Front Matter - Part 01

Analysis of historical events in Greek occupied Macedonia

An interview with Risto Stefov

Analysis of historical events in Greek occupied Macedonia An interview with Risto Stefov

July 15, 2016

INTERVIEWER – Risto, I found your name on the internet and want to ask you a few questions about Macedonia. In the past we have heard much about the Macedonians from various sources, the majority of which were non-Macedonian. You are among the first Macedonians on the internet to have contributed to the Macedonian point of view and to Macedonian history. What can you tell us about that?

RISTO – Macedonian history begins in prehistoric times but the Modern Macedonian nation’s unique history begins after the invention, if I can call it that, of nationalism and accelerates during the breakup of the Ottoman Empire in the early 1800’s.

The people that existed in the Balkan Region before the invention of nationalism cannot be called “nations”, something that was not yet invented.

Before these modern nations were created, by the nation building process, and before borders were placed around them, all the people in the Balkans lived together within the confines of one large borderless region.

As history tells us, the people in this large Balkan region began to openly and freely live together after Philip II, a Macedonian king (338 BC), opened the frontiers and united them under his kingdom which at the time extended from the Adriatic Sea in the west to the Black Sea in the east.

This frontier remained open from the 4th century BC to the 19th century AD. In other words, all through the Macedonian Empire, the Roman Empire, the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire and the Ottoman Empire until the European Great Powers of the 19th century decided break up the Ottoman Empire and replace it with smaller nation states each with their own unique people and borders.

The concept of “nationalism” and “nations” at the time was not known, was alien, to the people of the Balkans inside the borders of the Ottoman Empire.

Nationalism was introduced to these people by the European Western Powers, brought to them from the outside.

In addition to having lived together without borders for over 2,300 years, the Christian people of the Balkans, for over 1,800 years, shared a common religion which served as a unifying force and kept them together.

The Ottoman Empire of the 19th century was a multi-ethnic, multicultural and multi-religious pluralistic society, but outside of language and some folk traditions there was not much in the Balkans to distinguish one people from another.

Unfortunately the real aim of the European Great Powers was not to free the Christian people in the Balkans but to get rid of the ailing Ottoman Empire and replace it with smaller and more manageable “nation states”. In retrospect, freeing the Christians was a side effect of that aim.

To the Western European Great Powers it didn’t matter what kind of “nation states” they were creating as long as they were “non-Slav speaking” homogeneous societies which would agree to keep Russia out of the Mediterranean waters.

And while the Western European Great Powers were trying to break up the Ottoman Empire into smaller and divergent states, Russia, another European Great Power, was attempting unite all the Slav speakers in the Balkans under a Russian leadership.

The national awakening of Serbia, due to neighbouring Austro-Hungarian influence, was an accident that couldn’t be helped. But Greece, on the other hand, was purposely created by design. Greece was created to be the opposite of Serbia and a solution to keeping the balance of power in the Balkans. While Serbia was destined to become a Slav State, Greece would be destined to become the “opposite”.

The Western European Great Powers chose the name “Greece” and “Greeks” for the new state because it was a Latin name denoting a

“Latin” lineage which was to represent the Latin “Romaos” (Roman) character of the people.

[According to Strabo, the Phoenicians of Halkidiki were the first colonists of Eubeia who, in “Kampania” on the west coast of Italy, founded the cities “Kim”, in 757 BC and “Region”, about 730-720 BC. This was the oldest colony in that region. There, the Phoenicians made contact with the neighbouring Latin “Etrurci” and passed on to them their culture, their Phoenician alphabet and their myths. A few years later, around 600 BC, they founded the city Naples, and in Sicily they founded the cities “Mesena”, “Katana” (730 BC) and “Naks”. The Latins called the new colonists “Graios” in accordance with their origin, the land of the “Greia” (Graias), today’s “Orop”, a boundary located between Boeotia and Attica, at the mouth of the river Asop.] (Page 83, Antonije Shkokljev, “Prehistory - Central Balkans Cradle of Aegean culture”)

The name “Hellas” and “Hellenes” was later discovered by German historians. This was a more suitable, realistic and unique name for the new state and on top of that it had local origins.

[King Deukalion (Deykalion) was considered to be father of all Hellenes. He was married to Pira, daughter of Epimetei and Pandorar and lived in Thessalian Ftia together with the indigenous Pelasgians and later among the Achaean Mirmidonians in their existing cities. According to Homer (Homer, Iliad and Odyssey, II, 681, Novi Sad, 1985. (Prev. Gjurigj MN)), “… Some were from Arg and lived in Pelasgian cities. Some were from Alopa, Al in Trehina, and from Ftia and Hellada. They had beautiful women. They were called Mirmidonians, Hellenes and some still called themselves Achaeans. They had fifty ships and their leader was Ahilei.”

From what we know from Homer, it would appear that the cities Arg, Alop, Al, Hellada and Trahin existed in Thessalian Ftia before Deukalean’s arrival. Each place name had special meaning. The word “Ftia” comes from the verb “fino” meaning land of the dead, disappearance, destruction. The word “Hellada” comes from the word “helos” meaning swamp, mud. The word “Trahin” comes from the word “trahus” meaning brittle, rocky. The word “Al” comes from “alos” and “als” meaning salt. The word “Alopa” means salty,

salty island. The word “Arg” means white. The river which created the plain where these cities were located was called “Sperhei” meaning fiercely attacking. A mountain to the south bears the name “Eta” meaning misery, suffering. It was on this mountain that Hercules lit himself on fire to escape his pain. This is also the location of the Thermopolis Gorge and where the city Lamia, capital of Ftia, is located. (The word “Lamia” is a Macedonian word meaning dragon).

If the toponyms are names associated with real objects and events, then the stories in mythology must also have realistic meaning. And as such the ethno genesis of the Hellenes can be derived from the myths about who Pindar (Pindar, Olympia, IX, 41), Apolodori (Apollodori, Bibliotheca (I-II) I, 7, 2) and others have informed us.] (Pages 185, 186, Antonije Shkokljev, “Prehistory - Central Balkans Cradle of Aegean culture”)

In other words the 19th century German scholars found a more selective ancient name and history for the modern Greeks, now called “Hellenes”.

Unfortunately, both names, “Greece” and “Hellas”, were foreign to the 19th century Balkan people who lived in that region.

But, if you ask a Modern Greek person in English today to identify his or her “nationality” they will say they are “Greek”. If you ask them what is that in “Greek”? They will say “Ellinas” or “Ellinida”. There is no word for “Greek” in the Greek vocabulary. If there is it is rarely used and unknown to most Greeks.

According to most modern Greeks today, “Greek” and “Ellines” are synonymous. In other words a “Hellene is a native of either ancient or modern Greece; a Greek”.

The pre-19th century Balkan people had no notion of “nationalism” or knowledge of any “ancient City States”.

Encouraged by the European Great Powers, the Balkan people’s main aim was to drive the Ottomans out of the Balkans and replace

their Muslim Empire with a Christian Empire which they themselves could then rule.

But this was not what the Western European Great Powers wanted. As I said earlier, the European Great Powers wanted to break up the “large Ottoman state” and replace it with smaller divergent “nation states” and make sure they never again combined.

The process of “Hellenization” began by educating some of the elite Balkan people about the existence of the old City States and their exploits. People who studied abroad, London in particular, were seduced by the eloquently written, romantic stories the European had written about a people who lived at the bottom of the Balkans a long time ago. These Balkan people were especially thrilled when they were received by westerners as the descendents of those ancient people.

But, not all Balkan people were willing to be Hellenized or convinced to take the Hellenic road, some still wanted to replace the Ottomans with themselves in the existing large state. Unfortunately the Western Great Powers did not agree.

Also, it was one thing to create a theoretical “nation state” and another to give it life and a past. The idea of calling the new state “Greece” and modeling it after the “Romaos” (Romans) lacked uniqueness. All the Christian people in the Balkans, including the Slav speakers, were at some point or another, called “Romaos” and “Greeks” by the Ottomans and by outsiders.

The part of the Balkan Peninsula were Greece began as a modern state was then called “Morea” and occupied the region today called the Peloponnesus.

So, in order to distinguish Greece from Serbia and from other future Balkan states, a better model had to be found for Greece, one that had a unique and long past. And that model was found in the “Hellenes”, the pre-historic people I mentioned earlier.

Unfortunately there was no living trace of the “Hellenes” in the 19th century which made it difficult to explain how they got to the 19th century from pre-history. There was no history to explain that.

But, with some creative imagination, German ingenuity and a lot of convincing, the problem was solved by “re-engineered” history so that it could fit the modern “Hellenes” with the pre-historic or ancient “Hellenes”.

A bridge of “Hellene” continuity connecting the “Ancient Hellenes” from pre-history to the “Modern Hellenes” of the 19th century was apparently found in the Macedonians. The Macedonians, it would appear, had such continuity from ancient times to the 19th century.

Not only was historic information readily available that proved that there was such continuity but the 19th century people in the Balkans, who identified themselves as “Macedonians”, knew about it.

So, after the Great Powers introduced the little state to the world under the name “Greece”, a name which has stuck with the outside world to this day, its “architects”, for reasons mentioned above, decided to call the little country “Hellas” and its people “Hellenes”.

And so a “classical history” was written and introduced to the world which explained the beginning and continuity of the modern “Hellenes” as well as their contribution to our modern world; a classical history which unfortunately only served and still serves the interests of the Western European Great Powers.

In the new classical history Alexander the Great, the most hated man in the ancient so called “Hellenic” world, the man who wiped out Thebes and brutally crushed the spirits of the old City-State citizens, is now the “Great King of the Hellenes” whom the modern “Hellenes” revere and hold in high honour.

But, the only way this continuity between the “Ancient Hellenes” or “Ancient Greeks” as the outside world calls them, and the so called “Modern Hellenes” or “Greeks” to exist is if the Macedonians themselves were “Hellenes”. In more simple terms, in order for the

Modern Greeks to be the descendants of the “Ancient Greeks” the Macedonians would have to be Greek.

But how can the Macedonians be Greek? They were and still are Macedonians?!

According to the re-engineered 19th century classical history model, the Macedonians were “Hellenized”. They were “Hellenized”, a process that began sometime just before Philip II’s time. And so, being “Hellenized” makes them Greek.

So, how exactly does this “Hellenization” process work?

The explanation we are gives is that Macedonians began to speak the “Attic” language in the Macedonian king’s court, they began to adopt the so called “Greek culture” and they began to act like Greeks… and therefore they became Greeks.

[According to the Columbia Encyclopedia, Hellenism is “the culture, ideals, and pattern of life of ancient Greece in classical times. It usually means primarily the culture of ATHENS and the related cities in the Age of Pedicles [495-429 BC]. The term is also applied to the ideals of later writers and thinkers who draw their inspiration from ancient Greece. Frequently it is contrasted with Hebraism – Hellenism then meaning pagan joy, freedom, and love of life as contrasted with the austere morality and monotheism of the Old Testament. The Hellenic period came to an end with the conquest of Alexander the Great in the 4th century BC. It was succeeded by the Hellenistic civilization.”] (Page 930, Columbia Encyclopedia, Third Edition 1963, New York and London)

As I mentioned earlier, historically, the self-perception of the Greeks and the definition of Greekness have varied, but with the emergence and consolidation of the nation-state, from the late 18th century, Greekness was redefined along the lines of what some people call romantic nationalism.

Romantic nationalism is the form of nationalism in which the state derives its political legitimacy as an organic consequence of the unity of those it governs. This includes, depending on the particular

manner of practice, the language, race, culture, religion and customs of the “nation” in its primal sense of those who were “born” within its culture. This form of nationalism arose in reaction to dynastic or imperial hegemony, which assessed the legitimacy of the state from the “top down”, emanating from a monarch or other authority, which justified its existence. Such downward-radiating power might ultimately be derived from God.

Greece accepts all those who agree with this principle and rejects those who disagree.

In other words the Ancient Macedonians became “Greeks” because some spoke Greek, believed in the same Gods, and behaved like Athenians… But such behaviours can also be found in people today. Look at me for example, I speak English, I believing in the same God as the English, I live among the English and culturally I sometimes behaving like the English, does that make me English? No. I am still Macedonia.

Ancient history was very clear about who the Macedonians were and the fact that they were not “Greek”. The ancient people from the City States knew the Macedonians were not Greek and said so themselves many times. The ancient authors were also in agreement with that.

Many times history has mentioned that the Macedonians spoke another language, an “unidentified” language, unique to the Macedonian people, spoken by the common Macedonian people.

I am not going to get into details on this here but if you want to learn more about the differences between the Ancient Macedonian and the Ancient Greeks then read Josef S. G. Gandeto’s book, “Ancient Macedonians, Differences Between the Ancient Macedonians and the Ancient Greeks”.

“There is not a single word or fact written by the ancient authors that shows that the Macedonians are Greek. There is not a single word or fact written where the Macedonians thought of themselves as Greeks. There is not a single book written by the ancient authors, including the ancient Greek authors, which has mixed the lineage

and has not shown diverse differences between Macedonians and Greeks.” (Joseph Gandeto)

Also, modern scholars and scientists believe that the Slavic language has its roots in prehistory. A number of ancient inscriptions deemed undecipherable have recently been successfully deciphered by linguists Vasil Iliov, Anthony Ambrozic, Sergei V. Rjabchikov and others, by using the Slavic languages which indicates that these languages have been around a lot longer than previously thought. Even Alexander the Great may have spoken Slavic. It is well known that Alexander spoke at least two languages. We know one was Koine and the other was a language indigenous to Macedonia labeled “unknown” by Greek historians.

But, since no Macedonian or foreign archeologist has even been allowed to dig in Greek occupied Macedonia or examine any archeological findings unsupervised, we can’t verify what other language Alexander the Great spoke.

But, in order for the Macedonians to be Greek, as required by the “re-engendered” ancient historical model, the revisionists had to erase and cover up everything that was Macedonian. If the Macedonians were “Hellenized” then they were Greek and no longer Macedonian.

There could be no Modern Greece without the Ancient Macedonians! And there can be no Macedonia and Macedonians if there is to be a Greece and Greeks! It was as simple as that! And thus the slogans “The Ancient Macedonians were Greek”, “Macedonia is Greek” and “Macedonians do not exist”, were coined.

But, what to do with the living Macedonians who knew who they were and who wanted to be Macedonians? And how was the Slavic language the Macedonians spoke going to be explained?

Again, thanks to the ingenuity and brilliance of the western mind, the Macedonian problem for Greece was solved with the creation of a couple of historic revisions.

The first revision had to do with of the so called “Slav Migrations”. The 19th century model of history tells us that a number of tribes migrated to the Balkans, which among them was the “Slav tribe” which supposedly settled in Macedonia and wiped out the Ancient Macedonians. And by that assertion, today’s Macedonians are the descendents of the Slavs.

Even if there were such migrations, the Slavs at this time were not soldiers but harmless farmers traveling together with their families looking for land to settle on and cultivate their crops.

According to historic accounts the Slavs were not conquerors or marauders. They were very happy to settle in forested lands and marshes, even in places that usually were not suitable for crop farming. The Slavs whose main preoccupation was farming would not have easily abandoned their ancestral lands unless they were in grave danger. There was no good reason for the Slavs to have abandoned their traditional homes and endanger their lives by crossing the very difficult Danube River unless they were pushed south by force.

The Slavs did not cross the Danube at will but were forced to do so by the pressures of the invading barbarian tribes. The arrival of the Goths, Huns, Avars, etc., near the Danube forced the indigenous Slav speaking populations to flee south and seek refuge. A great number of the Slav migrations recorded by history, are actual refugee movements of displaced indigenous people from the Danube River region. My supporting evidence for this, in part, is based on Professor Curta’s findings which are based on archeological data derived from settlement excavations. “First, there is already enough evidence to move away from the migrationist model which has dominated the discipline of Slavic archaeology ever since its inception. A retreat from migrationism is necessary simply because the available data do not fit any of the current models for the study of (pre)historic migration.” “It has become increasingly evident that migrations across ecological or cultural boundaries would require considerable planning on the part of the migrants, and should leave substantial and clear archaeological evidence.” “Furthermore, the archaeological evidence… does not match any long-distance migratory pattern.” (Page 307, Florin Curta, The Making of the

Slavs, History and Archaeology of the Lower Danube Region c. 500–700, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001)

So, if the Slavs were not willing migrants as per Professor Curta’s findings then what motivated them to travel south to the Balkans?

The most logical and probable explanation, given the political situation of the time, is that the Slavs were war refugees forced out of their homes by the more aggressive invaders the Goths, Huns and Avars. There are those, including Falmerayer, who believe that the traveling Slavs were not allowed to settle in Macedonia and were driven to the south and west by the Byzantine army. This can be substantiated by the fact that with the exception of one, found north of Skopje, there are no archeological Slav burial finds in Macedonia but a great number of them are found to the west and south of geographical Macedonia. There are also unconfirmed claims that the original Slavs who made their way from north of the Danube region did not speak the “Slav language” that is attributed to them. They learned that language from the indigenous people living south of the Danube.

The second revision has to do with the creation of the Bulgarian “Nation state”. When Bulgaria was created it too had to be characterized “different” from Greece and from Serbia so that there can be ‘no hope” of any of these states re-combining.

The answer to tying the Macedonian “loose ends” was to eliminate the Macedonian entity all together. If the Macedonians were “Slavs”, as per the revised historic model, then they, at some point in time, may want to create a Slavic state of their own or combine with another Slavic state. But if they were to be “eliminated” all together, they would cease to exist.

So, with regards to the Macedonians, what was not Greek was attributed to Bulgaria and what was not Bulgarian was attributed to Greece. Everything Macedonian from Ancient times to the 6th century AD, before the so called Slav invasions, was attributed to Greece and everything Macedonian from the 6th century AD to the 19th century, was attributed to Bulgaria.

The 19th century creation of Bulgaria was the “answer” to covering up all remaining evidence of the existence of everything that was Macedonian outside of the “Hellenic model”.

Also, in order to give the Bulgarian “nation state” it’s unique character and make it distance from other states in the Balkans, it was given a non-Balkan name and a non-Balkan identity. The name “Bulgaria” was derived from the river “Volga”, located in present day Russia. This is where allegedly the original Bulgarians came from. We are also being told that the original “Bulgarians”, the ancestors of the modern Bulgarians, were Turkic Tatars, who conquered the northern region of present day Bulgaria and settled there and, over time, were assimilated into the Slavic tribes that lived there.

So, according to the “re-engineered” 19th century historic model, the Bulgarians were not exactly “pure Slavs” or pure Turkic Tartars but a mix of both, enough to make them different from the other Slavs in the region. But because the Bulgarians were partly Slav they could lay claim to the post 6th century Macedonian heritage.

Being part Turkic Tatar and having arrived in the Balkans around the same time, or maybe a little later than the Slavs, Bulgarians could not lay claim to the ancient Macedonian heritage or anything that was Macedonian before the 6th century AD.

Earlier I explained that before these modern Balkan “nation states” were created, out of the remnants of the crumbling Ottoman Empire, the people living in the Balkans had a common past, a common history. But after these “nation States” were created new histories were written for them; a foundation to build on. A myth was created for each state which claimed the state was “homogeneous” consisting of only a single people leaving no room for diversity.

Greece, for example, declared itself “pure Greek”, ignoring the fact that the “Greek” identity did not exist before the 19th century and that its population at the time consisted of people who identified themselves as Albanians, Macedonians, Vlachs, Turks, Roma and a few other minorities.

The Greeks, Bulgarians and Albanians, for example, have all made claims that Alexander the Great was Greek, Bulgarian and Albanian, identities which did not exist in Alexander’s time… which is fine. But at the same time each claims that he was uniquely “Greek”, “Bulgarian”, or “Albanian”, which is not fine. Alexander the Great was a king of all the people who lived in the Balkans during his time, which would make him king of the distant ancestors of the present day Greeks, Bulgarians and Albanians. He was king of all of our ancestors but at the same time he identified with the Macedonian people, which makes him Macedonian. He may have been everyone’s king but he was a Macedonian.

Also, today we have Greeks claiming that the “Slavs” (Macedonians) are “stealing” their Greek history… that the “Slavs” are stealing Alexander the Great from them… We have Bulgarians complaining of the same thing. We have Bulgarians claiming that Kiril and Metodi, the Macedonian Solun brothers, were Bulgarians and that the “Yugoslavs” (Macedonians from the Republic of Macedonia) are expropriating them.

These Greeks and Bulgarians unfortunately are forgetting that those historical figures existed before their nation states were created and Alexander and Kiril and Metodi belonged to the ancestors of all the people in the Balkans. They are not exclusively Greek or Bulgarian.

Kiril and Metodi made contributions to all the Slavic speaking people in Europe but the fact remains that they were from Solun, a Macedonian city and that they were Macedonians.

So, how could the Macedonians have stolen something that already belonged to everyone anyway, including to the Macedonians?

For example, I can claim that my great grandfather was “mine and mine alone” but he is not uniquely only my great grandfather. In fact there are at least a few dozen great grandchildren who can also lay that same claim and accuse me of robbing them of “their” great grandfather. My great grandfather was a common great grandfather to all of us, to all of his great grandchildren; he was never mine and mine alone. The only things I can claim to be “mine and mine alone” are things I acquired after I was born.

We all must accept that fact that before the Balkan nation states were created, Balkan history was common to all the people and belonged to everyone in the borderless Balkans. This is how pre 19th century Balkan history must be treated. If we want to be honest about it, we have to accept the fact that the Balkan people, before each nation state was created in the 19th century, had a common history and no one should be claiming historical events or historical figures especially at the exclusion of the others.

We must also accept the fact that the Balkan territory also belongs to all the people in the Balkans. Unfortunately that has not been the case and we have hundreds of examples where Macedonians have been driven out of their homes and lands for wanting to be Macedonians and for not wanting to be Greeks, Serbians, Bulgarians or Albanians.

On the question of who has the right to the “Ancient heritage”? I would say all the Balkan people do! Unfortunately that’s not how history has been re-written. Balkan history has been “re-written” so that each modern Balkan nation state can fit in its new artificial environment. In other words its past has been changed so that it can fit the present… This is precisely what is causing the problems among the various people in the Balkans experienced today. The accusations of infringing on each other’s territory… on each other’s history… accusations of theft of historical figures… people being exiled from their homes for non compliance… These are symptoms of misunderstanding stemming from the historical myths that passes as history especially written for each of the Balkan nation states by their patrons.

As I mentioned earlier, this behaviour is not accidental, it is part of the long term plan to keep these nation states from recombining; from forming a large state and from reclaiming their common heritage. Being small and existing among “belligerent neighbours”, who constantly have territorial claims against each other, also makes these states dependent on their patrons to protect them.

This is how the Balkans was set up by the Western European Powers after the disintegration of the Ottoman Empire and this how the situation has remained to this day, 200 years later.

Greece has a custom made history for Greeks only. There is no room for anyone else, even if that “anyone else” is indigenous to the territory today called Greece. Bulgaria has done exactly the same.

Both Greece and Bulgaria took chunks of Macedonia in 1913 but their histories did not change to reflect that; the addition of new people acquired with those chunks of land. Their histories remained unchanged. Non Greeks and non Bulgarians were forced to conform and fit into Greece’s and Bulgaria’s fictional mold because there was no room or tolerance for anything else...

So, when the Greeks today say “Macedonians do not exist” and “Macedonia is Greek”, they literally cut the Macedonian people completely out of existence, not only from Greece, but also from the entire planet, so that the Greek world can conform to its fictional history.

The Macedonian people, however, do exist and have lived on those lands for many generations, side by side with the people who today call themselves Greek, and don’t want to be cut out… assimilated or exiled… Unfortunately this is what has been happening from the day Greece acquired Macedonian territories and Macedonian people.

If you ask me what is the most important period of time for the modern Macedonian people as a nation, the way “nationalism” defines a nation, I would have to say the 19th century. This was the time when nationalism was brought to the Balkans. One cannot talk about nationalism before nationalism was invented.

The French Revolution (1789) gave birth to nationalism. As the turn of the 19th century brought economic change to Europe, the Balkans became the last frontier for capitalist expansion. By the 1800’s Europe’s political, economic and military institutions were rapidly changing. Western governments and exporters were aggressively pursuing Balkan markets on behalf of their western manufacturers. This aggressive pursuit smothered Balkan industries before they had

a chance to develop and compete. As a result, Balkan economies began to decline causing civil unrest and nationalist uprisings.

When Greece was born for the first time in 1832 it was unclear what its national character was? To quote David Holden, “the Greek nation-state was a product of western political intervention-‘the fatal idea’ as Arnold Toynbee once called it, of exclusive western nationalism impinging upon the multi-national traditions of the eastern world. By extension, therefore, at any rate in theory, it was a child of the Renaissance and of western rationalism. (Page 28, Greece without Columns)

None of the modern Balkan nation states had a defined national character or a unique history of their people when they were first created. Like I said, everything was intertwined and everyone was mixed. It took outside intervention to define each nation and give it its unique characteristic which, as I said, in most cases, infringed on the others. For example, Macedonia had to die in order for Greece and Bulgaria to live. There was no room for a Greece or for a Bulgaria to exist with a living Macedonia… Their true histories (not the myths that have been written for them) are so close and intertwined that their distinctions are blurred. The ancestors of the people, who lived in Greece and Bulgaria before the 19th century, before those two states were created, as I said, have a 2, 300 year-old common existence.

The Macedonian people’s unique history as a modern nation began when the modern Macedonian people made their bid for their independence. Macedonia’s unique history began when the Macedonian people understood what a nation was by definition and recognized themselves as a nation, a unique Macedonian nation. Unlike Greece and Bulgaria where their “nations” were created after their “states”, the Macedonian people considered themselves a nation, unique and separate from the artificially created Greek and Bulgarian “nations” long before they had a state. Unlike the Greeks who had “never” had a state before, and unlike the Bulgarians who only had a “fluid empire” that belonged to a Turkic Tatar tribe, the Macedonian people had a name, a state and an empire on which to build upon and to model their state and nation.

The Macedonian people’s first aim was to free the entire Balkans from the Ottomans and to regain the old Eastern Christian Empire under Christian rule. But, as small nation states like Serbia and Greece began to pop up in the Balkans, the Macedonian people started to making their own bid for an independent Macedonia with a multi-ethnic, multicultural and multi-religious character. Proof of this can be found in the various Macedonian proclamations and manifestos.

Here is a bit of Macedonian history that deals with that:

[On April 17th, 1880 the Ottoman government informed the Great Powers that the anticipated reforms had been drafted and prepared for their approval. Many Macedonian intellectuals, however, were not happy because the reforms neglected their demands, including the recognition of the Macedonian language. In May 1880 about two hundred prominent Macedonians signed and submitted a request to the European Commission protesting against the Ottoman Constitutional amendments because, among other things, the Ottomans neglected to recognize the Macedonian language. Unfortunately their written pleas were yet again ignored so a Macedonian delegation lead by Karandzhulov was dispatched to meet with Lord Fitzmorris, the British representative of the European Commission. Even though Lord Fitzmorris met with the Macedonians in person and heard their pleas, the Commission still ignored their demands.

Dissatisfied with the way the reforms were carried out, particularly by the attitude of the Great Powers, Macedonian leaders began to look inwards to find a solution to their problems.

A number of prominent leaders, including Leonidas Vulgaris from Berovo Region, Pop Kostandin Bufski and 30 others, got together and held a National Assembly from May 21st to June 2nd, 1880 in Gremen, Ostrovo Region (Aegean Macedonia). Among other things, one of the items on the agenda was the Macedonian situation after the Berlin Congress. On this item the Congress concluded that the reason Macedonia was given back to the Ottomans was because of the neighbouring propaganda, mainly that of Greece, Serbia and Bulgaria, which falsely represented the ethnic composition of the

Macedonian population. The Congress came to the conclusion that once the foreign propaganda was exposed and neutralized, the Macedonian people would have a better chance of uniting behind a Macedonian cause and creating an Autonomous Macedonian state within the Ottoman Empire or creating a Macedonian independent state. The Assembly also decided to challenge Ottoman authorities on articles 23 and 62 of the Treaty of Berlin which called for political and religious rights for the Macedonian people. If those rights were ignored then the Macedonians would have no other choice but to arm themselves and fight under the slogan “Macedonia to the Macedonians, for reestablishing Ancient Macedonia”. (Vanche Stojchev. “Military History of Macedonia”. Military academy. Skopje, 2004. Page 252)

The National Assembly was concluded with the formation of an executive authority responsible for carrying out political decisions under a Macedonian Provisional Government called “Unity” which was to represent all ethnic groups living in the territory of Macedonia. Vasil Simov was appointed President of the Provisional Government and Stefo Nikolov was elected President of the National Assembly. Pop Kostandin Bufski and Leonidas Vulgaris were given the task of organizing the Macedonian military.

Decisions made at this Assembly were communicated to the Great Power diplomatic missions in Solun which initially ignored them but later accepted them as the “Macedonian way” of dealing with problems.

On March 23rd, 1881 the Provisional Government of Macedonia approved a Manifesto and submitted it to the various diplomatic missions in the Ottoman territories.

The opening statements of the Manifesto began as follows:

“Macedonians, our precious fatherland Macedonia was once the most glorious country in the world. The Macedonian people have civilized Asia and mankind by the victorious Phalanx having laid the foundation of military arts, and Aristotle of education and enlightenment. Unfortunately the once so glorious Macedonia today is on the brink of disaster because we have made mistakes and

forgotten our past. Aliens are now trying to take our country away from us and destroy our nationality, the brightness of which can never be darkened.

Macedonia has become a poor widow abandoned by her sons and no longer flies the glorious flag it once flew in triumph by its victorious Macedonian armies. Today Macedonia has been reduced to a geographical term as if someone is attempting to extinguish its glory and send it to oblivion.

Intriguers are digging Macedonia’s grave and trying to destroy it by bringing in Austrian- Hungarian troops, but replacing the shackles of one with another will only destroy Macedonia. Macedonia will not be regenerated, and our nation will perish.

This moment is critical for Macedonia- it is a matter of life or death.” (Vanche Stojchev. “Military History of Macedonia”. Military academy. Skopje, 2004. Page 253)

Realizing that Macedonia had become a pawn of the Great Powers, the Provisional Government of Macedonia called upon all the Macedonian people, regardless of religion and ethnicity, to unite and fight for liberation and the creation of an independent Macedonian state.

“True Macedonians, faithful sons of Macedonia! How much longer are you going to put up with the decay of our fatherland?

Macedonia is calling you, crying out the words ‘You, my faithful children, successors of Aristotle and Alexander III of Macedonia, you who bleed with Macedonian blood, do not let me die, help me!’ What a sad sight it will be for you, genuine Macedonians, if you become witnesses to my death. Do everything in your power, carry my flag of unity and call out the words ‘United Macedonia!’ Be brave, throw out those murderers who hold in their hands the flag of disunity and divide you, my children of various ethnicities.

Gather under the flag of Macedonia, raise it high and write on it unanimously: Long live the Macedonian people! Long live Macedonia! Let them hear the voice of our fatherland; let us gain

liberty, the most precious heritage of nations. Say these words, for the liberal people who will applaud you. Call their noble hearts to hurry and give their help, to join your Holy fight for liberty, which has been away from our precious country for so many centuries. Macedonians, think about our origin, and do not give it up.” (Vanche Stojchev. “Military History of Macedonia”. Military academy. Skopje, 2004. Page 253)

The Manifesto was signed by President Vasil Simon, secretary Nikola Trajkov and three other members of the Provisional Government of Macedonia, Petro Jovanov, Kosta Bufski and Hriste Gorgov. The signatures were confirmed by two government seals and on April 11th, 1881 and the Manifesto was taken to Kjustandil where the transcript was translated to Russian and French and distributed to various foreign and domestic diplomatic representatives in Constantinople.

While the Provisional Government of Macedonia operated in Gremen, another Macedonian organization was formed in northeastern Macedonia called the Macedonian League. The League’s purpose was to unite Macedonian immigrants in neighbouring countries, particularly the large Macedonian Diaspora in Bulgaria. After the creation of the Macedonian League and the establishment of a General Headquarters in Pirin Mountain, the League initiated the drafting of a constitution in order to define the aims and structure of a future government in Macedonia. All in all the constitution was divided into fifteen chapters constituting 103 articles. The first article dealt with Macedonia’s territory within Ottoman borders, which consisted of the Solun, Bitola and Skopje sanjak vilayets comprising historic and geographic Macedonia.

Among other things the constitution defined the various ethnic and religious populations living in Macedonia, the ministries and departments necessary to run the administration, the division of power in the legislative body of the government and the regulation of security including the army and police.

The government structure proposed was based on gaining broad autonomy within the Ottoman Empire. Through the drafting of the constitution Macedonians made it clear that they wanted an

autonomous Macedonia, based on Article 23 of the Treaty of Berlin, emphasizing the distinct Macedonian national identity that was to be separate from the other Balkan countries.

Article 99 of the constitution called for use of military force to be exercised by the Macedonian Liberation Army should Ottoman authorities or the European Powers disagree with the request to form an autonomous Macedonian state within the Ottoman framework.

On matters of the Macedonian army, the Chief of the General Headquarters responsible for drafting the security part of the constitution added a separate chapter to the constitution for regulating the military. This Chapter known as the Military Instruction constituted 246 Articles was divided into two parts. The first part defined the structure and organization of the Macedonian army and the second part defined the tactics required if the liberation of Macedonia became necessary. The second part was put in place in case the Ottoman government or the Great powers refused to grant Macedonia autonomy and the Macedonian people would then have to fight for it.

The constitution drafted by the Macedonian League in aid of establishing a Macedonian government and a military organization was quite detailed and comprehensive, especially the Articles regarding the formation of a Macedonian army. For more information see chapter 14 of Vanche Stojchev’s book “Military History of Macedonia”.