ivo
Amicus
Posts: 2,712
|
Post by ivo on Dec 29, 2009 16:44:22 GMT -5
This is what is noted in the Encyclopedia Britannica, and the numbers are about the same in practically all non-biased sources. There are even some Serbian sources that claim that the Bulgarians formed more than 80% of the population of Macedonia.
Regardless, Novi seems to think that all these worldly individuals have somehow been duped by the Bulgarian Exarchate. However, he seems to be unaware of the fact that there are many independent sources that show the dominance of the Bulgarian character in Macedonia decades and even centuries before the formation of the Bulgarian Exarchate.
The below quotes are from an unbiased book, which was published more than 20 years before the formation of the Bulgarian Exarchate. They not only show that Bulgarians formed the vast majority of the populations of Macedonia, but they also show that the Torlaks were indeed Bulgarians as well.
This quote discusses parts of Serbia, Northern Macedonia, and Southern Macedonia (Aegean Macedonia). The interesting thing is that the people of these parts of South-Eastern Serbia, Northern Macedonia, and Southern Macedonia, all felt and identified as Bulgarians well before the Bulgarian Exarchate was formed. Therefore, there was no one telling them to feel Bulgarian, but rather they self-identified as Bulgarians because they were indeed Bulgarians.
This quote, once more, speaks of the dominance of the Bulgarian ethnic group and the fact that they comprised the ethnic majority in both Macedonia and today’s Eastern Serbia. The Morava River was the eastern border to which the Bulgarian ethnicity extended and Bulgarians formed the majority of the population.
This book also discusses Medieval Macedonia and the fact that the region changed hands between the Bulgarian Empires, Serbia, and Byzantium. However, the Serbian presence in Macedonia has clearly been nothing but a sojourn as Novi’s sources show us. Once more, for those like Novi that don’t have much vocabulary knowledge in English, ‘sojourn’ means ‘temporary stay’. The keyword is ‘temporary’.
Serbia’s assimilation tactics may have had success in making the Torlaks believe they are Serbs and not Bulgarians, but when it comes to Macedonia these tactics were nothing more than a greedy government funded and artificial movement that never had any credible footing.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Dec 29, 2009 20:32:33 GMT -5
^ all these little smoke screens of yours are nice, but can you first before l really answer, inform the readers of the Ruthenian G. Venelin, if you know who this person is?
|
|
ivo
Amicus
Posts: 2,712
|
Post by ivo on Dec 30, 2009 2:26:19 GMT -5
Hah, these ‘smoke screens’ come from non-Balkan sources only and represent the facts objectively. The above quotes pre-date the formation of the Bulgarian Exarchate by a couple of decades, which directly negates Novi’s supposed theory that it was the Bulgarian Exarchate that made Macedonians feel a Bulgarians. As Novi’s brought up Ruthenian G. Venelin, I can only assume he’ll resort to posting the following piece of propaganda again: www.archive.org/stream/macedonia00orevrich/macedonia00orevrich_djvu.txtIt should be noted that the link above is a representation of the exact Serbian propaganda I’ve been talking about. According to the text in that link, which is highly favored by Novi, Macedonians are represented as Serbs and the Macedonian dialect as a Serbian language. All traces of anything Bulgarian in Macedonia are omitted or negated with very plain and ill-informed statements. Anyone interested in the history of the region should definitely have a read, but be sure to read it all. For a person that is educated on the history of Macedonia and the Balkans as a whole, it will be fairly easy to spot the heavy pro-Serbian bias and the anti-Bulgarian attitude of the text. I’ll break it down for those who don’t feel the need to waste their time on anti-Bulgarian propaganda funded by past Serb governments. 1. The link above references Serbian sources mostly, mainly professors from the University of Belgrade. Novakovic is also a prime source that is referenced. For those who don’t know, he was the Prime Minster of Serbia in the late 19th and early 20th c. He is also one of the fathers of the Serbian propaganda that has claimed Macedonians as Serbs, and Macedonians as separate from Bulgarians. The fact that the text above bases its conclusions on Serbian sources alone is enough to render the text not-credible. 2. The link above makes illogical claims that Kyustendil, Plovidiv, Sofia etc. are Serbian cities/regions. 3. In the link above it’s easy to spot that the author is not objective, and speaks of the Bulgars in a negative light only. The text shows dislike toward the Bulgarian people as whole, for example this quote "Only one branch of the Southern Slavs met with a different fate. It was doomed, soon after its immigration, to fall under the sway of an alien people, to link its fate with it, to modify its civilization, its social structure, and the whole of its existence." shows the Bulgars as some sort of plague that has doomed the Slavs to suffer eternally. 4. The link above speaks of re-definition of the geographic area of Macedonia, and possibly including Kosovo, Novi Pazar etc. in this supposed region of Macedonia. 5. The link above speaks of Samuil's Bulgaria as an independent "Macedonian" state. It speaks of supposed "Macedonians" fighting Bulgarians for their freedom in the 900’s. Here is a direct quote: This is another direct quote, which speaks of Macedonians fighting against Bulgarians and eventually expelling them from Macedonia. If anyone is kind enough to provide any credible evidence of this that would be great, as the claims made by the text in the link above are not supported by any scholars outside of the Serbian political sphere of influence. Another direct quote.. need I discuss this further? I mean, come on, any half educated individual can easily agree that there was no such thing as an independent ‘Macedonian Empire of Samuil’. Another direct quote from a source favored by Novi.. Does any objective individual want to make any comments on these sources that Novi bases his opinions on? 6. The text above speaks of Bulgar attacks on Serbian schools and churches in Macedonia during the late 1800’s. However, these attacks were carried out by the local Macedono-Bulgarian populations who viewed the Serbs as foreign invaders that were trying overtake the region. These attacks were local incentives of the local inhabitants of the region and were perfectly understandable given the anti-Bulgarian agenda of the Serbs. 7. And finally, the text above speaks of several petitions of Serbs from a few Macedonian cities that were sent to Serbia begging the Serbs to fight against a possible Macedonian unification with Bulgaria. However, the signatures of these petitions ranged from 100 to 800, but no more than that. This only shows that there was some minor Serb presence in Macedonia, but that presence was never significant. If there was any significance to the Serb presence in Macedonia, those petitions would have a lot more than a mere few hundred signatures in a land inhabited by 1,000,000-1,500,000 people. I mean honestly, does anyone else here see how hypocritical Novi and his sources are? From what I’ve seen, Novi and Gyrro only focus on biased pro-Serbian excerpts while they omit anything and everything Bulgarian.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Dec 30, 2009 4:00:35 GMT -5
"Hah, these ‘smoke screens’ come from non-Balkan sources only and represent the facts objectively. The above quotes pre-date the formation of the Bulgarian Exarchate by a couple of decades, which directly negates Novi’s supposed theory that it was the Bulgarian Exarchate that made Macedonians feel a Bulgarians." and all my sources which are 99% non balkan are propaganda. "As Novi’s brought up Ruthenian G. Venelin, I can only assume he’ll resort to posting the following piece of propaganda again: www.archive.org/stream/macedonia00orevrich/macedonia00orevrich_djvu.txt" and what does the authour talk about here asen? "Anyone interested in the history of the region should definitely have a read, but be sure to read it all. For a person that is educated on the history of Macedonia and the Balkans as a whole, it will be fairly easy to spot the heavy pro-Serbian bias and the anti-Bulgarian attitude of the text." No Asen, its fact, there isn't propaganda. Nothing is Bulgarian prior to the 19th century. "This is another direct quote, which speaks of Macedonians fighting against Bulgarians and eventually expelling them from Macedonia. If anyone is kind enough to provide any credible evidence of this that would be great, as the claims made by the text in the link above are not supported by any scholars outside of the Serbian political sphere of influence." Again, its the truth and l thankyou for posting that section here ;D "These attacks were local incentives of the local inhabitants of the region and were perfectly understandable given the anti-Bulgarian agenda of the Serbs." Rubbish, typical Bulgar lies. Asen has to resort to typical Bulgar twisting and contradictions because he knows well the Bulgars cruel efforts in their attempts to convert the vardarian serbs. The firman required that at least two thirds of the total Orthodox population in any area should decide in favor of the Exarchate, that it be included in the area of the Exarchate and that it be given the the right to ask for the Exarchate bishops and priests. 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 Serbbia, 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 obvious 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 an emotion. It is a physical disease, the malady of the country, the ailment that comes of tyranny." Sources: Richard von Mach, Der Machtbereich des bulgarischen Exarchats in der Turkei, Leipzig-Neuchatel, 1906, p.11 Th. von Sosnosky, Die BBalkanpolitik 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
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Dec 30, 2009 4:11:47 GMT -5
BULGARIAN PROPAGANDA IN MACEDONIA
BULGARIAN RESURRECTION
Bulgars completely forgotten in Europe after the fall of the Bulgarian Empire in the Middle Ages — Bulgars in Bulgaria without national consciousness — Attempts at national awaken- ing — The Ruthenian G. Venelin forms an idealistic picture of the Bulgars and rouses them — Bulgars, inspired by Venelin's fables, begin to dream of Great Bulgaria — The romantic enthusiast George S. Rakovski fosters Bulgarian megalomania — Stephan Verkovic and his forged Bulgarian antiquities — All Bulgars united in the conception of their unlimited greatness — Education of the rising generation in this spirit — Bulgarian ideas take hold in Russia — Committees for the propaganda of the Bulgarian idea in Russia — Russian scholars, infected by Bulgarism, become its pioneers — Sympathy for the Bulgars spreads from Russia to the rest of Europe
from the link you have posted above.
Do you want me to continue Asen?
|
|
|
Post by rusebg on Dec 30, 2009 4:44:22 GMT -5
This is one of the reason why you are the utmost joke here, Novi. Even the most retarded and blinded Serbian nationalist wouldn't state there was nothing Bulgarian prior to the 19th century because the only thing such a statement does, is to display the ignorance of its author in its full power. Sorry, Novi, you are really mighty stupid. I don't know why Asen bothers to discuss anything with you in such full length.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Dec 30, 2009 5:46:38 GMT -5
^ so you consider it Bulgarian because even if the people they occupied considered it 'FOREIGN', its still in your mind Bulgarian?. I'm no joke Ruse, i've shown the truth, l know 'most' internet sources arn't reliable, hence why i've opted for another path, back luck for you ;D
|
|
|
Post by rusebg on Dec 30, 2009 6:27:57 GMT -5
You are. More and more tasteless and boring with each post of yours. Sorry, Novi. Wish you Happy new year.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Dec 30, 2009 6:40:27 GMT -5
^ Ruse, thanks mate, l'll just take this brief moment to say l wish you well and have a happy new year.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Dec 30, 2009 6:42:28 GMT -5
"You are. More and more tasteless and boring with each post of yours"
No i'm not, my sources tell the truth and its more accurate than the Bulgar propaganda.
|
|
ioan
Amicus
Posts: 4,162
|
Post by ioan on Dec 30, 2009 7:40:40 GMT -5
Its called selfhate people. Novi knows he is Bulgarian so he does hate everything Bulgarian. He has taken up foreighn identity that belong to real Serbs like Arsenije and tries to pass himself as the biggest Serb. What a laugh!!!
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Dec 30, 2009 8:08:15 GMT -5
^ Ioan, look, l dislike the propaganda, thats all.
|
|
ivo
Amicus
Posts: 2,712
|
Post by ivo on Dec 30, 2009 12:01:02 GMT -5
Novi,
You quote: H.N. Brailsford, Macedonia: Its Races and their future, London, 1906, p.36. This in itself shows that you don't have a well rounded knowledge on the subject.
Brailsford agrees that the IMRO and it's Bulgarian character were local Macedonian incetives. His conclusions side with Bulgaria, not with Serbia.
The link that I've posted above, from which you draw many of your quotes, claims that Samuil was the ruler of some imaginary "Macedonian Empire" that fought against the Bulgarians to free itself. This initself renders the source as a fairy tale and nothing more. The other fact is that that text from the link bases it's finding on the studies of Serb "professors" from the University of Belgrade.. who were not objective whatsoever.
And Novi, you have yet to address the source I posted above from Edmund Spencer. His book was published prior to the publication of any of your sources.. he was an independent scholar and he found that Macedonia and Eastern Serbia was populated by Bulgarians.
So why don't you try to actually discuss somthing for a change, rather than COPY/PASTING the same BS.
|
|
|
Post by rusebg on Dec 30, 2009 16:46:20 GMT -5
Because his IQ is that of a dying cangaroo. No offense to the animal.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Dec 30, 2009 20:37:19 GMT -5
"So why don't you try to actually discuss somthing for a change, rather than COPY/PASTING the same BS."
So what did my paragraph mean above Asen because even Brailsford could agree that there was so much hate and anger in that region, why Asen?
"Brailsford agrees that the IMRO and it's Bulgarian character were local Macedonian incetives. His conclusions side with Bulgaria, not with Serbia."
Yes it happens when Bulgarian agents convert people to their cause.
|
|
|
Post by rusebg on Dec 30, 2009 20:47:45 GMT -5
Hey, why are you still not in bed?
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Dec 30, 2009 21:45:20 GMT -5
^ isn't it just contradictions with you Bulgars, its 1.45pm here in Australia, l guess its 3am over in Ruse Bg, so why arn't you going to bed to drink your horse milk?
|
|
|
Post by EriTopSheqeri on Dec 31, 2009 0:01:49 GMT -5
Hey, why are you still not in bed? He's busy training a kangaroo army with the purpose of Greater Servia Be afraid.... be very afraid!!!... for Novi shall be known as Captain America and Spidey pale in comparison
|
|
ivo
Amicus
Posts: 2,712
|
Post by ivo on Dec 31, 2009 0:15:40 GMT -5
Captain Kangaroo You know what, Ruse is right.. if we read the definition of 'kangaroo' it seems to match Novi's traits quite closely. Novi == any herbivorous marsupial of the family Macropodidae, of Australia and adjacent islands, having a small head, short forelimbs, powerful hind legs used for leaping, and a long, thick tail: several species are threatened or endangered. But in Novi's case, instead of the strong hind limbs it's more like a strong fingers all the better to press Ctrl + V in during his COPY/PASTE rampages.
|
|