Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 15 of 42 FirstFirst ... 5131415161725 ... LastLast
Results 351 to 375 of 1031

Thread: Macedonians

  1. #351
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-10-10
    Posts
    390


    Country: Canada



    Quote Originally Posted by DejaVu View Post
    3. Macedonia was never a region of Greece. On the contrary, ancient Greece was subjected to Macedonia. In 1913, modern Greece and her Balkan allies partitioned Macedonia. If today a portion of Macedonia belongs to Greece, it is by virtue of an illegal partition of the whole and occupation of a part of Macedonia.
    Illegal partition? How so? The treaty was illegal somehow? or are you just buthurt that balgaria lost the second balkan war? In anycase, your not an ethnic macedonian because they do not exist. Self determination is not built on lies. I live in Canada but I'm not a native Huron person, nor can I claim that I am just because I live in the area they once lived in.

    Grow up Tito is dead. Macedonian by nationality? sure, by ethnicity, you're a comedian.

  2. #352
    Marquis Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    iapetoc's Avatar
    Join Date
    09-01-11
    Location
    Katerini Pieria Makedonia
    Posts
    890
    Points
    5,706
    Level
    22
    Points: 5,706, Level: 22
    Level completed: 32%, Points required for next Level: 344
    Overall activity: 0%


    Ethnic group
    Greeks
    Country: Greece



    well
    lets put it Different

    1 The MAKEDONIANS

    a. The Makedonians is an Ancient Greek tribe that lives in the area of today Greek Makedonia, relatives of Dorian Greek,
    The named the Makedonia after their name and ancestor Makednos,
    b. Their Kings were The Argeians Dynasty,
    They Unite with Aeolians of today Greek West Makedonia at 370 BC
    Under King Amyntas, and they colonised conquer East Greek Makedonia at times of Kings Phillip
    c. THE MAKEDONIANS NEVER INHABITED PAEONIA AND HAVE NOTHING TO DO,
    THE MAKEDONIANS RESPECT THE INDEPENDENCE OF NEIGHBORS AS LONG AS THEY RESPECT OUR INDEPENDENCE

    2 THE FYROMIANS

    a. Fyrom is an Independent state that is inhabited by Slavic people which name them selfs Makedonians, they took their name after the land, and the treaty of 1913 (Bucurest)
    b. Fyrom people have nothing to do with Ancient Makedonian Tribe, since their origin and land is Paeonia and their culture is Slavic, and their Kings like Stephan Dusan or Simeon or Samuel are Slavic kings either Serbian or Bulgarian which conquered the land of ancient Makedonians, and claim the title, but had nothing to do with ancient Makedonians.
    c. Fyrom claims Land and culture of Greek Makedonia which is a hostile stand,

    3 GENETICALLY THERE IS ENOUGH DIFFERENCE AMONG FYROM AND MAKEDONIA,

    4 AN EXCHANGE OF POPULATION WAS DONE IN 1923 AMONG GREECE AND YUGOSLAVIAN FEDERATION (FYROM) AND BULGARIA, SO THERE IS NO MINORITY IN ANY OF THESE 4 LANDS-States

    Self DETERMINATION IS NOT A CLAIMING IDEA, OR A WILLINGLY DETERMINATION,
    I CAN'T DETERMINE MY SELF AS A RUSSIAN OR A SCOTTISH,
    CAUSE THEN I LIVE IN AN ANOTHER WORLD,

    THAT IS THE RESULTS OF NATIONALIST PROPAGANDA WHOSE TENSIONS IS IMPERIALISM AND EXPANSIONS,
    and is every where in every country, But sometimes overpass the limits, if I Immigrate to Germany, and change passport that makes me a citizen, but not a German, my children or my grand children if they stay then have the right to self-determinate as Germans and not Greeks


    besides even in your documents you see Greek citizens, even if they were according church, they existed in Makedonia in Ottomans and Turkish Times census, as also existed Slavic people mainly named as Bulgarians.

    the 2 ethnicities Greek and Bulgarian(officially) or Greek and Slavic Makedonian(unofficially) proves that at 1900 there was 3 different nations, Turks, Greeks, And Slavic Populations,
    THAT IS A FACT YOU CAN'T DENY

    the Greeks did not invade or conquer one day, at 1900
    they didn't wake one morning and decided lets go take Makedonia from Fyrom-ians, at 1912
    they live in Makedonia since more than 3000 years

    understand that, my family lives here, they didn't came from outerspace at 1900

    Even the Turks admit that minor Asia was inhabited by Greeks, even the Bulgarians admit that many cities in Black sea was build by Greeks,
    the only one that Denies all is Fyrom, find out why.

    Exchange of population was done so avoid future wars,
    There is no Minority among Fyrom and Greece, cause the exchange had that purpose, to create more clear national states, Greeks left Monaster-Bitola, and Fyromians left Florina-Lerin.
    that was done to avoid future claims and wars,
    Last edited by iapetoc; 01-02-11 at 04:33.

  3. #353
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    DejaVu's Avatar
    Join Date
    30-10-10
    Posts
    578
    Points
    23,249
    Level
    46
    Points: 23,249, Level: 46
    Level completed: 70%, Points required for next Level: 301
    Overall activity: 6.0%


    Country: United Kingdom



    AS A CONTESTED space Macedonia in the late nineteenth century suffered political, religious and paramilitary incursions made upon the population by the neighbouring nascent states and the disappearing Ottoman empire. Territorial claims were rationalised by ethnographic maps and statistical population data. Interested commentators viewed Macedonia in accordance with government policy and presented their studies as academic and scientific, even though these studies were clearly political in nature. The European Powers maintained their own pretence and acted as patrons of the small Balkan States. Although churches, schools and paramilitary bands were the primary instruments of the Greek, Bulgarian and Serb states, expansion into Macedonia was ultimately achieved by a full military mobilisation when the armies of Greece, Bulgaria and Serbia marched into Macedonia in October 1912 and drove out the Ottoman Turks. The territorial division of Macedonia and claims upon the Macedonians have continued to be a matter of contention between the Balkan States into contemporary times.



    Neutral Statistics on the Population of Macedonia:

    1. Dr. K. Ostreich. Die Bevolkerung von Makedonien. Leipzig, 1905.
    2. K. Gersin. Macedonian und das Turkische Problem. Wien, 1903.
    3. Andrew Roussos. The British Foreign Office and Macedonian National Identity 1918 - 1941.

    Macedonian Slavs (Did not call themselfs Macedonian slavs only Macedonians)
    1. 1,500,000
    2. 1,182,036
    3. 1,150,000

    Serbs
    -
    -
    -

    Bulgarians
    -
    -
    -

    Greeks (Did not call themselfs Macedonians only Greeks)
    1. 200,000
    2. 228,702
    3. 300,000

    Turks and others
    1. 550,000
    2. 627,915
    3. 400,000



    Statistics without "Macedonians"
    There are three statistical tables that the Greeks and the Bulgarians point to show that the Macedonians do not exist as nation, and that Macedonia belongs to ether one of them.

    1) According to a Turkish census of Hilmi Pasha in 1904, in areas of Macedonia lived:
    Vilaet of Thessalonica - 373.227 (Greeks) - 207.317 (Bulgarians)
    Vilaet of Monastir - 261.283 (Greeks) - 178.412 (Bulgarians)
    Santzak of Skopje - 13.452 (Greeks) - 172.735 (Bulgarians)

    2) According to a Turkish census of Hilmi Pasha in 1906, in Macedonia lived:
    Muslims - 423.000
    Greeks - 259.000
    Bulgarians - 178.000
    Serbs - 13.150
    Others (Jews) - 73.000

    Turkish censuses above cannot be taken into consideration because the Turks registered the inhabitants based upon their religious background, not ethnic. In Macedonia at that moment the Macedonian Orthodox Church was forbidden (upon the insistence of the Greeks in 1767), and the Macedonians had choice to enter either Islam or the only Christian Orthodox Churches the Turks legitimized - and those were the Greek, Bulgarian, or Serbian, because Greece, Bulgaria and Serbia were already independent countries. The Islam was not an option for the first Christians of Europe, and the Macedonians had no other choice but to have religious services in Bulgarian, Greek, or Serbian Church. As result, as it can be seen above, the Turkish census registered Muslims, Jews, and the Christian Macedoniansweredivided depending on which church they belonged - mostly Bulgarian and Greek as it shows.

    3) Another table is the one published by the League of the Nations. According to the League of the Nations in 1926, in Aegean Macedonia occupied by Greece in 1913 lived:
    Turks - 2.000
    Greeks - 1.341.000
    Bulgarisants - 77.000
    Others (Jews) - 91.000

    Submitted to the League of the Nations by the Greek government and it is clear that it is biased. The League of the Nations had not visited Aegean Macedonia and did not participate at all in conducting these statistics. Greece here refers to the Macedonians as "bulgarisants", which means "those who pretend to be Bulgarians" and obviously non-Bulgarians. However, Greece uses many other names in falsifying the identity of the Macedonians. Slavophones, Slav Macedonians, Makedoslavs, Slav Greeks, and Bulgarisants, are only some of the names that prove Greece's unpreparess in this mean falsification of the Macedonian people and language.


    Greek, Bulgarian, and Serbian Statistics of Macedonia's Population
    The new independent Balkan states used their Churches and schools to propagate how the Macedonians do not exist, and how Macedonia was populated only by Greeks, Bulgarians, and Serbs. Ethnographers, historians, and writers begun writing books in favor of this or that propaganda. Many of them did not even visit Macedonia, while those who did already had a written scenario. Their presence there was only a simple formality.

    Nikolaides, 1899 (Greek)
    Slav Macedonians - 454.000
    Greeks - 656.300
    Turks and others - 576.600

    Kenchov, 1900 (Bulgarian)
    Serbs - 400
    Bulgarians - 1.037.000
    Greeks - 214.000
    Turks and others - 610.365

    Gopchevich, 1886 (Serbian)
    Serbs - 1.540.000
    Greeks - 201.000
    Turks and others - 397.020


    Forced Change of the Ethnic Structure of Aegean Macedonia
    The presence of the Macedonians in Aegean Macedonia could not allow Greece to claim that land to be Greek and only Greek. Since it was proven that they resisted the Hellenization, Greece decided to drive them out of Macedonia. Greece made agreements with Bulgaria (signed 10/27/19), and Turkey (1/30/23 in Lausanne), for exchange of population. This provided for the Macedonians of Aegean to leave for Bulgaria, while the Greeks in Bulgaria and Turkey settled in the Aegean part of Macedonia. These measures changed the ethnic character of the Aegean Macedonia. According to the "Great Greek Encyclopedia", there were 1,221,849 newcomers against 80,000 "slavophones". The "Ethnic Map of Greek Macedonia Showing the Ratio Between Various Ethnic Elements in 1912 and 1926," claims there were 119,000 "bulgarisants" in 1912, and 77,000 in 1926. The Greek ethnic map of Aegean Macedonia was submitted to the League of the nations by the Greek government. The League of the Nations had not visited Aegean Macedonia and did not participate at all in conducting this statistics. Greece here refers to the Macedonians as "bulgarisants", which means "those who pretend to be Bulgarians" and obviously non-Bulgarians. However, Greece uses many other names in falsifying the identity of the Macedonians. Slavophones, Slav Macedonians, Makedoslavs, Slav Greeks, and Bulgarisants, are only some of the names that prove Greece's unpreparess in this mean falsification of the Macedonian people and language. There are also other Greek sources that contradict the previous numbers of the Macedonians in Greece. The Athenian newspaper, "Message d' Aten" wrote on February 15, 1913, that the number of "Bulgar-echarhists" was 199,590 contradicting with those 119,000 of the "Ethnic Map of Greek Macedonia".

    How many Macedonians remained in Greece?
    When the Bulgarian and Serbian views are added, the confusion gets only bigger. According to the Bulgarian Rumenov, in 1928 there were total of 206,435 "Bulgarians", while the Serb Bora Milojevich claimed 250,000 "Slavs" in Aegean Macedonia. Belgrade's "Politika" in its 6164 issue of June 24, 1925 gave three times greater numbers for the Macedonians in Greece than official Athens:
    "The Greek government must not complain that we are pointing to the fact that the Macedonian population of West Macedonia - 250,000 - 300,000 - is the most unfortunate national and linguistic minority in the world, not only because their personal safety in endangered, but also because they have no church nor school in their own language, and they had them during the Turkish rule."
    The speculations with the real number of Macedonians is obvious again. Their true number remains disputable in the Balkan documents, same as it was the case before the partition of 1912. Unfortunately, the Greek government would not allow anybody, including neutral observers to conduct statistical studies. Forced to leave, the Macedonians emigrated in large numbers to Australia, Canada, and the USA. As a result, there are about 300,000 Macedonians that presently live in Australia. In the city of Toronto, Canada, there are about 100,000. The present Macedonian colonies in these counties are represented mostly by the descendants of those Aegean Macedonians who settled there in the 1920's.
    According to the "Ethnic Map of Greek Macedonia Showing the Ratio Between Various Ethnic Elements in 1912 and 1926", only 42,000 left their homes. If we take the statistical tables of the Balkan and neutral sources above, by 1913 in the whole of Macedonia lived around 1,250,000 Macedonians. In the Aegean part (51%) which Greece took after 1913, half of the Macedonian nation remained under Greek rule - that would be 625,000 people. If up to 1926 42,000 out of these 625,000 left, in the Greek part of Macedonian thereafter remained 583,000 Macedonians.
    Last edited by DejaVu; 02-02-11 at 23:00.

  4. #354
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    DejaVu's Avatar
    Join Date
    30-10-10
    Posts
    578
    Points
    23,249
    Level
    46
    Points: 23,249, Level: 46
    Level completed: 70%, Points required for next Level: 301
    Overall activity: 6.0%


    Country: United Kingdom



    Facsimile of the periodical Macedonian Voice published in St.Petersburg (Russia) in 1913-1914 with Sarafov's heading.

    We Macedonians are not Serbians nor Bulgars but simply Macedonians. The Macedonian people (narod) exists separate from the Bulgarian and the Serbian. We feel with both and the one that helps our liberation we'll thank but neither should forget that Macedonia belongs to the Macedonians."
    Boris Sarafov, 1902

    Austrian, Karl Hron
    "According to my own studies on the Serb-Bulgarian conflict I came to the conclusion that the Macedonians looking at their history and language are a separate nation, which means they are not Serbs nor Bulgarians, but the descendants of those Slavs who populated the Balkan peninsula long before the Serb and Bulgarian invasions, and who later did not mix with any of those other two nations..." and:
    "... the Macedonian language according to its own laws in the development of the voices, and its own grammatical rules, forms one separate language".

    Henry Brailsford, Macedonia: its Races and their Future
    "Are the Macedonians Serbs or Bulgars? The question is constantly asked and dogmatically answered in Belgrade and Sofia. But the lesson of history is obviously that there is no answer at all. They are not Serbs, for their blood can hardly be purely Slavonic... On the other hand, they can hardly be Bulgarians... They are very probably very much what they were before either a Bulgarian or a Serbian Empire existed - a Slav people derived from various stocks, who invaded the peninsula at different periods."

    The famous Macedonian Gjorgi Pulevski wrote in 1875:
    "People who originate from one and the same race, speak the same language, live together in harmony, and have the same customs, songs and mentality, constitute a nation, and the place where they live is their homeland. In this way, the Macedonians are a nation and their homeland is Macedonia" and,
    "I am not Bulgarian, nor Greek, nor Tzintzar, I am pure Macedonian as were Philip and Alexander the Macedonian and Aristotle Philosopher"

    William E. Gladstone
    "... Next to the Ottoman government nothing can be more deplorable and blameworthy than jealousies between Greek and Slav and plans by the states already existing for appropriating other territory. Why not Macedonia for the Macedonians as well as Bulgaria for the Bulgarians and Serbia for the Serbians."

    Gladstone was three times elected Prime Minister of England (1868 -1874; 1880 - 1885 and 1893 - 1894). He supported the Macedonian nation in its quest for freedom. Perhaps Macedonia would have gained its independence had this man been once again elected Prime Minister during the big Ilinden Uprising on August 2, 1903. Left without any support, the uprising was crushed by the Turks, followed by the massacre on the innocent Macedonian population.






    From La Macédoine et les Macédoniens, by Edmond Bouchié de Belle [E.B.de Belle], published in Paris (Librairie Armand Colin), 1922, completed in 1918. Translated from the French by Stavros N. Karageorgis C.Phil. Sociology UCLA. Original pages: 40-44.

    Part I: Macedonia and the Macedonians Chapter 1: The disputed race: The Macedonian peasant

    1- The Macedonian nationality
    In the entire countryside of Macedonia, one finds a race of peasants, speaking a Slavonic dialect, of Greek Orthodox religion, which presents most of the ethnic outward signs customary of the Slav peoples. These poor people have the unenviable privilege of being claimed by three different nationalities. - "The Macedonians", say the Bulgarians, "are Bulgarians. They have such a language and such a heart. It was the entire Christendom of European Turkey which comprised the 'Great Bulgaria' created by the Treaty of San Stefano. It is under the Bulgarian name that the victims of the Treaty of Berlin fought against the Turkish yoke". -"The Macedonians are Serbs", replies an equally ardent voice. "It is all of Macedonia which included the Empire of Dussan the Great. It is the Serbian name which the literature and monuments that traversed the Ottoman domination invoke. The Macedonian language is not Bulgarian, as the mal-intentioned ignorants say, it is old Serbian, Serbian arrested in its development. Moreover, have you ever seen Bulgarians celebrating the Slava? Yet, the Macedonians do celebrate it." Now come the Greeks who declare the Macedonians, if not Hellenes by origin, or even by language, at least hellenised by culture. "It is not blood," they say, "but the spirit which creates a race. The barbarian Slavs who conquered Macedonia were organized, and provided with law and order, by the Greek Empire, converted by the Greek Church. We can speak of them as Greeks the same way we speak of the French as Latin. The Macedonians would not have their own ethnic character except for the fact that the dispute of which they are the object had given them one, at least provisionally. One should not perhaps, in fact, take on-the-field part in the quarrel, but at least one fact is undeniable; that is, these people exist, and that one had better attribute a name to them. Being a 'contested people' forms, in sum, an international status equivalent to that of 'contested territory'. But, an observer of good faith will go a bit further. He will state easily that if the Macedonian has a lot in common with the Slavs of the Balkans, he has absolutely nothing in common with the Hellene. What's more, if by some customs, worship, and language traits he resembles a Bulgarian, by others, he resembles the Serb, and is not identified exactly either with the one or with the other. Besides, that which makes a Bulgarian, a Serb, a Greek is, more than any ethnic or linguistic particularity, the conscience he has of his nationality and his participation in an organized national life. Yet, the people in question distinguishes itself from the three other peoples by the fact that it has neither national conscience nor national life. Ask a peasant from around Ostrovo or Monastir what/who he is! He will, nine times out of ten, reply 'Makedon'. But, this declaration does not at all have the character of a profession of patriotic faith. The questioned may equally simply have answered by "My name is Dimitri'. He states that he is an inhabitant of Macedonia, and that's all. An observer of good faith will therefore set apart this population as that to which the name "Macedonian Slavs" or simply 'Macedonians' appeared to suit them best.

  5. #355
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    DejaVu's Avatar
    Join Date
    30-10-10
    Posts
    578
    Points
    23,249
    Level
    46
    Points: 23,249, Level: 46
    Level completed: 70%, Points required for next Level: 301
    Overall activity: 6.0%


    Country: United Kingdom



    http://www.gate.net/~mango/20thC_Docs.htm
    Documents on the Struggle of the Macedonian People for Indipendence and Nation-State
    1902
    Appeal of the "National Macedonian-Albanian League" Brother Macedonians! Brother Albanians! ...There is no need that the Bulgarians, the Greeks or others amend our homeland... Executive Committee British Museum (British Library), London, 1902
    1902
    Nikola Karev to Goce Delchev ...Let us not expect freedom either from the Greeks or the Bulgarians; it is we, the Macedonians, who should fight for our Macedonia ourselves... Neobjaveno pismo, Nova Makedonija, (Skopje), XXIV, nbr.7744 (May 5 1968), p.8
    1897
    William Gladstone ...Next to the Ottoman Govt. nothing can be more deplorable and blameworthy then jealousies between Greek and Slav, and plans by the States already existing for appropriating other territory. Why not Macedonia for Macedonians, as well as Bulgaria for Bulgarians and Servia for Servians. And if they are small and weak, let them bind themselves together for defence, so that they may not be devoured by others, either great and small, which would probably be the effect of their quarreling among themselves. The Times (London), 6th January 1897, p.12
    1900
    A. Brutus (A. Drandar): Concerning a movement in Macedonia A considerable section of the European press does not cease to inform us of the immense sufferings undergone by the Christian population of Macedonia....It was the sad fate of that population that made us publish this booklet, based upon our experience and personal observations I had acquired impartially, as a foreigner, during my stay in Macedonia of several years...If one takes a retrospective view of the history of Macedonia to the most ancient of times, one remains amazed by the great role this small country, this classical country par excellance, played in the world....The Macedonian, born in a land to which nature was so favorable, has always longed for heroic feats and aspired to great deeds...Even the glorious cradle of Ancient Hellenism is subjected to the Macedonian kings...We find Macedonians on the Byzantine throne at the time when this empire was at its peak. Following the course of history, we see how the star of Macedonia shone with the same intensity. It plays the chief role in the revival of the Slav people. Thus, the two brothers exalted to apostles, Cyril and Methodius, objects of general admiration for the Slav world, are Macedonians, and owing to the very existence of these two apostles, this small land becomes the cradle of the Slav people to whom it gives its religion and art...The inhabitants of Macedonia do not want to be annexed either to Bulgaria or Serbia, or Greece; they want, they want so strongly, to live a human life in an autonomous country. Their slogan is: Macedonia to the Macedonians. A. Brutus, A Propos d'un Mouvement en Macedonie, Bruxelles 1900, pp.12-13, 15, 56.
    1901
    A.V. Amfiteatrov: The Land of Discord Each Slav should and is obliged to feel sympathy for Macedonian freedom. But Macedonian freedom cannot be achieved with their own, Macedonian means. The land is too small and weak to fight against the power of Constantinople, which only has to give a sign and tens of thousands of soldiers will attack the Rumalian vilayets and strangle them like mice before Europe could compose itself, even before Europe could know it. Hence, Macedonia cannot be freed with its own forces. Only an evil enemy, an unconscious enemy of Slavism could desire an armed movement in Macedonia now when the land is totally unprepared for an uprising, in circumstances of tied hands of the whole Europe, of Serbo-Bulgarian clashes, of huge preparations of the Turks against the slightest possibilities of movement. Or a real fool. These were the exact words of one of the high-ranking persons deciding the fate of Balkan Slavism in a discussion with me concerning the Macedonian committees. Nobody in Europe, none of the Great Powers can actively intercede in favor of the Macedonians against the Turks at the present moment - except, perhaps, Austria. Bu the very name of Austria causes panic in the Macedonian Slav element, who will allow Austria to reign in Macedonia? For it would be the destruction of all ideas of pan-Slavism, it would be the end of the Eastern Question, it would be the decisive and last victory of the German world over the Slav world. Then, we the Russians, would only be humbly left to falling out of step with that state with the projected historical tasks, with the repudiation of racial ideals - a state similar to modern Italy or Spain, only in greater proportions. The young Slav states, adjacent to Macedonia, are too young and too poor to go into struggle for it. At the same time, these states are disintegrating both from the internal situation and external family hostilities. The Bulgarians and the Serbians cannot stand each other; each consider Macedonia as their lawful property. Neither the Bulgarians nor the Serbs have even the slightest desire to create Macedonia for Macedonia. Enthusiast for an autonomous Macedonia can only be found among the Macedonian natives. Neither the Serb nor the Bulgarian wants the autonomy of Macedonia. As far as the question of whether Macedonia should become Bulgarian or Serbian is concerned, every Bulgarian would tell you with utter sincerity: -It would be better that the Turks ruled there eternally then to give the Serbs a chance to spread towards the Aegean Sea. And the Serb would say: - It would be better that the Turks did there whatever they allow your damned brothers to achieve their Greater Bulgaria from one sea to the other! The question of nationality has not been settled in Macedonia and it is hard to assume that it will ever be settled in a satisfactory manner. If we are to believe Gopcevic and Jasterbov there are almost no Bulgarians - all of the are Serbs. If we are to believe Ofejkov and Miljukov, there are no Serbs, all of them are Bulgarians. It is more probable that where we are dealing with a perfectly branch of Slavs, transitional between the Bulgarians and the Serbs. But that branch taken alone is insufficiently significant to win its freedom and turn itself into a state unit. Consequently, no matter how the question of its nationality is resolved, it is deprived of the possibility to exist, so to say; it is cursed in itself to serve as political material directly for its neighbors, and deviously and indirectly for Europe, which governs its naighbours. The basic reason for the failures of the Macedonian revolutionary organization lies in the fact that it is fed by means that have historically proved their ineffectiveness against state order of a European kind to overthrow the system and authority that have nothing in common with European order; since with the tactics, which have overthrown many European government, it attempts to erase military slavery, which has continued in Macedonia and Old Serbia for five centuries now; since the arms, victorious in the civil war, are also used in external war, because the Turk is not a fellow-citizen and compatriot of the Slavs, but he was, is and will be their external enemy... - They consider me a Bulgarophile, I.A. Zinovjev told me. But it isn't so at all. I behave in perfectly equal manner to all Slavs, and, if a person is decent and likable, it is all the same to me whether he is a Bulgarian, a Serb or a Macedonian. But I am a Russian representative and I have been sent here to protect, first of all, Russian interests. Permanent patronage over the Balkan Slavs is inseparably linked with Russian interests. We are their natural patrons. But this patronage does not mean Russia's following of Slav leaders; patronage is not characterless yielding. However, as far as the Macedonian question is concerned, the Bulgarians, as our most spoilt children in the whole of the Slav world, would like precisely to lead Russia with them where they have blindly started closing their eyes, demanding that the patronage be turned into yielding. The activities of the Macedonian committees, long under the patronage (with) our tolerance of the Bulgarian government, had the following direct calculation: - We shall force the Turks to abandon their reserved behavior they have taken up and borne with difficulty - wit a series of small explosions, murders and blackmails we shall arose the fanatic excitement of the Moslems, the Sultan will be forced to give in to the demands of his subjects of the same faith, and Turkish atrocities will start in Macedonia, blood will be shed, villages will be burnt. For the attainment of the sublime goal it is of no consequence whether fifty or fifty thousand people will be killed - the main thing is: slaughter must be caused, which will in turn cause the necessity of European intervention, and since the protection of the Slavs is the perennial deed of Russia and it will never leave the Macedonian question to Austria - consequently, volens-nolens, Russia shall have to send again hundred of thousands of soldiers to the Balkan Peninsula and achieve the freedom of Macedonia with its bayonets, i.e. it should put the land into the mouth of the Bulgarians. For they don't recognize any other nationality in Macedonia except the Bulgarian one. Consequently, the future freedom of Macedonia for them is either the fulfillment of the Treaty of San Stefano and unification of Macedonia with the Bulgarian Principality, or a creation of a new autonomous Bulgarian body, which will sooner or later be merged with the former into an 'integral Bulgaria'.... Cvetan Stanoevski, Kako ja vidoa Makedonija, Skopje 1978, pp.189-190,193-194.
    1903
    Victor Berard on the Macedonians. The ambition for a small homeland, the egotism of a small nation, is not the ultimate ideal of the Macedonians. To replace Turkish subjugation with Greek, Serbian or Bulgarian dependence does not seem to them to represent some great gain...Until recently France did not know the Macedonians. They were Thracian, Peons, Sclavins for us, a wild and almost a mythical people, that lived somewhere at the bottom of some unknown land for us. We either did not know them or despised them, since we heard of them from the malicious notes of the ancient and modern Greeks... La Revue de Paris, Juin 1903.
    1904
    A Macedonian Theory Was it so long before the liberation of the Bulgarians that throughout Bulgaria, in answer to the question as to what they were (by nationality), the Bulgarians said they were "Christians" or raya (non-Moslem Turkish subjects)?And even now it is not so rare on occasion to hear a Bulgarian answering in court as to the question of his nationality that he is a "Christian". The notion of nationality has still not become a new accomplishment of his mind. During the Turkish period, the Bulgarian peasant referred to the Bulgarians in the towns as "Greeks" and city lother were "Greek dress" for him. And since the Greeks designated that peasant as a "fat-headed Bulgar", his brother from the town loved to be called a "Hellene", so that he should not be scorned for his real national name. It is not exactly the same case with what Mr. Misirkov elaborates concerning the name of the Macedonian Slav? The name "Bulgar" fell even in Bulgaria to such position which earned only the contempt of the others. This name appeared so empty even in the mouth of the Bulgarians themselves that it became a synonym for "Christian"; the later designated the whole ethnic contents of Bulgarian individual and social consciousness. When our peasant used to say "we are Bulgars", he meant "we are Christians", i.e. Orthodox. The Russian Tsar was a "Bulgarian Tsar" for him not by nationality, but by Orthodox Christianity. A. Teodorov-Balan, Edna makedonska teorija - Periodichesko spisanie (Sofia), LXV (1904), p.818
    1907-1908
    The Macedonian Villages ...I asked him what language they spoke, and my Greek interpreter carelessly rendered the answer Bulgare. The man himself had said Makedonski. I drew attention to this word and the witness explained that he did not consider the rural dialect used in Macedonia the same as Bulgarian, and refused to call it by that name. It was Macedonian, a word to which he gave the Slav form of Makedonski, but which I was to hear farther north in the Greek form of Makedonike. And so the "Bulgarophone" villagers are no longer willing to admit that they speak Bulgarian. They have coined a new term of their own accord, and henceforth their dialect, 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 thought they are Macedonians. Allen Upward, The East End of Europe, London 1908, pp. 204-205
    June 25, 1910
    Archimandrite Neophyte in Skopje to Bulgarian Exarch Joseph in Constantinople: Starting from some time ago, as I have already informed You several times, matters in the eparchy, and especially here have not developed as they should. The Eparchy Council, which, as You know, consists of the town's elders, has decided to send You a letter in which it strongly condemns the candidature of the former Metropolitan of Skopje, Theodosius, and among other things, upon my suggestion writes the following in the protest: "Outraged, we read in the newspapers that a group of villains wishes at any cost to urge the population - the voters of the Skopje Eparchy - to bring back that typical intransigent, Theodosious, as the Metropolitan of the Skopje Eparchy. This is the same Theodosius who 17 or 18 years ago wanted to separate the Skopje Eparchy from the Exarchate and proclaim himself an independent Metropolitan. For this purpose, he then made a special seal on which he deleted the words "Bulgarian Exarchate", so sacred to us, and printed his own baptismal certificates, marriage certificates and other documents; he did not fulfill the circular letters and the orders of the Exarchate, etc. Yet, since at that time there were not such a strong anti-Bulgarian movement among the local Bulgarians, it was possible for the Exarchate to remove this dangerous schismatic in time and thereby preserve the unity of the Bulgarian Church in Turkey. Now this same schismatic, contrary to Exarchist interests, wishes to restore his eparchy and continue his dishonest business of disuniting our Bulgarian people. We protest most strongly against his nomination as Metropolitan of Skopje, because he insults the Bulgarian feeling among the population". Unfortunately, Your Grace, if the Eparchy Council has such people with common sense, this is not the case with some craftsman's circles, which have come under the influence of Mr. Petar Pop Arsov, a teacher, who has taken the idea into his head that he is a leader of the people. He constantly speaks against the Exarchate and its leadership, including myself, and urges the craftsman to support Metropolitan Theodosios' candidature, since he once suffered for defending the interests of the Macedonians. It would not be superfluous if I informed You about another problem, which, I presume, will represent a kind of plot in this whole election propaganda. I have understood from some members of the Council that Krste Petkov, who at one time started "Misirkovism", had requested from certain relative of his, living here in Skopje, that he put him in touch with this teacher, Petar Pop Arsov, in connection with collecting songs about Krale Marko in the Skopje district, and Mr. Pop Arsov was so kind as to agree immediately. I am writing this to you, Your Grace, a justified suspicion that schismatic forces are being brought to life here. The said Mr. Krste Misirkov expressed in a letter to his relative has desire to return to Macedonia, more precisely, to come to Skopje as soon as Macedonia was liberated. The man wished to be a professor at the Skopje university (?!). If this is true, and there are no reasons for lying to me, then You may conclude Yourself what danger threatens the Bulgarian idea in these historic times. Just imagine if the "Misirkovism" of Mr. Krste, the "separatism' of His Grace Theodosius and the "autonomism" of Mr. Petar Pop Arsov joined together! I am of the opinion, Your Grace, upon the basis of the protest by the Eparchy Council (which was, after all, published in the press) that the candidature of His Grace Theodosius should be withdrawn, by which a danger of as yet unseen proportions for the Bulgarian cause in Macedonia would be evaded. I remain Your Grace's younger brother in Jesus Christ and I pray for You. S. Dimevski, Diskusija - K.P. Misirkov i nacionalno-kulturniot razvoj na makedonskiot narod do Osloboduvanjeto - Zbornik Misirkov. Simpozium. Skopje, Institut za makedonski jazik, 1975, pp.338-339. 1905(?)
    Sveta Simic, representative of the Kingdom of Serbia in Bulgaria, to Jovan Jovanovich-Pizon, head of the consular department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Belgrade. D. Gruev again visited me last Saturday. D. Hristov also chanced to be in my house, so we spent more then 3 hours in discussion. The Macedonians have been afraid that the Bulgarians and we agreed to divide them, and accordingly they are the only ones left to frown at the Imperial Alliance. They suspect it hides something else. They continually make agreements and preparations but undertake nothing more serious. They constantly send smaller bands and ammunition into their country. All their activity is reduced to this only in present. They would like to make an agreement with us, but such as to sacrifice nothing of what they call their autonomy. They have come to see more and more that there are obstacles before them which they cannot fight successfully, and under the influence of which they continually lose their importance as an authoritative factor in the development of the Maced(onian) question. This is what hurts them immensely. They are divided among themselves, just as before. The differences of their views also intensify their personal hatred, which makes some of them avoid the others, plotting among themselves....Unfavorable rumors reach us from Macedonia, too. The people, craving for freedom, would like to reject their yoke and uncertainty as soon as possible, so that they would be ready for some decisive steps as well, but their distrust both of their leaders and Bulgaria prevent them. Under the influence of the news about the Imperial Alliance a mood has been created in which they would like to be freed from their yoke at any cost, even if they were compelled to come under Bulgaria and Serbia. And if these two did not help them, they would gladly accept Austrian occupation, as well... Arhiv SFR Jugoslavije (Belgrade) - Fond Jovan Jovanovic-Pizon, 80 (1905).
    1906
    To my brother in arms, Dushan, voyvoda from the village of Bistrica Brother, you should know that I have received your letter and understood all that you wrote me. We have put the people in great trouble, it is true, but who is to blame for this? You say we are to blame, we say you are to blame. As far as I know, ten years have passed (and) has never been over those years any bloodshed between ourselves or division into Serbomans or Bulgarophils. We have been Macedonian fighters and we will fight to the end for the Macedonian people, but we do not fight for Bulgaria or Serbia, nor Greece; they are free and live freely and drink in shaded inns; they have the right to drink so since they shed their blood earlier. We, who come from this Macedonian land should work for Macedonia, because our Macedonian brothers are murdered on the roads and our Macedonian sisters are disgraced by the bloody Turk, by the fat Turk. We are not against any nationality of either Bulgaria, Serbia, or Greece; we should recognize the merit of those who would help us. If there had been any Serbian, Bulgarian or Greek land here, they should not have waited for us to die in the mountains but should have liberated Macedonia with their armies; only then they could have demanded Serbia, Bulgarian or Greek land here... Blazhe Krusheski DA SSID - Fond Izvrshnog odbora Srpske narodne organizacije F-6 (1906)
    1912
    A.V. Amfiteatrov: Macedonia ...Following the Russian war, Turkey of the old regime finally turned into a "sick man", and the heirs of the executors of the expected will gathered around his death-bed. The future destiny of Macedonia came to depend not as much on the will of Turkey itself as on the sympathies of the European guardians. In the 19th century Europe learned through Germany, Italy and Greece to consider the right to national self-determination a little. Thus, all the states and countries bordering on Macedonia have started intensive propaganda in favor of their nationalities, as it were a race or along jump for an award. They have taken care, as much as they have means and power, to persuade Europe by truth and lies, that allegedly the national self-determination of the Macedonian inclines in their favor, and not in favor of the neighboring nation. In this respect the Bulgarians proved more swift the their rivals. In order to make Macedonia Bulgarian, they had to Bulgarize the Macedonians. Thus, following the Bulgaro-Serbian War of 1885, the greatest powers and considerable sacrifices of the Bulgarian state apparatus were given to the Bulgarization of the Macedonian Slavs. Bulgarian agents were the priests and the teachers; the comitajis and band-members became the secret government of the country and, allegedly, its soul. In the beginning the propaganda was exceedingly successful. Miljukov, who visited Macedonia towards the end of the nineties, looked at it too much through Bulgarian glasses and - so to say - proclaimed all the Macedonians to be full-blooded Bulgarians. But his mistake can be considered as made with clear conscience. He found Macedonia so profoundly and brilliantly Bulgarized that it is no wonder that he took the clothes for the body - the culture for the nationality. Those who have read The Land of Discord know my view about the Macedonians. They are neither Serbs nor Bulgarians, but a primordial Slav people with simple basic language which is to a great degree able to be subject to any form offered by another, more influential and more developed Slav culture. There are Macedonian Bulgarians where the Bulgarian school and Church are firmly established, and Serbs where literacy is in the hands of the Serbs. They could have been turned with the same ease, under the influence of education, religion and commerce, into Little Russians, Great Russians or Poles. Their language is melted metal which can easily be molded into any kindred form. But - a related one. So, it is national kinship which is the main reason for making Macedonia a center of confrontation between the Slavs and for destroying the Greek influence in it. Statistics about Macedonia are confusing, tendentious and fantastic. In spite of that, even according to Greek sources, it is easy to see the Hellenes represent a minority in the Macedonian vilayets. As a result of this and aiming to create a majority, the Greeks had to resort to sufficiently unscrupulous falsifications, counting all Slav Patriarchists as Greeks. These are Slavs who have not acknowledged the Exarchate but remained faithful to the Constatinople Patriarchate, although they speak only Slavic. In this way the Greeks have come to understand one's nationality in the same manner as the Turks - religion equals nationality. A patriarchist - means a Greek... C. Stanoevski, Kako ja vidoa Makedonija, pp.210-211.
    1912
    Bulgarian statesman Dimitar Rizov on his nationality ....In the golden months of the successful beginning of the war against the Turks, he spoke to me as a convinced Yugoslav (South Slav). He explained to me, I being a Croat, the real situation of matters in Macedonia and said that it was shame that the first free Slav state had not been founded in Macedonia, which would equally attract to union the Bulgarians and the Serbs, and would be a bond and not a cause of discord between the Serbs and the Bulgarians...He told me that the Macedonians, to tell the objective truth, were neither Bulgarians nor Serbs, but Macedonian Slavs who spoke in their own individual Macedonian language or dialect. ..."Our people", he said, "were only 'Macedonian Christians,' and then, when Greek propaganda developed they become 'Macedonian Christian Slavs'. It was all the same to us which Christian country would help us to free ourselves from the Turks. I was born in Bitola. There were several grammar-schools in Bitola: Turkish, Greek, Serbian and Bulgarian. It was all the same to us, the Slavs, which Slav grammar-school we attended. For example, alongside many of my friends who later became Bulgarians, I attended the Serbian grammar-school. It is true that the teachers in the grammar-school told we were Serbs, just as those in the Bulgarian grammar-school were told that we were Bulgarians, but we kept our own counsel, and that was what our parents told us at home: it does not matter, let them talk, but we are Macedonian Christian Slavs..." Ivan Meshtrovic, famous Croatian sculptor, Uspomene na politichke ljude i dogagjaje. Zagreb 1969, pp. 25-26, 39.
    March 1, 1913
    Memorandum on the Independence of Macedonia submitted by the Macedonian colony in St. Petersburg to the Conference of the representatives of the Great Powers in London. ...it is more suitable for all the neighbors of Macedonia that this country remain undivided, since by any division, sections of our living compatriots will remain under foreign authority and will perish. The Macedonians have won their right to self-determination over their whole recent history, as well...The Serbs and the Bulgarians deliberately say nothing about these huge Macedonian victories and permit nobody to write about them...As a result of all this, the Macedonian Colony in St.Petersburg, fulfilling its sacred duty towards its fatherland and conscientiously applying the slogan "Macedonia to the Macedonians", protests and cannot remain indifferent when the allied Balkan states (Bulgaria, Serbia and Greece) - our brothers in blood and faith - aim to dismember our fatherland....Here is what is needed for the Macedonian people; 1. Macedonia should remain a single, indivisible and independent Balkan state with it geographic, ethnographic, historical, economic and political borders. 2. A Macedonian national assembly should be established on the basis of general elections in Salonika in the soonest possible time, which would work out in detail the internal structure of the state and determine its relations with the neighboring states. Makedonskii Golos, St. Petersburg 1913-1914
    1913
    Nace Dimov Chupovski: A Political Survey of Macedonia and the Macedonians. In examining the Macedonian question from the political point of view, I shall not deal with the old times....Condemned at first to Roman rule, and then to Byzantine oppression, and finally to Turkish slavery, the terrible name of Macedonian found shelter from generation to generation in Macedonian hearts only...In the same towns and villages, the priests that receive salary from the Bulgarian Exarchate call themselves Bulgarians, those that receive salary from the Serbian Metropolitan office call themselves Serbians...Besides, the Macedonians were always allies and participants both in the liberation of the Greeks, Serbs and Bulgarians....From all that has been previously mentioned, I dare say that the Macedonians have a one hundred percent right to autonomy and not to being subjected to dismembering among the Greeks, the Serbs and Bulgarians. Disregarding this fact, the Serbian, Greek and Bulgarian governments, aiming to extend their frontiers into Macedonians territory, spare no means and exterminate the Macedonians who refuse to call themselves Greeks, Serbs and Bulgarians...The Macedonian people will not reconcile themselves either with those who aspire to deprive them of their language, customs and the natural desire to be free masters of their own house. Hence, only if the Serbs, Greeks and Bulgarians renounce their aspirations will Macedonia live in a friendly way .... N.D. Dimov, Istoricheskii ocherk Makedonii i makedonskih slavjan - Peterburg, 1913
    June 7, 1913
    To the Governments and the Public of the Allied Balkans States The Macedonians have continually, over the centuries, risen up and fought for independence and freedom, and by their persistent struggle aided the liberation of Serbia, Greece and Bulgaria....More then on hundred thousand Macedonian fighters have fought shoulder to shoulder with the allied armies....Instead of Macedonia, celebrated by Alexander of Macedon, consecrated by the Apostle St. Paul, dignified by the activity of the holy brothers SS. Cyril and Methodius....instead of united, integral and free Macedonia, European diplomacy, and alongside it, you, too, our brothers - allies and liberators, are tearing us into pieces and defiling our sacred ideals....Remember, brother Bulgarians, Serbs and Greeks, that you were reborn to start a new life only after 14 bloody wars of Russia against the Ottoman Empire...Remember that a dismembered Macedonia will be an eternal apple of discord among you. Remember that also in the past times of history one after another state perished in the struggle for Macedonia and do not continue the bloody list of the dead in the present time.... Macedonia should be an independent state within its ethnographic, geographical, cultural and historical boundaries, with a government accountable to a national assembly...a national representative body should be established...in the city of Salonika, elected by general vote. Brother allies and liberators! We hope that our words will reach your hearts and minds.... St. Petersburg Signed by the authorized representatives Makedonskii Golos, St. Petersburg, pp. 52-55
    September 5, 1913
    Dimitrija Chupovski: What did Bulgaria represent for Macedonia The Bucharest Conference of the Balkan states completely destroyed Article 23 of the Berlin Congress which stipulated the introduction of reforms in Macedonia as a self-governing province of Turkey. At the time this stipulation gave wings to the hopes of the Macedonians for the possibility of creating an autonomous Macedonia and proved to be a counter-balance to the stipulations of the Treaty of San Stefano, which defaced Macedonia by its inclusion within the boundaries of Greater Bulgaria. However, regardless of the stipulations of the Berlin Congress, the Treaty of San Stefano constantly instigated the Bulgarians to actions for creating a Greater Bulgaria at the expanse of Macedonia and they continually spent millions of rubles for agitation in Macedonia by opening their own, purely Bulgarian, schools and churches. As a result of this, Bulgaria began regarding itself as the only future liberator of Macedonia, comparing its role in the cause of the liberation of macedonia with the role of Russia in the liberating Russo-Turksih War. We, however, cannot agree at all with such a comparison....Russia was Bulgaria's liberator, and accordingly, to compare its role with the role of Bulgaria in the present war is, at the very least, absurd and ridiculous for our contemporaries, before whose eyes this tragicomedy was being acted. The role of Bulgaria as regards to Macedonia was from the very beginning criminal; it was first to violate...the article of the Berlin Treaty which bound Turkey to introduce reforms in Macedonia. Moreover, carrying out unbearable, extremely chauvinist, propaganda among the Macedonians through its Constantinople Patriarchate, Bulgaria was the first to cause rivalry and the introduction of similar propaganda by the Greeks and the Serbs, thus instilling discord among the Macedonians. During the whole 30 years of its existence as a state, Bulgaria has carried out anti-Macedonian policy. Flattering and attracting the Macedonians to its side. at the same time it persecuted them with ferocity and hatred and strove to destroy in them any idea of an autonomous Macedonia; while doing so, the Bulgarians did not shrink from using any means. Thus, in 1888, the Bulgarian Government destroyed the 'Macedonian Literary Society' under the presidency of Georgi Pulevski....Two years later, in that same Sofia, the Bulgarian Government closed the evening schools, specially opened for the emigrant Macedonian craftsman, and the heads of those schools. Macedonian patriots - Damjan Gruev, Delchev, Petre Pop Arsov and many others - were expelled from Bulgaria. In addition, let us consider just those persecution to which the so-called Internal Macedonian Organization was exposed, working on the spiritual revival of Macedonia and its political liberation. Its members were persecuted both by the Bulgarian government and the Exarchate, the local instrument of those governments. In order to paralyze the successes resulting from the activity of the Internal Macedonian Organization, the Bulgarian government formed with Macedonian emigrant a requisite counter-Macedonian organization (made of the dregs(?) of society), known under the name of the Supreme Macedonian-Adrianople Committee, the task of which was to trumpet to the whole world that Macedonia is a purely Bulgarian country. Who does not know the shameful role of this Committee shown through its activity on the partition of Macedonia as a whole and of the Macedonian intelligentsia in particular? Guided by the Bulgarian government through its teachers and generals of the type of Mihajlovski and Conchev, this Committee acted against the Macedonian liberation movement and worked with all means on the annexation of macedonia to Bulgaria. Still more criminal was the role of Bulgaria in this shameful 'liberation' war. Did not Bulgaria hold long negotiations concerning the division of Macedonia with its present occupiers? Did it not, according to the treaty of 29th February 1912 with the Serbs, give to them the whole western section of Macedonia and thus violate its integrity? Did not Bulgaria, which attracted Greece, too, to the Serbo-Bulgarian alliance, start to divide Macedonia? Could it not know that the Greeks might join the alliance only because they had in mind the acquisition of the southern section of Macedonia? Is not Bulgaria to be blamed for the partition of Macedonia, hiding the real aim of the war from the representatives of the Macedonian people, which it had to reckon with. On the contrary, starting the war, it declared to the Macedonians that it was fighting against Turkey alongside the allies for their liberation. Allowing the Macedonians to organize themselves into military units, Bulgaria committed a hunderdfold crime, because it did not allow them to fight against Turkey in their native land, but directed them to Thrace, towards the shore of the Sea of Marmara, under the walls of Adrianople and the trenches of Chataldzha, which weren't needed, except for a bunch of Bulgarian glory-hunters; and the happened at the same time when the allied Bulgarians, Serbs and Greeks were conquering Macedonia. How can we explain this criminal act of the Bulgarians towards the Macedonians, if not by the fear that those same Macedonians with arms in their hands would defend their homeland equally from any encroachments upon its independence? But in fact Bulgaria thus ruined not only Macedonia but also all its future. Shedding now crocodile tears for the lost Macedonia, did Bulgaria at the proper time make any attempt to preservethe indivisibility of Macedonia, which it likes to call its younger sister?How can some Bulgarian patriots claim that Bulgaria was in respect to Macedonia that biblical mother which appeared before Solomon's court? Would not a mother worthy of setting an example rather prefer to renounce her own son in only he could thus remain intact? However, as we all know, Bulgaria was the first to agree to the partition of Macedonia.Why has not Bulgaria up to this moment acted like a real "native mother" with her unselfishness, with motherly generosity towards macedonia, with a project for its autonomy? This is exactly the attitude of Bulgaria which could have ensured the integrity and indivisibility of macedonia, peace among the Balkan peoples and would have preserved the dignity of the "native mother" herself - Bulgaria. What hindered it, having included the item about the autonomy of Macedonia in the treaty, from raising at the proper time the question about the realization of that item? Nobody hinder it at all, but it did not make any attempts itself to raise this question. It did not make this attempt after the end of the first half of the war, when it realized that its allies of yesterday, the Serbs and the Greeks, having occupied Macedonia, would not like to leave it.And instead of submitting a project for autonomy, it decided to go to war, in order to gain as great as possible a section of Macedonia for itself.Even following the defeat, when the question was posed not for Macedonia but for Bulgaria itself - I am referring here to the Conference of Bucharest, where Bulgaria was "generously" offered an eighth or tenth part of Macedonia - here, too, it preferred to take that part, and did not follow the example of the biblical mother, renouncing its share of the child. I repeat, the following of this, there are some people again who compare the present position of Bulgaria to the position of Russia in the liberating Russo-Turksih War, with a desire in this way to represent it in the role of the same unselfish liberator as Russia was with regard to Bulgaria itself, refusing to see that the main reason for the misfortunes of macedonia were precisely the Bulgaria aspiration towards this long tortured land. Dimitrija Chupovski, Makednoskii Golos, pp. 130-133
    July 20, 1916
    Rene Picard: The Autonomy of Macedonia The idea of Macedonia autonomy is familiar to all those who are acquainted with Balkan history and politics. If we asked the Christians of Macedonia they would answer that autonomy was the most desirable solution for them. There is and, in fact, there has always been a Macedonian spirit in Macedonia. Geographically, Macedonia has its own unity. Its borders are the following: to the south - Mt. Olympus, the mountains on the north bank of the River Bistrica, Lake Prespa and Lake Ohrid; to the west - the Drim from Debar; to the northwest and north - the Shar Mountains, the highlands north of Skopje, the defile of Kumanovo, the mountains that mark the Serbo-Bulgarian frontiers of before 1912; to the east - the Rhodope Mountains. The borderline with Thrace on this side is not clear. The regions of Drama and Kavalla can either be adjoined to macedonia or separated from it; the plain of Drama is populated mostly by Turks; the town of Kavalla, like all the ports, has a strong Greek colony. To the south, the Chalcidice Peninsula is geographically Macedonian, but ethnographically Greek; the line of lakes separates it by a natural border from the rest of Macedonia... Les archives du Ministere des affiars etrangeres (Paris). Guerre 1914-1918, Balkans, Dossier generale, pp.158-165.
    Dimitar Blagoev on the nationality of the Macedonians (Bulgarian Parliament session) December 10, 1917...D. Blagoev: Subordinate, but indipendant in their internal affairs. Someone from the left: Don't forget history. D.B.: What history? The one you falsify? (Laughter) We do not recognize such history. We see how things are in reality. It is a fact, gentleman national delegates, that there was a great struggle between the Bulgarian and the Slav peoples in the Balkan peninsula. And that process, descirebd by Mr. Sakszov and supportedd by others, was not aimed at the unification of the Bulgarian people but at domination over the Slav peoples in the Balkan Peninsula who moved en masse to Byzantium and Asia Minor, and on the other hand, went to the south, towards Macedonia
    1918
    Rudolph Archibald Reiss on the Macedonians I said I would rather call your Bulgarophones Macedonians. You call these people Bulgarophones, owing to their language which is similar to Bulgarian. But, is it Bulgarian, is the same language spoken in Sofia? No. Macedonian is just as similar to Serbian as it is to Bulgarian. I am not a linguist and I would not allow myself a personal judgment, but disinterested Balaknologist have asserted to me that Macedonian is more similar to Serbian the Bulgarian. It is possible that there are linguists who assert the opposite. But it is a fact that the Macedonia language is spoken neither in Sofia nor in Belgrade. It is an individual Slav language, just as we have the Romansch in Switzerland, spoken in Grisons, apart from Italian. To my mind, the Macedonian can be called neither Bulgarian nor Serb, but simply Macedonian. R.A. Reiss, Sur la situation des Macedonianes et des musulmans dans les nouvelles provinces grecques. Paris, 1918, pp.6-7.
    January 4, 1919
    Sister Augustine Bewicke on the Macedonian autonomy St. Paul's Hospital, Salonika Dear Sir, Please excuse the liberty I take in writing you, it is because the final settlement in the Balkans is of vital interest to the Catholics in these countries. - I have been 33 years in this Mission, the Uniate Catholic Mission, which at the beginning of the Second Balkan War counted about 10,000 Catholics. The Treaty of Bucharest, which divided Macedonia without any regard to justice, was the cause of these poor people being dispersed on account of their Slav language, which was forbidden in Churches and schools. - The Bishop had his residence in Salonika, he has now been in exile more then 3 years, his priests are dispersed, his flock is indeed without pastors, nor do we have any hope of his return to any place under Greek or Serbian rule. - The Greeks will not admit the Slav language in Churches or schools; the inhabitants of Macedonia are in the great majority Slavs; they call themselves Macedonians, and what they desire and what we ardently desire for them is an autonomy under European control. - I whatever way Macedonia might be divided, the people would be always discontented, and would fight again as soon as possible. The only hope I can foresee is in strong autonomy, which neither Greeks nor Bulgars nor Serbs would dare attack; then the Macedonians, who are really intelligent and docile when they are well treated. would peacefully develop this beautiful fertile country... Surely Europe will not leave Macedonia under people whom the Macedonians hate, and whom they will continually fight... Public Record Office (London) - FO 608/44. Peace Conference (British delegation), 1919.
    April 10, 1919
    Protest from the Provisional representative of the IMRO to the Paris Peace Conference To His Excellency, Monsieur Clemanceau, President of the Council: It is duty of my honor, as a delegate of the Macedonian Committees to the High Peace Conference, to protest against the maneuvers of certain suspicious persons who claim to speak in the name of Macedonia and represent some so-called "Executive Committee of the Macedonian Societies". Let me be allowed to indicate that the Macedonian emigrants to Bulgaria have over the past 30 years created quite a small class of Macedonians Bulgarized to such a point that they sacrifice completely the interests of their native land to those of Bulgaria. People who have two homelands are generally suspicious; what to say, on the other hand, about those who do not hesitate to propose as delegates to the Conference two persons such as Aleksandrov and Protogerov, adherents to the Kaiser and Ferdinand, and organizers of the massacres in Nish? Indeed, there is noone else who could more compromise the cause of "Autonomous Macedonia" before the Aeropagus of the victors! Hence I have the honor to point out that the only Macedonian Societies free from any Bulgarian political influence, or any other, and representing loyally the whole of Macedonia, without distinction of language or religion, are the Macedonian Committees, which starting from the 1893 constituted the IMRO... It is in their name, and by no means in the name of Bulgaria or the Bulgarians, that I have already had the honor to request and now I am requesting again from Your Excellency to grant me an audience so that I may present to You the desires of the Macedonian people... Archimandrite Paul Christoff, General Vicar of Thrace, delegate of the Macedonian Committees. A. Lainovich, Jugoslavika u biblioteci za savremenu - medzhunarodnu dokumentaciju u Parizu - Godishen zbornik na FF, 24-25 (1972-73) pp. 88-89
    July 1919
    Bulgarian Nikola Pushkarov on "The Economic Wealth of Macedonia and its Neighbors" All the neighbors of Macedonia wish her well. Each of them tries through all means to convince the Macedonians of its significance as a savior. When the population of Macedonia doubts the sincerity of the unwanted liberators, they even prove to it the opposite by the sword. And each of the neighbors denies the other the right to be a liberator. The neighbors waged wars in this dispute, they had been fighting among themselves for years to the right of Macedonia's liberators. They exhausted the three neighboring peoples and almost exterminated the Macedonian people. The wars ended, because the peoples realized that the liberation of Macedonia had turned into enormous increase of the capital of the false patriots at the expanse of the peoples ' blood and sweat. Today the exhausted peoples, exasperated by the terrible patriotic deeds of the false patriots, demand payment for the lies, for the terrible lies which threw them into terrible rows. But the false patriots of the neighbors do not despair; they have created special agencies of mercenaries responsible for proving by excusable and inexcusable means how the Macedonians most closely belong to the "homeland" of their patrons. They have called the population of this unfortunate land either "Bulgarophone Greeks", or "Macedonians Slavo-Serbs,: or "brothers beyond Mount Rila."... ...It is the wealth of Macedonia which makes the false patriots of her neighbors mad with "patriotism". Makes them burn with desire to cut off as large as possible a portion of Macedonia for themselves to "liberate" it, i.e. to deprive the Macedonians of the chance of governing themselves. But you must keep your land, Macedonians, from the false good wishes of those individuals. They will bring you a new slavery, harsher then the former. Your land is entirely capable of an independent existence. ...Unite around the banner of the autonomy of your homeland, because it is the only banner which you will not be persecuted for not being a Greek, Serb or Bulgarian, but simply Macedonian. Bjoletin br. 8 (19.VII.1919) pp.7-8
    November 18, 1919
    Telegram from the General Council of the Macedonian Societies in Switzerland to the Peace Conference in Paris ..Assembled at its plenary session and working in the name of the whole of the Macedonian people, without serving any foreign policy, energetically protest against the clause allowing the Macedonians the right to opt for Bulgarian nationality. We do not want to be made instruments of Bulgarian irredentism in Macedonia. Macedonia has never been a part of the present Bulgarian Kingdom. The Bulgarian diplomats, who bear part of the responsibilities for the misfortunes of the Macedonian population, are by no means qualified to intercede in favor of our cause and have no right to do it... Secretary: Bl. Bojadziev; Vice-Persident: G. Nikolov Lj. Lape, Aktivnosta na Glavniot odbor, p. 190

  6. #356
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    14-12-10
    Posts
    1,603
    Points
    20,999
    Level
    44
    Points: 20,999, Level: 44
    Level completed: 28%, Points required for next Level: 651
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Serbia



    Quote Originally Posted by how yes no View Post
    ok, looking forward to hear...
    but tomorrow...
    How yes no,
    Here's the research of international and Pakistani scientists have found a Haplogroup E1b1b1 (formerly E3b1) in tribe of Pathans in Pakistan.

    Although this is not ultimate proof that Alexander the Great was haplogroup E, if one of the elite soldier or his entourage was the E carrier indicates an increased likelihood that Alexander the Great was E carrier.

    Although scientists speak of the Greeks, can be read on forums that the Albanians used this research to demonstrate the Illyrian/Albanian descent of Alexander the Great, as the E haplogroup in Europe is the most common percentage of Albanians Gega.

    Sadaf Firasat1 et al

    Y-chromosomal evidence for a limited Greek contribution to the Pathan population of Pakistan


    Eur J Hum Genet
    ., 2007 January


    www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2588664/pdf/ukmss-2934.pdf

    Clade E lineages were more frequent in the Greeks (21%) as compared to Pakistan (4%). The majority of haplogroup E chromosomes belonged to clade E3b and all Greek and Pakistani samples were resolved into the branches E3b1 (M78) and E3b3 (M123). Among the three Pakistani populations claiming Greek descent, this clade was observed only in
    the Pathans. The Pathan samples belonged to clade E3b1 which constituted 17% of the Greek samples.

    A median-joining network of clade E Y chromosomes was constructed in order to examine the genetic relationship between these Greek and Pathan samples. A duplication of 10 and 13 repeat units was observed in the clade-E-derived Y chromosomes for the trinucleotide repeat DYS425 and this locus was, therefore, excluded from the network. The most striking feature of this network was the sharing of haplotypes between the Pathan and Greek samples (Figure 2). One Pathan individual shared the same Y-STR haplotype with three Greek individuals, and the other Pathan sample was separated from this cluster by a single mutation at the DYS436 locus. This demonstrates a very close relationship between the Pathan and Greek E lineages, but how surprising is this?

    Worldwide data for the 16-element haplotype are not available, but a subset of nine of the STRs are included in by the Y-STR Haplotype Reference Database (YHRD) 20 and were used to search this. The haplotype DYS19=13; 389I=13; 389II=30; 390=24; 391=10; 392=11; 393=13; 438=10; 439=12 was found in 53 individuals in a worldwide population sample of 7,897 haplotypes and was highly specific for the Balkans (Figure 3). The contour map shows a major concentration around Macedonia and Greece, with a low scattering in other European countries, Tunisia, West Africa and the Pathans. This gives a strong indication of a European, possibly Greek, origin of these Pathan Y chromosomes.

  7. #357
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    DejaVu's Avatar
    Join Date
    30-10-10
    Posts
    578
    Points
    23,249
    Level
    46
    Points: 23,249, Level: 46
    Level completed: 70%, Points required for next Level: 301
    Overall activity: 6.0%


    Country: United Kingdom



    COUNCIL FOR RESEARCH INTO SOUTH-EASTERN EUROPE OF THE MACEDONIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES AND ARTS

    THE MACEDONIAN QUESTION IN FOREIGN RELATIONS


    The Macedonian question appeared in foreign relations in the 1870's during the great Eastern Crisis when armed uprisings for liberation of the subdued peoples started in the Balkans. The uprisings in Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1875, in Bulgaria in April 1876 and in Macedonia in 1876 raised the question of the further existence of the Ottoman Turkish Empire in Europe. Following its current policy for the Balkans, Russia opposed the policies of the great Western European powers to retain the integrity of the Ottoman state, guaranteed by the Treaty of Paris concluded on April 15th 1856, and supported the fight of the conquered nations for liberation and independence. The Russian political programme devised several years before by counsellor Gorchakov was announced at the end of 186 and included a solution to the Macedonian question. The Russian plans for the Balkans anticipated a direct involvement of Russia in the liberation of the Orthodox Christian peoples and creation of national states: independence and territorial expansion for Serbia and Montenegro (in their ethnic borders), establishment of two Bulgarian principalities (north and south of the Stara mountain as counter-balance to the two Serbian principalities), and a separate, independent Macedonian principality. The Macedonian question divided the interests of Austria-Hungary and Russia. The Austro-Hungarian Minister for Foreign Affairs, Count Abrashi, requested establishment of an autonomous Macedonian state in customs union with Austria-Hungary-91 Gorchakov in principle agreed to it, but it soon turned out that Russia could not accept it. In 1876-77 an Ambassadors' Conference of the great European states was held in Constantinople. It was expected to reach a diplomatic solution to the problems of the conquered nations within the Ottoman state and thus prevent further escalation of the crisis. The USA, which did not have any special interests in Macedonia, initiated an appropriate inquiry and solution to the Macedonian question. The American diplomacy in association with the American professors from the Robert College in Constantinople who were well-acquainted with the real situation, submitted to the Conference a proposition for the autonomy of Macedonia. However, the Conference failed due to the opposing interests of the great powers. Russia changed its policy on Macedonia and abandoned the plans for creation of a Macedonian state and started working in favour of a greater Bulgarian state instead. This happened after the secret negotiations on the Balkans among Austria-Hungary, Russia and Germany in April 1878 when Austro-Hungarian diplomacy renewed the question of the creation of an autonomous Macedonian state, i.e. Macedonian principality (with General Radich as its governor). On that occasion the Russian representative, General Ignatiev, did not oppose that solution, but in May 1878 Russian diplomacy refused to clarify its view on the question or support the Macedonian demands for an independent state submitted in Constantinople to General Ignatiev by Dimitar Robev, a Macedonian representative in the Ottoman Parliament. On July 13th, the International Treaty of Berlin (Art.23), gave Macedonia a special autonomous status. The government of the Ottoman state was assigned to regulate the status of Macedonia and the other provinces with a separate Statute. However, as there was no international control to observe the implementation of these resolutions or authorize sanctions for their non-implementation, the government in Constantinople did not fulfil its duties. The Macedonian uprising from 1878-79 and the actions of "Edinstvo" ("Unity"), the Transitional Government of Macedonia (formed secretly at the meeting of the National Assembly held from May 21st to June 2nd 1880) renewed interest in the Macedonian question in the diplomatic circles of the Great European Powers. The Transitional Government sent an Appeal to the great powers accompanied by a Protocol of the National Assembly for liberation of Macedonia and its constitution as an independent state. Furthermore, on March 23rd 1881, it issued a Manifesto which was distributed among the diplomatic representatives in the Ottoman Turkish state. Macedonia became an object of special interest in the relations between Russia, Austria-Hungary and Germany. The agreement on a secret alliance of the emperors of these three states signed in 1881 included a separate stipulation for the protection of Macedonia from a possible attack by Bulgaria. The beginning of the Ilinden uprising for national liberation of Macedonia in 1903, which the European diplomats called "The Macedonian revolution", marked the Macedonian question as an acute one for European diplomacy. The uprising and the creation of the so-called Krushevo Republic proved that the Macedonian people were ready to fight for their national freedom and the formation of their national state. At that time, the European powers were against the creation of a new state in the Balkans. European diplomacy had to intervene in order to calm the situation by proposing several projects for reforms among which were the Austro-Hungarian - Russian project known as the Murzsteg Reforms Programme and the British initiative that gave Macedonia a special status in its natural and ethnic borders. US diplomacy also became involved. The secretary of state and the USA president T.Roosevelt himself wrote to the British government acclaiming the British initiative for the autonomy of Macedonia. As regards the reforms in Macedonia, American diplomats in 1907 suggested strict control of their implementation by the mandatory powers. In the beginning of March 1908 the government of Great Britain launched an initiative for the introduction of more radical reforms in Macedonia. This initiative was readily accepted by Russia. The two state sovereigns (British and Russian) met in June 1908 in Reval (Tallinn) and adopted a new proposal for reforms as a preliminary phase towards full autonomy for Macedonia."' Nevertheless, this initiative did not take place due to the revolution of the Young Turks which declared and introduced a constitutional order and democratization of the Ottoman Turkish state. However, the rule of the Young Turks with its Greater Ottoman politics stopped the process of further democratization and of a peaceful democratic solution to the Macedonian question within the Turkish state for which there existed the necessary conditions. It only led towards further deterioration of the situation which was used by the neighbouring Balkan states to interfere in the internal affairs of the Turkish state and to manifest openly their expansionist intentions. Due to the worsening relations on the Balkans, in 1911 US diplomats undertook steps to influence the governments of the Balkan states to ease the tension and avoid the war they were preparing for, which could have led towards further involvement of the great powers in the solution of the eastern crisis. However, European diplomats showed no interest in preventing the military conflict on the Balkans. Moreover, they took part in its preparation governed by their original interests. At the time of the Balkan Wars when Macedonia was occupied and partitioned by the neighbouring Balkan states which was confirmed by the Treaty of Bucharest of August 10th 1913, European diplomacy had its own interest in accepting the partitioning as such. This could well have been predicted as the European powers, divided into two opposite blocks, started hasty preparations for the forthcoming Great War. Thus, the Macedonian question entered a new and extremely dangerous phase, not only for the future of the Macedonian nation, but for the peace on the Balkans and in Europe too. These fears soon came true with the beginning of the First World War. At the end of the war the Macedonian question became a crucial problem in the negotiations and the plans for the post-war organization of Balkan relations. The high military and political circles of the Entente powers and the US diplomats considered the creation of an independent Macedonian state, under the protectorate of one of the great non-involved powers (having primarily in mind the USA) as an unbiased, just and permanent solution to the problem. The final aim of this idea was the establishment of radically new relations on the Balkans which would ensure permanent stability in that neuralgic region. Such a solution was also presented at the secret negotiations for separate peace between the powers of the Entente on the one side and Bulgaria on the other under the observance of the USA. The interest in the Macedonian question was renewed yet again in the official diplomacy of the USA, with President W. Wilson's peace programme. In the official American interpretation of the "14 items'.', the USA declared that they would support an objective and unbiased investigation of the problem. An American expert group studied the Treaty of Bucharest of 1913 and concluded that it could not serve as a basis for a solution to the Balkan problems because that agreement was "an act of the corrupted Balkan bourgeoisies". At the beginning of the Paris Peace Conference, twenty- five renowned intellectuals from different European countries, Great Britain and the USA signed a Memorandum on the Macedonian question and sent it to the President of the USA. They demanded the formation of an autonomous Macedonian state in its natural and ethnic borders, which in the south would stretch from the Lake of Kostur to the Vardar estuary, thus leaving the towns of Ber and Negrita and the Halkidiki Peninsula to Greece. Furthermore, it was suggested that in the beginning the autonomous Macedonian state be under the protectorate of one of the great powers (the USA presumably). An unsigned Memorandum with identical contents was sent to Great Britain, too. The issue of the formation of a Macedonian state was the subject of an intense exchange of opinions and viewpoints among the members of the USA Peace Delegation, the American diplomatic representatives in the European states and the members of the American teams of experts. This was especially evident after the request of the Macedonians to be allowed a presence at the Paris Conference in order to present their demands. The member of the team of experts for Balkan questions C. Day informed A. Dulles in a letter about his numerous consultations with impartial experts on the Macedonian question who admitted the existence of problems arising from the issue, but were unanimously for the formation of an autonomous Macedonian state. The envoy of the American President, his personal friend and an expert on European relations, Professor George Herron urged President W. Wilson and the American Peace Delegation to put the Macedonian question on the agenda of the Peace Conference, supporting the integrity and independence of Macedonia. In a letter of May 26th to Colonel Haus, the leader of the American delegation and the most influential political figure after the President, Professor Herron wrote that the Macedonians were a separate nation, unified in their demands and wishes to form an independent state under the protectorate of the USA. Col. Haus himself supported "the cause of Macedonian freedom". Despite the favourable attitude of most of the USA representatives, the Macedonian question remained outside the agenda of the Peace Conference due to the categorical opposition of France and Great Britain who supported the aspirations of the Balkan Allies, Greece and Serbia (i.e. the Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenians) to keep the occupied parts of Macedonia. At the Paris Peace Conference, when the peace terms were negotiated with the Balkan states, the Macedonian question was treated as a minority problem and discussed at the Committee for New States and the Protection of the Minorities. At its meeting on July 15th, 1919 the Italian delegation submitted a proposal for the autonomous status of Macedonia "within borders fixed by the Great Powers and their allies" with the highest possible degree of self-government, but within the borders of the the new Kingdom of SCS. The meeting of July 18th discussed the stipulations which were to be introduced at the peace negotiations with the Balkan states concerning the protection of minorities. These stipulations also included the Macedonian minorities in the Balkan states, referred to as "Macedonians". At the meeting of July 30th the Committee discussed the Italian proposal for the autonomy of Macedonia and the British proposal for the establishment of League of Nations control over Macedonia. As regards this, it was suggested that the League of Nations be authorized to send its representatives to Macedonia. The following meetings discussed the same proposals in a somewhat modified form. Due to the opposing views on the question, it remained open till the beginning of November 1919. The text of the Peace Agreement on minorities and the obligations of the government of the Kingdom of SCS for the protection of the rights of minorities were then finally formulated. On November, llth the Supreme Council accepted the proposed text of the document and obliged the government of the Kingdom of SCS to sign the agreement. The Committee for New States also prepared stipulations for protection of minorities in Greece where the Macedonian people were given minority status.' The Committee informed the Greek delegation about the draft-agreement for the protection of minorities and the stipulations included in it. The president of the Greek government and a leader of the peace delegation responded to this document issued by the Committee with a false statement that Greece had provided protection for the Albanian, Moslem and Slav minorities (the latter referred to as "the Slav communities in Macedonia") and claimed that Greece was ready to accept the agreement. According to this, the president of Greece recognized the existence of a Macedonian minority. The stipulations for the protection of minorities put Greece under an obligation to introduce minority languages in the state schools, but Venizelos resisted this and demanded reformulation of the decrees for the protection of minorities. At the meeting on September 18th the Supreme Council rejected all the Greek comments and on November 3rd ratified its agreement with Greece. Having imposed his plans for a reciprocal exchange of population between Greece and Bulgaria, the aim of which was only to conduct an ethnic cleansing of the occupied Aegean part of Macedonia with international approval, Venizelos presented himself as especially co-operative as regards the Agreement. Accepting his demands, the Committee for New States formed a separate Sub-Committee which prepared "special stipulations" for "voluntary emigration" of the citizens of these states during a period of four years after the effectuation of the Agreement. The Committee for New States only redefined this decree as an individual right for voluntary emigration, thus changing nothing essential in it. The suggestion of expanding these stipulations to refer to the Kingdom of SCS and Turkey was not accepted. The Committee prepared a separate convention for an exchange of citizens between Greece and Bulgaria on a voluntary basis. The Supreme Council approved of its text and obliged the Bulgarian delegation to sign it within 48 hours. The Bulgarian delegation signed the convention within the given period of notice. The stipulations for the protection of minorities which also referred to parts of the Macedonian people were not respected by the Balkan states. The Macedonian people was subjected to very severe de-nationalization and assimilation. Greece applied such means of violent pressure that it forced a great part of the Macedonian population to accept "voluntary" emigration.

  8. #358
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    14-12-10
    Posts
    1,603
    Points
    20,999
    Level
    44
    Points: 20,999, Level: 44
    Level completed: 28%, Points required for next Level: 651
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Serbia



    Quote Originally Posted by iapetoc View Post
    hahaha
    the mollosos




    Alexanders Dogs, from the kingdom of his mother,
    Garrick Alexander was surely not E
    probably he was J2 as Dorians,
    or maybe a kind of R his ancestors were all kings
    now about E has to do mainly in West Greek Makedonia, the Aeolian E and that surely ally after 200 years of 1rst Makedonian
    but also the myth of France royal family with G-Ydna that comes from Alexander can give a suspicius of G since Alexander left no sons and the 1 he left was slain,
    then we must search to near by blood connections,
    bones of Phillip (or Alexander 4rth have been found) and if a license from the museum a good reasearch can give more light
    Iapetoc
    I myself was convinced that Alexander the Great was J carrier.

    But after this research of Pakistani and international scientists, brings me closer to the idea that he was a E carrier.

    I would like to try to research and comment likelihood that Alexander the Great was the E haplogroup.

    This research is likely canceled the idea that Alexander the Great was I2a2, which means that the Slav Macedonians can not usurp Alexander the Great.

    And on the subject of the Albanians we will through long research and determined many important facts that will shed more light on the Albanian ancestry and origin, so I therefore would not bother on this topic, but I accepted the study of Pakistani and international scientists that illuminates situation and increases the likelihood that Alexander the Great was E carrier and Greek.

  9. #359
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    DejaVu's Avatar
    Join Date
    30-10-10
    Posts
    578
    Points
    23,249
    Level
    46
    Points: 23,249, Level: 46
    Level completed: 70%, Points required for next Level: 301
    Overall activity: 6.0%


    Country: United Kingdom



    Quote Originally Posted by Garrick View Post
    Iapetoc

    This research is likely canceled the idea that Alexander the Great was I2a2, which means that the Slav Macedonians can not usurp Alexander the Great.

    And on the subject of the Albanians we will through long research and determined many important facts that will shed more light on the Albanian ancestry and origin, so I therefore would not bother on this topic, but I accepted the study of Pakistani and international scientists that illuminates situation and increases the likelihood that Alexander the Great was E carrier and Greek.
    Garrick, again you are using a provocative statement without any evidence, because Macedonians are not Serbs.

    Why should Macedonians be I2a2 only? You are a big nationalist and you clearly show it.

    To find Haplogroup E in Alexander III Macedon (The Great) is your own vision and nobody cares what haplogroup he had, might be whatever.



    Macedonia FYROM (Pericic et al, 2005)

    Macedonia (FYROM)
    I2a2 29,1%
    I1 5,0%
    R1a 15,2%
    R1b 5,1%
    E1b1b1 24,1%
    J2 12,7%
    G2a 5,1%

    Macedonia (FYROM) 96,3% Total - of 79 Ethnic Macedonians.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y-DNA_h...oups_in_Europe



    Kalash
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalash
    In a 2005 study of ASPM gene variants, Mekel-Bobrov et al. found that the Kalash people of Pakistan have among the highest rate of the newly-evolved ASPM haplogroup D, at 60% occurrence of the approximately 6,000-year-old allele.
    The Kalash also have been shown to exhibit the exceedingly rare 19 allele value at autosomal marker D9S1120 at a frequency higher than the majority of other world populations which do have it.

    Firasat et al. (2006) conclude that the Kalash lack typical Greek haplogroups (e.g. haplogroup 21),

    On the other hand, a study by Qamar et al. (2002) found that even though "no support for a Greek origin of their Y chromosomes was found" in the Kalash, Greek y-chromosome admixture could be as high as 20% to 40%. Considering the apparent absence of haplogroup 21 in the local population, one of the possibilities suggested was because of genetic drift. On the basis of Y chromosome allele frequency, some researchers describe the exact Greek contribution to Kalash as unclear.

    Another study with Qasim Ayub, and S. Qasim Mehdi, and led by Quintana-Murci claims that "the western Eurasian presence in the Kalash population reaches a frequency of 100%, the most prevalent [mtDNA] haplogroup being U4, (pre-HV)1, U2e, and J2," and that they show "no detectable East or South Asian lineages. The outlying genetic position is seen in all analyses. Moreover, although this population is composed of western Eurasian lineages, the most prevalent ... are rare or absent in the surrounding populations and usually characterize populations from Eastern Europe, the middle East and the Caucasus... All these observations bear witness to the strong effects of genetic drift of the Kalash population... However, a western Eurasian origin for this population is likely, in view of their maternal lineages, which can ultimately be traced back to the Middle East".

    The estimates by Qamar et al. of Greek admixture has been dismissed by Toomas Kivisild et al. (2003): “some admixture models and programs that exist are not always adequate and realistic estimators of gene flow between populations ... this is particularly the case when markers are used that do not have enough restrictive power to determine the source populations ... or when there are more than two parental populations. In that case, a simplistic model using two parental populations would show a bias towards overestimating admixture”.

    The study came to the conclusion that the Pakistani Kalash population estimate by (Qamar et al. 2002) “is unrealistic and is likely also driven by the low marker resolution that pooled southern and western Asian–specific Y-chromosome haplogroup H together with European-specific haplogroup I, into an uninformative polyphyletic cluster 2”.

    A study by Rosenberg et al. (2006) employing genetic testing among the Kalash population concluded that they are, in fact, a distinct (and perhaps aboriginal) population with only minor contributions from outside peoples. In one cluster analysis with (K = 7), the Kalash formed one cluster, the others being Africans, Europeans/Middle Easterners/South Asians, East Asians, Melanesians, and Native Americans.

    A genetic study published led by Firasat (2007) on Kalash individuals found high and diverse frequencies of :Haplogroup L3a (22.7%), H1* (20.5%), R1a (18.2%), G (18.2%), J2 (9.1%), R* (6.8%), R1* (2.3%), and L* (2.3%). Haplogroup L originates from prehistoric South Asia.

    In the recent study: "Worldwide Human Relationships Inferred from Genome-Wide Patterns of Variation (2008)", geneticists using more than 650,000 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) samples from the Human Genome Diversity Panel, found deep rooted lineages that could be distinguished in the Kalash. The results showed them not only to be distinct, but perfectly clustered within the Central/South Asian populations at (K = 7). The study also showed the Kalash to be a separated group, with having no membership within European populations.

  10. #360
    Marquis Achievements:
    1 year registered5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    26-10-10
    Posts
    863


    Country: Netherlands



    Quote Originally Posted by Garrick View Post
    How yes no,
    Here's the research of international and Pakistani scientists have found a Haplogroup E1b1b1 (formerly E3b1) in tribe of Pathans in Pakistan.

    Although this is not ultimate proof that Alexander the Great was haplogroup E, if one of the elite soldier or his entourage was the E carrier indicates an increased likelihood that Alexander the Great was E carrier.

    Although scientists speak of the Greeks, can be read on forums that the Albanians used this research to demonstrate the Illyrian/Albanian descent of Alexander the Great, as the E haplogroup in Europe is the most common percentage of Albanians Gega.

    Sadaf Firasat1 et al

    Y-chromosomal evidence for a limited Greek contribution to the Pathan population of Pakistan


    Eur J Hum Genet
    ., 2007 January


    www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2588664/pdf/ukmss-2934.pdf
    this is politically motivated paper.... that should prove that ancient Macedonians were Greeks...those 3 nations do not claim origin from Greeks (as claimed in paper) but from armies of Alexander the Great which is much wider notion...

    ancient Macedonians were almost certainly dominantly R1a people (as Greek Macedonia has it more than Slavic Macedonia, as in Slavic Macedonia it is equally spread in ethnic Macedonians and Albanians, and as R1a on Balkan is ancient old)

    Greek Macedonia is R1a dominant area, and so are all 3 people who claim descend from ancient Macedonians......but they compare only E haplogroup and find 2.1% of E1b1b in Pathan, which could have arrived there in multitude other ways.... though it probably did arrive with armies of ancient Macedonians...

    question is why do they check only E1b1b? because R1a has connotation of being Slavic marker... and E and J as being Greek markers..... another indicator worth checking is haplogroup G, and again it is present in all 3 groups....

    proper research would go into deeper analysis of all haplogroups that are in common for those 3 people and Balkan, and look for details that distinguish those people from surroundings and are same as in Balkans......

  11. #361
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    14-12-10
    Posts
    1,603
    Points
    20,999
    Level
    44
    Points: 20,999, Level: 44
    Level completed: 28%, Points required for next Level: 651
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Serbia



    Quote Originally Posted by DejaVu View Post
    Garrick, again you are using a provocative statement without any evidence, because Macedonians are not Serbs.

    Why should Macedonians be I2a2 only? You are a big nationalist.

    To find Haplogroup E in Alexander III Macedon (The Great) is your own vision and nobody cares what haplogroup he had, might be whatever. Let him rest in peace.
    DejaVu
    I have never ever mention Serbs or I think that Alexander the Great have nothing to do with the Serbs, and to understand what I meant.

    If Alexander the Great was E haplogroup:

    Today only two nations in the Balkans that can be called the origin of Alexander the Great:

    Greeks and

    Albanians.


    No No No Slav Macedonians, Serbs, do not know who.


    You calling me a nationalist because I say that Alexander the Great was neither Slav Macedonian nor Serb???


    Do you know that in Serbia does have a nationalists (but in Macedonia FYROM much much more), who think that Alexander the Great was a Serb or I2a2?

    I just fight against the stupid nationalistic ideas!!!

    I don't accept it.

    I don't accept statues of Alexander the Great neither in Skopje nor in Belgrade.

  12. #362
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    DejaVu's Avatar
    Join Date
    30-10-10
    Posts
    578
    Points
    23,249
    Level
    46
    Points: 23,249, Level: 46
    Level completed: 70%, Points required for next Level: 301
    Overall activity: 6.0%


    Country: United Kingdom



    Quote Originally Posted by how yes no View Post
    proper research would go into deeper analysis of all haplogroups that are in common for those 3 people and Balkan, and that distinguish those people from surroundings......
    Agree.

    Hope they find same haplogroup that is common in all balkan countries, so all nationalist can get a big surprise. Then maybe all will agree that all have mixed population from many historical people and nations.

  13. #363
    Marquis Achievements:
    1 year registered5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    26-10-10
    Posts
    863


    Country: Netherlands



    Quote Originally Posted by Garrick View Post

    If Alexander the Great was E haplogroup:

    Today only two nations in the Balkans that can be called the origin of Alexander the Great:

    Greeks and

    Albanians.


    No No No Slav Macedonians, Serbs, do not know who.
    stop with that propaganda like argument...
    does 2.2% of I1 in some part of Russia proves that Hitler and Napoleon were I1?

    Alexander Macedonian origins from family that has Greek origin (at least one of his ancestors claimed that in order to be allowed to participate in Olympic games)...

    but origin of elite and origin of nations they rule over often differ...

    equal spread of R1a among Macedonia Slavic and Albanian population and elevated spread in Greece Macedonia coupled with R1a in Balkan being ancient old is clear indication that ancient Macedonians were dominantly R1a people... expected additional haplogroups are G2a, J2b and only than E-V13...

    of course, Alexander did in his army have also Thracians, Illyrians.... all people who are likely to have had some or much E-V13...

  14. #364
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    DejaVu's Avatar
    Join Date
    30-10-10
    Posts
    578
    Points
    23,249
    Level
    46
    Points: 23,249, Level: 46
    Level completed: 70%, Points required for next Level: 301
    Overall activity: 6.0%


    Country: United Kingdom



    "Today only two nations in the Balkans that can be called the origin of Alexander the Great:"
    "Greeks and Albanians."


    WHERE IS YOUR EVIDENCE??????????????

    You have provocative statements!!!!!!!!!!!!

  15. #365
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    14-12-10
    Posts
    1,603
    Points
    20,999
    Level
    44
    Points: 20,999, Level: 44
    Level completed: 28%, Points required for next Level: 651
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Serbia



    Quote Originally Posted by how yes no View Post
    this is politically motivated paper.... that should prove that ancient Macedonians were Greeks...those 3 nations do not claim origin from Greeks (as claimed in paper) but from armies of Alexander the Great which is much wider notion...

    ancient Macedonians were almost certainly dominantly R1a people (as Greek Macedonia has it more than Slavic Macedonia, as in Slavic Macedonia it is equally spread in ethnic Macedonians and Albanians, and as R1a on Balkan is ancient old)

    Greek Macedonia is R1a dominant area, and so are all 3 people who claim descend from ancient Macedonians......but they compare only E haplogroup and find 2.1% of E1b1b in Pathan, which could have arrived there in multitude other ways.... though it probably did arrive with armies of ancient Macedonians...

    question is why do they check only E1b1b? because R1a has connotation of being Slavic marker... and E and J as being Greek markers...and authors are Greeks... another indicator worth checking is haplogroup G, and again it is present in all 3 groups....

    proper research would go into deeper analysis of all haplogroups that are in common for those 3 people and Balkan, and look for details that distinguish those people from surroundings and are same as in Balkans......
    how yes no
    I'm not saying that your thinking is incorrect, perhaps it is properly.

    But for that you are talking requires some scientific evidence, some proof.

    No one says it is proven that Alexander the Great was the holder of E haplogroup.

    However this research exists and this is closest to now the final result, if we follow the scientific approach that we are closed to the truth which differs from the current assumptions this means that we need to have some findings, some other results based on which we can discuss.

    The result of Pakistani and international scientists has been widely quoted, and for now, until proven otherwise, the highest probability is that Alexander the Great was haplogroup E.

  16. #366
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    DejaVu's Avatar
    Join Date
    30-10-10
    Posts
    578
    Points
    23,249
    Level
    46
    Points: 23,249, Level: 46
    Level completed: 70%, Points required for next Level: 301
    Overall activity: 6.0%


    Country: United Kingdom



    Quote Originally Posted by Garrick View Post
    The result of Pakistani and international scientists has been widely quoted, and for now, until proven otherwise, the highest probability is that Alexander the Great was haplogroup E.
    Again you have no clue where Haplogroup E is.

    Haplogroup E
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y-DNA_h...oups_in_Europe

    Albanians
    25.5% (2008)

    Bosnians
    10,1% (2005)

    Bulgarians
    20.7% (2004)

    Croats (mainland)
    5,6% (2005)

    Greeks
    31.6% (2008), 20,8% (2007), 23,8% (2004)

    Macedonians (FYROM)
    18% (2010), 24,1% (2005)

    Romanians
    7,4% (2004)

    Serbs
    17,3% (2010), 21,2% (2005)

    Slovenians
    2,7% (2008), 7,1% (2000)


    What makes Haplogroup E, Greek or Albanian? Maybe, because you are Albanian from Serbia.

  17. #367
    Marquis Achievements:
    1 year registered5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    26-10-10
    Posts
    863


    Country: Netherlands



    Quote Originally Posted by DejaVu View Post
    Again you have no clue where Haplogroup E is.

    Haplogroup E
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y-DNA_h...oups_in_Europe

    Albania
    25.5% (2008)

    Bulgaria
    20.7% (2004)

    Greece
    31.6% (2008), 20,8% (2007), 23,8% (2004)

    Macedonia (FYROM)
    18% (2010), 24,1% (2005)

    Serbia
    17,3% (2010), 21,2% (2005)


    What makes Haplogroup E, Greek or Albanian? Maybe , because you are albanian from Serbia.
    Montenegro 27% > Albania 25.5%
    while Montenegro has 5% Albanians

    though in Ghegs haplogroup E is much more frequent than in Albania and Montenegro...
    however this can be misleading as variance of haplogroup E in Kosovo is very little... much less than in Dalmatia...
    big frequency coupled with small variation is indicator of extreme reproduction rate with most people in such group having common ancestor very close in time ....

  18. #368
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    14-12-10
    Posts
    1,603
    Points
    20,999
    Level
    44
    Points: 20,999, Level: 44
    Level completed: 28%, Points required for next Level: 651
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Serbia



    Quote Originally Posted by DejaVu View Post
    "Today only two nations in the Balkans that can be called the origin of Alexander the Great:"
    "Greeks and Albanians."


    WHERE IS YOUR EVIDENCE??????????????

    You have provocative statements!!!!!!!!!!!!
    DejaVu
    Do not know how you can not understand something that is obvious.

    Of course, the whole story becomes dangerous to the idea that the Slav Macedonians are the same as the ancient Macedonians, it is clear, however, why elite FYROM Macedonia follows the stupid ideas that can lead to disaster.

    And you know the Albanians; in the forums, newspapers, books, history, science has a lot of Albanians, who say that Alexander the Great was Albanian.

    You know that the Albanians did not accept the Macedonian encyclopedia, partly because the chapter on ancient Macedonia, which the Albanians think that this is their history and not the Macedonian Slav.

    And when they threatened protests over Macedonia, FYROM, encyclopedia is withdrawn.

    Do not understand me wrong, I do not say that the Albanians are right, but they refer to various sources, and indeed some authors in the West to give them the right.

    If by any chance to prove that Alexander the Great was the E haplogroup then you can only imagine how the Albanians to have wings.

    Next best thing, they would argue that this is evidence that they are descendants of ancient Macedonians.

    They will no longer be concerned only part of the western and northern Macedonia, where they have a majority, but they will see themselves as the successors to the whole of Macedonia.

    I'm trying to say how stupid FYROM Macedonian propaganda can itself cause the mat, then a hopeless position.

  19. #369
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    14-12-10
    Posts
    1,603
    Points
    20,999
    Level
    44
    Points: 20,999, Level: 44
    Level completed: 28%, Points required for next Level: 651
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Serbia



    Quote Originally Posted by how yes no View Post
    Montenegro 27% > Albania 25.5%
    while Montenegro has 5% Albanians

    though in Ghegs haplogroup E is much more frequent than in Albania and Montenegro...
    how yes no
    The highest concentration of Haplogroup E-V13 in the world is among the Gege Albanians.

    Albania,Gege, 41.21% (Ferri et al, 2010),

    Kosovo 45.6% (Pericic et al).

    And Gege Albanians make up almost the entire population of Albanians in Kosovo.


    It is true that there are studies showing that in the Peloponnese E-V13 is 47% however Maciamo caught my attention, and he's right, it's a small sample.

  20. #370
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    DejaVu's Avatar
    Join Date
    30-10-10
    Posts
    578
    Points
    23,249
    Level
    46
    Points: 23,249, Level: 46
    Level completed: 70%, Points required for next Level: 301
    Overall activity: 6.0%


    Country: United Kingdom



    You clearly have big problems. Its not even your business what kind of haplogroups people have.
    All should have a chance to be something and there is no problem over the matching with Albanians if it is the real proof, but they are not alone to have E-V13 "Hitler" is one who had it. What are you expecting, that all E-V13 people around the world will call themselfs Albanians or maybe Macedonians?

    There are only one kind of original Macedonians the ethnic Macedonians, everything else is used for propaganda by the neighbours of Republic of Macedonia.

  21. #371
    Marquis Achievements:
    1 year registered5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    26-10-10
    Posts
    863


    Country: Netherlands



    Quote Originally Posted by Garrick View Post
    how yes no
    The highest concentration of Haplogroup E-V13 in the world is among the Gege Albanians.

    Albania,Gege, 41.21% (Ferri et al, 2010),

    Kosovo 45,6% (Pericic et al).

    And Gege Albanians make up almost the entire population of Albanians in Kosovo.



    It is true that there are studies showing that in the Peloponnese E-V13 is 47% however Maciamo caught my attention, and he's right, it's a small sample.



    yes, but it is not only frequency what matters most when it comes to ancient history, but also the variation....

    Kosovo Albanians have almost no variation in their haplogroup E....which indicates rather recent common origin....

    in 4 generations you can have
    A has 10 kids, all his kids have 10 kids, all kids of his kids have 10 kids, and all their kids 10 kids... =>10000 people

    B has 3 kids, his kids have 2 kids, his kids have 1 kid, their kids 2 kids
    => 12 people

    now those two groups - one made of those 12 people and other of those 10000 people are probable to have same variation in YDNA haplogroup.... but 4 generations ago there were only person A and person B....

    when we talk about ancient Macedonians of Alexander the Great we talk about 2330 years ago...
    if you take that people had kids around their 20th year, that means around 116 generations since than

    Kosovo Albanians have minimalistic variation of haplogroup E, hotspot of variation of haplogroup E is in Dalmatia.....


    http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v...g2008249a.html

    big variation of haplogroup E in Dalmatia can be about Illyrians, but it may as well be about some pre-Illyrian people... it's hard to say anything as haplogroup E is unexpectedly low in frequency on Adriatic islands...I can understand that mainland Dalmatia had depopulation and repopulation due to waves of invaders.... but Illyrians who lived on islands, why would they run away and where...islands were never really heavily invaded.......

    it would be good if some ancient DNA could be analyzed... until than it is hard to claim anything on Illyrians...as they could have been E-V13 dominant, or J2b2 dominant, or R1b dominant or I2a2 dominant...

    in any case big variation of E in Dalmatia indicates that haplogroup E might have entered Balkan via sea by landing in Dalmatia..... probably from hotspot of E variance in Asia minor...

  22. #372
    Marquis Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    iapetoc's Avatar
    Join Date
    09-01-11
    Location
    Katerini Pieria Makedonia
    Posts
    890
    Points
    5,706
    Level
    22
    Points: 5,706, Level: 22
    Level completed: 32%, Points required for next Level: 344
    Overall activity: 0%


    Ethnic group
    Greeks
    Country: Greece



    Before and with same road to Geneticks it is the Lingustic.

    The Ancient Makedonian Dialect is Very well written by Royal Danish Academy,
    also by
    http://www.csad.ox.ac.uk/CSAD/Hesychius/Hansen.html
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Thurston_Peck

    AND THE MOST ANCIENT LEXICON OF HESYCHIUS OF ALEXANDDRIA

    which is Before every old Makedonian church and Before slavic invasions


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hesychius_of_Alexandria

    THE ANCIENT MAKEDONIAN LANGUAGE


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient...onian_language



    Now DejaVu none of these words are Slavic-Makedonians,

    ACCEPT IT

    THE ANCIENT MAKEDONIAN LANGUAGE is a Greek dialect


    Statistics without "Macedonians"
    There are three statistical tables that the Greeks and the Bulgarians point to show that the Macedonians do not exist as nation, and that Macedonia belongs to ether one of them.

    1) According to a Turkish census of Hilmi Pasha in 1904, in areas of Macedonia lived:
    Vilaet of Thessalonica - 373.227 (Greeks) - 207.317 (Bulgarians)
    Vilaet of Monastir - 261.283 (Greeks) - 178.412 (Bulgarians)
    Santzak of Skopje - 13.452 (Greeks) - 172.735 (Bulgarians)

    2) According to a Turkish census of Hilmi Pasha in 1906, in Macedonia lived:
    Muslims - 423.000
    Greeks - 259.000
    Bulgarians - 178.000
    Serbs - 13.150
    Others (Jews) - 73.000

    Even IF I NAME THE BULGARIANS AND HALF OF THE TURKS AS SLAVIC-MAKEDONIANS,
    THE EXISTANCE OF GREEK-MAKEDONIANS IS OBVIUS,

    THESE GREEKS DID NOT WAKE UP SUDENLY IN 1904 AND MOVED TO MAKEDONIA
    THEY EXISTED THERE 3000 YEARS,
    SO THE RIGHT OF GREEK PEOPLE TO BE THEIR THEIR NATION IS STRONGER THAN YOUR CLAIMS ABOUT A TREATY
    A TREATY IS STRONG OF THE PEOPLE ACCEPT IT,
    WE DO NOT WANT OR ACCEPT THE TREATY OF BUCUREST 1913 AND WANT OUR OWN STATE,
    IN THE LANDS THAT OUR FATHERS (ARGEIANS) LIVED AND ONLY THAT
    BECAUSE FYROM IS ANOTHER ETHNICITIE,

    Understand that
    the MAKEDONIA YOU CLAIM IS MADE BY 3 NATIONS
    GREEK-MAKEDONIAN
    SLAVIC-MAKEDONIAN
    ALBANIAN

    WE HAVE AT 90 % THE LANDS OF OUR FATHERS THE ANCIENT MAKEDONIANS AND BELLOW 40% OF THE LAND YOU CLAIM
    AS YUGOSLAVIA TODAY IS CUT TO ETHNICITIES
    AS USSR IS CUT TO ETHNICITIES
    AS INDIA IS CUT TO PAKISTAN-NEPAL_INDIA-BAGLADESH

    YOUR MAKEDONIA EXISTED ON THE MAPS ONLY,
    IN TREATIES AND PAPERS NOT IN THE HEART OF PEOPLE,
    EVEN IF WE WERE OR ARE LESS THAN YOU, WE DONT WANT TO BE A MINORITY
    SO KEEP YOUR MAJORITY AND YOUR STATE,
    AND CLAIMING AND BULLSHIT,

    THE I2a
    THE E-V13
    THE J2
    IS DIFFERENT AMONG SLAVIC AND GREEK MAKEDONIANS
    SO EVEN GENETICALLY WE ARE DIFFERENT,
    OR WE COME FROM DIFFERENT NATIONALITIES

    Have in mind that by claiming lands and ethnicitie you open your self to be claimed also

    Look at Ossetia and Abkhazia
    once they belong to Georgia,
    today are 'independent' (?) and choose according their will
    the south to Georgia the north 'independent' (Russian federate state)
    if I am georgian I go south
    If i am Ossetian I go north

    the same Here,
    If I am Greek-Makedonian I 'll go Greek Makedonia
    If I am Slavic-Makedonian I 'll go to Fyrom

    the problem is that Fyrom denies The Slavic and claims land And ethnicitie
    Understand that,


    Besides all the story here are mainly based in The KURGAN Hypothesis (hypothesis not thesis)
    and not the opposite Greco-Aryan-Armenian

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graeco-Aryan

    which leads us to Grassman's Law
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grassmann%27s_Law

    cause if we take that thesis upon that law the whole Kurgan hypothesis is never happened
    and the PIE language started at almost Armenia-Levant, and went to steppes, and returned from there,
    That Hypothesis is also existing,
    the propability that IE language went to steppes, and then returned back
    is mentioned in all archaic civilizations,
    Hebrew, Assyr, Greeks, Babylonians,
    as also a new approach of Black sea and
    Propontis cataclysm



    Last edited by iapetoc; 03-02-11 at 02:42.

  23. #373
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    DejaVu's Avatar
    Join Date
    30-10-10
    Posts
    578
    Points
    23,249
    Level
    46
    Points: 23,249, Level: 46
    Level completed: 70%, Points required for next Level: 301
    Overall activity: 6.0%


    Country: United Kingdom



    Language is your connection? Again you are lost in your fantasy world but continue, that is your problem.

  24. #374
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    14-12-10
    Posts
    1,603
    Points
    20,999
    Level
    44
    Points: 20,999, Level: 44
    Level completed: 28%, Points required for next Level: 651
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Serbia



    Quote Originally Posted by DejaVu View Post
    You clearly have big problems. Its not even your business what kind of haplogroups people have.
    All should have a chance to be something and there is no problem over the matching with Albanians if it is the real proof, but they are not alone to have E-V13 "Hitler" is one who had it. What are you expecting, that all E-V13 people around the world will call themselfs Albanians or maybe Macedonians?

    There are only one kind of original Macedonians the ethnic Macedonians, everything else is used for propaganda by the neighbours of Republic of Macedonia.
    DejaVu
    Type in the Google:

    Alexander the Great Albanian

    188 000 results!

    Here's a small selection from the first page:

    http://albhistory.netfirms.com/famousalbanians-alexander.html

    Alexander the Great
    There are few places where Alexander the Great's influence has not been felt. His vast empire spread from the Atlantic shores of Spain to the plains of India. His example has been admired and followed for generations to come, and his legacy has been deeply felt by the entire world. It is said that Julius Ceaser himself began to weep as he stood under the shadow of a statue of Alexander the Great, for Alexander had conquered half the world by 19, and Ceaser not even made a name for himself by that age.

    And how was he Albanian in any way? Well, first of all Alexander was son of Philip II and Olympia. Olympia, was the princess of Epirus, a province in Northern Greece, considered to be modern day Albania, and an ancient territory of Albanian tribes. This relation of Alexander having Albanian blood is considered somewhat feasible and acceptable by the history books, but we want to stretch out the enigma of Alexander.

    Initially there is the question of where and to what people Alexander belonged to. It is known that Alexander the Great, was really Alexander of Macedon, and the current flag of Macedonia is the ancient sun flag of Alexander's army. This seems reasonable, but what really were the "Macedon" people. As stated in the Compton's Interactive Encyclopedia, "the Slavs, occupied much of the area [Balkans] by the 6th century AD", so it cannot be possible for the now largely Slavic Macedonia to be a descendant from Alexander the Great. Slavic tribes did not come into the region of Northern Greece until well after Alexander's death, which leaves only two people left, the Albanians and the Greeks. It is important tot note that the history books have not labeled Alexander Greek, and therefore he can only be Albanian. Albanian tribes are the earliest known to occupy northern Greece, and that allows Alexander only one nationality. Alexander did not have Albanian blood, he was an Albanian. To Albanians this fact seems very clear, for we have named our currency lek, after Leka I Madh.




    http://answers.yahoo.com/question/in...7204138AAgmRrj

    How is alexander the great albanian?




    www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=00CIwd

    Alexander the Great is ALBANIAN




    www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ebxHtuf-YI

    George FINLAY Alexander the Great spoken Albanian

    Etc...


    Not to mention the sites in the Albanian language and other languages.

    And now. Can you even imagine what would happen to disclose that Alexander the Great was the holder of E?


  25. #375
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    DejaVu's Avatar
    Join Date
    30-10-10
    Posts
    578
    Points
    23,249
    Level
    46
    Points: 23,249, Level: 46
    Level completed: 70%, Points required for next Level: 301
    Overall activity: 6.0%


    Country: United Kingdom



    What was like the ancient Macedonian language?

    There are only a certain number of preserved words, and from the current knowledge the structure of the ancient Macedonian can not be fully synthesised. Most of the ancient Macedonian words are different to the ancient Greek language words, however there are a few that are similar. For the words from the ancient Macedonian language that are similar to the ancient Greek language words are believed to be taken on from Greek.19) In fact, this occurrence was and still is characteristic for all languages in the world. In the Macedonian language today terms are adopted from foreign languages mainly where there is no authentic terminology or analogy. For instance: antena (antenna); satelit (satellite); mobilen telefon (mobile/cellular phone); kompjuter (computer) etc. These foreign words are being adapted in accordance with the modern Macedonian phonetic system. This needs to be taken into account when analysing the ancient Macedonian language. The authenticity and the nature of a language can not be possibly determined only by the words that language adopted from another language.

    One needs to bear in mind that almost all the preserved ancient Macedonian words reached modern age through their Greek transcript which makes it more difficult to identify their true meaning. It is important that the phenomenon "Interpretato Graeca" is mentioned here, that is greekifying of all the foreign words: nouns, verbs, and especially names. A specific characteristic of this process is adding the suffix "os" or "s" to the foreign words, and this will be discussed later in this paper.

    Despite all this, it is very interesting to note that many of the authentic ancient Macedonian words, according to their etymology and pronunciation, have a striking resemblance to the appropriate words used in the modern Macedonian language (and other so called "Slav" languages).
    For instance, the word "tshelniku" which translated in English means foremost is a very interesting case. The British historian Hammond mentioned its etymology and said that the word "tshelniku" in the ancient Macedonian language had a meaning of "leader of a group". Hammond says that this word was translated into Greek only in the 14th century as "phylarchos".20)
    The word "tshelnik" with completely identical etymology and pronunciation has been registered in the so called "old Slavic language" in Macedonia as early as 11th century! Proof of this is the entry of Byzantine chronicle writer Kekavmen where he described the events surrounding the anti-Byzantine uprising of Petar Deljan in 11th century. He said that in the language of the rebels "the strategist is called tshelnik"!21) It is known that Kekavmen was fluent in the "language of the Slavs" in Macedonia therefore he could translate the Greek word "strategist" as "tshelnik" (the strategist was a high military rank in Byzantine). It is even more interesting that the word "tshelnik" with identical etymology and pronunciation is being used in todays' Macedonian language and in other "Slav" languages, as well! This can not be a coincidence, especially considering the fact that there could be hundreds of thousands etymological meanings that a single word can represent, and in this instance there is an identical etymological meaning for a word that has also an identical pronunciation.

    The remark that the middle age Macedonians simply borrowed this word from the language of ancient Macedonians and used it in 11th century is not valid. Assuming that it is so, becomes impossible to explain the fact that this word is present in the contemporary Croatian literary language. Have they inherited this word from the ancient Macedonians as well? It is the same with the contemporary Serbian and Bulgarian literary languages where this word is also present with the same pronunciation and etymology.
    It is highly likely that through analysis of the word "tshelniku" some other characteristics of the ancient Macedonian language could be identified, considering the fact that in the contemporary Macedonian language this word is deducted from the noun "tshelo" - forehead.
    As mentioned previously, the non-Greek words were recorded by the ancient Greeks on as-heard basis without analysing the form of the word. Due to the fact the word "tshelniku" had been recorded inclusive of the vowel "u" at the end, it is anticipated that "tshelniku" was recorded by the ancient Greeks in its vocative form. The vocative form of the noun "tshelnik" in the contemporary Macedonian language is precisely "tshelniku". Is it maybe that the Greeks used to hear the word "tshelniku" every time a Macedonian addressed the leader, therefore recorded this word without realising that they were recording its vocative form?

    Another word that is also very interesting in this regard is the word "phoinikos", which is related to the warfare22). Indubitable this word is very much alike the contemporary Macedonian word "voinik" meaning "soldier". There could be a little doubt that these words have a common origin. Why is this so? In the ancient Greek language the consonant "v" did not exist23). The conclusion is imminent that the true pronunciation of the word "phoinikos" would be "voinikos" ("ph" replaced with "v"). In addition to this, as established earlier in this text, ancient Greeks added the suffix "os" to a lot of non-Greek words they recorded. If the word "phoinikos" had been subjected to the "Interpretato Graeca" phenomenon i.e. if the suffix "os" had been added to this non-Greek word, by taking out the Greek suffix we arrive at the contemporary Macedonian word "voinik" (soldier). Not only the pronunciation, but also the etymology of the word "voinik" is very similar to that of the word "phoinikos" and is located in the domain of warfare.

    An abundance of water is described with the word "vodi" in contemporary Macedonian language. The corresponding ancient Macedonian word for this is the word "vedy". The Greek archaeologist Aliki Stuyanaki in the periodical "Edesaika Hronika" (Edessa, may-august, 1972) advised that the Macedonian city of Voden, to which the Greeks gave the name "Edessa", was originally a Brygian city and its old name was Vedy which means abundance of water24). Furthermore, St. Clement of Alexandria wrote that ancient Macedonians had a great respect towards the water (springs, wells, rivers) and they worshiped the Macedonian divinity they called Vedy25). In this instance as well, the similarity between pronunciation of a contemporary Macedonian and an ancient Macedonian word is undeniable, and again their etymology is identical.

    The contemporary Macedonian verb "pesh" (walk) in ancient Macedonian would have been pronounced "pez"26).

    "Pella"27) is another ancient Macedonian word. The etymology of this word is "a stone". The corresponding word in contemporary Macedonian language is "spila", which is similar in pronunciation with the ancient Macedonian word "pella".

    The ancient Macedonian word recorded through its Greek interpretation as "skoidos" bears the meaning of judges. In contemporary Macedonian this meaning is conveyed using the word "sudii"28).


    There are number of ancient Macedonian words with undetermined etymology which in their pronunciation undeniably resemble contemporary Macedonian words, as well as words from other so called "Slavic languages".


    A very good example is the word "arotos" which ancient Macedonians used as an epithet to the god Heracles29). Its etymology is undetermined to-date, however if the suffix "s" is deleted this word is practically identical with the adjective "aroto" - "the old one" (archaism to a degree) from the present Macedonian language. According to a legend Heracles was considered to be the oldest ascendant of the Macedonians. Can the answer for the etymology of the word "arotos" be located in this legend, by referring to Heracles as "the old one" or "aroto(s)"?


    It is inevitable that the Macedonian Phalanx is mentioned in this discussion. The strongest weapon of the phalanx was the long spear called "sarissa". It is very interesting to analyse the etymology of the word "sarissa". The first and obvious question is whether the first letter of this word, the letter "s", is authentic or perhaps there should be the letter "z" instead? It is well known that the name of the Brygian (ancient Macedonian) goddess was recorded as both "Semela" and "Zemela". If this is applied to the word "sarissa" i.e. the letter "s" is replaced with the letter "z" it will transform into the word "zarissa". An exciting assumption emerges regarding the etymology of this word. The reflexive verb in its dialectical form "zari se" in the contemporary Macedonian is identical in pronunciation with the word "zarisa" (thrust itself in, pierce itself into). This is of course an assumption, which nevertheless has a solid base in the information presented in relation to the pronunciation and etymology of the words discussed previously.

    By analysing ancient Macedonian words that have a determined etymology, it is possible to make some assumptions and even draw some conclusions regarding certain grammatical forms of the ancient Macedonian language. This forms are identical with the forms of the contemporary Macedonian language.

    It is worth to mention that there were words in the ancient Macedonian language that (at least without performing a deeper analysis) appear to have a little in common with the contemporary Macedonian language. However, the presence of these words does not deny the existence of words from the contemporary Macedonian language in the ancient Macedonian language. In fact, for some of these words it is more than obvious that they had existed in the ancient Macedonian vocabulary.
    We should also turn attention to a portion of the ancient Macedonian onomastics. At the same time it is necessary to keep in mind two things. First, there is no doubt that the ancient Macedonians (mainly those from the highest circles) accepted part of the Hellenic onomastics. But in fact a large number of Macedonian names were different than those in the Hellenic onomasticon, while a considerable number of these are reminiscent of the later Macedonian onomasticon, or are derived from words of Macedonian or from so called "Slavic" (Venetic) origin.

    A second thing that needs to be kept in mind is the fact that ancient Macedonian personal names up to our own time mainly achieved written form through their Greek (and in a smaller number Latin as well) transcription. We can surmise that a considerable number of these names were given the added Greek suffixes "os" and "s", and more rarely "us". There are a lot of proofs for this, but here for lack of space we shall only mention that, in our research we have noted over 350 personal names written by ancient Greek authors, which names belonged to various non-Greek peoples. The overwhelming number of these Persian, Thracian, Illyrian, Egyptian, Scythian, Brygian, Libyan, Indian, and other personal names (but also toponyms and other words) were artificially Hellenized by the old Greek authors, adding the Greek suffix "os", and where appropriate "s". Sometimes the old Greek authors went to such lengths that the foreign name was totally changed in the process. Thus, for example, the Egyptian Pharaoh Khu-fu in Greek sources became written as CheopS (with the attached Greek suffix "s"). Later the Indian King Chandragupta was written by Greeks as SandroticOS, and so forth. Sometimes the only change to the name would be the Greek ending "os" or "s". Thus, for example, the name of the Egyptian King Psamtic was written by Greeks as PsametihOS. The Macedonian name Ata, as well, became written as both Ata and AtaS (Hellenized by addition of the suffix "s"), etc.

    We've said that we have identified hundreds of such examples of artificially Hellenized non-Greek names (but also other non-Greek words) by old Greek writers, which for lack of space here, will not be mentioned. According to such practices of that time it happened that peoples from quite disparate cultures, ethnic origins (and even races) such as the Persians, Egyptians, Illyrians, Arabians, Libyans, Thracians, Ethiopians, Scythians, Indians, Macedonians, and others, all had identical (Greek) endings on their names. This is so unlikely as to be unbelievable. Therefore, in the following discussion particular attention will be paid to the roots of personal names, given the extensive artificial use of the Greek suffixes "os" and "s" (as well as "us").

Page 15 of 42 FirstFirst ... 5131415161725 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Albanians (OFFTOPIC Macedonians)
    By Besir Bajrami in forum Y-DNA Haplogroups
    Replies: 201
    Last Post: 04-09-14, 23:07
  2. New claim that Macedonians invented cement
    By DejaVu in forum European News & Hot Topics
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 26-05-11, 20:13

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •