Risto Stefov - Articles, Translations & Collaborations

[George S.]

Most Modern Greeks believe that Macedonians do not exist
Risto StefovOctober 08, 2008
What happens when a Modern Greek who believes Macedonians donīt exist, runs into a Macedonian?

Most Greeks, or at least the ones I have run into, are direct and to the point when they face off with a Macedonian. I have to admit I look Mediterranean and when I run into another Mediterranean looking person I am often asked where I am from. The favoured way for a Greek to ask is "Are you Greek?" to which I respond "No I am not!" The next question would then be "What are you?" to which I would respond "Macedonian". Then without any hesitation the Greek will respond with "What is that? There is no such thing!" Now if I persist and say "Yes there is" I will get a string of insults such as "You are a Slav" or "You are Bulgarian" or "You are a Skopjan". This, as unbelievable as it may sound, happens today not inside Greece but outside, in Canada, the USA and Australia. No Macedonians inside Greece have the courage to call themselves Macedonian without believing their lives would be in danger. I came from Greece and am speaking from experience.

Fair enough! If Greeks think Macedonians donīt exist I accept that but letīs look at the facts about Greece and the Greeks in comparison to the Macedonians and Macedonia.

Modern Greece became a country in 1829. There is no historical record prior to that of the existence of such a state. I welcome anyone to show me a map created before 1800 AD that shows a state called Greece encompassing its current borders.

I would also like to know how many people spoke Greek prior to the 1800īs in the region where Greece is today. It is well known that Greece created the 19th century Greeks by Hellenizing and assimilating a variety of other ethnic groups such as Vlahs, Albanians, Turks, Macedonians, Anatolian Turks and more recently Georgians, Russians, more Albanians and others.

Now letīs look at the Macedonians. The Macedonians are a real ethnic group of people that have existed in Macedonia for at least a millennium.

Unlike most of your Modern Greek great grandparents who spoke anything but Greek, our great grandparents all spoke Macedonian.

Our language which we call Macedonian is a living vibrant language, a language we learned from our mothers, unlike your language the ancient dead Koine which your government resurrected and taught you in school. May I also add that in spite of Greek efforts to stop us from speaking Macedonian for almost a century, we still speak it.

Before the Republic of Macedonia codified the modern Macedonian literary language, Macedonians all over geographical Macedonia spoke a variety of beautiful dialects. Macedonians living in Greece and Bulgaria, which those states refuse to recognize, still speak Macedonian in their original dialects.

Unlike the Greek language which is spoken by only about ten million Greeks, Macedonian is a Slavic language which belongs to a large family of languages spoken by about five-hundred million people throughout Eastern Europe. The fact that this language is so widespread shows that it has survived for many millennia and has been passed on orally from generation to generation.

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

Since no Macedonian or foreign archeologist has even been allowed to dig in Greek occupied Macedonia or examine any archeological findings unsupervised, we canīt verify what other language Alexander the Great spoke. Greek archeologists cannot be trusted to factually report findings, especially those findings that donīt agree with the Greek Governmentīs "politically correct policies".



If Greeks refuse to acknowledge the existence of "living and breathing Macedonians" what makes you think they would acknowledge the existence of artifacts that do not agree with their political ideology?

Arenīt they the same Greeks who destroyed every speck of Cyrillic (Macedonian) inscription from every single gravestone and church icon in Greek occupied Macedonia in order to erase everything that was Macedonian?

Are they not the same Greeks who torched and burned every single Slavonic book and bible and banned the Macedonian language and made it illegal to speak?

The question that begs to be asked is NOT whether Macedonians exist or not but, "Why do Greeks deny the existence of Macedonians?"

I have often asked Greeks that question and to this day I have not been able to get an honest answer. I believe those Greeks who deny our existence genuinely donīt know themselves why they do it. They have been told from a very young age to believe that somehow Macedonians are a threat to their own existence.

I have often heard expressions like, "they will do anything to take our Macedonia away from us" but to this day, I donīt know who "they" are. Sometimes "they" are the "Bulgars", other times "they" are the "Communists", nowadays "they" are the "Skopjans" and sometimes "they" are "the bad people" like me.

I have repeatedly stated that I was born in Greece and am a Greek citizen of Macedonian ethnic descent; yet to this day no Greek has acknowledged that. They keep ignoring what I say and go back to calling me "Skopjan" and treating me as if I was born not in Greece but in a totally different country. (I am using myself as an example but my situation is identical to the tens of thousands of Macedonians who were born in Greece after 1912, after Macedonia was occupied by Greece.)

Why is it so hard for Greeks to accept the fact that Macedonians live in Greece?

It is a well-known fact that Greece occupied about half of Macedoniaīs territory in 1912-1913. The other half was occupied by Serbia and Bulgaria.

It is a well-known fact that Macedonia was already fully populated by Macedonians when it was occupied.

It is also a well-known fact that most Macedonians became Greeks by force.

Is it not possible then that some of those Macedonians who were forced into becoming Greeks actually donīt want to be Greeks?

Well my Greek friends, there IS such a thing as a Macedonian. In fact there are many of us living throughout the entire planet. Our history goes back to about 1,000 BC when the word Macedonian was first coined. I canīt say with certainty that we are direct descendants of those early Macedonians but I can say that there is a high probability that we are not only the descendants of those pre-historic Macedonians but also the descendents of all those who overran and conquered our Macedonia.

Before the nineteenth century, most Macedonians lived in geographical Macedonia. Nineteenth and twentieth century turbulence such as the breakup of the Ottoman Empire, a number of uprisings inside Macedonia, the two Balkan wars, the partition of Macedonia, WW I, WW II, the Greek Civil War and Greek, Bulgarian, Serbian and Albanian oppression, have all contributed to the displacement of many Macedonians. Many left their homeland and went wherever they were welcome. More recently displaced Macedonians as well as political refugees and willing immigrants have been concentrating in Canada, Australia, the USA and Europe where they endeavour to preserve their culture and make their revival.

Greeks can deny our Macedonian existence as much as they want, but it doesnīt mean that we Macedonians donīt exist!

[George S.]

A vast majority of Modern Greeks today believe they are Hellenes
Risto StefovOctober 22, 2008
According to the Columbia Encyclopedia, Hellenism is "the culture, ideals, and pattern of life of ancient Greece in classical times. It usually means primarily the culture of ATHENS and the related cities in the Age of Pericles [495-429 BC]. The term is also applied to the ideals of later writers and thinkers who draw their inspiration from ancient Greece. Frequently it is contrasted with Hebraism – Hellenism then meaning pagan joy, freedom, and love of life as contrasted with the austere morality and monotheism of the Old Testament. The Hellenic period came to an end with the conquest of Alexander the Great in the 4th century BC. It was succeeded by the Hellenistic civilization." Page 930, Columbia Encyclopedia, Third Edition 1963, New York and London.

If you ask a Modern Greek today to identify his or her "ethnicity" they will say they are "Greek". If you ask them what is that in "Greek"? They will say "Ellinas" or "Ellinida". There is no word for "Greek" in the Greek vocabulary. If there is (Graekos) it is rarely used and unknown to most Greeks.

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

If I am to understand this correctly "a Hellene is a person who shares the culture, ideals, and pattern of life of ancient Greece in classical times" and "who is a native of either ancient or modern Greece". In other words, again if I understand this correctly, any person of any ethnicity who is native of either ancient or modern Greece and who shares the culture, ideals and pattern of life of ancient Greece in classical times qualifies to be a Hellene.

Can a person be a Hellene and something else at the same time? According to Modern Greek standards, NO! One cannot be a Hellene and a Turk at the same time; according to some Greeks, why would they want to? "A Hellene is a superior being!" Also, according to some Greeks, "To be a Hellene one must be a descendant of the ancient Hellenes".

Obviously there are people today who call themselves "Hellenes" or more accurately, "Ellines". My question here is "Who are these people and how did they become the Hellenes?"

Modern Greeks today consider themselves to be the inheritors of the ancient Greek and Byzantine civilizations and cultures. Historically, the self-perception of the Greeks and the definition of Greek-ness have varied, but with the emergence and consolidation of the nation-state, from the late 18th century, Greek-ness was redefined along the lines of what some people call romantic nationalism.

Romantic nationalism is the form of nationalism in which the state derives its political legitimacy as an organic consequence of the unity of those it governs. This includes, depending on the particular manner of practice, the language, race, culture, religion and customs of the "nation" in its primal sense of those who were "born" within its culture. This form of nationalism arose in reaction to dynastic or imperial hegemony, which assessed the legitimacy of the state from the "top down", emanating from a monarch or other authority, which justified its existence. Such downward-radiating power might ultimately derive from God.

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



So what exactly is this principle and what are the criteria for belonging to it? Or, what is this club called "Hellas" and how does one sign up to join it?

Is it ethnicity? Obviously not! Modern Greece is made up of Slav Speakers, Albanians, Vlachs, Turks, Christian Turks, Roma, etc.

Is it the Christian Orthodox Religion? Obviously not, even though most conservative Greeks like it to be! The so-called ancient Hellenes were Pagan.

So what exactly is a "Hellene" then in modern terms?

A Modern Hellene is a person who has rejected his or her real ethnicity, forsaken his or her real culture for the sake of belonging to a "CLUB".

A Modern Hellene or Modern Greek, since Hellene and Greek are synonymous, has abandoned reality and the truth for the sake of living an IDEA.

When Greece was coming together as a country for the first time in the early 1800īs, ethnically it could not hold itself together because of the various ethnicities living together and pulling in different directions. Every Greek should know that the majority of their national heroes of the "Greek uprising" against the Turks were not Greeks. They were Albanians (Arvanites), Vlachs and Slav Speakers (mostly Macedonians).

Even though there were many roads Greece could have taken during its national awakening it chose the road to "Hellenism". Unfortunately, appealing as it might have been to the Greek State it was destructive and devastating to the indigenous people of the region who are reeling from it to this day.

Greece wiped out half a dozen natural cultures and vibrant languages for the sake of resurrecting something that had died two thousand five hundred years ago so that it could re-live the old glory days and satisfy the imperial ambitions of the Great Powers of the day.

The truth is "there are no Hellenes living today", and as per the Columbia Encyclopedia definition, they died, came to an end with the conquest of Alexander the Great in the 4th century BC.

You Greeks can all pretend to be "Hellenes" but the only ones youīre fooling are yourselves, which is fine by me. Unfortunately when you claim that the Macedonians, a real, vibrant living people donīt exist, I take offense to that.

When you adamantly insist that Macedonia belongs to Greece, a group of people who fabricated their own identity, and not to the real Macedonians, I take offence to that.

When Macedonians are murdered, sent to prison, exiled from their homes and lands, forbidden to speak their mother tongue, not being recognized as people in their native lands, for the sake of propagating a Greek myth, I take offence to that.

When Macedonian names and toponyms are erased, Macedonian Bibles and tombstones eradicated, and peoplesī identities stripped from them for the sake of creating "Hellenes" an identity that died many eons ago, I take offense to that too.

So please take a good look at your creation and tell me that "Hellenism" is not another modern Greek invention!

[George S.]

Modern Greeks today claim the Macedonian language doesnīt exist
Risto StefovOctober 24, 2008
"If you peel away all that Greece has taken from others, you will find an empty carcass of a people shocked to find that they have been living a lie-a lie that they invented and a lie that will ultimately destroy them." Steve S.

There are some western academics and authors today who believe that the suppression of the Macedonians in Greek occupied Macedonia has arisen out of Greek efforts at nation-building. After Macedoniaīs occupation and partition in 1912, 1913, a great effort was made to turn its inhabitants into the citizens of the Greek nation-state. In order to make sure its citizens were loyal to the Greek state, politicians and intellectuals rewrote history, creating a myth that ALL Greek residents were "ethnic Greeks". "Ethnicity" was purposely confused with "nationality" which led directly to the denial of the existence of the Macedonians. Denying the existence of the ethnic Macedonians quickly led to the denial of everything that was Macedonian and for those who insisted otherwise, denigration and human rights abuses followed.

After denying the ethnic existence of an entire nation, it was not difficult for Greece to deny the existence of the Macedonian language. Unfortunately for Greece, it was not as easy to hide a language as it was to hide an entire ethnicity. Ever since Macedoniaīs occupation and partition in 1912, 1913, Macedonians living inside Greece or should I say inside Greek occupied Macedonia, continued to speak their language even at the risk of being persecuted. After numerous efforts, on the Greek part, to ban this language and make it illegal, Macedonians continued to speak it. Having to explain themselves why there are so-called "Greeks" speaking a non-Greek language inside Greece, Greek authorities resorted to calling the language "Slav", "Bulgarian", "Serbian" and even an "idiom" but never Macedonian. This idiom, according to some Greek explanations, was some sort of lost Slavic dialect probably a remnant of the "Bulgarian schools" from the Exarchate days when Macedonia was still under Ottoman rule.

"...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". Allen Upward, The East End of Europe. London, 1908, pp. 204-205.

The Greeks may have been able to fool their own people and outsiders with no interest in Greek or Macedonian affairs, but they could not fool those people who actually had interest in learning the truth and those who spoke Macedonian and whose mother tongue has been Macedonian for dozens of generations. In fact some believe that Macedonians spoke Macedonian and lived on Macedonian lands before the so-called "Ancient Greeks" were civilized. One thing is certain, Macedonians spoke Macedonian before the Bulgars descended from the Volga.

"The Greeks will not admit the Slav language in Churches or schools; the inhabitants of Macedonia are in the great majority Slavs; they call themselves now Macedonians, and what they desire and what we ardently desire for them is an autonomy under European control. -In whatever way Macedonia might be divided, the people would always be discontented, and would fight again as soon as possible. The only hope I can foresee is in a strong autonomy, which neither Greeks nor Bulgars nor Serbs would dare attack; then the Macedonians, who are really intelligent and docile when they are well treated, would peacefully develop this beautiful fertile country, and might learn to be civilized. -Surely Europe will not leave Macedonia under people whom the Macedonians hate, and whom they will continually fight. As the little Balkan states can never agree, but always fight for Macedonia, let none of them have it. -We might then have peace, the Catholics would again have heart, and all the years of hard work among them would not have been wasted." Catholic Sister of Charity, Augustine Bewicke, January 4th 1919. Letter to Ian Malcolm, a British diplomat. Sister Augustine lived in Macedonia for 33 years.

The Macedonian language is at least three thousand years old and fifteen-hundred years ago formed the basis of what we now call Church Slavonic, the language of Kiril and Metodi from Solun and the language of all Slavonic Churches. There are also people who believe that the Slavic family of languages began in Macedonia and was spread throughout Eastern Europe by Macedonians.



Here is what Christian Voss has to say. "The case of the Slavic-speaking minority, which until today is officially denied in its very existence, in a comparative perspective is very strange, especially in view of their large number. The Slavic dialects in Aegean Macedonia - a territory of about 35,000 square kilometers - have approximately 200,000 potential speakers. Since only one third of them makes active use of the vernacular, which since 30-40 years is not the primary code any more, the term "Slavic-speaker" presents a more or less ethnic category which is supported on the sociological level (cf. Voss 2003: 116-117).

The demographic development in the region is determined by several waves of ethnic cleansing in form of population exchange between Greece and Bulgaria (Neuilly 1919) and Greece and Turkey (Lausanne 1923) as well as in form of expulsion (during the Balkan Wars 1912-1913 and at the end of the Greek Civil War 1948-1949). As a result, the indigenous Slavic-speaking population, which until 1912 constituted the majority in Aegean Macedonia (with 30-40%), became minorised – except the western part, i.e. the prefecture of Florina, where they are still the majority and where many villages had no settlement of Asia Minor and Pontos refugees (Voss 2003a: 62-64).

My survey of 270 villages in Northern Greece, where until today Slavic dialects are spoken, results from fieldwork conducted in the area between 1999 and 2003 (Voss 2003d): 112 of them are in Western Macedonia (i.e. the prefectures Kastoria, Florina, and the northern part of Kozani), 121 of them belong to Central Macedonia (i.e. the prefectures Pella, Kilkis, Thessaloniki and the northern part of Imathia), 38 of them in Eastern Macedonia (i.e. the prefectures Serres and Drama)."

So, without going into details, it is not a case where a Macedonian language never existed or a case where a Macedonian language did exist and became extinct and is no longer in use. It is a case where a Macedonian language existed, exists and is spoken by Macedonians today.

So, the big question here is why is Greece insisting that there is no such thing as a Macedonian language? And why do Greeks insist that the Macedonians in Greek occupied Macedonia are "Slavic Speaking Greeks"?

Yes the Macedonian language is a "Slavic language" but so is Russian, Ukrainian, Polish, Serbian, Croatian, Bulgarian, Czech, Slovak, etc. The Greeks have no problem with the Russians calling their language Russian or with the Poles calling theirs Polish. So why do they have a problem with Macedonians calling their language Macedonian?

The Macedonian people living in Macedonia spoke a dialect of the Slavic branch of languages since the days of Kiril and Metodi. If I am not mistaken, by the turn of the 20th century there were at least fifty Macedonian dialects spoken in the territories of Macedonia. The Macedonian language, especially the dialects spoken in Greek occupied Macedonia, is an old and widely used language which took its time to develop and mature into the many dialects of this day. It is an oral and a mother language to all Macedonians and has been for as far back as the collective memory of Macedonians can recall.

Also there are more than four-hundred million people in Europe who speak variants of this language so how can Greece say it doesnīt exist?

Unlike "Greek" which is an imposed language, Macedonian is a natural language that has been orally passed on from generation to generation and has survived and flourished in the hearts and minds of the Macedonian people. I would say it is a precious language facing extinction that must be protected and preserved under all circumstances. Unfortunately Greece is totally ignorant of what a precious jewel it has and instead of cherishing it, it is bent on destroying it, choking the life out of it.

The Macedonian language exists not only in Macedonia but also in Canada, the USA, Australia and the world over. Only the Greek state and some Greeks deny its existence and that makes them conspirators in another Greek fabrication.

And now I leave you with this:

"Being shocked and increasingly concerned, I struck the village mayor when I heard him speak Bulgarian, which he wishes to call Macedonian, and I recommended that in the future he should always and everywhere speak only Greek, and that he should recommend that his villagers do the same." Greek Infantry Lieutenant Dim. Kamburas, Armensko, January 25, 1925.

[George S.]

Modern Greeks today believe in a 4,000 year existence of a so called "Greek Civilization"
Risto StefovOctober 28, 2008
4,000 year "Greek Civilization"? Very impressive! But, what is a "Greek Civilization"?

According to Oxford a civilization is "an advanced stage of social development" and civilized is "being brought out of barbarism, being made into a fully organized State, enlightened and refined". According to Webster a civilization is "a social organization of high order, marked by the development and use of a written language and by advances in the arts and science, government etc., the total culture of a particular people, nation, period, etc." and civilized is "to bring or come out of primitive or savage conditions and into a state of civilization, to improve in habits or manners."

So "4,000 years of Greek Civilization" must mean "an advanced stage of Greek social development marked by the development and use of a written language and by advances in the arts and sciences, government, etc., the total Greek culture and Greek nation spanning for 4,000 years".

4,000 years of "Greek" civilization? Indeed!

I have been accused (by Greeks of course) of "fabricating information", "not including sources", "telling lies", "speculating", "providing no conclusions", "not making footnotes", etc., etc. In this article I will provide direct quotes from Western authors just to prove to the skeptical reader that I am not the only one challenging Modern Greek claims about Greece and the Greeks.

"Although the Greek-speakers of Constantinople may have been beneficiaries of a rich cultural tradition associated with the Byzantine Empire, a position retained also through the church during Ottoman times, years before the concept of a Greek state (which was a product of Great power politics and a concerted effort to de-stabilize the Ottomans) ever existed, īthe Greeks did not know who they wereī". (P. 26, "The Balkans, Nationalism, War and the Great Powers", by Misha Glenny) (1)

"The ethnic mix of the Greek-speakers of the Ottoman empire (Greek was often learned as a second language by wealthier non-Greek people) was as diverse as any in the Ottoman Empire, possibly more. īThe islands and the seafarers from the coastal regions were distinguished by their peculiar ethnicity, many were of mixed Albanian-Greek originī. (P. 23 "The Balkans, Nationalism, War and the Great Powers" by Misha Glenny) (1)

"The Koundouriotes, for example, the most powerful maritime family on the island of Hydra, who led a substantial faction during the war (of independence), were of Albanian originī. (P. 25 "The Balkans, Nationalism, War and the Great Powers" by Misha Glenny) (1)

"Although modern day Greek nationalists like to boast about how they never forgot their rich heritage and cultural icons, this next piece contradicts their theories. The 'Klephts' were the Greek equivalent of the Komiti or Hajduci, the warriors who championed the notion of a free nation. īThe 18th century Greek scholar, Koumas, tells of a visit to one of the most influential Klephts, Nikotsaras (possibly of part Slavic descent, Niko-'tsar'-as). In order to show respect, Koumas addressed the Klepht leader as Achilles. Nikotsaras retorted angrily: 'What rubbish are you talking about? Who is this Achilles? Handy with a musket was he?ī." (P. 31 "The Balkans, Nationalism, War and the Great Powers" by Misha Glenny) (1)

"The philhellenes of America, Britain and Western Europe had called for a free Greek state in a romantic passionate attempt to bring to life the Hellenic culture of the past. Little did any of them know of what extreme changes had taken place in the region of what was once the Greek City States. īNaturally, many travelers and philhellenes were shocked at the Greeksī lack of sophistication, and the ABSENCE OF A PHYSICAL RESEMBLANCE TO THE HELLENES of their classical imagination. All came expecting to find the Peloponnesus filled with Plutarchīs men, and all returned thinking the inhabitants of Newgate more moralī." (P. 33 "The Balkans, Nationalism, War and the Great Powers" by Misha Glenny) (1)

"It was not only the resemblance, or lack of it but also the fact that īpolitically speaking the Greeks were Asiatics, and all their oriental ideas, whether social or political, required to be corrected or eradicated, before they could be expected to form a civilized people upon civilized European principalsī. (P. 32 "The Balkans, Nationalism, War and the Great Powers" by Misha Glenny)

So much for the cradle of European civilization". (1)

"As it is clearly obvious the Greek nation had many divisions and diversities within that had to be addressed before they could start telling the world that they are the descendents of the ancient Hellenes. Unfortunate though it may be, the modern-day Greek has more in common genetically with the Albanians, the Latin speaking Vlachs and the Turks than with īPlutarch's menī". (1)

"The inherent instability of the Balkan Peninsula—located as it is at the crossroads of invading Turks, migrating Slavs, and colonizing powers from western or central Europe (Venetians, Austro-Hungarians)—has bequeathed a bewildering amount of cultural confusion to Greece." (Britannica)

"One of the most vexing questions concerning the history of medieval Greece has been that of the extent to which the indigenous "Hellenic" population survived and brings with it the question whether this term can properly be used of anything other than a cultural (as opposed to ethnic or racial) identity. The archaeological data, certainly, can offer answers only in terms of cultural similarities and differences, so that the question, as it has been traditionally expressed, of a Hellenic ethnic survival, cannot be answered. The issue must be explored in the context of the influx of large numbers of Slavs during the later 6th–8th centuries as well as the migration across Greece of nomadic or semi-nomadic pastoral groups such as the Vlachs from the 10th or 11th century and the Albanians from the 13th century. Although the evidence of place-names suggests some lasting Slavic influence in parts of Greece, the evidence is qualified by the fact that the process of re-Hellenization that occurred from the later 8th century seems to have eradicated many traces of Slavic presence. Evidence of tribal names found in both the Peloponnesus and northern Greece suggests that there were probably extensive Slavic-speaking populations in many districts; and from the 10th century to the 15th century Slavic occupants of various parts of the Peloponnesus appear in the sources as brigands or as fiercely independent warriors. Whereas the Slavs of the south appear to have adopted Greek, those of Macedonia and Thessaly retained their original dialects, becoming only partially Hellenophone in certain districts." (Britannica) (1)

"For Christians of the early and middle Byzantine worlds, the terms Hellene and Hellenic generally (although not exclusively, since in certain literary contexts a classicizing style permitted a somewhat different usage) had a pejorative connotation, signifying pagan and non-Christian rather than īGreekī" (Britannica)

"Canning (a British politician, 1812-1862) had planned to head off Russia's advance, not by direct opposition, but by associating her with England and France in a policy of emancipation, aimed at erecting national States out of the component parts of the Turkish Empire. Such States could be relied upon to withstand Russian encroachment on their independence, if once they were set free from the Turk.. The creation of the Kingdom of Greece was the immediate outcome of Canningīs policy". (P. 372, Trevelyan, British History in the 19th Century). (1)

"To me, philhellenism is a love affair with a dream which envisions 'Greece' and the 'Greeks' not as an actual place or as real people but as symbols of some imagined perfection". (P. 12, Greece without Columns) (1)

"Further back still beyond the War of Independence, when the modern nation-state of Greece came into being for the first time, the whole concept of Greece as a geographical entity that begins to blur before our eyes, so many and various were its shapes and meanings. But if geography can offer us no stable idea of Greece, what can? Not race, certainly; for whatever the Greeks may once have been, ...., they can hardly have had much blood-relationship with the Greeks of the peninsula of today, Serbs and Bulgars, Romans, Franks and Venetians, Turks, Albanians,...,in one invasion after another have made the modern Greeks a decidedly mongrel race. Not politics either; for in spite of that tenacious western legend about Greece as the birthplace and natural home of democracy, the political record of the Greeks is one of a singular instability and confusion in which, throughout history, the poles of anarchy modulated freedom has very rarely appeared. Not religion; for while Byzantium was Christian, ancient Hellas was pagan." (P. 23 Greece without Columns). (1)

"The Greek nation-state was a product of western political intervention-'the fatal idea' as Arnold Toynbee once called it, of exclusive western nationalism impinging upon the multi-national traditions of the eastern world. By extension, therefore, at any rate in theory, it was a child of the Renaissance and of western rationalism..." (P. 28 Greece without Columns) (1)

"Its international use to describe the sovereign state that currently occupies that territory is merely a reflection of the fact that 'Greece' in this modern sense is literally a western invention" (P. 29 Greece without Columns) (1)

"Greek natural identity was not a 'natural development' or the extension of a 'high culture' over the region of Macedonia, although now it is frequently portrayed as so. The ideology of Hellenism imposed a homogeneity on the Macedonian region and its inhabitants". (P. 94, Fields of Wheat, Hills of Blood) (1)

"Modern Greek identity is based on an unshakable conviction that the Greek State is ethnically homogenous. This belief ... has entailed repeated and official denial of the existence of minorities which are not of 'pure' Hellenic origin. The obsession with Greek racial identity involves the distortion of the history of the thousands of years when there was no such thing as a Greek nation state." (Simon McIllwaine) (1)

"A sharp and brutal revolution altered the whole character of Hellas... It also involved a steep decline of civilized life and an almost total rejection of former values... The most striking change affected the ethnic composition of the people and resulted from the mass migration of Slavs into the Balkans which began in the sixth Century." (N. Cheetham) (1)

"What is the word for this obsessive Greek pseudo-relationship with their country's past (they even have a magazine, Ellenismos, devoted to the subject)? It is not quite pretentiousness. There is too much passion for that. No, the Greeks, the ancient ones, had a word for the modern Greek condition: paranoia. We must accept that Mr. Andreas Papandreou (former Greek prime minister) and the current EC presidency are the sole legitimate heirs of Pericles, Demosthenes and Aristide the Just. The world must nod dumbly at the proposition that in the veins of the modern Greek ... there courses the blood of Achilles. And their paranoid nationalism is heightened by the tenuousness of that claim." (The Sunday Telegraph, London, March 27, 1994) (1)



"The most usual ideological abuse of history is based on anachronism rather than lies. Greek nationalism refused Macedonia even the right to its name on the grounds that all Macedonia is essentially Greek and part of a Greek nation-State, presumably ever since the father of Alexander the Great, king of Macedonia, became ruler of the Greek lands on the Balkan peninsula ... it takes a lot of courage for a Greek intellectual to say that, historically speaking, it is nonsense. There was no Greek nation-State or any other single political entity for the Greeks in the fourth century B.C.; the Macedonian empire was nothing like the Greek or any other modern nation-state, and in any case it is highly probable that the ancient Greeks regarded the Macedonian rulers, as they did their later Roman rulers, as barbarians and not as Greeks, though they were doubtless too polite or cautious to say so". (Eric Hobsbawn) (1)

"It is a striking fact that the leading defenders of Greek liberty at this time were largely Non-Greek. Koundouriotis was descended from the Albanian invaders of Greece in the 14th century, and spoke Greek only with difficulty. His principal colleague was John Kolettis, a Vlach who had been Ali Pasha's court doctor at Ioannina. One of the few leaders who maintained resistance far to the north of the Gulf of Corinth was the Souliote, Marko Botsaris, whose followers were largely Albanian. By a strange chance, it happened that two of the Turkish commanders-in-chief during the war, Khurshid Pasha and Muhammad Rehid Pasha (known to the Greeks as Kiutahi), were by birth Orthodox Christians, who had been converted to Islam for the sake of career in the Sultans service." (C.M. Woodhouse) (1)

"Greece included considerably fewer than half of those who regarded themselves as Greeks by virtue of their language, their religion, and (less plausibly) their race. It was easy to stir up agitation in favour of enlarging Greece's frontiers by a progressive extension of īenosisī (union)". (1)

"Greek demographic continuity was brutally interrupted in the late sixth to eighth centuries A.D. by massive influxes of Avar, Slav and later, Albanian immigrants......modern Greeks could hardly count as being of ancient Greek descent, even if this could never be ruled out." (Anthony Smith) (1)

"Basically, the current historical īnarrativeī of modern Greece, removes all diversity from its pages. The young modern Greek State legitimized its existence, at least to the Great-Powers that supported it in the day, by claiming it represented ancient Greece, at a time when there weren't any īGreeksī to be found anywhere, and the īGreekī language between the Church and anything vaguely resembling it on the ground was unintelligible.

Any opportunity to influence public opinion in modern Greece and abroad, about the Greeks being 'pure' and 'homogenous'...etc is enthusiastically seized upon by the Greek State. It is not hard to work out that this kind of 'lie' would not really be well received if it could be shown that Greece had a lot of diverse ethnic groups still living there. The removal of Latin from the Vlach and Slavic from the Macedonian, among other things, is part in parcel of this censorship. The modern Greek State censors and abuses all its 'minorities'. The Greek historical īnarrativeī' prospers only by hijacking different ethnic groups, removing their language, denying the 'differences', and literally inventing a complete new history for them. Itīs just plain crazy". (1)

"The Editor of The Sunday Telegraph argues that Greece has been ruthless in erasing traces of ethnic diversity, and suggests that the desperation of its actions, including the Greek claim to a monopoly of the classical past (in which all peoples of European origins have a share) can be explained by the fact that the Greeks today are a mixture of Slavs, Turks, Greeks, Bulgars, Albanians, Vlachs, Jews and Gypsies". (1)

"I watched the Koutsovlachi disappear in Thessaly over a period of twenty years. I remember the first time I went up there in 1957, I was stunned, it was another world--it was Rumania. Blond, blue-eyed women wearing incredibly beautiful costumes: white, with about twelve to fifteen inches of thick fringes at the bottom, in saffron, black, and ocher. And everywhere I went, there were ducks and geese, which I didn't see anywhere else in Greece. Ducks and geese and pigs--standard East and Central European farm culture. But I saw all of that disappear.

It's a pity because Greece has lost the Sarakatsani, it's lost the Vlachi, the Koutsovlachi, the Karagounidhes -- it's lost all these fascinating minority groups, and now people are getting up and trying to stop it, but they're about twenty years too late." (A Point of Contact: An Interview with Nikos Stavroulakis, by Peter Pappas in The Greek American (January 9, 1988)) (1)

"According to anthropologist Roger Just, most of the nineteenth-century "Greeks, īwho had so recently won their independence from the Turks, not only did not call themselves Hellenes (they learned this label later from the intellectual nationalists); they did not even speak Greek by preference, but rather Albanian, Slavonic, or Vlach dialects.ī" (1)

"The obsession with Greek racial identity involves the distortion of the history of the thousands of years when there was no such thing as a Greek nation state. The early Slav invasions which reached far into the Peloponnesus and left Slav-speaking settlements well into the fifteenth century are conveniently ignored. So too is the fact that in the early nineteenth century the population of Athens was 24 per cent Albanian, 32 per cent Turkish and only 44 per cent Greek." (Simon Mcllwaine, The Strange Case of the Invisible Minorities, Institutional Racism in the Greek State, International Society for Human Rights, British Section, Dec 1993.) (1)

"No wonder the kodjabashis, the Peloponnesian notables, were disparagingly referred to as īChristian Turksī. One hero of the war of independence, Photakos Kyrysanthopoulis, said that the only difference was one of names: instead of being called Hasan the Kodijabashi, he would be called Yanni: instead of praying in a mosque he would go to church." (P. 42, "A concise history Of Greece", Richard Clogg) (1)

"The Academy was built with bequest from Simon Sinas, the hugely wealthy son of Georgios Sinas, a Hellenized Vlach whose family came from Moschopolis in Southern Albania, who made his fortune in the Habsburg Empire and was himself the donor of Theophilos Hansen's observatory (1843-6). (P. 79, "A concise history Of Greece", Richard Clogg) (1)

And finally, some haunting final words for the skeptical Greeks:

In the 1830's an Austrian classicist called JJ Fallmereyer made a study of the South Slav migrations and concluded that "not only are the modern Greeks Slavs, but not a drop of pure Greek blood was to be found in the modern Greek State". In Athens needless to say, his name is not much. "Consequently the medieval and modern Greeks are not the descendants of the Greeks of Antiquity, and their Hellenism is artificial". (Robert Browning , Greece Old and New , edited by Tom Winnifrith and Penelope Murray, the Macmillan Press , London 1963.) (1)

"Slavic blood, Albanian heroes, Pontian Orthodox Turks, Latin speaking Vlach politicians, assimilated Macedonians and Albanians not to mention the dozen other ethnicities? Is any one truly Greek today?" (1)

In the presence of company it is not how one sees himself or herself it is how others see them that counts. So, I dedicate this article to those Greeks who love to ridicule Macedonians feeling very smug, secure and confident in their place and proud of their 4,000 years of Greek Civilization. What they really donīt know is that they are standing on a rotten foundation ALL built on Greek lies.

You can believe the myths and fairytales your propagandists and government feed you or you can look at the evidence and start thinking for yourselves. You may be standing on what appear to be a solid foundation on the surface, but in reality you are standing on thin ice which with the slightest shock will crack and crumble before you.

Ask yourselves, why do so many people dispute your past? Are they all propagandists paid by rich Skopjans who have nothing better to do with their money but cause you trouble? Or are they in pursuit of finding the truth and telling you something that you should know? You canīt say ALL these people are Skopjan propagandists or accuse me of "fabricating information". All the quotes given in this piece are written by western authors and I expect you will find them fair and impartial.

So, do you believe modern Greece is a unique nation that belongs to a 4,000 year old "Greek Civilization" like no other or do you believe your Government and benefactors have been feeding you a load of anachronisms (the representation of something as existing or occurring at other than itīs proper time. Webster)?

My conclusion!

The truth is Greece is a modern state created for the first time in 1829. Modern Greece just happens to be located where once upon a time a so called civilization existed for a brief period. The only reason we know about it is because the people preserved their thoughts by writing them on rocks. It would be naïve to think that it was the only civilization in existence or that it miraculously survived for over 4,000 years.

Modern Greece was created for a specific purpose, to act as a barrier to Russia and fulfill the political desires and agendas of the 19th century Western Great Powers. To believe anything different is foolish and to infer that there exists a 4,000 year old Greek Civilization is simply a Greek myth.

NOTES: (1) Many thanks to Paul and SoM for their research for this piece.

[George S.]

Some Greeks believe Macedonia was liberated in 1912, 1913
Risto StefovOctober 31, 2008
"If the Greek State truly valued the thinking and methods of Socrates they would question themselves and their actions" Dedo Kire

Close to a century ago in 1912 under the guise of liberation, Greece, Serbia and Bulgaria invaded Macedonia and with the help of the Macedonian people, evicted the Turks. But instead of helping the Macedonian people create their own independent State, Greece, Serbia and Bulgaria occupied Macedonian territories and fought one another each to gain more land for themselves. Then in 1913 they partitioned Macedonia into three pieces under the 1913 Treaty of Bucharest. After placing artificial borders where such borders never existed before, each State treated its newly acquired territory as its own and began to colonize it. Those inhabitants who refused to recognize their new overlords were exterminated or evicted; those who remained passive were assimilated. This process was halted due to World War I but was resumed after the 1919 Treaty of Versailles when the Great Powers with minor changes sanctioned the 1913 Treaty of Bucharest making the partition permanent.

These are historic facts that cannot be denied. One only needs to examine events during the signing of the 1913 Treaty of Bucharest to understand the conditions under which Macedonia was partitioned.

Some Greeks today, ignoring historical evidence, insist that the 1912, 1913 Balkan conflict was about liberating ancient territories that belonged to Greece some 2, 400 years ago.

If that were true then;

1. Why did Greece agreed to sign the 1913 Treaty of Bucharest allowing Serbia to gain some 38% of Macedoniaīs territory and Bulgaria 11%? Why did Greece NOT demand, at least for the record, historical rights while signing the Treaty?

2. On what basis are these claims made? By now it should be well known to every Greek that there was no "Ancient Greece" or "Ancient Hellas". If you donīt believe me then try and find an ancient source or an ancient map that speaks of or shows "Greece" or "Hellas". How can Macedonian territories belong to "Ancient Greece" when such a name did not exist in ancient times?

3. If the word "Greece" or "Hellas" did not exist 2,400 years ago, how then can modern Greeks claim that "Macedonia was Greek"?

Was it not the Macedonians, Philip II and his son Alexander III who conquered the City States during the Battle of Chaeronea in 336 BC? Or do some Greeks still believe Philip II and Alexander III united the Ancient City States?

One more time here is a quote to refresh their memories:

"On his return trip home from a battle with the Scythians Philipīs convoy was attacked and his booty was lost to Thracian Triballians. During the skirmish, Philip suffered a severe leg injury, which left him lame for life. After returning home he spent several months recovering.

While Philip was recovering, the City States to the south were making alliances and amassing a great army to invade Macedonia. On hearing this, Philip decided it was time to meet this aggression head on and end the treachery once and for all. On August 2nd, 338 BC, in the shallow Cephisus River valley near the village of Chaeronea on the road to Thebes, the two opposing armies met face to face. On the north side stood Philipīs Macedonians with 30,000 infantry and 2,000 cavalry, the largest Macedonian army ever assembled. Among Philipīs commanding generals was his 18 year-old son, Alexander, in charge of the cavalry. On the south side, stood the allied Athenians, Thebans and Achaeans who assembled 35,000 infantry and 2,000 cavalry, the largest army ever assembled since the Persian invasion.

Closely matched, the armies clashed and while the battle ensued the Macedonian right flank fell back and began to retreat. Seeing the Macedonians weakening, the allied City State general gave orders to push on and drive the Macedonians back to Macedonia. As the Macedonians retreated, the allied flanks broke rank and began the pursuit. Not realizing it was a trick, the allies found themselves surrounded and slaughtered by Alexanderīs cavalry. When it was over, the majority of the allied army, including the elite Theban Sacred Band lay dead in the fields of Chaeronea. Philip erected a statue of a lion to commemorate the sacrifice of the Theban Sacred Band who upheld their tradition and fought to the last man.

Ancient City State and Roman historians consider the battle of Chaeronea as the end of City State liberty, history and civilization." (1)

After reading the above, do you still believe Philip and Alexander united the Ancient City States? Would it not be more correct to say "the Macedonians by way of war conquered and enslaved the Ancient City States thus making them the property of Macedonia"?

The question still remains; if not by historical rights then by what right does 51% of the present Macedonian territory belong to Greece?

I can understand if a successor of the Roman Empire such as Italy, which held Macedonia for two centuries makes claims that Macedonia is Italian based on the fact that Macedonia once belonged to the Roman Empire or that Macedonia is Ottoman based on the fact that Macedonia for five centuries belonged to the Ottoman Empire, but as God is my witness, I cannot fathom this Greek logic on how Macedonia could possibly be Greek?

"One can fool all of the people some of the time or some of the people all of the time but not all of the people all of the time"

I am not the only one looking at this "Greek Logic" as a bit unusual:

In Plutarch "The Age of Alexander" on page 212 we read: "While Demosthenes was still in exile, Alexander died in Babylon, and the Greek states combined yet again to form a league against Macedon. Demosthenes attached himself to the Athenian convoys, and threw all his energies into helping them incite the various states to attack the Macedonians and drive them out of Greece." Why didnīt Plutarch include Macedonia as part of Greece if Macedonia was Greek?

In M. Caryīs book "The Geographic background of Greek and Roman History" (ISBN 0-313-23187-7) we find the following constituent parts of Greece: Epirus, Acarnania, The Ionian Isles, Aetolia, Thessaly, The Spercheu Valley, Locris, Phocis, Boeotia, Euboea, Attica, Aegina, Corinth, Achaea, Elis, Arcadia, Argolis, Laconia, Messenia, The Greek Archipelago, Crete, The Outer Isles, The Northern Aegean, The East Aegean, Rhodes. It makes one wonder why M. Cary omitted Macedonia from the general description of Greece? Perhaps for the same reason the German classical scholar Bursian failed to include Macedonia in his otherwise comprehensive geographical survey of Greece "Geographie von Griechenland". (2)

On page 91 in "Hellenistic World" by F.W.Walbank we find: "It is necessary, in any assessment of the role of Macedonia in the Hellenistic world to bear in mind that although our sources naturally, being Greek or based on Greek writers, lay their emphasis on Macedonian policy towards Greece, Macedonia was in fact equally a Balkan power for which the northern, western and north-eastern frontiers were always vital and for which strong defenses and periodic punitive expeditions over the border were fundamental policy." (2)



In N. G. L. Hammond's book "The Macedonian State" on page 141 we read: "Philip and Alexander attracted many able foreigners, especially Greeks, to their service, and many of these were made Companions." (2) If Macedonians were Greeks why did Hammond call them foreigners?

In Eugene Borzaīs "Makedonika" on page 164 we read: "Alexander seems to have imported troupes of performers from Greece." (2) How does one import Greeks from Greece into Greece?

In Plutarchīs "The Age of Alexander" on page 264 we find: "Thebans countered by demanding the surrender of Philotas and Antipater and appealing to all who wished to liberate Greece to range themselves on their side, and at this Alexander ordered his troops to prepare for battle." (2) Were they also going to liberate Macedonia, i.e. Alexanderīs homeland, because according to modern Greek logic "Macedonia is Greek"?

In Quintus Rufusīs "The History of Alexander" on page 50-1 Alexander, in a letter, responds to Darius: "His Majesty Alexander to Darius: Greetings. The Darius whose name you have assumed wrought utter destruction upon the Greek inhabitants of the Hellespontine coast and upon the Greek colonies of Ionia, and then crossed the sea with a mighty army, bringing the war to Macedonia and Greece." (2) Shouldnīt Alexander have said "Greece and Greece"?

In Arrianīs "The Campaigns of Alexander" on page 292 Alexander speaking to his officers: "...But let me remind you: Through your courage and endurance you have gained possession of Ionia, the Hellespont, both Phrygias, Cappadocia, Paphlagonia, Lydia, Caria, Lycia, Pamphylia, Phoenicia and Egypt; the Greek part of Libya is now yours, together with much of Arabia, lowland Syria, Mesopotamia, Babylon, and Susia;..." Point of interest: "The Greek part of Libya is now yours?" How can the Greek part of Libya become Greek again, if it already was in Greek hands to begin with? (2)

"Only in Thessaly and Boetia, and outside Greece, in Macedonia, was there cavalry worthy of the name."

"The Peloponnesian War was a fratricidal war among the Greeks, a fact that was not altered by the intervention of foreign powers, Macedonia, for instance and later the Persian Empire."] (Excerpts taken from The Greeks and Persians, from the sixth to the fourth centuries; edited by Hermann Bengston; published by Delacorte Press, New York.) (2)

In Agnes Savil's book "Alexander the Great and his Time" on page 180 we find: "For a time Hellenism revived when Demetrius of Bactria, half Macedonian, half Greek, tried in 187 B.C. to reclaim the Indian empire of Alexander." Should we assume that there is such a person who is half Greek and half Greek? (2)

In Quintus Rufusīs "The History of Alexander" on page 188 we find: "Accordingly, one festive day, Alexander had a sumptuous banquet organized so that he could invite not only his principle friends among the Macedonians and Greeks but also the enemy nobility." "Macedonians and Greeks"? Not Greeks and Greeks? (2)

In Arrianīs "The Campaigns of Alexander" on page 294 we read: "Gentlemen of Macedon, and you my friends and allies [Greeks], this must not be. Stand firm; for well you know that hardship and danger are the price of glory, and that sweet is the savor of a life of courage and of deathless renown beyond the grave." (2)

In Quintus Curtius Rufusīs "The History of Alexander" on page 195 regarding the trial of Hermolaus we find: "As for you Callisthenes, the only person to think you a man (because you are an assassin), I know why you want him brought forward. It is so that the insult which sometimes uttered against me and sometimes heard from him can be repeated by his lips before this gathering. Were he a Macedonian I would have introduced him here along with you - a teacher truly worth of his pupil. As it is, he is an Olynthian [Greek] and does not enjoy the same rights." (2)

In Robert A. Hudleyīs paper "Diodoros 18.60.1-3: "A Case of Remodeled Source Materials" dissects "Eumenes": "We then come upon Eumenes' second observation that, being a foreigner, he has no right to exercise command over Macedonians. At no point, however, in Diodoros' prior narrative does Eumenes' Greek origin excite animosity among the Macedonians. More important, Eumenes does not see his foreign origin as an impediment to accepting the dynasty' offer of a supreme command in 18.58.4 and he proceeds to exercise that authority in 19.13.7 and 15.5 without any qualms on his part that he is not a Macedonian. Eumenes' foreign origin does become an issue at one point among the commanders of the Silver Shields." (2)

If the Ancient Macedonians themselves did not consider themselves to be kin to the people of the Ancient City States why should we?

Again the question still remains; if not by historical rights then by what right does 51% of the present Macedonian territory belongs to Greece?

Allow me to summarize:

1. The name "Greece" or "Hellas" did not exist in ancient times

2. The Ancient Macedonians did not consider themselves in any way, shape or form to be akin to the people from the Ancient City States

3. The Ancient City States were conquered and enslaved by the Macedonians; not united

4. The Ancient City States belonged to the Macedonians for nearly two centuries and not the other way around

5. No "Greek" or "Hellenic" State ever existed before 1829

So, how can Macedonian territories in 1912, 1913 be liberated by Greece when those lands NEVER belonged to Greece?

The truth is Macedonia NEVER belonged to Greece. The 1912, 1913 conflict was simply an imperial land grab perpetrated by Greece, Serbia and Bulgaria and sanctioned by the Great Powers to feed the imperial appetites of those three States. The so called "historical" claims were an afterthought designed to keep the innocent and uninformed tangled in a web of lies.

NO! Macedonia is NOT and NEVER was Greek. Macedonia BELONGS to the Macedonians! In the words of William Gladstone "MACEDONIA FOR THE MACEDONIANS"!

References:

1. Stefou, Chris. History of the Macedonian People from Ancient times to the Present. Toronto: Risto Stefov Publications, 2005, P 67.

2. Quotes provided by Dedo Kire.

[George S.]

Australian Macedonian Advisory Council and the falsification of Ancient Macedonian history Part 1
Risto StefovNovember 01, 2008
This is a response to the Australian Macedonian Advisory Council in regards to the article entitled "Risto Stefov and the falsification of Ancient Macedonian history" published on October 29, 2008 at this link: http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/79306

My reply to you is "Two can play that game!" I too can provide you with just as many arguments that the Ancient Macedonians WERE NOT Greek. BUT!

It is irrelevant, at least to me, if Modern Greeks claim that the Ancient Macedonians were Greeks or not, what is relevant here is that the Modern Greeks are not related to the Ancient Greeks or to the Ancient Macedonians. They call themselves "Greeks" but have nothing to do with the ancient Greeks or Ancient Macedonians because underneath their modern artificial Greek veneer is nothing more than Albanians, Vlachs, Turks and Macedonians, the same variety of Balkanites that exists throughout the entire southern Balkans. But, if they insist on accusing me of falsifying Ancient Macedonian history, then here is my rebuttal:

"The modern Greek claim -- that the ancient Macedonians were Greek -- is politically motivated and is not supported by historical evidence. This political mythology was created in the late 19th century to advance territorial claims against Ottoman Macedonia. In its current incarnation it is used by Greece as an excuse to discriminate against its Macedonian minority." (Gandeto)

"I. What were a people's origins and what language did they speak?

From the surviving literary sources (Hesiod, Herodotus, and Thucydides) there is little information about Macedonian origins, and the archaeological data from the early period is sparse and inconclusive. On the matter of language, and despite attempts to make Macedonian a dialect of Greek, one must accept the conclusion of the linguist R. A. Crossland in the recent CAH, that an insufficient amount of Macedonian has survived to know what language it was. But it is clear from later sources that Macedonian and Greek were mutually unintelligible in the court of Alexander the Great. Moreover, the presence in Macedonia of inscriptions written in Greek is no more proof that the Macedonians were Greek than, e.g., the existence of Greek inscriptions on Thracian vessels and coins proves that the Thracians were Greeks.

II. Self-identity: what did the Macedonians say or think about themselves?

Virtually nothing has survived from the Macedonians themselves (they are among the silent peoples of antiquity), and very little remains in the Classical and Hellenistic non-Macedonian sources about Macedonian attitudes.

III. What did others say about the Macedonians?

Here there is a relative abundance of information from Arrian, Plutarch (Alexander, Eumenes), Diodorus 17-20, Justin, Curtius Rufus, and Nepos (Eumenes), based upon Greek and Greek-derived Latin sources. It is clear that over a five-century span of writing in two languages representing a variety of historiographical and philosophical positions the ancient writers regarded the Greeks and Macedonians as two separate and distinct peoples whose relationship was marked by considerable antipathy, if not outright hostility.

IV. What is the nature of cultural expressions as revealed by archaeology?

As above we are blessed with an increasing amount of physical evidence revealing information about Macedonian tastes in art and decoration, religion, political and economic institutions, architecture and settlement patterns. Clearly the Macedonians were in many respects Hellenized, especially on the upper levels of their society, as demonstrated by the excavations of Greek archaeologists over the past two decades. Yet there is much that is different, e. g., their political institutions, burial practices, and religious monuments.

I will argue that, whoever the Macedonians were, they emerged as a people distinct from the Greeks who lived to the south and east. In time their royal court -- which probably did not have Greek origins (the tradition in Herodotus that the Macedonian kings were descended from Argos is probably a piece of Macedonian royal propaganda) -- became Hellenized in many respects, and I shall review the influence of mainstream Greek culture on architecture, art, and literary preferences.

Finally, a look at contemporary Balkan politics. The Greek government firmly maintains that the ancient Macedonians were ethnic Greeks, and that any claim by the new Republic of Macedonia (The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) to the name "Macedonia" and the symbols of ancient Macedonia is tantamount to an expropriation of Greek history. Moreover, it is claimed that there is no such thing as a distinct Slavic Macedonian identity and language separate from Bulgaria and Serbia.

I shall review the evidence for the existence of a modern Macedonian ethnicity with reference to my recent work in a Macedonian ethnic community in Steelton, Pennsylvania. Both the gravestones in a local cemetery and US census reports from the early twentieth century provide evidence that émigrés from Macedonia who lived and died in Steelton in the early twentieth century considered themselves to be distinct from their Serbian and Bulgarian neighbours." (Eugene Borza)

Speaking of Eugene Borza, the American Philological Association refers to Eugene Borza as the "Macedonian specialist". In the introductory chapter of "Makedonika" by Carol G. Thomas, Eugene Borza is also called "the Macedonian specialist", and his colleague Peter Green describes Eugene's work on Macedonia as "seminal."

Please read what P. Green thinks of Borza's approach to the studies of ancient history, and of his method of abstraction of truth: "Never was a man less given to the kind of mean-spirited odium philologicum that so often marks classical debate. Gene could slice an argument to pieces while still charming its exponents out of the trees."

Ernst Badian from Harvard University writes: "It is chiefly Gene's merit that recognizably historical interpretation of the history of classical Macedonia has not only become possible, but it is now accepted by all historians who have no vested interest in the mythology superseded by Gene's work. Needless to say, I welcome and agree with that approach and have never disagreed with him except on relatively trivial details of interpretation."

Here are some excerpts from Borza's writings regarding the Ancient Macedonians and the Ancient Greeks.

On the matter of distinction between Greeks and Macedonians:

1) "Neither Greeks nor Macedonians considered the Macedonians to be Greeks."



On the composition of Alexander's army:

2) "Thus we look in vain for the evidence that Alexander was heavily dependent upon Greeks either in quantity or quality."

3) "The pattern is clear: the trend toward the end of the king's life was to install Macedonians in key positions at the expense of Asians, and to retain very few Greeks."

4) "The conclusion is inescapable: there was a largely ethnic Macedonian imperial administration from beginning to end. Alexander used Greeks in court for cultural reasons, Greek troops (often under Macedonian commanders) for limited tasks and with some discomfort, and Greek commanders and officials for limited duties. Typically, a Greek will enter Alexander's service from an Aegean or Asian city through the practice of some special activity: he could read and write, keep figures or sail, all of which skills the Macedonians required. Some Greeks may have moved on to military service as well. In other words, the role of Greeks in Alexander's service was not much different from what their role had been in the services of Xerxes and the third Darius."

On the policy of hellenization with Alexander's conquest of Asia and the Greek assertion that he spread Hellenism:

5) "If one wishes to believe that Alexander had a policy of hellenization - as opposed to the incidental and informal spread of Greek culture - the evidence must come from sources other than those presented here. One wonders - archaeology aside - where this evidence would be."

On the issue of whether Alexander and Philip "united" the Greek city-states or conquered them:

6) "In European Greece Alexander continued and reinforced Philip II's policy of rule over the city-states, a rule resulting from conquest."

On the ethnic tension between Macedonians and Greeks:

Referring to the episode of Eumenes of Cardia and his bid to reach the throne: "And if there were any doubt about the status of Greeks among the Macedonians the tragic career of Eumenes in the immediate Wars of succession should put it to rest. The ancient sources are replete with information about the ethnic prejudice Eumenes suffered from Macedonians."

7) "The tension at court between Greeks and Macedonians, tension that the ancient authors clearly recognised as ethnic division."

On Alexander's dismissal of his Greek allies:

8) "A few days later at Ecbatana, Alexander dismissed his Greek allies, and charade with Greece was over."

On the so called Dorian invasion:

9) The theory of the Dorian invasion (based on Hdt. 9.26, followed by Thuc. I.12) is largely an invention of nineteenth-century historography, and is otherwise unsupported by either archaeological or linguistic evidence."

10) "The Dorians are invisible archeologically."

11) "There is no archaeological record of the Dorian movements, and the mythic arguments are largely conjectural, based on folk traditions about the Dorian home originally having been in northwest Greece.

12) "The explanation for the connection between the Dorians and the Macedonians may be more ingenious than convincing, resting uncomfortably on myth and conjecture."

On the Macedonian own tradition and origin:

13) "As the Macedonians settled the region following the expulsion of existing peoples, they probably introduced their own customs and language(s); there is no evidence that they adopted any existing language, even though they were now in contact with neighbouring populations who spoke a variety of Greek and non-Greek tongues."

On the Macedonian language:

14) "The main evidence for Macedonian existing as separate language comes from a handful of late sources describing events in the train of Alexander the Great, where the Macedonian tongue is mentioned specifically."

15) "The evidence suggests that Macedonian was distinct from ordinary Attic Greek used as a language of the court and of diplomacy."

16) "The handful of surviving genuine Macedonian words - not loan words from Greek - do not show the changes expected from Greek dialect."

On the Macedonian material culture being different from the Greek:

17) "The most visible expression of material culture thus far recovered are the fourth - and third-century tombs. The architectural form, decoration, and burial goods of these tombs, which now number between sixty and seventy, are unlike what is found in the Greek south, or even in the neighbouring independent Greek cities of the north Aegean littoral (exception Amphipolis). Macedonian burial habits suggest different view of the afterlife from the Greeks', even while many of the same gods were worshipped."

18) "Many of the public expressions of worship may have been different."

19) "There is an absence of major public religious monuments from Macedonian sites before the end of the fourth century (another difference from the Greeks)."

20). "Must be cautious both in attributing Greek forms of worship to the Macedonians and in using these forms of worship as a means of confirming Hellenic identity."

21) "In brief, one must conclude that the similarities between some Macedonian and Greek customs and objects are not of themselves proof that Macedonians were a Greek tribe, even though it is undeniable that on certain levels Greek cultural influences eventually became pervasive."

22) "Greeks and Macedonians remained steadfastly antipathetic toward one another (with dislike of a different quality than the mutual long-term hostility shared by some Greek city-states) until well into the Hellenic period, when both the culmination of hellenic acculturation in the north and the rise of Rome made it clear that what these peoples shared took precedence over their historical enmities."

23) "They made their mark not as a tribe of Greek or other Balkan peoples, but as 'Macedonians'. This was understood by foreign protagonists from the time of Darius and Xerxes to the age of Roman generals."

24) "It is time to put the matter of the Macedonians' ethnic identity to rest.

No matter how hard Modern Greeks try to prove otherwise, there is always more than one side to their story!

To be continued.

Many thanks to J.S.G. Gandeto for his contribution to this article.

[George S.]

Risto Stefov [ Chris Stefou ] Author on Macedonian Matters - YouTube
Risto Stefov [ Chris Stefou ] Author on Macedonian Matters

[George S.]

Risto Stefov - YouTube
risto stefov

[George S.]

Modern Greeks like to Bend the truth to suit their Agenda
Risto StefovOctober 26, 2008
How do Greeks deflect attention away from the atrocities their army committed in Macedonia in 1913?

By accusing me of "historical revisionism" for reporting the atrocities and by nitpicking on semantics.

If Chris Philipou and Akritas had read the articles in question they would have understood that the articles are not about semantics but about the atrocities and genocide the Greek army committed in Greek occupied Macedonia in 1913. Regardless of which ethnicity these people belonged to they were people first, people that died horrible deaths at the hands of the Greek army. But Chris Philipou and Akritas chose to ignore all that and delved deeply into accusations that I somehow have committed some wrong by supposedly misrepresenting the ethnicity of these people!

Here is what Akritas (an anti-Macedonian internet warrior propagandist) has to say:

http://modern-macedonian-history.blogspot.com/2008/09/risto-stefovaka-chris-stefou-vs.html

Chris Philipou in his blog has written a great article that expose Stefov as about the Carnegie Commision Report "claims". Read the article and you will realize why this person is a expert of the Slavmacedonian (FYROM) Historical revisionism

http://history-of-macedonia.com/wordpress/2008/05/30/stefov-vs-carnegie-commission/

In 1914 the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace published a report regarding the conduct of the nations that participated in the Balkan Wars. The report was written by an international commission that was dispatched to the region in order to investigate the actions of the Balkan armies as well as to investigate the causes of the various conflicts that took place during the wars.

Risto Stefov, who also publishes books under the name "Chris Stefou", has used the 1914 Carnegie Commission Report on the Balkan Wars as a primary reference for many of his articles. He has written a whole series titled "Greek attrocities in Macedonia" which can be found on www.maknews.com at the following links:

http://www.maknews.com/html/articles/stefov/stefov61.html

http://www.maknews.com/html/articles/stefov/stefov64.html

http://www.maknews.com/html/articles/stefov/stefov67.html

http://www.maknews.com/html/articles/stefov/stefov72.html

http://www.maknews.com/html/articles/stefov/stefov76.html

http://www.maknews.com/html/articles/stefov/stefov80.html

In these articles Stefov engages in a heavy dose of historical revisionism. He implies that the Carnegie Commission report describes atrocities committed against "ethnic Macedonians" when in fact the report made no mention of any "ethnic Macedonian" population. The fact that the report made no mention of "ethnic Macedonians" does not phase Stefov who shamelessly converts the Bulgarians the report described into "ethnic Macedonians". Stefov retrospectively molds the population descriptions found in the report to adhere to his nationalist historiography. He and his followers imply that the reason the report described "ethnic Macedonians" as Bulgarians was because the authors of the report were categorizing by religious affiliation. Their theory suggests that because 'ethnic Macedonians' attended the Bulgarian church (Exarchy) they were described as Bulgarians.

The report demolishes this theory in 2 ways:

The report makes it clear that those who attended the Bulgarian church were of Bulgarian nationality. If these people were actually "ethnic Macedonians" why would the authors of the report make the following statement?:

2. The report clearly states that the Serbs were amongst the first to categorize the Slavs of Macedonia as a distinct group from the Bulgarians for political purposes. The authors of the report clearly viewed the Slavic population as Bulgarian despite the claim of Serbian scholars who attempted to distinguish this group from the Bulgarians in order to diminish Bulgaria's claim to the region:

It should be sobering for Stefov's readers to actually read the pages of the report and to see for themselves how the "ethnic Macedonians" Stefov describes in his articles were actually recorded as Bulgarians by the international commission. As an example Stefov goes into length describing atrocities committed in Kukush by the Greek army.

Regardless of Stefov's attempts to focus only on the actions of the Greek army in order to demonize the Greek state as much as possible, the fact is that the 1914 Carnegie Commission report also describes atrocities committed by the other combatants.



The report was published during an era when the "Macedonian" ethno/national identity was still in it's infancy stages. The report provides the reader with valuable contemporary insight into how contemporary geopolitical dynamics fostered the notion that the Slavs of the region were a distinct ethnic group. Up to the period of the Balkan Wars the Slavic population of the region was largely regarded as Bulgarian. The 1914 Carnegie Commission report was authored by an international commission that spent time in the region. Their observations of the Slavic population of the region concurs with a vast number of other contemporary first hand accounts. Stefov and his nationalist cronies engage in a dishonest practice when they misrepresent the commission's first hand observations and reconstruct the Bulgarians described in the report as "ethnic Macedonians".

Implying that the Carnegie Commission failed to record what Stefov et al allege was the largest ethnic group in the region is akin to a modern international commission going into Palestine and not recording any Palestinians!]

Regardless of what you call them gentlemen these people who died at the hands of the genocidal Greek army were people first, yet you mention nothing about that. Furthermore you say that I call those people Macedonians when in fact the report calls them "Bulgarian". You however fail to mention that I also call Macedonian those people that the report calls "Greeks" and "Serbians"! Is that not selective reporting on your part? I emphasized that all these people were Macedonians not just those labeled "Bulgarian" by the report.

You also mentioned that I "intentionally" tried to make the Greek army the villain by failing to mention that the Serbian and Bulgarian armies too committed atrocities. Is that not deflecting attention on your part Chris Philpou and Akritas? Will the Greek army be any less guilty if I did? If you had read the articles, you would have found out for yourselves that Greek soldiers, by their own admission from their letters written to their relatives, have committed these inexcusable atrocities which were sanctioned by the Greek King himself.

Even though I mentioned in one of my articles that my focus of this study was "Greek Atrocities", had it not occurred to you that these particular articles as their title implies are about "Greek Atrocities"? Why would I mention Serbian and Bulgarian atrocities when my study is about atrocities committed by Greece?

I know exactly what the Carnegie Commission report said and I can show you a dozen more reports that say "No ethnic Macedonians Existed anywhere in geographic Macedonia" yet here we are! Serbia registered "No Macedonians" in its occupied Macedonian territory in 1913 yet now there is a Republic of Macedonia today registering a majority of ethnic Macedonians on those same lands! How do you explain this Chris Philipou and Akritas?

Greece too has registered no Macedonians living in Greece yet again here we are! I, along with hundreds of thousands of other people are claiming to be ethnic Macedonians from Greece where supposedly no Macedonians exist! How do you explain that?

The truth is the Greek state along with its partners Serbia and Bulgaria illegally invaded, occupied and partitioned Macedonia in 1912 and 1913. All three states then viciously attacked the Macedonian people committing genocide in an attempt to exterminate them. Later these same three states committed historical revisionism to cover up their crimes.

Chris Philipou and Akritas I am not here to commit historical revisionism, I am here to set the record straight.

As to why Macedonians were labeled "Greeks", "Serbians" and "Bulgarians" in the Carnegie Commission Report I can easily explained but it will have to be in a future article.

By the way, thank you gentlemen for bringing this to my attention, it will give me a chance to revise it and explain the issues a little better.

I encourage everyone to read my articles and find out what all the fuss is about;

http://www.maknews.com/html/articles/stefov/stefov61.html

http://www.maknews.com/html/articles/stefov/stefov64.html

http://www.maknews.com/html/articles/stefov/stefov67.html

http://www.maknews.com/html/articles/stefov/stefov72.html

http://www.maknews.com/html/articles/stefov/stefov76.html

http://www.maknews.com/html/articles/stefov/stefov80.html

[momce]

obviously this guy misses the entire point that the Macedonian population were victimised by all the partition states during and after the Balkan Wars..and greeks will call asia minor a greek genocide while remaining silent that they were conducting horrible atrocities against the turkish population of anatolia during the asia minor war(so bad the British told the greekos to stop flying their flag during the war)blah blah the history of greeko irrendentism is a sad evolution but I have to hand it to them greekos have won the propaganda war so far and theyre the biggest liars and whiners but now they have lost credibility

[George S.]

you know risto has written a hell of lot in other articles about what happened to the macedonian minorities.I do mean a hell of a lot.

[George S.]

Answer to Risto Stefov, #7 ( Macedonian name conflict - Answer to Stephen G. Millerīs letter ..)
Istor the MacedonianMay 22, 2009
This article is an answer to Risto Stefovīs article entitled " Answer to Stephen G. Millerīs letter to President Obamaŧ and published here: http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/103039 Please, read that article before reading this answer.

First let me tell you that history has decided that Macedonians have always been Greeks. Whoever denies that is a SlavoSkopian propagandist.

R: Why ask a politician to "clean up" "historical debris?"

I: Because, despite history has approved Greek claims, you still denying historyīs conclusions: Macedonians have always been Greeks. Macedoniansī Greekness was and is so obvious that only an illiterate would deny it. Thus the problem is political now. You could convince us that it is an historical problem if you let history decide about Macedonian identity. So reject any Macedonian name until history decides about it.

R: How does recognizing a country whose name was chosen by its people by referendum, repeal or cancel geographic and historic facts?

I: Childish question. SlavoSkopians are lying to themselves. If they knew the whole truth about Macedonians and themselves they wouldnīt be named Macedonians. What about Greeks who have chosen to be called Macedonians right after they arrived in Pindus, led by King Karanos at 800 BC?

R: How is "revisionism" dangerous when it is "scientific research" based on "historic facts"? Is revisionism "a bad thing"? Should revisionism have been "avoided" when it was discovered that the earth was not flat? Should we pretend to believe the earth is flat to avoid "revisionism"? "

I: Your revisionism is not based on historic facts but on propagandaīs orders. You have axiomatically accepted that you are Macedonians and you are working on raping history and common sense in order to approve your claims. Do you remember those pathetic Tentovīs claims about Rosetta stone third inscription? Do you remember the "letter" that Alexander has sent to Aristotle? http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/alexfake.html

R: Was Macedonia not Alexanderīs homeland? If it was then how is the Skopje government "misappropriating" Alexander the Great? Putting it another way "do you mean to tell me that the Modern Greeks, descendents of the Slav, Albanian and Vlach immigrants who came to reside in Greece during the 6th and 11th to 14th centuries and later the 1.1 million Christian Turk colonists deposited in Greece have more "rights" to the Macedonian heritage than the indigenous Macedonians who lived in Macedonia for millenniums? "

I: Blood and dna are not related to ethnicity, at least within a race. FYROMīs land was ex Dardania, Peonia, and Pelagonia. Macedonian is whoever is proud of that campaign that Macedonians did to spread Greek language and Civilization to the World. You are ashamed of that campaign, dear ethnic SlavoSkopians. No person can be Macedonian if it is not Greek.

R: The facts Mr. Stephen G. Miller? Do you now peddle Modern Greek propaganda as the facts? Why do you want to present the "facts" from 2,500 years ago and not the "facts" from two centuries ago when the Modern Greek state was created for the first time in 1829? "

I: So, before starting any further discussion dear Risto, confess that Macedonians have been Greeks and that you have no arguments against their Greekness. This will be your biggest contribution to your peopleīs liberty from Underground they live thanks to your lies and half-truths. Confess that Macedonians did spread Greek Language and Civilization to the World. Then, be sure, SlavoSkopians will solve the name problem naturally: Somemacedonia.

R: How about letting President Obama know how the Western Philhellenes created the Modern Greek state? How the Philhellenes made the Modern Greeks out of the ashes of the Slav, Albanian and Vlach ethnicities and cultures that lived there in the late 18th and early 19th centuries? "

I: Do you say, bre Risto, that Vlachs, Arvanites and other non Greeks did create a Greek state in absence of Greeks? Is this an excuse for the creation of your "Macedonian" state, bre Titozombies ?? Bre Risto, how much tones of humiliation could you suffer before opening your eyes and realizing your criminal behavior towards SlavoSkopians? Arenīt you SlavoSkopian? Donīt you respect them a bit? Why do you LIE to them?

R: How about discussing with President Obama more recent historic events like how Greece and its partners Serbia and Bulgaria invaded, occupied and brutally partitioned Macedonia and the atrocities they subsequently committed against the Macedonian people? How about discussing what Greece did with the Macedonian language? (http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/102469). "

I: Lets talking about that! If you dare! There were Greeks in Macedonia, the Macedonians, and they revolted against Ottoman Empire at the time that southern Greeks did that, and when they failed, most of them went south to join their brothers. And when you Slavs attempted to slavicize Macedonia and Macedonians our ancestors defended their Greekness successfully against your brutal attempt to rename Thessaloniki to Solun. You SlavoSkopians, being relics of that pathetic attempt of Panslavism, you still continue miserably to slavicize Macedonia through new and smart means: Steal the name and then fame and land of Macedonia.

R: Or, how about telling President Obama of the lack of human rights for the Macedonian people living in their ancestral lands in Greece today? How come these issues are missing from your one-sided biased letter? "



I: How about informing Barack Obama about democracyīs index in FYROM and Greece built by neutral international ngo ?? How about telling him that Greece is EU member? How pathetic can you be Mr. liar?

R: Perhaps these subjects might be a bit "too real" for you so youīd rather talk about abstract things that may or may not have happened 2,500 years ago. Since you are so keen in discussing "old issues" then how about clicking on the following link and answer Mr. Gandetoīs questions. http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/102727 "

I: Can someone avoid talking about ancient times when talking about Macedonia, bre Risto? Mercy bre! Isnīt Macedonia on earth since 800 BC?

R: We do not understand how the modern inhabitants of Greece who are the descendants of Slav, Albanian, Vlach and Christian Turk immigrants, who spoke Slavic, Albanian, Vlach and Turkish and who were ….."

I: Bre Risto, would you or we call us Greeks if we didnīt speak Greek and if we felt ashamed of Greek history and past? Arenīt we clearly Greeks? Are you Macedonian anything today? What is Macedonian on you, DAMN IT ??

R: Alexander the Great was thoroughly and indisputably Greek. [Says who?] "

I: Common sense and history, dear Risto. We know that SlavoSkopian propagandists do lack of that intentionally. Open your eyes: Alexander was Greek because he did spread Greek Language and Civilization to the World. If any modern white people do what Macedonians did we Greeks will call them Macedonians, if they want it.

R: Frankly Mr. Stephen G. Miller we are tired of the same old, same old! We have heard these arguments dozens of times from the Greek propagandists and we have more than once answered them already. You can find our answers at this link; http://www.americanchronicle.com/authors/view/3446 "

I: And still you insist claiming that Macedonians werenīt Greeks? For Godīs sake! What did they forget to do if they wanted to tell us loudly that they were Greeks bre Risto? Didnīt they write Greek? Didnīt they spread Greek Language and civilization to the World? Didnīt they name after Greek names ALL the cities they built or renamed? Didnīt southern Greeks honor, thank and haunt them for that? http://www.starkrealities.com/fortune.html

R: Mr. Stephen G. Miller why was the language of Greece Greek after 1829 when we know for a fact that the so-called king of Greece was a Bavarian prince? Why am I writing in English when I am Macedonian? Are these supposed to be "convincing" arguments?"

I: Are you raving bre Risto? Isnīt this a contradiction to your claim that Philhellenes created Greece upon non-Greek populations? Do you SlavoSkopians speak English when talking to each other? Well, Macedonians did speak Greek to each other. Have you seen Pella curse table written by a Macedonian girl in love?

R: Speaking Greek hardly has anything to do with ones own ethnicity. We use English today because of convenience. Many more people worldwide will understand me if I speak and write in English."

I: Well, Mr Risto, do you realize that you have reached the solution of the name problem? Look: if you SlavoSkopians make Greek an official language in FYROM and abort Slavic then you will not change ethnicity and we will call you Macedonians, as long as you do that! Go ahead! Language has nothing to do with ethnicity, said you above! We will not ask to change your "Macedonian" blood, PROMISE!

R: Why are the Modern Greeks, the descendants of Slav, Albanian, Vlach and Christian Turk immigrants who are "Greek" in name only, abducting a Macedonian figure such as Alexander the Great and make him into their national hero, especially since he conquered and subjugated the very same people modern Greeks today try to emulate?"

I: Because he wrote his name in Greek, maybe? Because you need our help to read what he wrote and said, maybe? Because you donīt dare to write his name as he wrote it, in his statue you are about to build in Skopje?

R: If Macedonians are "Slavs" what then are the modern Greeks? "

I: Greeks. Greek language has never stopped being heard in Greece and around. Macedonia wasnīt Macedonian only when it wasnīt Greek. You are Macedonian nothing. What is Macedonian on you? heroes, maybe? language, maybe? WHAT ??

R: One more thing Mr. Stephen G. Miller, are any of those who signed your letter aware that by supporting Greece they are in fact supporting Greeceīs anti-minority policies? "

I: What? Greece is EU member. Since the first Constitution of Greek state, written at 1822, "any person who comes in Greece is free from the very first moment". The banner "freedom or death" inspired not only Greeks but Slavs of Balkans, 100 years later. And because we both know pretty well what are you referring to, let me add that all what SlavoSkopians of Greece ( about 20,000 souls) ask is to read, write, teach and learn Macedonian. Well, this is exactly what Greece grants them. If they want something else they must ask it by name.

Dear good northern neighbors, stop living in Underground. It is shining but it is a fake World. You cannot lie to your children any more. They will live in an opened society and World. Protect them from international humiliation.

[George S.]

00 (AUS Eastern Daylight Time)

Home | Shop | Send Us Info | Subscribe | Advertise | Help |
News
World
National News
State News
Politics
Business (World)
Business (US)
Technology
Industry
Science
Medicine
Sports
Education
Entertainment
Opinion
Latest Articles
View Topics
View Authors
Features
Latest Articles
View Topics
View Authors
Community
Join Our List
Other Sections
Affiliates
Advertise
Video


Answer to Risto Stefov, #6 ( Macedonian name conflict - Education)
Istor the MacedonianApril 27, 2009
This article is an answer to Risto Stefovīs article entitled "Modern Greece and the Macedonian Heritage – Part 17 – Educationŧ and published here: http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/100122 Please, read that article before reading this answer.

Educators cannot lie, Mr Stefov. They respect children as no SlavoSkopian propagandist could respect them.

Educators of the World shall search, learn and teach the truth to the children of the World. Because ONLY truth will lead them to peace and friendship. Peace cannot raise upon lies or half-truths. No good thing could raise upon lies.

The identification of Macedonians with Greeks is natural. In fact, it is impossible to distinguish Macedonians and other Greeks but if you ask for regional identities. Look:

Macedonian is whoever is proud of that campaign that Macedonians did to spread Greek Language and Civilization to the World and belongs to the white race, right?

Greek is whoever is proud of that campaign that Macedonians did to spread Greek Language and Civilization to the World and belongs to the white race, right?

Do you see any difference? So, how could any mindful people distinguish Macedonians from Greeks? Didnīt Macedonian have Greek names, toponyms, ways, heroes, gods and dialect? Didnīt they proudly spread Greek Language and Civilization to the World? Didnīt they name after Greek names every city they built or renamed? Macedoniansī Greekness is doubtless.

What is that modern SlavoSkopians' vice against Macedoniansī Greekness? Are you ashamed of your Slavic identity? Do you feel threatened by lack of identity because you live near Greeks who are very and rightfully proud of our identity? (the question is rhetoric). Why do you lie to your own children about Macedonian and SlavoSkopian histories? http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/97071 Donīt you respect them at all? Are you really that fascist society? What is Macedonian about you Mr Kondoff? What is Macedonian about you Mr Stefov? What is not Slavic about you, dear ethnic SlavoSkopians? Names, toponyms, ways, heroes, gods, dialect or maybe pride for that campaignīs Greekness?



Enough, damn it! Respect yourselves and your identity, damn it! If you really love that much Macedonian name then macedonize yourselves. Stop being proud of Bulgarian heroes, language, names and toponyms. Start by toponyms: Donīt Solun any more: Thessaloniki. Donīt Plovdiv any more: Philippoupolis. Donīt let Titoīs dream, that is Macedonia's killer, to poison your identity, Macedonian dignity or peace of the Balkans.

Dear educators of the World, teach our children what we Greeks do teach them. Nothing but data and arguments about Macedonians and SlavoSkopians. Do not hide anything. When they grow up they will make right conclusions. For instance this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pella_curse_tablet is a Greek inscription written by a Macedonian girl in love, because this was her Macedonian language. This http://www.starkrealities.com/fortune.html ( passage 5 at least) is what southern Greeks wrote about Macedonians. This http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posidippus is a Macedonian poet of 1c AD. And this http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/98290 is what SlavoSkopians donīt teach their children.

I would call SlavoSkopian teachers to follow Worldīs teachers, but I know that they will loose their jobs if they do it. Anyway, if any teacher wants more information about Macedonian and SlavoSkopian histories let him ask me about.

It is impossible for any literate and mindful people to deny Macedoniansī Greekness: http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/92469

Istor

[George S.]

Answer to Risto Stefov, #5 ( Macedonian name conflict)
Istor the MacedonianApril 19, 2009
This article is an answer to Risto Stefovīs article entitled "Modern Greece and the Macedonian Heritage – Part 16 – On to Macedoniaŧ and published here: http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/98986 Please, read that article before reading this answer.

It is impossible for any literate and mindful people to deny Macedoniansī Greekness: http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/92469

In contrary to what Risto says, we Greeks do know the existence of Macedonians since the times of King Karanos, as a Greek tribe that lived to the North of the other Greek tribes. Those Macedoniansī proud descents defended Macedoniaīs Greekness through centuries against Slavic excruciation and Ottoman occupation. SlavoSkopians deny Macedoniansī Greekness and thus existence of Greeks in Macedonia. As if they are intentionally blind.

Smartly doing, as a good propagandist of evilness, Risto Stefov reduces discussion about Macedonia at the times after +6c when Slaves came in Balkans . He clearly stated in recent article that before that, Macedonians did not spoke Slavic; yet he denies accepting that they spoke Greek. But, no mindful people can deny this any more.

So, Macedonians did not exist since +6c but since very older times. That is since -8c, when, led by King Karanos, they left Argos (Peloponnesus) to live in the eastern slopes of Pindus and brink civilization there. And, of course, they were Greeks. Proved ones.

If SlavoSkopians deny this truth then no serious talking could take place with us. If they accept it though then they shall prove that fact by, lets say, adding an article in their constitution like "Macedonians of Alexander times have been Greeks"

All those references to Macedonian people cited by Risto in that pdf file are geographic or made by ignoramus or politician people. If those Ivan Ierakar and Marko Kraida and Dimitri Georgi Popovic were proud of that campaign then they were Macedonians. Otherwise they were not and Macedonian term is wrong or refers to gypsies or Vlachs of Macedonia. Risto dear, donīt ask us to deny the definition of a Macedonian cited below because some ignoramus claimed Macedonian.

Yes, SlavoSkopian nation did not exist before 20th c. Because:

1. Macedonian is whoever is proud of that campaign that Macedonians did to spread Greek Language and Civilization to the World. This is what humanity means when it says Macedonian the last 3000 years. If SlavoSkopians mean something else they shall change name.

2. ALL SlavoSkopian heroes mentioned in SlavoSkopian anthem clearly stated that they were Bulgarians. Delcev, Gruev, Misirkof, Miladinof, Sarafov, ….. all of them wrote and said, sometimes in secret, that they were Bulgarians. For instance lets see what Dame Gruev said. At September of 1903, that is just a month after Ilinden uprising, that SlavoSkopian consider the most famous "Macedonian" liberation action, he sent a telegram to Sofia, Bulgaria, begging for Bulgarian schools to open in Macedonia and Skopje regions:

" Considering the critical and terrible situation that the Bulgarian population of the Bitola Vilayet found itself in and following the ravages and cruelties done by the Turkish troops and irregulars, ... considering the fact that everything Bulgarian runs the risk of perishing and disappearing without a trace because of violence, hunger, and the upcoming misery, the Head Quarters finds it to be its obligation to draw the attention of the respected Bulgarian government to the pernicious consequences vis-a-vis the Bulgarian nation, in case the latter does not fulfill its duty towards its brethren of race here in an imposing fashion which is necessary by virtue of the present ordeal for the common Bulgarian Fatherland...



Being in command of our people's movement, we appeal to you on behalf of the enslaved Bulgarian to help him in the most effective way - by waging war. We believe that the response of the people in free Bulgaria will be the same.

No Bulgarian school is opened, neither will it be opened... Nobody thinks of education when he is outlawed by the state because he bears the name Bulgar...

Waiting for your patriotic intervention, we are pleased to inform you that we have in our disposition the armed forces we have spared by now.

The Head Quarters of the Ilinden Uprising

Damian GRUEV, Boris SARAFOV, Atanas LOZANTCHEV "

The telegram is in Sofia but SlavoSkopian leaders avoid examining it and of course they donīt inform SlavoSkopian people about it. Other arguments are here: http://www.network54.com/Forum/41592...ge/1126215175/

How can anyone say that those heroes were Macedonians? Mercy, damn it!

3. At 1908, that is only 5 years after famous Illinden uprising, the second Ottoman Parliament has been imposed and established. There were elections in the Empire after "Young Turks" movement. All populations of the Empire were called to elect their deputies. Guess what! No "Macedonian" deputy was elected !!! There were Turks, Arabs, Greeks, Bulgarians, Armenians, Jews etc even Vlachs. But no "Macedonian" !! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_...hilip_Mansel-0

4. And finally, at 1913 the Bucharest treaty council had taken place. Even Albanians were there. But no SlavoSkopians !! Why? Why Gladstone hasnīt imposed their presence?

So, how is it possible for "Macedonians" to fight for liberation while being absent from official councils and institutions?

Reading the hatred that Risto Stefovīs articles exhale against Greeks, I am wondering what would he do after the solution of the name problem. What would he tell to Greeks or to SlavoSkopians? Sorry? Well, the answer is pathetic: Risto doesnīt work for the solution of the problem but against any solution. He wants just to humiliate Greeks because he cannot loose a good source of money by keeping SlavoSkopian people in the darkness of Underground.

Dear ethnic SlavoSkopians, if you really love Macedonian name and notion that much then Hellenize yourselves. You cannot be Macedonians and Slavs. So, since you cannot (?) des-slavicize yourselves: Novomacedonia(n).

Happy Easter. Happy Easter Risto. I am sure that, some day, when the solution of the name problem comes, you will say sorry to us. Then we will drink raki with tzatziki and souvla in famous Aposkepos ( Aposkep!!), while dancing "kori Eleni" (Eleno mome), after visiting Aianiīs museum where I read for you the older Macedonian inscriptions: ŦΑΡΠΑΛΟΣ ΕΡΙΑŧ, ŦΙΠΠΟΜΑΧΑΣŧ

[George S.]

00 (AUS Eastern Daylight Time)

Home | Shop | Send Us Info | Subscribe | Advertise | Help |
News
World
National News
State News
Politics
Business (World)
Business (US)
Technology
Industry
Science
Medicine
Sports
Education
Entertainment
Opinion
Latest Articles
View Topics
View Authors
Features
Latest Articles
View Topics
View Authors
Community
Join Our List
Other Sections
Affiliates
Advertise
Video


Answer to Risto Stefov, #4 ( Macedonian name conflict)
Istor the MacedonianApril 13, 2009
This article is an answer to Risto Stefovīs article entitled "Modern Greece and the Macedonian Heritage – Part 15 – More questions ŧ and published here: http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/98095 Please, read that article before reading this answer.

It is impossible for any literate and mindful people to deny Macedoniansī Greekness: http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/92469

SlavoSkopians shall realize that they have nothing in common with Macedonians be ancient or modern. In fact they are ashamed of Macedonian past. Not only culture but the entire identity of them is Slavic. They are proud of belonging to the group of Slavic peoples, they are proud of "Civilizing" Slavs, as if Kyrillos and Methodios monks were Slavs. They have Slavic names, toponyms, ways, heroes, language and pride. All elements of their identity are Slavic. Donīt tell me about blood. Blood and dna are not related to ethnicity, at least within a race. http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/91930

Dear ethnic SlavoSkopians, if you want to be recognized and accepted as Macedonians you must macedonize yourselves that is you must reject your Slavicness. Otherewise there is nothing Macedonian about you. Macedonian is whoever is proud of that campaign that Macedonians did to spread Greek Language and Civilization to the World. Therefore Macedonians have always been Greeks.

Along with you, many other populations have lived in Macedonia. If you cannot realize that you are not Macedonians please realize that they are as Macedonians as you. But then, are Turks Yunanis for they settled the entire Ionia? No! Is Macedonian term geographic?

The region you live today has never been in Macedonia, except Pelagonia. Skopje was capital of Dardanians and then of Kosovars. Veles was capital of Peonia. Only 15% of FYROMīs land is in historic Macedonia. But that part had its own name, Pelagonia, which is free for you.

Do peoples change ethnicity when changing language? Of course. New language means new nation. If you donīt believe that then you have reached a solution of the name problem: You make Greek official Language in FYROM, you change Language of education to Greek and we will call you Macedonians!. What about that?



Risto Stefov is so miserably and pathetically anti-Greek that he is obviously blind. He wrote that you changed language at +6c but you havenīt changed the name of your language! You spoke Macedonian before +6c, you changed language after that and you are still speaking Macedonian today! Should I laugh or cry? Should I insult him, you or your leaders? MERCY, DAMN IT!

No, Mr. Stefov, we Greeks do not relate ethnicity with ancestry. Despite the big majority of us have direct ancestry from ancient Greeks we do know that this is not what makes us Greeks. Since the times of Herodotus and Issocrates we do know that Greekness is a matter of education ( at home or not). Ethnicity is software, race is hardware. Thatīs why many peoples around have Greek blood in their veins but are not Greeks any more.

The second half of Ristoīs article is written only to humiliate Greeks. No, it doesnīt deserve any serious comment. It is just pathetic. To see Greeks ( that is Hellenes, Yunan, Danaans, Achaeans, Argeians, …) around at any time after -20c, just open your eyes.

But let me inform Risto that Santa Claus did exist and was Greek. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_Claus

Never forget:

Greek is whoever is proud of that campaign that Macedonians did to spread Greek Language and Civilization to the World.

Macedonian is whoever is proud of that campaign that Macedonians did to spread Greek Language and Civilization to the World.

Yunan is whoever is proud of that campaign that Macedonians did to spread Greek Language and Civilization to the World.

SlavoSkopian is whoever is ashamed of that campaign that Macedonians did to spread Greek Language and Civilization. SlavoSkopian is whoever is ashamed of Macedoniansī doubtless Greekness.

Istor

Macedonian, therefore Greek.