Early 20th century Migrants from Macedonia

There have been several studies published that include the subject of early 20th century Slavic migrants to the United States from the region of "Macedonia". (note: I am using the post 19th century definition of "Macedonia")

To begin with lets examine an exhaustive volume titled "Harvard Encyclopedia of American Ethnic Groups" edited by Thernstrom, Orlov, and Handlin and published in 1980. The text provides valuable insight into how the Slavic immigrants from the region of "Macedonia" regarded themselves during different periods of the 20th century. From this we can deduce when the "Macedonian" ethno/national identity started to establish itself amongst the populace in the region of "Macedonia". As the following explains it wasn't until the period circa WWII that the majority of the immigrants from the region strongly identified with the "Macedonian" ethno/national identity. Prior to this Slavic immigrants from the region regarded themselves as, and were regarded as, Bulgarians:










The notion that pre WWII Slavic immigrants from the region of "Macedonia" largely regarded themselves as Bulgarians, and not as "Macedonians" in an ethno/national sense, is bolstered by 2 additional sources:

1. A publication titled "Immigrant Races in North America" by Peter Roberts published in 1910 states that the Slavs from Macedonia were Bulgarians. Roberts defined a "Macedonian" as a Bulgarian from Macedonia as is evidenced from the following excerpts:





2. The anthropologist Loring Danforth, in his book "The Macedonian Conflict(1995)" wrote the following regarding the Slavic immigrants from "Macedonia" :

"..the largest number of Slavic-speaking immigrants from Macedonia came to the United States during the first decade of the twentieth century at which time they identified themselves either as BULGARIANS or as Macedonian BULGARIANS. It has been estimated that between 1903 and 1906, 50,000 people who identified themselves in this way entered the United States [..] Since 1960, when Yugoslav emigration policies were liberalized, most of the immigrants from Macedonia to the United Stats have come from Yugoslavia and have had a strong sense of Macedonian national identity. They have founded their own churches in affiliation with the Macedonian Orthodox Church of Skopje, as well as their own cultural, sporting, and political organizations, all of which are concerned with preserving a uniquely Macedonian national identity. These organisations (some of which have maintained good relationships with the Republic of Macedonian and some of which advocate a more extreme and irridentist form of Macedonian nationalism) have succeeded in instilling a distinctly Macedonian national identity in some of those older immigrants from Macedonia who have previously adopted a more BULGARIAN orientation.-pages 87-88"

The question the reader should ask himself/herself is: if "ethnic Macedonians" have existed in continuity for centuries, and dominated the demographics of the Southern Balkans during that period, as nationalists from the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia constantly assert, why do several objective sources, both modern and contemporary, state that the Slavic immigrants from the region were regarded as, and regarded themselves as, Bulgarians? Could it be that the "Macedonian" ethno/national identity is a relatively recent phenomenon as a vast number of sources tell us?

Geographic Dictionary from 1688

The following excerpts are taking from a geographic dictionary published in 1668. These passages provide the reader with valuable insight into how contemporary European scholars defined "Greece","Macedonia", and "Scopia" during the 17th century. These definitions torpedo the theory advertised by nationalists from the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (F.Y.R.O.M) which implies that the geographic boundaries of Greece never encompassed the geographic region of Macedonia.





Excerpt 1 Greece: Notice how the definition of Greece incorporates Macedonia. Also notice how the Byzantine Empire was described as a "Grecian Empire".






Excerpt 2 Macedonia: Notice how the definition of Macedonia describes ancient Macedonia as a region of ancient Greece and notice how the excerpt makes reference to Thessalonica and not to "Solun" ("Solun" is the name nationalists from F.Y.R.O.M use for Thessaloniki)






Excerpt 3 Scopia: This is the definition for Scopia, known as Skopje today. Skopje is the capital city of F.Y.R.O.M. The most important thing to notice is that Scopia WAS NOT considered to be a part of Macedonia.





It is important to note that prior to the 19th century a vast number of depictions and definitions of "Macedonia" were published that did not include Skopje or much of F.Y.R.O.M's current geography. In other words, for most of history since antiquity, most of the geography of F.Y.R.O.M was never considered to be a part of "Macedonia".

Stefov vs Carnegie: Misrepresenting the 1914 Carnegie Report

In 1914 the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace published a report regarding the conduct of the nations that participated in the Balkan Wars. The report was written by an international commission that was dispatched to the region in order to investigate the actions of the Balkan armies as well as to investigate the causes of the various conflicts that took place during the wars.






Risto Stefov, who also publishes books under the name "Chris Stefou", has used the 1914 Carnegie Commission Report on the Balkan Wars as a primary reference for many of his articles. He has written a whole series titled "Greek attrocities in Macedonia" which can be found on maknews.com

In these articles Stefov engages in a heavy dose of historical revisionism. He implies that the Carnegie Commission report describes atrocities committed against "ethnic Macedonians" when in fact the report made no mention of any "ethnic Macedonian" population. The fact that the report made no mention of "ethnic Macedonians" does not phase Stefov who shamelessly converts the Bulgarians the report described into "ethnic Macedonians". Stefov retrospectively molds the population descriptions found in the report to adhere to his nationalist historiography. He and his followers imply that the reason the report described "ethnic Macedonians" as Bulgarians was because the authors of the report were categorizing by religious affiliation. Their theory suggests that because 'ethnic Macedonians' attended the Bulgarian church (Exarchy) they were described as Bulgarians.

The report demolishes this theory in 2 ways:

1. The report makes it clear that those who attended the Bulgarian church were of Bulgarian nationality. If these people were actually "ethnic Macedonians" why would the authors of the report make the following statement?:



2. The report clearly states that the Serbs were amongst the first to categorize the Slavs of Macedonia as a distinct group from the Bulgarians for political purposes. The authors of the report clearly viewed the Slavic population as Bulgarian despite the claim of Serbian scholars who attempted to distinguish this group from the Bulgarians in order to diminish Bulgaria's claim to the region:




It should be sobering for Stefov's readers to actually read the pages of the report and to see for themselves how the "ethnic Macedonians" Stefov describes in his articles were actually recorded as Bulgarians by the international commisison. As an example Stefov goes into length describing attrocities committed in Kukush by the Greek army. This is how the actual report describes Kukush:








Regardless of Stefov's attempts to focus only on the actions of the Greek army in order to demonize the Greek state as much as possible, the fact is that the 1914 Carnegie Commission report also describes atrocities committed by the other combatants. As an example this is an excerpt from the report which describes the massacre of Greeks in the Greek town of Doxato:




The report was published during an era when the "Macedonian" ethno/national identity was still in it's infancy stages. The report provides the reader with valuable contemporary insight into how contemporary geopolitical dynamics fostered the notion that the Slavs of the region were a distinct ethnic group. Up to the period of the Balkan Wars the Slavic population of the region was largely regarded as Bulgarian. The 1914 Carnegie Commisison report was authored by an international commission that spent time in the region. Their observations of the Slavic population of the region concurs with a vast number of other contemporary first hand accounts . Stefov and his nationalist cronies engage in a dishonest practice when they misrepresent the commission's first hand observations and reconstruct the Bulgarians described in the report as "ethnic Macedonians".

Implying that the Carnegie Commission failed to record what Stefov et al allege was the largest ethnic group in the region is akin to a modern international commission going into Palestine and not recording any Palestinians!