What was the Ilinden ?

[Tchakalaroff]

Originally Posted by pankration

I appreciate your earnestness Tchakalaroff but this is getting ridiculous as you keep saying the same thing over and over.

I repeated my statement because people of this forum keep answering me the same question over and over... I already answered it...

And in other post I gave a map and answered why we call ourselfs "macedonians" today..

I'll try to find it and link it

OK, here is the place where I explain my thoughts and belives..
So I won't repeat myself:

http://www.macedoniaontheweb.com/forum/8030-post9.html

[Ptolemy]

Originally Posted by Tchakalaroff

Ok, I'll say it again...

There we go again. I have already proven to you without any doubt that your statements are fully erroneous. How many times do I need to prove something apparent? Despite well documented and attested facts, you prefer to repeat the balloney above. Its getting tiresome and i will repeat just One MORE LAST TIME...
Turks or anybody who had a census back then, never mentioned a
"Macedonian" ethnicity. They all acknowledged the Slavic population of 1900s
in the region of Macedonia as Bulgarian. Obviously if a "macedonian" nation
existed then they would have a church of their own as the Bulgarians
and the Greeks and surely wouldnt identified themselves as Bulgarians. All the people like Gjorgi Karev who lost their life, obviously... werent because of religious reasons but on the contrary because they didnt betray their native country Bulgaria and I have already pinpointed to you the term "Macedonian" is regional/geographic term and not ethnical. Stop wasting out time here with your gibberish.

[Tchakalaroff]

Originally Posted by Ptolemy

There we go again. I have already proven to you without any doubt that your statements are fully erroneous. How many times do I need to prove something apparent? Despite well documented and attested facts, you prefer to repeat the balloney above. Its getting tiresome and i will repeat just One MORE LAST TIME...
Turks or anybody who had a census back then, never mentioned a
"Macedonian" ethnicity. They all acknowledged the Slavic population of 1900s
in the region of Macedonia as Bulgarian. Obviously if a "macedonian" nation
existed then they would have a church of their own as the Bulgarians
and the Greeks and surely wouldnt identified themselves as Bulgarians. All the people like Gjorgi Karev who lost their life, obviously... werent because of religious reasons but on the contrary because they didnt betray their native country Bulgaria and I have already pinpointed to you the term "Macedonian" is regional/geographic term and not ethnical. Stop wasting out time here with your gibberish.

I told you that in the census in 1903 noone was mentioned as a macedonian, but all of the macedonian slavic population were either greeks ether bulgarian...

But, after 1903 and especially after the Balkan Wars, there were emigrant clubs that propagated the idea of a aseparate macedonian poeople...

This idea was ignored by a lot of people..
but in 1945 in came true the makedonism was institutionalised...

And I explaned why we have the right to call ourselfs macedonians..

[Istor]

Tsakalaroff dear, do we Greeks of Macedonia have the right to call ourselves and be called by you and all Wolrd as Macedonians??

Why do those SlavoSkopians have the right to call themselves as Macedonians? What is Macedonian on them.

As it is well known, Macedonians had always Greek names, toponyms, ways, heroes, gods, dialect and spread Greek Language and Civilization to the World. Macedonians named after Greek names all the cities they built or renamed! Right ??

[akritas]

Tchakalaroff as I see you like to give cutted and enormous quotes regarding the Ilinden.Of course as usual avoid posts that not like you. The biggest work regarding the Macedonian struggle was and is the book from Douglas Dakin and not this from Penelope Delta. But I will stay in the writers that speak for Macedonian nation and as I see you are not mentioned them at all.
Karakasidou at the page 282 and note 49, quoted :

Suffice to say that there had been conscious, orginized efforts at least as early as the turn of the century to build a moovement for national autonomy, independence or liberation for Slavic speakers in Macedonia.

and continue

In fact many early 20th century contemporaries now praised in the FYROM as heroes and martyrs of the national campaign for indepedence were themselves unclear as to what an indepenent Macedonia would mean or entrail.

[Amarantos]

Originally Posted by Tchakalaroff

But,after 1903 and especially after the Balkan Wars, there were emigrant clubs that propagated the idea of a aseparate macedonian poeople...
This idea was ignored by a lot of people..
but in 1945 in came true the makedonism was institutionalised...

On 1912 after the first balkan war, "η Γενική Διοίκηση Μακεδονίας"=the "General Administration of Macedonia" was established by the Hellenic State in Thessaloniki.Noone objected on this,not to mention the fact that this was a rightful action of Greece.It's archives are part of the General State Archives of Greece.Now,when you speak of "the makedonism being institutionalized" in the frame of the yugoslav confederation on 1945,you are talking about a politically illegal action,that goes against the rules of the international law,from the moment that an other country officially already uses the particular terms regarding Macedonia.An action condemned from US State Department,too(Stettinius announcement).Of course the margins for Greece to react against the yugoslavian policy were limited from the fact that any decisive action against it,could intentionally be considered an intervention to internal affairs of an other country,like it happened in the mid 80's for example.

[Tsontos]

It should be pointed out that the IMARO uprisings of August 1903 were not just Krushevo/ Ilinden. The other uprising on the 19th of August was in the Adrianople Vilayet centered in Tsarevo, near the Black Sea coast. How many ethnic Macedonians were living on the Black sea coast

[Tsontos]

By the way I'd like to add about the "alliance" between the Greeks and the Turks at that stage.

as amarantos mentioned, the Greek were the first to develop revolutionary tendencies and to revolt in Macedonia; since as early as 1821. In 1897 Greece was defeated in a war with Turkey, a war which would move Greece within striking distance of Macedonia. By this time the Bulgarians had been awoken by the pan-slavist russians and had annexed eastern rumelia. At the treaty of san stefano the Russian diplomat had specified "not a span of earth to Greece". by this time it was clear the bulgarians were the enemy. the IMARO was a Bulgarian organisation, originally called the BMARO (Bulgarian committee). Greeks werent to be fooled that the organisation had concerns for the whole populations and multi-ethnic autonomy. Especially when the Bulgarian tsar had already ran to the sultan with Greek plans for an alliance against the turks. the imaro was created directly to counter Greek and Serb plans in Macedonia. When Grkomani had their eyes cut out because they refused to say they werent Greek its not hard to see it was everyone for themselves.


BTW Karavangelis is genuinley different to the Phanariot preists who discouraged any kind of rebellion, even pro-Greek rebellion from Constantinople. Karavangelis was a Greek revolutionary preist and a patriot who died for Greek Macedonia.

[Ptolemy]

Krushevo:
"In the house where the power resided, a BULGARIAN flag was put": A wire of the Serbian cunsul in Bitola to the Moinister of the Foreign
Affairs of Serbia, 13 August 1903.

(Quote after Ilindenski Sbornik, 1903 - 1953, Skopje 1953, p. 40.)

Tagepost 15 August 1903:
"The Bitola pashalik has been took over by general common
movement. Krushevo has saluted the BULGARIAN banner and
wants temporary to proclaim a republic".

Istambul, August 15, 1903:
SIR,
The political situation in Macedonia continues to grow worse each week.[...]
The real foundation for all the trouble is the desire of the BULGARIAN
population for freedom from Turkish rule, and were the powers to say to Bulgaria what they have already said to Turkey, "that under no conditions
would she be permitted to take one foot on additional soil", the trouble
would be speedily ended , but this they will not do, and consequently the
twentieth century crusade against the Turks is likely to go on, as no power,
not excepting Germany, is to brave public opinion openly taking sides with
the Turks against the Christians".

September 19, 1903:
"The Bulgarian government is in most delicate position.... and unless the
powers should intervene Bulgaria will be forced openly to embrace the
Macedonian cause. ... I am quite of the opinion that the people in Bulgaria
will revolt against the government unless something be done..." writes the
American ambassador at the Porte, Leishman

John G. Leishman, US Ambassador to the Sublime Porte (serving 1900 - 1908)
to John Hay, American Secretary of State.Source: U.S. Deaprtment of State.
Diplomatic Despatches. Despatches from U.S. Ministers to Turkey, 1818 -
1906. National Archives Publications, M46, Roll 72, July 5 - October 29,
1903.

[Tsontos]

Originally Posted by Tchakalaroff

First of all Ptolemy, I never said that they didn't call themselfs bulgarians in those days... but I did explain and elaborate why did they call themselfs like that... Because they were fanatic christians, and for them the church that they belonged to was their national identity...
Those that were under the Exarchate were bulgarians, and those slavs that were under the Patriarchy were greeks.. can't you guys understand that....

incorrect. From the 1914 Carnegie Commission:

Here are the statistics for the Bulgarian-exarchist schools for the same period: there were in Macedonia 1896-97, 843 such schools (against 77 Servian schools), 1,306 teachers (Servian, 118) ; 31,719 scholars (Servian, 2,873); children in the kindergarten, 14,713.

These figures show that at the close of the nineteenth century the overwhelming majority of the Slav population of Macedonia was sending its children to the exarchist Bulgarian school. The school became henceforth an auxiliary of the national movement, and independent of the church


Official Turkish statistics admitted only one principle of discrimination between the ethnic groups dwelling in Macedonia, namely religion. Thus all the Mahomrnedans formed a single group although there might be among them Turks, Albanians, Bulgarian "pomaks," etc.: all the patriarchists in the same way were grouped together as "Greeks," although there might be among them Servians, Wallachians, Bulgarians, etc. Only in the "exarchist" group, did religion coincide, more or less, with Bulgarian nationality.

http://knigite.abv.bg/en/carnegie/chapter1_1.html


Not to mention what Macedonian Slavs were calling themselves and being called before the establishment of the Exarchate