The article gives a critical review of previous views on the origin of komitats as administrative units in the Early Medieval Bulgarian State. Among the Bulgarian researchers, the opinion of their Byzantine origin prevailed, while the only Western researcher dealing with the problem, T. Wasilewski, advocated the thesis of their relationship with Western Europe, suggesting some of the conclusions of I. Venedikov. It is concluded that at the beginning of the 9th century, when Bulgaria expanded its territory almost doubled, its population is multiethnic and already has direct neighbors in the face of Byzantium and the Frankish state needed a new administrative division. The administrative division of the two countries is decided in two fundamentally different ways. In search of ways to solve the problem, the Byzantine themae system and the marks of the Frankish state are presented. Between komitats and the themae system the similarities are only formal, whereas the comparison with the marks proved to be much more efficient. In this case, similarities are found with regard to their location, their way of setting up, the powers and the way of appointing their governors, as well as the names and powers of the governors. The presence of komitats on the northern and western borders of the Early Medieval Bulgarian state was established, but not in the direction of Constantinople. These parts are directly subordinate to the central government, and this division of ‘inside’ and ‘out’ is characteristic of both early-medieval Bulgaria and the Frankish state of that period. It is pointed out the possibility that the Boritarkans are an intermediary between the central authority and the komitats, and on the basis of the source data the possibility is presented that they are directly subordinated to the komiti.

The article tries to answer three questions related to the tribes that came into conflict with the Bulgarian state during its expansion to the west in the first third of the 9th century. And the questions addressed in it are: 1. How many and which tribes were in conflict with the Bulgarian state?; 2. When were the lands of the Timociani annexed by the Bulgarian state?; 3. Where were the lands of the Abodriti-Praedenecenti and what caused the Bulgarian aggression towards them? After a thorough review and criticism of the sources and research on the issues under consideration, the following conclusions have been reached. From the beginning of the study of the problem how many tribes participated in the unrest against the Bulgarian state, P. Šafarik has the idea that among the tribes in the narrative sources, can be found other tribes as well. Thus appear the tribes of Bodriči (sounding, perhaps, like Krivichi), Kučani (Guduskani), Braničevci and others. After an assessment of the information in the Annales Regni Francorum, it turns out that the only tribes recorded in the source that had a clash with the Bulgarian state in the period were the Timociani and Abodriti-Praedenecenti. Since it is not directly related to the events that took place in 818, the question of when the Timociani lands were annexed to the Bulgarian state is hardly touched by the researchers. After research and exclusion of other possibilities, the thesis is defended that this could have happened recently after the Bulgarian conquest of Serdica in 809. With the inclusion of Serdica within the Bulgarian borders, Bulgaria controlled south of the Danube River not only the Danube plain but also the territories lying along the Thessaloniki-Danube axis. From this point on, the territories lying along this axis could be gradually taken over. Being further away from Byzantium, the lands located north of Sredets are more easily assimilated. It is in these territories that the Timociani fall. Given all the above, it can be assumed that it was after the capture and absorption of Sredets that the Bulgarian State looked northwest, but still south of the Danube river, where the Timociani lived. It seems that at this time an alliance was made with them, which turned out to be not particularly lasting. About the habitation of the Abodriti-Praedenecenti tribe in the information of 824, it is recorded that they lived in Danubian Dacia and were neighbours of the Bulgars. On the question of where this Dacia is located, which in its description does not correspond to any of the previously known Dacias, many hypotheses have been expressed, and in modern times most researchers are of the opinion that the lands of the Abodriti-Praedenecenti were located along the Left Bank of the river Danube, on the territory of modern Banat, i.e. east of the river Tisza. New evidence has been added to the localization of these habitations. In this case, the following question logically arises: provided that the Timociani lived on the Southern, Right Bank of the Danube, what caused the unfriendly relations of the Bulgarian state to the Abodriti-Praedenecenti living on the other side of the Big River? Given the size of the Danube River, it is quite difficult to cross and to transfer the fighting to the other bank of the Danube clearly should have had serious reasons. One of the possible explanations for this could be the transfer of the Timociani to their territory, on their way to the West, thus creating a casus belli for the Bulgars.

Христов Я. М., Хрисимов Н. Аспекти от всекидневния живот в старобългарския агиографски цикъл "Сказание за железния кръст". Агиографският цикъл от разкази-чудеса, известен под названието "Сказание за железния кръст", е сравнително добре познат в научните среди. Въпреки това, все още не може да се каже, че е проучен напълно като исторически извор. Подобен факт е до голяма степен изненадващ. Дори и бегъл поглед върху фрагментите от текста предоставя възможност за открояване на редица аспекти от всекидневния живот в новопокръстена България. Забелязват се описания на облекло, храни и напитки, а също така и на някои стопански занимания. Наред с това има регистрирани и различни заболявания, причини за здравословни проблеми и методи на лечение. Подобни детайли в старобългарския агиографски цикъл са от съществено значение, особено ако се отчете сравнително ограничения набор сведения за всекидневния живот на популярно равнище в началните етапи от изграждане на т. нар. Slavia Orthodoxa. Ключови думи: агиография; всекидневие; облекло; храни; напитки. Христов Я. М., Хрисимов Н. Аспекты повседневной жизни в староболгарском агиографическом цикле «Сказание о железном кресте». Агиографический цикл, состоящий из рассказов-чудес, именуемый «Сказание о железном кресте», сравнително хорошо известен в научной среде. Несмотря на это все еще нельзя сказать, что он полностью изучен как исторический источник. Подобное утверждение может показаться неожиданным. Но даже беглый взгляд на фрагменты текста представляет возможность отчетливо выделить ряд аспектов повседневной жизни в только что крещенной Болгарии. Обращают на себя внимание описания одежды, еды и напитков, а также и некоторые хозяйственные занятия. Вместе с тем зафиксированы различные заболевания, причины медицинских проблем и способы лечения. Подобного рода детали в староболгарском агиографическом цикле имеют большое значение, имея в виду сравнительно ограниченный набор сведений о повседневной жизни населения в начале строительства т. н. Slavia Orthodoxa. Ключевые слова: агиография; повседневность; одежда; еда; напитки. Hristov Y. M., Hrissimov N. Aspects of everyday life in Old-Bulgarian hagiographical cycle of stories A Tale of the Iron Cross. The hagiographical cycle of stories-А Tale of the Iron Cross is relatively well-known, but as a source of information for everyday life it still has not been studied properly. Such a fact is somewhat surprising. Even a glimpse at Tale's texts gives an opportunity many questionable aspects of daily life to be shown. A serious look at the cycle's data is very fruitful. There are some important descriptions of clothes, foodstuff, drinks consummation as well as craft activities. Moreover, records concerning various types of illnesses, reasons of health disorder and treatment skills also can be observed. At the same time the importance of those features increases when scholars take into consideration the historical database which left unknown many sides of daily life in the dawn of so-called Slavia Orthodoxa.

The article surveys the available data on food of plant origin used in the period of the First Bulgarian Empire. The information is based on written sources and paleobotanical data, which show the presence of diverse plants used for food. It is also evident that these data are rather scarce compared to those from Byzantium. No food recipes have survived from this period, but there is some secondary evidence allowing the reconstruction of some foods. It suggests that grain porridges, rather than bread, were the main food.