Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Robert Excellent work?!? :-))) It is telling that you have stooped to bulgarian "arguments". Can't get any lower than that.
The fact is that the Ottoman Empire was teritorially organized by religious affiliation based on the millet system. It is telling that originally, anybody who was in the Greek church was called "Greek".
As the Macedonian church, the Ohrid Archbishporic, was closed down by the Turks due to Greek treachery, the only acceptible option was to join the newly-formed Bulgarian church, mostly to avoid "helenized". Hence, the Ottoman censuses identify them as Bulgarians, and those Macedonians (or others) who joined the Patriarchate as Greeks.
It is a fact that in the 19 century, the Macedonians fought to re-establish their church, even as part of the Catholic church. For some reason the Bulgarian/Serbian/Greek historiography is silent on this point.
The hisghest Bulgarian agent sent by their Church to Macedonia, Petko Slaveikov, has noted on several ocasions in 1871-74:
" In speaking with some Macedonian "patriots" I understood that this movement, which only until several years ago consisted only of words, today is a clearly defined thought: 'The Macedonians are not Bulgarians, and they uncompromisingly try to reestablish their own church regardless of the price.' " |
Please post sources which you use as quotes. Also, you make broad accusations. If Turkish authorities considered all churches ie Byzantine Greek, how come the Turkish recognise other ethnicities such as Bulgarian in their census?
Just a few examples:
For references and better views see:
http://www.macedoniaontheweb.com/mac...109/si/turkish http://www.macedoniaontheweb.com/mac...oto/28/si/vila
You may have your information wrong.
07-11-2006, 04:47 PM
If you want to disquass the Ohrid Archbishporic,Macedonist moovement e.t.c. open a new thread please in
Similar Threads 
Linear Mode
