Talk:History of Independent Bulgaria
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
VMORO, why did you moved it back? Bulgaria was not independent until 1908, so the current title is wrong. bogdan 20:02, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
Formally not, de facto yes. And in the end, it is a title we are arguing about - show some aesthetic sense. VMORO 20:05, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
Actually, you could say about current Bulgaria as being independent, too. But the period described here (1878-1946), Bulgaria was a kingdom. So, how about Kingdom of Bulgaria, History of the Bulgarian Kingdom or something like this? bogdan 20:17, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
Hello, can I have a say? Usually a monarchy is referred to according to its 'highest' rank, (monarchies have ranks I guess you know that?) so, Bulgaria became a vassal principality in 1879 but in 1908 declared itself an independent kingdom, therefore, it should be referred to as a 'Bulgarian kingdom' when we speak about the entire period from the Liberation until the declaring of the people's republic in 1946. This does not exclude the specification of the periods of 'principality' and 'kingdom'. Agree with me? Just as Romania, the same, just earlier, happened with Romania, Serbia and Montenegro. Not with Greece if I know well. As for the title 'tsar', when speaking of the Third Bulgarian State it is equal to a king, but when speaking about Bulgarian tsars in the Middle Ages, they were recognized by the Byzantine emperors as 'caesars', that is, emperors. Agree with me? Cheers. I see here an active Romanian participation, I went to Bucharest last year, such a beautiful city, compliments! 85.11.148.60 21:50, 19 July 2006 (UTC)