This particular individual shows considerable bias against the Macedonians in his writings, and speaks with negative overtones, in support of certain propagandas while at the same time being remarkably contradicting. He is also speaks with a manner suggestive of a man with all the knowledge in the world, yet fails (or ignores) to highlight historical facts which are essential where it concerns the topics being discussed.
Here it speaks of the methods Bulgaria used in their aim to absorb Macedonia and the Macedonian people, attached with a comparison in relation to the Celtic peoples of Ireland and Scotland. At the beginning Upward seems to be (falsely) implying that Bulgaria "created" the Macedonian nationality as a means to eventually absorbing Macedonian territory. However, later he compares this to how Ireland would have to convince the people of Scotland that they are 'Irishmen', should not the correct comparison be that Ireland would first have to "create" the Scottish nationality? The Macedonian identity in the modern era was in existence well before the establishment of the Bulgarian state, and this is evidenced by contemporary Bulgarian writers such as Slaveykov and co.
As opposed to Upward's first hand "knowledge"? Heaven forbid. Upward is clearly one opposed to the idea of a Macedonian nationality as it goes against his own narrow way of understanding where it concerns issues in the Balkans. And despite his delusional opinions where it concerns the Macedonians, his own personal "first hand" experiences betray those very opinions, as on the occasion where he visited a Macedonian village:
Regardless of the contradicting Greek and Bulgarian propaganda, the biased western opinions, at the end of the day the native speaks for himself, and he clearly calls his language Macedonian. It is called Makedonski in his own language and Makedonike in the Greek language, which is a testament to local 'Greek' acknowledgement of the name of the language.
His thoughts on the Hellenes brings further confusion:
Violin time, I wonder, is Upward making reference to all the Romaic-oglou peasants in a fez when he refers to the children of light and pioneers of civilisation? Or to the Albanians of Athens? Or the Vlachs of Thessaly? Or to somebody from 3,000 years ago? But doesn't he contest the continuity of the Greek people? So again, who is a 'Greek' or a 'Hellene', anybody who wishes to be. It's like a free for all snatch for plastic glory in this charade of (Neo) "Hellenism"............
In order to justify the annexation of the entire territory between Bulgaria and the sea, therefore, it became necessary to create a fictitious country with a fictitious nationality. To return to the former illustration, we must imagine an independant Irish Republic desirous of adding the whole of Scotland to its dominion. It would be obliged, in the first place, to teach the Gaelic population that they were Irishmen, in order to enlist their support, and then to preach that Scotland was an invisible whole in order to establish a claim over the low lands..........
It was possibly with a view to some such result that Gladstone threw out the phrase "Macedonia for the Macedonians", a phrase which, be it said with all respect, could not have been used by any man of impartiality and intelligence who possesed a first hand knowledge of the country..............
I asked him what language they spoke, and my Greek interpreter carelessly rendered the answer Bulgare. The man himself had said Makedonski. I drew attention to this word and the witness explained that he did not consider the rural dialect used in Macedonia the same as Bulgarian, and refused to call it by that name. It was Macedonian, a word to which he gave the Slav form of Makedonski, but which I was to hear farther north in the Greek form of Makedonike..............
His thoughts on the Hellenes brings further confusion:
I use the word Hellene not as a racial, nor even as a national designation. I use it in the classical sense of the word Hellenist, or Hellenising. I do not believe in the existence in our days of a pure Greek population; perhaps there never was such a population.........A Hellene is he who wishes to be thought a Greek, as Philip wished, and Alexander wished, and half the inhabitants of their vanished kingdom wish to-day. For the Slave it is promotion to become Greek, as it is promotion for the Hindu to become a Briton. The Hellene is he who deserves to be reckoned a Hellene, for the true Hellene is the pioneer of civilisation and the child of Light.
Comment