82 chapter one
southern, western and northwestern direction that turned the Bulgars
into masters of almost the entire Byzantine West, as mentioned earlier.
Dominating over quite a high number of Christian subjects and large
territories overloaded with Roman imperial and Christian memory,
aft er the mid-ninth century the Bulgar aristocrats had, in my opinion,
a single choice: either to persist opposing the old Bulgar deities to
Christianity, or to embrace the Christian faith. And patriarch Photius,
together with the intellectual circle around him, developed ideas about
massive Christian missionary activity initiated by Constantinople in
the east, north, and northwest thus responding to Roman missionary
and political ambitions. Th e following fact, however—on this matter
knyaz Boris-Michael addresses not only the Byzantines but also the
Eastern Franks (the Germans) and later on the Papacy,—suggests that
his choice was determined to a certain extent by the political benefi ts
that were in fact completely in accordance with early medieval practice
and tradition that was especially typical for the Great Steppe. Knyaz
Boris’s trimming, however, was facilitated by the geographic location
of Bulgaria whose territories in the second half of the ninth century
were situated both in the diocese of the Constantinople patriarch and
under the jurisdiction of the Roman pope (a considerable part of Illyr-
icum was part of the Bulgar khan’s domain). Probably it was the fact
that tipped the balance towards the choice of Christianity—a religion
which, beyond any doubt, was familiar but still a foreign one—for an
offi cial religion of the Bulgarian polity.
Th e attempt of combining writings and dates at one place, on one
and the same material, was one of the ‘side eff ects’ of contact with the
sedentary civilizations and their religious doctrines. Th is phenomenon
is evidenced in a number of stone inscriptions from Bulgaria as well as
among the Turks and the Uighurs in the East. Undoubtedly, in these
cases, the nomadic elites were trying to establish a dialogue with the
Others by writing inscriptions in Greek (in Bulgaria), or in Sogdian and
Chinese (in the cases with Turks and Uighurs). It is quite apparent as
far as the latter are concerned, because aft er the mid-seventh century
they had their own runic writing developed on the basis of Sogdian
writing; nevertheless their most important inscriptions, apparently
aimed at propaganda, very oft en bore the marks of the Other as well.
Th e dates are very signifi cant indeed. Th e Chinese text of Kül-tegin’s
stela provides information about the exact dynastic date, e.g. the “K’ai-
yuan period (713–742), year 20th” (i.e. 732 A.D.). Th ere are three