|
Post by Novi Pazar on Jan 17, 2009 20:40:35 GMT -5
^ 42 years is a long time, a generation and a half of influence and teachings.
|
|
|
Post by kartadolofonos on Jan 18, 2009 0:22:43 GMT -5
History has proven that FYROM is traditionally a Serbian land in the north and central regions, a Bulgarian one in the east, and a Greek land in the south. The name "Macedonia" is the term used to define the Northern Greek Province. FYROM only came to exist by the Greek name Macedonia when Tito and his communist regime came to power. He had two reasons for creating the Pseudo"Macedonian" national identity. The first was his territorial aspirations for Thessaloniki and Greek Macedonia. The second was to weaken Serbia. He divided Serbia into many little republics and provinces in order to make the Serbian state weaker. Bosnians were, by many considered Serbian Muslims before Tito came to power. He even attempted to assimilate the Orthodox Serbs in Bosnia into a larger Bosnian ethnicity. Montenegro had very little aspirations of separating from the fatherland and its citizens called themselves Serbs. Much of the Dalmatian Coast was Serbian and was the site of Serbia's costal kingdoms (Zahumlje, Travunia, Duklja, and Pagania;however the origins of Pagania are dispute , the other three are not.) His goal was to weaken Serbia as much as possible. In the famous words of Tito, "a weak Serbia makes a strong Yugoslavia." The land (FYROM) was always known as Stara Srbija (old Serbia) or Juzna Srbija (South Serbia). Only twice did FYROM change its name after that. Once to Vardarska Banovina and the other time to the Socialist Republic of Macedonia. Linguistically, the FYR Macedonian language is closest to the language spoken in Serbia. Modern day FYR Macedonian is nearly identical to the Torlakian Dialect of Serbian. This means that the language spoken in FYROM is actually a dialect of the Serbian language. The FYR Macedonian language also has similarities with the Bulgarian language in terms of grammar. The current residents of FYR Macedonia are undisputedely Slavs. However, the main dispute is whether the FYR Macedonians are Serbian or Bulgarian. While large Bulgarian elements in the eastern section of the land exist, the northern and central areas are largely Serbian. This is due to the fact that the area of present day Bulgaria and FYROM was conquered first by the proto-Bulgarians (Turkic tribes) and only later were the Bulgarians Slavicized. Thus, in order for a majority of FYR Macedonians to be Bulgarian, they would have to have some Turkic blood in them. However, they don't meaning that FYR Macedonians are Serbs for the most part in the Northern and central regions. Also, a large presence of Greeks once existed in there and also in southern of FYROM. However, they have largely been assimilated during the communist era.
|
|
|
Post by jerryspringer on Jan 18, 2009 0:54:48 GMT -5
History has proven that FYROM is traditionally a Serbian land in the north and central regions, a Bulgarian one in the east, and a Greek land in the south. The name "Macedonia" is the term used to define the Northern Greek Province. FYROM only came to exist by the Greek name Macedonia when Tito and his communist regime came to power. He had two reasons for creating the Pseudo"Macedonian" national identity. The first was his territorial aspirations for Thessaloniki and Greek Macedonia. The second was to weaken Serbia. He divided Serbia into many little republics and provinces in order to make the Serbian state weaker. Bosnians were, by many considered Serbian Muslims before Tito came to power. He even attempted to assimilate the Orthodox Serbs in Bosnia into a larger Bosnian ethnicity. Montenegro had very little aspirations of separating from the fatherland and its citizens called themselves Serbs. Much of the Dalmatian Coast was Serbian and was the site of Serbia's costal kingdoms (Zahumlje, Travunia, Duklja, and Pagania;however the origins of Pagania are dispute , the other three are not.) His goal was to weaken Serbia as much as possible. In the famous words of Tito, "a weak Serbia makes a strong Yugoslavia." The land (FYROM) was always known as Stara Srbija (old Serbia) or Juzna Srbija (South Serbia). Only twice did FYROM change its name after that. Once to Vardarska Banovina and the other time to the Socialist Republic of Macedonia. Linguistically, the FYR Macedonian language is closest to the language spoken in Serbia. Modern day FYR Macedonian is nearly identical to the Torlakian Dialect of Serbian. This means that the language spoken in FYROM is actually a dialect of the Serbian language. The FYR Macedonian language also has similarities with the Bulgarian language in terms of grammar. The current residents of FYR Macedonia are undisputedely Slavs. However, the main dispute is whether the FYR Macedonians are Serbian or Bulgarian. While large Bulgarian elements in the eastern section of the land exist, the northern and central areas are largely Serbian. This is due to the fact that the area of present day Bulgaria and FYROM was conquered first by the proto-Bulgarians (Turkic tribes) and only later were the Bulgarians Slavicized. Thus, in order for a majority of FYR Macedonians to be Bulgarian, they would have to have some Turkic blood in them. However, they don't meaning that FYR Macedonians are Serbs for the most part in the Northern and central regions. Also, a large presence of Greeks once existed in there and also in southern of FYROM. However, they have largely been assimilated during the communist era. This clown copied that text from a website called Serbian National Front. www.freewebs.com/serbianpatriot/about.html
|
|
ioan
Amicus
Posts: 4,162
|
Post by ioan on Jan 18, 2009 3:34:45 GMT -5
History has proven that FYROM is traditionally a Serbian land in the north and central regions, WHAT sources? Every traveller that passed through Macedonia wrote it was populated with Bulgarians and with Greeks in the very south. These southern greek parts are already in Greece. Not only. Almost the whole of FYROM is populated with descedants of Bulgarians. There are no Greeks in present day FYROM. The Greek parts of the geographic region of Macedonia are in the teritory of Greece. Not true. It is used in 18-19 century as a GEOGRAPHICAL REGION, in which there live Bulgarians, Greeks (south), Vlkachs, Turks and Serbs (very northwest). It was used for the first time AS A STATE NAME. But as a geographical region it was used. The same as Thrace/Rumelia. What about the fact that it had to cut the links with the Bulgarians? What about turning Bulgarians into Macedonians? What about the recorded persecutions of the Bulgarians in fyrom? What about the fleeing of "Macedonians" in Bulgaria because they think it is their state?Also the history books made the people in fyrom hate the Bulgarians and the Greeks but not the Serbs. Makes u wonder! For the Serbs maybe. But for the world it was the geographical region of Macedonia, inhabited mainly by Bulgarians and Greeks in the south. When Serbians tried to Serbanize the Bulgarians. It was useless. The stupedest thing I ve read. Every linguist would tell u fyrom is Bulgarian dialect. After being ruled by Serbia, they have some Serbian words but that is. Torlakian is often classified as Bulgarian dialect also. Its analytical dialect. Serbian is lexical. The grammer is Bulgarian, the words: they have more Serbian words. Laughfable. No linguist would agree with that. Most agree it is a Bulgarian dialect. Similarities? It is the same grammer, the lexic is slightly different, but no more that the eastern Bulgarian dialect or the Thracian dialect. Stupid. They are Bulgarians in their majority. This is stupid for couple of reasons. First, the Serbs do not equal Slavs. Werent the Serbs an Iranian tribe? So shouldnt we search for iranian blood? Also it is disputed what nationality the protobulgarians were. Third, Bulgarians DO NOT equal Bulgars. Bulgars are one of the tribes that took part into the forming of the Bulgarian ethnicity. We have more Slavic and Thracian blood. The fyrom have Thracian (through the Peonians) and Slavic and Bulgar (through Kubers Bulgars) blood. All 3 groups that formed the Bulgarians were present in fyrom. Allso the slavs on the Bolkans were devided into 2 groups when they arrived: Bulgarian and Serbo-Croatian. Macedonia was inhabited by the Bulgarian group.
|
|
|
Post by Kassandros on Jan 18, 2009 7:37:21 GMT -5
"Also, a large presence of Greeks once existed in there and also in southern of FYROM. However, they have largely been assimilated during the communist era." --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Yes we know. Those are the commounists back then and the "devoted" "Macedonians" today. They are the Jannisaries of Hellenism. By the way.. who wants them? They're a discrace for Hellenism. If you get assimilated byt.. Tito... then you deserve to stay where you are right now. We dont want them. Keep them for yourselves.
|
|
|
Post by kartadolofonos on Jan 18, 2009 12:08:32 GMT -5
Finally we have a master clown here...he think we greeks are stupid to realize whats going on with Anittas response he often find a sympathetic ear with the anti-greek to claim his romanian bulls**t propaganda you're jealous, don't lie." ... I couldn't stop laughing at the comment you made! ;D
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Jan 18, 2009 19:13:06 GMT -5
Don't worry what Anittas wrote, he hasn't got a clue regarding the history of vardar. I just don't understand his, cognates and serbans anti-serbian stance. What you wrote is quite accurate.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Jan 18, 2009 19:17:14 GMT -5
"WHAT sources? Every traveller that passed through Macedonia wrote it was populated with Bulgarians and with Greeks in the very south. These southern greek parts are already in Greece."
Yes, during the period of the Exarchos and before the 19th century?
"Not only. Almost the whole of FYROM is populated with descedants of Bulgarians."
History will tell you otherwise pre 19th century.
"Not true. It is used in 18-19 century as a GEOGRAPHICAL REGION, in which there live Bulgarians, Greeks (south), Vlkachs, Turks and Serbs (very northwest)."
Very northwest, not accurate at all.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Jan 18, 2009 19:23:50 GMT -5
"Torlakian is often classified as Bulgarian dialect also. Its analytical dialect. Serbian is lexical. The grammer is Bulgarian, the words: they have more Serbian words."
Torlakian is the old serbian dialect that serbs once spoke, but in vardar the exarchate enforced the Bulgarian lanuage onto the population....read petition above.
|
|
|
Post by tsompanos on Jan 18, 2009 22:23:07 GMT -5
southern fyrom used to have large greek population if not the majority
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Jan 18, 2009 22:42:32 GMT -5
I've also posted this once before and it confirms Alexander von Heksch above.
Vilayet of Veles, village of Jabolchiste:
„Novak Burhanin,; Tome Belche, Bogche, Todor, son of Belche; Hrchko, brother of Pecko; Pejo, son of Danche, Vlkashin, Srbin; Gjurash, Srbin, Rade Stari; Dojchin, his son; Gjorgjo, son of Rade; Rale Momchil; Hrlo, son of Dapko; Brajko, son of Kovach; Ivan; Stale,son of Stojan; Rale, son of Stojan; Stepan, Srbin; Dabe; Pejchin, son of Rade...â€
(Turski dokumenti za istorijata na makedonskiot narod, Skopje, 1971, str 143)
village of Dobrushevo, Vilayet of Prilep: „Bogdan Srbin; Marko, his son, Dimitri son of Gruban...Dimitri son of Srbin; Todor son of Srbin, Pejo son of Rajcho...
(Turski dokumenti za istorijata na makedonskiot narod, Skopje, 1971, str 60)
village of Sopotnica, northwest from Krushevo: â€Ivanish Stale; Stanisha Mano; Petko, Srbin; Petar, Srbin; Stajko Srbin...„
(Turski dokumenti za istorijata na makedonskiot narod, Skopje, 1971, str 540)
village of Divjaci, northwest od Krushevo: â€Jandro, Srbin; Miho son of Srbin; Dimitri son of Srbin, Petko son of the priest...„
(Turski dokumenti za istorijata na makedonskiot narod, Skopje, 1971, str 541)
village of Volkoselo, nahiya of Prilep; â€Bogavec, Srbin; Stanisha son in law of Bogdan...Stanisha, Srbin; Pejo, son of Tonchin...„
(Turski dokumenti za istorijata na makedonskiot narod, Skopje, 1971, str 95)
|
|
|
Post by Alb_Korcar on Jan 19, 2009 11:24:32 GMT -5
Novi Pazar is right...."Macedonians" are Serbs...their propaganda is possible because of Serbija and it lives on today because of Serbs...figjete apo ta Ballkania i patridha sas eine sti Rusija Haha
|
|
ioan
Amicus
Posts: 4,162
|
Post by ioan on Jan 19, 2009 14:02:25 GMT -5
It makes no sense. If they were Serbs, ruled by Serbs for 100 years, they would ve been serbs now, not "Macedonians". The problem is they are Bulgarians and we all know it.You may thank the Serbs for creating the "Macedonians" who steal ancient Greek history.
|
|
|
Post by Kastorianos on Jan 19, 2009 15:50:53 GMT -5
...well in Greece the "makedonska" speaking people are not considered to be Serbs but Bulgarians by the Greek people. We call them Woulgaroi or woulgarofonoi, never Serbs. That has always been so... If they were Serbs we would have far better relations to them.
|
|
|
Post by Alb_Korcar on Jan 19, 2009 16:10:37 GMT -5
^^not if they were ur neighbors neighboring countires almost always never get along with each other. i say this because i know a girl from Fyrom and a Serbian guy and theyre always giving each other reach arounds and her myspace name is "Kosovo je Srbija" lmao. plus theyre always saying how Serbia and Fyrom are "best friends" just stating the truth, im obvouisly not trying to start anything ;D
|
|
|
Post by rusebg on Jan 19, 2009 19:11:07 GMT -5
Korcabre and Novi show one and the same pattern. No wonder why Serbs and Albanians fight. The reason is the common ignorance. Althought I see no point in proving who is sillier, there might be a reason for thht I am not familiar with.
Kastor, I never liked you so far, but you make sense, no doubt about this.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Jan 19, 2009 20:40:17 GMT -5
"It makes no sense. If they were Serbs, ruled by Serbs for 100 years, they would ve been serbs now, not "Macedonians". The problem is they are Bulgarians and we all know it.You may thank the Serbs for creating the "Macedonians" who steal ancient Greek history."
Serbs arrived 150 years before the bulgars. The Bulgarian Exarchate was the main factor in all of this ioan.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Jan 19, 2009 20:41:38 GMT -5
"Korcabre and Novi show one and the same pattern. No wonder why Serbs and Albanians fight. The reason is the common ignorance. Althought I see no point in proving who is sillier, there might be a reason for thht I am not familiar with."
I'm showing evidence.
|
|
ioan
Amicus
Posts: 4,162
|
Post by ioan on Jan 20, 2009 2:01:09 GMT -5
Novi is neglecting some 11 centuries where the fyrom kings selfdeclared they are Bulgarians, the writings of every traveller that says Macedonian slavs are Bulgarians and the fact that the national revival of the Bulgarians started in Macedonia and wants us to believe some "prooves". What a laugh! If they were indeed Serbians, the Greeks and we would not have problems with them stealing OUR history. The interesting part is the "Macedonians" do not steal Serbians history. No one claims Dushan was "Macedonian" or Uglesha or Marko. Makes u wonder why.
|
|
|
Post by meltdown711 on Jan 20, 2009 3:05:53 GMT -5
Pretty much anyone who knows anything about the Balkans today acknowledges that Macedonians are Bulgarian derived and culturally affiliated. That they have kinship to the Serbs is clear since they are between the two worlds, but considering how Bulgarian influence even pierces deep into the Serbian "heartland" in Kosovo.
Even the Macedonian minority in Albania admits links to Bulgaria and Bulgarians and we call them both Macedonian and Bulgarian minority...
|
|