You are on page 1of 22

The Message of the Local (Native) to Natives

PREFACE Surfing the web, I came across The Message of the Local (Native). It is a document allegedly issued by the Educational and Cultural Movement of Edessa .... because of 100 years from the annexation of Macedonia. Prompted by the fact that I'm one of the natives of Macedonia, rushed to read this text. I comment below some of its references. 1. THE LOCAL (NATIVES) MACEDONIANS The writers of this text, like to call Macedonians those (and only!) from the native of Macedonia who, during the liberation of 1912, spoke the Macedonian or Vlach or the Muslim Macedonians. For another large class of natives of Macedonia, merely they report that they were Greekspeaking or Greek Orthodox of Macedonia. Let us learn the above friends that, in district of Serres, were compact Macedonian population, not simply Greek-speaking but with Greek morale: This is the whole or the vast majority of the indigenous in the provinces of Nigrita, Pangaeum, Zichna, Serres with Darnakochoria, etc. High rates were also in towns like Demir-Hisar (now Sidirokastro), Eski Tjumaja (now Heraclea), Meleniko, Petrich, Alistrati and many other large villages. Also a high percentage of the population in the region of Serres spoke a dialect of Bulgarian, as characterized by the common people, then and now: It is the language that our friends from Edessa call Macedonian. All those locals of Bulgarian-speaking (or if you want Slavic speaking) were in constant contact with Greek-speaking compatriots. Further more, these Bulgarian-speaking were actually bilingual: All men, and a significant portion of women, spoke Greek. Bilingual was the brave agonist Karatasios 1821, according to friends of Edessa. Most of these bilingual remained stable in Greek morale. With the onset of racial competition in Macedonia (after 1870), their fellowmen of Bulgarian morale stuck them with the nickname Grecomani (of Greek morale). At one point mumbler this nickname our friends of the Educational ... Movement of Edessa. The aforementioned "Grecomani" were not some spacers of stepfather beliefs. Their Greek spirit inherited from their ancestors through oral tradition and religion. Mainly in the traditions of Greek-speaking natives, as well as in some bilingual, had left the memory of behalf of Alexander the Great, connected with the names Macedonians and Macedonia. However, was more catalytic the constant influence of religion: In the Macedonian countryside, until the last quarter of the 19th century, there were only Greek Orthodox churches. The Greek-speaking, as well as the bilingual, worshiped there every Sunday. In the evenings, the priest offered to teach Greek elementary letters to those children and boys like it. There was, if want, the need for selfpreservation: The bishops needed priests, and the priests needed chanters. Prospective priests or chanters had to learn Greek. Certainly some priests taught their students some nuggets of history. Thus, for centuries, all the Christians of Macedonia had in common denominator of a Greek culture, even elementary. Of course, there were some other social approaches: The priest Malamas Frantzanas from Agia Paraskevi (then Xylotros), had a slavespeaking wife from Scutari (then Kispeki). Mitrousis Tasioudis or Bartzas, was best man for one bilingual from Peponja (then YeniMahala) by which he had ourtakia (cooperation) The Greek-speaking Macedonians from Nigrita-district stayed overnight often as guests in the homes of their bilingual friends in Kamila or Peponja etc, when they went to the bazaar held every Tuesday at Serres.

So, the majority of these bilinguals consider as obvious to remain in Hellenism (Greek moral). There were of course the opposites. Some bilingual families were broken up: Half Greek morale (Grecomani) and the other half Bulgarian morale! Apart from the above, none can ignore the fact that these Grecomani suffered badly (and more than the Greek-speaking Macedonians) even sacrificing their own lives in order to defend their Greek morale. Until relatively recently (1941-44), during the Bulgarian occupation in eastern of river Strymon, many bilingual families from the occupied villages, Kamila, Vamvakousa etc, moved in German-region, west of the Strymon, to avoid the vengeance of the Bulgarians. Approximately ten bilingual families settled then in my village Xylotros, one of them in my grandfather's house. So, ladies and gentlemen of the Educational ... Movement of Edessa, will you do the grace to include as Macedonians (without quotes) all us the Greek-speaking, and generally the Greek-morale natives of Macedonia? 2. THE GREEK-MORALE NATIVES AND THE STRUGGLE OF LIBERATION The friends from Edessa argue that in the liberation struggle of Macedonia participated mostly non-Greek-speaking Macedonians. And emphasize that no leader and no body created by Greek speaking of Macedonia. Let they be informed that in Serres had participated in the liberation struggle manymany Greek-speaking locals. Among the best known are the captains Hatzipantazis, DukasGaitantzis (under the pseudonym Zervas), George Giagklis, their predecessor and legendary Captain Giorgas, Vlachbeis, PapaPaschalis Tsiangas (Captain Androutsos), Andreas Makoulis (from Stenimachos) etc. Less well known are dozens of local groupleaders, the vast majority of whom were Greek-speaking. Some examples are, Kotzampapas from Dimitritsi, Daratzis from Agia Paraskevi, Boulasikis from Serres, Tsouvaltzis from Rodolivos, Kioutsoukis from Agio Pnevma (then Veznikioi), Tzelepis 2

from Kamenikia, John Kepas from Vamvakofyto, Tentzios, Karatsolis, Semkos, Mylonas, Basil Gkaitantzis etc. And of course, separate position held by the nonGreek-speaking legendary Captain Mitrousis Gogolakis, from the homonyme village (then Chomontos). 3. GREEK-MORALE MACEDONIANS, VICTIMS OF RACIAL COMPETITION The authors argue, into their text, that never Greek-speaking people of Macedonia had complained about any attack or pressure from their non-Greek-speaking compatriots. I cite only some indicatively examples of the attacks and pressures had taken place against the Greek-speaking, and more generally against the Greek-morale Macedonians, at the sanjak of Serres, where, according the allegations of the Edessian friends, there was a strong separatist movement under Jane Sandanski. Just below are some of the works and days of such revolutionists or separatists: - In 1895, large groups of armed persons ... entered ... in Melenikon ... burned a Turkish neibourhood, killed ... 6 Ottomans, but some bullets ... diverted and instead of save the Greeks ... killed 7 of them. (from a narration of Paillares, later charge d'affaires of the Great Powers in the sanjak of Serres). - On 6/8/1998, in Ano Vrontou of Serres, had been mangled Peter Papavasiliou and Jim Mandouris, to be followed shortly the murders of Papantoni, Georga and Papagiannis Ouzounis. - On 24/1/1901, burnt and thrown into the oven Basil Gounaris from Demir-Hisar. - On 8/5/1901, the village Tseresovo of Nevrokopi (now Pagoneri of Drama), the revolutionists attacked against the GreekMacedonian cantor during the Divine Liturgy. - In the middle of 1901, murdered near Nevrokopi (now Goce Delchev, Bulgaria) the 13 years old son of of the Greek-Vlach Christos Kechagias. - Late September 1901, murdered the peasants Bozikas, Liontas and Mitas Mazanis, from Saviako (now Vamvakofyto).. - On Easter Sunday of 1902, at Zirnovo (now Kato Nevrokopi), a group of armed

revolutionists, forcibly interrupts the Liturgy of Love (Second Resurrection), invades into the Holy Bema and lacerate the vestments of the Greek-Macedonian Priest. - On 17/4/1902 murdered George Liontas from Saviako. - On 3/5/1902 at Zirnovo, twelve-team revolutionaries takes care for the clandestine harvesting of crops Vlassis Ioannidis. - In late June 1902 murdered John Bouravanis, mouchtar of Kruevo (now Achladochori). - In early 1903, Christ Lianos murdered into the church of Zirnovo, during the Divine Liturgy. Shortly afterwards murdered priest Papa-Elias from the village Frastena (now Oreini). The same time murdered Jim Iakovou, in Ano Vrontou of Serres. - On 15/3/1903 murdered outside Saviako Angelos Chasirtzis. - On 26/9/1903 murdered James Iakovou and Nik Dingos, in the village of Lakkos. - On 19/10/1903 murdered Papa-Giannis and Pericles Asteriadis from the Krousovo. - On 26/10/1903, a group of revolutionists invade into the celebrating Temple of Zirnovo and kidnaps the peasants Zafiriou, Basileiou and Christidis, which mangle. - On 6/3/1904, rally takes place in Thessaloniki on cruelties of the revolutionists against the GreekMacedonians - In October 1904, the Greek Community of Serres, sends to the High Porte, as well as to the European Powers, written complaint alleging for the murders and other felonies of the revolutionaries. - On 12/12/1904, a group of revolutionists entered the village Startsovo (origin of now inhabitants of Neo Petritsi) and forced the Greek-Macedonians residents, by gunpoint, to sign a declaration of accession to the Exarchate. With the intervention of the Bishop and Ottoman authorities, the inhabitants took courage and turned to Orthodoxy (at 17/1/1905). But they had to pay the price by the massacre 6 co-villagers (at 5/7/1905) - On 20/10/1905, Jim Philipou assassinated in square of Petritsi. That same year, Koboki

family exterminated, in the village Egri-Dere (now Kallithea of Drama}. - On 1/9/1906, the revolutionistsTaska enters the village Chomontos, invades the home of the (absent to the fields) Mitrousis Gogolakis and kills his wife and his only son. The cause of such a murder was the fact that the non-Greek-speaking Mitrousis refused to become a revolutionist of Taska type. - On 20/5/1906, the revolutionists sawing the peasant Velio Mitskari, in the fields of Kruevo. - On 6/6/1906, murdered the Grecomani Spasis Denas and Mitas Kepas, from the village Saviako, by co-villagers revolutionists. - On 28/6/1906 mangled outside the door of his home in Krousovo the old priest PapaChristos - On 12/12/1906, revolutionists invade the village Klepousna (today Agriani of Serres). The account was 11 killed and 8 wounded non-Greek-speaking Grekomani and 7 burned houses. - On 27/7/1907, a group of revolutionists are murdering Theodore Mandela, outside the village Frastena. Thus completed their work since before some months had murdered his brother and one year before his father.

(The above ... revolutionary actions gleaned from the History of Serres of the memorable Peter Pennas. Anyone interested in more ... blood, can refer to the above book). I am sure that the friends of Educational ... Movement of Edessa can present the same, or worse, have been made by the captains of the Macedonian Struggle (19041908), or anti-Macedonian as they like to call it. Of course, they have to accept that the revolutionary activity of their heroes, small sample of which is recorded above, preceded by a full decade. 4. MACEDONIAN IDENTITY The friends of Educational Movement ... of Edessa complain that by the "new regime" 3

(so call the liberation of Macedonia) they forbidden to have the same national identity (Macedonian) with their homogeneous of the Republic of Macedonia. First of all, they themselves and their homogeneous of the neighbouring state, are trying to monopolize the Macedonian identity: They do not want even to ... share this identity with the Greek-morale natives of Macedonia, as in detail already has mentioned. They know very well that such a national identity has been created just in late 1944, as an internal form of Yugoslavia. It is true that the friends of Edessa as well as their homogeneous of the neighbouring state, used earlier of the above year the name Macedonian. But not only those. Also called themselves Macedonians, the Arvanites and Albanians of Macedonia in order to be distinguished from their homogenous of other geographic areas. For similar reasons, called themselves Macedonians, the Vlachs as well as the Turks of Macedonia. Of course called themselves Macedonians the Greek-speaking natives of Macedonia. Indeed, I know by firsthand that the Greek-speaking locals in the village Xylotros of Nigrita, not only called themselves Macedonians, but did not know even the word Hellenas (Greek) or Romios. Finally, called themselves Macedonians all the non-Greek-speaking but of Greek-morale natives of Macedonia (Grecomani). It is a fact that, some ancestors of the friends from Edessa, tried before in 1944 to use the name "Macedonian" for (supposed) national determination. Already since 1903 Christe Misirkov wrote, in his work Macedonian Affairs, roughly as follows: Our fathers and grandfathers were saying, thirty years ago, that they were Bulgarians. But now we have become a new nation, the Macedonian nation. Here's how to make a nation! So simply Misirkof woke up one morning and turned from a Bulgarian to a Macedonian. In fact, he remained a very good Bulgarian. He saw that by the Bulgarian tactics until then had proved impossible to integrate the entire Macedonia to Bulgaria. Greece has successfully claimed the territories to which there was a strong presence of Greek-moral Macedonians, while 4

similar claims had the Serbia. The Bulgarian irredentism could prosper only through autonomy of Macedonia: The country would bulgarized in a second stage, according the successful model of Eastern Rumelia, which had survive only a few years as an autonomous principality with GreekBulgarian structure. But the recipe had to change somewhat: Not a Greek-Bulgarian principality. This trick did not go anymore because we got wind of not only by the Balkan neighbours but also by most of Europeans. To shed their wool over eyes, Bulgaria should not be seen as expedited. We will present that autonomy is seeking by another nation, the nation of the Macedonians. And, because there is no such a nation we, the Bulgarians of Macedonia, will create it. We declare from here that we are not Bulgarians but Macedonians! The fact that the Greek-moral ,as well as all the other natives of Macedonia, declared Macedonians, were butter on bread for the Bulgarian irredentism. The slogan Macedonia to Macedonians could confuse everyone! Really, nobody believed to the Macedonian ethnicity which discovered by Misirkof. Even Misirkov himself! Somewhere I read that in the years that followed rejoined the ... Orthodox Bulgarism. Those Bulgarian-Macedonian leaders that allegedly embraced the new ethnicity, held as grand secret the colpo grosso of Misirkofs inspiration. This applies to famous Jane Sandanski, whom our friends of Edessa present as the leader of a separatist movement ... particularly strong. Astride his horse, accompanies the Bulgarian army to the descent from the Strait of Rupel, during the first Balkan War, as the leader of the Bulgarian-Macedonian battalions. Sandanski, of course, knew very well that Bulgaria participated in this war, not to liberate or to autonomize Macedonia but to integrate the Bulgarian state. So, no effect had the invention of Misirkof on Macedonian ethnicity. From 1870 until 1944, everyone knew only Bulgarians. The Iliden movement was known as Bulgarian. Themselves the friends of Educational ... Movement of Edessa mention that the Iliden

movement characterized as Bulgarian by Kypreos and Dragoumis, serving then (1903) in the Greek consulate of Monastiri (Bitola) . Be so, the sources and not the modern Greeks who say that the revolution of Iliden was a Bulgarian one, regardless if you offend or hurt you You have chosen to think as homogenous the Macedonians of the neighbouring state. Those who also the Bulgarians think as their homogenous. 5. ANTI-GREEK DELIRIUM The friends of Educational ... Movement of Edessa have chosen the most inappropriate way to support their rights on language etc. They throw libels against Modern Greek and the Greek State, selecting anything unfavourable (in their view) has been said by those who opposed the modern Greeks. Not missing some coarse inaccuracies, rather unworthy of comment. By the same tactics (selective show of unfavourable historical references or events, as they think), attack sharply against Patriarchy or Romeo-orthodoxy Priesthood and particularly against Anthimos of Thessaloniki. In contrast, they are rounding and beautifying, as possible, any reference to Bulgarian Exarchate (while simultaneously ... they hurt because some people call them Bulgarians!). They call settlers, colonizers (!) and racist political bodies (!) the uprooted refugees from Asia Minor and attack against the Russian-Pontics refugees. Why so racial hatred by some claiming that they are themselves victims of racism? 6. MACEDONIAN LANGUAGE and Other MACEDONICS The friends of Educational Movement ... of Edessa also complained that by the new regime (as they call the liberation of Macedonia), their mother language have been banned, persecuted, derided and slandered. I have friends who know this language. They do not use it in public, not because that is prohibited by anyone but because ... 5

nobody understands them. I think I know enough of English but not use them in public. Because I will become a laughingstock in the eyes of my countrymen, especially of the ordinary people, who do not know English. I do not know what language use in their homes the above my friends, nor care. With the friends I mentioned, I went repeatedly in Bulgaria, where they did interpreter debts with relative ease. As they had been into an environment that knew their language, they spoke with Bulgarians themselves. The rest of us understand nothing, but no care what they say. In meetings we had with Bulgarian scientific committees in Greece, these friends did debts of ... additional interpreter when English were not enough. I wonder, my friends from Edessa: None of you has gone to Bulgaria? Bulgarians visitors do not come to Edessa? How you are consult with the Bulgarians? Use an interpreter? Anyway, either Bulgarian is this language or Macedonian (as like to call it the friends from Edessa), I fully agree that should not only be spoken freely but also be nurtured. As, generally, should be nurtured all languages and cultures, even in the case of very small population groups that represent them. Of course, under the current circumstances, if someone has the demand to join these languages in public education, unilaterally from Greece, he is at least naive. Further more, in terms of private initiative, I do not think in Greece today is any obstacle. As an example I can mention the civil nonprofit company of our friends from Edessa. At their website (http://www.edessavoden.gr), they give free lessons of Macedonian language and culture. Unfortunately, this excellent initiative accompanied by hostile against Hellenism. Not only is the aforementioned anti-Hellenic delirium thrown by Message of the local. They highlight any propaganda of the neighbouring state of their expatriates, as the map of ethnicgeographical Macedonia, which expresses their irredentism. THey are unwanted into the village, but they ask to go to ... Popes home, says a proverb.

7. THE DESTRUCTION OF KILKIS (And Not Only) The friends of Educational ... Movement of Edessa claim that during the Second Balkan (Greek-Bulgarian) war of 1913, ... the Greek army bombed ... the civilian population of towns and villages that were in his way. Destroyed the city of Kilkis as found it at first in his way ... ". With the exception of Kilkis they do not clarify which towns and villages imply with their report. There is no need of any proof, to accept that the soldiers and irregulars of both sides have made any kind of atrocities, certainly condemnable. Another thing though is to utter that the (regular) Greek army ... bombed ... civilian population or that destroyed the city of Kilkis. Kilkis So, friends of Edessa, as you well know, was chosen as battlefield from the Bulgarian military command of that war. When you put cannons, machine guns and ammunition inside Kilkis, and with these strafe your opponent, you know a priori that the positions of these arms will also be knocked by the opponent, that ammunition will get fire that will burn the city, that the civilians are delivered at the mercy of projectiles. Thus, the Bulgarian military command, and only this, is responsible for the disaster actually happened in Kilkis. None of the European war correspondents of that time have referred, not even a hint, about anyone fault of Greek army on the destruction of Kilkis. It is worth to mention here a reference, said from the well-known (from the Russian revolution) Trotsky, who in 1912-13 was in Sofia, as envoy by a newspaper of Vienna. Trotsky, among others complained about Bulgarian atrocities against Turks in Thrace. Some BulgarianMacedonians of Sofia complained because he does not write for the destruction of Koukouts (Kilkis) by the Greeks. He answered them, roughly as follows: I write for identified Bulgarian atrocities in Thrace. I do not know anything about Greek atrocities in Kilkis. The supposed Greek atrocities in Kilkis appeared for the first time in the report of the Committee set up by the American Institute of Carnegie. After the war, this Commission 6

arrived to Macedonia, but expelled by the Serbs. The Greeks were content to protest strongly, just the representatives of the Commission appeared in Thessaloniki, apparently because of its pro-Bulgarian composition. These had happened when Greeks and Serbs do not even know that the Commission will capped by two eminently pro-Bulgarian of its members: From the journalist Brailsford and (mostly) from Miljukov, professor of history at the University of Sofia and member of the Russian Duma. The report of Carnegie Commission, had been published in Washington in 1914, but immediately had been denounced as false and misleading by the Greek diplomatic authorities there. It has been reprinted in 1993 and since is projected by the Bulgarian side, as well as by the homogeneous friends of Educational ... Movement of Edessa in the neighbouring state. Miljukov follows, in general, the following tactics: He is rounding, as possible, the Bulgarian aberrations, when he cant hide these completely. Unlike, emphasizes and magnifies any Greek aberrations or invents such actions. So, invents, develops and promotes the alleged fault of the Greek army to destruction of Kilkis, stressing repeatedly that it was the first time (21/6/1913) of such an action: That is, the Greek army was first who began the unrighteous hands. Unlike, completely ignores the Bulgarian atrocities, massacres and disasters in Nigrita and the surrounding villages. About these atrocities, had boomed entire European press. When asked why he ignores the Bulgarian activities in Nigrita, he replied that he heard something, when passed from Serres, but had no time to go in Nigrita in order to verify the rumours! Miljukov knew well what he did. The Bulgarian atrocities in Nigrita, held on 18/6/1913, three whole days earlier than the destruction of Kilkis. So, the sad preeminence, is passing de facto to beloved Bulgarians. Also, there was another disadvantage against the aspirations of Miljukov. In Nigrita there was no battle between rival armies. There were simply slaughters of Greek-Macedonian civilians,

from Bulgarians: 470 slaughtered only in Nigrita. The city was burned completely. Furthermore, in each of the surrounding villages, about 10 peasants slaughtered, some dozens of houses burned etc. Atrocities in the region Nigrita had been made, or at least had been tolerated, by regular Bulgarian Army, in cooperation with the guerrillas. The latter were BulgarianMacedons. These which our friends of Edessa call revolutionists or separatists. It was the boys of Sandanski. They had organized by the Bulgarian state in battalions that accompanied the regular Bulgarian army. The dried numbers can not describe the horror. So, I refer in a case about which I know persons and things. In the village Xylotros, at June 16 of 1913, the residents panicked when heard that the Bulgarians are coming. All of them, as well as some thousands of the near villages, decided to leave hurriedly toward the rear of the Greek Army, in district of Halkidiki. All of them, except ten adventurous. They, in order to protect their possessions, decided to stay in the village, sending to Halkidiki only their families. The Bulgarians will slash you, were saying the others to them. But they had decided to take the risk. They are no beasts. They are people like us, said Mitrousis, the eldest of all. They are the ones who passed and we talked for an autonomous Macedonia. They are the same who the last winter had made my house headquarters, in order to hit Nigrita. They will respect the bread, which ate from my hands. When, after three days, the villagers returned, they found slaughtered the ten daring men and their homes burned. Today all of them have been forgotten. Their memory preserved in the memorial-statue of the village, erected after war. From the list of this memorial I copy only those from whom I get on ... license: Mitrousis Bartzas or Tasioudis and his brothers Nikolas and Kostantis. Malamoudis Athanasios and his brother Apostolos. The latter was the father of small Katerina. She was then only 6 years old. The cholera and other circumstances had completed the work of ... Separatists, decimating her family. She grew up in the home of her lala7

Basil (uncle Basil). She remained uneducated and illiterate. She married and did family: 7 kids! Every so often narrated the martyr of her father and was ending with the ... refrain: I leave you blessing and a curse, everywhere you meet Bulgarian to kill him. One day, when she was telling the story again of, happened to pass by the side street a stranger, unknown to the family. Then, one of her child said: Look at there mother! This on the street is a Bulgarian. I'm going to kill him! Katerina raised her eyes, saw the stranger and replied: No! What we blame this kid. Others were those Bulgarians who killed my father. The uneducated Katerina, gave, by her way, the message: Stop the tribal bloodshed. Can we not send out a similar message, we the educated, either belong to Educational ... Movement of Edessa or to any other arrangement? Did you have to wonder if, by a too lot of education, we have deformed? 8. SLAVES and MACEDONIANS I am also a Modern-Greek-Macedon and I have not taught that the Slavs are inferior people without culture and glorious history or that the Slavs are uncivilized and inglorious. Instead I know that they have to present unique literary, scientific bloom etc. Also, the establishment and development social schemes of humanitarian ideology during the previous century is a Slavic leading, irrespective of whether it agrees or disagrees anyone with this ideology and regardless of the fact that ultimately these schemes collapsed. The catalytic influence they have had on global social evolution is undeniable. So, if some people, historians or no, show you the Macedonians ... as slavized Greeks, may be wrong. In no case, however, may be considered such an opinion as an insult. In any case, it is crucial what do you think about yourself. In this respect, I brought special attention to some your writings. If I understand correctly, you claim (without clearly saying) that you descended from the ancient Macedonians, as they had evolved on the arrival of Slavs in the Balkan regions (especially in Macedonia). Further you allege that the two peoples (ancient-Macedonians

and Slaves) because of common social and economic conditions, felt close each other, which facilitated the merger, as well as the mutual assimilation. Until here, could someone digest your respects, even without the required historic substantiation. But you go to another logical leap: The fact (you say) that (the Slavs) easily assimilated with the old populations (Macedonians), shows that were related people. (Like we say, for example ... Dorians and Achaeans!). Not enough, however. You feel the need to give answer to the question of language you speak: Is it (ancient) Macedonian or Slavic? You answer to this question with another logical leap! You write: Paparigopoulos reported that the real name of the Emperor Justinian (527-565) was Oupravda (righteous), a Slavic name. And you go on: This indicates that the language of the region of Skopia (of the ancient Macedonians) was related to the language of those who probably settled there later (the Slavs)! From the City I come and cinnamon on my top! I hope that academics and historians of the neighbouring state of your "homogeneous", perhaps have less blithely arguments. 9. The MESSAGE of a NATIVE to the NATIVES Dear friends of the Educational ... Movement of Edessa. I also want to send you a message. A message from a Native to the Natives. Do believe, anything you want for your language or for your descent. But if you claim that you have any connection with the ancient Macedonians ought to embrace the culture that had this people. This culture was purely Greek, at least from the 4th century B.C. This culture, not only embraced by the Macedonians but spread by them across all the world. It is the culture that has prevailed for at least 7 centuries. This culture is yours and ours, as says the poet. On those distant times there was no Byzantium, so hated from you. There were no the modern Greeks, so hateful to you. There was no the so much hated from you Modern Greek State. Moreover, the monuments of Greek culture of Macedons, in your town, in Pella, Dion, etc, 8

"eye-popping". I believe that if you accept this fact, many secondary thorns will disappear almost automatically: - The religious leaders will find their way. I will not be surprised if I see Anthimos to embrace the... Archbishops of Ohrid and Skopje. - I would not be surprised if I hear some Edessians or Skopians, to less sharp charges against the Byzantine Empire which inherited all together (as would say Mr Pangalos). - You will not need any ideology to explain your Macedonian (without quotes) identity or your Slavic (or whatever you want it) language. Let solve these issues the historians and linguists unaffected by any propaganda. Nobody cared about the fact that the people of Bafralides, Karamanlides etc. are Turkishspeaking, or disputed their Greekness for that reason. - Above all, will disappear at once and for all the racial antagonism, which is responsible for rivers of blood that drenched the land of Macedonia. Perhaps some of your fellowmen will choose to be not Macedonians of Greek culture but Bulgarian or whatever they want. With hi and joy! Geobartz (gbarmal@yahoo.gr) November 2012 {Follows the Message of the Local (Native), as published by the Educational and Cultural Movement of Edessa}.

The Message of the Local (Native)


for the 100 years from the Annexation of Macedonia
how random was the inexplicable fact that the rate of extermination of the Jews of Thessaloniki by the Nazis is the largest among the major cities of Europe or the fact of the destruction of Jewish cemeteries and monuments in Thessaloniki by the Greek authorities during the Second World War or the fact that after the defeat of the Nazis, they did not return them to those who survived. To these events we, the Macedonians, can certainly engage first and foremost because we are the Natives, the Locals, as they call us, residents of this place and any historical changes concern us, first and foremost. We, however, are invited as spectators, applauders, spineless actors. No "leading history scientist" among those who will participate in the historic anniversary conference will dare to depict the real history. To testify to what actually happened before, during and after the events of 1912 and how those are related in the meaning of liberation. This evaluation we, the Macedonians, the Natives of Macedonia, the Locals as they call us, have to do first and foremost. We have to do it and submit it for the younger to know. Liberation means relief from the regime imposed by foreigners that restricts the freedoms of indigenous to the right of expression, government and in exercising their rights over their own land. What happened, however, to the vast majority of natives who were not Greek-speaking or Romanorthodox? To those Macedonians who spoke Listen Macedon Macedonian or Vlach language or to Muslim Listen modern Greek Macedonians? These communities were more than 3/4 of the indigenous population. This year marks 100 years since the annexation by By the changes in 1912, our freedoms, not only were Greece of the southern part of Macedonia, in 1912. not restored, but were even limited . Already, many entities have began their celebrations The land that had been seized by the Ottoman to commemorate in a festive way "the liberation of conquerors and had been converted to their own Macedonia from the Turkish yoke." estates, was not returned to us natives, but was given The focal point is, of course, the head city of either to Greeks landlord as estates, or distributed to Macedonia, Thessaloniki. new settlers who took the place of the Turks. The The municipality has planned numerous events. In wealth resources of our country that went through the the "axis of action", history has a dominant role. In exploitation of the Ottomans, had passed to the this context and according to the schedule, "a three- exploitation of the new rulers. day scientific conference is organized in October More than half of the locals were forced to flee their 2012, at the new Concert Hall, with international homeland: some to save their lives, others to escape interest and participation of scientists from all over the brutal oppression of the new regime and others the world. The organization will be done by leading because of economic oppression. history scientists. Also an exhibition for the 100 Those Macedonians who were killed, imprisoned, years' history of the city is planned in the port's exiled or driven into forced exile these 100 years, are warehouse C'". much more than those who suffered the same in the About the non-Greek-speaking and non Roman500 years of Turkish occupation. orthodox communities living in Macedonia at that The administration of our country was not passed to time, particular reference is made only to the Hebrew the Natives, as it would had in a real liberation. one. A special exhibition titled "The Jews in Policemen, army officers, teachers, priests, bishops, Thessaloniki. Indelible marks in the area" is administrators, prefects, etc. all came from organized by the Archaeological Museum of Peloponnese, Crete, the East. Thessaloniki in cooperation with the Jewish Museum The indigenous Macedonians, except the informers, of Thessaloniki and will operate during the entire were not appointed to the State jobs. Only after the year." Civil War (1946-1949) they began to be appointed to Of course, the "Top history scientists," who will lower positions in the public services. Even this did participate in the history conference, will not deal with

not happen to ascribe justice, but because, after the creation of the Republic of Macedonia within the Yugoslav federal state and the position of KKE for a unified and independent Macedonia during the Civil War, showed as very likely the loss by Greece of southern Macedonia. Small concessions aimed at mitigating the indignation of the natives and as a means of erosion and assimilation. With the new regime our mother tongue, not only did not replace the Turkish one of the invaders, but was banned, persecuted, laughed at, slandered. The traditions and customs came under control. Cultivation of local Macedonian culture was banned. They even banned the use of songs at weddings and celebrations. We were forbidden even to declare same national identity and origin with our co-nationals who expatriated as economic migrants or as conational political refugees. Only due to the support of international organizations and signature by Greece of international treaties on human rights, we are able to freely express ourselves Thanks to these bestowed freedoms we can talk freely about the real history of our country and our people. Thanks to new technologies, especially the internet, our voice can reach every corner of the country and the world. The least we can and we owe to do is to restore our dignity, history and basic human rights. Since early 1990 we address the official authorities and we ask them to eliminate all forms of racial discrimination. For measures to be taken as remedy for the injustices that made us to end up as third class citizens and economically disadvantaged even compared to Russian-pontious who settled in our localities during the 1990's. Our rightful request for removal of the racist exclusion for Macedonian political and economic refugees from the right of repatriation and rehabilitation, something that was done for all other expatriates, was not fulfilled. Instead of it, a massive settlement of Russianpontious who abusively are called "repatriates", who had never lived or were gone from our area, took place. In order for these new settlers to settle and stay in our country, the state gave them privileges, which were only for installation in Macedonia and Thrace. They were given favorable loans for house purchase, gratuitous in fact, preferentially recruited in public services, had preferential treatment in trade and professional activities, etc. And all this was done while the natives were and remain economically disadvantaged, with high proportion being unemployed, small-landowners, small business oweners, underemployed artisans. It is obvious that this policy served to reinforce the settlement of foreign populations in Macedonia, to further alter the composition of the population at the expense of the locals. It is the last stage of a policy that began the decade of 1910. Also then, the state of Athens sent the majority of refugees in Macedonia to alter the composition of the population at the expense of locals. Those populations were forced to leave their ancestral land, to serve a classic colonial policy. They

were victims of that policy. But were used as aggressors because they played the role of the abuser, playing the role as gendarmes of the Natives. The past Security battalions and PAO members likeminded people provocatively play that role even today. By leaving their homes, with Greece's signature and the consent of the Western allies, those refugees became settlers - bodies and hostages of the Greek colonization. They found themselves in a very uncomfortable position, to be left without homeland or to play the role of colonizers. Necessarily they chose the second of two evils and so turned into operators of a racist policy. The Natives appeared in their eyes as suspicious bodies of "Bulgarians", of "Slavs" or of "Pan-slavs" and last of "Skopians" which impinged or had "territorial ambitions" to "our Macedonia." So we appeared as a potential enemy to them and we had to dilute or to surrender and assimilate. So these settlers became bodies of racist organizations and propaganda policy of the state of Athens against the non Greek-speaking Natives. Not only they did not responded to our calls for support to our just cause, but they supported massively the racist official state policy. They justified and supported it politically. But even those who did not, they supported it passively. They saw the racial discriminations, persecutions, injustices and kept silent. The second, after the need, key factor on which the antimacedonian racism relied on, are the innumerable lies which feed on the citizens of this country. Many of the lies regard the "liberation of Macedonia." Real struggles for the liberation of Macedonia were done by Macedonians themselves. However, they are surrounded by innumerable lies, distortion and slander. The black propaganda displays them as struggles of the "savage Bulgarians", or Serbs, or "Pan-slavists" which had territorial claims to Macedonia. They hide the truth that says those struggles were made by the local inhabitants of Macedonia. Memoirs and official reports explicitly state Macedonia as the place of origin of the political leadership of the liberation organization E.M.E.O. (Macedonians Internal Revolutionary Organization), founded in Thessaloniki (1892), as well as of the chieftains and rebels. This information, however, is only available to researchers and heretic.citizens They systematically hide the fact that the dominant slogan of those fighters was "Macedonia for Macedonians" and all manifestos speak of an independent Macedonia, in which all ethnic and religious communities would coexist equally and the Ottoman Empire's power, against which they were fighting, it would have been replaced by the power of the Natives. Indeed, Bulgaria had aspirations in Macedonia, and Serbia, too. These aspirations Greece invoked to justify its own aspirations. But were they justified? In none of the local ethnic communities in Macedonia had been developed a political movement in favor of the union of their country with neighboring states or its partition among them. None called Macedonia Northern Greece, or Southern Serbia, or South-

Western Bulgaria. But neither in Greece, Bulgaria or Serbia anyone called it so. Everyone called it plain Macedonia. In the struggle for liberation of Macedonia, participated mostly the non-Greek speaking (macedonian speakers vlach speakers) Macedonians, as Greek speakers were living mainly in the lowlands and urban centers. Moreover, the Greek-speaking people were under the tutelage of the patriarchal priesthood that recommended "obedience to the rulers." During the Macedonian liberation struggle no opposition, nor conflict or rivalry ever were created among the locals. Never Greek-speaking of Macedonia did complain about any attack or pressure by non-Greek speaking Macedonians and never asked for some protection from Greece. Instead, all the testimony and the living reality speak of a long lasting harmonic co-existance. In the liberation struggle of the Macedonians, the Greek-speaking did not participated, but did not undermined it, either. The rivalry was nurtured later, with meager results, fortunately, by those who did not want the unity of the Natives of Macedonia. Those who implemented the tactic of "divide and conquer." Those that fought to divide the insurgent Macedonians, to reign over them and over their land. The main divisive role was played, of course, by the diplomatic machanism of Greece in Macedonia and the mechanism of the patriarchal priesthood. And they had their reason. After the rebellion of 1903, named Ilinden uprising as the launch coincided with the celebration of Prophet Elijah day, the creation of an autonomous Macedonian state appeared as very likely. This would have annuled the expansionist ambitions to the north of the kingdom of Greece. On the other hand, the patriarchal clergy of Constantinople to the possibility of liberation of Macedonia saw a repeatition of what happened with the liberation of other Balkan peoples. Every nation had created its own autocephalous church and, as a consequence, lead the flock of the Patriarchate to limit itself in the boundaries of the Ottoman Empire. Even the Greek-speaking Greece established its own independent church, which the Patriarchate had characterized as schismatic. Their relations were restored in 1850, but without abolishing the autocephalous of the Greek Church. Now, also inside the Ottoman Empire the patriarchal priesthood had the Bulgarian Exarchate as a competitor which was trying to win all Slavophone (Macedonians, Pomaks, Serbs) and the right of the Vlachs to create their own churches and schools had been recognized. So, for not losing its influence in Macedonia, it had to undermine the liberation struggle of its people. And it did this in a very dirty way. As its diplomats in Macedonia write in their memoirs themselves, Greece and the bishops - especially German Karavangelis of Kastoria - collaborated with the invaders and helped to suppress the Macedonian liberation movement. That collaboration led to even more Macedonian populations to remove from the Patriarchate and to their approach to the Exarchate,

which had kept much better attitude towards the separatist movement and also the Catholic Church (Uniate-Unionists). Having lost most spiritual contact with Macedonian people, it tried to restore its ranks with deceit and violence. Their main tool was acquisition, slander and division. Karavangelis himself mentions in his memoirs the case of acquisition of Captain Kotta from Roulia and Captain Vangelis from Srebeno, and also the attempted acquisition of Mitro Vlachou (a Vlach). However, as they were unable to bring back the Macedonian population by hypocritical promises, persuasion, acquisition and slander, they resorted to violence. They acted to create mercenary bodies led by officers of the Greek army. The fact that no leader and no mercenary body was created by Greekspeaking people of Macedonia, demonstrated the harmonious relations between Macedonian indigenous peoples with different native language. Those mercenary gangs, baptized "makedonomachous"(macedonian fighters) by the state and religious propaganda, did not come to Macedonia to hit the Ottoman conquerors or the Bulgarians who supposedly invaded Macedonia, but the rebelled Macedonian population. With murder, destruction of villages, acquisitions, threats, blackmail and terror they tried to restore them by force to the tutelage of patriarchal priesthood. Those who they, themselves, drove away with their treacherous, undemocratic and anti-Christian behavior. This dirty game (1904-1908) they present today as "Macedonian struggle." Even today, the successors of those bishops, starring Thessaloniki's Anthimos, are leading to spread lies and slander against the Macedonian liberation movement. They talk about the falsification of history, while they themselves are the biggest counterfeiters. The thief shouts to scare the landlord. Obviously they have the fear of "the thief and the liar only during the first year (century) are happy''. They encourage ordinary believers to repent for their evil acts by which they harmed their fellow-men, to confess to them, but they themselves never do it. They invite others to reflect on whether they have escaped the right track, but this does not apply to themselves. We Macedonians have a particular reason to deal and disclose the role of Roman-orthodox priesthood. It undermined our liberation and now it is starring in the undermining of our struggle for redress of injustice, freedom of expression, the restoration of truth. It fears the truth as the devil the incense.

The course of the Roman-orthodox priesthood


Christianity began as a religious movement of the humble and contempted. It denounced the greed of landlords and merchants, exploitation and oppression of the weak. For this reason, it suffered persecution by the Roman power. But when the Roman power found that the old Greco-Roman religions, to which it was based on until then, had degenerated and worn

out, it decided to replace it with a new and uncorrapted one. Moreover, this new religion was adopting the view of many Eastern religions about a higher God and the kings and priests as his representatives on earth. Many kingdoms of the East had long supported the survival on this principle. Thus, they adapted it to their power and exhibited the emperors and kings along with the bishops and priests, as the representatives of God on earth. In addition, expressly its founder, Jesus Christ, is stated as "King of Kings". This helped people's subjection to their spiritual and therefore their political power. It is no coincidence that Christianity was adopted and imposed as the official religion by the Eastern Roman Empire. Much of the populations of its eastern provinces, especially in Cappadocia, Cilicia, Syria, Palestine, were already Christians. These populations it sought to win in support for its authority in those areas. The conquerors and tyrants always sought to assimilate by religion the populations of the countries they impinge. More contemporary example is the Christianization of the Natives of America. The European colonialists along with the expeditionary corps they sent also missionaries. If you convince the Natives that you are the representative of the true God, then they subordinate themeselves more easily. Of course, the real Christians refused to play this role, but they did it those who were charmed and greedily swallowed the bait of goods of the secular power. With those, the emperors did their job and the religious beliefs of those were imposed. It is no coincidence that all the Ecumenical Councils, which formed the official Christian doctrine, were convened by the emperors. They appointed the patriarchs and bishops, they determined the basic principles of Christianity, they chased all other religious beliefs as non-correct faiths. A typical example is the fact of the prosecution of Icons as idolatrous symbols that was made by emperors, but also by emperors the enforcing of Iconolatry was done. The reason, of course, was mysticism, the theofobia (fear of God) and despotofobia (fear of bishops) that the images inspired in the ignorant believers. In addition, most of those who were declared saints were bishops and emperors. The result of this unholy alliance was the theocratic feudal system imposed by the Romans on the subjected peoples. The Roman Empire was not created by the voluntary pooling of some people. The Romans imposed themselves by force of arms as conquerors and behaved as conquerors. By force they seized the land of other people and turned them into helots and slaves or imposed them unsustainable taxes without offering anything to them. This power rewarded the preachers of Christianity by imposing as mandatory the new religion and persecuting all others, including the Greek one. It built magnificent temples, such as St. Sophia, founded monasteries, granted large tracts of land and large amounts of money from public funds for their maintainance. In turn, the most privileged clergy yielded these worldly benefits by making propaganda in favor of the "Kings on earth",

representatives of the heavenly King. They are calling themselves Fathers, representatives of the heavenly Father. Thus, according to their scriptures, the "slaves of God" became easily their slaves, too. A key element of the ritual became the pompous appeal to the heavenly King to donate "victories to the reign .... and store through your cross by the constitution." And the constitution for which they made prayers, was the feudal and slavery one. The emperor who imposed Christianity as official religion, was declared saint, although he was, for the sake of power, the slain even of his son. They spread the rumor that he prevailed over his opponents because he saw a vision of a cross with the inscription "In this you win." All historians agree that the struggle in which Constantine, the Saint and Great, prevailed, was a ruthless power struggle, full of violence, intrigue, distribution of offices, privileges and territories. It is impossible that the God of Christians favored someone of such ruthless kind of contenders of power. Simply, Christianity from an intellectual - philosophical operation, had become a political tool. Then the patriarchal priesthood was rewarded and became the second strongest authority after the institution of kingship. This regime, in order to survive, chased anything that undermined the spiritual and political authority over the subjected peoples. It chased whatever threatened the spiritual darkness in which it was based. Anything it would open the eyes of the citizens. It prevented the development of critical thinking and free spirit, for they were mortal threat to the obscurantist and feudal authority. Within this frame, it persecuted also Greek philosophy, of which they appear today as hypocritical defenders and heirs. For the rest, conspicuously they denounce hypocrisy. This clerical-feudal alliance persecuted all socialreligious and revolutionary movements. The most important of these, the Paulicians in Asia Minor and the Bogomiles in the Balkans, were chased from one side by the state-militaristic mechanism with slaughtering and destroying their writings and their communities, and from the other side by the clergy with calumniation, slandering and excommunocation. They were condemned as heretical, and they were indeed heretical. Struggling to eliminate fraud, hypocrisy, rape, exploitation, oppression, obscurantism and the use of theofobia (fear of God) for authoritarian purposes. From the word heretic arose the word exheretiko (in greek meaning: excellent), ie that which comes from (ex) heretic. In retrospect the ex-heretic prevailed on to be considered the best, out of the ordinary, special. They are the ideas, opinions and personalities of the ex-heretics (excellents). Ie those who questioned the established views, that usually were imposed by conservatives to sustain ideologies and regimes that allowed them to exploit their own people and to live richly as parasites on them. These ex-heretics, by challenging the views of incumbent regimes, led humanity to new discoveries, rational ideas and knowledge and contributed to liberalized democratic societies. So, usually they were persecuted by authoritarian regimes and were excommunicated by

the church as (ex) heretics. Macedonians, together with the Thracians, can be proud that in their homeland and from their ancestors the movement of Bogomiles (10th-14th centuries) was developed. They are descendants of ex-heretics (excellent) ancestors. Moreover, the very word Bogomiles (Vogomiloi in Greek) is macedonian and derived from the word boga (God) and mili (dear). The Bogomiles argued, among other things, that from God does not arise any power to people over people, God has no representatives on earth and therefore the bishops deceive the people. They rejected the hierarchy, the ceremonies and sacraments of the Church and saw the worship of images as idolatry. They refused to enlist and participate in the wars of kings or pay taxes, because they did not recognize the rights of feudal princes, kings and the Church on earth, and the like. Without the expensive sacerdotal vestments (amfia=sacerdotal vestments- "meta-amfi-esi" in greek means "dressed with sacerdotal vestments"=in disguise, masquerade) the priesthood does not inspire theofovia and without the rituals and mysteries does not submit the ignorant believer in physical and metaphysical fears and dependencies, nor hypnotizes a part of his brain in order to make it inaccessible to critical thinking. Instead of the mystirous rituals of the priesthood, and apart from their theological beliefs, the Bogomiles made popular celebrations and ceremonies honoring the life giving forces of nature (fire, water, springs, seasonal change, fertility, sun, moon, etc.), as other indigenous peoples of Europe did. The fact that they had rejected the priesthood and rituals of the imperial church, shows that those ceremonies were not rites of sacramental character of the priesthood, but were popular feasts in honor and in contact with natural forces. These folk rituals (pagan), the clergy presented to the ignorant flock as idolater with Greek thought and lifestyle ("the Greek way"). It is no coincidence that the adherents of Bogomiles in the West who were called Cathari (Pure), are considered forerunners of the European Enlightenment, the Reformation, the Protest (Protestant). The patriarchal status quo, seeing the collapse of the Roman Empire and the risk of losing its secular privileges, immediately allied with the new political power that began to prevail in the region, the Ottomans. It is also known it assisted to the fall of Constantinople, with its propaganda that the falling of the City is God's will. They preferred the subjugation to the Ottomans, instead of the union with the Catholics, which was entered as a condition for the defence of Byzantium by them, from the Ottoman threat. The pretext of doctrinal differences with Catholics, as they claim, it would be reliable if they had sought the union of the Orthodox churches. In such a case, Byzantium would have had allies all Orthodox and especially the most powerful, the Russians. But that would have required elected Patriarch and Holy Synod of all the Orthodox churches. Something similar to what happens in the Catholic church, where the Pope is elected by representatives of all

Catholics. Today he is a German, while the former was a Polish. This democratic process that would have lead to the unity of all Orthodox churches and would make the Patriarchate really Ecumenical, was not pursued by the clergy, because it simply did not serve its narrow political-economic interests. Thus, the cross with the "herein the victory'' was defeated by the crescent moon of Islam with the blessings of the priesthood, but the Patriarchate remained the second most powerful institution after the Sultan. Not only it did not lose the previous privileges, but increased them by gaining also political responsibilities. The patriarchs and bishops were appointed as political representatives of the Roman (genus) Nation (Rum Milliyet). This genus, ie, which has nothing to do with ethnicity and integrates all those it can by its propaganda activities, is a creation of the remnants of the Roman ruling class that allied with the power of the Ottomans to keep its privileges. It is a creation of the Roman and Ottoman conquerors. Since then, patriarchs and bishops appear as ethnarchs or "lords of the Nation". Since then, they adopted the dress and miter similar to the dress and the crown of medieval kings and emperors. There, the roots are of their involvement in the game of power in modern Greece politics. Having ensured from the Ottoman Empire authority the responsability of education of their Christian subjects, they continued to block the culture of free critical spirit, which would have allowed the emergence of the Enlightenment also on their territory, as it happened in the West. Any bright spirit that appeared, was excommunicated as heretical, was slandered and isolated or forced to flee to the West. In this way they prevented the cultivation of those elements of ancient Greek civilization, in the areas where they had developed, extending the medieval obscurantism until today. This intellectual stagnation has resulted directly also to a cultural, social, philosophical, scientific, political and economic stagnation to which they condemned the people they dominated. Their prevalence in Greece is directly related to the current economic crisis, which is a product of intellectual and social decay in which they condemned it. They are primarily responsible that the adjective graikylos, coming from the term Graikos, ended up to mean the delayed, the uncivilized. However, these miserable people, the gravediggers of the ancient Greek spirit, present themselves today as the rescuers of it. Of course, hypocritically and tumidily, they denounce hypocrisy. The Sultan gave them the Fanar district, where, apart from the patriarchate, the "lords of the Nation", known as Phanariots. built their luxurious villas These Christian leaders were senior officials of the Ottoman state, wholesalers and suppliers of the Ottoman court and army or "tenants taxes". In other words, they payed a rent to viziers and pashas and after they pocketed multiple taxes from the people. Members of these families, except Interpreters (ministers, diplomats), heads of the fleet, etc., were appointed as rulers of the Danubian countries. So, many of them made huge fortunes impoverishing their nationals.

The removal of the patriarchal priesthood from the principles of Christianity and its incorporation into the oligarchic structures of domination led to the removing of the majority of fans from it. With the abolition of the Roman power which imposed Christianity by force, a very large number of Christians joined Islam and other faiths. The Christians who fled Asia Minor and Eastern Thrace after the Balkan Wars, reached only 1.5 million, while tens of millions were in Byzantium. This, together with the fact that no people defended the Byzantine regime, even when the capital of Constantinople was besieged by the Ottomans, shows that the former subject peoples did not regarded it as something of their own. It paid his policy to treat its citizens as slaves. The relatively good image that the majority of Modern Greek has of Byzantium, is due to the relocation of the ruling class (Phanariots, homogeneous, clergy) in Greece, which became the ruling class and imposed its propaganda. The Balkan peoples, along with throwing off the Ottoman yoke, they cast off the spiritual tutelage of patriarchal priesthood, by founding their own autocephalous churches. They removed all the privileges the church and monasteries had and nationalized most of the huge tracts of land (foundations), which were granted to them by the Roman and maintained by the Ottoman Empire. The clergy knew very well that the same would have happened with the creation of a truly free Macedonian state. Apart from its jurisdiction over Macedonia, it would lose possession of huge tracts of land, which would be allocated to serfs who cultivated it, as well as many residential real estate and its secular privileges. So, it resorted to undermine the struggle for the liberation of Macedonia by the Macedonians themselves. It used the ecclesiastical machinery of propaganda as a political tool to blame the Macedonian liberation movement, to corrode it from the inside, to divide it. However, the Ottoman power on which for so many centuries it was based on, was heading towards the inevitable collapse. The clergy knew that it had become like a parasitic climbing plant. Alone could not survive and stand upright. It had to seek support in another political power. Among the newly established Christian Balkan states, the only one willing to offer such support, with profit in mind, of course, was the kingdom of Greece. And Greece, which in its effort to expand in 1897 to Macedonia suffered a debacle, needed the support of the patriarchal priesthood in the role of Fifth Phalanx for its expansionist plans.

The course of the Kingdom of Greece


The ideals of liberty, democracy and justice were those that roused the Greeks (1821), like other Balkan peoples, against Ottoman tyranny. The majority of the insurgents were inspired by the principles of the Enlightenment, as expressed mainly by the French Revolution (1789). Leading exponent of those progressive views in the Balkans was Rigas Velestinlis (Vlach from the former slavophone

Velestino in Thessaly, 1757-1798). His enlightening and organizational work, however, was violently interrupted. The Patriarchate excommunicated him and eventually he was betrayed to the oligarchic Austrian authorities by the Romios (Roman) dealer D. Economou and was handed over to Ottomans who strangled him. By the same progressive principles also the proclamations of the Filiki Eteria (Friendly Society), established in 1814, were inspired, to liberate the Balkan peoples. That organization has pioneered in the revolution of 1821, which led to the creation of independent Greece. The state that was created, which is directly related to us, the Macedonians, however, had absolutely nothing to do with the principles of freedom and democracy. The prospect of creating an independent state in southern Balkan peninsula, directly interested the great powers, which, of course, saw it as a mean to serve their interests. After the defeat of Napoleon, the oligarchic powers of Europe had reorganized and imposed their authoritarian power in the major European countries. They could not, however, ignore the fascination the principles of the Enlightenment exerted on the European peoples. Thus, they integrated them in their political rhetoric, to be able to influence them. On the other hand, the kotzampasides (elders) and kleftarmatoloi (armed bandits groups), who were a part of the Ottoman authorities participating in the oppression of the people, saw in the prospect of establishing an independent state, the possibility to become bosses themselves and to inherit the privileges of the until then rulers. To these, many Phanariots were added who, after the 1821 uprising in the Danubian countries, had lost the confidence of the Ottomans and started to experience problems. Moreover, many of them had taken care to join the Friendly Society already and had acquired substantial control of it. Immediately after the first successes of the rebels, the battle to control the new state began. That conflict led to civil war (1823-1825), in which the great powers were not aloof, and helped the Ottoman forces to suppress the revolt. Of the 2,000,000 pounds loan granted by England in 1825, only 521,624 pounds went to army organization and administration. The rest was misapproprieted by middlemen and politicians to buy off military men and elders and to subdue the true liberation forces. In the spring of 1827 the revolution was virtually stifled. The major powers (Britain, France, Russia) intervened, only then, as they saw their interests threatened. So, in July 1827, in absentia of the Sultan and the rebels, they decided to establish an independent Greek state. The Sultan, however, refused to comply, as he had already managed to quell the revolt. Then, the patrons forces intervened militarily. Their fleet destroyed the Ottoman fleet (Battle of Navarino, October 1827), whilst in August 1828 French army also landed in the area . Thus, the Sultan, seeing that his opponents are not joking, he was forced to withdraw its forces without a fight and to recognize the independence of Greece.

Independence, however, from the Ottomans did not lead to an independent state, but to a dependent one on the patron powers. These, not only appointed the supreme ruler (the Bavarian King Otto) and the threemember Regency (Armansberg, Mauer, Eideck) but did not appoint one single Greek. They framed the state apparatus with foreign dignitaries, as well as the military administration, excluding those who made the liberation struggle. To the population's reaction that followed, they responded with violence. Commander Kolokotronis was imprisoned and condemned even to death, along with other revolutionaries. Among the prisoners was also our Dimitrios Karatasos, Macedonian, who, except his macedonian native language, spoke also Greek. They did not get any other choice, except to comply and be reconciled with the new situation. Allies to the foreigners throughout this process were the Phanariots and the "homogenous" (those of same birth-race). They arrived to do the same they did during the Ottoman yoke: to govern and to make money by administrating, purchasing, looting the public wealth, the taxes and to exploit the weak people. First president of the National Assembly was appointed the Phanariot Alexander Mavrocordatos (Italian from Genoese family of Chios). The first Greek Constitution was drafted by the Italian Vincenzo Gallina together with, also of Italian origin, Phanariot Theodore Negri. Of Italian origin (Venetian) was also the first governor of Greece, Ioannis Kapodistrias (Capo D'Istria of the Vittori family). The three parties that were created primarily by those "homogenous Greeks" were characterized as French, English and Russian, according by whom and who they supported. The imposed regime was as authoritarian as the Ottoman conquerors' one. It took new struggles and the revolution of September 3, 1843 for the king to grant a constitution. This did not prevent him from interfering in the governance of the country. The indignation of the people led to a revolt that forced him to resign. But the British and French powers, appointed their own monarch again, the Danish George (1863). As it appeared that the state was not viable, the British ceded the Ionian Islands to Greece (1864). And thus enhance their influence in the protectorate. For the same reasons, they ceded to Greece also Thessaly and Arta (1881), without any prior rebellionn or expansionary war by Greece. That granting, of course, had no character of liberation of the Thessalians. It gave another chance to the "homogeneous" to buy for very cheap price the Ottomans' estates and make themselves nothing less but as brutal exploiters of the peasants. Thirty years later, the indignation of the Thessalians led to riots and the bloody events of March 1910 (Kileler), which forced the regime to make some expropriation of estates and give the most barren lands to the rebellious peasants. Thessaly was not liberated, but was granted. The Thessalians, as previously the Moraites and Roumeliotes, were not liberated in the true sense of the word, but merely changed masters. The ideologists and real revolutionaries very timely

saw the bad course of things. The leading teachers of the Genous (Nation), Adamantios Korais (17481833), highlighted in time the dangers of choosing a foreign ruler, around whom, he predicted, all adventurist and anti-democratic elements will rally. He named as such the Phanariots as "tourkoprigkipes"( Turkish-princes) and the Homogenous as "psoroarchontes" (scabies-rulers). When, informed of the authoritarian government of Kapodistrias, the brutal violation of the constitution, the imposition of censorship, etc., in the two booklets he published, "What is in the interests of liberated from Turks Greece to act, to avoid to be enslaved by Turkish kind of Christians", he denounced him as a tyrant, an instrument of oligarchy and urged the people to armed revolt. The most important ideological exponent of that liberating revolution, thought that the "liberated from Turks Greece" was enslaved "by Turkish kind of Christians " The situation deteriorated even further with the selection of the Bavarian and later the Danish king. Appointment in the public services, public procurement, concession of land, loans, grants, etc. depended on how loyal to the regime was each citizen. Here is rooted the current "client" relationship between citizens and political parties in power, which eliminates democracy in practice . The depended on that power voters are voting with criterion to keep this status and not for the good of society. This rule is the main reason why monarchs, dictators and authoritarian party leaders so easily imposed their power. Even today the leaders of major parties behave as sovereignes. The parties created by the regime, had as basic philosophy the conquest of the state to serve the personal interests of the party apparatus and the plunder of public funds. This philosophy has been maintained to date, which led to the recent economic crisis. The ruling class created in this way, it showed today how patriotic it is. Rather than return the capital it had in deposits abroad, it took out also those it had inside the country. Investments made in previous years in neighboring countries, they did not bring them back to support our "homeland" in this difficult time and to offer work to the Greeks. It showed once again, how it perceives patriotism and what kind of patriotism was the one that led to the "liberation" of Greece and, later, of Macedonia. But by the concept of homeland, it dopes its citizens to be able to use them in its adventurist plans. With that kind of Greece we, the Macedonians, later, will have to deal, that has nothing whatsoever to do with the principles of freedom and democracy. Even the elementary democracy we enjoy in the recent decades, is due to the country's accession to European organizations and institutions. The new regime in order to serve its plans, had to form a similar ideological consciousness in its own nationals. As it is indicated in the word itself, consciousness is all about knowledge (awareness). Thus, the multi-national alloy of Romioi (Romans), Arvanites (Albanian), Vlachs, hellenized Slavs, Arabs, Italians, Franks, Catalans, etc. began to be bombarded by the news about descent from the

ancient Greeks. It had to replace the loose awarness of the Romios, that made them vulnerable to the Italian states (Romans, Venetians, Genoese). For the same reason the Eastern Orthodox.was set as the official religion. Moreover constitutionally was defined, instead of the origin or the mother tongue of the citizens, that: "Those indigenous inhabitants of the territory of Greece who believe in Christ are Greek" (Article II). This forced the Muslims Albanians to convert for retaining the right to remain in their ancestral homes. So, those Greeks, who were remnants of the multinational East Roman Empire, began to be descendants of the ancient Greeks. This served well the interests of British and French in their effort to reduce the strong influence of Russia in the new state. It is no coincidence that the first Greek Academy, the Ionian Academy (1824), was founded by the British, who then occupied the Ionian Islands, in order to replace the Italian language which was until then the official one, with the Greek one. To this helped the European, romantic, philhellenic current that wanted the revival of ancient Greek culture and people, in the place where it had developed. On the substance, these by necessity and imagination Greeks had no biological and cultural continuity with the people of the ancient Greeks, who had scattered, merged and assimilated with dozens of other nations under the Macedonian and Roman Empires. It had disappeared as a separate people for over two millennia. Athens, which was the center of the ancient Greeks, in 1821 was a multinational town with some eight thousand inhabitants, with the largest ethnic group being Arvanites (Albanians). The term Greek meant the Greek-speaking or the follower of Greek religion and philosophy, the "participating in the Greek culture." It was the same with the term Latino, which meant the Latin speaking. The modern inhabitants of Central and South America, Spain, Romania, etc. are called Latino because of the culture and especially the language, not because they have some biological continuity from the ancient Latin or any origin from the country of the ancient Latins, Lazio. To serve its expansionist plans the ruling class of Greece cultivated the awarness to its nationals that they are heirs, except of the ancient Greek colonization, also of the Macedonian and Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantium). So, it implanted in them the awareness that the competitors of its expansionist plans, Turks, Russians, Bulgarians, Macedonians separatists, etc. Serbs are enemies, of the "nobrotherly" now Greek Nation. The main competitor to the British and French in the Balkans, the Russians, were the cause to cultivate in its own nationals also an intense co-antislavic consciousness. The modern Greek was taught that the "Slavic peoples are inferior, without culture and glorious history. They are invaders in Byzantine Balkan territories of which only they (the Greeks) are legal heirs." The teachers and priests do not say to them that the Peloponnesians, who were the backbone of the modern Greek state, are hellenized Slavs, who called themselves by the Slavic name Moraites, their homeland they called Moria and their

place had infinitely more Slav names than Greek ones. As about the greek-speaking people, at least there was some sense to be called Greeks, ie something similar to the Latin speaking named as Latino. For non Greek-speaking, however, it revealed the grotesque ideology of the Albanian-speaking Greek, the Vlach (Latin)-speaking Greek, the Turkishspeaking, the Slav-speaking Greek, etc. Recently, arose also the Russian-speaking Rosopontioi, Georgians, Armenians, Azeris, Chechens, etc. with "Greek origin." While in other European countries all those who went were economic migrants, in Greece came as "repatrieted". For the rest, they argue that Greece is ethnically homogeneous, clean. "There are no national minorities ... even the W. Thrace Turks are Greeks, simply Muslims by religion." The idea of superiority and purity, along with the idea of wronged Hellenism, which has "historical" rights to where the ancient Greek colonization, the Macedonian and the Byzantine Empire, as well as the Koine Greek language had spread, formed the ideological basis for using this people for expansionist purposes. It was the Great Idea by which they satureted their nationals. It is perhaps the most extreme chauvinist national ideology worldwide. The idea of the Roman Empire homing was adopted by the leader of the Italian fascist party, Mussolini, and therefore he was characterized as one of the biggest fascists. The fact that the principle of superiority and purity was the dominant ideology of the fascist regimes of Germany - Italy does not concern the modern Greeks. These are fascist principles only when others adopt them. When modern Greeks adopt them, they are democratic. The conquerors and colonizers are bad, only when are the others, especially if we are the victims. Our own conquerors and our conquests are fair, heroic, pious and glorious. Our own conquests are called liberations. It is a national right and duty. Anyone who doubts that, is automatically a tenderer and an anti-Greek. The only difference between modern Greek nationalism and the Nazi, is the size. Victims of the Nazis were all European peoples, while of the Greeks only the weak northward neighboring peoples. The real motives of the Greek establishment were revealed during the subsequent expansionist wars. If it cared about the liberation of even just the Greekspeaking people in Macedonia, it could try to rouse them against the invaders during the expansionist war of 1897. It did not, though. After the Ilinden uprising, it could try to turn them against the separatist organization E.M.E.O. (Macedonian Internal Revolutionary Organization). It did not, but even if it tried, it would had achieved nothing. It undermined the reconstruction of the liberation movement of the Macedonians (1904-1908) by military saturated with intollerance, by the Great Idea and by mercenaries. If it considered Macedonia part of Greece, it would not make a formal agreement with Serbia and Bulgaria before the First Balkan War (1912), to share it under "military occupation". Nobody makes an

agreement with others to share what it is its own. In addition, in the royal decrees issued (31-10-1912) for the administration of the occupied areas, it characterizes it "conquered countries" and new countries. In the Treaty of Alliance it made with Serbia (19-5-1913), the word liberation is completely absent,. The words that dominate are "possessions", "land distribution", "occupation", "occupied territories", "conquered countries." And it even determined its claims to the line "to the south of Kilkis ....will direct... a little bit eastward of the Gulf of Eleftheron ...". That is, it did not even claim Kilkis, Serres, Drama, Kavala, where there was solid Macedonian population and the separatist movement of Yane Sandanski was particularly strong. It knew it could not claim and keep those areas. However, the position of disadvantage of Bulgaria, which had occupied those areas, after the Alliance of Greece, Serbia, Montenegro, Romania and the Turkey's offensive, had created prospects for Greece to conquer more territories. It knew, however, that it could not keep those lands in the future without having discharged those indigenous populations, so it took care to dilute them. Along with the attacks by the five states to the Bulgarian army, it made attacks against civilians and local population. During its "heroic" march, the greek army bombed, except the few, due to its multi-front struggle, Bulgarian military forces, also the civilian population of towns and villages in its path. It destroied Kilkis, found first on its path, and killed many villagers in the surrounding villages, with the result to terrorize those who survived and make them leave their homes to save themselves from the ferocity of the invaders. Such things neither the Nazis did. This terrified also the local population of other areas, resulting in thousands to flee their homes, hoping to return after the end of hostilities. It was the first phase of a mass ethnic cleansing. The political leadership of Greece knew very well that those crimes would lead to reprisals against patriarchal and Greek-speaking populations. But, as proved to be, it sought to use those people as settlers in areas in which it made ethnic cleansing. Thus, those displaced people should not complain for the behavior of those who uprooted them from their homes, and let's see who actually is to blame. Once they settled in the areas and properties of the victims of the Greek ethnic cleansing, it was natural for them to collect the hostile feelings and revenge of the real beneficiary owners of those sites. Today, the settlers who settled in those areas in Greece celebrate without shame, perhaps out of ignorance of the real facts, those atrocities as "liberation", together with the chauvinist state apparatus This tactic was not an isolated event, but became an ongoing national philosophy. Six years later the same army, by the commands of the same chauvinistic leadership, did the same crimes against the Turkish civilian population of Asia Minor. After the successful operation in Macedonia, it thought it could repeat it also there. Countless villages were bombed, burned and looted, villagers and civilians killed or raped. So, countless were the caravans of terrified civilians who

fled to the interior of Asia Minor. The political leadership of Greece knew that it would provoke retaliation by the Turks against the Greeks of Asia Minor, but hoped to establish populations in those areas it had evacuated by brutality. The facts, however, were completely different from those of Macedonia, where it had allies in the other Balkan states and the support of Western allies. Moreover the Macedonian liberation movement was weakened after the suppression of the Ilinden uprising (1903) by the Ottomans, the Anti-macedonian War (1904-1908) of hellenic paramilitary gangs and the undermining struggle of the bishops. That is why, apart from the Asia Minor Catastrophe, it did not suffer a Macedonian Catastrophe, as well. In Asia Minor it was alone, with opponent strong people. The Western Allies wanted Turkey as an ally, too, and so they avoided to support the Greek expansionism. So, the hurt and angry Turks, in their counter-offensive, not only drove the Greek army, but, in retaliation, expelled also the Christian population, which Greece had intended to use for its expansion plans. From all that tragedy, citizens learn only the atrocities of the Turks during the offensive and not what caused them. The fact that Venizelos, who ordered that campaign, not only lost the elections in November 1920, but he even failed to be elected deputy, showed that the people were far from agreeing with the expansion plans of the regime. That barbaric behavior of Greece to all its neighbors, lead to the painful modern general conclusion, that "Greece is surrounded by enemies." This leads many to feel aggrieved, embittered and hostile to their neighbors "who hate, envy and conspire against the territorial integrity of our country", because they hide or do not want to learn themselves, what suffered the neighbors from it. Normally, after the restoration of democracy, states apologize for the crimes committed against other people. Greece did never do it. The Macedonians who remained in greek territory, apart from persecution, injustice, terrorism and oppression, were forced to undergo an unprecedented black propaganda. They had even to accept it without objection, otherwise they would have been suspicious. They had to forget what they knew about their history, their origin, their identity. Except bullying, also lies, misrepresentation and slander were routinely used. The main objective was the forgery of modern history. The struggles made by the national liberation organization E.M.E.O. for independent Macedonia, are presented as struggles not aimed at the liberation of Macedonia, but its annexation by Bulgaria. At this helps ignorance of the truth that the integrated in the Patriarchate Macedonians were characterized as Greeks, and those integrated in the Exarchate as Bulgarians. The ones periodically integrated to Catholicism (Uniate-Unionists) are also characterized by the Patriarchals as Bulgarians or schismatics. The Government of Greece knew the truth. It sent, in the spring of 1904, four officers in Western Macedonia in order to do fieldwork. Their report stated clearly that the rebels made sure to implant "in

the Greek (ie patriarchal) Macedonians a macedonian conscience, independent of any other race. [...] ... So, after they could, with art, develop in Macedonians the broad idea of independence ... ". For Captain Kota, who was patriarchal, they wrote that "he fought bravely against the Turkish army, without descriminating Orthodox and schismatic, seeing all in a Christian brotherhood and one Macedonia." To the same conclusions reached also the Secretary of the Embassy of Greece in Istanbul George Tsormpatzoglou after an official mission to Central and Western Macedonia: "Both the upper dream of the Macedonians and the relevant program of the true revolution of Macedonia have no political influence from the will and aspirations of the Bulgarian hegemony." Also stated that: "Macedonians chieftains and perhaps also the chiefs, just on a single term of their contract after the country, get, so far, their great strength: by the term to aim only to freedom of the Macedonians as Macedonians. [...] I venture, however, to think that it is impossible that I am mistaken on my following impression: that, as it is today, the revolution in Macedonia is not Bulgarian and just not a single harm to Hellenism has occured to its present development but the maximum benefit comes from it." In the report there is the answer to the lies about the size and participation in the revolution of the Macedonians: "... in the country the revolution is much widely spread over than commonly is thought[...] all, without exception, the villages and estates are versed to the common idea in favor of liberation and Greeks [Macedonians patriarchal] fanatics are important representatives of the rebel gangs in towns and villages and are not few those who are secretly armed followers of the gangs. [...] The Orthodox Greeks [ie patriarchal] as it was confirmed to me by the former bishop of Pelagonia, had collaborated with the rebels in brotherly unity for freedom [...] The only actors of the rebellion that the Greek Macedonian peasant fed and hid, were not Bulgarians but as genuine Macedonians as himself." In Tsormpatzoglou report there is the answer of what kind of "Greeks" the rebels hit: "The 300 or 350 until today our [patriarchal Macedonians] victims by the sword of the rebels were victims not of Bulgarian [Exarchists] greek-hate or of any Bulgarian idea, but simply of revenge, purely bandits' victims, or rather of the feeling of these for self-mainenance because they were denounced or slandered and repeatedly complained to partisan opponents as dangerous pursuers and fanatical snitchers of rebel hideout." Such informers had been executed by the Macedonians partisans, doing exactly what all the rebels do. The same did the Resistance to the collaborators of the occupiers during the Nazi occupation (1941-1945). Those who undermined the revolution for the liberation of Macedonia, now praise these informers exactly in the same way they would have praised the collaborators of the Nazi, if the Nazi occupation did not end. Besides, the official representatives of Greece in Macedonia have recorded the help to the conquerors in their reports

and in the memoirs of the bishop of Kastoria, German Karavangelis. The Greek consul in Bitola, K.Kypraios, wrote in his report (ar.554/24-7-1903): "This past Friday bulgarophone Orthodox villagers came and informed me in confidence that on the 20th of this month, Sunday, Prophet Elias feast day, is inevitably declared the revolution, and set me the points of concentration of the rebels. This, I did not miss to announce to the Governor-General ... ". In the report of July 26th, prepared by the secretary of the consulate Ion Dragoumis, they write: "rebelled populations are now convinced that are fighting for liberation, and it is impossible now to halt this revolutionary morale. But also Vlachs and Albanians are favorably disposed towards the movement, not because it is Bulgarian, but because it is considered liberational and as a result of this, many of them are participating to it, and as for the others, they are not willing to show any reaction to it. Whenever we can, we help Turkish authorities to suppress the movement, but with no success at all, nor it is possible for us to find more agents as interceptor of revolutionaries. " These informers and collaborators of the occupiers, the saboteurs of a noble people's liberation struggle, expressed in the most cynical way the interests of the predatory class who ravaged the wealth and sweat of the citizens of the kingdom of Greece. The only thing that interested it was to increase the territories and populations for exploitation. The looming collapse of the Ottoman Empire, sooner or later, would have lead to vindication of the liberation struggles of the Macedonian people. This struggle had to be undermined, in order for them to take the place of the Ottoman conquerors, in the same role. And because, as they write in their reports, they had no fans in Macedonia willing to play this hideous role, they will bring officers and mercenaries (1904-1908) to undermine the heavily injured by the Ottoman counteroffensive Macedonian liberation movement. The situation will favor the conquering aspirations of the Greek chauvinism, which will show its real face in Macedonia. It will face it purely as war booty and will behave to Macedonians in a far worse than Ottoman conquerors way. Not enough, it will force the Macedonians to honor as liberators those chauvinistic scums that undermined their struggle for freedom. They erect statues of those who collaborated with the invaders, were bougt and betrayed, murdered, destroyed, raped, extorted, bought, slandered. Those who, in current conditions, would be referred to the International Court in The Hague for crimes against humanity. The misnomer Hellenism and spurious Orthodoxy passed in Macedonia as barbarism and obscurantism. The worst, however, of all this, is that they forced a large portion of the Macedonians to be ashamed of their roots, their identity, their origin, their history. The main teaching tool was the manipulation of the concept of the term Greek and Slav. While both terms are only linguistic and multinational, they presented

10

them as national. Greeks have been shown of a high and glorious origin, while the Slavs are presented of inferior origin, uncivilized and inglorious. Us, the Macedonians, they showed as Slavicized Greek Macedonians. The concept Slav during the Classical and Hellenistic periods did not exist. Never there has been someone or some people that called themselves Slavs. The term was first used by the Romans and mainly by Byzantines. They called Slavs or Sthlavous or Sklavinous the populations that settled in each and every parts of the Balkans, from the early sixth century. Their cradle is considered to be Central Europe, focusing on the Carpathian Mountains and stretching from Romania to Poland. Before this generic name beeing stuck to them, were reported in various populations, such as Getes, Dacians, Vastarnes, Celts, etc. The main characteristic of those who settled in the Balkans, as well as those who remained in their original birthplace, was the lack of military structure and hegemones. Hence, where they settled, they did not created states. They were mostly farmers, breeders, artisans, etc. A key element of their social organization was the clan (community) that was commanded by an Elder, who represented it in the council of Elders of the ethnic group (hence the concept of the modern Senate). Powerful states have created hegemonic militarist mechanisms, which by force of arms exploited first the rich resources of their country and their people and then extended their exploitation, by expansionist wars, over other countries and peoples. This ensured wealth to the ruling class, which created an impressive culture. Impressive palaces, towers, temples, fortified cities to guard their wealth, their freedom to travel, to get education, to cultivate the arts and sciences. Those belonging in the ruling class (rulers, nobles, landowners, military officers, officials, clergy, bootlickers etc.) were not working, as for this porpuse they had the slaves and serfs. The word slave is the Latin equivalent of the Byzantine word doulos. From there comes the greek word doulia, the object of which is the job. The job we call doulia because it was something that concerned only the servants and not the ruling class. The ruling class is not slave-working. These central European nations, who lived in the northern border or the Balkan provinces and instead of having slaves working for them, they made their "job" by themselves, the Romans (Byzantines) characterized t as slaves (in Latin s(k)lavos). Even now in English and French the doulos is called slavos (slave). These Slavs, therefore, who did not have slaves to do their work and they made it by their own (self), considered unthinkable and unacceptable to be themselves the slaves of others. This political culture they did not abort when many of them emigrated to the then Roman Balkans. Here, however, they had to face the Byzantine feudal regime, that those who were working it wanted to exploit as slaves. These folks, however, according to the few historical data, does not seem they had trouble in the peaceful coexistence with pre-existing people. Nowhere are

mentioned conflicts, evictions or submissions to new people, simply because they had no military mechanism. In addition they settled in sparsely inhabitated due to pests (mostly plague) areas. The most important thing was the fact that the old folks were already slaves to the Romans (Byzantine). So, the old slaves felt closer to the newcomers "slaves" who were carriers of anti-faudal and even liberating ideology. This facilitated the merging and the assimilation of one another . Of course, there lays also the fact that nowhere is mentioned a case of the old population to prepare themselves to defend the Byzantine totalitarian regime from "invasions". The anti-feaudal political culture of these Slavs had as result the abolishion of the Byzantine power in Peloponnesus for 218 years (587-805), in the better known sociopolitical revolution in Asia Minor, lead by a Slav (Thomas 821-823) and the most important social-religious movement of the Bogomiles (Vogomiloi in Greek, 10th-14th century), starring these "Slavs." In practice they showed that they are the biggest opponents of slavery of the peoples and of the medieval Byzantine obscurantism. The fact that they assimilated easily with the older population, shows that they were related peoples. Moreover, the Balkan Peninsula is the southern edge of central Europe which is considered the birthplace of those Slavs. This shows also the case of the Bulgarian slavization. The Moesians (Thracian people), the country of whom the Bulgarians settled in the 7th century, can not had been slavisized by the Slavs who settled there only a century before (6th) and in a time when there were no teachers, or even an ecclesiastical system. Common sense says that they must have had a language relative to the north of the Danube neighbors' one. Thracian languages cannot have disappeared and their place be taken by the languages of some "Slavs" who settled in their lands, especially since they did not have an educational system, or political and religious power, which normally imposes the language. Common sense says that they had the same or related languages. The emperor Trajan, who conquered Dacia (modern Romania) in the beginning of the second century, says that there he found the Slavs, who then got Latinized. The current Romanian language is an alloy of Latin and Slavic languages. For the case of Macedonia, which directly concerns us, it is not simply one of the central provinces of the empire in the 6th century. The emperors who ruled Byzantium at that time (Justinian Dynasty (518-610) had origin from the region of Skopje. That is to say, they were "Skopjans." The historian of the Greek Nation K. Paparigopoulos says the real name of the Emperor Justinian (527-565 ) was Upravda (Righteous), which is "slavic." This shows that the language of the region of Skopje was related to the language of those who probably settled there later. Moreover Skopje (mentioned in ancient sources as Skoupi or Skopi) retained the same name also after the so called arrival of new populations, suggesting cohabitation and related origins. Where sizable organized militarilly peoples settled,

11

they also imposed their name. So Moesia became Bulgaria, Dacia became Serbia, Illyria became Albania - Croatia, Peloponnese became Morea etc. The fact that something similar did not happened to Macedonia, demonstrates a small number of immigrants settled there or that they had no militaristic structure or both. The city of Skopje was destroyed by an earthquake in 520 and rebuilt by Justinian and therefore was referred to as Justiniana Prima (first). This indicates a special care of the emperors to their hometown. Considering the fact that Byzantium under Justinians reached its peak, then it can only be excluded the case of settling populations as invaders or conquerors in the region Also, no source does mention any expulsion of population nor is there any reference to a people who were expelled from Macedonia. It seems much more likely Justinians had favored the establishment of some relative population from the north, to strengthen their position in the power struggle against the empire by competitors from Orient. It's no coincidence the fact that the hostile and scornful descriptions for the so-called Slavs now come mainly from the patriarchal priesthood, which prevailed on Anatolia's (Cappadocia, Pontus, Cilicia, Syria, etc.) prelates. The fact that our ancestors did not use the name Slavs, can be attested also by Grekoman Macedonians. It is not possible for Macedonians not to know their own origin themselves but this to be well known to the Eastern prelates and people! Something similar to the name of the Slavs happened most recently about the name of the Natives of America. They never called themselves Indians. First European explorers and settlers called them this way because they believed they had arrived in the East Indies by sailing west, round the Earth. Finally, although it was found that the New Land (similar to the New Territories in Greece) is not the Indies, the local inhabitants to be called Indians prevailed, because the European settlers did so. These, now so-called Slav people of Central Europe who lived quietly for centuries, without disturbing any neighbor and without feeling the need to build strong states, from the fifth century began to receive pressure from invasions, mainly from the east. There were not invasions of economic migrants looking for better living conditions, without bothering others or to exploit other weaker people, but hordes with military structure and authoritarian culture. They subjugated and exploited them or imposed taxes or pressured them to emigrate. Huns, Hungarians, Bulgarians, Pechenegs, Turks, etc. came to their lands and made states. This situation now imposed on them the need of military organization, individually or with other people. More recently, in the northwest they mixed with Germans and created German states. The GermanSlav state of Prussia, forerunner of today's Germany, had a Slavic name, as Slavic is also the name of the current capital, Berlin (Berlin). In the northeast, some moved east and mingled with Finns, Scythians, Tatars, Mongols, etc. and made the Russian nation

and state. The Venetians mingled with their conquerors the Lombards and constitute today's northern Italians. In the Balkans, they were nationals of the Eastern Roman Empire and then of the Ottoman Empire. The advent of the Enlightenment and the collapse of authoritarian empires enabled the European peoples to emancipation and self-determination. The historical circumstances did not allow Macedonian people to reach the desired result, since before the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, became the target of predatory regimes that had been created around it. Today is the last case of people of Europe, who not only failed to get self-determination, but still are even prevented to emancipation inside the states in which the parts of its homeland were annexed. Listen, then, Macedon! Listen modern Greek! The completion of 100 years from the annexation of southern Macedonia by Greece let it be an occasion for a real review of its implications for us, the indigenous Macedonians. Let's see the brute reality and dare say the whole truth, no matter how unpleasant it is. The national poet of Greece D.Solomos said that "national is the true." These 100 years did not let us taste the fruits of freedom, democracy and justice. These were years of brutal oppression and extreme violation of our rights. We were forced to renounce our national identity, our history, our relatives, our co-nationals. They turned us,in fact, against them, making us janissaries. They "hellenized" us by the most extreme fascist methods. They banned our mother tongue and changed our names and the names of our villages and cities, without asking us and without allowing any form of protest. If we accept this kind of hellenization, firstly we would justify the fascist practices of its enforcement and we woul reward the crimes committed against our ancestors, and, secondly, we would become a people without roots, without its own identity, without dignity, without history. Even if we would declare Greeks, they would not believe us, though they do not declare this publicly. They, inside them, would laugh at us, but they would hide their contempt. International treaties, especially the European institutions in which we are integrated, guarantee us freedom of expression and collective claim of our rights. To murmur among us, does no good. Only the collective struggle can bring results. We were finally given the opportunity not only to restore our dignity and our history, but to demand removal of the effects of racist policies against us, that made us to end up third class citizens. The real history places us in the democratic and progressive people, whose survival and prosperity is due only to their own work and not the exploitation of other people. For this reason the co-existence with all our fellow countrymen and neighbors, regardless of origin, language and religion had been always friendly and peaceful. We took up arms only against the rulers, the occupiers and the traitors. Hence, our

12

liberating revolution was regulated by the humanistic principles of the Enlightenment and aimed to independent Republic of Macedonia, which would guarantee freedom and equality to all citizens regardless of ethnic origin, language, religious beliefs. You, citizens of this country, particularly those who live in Macedonia, do awaken and get awareness. You see, next to you, the racist discrimination, human rights violations and terrorism practiced against your local co-citizens and you keep silent, just as silent were German citizens watching the crimes of the fascist regime of their country against their foreigners co-citizens. You got familiar with this situation and it seems normal to you. Fascism is not only the one that was manifested, in the extent and extreme forms, in Germany and Italy in the 1940's. It is also how Greece has faced non Greek-speaking peoples after the conquest of the New Territories, over a century ago. Macedonia, before 1912, was not Greek, as you were taught to cry but also, out of ignorance, to believe. It was Hellenized by ethnic cleansing, colonization and the violent hellenization of non Greek-speaking people. A century ago the chauvinist regime of Greece did not sought, as it owed, to help for the liberation of the Christian brother peoples from the Ottoman yoke. Macedonians had helped liberate Greece. When the rebellion failed, in 1822, known also as the Revolution of Vermion, a Macedonian armed body, headed by non Greek-speaking Tassos Karataso from Dobra Bogorodica Imathia (Good Panagia) and Gele Gacov (Angeli Gatso) from Sarakinovo (Sarakinoi) Pella, went to revolted Greece and fought until its liberation. Greece, not only did not reciprocated the help, but undermined the liberation struggle of the Macedonians. Moreover, it behaved in a worse way than the Ottoman conquerors behaved, to the descendants of those rebels. It does not respect, like almost all of you who are its nationals, not even their right to self-define as you name all those revolutionaries: Macedonians. The Ilinden uprising, which was done precisally by the descendants of those Macedonians, you call it Bulgarian, without caring if you are offending and hurting us. This behavior is not merely an act of ingratitude, but a historical infamy, a crime that tarnishes the history of this state and places it iamong non-democratic states. The fascist principle of purity and superiority is the fundamental principle of the national ideology of this state. You have adopted it, though, because it flatters you. The brainwashing we receive about the origin from a famous ancient people, created this narcissistic nation which looks arrogantly down at other neighboring nations. The same reality says that this nation was created by those who set up this state as an institution of service to their interests. They created the Big Idea, as a tool of their predatory ambitions. To the mixture of European ethnicities in which its nationals belonged, it added, in the begining of last century, also nationals of Asian ethnicities. It imposed, to this multiethnic mix, the idea of descent

from the Greeks, using the government and the ecclesiastical mechanisms. This cunstructed Greek nation could be named greek only in the sense the term had since classical times: "Greeks are the participants of Greek education." Thus, apart from the ethnic languages of the nations which compose it, the international greek language could have been its official one, just like the states which have English as official language, but their peoples are not of English descent. The education it imposed, however, it was anything but Greek. Instead of the free Greek spirit, critical thinking, rationality, the Greek way of life, it imposed the levantine mystical dogmatism and Byzantine medieval obscurantism, with an ancient-greek mask. Extreme expression of this absurdity is the definition as a Festival of Literature (students - teachers) on the Three Hierarchs, with origins from Cappadocia and Syria, memory day . To those, in other words, who not only contributed nothing to literature, but with passion chased the Greek culture. If we really had Greek education, Greek Literature Day would be dedicated to the ancient Greek writers and philosophers. The Church of Greece has privileges and political role, to such an extent that no other Christian Church does. That's why it reacts to rationalization and Europeanization, ie Hellenization, of education and political system. It reacts to what is obvious in all democratic countries: the separation of Church from the state. During the people's struggles for democracy and justice, it was always on the side of the authoritarian rule of monarchs, dictators and the oligarchic parties. It is the main reason for the lack of true democracy in the place where democracy was born. We, the Macedonians who fight for democratic rights and justice, we received the fiercest attacks and slanders against our struggle by bodies of the Church. They are a living example, for the role they play and how they act. Another confirmation of the use of religion for chauvinistic purposes. It is the complete transformation of the spiritual vocation of the priesthood to a political tool. And this transformation they call Orthodoxy. The most typical representative of this 'orthodoxy' is the bishop of Thessaloniki Anthimos. Through the state television and broadcastings of the diocese's 4 E television station, in close cooperation with the fascist organizations, he stars to insult and slander of our struggle and the struggle of our ancestors. He names Bulgarian the revolution of our ancestors and continually calls us Bulgarians, when he knows that this is an insult to us. The Church persecuted our language as a dialect of Bulgarian, though it knows this has nothing to do with the tatar-mongolian Bulgarian language and that its literary development was started by Cyril and Methodius from Thessaloniki and Ohrid literary school, founded by their students, Saints Naum and Kliment. In these 100 years they brought Cyrillic scripture to extinction and now are trying to destroy our mother tongue by derogatory propaganda against it. Systematically they are spreading the lie that it has

13

no writing, though they know that not only it has the Cyrillic alphabet which was created in Macedonia, but it also gave writing to other European languages. The widespread acceptance of this raw lies, shows how they have developed critical thinking in their spiritual subjects and how the liars disguise as messengers of truth. Anthimos can make some Macedonians to be reluctant to manifest themeselves freely and to hide their anger, but he also makes many of them to think how to send him back home to Peloponnese, since they do not see another way to get rid of him and his alike. In this crisis, the bishops showed what kind of Christians and patriots they are, but also how politically powerful they are. They demanded and obtained tax exemption of most of the Church property, the exception of cuts of bishops' hefty wages (paid by the state) which they get even in their very old age, the non reduction of the number of priests, although modern communications and transportation allow to cover needs of 2-3 or more parishes by one single priest. In the same way they abolished Prefectures that now are managed by the Regional Governor, so they could be removed also the Metropolis and be run by only one Metropolitan per Region, which will have an Archimandrite, as deputy in every former Prefectual Diocese. This whould alleviate the Greek taxpayers in this great crisis. The clergy, if they have two coats, instead of giving one voluntarily as taught by the founder of the Church, do not want to give neither one of the many expensive robes they have. Instead, as professional hypocrites, they interfere politically, posing themselves as supporters of those who, because of this crisis, risk being left with no coat at all. In this hypocritical way they remind the government of their ability to influence politically their ignorant flock. And each ruling party knows about this possibility of their power and avoid to harm ecclesiastical privileges, thus perpetuating this parasitic condition. The relatively good opinion that the majority of Modern Greeks have for this two authoritarian, backward and parasitic institutions, as well for Byzantium, is due to the reason that history is taught by them. Abusing their power, they teach it as they like through public education, state-fed historians, religious and parastatal institutions they have set up. Thus, the average citizen can not have correct opinion, as it requires proper knowledge, which is denied to him. The result of this fraudulent image are the surprised modern Greeks and their bitterness, when the international community in recent decades challenged their views on Macedonia and they listened to complains and protests by "anti-Greek Skopjans" abroad and do not understand why they are "anti-Greek", and discovered that all the neighbors are hostile to our state, as they characterized our country a trouble maker and "black sheep" of the Balkans. Last, except of Europe's "black sheep", it was described also as a Third World country, unreliable and incorrigible.

It also challenges and rebels against its European allies who allegedly treat it severely by throwing a few slaps, to revive it, rather than to rebel against those who made it to ended up that way. This state, since its creation, was the pampered one in the Western Balkans. Since the '90s, however, not only it is no more, but risks to become the scapegoat. The wheel began to turn upside down. The new conditions urgently require the need to create new alliances and new relationships with neighbors. First of all, it must create new relationships with those citizens belonging to other nations, who speak other languages and have different religions, whom it acquired after "doubling its size" within the expansive undertakings that started in 1912. With these Natives to whom it behaved as the worse conqueror of all the previous ones. We Macedonians will not celebrate the completion of 100 years of lack of freedom as liberation. We want to celebrate 2012 as the first year of real liberation. A prerequisite for this are: A public and practical apology of the state for the cruel way it behaved to us. The public condemnation of the crimes against our people. Taking of measures for free cultivation of local Macedonian culture. The teaching of the established in Macedonia Cyrillic script and of the macedonian language in all public schools. The development and implementation of special programs for the financial support of locals in order to remove the effects of racist policy which ended them up to be financially weaker than even the newly installed settlers in Macedonia. A public apology of the Church for its participation in crimes against our people and its dirty propaganda against our identity and history. The immediate prohibition, by threat of criminal prosecution, of the ceremonies in honor of criminals who undermined the liberation struggle of the Macedonians. The application of anti-racism law and prosecution ex officio for those who act and express in racist way against any expression of Macedonian culture, especially against the like-minded of PAO battalion corps who started to become provocative. The respect and promotion of Macedonian liberation struggles and the definition of Prophet Elias - Ilinden celebration day as the official national holiday of the Macedonians. The immediate start of substantive dialogue between the State and the Macedonian activists. A prerequisite, however, is that all we Macedonians behave as free citizens and all the modern Greeks as democratic citizens.

14