[Preview] The Bulgarian Empire.

[absinthia]

Just to note that these units are horribly outdated by now and will, hopefully, be improved upon before the first release of the mod.

given they are based mainly on Rusichi stuff and some re-make of Gogo-T`s bulgar textures, but are they all that bad?

[NikeBG]

Some of the shields and the banners need a rather urgent overhaul. The rest has room for improvement as well (f.e. those bright-red caps, the faces, some of the nasal helmets etc), but the shields (the ones of the Tarkans in particular) and the banners are most important and have to be improved before the 1st release, IMO.

[gogo t]

From this onely the Bagaturs must stay, all other units need to be redone. And I say it because its mostly my old work, so I'm criticising myself here.

[AnthoniusII]

From this onely the Bagaturs must stay, all other units need to be redone. And I say it because its mostly my old work, so I'm criticising myself here.

Don't be so hard with your self...You did a realy great work and this was the 1st major boost in TGC's development. That fact alone says much...
In the end -when all other rosters will be completed) and we will test units and armies in real battlefileds we can make some changes (for example add "balkan" heads to units that have turkic ones), add 3d belts and accessories and allow your creations to share the same standards with all the rest of units. It is natural that our early creations may have been less sophisticated than the last ones. We all make progress through everyday exercise.

[NikeBG]

Btw, in this regard, concerning the military banners, I've gathered a few potentially useful images in the dev forum, but we'd still welcome any icon fitting this period (which could've been used on a banner - f.e. icons of Christ, the Virgin Mary and the warrior saints) or images of actual Orthodox (Byzantine, Bulgarian etc.) banners themselves. Druzhina? Matmohair?

[NikeBG]

Inspired by Flieger's preview for the Eastern Franks, some time ago I had decided to try and write a somewhat more detailed, though still basic-enough description of the history of Bulgaria during the mod's timeframe. But as I do tend to get carried away, especially when it comes to history, I had to divide that text to five separate blocks, covering five respective periods - the reigns of Knyaz Boris I, Tsar Simeon, Tsar Petar, Tsar Samuil, as well as the fate of the Bulgarian lands under Roman rule. I haven't yet finished writing all the chapters (and I don't know if I ever will), but let's start with what's already finished for now:

Knyaz Boris I Mihail the Baptizer – Time of Diplomacy and Religion

Knyaz Boris I, also known as Bogoris, was the oldest son of the late Kanasubigi Persian. During his reign, he proved to be quite unsuccessful as a military commander, but truly brilliant as a diplomat and leader. Early rule and military campaigns Boris (whose name is considered to come from the Altaic or Iranic “bars”, meaning “tiger”) came to power in AD 852 and almost immediately (853) engaged in a war – some say that he was persuaded to do so by Charles the Bald, king of West Francia. “As the Bulgarians took the Slavs [the Moravians] as their allies, they fiercely attacked the German King Ludovik, but were defeated” and “a swarm of Franks covered Bulgaria”. At the same time, Boris suffered a defeat in Croatia, which was then allied to the Eastern Franks, and he had to “sign peace, giving great gifts to the Croats and being gifted by them in return”. Taking use of his preoccupation, the Byzantines also launched a campaign against Bulgaria and managed to capture the regions of Philippopolis and Zagora. This was the first of a line of military defeats of the new ruler. As the conflict with East Francia was resolved by 855, Boris sent an embassy to the Byzantine Empress Theodora, threatening he’ll launch a campaign against the lands of the Romans, if the continuing border skirmishes don’t stop. In response, the empress sent him a message: “You’ll find me in campaign against you as well and I hope that I will win. But if that doesn’t happen and you defeat me, even then I would overcome you, as you would have defeated a woman, not a man.” During the following negotiations, the peace was restored and Boris was given back some of the regions he had previously lost. In the early 860s, however, the country entered another set of wars, as a part of two alliance blocks – Bulgaria and East Francia on one side and Byzantium, Velikomoravia and Serbia on the other. By 863 Boris and Ludovik had a good success against the Moravians, but the situation in Serbia was quite the opposite for Boris – the Bulgarian forces suffered a great defeat and his heir, the Kanartikin Vladimir Rasate, along with the 12 great boils, were captured. Boris had to go to Serbia himself to negotiate their release, exchanging again great gifts between the two sides and even convincing the Serbs to remain neutral and break their alliance with Byzantium. At the same time, as the Byzantines had already learned of Boris’ plans to convert his country to Christianity through German missionaries, which would have put their external policy and possibly their very existence at stake, they launched an attack from the south, while most of Boris’ forces were still engaged in the north-west. In addition, it’s reported that the lands were beset by great plagues – a series of earthquakes began in August, which continued for 40 days and devastated the fortresses, the year also came to be unfruitful, the crops failed and were attacked by a swarm of locusts and as a result a great famine hit the land. Facing such overwhelming odds, Boris was forced to use his best weapon – diplomacy. He quickly sent messengers to Constantinople, announcing that he will convert by the Eastern rite. The negotiations could thus begin – Boris was baptized, receiving the name of his spiritual godfather (Emperor Michael), Byzantine priests started converting the lands, Boris had to end the war with Velikomoravia and break his alliance with the Germans, in exchange of which the Roman forces withdrew and Boris even received his lands in Zagora back, which the Byzantines had managed to occupy. This put the beginning of another period of “deep peace” between the two states. On the other hand, however, it caused a number of internal problems. The most immediate one was the opposition of the old god(s). In 865, about a year after the beginning of the conversion, Boris Mihail found himself besieged in his capital of Pliska by the insurgent forces of 52 boils (bolyars, nobles) and many commoners from all over the country. They wanted to depose their king, as he had “passed on a bad law” – less than half a century earlier, the Christians had been persecuted as enemies of the state and agents of the main foe of the Bulgarians – Byzantium – and now Boris was placing the entire country under their religious, and by extension – political influence. Furthermore, he was betraying not only the old ways, but his act could have also been seen as a selfish attempt to seize more power and secure his position on the throne, destabilized by all his military failures. It’s not quite clear how the uprising was quelled – a later Christian story claims Boris came out to meet the rebels, unarmed and unarmoured, carrying only a cross, and through the will of God the people became ashamed of their deeds and fell on their knees. Of course, there’s also the possibility that he did come out, but instead of a cross, he was carrying a sword, which he is reported to have soon thereafter sent as a gift to the Pope. In any case, the common people and the lower nobility were set free, while the 52 nobles received the most severe punishment for treason – they were executed, along with their whole families. Portrait of Knyaz Boris I Mihail from the Didactic Gospel of Konstantin Preslavski, 9-10c. Reasons for the conversion – The medieval authors, in the typical providential manner of the time, attribute the conversion of the Bulgarians to the will of God and explain it with several stories. Some say that Boris had a sister, which was captured by the Byzantines and became a convinced Christian. After her return to Bulgaria, she often spoke with her brother, showing him the strength of the Christian god, until she finally convinced him. Another legend tells a different, if somewhat naïve story: Boris built himself a new palace and wanted to cover its walls with awe- and fear-inspiring hunting scenes. A certain monk, named Methodios, was given the task. “But as the monk knew nothing inspires more fear than the Lord’s Second Coming, he decided to portray it: on one side how the righteous received the reward for their suffering and on the other – the sinners being sent away to the torments awaiting them.” When Boris returned from hunt and saw the wall-painting, he was filled with the fear of God and took the holy baptism. Medieval stories notwithstanding, the historians have offered a number of possible reasons, which might have helped Knyaz Boris I to take the big step: - Christianity was the most dominant religion in Europe. Furthermore, it was the religion of the other two great powers on the continent: the Byzantines and the Franks. It was a religion of prestige, in whose eyes all Pagans, no matter how powerful, were filthy barbarians. Barbarians, with which diplomacy was of an artificial, temporary and non-binding nature. All this bias would have certainly been a serious obstacle for the Bulgarian foreign relations. - Christianity was the only carrier of an established and highly advanced culture in Europe – the remains of the Greko-Roman one. It provided laws, an advanced social system, education – things which are absolutely necessary for the civic development of a nation. And developing such things nearly from scratch, on a Pagan basis, would have required a lot of time, resources and great effort. All this while trying to keep the well-established competition at bay. - Christianity, especially in its eastern tradition, was a powerful centralization tool in the hands of a king, aiming to increase his autocratic power. While Pagan rulers were often just men with great personal authority, the Christian ones were anointed by God and the eastern emperors were His representatives on Earth. - Last, but not least: The Bulgarian society was still divided by language and religion – Bulgars, Slavs, Greko-Romans (Byzantines) and others were all worshipping different gods. And the different religions had different customs and laws. Some were f.e. monogamist, while others – polygamist, which would have caused considerable inheritance issues, among other things. By converting to Christianity, Boris would remove those differences and thus also one of the biggest obstacles against the merging of his people into one homogenous ethnos. Knyaz Boris (in the centre) on a church fresco in Verona, Italy +Some atmospheric music for your audible pleasure The question for the Bulgarian church and the Photian Schism – The divine comedy As soon as the royal family and the court were converted, the Byzantine clergy started baptizing the common folk and the weaknesses of the hasty conversion started showing up. From one side, the Byzantine priests were relatively few and ill-prepared for this mission, without much knowledge of the Slavic language. Respectively, as the liturgies and rites were performed on Greek, the common people couldn’t truly understand the meaning of their new religion and their conversion remained largely formal, which eventually helped the preservation of Paganism on the commoners’ level for a whole century afterwards and the implementation of Pagan rituals into Christianity still existing to this day. From another side, this new religious vacuum and freedom allowed for a number of other creeds to make their way into the country. Various heresies started spreading around, especially the ones brought by the Syrian and Armenian colonists settled by the Byzantines near the Bulgarian borders. Jewish and Muslim missionaries started preaching as well, in addition to a number of charlatans, taking use of the situation and spreading all kinds of superstitions. The religious chaos was so great that even common Greeks, without any spiritual rank, are reported to have traversed the lands, baptizing everyone around. All these things required of Boris to take measures and put some order in his country’s spiritual life. To do this, he asked for advices from the Patriarch of Constantinople, the great scholar Photios. This, however, further pointed him to the disturbing fact that his new church, under the wing of Constantinople, could exert serious external political influence on his country. So among the other questions he sent to the Patriarch, he included probably the most important for him – how could he receive an independent, autocephalous church. Unfortunately for him, the answers of Photios were not what he hoped for – while he explained extensively the nuances of various Christian dogmatics and even court ceremonies, the Patriarch tenaciously refused to answer on the matter of the church’s organization, hinting that it must remain subordinated to Constantinople. Disappointed by this policy and aware of the growing conflict between Rome and Constantinople (the so-called Photian Schism – Photios himself was anathematized by the Roman bishops), Boris decided to place his question on the international scene. On the 29th of August 866, a Bulgarian delegation, led by Kavhan Petar, arrived in Rome, pledging Boris’ subordination to the Papal See, offering many gifts to the local churches (including Boris’ sword) and a large list of questions for Pope Nicholas I. He also asked for preachers to continue the conversion of his state, a request which he sent to Ludovik the German as well. A few months later, in November 866, the papal mission arrived in Bulgaria, led by the bishops Formosus of Porto and Paul of Populonia, later joined by bishop Donatus, returning from an unsuccessful delegation to Constantinople. In addition, the mission of bishop Ermanrich of Passau soon arrived as well, sent by Ludovik the German, but they were sent back by the papal legates. The papal mission quickly got to work, chasing away the Byzantine clergy and starting a new conversion of their own, claiming that the Greek baptisms were void. The legates also brought the 106 answers to Boris’ questions, including the one Photios had neglected. While not the best, Pope Nicholas’ answer was quite more satisfactory and promising: “You ask if you’re allowed to have an ordained patriarch… First you must have a bishop… and then among the bishops one can be chosen, if not for a patriarch, then at least for an archbishop”. The inglorious return of the Greek clergy further aggravated Patriarch Photios and in the beginning of 867 he sent an encyclical to the other patriarchates, accusing Rome for its uncanonical intervention in Bulgaria and for diverting from the dogmas and practices of the pure Christian faith. By the end of September the same year, a council in Constantinople condemned the papal servants in Bulgaria as heretics and antichrists and Pope Nicholas I was anathematized. In the meantime, the papal missionaries were busy at work and Knyaz Boris was particularly impressed by the energy and abilities of the ambitious Formosus. In the second half of 867, a new Bulgarian delegation arrived in Rome, asking for Formosus to be ordained as Archbishop of Bulgaria. Formosus, however, had many enemies among the Roman high clergy, so the request was denied with the allegation that a cleric can’t abandon the flock he’s been appointed to. Paul and Formosus were soon recalled to Rome, with rumours spreading that the latter had made a secret pact for Boris not to accept anyone else as archbishop, only Formosus himself. On the contrary – when the new Pope Adrian II (Pope Nicholas I died on the 13th of November 867) sent a new mission to Bulgaria on the following year, headed by the bishops Dominic of Trivena and Grimwald of Polimarthia, Boris chose a new man as his candidate – the deacon Marinus, a recommendation by Formosus. But that request was not granted either and Pope Adrian sent “some sub-deacon named Silvester to be chosen by the Bulgarians”, which proved to be Rome’s fatal mistake. Boris immediately sent Silvester back with a letter to “send as archbishop either deacon Marinus or bishop Formosus”, to which Adrian’ reply was a diplomatic No: “Whoever the pious prince names, I will certainly approve as Archbishop of the Bulgarians”. Disillusioned with Rome’s policy, Knyaz Boris decided to return to Constantinople, which was eager to have him back. And considerable changes had happened in Byzantium’s policy as well – the new Emperor Basil I the Macedonian had brought down Patriarch Photios, in an attempt to establish peace between the two sees and end the schism, raising the previous Patriarch Ignatios back to his former seat. In 869 Basil I called for a council to bring the churches together – the papal legates enjoyed a considerable victory (hence, only the Roman Catholics recognize that council as Ecumenical today) and Photios was anathematized once again. But, surprisingly, as the council had already pretty much finished and some of the Western legates had already left, a new, extraordinary session was called on the 4th of March 870, as the Bulgarian delegates, led by Kavhan Petar, “unexpectedly” arrived and posited the question to which church should they belong. The surprised remaining papal legates refused to debate on the matter, as there already were papal priests in Bulgaria and in older times the diocese of Illyricum (part of which formed the western part of Bulgaria) was under papal jurisdiction. But the eastern patriarchs asked the Bulgarians: “When you conquered your lands, who ruled over them before you and did you find Latin or Greek priests there?”. To which the answer was: “We found Greek, not Latin priests”. After the following debates, in which Patriarch Ignatios diplomatically remained silent, the eastern patriarchs decreed that the Bulgarian church should re-join the sphere of Constantinople and that it should receive the rank of an autocephalous archbishopric, with a Byzantine archbishop appointed only with the express permission of the Bulgarian king. After the council of 870, the Papacy refused to believe they’ve lost their important strategic position in Bulgaria and Pope Adrian II, as well as the following Pope John VIII, kept sending message after message to Knyaz Boris, asking him to reject what was done and return the Latin priests in his lands, praising the purity of faith of the Roman church and anathematizing the Greek bishops in Bulgaria; writing messages directly to them, promising forgiveness if they leave; as well as writing to a number of Bulgarian nobles, asking them to persuade their liege. But to no avail. Even less useful were Pope John’s letters to Constantinople, threatening to excommunicate Patriarch Ignatios and the Greek bishops in Bulgaria or to summon the Patriarch to be judged in Rome. But the latter soon thereafter passed away and the emperor knew well that the Papacy still needs the Byzantine help against the increasing incursions of the Arabs in Italy. And since the Byzantine elite were already tired of the supremacist ideas of the Popes, it was decided that Photios should return on the Patriarch’s seat. But since he was anathematized on a church council, a new one was necessary to restore him. The Papacy was invited to send its representatives to the council and, pressured by the Arab attacks, the Pope agreed. His only condition was the removal of the Byzantine clergy and the return of Bulgaria under Roman supremacy. The council was gathered and the Papacy which once anathematized Photios now restored him to his rank. But as the papal legates raised the Bulgarian question, the council diverted it, claiming it’s not competent to deal with it. Boris again remained deaf for John VIII’s pleas, while the legate sent to Constantinople to protest against the council’s behaviour was arrested. In response, the Pope issued another anathema on the newly restored Photios, but Bulgaria was lost to him for good and perhaps the greatest rift between the two churches (until the Great Schism of 1054) had already taken full effect. The baptism of Knyaz Boris I Mihail, illumination from the Manasses Chronicle Developing the church and state. Beginning of the Slavic civilization Having largely secured his state from the potentially dangerous external influences of the church, Knyaz Boris I Mihail now had to deal with the cultural consequences of the conversion. Some of them were rather beneficial – for example, Boris adopted the Byzantine law codexes – the “Ekloga” under the name “Zakon sudnii lyudem” (“Law for judging people”) and the “Nomokanon”, known as “Kormchaya kniga” (“Book of instructions”), thus incorporating the centuries-old tradition of Roman law in his state. Others of the consequences, however, were quite more worrisome. As had been mentioned above, one of the reasons for the conversion to Christianity was that the new religion could bind the separate ethnicities within the state into one new culture and nationality. But the way things were going, if nothing were to be done, that new culture and nationality would have been the Byzantine one. With the Latin clergy gone, both the high and many of the low clerics were now Greeks (as Pope John VIII complained that the bishops in Bulgaria, at least 10 at his time, are too many). And that wasn’t all: while there was some hope that, with time, a Bulgarian clergy would be trained and ordained to take their place, the matter of the language would still remain – the Bulgars had been using Greek as their main administrative language in the court almost since the creation of their state (the first such example being Khan/Kaisar Tervel’s inscription on the Madara Horseman from around 705). And now, with Greek becoming the language of the church and respectively of the education, there was a serious threat from a gradual Byzantinization of the society and especially of the nobility. Furthermore, the Bulgar runes were unsuitable for the complex tasks of state administration (not to mention the translation of all the holy books). And besides the Greek alphabet, the only other option was the newly-made and sanctified by both the Eastern and the Western church Slavic writing. But its proponents, the saints Constantine (who died as a monk under the name of Cyril in 869) and Methodios and their students, were isolated in Moravia, hard-pressed and even outright persecuted by the German clergy there. Things were looking bleak both for their mission and for Boris’ one. At least until 885/886… Cyril and Methodius creating an alphabet and translating the Gospel to the Slavic tongue, illumination from the Radziwiłł Chronicle The teachers of the Slavs According to "An account of letters" by Chernorizets Hrabar, the first Slavic alphabet, i.e. the Glagolitic one, and the translation of some of the holy books was done in the Polychronos Monastery on Mt. Olympos in Asia Minor (an area relatively near Constantinople with many monasteries and hermit’s abodes) in AD 855. According to the Life of Constantine-Cyril, it was made overnight, by divine providence, in 863. In any case, in AD 863 the two Byzantine brothers from Thessaloniki and most brilliant diplomats of the Empire, Constantine and Methodios, arrived in Velikomoravia at the request of its Knyaz Rastislav, who wanted Byzantine support in neutralizing the German clergy and Latin influence in his state. In Velehrad they arrived with a number of disciples (Byzantines, Bulgarians and Slavs from the Balaton Principality) and quickly gained many new local followers with which they got to work – training others, translating the holy books and liturgies to Slavic and spreading the Christian faith. But similarly to Bulgaria, Moravia was a heavily contested land. On the political side, its rulers saw a string of periods of subordination to the Franks and periods of insurrection against them, accompanied by a number of difficult wars and complex political intrigues. On the other side, the question in whose eparchy does the Moravian church fall into was rather controversial – the German clergy wanted to expand its direct influence over its Slavic neighbours, while Rome was hesitant to give such power to the archbishopric of Salzburg, as the latter even went as far as falsifying documents to suit their goals. Of course, when the new Byzantine missionaries arrived on the scene, the two sides initially united against them, supporting the trilingual dogma that the Holy Scripture can be written only on Latin, Greek and Hebrew and that the Slavic writings are uncanonical. In order to defend their work, Constantine and Methodios headed south and, after a successful debate in Venice, arrived in Rome in the beginning of 868. Incidentally, there was also a Bulgarian delegation in the city at the time, requesting the appointment of Bishop Formosus as archbishop. As the brothers were also carrying the relics of Pope Clement, which they had previously found and excavated during their mission in the Khazar lands, as well as due to the recent change in the relations between Rome and Constantinople, they were welcomed with a grand ceremony. The new Pope Adrian II proved to be quite well-disposed towards the Slavic teachers – he not only instructed Bishop Formosus and Bishop Gauderich to ordain some of the disciples in spiritual rank, but the Slavic books were also placed on the altar of the Santa Maria Maggiore church and consecrated, with Slavic liturgies being held in the biggest churches of Rome for the next five days. With such a great victory for their cause, the two brothers remained in Rome for over a year. The 42 year old Constantine eventually fell ill and passed away on the 14th of February 869, a week after he received the monk’s name of Cyril. His brother Methodios remained in Rome for a couple more months, until the Bulgarian church went back under the wing of Constantinople. Fearing similar reactions elsewhere in the Slavic world, the Pope sent him as archbishop to Pannonia, at the request of Knyaz Kotsel of the Balaton Principality. The nearby German clergy, however, was opposed to the Slavic liturgies. Furthermore, King Ludovik the German had managed to depose Knyaz Rastislav of Moravia, the supporter of the Slavic policy, and replace him with the supposedly more loyal Svetopolk – Rastislav’s nephew. In the Fall of the same year, 870, he gathered a council where Rastislav was convicted and blinded. Methodios had been called to the council as well, and since he was also a papal legate, the German clergy (led by the Bishop of Passau, Ermanrich) had to accuse him of performing services in a foreign eparchy and locked him in the Ellwangen Monastery in Bayern. He remained there for over two years, until the new Pope John VIII sent his legate Paul of Ancona to negotiate his release with the archbishop of Salzburg and the bishop of Passau, as well as with Ludovik the German. Soon after his release, Methodios resumed his work as archbishop of Pannonia and Moravia in Velehrad, translating books, training more disciples and even performing missionary work among the Vistulans and the Czechs. This particularly active work of his further aggravated the German clergy against him, which started a massive slandering campaign, inciting an increasing hostility in Svetopolk against the Slavic teacher. Finally, in 879, after yet another worsening of the relations between Rome and Constantinople (due to the Photian Schism), Pope John VIII issued a bull, forbidding Methodios to hold Slavic liturgies in the churches, allowing him to do so only in the open field. As Methodios didn’t comply, the Swabian Bishop Wiching immediately accused him and the two of them went to Rome to meet the Pope’s judgement. However, Methodios successfully defended himself and was not only acquitted of the charges against him, but on the 29th of June 880 he even received a special bull, the Industriae Tuae, which allowed the Slavic liturgies and confirmed Methodios’ archbishop’s rank, giving him great authority in his diocese, including the expatriation from the state of anyone he convicts. Despite the bull being a success also for Svetopolk, lifting the ruler's international prestige in the Christian world, his animosity towards his archbishop would not subside. Methodios decided to seek further support from Constantinople, which he visited in 881 and thus increased the German suspicions even more. Finally, the new Pope Stephen V, who was opposed to Methodios and his Slavic policy, issued a bull and ordered Svetopolk to ban the Slavic liturgies and literature. The papal order arrived in Velehrad a few months after the death of Methodios, who passed away on the 6th of April 885… "Knyaz Boris welcoming the disciples of Cyril and Methodius" by Dimitar Gyudzhenov, early 20th c. Return of the disciples. “The 7 apostles to the Slavs” Before his death, Methodios appointed his Moravian disciple Gorazd as his successor, but his work there was doomed from the start. With their teacher’s death and the papal decree, there was no safety in Moravia for them anymore. Accused of plotting a rebellion, the younger disciples were sold as slaves to Jewish merchants in Venice, while the senior ones were locked, beaten, tortured and finally those who survived were exiled from the state. Among them were several of those, who would later become known as “Sv. Sedmochislenitsi” among the Slavs (i.e. “the 7 apostles” – Constantine-Cyril, Methodios, Gorazd, Kliment, Naum, Sava and Angelariy – the Slavic teachers). Kliment, Naum and Angelariy, Bulgarians by birth, headed for their homeland – “they dreamed of Bulgaria, for Bulgaria they thought and hoped that Bulgaria is ready to give them peace”. After a number of hardships and even a miracle involving the resurrection of a young boy, they arrived in Belgrad in 886. There they were welcomed by the local boritarkan (garrison commander) Radislav and after some time to rest were sent to Knyaz Boris, who “was eager for such men… and was looking for them with great desire”. Unfortunately, Angelariy soon passed away from all the exhaustion, but Naum and Kliment were given everything possible to continue their work – the former remained in the capital of Pliska, where the Pliska-Preslav School was soon founded, while the latter was sent to “the lower Bulgarian land” of Macedonia, where the Ohrid School was then created. In this, Kliment proved to be particularly energetic – in just 7 years he managed to train 3500 pupils, in addition to all his preaching, construction and literary works and even the transplanting of different sorts of trees from Greece to Macedonia. He is also reported to have devised “other letters, easier to write than the ones made by Cyril”, which some consider to be the Cyrillic alphabet. It’s more likely, though, that he devised the so-called rounded form of the Glagolitic, as the earliest inscriptions on Cyrillic are found in the area of the Pliska School, which also started preferring Cyrillic over Glagolitic quite earlier than the Ohrid School. In any case, the two saints devoted their lives to developing the Slavic literature and spreading the Christian faith. And they weren’t alone – they received not only the full and passionate support of Knyaz Boris, but they were also joined by some old friends – some of the young disciples of Methodios, sold as slaves in Venice, had been bought by a Byzantine noble and sent to Constantinople, from where many of them soon went to Bulgaria, along with a few disciples Methodios himself had left in the city before… Seal of the monk-king Boris I Mihail The monk-king During his rather long reign, Knyaz Boris I Mihail accomplished possibly more than any other Bulgarian ruler, before or after. He successfully converted his whole country to Christianity, quelling the Pagan rebellion in one fell swoop; through diplomacy he turned defeat into victory; he skilfully manoeuvred between educated Patriarchs and Popes, gaining for his country an autocephalous archbishopric less then a decade after the conversion; he “encompassed his country with seven cathedral temples” and many “white churches” and monasteries, including the largest temple in Europe at that time, after the Hagia Sophia in Constantinople (i.e. the Great Basilica in Pliska, built in a Western style during the mission of Bishop Formosus) and finally he helped foster the Slavic writings and liturgies, putting an effective beginning to the Slavic (sometimes also called Slavo-Byzantine) civilization and an effective end to the long process of the Bulgarian ethnogenesis, of the gradual melting of the Bulgar, Slavic and local ethnicities into a new Bulgarian one. And all this while trying to save his soul and repent for his sins – as abbot Reginon has said: “during the day he appeared before the people in royal clothes, while at night, dressed in rough robes, he would secretly enter the church and prostrated on the floor of the temple he would spend the night in prayer…” Thus, old and tired, having secured much of his legacy, in 889 Boris I put down the crown and put on the monastic robes, going to a monastery near the capital and leaving the rule to his oldest son Vladimir Rasate. Based on the accounts of the aforementioned abbot Reginon, the short reign of Knyaz Vladimir Rasate is often portrayed as an attempt to return the country to Paganism – “he committed robberies, he spent his time in alcoholism, feasts and debauchery, trying to return his newly baptized people to the Pagan customs”. In his external affairs, Vladimir Rasate followed a policy of close relations with the Franks and an assistance in their fights with the Moravians (892), which has led some historians to believe his true “sins” were not Pagan, but rather pro-Frankish. In any case, the Bulgarian and the Byzantine sources mention only that in 893 Knyaz Boris I Mihail and his third son, Simeon, deposed Vladimir Rasate. A national council was gathered in Preslav the same year, where Simeon was chosen as the next king. After this, Boris Mihail returned to his monastery, but he was meant to take the sword for one more time – in 896 the country was ravaged by the invasions of the Magyars. Simeon was blocked in Drastar and the situation was dire, so the Bulgarian people turned for help to their old monk-king. After ordering three days of fasting and prayers, the 69 year old diplomat led his people in his only major victory against a foreign foe. He then returned to the monastery for one last time, where he later died at the age of 80 on the 2nd of May 907. Spoiler for ”Primary source – The miracle with the Bulgarian”:  ”The miracle with the Bulgarian” is a part of a cycle of 10th century Bulgarian stories about the Iron Cross. It exists in several versions and this is one of the most famous among them: ”Joseph the monk, who was born in Sicily and lived in the monastery near the town of Murra, told me the following story: A wandering brother came to me once. He carried with him a Cross, which did many wonders. And as he stayed for a few days, he got sick and called for me. When I went to the inn he was laid in, he told me: “Bless me, father, and pray to God for me! Take this Cross. Its story is long, but I don’t have the time to tell all of it: I see that my life is at an end, but with God’s help I’ll tell of it a bit.” I then called the abbot and three monks and after we prayed, he raised himself, sat up, made the sign of the cross and told us the following: Father abbot Peter, I’m from the newly converted Bulgarian people, which God enlightened with holy christening in these years through his chosen Knyaz Boris, named Mihail in the holy baptism. With Christ’s power and with the sign of the cross, he defeated the hardy and unruly Bulgarian people, and enlightened with a wise light their hearts, which had been darkened by the malevolent deeds of the devil. He turned them away from the dark, treacherous, foul and God-forsaken sacrifices, he led them from dusk to light, from deceit and guilt to truth; he rejected their stanching, unclean foods, destroyed their altars, affirmed them with the holy books in the rightful Christian faith, by bringing the Archbishop Yosif and other teachers and tutors, building churches and monasteries, placing bishops, priests, abbots to teach and lead his people in God’s path. Then God awarded him, so he took an angelic form and presented himself from this deceitful life to the Heavenly Jerusalem before Christ. And while he was still alive in monkhood and his firstborn son Vladimir was ruling in his stead, by God’s and Mihail’s will Simeon deposed his brother and rose to the throne. Then the Magyar people rose against Simeon and the Magyars captured his people, he fought with them and they overcame him. In that year I also took part in that war. I had no rank, nor did I live where the knyaz lives, but I lived outside, among the people. When the Magyars scattered us, we – fifty people – fled along one road and as the Magyars were chasing us, my horse started getting exhausted. And I cried out loud: “Lord, God of the Christians, help me with the prayers of the great martyr George and save me”. And then I turned to Saint George as well, saying: “Saint George, during the holy baptism the priest named me after you: I’m your servant, deliver me now from the heathens”. Then the front right leg of my horse got stuck in the ground and broke, while my company fled away from me. There was a small forest and a vale nearby. I stretched the bow and by holding the arrows in hand, I ran away from the horse. And when I looked back and saw the Magyars running for the horse, I cried: “Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on me and send Your servant and martyr George to shield me and preserve me in this hour”. As soon as I cried out these words, my horse came to me with a healthy leg, with the Magyars running behind him: they wanted to capture him, but none of them could get close to him. And I said again: “Glory be to You, Lord, for You are not far from those who call You out of heart. Great George, be with me!” Then I mounted the horse and even though the Magyars were chasing me and shot many arrows, they couldn’t harm me, due to Christ’s power and the help of Saint George. And in two hours I found myself in my village, which was three days away from the place the Magyars shot at me. Only two people returned from my company, two days after me: all others were caught up and slaughtered. Then Simeon, as he heard the Magyars are coming again, led us in war one more time. And as I was lying at home with my wife, a bright, clean-cheeked man appeared before me and I couldn’t look at his face. He told me: “Georgi, you have to go to war, but buy another horse, because your current one will suddenly die on the third day after you leave. But I order you to skin his leg, which was broken, so you can see the power of the Holy Trinity and the help of the martyred saint George. What you’ll find in that leg, don’t use it for anything else, but for a Holy Cross, and be silent about this until you see God’s glory”. And I asked: “Milord, who are you, whose face I cannot see?” “I am – he replied – Christ’s servant George, which you summoned with your prayers.” And as I woke from my sleep, I praised God and Saint George and then bought myself another horse, as the saint told me to. Before I left for the war, I called the priest to serve a liturgy and I slaughtered my best ox and ten sheep and ten pigs, which I gave to the poor. And so I went to war with two horses. As we went on, my horse got sick on the third day, fell down and died. As my company was in a hurry, they wouldn’t let me skin the leg, but when I told them how he had it broken while we were fleeing, they awaited me for a while. So we skinned the leg and found on it, below the knee, three iron rings holding the bone tight, which itself wasn’t broken, but was only cracked lengthwise: We tried very hard to pull the rings out, but we couldn’t. Then we cut off the bone, placed it on a rock and smashed it with our axes, so we could take the iron pieces. Wondering at the great and unspeakable power of the Holy Trinity and the quick help of the martyred saint George, we praised God and went to war. And with God’s mercy, as many of us set off, none died in that war and we all returned alive and healthy. When we came back home, I found my wife sick from a fiery fever. I waited for a couple of weeks and as I saw my wife in great pain, I became emboldened and I prayed: “Lord, with the prayers of the one who has given birth to You, and those of Your servant George, heal your servant Maria!” Then I placed these rings on her and she immediately got healed and praised the Lord and the great martyr George. And as I saw the Holy Trinity’s mercy and love for mankind, I called the smith and told him: “Forge me, brother, a Cross out of these rings.” He forged them, as the saint had told me. And many other miracles happened with this Cross: demons were exorcized from people and they were saved from ailments and wars with the prayers of the holy and great martyr George.“

[demagogos nicator]

Great initiative, looking forward to read it

[NikeBG]

Here's the next chapter:

Tsar Simeon I the Great – Time of War and Culture

Portrait of Tsar Simeon the Great by Dimitar Gyudzhenov, 1927 The early years Simeon, later known with the byname Labas (meaning unknown) and today widely known as Tsar Simeon the Great, was the third son of Knyaz Boris I Mihail and Knyagina Maria. He was born in AD 864 or soon after and for this he was called “child of peace” – the first child in the royal family being born as a Christian. Being third in the line of succession, after his older brother (the kanartikin Vladimir Rasate) and his second, older brother (the vulias tarkan Gavril), Simeon was meant to live the life of a scholar and cleric – after finishing his basic education in Pliska, he was sent to the Magna Aura School of Constantinople (also known as University of Constantinople) around 878. After finishing with the first step of the ladder of knowledge (grammar, poetry and rhetoric), under the tutelage of Patriarch Photios and the other great scholars in the court, he studied the classical Greek literature and the other philosophic arts, like arithmetic, astronomy and music. Almost a century later, Bishop Liudprand of Cremona wrote about Simeon that “as a child he mastered in Constantinople the oratorical art of Demosthenes and the syllogisms of Aristotle”, to the point that he was even called “emiargos, id est semigrecum” (half-Hellene). After completing his education, Liudprand continues, “he left his scholastic endeavours and devoted himself to Holy Communion”, i.e. he became a monk. Around 886 Simeon returned to Bulgaria – his tutor Photios had been removed from the patriarch’s seat for one last time, while the long-awaited disciples of St. Cyril and St. Methodios had just arrived in the country and were already starting their great work. Simeon would have likely become a part of the circle of St. Naum of Preslav at least until 893, diligently studying the new Slavic liturgies and writings. Some historians believe Boris’ plans for his third son were to prepare him for a career in the church and eventually have him ordained as its head. Whether this was so or not, we cannot know. But judging by the following events, we can guess that Simeon’s ambitions went far beyond the archbishop’s seat – “Simeon had a great desire to become king” and in 893, with the blessing of his father, he deposed his older brother and took the throne. But before this, several legal obstacles had to be overcome and the old monk-king Boris I gathered a national-church council to defrock the monk Simeon, so he could be king. In addition, but even more importantly, the law was changed, so the crown could be passed not only from father to son, but also from brother to brother. Furthermore, it’s considered that three more decisions were taken on the so-called Council of Preslav: the removal of the remaining Greek clergy and its replacement with a Bulgarian one (St. Kliment of Ohrid becoming “the first bishop in the Bulgarian language”), the official introduction of the Slavic language and writing into the state administration and church liturgy and the change of the Bulgarian capital from the Pagan Pliska to the Christian Veliki Preslav. The Trade War: The Magyar menace Possibly incited by these troubling events or maybe due to purely personal reasons, Emperor Leo VI the Wise agreed with the request of his chief counsellor (and future father-in-law and vasileopator) Stylianos Zaoutzes, giving the monopoly rights for trade with Bulgaria to two merchants, associates of Zaoutzes, and ordering “to move the Bulgarian market to Thessaloniki and the Bulgarian goods to be taxed with greater customs duties”. This seriously impaired the Bulgarian trade interests – the majority of the Bulgarian goods were shipped along the Danube and the Black Sea and until then were being unloaded in Constantinople, where their customs taxes were paid and they could then be sold across the empire. Leo’s move not only increased the travelling and tax expenses of the Bulgarian merchants, but also placed them under the iniquity and corruption of the new monopoly away from the eyes of the central authority in the capital. Upon hearing this, Knyaz Simeon protested and demanded the return of the Bulgarian market to Constantinople, but Leo VI refused. Thus, in 894 Simeon started his first war, which later became known as the Byzantine-Bulgarian Trade War (or “the first economics war in medieval Europe”, according to some historians). He gathered his army and advanced in Thrace. Since the thematic forces of Asia Minor were engaged with the Arabs, Leo VI quickly gathered an army only of his European forces, headed by his personal imperial guard unit, consisting of Khazar mercenaries. The Byzantine army, however, was crushed – the soldiers were routed, the commanders – killed, and the imperial guard surrendered. Simeon ordered the hands and noses of the Khazars to be cut off and “sent to Constantinople for the shame of the Romans”. Unable to mount a better resistance, the emperor resorted to the best weapon of the Byzantines – diplomacy. A mission, headed by Niketas Skleros, arrived in the realms of the Magyars to the north of the Black Sea and convinced the chieftains Arpad and Kusan to invade the Bulgarian lands, promising them the assistance of the Byzantine navy and that Byzantium would buy off all the prisoners they capture. The Magyars needed no further convincing and in 895 they attacked the northern Bulgarian lands, transported across the Danube by the navy of drungarios Evstatios, which managed to break the iron chains with which Simeon had barred the river. Surprised by this turn of events, Simeon had to leave most of his troops in the south, to keep at bay the Byzantine army of general Nikephoros Phokas (who had been recalled from his successful campaign in Italy to deal with this situation), and headed north, mustering whatever forces he could find on the way. Taking use of his weakness, the Byzantines sent an ambassador – the quaestor Constantine – to begin negotiations, but fearing espionage, Simeon ordered to have him locked up. In the meantime the Magyars had retreated to the north of the Danube, but upon hearing of Simeon’s few troops, soon returned and inflicted upon him a series of serious defeats. The knyaz was forced to seek refuge in the fortress of Mundraga (or in Drastar itself), besieged by the invaders, who kept ravaging the land all the way to the capital. In such dark times, the Bulgarians turned to their old knyaz, the monk Boris Mihail, and under his guidance and after a long and bloody battle, with great casualties on both sides, the Magyars were finally repelled. Tsar Simeon, pursued by the Hungarians, taking shelter in the stronghold of Drastar, miniature, Madrid Skylitzes, 12th century Now was the time to strike back, but Simeon needed time to recover and prepare, so he decided to resume the negotiations with Byzantium and stall them by engaging in a long-winded grammatical dispute with the Byzantine ambassador, magister Leo Choirosphaktes. As he got ready in 896, he locked him in Mundraga and set forth to the Magyar lands in the Atelkuzu. Following the Byzantine example, he also allied with the Pechenegs and together the two armies dealt such a devastating blow to the enemy, that the Magyars were later forced to flee westward to Pannonia, where they eventually recuperated and established their state. Spoiler for ”Primary source: Letters of Knyaz Simeon to Magister Leo Choirosphaktes”:  Letter I: “Two years ago your emperor showed himself most worthy of amazement, by informing us about the solar eclipse and its time: he told us not only of the month, the week and the day, the hour and the minute, but also how long this eclipse would last. It is said that he also knows many other things about the motion and the course of the heavenly bodies. Of course, if this is true, then he also knows about [the fate of] the captives; and since he knows, he could tell you whether we’d release them or hold them. And so, tell us of one of the two and if you guess our hidden thought, then as a reward both for the prediction and for your embassy, God is our witness, you will receive the captives. Hail!” Here magister Leo Choirosphaktes replies that Simeon plans to release the captives, but does so in a particularly ambiguous manner, which could allow him to claim the opposite, if need be. Knyaz Simeon takes use of this ambiguity and answers with the following letter. Letter II: “You didn’t guess at all, o magister, the future and the secret, by writing to us what you did. And your emperor and meteorologist doesn’t know the future at all. I really had in mind, I did – God is my witness – to return the captives. But I won’t release them, since you didn’t guess the future and falsely thought they won’t be sent, neither could you receive a reward for your prediction. Hail!” Here the magister explains in a long reply that Simeon’s scribes must have misunderstood his previous letter, that they’ve misplaced a comma and that he originally meant to say that Simeon plans to release the prisoners, which their misplacement of the comma has made it sound like he said the opposite. Letter III: “Magister Leo, I haven’t promised about [the release of] the captives [beforehand]; I haven’t told you anything; I won’t send them, most of all because you couldn’t guess the future well.” Here follow 9 letters sent by the magister to Knyaz Simeon, where the former engages in a long-winded explanation of the grammar of the Greek language, how some things can be written ambiguously, but must be interpreted in a philanthropic manner etc. etc. In a very diplomatic tone, he resorts to tactful threats of morality, followed by appeals to his sense of justice and philanthropy, even praising him for the clever way he [Simeon] tests the ambassador’s wit. But his letters were left unanswered by the Bulgarian knyaz, who was already negotiating with the Pechenegs and preparing to turn the tides of the war. Having secured his back, Simeon marched south in the summer of 896. Leo VI gathered an army from all the thematas and tagmatas of the Empire, but it was crushed near Bulgarophygon. The Bulgarians then advanced towards Constantinople, but were stopped by an army of Arab prisoners, who were promised their freedom if they succeed. With this, the two sides signed a peace treaty – the market for the Bulgarian goods was returned to Constantinople and Byzantium was obliged to pay an annual tribute to Bulgaria. But the conflict wasn’t quite over. In the beginning of the 10th century, Knyaz Simeon managed to gain control over 30 fortresses in the region of Dyrrachion, but returned them to Byzantium after a diplomatic mission of Leo Choirosphaktes. Byzantium, however, was fighting a war with the Arabs on many fronts – Armenia, Cilicia, the coasts of Asia Minor. On the 1st of August 902, the last Byzantine fortress in Sicily, Tauromenion, fell to the Saracens. The same year they also razed the rich Thessalian town of Demetriada and continued to raid the archipelago, the Peloponnesos and Thessaly. After the fall of Abydos, the Greek renegade Leo of Tripoli led his Arab army to Thessaloniki and after a three-day siege captured and sacked the city on the 31st of July 904. At the same time, Simeon advanced south, threatening to take the city for himself. The Byzantines were thus forced to make further territorial concessions – the region south of Zagora down to Midia on the Black Sea coast, the whole of modern Albania with the exception of the Dyrrachion area, as well as the region of Voden/Edessa, reaching all the way to 20 km north of Thessaloniki itself (according to the border columns from that year, found in Nares village, modern Nea Philadelphia). In the meantime, however, Bulgaria lost much of its economically important Transylvanian territories to Arpad’s Magyars, which it never again managed to recover. ”Tsar Simeon at Aheloy” by Vasil Goranov, 2014 + some atmospheric music by Kayno Yesno Slonce The Great Conflict The next several years were peaceful on the Balkans: Emperor Leo VI was busy fighting the Patriarch and the church in an attempt to legitimize his only heir from his fourth marriage, while Knyaz Simeon was busy developing the cultural heritage of his country during the so-called Golden Age. But things changed as Leo VI passed away on the 12th of May 912. His son, Constantine VII Porphyrogenitos, was barely six years old. The regency was taken over by Leo’s brother, Alexander, who took the imperial crown and sent the widow-empress Zoe to a monastery in order to secure his power. Alexander, however, was a light-minded man, a hedonist by nature and particularly proud of his new stature. Thus, when Simeon sent messengers to reconfirm the 896 treaty (including the Byzantine annual tribute), Alexander “possessed by madness and folly, shamefully chased them away, sending threats to Simeon and thinking he would scare him. Peace was thus broken and Simeon decided to take up arms.” Soon after the war was declared and while the Bulgarian king was still preparing for it, Emperor Alexander suddenly passed away, without having to take care of the problems he caused. The regency was taken over by the newly restored Patriarch Nikolaos Mystikos, the very same man who had earlier fought with Leo VI over the illegitimacy of his fourth marriage and his respective child from it. But now the Patriarch had to defend the interests of his state, so he tried to negotiate a peace between the two countries by sending to Simeon a Bulgarian renegade who had taken refuge in Constantinople. However, his own position was just as shaky – he faced the opposition of the nobility supporting the widow-empress Zoe and part of the clergy on the side of the now-deposed Patriarch Evtimios. Furthermore, the high commander and domestikos of the Scholae, Constantine Doukas, tried to usurp the throne for himself. Seeing this weakness and driven by his ever-growing ambition, Simeon led his armies south and in August 913 reached Constantinople unopposed. Despite the claim of one Byzantine chronicler that he was stopped by surprise of Constantinople’s defences (after all, Simeon had spent much of his youth in the Great City and knew its defences well enough), Simeon probably intended to use this show of force as a further leverage for the fulfilment of his plan. And, indeed, Kavhan Teodor soon returned with the message that the Byzantines wanted peace and were ready to negotiate. The Bulgarian delegation, led by Simeon and his two sons, was welcomed in the Blachernae palace by the high aristocracy, the Patriarch and the young Emperor Constantine himself, where they had lunch together and concluded the terms. And they were namely: The continuation of the Byzantine annual tribute, as per the 896 treaty; the recognition and coronation of Simeon as emperor (tsyasar/tsar, vasileos) of the Bulgarians; the betrothal of Constantine VII to one of Simeon’s daughters. This way, while holding the title of vasileos himself, Tsar Simeon intended through this marriage to become a vasileopator and thus eventually become an emperor in Constantinople, joining Bulgaria and the Roman Empire and establishing a new, Bulgarian dynasty in Byzantium. After these terms were met, the Bulgarian forces triumphantly returned home and Simeon’s seal from that time styles him as an “emperor peacemaker” (erinopoios vasileos), as he promised the Romans “a strong peace, the likes of which have never been before and which wasn’t even imagined by those living before us”. Things in the ancient Byzantion, however, changed again. The already unstable regency of Patriarch Nikolaos Mystikos was further shaken by the concessions made to the Bulgarian ruler and it finally collapsed in the end of the year, as the widow-empress Zoe Karbonopsina returned from her exile and took over the regency. Her first act was the annulment of her son’s betrothal to the Bulgarian princess and the refusal to recognize Simeon’s imperial rank, claiming that the Patriarch had put on his head not the imperial crown, but his own priestly head-cloth. The reason for the great importance of the imperial recognition both for Simeon and the Byzantines lies in the Byzantine ideology of the oikoumene. This ideology basically said that just as there is only one kingdom and ruler of Heaven, so must there be only one Christian empire and ruler of the Christian world, namely Byzantium and its emperor. This view made the Byzantine rulers, at least in theory, see the other Christian states as their spiritual subjects and their rulers as the spiritual sons of the Byzantine emperor. And the political independence of these countries was, at least in principle, just a temporary situation by the grace of God and the emperor. But the supremacy of Byzantium still stood, which is why only they could have an emperor. Of course, a breach in this policy had already been achieved, when in 812, forced by the recent death of Emperor Nikephoros I Genikos at the hands of Khan Krum the Terrifying, the Byzantines recognized the imperial title of Charlemagne. Naturally, they did so only with the note that they recognize him as emperor, but not of the Romans (i.e. “of all Christians”, in their mind), which they reserved for themselves to keep their supremacy in spirit and rank. But now, although Simeon was recognized only as emperor of the Bulgarians, his ambitions for the highest rank wouldn’t have been left unnoticed. And the threat was real, for while Charlemagne was far in the West, Simeon was at the doorstep of Constantinople. Feast in Constantinople in honour of Tsar Simeon (above) and a Bulgarian attack upon the Romans (below), miniature, Bulgarian translation of the Manasses chronicle, 14th century Thus, the war was reignited: the Bulgarian armies launched a campaign in Thrace, capturing Adrianople in 914 and continuing to fight in the areas of Dyrrachion and Thessaloniki, while Byzantium launched a major diplomatic campaign – first to convince Tsar Simeon to lay down his arms and, when that failed, to conclude peace and alliances with as many powers as possible. To that effect, it began negotiating a truce with the Arabs, which was finally concluded in 917, thus allowing all Byzantine thematic troops, both from the West and from the East, to be used in the war. Continuing an old tradition, the Byzantine diplomacy also contacted the Bulgarian neighbours: the Pechenegs, the Magyars and the Serbs. The strategos of Chersones, Ioannes Vogas, convinced the Pechenegs to attack from the north-east, as soon as the Byzantine navy arrives to transport them over the Danube. At the same time, the strategos of Dyrrachion, the protospatharios Leo Rhabdouchos, drew to his side the Serbian Knyaz Petar Goynikovich, who promised he’ll attack Bulgaria together with the Magyars. Tsar Simeon, however, was warned of this threat by his ally, the Zahumlian Knyaz Mihail Vishevich, and managed to bring the Magyars to his side, thus neutralizing the immediate threat from the west. Furthermore, along with the Magyars, he even convinced some of the Pecheneg tribes to join him. And so it came to be that Byzantium and Bulgaria had to meet in a direct conflict, one on one, in the coastal fields of Thrace. The entire Byzantine army, gathered from all the regions of the empire, crossed the Straits and marched north along the Black Sea coast, led by the commander in chief of the army, the domestikos of the Scholae Leo Phokas (son of general Nikephoros Phokas), who was accompanied by his brother Vardas Phokas (father of the future Emperor Nikephoros II Phokas) and the cream of the Byzantine military aristocracy. At the same time, the droungarios of the imperial navy Romanos Lekapenos took his fleet to the north, to meet the Pechenegs. Before they could be transferred, however, the Bulgarian army met the Byzantine one near the small river of Acheloos on the 20th of August 917. The size of the armies is estimated by some scholars to have been 60 000 Bulgarians against 62 000 Byzantines, considering the Roman army was gathered from all realms of the empire due to the peace treaty with the Arabs, made specifically for this purpose. In any case, the two forces formed ranks and prepared for battle – the Byzantine soldiers bowed “before the life-giving cross, swore readiness to die for each other and then the whole army charged against the Bulgarians.” The battle was ferocious and both sides fought with great fervour, which eventually led to the particularly high casualties, untypical for that age. Some scholars believe Tsar Simeon “pulled a Cannae” on the Romans, i.e. that he used Hannibal’s tactic of letting his centre pull back during the battle, thus forming a crescent and allowing his wings to outflank the enemy. It’s certainly possible that Simeon could have learned this tactic during his studies in Constantinople, where he had excelled in his interest for the classical world. Respectively, Leo Phokas might have dismissed him as a simple barbarian and not anticipated such a move. On the other hand, it’s also quite possible that Simeon might have used a “less sophisticated” tactic and simply led the Byzantines into an ambush – sources aren’t too clear on the tactics of the battle. Whatever the case is, some of the Bulgarian forces started withdrawing and their ranks were swept by the empire’s troops. But, as the sources claim, the retreat “wasn’t disorderly” and soon “confusion and hesitation appeared among the Romans”. This confusion was further increased by a peculiar event: secure in his apparent victory, and dead-tired and thirsty from the fight in this summer heat, Leo Phokas dismounted near the stream to drink some water. His horse, however, probably got startled and fled back, riderless, amidst the Byzantine troops. And as they recognized the horse, the news started spreading like wildfire – namely that the grand commander has fallen. The general himself eventually found another horse and rushed to his men, to reimburse their morale. But it was too late – noticing the right moment, Tsar Simeon charged with his reserves into the thick of battle. The clash was so strong that even his favourite horse got killed beneath him by an enemy’s blade. What followed was possibly one of the biggest massacres of the century – “as the Romans had already fallen in spirit, when they saw the sudden charge of the Bulgarians, they turned their backs and began fleeing in panic, with some of them trampling each other to death and others being slaughtered by the enemies”. As another source says: “It was a bloodshed, the kind of which had not been seen in centuries”, as a part of the Romans “were killed by the sword, others drowned in the sea, others yet were suffocated and crushed by the horses or from other violence, as everyone found death in a different way”. Leo Phokas managed to save himself behind the walls of Mesemvria only thanks to his fast new horse. But many others didn’t have that fortune. As Leo Diaconus mentions half a century later, upon passing by the remains of the battlefield: “Even now one can still see the piles of bones near Anchialos, where the fleeing army of the Romans was slain in disgrace.” Bulgarian forces rout the Byzantines at Anchialos in 917, miniature, Madrid Skylitzes, 12th century In the meantime, the Byzantine navy reached the Pechenegs, but a serious quarrel began between Romanos Lekapenos and Ioannes Vogas. Seeing this, the Pecheneg chieftains decided this whole endeavour is doomed to fail and returned home. At the same time, having learned of the defeat at Acheloos, Romanos Lekapenos rushed south with his fleet to Constantinople, where he hoped to solidify his position over his rival Leo Phokas. With his rear secured, Simeon’s armies advanced south and destroyed another large army gathered from the capital by Phokas in a night attack near Katasyrtai. As the campaign season was nearing its end, the Bulgarian troops returned home and the tsar turned his eyes towards another trouble-maker and potential tool of Byzantium – Serbia. Simeon hadn’t forgotten how they had joined the Byzantine coalition and were still stirring trouble in their lands, so he sent his voivodes Marmais and Teodor Sigritsa to deal with the situation. Ever since the death of their old ruler, Mutimir, the Serb princes were in a state of constant feud and conflicts. While Petar Goynikovich, a nephew of Mutimir, managed to grab the power with Byzantine help, many of the other claimants had to seek shelter abroad – in Bulgaria, Byzantium and Croatia. Some of them had lived in Bulgaria for decades, since the times of Knyaz Boris I Mihail. Using this, the Bulgarian troops captured Petar Goynikovich, after arranging a supposedly peaceful personal meeting between the leaders, and bring him in Bulgaria, placing another claimant on his place – Mutimir’s grandson Pavel Branovich. In 918 Tsar Simeon was the hegemon of the Balkan Peninsula and no longer hid his intentions to take the crown of the Empire and become “an emperor of the Romans”. He probably expected that after the catastrophic defeats at Acheloos and Katasyrtai, the position of Empress Zoe (as well as her favourite, Leo Phokas) was getting more and more unstable and that would eventually force her to concede to the 913 agreement and marry her son to Simeon’s daughter. To further remind her of her situation, he led a campaign all the way to Hellas, reaching the Corinthian Isthmus and destroying Thebes. But he could not anticipate what happened next: Admiral Romanos Lekapenos, the son of a common Armenian peasant (named Theophylact the Unbearable), was not only acquitted of the condemnations against him on a trial about his actions in the 917 campaign, but he skilfully managed to remove the empress’ supporters or alienate them from her, strengthening his own position more and more, until he finally overthrew Zoe. But it didn’t end there – in May 919 he married Constantine VII to his daughter Helena and thus became vasileopator, which opened for him the path for his further rise (in September 920 he became a kaisar and finally in December – a co-emperor, thus effectively becoming the new emperor). In a twist of fate, Simeon’s plan was thus fulfilled, but not by him. This turn of events unleashed the wrath of the Bulgarian tsar and led to an increase of the hostilities between the two states and to the chaos that followed. According to Prof. Zlatarski, in 918 – the year after the victory at Acheloos – Simeon convened a national church council, which proclaimed (uncanonically) the raising of Archbishop Leontiy to a Patriarch’s status and who in turn crowned Simeon as emperor of Bulgarians and Romans. And indeed – while his earlier seals styled him simply as “Simeon vasileos” or as “emperor peacemaker”, the new ones elevated him to “Simeon, in Christ an emperor of the Romans” (“Simeon en Hristo vasileos Romeon”) and his signature in his letters later on is as “emperor of Bulgarians and Romans” (“vasilea Voulgaron kai Romaion”). According to Prof. Mutafchiev, on the other hand, this started in 819-820, as a response to what Simeon viewed as an usurpation of the Byzantine throne, which was rightfully his. To that effect, the tsar announced in his correspondence with Patriarch Nikolaos Mystikos (as the Patriarch hadn’t ceased sending numerous letters to Simeon since the very beginning of the war, trying to arrange peace) that Lekapenos should “come down from the throne” and “leave the empire”. The Patriarch tried to convince him that this is impossible, blaming Empress Zoe and her supporters for this crisis and “the madness of those, who were incited by the Devil to start this war” and offering to arrange a new royal marriage, either by Simeon giving his daughter to Lekapenos’ son or by marrying his own son to the emperor’s daughter. But this was not enough. In 920 the Bulgarian troops reached the Dardanelles and crossed over to Asia Minor, attempting to take Lampsakos and thus control of the southern maritime access to Constantinople. The siege failed and the Bulgarians were repulsed, but they kept control over the Gallipoli Peninsula on the European side. Two years later, in 922, a new campaign was launched in that direction. As the Bulgarian forces captured Viza and reached Katasyrtai near the capital, the Byzantines mustered a new army from their tagmatic units and met them in the fields near Pegae, at the outskirts of Constantinople. But “when the Bulgarians appeared, shouting a strange and horrible cry and charging fiercely at them”, the Byzantine ranks wavered and were dispersed, their commanders (the domestikos of the Scholae Pothos Argyros and the admiral Alexios Mosele) being the first to flee. As the battle turned into another bloodbath during their rout, the area was devastated and the nearby imperial palaces were burned to the ground. In the meantime, in order to divert the Bulgarians into another direction, the imperial court had sent another claimant to the Serbian throne, Knyaz Zahariy Pribislavlyevich, to depose his cousin Pavel Branovich and take control over the country. A Bulgarian force was sent in retaliation and Zahariy was captured and sent to Preslav as a hostage. Soon, however, the Byzantines, managed to get Knyaz Pavel Branovich to their side as well. Thus, Zahariy was in turn released from Bulgarian captivity and given an army, with which he chased away the rebellious prince and took control over Serbia himself. But the game of diplomacy didn’t end with this. The Byzantine agents were trying their best to cause “a great upheaval among the Rus and with them among the Pechenegs, and also among the Alans and the Western Turks [i.e. the Magyars]. They have all conspired to wage war against you”, says Nikolaos Mystikos in one of his letters to Simeon. Whether that was an empty threat or maybe the Bulgarian tsar beat the Romans in their own game again – we can’t be certain. But the attack from the north never came. Instead, Simeon sent an embassy of his own. He knew that he would need a strong fleet to capture Constantinople – a fleet he didn’t have, but which the Arabs could procure. The Bulgarian mission was welcomed in the Fatimid court of al-Mahdiyya (in Tunisia) and presented its offer – a joint Arab-Bulgarian siege of Constantinople, where the Arabs would block the city by sea, while the Bulgarians would attack and capture it by land. In return for keeping the City (and thus the Empire) for themselves, the Bulgarians were ready to share half of the loot and concede the Byzantine holdings in Italy to Caliph Ubayd Allah al-Mahdi. The caliph seemingly agreed to the proposal and sent his representatives to Bulgaria to conclude the details of their future joint actions. While sailing towards the Bulgarian Adriatic ports, however, the ship of the two missions was captured by Calabrian pirates near Italy and they were sold to the Byzantines in Constantinople. Having unexpectedly learned of the great danger looming over their heads and praising God and fate, the Byzantines naturally threw the Bulgarians in the dungeon, while lavishly gifting the Arab emissaries and convincing them to recommend cancelling the planned alliance. Simeon I of Bulgaria sending envoys to the Fatimid Caliph Ubayd Allah al-Mahdi, miniature, Madrid Skylitzes, 12th century But the diplomatic game wasn’t quite over yet. Knyaz Zahariy, although he was recently placed on the Serbian throne by the Bulgarians, was convinced to rebel against them and to take the side of his former masters, the Byzantines. In the meantime, Simeon was already headed into another demonstrative campaign towards Constantinople. As he arrived, he called for the Patriarch Nikolaos Mystikos and some members of the senate, so they could begin negotiations. Soon after that he demanded a personal meeting with Romanos Lekapenos. Before leaving for the meeting, the emperor stopped by at the Blachernae church to pray to the Virgin Mary “to soften Simeon’s harsh heart and convince him to make peace”. In order to strengthen his divine support, he engirdled himself with Her homophor (the Veil of the Virgin, one of the most priceless relics in the church) and thus went to the meeting. And, indeed, the situation was such that Simeon needed peace as well. The army he had sent to Serbia, under the command of Kavhan Teodor Sigritsa and the famed Marmais, was crushed and the heads of the two commanders were sent as a gift to Constantine VII. Simeon needed to take care of the Serbian problem once and for all. Furthermore, he was having problems at home as well – this long war was leading to an increased unrest among his subjects and (according to Lekapenos) 20 000 of them had already fled from Bulgaria to Byzantium over the last year. And so the two emperors went to the meeting place on the 9th of September 923 with the hope to make the best out of the peace negotiations. The Bulgarian tsar did another demonstration of strength – “Simeon arrived with a large force, divided to many regiments. Some were armed with golden shields and golden spears, others – with silver shields and silver spears, while others yet – with all colours of weapon, and all of them were dressed in iron. As they placed Simeon among them, they greeted him on the language of the Romans [i.e. on Byzantine Greek] as an emperor”. An interesting curiosity is that some of the soldiers were then sent “to carefully check the scaffolding if there is any trickery or ambush in place” – apparently the Bulgarians remembered well how Khan Krum the Terrifying was almost killed in a very similar situation over a century ago. Then the two emperors got on the scaffolding, exchanged the necessary ceremonial hugs and began the negotiations. Finally, Simeon “agreed to make peace, as the emperor honoured him with great gifts” – Byzantium obliged itself to pay an annual tribute to Bulgaria, in exchange of the return of some of the towns they lost during the war, but most importantly – the imperial rank of the Bulgarian ruler was begrudgingly recognized by the vasileos, although only as “emperor of the Bulgarians” and not “of the Romans”. Campaign of Bulgarian Tsar Simeon against Constantinople (922-924) and conclusion of peace with Emperor Romanos I, miniature, Radziwiłł Chronicle, 15th century The Bulgarian tsar could now turn his eyes towards the torn at his side – in 924 a strong army was dispatched against Serbia, with Knin (possibly the kavhan, the grand commander in the army and second in the state hierarchy after the tsar), Imnik (possibly the ichirgu-boil, governor of the capital’s region and its troops, third in the state hierarchy) and Itsvokliy (possibly the minik, royal stablemaster and commander of the cavalry) as commanders and Knyaz Cheslav Klonimirovich as the figurehead. Cheslav was another descendant of Vlastimir – during the internecine strife in Serbia after the latter’s death, his father had found refuge in Bulgaria in the times of Boris I and had eventually married a Bulgarian noblewoman, from whom Cheslav was born. The Bulgarian invasion in Serbia was followed by great destruction, so much that some sources even claim the land was left almost completely depopulated. In any case, Knyaz Zahariy quickly fled to Croatia, while most of his nobles were chained and sent to Veliki Preslav. But this time there was no puppet-king appointed by Tsar Simeon – Cheslav was recalled to the capital, Serbia became an ordinary province of the Bulgarian state and never troubled Simeon again. What did trouble him, however, was the shelter which the Croatian King Tomislav provided to Knyaz Zahariy, as well as Croatia’s recent assistance to the Byzantines in Italy. This clearly suggested that Croatia could take the place of Serbia as a potential Byzantine agent in Bulgaria’s back. Thus, two years after Zahariy fled to the north-west, he was followed by a Bulgarian army, led by “Alogobotur” (some historians believe this could be a mistranslation of “olgu-bagatur”, possibly meaning “chief-bagatur”). The battle that ensued, known as the Battle of the Bosnian Highland, was a total and decisive victory for King Tomislav’s forces and one of the biggest defeats of Simeon’s – his entire expeditionary army was practically annihilated. Much to the comfort of Constantinople, this suggested that the Bulgarian tsar would have to divert all his attention to the far Balkan North-West. Unfortunately for them, however, things took a slightly different turn – apparently the tsar was negotiating with Pope John X for the recognition of Simeon’s and his church’s ranks. In the same year, 926, the mission of the papal legates John and Madelbert crowned the Bulgarian tsar and helped conclude a peace treaty between Croatia (as part of Rome’s diocese) and Bulgaria. Tsar Simeon could now look back to the south and soon started preparing for the next campaign against Byzantium, replacing his garrisons in Thrace with fresh troops and inciting the Slavs of Thessaloniki to rebel. But he never managed to lead this campaign – Tsar Simeon the Great passed away on the 27th of May 927, approximately at the age of 62. The Byzantines were overjoyed, as their greatest enemy had finally left them in peace. There was an interesting short story circulating in Constantinople about this event, according to which “some astrologer named Ioannes met Emperor Romanos and told him: “Milord, atop the arch on the Xerolophos hill stands a statue facing west – this is Simeon’s statue. If you cut off its head, Simeon will die instantly.” Emperor Romanos then sent some people at night to cut off the statue’s head, and in the same hour Simeon died in Bulgaria, seized by madness and heart failure.” Portrait of Tsar Simeon the Great by Dimitar Gyudzhenov, 1943 Tsar Simeon – An attempt of a very quick sketch If Simeon’s character is to be described with only one word, it would most likely be “ambition”. Ambition stood behind nearly all of his actions and endeavours. His “great desire to become king” drove him to depose his brother, while still being a monk himself. The ambition to prove himself on the battlefield had him resolve a trade dispute through war. The ambition for his country to shine as bright as Byzantium helped him build and foster its culture. And, finally, his uncompromising ambition to become a Roman Emperor himself led to all the wars and bloodshed his Byzantine contemporaries blamed him with. But besides ambition, one can find a number of other intriguing sides of Simeon’s character. “Love for knowledge” is probably the biggest one – even in his juvenile years Simeon exhibited an exceptional desire to learn and his education in Constantinople was the perfect means to quench his thirst. But it didn’t really quench it – despite all the syllogism of Aristotle and the oratorical art of Demosthenes, all the sciences and classical literature, even in his later years Simeon kept a vivid interest in acquiring more wisdom. Indeed, it could be said that knowledge for him was true wealth and while some rulers are praised for filling their vaults with gold to the brim, Simeon is praised for likewise filling his palaces with books. Another intriguing part of his character is his discipline and morality, probably a strong influence of his monastic past. It is said that, like his father, Simeon spent the nights wearing a simple cassock, praying before the icon-stand or writing books under the dim candlelight. Patriarch Nikolaos Mystikos mentions in one of his letters that in his youth, Simeon “lived as an excellent monk and had never in his life tasted wine”. It appears that even though he had been defrocked, he was still following the monastic austerity. Perhaps the only exception to this could be seen in his two marriages – first to an unknown woman, who gave him his firstborn son Mihail and a daughter, and then to another unnamed woman, sister of the great boil Georgi Sursuvul, who gave him his other three sons – Petar (future Tsar Petar I), Ivan and Veniamin/Boyan. Ceramic tiles icon of St. Theodore Stratelates, Veliki Preslav, “Saint Panteleimon” monastery, 10th century The Golden Age Tsar Simeon of Bulgaria is often referred to as “the Great”. Indeed, he has many great accomplishments and is famous for his very successful wars. And although Bulgaria’s greatest territorial extent wasn’t during his times (it was around 840, in the times of his grandfather, Kanasubigi Persian), it can be said that Simeon’s Bulgaria was at the height of its political, economical and military power. But that is not really why he is called “the Great”. The true reason for the modern use of that cognomen is the cultural development of his state, which he greatly fostered. As one French historian, Alfred Raimbaud, says about him: “Simeon was the Bulgarian Charlemagne, but he was better educated than our Charles the Great and much greater than him, for he laid down the foundations of a literature that belonged to the people.” True, it would be correct to point out that the seeds were really sown by his father Boris I, but it’s also a fact that the blossoming of this Slavo-Bulgarian culture happened under Simeon’s great care. And the fruits of his work can still be picked even today. Let’s start with the more fleeting thing – the material culture. Like his father, Simeon continued building numerous churches and monasteries all across the country, with their respective schools, scriptoriums etc. One intriguing suggestion by the archaeologists claims that, judging by the unusually high amount of various graffiti (wall-writings) from common people in this time period, the literacy in Bulgaria, and particularly the Preslav School region, was on a surprisingly high level by medieval standards – no doubt the well-developed educational system of neighbouring Byzantium (and Simeon’s own education there) would have had a big influence in this. Coloured glass was produced as ornamentation for the windows in the capitals, but particularly impressive is the so-called Ceramic School in Preslav, whose painted decoration tiles aimed to compete with Byzantium’s mosaics and had no parallel in contemporary Byzantine or Western art. But Simeon’s most important construction project is Veliki Preslav itself – an apocryphal Bulgarian chronicle from the 11th century claims he spent 28 years building the city. And indeed, it rose from a mere military camp, through a royal palace in the times of Kanasubigi Omurtag (814-831), finally to a “sedes imperii” in Roman terms – a true imperial capital. The magnificence of all his constructions there, of the palaces, the School’s buildings, the dozens of monasteries and churches (including the Golden/Round Church) and the various other public and non-public buildings, suggests again that he intended for Veliki Preslav to compete with Constantinople in its grandeur and prestige and make it a worthy capital of the Bulgarian Empire. And truly, while the great Pliska eventually became abandoned a couple of centuries later, Preslav continued to exist and when the Second Bulgarian Empire was re-established in 1185, the first thing that the rebels tried to do was to free Preslav. And even though the city lost its significance with time, the ruins of the palaces stood still just until two centuries ago, when the Ottoman governor Midhat Pasha finally destroyed them, by using the marble to make prime-quality lime and the stones were used for gravel for the first Balkan railway “Ruse-Varna”. Artistic recreation of the Round Church in Veliki Preslav – now (left) and before (right) The country’s economy also prospered – encompassing the greater part of the Balkan Peninsula, many of the trade routes between Northern and Central Europe, on one hand, and the Byzantine-Arab world in the Eastern Mediterranean, on the other, passed through Bulgaria’s territories. The Danube became an important international trade route, connecting Central Europe with the East, while the Bulgarian Black Sea ports were necessary way-stations of the Russian ships, sailing from the Dniepr to the Bosporus. While those coastal ports had been wealthy cities ever since Antiquity, the Danubian ports grew in significance – Drastar rivalled Preslav in size, Bdin and Belgrade were gaining importance as well, while Little Preslav (Preslavets in the mouth of the Danube) impressed the Kievan Knyaz Svyatoslav so much half a century later, that he wanted to move his capital there (according to the Primary Chronicle, he claimed that to Preslavets “all the riches would flow: gold, silks, wine and various fruits from Greece, silver and horses from Hungary and Bohemia, and from Rus’ furs, wax, honey and slaves”). In the mainland, the cities along the old Roman roads, especially the Via Militaris (Belgrad-Nish-Sredets-Philippopolis-Adrianople-Constantinople), were large and thriving as well. The taxes were reportedly particularly low and presented in nature (wool, butter, eggs), which further helped the accumulation of wealth among the people. A testimony to the country’s prosperity under Simeon’s reign could even by noticed by the imagery (metaphorical and literal) painted around him by his contemporary Bulgarian authors – according to them, similarly to the Biblical King David, Simeon played the harp with “golden strings”; with a “golden quill” he wrote his famous creation, which he called “Zlatostruy” (Goldstream), as it contained the best of John Chrysostom’s (i.e. Golden-mouthed) wisdom; he built the “golden church” in Preslav; in his throne room he sat on a “golden throne”, wearing a “golden sword”; finally, his soldiers before Constantinople’s walls wore “golden spears and golden shields”. All this aside, the greatest legacy of Tsar Simeon was his country’s literature. While the main driving force behind the Ohrid Literary School were the saints Kliment of Ohrid and Naum of Preslav and Ohrid, the heart of the Preslav Literary School was the tsar himself. Being probably the most educated ruler in all of Bulgarian history and famed with his love for knowledge, Simeon couldn’t stay away from the great activity in the school. It’s worth to note that this great care exhibited for the Preslav school wasn’t a single case in his family – his father, Knyaz Boris I Mihail, is believed to have personally observed and managed it during his last years as a monk, and later on Simeon’s uncle Dox and his own son Tudor Doxov are also reported to have taken on the black cloth, in service of literature – Ioan Exarch mentions that it was the monk Dox who urged him to translate the Theology (Heavens), while his son Tudor transcribed the “Four epistles against the Arians” of Athanasius of Alexandria, translated by Konstantin of Preslav at the request of the tsar. Likewise, Simeon himself is reported that he “wrote books in order to rest” and he is credited with personally writing the introduction to his Zlatostruy, as well as with the compilation of the so-called “Simeon’s (Svyatoslav’s) Codex”. Of course, he was far from the only man of letters in the school – many other notable men wrote new works of their own, and even more were their translations of the various existing Byzantine works – mostly religious literature, in line with the spirit of the time (various homilies, hagiographies, parables etc), but also encyclopaedias, historical chronicles, poetry, philosophical and rhetorical works, law codes and even the most popular adventure novels of the Orthodox Middle Ages – the Alexandria (a biography of Alexander the Great, based on the works by Quintus Curtius Rufus, Callisthenes and others) and the Story of the Trojan War. Among the most notable authors of his time are: St. Kliment of Ohrid (author of a number of moral lessons, eulogies and potentially of the Cyrillic alphabet itself), St. Naum of Preslav and Ohrid (the founder of the church hymnography in Bulgaria and the Slavic lands), Konstantin of Preslav (author of the Didactic Gospel, the Alphabetic Prayer and potentially Prologue to the Gospels), Chernorizets Hrabar (author of “An account of letters”, which shows his great education; as his identity is somewhat of a mystery, many scholars believe this was a “pseudonym” of Tsar Simeon himself, possibly from the time he was still a monk), Ioan Exarch (author of “Heavens” (a translation of John of Damascus’ “Theology”) and the “Shestodnev”/”Hexameron” encyclopaedia, based on the works of Basil the Great, John Chrysostom, Severian of Gabala, Aristotle, as well as additions by Ioan Exarch himself) and a number of others. All this development of the Slavic literature in Simeon’s times, as well as being the first country to greatly foster and raise the Slavic language to such high levels, including with the creation of the new Cyrillic alphabet, as well as its political and church’s prestige, made Bulgaria an uncontested spiritual centre of the Slavic world. Within just a few decades these writings and culture started spreading across the Orthodox world, greatly influencing the foundation and the development of the literary cultures of Serbia and Russia (and even later - of the Romance-speaking Romania), where the Old Bulgarian language eventually became the so-called Old Church Slavonic. Somewhat ironically, while one of the greatest achievements of the Thessaloniki brothers Cyril and Methodios and their legacy in Bulgaria was the breaking of the trilingual dogma and the administrative and liturgical use of a language understood by the common people (something which happened in Western Europe only after the Reformation), with time this language eventually became a holy one itself, almost frozen in time due to its reverence, a language which remained archaic (or even foreign) while the common vernacular of the people continued to evolve. ”The Bulgarian Tsar Simeon: The Morning Star of Slavonic Literature” by Alfons Mucha, 1923, part of his cycle “The Slav Epic” In the end, we’ll finish with quotes from three scholars, who most clearly and shortly explain why this first Golden Age of Bulgaria is so important and why it’s probably the country’s greatest achievement: - The Hungarian archaeologist Prof. Geza Feher: “The Bulgarians were this nation, which – along with the Vikings – contributed the most for the organization and formation of civilization in the whole of Eastern Europe.” - The French linguist Prof. Roger Bernard: “By saving the works of Cyril and Methodius, Bulgaria has deserved the gratitude and respect not only of the Slavic nations, but of all other nations in the world as well, and so it will be as long as humankind gives a true meaning to the words “progress”, “culture” and “humanity”. Bulgaria not only saved the great work of Cyril and Methodius from total oblivion, but in its lands it developed, enriched and perfected this priceless legacy. Bulgaria became a centre of a spirited cultural activity, while in that distant age many other nations lived in darkness and ignorance. The language of this first bloom of the Slavic literacy and culture was none other than the Old Bulgarian. This language outlived all attempts of assimilation from foreign invaders, thanks to the strength of the Bulgarian people, of their desire to preserve everything Bulgarian, especially the Bulgarian speech which has often been in danger, but has never been conquered.” - The Russian philologist Acad. Dmitry Likhachov: “The role of the Bulgarian clergy in the Middle Ages may be compared to that of the Irish monks before them” and “The flesh of the Bulgarian state was created by Asparuh, while its spirit was made by Cyril and Methodius. The foreign invaders couldn’t defeat this Nation of Spirit, because in defence of the Bulgarian people stood the language, the literacy, the literature…” This Nation of Spirit, as Dmitry Likhachov used to call it, and not its various military victories is Bulgaria’s true legacy to the world, and one of its greatest pillars was Tsar Simeon the Great and his Golden Age. Spoiler for Primary source: Description of Simeon’s palace, from Ioan Exarch’s Shestodnev, Day 6:  “When some common and poor man or a foreigner comes to the gates of the knyaz’ palace and sees them, he’s astonished. And as he steps towards the doors, he wonders and asks. And when he passes through, he sees houses rising from both sides, decorated with stone and wood and painted fully. And when he enters the court [of the inner city] and sees the high palaces and the churches, richly decorated with stone and wood and colours, and from the inside with marble and copper, silver and gold, he doesn’t know what to compare them with, as he’s seen nothing in his land other than straw huts. The poor man, he’d marvel at them, as if he’s lost his mind. But if he happens to see the knyaz, sitting [dressed] with a mantle covered in pearls, with a necklace of gold coins on his neck and rings on his hands, girdled with a crimson [or purple] sash and a golden sword suspended on his hip, and on both his sides are sitting bolyars with golden necklaces, with sashes and rings [or bracelets], and if someone in his land asks him when he returns: “What did you see there?”, he would say: “I don’t know how to tell you about it, because only with your own eyes you could truly admire this beauty.” Likewise, I also can’t describe this beauty and order well enough. But each of you, as you see it for yourself with your worldly eyes and muse upon it with your immaterial mind, only then can you be delighted the most by it. Because one’s own eyes don’t cheat. And even though sometimes they can also be deceiving, they’re still more reliable than other people’s eyes…” Spoiler for Primary source: Prologue to Zlatostruy, Addendum by the Christ-loving Tsar Simeon himself:  “Since the pious Tsar Simeon learned all the old and new books, the inner and the outer meaning of the Holy Scripture, the character and customs of all the teachers and the wisdom of the whole mind of the blessed John Chrysostom, he was amazed by his oratorical art and by the blessings of the Holy Spirit. And since he had gotten used in reading all of his books, he chose some speeches from among all of his works and gathered them into a single book, which he called Zlatostruy…” Spoiler for Primary source: Praise to Tsar Simeon:  The great among the rulers Tsar Simeon Desired most heartily, For he, the mighty ruler, to find The knowledge hidden in the depth Of these hard to understand books And in the thoughts of the most wise Basil. He ordered me, the unwise, To change the form of the speech, But to keep the meaning of his thoughts. Them, like a hard-working bee, From every flower of the Scripture, He gathered like in a single comb, Pouring them like a sweet honey From his mouth before the nobles, In order to enlighten their minds. A new Ptolemy as he presented himself to them, But not in faith – in desire mostly*, And due to his collection of all Divine and most precious books, With which his palaces he’d filled, He earned himself eternal memory. For this memory to be rewarded, May his Christ-loving soul Have as reward the wreaths Of the holy and blessed men For ever and ever. Amen. *Probably a reference to Ptolemy I Soter, the founder of the Great Library of Alexandria, or Ptolemy II Philadelphos, who ordered the creation of the Septuagint (a translation of the Torah from Hebrew to Greek - what would later become the basis of the Christian Old Testament). Both men were, naturally, not Christian by faith (as they lived before Christ), but were remembered with their sponsorship of knowledge.

[AnthoniusII]

This preview will be reworked on Nike's new info and finally with new models and units under his advices (few changes but totaly new textures where needed).