A couple of days ago, in an article entitled ´Australian Macedonian Advisory Council and the falsification of Ancient Macedonian history Part 1″ signed by Risto Stefov http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/79623
, we had the opportunity to witness once more the same desperate attempts by the same author with compilations of isolated phrases from authors which in reality contradict his main claims, aimed to somehow assist the mythology disseminating by FYROM´s Slavonic people upon unsuspected readers.
In general, it is productive to cite as a supporting evidence someone who has specialized knowledge of the specific field in question, and even more if he appears to be one of the leading authorities. What is counter-productive though, is the selective quotation applied blatantly in the article of Mr. Stefov, while simultaneously it is omitted completely anything which doesn´t fit the author´s political agenda.
Apparently, since the works of Eugene Borza - the so-called “Macedonian specialist” are overwhelmingly accepted, promoted and invoked as quasi-sacred documents by the Slavs of modern FYROM, then I guess Mr. Stefov and his people should also accept Borza´s account which rebukes their self-made erroneous assumption/myth upon their own ´identity´. The clearest relevant statement is to be found by Prof. Borza in his “Macedonian Redux” [1] : “Modern Slavs, both Bulgarians and “Macedonians”, cannot establish a link with antiquity, as the Slavs entered the Balkans centuries after the demise of the ancient Macedonian kingdom. Only the most radical Slavic factions—mostly émi-grés in the United States, Canada, and Australia—even attempt to establish a connection to antiquity.”. Essentially the same authority used previously by Mr. Stefov, has managed to contradict and debunks his allegations in his own articles, attempting to link Slavic people with antiquity. At least now we meet a couple of people who belong to these “most radical Slavic Factions”!!
In another instance, Prof. Borza adds further ” During medieval and modem times, Macedonia was known as a Balkan region inhabited by ethnic Greeks, Albanians, Vlachs, Serbs, Bulgarians, Jews, and Turks.” Sadly there goes shot down the myth of “ethnic Macedonians” promoted by the Slavs of modern FYROM in Macedonia during medieval and modern times.”[2]
“the Macedonians are a newly emergent people in search of past to help legitimize their precarious present as they attempt to establish their singular identity in a Slavic world dominated historically by Serbs and Bulgarians.”[3]
From the same source we read: “The emergence of a Macedonian nationality is an offshoot of the joint Macedonian and Bulgarian struggle against Hellenization. With the establishment of an independent Bulgarian state and church in the 1870s, however, the conflict took a new turn. Until this time the distinction between “Macedonian” and “Bulgarian” hardly existed beyond the dialect differences between standard “eastern” Bulgarian and that spoken in the region of Macedonia.”[4] In essence Eugene Borza accepts the testimonies of the vast majority of contemporary scholars, travellers, diplomats and other eye-witnesses who identified the ancestors of FYROM´s Slavs plainly as Bulgarians.
Therefore, I shall limit myself to restate the American´s scholar main conclusions in regards to the Slavs of Modern FYROM:
1. Modern Slavs, both Bulgarians and “Macedonians”, CANNOT establish a link with antiquity.
2. During Medieval and Modern times, there were NOT any “ethnic Macedonians” but merely Macedonia was “a region inhabited by ethnic Greeks, Albanians, Vlachs, Serbs, Bulgarians, Jews, and Turks”.
3. The emergence of a Macedonian nationality is an OFFSHOOT of the joint Macedonian and Bulgarian struggle against Hellenization.
4. Until the 1870s, there was HARDLY any distinction between the terms “Macedonian” and “Bulgarian” beyond the dialect differences between standard “eastern” Bulgarian and that spoken in the region of Macedonia.”
How is it possible then that so many and superbly competent scholars verify along with the massive amount of testimonies by self-witnessing contemporary accounts the Bulgarian origins of Slavs from modern FYROM, but they shamefully insist on denying the reality?? Simply because all these accounts hit upon uncomfortable truths.
It is depressing that the average citizen of FYROM is bombarded daily with such flagrant fairy tales of an alleged connection with ancient people, instead of tackling the most pressing problems of this state, namely unemployment, corruption, poverty, etc.
So, please, Mr. Stefov and others who frequently adopt and treat Prof. Borza´s work as having undisputed diachronic ´value´, at last make up your minds and stop your hypocrisy and double standards. Its you who always find it so easy to distribute ad naseum over and over Prof. Borza´s work as being essentially beyond any criticism because they originate from an “authority”, as commonly stated by the ‘Slavic internet warriors of FYROM’. You cannot simply selectively isolate and use only what fits your political agenda.
Furthermore, before we have an extensive analysis on the nature of ancient Macedonians, I have to highlight the striking inconsistencies in the specific text used by Risto Stefov. The claim in the beginning “From the surviving literary sources (Hesiod, Herodotus, and Thucydides) there is little information about Macedonian origins” is partly correct but appears a little misleading. The surviving literary sources points out ancient Macedonians being Greek. For instance, Professor NGL Hammond, an eminent historian, generally accepted as foremost authority in ancient Macedonian history, convincingly mentions about Hesiod: “Hesiod first mentioned ‘Makedon’, the eponym of the people and the country, as a son of Zeus, a grandson of Deukalion, and so a first cousin of Aeolus, Dorus, and Xuthus; in other words he considered the ‘Makedones’ to be an outlying branch of the Greek-speaking tribes, with a distinctive dialect of their own, ‘Macedonian’.” [5]
To say the least, it is quite comical indeed for Mr. Stefov to insist the promotion of the outdated – today - account of R.A. Crossland [1982] when in the meantime there is more certainty and the specialists classify Ancient Macedonian as a dialect of Greek; specifically North-West Greek, as already been attested by most recent accounts like of the eminent linguist’s Olivier Masson [6]. Obviously R.A. Crossland´s account lacked knowledge of the major recent archaeological discoveries like the Pella Katadesmos which shed more light among specialists to the Ancient Macedonian language question and force them to consider it now as a Greek dialect.
Essentially based on the literary available evidence we can conclude the following:
1. Alexander the Great was Greek
Alexander´s Greek descent, and in general Argead Greek lineage went unquestioned by ancient Greek and Roman writers, revealing a widely belief in ancient Greek and Roman world (including of course Macedonians themselves), the Argead royal house were Greeks descended from Argos of Peloponnese. The founder of their house belonged to the royal house of Argos, the “Temenidae”, descendants of Temenus, whose ancestor was Heracles, son of Zeus. (Diod. 17.1.5, 17.4.1; Plut, Alex 2.1-2, Fortuna 1.10 = Moratia 332a; Justin 11.4.5, 7.6.10-12, Theop. (FGTH US F3SS - Tzetzes, ad Lycophr 1439); Paus. ´Description of Greece´ 1.9.8, 7.8; Velleius Paterculus: “The Roman History” Book I.5; Isocrates: ´To Philip´ 32; Herod. 5.22.1-2, 8.43; Thuc. 2, 99, 3; Curt. 4.6.29)
2. Earliest accounts verify the earliest Macedonians as Greeks
The earliest literary accounts like Hesiodus (700 BCE) identified the earliest Macedonians as part of the greek world thus greek-speakers. Obviously if Macedonians werent Greeks but foreign people to Greeks, they wouldnt be part at all in Hesiodus´ account as Greek. After all its really irrational to have a supposedly ´non-greek´ people while migrating to rename existing foreign toponymies into Greek, like the renaming from the earliest Macedonians of the original Phrygian place-name ´Edessa´ to the Greek ´Aigae´.
3. Ancient Macedonians considered themselves as Greek
The surviving literary and archaeological evidence during Classical and Hellenistic Ages shows clearly that Macedonians considered themselves to be Greek, carriers to spread the Greek language and civilization to Asia while revenging Persians for their “crimes against Macedonia and the rest of Greece”.(Herod. 9.45; Diod. 16.93.1; Arrian 2.14.4, 3.18.11-12, I.16.10, “Indica” XXXIII; Plut- Alex. XXXIII, Moralia 332A; Curt. 5.6.1, 5.8.1; Joseph 11.8.5; Polyvius 7.9.4, 18.4.8; Liv. XXXI,29, 15; IG X,2 1 1031)
4. Ancient Greeks viewed Macedonians as Greeks
Ancient Greeks considered Macedonians as Greeks and specifically of Dorian stock. In fact ancient Greek accounts attributed some of the most patriotic Greek sentiments ever expressed to Macedonian rulers (Herodotos), described memories of the Greekness of the Makedones (Hesiodos, Hellanikos, Herodotos), mentioned their participations among Greek troops and folk, membership of Macedonia in the associations of the Greeks, namely the Delphic Amphictyony which had long been an important Panhellenic (Herodotos, Thucydides, Aichines). Hence they all verify the same conclusion. Greeks viewed Macedonians as Greeks.
5. Foreign nations considered Macedonians as Greeks
The ancient Roman, Persian, Indian, Jewish, Babylonian and Carthagenian testimonies are listing Macedonians among the other Hellenes, speaking the same language and in general Macedonians are portrayed as Hellenes fighting the Barbarians. (Curt. 3.3.6, 3.7.3, 3.12.27, 4.1.10, 4.5.11, 4.5.14, 4.6.29, 4.8. 13-14, 4.10.1, 5.6.1, 5.7.3, 5.7.11, 6.9.35, 7.5.36, 7.6.1, 7.6.35; Liv. XXXI.29.15, XLV, 32.22; Cicero Orations; Ceasar ´Civ. Wars´ 111.103.3; Vel. Patercul. ´Roman history´ I.5; Justinus Un. History 7.1, 11.3.6; Aelian ´Var Historia´ VII.8, 12.37(39); Pliny ´Natural history´; Tacitus ´Annals of Imperial Rome´ Chap. 8 pg 221; Persian inscr. of ca 513, Persian story of Zulqarneen, Bahram Yasht 3.34; Edicts of Ashoka V & XIII; Maccabees 1:10, 8:18, Megillah 11a, Dan 11:2, 10:20, Isiaiah chap. 19.20, 19.23, Joel Cahp 3.v6, Habacoum cap. 2.v5; Josephus ´Antiquities of the jews´ Book 11 par 337, 109, 148, 184, 286, Book 8 para. 61, 95, 100, 154, 213, Book 10 para. 273, Book 12 para. 322, 414, Philo of Alexandria, Maimonides; Babylonian Diaries Diary No -168. A14-15)
6. Ancient Macedonian names are Greek
In contrast with all their non-greek neighbours (Illyrians, Thracians, etc) ancient Macedonian names are either Greek or derive from Greek roots in a percentage of over 95%. According to the encyclopaedia Bolsaya Sovetskaya “In 200 names born from Macedonians born before the ascent of Philip II (359b.C.), hardly 5% are of non-greek origin. Non-Greek names in small numbers can also be found in other Greek tribes. We know some names of Gods and Heroes worshiped by the Macedonians. Among them, 39 are either pan-hellenic or worshiped by other Greek tribes, either purely macedonian, but with a Greek etymology [root]. 2 come from names of cities with a non-hellenic root but with a greek termination syllabe 3 are Thracian 1 is Egyptian All of the names of Macedonian Feasts that we know are Greek. Regarding the names of the months, 6 are common with other Greek calendars, and at least two more are also purely Greek. The idea that the Macedonians took the names of the months during their ´hellenisation´ is out of the question, as in that case they would have taken an integral Greek calendar instead of creating an amalgam of different greek calendars and, more important, they would never invent themselves two Greek names of months. ” All these of course are taking place at a time where the Illyrian and Thracian names have in their vast majority non-greek etymologies.
7. Ancient Macedonian was a Greek dialect
According to the eminent linquist, Olivier Masson, writing in 1996 for the “Oxford Classical Dictionary: ´Macedonian Language”. “For a long while Macedonian onomastics, which we know relatively well thanks to history, literary authors, and epigraphy, has played a considerable role in the discussion. In our view the Greek character of most names is obvious and it is difficult to think of a Hellenization due to wholesale borrowing. ´Ptolemaios´ is attested as early as Homer, ´Ale3avdros´ occurs next to Mycenaean feminine a-re-ka-sa-da-ra- (´Alexandra´), ´Laagos´, then ´Lagos´, matches the Cyprian ´Lawagos´, etc. The small minority of names which do not look Greek, like ´Arridaios´ or ´Sabattaras´, may be due to a substratum or adstatum influences (as elsewhere in Greece). Macedonian may then be seen as a Greek dialect, characterised by its marginal position and by local pronunciations (like ´Berenika´ for ´Ferenika´, etc.). Yet in contrast with earlier views which made of it an Aeolic dialect (O.Hoffmann compared Thessalian) we must by now think of a link with North-West Greek (Locrian, Aetolian, Phocidian, Epirote). This view is supported by the recent discovery at Pella of a curse tablet (4th cent. BC) which may well be the first ´Macedonian´ text attested (provisional publication by E.Voutyras; cf. the Bulletin Epigraphique in Rev.Et.Grec.1994, no.413); the text includes an adverb ´opoka´ which is not Thessalian. We must wait for new discoveries, but we may tentatively conclude that Macedonian is a dialect related to North-West Greek.”
Alexander the Great launched a Pan-hellenic campaign against Persia and through his conquests spread Hellenism in a vast colonizing wave throughout the Near East and created economically and culturally, a single world stretching from Greece to the Punjab in India with Greek (koine) as lingua franca. He built a network of almost thirty Greek cities throughout the empire, a building program that was expanded by later Hellenistic rulers. These became enclaves of Greek culture. Here gymnasia, baths, and theaters were built. The upper classes spoke koine Greek, wore Greek dress, absorbed Greek learning, adopted Greek customs, and took part in Greek athletics. Ancient sources reports as such and the pan-hellenic character of his campaign were the definitive statements of the Macedonian royalty and nobility. (Aelian ´Varia Historia´ 13.11; Arrian I.16.7, I12.1-2, Plutarch Ages. 15.4, Moralia I, 328D, 329A, Alex. 15, 33, 37.6-7; Diod. 16.95.1-2, 17.67.1; Callisthenes 2.3.4-5, 2.4.5, 2.4.7-8, 3.1.2-4; Arrian “Indica” XXXIII, XXXVIII, XXIX, ´Anab.´ Arrian I.16.7, II, 14, 4, 3.18.11-12 ; Polybius IX.35.2, IX.34.3, 17.4.9; Curtius 3.3.6, 4.1.10-11, 4.5.11, 4.14.21, 5.6.1, 5.7.3, 5.7.11, 8.1.29)
9. Macedonians shared the same religion as the rest of Greeks
Nowadays historians agree that Macedonians had the religious and cultural features of the rest of the Hellenic world. Like other Greek regions, regional characteristics have also to be noted especially near the borders.
It is quite interesting then, the fact that Macedonians also gave these deities the familiar Greek epithets, such as Agoraios, Basileus, Olympios, Hypsistos of Zeus, Basileia of Hera, Soter of Apollo, Hagemona and Soteira of Artemis, Boulaia of Hestia, etc. The worship of the twelve Olympian gods in Macedonia is undoubted; and it is shown explicitely in the treaty between Philip V and Hannibal of Carthage “`In the presence of ZEUS, HERA and APOLLO…and in the presence of ALL THE GODS who possess Macedonia AND THE REST OF HELLAS”. (Arrian I 11.1-2, I.11.6; Diod. 16.95.2, 16.91.5-6; Pausanias 6.18.3, 9.39.3; Ath. Deipnos. XII.537d-540a, XIII 572d-e; Diogenes Laert. 1.8; Curtius 3.7.3, 3.12.27, 4.13.15, 6.10.14, 8.2.32, 8.11.24, Plutarch ´Alexander´ 33; Polybius 7.9.1-7)
As it is evident through the surviving archaeological evidence and literary accounts, the Greek nature of ancient Macedonians is undoubted. Even if the vast majority of modern historians accept the latter as a fact, there may have been some modern historians who are still sceptical due to the scanty evidence available prior to Roman times, but there is no controversy later on. The entirety of historical community accepts as a fact that the Macedonians were indistinguishable from the other Greeks during Roman times. They also share the same notion that the Slavs of modern FYROM are totally unrelated to Ancient Macedonians. Unfortunately none shares the views of some extremist “radical Slavic factions” as Prof. Borza put it nicely, that quite comically think that if they can prove the non-Greekness of ancient Macedonians their mythical link to ancient Macedonia will be somehow validated. As one of their favourite writers which is quoted always selectively, namely T.J Winnifrith [7], states, “Macedonia was also an attempt at a multicultural society. Here the fragments are just about holding together, although the cement that binds themis an unreliable mixture of propaganda and myth. The Macedonian language has been created, some rather misty history involving Tsar Samuel, probably a Bulgarian, and Alexander the Great, almost certainly a Greek, has been invented, and the name Macedonia has been adopted. Do we destroy these myths or live with them?”. Apparently these “radical Slavic factions” decided to live with their myths and lies for the constant amusement of the rest of the world.
Footnotes:
1] “Macedonia Redux”, Eugene N. Borza, The Eye Expanded: Life and the Arts in Greco-Roman Antiquity, Frances B. Titchener and Richard F. Moorton, Jr., editors, p. 255
2] “Macedonia Redux”, Eugene N. Borza, The Eye Expanded: Life and the Arts in Greco-Roman Antiquity, Frances B. Titchener and Richard F. Moorton, Jr., editors, p. 252
3] “Macedonia Redux”, Eugene N. Borza, The Eye Expanded: Life and the Arts in Greco-Roman Antiquity, Frances B. Titchener and Richard F. Moorton, Jr., editors, p. 259
4]”Macedonia Redux”, Eugene N. Borza, The Eye Expanded: Life and the Arts in Greco-Roman Antiquity, Frances B. Titchener and Richard F. Moorton, Jr., editors, p. 253
We are producing here more evidence of who and where the people of The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) come from; below there is an extensive list from politicians, historians, writers, travellers, sociologists of neutral heritage that are not on the “Greek payroll” like these “alleged” FYROM(ians)propagandists claim. The flag on the image (main frame) is the only flag that the people from FYROM raised on their day of Ilinden(1903) (FYROM and Bulgarian National Day - 2nd August) which is obviously a Bulgarian flag. Greeks on the other hand, are a peace loving people that respect the law of the land. All they require is mutual respect from the northern Slavic neighbors; they have no irredentist claims, nor do they impose their ideology upon them; they simply let them be as long as they respect Greece. Sadly it’s people like Risto Stefov (a.k.a Christos Stefou)Gandeto (birth name Grezlovski), Donski, Ilyev, Tentov, Bosevski and others that propagate a false ideology that is totally flawed historically, but sadly and tragically confuses the ethos and legacy of its own citizens both in FYROM and their diaspora to a fanaticism that borders on extremism; that threatens to spill out to violence between the two communities. By consistently producing the evidence for all to see, it shows how deluded some people from FYROM can be. Greeks are told by the Bush administration to relent and accept them by name, yet Mr. Bush has no real idea of how deep Greek history really; and is associated with land and legacy. Mr. Bush wants Greeks to forget their past and move on for today, but a man with no past is a man of no future, and that sadly applies to the state of FYROM. Mr. Bush (soon to be former President) and FYROM propagandists: Greek (Macedonian) history is not up for trade nor is our legacy up for sale. The identity of the people of Greece is Greek (or Hellenes), and tragically for the people from FYROM, Macedonia is part of Hellenic history. Feel free to create a new identity; and try not to steal from your neighbors. Identity theft is a crime Mr. Stefov and you should be ashamed of yourselves!
Every ethnic Macedonian who does not claim Albanian or Serbian origin has the right to declare a Bulgarian origin. This is an individual act in accordance with the historical reality of our common ethnic origin.
Stefan Nikolov,(Bulgarian diplomat - Agency for Bulgarians Abroad of the Bulgarian Foreign Ministry in Sofia), AFP report, Sunday 13 August 2006
We are Macedonians but we are Slav Macedonians. That’s who we are! We have no connection to Alexander the Greek and his Macedonia. The ancient Macedonians no longer exist, they had disappeared from history long time ago. Our ancestors came here in the 5th and 6th century (AD).Kiro Gligorov,(first democratically elected president of FYROM, referring to the citizens of his country), Toronto Star, March 15, 1992
24 February 1999: In an interview with the Ottawa Citizen, Gyordan Veselinov, FYROM´s Ambassador to Canada, admitted: “We are not related to the northern Greeks who produced leaders like Philip and Alexander the Great. We are a Slav people and our language is closely related to Bulgarian.” He also commented “there is some confusion about the identity of the people of this country.”
Moreover, the Foreign Minister of FYROM, Slobodan Casule, in an interview to Utrinski Vesnik of Skopje on December 29, 2001, said that he mentioned to the Foreign Minister of Bulgaria, Solomon Pasi, that they “belong to the same Slav people.”
For many years, since the decade of the ’90s, we have been making efforts so that the name ‘Republic of Macedonia’(FYROM) is not recognized, because no nation should steal the history and symbols of another nation.
Mike Rann, Australian politician
For Macedonia to be recognized as an independent state, it would be necessary to change its name [...] It is historically proven that the Yugoslavian Democracy of Macedonia was created by Stalin, Tito and Dimitrov, aiming at the stealthy removal of a large part of Northern Greece. This Democracy was used during the period 1944-1949 in order to destabilise Greece.
Thomas Niles, US Ambassador
We talked a long time about the goal of this organization and at last we fixed it on autonomy of Macedonia with the priority of the Bulgarian element. We couldn’t accept the position for “direct joining to Bulgaria” because we saw that it would meet big difficulties by reason of confrontation of the Great powers and the aspirations of the neighbouring small countries and Turkey. It passed through our thoughts that one autonomous Macedonia could easier unite with Bulgaria subsequently and if the worst comes to the worst, that it could play a role as a unificating link of a federation of Balkan people. The region of Adrianople, as far as I remember, didn’t take part in our program, and I think the idea to add it to the autonomous Macedonia came later.
Dr. Hristo Tatarchev, Founding member of VMRO (IMRO)
Look, I believe that Greece is right to object and I agree with Athens. The reason is that I know history which is not the case with most of the others including most of the Government and Administration in Washington. The strength of the Greek case is that of the history which I must say that Athens have not used so far with success.
Henry Kissinger, Management Centre Europe, Paris, 19 June 1992
I call these songs Bulgarian and not Slavic, because if someone today should ask the Macedonian Slav “what are you?” he would be immediately be told: “I am Bulgarian” and would call his language “Bulgarian”.
Stefan Verkovich, Bosnian folklorist, “Folk Songs of the Macedonian Bulgarian”, Vol. 1
The Department has noted with considerable apprehension increasing propaganda rumors and semi-official statements in favor of an autonomous Macedonia emanating from Bulgaria, but also from Yugoslav partisan and other sources with the implication that Greek territory would be included in the projected State. This Government considers talk of “Macedonian Nation”, “Macedonian Fatherland”, or “Macedonian National Consciousness” to be unjustified demagoguery representing no ethnic or political reality, and sees in its present revival a possible cloak for aggressive intentions against Greece.
Edward R. Stettinius, Jr., U.S. State Dep. Foreign Relations Vol. VII, Circular Airgram [868.014]
There is no doubt that they are southern Slavs; they have a language, or a group of varying dialects, that is grammatically akin to Bulgarian but phonetically in some respects akin to Serbian, and which has certain quite distinctive features of its own……In regard to their own national feelings, all that can safely be said is that during the last eighty years many more Slav Macedonians seem to have considered themselves Bulgarian, or closely linked to Bulgaria, than have considered themselves Serbian, or closely linked to Serbia (or Yugoslavia). Only the people of the Skopje region, in the north west, have ever shown much tendency to regard themselves as Serbs. The feeling of being Macedonians, and nothing but Macedonians, seems to be a sentiment of fairly recent growth, and even today is not very deep-rooted.
Elisabeth Barker, “Macedonia, Its Place in Balkan Power Politics”
and Uskub, the great majority of the population is Slavic,[...] the middle ages until 1913 called themselves and were called by their neighbors Bulgarians.
George Hubbard Blakeslee, “The Journal of International Relations”.
When the Turks and the Bulgarians left, Macedonia remained a purely Greek region.
Henry Morgenthau, “I was sent to Athens”, Doubleday, Doran & Company, inc (1929).
Attention may have been deflected from the danger in that area by the nature of the dispute between Macedonia and Greece, which is seen as being ostensibly over a name, although it amounts to more than that. A name is important as it gives an area an identity. I shall not indulge in a lecture on the ancient identity of the Macedonians and on Philip II of Macedon and Alexander the Great, but the Greeks were historically correct in the campaign that they launched in the early days of the dispute. Understandably, detached outsiders say, “But that is ancient history, isn’t it?” Nor shall I engage in a lecture on the falsification of the history of Slavo-Macedonia since 1944, although that, too, has much hard factual content. I simply remind the House that Tito’s renaming of Vardar Banovina as the Republic of Macedonia in 1944 was a political statement. More than that, it was a territorial claim. It laid claim to territory in Greece and in Bulgaria. Notably, the objective was the warm water port of Salonika on the Aegean.
The Greeks fought a bloody civil war on that issue between 1945 and 1949, when we were celebrating the peace that was commemorated as recently as yesterday. Clause 49 of the constitution of the former Yugoslav republic of Macedonia enshrines that claim and subsequent propaganda, especially by a political faction, the VMRO, has kept the claim alive ever since.
Edward O’Hara, House of Commons Hansard Debates for 9 May 1995, Column 601
The idea that Alexander the Great was something that belonged to our history was in the minds of some extremist political groups only! These groups were insignificant the first years of our independence, but the big problem is that the old Balkan Nations have been used to be legitimized through their history. In the Balkans, if you want to be recognized as a Nation, you need to have history 3000 years old. So since you made us invent a history, we invented it!(…) You forced us to the arms of the extreme nationalists who today claim that we are direct descendants of Alexander the Great!
Denko Maleski, first Minister of foreign affairs of FYROM (1991 to 1993) and ambassador to the United Nations from 1993 to 1997, in an interview to Greek TV channel Mega, November 2006
The borders between Greece and Serbia were defined in 1913 on the basis of the advances of the armies of the two nations during the first Balkan war. The border between Greece and Bulgaria was defined at the Treaty of Bucharest. Since then, the borders of the three nations had remained the same. Macedonia, a region mostly of Greece since ancient times, was divided into three perhaps even four parts, with Greece keeping the largest portion of about 50%, then-Yugoslavia receiving about 35%, Bulgaria about 10% and a small percentage eventually ending in Albania. The Greek people on the portion of the Macedonia part in Greece have been there since time immemorial — over more than forty centuries before the Slavs arrived. The language spoken in the Greek region since antiquity is Greek, whereas the language of the former-Yugoslavia portion is a Slavic dialect of Bulgarian (Marline Simons, The New York Times, February 3, 1992). As a matter of fact, the portion of Macedonia in then-Yugoslavia was part of the Eastern Branch of the Roman Empire. The people who ruled over Serbia spoke Greek. Constantinople was their headquarters. Their main trade was to the South and East…
Joseph C. Harsch, American journalist, “The Christian Science Monitor”, January 29, 1992
A)We are Bulgarians, more Bulgarians than the Bulgarians in Bulgaria themselves.
B)And, anyway, what sort of new Macedonian nation can this be when we and our fathers and grandfathers and great-grandfathers have always been called Bulgarians?
Krste Misirkov(voted “Macedonian” of the 20th century), “On Macedonian Matters”, Macedonian Review Editions 1974,(Sofia 1903).
the Macedonian Slavs had as late as the congress of Berlin exhibited no perceptible national consciousness of their own. It was therefore impossible to foretell in what direction they would lean when their awakening came; in fact, so indeterminate was the situation that under favorable circumstances they might even develop their own particular Macedonian consciousness.
Ferdinand Schevill, “History of the Balkans: From the Earliest Times to the Present Day.
The star of vergina applies to the 3rd Century BC northern Greece - a very different situation, not related to the 21st Century AD. I think it’s modern politics, and we’re witnessing the use of an archaeological symbol for history that it’s really not related to.
Bajana Mojsov, FYROM archaeologist, “BBC News (2004), When archaeology gets bent, BBC World Service, 2004, The World Today programme”, Accessed 12 October 2006
But even stranger is the name Macedonians, which was imposed on us only 10 to 15 years ago by outsiders, and not as something by our own intellectuals… Yet the people in Macedonia know nothing of that ancient name, reintroduced today with a cunning aim on the one hand and a stupid one on the other. They know the older word: “Bugari”, although mispronounced: they have even adopted it as peculiarly theirs, inapplicable to other Bulgarians. You can find more about this in the introduction to the booklets I am sending you. They call their own Macedono-Bulgarian dialect the “Bugarski language”, while the rest of the Bulgarian dialects they refer to as the “Shopski language”.
Kuzman Shapkarev, in a letter to Prof. Marin Drinov of May 25, 1888.
The possible creation of a Macedonian free state within Greece to amalgamate with Marshal Tito’s Federated Macedonia State, with is capital in Skopje[...]would fulfill the Slavic objectives of re-uniting the…province of Macedonia under Slavic rule, giving access of the sea to Bulgaria and Yugoslavia
THE NEW YORK TIMES, July 26, 1946
Though once the heart of the empire of Alexander the Great,(Macedonia) has been for centuries a geographical expression rather than a political entity, and is today inhabited by an inextricable medley of people, among whom the Serbs, now Yugoslavs, are certainly the least numerous. But a “Federal Macedonia” has been projected as an integral part of Tito’s plan for a federated Balkans…taking Greek Macedonia for an outlet to the Aegean Sea through Salonica.
THE NEW YORK TIMES, July 10, 1946
During the occupation[...]a combined effort was made to wrest Macedonia from Greece[...]an effort that allegedly continues, although in altered form[...] The main conspirational activity in Macedonia today appears to be directed from Skopje.
THE NEW YORK TIMES, July 16, 1946
The possible creation of a Macedonian free state within Greece to amalgamate with Marshal Tito’s Federated Macedonia State, with is capital in Skopje[...]would fulfill the Slavic objectives of re-uniting the…province of Macedonia under Slavic rule, giving access of the sea to Bulgaria and Yugoslavia.
THE NEW YORK TIMES, July 26, 1946
According to most reliable information, a secret meeting was held yesterday at Comi in southern Bulgaria[...]to draw up plans for a general rising in Greek Macedonia, with the ultimate object of incorporating that region with Salonica in an autonomous Macedonia under Yugoslav hegemony.
THE NEW YORK TIMES, August 19, 1946
The lack of capability by “Macedonists” in condition of democracy, also contributes to the vision of their opponents. The creation of the “Macedonian” nation, for almost half of a century, was done in a condition of single-party dictatorship. In those times, there was no difference between science and ideology, so the “Macedonian” historiography, unopposed by anybody, comfortably performed a selection of the historic material from which the “Macedonian” identity was created. There is nothing atypical here for the process of the creation of any modern nation, except when falsification from the type of substitution of the word “Bulgarian” with the word “Macedonian” were made. In a case which that was not possible, the persons from history were proclaimed for Bulgarian agents who crossed into some imaginary pure “Macedonian” space.
But when we had to encourage the moderate Greek political variant and move into a direction of reconciliation among peoples, our nationalism was modelled according to the Greek one. The direct descendants of Alexander the Great raised the fallen flag on which the constitutional name of the Republic of Macedonia was written and led the people in the final confrontation with the Hellenes (Greeks), the direct descendants of Greek gods. This warlike attitude of the “winners” which was a consequence of the fear of politician from heavy and unpopular compromises had its price. In those years, we lost our capability for strategic dialog. With Greeks? No, with ourselves. Since then, namely, we reach towards some fictional ethnic purity which we seek in the depths of the history and we are angry at those which dare to call us Slavs and our language and culture Slavic!? We are angry when they name us what we -if we have to define ourselves in such categories- are, showing that we are people full with complexes which are ashamed for ourselves. We lost our capability for reasonable judgment, someone shall say, because the past of the Balkans teaches us that to be wise among fools is foolish. Maybe. Maybe the British historians are right when they say that in history one can find confirmation for every modern thesis, so, we could say, also for the one that we are descendants of the Ancient Macedonia…
Denko Maleski, Minister of foreign affairs of the FYROM from 1991 to 1993 and ambassador to the United Nations from 1993 to 1997, in an interview to FYROMian newspaper Utrinski Vesnik, October 16, 2006The province of Thessalonica (Saloniki) had, together with Greece, been awarded to the warlike Marquis Boniface of Montferrat with the royal title. It comprised the greater part of ancient Macedonia and Boniface carried his victorious arms into Greece, where he everywhere divided the conquered territories among his knights; but having perished in a skirmish with the Bulgarians, in 1207, his kingdom was invaded by the Greek despot, Theodore of Epirus who was received with open arms by the Greeks, and crowned emperor at Thessalonica in 1222.
Adolphus Louis Koeppen, Danish historian, “The World in the Middle Ages: An Historical Geography, with Accounts of the Origin”, Appleton, p.409
For Macedonia to be recognized as an independent state, it would be necessary to change its name [...] It is historically proven that the Yugoslavian Democracy of Macedonia was created by Stalin, Tito and Dimitrov, aiming at the stealthy removal of a large part of Northern Greece. This Democracy was used during the period 1944-1949 in order to destabilise Greece.
Thomas Niles, US Ambassador, statement on the 23rd June 1992 to the SubCommittee of US Congress, Eleutherotypia newspaper, June 24, 1992
have even met people who believe there is a special race which they call ‘Macedonian’, whose ’cause’ they wish to aid. The truth is, that in a district which has no official frontiers, and never has had any stable ones, there are people of six races, who, as we have seen, all have causes to be considered [...] I shall speak only of the part I have stayed in- the districts of Lakes Ochrida and Prespa. Here there are Greeks, Slavs, Albanians, and Vlahs. Of Turks, except officials and such of the army as may be quartered on the spot, there are few. The Albanians, I believe, are all Moslem. Should there be any Christians they would be officially classed as Greeks. A large part of the land near Lake Prespa is owned by Moslem Albanians as “chiftliks” (farms).
Edith Durham, “The Burden of the Balkans”, (1905), p. 76
But the Bulgarians, from the palace down to the meanest hut, have always been animated by that racial and national idea. The annexation of Eastern Roumelia in 1885 was a great step in the direction of its realization. And it was to carry that programme to completion that Bulgaria made war against Turkey in 1912. Her primary object was the liberation of the Bulgarians in Macedonia and their incorporation in a Great Bulgaria. And the Treaty of Partition with Servia seemed, in the event of victory over Turkey, to afford a guarantee of the accomplishment of her long-cherished purpose. It was a strange irony of fate that while as a result of the geographical situation of the belligerents Bulgaria, at the close of the war with Turkey, found herself in actual occupation of all European Turkey from the Black Sea up to the River Struma and beyond,–that is, all Thrace to Chataldja as well as Eastern Macedonia–her allies (Bulgaria’s) were in possession of the bulk of Macedonia, including the entire triangle she had planned to inject between the frontiers of New Servia and New Greece!
American educationist Jacob Gould Schurman, The Balkan Wars: 1912-1913
Attention may have been deflected from the danger in that area by the nature of the dispute between Macedonia and Greece, which is seen as being ostensibly over a name, although it amounts to more than that. A name is important as it gives an area an identity. I shall not indulge in a lecture on the ancient identity of the Macedonians and on Philip II of Macedon and Alexander the Great, but the Greeks were historically correct in the campaign that they launched in the early days of the dispute. Understandably, detached outsiders say, “But that is ancient history, isn’t it?” Nor shall I engage in a lecture on the falsification of the history of Slavo-Macedonia since 1944, although that, too, has much hard factual content. I simply remind the House that Tito’s renaming of Vardar Banovina as the Republic of Macedonia in 1944 was a political statement. More than that, it was a territorial claim. It laid claim to territory in Greece and in Bulgaria. Notably, the objective was the warm water port of Salonika on the Aegean.
The Greeks fought a bloody civil war on that issue between 1945 and 1949, when we were celebrating the peace that was commemorated as recently as yesterday. Clause 49 of the constitution of the former Yugoslav republic of Macedonia enshrines that claim and subsequent propaganda, especially by a political faction, the VMRO, has kept the claim alive ever since.
Edward O’Hara, House of Commons Hansard Debates for 9 May 1995, Column 601
Why are we ashamed and flee from the truth that whole positive Macedonian revolutionary tradition comes exactly from exarchist part of Macedonian people? We shall not say a new truth if we mention the fact that everyone, Gotse Delchev, Dame Gruev, Gjorche Petrov, Pere Toshev - must I list and count all of them - were teachers of the Bulgarian Exarchate in Macedonia.
Former Prime Minister and Vice President of FYROM, Ljubčo Georgievski, 2007, in his book “Слицекъмистината” (”Facing the truth”).
Το Link για την ιστορία του Μέγα Αλέξανδρου απο Επίσημο Ελληνικό Κυβερνητικό site παραπέμπει στο….ΣκοπιανόHistoryofmacedonia.org!!!!!
Για τέτοιες τεράστιες γκάφες μιλάμε!!! Αν η Ελληνική κυβέρνηση κάνει στα sites της, Links σε Σκοπιανά sites τότε καταλαβαίνουμε που βαδίζουμε!!!
By Christos
UPDATE: Έπειτα απο την άμεση προβολή του θέματος και απο άλλα διάφορα γνωστά blogs (Akritas-Ιστορία της Μακεδονίας, GreekAlert, HeLLeNiCReVeNgE) καθώς και πολλά e-mails διαμαρτυρίας, οι υπεύθυνοι του Greek News Agenda διέγραψαν το link. Ελπίζουμε στο μέλλον να υπάρξει γενικά μια πιο προσεκτική εξέταση σε θέματα που έχουν να κάνουν με τοσο ευαίσθητα Εθνικά θέματα. Τις ευχαριστίες μας σε όλους που βοήθησαν με οποιοδήποτε τρόπο στην επίλυση του θέματος.
Entries (RSS)