Medieval Kingdoms Total War: Second Bulgarian Tsardom

[warman222]

So here comes an updated version of the roster for the Second Bulgarian Tsardom. Enjoy

Archers

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Heavy Archers

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Bulgarian Brigands

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Auxiliary

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Militia Spearmen

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Spearmen

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Hooked Spearmen (with hooked spears and other polearms)

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Axemen (medium - heavy infantry having the advantage of dogs)

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Swordsmen

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Heavy Spearmen

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Pronoia Cavalry

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Tsar and Bodyguards

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

HIGH ERA Units



Crossbowmen

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Bulgarian Heavy Infantry

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Bolyars

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Cuman Units


Cuman Light HA

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Cuman Heavy HA

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Cuman Heavy Lancers

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[Visarion]

God damn stupit crash... stupid site... maaaannn 2 weeks of progress huh!? Thx 4 ur efforts guys...

[finix]

After studying the materials of Bulgarian archaeologists and historians for weaponry / army / of the Second Bulgarian kingdom was divided into several segments -

Royal Guards / most elite troops / - mainly heavy cavalry around 300 people in the mid 13th century to 1000 people. They were subject only to the ruler, even were sent on missions because of their abilities.
Shares is the possibility that some of them were foreigners, as in Byzantium. They all was on highly paid service.

Army subordinated to sevastokrators and despots
This was mainly conscript army, military service people living in the land of the despot and arms by despot himself.
Something similar to the western lords. Despot's army consisted mainly of infantry - light and heavy, archers and Prononia cavalry
Despots with a large army was in kinship with the ruler, smaller lords could maintain only to 150-200 people army.

Мilitia.
Every major city each arms every fit to bear arms in time in threat. Poorly armed, usually - blacksmiths, craftsmen and less guardsmen.
There were also fighting groups for ambushes and to weaken the enemy.

Мercenaries
With time, and fewer people available for waging war, Bulgarian rulers have used more and more mercenaries.
Besides the many Cuman troops, Vlachs, Bulgarians later used and Tatars, and at the end of the kingdom and many western soldiers - German and Hungarian

So we need to add a few units to the list.
@Ltd. - we need to add heavy cavalry different from boyars
@Warman - need to add Cuman Horse archers and later Tatars

[LinusLinothorax]

From what i have understood "Bulgaria" is only a relatively recent name which originated from the Turkish word for cereals (Bulghur). Is it known how the country was called before Turkish occupation?

[finix]

From what i have understood "Bulgaria" is only a relatively recent name which originated from the Turkish word for cereals (Bulghur). Is it known how the country was called before Turkish occupation?

What!!!!!!! You're in a huge mistake. Greater foolishness I had not heard, perhaps as large as this that bulgarians has Turkic roots.

[OutsiderKK]

Damn I butchered English language

[LinusLinothorax]

What!!!!!!! You're in a huge mistake. Greater foolishness I had not heard, perhaps as large as this that bulgarians has Turkic roots.

Well, that is what a history professor of mine stated, and it made kind of sense to me (Bulgaria = Turkic for "Where the cereals grow"). If the term is actually attested from before Ottoman occupation and derives from a people/tribe called "Bulgars" then ok. Would like to see a bulletproof source for that tho, like a historical document or such (Too lazy to read through Frozens blocktexts).

[ESmod]

Well, that is what a history professor of mine stated, and it made kind of sense to me (Bulgaria = Turkic for "Where the cereals grow"). If the term is actually attested from before Ottoman occupation and derives from a people/tribe called "Bulgars" then ok. Would like to see a bulletproof source for that tho, like a historical document or such (Too lazy to read through Frozens blocktexts).

Just read the video he sent "origin of the bulgarians". And i don't know why people listen to professors like these, even the german and the english professors that stated that Bulgarians are turkic when they never came to Bulgaria nor they ever seen one and you believe them ? If i may say, you are crazy.

[ESmod]

Our REAL history started coming out somewhere after 2000(i keep forgetting years), and even now some historians of ours demand to change our history books to the accurate, even that we are slavs is stupid, khan Asparuh conquered them when Bulgarians came to these lands, and moved them to the borders to defend them so therefor there wasnt even mixing between slavs and bulgarians.

[FrozenmenSS]

Well, that is what a history professor of mine stated, and it made kind of sense to me (Bulgaria = Turkic for "Where the cereals grow"). If the term is actually attested from before Ottoman occupation and derives from a people/tribe called "Bulgars" then ok. Would like to see a bulletproof source for that tho, like a historical document or such (Too lazy to read through Frozens blocktexts).

typical incompetence for Westerners and Turks(their academia).... reading outdated textbooks by at least...30-50 years...

[Muramasa1794]

I must say looking pretty good and authentic

[finix]

Well, that is what a history professor of mine stated, and it made kind of sense to me (Bulgaria = Turkic for "Where the cereals grow"). If the term is actually attested from before Ottoman occupation and derives from a people/tribe called "Bulgars" then ok. Would like to see a bulletproof source for that tho, like a historical document or such (Too lazy to read through Frozens blocktexts).

I'm not going to prove anybody anything. If you want to stay lazy believe your professor, don't believe me or FrozenmenSS. I'm not some sick nationalist, I do not pretend I'm an expert on history. It is your right to believe in whatever you want
... I invite you to come to Bulgaria, Sofia see our national historical museum and then pretend or argue about that you are convinced

[FrozenmenSS]

From what i have understood "Bulgaria" is only a relatively recent name which originated from the Turkish word for cereals (Bulghur). Is it known how the country was called before Turkish occupation?

another great post from you LinusLinothorax.I Will Take it as Sarcasm... (slow clapping) Finix dont mind him.He did recently some stupid posts about the Slavs when speculating the probably the next upcomming DLC for Attila getting the Slavs as Faction pack.

And now About the Name:Everybody (I mean Scientists).If For Example there were 1000 Scientists started researching this - each of them - 1000 different proposals for the meaning of the name Bulgarians.

And Im using not using the term Bulgars .The term Bulgars is a term coined in the 19th century by the historical science at that time (just like the Term Byzantine,or Latin empire) to distinguish the people founded and ruled the First Bulgarian Empire – from 681 AD onwards and before they merged with the Slavs and the,the remains of the ancient Thracians and Gothic population and the formation of the Modern Bulgarian nation.

Short story - all of the Scientists says that the Name was Really old and at some time the Local nations started using the part "Bulch-","Bolg-","Balch-",the greek "Backtr" (Bactria),the Arab "Burdj'' (Burdjan) and so on.The ancient meaning of the name Bulgarians is bright, luminous. Greeks and Romans the name ''Bulgarian'' sounded strange and therefore different authors at different times have written it differently - Bolg bleguri,, balagri.


Clip from the Movie I mentioned. in post #9

[OutsiderKK]

Bulgars are of Turkic origin. The word "Bulgar" was the name of Turkic tribe that migrated from Central Asia to Volga Bulgaria and from there current day Bulgaria. When they had converted to Christianity dropped their nomadic cultures. The Bulgars that stayed in Volga Bulgaria kept their nomadic ways and were called Volga Bulgars(get it ). But these things happend may years before Ottoman Empire was founded. Here you can see here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgars

[finix]

Bulgars are of Turkic origin. The word "Bulgar" was the name of Turkic tribe that migrated from Central Asia to Volga Bulgaria and from there current day Bulgaria. When they had converted to Christianity dropped their nomadic cultures. The Bulgars that stayed in Volga Bulgaria kept their nomadic ways and were called Volga Bulgars(get it ). But these things happend may years before Ottoman Empire was founded. Here you can see here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgars

Lies, lies and lies again. I'm sick to tell other people that they know about the Bulgarians are lies. Do not give me links from wikipedia where everyone can write whatever he wants. Bulgarians are not Turkish tribe, the Bulgarians had a civilization much before the Turkish tribes to discover that they can sleep with women and not just with their horses. Do not stand foreigners to teach me my own history! I have no time for this....talk whatever you want

[OutsiderKK]

Lies, lies and lies again. I'm sick to tell other people that they know about the Bulgarians are lies. Do not give me links from wikipedia where everyone can write whatever he wants. Bulgarians are not Turkish tribe, the Bulgarians had a civilization much before the Turkish tribes to discover that they can sleep with women and not just with their horses. Do not stand foreigners to teach me my own history! I have no time for this....talk whatever you want

If you believe bulgars weren't Turkic than you are ignorant about your own identity and your heritage. First of all you can't write whatever you like to wikipedia. When you make changes in wikipedia it must be approved to be published.

Secondly, you said that Bulgars had a civilization long before Turks. Let me tell you this, when the first Bulgars appeared, it was 4th ceuntry AD, my ancestors(Turkic people) had founded Xiongnou in modern day Mongolia (209 BC), under Oghuz Khan(Modu Chanyu). Turkic people weren't as separate as they are today. Even Mongols were no diffrent from us. Today genetically Bulgars might not be very close to Bulgars of Central Asia. But if you think, Turks of Anatolia aren't that close genetically to their ancestors in Central Asia too. I wonder, do you think that Magyars weren't Turkic too? The Xiongnu I mentioned was the only possible state where Attilla could come from. Man I teach and study these things at school. Don't try to have an argument with me about Turkic history

[FrozenmenSS]

If you believe bulgars weren't Turkic than you are ignorant about your own identity and your heritage. First of all you can't write whatever you like to wikipedia. When you make changes in wikipedia it must be approved to be published.

Secondly, you said that Bulgars had a civilization long before Turks. Let me tell you this, when the first Bulgars appeared, it was 4th ceuntry AD, my ancestors(Turkic people) had founded Xiongnou in modern day Mongolia (209 BC), under Oghuz Khan(Modu Chanyu). Turkic people weren't as separate as they are today. Even Mongols were no diffrent from us. Today genetically Bulgars might not be very close to Bulgars of Central Asia. But if you think, Turks of Anatolia aren't that close genetically to their ancestors in Central Asia too. I wonder, do you think that Magyars weren't Turkic too? The Xiongnu I mentioned was the only possible state where Attilla could come from. Man I teach and study these things at school. Don't try to have an argument with me about Turkic history

And I think that The Turkic tribes entered Central Asia from Asia in the late 6th Century,not the 4th.... and controlled the Bulgarian State in the Pontic Area for only 50-60 years.

And now lets not derail the thread. BTW good research Finix on the medieval army.I support what you said about it.I find the same thing.

[OutsiderKK]

And I think that The Turkic tribes entered Central Asia from Asia in the late 6th Century,not the 4th.... and controlled the Bulgarian State in the Pontic Area for only 50-60 years.

And now lets not derail the thread. BTW good research Finix on the medieval army.I support what you said about it.I find the same thing.

Well if you count White Huns Turkic(Xiongnu thing again), we can say Turkic tribes were in Central Asia in 4th century. I would count them Turkic because modern Turkic states mostly see them as ancestors and in Turkish presidental seal, they are represented with a star along with 15 other great Turkic states in history. And in the High School books White Huns are said to be a Turkic state and they are proven to be coming from the steppes.

[+Marius+]

I wonder, do you think that Magyars weren't Turkic too?

Magyars were Ugro-Finnic.

The Bulgars may have been Turkic or had Turkic origins, but they are described and depicted as caucasians at least since the moment they settled in modern day Bulgaria.

For instance, the Volga Bulgars are considered to be largely Ugro-Finnic tribes as well, including the modern Mari peoples and they settled far closer to the steppes than the Slavic Bulgars.

You modern Turkish related buddies are also being very exclusive when it comes to the very term "turkic" and what it represents, considering it was more of a cultural identity than an ethnic one, as the earliest descriptions by the ancient Chinese mention plenty of caucasian looking peoples among the asiatic peoples of the steppe, even as eastwards as the very borders of China, including the blue/green eyed, red/blond haired "large eyed"/"cat eyed" people.

You modern Bulgarian related buddies are, on the other hand, being kind of paranoid with accepting the fact that certain turkic elements in the early migrating Bulgars/Antes/Avars are definitely present.


Careful now, keep your heads cooled.

[Danishmend]

Bulgars are of Turkic origin. The word "Bulgar" was the name of Turkic tribe that migrated from Central Asia to Volga Bulgaria and from there current day Bulgaria. When they had converted to Christianity dropped their nomadic cultures. The Bulgars that stayed in Volga Bulgaria kept their nomadic ways and were called Volga Bulgars(get it ). But these things happend may years before Ottoman Empire was founded. Here you can see here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgars

There are other forums (or threads on this forum?) where you can talk about their origin, please do not derail this thread with off-topic discussions. You are annoying.

Lies, lies and lies again. I'm sick to tell other people that they know about the Bulgarians are lies. Do not give me links from wikipedia where everyone can write whatever he wants. Bulgarians are not Turkish tribe, the Bulgarians had a civilization much before the Turkish tribes to discover that they can sleep with women and not just with their horses. Do not stand foreigners to teach me my own history! I have no time for this....talk whatever you want

Watch your tongue.

Just read the video he sent "origin of the bulgarians". And i don't know why people listen to professors like these, even the german and the english professors that stated that Bulgarians are turkic when they never came to Bulgaria nor they ever seen one and you believe them ? If i may say, you are crazy.

They are clearly not referring to modern Bulgarians who are a Slavic people, but the Volga Bulgars were not Slavic, most historians agree that the Volga Bulgars were an Oghur (lir-Turkic) speaking Turkic people and together with Cuman-Kypchak tribes they gave rise to modern Kazan Tatars. There is not much point continuing a debate that is off-topic, let's just agree to disagree.