20.07.2007, 21:36
Zitat:wer soll euch all das abnehmen ?
Interessiert uns am wenigsten...
Der einen teil seiner GESCHICHTE VERGISST oder entehrt...sollte bereit sein den selben teil an ZUKUNFT zu vergessen...(zitat -uebersetzung dichter Odysseos Elitis...)
Aber anscheinend nach kannst/koennen Sie kein englisch...? (Merco)
Den Ich setze ungern ganze ziatate oder analysen...Die nicht gelesen werden...obwohl sich genau darin alle antworten befinden/existieren...
Kein Mensch auf dieser erde glaubt euch mehr...je schneller Ihr bemerkt Das ohne Griechenland...sogar eure staatliche existenz auf dem spiel steht im Balkan...desto besser fuer euch...mein lieber eberhardt...sory Merco...(mit dem doch so unwichtigem hin und her von namen die ja sowieso uninteressant sind...kann Ich ja anfangen jeden so zu bennen wie es Mir gerade passt...lol)
OK...part3...BITTE LESEN...und dann antworten...ansonten wird Mir das hier zu unserious...
Part-3
There are also figures given by 4 writers that are quite strange.
According to There were:
the following
author:
Goptchevitch Greeks 201,140 Bulgar 57,600 Serbs 2,048,320
V. Kantcheff Greeks 225,152 Bulgar 1,184,036 Serbs 700
M. Brancoff Greeks 190,047 Bulgar 1,172,136 Serbs -
Zolotovich Greeks - Bulgar 1,334,583 Serbs -
It is not very difficult to guess the nationalities of the 4 writers.
Other figures on the population of these two vilaets (also extrapolated from the number of schools and pupilsa attending these schools) are the following ones (some of the authors counted only specific groups of people such as Bulgars and/or Greeks).
(figures are in thousands)
Gr: Greeks Bu:Bulgars Se:Serbs
Speliotopoulos Gr 731 Bu 232
Fokas " 636 " 348
Virgilli " 642 " 341 Se 16.5
Nikolaides " 655 " 332 " 22.8
Von der Golts " 580 " 266 " 19
V. Colocotroni " 572 " 253
Ecum. Patr * " 650 " 332 " 12
Hilmi Pasa " 664 " 391 " 30
* Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople.
Hilmi Pasa, Turkish Governor(??) [yes - ce107].
After the population exchanges in the 1920s, 380,000 Turks left Greece and 538,253 Greeks came to Macedonia from Asia Minor. In 1919 in the treaty of Neuilly it was decided that the Bulgarian population residing in Greece would immigrate to Bulgaria and the Greek population living in Bulgaria would immigrate to Greece by 1924. The time limit was extended to 1932 after through an application of the Bulgarian Government which the then Greek Government accepted. Approximately 66,000 Bulgars left Greece at that time according to a report of the League of Nations (the precursor of the United Nations). About 52,000 Bulgars left Greece. Given that the 1928 Greek census gives for Macedonia a population of 1,412,477 this means that there were close to 850,000 Greeks in Macedonia before the arrival of the Greeks from Asia Minor. Considering the annual population increases one can conclude that an estimate of at least 660,000 for the Greeks in the two vilaets of Monasterio and Thessaloniki (and of Macedonia) is a quite accurate one.
Q23) What is the nationality of the Vlachs?
Although this topic seems to be irrelevant it may not be so.
What exactly the nationality of Vlachs is, historically speaking, is an open question. The ones living in Greece consider themselves Greeks, and no one is going to object to what they believe for themselves. Among them one can count the national benefactors Averof and Tositsas.
In the beginning of this century there was a controversy of what the nationality of the Vlachs really was. Since the Vlachs used a Latin oriented language it was claimed that they were of Romanian nationality (that is, the nationality of the people living in Romania).
A Greek historian, N. Kazazes, early this century, wrote that a Romanian politician once said
The Romanian people had desires on the beautiful Transylvania, where so many Romanians were living. But this was impossible because our relations with the AustroHungarian empire would have been jeopardized. So the non-existent subject of the Romanians in Macedonia was invented.
(Source: "The Macedonian Problem" by N. Kazazes, 1907,page 105).
The "Romanian Vlachs" question was invented mainly by Gustav Weigand. According to him the Vlachs were considered Romanians (and not, say, Romans, of the Roman empire) because the Vlachs were using a Greco Latin dialect.
Other historians of that time, such as Momsen, Krumwacher(sp?), and Korting dismissed such claims. Edward Stanford wrote in 1877 that Greek-Vlachs were to Greeks what Welsh were to English.
No matter how you call them (the Greek Vlachs) be it Romans or Romanians or Vlachs they call themselves Greeks.
An additional reason for the "romanisation" of the Vlachs was the desire of the Romanians to use them in their negotiations with the Bulgars related to the future of the area of Dobrucha. The Romanians would have favored the idea to 'transfer' their claims on the Vlachs to Bulgaria in exchange for Bulgars granting them rights on that region. This was mentioned by a Romanian Prince, Brancovan, in a book of his.
Q24) Skopjans claim that Greeks can only choose Greek names for their children
I am not going to waste my time on this. Both the Macedonian President of the Hellenic Republic and the [ex - ce107] Prime Minister are called Constantine, a name of hardly greek origin.
The fact that a considerable number of the greek population is called Mihail (Michael) or Maria which are of Jewish origin may put such claims in rest.
Q25) Was the Bulgarian King Samuel of Skopjan nationality as some Skopjans claimed he was?
Skopjans in order to by-pass the now established truths about the Greekness of the ancient Macedonians and build a future for their so-called "Macedonian nationality" and acquire historical rights to the Macedonian area claim that the infrastructure and population of the kingdom which Samuel established for a period of close to 18 years with the city of Achris as its capital was "Macedonian" (of the Skopjan type). They also claim that Samuel was also a "Macedonian" (of the Skopjan type) even though certain historians today believe that he was an Armenian. They also claim that Samuel as a ruler of a state that also included Macedonia was himself a Macedonian and that the state he established was the first "Macedonian state" (of the Skopjan type). Regarding Samuel, he was a Bulgarian king and not a "Macedonian" one, and the state he founded was a Bulgarian one as well. It is for this reason that the emperor Vasileios II of the Byzantine empire, who defeated Samuel, is known in history as Vasileios the Bulgar-slayer and not as Vasileios the "Macedonian"-slayer.
This fact is supported by historians such as Vasiliev and Levtchenko.
There is another piece of evidence which shows that the Skopjan claims that Samuel was a "Macedonian" are ridiculous. An inscription from the city of Monastirio dated 1017 has been preserved where John, nephew of Samuel and son of his elder brother Aaron is mentioned to be of Bulgarian descent. This inscription has been published in the book written by Gordana Tomovic "Morfologija Cirilickin Natpisa na Balkann", Belgrade, 1974, page 33.
It is worth mentioning that the area of Achris west inhabited in the Roman and Byzantine periods by Greeks. The book "The tombs of Trebenitse" by Keramopoullos (page 490) shows inscriptions from that period referring to persons with Greek names only. On one inscription the God of Lychnetis was Heracles Megistos.
Q26) What is the size of the Greek minority in the Republic of Skopje.
The size of the Greek minority in the Republic of Skopje is officially estimated to be close to 1,000-2,000 people. This figure is so reliable that recently a German official has asked the Skopjans to perform a new census. It wouldn't be surprising that Skopjans hide Greeks under such names as Vlachs. It is also noted that during the Greek civil war of 1944-1949 close to 28,000 Greek children were abducted by communists (including Skopjan ones) and transferred to Southern Yugoslavia that is today's Republic of Skopje. It is unknown under which label this population and their descendants are counted. Some Greek estimates raise the size of the Greek minority in Skopje to around 50,000.
Q27) Macedonia and the (Greek) War of Independence.
Macedonia, while under the rule of the Ottoman empire, was mainly inhabited by Greeks, Turks and Bulgars. There was also a significant Jewish population in the city of Thessaloniki most of whom arrived there from Spain in the late 15th century.
Macedonians [to mean only the Greek-nationality population of Macedonia] expected to be liberated and join the then newly founded Greek state as a compensation for their sacrifices and contributions to the (Greek) War of Independence. They were led in this effort by the enthusiastic but inexperienced leadership of Emmanuel Pappas, a member of Phillike Etaereia. The Macedonians of Chalcidice revolted in May 1821 and for a brief moment threatened to throw the Turks out of the city of Thessaloniki. Due to their inexperience they were easily suppressed by the Turks by November 1821. The countryside was ravaged and the Greek population of Thessaloniki was massacred and forced to move out of the city.
The second round of the revolt began in February 1822 when the kleftae and armatoloi of mountains Olympos and Vermion along with the inhabitants of the city of Naoussa declared that city free (of the Ottoman rule). The Turks deployed troops brought to Greece from Asia Minor, and by April the revolt was subdued. Naoussa was destroyed, the men were killed, and the women and children were taken as slaves. After this, many Macedonian fighters fled to Southern Greece to continue fighting the Turks alongside the Peloponnesians and the other Greeks.
The failure of the Macedonian revolt is mainly attributable to the inexperience of the rebels and the proximity of the area to Constantinople. Although the revolt failed, it provided great help to the rebels of Southern Greece because it tied a number of Turkish forces in Macedonia. The price paid by the Macedonians was heavy. The previously flourishing greek community of Thessaloniki was destroyed and the Greek population of the city was reduced by around 70%. The Jews took over the leading role among the communities residing in the city.
Once more in their long history, Macedonians sacrificed them- selves for the common good of all Greeks.
Q28)When was the first time the word "Macedonia" was defined to include lands of the nowadays Rep. of Skopje?
After the Russo-Turkish war of 1877-1878 which ended with a Russian victory the two parties signed what became known as the treaty of San Stefano (1878).
The chief Russian negotiator was Count Ignatiev, the Panslavist Russian Ambassador at Constantinople between 1864-1877. The statistics used by Ignatiev during these negotiations, when he gave a new definition to the word "Macedonia", were provided to him by a Bosnian, Kerkovic. The San Stedano treaty provided for the creation of "Greater Bulgaria" that would include the then Bulgarian state [The Bulgarian State was FORMED then - ce107], Eastern Rumelia, parts of today's Albania as far to the west as the city of Koritsa, and "Macedonia" which was then first defined to include what is known nowadays as Republic of Skopje, the southwestern part of nowadays Bulgaria, and Macedonia (of Greece). It is interesting to note that the three Turkish vilaets covering this "Macedonia" were the vilaets of Thessaloniki, Monastirio and parts of the Vilaet of Kosovo. The city of Skopje was in the Vilaet of Kosovo.
Even the most extremist Bulgarian nationalists celebrated on the good news.
The other European powers objected to this settlement because they feared that it would give Russia the ability to seize easily Constantinople. One of these powers, Austria-Hungary, was displeased by the prospect of Bulgaria holding the port of Thessaloniki as this would have barred its own descent to this port through Bosnia.
In the Berlin Congress, held weeks later, in the summer of 1878, the arrangements of the San Stefan Treaty (regarding Bulgaria) were cancelled with the full agreement of Russia since Russia did not want to risk a war against the other European Powers.
The "Macedonia" of the San Stefano treaty thus remained under Ottoman rule divided into various vilaets and sandjaks. It is ironic that this new definition of "Macedonia", invented for the purpose of delivering lands of the Ottoman empire to Bulgaria on the occasion of the San Stefano Treaty, outlived that Treaty and is still used by some people to define Macedonia.
The end result of the San Stefano treaty was that it gave Bul- garia the pretext to actively interfere in "Macedonia", as it would become apparent from later events in the region.
Q29) What were the views of the Bulgarian Exarchate on the population composition of Macedonia?
One of the main events that helped increase the Bulgarian influence in the part of the Ottoman empire to be called "San-Stefano Macedonia" eight years later was the creation of the Bulgarian Exarchate in 1870 which took over responsibility for the orthodox Bulgars living in the Ottoman empire.
The Greek War of Independence in the first half of the nineteenth century had its repercussions among the natives of Macedonia. Many Macedonians of joined their compatriots in Southern Greece in that War. Simultaneously a national awakening was observed among the Bulgars living at that time in Macedonia. It should be noted that the term "Bulgar" at that time was used to denote the laboring and illiterate masses living in Macedonia irrespective of ethnic origin. That awakening was mainly due to the Russian Panslavist. Russia supported the subsequent uprising of the Slavs against the Turks in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Around 1830, a scholar, Venelin explored Bulgaria and collected material but also invented other. He claimed that the Bulgars had taught the Russians the (Cyrillic) alphabet and were responsible for the conversion of Russians to Christianity. One of his followers, Rakowski claimed in 1859 that Zeus (the ancient Olympian God), Demosthenes (yes, the Athenian orator), Alexander the Great, and the Souliot hero of the Greek War of Independence Markos Botsaris were all Bulgars. He also claimed that St. Paul preached Christianity to Bulgars first and not to Greeks. Such claims quickly spread among the Bulgars living in Macedonia and beyond. Verkovic who wrote an ethnography on Macedonia and became the top Russian expert on Macedonia claimed that he had "discovered" Bulgarian (ancient) songs about Alexander the Great. Krstovic claimed that Aristotle spoke Bulgarian but wrote in Greek in order to educate the southern barbarians [Note:Krstovic seemed to believe that Aristotle, a Bulgar to him, was civilized, while the southern barbarians, i.e. the Southern Greeks such as the Athenians were not during the classic period. Such claims were made despite the obvious fact that Bulgars first appeared in the Balkans sometime in the 7th century AD]. Krstovic also considered Bulgars Constantine the Great, Cyril and Methodios, the hero of the Greek War of Independence, Karaiskakes and many other Greek and Serbian national heroes. Such ideas were believed not only in Russia (among the Bulgars they were a fact of life) but also in Western Europe, especially after the creation of the Bulgarian Exarchate in 1878 as it can be seen in the opinions expressed by various European politicians, scholars journalists and some scholars of that time also reflected in their belief that Macedonia was Bulgarian.
The Exarchate had the blessings of Count Ignatiev of Russia, who in 1878 would lead the Russians in their negotiations with the Turks leading to the San Stefano Treaty. The Bulgarian exarchate also became responsible for the education of the Bulgarian population and at the same time tried to strengthen the Bulgarian consciousness of those Bulgars living under the Ottoman rule. At the same time, through underground activities and the use of force, the Bulgars tried to force the Bulgar-speaking Greek population to declare themselves Bulgars and not Greeks.
In [9] the following excerpts appear from a report prepared in 1885 by the Secretary-General of the Bulgarian Exarchate describing the situation in Macedonia: [the writer of the report interprets Macedonia as the "Macedonia" of the San Stefano Treaty]
It is a sad fact but we must admit that the largest part of
the Bulgarian population of Macedonia does not have a Bulgarian
national conscience... If Europe were to demand today that the
Macedonian people decide on their fate and say to which nationality
they belong, we are certain that the largest part of the
Macedonian people and of Macedonia would slip away from our hands.
If we exclude two or three regions of Northern Macedonia, the
inhabitants of the other regions are ready to declare that they are
Greeks. If the Great Powers were to intervene and demand a
plebiscite to solve the Macedonian problem the Greeks would come out
as winners.
[D. Missev-Obreikov "Report on the Present Situation of Bulgarism in Macedonia"]
The Bulgarians had thus realized that if they were to increase their influence in Macedonia they had to deal not with the Turkish or Serbian influence but with the Greeks. Many foreign travelers who journeyed Macedonia during the 19th century have attested the existence, not only of a Greek-speaking population but also a Slav-speaking (Slavophone) one which considered themselves Greek even though they did not speak Greek, except possibly a few words.
Q30) Did all the Greeks in Macedonia speak Greek only in the late 19th century?
No. As we have mentioned in the previous question, a number of Greeks living in Macedonia as well as Bulgaria, and the lands of Rep. of Skopje (the San Stefano "Macedonia") were Slav-speakers (Slavophone) speaking a Bulgarian idiom. Although this may seem strange, given the circumstances of that time was not. There were also a large number of Turk-speaking Greeks in Asia Minor at that time. Some of these Turkish-speaking Greeks were forced under the threat of death by the Turks to move to Russia (or better, ex-USSR) in the beginning of the 20th century.
These are nowadays Russian-speakers (i.e. Slav-speakers) living in Azerbaijan and other newly created republics. These Greeks have probably not spoken Greek for the past 5-6 centuries.
The existence of Bulgar speaking Greeks in Macedonia is attested in the book by James Baker "Die Turken in Europa", Stuttgart 1878,pp19-20, quoted by Djoko Slijepcevic in "The Macedonian Question: The struggle for Southern Serbia", Chicago, The American Institute for Balkan Affairs, 1958, pp87. According to Baker
I asked some Bulgarian peasants in Macedonia about their na- tionality, and they immediately replied 'Rum' which, indeed, is the name peculiar to the Greek population of Asia Minor. They in- sisted that they were Greeks. 'If this is so', I told them, 'why do you speak Bulgarian at home?' 'Because our forefathers did so', they replied. although we are Greeks'.
Q31)What were the events that followed the Berlin Congress of 1878?
In early 1890's various Bulgarian groups were organized in the Ottoman empire advocating a more revolutionary program in Macedonia that would result in the Bulgarization of the area. One such group was IMRO (Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization) which was organized around 1893 and whose members included Gotse Deltchev, Damjan Grujev, Pere Tochev, Petar Pop Arsov, and other Bulgarians from Bulgaria and San-Stefano "Macedonia". This organization aimed at uniting "Macedonia", by any possible means, into a single entity.
In response to this, Macedonians, with financial help from their kinship in then Greece and also from abroad, organized themselves and tried to protect the Greek-speaking and Bulgar-speaking Greek-Macedonian, and especially those living small villages, from Bulgarian abuses. Wherever this was not possible and especially in areas where Bulgars were the majority, as it was the case in the north and central part of today's Rep of Skopje, it was common to have a member of a family declaring himself a Bulgar and another one declaring himself a Greek. Whole Greek villages, when under pressure from Bulgars, used to declare themselves Bulgarian to avoid destruction from the Bulgars.
In the beginning of the 20th century, when the situation got worse, both sides (Greek and Bulgarian) went many times to extremes although one may observe that the Bulgarian side was mainly responsible for that. At the same time the consciousness of the few Serbs living in San-Stefano "Macedonia" (in today's Republic of Skopje) was also awakened and Serbia got involved into these rivalries as well.
The Balkan Wars erupted because of these rivalries. The Bulgarian atrocities towards the Macedonians of Eastern Macedonia can be summarized in the following remark of Elizabeth Barker ("Macedonia: Its place in Balkan Power Politics", London, The Royal Institute of International Affairs, 1950,pp19-20) cited in [9]
The Bulgarian occupation authorities in Greek eastern Macedonia has behaved towards the Greek population with brutality singularly inappropriate in supposed liberators. An Inter-Allied Commission in 1919 reported that 94 villages had been entirely demolished, that 30,000 people had died of hunger, blows, and disease during the occupation, that 42,000 had been deported to Bulgaria, and that 16,000 had fled to [my note: then] Greece".
Q32) The Neuilly treaty of 1920.
The treaty of Neuilly brought peace to the relations of Bulgaria with her adversaries. A convention between Greece and Bulgaria, known as the Neuilly Treaty, entering force on August 9, 1920 provided for the voluntary exchange of populations between Bulgaria and Greece in order to avoid mistreatment of the alien populations in the two countries.
IMRO, still active, objected to the implementation of the exchange of populations because this would eliminate the Bulgarian element in Greece and would eliminate Bulgaria's claim on Macedonia. A number of Slavs who had expressed their desire to migrate to Bulgaria thus chose not to.
During the wars, prior to 1920, close to 16,000 Greeks and 30,000 Bulgars fled to their respective homelands and after the Neuilly Treaty the corresponding numbers were 30,000 and 53,000 [the figures were taken from [9]]. Still, some Bulgars, following IMRO's suggestions remained in Greece. Some others who, due to intermarriage, were not sure of their allegiance to either country also did not leave. Their presence was not noticed due to the chaotic situation in Greece following the Greek defeat of 1922 by the Turks and the subsequent forced exchange of populations between Greece and Turkey. The only minority (since the Bulgars were supposed to go according to the Neuilly Treaty) left in Greece was a Moslem one in Thrace.
The situation in Southern Serbia was quite complicated since a large number of Bulgars were still residing there. These were to be named in the 1940s "Macedonians" by Tito in order to eliminate the Bulgarian influence on this territory of then Yugoslavia.
In September 1924 a Greco-Bulgarian agreement, to be known as the Kalfov-Politis Protocol, was concluded. This protocol provided for the treatment of Bulgars/Greeks who had not yet left their alien countries under the Neuilly Treaty. The then Greek government appeared to accept the view that the Bulgar-speaking Greeks and the Bulgar-speaking Bulgarians (who had not left) still living in Greece were Bulgarians. It was soon realized that this agreement was a mistake and the Bulgar-speaking Greeks protested the agreement. Serbia also protested this agreement because these people were recognized as Bulgarians and not Serbs. Subsequent protests by both Bulgaria and Serbia, for various reasons, convinced the then Greek government not to insist on calling these people Bulgarians. The League of Nations, on March 14, 1925 relieved Greece of any obligations under the Kalfov-Politis Protocol. Since then, Greece considered them Greeks (including the Bulgars still living in Greece at that time). The Metaxas' dictatorship, who tried to force the abandonment of the Bulgarian idiom by these people, alienated some of them. The situation was to be resolved only after World War II when the remaining Bulgars and possibly some alienated Bulgar-speaking Greeks (various sources estimated their number upwards 60,000) finally left Greece (see also following questions).
Q33) Communism and Macedonia
Following the Balkan Wars and WWI, Bulgaria lobbied Soviet Union to support her position on the Macedonian problem that is the political future of San-Stefano "Macedonia" in case of a communist victory in the Balkans.
Bulgarians did not and still do not accept the existence of a "Macedonian nationality" (the way Skopjans do) but use the term "Macedonian" population to refer to the population of the San-Stefano "Macedonia", whose definition was only political and had nothing to do with the historic region of Macedonia. Thus, the resolution of the Sixth Communist Balkan Conference promised that
... In setting up the ideal of a workers' and peasants' government, the communist parties and the Communist federation of the Balkans will assure peace, independence and liberty of development of all the peoples of the Peninsula, that it will be a voluntary union of independent Balkan Republics, including the Republic of Macedonia and Thrace.
[This text is quoted in the book by Barker cited earlier, pp5-51, as quoted in [9].]
It is noted that this text indicates that Bulgaria wanted to see all Northern Greece taken away from Greece. Bulgaria had aspiration not only on Macedonia but also on Greek Thrace. This is in line with earlier Bulgarian claims (see question on Illyrians) that ancient Macedonians were Illyrians (or Thraco-Illyrians) and that they (Bulgarians) are ancestors of either the Illyrians or the Thracians. The Bulgarians realizing that it was difficult for the lands of San-Stefano "Macedonia" to become parts of Bulgaria, rallied for an independent "Macedonia" to appease objections from the Communist parties of Yugoslavia and Greece and also gain the support of the Soviet Union.
Separately, Bulgarian communist representatives and IMRO, represented by Alexandrov, Protogerov and Chaoulev, signed a manifesto which also included the following (see [9])
IMRO declares that it is fighting and will fight with all the means permitted by the revolution:
For the liberation and the reunion of the separated parts of Macedonia [My Note: that is the San-Stefano Russian defined "Ma- cedonia"] in a fully autonomous and independent political unit, within its natural geographical and ethnic frontiers.
For the democratization of the States bordering on Macedonia [My Note: presumably Greece, and Yugoslavia-Serbia. Only com- munist countries were considered democratic!] and for their union in a Balkan federation which alone can guarantee the political existence of an independent Macedonia and the independence of the other Balkan peoples."
That is, the existence of any "Macedonian" state would require the "democratization", a la Hungary and Czechoslovakia, of at least Greece.
The Greek communist party lost support for its decision to support the Bulgarians. In 1927, Yannis Kordatos, editor of the Communist party newspaper "Rizospastes", accused the party leadership by writing in Greek Macedonia, since the Greek bourgeoisie has already deported the Slav population [My Note: following the Neuilly treaty] and had settled greek refugees, the Communist party raised, nevertheless, the issue. This policy was the coup de grace (for the Party) which was dissolved not on account of the attacks of the Government but because it was DISAPPROVED BY THE WORKERS, since communism in Greece acted as the ally of BULGARIAN CHAUVINISM". [Quoted from [9], capitalization as it ap- parently appeared in the original text.]
Q34) Bulgaria and Germany in World War II.
After the Italian invasion of Greece through Albania and the subsequent war between the two countries, the Bulgarian Government began to think about joining the Axis. A member of the Bulgarian Parliament, Peter Doumanov, declared:
Two million [sic] Bulgarians are under foreign domination. Germany, with a population of 70 million shook the entire Europe for two million fellow nationals living in Czechoslovakia. We, Bulgarians, with a population of six million and with two million co-nationals as minorities, i.e. one third of our population, we dare not openly fight for our minorities in Macedonia and Thrace. Some may say that Bulgaria is not Germany; BULGARIA SHOULD BECOME FOR THE BALKANS WHAT GERMANY IS FOR EUROPE.
[Note: emphasis is mine. The term Thrace refers to the Greek Thrace. The term Macedonia probably refers to Macedonia although it may also refer to the lands of San-Stefano "Macedonia" that is Macedonia and the lands of the Rep. of Skopje.]
This speech raised protests in Yugoslavia (newspaper Politika, Dec 6,1940). Until that time Bulgaria avoided open provocations although she was secretly negotiating with the Germans for an exit to the Aegean Sea, through Greece [Macedonia and Thrace]. Germany accepted these terms on January 18, 1941. On February 8, German General Liszt and Bulgarian General Boider signed an agreement allowing Bulgaria to occupy the area of Greece stretching from river Evros to river Strymon, that is Greek Thrace and Eastern Macedonia.
Following the invasion and subsequent defeat of Greece by Germany in the spring of 1941, Bulgaria occupied or as some Bulgarians claimed, 'liberated' the Greek lands mentioned in Liszt-Boider agreement. Bulgarian Premier Filov in an interview with the German newspaper Borsen Zeitung on November 11, 1941 said:
in a few days we will begin with the colonization of the Aegean area... Thousands of Bulgarian families will be transported and settled in this area within the next weeks and months
[My Note: So much for Bulgarian claims about alleged Bulgarian minorities in neighboring countries, as far as Greece was concerned.]
At the end of WWII the feelings of the Greeks and especially of those living in the areas occupied by the Bulgarians toward their Bulgarian neighbors prompted a British [C.M. Woodhouse - ce107] to remark that "he only brotherly sentiment which Greek Macedonians felt towards the Bulgars was a disposition to raise Cain".
Elizabeth Barker similarly wrote:
Although Greeks were relieved by the belated Bulgarian withdrawal, they were left with an overpowering hatred of all Bulgars, whether pro-German or Communist. In fact the average Greek probably detested and feared the Bulgarian communists, who represented the great Slav menace to Greece from the north, even more than he had hated their predecessors.
Among the Bulgars still living in Greece at that time, some of them sided with the pro-German Bulgars who occupied parts of Greece during WWII. These, at the end of WWII, naturally left Greece. Some other (pro-communist ones) joined various communist oriented guerilla groups. These groups were controlled by the Yugoslavs of Tito and after WWII sided with the Greek communist guerillas who turned in the meantime against the Greek Government. After the communist defeat in the subsequent greek civil war they finally left Greece, 28-29 years after the signing of the Neuilly Treaty that first provided for their departure from Greece.
Q35) What are the intentions of the Communists still ruling Skopje towards the region of modern-day Greece called Macedonia since ancient times?
After the establishment of the People's Republic of Macedonia, the Central Committee of the Communist Party of "Macedonia" issued the following declaration:
Macedonian people: In your three-year popular liberation struggle you achieved your unity and you established your own army and set the foundations of the federate Macedonian state. With the participation of the entire Macedonian people against the fascist [My note: that is, the non-communists] [probably meant the German and Bulgarian forces as they were still in control there - ce107] occupiers in Yugoslavia, Bulgaria and Greece you will achieve the union of all parts of Macedonia which the Balkan imperialists seized in 1913 and 1918.
As for the demand for the complete unification of the Macedonian people, there are today on your side all the other peoples of Yugoslavia, the Anti-fascist People's Liberation Council of Yugoslavia and the heroic People's Liberation Army of Yugoslavia.
[in "Ten year from the Establishment of the P.R. of Macedonia", Skopje 1954, as quoted in [9].]
Three months later Milovan Djilas in a speech at Kolarac declared that the "question of the unification is today before the Macedonian people who have the right to unite themselves wherever they may live".
He further explained that the unification of "Macedonia" was not merely a theoretical question but one of vital interest to the security of Yugoslavia.
It is noted that the first 'premier' of the new republic of "Macedonia" was Dimitar Vlahov who had been an outspoken Bulgarian during the first decade of the 20th century, was an elected Bulgarian delegate to the Turkish Parliament, became leader of the "United" IMRO in 1925, and in the following years declared himself an "authentic Macedonian"...
Q36) Skopjan claims on Greece (continued).
On August 2, 1945 general Vukmanovic declared in a speech in front of a crowd in Skopje (quoted in [9]):
Comrades, you know very well that there is a part of the Macedonian people which is still enslaved [sic]. We must openly state this case. We are not the only ones to do this; there are tens of thousands of Ma- cedonian men and women who suffer and mourn today under the yoke of the Greek monarcho-fascist bands.
[Bulletin (Skopje) Aug 10,1945]
Q37) Why Skopjans use the term "Aegean Macedonia"
The Skopjan intentions, when they use the term "Aegean Macedonia" are summarized in the following excerpts from an article that appeared in the newspaper Borba on August 26, 1946 entitled "Aegean Macedonia" which reads as follows (quoted in [9]).
Greek imperialists have no right to keep the Macedonians any longer under their yoke... extermination of our populations in Greece and to their right and request to opt and unite themselves with their brethren in Yugoslavia.
[Note: As a Macedonian myself, I don't want to have anything to do with these Skopjans not now, not in the future, not any time.]
A month later, on Sept 22, the Premier of the PR Macedonia Dimitar Vlahov delivered a speech in Monastir published in Nova Macedonija on Sept 26, 1946 which referred to Macedonia as follows:
We openly declare that Greece has no right whatsoever over Aegean Macedonia.... The Macedonian people are struggling for their union within the Macedonian People's Republic which is an integral part of the Federal People's Republic of Macedonia.
Q38) What do some Skopjans claim that the population composition of Macedonia is?
Hristo Antonofsky an extremist Skopjan gave the following ethnological composition of Macedonia, Greece [for the period around 1941]
"Macedonians" (of the Skopjan type) 258,000
Greeks 250,000
"Caramanlides" 210,000
Armenians 80,000
Lazi and other caucasians... 74,000
Others 37,000
[source: Hristo Antonofksi: "Egejska Makedonija" (Skopje, Go na Zdruzhanieto na be Galcite od Eg. Makedonija, 1951),p50. ]
In addition to discovering new nationalities Antonofski excluded from the count the population of Thessaloniki, the Chalcidice peninsula, and the Kozani prefecture of Macedonia.
Q39) Bulgarian statements on Skopje in the late fifties [after the Tito-Stalin breakup].
After the creation of the People's Republic of "Macedonia", Yugoslavs embarked in an attempt to change the Bulgarian idiom spoken by the Skopjans. They removed Bulgarian words and replaced them with Serbo-Croatian ones. Bulgars then claimed that the purpose of the creation of a new "Macedonian' language" was not to unite the Macedonian people or advance their culture but to suppress and supplant the Bulgarian language spoken and read by all Slav Macedonians. In addition, P Gevgeliev wrote in "Skopje revives macedonian spectre", Free Bulgaria,pp229-230,
It is true that we have given up the teaching of "Macedonian history", a high falutin term for the ravings of a handful of maniacs in Skopje who are so far gone in their nationalistic dementia and mental aberration as to claim that the present "Macedonian" people are descendants of Alexander the Great. These "historians" seem to overlook the fact that the Slav tribes came to this territory fully a thousand years after the death of Alexander the Macedon."
Q40)Skopjan minority claims.
How many supposedly "Macedonians" of the Skopjan type are in Greece? Well, the Skopjans and their supporters cannot agree to a reasonable figure.
Once Radio Belgrade (Dec 14, 1950) claimed this number was 250,000. On August 28, 1953 Yugopress claimed it was 120,000.
The current claim depends on the weather , the mood of the es- timator, and the outcome of some (probably highly biased) random number generator .
Q41) Are there any Slavs living in Greece? When the last few Slavs left Greece? Are there any Slavophone living in Greece? Where are they living? Who are they?
Excluding a number of Polish and Hungarian immigrant workers as well as few Yugoslav illegal workers residing in Greece particularly during the summer months, there are no other Slavs living in Greece.
Skopjans claim that there is a sizeable Slavic minority in the region Macedonia of Greece. One can easily find out that there is not such a minority.
The answer to the second part of the question has been given in various answers to previous Questions. The Neuilly Treaty arranged for the exchange of the Greek Population living in Bulgaria and the Bulgarian (Slavic) population living in Greece. Their departure was finally completed in the late 1940s (See questions 32 and 34 for more details).
There are various Slavophones living in Greece most of whom are of Greek nationality. These are:
Few Bulgar-speaking Greeks living in Western Macedonia who may still speak this language. Their presence in Macedonia as well as their Greekness have been noted by many non-greek authors. For references to this check previous questions. Many of them fought against the Bulgars in the late 19th and early 20th century, like captain Kottas from the village of Roulia, against the Germans and the Bulgarians during WWII and the Greek communists in the following greek civil war. As time passes the Bulgarian language is dropped from usage just as this also happened with Turkish to the Turkish speaking Greeks who came in Greece from Asia Minor in 1922-1923.
Russian-speaking Greeks (some known as Pontian-Greeks) who are coming to Greece following the disintegration of the former USSR. These Greeks used to live in northern Turkey before they were expelled from there. Some of them have not been Greek-speakers for centuries, being previously Turkish-speakers (the Greeks of Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan fall in this category).
The Muslim Pomaks living in Greek Thrace and who are governed by the Lausanne Peace Treaty signed (among others) by Greece and Turkey which provided for the treatment of the Greek minority in Constantinople (nowadays Istanbul) and the Muslim minority in Greek Thrace (Western Thrace). Turks like to consider Pomaks as Turks, and Bulgars as Bulgarians. Pomaks were forcefully bulgarised by the Bulgars - that's why they are not so friendly to them and until some time in the 15-17th century were Christians when they became Muslims under the threat of death by the Turks. In the past years Turkey has been trying to convince Pomaks to abandon their language and start speaking Turkish. Due to this connection of the Pomaks and the Bulgars it is not much of a surprise that the Pomakian language looks like the one spoken by the Skopjans (sans the Serbo-Croatian words added to the Skopjan "Macedonian" idiom after 1945 to differentiate it from Bulgarian and some extra archaic greek and Turkish influences found in the Pomakian idiom).
Q42) A brief history of the Bulgarian-origin terrorist group IMRO (Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization) founded one hundred years ago (1893)
[This discussion contains excerpts from previous questions so that it can become as self-contained as possible. Despite this, reading of questions Q27-Q41 is still advised.] One of the main events that helped increase the Bulgarian influence in the part of the Ottoman empire to be called San-Stefano "Macedonia" in 1878 was the creation of the Bulgarian Exarchate in 1870 which took over responsibility for the orthodox Bulgars living in the Ottoman empire.
In early 1890's various Bulgarian groups were organized in the Ottoman empire advocating a more revolutionary program in Macedonia that would result in the Bulgarization of the area. One such group was IMRO (Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization) which was organized around 1893 and whose founders included Gotse Deltchev, Damjan Grujev, Pere Tochev, Petar Pop Arsov, and other Bulgarians from Bulgaria and San-Stefano "Macedonia". Since it was clear that European powers would never accept to Macedonia being part of Bulgaria, IMRO was aiming at uniting "Macedonia", by any possible (even violent) revolutionary means into a single entity and thus declaring a Macedonian state, which in the beginning would co-exist with Bulgaria then uniting with Bulgaria when the conditions in Europe would be favorable to such a union (although IMRO did not openly declare this intention). IMRO was theoretically open to all people living in "San Stefano Macedonia" be them Bulgars, Serbs, Greeks, Jews etc. Except for few Bulgar-speaking Greeks who joined IMRO on the belief that they were to fight the Turks and not fight for Bulgaria, no other non-Bulgars joined it. Even these Greeks, when it became clear to them what the intentions of IMRO really were departed and fought against it (such as captain Kottas from the village of Roulia). Thus, after 1900 the only members of IMRO were Bulgars living in the Ottoman empire as well as others from Bulgaria.
IMRO within a year from its creation came under Bulgarian-state control and financed mainly by the Bulgars in Sofia. The creation in 1894, of the Internal Macedonian-Adrianople Revolutionary Organization was to this direction. The "Adrianople" of this definition was referring to the then Turkish Vilaet of Adrianople which included the whole of nowadays Greek Thrace. The Bulgars since that time had eyes not only on Macedonia but also on Thrace (as the occupation during WWII of both these areas of Greece also suggests). IMRO thus began to be under the control of the Supreme (Macedonian) Committee located in Sofia, Bulgaria. Relations between IMRO and the Supreme Committee and between IMRO and the Bulgarian Exarchate were not without tensions. Besides leadership ambitions between the leaders of IMRO and SC, the two organization wanted to achieve the same objectives (Bulgarian control over Macedonia) differently. IMRO favored the creation of a separate Bulgarian state that of Macedonia. SC wanted the union of Macedonia to Bulgaria as the articles of the San-Stefano Treaty dictated. On the other hand the Bulgarian Exarchate objected to IMRO's revolutionary (and violent) means of achieving its target. It preferred more peaceful means that would involve the creation of schools educating the Bulgar-speaking population regardless of nationality and possibly providing monetary support to this population. The members of the SC were called Supremacist (Vrhovists), while the IMRO members of the terrorist bands in Macedonia were called comitadjis. In 1898, the Supreme Committee, under the leadership of Sarafov, prevailed and IMRO thus came under full Bulgarian control.
By that time it was clear to every non-Bulgarian member of IMRO the intentions of that organization. A terrorist campaign against the Greek population of Macedonia which began in 1893 intensified at that time. One reason for this was the inaction of the Greek Government mainly following the Greek defeat by the Turks in 1897. Because of this, the Turks tolerated the Bulgarian actions against the Greek population of Macedonia. This was to change only in the period of 1904-1908 when the first Greek bands with full support from Greece began to organize themselves and supplemented the few ones present in Macedonia since 1900 (whose organization was due to the efforts of the Bishop of Kastoria Germanos Karavaggelis and the monetary support of Macedonians living in Europe). Serbian bands were also active in "San Stefano Macedonia" at that time, but their presence and activity was mostly limited in the lands of nowadays Rep. of Skopje. The Balkan wars of the 1912-1920s erupted from these rivalries of Bulgars, Greeks, Serbs and Turks.
One member of IMRO in the period 1903-1908 was Dimitar Vlahov who was also elected as a Bulgar representative in the Ottoman Parliament. After the Balkan wars and the defeat of the Greeks by the Turks in 1922 the situation in Macedonia clarified with the forced population exchanges between Turkey and Greece and the voluntary exchanges between Greece and Bulgaria. Because of these population exchanges all Turks left Macedonia (or the Greek part of "San Stefano Macedonia", if one follows the alternative definition of the term "Macedonia" ), and almost all Bulgars left Greece. The Neuilly Treaty was to bring peace in the relations of Bulgaria with her adversaries. A convention between Greece and Bulgaria, known as the Neuilly Treaty, entering force on August 9, 1920 provided for the voluntary exchange of populations between Bulgaria and Greece in order to avoid mistreatment of the alien populations in the two countries.
IMRO, still active, objected to the implementation of the exchange of populations because this would eliminate the Bulgarian element in Greece and would eliminate Bulgaria's claim on Macedonia. A number of Slavs who had expressed their desire to migrate to Bulgaria thus chose not to do so due to pressures from IMRO.
During the wars, prior to 1920, close to 16,000 Greeks and 30,000 Bulgars fled to their respective homelands and after the Neuilly Treaty the corresponding numbers were 30,000 and 53,000. Still, some Bulgars, following IMRO's suggestions remained in Greece. Some others who due to intermarriage were not sure of their allegiance to either country also did not leave. Their presence was left noticed due to the chaotic situation in Greece following the Greek defeat of 1922 by the Turks and the subsequent forced exchange of populations between Greece and Turkey. The only minority (since the Bulgars were supposed to go following the Neuilly Treaty) left in Greece was a Moslem one in Thrace.
The situation in Southern Serbia was quite complicated since a large number of Bulgars were still residing there. These were to be named in the 1940s "Macedonians" by Tito in order to eliminate the Bulgarian influence on this territory of then Yugoslavia.
Around 1921, IMRO was ruled by Protogerov and Alexandrov, both ex-"Supremacist" (Vrhovists) who advocated a nationalistic Bulgarian policy. The "Centralists" advocated, just like the old IMRO, that an independent Macedonia was the only way towards a Bulgarian Macedonia. This latter faction within IMRO included as members Athanasov, Panitsa, Dimitar Vlahov kai Hadji-Dimov who in 1921 formed a new group inside IMRO. All four of them were leftists, either communists (like Hadji-Dimov) or socialists who were to become communist at a later time (such as Vlahov). By 1924 these two groups murdered the leaders of each other. First Alexandrov, then Hadji-Dimov and later Panitsa were murdered. In 1925 the surviving leaders Protogerov and Vlahov splitted and Vlahov founded United-IMRO. Although United-IMRO did not have as many followers as IMRO itself, it was nevertheless followed by socialists who had not yet declared themselves communists. In 1936 Vlahov dissolved United-IMRO and went to Moscow. He returned to Yugoslavia in 1943 after being invited by Tito and became Prime Minister of the then newly formed, by Tito, People's Republic of Macedonia. A revisionist history of IMRO by Vlahov interpreted the fight of IMRO from 1893-1920 as a fight of "Macedonian" (of the Skopjan type) and not Bulgarian poor peasants of low classes against the Turkish land owners. He also attacked the Supremacist and accused them of (which was naturally true since all IMRO members were then Bulgars) being under the guidance of the Bulgarians in Sofia and thus being indifferent to the independent "Macedonian" movement for independence. All these were being told by a person who was elected as a Bulgar in the Ottoman Parliament.
Following the Balkan Wars and WWI, Bulgaria lobbied Soviet Union to support her position on the Macedonian problem that is the political future of San-Stefano "Macedonia" in case of a communist victory in the Balkans.
Bulgarians did not and still do not accept the existence of a "macedonian nationality" (the way Skopjans do) but use the term "macedonian" population to refer to the population of the San-Stefano "Macedonia", whose definition was only political and had nothing to do with the historic region of Macedonia. Thus, the resolution of the Sixth Communist Balkan Conference promised that
... In setting up the ideal of a workers' and peasants' government, the communist parties and the Communist federation of the Balkans will assure peace, independence and liberty of development of all the peoples of the Peninsula, that it will be a voluntary union of independent Balkan Republics, including the Republic of Macedonia and Thrace.
It is noted that this text indicates that Bulgaria wanted to see all Northern Greece taken away from Greece. Bulgaria had aspirations not only on Macedonia but also on Greek Thrace. This is in line with earlier Bulgarian claims that ancient Macedonians were Illyrians (or Thraco-Illyrians) and that they (Bulgarians) are ancestors of either the Illyrians or the Thracians. The Bulgarians realizing that it was difficult for the lands of San-Stefano "Macedonia" to become parts of Bulgaria, rallied for an independent "Macedonia" to eliminate objection from the Communist parties of Yugoslavia and Greece and also gain the support of the Soviet Union.
Separately, Bulgarian communist representatives and IMRO, represented by Alexandrov (before his murder), Protogerov and Chaoulev, signed a manifesto which also included the following (see [9])
IMRO declares that it is fighting and will fight with all the means permitted by the revolution:
For the liberation and the reunion of the separated parts of Macedonia [My Note: that is the San-Stefano Russian defined "Macedonia". The two three pieces are "Macedonia" (Skopje) and what the Skopjans call Pirin Macedonia and Aegean Macedonia (what we Macedonians in Greece call simply Macedonia)] in a fully autonomous and independent political unit, within its natural geographical and ethnic frontiers.
For the democratization of the States bordering on Macedonia [My Note: presumably Greece, and Yugoslavia-Serbia. Only communist states were considered democratic by the two signatories.] and for their union in a Balkan federation which alone can guarantee the political existence of an independent Macedonia and the independence of the other Balkan peoples.
During WWII, Bulgars sided with the Germans and their reward for that was the occupation of Macedonia and Thrace of Greece.
At the end of WWII the feelings of the Greeks and especially of those living in the areas occupied by the Bulgarians toward their Bulgarian neighbors prompted a British [C.M. Woodhouse - ce107] to remark that "the only brotherly sentiment which Greek Macedonians felt towards the Bulgars was a disposition to raise Cain".
Elizabeth Barker similarly wrote:
Although Greeks were relieved by the belated Bulgarian withdrawal, they were left with an overpowering hatred of all Bulgars, whether pro-German or Communist. In fact the average Greek probably detested and feared the Bulgarian communists, who represented the great Slav menace to Greece from the north, even more than he had hated their predecessors.
Among the Bulgars still living in Greece at that time, some of them sided with the pro-German Bulgars who occupied parts of Greece during WWII. These, at the end of WWII, naturally left Greece. Some other (pro-communist ones) joined various communist oriented guerilla groups. These groups were controlled by the Yugoslavs of Tito and after WWII sided with the Greek communist guerillas who turned in the meantime against the Greek Government. After the communist defeat in the subsequent greek civil war they finally left Greece, 28-29 years after the signing of the Neuilly Treaty that first provided for their departure from Greece.
It is noted that the first 'premier' of the new republic of "Macedonia" was Dimitar Vlahov, who had been an outspoken Bulgarian during the first decade of the 20th century, was an elected Bulgarian delegate to the Turkish Parliament, became leader of the "United" IMRO in 1925, and in the following years declared himself an "authentic Macedonian".
K. J. Belloch "Griechische Geschichte" I-IV (2nd edition) Berlin-Leipzig 1912-1917.
St. Casson. "Macedonia, Thrace and Illyria", Oxford 1926.
Ap. B. Daskalakis. "The hellenism of Ancient Macedonia", (In Greek) Athens 1960.
[This text has also been translated into English. The English edition was published around 1964.]
Geyer Fr. "Makedonien bis zur Thronbesteigung Philipps II", Muenchen 1930.
O. Hoffmann "Die Makedonen, ihre Sprache und ihr Volkstum", Goettingen 1906.
M. Sakellariou, a chapter on the Macedonian dialect of Greek in "Macedonia: 4000 years of Greek history and civilization" edited by M. Sakellariou, EKDOTIKI ATHINON.
N. Martis "The falsification of Macedonian History". Ikaros Publications, Athens 1984.
D. Zagles "To Makedoniko Problhma kai oi Notioslayoi" (in Greek), Athens.
Evangelos Kofos "Nationalism and Communism in Macedonia" Institute for Balkan Studies (ETAIREIA MAKEDONIKON SPOYDON - IDRYMA MELETON HERSONISOY TOY AIMOY), THESSALONIKI, 1964.
Hammond, N. G. L. (Nicholas Geoffrey Lampriere). "The miracle that was Macedonia", Sidgwick & Jackson great civilization series. London: Sidgwick and Jackson; New York: St. Martin's Pre
End.-
HAVE FUN !!!