Is Vasil Kanchov's ethnographic research of Macedonia reliable?

[morski]

Regional identity.

[El Gre]

My question is, do you think his research is reliable?

Yes and No.

Its good if you want to know which villages spoke what at the time but his
numbers are warped to boost Bulgarian numbers. He also has his fair share of errors, but is not bad considering the task. He managed to find more Bulgarians than Greeks in Thessaloniki which is totally absurd. I have also
learned from a native of Serres who knows all the villages in his vicinity and he has looked at Kanchov Stats and several Greek speaking and Turkish speaking villages are labelled as Bulgarian.

were the most accurate and the only ones that took into concideration the self-determination of the people themselves.

This is wrong. Kanchov toes the line like these MacedoSlavs. If your great grandpa spoke Slavic then your automatically a MacedoSlav or in Kanchovs case a Bulgarian. A good example is the village of Kratero(Rakovo). Some of the most staunchest Greeks you will ever find. The Bulgarians burned it 3 times and communists from Bufi burned it during the civil war. Yet Kanchov lists it as Bulgarian village. Those villagers would piss on his grave if they found that out.
So i dont think he went around and asked the people of the villages how they felt.

[El Gre]

The local Bulgarians and Kucovlachs who live in the area of Macedonia call themselves Macedonians, and the surrounding nations call them Macedonians.

Your buddies at FYROMtruth put this book forward and looked like total fools and now its your turn.

1. Who cares what Bulgarians from Macedonia call themselves, they are still Bulgarians.

2. The key to the whole sentence which you fools missed is the Kucovlachs also call themsleves Macedonians. So tell us if you are the real Macedonians why are they also calling themselves that.

Pure regionalism

And thats that .

[morski]

Yes and No.

Its good if you want to know which villages spoke what at the time but his
numbers are warped to boost Bulgarian numbers. He also has his fair share of errors, but is not bad considering the task. He managed to find more Bulgarians than Greeks in Thessaloniki which is totally absurd. I have also
learned from a native of Serres who knows all the villages in his vicinity and he has looked at Kanchov Stats and several Greek speaking and Turkish speaking villages are labelled as Bulgarian.



This is wrong. Kanchov toes the line like these MacedoSlavs. If your great grandpa spoke Slavic then your automatically a MacedoSlav or in Kanchovs case a Bulgarian. A good example is the village of Kratero(Rakovo). Some of the most staunchest Greeks you will ever find. The Bulgarians burned it 3 times and communists from Bufi burned it during the civil war. Yet Kanchov lists it as Bulgarian village. Those villagers would piss on his grave if they found that out.
So i dont think he went around and asked the people of the villages how they felt.

Official Turkish statistics admitted only one principle of discrimination be-
tween the ethnic groups dwelling in Macedonia, namely religion. Thus all the
Mahomrnedans formed a single group although there might be among them
Turks, Albanians, Bulgarian "pomaks," etc. : all the patriarchists in the same way
were grouped together as '"'Greeks," although there might be among them Ser-
vians, Wallachians, Bulgarians, etc. Only in the "exarchist" group, did religion
coincide, more or less, with Bulgarian nationality. The Turkish official registers
included men only; women were not mentioned, since the registers served only
for the purposes of military service and taxation. Often nothing was set down
but the number of "households." This explains the lack of anything approaching
exact statistics of the Macedonian populations. Owing to the different princi-
ples and methods of calculation employed, national propagandists arrived at
wholly discrepant results, generally exaggerated in the interest of their own na-
tionality. The table subjoined shows how great is this divergence in estimate and
calculation :

BULGARIAN STATISTICS (Mr. Kantchev, 1900)

Turks 499,204

Bulgarians 1,181,336

Greeks 228,702

Albanians 128,71 1

Wallachians 80,767

Jews 67,840

Gypsies 54,557

Servians 700

Miscellaneous 16,407



Total 2,258,224










SERVIAN STATISTICS (Mr. Gopcevic, 1889) *

Turks 231,400

Bulgarians 57,600

Greeks 201,140

Albanians 165,620

Wallachians 69,665

Jews 64,645

Gypsies 28,730

Servians 2,048,320

Miscellaneous 3,500



Total 2,870,620

GREEK STATISTICS (Mr. Delyani, 1904)
(Kosovo vilayet omitted)

Turks 634,017

Bulgarians 332,162

Greeks 652,795

Albanians

Wallachians 25,101

Jews 53,147

Gypsies 8,911

Servians

Miscellaneous 18,685



Total 1,724,818

The Bulgarian statistics alone take into account the national consciousness of
the people themselves. The Servian calculations are generally based on the re-
sults of the study of dialect and on the identity of customs: they are therefore
largely theoretic and abstract in character. The Greek calculations are even more
artificial, since their ethnic standard is the influence exercised by Greek civiliza-
tion on the urban populations, and even the recollections and traces of classical
antiquity.

http://archive.org/stream/reportofin...euoft_djvu.txt

[Vojnik]

Yes and No.

Its good if you want to know which villages spoke what at the time but his
numbers are warped to boost Bulgarian numbers. He also has his fair share of errors, but is not bad considering the task.

But the statistics were based on the Ethnicity of the people living in Macedonia, not on the languages. Vlachs and Gypsies were also presented on Kanchov's stats, they are not Bulgarians but they still would of spoken Bulgarian in the areas that were majority Bulgarian, same goes with the Vlachs. So under your logic, Gypsies and Vlachs should of been noted as Bulgarians as well because they would of spoken the Bulgarian language. But they weren't, because they were not Bulgarians.

He managed to find more Bulgarians than Greeks in Thessaloniki which is totally absurd. I have also
learned from a native of Serres who knows all the villages in his vicinity and he has looked at Kanchov Stats and several Greek speaking and Turkish speaking villages are labelled as Bulgarian.

The native sees the current demographics of the Serres area. He can not apply what he currently sees with the demographics of over 100 years ago.

Here are the conclusions for Salonika as a city:

Bulgarian Christians: 10,000
Turks: 26,000
Greek Christians: 16,000
Jews: 55,000
Gypsies: 2,500
Others: 8,500

That sounds about right to me for that period of time. If Kanchov trully wanted to create propganda and boost the numbers of Bulgarians in Macedonia, he would of made Salonika a majority Bulgarian city.

This is wrong. Kanchov toes the line like these MacedoSlavs. If your great grandpa spoke Slavic then your automatically a MacedoSlav or in Kanchovs case a Bulgarian.

My above response applys to this too.

But the statistics were based on the Ethnicity of the people living in Macedonia, not on the languages. Vlachs and Gypsies were also presented on Kanchov's stats, they are not Bulgarians but they still would of spoken Bulgarian in the areas that were majority Bulgarian, same goes with the Vlachs. So under your logic, Gypsies and Vlachs should of been noted as Bulgarians as well because they would of spoken the Bulgarian language. But they weren't, because they were not Bulgarians.

A good example is the village of Kratero(Rakovo). Some of the most staunchest Greeks you will ever find. The Bulgarians burned it 3 times and communists from Bufi burned it during the civil war. Yet Kanchov lists it as Bulgarian village. Those villagers would piss on his grave if they found that out.
So i dont think he went around and asked the people of the villages how they felt.

That Village produced a couple of IMRO revolutionaries actually, so much for village of the "staunchest Greeks".

Rakovo was also noted as a Ethnic Bulgarian village in 1861 by the Austrian Johann Georg von Hahn.

Your buddies at FYROMtruth put this book forward and looked like total fools and now its your turn.

1. Who cares what Bulgarians from Macedonia call themselves, they are still Bulgarians.

2. The key to the whole sentence which you fools missed is the Kucovlachs also call themsleves Macedonians. So tell us if you are the real Macedonians why are they also calling themselves that.

Pure regionalism

And thats that .

Yes, I agree.

[morski]

Some Vlachs like Pitu Guli and his sons, although ethnically Vlach, embraced the Bulgarian national idea and are known to have been outstanding Bulgarian patriots.

[Vojnik]

Some Vlachs like Pitu Guli and his sons, although ethnically Vlach, embraced the Bulgarian national idea and are known to have been outstanding Bulgarian patriots.

And under El Gre's logic, Pitu Guli would of been noted as Bulgarian in the stats, but i doubt that. He would of been noted for what he was ethnically, and that is a Vlach.

Pitu Guli was from Krusevo. Here are the ethnographic stats of Krsevo at the time.

Bulgarian Christians: 4,950
Vlachs: 4,000
Albanian Christians (Arnauti): 400

9,350 as the total in the city of Krusevo.

[Vojnik]

Your buddies at FYROMtruth put this book forward and looked like total fools and now its your turn.

1. Who cares what Bulgarians from Macedonia call themselves, they are still Bulgarians.

Obviously the Macedeonians at the time cared. And this was before Tito's time. So much for this Tito propaganda

2. The key to the whole sentence which you fools missed is the Kucovlachs also call themsleves Macedonians.

After centuries of living and breathing Macedonian life style and language, its only natural Kucovlachs would feel Macedonians. What do you think will happen to Macedonians or Greeks or Italians after 3rd or 4th generation in Australia for an example? Don't you think naturally they will forget their language, culture, loose their identity and become Australians? its called Assimilation. But the only difference is it was a natural process and not forced.

So tell us if you are the real Macedonians why are they also calling themselves that.

I suppose why the Kucovlachs called themselves Macedonians is the same as the Albanian/Vlachs/Turks of the 19th 20th century, and their descendants of today call them selves Greeks and go as far as to claim they derive from the ancient Greeks. What is more absurd, is these Turks (Pontos) /Albanians ( Arvanites) claim, are the real decendents of ancient Macedonians and are more Macedonian than me

Pure stupidity and hypercritical.

[El Gre]

[QUOTE=Vojnik;981710]

After centuries of living and breathing Macedonian life style and language, its only natural Kucovlachs would feel Macedonians.

Its only natural that you are a retard and a clown. Did it ever occur to you that the majority of the Vlachs in Macedonia were the biggest Greeks or "Grkomans" of all. Havent you read Brailsford where he says they are "More Greeks than the Greeks themselves"

I suppose why the Kucovlachs called themselves Macedonians is the same as the Albanian/Vlachs/Turks of the 19th 20th century, and their descendants of today call them selves Greeks and go as far as to claim they derive from the ancient Greeks.

I suppose this is what happens when a Macedonian Slav gets backed in a corner and has no way out, he writes utter stupidity. So first you say they were assimilated(which was wrong) and thats why they called themselves Macedonian and now you are saying that they wanted to have some connection with Ancient Macedonians?

What is more absurd, is these Turks (Pontos) /Albanians ( Arvanites) claim, are the real decendents of ancient Macedonians and are more Macedonian than me

I dont know what Turks your talking about, Pontic Greeks actually spoke something similar to what Alexander spoke, you on the other hand speak some Shlavonic lengvich which is totally unrelated, thanks for plundering the region in the 6th century AD.

[Guapo]

Sure, sure, Bulgarians or Ottomans never do propaganda

Bulgarians are master of propaganda, I mean wtf is a Bulgarian anyway other than a Slav that carries a name from some Asiatic tribe that has nothing to do with Slavs in general.