"Macedonia's" Historic Borders - misconceptions

Nationalists from The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia along with their diaspora cohorts constantly advertise maps which depict what they claim is "historic Macedonia". There are numerous examples of such maps posted in all sorts of nationalist "Macedonian" websites and forums.

This is an example of such a map:







Notice the legend in the map above which defines the "historic borders", and notice that these borders encompass territory that belongs to Greece and Bulgaria.

So, how "historic" are these borders? Nationalists from The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia along with their diaspora cohorts will allege that "Macedonia" has been defined with such boundaries for dozens of centuries. This is, afterall, what they have been led to believe by their own state sponsored institutions including the education system in F.Y.R.O.M. The following map, taken from a F.Y.R.O.M school text book, illustrates how Macedonia was defined and populated circa the period of the Slavic Migrations (6th-7th century AD):



Taken from: Grade 7 History, Natural Sciences and Mathematics. Skopje 1992, page 155

In reality, these boundaries as well as the notion of a "Macedonian" ethnicity were unknown at the time (circa 7th century AD)! The implication of this misinformation and propaganda is that we now have a whole generation of people in F.Y.R.O.M believing that "Macedonia" existed as an ethno/social entity defined by borders that have remained roughly the same for millenia! From this they conclude that Greece and Bulgaria are occupying territory that rightfully belongs to a "Macedonian" nation. In reality a consensus on their definition of "Macedonia" was only established in the 19th century. Even academics from Skopje concede this fact in their publication "Macedonia and its Relations With Greece" published in 1993:






So much for "Historic Boundaries"!! Unless of course 100+ years, in the context of Balkan history, is supposed to be "historic"!

The geographic region of Macedonia has never belonged to a "Macedonian" nation or ethnos, has never been part of a "Macedonian" state and the geographic descriptor "Macedonian" did not have any ethnic signficance until certain Balkan states manufactured and promoted a "Macedonian" identity in the late 19th century. As a matter of fact, prior to the 19th century there were a vast number of depictions of Macedonia produced that did not even include most of the geography that F.Y.R.O.M is located on today:

Example 1: 1747 DG. De L'Isle. Nova et accurata Regni Hungariae Tabula, ad usum Serenissimi Burgundiae Ducis.



Notice how "Macedoine" is depicted as part of the geography of "Grece"



Example 2: 1651 - A depiction of "GRAECIA" (Greece) by the cartographer J. Janssonius.
This depiction of Macedonia hardly coincides with the version being peddled by FYROM's institutions today:




Example 3: During the Byzantine period "Macedonia" was defined as an administrative province called a 'Theme'. The following map depicts the contemporary Byzantine themes including theme of Macedonia. F.Y.R.O.M's current geography is located in what was the Byzantine theme of BULGARIA!




Example 4: Ptolemaic Map produced in 1480. Notice that the depiction of Macedonia hardly coincides with the current geography of F.Y.R.O.M



Example 5: G. Mercator. Macedonia and Epirus 1609. The depiction of Macedonia barely overlaps the current geography of F.Y.R.O.M.



Example 6: Macedonia Alexandri M. Patria - Janssonius à Waesberghe ,ca. 1684. Notice that the depiction of Macedonia barely touches the current geography of F.Y.R.O.M:



Example 7: Macedonia, Epirus et Achaia. - Blaeu ,1659-72. Notice that the depiction of Macedonia barely overlaps the current geography of F.Y.R.O.M.



Example 8: Nova Totius GRAECIAE descriptio - Mercator-Hondius-Jansson ,ca. 1633. Notice that the depiction of Macedonia not only barely overlaps the current geography of F.Y.R.O.M, the geography of Macedonia is also depicted within the cartographer's contemporary definition of 'Greece'.



As usual, claims from official F.Y.R.O.M sources have no basis in fact or reality. Macedonia surely did not have static boundaries for centuries on end. As shown above, even academics from Skopje concede that the modern geographic definition of "Macedonia", as espoused by nationalists from F.Y.R.O.M, was established during the 19th century. Prior to the 19th century most of F.Y.R.O.M's current geography, including the region encompassing Skopje, was not included in a vast number of depictions of Macedonia that were produced by European cartographers. This is why the name NEW Macedonia would be an accurate and appropriate name for the new Balkan state. In light of the fact that the "Macedonian" ethno/national identity is a 19th century construct the name "New Macedonia" would be the best compromise for the name dispute involving Greece and F.Y.R.O.M.

France backs Greece in Name dispute

French President Nicholas Sarkozy pledged his support for Greece with regards to the name dispute with The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia

http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/main/news/8630/

France Backs Greece In Macedonia Row

14 March 2008

Brussels _ French President Nicolas Sarkozy has confirmed he backs Greece in the row over Macedonia’s name.

On the margins of the European Union summit, Sarkozy said it was “the right impression” to conclude that that Paris is on Greek side in the “name” dispute. He also confirmed the issue is always raised during various meetings with Greek Prime Minister Costas Karamanlis. “I always stressed that we support the Greek position in the name issue. Greeks are our friends,” Sarkozy said. “I am confirming to you that we are in solidarity with the position of our Greek friends,” the French president said. Athens objects Skopje’s use of its constitutional name, “Republic of Macedonia” saying it implies Skopje's territorial claims over Greece's own northern province of Macedonia.

Greece has vowed to veto Macedonia’s bid to join NATO at the alliance’s Bucharest Summit at the beginning of April if a solution is not found. Meanwhile, the European Commission expressed its worry that Macedonia’s government crisis might affect the pace of EU reforms in the country. Late on Thursday, the Democratic Party of Albanians, the key partner in the centre-right government coalition lead by VMRO DPMNE, confirmed that it is withdrawing from the government.

“We expect the government to remain focused on the EU reform process. We believe that this is a moment when all parties need to put aside party interests, and work in a spirit of consensus and engage in continued dialogue in order to ensure success in reform processes,” said Krisztina Nagy, spokeswoman for the EU’s Enlargement Commissioner, Olli Rehn.

Of course this development was not viewed in a friendly light by the so called internet based "Macedonian Human Rights Activists". As an example the administrator of maknews.com and the architect of the official Rainbow Party of Greece website, the same Rainbow Party that is a champion of human rights for minorities in Greece, made the following comment regarding the French president and people. Remember, this is one of the "Macedonian" diaspora's greatest internet champions of human rights making these derogatory comments:




I suppose civility and 'human rights' only apply to issues that adhere to the maknews.com administrator's agenda!

Maknews.com members vote to BAN me for good

After exposing the maknews.com administrator's claim about his great grandfather fighting in an 'ethnic Macedonian' unit against the Ottoman Turks in 1903, my maknews.com account was suspended.

I emailed the administrator, who posts under the pseudonym 'Maknews', a request to allow me back on the forums with a promise not to mention his great grandfather again. Mr. Maknews decided to put up a poll in his forum, knowing very well that I would never get a majority vote, to determine if I were to be allowed access again. Of course he created a 'democratic' poll in order to sell the image that he is trying to propagate of a fair and objective administrator.

This was the result:



Some of the nationalists that frequent those forums despised my contributions and my challenges to the maknews version of history as is evidenced by this contributor:



In the end, Mr. Maknews made the call to ban me for good (as if there would be any other outcome!)

Exposing the Maknews.com administrator's 'historic' photo

I was banned from the maknews.com forums because I started a thread regarding a picture that the maknews.com forum administrator posted. He claimed that the picture was of an "ethnic Macedonian" armed unit that included his great grand father. The administrator, who posts using the pseudonym Maknews, claimed that the armed unit, or 'cheta', was involved in the Ilinden uprising against the Ottoman Turks in 1903. In the thread I challenged the administrator's claim that the picture was of an 'ethnic Macedonian' military unit.

This was the picture that he posted with the allegation that his great grandfather was one of the individuals in the unit:



Knowing that there was no formal 'ethnic Macedonian' army during this period I was highly skeptical of the claim that the band was an 'ethnic Macedonian' unit because several individuals were wearing formal military uniforms. Also the picture looked like it was taken during the WWI era and not during the turn of the 19th century. After researching the subject and the uniforms for several days I found some astounding evidence that could not be ignored. The formal military uniforms worn by the individuals matched those of contemporary Serbian military personel. The resemblance was uncanny.

The administrator of the maknews.com forums has made it a priority to advise some forum members of their 'true ethnic background' hence I thought I would challenge his version of his ancestry to see if he could tolerate the reciprocal treatment. My post had several implications: If he was a 'pure' ethnic Macedonian coming from a lineage of 'ethnic Macedonian' , as he has proudly implied on numerous occasions, why was one of his recent ancestors fighting on the side of the Serbs? Was he a Serb perhaps? Was he a Serbian sympathiser who had no sense of a 'Macedonian' identity as the maknews administrator does? I suppose it was easier to ban me than to face these questions in a public forum!

The following is a copy of my post on maknews that led to my account being suspended and to me being banned from the maknews.com forums.

________________________________________________________


There are volumes of texts regarding early 20th century Balkan military uniforms, weapons, and insignia. Lets examine those of the early 20th century Serbian army.

The Serbian army, circa 1900 to WWI, was well known for the head gear worn by all levels of personel rank in addition to the weapons the general infantry carried.

The head gear worn by the general infantry was known as the Sajkaca. The Sajkaca became a powerful symbol in contemporary Serbian culture and was worn by military personel and civilians. Up to this day the Sajkaca is a traditional Serbian hat worn by both young and old.

This is what a typical member of the Serbian infantry looked like during the early 20th century. Notice the distinctive Sajkaca and notice the foot wear.:



Another distinctive trait of the contemporary Serbian Army was their widespread use of Mauser type rifles produced in Germany. The Serbs even modified and designed their own custom Mausers. Their use of the Mauser is described by James M.B Lyon in his journal article "A Peasant Mob: The Serbian Army on the Eve of the Great War" (The Journal of Military History, Vol 61, No 3 (July 1997) pp. 481-502)

Here is an example of a Mauser type rifle:



Contemporary Officer uniforms used by the Serbian Army also had distinctive traits. One of the traits was their head gear which included a mid sized cylindrical cap with a visor.
Here is an example of a Serbian officer in a picture taken during the early 20th century in Belgrade. Notice the distinctive cap with visor:



At the turn of last century the tensions in the Balkans resulted in scuffles and squirmishes that involved both civilian and Military personel to form armed bands. This is an example of a Serbian led band circa early 20th century. Notice the Mauser rifles. Notice the Sajkaca. Notice how the officer is wearing a serbian Cap with Visor just as the officer is wearing above.



The sophisticated reader at this point would have recognized that the last image was posted by none other than Mr. Maknews who advised it was an 'ethnic Macedonian' band that included his great grand father.

Compare the soldier in Mr. Maknews' photo with the Serbian infantryman from above:



Compare the Officer in a formal military uniform in Mr. Maknews' photo with the Serbian officer from above. Notice the cylindrical cap with visor!:



Compare the rifles in Mr. Maknews' photo with the Mauser type rifle that the Serbian army was known to use:



Perhaps Mr. Maknews can explain why these civilians were led by Serbian Army personel. If there was no formal 'ethnic Macedonian' army at the time why are the officers wearing formal uniforms?

Is it not amusing that Mr. Maknews lectures everyone on their 'true identity' when his great grandfather was 'running with the Serbs'? Was he a Serboman?