The Macedonian Minority in Bulgaria

[Miliket]

Originally Posted by vicsinad

I've seen this on the web a lot lately. "Macedonians."

Perhaps "Bulgarians" is more accurate, being that about 1/3 of the "Bulgarian" population is descended from Macedonian refugees of the late 19th and early 20th century.

Do you even have a proof that 2.400.000 people in Bulgaria descends from people that called themselves Macedonians?

And why would they migrate to Bulgaria and resettle there if they called themselves Macedonians? Why not to Skopje? And why would they then lose their Macedonian self-awareness?

[vicsinad]

Originally Posted by Miliket

Do you even have a proof that 2.400.000 people in Bulgaria descends from people that called themselves Macedonians?

And why would they migrate to Bulgaria and resettle there if they called themselves Macedonians? Why not to Skopje? And why would they then lose their Macedonian self-awareness?

I have more evidence demonstrating that many Bulgarians are descended from Macedonians than you have proof suggesting that Macedonians are just "Macedonians"...

Why would refugees from Macedonia (fleeing Turkish atrocities) resettle in Skopje, which is in Macedonia? That doesn't make sense. "Oh, a fire is burning down my house. I'll just go from the dining room into the kitchen to be safe from the fire."

Who said all of them lost their Macedonian self-awareness? Not all did.

[Karposh]

Originally Posted by Miliket

Do you even have a proof that 2.400.000 people in Bulgaria descends from people that called themselves Macedonians?

And why would they migrate to Bulgaria and resettle there if they called themselves Macedonians? Why not to Skopje? And why would they then lose their Macedonian self-awareness?

Here's what a couple of Macedonians living in Bulgaria had to say about the matter about a century ago.

Dimitar Blagoev in 1917 Bulgarian parliament:
“I am not a Bulgarian, I am a Macedonian, a Macedonian Slav.”

Kosta Shahov 1:
“But don’t you believe for one minute that the revolutionaries are working towards an autonomous Macedonia that would, in the end, be incorporated into Bulgaria. God Forbid! That will never be…All of us Macedonians, no matter where we are, no matter how educated we are, none will allow Macedonia to be incorporated into any other…Instead, we will work towards incorporating other provinces to her. We, the intelligentsia, were educated by the Russians, Romanians, Serbs and Bulgarians…However, none of us will become slaves to any of these and at any cost. Instead, they will immediately go to their own flock, as we too have done…We have a glorious element, and our people is resilient. And once Macedonia gains autonomy, then Bulgaria will sooner become Macedonian rather than Macedonia – Bulgarian. We have a real chance for that to occur…In Bulgaria, the highest positions are held by Macedonians…without question, when the time comes, today’s notables, Macedonian by nationality, will come over to us and Bulgaria will be Macedonian…We believe this will be so sooner or later…Macedonia will be a state (Republican) and she will look towards drawing other states in a union as cantons and, that way, she will be powerful country”.

Kosta Shahov 2:
“Our fatherland Macedonia has her own history about her past, where one can see her might, glory, as well as her political subjugation under the rule of the then mighty Turkish Empire…Today, every Macedonian, when he mentions the name Aleksandar Makedonski, says: We once had King Alexander the Great. With those words he reminds oneself of the brightest period and glory of the Macedonian State. Aleksandar Makedonski stands before every Macedonian as national pride.”

From a Bulgarian perspective, Atanas Shopov, discussing the Macedonians with the Salonika Valiya, Hasan-Fehmi Pasha in the beginning of 1904:
“How can they not cause trouble pasha effendi when the bigger part of the Macedonian population is in Bulgaria, the greater portion of the population of Sofia is Macedonian, a big portion of the officers in the army are Macedonians, a big part of the esteemed establishment are Macedonians and, the whole Macedonian intelligentsia from Macedonia is in Bulgaria. Even the crowds in the streets are Macedonian…We have even more reason than you to be aggrieved by the Macedonians because they have taken over our hold on power, they have taken our best positions and services, they have taken over our finances and cities, they have taken over our army and ministries, they have taken over our trade, they have taken over just about everything in Bulgaria. Save us from them in the name of God”

From Wikipedia (Macedonian entry):
About 430 (33%) from a total of 1,289 Officers were from Macedonia. 15,000 (43%) from 35,000 public servants originated from Macedonia, while 1,262 (37%) from 3,412 Exarchate priests were from Macedonia. “The Bulgarian by birth is in conflict with the Macedonian who is competing for his services”. Quote is referenced in Macedonian Wikipedia.

And, from perhaps the most important Bulgarian perspective, the 19th century Bulgarian geographer, ethnographer and politician, Vasil Kanchov:
“The local Bulgarians and Kucovlachs who live in the area of Macedonia call themselves Macedonians, and the surrounding nations also call them Macedonians. Turks and Albanians from Macedonia do not call themselves Macedonians, but when asked where they are from, they respond: from Macedonia. Albanians, who also call their country Anautluk, and Greeks who live in the southern area of Macedonia, do not call themselves Macedonians, hence the borders in these areas according to the peoples’ perception are not clearly defined.”
As you can see even Vasil Kanchov, who was tasked with counting the Macedonians as Bulgarians for the purpose of statistical manipulation and propaganda, felt compelled to concede and declare that Macedonians considered themselves exactly that, Macedonians. There are no hyphenated self identifiers such as Slav-Macedonians, Bulgarian-Macedonians, Serb-Macedonians or Greek-Macedonians…Just Macedonians.

You and others like you believe the bullshit Bulgaria has been peddling for over century and a half but it’s a shame Kosta Shahov’s predictions of Bulgaria becoming a part of Macedonia (instead of the other way around) didn’t come true. Macedonians didn’t lose their self awareness. A century and a half of Bulgarian persecution against the Macedonian identity is what we have here and not a conscious decision to become Bulgarian patriots. Dig a little deeper, I’m sure you’ll find that your great (or great, great) grandfather was from Lerin, Kostur, Voden, Seres or Drama and considered himself a Macedonian when he moved to Bulgaria all those years ago.

[Spirit]

Originally Posted by Miliket

I'm not trying to be rude or anything but have you guys ever looked from Bulgaria's perspective? They have a lot of proof compared to you guys... But all you "Macedonians" always respond to something that disprooves your "theories" with "IT'S FABRICATED!! WE'RE RIGHT!!" or something like that.

"From Bulgaria's perspective?"
Are you serious?
What matters is our perspective, our perspective is that we are Macedonians and that's all that matters, we self determine and identify as Macedonians as is our right per The Universal Declaration Of Human Rights

[Redsun]

Originally Posted by Miliket

I'm not trying to be rude or anything but have you guys ever looked from Bulgaria's perspective? They have a lot of proof compared to you guys... But all you "Macedonians" always respond to something that disprooves your "theories" with "IT'S FABRICATED!! WE'RE RIGHT!!" or something like that.

What good is their perspective?

Just like selective listeners, they are selective viewers. They are afraid to open their eyes because the simplest of questions threatens their beliefs and just like other nationalist they will irrationally defend their nationalism.

How can I "look" from a Bulgarians perspective if they are blind?

Concerning the Bulgarians... Have you confused "perception" with "national consciousness"?

Why do you lie about comparing our history? If you really had, you wouldn't be here making an idiot of yourself.

In your first statement here, you make it obvious you are a hypocrite as you ask me to look from Bulgaria's perspective as if you had, at any time at all, looked from any other perspective.

Have you ever taken the time to look at both perspectives in a dispute before you open your big mouth? Then you make a statement regarding perception...

You haven't compared anything, haven't you?

What is it that you regard "theories", are you commenting on my history when you have made it obvious that you don't know what your talking about.

You have been very rude.

[Karposh]

I had to resurface this thread after stumbling onto some really interesting information recently.

Originally Posted by Miliket

I'm not trying to be rude or anything but have you guys ever looked from Bulgaria's perspective? They have a lot of proof compared to you guys... But all you "Macedonians" always respond to something that disprooves your "theories" with "IT'S FABRICATED!! WE'RE RIGHT!!" or something like that.

In reply to this plea from our Bulgarian friend, for some consideration of the Bulgarian perspective on Macedonia and Macedonians, I quoted Vasil Kanchov’s candid observation that the “Bulgarians” of Macedonia referred to themselves simply as Macedonians and that the surrounding peoples knew them as such.

In the same vein as the above, I’d like to present another Bulgarian perspective from a guy that I recently became aware of. Those in the know will of course have heard of the name Petar Draganov but for me it came as a complete surprise to read about this guy. A Bessarabian Bulgarian, he was invited by the Bulgarian church to be a teacher at the Bulgarian Boy’s High School in Solun where he could spread the idea that the Macedonians are really Bulgarians (the majority of the students in this school were in fact Macedonian natives).

Instead, the opposite happened and, during his dealings with the students and travels around Macedonia, Draganov found an unrelated people in the Macedonians. Although Draganov initially believed the propaganda that was fed him, his own research on the subject allowed him to draw his own independent conclusions and he wasn’t afraid to voice them. He is credited with having written a number of scientific journals based on his years of research on the cultural, ethnic and linguistic independence of the Macedonians and Macedonian language.

[Risto the Great]

Any texts we can refer to?

[Karposh]

There’s some basic info on him on English Wikipedia but you can get a more detailed look on Macedonian Wikipedia. Not sure how well you can read Cyrillic but there are some examples of his works in the photo section below the article and then some references of his works in the “Nadvoreshni Vrski” section.

https://mk.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9F...BD%D0%BE%D0%B2

[Amphipolis]

http://www.gate.net/~mango/Draganov.htm

Petar Danilovich Draganov[1],
1888:A New Work on the Ethnography of the Macedonian Slavs

Even today the collection of the Miladinov brothers, which has long since become a bibliographical rarity, serves as almost the only source of information for the ethnographic and dialectologicad study of the Slav section of Macedonia, a land of varied peoples, languages and cultures. However, while there are valuable examples in the Miladinov'a book -- printed in the original Greek transcription -- they are only from the regions of Struga, Kostur (Kastoria), Debar, Ohrid, Veles (Koprulu), Bitola (Monastir), Prilep and Kukush (Kilkis).

This is a relatively small number of places when we take into consideration the fact that, according to the data of the Bulgarian, A. Ofeikoff (a pseudonym), there are 3,289 places in today's Macedonia. And for the insignificant collection of S.I. Verkovich (Narodne pesme makedonskih Bugara - Folk Songs of the Macedonian Bulgarians), we find in it new examples for only (the village of) Krushevo (Mrvachko)[2], the Razlog region, and primarily the Serres region. In 1885, there appeared the first part of an anthology conceived as a comprehensive work by K. Shapkarev from Ohrid; in it there are excellent examples of little-known Macedonian prose, but again, they are not of significant interest for the study of the Macedonian dialects, because they come from the aforementioned regions of Ohrid, Prilep, Kukush, with the addition of the region of Gevgelija.

Information about the Debar subdialect has been substantially enriched by I.S. Jastrebov with the publication of his collection of songs and customs of the Serbs from the Kosovo vilayet. Prior to Mr Jastrebov's work, two or three examples from that area were published by M.S. Drinov (in Periodichesko spisanie -Periodic Journal in Braila). This, however, is not adequate. To which branch should this Debar subdialect be linked -- to the Serbian or the Bulgarian -- or is there no need to link it to either of them? The poorly edited, often inaccurate examples in the biased collections of M. Milojevich (Pesme i Obichaji Ukupnog Naroda Sprskoh -- Songs and Customs of the Whole Serbian People) and S. Verkovich (Slav Vedas), certainly cannot be taken as reliable sources. A. Dozon's collection is no better, although this collector, being a foreigner, can be forgiven his errors. This seems the place to say that the late Bulgarian critic and writer, Luben Karavelov, in his book Znanie (Knowledge) (1876), was correct in his sharp judgement of these Macedonian forgers -- both Bulgarophiles and Serbophiles (Verkovich, Dozon, Vezenkovich, Milojevich and others). Finally, to this we should perhaps add the numerous and useful ethnographic notes and examples of the so-called Macedonian dialect, scattered throughout a multitude of Bulgarian periodicals published at various times and in various cities of South-Eastern Europe and even in the Middle East. Not a third of this number of journals is to be found in the Sofia or Plovdiv National Libraries. And a Slavist could find even fewer of these editions in his study room. He would have to dig through newspaper morgues in order to find two or three details of interest to him. So we see that in spite of all our persistent studies, we managed to find very few, and then not always satisfactorily edited, examples. And these are solely from the following dialects:

the Salonica dialect -- in the Constantinople journal Sovqtnik (Advisor) of 1865 (reprinted by M. Gattalo in V. Jagich's Knjizevnik (Writer);
the Voden dialect -- primarily one song, which was accidentally included in the Miladinov's collection, and one other, poorly edited by M. Milojevich;
Kratovo dialect -- of which there is a very good monograph in Braila Periodichesko spisanie;
Dzhumaja dialect -- in the Western-Bulgarian (Shopic) Collection of V. Kachanovski;
Melnik dialect -- one song, from the same collection;
Shtip dialect -- two songs, poorly edited in Plovdiv Nauka (Science)
Tetovo dialect - one song honoring King Lazar, which we find with I. S. Jastrebov (it is also given by M. Milojevich, but it is either printed with errors or incorrectly written down);
Nevrokop, and
Ahachelebisko dialects[3] -- unphonetic songs, published in V. Cholakov's collection.


In addition there is the South Pomak dialect: in Bulgarian Iljustracija (Illustration) of 1882, by H. Konstantinov; in N. Shishkov's collection of 1886 (Plovdiv); by P. Slaveikov, Nauka 1882/83; by the Russian ethnographist, A. A. Bashmakow, also published in Nauka and finally by the Czech Bulgarist, K. Irechek, in book 8 of Periodichesko spisanie. Considering all of these, we have at our disposal material primarily from the part of Macedonia which borders on Albania.

We have a few accidentally and consequently not always well edited examples of some dialects spoken on the left side of the River Vardar. We have no examples whatsoever from South-Western, South-Eastern, and most important, Northern Macedonia. The latter represents a bone of contention between the Serbian and Bulgarian patriots, and even between some philologists. That is, we have not a line of specially published dialectological and ethnographical material from the following regions: Salonica, Enidzhe-Vardar, Doiran (Polin), Voden (Edhessa), Meglen, Kichevo, Resen, Lerin (Florina), Petrich, Drama, and regrettably not from Skopje, Kumanovo, Kriva Palanka, Kochani and Gostivar. Now if one does not want to believe the honest word of the Bulgrarians or the Serbs, who persistently claim that the whole Slav population of modern Macedonia speaks the dearest, one and inseparable literary Bulgarian, or respectively, literary Serbian language, one must state that it is necessary to investigate and prove such claims. In spite of the fact that the Macedonian Collection (Collection Macedonienne) is being published by the Bulgarian Exarchate and edited by Mr Ofeikoff with clear propagandist aims, i.e. to defend the Greater-Bulgarian idea of Macedonia from the corresponding Serbian idea, it will contribute a great deal to the treasury of Macedonistics.

According to the now available data, this collection will comprise 1,500 examples from all the regions of the Macedonian Slav province, recorded by Macedonians themselves and sent to the Bulgarian Exarchate by its activists and teachers in Macedonia. The title of the collection has also been aptly chosen: they do not use the Bulgarian but the neutral Macedonian Slav name (Macedoine Slave). This demonstrates the aim of the collection to be objective in the future study of the philological issue, thereby once and for all deciding whose examples these are - Serbian or Bulgarian. Do they belong to the aspirants partially or entirely? Are there some examples that should belong neither to the Serbs nor Bulgarians, but entirely to the Macedonians? It is regrettable that this eagerly awaited collection (and its texts) have not yet been seen by the world, with the exception of the article mentioned above, by the Bulgarian scholar, Mr Ofeikoff, representing profession de foi (a confession, editor's note) of the Great Bulgarian idea, and Mr. A. P. Sirku's article on Macedonian philology, which comprise the first part.

The historical articles of professor M. S. Drinov and Mr V. V. Kachanovski should appear later. Articles of the well-known historian of Bulgaria, K. Irechek, and two other Slavists should have been included in the collection, however they refused to participate. It has become imperative that these articles, written partly in Bulgarian and partly in Russian, should be translated into French, since their special purpose was to present them to the Western European education experts. And above all, the translation is necessary to reach the political and diplomatic circles who, the publishers hope, will identify themselves with the collection's central idea, in the practical resolvement of the Macedonian Question. Concerning this, we must note here that the diplomats, accustomed as they are to the preciseness of the French language, its exactness and clarity of expression, will be probably horrified by the French into which these articles have been translated. They may also be hororified by the printing and grammatical errors in the French introduction and especially in Ofeikoff's article. It is obvious that Mr Ofeikoff's lengthy introduction is an adaptation of his article which appeared last year in that mouthpiece of the future European Afghanistan and that of the future close "confederation" of all the Peoples of the Balkan under the protection of Austria, Revue de l'Orient. The latter is published in Budapest by the Hebrew, W. Weltner, the Pole, DePulski, and the Hungarian, Attila Semera. The Revue maintains a permanent staff of investigators and correspondents at large -- Bulgarian, Serbian, Wallachian (Romanian) Macedonian, Greek, even Turkish -- who are allowed to freely indulge in the scholarly polemics of the Macedonian subject.

Ofeikoff"s article is nothing but an elaborate polemic with the prominent Serbian writer, Matija Ban. Mr Ban has continued up to present day to dispute his Bulgarian opponents on the subject of whether the Ohrid Exarchate (i.e. Archbishopric, editor's note), the former Prima Justiniana, the centres of which were Skopje and Kustendil, was Bulgarian or Serbian church. Mr Ofeikoff quotes Ubicini, I.Miiller, Grisebach, Kolb, Bart, Hilferding, N. N. Obruchev, Mackenzie, Irby and others, who have allegedly long ago on an academic level resolved the Macedonian language question in favor of the Bulgarian patriots, and draws the conclusion that "all those well-known authors, ethnographers and travelling writers bear witness to the fact that Macedonia is populated by Bulgarians only" (Cf. Revue de I'Orient, 1887, No. 27). He also claims this in his new work, the only difference being that the latter is even more embellished with vain assumptions. For example, Mr Ofeikoff here mentions the following authors: Y. Venelin, P. J. Safarik, I. Muller, V. I. Grigorovich, Ami Boue, Cruz, Grisebach, Peterman, A. F. Hilferding, Lejean, Dumas, Dozon, Stein, Kolb, Reklyu, Bush, A. S. Budilovich, N. S. Obruchev, and A. F. Ritih, V. S. Teplov, V. V. Kachanovski, Mackenzie, Irby, Lavelle, plus such historians as Paisii Samokovski (the author of Tsarstvenik (Lives of Kings) and L. Dobrov (the author of Turki i Slavjane (Turks and Slavs)), and derives this conclusion: "None of these scholars has traveled through European Turkey aiming to reveal the Bulgarians. All of these writers and ethnographers declare that Macedonia is populated with Bulgarian Slavs"(p. 7).

But such a dogmatic solution to the Macedonian Question does not correspond by any means with the exceptionally complex scientific difficulties this question represents. As far as A. P. Sirku's article on Macedonian phonology is concerned, albeit unsystematic and verbose, it represents a complete exposition of all that has been shown up to now in the few published examples of Macedonian dialectology. The new thing here is that the author presents his own classification of the dialects in the Bulgarian language. He mentions four dialects: Thraco-Mysian, Shopic, Rhodopic or Rupalan (Rupis) and Macedonian. Another unique thing is that he writes in detail about the Rhodopic dialect partly from the material published by V. Cholakov, P. Slaveikov and N. Shishkov, as well as on the basis of S. Verkovich's Vedas. Furthermore, Sirku writes about the Debar dialect, disputing the well-known assertions of I. S. Jastrebov concerning this dialect. And he exhausts the scientific literature available on the nasalisms )|( and A in modern Macedonian Slav dialects, which are related to the East Bulgarians nasalisms. Doubtlessly he did not know that there is also nasalism or rineism in the Voden, Meglen, Resen and Demir Hisar dialects, and that the triple postpositive article in Macedonia is not only characteristic of the Rhodopic Pomaks, Tikvesh and Debar areas, but also of all the Brzaks (Brsyaks) from Prilep, Veles, Bitola and other regions. Therefore, it is understandable that Mr Sirku, starting from the known published literature on the Macedonian vernacular, has looked more extensively into the Rhodopic than the Macedonian dialect. However, the Western Rhodpic dialects on the border between Thrace and Macedonia are not so important to the academic solution of the Serbo- Bulgarian language issue, as are the dialects in South-Western, and especially, North-Western Macedonia. These apparently are completely unknown to Mr Sirku, so that what was unknown before remains so.

To expect others to believe from him what the Bulgarian experts themselves do not know is, to put it kindly, difficult. It is therefore with impatience that we await the publication of the Bulgarian Exarchate Macedonian Collection with its 1,500 examples of "folk songs, collected from peasants from all Slav Macedonia." Nor would it be inappropriate for the Serbian Academy of Sciences (the former Serbian Scientific Society), from its side, to edit and publish a Macedonian collection. Certainly, though, it should not be like the collections of M. Milojevich and Vuk Karadzhich, but compiled Sine studio et sine ira. Perhaps this is the place, too, to mention that currently the Serbs have their own consulates in Macedonia, lead by Mr S(tojan) Novakovich, a Serbian (diplomatic) delegate to Constantinople, who is also a respected philologist and has paid great service to Bulgarian literary history. In addition, if I succeed in publishing the Macedonian collection I have compiled, comprising about thousand texts from 105 populated areas in Macedonia, we can assume that with these combined materials the major problems of Macedonian dialectology can be solved. Having all this at our disposal, the Slav philological science should be able to solve, once and for all, the Macedonian language issue and to decide impartially what in these three Macedonian Slav collections belongs to the Bulgarian vernacular and what to the Serbian, and what then naturally, because it belongs neither to the Serbian nor Bulgarian, is the property only of the separate and independent Macedonian vernacular.

(Journal of the National Education Ministry), St Petersburg, Book CCLV, April 1888.

NOTES

[1] P. D. Draganov (1857-1928) was a versatile Russian Slavist of Bulgarian origin. He was graduated in 1884 from St Petersburg University, Faculty of History and Philology. He was granted the title of Candidate of historical and philological sciences at the same university. He was a professor in the Bulgarian Exarchate grammar-school in Salonica for three years (1885-1887). He wrote several works on Macedonistics. In this article he makes an analysis of A. Ofeikoff's work (a pseudonym for Atanas Shopov, secretary of the Bulgarian Exarch in Constantnople) entitled La Macedoine au point du vue ethnographique, historique et philologique Philopopoli, 1887.

[2] Krushevo is a place in the Demir Hisar district, Serres region (in Aegean Macedonia).

[3] Ahachelebisko is a place in Western Thrace.

[Karposh]

Thank you for posting that extensive reference Amphipolis. I trust you read it too and decided that the article speaks for itself and that no further commentary is needed? I can summarise it in one sentence for you if you like. All Draganov is saying is that the various Macedonian dialects that the Bulgarians and Serbs are trying to pass off as the purest form of Bulgarian and Serbian is in fact neither but simply Macedonian.