BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Sources

Published sources:

Анкета на Балканите, Доклады на Каргнаевата комисия по воинит през 1912-1913, София, 1914.

Documente diplomatice din peninsula Balcanică, Acţiunea României 20 septembrie 1913-1 avgust 1913, Bucureşti 1913.

Documents relatives oux actions antibulgares des pouvoir Serbes et Grecs em Macedoine ou cours de 1 annee 1912-1913, Sofija, 1930.

Ministere des Affaires Etrangers, Archive diplomatique, Grece 1918-1919, Paris.

Statistika apotelezmata tis apografis tu plitizmu tis Elados tis 15-16 maju 1928, Topos genisios, Hriskia ke glosa, Ipokatis, Atena, 1935.

2. Literature

Abecedar, Atena, 1925.

Ајановски Вангел-Оче, Егејски бури, Скопје, 1975.

Андоновски Христо, Ликвидирањето на Евреите од Егејска Македонија од германскиот окупатор, Гласник ИНИ, 1961, бр. 2, Скопје.

Андоновски Христо, ВМРО (Обединета) во Егејска Македонија, ИНИ, 1961, бр. 3, Скопје.

Андоновски Христо, Македонците под Грција во борба против Фашизмот, (1941-1944), Скопје, 1968.

Ancel Jacques, La Macedoine, son evolution contemporaine, Paris, 1930.

Vacalopoulos Apostolos, Histoire de la Grece moderne, 1975, s.l.

Gentizon Poul, Mustapha Kemal ou L’orient en Marche, Paris, 1929.

Dafni Grigori, I Elas metaksi deo polemon 1923-1940, Atina, 1955.

Devedji A. L’echange obligatoire des minorites greques et turques en vertu de la convention de Lausanne du 30 janvier 1923, Paris, 1930.

Димитров В. Георги, Настаняване и оземляване на българските бежанци (1919-1939), Благоевград, 1985.

Drauet F. L’heritier M. Historie diplomatique de la Grece de 1821 a nos jours, Paris, 1926.

Ekrem Mehmed Ali, Ataturc-făuritorul Turciei moderne, Bucureşti, 1969.

Иванов Йордан, Българите въ Македония, София, 1915.

Jonescu Eugen, Cauza romanească in Turcia europeană şi confflictul cu Grecia, Bucureşti, 1906.

Кастелан Жорж, История на Балканите 14-19 век, Пловдив, 2002 г.

Katsulis D. Giorghi, Istoria tu Komunstiku Komatos Elados, tomos 1, 2, 3, 4, Atina, 1976.

Capidan Th, Les Macedo-Roumains, Bucuresti, 1937.

Kitsikis Dimitri, Propagande et pression en politique international, la Grece et ses revendications a la conference de la paix 1919-1920, Paris, 1963.

Kirakides P. Stilipon, The Nothem ethnological boundaries of Hellenism, Thesaloniki, 1955.

Kiru A. Ahil, Sinomasia enasdion tis Makedonias, 1940-1949, Atina, 1950.

Киселиновски Стојан, Грчката колонизација во Егејска Македонија (1913-1940), Скопје, 1981.

Киселиновски Стојан, КПГ и македонското национално прашање 1918-1940, Скопје, 1985.

Киселиновски Стојан, Етничките промени во Македонија (1913-1995), Скопје, 2000.

Киселиновски Стојан, Ирена Ставови-Кавка, малцинствата на Балканот (20 век), Скопје, 2004.

Киселиновски Стојан, историскиот детерминизам и македонскиот јазик (20 век), Скопје, 2009.

Kofos Evanghelos, Nationalism and communism in Macedonia, Thesaloniki, 1964.

Kolokotronis V., La Macedoine et L’hellenisme, Etude historique et ethnographique, Paris, 1919.

Kontohianos P.M., Turkia ke Turki, Atina, 1924.

Korizis S. Hariton, Makedonia qhi eliniki, Atina, 1950.

Cuşa Nikolae, Aromâni (macedonenii) in România, Constanta, 1996.

Кънчов Васил, Избрани произведения, София, том 2, 1970.

La Question Macedoine, Sofia, 1918.

La Mouche Leon-Colonel, La question des minorities, Paris, 1931.

La Mouche Leon, La Question Macedoine, Sofia, 1927.

Laveleye Emile, La peninsuke des Balkans, Paris, 1888.

Livieratu Dimitri, Pantelis Puliopulos, Atina, 1992.

Lonard Geordes, Les deux guerres et les atrocities balkaniques, Bruxelles, 1941.

Люоис Бърнард, Възникване на съвременна Турция, Пловдив, 2003.

Манчев Кръстьо, История на балканските народи (14-20 век), София, 2001.

Македония като природно и стопанско цяло, 1945.

Maravelaki M. Vakalopulu A. I Prosfigiki engatastasi en tin periohi Thesaloniki, Thesaloniki, 1955.

Mavrokordatu M.I. Hamudopulu A.X., I Makedonia meleti dimografiki ke ikonomiki, Thesaloniki, 1931.

Mbocari D. Noti, I Mikra Asia ke o elinismos, Atina, 1919.

Mbramu Kosta, Slavjano-makedonikes organosis en Macedonia, Thesaloniki, 1953.

Милетич Л. Гръцките жестокости въ Македония през гръцко-българската война, София, 1913.

Митрев А., Зографски Д., Абаџиев Ѓ., Керамитчиев М., Егејска Македонија во нашата национална историја, Скопје, 1951.

Montran Robert, Historie de la Tourquie, Paris, 1952.

Павловић Стефан, Историја Балкана, Београд, 2001.

Пејов Наум, Македонците и Граѓанската војна во Грција, Скопје, 1968.

Panutiadis A., Istoriki ke ethnologiki meleti ut Valkaniku zitimatos, Atina, 1947.

Ristelhueber Rene, Histoire des peuples balkaniques, Paris, 1950.

Руменов Владимир, Българите в Македония подъ гръцка властъ, Македонски преглед (МП), кн. 4, София, 1941.

Sarafis St., O Elas, 1958, s. 1.

Симовски Тодор, Балканските војни и нивните реперкусии врз етничката положба на Егејска македонија, ГИНИ, 1972, бр. 2, Скопје.

Симовски Тодор, Населените места во Егејска македонија, том. 1-2, Скопје, 1998.

Societe des Nations, L’etablissement des refugies en Grece, Geneve, 1926.

Svoronos Nikolas, Historie de la Grece moderne, Paris, 1968.

Ставови Кавка Ирена, Историја на Македонија, Скопје, 2002.

Statistiki epiteris tis Elados, Athina, 1958.

Трайков Н. Веселин, Населенитъ места въ Тракия и Македония, София, 1941.

Veritas, Македония подъ иго (1919-1929). Документи и свидителства, София, 1931.

Vilari Luigi, The Balkan question, London, 1905.

Weigand G., Ethnographie von Makedonien, Leipzig, 1924.

Wurbain A., L’echange greco-bulgare des minorities ethniques, Laussane, 1930.

3. Journals

Komunistiki epiteorisi, 1934.

Makedoniko imerologio, Thesaloniki, 1939. Peninsula Balkanica, Bucuresti, 1925.

4. Newspapers

Rizospatis (1927-1934) Балканска федерация (1924-1926). Македонско дело (1924-1926).

German historian explains how Greek history has been forged

http://mn.mk/istorija/15572-German-istoricar-objasnuva-kako-e-falsifikuvana-grckata-istorija

In his book “Falsifying Human History” a German historian [Uwe Topper] says that history is different from the one we studied in school and quite openly claims that all “Greek” authors are in fact Western Europeans who have falsified “sources” in the period between the 11th and 12th century.

According to Professor Dr. Anatoly Timofeevich Fomenko, a mathematician from the University of Moscow and a member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, ancient Greece was conceived by Renaissance writers and artists, and after that their fantasies were turned into “historical facts” upon which the entire Western European civilization was based. Even though he was not a historian, Greek President Prokopis Pavlopoulos, from Kalamata, everywhere and constantly argued that “the Greek character of Macedonia is incontestable and not negotiable”, that is, “the day that Saint Demetrius, the Holy Memorial of Solun (Salonica) is celebrated, is the anniversary of the famous Solun way, on the one hand, for the history of the nation and Orthodoxy, and second, for his role as a watchful guardian of the Greek character of our Macedonia, which is incontestable and for which there is no negotiation.”

Earlier, in Voden, the same “expert” confidently stated that “Macedonia was and will remain Greek,” and in Solun he added that his country would do everything in its power “to defend the Greek character of Macedonia.”

But the facts speak differently. Accordingly, Macedonia began from the time of Karan, about 800 BC, until, let’s say, the time of the so-called “Slavs”, a period during which Macedonia was not only “not Greek”, but in its form never entered Greece. Even after Macedonia was divided in 1913, that is after Greece occupied 51% of Macedonian territories, the Greeks refused to use the term “Macedonia” even as a geographical term. After the Republic of Macedonia became independent, especially during Kostas Karamanlis’s (the great patron of current President Pavlopoulos) term in office, the Greeks, with support from Western friends and politicians, vehemently began to turn to the ancient Macedonians, who they “claim” were Greek so that they could prove that Macedonia is also Greek.

“How can a Greek be a friend of the Greeks?”

It is interesting to note that their own documents attest to the fact that according to ancient poets and historians, the Macedonians and Greeks have always been two different people. For example, in 700 BC Hesiod wrote: “And she, Deucalion’s daughter, from Zeus, the lover of love, gave birth to two sons: Magnit and Macedon - a horseman, a warrior...”

Also according to Hesoid: “The second daughter of Deucalion gave birth to two sons: Graic and Latin...” Accordingly, even Hesiod saw the Macedonians, the Latins and the Greeks as different people with some similarities.

Not only the ancient poets but also the ancient historians, according to historical facts, have confirmed that Macedonian king Alexander I, for his Hellenic service before the Battle of Platea in 479 BC, received the nickname “Philhellene”, which means “friend of the Hellenes”. Friend of the Greeks!

One does not need to have a French diploma, like the one Pavlopoulos has, to ask the one and only logical question: “How can a Greek be a friend of the Greeks?”

It should also be emphasized and kept in mind that the ancient Greeks always identified the ancient Macedonians as barbarians. Thus, for example, historian Kito was specific when he wrote:

“When you speak of a Macedonian, you need to understand that he is a barbarian who does not speak and who does not think Greek.”

Let us not mention Demosthenes and what he had to say about the Macedonians…

But, according to historical facts, the highest joint Hellenic bodies were inaccessible to Macedonians precisely because they were viewed as a barbarous, non-Hellenic people. The term “barbarian” was not only used to offend the Macedonians but also to separate them as a different people. According to historical facts, no matter how many times and how long Athens and Sparta fought each other, for example, they never referred to one another as barbarians.

Similarly, there was not a single Macedonian at the Amphictonic Council at Delphi, the highest Hellenic body of that time. It was not until after Philip II defeated the Phrygians that he obtained two votes by force. And even though his two representatives sat at the Council they were referred to not as Hellenes but by their tribal affiliation and the cities from which they came.

Pompey Trog wrote:

“The Thebans and the Thessalians did not oppose Onomark as their leader or their fellow citizens, but they did oppose Philip the Macedonian king, and as such voluntarily surrendered the government to an old man…”

This opposition was not limited to political bodies but also to cultural institutions and events which were forbidden to Macedonians because they were viewed as non-Hellenes. It is well-known that Macedonians were denied access to the Hellenic Olympic Games. This is why the Macedonians had to organize their own Macedonian games. The one Macedonian who was allowed to participate was Alexander the Philhellene, but this was a politically calculated move. In this context, it is a fact that Alexander the Great had a number of Hellenes in his army during his eastern expedition but they were treated merely as mercenaries and not as Macedonian soldiers.

Europe has accepted the Greek propaganda because of its strong antagonism towards the Ottoman Empire!

According to history, after the Greeks migrated from Africa into Europe they first occupied parts of today’s southern Greek islands

and over time, began to impose their spoken language on the indigenous population. When they did that they encountered resistance from the indigenous people; there were clashes between the Hellenes and the Pelasgians, which were mentioned by Herodotus. Even though there was not a single state named “Greece” in the ancient world, today we use the term “ancient Greece”. This is completely wrong and very misleading!

In addition to that, it is well-known that the so-called ancient Greeks used the Phoenician alphabet and not some “Greek alphabet” as is being claimed. In this context, Western historiography is full of errors and forgeries. This means that all valuable antiquities claimed to be “Greek” are also put into question. If the idea of “ancient Greece” is a myth then how can there be “Greek antiquities”? Most of the material presented today as “ancient Greek” is in fact Macedonian, Thracian, Illyrian, Pelasgian and material that belonged to other ancient nations. Unfortunately the creation of modern Greece in the twenties and thirties of the 19th century, with the help from the Great Powers, and above all with help from Russia, “strong Greek propaganda was created and accepted by the European states because of their antagonism towards the Ottoman Empire.”

In other words those European countries which were looking forward to expelling the Ottoman Empire out of Europe were more than eager to accept Greek forgeries of Greece’s alleged “historical rights” of owning a large part of the Balkans. That is why all these Greek lies and counterfeit history were accepted by the Europeans, and have been prescribed by inertia to this day.

The fact is, according to historical data, the so-called modern Greeks did not even know that they were Greeks until 1830, and had no share in the project for creating awareness of the Greek identity. The fact is, the so-called Greeks were not at all signatories to the treaty signed in May 1832 between Britain, France, Russia, and Bavaria, which set out the conditions under which king Otto entered the Greek throne, and by which the territory of the Greek kingdom was placed under “a guarantee of protection by these powers.”

The first Greek king was Otto of Bavaria

The young Bavarian king arrived in Greece in February 1833 and landed in the Greek provisional capital called Naphplion where he was faced with numerous problems. In addition to the inevitable problem surrounding the construction of infrastructure for a brand new state, he had the urgent need to create a common awareness of the Greek identity, that is, to create “Greeks” from the local population.

That is why the Bavarian people and king Otto were faced not only with problems of constructing a state, but also with problems of building a nation. It was after that, in the last two decades of the 19th century and in the first decade of the 20th century, that Macedonia became the focus of Greek, Bulgarian and Serbian nationalism… that is of grabbing Macedonian territories.

According to the research on Greek politics in the Balkans, conducted by Professor Dr. Dalibor Jovanovski from the Department of History at the Skopje Faculty of Philosophy, the Great Powers, in 1830, had agreed to appoint Leopold Saksenkoburski king of Greece, but he soon abandoned the throne upon which he never sat. Two years later, in 1832, the Great Powers found a new solution to the “Greek king” problem, and with a new treaty enacted between England, France, Russia and Bavaria, signed on May 7, 1832, Friedrich Otto, the Bavarian king’s second son, became the crowned king of Greece.

According to the agreement, Otto, the new Greek king, wore the title “king of Greece” and not king of the Greeks. The same countries that appointed Otto then signed an agreement with the Ottoman authorities establishing the northern border of the Greek kingdom which extended along the Arta-Volos line. After that Greece functioned like an independent state.

Then, by decree enacted on August 4, 1833, the Greek autocephalous Orthodox Church was created and proclaimed. This was done without the approval of the Constantinople Patriarchate. Who and when the Greek Church was recognized is still an issue that deserves special analysis. In any case, the Synod of the newly

created schismatic church was subordinated to the German king Otto.

A special ministry of religion was also created by decree and reforms were made to the various monasteries. Behind the creation of the Greek autocephalous church stood the circles that were under English and French influence. Russia did not agree to an autonomous Greek Church, believing that it was not in harmony with its own interests, and for that reason it supported the Constantinople Patriarchate. There were also many Greeks in the kingdom that supported the Constantinople Patriarchate and wanted to maintain bonds with it. In late 1833 and early 1834, in parallel with “building a Greek consciousness” the royal Greek protectorate began to accredit its first diplomatic representatives. Out of the nineteen consuls and vice-consuls it asked for, the Istanbul Port gave permission for only seven. With this permission, Greece began to send out its first consuls. The first Greek consul arrived in Solun on December 6, 1834, and thus it officially began its first Greek diplomatic activities on Macedonian soil. The first Greek consul appointed by the Greek government to Macedonia was Valianos. He was headquartered in Solun.

And this is how the invention of history was conceived and intensified in the offices of Western historians in the service of the new so-called Western European civilization. Or, according to Uwe Topper, “true history has nothing to do with what Western historians wrote, especially not with their fictional ancient history, or any other history relating to Greece.”

Source: Today’s newspaper

The Greek identity and the Greek nation are an artificial German creation

http://www.mn.mk/aktuelno/15557-Grckiot-identitet-i-grckata-nacija-se-vestacki-proekt-na-Germanija

Just to be clear: We demand that our country’s name “Macedonia” and our “Macedonian” identity be recognized by the countries that created the Greek state and Greek identity and approved Macedonia’s division in 1913, and who now want to “induct” us into their alliance at our expense, as a nameless and stateless people. At the head of this anti-Macedonian alliance sits Germany, which aims to achieve its goal through the United Kingdom, and the United States of America. Barely two hundred years old, the United States of America has become one of the world’s warlords and is now an instrument capable of realizing its goals at the expense of others, including the Macedonians.

And of course there has been Russian participation in all this. But now, unlike in the past, Russia has it own positive ideas and, at least, is in favour of an independent Macedonia.

The text that follows is a description of events which, of course, without wider analysis, should be viewed from a different perspective. In 1830 Great Powers, France, Britain and Russia agreed to appoint Leopold Saksenkoburski king of Greece, but he soon abandoned his throne.

Two years later a new Treaty (the London Convention) was signed by France, Britain and Russia, as well as by Bavaria which granted Greece statehood on May 7, 1832. This agreement set out the conditions and manner by which young king Otto Friedrich Ludwig von Wittelsbach of Bavaria, the second son of the Bavarian King Ludwig I was going to rule the Greek kingdom.

A treaty of association and friendship between Bavaria and Greece was signed on November 1, 1832, in Munich, which regulated the stay of 3,500 Bavarian soldiers on Greek territory for three years. After the treaty was put into effect, Otto arrived in his new kingdom and, on February 6, 1933, took the throne in Naphplion, Peloponnese. After this the kingdom of Greece becomes a protectorate of the three most powerful states, France, Britain and Russia.

These countries also signed an Agreement with the Ottoman Empire, which established the northern border of the Greek kingdom, extending along the Arta-Volos line. After that Greece began to function like an independent state.

Frederick Otto wore the title “King of Greece” because the Great Powers would not allow it to be “King of the Greeks”. This was because there was no “Greek nation” or “Greek state” in existence before that and no such thing was mentioned in the Treaty, or by its signatories.

In 1833 king Otto was still a minor and until 1835 the Kingdom of Greece was governed by a Council of three “deputies” from Bavaria. They were Josef von Aramanshpert, Ludwig Maurer, and General Karl Wilhelm von Haidem.

This was when the “building of the Greek consciousness” began and when a “Greek nation” was being created for a first time out of the local population. Three political parties functioned in the Kingdom of Greece: the French party, the British party and the Russian party, of which only the French party was in favour of the “Megali Idea” (a Greater Greece).

In order for Greece to be a “legal state”, the Greek autocephalous Orthodox Church was created and proclaimed on August 4, 1833, with a decree enacted by the Bavarian “deputies”. The Patriarchate of Constantinople, however, did not agree with its establishment. Who recognized it and when the Greek Church was recognized remains an issue that needs to be further investigated and analyzed.

The Synod of the newly created Greek schismatic Orthodox Church was subordinated to the Bavarian King Otto, who was a Catholic. For this purpose, another decree was enacted and a separate Ministry of Faith was established, after which reforms were made to the monasteries. The English and French party stood behind the creation of the Greek autocephalous church. Russia did not to agree to the

Greek Church having autonomy because it was not within its interests. Russia was supported in this by the Constantinople Patriarchate, as well as by some prominent Greeks from the Greek kingdom who were also supporters of the Constantinople Patriarchate.

And as the “building of the Greek consciousness” continued in late 1833 and early 1834, the Royal Protectorate (Kingdom of Greece) was ready to have its first diplomatic representatives accredited in major European countries. But, even though no agreement was reached on trade co-operation between the Kingdom of Greece and the Ottoman Empire, the Kingdom of Greece managed to acquire 7 out of 19 consul and vice-consul places in the Ottoman Empire with Butanev’s help, an MP from the Russian party. As a result Valianos, the first Greek consul, arrived in Solun, Macedonia on December 6, 1834. This marked the beginning of official Greek diplomacy on the territory of Macedonia.

Greece’s capital was moved from Naphplion to Athens in June 1835. This was done to honour king Friedrich Otto’s birthday and reaching adulthood.

This was also the time when “Greek history” started to be “invented” in the offices of French, British, Russian and Bavarian historians and politicians, who were later joined by historians from the then Austro-Hungarian Empire.

And finally, an interesting discovery showing that historical monuments in Greece are fake. According to Russian engineer Alexei Kungurov, not only is Greek history fake but there are also Greek historical monuments that are not what they seem. By analysing and comparing the so-called ancient Greek monuments with those in St. Petersburg, Kungurov concluded that the Parthenon is a fake monument made much later in order to attract tourists. The Parthenon has no foundation at all!

Source: The blog “Republic of Macedonia”