the ‘outside’ other 79
the captives”), by the so-called Successor of Th eophanes/Th eophanes
Continuatus (he ascribed the return of the captives to God’s inter-
vention), as well as by John Skylitzes, confi rm that Omurtag kept his
promise and fulfi lled the clause provision pointed out above. However,
the mentioned authors reveal only part of the truth as they omit men-
tioning that not all captives returned to the Byzantine Empire as, for
various reasons, some of them stayed and lived in Bulgaria.^250
Th erefore, from a confessional point of view, the Other (with the
exception of the Bulgars, because the otherness in their society was
highly radicalized for a certain period, namely in confessional aspect)
was not totally rejected since he/it was necessary for the own identifi ca-
tion in the search of a higher homogeneity in these confederations. For
that reason the introduction of the world religions in their societies
related to the foreign in general, had economic and religious reasons
as well as identifi cation and political reasons. Even among the Bulgars,
however, a more tolerant attitude towards the confessional otherness
was observed ca. mid-ninth century as well as a decrease of the radical-
ization of the attitude towards the Other confessing some of the mono-
theistic religions, which became apparent through the deeds of the
Bulgar aristocracy rather than its words. Th e sources are silent about
the persecutions of Christians in Bulgaria aft er the 830s but mention
the propaganda of Islam and probably Judaism in this part of Europe.
Such propaganda is referred to in such sources as “Th e Answers of
Pope Nicholas I to the Questions of Knyaz Boris-Michael”.^251 Th e mis-
sions to the Khazars and the Bulgars in the early 860s, which were sent
by various representatives of Islam, Judaism, and Christianity, confi rm
the existence of a struggle for superiority in this part of Europe that
resulted in a struggle to win the hearts and minds of the local popula-
tion. Th e Byzantine patriarch Photius was beyond any doubt one of
the architects of this strategy.^252
Why did the Bulgars still break the general rule and accept the reli-
gion of their main opponent, the Byzantine Empire? Th e answer (or
(^250) Nikolova 1995, 190.
(^251) Latinski izvori 1960, Ch. 103: “You are asking what should be done with the
impious books which, as have been reporting, have been introduced to you by the
Saracens and are now in your [country].. .”; Ch. 104: “You are claiming that by a
certain Jew, you do not know whether he is a Christian or a pagan, many have been
baptized in your fatherland.. .”. 252
For the Photius’ model of a ruler converted to Christianity see, Giuzelev 1985,
19–31; Gjuzelev 1987, 34–42. For the missions see, Shepard 2002, 230–247.