethnic composition. This fact, however, is forgotten or ignored, while the aforementioned three-component scheme is overexposed forward in time (mainly in the field of anthropology), which leads to strange conclusions without benefit for the scientific research. For example, the presence of Mongoloid features in recorded craniological series from 11th – 14th centuries is unambiguously associated only with Bulgars, while the artificial skull deformities, as well as healing or symbolic trepanations are defined as reminiscences of pre-Christian usual practices, brought by the Asparuh’s Bulgars. Based on data from the necropolises of Shumen fortress, Kabile, Drustar, Bozhenishki Urvich Fortress, Pernik and Pliska it is accepted the idea that the role of the Thracian and Slav components of the population in the Second Bulgarian Kingdom is exaggerated. In conclusion it is recommended anthropological conclusions to be concrete, relevant to the historical period they refer to as well as to the historical written and archaeological data on the demographic changes in the respective territories. Such interdisciplinary approach would make the historiographical interpretation objective and would avoid hypothesis presenting the ethnic view of the Bulgarian lands in the period 11th – 14th centuries as unnecessarily archaic.
The paper reviews published ethnographic studies on the similarities in the habits and folkloric traditions of ethnographic groups from the regions of Lower Danube and Middle Volga, often defined as ‘ethnocultural parallels between Danube Bulgarians and Volga Bulgarians’. Traditionally they consider data collected among the so called Kapantzi in Northeast Bulgaria and among the Volga Chuvash being the similar features given to their common origin from the times of Old Great Bulgaria (7th century). The author suggests an alternative interpretation of these ‘parallels’, namely introduced habits, part of the late nomads’ culture (11th – 14th centuries), who settled down in both regions, and he provides ethnographic and anthropological evidence for his hypothesis. In conclusion he admits that study of the medieval cultures of Danube Bulgarians and Volga Bulgarians must be as concrete as possible, consistent with available written, archaeological, ethnographic and anthropological material. Attempts for comparative analysis should not be limited to specific ethnographic groups and syncretic cultural influences of geopolitical nature – local environment, secondary ethnic waves etc. – must be considered.
The text addresses two necropolises near Yantra village, close to the town of Gorna Oryahovitsa, Veliko Tarnovo region, discovered and explored in the late 1980s and early 1990s. The necropolises are from 14th century. Common picture of both necropolises discover heterogeneous burial culture with specifics of the grave inventory out of the traditionally Christian ones. In several graves presence of charcoal and lime, bones of livestock and fish, shells of clams and snails, question mark shaped earrings, over 300 Bulgarian, Byzantine, Serbian, Tatar and other coins have been registered.
The necropolises near Yantra village are not a separate phenomenon among the burial complexes from the period of Second Bulgarian Kingdom. Undoubtedly the population representing the burial culture from these necropolises belongs to the so called in the Byzantine sources „mixed Barbarians“, among whom there are Jasses–Alanes as well, according to the author. Whether it is a mixture of local population and migrants, trying to escape from the invading Mongols, whether they are descendants of the population moved in 13th century from the Hungarian Kingdom population (Cumans and Jasses), whether they are migrants from the Nogay’s ulus, disintegrated in the beginning of 14th century, or refugees from the ‘Black Death‘, overtaking the Golden Horde in the middle of the same period we can only assume. It seems that the whole 14th century is marked by the active influx of diverse population, mainly through the depopulated Dobrudzha corridor – a process which could be considered as a reason for the centrifugal forces in medieval Bulgaria, which permanently fragment its territory and facilitate its Ottoman conquest. Having said that, burial monuments of Second Bulgarian Kingdom and the inventory found in them, mainly those in North and North-Eastern Bulgaria, should be considered in the context of overall dynamic in its variability and strong as impact cultural picture of PAX NOMADICA, and (hypo)theses of Byzantine influences should be applied concretely, out of the globalizing cliches of Byzantine cultural domination in the Balkans in the Middle Ages.
The text presents challenges in researching of history of Volga Bulgaria in Bulgarian historiography. The collision between traditional science and so-called 'folk-history' in the Volga Bulgarian's field are presented and analyzed. Recommendations about legitimation of the topic in academic society are offered. Necessity of precise definition of criteria for authenticity as a measure against falsification and commercialization of the theme are emphasized.
The article presents dynamics in the ethnic and cultural picture of Bulgarian lands in 12th - 14th century with emphasis on the late nomads' role in those processes. Archeological traces from newly arrived ethnic groups, that settled in these lands in the considered chronological period, have been presented in brief. Attention has been paid to certain little-known anthropological data which additionally light on these migration waves. Conclusion has been drawn on the necessity of complex approach in the studies of the late Bulgarian Middle Ages through attraction and interpretation of maximum amount of scientific evidences of historical, archeological and anthropological origin.
The article is on the unconsidered in our medievalism issue about the representative architecture in the Volga Bulgaria, the monumental luxury construction in Bolghar in the times of the Golden Horde, the attempts it to be defined and recognized as archaic analog of the past monuments of the pagan Danubian Bulgaria. Different examples from written and archeological sources are given. The approved concept is that the analytical approach should reflect as a priority on the variety, stemming from context, confession and historical events rather than on the intentionally postulated unity based on common origin and other non-scientific comparisons.
The paper presented and analyzed information about the juridical culture of the Kazan Khanate, contains in concrete document – the tarkhanny yarlyk (edict) by khan Sahib-Girey from 1523. Administrative posts and taxes functioned in Khanate and their possible analogs and archetypes are commented. It reached the conclusion that Kazan juridical culture is a result of combination of traditions, followed from Volga Bulgaria and Golden Horde.
The article considers one problematic text on the Volga Bulgaria issue and the early history of the Bulgars as a whole. It is about the so called ‘Djagfar Tarikhy’ annals (‘History of Djagfar’), firstly published in a Russian newspaper ‘Bulgar al-Djadid’. Arguments of leading world researchers are presented within a discussion on its authenticity. The author outlines several problems and puts questions to the historiography regarding one future productive debate on the trends for contemporary historical knowledge and the challenges that it faces as a support of identity.
The research focuses on the birth, development and decay of the architectural culture of the other medieval Bulgaria – the one in the middle reaches of the Volga River. The chronological term subject to analysis herewith covers the earliest traces of Bulgarian presence in the basin of Middle Volga and ends with the destruction of the architectural wealth of Muslim Kazan by the Russian army of Ivan the Terrible in mid 16th century. Such type of study is absent not only in Bulgarian medieval research (wherein the themes related to Volga Bulgaria are still new), but in the Russian and Kazan historical studies as well, where only details have been researched but no attempt to complete the jig-saw of historical and architectural artifacts has been undertaken.
The introduction presents some general historical and architectural data of the region and the settling of the Bulgarians therein. A reconstruction is achieved of the general context of what is ‘available’ and ‘brought’ as factors in the future development of the mid-Volga territories. A short analysis is made of the major written sources about the constructions in Volga Bulgaria. The main part focuses on the genesis of the basic forms of architecture in the state by the Volga – urban, representative, cult and civil architecture. The history of construction is developed in four basic stages – Early Bulgarian, pre-Mongolian, Mongolian (Golden Horde-type) and Kazan stages. The author provides a summary of the cultural traits of each of the periods and situates the particular architectural samples, emblematic for each stage, in the respective context. The accompanying captions and illustrations present the basic parallels of each monument as a potential direction of reflection on the influence and dynamics of the processes in the formation and strengthening of the construction visions in the culture of Volga Bulgaria. Interesting legends about the constructions are provided.
The conclusion confirmed at the end of the research is that the history of the architecture of Volga Bulgaria forms an inseparable part of the culture of the region during the Middle Ages synchretistic in its nature. The lasting impression is that the culture of Volga Bulgaria exceeds far beyond the framework of the popular political history of the state and that the separate stages of its development are united by strong continuity interrupted by the 16th c. Russian aggression, which terminated the Bulgarian-Kazan elite culture. The elements of the old spirituality as a recollection of the epoch of independence and grandeur of the Bulgarian ‘North Mecca’ have remained widely popular.
In the concluding part the author summarizes in brief the known material traces of the Cumans and the Golden Horde, stored in Bulgarian museums. The idea that in 13th century the cultural and ethnic map of Medieval Bulgaria acquires Cumans features while in the first half of the 14th century – Tatar features is endorsed. These processes were realized in the lack of or quite weak political and cultural impact of the Byzantine factor – until early 1360s. Byzantine does not exist while the restored Palaeologus country is far from the prestige and glory of the Byzantine Empire in previous eras. For this reason, knowledge and study of the cultural scene in medieval Bulgaria in the last centuries of its independent existence suggests comprehensive studying of the processes in the East and the influences that determine to a large extent the fate of the Balkans’ Southeast in 13-14th century.
Myths and legends of the populations alongside the Volga River, which you will get to know, will take you centuries back to another world , will invite you to walk the historic way of the Volga Bulgarians guided by characters of popular imagination – dragons and heroes, giants and princesses, magicians and oracles.
This is a gripping fairy-tale, which is worth going through it, but it is also a serious reading, which is worth speculating on it.
Who were the Tartars and who were the Mongols?
Why the Golden Horde is called ‘golden’?
Has there been a civilisation of the Golden Horde?
What were the relations between Danube Bulgarians and the Golden Horde?
Did the invasion of the Mongols contribute to the disappearance of Volga Bulgarians?
What were the dimensions of the so-called Tartar hegemony in the Bulgarian kingdom by the Danube?
Was there a Tartar king on the Bulgarian throne in Tarnovo?
The above questions are only part of the multitude of questions the present research seeks to answer. The victorious military campaigns of the Mongols, the appearance of the Golden Horde as a part of the Empire of the Mongols and its transformation from a centralized military and nomadic state into a typical Muslim sedentary and civilized one – all these topics are developed herewith. On the one hand, emphasis is laid on the relations of the Golden Horde with Danube Bulgaria in the second half of the 13th century, as well as on the history of these contacts in the following 14th century, and, on the other hand, on the interaction between the rule of the Golden Horde and the Bulgarian emirates along the Middle Volga in the 13th–15th centuries. None of the scientific research produce till now has combined these two, seemingly multi-directional historical and historiographic streams. It was the Golden Horde that became an original ‘mediation’ unit between these two ‘Bulgarian medieval worlds’, which had been established since long ago. The political, economic and cultural impact of the Golden Horde members on the Bulgarians and vice versa is discussed in the research. The above topics, despite of being hot, represent an actual contribution to the analysis of the relations between the Tartars-Mongols and the ‘Bulgarian presence by the Danube’ and the ‘Bulgarian presence by the Middle Volga’. And, last but not least, the research provides strong scientific arguments against historically groundless, cheap slogans of the ‘Bulgars – Tartars’ type and against their town criers’ ignorance and lack of understanding of the historical circumstances.
Hereby the authors are confident that this research will further stimulate the research efforts in this direction and will intensify the interdisciplinary work of Bulgarian, Russian, Tatarstan, West European and American researchers alike, who are all tempted by this intriguing matters.
The present research is the first of its kind and it has gathered about 100 ancient European and Arab maps, from Middle Ages to the Early Modern Times, which illustrate the cartographic notions of the region of Middle Volga, the 10th-16th century state of Volga Bulgaria and its immediate successor – the Kazan Khanate. The aim of this research is to visualize the ‘appearance’ and ‘disappearance’ of particular realia in these lands as a result of objective historical processes or gradually accumulated knowledge.
The analysis of the cartographic sources conducts to several important conclusions about the ‘cartographic images’ of Volga Bulgaria and the Kazan Khanate.
First of all, Volga Bulgaria appeared for the first time as a state structure on the map of the Arab geographer Al-Idrisi (1154) as late as the 12th century. The cartographic ‘image’ of the Kazan Khanate also appeared too late as compared to its actual history and was registered as late as the 16th century. Since the second half of the same century both state structures have been depicted as ‘neighbours’, living in parallel along the middle reaches of Volga. This probably is due to the fact that Early Modern Times’ cartography is often based on old data which leads to the ‘synchronization’ /re-covering/ of these two states in contradiction to the historical facts.
On the other hand, the Kazan State has never been identified as a ‘khanate’ but had the status of a kingdom (Regnum). Volga Bulgaria has been denoted by cartographers as ‘Great Bulgaria’ (16th century maps), ‘The Kingdom of Bulgaria’ (18th century maps), or just ‘Bulgaria’. Both states had been present in West European cartography up to the 19th century.
Finally but not lastly of importance is the urbanization structure of Volga Bulgaria and the Kazan Khanate, represented in cartography to a certain extent. The town of Bolgar appeared for the fist time on the map of the Turkic author Mahmud Al-Kashgari in his work Diwan lughat al-Turk (1076). Up to the age of Ortelius and of Mercator (the second half of the 16th century) Bolgar appeared under the name of Borgar, Blagar, Bulgal and was rarely present on the European maps. At a later stage Bolgar, along with Kazan, became the most frequently mapped town centre along Middle Volga.
Since the beginning of the 17th century European cartographers have frequently placed Bolgar on the location of Bilyar. There even was a case of Bolgar replacing Kazan. On a West European map of the early 17th century Bolgar appeared under its local name of Veliki [Great] Bolgar (Bulgar Weliki), and in another one it was called paganzina. In the early 18th century the Map of Europe of Carel Allard featured the toponym Lanjer instead of Bolgar.
In the 18th century Bolgar was often referred to as Bulgar or Belojer and gradually disappeared from the geographic realia of the region of Middle Volga.
For the first time Bilyar appeared on the 1367 map of the Picigano Brothers, with the inscription Cintas que Marmorza. In the same way the town appeared on the Anonymous Map of the World (1570) and on the Map of Europe by N. Sanson (a century later). Bilyar also appeared with its Russian name Bilyarsk on the 1749 map of John Schreinbern. The absence of the town on the geographic maps may be explained by its gradual replacement with Bolgar as well as with the fading life in Bilyar at the end of the 13th century.
For the first and only time Suvar was registered on the map of the world by Mahmud Al-Kashgari (1076). West European cartographic tradition does not know well the town and therefore it is left unregistered on the maps. That was probably due to the fact that Suvar had a relatively short existence within the frames of pre-Mongol Volga Bulgaria period in the 10th-13th centuries.
The problem of the cartographic ‘appearance’ and ‘existence’ of Kazan is far more complicated than that of the other settlements in the state of Volga Bulgarians. On a number of maps it is not present at all, while on others it appears under various names. On the world map of the Picigano Brothers (1367) a settlement with the name of Qormancucto appears instead of Kazan. Kazan was also known by names with Latin roots meaning ‘a fortress’, probably related to the fortified appearance of the town – Castrama (Catalan Atlas of Abraham Crepques, 1375), Kostruni (Borgian map, 1452), Castorma (Catalan world map, 1460), etc.
For the first time the toponym of Kazan was registered on a 1500 anonymous map of Russia. Later on it is also known as Kazan Castrum or in its Russian version – Casane gorode. Of particular interest are the maps where Kazan appears on the geographic location of Bolgar (Maps of the Moscow Region of Giacomo Gastaldi, and of Girolamo Ruscelli of the 16th century, etc.).
In brief, the cartography of the Middle Ages and the Early Modern Times contains interesting data on the gradually evolving notion of the historical life, status, ethics and urbanization structure of the region of Middle Volga. Despite the fact that those special types of ‘geographic myths’ are often neglected in the works of historiography, their analysis undoubtedly shows the importance of these sources in the overall reconstruction of the image and the ‘vision of the Others’ for ‘Second Medieval Bulgaria’.