Sveštenite dvorci na bǎlgarskite kanove
Свещените дворци на българските канове
Gespeichert in:
| 1. Verfasser: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Buch |
| Sprache: | Bulgarian |
| Veröffentlicht: |
Sofija
Izdat. Agató
2008
|
| Schriftenreihe: | Archeologija i architektura
|
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Inhaltsverzeichnis Abstract |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
MARC
| LEADER | 00000nam a2200000 c 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | BV035483292 | ||
| 003 | DE-604 | ||
| 005 | 20090519 | ||
| 007 | t | ||
| 008 | 090512s2008 ab|| |||| 00||| bul d | ||
| 020 | |a 9789548761826 |9 978-954-8761-82-6 | ||
| 035 | |a (OCoLC)318921153 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)BVBBV035483292 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-604 |b ger |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | 0 | |a bul | |
| 049 | |a DE-12 | ||
| 050 | 0 | |a DR49.24 | |
| 084 | |a 7,12 |2 ssgn | ||
| 084 | |a 6,15 |2 ssgn | ||
| 100 | 1 | |6 880-01 |a Čobanov, Todor |d 1977- |e Verfasser |0 (DE-588)136321887 |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |6 880-02 |a Sveštenite dvorci na bǎlgarskite kanove |c Todor Čobanov |
| 264 | 1 | |6 880-03 |a Sofija |b Izdat. Agató |c 2008 | |
| 300 | |a 304 S. |b zahlr. Ill., Kt. |c 29 cm | ||
| 336 | |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |b n |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |b nc |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 490 | 0 | |a Archeologija i architektura | |
| 500 | |a In kyrill. Schr., bulg. - Zsfassung in engl. Sprache | ||
| 648 | 7 | |a Geschichte 700-1000 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Excavations (Archaeology) / Danube River Valley | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Excavations (Archaeology) / Bulgaria | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Palaces / Danube River Valley | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Palaces / Bulgaria | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Funde | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Excavations (Archaeology) |z Bulgaria | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Excavations (Archaeology) |z Danube River Valley | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Palaces |z Bulgaria | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Palaces |z Danube River Valley | |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Khan |0 (DE-588)4213024-4 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Palast |0 (DE-588)4044394-2 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Ausgrabung |0 (DE-588)4129464-6 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 651 | 4 | |a Danube River Valley / Antiquities | |
| 651 | 4 | |a Bulgaria / Antiquities | |
| 651 | 4 | |a Bulgaria |x Antiquities | |
| 651 | 4 | |a Danube River Valley |x Antiquities | |
| 651 | 7 | |a Untere Donau |z Region |0 (DE-588)4286969-9 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf | |
| 651 | 7 | |a Bulgarien |0 (DE-588)4008866-2 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf | |
| 689 | 0 | 0 | |a Bulgarien |0 (DE-588)4008866-2 |D g |
| 689 | 0 | 1 | |a Khan |0 (DE-588)4213024-4 |D s |
| 689 | 0 | 2 | |a Palast |0 (DE-588)4044394-2 |D s |
| 689 | 0 | 3 | |a Ausgrabung |0 (DE-588)4129464-6 |D s |
| 689 | 0 | 4 | |a Untere Donau |z Region |0 (DE-588)4286969-9 |D g |
| 689 | 0 | |5 DE-604 | |
| 689 | 1 | 0 | |a Untere Donau |z Region |0 (DE-588)4286969-9 |D g |
| 689 | 1 | 1 | |a Palast |0 (DE-588)4044394-2 |D s |
| 689 | 1 | 2 | |a Ausgrabung |0 (DE-588)4129464-6 |D s |
| 689 | 1 | 3 | |a Geschichte 700-1000 |A z |
| 689 | 1 | |5 DE-604 | |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |m Digitalisierung BSBMuenchen |q application/pdf |u http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=017539804&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |3 Inhaltsverzeichnis |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |m Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen |q application/pdf |u http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=017539804&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |3 Abstract |
| 880 | 1 | |6 100-01/(N |a Чобанов, Тодор |a ut | |
| 880 | 1 | 0 | |6 245-02/(N |a Свещените дворци на българските канове |c Тодор Чобанов |
| 880 | 1 | |6 264-03/(N |a София |b Изд-во Агато | |
| 940 | 1 | |f sla | |
| 940 | 1 | |n oe | |
| 999 | |a oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-017539804 | ||
| 942 | 1 | 1 | |c 307.09 |e 22/bsb |f 09021 |g 499 |
Datensatz im Suchindex
| _version_ | 1804139094763110400 |
|---|---|
| adam_text | СЪДЪРЖАНИЕ
· CONTENTS
Предисловие
........................................................................................6
Preface
...............................................................................................6
Уводни думи
.......................................................................................7
Introduction
..........................................................................................7
Глава
І. От
византийски провинции към българско канство
..............................13
Chapter I. From Byzantine provinces to Bulgarian Kanate
....................................13
Глава
II.
Произход на монументалната дворцова архитектура
...........................40
Chapter II. Origins of the pagan Bulgarian monumental architecture
........................40
Глава
III.
Изява
и значение на
монументалната дворцова архитектура
...............102
Chapter III. Manifestation and meaning of the pagan Bulgarian monumental architecture
102
Заключение
.....................................................................................155
Conclusion
...................................................................................— 155
Библиография
..................................................................................165
Bibliography
.................................... .................................................165
Summary
........................................................................................190
Илюстрации
....................................................................................201
Illustrations
......................................................................................201
Тодор Чобаноб
SUMMARY
The present study pursues several ambitious imposing that these territories of Byzantium lost
aims. In the first place, this concerns the question most quickly its stability and as a result, the interest
of the genetic relation extent between the royal of the central power in them lessened. The downfall
architecture and the acquired by the
proto-
of the commodity-money relations, the bringing to
Bulgarians cultural heritage along the Lower ruin of the towns and the fading of many of them,
Danube (i.e. the question of the continuity), pushed out for any length of time a large portion
In the second place comes the question of the of these territories into a kind of periphery, where
origin of the monumental royal architecture the way of living significantly differed from that in
phenomenon, and of its horizontal (in space) the capital and in the rich provinces, including the
and vertical (in time) parallels. The question building practices as well.
of the social, political and cultural significance The points of view of three groups of Bulgarian
of the royal architecture in the First Bulgarian scholars are also presented in detail: of the
Kingdom is considered in the third place. An adherents to the idea that there was continuity,
attempt is made to consider the motivation of of those who oppose to that idea and of scholars
the proto-Bulgarian elite, as some of the most that support borderline cases. Their ideas are
specific peculiarities of the royal architecture of discussed and some of them are subjected to
Danube Bulgaria find their explanation namely constructive criticism. A conclusion is imposing
through its elucidation. that the change in the town live was irrelevant
The question of the continuity is considered to the question of continuity as it embraced
in the first chapter of the study. The clarification in practice all territories of Byzantium
-
both
of the fate of the towns of the Late Antiquity the territories conquered by Bulgarians and
and their transformation into mediaeval ones Arabians, and the provinces that stayed under
is unavoidable in such an analysis. Obviously, Byzantine control.
the accent in this analysis falls on the towns in One major feature brings closer the two
the East Roman Empire. Changes are outlined, conquests: both Bulgarians and Arabians tried
subdued to most miscellaneous factors: to preserve as much as possible the acquired
-
The end of the local self-government and the heritage. The Caliphate was much more favoured
appearance of new elites that were focused on in the course of this adoption of the Byzantine
the center
-
Constantinople; heritage, as in the years of the Umayyads its center
-The imposing of Christianity and the changes was situated in some of the richest Byzantine
it brought in the adjustment of the elite and in provinces
-
Syria and Palestine, where the
the character of the representative architecture; heritage of the Late Antiquity was significantly
-The need of powerful fortification of the town better preserved than in the conquered by the
organisms, and thus, the turning of fortification Bulgarians lands along the Lower Danube,
into one of the major features of town; Although the Bulgarians succeeded until
-
The abandoning of the principles of the the early 9th century to include into their new
town-planning of Antiquity and the eventual territory a series of living towns
-
Silistra,
changes in the urban appearance. Odessos, Mesemvria, Serdica and probably
Particular attention is given to the Balkans as other settlements on the Danube delta
-
it is
a zone of constant Barbarian pressure from as highly improbable that they discovered in these
early date as the 3rd century AD. A conclusion is centers the building experience that had made
190
Сбещените дборци на българските канобе
possible
the construction of the monuments
in Pliska and
Presláv.
There were no adequate
architectural samples in these towns to serve
as a model, neither were any builder s guilds to
realize the significant monuments we see in the
new true Bulgarian centers. The only exceptions
in this direction were the pentagonal towers that
the Bulgarians could have seen in Mesemvria
and in other still existing at the time fortresses,
and could have adopted in the fortification walls
of Pliska.
Although there must have been certain conti¬
nuity in respect to heritage, to the stage of its
preservation, it is hard to perceive in it the
potential that had led to the appearance and
the establishment of the palace models in Pliska
and
Presláv.
The most specific characteristics
of the monuments in the centers of the newly
conquered Bulgarian lands did not find their
manifestation. The
quadri dry
masonries of the
4th century AD were abandoned; the
polychromy
(the alternating with thick reddish layers of
mortar white stone blocks) was out of practice;
the tripartite buildings were out of fashion by
what we see as a stable model of royal building
in the Bulgarian capitals. It is obvious that the
Bulgarian monumental royal architecture should
be related to another cultural zone. Thus, the
First Chapter forewords to the Second Chapter
that is dedicated to the origin of the monumental
royal architecture.
Various opinions had been put forward by a
series of scholars, among whom: S. Vaklinov,
B. Filov, A. Protich, K. Miyatev,
A. Jacobson,
S.
BoyadzhieVjetc.Severalmostperspectivetheories
were formulated: Sasanian, local, Armenian,
and Constantinople s. The Constantinople s
theory should be rejected after the survey of
the evidence. The construction tradition in the
capital of Byzantium is studied perfectly. Tens of
monographs of eminent scholars were dedicated
to it. In the 7th-9th centuries the buildings of the
Byzantine masters from the capital were not
executed in opus quadratum like the Bulgarian
ones; there was no established taste for the
polychromy
of white
quadri
and red mortar.
The cross-domed layouts that replaced those of
the basilicas were dominating as early as in the
time of Justinian the Great. The alternation of
quadri
(much smaller than those used in Pliska
and
Presláv)
with bands of bricks turned into
a trade mark of the builders from the capital,
and their style may be traced far, to monuments
like the Byzantine residence Kasr-ibn-Vardan on
the eastern border of the Empire. It is obvious
that no master of the Constantinople s school
had worked in Pliska. A similar conclusion is
supported by the broad use of non-Byzantine
symbols on the
quadri
of the monumental
buildings. They prove by their original character
that we are speaking of a different building
tradition.
Quite trustworthy is the Syrian-Arabian
theory, formulated by our distinguished scholar
S. Vaklinov. His view on this topic is undoubtedly
true:
...
the beginning of the monumental
architecture of the Arabs presents an exact
culture-historical parallel of our early cultural
history.
(Ваклинов
1977, 95).
If we apply the
concept of Arnold
Toynbee
to this problem and
assume that the building of the state had been
the challenge with which two peoples
-
both
rivals of Byzantium
-
had to deal, then they
would have coped with it identically. The royal
monumental architecture of the Arabs, however,
used to a far fuller extent the Byzantine heritage
of the Late Antiquity. We see there intricate
mosaics and monumental frescoes, obviously
done by Byzantine masters, as early as in the first
monuments. In the palaces of the Umayyads we
find next to the Byzantine the influence of the
Sasanian Iran, across the territories of which the
Caliphate had partially spread after its downfall
towards the mid 7th century. The stucco mortars,
statues, pointed arcs, iwans above the central
entrance, etc. The result was a new eclectic
architecture that bore features of both Byzantine
and Sasanian traditions.
191
Тодор Чобаноб
We .should thickly underline here that should elucidate in detail the question about the
the monuments of the Umayyads were not cultural relations between the two flourishing in
precursors but contemporaries to those in the parallel state organisms. The fact that the fall of
Danube Bulgaria and as such they could not have Danube Bulgaria under Byzantine power almost
given birth to them. May be in this case we can coincide with the starting period of the gradual
talk about common roots, but we should remind downfall of the Abbasids and of the transition
again that the Arabs had conquered the most of the real power into the hands of some local
vital provinces with the best preserved heritage emirs (since mid 9th century), is very interesting,
from the Late Antiquity. The masters from both However, we must go back to the theories
Byzantium and Iran found in them solvent concerning the origin of the monumental royal
patrons, and during the second half of the 7th architecture in Danube Bulgaria. The theory
century until the mid 8th century they built for of the local origin should be discarded too.
them the famous badaya
-
palaces on the brink Fundamental here is the fact that the local
of the desert. However, from the middle of the 8th masonry with
quadri
that had been built until
century the tendency changed together with the about the end of the 6th century differ from the
changes in the ruling of the Caliphate. In
750
the ones in Pliska and
Presláv.
It is well-known that
Persian heritage gained the upper hand, but the the masonries in
quadri
had been very popular
Arabs still possessed the central zone of the old in the areas along the west, north and east coasts
Sasanian Empire. The new dynasty, that of the of the Black Sea, especially in Chersoneses and
Abbasids, decisively broke with the practices of the region of Caucasus. However, the tradition
the Umayyads, moved the capital near Ctesiphon of such building had certainly ceased by the late
and settled permanently in the cities to live 7th century in the lands along the Lower Danube,
together with the people of the same tribe and The last buildings with massive
quadri in
religion. This had been something the Umayyads Chersoneses
-
fortification walls
-
are dated no
could not and did not want to do because they later than the middle of the 6th century. However,
had always been an ethnic minority
-
both in in north-east the
quadri
masonry continued to be
Iran and in the Byzantine provinces, where they practiced, including in the lands along the coast
resided. On the other hand they had been elite
-
in Lazica, which was under strong influence
from the desert in their nature that had always of the Byzantine provincial culture, where single
praised their Bedouin roots. A similar braking churches built by
quadri
masonry continued to
with the old model had happened in Bulgaria be built until the conquest of the Arabs. The zone
towards the end of the 9th century, when with the of most active application of
quadri
was the true
adoption of Christianity the capital was moved Caucasus where the masonry with accurately
from Pliska to
Presláv
as a symbol of the general cut stone blocks continued throughout Late
change of the model. Antiquity. This tradition continued during the
With the rise of the Persized Abbasids on Early Middle Ages too.
the throne of the Caliphate in the middle of the A monument was erected there in
570
that is
8th century started the golden era of Persia ! the most probable candidate either for a direct
according to R. Frye. It is no accident that this predecessor of the monumental building along
Golden Era coincided in time with the Golden the Lower Danube or for its
inspirer,
at least.
Century of Simeon in Bulgaria. Undoubtedly, This is the stronghold of Derbent the building
similar tendencies defined the development of characteristics of which undoubtedly get it
the Early Medieval organisms in the different closer to the buildings in Pliska and
Presláv,
areas of the Mediterranean. Future studies The resemblances are many
-
starting with the
192
Сбещеншпе дборци на
българските канобе
rectangular
layout of the central fortifications,
the massive blocks of the masonry that are
arranged in accordance with the binder-loiter
system, the usage of round and rectangular
towers. One parallel of the monuments along the
Lower Danube particular interest is the shape of
the gates and their decoration. A statue of lion
close both in style and in dimensions to the one
discovered in Pliska is still standing above the
arc of one of them, while a pair of rams, which
had been worshipped by the Iranians as animals
of good lack together with the lions, is standing
next to another gate. Looking closely at the pairs
of animals at some of the gates of Derbent, the
unprejudiced observer will certainly wonder
if Khan Omurtag had had namely the same in
front of his
aul
on the river of
Ticha,
evidenced
by the inscription of Chatalare. The walls of
Derbent bear over
500
building symbols left by
their master-builders. Although they are not the
same as the ones from Pliska and
Presláv,
their
presence speaks of similar cultural traditions.
Derbent had not been the only monument in
that part of the region that was built by Sasanian
Iran. Two older ramparts made of earth and
bricks that had blocked two important passes
are located in the south of it. It seems that the
line of the passes did not stand in the way of
this intense fortification activity. Y.
Harmattá
deciphered the traditional Sasanian building
formula en
Bahrãn
kird (Bahran built it) in
an unknown so far in Bulgaria inscription on a
quadric stone block found near the settlement
of
Humara
in
1978.
This formula is well-know
from the tens of inscriptions by the Sasanian
officials on the walls of Derbent
(Harmattá
1996,
82-83;
Гаджиев, Касумова
2006, 115-116).
The
stylistic peculiarities of the inscription, if the
deciphering of Y.
Harmattá
is accurate, define it
to be from the second half of the 5th century, and
more precisely
-
from the rule of Peroz
(457-
484).
Having no doubts about its authenticity,
M. Gadzhiev and S. Kasumova think that it may
be referred to
569
and they quote the evidence
of Menander about the Byzantine emissary in
the court of the
Khan Istemi Zemarh
who had
been warned on his return to Constantinople to
beware of a four thousand Persian military unit
that was dislocated along the course of the river
of Kuban
(Гаджиев, Касумова
2006,116).
The influence of Sasanian Iran on the proto-
Bulgarians is acknowledged not only by the
authors of the theory
-
B. Filov and A. Protich
-
but also by S. Vaklinov who accepts that
namely this influence had established in the
proto-Bulgarian aristocracy the taste towards
the heavy, ceremonial and representative forms
in all arts. This culture [the Sasanian]
-
writes
S. Vaklinov
-
gave tune not only to the tastes
of the entire Middle and Near East, but also
to the official royal art in Europe as well as in
Byzantium
(Ваклинов
1977, 92-93).
P. Brown
reached a similar conclusion by saying that
Byzantium and Persia attracted each other in
respect to culture (Brown
1999, 181).
Although
there was a permanent undeclared war in this
region, one of the zones in which the cultures
of both empires interlaced on fertile grounds
namely in Caucasus. They gave birth to complex
but strong phenomena like the Armenian and
Georgian architecture of the Early Middle Ages.
The possible projection of the Iranian
influence on Lower Danube also through the
ethnic belonging to the Iranian peoples of some
important part of the proto-Bulgarian elite is
presented in Chapter Two as a part of the study.
Some badly known in Bulgaria monuments are
given as a proof, including res-gestae of Shapur I
situated beside his representation as a horseman
in relief in Naqsh-e
Rostám.
Centuries later Khan
Tervei
-
beside the
Madara
Horseman
-
and
other Bulgarian rulers placed their inscriptions.
V. Beshevliev
-
the distinguished connoisseur
of the stone inscriptions
-
also believed that
the proto-Bulgarians started their tradition in
writing influenced by the Persians as early as
in Caucasus. It seems that a late reminiscence
of the Persian formulae may exist in those
193
Тодор Чобаноб
used in Danube Bulgaria, as there are many
similar moments. In their contents and in a
series of other peculiarities the proto-Bulgarian
inscriptions in Greek are much closer to the
Sasanian and the Caucasian than the famous
Orhon-Yenisey inscriptions, as is traditionally
accepted, disregarding important characteristics
of the culture of the Turks in the Khaganate. One
of these characteristics is that their tradition to
place inscriptions developed under Sogdian
(Iranian) influence.
A survey on some important monuments
from the circle of the artistic metal was carried
out in connection with the study of the Sasanian
theory. They prove in their turn the powerful
influence of the Iranian culture that spread
out far beyond the borders of the empire. The
treasure of Pereshchepina is the largest find
of luxury Sasanian vessels from the period.
Sasanian objects came together with the
Bulgarians in the lands along the Lower Danube,
such as the known so far second belt adornment
from
Madara,
a profane applique now in the
Shumen Museum of History and the belt end-
piece with a representation of a baby duck in the
collections of the National Museum of History,
Sofia. By the way, representations of ducks with
bows in medallions had been a popular motif on
the Byzantine ceramics in Crimea
(Ваклинов
1977, 67).
The treasure from Nagy-Saint-Miklos
should also be included to the objects influenced
by the Iranian culture as on some of the vessels
in the treasure are seen scenes with pan-Iranian
and Zoroastrian motifs. The Bulgarian affiliation
of this treasure is contested by some foreign
scholars but its is beyond any doubt in the
complex consideration of the proto-Bulgarian
culture, which receipted Iranian influence
through Caucasus much more than that of the
Avars. The proto-Bulgarian pagan sanctuaries
in the lands along the Lower Danube contribute
to such a conclusion. These temples originate
undoubtedly from the Zoroastrian temples
of fire, and their layouts had been popular in
Caucasus as early as during the period between
the 1st and the 2nd centuries AD. They are
discovered in various places that were connected
with the history of the proto-Bulgarians like the
settlements of
Humara
andMayatskoe (Fig.
125;
122
r).
The
Madara
Horseman should undoubtedly
be included to the monuments from the lands
along the Lower Danube that were influenced
by the Iranian cultural circle. In fact, the Iranian
influence is strongest in it and its realization as a
single monument is a serious argument in favour
of the thesis that it had been the work of visiting
master-craftsmen from Caucasus, or directly
from Iran. By the way, a similar case may be
found with the Arabs as well
-
the statue of the
scandalous Caliph
Al-
Valid from the palace of
Mafjar in the present day Jordan, which shows
him dressed as a Sasanian prince. Attention
should be paid on the fact that those who erected
the statue did not want to leave things to chance
and in order to strengthen its message they
fixed the statue on a pediment with two lions in
front and hung above it a chain with pendants,
just like the one that had hung above the throne
of the shahanshah in Ctesiphon. By the way,
similar propaganda subject matter, but with
the expressive means of the Byzantine fresco,
had been realized in the famous Kasr-Amra,
where the overpowered by the Arabians kings
were painted on a wall in the
aul.
The political
influence of Sasanian Iran in the Near East had
been so durable that the state coat-of-arms of
the dynasty
-
a star with a crescent
-
that passed
into the Arabian Caliphate is present even today
on the flags of most of the states in the region.
It should be concluded as a result of the
analysis carried out that the Sasanian theory is
laid on a most serious fundament of facts and
cannot be rejected due to the arguments pointed
out so far, namely that the Iranian monuments
were far form the proto-Bulgarian both in time
and space. It should be concluded for once
that living in the region of Caucasus the Proto-
194
Сбещените дВорци на българските канобе
Bulgarians had made contacts with the Iranian
culture. If we agree that part of their elite had
been of Iranian origin, as had been the situation
in most
о
the peoples in Caucasus, it would have
been logical to have the notions of representative
and elite formed under the influence of Iran. The
other variant would have been the Iranization
of the elite, which will explain the appearance
of many rather popular Persian names like
Asparuh, Zabergan and Bezmer among the
proto-Bulgarians. The evidence given by a series
of Araian and Persian authors who wrote in the
period between the 9th and the
11*
centuries
-
Al-Masudi, At-Tabari, Hamza Isfahani, Al-
Baladzuri, Ibn-Horadbeh, etc.
-
may be quoted
in favour of the idea about the contacts between
the Sasanids and the Caucasian peoples,
including the Bulgarians.
Although the cultural influence of the
Sasanids on the proto-Bulgarians to have also
been profaned to a certain extent by its passing
through the region of Caucasus, it was doubtlessly
significant and continued to be apparent,
although gradually declining to
865.
However,
some of its cultural manifestations
-
like the
stone inscriptions
-
had continued after that
date. It is certain that in the pagan period of the
Danube Bulgaria these old traditions were used
by the Bulgarian elite to stand up against the
different
-
to the establishment of their own
state-political model, propagated by the original
monumental building that could not have been
and was not imitation of the Byzantine.
The manifestation of the monumental royal
architecture is considered in the Chapter Three
of the here presented study. The question of the
beginning of Pliska is considered in particular.
The concept that it was created as a center
immediately after
680
is proved by various
arguments. Key argument here is the complex
building history of the royal center, as well as of
the numerous building phases in the construction
of some buildings like the Little Palace. One
other consideration that was pointed out in
favour of the thesis of the foundation of Pliska
in
680
is the closeness to the
Madara
Horseman
and the related to it religions complexes. It is
not an accident that the so-called second belt
adornment, which was associated with the first
immigration wave of proto-Bulgarians in the
south of Danube immediately after
680,
was
found namely here. Other significant arguments
are the centers of the camp type around Pliska,
like the
aul
appearing near the stud-farm
Kabiyuk. This can be explained by the arrival
of large groups of proto-Bulgarians only, which
happened immediately after the war of
680.
The peculiarities of the earliest period of the
existence of Pliska are outlined, and a stand is
taken that Pliska was thought to be a center
with three belts: outer, inner and a citadel (the
residence of the khan). This opinion is supported
by the discovered traces of wooden fence around
the Citadel, before the brick one and of similar
layout. At the same time Pliska was not the only
founded town and did not exist in isolation.
The discoveries in Kabiyuk during the last few
years confirm the old idea of S. Vaklinov that
two other settlements had existed next to Pliska
and that the three settlements are forming a line
and respond to the idea of the tripartite state,
reflected in the description of sarakta in the
Hambarli inscription.
Parallels from Central Asia and Iran may
be pointed pout to clarify the character of the
layout of Pliska. The parallels from Central
Asia seem to be of special perspective as many
centers of similar layout existed during early
mediaeval times and are known as roustak.
The most important feature of the latter was
the gathering of many settlements situated
at a fixed distance from one another around
a water source. The roustak settlements had
been fortified by common means of defense
-
ramparts
-
but the larger par of the territory
had remained as a free space between the single
nuclei. The other common with some of the
Central Asian organisms feature, apart from the
195
fWf
Тодор Чобаноб
tripartite
division
of the settlements, was the palace that had been rectangular. It is possible
manifested preference given to the rectangular to suppose on the basis of parallels from a vast
or exactly outlined with fortification spaces, area
-
Caucasus, Iran, Central Asia and Pakistan
divided by two road axes along the four cardinal
-
that one or the other of the round wooden
points. Similar principles of town-planning buildings had been a cult one. The fact that none
were also characteristic for some parts of Iran, of the monumental versions of royal palaces built
The example with the town of Gour/Firuzabad of stone were of circular layout supports such
is very indicative as the town had been a military a conclusion, all the more, a round sanctuary
residence of Ardashir I. The town had had made of stone had been built in the settlement of
three belts and a circular layout and was never Durankulak and the circular layout had not been
compactly built-up. unfamiliar to the proto-Bulgarian paganism.
The question of the construction in wood An important part of the pagan cultural
in Pliska was considered in a similar way. The tradition that had found its manifestation in the
idea that it did not have the true character of lands along the lower Danube were the auls of
a building-in-wood culture seems to win its the proto-Bulgarians. The careful analysis of the
recognition as otherwise it should have existed written sources, and most of all of the domestic
for a long period of time, like for example in inscriptions of Khan Omurtag, combined with
Novgorod. It persisted in the latter town until the archaeological data, allow us to define
15th century, while in Pliska it had been replaced them as military-administrative settlements,
by stone as early as during the early 9th century, In the earlier stage of their existence the
at least in the representative buildings. It should military function had predominated. One other
be accepted on the basis of various arguments important characteristic of these settlements
that the building-in-wood had had a temporary was the existence in them of khan s homes
character and had been a substitute to the stone
-
residences. In the time of Omurtag, however,
one. This was due to the fact that during the we see the khan permanently settled in his old
Early Middle Ages the elites of both Europe and home
-
Pliska
-
which means that members of
the Near East considered representative only the higher aristocracy should have resided in
the monumental building in stone and bricks, the rest of the auls. The trinity in power
-
the
This model of royal architecture, imposed by the khan, the kapkhan and the ichirgu-boyl
-
had
traditions of both Byzantium and Iran, had been resided in the most important of the auls. Thus,
leading for the Bulgarians of Lower Danube, for monumental royal buildings were built in the
the Francs in Central and West Europe and for latter. The make of the auls more complex, as well
the Umayyads in the Near East. We can accept for as the concentration in them of both population
the proto-Bulgarians that during their living for and economic activities, turned two of them
centuries in the north of Caucasus they had been into true cities
-
these were the capitals Pliska
under the influence of the Persian traditions that and
Presláv.
The urban processes in Central Asia
were distinguished by their taste for the heavy passed seemingly: the
shahrestan
-
the fortified
and representative forms in all arts. town core, around which were organized the
The considering of two wooden buildings
-
economic activities and which formed the town
the so-called yurt in front of the citadel and the periphery {rabad) that inscribed in a bordered
newly discovered big yurt
-
lead to interesting by long walls large empty space
-
was built
conclusions. They were most probably royal around the citadel
(dez).
dwelling buildings. However, they do not Two models from the Early Middle Ages
reproduce the layout of the Attila s wooden may be compared with the auls of Low Danube
196
Сбегценшпе дборци на българските кано8е
řfft
Bulgaria. These were the pfalz-es
-
residences of
the Carolings
-
and the out-of-town residences
{badaya) of the Umayyads. All three cases
-
auls,
pfalz-es and badaya
-
indicate close culture-
historical situations. These were monuments of
establishing elites that found inspiration in the
heritage of the Late Antiquity. Historically, these
were three close solutions to one and the same
problem.
However, there were significant differences
along with the similarities. One of them is
the ascertainment that Karl the Great was
permanently settled in one residence
-
Aachen
-
as late as in the late 8th century, while the
Umayyads used in fact the badaya to spend
their free time. The Khan in the Lowe Danube
resided in Pliska only, while the rest of the auls
accommodated other members of the elite. In
contrast to the pfalz-es of the Carolings, the
Bulgarian auls were not connected with the
gathering of taxes in money.
One other important difference was that the
monuments of the Carolings originated directly
from the Roman-Byzantine architectural
models
-
the Carolingian renaissance
-
while
the badaya inherited the model of the Roman-
Byzantine provincial estate. Byzantine models
had not been followed in Danube Bulgaria at least
to the adoption of Christianity. The architecture
reproduced original monuments with roots in
the architecture of Caucasus.
The so-called Palace of Krum stands out
as the indisputably first monumental building
in Pliska. It remains the largest in dimensions
building of the Bulgarian Middle Ages, and is
among the leading ones in Europe being bigger
than the Throne Palaces of
Theodorich in
Ravenna and of Karl the Great in Aachen. The
early phase of the water-supply and drainage
implements in Pliska was probably done in
parallel to its building. The idea of S. Vaklinov
that a building under the east wing of the Little
Palace had functioned at the same time should
be accepted. This building should have been the
real home of the khan, while the Palace of Krum
had played the role of a Throne Hall.
WeprovedbyvariousargumentsthatthePalace
of Krum had been built entirely of stone and
bricks, at that, the bricks had most probably been
used for the roofing rather than for the walls. We
are able to offer a reliable reconstruction on the
basis of the numerous Arabic parallels
-
palaces
of the same dimensions and layout. It had been
two-storey and the building had been organized
around a small square courtyard. It is possible
that it contained more than one reception hall
as such examples exist in the architecture of the
Umayyads. The rest of the rooms had served as
storages for food, weapons, wine, etc.
The Palace of Krum is dated for now mainly
towards the end of the 8th century. However,
such an opinion should be revised as the
Arabian ones were built in the period between
690
and
750.
With the downfall of the Umayyads
and the rise of the Abbasids at the end of this
period the Arabian-Persian elites finally settled
into towns, and the out-of-town residences
with a square layout like the one of the Palace
of Krum stopped being built. The disappearance
of this architecture model since
750
urges us to
reconsider the dating of the Palace of Krum. The
date of its built should be placed in a much earlier
period than the accepted at the moment, namely
a date in the time of the rule of Khan
Tervei
as
he was the only of the rulers in the 8th century
of whom we know that had had the necessary
resources for such an undertaking. The power
of Danube Bulgaria in
Terveľs
time yielded
not only the Palace of Krum, i.e. the Palace of
Tervei,
but also the Horseman of
Madara.
These
two monuments should have been created at
one and the same time as a part of the dynastic
propaganda of the Bulgarian ruler, who had to
dress in stone the great acknowledgement he
received from Byzantium.
The study of the monuments from Pliska
and
Presláv
leads us to the conclusion that
in the pagan period of Danube Bulgaria the
197
Тодор Чобаноб
representative buildings were built in accordance
with an established model. The latter should have
found its manifestation in a series of monuments
sometime since the second half of the 8th century,
or may be earlier, during the wood phase. These
were the known in the literature tripartite
buildings . The following monuments in Pliska
belonged to the latter: the two wings of the Little
Palace in Pliska during all their phases, the Throne
Hall of Omurtag, the Boyar s House, the tripartite
building at the west bordering wall of the Citadel
and the Palace of the Archbishop. In
Presláv
the
tripartite layout is seen in monuments like the
so-called administrative building and the Place
of the Patriarch. Under certain conditions, the
two wings of the Palace of
Presláv
in its various
phases may also be included to the buildings of
that layout. The representative building from the
aul
near the village of Tsar Krum may also be
included to the tripartite type of buildings. The
preliminary data indicates the existence of such
a building in the Drustur
aul,
too. The latter was
monumentally build-up by Omurtag but was
most probably used as a military point as early
as since
680.
The tripartite buildings may conditionally be
divided into two groups: Throne Palaces and
Representative dwelling buildings. The palaces
in Pliska and
Presláv
belong to the first group,
while all the rest belong to the second. This leads
us to the suggestion that the second group was
the chief one and that the first one was )ust an
isolated case. This division id conditional and is
done to facilitate the search for the roots and the
parallels of the phenomenon.
The first group
-
the Throne Palaces
-
may be
associated with various monuments across the
entire Mediterranean area and the Near East.
They were most often compared to the famous
Palace of Magnaure in Constantinople. However,
this latter building had not been discovered
yet, but the Turkish scholars accepted recently
that it had been a cross-domed building that
had been erected in the tome of Justinian the
Great. It had probably been done in the typical
for the architecture school of the capital mixed
masonry of brick bands and small stone
quadri,
like the one we see in the preserved Byzantine
palace of Kasr-ibn-Vardan, situated on the past
Byzantine-Iranian border, but almost certainly
built by master-craftsmen from the capital.
The reception hall of Al-Mundir near to
Aman
is the closest parallel to the Bulgarian monuments.
Another interesting parallel is the palace in
Oviedo
that was turned into a church in the 13th
century. The most perspective is, however, the
comparison with the Armenian palaces in Dvin,
Arouch and Zvartnots that date from a period
of time between the 5th and the 7th centuries
and which are themselves genetically related to
the Sasanian tradition. The question about the
predominance of either Byzantine or Caucasian-
Persian influence in the tripartite division of the
throne halls and in the exedra shaping, remains
disputable. It is not so important to solve this
problem as certain cultural unification in the two
fundamental traditions
-
those of Byzantine and
Iran
-
was established during the Late Antiquity,
as far as it concerned the royal ceremonial and
the related to it manifestations of art.
The study of the second group
-
of the
representative dwelling tripartite buildings
-
leads us to interesting conclusions. Their model
did not leave the Roman-Byzantine models. The
alternating square and rectangular rooms, as well
as the division into three bands of longitudinally
situated connected rooms were not among
the characteristic techniques of the Byzantine
architecture, too. However, they may be seen in the
representative secular architecture of the region
of Caucasus, Central Asia and Iran, and namely in
these regions should be sought for parallels.
The monumental architecture of Danube
Bulgaria in the period of the First Bulgarian
Kingdom had been a complex cultural
phenomenon that was in harmony with the
general objective laws of the Early Middle
Ages. Its establishment was directly connected
198
Сбещените дборци на българските канобе
to the establishment of the authority of the
Bulgarian state and its elite. It started and was
realized as architecture of the power and was
genetically related to the representative military
architecture and to the pre-Christian cult
architecture. During the pagan period of our
history, the royal architecture served as a means
for the ideological opposition to Byzantium
and for the establishment of the differences.
Specific models that were not borrowed from
the Byzantine ones were intentionally sought
and realized as architecture was understood
as a kind of propaganda. The look of the
representative buildings with their massive
white masonry in stone
quadri
and the reddish
mortars, with their facades without divisions
and decoration including animal sculptures, had
been a manifestation of a tradition that differed
from the Byzantine.
The extensive research on the region of
Caucasus and on the monuments from the Early
Middle Ages in it will inevitably lead us to the
conclusion that the roots of the Lower Danube
monuments and the related phenomena that had
accompanied them should both be sought there.
A view of this kind is particularly perspective due
to the fact that the Iran-Byzantium opposition
in that region had turned it into a zone of a
syncretic culture.
It is not an accident that certain particularities
that get them closer to the monuments from the
Lower Danube are to be found namely among
the monuments of the Saltovo-Mayatska culture.
The same building marks like the ones we find in
Pliska and
Presláv
were known there, together
with the practice of
quadri
masonry. We found
exact correspondence when applying the Old
Iranian measuring system to the fortress of Sarkel
and to some buildings in the lands along the
Lower Danube. The results of the measurement
of the pagan temples are most perspective for
Pliska as similar to them had functioned in the
region of Caucasus.
The conclusion is simple, the master-
craftsmen that built the single monuments
(those from the Danube Bulgaria and those from
the Khazar s Khaganate) belonged to one and
the same building tradition. The connections
most probably were never broken completely
and contacts were established both by Black Sea
and by land. Byzantium itself contributed to that
as both Armenians and Georgians had been part
of the empire and were settling on the Balkans
constantly.
However, the building and cultural traditions
become gradually drawn apart. This was due to
various factors, the most important of which was
the powerful influence of Byzantium on Danube
Bulgaria. During the early 9th century the elite
realized that this influence, and its Christian
nature in particular, maybe of a lethal danger for
the state that had led a battle for survival with
the ambitious and brave Byzantine Emperor
Constantine
V during the larger portion of the
8th century. The last pagan rulers chased the
Christians in attempt to set limits to the spread
of Christianity. The state propaganda that
was realized by the erection of representative
buildings, strengthened. The old pagan building
traditions found their last prosperity in the times
of the khans Omurtag, Malamir and Persian,
eventually Bulgaria joined to the family of the
Christian states.
The royal architecture turned into Christian
royal architecture, and the temples of the
victorious Christian faith were bigger and more
beautiful than the palaces. According to Arnold
Toynbee,
the Bulgarian-Byzantine dialogue
started and led to the final formation of the
Christian Orthodox civilization.
199
|
| any_adam_object | 1 |
| author | Čobanov, Todor 1977- |
| author_GND | (DE-588)136321887 |
| author_facet | Čobanov, Todor 1977- |
| author_role | aut |
| author_sort | Čobanov, Todor 1977- |
| author_variant | t č tč |
| building | Verbundindex |
| bvnumber | BV035483292 |
| callnumber-first | D - World History |
| callnumber-label | DR49 |
| callnumber-raw | DR49.24 |
| callnumber-search | DR49.24 |
| callnumber-sort | DR 249.24 |
| callnumber-subject | DR - Balkan Peninsula |
| ctrlnum | (OCoLC)318921153 (DE-599)BVBBV035483292 |
| era | Geschichte 700-1000 gnd |
| era_facet | Geschichte 700-1000 |
| format | Book |
| fullrecord | <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>03217nam a2200769 c 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">BV035483292</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-604</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20090519 </controlfield><controlfield tag="007">t</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">090512s2008 ab|| |||| 00||| bul d</controlfield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">9789548761826</subfield><subfield code="9">978-954-8761-82-6</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(OCoLC)318921153</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)BVBBV035483292</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-604</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">bul</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="049" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-12</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">DR49.24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">7,12</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">6,15</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="6">880-01</subfield><subfield code="a">Čobanov, Todor</subfield><subfield code="d">1977-</subfield><subfield code="e">Verfasser</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)136321887</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="6">880-02</subfield><subfield code="a">Sveštenite dvorci na bǎlgarskite kanove</subfield><subfield code="c">Todor Čobanov</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="6">880-03</subfield><subfield code="a">Sofija</subfield><subfield code="b">Izdat. Agató</subfield><subfield code="c">2008</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">304 S.</subfield><subfield code="b">zahlr. Ill., Kt.</subfield><subfield code="c">29 cm</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="490" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Archeologija i architektura</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">In kyrill. Schr., bulg. - Zsfassung in engl. Sprache</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="648" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Geschichte 700-1000</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Excavations (Archaeology) / Danube River Valley</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Excavations (Archaeology) / Bulgaria</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Palaces / Danube River Valley</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Palaces / Bulgaria</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Funde</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Excavations (Archaeology)</subfield><subfield code="z">Bulgaria</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Excavations (Archaeology)</subfield><subfield code="z">Danube River Valley</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Palaces</subfield><subfield code="z">Bulgaria</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Palaces</subfield><subfield code="z">Danube River Valley</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Khan</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4213024-4</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Palast</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4044394-2</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Ausgrabung</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4129464-6</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Danube River Valley / Antiquities</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Bulgaria / Antiquities</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Bulgaria</subfield><subfield code="x">Antiquities</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Danube River Valley</subfield><subfield code="x">Antiquities</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Untere Donau</subfield><subfield code="z">Region</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4286969-9</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Bulgarien</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4008866-2</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Bulgarien</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4008866-2</subfield><subfield code="D">g</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Khan</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4213024-4</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">Palast</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4044394-2</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="3"><subfield code="a">Ausgrabung</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4129464-6</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Untere Donau</subfield><subfield code="z">Region</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4286969-9</subfield><subfield code="D">g</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="5">DE-604</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Untere Donau</subfield><subfield code="z">Region</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4286969-9</subfield><subfield code="D">g</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Palast</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4044394-2</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="1" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">Ausgrabung</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4129464-6</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="1" ind2="3"><subfield code="a">Geschichte 700-1000</subfield><subfield code="A">z</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="5">DE-604</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="m">Digitalisierung BSBMuenchen</subfield><subfield code="q">application/pdf</subfield><subfield code="u">http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=017539804&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA</subfield><subfield code="3">Inhaltsverzeichnis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="m">Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen</subfield><subfield code="q">application/pdf</subfield><subfield code="u">http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=017539804&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA</subfield><subfield code="3">Abstract</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="880" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="6">100-01/(N</subfield><subfield code="a">Чобанов, Тодор</subfield><subfield code="a">ut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="880" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="6">245-02/(N</subfield><subfield code="a">Свещените дворци на българските канове</subfield><subfield code="c">Тодор Чобанов</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="880" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="6">264-03/(N</subfield><subfield code="a">София</subfield><subfield code="b">Изд-во Агато</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="940" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="f">sla</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="940" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="n">oe</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="999" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-017539804</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="942" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="c">307.09</subfield><subfield code="e">22/bsb</subfield><subfield code="f">09021</subfield><subfield code="g">499</subfield></datafield></record></collection> |
| geographic | Danube River Valley / Antiquities Bulgaria / Antiquities Bulgaria Antiquities Danube River Valley Antiquities Untere Donau Region (DE-588)4286969-9 gnd Bulgarien (DE-588)4008866-2 gnd |
| geographic_facet | Danube River Valley / Antiquities Bulgaria / Antiquities Bulgaria Antiquities Danube River Valley Antiquities Untere Donau Region Bulgarien |
| id | DE-604.BV035483292 |
| illustrated | Illustrated |
| indexdate | 2024-07-09T21:38:37Z |
| institution | BVB |
| isbn | 9789548761826 |
| language | Bulgarian |
| oai_aleph_id | oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-017539804 |
| oclc_num | 318921153 |
| open_access_boolean | |
| owner | DE-12 |
| owner_facet | DE-12 |
| physical | 304 S. zahlr. Ill., Kt. 29 cm |
| publishDate | 2008 |
| publishDateSearch | 2008 |
| publishDateSort | 2008 |
| publisher | Izdat. Agató |
| record_format | marc |
| series2 | Archeologija i architektura |
| spelling | 880-01 Čobanov, Todor 1977- Verfasser (DE-588)136321887 aut 880-02 Sveštenite dvorci na bǎlgarskite kanove Todor Čobanov 880-03 Sofija Izdat. Agató 2008 304 S. zahlr. Ill., Kt. 29 cm txt rdacontent n rdamedia nc rdacarrier Archeologija i architektura In kyrill. Schr., bulg. - Zsfassung in engl. Sprache Geschichte 700-1000 gnd rswk-swf Excavations (Archaeology) / Danube River Valley Excavations (Archaeology) / Bulgaria Palaces / Danube River Valley Palaces / Bulgaria Funde Excavations (Archaeology) Bulgaria Excavations (Archaeology) Danube River Valley Palaces Bulgaria Palaces Danube River Valley Khan (DE-588)4213024-4 gnd rswk-swf Palast (DE-588)4044394-2 gnd rswk-swf Ausgrabung (DE-588)4129464-6 gnd rswk-swf Danube River Valley / Antiquities Bulgaria / Antiquities Bulgaria Antiquities Danube River Valley Antiquities Untere Donau Region (DE-588)4286969-9 gnd rswk-swf Bulgarien (DE-588)4008866-2 gnd rswk-swf Bulgarien (DE-588)4008866-2 g Khan (DE-588)4213024-4 s Palast (DE-588)4044394-2 s Ausgrabung (DE-588)4129464-6 s Untere Donau Region (DE-588)4286969-9 g DE-604 Geschichte 700-1000 z Digitalisierung BSBMuenchen application/pdf http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=017539804&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA Inhaltsverzeichnis Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen application/pdf http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=017539804&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA Abstract 100-01/(N Чобанов, Тодор ut 245-02/(N Свещените дворци на българските канове Тодор Чобанов 264-03/(N София Изд-во Агато |
| spellingShingle | Čobanov, Todor 1977- Sveštenite dvorci na bǎlgarskite kanove Excavations (Archaeology) / Danube River Valley Excavations (Archaeology) / Bulgaria Palaces / Danube River Valley Palaces / Bulgaria Funde Excavations (Archaeology) Bulgaria Excavations (Archaeology) Danube River Valley Palaces Bulgaria Palaces Danube River Valley Khan (DE-588)4213024-4 gnd Palast (DE-588)4044394-2 gnd Ausgrabung (DE-588)4129464-6 gnd |
| subject_GND | (DE-588)4213024-4 (DE-588)4044394-2 (DE-588)4129464-6 (DE-588)4286969-9 (DE-588)4008866-2 |
| title | Sveštenite dvorci na bǎlgarskite kanove |
| title_auth | Sveštenite dvorci na bǎlgarskite kanove |
| title_exact_search | Sveštenite dvorci na bǎlgarskite kanove |
| title_full | Sveštenite dvorci na bǎlgarskite kanove Todor Čobanov |
| title_fullStr | Sveštenite dvorci na bǎlgarskite kanove Todor Čobanov |
| title_full_unstemmed | Sveštenite dvorci na bǎlgarskite kanove Todor Čobanov |
| title_short | Sveštenite dvorci na bǎlgarskite kanove |
| title_sort | svestenite dvorci na balgarskite kanove |
| topic | Excavations (Archaeology) / Danube River Valley Excavations (Archaeology) / Bulgaria Palaces / Danube River Valley Palaces / Bulgaria Funde Excavations (Archaeology) Bulgaria Excavations (Archaeology) Danube River Valley Palaces Bulgaria Palaces Danube River Valley Khan (DE-588)4213024-4 gnd Palast (DE-588)4044394-2 gnd Ausgrabung (DE-588)4129464-6 gnd |
| topic_facet | Excavations (Archaeology) / Danube River Valley Excavations (Archaeology) / Bulgaria Palaces / Danube River Valley Palaces / Bulgaria Funde Excavations (Archaeology) Bulgaria Excavations (Archaeology) Danube River Valley Palaces Bulgaria Palaces Danube River Valley Khan Palast Ausgrabung Danube River Valley / Antiquities Bulgaria / Antiquities Bulgaria Antiquities Danube River Valley Antiquities Untere Donau Region Bulgarien |
| url | http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=017539804&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=017539804&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT cobanovtodor svestenitedvorcinabalgarskitekanove |