Archive for February 2007

Alexander I of Macedon in Olympics

February 22, 2007


XXII. Now that these descendants of Perdiccas are Greeks, AS THEY THEMSELVES SAY, I MYSELF CHANCE TO KNOW AND WILL PROVE IT in the later part of my history. Furthermore, the Hellenodicae who manage the contest at Olympia determined that it is so, [2] for when Alexander chose to contend and entered the lists for that purpose, the Greeks who were to run against him wanted to bar him from the race, saying that the contest should be for Greeks and not for foreigners. Alexander, however, proving himself to be an Argive, was judged to be a Greek. He accordingly competed in the furlong race and tied step for first place. This, then, is approximately what happened.

Firstly, we should examine who exactly were the “Hellanodikae” and their responsibilities.

Hellanodikai had unlimited responsibilities that could be seperated in two parts, administrative and judicial. As Administrative tool, Hellanodikai had also first of all, the responsibility of applying the rules in reference to the athletes, among them to check if an athlete met all the necessary participation requirements like Alexander’s Philhellene case.

“Distinctively dressed in puprple robes and allowed the priviledge of elevated seating (while others sat on the ground or stood), the Hellanodikai admitted or excluded competitors, assigned them to Age-classes,…”

[Sport in the Ancient World from A to Z] by Mark Golden

“the people who shared in the Greek ethnic identity were the people who perceived themselves to be Greeks, and whose self-perception was shared by those who had the dominant role in ‘controlling” the boundaries of Greekness, such as, in the fifth century, the Hellanodikai who controlled participation in the Olympic games

[Herodotus and his world, Essays from a conference in memory of George Forrest] By Robert Parker, Peter Derow


Knowing by now exactly their responsibilities we will try and analyze the above quote of Herodotus.

1. First thing coming in mind is why didnt Hellanodikae, the ones having the dominant role in ‘controlling” the boundaries of Greekness of an athlete, excluded Alexander in first place?? It is indicative that initialy ONLY the other athletes protested and NOT Hellanodikae. In reality, Hellanodikae – whose judgement was considered sacred – were the ones that should forbid in the first place, participation of Alexander I if they thought he was a Barbarian.

Evidently that was *not* the case!!! After the incident, Hellanodikae had to simply ‘investigate’ the claim of the other athletes – as its being done even in the modern athletics with judges – and Alexander proved to them he was a Greek and he was accepted by them as a bona fide competitor. So, the head of the games concluded that the lineage presented was reasonable and consistent with their Peloponnesian accounts.

2. To quote John Whitehorne: “In the race itself, Alexander came in equal first (Herodotus 5.22) making the entire issue even more suspect to the ground that the original protest by his rivals may well have a claim to be regarded as one of the earliest recorded examples of those “dirty tricks” which so beset modern sport.”

3. Did Athletes in ancient Olympics could employ “dirty tricks” in order to exclude an athlete’s participation in olympic games??

Answer: Yes! There are a few examples. In one of these, Themistocles urges the exclusion of the tyrant Hieron of Syracuse in Olympic games, accusing him that he neglected to help militarily against Persians. (Lysias also urged the exclusion of Dionysious a century later). Noone can ignore the fact Hieron had the best horses at that time in Greek world and his chariots were the absolute favourite to win again Olympic games as they did 4 years earlier.

4. It is also indicative the moment Alexander I the Philhellene, announced his Temenid origin to all bystanders. Among Bystanders were certainly Argives and other Peloponessians. On the sound of the names “Temenos” and “Hercules” used by Alexander to trace his descent, they would strongly protest if it was not true. Noone did but contrary we find evidence of the same Alexander taking part in the Argive Heraea together with other Argives. Hence those Argives and Peloponessians were aware of a number of Temenids having indeed migrated to Macedonia and the Argive origin of Macedonian kings is beyond any doubt.

5. Macedonia at the time being, was isolated from the rest of Greece. Greeks generally regarded it as a primitive backwater, inhabited except from Macedonians, also by semi-savage barbarians, mostly of Thracian stock. These Barbarians were remnants of indigenous populations who had been incorporated into Macedonian kingdom during and after Macedonian expansions. Macedonian political institutions were tribal to say the least and their customs, social values were primitive, to the degree that city-state Greeks thought about isolated Macedonia at all from the perspective of snobbish contempt and not in ethnological sense.

6. Herodotos who visited them (5th century) said both Macedonian kings and population were Greeks and particularly of Dorian stock.

Source: Lysimachos Articles

The ‘Hellenization’ argument contradiction about ancient macedonians

February 19, 2007

 Whenever the issue of ancient Macedonian greekness arises, i notice the same contradiction over and over. Until now as we all know all the archaeological inscriptions found and mostly Pella’s curse tablet of 4th cent. BC, which is the oldest ancient ‘Macedonian’ text we have, are proving that Macedonians spoke a dialect related to North-West Greek, and this is a something the entirety of the scientific community agrees on.

 Now, if archaeologists discover eg. an inscription written in a different language, and its older than the existing ones, this is obviously evidence that Macedonia had a language/dialect which was not greek. But if they dont, as they havent found all these decades, this is only taken as evidence, that ancient Macedonia was simply ‘Hellenized’.

 In other words, according to what people claim, if they find archaeological discoveries, older than the existing in a different language that’s proof Macedonia wasnt greek and if they dont, its proof Macedonia was ‘hellenized’ therefore it wasnt greek again.

Same contradiction exists with other arguments i read every now and then about Alexander declaring in every chance he was given that he was greek. The explanation of some is usually that Alexander was doing “propaganda”. All these examples, mean exactly, nothing at all could be accepted as evidence that Macedonians were of greek origin since only evidence that they were not is counted.

It is logical that in order to perform a genuine discussion of a theory people must permit the possibility of evidence that would count against it. If you do not, the discussion cannot be genuine or constructive, because a discussion that is run with the presumption that nothing could count as a failure of a point is no real discussion at all, but rather its a joke.

Modern Writers about the Bulgarian origin of FYROM’s slavs Part II

February 17, 2007


According to Mustakov, Yane asserted that, in spite of believing in the possibility of Turkey’s regeneration, HE WAS STILL A PURE BULGARIAN AT HEART, and he spoke bitterly of those who accused him of lack of patriotism, of hostility towards Bulgaria, etc., when he had done nothing for Turkey which had harmed his own people, when he had protected them against what they had suffered in other regions, when he had preserved his arms (and even increased them) and was always ready, when necessary, to win something through revolution.

For Freedom and Perfection. The Life of Yane Sandansky
M. MacDermott (1988)


It was my intention to make Castoria my central position, from which to make radial excursions to different points of the environs. All those it was not, however, in my power to accomplish, for various reasons, one of which was, that the surrounding inhabitants in general understood only their own tongue, that of the modern Bulgarians

“Travels in Epirus, Albania, Macedonia, and Thessaly”, F. Pouqueville (1820)


My first expedition was directed northwards for Monastir, or Bitolia, the seat of the general government of Macedonia. Travelling by Visani and Papso-Derveni, over the spurs of Mount Sarakina, I arrived at a ford over a river running, like all the small streams on my route, to the eastward. This river the Bulgarian inhabitants called the Vardar of the Sarigul (the yellow lake,) to distinguish it from the other Vardar, the Axius of antiquity; and I concluded it to be the Erigon

“Travels in Epirus, Albania, Macedonia, and Thessaly”, F. Pouqueville (1820)


Pushing forward beyond the Erigon for an hour, in compliance with the desire of my guides, who expected every step to be beset by robbers, we came to Machala, a large Bulgarian village, on a river still running eastward.

“Travels in Epirus, Albania, Macedonia, and Thessaly”, F. Pouqueville (1820)


Consulting with my guide, we turned northward up the course of the Devol to Bobsouri, a Bulgarian village, where we passed the night.

“Travels in Epirus, Albania, Macedonia, and Thessaly”, F. Pouqueville (1820)


A league north-north-west from Gheortcha, after crossing the Devol on a stone bridge, if you turn north, you enter a derven or narrow gorge of the mountain, watered by a small stream. Following it for a league and-a-half below the village of Panta-Vinia, are seen the remains of an acropolis, probably the site of Sation; and nearly opposite, a league to the westward, is the village Mocrena. To the northward, and below these villages, inhabited by Bulgarians, commences an open space of ground, which expands for a distance of four miles on to the lake of Ochrida or Lychnidus

“Travels in Epirus, Albania, Macedonia, and Thessaly”, F. Pouqueville (1820)


At the discharge of the lake is situated Strunga, (Stronges in Procopius,) divided by the Drin, as Geneva at the discharge of its lake is divided by the Rhone, the two parts being connected by a wooden bridge, where the river is the narrowest. The inhabitants of the town, where a much frequented fair is held annually on the 8th September, are 3,000, one-fifth of them mussulmans. The course of the Drin northwards is the limit between the Bulgarian language on the east, and the Albanian on the west. From the West end of Strunga proceed two ronds, the one northwards to the Dibras, Scutari, and Dalmatia; the other southwards up the west bank of the lake, to the pass over the hills info the valley of the Devol, or Genusus, and to Elbassan and Durazzo

“Travels in Epirus, Albania, Macedonia, and Thessaly”, F. Pouqueville (1820)


the Macedonian question has been the cause of every great European war for the last fifty years, and until that is settled there will be no more peace either in the Balkans or out of them. Macedonia is the most frightful mix-up of races ever imagined. Turks, Albanians, Serbs, Rumanians, Greeks, and Bulgarians live there side by side without mingling

“War in Eastern Europe”, John Reed (Scribners, London, 1916)

Scientists about Rosetta Stone – FYROM’s propaganda exposed

February 16, 2007

TheHellenisticPtolemaic dynasty,which ruled Egypt from 305 BC to 30 BC, issued a series of decrees over the course of their reign known as Ptolemaic Degrees. The Rosetta Stone is a well-known example of one of the decrees.

The Rosetta Stone was included in the third part of a series of three decrees, the first from Ptolemy III (the Decree of Canopus), the second from Ptolemy IV (The Memphis Stele), and the third from Ptolemy V.

There are approximately two copies of the Stone of Canopus, two of the Memphis Stele (one imperfect) and two and a half copies of the text of the Rosetta Stone, including the Nubayrah Stele and a pyramid wall inscription with “edits”, or scene replacements, completed by subsequent scribes.

Multiple copies of the stones were erected in multiple temple courtyards, as specified in the text of the decrees.

stone 1: Stele of Canopus, (no. 1), found 1866, 37 lines hieroglyphs, 74 lines Demotic (right side), 76 lines Greek ‘capitals’, fine limestone.
stone 2: Stele of Canopus, no. 2, found 1881, 26 lines hieroglyphs, 20 lines Demotic, 64 lines Greek ‘capitals’, white limestone. 3rd partial of hieroglyphic lines (location: Louvre).

stone 1: Stele No. 1, found 1902, hieroglyphs, demotic, and Greek, dark granite.
stone 2: Pithom Stele, No. II, found 1923, hieroglyphs (front), 42 lines Demotic (back), virtually complete providing almost total translation, and Greek (side), sandstone.

  • 196 BC, Decree of Memphis (Ptolemy V), (203–198 BC)

stone 1: Rosetta Stone, “Stele of Rosetta”, found 1799, (remaining) hieroglyphs, 14 lines, 32 lines Demotic, 54 lines Greek ‘capitals’, dark granite-(granodiorite).
stone 2: Stele of Nubayrah, found early 1880’s, hieroglyphs, lines 1-27 used to complete missing Rosetta Stone lines, demotic, Greek capitals, limestone. site 3: the Temple of Philae, inscribed hieroglyphs, for Decree of Memphis (Ptolemy V), on walls, also overwritten, by scenes, and figures of humans/gods. Totals: 6 stones, or stelae, 1 partial, and 1 temple wall inscription writing.

As you realize from the above all Degrees have three written texts

  • Egyptian Hieroglyphs
  • Egyptian Demotic
  • Ancient Greek



The bilingual (not trilingual) inscription on the Rosetta Stone is written from right to left in the two forms of Egyptian writing and in Greek. It was the fashion at one time to compare the inscription on the Rosetta Stone with the great Inscription which Darius I had cut upon the rock at Bahistun in Persia, and to describe each of these documents as trilingual. But it must be remembered that the Decree on the Rosetta Stone is bilingual, though written in three kinds of writing, and that the Bahistun Inscription is trilingual, and written in three languages (Persian, Susian, and Babylonian) in three different kinds of cuneiform character. The Greek portion of the inscription on the Rosetta Stone is written in uncials ; it contains 54 lines of text, the last 26 of which are imperfect at the ends.

“The Rosetta Stone” By E A Wallis Budge, Page 40


The Rosetta stone which should really be called the Memphis Decree after the place where the document was probably first composed and “published”, is often described as a trilingual stela. This is not quite accurate. First of all, no version of the text could be properly described as an accurate translation of the others. Secondly, the stela presents roughly the same text written in three different scripts, but not in three languages. There are really only two unrelated tongues here, Greek and Egyptian, but the latter occurs in two dialects, each in its own script.

“Semitic Papyrology in Context” Kael Marinus Braun, Page 3


In its present state the Rosetta Stone is an irregularly shaped slab of compact black basalt which measures abot 3 ft. 9 in. by 2 ft. 4 1/2 in. by 11 in. and the top corners and the righthand bottom corner are wanting. It is inscribed with 14 lines of hieroglyphic text, 32 lines of Demotic and 54 lines of Greek. The inscription on the Stone is bilingual and is written in Egyptian and in Greek. The Egyptian portion is in hieroglyphs and also in Demotic characters.

The Mummy: A Handbook of Egyptian Funerary Archaelogy By E A Wallis Budge, Page 124


Rosetta Stone. The Rosetta Stone, written in Greek, Demotic and Egyptian hieroglyphics, is a decree produced at a general council of priests..

“In Defense of Nature: The History Nobody Told You about” by Richard Michael Pasichnyk, P. 163


At the top of the Rosetta Stone are Egyptian hieroglyphics, in the middle is Egyptian demotic script, and at the bottom is Greek.

“Academic American Encyclopedia”, Page 160


It is made of black granite, its top register written in hieroglyphic, the middle demotic.

“Discoveries and Documents: An Introduction to the Archaeology of the Old Testament”, Page 7 by Edgar Jones, 1974


The Rosetta stone consists of fourteen lines of Egyptian hieroglyphics (shown above); thirty-two lines of Egyptian Demotic, and fifty-four lines of ancient Greek

Historical Deception: Untold story of Ancient Egypt”, By Moustafa Gadalla, page 23


Then in the summer of 1799, the Rosetta Stone was discovered. This slab of basalt was engraved with three versions of the same story, written in hieroglyphs on top, Egyptian cursive demotic script in the middle and the more familiar greek in the bottom.

Knowledge Management Handbook By Jay Liebowitz


Copies of the decree in the Egyptian (Hieroglyphic and demotic) and Greek languages were ordered to be cut on stele, which were to be set up in every temple of the first, second, and third class in Egypt.

Short History of the Egyptian People 1914 By E. A. Wallis Budge, page 155


He recognized the shorthand nature of the demotic writing on the Rosetta Stone

“Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt”, Page 192 by Kathryn A. Bard, Steven Blake Shubert, 1999

Indisputable Evidence of FYROM’s Slavs being originally Bulgarians

February 15, 2007

Invitation from the central Bulgarian revolutionary commitee BMPO to all Bulgars in Skopje….

Translation:”YOU, Bulgarian, in the name of the patriotism, freedom and saving your life, pay to the bearer of this invitation the sum of … ”

See Bulgarian “SVOBODA”

[url=]Documents related to the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization. Goce Delcev, Dame Gruev, oath of Vmro and more.[/url]

Bulgarian Ilinden flag (See Bulgarian “Svoboda”):

 The Pseudomacedonian Bulgarian ILINDEN!

[url=]eBay: 1926 Macedonia Book Ilinden (Artikel 110058638780 endet 28.11.06 16:37:09 MEZ)[/url]

The FYROMIAN Bulgar Kultura ! Revolucionary flag made it in Struga – an unique example of sacrificied of woman for freedom See Bulgarian “Svoboda”

[url=]EKP Gallery: d-r Dusko Konstantinov[/url]

 See Bulgarian VMRO(BMPO) 1924


VMRO BLACK MAIL VOUCHER.RRR – With signed by Todor Aleksandrov, a member of the IMRO Central Committee, [url=]eBay: BULGARIA/MACEDONIA 20000 LEVA 1924 VMRO BLACK MAIL VOUC (Artikel 120068973913 endet 03.01.07 19:12:33 MEZ)[/url]

1932 Macedonia Share in VMRO Financial Org Share from 1932 for endow in the VMRO financiail organization ” Committee of peoples stock capital”. [url=]1932 Macedonia Share in VMRO Financial Org in > Documents > Paper Antiques, Postcards, Posters, War, World war, Militaria, PCs, Collectible, Collectibles, WWII, WWI, WW1, historical, artifacts, authentic, rare, originals, Gallery, Ancient, Shop, Item[/url]

BMPO !See SVOBODA(Bulgarian language)! Not “Sloboda” 


BMRO was first established in 1893 under the name of Bulgarian Macedono-Odrin Revolutionary Organisation(BMPO). See in BULGARIAN language “Svoboda”:


 Ilinden Bulgarians revolutionary and Military! 


Bulgarski Krushevo Republic!

[url=]Bash Bugarash Gallery (Krushevo2.jpg)[/url] Bulgarians in Bitola!

 [url=]Bash Bugarash Gallery (posreshtane_bgcheti_bitolja_mladoturskarevol.jpg)[/url] Bulgarians in Strumica! [url=]Bash Bugarash Gallery (pechat_i_blanka-strumica.jpg)[/url] Bulgarians in Kumanovo 1908!

 The Bulgarian society in Skopje

 The Bulgarian society in Veles

 Bulgarian municipality – Prilep

 Theophylacti Bulgariae archiepiscopi In omnes divi Pauli apostoli epistolas enarrationes THEOPHYLACTUS, arcivescovo di Ochrida

[url=]Biblioteca comunale di Empoli – Catalogo delle edizioni del Cinquecento – Scheda 785[/url] [url=]Biblioteca comunale di Empoli – Catalogo delle edizioni del Cinquecento – Frontespizio 785[/url] Theophylacti archiepiscopi Bulgariae In quator Evangelia enarrationes THEOPHYLACTUS, arcivescovo di Ochrida [url=]Biblioteca comunale di Empoli – Catalogo delle edizioni del Cinquecento – Scheda 652[/url] [url=]Biblioteca comunale di Empoli – Catalogo delle edizioni del Cinquecento – Frontespizio 652[/url]

 [B]they will ask if we are not thinking of creating a new Macedonian nation[/B]. [B]Such a thing would be ARTIFICIAL AND SHORT-LIVED[/B].

Krste Misirkov: “Many people will want to know what sort of national separatism we are concerned with; they will ask if we are not thinking of creating a new Macedonian nation. Such a thing would be artificial and short-lived. 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? Have the Macedonians in their history ever found any outward form of spiritual and political expression? What have been their relations to the other Balkan nations and vice versa?

[url=]Krste Misirkov – On Macedonian Matters – Can Macedonia turn itself into a separate ethnographical and political unit? Has it already done so? Is it doing so now?[/url]

Some villages have Serbian schools and some have Bulgarian schools. “ the towns Serbian schools can be found alongside the Bulgarian boys’ and girls’ elementary and grammar schools. [B]Some villages have Serbian schools and some have Bulgarian schools. [/B]Some villagers, along with their teachers and priests, recognize the Patriarchate and come under the protection of the Serbian or Greek consul, while others recognize the Bulgarian Exarchate and place themselves under the authority of the Bulgarian trade representatives.

-Misirkov Krste “what is the Macedonian Slav nation? [B][U]Macedonian as a nationality has never existed, they will say, and it does not exist now. There have always been two Slav nationalities in Macedonia: Bulgarian and Serbian[/U][/B]. So, any kind of Macedonian Slav national revival is simply the empty concern of a number of fantasists who have no concept of South Slav history.”

-Misirkov Krste “It was upon their initiative that in the eighteen nineties [B]a nationalist-SEPARATIST movement was first formed with the aim of DIVORCING Macedonian interests from those of Bulgaria[/B] by introducing a Macedonian tongue which would serve as the literary language of all Macedonians.”

Misirkov Krste, “On Macedonian matters” MISIRKOV:”[B]We are Bulgarian more than the Bulgarians in Bulgaria. The population of Skopje is pure Bulgarian. “Our fathers, grandfathers, and great grandfathers have always been called Bulgarians[/B]”

-Krste Misirkov but what can we possibly do [B]when we ourselves are Bulgarians [/B]…….

Text of Delcev’s letter to Nikola Maleshevski:[B]WE ARE BULGARIANS[/B]! “[I]Sofia, 01.05.1899, Kolyo, … May the dissents and cleavages not frighten you. It is really a pity, but what can we possibly do when we ourselves are Bulgarians and all suffer from the same disease! If this disease had not existed in our forefathers who passed it on to us, we wouldn’t have fallen under the ugly sceptre of the Turkish sultans[/I]…”

 We are Bulgarians and we always work and will work for the unification of the Bulgariandom.” –Dame Gruev (Director of the Bulgarian school in Stip). „@N EXCERPT FROM THE MEMORANDUM SENT TO THE BULGARIAN GOVERNMENT BY THE ILINDEN UPRISING’S LEADERS ” Considering the critical and terrible situation that [B]the Bulgarian population of the Bitola Vilayet[/B] found itself in and following the ravages and cruelties done by the Turkish troops and irregulars, … considering the fact that everything Bulgarian runs the risk of perishing and disappearing without a trace because of violence, hunger, and the upcoming misery, the Head Quarters finds it to be its obligation to draw the attention of the respected Bulgarian government [B]to the pernicious consequences vis-a-vis the Bulgarian nation, in case the latter does not fulfill its duty towards its brethren of race here [/B]in an imposing fashion which is necessary by virtue of the present ordeal [B]for the common Bulgarian Fatherland[/B]… …Being in command of our people’s movement, we appeal to you [B]on behalf of the enslaved Bulgarian to help him in the most effective way[/B] – by waging war.We believe that the response of the people in free Bulgaria will be the same. … No bulgarian school is opened, neither will it be opened… Nobody thinks of education when he is outlawed by the state because[B] he bears the name Bulgar… [/B]Waiting for your patriotic intervention, we are pleased to inform you that we have in our disposition the armed forces we have spared by now.

The Head Quarters of the Ilinden Uprising” Damian GRUEV, Boris SARAFOV, Atanas LOZANTCHEV

Bulgarian komitatji Todor Aleksandrov!:WE ARE BULGARS

 “ Respected representatives of the Bulgarian people, …. Here is a excerpt from a letter written in 1861 by the people of Ohrid in protest to the arbitrariness of the Greek metropolite Meletius in which they insist on the restoration of the Ohrid Archbishopric closed back in 1767. ” Respected representatives of the Bulgarian people, The undersigned inhabitants of Justiniana Prima or Ohrid, after seeing, on one hand, that regardless of all our hopes our common mother, the Great Church of Christ, did not pay attention to the petitions submitted to Her one after another in which we kindly beg Her to change Metropolite Meletius appointed against our will and requests, and ,on the other hand, informed that all our Bulgarian people is indignant with the same at the Great Church of Chris, considered it our inevitable duty to appoint you and recognize you, in accordance with our people, as our plenipotentiary representatives so you can petition, in the kindest fashion, the Sublime Porte to hear our our requests and deliver us from the arbitrariness of the Greek clergy by affirming the restoration of an autocephalous archbishopric of Ohridian Prima Justiniana and all Bulgaria….

April 9th, 1861 Prima Justiniana or Ohrid There are no ‘Macedonians’. There are Bulgars! “Let me begin by correcting an almost universal fallacy. There are no ‘Macedonians’. There are Bulgars. There are Roumans – the relics of the Latin-speaking provincials of Rome’s Illyrian provinces, who still hold their own in the Pindus range and in the neighboring towns. There are Greeks, including more or less superficially Hellenized Roumans. There are ‘Turks,’ including Mohammedan Bulgarians, and some true Turkish villages in the Vardar valley representing a settlement earlier than the Ottoman conquest. There is an infusion of Skipetars or Albanians on the western and northern fringe. Finally, there is the large Spanish Jew population in Salonika. But there are no ‘Macedonians’.” Sir Arthur J. Evans. English archaeologist.London Times, on September 30, 1903 STALIN:That a Macedonian consciousness has not yet developed among the population is of no account. Otecestven Vestnik (Sofia daily), 19 June 1991 STALIN TO BULGARIAN DELEGATION (G. Dimitrov, V. Kolarov, T. Kostov) The Kremlin, 7 June 1946 Cultural autonomy must be granted to Pirin Macedonia within the framework of Bulgaria. Tito has shown himself more flexible than you – possibly because he lives in a multiethnic state and has had to give equal rights to the various peoples. Autonomy will be the first step towards the unification of Macedonia, but in view of the present situation there should be no hurry on this matter. Otherwise, in the eyes of the Macedonian people the whole mission of achieving Macedonian autonomy will remain with Tito and you will get the criticism. You seem to be afraid of Kimon Georgiev, you have involved yourselves too much with him and do not want to give autonomy to Pirin Macedonia. That a Macedonian consciousness has not yet developed among the population is of no account. No such consciousness existed in Byelorussia either when we proclaimed it a Soviet Republic. However, later it was shown that a Byelorussian people did in fact exist. … creation of a “Socialist Republic of Macedonia” with Skopje as capital is only a sad farce.

Dear Sir, The magazine HISTORIA has just provided me with the very beautiful book that you so kindly sent me. I have first of all admired the presentation and then was struck by its contents. Your thesis is brilliant. [B]The Macedonians are and have always been Greeks, and the creation of a “Socialist Republic of Macedonia” with Skopje as capital is only a sad farce.[/B] I will not miss, when the opportunity arises, to pass this on. In thanking you for having so kindly sent me your book, which has interested me even more, having myself written many works on Byzantium, I beg you to believe, dear Sir, by best feelings.


[B]Gligorov or Gligoroff in Skopje 1942:WE ARE BULGARS ![/B]

The referred Slavs were only “Serbian” and “Bulgarian” The deliberately misleading use of the terms “Macedonians” and “Slavs” is exposed by two irrefutable Turkish documents. One is a population census of 1905, published by an Italian firm and the other is an election announcement of 1912 from Monastir (now Bitolj), which describes the candidates as Turks, Greeks, and Bulgarians. There was no such thing as “Macedonian” nationality during the Turkish period either. The referred Slavs were only “Serbian” and “Bulgarian” (see Document No 10). [url=]Nikolaos Martis: MACEDONIA[/url]

Ohrid:”Shepherd of the Bulgarians, remember the ruler Andronicos Palleologus, when sacrificing”. Shroud, XIII c. Ochrid Presented by the Emperor Andronicos II Palleologus (1282-1328) to the Ochrid Archbishop, inscribed with gold fibers: “[B]Shepherd of the Bulgarians[/B], remember the ruler Andronicos Palleologus, when sacrificing”. (National Museum of History, Sofia)

 USKUB 1915:

Modern Writers about the Bulgarian origin of FYROM’s slavs

February 14, 2007


The town of Monastir, capital of the vilayet of Monsastir, lies just about half way between Bulgarian and Greek territory. North, the majority of Macedonians are Bulgar, south the majority are Hellenes. The villages meet, cross, and mix in the Monastir vilayet. The reason, therefore, we hear so much about disturbances at Monastir is not because the Turks there are more wicked than Turks elsewhere, but because there is a persistent feud between Greek and Bulgarian political religionists.
Monastir is an undistinguished, motley sort of town of some 60,000 nhabitants, 14,000 of them Greek, 10,000 of them Bulgarian, four or five thousand Albanian, two or three thousand Jew, and the rest Turk.

“Pictures From The Balkans” by John Foster Fraser (published in 1906), chapter 20.


But who are the Macedonians? You will find Bulgarians and Turks who call themselves Macedonians, you find Greek Macedonians, there are Servian Macedonians, and it is possible to find Roumanian Macedonians. You will NOT, however, find a single Christian Macedonian who is not a Servian, a Bulgarian, a Greek, or a Roumanian. They all curse the Turk, and they love Macedonia. But it is Greek Macedonia, or Bulgarian Macedonia, and their eyes flame with passion, whilst their fingers seek the triggers of their guns

“Pictures From The Balkans” by John Foster Fraser (published in 1906), PAGE 5


They visited the Bulgarian villages, levied contributions, and stored arms, so that on an appointed day there might be a rising against the Turk, and Bulgarian Macedonians be liberated from their oppressors for ever. Naturally they were greeted as heroes;

“Pictures From The Balkans” by John Foster Fraser (published in 1906), PAGE 8


i have some hope that in years to come the inhabitants will think less of their Turkish, Bulgarian or Greek Origin and a great deal more with the fact that they are all Macedonians.

“Pictures From The Balkans” by John Foster Fraser (published in 1906), PAGE 17


There was petty persecution; Bulgarian Christians crossed from Macedonia into Bulgaria proper and told their tales of woe. Then followed raids by armed bands of Bulgarians into Turkey. In time associations were formed in Bulgaria and secret committees in Macedonia to aid the Bulgarian cause. In time came a congress and the formation of the ” High Committee,” having for its object the securing of political autonomy for Macedonia, and pledged, in order to secure it, to take any action ” which may be dictated by circumstances.” The consequence was that peaceful Bulgarians in Macedonia were forced into the revolutionary movement, compelled to secrete arms, made to contribute to the maintenance of the “bands,” and were put to death if they reported to the Turks, or were massacred by the Turks because they were revolutionaries. However oppressive the Turks had been, however zealous were good Bulgarians to save their fellow – countrymen and co- religionists in Macedonia from oppression, the revolutionary movement, as it is in Macedonia to-day, is the outcome of terror and murder.

“Pictures From The Balkans” by John Foster Fraser (published in 1906), PAGE 179 


Basil II of Constantinople in 1014 decided to end once and for all a war that had already lasted forty years. To break the spirit of the hated Bulgarians, he blinded all but 150 of 15,000 prisoners. The “lucky” 150 were blinded in one eye only. Every 100 blind men were guided by a one-eyed leader back to the Bulgarian capital of Ohdrid, whose ruler, Samuel , had received word that his army was returning to him. Samuel hastened to meet his men and found himself staring at thousand of helpless blind men. The sight was fatal. Samuel suffered a stroke on the spot and died two days later. (Basil II received the surname Bulgaroktonos, meaning “slayer of Bulgarians”, )

Isaac Asimov’s Book of Facts By Isaac Asimov, page 225



They population of Uskioub, consisting of Arnouts, Jews, Armenians, Zinzars, Greeks, Bulgarians and Servians, amounts to upwards of twelve thousand

“Travels in European Turkey, in 1850: Through Bosnia, Servia, Bulgaria, Macedonia, Thrace,…” By Edmund Spencer, page 28, Published 1851


As the day was drawing to a close, we descended into the vast plain of Bittoglia, where we had to ford several unimportant streams rushing onward to the sluggish waters of the karasu,..With the exception of a few Greeks and Zinzars, the congregation consisted of Bulgarians, EASILY DISTINGUISHED by their short, thick-set figures, honest open countenances, and the unvarying costume, we before described

“Travels in European Turkey, in 1850: Through Bosnia, Servia, Bulgaria, Macedonia, Thrace,…” By Edmund Spencer, page 46, Published 1851


Those of the vilayets of Adrianople and Macedonia , where, at the recent census, two-thirds of the inhabitants were found to be Bulgarians

“The Balkan Peninsula” by E. Laveleye, 1887, Page 251


The unfortunate Armenians are at the present time most piteously oppressed and pillaged by the Kurds, the Circassians, and more especially by Turkish functionaries. ‘Their condition is very similar to that of the Bulgarians in Macedonia

“The Balkan Peninsula” by E. Laveleye, 1887, Page 305


But having lived now with the Montenegrins, the Serbs, and the Bulgarian ‘Macedonians,’ I clung to the idea that somehow or other I must get right into Albanian territories

“The Burden of the Balkans” By M. Edith Durham 1863-1944, page 207


Vatatzes was now quick to perceive the high tide in his efforts and decided to sail with the current. He ventured north to take Melnik, and continued northeastward to capture Stenimachus, Tzapaena and other places in the upper valley of the Maritsa, which became the boundary between Bulgaria and the Nicene empire, all without a struggle, “as though he was taking over an inheritance from his father”. He pushed on into the far northwest, taking Velbuzd (Kustendil) on the upper strymon; moved south taking skopje and trip in teh vardar region; then through Veles, Prilep and Pelagonia in the plains of Monastir; and eastward again to the Vardar where he took Prosek. It was a triumphant progress from beginning to end, but the end was not yet. In less than three months Vatatzes had overrun all Sourthwestern Bulgaria.

The Papacy and the Levant, 1204-1571 By Kenneth Meyer Setton, page 62


Theodore Ducas began his spectacular reign over Epirus by an attack upon the Bulgarians (1216) from whom he seized the important towns of Ochrida and Prilep, extending his northeastern border to the plains of Monastir

The Papacy and the Levant, 1204-1571 By Kenneth Meyer Setton, page 43


In Monastir also, the majority of the inhabitants is Bulgarian, and Bulgarian is the language in the market

“We, the Macedonians”, by Constantine Stephanove


and Uskub, the great majority of the population is Slavic, … the middle ages until 1913 called themselves and were called by their neighbors Bulgarians

The Journal of International Relations By george h. blakeslee


Si la Bulgarie, après beaucoup d’hésitations et non sans regret, a fait le grand sacrifice d’abandonner Uskub, dont la population est bulgare

Documents diplomatiques français (1871-1914). By France. Commission de publication des documents relatifs aux origines de la guerre de 1914

Translation: If Bulgaria, after many hesitations and not without regret, did the great sacrifice and give up Uskub, whose population is Bulgarian


The writer who has frequently visited Monastir, can add his to mony to these pronouncements. The population of Monastir is Turkish, Bulgarian and Vlach

“The Quarterly Review” Published 1872, J. Murray


“In the house where the power resided, a BULGARIAN flag was put“: A wire of the Serbian cunsul in Bitola to the Moinister of the Foreign
Affairs of Serbia, 13 August 1903.

(Quote after Ilindenski Sbornik, 1903 – 1953, Skopje 1953, p. 40.)


Tagepost 15 August 1903:
“The Bitola pashalik has been took over by general common
movement. Krushevo has saluted the BULGARIAN banner and
wants temporary to proclaim a republic”.


Istambul, August 15, 1903:
The political situation in Macedonia continues to grow worse each week.[…]
The real foundation for all the trouble is the desire of the BULGARIAN
population for freedom from Turkish rule
, and were the powers to say to Bulgaria what they have already said to Turkey, “that under no conditions
would she be permitted to take one foot on additional soil”, the trouble
would be speedily ended , but this they will not do, and consequently the
twentieth century crusade against the Turks is likely to go on, as no power,
not excepting Germany, is to brave public opinion openly taking sides with
the Turks against the Christians”.


September 19, 1903:
“The Bulgarian government is in most delicate position…. and unless the
powers should intervene Bulgaria will be forced openly to embrace the
Macedonian cause. … I am quite of the opinion that the people in Bulgaria
will revolt against the government unless something be done…” writes the
American ambassador at the Porte, Leishman

John G. Leishman, US Ambassador to the Sublime Porte (serving 1900 – 1908)
to John Hay, American Secretary of State.Source: U.S. Deaprtment of State.
Diplomatic Despatches. Despatches from U.S. Ministers to Turkey, 1818 –
1906. National Archives Publications, M46, Roll 72, July 5 – October 29,


The name ANTES suggest this people was intermixed with Iranians, and linguists point to a large number of Iranian loanwords in Slavic that were acquired very early. This would not be surpsising if the Slavs came from Ukraine because they would have had contact with both Iranian Scythians and Sarmatians. Indeed the Sarmatians were still to be found in Backa and the Banat near the Danybe at the time Slavs arrived there.

The Early Medieval Balkans: a critical survey from the sixth to the late twelfth century By John Van Antwerp Fine, page 26


Most of the Balkans were settled by Slavs of one of the two types. (excluding the smaller groups of Slavic Slovenes and Turkic Avars in the western Balkans). Each one of these two main Slavic groups was to be named for a second conquering group who appeared later in te Seventh century.

The first of these two groups was the Bulgaro-Macedonians, whose Slavic component the Bulgarian historian Zlatarski derives from the Antes. They were conquered in the late seventh century by the Turkic Bulgars. The slavs eventually assimilated them, but the Bulgars’ name survived.

The Early Medieval Balkans: a critical survey from the sixth to the late twelfth century By John Van Antwerp Fine, page 36


Until the late nineteenth century both outside observers and those Bulgaro-Macedonians who had an ethnic consiousness believed that their group, which is NOW two seperate nationalities, comprised a SINGLE people, THE BULGARIANS. Thus the reader should IGNORE references to ethnic Macedonians in the Middle Ages which appear in some modern works. In the Middle Ages and into the nineteenth century, the term ‘Macedonian’ was used ENTIRELY in reference to a geographical region. Anyone who lived within its confines, regardless of nationality could be called a Macedonian.

The Early Medieval Balkans: a critical survey from the sixth to the late twelfth century By John Van Antwerp Fine, Page 37


It is the national identity of these Slav Macedonians that has been the most violently contested aspect of the whole Macedonian dispute, and is still being contested today. 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.

[Elisabeth Barker, “Macedonia, its place in Balkan power politics”,
(originally published in 1950 by the Royal Institute of International Affairs), p.10]


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 Skoplje 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”,
(originally published in 1950 by the Royal Institute of International Affairs), p.10]


May the heroic Serb people at last find the necessary moral force–and they have it, it dwells within them–to recognize spontaneously what has long and unanimously been recognized by history, science, and the national sentiment of the Macedonian population itself, which sees in the Bulgarians ITS BROTHERS in language and blood, and which has fought hand in hand with them for religion, life, and liberty.

[N.S. Derzhavin, “Bulgaro-Serb Relations and the Macedonian Question”, (1918)]


You seem to be afraid of Kimon Georgiev, you have involved yourselves too much with him and do not want to give autonomy to Pirin Macedonia. That a Macedonian consciousness HAS NOT YET DEVELOPED AMONG THE POPULATION IS OF NO ACCOUNT. No such consciousness existed in Byelorussia either when we proclaimed it a Soviet Republic. However, later it was shown that a Byelorussian people did in fact exist.

[Stalin to Bulgarian Delegation (G. Dimitrov, V. Korarov, T. Kostov) on 7 June 1946]


It should be remembered, to begin with, that there is NO Macedonian race, as a distinct type. Macedonians may belong to any of the races of Eastern Europe or Western Asia, as, indeed, they do. A Macedonian Bulgar is just the same as a Bulgar of Bulgaria proper, the old principality, that in October, 1908, at Tirnova, was proclaimed independent of Turkey. He looks the same, talks the same, and very largely, thinks the same way. IN SHORT HE IS OF THE SAME STOCK. There is no difference, whatsoever, between the two branches of the race, except that the Macedonian Bulgars, as a result of their position under the Turkish government, have less culture and education than their northern brethren.

[Arthur Douglas Howden Smith, “Fighting the Turk in the Balkans: An American’s Adventures with the Macedonian Revolutionists”, 1908, p. 4-5]


In general, however, the Macedonian Slavs differ somewhat both in appearance and character from their neighbours beyond the Bulgarian and Servian frontiers: the peculiar type which they present is probably due to a considerable admixture of Vlach, Hellenic, Albanian and Turkish blood, and to the influence of the surrounding races. Almost all independent authorities,however, agree that the bulk of the Slavonic population of Macedonia IS BULGARIAN. The principal indication is furnished by the language, which, though resembling Servian in some respects (e.g. the case-endings, which are occasionally retained), presents most of the characteristic features of Bulgarian.

[The 1911 Edition Encyclopedia, found online at: ]Bad title – LoveToKnow 1911


Modern turkish histories present the idea that the macedonian question was the essential ingredient in understanding the volatile mix of problems that ultimately led to Balkan wars. Because the population of Macedonia was primarily Bulgarian, it was influenced heavily by the events of 1878. It is very likely that the establishment of the greater Bulgaria envisioned by the treaty of San Stefano, and which included much of Macedonia whetted the nationalistic appetites of a substantial portion of the Bulgarian population of Macedonia.

“Defeat in Detail: The Ottoman Army in the Balkans, 1912-1913” By Edward J. Erickson, page 39


In Sofia, Bulgarians organized the Adrianople Region- MAcedonia Committee in 1890, and in Salonika, the internal Macedonian Revolutionary committee and Organization was formed in 1893.

“Defeat in Detail: The Ottoman Army in the Balkans, 1912-1913” By Edward J. Erickson, page 42


In order to pave the way to the annexation of Rumelia, the task before the Bulgarian imperialists was twofold. In the first place they had to detach the Slav-speaking inhabitants from the Patriarcate, and attach them to the Exarchate. But that in itself would not have been enough, because of the local distribution of the different races. The Hellenes, as we should expect, occupy the whole of the sea coast in a nearly solid mass, which shades off in approaching the centre and north. The Slav element is equally solid in the north, and fades away to almost nothing on approaching the sea. The danger which the statesmen of Sofia had to fear was an equitable partition of the country on these lines between the two natioanalities, which would leave Bulgaria bigger indeed, but without the coveted coastline of the Aegean, and without that reversion to Contantinople which is the prime goal of Balkan ambitions. […]

In order to justify the annexation of the entire territory between Bulgaria and the sea, therefore, it became necessary to create a FICTITIOUS country with a FICTITIOUS nationality. To return to the former illustration, we must imagine an independant Irish Republic desirous of adding the whole of Scottland to its dominion. It would be obliged, in the first place, to teach the Gaelic population that they were Irishmen, in order to enlist their support, and then to preach that Scotland was an invisible whole in order to establish a claim over the low lands.

[b]The Bulgarian propagandists found what they required in the word “Macedonia” a name with no more definite significance than Wessex or Languedoc.[/B] Unfortunately for themselves, the Greeks had been the first to make use of this name, with its classical associations, and to give it a wide extension to the north in interests of Hellenic expansion. As usual their exaggerated pretensions defeated themselves, and the Bulgars now hoist them with their own petard, by persuading Europe that Macedonia was a definite political entity, like Wales or Switzerland. [..]

The Macedonia thus constituted has no more national identity or cohesion than India. But the Christians on the whole outnumber the Moslems by probably four to three, and if the European Powers could be wrought upon to ignore the Moslem element in the population, as is so constantly done by European writers, and erect “Macedonia” into an autonomous state like Eastern Rumelia, Bulgaria would have the fairest prospect of repeating her former coup. It was possibly with a view to some such result that Gladstone threw out the phrase “Macedonia for the Macedonians”, a phrase which, be it said with all respect, could *not* have been used by any man of impartiality and intelligence who possesed a first hand knowledge of the country. The Bulgarians were prompt to adopt it, for the use against the Turks, while keeping that of Macedonia for the bulgars for use against the Greeks. Within the last few years, however, they have felt encouraged to lay claim openly to the remaining vilayet of Rumelia; the committee which directs the Folk War from Sofia has taken the name of “Macedonia-Adrianople” and bands of Comitadjis have been actively at work in the valley of the Martiza. IT IS THEREFORE NO LONGER NECESSARY TO DEMONSTRATE THE MYTHICAL CHARACTER OF THE “MACEDONIAN” nationality in the eyes of every element in the Macedonian population.

Allen Upward, The East End of Europe, London 1908, pp 25-27


And so the “Bulgarophone” villagers are no longer willing to admit they speak Bulgarian. They have coined a NEW term of their own accord, and henceforth, until they have got rid of it, is to be known as “Macedonian“. My Athenian friends were delighted when I told them of this on my return. It should give even greater pleasure to those Bulgarian agents who are SO ANXIOUS TO SEE THE MACEDONIANS TAUGHT THEY ARE MACEDONIANS

Allen Upward, The East End of Europe, London 1908, pp 205


A letter from Dimiter Miladinov1 (in Ohrid) to Victor Grigorovich2 (in Vienna) about the search for Bulgarian folk songs and relics in Macedonia

February 25th, 1846

I have not received a single line since your departure. In the meantime my efforts concerning OUR Bulgarian language and the Bulgarian (folk) songs, in compliance with your recommendations are unsurpassed. I have not for one moment ceased to fulfill the pledge which I made to you, Sir, because the Bulgarians are spontaneously striving for the truth. But I hope you will excuse my delay up till now, which is due to the difficulty I had in selecting the best songs and also in my work on the grammar. I hope that, on another convenient occasion, after I have collected more songs and finished the grammar, I will be able to send them to you. Please write where and through whom it would be safe to send them to you (as you so ardently wish).

We are completely convinced, by assurances of the villagers of Glavinitsa, that the stone inscriptions for which we have been looking will also be found. I will study them next spring. It would be wonderful and desirable if, with your assistance, we could ask the Government for the holy relics of Saint Clement of Ohrid, verified by the Great Church of Christ, as you yourself witnessed with your own eye, and requested on your own initiative. And the steps taken before the authorities here concerning the holy relics in question will do much to bring you praise and to confer benefit upon our newly-opened school.

I am writing you this letter on the instructions of the notables in Ohrid. Looking forward to an immediate reply in Greek through the same bearer, I greet you with the deepest esteem and respect.

Братя Миладинови, Преписка, София (The Miladinov Brothers, Correspondence), Sofia, 1964, p. 15; the original is in Greek.

1 Dimiter Miladinov (1810-1862), born in Strouga, an eminent figure of the Bulgarian Revival and an active fighter for public education of the Bulgarians and for their spiritual and political awakening; he taught in Strouga, Ohrid, Koukoush and Prilep, where he introduced the Bulgarian language into the schools, where Greek had previously been the medium of instruction. Falsely accused by the Greek bishop of Ohrid, he was sent to prison in Constantinople where he died
2 Victor Ivanovich Grigorovich (1815-1876), Russian slavicist. In 1844-1847 traveled throughout the Bulgarian lands, including Macedonia and collected ethnographic and folklore material

II. The National Revival Period 1


The origin of the Macedonian dispute the south-east half of Slav Macedonia where the population was most nearly Bulgarian

The New Macedonian Question (St. Antony’s) by James Pettifer, page 12


Where an overaching identity existed among Slavs in Macedonia, it was a Bulgarian one UNTIL at least the 1860s. The cultural impetus for a seperated Macedonian identity would only emerge LATER

Outcast Europe BY Tom Gallagher, page 47


..descendant of Samuil, collected an army and took the chief Bulgarian town, Skopje, and soon came to dominate Thrace, Epirus and Macedonia

A Concise History of Bulgaria (Cambridge Concise Histories) by R. J. Crampton, page 23


Among the Bulgarians of Prilep, after the ceremony in church is over, one of the brothers entertains his relatives..

Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, Part 4 by James Hastings, page 79


The Bulgarians fall into two divisions, the Black Bulgarians and the Gaugauz.–The latter came from the Dobrudzha between 1804 and 1812, the former are subdivided in

  1. Black Bulgarians and Macedonians and
  2. Black Bulgarians of Rumanyo origin.The former came in 1830, the latter at the same time with the Gaugauz.

The Gaugauz speak Turkish and write in the Romanyo Alphabete
The Black Bulgarians speak –those of Macedonian origin writing in Greek , those of the Romanyo countries in Slavonic characters.

The Nationalities of Europe, Robert Gordon Latham ,1863, Colonists in Russia,page 360


“The general estimate is that between forty and fifty United thousand Bulgars (from Bulgaria and Macedonia) have come to this country, including those in Canada. Their principal centre was here in Granite City, an outlying suburb of St. Louis, but during the last year the majority of the 10,000 who were here have migrated westward. At present there are less than a thousand here. About 10,000 are now working on the railroad lines in Montana, the two Dakotas, Iowa and Minnesota. The belief is they will return here in autumn, but my own impression is, there will never again be 10,000 of them in Granite City.
” Other important centres are Seattle, Butte, Montana, Chicago, Indianapolis and Steelton, Pennsylvania; but they are too shifting a people to make estimates of their numbers in those centres of any value.
“I hope you are not making any racial distinctions between Bulgars and Macedonians. I believe the Bulgars who have come from Macedonia are registered on Ellis Island as Macedonians, which is bound to be confusing and inaccurate, for Macedonians may include Greeks, Vlachs, and even Turks. The distinction between the Bulgars from Bulgaria and those from Macedonia is PURELY political. Many of those who are registered as Greeks are so in church affiliation only, being Slavic by race and tongue.
The majority (I should say about 80 per cent) of the Bulgars in this country are from Macedonia, and nearly all are from one small districtin Monastir vilayet; Kostur, or Castoria.

Their reasons for coming are fundamentally economic, but the immediate causes are the revolution of 1904, when half the people in Monastir were rendered homeless by the burning of their villages, and the continued persecution of the Greek Church since then, which closed Greece to them as a market for their labor. Not five per cent of the Bulgars in this country came before four years ago.

“Our Slavic Fellow Citizens” By Emily Greene Balch pp 274-275


It is very interesting to compare together the different inhabitants of European Turkey, such as the Servians, the Bulgarians, the Wallachians, the Greeks, and the Albanians. The Servians and Bulgarians may be said to be nearly the same people, and appear to be more numerous than the Greeks;

The Edinburgh New Philosophical Journal: exhibiting a view of the Progressive discoveries..” Published 1838
by A. and C. Black – Original from the New York Public Library – p.240


The language of these various populations divides itself into two principal idioms: each of these into three where the difference is less. Of the Southern dialect are the Slovaks, the Serbs and Bulgarians; of the Northern, the Bohemians, Poles, and Russians.

Vacation Tourists and Notes of Travel in 1860 By Francis Galton Published 1861 Macmillan and co. Original from the University of Michigan, page 108


The Bulgarians in their turn wanted to exploit the dense presence of Slavonic-Speakers all over Macedonia to support their own irredentist aspirations in the region. A leading part in achieving their national goals was to be played by the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization (IMRO) and the Bulgarian presence and influence throughout Macedonia, particularly in the controversial middle linguistic zone, was considerably strengthened by means of education and the Exarchal Church. This combination was regarded as the best counterweigtht to the Greek Patriarchal influence in the region, in an effort to offset the losses inflicted by the treaty of Berlin. The chief aim of the Bulgarian strategy was to awaken the notion of self-defence in the Bulgarian-speaking population of Macedonia and Thrace, which would urge them to demand and achieve a degree of political autonomy within the Ottoman empirel subsequently they could be annexed by Bulgaria.

Mediterranean Politics By Richard Gillespie, page 88

Books in Greek education prior to 1936 about Macedonia

February 14, 2007

Another lie used by propagandists of FYROM is the alledged association in Greek education, of ancient Macedonians as Greeks Only After 1912. These lies are being exposed by the following books and references found in Greek history books from 19th century.

Book of Theagenes LivadasStoiheia Genikis Istorias” (Tergeste 1867).

Inside this book there are many references to the unification of Greeks by Philip of Macedon, without as the author mentions, disruption of anyone’s autonomy. Moreover there are lots of references to Alexander’s administrative policies and his desire to “spread Greek civilization to Asians“.

In his “Istoria tou Ellinikou Ethnous” (Athens 1853), Konstantinos Paparigopoulos, follows the views of Droysen and underlines “Macedonians even if they arent mentioned in the earliest ancient years of Greek history, they were Greeks!“. About Philip of Macedon, he mentions “his aim wasnt to be despot of Greece but only to unite the greek city-states, in order to undertake the expedition against Persians and conquer this great kingdom, taking this way revenge“. Alexander is being called “King of Greeks“, and he adds “his aim was not only to subdue Asia, but to spread to Asia’s inhabitants, all the great things Greeks got“.

We are going now to 3 books about ancient Greek history which were part of Greek education during High school and primary school.

1. “Istoria ton arxaiwn Anatolikwn Ethnwn kai tou Ellinikou Ethnous mexri tin Romaiki kataktisi” (Athens 1888) by George Tsagres for A’, B’ of high school.

2. “Istoria tis Arxaias Elladas” (Athens 1896) by Bl. Skordelis and Ar. Kourtides for C’ of Primary school

3. “Istoria tis Arxaias Elladas, Biografies” (Constantinople 1889) of P. Paparrousis.

 All these books refer to the greekness of ancient Macedonians, in city-state’s  decline, to the plans of Philip II for union of Greeks, in the education of Alexander, his impressive conquests, his role as spreading Greek civilization to the Asians and finally his death.

In books about Local history of Greek education in 19th -20th centuries, we can find two general histories about Macedonia and a Biography of Alexander the Great.

1. “Epitomos istoria tis Makedonias (apo ton arhaiotaton xronon mexri tis Tourkokratias” (Athens 1879) for primary Greek schools, by Margaritis Dimitsas.

2. “Istoria tis Makedonias, Teuxos A'” (Athens 1935) for E’ grade of Primary school, by K. L. Lagoumitzakis.

3. “Megas Alexandros” (Athens 1914) for E’ of Primary School, by Pantelis Oikonomos.

Inside there are many references like for the greekness of ancient Macedonians and Philip’s aim to unite Greeks to “punish” Persians. Pantelis Oikonomos writes “ I praise the Lord because he honoured me to see my dream coming true and my nation to achieve again great things and liberate my brothers who were for centuries under occupation*” (*Macedonia)

%d bloggers like this: