Saturday, January 23, 2010

The political ethno-myth of the Slav Macedonians

The political ethno-myth of the Slav Macedonians[1] can be divided in two opinions. Namely, the issues are two ethno-myths, which are produced and dictated by opposed opinions of certain political power centers in FYROM and her diasporas. The first view or the first ethno-myth is when the Slav Macedonians declare themselves as direct descendents of the Ancient Macedonians and 7.000 B.C Balkan peoples and the second one is when they connect their own genesis with the history of the amalgamation of the Slavs with the 6th cent A.D Balkan people. This kind of divergency, which appears in the Slav Macedonian ethnos, started to be illustrated at a larger extent after the independence of Macedonia that is in the period when the era of totalitarianism finished.

The first view promoted from the Gruevski regime and his ultra-nationalist political partie, nationalists parties, Institute of National History (INI, Institut za natsionalna istorija), World Macedonian Congress and the second from the Socialists political parties, Macedonian Academy of Sciences and Arts (MANU, Makedonska Akademija na Naukite i Umetnostite)

Both of them characterizing from theirs.....
extremist  Revisionist views and the denials of the main stream scientist views.


The history of the construction of a Slav Macedonian national identity does not begin with Alexander the Great in the fourth century B.C. or with Saints Cyril and Methodius in the ninth century a.d., as Slavmacedonian nationalist historians often claim. Nor does it begin with Tito and the establishment of the People's Republic of Macedonia in 1944 as some Greek or Bulgarian historians would have us believe. It begins in the nineteenth century with the first expressions of Slavmacedo­nian ethnic nationalism on the part of a small number of intellectuals in places like Thessaloniki, Belgrade, Sophia, and St. Petersburg. This period marks the beginning of the process of "imaging" a Slavmacedo­nian national community, the beginning of the construction of a Slavmacedo­nian national identity and culture. [2].

At that time the Bulgarian ethno-character of the Slavs of Macedonia went unchallenged. The Graeco-Turkish war of 1897 fomented anti-Turkish strife in Macedonia and subsequently the Bulgarian leadership of the V.M.R.O./ I.M.R.O. staged an abortive revolution at the modern geographical Macedonia in 1903. In the same year Miisinko, who described him­self as a Macedonian, postulated, in an article published in Sofia, the existence of a Macedonian nation.' Possibly, Bulgaria was behind the Macedonian independence movement, which could be used to counter Greek and Serbian pretensions. Unfortunately for, the Bulgarians, the Serbian Cvijic seized upon the idea of  the “Macedonians” and gave to what had originally been a political tag, an  ethnic signifi­cance. [3].


Besides the myths of ethnic origin and descent, FYROM historiography also embraces the myth of victimization. On the one hand, this myth serves to define the “others” against whom ethnic consolidation must be achieved. On the other hand, it seeks to instill into the present generation a feeling of indebtedness to its ancestors, as well as to nurture the virtue of being able to stand alone because, it is said, Slav Macedonians in the past were unable to count on the help of anyone or anything other than their own strength and unity. The division of the region of Macedonia after the Balkan Wars is regarded as a traumatic event in the history of the Macedonian people because it destroyed the “ethnic” and “geographical” unity of the country. The Slavic population is portrayed as the victim of harsh assimilation attempts in Serbia, Bulgaria, and Greece, vividly described by Slavmacedonian historians. [4]


The Slav Macedonian language is considered by most Slav Macedonians to be one of the most positive contributions to their separate status. The question of what language Slav Macedonians actually spoke prior to 1945 has caused disagreements among even the most disinterested linguists. The Slav Macedonian dialects made a gradual transition from Serbian north of Skopje to Bulgarian in Eastern Macedonia. Even those who claim that a separate Slav Macedonian language existed before 1945 admit that all these dialects have a very close affinity to Bulgarian.  The elements of distinction between the central Slav Macedonian group of dialects (i.e., the language spoken roughly within the region Prilep-Bitolj-Kicevo-Titov Veles) and western Bulgarian were noticeable but not significant. Bulgarian linguistic influence was strengthened by intense secular and religious propaganda in the past and by the fact that Bulgarian was the language used by the old Slav Macedonian nationalists. [5]


Their first aim was to cut off every link between the so-called "Macedonians" and the Bulgarians, as a well as the Serbs, and to convince the people that they belonged to a separate Slavic nation, the "Macedonian" one. Therefore the history of the region, as well as the language, had to be "purged" of all Bulgarian and Serbian elements. All Bulgarian and Serbian historical data connected to that region - historical events, people, activities and intellectual work - were renamed "Macedonian"18, so that they could be incorporated into the new "Macedonian" history which was then being written, or, if they did not fit into the new historical frame work and guidelines, they were denounced as hostile.

The second aim was to eliminate Greek character of Macedonia and Macedonian history; and this would be achieved by minimizing the Greek presence in this region and misinterpreting or falsifying their role, specifically the cultural and intellectual contribution of Hellenism, the orthodox Greek clergy and Greek schools.

The third aim was to search for, fabricate and project the historical development of the so-called "Macedonian people", so as to prove the separate national identity of the "Macedonians", as well as their cohesion and continuity from ancient times until today. It should be noted that this attempt was the reverse of normal methods: that is, they studied modern history first and turned to the study of Antiquity later.

The fourth aim was to create a Great Idea, which would bring awareness to the masses. So the historians of Skopje started declaring that Macedonia, as a whole, was a Slavic country both in its historical tradition and its ethnic composition. For this reason, it had to be united and form a unified state. After World War II, only the Yugoslavian part was re-established nationally within the framework of the Yugoslav Federation. The other two parts, Aegean Macedonia and Pirin Macedonia would have to be restored, i.e., to be united with Yugoslav Macedonia.[6]


This political ethno-myth of the Slav Macedonians called from many  obderver as Macedonism/pseudomacedonism/slavmacedonism.[7]Slavmacedonists and theirs supporters supporters have suggested many ways to revise the teaching of European history and science.[8] But if diversity does not apply to truth, then there are limits to academic freedom. That does not mean that we should try to keep people from knowing about erroneous theories or hypothetical possibilities, or from reading works like the Macedonians Slavs and the connection with the ancient Greek culture or the Slavic idiom that speak Greeks and Slavmavedonians is the same with the creation of the Slav Macedonian language that had as aim to de-Bulgarize the Slav Macedonians and create a separate national consciousness.[9]


[1]- A Macedonian according to several sources [], [], [Oxford English Dictionary] is a native or inhabitant of the (Ancient or Modern) Macedonian region. Any usage diffrent from this that give from the dictionaries has political and ambiguous motives.

[2]- Loring Danforth, The Macedonian Conflict: Ethnic Nationalism in a Transnational World, page 56

[3]- Henry Wilkinson, Maps And Politics: A Review Of The Ethnographic Cartography Of Macedonia ,  page 151

[4]- Ulf Brunnbauer Serving the Nation: Historiography in the Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) After Socialism,  Page 168

[5]- Yugoslav Communism and the Macedonian Question” by Stephen E. Palmer, Jr. robert r. king, 1971, page

[6]- Maria Nystazopoulou - Pelekidou , The "Macedonian Question",

[7]- Slav-Macedonism(also call as Macedonism and pseudo-Macedonism) is the political idea prevailing in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) which utilises historical revisionism to establish links between an ethnic group that formed in the 20th century - ethnic 'Macedonians' - and historical events and figures of the 19th century and Middle Ages. For example, Bulgarian Tsar Samuil, despite the overwhelming evidence, is portrayed as a "Macedonian" king. Further attempts are made to deny the Hellenic nature of the ancient kingdom of Macedon and to seek connections between present day ethnic Macedonians and the Ancient Macedonians. Unfortunately for extremist Macedonists , history bears witness to the fact that in the early 1940s the Bulgarian inhabitants of Vardar Macedonia were transformed into "Macedonians" for political reasons by communist dictators (Tito, Stalin, and Dimitrov) and infamous communist organizations (Comintern and the Balkan Communist Federation ).

[8]- The ROSETTA STONE and the Tendov-Boshevski Controversy by Miltiades, Phoebos and Hephastion Bolaris.[ ]

[9]- Mary Lefkowich, History Lesson, a race odyssey, Yale University Press, 2008


  1. It is natural for a new state, like the self-styled Macedonian Republic, to create an easily digestable identity on which to base a national consciousness. The dilemna that the ROM faces is that it decided to base its national consciousness on identities belonging to other nations. It was natural, too, for the other nations to resist the usurpation of their own patrinomy. This has led to ROM's stalemate with the name issue. As an aside, it is interesting to note how the cultures of the great Slavic peoples are essentially secondary cultures formed by older European groups like the Byzantine, the Teutonic and the Italian. The southernmost Slavic peoples, particularly the self-styled Macedonians, are a hodge-podge conglameration of the most confused and confusing tribal groupings. I agree with the above writer that they are an intriguing subject for study that could increase the self-knowledge of the Greeks.

    The direct descent of the Greeks to the ancient world, a concept that supported and affirmed the consciouness of the new state in the 19th century, has become inadequate because it has always omitted the intervening 2,500 years of development and connection. Present day Greece with it's unprecedented phenomenon of mass legal and illegal immigration that is changing Greek society, needs to expand and inhance its national identity by including the so called "Hellenistic" and "Byzantine" periods when the social entity was more multicultural in composition but no less Greek. Greece has outgrown the restrictions (and oppresions)of a simplistic and monolithic attachment to their distant ancestors. Living cultures, like languages, are dynamic, not static. This is a tremendous opportunity for Greece.

    Incidentally, my suggestion for the new republic is the composite name "Pseudomacedonia", "Pseftomakedonia", but I'm not sure they would accept it.

  2. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  3. Δεν έχει καμιά σχέση με το άρθρο για αυτό και στο σβήνω.

  4. I don't understand what do you actually define as nationalistic? How would you tag this article? Progressive and liberating? And most importantly what do you think you will accomplish? - That the so called "Slavic Macedonians" will read this article and realize we were wrong from the start so lets just change our identity! Just like that! Do you really think you are Greek just because you were born in Greece or your last 3 ancestors were Greek? Maybe you are a Macedonian or Bulgarian or Turkish or Albanian... Why are you sure that you are Greek and so willingly fighting for ONE philosophy, in the same time, promoting aggression and intolerance? Of course it is easier to sleep at night when you are right and everybody is wrong.
    Why you think that what you are imaging is REAL and we are the product of a propaganda? Have you ever thought that you might be the product of a well defined propaganda?
    What you are writing is not just UNTRUE it is also promoting intolerance and hate speech, in a very subtle and sophisticated way but never the less.
    And my final question: I don't like the current politics in Macedonia, and like to think that negotiation and compromise is a best way to solve this issue. But would you blame me or any other, in any country, at any time, if I vote AGAINST compromise IF I am confronted by repression of my basic human rights? Wouldn't you do the same thing if your rights are threatened?

  5. webpro where I promoting aggression and intolerance and have hate speech in my article?
    All my sources are well known scientists and couple of them are favour in your side.
    So before you attack me answer step by step my arguments and my thesis with severe data and without arbitaries talks.


Commentators have the exclusive responsibility of their writings, the material that they mention, as well as and the opinions that they express.