A reader comment Pr. Tompkins article.

A reader with the username iconoclast made some intresting comments as regards Professor Tompkins article that had as subject the letter that sent from 200 world scholar to US President Obama and respectfully requested to intervene to clean up some of the historical debris about Macedonian History left in southeast Europe by the Bush administration.

My thesis is clear. The meaning of this letter has political dimesion since the receiver is a political person, but also and an academic one since this letter undersigned from top universities professors and writers like Ian Worthington, Malcolm Errington and Paul Cartledge - that involve with ancient Greek history- and the most of the content has historical material.

Political dimesion originated from the ill-conceived decision by Bush administration to recognize FYROM as the Republic of “Macedonia,” clearly became the catalyst of a more aggressive stance by FYROM that can presently be perceived as hostile towards Greece, a NATO ally of the US for many years. Obama administration should reverse Bush decision, recognize them again as FYROM, and actually block their NATO integration until a new name is found. In addition the US should condemn in the strongest terms their irredentist and aggressive behavior, as mentioned in the letter. It is imperative that a negotiated mutually acceptable solution also includes change of the FYROM constitutional name to the new agreed name, i.e. change in their passports and use of that name erga omnes.

The academic dimension is clear because the names that undersigned this letter are so huge and any comment by me will be a tom-fool thing to do.

Enjoy the comment

Daniel,

you assert:

"This is a very unfortunate letter, inaccurate in important ways and staking out a position to the right of the Greek government's."

I suggest,if you wish to assert that this letter is inaccurate in some way, give those that are concerned with the falsification of history their due respect, and specify precisely what these supposed inaccuracies, which you have identified, are.

Linking to the fallacious retort put forward by Tompkins does not cut it.

Tompkins specious and nugatory retort does not even address one, not even one, single point raised by this letter with any intellectual rigor that would be worthy of a supposed scholar of the Greco-Roman Classical period.

Rather, he attempts to use all manner of rhetorical devices, as an attempt to derail this worthy action that has been taken by the community of classical scholars, who, in fact, play a very important and defining role in this unfortunate dispute between Greece and it's northern neighbour.

Moreover, Tompkins arguments contain all manner of fallacies, it is hard to know where to begin. I shall have more to say about this, although it is suffice to say, for now, that his arguments exhibit the fallacy of relevance, of weak induction, of presumption, and of ambiguity.

One can only conclude, inter alia, that Tompkins has only discredited himself with his attempt to deride this letter, when he has clearly stepped out side his area of expertise.

The below posting was posted with reference to Professor Miller's letter on the following site http://archaeoastronomy.wordpress.com/2009/05/29/macedonia-from-bad-to-worse/comment-page-1/.

I believe it would be worthwhile being posted here as well.

Alun, you make some valid points. Although, I must correct you on parts of your analysis, before I begin in earnest.

You say:

"As far as I know, no-one is suggesting that the southern part of Italy should be in the modern state of Greece. No-one contests that the region was Greek."

As far as I know, no one is suggesting that the FYROM, or any of its constituent parts, should be in the modern state of Greece either! You, infact, have it the wrong way around. Greece has no modern territorial claim over the FYROM. Rather, the irrdentist activity by the Government of the FYROM, and its denizens, have openly displayed their territorial claims over Greek sovereign territory, and these territorial claims are, but one, of a number of concerns, to us Greeks.

You say:

"It’s simply that the ancient history isn’t relevant to modern territorial claims. Why is it therefore important in Macedonia?"

Alun, relevance is a two place predicate. That is, relevance is relvant to something. Relevance is a symmetrical and reciprocal relationship. If A is relevant to B, then B is relevant to A.

Your statement of relevance must, therefore, also equally apply to the case of the Slavs, of the FYROM. It is the Slavs that are the protagonist who are attempting to use ancient history to establish modern day territorial claims, not the Greeks!

Let me by way of analogy, posit the following as an attempt to, possibly, lift the fog of uncertainty that has mired this polemic controversy, and bring some clarity to this discussion. My reasoned analogy is founded on the meme.

A meme can be defined as cultural characteristics or artifacts that are passed down throughout generations. Moreover, a meme can be defined as any characteristic of a culture, be it, for example, memories, language, ideas, toponyms, inscriptions, peoples names, norms, customs, sensibilities, religion, festivals, dance, rituals, codes of behaviour, history, myths and story telling, and social gestures. These characteristics can be considered as mimetic markers of a society/civilization. These markers can be transmitted from one generation to the next in a way, analogous to the transmission of genetic information. A corpus of mimetic markers together form a mimetic strand, or thread, which, as a single unit, identifies a society/civilization.

A mimetic strand, carries with it, both the social structure and culture of a society/civilization. The social structure can be thought to be comprised of relationships among groups, institutions, and individuals within a given society/civilization. Whilst, the culture, composed of memories, language, ideas, toponyms, inscriptions, peoples names, norms, et cetera, provides a sense of meaning to individuals within a given society/civilization.

By way of example, in many societies the family unit is a core institutional building block of social structure. Whilst, for example, marital monogamy or polygamy, expectations of a certain number of children, manner of child upbringing, and willingness to live with in-laws are highly variable in different societies. These latter characteristics can be said to be of a cultural nature. Social structure can be thought of as a skeleton, with culture being the muscle on the bones. The two are inextricably connected, mutually dependent and reinforcing. A change in one results in a change in the other. The mimetic strand represents this unity, which is simply referred to as society/civilization.

I shall refer to the term mimetic strand, or thread, from this point on, simply as a strand, and equally, the term marker to mean mimetic marker.
Let us first take the case of Sicily, in Italy.

The contemporary Sicilian strand is one that is composed of many markers, spanning, chronologically, back through to the Sicilian primordial past. The contemporary Sicilian strand contains a marker of the classical epoch, to which you have alluded to, and this same marker, is also found in the contemporary Greek strand. However, the contemporary Sicilian strand also contains a large number of markers that are not shared with the contemporary Greek strand. The Sicilian strand has, of course, evolved over time, and continues to do so, in a manner that has never, in any way, impinged on the soma, or being, of the contemporary Greek society, such that it be considered a threat to the Greek strand. The Sicilian strand does not exhibit a desire to over-emphasize one marker in their strand, whilst de-emphasizing, ignoring, or synthesizing their remaining markers. The Sicilian strand exhibits a mature and stable state. Thus, both strands can, and do, coexist side-by-side in harmony. The Greeks would not even batter an eye-lid towards the Sicilians, if the Sicilians were to show a desire to erect an eight storey statue of Pythagoras in Siracusa, since the Sicilians acknowledge that historically, Pythagoras was part of the Greek cultural sphere and history, as you also readily acknowledge, and in *equal* measure, Pythagoras is also a part of Sicilian history.

Let us take the case of Greece.

The contemporary Greek strand, like all strands, is by definition, centered on mimetic markers, which in essence, defines, in the Greek case, Hellenicos Politismos (Greek Civilization). To the Greeks, the strand composed of the markers identifying the strand as Greek are taken to be far, far, more important than their analogous biological equivalent. This mimetic strand is what is cherished by the Greeks. That is, the social structure and culture, known simply to the Greeks as, Hellinicos Politismos, is what defines someone to be Greek, rather than their genetic make up, and consequently, gives them their right to lay claim to Greek culture, which consists of their memories, language, ideas, toponyms, inscriptions, peoples names, norms, customs, sensibilities, religion, festivals, dance, rituals, codes of behaviour, history, myths and story telling, and social gestures, et cetera.

Let us take the case of the FYROM.

The Slavic strand of Greece's immediate northern neigbour, the FYROM, on the other hand, has unfortunately attempted to impinge itself on the soma of Greek society, in a manner that is considered threatening to the Greek strand. This threat, is not something new, it is something that has been been present throughout Greece's recent bloodied history, although, this Slavic strand has metamorphosed itself overtime.

The Greeks see this Slavic strand, of the FYROM, as one that has *not* evolved naturally over the course of time, in a manner born out by the Sicilian case, but rather, it has mutated itself through a process of artificial synthesis. One can attest to this synthesis by observing all manner of propaganda, Government sponsored or otherwise, against the Greek strand over a extended period of time. The Greeks look at that this Slavic strand, of the FYROM, and see it as a recent artificial mutation, synthesized via the Bulgarian strand. Moreover, this mutant strand is attempting to enter the Greek soma, and use certain specific markers of the Greek strand, whilst, in equal time, discard other mimetic material that is also part of the Greek strand, resulting in a mutant strand that represents the society of modern day FYROM.

This attempted mimetic engineering, to create this mutant strand, using Greek mimetic material, in a selective manner, without the consent of the Greeks, is seen by the Greeks as immoral and in no way acceptable, period!

The attempted mimetic engineering, has focused on specific markers, in this case, markers that are of the Classical Macedonian epoch, and this is why the Greeks show their concern and specific focus on those mimetic markers of the Greek strand. Although, if they attempted to target and mimetically engineer other mimetic markers of the Greek strand, the Greeks would have equally been in uproar, and they would have focused on those particular markers.

The FYROM, if they so desire, to be irrational, can call themselves Macedonian, but it will have a hollow ring to it.

The legitimate Macedonians, who can attest to this assertion, through their mimetic strand, and consequently, their mimetic markers can only be Hellenes (Greeks) and never Slavs. The Slavs of the FYROM, can never assert this, for their strand does not have the necessary, or sufficient, mimetic markers to allow them to do so.

The Greeks look at the mimetic variation between the Slavic strand, of the FYROM, and the Greek strand and see a discernable difference. Equally, the Slavs, of the FYROM, also look at the mimetic variation between the Slavic strand, which is attempting to mutate, and the Greek strand and see a discernable difference. Whilst, by means of comparison, the mimetic variation between the Greek-Cypriot strand, and the Greek strand, is seen by both the Greek-Cypriots and the Greeks, to not be discernably different.

The Slavic strand, of the FYROM, is analogous to a Frankenstein creation, it may exist, but like Frankenstein was not human, they equally are not Macedonian; they are not the real thing!

The Slavs, of the FYROM, continually ramble on about their right to self declare themselves as Macadonians, but equally, the Greeks have the right to self declare themselves as the Real Macedonians!

Interested parties must recognize, that the Slavs, of the FYROM, use various tools of propaganda, although, one particular tool is one that attempts to impose "concision" as a means of silencing debate. They attempt to assert their "right" to all that is Macedonian, in an a priori manner, without debate.

Well, sorry, they do not have the right to appropriate all that is Macedonian by using fallacious arguments that skip the vital step of the *burden of proof*, and simply ask everyone to jump to their a priori conclusion.

These specious arguments that they shove down peoples throats must be vehemently rejected.

This is their dilemma, and this is the reason why they are attempting to manufacture a mimetic strand that contains markers that are, to all intense and purposes, and knowingly, synthetic and foreign to them. However, their conceited Government, blindingly continues with this unnatural social experiment, to create a Frankenstein monster, as this is the only way that they can attempt to lay claim on the mimetic markers of the Classical Macedonian epoch, and as such, lay claim to characteristics, such as the name, Macedonia, and to justify their territorial claims to the Macedonian province of Northern Greece.

Alun, this is what irks us Greeks and in a similar way, what also irks the Bulgarians. (note: The FYROM has impinged on the Bulgarian strand, as it has done on the Greek strand).

Greece and Bulgaria are attempting to protect their mimetic material against a mutated and metastasized strand, which is the FYROM strand.

This reaction to protect ones mimetic strand is not, in fact, isolated to Greek society. Similar dynamics were readily seen in contemporary US society. By way of example, I put forward the case of the Absolut Vodka launched an advertisment in Mexico, showing a map of Mexico from the 1830's; the map can be seen here http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/laplaza/2008/04/mexico-reconque.html, and here http://www.absolut.com/iaaw/blog/we-apologize?page=329. There was such an uproar in the US, because of this map that the company was forced to withdraw the commercial and apologize to the US. Now just imagine it being the sovereign Government of Mexico, and not an alcoholic beverage company making such claims towards the US. How would have the US reacted?

The Tompkins rebuttal ignores a similar social dynamic within his own society, whilst he attempts to deride Greece's sovereign right to protect herself. This guy is not to be trusted, he is an amateur.

To end this post, Tompkins chastises Greece's sovereign right to close their borders towards the FYROM during the 1990's (cf. the US embargo imposed on Cuba, since 1961, and it is still in place), and talks about its economic impact on them, whilst in equal time, he simply ignores the FYROM's recent ridicules spendthrift eight storey statue of Alexander the Great in Skopje, amongst many other delusional activities.

Further, Tompkins, in his opening address of his rebuttal letter, found here http://astro.temple.edu/~pericles/Letter.htm, puts forward the UN as an authority, in a poor attempt to legitimize his argument. However, this rhetoric, is simply absurd, since the UN is an organ created and established through a hegemonic power, that is, the US, being the victor of WWII. This political organ is neither democratic, nor is it scientific. This authority of the UN, can neither lend credibility to the FYROM's claims, nor can it say anything about this matter that is of any scientific importance, and as the Philosopher Spinoza says, numbers by themselves can not produce wisdom.

So, Tompkins argument is, simply, a fallacy of both relevance and of weak induction, specifically it is, in this case, an appeal to force and to an unqualified higher authority, respectively. So once again, Tompkins demonstrates that he can not think! An automaton could do better.

The word Macedonian as used by the Slavs, of the FYROM, does not have a sense, that is, it has no convention or meaning, and is thus, cognitively empty and can not refer, and therefore, can be ignored. [1]

I'm done, for now.

Reference:

[1] Valid deductive argument form:
A word that does not have a sense, that is, it has no convention or meaning, and is thus, cognitively empty and can not refer, and therefore, can be ignored.

P.S.

Telemachus, now is the time to be angry.

— Odysseus, when the time came to deal with the Suitors.

and

The man who gets angry at the right things and with the right people, and in the right way and at the right time and for the right length of time, is commended.

— Aristotle

The Greeks are fully in their right to be angry at the misinformation and propaganda that has been perpetrated on them by the Slavic denizens of the FYROM.

Писмо на меѓународна група од 200 академици до Барак Обама против Псевдомакедонизмот на БЈРМ

Translated by Vasko Gligorijević.

Преведено од Васко Глигоријевиќ.

http://macedonia-evidence.org/obama-letter-fyrom.html

ancient-scholars@macedonia-evidence.org

18 Maj 2009
Уважен Барак Обама,
Претседател, Соединети Американски Држави
Бела Куќа
1600 Авенија Пенсилванија NW
Вашингтон, ОК 20500

Ние, долупотпишаните професори на грчко-римската древност, учтиво побаруваме да интервенирате да се исчисти дел од историјскиот смет оставен во југоисточна Европа од претходната администрација на САД.

На Ноември 4ти 2004, два дена пред повторниот избор на Претседателот Џорџ В. Буш, неговата администрација унилатерално ја призна “Република Македонија“. Оваа акција не само што ги видоизмени географските и историјските факти, туку ослободи опасна епидемија на историјски ревизионизам, од кој најочебијните симптоми се присвојувањето од владата во Скопје на најпознатиот Македонец, Александар Велики.

Ние веруваме дека оваа глупост отиде предалеку и дека САД немаат работа да подржуваат субверзија на историјата. Ајде да ги прегледаме фактите. (Документацијата за овие факти [тука во дебели букви] може да се најде прикрепена и на: http://macedonia-evidence.org/documentation-fyrom.html).

Земјата за која станува збор, со Скопје како современ главен град, беше наречена Пајонија во древноста. Пл. Барнос и Орбелос (кои ги оформуваат денес северните меѓи на Грција) обезбедуваат природна бариера која ги одделувала и ги одделува Македонија од нејзиниот северен сосед. Единствена вистинска врска е преку реката Аксиос, Вардар и дури оваа долина не оформува линија на комуникација бидејќи е поделена со клисури.

Иако е точно дека Пајонците биле потчинети од Филип Втори, таткото на Александар, во 358 г. п.н.е., тие не беа Македонци и не живееа во Македонија. Исто така, на пример, Египтјаните, кои беа потчинети од Александар, беа владеени од Македонците, вклучително и од фамозната Клеопатра, но тие никогаш не беа самите Македонци, и Египет никогаш не бил нарекуван Македонија.

Попрво, Македонија и македонските Грци беа сместени за барем 2.500 години токму таму каде е современата грчка провинција Македонија. Точно истата релација е вистинска за Атика и атинските Грци, Аргос и аргоските Грци, Коринт и коринтските Грци, итн.

Ние не разбираме како современите жители на Пајонија, кои зборуваат словенски – јазик воведен на Балканот околу милениум по смртта на Александар – можат да го присвојуваат како нивен национален херој. Александар Велики бил целосно и неоспорно Грк. Неговиот пра-пра-прадедо, Александар Први, се натпреварувал на Олимписките игри каде учеството беше ограничено на Грци.

Дури пред Александар Први, Македонците го лоцираа своето потекло во Аргос, и многу од нивните кралеви ја користеа главата на Херакле – суштествениот грчки херој – на нивните монети.

Еврипид – кој умрел и бил погребан во Македонија – ја напиша својата пиеса Архелај во чест на прастрикото на Александар, и на грчки. Додека бил во Македонија, Еврипид исто ја напиша Бахаи, повторно на грчки. По презумпција, македонската публика можеше да разбере што напишал и тоа што го слушале.

Татко му на Александар, Филип, добил неколку коњанички победи во Олимпија и Делфи, двете најхеленски од сите светилишта во древна Грција каде на Негрците не им беше дозволено да се натпреваруваат. Уште позначајно, Филип беше назначен да ги раководи Питијските игри на Делфи во 346. г.п.н.е. Со други зборови, татко му на Александар Велики и неговите предци беа целосно Грци. Грчкиот беше јазик ползуван од Демостен и неговата делагација од Атина кога му упатија посети на Филип, исто така во 346 г.п.н.е. Уште еден северен Грк, Аристотел, отиде да студира за скоро 20 години во академијата на Платон. Аристотел последователно се вратил во Македонија и станал тутор на Александар Трети. Тие ползувале грчки во нивната училница која се уште може да се види близу Науса во Македонија.

Александар го носел со себе низ своите освојувања Аристотеловото издание на Хомеровата “Илијада“. Александар исто така ги ширел грчкиот јазик и култура низ неговата империја, основајќи градови и востанувајќи центри за учење. Оттаму натписи кои се однeсуваат на такви типични грчки институции како што е гимназиумот се наоѓаат дури во Афганистан. Сите тие се напишани на грчки.

Се поставува прашањето: зошто грчкиот беше lingua franca преку целата Александрова империја ако тој бил “Македонец“? Зошто беше Новиот Завет, на пример, напишан на грчки?

Одговорите се јасни: Александар Велики беше Грк, а не Словен, и Словените и нивниот јазик не беа никаде блиску до Александар или неговата татковина се до 1.000 години подоцна. Ова не носи назад до географската област позната во древноста како Пајонија. Зошто луѓето кои живеат таму се нарекуваат себеси Македонци и нивната земја Македонија? Зошто тие зграпчуваат целосно грчка фигура и прават од него нивен национален херој?

Древните Пајонци можеби биле или можеби не биле Грци, но тие секако станаа грковидни, и тие никогаш не биле Словени. Тие исто така не биле Македонци. Античка Пајонија била дел од Македонската Империја. Исто тоа беа Јонија и Сирија и Палестина и Египет и Месопотамија и Вавилон и многу други. Така, тие можеби станаа “македонски“ привремено но ниту една од нив не беше “Македонија“. Кражбата на Филип и Александар од земја која никогаш не била Македонија не може да биде оправдано.

Традициите на древна Пајонија можат да бидат усвоени од сегашните жители на тоа географско подрачје со значително оправдување. Но издолжувањето на географскиот термин “Македонија“ да ја покрие јужна Југославија не е можно. Дури во доцниот 19. век, оваа злоупотреба имплицирала нездрави територијални аспирации.

Истата мотивација се гледа во школски мапи кои ја покажуваат псевдо-голема Македонија, протегнувајќи се од Скопје до пл. Олимп и со ознаки на словенски. Истата мапа и нејзините тврдења се на календари, налепници, банкноти итн., кои циркулираат во новата држава постојано од кога таа ја прогласи својата независност од Југославија во 1991. Зошто сиромашна земја без излез на море прави таков историјски нонсенс? Зошто безобразно го исмејува и провоцира својот сосед?

Како год некој да сака да го карактеризира таквото однесување, тоа јасно не е сила за историјска точност ниту за стабилност на Балканот. Тажно е што Соединетите Американски Држави го помогнаа и охрабрија таквото однесување. Ве повикуваме вас, г-не Претседател, да помогнете – на било кој начин кој го сметате за соодветен – на владата во Скопје да разбере дека не може да изгради национален идентитет на трошок на историјската вистина. Нашето заедничко меѓународно општество не може да преживее кога историја е игнорирана, уште помалку кога историјата е фабрикувана.

Искрено,


Harry C. Avery, Professor of Classics, University of Pittsburgh (USA)
Dr. Dirk Backendorf. Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur Mainz (Germany)
Elizabeth C. Banks, Associate Professor of Classics (ret.), University of Kansas (USA)
Luigi Beschi, professore emerito di Archeologia Classica, Università di Firenze (Italy)
Josine H. Blok, professor of Ancient History and Classical Civilization, Utrecht University (The Netherlands)
Alan Boegehold, Emeritus Professor of Classics, Brown University (USA)
Efrosyni Boutsikas, Lecturer of Classical Archaeology, University of Kent (UK)
Keith Bradley, Eli J. and Helen Shaheen Professor of Classics, Concurrent Professor of History, University of Notre Dame (USA)
Stanley M. Burstein, Professor Emeritus, California State University, Los Angeles (USA)
Francis Cairns, Professor of Classical Languages, The Florida State University (USA)
John McK. Camp II, Agora Excavations and Professor of Archaeology, ASCSA, Athens (Greece)
Paul Cartledge, A.G. Leventis Professor of Greek Culture, University of Cambridge (UK)
Paavo Castrén, Professor of Classical Philology Emeritus, University of Helsinki (Finland)
William Cavanagh, Professor of Aegean Prehistory, University of Nottingham (UK)
Angelos Chaniotis, Professor, Senior Research Fellow, All Souls College, Oxford (UK)
Paul Christesen, Professor of Ancient Greek History, Dartmouth College (USA)
Ada Cohen, Associate Professor of Art History, Dartmouth College (USA)
Randall M. Colaizzi, Lecturer in Classical Studies, University of Massachusetts-Boston (USA)
Kathleen M. Coleman, Professor of Latin, Harvard University (USA)
Michael B. Cosmopoulos, Ph.D., Professor and Endowed Chair in Greek Archaeology, University of Missouri-St. Louis (USA)
Kevin F. Daly, Assistant Professor of Classics, Bucknell University (USA)
Wolfgang Decker, Professor emeritus of sport history, Deutsche Sporthochschule, Köln (Germany)
Luc Deitz, Ausserplanmässiger Professor of Mediaeval and Renaissance Latin, University of Trier (Germany), and Curator of manuscripts and rare books, National Library of Luxembourg (Luxembourg)
Michael Dewar, Professor of Classics, University of Toronto (Canada)
John D. Dillery, Associate Professor of Classics, University of Virginia (USA)
Sheila Dillon, Associate Professor, Depts. of Art, Art History & Visual Studies and Classical Studies, Duke University (USA)
Douglas Domingo-Forasté, Professor of Classics, California State University, Long Beach (USA)
Pierre Ducrey, professeur honoraire, Université de Lausanne (Switzerland)
Roger Dunkle, Professor of Classics Emeritus, Brooklyn College, City University of New York (USA)
Michael M. Eisman, Associate Professor Ancient History and Classical Archaeology, Department of History, Temple University (USA)
Mostafa El-Abbadi, Professor Emeritus, University of Alexandria (Egypt)
R. Malcolm Errington, Professor für Alte Geschichte (Emeritus) Philipps-Universität, Marburg (Germany)
Panagiotis Faklaris, Assistant Professor of Classical Archaeology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (Greece)
Denis Feeney, Giger Professor of Latin, Princeton University (USA)
Elizabeth A. Fisher, Professor of Classics and Art History, Randolph-Macon College (USA)
Nick Fisher, Professor of Ancient History, Cardiff University (UK)
R. Leon Fitts, Asbury J Clarke Professor of Classical Studies, Emeritus, FSA, Scot., Dickinson Colllege (USA)
John M. Fossey FRSC, FSA, Emeritus Professor of Art History (and Archaeology), McGill Univertsity, Montreal, and Curator of Archaeology, Montreal Museum of Fine Arts (Canada)
Robin Lane Fox, University Reader in Ancient History, New College, Oxford (UK)
Rainer Friedrich, Professor of Classics Emeritus, Dalhousie University, Halifax, N.S. (Canada)
Heide Froning, Professor of Classical Archaeology, University of Marburg (Germany)
Peter Funke, Professor of Ancient History, University of Muenster (Germany)
Traianos Gagos, Professor of Greek and Papyrology, University of Michigan (USA)
Robert Garland, Roy D. and Margaret B. Wooster Professor of the Classics, Colgate University, Hamilton NY (USA)
Douglas E. Gerber, Professor Emeritus of Classical Studies, University of Western Ontario (Canada)
Hans R. Goette, Professor of Classical Archaeology, University of Giessen (Germany); German Archaeological Institute, Berlin (Germany)
Sander M. Goldberg, Professor of Classics, UCLA (USA)
Erich S. Gruen, Gladys Rehard Wood Professor of History and Classics, Emeritus, University of California, Berkeley (USA)
Christian Habicht, Professor of Ancient History, Emeritus, Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton (USA)
Donald C. Haggis, Nicholas A. Cassas Term Professor of Greek Studies, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (USA)
Judith P. Hallett, Professor of Classics, University of Maryland, College Park, MD (USA)
Prof. Paul B. Harvey, Jr. Head, Department of Classics and Ancient Mediterranean Studies, The Pennsylvania State University (USA)
Eleni Hasaki, Associate Professor of Classical Archaeology, University of Arizona (USA)
Miltiades B. Hatzopoulos, Director, Research Centre for Greek and Roman Antiquity, National Research Foundation, Athens (Greece)
Wolf-Dieter Heilmeyer, Prof. Dr., Freie Universität Berlin und Antikensammlung der Staatlichen Museen zu Berlin (Germany)
Steven W. Hirsch, Associate Professor of Classics and History, Tufts University (USA)
Karl-J. Hölkeskamp, Professor of Ancient History, University of Cologne (Germany)
Frank L. Holt, Professor of Ancient History, University of Houston (USA)
Dan Hooley, Professor of Classics, University of Missouri (USA)
Meredith C. Hoppin, Gagliardi Professor of Classical Languages, Williams College, Williamstown, MA (USA)
Caroline M. Houser, Professor of Art History Emerita, Smith College (USA) and Affiliated Professor, University of Washington (USA)
Georgia Kafka, Visiting Professor of Modern Greek Language, Literature and History, University of New Brunswick (Canada)
Anthony Kaldellis, Professor of Greek and Latin, The Ohio State University (USA)
Andromache Karanika, Assistant Professor of Classics, University of California, Irvine (USA)
Robert A. Kaster, Professor of Classics and Kennedy Foundation Professor of Latin, Princeton University (USA)
Vassiliki Kekela, Adjunct Professor of Greek Studies, Classics Department, Hunter College, City University of New York (USA)
Dietmar Kienast, Professor Emeritus of Ancient History, University of Duesseldorf (Germany)
Karl Kilinski II, University Distinguished Teaching Professor, Southern Methodist University (USA)
Dr. Florian Knauss, associate director, Staatliche Antikensammlungen und Glyptothek Muenchen (Germany)
Denis Knoepfler, Professor of Greek Epigraphy and History, Collège de France (Paris)
Ortwin Knorr, Associate Professor of Classics, Willamette University (USA)
Robert B. Koehl, Professor of Archaeology, Department of Classical and Oriental Studies Hunter College, City University of New York (USA)
Georgia Kokkorou-Alevras, Professor of Classical Archaeology, University of Athens (Greece)
Ann Olga Koloski-Ostrow, Associate Professor and Chair, Department of Classical Studies, Brandeis University (USA)
Eric J. Kondratieff, Assistant Professor of Classics and Ancient History, Department of Greek & Roman Classics, Temple University
Haritini Kotsidu, Apl. Prof. Dr. für Klassische Archäologie, Goethe-Universität, Frankfurt/M. (Germany)
Lambrini Koutoussaki, Dr., Lecturer of Classical Archaeology, University of Zürich (Switzerland)
David Kovacs, Hugh H. Obear Professor of Classics, University of Virginia (USA)
Peter Krentz, W. R. Grey Professor of Classics and History, Davidson College (USA)
Friedrich Krinzinger, Professor of Classical Archaeology Emeritus, University of Vienna (Austria)
Michael Kumpf, Professor of Classics, Valparaiso University (USA)
Donald G. Kyle, Professor of History, University of Texas at Arlington (USA)
Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Helmut Kyrieleis, former president of the German Archaeological Institute, Berlin (Germany)
Gerald V. Lalonde, Benedict Professor of Classics, Grinnell College (USA)
Steven Lattimore, Professor Emeritus of Classics, University of California, Los Angeles (USA)
Francis M. Lazarus, President, University of Dallas (USA)
Mary R. Lefkowitz, Andrew W. Mellon Professor in the Humanities, Emerita, Wellesley College (USA)
Iphigeneia Leventi, Assistant Professor of Classical Archaeology, University of Thessaly (Greece)
Daniel B. Levine, Professor of Classical Studies, University of Arkansas (USA)
Christina Leypold, Dr. phil., Archaeological Institute, University of Zurich (Switzerland)
Vayos Liapis, Associate Professor of Greek, Centre d’Études Classiques & Département de Philosophie, Université de Montréal (Canada)
Hugh Lloyd-Jones, Professor of Greek Emeritus, University of Oxford (UK)
Yannis Lolos, Assistant Professor, History, Archaeology, and Anthropology, University of Thessaly (Greece)
Stanley Lombardo, Professor of Classics, University of Kansas, USA
Anthony Long, Professor of Classics and Irving G. Stone Professor of Literature, University of California, Berkeley (USA)
Julia Lougovaya, Assistant Professor, Department of Classics, Columbia University (USA)
A.D. Macro, Hobart Professor of Classical Languages emeritus, Trinity College (USA)
John Magee, Professor, Department of Classics, Director, Centre for Medieval Studies, University of Toronto (Canada)
Dr. Christofilis Maggidis, Associate Professor of Archaeology, Dickinson College (USA)
Jeannette Marchand, Assistant Professor of Classics, Wright State University, Dayton, Ohio (USA)
Richard P. Martin, Antony and Isabelle Raubitschek Professor in Classics, Stanford University
Maria Mavroudi, Professor of Byzantine History, University of California, Berkeley (USA)
Alexander Mazarakis Ainian, Professor of Classical Archaeology, University of Thessaly (Greece)
James R. McCredie, Sherman Fairchild Professor emeritus; Director, Excavations in Samothrace Institute of Fine Arts, New York University (USA)
James C. McKeown, Professor of Classics, University of Wisconsin-Madison (USA)
Robert A. Mechikoff, Professor and Life Member of the International Society of Olympic Historians, San Diego State University (USA)
Andreas Mehl, Professor of Ancient History, Universitaet Halle-Wittenberg (Germany)
Harald Mielsch, Professor of Classical Archeology, University of Bonn (Germany)
Stephen G. Miller, Professor of Classical Archaeology Emeritus, University of California, Berkeley (USA)
Phillip Mitsis, A.S. Onassis Professor of Classics and Philosophy, New York University (USA)
Peter Franz Mittag, Professor für Alte Geschichte, Universität zu Köln (Germany)
David Gordon Mitten, James Loeb Professor of Classical Art and Archaeology, Harvard University (USA)
Margaret S. Mook, Associate Professor of Classical Studies, Iowa State University (USA)
Anatole Mori, Associate Professor of Classical Studies, University of Missouri- Columbia (USA)
Jennifer Sheridan Moss, Associate Professor, Wayne State University (USA)
Ioannis Mylonopoulos, Assistant Professor of Greek Art History and Archaeology, Columbia University, New York (USA).
Richard Neudecker, PD of Classical Archaeology, Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Rom (Italy)
James M.L. Newhard, Associate Professor of Classics, College of Charleston (USA)
Carole E. Newlands, Professor of Classics, University of Wisconsin, Madison (USA)
John Maxwell O'Brien, Professor of History, Queens College, City University of New York (USA)
James J. O'Hara, Paddison Professor of Latin, The University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill (USA)
Martin Ostwald, Professor of Classics (ret.), Swarthmore College and Professor of Classical Studies (ret.), University of Pennsylvania (USA)
Olga Palagia, Professor of Classical Archaeology, University of Athens (Greece)
Vassiliki Panoussi, Associate Professor of Classical Studies, The College of William and Mary (USA)
Maria C. Pantelia, Professor of Classics, University of California, Irvine (USA)
Pantos A.Pantos, Adjunct Faculty, Department of History, Archaeology and Social Anthropology, University of Thessaly (Greece)
Anthony J. Papalas, Professor of Ancient History, East Carolina University (USA)
Nassos Papalexandrou, Associate Professor, The University of Texas at Austin (USA)
Polyvia Parara, Visiting Assistant Professor of Greek Language and Civilization, Department of Classics, Georgetown University (USA)
Richard W. Parker, Associate Professor of Classics, Brock University (Canada)
Robert Parker, Wykeham Professor of Ancient History, New College, Oxford (UK)
Anastasia-Erasmia Peponi, Associate Professor of Classics, Stanford University (USA)
Jacques Perreault, Professor of Greek archaeology, Université de Montréal, Québec (Canada)
Yanis Pikoulas, Associate Professor of Ancient Greek History, University of Thessaly (Greece)
John Pollini, Professor of Classical Art & Archaeology, University of Southern California (USA)
David Potter, Arthur F. Thurnau Professor of Greek and Latin. The University of Michigan (USA)
Robert L. Pounder, Professor Emeritus of Classics, Vassar College (USA)
Nikolaos Poulopoulos, Assistant Professor in History and Chair in Modern Greek Studies, McGill University (Canada)
William H. Race, George L. Paddison Professor of Classics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (USA)
John T. Ramsey, Professor of Classics, University of Illinois at Chicago (USA)
Karl Reber, Professor of Classical Archaeology, University of Lausanne (Switzerland)
Rush Rehm, Professor of Classics and Drama, Stanford University (USA)
Werner Riess, Associate Professor of Classics, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (USA)
Robert H. Rivkin, Ancient Studies Department, University of Maryland Baltimore County (USA)
Barbara Saylor Rodgers, Professor of Classics, The University of Vermont (USA)
Robert H. Rodgers. Lyman-Roberts Professor of Classical Languages and Literature, University of Vermont (USA)
Nathan Rosenstein, Professor of Ancient History, The Ohio State University (USA)
John C. Rouman, Professor Emeritus of Classics, University of New Hampshire, (USA)
Dr. James Roy, Reader in Greek History (retired), University of Nottingham (UK)
Steven H. Rutledge, Associate Professor of Classics, Department of Classics, University of Maryland, College Park (USA)
Christina A. Salowey, Associate Professor of Classics, Hollins University (USA)
Guy D. R. Sanders, Resident Director of Corinth Excavations, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens (Greece)
Theodore Scaltsas, Professor of Ancient Greek Philosophy, University of Edinburgh (UK)
Thomas F. Scanlon, Professor of Classics, University of California, Riverside (USA)
Bernhard Schmaltz, Prof. Dr. Archäologisches Institut der CAU, Kiel (Germany)
Rolf M. Schneider, Professor of Classical Archaeology, Ludwig-Maximilians- Universität München (Germany)
Peter Scholz, Professor of Ancient History and Culture, University of Stuttgart (Germany)
Christof Schuler, director, Commission for Ancient History and Epigraphy of the German Archaeological Institute, Munich (Germany)
Paul D. Scotton, Assoociate Professor Classical Archaeology and Classics, California State University Long Beach (USA)
Danuta Shanzer, Professor of Classics and Medieval Studies, The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and Fellow of the Medieval Academy of America (USA)
James P. Sickinger, Associate Professor of Classics, Florida State University (USA)
Marilyn B. Skinner 
Professor of Classics, 
University of Arizona (USA)
Niall W. Slater, Samuel Candler Dobbs Professor of Latin and Greek, Emory University (USA)
Peter M. Smith, Associate Professor of Classics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (USA)
Dr. Philip J. Smith, Research Associate in Classical Studies, McGill University (Canada)
Susan Kirkpatrick Smith Assistant Professor of Anthropology Kennesaw State University (USA)
Antony Snodgrass, Professor Emeritus of Classical Archaeology, University of Cambridge (UK)
Theodosia Stefanidou-Tiveriou, Professor of Classical Archaeology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (Greece).
Andrew Stewart, Nicholas C. Petris Professor of Greek Studies, University of California, Berkeley (USA)
Oliver Stoll, Univ.-Prof. Dr., Alte Geschichte/ Ancient History,Universität Passau (Germany)
Richard Stoneman, Honorary Fellow, University of Exeter (England)
Ronald Stroud, Klio Distinguished Professor of Classical Languages and Literature Emeritus, University of California, Berkeley (USA)
Sarah Culpepper Stroup, Associate Professor of Classics, University of Washington (USA)
Nancy Sultan, Professor and Director, Greek & Roman Studies, Illinois Wesleyan University (USA)
David W. Tandy, Professor of Classics, University of Tennessee (USA)
James Tatum, Aaron Lawrence Professor of Classics, Dartmouth College
Martha C. Taylor, Associate Professor of Classics, Loyola College in Maryland
Petros Themelis, Professor Emeritus of Classical Archaeology, Athens (Greece)
Eberhard Thomas, Priv.-Doz. Dr.,Archäologisches Institut der Universität zu Köln (Germany)
Michalis Tiverios, Professor of Classical Archaeology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (Greece)
Michael K. Toumazou, Professor of Classics, Davidson College (USA)
Stephen V. Tracy, Professor of Greek and Latin Emeritus, Ohio State University (USA)
Prof. Dr. Erich Trapp, Austrian Academy of Sciences/Vienna resp. University of Bonn (Germany)
Stephen M. Trzaskoma, Associate Professor of Classics, University of New Hampshire (USA)
Vasiliki Tsamakda, Professor of Christian Archaeology and Byzantine History of Art, University of Mainz (Germany)
Christopher Tuplin, Professor of Ancient History, University of Liverpool (UK)
Gretchen Umholtz, Lecturer, Classics and Art History, University of Massachusetts, Boston (USA)
Panos Valavanis, Professor of Classical Archaeology, University of Athens (Greece)
Athanassios Vergados, Visiting Assistant Professor of Classics, Franklin & Marshall College, Lancaster, PA
Christina Vester, Assistant Professor of Classics, University of Waterloo (Canada)
Emmanuel Voutiras, Professor of Classical Archaeology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (Greece)
Speros Vryonis, Jr., Alexander S. Onassis Professor (Emeritus) of Hellenic Civilization and Culture, New York University (USA)
Michael B. Walbank, Professor Emeritus of Greek, Latin & Ancient History, The University of Calgary (Canada)
Bonna D. Wescoat, Associate Professor, Art History and Ancient Mediterranean Studies, Emory University (USA)
E. Hector Williams, Professor of Classical Archaeology, University of British Columbia (Canada)
Roger J. A. Wilson, Professor of the Archaeology of the Roman Empire, and Director, Centre for the Study of Ancient Sicily, University of British Columbia, Vancouver (Canada)
Engelbert Winter, Professor for Ancient History, University of Münster (Germany)
Timothy F. Winters, Ph.D. Alumni Assn. Distinguished Professor of Classics, Austin Peay State University (USA)
Ian Worthington, Frederick A. Middlebush Professor of History, University of Missouri-Columbia (USA)
Michael Zahrnt, Professor für Alte Geschichte, Universität zu Köln (Germany)
Paul Zanker, Professor Emeritus of Classical Studies, University of Munich (Germany)


201 signatures as of May 18th 2009.
For the growing list of scholars, please go to the Addenda.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

cc:
J. Biden, Vice President, USA
H. Clinton, Secretary of State USA
P. Gordon, Asst. Secretary-designate, European and Eurasian Affairs
H.L Berman, Chair, House Committee on Foreign Affairs
I. Ros-Lehtinen, Ranking Member, House Committee on Foreign Affairs
J. Kerry, Chair, Senate Committee on Foreign Relations
R.G. Lugar, Ranking Member, Senate Committee on Foreign Relations
R. Mendenez, United States Senator from New Jersey.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Addenda

12 Scholars added on May 19th 2009:
Mariana Anagnostopoulos, Assistant Professor of Philosophy, California State University, Fresno (USA)
John P. Anton, Distinguished Professor of Greek Philosophy and Culture University of South Florida (USA)
Effie F. Athanassopoulos, Associate Professor 
Anthropology and Classics, University of Nebraska-Lincoln (USA)
Leonidas Bargeliotes, Emeritus Professor of Philosophy, University of Athens, President of the Olympic Center for Philosophy and Culture (Greece)
Joseph W. Day, Professor of Classics, Wabash College (USA)
Christos C. Evangeliou, Professor of Ancient Hellenic Philosophy, Towson University, Maryland, Honorary President of International Association for Greek Philosophy (USA)
Eleni Kalokairinou, Assistant Professor of Philosophy, Secretary of the Olympic Center of Philosophy and Culture (Cyprus)
Lilian Karali, Professor of Prehistoric and Environmental Archaeology, University of Athens (Greece)
Anna Marmodoro, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Oxford (UK)
Marion Meyer, Professor of Classical Archaeology, University of Vienna (Austria)
Jessica L. Nitschke, Assistant Professor of Classics, Georgetown University (USA)
David C.Young, Professor of Classics Emeritus, University of Florida (USA)

10 Scholars added on May 20th 2009:
Maria Ypsilanti, Assistant Professor of Ancient Greek Literature, University of Cyprus
Christos Panayides, Associate Professor of Philosophy, University of Nicosia (Cyprus)
Anagnostis P. Agelarakis, Professor of Anthropology, Adelphi University (USA)
Dr. Irma Wehgartner, Curator of the Martin von Wagner Museum der Universität Würzburg (Germany)
Dr. Ioannis Georganas, Researcher, Department of History and Archaeology, Foundation of the Hellenic World (Greece)
Maria Papaioannou, Assistant Professor in Classical Archaeology, University of New Brunswick (Canada)
Chryssa Maltezou, Professor emeritus, University of Athens, Director of the Hellenic Institute of Byzantine and Postbyzantine Studies in Venice (Italy)
Myrto Dragona-Monachou, Professor emerita of Philosophy, University of Athens (Greece)
David L. Berkey, Assistant Professor of History, California State University, Fresno (USA)
Stephan Heilen, Associate Professor of Classics, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (USA)

3 Scholars added on May 21st 2009:
Rosalia Hatzilambrou, Researcher, Academy of Athens (Greece)
Athanasios Sideris, Ph.D., Head of the History and Archaeology Department, Foundation of the Hellenic World, Athens (Greece)
Rev. Dr. Demetrios J Constantelos, Charles Cooper Townsend Professor of Ancient and Byzantine history, Emeritus; Distinguished Research Scholar in Residence at the Richard Stockton College of New Jersey (USA)

3 Scholars added on May 22nd 2009:
Ioannis M. Akamatis, Professor of Classical Archaeology, University of Thessaloniki (Greece)
Lefteris Platon, Assistant Professor of Archaeology, University of Athens (Greece)
Lucia Athanassaki, Associate Professor of Classical Philology, University of Crete (Greece)

5 Scholars added on May 23rd 2009:
Georgios Anagnostopoulos, Professor of Philosophy, University of California-San Diego (USA)
Ioannes G. Leontiades, Assistant Professor of Byzantine History, Aristotle University of Thessalonike (Greece)
Ewen Bowie, Emeritus Fellow, Corpus Christi College, Oxford (UK)
Mika Kajava, Professor of Greek Language and Literature; Head of the Department of Classical Studies, University of Helsinki (Finland)
Christian R. Raschle, Assistant Professor of Roman History, Centre d’Études Classiques & Département d'Histoire, Université de Montréal (Canada)

4 Scholars added on May 25th 2009:
Selene Psoma, Senior Lecturer of Ancient History, University of Athens (Greece)
G. M. Sifakis, Professor Emeritus of Classics, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki & New York University (Greece & USA)
Kostas Buraselis, Professor of Ancient History, University of Athens (Greece)
Michael Ferejohn, Associate Professor of Ancient Philosophy, Duke University (USA)

5 Scholars added on May 26th 2009:
Ioannis Xydopoulos, Assistant Professor in Ancient History, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (Greece)
Stella Drougou, Professor of Classical Archaeology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (Greece)
Heather L. Reid, Professor of Philosophy, Morningside College (USA)
Thomas A. Suits, Emeritus Professor of Classical Languages, University of Connecticut (USA)
Dr Thomas Johansen, Reader in Ancient Philosophy, University of Oxford (UK)

6 Scholars added on May 27th 2009:
Frösén Jaakko, Professor of Greek philology, University of Helsinki (Finland)
John F. Kenfield, Associate Professor, Department of Art History, Rutgers University (USA)
Dr. Aristotle Michopoulos, Professor & Chair, Greek Studies Dept., Hellenic College (Brookline, MA, USA)
Guy MacLean Rogers, Kemper Professor of Classics and History, Wellesley College (USA)
Stavros Frangoulidis, Associate Professor of Latin. Aristotelian University of Thessaloniki (Greece)
Yannis Tzifopoulos, Associate Professor of Ancient Greek and Epigraphy, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (Greece)

1 Scholar added on May 29th 2009:
Christos Simelidis, British Academy Postdoctoral Fellow, Lincoln College, University of Oxford (UK)

3 Scholars added on June 2nd 2009:
Dr. Peter Grossmann, Member emeritus, German Archaeological Institute, Cairo (Egypt)
Eleni Papaefthymiou, Curator of the Numismatic Collection of the Foundation of the Hellenic World (Greece)
Evangeline Markou, Adjunct Lecturer in Greek History, Open University of Cyprus (Cyprus)

2 Scholars added on June 3rd 2009:
Aliki Moustaka, Professor of Classical Archaeology, Aristotelian University of Thessaloniki (Greece)
François de Callataÿ, Professor of Monetary and Financial history of the Greek world, Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes (Paris/Sorbonne) and Professor of Financial history of the Greco-Roman world, Université libre de Bruxelles (France and Brussels)

TO: Mr. Daniel P. Tompkins
May 24, 2009
Director, Intellectual Heritage Program Associate Professor, Department of Greek, Hebrew and Roman Classics
Temple University
214 Anderson Hall Philadelphia, PA 15222-6090
Via: Email pericles@temple.edu


Dear Prof. D. P. Tompkins:

We were very appalled and astonished to read your “Letter to Colleagues:” recently. We appreciate anyone’s comments, as well as your eloquent rhetoric, regarding this matter as long as they are pragmatic, honest, and based on undisputable and Historical foundation.

Greece was very lenient in allowing the term “Macedonia” in the temporary name of FYROM, for their admission to the U.N. The temporary name should have been “The Former Yugoslav Province of Vardarska”, since until 1944, the end of WWII, this part of Yugoslavia was known as “Vardarska Banovina”. At that time, as History has recorded, the Dictator Marshal Tito together with Stalin of USSR baptized this part of southern Yugoslavia as “Socialist Republic of Macedonia”. At that time a guerilla war was begun with attacks from Albania, Yugoslavia and Bulgaria in order to annex the Macedonia of Greece (part of an old plan of greater Macedonia) and in order to gain access to the Aegean Sea. It is well known that their language is clearly Slavic, mainly Bulgarian. The United States recognized the threat against Greece and invoked the Truman Doctrine to prevent the attempted Communist takeover. To demonstrate their desire for peace, the FYROM must revert to the name they had prior to 1944 or at the least to select a neutral name.

The right of Greece to veto the membership of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) to NATO is trivialized as merely a name issue, casting aside and underestimating the rights of Greece through falsification of world renowned History and our identity theft. The important points of the issue are totally ignored in portraying Greece as being heavy handed and unreasonable.

One must consider that the Slavs did not appear in the region until 700 A.D. In other words, 1000 years after the period of Alexander The Great who, during Hellenistic times, spread the Greek civilization throughout the known world. In 1992, FYROM’s President Gligorov [who ever since has disappeared from public appearances after suffering an assassination attempt], during a news conference he stated;
“We are all Slavs and we have no relationship with Alexander The Great”.
Henry Kissinger also stated repeatedly in the past:
“Who ever knows History, knows the rights are with Greece. I happen to know History while many on the Hill do not.”

The Skopjians have no other choice but to study carefully the authentic World History, to stop vicious propaganda through internet media and any other way, to recognize and appreciate Greece’s tremendous support; especially financial as a major investor creating jobs for thousands of the Skopjians, even when this gesture results in Greek people losing their jobs.

The new problems created by a small Republic calling itself “Macedonia” are much different from those earlier posed by Bulgaria and Yugoslavia. This “Nationality” was created artificially and therefore it lacks legitimacy. For sure you can not simply create a Nationality or Ethnicity.

Many contemporary “anthropologically sophisticated work on ancient ethnicity” is the modern concept to extrapolate rumor to achieve imaginary conclusions. The testimony of those who were closest to the true historical facts are considered incorrect by contemporary classicists in an effort to gain notoriety by challenging documented Archaeological and Historical fact. These “modern” classicists you cite, have made their existence out of the most remotely possible ideas; creating a new mythology to replace the voracity of Historical and Archaeological evidence. The stones bear testimony to Historical fact, and stones do not lie!

In order for the International arena to comprehend the true story, how Josip Broze (aka Marshal Tito) created the Macedonian Nationality in 1944, he borrowed an idea which was circulated since 1924 within the bases of the Communist Party internationally, we are presenting two extremely interesting reports. The first comes from the London Times dated 7-3-1944, a few months before Tito’s decision to create the “Socialist Republic of Macedonia”: “A Plasmatic Autonomy In some Bulgarian circles, probably because they realize that the Bulgarian territorial claims can not be compensated, there is a trend to revive an old idea of an autonomous “Macedonia”. From all the solutions of the Balkan problem, this would be by all means the worst. A country with a separate Macedonian Ethnicity, belongs to the land of fantasy the way by which the Bulgarian “Komitatzides” were nursing it. There are not Macedonians as a particular ethnicity”

The second one comes from the Bulgarian newspaper “Ote-Cestven Vesnik” in
19-6-1991. After the fall of Communism, the Bulgarian archives opened and an important conversation came to light, which took place in Moscow, 7-6-1946 between Stalin and the leaders of the Bulgarian Communist Party; G. K. Dimitrof, B. Kolarof, and T. Kostof. Stalin said to them:
“To Macedonia of Pirin you must grant cultural autonomy within the boundaries of Bulgaria. Tito appeared to be more adjustable than you. Autonomy is the first step for the unification of the entire Macedonia. The fact that the National Consciousness within the community it has not yet been created, it is not important. Neither in
LevkoRosia (White Russia) existed separate National Conscience, when we declared it Soviet Democracy . . . .”! ! !

Another vital point is that the language which Aristotle used in Alexander’s teaching was Greek. Greek was also the language which Alexander used in his expeditions to the East. This has been proved by the numerous ancient Greek inscriptions in far away settlements like in Afghanistan which were established by Alexander The Great. Recently at an Afghanistan Exhibit “Hidden Treasures from the National Museum of Kabul” which visited several large American cities, the Greek inscriptions had an impressive large percentage. Good question; why were the inscriptions not in the so-called “Macedonian” language? Another good question is, why the Greek language became the “Lingua Franca” in Alexander The Great empire instead of the so-called “Macedonian”??

As an outcome of the above reports one can easily understand why the Hellenes can not grant the Hellenic name Macedonia neither as a compound nor as a derivative name.

Prof. Stephen Miller, is to be commended for his objective judgment, his highly Historical knowledge of authentic World History, his great respect for justice and his quest for justice to prevail!

Dear Sir; Nations cannot be created by stealing cultural identities. Neither can Democracy survive by replacing Historic vision with the revision of History. For us the Hellenes, the created problem is not Political; however, it is a matter of our Identity, our Heritage, History of Ancient Macedonia, which has been Hellenic for 3,000 years.

It is time for this minute Republic, in order to survive, to accept a neutral name, in order to have peace and stability in that region. They need to refrain from the identity theft of the Historically Greek Macedonia. Justice is asking for that; History demands it!


Very Sincerely,
Nina Peropoulos, Peter Peropoulos

Dan Tompkins letter to Prof Miller

source: panmacedonian.info

Jacques Barrot, European Politician Uses the Term "Northern Macedonia" for FYROM [04-6-2009]

Vice-President of the European Commission Jacques Barrot called FYROM yesterday "Northern Macedonia".
After briefing the 27 EU foreign ministers at a regular session in Luxembourg on the progress of the countries from the Western Balkan's region in meeting of the conditions relating visa liberalization, Barrot singled out FYROM, Serbia and Montenegro as the countries which can expect lifting of the visa regime, Alsat-M TV Station said.

Barrot said....

"What I can say is that today we are under impression that FYROM, i.e. Northern Macedonia, Serbia and Montenegro made a really great effort. It's still uncertain, but there is a possibility for us to suggest that these three countries achieve the liberalization by the end of this year, however this is simply a suggestion and I can not be absolutely sure in this stage. But, if the member-countries do agree on this, it can happen"

The Struggle for the Liberation of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM)

Australian Macedonian Advisory Council

June 03, 2009

What can be said about the present day situation in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia which could encourage a goal-oriented initiative towards deconstruction of its ultranationalist, parochial and irredentist ethos? The well-know state of affairs created by the overwhelming influence of the ideology of Pseudomacedonism, a patchwork of ideas establishing a several millenia old frame of reference within all levels of domestic discourse has been and still is a phenomenon not noticed by social anthropologists and other relevant thinkers. In the Balkans, where historicism often takes precedence over future-oriented pragmatism, FYROMian oppositional defiance to Greece is one of the key incentives that threatens escalation of conflict of the type typical for the region for much of the 1990´s. While Pseudomacedonian politics, with all of its core component: Hellenophobia and Slavophobia, formulation of "Macedonian exceptionalism" with common leitmotivs of mental and moral superiority based on biological determinism certainly deserves recognition as an academic question, preferably treated on multidisciplinary grounds, the objective of establishment of practical policy, both in form of general principles and practically applied methodology, has failed on multiple grounds. The problem is exacerbated by attempt to analyze the social and ethnopsychological reality of present-day FYROM in terms of "objective", quantifiable parameters, an approach used by such international organization as the European Union and NATO, among others.

While systematic research and cross-comparison of the institutionalized, faceless type may create an illusion of "objectivity" and rationality and while there is no doubt that to a large extent (but with limited potential to portray the situation in all of its picturesque colorfulness) some of these data display accurate parameters of socio-economic affairs in FYROM, these are not much usefulness in deconstruction of the sheer anti-human dimension of the present-day political vector of FYROM. With a strong reflection on the daily, mundane lives of citizen of that small statelet, with a profound impact on psychological links among its citizen and culmination in the construction of a small, isolated world, cut from both the mainstream of trends in Europe and from infusion of alternativeness, the postmodern "nation building" of fascistoid intensity in FYROM is a phenomena with no precedent in the realm of modern politics.

The main premises of the plot are as follows: FYROM, a country which inherited colonial borders set in a mixture of arbitrary decision, de facto post-conflict situations and more than 4 decades of Communist totalitarian rule, is not a product of a natural, usual nation-building in which elite-imposed foresight provides selective continuity and discontinuity with the tradition. Instead, the concrete set of circumstances in which FYROM or "Republika Makedonija" emerged as an established subject of international politics (the Balkan wars 1912-1913, the post-1943 reestablishment of "Yugoslavia" and the bloody dissolution of the later in 1990´s) is indicative of conformism , coupled with dissonance among its elite, which inherited a premodern population, bypassed by the Enlightenment and Rationalism. For the early founding fathers of Pseudomacedonian nationalism, the revolutionaries of the so-called VMRO, the ultimate goal, in whose name much grandiloquence and pathos has been expressed and much blood was shed, was the emancipation of the "Macedonian Bulgarian". The fact of their declared Bulgarian character, which is in harmony with enormous number of testimonies of outsiders intimately acquainted with the ethnological situation on the ground is not an obstacle to local historians-the clergy of current FYROMian ultranationalism, to enlist them into the rank of symbolic figures of alleged "Macedonian ethnicity". This "ethnicity", completely unbeknown to history, is one of the last enduring legacies of the Cold War, having grown in Tito´s Yugoslavia as an organ of the Communist empire specialized in Anti-Greek predatory geopolitics. The choice of the new nation´s name was an adaptation of VMRO nurtured idea that the inhabitants of the geographic region of Macedonia, the form of which is a recent construct unrelated with historic Macedonia in strict sense, while having a Bulgarian ethnic affinity are nevertheless also the only true "Macedonians" in some mystically superior sense excluding other inhabitants of the region, even bordering on parallel ethnicity, non-exclusive and synonymous with the wider Bulgarian one. The Commintern in 1934 and the Communist Yugoslavia took this absurd proposition to its logical extreme, severing the consciousness of the Slavic population of the wider Macedonian region from its Bulgarian core. The massive allocation of funds to creating national institutions: schools, press, universities, museums, academic centers by Belgrade to the southern Yugoslav province in order to sustain the new national narratives provided Yugoslavia safety against Bulgaria, Serbian unitarianism and provided a pretext for expansion into Northern Greece, the most serious attempt of which was the Yugoslav support for Communist combatants in Greek Macedonia (or Macedonia proper, as the present-day north Greek region is nearly identical geographically to Ancient Macedonia) during the Greek Civil War (1946-1949).

The entire social development of the FYROM, as a nominal "Republic" in Yugoslavia, while heavily influenced by application of local version of Communism in political, economic and legal practice, was – quite unlike the situation in other Republics where traditional ethnohistorical narratives were viewed as dangerous to the concept of unitary Yugoslavia - characterized by vivid expression of nationalistic sentiments encouraged by the local leadership and methodically carried through all conventional means of propaganda. TV and radio broadcasts, including documentaries, docudramas, songs of various genres with nationalistic overtones were prevalent form of public entertainment. Maps of "Greater Macedonian Homeland" incorporating Northern Greece and large section of Bulgaria were regular fixture in thousands school classrooms. Impressive body of government-subsidized and obligatory belletristic literature dealing with "national" themes, "national tragedies" in which the image of the "exploited Macedonian" as a tragic hero was central in a social-realist imagery imprinted a sense of victimization and deprivation in generation of Pseudomacedonians. With the complete independence from Yugoslavia in 1992 and inheritance of intact – although quite obsolete – infrastructure, as a result of avoiding inclusion into the series of Yugoslav wars, the young and small Balkan nation would perhaps had promising start if it was not for the fact that in those times of change it was left without national intelligentsia, in terms of intellectuals of non-Communist affiliation. The extermination of the Bulgarian leading strata immediately after the World War II, the expulsion of pre-war Serb colonists and the brain-drain from 1960´s onwards via emigration mostly in the Angloshpere countries depleted the nation from the existence of transitional elite which would redefine and reestablish suitable values and set dynamics of social recovery.

In the presence of such spiritual vacuum, what initially started as an imported speculation – that the origin of the "Macedonian" nation should be sought in unbroken racial, linguistic and cultural continuity with the Macedonians of Philip II and Alexander the Great – became throughout the 1990´s the main integrative trend which unified folklore, pop-culture, the ubiquitous "coffee-shop politics", academia and the public education system. In the image of Ancient Macedonians, a Greek entity which created brief global empire as a substratum of Hellenistic civilization, suddenly the entire nation found itself. No more the colloquial "little Macedonian" ( "Makedončeto") was a passive observer to his destiny as created by his (demonized) neighbors. No more the "Macedonians" just an aggregate of impoverished people in a poor, landlocked Balkan country undistinguished culturally, technologically, being outside the realm of the global trends at the eve of Third millennium. Now they could boast a tradition old thousands of years, not only as a historical narrative, but more importantly – in a naïve, popular biodeterministic wisdom – as an evidence of what may became of his group: a great, mighty people of first-rank international relevance.

From 2006, when the Government of VMRO-DPMNE led by Nikola Gruevski, a man mostly thought of as a obscure economic technocrat, won the popular vote, the entire revolt of people defeated so often in conflicts and competitions in modern times escalated, looking for a symbolic compensation. While it would be impractical to list the protagonists, the chronology, and more importantly, to analyze the causes of enormous popularity the fascist reorganization of society and the complete consolidation of a tribalist, xenophobic, collectivist FYROMian nation guided by pseudohistorical delusions, it is sufficient to say that the very precedent left the international community helpless, since no norms which would be used to extrapolate solution to the problem of this kind exist. There is no known instance that an ethnic group, on apparently voluntary and almost unanimous basis, completely rejected its ethnological nature – in this case of being a Slavic ethnic group originating in medieval times from the boreal regions of Eastern Europe, a fact held in consensus in global academia – and based it entire cultural, economical, educational policies, its "reason of being" on outrageous claims on continuity with an unrelated Greek ancient people with whose territory it has a very tiny overlap. Consequently, for now, Europe is left powerless in dealing with Nikola Gruevski, a brutal, authoritarian dictator who mesmerizes his nation with fables of "ancient imperial glory" in light of total inability to solve real problems faced by FYROM: 40% unemployment, 300 USD salaries, scientific and educational decay, the threat by the Albanian-led Islamic separatist block which accounts for 38% of FYROM´s population. What initially started as – undoubtedly clever in Machiavellian sense – Gruevski´s idea to provoke Greece in order to gain some negative diplomatic feedback and portray itself as the "savior of the endangered nation", galvanizing people around "collective virtues" is now an elaborate fascist ideology, with its thinkers, institutions, manners of manifestation, unwritten codes, popular electoral and activist base and symbolism.

It is certain that this criminal situation won´t resolve out of itself. The manner in which global bureaucracy can act is limited by the aforementioned idiosyncrasy of the way of rule of VMRO gang. As North Korea exemplified, tyranny based on ignorance and fear may propagate itself for a considerable period. The opposition in FYROM itself is relatively negligible and very much bellow the critical mass needed for ignition of a popular revolt. Insofar, the organized political opposition did not offered the most needed solution to the problem: radical rejection of Pseudomacedonism in it´s fabricated entirety. The internal identity debate is on the marginal position outside the spotlight of the wider audience and is being sustained by informal networks loyal to central authorities. In terms of productivity, capability of potential maverick scholars to change the discourse from within is limited due to total financial dependency and certain ostracization. Sustained pressures from outside are necessary in order to implement long-term solution for a prosperous Balkan without VMRO, without Gruevski. While the issue should be reviewed with the scrutiny typical of serious scholarship, such effort cannot culminate in the much needed change in short-term. Politics should follow and align itself with science and practical activism should be supported by external factors in order to bring down the Pseudomacedonism, an ideology that threatens to plunge South-Eastern Europe into war and to help liberate the Slavs of FYROM from the cult of state-imposed grandomania and paranoia.

Vasko Gligorijević

03-VI-2009

Skoplje, FYROM

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/104778

Historical revisionism in the school books of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM).

by Tymphaios

May 24, 2009

americanchronicle.com

Part 1: The reinvention of ancient Macedonia.

Schoolbooks in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia consistently represent Macedonia as encompassing a region that consists of FYROM, the Greek administrative district of Macedonia and parts of other countries. An astonishing fabrication of history teaches schoolchildren that these borders of "Macedonia" existed from antiquity and that their country was "dismembered" and Macedonians underwent a genocide by the Greeks.

Indeed, young children in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia are taught through their schoolbooks that Macedonians were a non-Greek people that have inhabited the land of Macedonia continuously. They are taught that this exact land as shown in the maps of Greater FYROM, was exactly the same as that inhabited by the ancient Macedonians. The boundaries are shown again and again in their schoolbook maps to have remained the same from antiquity! These schoolchildren are taught that the Greeks expelled the "Macedonians" from the "Aegean" part of this country in the middle of the 20th century. Generations of poisoned minds have since the days of Tito and again since 1998 been taught to believe that Greeks expelled their "Macedonian" but Slav speaking forefathers from their ancestral lands in some kind of genocide – that mysteriously no international organisation ever recorded. Raised with this kind of modern myth, it is no surprise Greece is faced with an insistence that their country (FYROM) should be named Macedonia and that no other name would be acceptable to them.

It is sad but true. Furnished with this kind of evidence, one is convinced that people can be raised in schools to believe in anything whatsoever, and to be poisoned as children to hate a people for imagined reasons. Unfortunately, this tactic of the FYROM government also revives the expansionist policies of Tito against historic Macedonia (in Greece). It reveals a sinister side in the claims of FYROM on Macedonian history and heritage despite assurances made to the United Nations prior to the Interim Agreement. These aggressive policies are carried out at a time when FYROM paradoxically wants to join the European Union and NATO - of which the invented enemy Greece is a member. Even more ironically, the current FYROM government claims and says to NATO that this policy of inciting ethnic hatred against Greece (and suitably inventing history schoolbooks for this purpose) is in the interests of peace in the region.

In the school books, there is again and again a map of Macedonia with fixed borders. It includes not only FYROM but also the present administrative region of Macedonia in Greece and parts of Bulgaria and Albania. This "Macedonia" is shown unaltered from times immemorial. Something like this type of map appeared for the first time in an ethnological description in 1899 by a Greek named C. Nicolaides and had formed the Greek view for the 1913 Bucharest Treaty discussions regarding the ethnicities in the region.



It was an attempt at depicting the ethnic constitution of a part of the Balkans. It did not represent of course a country. The region shown was part of a larger area under Turkish rule. It was not a map of a country. Such a "country" did not exist in 1899. A country with such boundaries had never existed before.

Below are three maps of the Ottoman vilayets of Salonik, Manastir and Kosova. FYROM mostly consists of parts of the later two.



Vilayet of Selanik



Vilayet of Manastir



Vilayet of Kosova

Nowhere in the Turkish maps is there any indication of a Macedonia. No such map can be seen either. Yet such a Macedonia, belonging to the FYROM schoolbooks was allegedly partitioned or dismembered by the Balkan nations during the Balkan wars! It is surprising that the level of miseducation and the hatred it has engendered stop people in FYROM from looking at this paradox and realise they are applying WWII propaganda as historical truth backwards to 1912 and beyond.

The ethnological map of Nicolaides moreover made no reference to a Macedonian ethnicity. The ethnicities were clearly labelled as Serbian, Bulgarian, Greek, Albanian and Turkish or Muslim (as in the Turkish censuses of around the same time). The FYROM propaganda kept the map as a map of "Macedonia" in the schoolbooks, but changed all ethnic groups into one: the Macedonians. These are now claimed to have existed from time immemorial unchanged, although quite paradoxically the Slav Macedonians of FYROM are Slavic speaking and have no established cultural, religious or other connections to the ancient Macedonians. Then in the mid-20th century a completely unreported genocide apparently took place that wiped out these ancient FYROMacedonians from Macedonia in Greece.

Let us have a look at some of the unhistorical claims made by the FYROM schoolbooks (mainly from 1997-2006, still being used at least as late as 2007).

PRE-HISTORIC MACEDONIA

The first map shows the arbitrary map of a Greater FYROM closely modelled on the Nicolaides ethnological plan. It contains exactly modern Macedonia (in Greece), the former Blagoevegrad district in Bulgaria and FYROM. These boundaries were only fixed and recorded for the first time at around the time of the first world war.



If you thought this is a map from the first world war or an irrendentist map of Greater FYROM, it is not. Rather it is supposed to be a schoolbook map of prehistoric Macedonia! Nothing has changed. In another almost identical map we see even the names of the ancient prehistoric cities, all in Slavic, including Solun (the Slavic name of Thessaloniki):



"Greater FYROM" appears as a distinct geographical unit in prehistoric times with Slavic cities. This unhistorical map is from the «Istoriski Atlas», Skopje 1998, pg. 10 and the «Istoriski Atlas», Skopje 2006, pg. 10. This Istoriski Atlas is used in schools in FYROM to educate children on how to hate their neighbours.

ANCIENT MACEDONIA

The next schoolbook map is of Greece from the period around 6-5th C BC. It describes the colonies of Greeks and Phoenicians. Macedonia is labelled in pink as a part of Greece and encircled correctly. The map is from Istoriski Atlas, Skopje from the year 1992 (page 8).



More recent maps have Macedonia outside Greece and the word "Macedonia" actually outside Macedonia. It is instead written suitably over the region of the central Balkans! Below is such a map from the 5th Grade Primary School History book in FYROM by Kosta Adžievski, Darinka Petreska, Violeta Ačkoska, Naum Dimovski and Vančo Gjorgjiev, Istorija za petto oddelenie, Skopje 2005, pg. 37.



The map is entitled "The Colonies of the Greeks". In this map "Macedonia" is written outside Macedonia, in a void in the middle of the Balkan peninsula. Paradoxically, the historical region of ancient Macedonia, where the Macedonians actually lived, is here correctly labeled in pink along with the other Greek areas and colonies – but is not called Macedonia!

In the 5th Grade Primary School History book (Kosta Adžievski, Darinka Petreska, Violeta Ačkoska, Naum Dimovski and Vančo Gjorgjiev, Istorija za petto oddelenie, Skopje 2005, pg. 39) we find another map entitled "Athens and Sparta". Presumably Greece is the pink area and Macedonia was outside Greece (same with Crete, the colonies in Asia Minor,many of the islands, etc).

The appearance is like intending to say "go back to Greece, the pink area". FYROM propagandists often claim that Greece stops in Thessaly, this is the clear effect maps such as this have in the mind-frame of children in FYROM.

A map from the Roman period also from the 5th Grade Primary School History book (Kosta Adžievski, Darinka Petreska, Violeta Ačkoska, Naum Dimovski and Vančo Gjorgjiev, Istorija za petto oddelenie, Skopje 2005, pg. 79), in its section on "The Roman State during the 1st century A.D." is showing Macedonia and Greece as separate Roman provinces.



Though factually correct, this echoes the FYROM dogma of two separate countries with different people. They were actually separate Roman provinces and indeed the Romans had incited constant wars between Macedonia and some of the other Greek states in an effort to weaken and conquer all the Greeks. It was the very tactic that led to the proverb "Divide et impera" (divide and conquer). For modern FYROM propaganda it is evidence that the Greeks were different from the Macedonians - even though the inscriptions, city names, peoples´ names, customs, religion and festivals were everywhere Greek.

BYZANTINE PERIOD

It is not clear what continuity is envisaged between the prehistoric and ancient Macedonians and the Slavs. The following map shows the Slavic settlement in Greater FYROM. It is another school map from the Istoriski Atlas, Skopje, 1997, pg. 33 that describes "The settlement of the Slavic tribes in Macedonia".



The Slavs and Huns ransacked most of the European side of the Byzantine Empire, until they were repelled to the regions beyond the Ceraunian mountains and settled the area known as Illyricum (part of modern Yugoslavia). Byzantine Greeks from the eastern dominions were settled in the depopulated areas after Byzantine rule was re-established. What do these Slavs who were for the most part cast out of the empire have to do with the Macedonians? They murdered and pillaged the inhabitants of Macedonia for sure. Did that make them Macedonian? What is the connection? The unhistorical map of this fictitious "Macedonia" of the Slavs of the 6th century AD is again exactly the same as the modern maps of Greater FYROM.

This revisionism is recent, appearing after the Interim Agreement. Instead, in 1992, a Historical Atlas from FYROM described "the places where the first State entities of the Southern Slavs were established" (Istoriski Atlas, Skopje, 1992, pg. 26) very differently:



This map had the word Macedonia very far outside the actual region of Macedonia (see for example the article European maps of Macedonia before the 19th century http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/98614). However, to the credit of the mapmakers it did not make claims that the region of FYROM has some unredeemed territories elsewhere in the Balkans. More recent maps since 1998 and under the Gruevski government have revised it to this:



This schoolbook map shows the "The intrusion of the Normans and the Crusaders into the Balkans and Macedonia" (Istoriski Atlas, Skopje 1998, pg. 63. Istoriski Atlas, Skopje 2006, pg. 71). Macedonia is shown as a Slavic country with Slavic place names, covering the entire area of Greater FYROM down to Mt Olympus. The Normans in fact fought Emperor Alexius I Comnenus, referred by them as Imperator Graecorum. Nevertheless, here they are shown invading presumably not Byzantium but medieval Slavic Greater FYROM. A subsequent map has the name Macedonia written over the region of FYROM.



It is a map of the subsequent historical period entitled: "The independent feudal lords of Macedonia in the 12th and 13th centuries" (Istoriski Atlas, Skopje 1998, pg. 66 and Istoriski Atlas, Skopje 2006, pg. 74). There is not a shred of evidence that any feudal lords of the time referred to themselves as Macedonians, whether they were Normans, Francs, Venetians or Slavs. Yet here we have a statement about independent Macedonian feudal lords in an unhistorical atlas of Macedonia. The word "Macedonia" is shown outside Macedonia, over the region of FYROM. The location does not conform whatsoever to the Byzantine administrative district with that name, that was further east and only existed up to the 11th century as a Byzantine administrative district. It had the same administration as the rest of the Byzantine Empire and the language was Greek. The Byzantine administrative district of Macedonia was founded by Constantinos Porphyrogenitus, together with the other Themata of the empire. He chose the name of Macedonia in reference to the ancient Greek hero Macedon:

"The district Macedonia took its name from Macedon the son of Zeus and Thyia, Deucalion's daughter, as Hesiod says: `And she conceived and bare to Zeus who delights in the thunderbolt two sons, Magnes and Macedon, rejoicing in horses, who dwell round about Pieria and Olympus ((lacuna)) . . . And Magnes again (begot) Dictys and godlike Polydectes."

Byzantine Emperor Constantinus Porphyrogenitus, 2 de Them. 2 p. 48B

But in the map from the unhistorical FYROM school atlas we have Macedonia neatly in the location of modern FYROM and if one traces the black line around this "Macedonia", it can be seen that it perfectly conforms to the other revisionist maps. Perfect fiction inciting racial and ethnic hatred against Greece and Greeks. Despite the repeated claims of FYROM schoolbooks, no such country contour can be found in any historical European map. The distinctive contours of Greater FYROM are found as a country for the first time in a map of Greater Macedonia envisaged by fascist Bulgaria in 1941:



This is the actual source of all these revisionist maps of ancient and medieval "Macedonia" in the FYROM schoolbooks. It is the actual origin of all the maps of Greater FYROM and the only truly historical example, but unsurprisingly it does not appear in the schoolbooks. That all the other maps showing Greater FYROM are fictitious and the last map is the actual original can easily be proven since no real historical maps show anything like it and the Nicolaides map does not refer to Macedonians as an ethnicity or Macedonia as a country. The fascist map above the portraits of Adolf Hitler and King Boris of Bulgaria is the inspiration for the endeavor by the Bulgarians, later by Tito and now eventually by FYROM schoolteachers to rewrite history and national boundaries.

We normally regard education as liberating and a means of learning and transmitting knowledge freely. We consider education a civil right. Sadly there are examples, especially in former communist countries, were education simply meant the indoctrination of the population to a new version of history where truth was what the party wished it to be. This is no way of facing the future. Are the political leaders and miseducators responsible for this poisoning of children´s minds really prepared to face the challenge of entering Europe? Of entering NATO? Can they face the judgement of future historians?

New resolution from the USA House of Representatives as regards FYROM irredentist and aggressive behavior.

111th CONGRESS 1st Session

H. RES. 486

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia should work within the framework of the United Nations process with Greece to achieve longstanding United States and United Nations policy goals of finding a mutually acceptable composite name, with a geographical qualifier and for all international uses for the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.

---

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

May 21, 2009

Mrs. Maloney (for herself, Mr. Bilirakis, Ms. Berkley, Mr. Space, Ms. Ros-Lehtinen, Ms. Tsongas, Mr. Brown of South Carolina, Mr. Sarbanes, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Van Hollen, Mr. Carnahan, Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart of Florida, Mr. Pallone, Ms. Lee of California, Mr. Sires, Ms. Titus, Mr. Poe of Texas, Mr. McMahon, and Mr. Jackson of Illinois) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs

---

RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia should work within the framework of the United Nations process with Greece to achieve longstanding United States and United Nations policy goals of finding a mutually acceptable composite name, with a geographical qualifier and for all international uses for the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.

Whereas, on April 8, 1993, the United Nations General Assembly admitted as a member the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, under the name the “former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”;

Whereas United Nations Security Council Resolution 817 (1993) states that the international dispute over the name must be resolved to maintain peaceful relations between Greece and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and regional stability;

Whereas Greece is a strategic partner and ally of the United States in bringing political stability and economic development to the Balkan region, having invested over $20 billion in the countries of the region, thereby creating over 200,000 new jobs, and having contributed over $750 million in development aid for the region;

Whereas Greece has invested over $1 billion in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, thereby creating more than 10,000 new jobs and having contributed $110 million in development aid;

Whereas H. Res. 356 of 110th Congress, urged the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia to abstain from hostile activities and stop the utilization of materials that violate provisions of the United Nations-brokered Interim Agreement between the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Greece regarding “hostile activities or propaganda”;

Whereas NATO’s Heads of State and Government unanimously agreed in Bucharest (April 3, 2008) that “… within the framework of the UN, many actors have worked hard to resolve the name issue, but the Alliance has noted with regret that these talks have not produced a successful outcome. Therefore we agreed that an invitation to the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia will be extended as soon as a mutually acceptable solution to the name issue has been reached. We encourage the negotiations to be resumed without delay and expect them to be concluded as soon as possible”;

Whereas the Heads of State and Government participating in the meeting of the North Atlantic Council in Strasbourg/Kehl (April 4, 2009), reiterated their unanimous support for the agreement at the Bucharest Summit “to extend an invitation to the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia as soon as a mutually acceptable solution to the name issue has been reached within the framework of the UN, and urge intensified efforts towards that goal.”;

Whereas the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia has consistently engaged in anti-Greek rhetoric, thus creating hostile feeling among its citizens, which violates the principle of good neighborly relations; and

Whereas authorities in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia urged their citizens to boycott Greek investments in the country and not to travel to Greece: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the House of Representatives—

(1) urges the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia to work within the framework of the United Nations process with Greece to achieve longstanding United States and United Nations policy goals by finding a mutually acceptable composite name, with a geographical qualifier and for all international uses for the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia; and

(2) urges the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia to abstain from hostile activities and stop violating provisions of the United Nations-brokered Interim Agreement between the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Greece regarding “hostile activities or propaganda”.

---

The fake "evidence" regarding Dr. Mittag e-mail.

A few internet forums, namely topix.com and macedoniantruth.org, posted an e-mail, supposedly from the "Oxford Classicists Discussion Group" mailing list. Such a group is nowhere to be found online.

The e-mail showing as...

=?UTF-8?B?0Jw=?=
From: Peter F. Mittag peter.franz.mittag@uni-koeln.de

To: Oxford Classicists Discussion Group oxford.ssac.clarence.uk@barebones.usenetnext.co m
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
I was surprised to find my name on Miller's list. I would think of that as a typo, since most likely this was not an automated process (or it was an anomalous one!). But I haveto distance myself from the list. I am not its signatory and it isa farce if Miller could not get its instruments straight on the matter.I will contact him, likely via ESOP's email list and challenge him.I dislike the general tone of the letter, I think its a political no-win game.

peter.franz.mittag@uni-koeln.de

The supposed e-mail address of the group is "oxford.ssac.clarence.uk@ barebones.usenetnext.com".

In other words, the format is "mail@subdomain.domain.com".
The domain is "usenetnext.com" and it's non-existent, as a whois search shows.
http://www.who.is/whois/usenetnext.com/

In this universe, there is absolutely no way that a mailing list will function with an imaginary domain.

This is another shameless propaganda attempt, in order to discredit dozens of scholars supporting the historical truth about Macedonia and its greek character.

People spreading and supporting unsubstantiated accusations, based on falsified data, face the danger of being publicly humiliated

A mailing list can only function with a domain that exists.

Concluding, this e-mail is fake.

by PetrosM



UPDATE(23:10)

Vasko sent me the following information as regards the issue:

In this video, by FYROMian Sitel TV it is claimed that P. F. Mittag actually stated:

"I am surprised to find my name on the list....I have to distance myself from the list. I am not its signatory and it is a farce if Miller does not correct that. I don't like the tone of the letter. I think it is a political game without winner."

This is a screenshot of his statement:

This is the video-clip:

http://www.sitel.com.mk/?ItemID=1DC67A0D96DAEF45B7A28AC7E140FA0A

From the above is obvious that the FYROM is under falsification racing in order to discredit Mr Miller letter. Is not first time that Slavmacedonists produce propaganda in order to discredit scholars. No credible and objective historian in the world supports therts historical far fetched claims. Unfortunately for the nationalists from FYROM and her diaspora the ancestors of the Slavs of FYROM were almost universally regarded as Bulgarians up until the early 20th century .

Slavmacedonians do you still believe Gruevski administration as regards the supposing Greek veto?

The outgoing NATO Secretary General Jaap De Hoop Scheffer said as regards the Greek veto at the NATO summit in Bucharest last year.

«there has never been a veto»

«There is no veto. NATO doesn’t know the word veto. NATO does know the word consensus. And although people might have disappointed, there was a consensus in Bucharest last year, and there was a consensus again in Strasbourg and Kehl. NATO doesn’t know the word veto, and no nation has ever vetoed anything in NATO»

Source :makfax