This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Belarus, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Belarus on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BelarusWikipedia:WikiProject BelarusTemplate:WikiProject BelarusBelarus articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bulgaria, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Bulgaria on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BulgariaWikipedia:WikiProject BulgariaTemplate:WikiProject BulgariaBulgaria articles
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
@Slava History Hey, you keep taking away my edits and adding what you like, first of all, it contradicts the policy WP:NPOVHOW, also, please note, I did not remove your sources. And now let me quote my sources so that you have no doubt. Egorshina: „Svyatoslav gathered a force of 10,000 and crossed the Danube, from where he moved to Bulgaria. Here the 30,000 Bulgarian army tried to interfere with him, but Svyatoslav defeated them and forced them to retreat to Dorostol, where they also suffered defeats” Karamzin: „Svyatoslav fulfilled Nikifor's wish, gathered an army of 60,000 and appeared on the Danube, then a small army of Bulgarians tried in vain to resist, the Rus crushed them. The cities also surrendered to the winner” Dushnilkin (talk) 09:05, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I know I did wrong and I apologize for what I did. But have clear two things:
The first thing I would like to write is to remind you that you wrote that the Rus conquered the whole Bulgarian lands, which was your mistake. You know perfectly that the Western Bulgarian lands were not conquered. Svyatoslav managed to recapture the Northeastern Bulgarian lands.
The second thing I would like to mention is that the first campaign was mostly a raid and not a conquest campaign. According to the Bulgarian author of the Veliko Tarnovo University Ivelin Ivanov, Svyatoslav captured Drastar during the second campign (969-971):
21 Повесть временных лет, c. 32. I would not not focus my attention to the dispute over the location of this fortress on the Lower Danube but to the fact that Svyatoslav took advantage of the key-position of Durostorum and its defended harbor during his second campaign. In my view a thesis could be shaped that it was a plan for providing a permanent military base and even a controlled territories for settlement on the Lower Danube. Actually, it was a common Normans’ strategy in the Norman invasions in Northern and Western West Europe in the period between 9th-11th c.
I could also cite that:
The fall of the key fortress of Durostorum put Boris II in a difficult situation and he chose a union with Knyaz Svyatoslav to a war on two fronts.
((Boris II was not proclaimed as Tsar before 969))
Another citation of the author:
22 The traditional Eastern route from Varangians to Greeks passed along the western Black sea shore and most probably the invasion deep in the Lower Danube took aback the Bulgarians. Most likely, Svyatoslav’s fleet navigated from the delta to Durostorum (380 kilometers) for two or three days this way taking in surprise the garrison of the fortress. The way from Durostorum to the capital Preslav ( 130 kilometers) also did not stop the Rus’ advance.
As you perfectly know, Great Preslav fell to the Rus in 969 (during the second campaign). The citations are clear and show the way actually the war went. The battle of Silistra resulted in Bulgarian defeat but not the siege (some sources even claim that Peter closed himself with his troops in Dorostolon. By saying that the Rus captured the fortress after the battle, Peter would be captured, something that never happened) then the Rus forces wintered at Pereyaslavets and after the news that Svyatoslav received about the Pecheneg attack on Kiev, he retreated, leaving the garrisons in the conquered fortresses which were repelled soon after by the Bulgarian army. After Svyatoslav resolved the problem in Kiev, he returned with even bigger army (969), he conquered again Pereyaslavets and then he took the fortress of Dorostolon, the capital Preslav and Philippopolis in Thrace, resulting in a decisive Bulgarian defeat.
Im my oppinion, the result of the conflict should be the next (by writing in [] I mean about the reasons, this does not enter in the result text):
- Rus advance to the Bulgarian lands temporarily halted (968) [As the Bulgarians bribed the Pechenegs to attack Kiev, resulting in the retreat of Svyatoslav and the temporal recovering of the lost lands by the Bulgarian army]
-Decisive Svyatoslav victory over Bulgaria (969)[The defeat of the Bulgarians at Pereyaslavets, Great Preslav and Dorostolon]
-Byzantine military victory over Rus[The battle of Arcadiopolis and the siege of Dorostolon in 971. As you wrote, the Rus achieved a political victory so it remains only as a military victory of Byzantine Empire]
-Start of the Byzantine conquest of Bulgaria[The 50 year war between Bulgaria and Byzantium].
Let's be fair and mention the actoons of the three States. Bulgaria also showed resistance and this should not be underestimated. I don't have any bad intentions and I apologize again for the mistakes. Slava History (talk) 19:49, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Since my message just didn't go through, I'll answer more briefly.: I agree with you in terms of the presentation of the page, it looks right. Russian sources claim that Peter did not participate in the battles against Svyatoslav, so the capture of Dorostolo is quite possible, I admit that not the entire territory of Bulgaria was conquered, but Lev Gumilev wrote about it so that you would not think that I invented it and so on. In general, this contradicts even my other sources, so I suggest avoiding quoting this author in this question. Dushnilkin (talk) 20:55, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I realised something about your first comment. No of the sources that you cuted is mentioned a direct conquest of the fortress of Dorostolon. Egorshina: „Svyatoslav gathered a force of 10,000 and crossed the Danube, from where he moved to Bulgaria. Here the 30,000 Bulgarian army tried to interfere with him, but Svyatoslav defeated them and forced them to retreat to Dorostol, where they also suffered defeats” (In this citation, the author claims that the Bulgarians suffered defeats, but he does not mention the conquest of the fortress. You perfectly know that there was battle out of the fotress.)
„Svyatoslav fulfilled Nikifor's wish, gathered an army of 60,000 and appeared on the Danube, then a small army of Bulgarians tried in vain to resist, the Rus crushed them. The cities also surrendered to the winner”
(In this citation, the author writes that the cities also surrendered to thw winner but did not mentions Dorostolon in them. That cities are the ones that Svyatoslav seized, the "80" ones in the region of Dobruja. Dorostolon however is not mentioned. By the other side I mentioned multiple authors that wrote that Dorostolon fell in 969 to Svyatoslav. So the siege have to remain as Bulgarian victory. Slava History (talk) 15:40, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As for egorshina, maybe I somehow incorrectly translated the text of the source, but the author mentioned the battle in front of the fortress, after which he stated that the Bulgarians retreated to Dorostol, where they also suffered defeats, you somehow incorrectly interpret the meaning of the text in the source.
Your criticism of my data and your interpretation of the information in general is more like thinking up information, at the level of "the cities fell, but no one specified that Dorostol was among them, so the siege was unsuccessful" Dushnilkin (talk) 15:47, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=small}
