The present work reviews and analyzes the fierce debates surrounding Samuel’s state in Macedonia, which existed for almost fifty years after the fall of the eastern part of the Bulgarian kingdom, of which it was a part, to the Byzantines. This state adopted the traditions of the Bulgarian kingdom, particularly as Samuel proclaimed himself Bulgarian Tsar (King) and the Bulgarian Patriarch fled to him after the abolition of the autocephalous Bulgarian church. After the initial appropriation of Samuel’s state by Bulgarian historiography, the controversy was sparked by several Serbian authors, who denied the “Bulgarian character” of Samuel’s state because of its new location and capital, new directions of expansion, and different ethnic composition. After World War II, Macedonian historians from the then institutionalized Macedonian historical profession also intervened, claiming a Macedonian character of Samuel’s state at least in its ethnic makeup. The controversy between Bulgarian and Macedonian historians, bearing upon identities and legacies, still continues.