The Ethnic and Historical origins of FYROM Part VIII

Further data concerning overall role of the CPY in the ethnic falsifications of Macedonia

Quote:

“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…
“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.”

[Mr. Edward O’Hara of the British Parliament]

———————————————————————————————

“For three weeks the Partisan National Liberation Committee had been busy creating, on paper, the new Yugoslavia. Twice Tito had flown to Moscow, conferred with Stalin and the Peoples’ Commissar for Foreign Affairs Vlacheslav M. Molotov… The new power at once began to expand. Yugoslav Macedonians insisted that Yugoslavia’s new Macedonian district should include not only Bulgarian Macedonia but Greek Macedonia.”

TIME Magazine – December 4, 1944

———————————————————-

“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

—————————————–

U.S STATE DEPARTMENT
Foreign Relations Vol. VIII
Washington D.C. Circular Airgram
(868.014/26 Dec. 1944)

The Secretary of State to Certain Diplomatic and Consular Officers*

The following is for your information and general guidance, but not for any positive action at this time.

The Department has noted with considerable apprehension increasing propaganda rumors and semi-official statements in favor of an autonomous Macedonia, emanating principally 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 Macedonia “national consiousness” to be unjustified demagoguery representing no ethnic nor political reality, and sees in its present revival a possible cloak for aggressive intentions against Greece”.

The approved policy of this Government is to oppose any revival of the Macedonian issue as related to Greece. The Greek section of Macedonia is largery inhabited by Greeks, and the Greek people are almost unanimously opposed to the creation of a Macodonian state. Allegations of serious Greek participation in any such agitation can be assumed to be false. This Government would regard as responsible any Government or group of Governments tolerating or encouraging menacing or aggressive acts of “Macedonian Forces” against Greece.

The Department would appreciate any information pertiment to this subject which may come to your attention.

Department of State

—————————

Further data concerning the ethnic, historical origins of F.Y.R.O.M and the ethnic make-up of Macedonia

Quote:

“Although in some areas [of Macedonia] the various groups were all inextricably intermingled, it is pertinent to point out that in other sections a given race decidedly predominated. In the southern districts, for instance, and more particularly along the coast, the Greeks, a city people given to trade, had the upper hand, while to the north of them the Slavs, peasants for the most part working the soil, held sway. These Slavs may properly be considered as a special Macedonian group, but since they were closely related to both Bulgars and Serbs and had, moreover, in the past been usually incorporated in either the Bulgar or Serb state, they inevitably became the object of both Bulgar and Serb aspirations and an apple of discord between these rival nationalities. As an oppressed people on an exceedingly primitive level, 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 ther own particular Macedonian consciousness.”

[Ferdinand Schevill, “A History of the Balkans”, p.432]

———————————————————————————————-

“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]

———————————————————————————————

“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…. 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 nothig 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]

——————————————————–

They population of Skopje, consisting of Arnouts, Jews, Armenians, Vlachs, 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

———————————————————

“However, in the nineteenth century the term Macedonian was used almost exclusively to refer to the geographic region; the Macedonians were usually not considered a nationality separate from the Bulgarians, Greeks, Serbs, or Albanians. The diplomatic records of the period make no clar mention of a separate Macedonian nation.”

[Barbara Jelavich, “History of the Balkans”, vol. 2;Cambridge University Press, 1983, p.91]

———————————————————

As the day was drawing to a close, we descended into the vast plain of Bitola, 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

———————————————

the Byzantine emperor, 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 the 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

———————————————–

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

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

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

———————————————-

“The town of Monastir lies just about half way between Bulgarian and Greek territory. North, the majority of Macedonians are Bulgar, south
the majority are Hellenes”

“Monastir is an ordinary Turkish European town, even to the attempt at a garden where the richer Turks and Bulgars and Greeks come and sit at
little tables and drink beer and listen to a string band composed of girls from Vienna.Everybody is jolly. Murder is so commonplace that it
arouses no shudder. In the night the little bark of a pistol, a shriek, a clatter of feet. “Hello! Somebody killed!” That’s all. . . . ”

“Pictures from the Balkans”, John Fraser

—————————————————-


“As for the alternative plan, which is favoured by some, and greatly disliked by others of the Christian peoples whose interests are concerned that of appointing a Christian European Governor to a State to be arbitrarily mapped out and called Macedonia-it might stave off for a time the partition of the territories that must ultimately take place, but as it would rest on no historical, geographical, or racial basis, it would do little more. For the crux of the whole matter is not Turk versus Christian any longer. The question now is, how much of the Turk’s land shall be occupied by Serb, Bulgar, Greek and Albanian respectively” – p103

“When Von Hahn visited Ochrida in I868 he found one Slav school and four Greek, and the people expressed their preference for the Greek party” – p203

“Maria, told me triumphantly that it had consisted of no less than 250 men, who had all escaped. Talk turned on ‘ chetas.’ ‘Do you know what they are doing? [Bulgars] ‘ asked Achilles bitterly. I did not. ‘They are killing Greeks,’ he said fiercely. ‘ Killing Greeks! ‘ said I in amazement. ‘ Yes,’ he replied; ‘they are not fighting Turks, but Greeks. They go armed to a village, and they offer the people a petition to sign. It is to ask for a Bulgar priest, and to say they are Bulgars. They do not wish to change their priest, but if they do not sign they will be shot We Greeks have had enough of this. I myself have had to give money to them. Otherwise I should have been shot from behind a wall the first time my business took me outside the town. Now we have sworn an oath we will stand it no longer. We shall organize Greek bands, and for every Greek that is shot we shall kill ten Bulgars.'” – p204

-Edith Durham, ‘The Burden of the Balkans’ (1905),

—————————————————-

“Thessaloniki was bulwark of the Greeks ever since the third century AD”

Written in a guide to Thessaloniki by German archaeologists and historians for the occupying forces of 1941-45

———————————————————————

“When the Turks and the Bulgarians left, Macedonia remained a purely Greek region”

Henry Morgenthau Serving in Greece between 1925 and 1926 as President of the Committee on Refugees for the Community of Nations; in his book ‘I was sent to Athens’

——————————————————————-

Some testimonies from The FYROM’s officials:

a. The former President of The FYROM, Kiro Gligorov said: “We are Slavs who came to this area in the sixth century … we are not descendants of the ancient Macedonians” (Foreign Information Service Daily Report, Eastern Europe, February 26, 1992, p. 35).

b. Also, Mr Gligorov declared: “We are Macedonians but we are Slav Macedonians. That’s who we are! We have no connection to Alexander the Greek and his Macedonia… Our ancestors came here in the 5th and 6th century” (Toronto Star, March 15, 1992).

c. On 22 January 1999, Ambassador of the FYROM to USA, Ljubica Achevska gave a speech on the present situation in the Balkans. In answering questions at the end of her speech Mrs. Acevshka said: “We do not claim to be descendants of Alexander the Great … Greece is Macedonia’s second largest trading partner, and its number one investor. Instead of opting for war, we have chosen the mediation of the United Nations, with talks on the ambassadorial level under Mr. Vance and Mr. Nemitz.” In reply to another question about the ethnic origin of the people of FYROM, Ambassador Achevska stated that “we are Slavs and we speak a Slav language.”

d. On 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 my country.”

e. Moreover, the Foreign Minister of the 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.”

———————

By Voulgaroktonos

Back

Explore posts in the same categories: FYROM Propaganda

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: