"They call themselves Macedonians"

[makedonin]

How is the translation from German advancing?

Page 16 right after the translation from the Daskalot:

In Prilep: "On the bridge young man are playing; one is not embarrassed when questioned. "I am Serb, but those "he points to the others" are Macedonians" - "Where are you from?" - "From Nish". And in Resen: "Swarms of boys around the car. "Well, what are you? "He looks up shy and uncomprehending. "He is a Turck", yelled the Chor. "Aha? and you (to the Chore)?"-"Macedonians!", streight out, like out of the gun." Also Edmond Bouchie de Belle stated in 1920, that, if a slavic Peasant from the region of Ostrovo (in Greece) or Monastir (Bitola) was questioned what he is, in nine of ten cases the answear was Makedon. His conclusion was: "Un observateur de bonne foi classera donc a part cette population a laquelle le non de "Slaves Macedoniens" ou simplement de "Macedoniens" parait le mieux convenir". (Translation: An honest observer will classify this population as "Slav Macedonians" or simply "Macedonians" as best suited.)

R.A. Gallop, the third Secretary of the britisch embassy in Belgrade spent one week in April 1926 in Vardar-Macedonia and wrote: "those of the later [Macedo-Slavs] that I ment were equally insistent on calling themselfs neither Serbs nor Bulgarians, but Macedonians. [...] There seemed to be no love lost for Bulgars in most places. Their brutality during the war had lost them the affection even of those who before the Balkan War had been their friends." Oliver C. Harvey from the britisch foreighn office visited the greek and yugoslav part of Macedonia on April and Mai 1926 and concluded: "Tha slavophone population of Serb Macedonia definitely regard themself as distinct from the Serbs. If asked their nationality they say they are "Macedonians", and they speak the Macedonian dialect. Nor do they identifiy themself with the Bulgars, although the later seem undoubtedly to be regarded as nearer relatives than the Serbs". To the slavic population in the nord-west of Greece he concluded: "These are of course constitute the much advertised "Serb mnority" [...] But they are no more Serb than the Macedonians of Serbia-they speak Macedonian, and call themselfs Macedonians and sentimentally look to Bulgaria rather than to Serbia."

[Bratot]

How is the translation from German advancing?


Meanwhile, to feed you with more of it:

"Macedonia will be independent and the Macedonians will remain Macedonians.
If Europe thinks otherwise, will be wrong? If the Bulgarians consider on the Bulgarisation of Macedonia, these are illusions. What the Macedonians want is the autonomy for their country, with the intervention of Europe in their favor. No division, no annexation to another state; Macedonia is unique and to the Macedonians. Who can oppose the creation of an autonomous Macedonia? Greeks, for example. Greeks have large claims, it is clear, but after the war of 1897 that they cause, they verified their military incompetence. Macedonians should be recognized and they should be helped to create their own autonomous state in the Balkans, safe and civilized. These people are talented people who would do great deeds. "

Source: Routier Gaston, "La Macеdoine et la question macеdonienne", Paris, 1903


The ereyer Dimitar from Krivopalanechko on his ethnic origin in 1848, he wrote:
"I was born a Macedonian ... It was written by God to my country to suffer from the Greeks, so they do not give us peace even today, although everyone knows that Macedonia was an older state of their empire."


"... To be known, when the villagers from my village Radibush Krivorechka Palanka, appointed me for a teacher in our village school, and for Rankovce and Krivi Kamen, for 1,800 pennies a year. I was born from my father priest Dimitar and mother Vaskresija as 7th child of twelve children, five males and seven females. The Slavic letter I learnt from my father, Dimitar Macedonian, who is called like that because we are Macedonians, not Greeks, and his father was called Joseph priest, and his grandfather Stojmen priest. I took his nickname Macedonian as well, not because of my father and my grandfather, but to know that we are Slavs of Macedonia. "
- (Ден Голема Богородица на 1846. Ѓорѓи Македонски, 15, т.Први, 282)


"... There are still those that today's inhabitants of Macedonia do not consider neither for Serbs or Bulgarians, but a separate ethnicity, probably descendants of the ancient Macedonians. ... "
- Slishkovikj Jakov, "Albania and Macedonia", Sarajevo 1904, pp. 160

[makedonin]

My translation might not be 100% correct, if so please correct me.

The translation is correct. Daskale, you are German speaker as I see

Here is the part before the quote you have translated:

........, Serbs, Bulgarians and Greeks could historically evenly legitimize their claims. That is why they looked into another legitimization of their claims, which is more contemporary:
the Nationality of the population. At first, it were Bulgaria and Greece who started the Propaganda in Macedonia to persuade the Christians of Macedonia (and the public in Europe) that they are Bulgarians
or Greecs. Beside the Churchs, they started building Schools. Also guerrilla penetrated the theritorry of Macedonia, that with gun force were pushing their National agenda. Not much longer, and the serbs joined the game as third power. Until 1875 the Serb interest was focusing on Bosnia and Hercegovina and it's Serb population. After the occupation of the province through double-monarchy (1878)
and specially after the annexion (1908) they focused on Macedonia. The Serbia followed the pattern. They opened schools and sent guerrila.

1912 the rivals came together and with together with Montenegro they fought the Ottomans and drive them away from the Balkans. This war was followed by another war to divide the pray.
the war was put to an end witht he Bukarest treaty on 10 August 1913, where they agreed to divide Macedonia between them. The borders which were agreed upon at the time are almost the same of today.
After the division, they had full juristdiction over their parts and theritorry, so that they could proceed with the assimilation of Slavic population, making them into Greeks, Serbs and Bulgarians.
It happened that this assimilation did not went so good as they expected it to be. After decades of different indoctrinations specially at the peasant poplulation there was obvious confisuion
what they are in Nationa sense- if the even understood what that means, and if this aspect was still not confused with the Church affiliation.
Others have developed new conscience - a Macedonian conscience, which most probably had it's origin as answear to the neighbor propaganda: We are nothing from all that, what the others are claiming we are; we are the inhabitants of Macedonia, so we are Macedonians.
Early enought there were representatives similar to another national movments, who researched the Macedonian language and culture and it's tradition, who explicitly talked about "Macedonian Folk". The most explicite definition is found by gergi pulevsik (1838-1895), a mason and autodidact from galichnik in the mountanious west Macedonia, who got around far as work-emigrant. Pulevski actuated in the Phase A in typical national building manner as language researcher. He constituted a grammar of the Macedonian language and published in 1875 in Belgrad the "Dictionary of the three languages"(S.[lavic] Macedonian, Albanian [albanski] and Turkish).
In his mother tongue which he called "Macedonian" and sometimes "Slavo- Macedonian", he wrote:

"Folk(Nation) are people who belong to one race, who speak the same language, who live together and are friends, who cherish the same customs, who have the same music and festivity, this are called Folk(Nation), and the theritorry that this Folk(Nation) is living at is called Fatherland of this Folk(Nation). Therfore the Macedonians are also a Folk(Nation), and their theritorry is Macedonia".

This deffinition from Pulevski includes all the important Elements, that characterize one Nation, for example after the definition of Benedict Anderson. It is all about the presented limited (Descent-) comunity, with common language and culture, friendly relation between equals, and a theritorry. If the striving towards Statehood is part of Nationhood is controversial. Hroch argued that the newest theories about Nationalhood (Gellner, Hobsbawm, Brueilly) are connecting Nationalhood with political Statehood, while the empirical research is not confirming this.
The most of the movments of the 19 Century were striving towards Autonomy.

But the goal of this text is not to research the National building of the Macedonians. It tends to show that during the State building of Yugoslavia (1918) the self identification "Macedonians was already established within the Slavic population. There is abudance of evidence for that, specialy by foreighn observers.

Sorry for the bad english, but you will get the Idea.

The rest will follow.

[Bill77]

This thread is a gem. I would suggest we make it a sticky.
The argument by the New Greeks that there were no Macedonians, is a common lie and always has been which will never cease. I do not want this thread to get lost and should be easily available for every Macedonian to get there hands on and shove it down the gobs of to whom it may concern.

Another thing, we should create threads and make them stickies for every common question or lies Greeks come up with. Ive been wanting to do this for a while.

The idea is creating a compilation (which new ones down the track can be added) of all the information scattered around here at mto and putting them in categories under each particular common Greek lie. This is to much work for one person and we will need volunteers to search for posts related to a subject allocated to them. It is also important to keep them clean of any comments no related even if they are compliments for good job done or anything. These threads must be purely for references where any Macedonian can come in, borrow what they need hassle free. Again if they are sticky, they will always be on top in every category and easily accessible. The mods can even start its own categorie calling it something like 'ANSWERS TO GREEK COMMON QUESTIONS"

List of common questions/lies.

Alexander was Greek
Macedonia is Greek
There was no Macedonians
Who are the Modern Greeks
we are Bulgarians
etc etc.

I'll do my bit and pick a subject that i always come accross. Give me a couple of weeks and i will compile one as an example.

[Pelister]

"They call themselves Macedonians"

Daskalot, Makedonin, thanks for contributing to this thread. You've presented some amazing stuff.

I got excited when I read the following:

Here is a translation into English of the last part on page 15 and the top of page 16:

Quote:
The German Social Democrat Hermann Wendel, visited Macedonia in August and September of 1920, asking the people systematically what they were. ln Bitola, he noted: "The Slavs call themselves Makedonci as everywhere else standing between the Serbs and the Bulgarians, knowing this and knowing this only."

The New Greeks have been tryng to convince 'the rest of the world' that there were no Macedonians, which goes hand in hand with those other colonial themes such as the land was 'up for grabs' or a kind of political and ethnic terra nullius. Such a presupposition is of course false, but it also goes hand in hand with that other colonial 'idea' that Macednoia was simply inhabited by Bulgarians and Greeks, as well as a smal bunch of nameless 'Slavs' who were nothing but confused Bulgarians. One of the striking things about these colonial threads is that we never actually here from the Macedonians themselves, and once again, when we do - it is almost always distorted. Anything to 'hide' the Macednoians from view. More and more I have come to see the use of this colonial offensive as an attempt to undermine the effectiveness of Macedonian legal and political resistance, and stave of legal claims for historical title to territory, and even compensation. If the invading Greeks (and Bulgarians), who lets face it collaborate closely on this colonial enterprise can succeed in convincing 'others' that there were no distinctive Macedonians, or undermine the credibility of Macedonians as clearly a richly complex, distinct and native people - they potentially weaken the legitimacy of Macedonian demands, both legal demands and political demands. This thread is about challenging the lies of the occupiers of our land, and undermining 'their' narratives, which fly on the back of our extermination.

Why weren't the Macedonians ever accorded the protection of the law?

[Daskalot]

Here is a translation into English of the last part on page 15 and the top of page 16:

The German Social Democrat Hermann Wendel, visited Macedonia in August and September of 1920, asking the people systematically what they were. ln Bitola, he noted: "The Slavs call themselves Makedonci as everywhere else standing between the Serbs and the Bulgarians, knowing this and knowing this only."

Here is the part in German:

Der deutsche Sozialdemokrat Hermann Wendel, der Makedonien im August und September 1920 bereiste, fragte
die Menschen systematisch, was sie seien. ln Bitola stellte er fest:>>Die Slawen nennen sich wie überall Makedoncí, stehen zwischen Serben und Bulgaren, können so und können auch so.<<

My translation might not be 100% correct, if so please correct me.

[makedonin]

Lets translate it all.

That would take a time. Let me see what I can do.

[Daskalot]

Here is some more on the topic, albeit we need to tranlate the text from German into English.














Source: "Das jugoslawische Makedonien 1918-1941: eine Randregion zwischen Repression und Integration" by Nada Boškovska, Böhlau Verlag Wien, 2009, pages 14-20.


Here we have a multitude of references which are very important.

Lets translate it all.

[makedonin]

thank you makedonine!

Нема зашо Брате!

[Bratot]

Thank you Makedonine!

[makedonin]

I saw the last one from Bratot, and remembered this one from Sarafov:

THE MACEDONIAN AGITATION
The Times, London, April 12, 1901, pp. 3-4

THE MACEDONIAN AGITATION

(From our own correspondent.)
Vienna, April 11.

A correspondent of the news sheet Information has had an interview with M. Sarafof, the president of the Bulgarian Macedonian Committee, who was arrested a few days ago at Sofia. M. Sarafof made an instructive statement. He said that the whole movement had been misunderstood. It must be divided into two periods. During the first period it was under the leadership of men who were in close connection with the Bulgarian court itself and had been employed by several successive Ministries. The latter used the committee and the influence which it had in the country in order to fortify their own position, and to carry out the programmes of their parties. M. Sarafof continued thus: -
“In 1895 we young men were sent to Macedonia to prepare an insurrection, or, at all events, to try and start an outbreak of some kind, if only to show Europe that Prince Ferdinand constituted a powerful factor in the Balkan Peninsula and that his deposition would be a greater danger for the peace of the continent. It was only after these disturbances that the Powers, one after the other, recognized Prince Ferdinand as chief of the new Bulgarian dynasty. This first phase of the Macedonian movement, owing to the fact that it was subordinated to different party interests, acquired no hold on the bulk of the population in Macedonia. We young people have therefore been endeavouring for some years past to separate the Macedonian cause from Bulgarian domestic politics. If the rulers of the Principality now declare that they cannot tolerate us as a State within the State, it shows that we have at least succeeded in emancipating ourselves from the pernicious influence of the Bulgarian government. It is only because we are no longer disposed to sacrifice ourselves for this or that party, and regard the liberation of Macedonia as a question of honour for the entire people, that the Bulgarian Government is persecuting us….
“It is a grievous error to suppose that we seek to acquire Macedonia on behalf of Bulgaria. We Macedonians consider ourselves to be an entirely separate national element, and we are not in the least disposed to allow our country to be seized by Bulgaria, Servia, or Greece. We will, in fact, oppose any such incorporation with all our might. Macedonia must belong to the Macedonians. The misunderstanding has arisen through our residing in Bulgaria. The circumstance of our having prepared a Macedonian insurrection while living in this country led to the conclusion that we were aiming at a union between the two Slav provinces. That is, however, perfectly absurd. If we were to be expelled from Bulgaria and were to settle in Switzerland nobody would suppose that we intended to liberate Macedonia on behalf of Switzerland; we merely go where we find the most favourable opportunities for our revolutionary work….
But, wherever we may be, we wish to keep our movement distinct from the national aspirations of the independent Balkan States. We shall energetically resist any attempt on the part of those States to secure Macedonia for themselves. We have been reproached with wanting to disturb the peace of Europe. That leaves us indifferent. What do we infortunate Slavs care for the peace of Europe! Russia has frequently promised us that she will soon take our cause in hand. Only a short time ago a Russian statesman told me that we should be patient, as whenever Russia was no longer occupied in East Asia she would come forward in favour of the autonomy of Macedonia. My own conviction is, however, that Russian diplomacy will first begin to think of us when it decides to realize its own ideal of the conquest of Constantinople. Its object will than be not the emancipation of Macedonia, but its subjugation. Consequently, my friends and myself are resolved to separate entirely the movement we are prompting from Russia’s Balkan policy. Without in any way wishing to identify our efforts with the policy of Vienna, I am nevertheless of opinion that Austro-Hungarian aspirations are infinitely less dangerous for the autonomy of Macedonia than are those of Russia. The conquest of Macedonia by Austria-Hungary is impossible, owing to the composition of that Monarchy and to the resistance which such a plan would find on the part of all the Balkan peoples…..
“I must, at the same time, clearly state that we neither ask for, nor would accept, any official support of our movement from Austria-Hungary. We will have nothing to do either with official Bulgaria or with official Servia, nor yet with official Austria-Hungary. We are revolutionists, and count only upon one-half of the peoples of Europe. In order to put and end to the misunderstandings among the Slav States of the Balkans concerning the movement in which we are engaged, two of our friends will shortly go to Servia and then proceed further in order to deliver lectures. Macedonia must no longer be a source of dissension among the Balkan countries. Emancipation must form the basis upon which the federation of those countries can be founded.”

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pro Armenia, Paris, 25 avril 1901, p. 87

Nouvelles d’Orient

« […]
Boris Sarafov avait fait des déclarations fort importantes à un correspondant de l’Information de Vienne. Elles se résument en quelques points capitaux : 1º Le mouvement macédonien n’est pas un mouvement bulgare ; les Macédoniens constituent une nationalité particulière qui ne veut s’agréger à la Bulgarie, ni à la Serbie, ni à la Grèce ; 2º le malentendu provient de ce que l’action macédonienne avait pour centre Sofia. Expulsés de Bulgarie, les Macédoniens réfugiés en Suisse deviendraient-ils suspects de vouloir annexer leur pays à la République helvétique ; 3º la Russie ne viendrait en aide à la Macédoine que pour réaliser son plan de conquête de Constantinople ; elle ne l’émanciperait pas, mais la subjuguerait. Le mouvement macédonien doit donc être entièrement séparé de toute action russophile ; 4º il ne doit pas subir non plus d’influences austro-hongroises, bien que le danger de la conquête du pays soit de ce côté bien moins imminent que du côté russe ; 5º on reproche aux Macédoniens de mettre en péril la paix européenne : cela les laisse indifférents ; ils ne sont point les gardiens de cette paix précaire et l’Europe n’a qu’à faire exécuter les engagements pris par traité comme c’est son droit et son devoir.
Telles sont les déclarations de Boris Sarafov.
[…] »

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The french text translated using google translate:

Boris Sarafov had made extremely important statements with a correspondent of the Information of Vienna. They are summarized in some most important points: 1º the movement Macedonian is not a Bulgarian movement; the Macedonians constitute a particular nationality which wants to incorporate themselves in Bulgaria, neither in Serbia, nor in Greece; 2º the misunderstanding comes from what the action Macedonian had as a Sofia center. Expelled of Bulgaria, the Macedonians taken refuge in Switzerland would become suspect to want to annex their country with the Swiss Republic; 3º Russia would come to assistance of Macedonia only to carry out its plan of conquest of Constantinople; it does not émanciperait it, but would subjugate it. The movement Macedonian must thus be entirely separated from any Russophile action; 4º it should not be subject to Austro-Hungarians influences either, although the danger of the conquest of the country is on this side much less imminent than on the Russian side; 5º one reproaches the Macedonians for putting in danger European peace: that leaves them indifferent; they are not the guards of this precarious peace and Europe does not have that to make carry out the commitments entered into by treaty as it is its right and its duty. Such are the declarations of Boris Sarafov.

The original from The Times:

[Bratot]

"Makedonski Golos" proclamation of 8th June 1915:

"We Macedonians- not Serbs,not Bulgarians but simply Macedonians"

[Bratot]

NP Pelister, we all need to collaborate

In a letter adressed to the vrhovist MPO in year 1930:



So we have an example of a Macedonian - Krsto Trajkov absolutely aware of his national continuity, which thus supports the formation of a separate Macedonian Orthodox Church, with its own synod.

[Pelister]

There now exists a massive amount of misinformation that has been building up around the idea that there were no Macedonians, for nearly a century. The various Greek and Bulgarian representations of the Macedonians have influenced heavily Western interpretations about just who lives there, and who doesn't. False data, false representations, bits of misinformation have been published from book to book, as though they were valid, and usually without question. This has in turn led to the belief (in the West, particularly in academic institutions), that there were no Macedonians, or that if there was they did not know it, or had a weak sense of ethnic and national identity. But throughout all of this we never actually here from the Macedonians themselves. The fact was that "they called themsleves Macedonians" - they always had.

TM and Bratot thanks for producing some great sources in this thread.

[TrueMacedonian]

Bratot I think with this link here - http://www.macedoniantruth.org/forum...hread.php?t=67
we have tripled the content of this topic because I of Macedon has gathered much of the info for us. But we can still keep going if you're still game.