| |||||||
| Macedonia Articles Macedonia Articles |
The Ethnic and Historical origins of F.Y.R.O.M
Macedonia Articles
 |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
| |||||||
| Macedonia Articles Macedonia Articles |
|
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
12-04-2006, 07:33 AM
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
 Ethnic and Historical Origins of F.Y.R.O.M - Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Overview and Introduction This Page is reserved to highlight the historic and ethnic origins of the Slavs of F.Y.R.O.M and the historical circumstances under which the first emergence of the ethnically artificial 'Macedonism' occured during the mid-19th century and the course it has taken until the present day. These first Macedonists were defined as a individuals favouring an autonomous or independent Macedonian state. As an extension of this they favoured, in differing degrees, the complete or partial seperation from the Bulgarian consciousness in the region of a Slavic 'Macedonian ethnicity' and hence also a 'Macedonian' conciousness and language. The first origins of Macedonism in the mid-19th century occured as a result of the turmoil created by the competing forces in the region; the Austrian, Pan-Slavist Russian and Ottoman Empires as well as Serbia, Bulgaria, Greece and the other Great Powers as well. The geopolitics of the Serbs' evidently played the crucial role in the ethnogenosis by promoting a seperate Macedonian consciousness at the expense of the Bulgarians. Though the Serbs initially put forward the idea that the majority of Slavs in Macedonia were Serbs; upon the realisation that their initial claim of the Slavs of Macedonia being Serbs and not Bulgarians was making little headway in the solidly Bulgarian Slav population, they began a systematic 'encouragement' of a seperate Macedonian consciousness. The Macedonist ideology drew on the historical legacy of the region with an implied sense of ethnicity in order to draw support to its cause. Despite gaining in support and appeal via reactionist forces, the ideology struggled to win the support of the Slavs of Vardar, the majority continued to be described and describe themselves as Bulgarian by all foreign records and censuses. The ideology later found fruition with the support of the Soviet Union and later advent of Yugoslav communist rule for the sake of the communists' own political interests. Various declarations were made during the 1920s & 30s seeing the official adoption of Macedonism by the Comintern (the international communist organ headed in Moscow coordinating communist parties in other countries) and in turn declarations were made by the Greek, Yugoslav and Bulgarian communist parties, as they agreed on the adoption of Macedonism as their official policy for the region: the various Comintern congresses of the 1930s called for a 'Macedonian' nation as part of a wider 'Balkan Federation'. In 1944, wartime Yugoslav Communist Partisan leader Tito, who had gained control of the region during the war and aided by growing leftist reactionist support for Macedonism, proclaimed the 'Peoples' Republic of Macedonia' as part of the Yugoslav Federation, thus partially forfilling the Comintern's pre-war policy, despite a split between Tito and Stalin in 1948. With the break up of Yugoslavia in 1991, the independent 'Republic of Macedonia' was proclaimed. The situation exists today in the form where the Slavs of F.Y.R.O.M (Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) have a 'Macedonian' nationality, a nationality having been constructed for over a century, owing to multiple historic and political factors. Primary and secondary sources following will illustrate this point.  French statistics on Ottoman Macedonia. The statistics listed are the number schools, teachers and students according to nationality; Greek, Bulgarian, Serb or Vlach in the various cities Overview of Slavic Migratory history in the Balkans and Macedonia Slavs had arrived in the region after crossing the Danube during the 6th and 7th centuries AD. The inhabitants of Macedonia of significant numbers prior to the large South Slavic migrations, were the Greeks, the Vlachs (A Romanized people), Albanians (North West). Smaller settlements of Turkish inhabitants came with the advent of Ottoman rule as well as a small percentage of Gypsy Roma who inhabited the area. Come the Slavic migrations, the bulk of the Vardar (FYROM) region's Slavs were recorded as being ethnic Bulgarians; and as well in the North around Skopje there was an encroaching Serbian influence. Note* The fact that Slavic Migrations occured over 1000 years after the time of the ancient kingdom of Macedon in the 6th and 7th centuries, is obviously ignored by nationalist revisionist historians, who claim that a Slavonic Macedonian ethnicity has existed for 2000 years as a continuation of the ancient kingdom of Macedon. Nevertheless we will not dwell on that fact as this page is specifically designed to describe the historic origins of F.Y.R.O.M and its 'Macedonian' ethnogenosis, an ethnogenosis which occured over a millenia after the first Slavic migrations to the area. Chapter 01 ================================================ Ethnogenesis It is a fact that the Slavs of FYROM now have an artificial 'ethnic Macedonian' conscience and owe this to various historical and political circumstances. This political turmoil involved the forcefully competing interets in Macedonia of the Russian, Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman empires as well as the emerging nation states; Greece, Serbia and Bulgaria. The first origins of this 'Macedonism' are found in the mid-to-latter stage of the 19th century as an ideology with little influence on the Slavic population of Macedonia initially. The catalyst for ethnogenosis evidently lies with Serbian and counter Bulgarian geopolitics. Not without opposition at home, Serbs propagated the idea of the Serb ethnicity of the Slavs of Macedonia. Their lack of success prompted the Serbs to promote an idea with more appeal to the population and more acceptance by the foreign powers; Macedonism. It was then that the crucial event occured when Belgrade resorted to vigorously promoting the idea of a seperate Macedonian consciousness among the Slavs of Macedonia at the expense of the Bulgarians. Though with alltogether different aims the Bulgarians promoted autonomy of Macedonia and Thrace as a way of gaining the upperhand by eventually incorporating the regions into Bulgaria, in the same way that Bulgaria had already annexed the autonomous Eastern Rumelia region in 1885. At the same times the Bulgarians resisted what they saw as Serbian attempts to de-Bulgarize Macedonia. In 1822 the Serbian folklorist and linguist, Vuk Stefanovich Karadjich (1787-1864), published the first work containing grammatical facts about the Bulgarian language. Interestingly Karadjich's analysis of the Bulgarian language was based on the Macedonian dialects. Prior to formation of the Bulgarian Exarchate in 1870, there was a small, but influential group of Serbians, mainly politicians and some academics, who supported the concept of a "Greater Serbia". However, this was not the popular view and most Serbians saw Bulgarians as their Slav brothers and foresaw a close future relationship. In 1860, the Serbian Academic Society published Bosnian Croat, Stefan Verkovich's first volume of "Folk Songs of the Macedonian Bulgarian" awarding him the Serbian "Uceno Druzestvo" (Scholar's Society), in his preface Verkovich said: Quote:
Ilija Garashanin (1812-1874) was a distinguished Serbian statesman and the main architect of Serbian state policy between 1843-1868. In 1844 he published a blueprint, known as "Nachertanije" (Outline), describing future Serbian territorial ambitions. A plan modelled directly on Dushan's medieval empire - that is including both Macedonia and Old Serbia. But, at the same time Garashanin also encouraged a diplomatic policy of strong support for Bulgarian revolutionary activity against the Turks. Milosh S Milojevich (1840-1897) was the first Serbian to publicly challenge the prevailing consensus concerning the Exarchate's boundaries and the ethnic composition of the Macedonian territories (The Bulgarian Exarchate was the church body which was granted independence from the Patriarchate in 1870 as spititual head of all Bulgarians). In 1873 Milojevich presented a paper to the Serbian Scholar's Society which characterised the Slavic population of Macedonia as Serbian - a basic repetition of Garashanin's beliefs. Milojevich's thesis was severely criticised by two other Society members, Stoyan Novakovich (1842-1915) and Milan Kujundjich. The latter described Milojevich as: Quote:
The Russo-Turkish war of 1878 had a number of dire consequences for Serbian nationalistic goals. Because of its support for Russia, Turkey closed all Serbian schools within Macedonia. The Treaty of San Stefano in 1878 demonstrated to Serbian politicians that there existed a strong and general acceptance that Macedonia was populated by Bulgarians. Later in 1881 Serbian hopes to annex Bosnia and Herzegovina had to be abandoned, which meant redirecting its quest for an outlet to the Aegean - via Macedonia. These setbacks led Serbia to instigate the Serbo-Bulgarian war of 1885, which ended in its convincing defeat. Thus to accomplish, what it had failed to do militarily, Serbia now pursued two separate tactics to enhance its future claims to Macedonia. The first was based on proving directly that Macedonia was actually populated by Serbs not Bulgarians; the second involved fostering nascent Macedonian separatism (Macedonism) as a counter to Bulgarian influence. While previously Stoyan Novakovich had criticised the chauvinistic policies of individuals like Milojevich, times had changed and now as an eminent Serbian statesman he felt it his duty to support Serbian claims to the Macedonian territories. Therefore initially Novakovich attempted to show that Slavic dialects of Macedonia were not part of the Bulgarian language but actually part of the Serbian language. However because his study was dismissed by noted academics of the period, including Yagich, Miletic, Oblak and Derzhavin, he realised that this strategy could not succeed. Subsequently Novakovich advanced a thesis that in the late 9th century Macedonia had three ethnic Slavic groups - Bulgarian, Serbian and "Slovene" - and that these divisions still persisted and were identifiable in the present population. He outlined his theory in "First Foundations of Slavic Literature Amongst the Balkan Slavs", a 300 page monograph published in 1893 by the Serbian Academy of Sciences. What Novakovich had produced was a blueprint for "de-Bulgarization" of the Macedonian Slavs by their "Macedonianization", if direct "Serbianization" could not be readily effected. The intent is explicitly confirmed by Novakovich's well known (and quoted) dispatch to the Serbian Minister of Education in 1888: Quote:
Serbian agitations for the encouragement of a seperate Macedonian Slav consciousness continued well up until the Balkan wars through Serbs like Alexander Belic (Belich) and the ethnographer, Jovan Cvijic (Cvijich), who published numerous maps on the subject. Further indication of the imposition of Macedonism by "outsiders", and the dubbing of the local Bulgarian dialect as "makedonski" can be found in a letter to Prof. Marin Drinov of May 25, 1888 Kuzman Shapkarev writes: Quote:
In contrast to the Serbian aim of creating a "Macedonian nation consciousness", the Bulgarians saw advantages in an autonomous Macedonia: Quote:
------------------------------------------------------- Quote:
------------------------------------------ Quote:
------------------------------------------ Quote:
Chapter 02 ================================================ Macedonism - the ideology's first emergence in the 19th century, its course through the Balkan wars and the ground it gained up until 1945 - Overview Emerging in the middle to later stages of the 1800s, being first recorded in the 1860s and without ethnic/ historic reality, this Macedonist phenomena was never prolific enough to eventuate on its own and never consituted a fully fledged ethnicity. All foreign examinations attest to this, never deeming such Macedonism neither significant to constitute being mentioned as an ethnicity in official maps, censuses with the vast majority of Slavs in Macedonia being described as Bulgarians and lingustically Bulgarian. In the the late 19th century, during the height of the activity of the IMARO, during the 1903 uprising, the balkan wars and Yugoslav rule thereafter, the "Macedonists", as the Bulgarians called them, were clearly a minority, especially amongst the uneducated peasant masses of Macedonia. Yet their views were gaining ground; if only a little. The Macedonists are recorded as having told the peasants they were descendants of the glorious ancient Macedonians, that they civilised all the Slavs through St Cyril and Methodius and they looked down on the rest of Bulgarians who were "not pure Slavs" as the Macedonians were. With the advent of Yugoslav rule and the forceful policies of Serbinization and de-Bulgarianization which occured on the Slavs of Vardar, the Macedonists did gain ground however with the idea of an independent Macedonia winning more hearts and minds. During WW2 Tito and his Yugoslav Communist party enjoyed the support of the leftist Slav partisans in Vardar who favoured 'Macedonism' as an alternative to the opressive nature of the Bulgarian fascist occupation; this factor combined with Serbinization and Greece's mistreatment of its Bulgarophone minority gave the Yugoslav communists an opening. Yet at the same time much of the population welcomed the Bulgarians as liberators, despite having been under Yugoslav/ Serb rule since 1913 and being subject to Serbinization policies since that time. In some ways however, a German invasion and subsequent fascist Bulgarian occupation again gained more appeal for the idea of a "free and independent Macedonia" and seperatism from Bulgaria in terms of conscience. With the Comintern and all the communist parties of the region; Greek, Yugoslav and Bulgarian already having adopted the Macedonist cause over a decade before the war, through Comintern and Balkan Communist Federatiom direction, Tito capitalised in the growing support for an independent/ autonomous Macedonia eminatting from the leftist Slav spectrum of Vardar. Espcially through the Partisans' resistance movements formed to resist axis occupation and win control for the communists in a post war situation. Such a group in Macedonia was 'SNOF', a group made up of Slav partisans specifically formed as a 'Free Macedonian Slav' unit and as a sub-branch of the Yugoslav Partisan movement. More on the collusion of the various communist partisan leadership of the region; Greeks, Slavs and Albanians and their subordinacy to Belgrade and Moscow and their contribution to the Macedonian affair can be found later on in this article. In 1944, Tito, head of the CPY (Communist party of Yugoslavia) and the partisan forces gave Macedonism its fruition, though as part of the Federal Yugoslavia. The 'codification' of this artificial ethnisism with the creation of the 'Socialist Republic of Macedonia', the establishment of commitees on "Macedonian" language and alphabet as well as the "Macedonian Orthodox Church" in 1968 by the Yugoslav communist party. Thereafter Belgrade directed a concerted policy of the complete Macedonization of Vardar and promoted Macedonian nationalism. Manufactured ethnogenesis - an ideology in the minority and its struggle to materialise This quote from an observer in the 1950s after 5 years of Yugoslav Communist rule gives an idea of the ground still needed to be gained before FYROM can be said to be the country where a fully fledged Macedonian ethnicity exists: Quote:
Quote:
[Eugene Borza,The Macedonian Rendux] Quote:
[Ferdinand Schevill, "A History of the Balkans", p.432] Quote:
[Loring Danforth,The Macedonian Conflict. Ethnic Nationalism in a Transnational World,page 56] Krste Misirkov  Krste Misirkov is an example of the struggle of the Macedonist philosophy to materialise initially. He is also prime example of the often fluxuating ethnic conscience of some of the early Macedonists at the turn of the century. Many intellectuals were having to decide whether they favoured annexation by Bulgaria, or an autonomous Macedonia. While Misirkov is curiously heralded by FYROM historians as one of the "founders of the Macedonian nation", he is also wrote that "We [Macedonian Slavs] are more Bulgarian than those in Bulgaria!". In view of his ethnic fluxuations it can be seen that Misirkov only promoted the concept of "Macedonism" when he felt the Bulgarian position in Macedonia was irrevocably lost - as in 1903 after Ilinden (when he wrote "On Macedonian Matters") and after WWI. At all other times he was a staunch advocate of the Bulgarian character of Macedonia. He was the first person to transform "Macedonian" as a literary language, when in Sofia in 1903, he published the book ''Za Makedonckite Raboti'' ('On Macedonian Matters') in which he laid down the principles of the 'Macedonian' language. According to this book, the language should be based on the central dialects of Vardar. He also used those dialects to write the book itself. Misirkov died in 1926. Misirkov's pro-Macedonism arguments were resurrected and re-packaged by the Comintern in 1934 as evidence for a "Macedonian Nation" and his principles were used by the Yugoslav committees for the codification of the Macedonian language. Some exceprts from his pro-Macedonist stance publication "On Macedonian matters": Quote:
In his book, ''The national identity of the Macedonians'', which he wrote in 1924, two years before he died, he uncompromisingly defends the Bulgarian character of the population of Macedonia He completley retracts everything he wrote in his book ''Za Makedonckite Raboti'' about the Macedonian language, with the explanation that "I wrote it as a politician". The book is uncompromisingly pro-Bulgarian, describing himself as a Bulgarian, nationalistically so. Krste Misirkov National Identity of the Macedonians. 1924 γ: Quote:
Chapter 03 ================================================ Foreign Evaluation of the ethnic make-up of Macedonia in the 1800s and 1900s "Macedonian" was a geographical label, not ethnic. For outside/ foreign observers in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, when the first stages of Macedonian (or makedonski) ethnogenosis had taken place, there was simply not sufficient evidence to distinguish the Vardar Slavs from the Bulgarians. Indeed there was simply no historic precedent or reality to a "Macedonian" race existing in the region, not in Byzantine times nor Ottoman obviously. This is reflected through the fact that foreign records did not take into consideration the small faction of Macedonists when considering the pressing Macedonian Problem, its ethnic make-up and future in light of the crumbling Ottoman Empire. Needless to say not one foreign record, treaty, map or census: be it Ottoman, English, French, German or anyother ever mentioned a seperate "Macedonian ethnicity" or "Macedonian language" (see numerous maps and censuses below). For example none of the following censuses identified any "Macedonian" language/ conscience/ ethnicity; only Greek, Bulgarian, Vlach, Turk, Albanian, Roma, Serb or Armenian: -The League of Nations (forerunner to UN set up after WWI) never mentions any Macedonian race/ ethnicity. -Journal "Le Temps" Paris 1905 (Gave a total population of 2,782,000 inhabitants and no "macedonian" race) -Prof. G. Wiegland - Die Nationalen Bestrebungen der Balkansvölker. Leipzig 1898 (Gave a total population of 2,275,000 inhabitants and no "macedonian" race) -1904 Turkish census of Hilmi Pasha for Thessaloniki, Monastiri, Scopje -1906 Turkish census of Hilmi Pasha for the area of Macedonia. -Official Turkish Statistic Ethnicity of Macedonia Philippopoli 1881 -Vassil Kantcheff - Macedonia Ethnicity and Statistic - 1900 -Leon Dominian - The frontiers of Language and Nationality in Europe. Published for the American Geographical Society of New York 1917 -Richard von Mach - Der Machtbereich des bulgarischen Exarchats in der Türkei. Leipzig - Neuchatel, 1906 -Prinz Tcherkasky ethnographie 1877 -The treaties of San Stefano (1878), London (1913) , Versailles (1919), the Congress of Berlin (1878) and others; all of which dealt with the Macedonian question, made no reference even to small group declaring themselves as 'ethnic' Macedonians, only Bulgarians, Serbs, Greeks, Muslims and other minorities Popolazione dell'Impero ottomano , 1911 - Italian report on the population make up of the Ottoman Vilayets (administrative regions) which made up Macedonia; Monastir, Thessaloniki as well as Adrianople, Kosovo, Ioannina and Skutari:  Lingustically there is no doubting that the so called "Macedonian language" of today is a Bulgarian dialect. The Slavs of Vardar were traditionally described as Bulgarian by foreign obsevers and the Macedonists first dubbed their Bugarski dialect 'Makedonski' in the 19th century (As was described earlier in the page by Shapkarev in 1888). For more information on the FYROM language and the history of its transformation from a Bulgarian idiom to a "Macedonian" language visit the page: Linguistic origins of F.Y.R.O.M - From Bulgarian dialect to "Macedonian" language ------------------- Contemporary foreign evaluation of the Slavonic idiom and the other languages spoken in Macedonia American 1910 Census of languages spoken in the U.S: Note that: *that the instructions in bold at the bottom indicate to the census enumerators that the language of each American citizen is to be classified on the basis of language spoken, be it Greek, Bulgarian, Serbian, Albanian, Turkish, Vlach etc, rather than classifying them geographically as 'Macedonian'. Such an instruction was necessary given the amount of Bulgarian immigrants from Macedonia. *It is seen from through that despite efforts of the Macedonists to have the Bulgarian dialect recognised as "Makedonski", no foreign records describe such a language in their list of the various languages spoken in the Balkans: Department of Commerce and Labour Bureau of the Census Washington Thirteenth Census of the United States April 15, 1910 p.32 - Instructions to census Enumerators: Quote:
-------------------------- According to the 1899 edition of Encyclopedia Brittanica considering the respective Serb and Bulgarian for the Slavonic population: "Almost all independent authorities, however, agree that the bulk of the Slavonic population of Macedonia is Bulgarian" 1903 London Times article outlining the Macedonian problem. Evidently the article does not consider Macedonism significant enough, or any revisionist claims of a "Macedonian ethnicity" a reality . The only ethnic groups mentioned are Albanians, Turks, Vlachs, Rumanians, Greeks, Servian and Bulgarian. Slavonic population exerpt (Click for greater picture resolution):  The Above article in its entirety (Click for greater resolution):  Chapter 04 ================================================ Foreign evaluation continued.. A later Encycolpedia Brittanica edition from 1911 on Macedonia refers to the diverse ethnic make-up of Macedonia, and does not mention any Macedonian ethnicity, only Macedonian Greeks, Macedonian Bulgarians, Vlachs, Turks, Albanians, Serbs, Jews, Gypsies, Armenian minority and so on: Macedonia - LoveToKnow 1911 Some Excerpts: Quote:
Ethnic/ racial maps concerning the Macedonia and Vardar regions Quote:
None of these racial/ ethnological maps record a "Macedonian" race/ ethnicity. Indeed no contemporary racial cartographer deems the Macedonist seperatists significant enough to be recorded in any maps. Ethnologists only recorded Greeks, Bulgarians, Serbs, Albanians, Turks, Vlachs/ Aromanians, Turks and other minorities such as Gypsy Roma, Armenians etc. (Click for higher resolution of pictures): Map from 1877 by the British Stanford firm, studying the ethnology of Macedonia at the time:  Ethnograhical Map 1880s - by E. G. Ravenstein F.R.G.S. - Published by: New York, D. Appleton & Co  French Ethnocarte Map of Macedonia:  Shepards' Peoples of Europe around 900:  This Racial Map of Europe does not mention a Macedonian race and cites most of Vardar as Bulgarian. [Source Records of the Great War (National Alumni 1923 Volume VII)]  The ethnicity of the villages around Skopje in the last years of Turkish rule. (Source: Makedonien, Landschafts- und Kulturbilder., Schultze Jena, 1927):  Further Ethnolgraphical and Lingustic Maps (click to enlarge): French 1 - racial map: Macedonia French 2 - linguistic map of Macedonia concerning Serb/ Bulgarian dialects French 2 - Map of A. Boue, French (1840). A traveler and scholar who edited in 1840 his cornerstone piece "La Turquie d'Europe". He traced almost precisely the borderlines separating the different races in Macedonia. German 1 - Lingustic divisions of Europe in 1914 German 2 - Kiepert 1867 ethnographical map of Macedonia German 3 - German map of the peoples and languages of Europe, end of 19th century German 4 - Racial map of central and South Europe. Taken from F. W. Putzgers Historischer Schul-Atlas, 1905 German 5 - Der Grosse-Herder-Atlas German 6 - Balkan-Region 1881 British 1 - H,N Brailsford, Macedonia. Its Races and their Future: Methuen & C.O British 2 - P.C.G.N 1942 - Map drawn according to the lingustic divisions of Macedonia British 3 - Ethnological map of Europe. (notice the green representing the South Slav races - Serbs, Croats, Slovenes, Bulgarians but no Macedonians) British 4 -Races of the Balkan peninsula, Historical Atlas by William R. Shepherd, 1923 Czech 1 - Map of T.Safarik, Czech (1842) (must be approached with caution to an extent due to bias on account of the man being a well known Slavicist) Compare the above foreign ethnological maps with the following Serbian maps, where a group seperate of Bulgarians; the 'Slavs of Macedonia' appears. Both cite Jovan Cvijic as the source of the ethnological data, Cvijic being one of the cheif Serb proponents of 'Macedonianism' as discussed earlier in the article: Serbian map 1 - "Ethnological map from the point of view of the Serbs", map published by the 1914 Carnegie Commission on the Balkan wars, as an example of the Serbian view. Based on the ethnological data of Jovan Cvijic Serbian map 2 - "Ethnographic map of the Balkan penninsula", published in 1913 through Austrian channels but once again citing Cvijic as the collector of the ethnological material on which the map is based The Carnegie Commission on such maps: Quote:
------------ Chapter 05 ================================================ The VMRO (IMARO) and the Illinden-Krushevo-Preobrazhenie Uprising The revisionist attempts by F.Y.R.O.M's revisionist historians to portray the Bulgarian revolutionaries of the VMRO as 'early fathers of Macedonia' and exclusively as 'Macedonian nationalists' are indicative of both the ethnic Bulgarian origins of the Slavs of F.Y.R.O.M and the inherent flaws of the 'Macedonist' historical revisionism. This article will provide multiple primary and secondary sources describing the VMRO as "Bulgarian Komitadjis (committees)" as well as the Bulgarian conscience of all the Committee's founders and leaders, Hristo Tatarchev, Dame Gruev, Petar Pop-Arsov, Andon Dimitrov, Hristo Batandzhiev, Jane Sandanski and Ivan Hadzhinikolov. The Bulgarian conscience of its most famous leader, Goce Delchev (despite portrayals of Delchev by revisionists as the 'father of Macedonian nationalism') will also be seen. The IMARO was Bulgarian since its establishment, one of the cheif motivations for its founding by Dame Gruev in 1893 was to block the spread of Serbian influence into Macedonia, less it hinder the ultimate unification of the Bulgarian people. Even earlier (1891), Gyorche Petrov, later a famous IMRO committee member, was so concerned by the obvious Serbian schemes that he spent his time exclusively on ethnographic research in Skopje to ensure the availability of indisputable evidence to support the "Bulgarian" character of the Macedonian population. However later on, the Committees experienced internal struggles between the pro-Bulgarians and the autonomists/ Macedonists who were in the minority. The autonomists' political outlook came in varying forms and degrees. While hardline Bulgarians favoured the complete Bulgarian annexation of Macedonia; certain sections favoured initial Macedonian autonomy uniting the different ethnicities in the region, with the hidden eventual aim of annexation by Bulgaria just as Bulgaria had annexed the autonomous Eastern Rumelia in 1885. There was also a minority of Macedonists who were clearly in favour of Macedonian autonomy and not annexation by Bulgaria. The climax and fall of the "Internal Committe's" activity occured August 1903 when the IMARO organised an uprising in two parts of Ottoman territory. The main rising was in the Ilinden region North of Skopje on the 2nd of August where rebels proclaimed the short-lived 'Krushevo Republic' in the Bitola Vilayet. The Ilinden uprising was a Bulgarian uprising taking place under the Bulgarian flag, and was reported as such by the Western press, with hundreds of Bulgarian flags lining the streets. The Komitadjis however were successful in inlisting the support of the local Vlach population; claiming their aim was to establish an autonomous and multi-ethnic Macedonia. The second uprising was centered in Tsarevo in the Adrianople Vilayet near the Black Sea coast on the 19th of August, the day of the Transfiguration or Preobrazhenie in Bulgarian. Both uprisings were put down by the Turks without difficulty and despite the Bulgarians' claims that the rising was in the name of all disgruntled Ottoman subjects, many Greeks and Vlachs were murdered by the Committee in the process.  The failure of the 1903 insurrection resulted in the dispersal of the autonomy seeking, left-wing faction of IMRO and it becoming largely an agent of Bulgarian expansionism. in the years from 1904 to 1908, armed groups sponsored by all three neighboring states fought the Ottomans and each other, and the Ottomans took reprisals. The resulting brutality of the Young Turk government which took power in 1908 played a large part in provoking the Balkan Wars which broke out in 1912. After the Balkan wars and the defeat of Bulgaria, the VMRO mostly died out in Greek Macedonia and Yugoslavia, continuing as a radical right wing part in Bulgaria. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -From the Statute of the 'Bulgarian Macedonian-Adrianople Revolutionary Committee', founded in 1893, as it was originally known before being simply referred to as SMARO/ IMARO, 'Secret/ Internal Macedonian-Adrianople revolutionary Committee': Quote:
No doubt the reason for the change in name of the Committee was to not allow the Greeks and Serbs label it as a Bulgarian organisation. The advantages of not openly being a Bulgarian apparatus for annexation and instead to aim for autonomy with the slogan "Macedonia for the Macedonians", Greeks, Serbs, Vlachs and even Turks inclusive. Later statutes in 1902 for example deleted the goals mentioning the "self defence" of the Bulgarian population instead their goal being: "uniting all the disgruntled elements in Macedonia and the Adrianople region, regardless of their nationality, to win, through a revolution, a full political autonomy for these two regions." (1902 Statute of the Secret Macedonian-Adrianople Revolutionary Organization) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Quote:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Various sources following will identify the Bulgarian character of the group and illustrate that, to foreign observers at least, there was no means by which, or historical precedent, to distinguish Macedonists and their ideas for the seperation of an 'ethnic Macedonian' consciousness from the Bulgarian consciousness of the Slavic population of the region. Primary, contemporary, foreign sources concerning the Bulgarian ethnicity of Goce Delchev: The following is a letter from Goce Delchev to Nikola Maleshevski, in which refers to himself as Bulgarian: Quote:
 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The following is an Ottoman Turkish document, following the Illinden Uprising, describing the death of Goce Delchev, a 'Bulgarian leader':  Extracts from the document once again confirming Delchev as a Bulgarian: Quote:
---------------------------------------------------  Greek newspaper, Empros, May 1903. Caption of picture reads: "Gotse Delchev, assassinated leader of the Bulgarian bands" -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bulgarian conscience of Dame Gruev, IMARO founder: Quote:
-Memoranum from Dame Gruev, Boris Sarafov and Atanas Lotanchev to the Bulgarian consul in Bitola and transmitted from there to Sofia with report N441, September 17th, 1903 -Link to original Dame Gruev memorandum ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Primary, contemporary, foreign sources concerning the Illinden-Krushevo Uprisings: The 'Orhid banner' shows the banner used by the insurgents of the Krushevo-Illinden uprisings. As can be seen the Bulgarian flag being held by a figure representing the uprising. On one side the word 'Makedonija' (Macedonia) is written in cyrillic describing Bulgarian aspirations in Macedonia with the Turkish flag at the bottom representing the uprising against the Turks:  -------------------------------------------------------- In any country's archives, and in the reports of the four Consuls and vice-consuls (British, French, Austrian and USA) in Monastir (now Bitola) and Thessaloniki in 1903, the VMRO's activities are described as a revolt by Bulgarian Komitadjis. The following are articles from August 1903 from the London times, clearly describing the uprisings as Bulgarian and the VMRO as Bulgarian Komijitads:  More London Times articles on the Ilinden Uprising (Click for higher picture resolution): The Situation in Macedonia, Aug 03, 1903 The Bulgarian Bands In Macedonia, Aug 04, 1903 The Renewed Outbreak In Macedonia, Aug 07, 1903 The Rising In Macedonia. A Russian Consul Murdered. Aug 10, 1903 Balkan Crisis Aug 11, 1903 --------------------------------------------------- Further foreign evaluation from diplomatic sources referring to the VMRO, Ilinden and Krushevo as Bulgarian: Ottoman diplomatic document: NOTAM by the Imperial Ottoman Embassy in Paris to the French Foreign Office Paris, August 10, 1903 Source: French Foreign Office Archives, AMAE/NS Turquie-Macedoine, vol 35, p. 230r The Bulgarians gathered in large numbers at Kleisoura and its suburbs have occupied the villages of Djivarek in the Kesrie administrative region, have assasinated all the Muslim inhabitants, women and children, and burnt down their houses. They are currently fiercely attacking the remaining villages in the area, were they already captured a big number of inhabitants. Some of these poor people have been burnt alive. The greek and the muslim poulations are terrified after this terrible slaugtering. In the suburbs of Monastir, Bulgarian bandits have burnt 8 barns, in 8 different farms, with all the cereals that had been stored there. These violent attacks, during which the muslim villages in the Resna and Persie regions have been attacked, have terrified the Muslims. In the Ochrida region the postman from Janina has been encyrcled by the Bulgarian bandits and a big number of items belonging to Muslims have been burnt by Bulgarian crooks. ----------------------------------------- French diplomatic document: The French vice-consul N.Vernazza reporting to T.Delcasse. French Foreign Office Archives, AMAE/NS Turquie-Macedoine, vol 35, p. 193-195, prot.n. 35 Thessaloniki August 6, 1903 News coming from Monastiri and areas between this town and Thessaloniki are always very alarming. Every night the Bulgarian rebels are trying to destroy (with dynamite) the railway. The government telegraph lines remain cut, and only those of the railroad have been repaired and it is so that the authorities communicate with Monastiri. According to my information, all Bulgarian residents, men, women and children, from the villages of Tzerovo, Banitza, Rossen, Zaboritzeni, between Florina and Ekchi-Sou, have found refuge to the mountains. Two farms belonging to an Albanophone Greek and a Muslim have been burnt down in this area. An employee of the bulgarian commercial agency told me yesterday that up to date the Bulgarian gangs have kept a defensive attitude, but since last Sunday they have decided to attack and that the Bulgarian villagers will help them significantly. I have indeed personally verified that many young Bulgarians have recently left our town and suburbs to join gangs in the kazas of Gevgeli and Koukoush, on which there is no further conversation after the Postolari events. My opinion is that the Bulgarians have decided to make a last venture in Monastiri area, where they are a majority. Passengers arriving from Monastiri confirm that many muslim villages have been partly burnt down and since yesterday morning news about the Krushevo administration building having been blown up is circulating. This town, with 1700 houses, is populated by BULGARIANS Vlachs and a few muslim Albanians. It is heard that more than 30 persons, in their majority government employees, have been killed during this Bulgarian uprise, imitating the example of their colleagues in Thessaloniki. Vernazza ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Austrian diplomatic docmument: The Austrian consul August Kral to the head of the (Austrian) Foreign Office Count Agenor von Goluchowski. Monastir, March 11, 1903 Source: Austrian Foreign Office Archives, HHStA PA XXXVIII/Konsulat Monastir. 1903, vol 392, prot.no. 22 Hochgeborener Graf, {your Highness the Count} The Comitate with unspeakable audacity blackmails economically Bulgarians, Greeks, Wallachs, Christians and Muslims. In case of refusal to pay, the Christians are threatened with murder, and the rich, armed and guarded muslim landowners are threatened with the burning down of their fields. In gathering the money the comitates do not discriminate between the Christians, because, as they assert, their efforts aim to the amendment of the situation of all Christians of Macedonia. The amount of the money requested depends on individual income, but the Comitate is debatable in some special cases. The amount of the contributions varies between 5 and 100 Turkish pounds, some rare times even more. In the Perlepe region, where the Muslims are a minority, each and every Aga has to pay, the same for most Greeks ( i.e. the Wallachs) from Monastiri and the vlach villages, like Gopes, Mollovista, Tirnovo, Krushevo etc. The comitates have won over, often with by the means of threats, a number of families in the above NON-BULGARIAN small towns. The comitates need such pied-a-terre in important small towns, that, overmore, being non-Bulgarian appear less suspect to the Turks. The continuing and phenomenal in pressure blackmails, have attenuated to the maximum the anxiety of the non-Bulgarian populations, mainly of the Greeks. Fear dominates everywhere. Noone dares to resist. In this state of terror anyone feels the lack of protection to which he is exposed because of the incompetence, the feableness and the corruption of the turkish administration. There is a strong desire for the regularisation of the situation, which is unbearable, and the need for a new, strong government. I have already stated that the population does not want reforms or autonomy, the majority of the Macedonians want nothing more than the fate of Bosnia. The execution of the punishments is a permanent chapter of the gangs' activities. One could mention the recent assasination of the Greek priest in Zelenic, the Greek teacher in Strebeno, a Greek supporter in Ajtos ( all three in the Kaza Florina ), the Serbian priest in Vrbjani and of an Albanian landowner in Lenista (in the Kaza Perlepe) who has been decapitated. Especially the Vrbjani crime has been very shocking, as for two years now there has been no Bulgarian action against the Serbs and therefore the Serbophiles have not been hostile towards the rebel groups. the assasins, now being fugitives, according to the inquiry performed by the Serbian Genaral Consul himself, have been three local villagers, an old friend of the priests' being one of them, who had to perform the murder as a sort of examination in order to join the comitate. Kral ------------------------------------------------------------- British diplomatic document: The British General Consul Sir Alfred Billioti to the British Charge D'Affaires J.B.Whitehead. Source: Foreign Office F.O. 195/2156, p76r-80v, prot.no. 20 Thessaloniki, January 26, 1903 Sir, Two years ago some Greco-Vlachs, i.e. Wallachians who are educated exclusively in Greek schools and embued with Greek ideas, who in some parts speak nothing but Greek, and form, in the Vilayet of Monastir the bulk of the Macedonian Greek population, requested the permission of the Patriarchate to use the Roumanian language in their churches. The Patriarchate refused but the Exarchate acceded to the request, and this false step on the part of the former caused the first split in the Greco-Vlach party by inducing a number of Vlachs to throw in their lot with the Exarchate. These new converts were, as is usually the case, more fervent than the Exarchists themselves and bashed by the Committees' bands resorted to intimidation and murder to coarse their compatriots who had remained faithful to the Patriarchate to join them. One of the first Greco-Vlach villages affected was Oshin in the Caza of Ghevgheli,at the instigation of the Exarchist inhabitants of which two of the most influential Patriarchists were murdered in August last by a Bulgarian band under a certain Giovanni or Yovanoff of Ghevgheli. About three months ago, as I mentioned in my report no 198 of November 9, 1902, he called at Oshin with his band and that of another leader, Argiri, turned out at the Greek schoolmasters, appointed Roumanians (Non-Bulgarian speaking) and tried to induce the Orthodox priest to turn Exarchists, but failing in this they insisted on their reading the liturgy in Roumanian. On the priests' pleading ignorance of the language Yovanoff gave them six months to learn it. Since their other chiefs have joined Yovanoff and Arghiri, viz. Pavlo, who died lately, Athanasi, Karadouka, and Apostoli, but the men under them do not exceed forty, a number which may, however, be increased at any time by recruits from among the natives. These chiefs have continued the system initiated at Kupa, Oshin, Houma, Longountza, and Loubnitsa, neighbouring villages of Ghevgheli, where also the Patriarchists are in the majority. In the village of Ghera Kortzi, where they form the minority, one of the most influential among them was murdered in broad day light while working in his field by a Bulgarian band some three weeks ago for refusing to recant. Papa Nikola, Orthodox priest of Livadi, another Greco-Vlach village some five hours distance from Goumendje is being threatened with death for remaining Patriarchist and if he is murdered the whole village will join the Exarchate from fear. Meanwhile the forty men forming these Bulgarian bands live at the expense and in the houses of the Orthodox (or Roum, as they are officially termed, whether Greeks or Vlachs, in contradiction to the Exarchists), and no longer of the BULGARIAN peasants, thus shifting the onus of supposed complicity from the latter to the former, as reported to one of my previous dispatches. The villages in the southwestern district of Ghevheli, Gorpop, Boemitza, Bogdanza, Bores (or Bogros), Stoyakovo, Matchoukovo etc, are only in part Exarchist, but the villages of Yenidje Vardar, Kriva, Barovitza, Tchernareka, Petges, Ramna, Petrovo with Corfalia (or Corfali) in Salonica are entirely Orthodox. None of these are, however, being pressed just now by the bands to join the Exarchate nor to dismiss their Greek schoolmasters but they have been warned to hold themshelves ready to take up arms when ordered to do so in a few months. In the meantime they are threatened with death if they should denounce the bands, for whose reception they are ordered to have a house and provisions in constant readiness. All these details some of which I have already had the honour of reporting, e.g. the payment of the taxes to the Committees agents and not to the Government, the submittal of cases to the Committees representatives and not to the local tribunals, the rape of Dimitris' daughter at Moouin for her father's refusal to join the bands and (as I did not know at the time) the exaction from him of twenty five pounds, have only lately come to light. The poor wretches, who suffered, being afraid to visit even Salonica for fear of being suspected of having come to denounce their opressors and only lately have a few dared to come secretly and, explaining their position, enquire what they can do for themselves or what can be done for them. They trembled lest the bands should discover what would assuredly cost them their lives. The Vali himself is at a loss how to relieve the Patriarchists. He told me a forthnight ago that he had summoned the Kaimakamis of Ghevgheli and Yenidje Vardar and secretly arranged with them to invest all the villages mentioned above on a given day and in case of need to repeat the operation until successful, and also to send out flying columns. But nothing has been done, nor do I anticipate any very brillant result from such a plan even if carried out properly and thoroughly with the strong force required since many of the Komitatjis are villagers against whom it would be difficult to prove anything, while the strangers have secured themselves against denunciation by the terrorism which they have established, and would succeed in slipping through the lines. Want of foresight on the part of the Government has, I fear, allowed matters to go too far for any remedy to be easily discoverable. The late Halil Rifat Pasha was induced by the dread of an "atrocities outcry", which has after all been raised, to allow the small minority of new-made Exarchists to share the Churches of the Patriarchists, who naturally regarded them as schismatics and to use the Bulgarian Liturgy - or to cause the closure of the Churches for months, thus depriving their original proprietors of the means of fulfilling their religious duties, even on such holidays as Christmas and Easter. The support thus given to the Exarchists was the more regrettable that it encouraged the revolutionary Committees to attain their end by assasinating the priests whom they could not bribe and the notables whom they could not coerce. I frequently called the successive Valis' attention to this policy as detrimental to the interests of their Government, but in answer they all said that they were acting orders from the Porte which they could not disregard. The only other band which is known to exist in this Vilayet is that of Alexis of Poroia. The daring which prompted his attempt on the train ( as reported in my dispatch No13 of the 17 inst.) near the station of Poroia proves how far the bands have esthablished themselves or, at least, how inadequate are the means employed by the local authorities hitherto in coping with them. The sufferings of the Greeks, described above, extend also to those Bulgarians and Vlachs who are Patriarchists and can only be remedied by the extermination of the few now existing bands, which if not destroyed will form the nucleus of larger bands in the spring. Only exceptionally severe and thorough measures can effect this and only the appointment of the most trustworthy officers for the work can prevent an "atrocities outcry". ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The American Consul Pericles Lazzaro to the Consulate General and the Embassy Source: [NAUSA, roll 2, vol.1 from July 5, 1902 to February 2, 1910, ff.26r-29r, inclosed in Nos 605 XI] Thessaloniki, September 10th, 1903 The case of Kruchevo is typical, because it shows that the tactics of the Bulgarians consist in compromising Greek towns, and that the Turks have neither learnt anything, not forgotten any of their old tricks. Reports show that about 35 Bulgarian and Greek villages have been plundered and burned by the Turkish troops in the Monastir Vilayet since the recent outbreak. The number of Turkish villages treated likewise by the Bulgarians is about 20. Many hundreds of bodies are lying unburied all over the country. Smilevo has had the same fate with Kruchevo, and there also no difference was made between those who had remained loyal to the Government and those who were in sympathy with the rebels. On Aug. 26th 400 rebels entered the Graeco-Wallachian town of Neveska, near Klissura (Exisou station) on their way they came across a detachment of 150 soldiers, of these 20 only succeeded in escaping, the others, it seems, were killed by the rebels. After ransoming the town the B[ulgarian]s fortified themselves in the stone barracks which are outside Neveska. Four battalions of troops having arrived the next day from Kastoria and Florina, the rebels retreated with hardly any losses, as far as I can make out. -----------------------------------------------------  Greek Newspaper 'Empros' - 30th April of 1905. reads as follows: Quote:
---------------------------------------------------------- „Prior to 1908, the Macedonian Bulgarians were the most militant element..." -page 372 in the Turkish edition). Memoires of the Turkish national hero Enver Bey (Enver Pasha). -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It was in Macedonia that the real revolutionary organization, uncompromising and jealous of its independence, was to be found. For the origins of this internal organization we must go back to 1893 when, in the little village of Resna, a small group of young Bulgarian intellectuals founded a secret society with the clearly expressed intention of "preparing the Christian population for armed struggle against the Turkish regime in order to win personal security and guarantees for order and justice in the administration," which may be translated as the political autonomy of Macedonia. --Carnegie Endowment for International peace, Commission to Inquire into the causes and conduct of the Balkan wars, published 1914 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "The European intervention which they demanded was to support only Bulgarian claims; 'autonomy for Macedonia' was to be a half-way house to Great Bulgaria." -Edith Durham, 'The Burden of the Balkans' (1905), p 221 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "The Krusevo manifesto was declared, assuring the population that the uprising was against the Sultan and not against Muslims in general, and that all peoples would be included. As the population of Krusevo was two thirds hellenised Vlachs and Patriarchist Slavs, this was a wise move. Despite these promises the insurgent flew Bulgarian flags everywhere and in many places the uprising did entail attacks on Muslim Turks and Albanians wh themselves organised for self defence." [Hugh Poulton, "Who are the Macedonians", Indiana University Press, 2000, p.57] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The Modern VMRO It should be noted that there are two modern organisations calling themselves 'VMRO' despite neither having any real connection with the historic VMRO other than being symbolic. The two parties are a modern political party in F.Y.R.O.M, the VMRO-DNMPE, as well as the BMRO, a modern political party in Bulgaria. Neither of the two parties have any connection -------------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 06 ================================================ The Balkan wars - Bulgarian defeat means Vardarska cedes to Serbian Kingdom - and WWI Ottoman Empire and the Balkan wars Ottoman rule was declining fast by that time and Austrian, Russian imperialist interests as well as Serb, Bulgarian and Greek nationalist interests, all wanting a peice of Ottoman Macedonia fuelled the turmoil from which the Macedonism first emerged. Between the 19th century and 1913, the Greeks and the Bulgarians had their own respective struggles against Turkey with the 'internal organisations' uprisings centered Krushevo and Tsarevo and against eachother. The years between 1904 and 1908 saw the most violent period of Greek-Bulgarian fighting with the fighting all but coming to a standstill in 1908 with the Young Turks promising an amnesty and reforms. With the Young Turks showing however to be even more ruthless than the Sultan it was clear the situation couldnt endure. In 1912 Greece, Serbia, Montinegro and Bulgaria; to the surprise and disaproval of all the Great Powers, formed an entente and comprehensively defeated the Turks in the first Balkan War. Each of the nations took what share they had won in battle against the Turks. Bulgarian anger at their limited gains in the first Balkan war led to the second war were Greece and Serbia crushed the Bulgarian armies and the demoralised Bulgarians were quick to sign an armistice. From both wars Greece had gained the largest share of Macedonia and Thrace in the South which roughly corresponded to the areas where ethnic Greeks lived as well as corresponding to historical boundaries of anceint Greek Macedonia and the Serbs had gained the Vardar Valley region (modern FYROM); Bulgaria taking the smallest share: the Blaveograd region. The Bulgarians that did live in the territory won by Greece were exchanged with Greeks living in Bulgarian territory at the time. Hence whilst Greece and Bulgaria exchanged their nationals (96,000 Bulgarians and 46,000 Greeks were exchanged) the same was not done for Serbia which retained its Bulgarian nationals. This resulted in a need for Serbia to adopt an even more aggressive policy of Serbinization of the Slavs of Vardar and quite possibly a shot in the arm for the ideology of the Macedonists and their aim of gathering more popular support for an independent Macedonia. The Serbian Kingdom referred to what is now modern F.Y.R.O.M as 'Vardarska' or Southern Serbia. Macedonia in World War One The outbreak of WWI in 1914 meant Serbia was unavoidably thrust against the Central powers and overran by Austria and parts of Greek and Serb Macedonia was occupied by Bulgaria who had joined the Central Powers. Greece remained neutral due to much foreign turmoil and disagreement about involvment in the war until the end when it conducted several successful offensives against Bulgaria with the help of the British and French deplpyments. Both Britain and France had been heavily involved in Macedonia during the war; protecting against further Austrian or Bulgarian advance. In 1918, the defeat of the Central Powers and Bulgaria meant that all of what was the Serbian Kingdom and the other lands inhabited by South Slavs previously under Austrian control; Bosnia, Croatia, Slovenia and Montinegro all formed the new Yugoslav (South Slav) Kingdom. Vardarska continued much as it had after the balkan wars as a Serbian province 'Vardarska Banovina' or just 'South Serbia'. This great dissapointment for the Bulgarians meant the VMRO still continued some operations nominally out of Bulgaria. A stamp showing the map of Yugoslavia with the Southern province called 'Vardarska' as it was before the red partisan take over of Yugoslavia and the creation of the 'Socialist Republic of Macedonia' at the end of WW2  ------------- Chapter 07 ================================================ 1919-1944 - the Comintern and World War Two in Macedonia and Yugoslavia The interwar period clearly gave Macedonism as an ideology a shot in the arm. The Serbinization policies of the Yugoslav kingdom and the Comintern's adoption of the ideology for its strategic reasons meant that the movement went beyond struggling reactionism to Serb/Bulgarian geopolitics and gained the support of a superpower in the Soviet Union. The vital importance of Thessaloniki warm water port, Imperial Russia and Soviet Russia Although the first official declarations regarding the "recognition of the supressed members of the Macedonian nation" and calls for modifications to territorial boundaries were made during the 1920s, the Macedonian question was said to be in discussed in communist circles even earlier. To understand the Comintern's policy one must consider that the Soviet Union saw itself as the expander of communism, similar to the expansive intentions of Imperial Russia before the 1917 revolution. Russia and Catherine the Great had supported the Greeks in the early years of nationhood, sharing a common religion, later the Russians supported the Bulgarians against Greek interests, with whom they shared common Slavic blood and religion as well. The statement of the Russian Tsar Nikolaos in 1854, while addressing to the British Ambassador of Petroupolis, Hamilton Seymour: "A strong Greek kingdom or Greek nation is against the interests of Russia's southern gates" Quote:
On several occassions the Russian army threatened Constantinople (Istanbul) and Macedonia herself, always however being kept in check by the other great powers. In this way Imperial Russia used Bulgaria for its own expansionist aims. After the Turkey's defeat in the Russo-Turkish War, 1877–78, Russia managed to have the treaty of San Stefano signed by the Turks, on March 3, 1878, which created a Greater Bulgaria was created with borders including the largest chunk of Macedonia, an outlet to the Aegean and on Thessaloniki's doorstep; the Russians were thwarted by the great powers who rejected San Stefano and replaced it with the 1978 Treaty of Berlin the same year which deprived Bulgaria (and indeed Russia an outlet to the Aegean). In 1870 the Bulgaric Exarchate was founded with a Sultan's Decree, and in 1872 the scism of the Bulgaric Exarchate occured. On 21/2/1878 (3/3/187 , Russia obliged the Othoman empire with the signing of the Saint Stefan treaty. Tsar Nikolaos had given his ambassador in Constantinople, Ignatiev, the order: "Not a span of earth to Greece" Thus the Russians were deprived again of access to the Aegean as they were denied previously, by the Crimean war, access to the straights of Istanbul and the prospect of a warm water port. Throughout Russia's history much of its efforts were concentrated on the aim of one day aquiring a warm water port (Vladivosktok in the far East freezes over completely in the winter as do all ports in the West as well). In the hey day of the Soviet Union the Russians tried to gain a warm water port on the Indian Ocean by invading Afghanistan but once again failed. The huge strategic importance of Thessaloniki and its port, once called the 'dual capital' of the Byzantine Empire and the hub of Balkan trade made it a target for the great powers and for Russia and the Soviet Union especially. Salonika port would have been a priceless possession for the communist bloc which never managed to possess a warm-water port during the length cold war. In this way it can be said that the cloak of Russian imperialism in South East Europe was initially support of Greece and later Bulgaria and in much the same respect the cloak of Soviet expansionism was Slavic Macedonism. The Comintern adressed the age-old Macedonian question with its decision to promote the 'plight of the Slav Macedonians as a suppressed people in Macedonia and the Slav speakers of Northern Greek Macedonia' rather than the plight of the Bulgarians. The beginning of communist involvment in the Macedonian question - the interwar period; the Comintern and Balkan communists The Comintern, otherwise known as the 'International Communist Organisation' or the 'Internationale' was founded in March 1919, in the midst of the "war communism" period (1918-1921), by Vladimir Lenin and the Russian Communist Party (Bolshevik), which intended to fight "by all available means, including armed force, for the overthrow of the international bourgeoisie and for the creation of an international Soviet republic as a transition stage to the complete abolition of the State." The Comintern played a vital role in the establishment of communist parties all over Europe and in the Balkans as well during the interwar period. The Comintern funded and coordinated communist parties and even had the power to dispel people from a local Balkan party should they feel they are not acting in the revolution's best interests. Thus the Comintern can be described as the foreign affairs organ of the Soviet Union. The Balkan Communist Federation (1919-1939) was a communist umbrella organisation in which all the Balkan communist parties were represented. It was dominated by the Soviet Union and Comintern requirements. An important feature of the Federation was the Macedonian question. The Federation was the successor of the earlier Balkan Democratic Federation and the Balkan Socialist Federation. The Balkan Federation would have included Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, Greece, and Turkey. The manifesto of the federation stated that, "The nations of southeastern Europe possess all the cultural conditions for autonomous development. They are related economically. They should be related politically. Socialism will therefore uphold with all its influence the idea of the solidarity of the Balkan nations. ". Already the Macedonian question was on the table at the first assembly in 1910 before the Balkan wars; The main platforms at the first conference were Balkan unity and action against the impending wars. In 1915, Bulgarian communist Georgi Dimitrov wrote that Macedonia, "...which was split into three parts...", would be, "...reunited into a single state enjoying equal rights within the framework of the Balkan Democratic Federation." and that this was "important to settle outstanding national issues." This independent and united Macedonia would have consisted Yugoslav and Greek Macedonian territory. Naturally the Greek and Yugoslav parties were hesitant about the plan having much more to lose than Bulgarian communists who could only gain in popularity at home from such an outcome and policy.  1935 Resolution of the KKE in regards to a independent Macedonia and Thrace The Bulgarians, from the beginning, had assumed a leading role in the Balkan Federation. In Sofia, May-June 1922, the question of the "autonomy of Macedonia and Thrace"</ |
