Is Vasil Kanchov's ethnographic research of Macedonia reliable?

[Vojnik]

Vasil Kanchov was a Bulgarian geographer, ethnographer and politician. In 1888 he travelled right across the whole territory of Macedonia gathering ethnographic statistics of all cities and villages which can be seen in one of his works titled, 'Macedonia — ethnography and statistics 1900'

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

http://i48.tinypic.com/vigmrl.jpg

For example, here is the ethnographic statistics of the village which my Great Great Grandfather and Great Grandfather were born in.

Buf (Akritas)


Според статистиката на Васил Кънчов („Македония. Етнография и статистика“) в 1900 Бухъ (Буфъ) има 1 900 жители българи. Цялото село е под върховенството на Българската екзархия.

Гьорче Петров („Материали по изучаванието на Македония“) пише в 1896 година за Буф, че е село с 200 къщи с 2 120 жители българи. По това време в Буф функционират мъжко и девическо училище, в които се преподава на български език. Той описва селото като традиционен център на българите от местността Буф Колу, а буфчани като юначни и сплотени:


Водител и крепител на другите села е било селото Буф. Щом има нападение на някое село, известява се за това на буфчани и те вкупом се затичват на помощ... преследва ли се някой човек или мома от турците, тя се изпраща в Буф на прибежище... Буф е давал много юнаци хора. Най-славен е бил „попо от Буф“, който умря в Кюстендил по-миналата година. Той е бил тип на старите български хайдути. Непристъпността на мястото служи за крепост... борбата им с близките турски села ги заставлявала да имат съгласие

http://bg.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%91%D1%83%D1%84

[morski]

I believe it is as accurate as it could for the period. Certainly much more reliable than the Greek and Serb ones, which is attested by the Carnegie committee on the conduct of the Balkan wars, where the conclusion was drawn that the Bulgarian statistics for Macedonia were the most accurate and the only ones that took into concideration the self-determination of the people themselves.

[Vojnik]

I believe it is as accurate as it could for the period. Certainly much more reliable than the Greek and Serb ones, which is attested by the Carnegie committee on the conduct of the Balkan wars, where the conclusion was drawn that the Bulgarian statistics for Macedonia were the most accurate and the only ones that took into concideration the self-determination of the people themselves.

That's the type of answer I was looking for. I was wondering if whether Kanchov just made conclusions based on political agendas rather then honesty by asking the people what they thought of themselves ethnically. Thank you for clearing that up.

[Onur]

Actually the official Ottoman censuses are the most correct ones but the problem is; they only counted people according to their religious affiliation but not ethnic groups.

I think Kanchov`s figures is the most reliable one which shows ethnic groups. The best conclusion about that can be made by analyzing Ottoman censuses and Kanchev`s, then comparing both while knowing the groups of patriarchist and exharchists.

Serbian and Greek ones are complete joke and pure propaganda, e.g. presenting everyone in Skopje as Serbs and stuff like that.

[Vojnik]

One thing I know is It would of taken a very long time for Vasil Kanchov to do what he done. I mean by him travelling through the whole of Macedonia gathering information from every City and Village. You must give respect to the man for doing that.

[morski]

One thing I know is It would of taken a very long time for Vasil Kanchov to do what he done. I mean by him travelling through the whole of Macedonia gathering information from every City and Village. You must give respect to the man for doing that.

Well, as far as I know, he didn't visit personally every settlement.

[Queen B]

Sure, sure, Bulgarians or Ottomans never do propaganda :)

:rolleyes2::rolleyes2:

[Lithium]

Sure, sure, Bulgarians or Ottomans never do propaganda :)

:rolleyes2::rolleyes2:

Like the Greeks do not.

[morski]

Sure, sure, Bulgarians or Ottomans never do propaganda :)

:rolleyes2::rolleyes2:

http://www.stoblog.gr/blogs/macedonia/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/macedonia.jpg

[Vojnik]

where the conclusion was drawn that the Bulgarian statistics for Macedonia were the most accurate and the only ones that took into concideration the self-determination of the people themselves.

Did Kanchov really take into consideration what the people thought of themselves? In the ethnographic statistics conducted by Kanchov, he notes Bulgarian as the ethnicity of the local Slavic speaking population of Macedonia. Well I have found something that Kanchov noted in one of his other books titled "Orohydrography of Macedonia" in which he himself refutes the fact that the Bulgarians of Macedonia did not consider themselves Bulgarians but rather Macedonians only.

Title page.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/db/OrohidrografijaNaMakedonijaStrana1.jpg
First page.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/86/OrohidrografijaNaMakedonijaStrana6.jpg


Here it is translated into English:

It is impossible to give precise borders of the area of Macedonia, since this country is not limited with some strict geographic features, nor is it administratively separated by the other countries. Only in the ethnographic sense Macedonia has defined borders, since the Bulgarian tribe is settled in the entire country, and rarely exits its limits. The areas to the north, west and south of Macedonia have predominantly other population. To determine its borders we will follow mainly the main perception of the population and the determination given by the most skilled recent travelers. The local Bulgarians and Kucovlachs who live in the area of Macedonia call themselves Macedonians, and the surrounding nations call them Macedonians. Turks and Albanians from Macedonia do not call themselves Macedonians, but when asked where they are from, they respond: from Macedonia...

And it continues with the following which I want Greeks to see:


also Greeks who live in the southern area of Macedonia, do not call themselves Macedonians...

So according to Kanchov, Greeks from Macedonia did not even consider themselves as Macedonians. :thumb001:

I do not deny the results of the ethnographic conclusion of Macedonia by Kanchov, but, what I do not agree on is how he noted the local Slavic speakers as Bulgarian Christians and Bulgarian Muslims when they really identified as Macedonians.

[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/reportofinternat00inteuoft/reportofinternat00inteuoft_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. :wink

[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:rolleyes:

Pure stupidity and hypercritical. :)

[El Gre]

[QUOTE]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:rolleyes:

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 :)

:rolleyes2::rolleyes2:

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.

[Coolguy1]

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.

Which villages did he say were actually Greek speaking?

[El Gre]

Which villages did he say were actually Greek speaking?

There were hundreds, what kind of question is this?

You want 1 specific village?

[Vojnik]

Which villages did he say were actually Greek speaking?

Going by Kanchov's stats, Greek was mainly spoken in villagers in the deep south of Macedonia.

[Coolguy1]

There were hundreds, what kind of question is this?

You want 1 specific village?
No, i meant which villages did your friend say were actually Greek, but labeled as Bulgarian

[Vojnik]

I would like to remind yous what Kanchov noted. He noted in another book that only the local Bulgarians and Kuchovlachs identified as Macedonians, Turks, Albanians and GREEKS did not considder themselves as Macedonians.

[Coolguy1]

I would like to remind yous what Kanchov noted. He noted in another book that only the local Bulgarians and Kuchovlachs identified as Macedonians, Turks, Albanians and GREEKS did not considder themselves as Macedonians.

"But even stranger is the name Macedontsi, which was imposed on us only 10 to 15 years ago by outsiders, and not as something by our own intellectuals.... Yet the people in Macedonia know nothing of that ancient name, reintroduced today with a cunning aim on the one hand and a stupid one on the other. They know the older word: Bugari, although mispronounced: they have even adopted it as peculiarly theirs, inapplicable to other Bulgarians". (Kuzman Shapkarev)

[Coolguy1]

Hmmm, no response??? :)

[El Gre]

No, i meant which villages did your friend say were actually Greek, but labeled as Bulgarian

Oh ok, im not sure the names but they were near Serres.

I can try and find out.

[Coolguy1]

Oh ok, im not sure the names but they were near Serres.

I can try and find out.

Thanks

[Vojnik]

"But even stranger is the name Macedontsi, which was imposed on us only 10 to 15 years ago by outsiders, and not as something by our own intellectuals.... Yet the people in Macedonia know nothing of that ancient name, reintroduced today with a cunning aim on the one hand and a stupid one on the other. They know the older word: Bugari, although mispronounced: they have even adopted it as peculiarly theirs, inapplicable to other Bulgarians". (Kuzman Shapkarev)



My father during our childhood was telling us many tales, some of them about King Marko and about Tsar Alexander – Alexander the Great. Kuzman Shapkarev collector and recorder of Macedonian folklore

Regardless of when the term 'Makedontsi' came about, I am sure on one thing, that is that we Macedonians have called ourselves as such even before you modern Greeks.

Here is a quote by a Bulgarian:

Article“The Macedonian Question,” Published on 18/01/1871
Petko Slaveikov (Bulgarian activist, intellectual and church official) wrote; “I have heard many times from Macedonians that they were not Bulgarians, but Macedonians, descendant of the ancient Macedonians, and we have always anticipated evidence of that, but it never came...”

[Vojnik]

Marko Tsepenkov, Folklore compiler, 1899

“There at Pindus and Shar, at Struma and Vardar where everything is covered by deep wounds, noble descendants of the Great Alexander, are fighting heroically against centuries long tyranny.”

[Vojnik]

The synod records of the Ohrid Archbishopric at the beginning of the 13th century contain the words;


Ivan Ierakar by birth Macedonian

[Vojnik]

The unpublished memoirs of Madame Tsilka who was kidnapped along with the infamous Miss Ellen Stone. Date is 1901. The man Tsilka wrote about was none other than Jane Sandanski.


Very soon a man emerged from a pile of branches and came near us. He looked nervous and confused and hesitated in his speech. "Please," I said, "Tell us, are you Christian bandits of Turks?"
"Oh," he said "We are a mixture of faiths and nationalities. Among us are Bulgarians and Albanians, Serbs and Macedonians. We even have a Jew with us. But we are no bandits. You shall know very soon why you were captured."

[Vojnik]

15th century:


I remember the great subordination under which the Turk holds the emperor in Constantinople and all the Greeks, Macedonians and Bulgarians....As I said earlier, there are many Christians who are forced to serve the Turk, such as Greeks, Bulgarians, Macedonians, Albanians, Esclavinians, Rasians and Serbians... Bertrand de la Brocuiere, Putovanje preko mora, Beograd 1950, p.134-135, 140-141.

[Vojnik]

I can keep going if you like? One quote by Kuzman Shapkarev doesn't have to be necessarily reality.

[Coolguy1]

Everything that you just said is means nothing when you look at the fact that you previously called yourselves as Bulgarians. When you really look at it, if the name "Macedonian" was not given to you by foreign powers, then you would be part of Bulgaria today.


My father during our childhood was telling us many tales, some of them about King Marko and about Tsar Alexander – Alexander the Great. Kuzman Shapkarev collector and recorder of Macedonian folklore

Sounds like complete bullshit to me, if the name "Macedonian" was given to these people during the late nineteenth century, then what did they call Alexander? the Bulgarian?! LOL

[Vojnik]

Everything that you just said is means nothing when you look at the fact that you previously called yourselves as Bulgarians. When you really look at it, if the name "Macedonian" was not given to you by foreign powers, then you would be part of Bulgaria today.



Sounds like complete bullshit to me, if the name "Macedonian" was given to these people during the late nineteenth century, then what did they call Alexander? the Bulgarian?! LOL

But the fact is what do you PROSFIGAS know about Macedonia, Macedonians and Alexander the Great? yous are new arrivals to a land which was once dominated by Slavic speaking Macedonians and Bulgarians. Show me something from those periods that I posted of modern Greeks even mentioning at all that they were fake 'Greek Macedonians' which is a recent invention.

[Coolguy1]

But the fact is what do you PROSFIGAS know about Macedonia, Macedonians and Alexander the Great? yous are new arrivals to a land which was once dominated by Slavic speaking Macedonians and Bulgarians. Show me something from those periods that I posted of modern Greeks even mentioning at all that they were fake 'Greek Macedonians' which is a recent invention.

I dont need quotes saying how the Greeks are Macedonians, its evident in the language, customs, dances, and traditions of the people. It is proven that the ancient Macedonians spoke a Greek Dorian dialect, so do the modern Greek Macedonians. It has been proven that the ancient Macedonians considered themselves as Greeks, which the modern Greek macedonians do. The modern fyromians do none of that. If you are so "Macedonian" than why dont you speak Greek? Or identify as Greek? Makes no sense to me.

What do the prosfiges have in common with Macedonia? Well to start, they speak a language that is as close to the ancient Macedonian dialect as possible, while you speak something that Alexander fought to keep away from his land. They also identify as Greeks (As the ancient Macedonians did)

In my honest opinion, the reason why the Greek Macedonians identified as only "Greeks" was because they considered the term "Macedonian" as derogatory from the other Greeks, so they just cut it out.

[poiuytrewq0987]

Sorcelow is one of these Greeks who just won't admit we are indigenous to Macedonia. Our culture began 1,500 years ago but our presence in Macedonia is probably much older than 1,500 years -- and I present my genes to bear witness...

[poiuytrewq0987]

In fact, Macedonia before all the ethnic cleansing, was 35% Macedonian-Bulgarian, 45% Turkish and 15% Greek. The rest were made up of Vlachs, Gypsies and Jews. Greeks are a hundred times more murderous than Turks. Have you ever seen Turks completely wipe out multiple ethnic groups in a region before in their 500 year rule??

[Coolguy1]

In fact, Macedonia before all the ethnic cleansing, was 35% Macedonian-Bulgarian, 45% Turkish and 15% Greek. The rest were made up of Vlachs, Gypsies and Jews. Greeks are a hundred times more murderous than Turks. Have you ever seen Turks completely wipe out multiple ethnic groups in a region before in their 500 year rule??

Actually ive done some research and came to the conclusion that bulgars made up 38%, Turks 30% and Greeks 28%. Sure thr Bulgarians were the largest ethnic group but they lived mostly outside the region of ancient Macedonia.

[Queen B]

Actually ive done some research and came to the conclusion that bulgars made up 38%, Turks 30% and Greeks 28%. Sure thr Bulgarians were the largest ethnic group but they lived mostly outside the region of ancient Macedonia.
And by NO means, they were the majority in the real Macedonia, the one that shares the same borders with ancient, not the Macedonia as it is defined during Roman times and after.

[poiuytrewq0987]

And by NO means, they were the majority in the real Macedonia, the one that shares the same borders with ancient, not the Macedonia as it is defined during Roman times and after.

You sure? Because according to this map only Turks and Macedonians were the majority in the most important part of Macedonia which is around Solun. Haldike, irrelevant.

http://i48.tinypic.com/vigmrl.jpg

[El Gre]

You sure? Because according to this map only Turks and Macedonians were the majority in the most important part of Macedonia which is around Solun. Haldike, irrelevant.

http://i48.tinypic.com/vigmrl.jpg

This map omits Dion which was like a 'capital' if you like.

Thats typical Bulgarian propoganda of the time and today its typical MacedoSlav/Bulgarians with amnesia propoganda.
Include idiotic places like Tetovo, Kumanovo which had nothing to do with Macedonia of ancient times and OMIT real Macedonian places!!

The reason is simple, the area around Dion and Katerini was PURELY HELLENIC!!

[poiuytrewq0987]

This map omits Dion which was like a 'capital' if you like.

Thats typical Bulgarian propoganda of the time and today its typical MacedoSlav/Bulgarians with amnesia propoganda.
Include idiotic places like Tetovo, Kumanovo which had nothing to do with Macedonia of ancient times and OMIT real Macedonian places!!

The reason is simple, the area around Dion and Katerini was PURELY HELLENIC!!

Cool story bro, but what happened to Macedonian Bulgarians as shown on the map?? Enjoyed your ethnic cleansing??

[Queen B]

Cool story bro, but what happened to Macedonian Bulgarians as shown on the map?? Enjoyed your ethnic cleansing??

:crazy: Balkan wars, Einstein.

[poiuytrewq0987]

:crazy: Balkan wars, Einstein.

This justifies your mass murder of Macedonians? Pathetic. Bulgarians have NEVER copied Greeks as is quite evident where they allowed thousands of Greeks and Turks live in Western Thrace when it was part of Bulgaria until 1919. But... Macedonians in Greek-occupied Aegean Macedonia? Exterminated!

Sometimes I think Turks should have just gave you a taste of your medicine you've been giving everyone by exterminating all Greeks in Macedonia in 1453. :coffee:

[Coolguy1]

Turns out Kanchov did have a number of mistakes, probably even more

http://www.macedoniaontheweb.com/forum/modern-macedonian-history/10909-bulgarian-ethnographic-propaganda-macedonia.html

[Vojnik]

Here is a ethnographic map of Macedonia in 1847 by the Austrian Ami Boué.

http://i46.tinypic.com/2d79a2r.jpg

As yous can see, the ethnic majority of Macedonia at the time were Macedonians/Bulgarians. Now I would like to see yous call a un-biased Austrian a propagandist. Unless he had some hidden agenda behind his research?

[Queen B]

This justifies your mass murder of Macedonians? Pathetic. Bulgarians have NEVER copied Greeks as is quite evident where they allowed thousands of Greeks and Turks live in Western Thrace when it was part of Bulgaria until 1919. But... Macedonians in Greek-occupied Aegean Macedonia? Exterminated!

Douchesan, your negative IQ doesn't allow you to understand THAT much?

You said what happened to the Bulgarians. Balkan wars, you genius happened.
Fight for land, lose/win land.
Move within your country's new borders. That's why population exchanges happen after a war.
Does this need more than +1 IQ to understand?



Sometimes I think Turks should have just gave you a taste of your medicine you've been giving everyone by exterminating all Greeks in Macedonia in 1453. :coffee:
You think? You can think? :rotfl:

[Ushtari]

i dont understand why greeks try to steal macedonian identity, identity crises?

[poiuytrewq0987]

Douchesan, your negative IQ doesn't allow you to understand THAT much?

You said what happened to the Bulgarians. Balkan wars, you genius happened.
Fight for land, lose/win land.
Move within your country's new borders. That's why population exchanges happen after a war.
Does this need more than +1 IQ to understand?


You think? You can think? :rotfl:

Your logic is baffling. Did Turks exterminate Greeks when they conquered Balkans? Did Russians exterminate Polacks when they conquered Poland? Did Germany exterminate the French when they conquered France in WW2?? You can find out the answers yourself.

Now, on the other hand, Greeks HAVE exterminated everyone who didn't identify with the Greek church. Greeks = biggest ethnic cleansers, even bigger than Serbs and second only to Nazis.

[Queen B]

Your logic is baffling. Did Turks exterminate Greeks when they conquered Balkans? Did Russians exterminate Polacks when they conquered Poland? Did Germany exterminate the French when they conquered France in WW2?? You can find out the answers yourself.

When we ''conquered'' those places, you genius?
Greeks are living in those places for thousands of years.


Now, on the other hand, Greeks HAVE exterminated everyone who didn't identify with the Greek church. Greeks = biggest ethnic cleansers, even bigger than Serbs and second only to Nazis.
Lolz. That's stupid.

[poiuytrewq0987]

Greeks are living in those places for thousands of years.


We have lived in Macedonia for more than 15 centuries. Does that disqualify us from living there? I think not!

[Archduke]

Douchesan, your negative IQ doesn't allow you to understand THAT much?

You said what happened to the Bulgarians. Balkan wars, you genius happened.
Fight for land, lose/win land.
Move within your country's new borders. That's why population exchanges happen after a war.

That's very funny.

It seems that only Bulgarians went stupid and did not assimilated its minority.

Serbia did, Romania did, Greece did, it seems that Bulgaria is the only humane country on the Balkans.

[Queen B]

That's very funny.

It seems that only Bulgarians went stupid and did not assimilated its minority.

Serbia did, Romania did, Greece did, it seems that Bulgaria is the only humane country on the Balkans.

Greece did? Where exactly?

[Archduke]

Greece did? Where exactly?

Macedonia for example. :rolleyes:

[Queen B]

Macedonia for example. :rolleyes:
Where in Macedonia you saw assimiliation?

[Archduke]

Where in Macedonia you saw assimiliation?

i didn't saw it, the ancestors of all Bulgarians from Macedonia saw it. :)

[Queen B]

i didn't saw it, the ancestors of all Bulgarians from Macedonia saw it. :)
The ancestors of all Bulgarians returned to their homeland, because they lost the war, actually.
Most of those that remained after Balkan wars, were kicked out in Civil war, because they sided with communists.

[Archduke]

The ancestors of all Bulgarians returned to their homeland, because they lost the war, actually.
Most of those that remained after Balkan wars, were kicked out in Civil war, because they sided with communists.

How can the majority of one region be "kicked out" ? :confused:

[Queen B]

How can the majority of one region be "kicked out" ? :confused:
The ''kicked out'' part was about the civil war. Those who collaborated with communists GTFO here . Greeks and Bulgarians.

The ones that left before, were not kicked out, but returned to their country of origin. What's the strange on that ?

[Onur]

Where in Macedonia you saw assimiliation?
Do you honestly believe what you wrote here? Or is it your habit to be in constant denial? Do you think this will change the truth? Maybe for yourself but not for us.

What you do is like repeating "2x2=5" countless times in your head and then start to believe it afterwards!!!

[Queen B]

Do you honestly believe what you wrote here? Or is it your habit to be in constant denial? Do you think this will change the truth? Maybe for yourself but not for us.

What you do is like repeating "2x2=5" countless times in your head and then start to believe it afterwards!!!

That's your habit, and I don't share the same habits with you. :rolleyes:

[Ellin Arhon]

How can the majority of one region be "kicked out" ? :confused:


Because they were not the majority. In fact, how it would have been possible to Pavlos Melas and his comrades to go from village to village in a turkish occupied Macedonia if the population was supposed to be Bulgarian? And why the Bulgarian troops during the 2nd WW commited a series of attrocities in Macedonia? You don't do that to populations that you consider your own. The series of attrocities of the bulgarian troops during that war is very well known to be denied.

Very simple questions that no Bulgarian/Scopjan can ever give a answer.

[Archduke]

Because they were not the majority. In fact, how it would have been possible to Pavlos Melas and his comrades to go from village to village in a turkish occupied Macedonia if the population was supposed to be Bulgarian? And why the Bulgarian troops during the 2nd WW commited a series of attrocities in Macedonia? You don't do that to populations that you consider your own. The series of attrocities of the bulgarian troops during that war is very well known to be denied.

Very simple questions that no Bulgarian/Scopjan can ever give a answer.

http://e-vestnik.bg/imgs/bulgaria/Bulgarin%20da%20ne%20ostane_976.jpg

It seems that he had very hard time killing Bulgarians. :(:(

[Onur]

Let me answer because your questions are easy.


Because they were not the majority. In fact, how it would have been possible to Pavlos Melas and his comrades to go from village to village in a turkish occupied Macedonia if the population was supposed to be Bulgarian?
Because Pavlos Melas and his gang was terrorists, directly funded by Greek state and supported by the agents of Istanbul patriarchy like the devil incarnated aka Germanos Karavangelis, the bishop of Satan. On the other hand, poor Macedonian villagers was mostly unarmed or they only had their hunting rifles at best.

Already the local Macedonians was mostly unarmed in 1903 uprising. The armed groups was the terrorists pro-Greek and pro-Bulgarian groups who were getting funded by Greece and Bulgaria respectively.

Turkish authorities and was their common enemy but their common goal was to create as much as terror possible in Macedonia.


And why the Bulgarian troops during the 2nd WW commited a series of attrocities in Macedonia? You don't do that to populations that you consider your own. The series of attrocities of the bulgarian troops during that war is very well known to be denied.
I don't know if such an event really happened but this is easy to answer again.

By 1940s, Aegean Macedonia`s population was already completely altered due to Greek state`s harsh policies. Around 900.000 out of 1.2 million Anatolian christians has been settled to Macedonia in 1923 to be able to alter the population figures in favor of neo-hellenes. Then around 100.000 Jews has been expelled out from Salonika during Metaxas regime. So, by the 1940s, the hellenisation of Macedonia`s was already quite completed, so when Bulgarian army gone there in WW-2, they found neo-hellenes in there.

Your civil war was just the latest event to expel out the last remaining remnants of old Macedonia, by branding the slavic speakers as "communists" and throw them out from there.

[Bugarash]

The ancestors of all Bulgarians returned to their homeland, because they lost the war, actually.
Most of those that remained after Balkan wars, were kicked out in Civil war, because they sided with communists.

Hate to say this
but this sounds reasonable

You side with your mother country-which was on the losing side
you get kicked out of the current state

fair

[poiuytrewq0987]

Hate to say this
but this sounds reasonable

Macedonia has been our homeland for 15 centuries. That's 15 centuries of history no Greek can change.

[Bugarash]

Macedonia has been our homeland for 15 centuries. That's 15 centuries of history no Greek can change.


You side with your mother country-which was on the losing side
you get kicked out of the current state

fair

[poiuytrewq0987]

We'll come back one day. The bankrupt Greek state can't afford bullets for their guns and fuel to run their tanks and airplanes. :rotfl:

[Bugarash]

Greece is a must to exist in this region as a power,at least in this period...
Because if it isnt for Greece keeping that side of the entrence to Europe secured,the turks will try their tricks.

Just look at what they are doing now.

Turkish companies coming on the macedonian market.
Turkey sniffing around Kosovo,Sandzak and Bosnia.

When it comes to the relations with Turkey all of the balkan states must put the differences aside and unite just like in 1912!

After that,we can resume killing eachother.

[poiuytrewq0987]

Greece is a must to exist in this region as a power,at least in this period...
Because if it isnt for Greece keeping that side of the entrence to Europe secured the turks will try their tricks.

Just look at what they are doing now.

Turkish companies coming on the macedonian market.
Turkey sniffing around Kosovo,Sandzak and Bosnia.

When it comes to the relations with Turkey all of the balkan states muist put the differences aside and unite.

More like Turkey and Bulgaria vs Greece. I would side with a Turk over a Greek anyday. Turks never ethnically cleansed our people in their 500 years of rule... unlike the Greeks who have done it to us 1000 times over in a short 10 years. We can make an alliance with Turkey easily. Have Turkey annex Aegean Islands, Crete and Cyprus while we take back Macedonia and Western Thrace. Sounds a like a great deal, doesn't it? :thumb001:

[Archduke]

More like Turkey and Bulgaria vs Greece. I would side with a Turk over a Greek anyday. Turks never ethnically cleansed our people in their 500 years of rule... unlike the Greeks who have done it to us 1000 times over in a short 10 years. We can make an alliance with Turkey easily. Have Turkey annex Aegean Islands, Crete and Cyprus while we take back Macedonia and Western Thrace. Sounds a like a great deal, doesn't it? :thumb001:

it would be great :D

[Queen B]

More like Turkey and Bulgaria vs Greece. I would side with a Turk over a Greek anyday. Turks never ethnically cleansed our people in their 500 years of rule... unlike the Greeks who have done it to us 1000 times over in a short 10 years. We can make an alliance with Turkey easily. Have Turkey annex Aegean Islands, Crete and Cyprus while we take back Macedonia and Western Thrace. Sounds a like a great deal, doesn't it? :thumb001:
You can't take back something you never had.:wink


By 1940s, Aegean Macedonia`s population was already completely altered due to Greek state`s harsh policies. Around 900.000 out of 1.2 million Anatolian christians has been settled to Macedonia in 1923 to be able to alter the population figures in favor of neo-hellenes. Then around 100.000 Jews has been expelled out from Salonika during Metaxas regime. So, by the 1940s, the hellenisation of Macedonia`s was already quite completed, so when Bulgarian army gone there in WW-2, they found neo-hellenes in there.

Hellenization?????????????????????????
When?
Between Balkan wars? Between World Wars, οr up until civil war?
:rotfl:

Hate to say this
but this sounds reasonable

You side with your mother country-which was on the losing side
you get kicked out of the current state

fair

Same happened with Greece and Turkey.
Greco-Turkish wars.

More than a million Greeks returned to Greece, around half of million Muslims went to Turkey.

[Bugarash]

More like Turkey and Bulgaria vs Greece. I would side with a Turk over a Greek anyday. Turks never ethnically cleansed our people in their 500 years of rule... unlike the Greeks who have done it to us 1000 times over in a short 10 years. We can make an alliance with Turkey easily. Have Turkey annex Aegean Islands, Crete and Cyprus while we take back Macedonia and Western Thrace. Sounds a like a great deal, doesn't it? :thumb001:

True but these days the turks are the real danger unlike the greeks who are on our level-in terms of civilization.

Greece has no claims in Bulgaria while Turkey has plans to spread it's influence.

And who do you think the turks will choose between albanians and macedonians for example?

They always choose the muslim!
thats in their blood.

And I wouldnt say never,what about the eastern thracian bulgarians?
remember who attacked Bulgaria from behind in the second balkan?

[poiuytrewq0987]

True but these days the turks are the real danger unlike the greeks who are on our level-in terms of civilization.

Turks pose no danger to us. They have moved on from the Ottoman days and so should we. They are in the Balkans only as businessmen and investors. There's absolutely nothing with with THEM investing, giving us THEIR money so we can profit off them!


Greece has no claims in Bulgaria while Turkey has plans to spread it's influence.


Oh, if Greece was as strong as Turkey and perhaps as numerous then you can be certain they would be conspiring to conquer Plovdiv... or should I say Philippopolis?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ed/Edward_Stanford_1877.jpg/629px-Edward_Stanford_1877.jpg



And who do you think the turks will chose between albanians and macedonians for example?

There will be no choosing. We can align with Albanians too in an tripartite alliance composed of Albania, Macedonia and Turkey against Greece.


And I woildnt say never,what about the eastern thracian bulgarians?
remember who attacked Bulgaria in the second balkan war from behind?

What they did was indeed unforgivable but I think we can forget about Eastern Thrace if it gets us back Western Thrace and all of Macedonia in exchange.

[Bugarash]

Turks pose no danger to us. They have moved on from the Ottoman days and so should we.

Only to the untrained eye my little naive friend


They are in the Balkans only as businessmen and investors. There's absolutely nothing with with THEM investing, giving us THEIR money so we can profit off them!

There is a hiden agenda in that


Oh, if Greece was as strong as Turkey and perhaps as numerous then you can be certain they would be conspiring to conquer Plovdiv... or should I say Philippopolis?

Yeah but it isnt


There will be no choosing. We can align with Albanians too in an tripartite alliance composed of Albania, Macedonia and Turkey against Greece.

And after that albanians will eat you up
You're better off in the Benelux.

[poiuytrewq0987]

Only to the untrained eye my little naive friend



There is a hiden agenda in that



Yeah but it isnt



And after that albanians will eat you up

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkophobia

[Bugarash]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkophobia

Turkophobia is needed if you want to survive in this region.

Only a idiot can think that turks dont have plans for this region.

[Bugarash]

The turks are tricky

they are now trying to approach us in a good way,through culture but again with a hiden agenda.

For example there was a campaign sponsored by the turks called ''Balkan Express''
they were going by train through all balkan (former ottoman) states and throwing away concerts and stuff...but the real slogan was''we dont know anything about the states we held under our reign for 5 centures,let us learn more''

In Sofia they got a nice greeting:D

rDVefeBcbd8

[Anatolian Eagle]

Turkophobia is needed if you want to survive in this region.

Only a idiot can think that turks dont have plans for this region.

Man you're insane...

[Coolguy1]

Back on topic guys, I have done some extensive research on the matter taking information from numerous sources and have come up with this. This is only on Greek Macedonia

http://i1071.photobucket.com/albums/u511/Sorcelow/GreekMacedonia.png

The first category represents the population that would have been in the Saloniki vilayet, the second category represents the Manastir vilayet while the third represents the total population.

Most of the research is based off of Kanchov's data with tweaks from other sources that fix his errors.

As you can see, the Greeks are the most numerous, they are 30%of the population, the Bulgars are the second most numerous, they also contribute around 30% of the total population, the Turks are third and the other ethnic groups are under, "other"

[El Gre]

Turns out Kanchov did have a number of mistakes, probably even more

http://www.macedoniaontheweb.com/forum/modern-macedonian-history/10909-bulgarian-ethnographic-propaganda-macedonia.html


Well if you went through that thread then your question which you asked me about which villages in Serres were Greek yet counted as Bulgarian you will have your answer!!!:thumb001:

So its quite obvious that his stats were biased to boost Bulgarian numbers.
To omit Pieria and Thasos which had purely Hellenic populations was done for a reason, if i can quote the poster from your link


positioned in what the Slavic ethnographers considered to be "the southern border of Macedonia". Their aim was to exclude Pieria from Macedonia , because it was a homogeneously Greek speaking population , and with few of the ubiquitous Vlachs dwelling around Vlacholivado Olympou , who by the way were pro-Greek in their ethnic orientation.

You can watch again Vasli Kanchev's map , where he leaves Pieria uncolored , because he did not include her into Macedonia.

Again if you include these regions the Greeks will run neck and neck with the Bulgarians in terms of numbers, if you add the Pro Greek Vlachs and 'Grkomani' with the Greeks then the Bulgarians really stand no chance in what they call 'aegean macedonia'.

What makes me laugh is that they call the Vergina Sun = Kutlesh sonce.
They think Kutlesh is the old 'makedonski' name.
1. Too bad is a Turkish toponym
2. Too bad it was inhabited by Greeks!!!

[Coolguy1]

Well if you went through that thread then your question which you asked me about which villages in Serres were Greek yet counted as Bulgarian you will have your answer!!!:thumb001:

So its quite obvious that his stats were biased to boost Bulgarian numbers.
To omit Pieria and Thasos which had purely Hellenic populations was done for a reason, if i can quote the poster from your link



Again if you include these regions the Greeks will run neck and neck with the Bulgarians in terms of numbers, if you add the Pro Greek Vlachs and 'Grkomani' with the Greeks then the Bulgarians really stand no chance in what they call 'aegean macedonia'.

What makes me laugh is that they call the Vergina Sun = Kutlesh sonce.
They think Kutlesh is the old 'makedonski' name.
1. Too bad is a Turkish toponym
2. Too bad it was inhabited by Greeks!!!

Exactly dude, from my research, Kanchov neglects over 80,000 Greeks by either not including them or changing their ethnicity from Greek to Bulgarian or Turkish.

After the population exchanges and wars, the slavophone population in Macedonia has decreased to at most 150,000 of which 99% identify as Greek!!!
When will this fyromian propoganda end!?!? Lol, probably in at most 20 years when albs form over 40% and they lose the name dispute:thumb001:

[Onur]

As you can see, the Greeks are the most numerous, they are 30%of the population, the Bulgars are the second most numerous, they also contribute around 30% of the total population, the Turks are third and the other ethnic groups are under, "other"
No, Greeks were no way 30% of the total population because the so-called Greeks in this table also includes orthodox Albanians, orthodox Vlachs, orthodox Gagauz Turks and some slavic Macedonians who were still adhere to Greek church at that time.

Probably the number of Greek speakers in that 30% was no more than half of it.

[Coolguy1]

No, Greeks were no way 30% of the total population because the so-called Greeks in this table also includes orthodox Albanians, orthodox Vlachs, orthodox Gagauz Turks and some slavic Macedonians who were still adhere to Greek church at that time.

Probably the number of Greek speakers in that 30% was no more than half of it.


No, why dont you do some research yourself and see the truth, Kanchov neglected 80,000 Hellenophones by excluding the important regions of Katerini, Thasos, Deskati etc. He also misrepresented populatipns in the area to be bulgarophone or turkophone when they were actually Greek speaking. Go crack open a couple books and stop following what everyone else says and do some research for yourself

[poiuytrewq0987]

The turks are tricky

they are now trying to approach us in a good way,through culture but again with a hiden agenda.

For example there was a campaign sponsored by the turks called ''Balkan Express''
they were going by train through all balkan (former ottoman) states and throwing away concerts and stuff...but the real slogan was''we dont know anything about the states we held under our reign for 5 centures,let us learn more''

1. Who supported us in the formation of the Bulgarian Exarchate when the Rum Patriarchate called the Exarchate schismatic? Turks or Greeks?

2. Who repeatedly tried to Hellenize Bulgarians in the 500 years of Ottoman rule of Balkans? Turks or Greeks? Do you remember who disestablished the Ohrid Archbishopric? Turks or Greeks?

3. Who wiped out the Bulgarians in Aegean Macedonia? Turks or Greeks?




In Sofia they got a nice greeting:D


Childish. :rolleyes: