Interpretations of Volga Bulgaria in contemporary Bulgarian historiography through the works of Gainetdin Akhmarov.
The article focuses on analyzing different interpretations and assessments of the works of the lead Tatar scientist Gainetdin Akhmarov (1864–1911) in contemporary Bulgarian historiography based on translations of some of his texts in the Bulgarian language. His essay History of [Volga] Bulgaria (in...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Tatarstan Academy of Sciences, Marjani Institute of History
2019-01-01
|
| Series: | Историческая этнология |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://historicalethnology.org/news/en-2019-t4-n1-4/ |
| Summary: | The article focuses on analyzing different interpretations and assessments of the works of the lead Tatar scientist Gainetdin Akhmarov (1864–1911) in contemporary Bulgarian historiography based on translations of some of his texts in the Bulgarian language. His essay History of [Volga] Bulgaria (in Tatar: Bulgar tarikh) (1909) was published in Sofia, Bulgaria in 2002 by Ogledalo Publishing House (which has also published other works on the topic of Volga Bulgaria). The article points at deliberate re-interpretations of G.N. Akhmarov’s original theses made in order to openly correspond with the dominant ideas on Volga Bulgaria that are present in contemporary Bulgarian historiography. This was predominantly imposed on the original text of Akhmarov through a number of commentaries, clarifications and additions by the editorial team and specifically by Tatyana Yarullina. The latter is an author of several popular quasi-historical works on Volga Bulgaria, which are closely related to the ideas of the so called neo-Wäisi movement. Such commentaries not only overexpose Akhmarov’s main thesis concerning the ethnic and historical continuity between Volga Bulgaria and the Kazan Khanate, but they also underscore the teleological fiction of the primordial ethnic relatedness between the Volga Bulghars (and therefore the contemporary Kazan Tatars, perceived as their descendants) and the Bulgarians in the Balkan peninsula. Multiple citations of the historical forgery Djagfar Tarikhy, in the commentaries to the original text are indicative of these manipulations. Despite the fact that it has been largely repudiated internationally by Bulgarian Studies scholars, the fabrication enjoys relative popularity in Bulgaria. The thesis of the present paper suggests that the academic and quasi-academic publications revolving around the history of Volga Bulgaria in present-day Republic of Bulgaria (a prominent example of which is namely this translation of G.N. Akhmarov’s essay) reveal certain tendencies, critical conditions and methodological problems of the Bulgarian historical science in general. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2587-9286 2619-1636 |