This article is a response to Risto Stefov´s article “Ancient versus Slav controversy”

The Macedonian nobles in the court of king Ptolemy in Alexandria had Doric names and spoke their Macedonian-Doric dialect:

“One of the poems on the Milan papyrus of Posidippus of Pella (P.Mil.Vogl. VIII 309) celebrates the chariot victories of the Ptolemaic house; the epigram is imagined as inscribed upon, and thus spoken by, an image of Philadelphus:

“We were the first three kings to win on our own the chariot race at Olympia,my parents and I.I am one of them, Ptolemy’s namesake, son of Berenice, of Εordean stock,and my two parents.To my father’s great glory I add my own. but that my mother won a chariot victory as a woman,this is something great.(Posidippus 88 AB,trans. Austin (adapted))This Philadelphia speaks with a markedly Doric flavour,as also do Berenice’s horses in another of the new epigrams (87 AB).

In the new epigram,Philadelphia proudly declares himself nursling of Eordaia (an important province of central Macedonia),and it is this combination of Doric language and Macedonian heritage which calls attention to itself.Whether or not the Macedonian language – for which we have painfully little evidence — was a form of Greek has been much discussed, but it is clear that its Greek affiliations are to west Greek and Aeolian dialects.

but if we were to speculate for a moment that some memory,if not in fact knowledge, of a believed affinity between the local dialects of Macedonia and Doric speech had survived through to the Ptolemaic court, then, as the language of both Argos and Macedonia, Doric would indeed have been marked in a particularly powerful way at the court. Its ‘otherness’ marks it as the preserver of genuine Greek tradition, and in particular of the rightful claim of the Ptolemies to be the heirs of Heracles and Alexander.

Praxinoa´s claim to share in such a culture may seem inherently absurd, and this would be in keeping with the mimic context in which it is set, but in fact she reflects both Ptolemy’s Macedonian heritage and his claims to be the standard-bearer of Greek culture.”

“Tradition and innovation in Hellenistic poetry” by Marco Fantuzzi,Richard L.Hunter page 375

http://books.google.com/books?id=38sLUqbZj4QC&pg=PA375

Another peculiarity of the Macedonian nobles in Ptolemaic Alexandria is that besides speaking their native Macedonian-Doric dialect they also had Doric names:

32 259 Androkades (koine Ανδροκήδης)

34 257 Kebbas (Doric gen. Κεββά)

43 247 Kratidas (Doric gen. Kρατίδα)

46 245 Damas (koine Δημη|-)

55 236 Eubatas (Doric gen. Ευβάτα)

63 228 Ikatidas (koine εικοσι-)

73 218 Mnasiadas (koine Μνηασιάδης)

103 188 Charileos (koine Χαρίλαος)

133 158 Charimortos (northern Greek; cf. Masson. On. Set., pp. 43-47)

135 156 Kaphisodoros (koine Κηφισόδωρος)

d ca. 145 Nikaso (koine Νικησώ)

All these names have in common the feature that they are not koine, but represent one of the “Doric” Greek dialects.As the old Greek dialects gradually disappear in Greece itself towards the end of the Hellenistic period, it is the more interesting to see them alive and well in the names of the most prominent families at the royal court in Alexandria. Dialect names were not born by peasants or common Alexandrians, but functioned as a hallmark of the highest nobility.

To the same class of society as the eponymous priests belonged the eponymous officers, as is clear from the fact that in more than one case the same persons or members of the same families held both offices.” The list of eponymous officers in Pros. Plot. II and VIII 1825-2022 also presents us with several non-koine names:

Pros.Ptol. Π name date

1825 Αγήσανδρος 225

1826 Άγησίδας 132

1841 Άντίοχος Κρατδα: 258-243

1872 Δάμων 238-236

1917 Ίκατίδας 237

1938 Λιχας (gen Λίχα) 238

1957 Ναύτας (gen. Ναύτα) 282

1987 Πτολεμαίος Ναύτα 235

The list of eponymous officers confirms that of the eponymous priests: Doric names were typical of some of the highest families at the royal court. It seems possible that members of these families were still speaking a Doric dialect.

This reminds us of a famous passage where Plutarch criticizes the later Ptolemies because some of them had forgotten to speak Macedonian .This shows that at the Alexandrian court Macedonian remained spoken for a long time alongside koine Greek and was considered as a sign of aristocratic descent. Speaking only plain koine was even considered a sign of degeneration! A vivid illustration of the Macedonian roots of the Ptolemies is provided by one of the poems of Poseidippos in the famous Milan papyrus, which is to be published shortly by G. Bastianini and C. Gallazzi.The poem was no doubt meant to accompany a statue group of Ptolemy II and his parents, perhaps in Olympia- Ptolemy II himself speaks, proudly reminding the reader of his roots in Heordaia:

“We are the first three and only kings who have won the Olympic chariot race, my parents and I.I am number one having the same name Ptolemaios and being the son of Berenike belonging to the race of the Heordaioi.The two others are my parents.”

The most remarkable thing about this poem is its language: it is the only poem by Posidippos that is not written in the usual poetic koine. It is written in a Doric dialect, the prestige dialect” which the Macedonian kings spoke among their peer.That the Macedonians kings claimed a relationship with the Dorians is confirmed by an inscription found in Xanthos, where the Dorieis of Central Greece, asking for financial help from the Xanthians,stress that such help would be appreciated by king Ptolemy,who is a relative of the Dorians through the line of the kings of the Argead dynasty since Herakles”.

“The two faces of Greco-Roman Egypt,Greek and Demotic and Greek-Demotic Texts and studies presented to P. W. Pestman” by Arthur M. F. W. Verhoogt and S. P. Vleeming,pages 11-12

http://books.google.com/books?id=Hh0CDL-cLIoC&pg=PA11

The famous 19th century German scholar Otto Hoffman,author of the legendary “Die Makedonen,ihre sprache und ihr vokstum” (The Macedonians,their language and their nationality) after a detailed linguistic research on the Macedonian personal names,toponyms and other saved Macedonian words drew the conclusion that Macedonians were as Greek as Athenians,Spartans e.t.c :

Wer also die Makedonen nicht zu den Griechen zählt,der muss konsequenter Weise folgern,dass sie ihre nationale ursprüngliche Namengebung schon im VI. und V. Jahrhundert vollständig aufgegeben und dafür zum Zeichen ihrer Bewunderung der griechischen Kultur die griechischen Personennamen eingeführt hatten.Diese Auffassung zu bekämpfen halte ich für müssig.Denn sprachgeschichtliche Hypothesen,die ohne Rücksicht auf das reale Leben der Völker in die Welt gesetzt werden, richten sich selbst”.

(Whoever does not consider the Macedonians as Greeks must also conclude that by the 6th and 5th centuries BC the Macedonians had completely given up the original names of their nation – without any need to do so – and taken Greek names in order to demonstrate their admiration for Greek civilization. I think it not worth the trouble to demolish such a notion; for any hypothesis of historical linguists which is put forward without taking into account the actual life of a people, is condemned as it were out of its own mouth).

“Die Makedonen,Ihre Sprache und Ihr Volkstum” by Otto Hoffmann,pages 230-231

http://www.archive.org/stream/diemakedonenihre00hoffuoft#page/230/mode/1up

Some other fraudulent claims of Mr. Stefov can easily be debunked:

1) “Still, Alexander spoke also Greek, loved Homer,and respected his tutor Aristotle. At the same time though,there is much evidence that generally he was not fond of the Greeks of his day After all, he thoroughly destroyed Thebes”.

First and foremost,it was not Alexander´s decision to destroy the city of Thebes,but rather of some other Greek city-states,allies of Alexander in the battle of Chaeronea that were mortal enemies of Thebans:

“When the destruction of the city was being discussed in council, the Phocians, the Plataeans, the Thespians and the Orchomenians, Alexander´s allies who now shared his victory, recalled the devastation of their own cities and the ruthlessness of the Thebans,reproaching them also with their past as well as their present support of Persia against the independence of Greece.This,they said, had made Thebes an abomination to all the Greek peoples,which was obvious from the fact that the Greeks had one and all taken a solemn oath to destroy the city once the Persians were defeated.They also added the tales of earlier Theban wickedness—the material with which they had filled all their plays—in order to foment hatred against them not only for their treachery in the present but also for their infamies in the past”.

M.Justinus “Epitome of the Philipic history of Pompeius Trogus” 11.3.6

http://books.google.com/books?id=FGGvJ3AfgbYC&pg=PA45

And even if we accept for the sake of the argument that it was a personal decision of Alexander,the destruction of Thebes used by Mr.Stephov as a proof of Alexander´s alleged anti-Greek sentiments is at least a very lame argument,for the total razing to the ground of a Greek city by some other Greek city-state wasn´t something unknown to the ancient Greek world.Taking into consideration what treatment the Melians,the Mitylenaians and the Skionaians suffered by the Athenians during the Peloponnesian War,we should conclude in this cases that Athenians “weren´t fond of the Greeks” either:

“And the strength which might have recovered Amphipolis was put forth in the following year for the destruction of a petty township in the island of Melos.This place,a colony from Sparta,had never been included in the Athenian confederacy;and if force was to be employed to bring them within it,this force should have been used in the days of Aristeides,and not now,when a long war with Sparta had materially altered the complexion of the case.But in the sixteenth year of the war Nikias appeared before the city,and on the refusal of the Melians to become allies of Athens,proceeded to blocked it;time went on;no help came from Sparta;and plots were discovered for betraying the place to the Athenians.The Melians resolved to anticipate them by unconditional surrender;and their recompense for so doing was the murder of all the grown men and the selling of the women and children into slavery.But the case of the Melians is obviously quite different from that of the Mytilenaians,who were threatened with the same punishment,or of the Skionaians, on whom it was actually inflicted”.

“The Athenian empire” by William Cox,pages 110-111

http://books.google.com/books?id=mJzpMuxOCkgC&pg=PA111

2)”Therefore, his empire is correctly called Macedonian, not Greek, for he won it with an army of 35,000 Macedonians and only 7,600 Greeks…The Macedonians later used the Greeks (along with equal numbers of the Thracians and Illyrians) for their conquest of Persia.”.

You was never good at mathematics,Mr. Stefov…35,000 Macedonians and 7,600 Greeks,that means 42,600 Hellenes altogether.Alexander himself solved it for you:

“Our enemies are Medes and Persians, men who for centuries have lived soft and luxurious lives; we of Macedon for generations past have been trained in the hard school of danger and war. Above all, we are free men, and they are slaves. There are Greek troops, to be sure, in Persian service – but how different is their cause from ours. They will be fighting for pay – and not much of it at that; we, on the contrary, shall fight for Greece, and our hearts will be in it. As for our foreign troops -Thracians, Paeonians, Illyrians, Agrianes – they are the best and stoutest soldiers in Europe”

Arrian, “Alexander´s anabasis”,2a7

http://books.google.com/books?id=o2Nr-P5HArMC&pg=PA112

So the only truth in what Mr.Stefov claimed above is that Macedonians indeed used southern Greek,Illyrian and Thracian soldiers to conquer the Persian empire.He only missed that Macedonians and southern Greeks were fighting as compatriots for a common cause,unlike both Illyrians and Thracians who were foreign allies or mercenaries that couldn´t be inspired by the same patriotic sentiments

3)”The Macedonians garrisoned the Greek cities (like the Thracian and Illyrian cities) to enforce their occupation”

That´s absolutely right!What this ugly sad replica of Joseph Goebbels again “omits” to mention is that Athenians,Spartans and Thebans had likewise garrisoned the Greek cities in order to consolidate their dominance over the Greek world,almost a century before the ascendance of Macedonia to the throne of Panhellenic hegemony:

“Observing this,the Athenians sent garrisons to the different towns,as far as was possible at such short notice and in winter.”

Thucydides,”History of the Peloponnesian War” republished in 2008 by “Forgotten books” page 239

http://books.google.com/books?id=mo3-jF9-jlUC&pg=PA239

“The settlements at Chalcis and Eretria are all we need to complete our picture of the condition of the Athenian Empire at the end of the First Peloponnesian War.It was not much different at the beginning of the Great Peloponnesian War a decade later.What had begun as a voluntary alliance of autonomous states had become an imperial organization in which the hegemonal power exacted military support,financial contributions, and religious deference from her colonies.Whatever autonomy might mean, it was plainly incompatible with garrisons,cleruchies,foreign officials,imposed constitutions,and the kind of language found in Athenian imperial decrees”.

“The outbreak of the Peloponnesian War” by Donald Kagan,page 127

http://books.google.com/books?id=fCEmz4mcZFsC&pg=PA127

“The Boiotian War began in earnest in 378,when some Thehan democrats killed many Spartan supporters among them,and then rallied to assault the Spartan garrison on their acropolis.The return of the acropolis toTheban control—the “Liberation ol Thebes”—was a vital step toward expelling the Spartans from Boiotia,but there were other Spartan garrisons and sympathizers in the area—in Orchomenos,Plataea,and Thespiai,for instance—and the Spartans were determined to support them and their allies”.

“Nothing Less Than Victory:Decisive Wars and the Lessons of History” by John David Lewis,page 50

http://books.google.com/books?id=BHe0KeXyL_AC&pg=PA50

What have we here?Greeks allying with Persians against fellow Greeks?It can´t be true!According to Mr.Stefov,Greeks allied with Persians only to fight against the “barbarian” Macedonians!

“The Greek cities of Asia expelled the Spartan garrisons and acknowledged the

overlordship of Persia”.

“A history of Greece to the death of Alexander the Great” by John Bugnell Bury,page 539

‎ http://www.archive.org/stream/ahistorygreecet01burygoog#page/n543/mode/1up

“While the attention of the Thebans was thus occupied with their northern frontier,the Spartans were on their part not inactive.Archidamus,son of Agesilaus,was.successful in expelling the Theban garrisons which had been introduced into various cities of Laconia”.

“A pictorial history of Greece: ancient and modern” by Samuel Griswold Goodrich,page 270

http://books.google.com/books?id=Xj0LAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA270

In Peloponnese in the 360s Xenophon records treaties ‘to be allies and to follow wherever the Thebans may lead’ (Hellenika 7. 1. 42).Military control involved Theban garrisons and commanders,whom Xenophon describes with the Spartan word ‘harmost’.

“Democracy and classical Greece” by John Kenyon Davies,page 218

http://books.google.com/books?id=hh6rAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA218

4) “The ancient Greek, Roman, and Jewish historians, geographers, and orators, speak of the Macedonians as distinct nation, separate from their Greek, Thracian, and Illyrian neighbors. The ancient Greeks did not regard the Macedonians as Greeks, nor did the Macedonians regard themselves to be Greek.”.

It seems Mr.Stefov loves to see his claims being humiliated by the abundance of the opposite evidence thrown in his face.Let´s start with Greek historians and orators:Polybius recorded the speech of the Acarnanian envoy Lyciscus who addressed the Aetolians Cleonicus and Chlaeneas at the assembly of Sparta,when the Greek world was threatened by submission to the Romans,as follows:

“Then you were contending for glory and supremacy with Achaeans and Macedonians,men of kindred blood with yourselves,and with Philip their leader;now a war of slavery is threatening Greece against men of another race,whom you think to bring against Philip,but have really unconsciously brought against yourselves and all Greece”.

Polybius,”Histories” 9.37

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0234%3Abook%3D9%3Achapter%3D37

The Athenian orator Aeschines informs us that king Amyntas of Macedonia (Philip´s father) was present among other Greeks at the Panhellenic congress of Sparta in 371 BC:

“For at a congress of the Lacedaemonian allies and the other Greeks,in which Amyntas,the father of Philip,being entitled to a seat,was represented by a delegate whose vote was absolutely under his control, he joined the other Greeks in voting to help Athens to recover possession of Amphipolis.As proof of this I presented from the public records the resolution of the Greek congress and the names of those who voted”.

Aeschines “On the embassy” 2.32

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0002%3Aspeech%3D2%3Asection%3D32

In case Mr.Stefov has a hard time to understand the full meaning of this abstract:

“In the context of a trial in 343,the Athenian Aeschines similarly identifies Amyntas as a political figure of some significance,when he records that Amyntas had been represented by a delegate at a Panhellenic congress (of which there were three between 375 and 371) but had full power over that delegate’s vote.According to this,Amyntas was regarded as a full member of the community of Greek states at least toward the end of the 370s.The Athenians had already regarded him as such a little earlier in the 370s when they entered into an alliance with him”

“Alexander the Great:a new history” by Waldemar Heckel,page 10

http://books.google.com/books?id=jbaPwpvt8ZQC&pg=PA10

In other words,the Macedonian kingdom was accepted as a full member of the community of Greek states long before it was established during the reign of Philip as a leading power of the Greek world that could impose it´s own will to the other states.Now the burden falls on the shoulders of Mr.Stefov and his colleagues who should explain why the “barbarian” Macedonians were granted full membership in Panhellenic congresses.Do we have any recorded instances of Thracians,Illyrians

Paeonians,Persians e.t.c voting in a Panhellenic congress?

Now let´s see some Roman historians and their opinion on the ethnicity of Macedonians:

“Anthemusias and the other cities,which having been founded by Macedonians, claim Greek names.”

Tacitus, “The Annals of Imperial Rome”,6.41

http://books.google.com/books?id=bYykuxO8kbUC&pg=PA345

“Such, at all events,were the opinions generally entertained in the reign of Alexander the Great, at a time when Greece was at the height of her glory, and the most powerful country in the world”.

“The natural history” of Pliny the Elder,chapter 12

http://books.google.com/books?id=IUoMAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA25

“For if all the wars which we have carried on against the Greeks are to be despised, then let the triumph of Marcus Curius over king Pyrrhus be derided; and that of Titus Flamininus over Philip; and that of Marcus Fulvius over the Aetolians; and that of Lucius Paullus over king Perses; and that of Quintus Metellus over the false Philip; and that of Lucius Mummius over the Corinthians. But, if all these wars were of the greatest importance, and if our victories in them were most acceptable, then why are the Asiatic nations and that Asiatic enemy despised by you?”

Cicero,”For Lucius Morena” chap.31

http://books.google.com/books?id=6b0pAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA345

Some Jew historians:

Josephus:

“And when he had said this to Parmenio,and had given the high priest his right hand, the priests ran along by him, and he came into the city.And when he went up into the temple, he offered sacrifice to God, according to the high priest’s direction, and magnificently treated both the high priest and the priests. And when the Book of Daniel was showed him (Alexander) wherein Daniel declared that one of the Greeks should destroy the empire of the Persians,he supposed that himself was the person intended.And as he was then glad, he dismissed the multitude for the present; but the next day he called them to him, and bid them ask what favors they pleased of him;”

http://books.google.com/books?id=YU4-AAAAYAAJ&pg=PA237

Aphrahat/Aphraates

“Because after that Alexander the Macedonian became king, the kingdom of the Greeks was founded, since Alexander also was one of them, even of the Greeks”.

http://books.google.com/books?id=lE_TafAcVkUC&pg=PA358

“But when Alexander the Greek came,he slew Darius,King of Media and Persia. For thus the angel said to Daniel, when he was explaining the vision to him:

http://books.google.com/books?id=lE_TafAcVkUC&pg=PA354

5) “The assertion of those modern historians that propagate that the Macedonians “were Greeks” which have “united” Greece,is absurd and is completely unsupported by the words of the ancients who clearly considered Greece subjected by the Macedonian foreigners”.

This quote deserves a place in any lexicon under the “pitiful liar” definition and I really wonder how does it feel to be repeatedly caught lying!Judging by Mr.Stefov´s attitude,I can guess what it definitely doesn´t feel:Shame!Unless Mr.Stefov is that clueless of the works of ancient Greek historians!In that case,I apologize and I suggest him to read Polybius´ “Histories”:

“Again, you bitterly denounced Alexander, because, when he believed himself to be wronged, he punished Thebes: but of his having exacted vengeance of the Persians for their outrages on all the Greeks you made no mention at all; nor of his having released us all in common from heavy miseries, by enslaving the barbarians, and depriving them of the supplies which they used for the ruin of the Greeks,sometimes pitting the Athenians against the ancestors of these gentlemen here, at another the Thebans; nor finally of his having subjected Asia to the Greeks”

Polybius,”Histories” 9.34

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0234%3Abook%3D9%3Achapter%3D34

“Not being able to say anything in defence of any of these acts,you talk pompously about your having resisted the invasion of Delphi by the barbarians, and allege that for this Greece ought to be grateful to you.But if for this one service some gratitude is owing to the Aetolians; what high honour do the Macedonians deserve, who throughout nearly their whole lives are ceaselessly engaged in a struggle with the barbarians for the safety of the Greeks? For that Greece would have been continually involved in great dangers,if we had not had the Macedonians and the ambition of their kings as a barrier,who is ignorant?”

Polybius, “Histories” 9.35

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0234%3Abook%3D9%3Achapter%3D35

6) “We know who we are and we already have an ethnic identity. It is called Macedonian! We are Macedonians defined by our motherland Macedonia on which our ancestors were born. We are the product of all people who have ventured to Macedonia since the last ice age. We are the indigenous people of Macedonia and have always been Macedonian”.

Sorry for breaking the news to you,Mr.Stefov,but your ancestors a century ago held a very different view on their real origin and.Some abstracts from the report of the International Commission on the conduct of the belligerent parties of the Balkan Wars are eloquent,especially those that refer to the ethnic self-identification of the native population of cities of modern FYROM such as Krushevo,Uskub (Skopje),Veles Prilep and Ghevgheli:

“On the next day,Vantcho Iogov,one of these recruits,beat a Bulgarian merchant,Demetrius Krestev,in the open market because the latter had a Bulgarian sign.On the merchant’s complaint the sub-prefect issued a notice ordering the removal within twenty-four hours of all signs in the Bulgarian language: they were ordered, on pain of courtmartial,to be replaced by Servian signs.(The same facts are repeated everywhere,at Uskub,Veles,Prilepe, etc.We need not mention the other acts of violence committed under pretext of domiciliary perquisition.Even women were beaten and imprisoned for calling themselves Bulgarian.On June 29/July 12,the birthday of King Peter,all the prisoners were brought into the gov-

ernment hall.The sub-prefect promised them an amnesty if they would agree to admit that they were Servians.Two of them replied in the name of all the others that it was solely as Bulgarians that they could be loyal subjects of Servia and useful to the State.They were immediately taken back to prison where they remained for another month”.

“Report of the International Commission to inquire into the causes and conduct of the Balkan Wars”,page 180

http://www.archive.org/stream/reportofinternat00inteuoft#page/180/mode/1up

“Anastasia Pavlova, a widow of Ghevgheli:

Shortly before the outbreak of the second war I was staying with my daughter,a Bulgarian school teacher in the village of Boinitsa.A Greek lady came from Salonica,and distributed money and uniforms to the Turks of the place some six or eight days before the outbreak of the second war.She also called the Bulgarians of the village together,and told them that they must not imagine that this village would belong to Bulgaria.She summoned the Bulgarian priest,and asked him if he would become a Greek.He replied,”We are all Bulgarians and Bulgarians we will remain”.

“Report of the International Commission to inquire into the causes and conduct of the Balkan Wars”,page 304

http://www.archive.org/stream/reportofinternat00inteuoft#page/304/mode/1up/

“Athanas Ivanov of Kirchevo,near Demir Hisar.

Our village is pure Bulgarian and consists of 190 houses”

“Report of the International Commission to inquire into the causes and conduct of the Balkan Wars”,page 305

http://www.archive.org/stream/reportofinternat00inteuoft#page/305/mode/1up

The English journalist George Frederick Abbott who visited Macedonia and FYROM in 1900 wrote about the population of the city of Veles (in modern FYROM):

“The majority of the Christians call themselves Bulgarians,at least they did at the time of which I was speaking”.

“The tale of a tour in Macedonia” by G.F.Abbott,pages 9-10

http://www.archive.org/stream/taleoftourinmace00abbo#page/n26/mode/1up

After all,the only dilemma that bothered Mr.Stefov´s ancestors was not whether they were of Slavic or ancient Macedonian origin,but in what language should they call themselves Bulgarians.In Serbian or in Bulgarian?

“The remaining two fifths speak a Slave patois,which appears to resemble the Bulgarian more closely than the Servian,except on the Servian frontier,and until the recent strife arose they were generally content to be known as Bulgars,although, curiously enough,when they call themselves Bulgars they do so in Serb1.

1Ja sam Bougarim (“I am Bulgarian”).The Bulgar proper calls himself Bolgarim”.

“The East end of Europe” by Allan Upward,page 54

http://www.archive.org/stream/eastendeuropere00upwagoog#page/n54/mode/1up

Written by Kapetan Doukas