Front Matter - Part 04

disappointed with the Bulgarian shift in loyalty, made it clear that Bulgaria could no longer expect any help from Russia. In what was later termed the “Second Balkan War”, the Bulgarian army, unprovoked, preferring the element of surprise, attacked its former allies on June 30th, 1913. The bloody fight was short lived as Romania, Montenegro and Turkey joined Greece and Serbia in dealing Bulgaria a catastrophic blow. The promised Austrian support didn’t materialize as the risks for Austrian involvement outweighed any benefits. Turkey was able to re-gain some of what was lost to Bulgaria but the greatest beneficiary of all was Greece which received the biggest piece of the Macedonian pie. The Second Balkan War ended on August 10th, 1913, the darkest day in the history of the Macedonian people, with the conclusion of the Peace Treaty of Bucharest. With Macedonia dismantled Serbia gained territories from the summit of Patarika, on the old frontier, and followed the watershed between the Vardar and the Struma Rivers to the Greek-Bulgarian boundary, except that the upper valley of the Strumnitza remained in the possession of Bulgaria. The territory thus obtained embraced central Macedonia, including Ohrid, Bitola, Kossovo, Istib, and Kotchana, and the eastern half of the sanjak of Novi-Bazar. By this arrangement Serbia increased its territory from 18,650 to 33,891 square miles and its population by more than 1,500,000. Greece’s gains started from the boundary line separating Greece from Bulgaria from the crest of Mount Belashitcha to the mouth of the Mesta River, on the Aegean Sea. This important territorial concession, which Bulgaria resolutely contested, in compliance with the instructions embraced in the notes which Russia and Austria-Hungary presented to the conference, increased the area of Greece from 25,014 to 41,933 square miles and her population from 2,660,000 to 4,363,000. The territory thus annexed included Epirus, southern Macedonia, Solun, Kavala, and the Aegean littoral as far east as the Mesta River, and restricted the Aegean seaboard of Bulgaria to an inconsiderable extent of 70 miles, extending from the Mesta to the Maritza, and giving access to the Aegean at the inferior port of Dedeagatch. Greece also extended its northwestern frontier to include the great fortress of Janina. In addition, Crete was definitely assigned to Greece and was formally taken over on December 14, 1913. Bulgaria's share of the spoils, although greatly reduced, was not entirely negligible. Bulgaria’s net gains in territory, which embraced a portion of Macedonia, including the town of Strumnitza, western Thrace, and 70 miles of the Aegean littoral, were about 9,663 square miles and her population was increased by 129,490.

Minority Agreements

Under the 1913 Treaty of Bucharest, Greece, Serbia and Bulgaria not only partitioned Macedonian territories but they also divided the Macedonian people. Never since Roman times have Macedonians been divided by artificially imposed borders and never in the history of Macedonia has the Macedonian identity been so forcefully and brutally attacked. At the turn of the 20th century Macedonia was still under Ottoman control and the Macedonian people had little to no contact with the outside world. At the time there were no NGO’s or governing bodies that represented the Macedonian voice. Outside contact with the Macedonian people was thus relegated to outside agencies like the foreign Embassies and the Greek, Bulgarian and Serbian Churches. Anyone wanting to visit Macedonia, be it a journalist or diplomat, first had to obtain permission from the Ottoman authorities. Then government or Church appointed guides, who only supported Ottoman, Greek, Bulgarian, or Serbian interests, would guide them. The only legitimate Macedonian authority, which represented the interests of the Macedonian people, the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization (IMRO), was viewed as illegitimate, radical and in some cases as a terrorist organization. When the outside world looked for demographical statistics to find out what ethnicities lived in Macedonia they went to the Greek, Serbian, or Bulgarian Churches. The Ottoman authorities kept statistics by religion “Muslim” and “Others”. The foreign Churches on the other hand, who refused to acknowledge the Macedonian identity on account that there was no Macedonian Church to legitimize and represent it, took their own statistics based on their own criteria. Anyone who attended or was affiliated with the Greek Church was thus counted as being Greek. Similarly, anyone attending or being affiliated with the Bulgarian Church was counted as Bulgarian and so on. By the turn of the 20th century foreigners, including the foreign media, came to depend on the Greek, Bulgarian and Serbian agencies for information on Macedonia. Thus the ethnic Macedonians having no representation of their own were now represented by Greeks, Bulgarians and Serbians, the very same people who had designs on annexing their Macedonia. Worse, which would become a problem for Greece, Bulgaria and Serbia later, was that the various Macedonian people identified as Greeks, Bulgarians and Serbians by these foreign agencies were prevalent and overlapping throughout the whole of Macedonia. In other words there was no region in Macedonia that was exclusively affiliated with one Church or another. Even most of the small villages were of mixed affiliations so there were no clear cut dividing lines to distinguish one identity from the others.

It is also well known that when Macedonia was invaded by Greece, Serbia and Bulgaria in 1912, there were no plans on how it was going to be divided. In fact this indecision was the cause that sparked the second Balkan War in 1913 which again ended without a mutually accepted plan on the division of Macedonia. Thus Macedonia’s division and annexation by Greece, Bulgaria and Serbia was arbitrary and without design and was going to be settled by military means, in other words by war. So when the dust settled there were winners and losers and none of the contestants were satisfied with what they received. Worst off were the Macedonian people whose home was now not only occupied by foreigners but also partitioned by three different, warring states which were determined to turn the Macedonian people into Greeks, Bulgarians and Serbians by any means possible even by extreme violence if necessary. The bitterness of the Second Balkan War and the dissatisfaction of not meeting expectations with regards to Macedonian territories turned Bulgaria against Greece and Serbia making the Macedonian population its political pawns. Hoping to gain more territory from Greece and Serbia and in retribution for Greece’s and Serbia’s part in the Second Balkan War, Bulgaria joined the Central Powers during World War I and fought against the Allies ending in its defeat with the signing of the Neully Treaty on November 27, 1919. It was again a bitter defeat for Bulgaria with more suffering in Macedonia. After the Treaty of Neully, some 46,000 Macedonians were kicked out of Bulgarian occupied Macedonia for their past affiliations with the Greek Church and 92,000 Macedonians were deported from Greek occupied Macedonia for their past affiliation with the Bulgarian Church. The deportations continued through the early 1920s until the spring of 1924 when Greece and Bulgaria signed the Politis-Kalfov Protocol on March 24, 1924 which was to provide minority rights for the so called “Greek minority” in Bulgaria and the so called “Bulgarian minority” in Greece. The protocol obliged Greece to secure fair treatment for all members of this minority according to the terms of the August 10th 1920 Treaty of Sèvres between Greece and its major allies in World War one. Unfortunately Greece never implemented the Protocol. Here are some details from a Greek source that somewhat explains what transpired: Colonel A. C. Corfe and Major Marcel de Roover, members of the Mixed Commission for Greek-Bulgarian Emigration established in 1919, were assigned to observe the protocol's implementation paying particular attention to minority's specific needs especially in matters of education and religion. Subsequently they would submit reports to the Greek government making their recommendations.

After the protocol was signed, Greece and the League of Nations engaged in negotiations regarding the details of its implementation. The Greeks offered a proposal which focused on three points: (1) Bulgarian minority schools with more than forty students would be sponsored by the Greek state. If there were fewer than forty students, then it would be the community's task to support its school financially. It would be compulsory for teaching personnel to obtain Greek citizenship. (2) Exarchate priests would be obliged to obtain Greek citizenship and no bishops would be appointed to the Bulgarian minority, because, according to the rules of the Orthodox Church, the coexistence of two religious authorities of the same dogma within the same bishopric is forbidden. (3) A Minority Bureau reporting to the Greek Foreign Ministry would be established in Solun which would collect and evaluate all petitions concerning minority rights. It would also investigate cases and submit its report to the minister in charge, who was expected to settle each issue. In the Greek government’s view the establishment of such a service was the best way not only to handle all minority matters but also to assist the League of Nations, which at that time was overwhelmed by numerous petitions and letters of grievance concerning the so called “Bulgarian minority of Greece”. According to the Greek Government the so called “Slavophones” of Greek Macedonia lacked a sound national orientation and there were several with pro-Bulgarian leanings, but the presence of the Commission members and the collection of petitions might encourage the so called “non-Bulgarian Slavophones” to join the minority group owing to its apparently preferential treatment. Such a development would then accelerate the flow of Bulgarian money into Macedonia for the establishment of additional Bulgarian schools. In any case, Greece was not prepared to give the impression that the so called “Greek Slavophones” were neglected by the state while the so called “Bulgarian minority” enjoyed favorable treatment. Greece obviously expected that these measures, especially the establishment of the Minority Bureau, would suffice to treat the minority question in the best possible way and in conformity with the minority treaties. On the other hand, it is clear that Greek officials were confused about the national preferences of Greece's Slavic-speaking inhabitants. Politis, for example, considered all Slavophones to be Bulgarians while his superior, the foreign minister, stated that only a few Slavophones aligned themselves with Bulgaria. On November 28, 1924, the secretary general of the League of Nations sent a letter to the minority section director, to inform him of this and rejecting the Greek proposal to channel all minority complaints to the League of Nations exclusively through the Solun Minority Bureau, arguing that this was against Article 2 and Article 3 of the protocol, signed only two months earlier, which in fact had provided for a League of Nations' service and not for a service by a branch office of the Greek Foreign Ministry. The secretary general closed his letter with a number of his own suggestions: (1) The Greek government would have to establish a Minority Bureau in Solun. (2) Attached to this office would be a separate service which would have to be provided for Corfe and de Roover, to which all minority petitions, complaints, etc. would be addressed. (3) All these documents would then be forwarded, together with Greek remarks, to the Mixed Commission. (4) After that Greek officials could send these documents to the Minority Section of the League of Nations, which was expected to investigate the cases and take appropriate measures. (5) The Minority Section would have to report to Corfe and de Roover who, in turn, were expected to inform the League of Nations. On December 4 Marcel de Roover dispatched a confidential report to Eric Colban to inform him of a conversation he had had with the Greek foreign minister with whom, among other things, he discussed the language to be used in the minority schools.

He maintained that the medium of instruction should be neither literary Bulgarian nor Serbian but a Macedonian dialect. A few days later, during the meeting of the Council of the League of Nations in Rome, negotiations took place between Greece and the League on the implementation of articles in the Politis-Kalfov Protocol concerning the so called “Bulgarian minority”. Eric Colban recorded the negotiation procedure in detail in his lengthy, confidential report under the title “Record of Various Conversations in Rome concerning the Execution of the Minorities Protocol of September 29, 1924 between the Greek Government and the League of Nations.” On December 14, Corfe and de Roover started talks with Colban concerning the problems the Greek government was experiencing with the Geneva protocol. It was already clear that the Greek parliament was not going to ratify the protocol. On the question of the minority schools Colban noted that, according to the Minority Treaty of Sèvres, the language of the minority was meant to be its mother tongue which the so called “Bulgarians of Greece” spoke being slightly different from all the other Slavic languages. Since no newspaper or book had ever been written in these dialects therefore, a new literary language had to be standardized, based on these local dialects. Colban observed, however, that since such linguistic construction was against the terms of the minority treaty, Bulgaria would protest and would press for the use of literary Bulgarian instead. Although Bulgaria was not directly involved in the minority treaties that Greece had signed, Colban felt that its views should not be neglected even though its claims were not legitimate. De Roover also supported the view that the local dialect should be used since this option was expected to help the Greek government deal with any counterarguments during the forthcoming parliamentary debates. But Corfe reacted, feeling that such an option was too risky because “the creation of a Macedonian language might encourage the Macedonian movement not only in Greece but also in Bulgaria and Serbia.” Nevertheless, he concluded that strict implementation of the minority treaties was absolutely necessary, which meant that use of the local dialects was inevitable. On December 15, 1924, Greek representatives informed the League of Nations representatives that the Greek government would be glad to sanction local dialects as the minority school language. However, since those dialects lacked literary form, Greece would prepare a primer and other textbooks. With regards to risks associated with: (1) The provocation of a Macedonian movement following the creation of a distinct Macedonian language and (2) Bulgaria's consequent reaction; the Greek representative replied that Greece fully appreciated those risks. On February 2, 1925 the Greek parliament voted against the protocol which prompted the Council of the League of Nations to insist that Greece was not going to ignore its obligations toward the minorities as defined by the Treaty of Sèvres and submitted three questions to the Greek government regarding the Slavic speakers in Greece: (1) What measures had Greece taken since September 29, 1924 to implement the minority treaty it had signed on that day? (2) What measures would Greece be taking if it could not comply with the terms of the treaty? (3) What were the Greek views regarding the educational and religious needs of the Slavophones and what measures did the Greek government intend to take to meet those needs? On May 29, 1925 Greek representatives informed the League of Nations secretary general that no measures could be taken before the completion of the Greek-Bulgarian voluntary emigration that had been decided in Neuilly in 1919, which was still in progress. They also affirmed that Greece intended to respect the terms of the Treaty of Sèvres. Regarding the third question, they stressed that Greece was open to any suggestions concerning the education of the “Slavic-speaking” linguistic minority.

In late 1925, following a legislative decree, a department was established in Greek occupied Macedonia for the administration and supervision of elementary non-Greek education. The new department was manned by three members of the educational council appointed by the minister of education, in addition to the director of the Second Political Department of the Foreign Ministry and three unpaid citizens, all living in Macedonia, suggested by the foreign minister and appointed by the minister of education. A counselor of education proficient in one of the local dialects was appointed head of the new department for a three-year period. It was also decided that only teachers who knew the local dialects would be appointed to teach the non-Greek classes. The establishment of the Department of Non-Greek Education was just a beginning. Following the decision to employ the local Slavic dialect in the minority schools, the Greek government entrusted to a three-member committee of specialists the preparation of a primer that became known as the “Abecedar.” The three members were Georgios Sagiaxis—who had been involved since the early years of the century in folklore and linguistic studies concerning Vlach-speakers and Slavic-speakers and had studied ethnography and linguistics abroad on a Foreign Ministry scholarship— and two philologists, Iosif Lazarou and a certain Papazachariou, both native Vlach-speakers who also knew the local Slavic dialect. The product of their combined efforts was a primer in the local Slavic dialect but written in Latin characters. This choice caused an immediate, furious reaction by Bulgaria, since the use of the dialect instead of standard Bulgarian undermined Sofia's traditional argument that Slavic speaking clearly indicated Bulgarian ethnicity. Mikov, the Bulgarian representative in the League of Nations, expressed his government's discontent regarding the Greek initiative. At the same time, Ivan Sismanov, a university professor in Sofia, published an article in a local newspaper stressing that these measures would reduce the population of Macedonia to a “semibarbarous” Moreover, the use of the Latin alphabet was condemned as constituting a “rude insult” for Macedonia's “suffering Bulgarian population” Macedonian pro-Bulgarian refugee organizations also protested, demanding the immediate introduction of the Cyrillic alphabet. At this point a reassessment of the Greek views was necessary. The League of Nations had made it clear that complying with the treaties was not optional. Both Serbians and Bulgarians vehemently protest to the League of Nations, claiming the primer in its current form undermined their claim that Macedonians are Serbs and Bulgarians respectively to which Greece countered with a last minute cable to the League stating that "the population...knows neither the Serbian nor the Bulgarian language and speaks nothing but a Slav-Macedonian idiom." This was indeed a rare Greek admission to the existence of Macedonians not only on Greek soil but also on Bulgarian and Serbian soil, encompassing the entire geographical Macedonia.

Soon afterwards Greece "retreated" the Abecedar so as to preserve its Balkan alliances and the Primer was destroyed soon after the League of Nations delegates left Solun. Since then Greece has denied of the existence of Macedonians and refers to Macedonians as "Slavophone Greeks", "Old Bulgarians" and many other appellations but not as Macedonians. The very fact that official Greece did not, either de jure or do facto, see the Macedonians as a Bulgarian minority, but rather as a separate Slav group ('Slav speaking minority'), is of particular significance. The primer, published in the Latin alphabet, was based on the Lerin - Bilola dialect. After Gianelli's Dictionary, dating from the 16th Century, and the Daniloviot Cetirijazicnik written in the 19th century, yet another book was written in the Macedonian vernacular. The primer with instructions in the Macedonian mother tongue, was mailed to some regions in Western Greek occupied Macedonia (Kostur, Lerin and Voden) and the school authorities were prepared to give it to Macedonian children from the first to the fourth grades in elementary school. Unfortunately this did not materialize. Subsequent Greek governments, even though their state was a signatory to the Minority Treaty of Sèvres, have never made a sincere attempt to solve the question of the Macedonians and their ethnic rights in Greece. Thus while measures were being undertaken for the opening of Macedonian schools, a clash between the Greek and Bulgarian armies at Petrich was concocted, which was then followed by a massacre of the innocent Macedonian population in the village of Trlis near Serres. All this was aimed at creating an attitude of insecurity within the Macedonians so that they themselves would give up the recognition of their minority rights and eventually seek safety by moving to Bulgaria. The Greek governments also skillfully used the Yugoslav-Bulgarian disagreements with organized pressure on the Macedonian population, as was the case in the village of Trlis, tried to dismiss the Macedonian ethnic question from the agenda through forced resettlement of the Macedonian population outside of Greece. The ABECEDAR, which actually never reached the Macedonian children, is in itself a powerful testimony not only of the existence of the large Macedonian ethnic minority in Greece, but also of the fact that Greece was under an obligation before the League of Nations to undertake certain measures in order to grant the Macedonian minority their rights Even though much time has elapsed since then, Greece still owes the Macedonian people living on Macedonian soil the rights it promised then in 1920. I believe that time has come for Greece to recognize the Macedonian minority and fulfill its obligation to the Macedonian people as promised by the various Treaties and Conventions it has signed. From a Majority to a Minority

Despite all the minority agreements and promises of fair treatment for their newly subjugated Macedonian people, the Greek, Bulgarian and Serbian Governments not only maintained the status quo but began to accelerate the process of expulsion, denationalization and forced assimilation in Macedonia. Following World War I, Greece and Bulgaria, according to the November 27, 1919 Minority Treaty convention, exchanged populations. Greece expelled some 53,000 (Wilkinson, 1951:262) “Slav speakers” to Bulgaria in exchange of 30,000 so called “Greeks” from Bulgaria. Then with the breakout of the Turkish-Greek war in 1921 as a result of Venizelo’s “Megali Idea” a policy to create a “Greater Greece” and bring together all "Greek peoples" under a single Greater Greek State, the Macedonians in Greece again became victims of yet another war. First it was Macedonian men sent to fight and die in Turkey for the glory of “Greater Greece” and later Macedonian lands were given away as Macedonia became a dumping ground for the Turkish refugees. Greece launched a major offensive against Turkey in March 1921 and by the end of the summer the Greek armies reached the Sakarya River, about forty miles west of Ankara. The assault on Asia Minor was an "exclusively Greek initiative" without the blessing of the Entente Powers and as a result the Greeks found themselves alone and running out of ammunition. They knew they couldn't count on Italy or France for help but the realization of their predicament sunk in when Britain also refused to help them. By early autumn the Greeks were pushed back beyond the halfway point between Smyrna and Ankara, reaching an uneasy military stalemate. Realizing that they couldn't possibly win militarily or politically, the Greeks turned to the Paris Conference of March 1922 looking for a compromise. The compromise called for the withdrawal of the Greek armies and placing the Christian population under the protection of the League of Nations. Sensing a victory, Mustafa Kemal of Turkey insisted on an unconditional evacuation of the Greek forces, a demand unacceptable to the Greeks. Still counting on British help, in July 1922 the Greeks unsuccessfully attempted to get permission from their allies to enter Tsari Grad (Istanbul). Turkey launched a full-scale offensive on August 26, 1922 (a dark day for Greece and its Megali Idea) near Afyonkarahisar and forced the Greeks into a hasty retreat back to Smyrna. On September 8th the Greek army was evacuated and the next day the Turkish army invaded Smyrna. The worst came on the evening of the 9th when outbreaks of killing and looting began, followed by a massacre of the Christian population in which 30,000 Christians, perished. As a result

of the violence 250,000 people fled to the waterfront to escape the catastrophic disaster. The Asia Minor campaign was over along with the "Megali Idea" of a Greater Greece. Worse yet, as a result of this catastrophic Greek fiasco, over one million Turkish Christians were displaced; most of them were moved to Macedonia. Their settlement affected the demography of the Macedonian landscape as well as the morale of the Macedonian population. An entire generation of young Macedonian men, who were drafted into the Greek military, were sent to the Asia Minor campaigns and many lost their lives. The Greek authorities never acknowledged their service and no compensations were ever paid to the families of those "breadwinners" who lost their lives. The reason for the omission, according to Greek authorities, those who fought for Greece from Macedonia "were not Greeks but Bulgarians". How convenient! This is how Greece treated and is still treating its noble citizens of Macedonian descent! I just want to mention here that many Greeks blame this catastrophe on the Turks and believe the Turks were at fault. How can Turks be at fault when it was Greece that unlawfully and without provocation attacked and invaded Turkey? By the Treaty of Lausanne in July 1923, the Greco-Turkish war came to an end and Greece and Turkey signed a population exchange agreement. It is important to understand that the selection criteria for the population exchanges were based strictly on religion. In other words, Greece agreed to accept a Christian population regardless of ethnicity or language. Similarly Greece agreed to expel a Muslim population regardless of what ethnicity it belonged to and what language it spoke. As a result, Greece exiled many Macedonians from Greek occupied Macedonia simply because they were of the Muslim faith. The November 1925 issue of National Geographic Magazine best illustrates the magnitude of the human wave, the audacity of the Greek and Turkish authorities and the total disregard for human life. "History's Greatest Trek, Tragedy Stalks the Near East as Greece and Turkey Exchange Two Million of their People. ...1922 began what may fairly be called history's greatest, most spectacular trek-the compulsory intermigration of two million Christians and Muslims across the Aegean Sea." "…the initial episodes of the exchange drama were enacted to the accompaniment of the boom of cannon and the rattle of machine gun and with the settings pointed by the flames of the Smyrna holocaust." (Page 533, Melville Chater, National Geographic, November 1925) "Stroke of the Pen Exiles 3,000,000 People. It is safe to say that history does not contain a more extraordinary document. Never before in the world's long pageant of folk-wanderings have 2,000,000 people-and certainly no less than 3,000,000 if the retroactive clause is possible of complete application-been exiled and re-adopted by the stroke of the pen" (Page 569, National Geographic, November 1925). "Even if regarded as a voluntary trek instead of a compulsory exchange, the movement would be without parallel in the history of emigration." "One might just add that history has never produced a document more difficult of execution. It was to lessen these difficulties that exchangeability was based in religion and not race. Due to five centuries of Turkish domination in Greece, the complexities in determining an individual's racial status are often such as would make a census taker weep." (Page 570, National Geographic, November 1925) "Greece with one-fifth Turkey's area has 1,5000,000 more people. Turkey with a population of 5,000,000 and naturally rich territory contains only 15 people to the square mile...Greece, with less than one fifth of Turkey's area, emerges with a population exceeding the latter's for the fist time by 1,500,000 people averaging 123 to the square mile." (Page 584, National Geographic, November 1925) "History's Greatest Trek has cost 300,000 lives. Conservative estimates place it at 300,000 lives lost by disease and exposure."

(Page 584, National Geographic, November 1925) "The actual exchange was weighted very heavily in Turkey's favour, for some 380,000 Muslims were exchanged for something like 1,100,000 Christians." "The total population in Greece rose between 1907 and 1928 from 2,600,000 to 6,200,000." "After the Greek advances of 1912, for instance, the Greek elements in Greek Macedonia had constituted 43 percent of the population. By 1926, with the resettlement of the refugees, the Greek element has risen to 89 percent." (Page 121, Richard Clogg, A Short History of Modern Greece). Please note that Clogg uses the words “Greek element” and not “ethnic Greeks” (if there is such a thing?) when referring to the population in Greek occupied Macedonia. What exactly did he mean by “Greek element”? The “Greek element”, as he calls it is not Greek at all. It consists of Vlachs, Albanians and some Macedonians mainly those affiliated with the Greek Church. There were no “ethnic Greeks” living in Macedonia prior to its colonization by the Turkish refugees. Many people of Turkish speaking Eastern Orthodox stock were exchanged with Sunnite Muslims of Greece. The Turkish speaking Karamanlides were sent to Greece, while Greek speaking Cretan Muslims were deported to Turkey. The Karamanlides lived in Karaman or Cappadocia and may have been Orthodox Christian by religion but they spoke and wrote Turkish and considered themselves to be Turks. When the time came for them to leave for Greece, they were reluctant and while living in Greece were regarded as “foreigners".

In 1924, 31 of the 81 orthodox cities and villages in Cappadocia spoke so called “broken Greek” which Greeks from Greece proper could not understand and the other 50 spoke Turkish only. Also, Christians living in the larger cities like Caesaria, Nigdi, Neapolis, Prokopi, etc spoke Turkish only. Christians living in the eastern provinces of Asia Minor like Pamphylia, Isavria, Cappadocia, Kilikea and Lycaonia from whom the Karamanlides originated and were not Islamized, also spoke Turkish only. In my estimation it is doubtful that the actual population of “Greeks” present in Greek occupied Macedonia prior to the arrival of the Turkish settlers was 43% as Clogg and others claim. A more accurate estimate would be 3%, representing the new Greek settlers mainly business opportunists already there, the Greek administration, police and military types that arrived and settled in Macedonia between 1912 and 1922. Further proof of the low existence of so called “Greeks” in Macedonia can be found in the 1911 edition of Encyclopedia Britannica under the heading “The Outline of the Macedonian Problem”. According to Encyclopedia Britannica, the total population living in Macedonia was 2.2 million consisting of 1.3 million Christians, 800 thousand Mohammedans and 75 thousand Jews. Among the races [ethnicities probably determined by language] living in Macedonia included are 1.15 million Slavs, 500 thousand Turks, 120 thousand Albanians, 90 thousand Vlachs, 75 thousand Jews, 35 thousand Gypsies and 25 thousand Greeks. If we go by these stats, the so called “Greek speaking” population living in Macedonia in 1911 amounted to no more than 1.1% of the total population. Hardly the 43% presented by Clogg. What Clogg is referring to by this 43% is most probably the Macedonian Christian population affiliated with the Greek Church which by no means was “ethnic Greek” or Greek speaking. I also do not agree with the idea that the entire refugee population that was settled in Macedonia from Turkey was “ethnic Greek” or “Greek speaking” as Greek authorities would like to portray it. In any case, assuming that the total population of settlers from Turkey (89%-43%) was 46% and that from Greece was 3% then by 1932 there were 49% newcomers and 51% indigenous people living in Greek occupied Macedonia. I call the settlers “newcomers” because there is no proof that they were in any way “Greek”. Yes, the Turkish refugees were Christians but that does not mean that they were actually “ethnic Greeks”. "If Greece exists today as a homogeneous ethnos, she owes this to [the Asia Minor Catastrophe]. If the hundreds of thousands of refugees had not come to Greece, Greek Macedonia would not exist today. The refugees created the national homogeneity of our country. (Antonios Kandiotis, Metrpolite of Florina, Page 141, Anastasia Karakasidou, Fields of Wheat, Hills of Blood)

Surprisingly (and shamefully) after knowing all this, Greece still claims its population to be homogeneous and directly descendent from the ancient peoples of the ancient City States and of the ancient Macedonians. According to Karakasidou, almost half of the refugees from Turkey were settled in urban centers and rural areas in Macedonia. "Searching for locations in which to settle this mass of humanity, the Greek government looked north to the newly incorporated land in Macedonia..." "...by 1930, 90 percent of the 578,844 refugees settled in rural Greece were concentrated in the regions of Macedonia and western Thrace. Thus Macedonia, Greece's newly acquired second 'breadbasket' (after Thessaly), became the depository for East Thracian, Pontic, and Asia Minor refugees." (Page 145, Anastasia Karakasidou, Fields of Wheat, Hills of Blood) If we take into consideration that most of the population imported from Turkey into Macedonia was ethnically “unknown” or non-Greek and the fact that very few so called “Greeks” from Greece proper settled in Macedonia we can conclude that Greek occupied Macedonia was settled by a number of non-Greek ethnicities. It is not ridiculous to assume that Greek occupied Macedonia after the settlements consisted of 51% indigenous people, predominantly Macedonians and 49% of newcomer settlers mostly of non-Greek (Turkish, Armenian, Albanian, Vlach, Patriarchic Macedonian, etc) origins. In other words the demographic composition of Greek occupied Macedonia after the arrival of the Asia Minor refugees still consisted of a Macedonian majority and a slew of unidentified other minorities. A census done by the Greek government in 1928 reported that there were 81,984 “Slavophones” in Greece. Interestingly, the number of Macedonians drastically fell between 1903 and 1928, supporting the idea that Macedonia was being Hellenized. Bearing in mind the stats presented in the 1911 edition of Encyclopedia Britannica, 1.15 million Slav speakers lived in Macedonia. Since Greece occupied 51% of Macedonia in 1912, 1913 we can safely assume that 51% or more of the total Slav speaking population which lived in Macedonia ended up under Greek control. 51% amounts to approximately 600,000 people. Thus, according to 1928 Greek stats, in less than 30 years approximately half a million Macedonians became Hellenized and made into “pure Greeks”. I am using the term “Macedonians” instead of “Slavophones”, even though Greece did not recognize them as such and considered them to be Bulgarian speakers, which explains why Professor R. A. Reis, who was commissioned by the Greek government to ethnologically study the new territories, felt compelled to insist that “those you call Bulgarophones, I will simply call them Macedonians” (Reiss, 1915:3). The numbers really get confusing when we add the Bulgarian and Serbian views. According to the Bulgarian Rumenov, in 1928 there were a total of 206,435 "Bulgarians" living in Greek occupied Macedonia. The Serb Bora Milojevich pegs the numbers at 250,000 "Slavs". Belgrade's "Politika" in its 6164 issue published 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 is endangered, but also because they have no church or school in their own language, which they had during Turkish rule." So the “real” number of Macedonians living in Greek occupied Macedonia in the late 1920’s is unknown and to this day remains disputed in Balkan documents. Unfortunately, Greek governments will not allow anyone, including neutral observers to conduct statistical studies. If we follow the “Greek example” we will note that according to Greek Stats, Greece is populated by 98% “pure Greeks” and 2% “Muslim Greeks”. In other words Greece, to this day, has no creditable population statistics that are based on ethnic composition.

Without a clear definition of what a “pure Greek” is one cannot accurately interpret what that means. However, looking at the numbers one can speculate that Greece may still be using religious affiliation to define its demographics. The numbers 98% Orthodox Christians and 2% Muslims most accurately represent Greece’s demographics. Unfortunately, religious affiliation hardly speaks of the various ethnicities that make up that population. So, what exactly is the Modern Greek nation made up of outside of Orthodox Christians and Muslims? Who are the “ethnic groups” living in Greece today? To answer this question we need to go back to the time before Greece became a State and examine the ethnic composition of the populations living on those lands that now make up Greece. Before Greece became a State for the first time in 1829, its ethnic composition consisted of a Majority of Albanians, Turks, Vlachs and Slav speakers. If there were any so called “Greeks” they were a small minority. As Greece acquired Epirus and Thessaly, more Albanians, Vlachs, Slav speakers and Turks were added to its Population. In 1912, 1913 as Greece acquired 51% of Macedonian territories, it added a large portion of Macedonians (or Slav Speakers as Greece like to call them), Vlachs, Albanians, Turks, Roma and Jews to its total population. Since then Greece expelled a number of Macedonians to Bulgaria because they were affiliated with the Exarchate Church, and imported some so called “Greeks” from Bulgaria. Through the 1920’s Greece expelled a sizable Muslim population and added a large number of Christian Turks from Asia Minor and other regions of Turkey as indicated earlier. Thus, ethnically speaking at the end of the 1920’s even after all the population exchanges, Greece remained predominantly the same; made up of Slav Speakers, Turks, Albanians, Vlachs, Roma and Jews. There is no doubt that the Slav speakers in Greece are Macedonian and will declare themselves as Macedonians should Greece allow them to do so under the right conditions. If we examine the situation in the Republic of Macedonia in the 1920’s and today we will see that in the 1920’s there were no Macedonians registered to live in that territory. There was a large Majority of “Slav Speakers” referred to as “Serbians” by the Serbian Sate and smaller minorities of Albanians, Vlachs, Roma, Jews, etc. The situation however in the 1990’s became different. The so called Serbians were not Serbians at all but Macedonians. The only Serbians registered as Serbians in the Republic of Macedonia in 1990 were the Serbian settlers who came with the army and administration in 1912, 1913 when Macedonia was invaded, occupied and partitioned by Greece, Serbia and Bulgaria. All the so called “Slav speakers” of the late 1920’s declared themselves as Macedonians in the 1990’s. So, if we examine today’s demographic statistics of the Republic of Macedonia we will find a large Majority of Macedonians living there with well represented minorities of Albanians, Vlachs, Roma, Serbians, etc., or minorities of the same ethnicities and somewhat same proportions that lived on the same soil in the late 1920’s. Now if we apply the same conditions to the Greek occupied territories and adjust for the population exchanges of the 1920’s we can deduce that the population living in Greek occupied Macedonia is predominantly ethnic Macedonians, Turks, Vlachs, Albanians, Roma, etc. Proportionally, when stacked against the entire population living in Greek occupied Macedonia the Macedonian population may be a minority (30% to 49%) but given the number of other ethnic minorities such as the Asia Minor Turks, Albanians, Vlachs and Roma and their numbers, the Macedonian population may be close to being the majority. In other words, the Macedonians in Greek occupied Macedonia may outnumber all of the other individual ethnic groups. As I said, the only way to prove or disprove this is by Greece recognizing the various ethnicities living on its soil and by creating the right climate for them to self-declare.

Denationalizing the Macedonians in Greece