Talk:Cyprian, Metropolitan of Kiev

suggestion
"Bulgarian nationality" applied to a 14th century person may be a bit misleading to contemporary readers for whom the term denotes an amalgamation of a number of characteristics (jurisdiction, ethnic origin, language, customs, loyalty, place of more or less permanent residence, etc) of which only few could be said to have applied to Cyprian or people of his time and status. The Bulgarian article refers to his family line ("rod") Camblak, while the Russian describes him as either Serb or Bulgarian born in Tarnovo —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.75.128.8 (talk) 09:35, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

So what's your point? He's referred to in the sources as a Bulgarian. --Mcpaul1998 (talk) 08:13, 9 December 2008 (UTC)


 * But there's no problem calling him "Serbian"? 151.237.126.24 (talk) 23:51, 23 February 2016 (UTC)