Who are the FYROMians?

[HungAryan]

Simple question, simple answer.

Don't post before the poll is added.

[Ushtari]

Monkeydonkeyians are Burglarian gypsies

[Unurautare]

I put "Slavicized descendants of Ancient Macedonians" because I see them as unique in the region,not necessarily that I believe they all descend from Alexander the Great.

[Tabiti]

"God created 3 races - Mongoloid (Yellow), Negroid (Black) and Macedon (White)!".
This is taught in some elementary school and kindergardens in FYROM, so be serious when it is about the mighty Macedons!


because I see them as unique in the region
Yeah, unique language, look, customs...They are unique in only one thing - making the lack of national history and identity an advantage. Just the opposite of us.

[HungAryan]

"God created 3 races - Mongoloid (Yellow), Negroid (Black) and Macedon (White)!".
This is taught in some elementary school and kindergardens in FYROM, so be serious when it is about the mighty Macedons!

LOL :rotfl:

It reminds me to Korea and South Sudan.

Koreans


OEba68tEuFw
OqEP0Fn5YDo
Ng6w4YaBpxA
CHtJ8pzz27Y
iugsAkysb8g

South Sudan


t8x6D2liNTw

Listen at 0:26 :D

[Caeruleus]

delusional bulgarians :confused::D (its only a joke)

[Midori]

"God created 3 races - Mongoloid (Yellow), Negroid (Black) and Macedon (White)!".
This is taught in some elementary school and kindergardens in FYROM, so be serious when it is about the mighty Macedons!

That's not true. I've never heard any of the teachers in the schools I went to say something like that. It was just some stupid funny commercial that was broadcast on national TV. But yeah, most of the people here believe they are direct descendants of Alexander the Great which is kinda silly in my opinion and we all know why..

As for the question, I'm not sure but I think the general genetic makeup of the nation would be Slavic + some ancient Macedonian and perhaps some other tribes indigenous to the Balkans.

[Osweo]

Lightly slavicised Palaeobalkanites (their grammar is distinctly unslavonic, as is that of the Bulgarians proper) who slipped between stools and were not sufficiently brought into the Serbian or Bulgar political realms to imprint this new smaller-than-simply-'Slavonic' identity onto them. In the past, their educated people seem to have had less trouble adopting a straight forward Bulgarsky identitiy, but political factors impeded this from taking root enough in recent times.

[Hurrem sultana]

they dont look slavic at all,they language is slavic only

[Panopticon]

From what I have seen Slavic looks are quite common among Macedonians. Baltid/Baltoid influences are very common among them. That the majority of them don't look stereotypically Slavic could be said for all South Slavs as well.

[HungAryan]

Glad to see that one of my threads finally stayed civil and did not turn into a trollfest instantly :D

[morski]

I'll just post these:

http://www.picvalley.net/u/2158/4485747211740290766.JPG

http://www.picvalley.net/u/2610/6485773382129877308.JPG

Бойни знамена на Шеста Охридска дружина от Македоно-Одринското опълчение (http://bkks.org/forum/index.php/topic,263.msg1368.html#msg1368)

http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRppHhSxkjNCaWrTahkDr3hohl_gD6p4 c5JeQU3iFWy89a_S_N8ljCfR8b8

[Queen B]

Slavs and Albanians.

[Incal]

A bunch of bulgarians and albanians who were granted a country coz the US needed more proxies in the region.

[Dejan]

Fyromians are assimilated bulgarians,nothing more.

[Unurautare]

Macedonian stuff :cool::

*Images(the spoiler is because it's ultra-nationalistic and obscene):
http://turkeymacedonia.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/macedonia-united.png

http://puu.sh/9ZIN

The woman in the Macedonian cartoon is Greek Foreign Minister Dora Bakoyannis (I suggest you see this 1st -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ODaUkwIJ2qc and http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=iv&annotation_id=annotation_214622&src_vid=h_b0_gFin5A&v=mhf8_QpHRlo). This cartoon especially trashes Greeks but also the other neighbors that claim Macedonia and Alexander the Great.

h_b0_gFin5A

cm1SseBJIwc

y8WyZjJwrsM

FsRGhrHSvZI

4nKZ6DRaCz0

[Turkophagos]

http://i28.tinypic.com/r7p1jp.jpg

[Queen B]

Hahahhaha cool post Chimo

[Bakura]

They are blend of Slavicized Ancient Macedonians and Slavs, most of them have dark hair and dark eyes, but I also saw blond Macedonians. :thumbs up

[morski]

They are blend of Slavicized Ancient Macedonians and Slavs, most of them have dark hair and dark eyes, but I also saw blond Macedonians. :thumbs up

Yeah and the Little Red Riding Hood is their commander-in-chief and wears the star of Vergina on her mantle:D

[Queen B]

Yeah and the Little Red Riding Hoodis their commander-in-chief and wears the star of Vergina on her mantle:D

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_u0XIriS-d3c/SrlIrnjCQyI/AAAAAAAAJ5o/Uc_4zWhA5BA/s400/skopjie_51.jpg

Look at the athletic socks ! :lol:

[Trun]

Fyromanians? They are creatures that Tito and the commies created.
One day they will be on the queue for Bulgarian passports when Albanians spread more into their "country".
I'm just sorry that the grandfathers of the "proud" Fyromanians died with the shout "For Bulgaria". :icon_cry: It's sad when your grandparents are Bulgarian but you are Fyromanian...

[Flintlocke]

They're a bunch of unimportant people, they are self hating Bulgarians and angry while the proper Bulgarians are drinking vodka and chilling under the sun.

[morski]

You are all haters.Macedonia is a reality and nobody can change that fact.

I'm perfectly OK with the existence of their state. It's the shitty view on history they use to indoctrinate their citizens and their shallow propaganda that bothers me.

[Trun]

You are all haters.Macedonia is a reality and nobody can change that fact.
Are you an Albanian living in FYROM or simply a Fyromanian pretending to be an Albanian? Just asking.

[Trun]

I hope you are sarcastic.

[Γέλως]

Macedonians have vanished long before the Slavs arrived in the region (6th century). So the notion that Slavs have mixed with them is inaccurate. At the time they arrived the most could have been occurred is mixing with various Roman citizens.

[Hess]

whether you people like it or not, there ARE a people called the Macedonians and the vast majority of them have a national identity- they are not Greeks or Bulgarians in denial like some of you are saying

[The Journeyman]

The Persian chronicler Ibn al-Faqih wrote that there were two types of saqaliba: those with swarthy skin and dark hair that live by the sea and those with fair skin and light hair that live farther inland. Abu Zayd al-Balkhi described three main centers of the Saqaliba - Kuyaba, Slavia, and Artania.

Ibrahim ibn Yaqub placed the people of "Saqalib" in the mountainous regions of Central Balkans, west of the Bulgarians and east from the "other Slavs" (Croat and Serb land). The Saqalib had the reputation of being "the most courageous and violent"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saqaliba

[Queen B]

Where did they go?The earth didn't suck them.They reappeared again in history with the same Macedonian ethnonym just slightly Slavicized.

Where did they go? They evolve together with the rest of Greeks.
The ''Macedonian'' haven't dissapeared, it continued all these years and was assosiated with Greeks.

The so-called Macedonians, what they are? Some years ago they were calling themselves Yugoslavians, Serbians, Bulgarians, Albanians...
The exact same people claiming even national hereos or figures from Greece, Albania, Bulgaria, Serbia...

[iNird]

Serbian or Bulgarian. There are a few assimilated Albanians, vlachs, Greeks and other groups but they are not as numerous.

[Queen B]

Ancient authors separated the Macedonians as different ethnos.

Ancient authors also DIDN't and actually wrote the opossite.

(Too bored to do it right now, I can post you tommorow tho)

[morski]

Most of what they use as indentification attributes(appart from the Greek name and continuity since Alexander mythos) is actually Bulgarian history period. Either they accept they are an entirely new nation created by the communist International around WW2(and leave history to professionals), or they put up with the fact that they are not getting any friends in the vicinity.

[Queen B]

I provided you just a sample of sources.In various occassions they were considered as just slightly Hellenized Paleo-Balkanites more the upper caste since Hellenic language was lingua franca in those times,but clearly they were differed from Greeks,probably clustering more with neighbouring Illyrian/Albanian and Thracian/Bulgarian neighbours just as today.

I can provide you twice, or multiple times more...

The lingua-france thing is getting more and more rediculous.
Why other civilazations who also used the Greek as lingua franca had NON Greek names?
Why other civilazations who also used the Greek as lingua franca had inscriptions found in other languages other than Greek?
Why other civilazations who also used the Greek as lingua franca had different culture?
Why other civilazations who also used the Greek as lingua franca did NOT spread Greek culture?
Why other civilazations who also used the Greek as lingua franca did NOT considered themselves Greeks?

What you are trying to deny here is the obvious. They spoke ONLY Greek, they considered themselves GREEKS, they spread GREEK culture, all ancient artifacts found where in GREEK, they followed the art that GREEKS followed, worship the same gods like GREEKS did, took place in Olympic games where only GREEKS participated, fighted together with the rest of GREEKS,etc , etc....
Its not lingua franca. Its that everything that is associated with them was ONLY Greek.

Omg, now I saw it.. You changed from Albanian to ''Macedonian''?

[Hess]

I can provide you twice, or multiple times more...

The lingua-france thing is getting more and more rediculous.
Why other civilazations who also used the Greek as lingua franca had NON Greek names?
Why other civilazations who also used the Greek as lingua franca had inscriptions found in other languages other than Greek?
Why other civilazations who also used the Greek as lingua franca had different culture?
Why other civilazations who also used the Greek as lingua franca did NOT spread Greek culture?
Why other civilazations who also used the Greek as lingua franca did NOT considered themselves Greeks?

What you are trying to deny here is the obvious. They spoke ONLY Greek, they considered themselves GREEKS, they spread GREEK culture, all ancient artifacts found where in GREEK, they followed the art that GREEKS followed, worship the same gods like GREEKS did, took place in Olympic games where only GREEKS participated, fighted together with the rest of GREEKS,etc , etc....
Its not lingua franca. Its that everything that is associated with them was ONLY Greek.

Omg, now I saw it.. You changed from Albanian to ''Macedonian''?


If Macedonians are really Greeks in denial as you seem to believe, why is it that Macedonian immigrants are treated to so poorly in Greece?

[Queen B]

If Macedonians are really Greeks in denial as you seem to believe, why is it that Macedonian immigrants are treated to so poorly in Greece?

If by Macedonians you mean the residents of Fyrom, let me re-name your question

If Fyromians are really Greeks in denial as you seem to believe, why is it that Fyromian immigrants are treated to so poorly in Greece?

I never said that Fyromians are Greek in denial. Fyromians are a mix of Serbians-Bulgarians and Albanians, the have NO relation to Macedonians aka Greeks.

Also, there are no Fyromian IMMIGRANTS here in Greece. There are a few hundreds of Fyromian ancestry (previously calling themselves Bulgarians and/or Serbians). How exactly they are treated ''poorly''?

[Hess]

If by Macedonians you mean the residents of Fyrom, let me re-name your question

By Macedonians, I mean ethnic Macedonians from the Republic of Macedonia.


Also, there are no Fyromian IMMIGRANTS here in Greece. There are a few hundreds of Fyromian ancestry (previously calling themselves Bulgarians and/or Serbians). How exactly they are treated ''poorly''?

Here is an excellent essay about the systematic denial of rights to the Macedonian minority by the Greek government.

http://www.gate.net/~mango/Kimlika.html

[Queen B]

By Macedonians, I mean ethnic Macedonians from the Republic of Macedonia.
Sorry, we don't speak the same language then :coffee:



Here is an excellent essay about the systematic denial of rights to the Macedonian minority by the Greek government.

http://www.gate.net/~mango/Kimlika.html

''Excellent'' essay from a Fyromian? :lol::lol::lol:Wow, how non-bias it is! :lol::lol:

An essay which includes nationalistic terms like ''Aegean'' Macedonia and ''partition'' of ''their'' Macedonia?
Gimme a break. Find a real essay , not a stupid propaganda one...

However, I will answer/ask...

Even the tittle is stupid for start.

Minority.

- When a minority is considered and must be legaly established?
- In a population of 11.000.000 millions, what's should be the minimum population so a ''minority'' can be happen?


- Hess, Do you know how many so-called Macedonians exist in Greece?
(Fyi,Their political party haven't collected more than 3.000 votes in the last elections.)
- And the so-called Macedonians are supposed to live in the Macedonia region, mostly in Kastoria and Florina. Right?
So, have you ever seen any of their ''celebrations''? Why they are hardly 3.000-5.000, TOGETHER with those who come from Fyrom with buses?


When you are trying to prove your presence, you should be there, shouldn't you? When you are trying to defend your people, you should vote for them, right?
Do you know that in the protests about the name Macedonia, back in Greece in the 90s, there were more than 1.200.000 Greeks protesting? And that was just in Thessaloniki?

- So, if their ''nationals'' in Greece are around 3.000 to 5.000, can you ''form'' a minority?

Let me continue...
-
How their minority will be called? When the majority is also calling themselves Macedonians, should the minority call themselves the same?
And we will have a minority who calls themselves Macedonians in a majority who calles themselves Macedonians? :rolleyes:


''However, in 1949 DAG forces were defeated and a new exodus of Macedonians from Greece followed. The number of those who fled is estimated at 100,000 including 28,000 children.''

All those who fought against the right-winged party, left the country.
Fighting in order to join communist states was considered treason, and everyone, with the majority being Greeks, left the state.
However, the number weren't even that big, including Greeks.

As for the 28.000 kids, please have a look/google ''Paidomazoma''.

(Communists forcibly took Kids, thousands of GREEK kids, and Metrovsky and Stavro Kocev were responsible of Slavic kids abduction. See Red Cross' archives for that matter)

''During the military dictatorship in Greece (1967-1974), many Macedonian villages near the border''

Macedonian Villages? So,hypothetically if a city in Italy has (supossedely) a strong Greek community, I can call it a .... Greek city?

''Moreover, in 1962 the legal Act 4234 was issued which stipulated that persons who were stripped of their Greek citizenship were banned from returning to Greece. In 1969 a legal Act was issued to allow the settlement by ethnic Greeks of Macedonian property left behind. ''

So, if you a traitor, what do you expect?
Its like ME being hosted in a friendly house, trying to kill the owners or take their house and expect them to welcome me back, and give me the bed I was sleeping... Its TREASON for f*ck's shake!!!!

''In 1982, Greece adopted a law that allows return to Greece of all political refuges from the Civil War except those who are not "Greeks by genus" (i.e. of Greek origin). Therefore, those refugees who were not Greek by origin, that is the Macedonians, were not allowed to return.''

And this is strange? You can forgive your kids, even after 35 years.

''The estimated number of Macedonians that stayed in the country was 200,000. However, the last Greek census (1951) that listed ‘Slav speakers’, i.e., Macedonians gave a number of 41,000 Macedonians in Greece.''

So , how many are they? From the estimated 200.000 we are back to 50.000 (means 1/4).
Out of the 50.000, how many are Serbian or Bulgarian? (especially Bulgarians, there is a huge population of them)?

So Hess, please, next time where you are about to post an ''excellent'' essay, please check your sources. Check for a more neutral source, with no stupid iirredentistic claims and terms, and don't just simply quote propaganda.

[Trun]

Also, there are no Fyromian IMMIGRANTS here in Greece. There are a few hundreds of Fyromian ancestry (previously calling themselves Bulgarians and/or Serbians). How exactly they are treated ''poorly''?

There are thousands of Slavic speakers in Greece and they aren't "Fyromanians" but Macedonian Bulgarians.
And there were several Bulgarian genocides by Greeks after WW1.
All this was done by Greek government in order to assimilate the minorities. But the elderly people in several regions in Aegean Macedonia and Thrace speak Bulgarian as a mother tongue.
Even today Bulgarians in Aegean Macedonia are tormented if they speak in their mother tongue on the streets...

[someone]

dandelion, shut up

[someone]

There are thousands of Slavic speakers in Greece and they aren't "Fyromanians" but Macedonian Bulgarians.
And there were several Bulgarian genocides by Greeks after WW1.
All this was done by Greek government in order to assimilate the minorities. But the elderly people in several regions in Aegean Macedonia and Thrace speak Bulgarian as a mother tongue.
Even today Bulgarians in Aegean Macedonia are tormented if they speak in their mother tongue on the streets...

the slavic-speakers in greek occupied Macedonia are autochthonous people who have nothing to do with the Bulgarians, neither culturally, linguistically nor ethnically. you can call the Chuvash people in Russia the "real" Bulgarians.


The Chuvash speak a Turkic language and claim to be descended from the Bolgars who in the 4th century ad migrated from Central Asia to the region west of the Volga River. It is not unlikely that they represent an amalgamation of Bolgars with the tribes then living in the area. Their language is very different from other Turkic languages. The Chuvash are nominally Russian Orthodox; both their remaining traditional beliefs and their nominal religion, however, are said to be in decline.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/117436/Chuvash

the term "Bulgar" in the balkans was not an ethnical but a political definition only. Noone in the balkans talks Bulgarian either.... but alright, keep insulting us....

how called the greeks themselves during the Byzantine era? hellenes or Rhōmaís? and their language? ellinika or rhomika? are greeks romans? no. does greek belong to the roman languages? no. yet they took that definition for themselves.....

There is nothing Bulgarian about Macedonia/Macedonians.

[morski]

^:loco:

[someone]

kolku ste smotani, ebavi bugarite

[morski]

kolku ste smotani, ebavi bugarite

Така, така, покажи си българската магария.:thumb001:

[Flintlocke]

Kurwa mac sljuha, davai davai, davarich, niet. :P

[morski]

http://books.google.bg/books?id=TRttHdXjP14C&printsec=frontcover&dq=Developing+Cultural+Identity+in+the+Balkans&hl=en&ei=sjt-TZKjHoSclgfnvPzLBQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&sqi=2&redir_esc=y#v=snippet&q=the%20bulgarian-macedonian%20divergence&f=false

Самуан, прочети частта озаглавена The Bulgarian-Macedonian Divergence. Допускам, че ще ти е интересно. Според мен авторът е доволно обективен.

[Trun]

I personally have smelled some Fyromanians pretending to be Albanians right here...I'm interested are they preparing themselves for being invaded by Albanians and claim themselves Albanian to save their a**** from the hard anal that awaits them :laugh:

Морски, според мен нашият ФиРОМСКИ приятел трябва да прочете и четирилогията на Димитър Талев и ще види дали баба му и дядо му са се идентифицирали като ФиРОМИ.

[morski]

that is a cheap ad-hominem,you irano-mongol bulgarian.it has been proven couples of times that there is a historical cohesion from ancient macedonians till todays macedonians.

bs!


Морски, според мен нашият ФиРОМСКИ приятел трябва да прочете и четирилогията на Димитър Талев и ще види дали баба му и дядо му са се идентифицирали като ФиРОМИ.

Да. Талев е задълже за тия магарета инати.

[bluesky]

Nie si4ki sme bratja ne slorete...

[bluesky]

lol i just wanted to practice my bulgarian XD

[Hess]

Sorry, we don't speak the same language then :coffee:



''Excellent'' essay from a Fyromian? :lol::lol::lol:Wow, how non-bias it is! :lol::lol:

An essay which includes nationalistic terms like ''Aegean'' Macedonia and ''partition'' of ''their'' Macedonia?
Gimme a break. Find a real essay , not a stupid propaganda one...

However, I will answer/ask...

Even the tittle is stupid for start.

Minority.

- When a minority is considered and must be legaly established?
- In a population of 11.000.000 millions, what's should be the minimum population so a ''minority'' can be happen?


- Hess, Do you know how many so-called Macedonians exist in Greece?
(Fyi,Their political party haven't collected more than 3.000 votes in the last elections.)
- And the so-called Macedonians are supposed to live in the Macedonia region, mostly in Kastoria and Florina. Right?
So, have you ever seen any of their ''celebrations''? Why they are hardly 3.000-5.000, TOGETHER with those who come from Fyrom with buses?


When you are trying to prove your presence, you should be there, shouldn't you? When you are trying to defend your people, you should vote for them, right?
Do you know that in the protests about the name Macedonia, back in Greece in the 90s, there were more than 1.200.000 Greeks protesting? And that was just in Thessaloniki?

- So, if their ''nationals'' in Greece are around 3.000 to 5.000, can you ''form'' a minority?

Let me continue...
-
How their minority will be called? When the majority is also calling themselves Macedonians, should the minority call themselves the same?
And we will have a minority who calls themselves Macedonians in a majority who calles themselves Macedonians? :rolleyes:


''However, in 1949 DAG forces were defeated and a new exodus of Macedonians from Greece followed. The number of those who fled is estimated at 100,000 including 28,000 children.''

All those who fought against the right-winged party, left the country.
Fighting in order to join communist states was considered treason, and everyone, with the majority being Greeks, left the state.
However, the number weren't even that big, including Greeks.

As for the 28.000 kids, please have a look/google ''Paidomazoma''.

(Communists forcibly took Kids, thousands of GREEK kids, and Metrovsky and Stavro Kocev were responsible of Slavic kids abduction. See Red Cross' archives for that matter)

''During the military dictatorship in Greece (1967-1974), many Macedonian villages near the border''

Macedonian Villages? So,hypothetically if a city in Italy has (supossedely) a strong Greek community, I can call it a .... Greek city?

''Moreover, in 1962 the legal Act 4234 was issued which stipulated that persons who were stripped of their Greek citizenship were banned from returning to Greece. In 1969 a legal Act was issued to allow the settlement by ethnic Greeks of Macedonian property left behind. ''

So, if you a traitor, what do you expect?
Its like ME being hosted in a friendly house, trying to kill the owners or take their house and expect them to welcome me back, and give me the bed I was sleeping... Its TREASON for f*ck's shake!!!!

''In 1982, Greece adopted a law that allows return to Greece of all political refuges from the Civil War except those who are not "Greeks by genus" (i.e. of Greek origin). Therefore, those refugees who were not Greek by origin, that is the Macedonians, were not allowed to return.''

And this is strange? You can forgive your kids, even after 35 years.

''The estimated number of Macedonians that stayed in the country was 200,000. However, the last Greek census (1951) that listed ‘Slav speakers’, i.e., Macedonians gave a number of 41,000 Macedonians in Greece.''

So , how many are they? From the estimated 200.000 we are back to 50.000 (means 1/4).
Out of the 50.000, how many are Serbian or Bulgarian? (especially Bulgarians, there is a huge population of them)?

So Hess, please, next time where you are about to post an ''excellent'' essay, please check your sources. Check for a more neutral source, with no stupid iirredentistic claims and terms, and don't just simply quote propaganda.

thanks for the corrections, I guess that essay wasn't as excellent as i thought :p

I don't have that strong of an opinion either way because I still don't know a lot about the subject.

[Queen B]

thanks for the corrections, I guess that essay wasn't as excellent as i thought :p

I don't have that strong of an opinion either way because I still don't know a lot about the subject.

Nice to see that Hess. First thing is , to - at least - check from where it is coming.
:thumb001:
Nice to see also that someone can agree/disagree on a civil level :thumb001:


The Thracians used Greek language too,the Illyrians also even those from Bosnia the Daorsoi tribe.That doesn't change anything except that Macedonians were somewhat more influenced by Hellenic culture.They were Central Balkanian looking unlike Greeks who were and are South Balkanian looking.
Did the Thracians and Illyrians used ONLY Greek language? Did the Thracians and Illyrians had ONLY Greek names? Did they participate in Olympica games? Did they spread ONLY Greek culture, did they considered themselves Greeks?Have you seen artifacts of Thracians and Illyrians, ONLY in Greek?



Even today Bulgarians in Aegean Macedonia are tormented if they speak in their mother tongue on the streets...

Tormented? :lol: Are you kidding me ? Greece has millions of immigrants speaking all Babel languages. From Pakistani,Albanian,Russian,Bulgarian,Ukranian,Roma nian,Indian,Afrikans,etc etc...
They will ...torment someone that speaks a foreign language??? :lol: Have you ever been in Greece?
:lol:

And where are all these thousands of speakers? Seriously? I lived in Macedonia for 16 years, in 3 different places (Serres (Promahonas - to the borders with Bulgaria), Chalkidiki and Thessaloniki.

[Trun]

dandelion, unfortunately, I'm not kidding. A Bulgarian group of tourists in Thessalloniki were made a rude remark not to speak Bulgarian on the street.
And Bulgarians live mostly in the regions of Kastoria, Edessa and Florina. There are whole Bulgarian villages there.

[hajduk]

Fans of Sofia’s CSKA club complained of being maltreated by the Greek police after not being allowed to watch the volleyball game between Iraklis and CSKA in Thessaloniki last night.
In a letter sent to FOCUS News Agency one of the fans, Stoyan Videnov, said that at the Bulgarian-Greek border at the Kulata checkpoint the CSKA supporters were first made to leave the Greek territory and then they were kept blocked in the bus, since they were not allowed to get out. According to witnesses, the Greek authorities used tear gas at the fans, even inside the bus. There was a fight in which the Greek policemen used truncheons against the fans. http://focus-fen.net/?id=n268504

[Queen B]

dandelion, unfortunately, I'm not kidding. A Bulgarian group of tourists in Thessalloniki were made a rude remark not to speak Bulgarian on the street.
And Bulgarians live mostly in the regions of Kastoria, Edessa and Florina. There are whole Bulgarian villages there.

So, are you talking about a rude remark , by a citizen??? How that is so ... bad from Greece in general?
I might (hypotheticaly) , might make a rude remark, about it , Bulgarians or every other nationality as well,that means that they are tormented by Greek goverment not to speak their language?


Sorry to mention it , but this is bullshit to me. There are thousands of IMMIGRANTS from bulgari, and millions (around 1-2) of Albanians (and others) in Greece. You can get in every single bus or trolley or metro, and hear every kind of language...

[someone]

dandelion, unfortunately, I'm not kidding. A Bulgarian group of tourists in Thessalloniki were made a rude remark not to speak Bulgarian on the street.
And Bulgarians live mostly in the regions of Kastoria, Edessa and Florina. There are whole Bulgarian villages there.

excuse me mister, but there is no Bulgarians living there. you will find Bulgarians in the Chuvash republic in russia. please stop insulting those slavic-speaking Macedonians calling Bulgarian. i would also recommend you visiting those places and tell the people what you think they are... i'd be looking forward to knowing what you had experienced.

[morski]

Don't be so stubborn, mate. Read more history. From all kinds of sources you have access to.

[someone]

Don't be so stubborn, mate. Read more history. From all kinds of sources you have access to.

i will say it again, the term "Bulgar" was a political term in the Balkans. the slavic-speaking Macedonians are no ethnic bulgarians. and they don't even speak Bulgarian. how can a slavic language be called Bulgarian? .... those people are autochthonous. can i call german chinese? or french souaheli? no matter if the Bulgarians were a turkic tribe with iranian influences or an iranian tribe with some turkish mixture, the real bulgarian language has nothing to do with slav-macedonian.

ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION OF GREECE
Origin of Greeks (Dr. Aris Poulianos)
www.aee.gr


..over 150 scientists of the University and the Academy of Moscow have fully agreed with the scientific views of Mr. Aris. Poulianos, underlining the seriousness of the research, and without sparing their expressions..


..the same study indicated that the Slav-speaking...of the greater Macedonian... region are in their majority also autochthonous..

and it is by far not the only anthropological research that has been done..
we finally got rid of the term "Bulgar" that has been following us for such a long period.

enough under bulgarian rule
enough under yugoslavian rule

[Rron]

i will say it again, the term "Bulgar" was a political term in the Balkans.

:loco:

[morski]

OK, following your logic I'm not a real Bulgarian(in the sense you put into the term). What am I then? Do you recognize me as a bro? Кажи честно?

[Rron]

OK, following your logic I'm not a real Bulgarian(in the sense you put into the term). What am I then? Do you recognize me as a bro? Кажи честно?
You are political term:D

[Queen B]

excuse me mister, but there is no Bulgarians living there. you will find Bulgarians in the Chuvash republic in russia. please stop insulting those slavic-speaking Fyromians calling Bulgarian. i would also recommend you visiting those places and tell the people what you think they are... i'd be looking forward to knowing what you had experienced.
Wow, a Fyromian denies that Bulgarians, that exist... in Greece?
There ARE Bulgarians in Greece. Christian Bulgarians, Bulgarian immigrants AND the Pomaks
Its you that you mistake them for Fyromians... Who, as I said earlier are not more than 3/5.000...

those people are autochthonous.

:lol:

You are political term:D

:lol:

[Rron]

:lol:
You didnt notice my sarcasm there but nevermind, read my reply too someone when he made such a stupid sentence about Bulgarians!

[Queen B]

You didnt notice my sarcasm there but nevermind, read my reply too someone when he made such a stupid sentence about Bulgarians!
I did actually, and I am laughing with your remark to him, not with you..

[Rron]

I did actually, and I am laughing with your remark to him, not with you..:thumb001:

[hajduk]

FYROM should be divided between Bulgaria and Albania. Next is Serbia.
Bulgaria and Albania common border:cheers::cheers:

[morski]

We always shared ethnical border with them historically. Why not.:D

[Unurautare]

The MACEDONIANS are the best things to happen to the Balkans,they basically are uber and the rest,with no real history,not comparable to the Macedonians anyway,are just jealous bastards that pretend not to see their awesomeness,morski.:<

[Queen B]

The MACEDONIANS are the best things to happen to the Balkans,they basically are uber and the rest,with no real history,not comparable to the Macedonians anyway,are just jealous bastards that pretend not to see their awesomeness,morski.:<

Yeah, because, you know, Greeks have no history at all, no beautiful country, so they are jealous bastards , and they are jealous of this new-born 20years of history - landlocked - country, who have the highest unemployment rate, is the least developed country from the ex-Yusoslavs, their language is borrowed, their are a mix of Bulgarians,Serbians and Albanians....

Why not to be jealous of them ? :lol:

[Queen B]

Strabo
Roman Historian



http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/126/314/3cd8a33a.png?1306264975


Btw, Strabo said the infamous...

''εστί μεν ούν ελλάς καί ή μακεδονία '' (Macedonia is also part of Greece)

There are tones of references, sayin the same thing exactly, like Arrian , Polybius , Plutarch, Dio Chrysostom, I can quote them if you want it :)

[Unurautare]

Yeah, because, you know, Greeks have no history at all, no beautiful country, so they are jealous bastards , and they are jealous of this new-born 20years of history - landlocked - country, who have the highest unemployment rate, is the least developed country from the ex-Yusoslavs, their language is borrowed, their are a mix of Bulgarians,Serbians and Albanians....

Why not to be jealous of them ? :lol:

Yeah,modern Greeks are just some Ethiopian emigrants with failed economy. Macedonians are kings since 336 BC. :cool:
You were lucky enough to get Hellenist civilization spread by the benevolent Macedonian-gods-on-Earth-people.
Don't forget that Spartans actually descend from Macedonian tribes,so while your so-called direct ancestors were hunting wildlife in the hills of Ethiopia,or spreading homosexuality in ancient Greece(as your wannabe historian say about your wannabe history) the Macedonians were the ones defending Europe from every foreign invader.
You,as Ethiopian-Greek should really be thankful you're not fully Ethniopian because of the Macedonians in today's Macedonia(FYROM,as you want to call it).
Worshiping Macedonians would be better religion that what you have right now,because they are whiter than you and with bigger culture + history. Recognize all these facts and repent,dandelion,because I don't know how much more patience the living gods,Macedonians,will have with Ethiopian Greece(Modern Greece).


EDIT: In case of something,because I'm not sure people will see the joke-> Only kidding,Greeks are white Europeans descendant from Ancient Greeks(who weren't homosexuals in the large majority),and FYROM is slavic but I don't have anything against it because it's kinda progressive compared to it's neighbors.

[morski]

Progressive... :confused:

[Unurautare]

Progressive... :confused:

It's called not butchering and denying the culture of it's Romanian minority,read that? Bulgarians,Albanians,Greeks and Yugoslavs? :thumb001: And other things but I only really care about the Romanian minority and how it's treated.

[morski]

It's called not butchering and denying the culture of it's Romanian minority,Bulgarians,Albanians,Greeks and Yugoslavs.:thumb001: And other things but I only really care about the Romanian minority and how it's treated.

Oh... you are sooo wrong;)

[Wanderlust]

FYROM should be divided between Bulgaria and Albania.

I agree.

[Unurautare]

Oh... you are sooo wrong;)

Yeah,we should just invade the Balkans and end all your rump states,maybe even make some of you into white people,who knows,at least I'd make sure to dump gypsies and Turks either to Anatolia or Central Asia. :coffee:

[Absinthe]

Damn, what a mess of a thread! I wonder if anything good is ever gonna come out of such debates. :no000000:

[Queen B]

How much fantasies here.Macedonia will remain a state no matter of your tiny opinions.

Macedonia is a region already. Fyrom , won't remain as a state...
Its not me, its the path they chose...

[Wanderlust]

@ Leo
^ I'm curious to see what you're going to say when the 30% of the Albanian population in fyrom becomes 50%+. ;)

[morski]

How much fantasies here.Macedonia will remain a state no matter of your tiny opinions.

I personally am in favour of an independent "Macedonia" and I'm saying this for the Nth time. It surely has some potential if run properly.

[morski]

We will overthrow the Slavophones and become the new Macadonians.:cool:

Now, that's not gonna happen. :)

[Wanderlust]

We will overthrow the Slavophones and become the new Macadonians.:cool:

phew..for a moment I thought you're a genuine altruist, caring for other people and all that :p

[Unurautare]

Now, that's not gonna happen. :)

:thumb001:
Z5WIoMNErBM

[hajduk]

:thumb001:
Z5WIoMNErBM

Put this map in your arse thank you

[Unurautare]

Put this map in your arse thank you

It's not my map though,and even if it was I wouldn't,it doesn't look that bad. :)

[Duke]

It's not my map though,and even if it was I wouldn't,it doesn't look that bad. :)

That map you posted gave me urge to crack some romanian skulls, and this comment gave me urge to hunt you down, and beat you to death.


No hard feelings ;)

[Unurautare]

That map you posted gave me urge to crack some romanian skulls, and this comment gave me urge to hunt you down, and beat you to death.


No hard feelings ;)

Maybe you're right but I didn't put it to talk about personal feelings on the matter,and the map looks indeed dumb in many areas,and it was made by some nobody,so you shouldn't lose your sleep over it.
I'm just saying the map looks nice for Romanians(except for that Crimean annexation) and Aromanians + it doesn't have some states that shouldn't exist in the real world anyway(Rep.Moldova and Kosovo,as example).
If you want to talk about feelings: "In real" many Romanians wouldn't want more land,that map is beyond ultra-nationalistic and it's well into imperialism(something we can't afford on the long run,not the way that map looks anyway),at most many would want just a union/annexation of Rep.Moldova.

EDIT:It would still be nice to see your reactions in a proper,polite,manner,because I have no problems to reply accordingly to any post.

[Unurautare]

LOL the way you said it, and in the end no hard feelings.:p


Comparable to the Muslims in Afghanistan that beheaded UN personnel,right after the burning of the Koran by a preacher in the USA.



No worries Romanians can never beat us Balkan Gitanos.

If my nation would be wiling to take that bet you might all be waking up bowing to the Romanian flag the next morning,especially since you're all so weak in your division and hate(posting just a video on a forum is enough to start another Balkan war,apparently) that I don't even need to comment on this. :P Though it might be hard with the Yugoslavs since they are "warmed up".
Then again,as I stated before,why would we? In my eyes it's not worth the effort,neither for the people(especially) or for the lands. Ukrainian lands might be worth it,but only if we got rid of the Ukrainians and Slavs that live there.

[Unurautare]

We need to collaborate more to get rid of this Slavic Untermenschen.

It would be nice :D but only if most Albanians would be Christians or,at least,against Islam.

[poiuytrewq0987]

Where did they go? They evolve together with the rest of Greeks.
The ''Macedonian'' haven't dissapeared, it continued all these years and was assosiated with Greeks.

The so-called Macedonians, what they are? Some years ago they were calling themselves Yugoslavians, Serbians, Bulgarians, Albanians...
The exact same people claiming even national hereos or figures from Greece, Albania, Bulgaria, Serbia...

Actually no... we never identified with Serbs or Bulgarians and only identified as such when we were forced to by Serbia/Bulgaria's failed assimilation programs. We never felt Serbian, Bulgarian or Greek and we asked ourselves what else could we be? We realised we were living on this land called Macedonia. An ancient people also used to live here and they had a strong Macedonian identity that was also loosely associated with Athenian one alas we realised we are Macedonian. :lightbul: I have no territorial aspirations on the Greek-controlled part of Macedonia so you needn't worry. :lol:

[Queen B]

Actually no... we never identified with Serbs or Bulgarians and only identified as such when we were forced to by Serbia/Bulgaria's failed assimilation programs. We never felt Serbian, Bulgarian or Greek and we asked ourselves what else could we be?

Find me some of your countrymen of f.e. 5 generations back (before balkan wars) that DIDN'T identify with Serbians or Bulgarians...
Where are the Macedonians (as nationality) during Early and/or middle Ottoman years?
Where are Macedonians (as nationality, since you call this ) during Byzantines?
Where are Macedonians (as nationality) since Roman empire?

Find me where are those self Identified - as nationality- Macedonians all those years..
Because I can find people calling themselves Serbians, Greeks, Bulgarians and even Albanians all those years. From middle years, medivial, and even Ancient.

(I can also find you people calling themselves Macedonians or Cretans,and meaning they were Greeks as well.)

No, not only the last 100 years, but even before.

People with different language, customs, that distinguise themselves from each other, and having THAT national identity to carry.





We realised we were living on this land called Macedonia. An ancient people also used to live here
Wrong story you've been teached.
Ancient Macedonia's borders have nothing to do with Fyrom's borders.
The Macedonia, as a geographical term, expanded its borders through medevial years and Byzantine years . Means after ancient Macedonians.
So, you don't even live where ancient Macedonians lived.
The place your country is located now, is the place where Paeonia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paionia)was.



I have no territorial aspirations on the real Macedonia so you needn't worry. :lol:
I wouldn't worry :lol: that doesn't mean I tolarate those stupid nationalistic ideas of a newborn country..

[poiuytrewq0987]

Find me some of your countrymen of f.e. 5 generations back (before balkan wars) that DIDN'T identify with Serbians or Bulgarians...
Where are the Macedonians (as nationality) during Early and/or middle Ottoman years?
Where are Macedonians (as nationality, since you call this ) during Byzantines?
Where are Macedonians (as nationality) since Roman empire?

Find me where are those self Identified - as nationality- Macedonians all those years..
Because I can find people calling themselves Serbians, Greeks, Bulgarians and even Albanians all those years. From middle years, medivial, and even Ancient.

(I can also find you people calling themselves Macedonians or Cretans,and meaning they were Greeks as well.)

No, not only the last 100 years, but even before.

People with different language, customs, that distinguise themselves from each other, and having THAT national identity to carry.

I don't really care enough to dig that far back in the history. I know we are different from our neighbors and it's because we are Macedonian. That's just a simple fact. Maybe our language is a bit similar with our Slavic-speaking neighbors but that's hardly unique to us as Czechoslovaks have similar langauges but they are two different ethnic groups.

But I'll appease your desire for some evidence that we existed before the 1900s. What we have here is an Austrian confirming our existence:

K. Hron (1890)

These remarks were written in 1890 by the Austrian student of Macedonian matters Karl Hron who, with evident scientific objectivity, tried to describe, and prove the independent development of the Macedonian people. He set out his views and conclusions on the independent development of the Macedonian people and the Macedonian nationality with Impressive erudition in his book, The Nationality of the Macedonians Slavs, published in Vienna in 1890.

To understand this study by Karl Hron, and its most valuable observations on the Macedonian question, it is necessary to describe the times and the atmosphere as they then affected Macedonian.

This was a period of revolutionary ferment in Macedonia. Already we find all the social and economic conditions for the concrete, revolutionary unification of all forces in one, revolutionary organism which could lead the Macedonian people in the battle for national and social liberation. At this time, three years before the formation of the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization, Macedonian activists were already tracing the road which would unite the Macedonian revolutionary currents and lead the enslaved Macedonian masses to the foot-hills of the revolution.

All the conditions, attributes of a national revolution, were present. The Macedonian slave could no longer endure either the economic or political suppression. The earlier revolutionary occurrences now served only as traditional, instructive examples for a bolder and more vital march along the paths of a far reaching revolutionary epic, to the peaks of the Macedonian revolution whish could already be felt stirring in the country.

It was during this period that the Balkan monarchies increased their efforts to expand and establish their aspirations towards Macedonia. The entire apparatus of government was involved in this propaganda action with the aim of ensuring influence in Macedonia, and "proving" the existence of some imaginary "historical" and "national" cause. These aims were pursued without scruple.

It was during times such as these that Karl Hron and his book, The Nationality of the Macedonian Slavs, appeared. In it he set out his assessment of the independent development of the Macedonian people and nationality without any prejudice or partiality.

The very objectivity of his survey of Macedonia and the Macedonians prompts us to emphasize the origins of his interest in Macedonian affairs, and the intentions which led him to study this question.

Karl Hron came from Czechoslovakia. He was a journalist, publicist and scientist by profession. He served in the Austrian army. He traveled through the Yugoslav countries and learned the Yugoslav languages. In 1888 he traveled through Macedonia and this helped him to learn the language of our people better and to note the historical particularities of its development more thoroughly.

As soon as he had gathered a large amount of empirical data on the Macedonian people Karl Hron turned to the study of this subject from its historical, philological and ethnological aspects with unusual honesty and scientific lucidity.

Karl Hron was directly stimulated to write his study on Macedonia and the Macedonians by the publication, in 1889, of works by Stefan Verkovich and Spiridon Gopchevich, who viewed the Macedonian national question in quite a different light. Hron made a detailed analysis of these studies, particularly that by Spiridon Gopchevich, and disproved their views with scientific argument. He uncovered their weaknesses, distortions, falsifications and unscientific conclusions concerning the proper position of the Macedonians with respect to their nationality.

In his own work Hron described his own position on the development of the Macedonian language, the specific points and subtleties of the Macedonian speech. This was followed by a discussion of the historical facts with the accent on the most notable characteristic moments in the development of the Macedonian people during the period which lasted from the settlement of the Macedonian Slavs to the end of the seventeenth century. Hron succeeded in delineating the development of the Macedonian people in stages and drawing from his exposition theoretical and practical conclusions. He gave a theoretical, objective description of the problem of the Macedonian nationality and advanced his practical hypotheses concerning the possibilities for a solution of the Macedonian question.

The major part of Karl Hron's study on Macedonia and the Macedonians was devoted to a critical and, at times, polemical estimation of the views expounded by Spiridon Gopchevich on Macedonia. In his preface and in the ninth chapter of his book Hron underlined Gopcthevich's statements so that he could prove and explain the independence of the Macedonian people's development.

Having confirmed Spiridon Gopchevich's unscientific treatment and misrepresentation of the Macedonian question Karl Hron then continued his preface with an explanation of his own views of the development of the Macedonian people. He said: "From my own studies of the Serbian-Bulgarian disagreement I came to the conviction that the Macedonians are a specific national group, both in terms of history and language; they are neither Serbs nor, to an even greater extent, Bulgarians, but the descendants of those first Slav settlers who settled the Balkan Peninsula long before the Serbian and Bulgarian invasions, and later mixed with neither of these nations".

After describing the basic pages of Spiridon Gopchevich's publication Karl Hron then goes on to uncover the defects, distortions, falsifications and unscientific conclusions in the determination of the Macedonian national position. Here he achieved a perfect critical tone; he succeeded in unmasking Gopchevich's statements to the smallest detail, in proving his unserious attitude to the interpretation of serious scientific questions. Hron presented his own scientific formulations on the development of the Macedonian people through the prism of this critical outline.

Hron gave an important place to his profound analysis of the peculiarities and subtleties of the Macedonian language and dialects. He criticized Gopchevich's contention that the article is not found in Macedonian and said: "From personal experience I can say that the Macedonians use articles". He listed examples collected during his stay in Skopje in 1888, when he was imprisoned by the Turkish authorities. About his period in prison he wrote: "In the overcrowded prisons I met many prisoners from Macedonia, which gave me the opportunity to study the linguistic peculiarities. Unfortunately, all my writing materials were removed from me so I could make no notes and was forced to rely on memory for the total impression of these verbal contacts".

Hron criticized Gopchevich for his incorrect conclusions concerning the language of the Macedonians. On this subject he said: "According to such outstanding authorities as Mikloshevich Gopchevich is wrong to claim that they speak Serbian; if Gopchevich wishes to oppose the ‘opinions’ of such authorities he must first prove that he has some knowledge in this field, where linguistic differences should be sought. From my own experience I can conclude that the Macedonians do not speak Serbian. As a classic proof of this I should mention that, when I was in prison in Skopje, another prisoner and his son, Montenegrins, were hardly able to make themselves understood with the other Macedonian prisoners."

On the problem of the Macedonian language Hron posed this question: "What language do the Macedonians speak?" He gave the following answer: "Seen from this aspect we can confirm that the Macedonian language, according to its own rules on the development of the intonation, and its grammatical structure, forms a separate language..."

Having discussed such characteristics of the language of the Macedonians, Hron turned to the independent development of the Macedonian people, the characteristic moments in the history of Macedonia. His views on this were illustrated with numerous details, which contributed to a better synthesis of his thesis on the nationality of the Macedonians.

Once again he criticized Gopchevich's conclusions. He stressed that “..as long as he makes no effort to study the question of the proper position of the Macedonians with respect to nationality then, without a doubt, he is not going to convince me that the Macedonians are Serbians, even less that they are Bulgarians. They are Macedonians, direct descendants of those Slavs who settled Macedonia long before the Serbian and Bulgarian invasions and did not mix with the Serbs and Bulgarians later."

To prove his point Hron introduced many historical facts on the specific points of Macedonian historical development. He treated these facts through the prism of the historical acts of the remaining peoples on the Balkans, in particular in relation to the development of the South Slavs. On this he said: "..Knowledge of the history is of such importance in understanding the national relationships that a brief review of it is included here."

Hron set out his historical data on the development of the Macedonian people with a considerable amount of argumentation. In doing so he made mistakes and overlooked certain points, particularly when dealing with questions which had not been subjected to proper scientific method in his time. But we should not forget the fact that he was quite precise in his arguments and, of even greater importance, he succeeded in delineating the development of medieval Macedonia in stages and drawing positive conclusions from his material.

Hron described the Slav settlement in Macedonia in detail and brought to light some interesting facts. On this subject he noted: "In 334 Constantine the Great settled 300,000 Slav Sarmatians in Macedonia. This led to the peaceful settlement by Slav colonists of the regions which had been ravaged as the result of war and left empty. The first independent Slav invasion occurred in 493 in Thrace, and in 517 in Macedonia. Between 551 and 558 many Slav tribes penetrated as far south as Thermopylae, that is to the Macedonians of today. One part of this movement of tribes was led by Velizar to Constantinople. In 597 the tribes known in history as the Macedonian Slavs twice surrounded the coastal town Salonica. They were armed with excellent military equipment which proves a high level of culture and indicates that they were already old settlers in these parts. According to Irechek, Yovan Efeski tells us that they fought better than the Romans..."

Similar details and arguments were used by Hron in his exposition which covered the period up to the fall of Macedonia to the Turks. He underlined the characteristic particularities of the development of the Macedonian people with special stress on the period of Samol’s kingdom, the Bogomil movement and the foundation of the Ohrid Archbishopric and Patriarchate. He sets out the many attempts made that enabled Hron to formulate some of his conclusions. With the accent on the Bulgarian subjection of Macedonia he emphasized the following points: "To come to any conclusions on the national relations the following factors from Bulgarian history are important:

1. The Macedonians, during the first and the second Bulgarian empires, were conquered and later broke away once more;

2. They always had their own ecclesiastical organization with a Patriarchate in Ohrid."

Hron also explained the Serbian subjugation of Macedonia adequately. On this he said: "It is important to consider the following facts from the history of Serbian relations with the Macedonians:

1. The aim of the Serbian rulers was to transform this country into a Serbian homeland when they conquered it;

2. Macedonia was part of a Serbian state for only 26 years and their ecclesiastical unity lasted only 21 years;

3. Macedonia suffered under a murderer as ruler after the disintegration of the Serbian Kingdom only so as to win freedom from Serbian rule;

4. Macedonia did not join the Pech Patriarchate, which covered the whole of Serbia after the Turkish invasion."

Hrons argumentative conclusions as to the position of Macedonia with relation to the actions of the Bulgarian and Serbian medieval states clarify many of the peculiarities which were characteristic of the development of Macedonia during this period. In fact they give a clearer picture of the independent development of the Macedonian people who, during those historical times, succeeded in preserving their national identity. Hron explained this extremely important fact for Macedonian history in the following passage:

"From this short, historical sketch which describes the insignificant degree of cohesion achieved when Macedonia was joined either to the Bulgarian or Serbian states, the destruction twice over of the independent ecclesiastical organization, it is impossible to accept the idea that the Macedonians belong to the Bulgarian or Serbian tribes. On the contrary, it seems that in place of foreign elements the Macedonians preserved their own. That the Macedonians cannot be numbered among the Serbs is proved by their separation with which they opposed the later outburst of Serbian national feeling... We can conclude that the Macedonians are neither Serbs nor Bulgarians, but a specific people, the direct descendants of those Slav settled the Balkan Peninsula long before the Serbian and Bulgarian invasions and did not mix with either people later."

Apart from these conclusions on the linguistic and historical particularities of the Macedonian people Hron also supported the truth with statistical data and with comments from the travelers of the nineteenth century, who traveled throughout Macedonia and described the intolerable situation to be found there. These enabled him to emphasize once again the conclusions of his thesis concerning the separate national identity of the Macedonians. He wrote: "My researches up to now support, in my opinion, the correctness of my view of the national identity of the Macedonian Slavs..." He did not neglect to study more fully and develop research material on the particularities of language, customs, habits, traditions, folk songs and all other national characteristics and specific aspects in the development of the people. He boldly and clearly confirmed a truth, which some had forgotten or deliberately hidden or falsified. With unusual perceptiveness Hron described this truth in the following way: "The more I see of the conclusions up to date the more firmly convinced I am that the separate national identity of the Macedonians will be clarified and supported with the progress of research.…"

Hron was also concerned enough to offer discussion on the political solution to the Macedonian question. He was quite right to say that a political solution to this question did not seem possible at his time. He concluded, in a visionary manner, that "the political solution rests with future generations". With this in mind he stressed the justice of supporting an independent Macedonian literature.

The views of the student of Macedonia, Karl Hron, on the independent development of the Macedonian people and their national identity are of exceptional importance. He threw light on a very important problem in our history. His work is a great contribution to the clarification of the Macedonian question, for perfecting our knowledge of the independent development of the Macedonian people. His conceptions are based on a scientific approach to the history, language and ethnography of the Macedonians. Hron set out to define the problems supremely well and then approached the truth with authority.

His observations on the independent development of the Macedonians were not incidental, nor the result of a momentary need. On the contrary, they were the outcome of long research into the truth of a people's development when the waves of history were beating against it and yet it always succeeded in resisting the tides to bear witness to its position on the historical stage.

Karl Hron’s thesis added to the previous investigations. During his own time the description of the independent development of the Macedonian people was being improved step by step. The aim of his work was to prove that this national identity had been the decisive factor in the survival of this people in history.

At the time when Hron's study was published there were several other students of the question who were interested in the independent development of the Macedonian people, Russian scholars became involved in the discussion concerning the character of the Macedonian language and national identity during 1887, 1888 and later. We should mention the research carried out by Draganov, who proved that the Macedonian language was a specific South-Slav language and that the Macedonians formed a separate national group, in this context.

All these efforts were an obvious step forward in the clarification of the Macedonian problem. Hron's work was not without precedent, it only gave more developed form to the objective, scientific interpretation of this exceptionally interesting question.

Karl Hron's work is also important in that it appeared 13 years before Krste Missirkov's book, On Macedonian Matters, which dealt with similar problems from the history and development of the Macedonian people. In Karl Hron we find the great predecessor of Krste Missirkov, who was later to give us an even more thorough conception of the independent national identity of the Macedonians.

Karl Hron's conclusions helped throw light on many aspects from Macedonian history. They clarify the truth of the Macedonian national identity and justify the survival of the Macedonian people today.




Wrong story you've been teached.
Ancient Macedonia's borders have nothing to do with Fyrom's borders.
The Macedonia, as a geographical term, expanded its borders through medevial years and Byzantine years . Means after ancient Macedonians.
So, you don't even live where ancient Macedonians lived.
The place your country is located now, is the place where Paeonia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paionia)was.


Actually, a bit of us used to live in southern Macedonia before the ethnic cleansings of the 20th century...

We even have a British ethnographer confirming our existence and presence in much of Macedonia:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/df/Races_of_Eastern_Europe_-_A._Gross_1918%2C_London.jpg


I wouldn't worry :lol: that doesn't mean I tolarate those stupid nationalistic ideas of a newborn country..

I don't really care about your political opinions, you can have them. I don't see a reason to throw them in my face, is all. ;)

[Queen B]

I don't really care enough to dig that far back in the history. I know we are different from our neighbors and it's because we are Macedonian. That's just a simple fact. Maybe our language is a bit similar with our Slavic-speaking neighbors but that's hardly unique to us as Czechoslovaks have similar langauges but they are two different ethnic groups.

Don't talk about history and ancient stuff then, if you don't want to dig in history... Tell that you like to be called Macedonians because of the reason you live in a PART (not even the bigger one) of medevial and Byzantine borders of Macedonia, and don't talk about Ancient.
If you want to talk, be ready to dig that far back in history.



But I'll appease your desire for some evidence that we existed before the 1900s. What we have here is an Austrian confirming our existence:

I actually asked about, before balkan wars, and when I talk about Ottoman years, I said early and middle...

Like 1700, or 1800 or something...

But anyway...



K. Hron (1890)
These remarks were written in 1890 by the Austrian student of Macedonian matters Karl Hron who, with evident scientific objectivity, tried to describe, and prove the independent development of the Macedonian people. He set out his views and conclusions on the independent development of the Macedonian people and the Macedonian nationality with Impressive erudition in his book, The Nationality of the Macedonians Slavs, published in Vienna in 1890.

Student????? A student????? A student?????????
:lol:

Not historian, not even in intellectual or someone with knowledge on that matter.
Sorry, but a 20 or 22 y.o over a random student, on almost 1900, doesn't answer my question...

I repeat it , just in case...

Where are the Macedonians (as nationality) during Early and/or middle Ottoman years?
Where are Macedonians (as nationality, since you call this ) during Byzantines?
Where are Macedonians (as nationality) since Roman empire?

Also, I'd love to see this student's ''book'', but I googled it and didn't find it ..

Anyway, its not even a source to count on, I just wondered...



Actually, a bit of us used to live in southern Macedonia before the ethnic cleansings of the 20th century...
:lol:

When you ll start talking with normal arguments and not imaginary stuff of stupid propaganda, we can talk again...



I don't really care about your political opinions, you can have them. I don't see a reason to throw them in my face, is all. ;)

Well, the question was public and I stated my opinion. I didn't quoted you, you did, so..

[morski]

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-gNZ7qEOa4bg/TiX2I4dIiiI/AAAAAAAAEGw/9k110i281u0/s1600/271893_2180215062440_1158832703_32653247_3034435_o .jpg

All text written in Bulgarian. All of those people self-identified(and that's documented) as Bulgarians.

[Ushtari]

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/126/314/3cd8a33a.png?1306264975


Btw, Strabo said the infamous...

''εστί μεν ούν ελλάς καί ή μακεδονία '' (Macedonia is also part of Greece)

There are tones of references, sayin the same thing exactly, like Arrian , Polybius , Plutarch, Dio Chrysostom, I can quote them if you want it :)
Strabo also said that Epirotes where non-greeks :wink

[morski]

Macedonia, wonderful land,

Never shall she be Greek!

Leaf and forest, and mountain,

The very stones of this land,

Bird, and fish in the Vardar river,

Living and dead on their feet

Will rise and will reply

To all Europe, to all the world:

I am Bulgarian, Bulgarian am I,

Bulgarians live in this land!

Raiko Zhinzifov, [1] 1862

In Kukush - Gotsé's birthplace - an ancient legend told of a vanished underground river, which one day would burst forth at a place called the Duflo and flood the whole town. Ironically enough, when total disaster overtook Kukush during the Second Balkan War in 1913, it was fire and not water which was the fatal agent, and the Duflo - a hollow overgrown with wild fig-trees - remained obstainately dry in the summer heat while the town burned. The greater irony, however, was yet to come, when after the War the whole area was awarded to Greece and a new Greek town named Kilkis arose on the ruins of Kukush - Kukush, which for centuries before had been inhabited almost exclusively by Bulgarians, and a handful of Turks; Kukush, which had fought so stubbornly against Phanariot Greek domination of its Church, which had been the first town in the Turkish Empire to obtain a Bulgarian bishop, and which had twice sought a Uniat with Rome, rather than accept a Greek bishop of the Orthodox faith.



It was not that the people of Kukush hated the Greeks. They did not hate anybody as such - not even the Turks, who had misruled and oppressed them for five hundred years. Indeed, one of the most attractive qualities of the Bulgarians, both as individuals and as a nation, is that they judge people according to their deeds and not their race or nationality, and do not ascribe to all members of a community the sins of a section thereof.



The people of Kukush hated the Greek Bishop Meleti for his avarice and depravity, but they welcomed and even intermarried with Greek workers who came to their town to shred tobacco or extract the oil from sesame and poppy seeds. They hated those Turks whose fanaticism and inhumanity made their lives unbearable, but their relations with their inoffensive Turkish neighbours were excellent. And they kept a portion of hatred and scorn for those of their own people who, out of cupidity, became the creatures of Greek or Turk and wronged their fellow-men.

http://www.kroraina.com/knigi/en/mm_gd/index.htm

[morski]

An American Macedonian
G. Lebamoff


SIX

The Macedonian Patriotic Organization


I am president of the local chapter of the Macedonian Patriotic Organization, MPO. For several years I was national treasurer, and my brother Ivan has served as national president. When the new Macedonian government was formed from the former Yugoslavia in 1991, we began meeting with some of the Macedonian politicians and tried to help them in Washington. Some classify the MPO as pro-Bulgarian, and we say that maybe it was at one time, but now Macedonia needs help. Forget what was in the past; let's build a new future.

Still, some people who were educated under the old Yugoslav government continue to be pro-Serbian, pro-Communist, even pro-Greek, but anti-Bulgarian. If they would just read histories of Bulgaria and Macedonia in the tenth century, they would learn that Tsar Samuel was king of Bulgaria and all of Macedonia. But over the centuries Macedonians have falsified history by saying that Samuel was king of Macedonia, not mentioning Bulgaria.

http://www.kroraina.com/knigi/en/gl/index.html

[morski]

Servia's failure. [1] In the first place, it is only recently that Servia has taken much interest in Macedonia. Up till the Austrian occupation of Bosnia and Herzegovina Servia's ambitions were directed rather to these genuinely Servian lands than to Macedonia. Even after the Treaty of Berlin it was long before she realised that the northern and western part of her natural heritage was irreparably lost. Then, however much she might have wished to repair her error, it was too late. The Bulgarians had already created their national Church; the majority of the Macedonian Slavs had already adhered to it, and its schools were firmly established and thoroughly popular. Servia could not bring herself to break with the "Greek" Orthodox Church, and accordingly she had no fold into which the Macedonians might be shepherded. Thirdly, her internal weakness tied her hands. She had suffered a disastrous military defeat at Slivnitza at the hands of the Bulgarians, and from this her prestige in the Balkans has never recovered. Her finances were and still are in the utmost disorder; and while King Milan squandered money on his pleasures and sold the country to foreign speculators, there was no surplus to spare for propaganda. Under Milan and Alexander Servia passed through one long and shameful crisis, and her domestic revolutions and reigns of terror were preoccupation enough. Lastly, one must recognise that, despite their kinship and their very similar history, there is a profound difference between the Bulgarian and the Servian national characters — a difference which has its counterpart in two physical types. [2] The Servians are a pleasure-loving people, with more aesthetic sense and a more excitable disposition than the Bulgarians. They have not the same power of continuous work, the same indifference to pain, the same resolute stolidity, or the same habit of mental application...

1. I am speaking here of Macedonia proper. In "Old Servia" the Bulgarians have no footing, nor do they seek to acquire one. See Chapter VIII., Section 7, p. 274.

Macedonia: Its Races and Their Future
H. Brailsford

V. The Bulgarian movement

1. First Impressions of the Bulgarian Character


A TRAVELLER'S first impressions of the Bulgarians of Macedonia are rarely favourable. It is a race with few external attractions; and it seldom troubles to sue for sympathy, or assist the process of mutual understanding. It is neither hospitable nor articulate. The Slav peasant has no passwords to the foreigner's heart. He cannot point, like the Greek, to a great past; he cannot boast that his forbears have been your tutors in civilisation. He leaves you to form what opinion of him you please, and shows himself only in the drab of his daily costume of commonplace. He will not call on you unbidden at your hotel, or invite you to his schools, or insist that you shall visit his churches. And, perforce, you study him from the outside. You find him dull, reserved, and unfriendly, for experience has taught him to see in every member of an alien race a probable enemy. He lacks the plausibility, the grace, the quick intelligence of the Greek. He has nothing of the dignified courtesy, the defiant independence, the mediaeval chivalry of the Albanian. Nor has he physical graces to recommend him; and even the women are unprepossessing. He has no sense for externals, no instinct for display. If he is wealthy he hoards his wealth. If he is poor he lives in squalor and in dirt. His national costumes are rarely picturesque, his national dances monotonous, his national songs unmusical. You may learn to respect his industry, his vast capacity for uninteresting work; but it is all the toil of the labourer, and the spirit of the artist and the craftsman is not in him...
The more you learn the more you will incline to a kindly pity, but at the first you are hardly likely to admire this stolid and unprepossessing race. Time and accident alone bring the clue to a different reading of its character. [1]

1. Another reason why the Bulgarians of Macedonia seem so unattractive is that all their best men are exiles in free Bulgaria. There is no educated class left to leaven the rest, or to represent the nation to the traveller.

http://www.kroraina.com/knigi/en/hb/index.html

[morski]

The national revival of the Slavs of Macedonia began in the late Ottoman Empire, in the middle decades of the nineteenth century. This national revival was roughly contemporaneous with those of the other Orthodox Christian peoples of the Balkan peninsula, and was produced by more or less the same causes: a growing sense that the Ottoman Empire was doomed, and that the emancipation of its subject peoples was a realistic prospect; an increasing commercial prosperity, which strengthened the urban, "middle-class", social leadership of the Orthodox peoples; an expanding demand tor education, and in particular, for popular education in the vernacular languages of the Orthodox; and an increasing exposure to cultural and intellectual influences from Western and Central Europe, and also from Russia.(6) The national content of the Macedonian Slav revival was clearly and unequivocally Bulgarian. This should occasion no surprise. The identification "Bulgarian" was already current among the Macedonian Slavs; their dialects closely resembled those of their eastern Slav neighbours, who then, as now, were also known as Bulgarians; and the emerging modern Bulgarian literary language was readily comprehensible in Macedonia. Indeed, nineteenth century Macedonia served as one of the principal centres of the Bulgarian national revival: its Slav inhabitants, led by their new nationally-minded intelligentsia, participated fully in the Bulgarian literary and linguistic revivals, in the movement lor schooling in Bulgarian, and also in the first major political expression of the Bulgarian national movement, namely, the successful campaign tor a national Orthodox church, established in 1870 as the Bulgarian Exarchate.

http://www.kroraina.com/knigi/en/other/yasamee.html

[morski]

LITERARY LANGUAGE
(A LATE CASE OF GLOSSOTOMY?)
Otto Kronsteiner (Austria)


"The split of a language into two is something which the greatest fantasts in the world have not dared do. Our scholars, however, did it for political, rather than linguistic considerations." Leonida Lari, Rumanian writer from Moldova, (Literatura si arta am 18.8.1988)

There are quite a few European languages spoken outside their "own" country: for instance German in Germany, but also in Austria, Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Luxemburg,: Denmark, Belgium, Poland, Russia; Spanish in Spain, but also in Argentina, Chile, Bolivia etc. But nowhere a necessity has come to being, neither an attempt has been made to father a new (official) language (Austrian, Liechtensteinian, Argentinian, Chilien etc.) despite apparent differences emerging in the usage of the languages.

Many minority languages have never had their own state, others have had - though for a short time. Nevertheless, they have kept their integrity in the course of centuries, and have patiently waited for their recognition. This holds good of Ladinian, Basque, Sardian, Catalan and others. Quite to the contrary, there has never been a necessity for the creation of a spedal literary language to serve the Bulgarian-speaking Slavs residing outside Bulgaria (for example, in Vardar or Aegean Macedonia, Albania, Serbia, Rumania, Ukraine). Similarly, there had never been a Macedonian linguistic community dreaming for centuries on end to be recognised for its linguistic uniqueness.

As late as the XXth c. the method of linguistic partition (glossotomy) [1] would be repeatendly applied, motivated politically, rather than linguistically. In the West (as was the case of SlovenianNindian) those attempts crashed and burned. In the East however, forcefully conceived languages under communism (socialism) (Rumanian/Moldovan [2]; Finnish/Karelian; Tatar/Bashkir; Turkish/Gagaouz) did survive to live a longer "life" thanks to political coercion. Those who refused to accept language partition would be proclaimed nationalists and treated in the respective way. In politics, language partition was counted upon as a way to reinforce the new political borders, thus eliminating the feeling of one-time belonging to a certain community. [3] The strategies behind the fathering of such new languages in the communist regions would follow one and the same principles.

One scholar (or a handful united in a group) would publish an orthography, grammar, dictionary, bilingual dictionaries (but, note, never from the old to the new language, that is, never Rumanian- Moldovan, but Moldovan-Russian for example, or others). Shortly, they would publish a historical grammar, a history of the language, as well as a history of the new nation. Further, as "flank" initiatives, an Academy of Sciences, a National Theatre and a National Folk Ensemble would be established. In the meantime, a national literature was bound to shape up, and the first writer to venture in any genre, would be proclaimed a great playwright, novelist or Iyrist on the new language. [4] All that in its turn, called to life a literary history. The political accompaniment to the whole affair would be a most characteristic sentence in the communist countries: notably, that the (new) language was "a remarkable achievement serving the entire cultural complex". And, the direction to follow derived from the (unvoiced) formulation: "the worse the old language is treated, the better for the new one", that is, the worse Roumanian is being spoken/spelled, the better for Moldovan, which would be more correctly spoken/spelled. And, this entailed a deepening of the artificial gulf between the old and the new tongue (even by the use of force). All that holds good of the Macedonian literary language (македонскиот jазик).

Date of creation: 1944

Place of creation: The Socialist Republic of Macedonia (within the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia) - the "Prohor Pcinski" monastery.

Used by: some 1 000 000 Bulgarians (in Macedonia).

Oldest literary monument: "New Macedonia" newspaper.

http://www.kroraina.com/knigi/en/kronsteiner/ik_3_eng.html

[morski]

War is coming again

(BLACK HAND OVER EUROPE)
The Bulgarian Scene

Henri Pozzi


Bulgaria The Unlucky
Twenty years ago Bulgaria was incontestably the most powerful of the four little Christian states in the Balkan peninsula which were pushing Ottoman domination step by step out of Europe.
She was not even then in possession of her natural frontiers, because the Austro-German politicians were desirous of avoiding the constitution of a Bulgarian State whose extent and force would have barred the route to the ambitions of Austria. But she was well on the way, and her power seemed to be destined to dominate in the Balkans.
She had recovered Western Roumelia in 1885 as a result of a war with Serbia, which had been brought about by the diplomacy of Vienna, and thus was master of two-thirds of her own national territory. Macedonia, the third portion of the Bulgarian body, remained Turk.
However, it was only Turk politically, thanks to the efforts of the Macedonian Revolutionary Organisation (the ORIM) which had galvanised the Christian populations of Macedonia to a realisation of their Bulgar blood and destiny. So well did they do their work that the first victory of the Balkan Allies in 1912 was won in the Valley of the Vardar by the volunteers of the ORIM.
A profound sentiment was generated in the Balkan mind of the ethnic unity of all of the Bulgarian populations established in the peninsula, from the Black Sea to Albania, and from the Danube to the Aegean Sea.
The man who reigned at Sofia possessed an exceptional intelligence, a spirit of intrigue, a total absence od scruples, a knowledge of men and a profound contempt for them, and these qualities seemed just those needed in the fetid political atmosphere of the Balkans to enable him to realise his profound dreams. In order to prevent a recurrence of the German opposition of 1878, he had formed precious friendships at Berlin and Vienna. The Russian friendship had already been established. Finally, a close alliance, in which the most insignificant eventualities had been foreseen and regulated, united him to Serbia and Greece.
The Bulgarian mobilisation decree in September 1912 called to arms nearly half-a-million thoroughly trained men, filled with enthusiasm, and provided by Creusot with a crushing superiority in artillery. This peasant army, advancing irresistibly in less than six weeks to the very doors of Constantinople, stupefied Europe.
The Great Powers, however, were interested in seeing to it that the Bulgars should not solve the question of the Orient and so the dream of Bulgaria was checked. There followed the armistice of 1912, the interminable negotiations at London, the refusal of the Serbs to respect the agreement which they had concluded with Sofia in regard to the division of eventual conquests; the sullen attack on the Serbian positions by the Bulgars on 29th June, 1913; the Greeks' rush to the aid of Belgrade' the intervention of Roumania who attacked the Bulgarian armies from the rear; and the treaties of Bukarest on 10th August, 1913, and of Constantinople on 29th September.
If there is one thing that is widely known about the history of the two Balkan Wars, surely it is the story of the shameful way in which Bulgaria turned and attacked her ally Serbia by surprise because she (Bulgaria) believing herself to be the stronger, was determined to keep for herself alone all the fruits of the victory gained in common. The annals of Serbian history ring with this felony of Bulgaria, and how she paid the price of her treason.
What a fine moral story it makes! The good little boys from whom the bad little boy tried to steal marbles, how splendid to see them triumphant and the bad little boy discomfited!
The little that has so far been permitted to escape from the archives of revolutionary nations has thrown some light on the "Bulgarian felony" of 29th June, 1913. Here again we find the hidden hand of Serbia plotting and planning that Pan-Serb dream of aggrandisement which was and is charged with so much evil for Europe. Enough has been revealed to show that the responsibility for the Bulgar act does not lie with King Ferdinand. He bears the burden of enough faults without adding this one. The author of the second Balkan War was Pasitch, President of the Serb Council.

http://www.kroraina.com/knigi/en/hp_eng/index.html

[morski]

I will not go into a presentation of the manifold facts of history, ethnography, linguistics, folklore and statistics which bear testimony - and I think this testimony is incontrovertible - of the Bulgarian character of the Slavic-speaking population settled in Macedonia. Whole libraries, have been written to establish the Bulgarianism of the Macedonian Slavs and I believe that many of you are much more intimately familiar with this vast literature than I could ever be. And, Indeed, it would be absurd if I, a mere outside observer, and only an occasional one at that, would presume to teach you things which you not only know, but live.
Let me, however, point out one circumstance which in my eyes, has profoundly changed the whole situation. Up to the Second World War the Bulgarian Macedonians, after the retreat of Turkey from Europe, had to struggle incessantly for the preservation of their heritage against the encroachment and machinations of the Pan-Serbian circles, carried under the slogan that Macedonia is nothing but Southern Serbia; and on the other hand they had to fight the absurd notion propounded by Athens, that the Bulgarian-speaking Macedonians are but "Slavophone Greeks". That would be the same as if the English would assert that the French-Canadians are but "Francophone" English people! Recent events have taught us what reactions to expect from the French-Canadians if such insinuations were to be made.
I believe, however, that it was easier to counter the Pan-Serbian claims, even though they were dressed in the political scholarship of men like A.Belie and Jovan Cvijic, because here was only the matter of a spirited and well-reasoned defense against the illegitimate ambitions of expansionists, which was, at bottom, still old fashioned nationalism. And this is still the situation in which the Macedo-Bulgarians find themselves under Greek rule.
I wish,however, to call your attention to a much more sinister device concocted in Belgrade under the sign of the Red Star, the Hammer and the Sickle. That the invention of a separate Macedonian nation, a Macedonian literary language and even a Macedonian history, is divorced from all the evidences of historical research and scholarship. By sophistry and the distortion of the historical facts it is said, for example, that St.Clement of Ochrid was a member of some separate Macedonian people which has never exited, and that the language used by the apostles and teachers of the Slavs for the christianization and the enlightenment of the Slavonic world was a separate Macedonian idiom, which has nothing or only very little to do with the Bulgarian language as such. In order to find some historical foundation for these unproven and undemonslrable allegations, historians of this school have even restyled the West-Bulgarian Kingdom of Tsar Samuel as a state run for the benefit of the mythical separate Macedonian people. Let me quote only one authority, the eminent Russian byzaniologist, A. A. Vassilijev, whose monumcnted history of the Byzantine Empire is generally considered a standard work in this field. What has he to say about the national character of Samuels Kingdom?"Afler the death of John Tzimisoes the Bulgarians took advantage of the internal complications in the Empire and rebelled against Byzantine domination. The outstanding leader of this period was Samuel, the energetic ruler of Western independent Bulgaria, and probably the founder of a new dynasty, one of the most prominent rulers of the First Bulgarian Empire." In the entire passage dealing with this heroic, as well as tragic episode in Bulgarian history, Vassiljev consistently uses the term "Bulgaria". In a footnote, it is true, he mentions the hypothesis put forward by the Serbian historian D.Anastasijevich that Samuel's Kingdom was not lawfully Bulgarian, but a "Sloveno-macedonian Empire". But quite obviously he does not make this hypothesis his own.

http://www.kroraina.com/knigi/en/other/mkslavs.html

[morski]

D8hTR3yeLt4


Andrey Tasev Lyapchev (Tarpov) (Bulgarian: Андрей Тасев Ляпчев (Tърпов)) (30 November 1866 – 6 November 1933) was a Bulgarian political figure and Prime Minister in 3 consecutive governments.
[edit] Early years

Lyapchev was born in the Macedonian city of Resen, which was at the time a part of the Ottoman Empire, and played a leading role in Macedonian politics. Lyapchev's family is thought to have originated from a certain Dore, a Megleno-Romanian potter who fled the Islamization of his native Notia and settled in Resen in the 18th century.[1]

Andrey Lyapchev started his education in Resen but after the April Uprising of 1876 the local school was shut down by Turkish authorities, following the fate of many other Bulgarian schools in Macedonia. He spent the next three years helping his brother Georgi run his shop in Bitola. Georgi was left to take care of the family after the death of their father. In 1879 Lyapchev signed in the Bitola gymnasium and two years later he moved to the newly-established Bulgarian Men's High School of Thessaloniki. One of his teacher’s there was his fellow-townsman Trayko Kitanchev, who had a significant influence on the young student. After Kitanchev’s dismissal in 1884 Lyapchev left the school and moves to Plovdiv together with his teacher. At the time Plovdiv was the main city of the Autonomous Province of Eastern Rumelia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrey_Lyapchev

[morski]

spn2RYy-eFQ


Kliment Boyadzhiev (Bulgarian: Климент Бояджиев; 15 April 1861 - 15 July 1933) was a Bulgarian General during the Balkan Wars and First World War.

Born in Ohrid, he studied in an elementary school there. After the liberation of Bulgaria in 1878 he emigrated to Sofia. In 1883 he graduated the Military School in Sofia and in 1895 graduated the Military Academy in Torino, Italy with excellent marks.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kliment_Boyadzhiev


According to Skopie "historians" this bloke occupied his own hometown in 1915 during WWI.

[hajduk]

http://www.mtholyoke.edu/~kolev20k/pics/Picture_of_the_CD-book_Macedonian_Book_2006_Macedonia_for_the_Macedo nians.jpg

[Queen B]

http://history-of-macedonia.com/coppermine/albums/userpics/10001/katadesmos.jpg

Nuff said

[morski]

gOo_4tlsffI

edyC1QvIbxE

Interview with Ivan Mihaylov, the last leader of the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization, shortly before he passed away.

http://www.bg-history.info/i/cal/th/th_497.jpg

[morski]

QxEEwavjAFA

[morski]

Кога ќе стигнеш во моја земја
во Бугарска Македонија
ќе видиш Бугари јунаци
нестрашливи македонци...
Речи речи: „Македонии вие Бугари јунаци
докога вие во темница ќе седите црни лица?
Сите согласни станете,
Бугарски школи отворете
во цркви Бугарски читајте,
од никого не се плашите!

Рајко Жинзифов (1860 год. „Гулаб")


Во својата статија „Слово за полка Игорев" Pajко Жинзифов одбележува:...„Ние за Болгарски јазик го сметаме Toj јазик, кој сја говорит по цела Македонија, Тракија, Болгарија, меѓу говорите на кои има многу малку разлика...
Нема Македонци, нема Тракијци, како отделни народи, а има само Славјане Болгаре, кои живеат по кажаните места, имената на кои, може би имаат си право во географијата, а не во народността..."
Подобар одговор на тие кои служајќи на србоманството и југословенскиот комунизам се обидуват да префрлат географскиот поим врз народността едва ли може да се даде дури и денес!

Автор Рајко Жинзифов


Гусляр в собор

"O, гърци, гърци, чуйте нас,
чуйте наш народен глас!
Знайме ми, разбираме ми
злобна цел, коя криете ви.
Досега не погърчихте нас,
занапред храбро чекаме вас.
Време ет дошло, не ет далеч,
с остро ли перо, с остър ли меч
ке делим, ке ся караме ми
в сегашни дни и в подирни дни,
в широко поле,- в планина
за народност и за правина,
за бащина, за майчин язик...
Охрид и Търнов веч дали вик.
Македония, чудна страна,
нема да бидит гърчка она!
Шума и гора, и планина,
самий камен на тая страна,
птица и риба в Вардар река,
живо, мъртво на свои крака
ке станат и ке дадат ответ
на цела Европа, на цел свет:

Я българка сум. българин сум я,
българе живеят в тая страна!"
Так ся кълнат, гласи вишат
сложно, дружно старци, момци.
И казаха да запишат
тие думи за потомци.
А невинните девойки
заиграха си народно,
накитени глави с вейки,
с цвете полско, домородно.
Из них една македонка,
хубавица милолика,
светлокоса, чърноока,
с снага стройна, белолика,
запеяла,загукала -

- исто славей, малка птица,
запрусала, заиграла
како полска яребица.

"Я сум млада бугарка,
име ми ет Милкана,
я сум чиста славянка,
в Бугария родена
от бугарски род
и бугарски плод.

Майка ми ет бугарка,
керка на чист бугарин,
имам кума бугарка.
вуйко им ет бугарин
от бугарски род
и бугарски плод.

Любам я бугарина,
юнака я милувам,
свършена за Драгана
и ке да ся омажам.
Гърк за мене враг
а бугарин - драг.

На мой род ке придадам
неколку си синчиня,
ке кърстам, ке израстам
вси чисти славянчиня.
от бугарски род
и бугарски плод.

Тежко се закълнувам,
ке ги кърстам бугарски,
с иминя ке назовам
не г-ърчки, не немечки.
Гърк за меяе враг.
а бугарин - драг.

Име нека ет Боян.
Здраве, Драган ил' Стоян.
а не гърчко Ксенофон
или друго - Демофон.
Чуждо за чужд род,
свое за свой род-
При моя умирачка
клетва я ке оставам,
при земна ми отлъчка
сину си ке зарачам
от бугарски род
да оставит плод."

А млади не мълчат и младите пеят
и нихното сърдце се распламенило, .
и нихните чувства веч не немеят,
българско слово в них мисли оживило.
И гледаят они, че безплодна ет нива,
пълна сос троскот, она със търнйе расла,
при диво оранйе, при работа дива
зърно мъртвеяло и сила му гасла.

И видеха на дедови им слепенйе
и нихно страданье, глупаво търпенйе,
че стари години, златното време
мина с съдни мъки и с тежко бреме.
Пак сос гуслярът заедно грмогласно
песън запеаха, та песня последна,
и ръци ои дали сложно, согласно
ся кълнат с душа за свобода жедна.

..................


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/24/Rayko_Zhinzifov.jpg

"Мые за Българскiй языкъ бройме той языкъ, кой ся говоритъ по цѣлѧ Македонiѧ, Тракiѧ и Българiѧ, между говорите на кой има малу много разлика, но мые, както и секой, Българинъ не кѧсогледъ, не можиме да речиме, що слово-то рѧка или вóда iе Македонско или Тракiйско, а рѧкá и водá iе Българско, защото нема Македонцы, нема Тракiйцы като отдѣлни народи, а има само Славяне-Българе, кои-то живѣятъ по реченны-те мѣста, имена-та на кои, може бы, имаятъ си право в землеписанiе-то, а не в народность-тѧ, накѧсо да речиме, има единъ цѣленъ народъ Българскiй и единъ языкъ Българскiй, кой-то, какъ и секой кой му драго другiй языкъ ся делитъ на наречiя..."

Райко Жинзифов из Велес, предговор към неговия превод на "Слово о пълку Игоревѣ", 1863 г.

[poiuytrewq0987]

Sorry, I don't speak Tatarski. Additionally, fuck off back to Volga Tatarstan err I mean Bolgarstan. We don't need interlopers who started three wars in the Balkans. Bye bye.

[morski]

This is the language in which Rayko Zhinzifov (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rayko_Zhinzifov) wrote;).

[morski]

We started two wars in the Balkans. One was with our allies against the Ottomans(a noble endevour to throw them out of Europe) and one against our allies. Here is what Henri Pozzi wrote about the second:


If there is one thing that is widely known about the history of the two Balkan Wars, surely it is the story of the shameful way in which Bulgaria turned and attacked her ally Serbia by surprise because she (Bulgaria) believing herself to be the stronger, was determined to keep for herself alone all the fruits of the victory gained in common. The annals of Serbian history ring with this felony of Bulgaria, and how she paid the price of her treason.
What a fine moral story it makes! The good little boys from whom the bad little boy tried to steal marbles, how splendid to see them triumphant and the bad little boy discomfited!
The little that has so far been permitted to escape from the archives of revolutionary nations has thrown some light on the "Bulgarian felony" of 29th June, 1913. Here again we find the hidden hand of Serbia plotting and planning that Pan-Serb dream of aggrandisement which was and is charged with so much evil for Europe. Enough has been revealed to show that the responsibility for the Bulgar act does not lie with King Ferdinand. He bears the burden of enough faults without adding this one. The author of the second Balkan War was Pasitch, President of the Serb Council.

http://www.kroraina.com/knigi/en/hp_eng/index.html

[poiuytrewq0987]

We started two wars in the Balkans. One was with our allies against the Ottomans(a noble endevour to throw them out of Europe) and one against our allies. Here is what Henri Pozzi wrote about the second:



http://www.kroraina.com/knigi/en/hp_eng/index.html

Wars that destroyed our economy, hurt our people and divided the land into three pieces. I don't care for other two pieces as I am happy to be at least independent though not having all our lands.

First Balkan War: Started by Bulgaria for Greater Bulgaria

Second Balkan War: Started by Bulgaria for Greater Bulgaria i.e. San Stefano Bulgaria

WW1: Started by Bulgaria for Greater Bulgaria

WW2: Indirectly started by Bulgaria for Greater Bulgaria

You people are warmongers in the region. We need a Versailles-style treaty for Bulgaria...

[bimo]

the options in the poll are nonsense!
what does it mean " pure slavs (serb or bulgarian ) " ? , bulgarian are not only slav , the thracian are important like the slav in bulgarian history.
however for people in fyrom i think they are bulgarian , but they today do not consider themselves bulgarian but macedonian , I do not claim anything from their territory if they don't consider them bulgarian is a nonsense to forced them , but they should not touch pirin macedonia , in pirin macedonia people know that they are bulgarian and fyromians should not claim anything from pirin ;)

[morski]

Wars that destroyed our economy, hurt our people and divided the land into three pieces. I don't care for other two pieces as I am happy to be at least independent though not having all our lands.

First Balkan War: Started by Bulgaria for Greater Bulgaria

Second Balkan War: Started by Bulgaria for Greater Bulgaria i.e. San Stefano Bulgaria

WW1: Started by Bulgaria for Greater Bulgaria

WW2: Indirectly started by Bulgaria for Greater Bulgaria

You people are warmongers in the region. We need a Versailles-style treaty for Bulgaria...

First Balkan War: Started by Bulgaria along with Serbia, Greece and Monte Negro with the blessing of Russia.

Second Balkan War: Started by Bulgaria - true. Again, here is what Henri Pozzi wrote about that war:



If there is one thing that is widely known about the history of the two Balkan Wars, surely it is the story of the shameful way in which Bulgaria turned and attacked her ally Serbia by surprise because she (Bulgaria) believing herself to be the stronger, was determined to keep for herself alone all the fruits of the victory gained in common. The annals of Serbian history ring with this felony of Bulgaria, and how she paid the price of her treason.
What a fine moral story it makes! The good little boys from whom the bad little boy tried to steal marbles, how splendid to see them triumphant and the bad little boy discomfited!
The little that has so far been permitted to escape from the archives of revolutionary nations has thrown some light on the "Bulgarian felony" of 29th June, 1913. Here again we find the hidden hand of Serbia plotting and planning that Pan-Serb dream of aggrandisement which was and is charged with so much evil for Europe. Enough has been revealed to show that the responsibility for the Bulgar act does not lie with King Ferdinand. He bears the burden of enough faults without adding this one. The author of the second Balkan War was Pasitch, President of the Serb Council.

WW1: Started by Bulgaria for Greater Bulgaria- utter nonsense.

WW2: Indirectly started by Bulgaria for Greater Bulgaria- utter nonsense.

[poiuytrewq0987]

First Balkan War: Started by Bulgaria along with Serbia, Greece and Monte Negro with the blessing of Russia.

Bulgaria could have stayed out of the war and then Balkan League would have collapsed with feeble Greece and lonely Serbia. But no, you wanted Macedonia, so you declared war on the Ottoman Empire along with others thereby shattering Macedonia into three pieces.


Second Balkan War: Started by Bulgaria - true. Again, here is what Henri Pozzi wrote about that war:

Pasitich can lick my balls, it was Bulgaria who GAVE the go-ahead to war on Serbia and Greece which backfired on Bulgaria in end.




WW1: Started by Bulgaria for Greater Bulgaria- utter none snense.


Bulgaria was promised Macedonian and Thracian territories in exchance for joining the Central Powers. If you didn't then Serbia might not have ended up backstabbed again and causing more chaos in Macedonian territories.


WW2: Indirectly started by Bulgaria for Greater Bulgaria- utter none sense.

You people chose to align with Nazi Germany in exchange for Macedonian and Thracian territories instead of staying neutral in the conflict like Turkey.

:coffee:

[morski]

Bulgaria could have stayed out of the war and then Balkan League would have collapsed with feeble Greece and lonely Serbia. But no, you wanted Macedonia, so you declared war on the Ottoman Empire along with others thereby shattering Macedonia into three pieces.



Pasitich can lick my balls, it was Bulgaria who GAVE the go-ahead to war on Serbia and Greece which backfired on Bulgaria in end.




Bulgaria was promised Macedonian and Thracian territories in exchance for joining the Central Powers. If you didn't then Serbia might not have ended up backstabbed again and causing more chaos in Macedonian territories.



You people chose to align with Nazi Germany in exchange for Macedonian and Thracian territories instead of staying neutral in the conflict like Turkey.

:coffee:

Now all of this is somewhat correctly presented by you this time so I won't bother to scrutinize it point by point. I'll say just that: Our grand strategy between 1878-1944 was the unification of all the lands populated by Bulgarians(whether by absolute or relative majority) in one state. We made a lot of mistakes and we've been living with the consequences. History is what the documents from the period say it is, and in our case documents say that most of the MAcedonian populace were Bulgarian untill 1944.

[poiuytrewq0987]

Now all of this is somewhat correctly presented by you this time so I won't bother to scrutinize it point by point. I'll say just that: Our grand strategy between 1878-1944 was the unification of all the lands populated by Bulgarians(whether by absolute or relative majority) in one state. We made a lot of mistakes and we've been living with the consequences. History is what the documents from the period say it is, and in our case documents say that most of the MAcedonian populace were Bulgarian untill 1944.

There are documents that do say most of Macedonians were Bulgarian but there are also lots of documents that say the opposite. The fact that the opposing documents also exist creates doubt about your argument. If we were simply Bulgarian then such doubts would not even exist today and we'd be identifying Bulgarian all the way today.

[Lithium]

morski, no need to post articles and videos in any Slavic language, he does not undestand them because he is American :)

[morski]

There are documents that do say most of Macedonians were Bulgarian but there are also lots of documents that say the opposite. The fact that the opposing documents also exist creates doubt about your argument. If we were simply Bulgarian then such doubts would not even exist today and we'd be identifying Bulgarian all the way today.

Yes, things got nasty when the Greek and Serb propaganda increased in response to the cultural and political activities and achievments of the local Macedonian Bulgarians in the second half of the XIX c.- the establishment of the Exarchate, the numerous Bulgarian language schools built by local, municipal, school boards of trustees, etc.

Keep in mind that there was no Bulgarian state for most of this period, it was the grassroot movement known as Bulgarian national revival that accomplished all this. There was however Greek and Serbian states, hence the better means for waging a good propaganda.

[poiuytrewq0987]

Yes, things got nasty when the Greek and Serb propaganda increased in response to the cultural and political activities and achievments of the local Macedonian Bulgarians in the second half of the XIX c.- the establishment of the Exarchate, the numerous Bulgarian language schools built by local, municipal, school boards of trustees, etc.

Keep in mind that there was no Bulgarian state for most of this period, it was the grassroot movement known as Bulgarian national revival that accomplished all this. There was however Greek and Serbian states, hence the better means for waging a good propaganda.

Bulgaria did become very powerful during her early years but it all collapsed when Greece and Serbia teamed up to stop Bulgaria from becoming too strong. That is a fact. Bulgaria could have allied with Romania but not sure why they didn't.

[purple]

Weren't Macedonians Bulgarians in disguise?

[пустиняк]

IF you mean Slavic population of Macedonia they are descendants of Bulgarian not of Serbs Albos or ancient Macedonians.
You should add option only Bulgarians

[morski]

Bulgaria was promised Macedonian and Thracian territories in exchance for joining the Central Powers. If you didn't then Serbia might not have ended up backstabbed again and causing more chaos in Macedonian territories.


Hm, I just now realized what a nasty insinuation you made here... It's really the Everest of hypocrisy on the Serbian part to claim we backstab them as a national pastime or smth, when the reallity is they backstabbed us in our most dire of moments as a young country.


On 6 September 1885, Bulgaria and the semi-autonomous Ottoman province of Eastern Rumelia declared their unification in the city of Plovdiv. Eastern Rumelia, whose population was predominantly ethnic Bulgarian, had been an artificial creation of the Berlin Congress seven years earlier. The unification took place against the will of the Great Powers, including Russia. The Austro-Hungarian Empire had been expanding its influence in the Balkans and was particularly opposed. Bulgaria's western neighbor Serbia also feared this would diminish its position in the Balkans. In addition, Serbia's ruler Milan Obrenović IV was annoyed that Serbian opposition leaders like Nikola Pašić, who had escaped persecution after the Timok Rebellion, had found asylum in Bulgaria.

Lured by Austria-Hungary's promises for territorial gains from Bulgaria (in return for concessions in the Western Balkans), Milan IV declared war on Bulgaria on 14 November 1885. The military strategy relied largely on surprise, as Bulgaria had moved most of its troops near the border with the Ottoman Empire, in the southeast.

The pretext became a minor border dispute, known as the Bregovo Dispute. The river Timok, which formed part of the border between the two countries, had slightly changed its course over the years. As a result, a Serbian border guardhouse near the village of Bregovo had found itself on the Bulgarian bank of the river. After some denied requests from Bulgaria to evacuate the guardhouse, Bulgaria expelled the Serbian troops by force.

As it happened, the Ottomans did not intervene and the Serbian army's advance was stopped after the Battle of Slivnitsa. The main body of the Bulgarian army traveled from the Ottoman border in the southeast to the Serbian border in the northwest to defend the capital Sofia. After the defensive battles at Slivnitsa and Vidin (the latter's defence was organized by Atanas Uzunov), Bulgaria began an offensive which took the city of Pirot. At this point, the Austro-Hungarian Empire stepped in, threatening to join the war on Serbia's side if the Bulgarian troops did not retreat. No territorial changes were made to either country, but the Bulgarian unification was recognized by the Great Powers. However, the relationship of trust and friendship between Serbia and Bulgaria, built during their long common fight against Ottoman rule, suffered irreparable damage.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbo-Bulgarian_War

When we were expecting a strike from the Ottomans our Slavic, Orthodox brothers instead of helping us did guess what... back... waaait for it... stabbed us.

And the other Slavic, Orthodox brother(Russia) was so selfishly following his own interests that they called back all their officers serving in the young Bulgarian army, thus leaving us with mostly captains leading it, hence the war was dubbed "War of the captains".

[Trun]

Russia has always been supporting Serbia against us- in 1885, in the Second Balkan war, in the World wars...one of those who most vigorously opposed the idea for Great Bulgaria after the First Balkan war was Russia. They were so much afraid if Bulgaria becomes too strong and commits rivalry for Constantinopol, because Ferdinand has a visible interests concerning the city.

[morski]

Russia has always been supporting Serbia against us- in 1885, in the Second Balkan war, in the World wars...one of those who most vigorously opposed the idea for Great Bulgaria after the First Balkan war was Russia. They were so much afraid if Bulgaria becomes too strong and commits rivalry for Constantinopol, because Ferdinand has a visible interests concerning the city.

Ferdinand was only one man. Our grand strategy was all Bulgarians in one state. Fuck Constantinople! Even if at some point we did manage to take it I doubt we'd have tried to hold it at all costs.

[Trun]

That is why Ferdinand is one of the most hated people in our history. He has his own goals different from the dream of Bulgarians. He wanted Thessaloniki and Constantinople in order to be accepted as a great ruler and to leave a trace in the history...but he overestimated the power of Bulgaria and didn't refer to the history. Thessaloniki and Constantinople have never been Bulgarian so Bulgaria mustn't have any ambitions on them. He must have been satisfied with the parts of Aegean Macedonia and Thrace we had and wait for possible better solution of the Vardar Macedonia question in the future.

[Dorian]

I agree with the majority of voters ,pure slavs.