The Byala Inscription

Proceedings of the 23rd International Congress of Byzantine Studies - Thematic sessions of free communications, 2016

The authenticity and dating of the well-known Cyrillic inscription from Bitola, which was brought to light in 1956 during the demolition of Çavus mosque, where it had been placed in second use as a threshold, is being reviewed. Since then, it has been kept at the local museum. It consists of a 0,98 x 0,61 x 0,27 m. marble slab, broken into two pieces. A relatively small part of the bottom left corner of the inscription is missing. The text consists of 12 lines with missing letters both at the beginning and at the end of each line. The bottom left part which accounts for one quarter of the inscription text has been damaged and no traces of its letters have survived. Although the inscription is of exceptional interest, the first study that attempted to fill in the missing text, was carried out by Vladimir Mošin only one decade after it was brought to light. Since, it has been the subject of studies of numerous researchers. Most of them reckon that the inscription is the last written source of the First Bulgarian State with an accurate dating, while others question this view and argue that it dates from the 13th century. According to a third view that was expressed ten years ago, the inscription is falsified. The most extensive study about the inscription was conducted in 1970 by Jordan Zaimov, who had a different view than Mošin about the missing text. Even though his suggestion was deemed unfounded, it is still embraced today by modern researchers in publications about the history of the First Bulgarian State. After an on-the-ground examination of the monument, we found out that the inscription carrier originates from an older building, most likely from the Roman era, as evidenced from the top narrow surface of the marble, where there are holes and channels to fit Π-shaped metal joints. This contradicts the view that the inscription could have had another line on the top side of the inscribed surface, which was allegedly removed when it was placed in the place of the threshold. We also found out that the indicated date from the creation era (‘anno mundi’) was not read correctly despite the fact that all its numbers are clearly defined. It seems that the inscription editors were led to a mistake because of a reference made in the text to an emperor called John whom they mistook for Ivan Vladislav thus placing the dating of the inscription to the years of his reign (1015- 1018). Nonetheless, the year indicated on the inscription corresponds to the year 1202/3, i.e. the years of Ivan I, known as Kalojan (1197-1207), who, that same year, annexed to his acquisitions a large part of the western Balkans. It seems that it is an inscription that, looking back at the past, mentions some historical events with a view to connecting the newly-established Second Bulgarian State to the glorious past of the Cometopuli and, in particular, Tsar Samuel.

Advances in Anthropology, 2016

A rock inscribed with ancient, strange characters in the locality of Parvomai on the peak Elez, in the area of the villages of Bukovo and Voden near Mount Dragoyna, Northeastern Rodopi region (Bulgaria) was brought to the attention of the archaeologists by Paun Tashev. The inscription attracted our attention and pushed us to exercise our skills for providing its deciphering. The similarities between the name or the words in the inscription with a Slavic god name or surviving words still present in modern Slavic languages indicate, in both the cases, that tribes or peoples speaking Slavic languages were present in Northeastern Rodopi region in the Bronze Age, i.e. well before the VII century A.D. generally accepted period of the arrival of the Slavs in Eastern Europe.

Advances in Anthropology, 2017

The inscription 6858 was discovered on a grave slab at the beginning of 1965, 1 km far from the village of Kjolmen (Preslav district—Bulgaria). After having considered previous decipherings, we propose a deciphering based on similarities between the inscription characters and characters in the Greek alphabets and on similarities of its words with words in present, surviving Slavic languages. The inscription meaning is: this is the tomb of Ebavo son of Zesasha and in the grave is too Ilasi wife of Leteda and daughter to me, which indicates that, originally, the slab was inscribed in a non-survived Proto-Slavic language. This indicates that the inscription originated from a Proto-Slavic culture which settled in the southern part of the Balkan area during the 6 th-5 th cen. BC, i.e. well before the 7 th cen. AD the generally accepted period of the Slavs arrival in Eastern Europe, and represents an invitation to make efforts for exploring the presence and development of Proto-Slavic cultures in the Balkan area, Europe and Middle-East in the antiquity.

The paper introduces over 29 stone, brick and mortar bedding surfaces covered with Runiform graphs, ligatures and inscriptions found in valley of Bregalnica, Republic North Macedonia. In addition, all graphs are analysed and compared with written material from other parts of Early Medieval Bulgaria.

recent study of the Bitolja inscription, which he considers to have been cut ca. 1015-1016, greatly facilitates the palaeographic study of this interesting monument.l Yet Zaimov has failed to observe one very important fact: the palaeographic character of the flrst half of the inscription (lines 1-6) consistently differs in three particulars from that of its second half (lines 7-12), as follows: 1. The digraph for [y] is written with a front jer' (E-l) in the first half of the inscription (3x: lines 2, 3, 6), but with a back jer (El) in the second half (2x: lines 7, 9). (See Zaimov's illustrations, 54.) 2. The letter for [g] has the shape of our capital A with a bent crossbar (A) in the flrst half (6x: lines 2 f4xf, 4,5), but the shape of a triangle bisected by a horizontal line (A) in the second half (3x: lines 9, lO,lZ). (Zaimov,57.) 3. The letter for [z] has its tail bent sharply to the lefr (2. ) m the first half (lx: line 4), but not so (() in the second halt (3xl lines 8, gl}xl). (Zaimov, 40.) 2 Thus, the inscription is clearly the work of not one, but two stonecutters, who both employed a cyrillic alphabet and orthography of the same general character (apart from the three peculiarities listed above), e.g. each cutter's alphabet had only two letters for nasal vowels, and these letters did not admit of pre-iotation. Since the juncture between the two halves of the inscription falls in the middle of a phrase, it is clearly a case of two cutters collaborating on a single inscription, and not of a second cutter's later addition to the work of a flrst cutter. In other words, the Bitolja inscription is evidence for the existence of a school of cyrillic epigraphy, and is a product of this school; it is not the work of a single stonecutter who, perhaps, might have cut an inscription of markedly idiosyncratic character. Herein lies the special importance of the Bitolja inscription.

ingenio celeberrimus et studiis humanioribus devotissimus, natus est Kalendis Novembribus (vel a. d. XIV Kal. Nov. stili veteris) anno Domini MCMXV in oppido Sliven. Studuit Serdicae apud Al. Balabanov, D. Detschew, G. Kazarow, V. Beševliev, Vl. Georgiev, Y. Todorov, B. Filov, Parisiis apud H. Jeanmaire, J. Vendryes, P. Chantraine, F. Chapouthier, A. Mirambel et L. Robert. Cathedrae philologiae classicae Universitatis Serdicensis octo per lustra particeps fuit summosque honores obtinuit. Societati internationali epigraphiae Graecae et Latinae, quam ipse creavit, praeses perpetuus fuit. Vitam obiit a. d. XI Kalendas Decembres anno Domini MCMXCI.

The article examines some recently published Greek and Latin inscriptions from Bulgaria and proposes a few emendations in their text and interpretation.

The paper introduces newly found logographic script named by authod Bulgarian Sacred Script. Several inscriptions attributed to this Runiform script are investigated. Also, connection between BSS and Chinese script is being established.

This article focus on the Runiform inscriptions and Pagan art found in the caves near the village Tsarevets, Vratsa district, Bulgaria. Those meterials are analysed through comparisons with material from Bulgarian und Russian folklore and myths of some Siberian and East European people.

Paper discusses several early Runiform inscriptions. They are compared with inscription from Bulgaria. Also, some aspects of the origin of the script are examined as well as new reasings of few inscriptions are given.