|
Post by benkovski on Jun 21, 2008 11:33:08 GMT -5
Here's a few quotes from primary and secondary sources.
So here it becomes clear that the Serbians were payed to propagate their views in Macedonia. But, it seems that even the Turks were aware that Serbia will not be able to Serbianize the Macedono-Bulgarians.
Here we see that B and H are referred to as genuine Serbian lands. Macedonia was rather a land of political interest as Bulgaria was still divided into three parts. Serbia was aware that it would be easier to go after a divided Bulgaria than to oppose a well united Austro-Hungarian Empire. Serbia justified its cause with propaganda.
Here we see that Serbia and Greece wanted Macedonia for political reasons. On the other hand, Bulgaria was more concerned about the well being of the population in Macedonia. The aim of IMRO was that a free Macedonia would later have the option of remaining independent or uniting with Bulgaria. Unfortunately, as soon as it was freed from the Turks it fell under Serb and Greek domination and their anti-Bulgarian propaganda has played a big role in de-Bulgarizing the initial identity of the region. This is anti-Bulgarian propaganda is still evident in Vardar Macedonia today.
Here it can be seen that the author speaks of Macedonians and Bulgarians interchangeably. Referring to the same people either by calling them Macedonians (ie. Bulgarians of Macedonia) or Bulgarians (ie. Bulgarians from Bulgaria, or Bulgarian Macedonians who have been exiled to Bulgaria) And as he discusses the Macedonian towns, it seems that he enters a Bulgarian house in order to further understand the Macedonian character.
Here the author talks about how the heart of the Macedonian revolutionaries was actually Bulgarian. Notice also what Macedonian children were taught to chant. The reason for this is political, as the great powers had no interest to see a strong and unified Bulgaria. So, they were pertaining to wanting their freedom before all, and not stating that they had any interest to unite with Bulgaria. Something similar can be seen with Kosovo today. The US and the other great powers, recognize it as interdependent and free, but they don't want it to unite with Albania. Regardless of the fact that Kossavars are mainly of Albanian ethnic origin.
Here the author clearly states that for Macedonia to be free it was to be a part of Bulgaria.
Here the author states that Bulgaria had been divided into different geographical regions. Those being, the Principality of Bulgaria, Macedonia, and Eastern Rumelia or Thrace. It is clearly stated that aside from being divided by geography, there wasn't any other divide at the time.
Here the author goes further to state that the populations of Bulgaria and Macedonia both willingly chose to identify with the Bulgarian church.
Here again, its mentioned that Macedonia wanted to be united with Bulgaria, but the great powers didn't want a strong Bulgarian state that was pro-Russian.
This is from a Serbian source.
Here one of the most chauvinistic Serbs of the time is attemtpting to coerse a Macedonno-Bulgarian woman to allow her kids to study under him and become Serbs.
Here is an example of where the idea of ancient Macedonian claims is rooted. Serbs were failing to entirely Serbianize the Macedono-Bulgarians, and so dividing Bulgaria seemed like a much more attainable goal.
Brief example of the Serbian approach to administering the region of Macedonia.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Jun 21, 2008 19:55:21 GMT -5
"So here it becomes clear that the Serbians were payed to propagate their views in Macedonia. But, it seems that even the Turks were aware that Serbia will not be able to Serbianize the Macedono-Bulgarians."
Benkovski the Bulgarian Exarchate had an important part because it was the first to push for Bulgarian territorial ambitions into the vardarian slavic mass. The Bulgars were fearful of being overrun by the Greeks and their Church. "The Greek schools in Bulgaria," wrote Ivan Minchev, "were a greater danger than the tyrannical regime of the Turks, for they were on the way to denationalizing the Bulgars." I found that quote simply amazing, l couldn't comprenhend why the Greeks were more of a danger than the oppression created by the Turks.
So a way for the Bulgars to overcome this fear that they felt was threatening them from the Patriarchate at Constantinople, the Bulgars threw themselves into the arms of the Turks!.
The following Benkovski will make you realise something as the ottoman tyrannial regime hated the name serbia and everything serbian because they like the Greeks where rebellious, but the Bulgar was patient and submissive, they (ottomans) preferred this. Now because of this fear that they were going to be oppressed by the Greeks, the Bulgars in 1867 appealed to the Porte for permission to set up a special body for public instruction in Bulgaria. In a memorandum which the Bulgarian revolutionary committee handed to the Sultan in 1870, it stated that the Bulgars were fully prepared to remain under the Sultan's authority. "If our independance," says the memorandum, "could find recognition and confirmation under the glorious scepter of the sultans, and if the sultans were at the same time willing to be also emperors of the Bulgars, then why should we not offer our help and our strength to the Ottoman monarchy, as the Magyars did to Austria and the Algerians to France?.......Diplomacy would then stand in astonishment when it saw a miracle where it had been accustomed to seeing a weak body. In this way, all pretxt for intervention and threats from whatever power would be precluded for all time. Not one foreign country would look askance at Istanbul under the pretext of liberating the Christians, since the latter would be free and would want to remain so."
There you have it Benkovski, the Bulgars threw themselves into the hands of the Ottoman regime because they felt they were going to be denationalized by the Patriarchate at Constantinople.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Jun 21, 2008 20:23:39 GMT -5
"Here we see that B and H are referred to as genuine Serbian lands. Macedonia was rather a land of political interest as Bulgaria was still divided into three parts. Serbia was aware that it would be easier to go after a divided Bulgaria than to oppose a well united Austro-Hungarian Empire. Serbia justified its cause with propaganda."
Your confusing here, wasn't Serbia divided as well?.....Bulgaria was under the regime of the Ottomans, whereas the serbs liberated a portion of itself from the ruling ottomans, but the rest was under the Austro-Hungary and Ottomans?.
If Vardar was of politicial interest for Serbia then why did she receive letters of help from vardarians:
Georgi Babadžanović and Vasil Teofilić from Ohrid in a letter to Jovan Ristić, President of the Minister's Council:
Mister Minister, it is very-well known to you, how the Bulgarians trough their Exarcho fooled us and promised us mountains of gold, and we hold that you know by whose initiative the Bulgarian propaganda took root in our peaceful and beautiful areas, but what are we going to do under such strong arm, we couldn't have resisted, but when the Bulgarians may do like this, and against us and against their liberators, than also we cannot, neither want to serve to the interests of Bulgaria, and that which we have done, we did it because of ignorance.
Mister Minister, we have nothing in common with Bulgarians, and everything among us, says that we are of Serbian breed and origin, and d*mned may be hundred times, the one who implies, to mix ourselves with Bulgarians.
Mister Minister, we haven't lost hope yet, it only depends on you, that as soon as possible yo come to the help of the schools and teachers, so that the Bulgariansm in our areas may be broken, and than the Serbian cause is achieved. We would with all our heart work on this, we would brought our women and children here, so that Serbian dance may flourish within Macedonia..........
That we are exhausted and from decent families, as that we speak the truth, shall be confirmed by ouur compatriot Mr. Kosta A. Šumenković trad(er), loc(al), and we are also known to Milojko Veselinović, a civil servant loc(al) and the editor of the "Serbdom".
22. July 1887. year Belgrade Most humble ones,
Georgi Babadžanović Vasil Teofilović
(Original. AIIS, collection of Jovan Ristić-Zbirka Jovana Ristica 12/541, XII/10)
The men of the village of Lazaropole, North-Western FYROM, to the Government in Belgrade, 1887.
"Since when the Exarchate has been established all Orthodox Serbs of these areas suffer various discomforts because both the Patriarchate and the Exarchate are trying to keep the local people within its authority grabbing of theirs brings great harm to our people. That is because many of our best men are falling into prisons. Because of that many are renouncing the Patriarchate and do recognize the Exarchate which has won on its side only because of: to the our people it sends teachers for free and all the schooling necessities.
The smart people see that is all that foreign and that the Exarchate has an intention to bulgarize us a;;, but what we are going to do when the people is thirsty to have schools and teachers the Exarchate extended its arms into the county of Debar, and pays to the teachers in Varoš, in our village, in Galičnik and also into some other villages.
The undersigned chieftain of the village of Lazaropole and together with its teacher, know that our language isn't the Bulgarian language, that our customs are not Bulgarian, but Serbian and according to that we wish that our children do learn in Serbian language.
For that from the administration of the Prizren Theological Seminary we asked for and obtained quite a number of Serbian books for our school, but in order that our wish would be fulfilled in its entirety it is very necessary tha our teacher gets a salary, and later also all others, which are now payed by the Exarchate, know that Sima A. Igumanov left his property for the enlightenment of the local parts of our people, we are hopeful that you shall do good to us and provide our teacher a salary and his funds.
We think that we have a right on that, just like the other communities, to shake-off the foreign language, at we were obliged to learn until now.
To the our teacher the annual salary was 65 Turkish liras. We are asking you as soon as possible to report to us through the head of the Prizren Theological Seminary will you receive this our will and request, with such a hope , staying with greatest respect
1887, March 8 In the village of Lazaropole (Seal:Sv Ve(lk)mch Georgi vo Lazaropole)
To you humble: Ikonom pop Kosto Pa(pa) Serafim Isak Iosifov Iosif Radević Teacher Vasil A Ikonomović
(Original AC, MID, PP f. II br 28/1887)
Request of the Serbs from the village of Bašino, near Veles (central FYROM) to the Dečani Ieromonach Ruvim, 1887.
"To the honorable gentlemen Ruvim the Ieromonach of the Monastery of Visoki Dečani
The inhabitants of the Bašino village community until ten years ago have instructed their youth in the school of theirs in pure Serbian language, and were distinguished by thath, that they never approached Bulgarian preachers.
But for ten years in the Serbian school of the village of Bašino, the Bulgarian language is taught, not by the will of the inhabitants, but by force from several persons
And that science which is being taught in our school in Bulgarian language is devastating our society, and we cannot get rid of it because, we do not have - as always before ten years- a Serbian teacher.
We decided, to ask Mr. Ruvim, to send us a Slavic teacher, which will teach our youth on the natural Serbian and not unnatural Bulgarian alphabet, which for our speech is worthless, since our words, sveća, đubre etc. cannot be written in the Bulgarian alphabet. In hope that our request will be received, we remain.
28th December 1887, Bašino village
Seen by: Rufim Serafimovic Monastery V. Dečani (Turksih seal from Dečani)
Humble dwellers of the village community of Bašino:
Ando Dzimat Manče Pulšor Petar M Tašov Andrea Višnić Kole Panov Diman Gigo DZimrev Nikola Micević Jovan Anević Joavan Dimanin Lazo Mincić Zafir Ranđelović Risto Paple Andria Eplun Tošo Dimković Dushmorović Sazdo Dimov Koce Dolev
(Diplomatic Archive-Diplomatski arhiv III, department-odelenje F. I 13/1887)”
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Jun 21, 2008 20:31:15 GMT -5
"Unfortunately, as soon as it was freed from the Turks it fell under Serb and Greek domination"
You've said it here, because the exarchate was shielded and protected by the ruling ottomans. I will further say more later, it will tell of how Russia actually supported an enlarged Bulgaria!.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Jun 22, 2008 22:15:59 GMT -5
I will explain that during the 19th century the Exarchos was supported by the Ottomans and secretly fostered by Russia.
As l was saying above about the memorandum which the Bulgarian revolutionary committee handed to the Sultan in 1870, now, the idea behind this memorandum, with its digs at Russia, is attributed by Braun-Wiesbaden to the Porte. "It was", he says, "neither a French, nor a Roman, nor a Greek, but a Turkish idea, although, indeed, completely beyond the grasp of a man like Abdul Aziz." Joseph Maria von Radowitz, whose position at that time would enable him to be well informed on such matters, ascribed the idea of proclaming an exarchate and the execution of this idea to Russia: "This movement [the Bulgarian movement for ecclesiastical separation from the Patriarchate of Constantinople] was secretly fostered by Russia, i.e., by Ignatiew, whose personal idea it was, without, however, its suddenly coming out into the open. It represented turnabout in Russian oriental policy: while, until the Crimean War, the Russian slogan had been the defense of Orthodox as a whole, now the Slavic national idea emerged for the first time as a leading principle to which the ancient Patriarchate of Constantinople sacrificed, together with the sympathies of the disappointed Greeks. From now on, Russia was no longer merely the chief power behind Holy Russian Orthodoxy, but a mightly champion of the slav national movement......Only in the summer of 1872 did this gradually become clear. Foreign diplomats on the Bosphorus did not, apparently, appreciate this as they should have done - least of all the Bristish representative, Elliot, who spoke of it to me disparagingly. In the meanwhile, l reported it to Berlin as the biggest change for centuries in Russian oriental policy, and expressed the conviction that it marked the beginning of a future conflict between Russia and Turkey."
Why do you think Russia supported for an enlarged Bulgaria?
Cf. Mintschev, op.cit., pg.29, and Baker, op.cit., pp.44-46 and 363-65, where the text of the firman proclaiming the Exarchate maybe found.
Braun-Wiesbaden, Eine turkische Reise, Vol. II, pg.187.
Hajo Halborn, Auizeichnungen und Erinnerungen aus dem leben des Botschafters Joseph Maria von Radowitz, Vol. I, Berlin-leipzig, 1925, p.242.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Jun 26, 2008 1:46:56 GMT -5
As l was saying above, this was the setting in which the Bulgarian Exarchate was born. Without doubt, the Russians exerted great effort toward its creation, since they believed that in this way they would secure a powerful means of realizing their policy in the Balkans. The Porte, on the other hand, which understood better than the Russians what was going on, thereby acquired a new weapon with which to smash the unity of the balkan Christians. Serbia, who was ill informed and prompted, as ever, by sentiment for the Slavic cause, interpreted the proclamation of the Exarchate as a gain for the Slavic world and for Orthodoxy. The Serbian government, through its envoy in Istanbul, and Metropolitan Mihailo personally-who was very favorably disposed toward the Bulgars-welcomed the creation of the Exarchate in the belief that its influence would be confined to ecclesiatical matters and that a much happier time was thus ahead for the Slavic population in the south of the Peninsula. A true pan-slav, completely devoted to the Russians and to Orthodoxy, and one of the main leaders of Slavophilism in the Balkans, Metropolitan Mihailo made great efforts to secure recognition of the Exarchate, for he was anxious to preserve the unity of the Orthodox Church in the Balkans, which was being subjected to heavy attack, both by propaganda of various kinds and by materialistic ideas.
Richard von Mach, Der Machtbereich des bulgarischen Exarchats in der Turkei, Leipzig-Neuchatel, 1906, p.11.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Jun 29, 2008 3:59:12 GMT -5
As l was saying above that the serbs naively supported the exarchate since she felt that this may serve to preserve unity for the orthodox church, but, as you will see:
The Bulgars, on the other hand, understood the matter quite differently. Still without a state, they tried to exploit the Exarchate for the realization of all their national ambitions, which sprang from the influence of Venelin and that nebulous romanticism which had seized their leaders of the time. Some of these leaders were, in any case, little concerned about the Church; what did concern them above all was the realization of their national ambitions and the formation of a Bulgarian state at the first opportunity. Richard von Mach was not far from the truth when he wrote that the firman of March 11, 1870, by which the Exarchate was established, marked "the beginning of a new national development of the Bulgarian people." Mintschev commented that this firman "belongs to the greatest moral victories attained by the Bulgarian people during the nineteenth century." Dr. Vasil Radoslavoff wrote: "The Constitution of the Bulgarian Principality contains a special provision whereby the new Bulgarian state constitutes an essential part of the Church and is subordinate to the Holy Synod, regardless of where the latter shall have its seat." In the light of all these circumstances, it is not surprising that the first five Bulgarian bishops, in a letter to the Bulgarian nation, urged the people, not only to remain loyal to the Sultan, but to redouble their loyalty and submission."
For the Bulgars, the most valuable gain was the official recognition, throughout the territory of the Exarchate, of "bugar-mileti" as well as "urum-mileti." The former term was intended as designating all those members of the Orthodox Church who remained loyal to the Patriarchate but who did not feel themselves to be Greeks. From the practical or political point of view, this was the first offical recognition of Bulgarian nationality. On the other hand, the Serbs in Old and Southern Serbia suffered a twofold setback: since they had no national Church of their own, it was impossible for them to be entered in the population register as a separate nation, and, divided as they were between the Exarchate and Patriarchate, they were thrown into conflict among themselves. "With the creation of the Exarchate," says Carl Ritter von Sax, "the Bulgarian name once more acquired official significance."
Vasil Radoslavoff, Bulgarien und die Weitkrise, Berlin, 1923, p.1
Carl Ritter von Sax, Geschichte des Machtverialles der Turkei bis Ende des XIX. Jahrhunderts und die Phasen der orientalischen Frage bis auf die Gegenwart, Wien, 1913, p.19.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Jun 29, 2008 4:36:02 GMT -5
I will continue with the underhanded exploitation:
The edict establishing the Exarchate opened up considerable opportunities for spreading Bulgarian influence in all the Serbian lands under Turkish rule. The opportunities were amply exploited. Under the pretext of introducing Church services read in Slav and liberating the people from the authority of the Greek bishops, there began a bitter struggle for the Bulgarization of areas that had never been Bulgarian. "Those who declared themselves for the Exarchate were Bulgars, those who acknowledged the Patriarchate were Serbs. It was scarcely possible at that time to trace any linguistic borderline." Bulgarian agents, many of whom were from Macedonia and had been converted to the Bulgarian cause, inundated the whole of Macedonia and, under the aegis of the Exarchate, engaged in the work of bringing the people over to their side. On January 14, 1899-i.e., at a time when relations had become well defined. Freiherr von Marschall reported to the German Chancellor von Hohenlohe that all the Bulgarian commercial representatives in Macedonia were merely revolutionary agents: "This is especially true," he said, "of the agent Rizov in Skopje, where he has organized a central depot for the Macedonian-Bulgarian movement. The same is essentially true of Bulgarian diplomatic representatives, who consider their cheif task to be conducting of propaganda for a Greater Bulgaria."
Article 10 of the above-mentioned firman required that at least two thirds of the total Orthodox population in any area should decided in favor of the Exarchate, that it be included in the area of the Exarchate and that it be given the right to ask for Exarchate bishops and priests. Taken all in all, this edict subordinated to the Exarchate the dioceses of Pirot, Nish, Chustendil and Samokov, all of which had previously come under the Patriarchate of Pech. The omission of all reference to Skopje, Veles and Shtip in the edict is conspicious. "In Macedonia and eastern Thrace," says Richard von Mach, "i.e., in those areas that are today under direct Turkish adminstration, not one diocese was orginally subordinated to the Bulgarian Exarchate." Later, however, they too were included in the Exarchate and received bishops appointed by the Exarch.
In their efforts to obtain this two-thirds majority, Bulgarian propagandists did not scruple in their choice of methods. Referring to their work in Southern Serbia, Theodor von Sosnosky wrote: "What these methods were the Greeks, Serbs and Turks of this unhappy land felt on their own backs. By plunder and arson, rape and murder, armed bands tried to make them come over to the Bulgarian side. The obivious consequence of this terrorism was that other nations retaliated according to their strength. In this manner, one band raged against another." "Their terrorism," says Hugo Grothe of the Bulgars, "brought them more enemies than friends. If power were to come into their hands today, there would be a danger that everything non-Bulgarian would be persecuted ten times as bitterly as it was when Bulgaria was in Turkish hands." "The fear in Macedonia," wrote H.N. Brailsford, "is more than emotion. It is a physical disease, the malady of the country, the aliment that comes of tyranny."
Theodor von Sosnosky, Die Balkanpolitik Osterreich-Ungarns seit 1886, Stuttgart-Berlin, 1914, Vol. II, p.129
Hugo Grothe, Auf turkischer Erde, Berlin, 1903, p.366
H.N. Brailsford, Macedonia: Its Races and their future, London, 1906, p.36
Benkovski, l even quoted Brailsford as you can see just above.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Jun 30, 2008 22:32:34 GMT -5
As l was saying above that these agents had been engaged in terrorism to bring people over, nothing was done to stop this, even the Turks tolerated it:
For a long time, the Turks tolerated this conduct on the part of the Bulgarian missionaries, for their old hatred of the Serbs had been exacerbated by the Serbo-Turkish war of 1878. "It is understandable," says Heksch, "that the Turks preferred the patient and submissive Bulgar, to the rebellious Serb or Greek. Since the Serbian principality had gained its freedom, the Turks regarded every Serb who declared himself to be such a rebellious conspirator against the Turkish regime. This circumstance was exploited by the Bulgars in order to spread their propaganda among the Serbs outside the principality. Whoever was reluctant to become a Bulgar and persisted in calling himself a Serb was denounced to the Turks as conspiring with Serbia, and could only expect severe punishment. Serbian priests were maltreated; permission was refused to open Serbian schools, and those that were already in existence were closed; Serbian monastries were destroyed. In order to avoid persecution, the population renounced its nationality and called itself Bulgarian.....During the last thirty or forty years, propaganda has been rife in which the Bulgars had encouraged the Turks to act against Serbs and Greeks. Hence, throughout Macedonia, Thrace and Dardania (kosovo), Slavs are considered to be Bulgars, which is quite incorrect. On the contrary, the Slavs in Macedonia are incapable of understanding a Bulgar from Jantra. If it is desired to designate these Slavs correctly, then they must be considered as Serbs, for the Serbian name is so popular with them that, for example, male children are sometimes christened 'Srbin' [Serb]. The Serbian hero of the folk poems, Marko Kraljevich, is obviously the Serbian ruler in Macedonia." Scarcely any serious scholars have considered that a vote for the Slavic church service was a declaration that one was a Bulgar."If," says Hugo Grothe, "during the church plebiscite of 1872, two thirds of the Christian Slavs voted for the Exarchate, this by no means a confession of their Bulgarian descent." Brailsford remarks that the inhabitants of Southern Serbia of that time were Bulgars, "because free and progressive Bulgaria has known how to attract them." The Exarchate was a laboratory in which they were nationally transformed: on these grounds, Brailsford says that the Exarchate clergy were "missionaries of the Bulgarian idea." It is not, therefore, too much to say that the Bulgarian Exarchate was the precursor of San Stefano Bulgaria, which, as D. Rizov says, "remained the national and political ideal of the entire Bulgarian people." "Present-day Bulgaria," wrote Paul Dehn, "is considered by Bulgarian politicians as a torso, and they will not rest until they resurrect their country within the frontiers, more or less, of the San Stefano treaty, including, in particular, the Aegean ports, since Varna, on account of the expensive and time-wasting passage through the Bosphorus and Dardanelles, is insufficient." In order to consolidate the territory for this dreamed-of state, the Bulgars, as Hermann Wendel pointed out, set about the Macedonian Slavs with deliberate and well-organized propaganda and a program for spreading Bulgarian education. "Teachers," says Wendel, "not only taught the children to read and write, but instilled into them the Bulgarian national outlook. Thus, the Bulgars emerged, not as the initiators, but as the exploiters, of a movement which, in the form of the awakening of the 'unhistorical nationas,' was bound inevitably to appear one day." "The new state," says Jirechek in reference to the Bulgaria it was hoped to create, "was supposed to embrace the area from the Bashicko Lake and the port of Kavalla, and in the west to include Pirot, Vranje, Debar and Kastoria. These frontiers were never realized, but for the Bulgars they remained as a formulated political ideal."
Alexander von Heksch, Die Donau von ihrem Ursprung bis an die Mundung, Leipzig, 1885, p.636
Grothe, Auf turkischer Erde, p.364
Dimitar Rizoff, Bulgarien und Russland, Berlin, p.8
Paul Dehn, Die Volker Sudosteuropas und ihre politischen Probleme, Halle, 1909, p.22
Hermann Wendel, makedonien und der Friede, Munich, 1919, pp.28-29
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Jul 1, 2008 22:58:16 GMT -5
from memorandums, san stefano, agents etc....here is what else l need to say on this topic:
The Exarchate, as it was envisaged by Bulgarian ecclesiatical and popular leaders, was the precursor of San Stefano Bulgaria-a hastily fromed conception that was to become the tragedy of the Bulgarian people. Bulgaria, in the form in which it was carved out by the Russians at San Stefano, was intended to serve the Russians as a fulcrum in the Balkans, as a springboard toward domination of the Mediterranean. "Such a Bulgaria," says Dr. Alexander Redlich, "was conceived, not as an independent country, but as a Russian province, which would formally speaking, remain under the sovereign power of Turkey. It was intended to become a Russian Egypt and to keep the route open for Russian to Istanbul. In this way, Russia became the territorial neighbor of Turkey, which her next blow would destroy." In the view of H.W.V. Temperley, San Stefano Bulgaria fulfilled all Bulgarian ambitions: it was presented as an ideal for succeeding generations, and maps of it were in every school. "The realization of these frontiers," he says, "was the aim of the whole of subsequent Bulgarian policy." Wolfgang Windelband states that it was an attempt to achieve undisputed Russian control in the Balkans, "and St. Petersburg reckoned on Europe's bowing before a fait accompli, the force of which has always been attested in the history of diplomacy." In the calculations of those who hankered after a Greater Bulgaria, Macedonia played an essential role. "Bulgaria," wrote D. Krapchev on March 24, 1915, "will never renounce her claim to Macedonia. Sooner or later, in one way or another, it will become an inseparable part of our state. Enormous sacrifices have been paid for it, and, if necessary, yet more will be made when a suitable opportunity offers itself. The proper moment and the means....will be determined by the Bulgarian government."
The Congress of Berlin made it impossible for San Stefano Bulgaria to remain as it had been carved out: instead of bowing to Russia, Europe threw her plans into confusion. The regions of Pirot, Vranje, Leskovac, Prokuplje and Nish were annexed to Serbia, but Southern Serbia continued to be subjected to Bulgarian propaganda, which, after this setback, merely redoubled its efforts. "That the Congress of Berlin left Macedonia under Turkish rule," says Gilbert in der Maur, "was the result of complete ignorance and indifference to human dignity, a disgrace for the century in which the italian and German nations, on the basis of the national principle, emerged as states." Von Radowitz did not believe that the Russian negotiators were convienced of the permanency of their achievement. "If they had been, then they would have been under an illusion as regards the world situation." Bismarck appears to have forseen the possibility of such a development in Balkan relations. In his Memoirs, he wrote: "It is not impossible that in the distant future all these tribes [the Orthodox peoples in the Balkans] will be forcibly annexed to the Russian system; that their mere liberation will not make them supporters of Russian authority has been proved primarily by the Greek people......The liberation movement continued, and the same thing happened with the Rumanians, Serbs and Bulgars as with the Greeks: all these peoples readily accepted Russian assistance in their liberation from the Turks, but, when they had won their freedom, they did not show the slightest disposition to accept the tsar as the sultan's successor." From fear of the Russian danger-a fear that at that time was justified-the great powers continued to enslave a section of the Balkan Christians, on whom Bulgarian propaganda decended with renewed fervor, persisting in its attitude that what had now proved impossible of attainment would nevertheless one day be achieved.
|
|
ioan
Amicus
Posts: 4,162
|
Post by ioan on Jul 2, 2008 2:14:09 GMT -5
Novi, do u think the Exarchate "changed" the Serb grammer of the fyrom language into Bulgarian one? If not, why does every selfrespecting linguist classifies fyrom lang as Bulgarian dialect and never Serbian? Do u think smth as essential as the language (a sure give away for nationality) can be changed by the Exarchate? I really think u sould start reading some unbiased (should be read as non serb, non fyrom) sources on the fyrom people and u d find out they are no different then the shops, who last I check, were pure bulgarians. they speak identical dialect.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Jul 2, 2008 7:31:16 GMT -5
My sources arn't serbian they come from many western sources.
Lanuage, remember that serbian wasn't the same as it is today, many describe the Torkian dialect as the 'Old Serbian' dialect. Linguists have found that Serbo-Croat and Slovenian are the product of a common language and that they were spoken even before the grouping, of the Slavic tribes, in the regions they occupy today took place.
Now brings me to Max Vasmer, he refers to the proto-slavic speakers, "before the more important dialectial differences began to emerge, they unhabited a region whose individual areas were subject to mutual linguistic modification." Now as per J.J. Mikkola he says, "who call themselves Slavs, we must derive them from a single proto-tribe."
As l have mentioned in the serbia forum (Europe 2015), linguistic oases have survived in the southern balkan peninsula which testify to the kinship with those which inhabit present-day Slovenia and Korushka. During World War 1, Ljubomir Pavlovich discovered in some villages around Ostrovo, a lanuage group that resembles Slovenian. "The lanuage of these Slavs," he says, "is nearest to that of the Slovenes. I have seen many Slovenes from our front who have no difficulty in conversing with these Slavs. Moslems from Meglen stated repeatedly that linguistically they are nearest to the Slovenian volunteers in the Serbian army. An acquaintance of mine, a respected householder from Edessa, told me, after a conversation with a lieutentant colonel in our army who came from Slovenia, that he understands the Slovenes better than he does Serbs and Bulgarians. Slavic customs associated with weddings, "slava," funerals, domestic and agricultural life are almost identical with those in the mountain villages of Old Serbia and Montenegro."
I want to mention about Constantine Porphyrogenitus, he says, "Serbs settled near Salonica in a district which was called 'ta Serblia.'" Now this is backed by J. Mikotcy who says that serbs in the year 640 first appeared in macedonia and then spread into illyria.
Max Vasmer, Untersuchungen uber die altesten Wohnsitze der slaven. Part 1: Die Iranier in Sudrussland, Leipzig, 1923, P.1
J.J. Mikkola, Samo und sein Reich," Archiv fur Slavische Philogie, Vol. XLII, 1929, p.86
|
|
|
Post by srbobran on Jul 2, 2008 10:55:48 GMT -5
)In the year 680 in Bythinia, city of Gordoservon is mentioned whose name is derived from the Serbs resettled in Asia Minor by Byzantine Emperor Constance II from the areas around river Vardar. Isidor,the Episcop of Gordoservon is mentioned in 680/681 and the fact that this town was Episcopal Center gives ground to the thesis that it had large Serbian population. Around year 1200 this city is mentioned as Servochoria (Serbian Habitation).
Constantin Porfyrogenitus "De administrando imperio"
Erdeljanovich.J. "O naseljavanju Slovena u Maloj Aziji i Siriji od VII do X veka" Glasnik geografskog drushtva vol. VI 1921 pp.189
Lequen,M. "Oriens Christianus" I, 1740, pp.659-660
Micotky,J."Otiorum Chroate", Vol. I ,Budapest, 1806, pp.89-112
Niederle,L. "Slovanske starozhitnosti" Dilu II,Svazek pp.389-399; pp. 444-446
Ostrogorski,G."Bizantisko-Juzhnoslovenski odnosi",Enciklopedija Jugoslavije 1,Zagreb 1955,pp. 591-599
Ramsay,W.M. "The Historical Geography Of Asia Minor", London, 1890, pp.183, pp.210
2)Arround 1229/1230 Bulgarian Emperor John Asen II wrote an inscription in Trnovo:"I have took the land from Adrianopolis to Drach,Greek,Albanian and also Serbian".
Daskalov,H.S. "Otkritija v drevnei stolicji Bolgarskoi,Ternovo"Moskva, 1859 pp.18-19
Dujchev,I. "Car Ivan Asen II" Sofija, 1941 pp.23-24
Makushev,V "Bolgarija v' koncjah XII i v pervoi polovini XIII veka" ,1872 pp.56-57
3)In the Law of Serbian Emperor Stephan Dushan (Dushanov Zakonik) issued 1349-1354 in Skoplje and Seress following peoples are mentioned in Serbia:Serbs,Greeks,Albanians (Arbanasi) (art.77,82), Aromanians (Vlasi) (art.32,77,82), Saxons (Sasi) (art.123).
Novakovich,S. "Zakonik Stefana Dushana Cara Srpskog 1349-1354" Beograd 1898
4)Despot Ugljesha in the 1366 letter written and confirmed in Skoplje stated that he is the master of Serbian land,Greece and Pomorje.
Novakovich,S. "Zakonski spomenici Srpskih drzhava srednjeg veka", 1912, pp.509
5)Patriarch of Constantinopolis mentioned master of Serbia,Ugljesha in a letter from 1371. Ugljesha's state was arround Lower Struma.
Mikloshich,F & Muller,J. "Acta et diplomata" I, 1860, pp.571
6)The place of 1371 battle at Marica,when Kings Vukashin and Ugljesha, leading armies from their provinces in Old Serbia ,clashed with the Turks, was named "Sirf-Sindughi"-"Serbian defeat".
Jorga,N. "Geschiste des Osmanischen Reiches" Vol.I, cap IV,pp241
7)In the second half of 14th century, monk Isaiah said that Ugljesha has risen Serbian and Greek army (Srbskija i Grchskiija voiska) and his brother Vukashin,and with that army they confronted the invading Turks.
Novakovich,S. "Srbi i Turci XIV i XV veka , 1893,pp.184,
Mikloshich ,F. "S.Joannis Chrystostomi homilia in ramos palmarum", 1845, pp.71
Mikloshich,F. "Chrestomatia Paleoslovenica", 1861, pp 41
8)In 1395 Mihael Paleologos and his wife Helena established estate to Helena's father,Master of Serbia,Konstantin Dejanovich.Konstantin's state was around river Struma.
Mikloshich,F. & Joseph,M. "Acta et dipolomata",1862, pp.260
9)A 1401 remark from goverment of Venice says about the envoy of "Konstatntin,master of Serbia,which is arround our Drach area" (Constantini domini Servie teritorii,quod est circa teritorium nostrum Durachii).
Ljubich,S. "Listine" 4,1874, pp.437
10)Sometimes in the beggining of 15th century Bulgarian chronicles are written,where remark that Turkish Sultan Murat had went to conquer either Bulgars or Ugljesha.Ugljesha and King Vukashin has gathered great Serbian army (Sobra sja mnozhestvo voisk Serbskih).
Bogdan,J. "Archiv fur Slavische philologie" 13, 1891,pp.481; pp.493
11)Dimitar,writter from Kratovo in 1446 said that he begin to translate "Law" for the Archbiscopate of Ohrid from Greek language into Serbian (v ezhe sastaviti mi pisaniem srbskoga ezika sochinenie, rekshe knigu imenuemu zakonik) under order of Ohrid Archbiscop Dorotej,who visited him in Kratovo,because Congregational Church in Ohrid did not had that book in Serbian language (po eziku srbskom) but only in Greek.
Kachanovski,V. "Starine" 12,1880 ,pp.255
12)Remains of John Rilski are transfered from Trnovo in the Monastery of Rila.That was descriped by Vladislav Gramatik,in 1469,who also mentioned Serbian soldiers (Srbskiie voje) in the 1371 Marica battle.
Novakovich,S, "Glasnik Srpskog uchenog drushtva" 22,1867,pp.287
13)In the year 1515 Gjuragj Kratovian was burnt.In his biography stands:...From the Serbian root and guided by Holy Spirit you have left fatherland and relatives in Kratovo and moved to the Sardakian City (Ot korene srpskago i douhom svetim vodimi ostavil jesi otachastvo i srodniki izhe v' Kratovja, prishel jesi k' Gradou Sardaskomu).
Novakovich.S. "Glasnik Srpskog uchenog drushtva" 21,1867, pp.154
14)Jakov Soranzzo from Venice arrives in Skoplje,in the province of Serbia, in the year 1575.
Matkovich.P."Rad. Jugosl. Akad." 124,1895, pp.131
15)In Kraljevo (Romania) ,priest John has written in 1580 that he is a Serb from Kratovo (Srbin od mjasta Kratova).
Stojanovich,Lj."Stari Srpski zapisi i natpisi" I,1902 ,pp.752
16)Mitropolit Jeremiah from the City of "Pelagon" (Bitolj) went to Russia in 1603 saying that he comed from Serbian land.
Archive of the Russian Ministry For Foreign Affairs, Year 7112,Dec.19
17)In the October of 1605 delegation of monks went in Russia and among them was Diakon Avksentij from the Serbian land, Nicholas Monastery in Strumica (Serbskoi zemli nikolskoga monastira chto na Strumicja,Diakon Avksentii).
"Snoshenia Rossii po djelam cerkovnim" ,I,1858
18)In 1609,in the archive of Vatican,catholic church in Skoplje Serbia is mentioned (La chiesa di Scopia in Servia).
Horvat,K. "Glasnik zemaljskog muzeja u Bosni i Hercegovini" XXI,1909
19)Mitropolit Sergius said in Russia that he was appointed as Mitropolit in Greven by Archbiscop of Ohrid,Nectarij of Serbian land (Posvjashchen on na mitropoliju grevenskuju arhiepiskop ohridskim ,Nektariem serbskoi zemli).
"Snoshenia Rossii po djelam cerkovnim" II, 1860 pp.29
20)Archbiscop of Ohrid Avram in 1634 arrived in Russia with escort.When asked,they said they were Greeks from the Serbian land of Ohrid (Grechane Serpskie zemli iz Ahridona Goroda).
Archive of the Russian Ministry Of Foreign Affairs, Year 7142,No 8
21)Adressing the Russian Emperor Mihail in 1641, Mitropolit of Skoplje said that he is from Serbian land (Serbskie zemli Semion mitropolit).
Dimitrijevich.S. "Spom. Srp. Kralj. Akad." 38, 1908 pp.60a, pp 60b
22) Peter Heylin,English geographer writtes under the word "Servia": Principal towns hereof : 1.Nissa 2.Vidina (by the Turks called Kiratow) 3.Cratova........9.Scopi,by Ptolemy called Scupi.
Heylin,P. "Cosmographie in four books" London,1666
23)Arround 1680 Urban Cerri mentioned in his report to Pope Inocentius XI archbiscop of Skoplje in Serbia.
Theiner,A." Vetera. Monum. Slav. Mer. Histor. Ill." II, 1875,pp 213
24)Archbiscop of Skoplje writtes about Serbia and says that Skoplje is capital city in serbia (Scopia....metropolli di Servia).Further,He mentiones that Orthodox houses in Skoplje are Greek and Serbian (Case Greche e Serviane).
Theiner,A. ibidem, pp. 220
25)Dimitrije Petrov from Kichevo arrived in Russia to collect funds for building church dedicated to St. Demetrius in Kichevo.He declared himself as coming from the Serbian land of Kichevo (Serbskie zemli goroda Karacheva)
Archive of the Russian Ministry For Foreign Affairs,Year 1706,No 7
26)In the year 1744 Russian Empress Elisabeth adresses "Noble and honest lords of Serbian lands in Macedonia,Skandaria,Montenegro and Primorje of Montenegrian people,to the governers , dukes, princess and captains as well as their spiritual and secular masters".
Milutinovich,S."Istorija Crne Gore",1835
27)A group of French staff officers in 1807,with the permission of the Turks, traveled around Macedonia compiling a statistical survey of the population. Apart from Greeks,Turks,Albanians and Aromanians they found only Serbs.
Slijepchevich, Dj. "The Macedonian Question",The American Institute For Balkan Affairs Chicago,1958
28)A 1854 request of the inhabitants of village Selce near Debar to Alexander Karagjorgjevich
22 Oktovra Arsenije Janovich,Gavril Janovich,Damjan Markovich, Vasil Milich, Tane Ninovich, Trifun Grujovich, Stanisha Nikolich, Cvetko Damjanovich, Despot Potnikovich, Gligorije Naumovich i Filip Aleksich proshenijem od 21 t.m. mole Knjaza da bi se obshtini ninoi Selachkoi u Albaniji za Crkvu shtogod knjiga pravitelstvom srpskim za sirotinske crkve u Turskoj nabavljeni podarilo.
Djambazovski, K. et al. "Arhivska Gragja za istorijata na Makedonskiot narod" Beograd 1979 vol I, book 2, pp. 235
29)Stephan Gerlach wrote in 1574 that relative of Mehmed Pasha "Became Archbiscop in Bulgaria,and his seat is ten days away from Adrianopolis in the city of Ohrid,on the border between Epirus and Serbia" (Zu eineim Erz-bischopff in der Bulgarey gemacht worden,hat seinen Sitz zehn Tagreiss von Adrianopol,in der Stadt Ochrida,in der Grantzen Epiri und Servien) .
Gerlach,S. "Tage-Buch",Frankfurt,1674, pp.64a
30)Petar Bogdani had wrote in 1650 a letter of recommendation for his relative Andria Bogdani from Albania ,saying about him that he is recommended for Archbiscopate of Ohrid in Serbia (Proposto per L'Archivescovato d' Ochrida su in confini della Servia).
Fermendzhin,E. "Starine" 25,1892, pp.172
31)in 1651 Mitropolit of Kratovo wrote to Russian Emperor "My forefathers and ancestors are lords of the Serbian land of Kratovo".
Dimitrijevich,S. "Glasnik Srpske kraljevske akademije", 58,1900.
32)1652 In the documents of Russian Imperial House,it is recorded that Serbian Mitropolit Mihailo(Serbskii Mitropolit Mihailo) had dinner with the Russian Emperor.He is the same person from reference above.
"Filologicheskaja nabljudenija A.H. Vostokova".1865, pp.184
33)1653 Jeromonah Damaskin,wrote a letter to his cousin,mitropolit Mihailo of Kratovo,in which there is a statement about mercy of the Russian Emperor towards our Serbian language (Jeziku nashemu Srbskom).
Stanojevich,Lj "Stari Srpski zapisi i natpisi", I,1902.No 1547,No 1562
34)Catholic missionaries in Serbia (Servia) are mentioned and among them mr.Stefan Kratovian (In Cratovo d.Stefano da Cratovo).
Fermendzhin,E. "Starine" 25,1892, pp.194
35)In 1665 Archbiscop Petar of Sophia wrote that:"Now in this Kingdom of Serbia there is one Metropolitan church,that of Skoplje"(Al presente si trovano in cotesto regno di Servia una chiesa Metropolitana,cioe,Scopia),than saying that Pope Urban VIII in his declaration on foundation of "del collegio Illyrico" says that there are three biscopate in Serbia :those of Skoplje,Justinijana called Prizren ,and Nish (Che sono del regno di Servia tre vescovati:cioe Scupi,ovvero Scopia,Justiniana detta Prisren,et anche Nissa).
Fermendzhin,E. ibidem,pp189
36)In 1666 Mitropolit Ananije of Cratovo wrote to Russian Emperor, mentioning "Mihailo,Mitropolit of Serbs" (Mihaila Mitropolita Srbian).
Dimitrijevich,S. "Spomenica Srpske kraljevske akademije",38,1900 pp.64b
37)1667 Emperor Leopold gave some privileges to the Greeks (Graeci) and Serbs (Rasciani) who emigrated toward Northern Hungary and most of them arived from Macedonia (Praesertim autem ex Macedonia adventum).
Vitkovich,G "Glasnik Srpskog uchenog drushtva",67,1887,pp.128;pp.131
38)1676 Secretary of the society "De Propaganda Fide" wrote a report to Pope Inocentius about Catholic Church in Bosnia and neighboring countries, in which Biscop of Skoplje,Andrea Bogdani in Serbia (Servia) is mentioned.
Horvat,K. "Glasnik Zemaljskog Muzeja Bosne i Hercegovine" XXI,1909,pp.393
39)Martin Crusius in his book mentiones "Vscopia, or Scopia, a great and populous City of Turkey in the K. of Servia".
Crusius, M. "Turcogreciae libri octo", 1584, pp.50
40)In 1685 Catholic Archbishop of Skoplje Petar Bogdani wrote to Cardinal Cibo saying that Turks had thrown him into exile from entire Serbia (da tutta la Servia).
Horvat,K. "Glasnik zemaljskog muzeja u Bosni i Hercegovini" XXI, 1909, pp. 403
41)Mitropolit Jevtimije from Serbian land of Skoplje (Serbskija zemli goroda Skopija) arrived in Russia where he delivered a request in which he says that he is Mitropolit of Serbian land of Skoplje (Mitropolit Serbskije zemli Skopskie Crkve).
Dimitrijevich,S. "Glasnik Srpske Kraljevske Akademije" 60, 1901 pp.154
42)In a 1756 letter main cities in Serbia (La Servie) are mentioned, and among them Skoplje ,where Serbian Archbishop reside; Cratovo,by which province is named (Scopia, ou reside Archeveque Rascien; Cratovo, qui donne son nom au Gouvernement).
"Le Voyager francois, ou la connoissance de l' ancien et du noveau monde mis au jour par M. l' Abbe Delaporte", tome XXIII, Paris, 1777
43)Around 950,Constantin Porphyrogenitos stated that city of Servia situated north-western from Thesaloniki,has it's name from the Serbs and around 10th century that same city is mentioned as Srpchishte.
Constantin Porphyrogenitos "De Administrando Imperio" cap.32, pp.152 ed.Bonn
"Starine" 14,1882 pp.163
44)In 14th century Byzantine Emperor Kantakusen mentioned Serbs near Phillipi and Prosek.
Kantakusen "History", bk.II pp.256 ; pp.274
45)In the year 1584 Alexander Komulovich mentioned that in Serbia (Servia),Skoplje is principal city (Scopia principale citta) and that it is situated in the middle of the province (nel mezzo della provincia).
Fermendzhin,E. "Acta Bosniae" "Monum. Slav. Mer. XXIII 1892 pp.392
46)In 1644 a Serb,Dimitrije Nikolajev (Serbjanin' Dmitrei Nikolaev) from Kastoria, arived in Russia.
Archive of the Russian Ministry For Foreign Affairs,Year 7156
47)In 17th Century,Hadji Kalpha,a Turkish geographer recorded that mountains of the Castoria district are peopled by Serbs and Aromanians.He also mentiones that on the bank of the lake between Seres,Thesaloniki and Siderocaps there is a village inhabited by Greeks,Serbs and Aromanians.
"Rumeli und Bosna,Geographisch beschrieben von Mustapha Ben Abdalaih Hadschi Chalfa aus dem turkischen ubersetzt von J. von Hammer" Wien 1812 pp.80; pp.97
48) In an inscription from 1659 stands:"Mihail Mitropit, visitor of Holy God's Grave in the Holy Jerusalem, from the Serbian land city of Kratovo" (Mihail Mitropolit,poklonik bozhia groba svetago Ierusalima ot Srbskie zemli grada Kratova).
"Chtenija v imperatorskom' obshtesvja istorii i drevnosti Rossiiskih pri Moskovskom univerziteta" Moskva 1896 II 5th part pp.4a
49)Austrian emperor Leopold proclaimed Jovan Monastirlija from Bitolj a Vojvoda (Military chieftain) of the Serbian nation in Austria in 1691.
Trifunoski,F.J. "Makedoniziranje Juzhne Srbije" Beograd 1995 pp.24
50)Bratan Ivanov,a Serb from Macedonian land arrived in Russia (Makedonskie zemli Serbin' Bratan' Ivanov) in the year 1704.
Archive of the Russian Ministry For Foreign Affairs,Year 1704
Kapterev,N.A. "Harakter otnoshenii Rossii k Pravoslavnomu Vostoku v XVI i XVII stoletija" 1914 pp.348
51)In 1723 Gerard Cornelius von Driesch,secretary of the Austrian delegation heading for Constantinopolis, mentioned that in Pirot there are Greeks and Serbs i this lands (Grichen oder Raitzen dieses landes).He also mentioned place named Grobblian eastern of Sofia saying that the greater part of its inhabitants are Serbs (Raitzen).
Cornelius,G.V.D. "Historische nachricht von der Rom. Kayser.Gross-Botschaft nacht Konstantinopol" Nurnberg 1723 pp.84; pp.102
52) From 1880 to 1881 the Serbian Brsjaci Revolt (Brsjachka Buna) was fought in the areas of Demir-Hisar,Porech and Kichevo.The leaders of this uprising were local Chetniks:Ilija Delija,Rista Kostadinovich,Micko Krstich and Andjelko Tanasovich.
Veselinovich,V.M. "Brsjachka Buna" Beograd 1905
53)A statement by Joseph Muller,Austrian,Medical officer in Turkish Army in early 19th century, who worked in Albania about Slavs in neighboring countries that he visited.
"Together with Slavic community of Spiz on Triplex confinium and smaller communities in Skadar,Podgorica and Spuzh, Serbian tribes live in eastern mountains Altin-Ili in Dibr-Sipre in the area of Struga as well as in eastern coast of the Ohrid Lake, further in the valleys of Rezna and Prespa in the city of Monastir and its northeastern surrounding, in the valley Srebrnica,and by name on communities of Optorosh,Shrbica,Mahmusha,Mrtvuca,along the left, eastern coast of White Drim in communities of Kremovik,Mirozhizh,Cuprevo,Grebnik,Zlokuche………"
Joseph Muller, “Albanien,Rumelien und die Osterreichisch-Montenegrinische Grenze”,Prague,1844
54)"It is understandable that the Turks preferred the patient and submissive Bulgar to the rebellious Serb or Greek. Since the Serbian principality had gained its freedom, the Turks regarded every Serb who declared himself to be such as a rebellious conspirator against the Turkish regime. This circumstance was widely exploited by the Bulgars in order to spread their propaganda among the Serbs outside the principality. Whoever was reluctant to become a Bulgar and persisted in calling himself a Serb was denounced to the Turks as conspiring with Serbia, and could expect severe punishment. Serbian priests were maltreated; permission was refused to open Serbian schools and those that were already in existence were closed; Serbian monasteries were destroyed. In order to avoid persecution, the population renounced its nationality and called itself Bulgarian........during the last thirty or forty years, propaganda has been rife in which the Bulgars have encouraged the Turks to act against Serbs and Greeks. Hence, throughout Macedonia, Thrace and Dardania, Slavs are considered to be Bulgars, which is quite incorrect. On the contrary, the Slavs in Macedonia are incapable of understanding a Bulgar from Jantra. If it is desired to designate these Slavs correctly, than they must be considered as Serbs, for the Serbian name is so popular among them that for example male children are sometimes christened "Srbin" [Serb]. the Serbian hero of the folk poems, Marko Kraljevich is obviously the Serbian ruler in Macedonia."
Alexander von Heksch "Die Donau von ihrem Ursprung bis an die Mundung",Leipzig,1885,pp.636
55)In 1886 Russian publicist I.S. Jastrebov published his book "Obichai i pesni tureckih serbov v Prizren,Ipek,Morava,i Dibra" ("Customs and songs of the Turkish Serbs in Prizren,Pech,Morava and Debar) in which the following reference to the important Serb custom of "Slava" is found: "Slava is celebrated by Serbs not only in Serbia,in Austria,Hungary,Bosnia,Montenegro,Kosovo,Morava and area of Prizren,but also in the areas of Skopje,Veles,Prilep,Bitola and Ohrid,including also Debar and the area of Tetovo.All inhabitants in the mentioned area who speak with the Slavo-Serbian dialect keep that custom holy."
Jastrebov,I.S. "Obichai i Pesni tureckih serbov v Prizren,Ipek,Morava i Dibra",1886,pp.1-2
56) A List of topographical names in Old Serbia (FYROM) with the characteristic Serbian root "Srb-": Srbinovo, near Tetovo; Srbica, Srbjani , Srbjan Dolence in the Area of Bitolj (Bitola,Monastiri);Srbce and Srbci south from Bitolj;Srbinovo in the area of Gorna Dzhumaja (Pirin area in Bulgaria);Srbinica,river source near the village of Podles.
V.K'nchov "Makedonija" ,Sofia,1900 pp.256
M.A. Vujucic "Recnik mesta u oslobodjenoj oblasti Stare Srbije",1914,pp.241
V.K'nchov Ibidem pp.191
V. K'nchov Ibidem pp. 238
V. Radovanovic: "Tikves i Rajec", Etnogr. Zbornik XXIX pp.457
J.F. Trifunoski "Makedoniziranje Juzne Srbije",1995,pp.33
57) An observation by the Austro-Hungarian Field Marshal Anton Tuma von Waldkampf: "In Macedonia Serbs are living, partly in the great plain of Bitolj,partly in Vardar plain and are particularly compact in the valley of Tetovo"
Anton Tuma von Waldkampf "Griechland,Makedonien und Sudalbanien",Leipzig, 1897 pp-214-215
58) Remark of Dr. Karl Oestreich about Skoplje: "The city's population consist of all possible elements-some of whom have come out in favor of the Bulgarian Exarchate and call themselves 'Bulgars'-and Albanians or Mohammedanized Serbs. Although it is situated south of Sar-planina, Skoplje is the chief city of Old Serbia.....the rural population, although it is Serbian in origin, has for the most parts given its support to the Exarchate, since a Bulgarian bishop is for them more acceptable than a Greek bishop of the Ecumenical Church to which they formerly belonged. This is how the rural population around Skoplje has today come to be mostly Bulgarian; the same is true of the purely Serbian Tetovo".
Karl Oestreich "Makedonien" Geographische Zeitschrift, Vol.X, No.1, 1904,pp 198-199
59) Referring to the establishment of the Bulgarian Exarchate in Macedonia,Karl Oestreich noted: "A considerable part of the rural population, although it then felt to be Serbian, seized the first opportunity of obtaining Slavic priests and so declared itself to be Bulgarian......Whoever joined the Bulgarian Exarchate was registered in the Turkish population records as "bulgari-milet" and to the world as large was a Bulgar".
Karl Oestreich "Die Bevolkerung von Makedonien",Geographische Zeitschrift,Vol. XI, No.1,1905,pp.291
60) Theodor von Sosnosky wrote about Bulgarian Propaganda in Macedonia: "What this methods were the Greeks, Serbs and Turks of this unhappy land felt on their own backs. By plunder and arson, rape and murder, armed bands tried to make them come to the Bulgarian side".
Theodor von Sosnosky "Die Balkanpolitik Osterreich-Ungars seit 1886,Stuttgart-Berlin,1914, Vol.II,pp.129
61)During World War I, the Bulgarian troops under the command of first lieutenant Protogerov were ordered to inflict reprisals upon the population east of Kumanovo for an attack made on some Bulgarian troops.Before the reprisal measures were begun, the entire population declared that it was Bulgarian, purely in order to avoid being punished.Protogerov was greatly perplexed. Here is a quote by Gilbert in der Maur regarding this event: "Then Protogerov's aides had an idea: they asked who celebrated the 'slava'.Those who did so were shot, since the celebration of the 'slava' is a sign that one is a Serb:it is a custom which the Bulgarians do not have".
Gilbert in der Maur "Jugoslawien einst und jetz" Leipzig-Vienna, 1936,pp.330
62)"Although the Serbian national epic found its fullest realization in the regions of the northwest, nevertheless a considerable part of its material was taken from Southern Serbia.And Vice Versa: many poems which originated elsewhere found their way to Southern Serbia, were sung here and inherited".
Alois Schmaus, "Dichtung","Mazedonien: Leben und Gestalt einer Landschaft",Berlin,1940 pp.106
63)Hungarian historian Bonfini wrote about "Macedonia,which is now called Serbia" ("Macedoniam quam Serbua nunc appelant").
Ant.Bonfini "Rerum Hungarii Indec." II lib IX,Viennae, 1774 pp.248a
64)A conclusion by the linguist Petar Draganov about the songs of "Macedonian Slavs":"It is a strikingly obvious that within the circle of Cars,Kings,dukes,heroes and other individuals of this songs one can find only persons and significant events from the medieval,new and latest Serbian history".
P.Draganov "Makedonsko-Slavjanskii Sbornik" pp.VIII (n.d.)
65)Bulgarian publicist Rakovski noted in the 19th century that Macedonian emigrants in Srem and Southern Hungary called themselves Serbs and Greeks.
G.S.Rakovski "Gorski Patnik" pp.267,268 (n.d.).
|
|
|
Post by Kassandros on Jul 2, 2008 16:14:12 GMT -5
Guys, I dont want to interven to your discussion, but my grand father when he was speaking about his grand father and his dad when he was telling stories from the Macedonian Struggle to me, he was speaking about "Bulgarian kommitatzides" as the enemies.
So, most propably, the Bulgarian character of Fyromians was more obvious those years.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Jul 2, 2008 21:26:27 GMT -5
^ As l was saying above, the Bulgarian Exarchate exploited and used it as an opportunity to bring people over to their side which was even tollerated by the Turks.....just have a look above Basil bro!.
|
|
|
Post by kartadolofonos on Jul 2, 2008 22:39:46 GMT -5
The Slavobulgaric threat over Macedonia started in the end of the 19th century after the fountation of the modern BULGARIA state and the ocupation of ANATOLIKH ROMYLIA(north THRACE) a Greek territory with Greek population that were all killed or came in the Soutern Greece as refuges.
Ancient Greek cities were destroyed then by Bulgaric hords Stenimaxos, Pyrgos, Pillipoupoli, Varna and many more.
But they wanted more,after North Thrace they started TERRORISM against the Greek population of Macedonia by their Terrorist Gangs named KOMITATZIDES,
and by killing, raping, burning, and blackmailing, they tried to take Macedonia too.
But the Brave Macedonians, and other Greeks and especially Cretans decided that we had had enough.That way began the Macedonian Fight between native Macedonian-Greeks and KOMITATZIDES and OTHOMAN authorithes from the other side.
Durring German and Italian occupation of Greece at world war two, their allies Bulgarians, occupied parts of Greek territory, West Thrace and East and Central Macedonia.
An orgy of killings, and destruction and all kinds of terror began, a small example is the genocide of the people of Serres and DOXATO in DRAMA region of Macedonia, where they murder
all 4000 citicens of the village.
The "Macedonian problem" in the late 19th and early 20th centurie was the Greek-Bulgarian conflict for the occupied by the Turks Greek province Macedonia.
They were fighting the Greeks to set Macedonia free, and Bulgaria to succes the Turks.
This problem came to an end by the Victorius march of the Greek army in the Balkan wars of 1912-13, that set free almost all historical Macedonia teritories.
The new version of Macedonian problem started at the middle 20th century when marchall Tito of Yogoslavia and Stalin dictator of Russia changed the Name of South Serbia /Vardarska Banovina to SJR Macedonia wanted a way out to Aegen sea and the very important port of Thessalonica.
|
|
|
Post by benkovski on Jul 6, 2008 15:33:33 GMT -5
Novi, it really becomes evident that you don’t want to discuss the issue. I mean all you do is copy/paste massive amounts of mostly irrelevant and highly bias information. Like I told you, we’ll get further if each of us extracts only the relevant information rather than flooding the post with someone else’s opinions. Additionally, I see that you are using the same sources as in your other threads. Regardless I’ll continue posting relevant quotes from different sources, mostly western.
And, also, yes you are right about Russia wanting a strong and united Bulgaria. ie. the Bulgaria under the Treaty of San Stefano. But, what you seem to not be aware of, is that Russia asserted those boundaries based on the majority agreement of Western scholars, along with the agreement of the Ottomans, that those lands, including Vardarska, were almost entirely populated by people who identified with Bulgaria. Since, however, for Britain particularly it was more advantageous to have those territories administered by the Ottomans, Bulgaria was divided into three. ie. Macedonia, Eastern Rumelia, and the Principality of Bulgaria (Northern Bulgaria).
Basil, you are absolutely right.
Novi, read the quotes above. The Turks tolerated Serbians who came into Macedonia and tried to assert that the population is Serbian. The reason was that it was obvious that they wouldn’t succeed. Bulgarian religious movements in Macedonia were tolerated equivalently throughout all lands that were deemed Bulgarian by the Turks. If you read less bias materials, you’ll find out that the Turks regarded the people of Macedonia as mostly Bulgarian. There is no mention of any large scale Serbian self identification.
And what you said that Serbs identified themselves as Bulgarians.. this is pure Serbian propaganda. I mean there may have been some Serbs who did so, but how many? 1? 50? Like I told you, even if the number was as high as 100,000, which no credible source has ever claimed, that still leaves over a million people who were Bulgarian.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Jul 6, 2008 21:36:59 GMT -5
"Novi, it really becomes evident that you don’t want to discuss the issue. I mean all you do is copy/paste massive amounts of mostly irrelevant and highly bias information. Like I told you, we’ll get further if each of us extracts only the relevant information rather than flooding the post with someone else’s opinions. Additionally, I see that you are using the same sources as in your other threads. Regardless I’ll continue posting relevant quotes from different sources, mostly western."
No Benkovski, its not biased because they are not serbian sources. Yes l'm using the some ones until you can refute them, and l bet you can't because the 19th century is the century you can only refer to.
"And, also, yes you are right about Russia wanting a strong and united Bulgaria. ie. the Bulgaria under the Treaty of San Stefano. But, what you seem to not be aware of, is that Russia asserted those boundaries based on the majority agreement of Western scholars, along with the agreement of the Ottomans, that those lands, including Vardarska, were almost entirely populated by people who identified with Bulgaria. Since, however, for Britain particularly it was more advantageous to have those territories administered by the Ottomans, Bulgaria was divided into three. ie. Macedonia, Eastern Rumelia, and the Principality of Bulgaria (Northern Bulgaria)."
No, as l have said above Bulgaria wanted to regain territories which they had conquered at the time of Samuil etc....so they used to the exarchate, especially in southern serbia to reach their goal....read again above!.
"Novi, read the quotes above. The Turks tolerated Serbians who came into Macedonia and tried to assert that the population is Serbian. The reason was that it was obvious that they wouldn’t succeed. Bulgarian religious movements in Macedonia were tolerated equivalently throughout all lands that were deemed Bulgarian by the Turks. If you read less bias materials, you’ll find out that the Turks regarded the people of Macedonia as mostly Bulgarian. There is no mention of any large scale Serbian self identification."
Wrong again, read above because l realise your not reading what l'm writing.
a reminder:
"For a long time, the Turks tolerated this conduct on the part of the Bulgarian missionaries, for their old hatred of the Serbs had been exacerbated by the Serbo-Turkish war of 1878. "It is understandable," says Heksch, "that the Turks preferred the patient and submissive Bulgar, to the rebellious Serb or Greek. Since the Serbian principality had gained its freedom, the Turks regarded every Serb who declared himself to be such a rebellious conspirator against the Turkish regime. This circumstance was exploited by the Bulgars in order to spread their propaganda among the Serbs outside the principality. Whoever was reluctant to become a Bulgar and persisted in calling himself a Serb was denounced to the Turks as conspiring with Serbia, and could only expect severe punishment. Serbian priests were maltreated; permission was refused to open Serbian schools, and those that were already in existence were closed; Serbian monastries were destroyed. In order to avoid persecution, the population renounced its nationality and called itself Bulgarian.....During the last thirty or forty years, propaganda has been rife in which the Bulgars had encouraged the Turks to act against Serbs and Greeks. Hence, throughout Macedonia, Thrace and Dardania (kosovo), Slavs are considered to be Bulgars, which is quite incorrect. On the contrary, the Slavs in Macedonia are incapable of understanding a Bulgar from Jantra. If it is desired to designate these Slavs correctly, then they must be considered as Serbs, for the Serbian name is so popular with them that, for example, male children are sometimes christened 'Srbin' [Serb]. The Serbian hero of the folk poems, Marko Kraljevich, is obviously the Serbian ruler in Macedonia."
|
|