Anda di halaman 1dari 39

The Macedonian Digest

“From the readers for the readers”

Edition 64 – April 2011


Editor’s Notes
Our Name is Macedonia

Feature Stories
Pascali: Some Macedonian Politicians work against Macedonia
Friday, 11 March 2011
It's impossible to escape the feeling that certain high ranking Macedonian structures in Parliament are
working against their own country, says US analyst Umberto Pascali in an interview for Macedonian

"There has been numerous attempts by other countries aided by Macedonian politicians who work with
hysterical determination to destabilize their own country from the inside", says Pascali.

Commenting on statements by analysts who claimed Macedonia is close to being destabilized, Pascali
explains that the reality shows something else. "It's very true that there are powerful countries who at
this moment wage informational war against Macedonian leaders who have not accepted any sort of
blackmail from anyone and are looking out for the very best interests for the country. Lets face it, no
one likes leaders that can't be bought."

Pascali explained of the so called "colored revolutions" waged against nations who would prefer to
keep their national sovereignty.

"We have seen lots of names so far, from orange to jasmine to rose revolutions. All of these
'revolutions' follow the same scheme. You have a small group of very vocal protesters (financed by
western philanthropists) who take over a very visible public space (ex: town square) and all carry
English written signs!? These people are less than 1% of the population and is very much anti
democratic. However, these are the people who get in the focus of the international media who fills
their programming with the plight of the protesters 24/7. The rest, the 99% of the population doesn't
matter, it's that 1% that does. The aim, of course is to portray the leader of the country as a dictator
after which foreign forces intervene to protect the "rights" of the protesters. The people in Government
are afraid what may happen to them and end up accepting the anti democratic farce. There, you have
your colored 'revolution'," explains Pascali.
"In Macedonia , the situation is much different. Your PM was elected with overwhelming majority.
Your citizens are very patriotic and intelligent. The numerous attempts to destabilize the nation by
external manipulators and their internal helpers made the country only stronger and the leaders more
determined. Skopje is the center of the Euro-Asian highways (8, 10) that connects North and South,
East and West. This is the key for great progress and prosperity. Macedonians have shown time and
time again that their future will not be held hostage by outsiders and Fifth Colony insiders," stated
Umberto Pascali for MTV.

Not another BIG Greek Lie?

The Myth of Greek Ethnic 'Purity'
Macedonia and Greece,
John Shea, 1997 pp.77-96


Just as Macedonia and other Balkan states were invaded by Slavs and other peoples from the north and
from within the Balkans themselves, so were the lands that eventually were to become modern Greece .
We need to examine this issue, since the modern Greeks repeatedly argue that they are direct ethnic
descendants of the ancient Greeks and Macedonians. The fact is that the ethnic, linguistic, and cultural
developments that these invasions created simply built upon similar movements of peoples into and out
of the Balkans in the ancient past.


Greek writers give a great deal of emphasis to the idea of Greek racial purity. For instance, in speaking
of the movements of Germanic tribes in the Balkans before the Slavs, the writer of Macedonia History
and Politics says that the Goths were beaten off and the invasions in the fourth century did not lead to
"ethnological adulteration." In speaking about more modern times the writer says (p. 43), " Greece
became involved in the 'Macedonian disputes,' because of political pressure from the Bulgarians and
Yugoslavs, and because of the sensitivity of the Greeks towards the historical continuity of their race."
Clearly this view about racial purity amongst the Greeks, presented here in a magazine distributed by
the Greek government in English-speaking countries, is important to the Greeks.

Macedonia has been represented as a buffer protecting Hellenism from the waves of the barbarians
throughout the centuries. Thus it is argued by modern Greeks that the area of the present-day Republic
of Macedonia was affected by these barbarian invasions, but the lands that are now Greece were largely

The Greek insistence on ethnological purity for its people is not unusual among expressions of
nationalism. The American political scientist Buck explained that the notion of physical kinship
implied in the word "nation" is the most conspicuous element in the popular conception of nationality.
However, it is also the least realistic. Buck points out that we have only to think of the extent of
invasion and colonization that has occurred in nearly every corner of Europe to realize that this notion
could at best be only approximate. More importantly, from the viewpoint of historical analysis, it is not
possible to demonstrate national family connections. Recorded descent is at best restricted to a few
families that are notable for some reason or another. All that can be shown convincingly is linguistic
descent, but this is often taken as evidence of national descent.'

Anthony D. Smith points out, specifically in reference to the modern Greek nation, "Greek
demographic continuity was brutally interrupted in the late sixth to eighth centuries A.D. by massive
influxes of Avar, Slav and later, Albanian immigrants." He adds that modern Greeks "could hardly
count as being of ancient Greek descent, even if this could never be ruled out.”
It seems clear that Greek nationalists do not wish to examine evidence concerning the present state
within Greece that may reflect on this question about the reality of ethnic purity. The editor of The
Times, long the most prestigious of British newspapers, wrote in August 1993: "Since 1961, no Greek
census has carried details of minorities. This is because successive Greek governments, ‘a la mode
japonaise,' subscribe to a myth of homogeneity. Today, the historical refusal to acknowledge ethnic or
cultural plurality has transmogrified into a refusal to accept political dissent in relation to these ethnic
or cultural questions."

Simon Mcllwaine writes, "Modern Greek identity is based on an unshakable conviction that the Greek
State is ethnically homogenous. This belief ... has entailed repeated and official denial of the existence
of minorities which are not of 'pure' Hellenic origin. The obsession with Greek racial identity involves
the distortion of the history of the thousands of years when there was no such thing as a Greek nation

Many of the views that follow explain that, whether the Greeks feel comfortable with the idea or not,
their peoples are of diverse ethnic background, a great mix of the peoples of the Balkans, and have
been for the past several thousand years. If all of the peoples of the Balkans were subjected to mixture
of varying degrees with the invaders, as was certainly the case, then the argument might readily be
made that modern-day Greeks are no more ethnically related to early Greeks than present-day
Macedonians are to ancient Macedonians.

Ancient Greeks. A common assumption is that ancient peoples were ethnically homogenous. As has
already been noted with regard to the peoples of Macedonia , the kingdom was undoubtedly a great mix
of people, and the diversity increased with the expansion of the Macedonian Empire. There was
probably a comparable mix of peoples in various Greek city-states. While the Greeks who came into
the Balkan peninsula became the dominant people in that area, strong influences from the earlier
inhabitants remained. "For certain areas of the Greek mainland and many of the islands, the names of
some fifteen pre-Greek peoples are preserved in ancient traditions, together with a number of other

A widely accepted view is that the Indo-European language moved into Greece from Anatolia with the
spread of agriculture around 7000 B.C.6 Thus a dialect of Indo-European would have been the
language of the Neolithic cultures of Greece and the Balkans in the fifth and fourth millennia. There
were also infiltrations or invasions from the north by Indo-European speakers sometime during the
fourth or third millennium B.C.

Bernal suggests an explanation of ancient Greek development in terms of what he calls "the ancient
model." Classical, Hellenistic, and later, pagan Greeks from the fifth century B.C. to the fifth century
A.D. believed their ancestors had been civilized by Egyptian and Phoenician colonization and the later
influence of Greek study in Egypt . Up to the eighteenth century A.D., Egypt was seen as the fount of
all "Gentile" philosophy and learning, including that of the Greeks, and it was believed that the Greeks
had managed to preserve only a part of this wisdom. Bernal suggests that the sense of loss that this
created, and the quest to recover the lost wisdom, were major motives in the development of science in
the seventeenth century.

Bernal argues that the ancient model was accepted by historians from antiquity till the nineteenth
century, and was rejected then only for anti-Semitic and racist reasons. He sees the Egyptian and
Phoenician influence on ancient Greeks as beginning in the first half of the second millennium B.C. He
concludes that Greek civilization is the result of the cultural mixtures created by these colonizations
and later borrowings from across the eastern Mediterranean . These borrowings from Egypt and the
Levant occurred in the second millennium B.C. or in the thousand years from 2100 to 1100 B.C., which
Bernal suggests is the period during which Greek culture was formed! "The Ancient Greeks, though
proud of themselves and their recent accomplishments, did not see their political institutions, science,
philosophy or religion as original. Instead they derived them - through the early colonization and later
study by Greeks abroad - from the east in general and Egypt in particular."

"Pelasgians" is the name generally given by ancient writers to the peoples before the Hellenes.
According to both Herodotus and Thucyclides, Pelasgians formed the largest element of the early
population of Greece and the Aegean , and most of them were gradually assimilated by the Hellenes.
Herodotus saw this transformation as following the invasion by Danaos (the Egyptian), which he took
to be around the middle of the second millennium B.C. Herodotus stated that the Egyptian Danaids
taught the Pelasgians (not the Hellenes) the worship of the gods." The idea that the Pelasgians were the
native population, converted to something more "Greek" by the invading Egyptians, also occurs in the
plays of Aischylos and Euripides, written around the same time as Herodotus' Histories.

The Ionians were one of the two great tribes of Greece , the other being the Dorians. In classical times
the Ionians lived in a band across the Aegean from Attica to " Ionia on the Anatolian shore ...
Herodotus linked the Pelasgians to the lonians."

Tiberius Claudius wrote about the movements of some Greek tribes into the Balkan peninsula :
“Among these Celts, if the word is to have any significance, (are included) even the Achaean Greeks,
who had established themselves for some time in the Upper Danube Valley before pushing southward
into Greece. Yes, the Greeks are comparative newcomers to Greece. They displaced the native
Pelasgians ... This happened not long before the Trojan War; the Dorian Greeks came still later -eighty
years after the Trojan War. Other Celts of the same race invaded France and Italy at about the same

With regard to what is now called the Dorian Invasion, Bernal notes that in ancient times this was much
more frequently called "the return of the Heraklids." The Dorians came from the northwestern fringes
of Greece , which had been less affected by the Middle Eastern culture of the Mycenaean palaces
which they destroyed. Their use of the name Heraklids was a claim not only to divine descent from
Herakles, but also to Egyptian and Phoenician royal ancestors. This is not simply a modern theory.
Ancient sources show that the descendants of these conquerors, the Dorian kings of classical and
Hellenistic times, believed themselves to be descended from Egyptians and Phoenicians."

Bernal argues that the explanation of Greek development in terms of Egyptian and Phoenician
influences was overthrown for external reasons, not because of major internal deficiencies or
weaknesses in the original explanation, but because eighteenth- and nineteenth-century Romantics and
racists could not tolerate the idea that the crown jewel of European civilization owed its beginnings to a
racial mix of cultures. For such reasons the ancient model had to be discarded and replaced by
something more acceptable to the political and academic views of the time.

The Aryan model

The Aryan model, an alternative theory about the development of the ancient Greeks, first appeared in
the first half of the nineteenth century. It denied any influence of Egyptian settlements and expressed
doubt about a role for the Phoenicians. An extreme version of this model was propounded during the
height of anti-Semitism in Europe in the 1890s, and then in the 1920s and 1930s; this particular
explanation denied even the Phoenician cultural influence." According to the Aryan model, there had
been an invasion from the north, an invasion not described by ancient writers, which had overcome the
existing pre-Hellenic culture. Greek civilization was seen as the result of the mixture of the Indo-
European speaking Hellenes and the older peoples over whom they ruled.

Bernal argues that four forces explain the overthrow of the ancient model as a description of the
beginnings of Greek culture: Christian reaction to the threat of Egyptian ideas, the rise of the concept of
"progress," the growth of racism, and Romantic Hellenism .16 In particular, a tidal wave of ethnicity
and racialism swept over northern Europe at the end of the eighteenth century. The view was
established that humankind was made up of races that were intrinsically unequal in physical and mental
endowment. Racial mixing could lead to degradation of the better human qualities. To be creative, a
civilization needed to be "racially pure." It became accepted that only people who lived in temperate
climates - that is, Europeans - could really think. Thus the idea that " Greece , which was seen not
merely as the epitome of Europe but also as its pure childhood, [could be] the result of the mixture of
native Europeans and colonizing Africans and Semites" could not be tolerated. 17 By the turn of the
eighteenth century, the so-called "European" Greeks were considered to have been more sensitive and
artistic than the Egyptians and were seen as the better philosophers, even the founders of philosophy.
By the end of the nineteenth century, some popular German writers had come to see the Dorians as
pure-blooded Aryans from the north, possibly even from Germany . The Dorians were certainly seen as
very close to the Germans in their Aryan blood and character. Significant British historians of the time
also were enthusiastic about the supposedly pure northern, and possibly Germanic, blood of the

These ideas were developing in Europe in the same period as the Greek War of Independence, which
united all Europeans against the traditional Islamic enemies from Asia and Africa . This war and the
philhellenic movement throughout Europe and North America , which supported the struggle for
independence, helped refine the existing image of Greece as the epitome of Europe . Paradoxically, the
more the nineteenth century admired the ancient Greeks, the less it respected their writing of their own

Linguistic evidence and the ancient model

Bernal provides evidence in support of his view that Egyptian and Phoenician elements were powerful
in the development of ancient Greek culture. He notes that it is generally agreed that the Greek
language was formed during the seventeenth and sixteenth centuries B.C. Its Indo-European structure
and basic lexicon are combined with a non-Indo-European vocabulary of sophistication. He argues that
since the earlier population spoke a related Indo-European language, it left little trace in Greek; thus the
presence of that population does not explain the many non-Indo-European elements in the later
language. Bernal suggests that it has not been possible for scholars working in the Aryan model over
the last 160 years to explain 50 percent of the Greek vocabulary and 80 per cent of proper names in
terms of either Indo-European or the Anatolian languages supposedly related to "pre-Hellenic." Since
they cannot explain them, they simply call them pre-Hellenic.

Bernal suggests to the contrary: that much of the non-Indo-European element can be plausibly derived
from Egyptian and West Semitic and that this would fit very well with a long period of domination by
Egypto-Semitic conquerors. He claims that up to a quarter of the Greek vocabulary can be traced to
Semitic origins (which for the most part means the Phoenicians), 40 to 50 percent seems to have been
Indo-European, and a further 20 to 25 percent comes from Egyptian, as well as the names for most
Greek gods and many place names. Thus 80 to 90 percent of the vocabulary is accounted for, as high a
proportion as one can hope for in any language.

Bernal argues that the Indo-European component of the Greek lexicon is relatively small. There is a
low proportion of word roots with cognates in any other Indo-European language. Further, the semantic
range in which the Indo European roots appear in Greek is very much the same as that of Anglo-Saxon
roots in English, another culture strongly influenced by invaders (in this case, the French-speaking
Normans). These roots provide most pronouns and prepositions, most of the basic nouns and verbs of
family, and many terms of subsistence agriculture. By contrast, the vocabulary of urban life, luxury,
religion, administration, political life, commercial agriculture and abstraction is non-Indo-European.
Bernal points out that such a pattern usually reflects a long-term situation in which speakers of the
language which provides the words of higher culture control the users of the basic lexicon. For
example, he claims that in Greek the words for chariot, sword, bow, march, armor, and battle are non-
Indo-European. Bernal explains that river and mountain names are the toponyms that tend to be the
most persistent in any country. In England , for instance, most of these are Celtic, and some even seem
to be pre-Indo-European. The presence of Egyptian or Semitic mountain names in ancient Greek would
therefore indicate a very profound cultural penetration. Bernal presents many examples of these and
notes that the insignificant number of Indo-European city names in Greece, and the fact that plausible
Egyptian and Semitic derivations can be found for most city names, suggest an intensity of contact that
cannot be explained in terms of trade.

Bernal maintains that when all sources, such as legends, place names, religious cults, language and the
distribution of linguistic and script dialects, are taken into account alongside archaeology, the ancient
model, with some slight variations, is plausible today. He discusses equations between specific Greek
and Egyptian divinities and rituals, and the general ancient belief that the Egyptian forms preceded the
others, that the Egyptian religion was the original one. He says that this explains the revival of the purer
Egyptian forms in the fifth century B.C." The classical and Hellenistic Greeks themselves maintained
that their religion came from Egypt , and Herodotus even specified that the names of the gods were
almost all Egyptian.

Using linguistic, cultural, and written references, Bernal presents interesting evidence connecting the
first foundation of Thebes directly or indirectly to eleventh-dynasty Egypt . He argues that both the city
name Athenai and the divine name Athene or Atena derive from Egyptian, and offers evidence to
substantiate this claim. He traces the name of Sparta to Egyptian sources, as well as detailing
relationships between Spartan and Egyptian mythology. He says that much of the uniquely Spartan
political vocabulary can be plausibly derived from late Egyptian and that early Spartan art has a
strikingly Egyptian appearance. For Bernal, all these ideas link up with the Spartan kings' belief in their
Heraklid - hence Egyptian or Hyksos - ancestry, and would therefore account for observations such as
the building of a pyramid at Menelaion, the Spartan shrine, and the letter one of the last Spartan kings
wrote to the high priest in Jerusalem, claiming kingship with him.
Bernal claims that there has been a movement, led mainly by Jewish scholars, to eliminate anti-
Semitism in the writing of ancient history, and to give the Phoenicians due credit for their central role
in the formation of Greek culture. A return to the ancient model is less clear with regard to Egyptian
influence. However, Bernal proposes that the weight of the Aryan model's own tradition and the effect
of academic inertia have been weakened by startling evidence showing that the Bronze Age
civilizations were much more advanced and cosmopolitan than was once thought, and that in general
the ancient records are more reliable than more recent reconstructions. He believes the ancient model
will be restored at some point in the early twenty-first century. For our purposes it is sufficient to note
that even the current acknowledgment of the significance of Phoenician influence in the formation of
ancient Greek culture indicates some of the ethnic mix that made up ancient Greece .


Slavery in the ancient world

While it is difficult to gauge the intermixture that took place between the older established inhabitants
and the infiltrating Greeks wherever they may have come from, the tradition of slavery in the ancient
Mediterranean may have had an even greater impact on the physical nature of the people. It has been
estimated that in classical times the number of slaves in Attica was roughly equal to the number of free
inhabitants, or around 100,000." In Sparta there was an even greater proportion of slaves, and most of
them, the helots, were Messenians. While the slaves of Athens were a wide racial mix and therefore
less likely to unite on the basis of a common language, these Messenian helots of Sparta all spoke
Greek, and had a kind of group self-consciousness. Thus they presented "special problems of security
for their Spartan masters, whose numbers were constantly on the decline."

Changes in the ethnic composition of Greek city-states are illustrated by the comments about the case
of Piso. Piso, who had been the recipient of an unhelpful decision by a vote of the Athenian city

"made a violent speech in which he said that the latter-day Athenians had no right to identify
themselves with the great Athenians of the days of Pericles, Demosthenes, Aeschylus, and Plato. The
ancient Athenians had been extirpated by repeated wars and massacres and these were mere mongrels,
degenerates, and the descendants of slaves. He said that any Roman who flattered them as if they were
the legitimate heirs of those ancient heroes was lowering the dignity of the Roman name."

Such historical ideas make it clear that even two thousand years ago the notion of ethnic purity
amongst the Greeks was difficult to sustain. The ethnic mix continued over the next two thousand
years. As Nicol has observed, "The ancient Greeks were, after all, of very mixed ancestry; and there
can be no doubt that the Byzantine Greeks, both before and after the Slav occupation, were even more

Celtic Influence

In 282-280 B.C., a Celtic army of about 170,000 led by Brennos and Achicorius entered Macedonia
and, with Bolgios, overwhelmed the country. The Celtic army swept into Greece , defeating the Greeks
at Thermopylae , and went on to sack the temple of Delphi , the most sacred site of the Hellenic world,
before withdrawing. The Celtic army eventually withdrew in an orderly manner, taking their loot with
them. No Greek army was strong enough to attack them. The Celtic invasions had a lasting effect on
Greek consciousness, being commemorated in Greek literature.
Though some remained as mercenaries, the bulk of the Celtic armies moved north again, having found
little room to settle in populated Greece and Macedonia . The Celts remained in Thrace , though they
were Hellenized. The Scordisci had established a prosperous and strong kingdom around modern
Belgrade , and one Celtic tribe settled on the slopes of Haemos. However, most went further north and
east, some even settling in Asia Minor , in Galatia .

Greeks as Slavs

In recent historical time other Europeans have held the view that the people of modern Greece have
little ethnic connection with the ancient Greeks. Robert Browning, 32 a writer who is sympathetic to
the Greeks, discusses the writings of the Bavarian Johann Philipp Fallmerayer, who in 1830 proposed
that the Slav invasions and settlements of the late sixth and seventh centuries resulted in the "expulsion
or extirpation of the original population of peninsula Greece . Consequently the medieval and modern
Greeks ... are not the descendants of the Greeks of antiquity, and their Hellenism is artificial."
Fallmerayer's view that not a drop of pure Greek blood is to be found in the modern Greek is often held
to be extreme. A more moderate version of essentially the same idea was presented more recently by
R.H. Jenkins.

Browning concedes that the Slavic impact was considerable in the Balkan Peninsula , and that there
was great intermixture of races in Balkan Greek lands. He says Fallnierayer wits right in drawing
attention to the extensive Slav invasion and settlement in continental Greece . Despite the great
attention given by the Greek government to renaming towns, villages, rivers and other geographic
locations, there remain large numbers of place names of Slavonic origin. Even so, Browning suggests,
the majority of the Greek-speaking people lived in Constantinople and Asia Minor , and in these more
distant locations were not so strongly affected by the Slavs. He says also that the original population
was not extirpated or expelled, since many remained in coastal regions, cities, and inaccessible areas.

Nicholas Cheetham is uncompromising in the language he uses to describe the Slav influence. He says
that between the fifth and seventh centuries "a sharp and brutal revolution altered the whole character
of Hellas ... It also involved a steep decline of civilized life and an almost total rejection of former
values... The most striking change affected the ethnic composition of the people and resulted from the
mass migration of Slavs into the Balkans which began in the sixth Century.”

Cheetham explains that the eastern emperor held back the Slavs for decades. For instance, the emperor
Constans II (642-68) successfully forced back the "Macedonian Slavs" (as Cheetham calls them) who
were threatening Thessalonika. Later Constans' grandson, Justinian II, undertook a major campaign
against the Slavs and settled many in Asia . But in the end there was a continuous infiltration followed
by settlement. It seems that earthquakes and the bubonic plague had thinned the population on the eve
of the Slav invasion. After the great plague of 744-747, Constantinople was repopulated with Greeks
from the Balkan peninsula and the islands, and this may have made even more room for the
newcomers. The land was re-peopled, Cheetham says. The Slavs occupied the fertile plains and river
valleys, while the original peoples were forced into the numerous mountain ranges. The Slavs remained
rural dwellers, so the cities may have suffered less from their arrival. The Slav settlements extended the
length and breadth of the Balkan peninsula . They overran the "whole of Greece ," and more, Cheetham
says. Their influence extended across the Balkans from the Danube to Cape Tainaron . In the process,
Roman authority was submerged, and the remnants of classical culture and the Christian religion were
extinguished. There were few areas remaining where the Greeks predominated, though at least in those
early times Thessalonika was one of them. In the eighth century Strabonos Epithomatus wrote, "And
now, in that way almost all of Epirus , Hellada, the Peloponnese and Macedonia have also been settled
by the Skiti-Slavs." In general, the lands that had been Greek in ancient times were commonly regarded
by foreigners as a Slav preserve.

In 805 the Slavs came under imperial control. They learned the ways of Roman citizens and were
probably being attracted to Christianity. Eventually, peasant farmers from Asia minor were brought in
to re-colonize coastal plains and river valleys of " Hellas ." Those Slavs who did not assimilate were
gradually pushed back into the more rugged and inhospitable regions of the interior.

The distinction between Romans and assimilated Slavs became blurred. As early as 766 Niketas, a
(Macedonian) Slav, became patriarch of the Constantinople patriarchate.

Nicholas Cheetham claims that the Orthodox church made intense efforts to convert the Slavs in
Greece, and that this took effect more or less in the period from A.D. 800 to 1000, only when the Greek
language had ousted Slavonic. Again, this effect was stronger in the southern part of the peninsula than
further to the north, since the Christianization of the Slavs as a whole was made possible only when
some Slav monks from Thessalonika created a suitable script in their own language as the vehicle for
this task. Yet the central point, that the ethnic mix was profound, is quite clear.

Another historian, Tom Winnifrith, says that the Slav conquest of the Balkans was rapid, eliminating
the Latin heritage. He says the Slavs "spread throughout Greece ." However, it was not just the Slavs
who created ethnic change at this time. Winnifrith says there were many Latin-speaking refugees from
cities in the thickly populated areas of the Danube frontier and Illyricum who are likely to have
gravitated to Salonika and Constantinople and exchanged their Latin for Greek. These refugees added
another element to the constantly changing ethnic equation in the Balkans.

The extent of the Slavic inroad is evident on maps showing mediaeval population distribution. The map
titled "Slavs in the Balkans" shows that by about the eighth century A.D., Slavs were settled along the
whole length of the Balkan peninsula right to the tip of the Peloponnese and were especially strong
along the western coast. Pockets of Greek inhabitants remained along the east coast.

The Byzantine emperor Constantine Porphyrgenitus openly says that the whole of Hellas had been
Slavicized. The Slavonic tribes of the Ezerites and the Milingi were independent in the Peloponnese in
the seventh and eighth centuries and did not pay tribute to Byzantium . Even today in the Peloponnese ,
one cannot go three miles in any direction without encountering a Slavonic place-name."

Arnold Toynbee compares the Slavic invasion with the early Greek invasions, noting that "on the
mainland itself, the Slav occupation was more nearly complete than the North-West-Greek occupation
had been." He explains that Attica was not occupied in either historical invasion, but in the
Peloponnese , " Arcadia , which had escaped occupation in the twelfth century B.C., was now overrun."
For more than two hundred years, till the re-conquest of the Peloponnese by the East Roman
government around A.D. 850, the Slavs controlled almost all of it. "As late as the year A.D. 1204, the
French invaders of the Peloponnese found that, after more than three centuries of East Roman rule,
there were still two independent Slav peoples, the Ezeritai and the Melingoi, in the fastness of Mount
Taygetos ."

There is much agreement among historians about the dramatic and overpowering influx of Slavic
peoples to Greece . These people often intermarried and were assimilated in the "Roman" culture.
Some writers tend to downplay the importance of the racial intermixture for Hellenization, suggesting
that being a Hellene does not require particular racial antecedents. This is a point that modern Greeks
appear unwilling to believe. Their preference seems to be simply to deny that "ethnological
adulteration" ever took place. For example, in Macedonia , History and Politics (a publication
sponsored by the Greek government and distributed throughout the English-speaking world) it is
acknowledged (p. 10) that after Basil 11 there was a "solid Slav element" in Yugoslav and Bulgarian
Macedonia, but it claims there was no impact at all in Greek Macedonia, or in Greece itself. The
analyses from other sources lead us inevitably to a rejection of these claims. The Slavic influence in
what is now Greece is clear. However, there were other important influences also.

Greeks as Albanians

Slavs were not the only groups to move into the southern part of the Balkan peninsula . Many
Albanians came in also. Albanians settled in Athens , Corinth , Mani, Thessaly and even in the Aegean
islands. In the early nineteenth century, the population of Athens was 24 percent Albanian, 32 percent
Turkish, and only 44 percent Greek. The village of Marathon , scene of the great victory in 490 B.C.,
was, early in the nineteenth century, almost entirely Albanian."
Nicholas Hammond a historian who is sympathetic to the Greek view that the ancient Macedonians
were a Greek tribe and who has had several works published in Athens, is unable to support the Greek
view on this matter. He says that by the middle of the fourteenth and early fifteenth century the
majority of people in the Peloponnese were Albanian speakers. The fascinating point is that the people
with whom they were competing for land were overwhelmingly not the original Greek-speaking
Roman citizens, but the new breed of Greek-speaking Slavs. As Hammond says, many Greek-speaking
people at that point in time were probably ethnic Slavs.

The continuing impact of this new ethnic and cultural force is indicated in Hammond 's comments that
the Albanian incursions into Greece continued under the Turkish system and went on right into the
eighteenth century, and that the descendants of these Albanian people were still speaking Albanian
when he was in Greece in the 1930s. This is not a reflection on the national consciousness of these
Greek citizens, for as Hammond explains, they thought of themselves as Greek. Indeed Hammond
points out that the Albanian role in the resistance to the Turks, and in the formation of the Greek nation,
was significant. Like the Slavs, the Albanians became attached to their new lands, learned the new
language, and began to think of themselves as one with the other peoples living there.

Greeks as Vlachs

Also quite numerous during the eighteenth century in Greek lands and in territories that were to
become Greek were the Vlachs. Hammond says that the Vlachs came in with the Albanians and
provided leadership. He suggests that the Vlach peoples probably originated in Dacia , an area that is
now part of Romania . Hammond says that the Vlachs managed to acquire possession of the great
Pindus area. In general, they stayed in northern Greece and were never assimilated in terms of language
the way that other ethnic groups were, though some groups ended the nomadic life and settled in
Macedonia and in Thessaly .

According to Tom Winnifrith, some Greek writers have claimed the Vlachs as ethnic Greeks. He is
skeptical about this idea, claiming that these Greek historians have "been at unfair pains to eliminate
almost completely the Latin element in Vlach language and history." Winnifrith comments that one of
these Greek writers, M. Chrysochoos, the first to suggest that the Vlachs living in the passes crossing
the Pindus mountains were the linear descendants of Roman soldiers, is inspired by misplaced
patriotism to insist that these Romans were really some kind of Greeks.
The Vlachs seem to have left Dacia as part of a wave of migration that spread throughout the Balkans
from Greece, where they are known as Kutzo Vlachs, Tzintzars, or Aromani, through Bulgaria and
Yugoslavia to the Trieste region . Many of them are still in these areas today. They all speak varieties of
Romanian, but represent the remnants of originally Dacian-, Illyrian-, Thracian- and even Scythian-
speaking tribes. Vlachs settled in Thessaly , Rourneli, the Ionian Islands and the Aegean islands.

The Romanian Balkan history professor Motiu has said that the Vlachs comprised 7 to 8 percent of the
population of Greece , numbering seven to eight hundred thousand. There have been no population
statistics regarding the Vlach minority since the Greek census of 1951. The census of 1935 and 1951
recorded 19,703 and 39,855 Vlachs respectively. Greece does not recognize the presence of a Vlach

Greeks as Turks

A recent issue that has engaged the vigorous attention of Greek politicians is the position and status of
Cyprus . It is an area of conflict with Turkey , and one in which Greece has attempted to influence
world opinion in its direction by fostering the theory of Greek ethnic purity. In 1964 German
archaeologist Franz Maier argued that the Turkish Cypriots were a "people" and not a minority, and that
Greek Cypriots and Greeks were not really racially Greek but a mixture. Similarly the Cypriot
sociologist Andreas Panayiotou has been quoted as saying that Cypriots were not Greek, but were a
synthesis of Greek, Turkish and other elements. He advocated that the Cypriot dialect should become
the island's official language.

Some external observers (perhaps with their own case to make) have come to similar conclusions: "
Greece , while denying the presence of ethnic and religious minorities within its borders, tries to
convince the world that the Orthodox people living in its neighboring countries are ethnic Greeks. But
this is not true. In Cyprus , the Southern Cypriot Orthodox whom Greece presents to the world as
Greek Cypriots, are not ethnic Greeks.”

This material demonstrates that the Greek attitude towards ethnic purity in Greece , and all that follows
from it, can be seen in various spheres of political interest, not only in the case of the ethnic
Macedonians of Aegean Macedonia and in behaviors towards the new Republic of Macedonia . It is a
mainstay of the Greek nationalist position.

The Cyprus position is something of a special case; nevertheless, it reminds us of the 400-year
occupation of Greek lands by the Turks and the inevitable ethnic impact. It has already been noted that
in the early part of the nineteenth century the population of Athens was about one-third Turk. "Auberon
Waugh ... wrote in The Daily Telegraph that the Greeks of today, with hairy popos, flat noses and bushy
eyebrows, are clearly a race of Turkish descent and have nothing to do with the Greeks of antiquity
sculpted on the Elgin marbles."

The Greek independence movement

Just as interesting as the ethnic diversity of Greece is the idea that the new peoples in the southern
Balkan Peninsula learned Greek, became good Roman citizens, and identified a community of interest
with other peoples living in their land. Writing nearly one hundred and fifty years ago, just a few years
after the success of the Greek revolution, George Finlay49 noted that the local energies and local
patriotism of all the Christian municipalities in the Ottoman empire were able to readily unite in
opposition to "Othoman oppressions" whenever some kind of communication or administrative
structure to centralize their efforts could be created. In these local institutions, Finlay suggested, a
foundation was laid for a union of all the Christian Orthodox races in European Turkey. This comment
was made, of course, a generation before Bulgaria achieved its autonomy from the Turks, and long
before a Macedonian state became possible. Greece was then still a very small state at the bottom of the
Balkan peninsula . Finlay recognized " the vigorous Albanians of Hydra, the warlike Albanians of Suli,
the persevering Bulgarians of Macedonia, and the laborious Vallachians on the banks of the
Aspropotamos" who embarked together on a struggle for Greek independence, "as heartily as the
posterity of the ancient inhabitants of the soil of Hellas . Nicholas Hammond tells us that in the Greek
War of Independence the Albanians, above all, drove the Turks out.

The heroism and determination of the Greek revolutionaries alone probably would not have been
enough to overcome the Turks and their allies. The armed intervention of the European powers made a
difference at crucial times. With the beginning of the Greek War of Independence in 1821, the Turkish
sultan gave Mohammed Ali (an Albanian general of the Turkish forces in Egypt who had seized power
in 1808) the provincial governorships of Crete and the Peloponnese with a commission to exterminate
the Greek rebels. The Greek fleet kept them out till 1825, when the fleet mutinied over a lack of pay. A
battle at Missolonghi, where Greek patriots were being besieged by the Turks, was swayed in Turkish
favor by the arrival of the Egyptians. The heroic defense and the appearance of an Egyptian threat
moved the governments of Europe to support the Greek cause. In 1827 squadrons of British, French
and Russian navies destroyed the Turkish and Egyptian fleets at Navarin, and Greek independence was
made certain.

According to anthropologist Roger Just, most of the nineteenth-century "Greeks," who had so recently
won their independence from the Turks, not only did not call themselves Hellenes (they learned this
label later from the intellectual nationalists); they did not even speak Greek by preference, but rather
Albanian, Slavonic, or Vlach dialects." He held that their culture was similarly remote from the culture
of the ancient Greeks. Their "customs and habits might seem to bear as much if not more relation to
those of the other peoples of the Balkans and indeed of Anatolian as they did to what were fondly
imagined to be those of Pericline Athens."

Maintaining the myth

Other Europeans have become irritated with the Greek myth of ethnic purity. For instance, in an
editorial in The Sunday Telegraph, London , March 27,1994 , the Greek attitude is taken to task:
What is the word for this obsessive Greek pseudo-relationship with their country's past (they even have
a magazine, Ellenismos, devoted to the subject)? It is not quite pretentiousness. There is too much
passion for that. No, the Greeks, the ancient ones, had a word for the modern Greek condition:
paranoia. We must accept that Mr. Andreas Papandreou (Greek prime minister) and the current EC
presidency are the sole legitimate heirs of Pericles, Demosthenes and Aristide the Just. The world must
nod dumbly at the proposition that in the veins of the modern Greek ... there courses the blood of
Achilles. And their paranoid nationalism is heightened by the tenuousness of that claim.

The Editor of The Sunday Telegraph argues that Greece has been ruthless in erasing traces of ethnic
diversity, and suggests that the desperation of its actions, including the Greek claim to a monopoly of
the classical past (in which all peoples of European origins have a share) can be explained by the fact
that the Greeks today are a mixture of Slavs, Turks, Greeks, Bulgars, Albanians, Vlachs, Jews and
One modern Greek intellectual who now lives outside of that country has reflected on the forces within
Greece that foster and sustain the theory of Greek ethnic purity:

In retrospect it is clear to me that my 12 years of Greek schooling, mainly in the 1970s, conspired to
instill in me precisely one attitude: an almost unshakable belief in the purity and unity of the Greek
people, language and culture ... Belief in the continuity of Greece against all odds was enabled also by
the method of withholding information and sealing off interpretive paths. We had, as children, neither
the capacity nor the inclination to explore disunities and "impurities.”

Modern Greek citizens who try to assert their ethnic identity are not treated tolerantly in Greece even
today. One of these recently said, "There are a million Macedonian speakers [in Greece ]. We are
entitled to rights, to associations, schools, churches, traditions ... I have a Macedonian ethnic
consciousness ... I belong to an ethnic minority which isn't recognized by my State." As a consequence
of this statement and others like it, Christos Sideropoulos and another Greek Macedonian, Anastasios
(or Tasos) Boulis, repeatedly faced the Greek courts. They were charged with spreading false rumors
about the non-Greekness of Macedonia and the existence of a Macedonian minority on Greek territory
which is not officially recognized, and with instigating conflict among Greek citizens by differentiating
between the speakers of a Slavic language and Greeks. If convicted they faced possible terms of several
years' imprisonment and heavy fines.

More will be said about charges of human rights abuses against Greece in a later chapter. At this point
it is enough to recognize the continuing vigor with which Greece asserts an ethnic purity that cannot be
substantiated by historical analysis.

Of particular interest are the population changes that have occurred in Aegean Macedonia during the
twentieth century. The Greek position is that the Greek citizens of Aegean Macedonia have a genuine
claim to historic connection with Macedonia and that the Slavs do not. It is implied that they have this
connection since they are Greek and the ancient Macedonians are claimed to have been Greek.
However, it is not commonly known, even among Greeks, that a majority of the "Greek" population of
Aegean Macedonia can trace its immediate ancestors not to Macedonia , but to Anatolia , western
Turkey , since they came from Turkey as refugees in the 1920s during one of the Greek-Turkish wars.
The population of western Turkey at the time had been subject to many of the same forces that affected
the populations of the southern Balkans, though for various reasons, including the tendency of the
Byzantine Empire to move troublesome peoples to this area and the strong presence of peoples of
Turkic origin, the mix was even more complex. If the connection of Balkan Greek speakers to the
ancient Greeks and thence to the ancient Macedonians is tenuous, the links with the Turkish Greek
speakers who came into Aegean Macedonia are even more dubious. This issue will be explained further
in another chapter.

Nineteenth-century European attitudes toward Greece

In 1821, after the Greek War of Independence broke out, western Europe was swept by Philhellenism."
The Germans were the nationality most quickly and deeply involved. Over 300 Germans went to fight
in Greece , but throughout Europe tens of thousands of students and academics were involved in
support movements. Many Britons, French, and Italians went to Greece to fight, and there was a strong
support movement in the U.S. Though only sixteen North Americans reached Greece, the widespread
philhellenic feelings arising from the war provided a big boost for the "Hellenic"- Greek letter
-fraternities in the US. Shelley wrote:
We are all Greeks. Our laws, our literature, our religion, our arts all have their roots in Greece. But for
Greece ... we might still have been savages and idolaters ... The human form and the human mind
attained to a perfection in Greece which has impressed its images on those faultless productions whose
very fragments are the despair of modern art, and has propagated impulses which can never cease,
through a thousand channels of manifest or imperceptible operation, to enable and delight mankind
until the extinction of the race.

Throughout western Europe, the Greek War of Independence was seen as a struggle between European
youthful vigor and Asiatic and African decadence, corruption and cruelty.

The Greek fight for independence had attracted European sympathy because of European distrust of the
Moslem Turks, sympathy with the Christian Greeks, a great respect for classical Greek scholarship, and
views developing in Europe that the ancient Greeks were "northern Europeans" and the originators of
philosophy and science. Despite this favorable view of the ancients, closer inspection of modern
Greeks had left many western Europeans disappointed with their heroic, but superstitious, Christian
and dirty, "descendants," whom some regarded as "Byzantinized Slavs.” These views were not isolated.
Mark Twain, for instance, "had thought modern Greeks a libel on the ancients."" The English poet
Byron was shocked when he came to Greece expecting to find the tall, blond, blue-eyed heroes of

Cheetham says that the new Greeks were regarded with vague suspicion in academic circles, since their
association with ancient Greece was not considered to be genuine. They were, in Robert Byron’s
words, "discounted as the unmoral refuse of medieval Slav migrations, sullying the land of their birth
with the fury of their politics and the malformation of their small brown bodies." Cheetham says that
the classical master at his school commiserated with him on the prospect of his having to consort on his
holidays with what he called "those nasty little Slavs."

It may be that European racist contempt for the Greek revolutionaries of the nineteenth century goes
some way toward explaining the persisting determination of the Greeks to create an alternative racial
model for themselves. If we juxtapose the nineteenth-century view of the ancient Greeks as Aryans
with attitudes towards the ethnic characteristics of the Greek revolutionaries, we can see the enormous
burden that the Greeks carried in their dealings with Europe . While it has been a characteristic of new
nation-states during the last century and a half to manufacture a suitable cultural, linguistic and ethnic
pedigree for themselves, the Greeks have carried this process through to an extent that is unparalleled
in Europe . Even today, Greece clings to a European connection via its rather tumultuous relationship
with the European community. It is ironic that a part of the continuing European mistrust of the Greeks,
as is evident from influential editorial comments such as those cited above, has developed because of
the very myths that the Greeks propagate in order to purify their image. Greek myth-making today can
be seen as inspired by the wider European racism of the nineteenth and early twentieth century, and
even a continuation of that racism. The United States State Department and international human rights
organizations have claimed that Greek suppression of ethnic minorities has come out of such policies.
These claims will be elaborated in a later chapter.


Arnold Toynbee discusses the evolution of the meaning of the word "Hellene" in Greek literary usage,
noting that it was originally given to a very specific group of northwest Greek-speaking people who
lived in the interior of Epirus, but later came to be used to describe the association of twelve peoples in
central and northeastern continental Greece that formed the Delphi-Anthela amphictyony. This was
primarily a religious communality. Other Greek citystates joined this association and the name Hellene
was applied to all who participated in this civilization. Toynbee points out that the principal distinctive
feature of this new Hellenic civilization, a characteristic that distinguished it from the earlier
Mycenaean civilization, was the city-state. This feature was more important even than language, as is
evidenced by the admission of the Luvian-speaking city-states of Lycia and Caria .

Toynbee notes that Herodotus, writing in 479 B.C., put common race and language first in his
definition of Hellenism, but acknowledged a role for a common culture. However, Isocrates, nearly 100
years later (380 B.C.), made the point that the Athenians "have given the name 'Hellenes' a spiritual
connotation instead of its former racial one. People who share in our Athenian culture are now felt to
have a stronger title to the name 'Hellenes' than people who share with us merely a common physical

Robert Browning dismisses the significance of the Slavic influence in Greece by taking up this idea,
arguing that being Hellene was not a matter of genetics or tribal membership, but of education. Thus
Browning suggests that if you speak Greek and live like a Greek, you are Greek. Cheetham takes a
similar tack, claiming that the "original" citizens of the Balkan peninsula were intensely proud of their
Hellenic culture but adding that questions about racial origins would have appeared pointless to
educated persons of the high Byzantine age, since they tended to indifference towards such matters.
They had become quite accustomed to the enormous ethnic mixture that had characterized the empire
since late Roman times. Both of these explanations, though intended to be sympathetic to the Greeks,
are diametrically opposed to the present Greek government position.

Like Robert Browning, Cheetham makes the point that there was at least some continuity of culture in
early medieval times, since the mixture of peoples was held together by the combined power of "Greek
civilization, Roman law and the Christian religion." Cheetham argues that the Slav immigrants were
progressively intermingled with the Greeks so that an eventual fusion took place.
Browning also notes that over time the Slavs were acculturated and were often converted to
Christianity. A process of "re-Hellenization" took place, led by the Greek Orthodox Church, using the
vehicle of the Greek language. To use the words of Nicholas Cheetham, (in the south) "religion and
Hellenization marched hand in hand." The Slavs and Albanians, in particular, converted to Christianity
and learned to speak Greek.

The nature of this re-Hellenization must be questioned, since even its advocates recognize that Roman
law and the Christian religion were in no sense contiguous with classical culture yet made up a large
part of the character of this "new Hellenic culture." If we strip away the religion of classical Greece and
the unifying force of common shrines and rituals of the Delphi-Anthela amphictyony; eliminate the
political structure of the city-state; and replace Greek law and administrative procedures with those of
Rome, it seems unreasonable to assert that the remaining elements constitute a culture essentially the
same as classical Greece. It is simply not plausible to suggest that the bulk of Greek speaking Roman
citizens in the Middle Ages, let alone the former Turkish subjects of nineteenth-century Greece, "lived
like" ancient Greeks.

Making a case about the difficulty classical writers faced in distinguishing between dialects of Greek,
Arnold Toynbee 61 offers an analogy. He suggests that a speaker of High German from Frankfurt am
Main, or a speaker of Low German from Flanders or Holland , might find it difficult to believe that the
language spoken by people in some rural district in Luxembourg , Alsace , or one of the forest cantons
of Switzerland is a dialect of his own language. Perhaps the most interesting point about this example is
how it demonstrates that although people may speak dialects of the same language, they can enjoy very
different lifestyles and cultures. If we compare the Dutch seaman of the sixteenth century and a Swiss-
German farmer of the same period, we might wonder whether the two would see any affinities between
themselves except for a remote language similarity. We might also contemplate the absurdity of the
idea of a Swiss-German of the present day saying to himself, "My (Dutch) ancestors were among the
greatest of sea navigators." It would be an anachronism.

Eric Hobsbawn reminds us:

The most usual ideological abuse of history is based on anachronism rather than lies. Greek
nationalism refused Macedonia even the right to its name on the grounds that all Macedonia is
essentially Greek and part of a Greek nation-State, presumably ever since the father of Alexander the
Great, king of Macedonia, became ruler of the Greek lands on the Balkan peninsula ... it takes a lot of
courage for a Greek intellectual to say that, historically speaking, it is nonsense. There was no Greek
nation-State or any other single political entity for the Greeks in the fourth century B.C.; the
Macedonian empire was nothing like the Greek or any other modern nation-state, and in any case it is
highly probable that the ancient Greeks regarded the Macedonian rulers, as they did their later Roman
rulers, as barbarians and not as Greeks, though they were doubtless too polite or cautious to say so.

In the same way that it would be questionable for a modern Swiss-German to claim descendence from
sixteenth century Dutch seafarers, it is questionable for modern Greeks to claim family affinity with the
ancient Macedonians, even if the ethnological purity which such a claim requires could be established.

An appeal to continuity of Hellenism through the Greek language is similarly dubious. We have already
seen Roger Just's comment that by the nineteenth-century most of the newly independent "Greeks" did
not call themselves Hellenes, and did not even speak Greek by preference. Furthermore, the use of a
form of the Slavic language was still widespread, perhaps dominant, in the territories that were not
taken into the Greek nation until later in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.

It has been claimed that the Greek language of the nineteenth century was a corrupted ecclesiastical
version of classical Greek that the ancients might have had some trouble comprehending. George
Finlay was extremely critical of this language and the role of the church hierarchy based in
Constantinople in reducing it to the level apparent in the mid-nineteenth century.

If we consider the standard applied by Herodotus that ancestry, language and culture were the basis for
Greek community, or even if we prefer the evolved definition of Isocrates that gives primary emphasis
to culture, it is not an unreasonable conclusion that nineteenth-century Greeks failed to meet these
criteria. After the establishment of independence, Greek intellectuals made a great effort to return their
country to its Hellenic past. Classical place names were revived, and Turkish, Venetian and even
Byzantine buildings were removed to reveal ancient ruins. The language was standardized in the
nineteenth century as part of a concerted effort to create a new Greece . This brought some stability to
the culture of the diverse "new Hellenic" peoples who could be recognized at that time. Since 1988 and
the renaming of northern Greece as Macedonia , a whole new focus has been given to the Greek effort
to identify with the classical and Hellenic past.


The following are official Greek statistics published in 1935 by the Greek government. They
summarize characteristics of the refugees who entered Greece between the period of 1923-1928, their
numbers and the country where they came from. The total number of registered refugees were
1,159,311 people, of whom 565,143 (about half) were settled in Greek occupied Macedonia .

Eastern Thrace: 140,915
Bulgaria: 29,439
Istanbul (Turkey): 14,138
Yugoslavia: 13,038
Albania: 5,168
Russia: 5,083
Romania: 1,077
Italy: 438
Germany: 298
France: 293
Austria: 133
England: 109
Czechoslovakia: 63
Switzerland: 44
Hungary: 44
Belgium: 40
Poland: 34
Estonia: 3
Lithuania: 3
Latvia: 2
Norway: 2
Netherlands: 2
Finland: 2
Ireland: 1

Asia Minor (Turkey): 201,173
Pontus (Turkey): 122,180
Caucasus (USSR): 29,313
Dodecanese (Turkey): 394
Cyprus: 324
Syria: 100
Iraq: 89
Iran: 31
Palestine: 29
Yemen: 10
India: 4
Philippines: 3
China: 2


USA: 537
Argentina: 12
Canada: 11
Brazil: 2
Uruguay: 2
Cuba: 1
Mexico: 1
Chile: 1


Egypt: 446
Ethiopia: 10
South Africa: 10
Algiers: 5
Tunisia: 5
Libya: 4
Sudan: 3
Tanzania: 2
Morocco: 1

From the International Scene

300: Racist War Propaganda with Septic Timing
By John Powers, March 16, 2007

Growing up, my mother's Greek ancestry was a personal lode star, a point from which I was able to get
my bearings in the world. I read the myths, memorized the names of gods and heroes, and took pride in
a people's accomplishment, as if they were my own. This is the sort of thing that some boys do when
they are a bit lost. When they are afraid, they latch on to visions of power and when fear poisons boys
against the world, they turn to hate and cruelty. I never associated myself with the Spartans; I hardly
thought of them as Greeks. I thought they were hateful. Even as a child I could see that they were the
cruelest kind of aristocrats. They gloried in war and had no work other than killing. They could do this
because they were surrounded by "helots" - slaves whose lives were given over to feeding, clothing,
and when the time came for a Spartan boy to become a man, dying for the pleasure of these despots.
Spartans are exactly the kind heroes a fearful boy wants. The kind of heroes that make him feel that he
is superior and pure in the hatred of others' weaknesses. The new film 300 basks in precisely this sort of

A.O. Scott dismisses the movie as stupid and violent, but it took in over $70 million during its opening
weekend. Scott's dismissal failed to see something a lot of other Americans were quick to recognize.
300 is not a terrible film, it’s a fantastic film that panders to a fearful America . It is a brand of
propaganda I had imagined was a thing of the past. 300 would make Leni Riefenstahl blush. I think this
is a smart film, that a lot of thought went into its making, but that its intended audience is not Scott, it is
young men and women of fighting age. 300 is following up on the success of Sin City . Both films are
adaptations of comic books by Frank Miller, who also is credited as a producer for both films. The
films share an aesthetic of digitally abstracted violence, real flesh is turned into the consistency of
cartoon ink: it gives way like warm butter, without resistance and without regret or consequence. These
are worlds of deep black and white. Sin City pioneered this aesthetic at the service of noir nihilism.
With 300 this stylized violence is harnessed to the cause of glorifying total war. 300 is a pornographic
vision of power and perfection and has only contempt for the disfigured and unfamiliar. It plays on the
contemporary fear that we are facing a clash of civilizations, and stokes that fear with racist imagery.
By calling up old Aryan dreams of a classical world peopled by blond haired blue eyed individuals, and
threatening that world with an undifferentiated dark-skinned horde, the film panders to the ugliest
aspect of America . Race separates good from evil in this film, this is part of the way it promotes total
war. 300 would have us believe that no quarter can be given to our enemies because they are sub-
human and hideous.

When I found out that 300 had been turned into a film and was due to be released this winter I
described its timing as "septic." The comic book was a retelling of the story of Thermopylae - a story
that has been used to psych up populations for war in democratic nations since year one of the French
revolution. The original story, of warrior idealists protecting Greece against a huge Persian army, was a
familiar one from childhood. Making a film from the story I grew up with now, with the US and Iranian
administrations playing chicken with nukes and threats of attacks, would seem like tragically bad
timing. When you add to that the comic's racist imagery: the god-king Xerxes and his spokesmen are
all dark skinned blacks, his army, masked and identical henchmen, described repeatedly as "slaves.", it
fulfills my prediction of "septic" timing. But I underestimated exactly how septic a film version of 300
could be.

The racism of the comic was something I could excuse. I like to think I am a sophisticated consumer of
contemporary culture, used to unpacking the racist elements of films by the likes of Quentin Tarantino
and Martin Scorsese. I can enjoy a film with racist characters or racist banter without feeling like I am
participating in racism. Even so, the comic book was troubling. I am half Greek, and I am used to being
mistaken by orthodox Jews as Jewish (they want me to go to temple), by Turks as a Turk, Lebanese and
Iranians as Middle Eastern (those guys generally want to talk food - sometimes they tell me warmly
that I should pray). I like when this happens. I am being told: "you look like one of us." And I do.
Across the Mediterranean , everybody eats the same food (the Lebanese use more mint) and look pretty
much the same - or as a character in the film Mediterraneo (1991) put it: "One face, one race." In an
electric scene from Quentin Tarantino's script for True Romance Dennis Hopper's character provokes a
mobster, played by Christopher Walken, into killing him, telling him that "Sicilians were spawned by
******s... blond hair and blue eyes became black hair and dark skin... you're part eggplant."
Tarantino's script credits the "Moors' with this change - that the dark skinned characteristics of Italians,
and by extension Greeks, are a modern development. I have no doubt that sub-Saharan Africans
contributed a mighty portion to my genetic heritage, but I think this is an exchange that has been going
on since humans spread out around the fertile crescent. Africans have helped shape the ancient world,
body and mind. I am sure that blonds helped too, but the Iliad makes it clear that Greeks did as well.
Homer differentiates the Greeks from their neighbors only by the length of their hair (Greeks had the
longer hair). If I am part "eggplant" it is because Greeks have always been part eggplant. The image of
fair skinned blue eyed ancient Greeks is the wishful thinking of racist anglicizers of the classical world.

So I took the racism of the comic as part of an un-reflected, inherited prejudice about the "Moorish"
origin of Greek's dark features. But the filmmakers took it further; the Greeks were fairer in the film,
and the Persians darker. The ranks of identical masked Persian soldiers revealed flashes of long dark-
kinky hair and charcoal rimmed eyes. Such stereotypically racist depictions of the enemy aren't limited
to 300, of course. Peter Jackson was criticized for imbuing "Easties ", a masked, race/tribe/group in his
Lord of the Rings, with vaguely Middle Eastern features. And while the embarrassed director sought to
placate critics by adding an explanatory/exculpatory scene in the DVD edition of the film, the makers
of 300 have taken the opposite tack, pushed this aspect well beyond the racist colorations found in the
original. In among the ranks of uniformed Persian regulars were whitewashed Sub-Saharan Africans,
who were made to look especially pathetic and bumbling in their unlikely regalia. Xerxes' shock troops
of grimacing "Immortals" wore "Africanized" tragedy masks in the comic book. But that wasn't enough
for the filmmakers, who removed these bronze masks to reveal vampiric monsters with tusks like wild

Because the movie takes so directly from the comic - almost religiously copying the look and
composition - the aspect of the film that reveals the intentions of its makers is what is changed from
comic to film. The comic turned a Greek traitor, Ephialtes, into a victim of the Spartan practice of
exposing to the elements deformed newborns. Miller draws Ephialtes as a nightmarish hunch back,
who desires to take his place among the Spartans. This is not a part of the story I grew up with and I
found it an interesting twist. The filmmakers might have chosen to highlight the cruelty of the Spartan
practice, and the irony that it led to their downfall, but instead they added a menagerie of monstrous
and disfigured freaks to Xerxes' army (but not as many as they added to his harem). Added to the story
of the Spartan king defying the "priests of the old gods" is a new rear guard force - a decadent do-
nothing parliament led by a traitorous politician in the payment of Xerxes who seeks to undo the King's
plan to mobilize all Greece by his heroic self-sacrifice. The peacenik politician tricks the noble "stay-
the-course" queen into giving him the only thing the filmmakers could imagine a peace-seeking
politician might want: forced sex, with the terms laid out clearly by the politician as he takes her from
behind: "This will not be short, and you will not enjoy it." The queen is betrayed all the same, but the
traitor revealed. The film's homophobic racist war-mongering intentions could only be made more
explicit if the queen had hollered "Take that, you Nancy Pelosi-boy!" as she stabbed the traitor to death.

I am not easily alarmed by the spectre of propaganda, but this movie, which follows the comic book
almost religiously, has reconstructed the narrative of Miller's book in pointed manner that panders to
those with the agenda of expanding the American war in Iraq . The image of Roman and Greek
austerity and heroics have been used since the earliest years of the enlightenment as an ideal of
democratic militancy. In his book Total War, David A. Bell argues that story of Spartan sacrifice at
Thermopylae played a key role in the construction of the rhetoric for all out war. Bell argues that total
war was spoken into being by enlightenment thinkers; only after the French revolution would their
ideas be put into practice. As I watched 300 I kept wondering what it was that was being spoken into
being. I understand that the director, Zack Snyder feels that the film can be interpreted as either pro-
Bush or anti-Bush. That Bush could be either the Spartan king, or the Persian king - so he asserts that
the film is non partisan, that's a false choice. This movie is pro-war propaganda, it tells its audience to
hate and destroy its inhuman enemy. The original story has a long pedigree of idealizing war. The
comic book adds to this by abstracting out the nasty parts and carving it down to a simple idealized
shape. In his book, Bell contrasts two works of Voltaire. The realism and horror of Candide, is
contrasted with an early poem called Fontenoy, which describes a terrible and bloody French victory.
Bell writes that "It avoided the gruesome details almost entirely. Instead, it used a style that reduced the
battle to sonorous and decorative abstractions." The filmmakers stated politics may be ambivalent, but
the aesthetic they have used is unambiguously pro-war, and more alarming, pro-total war.

Bullies are unable to properly judge threats - they see everyone and everything as a threat. Bullies live
in fear and they deal in hate. The current administration tells Americans to be afraid. They have told us
what to fear, when to fear, and they have color-coded fear so they can tell us at what level our fear
should rise to. They have told us that fanatics with box cutters and plastic explosives are as dangerous
to us as the industrial might of Nazi Germany and the nuclear missiles of Soviet Russia. Only a coward
would believe that. 300 was crafted by someone that is telling us we don't have to be afraid, that we can
hate instead, but they're wrong. The Bush administration has picked the low hanging fruit, if they could
bully North Korea or Syria or Iran the way they bullied Iraq , they would have already. America needs
to stop being afraid. "Taking the fight to the terrorists" is one more policy built on fear, but to make
friends we need to be brave.

John Powers is an artist living and working in Brooklyn , NY .

Don is the "Son of Ra"

The term "Zeus" (or "Zhe", "Ven"/"Ben"/"Bos"/"Pus"/ "Kos"/"Gos", etc, etc) refers to 'life' and
is really only a nick-name for the god "Don"!!! In other words, "Zhe" is only an adjective or a prefix
to the noun 'don'.

Consider the following names:

Grozdanovski > G-ro, z-dan > Lives-ra, lives-dan.

Georgiades > Geo-r, gia-de > Lives-ra, lives-de.
Gordon > Go-r-don > Lives-ra-don.
Claudio > C-lau-dio > Lives-la-don.
Alladin > A-lla-din > Lives-lla-din.
London > Lon-don!
Slav > Slovene > Sloveneti > S-lo - vene-ti > Lives-li, lives-di.
Cleopatra > C-leo - pa-t > Lives-li, lives-don!

By Dusko L

The Parents of "Don"

A standard history book will tell you that "Kronos and Rhea were the parents of Zeus".
If we go by the previous article we can change the phrase to:
"K-ron and Ma-ria were the parents of Don".
"The living (Sun god) -ra" and "Mother (Sun goddess) -rhea" were the parents of Don".
Here we have Ra-Ma-Dan!
So, Ma-rhea was the Ma-donna!
Mother-Donna = Make-donna!!! (Bingo!)

By Dusko L


As has previously been mentioned in the Macedonian Digest it was the Homo-Sapiens
who invented the Ra-Ma-Da theology BEFORE they migrated out ofAfrica and ventured in all
All the people on the planet are homo-sapiens and therefore the Ra-Ma-Da theology
actually belongs to all of us (regardless of mixed marriages)!
Without complicating things too much, it all comes down to linguistics.
Make-donna > Mother Donna
Make-don-ia > Mother Donna-State

The above terms are proto-Slavic.

*The following is how the Eur-African Ancient City States would have pronounced the same terms:

Ma-thia > Mother Donna

E-ma-thia > Mother Donna-State

**The Ancient (expanding) Macedonian State began from 825 BC.

"....As for the use of the Greek language by the Macedonian Royal house, it is known that it was
adopted at a certain point in the development of the Macedonian state, but it was not always so.
In support of this we will emphasise that there IS NOT ONE inscription in the Greek language on
the territory ofMacedonia prior to the 5th century BC, i.e. before the period of partial adoption of
Greek culture in Macedonia. Ancient inscriptions in Greek dating from long before the 5th century
BC have been found on the territory where the ancient Greek city-states existed, and even Thrace,
but there are no such inscriptions to be found so far in Macedonia.,...." (1)

***The "BIG" Question is:

If the Macedonians became Eur-Africans why didn't they change the name of their state to

***** Answer:

The Macedonians retained the name Macedonia because they were always proto-Slavs and only at
a later time did the Macedonian elite become bilingual and used the Attic/Koine language as a
second language!


By Dusko L


The word Odyssey is Homeric or more accurately Pelasgian. The Pelasgians were the forefathers of the
Macedonians and inhabited most of Europe in Ancient times. According to my studies the name is
made up of two words. We have to go back to an older form of the name 'Odisea' made up of the basic
verb 'odi' to move to go to travel. This is a fundamental Macedonian action verb beyond any doubt
as in itself is made of 'od' (from) and 'do' (to) > oddo > odi - the basic concept of movement from one
point to another. The second word is sea > se > see, which as per my studies is the base root for the
basic Macedonian / Pelasgian word meaning lake > sea or a large surface of water. It is the source of
the English and other European Languages for the word sea > see meaning sea. Originally as it is in
Old English, it meant lake ( Oxford ). In modern Macedonian and all the Slavic languages (Slavic <
Macedonian < Pelasgian) it is the base for the word esse-ro > aze-ro > jezero = lake.
Therefore odi + sea = odisea or basically a sea or water traveler. This is much in agreement with the
famous Homeric epic. Further to this the Greeks adopted the basic Pelasgo – Macedonian action verb
odi > odo, and today have this Pelasgian root / word odos meaning street.

I was the original person that explained the word vasil < vasilea -e many years ago .The meaning is
confirmed in the works of the linguist L. Passow (1830 - 1845). It is of basically the same meaning that
you have heard or found out yourself.

These words are most definitely not of Greek origin .The Original Homeric Epics were written in the
Ancient Pelasgian Language. The Greek language is a far newer language. It has absorbed and
(unfortunately) modified/corrupted much of the Pelasgian vocabulary. Most of the main Greek
Vocabulary is of Pelasgian origin, such as Akadimia , sofos, theos, etc. This has not been disputed by
any scholars because the Greek Language has no roots or offer any widely acceptable explanation or
etymology to these words. Of course this is what has concerned most of the etymologists of today,
and may create disagreement or even revolt in the Greeks, because the language that they say is
artificial (the Macedonian < Pelasgian) is really the one that has given roots to many modern Greek


Book and other Reviews

Александар ДОНСКИ


(Ова писмо веќе е испратено на илјадници е-маил адреси на медиуми, веб-страни, политичари,
поединци и институции во РМ и во дијаспората)

Не е прв пат некој анонимус да сака да се појави во јавноста преку тоа што ќе ги се обиде
да ги „нападне“ моите трудови, иако сите такви обиди на крајот завршуваат поразени и
прегазени од силата на аргументите. Последен ваков случај е некојси магистер Петар Јорда-
носки кој објави писмо-памфлет во „Утрински весник“ во кое се обидува да го „нападне“ мојот
МАКЕДОНИЈА“, при што го напаѓа и Институтот за историја и археологија (ИНИСА), а на
крајот ја напаѓа и самата влада. Овој пат Јорданоски делумно „успеа“ затоа што дел од неговиот
памфлет беше преобјавен во уште еден дневен весник, па сега веројатно е презадоволен затоа
што стана уште „пославна личност“ (иако не сум сигурен дали по читањето на овој текст и на
одговорот што веќе го испратив до „Утрински весник“ ќе остане таков). Но, да се вратиме на
неговиот памфлет. На веб-страната на Институтот за историја и археологија (ИНИСА) се
објавени проектите што овој Институт ги работи. Еден од нив е и мојот проект под
гореспомнатиот наслов. Кога го видел овој проект, Петар Јорданоски, верувале или не, се
разочарал (!?). Еве што пишува на почетокот на неговиот памфлет:
„Пред некој ден ме извести мој пријател, студент на докторски студии по модерна
историја на Источна Европа, дека на македонски државен Универзитет се пишува книга со
која се докажува македонското потекло на руските цареви, т.е. на династијата Романови.
Менторот на мојот пријател, професор по историја на московскиот Универзитет, бил
контактиран од страна на Институтот за историја од Македонија и со сигурност се
пишувала таква книга, беше дециден мојот пријател. Во обид да го разубедам мојот колега,
бидејќи постојат илјадници книги од реномирани светски автори, кои го докажуваат
спротивното, наидов на разочарувачко откритие.“
Во продолжение разочараниот Јорданоски објаснува зошто се разочарал:
Имено, од официјалната страна на Институтот за историја и археологија при
Универзитетот „Гоце Делчев“ во Штипwww.може да се види дека во тек е
подготовка на книга под наслов „Роднинската врска меѓу руската царска династија Романови
и династијата на Александар Велики од Македонија“. Авторот Александар Донски, инаку
вработен во Институтот и лице за контакт, во книгата пишува за „роднинската врска, која
почнува од античко-македонската царска династија, па оди преку династиите на Медија,
Партија и Ерменија, па преку европските средновековни благороднички и царски семејства, се'
до руската царска династија Романови“. А бидејќи и Аце е наш, по логиката на нештата, и
руските цареви се Македонци.
Овде за миг ќе сопреме со цитати од памфлетот, не за да го утешиме разочараниот
Јорданоски, туку за да им објасниме на добронамерните читатели со какви дрски лаги и
манипулации се служи овој памфлетист.
Како прво очигледно е дека неговиот памфлет (кој претендира да биде „критика“ на
историски труд) во себе не содржиниту еден историски контра-аргумент на оние кои се објавени
во трудот. Овој „напад“ практично претставува приземен и мизерен обид за дискредитација без
аргументи, при што Јорданоски дури се служи и со дрски измислици и лаги.
Така, на пример, тој пишува дека јас наводно сум тврдел дека руските цареви се
„Македонци“ (цитат):
„А бидејќи и Аце е наш, по логиката на нештата, и руските цареви се Македонци.“
Но, во мојот труд (од неодамна достапен целосно на интернет на нашата веб-
страна, на
стр. 8, сосема јасно пишува:
„... Не треба ниту да се помисли дека руската царска династија Романови има
античко-македонско потекло“.
Значи јас пишувам дека руската династија Романови НЕМА античко-македонско потекло, а
Јорданоски бесрамно лаже дека сум тврдел дека „руските цареви се Македонци“ (!?). Да сум во
можност веднаш би му дал уште една магистерска титула – овојпат за лажење!
Но, зошто тогаш насловот на овој труд е таков каков што е, ако од една страна, тврдиме
дека руската царска династија Романови не се Македонци, а сепак пишуваме за
нивната роднинска врска со античко-македонската царска династија? Овде накратко ќе
објасниме некои факти, не заради Јорданоски (кој очигледно нема доволен капацитет да ги сфати
овие едноставни работи – во спротивно не би пишувал вакви глупости), туку заради чесните и
добронамерни читатели.
Значи во трудот само се наведени податоци за родословната линија која (врз основа на
релевантни историски извори кои ги цитираме, а пред се врз основа на светски познатите
родословни табели „Алманахот Гота“ и други) почнува од античко-македонската царска
династија и, низ вековното крвно мешање со стотици припадници на други инородни династии,
стигнува (генерација по генерација) прво до средновековните, а потоа и до денешните европски
кралски и царски семејства. (За да не ги набројуваме сите овие бројни генерации, како доказ
повикуваме да се прочитаат овие податоци во самиот труд). Ако се има предвид ваквото вековно
мешање на припадници од разни народи, тоа конечно значи дека сосема мал и незначителен дел
(да кажеме сликовито – можеби само неколку капки) од античко-македонската крв, низ ваквото
вековно мешање со подоцнежните инородни династии, стигнал и до европските царски
семејства, меѓу кои и до руската династија Романови, а не дека Романови се „Македонци“ или
дека имаат „античко-македонско потекло“ како што злонамерно импутира Јорданоски. Ова ќе го
објасниме со еден едноставен пример. Лично имам пријател, припадник на црната раса од
Нигерија. Но, една од неколкуте негови прабаби била Швеѓанка. Ако напишеме дека „постои
роднинска врска помеѓу Швеѓанката и Нигериецот“, дали тоа значи дека тврдиме оти
Нигериецот (црнец) има „шведско етничко потекло“? Се разбира дека не. Тој си е Нигериец, но
во една негова далечна роднинска нитка (од стотиците роднински нитки што ги има длабоко во
минатото) поседува и шведска крв и гени (во многу мал дел). Е токму ваквата едноставна
вистина не успеал да ја сфати Јорданоски. Руската династија Романови главно си биле етнички
Руси и ние тоа го тврдиме во книгата, но тие во себе имале крв и гени и од многу други не-руски
народи (Германци, Французи, Ерменци и други – посебно ако се знае дека царските семејства
уште од антиката, па наваму, низ вековите, се мешале меѓу себе). Меѓу нив (пак ќе повториме)
имало и многу мал и незначителен дел и од крвта и гените на античко-македонската династија
(за што наведуваме цврсти историски докази преземени од релевантни извори, па ако некој сака
ова да го негира, прво нека ги прочита, па потоа нека реагира).
Впрочем, овде е текстот на книгата, поставен бесплатно за читање на спомнатата веб-
страна (иако авторските права се заштитени) па секој сам може да се увери во лагите на
Јорданоски со кој се обидува да го „нападне“ овој труд. На крајот ќе кажеме и дека не е тајна оти
наша крајна цел е историски поткрепените аргументи од овој труд да ги претставиме пред
руската јавност во знак на поддршка во зближувањето на нашите два народа и држави.
Во продолжение на својот памфлет Јорданоски пишува:
Ги повикувам читателите да го посетат овој веб-сајт. Загарантирана е значителна
доза на смеење кога ќе читате дека Македонија е првата централизирана држава во Европа,
дека целта на Институтот е да ги развива патриотските и чувствата за припадност кон
својата држава, дека ние сме исклучиви наследници на античките Македонци, и мноштво
други бисери.
Во овој дел од памфлетот Јорданоски го достигнал дното, посебно кога пишува дека на
веб-страната на ИНИСА имало работи кои ќе предизвикаат „доза на смеење“. Да потсетиме. На
веб-страната на ИНИСА е објавена информација за успешно одржаниот научен симпозиум за
Јосиф Ковачев, на кој настапија наши познати научни работници и беа презентирани значајни
трудови од животот и дејноста на овој наш истакнат педагог. Го прашувам Петар Јорданоски:
што има смешно во ова? На веб-страната на ИНИСА е објавена и информација за учеството на
двајца наши членови на Македонско-украинската научна конференција која, во организација на
МАНУ и УГД, лани се одржа во Штип. И овде не ми е јасно што е толку смешно? Или можеби
на памфлетистот Јорданоски му е „смешен“ податокот за Одговорот на ИНИСА на прогрчкото
писмо до американскиот претседател (единствено од таков вид кај нас)? Или можеби му е
„смешен“ податокот за излегувањето на Првиот број на Годишниот гласник на ИНИСА, во кој
исто така се застапени наши познати историчари? Или можеби му е „смешна“ електронската
библиотека (создадена од стотици автентични и оригинални дела на антички автори) што
трпеливо ја создаде ИНИСА изминативе години? Или можеби му е „смешно“ истражувањето за
карактеристиките на животот во Штип непосредно по заминувањето на Турците од Македонија?
Или можеби најавениот труд за изгубените дела на античко-македонските историчари?
(Останатите проекти на ИНИСА секој сам може да ги види на нашата веб-страна). Навистина не
ми е јасно дали некој нормален човек може да се смее на вакви работи? Но, има секакви луѓе...
Прво се разочаруваат затоа што некој го истражувал потеклото на руската династија, потоа
лажат, а на крајот се смеат на сериозни историски проекти...
Авторот на овој памфлет се „потсмева“ на тврдењето дека Македонија била првата
централизирана држава во Европа, со што покажува дека не само што има проблем со
вистината, туку и дека познавањето на историјата му е на мизерно ниво. Дека Македонија е
првата централизирана држава во Европа е добро познат факт во историјата. Само како
илустрација ќе цитираме што пишува светски познатиот современ историчар Питер Грин во
својата книга „Александар Македонски 356 – 323 година пред Христа“:
„Македонија... била првата голема територијална држава со ефективна централизирана
политика, воена и административна структура што се појавила на европскиот континент“
Во спомнатиот памфлет Петар Јорданоски лаже и кога тврди дека на веб-страната на
ИНИСА пишувало дека ние „сме исклучителни наследници на античките Македонци“. Јавно го
повикувам да покаже каде на веб-страната на ИНИСА го пишува тоа? Ние само тврдиме дека и
античките Македонци (како овдешни староседелци) ја внеле својата крв и култура во денешната
македонска нација. Впрочем, оваа вистина е прифатена и од нашата официјална
историографија, од МПЦ и од други релевантни фактори, за што Јорданоски исто така нема
На крајот од памфлетот Јорданоски се чини ги открива вистинските причини за
создавањето на своето мизерно писмо – а тоа е напад против владата, која безобѕирно ја напаѓа,
тврдејќи дека не требало да финансира вакви проекти (иако проектот воопшто не е финансиран
од владата).
Нема што да додадеме на крајот освен дека лудилото за неаргументирани напади против
владата навистина нема граници.
ИНИСА продолжува со работата без оглед на вакви долни провокации, кои всушност
повеќе помагаат во нејзина популаризација.

Zdravo Risto,

In Australia , the British have established an English speaking country of over 20 million people in
about 200 years. How did they do this? The place where I live was bush land just two hundred years
ago. Now there is a city here. If there was one thing the British were good at it was colonizing territory.
They built villages from the ground up where there was nothing before, brick by brick, house by house.

I believe that if the Macedonian government wants to hold onto its land its needs to build a large town
and even city, populated by Macedonian Christians from the ground up. It needs to lay down the
infrastructure and start the job.

It would add more Macedonian MP's to the Parliament, taking pressure off the country and the
potential of a hung parliament. It would also entirely negate the effects of the Framework Agreement.
The Framework Agreement only applies to regions where Albanians number more than 25 percent.
These are just two advantages to building a large town.

The Israeli government have created a 'National Fund' where the government buys land which they
hold 'in perpetuity' for Jewish people. They buy the land, then they build settlements on it, then they
plant Jews there. They are not houses owned by individuals, rather houses owned by the government. If
the Macedonian government wants to hold onto its territory, it needs to do this.

More specifically, it needs to build this kind of city around the region of Debar or Galichnik because
that is a sparsely populated region that the Albanians will try to take one day. The houses need to be
modern, they need to have plumbing and power, water and more so that they appeal to Macedonian
families, many who would like to return but won't because basic infrastructure is still lacking in many

If the Macedonian government is serious about preventing the disintegration of the country and the
State, I believe this is something it has to do. If the Macedonian government cannot be persuaded to do
what other countries have been doing for centuries to secure territory, then the Macedonian Orthodox
Church could perhaps be convinced of doing something like this. Perhaps a number of very wealthy
Macedonians in the Diaspora could be convinced of its merits and a desire to leave a lasting legacy
behind that ensures the future of the country? It’s something that needs to be done.

The Macedonians have always founded new villages and new towns. Tetovo was founded by
Macedonians. There are many cases throughout the centuries of Macedonians founding a new village,
or a new town, from scratch - literally brick by brick from the ground up. Why is it so inconceivable for
the Macedonian government, or the Macedonian Orthodox Church or a wealthy individual to do the
same? I think it is necessary.


Hi, Risto,

You raise very interesting questions about mistakes but I will disagree of some facts called "Mistakes".
I did mention to you in the past that our problem is: "the anti-Macedonian conspiracy", that is, the West
with several crusades against Russia , tried to prevent "The Third Rome", Moscow , to claim ancestry,
the heritage of Alexander the Great. Read Wikipedia, "Third Rome", and you will find many facts

"Koini Language", in my opinion is Bul*hit, there never was such a language and all the scripts were
artificially created.

Till 1752, there was no Greek, state, Hellenic state or words, Johan Gustav Droysen invented them in

In the call to uprising against the Ottomans, the Russian Tsar calls: Horvati (Croatians), Serbians,
Romanians, Volachians, Bulgarians, Macedonians, but no Greeks or Hellenes in this call. Why not?
Because such an entity never existed.

The 1821 Greek uprising, Filiki Eteria was a Franko-English interference, it was a Macedonian
uprising intercepted by the West and executed all the ethnic leaders.

The biggest serious problem was that in South East Macedonia, we had Macedonian schools, church,
textbooks in our vernacular tongue, about 1825. These schools were facilitated by Western protestant
and Catholic missionaries in Macedonia . It was this fact that Greeks, Phanariots, Bulgarians, Sultan
and Russians worked against us and divided Macedonia , by religion in various ethnic spheres, which
continues to this days. Russia was forced by several wars to denounce ancient Macedonia , therefore
Present Macedonia. We made a mistake when we took up arms against our occupiers. As Gotse
Delchev said “it was suicidal”.
Up to 1935, the Bulgarian Vrhovists were sending illegal fighters in Greece . That was very bad for our
people who were persecuted as Bulgarian collaborators. After 1949, Zahariadis was sending Paranomia
agents in Greece . The local left wing suffered, as collaborators.
The communist party was treated as religion and helped each other, like princes.
I was persecuted in Bucharest as a "Titoist", but was not allowed to migrate to Skopje . All the
members of KKE were received with great honour.

This, for the time being.

Dedo Mano.

Dear Risto

This outrageous tactic and bullish attitude of the Greeks should be exposed first to the world that
Greeks are rude, savage and bullish, their attitude as the one of Karagianis proves that Greece and
Greeks are fascists and chauvinists.

In Australia they employ the same tactics. But our MHR and other Macedonian councils are naive and
immature and take no notice of the senior Macedonians. For instance there is one guy: Anasthasios
Tamis Majir from Lerinsko, pretending to be doctor of "Hellenism" and propagates bulls*it where ever
he gives a talk. He was head of the Greek studies at Latrobe University , Melbourne and called several
pan-Hellenic world congresses to prove: "the word Macedonia does not exist".

At the congress Macedonians from Melbourne demonstrated and yelled Macedonian slogans.
All this made the Greeks change tactics and renamed Northern Greece to Macedonia : East, Central and

Mr. Tamis ashamed, vanished. I read a speech and at the bottom I saw the name A. Tamis, Notre Dame
University , Fremantle, W. A.

In one English flyer he says that Alexander the Great, like Nero were Barbarian kings.
Our new intellectuals, sorry to say are Ucheni Tellinja, do not want to challenge.

Recently he gave a talk at UWA, main university here and denigrated Macedonians.
These Malakides, must be exposed publicly, because the tides are changing in our favour. Such scholars
are a detriment to themselves, like "Damianos", he is so brain washed he has lost touch of reality.
Keep up the good work.

PS. Risto what happened with the USA census? Are there any news?

Regards, Dedo Mano

(Keeper of the Linguistic Flame)

By Spero Thompson

Today's Macedonians are proud of their Heritage

Especially for the role of women in keeping language alive
During a violent century, it was the Macedonian speaking home
That held together the Macedonians as a distinct people
Who held the people together?
She who was the preserver of the Macedonian language

The teacher is honoured by the child’s first word “Maijka”

Words to infants are seeds planted, which grow to become
Words of poetry and song, sadness and joy, nation and patriotism
Words of tradition, history, life and death
Who is the teacher?
She who was the preserver of the Macedonian language

Macedonians have always held their language to be original

Adversaries could not stifle or disallow this beloved language
Circumstances force men to leave and learn new languages
The woman stands, keeper and guardian of the spoken word
Who stands? Who is guardian?
She who was the preserver of the Macedonian language

Balkan, World and Civil wars bring upheaval, emigration and change
Outside the home the Macedonian man is battered by nationalism
His national flame Macedonia for Macedonians is nearly extinguished
Inside the home, children cling to the woman's apron; embers glow
Whose apron?
She who is the preserver of the Macedonian language

Outside the assimilators press their false racial claims

You are Greek, you are Bulgarian you are Serbian
Inside the home, the woman speaks quietly to the children
In native tongue she tells them “You are Macedonian”
Who tells them?
She who is the preserver of the Macedonian Language

When you meet a Baba dressed in black of peasant stock

Forget not to praise her, this unsung linguistic heroine
This language we moderns so casually, speak, read and write
Was kept and preserved for us by her and her sisters
Who kept? Who treasured?
She who was the preserver of the Macedonian language.

From the Archives


By Slave Nikolovski - Katin


Macedonians have always been subject to various kinds of foreign religious, national, and influence,
wherever there were conditions for such activity. The most active of all in this respect were the
Bulgarian, Greek, and Serbian propaganda, which fulfilled their goals successfully. This was enhanced
by the lack of organization of the Macedonian emigrants, who unfortunately had neither a state of their
own nor Macedonian Orthodox churches. For this reason during the period from their arrival to USA ,
Canada , Australia , and other countries till the constitution of the Macedonian state the Macedonians
were subject to Bulgarian, Greek, and Serbian propaganda. The Catholic, Anglican, and certain
Protestant Churches also imposed their propaganda and influence upon the Macedonian emigrants.
Thus, many of them joined these churches.

During the period between the two World Wars when the MOC had not yet been established as an
institution, the Macedonian emigrants in USA and Canada not only participated in the organization and
construction of the so-called Macedonian-Bulgarian Orthodox churches, but they also supported,
financed and attended them. These churches were initiated, built, and controlled by MPO. A small
number of Macedonians, especially the elderly generations, continue to satisfy their religious needs at
some of these Christian churches. Since the 1990’s most of the churches of Macedonian-Bulgarian
character which had been controlled by the MPO were handed over and are now under full control and
jurisdiction of the Eastern Orthodox Church of USA and Canada, which is in no way related to the
Macedonian people and Macedonia.

Similarly, prior to the constitution of the MOC as part of the Ohrid Archiepiscopate, a large number of
Macedonian emigrants attended, and offered financial and spiritual support in the construction and
existence of Serbian Orthodox Churches. Even today a certain number of Macedonian emigrants
continue to attend Serbian, Russian, Ukrainian, Romanian, and other Christian churches in USA and
Canada .


The first Macedonian – Bulgarian church in USA was established and built in Granite City , Illinois in
the summer of 1909. It was built in what was then the suburb of “ Lincoln ” which had a large
Macedonian emigrant population, the majority of which had come from Aegean Macedonia, and some
from Bulgaria . The church was blessed and the Bulgarian archimandrite, Teofilakt held the first
service, on 14 September 1909 . As early as June 1908 he had been sent by the administration of the
Holy Synod in Sofia to serve the Bulgarians. However, his aim was to “gather” the Macedonians
around to the Bulgarian Orthodox Church, which had a strong influence over the Macedonians at the
time, particularly over those who had come from the Aegean part of Macedonia .
During the period 1913 – 1922 the church was practically closed since it did not have a permanent
priest. After 1933 it became more active. However, after World War II its activities declined. Thus, in
1954 it was sold to the Armenian Apostle Church .


The Bulgarian Orthodox Church of St. Holy Trinity in Madison , Illinois was founded in 1910. It was
built using the funds of Macedonians from the Aegean part of Macedonia and some Bulgarians. As was
the case with the other Macedonian Bulgarian Orthodox Churches, the Bulgarian archimandrite
managed this, too. In 1919 the church was set on fire and was extremely damaged. Ten years later the
church was reconstructed and restored. It consisted of the church premises and a small hall. In 1975 the
church was expanded and services were conducted in English. This was the only church built mostly by
Macedonians, which was not controlled by the MPO till 1938. Till about ten years ago every other
Macedonian Bulgarian or Bulgarian Orthodox Church had been controlled by the Macedonian Political

ST. ANNUNCIATION IN STILTON - (Sv. Blagoveshtenie)

The second Macedonian Bulgarian Orthodox Church in USA is the St. Annunciation Church in Stilton,
Pennsylvania . It was established in 1909 several months after the foundation of the St. Cyril and
Methodius Church in Granite City . The same Bulgarian archimandrite, who was also elected to be the
first enoric priest of the church, too devoted this. Mostly MPO members of the “Prilep” branch
attended it. This branch was established in 1921, and in fact owned the house which had a hall
immediately next to the church. The church, on the other hand, had been built in 1927 using the funds
of Macedonian emigrants who came mostly from Prilep, and the region. The church was completed in
1949. However, at the beginning of 1975 the church was set on fire and was largely damaged. This
church continues its activities now and belongs to the Bulgarian Eastern Orthodox Church in USA ,
Canada , and Australia .


One of the larger Macedonian colonies in USA after the Ilinden Uprising was in Indianapolis . Hence,
about a thousand people from the areas of Lerin, Voden, and other places in Western Macedonia, and
about a hundred Bulgarians joined in organizations known as: “Ekshisu,” “Ostrovsko,” and “Patelsko.”
They had decided to establish a Christian church in Indiana . At the time the same Bulgarian
archimandrite had come to their community and continued his mission “helping” them establish the
Bulgarian Orthodox Church of St. Stefan on 1 January 1915 . Funds raised mostly by the Macedonians
were used to purchase the building, which was renovated and adapted into a church. 1918 had already
paid off the church premises. This church still stands today. It is attended by a certain number of
families who originally came from Aegean Macedonia and Bulgaria . The integration process in the
new environment had its effects on them, too. Church services are conducted only in English at this
church as well.


The Macedonian - Bulgarian St. Resurrection Church served the Macedonian and small number of
Bulgarian emigrants in Toledo , Loraine, Mansfield , and Cleveland . The church was built and opened
on 18 June 1923 . The MPO had a strong influence in this church.
ST. PETER AND PAUL - (Sv. Petar i Pavle)

The St. Peter and Paul Macedonian Bulgarian Church was founded in Mason City , Iowa . It was built
and opened in May 1928, and was attended by emigrants from Iowa and Minnesota .

ST. CLEMENT OF OHRID IN GARY - (Sv. Kliment Ohridski)

The St. Clement of Ohrid Macedonian – Bulgarian Orthodox Church was founded in July 1929 in Gary
, Indiana . Initially a Serbian Orthodox Church had been purchased which engaged and was attended by
a large number of Macedonians and Bulgarians. The church had problems with the property owner, and
was therefore closed down. Later a new church was built on new premises but its activities decreased
until it stopped functioning.


The seat of the MPO is found in Fort Wayne . It was here that church life began at first in private
houses and stores, and in Butler ’s Hall between 1940 and 1948. Church services were conducted in
Bulgarian. A decision was brought to raise funds for a new St. Nikola’ Church in 1946. Two years later,
the newly constructed church was devoted in November 1948. It is one of the most beautiful
Macedonian Bulgarian Orthodox churches on the North American continent. As was the case with
other Macedonian Bulgarian Orthodox churches in USA and Canada , this church was also a place for
conducting religious instruction, and it helped many newcomers of various nationality and
denomination. It was also a place from which the Orthodox religion spread and it maintained the
Bulgarian – Macedonian heritage. Throughout the period of about forty years priests conducted
services in Bulgarian, but recently services are conducted in English.

Macedonian – Bulgarian and Bulgarian churches in which the majority of members were Macedonians
were also built in USA in the period before and after World War II. This was the case with the
following churches: St. George in Toledo; St. Prophet Ilija in Akron, Ohio; St. Sofia in Chicago,
Illinois; St. Spirit (Sv. Duh) in Youngstown, Ohio; St. Nikola in Flint, Michigan; St. Clement of Ohrid
and St. George, both in Los Angeles, California; St. Spirit in Cincinnati, Ohio; St. Dimitrija in
Cleveland, Ohio; St. Nikola in Buffalo, New York; St. Andrej in New York City; and St. Spas in Bottle
Creek, Michigan, founded in 1947.

After World War II till the restoration of the Macedonian Orthodox Church, the Macedonian emigrants
built, supported, and attended Macedonian-Bulgarian, Serbian, Greek, Russian, Romanian, and other
churches, including the following:

ST. CLEMENT OF OHRID IN DETROIT - (Sv. Kliment Ohridski)

By all means the largest Macedonian colony in USA is Detroit , where the majority of Macedonian
emigrants arrived at the beginning off the XX century. They came for various reasons and with various
national, political, and religious beliefs. Hence, they began various forms of organization and
connection both culturally and spiritually. Thus, a certain number of Macedonians together with the
small number of Bulgarian emigrants joined on a religious scale. Till 1927 they satisfied their religious
needs at various Christian churches. After this year they got together in the Macedonian Bulgarian
Orthodox Church which today bears the name of St. Clement of Ohrid.
In 1928 in Dearborn two houses were bought using funds from the Macedonians, the majority of which
came from the Aegean part of Macedonia . On 17 February 1929 on these premises the foundation
stone was placed for the new St. Trinity Church.
The church was soon built although not finished, and on 2 May the same year the first church service
was held. This marked the beginning of joint church attendance of the Macedonians and Bulgarians
lead by the Bulgarian priest – “missionary” who had been sent for this purpose directly from Sofia .

However, during the crisis (1930 – 1934) problems of a financial character emerged so the church was
closed and put up for sale. This forced the members of the “Tatkovina” branch of the Macedonian
Patriotic Organization (MPO) in Detroit to pull down the St. Trinity Church in Dearborn , and invest in
a new church. Thus, in March 1935 foundations were placed to a new church community that was
named St. Clement of Ohrid. The new church was ready in three years and served till 1964 when a
division among the members appeared. One fraction remained at St. Clement of Ohrid, built in 1964
and blessed in June 1966 by the Bulgarian metropolitan Andrej. It was a three-section church attended
nowadays by a large number of Macedonians from every part of Macedonia as well as a small number
of Bulgarians and other Christians. The other fraction built a new church in Dearborn Heights named
St. Paul (Sv. Pavle).

This state came as a consequence to the division of the Bulgarian Orthodox Church, the effects of
which were seen on the emigrants, too. For this reason, since 1963 in USA and Canada there are two
administrations. One consists of those loyal to the Bulgarian Orthodox Church, joint with the Eastern
Orthodox Church Eparchy for North and South America , and Australia , having seat in New York
City , and controlling eight churches. The other consists of the Eparchy of the Bulgarian Orthodox
Church for USA and Canada with seat in Toledo , Ohio , which controls and has under its jurisdiction
nine churches.


A certain number of Macedonians in Detroit , who came from the Tetovo area attended the Serbian
Orthodox Cathedral Church of St. Lazar = “Ravanica.” They helped it financially, and are presently
among its most numerous and active members. They came from the villages of Vratnica, Belovishte,
Rogachevo, Odri, and others. Since the building of the new church in the 1970’s a large part of the
Macedonian emigrants participated in the cultural, educational, church and sports activities. Otherwise,
the old or original church began its activities on 20 May 1917 when the land was purchased. Ten years
later, in 1927, construction of the church began. It was registered with the authorities in Lansing ,
Michigan on 27 September 1932 as a church corporation. The church was blessed on 17 June 1934 .
Throughout the next few decades the church was built three times. The foundation stone of the present
day building of “Ravanica” was placed on 27 June 1965 . The church was blessed on 25 and 26
November 1967 . The St. Lazar Ravanica Church has collaborated with the former Yugoslav authorities
since 1963 when the shizma emerged in the Serbian Orthodox Church. This gave the Macedonian
emigrants reason and motive to attend this church.

At the same time, a certain number of Macedonian emigrants used to attend both Macedonian and
Serbian churches, while a small number continue to do this even today. This is the case with the
Serbian Orthodox Churches of St. Stefan in Lackawanna , St. Mary in Windsor , St. Sava in Toronto ,
and other cities.


According to some evidence the majority of Macedonian emigrants in Detroit come from Vratnica, near
Tetovo. They also attend the following churches: Macedonian Orthodox Church of St. Mary; Serbian
Orthodox Church of St. Lazar Ravanica; and St. Petka of Vratnica. This village community which owns
a large hall used for organization of various manifestations also has a small church. The building was
constructed in 1979 and includes the church which is under the jurisdiction of the Serbian Orthodox
Church. Presently, the emigrants from Vratnica are raising funds for construction of a new church.


The city of Loraine , Ohio was also center of the Macedonian emigration in the beginning years. It also
had a church community, but it was founded in 1932, one year after the closure of the church in Mount
Union , Pennsylvania , which was attended by Russian and Macedonian emigrants. Thus, on 24
September 1933 an assembly was held at a Slovak community center. At this assembly a committee
was formed which began collecting funds for construction of a church. On 29 October 1933
foundations were placed to the St. Cyril and Methodius community. This church became the center of a
large number of activities of the emigrants from the Balkans. Nowadays it is still active although
attended by very few.


St. Thomas ’ Church, like the St. Clement of Ohrid Church in Detroit , is also registered as an Eastern
European Orthodox Church. It was founded in 1959 after a certain number of believers of what was
then the St. Prophet Ilija Church in Akron refused to acknowledge control of the MPO. On 8 November
1959 they decided to found a new church which would be served by the Bulgarian priest from the St.
Prophet Ilija Church. The part of the name that stated “Macedonian – Bulgarian” was removed and the
name “ St. Thomas – Eastern Orthodox Church” was accepted. Land for construction of a church was
bought and blessed on 20 February 1960 by the Bulgarian bishop, Andrej Velicki. A certain number of
Macedonian emigrants from Akron , Kenton, and Maslon, attended the Serbian Orthodox Church of St.
George in Kenton, as well as the Romanian and Syrian churches. At the same time a large number of
Macedonians from the Lerin (Florina) and Kostur (Castoria) areas support and attend the Greek
Orthodox Church.


The first organized community of the Macedonian emigrants in Canada is by all means the Macedonian
– Bulgarian Orthodox Church of St. Cyril and Methodius in Toronto . Initiatives for establishment of
this community began in 1910. A group of Macedonians from Aegean Macedonia gathered at the
“Nevolska kukya” (Nevoljani House) of the villagers from Nevoljani, near Lerin, and decided to
establish their own church community. A committee was formed comprising of about twenty members,
all from Aegean Macedonia. The second half of August 1910 is in fact the beginning of the
establishment of the church community and the time when they began raising funds for construction of
the church. On 24 November of the same year they purchased a property which they adapted into a
church. This was a meeting place for members of the “Pravda” branch of the MPO in Toronto and other
emigrants from the Balkans.

The foundation stone of the present day church was placed on 24 May 1948 . It was completed in 1949
and on 19 June of the same year the Bulgarian metropolitan Andrej Velicki devoted it. The church was
completely finished in 1954.
Despite the fact that this church was built mainly from the funds of Macedonian emigrants, it
nevertheless found itself under jurisdiction of the Bulgarian church and served Bulgarian propaganda
the whole time. Even now the majority of believers who attend it are Macedonians. Most of them feel
as Macedonians, but the tradition nurtured for several generations is quite an important factor that links
the Macedonian emigrants with this church. This is also the case with the other Macedonian-Bulgarian
Orthodox Churches in USA and Canada . Today it is a monument to the past, which has no believers,
no young generations, but instead it is rented to people of other nations and religions in order to


The St. George Church in Toronto is the second Macedonian-Bulgarian Eastern Orthodox Church. It
was established following the separations within the first Macedonian-Bulgarian Church of St. Cyril
and Methodius in 1940. As a consequence of this a group of Macedonian emigrants the majority of
which had come from the Kostur area, who had been under the influence of Bulgarian propaganda,
founded the St. George Church on 1 June 1941 . On 26 October of the same year the foundation stone
was placed, and the church was blessed on 14 November 1943 . This church continues to be active
presently and its members belong to the elderly Macedonian generations. It is under the jurisdiction of
the Bulgarian Eastern Orthodox Church – USA and Canada Eparchy.


A certain kind of division among the members of the MPO at the church of St. George emerged in the
1970’s. Some Macedonian families who mainly came from the Kostur area withdrew and established
the Holy Trinity Church . In 1971 they purchased an Anglican church and adapted it into a Christian
home. In 1986 the Bulgarian bishop blessed the church and it came under jurisdiction of the Bulgarian
Eastern Orthodox Eparchy for USA , Canada , and Australia . This church continues to be active.

The following are Macedonian – Bulgarian Orthodox Churches under jurisdiction of the Eastern
Orthodox Church which are attended by Americans and Canadians of Macedonian descent: Holy
Trinity (Sv. Trojca) in St. Luis; St. Cyril and Methodius in New York; St. George in Los Angeles; as
well as St. Cyril and Methodius in Melbourne; and St. Petka in Adelaide, Australia.


This is a Greek Orthodox Church whose construction was helped financially by Macedonians from
Aegean Macedonia. It is located in the immediate vicinity to the Macedonian Orthodox Church of St.
Clement of Ohrid in Thorncliffe Park . The purpose for building this church in 1967 was to win over
the believers from St. Clement of Ohrid especially those from the Aegean part of Macedonia . Despite
the fact that the Macedonians did not understand the Greek tongue, there are still a large number of
those who got trapped in the web of the Greek propaganda of the so-called “Pan Makedoniki” (All
Macedonian) organization, and left their herd.

A similar or identical history, faith, and intention are shared by the following Greek Orthodox churches
in Toronto : St. George built in 1938, St. Nikola built in 1970; St. Nikola in Cincinnati ; the Greek
Church in Windsor , and others. Their members are mainly emigrants of Macedonian origin but under
strong influence of the Greek propaganda and the so-called “Pan Makedoniki” organization.
This period of construction and support of Macedonian – Bulgarian Orthodox churches throughout the
world has ended now since the Macedonian Orthodox Church is growing strong and numerous
churches were and continue being built under its jurisdiction. These are spiritual centers to the majority
of Macedonians from every part of Macedonia including the young generations of families which
belonged to the MPO, the Macedonian – Bulgarian, and Serbian churches in USA and Canada .

The Ethnicity of Protagoras.
To my friend who observed that protagoras was a Thracian philosopher, being born in Abdera. Is not
Abdera in Macedonia? Was it ever a Thracian state or nation? Was not Abdera the center of the
Macedonian philosophy , which the Athenians hated?
As we can see wikipedia describes Protagoras born in Abdera, Thrace, in ancient Greece. Was there a
country ever called Greece before 1828?
Hellenistic thinkers are trying every trick to deny Macedonia as a country and nation. So, don’t be
intimidated to call yourself Macedonian and your ancestors Macedonians.
Don’t the “West call Sv. Kiril and Methody Greek Missionaries who spread Macedonian Scripture?
Why they are prohibiting now our language and ethnicity? Can you see any logical reasoning in all this
shauvinistic policy, and genocidal agression against Macedonians? Macedonians don’t be fooled by
Greek propaganda be proud to call yourselves Macedonians.

“Protagoras was born in Abdera, Thrace, in Ancient Greece. According to Aulus Gellius, he originally
made his living as a porter, but one day he was seen by the philosopher Democritus carrying a load of
small pieces of wood tied with a short cord. Democritus discovered that Protagoras had tied the load
himself with such perfect geometric accuracy that it revealed him to be a mathematic prodigy. He
immediately took him into his own household and taught him philosophy”.
"In Plato's Protagoras, before the company of Socrates, Prodicus, and Hippias, he states that he is old
enough to be the father of any of them. This suggests a date of not later than 490 BC". In
the Meno (91e) he is said to have died at about the age of 70 after 40 years as a practicing Sophist. His
death, then, may be assumed to have occurred circa 420." He was well-known in Athens and became a
friend of Pericles”.
The above article is from the Wikipedia.

As we can see, most of the suppliers to wikipedia are Hellenistic scholars, that means anti-Macedonian.
Therefore they should be ignored and look at the facts and truth itself.
Greeks and their godfathers the French illuminated, don’t have a leg of truth to stand on.

Samson Stanislavski, PhD


Just wanted to let you know that the film "Sinbad the Sailor" (1947) starring Douglas Fairbanks Jr. and
Maureen O’Hara has a scene early on when Sinbad enters the captain's cabin of a ship he has come
across. The crew is all dead. In the cabin there is a scene where there is a map of Asia and the writing
on it is in Arabic; this writing changes to the English and this is what it said:
The true route of Alexander the Macedonian
If you get a chance to see the film, this alone would make this film interesting in seeing. By the way
Fairbanks was the son of Mary Pickford (Canadian) and DF senior; if I'm not mistaken, this couple
along with Charlie Chaplin and others started United Artists. I believe that Maureen O'Hara is the
mother of Shirley McClain and Warren Beatty.


check out our websites

Dear Risto,

Greetings, you have many interesting articles in this "Digest". I would like to comment about our friend
who tries to explain the etymology of the word "Komita". Briefly, he tells us that it comes from the
Greek "Koma", party. This shows that we only scratch the surface of things.

When the Modern Greek state was formed, they did not have a common language. They used, French,
English, Italian and Turkish. But there was a colloquial common tongue, Turkish, Macedonian,
Valachian, Gypsy, Armenian and Jewish. The citizens of the new state combined all these words and
later called it Greek, “Hellenic”. Like a mining license, if you think there is gold on this paddock, get
yourself a mining license and appropriate the land and dispossess the owner. That’s what the Greeks
have done.

Now for a person that studied Latin there is a verb, “ mito ”, “mitere”, to send.
"Comitere" means the person who is delegated, from where "commission" and "commissar" comes. Of
course Greeks stole this word.

But further explanations are given that there is a Tartar explanation, where their chieftain was called
"Komis", and from here comes our Macedonian word: "kmet", lord Mayor, and "kozhobash". There is,
also a Greek word, "komis", head and in Romanian the word " Main " of the horse is called "Koama".

Samson Stanislavski PhD

E-mail(s) of the Month

Dear Risto

Firstly I must commend you on your eloquence and passion. It comes across clearly. And there is no
doubt that you are an extremely articulate and highly intelligent person. However I would like to ask
you, if I may that is. What are your credentials? Have you researched all this as a passion or do you
hold some authority in the field. It sounds like you do or you want to appear so. Your arguments are
intelligently put forth and you have worded your articles with the precision of a diplomat. I would like
to ask you however a few questions if I may – for I am sure you expected to get some when you wrote
– what at times come across as very vitriolic writing.

Risto no one in their right mind can claim ethnicity in the sense that we talk about a pure race of
people. At least none of the European peoples have not been ‘adulterated’ in one way or another the
historical movements of people. I am a Hellene, Greek call it what you like and manipulate it as you
will, but I have no delusions. I know, that at some time in the history of the land from which I
supposedly descend, there were other people who might or might have not mixed with the local
element. One would have to be very naive to assume they are a ‘true’ anything. The arguments you so
cleverly advocate could be applied to your people. The people who settled in your region in the 6th
century AD were certainly Slavs. True there were other peoples living in the area, like the Illyrians and
Thracians, but the Slavs from whom the modern ‘Macedonian’ is descendant are relatively new-
comers. You say that the Greeks ‘fabricated’ their identity and language. Ok I’ll accept your
argument. So what were they speaking before they ‘adopted’ the koine?

I understand you are very passionate about your so-called identity and please don’t think I am attacking
or patronizing you. I too don’t want to offend my fellow ‘Slav Macedonians’. Our identity is firmly
imbedded in the legacy the ancient Hellenes have bequeathed to humankind. Sure some of the modern
Greeks do not deserved to be associated with such a legacy nor do they have the right to, but that is the
legacy that we as a nation see ourselves as an extension of and that is reflected in the use of the Greek
language, literature, architecture, music, etc. Whether or not we have been worthy of being
‘respectable’ custodians is debatable. But for people to come out and attempt to usurp our history
because theirs is devoid of anything remarkable is petty.

I took time to read your writing and I admired your arguments and lexical eloquence, but you are sadly
blowing your own trumpet. You speak of the Greeks as some kind of bastardized people with a stolen,
fabricated identity. That we are devoid of substance and that you are a proud Macedonian. My friend
Risto. The pride that goes with being Macedonian was there one thousand years before your people
come to the region.

Even if I accept your argument of a bastardized Greek nation with a fabricated identity and a history of
lies, there is still a connection between this nation and the ancients in terms of linguistic, cultural and
topographical senses. Your people are neither linguistically or culturally related to the ancient
Macedonians in any way whatsoever. And let us not touch on the race mixing argument, because I’m
sure the ancient Macedonians, in the thousand years it took for you guys to arrive, must have mixed
with the other Greeks with whom they shared the same language, gods, Olympics, philosophers,
mythology and ancient heroes, rather than sit around waiting for you guys to arrive so they could

For arguments sake, I will accept that everything you have said is right. That the Greeks are liars and
propagandists and the rest that you claim. But how on earth can you write that your people, being from
a Slavic stock, completely disconnected from Alexander the Great by language, culture and historical
context, are real Macedonians. At best my friend, you are ‘New Macedonians’. It is laughable that you
would claim otherwise.

It is simple. Your state, formed in 1947 by martial Tito, is problematic and socially schizophrenic state
in search of a modern identity. You are children of communism with a brainwashed and stunted
perspective of identity and your place in the world. Out of a population of about two million twenty
per cent are ethnic Albanians and you have the audacity to focus on the heterogeneity of the Greek
modern state. Of course it is heterogeneous. Only idiots argue it is mono ethnic. I understand your
pain and frustration with your identity. If I lived on the fringes of the most glorious territory in the
history of this planet I too would consider usurping it. Sure the Greeks might have no connection with
the ancients for one reason or another – although that too is relative and has not been studied enough.
Your people however are definitely unrelated to the ancient Macedonians. Nor have you been the
custodians of their legacy in any sense of the word except the name of your assumed identity.

Check your sources again. Alexander was a pupil of Aristotle as you very well know. Alexander was
taught attic Greek. The Koine is what came out of Anatolia and that which the Septuagint in the 3rd
century BC and then the gospels were written in. How can you suggest that Greece adopted koine
because it was the lingua franca? Ok – so what were they speaking before that? Or are you implying
that there was no such thing as a Greek element and that it was completely fabricated to somehow
‘usurp’ the glory of the ancient Hellenes?

My apologies to the Slavic Macedonian people (from the 6th century AD) if they find these opinions
offensive. My objective here is NOT to create tension between the Slav-Macedonian and Greek people
but rather to highlight the problem that exists within the F.Y.R.O. M and its institutions. As long as
F.Y.R.O.M insists on hijacking the 3000 year old Macedonian identity for their 64 year old state,
previously known as southern Serbia , and home to every kind of Balkan ethnicity, then we too will
continue to respond to your eloquently delivered propaganda.

With respect for your views and your struggle for identity

Truly, I hope that one day you are called ‘Nova Macedonia ’. I believe in your rights and your right to
have an identity that defines you historically and geographically, but I disagree with your subversive

Dimitri (a bastardized Hellene, with a manufactured identity who never stole anything from another


If you have something to say or if you want to know something, this is the forum for you. Please write
to us and we will publish your thoughts in this Digest. Try and keep it simple and brief, no longer than
a page. Please send your comments to Risto Stefov at

“ From the readers for the readers”

A Monthly free of charge electronic Digest for fair use only