Some Questions about the Slavic Tribes that participated in the Anti-Bulgarian Uprisings along the Mid-Danube in the First Decades of the 9th Century

Q1 Arts and Humanities
N. Hrissimov
{"title":"Some Questions about the Slavic Tribes that participated in the Anti-Bulgarian Uprisings along the Mid-Danube in the First Decades of the 9th Century","authors":"N. Hrissimov","doi":"10.18778/2084-140x.12.16","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article tries to answer three questions related to the tribes that came into conflict with the Bulgarian state during its expansion to the west in the first third of the 9th century. And the questions addressed in it are: 1. How many and which tribes were in conflict with the Bulgarian state?; 2. When were the lands of the Timociani annexed by the Bulgarian state?; 3. Where were the lands of the Abodriti-Praedenecenti and what caused the Bulgarian aggression towards them? After a thorough review and criticism of the sources and research on the issues under consideration, the following conclusions have been reached. From the beginning of the study of the problem how many tribes participated in the unrest against the Bulgarian state, P. Šafarik has the idea that among the tribes in the narrative sources, can be found other tribes as well. Thus appear the tribes of Bodriči (sounding, perhaps, like Krivichi), Kučani (Guduskani), Braničevci and others. After an assessment of the information in the Annales Regni Francorum, it turns out that the only tribes recorded in the source that had a clash with the Bulgarian state in the period were the Timociani and Abodriti-Praedenecenti. Since it is not directly related to the events that took place in 818, the question of when the Timociani lands were annexed to the Bulgarian state is hardly touched by the researchers. After research and exclusion of other possibilities, the thesis is defended that this could have happened recently after the Bulgarian conquest of Serdica in 809. With the inclusion of Serdica within the Bulgarian borders, Bulgaria controlled south of the Danube River not only the Danube plain but also the territories lying along the Thessaloniki-Danube axis. From this point on, the territories lying along this axis could be gradually taken over. Being further away from Byzantium, the lands located north of Sredets are more easily assimilated. It is in these territories that the Timociani fall. Given all the above, it can be assumed that it was after the capture and absorption of Sredets that the Bulgarian State looked northwest, but still south of the Danube river, where the Timociani lived. It seems that at this time an alliance was made with them, which turned out to be not particularly lasting. About the habitation of the Abodriti-Praedenecenti tribe in the information of 824, it is recorded that they lived in Danubian Dacia and were neighbours of the Bulgars. On the question of where this Dacia is located, which in its description does not correspond to any of the previously known Dacias, many hypotheses have been expressed, and in modern times most researchers are of the opinion that the lands of the Abodriti-Praedenecenti were located along the Left Bank of the river Danube, on the territory of modern Banat, i.e. east of the river Tisza. New evidence has been added to the localization of these habitations. In this case, the following question logically arises: provided that the Timociani lived on the Southern, Right Bank of the Danube, what caused the unfriendly relations of the Bulgarian state to the Abodriti-Praedenecenti living on the other side of the Big River? Given the size of the Danube River, it is quite difficult to cross and to transfer the fighting to the other bank of the Danube clearly should have had serious reasons. One of the possible explanations for this could be the transfer of the Timociani to their territory, on their way to the West, thus creating a casus belli for the Bulgars.","PeriodicalId":41598,"journal":{"name":"SEARCH-Journal of the Southeast Asia Research Centre for Communications and Humanities","volume":"38 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SEARCH-Journal of the Southeast Asia Research Centre for Communications and Humanities","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18778/2084-140x.12.16","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The article tries to answer three questions related to the tribes that came into conflict with the Bulgarian state during its expansion to the west in the first third of the 9th century. And the questions addressed in it are: 1. How many and which tribes were in conflict with the Bulgarian state?; 2. When were the lands of the Timociani annexed by the Bulgarian state?; 3. Where were the lands of the Abodriti-Praedenecenti and what caused the Bulgarian aggression towards them? After a thorough review and criticism of the sources and research on the issues under consideration, the following conclusions have been reached. From the beginning of the study of the problem how many tribes participated in the unrest against the Bulgarian state, P. Šafarik has the idea that among the tribes in the narrative sources, can be found other tribes as well. Thus appear the tribes of Bodriči (sounding, perhaps, like Krivichi), Kučani (Guduskani), Braničevci and others. After an assessment of the information in the Annales Regni Francorum, it turns out that the only tribes recorded in the source that had a clash with the Bulgarian state in the period were the Timociani and Abodriti-Praedenecenti. Since it is not directly related to the events that took place in 818, the question of when the Timociani lands were annexed to the Bulgarian state is hardly touched by the researchers. After research and exclusion of other possibilities, the thesis is defended that this could have happened recently after the Bulgarian conquest of Serdica in 809. With the inclusion of Serdica within the Bulgarian borders, Bulgaria controlled south of the Danube River not only the Danube plain but also the territories lying along the Thessaloniki-Danube axis. From this point on, the territories lying along this axis could be gradually taken over. Being further away from Byzantium, the lands located north of Sredets are more easily assimilated. It is in these territories that the Timociani fall. Given all the above, it can be assumed that it was after the capture and absorption of Sredets that the Bulgarian State looked northwest, but still south of the Danube river, where the Timociani lived. It seems that at this time an alliance was made with them, which turned out to be not particularly lasting. About the habitation of the Abodriti-Praedenecenti tribe in the information of 824, it is recorded that they lived in Danubian Dacia and were neighbours of the Bulgars. On the question of where this Dacia is located, which in its description does not correspond to any of the previously known Dacias, many hypotheses have been expressed, and in modern times most researchers are of the opinion that the lands of the Abodriti-Praedenecenti were located along the Left Bank of the river Danube, on the territory of modern Banat, i.e. east of the river Tisza. New evidence has been added to the localization of these habitations. In this case, the following question logically arises: provided that the Timociani lived on the Southern, Right Bank of the Danube, what caused the unfriendly relations of the Bulgarian state to the Abodriti-Praedenecenti living on the other side of the Big River? Given the size of the Danube River, it is quite difficult to cross and to transfer the fighting to the other bank of the Danube clearly should have had serious reasons. One of the possible explanations for this could be the transfer of the Timociani to their territory, on their way to the West, thus creating a casus belli for the Bulgars.
本文试图回答三个与九世纪前三分之一时期保加利亚向西扩张过程中与之发生冲突的部落有关的问题。其中涉及的问题是:1。有多少部落和保加利亚发生了冲突?2. 蒂莫西亚尼人的土地是什么时候被保加利亚吞并的?3.。阿伯德里蒂-普雷代内森蒂人的土地在哪里?保加利亚对他们进行侵略的原因是什么?在对所审议问题的资料来源和研究进行彻底审查和批评之后,得出以下结论。P. Šafarik从一开始研究有多少部落参与了反对保加利亚国家的动乱这个问题,就认为在叙述来源的部落中,也可以找到其他部落。这样就出现了bodrii(听起来可能像Krivichi)、ku ani (Guduskani)、brani evci和其他部落。在对《Regni Francorum年鉴》中的信息进行评估后发现,在这一时期,文献中记录的唯一与保加利亚国家发生冲突的部落是Timociani和Abodriti-Praedenecenti。由于它与818年发生的事件没有直接关系,研究人员几乎没有触及Timociani土地何时被保加利亚国家吞并的问题。在研究和排除了其他可能性之后,该论文辩称,这可能发生在809年保加利亚征服塞尔迪卡后不久。在将塞尔迪卡纳入保加利亚边界后,保加利亚不仅控制了多瑙河平原,而且控制了塞萨洛尼基-多瑙河轴心沿线的领土。从这一点开始,沿着这条轴线的领土可以逐渐被占领。由于远离拜占庭,位于斯雷茨北部的土地更容易被同化。蒂莫西亚尼人就是在这些领土上沦陷的。综上所述,可以假定保加利亚是在占领和吸收斯雷代茨之后才向西北方向望去,但仍在多瑙河以南,即蒂莫西亚尼人居住的地方。似乎在这个时候与他们结成了联盟,结果证明这并不是特别持久。关于824年的abdriti - praedenecenti部落的居住地,据记载他们居住在多瑙河沿岸的达契亚,是保加利亚人的邻居。关于这个达契亚位于何处的问题,在它的描述中与以前已知的任何达契亚都不相符,有许多假设被表达出来,在现代,大多数研究人员认为,Abodriti-Praedenecenti的土地位于多瑙河左岸,在现代巴纳特的领土上,即Tisza河以东。新的证据已经加入到这些居住地的定位中。在这种情况下,合乎逻辑地产生了以下问题:假如提莫西亚尼人居住在多瑙河右岸的南岸,是什么原因导致保加利亚国家对生活在大河另一边的阿波德里蒂-普雷代内森蒂人的不友好关系?考虑到多瑙河的大小,很难越过多瑙河,把战斗转移到多瑙河的另一边显然应该有严重的理由。其中一个可能的解释是,提莫西亚尼人在前往西方的途中被转移到他们的领土上,从而为保加利亚人制造了一个开战的理由。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信