Skip to main content

Full text of "Macedonia"

See other formats 


="3- 


=  LO 

=  00 


=0) 
"00 


:lo 


— o 


•CD 


00 


r 


■■ 


A~ 


fc  %•  fy^-ti  .  in  i. 


MACEDONIA 


A    BULWARK    AGAINST 
GERMANY 

The  Fight  of  the  Slovenes,  the  Western 

Branch  of  the  Jugoslavs,  for  National 

Existence 

By  BOGUMIL  Vosnjak,  late  Lecturer  of  the  University 
of  Zagreb  (Croatia). 

Translated  by  Fanny  S.  Copeland. 
Crown  Svo,  4s.  6d.  net.  Postage  $d. 

41  Not  only  a  piece  of  powerful  propaganda,  but  a 
literary  production  of  high  quality.  Full  of  illumina- 
tion on  Near  Eastern  questions." — Pall  Mall  Gazette. 


A   DYING    EMPIRE 

By  Bogumjl  Vosnjak. 
With  a  Preface  by  T.  P.  O'Connor,  M.P. ' 

Crown  Svo,  4s.  6d.  net.  Postage  5<tf. 

In  this  account  of  the  Dying  Empire  of  Austria  the 
author  has  tried  to  describe  the  sociological  factors  in 
the  breakdown  of  the  Hapsburg  Empire,  and  to  show 
that  in  the  fabric  of  a  "  Central  Europe  "  is  closely 
woven  the  idea  of  a  predominating  Pan-Germanism. 
Either  Germany  must  stretch  from  Hamburg  to 
Trieste  and  Salonika,  or  Austria-Hungary  must  be 
dismembered.     There  is  no  alternative. 


London:  George  Allen  &  Unwin  Limited 


MACEDONIA 


BY 


T.   R.   GEORGEVITCH 


jS£S£,G.£^SJ^b  £.n-'^  lis 


LONDON:  GEORGE   ALLEN   &c   UNWIN'LTD. 
NEW   YORK:    THE    MACMILLAN    COMPANY 


First  published  in  1918 


DR 

10! 


(AH  right*  reserved) 


PREFACE 

Traditions  and  accepted  opinions  die  hard,  no  matter 
what  their  origin.  Even  the  most  erroneous  view,  once 
it  has  taken  root,  can  only  be  disproved  with  great 
difficulty.  It  has  become  a  matter  of  conviction,  or 
belief,  and  these  are  really  feelings,  and  have  no  direct 
connection  whatsoever  with  logic  and  truth ;  people 
will  be  as  firmly  convinced  in  their  belief  in  a  false- 
hood as  in  their  belief  in  a  truth.  In  course  of  time, 
individual,  social,  and  national  interests,  both  material 
and  moral,  become  so  firmly  bound  up  with  the  existing 
belief  that  they  render  it  all  the  more  immune  to 
criticism. 

In  scientific  questions  an  accepted  opinion  possesses 
as  great  a  prestige  as  one  which  bears  upon  the  material 
interests  of  an  individual  or  nation.  The  number  of 
those  who  trouble  to  go  to  the  fountain-head  and  get 
their  information  at  first  hand  is  very  small  indeed ; 
the  rest  perforce  accept  information  and  conclusions 
without  verifying  them.  By  dint  of  constant  repetition 
a  given  information  gains  universal  belief,  as  for  the 
majority  of  people  the  repetition  of  an  assertion  has  as 
much  value  as  an  argument,  and  one  which  they  are 
least  able  to  oppose. 

In  this  book  the  author  has  tried  to  collate  his  facts 
and  publish  them  as  a  contribution  to  the  elucidation 


VI 


PREFACE 


of  the  Macedonian  question.  After  all,  the  adducing  of 
facts  is  still  the  best  way  of  arriving  at  the  truth ; 
wherefore  the  reader  is  asked — independently  of  the 
author's  conclusions,  and  passing  over  all  that  might 
have  a  polemical  tone  in  the  text — kindly  to  give  his 
attention  to  the  facts  which  are  marshalled  in  this  book, 
and  to  form  his  own  opinion,  independent  of  his  own 
preconceived    ideas   and    independent    of    the    author's 

opinion. 

T.  B.  G. 

London,  January  1918. 


SERBIAN   ORTHOGRAPHY 


8  =  eh  in  English  "  ship" 
c  =  ts  ,,  "cats." 

Z,  =  ch         ,,  "  church." 

c  =  (the  same,  softer  =  t  in 
"nature"). 


j  =  y  in  English  "  you." 
z  =  in  French  "jour." 
nj  =  n  in  English  "  new." 

g  =  g        „       "  got." 


CONTENTS 


PASS 

INTRODUCTION  .  .  .  .1 

Confusion  as  regards  definition  of  Macedonia — Correct 
conception  of  Macedonia — Origin  of  confusion — Subject 
of  this  book — Historical  and  literary  sources  consulted 
by  the  author. 

THE    SOUTHERN    SLAVS  .  .  ...  .12 

The  Southern  Slavs  and  their  arrival  in  their  present 
territory — Ethnographic  changes  brought  about  by  their 
arrival — Ethnical  unity  of  the  Southern  Slavs — The 
Bulgars  and  their  invasion  of  the  Southern  Slav  lands 
between  the  Danube  and  the  Balkan  mountains — Con- 
trast between  the  Bulgars  and  the  conquered  Slavs — 
Their  gradual  fusion  into  the  present  Bulgarian  nation 
— Traces  of  old  Bulgarian  qualities  in  the  modern  Bulgars 
— Territory  in  which  the  present  Bulgarian  nation  was 
evolved. 

Ill 

THE    MACEDONIAN    STATE  .  .  .22 

The  Macedonian  Slavs — Bulgarian  invasion  of  Macedonia 
— Contrast  between  the  Bulgars  and  the  Macedonian 
Slavs — Adverse  conditions  under  the  Bulgars — Revolt  of 
the  Macedonian  Slavs  and  emancipation  from  the  Bul- 
gars— 'Renewal  of  Byzantine  domination  in  Macedonia — 
Revolt  and  emancipation  from  Byzantium — The  Mace- 
donian State — Its  rise — Frontiers — Name  of  the  Mace- 
donian State. 


viii  CONTENTS 

IV 

BULGARIAN    RULE    IN    MACEDONIA        .  .  .  .29 

Subjugation  of  the  Macedonian  State  by  Byzantium  in 
1018 — Bulgars  shake  off  the  Byzantine  yoke  in  1186— 
Second  Bulgarian  invasion  of  Macedonia  —  Macedonia 
under  the  Latins  and  Epirotea — Fresh  Bulgarian  invasion 
of  Macedonia — Macedonia  under  the  Byzantines  and 
Epirotes — Bulgars  possess  Macedonia  once  more  for  a 
brief  period  and  then  lose  it  for  good  in  1256. 

V 

SERBIAN    RULE    IN    MACEDONIA  .  .  .  .3$ 

Systematic  unification  of  Serbian  territory  under  the 
Nemanjici — Part  of  Macedonia  won  by  King  Uros  in  1258 
— Macedonia  added  to  Serbia  under  King  Milutin  and 
King  Stephan  Decanski — Bulgaria  makes  war  upon 
Stephan  Decanski  in  1330 — Macedonia's  fate  permanently 
decided  in  favour  of  Serbia  by  the  Serbian  victory  over 
the  Bulgars — Subsequent  insignificance  of  Bulgaria — 
Serbian  magnanimity  towards  Bulgaria — King  (afterwards 
Tsar)  Dusan  unites  the  whole  of  Macedonia  with  Serbia 
— Bulgars  no  longer  interested  in  Macedonia — Bulgars 
conscious  of  having  no  claim  on  Macedonia — Bulgars 
recognize  the  legitimacj^  of  the  Serbian  rule  in  Macedonia 
— Macedonia  considered  a  Serbian  country — Macedonians 
never  called  anything  but  "  Serbs  "  in  historic  records — 
Dismemberment  of  the  Serbian  Empire  —  Macedonian 
States  always  referred  to  as  "  Serbian  " — Turks  conquer 
Macedonia  as  a  Serbian  country — This  fact  recognized 
by  all  historic  sources,  including  Bulgarian — Serbian  in- 
fluence in  Macedonia  under  the  Turkish  rule — Serbian 
princes  in  Macedonia  under  Turkish  suzerainty— Serbian 
Sultana  Marija  and  her  importance  for  the  Macedonian 
Serbs. 

VI 

DIFFERENCE     BETWEEN     SERBIAN    AND     BULGARIAN      RULES 

IN    MACEDONIA  .  .  .  .  .56 

Comparative  duration  of  Bulgarian  and  Serbian  rules  in 
Macedonia — Bulgars  and   conquered   Slavs  in   Macedonia 


CONTENTS  ix 

PA.au 
two  nations — Bulgars  are  masters,  and  Macedonians  slaves 
— Reasons  why  they  never  niingled — No  traces  left  of 
Bulgarian  rule  in  Macedonia,  either  ethnically  or  as 
regards  civilization — Misconceptions  concerning  Bulgaria's 
role  in  the  creation  of  Slav  letters  and  literature — The 
Macedonians  pioneers  of  Christianity  among  the  Slavs — 
The  first  Slav  apostles  natives  of  Macedonia — Bulgars  also 
receive  Christianity  from  Macedonia—  Language  of  earliest 
Slav  books  merely  called  "  Slav " — Second  Bulgarian 
rule  in  Macedonia,  short,  tyrannical,  and  obnoxious. 

Serbs  and  Macedonians  are  but  one  nation — Serbian  rulers 
the  liberators  and  uniters  of  the  Serbian  nation  into  one 
state  entity — Serbian  rule  in  Macedonia  represents  the 
zenith  of  Serbian  civilization  —  Building  of  monasteries 
and  intellectual  progress  in  Macedonia — Serbian  literature 
in  Macedonia — DuSan's  Code  originated  in  Macedonia — 
Macedonia  the  heart  and  focus  of  the  Serbian  Empire 
— Serbian  capitals  situated  in  Macedonia — State  Councils, 
at  which  the  fate  of  the  nation  was  decided,  held  in 
Macedonia — It  was  in  Macedonia  that  Serbia  was  elevated 
to  the  rank  of  an  Empire  and  the  Serbian  Church  to  that 
of  a  Patriarchate  —  Byzantine  influence  reaches  Serbia 
through  Macedonia. 

VII 

TURKISH    RULE    IN  MACEDONIA  .  .  .  .70 

s 

Complete  disappearance  of  the  Bulgars  under  Turkish 
rule — Serbian  national  life  not  arrested  by  Turkish  con- 
quest— Macedonians  remain  Serbian  under  Turkish  rule 
— Significance  of  the  independent  Serbian  Patriarchate 
for  the  Serbian  nation  during  the  Turkish  rule — Mace- 
donia an  integral  part  of  the  Serbian  Patriarchate. 

VII   (Continued) 

MACEDONIA    FROM    THE    LOSS    OF    HER    INDEPENDENCE    TO 
THE     SUPPRESSION     OF     THE      SERBIAN     PATRIARCHATE 

(1413-1459)  .  .  .  \  .  .75 

The  role  of  the  Serbian  State  devolves  upon  the  Serbian 
Patriarchate — Character  of  the  Serbian  Patriarchate — 
Serbian  sentiment  among  the  Macedonian  clergy — Serbian 


x  CONTENTS 

FAGS 

sentiment  among  the  Macedonian  people — The  Mace- 
donians seek  refuge  only  among  Serbs — They  feel  among 
kinsmen  with  the  Serbs — Part  played  by  Macedonians 
among  the  Serbs  as  a  whole. 

VII  (Continued) 

MACEDONIA      FROM      THE      SUPPRESSION     OP     THE      SERBIAN 

PATRIARCHATE    TO    ITS    RESTORATION    (1459-1557)  .       80 

Suppression  of  the  Serbian  Patriarchate  and  its  super- 
session by  the  Archiepiscopate  of  Ochrida — Greek  cha- 
racter of  the  Archiepiscopate ;  Slav  and  Serbian  clergy 
in  it  —  Detriment  caused  to  the  Serbian  nation  by  the 
suppression  of  the  Serbian  Patriarchate — Vitality  of  the 
Serbian  nation — The  Archiepiscopate  of  Ochrida  "  Serbi- 
cized  " — Sad  plight  of  the  Serbian  people  in  those  days — 
Serbian  literature  barely  kept  alive  in  Macedonia — Serbian 
sentiment  of  the  clergy  in  Macedonia — Serbian  historic 
records  and  sources  call  the  Macedonians  "  Serbs " — 
Other  historic  sources  do  the  same. 

VII    (Continued) 

MACEDONIA  FROM  THE  RESTORATION  OF  THE  SERBIAN 
PATRIARCHATE  TO  ITS  SECOND  SUPPRESSION  (1557- 
1766)       .  .  .  .  .  .  .90 

Restoration  of  the  Serbian  Patriarchate — Jurisdiction  of 
the  restored  Serbian  Patriarchate  based  on  the  principle 
of  nationality — Reorganization  of  the  Church ;  the  standard 
of  religion,  literature,  and  national  life  raised  within  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  Serbian  Patriarchate — Increased  im- 
portance of  the  Serbian  Patriarchs — Their  relations  with 
foreign  Powers — Hard  lot  of  the  Serbs  in  Macedonia — 
Macedonian  missions  solicit  help  in  Russia  for  Serbian 
Churches — These  missions  call  themselves  " Serbian" — 
The  Serbian  migrations — Macedonian  emigrants  everywhere 
call  themselves  "Serbian"  —  Relations  between  Mace- 
donian emigrants  and  Macedonian  Serbs — Migrations  en 
masse  from  Macedonia  to  Austria  under  Patriarch 
Arsenije  III — Serbian  sentiment  of  Macedonian  emigrants 
m    Austria — Bole    of    Macedonians   among  the    Serbs    in 


CONTENTS  xi 

PAGB 

Austria — Serbian  historic  records  speak  of  Macedonians 
as  "  Serbs " — So  do  all  non-Serbian  historic  records — 
Suppression  of  the  Serbian  Patriarchate — Protest  by  the 
Metropolitan  of  Montenegro  against  this  crime  against 
the  Serbian  nation  as  a  whole,  of  which  the  Macedonians 
also  form  part. 

VIII 

MACEDONIA   AND    THE    SERBIAN    STRUGGLE    FOR   LIBERATION    109 

Serbian  sentiment  of  the  Macedonians  after  the  sup- 
pression of  the  Serbian  Patriarchate — Sad  plight  of  Mace- 
donia after  the  suppression  of  the  Serbian  Patriarchate — 
Serbian  sympathy  for  Macedonia — Alacedonian  aspirations 
to  emancipate  Serbian  nation  from  the  Turks — Participa- 
tion of  Macedonians  in  Austro- Turkish  War  (1788-1791)  for 
liberation  of  the  Serbs  from  the  Turks — Participation  of 
Macedonians  in  the  Serbian  insurrection  under  Karageorge 
and  Milos  Obrenovic  at  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth 
century — Moral  support  for  Serbia  from  Macedonia — Mace- 
donian national  poetry  celebrates  the  struggle  of  the  Serbian 
nation  against  the  Turks. 

IX 

BULGARIAN       PROPAGANDA       IN        MACEDONIA.        BULGARIAN 

RESURRECTION  .....    119 

Bulgars  completely  forgotten  in  Europe  after  the  fall  of 
the  Bulgarian  Empire  in  the  Middle  Ages — Bulgars  in 
Bulgaria  without  national  consciousness — Attempts  at 
national  awakening — The  Ruthenian  G.  Venelin  forms  an 
idealistic  picture  of  the  Bulgars  and  rouses  them — Bulgars, 
inspired  by  Venelin's  fables,  begin  to  dream  of  Great 
Bulgaria — The  romantic  enthusiast  George  S.  Eakovski 
fosters  Bulgarian  megalomania — Stephan  Verkovic  and 
his  forged  Bulgarian  antiquities — All  Bulgars  united  in 
the  conception  of  their  unlimited  greatness — Education 
of  the  rising  generation  in  this  spirit — Bulgarian  ideas 
take  hold  in  Russia — Committees  for  the  propaganda  of 
4he  Bulgarian  idea  in  Russia — Russian  scholars,  infected 
by  Bulgarism,  become  its  pioneers — Sympathy  for  the 
Bulgars  spreads  from  Russia  to  the  rest  of  Europe. 


xii  CONTENTS 

IX  (Continued) 


PAOB 


BULGARIAN    ACTION  IN    MACEDONIA     .  .  .  .    134 

The  Greek  Church  abuses  its  power  over  the  Slavs  in  the 
Turkish  Empire — Slav  dissatisfaction — Inability  of  the 
Serbs  to  fight  the  Greek  Church — The  Bulgars,  assisted  by 
Russia,  open  their  campaign — The  Uniate  Church  (Greek 
Catholicism)  among  the  Bulgars — The  Russians,  alarmed 
at  the  progress  of  the  Uniate  Church,  increase  their 
help  to  the  Bulgars — The  Greek  Patriarch,  alarmed  at 
the  growth  of  the  Uniate  Church,  yields  to  the  Bulgars 
— The  Porte,  taking  the  part  of  the  Bulgars,  inter- 
venes with  the  Greek  Patriarch,  and  the  Sultan  declares 
the  independence  of  the  Bulgarian  Church  in  Turkey 
— Significance  of  the  creation  of  the  Bulgarian  Exarchate 
—  Detriment  caused  to  the  Serbs  in  Turkey  by  the 
creation  of  the  Bulgarian  Exarchate  —  Attitude  of  the 
Greek  Church  towards  the  Macedonian  Serbs — Mace- 
donians begin  to  turn  Uniate — Russia  advises  them  to 
join  the  Bulgars  in  their  struggle  against  the  Greek  Church 
— Macedonians  help  Bulgars,  but  only  to  free  themselves 
from  the  Greek  clergy — The  Macedo-Roumanians  do  the 
same — The  Bulgarian  Exarchate  and  Macedonia — Turks 
side  with  Bulgars  in  Macedonia — New  Bulgarian  bishoprics 
in  Macedonia — Forcible  Bulgarization  of  the  Macedonians 
— Creation  of  independent  Bulgaria — Propaganda  in  Mace- 
donia from  Bulgaria — Many  Macedonian  Serbs  refuse  to 
join  the  Bulgars — Bulgarian  terror  among  Serbian  popu- 
lation of  Macedonia—  Bulgarian  comitadjis  in  Macedonia 
— Destruction  of  Serbian  records  and  monuments  in 
Macedonia. 

X 

SERBIA    AND   MACEDONIA  .....    16C 

Serbia  the  refuge  for  the  Macedonians —Macedonians 
accepted  as  Serbs  in  Serbia — Macedonians  always  con- 
sidered foreigners  in  Bulgaria — Serbian  public  opinion 
looks  upon  Macedonians  as  forming  part  of  the  Serbian 
nation — So  do  Serbia's  statesmen — So  does  Serbian 
science — Non-Serbian  science  takes  the  same  view — 
Serbia  welcomes  Bulgarian  immigrants  and  assists  the 
Bulgarian  Church  movement  so  loDg  as  Bulgaria  does  not 
lay  claim  to  Macedonia  also — Serbia's  inability  to  check 


CONTENTS  xiii 

FA.GS 

Bulgarian  encroachment  in  Macedonia — Serbian  interest 
in  Macedonia — Serbian  schools  opened — Assistance  of  the 
Serbian  Church  movement  in  Macedonia  —  Macedonians 
as  guardians  of  Serbian  nationality — Serbian  schools  in 
Macedonia — Macedonians  petition  for  a  restoration  of  the 
Serbian  Patriarchate — Failing  in  this  request,  they  ask  for 
Serbian  bishops — Insurrection  in  Macedonia  in  favour  of 
annexation  to  Serbia — Macedonians  appeal  to  Prince  Milan 
of  Serbia  and  to  the  Congress  of  Berlin  to  be  permitted  to 
belong  to  Serbia,  and  not  to  Bulgaria — Macedonians'  brave 
fight  against  Bulgarian  comitadjis — In  spite  of  all  Bulgarian 
propaganda  the  better  part  of  Macedonia  remains  Serbian — 
The  rest  ostensibly  sides  with  the  Bulgars. 

XI 

MACEDONIAN    DIALECTS   OF   THE    SERBIAN   LANGUAGE  .    188 

Language  of  the  Macedonian  Slavs  originally  merely  called 
"  Slav  " — No  mention  of  Bulgarian  language  in  Macedonia  up 
to  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century — Language  of 
literary  records  in  Macedonia  Serbian  throughout  the  Middle 
Ages — Serbian  also  in  the  nineteenth  century  until  the 
advent  of  the  Bulgarian  propaganda — Difference  between 
Macedonian  and  Bulgarian  languages  noticed  at  a  very 
early  date — Macedonian  idiom  not  identical  in  all  districts 
— Insufficiency  of  linguistic  material  for  thorough  study 
of  Macedonian  idiom — All  Macedonian  dialects  belong  to 
one  type — Macedonian  dialects  are  Serbian — Morphology 
— Etymology — The  article  as  it  appears  in  Macedonian 
dialects   is   not   a   Bulgarian   characteristic. 

XII 

NATIONAL   CUSTOMS     ......    200 

Old  Slav  tribal  system  completely  broken  up  by  Old  Bul- 
garian State  system — Tribal  system  preserved  in  Macedonia 
and  other  Serbian  lands — Hence  the  identity  of  social 
conditions  and  customs — Typically  Serbian  customs  in 
Macedonia — The  "  Slava  " — Bulgarian  campaign  against 
"Slava"  in  Macedonia— " Preslava "—Village  "Slava"— 
Custom  of  pilgrimage  to  Serbian  monasteries — Pilgrimages 
to  the  Monastery  of  Decani. 


xiv  CONTENTS 

XIII 

PAGB 

POPULAR   TRADITION  .....    210 

Beauty  and  wealth  of  Serbian  popular  tradition — Ethno- 
graphic element  and  historic  memories  enshrined  in  it — 
Macedonia  considered  a  Serbian  country  by  non-Mace- 
donian Serbian  popular  tradition — National  tradition  of 
Macedonia  shows  a  purely  Serbian  character — Example 
from  beginning  of  eighteenth  century — Examples  from  the 
nineteenth  century  —  Folk  poetry  in  Macedonia  purely 
Serbian — Bulgarian  collections  of  Macedonian  national 
poetry  reveal  purely  Serbian  characters  in  spite  of  touching 
and  editing — Reference  to  none  but  Serbian  historic  events, 
places,  and  characters — No  reference  to  Bulgarian  historic 
events,  places,  and  characters — Serbian  monasteries  famous 
in  Macedonian  folk  poetry — Serbian  names  in  Macedonian 
poetry — Language  in  Macedonian  poetry  pure  Serbian — 
According  to  national  tradition  the  liberation  and  unification 
of  all  Serbia  is  bound  up  with  Macedonia. 

XIV 

CONCLUSION    .......    226 

SUPPLEMENTS 

I.    STORY   OF   THE    PROGRESS   OF    THE   BULGARIAN  CHURCH 

MOVEMENT,     TOLD    BY   T.  ,HADZI    MISEV,    OF    VELE8  .    235 

II.  THE  STORY  OF  JOVAN  VELJIC,  OF  DEBAR,  TELLING 
HOW  THE  BULGARIAN  TEACHERS  MADE  HIM  A 
BULGAR     BY     FORCE    .....    238 

III.  STORY  OF  THE  DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  BULGARIAN 
PROPAGANDA  IN  MACEDONIA,  TOLD  BY  A  CITIZEN 
OF   BITOLJ         ......    240' 

IT.  PETITIONS  OF  MACEDONIANS  TO  THE  SERBIAN  PRINCE 
MILAN  AND  TO  THE  CONGRESS  OF  BERLIN  TO  BE 
UNITED    WITH    SERBIA  ....    245 

A.  From  the  districts  of  Kicevo,  Prilep  and  Veles,  with  the 
signatures  of  170  mayors,  priests,  archimandrites, 
etc.,  appended  and  bearing  the  seals  of  44  communes. 


CONTENTS  xv 

B.  Petition   addressed    to   Prince   Milan,   signed    by   520 

parish  councils,  etc.,  from  the  districts  of  Kurnanovo, 
Kratovo,  Palanka,  Istip,  Petric,  Strumica  and  Kocani, 
■with  the  seals  of  220  communes  affixed,  drawn  up  on 
June  2,  1878,  at  Kozjak. 

C.  Petition  addressed  to  the  British  Consul  at  Vranje,  as 

Envoy  of  the  Berlin  Congress,  signed  in  Vranje,  on 
June  11,  1878,  by  20  natives  of  Gilane  (from  the 
towns  and  villages  of  Gilane,  Pasijan,  Petrovac, 
Banilug,  Kopotovo,  Domorovac,  Kufedze,  Koretiste, 
Stanisor,  Budrig,  Partes,  Grizimi,  Mocar,  Miganovac, 
and  Businac). 

D.  Petition  of   500  distinguished  citizens,  archimandrites, 

priests,  teachers,  mayors,  etc.,  of  the  districts  of 
Kicevo,  Ochrida,  Debar,  and  Elbasan,  with  the  seals 
of  308  communes  affixed,  dated  from  the  Monastery  of 
Cista  Precista  in  Skrzava  at  the  Sabor  (meeting)  of 
June  15,  1878,  and  addressed  to  the  "  King  "  of  Serbia. 

E.  Petition  addressed  to  the  British  Consul  (Envoy  of  the 

Berlin  Congress),  dated  Gilane,  June  18,  1878,  and 
signed  by  375  distinguished  inhabitants  frOm  the 
districts  of  Gilane,  Skoplje,  and  Tetovo.  A  footnote 
accounts  for  the  absence  of  parish  seals  by  explaining 
that  plundering  Circassians  and  Albanians  had  taken 
them  away. 

F.  Petition  to  the  "  King "  of  Serbia,  dated  Skoplje,  June 

20,  1878,  with  the  seals  of  more  than  50  communes 
affixed.  Nobody  had  dared  to  sign,  as  of  the  signa- 
tories to  the  Bozince  petition  250  had  been  arrested 
in  Skoplje  alone,  of  whom  only  50  had  come  out  of 
prison  alive.  In  the  face  of  such  intimidation  it  is 
truly  amazing  that  the  mayors  of  50  communes  yet 
had  courage  to  affix  their  seals. 

G.  Petition  to  the  Berlin  Congress,  dated  "  On  the  Gjerman 

Planina,  July  1,  1878,"  bearing  800  signatures  and  the 
seals  of  196  communes  and  monasteries  from  the 
districts  of  Kurnanovo,  Kratovo,  Kocani,  and  Palanka. 
(An  almost  identical  but  far  more  explicit  petition,, 
bearing  350  signatures  and  145  seals,  was  presented  tc 
the  Prince  of  Serbia.) 


xvi  CONTENTS 

FAGB 

V.    INCOMPLETE     LIST     OF     BULGARIAN      ATTACK8      UPON 

SERBIAN    SCHOOLS    AND    TEACHERS    IN    MACEDONIA        .    254 

VI.  INCOMPLETE  LIST  OF  SERBS  MURDERED  BY  THE 
BULGARS  OR  AGENTS  OF  THE  BULGARIAN  COM- 
MITTEE   IN    MACEDONIA    BETWEEN    1881    AND    1909  .    256 

VII.  INCOMPLETE  LIST  OF  ATTEMPTED  MURDERS  PERPE- 
TRATED BY  BULGARS  ON  SERBS  BETWEEN  1897 
AND   1901      .  .  .  .  .282 

VIII.  BULGARIAN  PROCLAMATION  IN  1879,  CALLING  UPON 
THE  INHABITANTS  OF  MACEDONIA  TO  RISE 
AGAINST      THE     TURKS  ....    284 


MACEDONIA 


INTRODUCTION 

Confusion  as  regards  definition  of  Macedonia — Correct  conception 
of  Macedonia — Origin  of  confusion — Subject  of  this  book — 
Historical  and  literary  sources  consulted  by  the  author 

ALTHOUGH  much  has  been  written  about  Mace- 
donia, it  is  not  until  recent  years  that  any  one 
has  succeeded  in  attaching  a  correct  conception  to  the 
term.  Hence  every  writer  on  the  subject  of  Macedonia 
extended  his  own  definition  to  such  territorial  area  as 
seemed  convenient  or  expedient  to  him  to  include  within 
her  borders.  The  widest  definition  of  Macedonia  has 
been  furnished  by  the  Bulgars.  This  is  because  in  the 
eyes  of  the  Bulgars  the  frontiers  of  Macedonia  proper 
are  too  narrow  for  their  extensive  pretensions  in  the 
Balkan  Peninsula.  Several  Bulgarian  writers  have 
even  gone  so  far  as  to  include  practically  the  whole 
of  the  Turkish  Empire  in  Europe  under  the  head  of 
Macedonia.  Non-Bulgarian  N  writers  on  the  subject 
have  likewise  enlarged  the  definition  of  Macedonia, 
either  from  ignorance,  or  out  of  political  consideration 
for  this  country  or  that,  or  because  they  took  their  cue 

2 


2  MACEDONIA 

from  the  Bulgars,  or  because  it  did  not  occur  to  them  to 
devote  special  study  to  the  definition  of  what  ought  to  be 
understood  under  Macedonia,  and  to  establish  this  by 
critical  investigation. 

It  is  only  within  recent  years  that  Dr.  J.  Cvijic,  Pro- 
fessor of  Geography  at  the  University  of  Belgrade,  has, 
as  the  result  of  many  years'  travelling  in  Macedonia  and 
exhaustive  study  of  all  the  literary  records  in  the  country, 
established  beyond  all  doubt  that  the  central  part  of 
Macedonia  extends  to  the  middle  (below  Skoplje) „  and 
lower  reaches  of  the  Vardar ;  that  her  territory  extends 
westward  to  the  great  lakes  of  Ochrida  and  Prespa,  and 
eastward  to  the  River  Struma  and,  in  places,  to  the  River 
Mesta.  Consequently  the  territorial  unit  of  Macedonia 
would  include  the  regions  around  Ochrida,  Bitolj,  Voden, 
Salonica,  Dojran,  Strumica,  Seres,  and  Kavala.  All  else 
to  the  north  of  this  is  not  Macedonia. 

In  order  to  make  the  matter  quite  clear  we  shall  quote 
some  of  the  reasons  given  by  Mr.  Cvijic.  But  in  order 
to  deprecate  criticism,  we  will  quote  only  those  of 
Mr.  Cvijic's  arguments,  touching  which  it  cannot  pos- 
sibly be  laid  to  his  charge  that  they  are  the  biassed  expres- 
sion of  a  Serbian  patriot  of  the  present  day,  and  which 
are  consequently  beyond  cavil.  In  establishing  the  terri- 
torial extent  of  Macedonia,  Mr.  Cvijic  has  among  other 
material  consulted  the  old  maps  published  up  to  within 
the  first  decades  of  the  nineteenth  century,  when  there 
were  as  yet  no  nationalist  discussions  over  the  frontiers 
of  the  Balkan  peoples  and  when  the  statements  of 
scientific  geographers  rested  on  facts  alone. 

"From  the  time,"  says  Mr.  Cvijic,  "when  in  the  six- 
teenth century  better  and  more  complete  geographical 
maps  of  the  European  countries  began  to  appear,  and 


INTRODUCTION  3 

right  up  to  the  eighteenth  century  the  most  reliable 
maps  of  the  Balkan  Peninsula  are  the  Italian.  After 
these  come  Mercator's  map  and  the  maps  by  the  Koyal 
French  Geographers.  On  all  these  maps  the  name  of 
Serbia  extends  over  the  regions  south  of  the  Sar  Moun- 
tain and  the  Skoplje  Crna  Gora.  On  the  map  drawn  by 
the  Italian  geographer  Giac.  Gastaldi,  in  1566,  Serbia 
includes  not  only  Kosovo  Polje  and  Skoplje  itself  but 
also  the  regions  around  Skoplje.  On  many  maps  drawn 
by  the  official  '  Geographer  of  the  Republic  of  Venice,' 
the  famous  V.  Coronelli,  in  1692  (in  the  '  Corso  Geogra- 
fico  '),  Serbia  is  showTn  as  extending  south  of  the  Sar 
Mountain  and  the  Skoplje  Crna  Gora.  In  those  maps 
we  practically  always  find  the  legend  '  Metropoli  della 
Serbia '  beside  the  name  of  Skoplje.  On  many  French 
seventeenth-century  maps  drawn  by  the  '  Royal  Geogra- 
phers,' Serbia  includes  not  only  Novi  Pazar  and  Prizren, 
but  also  the  surroundings  of  Skoplje  in  the  wider  sense. 
Similar  frontiers  are  also  assigned  to  Serbia  in  the  maps 
by  F.  de  Witt,  in  the  maps  in  the  atlases  by  Blaeu  and 
H.  Moll,  and  in  many  others  of  the  second  half  of  the 
seventeenth  century.  In  numerous  maps  by  the  well- 
known  cartographer,  Joh.  Bapt.  Homann,  dating  from 
the  first  half  of  the  eighteenth  century,  the  districts  of 
Skoplje,  Kratovo,  and  Custendil  are  included  in  Serbia, 
and  the  frontier  of  Macedonia  runs  considerably  south 
of  Skoplje.  In  the  maps  published  in  Nuremberg  by 
Homann's  Successors  at  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth 
century  (in  1802,  1805,  etc.)  Serbia  includes  not  only  the 
regions  of  Novi  Pazar  and  Kosovo,  but  also  those  of 
Skoplje  and  Kratovo.  Similarly  wide  frontiers  are  also 
assigned  to  Serbia  in  the  books  of  the  Serbian  historian 
J.   Raji6   (eighteenth    century),    by   the    geographer    P. 


4  MACEDONIA 

Solaric,  and  by  the  father  of  Serbian  literature,  Vuk. 
S.  Karadzic  (nineteenth  century).  In  the  map  pub- 
lished by  S.  Tekelja  in  1805,  the  wider  frontiers  of 
Serbia,  as  understood  up  to  the  time  of  the  liberation, 
are  shown  in  detail.  Serbia  is  made  to  include  Prizren, 
Pristina,  Vucitru  (the  whole  of  Kosovo),  Skoplje,  Kratovo, 
Oustendil,  Pirot,  and  Caribrod.  In  the  '  Geography  of 
Serbia,'  by  Baron  Kotkirch,  translated  into  Serbian  and 
the  map  copied  by  Stephan  Milosevic  in  1822,  we  find  the 
wider  frontiers  of  Serbia,  as  also  in  the  map  by  Fried  of 
Vienna  in  which  the  Serbian  frontier  runs  south-east 
of  Oustendil. 

"  These  remarks  apply  to  all  the  more  important 
geographical  handbooks  in  which  Serbia  is  mentioned 
and  her  frontiers  are  given.  Similar  instances  and 
proofs  from  the  earlier  cartographers  could  be  tripled. 
It  is  a  well-known  fact,  moreover,  that  this  definition 
of  Serbia  was  not  merely  a  cartographic  and  literary 
conception,  but  one  that  lived  in  the  minds  of  the 
inhabitants,  since  persons  from  those  regions  (Kratovo, 
Skoplje,  Ovce  Polje,  etc.)  described  their  native  districts 
as  '  Serbian  countries.'  Thus  it  is  quite  natural  that 
after  the  liberation  of  Serbia  these  regions  were  called 
Old  Serbia,  in  order  to  distinguish  them  from  the  Princi- 
pality. ...  I  know  of  no  map  drawn  prior  to  the  libera- 
tion of  Serbia  in  which  the  above-mentioned  regions  are 
included  in  Macedonia ;  and  this  applies  even  to  those 
districts  across  which  the  name  of  Serbia  is  not  indi- 
cated. In  many  of  the  above-mentioned  maps  the  name 
Macedonia  is  indicated  across  the  counties  extending 
from  the  Skoplje  southern  frontier  of  Serbia,  along  the 
Vardar  and  up  to  Salonica.  Macedonia  therefore 
includes   mainly  the  middle   and   lower   reaches   of   the 


INTRODUCTION  5 

Vardar,  the  regions  around  the  Great  Lakes  in  the 
west,  and  as  far  as  the  Struma  and  (in  places)  as  far 
as  the  Struma  and  (in  places)  as  far  as  the  Mesta  in 
the  east."  J 

From  the  foregoing  it  is  clear  what  was  formerly 
understood  under  the  name  of  Macedonia.  The  con- 
fusion of  ideas  with  regard  to  her  territorial  extent  is 
a  thing  of  recent  growth.  The  liberation  of  Serbia  and 
Greece  has  entailed  many  changes  in  the  geographical 
conceptions  of  the  Balkan  Peninsula.  "  Cartographers 
are  confused  because  the  old  geographical  names  have 
ceased  to  tally  with  the  names  of  new  States.  Even 
the  Balkan  Peninsula  has  been  without  a  name  since 
then,  for  the  whole  of  its  extent  had  been  called  '  the 
Ottoman  Empire  in  Europe,'  'European  Turkey,'  etc., 
because  with  small  exceptions  it  all  belonged  to  Turkey. 
In  1808  the  German  geographer  Zeune,  writing  in  the 
periodical  Gaea,  gave  the  Balkan  Peninsula  the  name 
of  '  Hamushalbinsel,'  which  term  was  subsequently 
modernized  into  '  Balkan  Peninsula.'  At  that,  time, 
when  names  were  being  invented  for  the  Balkan 
Peninsula  and  its  countries,  the  cartographers  began 
gradually  to  eliminate  from  the  map  the  broader  con- 
ception of  Serbia  and  to  apply  this  name  only  to  the 
liberated  political  Serbia.  Simultaneously  the  indica- 
tion of  Macedonia  began  to  be  extended  on  the  maps. 
.  .  .  Sporadically,  however,  the  broader  conception  of 
Serbia  was  preserved  throughout  the  earlier  half  of  the 
nineteenth  century."2 

1  J.  Cvijic,  "  Geografski  Polozaj  Makedonije  i  Stare  Srbije " 
("  Geographical  Conditions  of  Macedonia  and  Old  Serbia"),  "  Srpski 
Knjizevni  Glasnik,"  vol.  xi.,  1904,  pp.  208-212. 

■  J.  Cvijic,  ibid.,  pp.  210-211. 


6  MACEDONIA 

With  such  confusion  prevailing  in  the  ranks  of  the 
professional  cartographers  with  regard  to  the  definition 
of  Macedonia,  it  is  not  to  be  wondered  at  that  the 
Bulgarian  "  patriots,"  politicians  with  an  axe  to  grind, 
and  others  imperfectly  acquainted  with  the  facts,  put 
forward  the  most  extravagant  claims  as  regards  the 
territorial  conception  of  Macedonia. 

If  matters  had  stood  thus  merely  as  regards  the 
physical  area  of  Macedonia,  it  would  still  be  quite 
simple  to  apply  that  name  only  to  the  territory  within 
her  true  frontiers,  since  all  that  lies  outside  these 
frontiers,  not  forming  part  of  Macedonia,  would  not 
enter  intos  the  discussion.  But  as  by  the  enlarged 
conception  of  Macedonia  everything  else  included  in 
this  conception  has  become  involved  in  it,  it  has  become 
necessary  to  deal  with  everything  together.  This  is  the 
only  reason  why  in  this  book  the  term  Macedonia  is  to 
be  understood  as  applying  not  only  to  Macedonia  proper, 
but  also  to  a  great  part  of  Old  Serbia  to  which  the 
enlarged  definition  of  Macedonia  has  been  extended,  and 
which  the  Bulgars  have  claimed — like  everything  else 
wherever  possible — as  coming  within  the  scope  of  their 
aspirations. 

In  writing  this  book  we  have  therefore — although 
incorrectly — for  the  nonce  adopted  the  conception  of 
Macedonia  according  to  the  Bulgarian  definition,  viz.  as 
the  territory  extending  from  the  Bulgarian  State  frontiers 
to  the  Sar  Mountain,  to  the  Eiver  Drim,  to  the  Gulf  of 

Salonica,  and  to  the  Eiver  Mesta. 

*  *  *  *  * 

The  object  of  this  book  is  to  furnish  a  trustworthy 
account  of  what  the  Macedonians  are  as  to  their  origin, 
what  they  were  in  the  past,  what  they  are  to-day,  and 


INTRODUCTION  7 

how  the  present  confusion  arose,  until  the  true  position 
of  affairs  was  forgotten  and  the  "  Macedonian  Question" 
created.  In  collecting  material  concerning  this  Question 
I  did  my  best  to  consult  only  the  most  reliable  sources 
and  the  best  authorities  on  Macedonia. 

Historical  sources  conveying  information  on  the  subject 
are  limited  in  number.  I  have  restricted  myself  to 
such  as  are  unquestionably  reliable.  Doubtful  historical 
sources  I  have  been  careful  to  reject.  I  have  been 
specially  cautious  in  my  attitude  towards  the  casual 
notes  of  foreign  travellers  in  the  Balkan  Peninsula. 
Ignorant  of  the  history,  ignorant  of  the  circumstances, 
ignorant  of  the  language,  they  have  included  statements 
in  their  books  which  are  amazing  in  their  inaccuracy. 
Already  in  1857,  G.  S.  Rakovski,  one  of  the  greatest 
Bulgarian  chauvinists,  called  the  notes  of  such  travellers 
"poetic  imaginations,"  and  "  tales  from  the  'Arabian 
Nights,'  "  whenever  he  found  their  contents  unfavourable 
to  the  Bulgars.  But  the  Bulgars  soon  forgot  these 
strictures,  and  whenever  the  notes  of  foreign  traveller- 
authors  are  favourable  to  them  at  the  expense  of  the 
Serbs  and  Greeks,  they  quote  them  abundantly.  Some 
travellers  have  gone  so  far  as  to  say  that  Kosovo  Polje, 
Prizren,  and  Novi  Pazar  are  in  Bulgaria,  and  the  Bulgars 
have  greedily  seized  upon  these  statements  and  backed 
them  up  with  their  own  assertions  that  Macedonia  is 
Bulgarian.  I  desired  my  statements  to  be  on  a  different 
level,  and  have  therefore  been  on  my  guard  against 
similar  misstatements,  although  I  have  frequently  found 
it  asserted  in  books  of  travel  that  not  only  is  Macedonia 
inhabited  by  Serbs,  but  that  Philippopolis  is  "  one  of  the 
oldest  Serbian  cities  "  ("  une  des  plus  anciennes  villes  de 
la  Servie  ")  !     Historic  data  of  this  type  prove  nothing 


8  MACEDONIA 

in  favour  of  either  Serbs  or  Bulgars.     They  are  utterly 
valueless. 

Much  has  been  written  about  Macedonia,  and  out  of 
all  this  material  I  have  striven  to  use  only  the  best. 
The  Bulgars  especially  have  written  voluminously  upon 
the  subject ;  it  was  necessary  for  them  to  convince  the 
world  by  hook  or  by  crook  that  Macedonia  is  Bulgarian, 
and  they  have  been  indefatigable  in  writing  about  her. 
Bulgarian  literature  dealing  with  Macedonia  falls  into 
two  categories. 

The  first  of  these  consists  of  a  host  of  insignificant 
small  books  and  pamphlets,  printed  on  tile  paper  in  bad 
type,  written  in  a  style  and  form  which  are  beneath 
criticism  and  padded  with  arguments  beyond  the 
comprehension  of  sane  men.  They  have  been  written 
and  published  by  half-educated,  unlettered  Bulgarian 
priests,  teachers,  and  small  clerks  from  villages  and 
townships  buried  away  in  the  interior,  and  their  purpose 
is  to  convince  the  Bulgarian  lower  classes  that  Macedonia 
is  Bulgarian.  This  literature  does  not  merit  serious 
consideration. 

The  second  category  consists  of  large  volumes,  printed 
in  superior  type  on  superfine  paper,  written  in  pretentious 
style  and  form  and  aggressive  in  argument.  These 
books  bear  on  their  title-pages  the  names  of  University 
professors,  members  of  academies,  doctors  of  philosophy, 
scientific  and  political  men,  and  they  are  written  some- 
times in  Bulgarian  and  sometimes  in  a  foreign  tongue. 
Those  written  in  Bulgarian  pursue  the  object  of  showing 
how  deeply  the  Bulgarian  "high  circles"  are  interested 
in  Macedonia.  Those  written  in  a  foreign  tongue  have 
the  task  of  enlightening  public  opinion  in  Europe  on  the 
subject  of  Bulgaria's  rights  to  Macedonia.     Hence  these 


INTRODUCTION  9 

books  are  furnished  with  references,  illustrations,  and 
maps.  Very  often  more  than  one-half  of  the  book 
consists  of  supplements.  These  books  are  distinctly 
interesting.  Ever  mindful  of  their  aim  and  of  the 
knowledge  that  foreigners  cannot  check  their  state- 
ments to  a  sufficient  extent,  their  authors  have  ladled 
in  everything  that  could  be  made  effective.  The  better 
to  reinforce  Bulgaria's  claim  to  Macedonia,  these 
books  include  not  only  the  latter,  but  half  Serbia  in 
"Bulgaria."  In  their  pages  the  heroes  of  Serbian 
history  are  "  Bulgars  "  ;  so  are  the  liberators  of  Serbia, 
and  the  present  population  of  Serbia  as  well.  These 
volumes,  too,  abound  in  irrelevancies  and  puerilities.  In 
one  of  the  most  recent  of  them,1  for  instance,  we  find 
it  asserted  that  in  1878  the  Serbs  in  extending  the 
frontiers  of  Serbia  encroached  upon  Bulgarian  rights, 
and  subsequently  in  their  new  provinces  "  Serbicized  " 
the  Bulgarian  place-names.  As  an  example  of  this 
Leskovec  is  quoted,  which  the  Serbs  are  accused  of 
having  renamed  Leskovac.  In  the  meantime  the  texts 
dating  from  1836  to  1838,  1841,  1858,  and  1861,  and' 
quoted  as  supplements  in  the  said  book,  and  all  the 
maps  from  between  1853  to  1878,  which  are  likewise 
given,  invariably  give  the  name  of  the  town  in  its 
Serbian  form  of  Leskovac,  and  not  once  in  its  Bulgarian 
form  of  Leskovec.  It  takes  courage  to  make  these 
allegations  !  The  supplements  and  notes  to  these  books 
are  likewise  interesting.  If  even  a  single  word  of  their 
text   is   favourable    to    Bulgarian    pretensions,  they   are 

1  A.  Ishirkov,  Docteur  es  lettres,  Professeur  de  Geographie  a 
l'Universite  de  Sofia,  Membre  de  l'Academie  Bulgare  des  Sciences, 
etc.  "  Les  confins  occidentaux  des  Terrcs  Bulgarcs,"  Lausanne, 
1916,  pp.  119,  183,  189,  194,  202. 


10  MACEDONIA 

quoted  to  the  public  as  gospel  truth,  regardless  of  their 
authorship,  their  meaning,  their  correctness  (or  lack 
of  it),  and  whether  they  contain  statements  such  as  that 
"  the  Morava  rises  in  Bosnia,"  that  "  Nish  is  the  capital 
of  Bulgaria,"  that  "  (5ustendil  is  not  far  from  Prokuplje 
near  the  Morava  valley,"  or  that  "  Prizren  and  Novi 
Pazar  are  in  Bulgaria  "  !  This  literature,  too,  does  not 
merit  serious  consideration. 

Non-Bulgarian  literature  dealing  with  Macedonia  is 
likewise  extensive.  In  the  first  place  we  have  the 
Russian  writers  on  the  subject.  The  Bulgars  are 
Russia's  children.  The  Russians  at  the  beginning  of 
the  nineteenth  century  discovered  the  moribund  Bul- 
garian nation,  revealed  it  to  the  world,  fostered  it, 
reared  it,  and  spoiled  it  as  a  parent  spoils  a  sickly  and 
wayward  child.  Of  Russian  sympathies  for  the  Bulgars 
more  will  be  said  in  another  part  of  this  book.  Here 
I  will  merely  mention  that  beside  and  behind  these 
sympathies  for  the  Bulgars  there  was  also  the  question 
of  Russia's  political  interests.  Russia  looked  upon 
Bulgaria  as  a  lever  and  an  annexe  for  her  political  aims 
in  the  Balkan  Peninsula.  Bulgarian  pretensions  in  the 
Balkans  went  hand  in  hand  with  Russian  interests. 
The  greater  Bulgaria,  the  stronger  Russia's  lever  in 
the  Balkans.  Hence  in  Russian  literature,  Bulgarian 
territory  extends  to  the  limits  claimed  for  it  by  the 
Bulgars. 

Finally,  other  foreigners  have  written  about  Mace- 
donia. This  literature,  too,  is  very  varied.  There  are 
books  in  which  all  knowledge  of  the  subject  is  con- 
spicuous by  its  absence.  There  are  some  which  are 
inspired  by  weak-kneed  sympathy  for  the  small  and 
insignificant  nation  of  the  Bulgars.     In  some  cases  the 


INTRODUCTION  11 

authors  have  been  misled  by  following  in  the  wake  of 
other  writers.  In  others  the  books  have  been  written 
to  order  for  Bulgaria  or  the  authors  were  in  Bulgarian 
pay.  Very  few  of  the  books  upon  Macedonia  have 
been  written  with  real  knowledge  of  the  subject,  impar- 
tially, independently,  and  honestly. 

I  have  endeavoured  to  be  as  careful  in  selecting  my 
literary  data  as  I  have  been  in  choosing  my  historical 
sources.  Of  the  huge  mass  of  literature  on  Macedonia 
I  have  consulted  only  such  works  as  are  above  reproach. 

Throughout  my  work  I  have  had  but  one  aim  before 
me — to  be  unbiassed,  to  set  forth  the  truth  so  as  to 
disarm  criticism — even  from  the  Bulgarian  side.  I 
have  therefore  made  some  concessions  to  the  Bulgars. 
In  the  first  place  I  have — against  my  personal  convic- 
tion— extended  the  territory  of  Macedonia  to  the  limits 
claimed  by  the  Bulgars ;  I  have  consulted  their  litera- 
ture so  far  as  it  was  possible  to  do  so ;  and  finally  in 
my  chapter  on  national  tradition  in  Macedonia  I  have 
consulted  no  collections  of  Macedonian  national  tradition, 
but  such  as  have  been  compiled  by  the  Bulgars  them- 
selves in  Macedonia. 

This  book  is  written  far  from  Serbian  scientific 
centres  and  libraries.  There  remain,  therefore,  some 
books  and  references  I  was  not  able  to  consult  for  my 
work,  and  which  would  have  thrown  the  statements  in 
this  book  into  stronger  relief,  and  have  shed  a  clearer 
light  upon  the  malpractices  and  dishonesty  of  the 
Bulgars  with  regard  to  their  seizure  of  Serbian 
Macedonia. 


II 

THE   SOUTIIEEN  SLAVS 

The  Southern  Slavs  and  their  arrival  in  their  present  territory — 
Ethnographic  changes  brought  about  by  their  arrival — Ethnical 
unity  of  the  Southern  Slavs — The  Bulgars  and  their  invasion  of 
the  Southern  Slav  lands  between  the  Danube  and  the  Balkan 
mountains — Contrast  between  the  Bulgars  and  the  conquered 
Slavs — Their  gradual  fusion  into  the  present  Bulgarian  nation 
— Traces  of  old  Bulgarian  qualities  in  the  modern  Bulgars — 
Territory  in  which  the  present  Bulgarian  nation  was  evolved 

r  |  THE  Southern  Slavs  are  a  branch  of  the  great 
-L  Slav  group  of  nations.  On  leaving  the  main 
body  of  the  Slav  community  the  Southern  Slavs  first 
remained  for  a  long  time  in  Central  Europe  in  the 
plains  between  the  Carpathians  and  the  Alps.  Begin- 
ning in  the  reign  of  the  Byzantine  Emperor  Justinus 
(518-527)  and  continuing  up  to  that  of  Heraclius  (610- 
641),  they  gradually  crossed  the  Save  and  the  Danube 
into  ihe  Balkan  provinces  of  the  Byzantine  Empire, 
until  they  finally  spread  over  the  whole  territory  from 
the  Alps  to  the  Carpathians  in  the  north,  to  the  Morea 
in  the  south,  the  Adriatic  in  the  west,  and  the  iEgean 
and  Black  Seas  in  the  east. 

With  the  arrival  of  the  Southern  Slavs  great  ethno- 
graphic changes  took  place  in  the  Balkan  Peninsula. 
The  ancient  Greek  inhabitants  who  lived  principally  in 
the  eastern  and  southern  parts  of  the  Balkan  Peninsula 

12 


THE    SOUTHERN    SLAVS  13 

were  pressed  to  the  eastern  and  southern  extremities  of 
the  Peninsula.  The  remnant  of  the  ancient  Illyrians 
who  inhabited  the  western  part  of  the  Peninsula,  were 
driven  farther  into  the  mountains  and  intermingled  with 
the  numerous  Slav  settlers  there.  The  Koman  colonists 
still  remaining  in  the  Peninsula  were  gradually  absorbed 
by  the  Slav  masses  or  survived  to  any  great  extent 
only  in  those  regions  where  the  Slav  tide  of  invasion 
was  less  strong,  as  in  Thessaly  and  South  Macedonia 
(Tsintsars  or  Macedo-Rournanians)  and  in  Dacia 
(Roumanians) .  Thus  throughout  the  Balkan  Peninsula 
and  far  to  the  north  of  it  the  Southern  Slavs  became 
the  principal  ethnic  element. 

This  whole  group  of  Slavs,  extending  from  the  Alps 
to  the  Carpathians  across  the  whole  of  the  Balkan 
Peninsula,  went  by  this  common  name  of  Slavs.  Thus 
they  are  so  called  by  the  Greek  and  Latin  writers  both 
at  the  time  of  their  immigration  and  for  a  long  time 
afterwards.  The  territory  in  which  they  settled  was 
called  Slavinia  CSicXafiiviai,  Sclavinia,  Sclavonia,  or — 
rarely — Sclavinica).  The  name  of  Slavs  for  the  nation 
and  that  of  Slavinia  for  their  country,  was  retained  by 
the  Southern  Slavs  for  a  very  long  time.  There  is  a 
province  between  the  Rivers  Drave  and  Save  which  is 
called  Slavonia  to  this  day.  Apart  from  the  Southern 
Slavs  themselves,  the  name  of  Slavs  as  applied  to  the 
Southern  Slav  nation  has  survived  also  among  the 
Roumanians  and  Albanians  to  this  day.1 

The  Southern  Slavs  were  in  every  respect  one  nation. 
Besides  having  the  name  in  common,  they  bore  also 
every  other  sign  of  being  one  nation.     They  spoke  one 

1  C.  Jirecek,  "Geschichte  der  Serben,"  t.  i.,  Gotha,  1911,  pp.  113- 
114. 


14  MACEDONIA 

language,  they  all  possessed  the  same  type  of  civilization, 
the  same  religion,  the  same  customs.     Their  social  life 
was  also  everywhere  the    same.      They  lived  mostly  in 
villages ;    their  occupations  were     farming   and    cattle- 
rearing.     Urban  civilization  and  social  life  were  as  yet 
unknown  to  them.     Their  social  structure  was  in  keep- 
ing with  their  primitive  mode  of  life,  and  was  organized 
on   the   tribal   system.      Each   Southern    Slav   tribe   or 
clan  formed   a  separate  body   bearing  its   own   special 
name.      The   head  of   the  clan    assisted    by  the    tribal 
council   conducted  the   internal  affairs  of  the  clan  and 
regulated  the  relations   between   his   own  clan  and   its 
neighbours.     They  had   nothing  resembling  a  State   or 
commonwealth  as  yet.    The  southern  and  more  numerous 
division  of  the  Southern   Slavs  acknowledged  the   suze- 
rainty  of  Byzantium,  the  northern  and    lesser  division 
owned   the   sway   of  the   Avars.      The  tribal   chiefs   or 
princes    were    semi-independent    towards    the    suzerain 
State,  and  its  power  was  not  greatly  felt  by  the  tribes. 
The  organized  State  did  not  arise  everywhere  at  the 
same  time  among  the  Southern  Slavs.     Their  first  native 
State  arose  during  the  second  half  of  the  seventh  century 
and  among  the  northern  branch  of  the  Southern  Slavs, 
the  ancestors  of  the  Slovenes  of  to-day,  under  the  leader- 
ship of   the  native  tribal  princes.     Towards  the  end  of 
the  eighth  century  and  in  the  beginning  of  the  ninth  the 
Croatian  State  emerged  on  the  shores  of  the  Adriatic. 
About  the  same  time  the  Serbian  State  appeared  in  the 
mountainous  regions  around  the  Kivers  Drina,  Ibar,  and 
Lim.     The  Macedonian  Slavs,  as  we  shall  see,  built  up 
their  State  rather  later.     All  these  States  the  Southern 
Slavs  built  up  unaided,  under  the  leadership  of  native 
princes  and  chieftains,  free  from  all  foreign  influence. 


THE    SOUTHERN    SLAVS  15 

Only  one  branch  of  the  Southern  Slavs  met  with  a 
different  fate.  It  was  doomed,  soon  after  its  immigra- 
tion, to  fall  under  the  sway  of  an  alien  people,  to  link  its 
fate  with  it,  to  modify  its  civilization,  its  social  structure, 
and  the  whole  of  its  existence.  This  was  that  branch  of 
the  Southern  Slavs  which  took  possession  of  the  Balkan 
country  bounded  by  the  Danube  in  the  north  and  the 
Balkan  mountains  in  the  south,  the  River  Iskar  in  the 
west,  and  the  Black  Sea  in  the  east.  In  that  area  eight 
Southern  Slav  clans  had  settled.  They  formed  part  of 
the  rest  of  the  Southern  Slavs,  with  whom  they  shared 
the  same  language  and  civilization,  religion,  and  social 
system.  In  the  year  679  they  were  invaded  by  a  nomad 
people  with  a  martial  organization  and  of  Turanian  origin, 
called  the  Bulgars.  Like  a  hurricane  the  Bulgars  over- 
ran the  peaceful  Slav  tribes  settled  between  the  Danube 
and  the  Balkan  mountains  and  established  their  State  in 
that  territory. 

While  the  ethnological  problem  of  all  other  Southern 
Slavs  is  quite  simple  and  straightforward  as  we  have 
seen,  that  of  those  Southern  Slavs  who  were  invaded  by 
the  Bulgars  is  far  more  complex.  It  is  therefore  neces- 
sary to  add  some  further  explanation  concerning  this 
last-named  branch  of  the  Southern  Slavs.  These  remarks 
will  at  the  same  time  explain  the  huge  difference  between 
the  Bulgars  of  to-day  and  all  the  rest  of  the  Southern 
Slavs. 

Between  the  Bulgarian  conquerors  and  the  Slavs  who 
had  to  submit  to  them  there  was  a  vast  difference.  The 
Bulgars  were  Mongols.  The  conquered  Southern  Slavs 
were  Indo-Europeans.  Differing  as  regards  race,  they 
also  possessed  radically  differing  languages.  In  fact, 
they   belonged   to    two    totally   different    nations,    with 


16  MACEDONIA 

different  forms  of  civilization.  The  Bulgars  were 
nomads ;  the  conquered  Southern  Slavs  were  settled 
farmers  and  keepers  of  cattle.  The  Bulgars  were  a 
nation  of  conquerors  with  a  martial  organization  with 
the  central  authority  in  the  hands  of  the  ruler ;  the  con- 
quered Southern  Slavs  were  pacific,  divided  into  clans, 
a  nation  loosely  knit  together  without  political  unity. 
The  Bulgars  possessed  a  State  structure ;  to  the  con- 
quered Southern  Slavs  the  self-contained  State  was  yet 
unknown.  The  Bulgars  owned  a  despotic  rule ;  the 
conquered  Southern  Slavs  had  a  democratic,  tribal 
administration,  in  which  the  tribal  assemblies  took  part. 
The  religion  and  customs  of  the  Bulgars  differed  from 
those  of  the  conquered  Southern  Slavs.  The  Bulgars 
burned  their  dead  or  buried  them  in  grave-mounds 
together  with  their  living  wives  and  slaves ;  the 
Southern  Slavs,  although  they  sometimes  burned  their 
dead,  never  sacrificed  the  family  and  slaves  of  the 
deceased.  The  Bulgars  practised  polygamy  —  their 
Boyards  (princes)  had  whole  harems ;  among  the 
Southern  Slavs  polygamy  was  very  rare.  Bulgarian 
justice  was  barbarous  in  the  extreme.  If  one  of  the 
boyards  rebelled  and  was  defeated,  then  not  only  was 
he  deprived  of  his  life  and  possessions,  but  his  children 
and  all  his  kinsfolk  were  put  to  death ;  among  the 
Southern  Slavs  the  penalties  were  humane,  and  sentence 
had  to  be  passed  by  the  assembly.  The  Bulgars  lived 
in  war  and  for  war;  the  Southern  Slavs  only  went  to 
war  when  they  were  attacked.  The  war  customs  of  the 
Bulgars  were  cruel ;  they  made  the  skulls  of  their  con- 
quered enemies  into  goblets  from  which  they  quaffed 
wine  at  their  banquets;  the  Southern  Slavs  were  mag- 
nanimous to  their  foes  both   during  and  after  the  war. 


THE    SOUTHERN    SLAVS  17 

In  time  of  peace  with  Byzantium  the  Bulgars  sold  Slav 
boys  and  girls  in  the  slave  market ;  the  Southern  Slavs 
held  such  a  trade  in  abhorrence.  The  Bulgars  and  the 
conquered  Southern  Slavs  represented  two  distinct  races, 
with  two  distinct  languages  and  two  totally  distinct 
civilizations.  The  vast  difference  between  the  Bulgars 
and  the  Slavs  of  the  Balkan  Peninsula  in  the  sixth  and 
seventh  centuries,  as  described  by  the  Byzantine  his- 
torians Procopius  and  Maurikios,  has  also  been  emphati- 
cally insisted  on  by  Const.  Jirecek,  the  best  Bulgarian 
historian.1 

The  Bulgars  were  greatly  inferior  in  numbers  to  the 
conquered  Southern  Slavs.  They  owed  their  victory  over 
the  Southern  Slavs  solely  to  their  martial  organization 
and  brute  force. 

The  conquered  Southern  Slavs  had  no  love  for  their 
conquerors.  Their  hatred  is  easy  to  understand  when 
one  considers  the  contrast  between  them.  An  old  Rus- 
sian chronicler  of  the  eleventh  century  knows  that  the 
Bulgars  "  terrorized  the  conquered  Slavs."  Many  of 
the  Slav  tribes  opposed  a  determined  resistance  to  the 
Bulgars.  When  the  Bulgars  attacked  the  Slav  tribe 
living  by  the  River  Timok,  these  Slavs  abandoned  their 
home  by  the  Timok  rather  than  submit  to  the  Bulgars. 

But  in  spite  of  all  divergencies  and  all  hates,  closer 
relations  gradually  supervened  between  the  Bulgars 
and  the  conquered  Slavs — mutual  influence,  adaptation, 
and  finally  the  fusion  into  one  nation.  The  old  name 
of  Turanian  conquerors — Bulgars — became  the  general 
name  for  this  mixed  Turano-Slav  nation. 

The    Bulgars    gradually   settled    down   in   their   new 

1  Const.  Jirecek,  "  Geschichte  der  Bulgaren,"  Prague,  1876, 
pp.  131-134. 


18  MACEDONIA 

territory  among  the  conquered  Southern  Slavs.  From 
being  nomads  they  became  a  settled  people  like  the 
Slavs.  As  the  Bulgars  were  in  the  minority,  they 
were  in  many  things  compelled  to  adapt  themselves  to 
the  Slav  majority.  They  took  up  the  agricultural  pur- 
suits of  the  Slavs.  The  Bulgars  also  familiarized  them- 
selves with  the  customs  and  civilization  of  the  Slavs. 
Finally,  the  Bulgarian  language  gradually  disappeared, 
until  it  was  completely  ousted  by  the  Slav  tongue. 
The  fusion  of  the  Bulgars  and  the  conquered  Southern 
Slavs  was  fairly  rapid  ;  within  two  hundred  and  fifty 
years  the  process  was  complete.  The  Bulgarian  nobility, 
who  were  very  exclusive,  of  coarse  amalgamated  less 
easily  than  the  small  number  of  Bulgarian  commons  who 
lived  scattered  among  the  conquered  Slavs  ;  but  even  the 
Bulgarian  nobility  yielded  little  by  little.  Already  in 
812  we  find  a  Bulgarian  envoy  to  Constantinople  bearing 
the  Slav  name  of  Dragomir,  and  about  the  middle  of  the 
ninth  century  Slav  names  occur  even  among  members 
of  the  princely  families. 

Such  was  the  influence  of  the  Southern  Slavs  upon  the 
Bulgars.  But  the  Bulgers,  too,  have  left  traces  of  their 
influence  upon  the  conquered  Slavs.  Physical  and  moral 
qualities  are  not  so  easily  modified  as  the  manner  of 
living,  occupation,  custom,  and  language  of  a  race.  The 
physique  of  the  modern  Bulgars  is  very  striking.  They 
are,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  no  longer  Mongols,  but  certain 
Mongol  features  appear  at  the  first  glance.  Their  short 
stature,  their  well-built  but  thick-set  figure,  their  very 
pronounced  roundness  of  face — all  are  features  which 
distinguish  the  Bulgars  from  the  true  Southern  Slavs. 
They  are  the  survival  of  the  Mongolian  type  in  the 
Bulgarian  physique.    The  moral  qualities  of  the  Turanian 


THE   SOUTHERN    SLAVS  19 

Bulgar  can  also  be  traced  in  the  Bulgars  of  to-day. 
These  qualities  are  no  longer  unalloyed,  as  among  the 
ancient  Bulgars,  but  in  the  main  they  are  still  there. 
The  insatiable  lust  of  possession  which  characterized 
the  Bulgars  when  they  first  came  to  the  Peninsula  is 
still  equally  strong  in  the  Slavicized  Bulgars.  The  only 
difference  is  that  whereas  the  Turanian  Bulgars  were  an 
intrepid  warrior  horde,  the  Slav  Bulgars  are  insatiable 
grabbers  only  when  there  is  a  prospect  of  profit  without 
risk.  The  old  Turanian  cruelty  and  brutality  towards  all 
and  sundry  has  persisted  in  their  mixed  descendants  only 
for  the  benefit  of  those  who  are  weaker  than  themselves  ; 
towards  their  superiors  in  strength  these  qualities  are 
toned  down  even  to  servility.  The  traces  of  the  mental 
and  moral  qualities  of  the  Turanian  Bulgars  we  find 
clearly  and  consistently  expressed  through  the  whole  of 
Bulgarian  history,  both  remote  and  recent.  We  can 
recognize  them  in  every  description  of  the  modern 
Bulgar,  no  matter  whether  the  description  be  furnished 
by  the  Bulgars  themselves  or  by  foreigners.  We  can 
trace  them  finally  also  in  the  Bulgarian  attitude  during 
the  great  World  War. 

There  is  one  more  legacy  from  their  Turanian  antiquity, 
which  distinguished  the  Bulgars  from  the  Southern  Slavs 
from  the  very  first  day  of  their  life  in  the  Balkan 
Peninsula,  and  which  completely  distinguishes  their 
Turano-Slav  descendants  to  this  day  from  the  true 
Southern  Slavs ;  that  is  their  social  organization. 
Their  State  structure,  which  the  Bulgars  brought  with 
them  and  transplanted  among  the  conquered  Slavs, 
destroyed  for  good  every  trace  of  the  Slav  tribal  organi- 
zation. During  the  course  of  their  history  the  State 
organization  of  the  Bulgars  sometimes  declined,  but  the 


20  MACEDONIA 

destroyed  tribal  organization  of  the  Slavs  in  Bulgaria 
never  revived.  With  the  tribal  organization  all  those 
social  customs  which  have  their  origin  in  the  clan, 
the  gens,  and  the  family  likewise  disappeared  in 
Bulgaria.  While  in  all  other  Southern  Slav  countries 
there  are  preserved  to  this  day  either  the  remains  of  the 
old  division  into  clans  or  tribes,  and  even  the  tribal 
organization  or  at  least  recent  memories  of  them,  together 
with  the  customs  which  refer  to  the  clan,  the  gens, 
and  family,  in  Bulgaria  all  this  disappeared  very  early 
and  left  no  trace.  But  whereas  in  Bulgaria  the  very 
names  of  the  clans  have  been  lost,  in  Macedonia  there 
were  not  only  clans  in  olden  times,1  but  they  can  be 
traced  there  to  this  day.2  The  difference  between 
Bulgaria  and  Macedonia  in  this  respect  was  already 
pointed  out  in  1848  by  the  Russian  savant  V.  Grigorovic. 
After  quoting  the  names  of  clans  which  exist  to-day  in 
Macedonia,  he  adds  that  the  Bulgars  "  have  no  tribal 
names."  3 

Such  are  the  Bulgars,  and  such  are  the  differences 
between  them  and  the  rest  of  the  Southern  Slavs.  The 
Slav  language,  which  the  Bulgars  adopted  from  the 
conquered  Slavs,  is  the  only  feature  on  the  strength  of 

1  Concerning  the  Slav  tribes  in  Macedonia  after  the  immigration  of 
the  Southern  Slavs,  see  B.  Prokic,  "  Postanak  jedne  slovenske  care- 
vine  u  Makedoniji  "  ("Bise  of  a  Slav  Empire  in  Macedonia  "),  "  Glas 
Srpske  Kraljevske  Akadenije,"  vol.  lvi.  pp.  294-297,  quoting  from 
Byzantine  sources  the  following  names  of  Slav  clans  in  Macedonia : 
Brsjaci,  Dragovici,  Sagudati,  Velegostici,  Vojinici,  Binkini,  Struml- 
jani,  and  Smoljani. 

-  To  this  day  the  districts  are  accurately  known  in  Macedonia 
which  are  inhabited  by  the  following  clans :  Brsjaci,  Mrvaci, 
Sopovi,  Polivaci,  Babuni,  Keckari,  and  Mijaci  (V.  Grigorovic,  "  Ocerk 
putesestviji,  po  evropejskoj  Turciji"  ("Sketches  by  a  Traveller  in 
European  Turkey"),  Kazan,  1848,  p.  196. 

3  V.  Grigorovic,  "  Ocerk,"  p.  196. 


THE    SOUTHERN    SLAVS  21 

which  they  have  been  included  in  the  Slav  group  of 
nations.  As  far  as  other  things  are  concerned,  there 
would  be  no  place  for  them  there. 

The  territory  which  saw  the  process  of  the  evolution  of 
the  Bulgarian  nation  was  the  very  sanie  as  that  which 
the  Turanian  Bulgars  occupied  when  they  first  came 
to  the  Balkan  Peninsula.  It  did  not  extend  farther  west 
than  the  River  Iskar  in  Modern  Bulgaria,  nor  farther  south 
than  to  the  Balkan  Chain.  Until  the  year  800  Bulgaria 
was  bounded  in  the  west  by  the  River  Iskar,  and  before 
861  it  did  not  extend  beyond  the  Balkan  Chain.  At  first 
the  Bulgarian  capital  was  Pliskov,  to  the  north-east  of 
Sumen  of  to-day  in  Bulgaria.  Later  on  it  was  Preslav, 
on  the  northern  slopes  of  the  Balkan  Chain.1  There  was 
the  first  Bulgarian  State,  and  there  the  assimilation 
between  Bulgars  and  Slavs  took  place ;  there  the 
Bulgarian  nation  was  created,  and  there  it  remains  to 
this  day,  clearly  distinct  in  all  its  qualities  from  the 
rest  of  the  Southern  Slavs.  The  difference  between  the 
Bulgars  within  their  well-defined  frontiers  and  the  Slavs 
beyond  those  frontiers  was  observed  very  early  by  the 
Byzantine  writers.  They  speak  of  the  Southern  Slav 
territory  between  the  Adriatic  and  the  Rhodope  moun- 
tains as  Slavinia  (StcXajSn'ta),  in  order  to  distinguish  it 
from  Bulgaria,  and  they  refer  to  the  inhabitants  of  the 
former  country  as  Slavs,  in  order  to  distinguish  them 
from  the  Bulgars.2 

1  C.  Jirecek,  "  Geschichte  der  Serben,"  i.  pp.  189-190. 

2  B.  Prokic,  "  Postanak  jedne  slovenske  carevine  u  Makedoniji," 
pp.  299-300.     C.  Jirecek,  "  Geschichte  der  Serben,"  i.  p.  194. 


Ill 

THE  MACEDONIAN  STATE 

The  Macedonian  Slavs — Bulgarian  invasion  of  Macedonia — Contrast 
between  the  Bulgars  and  the  Macedonian  Slavs — Adverse  con- 
ditions under  the  Bulgars — Revolt  of  the  Macedonian  Slavs  and 
emancipation  from  the  Bulgars — Renewal  of  Byzantine  domina- 
tion in  Macedonia — Revolt  and  emancipation  from  Byzantium — 
The  Macedonian  State — Its  rise — Frontiers — Name  of  the 
Macedonian  State 

THE  Macedonian  Slavs,  as  we  have  seen,  are  merely 
a  branch  of  the  Southern  Slavs.  But  while  the 
Southern  Slav  States  of  Slovenia,  Croatia,  and  Serbia 
were  being  built  up  in  the  countries  north  of  Macedonia, 
and  the  Bulgarian  State  and  nation  resulted  from  the 
amalgamation  of  the  Southern  Slavs  between  the  Danube 
and  the  Balkan  Chain  with  their  conquerors,  the  Mace- 
donian Slavs  still  remained  under  the  domination  of  the 
Byzantine  Empire.  The  Byzantine  writers  invariably 
refer  to  them  as  "Slavs,"  or  the  "Slav  nation"  (to  tuv 
SKXa/3tvwv  t Svog) .  They  still  lived  mainly  in  villages  ;  they 
were  an  agricultural  people,  and  retained  their  primitive 
tribal  organization.  The  Byzantine  writers  say  that  the 
territories  occupied  by  the  individual  tribes  in  Macedonia 
were  called  "  Slovenia"  (SjcAa/3tv£ai),  and  that  each  tribe 
had  a  semi-independent  prince  (ap\ov).  The  dignity 
of  these  princes  was  hereditary,  and  they  were  quite 
independent  as  regards  the  internal  management  of  the 


THE  MACEDONIAN    STATE  23 

tribe.  They  acknowledged  only  the  suzerainty  of  the 
Greek  Empire,  and  they  paid  a  fixed  tribute. 

Beside  the  above-mentioned  common  name  of  "  Slavs  " 
in  Macedonia,  the  name  of  "  Serbs  "  is  also  mentioned  at 
a  very  early  date.  Serbs  are  also  mentioned  among  the 
Slavs  of  Macedonia  (between  the  Struma  and  Vardar 
Rivers),  who  Were  subdued  by  the  Byzantine  Emperor 
Constantin  III  in  649  and  sent  to  Asia  Minor.  The  town 
of  Gordoserba,  in  Bithynia,  was  named  after  them,  and  it 
used  to  be  the  seat  of  a  Bishopric.1  Some  time  about  950 
the  Byzantine  Emperor  Constantine  Porphyrogenitus 
wrote  that  the  town  of  ra  2£joj3A<'a,  in  the  district  of 
Salonica,  at  the  foot  of  Olympus,  derives  its  name  from 
the  Serbs  who  originally  settled  there.2 

Towards  the  middle  of  the  ninth  century  the 
Bulgars  began  to  attack  Byzantium  in  the  direction 
of  Macedonia.  About  the  year  861,  under  their  Tsar 
Boris  (852-888),  they  conquered  part  of  Macedonia. 
By  the  wars  waged  by  the  Bulgarian  Tsar  Simeon  (893- 
927)  against  Byzantium,  the  Bulgars  succeeded  in 
gaining  possession  of  the  whole  of  Macedonia. 

Coming  in  this  manner  under  the  sway  of  the  Bulgars, 
the  Macedonian  Slavs  maintained  the  same  relations 
towards  them  which  they  had  hitherto  observed  towards 
Byzantium.  The  Slav  tribes,  under  the  rule  of  their 
native  princes  or  chieftains,  retained  their  independent 
domestic  organization,  only  their  allegiance  was  trans- 
ferred to  their  new  masters.  The  change  of  allegiance 
did   not,    therefore,    interfere   with   the  domestic  life   of 

1  St.  Stanojevic,  "  Yizantijai  Srbi"  ("  Byzantium  and  the  Serbs  "), 
t.  ii.,  N.  Sad,  1896,  pp.  41  and  215. 

2  Const.  Porphyrogenitus,  "  De  administrando  iinperio,"  cap.  32, 
p.  152,  ed.  Bonn. 


24  MACEDONIA 

the  Macedonian  Slavs.  Likewise  it  exercised  no  influence 
on  the  ethnical  evolution  of  the  Macedonians  either. 
The  Bulgars  did  not  come  as  settlers,  but  as  conquerors. 
As  only  the  towns  *  in  which  the  whole  of  their  military 
strength  was  concentrated  came  under  their  direct  rule, 
they  never  came  into  contact  with  the  Macedonian 
Slavs ;  because  in  the  towns  the  population  was  pre- 
ponderantly Greek  and  not  Slav. 

The  lot  of  the  Macedonian  Slavs  under  the  Bulgars 
was  not  a  pleasant  one.  The  Bulgars  and  the  Mace- 
donian Slavs  represented  not  only  two  social  classes 
one  of  which  was  the  ruling  and  the  other  the  ruled, 
but  also  two  nations,  two  religions,  and  two  civilizations. 
It  is  true  that  the  Bulgars  had  already  approximated 
themselves  considerably  to  the  conquered  Slavs  in 
Bulgarian  territory,  but  to  all  intents  and  purposes 
they  were  in  the  main  Bulgars.  Although  they  were 
nominally  converted,  they  were  far  from  being  really 
Christians.  Even  in  968  a  Bulgarian  envoy  in  Con- 
stantinople wore  his  hair  cut  in  the  Barbarian  style  like 
an  "Ungar";  he  wore  an  iron  chain,  and  he  was  a 
catechumen  not  yet  baptized.  Brought  up  under  the 
influence  of  still  unsoftened  barbarous  Turanian  quali- 
ties, the  Bulgars  were  not  popular  masters  with  the 
peaceable  Slavs  of  the  cultivated  and  prosperous  Mace- 
donian provinces  of  Byzantium,  whose  ancient  intel- 
lectual centres  were  Salonica,  Justiniana  Prima,  and 
)fche£_jcities.  *S^/ 

DissatisTactionwith  the  Bulgarian  rule  manifested 
itself  very  early  among  the  Macedonian  Slavs.  Two 
insurrections,  one  in  929  and  a  second  in  931,  although 

1  B.  Prokic,  "  Postanals  jedne  slovenske  carevine  u  Makedoniji " 
("  Rise  of  a  Slav  Empire  in  Macedonia  "),  pp.  287-288. 


gCtfcoL-      -re     L  t/4  ^ 


-- 


THE    MACEDONIAN    STATE  25 

unsuccessful,  show  clearly  what  were  the  feelings  of  the 
Macedonian  Slavs  towards  the  Bulgarian  conquerors. 
A  third  insurrection  broke  out  in  969.  The  leaders  of 
this  insurrection  were  four  brothers,  sons  of  a  Slav 
prince  in  Macedonia.  This  insurrection  was  finally 
successful,  and  the  Macedonian  Slavs  drove  out  the 
Bulgars  and  established  an  independent  State  of  their 
own.  In  973  the  young  Macedonian  State  fell  once 
more  under  the  domination  of  Byzantium ;  but  already 
in  976  the  same  four  brothers  who  freed  Macedonia 
from  the  Bulgars  succeeded  in  liberating  her  from 
the  Greeks.  Macedonia  once  more  became  independent, 
and  one  of  the  four  brothers,  Samuel  by  name,  pro- 
claimed himself  Tsar  (976-1014).  Thus  by  the  end 
of  the  tenth  century  the  Macedonian  Slavs  had  like- 
wise established  their  State. 

Young,  fresh  and  full  of  energy,  the  new  Southern 
Slav  State  expanded  rapidly.  In  .986  Tsar  Samuel 
successfully  deprived  Byzantium  of  Bulgaria,  which 
the  Byzantine  Emperor  John  Zimisces  had  added  to 
his  empire  in  971.  Hereafter  Samuel  conquered 
Albania,  and  then  the  Serbian  States  of  Duklja,  Zeta, 
and  eventually  Travunia,  Zahumlje,  Neretva,  Ra§ka,  and 
Bosnia.  The  frontiers  of  Samuel's  State  comprised 
all  the  Serbian  principalities  and  the  whole  of  Bulgaria. 

Over  so  vast  an  empire  Samuel  failed  to  maintain 
his  hold.  Bulgaria  remained  in  his  hands  only  for 
fourteen  years  (986-1000).  Then  Byzantium  wrested 
it  from  Samuel  and  reconquered  it. 

As  ruler  over  the  greater  part  of  the  conquered 
Serbian  States  Samuel  appointed  Jovan  Vladimir,  the 
deposed  Serbian  Prince  of  Zeta  and  Duklja,  after 
giving  him  his  daughter  to  wife.     Samuel  retained  only 


26  MACEDONIA 

Macedonia  and  the  countries  directly  adjoining  the 
principality. 

The  Bulgars,  as  we  have  seen,  were  for  a  certain  time 
masters  of  Macedonia  ;  but  on  the  strength  of  this  rule 
of  theirs  the  Bulgars  are  scarcely  entitled  to  lay  claim  to 
Macedonia.  On  the  contrary,  the  Macedonians  always 
looked  upon  the  Bulgars  as  foreign  conquerors ;  they 
rebelled  against  them  and  drove  them  out.  The  Mace- 
donian Empire  which  the  Macedonians  built  up  after 
emancipating  themselves  from  the  Greeks  by  their  own 
efforts  has  no  connection  whatever  with  the  Bulgars 
except  that  Bulgaria  also  was  subject  to  it  for  a  time. 
After  that  Bulgaria  came  under  Byzantium,  and  Mace- 
donia remained  a  purely  Southern  Slav  native  State. 

Between  Bulgaria  and  this  independent  Macedonian 
Empire  there  is  no  connection  at  all.  They  are 
two  distinct  States  as  regards  population  and  origin, 
capital  towns,  and  tendencies.  The  population  of  Bul- 
garia is  a  mixture  of  Turanian  Bulgars  and  Slavs,  and 
that  of  Macedonia  is  as  purely  Southern  Slav  as  that  of 
Serbia,  Croatia,  and  the  Slovene  lands.  The  Bulgarian 
State  was  founded  by  the  Bulgarian  conquerors,  that  of 
Macedonia  by  the  Slavs  who  desired  to  emancipate  them- 
selves from  both  Bulgaria  and  Byzantium.  Bulgaria 
had  her  capitals  in  Pliskov  and  Preslava,  north  of  the 
Balkan  Chain  ;  the  capitals  of  the  Macedonian  Empire 
were  Ochrida  and  Prespa  on  the  lakes  of  Prespa  and 
Ochrida. 

But  the  Macedonian  Empire  was  called  Bulgaria.  It 
is  necessary  to  explain  this  seeming  paradox.  It  arose 
from  a  special  cause  and  has  its  logical  justification.  It  was 
a  legacy  of  the  Bulgarian  Empire  name  in  Macedonia — 
the  legacy  of  a  bygone  mastery  and  an  historic  tradition. 


THE    MACEDONIAN    STATE  27 

In  971  the  Byzantine  Emperor  John  Zimisces  subdued 
the  whole  of  Bulgaria,  whose  empire  at  that  time  in- 
cluded Macedonia.  When  immediately  afterwards  Mace- 
donia, without  Bulgaria,  freed  herself  from  Byzantium, 
she  assumed  the  name  of  Bulgaria,  because  she  aspired 
to  take  over  the  heritage  of  fallen  Bulgaria.  Before  her 
downfall  Bulgaria  ranked  as  an  Empire  ;  her  rulers  bore 
the  imperial  title,  and  were  the  upholders  of  an  imperial 
policy  and  tradition.  This  heritage  was  vacant.  Mace- 
donia required  immediate  recognition  and  respect,  and 
so  took  over  the  Bulgarian  name  and  claims ;  she 
assumed  even  before  conquering  Bulgaria,  and  retained 
them  later  on  after  having  lost  her. 

Thus  it  came  about  that  the  Macedonian  Empire 
styled  itself  Bulgaria.  The  name  of  the  State  is  always 
stronger  than  the  name  of  the  nation.1  In  this  case  also 
it  was  transferred  from  the  State  to  the  nation.  This  is 
why  foreign  writers  from  that  time  onward  began  to  refer 
to  the  Southern  Slavs  of  Macedonia  as  Bulgars  also. 

Instances  of  young  states  usurping  the  name  and 
heritage  of  other,  older  states  are  not  infrequent  in 
history.  At  the  very  same  time  when  the  Macedonian 
Empire  was  founded  the  German  Emperors  were 
building  up  a  German  Empire  in  outlying  provinces  of 
what  had  been  the  ancient  Empire  of  Rome.  They, 
too,  appropriated  the  attributes  of  a  former  empire. 
They  named  their  State  the  "Roman  Empire"  and 
styled  themselves  "  Roman  Emperors."  The  Byzantine 
Empire  was  only  part  of  the  ancient  Roman  Empire ; 
nevertheless,  down  to  its  fall  it  styled  itself  the 
"  Roman     Empire,"     and     its    emperors    called    them- 

1  "  Starker  als  der  Volksname  war  und  ist  immer  der  Name  de3 
Staates  "  (C.  Jirecek,  "  Gesehichte  der  Bulgaren,"  p.  138). 


28  MACEDONIA 

selves  "  Koman  Emperors."  The  Greek  inhabitants 
of  this  "  Koman  Empire  "  called  themselves  "  Komans  " 
(Po/LHuot).  And  just  as  the  Roman  name  of  the  German 
and  Greek  Empires  has  no  connection  with  the  Romans, 
so  the  Bulgarian  name  in  Macedonia  has  nothing  to  do 
with  the  Bulgars.  All  these  names  are  only  a  memento 
of  the  empire  whose  heritage  was  assumed  by  those  who 
bore  them. 

In  the  meantime  a  distinction  has  always  been  drawn 
between  the  population  of  Bulgaria  and  that  of  Mace- 
donia. Dukljanin,  the  priest  who  wrote  his  Chronicle 
at  Bar  (Antivari).  in  the  eleventh  century,  calls  the 
Macedonians  of  Samuel's  Empire  "Bulgcmni"1  and 
refers  to  the  Bulgars  by  their  proper  name  of  "  Bul- 
garia 2  In  the  German  chronicles  and  elsewhere  the 
Macedonians  are  often  called  "  Bulgarii "  (Bulgariorum) 
and  the  Bulgars  "  Bulgari  "  (Bulgarorum).3 

Finally,  the  Macedonians  never  in  olden  times  called 
themselves  Bulgars.  Dr.  V.  Gjeric,  Professor  at  the  Uni- 
versity of  Belgrade,  after  an  exhaustive  study  of  all  the 
records  referring  to  the  Macedonian  Slavs  from  the  earliest 
times,  came  to  the  conclusion  that  "from  the  oldest 
times  down  to  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century 
there  is  not  one  reliable  instance  of  the  Macedonians  call- 
ing themselves  Bulgars  or  their  language  the  Bulgarian. 4 

1  "Samuel  Bulgarinorum  Imperator"  I.  Crncie,  "  Popa  Dukljanina 
Letopis"  ("Pop  Dukljanin's  Chronicle"),  Kraljevica,  1874,  p.  41. 

2  "  Eo  tempore  (968)  defunctus  est  Bulgarorum  Imperator  Petrus 
nomine  "  (Ibid.,  p.  38). 

3  B.  Prokic,  "  Postanak  jedne  slovenske  carevine  u  Makedoniji  " 
("Rise  of  a  Slav  Empire  in  Macedonia"),  p.  320. 

4  Dr.  V.  Gjeric,  "  O  srpskom  imenu  u  Sbaroj  Srbiji  i  Makedoniji " 
("  The  term  '  Serbian  '  in  Old  Serbia  and  Macedonia"),  Belgrade,  1904, 
p.  42. 


IV 

BULGARIAN  RULE  IN  MACEDONIA 

Subjugation  of  the  Macedonian  State  by  Byzantium  in  1018 — Bulgars 
shake  off  the  Byzantine  yoke  in  1186 — Second  Bulgarian  in- 
vasion of  Macedonia — Macedonia  under  the  Latins  and  Epirotes 
— Fresh  Bulgarian  invasion  of  Macedonia — Macedonia  under  the 
Byzantines  and  Epirotes — Bulgars  possess  Macedonia  once  more 
for  a  brief  period  and  then  lose  it  for  good  in  1256 

SAMUEL'S  vast  MJaee4ee*an  Empire  was  not  of  long 
duration.  Already  under  his  immediate  successors 
it  began  to  decay,  until  finally  in  1018  it  fell  completely 
under  the  domination  of  Byzantium.  Of  all  the  exten- 
sive territories  that  had  formed  the  Macedonian  Empire 
only  the  central  Serbian  tracts  of  Raska  on  the  Drina, 
Lim  and  Tara,  and  Zeta  on  the  coast  remained  free. 
These  lands  were  destined  to  preserve  the  seed  of  the 
future  liberation  and  unity  of  the  Southern  Slavs.  The 
abortive  insurrections  in  1040  in  the  county  of  Vardar 
in  Macedonia,  which  aimed  at  liberation  from  Byzantium, 
proved  unsuccessful.  While  the  Serbian  States  were 
laying  up  their  strength  for  the  great  historic  role  of 
the  Serbian  nation  in  the  Balkan  Peninsula,  Macedonia 
came  yet  again  for  a  short  time  under  Bulgarian  rule. 
From  about  a.d.  1000,  when  she  fell  under  the 
domination  of  Byzantium,  Bulgaria  remained  under  it 
until  1186.  In  that  year  the  Bulgars  revolted  against 
the    Byzantine     supremacy.      With     the    help    of     the 


30  MACEDONIA 

Kumans  (Russian  Polovci)  from  the  steppes  of  Pontus, 
they  succeeded  in  freeing  themselves  and  in  once  more 
establishing  their  State.  The  capital  of  this  new  Bul- 
garian State  was  Trnovo.  As  their  power  gradually 
increased  the  Bulgars  awaited  a  suitable  opportunity 
for  embarking  upon  conquests.  .  This  opportunity 
arrived  in  1202.  In  that  year  the  Latins  besieged 
Constantinople.  While  the  siege  was  proceeding  the 
Bulgarian  Tsar  Kalojan  "  took  advantage  of  the  general 
confusion  and  overran  the  western  part  of  the  Byzantine 
Empire  from  Sofia  to  the  frontiers  of  Thessaly,  taking 
the  towns  of  Skoplje,  Ochrida,  and  Ber,  and  even 
Prizren."  l  Not  feeling  secure  in  the  territory  they  had 
conquered,  the  Bulgarians  expelled  all  the  Greek  bishops 
and  replaced  them  by  Bulgarian  ecclesiastics.  They  like- 
wise transported  all  Greek  suspects  to  the  Danubian 
regions.  Serbia  was  at  the  time  powerless  to  prevent 
Bulgarian  aggression  and  violence  in  Macedonia.  The 
struggle  for  the  throne,  which  was  fomented  by  Hungary, 
absorbed  all  Serbia's  strength  and  attention.  This  Bul- 
garian domination  in  Macedonia  did  not  last  long,  only 
until  the  death  of  Kalojan  in  1207.  Then  internal  dis- 
sensions broke  out  among  the  Bulgarian  princes,  and 
Bulgaria  was  divided.  Part  of  Macedonia  came  to  be 
ruled  by  a  relative  of  Kalojan,  Strez  by  name,  but  under 
Serbian  suzerainty.  Strez  died  in  1215  ;  part  of  his  lands 
was  taken*  by  the  Latins  of  Salonica,  and  part  by  the 
Greeks  of  Epirus.  Thus  every  trace  of  Bulgarian  rule 
in  Macedonia  was  obliterated  once  more. 

In  1223  Macedonia  was  ruled  by  Theodore  Komnenus, 
Despot   of    Epirus,   who    presently    proclaimed   himself 
Emperor.    His  lieutenants — Greeks,  Slavs,  and  Albanians 
1  C.  Jirecek,  "  Gescbichte  der  Serben,"  i.  p.  288, 


BULGARIAN    RULE    IN    MACEDONIA       31 

— administered  the  provinces  of  Macedonia  and  Albania 
right  up  to  the  Serbian  frontier,  which  ran  north  of 
Arban,  Debar,  and  Skoplje.1  Towards  the  east,  Theodore 
Komnenus  extended  his  power  even  over  Thrace  with 
its  capital  of  Adrianople.  Theodore  ruled  over  Macedonia 
for  seven  years  in  all.  In  1230  he  was  suddenly  attacked, 
defeated,  and  made  prisoner  by  the  Bulgarian  Tsar 
Asen  II,  near  the  village  of  Klokotnica  (now  Semisdze), 
on  the  road  from  Philippopolis  to  Adrianople.  The 
Bulgars  now  without  any  difficulty  occupied  the 
country  west  of  Adrianople,  beyond  Skoplje  and 
Ochrida  as  far  as  Durazzo.2  It  is  important  to  note 
that  Tsar  Asen  says  that  by  this  victory  he  conquered 
Serbian  lands.  In  gratitude  for  his  success  over  Theodore 
Komnenus,  Asen  II  built  the  Church  of  the  Forty 
Martyrs  in  his  capital  of  Trnovo.  In  an  inscription  in 
this  church  he  gives  a  brief  account  of  his  war  with 
Theodore.  There  he  describes  how  he  captured  Theodore 
with  all  his  nobles  and  subdued  all  the  lands  from 
Adrianople  even  to  Durazzo :  the  Greek,  then  the 
Albanian  and  the  Serbian.^  This  Bulgarian  domination 
in  Macedonia  extended  over  a  period  of  sixteen  years 
in  all. 

In  1246,  Michael,  the  son  of  Asen  II,  ascended  the 
Bulgarian  throne.  That  same  year  the  Greek  Emperor 
John  Vatatzes  succeeded  in  retaking  from  the  Bulgars 
all  the  Macedonian  provinces  from  Adrianople  to  the 
Vardar.      Michael   II,    Despot   of    Epirus,   on   his   part 

■  C.  Jirecek,  "  Geschichte  der  Serben,"  i.  p.  300. 

J  Ibid.,  p.  303. 

3  The  former  translation  of  this  passage  from  the  inscription  runs 
thus :  "  Und  alle  Lander  habe  ich  erobert  von  Odrin  (Adrianopel)  bis 
nach  Durazzo :  das  griechische,  dann  das  albanische  und  serbische 
Land"  (C.  Jirecek,  "  Geschichte  der  Bulgaren,"  pp.  148,  252). 


32  MACEDONIA 

occupied  the  Macedonian  districts  lying  west  of  the 
Vardar,  with  the  towns  of  Veles,  Prilep,  and  Ochrida. 
In  1252  John  Vatatzes  overcame  Michael  II,  and  all 
Macedonia  as  far  as  the  frontiers  of  the  Serbian 
contemporary  State  became  a  Greek  province. 

There  was  one  more  Bulgarian  invasion  of  Eastern 
Macedonia  as  far  as  the  Vardar,  which  lasted  from  the 
end  of  1254  until  1256,  and  was  also  "  carried  out 
without  difficulty " ;  but  I  hardly  know  whether  it  is 
worth  mentioning.1 

Weak  and  insignificant  as  are  these  historic  linkings 
of  Macedonia  with  Bulgaria,  such  as  they  are  they 
recur  no  more.  From  that  time  Bulgarian  history  has 
no  further  connection  with  Macedonia.  Soon  after- 
wards began  the  henceforth  uninterrupted  historic 
connection  of  Macedonia  with  Serbia.  This  connection 
has  bequeathed  to  Macedonia  imperishable  and  ineradi- 
cable memories.  It  has  also  brought  the  ethnic  unity 
of  the  Macedonians  and  Serbs  into  better  and  clearer 
relief. 

1  It  is  interesting  to  note  that  the  Bulgars  never  ran  any  risks  for 
the  sake  of  Macedonia,  nor  did  they  ever  conquer  it  heroically  and  at 
the  cost  of  great  sacrifice.  All  their  invasions  of  Macedonia  occurred 
either  at  a  time  of  "  general  confusion,"  or  were  accomplished 
"  without  any  difficulty "  (C.  Jirecek,  "  Geschichte  der  Serben,"  i. 
pp.  288,  303,  315). 


SERBIAN  RULE  IN  MACEDONIA 

Systematic  unification  of  Serbian  territory  under  the  Nemanjici — 
Part  of  Macedonia  won  by  King  Uros  in  1258 — Macedonia  added 
to  Serbia  under  King  Milutin  and  King  Stephan  Decanski— 
Bulgaria  makes  war  upon  Stephan  Decanski  in  1830 — Macedonia's 
fate  permanently  decided  in  favour  of  Serbia  by  the  Serbian 
victory  over  the  Bulgars — Subsequent  insignificance  of  Bulgaria 
— Serbian  magnanimity  towards  Bulgaria — King  (afterwards 
Tsar)  Dusan  unites  the  whole  of  Macedonia  with  Serbia — 
Bulgars  no  longer  interested  in  Macedonia — Bulgars  conscious 
of  having  no  claim  on  Macedonia — Bulgars  recognize  the 
legitimacy  of  the  Serbian  rule  in  Macedonia — Macedonia 
considered  a  Serbian  country  —  Macedonians  never  called 
anything  but  "  Serbs "  in  historic  records — Dismemberment 
of  the  Serbian  Empire — Macedonian  States  always  referred  to 
as  "  Serbian  " — Turks  conquer  Macedonia  as  a  Serbian  country 
— This  fact  recognized  by  all  historic  sources,  including  Bulgarian 
— Serbian  influence  in  Macedonia  under  the  Turkish  rule — 
Serbian  princes  in  Macedonia  under  Turkish  suzerainty — 
Serbian  Sultana  Marija  and  her  importance  for  the  Mace- 
donian Serbs 

WHILE  Macedonia  after  losing  her  independence 
in  1018  was  first  under  Byzantium  and  then 
for  a  short  time  under  Bulgaria,  two  young  and  vigorous 
Serbian  States  grew  up  and  developed  to  the  north  of  her 
— Raska  and  Zeta.  In  the  second  half  of  the  twelfth 
century  they  were  united  to  form  the  one  State  of  Serbia, 
which  then  entered  upon  the  most  brilliant  epoch  of  the 
Serbian  past.  Slowly  but  surely,  the  native  rulers  of  the 
new  Serbian  State  emancipated  the  Serbian  nation  from 

4  33 


34  MACEDONIA 

Byzantium  and  united  the  Serbian  lands.  The  first 
Serbian  ruler  who  set  about  to  accomplish  the  systematic 
union  of  all  the  Serbian  lands  into  one  polity  was 
the  Grand  Zupan  Stephan  Nemanja  (1169-1196).  His 
successor  went  far  beyond  him.  The  complete  union 
of  the  Serbian  lands  was  especially  apparent  during  the 
reigns  of  King  Milutin  (1282-1321)  and  Tsar  Dusan 
(1331-1355).  During  these  reigns  Macedonia  was 
also  incorporated  with  Serbia. 

We  have  already  said  that  under  Strez  (1207-1215) 
Macedonia  was  for  a  short  time  under  Serbian  suzerainty. 
In  1258  King  Uros  of  Serbia  took  Skoplje,  Prilep,  and 
Kicevo  from  Byzantium,  but  lost  them  again  shortly 
afterwards  in  1261.1  But  this  was  only  the  prelude  to 
the  complete  union  of  Macedonia  with  Serbia.  In  1282, 
King  Milutin,  the  son  of  Uros,  took  Skoplje  from 
Byzantium,  together  with  the  districts  of  Gornji  and 
Donji  Polog,  in  the  upper  Vardar  valley,  and  sub- 
sequently Ovce  Polje,  Zletovo  and  Pijanac,  round  about 
the  Bregalnica.  No  sooner  had  Milutin  taken  Skoplje 
than  it  became  the  capital  and  chief  city  of  all  Serbia. 
In  1283  King  Milutin  made  further  progress  in  liberating 
Serbian  lands  from  Byzantium.  He  conquered  the  entire 
territory  as  far  as  Ser  (the  Seres  of  to-day),  Morunac 
(Krestopolje,  or  Kavala  of  to-day),  and  the  neighbourhood 
of  Mount  Athos,  and  afterwards  added  Porec,  Ki6evo, 
and  Debar  in  Macedonia  to  these  conquests.  Milutin's 
son  Stephan  Decanski  (1321-1331)  took  the  town  of 
Prosek  on  the  lower  Vardar. 

During  the  whole  of  this  Serbian  progress  in  Macedonia, 
the  Bulgars  did  not  appear  as  Serbia's  rivals  nor  did  they 
attempt  to  hinder  the  Serbian  advance  in  Macedonia. 
1  C.  Jirecek,  "  Geschichte  der  Serben,"  i.  p.  317. 


SERBIAN    RULE    IN    MACEDONIA  35 

They  waited,  as  before,  for  a  convenient  opportunity  of 
success  without  difficulty.  Such  an  opportunity  was 
given  them  when  trouble  arose  between  Stephan  Decanski 
and  the  Emperor  Andronikos  III  of  Byzantium.  Think- 
ing that  this  was  a  propitious  moment  for  an  attack 
upon  Stephan,  the  Bulgarian  Tsar  Mihajlo  Sisman,  who 
was  married  to  Stephan's  sister,  put  away  his  wife, 
married  the  sister  of  Andronikos  in  her  stead,  concluded 
an  alliance  with  his  new  brother-in-law  and  attacked 
Stephan.  Stephan  begged  Mihajlo  to  avoid  war,  but 
Mihajlo  was  obdurate.  Trusting  finally  to  defeat  Stephan, 
Mihajlo,  in  the  words  of  a  contemporary,  boasted  that  "  he 
would  set  up  his  throne  "  in  Serbia.  Stephan  was  com- 
pelled to  go  to  war.  The  Bulgars  and  the  Byzantines  ad- 
vanced against  him  simultaneously,  but  their  forces  failed 
to  establish  a  junction.  Andronikos  was  late,  and  the 
Bulgars  were  defeated  ere  he  could  come  to  their  rescue. 

This  war  was  of  great  importance,  because  it  decided 
not  only  the  question  of  the  supremacy  of  Serbia  over 
Bulgaria  during  the  rest  of  the  Middle  Ages,  but  also 
the  fate  of  Macedonia.  The  Serbs  expected  the  Bulgars 
to  attack  from  the  east,  but  they  turned  southwards, 
towards  Macedonia.  Where  the  frontier  between  Serbia 
and  Bulgaria  follows  the  course  of  the  river  Struma, 
north-east  of  Velbuzd  (now  called  Custendil),  the 
Bulgarian  forces  crossed  the  frontier  into  Serbia  and 
went  as  far  as  Velbuzd,  "  committing  many  evil  deeds  in 
that  district."1  The  battle  of  Velbuzd  took  place  on  July 
28,  1330.  The  Bulgarian  army  was  completely  over- 
thrown and  Tsar  Mihajlo  himself  slain  in  the  battle.  The 
Serbs  were  left  victors  and  masters  of  the  situation. 

1  St.  Novakovic,  "  Zakonik  Stefana  Dusana  "  ("Stephan  Dusan's 
Code"),  Belgrade,  1898,  p.  3. 


36  MACEDONIA 

After  the  victory  Stephan  intended  to  subdue  Bulgaria, 
but  he  was  met  on  his  way  by  the  envoys  of  Belaur, 
brother  of  the  fallen  Tsar,  and  the  Bulgarian  nobles 
who  tendered  him  their  submission.  How  important 
was  the  Serbian  victory  and  how  great  the  Bulgarian 
defeat  can  be  seen  from  the  humble  demeanour  of  the 
Bulgarian  envoys  towards  the  Serbian  King.  "  This 
Empire  of  Bulgaria " — thus  the  Bulgarian  envoys 
addressed  King  Stephan — "and  the  whole  of  its  state, 
its  towns  and  their  wealth  and  their  glory,  let  them  be 
to-day  in  your  hand  to  dispose  of  all  this  as  though  it 
were  given  to  you  by  God.  We,  your  slaves,  hail  you 
as  our  overlord  and  mighty  King.  .  .  .  Henceforth  let 
the  Kingdom  of  Serbia  and  the  Empire  of  Bulgaria  be 
as  one,  and  let  there  be  peace."  These  words  were 
recorded  by  the  Serbian  Archbishop  Danilo,  who  was  a 
contemporary  of  these  events.1  Thus  was  solved  the 
problem  of  the  relations  between  Serbs  and  Bulgars  in 
the  Middle  Ages.  Thus  was  the  fate  of  Macedonia 
decided  at  that  time. 

King  Stephan  showed  himself  magnanimous  towards 
the  Bulgars.  Directly  after  the  battle  he  caused  the  body 
of  the  Bulgarian  Tsar  to  be  interred  in  the  Monastery 
of  Nagoricino,  near  Kumanovo,  "  in  our  country,"  as  his 
son  Tsar  Dusan  used  to  say  in  after-years.2  He  did  not 
interfere  with  the  Bulgarian  polity,  which  was  reduced 
to  the  frontiers  of  the  Bulgarian  people.  He  confirmed 
the  Bulgarian  nobles  in  their  former  privileges,  and  on 
the  Bulgarian  throne  he  placed  his  banished  sister,  Tsar 

1  Dj.  Danici6,  "  Zivoti  Kraljeva  i  arhiepiskopa  srpskih  "  ( "  Lives 
of  the  Serbian  Kings  and  Archbishops"),  by  Archbishop  Danilo, 
Zagreb,  1866,  pp.  193-195. 

*  St.  Novakovic,  "  Zakonik  Stefana  Dusana  "  ("  Stephan  Dusan's 
Code"),  p.  3. 


SERBIAN    RULE    IN    MACEDONIA  37 

Mihajlo's  widow,  with  her  son  Jovan  Stephan,  who  was 
not  yet  of  age.  On  the  spot  where  he  had  invoked  the 
help  of  God  before  the  battle  the  pious  Serbian  King 
erected  a  church  to  Our  Blessed  Saviour,  which, 
although  in  ruins  to-day,  still  shows  clear  traces  of  its 
original  beauty.  To  this  victory  the  King  also  dedicated 
the  Monastery  of  DeSani,  which  was  then  being  built, 
the  finest  example  of  Serbian  ecclesiastical  architecture 
in  the  Middle  Ages.  Stephan's  son  Dusan,  who  soon 
afterwards  succeeded  to  the  Serbian  throne,  continued 
his  father's  policy  towards  the  Bulgars,  and  concluded 
an  alliance  with  them  which  lasted  until  the  fall  of  the 
mediaeval  Empires  of  both  Serbia  and  Bulgaria. 

Dusan's  reign  marks  an  epoch  in  the  history  of 
Macedonia,  one  more  brilliant  and  prosperous  than  any 
she  had  hitherto  passed  through.  At  the  very  outset  of 
his  reign  he  took  Ochrid,  Strumica,  Kostur,  and  many 
other  towns  in  Macedonia  from  Byzantium,  right  up  to 
Salonica.  In  Salonica  there  was  already  a  considerable 
party  prepared  to  open  the  gates  and  surrender  the  city 
to  him ;  but  the  Byzantine  Emperor  Andronikos  III 
arrived  with  a  large  army  and  prevented  the  Serbs 
from  entering  Salonica.  Later  on,  in  1342,  Dusan  took 
Yoden  and  Melnik;  in  1345  he  took  Ser  (Seres),  Drama, 
Philippi,  Hristopolje  (now  called  Orfano).  Thus  the 
whole  of  Macedonia  became  a  Serbian  province.  The 
eastern  frontiers  of  Dusan's  empire  extended  from  the 
crest  of  Mount  Kilo  along  the  slopes  of  the  Dospat 
and  the  left  basin  of  the  River  Mesta  down  to  the  sea.1 

■  St.  Novakovic,  "  Struinska  Oblast  u  XIV  veku"— "  The  Province 
of  Struma  in  the  Fourteenth  Century  "  ("  Glas  Srpske  Kraljevske 
Akademije,"  vol.  xxxiv).  By  the  same  author:  "  Srbi  i  Turci  u 
Srednjem  Veku"  ("Serbs  and  Turks  in  the  Middle  AgeB"),  p.  129. 


38  MACEDONIA 

During  the  whole  time  of  DuSan's  progress  in 
Macedonia,  the  Bulgars  showed  no  dissatisfaction.  After 
the  battle  of  Velbuzd,  Bulgaria  was  to  a  certain  extent 
dependent  upon  Serbia.1  DuSan  was  constantly  at  war, 
first  with  Byzantium  and  then  with  Hungary.  Had  the 
Bulgars  been  conscious  of  a  right  to  Macedonia,  these 
would  have  been  suitable  opportunities  for  allying  them- 
selves to  either  of  these  two  Powers,  and  not  only  to  rise 
in  defence  of  Macedonia,  but  also  to  emancipate  them- 
selves from  the  Serbian  supremacy.  In  the  meantime 
they  did  neither,  but  remained  on  the  best  of  terms  with 
DuSan,  even  at  a  time  when  the  throne  of  Bulgaria  was 
not  occupied  by  Dusan's  kinsman.  But  what  is  most 
important  with  reference  to  Macedonia  is  that  the 
Bulgars  took  it  for  granted  that  by  the  Serbian  conquest 
of  Macedonia  their  rights  were  in  no  way  encroached 
upon,  and  that  they  plainly  recognized  Serbia's  right 
to  that  country.  When  in  1346  the  Archbishop  of  Serbia 
was  precisely  in  Macedonia  raised  to  the  rank  of  "  Patri- 
arch of  the  Serbs  and  Greeks" — the  expression  used 
at  that  time  to  define  the  Serbian  Empire — the  Bulgars 
would  certainly  have  protested  had  they  looked  upon  the 
Macedonian  population  as  Bulgarian.  As  a  matter  of 
fact  they  did  nothing  of  the  kind,  but  the  promotion 
of  the  Archbishop  of  Serbia  to  the  Patriarchate  was 
carried  out  "  with  the  full  approval  of  the  Bulgarian 
Patriarch   of  Trnovo."  2     When  subsequently  on  Easter 

1  On  October  15,  1345,  Dusan,  King  of  Serbia,  addressed  a  letter  to 
Andrea  Dandolo,  Doge  of  Venice,  beginning  as  follows  :  "  Stephanus, 
Dei  gratia  Servire,  Dioclite,  Chilminiae,  Zenta?,  Albania?  et  Maritime 
regionis  rex,  nee  non  Bulgaria  imperii  partis  non  rnodice  par ticeps 
et  fere  totius  Romanise  Dominus "  ("  Glasnik  Srpskog  Ucenog 
Drustva,"  xi.  pp.  262-263). 

2  C.  Jirecek,  "  Geschichte  der  Serben,"  i.  p.  387. 


SERBIAN    RULE    IN    MACEDONIA  39 

Sunday  of  the  same  year  the  Serbian  King  solemnized 
his  second  coronation  as  Serbian  Tsar,  likewise  in 
Macedonia,  there  was  even  greater  opportunity  for  a 
Bulgarian  protest.  Byzantium  protested.  She  declared 
the  establishment  of  the  Serbian  Patriarchate  un- 
canonical  and  the  coronation  of  the  Serbian  Tsar 
non-valid.  The  Greek  Patriarch  Kallistos  anathematized 
the  new  "  uncanonical "  Patriarch  and  the  "unlawful" 
Tsar.  The  Greeks  would  not  hear  of  a  Serbian  Empire 
which  was  proclaimed  on  territory  which  they  had  once 
owned  and  to  which  they  still  claimed  to  have  rights. 
The  Emperor  John  Kantakuzenos,  in  his  "  History," 
never  once  refers  to  Dusan  as  "  Tsar,"  always  as  "  King." 
And  thus  we  find  it  also  in  other  Byzantine  sources. 
The  Bulgars,  however,  did  not  consider  that  the  Serbian 
Patriarch  and  Tsar  had  usurped  their  rank,  and  they 
took  no  steps  against  them ;  but  Dusan's  coronation  as 
Tsar  was  solemnized  in  Macedonia  on  the  strength  of  the 
conquest  of  Macedonia,  and  moreover  "  with  the  blessing 
and  consent  (lit.  hands)  of  the  Bulgarian  Patriarch  and 
the  consent  (hands)  of  all  the  Bishops  of  the  Bulgarian 
Synod."  l  By  the  conquest  of  Macedonia,  Serbia  became 
great.  By  this  conquest  she  became  worthy  of  pro- 
claiming herself  an  Empire.  The  Bulgars  not  only 
acquiesced  in  this  without  taking  offence,  but  they  even 
added  their  blessing. 

Bulgaria  did  this  consciously.  Macedonia  was  looked 
upon  as  Serbian  territory.  Ever  since  the  earliest  times 
after  the  Slav  immigration  into  the  Balkan  Peninsula 
Serbs   have   been   mentioned   as   inhabiting   Macedonia. 

1  St.  Novakovic,  "  Zakonik  Stefana  Dusana "  ("  Stephan  Du- 
san's Code "),  p.  4.  C.  Jirecek,  "  Gescliicbte  der  Serben,"  i. 
p.  387. 


40  MACEDONIA 

The  Byzantine  Emperor  Constantine  Porphyrogenitus  * 
wrote  some  time  about  950  that  the  town  of  "rd  S£/o/3Ata," 
in  the  district  of  Salonica  near  the  Kiver  Bistrieca,  at  the 
foot  of  Olympus,  derives  its  name  from  the  Serbs  who 
originally  settled  there.  Subsequently  this  town  is 
frequently  mentioned.  It  was  also  the  seat  of  the 
Bishop ;  in  an  old  Serbo-Slav  translation  of  the  Greek 
Writer  Johannes  Zonaras  it  is  called  SrpciSte.2  The 
small  number  of  Bulgarian  conquerors  had  disappeared 
completely  and  left  no  trace.  Writing  in  the  middle 
of  the  fourteenth  century,  the  Greek  historian  Nicephorus 
Gregorae  says  that  the  Byzantine  Emperor  Basil  II 
destroyed  the  Bulgars,  at  that  time  masters  of  Mace- 
donia, in  many  battles,  and  that  "  he  banished  those 
who  remained  in  the  land  (Macedonia)  to  Moesija 
on  the  Danube."  3  As  we  have  seen,  the  Bulgarian 
Tsar  Asen,  after  conquering  Macedonia  in  1230,  expressly 
states  in  an  inscription  in  the  church  of  the  Forty 
Martyrs  in  Trnovo  that  he  had  conquered  "  the  Greek, 
the  Albanian,  and  the  Serbian  lands."  This  was  a 
hundred  years  before  the  Serbian  conquest  of  Macedonia. 
The  Serbs  conquered  Macedonia  as  a  Serbian  country. 

Neither  in  connection  with  the  conquest  of  Macedonia 
nor  later  are  the  Bulgars  mentioned  among  the  inhabi- 
tants. King  Milutin  several  times  mentions  his  con- 
quests in  Macedonia.  He  mentions  the  conquered 
counties,  and  refers  to  them  by  their  local  names  or 
by  the  names  of  their  towns  ;  but  nowhere  do  we  find 
a  word  about  Bulgars.     In  Milutin's  biography,  which 

1  Const.  Porphyrogenitus,  "  De  administrando  Imperio,"  chap.  xxii. 
p.  152,  ed.  Bonn. 

2  "  Starine  Jugoslovenske  Akadermje,"  Zagreb,  vol.  xiv.  p.  163. 

3  N.  Gregorae,  "  Histor.  Bizant.,"  ii.  2,  p.  15a,  ed.  Bonn. 


SERBIAN    RULE    IN    MACEDONIA  41 

was  compiled  by  his  contemporary,  the  Archbishop 
Danilo,  all  Milutin's  Macedonian  conquests  are  likewise 
enumerated  ;  the  counties  are  mentioned,  and  again  there 
is  no  mention  of  Bulgars.  Writing  about  the  year  1318, 
the  Serbian  Archbishop  Nikodim  chronicles  all  the  deeds 
of  the  Serbian  King  Milutin  "  in  his  own  native  country, 
in  the  Serbian  land."  Afterwards  he  speaks  of  the 
Serbian  Council,  in  which  the  bishops  and  monks  were 
also  included.  Among  the  Serbian  bishops  is  mentioned 
the  Bishop  of  Skoplje,  and  among  the  Serbian  monks 
are  mentioned  the  monks  of  Tetovo,  Gostivar,  Nagori&no, 
and  Skoplje.1  A  MS.  of  the  Monastery  of  Lesnovo,  in 
Macedonia,  dating  from  1330,  says  of  Milutin's  successor 
Stephan  De6anski  that  "he  inherited  the  kingdom,  i.e. 
all  the  Serbian  maritime  regions,  those  by  the  Danube 
and  the  Ovce  Polje."2  Relating  the  history  of  the 
Bulgarian  attack  upon  the  Serbs  in  1330,  Stephan 
De6anski,  in  a  deed  to  the  Monastery  of  Decani,  says 
that  the  Bulgarian  Tsar  went  to  Macedonia  in  order 
to  conquer  "  Serbian  territory."  In  the  Appendix  to  his 
Code,  Tsar  Dusan  says  that  the  Bulgarian  Tsar  went 
against  "  Our  country,  against  the  land  of  our  fathers."  3 
Under  DuSan's  reign  the  Serbs  conquered  the  whole  of 
Macedonia.  In  a  deed  to  the  Monastery  of  Treskavac, 
near  Prilep,  in  1336,  in  which  he  is  styled  "  Stephan,  King 
of  all  Serbian  and  the  Maritime  Regions,"  Dusan  says 
that  "  with  the  help  of  God  Almighty,  the  Preserver  and 
His  immaculate  Mother,  and  the  prayers  of  his  forbears 
Simeon  and  Sava,  he  had  taken  many  towns  over  which 

1  Lj.  Stojanovid,  "  Stari  Srpski  zapisi  i  natpisi "   ("  Old   Serbian 
Inscriptions  and  Notes  "),  Nos.  301-304. 

2  "  Glasnik  Srpsrog  Ucenog  Drustva,"  vol.  xvi.  pp.  34-35. 

»  St.  Novakovid,  "  Zakonik  Stefana  Dusana  "    ("  Stephan  Dusan's 
Code  "),  p.  3. 


42  MACEDONIA 

the  Greeks  had  formerly  ruled."  x  But  not  a  word  about 
the  Bulgars.  In  a  note  in  a  MS.  of  the  Four  Gospels 
written  at  Mount  Athos,  about  1347,  we  are  told  that 
"  by  God's  grace  and  the  prayers  of  his  ancestors,  it  was 
given  to  DuSan  to  rule  over  the  whole  of  the  Serbian 
land,  as  far  as  the  town  of  Morunac,  which  is  called 
Kristopolje  (the  Kavala  of  to-day),  and  as  far  as  Salonica, 
and  over  all  Dioclitia  as  far  as  Drac."2  In  a  deed 
presented  by  Tsar  Dusan  about  1350  to  his  Monastery 
of  the  Blessed  Archangels  St.  Michael  and  St.  Gabriel 
at  Prizren,  the  gifts  he  bestowed  upon  this  monastery 
are  enumerated.  Among  other  gifts,  he  also  endowed 
it  with  a  church  in  Veles  with  "  men,  mills,  and  vine- 
yards," and  with  a  church  in  Strumica  with  "  men, 
lands,  vineyards,  and  mills."  In  assessing  the  rights  and 
duties-  of  these  men  whom  he  assigned  to  the  monastery, 
he  refers  to  them  as  Serbs,  Albanians,  and  Vallachians. 
No  Bulgars  are  mentioned. 3  In  the  Code  which  he 
compiled  for  the  whole  of  his  empire  at  the  State 
Councils  of  Skoplje  in  1349  and  of  Seres  in  1354,  Dusan 
nowhere  mentions  Bulgars,  although  he  omitted  none 
of  the  nationalities  represented  in  his  country,  viz.  Serbs, 
Greeks,  Albanians,  and  Germans. 4  It  is  impossible  that 
the  Serbian  legislators  of  that  time,  at  two  Councils, 
both  held  in  Macedonia,  should  have  remained  ignorant 
of  the  existence  of  a  Bulgarian  element — if  it  existed — in 
Macedonia.     If  even   the   small  national  populations  in 

1  St.  Novakovic,  "Balkanska  Pitanja"  ("  The  Balkan  Question"), 
pp.  290-293. 

-  Lj.  Stojanovic,  "  Stari  srpski  zapisi  i  natpisi "  ("  Old  Serbian 
Inscriptions  and  Notes  "),  No.  89. 

a  "  Glasnik  Srpskog  Ucenog  Drustva,"  vol.  xv.  pp.  264-310. 

4  St.  Novakovic,  "  Zakonik  Stefana  Dusana"  ("  Stephan  Dusan's 
Code  "),  Arts.  32,  39,  77,  82,  173. 


SERBIAN    RULE    IN    MACEDONIA  43 

Serbia  are  mentioned  in  the  Code,  as  in  the  case  of  the 
small  German  mining  population,  the  Bulgars  would 
certainly  not  have  been  omitted.  In  the  decree  issued 
by  Dusan  at  the  Council  of  Skoplje  in  1347,  whereby  he 
made  the  Monastery  of  Lesnovo,  in  Macedonia,  the  seat 
of  the  bishopric,  he  is  styled  "  Stephan,  the  God-fearing 
Tsar  in  Christ  our  Lord  and  autocrat  of  the  Serbs  and 
Greeks  and  the  whole  of  the  Western  Regions."  *  This 
decree  concerns  some  of  the  most  important  institutions 
in  Macedonia.  It  was  approved  by  the  first  Serbian 
Council  convoked  after  the  proclamation  of  the  Serbian 
Empire,  and  it  deals  not  only  with  the  establishment  of 
the  bishopric,  but  also  with  many  other  matters,  such  as 
the  duties  of  the  subject.  Here,  also,  there  is  not  a  word 
about  Bulgars.  DuSan's  usual  signature  as  Tsar  ran  : 
"  Tsar  of  the  Serbs  and  Greeks,"  and  when  signing  in 
Latin  he  styled  himself,  "Imperator  Rascise  et  Romanise."2 
Neither  of  his  titles  makes  mention  of  Bulgars. 

Nor  are  Bulgars  mentioned  in  books  written  in 
Macedonia  during  the  Serbian  rule  ;  nor  are  they  men- 
tioned in  any  notes  in  these  books.  On  the  contrary,  it 
is  recorded  in  these  books  merely  that  they  were  written 
at  such  and  such  a  place,  in  such  and  such  a  country, 
during  the  reign  of  such  and  such  a  Serbian  sovereign. 
The  Serbian  sovereigns  are  praised  in  these  books  ;  the 
monasteries  they  built  in  Macedonia,  the  gifts  they  be- 
stowed upon  these  monasteries,  their  successes  are  extolled 
and  their  victories  commemorated.  Some  of  these  books 
commemorate  the  Serbian  victories  over  the  Bulgars. 3 

1  "  Glasnik  Srpskog  Ucenog  Drustva,"  vol.  xxvii.  pp.  288,  etc. 

2  V.  Grigorovic,  "  Ocerk  putesestvija  po  Evropciskoj  Turciji," 
pp.  49-50.     C.  Jirecek,  "  Geschichte  der  Serben,"  i.  p.  386. 

3  Lj.  Stojanovic,  "  Stari  srpski  zapisi  i  natpisi  "  ("  Old  Serbian 
Inscriptions  and  Notes"),   Nos.  34,  43,  56,  75,  103,  4944. 


44  MACEDONIA 

Even  in  those  Serbian  records  which  have  their  origin 
in  Macedonia  there  is  no  mention  made  of  Bulgars 
anywhere.  On  the  contrary,  it  clearly  transpires  from 
these  books  that  the  population  of  Macedonia  was 
Serbian. 

Foreign  records  in  this  respect  absolutely  corroborate 
the  Serbian.  C.  Jirecek  says  that  according  to  the  Greek 
historian  N.  Gregoras,  who  lived  during  Dusan's  reign, 
there  were  at  the  time  of  Dusan's  conquests  in  South 
Macedonia  "  Greek  and  Serbian  parties  in  every  town."  l 
N.  Gregorae  relates  how  the  Byzantine  Empress  Irene 
sent  her  kinsman  Manuel  Tarhaniot  to  seek  the  fugitive 
Kantakuzen,  and  how  starting  from  Dimotik  he  crossed 
the  Balkan  mountains  (the  Hsenius)  and  entered  the 
Serbian  land.2  John  Kantakuzenos,  Who  waged  long 
wars  on  Macedonian  territory  against  John,  the  lawful 
Emperor  of  Byzantium,  against  the  Empress  Anna  and 
the  Serbian  Tsar  Du§an,  had  every  opportunity  of 
becoming  well  acquainted  with  Macedonia  and  of 
thoroughly  exploring  it.  There  are  frequent  references 
to  Serbs  in  Macedonia  in  his  "  History."  3 

Even    after  DuSan's   reign  there   is    no    mention    of 

1  C.  Jirecek,  "  Geschichte  der  Serben,"  i.  p.  382. 

2  "  Relicto  igitur  ob  metum  recto  tramite,  sinistrum  versus  per 
ovia  contendere  arduisque  ac  difficultibus  locis  applicare  se  perrexit, 
donee  Haemo  monte  superato,  in  Tribalorum  terram,  illtesus  furtim 
delapsus  est "  (Nieephori  Gregorae,  "  Hist.  Bizant.,"  xiii.  4,  8, 
p.  623,  ed.  Bonn). 

3  He  mentions  them  as  living  near  Prosek  (Prossecum,  a  town  on 
the  Vardar  at  the  eastern  opening  of  the  Demir  Kapija  gorge ;  now 
in  ruins) :  "  Interea  pecuarius  quidam  Tribalus,  iuxtra  Prosacum  in 
vico  Davidis  nuncupato  habitans  Zimpanus  (Zivan,  a  typical  Serbian 
name),  nomine  auditis  qu«  Cantacuseno  .  .  ."  (Joannis  Cantacuseni 
Imperatoris  Historiarum,  iii.  394,  vol.  ii.  p.  256) ;  near  Philippi 
(between  Seres,  Drama  and  Kavala,  now  in  ruins) :  "  Pauci  enim 
Tribali  ex  proximis  vicis  concurrentes  .  .  ."  (Ibid.,  iv.  45,  vol.  ii.  329). 


SERBIAN    RULE    IN    MACEDONIA  45 

Bulgars  in  Macedonia.  Dusan  was  succeeded  on  the 
throne  of  Serbia  by  his  son  Tsar  Uros  (1355-1371).  His 
official  title  was  "  Stephan  Uros,  Tsar  of  the  Serbs 
and  Greeks."  «  In  a  document  dating  from  1365  the 
sons  of  Branko  Mladenovic,  Serbian  Governor  of  the 
county  of  Ochrid,  call  Tsar  Uro§  "Autocrat  of  all 
Serbian,  Greek,  and  the  Maritime  Kegions."  2 

Under  the  feeble  reign  of  Tsar  Uros,  the  division  and 
dismemberment  of  the  Serbian  Empire  soon  set  in. 
Macedonia,  too,  was  divided  into  several  parts,  the  men 
who  had  acted  as  governors  under  Dusan  setting  them- 
selves up  as  independent  princes  in  the  districts  over 
which  they  ruled.  This  was  an  excellent  opportunity 
for  showing  to  whom  Macedonia  truly  belonged.  The 
new  Macedonian  sovereigns,  who  had  broken  away 
from  the  Serbian  Empire,  were  no  longer  in  any  way 
bound  to  it.  They  were  independent  and  could  style 
themselves  as  they  pleased.  Had  their  Macedonian 
subjects  been  Bulgars,  there  would  have  been  no  reason 
why  they  should  not  have  proclaimed  themselves  Bul- 
garian sovereigns.  Hereby  they  would  not  only  have 
increased  the  loyalty  of  their  subjects,  but  they  would 
have  eliminated  from  Macedonia  even  the  shadow  of 
the  Serbian  domination.  But  we  find  no  trace  of  this. 
All  parts  of  Macedonia  continued  to  remain  Serbian, 
and  their  sovereigns  continued  to  style  themselves 
Serbian  princes. 

In  Dusan's  reign  his  half-brother  (on  his  mother's 
side)  Simeun  (Sinisa)  was  Governor  in  Epirus  and  part 
of  Macedonia.      During   UroS's  reign,   Simeun   in  1356 

*  V.  Grigorovic,  "  Ocerk  putesestvija,"  p.  51.    C.  Jirecek,  "  Gesch. 
d.  Serben,"  i.  p.  414. 
-  "Spomenik  Srpske  Kraljevske  Akademije,"  vol.  iii.  p.  31. 


46  MACEDONIA 

gathered  an  army  composed  of  "  Serbs,  Greeks,  and 
Albanians,"  and  proclaimed  himself  independent  "  Tsar 
of  the  Greeks,  Serbs  and  all  Albania." l  In  1361  he 
signed  his  name  thus  :  "  Simeun  Palaeologos,  god-fear- 
ing Tsar  in  Christ  the  Lord  and  Autocrat  of  the  Greeks 
and  Serbs.  .  .  ."  2  On  another  occasion  he  styled  him- 
self "  Simeun  Uros  Palaeologos,  god-fearing  Tsar  in 
Christ  the  Lord  and  Autocrat  of  the  Greeks  and  Serbs 
and  all  Albania."  3 

In  Dusan's  reign  Vukasin  Mrnjavic  was  Zupan  in 
Prilep.  At  the  beginning  of  his  reign  Uros  created  him 
a  Despot,  but  Vukasin  was  not  satisfied  with  this.  In 
1366  he  proclaimed  himself  an  independent  King  and 
ruled  over  the  territory  on  either  side  of  the  Sar 
Mountain  with  the  chief  towns  of  Prizren,  Skoplje, 
Prilep  and  Bitolj.  In  all  these  regions  he  was  acknow- 
ledged by  the  inhabitants  as  King.  He  officially  styled 
himself  "  Lord  of  the  Serbian  land,  of  the  Greeks,  and 
the  Western  Kegions."  4  In  a  letter  to  the  Kepublic  of 
Eagusa  on  April  5,  1370,  King  Vukasin  says  of  himself, 
"  and  He  (Christ)  appointed  me  lord  of  all  the  land  of 
Serbia,  of  the  Greeks  and  Western  Kegions."  s 

Vukasin's  brother  Ugljesa  proclaimed  himself  inde- 
pendent ruler  of  the  neighbouring  Macedonian  counties 
towards  the  east.  In  Serbian  and  Greek  records  he  is 
spoken  of  as  "Despot  of  Serbia."6    Both  Vukasin  and 

1  C.  Jirecek,  "  Gesch.  d.  Serben,"  i.  p.  415. 

-  Fr.  Miklosich  and  Jos.  Miiller,  "Acta  et  diplouiata  Graaca  medii 
aevi,"  iii.  p.  129. 

3  "Glasnik  Srpskog  Ucenog  Drustva,"  vol.  xviii.  p.  201. 

*  St.  Novakovic,  "  Srbi  i  Turci "  ("  Serbs  and  Turks  "),  p.  144. 
C.  Jirecek,  "Gesch.  d.  Serben,"  i.  pp.  423,  480,  433. 

s  Fr.  Miklosich,  "  Monumenta  Serbica,"  p.  180. 

6  Fr.  Miklosich  et  Jos.  Miiller,  "  Acta  et  diplomata  grseca  medii  sevi," 
i.  pp.  553,  558,  559,  571.  St.  Novakovic,  "  Srbi  i  Turci "  ("  Serbs  and 
Turks  "),  pp.  153,  155,  166.    C.  Jirecek,  "  Gesch.  d.  Serben,"  i.  p.  431. 


SERBIAN    RULE    IN    MACEDONIA  47 

Ugljesa  are  referred  to  as  "Serbian  lords"  also  in  a 
contemporary  Bulgarian  chronicle  (1296-1413).  This 
chronicle  was  penned  in  Bulgaria,  in  the  Bulgarian 
tongue,  and  from  an  altogether  Bulgarian  point  of 
view.1  The  author  knew  what  he  was  writing  about, 
and  his  testimony  is  perfectly  reliable. 

In  the  north-east  of  Macedonia,  after  having  re- 
nounced their  allegiance  to  him,  two  cousins  of  Uros, 
the  brothers  Despot  Jovan  Dragas  and  Konstantin 
Dejanovic  ruled  independently  in  the  territory  around 
Istip,  Strumica,  Kumanovo,  Kratovo,  and  Velbuzd.  It 
was  after  this  Konstantin  that  Velbuzd  was  renamed 
Custendil.  Konstantin's  daughter  Helen  speaks  of  him 
in  1395  as  "  the  most  pious  and  the  most  illustrious  of 
the  Serbian  lords." 2  In  1401  an  envoy  arrived  in 
Venice  from  "Konstantin  (Dejanovic),  lord  of  Serbia, 
of  that  territory  which  surrounds  our  own  territory  of 
Durazzo  "  ("  Constantini  domini  Serviae,  territorii,  quod 
est  circa  territorium  nostrum  Durachii  ").3 

Besides  the  aforesaid  princes  there  were  also  in 
Uros's  time  several  lesser  territorial  lords  in  Macedonia, 
such  as  Srbin  Novak,  the  "Kesar"  (treasurer)  around 
Lake  Prespa,  Branko  Mladenovic  of  Ochrid,  and  Bogdan, 
lord  of  the  territory  between  Salonica  and  Seres. ■*     Of 

*  J.  Bogdan,  "  Ein  Beitrag  zur  bulgarischen  und  serbischen  Ge- 
schichtschreibung "  ("  Archiv  fur  slavische  Pbilologie,"  iii.  1891, 
p.  527).  The  Chronicle  is  "  ohne  Zweifel  in  Bulgarien  und  von  einern 
Bulgaren  geschrieben  wurden,  ausserdem  ist  sie  in  mittel-bulgar- 
ischer  Recension  erhalten"  (p.  490).  "Die  Chi-onic  ist  ganz  voni 
Standpunkte  eines  Bulgaren  geschrieben  "  (p.  492). 

2  Fr.  Miklosich  et  Jos.  Miiller,  "  Acta  et  diplomata  Graeca  medii 
aevi,"  ii.  pp.  260,  261.  St.  Novakovic,  "  Srbi  i  Turci "  ("  Serbs  and 
Turks"),  p.  190. 

3  "  Glasnik  Srpskog  Ucenog  Drustva,"  vol.  iii.  p.  198. 
«  C.  Jirecek,  "  Gesch.  d.  Serben,"  i.  pp.  415,  434. 


48  MACEDONIA 

none   of  these   is   it  anywhere    said    that  they  were   in 
any  way  akin  to  Bulgars. 

The  Turks  conquered  Macedonia  as  a  Serbian  country. 
Contemporaneously  with  the  breaking-up  of  the  Serbian 
Empire  after  Dusan's  death  came  the  spreading  of  the 
Turks  in  Europe.     Already  during  Dusan's  lifetime  the 
Turks  took  Gallipoli  from  the  Greeks  (1354)  and  thence 
began  to  attack  both  Byzantine  and  Serbian  territory. 
During  the  feeble  reign  of  Tsar  Uros  they  had  already 
overrun  a  considerable  part.     In  1365   Adrianople   was 
already    the  Turkish    capital,    and    the   whole   territory 
from  the  Sea  of  Marmora  to  the  Balkan  Mountains  and 
from  the  Black  Sea  to  the  Rhodope  Mountains  was  in 
the   hands  of   the   Turks.      The  focus   of   the   Turkish 
power  was  consequently  transferred  from  Asia  to  Europe. 
In  face  of   the  Turkish  peril  the  Serbian  princes  were 
compelled  to  think  of  serious  measures  to  defend  them- 
selves  and   their   lands.      During  the  summer   of  1371 
Ugljesa  Mrnjavic  made  preparations  to  expel  the  Turks 
from  Thrace.      He  was  joined  by  his  brother  Vukasin. 
The  advance  against  the  Turks  began  in  the  autumn  of 
that  year.     On  September  26th  a  decisive  encounter  took 
place  between  the  Serbs  and  Turks  on  the  left  bank  of 
the  River  Marica,  to    the    east    of   the   Mustafa-Pasha 
Palanka   of    to-day,    north    of    Cernomen    (now    called 
Cirmen).      The   Serbs    were   defeated    and  Ugljesa  and 
VukaSin  perished   on  the   field.     After    this    battle   the 
Turks  conquered  Macedonia. 

Serbian  and  foreign  historical  sources  agree  in  stating 
that  it  was  the  Serbian  army  which  was  defeated  on 
the  Marica,  that  Serbian  princes  perished,  and  that, 
after  the  battle,  Serbian  lands  were  conquered. 

Serbian   historical  sources  look  upon  the  disaster  on 


SERBIAN    RULE   IN    MACEDONIA  49 

the  Marica  as  an  event  of  the  Serbian  past,  and  they 
include  it  in  the  category  of  Serbian  historic  events.1 
A  contemporary  of  the  battle  on  the  Marica,  the 
Serbian  Monk  Jsajija  who  lived  in  Seres,  not  far 
from  the  spot  where  the  bloody  encounter  took  place 
between  the  Serbs  and  Turks,  relates  "  how  the 
Despot  UgljeSa  raised  all  Serbian  and  Greek  fighting 
men  and  his  brother  King  VukaSin  and  many  other 
chiefs,  to  expel  the  Turks."2  Vladislav  Gramatik,  a 
Serbian  writer  of  the  second  half  of  the  fifteenth 
century,  says  that  "  the  Serbian  army  of  Macedonia  was 
beaten  to  its  knees  by  the  river  which  is  called  the 
Marica."  3  The  Serbian  Patriarch  Pajsej,  writing  in 
the  first  half  of  the  seventeenth  century,  says  that  the 
Turks  after  taking  Adrianople  "  tried  to  enter  Serbian 
territory,"  and  that  they  were  opposed  by  UgljeSa  and 
Vukasin  with  the  Serbian  forces.4 

The  historical  sources  of  Western  Europe  absolutely 
agree  with  the  Serbian  records  as  regards  the  battle 
on  the  Marica.  The  news  of  the  Serbian  disaster  did 
not  reach  Pope  Gregory  XI  at  Avignon  until  the  spring 
of  1372.  Writing  in  May  of  that  year  to  King  Louis 
of  Hungary,  to  inform  him  of  the  situation  in  the 
Balkan  Peninsula  after  the  battle  on  the  Marica,  the 
Pope  says  that  in  that  battle  several  magnates  of  the 
Kingdom  of  Serbia  were  defeated  ("  subactis  quibusdam 
magnatibus  regnii  Rasciae").  That  same  year  in  the 
autumn   the   Archbishop   of   Neopatra,  in   the  duchy  of 

1  "  Spomenik  Srpske  Kraljevske  Akademije,"  vol.  iii.  pp.  95,  126, 
131,  139,  149,  151,  154. 

-  Lj.  Stojanovic,  "  Stari  Srpski  Zapisi  i  Natpisi  "  ("  Old  Serbian 
Inscriptions  and  Notes  "),  No.  4944. 

3  "  Glasnik  Srpskog  Ucenog  Drustva,"  vol.  xxii.  p.  287. 

«  "  Ibid.,  p.  222. 

5 


50  MACEDONIA 

Athens,  wrote  to  the  Pope  telling  him  that  "  the  Turks 
had  gained  a  brilliant  victory  over  sundry  magnates 
of  Greece,  Vallachia  (Thessaly),  and  the  Kingdom  of 
Serbia,"  and  that  after  subduing  these  lands  the  Turks 
had  advanced  up  to  the  frontiers  of  the  duchy  of  Athens 
and  the  principality  of  Achaia.1 

The  records  of  the  nearest  neighbours  of  the  Serbians, 
the  Roumanians,  likewise  speak  of  the  disaster  on  the 
Marica  as  of  a  Serbian  defeat.  In  a  Roumanian  MS. 
dating  from  the  beginning  of  the  seventeenth  century, 
we  are  told  that  in  1371  "  Murat  with  the  Turks 
attacked  Ugljesa  and  VukaSin.  They  gathered  together 
a  great  Serbian  army  and  accepted  battle  with  the 
Turks  .  .  .  the  Turks  were  finally  victorious,  and 
UgljeSa  and  VukaSin  were  slain  in  the  valley  of  the 
Marica  in  1371."  2 

And  also  the  Turks,  the  opponents  of  the  Serbs  in 
the  battle  of  the  Marica,  and  therefore  intimately  con- 
nected with  these  events,  wrote  similarly.  Their  annals, 
which  Zinkeisen  drew  upon  in  compiling  his  Turkish 
History,  say  that  "  the  Serbian  infidels  had  gathered 
together  to  attack  Adrianople,"  but  that  they  were 
routed.3 

Finally,  the  Bulgarian  historical  sources  agree  with  the 
rest.  The  contemporary  Bulgarian  chronicle  already 
referred  to  (1296-1413)  relates  how  Vukasin  and 
Ugljesa  "  gathered  a  great  Serbian  army  and  went  up 
against  the  town  of  Serez,  how  the  Turks  sallied  forth 
to  oppose   them,   how  there   was   a   great    battle    and 

1  C.  Jirecek,  "  Gesch.  d.  Serben,"  vol.  i.  p.  440. 

2  V.  Grigorovic,  "  O  Serbiji  v  ea  otnoseniah  k  sosednim  derzavam," 
Kazan,  1859,  p.  17. 

3  J.    W.    Zinkeisen,    "  Geschichbe    des     osmanischen     Reiches," 
Hamburg,  1840,  i.  p.  224. 


SERBIAN    RULE    IN    MACEDONIA  51 

bloodshed    on   the    Marica,   and    how    the    Turks   slew 
Ugljesa  and  Vukasm  while  the  Serbs  were  in  flight."  r 

The  Turkish  historical  sources,  from  which  Zin- 
keisen  takes  his  description  of  the  battle  on  the  Marica, 
viz.  those  of  Negri,  Irdis-Bitlisi,  Sead-Edin,  and  the 
Turkish  chronicler  of  Leunklav  only  have  traditional 
knowledge  of  this  battle,  and  were  compiled  a  hundred 
years  after  the  battle  had  taken  place.  According 
to  them  the  site  of  the  battle  was  called  at  that  time 
Sirb  Zandughi,  which  signifies  the  Serbian  peril.  The 
place  was  always  referred  to  by  that  name.  It  is  to 
this  day  called  Sr6-Sindigi  (Serbian  downfall),  Srb  Sidi 
(the  Serbian  feared),  or  Srb  Hududi  (Serbian  frontier).2 
As  there  were  no  Serbs  engaged  in  the  battle  on  the 
Marica  save  those  from  Macedonia,  this  Serbian  peril 
can  only  refer  to  the  Serbs  of  Macedonia. 

The  battle  on  the  Marica  did  not  yet  put  an  end  to 
the  Serbian  rule  in  Macedonia.  King  Vukasin  who 
perished  on  the  Marica  was  succeeded  by  his  son,  King 
Marko  (1371-1394),  and  his  brothers  Dmitar  and  Andrija. 
While  acknowledging  the  suzerainty  of  the  Turkish 
Sultan,  Marko  remained  until  his  death  the  Serbian, 
King  of  Macedonia  with  his  capital  in  Prilep.  Like- 
wise as  a  Turkish  vassal  Jovan  Dragas  Dejanovic  ruled, 
for  some  time  jointly  with  his  brother  Konstantin  and 
afterwards    as    sole    ruler,   over    the    territory    around 

1  J.  Bogdan,  "  Archiv  fur  slavische  Philologie,"  xiii.  p.  528. 

-  See  the  following  references  for  the  foregoing  :  J.  W.  Zinkeisen, 
"Geschichte  des  osmanischen  Reiches,"  i.  225;  N.  Jorga,  "  Ge- 
schichte  des  osmanischen  Reiches,"  i.  1908,  Gotha,  p.  241 ;  Le  Vte 
de  la  Jonquiere,  "Histoire  de  l'Empire  Ottoman,"  i.  Paris,  1914, 
p.  70;  St.  Novakovic,  "  Srbi  i  Turd,"  pp.  176-177;  J.  Miskovic, 
"  Jedan  Priloscic  Marickom  Boju" — "A  Contribution  to  the  Battle 
on  the  Marica"  ("  Glas  Srpske  Kraljevske  Akademije "),  vol  lviii. 
p.  111). 


52  MACEDONIA 

Istip,  Strumica,  Kumanovo,  Kratovo  and  Velbuzd. 
Finally,  south  of  that,  in  the  district  between  Salonica, 
Seres,  and  Lake  Dojran,  lay  Bogdan's  state.  These 
Serbian  princes  paid  tribute  to  the  Sultan  and  had  to 
furnish  him  with  auxiliary  contingents  when  he  went 
to  war,  but  in  all  other  respects  they  were  quite  inde- 
pendent. They  carried  on  the  traditions  of  the  Serbian 
kings  in  their  territories ;  they  built  and  restored 
churches  and  monasteries,  endowed  them  handsomely 
and  protected  the  Serbian  people.  King  Mafko  (Kral- 
jevic  Marko)  is  to  this  day  the  most  popular  hero  of 
the  national  ballad  poetry  in  all  Serbian  lands.  Fight- 
ing as  Turkish  vassals  both  King  Marko  and  Jovan 
Dragas  perished  in  the  Battle  of  Bovine  in  1394  against 
the  Boumanian  Duke  Mirce.  After  their  death  the 
Turks  definitely  subjugated  their  lands.  The  last 
Serbian  ruler  in  Macedonia  was  Bogdan,  who  can  be 
traced  up  to  the  year  1413. 

But  the  Serbian  influence  in  Macedonia  did  not  end 
then.  It  extended  far  into  the  dark  days  of  the 
Turkish  domination  in  Macedonia.  The  influence  of 
Serbian  ruling  and  noble  families  persisted  for  a  long 
time  in  Macedonia,  and  disappeared  only  with  the 
death  in  1487  of  the  Sultana  Marija,  the  daughter  of 
the  Serbian  Despot  Djuradj  Brankovic.  This  princess 
was  married  to  the  Sultan  Murat  II.  When  she 
became  a  widow  in  1451  she  at  first  returned  to  what 
was  left  of  free  Serbia  in  those  days ;  but  in  1457  she 
quitted  Serbia  and  took  up  her  residence  in  Macedonia 
at  Jezevo  near  Seres,  where  she  lived  until  her  death. 
Her  life  and  work  may  be  looked  upon  as  a  continua- 
tion of  the  Serbian  rule  and  Serbian  influence  in 
Macedonia.     Although  the  spouse  of   a  Turkish  sultan, 


SERBIAN    RULE   IN    MACEDONIA  53 

she  supported  the  Christian  Churches,  priests  and 
monks,  and  bestowed  her  charity  upon  the  world  of 
the  Christians.  In  her  widowhood,  highly  respected 
and  generously  treated  by  the  Sultan  Mehmed  II, 
she  enjoyed  an  ample  and  quasi-royal  maintenance  in 
Macedonia.  But  what  matters  in  this  connection  is 
that  she  occupied  the  position  of  a  kind  of  Serbian 
sovereign  in  Macedonia.  In  her  letters  she  writes  like 
a  reigning  Tsaritsa,  assuming  the  royal  titles  of  the 
Serbian  kings  in  the  days  of  their  independence,  "  Carica 
i  samodrzica  Kira  Marija  "  (Empress  and  Autocrat  Lady 
Mary).  She  insists  even  more  distinctly  on  her 
Serbian  nationality  when  in  her  letters  she  clearly 
indicates  her  connection  with  her  Serbian  kin  ("  Sultana 
Cara  Murata,  Carica  Mara,  kci  Djurdja  Despota" — 
Tsaritsa  Mara,  spouse  of  the  Sultan  Tsar  Murat  and 
daughter  of  the  Despot  Djuradj).  On  her  letters  she 
always  employed  her  father's  seal  with  the  inscription 
"  Gospodin  Despot  Djuradj  ,!   (Lord  Despot  Djuradj). 

The  Sultana  Marija  went  even  further.  She  worked 
in  j;he  spirit  of  the  Serbian  kings  of  old.  She,  like 
them,  endowed  churches  and  monasteries,  and  protected 
them.  She  not  only  compelled  the  Turks  to  fulfil  their 
obligations  towards  the  Serbian  people,  but,  like  a 
real  sovereign,  entered  into  relations  with  other  States 
besides  Turkey.  The  Eagusan  archives  contain  many 
letters  from  her  addressed  to  the  Republic  of  Ragusa. 
In  these  letters  she  arranged  that  the  tribute  which 
the  Ragusans  were  compelled  to  pay  to  the  Serbian 
Church  in  Jerusalem  at  the  time  of  the  Serbian  kings 
should  henceforth  be  given  to  the  Serbian  Monasteries 
of  Hilendar  and  St.  Paul  at  the  Mount  of  Athos, 
u  which    were    built     by    our     ancestors     St.     Simeon 


54  MACEDONIA 

Nemanja,  the  Archbishop  St.  Sava,  and  others  who 
have  succeeded  them  unto  this  day."  In  her  letters 
she  refers  to  the  Serbian  laws,  "  which  were  compiled 
by  my  imperial  forbears,  Tsar  Dusan  and  Tsar 
Uros." 

The  Serbian  kings  had  always  paid  special  respect 
to  the  memory  of  those  godly  men  who  first  preached 
the  Gospel  to  the  Balkan  Slavs.  There  were  many 
such  missionaries  in  Macedonia  during  the  tenth 
century.  Because  of  their  godly  work  they  were  canon- 
ized and  popular  legends  about  them  grew  up  among 
the  people.  After  conquering  Macedonia  the  Serbian 
kings  and  nobles  abundantly  honoured  the  memory  of 
these  preachers  of  Christianity  by  erecting  monasteries 
over  their  graves  or  in  places  connected  with  their  work. 
Thus  were  founded  in  Macedonia  the  monasteries  of 
Sarandapor  and  Xagoricino,  which  were  built  by 
King  Milutin  and  dedicated  to  St.  Jovan  Sarandaporski, 
the  Monastery  of  the  Blessed  Archangel  in  Lesnovo, 
which  was  built  in  honour  of  St.  Gabriel  Lesnovski  by 
the  Serbian  Despot  Oliver,  and  the  Monastery  of  Rilo 
which  was  built  by  the  noble  Hrelja  in  honour  of 
St.  John  Rilski.  The  Sultana  Marija  followed  in  the 
footsteps  of  the  Serbian  kings  with  regard  to  these 
saints.  She  restored  the  Monastery  of  Rilo.  The  body 
of  St.  John  of  Rilo.  which  had  been  worshipped  as  a 
holy  relic  in  the  Rilo  Mountain  near  this  monastery 
had  since  then  been  moved  from  one  place  to  another 
until  it  reached  the  Bulgarian  capital  of  Trnovo.  Not 
wishing  it  to  remain  in  a  foreign  land,  the  monks  of  Rilo 
begged  that  the  remains  of  St.  John  Rilski  might  be 
transferred  to  the  Monastery  of  Rilo.  Thanks  to  the 
efforts   of   the  Sultana  Marija  the  wish  of   the    Serbian 


SERBIAN    RULE    IN    MACEDONIA  55 

monks  was  fulfilled  with  great  pomp  and  amid  a  great 
concourse  of  Serbs  from  Macedonia.  Thus  the  Serbian 
people  of  Macedonia  realized  the  presence  of  a  Serbian 
Empress  among  them  even  in  the  midst  of  the  Turkish 
rule. 

Before  the  end  of  her  life  the  Sultana  Marija  brought 
her  sister  Kantakuzina  to  live  with  her,  and  both  together 
protected  the  Serbian  people  and  the  Christian  faith 
in  Macedonia.  The  Sultana  died  on  September  14, 
1487,  and  was  laid  to  rest  in  the  Monastery  of  Kosanica 
near  Seres.  Her  sister  was  buried  at  Konca,  above 
Strumica. 

Because  of  her  devotion  to  the  Christian  faith  and 
to  the  Serbian  people  an  abundant  tradition  of  the 
Sultana  Marija  has  survived.  A  strip  of  the  coast 
between  Salonica  and  the  Peninsula  of  Kasandra  has 
been   named   Kalamarija    after   her — Mary   the    Good. 

Only  with  the  death  in  1487  of  the  Sultana  Marija 
did  the  influence  of  the  tradition  of  Serbian  rule  in 
Macedonia  finally  come  to  an  end. 


VI 


DIFFERENCE  BETWEEN  SERBIAN  AND  BUL- 
GARIAN RULES  IN  MACEDONIA 

Comparative  duration  of  Bulgarian  and  Serbian  rules  in  Macedonia — 
Bulgars  and  conquered  Slavs  in  Macedonia  two  nations — Bulgars 
are  masters,  and  Macedonians  slaves — Reasons  why  they  never 
mingled — No  traces  left  of  Bulgarian  rule  in  Macedonia,  either 
ethnically  or  as  regards  civilization — Misconceptions  concerning 
Bulgaria's  role  in  the  creation  of  Slav  letters  and  literature — The 
Macedonians  pioneers  of  Christianity  among  the  Slavs — The  first 
Slav  apostles  natives  of  Macedonia — Bulgars  also  receive  Chris- 
tianity from  Macedonia — Language  of  earliest  Slav  books  merely 
called  "  Slav  " — Second  Bulgarian  rule  in  Macedonia,  short, 
tyrannical,  and  obnoxious 

Serbs  and  Macedonians  are  but  one  nation — Serbian  rulers 
the  liberators  and  unifiers  of  the  Serbian  nation  into  one 
state  entity — Serbian  rule  in  Macedonia  represents  the  zenith 
of  Serbian  civilization — Building  of  monasteries  and  intellectual 
progress  in  Macedonia — Serbian  literature  in  Macedonia — 
Dusan's  Code  originated  in  Macedonia — Macedonia  the  heart 
and  focus  of  the  Serbian  Empire — Serbian  capitals  situated  in 
Macedonia — State  Councils,  at  which  the  fate  of  the  nation  was 
decided,  held  in  Macedonia — It  was  in  Macedonia  that  Serbia 
was  elevated  to  the  rank  of  an  Empire  and  the  Serbian  Church 
to  that  of  a  Patriarchate — Byzantine  influence  reaches  Serbia 
through  Macedonia 

BULGARIAN  rule  in  Macedonia  lasted,  as  we  have 
seen,  from  a.d.  861  to  a.d.  969,  from  a.d.  1202  to 
A.D.  1204,  and  from  a.d.  1230  to  a.d.  1246,  one  hundred 
and  twenty-nine  years  in  all.  The  Serbian  rule,  not 
counting  the  reign   of  the  Sultana  Marija,  lasted  from 

56 


SERBIAN    AND    BULGARIAN    RULE         57 

a.d.  1282  to  a.d.  1413,  or  one  hundred  and  thirty-one 
years  in  all.  As  regards  length,  there  is  practically 
nothing  to  choose  between  the  Bulgarian  rule  and  the 
Serbian  in  Macedonia,  except,  perhaps,  in  so  far 
as  the  Bulgarian  rule  was  interrupted,  whereas  the 
Serbian  was  continuous.  There  is,  nevertheless,  a 
great  and  real  difference  between  the  Bulgarian  rule 
and  the  Serbian  in  Macedonia. 

The  Bulgars  and  the  conquered  Macedonians  were  two 
different  nations  as  regards  origin,  race,  and  civilization. 
Special  conditions  were  required  to  bring  about  their 
fusion  into  one  nation.  Such  fusion,  however,  was  out 
of  the  question.  The  Bulgarian  conquerors  in  Macedonia 
represented  an  infinitesimal  layer,  which  kept  itself  aloof 
from  the  nation  at  large  and  refrained  from  intermingling 
with  it.  When  the  Bulgars  took  Macedonia  for  the  first 
time  from  Byzantium  they  established  their  garrisons  in 
the  cities  and  thence  ruled  the  nation  at  large  as  the 
Greeks  had  previously  done.  Under  these  conditions 
the  Macedonian  populace,  which  was  mostly  rural, 
merely  exchanged  one  master  for  another.  The  Mace- 
donian clans  continued  to  live  under  their  tribal  chief- 
tains under  the  Bulgarian  rule  as  they  had  formerly  done 
under  the  Greek,  only  instead  of  paying  tribute  to  the 
Greeks  they  now  paid  it  to  the  Bulgars.  Reliable 
Byzantine  sources  actually  mention  that  such  relations 
did  subsist  between  the  Macedonians  and  the  Bulgars.1 
Between  the  Bulgarian  masters  and  the  conquered  Mace- 
donians there  was  no  intermingling.  And  in  Macedonia 
the  Bulgars  represented  only  a  superficial  layer  which 
never  penetrated  the  depths  of  the  nation  at  large.  In 
Macedonia  the  Bulgarian  rule  was  the  same  as  later  on 
■  J.  Cameniata,  ed,  Bonn,  496,  p.  6, 


58  MACEDONIA 

the  Turkish,  which  in  more  than  five  hundred  years 
failed  to  produce  ethnical  changes  in  the  indigenous 
population.  The  Bulgars,  too,  exercised  no  ethnical 
influence  on  the  body  of  the  people ;  it  remained 
entirely  unchanged. 

The  first  period  of  Bulgarian  rule  in  Macedonia  falls 
into  the  time  when  the  Bulgars  were  still  barbarians. 
The  population  of  Macedonia  was  then,  as  far  as 
civilization  is  concerned,  far  ahead  of  its  conquerors. 
For  this  reason  it  was  impossible  for  the  Bulgars  to 
leave  traces  of  a  Bulgarian  civilization  in  Macedonia. 

To  the  Macedonian  Slavs  falls  the  honour  that, 
towards  the  middle  of  the  ninth  century,  the  first 
Slav  Christian  books  and  MSS.  were  written  in  their 
dialect.  From  this  has  arisen  a  misapprehension,  as 
though  the  earliest  Slav  writings  had  been  written  in 
the  Bulgarian  tongue  and  as  though  the  Bulgars  were 
responsible  for  this  achievement.  The  very  stage  at 
which  Bulgarian  civilization  was  at  that  time  gives  the 
lie  to  such  an  assumption.  Positive  facts  which  we  will 
go  into  definitely  exclude  any  theory  in  favour  of  the 
Bulgars. 

Immediately  after  the  immigration  of  the  Slavs  into 
the  Balkan  Peninsula,  Christianity  began  gradually  to 
spread  among  them.  Assisted  by  the  imperial  officials, 
Greek  and  Roman  missionaries  induced  the  pagan  Slavs 
to  accept  Christianity.  Among  the  less-frequented, 
isolated  mountain  tribes  matters  did  not  always  go 
smoothly,  but  in  the  more  accessible  parts  of  the 
country,  where  there  were  cities,  as  in  Macedonia  and 
Thessaly,  they  progressed  far  more  satisfactorily.  At 
a  very  early  date  new  bishoprics  were  created  whence 
Christianity  was  propagated  among  the  Slavs.     Presently 


SERBIAN    AND    BULGARIAN    RULE         59 

Slavs  were  even  ordained  to  the  priesthood.  It  is  true 
that  divine  service  continued  to  be  celebrated  in  Greek, 
but  the  priests  had  to  preach  and  to  impart  instruction  to 
the  people  in  the  Slav  tongue.  By  adapting  the  words 
of  their  native  tongue  to  Christian  ideas  these  Slav 
priests  laid  the  first  foundations  of  Slav  Christianity. 
Thus  the  definite  conversion  of  the  Slavs  to  the  Christian 
faith  was  largely  prepared  in  Macedonia.  Macedonia  is 
the  cradle  of  Slav  Christianity.  But  all  this  movement 
towards  converting  the  Slavs  is  in  no  way  connected 
with  the  Bulgars.  It  took  place  generations  before  any 
Bulgar  set  foot  in  Macedonia. 

This  first,  partial  conversion  of  the  Macedonian  Slavs 
was  only  the  prelude  of  their  final  and  complete  adoption 
of  Christianity.  This,  too,  was  quite  unconnected  with 
the  Bulgars.  It  was  fully  prepared  before  the  Bulgars 
ever  conquered  Macedonia.  The  brothers  Cyril  and 
Method,  natives  of  Salonica,  were  the  true  apostles  of 
Christianity  among  the  Slavs.  Being  highly  accom- 
plished, they  were  also  well  acquainted  with  the  Mace- 
donian dialect.  Method  was  for  many  years  Greek 
Governor  of  a  Slav  province  in  Macedonia,  before  Athe 
beginning  of  the  Bulgarian  conquest. 

In  862  the  Moravian  princes,  Bastislav  and  Svetopluk, 
sent  envoys  to  the  Byzantine  Emperor  Michael  III, 
asking  for  missionaries  acquainted  with  the  Slav  tongue 
and  the  Christian  faith,  who  would  introduce  Christianity 
in  the  Slav  language  in  Moravia.  For  this  task  Cyril  and 
Method  were  chosen ;  they  invented  the  Slav  alphabet, 
translated  the  most  needful  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  and 
liturgic  writings  into  the  language  of  the  Macedonians, 
and  undertook  the  charge  entrusted  to  them  in  Moravia. 
The  mission  of  the  Moravian  princes  falls  into  the  year 


60  MACEDONIA 

862,  and  the  Bulgars  began  their  conquest  of  Macedonia 
in  861.  Long  before  that  date  Cyril  and  Method  were 
in  Constantinople.  The  Slav  language  they  knew  was 
the  Macedonian.  Their  labours  in  translating  the  Holy 
Scriptures  are  outside  any  connection  with  the  Bulgars. 
In  all  records,  both  contemporary  and  subsequent,  their 
language  is  called  simply  the  Slav,  and  nowhere  the 
Bulgarian.1  The  great  achievement  of  the  foundation 
of  Slav  letters  is  in  no  way  connected  wjth  the  Bulgars. 

Likewise  the  systematic  spreading  of  Christianity 
among  the  Balkan  Slavs  by  the  disciples  of  Cyril  and 
Method  was  also  undertaken  independently  of  the 
Bulgars. 

The  time  when  the  Bulgars  were  establishing  them- 
selves in  Macedonia  coincides  with  the  beginning  of  the 
persecution  of  the  followers  of  Cyril  and  Method  in 
Moravia.  Some  of  them  sought  refuge  in  Bulgaria. 
The  Bulgarian  Tsar  Boris  (852-888)  received  them  well, 
but  did  not  keep  them  in  Bulgaria,  sending  them  on  to 
Macedonia  instead.  Bulgaria  was  not  a  suitable  field  for 
the  Slav  preachers  of  Christianity. 

Towards  the  end  of  the  seventh  century  the  Turanian 
Bulgars  had  destroyed  the  first  harvest  of  the  Gospel 
which  Christian  missionaries  had  sown  among  the  Slavs 
before  the  arrival  of  the  Bulgars  in  those  countries  which 
they  subdued.     A  long  time  elapsed  before  we  find  fresh 

»  V.  Djeric,  Professor  at  the  University  of  Belgrade,  has  studied 
all  history  sources  from  the  ninth  to  the  twelfth  centuries,  in  which 
the  language  of  the  Slavs  of  the  Balkan  Peninsula  of  that  period  is 
mentioned,  and  found  nowhere  that  the  language  of  the  earliest  Slav 
books  is  called  anything  but  Slav.  There  are  no  traces  at  all  of  the 
Bulgarian  designation  (V.  Djeric,  "  O  Srpskom  imenu  u  Staroj 
Srbiji  i  Makedoniji '.'  ("The  term  'Serbian'  in  Old  Serbia  and 
Macedonia"),  Belgrade,  1904,  pp.  32-38. 


SERBIAN    AND    BULGARIAN    RULE        61 

attempts  to  introduce  Christianity  among  the  Bulgars. 
As  with  all  barbarians,  the  work  of  converting  them  was 
fraught  with  difficulty.  Even  those  who  were  baptized 
frequently  reverted  to  their  old  faith.  Neither  were 
such  of  the  Bulgarian  sovereigns  who  adopted  Chris- 
tianity reliable  converts.  Tsar  Boris,  who  became  a 
Christian,  abdicated  about  a.d.  888  in  favour  of  his  son 
Vladimir,  but  soon  found  himself  compelled  to  resume 
the  reins  of  government  because  the  new  Tsar  renounced 
Christianity  and  reverted  to  paganism.  Boris  defeated 
him,  blinded  him  for  punishment,  and  placed  his  younger 
son  Simeon  upon  the  throne.  Islam,  too,  had  by  this 
time  taken  considerable  root  among  the  Bulgars.  Pope 
Nicholas  mentions  in  a  letter  that  Saracen  books  were 
found  among  the  Bulgars.  (Libri  profani,  quos  a  Sara- 
cenis  vos  abstulisse  ac  apud  vos  habere  perhibetis.) 
Neither  did  the  Bulgarian  people,  who  still  preserved 
many  Turanian  qualities  in  their  pristine  savagery, 
present  a  suitable  field  for  the  growth  of  Christianity. 
Finally,  the  Slav  language  in  Bulgaria  had  not  yet 
assumed  a  definite  form. 

In  Macedonia,  the  cradle  of  Slav  Christianity,  con- 
ditions were  altogether  different.  There  the  spreading 
of  Christianity  among  the  Slavs  was  not  in  any  way 
impeded,  but  its  progress  was  constantly  maintained. 
There  no  Bulgarian  influence  interfered  with  the  lan- 
guage. The  Holy  Scriptures  could  be  understood  by 
everybody.  The  race  was  pure  and  of  settled  habits. 
These  were  suitable  conditions  for  the  lofty  mission  of 
the  persecuted  Slav  ministers  of  the  Gospel  from  Moravia. 
For  this  reason  Tsar  Boris  directed  them  to  Macedonia. 
It  is  in  Macedonia  that  the  new  era  of  Slav  Christianity 
then   began,    with   the    Holy    Scriptures    no   longer   in 


62  MACEDONIA 

Greek,  but  in  the  Slav  tongue,  and  with  divine  service 
celebrated  in  Slav.  There  were  compiled  fresh  trans- 
lations of  the  Christian  writings,  and  there  were  laid  the 
first  foundations  of  Slav  literature.  This  Slav  Chris- 
tianity made  a  vigorous  start.  From  Macedonia  its 
radiant  beams  spread  in  all  directions — to  Serbia,  to 
Bulgaria,  and  to  Bussia. 

This  is  the  substratum  of  fact  in  the  great  legend  of 
the  part  played  by  Bulgaria  in  the  first  introduction 
of  Christianity  and  letters  among  the  Slavs. 

As  uncivilized  foreigners  and  invaders,  the  Bulgars 
could  only  be  hated  in  Macedonia.  That  is  why  the 
Macedonian  Slavs  rebelled  against  them,  drove  them  out, 
freed  themselves  and  established  a  state  of  their  own. 

Thus  ended  the  first  Bulgarian  rule  in  Macedonia,  nor 
did  there  remain  in  Macedonia  either  ethnical  traces  of 
it  or  the  legacy  of  a  civilization. 

The  second  Bulgarian  rule  in  Macedonia  represents  an 
easily  won  success  during  an  auspicious  opportunity.  It 
was  short — only  twenty-one  years  in  all ;  far  too  short  a 
time  to  alter  the  ethnic  character  of  a  large  country. 
Moreover,  this  time  also  the  Bulgars  only  garrisoned  the 
towns  without  having  intercourse  with  the  native  popu- 
lation or  mingling  with  it.  Lastly,  the  Bulgarian  rule 
was  so  barbarous  that  it  inspired  nothing  but  loathing 
among  the  nation.  The  Bulgarian  rulers  were  cruel  and 
bloodthirsty  tyrants.  They  knew  no  moderation  in  deal- 
ing with  a  conquered  populace.  Their  principes  imperii 
(Princes  of  the  Empire)  were  mere  savages.  Frankish 
and  Byzantine  historians  describe  the  disgusting  cruelty 
of  the  Bulgarian  Tsar  Kalojan  (1197-1207).  Ivanko,  the 
nephew  and  assassin  of  Tsar  Asen  I,  used  to  have  Greek 
prisoners  executed  during  his  banquets  in  order  to  add 


SERBIAN    AND    BULGARIAN    RULE         63 

zest  to  his  revelry  and  enjoyment.  This  is  a  sample  of 
the  kind  of  rule  the  Bulgars  brought  to  Macedonia. 
Strez,  who  was  governor  of  part  of  Macedonia  during 
the  Bulgarian  rule,  is  a  fair  representative  of  Bulgarian 
rule  in  Macedonia.  In  his  castle  at  Prosek,  perched  on 
a  rock  high  above  the  Vardar,  he  had  a  wooden  platform 
built,  where  it  was  his  custom,  when  he  was  in  his  cups, 
to  condemn  men  to  death  for  the  slightest  offence, 
causing  them  to  be  cast  from  the  platform  into  the 
torrent  of  the  Vardar  far  below.  "  While  the  poor 
wretches  were  being  dashed  to  pieces  on  the  rocks,  he 
used  to  shout  in  mockery :  '  Mind  you  do  not  spoil  your 
skin  ! '  There  was  no  place  for  those  cast  down  to  fall, 
except  the  river.  If  a  man  was  not  rescued  thence  by 
some  of  his  kinsfolk,  or  by  godfearing  men,  or  washed 
ashore  by  the  waves,  he  remained  in  the  river,  and  was 
devoured  by  the  fish." 

Thus  a  contemporary,  who  was  perhaps  an  eye-witness 
of  these  horrors,  describes  the  Bulgarian  rule  in  Mace- 
donia.1 Such  are  the  memories  of  the  second  Bulgarian 
rule  in  Macedonia. 

Serbian  rule  in  Macedonia  bears  quite  a  different 
character ;  it  is  bound  up  with  altogether  different 
memories. 

The  Serbs  and  the  Macedonians  are  one  and  the  same 
nation  as  regards  origin,  race,  and  civilization.  There 
were  no  differences  between  them  that  had  to  be 
adjusted  or  equalized.  The  Serbs  were  not  conquerors 
or  aggressors  in  Macedonia,  but  liberators.  Mediaeval 
records  refer  to  the   Serbian  rulers  as  the  "liberators" 

1  "Zivot  Svetoga  Save"  ("Life  of  St.  Sava"),  by  Donientijan, 
ed.  Dj.  Danicic\  Belgrade,  1860,  p.  106. 


64  MACEDONIA 

(osvoboditelji)  and   "gatherers"    (savakupitelji)  into  one 
realm  of  the  whole  Serbian  nation. 

The  Serbs  in  Macedonia  did  not  represent  a  ruling 
class,  but  the  sons  of  a  brother  nation,  who  had  brought 
freedom.  They  did  not  seek  riches  and  booty  in  Mace- 
donia, but  themselves  imported  wealth  and  prosperity. 
At  the  time  of  her  acquisition  of  Macedonia,  Serbia  had 
attained  a  high  level  of  material  prosperity.  Her  trade 
in  minerals,  agricultural  produce,  and  cattle  with  her 
neighbours  had  so  enhanced  Serbia's  reputation  that 
even  Bulgars  left  their  country  and  emigrated  to  Serbia. 
The  effects  of  the  wealth  of  King  Milutin  were  felt  far 
beyond  the  borders  of  Serbia,  in  Constantinople,  in 
Salonica  and  Jerusalem,  where  he  built  churches  and 
hospitals  for  the  poor.  In  Dusan's  time  Serbia  was  the 
richest  country  in  the  Balkan  Peninsula.  Dusan 
endowed  monasteries  "  on  a  golden  scale,"  and  show- 
ered gifts  in  all  directions.1  On  their  entrance  into 
Macedonia  the  Serbs  caused  the  Macedonians  to  share 
in  their  freedom,  prosperity,  and  wealth. 

While  the  Bulgarian  rule  in  Macedonia  marked  the 
acme  of  barbarity,  the  Serbian  rule  brought  a  golden  era 
of  Serbian  civilization.  Upon  their  entrance  into  Mace- 
donia the  Serbs  destroyed  and  abolished  nothing.  It 
was  the  opposite  that  was  the  case.  During  the  short 
time  that  he  ruled  in  Skoplje,  King  Uros  confirmed  the 
Church  in  all  its  old  privileges  which  had  been  granted  to 
it  by  the  Bulgarian  Tsar  Asen  II.  Tsar  Dusan  over- 
whelmed the  Monastery  of  St.  Jovan  Preteca — founded 
by  the  Greek  Emperor  Andronikos  and  situated  near 
Serez — with  his  generosity,  granted  it  certain  rights 
and  endowed  it  by  patents  specially  drawn  up  in 
1  C.  Jirecek,  "  Gesch.  d.  Serben,"  i.  pp.  338,  391. 


SERBIAN    AND    BULGARIAN    RULE        65 

Greek.1  All  monasteries  and  holy  places  in  Macedonia  were 
respected  by  the  Serbs.  The  Greek  cities  of  Macedonia, 
which  enjoyed  special  privileges  under  the  Greek  rule, 
were  confirmed  in  these  privileges  by  special  decree.2 

By  acquiring  Macedonia  the  Serbs  merely  extended  to 
her  the  field  for  developing  their  civilization.  While  of 
the  Bulgarian  rule  in  Macedonia  there  remains  not 
one  typical  church,  nor  painting,  nor  literary  record,  the 
mementoes  of  the  rule  of  the  Serbs  in  Macedonia  are 
cogent  proof  of  their  presence  there. 

The  list  of  churches  and  monasteries  which  the 
Serbs  have  either  built  or  restored,  or  handsomely 
endowed  in  Macedonia,  is  a  long  one.3 

By  the  consensus  of  expert  opinion  all  these  churches 

1  V.  Grigorovic,  "  Ocerk  putesestvija,"  p.  145. 

2  C.  Jirecek,  "  Gesch.  d.  Serben,"  i.  p.  386. 

3  We  cannot  refrain  from  mentioning  at  least  some  of  the  principal 
monasteries  among  those  which  the  Serbian  kings  either  built  or 
restored  in  Macedonia,  viz.  the  Church  of  Our  Blessed  Redeemer 
near  Custendil,  which  Stephan  Decanski  built  to  commemorate 
his  victory  over  the  Bulgars  and  to  which  we  have  already- 
referred.  King  Milutin  built  the  Church  of  Our  Blessed  Lady 
Trojerucica  (with  the  three  hands)  at  Skoplje  ;  the  Church  of  St. 
George  Nagoridinski  near  Kumanovo ;  the  Church  of  St.  John 
Sarandaporski  in  the  same  neighbourhood  ;  the  Church  of  St.  George 
on  the  River  Spreva  in  Skoplje  ;  St.  Constantine's  in  Skoplje ;  the 
Church  of  St.  Nikita  Martyr  near  Skoplje.  Dusan  built  the  Church 
of  Our  Blessed  Lady  in  Tetovo  ;  the  Monastery  of  Treskavac  near 
Prilep  ;  the  Monastery  of  Zrze  near  Prilep  ;  the  Church  of  St.  John 
Preteca  near  Serez.  Tsar  Uros  built  the  Church  of  Our  Blessed  Lady 
in  Skoplje.  King  Vukasin  and  his  sons  built  the  Church  of  St. 
Demitrius  (Marko's  Monastery)  near  Skoplje.  Tsar  Simeon  (Sinisa) 
built  the  Churches  of  the  Holy  Archangel  and  St.  Elias  in  Kostur ;  and 
the  Church  of  Our  Blessed  Lady  in  Janjina.  Uglesa  built  the  Monas- 
tery of  Samotrepa.  Constantine  Dejanovic  built  the  Monastery  of 
Osogovo  near  Kriva  Palanka.  Despot  Oliver  built  the  Monastery 
of  Lesnovo  near  Istip.  Hrelja  built  the  Monastery  of  Bilo  and  the 
Church  of  the  Holy  Archangel  in  Istip.  Novak  built  the  Church  of 
Our  Blessed  Lady  on  the  Isle  Mali  Grad  in  Lake  Prcspa,  and  so  oh, 

6 


66  MACEDONIA 

are  classified  as  examples  of  Serbian  architecture,  just  the 
same  as  the  monasteries  in  other  Serbian  countries.  Many 
of  these  edifices  are  to-day  in  ruins  ;  but  so  far  as  they 
have  been  preserved  they  bear  witness  to  the  high  level 
of  Serbian  architecture  and  artistic  taste  at  the  time. 

The  images  in  them  are  also  Serbian  in  character. 
And  they  bear  yet  another  Serbian  sign,  viz.  the  repre- 
sentations of  Serbian  kings  and  worthies,  and  the 
Serbian  legends  on  those  pictures.1 

When  building  churches  and  monasteries  in  Mace- 
donia, the  Serbian  kings  and  princes  liberally  endowed 
them  nvith  money  and  other  property,  such  as  villages 
and  tolls  on  produce,  thus  affording  them  facilities  for 
becoming  centres  of  education  and  learning.  They  were 
the  seats  of  schools  and  literary  studies.  Many  Serbian 
books  on  various  subjects  were  penned  within  their  walls. 

1  The  Bulgarian  agents  have  destroyed  many  of  the  paintings 
representing  Serbian  kings  and  princes  and  the  legends  referring 
to  them  in  the  churches  and  monasteries  of  Macedonia.  Of  those 
which  have  been  preserved  we  will  mention  the  paintings  represent- 
ing St.  Sava,  the  first  Serbian  Archbishop  of  Serbia ;  those  of  Tsar 
Uros  and  King  Marko  in  the  Church  of  St.  Demitrius  near  Skoplje ; 
that  of  King  Milubin  in  the  Church  of  St.  George  Nagoricinski ;  repre- 
sentations of  King  Dusan,  Queen  Jelena,  and  the  Kraljevic  Uros  in 
the  Monastery  of  St.  Nicholas  near  Skoplje ;  paintings  of  Tsar  Uros 
and  King  Vukasin  in  the  Church  of  St.  Nicholas  in  Psaca  (near 
Kumanovo)  ;  paintings  representing  Tsar  Dusan,  Tsaritsa  Jelena, 
Despot  Oliver  and  his  wife  Marija  in  the  Monastery  of  Lesnovo  ; 
those  of  Tsar  Dusan,  Tsaritsa  Jelena,  and  their  son  Uros  in  the 
Monastery  of  St.  John  Preteca  near  Serez  ;  painting  representing 
King  Vukasin  in  the  Church  of  the  Holy  Archangel  in  Prilep,  and 
the  picture  of  King  Marko  in  the  church  near  Prilep.  Paintings 
representing  Stephan  Nemanja,  St.  Sava,  Stephan  Decanski,  King 
Milutin,  Tsar  Uros,  Milos  Obilic,  etc.,  have  been  preserved  in  the 
churches  and  monasteries  in  Skopska  Crna  Gora  (Montenegro). 
"  Everywhere  these  pictures  were  given  the  most  prominent  posi- 
tions "  (Srpska  Kraljevska  Akademija,  "  Naselja  Srpskih  Zemalja") 
("  Settlement  of  the  Serbian  Lands"),  vol.  iii.  pp.  500-507, 


SERBIAN    AND   BULGARIAN    RULE        67 

Besides  those  written  in  the  Macedonian  monasteries, 
many  contemporary  Serbian  books  written  elsewhere 
have  also  been  preserved.  In  all  of  these  it  is  men- 
tioned that  they  were  written  during  the  reign  of  such 
and  such  a  Serbian  ruler,  or  prince  of  the  Church,  and 
on  Serbian  territory.  Not  one  of  them  mentions  Bulgars, 
except  in  so  far  as  some  of  these  books  commemorate 
victories  over  the  Bulgars.1 

Speaking  of  the  Serbian  literary  monuments  in  Mace- 
donia, we  must  not  forget  to  mention  the  most 
important  among  them,  perhaps  the  most  important 
of  all  the  Serbian  literary  records  of  the  Middle  Ages, 
viz.  Dusan's  Code.  This  celebrated  achievement  of 
Serbian  literature  and  civilization  was  compiled  in 
Macedonia,  in  Skoplje  and  Serez,  at  the  State  Coun- 
cils (Sabor)  of  1349  and  1354. 

Under  the  Bulgarian  rule  Macedonia  was  a  mere 
province  of  secondary  importance,  a  march  of  the' 
Bulgarian  Empire.  Under  the  Serbian  rule  Macedonia 
was  the  centre  of  the  life  of  the  Empire.  As  soon  as 
King  Milutin  had  taken  Skoplje  he  made  it  the  capital 
of  Serbia.  Dusan  spent  nearly  the  whole  of  his  reign 
in  Macedonia,  where  he  had  many  royal  residences. 
In  Prilep  he  built  an  Imperial  palace  for  himself.  The 
winters  of  1354  and  1355  he  spent  in  his  palace  at 
Serez.  Serez  was  the  residence  of  Tsaritsa  Jelena, 
Dusan's  wife.  She  continued  to  live  there  even  after 
she  had  taken  the  veil.  Serez  was  subsequently  the 
capital  of  Jovan  Ugljesa.  Prilep  was  the  permanent 
capital  of  King  Vukasin  and  King  Marko.  Branko 
Mladenovic  made  Ochrid  his  capital,  and  all  the   other 

1  See  Lj^Stojanovic,  "  Stari  Srpski  Zapisi  i  Natpisi  "  ("  Old  Serbian 
Inscriptions  and  Notes  "),  Nob.  34,  43,  56,  75,  102,  103,  4944. 


68  MACEDONIA 

Serbian  princes  who  ruled   in   Macedonia   likewise  had 
their  capitals  there. 

Most  important  events  in  Serbia's  domestic  history 
took  place  in  Macedonia,  the  heart  of  Serbian  State 
life,  and  the  fate  of  the  Serbian  nation  was  decided 
within  her  borders.  In  Macedonia  were  held  those 
Serbian  State  Assemblies  or  Councils  (Sabor=Assembly, 
Council ;  Sabor  Srpski  =  Serbian  Council ;  Sabor  Zemlje 
Srpske  =  Serbian  Land  Council ;  Sabor  otacastvija  = 
Council  of  the  Fatherland,  as  these  assemblies  are 
actually  called  in  old  historic  records)  at  which  most 
far-reaching  decisions  were  taken.  We  have  already 
referred  to  two  of  these  Councils,  those  of  Skoplje  and 
Serez,  at  which  Dusan's  Code  was  compiled.  At  the 
Council  of  Skoplje  in  1346,  Serbia  was  proclaimed  an 
Empire,  and  Dusan  crowned  the  first  Serbian  Tsar. 
At  the  same  Council  the  Archbishopric  of  Serbia  was 
raised  to  the  rank  of  a  Patriarchate.  The  Bishopric  of 
Lesnovo  was  created  at  the  Council  of  Skoplje  in  1347. 
At  the  Council  of  Serez  in  1354  a  new  Patriarch  was 
appointed.  A  Council  was  held  in  Krupiste,  south  of 
Kostur,  in  1355.  In  1357  there  was  another  Council 
in  Skoplje,  and  so  forth. 

It  was  in  Macedonia  that  Serbia  not  only  achieved 
her  full  strength  and  significance,  but  also  her  complete 
external  development.  It  was  there  that  on  Easter 
Sunday,  April  17,  1346,  Serbia  proclaimed  herself  an 
Empire  at  the  State  Council  in  Skoplje.  The  greatest 
day  in  Serbia's  past  was  celebrated  in  Macedonia,  when 
Serbia  became  an^  Empire  and  the  Serbian  King  and 
Queen  were  proclaimed  Tsar  and  Tsaritsa.  There  the 
new  Serbian  Imperial  Palace  became  the  equal  of  that 
in  Constantinople  in  splendour,  ceremonial,  and  *  its 
attendant  nobility. 


SERBIAN    AND    BULGARIAN    RULE         69 

Such  are  the  memories  bequeathed  to  Macedonia  by 
the  Serbian  rule.  "While  national  tradition  in  Macedonia 
does  not  retain  even  the  slightest  memento  of  the 
Bulgarian  rule,  it  cherishes  naught  but  events  from  the 
Serbian  past,  and  none  but  heroes  of  (Serbian   history. 

Such  was  the  Serbian  rule  in  Macedonia. 

***** 

Macedonia  undoubtedly  also  influenced  Serbia.  But 
even  here  we  find  no  trace  of  anything  Bulgarian.  It 
was  purely  a  Greek  influence.  Macedonia  is  an  old 
Greek  province.  Although  after  the  immigration  of 
the  Slavs  the  population  became  Slav  in  the  majority, 
yet  Greek  civilization  remained  strong  within  her.  Very 
frequently  in  the  cities  the  Greeks  were  in  the  majority. 
They  already  possessed  Christianity ;  ecclesiastical  power, 
literature,  higher  civilization,  the  learned  professions, 
commerce,  and  administration  were  all  in  their  hands. 
All  of  this  subsequently  passed  over  to  the  Serbs  in 
Macedonia.  During  the  Serbian  rule  in  Macedonia  the 
memory  of  the  Greek  domination  was  still  quite  fresh. 
For  this  reason  Macedonia  is  sometimes  referred  to 
as  the  "  Greek  country "  in  old  Serbian  records.  Nor 
were  the  Greeks  or  Greek  literature  in  any  way  sup- 
pressed by  the  Serbian  sovereigns.  The  latter  styled 
themselves  rulers  of  the  "  Serbs  and  Greeks."  The  State 
ceremonial,  official  titles,  the  life  of  the  Court  and  Serbian 
usage  of  that  age  in  many  ways  betray  the  Greek 
influence.  This  was  Serbia's  experience  in  conquering 
Macedonia,  an  experience  which  continued  to  gain 
strength  in  time,  in  spite  of  her  being  already  under 
the  influence  of  Byzantine  culture.  Of  the  Bulgars  and 
Bulgarian  influence  in  Macedonia,  Serbia  felt  nothing, 
nor  could  she  have  felt  anything,  for  indeed  there  was 
none  left  in  Macedonia. 


VII 

TURKISH  RULE  IN  MACEDONIA 

Complete  disappearance  of  the  Bulgars  under  Turkish  rule — Serbian 
national  life  not  arrested  by  Turkish  conquest — Macedonians 
remain  Serbian  under  Turkish  rule — Significance  of  the  indepen- 
dent Serbian  Patriarchate  for  the  Serbian  nation  during  the 
Turkish  rule — Macedonia  an  integral  part  of  the  Serbian 
Patriarchate 

WITH  the  fall  of  Macedonia  under  the  Turkish 
domination,  every  connection  between  her  and 
Serbia  was  severed.  Surely  this  was  the  moment  for 
the  Macedonians  to  prove  what  they  truly  were.  And 
they  proved  it.  During  the  whole  time  of  the  Turkish 
rule  in  Macedonia,  the  Macedonians  have  remained  Serbs. 
Meantime  there  were  no  causes  at  work  which  might  have 
wrought  changes  to  the  advantage  of  the  Bulgars.  The 
Bulgarian  Empire  was  conquered  by  the  Turkish  during 
the  Turkish  invasion  of  1393,  before  the  final  fall  of 
Macedonia.  Bulgaria  disappeared  completely  under  the 
Turkish  rule,  and  for  centuries  she  was  as  utterly  un- 
known as  though  she  did  not  exist.  "  Under  the  Turks, 
the  Bulgars  ceased  to  exist  as  a  nation  ;  they  were  only 
a  host  of  individuals,  oppressed,  vanquished,  and  reduced 
to  abject  misery.  Even  the  designation  '  nation  '  {jazik) 
had  disappeared,  and  its  place  was  taken  by  the  word 
khora,  which  means  a  multitude,  a  rabble  of  ignorant 
folk,  condemned  to  labour  and  to  forced  labour."     Such 

70 


TURKISH    RULE    IN    MACEDONIA  71 

is  the  description  of  the  Bulgars  during  the  Turkish 
rule,  by  the  Bulgarian  historian  M.  Drinov,  a  Bulgar 
by  nationality,  Professor  at  the  University  of  Harkow 
and  the  first  Minister  of  Public  Instruction  in  resusci- 
tated Bulgaria.1  How  could  a  Bulgaria  in  this  condition 
have  had  any  power  to  Bulgarize  the  Serbian  people  of 
Macedonia  under  the  Turkish  rule  ? 

As  regards  the  Serbs,  the  case  was  different.  Therefore 
the  Serbian  sentiment  of  the  Macedonians  never  flagged. 
The  Serbian  principalities  north  of  Macedonia  survived 
the  fall  of  Macedonia  for  many  years  (Serbia  until  1459, 
Bosnia  until  1463,  Hercegovina  until  1482,  Zeta  until 
1499).  So  long  as  these  States  survived,  Macedonia 
looked  upon  them  as  a  pledge  of  hope  for  liberation 
from  the  Turks  and  the  return  of  the  conditions  which 
prevailed  before  the  Turkish  conquest.  The  story  of  the 
fall  of  the  Serbian  States  teems  with  glorious  examples 
of  heroic  fighting  and  self-sacrifice,  which  have  enriched 
the  popular  traditions  of  Macedonia  even  as  they  enriched 
those  of  every  other  Serbian  country.  Nor  did  the  Serbs 
disappear  under  the  Turks.  The  entire  history  of  the 
Turkish  Empire  in  the  Balkan  Peninsula  is  strongly  inter- 
woven with  Serbia's  share,  in  which  the  Macedonians 
always  played  a  thoroughly  Serbian  part.  They  were 
staunch  guardians  of  their  national  Serbian  feeling, 
their  Serbian  churches  and  monasteries,  Serbian  culture 
and  history.  Finally,  they  were  also  warriors  for  the 
liberation  of  the  Serbian  people  from  the  Turkish  yoke. 

Under  the  Turkish  rule  it  was  an  accepted  fact  that 

the  nation  which  possessed  an  autonomous  Church  also 

retained  its  status  and  significance  as  a  nation.    Christians 

who  had  no  autonomous  Church  were  simply  so  many 

1  "Teriodiceskoe  Spisanie,"  iv.  p.  4  (in  Bulgarian). 


72  MACEDONIA 

Turkish  subjects,  without  any  nationality  or  status  of 
their  own.  The  Bulgars  had  no  autonomous  church 
under  the  Turkish  rule.  When  the  Turks  conquered  the 
Bulgarian  Empire  they  likewise  abolished  the  Bulgarian 
autonomous  Patriarchate  in  Trnovo,  and  affiliated  it  to 
the  Greek  Patriarchate  in  Constantinople.  This  is  one 
of  the  chief  reasons  why  the  Bulgars  even  in  their  own 
fatherland  "had  no  existence  as  a  nation"  under  the 
Turks,  but  only  as  a  "  host  of  individuals."  Even  under 
the  Turkish  rule  the  Serbs  retained  their  autonomous 
Church.  The  Serbian  autonomous  Patriarchate  of  Ipek, 
whose  spiritual  powers  extended  over  Macedonia  also, 
continued  in  many  respects  to  embody  the  role  played 
formerly  by  the  Serbian  State.  Herein  lies  the  reason 
why  the  Serbian  nation  has  everywhere,  including 
Macedonia,  preserved  the  national  Serbian  consciousness. 
The  autonomous  Churches  possessed  a  vast  significance 
under  the  Turkish  regime.  They  were,  so  far  as  Turkish 
abuses  permitted,  a  kind  of  imperium  in  imperio.  They 
were  absolutely  independent  as  regards  the  religious  and 
national  affairs  of  their  adherents.  In  all  the  autonomous 
Christian  Churches  in  Turkey  the  election  of  the  Patri- 
arch and  all  other  dignitaries  of  the  Church  was  free. 
The  Sultan  was  merely  entitled  to  confirm  them  in  their 
dignities.  The  Patriarch  was  the  highest  spiritual 
authority,  and  the  supreme  guardian  of  the  national 
interests  of  his  people.  He  was  not  only  allowed  full 
freedom  to  exercise  his  spiritual  functions,  but  also  to 
protect  national  traditions,  customs,  and  institutions, 
so  long  as  these  did  not  clash  with  the  interests  of 
the  Turkish  State.  The  ecclesiastical  authorities  were 
entitled  to  administer  justice.  Not  only  religious  matters 
and  the  clergy  came  under  their  jurisdiction,  but  they 


TURKISH    ROLE    IN   MACEDONIA  73 

were  the  real  temporal  courts  of  justice  in  all  matters 
arising  from  the  rites  and  ordinances  of  the  Church.  All 
questions  pertaining  to  marriage  and  divorce  were  dealt 
with  by  the'  spiritual  courts.  Even  the  question  of  the 
dowry,  the  maintenance  of  a  divorced  wife,  and  the  care 
of  the  children  of  divorced  parents  were  dealt  with  by 
these  courts.  They  were  empowered  also  to  administer 
the  laws  dealing  with  wills  and  bequests,  the  question  of 
inheritance,  the  adoption  of  children,  and  everything  else 
in  any  way  connected  with  religious  observance.  The 
Church  was  also  the  authority  in  educational  matters. 
Schools,  letters  and  literature  were  the  exclusive  province 
of  the  clergy.  A  nation  possessing  no  Church  autonomy 
under  the  Turks  was  also  without  the  means  of  safe- 
guarding its  civilization.  The  Church  parish,  which 
existed  everywhere  under  the  Turkish  rule,  was  an 
institution  within  whose  scope  the  nation  was  entitled 
to  minister  to  its  spiritual  and  national  needs.  Through 
it  the  higher  dignitaries  of  the  Church  were  in  touch 
with  the  common  people.  From  the  patriarch  on  his 
throne  to  the  poorest  of  the  poor  all  were  in  direct  touch, 
and  all  were  imbued  with  the  same  religious  and  national 
spirit. 

The  Serbian  prelates  were  the  chiefest  and  most 
eloquent  representatives  of  the  unity  and  solidarity  of 
the  nation.  As  such  they  were  its  natural  envoys  and 
representatives  in  all  its  relations  with  the  Turkish 
Government  and  its  officials.  On  behalf  of  their  people 
they  concluded  treaties  with  the  Turks,  protested  against 
acts  of  injustice,  offered  themselves  as  hostages  for  the 
sake  of  the  people,  and  exposed  themselves  to  endless 
dangers.  The  lesser  clergy  and  the  people  obeyed  them ; 
they  submitted  to  the   guidance  of   the  princes  of    the 


74  MACEDONIA 

Church  and  every  notable  act  was  connected  with  them. 
If  a  church  were  built,  if  a  picture  were  painted  in  a 
church,  if  a  book  were  written,  copied  or  transcribed,  or 
a  well  constructed,  there  was  always  inscribed  upon  them 
that  this  was  work  done  during  the  reign  of  such  and 
such  a  Patriarch  or  Bishop.  The  names  of  the  Serbian 
prelates,  as  inscribed  in  these  legends,  seem  as  though 
they  were  the  names  of  temporal  sovereigns. 

So  great  was  the  part  played  by  the  autonomous 
Churches  under  the  Turkish  rule.  Such  a  part  devolved 
also  upon  the  autonomous  Church  of  Serbia,  whose 
domain  at  all  times  included  Macedonia  also. 


VII   {Continued) 

MACEDONIA  FROM  THE  LOSS  OF  HER  INDE- 
PENDENCE TO  THE  SUPPRESSION  OF  THE 
SERBIAN  PATRIARCHATE  (1413-1459) 

The  role  of  the  Serbian  State  devolves  upon  the  Serbian  Patriarchate 
— Character  of  the  Serbian  Patriarchate — Serbian  sentiment 
among  the  Macedonian  clergy — Serbian  sentiment  among  the 
Macedonian  people — The  Macedonians  seek  refuge  only  among 
Serbs — They  feel  among  kinsmen  with  the  Serbs — Part  played 
by  Macedonians  among  the  Serbs  as  a  whole 

MACEDONIA'S  independence,  as  we  have  seen, 
was  not  totally  destroyed  by  the  Turks  until 
about  1413.  After  the  Turks  had  wrested  Macedonia 
from  the  Serbs,  the  role  of  the  Serbian  State  in 
Macedonia  was  taken  over  by  the  autonomous  Patri- 
archate of  Serbia,  whose  seat  was  in  Ipek.  Not  until 
the  fall  of  the  Serbian  State  on  the  Morava  and 
Danube  in  1459  did  the  Turks  also  dissolve  the 
Serbian  Patriarchate. 

During  the  time  of  the  Serbian  Patriarchate,  none 
but  Serbs  occupied  the  Patriarchal  throne.  All  episcopal 
thrones  dependent  upon  the  Patriarchate  See,  were  like- 
wise occupied  by  bishops  who  were  Serbs.  All  the 
parish  priests  and  the  monks  were  Serbs.  In  all  Serbian 
countries,  as  well  as  in  Macedonia,  all  the  churchmen 
taught  and  upheld  the  religious,  intellectual,  and  national 
traditions  of  the  old  Serbian  State  life.     With  the  help 

75 


7G  MACEDONIA 

of  the  populace  they  built  new  churches  and  monasteries, 
and  restored  the  old  ones.1  Within  these  churches  and 
monasteries,  divine  service  continued  to  be  celebrated  in 
the  same  tongue  as  it  had  been  in  the  days  of  the 
Serbian  Empire.  The  clergy,  the  only  scholars  of  that 
age,  carried  on  their  Old  Serbian  literary  tradition,  adding 
to  and  transcribing  the  extensive  material  of  Old  Serbian 
literature.  Serbian  literary  records  of  those  days  are  to 
be  found  in  Skoplje,  Mlado  Nagoricino,  and  elsewhere.2 
How  strong  was  the  Serbian  sentiment  of  the  Macedonian 
scribes  and  chroniclers  of  those  days  may  be  shown  by  an 
example.  In  1434  a  monk  of  Skoplje  who  lived  in  the 
village  of  Vitomirci,  near  Skoplje,  made  a  copy  of  one 
of  the  Gospels.  In  dating  his  work  he  mentions  that 
he  wrote  it  "  in  the  seventh  year  after  the  death  of  the 
Honourable  Despot  Stephan  (Stephan,  son  of  Lazar, 
Despot  of  Serbia,  1389-1427),  in  the  Empire  of  the  infidel 
Emperor  Murat."3  What  caused  this  monk,  so  long 
after  the  fall  of  Macedonia,  and  so  far  from  the  free 
Serbian  States,  to  remember  the  Serbian  Prince,  and  to 
mention  the  death  of  Despot  Stephan  in  dating  his 
work?  Does  he  not  give  expression  to  the  general 
popular  feeling  of  the  Macedonians  towards  the  Serbian 
princes  ? 

Side  by  side  with  the  Serbian  sympathies  of  the 
Macedonian  clergy  we  find  records  of  similar  feelings 
among  the  mass  of  the  people.  The  Serbian  people  did 
not   fare   well   in    "the  Empire  of  the  infidel  Emperor 

'  Lj.  Stojanovic,  "  Stari  Srpski  Zapisi  i  Natpisi  "  ("  Old  Serbian 
Inscriptions  and  Notes "),  i.  Nos.  254,  273.  J.  H.  Vasiljevic, 
"  Pritep  i  nijegova  Okolina  "  ("  Prilep  and  its  Environs  "),  p.  84. 

-  Lj.  Stojanovic,  "  Stari  Srpski  Zapisi  i  Natpisi "  ("  Old  Serbian 
Inscriptions  and  NoteB  "),  i.  Nos.  261,  313,  etc. 

3  Ibid.,  No.  261. 


THE    LOSS   OF    HER   INDEPENDENCE      77 

Murat."  That  is  why  so  many  fled  from  it.  The  stream 
of  emigration  began  during  the  earliest  days  of  the 
Turkish  conquest  of  Serbian  territory  in  1371,  and 
afterwards  proceeded  uninterruptedly.  Until  the  fall 
of  Bulgaria  in  1393  there  were  two  countries  open  to 
the  Macedonian  refugees — Bulgaria  and  Serbia.  Under 
such  circumstances  the  chance  of  refuge  among  one's 
own  people  is  the  deciding  factor.  There  were  no 
emigrants  from  Macedonia  to  Bulgaria;  they  all  fled 
to  Serbia.  One  of  the  first  notable  refugees  was  the 
Lady  Jefimia,  widow  of  the  Serbian  Despot  Ugljesa 
whose  throne  was  in  Serez,  as  we  have  said  before. 
Vuk  Brankovic,  the  son  of  Branko  Mladenovic,  lord 
of  Ochrida  and  its  neighbourhood,  is  mentioned  sub- 
sequently to  1371  as  living  in  Serbia  as  lord  of  part  of 
Kosovo  Polje  and  the  surrounding  territory.1 

What  applies  to  the  refugees  we  have  mentioned, 
applies  also  to  the  nation  at  large.  The  common  people 
likewise  fled  to  Serbia,  or  in  any  case  took  refuge  among 
Serbs.  After  the  battle  on  the  Marica  in  1371,  great 
numbers  of  plain  men  from  Macedonia  with  their 
families  and  household  goods  took  refuge  in  Serbia. 
Some  of  the  refugees  from  Macedonia  went  to  Monte- 
negro, 3  and  others  to  other  Serbian  countries.  Wher- 
ever they  went  they  were  received  as  true  Serbs.  A 
party  of  Macedonians  who  emigrated  from  Kratovo 
and  its  surroundings  and  fled  to  the  Serbs  in  Eagusa, 
were  at  once  received  as  Kagusan  citizens, 3  and  this  was 
a  privilege   never   extended  by  the  Ragusans  to  aliens. 

1  Lj.  Kovacevic,  "Vuk  Brankovic,"  Belgrade,  1888,  p.  15. 

2  G.    S.   Rakovski,    "  Gorski  Putnik  "  ("A  Traveller  through  the 
!    Mountains  "),  Novi  Sad,  1857,  pp.  267-268  (in  Bulgarian). 

j       3  Sb.     Novakovic,     "  Srbi    i    Turci  "     ("Serbs     and      Turks"), 
|   pp.  184-185. 


78  MACEDONIA 

The  descendants  of  Macedonian  emigrants  very  fre- 
quently distinguished  themselves  and  became  the  pride 
of  the  Serbian  nation.  The  ancestors  of  Dinko  Zlataric, 
one  of  the  greatest  of  the  Serbian  poets  of  Ragusa, 
emigrated  from  Macedonia  to  Ragusa  in  those  days.1 
All  this  happened  while  the  Bulgarian  Empire  still 
existed.  It  is  surely  not  due  merely  to  chance  that 
the  stream  of  emigration  from  Macedonia  was — in  spite 
of  the  existence  of  a  free  Bulgaria — directed  exclusively 
towards   Serbia  and   the  rest   of   the  Serbian  countries. 

This  trend  of  the  stream  of  emigrants  from  among 
the  Serbs  of  Macedonia  towards  Serbia  and  Serbian 
countries,  which  was  due  to  the  national  kinship, 
persisted  equally  after  the  fall  of  the  Bulgarian  Empire. 
It  is  also  a  noteworthv  fact  that  after  the  fall  of  their 
Empire  the  Bulgars  themselves  did  not  emigrate  to 
Serbia  or  to  Serbian  countries,  but  went  mostly  to 
Roumania  and,  later  on,  from  the  eighteenth  century 
onward,  to  South  Russia.2 

In  their  new  home  among  the  Serbs,  the  Macedonian 
emigrants  felt  as  though  they  were  in  their  own  country. 
During  the  Turkish  domination  the  Serbs  of  other 
Serbian  countries,  too,  found  themselves  compelled  to 
emigrate  elsewhere,  especially  to  Hungary.  Wherever 
they  went,  the  emigrants  from  Macedonia  and  those 
from  other  Serbian  lands  felt  as  though  they  were 
one  nation.  Possessing  the  same  language,  the  same 
customs,   a   common   past,   common   historic    traditions 

1  P.  Budrnani,  "  Djela  Dorninika  Zlatarica "  ("  The  Works  of 
Dominic  Zlataric  "),  Zagreb,  1899,  p.  ix. 

2  G.  S.  Eakovski,  "  Gorski  Putnik "  ("  A  Traveller  through  the 
Mountains  "),  p.  271.  A.  N.  Pipin  and  V.  D.  Spasovic,  "  Istorija 
Slav]  anskih  Literatur  "("  History  of  Slav  Literature"),  Petrograd, 
1879,  p.  139  (in  Russian). 


THE    LOSS    OF    HER    INDEPENDENCE      79 

and  common  aspirations  touching  the  preservation  of 
their  common  nationality,  they  established  their  Serbian 
parishes  jointly ;  jointly  they  built  churches,  opened 
schools  and  jointly  they  faced  every  danger.  This  fact 
was  noted  long  ago  even  by  the  Bulgars.1 

Among  the  emigrant  Serbs  some  of  those  who  had 
originally  emigrated  from  Macedonia  distinguished 
themselves  considerably.  After  the  death  of  the 
Serbian  King  Marko  of  Macedonia  in  1394,  his 
brothers  Dmitar  and  Andrejas  left  Macedonia  and 
settled  among  the  Ragusan  Serbs.  The  Ragusans 
received  them  cordially  and  delivered  to  them  a  certain 
treasure  which  their  father,  unknown  to  them,  had 
in  former  years  entrusted  to  the  care  of  Ragusa.  From 
Ragusa  the  Macedonian  princes  proceeded  to  Hungary, 
where  there  were '  already  large  numbers  of  Serbian 
emigrants  from  Macedonia  and  other  Serbian  territories. 
Historic  records  of  1404  and  1407  mention  Dimitrije 
(Dmitar)  as  Grand  Zupan  of  Zarand  and  Royal 
Commandant  of  the  city  of  VillagoS,  where  there  were 
many   Serbian  emigrants.2 

1  G.  S.  Rakovski,  one  of  the  greatest  Bulgarian  chauvinists, 
mentions  that  the  Macedonian  emigrants  in  Srem  and  South 
Hungary  called  themselves  Serbs  and  Greeks  (G.  S.  Rakovski, 
"  Gorski  Putnik,"  pp.  267-268). 

-  St.  Novakovic,  "  Srbi  i  Turci  "  ("  Serbs  and  Turks  "),  p.  247. 


VII   (Continued) 

MACEDONIA  FROM  THE  SUPPRESSION  OF  THE 
SERBIAN  PATRIARCHATE  TO  ITS  RESTORA- 
TION (1459-1557) 

Suppression  of  the  Serbian  Patriarchate  and  its  supersession  by  the 
Archiepiscopate  of  Ochrida — Greek  character  of  the  Archi- 
episcopate — Slav  and  Serbian  clergy  in  it — Detriment  caused 
to  the  Serbian  nation  by  the  suppression  of  the  Serbian  Patri- 
archate— Vitality  of  the  Serbian  nation — The  Archiepiscopate 
of  Ochrida  "  Serbicized  " — Sad  plight  of  the  Serbian  people  in 
those  days — Serbian  literature  barely  kept  alive  in  Macedonia — 
Serbian  sentiment  of  the  clergy  in  Macedonia — Serbian  historic 
records  and  sources  call  the  Macedonians  "Serbs" — Other 
historic  sources  do  the   same 

IN  1459  the  Turks  suppressed  the  Serbian  Patriarchate 
and  transferred  the  administration  of  the  Church  to 
the  self-governing  Archiepiscopal  See  of  Ochrida. 

The  Archbishopric  of  Ochrida  was  founded  by  St. 
Clement  (ob.  916),  a  disciple  of  SS.  Cyril  and  Method, 
who  had  come  to  Macedonia  from  Moravia.  At  the 
time  of  its  foundation  the  Archiepiscopal  See  received 
the  rank  of  a  Patriarchate.  As  it  was  founded  under 
the  Bulgarian  rule  in  Macedonia,  it  was  called  the 
Bulgarian  Patriarchate.  The  official  title  of  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Ochrida  was  "  Patriarch  (afterwards  Arch- 
bishop) of  Justiniana  Prima  and  all  Bulgaria."  While 
the  Bulgarians  ruled  in  Macedonia  the  Patriarch  of 
Ochrida     was    the    head     of    the     Bulgarian     Church. 

BO 


THE   SERBIAN    PATRIARCHATE  81 

When  the  Macedonians  expelled  the  Bulgars  from 
Macedonia  in  969,  Ochrida  remained  the  independent 
Church  of  the  Empire  of  Samuel  and  his  successors. 
"When  the  Emperor  of  Byzantium  in  1018  overthrew 
Samuel's  State,  he  respected  the  self-governing  Patri- 
archate of  Ochrida  and  maintained  it  in  its  autocephalous 
rights  and  territories,  merely  reducing  it  to  the  rank  of 
an  archbishopric.  The  contemporary  Patriarch  John,  a 
Slav  from  Debar,  from  being  a  Patriarch  was  reduced 
to  being  an  Archbishop.  Bight  up  to  his  death  in  1037 
the  Slav  character  of  this  autonomous  Archbishopric 
was  maintained.  After  his  death  the  See  of  Ochrida 
assumed  the  character  of  a  Greek  Church.  The  Emperor 
Michael  IV  Paphlagonian  of  Byzantium,  even  deprived 
the  people  and  clergy  of  the  diocese  of  Ochrida  of  the 
right  of  electing  their  archbishop,  and  made  his  appoint- 
ment dependent  upon  the  throne  of  Byzantium. 

From  that  time  until  the  second  half  of  the  eighteenth 
century,  when  the  Archbishopric  was  abolished,  all  its 
archbishops  were  Greeks,  with  the  exception  of  a  few 
who  were  Serbs.  The  official  language  of  the  prelacy 
was  Greek.1  From  1018  to  1219  all  Serbian  territories 
were  under  the  See  of  Ochrida,  but  it  nevertheless 
retained  its  Greek  character.  When  in  1219  the 
independence  of  the  Serbian  Church  was  proclaimed, 
the  Archbishop  of  Ochrida  protested,  as  head  of  the 
Greek  Church.  The  See  of  Ochrida  preserved  its  Greek 
character  also  during  the  time  of  the  Serbian  rule  in 
Macedonia.     Moreover,  the  Serbian  Tsar  Dusan  respected 

1  B.  Prokic,  "  Prvi  ochridski  arhiepiskop  Jovan" — "  Jovan,  first 
Archbishop  of  Ochrida"  ("  Glas  Srpske  Kraljevske  Akademije," 
vol.  lxxxviii.  pp.  268,  284,  296).  P.  Popovic,  "Serbian  Mace- 
donia," London,  1916,  pp.  22,  etc. 

7 


82  MACEDONIA 

its  autonomy  and  all  its  rights  and  privileges.  Arch- 
bishop Nicholas  of  Ochrida  assisted  at  Dusan's  corona- 
tion as  Tsar,  and  also  took  part  in  the  Serbian  State 
Councils,  like  the  other  Serbian  prelates,  but  his  title 
continued  to  be  "  Hierarch  of  the  Greek  throne."1 
This  Greek  character  of  the  Archiepiscopal  See  of 
Ochrida  was  maintained  also  during  the  Turkish 
rule. 

The  Archiepiscopal  See  of  Ochrida  had  no  further 
connection  with  the  Bulgars  after  their  expulsion  from 
Macedonia  in  969.  The  attribute  "Bulgarian"  in  the 
Archbishop's  title  represented  only  a  faded  tradition, 
a  relic,  preserved  like  all  other  similar  relics  in  titles, 
without  significance  or  importance.2  The  epithet  "  Bul- 
garian "  was  retained  in  the  title  of  the  Archbishop  of 
Ochrida  equally  when  Ochrida  became  a  recognized  Slav 
See,  when  it  became  Greek,  and  when  it  definitely 
received  a  Greek  character.  In  1186  the  Bulgars  received 
an  independent  Patriarchate  of  their  own  in  Trnovo  in 
Bulgaria,  but  nevertheless  the  Archbishop  of  Ochrida 
continued  to  style  himself  "Primate  of  all  Bulgaria." 
Thus  he  styled  himself  during  the  Serbian  rule,  during 
the  Turkish  rule,  at  a  time  when  Serbian  archbishops 
were  occupying  the  archiepiscopal  throne  of  Ochrida, 
and  all  the  time  until  it  was  suppressed. 

In  speaking  of  the  Greek  character  of  the  See  of 
Ochrida,  we  are  referring  only  to  its  prelates — its 
archbishops  and  bishops.     The  minor  clergy,  who  were 

1  C.  Jirecek,  "  Staatund  Gesellschaft  im  mittelalterliehen  Serbien," 
i.  p.  53.    B.  Prokic,  "  Prvi  ohridski  arhiepiskop  Jovan,"  p.  279. 

a  The  Byzantine  historian  N.  Gregoras  says  that  after  the  Bulgars 
were  expelled  from  Macedonia  the  epithet  "  Bulgarian"  was  retained 
in  the  title  of  the  Archbishop  of  Ochrida  merely  as  a  relic 
(N.  Gregoras,  ed.  Bonn,  p.  27). 


THE   SERBIAN    PATRIARCHATE  83 

in  direct  contact  with  the  people  and  attended  to  the 
religious  ministrations  in  the  parishes,  were  not  Greek, 
but  Slav,  in  all  parts  where  the  Slavs  formed  the 
compact  population.  They  were  Slav  almost  immedi- 
ately after  the  arrival  of  the  Slavs  in  Macedonia  even 
before  the  foundation  of  the  Patriarchate  of  Ochrida.1 
When  Christianity  first  spread  among  the  Macedonian 
Slavs  and  the  Slav  St.  Clement  established  the  Slav 
Archbishopric  of  Ochrida,  the  majority  of  the  clergy 
were  Slavs.  During  the  Greek  rule  in  Macedonia,  the 
archbishops  of  Ochrida  persecuted  the  Slav  clergy  and 
letters,  but  without  success,  because  both  were  favoured 
by  the  people.2  During  the  Serbian  rule  in  Macedonia 
the  minor  clergy  of  Ochrida  were  Serbian.  Under  the 
Turkish  rule  all  this  simply  remained  just  as  it  had 
been  under  the  Serbian  rule.  Many  legends  and  in- 
scriptions from  the  immediate  vicinity  of  the  archi- 
episcopal  diocese  of  Ochrida,  dating  from  the  time  of 
the  Turkish  rule,  are  in  Serbian.3 

It  was  an  Archiepiscopal  See  of  Ochrida  with  Greek 
prelates  and  a  Slav  minor  clergy  to  which  the  Turks 
subjected  the  Serbian  Patriarchate  in  1459. 

By  the  loss  of  the  Patriarchate  the  Serbian  people 
sustained  a  grievous  blow.  The  head  of  the  Serbian 
Church,  the  guardian  of  the  national  conscience  and 
civilization,  had  ceased  to  exist.  The  Archiepiscopal 
See  of  Ochrida  was  merely  a  religious  institution,  in- 
dependent as  regards  administration,  finance,  etc.,  the 
civilization  of  which  was  Greek.     It  did  not  represent 

1  C.  Jirecek,  "Gesch.  d.  Serben,"  i.  pp.  174-175. 

2  B.  Prokic,    "  Prvi   ohridski   arhiepiskop   Jovan "    ("Jovan,   first 
Archbishop  of  Ochrida"),  p.  296. 

3  Lj.    Stojanovic,    "  Stari  srpski  zapisi  i  natpisi "    ("  Old  Serbian 
Inscriptions  and  Notes"),  Nos.  300,  461,  522,  etc. 


84  MACEDONIA 

Greek  national  claims.  Greek  national  interests  were 
represented1  by  the  Greek  Patriarchate  in  Constanti- 
nople, and  between  the  two  there  was  never-ending 
friction.  The  Greek  Patriarchate  in  Constantinople 
was  hostile  to  the  See  of  Orchrida  as  well  as  to  the 
Serbian  Patriarchate.  In  its  intrigues x  against  the 
Archiepiscopal  See  of  Ochrida  the  Greek  Patriarchate 
was  finally  successful  in  having  it  suppressed  by  the 
Turks  in  1767.  Still,  the  Patriarchate  of  Ochrida  had 
not  been  much  of  a  protector  of  Serbian  national 
aspirations.  The  Serbian  people  were  not  satisfied 
with  it.  In  1531  a  Serbian  bishop  endeavoured  to 
restore  the  Serbian  Patriarchate. 

After   the  Serbian  Church  was  deprived  of   its  inde- 
pendence, the   nation   was   left   absolutely   unprotected, 
and   only   to   its  own   moral    strength   and   vitality   did 
it   owe  the   preservation   of   its   national   consciousness. 
That   strength,    however,    was    so    great    that    even   in 
those    adverse    times    it    succeeded    in    impairing    the 
Greek    character    of    the    Archiepiscopacy    of    Ochrida. 
The  diocese  of  Ochrida  had  even  in  former  times  been 
in   the  very  heart  of   Serbian  territory.     By  having  its 
power    extended    over    the    territory    of     the    Serbian 
Patriarchate,    its     population     became    overwhelmingly 
Serbian.     The   natural    result    of    this    was    that   even 
around  the  archiepiscopal  throne  of  Ochrida  the  breath 
of  Serbian  influence  began  to  make  itself  felt.     Already 
in  1466,  only  seven  years  after  the  dissolution  of  the 
Serbian    Patriarchate,    Archbishop    Marko    of    Ochrida 
caused  a  Serbian  translation  to  be  made  of  the  "  Canon 
of   the   great    Archiepiscopal    Church,"    which    had    so 
far    not    been    transcribed    into    Serbian,    but    existed 
1  "  Glas  Srpske  Kraljevske  Akadeinije,"  vol.  lviii.  p.  282. 


THE   SERBIAN    PATRIARCHATE  85 

only  in  Greek.1  Why  should  the  Archbishop  of  Ochrida 
require  the  "Canon  of  the  Great  Church"  in  Serbian 
when  he  already  possessed  it  in  Greek? 

But  this  is  not  all.  From  this  time  forward  we 
find  Serbia  represented  in  the  titles  of  the  Archbishop 
of  Ochrida.  Already  in  1466  we  find  Archbishop  Doro- 
theus  of  Ochrida  styled  prince  "  of  the  Serbian  land," 
and  "Archbishop  ...  of  the  Serbs."2  This  style  was 
likewise  adopted  by  succeeding  archbishops  of  Ochrida. 3 

Moreover,  the  Archbishops  of  Ochrida  were  perfectly 
acquainted  with  the  Serbian  language.  In  1548,  as 
Archbishop  Prohor  of  Ochrida  was  staying  in  Janjevo 
in  Kosovo,  he  with  his  own  hand,  in  the  purest  Serbian 
literary  language  of  the  period,  made  an  entry  in  a 
"  Tetraevangel"  (The  Four  Gospels)  to  the  effect 
that  he  was  at  the  time  in  Janjevo  and  that  a 
certain  tailor,  Peter  by  name,  had  on  that  occasion 
presented  this  Evangel  to  the  Church  of  the  Blessed 
Archangel  in  Janjevo.4  Last,  but  not  least,  we  find 
Serbs  installed  upon  the  archiepiscopal  throne.  We 
have  positive  records  of  two.  Perhaps  there  were 
more.  The  first  one  *is  Simeon,  who  became  Arch- 
bishop of  Ochrida  in  1550,  after  having  previously 
been  Metropolitan  of  Koska.  The  second  was  a  nephew 
of  the  first  Serbian  Patriarch  of  the  restored  Patri- 
archate of  Serbia.  He  was  appointed  Archbishop  of 
Ochrida  in  1574.5 

1  Lj.  Stojanovic,  "  Sfcari  Srpski  Zapisi  i  Natpisi "  ("Old  Serbian 
Inscriptions  and  Notes"),  No.  328. 

2  "  Glasnik  Srpskog  Ucenog  Drustva,"  vol.  vii.  pp.  177,  178  ; 
vol.  xlvii.  p.  271. 

3  Lj.  Stojanovic,  "  Stari  Srpski  Zapisi  i  Natpisi"  ("Old  Serbian 
Inscriptions  and  Notes  "),  Nos.  547,  552,  etc. 

1  Ibid.,  No.  547.        5  P.  Popovic,  "  Serbian  Macedonia,"  pp.  27-28. 


86  MACEDONIA 

Thus,  instead  of  deriving  protection  from  the  See 
of  Ochrida,  the  Serbian  people  created  a  protection  for 
itself  out  of  its  own  strength.  In  this  way  the  Serbian 
national  tradition  was  not  interrupted  in  Macedonia 
even  during  the  time  while  the  Serbian  Patriarchate 
was  suppressed.  The  churches  built  by  the  people 
during  that  period  were  decorated  with  pictures  of 
Serbian  saints,  especially  St.  Simeon  (Stephan  Nemanja) 
and  St.  Sava  (Stephan  Nemanja's  son,  first  archbishop 
of  Serbia).1 

The   Turks  were   at  this   time  at  the  zenith  of  their 
power.     The    Serbian  people — without   leaders,    without 
a    national    Church    or   any    other   national    centre    of 
spiritual  and  intellectual  life,   without  directive — passed 
through   a  grievous  time.     Deserted   villages,    churches 
laid    waste,    her    inhabitants    driven    into    exile,    fields 
overgrown    with    weeds — this  is  the  picture   of    Serbia 
during  that  age.     Learning  and  letters   had   practically 
disappeared.     Only   in   the   recesses   of    the   mountains, 
and  in  sequestered  spots  removed  from  the  trail  of  the 
Turks,    do    we    still    find    a    few    feeble    remnants    of 
both.      The   literary   output   of    the   Macedonian    Serbs 
during    this    period     is     represented     only    by    a    few 
insignificant  transcriptions,    mostly   of   sacred   writings, 
and    these    made    only    so    that    the    literary    contact 
might    not   be   lost   altogether.      From    the    year    1515 
we   have   a    "  Troparnik "     (collection   of    sacred  songs) 
in     Istip ;     a     "  book     of      Prayer,"      transcribed      in 
1526,    in  Kratovo;    a    "  Mineos,"    transcribed   in   1545, 
in    the    Monastery    of    Slep6e ;    and    the    Sermons    of 
John   Zlatousti   (St.    Chrysostom),   transcribed   in   1547 
in   the    Monastery    of    St.    John    Preteca,    and    a    few 
1  B.  Kondakov,  "  Makedonija,"  Pefcrogracl,  p.  186  (in  Russian). 


THE   SERBIAN    PATRIARCHATE  87 

more  similar  works.1  The  scribes  were  all  Macedo- 
nians.2 

This  was  as  much  as  the  Serbian  nation  could  achieve 
in  that  age.  But  if  it  was  not  enough  to  improve  the 
wretched  state  of  the  Macedonian  Serbs,  it  was  on 
the  other  hand  sufficient  to  reveal  their  Serbian 
sentiment.  The  scanty  notes  in  the  books  and  MSS. 
of  that  time  sorrowfully,  as  from  a  living  grave,  sigh 
for  the  glories  of  the  Serbian  past  in  Macedonia ; 
though  laconically  brief  they  clearly  reveal  the  Serbian 
spirit  of  the  nation  in  Macedonia.  "  O  most  pious 
Tsar  Stephan,  where  art  thou  now  ?  "  is  the  cry  of  a 
short  entry  penned  by  a  sixteenth-century  monk  of 
the  Monastery  of  Treskovac,  near  Prilep,  on  the  margin 
of  an  original  diploma  from  the  hand  of  the  Serbian 
Tsar  Dusan.3 

Thus  did  the  Macedonians  give  expression  to  their 
Serbian  sentiments  in  those  dark  days. 

Serbian  writers  of  that  age,  no  matter  whence  they 
hailed,  considered  Macedonia  a  Serbian  country. 
Vladislav  Gramatik,  a  Serbian  writer  of  the  second  half 
of  the  fifteenth  century,  looks  upon  Macedonia  as  Serbian. 
Referring  to  the  battle  of  the  Marica,  he  says  that 
"  the  Serbian  army  was  beaten  to  its  knees  (lit.  feet)  on 
the  river  which  is  called  the  Marica."4  In  a  short 
history  of  the  Serbian  Tsars,  dating  from  1503,  we  find 

1  Lj.  Stojanovic,  "  Stari  Srpski  Zapisi  i  Natpisi  "  ("  Old  Serbian 
Inscriptions  and  Notes  "),  Nos.  425,  455,  532,  546,  573,  5611,  etc. 

2  Some  of  the  scribes  say  that  they  are  from  Debar  (Serb., 
"  Rodom  iz  Debra  ") ;  some  say  they  are  from  the  region  of  Debar 
(Serb.,  "  iz  debarskog  predela")  "Stari  Srpski  Zapisi  i  Natpisi," 
Nos.  546,  573;  one  says  he  is  from  Istip  (Serb.,  "iz  Stipa"),  ibid., 
No.  425. 

3  I.  H.  Vasiljevic,  "  Prilep,"  p.  89. 

*  "  Glagnik  Srpskog  Ucenog  Drustva,"  vol.  xxii.  p.  287. 


88  MACEDONIA 

"the  Serbs  of  Serez"1  mentioned.  On  February  11, 
1515,  a  pious  Serbian  youth  from  Kratovo  was  burned 
alive  by  the  Turks,  because  he  refused  to  renounce  his 
faith.  The  Serbian  Church  canonized  him  under  the 
name  of  St.  George  Kratovac  (St.  George  of  Kratovo). 
In  writing  the  life-story  of  this  saint,  his  countryman 
the  priest  Peja  says  that  he  was  a  Serb  (of  "  Serbian 
stock  ").2  There  was  in  those  days  a  Serbian  printing- 
press  in  Venice.  In  view  of  the  decline  of  Serbian 
letters  and  literature,  Vuk  Bukovic,  the  owner,  appealed 
in  1546  by  letter  to  all  notable  Serbs  of  "  Macedonia, 
Serbia,  Bosnia,  Srem,  and  other  Princes  and  elders 
(starehiia)  great  and  small  who  write  in  this  (the  Serbian) 
tongue "  to  send  him  "  old  Serbian  books  written  in 
the   Serbian  lands  so  that  he  may  reprint  them."3 

Foreign  writers  of  note  and  others  who  were  ac- 
quainted with  Balkan  conditions  at  the  time  likewise 
considered  Macedonia  a  Serbian  country.  In  the 
fifteenth  century  two  monks  of  Greek  nationality, 
Komnenos  and  Prokles,  wrote  a  history  of  the  princes 
of  Epirus.  Incidentally  they  mention  that  Dusan's  half- 
brother  Simeon  was  overthrown  by  Nikephoros  his 
brother-in-law,  and  exiled  to  Kostur.  Simeon  settled 
there,  conquered  several  towns  and  made  himself  strong. 
"  When  he  had  been  joined  by  many  Greeks,  Serbs,  and 
Albanians"   he  gathered   an   army  of  some  four  or  five 

7  P.  I.  Safarik,  "  Parnatky  drevniho  pismenictva  Jihoslovanuv," 
Prague,  1873,  p.  55  (in  Czech). 

2  "Glasnik  Srpskog  UcenogDrustva,"  vol.  xxi.  p.  115.  On  February 
11,  1915,  in  the  midst  of  the  miseries  of  the  present  war,  the 
martyrdom  of  St.  George  Kratovac  was  solemnly  commemorated 
by  the  Kratovo  inhabitants. 

3  Lj.  Stojanovic,  "  Stari  Srpski  Zapisi  i  Natpisi  "  ("Old  Serbian 
Inscriptions  and  Notes  "),  No.  534. 


THE    SERBIAN    PATRIARCHATE  89 

thousand  men,  and  "  proclaimed  himself  Tsar."1  In 
his  narrative  of  the  battle  of  the  Marica,  the  Greek 
historian  L.  Chalcocondyla  says  of  King  Vukasin  and 
Ugljesa  that  they  were  "  Serbian  vojvodes."2  Speaking 
of  Macedonia,  the  Hungarian  historian  Ant.  Bonfini, 
writing  towards  the  end  of  the  fifteenth  century,  says 
that  "  it  is  now  called  Serbia  "  ("  Macedoniam  quam 
Serbiam  nunc  appellant  ").3 

After  the  dissolution  of  the  Serbian  Patriarchate, 
Macedonia  remained  a  Serbian  country,  and  its  in- 
habitants remained  Serbs. 

1  "  Glasnik  Srpskog  Ucenog  Drustva,"  vol.  xiv.  p.  238. 
3  "  L.  Chalcocondylae  Atheniensis  Histor.,"  p.  30,  ed.  Bonn. 
3  "Ant.  Bonfini  rerum  Hungaricarum,"  dec.    i.,  lib.  ix.,  Viennae, 
1744,  p.  248a. 


VII  (Continued) 

MACEDONIA  FROM  THE  RESTORATION  OF  THE 
SERBIAN  PATRIARCHATE  TO  ITS  SECOND 
SUPPRESSION    (1557-1766) 

Restoration  of  the  Serbian  Patriarchate — Jurisdiction  of  the 
restored  Serbian  Patriarchate  based  on  the  principle  of 
nationality — Reorganization  of  the  Church  ;  the  standard  of 
religion,  literature,  and  national  life  raised  within  the  jurisdiction 
of  the  Serbian  Patriarchate — Increased  importance  of  the 
Serbian  Patriarchs — Their  relations  with  foreign  Powers — 
Hard  lot  of  the  Serbs  in  Macedonia — Macedonian  missions 
solicit  help  in  Russia  for  Serbian  Churches — These  missions 
call  themselves  "Serbian" — The  Serbian  migrations — Mace- 
donian emigrants  everywhere  call  themselves  "Serbian" — 
Relations  between  Macedonian  emigrants  and  Macedonian 
Serbs — Migrations  en  masse  from  Macedonia  to  Austria  under 
Patriarch  Arsenije  III — Serbian  sentiment  of  Macedonian 
emigrants  in  Austria — Bole  of  Macedonians  among  the  Serbs  in 
Austria — Serbian  historic  records  speak  of  Macedonians  as 
"  Serbs  " — So  do  all  non-Serbian  historic  records — Suppres- 
sion of  the  Serbian  Patriarchate — Protest  by  the  Metropolitan 
of  Montenegro  against  this  crime  against  the  Serbian  nation  as 
a  whole,  of  which  the  Macedonians  also  form  part 

FOR  nearly  one  hundred  years  the  Serbian  people 
were  left  without  their  Patriarchate.  Towards 
the  middle  of  the  sixteenth  century  a  Serb  from 
Hercegovina,  who  had  been  taken  away  by  the  Turks 
in  his  childhood  and  brought  up  as  a  Moslem,  attained 
the  highest  dignity  in  the  Turkish  Empire,  that  of 
Grand  Vizier.  This  was  the  great  Mehmed  Sokolovic. 
At  the  request  of  his  brother  Makarije,  a  monk  in  the 

90 


RESTORATION    OF   THE    PATRIARCHATE    91 

Monastery  of  Milesevo  in  Hercegovina,  and  moved 
perhaps  also  by  sentimental  regard  for  his  own  origin, 
Mehmed  Sokolovic  in  1557  obtained  the  restoration  of 
the  Serbian  Patriarchate  with  its  seat  in  Ipek,  as  before. 
The  first  Patriarch  of  the  restored  Patriarchate  was  the 
Vizier's  own  brother  Makarije. 

But  whereas  formerly  the  power  of  the  Serbian 
Patriarchate  extended  only  as  far  as  the  frontiers  of 
the  old  Serbian  |State,  the  restored  Patriarchate  em- 
braced the  entire  Serbian  nation.  In  establishing  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  restored  Patriarchate,  the  Turks  were 
guided  by  the  principle  of  nationality.  In  accordance 
with  this  principle  the  new  Patriarchate  embraced  not 
only  contemporary  Serbia  but  all  other  Serbian  lands 
within  the  Turkish  Empire,  viz.  Bosnia,  Hercegovina, 
Dalmatia,  Slavonia,  and  the  rest  of  the  Serbian  territory 
to-day  included  in  Austria-Hungary.  Macedonia,  as  an 
integral  part  of  the  old  Serbian  State  and  also  on  the 
strength  of  the  principle  of  nationality,  was  likewise 
placed  under  the  Serbian  Patriarchate.  The  impres- 
sion which  the  Turks  derived  of  Macedonia  at  that 
period  was  that  it  was  impossible  to  discriminate 
between  her  and  the  rest  of  the  Serbian  countries.  At 
every  step  in  Macedonia  the  Turks  came  upon  either 
the  graves  of  Serbian  princes  and  nobles,  or  their 
cities,  churches,  monasteries,  bridges,  and  other  buildings 
linked  with  their  names ;  or  fields  where  the  Serbs  had 
waged  battles,  or  other  spots  which  popular  tradition 
connected  with  them,  such  as  Dusan's  Bridge  in  Skoplje, 
Marko's  Cave  in  the  Demir  Kapija,  Marko's  Footstep, 
etc.  In  the  monasteries  of  Macedonia  the  monks 
copied  old  Serbian  MSS.  and  taught  the  Serbian 
language.     The  common  people  in  their  traditions  spoke 


92  MACEDONIA 

only  of  the  Serbian  past,  and  had  never  in  their  lives 
followed  other  than  Serbian  customs.  To  whom,  there- 
fore, could  the  Turks  have  assigned  Macedonia,  except 
to  the  Serbian  Patriarchate  ?  Tetovo,  Skoplje,  Kratovo, 
Zletovo,  Istip,  and  Kadoviste  were  placed  under  it. 
Only  the  southern  part  of  Macedonia — Ochrida, 
Monastir,  Debar,  and  Prilep — remained  under  the 
Archiepiscopate  of  Ochrida.1 

With  the  restoration  of  the  Patriarchate  the  Serbian 
nation  renewed  its  strength  and  vitality.  The  Serbian 
Patriarchs  strenuously  set  about  the  reorganization  of 
the  Serbian  Church,  which  had  greatly  fallen  into  decay, 
and  that  of  the  already  exhausted  Serbian  people. 
This  is  not  a  history  of  the  Serbian  Patriarchs,  but  of 
the  Serbian  people  as  a  whole,  and  therefore  we  cannot  go 
into  their  magnificent  work  for  the  Serbian  nation.  We 
will  limit  ourselves  solely  to  what  concerns  Macedonia. 

No  sooner  had  the  new  Patriarch  taken  over  the 
administration  of  the  Serbian  Patriarchate  than  he  at 
once  reorganized  the  Churches  in  Macedonia.  He 
restored  the  old  bishoprics  and  created  new  ones, 
attended  to  the  building  and  restoring  of  churches  and 
monasteries  and  the  improvement  of  church  literature. 
His  successors  followed  zealously  in  his  footsteps. 
Patriarchs  and  bishops  visited  the  eparchies  and  sent 
their  exarchs  to  study  the  condition  of  the  churches, 
monasteries,  priests,  and  people.  The  Church  expanded 
in  Macedonia.  The  catalogue  of  literary  productions 
in  Macedonia   assumed   considerable   dimensions.2     The 

1  P.  Popovic,  "  Serbian  Macedonia,"  p.  16. 

3  Lj.  Stojanovic,  "  Stari  Srpski  Zapisi  i  Natpisi  "  ("  Old  Serbian 
Inscriptions  and  Notes"),  Nos.  5611,  5614,  5618,  812,  900,  2234, 
629,  752,  1001. 


RESTORATION    OF   THE    PATRIARCHATE    93 

Patriarchs  set  the  example  in  writing  books.1  "  With 
their  own  hands"  they  presented  books  to  the  Churches 
and  Monasteries  of  Macedonia.2  The  trade  in  books 
began  to  nourish.  Already  in  about  1570  Skoplje 
possessed  a  bookseller's  store,  the  depot  of  the  Serbian 
books  printed  by  the  Serbian  printing  press  in  Venice.3 
Serbian  books  produced  in  Macedonia  are  likewise 
mentioned. 4  From  the  highest  dignitary  of  the  Serbian 
Church  to  the  lowest  peasant,  contact  and  unanimity  were 
established.  The  entire  Serbian  nation  experienced  a 
vigorous  religious  and  national  revival. 

In  the  restored  Patriarchate  the  role  of  the  Serbian 
Patriarchs  was  greater  and  more  important  than  it  had 
been  before.  The  Patriarchs  did  not  merely  confine 
themselves  to  fostering  and  cherishing  the  Christian 
faith  and  the  Serbian  name,  but  they  went  much 
farther.  They  began  to  labour  for  the  organization  of 
national  defence  against  the  Turks.  Not  unlike  the 
Prince-Bishops  of  Montenegro,  they  became  a  kind  of 
Serbian  temporal  rulers  within  the  Turkish  Empire.  At 
their  word,  entire  Serbian  counties  rebelled  against  the 
Turks,  and  in  peace  negotiations  they  represented  the 
entire  Serbian  nation.  But  the  activities  of  the  Serbian 
Patriarchs  were  not  confined  to  the  boundaries  of  the 
Turkish  Empire.  In  those  days  they  extended  far 
beyond  those  frontiers.  The  Patriarchs  appealed  for 
aid  and  support  for  the  Serbian  people  to  Kussia,  Spain, 
Venice,    and    Austria,    and    thus    became    well-known 

1  "  Glasnik  Srpskog  Ucenog  Drustva,"  vol.  xxii.  "  Zivot  Cara 
Urosa  od  Patrijarha  Pajseja"  ("Life  of  Tsar  Uros  by  Patriarch 
Pajsej "). 

2  Lj.  Stojanovic,  "  Stari  Srpski  Zapisi  i  Natpisi  "  ("  Old  Serbian 
Inscriptions  and  Notes  "),  No.  441. 

>  Ibid.,  No.  683.  «  Ibid.,  No.  1534. 


94  MACEDONIA 

figures  in  international  politics.  Everywhere  the  Courts 
and  Governments  of  foreign  States  recognized  the 
Serbian  Patriarchs  as  the  heads  of  the  Serbian  people. 
Russian  Tsars  corresponded  with  them  ;  when  Spain  was 
at  war  with  Turkey  it  was  to  the  Serbian  Patriarch 
to  whom  she  had  to  apply  when  she  desired  help  from 
the  Serbs ;  Austrian  Emperors  wrote  to  the  Serbian 
Patriarchs,  negotiated  with  them,  and  granted  them 
privileges  for  the  whole  Serbian  nation.  In  all  these 
activities  of  the  Serbian  Patriarchs  the  Macedonians 
were  inseparably  united  with  the  rest  of  the  Serbs. 
But  it  is  in  connection  with  the  dealings  of  the 
Patriarchs  with  Russia  and  Austria  that  the  Serbian 
character  of  Macedonia  comes  out  most  clearly. 

The  lot  of  the  Serbian  people  under  the  Turks  was 
always  hard  in  the  extreme.  Exorbitant  taxes,  confisca- 
tions of  property,  the  persecution  and  devastation  of 
entire  counties  were  the  order  of  the  day.  Distress  and 
poverty  pressed  hard  upon  the  Serbs  from  all  sides. 
"  0  poor,  poor  are  we  because  of  the  Turks  in  these 
days,"  laments  a  Serbian  monk  of  the  Monastery  of 
Lesnovo  in  Macedonia  in  an  annotation.1  With  great 
difficulty  the  impoverished  and  reduced  Serbian  popula- 
tion succeeded  in  repairing  its  churches  and  monasteries 
and  supplying  them  with  the  bare  necessities.  This 
caused  the  Serbian  Patriarchs  to  think  of  applying  for 
help  to  their  Russian  brothers  in  race  and  religion. 
With  the  blessing  and  recommendation  of  the  Patriarch, 
Serbian  missions  travelled  to  Orthodox  Russia  and 
returned  thence  with  abundant  gifts.  In  this  matter, 
too,  Macedonia  formed  no  exception.     From  Macedonia, 

1  Lj.  Stojanovid,  "  Stari  Srpski  Zapisi  i  Natpisi"  ("Old  Serbian 
Inscriptions  and  Notes  "),  No.  2922. 


RESTORATION    OF  THE    PATRIARCHATE    95 

as  from  other  Serbian  lands,  missions  went  to  Russia 
to  collect  alms  and  donations  for  their  churches  and 
monasteries. 

In  this  contact  with  Russia,  the  Serbian  character  of 
Macedonia  comes  out  quite  clearly.  All  Macedonian 
missions  to  Russia  describe  themselves  simply  as  Serbian. 
The  first  of  these  missions  from  Macedonia  travelled  to 
Russia  in  1585.  It  consisted  of  the  Metropolitan  of 
Kratovo,  Visarion,  accompanied  by  a  monk  of  the 
Monastery  of  Osogovo  and  a  monk  in  holy  orders. 
The  object  of  their  journey  was  to  solicit  donations 
for  the  restoration  of  the  Monastery  of  Osogovo,  "  which 
had  been  built  aforetime  by  the  great  Serbian  Vojvode 
Constantine  Dejanovic."1  In  1641,  the  Metropolitan 
Simeon  of  Skoplje  travelled  to  Russia  to  collect  dona- 
tions, and  there  recorded  his  signature  as  "  Simeon, 
Metropolitan,  of  the  land  of  Serbia."2  In  1666,  Ananiji, 
Metropolitan  of  Kratovo,  addressed  a  petition  to  the 
Russian  Tsar  to  help  the  Monastery  of  Lesnovo,  "  which 
had  been  built  by  the  late  and  deceased  Tsar  Stephan, 
who  was  formerly  a  Tsar  in  the  land  of  Serbia. "3  In 
1687  a  petition  was  presented  to  the  Russian  Tsars 
Ivan  and  Peter  Alexievitch  by  "  Jeftimije,  by  the  grace 
of  God  Orthodox  Metropolitan  of  the  Serbian  lands  of 
the  Church  of  Skoplje,"  soliciting  help  for  the  Metro- 
politans of  Skoplje. 4  In  1688  there  came  to  Russia 
certain  monks  "  from  the  land  of  Serbia,"  who  hailed 
from  the  Monastery  of  St.  John  Preteca  near  Skoplje. 5 

1  "  Glas  Srpske  Kraljevske  Akademije,"  vol.  Iviii.  pp.  222-224. 
-'  "  Spomenik    Srpske  Kraljevske  Akademije,"   vol.  xxxviii.  p.  60  ; 
"  Glas  Srpske  Kraljevske  Akademije,"  vol.  Iviii.  p.  228. 

3  "  Glas,"  vol.  Iviii.  p.  261 ;  "  Spomenik,"  vol.  xxxviii.  p.  66. 

4  "  Spomenik,"  vol.  xxxviii.  p.  71. 
s  »  Glas,"  vol.  lx.  p.  156. 


%  MACEDONIA 

We  need  not  assume  that  these  missions  described 
themselves  as  Serbian  merely  because  they  came  from 
territories  under  the  Serbian  Patriarchal  See.  On  the 
contrary,  they  did  so  because  it  was  at  that  time 
unquestionably  received  that  Macedonia  was  a  Serbian 
country.  The  mission  which  came  from  territories 
lying  outside  the  Serbian  Patriarchate,  e.g.  from  the 
territory  belonging  to  the  Archbishopric  of  Ochrida, 
described  themselves  similarly.  There,  too,  the  Serbians 
suffered  the  same  hardships  as  those  who  were  under 
the  Serbian  Patriarchate.  Thence,  too,  missions  travelled 
to  Russia  to  ask  for  help,  and  they,  too,  described 
themselves  as  Serbian.  In  1625,  Sergius,  Metropolitan 
of  Greben  in  the  southernmost  part  of  Macedonia,  went 
to  Russia  for  the  purpose  of  collecting  alms.  There 
he  stated  that  "  he  had  been  consecrated  Metropolitan 
of  Greben  by  Nektarije,  Archbishop  of  Ochrida  in  the 
land  of  Serbia."1  In  1628  Bishop  Kalinik  travelled  to 
Russia.  He  stated  that  he  came  "from  the  country  of 
Salonica,  which  is  in  Serbia."2  In  1634,  Archbishop 
Avram  of  Ochrida  went  to  Russia  with  his  suite.  On 
being  asked  who  they  were,  they  replied  that  "  they  were 
of  the  Orthodox  faith,  from  the  Serbian  country,  from 
the  town  of  Ochrida."  3  In  1643  the  Archimandrite  of 
the  Monastery  of  Kremenec,  German,  during  his  stay  in 
Russia,  described  himself  as  being  "  from  the  Serbian 
country,  from  the  town  of  Kostur."4    In  1648  we  find 

1  "  Snosenija  Rosiji  s  vostokom  po  djelam  cerkovnim,"  ii.  Petro- 
grad,  1860,  p.  29. 

2  Ibid.,  p.  62. 

3  V.  Djeri6,  "  O  Srpskoin  Imenu  u  Starvj  Srbiji  i  Makedoniji " 
("  The  term  '  Serbian '  in  Old  Serbia  and  Macedonia  "),  Belgrade,  1904, 
p.  18. 

4  "  Snosenja  Rosiji  s  vostokom,"  p,  238. 


RESTORATION    OF  THE    PATRIARCHATE    97 

the  "Serb  Dimitrije  Nikolajev,"  from  Kostur,1  in  Russia. 
In  1704  "the  Serb  Bratan  Jvanov  "came  to  Eussia " 
from  the  land  of  Macedonia."2  In  1706  a  certain 
Dimitrije  Petrov  went  to  Russia  for  the  purpose  of 
collecting  contributions  for  the  completion  of  the  Church 
of  St.  Dimitrije;  he  subscribed  himself  as  "from  the 
country  of  Serbia,  for  the  eparchy  of  Ochrida,"  of  the 
town  of  Krdava.  A  Russian  document  concerning  this 
Dimitrije  states  that  upon  his  departure  "for  the  land  of 
Serbia  "  the  "  Serb  Dimitrije  Petrov  "  was  presented  with 
a  gift. 3 

Owing  to  their  unhappy  lot  under  the  Turks,  the 
Serbian  people  continued  to  emigrate.  From  Macedonia, 
too,  numerous  Serbs  fled  to  foreign  parts.  No  matter 
whither  they  went  they  invariably  described  them- 
selves as  Serbs.  And  this  is  valuable  additional  testi- 
mony to  the  Serbian  nationality  of  the  Macedonians. 
In  1580  we  find  in  Krajova  in  Roumania,  the  "  protopop 
(Archpresbyter)  John,  a  Serb  of  Kratovo,"  as  he  styles 
himself  in  an  MS.  from  his  hand.4  Because  of  the 
Turkish  persecutions,  which  had  become  intolerable, 
Simeon,  Metropolitan  of  Skoplje,  went  to  Russia  in 
1641  to  settle  there  permanently.  He  says  of  him- 
self, that  he  is  "from  the  country  of  Serbia,  from  the 
town  of  Skoplje."  With  him  were  a  monk  in  holy 
orders  and  three  servants. s  In  1651,  the  Metropolitan 
Michael  of  Kratovo,  accompanied  by  the  Archimandrite 
Dionisij  and  the  deacons  Damaskin  and   Nikodim,  fled 

■  V.  Djeric,  "  O  Srpskom  Imenu,"  p.  27. 
"■  Ibid.,  p.  27. 

3  Ibid.,  p.  23. 

4  Lj.   Stojanovid,  "  Stari  Srpski  Zapisi  i  Natpisi"   ("  Old  Serbian 
Inscriptions  and  Notes"),  No.  752. 

5  "  Glas  Srpske  Kraljevske  Akademije,"  vol.  iviii.  p.  229. 

8 


98  MACEDONIA 

to  Russia  because  of  Turkish  persecutions.  In  a  letter 
to  the  Russian  Tsar  the  Metropolitan  Michael  states 
that  "  his  fathers  and  his  forefathers  were  princes  in 
the  land  of  Serbia,  in  the  town  of  Kratovo."1  In  1687 
"the  Venerable  Jeftimije,  by  the  grace  of  God  Orthodox 
Metropolitan  of  the  Serbian  lands  of  the  Church  of 
Kratovo,"  came  to  Russia  with  the  purpose  of  settling 
there  as  his  metropolitanate  was  in  a  sad  plight,  and 
the  outrages  of  the  Turks  had  become  intolerable.  He 
was  accompanied  by  Antinogen,  a  monk  in  holy  orders, 
the  deacon  Antonije,  and  an  old  man,  Marko.2  In  1688 
the  monk  in  holy  orders,  Petronije,  and  the  deacon  Joseph 
travelled  "from  the  land  of  Serbia,"  from  the  Monastery 
of  St.  John  Prete5a  near  Skoplje,  to  Russia  to  settle 
there,  because  their  monastery  had  been  destroyed  by 
the  Turkish  soldiery. 3 

Although  these  Macedonian  emigrants  lived  far  from 
their  native  land,  they  never  forgot  that  they  were 
Serbs.  Everywhere  they  worked  zealously  for  the 
benefit  of  their  people,  and  their  Church  in  Macedonia 
and  elsewhere.  While  living  as  an  emigrant  in  Russia, 
"  Michael,  Metropolitan  of  Banja,  Kratovo,  and  iStip," 
in  1653  despatched  thence  copies  of  the  sacred  writings 
to  the  Serbian  Patriarchate  at  Ipek.  In  a  psalter  which 
has  been  preserved,  the  Metropolitan  Michael  wrote 
with  his  own  hand  that  he  "  sends  it  to  the  Serbian 
Patriarchate  at  Ipek,  where  rest  the  bones  of  the  Holy 
Fathers     Arsenij,     Evstatij,     and    Nikodim,     aforetime 

1  "Glas  Srpske  Kraljevske  Akademije,"  vol.  lviii.  p.  233.  The 
signature  of  this  Metropolitan  used  to  run  "  Metropolitan  of  Banja, 
Kratovo,  Istip  and  Radonir"  (Lj.  Stojanovid,  "  Stari  Srpski  Zapisi 
i  Natpisi"  ("  Old  Serbian  Inscriptions  and  Notes"),  Nos.  1494,  1547). 

3  "  Glas  Srpske  Kraljevske  Akademije,"  vol.  lx.  p.  155. 

s  Ibid.,  p.  156. 


RESTORATION    OF  THE    PATRIARCHATE    99 

Serbian  Patriarchs."  l  In  1660  that  same  Metropolitan 
Michael  petitioned  the  Kussian  "Tsar  for  aid  for  the 
"  Serbian  Monastery  of  Lesnovo  "  in  Macedonia,  "  which 
was  a  foundation  of  the  Serbian  Tsar  Stephan."  2  Such 
of  the  Serbian  population  as  remained  in  their  own 
country  looked  upon  the  Serbian  emigrants  as  their 
natural  representatives  and  ambassadors  abroad.  The 
former  therefore  appealed  to  the  latter  on  every  occasion 
for  help  and  intervention.  In  1653  the  monks  of  the 
Serbian  monastery  of  Hilendar  on  Mount  Athos  applied 
to  the  Metropolitan  Michael  for  his  intervention  so  that 
their  monastery  might  receive  subsidies.3 

But  apart  from  these  individual  emigrants,  the  whole- 
sale emigrations  of  Macedonians  equally  bear  a  purely 
Serbian  character.  The  main  current  of  the  stream  of 
Serbian  emigration  en  masse  continued  to  set  north- 
wards, as  before,  to  the  lands  under  Austria.  There 
Serbian  emigrants  had  lived  in  large  numbers  ever  since 
the  Turkish  invasion.  There,  too,  we  find  the  emi- 
grants from  Macedonia.  At  this  epoch  the  emigrations 
en  masse  were  largely  connected  with  the  political 
activities  of  the  Patriarchs.  Seeing  that  in  obedience 
to  the  call  of  their  Patriarchs  the  Serbs  had  risen  in 
revolt  and  joined  a  foreign  nation  in  fighting  against 
the  Turks,  the  Serbian  people,  thus  compromised,  dared 
not  remain  any  longer  under  the  Turks,  but  were  com- 
pelled to  fly.  In  Budapest,  in  Komoran,  and  all  other 
Hungarian  towns  we  now  find  emigrants  from  Macedonia. 
In  1667  the  Austrian  Emperor  Leopold  I  granted  certain 

1  Lj.  Stojanovic,  "  Stari  Srpski  Zapisi  i  Natpisi,"  ("  Old  Serbian 
Inscriptions  and  Notes  "),  No.  1500. 

2  "  Spomenik  Srpske  Kraljevske  Akademije,"  vol.  xxxviii.  p.  64. 

3  Ibid.,  p.  62. 


100  MACEDONIA 

privileges  to  the  Serbs  and  Greeks  who  settled  in  Upper 
Hungary,  and  who  were  mostly  natives  of  Macedonia 
("  prsesertim  autem  ex  Macedonia  advenientium  ").r 

The  greatest  of  these  Serbian  migrations  to  Austria 
took  place  in  1690.  It  affords  a  specially  striking  proof 
of  the  political  power  and  authority  of  the  Serbian 
Patriarchs. 

After  their  failure  before  Vienna  in  1683  the  Turks 
began  to  be  thrust  back  towards  the  south.  In  the 
hearts  of  the  Serbian  people  the  Austrian  successes 
aroused  the  hope  of  liberation  from  the  Turks.  After 
the  Turkish  defeat  at  Mohacs  in  1687,  the  Serbs  rebelled 
in  earnest  with  a  view  to  regaining  their  liberty.  At 
that  time  the  Patriarch  Arsenije  III  Carnojevic  was 
head  of  the  Serbian  Church.  Wishing  to  take 
advantage  of  the  dissatisfaction  of  the  Serbs  with  their 
Turkish  masters,  Austria  negotiated  with  him,  and 
promised  to  help  him  in  the  liberation  of  the  Serbian 
people  from  the  Turks.  At  the  call  of  their  Patriarch 
the  people  rose  in  arms  against  the  Turks  and  helped 
the  Austrian  forces  to  penetrate  into  the  very  heart  of 
the  Serbian  lands.  The  Turks,  however,  succeeded  in 
beating  back  the  Austrians  in  1690.  The  Patriarch,  the 
leading  insurgents,  and  a  multitude  of  the  Serbian  people 
— over  40,000  families — dared  not  wait  for  the  advancing 
Turks,  but  joined  the  Austrian  army  in  its  retreat.  The 
Turks  reconquered  all  Serbia  as  far  as  the  Save  and  the 
Danube,  and  the  Serbian  refugees  were  compelled  to  re- 
main in  Austria.  By  special  charters,  issued  to  the  Serbian 
Patriarch,  the  Austrian  Emperor  Leopold  I  guaranteed 
political  and  religious  rights  to  these  emigrant  Serbs. 

1  See  document  in  "  Glasnik  Srpskog  Vcenog  Druitva,"  vol.  lxvii. 
pp.  128,  131. 


RESTORATION    OF   THE    PATRIARCHATE    101 

This  "  Great  Migration,"  as  it  is  called  in  Serbian 
history,  had  a  far-reaching  effect  upon  the  Serbian 
people.  Whole  provinces  in  Bosnia,  Hercegovina,  Monte- 
negro, Serbia,  and  Macedonia,  "  even  to  Salonica,"  ' 
were  depopulated.  To  this  day  popular  tradition  in 
Macedonia  remembers  the  pitiful  depopulation  of  entire 
villages  at  that  time.2  In  the  town  of  Buda  alone  there 
were  at  that  time  to  be  found  emigrants  from  all  over 
Macedonia.  There  were  Cira  Krajic  of  Skoplje ;  Stojan 
Josipovic  from  Prilep  ;  Veljko  Popovic  and  the  monk 
in  holy  orders,  Grigorije,  from  Kratovo  ;  Dima  Aposto- 
lovic  ;  Danilo  and  Kuzman  Dimic  from  Salonica ;  Isak 
Bojkovic  (native  place  unknown),  etc. 3 

In  Austria  all  these  emigrants,  no  matter  whence 
they  came,  felt  themselves  to  be  parts  of  one  and  the 
same  nation.  The  Macedonians  were  not  kept  apart  as 
being  different,  but  on  the  contrary  often  distinguished 
themselves  as  leaders  and  representatives  of  all  the 
Serbs.  When  in  October  1689  the  Austrians,  for  political 
reasons,  imprisoned  George  Brankovic,  the  leader  of  the 
Serbian  nation,  all  the  Serbs  in  Austria  elected  in  his 
place  as  their  lieutenant  ("  vice-ductor  nationis  SerbicaB") 
one  Jovan  Manastirlija,  a  Macedonian  from  Bitolj.  He 
was  confirmed  in  his  dignity  on  April  11,  1691,4  by  the 

1  Lj.  Stojanovic,  "  Stari  Srpski  Zapisi  i  Natpisi"  ("Old  Serbian 
Inscriptions  and  Notes  "),  No.  2015. 

2  "  Srpska  Kraljevska  Akademija" — "  Naselja  Srpskih  Zemalja" 
("  Settlements  of  Serbian  Lands  "),  vol.  iii.  p.  453. 

3  G.  Vitkovic,  "  Spoinenici  iz  budimskog  i  pestanskog  arhiva " 
("  Glasnik  Srpskog  Ucenog  Drustva"),  series  2,  vol.  iii.  pp.  228-255. 
Lj.  Stojanovic,  "  Stari  Srpski  Zapisi  i  Natpisi  "  ("  Old  Serbian  In- 
scriptions and  Notes  "),  No.  2296. 

4  "  Nos  electum  a  mentionata  communitate  Rasciana  vice  direc- 
torem  Joannem  Manasterly  ad  demissam  eiusdem  gentis  instantion 
benigne  confirmasse  .  .  ."  ("  Glasnik  Srpskog  Ucenog  Drustva," 
vol.  lxvii.  p.  140). 


102  MACEDONIA 

Emperor  Leopold  I.  On  being  appointed  head  of  the 
Serbian  nation,  Jovan  Manastirlija  led  the  Serbs  against 
the  Turks  ;  the  fate  of  the  nation  was  in  his  hands, 
and  he  left  a  glorious  memory  behind  him.  The 
descendants  of  John  Manastirlija  played  a  distinguished 
part  among  the  Serbs  in  Austria.  Several  of  them 
were  buried  in  Serbian  monasteries,  in  token  of  the 
high  respect  they  had  enjoyed  during  their  lives.1 
Other  important  positions  among  the  Serbs  in  Austria 
were  also  at  one  time  and  another  held  by  Macedonians. 
In  1696  Jefrem  Jankovic-Tetovac 2  (of  Tetovo)  was 
Serbian  bishop  of  the  eparchy  of  Mohacs.  Finally, 
some  of  the  descendants  of  these  Macedonian  emigrants 
among  the  Serbs  attained  the  highest  distinction  from 
an  intellectual  point  of  view.  The  ancestors  of 
Branko  Eadicevic,  the  founder  of  Serbian  modern 
poetry,  came  originally  from  the  neighbourhood  of 
Skoplje. 

Serbian  literary  records  of  those  days  speak  of 
Macedonia  as  a  Serbian  country.  The  Serbian  Patri- 
arch Pajsej,  writing  during  the  first  half  of  the 
seventeenth  century,  says  in  his  life  of  Tsar  Uros, 
that  the  Turks,  after  taking  Adrianople,  "  tried  to 
enter  the  Serbian  land  (Macedonia),"  and  that  "■  they 
were  opposed  by  Ugljesa  and  Vukasin  with  the 
Serbian  (Macedonia)  forces."  3  A  MS.  has  been  pre- 
served to  us  containing  the  entry  dating  from  1625 
which  mentions  that  the  Metropolitan  Sergije  of 
Greben    was    ordained    to    this    dignity    by    Nektarije, 

■  Lj.  Stojanovic,  "  Stari  Srpski  Zapisi  i  Natpisi"  ("Old  Serbian 
Inscriptions  and  Notes  "),  Nos.  2968,  3343,  5287. 

2  D.   Ruvarac,   "  Vladika   Jegarski   Jefrem   Banjanin "   ("  Jefrem 
Banjanin,  Bishop  of  Jegar  "),  Sremski,  Karlovici,  1904,  p.  20. 

3  "  Glasnik  Srpskog  Ucenog  Drustva,"  vol.  xxii.  p.  222. 


RESTORATION    OF   THE    PATRIARCHATE    103 

Archbishop  of  Ochrida  in  the  land  of  Serbia.1  In 
1624  the  Metropolitan  Michael  of  Kratovo  travelled 
from  Russia  to  Jerusalem.  He  relates  how  by 
traversing  Poland,  Roumania,  and  the  Serbian  land, 
he  reached  Mount  Athos.  Likewise,  he  says,  that 
on  his  return  he  went  by  Mount  Athos,'  through 
"  Serbian  country,"  Roumania,  and  Poland,  and  thus 
back  to  Russia.  The  "  Serbian  land "  lying  close  to 
Mount  Athos  could  only  be  Macedonia.  From  an 
entry  in  a  book  preserved  in  the  Troicko-Sergievskaya 
Lavra,  near  Moscow,  and  dating  from  1659,  we 
learn  that  in  that  year  that  same  Metropolitan 
Michael  "  of  the  Serbian  land,"  of  the  town  of 
Kratovo,  performed  the  usual  rites  in  connection  with 
the  ordination  of  certain  priests  and  deacons.  After 
residing  for  many  years  in  Russia,  this  Metropolitan 
Michael  finally  declared  that  he  desired  to  return  "  to 
his  Serbian  country,"  to  his  Monastery  of  Lesnovo.2 
In  1682  the  Serbian  Patriarch  Arsenije  III  Carnojevic 
went  to  Jerusalem.  On  his  way  through  Macedonia 
(Skoplje,  Mlado  Nagoricino,  Palanka,  Dupnica,  and 
Samokov)  he  was  everywhere  joyfully  received  by 
the  bishops,  priest,  and  people.  Many  joined  him 
and  accompanied  him.  In  his  diary  the  Patriarch 
specially  mentions  that  in  the  village  of  Sestrima,  a 
day's  walk  from  Samokov  towards  Tatar-Pazardzik, 
"  Master  Raja,  a  Serbian,  made  a  great  banquet  in 
his  house,  to  which  he  invited  all  the  Hadzis  and 
feasted   them."     The   only   Bulgars   mentioned    by   the 

1  "  Snosenija  Rosiji  s  vostokom  po  djelam  cerkovnim,"  ii.  1680, 
p.  29. 

1  "Glas  Srpske  Kraljevske  Akademije,"  vol.  lviii.  pp.  233,  254,  258, 
259.  Lj.  Stojanovic,  "  Stari  Srpski  Zapisi  i  Natpisi"  ("Old  Serbian 
Inscriptions  and  Notes  "),  Noa.  1563,  1568. 


104  MACEDONIA 

Patriarch  are  those  of  Tatar-Pazardzik ;  he  was  not 
their  guest,  but  the  Bulgarian  merchants  vied  with 
each  other  as  to  who  should  sell  him  goods  at  the 
highest  price.1  An  entry,  dating  from  the  end  of 
the  seventeenth  century,  relates  how  in  1683  the 
Austrians  took  "  the  Serbian  country  as  far  as  Skoplje 
and  Sofia "  from  the  Turks.2  A  chronicle  of  1712 
enumerates  the  Orthodox  Metropolitans  in  the  "  land 
of  Serbia."  Among  them  are  included  the  Metro- 
politans of  Skoplje  and  Kratovo.3  In  1778  a  monk 
of  the  Monastery  of  Hilendar  copied  a  history  of 
Skander  Bey  (George  Kastriot  Skanderbeg)  from  an 
old  MS.  In  this  history  Macedonian  is  in  many 
passages  spoken  of  as  the  "  Serbian  country,"  and  its 
inhabitants  as  Serbs.  This  history  also  contains  the 
statement  that  in  the  towns  of  Debar  and  Sveti  Grad 
live  "  Serbs  of  the  Orthodox  faith,  and  Latins  and 
Albanians  of  the  Catholic  faith."  4  An  eighteenth- 
century  chronicle  says  that  in  the  fourteenth  century 
"  there  were  three  Serbian  kings ;  to  wit,  in  Prizren 
there  was  Lazar,  in  Bosnia  there  was  Stephan  Tortko, 
and  in  Prilep  there  was  Marko   Vukasinov."  5 

Foreign  records  of  those  days  likewise  speak  of 
Macedonia  as  being  a  Serbian  country.  On  the  map 
of  the  Italian  Geographer  Giac.  Gastaldi,  dating  from 
1566,  Serbia  includes  Skoplje  and  the  surrounding 
country.     On    many     maps     by    V.     Coronelli,    official 

1  "  Glasnik  Srpskog  Ucenog  Drustva,"  vol.  xxxiii.  pp.  187-188. 
■  Lj.   Stojanovic,  "  Stari  Srpski  Zapisi  i  Natpisi "  ("  Old  Serbian 
Inscriptions  and  Notes  "),  No.  5304. 

3  "  Spomenik  Srpske  Kraljevske  Akademije,"  vol.  iii.  p.  108. 

4  "  Glas  Srpske  Kraljevske  Akademije,"  vol.  xxii.  pp.  15-18. 

s  S.  Ristic,  "  Decanski  Spomenici "  ("  Decani  Records  "),  Belgrade, 
1864,  p.  7. 


RESTORATION    OF    THE    PATRIARCHATE    105 

geographer  to  the  Kepublic  of  Venice,  and  dating 
from  1692,  Serbia  is  shown  as  extending  even  beyond 
Skoplje.  Besides  Skoplje  we  practically  always  find 
the  legend  "  Capital  of  Serbia "  (Metropoli  della 
Servia).  On  many  seventeenth-century  maps  drawn 
by  "  the  Royal  Geographer "  Serbia  is  shown  as 
including  even  the  whole  of  the  country  surrounding 
Skoplje.  These  are  also  the  frontiers  assigned  to 
Serbia  on  the  maps  of  F.  de  Witt  and  of  Blau,  and  in 
H.  Moll's  atlas  as  well  as  on  many  other  maps  of  the 
second  half  of  the  seventeenth  century.  On  numerous 
maps  in  the  well-known  atlases  by  Joh.  Bapt. 
Homann's,  dating  from  the  first  half  of  the  eighteenth 
century,  Serbia  includes  the  regions  of  Skoplje,  Kra- 
tovo,  and  Custendil.  Thus  it  is  also  shown  on  many 
other  maps.1 

More  clearly  than  from  .  these  maps  the  Serbian 
character  of  Macedonia  transpires  from  certain  MSS. 
and  other  books  in  foreign  languages.  A  Roumanian 
MS.  of  the  beginning  of  the  seventeenth  century, 
in  describing  the  battle  of  the  Marica  says  incidentally 
that  "  Sultan  Murat  went  with  the  Turks  against 
Ugljesa  and  Vukasin,  and  that  they  assembled  a 
great  army  of  Serbs  (in  Macedonia)  and  accepted 
battle.  .  .  .  " 2  The  Russian  Tsars,  when  granting 
subsidies  to  the  Serbian  churches  and  monasteries  in 
Macedonia,  invariably  call  them  Serbian,  and  speak 
of  Macedonia  as  the  Serbian  land.  When  on  August 
1st,    1641,    the    Russian    Tsar,    Michael    Feodorovitch, 

1  J.  Cvijic,  "  Geografski  Tolozaj  Makedonije  i  Stare  Srbije  " — 
"  Geographical  Conditions  of  Macedonia  and  Old  Serbia  "  ("  Srpski 
Knjizevin  Glasnik  *'),  vol.  xi.  1904,  p.  209. 

"  V.  Grigorovic,  "  O  Serbiji  v  jeja  otnosenijah  k  sosedniin  der- 
zavam,"  p.  17. 


106  MACEDONIA 

made  a  donation  to  the  Serbian  Patriarchate  through 
the  Metropolitan  of  Skoplje,  he  addressed  the  latter 
as  Metropolitan  of  ' '  the  Serbian  land  of  the  town  of 
Skoplje."1  It  is  recorded  in  the  annals  of  the  Russian 
Court  that  in  the  year  1652  the  "  Serbian  Metropolitan 
Michael,"  of  Kratovo,  twice  dined  with  the  Tsar.2 
In  an  Imperial  letter  to  the  Monastery  of  Lesnovo, 
dated  October  31,  1660,  the  Russian  Tsar  Aleksije 
Mihailovic  speaks  of  the  Metropolitan  of  Kratovo  as 
"  the  Metropolitan  Michael  of  the  Serbian  land."  3 
The  Russian  Tsaritsa  Elizabeth  in  her  letters  invariably 
refers  to  Macedonia  as  a  "  Serbian  country"  In  her 
messages  of  1744,  1754,  1758,  and  1766  she  addresses 
herself  to  the  "  noble  and  honourable  gentlemen  of 
the  Serbian  countries  of  Macedonia,  Skanderia 
(Albania),  Montenegro,  the  Maritime  Region.  ...  "4 
Writing  about  Serbia  in  1685,  the  Catholic  bishop  of 
Skoplje  speaks  of  Skoplje  as  "  the  Capital  of  Serbia  " 
("  Scopia  .  '.  .  metropoli  de  Servia").  After  this  he 
proceeds  to  mention  Catholic,  Mohammedan  and 
Orthodox  households  in  that  city.  Among  the  Ortho- 
dox he  mentions  only  "Greek  and  Serbian  households" 
("case  greche  e  serviane").s  Finally  we  have  the 
testimony  of  the  Bulgarian,  Peter  Bogdani-Baksic,  a 
native  of  Ciprova  in  Bulgaria,  the  Catholic  Bishop 
of   Sofia,  who   wrote   to    some  Cardinal   in    1650   about 

"  "  Spomenik  Srpske  Kraljevske  Akademije,"  vol.  xxxvii.  p.  60. 

-  J.  Sreznevski,  "  Filologiceskija  nabljudenija  A.  H.  Vostokova," 
1865,  p.  184. 

3  "  Spomenik,"  vol.  xxxvii.  p.  65. 

«  S.  Milutinovic,  "  Istorija  Crne  Gore  "  ("  History  of  Montenegro"), 
1835,  pp.  76,  77,  83,  85. 

s  A.  Theiner,   "Vetera  monumenta  Slavorum   Meridionalium,"  ii. 

1875,  p.  220. 


RESTORATION   OF   THE    PATRIARCHATE    107 

his  cousin  Andreas  Bagdani  to  recommend  him  for 
the  appointment  of  Catholic  Archbishop  of  Ochrida. 
He  says  that  his  cousin  "  has  been  nominated  for  the 
archiepiscopate  of  Ochrida  up  in  Serbia"  ("  proposto 
per  l'archivescovato  d'Ocrida  su  in  confini  della 
Servia").1 

While  the  power  of  the  Serbian  Patriarchate  endured, 
the  Serbian  character  of  Macedonia  was  not  in  any  way 
overthrown  or  impaired. 

In  1766  the  Turks  once  more  suppressed  the  Serbian 
Patriarchate  and  its  territories  were  placed  under  the 
administration  of  the  Greek  Patriarchate  in  Constanti- 
nople. The  suppression  of  the  Patriarchate  was  a 
terrible  blow  to  the  Serbian  nation.  The  Serbian 
bishops  were  stripped  of  their  dignities,  they  were 
expelled  or  went  voluntarily  into  exile.  Greek  bishops 
were  appointed  in  their  places.  The  Serbian  nation 
was  left  without  a  head,  Serbian  civilization  lost  its 
protector,  and  in  the  Christian  churches  divine  service 
was  conducted  in  Greek.  This  misfortune  also  fell 
heavily  upon  that  part  of  the  Serbian  nation  which 
lived  outside  the  Turkish  Empire.  Sava  Petrovic, 
Metropolitan  of  Montenegro,  as  representative  of  the 
free  part  of  the  Serbian  nation,  protested  to  Kussia,  and 
besought  that  this  crime  against  the  Serbs  in  Turkey 
should  find  redress.  In  a  letter  written  on  February 
26th,  1767,  to  the  Metropolitan  Platon  of  Moscow,  he 
speaks  "  of  the  Serbian  nation  under  the  harsh  and 
intolerable  yoke  of  Turkish  slavery,"  and  of  the  Serbian 
bishops  of  "  Samokov,  Skoplje,  Istip,  Novi  Pazar,  Nis, 
Uzice,  Belgrade  and  Hercegovina,"  all  of  whom  "  are 
expelled  and  deprived  of  their  Sees,  and  are  homeless 
1  "  Sfcarine  Jugoslovenske  Akademije,"  vol.  xxv.  p.  172. 


108  MACEDONIA 

wanderers  .  .  .  ,  while  others  are  exiled  to  strange 
parts,  and  not  one  eparchy  has  its  native  bishop,  a 
Serbian.  .  .  .  Greeks  have  been  brought  thither  in  their 
stead.  .  .  ."  Hereupon  he  begs  that  "  the  deposed 
Serbian  bishops  be  reinstated,"  and  "the  throne  of 
the  Serbian  Patriarchate  of  Ipek  freed  from  the  Greeks," 
to  "  the  joy  of  all  Serbian  Bishops  and  the  whole  Serbian 
nation."  1 

Even  in  this  epilogue  to  the  history  of  the  Serbian 
Patriarchate,  the  Montenegrin  Metropolitan  draws  no 
distinction  between  the  Serbian  dioceses  in  Macedonia 
and  the  rest  of  the  Serbian  dioceses.  All  are  alike 
Serbian  to  him,  and  for  all  of  them  he  begs  for  "  their 
native  Serbian  Bishops." 

1  "  Glasnik  Srpskop  Ucenog  Drustva,"  vol.  xii.  pp.  357-359. 


VIII 

MACEDONIA  AND   THE  SERBIAN  STRUGGLE 
FOR  LIBERATION 

Serbian  sentiment  of  the  Macedonians  after  the  suppression  of  the 
Serbian  Patriarchate — Sad  plight  of  Macedonia  after  the  sup- 
pression of  the  Serbian  Patriarchate — Serbian  sympathy  for 
Macedonia  —  Macedonian  aspirations  to  emancipate  Serbian 
nation  from  the  Turks — Participation  of  Macedonians  in  Austro- 
Turkish  War  (1788-1791)  for  liberation  of  the  Serbs  from  the 
Turks — Participation  of  Macedonians  in  the  Serbian  insur- 
rection under  Karageorge  and  Milos  Obrenovic  at  the  beginning 
of  the  nineteenth  century — Moral  support  for  Serbia  from 
Macedonia — Macedonian  national  poetry  celebrates  the  struggle 
of  the  Serbian  nation  against  the  Turks 

THE  feeling  of  unity  between  the  Macedonians  and 
the  rest  of  the  Serbian  nation  did  not  become 
extinct  even  after  the  fall  of  the  Serbian  Patriarchate. 
All  Serbs  outside  Macedonia  continued  to  regard 
Macedonia  as  belonging  to  them.  Macedonia  was  then 
in  a  wretched  plight.  Left  to  the  mercy  of  the  Greek 
bishops,  she  had  lost  all  her  schools.  The  churches  and 
monasteries  were  in  Greek  hands  or  else  deserted.  The 
Slav  liturgy  had  practically  become  extinct.  The  Serbian 
monks  in  those  monasteries  where  the  Greek  influence 
was  less  felt  regarded  it  as  their  duty  to  the  nation  at 
such  a  time  to  do  all  they  could  to  elevate  Serbian 
education  and  religion  in  Macedonia.  In  1780,  the  monk 
Teofil  of  the  Monastery  of  Dedani,  went  to  the  Monastery 
of  the  Holy  Archangel  in  the  Skopska  Crna  Gora  (Black 

109 


110  MACEDONIA 

Mountain).  There  he  opened  a  school,  taught  the  young 
men  to  read  and  write,  and  prepared  candidates  for  the 
priesthood.1  In  1805,  Teodosije,  a  monk  in  holy  orders 
of  the  Monastery  of  Decani  went  to  the  deserted  Monas- 
tery of  Lesnovo  in  Macedonia ;  with  the  help  of  the 
inhabitants  of  the  neighbourhood  he  repaired  it,  and 
reintroduced  the  forgotten  Slav  liturgy  within  its  walls.3 
In  the  same  year  we  find  the  "  monk  in  holy  orders 
Mojseg  Decanac  "  in  Tetovo.3 

But  the  Serbian  lay  population  did  not  make  any 
difference  either.  Writing  to  the  Emperor  of  Russia  in 
1789,  the  Montenegrin  governor  Ivan  Radonjic  begins 
his  letter  as  follows  :  "  Now  all  we  Serbs  of  Monte- 
negro, Hercegovina  .  .  .  Albania,  Macedonia  .  .  .  beg 
of  ..."  4 

But  more  strongly  than  by  any  fraternal  sympathy  did 
the  Macedonians  express  their  Serbian  feeling  in  later 
days ;  they  expressed  it  most  positively  and  by  the 
greatest  sacrifices,  and  they  did  this  by  the  share  they 
bore  in  the  struggle  which  the  Serbian  nation  waged 
for  liberation  from  the  Turks.  The  focus  of  that 
struggle  could  not  be  in  Macedonia.  Not  on  any  of 
her  frontiers  was  Macedonia  sufficiently  near  to  a  foreign 
State  whence  she  could  be  supplied  with  the  necessaries 
of  war.  The  Serbian  struggle  for  liberation  began  in 
regions  remote  from  her,  where  the  support  of  free 
Europe  was  accessible.  Yet  from  the  first  the  fight 
against    the    Turks    was    understood    as    the    common 

1  S.  Toinic,  "  Naselja  Srpskih  Zemalja"  ("  Settlement  of  the  Serbian 
Lands"),  vol.  iii.  p.  509. 

~  Lj.  Stojanovic,  "  Stari  Srpski  Zapisi  i  Natpisi "  ("  Old  Serbian 
Inscriptions  and  Notes"),  No.  3822. 

3  Ibid.,  No.  3828. 

4  "  Glasnik  Srpskog  Ucenog  Drustva,"  vol.  lxxii.  p.  297. 


THE    STRUGGLE    FOR   LIBERATION       111 

action  of  the  whole  Serbian  nation,  as  the  germ  of 
future  freedom.  Serbs  from  all  the  Serbian  lands  took 
part  in  the  struggle.  The  Macedonians  bore  their  share 
with  the  rest. 

Already  in  those  battles  which,  at  the  call  of  the 
Serbian  Patriarch,  the  Serbian  people  fought  at  the 
the  close  of  the  seventeenth  century,  we  have  seen 
Macedonians  fighting  by  the  side  of  their  brothers. 
Defeated  together  with  the  other  Serbs  they  fled  in 
large  numbers  to  Austria,  and  there,  as  we  have  seen, 
strengthened  the  ranks  of  the  Serbian  emigrants.  In 
the  renewed  struggle  against  the  Turks  the  part  played 
by  the  Macedonians  was  even  greater. 

When  in  1788  Austria  went  to  war  with  Turkey,  she 
called  also  upon  the  Serbs  for  assistance.  As  recom- 
pense for  their  help,  Austria  promised  them  liberation 
from  the  Turks  and  a  happier  future.  Desirous  of 
freedom,  great  hosts  of  Serbs  enrolled  themselves  as 
volunteers  under  the  Austrian  flag.  The  more  notable 
of  these  volunteers  were  commissioned  as  officers  by  the 
Austrians  and  placed  at  the  head  of  the  Serbian 
volunteers.  The  list  of  these  officers,  taken  mainly  from 
the  archives  in  Vienna,  shows  to  what  extent,  in  pro- 
portion, many  Serbian  provinces  were  represented. 

Of  the  Serbian  leaders  commissioned  by  Austria,  16 
had  come  from  Serbia,  2  from  Bosnia,  9  from  Croatia, 
38  from  Srem  and  Slavonia,  1  from  the  Backa,  1  from 
the  Banat,  1  from  Old  Serbia,  and  9  from  Macedonia. 
Of  these  last  there  were  commissioned  as  Captains : 
Vlajko  Stojanovic,  of  Leunovo  (district  of  Tetovo)  ; 
Deli  Djordje  Nikolajevic,  of  Bele  Vode  (Prilep  district)  ; 
Petar  Novakovic-Cardaklija,  of  Leunovo  ;  Kuzman  Cikic, 
of    Mavrovo.       Commissioned     as    Lieutenants :    MiloS 


112  MACEDONIA 

Krajevic,  of  Mavrovo ;  Jovan  Nikolajevic-Cardoklija,  of 
Leunovo.  Commissioned  as  Sub-lieutenants :  Trifun 
Tenasevic,  of  Debar  ;  Vucko  Cikic,  of  Mavrovo  :  Trifun 
Trpkovic,  of  Debar.1 

These  men  who  fought  for  the  freedom  of  the  Serbian 
nation  at  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century  are  the  best 
proof  of  the  Serbian  sentiment  in  Macedonia  at  that 
time. 

The  Serbian  sentiment  of  the  Macedonians  is  likewise 
clearly  shown  by  their  taking  part  in  the  fights  against 
the  Turks  which  broke  out  in  Serbian  territory  at  the 
beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century.  The  two  Serbian 
insurrections  against  the  Turks  at  the  beginning  of  the 
nineteenth  century  were  decisive  events  in  the  history 
of  the  Serbian  nation.  The  Serbs  regarded  them  as  a 
resurrection,  as  the  opening-up  of  a  new,  free,  national 
period  of  Serbian  history.  Therefore,  there  was  no 
part  of  all  the  Serbian  lands  which  did  not  hasten 
to  place  its  services  at  the  disposal  of  the  Serbian 
insurgents  and  resuscitated  Serbia.  From  the  last  and 
least  herd-boy  to  the  most  distinguished — the  writers, 
poets,  philosophers  of  the  nation — they  all  stood  by  the 
Serbian  insurgents.  Some  joined  the  ranks  of  the  fight- 
ing men ;  others  gave  their  moral  support. 

Here,  also,  we  find  Macedonians.  They,  too,  helped 
with  all  their  might.  Many  heroes  from  Macedonia 
have  set  their  mark  upon  the  history  of  the  Serbian 
insurrection  against  the  Turks.  We  will  mention  only 
the  most  important  among  them. 

1  Drag.  M.  Pavlovic  :  "  Srbija  za  vreme  poslednjeg  austro-turskog 
rata "  ("  Serbia  during  the  last  Austro-Turkish  War,  1788-1791  "), 
p.  143,  Belgrade,  1910.  Lazar  Arsenijevic-Batalaka,  "Istorija  srpskog 
ustanka  "  ("  History  of  the  Serbian  Insurrection"),  i.  p.  141,  Belgrade, 
1899. 


THE    STRUGGLE    FOR   LIBERATION       113 

Vucko  dikic,  of  Mavrovo.  Served  as  officer  in  the 
Austro-Turkish  War.  After  the  war,  he  would  not  return 
to  his  native  country,  which  was  under  Turkish  rule, 
but  settled  in  Srem,  where  he  was  in  receipt  of  a 
pension  from  Austria.  When  the  Serbian  insurrection 
broke  out  in  1804,  he  at  once  sacrificed  his  pension 
and  comfortable  existence,  went  to  Serbia  and  joined 
the  ranks  of  the  combatants.  While  in  command  of 
an  army  which  was  resisting  the  Turkish  pressure  from 
the  south,  he  constructed  the  well-known  Serbian  fortress 
of  Deligrad.  While  defending  Deligrad  Cikic  died 
gloriously  on  April  3rd,  in  1808.  He  was  buried  in  the 
old  Serbian  Monastery  of  St.  Roman,  near  Deligrad.1 

Kusman  Cikic,  brother  of  Vucko  Cikic,  also  of  Mav- 
rovo, succeeded  him  in  the  command  of  Deligrad.  He 
was  an  Austrian  volunteer  officer.  He  also  settled  in 
Srem  and  enjoyed  an  Austrian  pension.  He  also  gave 
up  everything  and  accompanied  his  brother  to  Serbia. 
He  also  fought  heroically  for  Serbia's  independence  from 
the  Turks.2 

Janko  Popovic,  of  Ochrid.  He  went  to  Serbia  before 
the  insurrection.  A  bitter  enemy  of  the  Turks,  he 
agitated  against  them  even  before  the  insurrection.  No 
sooner  had  the  insurrection  broken  out,  than  he  joined 
the  ranks  of  the  combatants.  Owing  to  the  gallant 
way  in  which  he  distinguished  himself  in  battle,  he 
became  a  leader  (vojvoda)  and  is  one  of  the  most 
notable  figures  in  the  Serbian  insurrection.  His  courage 
and  ability  were  specially  in  evidence  in  the  battles   of 

1  M.  Dj.  Mili6evic,  "  Pomenik  znamenitih  ljudi  u  srpskom  narodu" 
("  Reminiscences  of  Famous  Men  of  the  Serbian  Nation"),  p.  168. 

-  L.  Arsenijevic-Batalaka,  "  Istorija  Srpskog  Ustanka  "  ("  History 
of  the  Serbian  Insurrection  "),  i.  pp.  4,  5,  59,  141. 

9 


114  MACEDONIA 

Misar,  Belgrade,  and  Bijeljina.  He  died  in  1833,  and 
was  buried  at  Bavanica,  one  of  the  most  important  of 
the  Serbian  monasteries  of  the  Middle  Ages.1 

Marko  Krstic,  of  Belica.  He  also  went  to  Serbia 
before  the  insurrection.  As  soon  as  the  insurrection 
broke  out  he  joined  the  ranks  of  the  combatants.  He 
was  under  the  direct  command  of  Kara  George.  As  he 
distinguished  himself  in  every  battle,  Kara  George  took 
note  of  him,  and  he  soon  became  an  independent 
vojvoda  (leader).  He  was  one  of  the  most  important 
army  leaders  in  the  second  insurrection  under  Milos 
Obrenovic,  in  1815.  Through  exposing  himself,  he  was 
severely  wounded  in  the  second  insurrection.  He  died 
at  Sabac  in  1822.2 

Djordje  Zagla,  of  Blace.  He  went  to  Serbia  with 
three  of  his  brothers  after  the  outbreak  of  the  insurrec- 
tion, and  immediately  joined  the  fighting-men.  He 
soon  became  the  chief  military  leader  in  Smederevo 
under  the  command  of  Vujica  Vulicevic,  was  distin- 
guished for  his  gallantry  and  an  enthusiastic  fighter. 
He  was  wounded  frequently,  several  times  seriously. 
He  died  in  Belgrade  in  1847.3 

Vreta  Kolarac,  of  Macedonia  (his  native  place  is  not 
exactly  known).  Conspicuous  for  his  bravery  as  a  volun- 
teer, he  became  an  army  leader  in  the  Kara  George 
insurrection.  He  distinguished  himself  especially  at 
Macva  in  1806.4 

Mica  Brka,  of  Mavrovo,  son  of  Milos  Krajevic. 
Lieutenant  of  Volunteers  in  the  Austro-Turkish  war. 
He  fought  bravely  in  every  battle  in  the  Kara  George 
insurrection,    and   finally  found   a  hero's   death   on  the 

1  M.  Dj.  Milicevic,  "  Pomenik  "  ("  Reminiscences  "),  pp.  196-197. 
"  Ibid.,  pp.  796-799.       3  ibid.,  pp.  169-170.       *  Ibid.,  pp.  60-61. 


THE   STRUGGLE   FOR  LIBERATION       115 

battlefield  in  1813,  together  with  Hajduk-Veljko,  the 
greatest  hero  of  New  Serbian  history.1 

Besides  those  distinguished  Macedonians  who,  as  leaders 
of  the  Serbian  insurgents,  opened  up  an  epoch  of  liberty 
in  modern  Serbian  history,  there  was  also  a  host  of  heroes 
of  the  rank  and  file  from  Macedonia,  who  with  their 
blood  and  self-sacrifice  helped  to  create  a  free  Serbia. 

But  in  joining  the  Serbian  insurrection,  the  Mace- 
donians offered  not  only  their  blood.  There  were 
numerous  Macedonians  who  helped  morally  in  the 
liberation  and  the  strengthening  of  Serbia,  and  of  these, 
too,  we  will  mention  the  most  distinguished. 

Petar  Icko,  born  in  Katranica.  Upon  the  outbreak 
of  the  insurrection  under  Kora  George,  he  proceeded 
to  Serbia.  Being  an  able  and  intelligent  man,  he  was 
employed  on  various  missions.  He  was  also  entrusted 
with  the  negotiations  with  the  Turks.  The  peace  which 
the  Serbian  insurgents  concluded  with  the  Turks  in 
1806  was  concluded  through  his  mediation,  and  to  this 
day  it  is  called  Ickov  Mir  (Ichko's  Peace).  He  was 
buried  in  the  Monastery  of  Kakovica,  near  Belgrade.2 

V 

Petar  NovakoviS-Gardaklija,  born  in  Leunovo.  He 
held  a  captain's  commission  in  the  Austro-Turkish  war. 
After  the  war  he  enjoyed  a  pension  from  Austria.  When 
the  tidings  of  the  insurrection  reached  him,  he  at  once 
sacrificed  his  pension.  Being  a  man  of  ability  and 
experience,  he  was  entrusted  with  various  missions  on 
behalf  of  the  Serbian  insurgents — the  first  time  in  Petro- 
grad  in  1804  and  subsequently  in  Constantinople  in  1805  ; 
also   to  the  Russian  General  Staff  in  1807.     When  the 

'  L.  Arsenijevic-Batalaka,  "Istorija  srpskoga  ustanka"  ("History 
of  the  Serbian  Insurrection"),  i.  p.  59. 
s  M.  Dj.  Milicevic,  "  Pomenik"  ("  Reminiscences  "),  pp.  186-189, 


116  MACEDONIA 

"  Praviteljstvujusci  Sovjet  Srbski  "  (the  first  Government 
of  Free  Serbia)  was  established  in  1805,  he  was  one  of 
the  members.     He  died  in  1810.  * 

Jovan  Novakovic-Cardaklija,  the  brother  of  Petar 
Navakovic-Cardaklija,  also  born  in  Leunovo.  He  held 
a  lieutenant's  commission  in  the  Austro-Turkish  war, 
and  subsequently  enjoyed  an  Austrian  pension.  He 
also  sacrificed  his  Austrian  pension  and,  together  with 
his  brother,  crossed  the  Serbian  frontier.  He  also  was 
entrusted  with  various  services  which  the  insurgents 
required  from  this  able  and  distinguished  patriot.2 

Dimitrije  Djordjevic,  of  Macedonia — his  birthplace 
is  not  exactly  known.  He  served  under  Milan 
Obrenovic  in  the  insurrection  led  by  Kara  George.  In 
the  insurrection  under  MiloS  Obrenovic  he  fulfilled 
various  duties  as  interpreter,  clerk,  treasurer,  Governor 
of  Jagodina  District,  and  envoy  in  diplomatic  missions 
to  Constantinople.  From  every  point  of  view  he  was 
an  upright  man  and  a  great  patriot.  For  the  services 
he  had  rendered  to  renewed  Serbia,  Prince  Milos  decreed 
that  the  names  of  Dimitrije  Djordjevic  and  his  wife 
were  to  be  mentioned  in  divine  service  in  church 
in  the  same  way  as  those  of  Prince  Milos  and  his 
brothers.  He  died  in  Jagodin  in  1836.  The  inscription 
on  his  tomb  says  that  "  He  was  a  man  who  deserved 
greatly  of  his  Serbian  fatherland. 3 

Dositije  Novakovic,  born  in  the  village  of  Dabica,  near 
Prilep.  He  was  a  monk.  As  he  could  not  endure  the 
Turkish  horrors,  he  fled  to  newly  liberated  Serbia  under 
Milos"  Obrenovic  and  laboured  actively  for  her  exten- 
sion towards  the  east.     When  Serbia   was  enlarged,  he 

1  L.  Arsenijevic-Batalaka,  "  Istorija  srpskog  ustanka  "  ("  History 
of  the   Serbian  Insurrection  "),   i.   pp.  141,'  147,  161,  183,  242,  etc. 
*  Ibid.  *  m.  Dj.  Milicevic,  "  Reminiscences,"  pp.  151-153. 


THE    STRUGGLE    FOR    LIBERATION      117 

became  the  first  bishop  in  the  new  territories  in  1834. 
His  kindness,  generosity,  and  wise  instruction  to  his 
people  endeared  his  memory  to  them.  He  died  in  1854. 
His  last  wish  was  that  he  might  not  be  buried  in  the 
church,  as  is  usual  for  a  bishop,  but  in  the  cemetery. 
"  I  have  lived  with  my  people,  and  it  is  with  them  that 
I  wish  to  be  in  the  churchyard ;  let  the  young 
grass  grow  on  my  grave."  The  grateful  Serbian  nation 
fulfilled  the  wish  of  its  patriotic  bishop.1 

It  was  in  this  manner  that  the  Macedonians  expressed 
their  Serbian  sentiments  during  the  Serbian  insurrection 
for  liberation  at  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century. 

But  this  is  not  all.  The  whole  of  Macedonia  has 
with  its  soul  taken  part  in  the  Serbian  struggle  for 
liberation.  While  the  men  of  Macedonia,  shoulder  to 
shoulder  with  the  other  Serbs  were  shedding  their  blood 
for  Serbia,  to  whom  they  looked  for  the  liberation  of 
Macedonia  also,  the  progress  of  the  Serbian  insurrection 
was  followed  with  most  ardent  sympathy  in  every  home 
in  Macedonia  inhabited  by  the  plain  people  of  the  land. 
Everybody  in  Macedonia  anxiously  awaited  the  news 
from  the  battlefields ;  they  took  the  keenest  interest 
in  every  success,  and  composed  ballads  to  celebrate 
the  heroes  of  the  Liberation  of  the  Serbian  people. 
Many  songs  have  been  composed  in  Macedonia  in  honour 
of  the  Serbian  insurgents.  The  deeds  of  Kara  George  are 
celebrated  in  Macedonian  ballads  just  the  same  as  in 
ballads  from  other  Serbian  countries.2  There  is  not  a 
child  in  Macedonia  who  does  not  know  the  popular 
ballads  of  "Ilija  Delija."3     Ilija  Delija  is  a  well-known 

1  M.  Dj.  Milicevic,  "  Eeminiscences,"  pp.  446-448. 

2  P.  Draganov,  "  Makedonsko-slavjanski  Sbornik  "  ("  Macedonian 
Slav  Collection"),  i.,  St.  Petersburg,  No.  96  (Song  from  Prilep^. 

3  Ibid.,  Nob.  101.  102,  103,  104. 


118  MACEDONIA 

hero  of  the  Serbian  insurrection.  His  real  name  was 
Ilija  Strelja.  He  was  born  in  GradiSte,  near  Leskovac. 
After  gathering  together  a  large  number  of  volunteers 
from  his  neighbourhood,  he  proceeded  to  Serbia.  He 
distinguished  himself  specially  at  Deligrad  in  1806.  In 
1809  he  succeeded  in  invading  his  native  district,  whence 
he  was  intended  to  organize  incursions  and  to  raise 
all  Macedonia  against  the  Turks.  Ilija  Delija's  ardent 
wish  to  free  Macedonia  from  the  Turks  made  him  a 
favourite  subject  of  Macedonian  national  poetry.  Hajduk 
Veljko,  the  greatest  hero  of  the  insurrection  under  Kara 
George,  even  during  his  lifetime  became  a  legendary 
hero  and  was  celebrated  in  song ;  and  also  in  Macedonia 
we  find  many  songs  in  which  Hajduk  Veljko  is  honoured 
and  celebrated,  just  as  there  are  songs  about  him  in  other 
parts  of  Serbia.1  In  a  popular  ballad  from  Macedonia 
celebrating  the  insurrection  under  MiloS  Obrenovi6,  the 
Macedonians  sing  thus  of  the  share  they  bore  in  it : — 

"  Enough  have  we  gone,  enough  have  we  walked, 
Enough  have  we  walked  on  the  plain  of  Sumadja  (Serbia) 

*\*  Jp  JJS  »f!  rfZ 

:|*  *  *  #  % 

To  destroy  the  great  army, 
To  free  our  poor  children." 2 

In  order  to  deprecate  criticism,  we  beg  to  state  that 
we  have  quoted  all  Macedonian  songs  of  the  Serbian 
Insurrection  against  the  Turks  solely  from  the  collections 
of  Macedonian  national  songs  and  ballads  made  by 
Bulgarian  collectors. 

1  Braca  Miladinovci,  "  Bugarske  Narodne  Pesme  "  ("  Bulgarian 
National  Songs"),  Nos.  215,  216,  217  (Songs  from  the  Neighbourhood 
of  Ochrid).  P.  Draganov,  "  Makedonsko-slavjanski  Sbornik,"  i., 
No.  73  (Song  from  the  Neighbourhood  of  Debra),  No.  74  (Song  from 
the  Neighbourhood  of  Kostur),  No.  75  (Song  from  Tetovo). 

3  St.  I.  Verkovic,  "  Narodne  pesme  Makedonskih  Bugara " 
("National  Songs  of  the  Macedonian  Bulgars"),  i.,  1860,  No.  353. 


IX 

BULGARIAN  PROPAGANDA  IN  MACEDONIA 

BULGARIAN    RESURRECTION 

Bulgars  completely  forgotten  in  Europe  after  the  fall  of  the 
Bulgarian  Empire  in  the  Middle  Ages — Bulgars  in  Bulgaria 
without  national  consciousness — Attempts  at  national  awaken- 
ing— The  Ruthenian  G.  Venelin  forms  an  idealistic  picture 
of  the  Bulgars  and  rouses  them — Bulgars,  inspired  by  Venelin's 
fables,  begin  to  dream  of  Great  Bulgaria — The  romantic 
enthusiast  George  S.  Rakovski  fosters  Bulgarian  megalomania — 
Stephan  Verkovic  and  his  forged  Bulgarian  antiquities — All 
Bulgars  united  in  the  conception  of  their  unlimited  greatness — 
Education  of  the  rising  generation  in  this  spirit — Bulgarian 
ideas  take  hold  in  Russia — Committees  for  the  propaganda  of 
the  Bulgarian  idea  in  Russia — Russian  scholars,  infected  bjT 
Bulgarism,  become  its  pioneers — Sympathy  for  the  Bulgars 
spreads  from  Russia  to  the  rest  of  Europe 

IF,  in  the  nineteenth  century,  the  Bulgars  arose  from 
the  grave  into  which  they  were  thrust  by  the 
Turks  ever  since  the  end  of  the  fourteenth  century,  they 
are  indebted  for  this  entirely  to  the  sentimental  devo- 
tion of  Slavophil  Russia.  Without  this  they  would  be 
ignorant  to  this  day  of  their  own  existence  as  a  nation. 
If  during  the  course  of  the  second  half  of  the  nineteenth 
century  they  attained  emancipation  from  the  Turks, 
they  owe  it  to  Russian  blood  and  the  humane  sentiment 
of  Europe.  Without  these  they  would  have  been  slaves 
of  the  Turk  to  this  day.  But  although  they  were  re- 
suscitated through  the  efforts  of  others,  although  their 

119 


120  MACEDONIA 

emancipation  was  bought  with  the  blood  of  others,  the 
Bulgars  were  not  content  to  let  matters  rest  there. 
The  psychology  of  a  nation  is  not  changed  so  easily. 
The  old  Bulgarian  blood  and  the  old  insatiable  and 
truculent  Bulgarian  spirit  came  out  from  the  very  first 
day  of  the  renascence  of  the  Bulgarian  nation.  The 
first  New  Bulgar  dreamed  already  of  becoming  master 
over  all  his  neighbours  and  much  more  besides.  By 
servility,  cunning  and  duplicity  in  their  dealings  with 
those  who  were  stronger  than  themselves  and  able 
to  help  them ;  by  a  cleverly  organized  appeal  to  those 
who  have  anything  to  give ;  by  an  indefatigable  propa- 
ganda for  their  imaginary  rights,  the  Bulgars  have 
succeeded  in  creating  the  fable  of  a  greatness  of  the 
Bulgarian  nation,  its  past  and  culture,  of  Bulgarian 
rights  and  interests  beyond  Bulgarian  frontiers,  and  of 
Macedonia  as  a  Bulgarian  country.  Herein  alone  lies 
the  explanation  why  the  Bulgars,  a  completely  defunct 
nation,  succeeded  not  only  in  obtaining  their  freedom 
and  independence  but  also  in  finding  advocates  for  their 
insatiable  demands. 

"  After  the  fall  of  the  Bulgarian  Empire  at  the  end 
of  the  fourteenth  century,  the  Bulgars  were  completely 
forgotten  in  Europe.  Even  kindred  Russia  knew  next  to 
nothing  about  them.  .  .  .  They  were  forgotten  to  such 
an  extent,  that  at  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century 
and  in  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  even  the  most 
well-informed  and  conscientious  scholars  had  no  clear 
knowledge  of  them.  Thus,  in  1771,  Schlotzer  hazarded 
the  opinion  that  a  study  of  the  neo-Bulgarian  language 
might  throw  light  upon  the  nature  of  the  Old  Bulgars. 
Dobrovski,  the  patriarch  of  modern  Slavistic,  believed  the 
Bulgarian  language,  of  which  he  was  entirely  ignorant, 


BULGARIAN    PROPAGANDA  121 

to  be  a  dialect  of  Serbian.  All  that  was  known  to 
Kopitar  in  1815  was  that  in  Bulgarian  the  article  is 
placed  after  the  noun.  The  earliest  data  concerning 
the  Bulgarian  language  were  furnished  by  the  Serb 
Vuk.  S.  Karadzic  in  1822  in  his  '  Dodatak  Petrograd- 
skim  Uporednim  Recnicima '  ('  Supplement  to  the 
Petrograd  Parallel  Dictionaries').  All  that  Safarik  knew 
in  1826  was  that  the  Bulgars  live  between  the  Danube 
and  the  Balkan  Mountains  and  that  there  are  600,000 
of  them !  ".  .  .  In  these  very  words  two  distinguished 
Russian  scholars  express  their  total  knowledge  of  the 
Bulgars  at  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century.1 

Even  the  Bulgars  themselves  knew  nothing  about 
themselves.  As  the  Bulgarian  historian  Drinov  says, 
they  had  ceased  to  exist.  Their  one-time  culture  had  not 
only  disappeared,  but  was  forgotten  even  by  themselves. 
Educated  Bulgarians — who  could  be  counted  on  the 
fingers  of  one's  hands — could  not  write  their  own 
language.  The  most  notable  Bulgarians  were  merchants, 
many  of  them  were  in  business  relations  with  Germany, 
Russia,  and  Africa ;  but  not  one  of  them  knew  a  single 
letter  of  Bulgarian.  They  not  only  "  carried  on  their 
correspondence  in  the  neo-Greek  or  Roumanian 
languages,  but  they  spoke  only  Greek  and  were  proud 
of  their  Hellenism.  The  man  who  occasionally  for  his 
own  convenience  desired  to  make  a  note  in  Bulgarian 
as  well,  would  write  Bulgarian  with  Greek  characters.2 

Even  towards  1830  the  "intellectual  "  class  contained 

1  A.  N.  Pipin  and  V.  D.  Spasovic,  "  Istorija  Slavjanskih  Literatur, 
1879  "  ("  History  of  Slav  Literature  "),  p.  104  (in  Russian). 

'  I.  Venelin,  "  Zaradi  Vozrazdenije  Novobolgarskoj  Slovesnosti " 
("  Concerning  the  Renascence  of  Neo-Bulgarian  Slavdom  "),  prevel 
(edited  by)  M.  Kifilov,  Bucharest,  1842,  pp.  11,  34,  35,  50  (in  Bul- 
garian) ;  S.  Milarov,  V.  E.  Aprilov,  Odessa,  1885,  p.  5  (in  Bulgarian). 


122  MACEDONIA 

"not  a  single  Bulgar  who  would  confess  to  being  a 
Bulgar,  or  one  who  spoke  Bulgarian  or  attended  divine 
service  in  the  Slav  language.  And  after  the  fashion 
of  all  renegades  they  hated  and  despised  all  that  was 
Bulgarian  more  than  did  the  real  Greeks."  * 

All  Bulgarian  attempts  to  emerge  from  this  ignomin- 
ious condition1  proved  unavailing.  The  efforts  of  the 
Bulgarian  monk  Pajsije,  who  in  1762  tried  to  vindicate 
his  nation  by  his  "History  of  the  Bulgarian  Nation," 
remained  unnoticed  among  the  Bulgars  themselves. 
His  passionate  reproaches  to  the  Bulgars,  because  they 
read  and  write  in  Greek ;  because  they  forgot  their 
nationality ;  because  they  yielded  to  Greek  customs ; 
because  they  insulted  their  native  tongue  ;  because  they 
were  ashamed  of  calling  themselves  Bulgars,  clearly 
show  how  low  the  Bulgars  had  sunk.  All  attempts 
made  at  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century  by  the 
Bulgarian  emigrants  in  Russia  likewise  remained  un- 
successful. There  were  many  Bulgarian  emigrants  in 
Russia,  especially  in  the  southern  towns.  Many  of 
these  were  merchants  of  considerable  wealth.  Although 
every  one  of  them  had  received  a  Greek  education,  yet 
there  were  some  among  them  who  contemplated  a 
resurrection  of  their  defunct  nationality.  But  all  in 
vain.  The  Bulgars  were  not  able  to  raise  themselves 
from  their  grave. 

The  Bulgarian  renascence  came  from  abroad.  It  was 
reserved  for  the  youth  Gjorgje  Venelin,  a  Ruthenian, 
(1802-1839),  a  native  of  Lemberg,  to  re-create  the 
Bulgarian    nation.       After    studying    Slavistic     at    the 

1  E.  Golubinski,  "  Kratki  Ocerk  Istoriji  Pravoslavnih  Cerkvej  " 
("  Short  Outline  of  Orthodox  Church  History "),  Moscow,  1871, 
pp.  176-177  (in  Russian). 


BULGARIAN    PROPAGANDA  123 

University   of  Leinberg,   he   proceeded    to   Russia.     At 
Kismjev  he  came  across  some  Bulgarian  emigrants  who 
fired    him    with    enthusiasm   for   the   Bulgarian   cause, 
and  in  1829  he  wrote  a  book  in  Russian  entitled  "  Old 
and   New   Bulgars."     Containing   as    it    did    something 
so    far    unknown,    the    book    met    with    a    favourable 
reception,  and   Venelin   devoted  himself  with  increased 
ardour    to    the    cause    of    the    Bulgars.     In    1830    the 
Russian  Academy  commissioned  him  to  explore  Bulgaria. 
Thus    he  was   afforded   the   opportunity   of    seeing   the 
nation    to   which   he   had   so   lovingly  devoted  himself. 
Although  he  had  considerable  trouble  with   the  objects 
of  his  affection,  who  threatened  and  blackmailed  him — he 
was  even  robbed  by  a  Bulgar  of   the  "  Carostavnik,"  a 
MS.  of  the   Serbian   Kings   and   Cars — and  placed   the 
most  vexatious  obstacles  in  his  way,  Venelin  succeeded 
in  collecting   several   old  MSS.,  national  ballads,  and  a 
certain     amount     of     philological     material.      All     this 
material  was  utilized  by  Venelin  in  his  subsequent  works 
on  the  Bulgars  (description  of  his  travels,  the  national 
ballads,    Bulgarian    literature,    history    and    language). 
Although  Venelin  in  his  books   furnished   many  details 
and  created  many   assumptions  regarding   the  Bulgars, 
his  work  does  not  possess  great  scientific  value.     Venelin 
was  a  great  idealist,  with  a  lively  imagination.     In  his 
day   the  scientific   material  available  on   the  subject  of 
the  Bulgars  was  both  poor  and   scanty,   and  where  his 
material  failed  him  he  supplied  the  deficiency  from  his 
exuberant  imagination,   "  which  in  a  few  lines  created 
pictures,   so   that   he   mistook   for   scientific  results  the 
ardent   wish  of  his  soul  and  the   dream   of  his    spirit." 
He   himself   admits   that    when   he    found   his   material 
deficient  he  supplemented  it  out  of  his  own  head.     For 


124  MACEDONIA 

this  reason  "his  books  are  full  of  mistakes,  sometimes 
grave  mistakes,"  and  for  this  reason  also  "  they  very 
soon  became  obsolete."  But  if  his  works  are  of  no 
scientific  value,  they  are  nevertheless  of  immense  signifi- 
cance for  the  Bulgarian  nation.  "  His  great  merit 
consists  in  the  fact  that  he  by  himself  created  and  re- 
suscitated the  Bulgarian  nation,  that  he  was  responsible 
for  the  birth  of  the  completely  defunct  Bulgarian 
nationality."  1 

The  romantically  fantastic  Venelin  appealed  to  the 
immature  imagination  of  the  Young  Bulgars.  He  was 
hailed  with  love  and  enthusiasm,  as  a  Messiah  come 
to  rescue  a  lost  nation.  All  his  observations,  all  his 
praises,  all  his  suggestions  were  accepted  like  com- 
mands from  heaven.  He  urged  the  wealthy  Bulgars 
of  Russia  and  Roumania  to  subscribe  donations  for 
the  support  of  the  Bulgarian  cause,  for  the  opening 
of  Bulgarian  schools,  for  the  printing  of  school  books. 

Two  Bulgarian  merchants  of  Odessa,  V.  E.  Aprilov 
and  N.  Palauzov,  who  had  been  completely  Hellenized 
in  their  youth,2  by  reading  Venelin  became  Bulgars 
and  the  first  apostles  of  the  Bulgarian  awakening. 
Aprilov  began  to  write  books  in  Bulgarian,  in  which 
he  speaks  of  his  nation  with  fantastic  enthusiasm. 
Palauzov  conducted  his  propaganda  by  word  of  mouth 
and  collected  contributions.  Both  gave  money  for  the 
opening  of  the  school  in  Gabrovac,  in  1835,  the  first 
of  the  Bulgarian  schools.  This  work  also  influenced 
other  Bulgars.  The  sum  of  donations  contributed  not 
only  by  Bulgars,  but  also  by  Russians  and  Roumanians 

1  Pipin  and  Spasovic,  p.  112. 

-  Vasil  Aprilov  was  treasurer  of  the  Greek  Insurgents'  Com- 
mittee in  182J. 


BULGARIAN    PROPAGANDA  125 

constantly  assumed  greater  proportions.  Schools  were 
opened,  books  published,  young  men  sent  to  study  in 
European  schools  and  universities.  Thus  was  in- 
augurated the  first  appearance  of  the  Bulgars  as  a 
nation  and  the  foundation  of  the  idea  of  their  deliver- 
ance from  the  Turks. 

The  whole  of  this  movement  took  place  within  the 
limits  of  Bulgarian  territory  ;  of  Macedonia  the  Bulgars 
had  not  even  begun  to  dream.  The  movement  was 
very  popular,  especially  in  Russia,  who  considered 
herself  the  protectress  of  the  conquered  Slavs,  and  in 
Serbia,  who  regarded  the  Bulgars  as  the  broken  nation 
of  a  brother-country.  But  the  Bulgars  were  not  con- 
tent with  this.  In  Venelin's  books  they  found  the 
stimulus  towards  a  state  of  things  which  they  had  so 
far  not  even  contemplated.  Before  visiting  the  Balkan- 
Peninsula,  Venelin  wrote  that  the  Bulgars  were  to 
be  found  not  only  in  Bulgaria,  but  in  Rumelia, 
Macedonia,  Albania,  Thessaly,  South  Morea,  and  Asia 
Minor  as  well;1  that  the  Russians  received  Christianity 
from  the  Bulgars ;  that  it  was  the  Bulgars  who 
brought  them  the  use  of  the  alphabet ;  that  up  to 
the  time  of  Lomonosov,  divine  service  had  been  cele- 
brated in  Russia  in  Bulgarian,  which  had  also  been 
the  literary  language,  and  that  in  ancient  times  not 
one  of  the  other  Slav  nations  had  been  so  rich  in 
MSS.  and  so  forth.3  The  Bulgars  were  not  slow  in 
adopting  even  the  most  preposterous  of  Venelin's 
statements  and  magnifying  them   out  of   all  sense   and 

■  "  Drevinje  i  Ninjesnije  Bolgare "  ("  Old  and  New  Bulgars "), 
Moscow,  1829,  vol.  i.  (in  Russian). 

2  "  Zaradi  Vozrazdenije  "  ("  Concerning  the  Renascence  "),  pp.  5, 
17  (in  Bulgarian). 


126  MACEDONIA 

proportion.  For  whereas  Venelin  was  a  good  man 
with  the  soul  of  a  poet,  an  idealist  whose  infatuation 
for  the  Bulgars  carried  him  to  absurd  lengths — as  he 
himself  often  admitted — the  Bulgars  grew  restive  under 
all  criticism  and  went  recklessly  far  beyond  the  limits 
which  Venelin  in  his  infatuation  had  assigned  to  the 
Bulgarian  nation. 

One   of  Venelin's  first   followers,  the   man   who   laid 
the  foundation  of   the  Bulgarian  idea  of  expansion  and 
of   the  role  of   the  Bulgarian   nation  in   the  world,  was 
the     Bulgar     Gjorgje     S.     Kakovski     (1818-1868).      In 
Venelin's   fantastic    ideas   Bakovski   found    the   inspira- 
tion  for   evolving  a   practical   propaganda   for   the   idea 
of    the   prehistoric   claims   of   the   Bulgars   not   only  in 
the   Balkan  Peninsula,    but   far   beyond   it.     Poet,  his- 
torian, ethnographer,  archaeologist,  publicist,  social  and 
ecclesiastical    agitator,   Bakovski    wrote    much    on    the 
subject    of     his    nation.      But     his    violent     patriotism 
extinguished     every    glimmer    of     common    sense     and 
critical    faculty  in    his   writings.     A    few   samples   will 
suffice   to   show   what    Bakovski   is.     In    his   efforts   to 
raise   the   Bulgarian   nation,    "high  in   the   eyes   of  its 
own  sons,  and  afterwards  in  those  of  the   world,"1  he 
has  recourse   to  the  realm  of  fairy   tales,  which   is  not 
the  way  of  intelligent  persons.     He  denies  the  ancient 
Greek    sources,    and    places   the   Bulgars  as   precursors 
of  the  European  nations  ;  the  Bulgarian  language  does  not 
differ  from  the  Sanscrit;  Bulgarian  national  mythology 
is    Indian,2   even    before     the    advent     of     Christianity 
the    Bulgars    could    read    and    write    and    possessed   a 
literature;    Bulgaria   was    "at   one    time   the   chief    of 
the    Slav    nations,    the   mightiest    and    most    extensive 
'  Sofia  paper  Mir,  February  3,  1917.        =  Pipiri  and  Spasovic. 


BULGARIAN    PROPAGANDA  127 

Empire  in  Europe  in  olden  times;"  "moral  truth 
appeared  among  the  Bulgars  first  of  all  the  Slavs," 
"  the  most  ancient  relics  of  the  old  Slav  customs 
and  language  have  been  preserved  in  various  parts 
of  Bulgaria  and  among  the  Bulgars  of  to-day." 
The  Bulgars  lived  in  the  Balkan  Peninsula  before 
the  Greek  immigration ;  Demosthenes  was  a  Bulgar ; 
so  was  Marko  Botsaris,  a  hero  of.  the  Greek  insurrec- 
tion ; 1  all  European  languages  and  all  European 
culture  originated  with  the  Bulgars.  The  ancient 
Peons  and  the  Kelto-Kimbers  were  Bulgars ;  Clovis 
and  Merovaeus  were  Bulgars ;  the  first  Christian 
Church  in  Europe  was  founded  among  the  Bulgars ; 
they  helped  to  establish  the  other  churches,  and  they 
were  the  founders  of  Christian  missionary  activity ;  the 
Bulgars  received  Christianity  earlier  than  the  Greeks, 
"  because  they  believed  in  one  God,  in  the  immortality 
of  the  soul,  and  in  recompense  after  death  "  ;  the  Greeks 
were  converted  later,  because  they  were  polytheists. 
Even  the  Olympic  Zeus  could  not  exist  without  the 
Bulgars.  He  was  nursed  and  reared  by  the  Bul- 
garian Mountain  Villa  (fay)  Neda.2 

It  should  specially  be  pointed  out  that  Kakovski  is 
not  a  "vulgar  Bulgarian  enthusiast."  He  is  one  of  the 
most  distinguished  Bulgars  of  the  nineteenth  century. 
No  one  else  looms  so  large  in  neo-Bulgarian  political 
and  literary  history.  The  Sofia  paper  Mir  of 
February   3,    1917,   while   calling  upon   the   Bulgars  to 

«  G.  S.  Rakovski,  "  Gorski  Putnik"  ("A  Traveller  through  the 
Mountains"),  Novi  Sad,  1857,  pp.  164,  166,  175,  201,  231  (in 
Bulgarian). 

2  G.  S.  Rakovski,  "  Kljuc  Bolgarskoga  Jazika "  ("  Key  to  the 
Bulgarian  Language"),  Odessa,  1880,  pp.  109,  142-143,  94,  etc. 
(in  Bulgarian). 


128  MACEDONIA 

celebrate   the  fiftieth    anniversary  of   Kakovski's   death, 
says   that    "  the    first    half    of    the    modern    period   of 
Bulgarian  history  is  Eakovski's  epoch,"  and  proceeds  to 
add   that   the  question  of   the  celebration  "has  already 
been  taken  up   by  the  Bulgarian  Academy  of  Science." 
But   Kakovski  is   by  no  means   the  only  example  we 
could   quote.     All   Bulgarian  patriots  of   the  nineteenth 
century  resembled   him.     There  is  one   name,  however, 
that   we   must   mention,    a  name    especially    connected 
with    Macedonia.     It   is   that   of    Stephan   I.   Verkovic 
(1827-1893).      As    a    schoolmaster    in     Macedonia,    he 
is    one   of    the   most   responsible,   especially   in   Eussia, 
for  having  paved  the  way   for   the  mistaken  idea   that 
Macedonia    is   a    Bulgarian   country.     He   collected    in 
Macedonia  the  local  "Bulgarian"  national  ballads  and 
wrote  monographs  upon  them.     Verkovic,  too,  can  best 
be  judged  by  quoting  his  work.     Among  other  amazing 
troves   he    discovered  in  Macedonia  the  "  Veda  Sloven- 
ska,"  i.e.  national  poems  of  pre-historic  antiquity!     He 
collected   hymns  to   Orpheus,  the  Thracian  singer,  and 
to  the  ancient  Slav  gods  in  Macedonia !     He  discovered 
ballads  of   Alexander   the  Great   and   the  settlement   of 
the   Slavs   in    the    Balkan    Peninsula!     He    discovered 
what   other  less  privileged  mortals  had  overlooked,  viz. 
that  the  "  Bulgars  "   of  Macedonia  have   preserved  cer- 
tain national  songs  or  poems  "  referring  to  the  primitive 
development  of  the  human  race,"  and  the  "mythology 
expressed   in   these  traditions  has  a  remarkable   affinity 
with   the  Kig  Veda,"  so  that  it   occurred  to   him   that 
"these    poems   must    be,   not   only    twin-sisters   which 
grew   from   the  same   spring   and   source,  but — what  is 
more — that  these  poems  of  ours,  judging  by  their  sim- 
plicity  and   extreme  antiquity,   must   be  the   model   of 


BULGARIAN    PROPAGANDA  129 

the  Big  Veda,  having  developed  independently  ever 
since  the  first  separation,  one  version  developing  in 
one  direction  and  the  other  in  another."  1 

Before  printing  these  hymns  or  songs,  Verkovic  sent 
them — like  samples — to  different  quarters.  To  the 
Ethnographical  Exhibition  in  Moscow  in  1867  he  sent 
an  "Ancient  Bulgarian  Orphic  Hymn"  of  which  he 
declared  that  he  had  taken  it  down  from  an  old  man 
of  one  hundred  and  five.  The  hymn,  of  course,  sounded 
merely  like  "a  fairy  tale,"  as  Verkovic  himself  admits, 
but  this  did  not  prevent  him  from  printing  and  publish- 
ing it  together  with  others,  or  even  from  maintaining 
in  the  preface  "  that  the  contents  of  these  songs  are 
based  on  historic  truth  and  on  facts  which  have  really 
taken  place,"  and  to  point  out  "  that  there  is  more 
truth  in  them  than  in  any  other  similar  products 
of  the  past,  whether  European  or  Asiatic."2  Even 
though  all  Verkovic's  forgeries  were  exposed  at  once 
and  without  difficulty,  this  did  not  in  the  least  deter 
him  from  publishing  the  second  volume  of  his  "  Veda  "3 
seven  years  later. 

Verkovic  is  not  really  remarkable  in  himself.  But  he, 
too,  is  an  important  figure  in  Bulgarian  history.  He  was 
for  a  long  time  the  chief  and  only  authority  in  Russia  on 
matters  Macedonian.  In  fact,  one  of  his  works  is  an 
"  Ethnography  of  Macedonia  "  written  in  Russian.  To- 
day the  Bulgars  refer  copiously  to  him  over  the  Mace- 
donian question — to  his  songs,  his  treatises,  and  reports. 
For  them  he  is  "  well-known  in   the  Slav  world  as   an 

1  "  Veda  Slovena,  narodni  pesni  ot  predhistoricno  i  predhristjansko 
doba,  otkril  v.  Trakija  i  Makedonia  i  izdal  Stefan  I.  Verkovic,"  1874, 
p.  x. 

2  Ibid.,  p.  xii. 

3  Petrograd,  1881. 

10 


130  MACEDONIA 

ethnographer  and  archaeologist ;  he  is  especially 
esteemed  for  his  perfect  knowledge  of  Macedonia."1 

These  ideas  were  held  by  all  Bulgars  of  the  nineteenth 
century.  They  were  shared  also  by  the  Bulgarian 
historian  Gavril  Krstovic,  one  of  the  chief  agitators  in 
the  Bulgarian  Church  Question.  His  "  History  of  the 
Bulgarian  Nation"  is  full  of  fables  and  wild  exaggera- 
tions concerning  the  Bulgars  and  their  past.  Even 
Mr.  Drinov,  the  best  of  the  Bulgarian  historians,  is  not 
entirely  free  from  these  ideas. 

By  such  ideas  was  the  Bulgarian  awakening  accom- 
panied. They  permeated  the  whole  of  the  nation, 
all  its  new  history,  its  science,  its  policy,  and  all  its 
social  and  political  programme,  the  rising"  generation  of 
Bulgaria  is  brought  up  on  these  ideas ;  all  school  and 
instruction  are  imbued  with  them.2 

Armed  with  ideas  of  this  kind,  then,  the  Bulgars  began 
their    propagandist    activity    in     Macedonia    and     their 


i 


A.  Ischirkov,  "  Les  confins  occidentaux  des  Terres  Bulgares," 
Lausanne.  1915,  p.  231.  Mr.  Ischirkov  is  Professor  of  Geography  at 
the  University  of  Sofia  and  Member  of  the  Bulgarian  Academy  of 
Science. 

2  In  Bulgarian  school-books  we  find  it  is  stated  that  Alexander  the 
Great  was  a  Bulgar,  because  he  was  born  in  Macedonia,  and  that 
Aristotle  was  a  Bulgar  for  the  same  reason.  It  is  true  that  he  wrote 
in  Greek,  but  he  did  so  only  in  order  to  educate  the  southern  bar- 
barians. He  wrote  also  in  Bulgarian,  but  the  Greeks  destroyed 
the  MSS.  (see  Morning  Pcfsi  of  February  8,  1916).  According  to 
Bulgarian  school-books  Constantine  the  Great  Was  also  a  Bulgar,  as 
he  was  born  in  Nis,  which,  is — according  to  them — a  Bulgarian  town. 
According  to  the  same  authority  Cyril  and  Method  are  Bulgars, 
because  they  were  born  in  Salonica  ;  Aleksa  Nenadovid  and  Hajduk 
Veljko,  those  heroes  of  the  Serbian  liberation,  are  likewise  Bulgars, 
and  also  the  heroes  of  the  Greek  insurrection  Botsaris,  Karaiskis, 
Kanaris,  Miaulis,  and  others.  (Cf.  "  Drzave  i  narodi  Balkans- 
kog  Poluostrva,"  translated  from  the  .Russian,  Belgrade,  1891, 
pp.  100-101.) 


BULGARIAN    PROPAGANDA  131 

opposition  to  the  Serbian  claims  to  that  country.  Un- 
fortunately these  ideas  did  not  remain  confined  to  the 
Bulgars.  By  dint  of  constant  and  ubiquitous  repetition 
they  had  the  good  fortune  to  be  heard  of  and  taken 
into  consideration.  The  first  and  most  strongly  to  be 
influenced  by  them  was  .Russia,  who  regarded  the  Slavs 
of  Turkey  as  her  oppressed  brothers  in  blood  and  religion. 
In  Eussia  there  were  always  Bulgarian  refugees.  For 
whereas  the  refugees  from  Serbian  countries  under 
Turkey  always  fled  to  the  Serbs,  the  Bulgars  fled  to 
Wallachia,  Moldavia,  and  South  Bussia.1  From  these 
the  Russians  heard  of  the  misery  that  prevailed  in 
Bulgaria.  It  was  in  Russian  that  Venelin  with  pas- 
sionate devotion  and  fanciful  idealism  introduced  the 
Bulgarian  nation  and  its  fictitious  value  for  Slavdom 
and  for  the  world.  In  their  war  with  Turkey  towards 
the  end  of  the  thirties  of  the  nineteenth  century,  the 
Russians  had  at  last  the  opportunity  of  personally 
observing  the  miseries  of  the  nation  of  which  Venelin 
was  just  at  that  time  writing  with  so  much  sympathy 
and  enthusiasm.  Added  to  this  came  the  agitation  of 
the  "  awakened "  Bulgarian  patriots  in  Russia  and 
Roumania.  "Bulgarian  Committees  for  the  aid  of  the 
Danubian  Bulgars"  were  established  in  Odessa  and 
Bucharest,  with  the  object  of  making  propaganda  in 
Russia  and  elsewhere  for  the  benefit  of  the  Bulgarian 
cause.  To  Bulgaria  these  Committees  sent  school  and 
liturgical  books,  crucifixes,  vestments,  chalices,  and  other 
ecclesiastical  furniture.  Russia  was  the  first  to  take 
a  lively  interest  in  the  Bulgars.  She,  too,  sent  books 
and  subscriptions  for  the  Bulgarian  schools  and  ecclesi- 

1  Pipin  and  Spasovic,  p.  139 ;    G.  S.  Rakovski,  "  Gorski  Putnik" 
("A  Traveller  through  the  Mountains  "),  p.  271. 


132  MACEDONIA 

astical  furniture  for  the  Bulgarian  churches.  She  was 
the  first  to  attract  and  to  educate  the  Bulgarian  younger 
generation,  which  produced  some  of  the  most  -ardent 
Bulgarian  patriots  who  then  either  laboured  in  Eussia 
or  else  made  propaganda  in  the  Balkan  Peninsula. 
Finally,  little  by  little,  Bulgaromania  became  general  in 
Russia.  Even  sober  men  of  science  were  bitten  with 
the  Bulgarian  craze  and  prepared  to  pronounce  the 
whole  of  the  Balkans  to  be  Bulgarian.  The  learned 
V.  Grigorovic,  travelling  in  the  Balkans  in  1844,  saw 
only  Bulgars  wherever  he  went.  Although  he  noticed 
a  prevailing  difference  between  the  speech  of  the  Mace- 
donians and  that  of  the  Bulgars,  he  could  not  get  rid 
of  his  Bulgarophilism,  and  so  pronounced  all  Macedonians 
to  be  Bulgars.1  He  also  noticed  other  differences,  but 
being  completely  fascinated  by  the  Bulgars,  he  did  not 
think  of  discriminating  between  them  and  the  Mace- 
donians.2 Gfigorovic"s  unquestioned  authority  only 
served  to  strengthen  the  Russian  love  for  the  Bulgars. 
They  were  the  favourite  children  of  the  Great  Slav 
Mother.  The  Russian  Society,  "  Slavyanskoe  Blagot- 
voritelnoe  Obscestvo,"  established  in  1858,  laboured 
untiringly  at  the  propagation  of  the  Bulgarian  cause. 
The  ethnographic  maps  published  by  the  Society  were 
in  complete  accord  with  the  most  ambitious  of  Bulgarian 
ideals.  In  1870  Russia  created  the  Bulgarian  auto- 
nomous Church.  Finally,  when  in  1878  it  became 
necessary  to  establish  the  Bulgarian  State,  all  Russia 
was  carried  away  with  excitement.  Public  opinion  was 
stronger  than   the  Government.     Thus  was  created  the 

1  V.  Grigorovic,  "  Ocerk  putesestvija  po  evropejskoj  Turcii,"  1848, 
pp.  194,  195,  196  (in  Russian). 
3  Ibid. 


BULGARIAN    PROPAGANDA  133 

Great  Bulgaria  of  San  Stefano,  on  March  3,  1878 — a 
Bulgaria  within  whose  frame,  beside  the  real  Bulgaria, 
were  included  Macedonia  and  a  great  part  of  Old  Serbia. 
According  to  popular  opinion  in  Russia  at  the  time 
Bulgaria  was  entitled  to  an  area  of  164,000  sq.  km. 
with  a  population  of  4,500,000.  And  if  there  had  been 
no  Congress  of  Berlin,  1878,  which  reduced  Bulgaria  to 
her  proper  ethnical  boundaries,  the  Bnlgars  would  long 
ago  have  been  masters  of  the  Balkan  Peninsula.  But 
although  the  Bulgaria  of  San  Stefano  was  not  realized, 
it  left  a  strong  impression  among  the  Bulgars.  It 
remained  for  them  a  recognized  and  merely  unrealized 
goal.  It  has '  been  the  dream  of  the  whole  of  the 
Bulgarian  nation  ever  since. 

From  Bussia  this  sympathy  for  Bulgaria  spread  all 
over  the  world.  It  was  in  Russia  that  the  fables  of 
the  Bulgars  were  given  wings.  Russia  was  the  chief 
authority  on  Bulgaria  and  her  chief  advocate.  Thence 
the  sympathy  and  help  extended  by  all  the  world  to 
the  unjust  aspirations  of  Bulgaria,  to  the  huge  detri- 
ment  of   the   just   interests   of  the   Serbian   nation. 


IX    (Continued) 

BULGABIAN  ACTION  IN  MACEDONIA 

The  Greek  Church  abuses  its  power  over  the  Slavs  in  the  Turkish 
Empire — Slav  dissatisfaction — Inability  of  the  Serbs  to  fight 
the  Greek  Church — The  Bulgars,  assisted  by  Russia,  open  their 
campaign — The  Uniate  Church  (Greek  Catholicism)  among  the 
Bulgars — The  Russians,  alarmed  at  the  progress  of  the  Uniate 
Church,  increase  their  help  to  the  Bulgars  —  The  Greek 
Patriarch,  alarmed  at  the  growth  of  the  Uniate  Church,  yields  to 
the  Bulgars — The  Porte,  taking  the  part  of  the  Bulgars,  inter- 
venes with  the  Greek  Patriarch,  and  the  Sultan  declares  the 
independence  of  the  Bulgarian  Church  in  Turkey — Significance 
of  the  creation  of  the  Bulgarian  Exarchate — Detriment  caused 
to  the  Serbs  in  Turkey  by  the  creation  of  the  Bulgarian 
Exarchate — Attitude  of  the  Greek  Clmreh  towards  the  Mace- 
donian Serbs — Macedonians  begin  to  turn  Uniate — Russia 
advises  them  to  join  the  Bulgars  in  their  struggle  against  the 
Greek  Church — Macedonians  help  Bulgars,  but  only  to  free 
themselves  from  the  Greek  clergy — The  Macedo-Roumanians  do 
the  same — The  Bulgarian  Exarchate  and  Macedonia — Turks 
side  with  Bulgars  in  Macedonia — New  Bulgarian  bishoprics  in 
Macedonia — Forcible  Bulgarization  of  the  Macedonians — Creation 
of  independent  Bulgaria — Propaganda  in  Macedonia  from  Bul- 
garia— Many  Macedonian  Serbs  refuse  to  join  the  Bulgars — 
Bulgarian  terror  among  Serbian  population  of  Macedonia — 
Bulgarian  comitadjis  in  Macedonia — Destruction  of  Serbian 
records  and  monuments  in  Macedonia 

DESPITE  Bulgarian  zeal,  and  in  spite  of  the 
sympathies  of  Europe,  the  Bulgars  would  not 
have  prevailed  in  Macedonia  had  they  not  succeeded 
in  pressing  the  Church  into  the  service  of  their 
nationallnterests.      When  speaking   of  the  part  played 

134 


BULGARIAN    ACTION    IN    MACEDONIA     135 

by  the  Serbian  Patriarchate  we  explained  how  great 
is  the  importance  of  au  autonomous  Church  in  Turkey. 
The  Bulgars  contrived  to  have  Macedonia  placed  under 
the  power  of  their  own  autonomous  Church,  and  then 
drew  every  advantage  from  this  circumstance  that  could 
possibly  be  drawn  from  it,  to  the  utmost  limit. 

Bight  up  to  the  latter  half  of  the  eighteenth  century 
the  greater  part  of  Macedonia  was  from  an  ecclesiastical 
point  of  view  under  the  Serbian  Patriarchate,  while 
the  smaller  part  was  under  the  archiepiscopal  see  of 
Ochrida.  In  1766  the  Turks  suppressed  the  Serbian 
Patriarchate,  and  in  1767  they  suppressed  the  archi- 
episcopate  of  Ochrida.  All  the  powers  and  rights  of 
these  two  independent  Churches  were  henceforth  trans- 
ferred to  the  Greek  Patriarchate  in  Constantinople.  In 
this  way  not  only  the  vast  territories  which  had  already 
been  under  the  Greek  Patriarchate  before,  but  also  all 
those  regions  in  the  Turkish  Empire  in  which  the  Church 
service  was  conducted  in  the  Slav  tongue,  were  placed 
under  the  Greek  Patriarchate. 

The  Greek  Patriarchate  is  above  all  things  a  Greek 
Church.  It  was  never  friendly  to  the  Slavs  of  the 
Balkan  Peninsula.  While  the  Southern  Slavs  had  their 
independent  States  in  the  Middle  Ages,  their  auto- 
cephalous  Churches  were  rivals  of  the  Greek  Patriarchate. 
Under  the  Turkish  rule  the  independent  Serbian  Church 
guarded  the  Serbian  nation  and  its  national  civilization 
from  the  influence  of  the  Greek  Church,  just  as  it 
guarded  them  from  that  of  the  Turks.  When  the 
Greek  Patriarchate  found  itself  in  the  proud  position 
of  being  the  chief  and  sole  Orthodox  Church  in  European 
Turkey,  it  looked  upon  it  as  its  duty  to  suppress  every 
non-Greek  national  feeliDg  and  to  foster  and  strengthen 


136  MACEDONIA 

only  Greek  sentiment.  Only  Greek  nationality  and 
Greek  civilization  enjoyed  its  favour ;  everything  else 
was  persecuted  and  crushed.  None  but  Greeks  could 
occupy  high  positions  in  the  Church.  From  these 
positions  they  everywhere  protected  the  Greeks  alone, 
they  introduced  an  exclusively  Greek  intellectual  life, 
and  they  invested  everything  with  an  exclusively  Greek 
character.  The  Slavs,  no  matter  what  their  ability,  were 
never  permitted  to  rise  beyond  the  dignity  of  a  parish 
priest,  and  that  they  could  attain  only  by  heavy  pay- 
ments. The  Slav  office  was  persecuted,  old  Slav  MSS. 
were  destroyed,  the  legends  in  the  churches  coated  over 
with  plaster  and  replaced  by  Greek  inscriptions.  Besides 
all  this  the  Greek  Church  was  morally  in  a  most  corrupt 
state.  Robbery  and  venality  prevailed  in  high  places. 
Preferment  was  given  only  to  sycophants  and  to  those 
who  were  able  to  pay  well.  A  bishopric  cost  about 
;£T1,000  in  gold.  For  gold,  ex-cooks  and  innkeepers  were 
permitted  to  attain  the  dignity  of  a  bishop.  And  other 
vices  of  the  vilest  sort  werft  prevalent  in  the  hierarchy 
of  the  Greek  Church.  Standing  by  the  Turks  in  all 
things,  truckling  to  them  and  bribing  them  with  money, 
the  Greek  Church  with  the  help  of  the  Turks  exploited 
the  nation  and  treated  it  even  as  the  Turks  were  doing. 

This  state  of  affairs  produced  a  profound  dissatisfac- 
tion with  the  Greek  Church  among  the  Slavs.  For 
this  reason,  in  Serbia — as  soon  as  the  country  had  set 
itself  free — MiloS  Obrenovic,  her  prince  at  that  time, 
made  it  one  of  his  first  cares  to  separate  the  Serbian 
Church  from  the  Greek  Patriarchate  and  to  render  it 
independent. 

Throughout  Turkey,  this  dissatisfaction  with  the 
Greek    Church   increased  from  day    to    day.     Nothing 


BULGARIAN    ACTION    IN    MACEDONIA     13? 

was  lacking  but  a  suitable  opportunity  to  begin 
an  open  struggle  against  it.  Although  the  Serbs 
were  far  more  numerous  in  Turkey  than  the  Bulgars, 
they  were  nevertheless  practically  debarred  from  rebel- 
ling against  the  Greek  Church.  The  liberation  of 
Serbia  at  the  expense  of  .Turkey  made  the  Serbian 
people  an  object  of  mingled  hate  and  fear  on  the  part  of 
the  Turks.  Any  movement  on  the  part  of  the  Serbs  in 
Turkey  was  supposed  to  be  instigated  from  Serbia.  Every 
Serb  in  Turkey  was  considered  a  rebel.  The  detachment 
of  the  Serbian  Church  from  the  Greek  Patriarchate 
increased  the  hostility  of  the  Greeks  towards  the  Serbs, 
and  stimulated  Greek  intrigue  against  them.  The 
Turkish  Empire  and  the  Greek  Patriarchate  became 
natural  allies  against  the  Serbs.  The  Bulgars  were  (at 
that  time)  in  a  far  better  position  to  fight  against  the 
abuses  of  the  Greek  Church.  They  were  docile  subjects 
of  Turkey,  without  political  aspirations.  The  Bulgarian 
State  did  not  as  yet  exist,  and  the  Turks  could  not  lay 
it  to  their  charge,  as  they  did  to  that  of  the  Serbs,  that 
they  were  agitating  abroad  for  the  formation  of  a  free 
State. 

The  Bulgars,  too,  had  good  reason  to  be  discontented 
with  the  Greek  Patriarchate.  For  many  years,  ever 
since  the  Bulgarian  Patriarchate  in  Trnovo  was  sup- 
pressed in  1393,  the  Greeks  had  cruelly  oppressed  the 
Bulgars.  They  denationalized  them  and  destroyed  all 
their  native  civilization.  Very  early  in  the  day  there 
were  voices  raised  among  the  Bulgars  against  the  Greeks. 
Already  in  the  middle  of  the  eighteenth  century  the 
Bulgarian  historian  Pajsije  complained  bitterly  of  the 
Greeks.  Venelin  relates  how,  some  time  about  1794, 
the  Greeks  burnt  a  number  of  old  Bulgarian  MSS.  at 


138  MACEDONIA 

Trnovo;  how  the  Bulgarian  alphabet  had  ceased  to 
exist ;  how  the  Bulgars  write  the  words  of  their  own 
language  in  Greek  characters  or  carry  on  their  corre- 
spondence entirely  in  Greek ;  how  the  Christian  faith 
has  declined  among  the  Bulgars,  how  priests  are  scarce, 
and  one  may  find  unbaptized  young  men  of  between 
seventeen  and  twenty  years  of  age.1  When,  in  1823,  the 
Metropolitan  of  Sofia  discovered  the  presence  of  Bul- 
garian books  and  antiquities  in  the  village  of  Cerovina, 
near  Sofia,  he  ordered  the  former  to  be  burnt  and 
replaced  by  Greek  books.2  In  1825  the  Metropolitan  of 
Trnovo  ordered  the  burning  of  the  old  library  of  the 
Bulgarian  Patriarchate  during  the  Trnovo  period,  which 
had  been  accidentally  re-discovered  shortly  before. 3  All 
this  provided  sufficient  cause  for  the  Bulgars  to  be 
thoroughly  dissatisfied  with  the  Greek  Patriarchate. 

The  denationalized  Bulgars,  however,  did  not  begin 
to  consider  all  these  matters  till  Venelin  roused  them 
from  their  torpor.  It  was  precisely  through  his  influence 
among  the  more  notable  Bulgars  that  the  idea  of 
emancipation  from  the  Greeks  began  to  appear.  In 
1840  the  Bulgars  begged  the  Greek  Patriarchate  that  in 
the  Bulgarian  counties  the  Greek  language  might  be 
replaced  by  the  Bulgarian  in  the  Church  services. 
As  this  petition  was  unsuccessful,  the  Bulgars  in  1853 
appealed  to  the  Russian  Ambassador  (in  Constantinople), 
Prince  Menshikov,  for  intervention  on  their  behalf  in 
this  matter.      But   even    then    they   failed   to  succeed. 

1  J.  Venelin,  "  Zaradi  vozbuzdenie  novobolgarskoj  slovesnosti " 
("  Concerning  the  Eenascence  of  Neo-Bulgarian  Slavdom"), Bucharest, 
1842,  pp.  11,  27,  34-86  (in  Bulgarian). 

2  G.  Bousquet,  "  Histoire  du  Peuple  Bulgare,"  Paris,  1909,  p.  133. 

3  J.  Bakovski,  "  Gorski  Putnik"  ("A  Traveller  through  the 
Mountains  "),  pp.  208,  etc. 


BULGARIAN    ACTION    IN   MACEDONIA     139 

After  the  Crimean  War,  the  Porte  by  a  decree  on 
February  16,  1856,  promised  her  Christian  subjects  that 
their  rights  should  be  respected  and  their  religion  pro- 
tected. On  the  strength  of  this  the  Bulgars  demanded 
that  in  the  Bulgarian  eparchies  Bulgarian  bishops  and 
priests  should  be  appointed,  and  that  in  the  churches  the 
Bulgarian  language  should  be  introduced  in  place  of  the 
Greek.  Although  the  Russian  Ambassador  supported 
their  petition  in  Constantinople,  the  Bulgars  were  again 
unsuccessful.  In  the  meantime  the  Bulgarian  agitation 
increased  from  day  to  day,  and  the  interest  in  the 
emancipation  of  the  Church  was  growing  even  among 
the  mass  of  the  people.  In  December  1858,  the  Bulgars 
again  presented  a  petition  to  the  Greek  Patriarch, 
demanding  that  no  bishops' should  be  appointed  in  the 
Bulgarian  eparchies  who  were  not  acquainted  with 
the  Bulgarian  language.  The  Holy  Synod  of  the  Greek 
Patriarchate  refused  even  this  demand,  but  promised 
that  it  would  consider  the  matter.  Although  four 
members  of  the  Holy  Synod  were  actually  Bulgars  (from 
Philippopolis,  Vidin,  Sofia,  and  Trnovo)  the  Bulgarian 
request  was  in  the  end  definitely  refused  in  February 
1860.  This  was  the  signal  for  fresh  agitations.  By 
this  time  the  Bulgars  possessed  books  and  newspapers. 
Four  Bulgarian  printing  presses  (in  Constantinople, 
Trnovo,  Sunien,  and  Philippopolis)  were  busily  turning 
out  inflammatory  books  and  newspapers.  The  nation 
was  aroused.  In  many  places  the  populace,  with  new- 
found fanaticism,  expelled  the  Greek  priests  from  the 
churches  and  refused  the  bishops  their  stipends.  But 
the  whole  of  this  Bulgarian  Church  movement  has  no 
connection  with  Macedonia.  It  concerned  the  Bulgars 
only,  and  not  the  Serbs  in  Macedonia. 


HO  MACEDONIA 

One  contemporary  circumstance  proved  a  decisive 
factor  in  favour  of  the  Bui  gars  by  winning  them 
Kussia's  unlimited  help,  and  the  Bulgars  took  every 
possible  advantage  of  it.  In  consequence  of  the  dissen- 
sions between  the  Bulgars  and  the  Greek  Patriarchate, 
a  Uniate  propaganda  began  to  make  headway  in  Bulgaria. 
This  propaganda  offered  the  Bulgars  what  the  Patri- 
archate had  refused  even  to  think  of  giving  them.1  It 
offered  them,  if  they  went  over  to  the  Uniate  faith, 
emancipation  from  the  Greeks,  divine  service  in  the 
Bulgarian  language,  bishops  whom  they  need  not  pay, 
help  for  intellectual  requirements,  school  and  church 
books,  and  everything  else  needed  to  elevate  the 
Bulgarian  nationality.  In  its  outer  form  the  Uniate 
Church  does  not  differ  in  the  least  from  the  Orthodox. 
Moreover,  the  advantages  it  offered  suited  the  needs 
of  the  Bulgars.  The  common  people  took  to  it  very 
sympathetically.  Conversions  to  the  Uniate  Church 
became  frequent.  In  order  to  dismay  Kussia,  the 
Bulgarian  leaders  showed  themselves  especially  enthu- 
siastic supporters  of  the  Uniate  movement.  In  order  to 
make  the  danger  appear  more  pressing  to  the  Russians, 
many  of  them  became  converts  to  the  Uniate  Church. 
One  of  the  first  converts  was  Cankov,  a  popular  leader 
at  that  time  and  subsequently  one  of  the  most  prominent 
men  of  free  Bulgaria.2 

The  news  of  the  spread  of  the  Uniate  faith  among 
the  Bulgars  came  to  the  Russians  like  a  bolt  from  the 
blue.     Bigoted  Orthodox  Russia  did  not  lose  a  moment 

1  Uniates  being  members  of  any  Eastern  Christian  Church  acknow- 
ledging the  Papal  supremacy  but  retaining  their  own  liturgy. 

-  That  this  movement  was  really  only  intended  to  force  Russia's 
hand  is  proved  by  the  fact  that  Cankov  and  the  rest  of  the  Bulgarian 
leaders  eventually  all  reverted  to  the  Orthodox  faith. 


BULGARIAN    ACTION    IN    MACEDONIA     HI 

in  doing  all  she  could  to  check  the  Uniate  movement. 
Every  Bulgarian  wish  received  attention.  From  this 
time  forth  Bulgarian  demands,  however  extravagant, 
and  Russian  support  went  hand  in  hand  ;  the  Bulgars 
proposed  and  the  Russians  disposed. 

This  spread  of  Uniacy  was  to  the  detriment  of  Ortho- 
doxy in  general.  The  Greek  Patriarch,  too,  became 
alarmed,  and  announced  that  he  was  prepared  to  meet 
the  Bulgars  as  far  as  possible,  so  that  they  would  remain 
in  the  Orthodox  fold.  The  Bulgars  at  once  increased 
their  demands,  and  insisted  upon  the  autonomy  of 
the  Bulgarian  Church.  In  other  words,  the  Bulgars 
demanded  an  independent  head  of  their  Church,  to  be 
elected  only  by  the  Bulgars  and  whose  seat  would 
be  in  Constantinople ;  furthermore,  that  all  Bulgarian 
bishops  should  be  elected  only  by  Bulgarian  priests, 
and  that  they  must  be  confirmed  in  their  dignity  by 
the  head  of  the  Bulgarian  Church ;  and  that  the 
administration  of  the  Bulgarian  Church  should  be 
entrusted  exclusively  to  the  Bulgars.  The  Patriarch 
was  willing  to  yield  to  the  Bulgars,  but  only  as  regards 
the  truly  Bulgarian  counties,  between  the  Danube  and 
the  Balkan  chain.  He  therefore  requested  the  Bulgars 
to  define  the  scope  of  their  future  Church. 

Having  gained  Russia's  help  and  the  acquiescence  of 
the  Greek  Church,  the  Bulgars  now  showed  themselves 
in  their  true  colours :  "  Let  us  get  what  we  can,  no 
matter  if  it  belongs  to  others."  The  dream  of  a  great 
Bulgaria  and  of  a  hegemony  over  the  nations  of  the 
Near  East  began  to  appear  as  a  realizable  goal.  The 
Bulgars  rejected  the  proposal  of  the  Patriarch,  and 
began  with  fresh  agitations  and  threats.  The  Patriarch 
endeavoured  to  allay  the  Bulgarian  tempest  by  a  letter 


142  MACEDONIA 

promising  to  accede   to   all   the   Bulgarian  demands  in 
all  eparchies  that  were  truly  Bulgarian.     The  Bulgars 
were  not  satisfied  with   this   either,    but  applied  to  the 
Porte  and  began  to  negotiate  with  her  direct.     While 
the  Porte  was   still   considering   the  Bulgarian  Church 
question,  the  Bulgars  presented  their  ultimatum :  a  free 
Church  or  rebellion  !     Partly  the  Bulgarian  unrest,  but 
vastly  more  the   influence   of    the  Russian  Ambassador 
prevailed  with  the  Porte   to   submit  a   scheme  for  the 
solution  of  the  Graeco-Bulgarian  imbroglio  to  the  Greek 
Patriarch  in  October  1868.     In  an  accompanying  letter 
to  the  Patriarch  the   Porte  declared  that  this  question 
could  no  longer  be  permitted  to  remain  open,  and  that 
it  was  a  State  necessity  to  satisfy  the  Bulgars.     In  this 
scheme  the  Porte  demanded  that  wherever  the  Bulgars 
constituted  the  majority,  it  was  they  who  should  elect 
the  priests  ;  that  their  bishops  should  be  Bulgars,  and 
that  the  head  of  the   Bulgarian   Church   should  reside 
in   Constantinople,    whence   he   would   with   his    Synod 
minister  to  the  ecclesiastical  needs  of  the  Bulgars.     The 
Greek  Patriarchate   had   not   yet   fully   considered   this 
scheme   when   the    Bulgars    announced   it   in   all   their 
eparchies  as  a  fait  accompli.      This  was  a  decisive  step 
in   the    detachment    of    the    Bulgars    from    the    Greek 
Patriarchate.     The  Patriarch   considered   their   attitude 
quite  illegal,  and  appealed  to  all  the  Orthodox  Churches, 
inviting  them  to  a  (Ecumenical  Council  to  deal  with  the 
question.     This  Council  never  met.     The  Porte,  thanks 
to  Russia's  endeavours,  settled  the  matter  herself  instead. 
Without  paying  any  attention  to  the  Greek  Patriarchate, 
the  Porte  in  1869  arranged,  and  on  February  28,  1870, 
by  a  firman  from  the  Sultan  announced  the  establishment 
of  an  independent  Bulgarian  Church  under  the  name  of 


BULGARIAN    ACTION    IN    MACEDONIA     143 

the    Bulgarian    Exarchate,    whose    See    was    to   be   in 
Constantinople. 

The  creation  of  the  Bulgarian  Exarchate  gave  a 
new  direction  to  the  development  of  conditions  in 
the  Christian  territories  of  the  Turkish  Empire.  The 
establishment  was  a  great  blow  to  the  Greeks.  The 
new  Bulgarian  Exarchate  not  only  deprived  the  Greek 
Patriarchate  of  a  great  part  of  its  territory,  but  became 
a  danger,  threatening  to  wrest  from  the  Greek  Patri- 
archate even  the  remaining  Slavs  who  were  left  under 
it.  As  for  the  Serbs,  they  found  a  new  enemy  in  the 
Bulgarian  Exarchate,  an  enemy  who  was  under  Russia's 
protection  and  enjoyed  the  favour  of  the  Porte.  By 
their  solicitude  and  success  in  the  creation  of  the 
Bulgarian  Exarchate  the  Russians  established  a  great 
prestige  for  themselves  among  the  Slavs  of  the  Turkish 
Empire  as  the  all-powerful  protectors  of  Slav  Orthodoxy, 
while  in  that  same  Exarchate  they  found  a  channel  for 
their  own  political  activities  in  Turkey.  The  Turks  also 
considered  that  by  the  creation  of  the  Exarchate  they 
had  scored  a  great  political  success.  They  imagined  that 
by  the  establishment  of  the  Exarchate  they  had  killed  the 
prestige  of  the  Greek  Patriarchate,  which  had  served  as 
a  screen  for  the  policy  of  Greece,  that  by  it  a  focus  was 
created  -in  Constantinople,  towards  which  all  the  Slavs 
of  the  Turkish  Empire  would  gravitate,  including  the 
Serbs,  whose  gravitation  towards  Serbia  was  considered 
so  dangerous.  The  Bulgars  made  the  fullest  use  of 
their  Exarchate.  They  not  only  received  an  autonomous 
Church,  but  the  incidental  conditions  established  by  it 
were  also  all  to  their  advantage.  The  defeat  of  the 
Greek  Patriarchate  and  the  weakening  of  the  ties 
between  Serbia  and  the  Slavs  under  the  Turks,  Russia's 


144  MACEDONIA 

increased  prestige  and  her  policy  in  the  Balkans,  and 
the  gravitation  of  the  Slavs  in  Turkey  towards  Con- 
stantinople— all  this  was  greatly  in  favour  of  the 
Bulgars. 

These  were  the  conditions  under  which  the  Bulgarian 
Exarchate  began  its  activities.  The  Bulgarian  Exarch 
was  not  only  head  of  the  Bulgarian  Church  and  protector 
of  the  Slav  liturgy,  but  also  the  representative  of  the 
Bulgarian  people  with  the  Sultan  and  his  ministers,  the 
protector  of  Bulgarian  interests,  and  the  inaugurator  of 
the  improvement  and  revival  of  Bulgarian  culture  and 
nationality.  Abundant  funds,  which  the  eparchies 
readily  contributed,  were  employed  without  delay  in 
improving  Bulgarian  education.  Schools  were  opened 
throughout  the  extent  of  the  Exarchate.  Large  numbers 
of  students  were  sent  to  high  schools,  especially  to 
Kussia.  All  Bulgaria  pulsated  with  new  life.  The  people, 
wearied  of  their  ill-treatment  by  the  Greeks  and  anxious 
for  the  introduction  of  the  Slav  language  in  the  Church 
service,  rallied  enthusiastically  around  their  leaders. 

Already  at  the  outset  the  Bulgarian  Exarchate  inflicted 
a  grave  injury  upon  the  Serbian  nation.  It  did  not 
limit  itself  to  the  Bulgarian  counties.  Besides  the 
Bulgarian,  several  purely  Serbian  eparchies  were  included 
in  its  jurisdiction,  viz.  the  Eparchies  of  Nifi,  Pirot, 
Custendil,  Samokov  and  Veles,  which  had  been  under 
the  Serbian  Patriarchate  until  the  latter  half  of  the 
eighteenth  century.  Although  in  Macedonia  only  the 
eparchy  of  Veles  was  assigned  to  the  Exarchate,  yet 
this  was  the  beginning  of  Bulgaria's  full-blown  activity 
in  Macedonia. 

***** 

The  Serbs  in  Macedonia  were  also  greatly  tyrannized 


BULGARIAN    ACTION    IN    MACEDONIA     145 

over  by  the  Greeks.  Immediately  after  the  suppression 
of  the  Serbian  Patriarchate  we  begin  to  hear  of  dis- 
content in  Macedonia  with  the  heads  of  the  Greek 
Church.  In  1791  a  priest  named  Antim  was  appointed 
Metropolitan  of  Skoplje.  He  was  of  purely  Greek  origin. 
A  Serbian  monk  of  the  Monastery  of  Lesnovo  has 
given  us  the  following  description  of  the  Metro- 
politan Antim: — "A  great  lover  of  lucre,  who  cares 
naught  for  the  canon  because  of  his  covetousness.  The 
monasteries  are  rank  with  simony,  he  cares  neither  for 
the  Church,  nor  the  poor,  nor  the  widows.  He  bestows 
no  alms  and  exacts  taxes  from  the  monasteries."  l  Else- 
where the  position  was  no  better:  "Throughout  Mace- 
donia from  Salonica  to  Ochrida,  and  from  the  frontiers 
of  Thessaly  up  to  Skoplje  and  Melnik,  not  only  in  the 
places  where  the  Metropolitans  have  their  residence, 
but  even  in  the  village  churches,  divine  service  is  being 
celebrated  in  the  Greek  tongue."2  The  few  Serbian 
schools  that  remained  were  unable  to  counteract  the 
Greek  influence.  Plenty  of  people  were  in  the  habit  of 
using  the  Greek  alphabet  even  when  they  had  to  write 
in  Serbian.  The  national  customs,  to  which  the  Serbian 
people  are  deeply  attached,  were  persecuted.  The  Greek 
priests  particularly  strove  to  eradicate  the  "  Slava,"  a 
universal  Serbian  custom  which  is  kept  as  a  sign  of 
Serbian  nationality,  and  to  replace  it  by  Greek  customs. 3 
This  conduct  on  the  part  of  the  Greek  priests  exas- 
perated the  Serbian  population  of  Macedonia.     Upon  the 

1  Lj.  Stojanovic,  "  Stari  Srpski  Zapisi  Natpisi "  ("Old  Serbian 
Inscriptions  and  Notes  "),  No.  3759. 

a  V.  Grigorovic,  "  Ocerk  putesestvija  po  Evropejskoj  Turcii," 
p.  136. 

3  Iv.  S.  Jastrebov,  "  Obicai  i  pjesni  tureckih  Serbov,"  Petrograd, 
1886,  p.  3  (in  Russian). 

11 


146  MACEDONIA 

appearance  of  the  Uniate  propaganda,  the  Macedonians, 
too,  began  to  be  converted  by  it.  The  centre  of  this 
propaganda  was  at  Kuku§  in  Southern  Macedonia,  where 
the  Uniates  established  a  church  in  1857.  The  Bulgars 
were  not  slow  to  turn  this  popular  discontent  and  the 
spread  of  the  Uniate  faith  in  Macedonia  to  their  own 
advantage.  In  the  dissatisfaction  of  the  Macedonian 
Serbs  with  the  Greek  rule  the  Bulgars  found  corrobora- 
tion of  what  they  themselves  always  alleged  against  the 
Greeks,  and  on  the  other  hand  it  provided  them  with 
a  further  field  for  their  activities.  While  the  Bulgars 
were  drawing  the  attention  of  the  Eussians  to  the 
activity  of  the  Uniates  in  Macedonia,  they  were  them- 
selves doing  their  best  to  win  over  the  Macedonians  to 
join  the  Bulgarian  movement  against  the  Greeks. 
Orthodox  Eussia  likewise  considered  the  presence  of  the 
Uniate  communities  in  Macedonia  a  danger  to  Slav 
Orthodoxy,  and  so  began  to  send  her  agents  to  dissuade 
the  populace  from  joining  the  former  and  to  promise 
that  the  Serbian  question  in  Macedonia  should  be 
solved  together  with  the  Bulgarian  Church  question. 
Looking  upon  Eussia  as  the  protectress  of  Slav 
Orthodoxy,  the  Macedonians  listened  to  these  counsels 
and  helped  to  further  the  Bulgarian  cause,  upon  the 
success  of  which  their  own  cause  was  likewise  to 
depend.  The  Uniate  movement  weakened,  and  support 
for  the  Bulgarian  movement  increased.  Thus  began 
the  rapprochement  between  the  Macedonian  Serbs 
and  the  Bulgars. 

When  the  agitation  against  the  Greeks  and  the  con- 
versions to  the  Uniate  faith  first  began  in  Macedonia 
nobody  thought  of  the  Bulgars.  It  was  only  a  question 
of  emancipation   from   the   Greek  Patriarchate  and  the 


BULGARIAN    ACTION    IN    MACEDONIA     14? 

restoration  of  the  national  tongue  in  the  Church  offices. 
When  the  Uniate  Church  in  Kukus  was  consecrated  in 
1857,  it  received  the  inscription :  "  On  March  1st,  1857, 
our  lost  mother  tongue  was  restored  to  us."  x  Better 
than  anything  else,  this  inscription  reveals  the  motives 
of  the  Serbs  in  Macedonia  when  they  went  over  to  the 
Uniate  faith.  When  the  Russians  entered  the  lists 
against  the  Uniate  movement  the  Serbs  were  left  but 
one  way  of  attaining  emancipation  from  the  Greeks,  and 
that  was  to  join  the  Bulgarian  movement.  This  step 
did  not  imply  Bulgarization,  but  only  a  joint  struggle 
against  the  Greeks  for  the  use  of  the  Slav  tongue  in 
the  Church. 

That  the  struggle,  which  the  Macedonians  had  from 
the  very  first  waged  against  the  Greeks,  did  not  bear 
a  Bulgarian  character,  nor  prove  that  the  Macedonians 
wished  to  become  Bulgars,  is  best  shown  by  the 
adherence  of  the  Roumanians  of  Macedonia  to  the 
Bulgarian  cause.  The  Roumanians  in  Macedonia 
suffered  the  same  wrongs  at  the  hands  of  the  Greek 
priests  as  did  the  Slav  Christians.  So  the  Roumanians, 
too,  began  to  rebel.  Like  the  Serbs,  they  too  joined 
the  Bulgars  and  waged  a  struggle  for  a  native  clergy 
and  use  of  the  national  tongue  in  the  Church.  In  many 
localities  they  for  a  long  time  acted  jointly  with  the 
Bulgars.  When  the  Bulgarian  Exarchate  was  created, 
they  recognized  it  as  their  own.  In  Ochrida,  about 
eighty  Roumanian  families  were  under  the  Bulgarian 
Exarchate  until   the  nineties   of  last  century.2     But  no 

1  Iv.  Ivanic,  "  Iz  crkvene  istorije  Srba  u  Turskoj  "  ("  Church 
History  of  the  Serbs  in  Turkey  in  the  Eighteenth  and  Nineteenth 
Centuries  "),  p.  41. 

2  P.  Balkanski,  "  Kroz  Groblje  "  ("Through  the  Graveyard"), 
Belgrade,  1894,  pp.  55-62. 


148  MACEDONIA 

one  could  say  of  these  Eoumanians,  who  from  practical 
considerations  had  joined  the  Bulgarian  movement,  that 
they  had  done  so  as  Bulgars,  and  it  would  be  equally 
false  to  say  so  of  the  Serbs. 

The  true  epoch  of  Bulgarian  influence  in  Macedonia 
only  dates  from  the  creation  of  the  Bulgarian  Exarchate. 
In  the  second  clause  of  Art.  10  of  the  Imperial  firman, 
whereby  the  Bulgarian  Exarchate  was  established,  there 
occurs  the  following  passage :  "  If  the  inhabitants  of 
any  other  places  besides  those  enumerated  above,  and 
professing  the  Orthodox  faith,  should  wish  unanimously, 
or  if  at  least  two-thirds  of  them  should  wish  to  be  subject 
to  the  Bulgarian  Exarchate,  and  if  subsequent  investiga- 
tion should  prove  this  to  be  so,  their  desire  ought  to 
be  gratified."  The  Bulgars  did  not  lose  a  moment  in 
doing  their  very  best  to  turn  this  clause  to  good  account. 
The  new  Bulgarian  bishops  of  these  eparchies,  one  of 
which  was  actually  in  Macedonia,  while  others  were 
in  close  proximity  to  it,  inaugurated  a  spirited  propa- 
ganda in  order  to  win  the  Serbian  inhabitants  to  the 
Bulgarian  Exarchate.  No  one  interfered  with  this  agita- 
tion. The  bishops  as  well  as  their  agents  were  Turkish 
subjects.  Turkey  not  only  trusted  them,  but  she  helped 
them.  It  was  to  her  interest  to  attach  the  Serbs  to  the 
Bulgarian  Exarchate  in  Constantinople,  and  to  diminish 
their  inclination  to  gravitate  towards  Serbia.  As  the 
Greek  priests  were  still  masters  in  Macedonia,  and  the 
use  of  the  Slav  language  in  the  Church  was  persecuted, 
and  Serbian  schools  and  Serbian  intellectual  life  were 
at  the  last  gasp,  the  Bulgarian  agents  found  no  difficulty 
in  carrying  on  their  propaganda.  In  place  of  the  hated 
Greek  Patriarchate  they  offered  the  people  the  protection 
o'f  the  Slav  Bulgarian  Exarchate,  the   creation  of   Slav 


BULGARIAN    ACTION    IN    MACEDONIA     149 

Russia;  in  place  of  the  Greek  language  in  the  Church 
they  offered  them  the  Slav  language,  the  common 
hieratic  tongue  of  the  Serbs,  Russians,  and  Bulgars;  in 
place  of  the  Greek  schools,  they  gave  them  to  understand 
that  there  was  a  prospect  of  national  schools.  Exasper- 
ated by  the  Greeks  and  cut  off  from  Serbia,  the 
Macedonians  were  on  the  horns  of  a  dilemma.  The 
choice  lay  between  three  evils,  viz.  either  to  continue 
under  the  Greeks  or  to  abandon  their  faith  and  become 
Uniates,  or  to  come  under  the  Bulgarian  Exarchate. 
The  decision  was  difficult.  How  difficult  it  was  is  best 
shown  by  the  fact  that  the  nation  was  by  no  means 
unanimous  in  its  decision.  A  part  remained  true  to 
the  Greeks,  part  clung  to  the  Uniate  faith,  and  a  third 
part  joined  the  new  Bulgarian  movement. 

The  adherents  of  the  Bulgarian  movement  sent  in 
a  petition  for  the  establishment  of  Bulgarian  bishoprics 
in  Skoplje  and  Ochrida.  A  Turkish  commission  was 
sent  down  from  Constantinople,  before  which  the 
inhabitants  had  to  declare  whether  they  acknowledged 
the  Exarchate  or  not.  This  commission,  too,  did  much 
to  further  the  Bulgarian  cause  in  Macedonia.  It  used 
considerable  pressure  in  order  to  induce  the  inhabitants 
to  declare  themselves  for  the  Bulgarian  Exarchate.  It 
openly  threatened  that  all  Macedonians  who  should 
refuse  to  join  the  Bulgars  would  be  denounced  as  agents 
of  Greece  and  Serbia.  By  these  means  the  necessary 
majority  was  obtained,  and  in  1872  Bulgarian  bishops 
were  duly  installed  in  the  dioceses  of  Ochrida  and  Skoplje. 

The  two  new  bishops  were  great  Bulgarian  agitators. 
Their  first  and  chiefest  care  was  the  obliteration  of  all 
Serbian  memories  in  Macedonia.  A  whole  army  of 
priests  and  teachers   was   sent   from  Bulgaria  to  Mace- 


150  MACEDONIA 

donia.  All  written  matter  emanating  from  the  Church 
and  the  denominational  school  communities  became  Bul- 
garian. The  birth,  marriage,  and  death  certificates  issued 
by  the  priests  to  the  people  began  to  be  written  in  Bul- 
garian. All  documents  bore  Bulgarian  superscriptions  and 
seals.  Persons  who  could  not  write  were  entered  in  the 
osmanlie  (papers  giving  a  person's  name,  surname,  religion, 
nationality,  and  occupation,  and  with  which  every  Turkish 
subject  must  be  provided)  as  Bulgars  by  the  Bulgarian 
priests  and  schoolmasters.  On  the  strength  of  these 
papers  the  Macedonians  were  then  entered  in  the  official 
registers  as  Bulgars.  Thus  Macedonia  began  gradually 
to  be   outwardly  Bulgarized. 

When  in  1876  war  broke  out  between  Serbia  and 
Turkey,  the  Bulgars,  too,  made  a  move  to  liberate  them- 
selves from  the  Turks.  Incensed  at  this  conduct  on 
the  part  of  the  Bulgars,  the  Porte  put  down  the  Bul- 
garian bishoprics  in  Macedonia.  The  Bulgarian  pro- 
paganda in  Macedonia  was  not  greatly  impaired  by 
this  step.  On  the  one  hand  the  oppressions  of  the 
Greek  priests  were  still  too  fresh  in  men's  memories,  and 
on  the  other  hand  the  propagandist  machinery  set  up  by 
the  Bulgars  in  Macedonia  continued  to  operate  there. 

The  Russo-Turkish  war  of  1877-1878  was  the  greatest 
stroke  of  luck  ever  vouchsafed  to  the  Bulgars.  By 
that  war  Russia  presented  Bulgaria  with  freedom  and 
a  State.  Beside  their  sympathies  for  the  oppressed 
Slavs  in  general,  the  Russians  had  a  special  interest  in 
Bulgaria.  They  believed  that  "  gratitude  would  bind  the 
Bulgars  to  Russia  for  ever,  and  that  if  Russia  were  to 
unite  them  in  an  independent  State,  the  Russians  would 
find  a  devoted  and  faithful  instrument  in  that  State."  l 

1  Max  Cboublier,  "La  question  d'Orient,"  Paris,  1897,  p.  85, 


BULGARIAN    ACTION    IN    MACEDONIA     151 

It  was  quite  natural  to  assume  that  Bulgaria's  grati- 
tude would  be  in  proportion   to  the  size  of  the  State 
in   question   and  also   that   the  greater  this  State,   the 
stronger    would    be    Russia's    support    in    the    Balkan 
Peninsula.     These  were  the  reasons  that  moved  Russia 
in  1878  to  create  the  great  Bulgaria  of  San  Stefano,  in 
the  frame  of  which  were  included  not  only  Macedonia, 
but    other    Serbian    provinces    as   well.     Although    the 
Congress  of  Berlin  reduced  the  frontiers  of  the  Bulgarian 
State  to  the  limits  of  the  Bulgarian  nation,  yet  a  deep 
impression   was   left   upon   the   Bulgarian  mind   by  the 
Bulgaria   of  San  Stefano.     The   Bulgars   felt   as  if  the 
Congress  of  Berlin  had  robbed  them  of  something  that 
belonged    to    them.     Since   then    the   Bulgaria   of  San 
Stefano    has    been    their    ideal.      Many     Macedonians, 
having   been   for  months   under  the  impression  that   if 
Russia  had   had  her  way  they  would  have  belonged  to 
Bulgaria,  and  that  it  was  by  the  Congress  of  Berlin  and 
against  Russia's  wish,  that  they  were  being  redelivered 
into  Turkish  slavery,  regretted  the  freedom  they  had  so 
recently  enjoyed.     Serbia  was  not  only  not  even   taken 
into   consideration   as   a   possible   owner  of   Macedonia, 
but  she  was  actually  expelled  from  those  countries  which 
she  had  won  with  her  blood.     The  impression  gained  by 
the  Macedonians  at  the  time  was  that  they  had  nothing 
to  hope  from  Serbia.     This  impression,  more  than  any- 
thing  else,   caused  the  Macedonians   to  waver  in   their 
Serbian  feeling. 

Meantime  the  Bulgarian  propaganda  in  Macedonia 
was  pursued  with  relentless  energy  from  the  Bulgarian 
State.  Those  Bulgars  who  had  been  educated  abroad 
by  the  Russian  Committees  and  had  lived  as  emigrants 
in  Europe  now  returned  to  Bulgaria,  fanatically  devoted 


152  MACEDONIA 

to  Great  Bulgarian  ideas.  One  of  the  chief  cares  of 
these  men  was  to  reopen  that  agitation  for  a  Great 
Bulgaria  which  had  been  so  successfully  started  before 
and  had  received  definite  expression  in  the  Treaty  of 
San  Stefano.  The  Exarchate  continued  to  remain  in 
Constantinople,  but  was  now  in  closest  touch  with  the 
Bulgarian  Government.  With  money  provided  by  the 
Bulgarian  State  budget,  the  Exarchate  created  a  special 
department  called  the  "Skolsko  Popeciteljstvo  "  (School 
Department),  which  maintained  a  whole  army  of  agents 
in  Macedonia.  The  denominational  schools  in  Mace- 
donia became  so  many  branches  of  the  School  Depart- 
ment of  the  Bulgarian  Exarchate.  Finally,  directly 
the  war  was  over  the  Bulgars  began  to  work  not  only 
for  the  return  of  the  forfeited  Bulgarian  dioceses  in 
Macedonia,  but  also   for   the   creation   of  new  ones. 

Thus  were  established  conditions  under  which  the  Ser- 
bian population  had  to  submit  to  the  Exarchate  if  it  wished 
to  remain  Slav  and  to  live  in  peace.  All  Macedonians 
know  that  their  ancestors  were  Serbs,  and  a  good  many 
remember  that  in  their  youth  the  Bulgars  were  unknown 
in  their  country  (see  Supplements  Nos.  I,  II,  and  III). 
The  following  example  alone  will  suffice  to  show  how 
successful  was  the  Bulgarian  propaganda  in  Macedonia  : 
In  the  days  before  the  Bulgarian  Exarchate  there  came 
to  Veles  as  Serbian  schoolmaster  George  Miletic,  the 
brother  of  Svetosar  Miletic,  the  Serbian  national  leader 
in  Hungary.  He  was  in  Macedonia  at  the  time  of  the 
struggle  for  emancipation  from  the  Greeks.  As  a  good 
Serb  he  also  supported  the  struggle,  but  threw  in  his  lot 
with  those  who,  taking  Kussia's  advice,  joined  the  Bul- 
garian movement,  and  he  became  a  Bulgarian  leader  in 
Macedonia.     To-day   his   son   Ljubimir    Miletic    (whose 


BULGARIAN    ACTION    IN    MACEDONIA     153 

name  and  surname  are  both  Serbian)  is  professor  at 
the  University  of  Sofia,  and  one  of  the  bitterest 
Serbophobes. 

But  in  spite  of  all  hatred  of  the  Greeks,  in  spite  of 
the  inducement  of  the  Slav  liturgy  offered  by  the 
Bulgarian  Church,  and  in  spite  of  the  Bulgarian  pro- 
paganda, the  Bulgarian  success  in  Macedonia  was  never 
complete.  A  great  part  of  the  nation  continued  to 
remain  Serbian  in  its  feelings.  One-third  of  the  in- 
habitants, fearing  Bulgarization,  actually  preferred  to 
remain  under  the  hated  Greek  Patriarchate  rather  than 
go  over  to  the  Bulgarian  Exarchate.  Many  of  those 
who  joined  the  Exarchate  out  of  hatred  for  the  Greeks 
still  remained  Serbs  in  their  feeling.  The  best  proof 
of  this  is  to  be  found  in  the  pro-Serbian  insurrection 
against  the  Turks,  in  the  appeals  to  the  Congress  of 
Berlin  not  to  hand  them  over  to  Bulgaria  (see  Supple- 
ment No.  IV),  and  in  the  secret  agitations  in  favour  of 
Serbia. 

This  positively  expressed  Serbian  feeling  on  the  part 
of  the  Macedonians  the  Bulgars  endeavoured  to  stifle 
either  by  espionage  and  denunciation  to  the  Turkish 
authorities  or  by  direct  terror.  Nowhere  and  never  have 
there  been  such  espionage  and  denunciation  as  the  Bul- 
gars practised  in  Macedonia.  The  Bulgarian  bishops, 
priests,  schoolmasters,  and  agents  knew  no  bounds  in 
their  campaign  against  the  Serbs.  They  falsely  accused 
the  Serbs  of  high  treason,  conspiracy,  and  of  the  vilest 
crimes.  Turkish  justice  was  very  summary,  and  the 
sentences  were  inhuman.  We  will  quote  but  one 
instance.  On  April  10,  1881,  Spira  Crncevic  and 
seventy-two  of  his  friends  declared  that  they  felt 
themselves  to  be  Serbs.     The   Bulgars  denounced  them 


154  MACEDONIA 

as  traitors  and  •  handed  Spira  over  to  the  Turks.  The 
Turks  put  Spira  to  death  and  exposed  his  head  in 
public  at  Kumanovo  as  a  warning  to  others.  A  vast 
number  of  Serbs  paid  with  their  heads  or  with  incar- 
ceration in  Salonica,  Asia  Minor,  and  the  islands  of 
the  Archipelago  for  their  Serbian  feeling. 

The  Bulgarian  terror  was  even  more  appalling.  The 
Bulgars  did  not  shrink  from  any  baseness  in  their 
attempt  to  stifle  Serbian  feeling  in  Macedonia.  The 
opening  of  every  Serbian  school  was  attended  by 
hostile  demonstrations  or  attacks  from  the  Bulgars. 
On  these  occasions  there  were  bloodshed  and  murder. 
The  Turkish  authorities  were  always  on  the  side  of 
the  Bulgars.  The  Bulgars  did  not  even  shrink  from 
assaulting  helpless  Serbian  female  teachers  and  inno- 
cent Serbian  schoolboys.  In  1899  they  assaulted  two 
Serbian  female  teachers  in  Krusevo,  Olga  Vukojevic 
and  Zlata  Krstic.  Krstic  fell  ill  from  the  shock  and 
died  soon  afterwards.  In  a  raid  upon  the  Serbian 
school  in  Bitolj  (Monastir)  the  local  Bulgarian  pro- 
fessor wounded  George  Vojvodic,  a  lad  attending  the 
Serbian  Lycee  (or  Boys'  High  School).  An  incomplete 
list  of  such  assaults  upon  Serbian  schools,  churches, 
and  teachers  appears  in  the  Supplement  at  the  end  of 
this  volume  (see  Supplement  No.  V). 

The  worst  period  of  the  Bulgarian  terror  in  Mace- 
donia set  in  when  the  Serbian  population  began  to 
express  its  Serbian  feeling  and  to  demand  Serbian 
schools  and  Serbian  priests.  From  that  time  dates 
the  systematic  assassination  of  Serbs.  Already  in  1884, 
Cvetko  Popovic,  schoolmaster  in  Lukovo,  was  murdered 
by  the  Bulgars.  After  that,  these  murders  became 
more    frequent.     In    1885    the    Bulgars    founded    com- 


BULGARIAN    ACTION    IN    MACEDONIA     155 

mittees  in   Routnelia  for  making  propaganda  in  Mace- 
donia.    In   1886,  inspired   by   these  committees,  began 
secret  ruffianly  attacks  upon  everybody  and  everything 
that  hindered  the  Bulgars  in  Macedonia.     Whole  bands 
were    despatched    by    the    Bulgarian    Government    to 
suppress  Serbian  feeling.     At  a  general  meeting  of  all 
the    Bulgarian    Committees  in    Sofia    in    1894,   the   so- 
called    "  Spoljna    Organizacija "    (foreign    organization) 
was   formed    for    the    purpose   of    bringing    about    the 
autonomy  of  the  Bulgarian  regions  in  Turkey.     In  1896 
the   Bulgars   founded    the    "  Unutrasnja    Organizacija " 
(internal   organization),  which  was  an  organizing  com- 
mittee in  Macedonia.     This  body  even  included  several 
Macedonians    who    had    been    bought ;    but    both    the 
money  and  the  guiding  spirit  proceeded  from  Bulgaria. 
Its   purpose  was  to   put    an   end   to  the   Serbs.     Never 
will  the  Serbian  population  forget  the  branches  of  this 
organization   which  ramified  all   over  Macedonia.     The 
name  of  "Bulgarian  Comitadji  "  is  notorious  throughout 
the    world.     Threats,   blackmail,   incendiarism,   murder, 
the  expulsion  of  whole  village  communities — these  were 
the    exploits     perpetrated    wholesale    by    the    Bulgars. 
Led  by  John  Varnelija  (from  Varna)  and  Pan  Arnaut, 
a    band     of     comitadjis    from    Bulgaria    attacked    the 
inhabitants  of  the  neighbourhood  of  Veles,  with  intent 
to    murder    all     who     refused     to    declare    themselves 
Bulgars.     The    terror    was    appalling.      By     1900    the 
obstinately   Serbian  village  of  Orahovac  was  completely 
depopulated   and  destroyed.     There  were   many  similar 
instances.     Even    an    incomplete    list    of    the    murders 
committed    upon   notable    Serbs   in    Macedonia    by   the 
Bulgars    up    to    1907    is     appalling     (see     Supplement 
No.    VI).     In   the    neighbourhood   of    Kumanovo    and 


156  MACEDONIA 

Kriva  Palanka,  the  Bulgars  in  1905,  within  less  than 
five  months,  murdered  fifty-nine  highly  respected 
Serbian   priests,    schoolmasters,   and   citizens.1 

But  even  this  terror  sometimes  failed  to  achieve  its 
object.  The  innate  Serbian  feeling  of  the  Macedonians 
could  not  be  completely  eradicated.  From  time  to 
time  it  showed  in  unmistakable  clearness.  Any  such 
manifestation  was  met  by  the  Bulgars  in  a  truly 
ferocious  spirit.  We  will  quote  a  single  instance.  In 
1899  the  peasants  of  the  village  of  Eabrovo  in  the 
county  of  Strumica  declared  that  they  had  been 
duped  and  terrorized  by  the  Bulgars  into  signifying 
their  adherence  to  the  Exarchate,  but  that  they  felt 
that   they  were  Serbs,  that   they  could   no  longer  hide 

1  J.  H.  Vasiljevic,  "  Ustanak  Srba  u  Kumanovskoji  Palanackoj 
Kazi  u  1878"  ("Insurrection  of  the  Serbs  in  the  Kurnanovo  and 
Palanca  Districts"),  Belgrade,  1906,  pp.  1-13.  Some  very  charac- 
teristic examples  of  the  abominable  action  of  the  Bulgarian 
Comitadjis  in  Macedonia  may  be  gleaned  from  a  report  submitted 
to  the  Bulgarian  Government  by  a  Bulgarian  consular  represen- 
tative ("  Le  Brigandage  en  Macedoine,  un  rapport  coniidentiel  au 
gouvernement  bulgare,"  Berlin,  1908).  As  a  matter  of  fact,  the 
Bulgars  themselves  made  no  secret  of  the  terror  in  Macedonia 
and  the  slaughter  of  the  Serb  inhabitants.  In  repelling  the 
attacks  of  the  Serbian  press  on  account  of  the  Macedonian 
murders,  the  Bulgarian  paper  Blgarija  (1898,  Nos.  103  and 
104)  openly  commends  the  action  of  the  assassins  of  the  Serbs  : 
"  The  Serbian  press,  by  publishing  news  of  the  Bulgarian  Bevo- 
lutionary  Committee  in  Macedonia  and  its  purpose  to  overthrow 
the  Turkish  rule,  is  playing  the  part  of  a  spy.  Revolutionists, 
wherever  they  are,  punish  spies  by  putting  them  to  death.  The 
Macedonian  secret  revolutionary  Committees  are  not  more  lenient 
than  others  to  those  who  spy  upon  thern  in  Macedonia.  .  .  .  Had 
the  Serbs  made  this  clear  to  their  own  agitators,  it  is  possible 
that  the  murders  in  Ochrida,  Qevgeli,  and  Bitolj  would  not  have 
occurred.  ..."  The  paper  Beforma  (1899,  No.  6),  praising  the 
assassin  of  the  Serbian  priest  Todor  Pop-Antic  in  Prilep,  says 
that  "  with  exceptional  devotion  and  exemplary  courage  he  carried 
out  a  patriotic  deed.  ..." 


BULGARIAN    ACTION    IN    MACEDONIA     157 

their  feelings,  and  that  they  wished  to  secede  from 
the  Exarchate.  The  leader  of  these  victimized  Serbs 
was  their  parish  priest  Aleksa.  For  this  the  Bulgars 
took  a  horrible  vengeance  upon  him.  They  first  set 
fire  to  his  house,  and  then  cut  to  pieces  his  wife,  his 
brother,  his  daughter-in-law,  and  two  children. 

Under  these  appalling  conditions,  under  the  protection 
of  the  Turkish  Empire,  the  helpless  Serbian  inhabitant 
of  Macedonia  was  compelled  to  yield  to  the  Bulgarian 
comitadji,  bishop,  priest,  schoolmaster,  and  agent — to 
attend  the  Bulgarian  church,  send  his  children  to  the 
Bulgarian  school,  and  to  obey  orders  from  Sofia. 

While  the  Bulgars  were  thus  killing  Serbian  nation- 
ality in  Macedonia,  they  took  care  to  destroy  everything 
else  that  could  recall  the  Serbs.  The  Serbian  relics  in 
Macedonia  were  a  great  stumbling-block  to  the  Bulgars. 
Every  memento  of  the  Serbs  was  to  disappear,  and  they 
spared  nothing  in  their  fanaticism.  The  old  MSS.,  the 
pictures  of  Serbian  kings  and  saints,  the  legends  and 
inscriptions  in  books  and  churches — all  were  destroyed. 
We  have  not  at  this  moment  a  list  available  of  all 
that  the  Bulgars  have  destroyed  in  Macedonia,  but  we 
will  quote  a  few  examples,  which  will  amply  serve  as 
illustrations. 

Near  Skoplje,  in  the  Suhorecka  Zupa,  stands  to  this 
day  the  old  Serbian  monastery  of  St.  Demitrius,  built 
by  the  Serbian  king  Vukasin  (1366-1371)  and  his  sons 
Marko,  Andreas,  Ivanis;-  and  Drnitar.1  In  this  monas- 
tery many  old  Serbian  writings,  both  books  and  MSS., 
had  been  preserved.  The  whole  interior  of  the  monastery 
was  decorated  with  frescoes  representing  Serbian  saints 
and  kings  of  the  day  of  the  Nemanjici.  At  the  beginning 
1  "  Spomenik  Srpske  Kraljevske  Akadetnije,"  vol.  iii.  p.  157. 


158  MACEDONIA 

of  the  Bulgarian  propaganda  in  Serbia  two  strangers 
from  Bulgaria  cajoled  the  local  inhabitants  into  letting 
them  become  custodians  of  this  monastery.  They  then 
employed  a  certain  Bulgarian  monk,  named  Dionisiji,  to 
destroy  the  Serbian  relics  in  the  monastery  and  appointed 
him  head  of  the  monastery.  For  a  whole  month  Dion- 
isiji used  the  Serbian  MSS.  to  light  fires  with  until  he 
had  burned  them  all,  But  he  did  not  stop  there.  Being 
a  painter  of  sorts,  he  plastered  over  the  pictures  of  the 
Serbian  kings  and  the  legends  attached  to  them,  and 
on  the  coating  of  plaster  he  painted  fantastic  and 
meaningless  pictures  of  birds  and  snakes.  When  the 
peasants  found  out  what  the  monk  was  doing  it  was 
too  late.  They  were  barely  in  time  to  save  the  picture 
of  King  Marko,  and  to  clean  the  pictures  of  St.  Sava 
Neinanjic  and  Tsar  Uros,  which  were  not  yet  dry.  Be- 
cause of  this  conduct  the  peasants  procured  the  dismissal 
of  the  monk,  but  of  course  the  books  and  MSS.  were 
gone  past  recall.  To  make  up  for  all  the  damage  he 
did,  Dionisiji  bequeathed  to  posterity  his  own  portrait 
on  the  outer  wall  of  the  church,  with  the  legend  "  Dion- 
isiji, Zoograf,  B'lgarin "  (Dionysius,  painter,  Bulgar). 
This  outrage  by  the  Bulgarian  agitators  was  reported 
by  an  eye-witness,  P.  Sreckovic,1  professor  of  history  at 
the  University  of  Belgrade.  The  Russian  academician 
N.  P.  Kondakov,  who  traversed  Macedonia  in  1900  for 
the  purpose  of  studying  old  Macedonian  art,  speaks  with 
deep  regret  of  this  act  of  abominable  vandalism  in  the 
monastery  of  St.  Dmitar  "which  was  perpetrated  by 
the  hatred  of  the  Bulgarian  clergy  upon  the  relics  of 
the  old  Serbian  civilization."  The  frescoes  representing 
the  founder  of  this  monastery  were  destroyed  "  because 
1  "  Glasnik  Srpskog  Ucenog  DruStva,"  vol.  xlvi.  p.  221. 


BULGARIAN    ACTION    IN    MACEDONIA     159 

they  constituted  a  record  of  the  Serbian  domination  in 
these  parts,  and  out  of  Bulgarian  patriotism."  l 

In  the  Monastery  of  Mlado  Nagori6ino  the  Bulgars 
destroyed  an  inscription  dated  from  1330,  which  referred 
to  the  victory  of  the  Serbs  over  the  Bulgars  in  that  year.2 

On  an  icon  in  the  Monastery  of  St.  Clement's  in  Ochrida 
there  were  inscriptions  and  emblems  recalling  the  Serbian 
State  in  Macedonia.     The  Bulgars  destroyed  them  all.3 

Two  hours'  walk  from  Zletovo,  in  the  cliffs  above 
the  River  Zletovo,  is  the  old  Serbian  Monastery  of 
Uspenje  Svete  Bogorodice.  In  it  is  preserved  the 
picture  of  one  of  the  old  kings  of  Serbia.  The  legend 
attached  to  the  picture,  giving  his  name  and  recalling 
the  days  of  the  Serbian  rule  in  Macedonia,  was  effaced 
by  the  Bulgarian  priest  Teodosije  from  Zletovo.4 

Prince  Milos  Obrenovic  (1815-1839)  and  Prince 
Alexander  Karagjorgjvic  (1842-1859),  the  father  of  King 
Peter,  each  presented  the  monastery  of  St.  John  Bigorski 
near  Debar  with  a  large  bell.  Round  each  bell  runs 
an  inscription  saying  that  this  gift  was  presented  by 
the  Serbian  prince  in  question  to  the  Serbian  monastery. 
The  Bulgars  tried  to  obliterate  these  legends  by  hammer- 
ing them.  But  the  metal  was  too  hard,  and  although 
the   letters  are  damaged  they  are   still  perfectly  legible. 

Such  were  the  trials  through  which  the  Serbian  nation 
and  its  civilization  in  Macedonia  were  called  upon  to 
pass.  If  they  have  so  far  survived,  it  is  only  a  proof 
of  the  vitality  of  the  Serbian  people  and  its  national 
conscience  in  Macedonia. 

1  N.    P.   Kondakov,   "  Makedonija,"   Petrograd,   1909,   p.   184   (in 
Russian). 

*  Ibid.,  p.  195.  v  3  ibid.,  p.  262. 

4  Iv.   Ivanic,   "  Macedonia   and   Macedonians,"   i,   pp.   87-88 
Serbian). 


SERBIA    AND  MACEDONIA 

Serbia  the  refuge  for  the  Macedonians — Macedonians  accepted  as 
Serbs  in  Serbia — Macedonians  always  considered  foreigners  in 
Bulgaria — Serbian  public  opinion  looks  upon  Macedonians  as 
forming  part  of  the  Serbian  nation — So  do  Serbia's  statesmen— 
So  does  Serbian  science — Non- Serbian  science  takes  the  same 
view — Serbia  welcomes  Bulgarian  immigrants  and  assists  the 
Bulgarian  Church  movement  so  long  as  Bulgaria  does  not  lay 
claim  to  Macedonia  also — Serbia's  inability  to  check  Bulgarian 
encroachment  in  Macedonia — Serbian  interest  in  Macedonia 
— Serbian  schools  opened — Assistance  of  the  Serbian  Church 
movement  in  Macedonia — Macedonians  as  guardians  of 
Serbian  nationality — Serbian  schools  in  Macedonia — Mace- 
donians petition  for  a  restoration  of  the  Serbian  Patriarchate — 
Failing  in  this  request,  they  ask  for  Serbian  bishops — Insur- 
rection in  Macedonia  in  favour  of  annexation  to  Serbia — 
Macedonians  appeal  to  Prince  Milan  of  Serbia  and  to  the 
Congress  of  Berlin  to  be  permitted  to  belong  to  Serbia,  and  not 
to  Bulgaria — Macedonians'  brave  fight  against  Bulgarian 
comitadjis — In  spite  of  all  Bulgarian  propaganda  the  better 
part  of  Macedonia  remains  Serbian — The  rest  ostensibly  sides 
with  the  Bulgars 

FEEE  Serbia  was  created  by  the  united  efforts  of  the 
whole  Serbian  nation  from  all  Serbian  lands.  In 
this  patriotic  rally,  as  we  have  seen,  the  Macedonians 
played  a  very  prominent  part.  From  the  day  of  her 
creation  Serbia  not  only  knew  herself  to  be  the  common 
heritage  of  the  Serbian  people,  but  realized  that  she  had 
been  called  into  being  to  be  the  centre  whence  the 
sufferings  of  the  Serbian  nation  were  to  be  allayed  and 

160 


SERBIA   AND   MACEDONIA  161 

the  liberation  of  all  Serbs  still  remaining  in  foreign 
bondage  was  to  be  prepared.  By  taking  this  view  of 
her  position,  Serbia  looked  with  equal  and  impartial 
interest  upon  all  parts  of  the  Serbian  nation  under  the 
foreign  yoke.  Macedonia  was  not  in  the  least  left  out 
in  the  cold.  From  the  very  first  day  of  Serbia's  libera- 
tion, the  most  cordial  relations  were  established  between 
her  and  Macedonia. 

All  Macedonians  who  helped  in  the  creation  of  Serbia 
remained  in  the  country  to  enjoy  its  freedom.  Many  of 
them  rose  to  high  positions  in  Serbia ;  they  had  charge 
of  her  destinies  and,  in  short,  reaped  the  full  reward  of 
their  labour  and  devotion. 

From  the  first,  free  Serbia  was  the  refuge  of  all  Serbs 
who  languished  in  foreign  slavery.  These  Serbs,  too, 
either  because  they  were  flying  from  persecution  or 
because  they  desired  freedom,  found  a  true  motherland 
in  Serbia.  We  are  not  at  present  in  possession  of  all 
the  particulars  regarding  the  Macedonians  who  settled 
in  Serbia  after  her  liberation.  But  we  know  one  par- 
ticular detail  which  clearly  indicates  the  considerable 
proportion  of  this  immigration.  We  have  before  us  a 
list  of  the  members  of  the  Tailors'  Guild  in  Belgrade, 
dating  from  the  time  of  the  reign  of  Prince  Milos 
Obrenovic  (1815-1839). '  From  this  list  we  learn  that 
there  were  at  that  time  in  the  tailoring  trade  in  Belgrade 
alone — besides  Serbs  from  Serbia  and  from  other  unli- 
berated  regions — no  fewer  than  twenty-five  Macedonians, 
as  from  Tetovo,  Debar,  Prilep,  Bitolj,  Krusevo,  Ochrida, 
Klisura,  Blace,  Kostur,  and  Seres.  From  this  list  it  is 
easy  to  guess  how  great  must  have  been  the  number  of 

1  We   copied   this  list  already   in   1910  from  the  original  in  the 
archives  of  the  Tailors'  Union  (Terzijski  Esnaf)  in  Belgrade. 

12 


162  MACEDONIA 

Macedonians  engaged  in  various  professions  throughout 
the  whole  of  Serbia. 

These  Serbs  from  Macedonia  not  only  found  a  home 
in  Serbia,  but  from  the  first  day  of  their  sojourn  there, 
they  were  regarded  as  full  citizens  equally  with  all 
other  Serbs,  so  that  they  felt  themselves  to  be  indeed  in 
their  own  country.  Their  ranks  included  labourers, 
merchants,  clerks,  public  men,  and  politicians.  But  they 
were  not  mere  settlers.  They  contributed  their  quota 
to  the  intellectual  progress  of  Serbia  from  every  point  of 
view.  Together  with  the  Serbs  of  Serbia  we  find  them 
the  founders  of  public  institutions,  the  improvers  of 
commerce  and  industry  and  patrons  of  letters  and 
literature.  Merely  among  the  subscribers  for  certain 
books  which  were  published  during  the  reign  of  Prince 
Milos  Obrenovic,  we  have  found  hundreds  of  names  of 
Macedonian  Serbs  from  Skoplje,  Veles,  Kratovo,  Kuma- 
novo,  Razlog,  Serez,  Salonica,  Selce,  Prilep,  Krusevo, 
Bitolj,  Ochrida,  Mecovo,  Kostur,  Blace,  Klisura,  Mos- 
kopolje,  etc.  These  people  lived  scattered  in  various 
places  all  over  Serbia,  and  followed  widely  different 
professions. 

Descendants  of  these  Macedonians  and  fresh  immi- 
grants from  Macedonia  have  arisen  to  positions  of  the 
highest  importance  in  Serbia.  They  have  become 
Ministers  of  State,  councillors,  politicians,  generals. 
They  often  held  the  fate  not  only  of  Serbia,  but  of  the 
entire  Serbian  nation  in  their  hands.  All  of  them  were 
pure  Serbs  and  ardent  patriots.1 

1  We  will  name  only  a  few  of  the  most  distinguished  Macedonians 
in  Serbia : 

Nikola  P.  Paste,  the  present  Serbian  Premier,  and  leader  of  the 
Radical  Party.  His  family  originally  came  from  Tetovo ;  Dr. 
Vlaclan  Gjorgjevitch,  at  one  time  Serbian  Premier,  member  of  the 


SERBIA    AND    MACEDONIA  163 

All  of  which  might  be  answered  by  the  statement 
that  Macedonians  have  also  migrated  to  liberated 
Bulgaria.  This  is  true;  but  there  is  a  great  difference 
between  Macedonian  emigration  to  Serbia  and  Mace- 
donian emigration  to  Bulgaria.  To  Serbia  the  Mace- 
donians went  as  to  their  own  country,  for  whose 
liberation  they  had  fought.  They  went  there  for  the 
love  of  her,  to  labour  at  the  advancement  of  Serbia,  in 
whose  progress  they  saw  their  own  advancement  as 
well.  To  Bulgaria  they  went  only  after  a  great  propa- 
ganda had  exerted  its  influence — after  it  had  been 
suggested  to  them ;  they  went  as  graduates  of  the  Bul- 
garian schools,  to  occupy  well-paid  appointments  in 
Bulgaria,  or  as  recipients  of  allowances,  or  as  paid 
agitators.  In  Serbia  no  difference  is  made  between 
Serbs  and  Macedonians ;  both  are  but  one  nation. 
In  Bulgaria  the  difference  between  Bulgars  and  Mace- 
donians persists  for  a  long  time  because,  in  the  words  of 
a  Bulgarian  professor,  "  the  Macedonians  find  a  difficulty 
in  acquiring  the  modern  Bulgarian  idiom."  l  In  Bulgaria 
we  find  the  special  derogatory  nickname  "  Makedonstvu- 

Acadeiny  of  Science,  and  a  well-known  man  of  letters,  a  native  of  the 
district  of  Bitolj  ;  Dr.  Lazar  Patchou,  at  one  time  Minister  of 
Finance,  likewise  from  the  district  of  Bitolj  ;  Nikola  Stefanovic, 
a  former  Minister  of  Police,  from  Mavrovo,  Gostivar  district ;  Kosta 
Stojanovic,  a  former  Minister  of  Commerce,  and  member  of  the 
Skupstina,  from  Maloviste,  near  Bitolj  ;  General  Dimitrije  Cincar- 
Markovic,  at  one  time  Minister  of  "War,  from  Ochrida  ;  Mihajlo  G. 
Bistic,  Serbian  Minister  in  Rome,  from  Prilep ;  General  Lazar, 
Lazarevic,  from  Moskopolje,  near  Bitolj ;  General  Lazar  Petrovic, 
first  aide-de-camp  to  the  late  King  Alexander  Obrenovic,  from  BaSino 
Selo,  near  Veles  ;  Svetolik  Popovic,  ex-Under-Secretary  of  State  for 
Public  Works,  from  Ljubinac,  Skoplje  district ;  Branislav  Dj.  Nusic, 
Serbian  poet  and  well-known  author,  from  Bitolj,  etc. 

1  P.  Draganov,  "Makedonsko-Slavjanski  Sbornik"  ("Macedonian 
Slav  Collection"),!.,  Petrograd,  1894,  p.  iv. 


164  MACEDONIA 

juSci,"  which  denotes  a  special  party,  and  which  is  met 
with  constantly  as  a  colloquial  and  journalistic  expression. 
In  Serbia  the  Macedonians  are  loved  as  brothers,  as 
part  of  the  Serbian  people.  In  Bulgaria  the  Mace- 
donians are  disliked  and  only  tolerated  from  considera- 
tions of  policy.  Mr.  Stambulov,  one  of  Bulgaria's 
greatest  statesmen  and  patriots,  was  typical  of  the 
ordinary  feeling  of  the  Bulgars  towards  the  Macedonians 
in  his  cordial  dislike  of  the  latter.1 

Public  opinion  of  the  nation  at  large  in  Serbia  has 
always  looked  upon  Macedonia  as  a  Serbian  country. 
The  national  ballads  collected  among  non- Macedonian 
Serbs  at  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century  sing 
of  Macedonia  as  a  Serbian  country  and  of  the  historic 
sites  and  personages  of  Macedonia  as  "  Serbian  "  sites 
and  personages.  Every  child  knows  of  Prilep,  Ochrida, 
Salonica,  Kostur  and  other  places  in  Macedonia.  The 
most  popular  hero  in  the  whole  of  Serbian  national 
poetry,  Kraljevic  Marko,  hailed  from  Macedonia.  So 
did  King  Vukasin,  Despot  Ugljesa,  Constantine-Bey, 
and  many  others.  But  we  will  speak  of  Macedonia  from 
the  point  of  view  of  national  tradition  in  another  chapter. 

The  men  at  the  head  of  affairs  in  Serbia  during  the 
nineteenth  century  have  taken  a  keen  interest — so  far 
as  circumstances  would  allow — in  the  non-liberated 
parts  of  the  Serbian  nation.  Macedonia  was  looked 
upon  as  being  the  same  as  any  other  Serbian  country 
under  the  foreign  yoke.  Serbian  princes,  Ministers  of 
State,  councillors  and  leading  men  in  general  sent  help 
from  Serbia  to  Macedonia  for  the  building  and  repairing 

1  "  He  also  grew  to  dislike  the  Macedonians  on  account  of  their 
treachery  and  want  of  a  real  sense  of  patriotism  and  honour  " 
("  M.  Stambulov,"  by  A.  Hulme  Beaman,  London,  1895,  p.  40). 


SERBIA   AND    MACEDONIA  165 

of  churches  and  schools,  they  subsidized  the  school- 
masters, contributed  school  and  church  books,  and  so 
forth.  Directly  after  the  liberation  of  Serbia,  Prince 
Milos  Obrenovic  presented  the  Monastery  of  Lesnovo 
near  Istip  with  a  bell,  and  bestowed  another  upon  the 
Monastery  of  St.  John  Bigorski  near  Debar.  His 
brother  Jevrem  Obrenovic  presented  one  to  the  Monas- 
tery of  Treskavac  near  Prilep,  Prince  Alexander  Karag- 
jorgjevic  bestowed  a  similar  gift  upon  the  Monastery  of 
St.  John  Bigorski  near  Debar,  etc. 

All  Serbian  Governments  considered  it  their  patriotic 
duty  to  admit  Serbian  children  from  Macedonia  to 
Serbian  schools,  and  to  educate  them  at  the  expense  of 
the  State.  Young  men  who  wished  to  study  for  the 
priesthood  or  the  scholastic  profession  were  especially 
welcomed. 

Serbian  science  never  discriminated  between  Mace- 
donia and  the  rest  of  the  Serbian  lands.  J.  Eajic,  the 
first  Serbian  historian  (1726-1801)/  and  P.  Solaric,  the 
first  Serbian  geographer,  used  broadly  to  include  Serbia 
with  Macedonia.  The  map  of  Sava  Tekelija,  of  the 
year  1805,  gives  the  frontiers  of  Serbia  in  great  detail. 
They  include,  besides  Kosovo  Plain,  Skoplje,  Kratovo,  and 
Custendil.  In  Baron  Eotkirch's  "Geography  of  Serbia," 
which  was  translated  into  Serbian  and  the  map  copied 
by  Stephan  Milosevic  in  1822,  we  also  find  Macedonia 
included  in  the  Serbian  frontiers.1 

In  his  "Serbian  Dictionary"  of  1852,  which  from  an 
ethnographic  point  of  view  may  be  considered  a  veritable 
Encyclopaedia  of  that  period,  Vuk  St.  Karadzic,  the 
father  of  Serbian  modern  literature,  speaks  of  localities 
in   Macedonia   as   Serbian.     There   we  find  the   Vardar 

■  J.  Cvijic,  "  Srpski  Kiijizevni  Glasnik,"  xi.  (1904),  pp.  209-210. 


166  MACEDONIA 

and  the  Crni  Drim  and  Beli  Drim  figuring  as  rivers  of 
Old  Serbia,  the  counties  of  Gornji  Polog  and  Donji 
Polog  referred  to  as  counties  of  Old  Serbia  and  Kratovo, 
Kumanovo  and  Prilep,  etc.,  as  towns  of  Old  Serbia. 
Concerning  some  localities  Karadzic  is  more  explicit. 
Thus,  for  instance,  he  mentions  under  Tetovo  that  it  is 
a  town  in  Old  Serbia,  that  the  "  Turks  (Moslems)  there 
speak  Turkish  and  Albanian,  and  the  Christians 
Serbian,"  and  that  "  round  about  Tetovo  there  are 
villages  the  inhabitants  of  which  are  of  the  Turkish 
(Moslem)  faith,  but  speak  Serbian."  Under  Krlava 
(Kicevo)  we  read  that  it  is  "a  town  in  the  pashalik  of 
Skoplje  ;  that  one-third  of  its  inhabitants  are  Christians, 
whereas  the  rest  are  Turks  (Moslems),  but  that  all  speak 
Serbian.  ..."  Under  Gostivar  we  find  that  "it  lies  in  the 
district  of  Tetovo,"  and  that  "  the  Turks  (Moslems)  there 
speak  Turkish  and  Albanian,  and  the  Christians  Ser- 
bian." Under  Debar  we  find  mentioned  that  in  1836  he 
met  two  men  from  Debar  in  Cetinje  who  spoke  Serbian, 
and  that  "  there  are  many  villages  there  (in  Debar) 
where  the  inhabitants  speak  as  they  do,  and  that 
they  are  called  Serbs  even  as  they  themselves  were 
said  to  be." 

Leading  foreign  scholars  of  the  first  half  of  the  nine- 
teenth century  also  considered  Macedonia  as  forming 
part  of  Serbian  territory.  In  the  maps  published  in 
Nuremberg  by  "  Homann  Nachfolger"  at  the  beginning 
of  the  nineteenth  century  (1802,  1805,  etc.),  Serbia 
not  only  includes  the  regions  of  Kosovo  and  Novi  Pazar, 
but  also  Skoplje  and  Kratovo.  On  the  map  by  Kotkirch, 
already  referred  to,  we  find  the  same  thing.  On  the 
map  by  Fried,  published  in  Vienna,  the  frontiers  of 
Serbia  are  drawn  east  of  Custendil.     It  is  the  same  in 


SERBIA   AND    MACEDONIA  167 

all  the  better  geographical  handbooks  in  which  Serbia, 
although  not  yet  fully  liberated  from  the  Turks,  is 
represented.  Such  examples  and  evidence  might  be 
tripled.1  Dr.  Joseph  Miiller,  who  was  for  many  years 
a  surgeon  in  the  Turkish  army  and  knew  Serbian, 
mentions  at  length  where  Serbs  are  to  be  met  with  in 
Macedonia.  He  mentions  them  as  being  found  in  the 
counties  of  Debar,  Struga,  Ochrida,  Resan,  Prespa, 
Bitolj  and  throughout  the  whole  of  Macedonia  generally.2 

Where  was  the  need  for  Serbia  under  these  circum- 
stances to  set  on  foot  a  propaganda  to  bring  about  the 
"  Serbicization  "  of  Macedonia?  What  was  there  that 
could  possibly  be  Serbicized  ?  In  Macedonia,  as  in  all 
other  liberated  Serbian  countries,  the  Serbian  national 
consciousness  was  thoroughly  awake.  There,  too,  even 
as  in  other  Serbian  lands,  the  Serbian  tongue  was  spoken, 
the  Serbian  customs  were  upheld,  the  Serbian  tradition 
was  handed  down,  and  in  both  church  and  school  the 
knowledge  of  Serbian  letters  as  steadfastly  guarded. 
Serbia,  small,  poor,  and  still  under  Turkish  suzerainty ; 
Serbia,  who  had  just  joined  the  ranks  of  European 
states,  left  matters  in  the  non-liberated  regions  to 
develop  naturally  and  normally.  She  concentrated  all 
her  attention  upon  her  own  intellectual,  economic,  and 
political  progress,  so  that  she  might  be  ready  for  the 
moment  that  would  bring  the  great  achievement  of  the 
unification  of  the  whole   Serbian  race. 

Towards  the  Bulgars  and  their  revival  in  the  nine- 
teenth century,  Serbia's  attitude  was  most  friendly. 
Serbia    herself    had   but   lately   been  a  slave  under  the 

1  J.  Cvijic,  "  Srpski  Knjizevni  Glasnik,"  xi.  (1904),  pp.  208-212. 

2  Dr.  Joseph  Miiller,    "  Albanien  Ruinelien,  und  die  Oesterreich- 
Montenegriniscbe  Grenze,"  Prague,   1844. 


168  MACEDONIA 

Turks  and  a  martyr  under  the  Greek  clergy.  Her  kins- 
men, too,  were  still  slaves  and  martyrs  in  Turkey. 
Serbia  fully  understood  the  position  of  the  Bulgars,  and 
tried  to  meet  them  and  to  help  them  to  the  best  of 
her  ability.  In  the  State  Archives  in  Belgrade  are  the 
records  proving  that  Prince  MiloS  Obrenovic  cordially 
agreed  to  Panta  Hadzi  Stoilov's  proposal  that  30,000 
Bulgars  from  the  interior  of  Bulgaria  should  emigrate 
to  Serbia.  The  Serbian  Government  assisted  the  Bulgars 
in  every  way.  The  first  Bulgarian  books  were  printed 
gratis  in  the  Serbian  State  printing  works.  The  leading 
young  men  of  reawakened  Bulgaria  studied  at  the 
expense  of  the  Serbian  Government.  To  such  Bulgarian 
patriots  as  Rakovski,  Karavelov,  and  many  others  Serbia 
not  only  showed  hospitality,  but  she  helped  them  in 
their  struggle  with  the  Greeks,  furnished  them  with 
the  means  of  subsistence  and  intervened  on  their  behalf 
in  the  matter  of  amnesties.  Serbia  never  dreamt  that 
one  day  Bulgaria's  demands  would  become  grasping, 
extravagant,  and  hostile  to  herself. 

When  the  Bulgars  began  to  push  their  propaganda 
beyond  the  limits  of  their  own  territory,  Serbia  woke 
up  and  immediately  stood  upon  the  defence  of  Serbian 
rights.  She  fully  realized  her  duty  towards  the  Serbs  in 
Turkey,  but  its  fulfilment  was  fraught  with  the  greatest 
difficulties.  Great  indeed  were  the  difficulties  in  Serbia's 
way.  They  were  decisive  factors  in  Bulgaria's  success 
in  Macedonia. 

1.  Serbia  by  her  insurrection  and  emancipation 
represented  the  first,  and  a  very  shrewd  blow  at  the 
Turkish  Empire  in  the  nineteenth  century.  For  this 
alone  she  was  already  hated  in  Turkey.  Moreover,  Serbia 
had  become  a  centre  of  attraction  for  the  non-liberated 


SERBIA   AND    MACEDONIA  169 

Serbs.  This  further  increased  the  feeling  of  hostility 
towards  her.  Finally,  the  sturdy  national  conscious- 
ness of  the  Macedonian  Serbs  roused  the  suspicion  of 
the  Porte  and  led  to  the  persecution  of  the  Serbs  within 
her  borders.  The  very  designation  "  Serbian ':  was 
prohibited.  A  Serb  in  Macedonia  might  officially 
describe  himself  as  a  "  rayah  "  (Christian  subject),  a 
Christian,  a  Greek,  or  even  as  a  Bulgar,  only  not  as  a 
Serb.  Under  these  conditions  every  attempt  to  help 
the  Serbs  in  Turkey  from  Serbia  was  foredoomed  to 
failure. 

2.  By  proclaiming  the  independence  of  the  Church 
of  free  Serbia,  Serbia  had  offended  the  Greek  Patri- 
archate in  Constantinople.  The  latter  now  viewed 
Serbia,  and  all  Serbs  generally,  with  mistrust ;  where- 
fore it  was  not  favourably  inclined  towards  them  and 
their  demands,  but  intrigued  against  them  all  the  time. 

3.  Apart  from  the  sympathy  with  which  the  Bul- 
garians inspired  the  Russians,  there  were  also  Russia's 
political  calculations  to  be  taken  into  account.  The 
Russian  diplomats  in  Petrograd  and  Constantinople 
looked  upon  Bulgaria  as  within  the  sphere  of  Russian 
political  interests.  To  put  it  quite  mildly,  they 
reckoned  that  in  free  and  great  Bulgaria  they  would 
have  a  tool  for  carrying  out  their  policy  in  the 
Balkans.  The  greater  this  Bulgaria,  the  stronger 
would  be  their  support.  Wherefore  official  Russia  too 
assisted  the  aspirations  and  propaganda  of  the  Bulgarian 
patriots  with  might  and  main ;  she  furnished  them 
with  means  and  advice  and  pledged  herself  to  a  great 
Bulgaria. 

4.  Serbia  and  Serbian  territory  were  always  assumed 
by   Russia — although    Serbia    herself    had    never   given 


170  MACEDONIA 

any  cause  for  this  assumption — to  belong  to  the 
Austrian  sphere  of  interest  in  the  Balkans.  This 
sphere  was  to  be  restricted  as  much  as  possible,  and 
so  the  Eussians  strove  by  helping  the  Bulgars  to 
reduce   Serbia   and   to   weaken  her. 

5.  Poor  little  Serbia,  hated  by  Turkey,  having 
neither  the  sympathies  of  the  Greek  Patriarchate  nor 
Russia's  protection,  menaced  by  Austria  as  her  constant 
enemy,  had  no  material  resources  at  her  command  to 
further  any  propaganda  among  her  kinsmen  in  Turkey. 

All  this  notwithstanding,  Serbia  did  her  best.  Already 
in  the  reign  of  Prince  Mihajlo,  Serbia  endeavoured 
through  Russia  and  through  her  own  representatives  in 
Constantinople  to  counteract  the  Bulgarian  influence  in 
Macedonia.  In  view  of  the  fact  that  the  Bulgars  were 
likely  to  succeed  in  emancipating  themselves  from  the 
Greek  Patriarchate,  and  that  they  were  already  openly 
agitating  for  the  inclusion  of  Macedonia  within  their 
sphere,  the  Serbian  Government  took  the  position  very 
seriously. 

On  March  11,  1868,  the  then  Serbian  Minister  for 
Foreign  Affairs  wrote  in  a  letter  to  the  Serbian 
diplomatic  representative  in  Constantinople  that  "  it 
is  the  duty  of  the  Serbian  Government  to  see  to  it 
that  the  ancient  ecclesiastical  prerogatives  of  that 
nation,  whose  head  is  the  Serbian  principality,  are  not 
infringed  by  the  emancipation  of  the  Bulgarian  Church. 
This  duty,  which  we  have  never  lost  sight  of,  has  now 
been  acutely  accentuated  by  the  circulars  of  the  Bul- 
garian leaders,  which  have  been  sent  also  to  purely 
Serbian  eparchies.  .  .  .  You,  Sir,  will  readily  understand 
that  the  desire  of  the  Serbian  Government  to  recognize 
the  rights  of  the  Bulgars  cannot  go  so  far  as  to  abandon 


SERBIA    AND    MACEDONIA  171 

our  own  national  rights.  ...  At  one  time  there  were 
four  Patriarchates  in  the  Balkan  Peninsula,  viz.  the 
Patriarchate  of  Constantinople  for  the  Greeks,  that  of 
Ipek  for  the  Serbs,  that  of  Trnovo  for  the  Bulgars, 
and  that  of  Ochrida  which  by  right  of  conquest  was 
sometimes  under  the  Bulgars  and  sometimes  under 
the  Serbs,  but  finally — and  this  fact  deserves  special 
attention — fell  under  the  Ottoman  Empire  as  a  Serbian 
possession.  .  .  .  The  Patriarchates  of  Ipek  and  Ochrida 
were  not  completely  abrogated  in  the  latter  half  of 
last  century,  but  are  to  this  day  referred  to  in  the 
Constantinople  records  as  being  merely  annexed  to  the 
Patriarchate  of  Constantinople,  which  now  pays  the 
annual  tribute  to  the  Imperial  Treasury  on  their 
behalf.  ...  As  it  is  now  proposed  to  detach  one  of 
these  Patriarchates,  called  the  Bulgarian,  from  the 
Patriarchate  of  Constantinople,  nothing  else  can  be 
meant  save  what  can  be  honestly  implied,  namely,  the 
Patriarchate  of  Trnovo.  By  the  cession  of  any  other 
Patriarchate  to  the  Bulgarian  Church,  the  question 
would  arise  whether  an  old  Serbian  possession  would 
not  thereby  be  transferred  to  such  as  have  no  claim 
to  it  according  to  church  history,  nor  yet  because  of 
the  vested  rights  of  the  Serbian  nation  in  the  Balkan 
Peninsula.'' x 

The  Serbian  Government  took  up  exactly  the  same 
line.  From  a  letter  written  by  the  Serbian  diplomatic 
representative  in  Constantinople  on  April  29,  1869, 
it  may  be  gathered  that  his  work  in  Constantinople 
consisted    in    endeavouring    to    obtain    that,    "  by    the 

'  J.  Ristic,  "  Spoljni  odnottaji  Srbje  "  ("  Serbian  Foreign  Relations"), 
vol.  iii.  pp.  296-802  ;  "  Kako  je  postala  Bugarska  Egzarhija  "  ("  How 
the  Bulgarian  Exarchate  Arose  "'),  Belgrade.  1897,  pp.  24-27. 


172  MACEDONIA 

restoration  of  the  Bulgarian  Church,  the  rights  of  the 
Serbian  Church  should  not  be  violated,"  "that  the  Serbian 
eparchies  should  continue  to  remain  in  touch  with  the 
(Ecumenical  (Greek)  Patriarchate,"  and  "  that  the  Patri- 
archate should  appoint  Serbian  priests  for  the  people."1 

But  all  efforts  of  the  Serbian  Government  were  too 
weak  to  counteract  the  greatly  superior  Russian  in- 
fluence in  Constantinople.  The  Bulgarian  Exarchate, 
finally  established  in  1870,  cut  deeply  into  purely 
Serbian  territory  also.  The  protests  of  the  Serbian 
Government  received  no  attention. 

The  independent  Church  of  Serbia  was  likewise  ill- 
pleased  with  the  creation  of  the  Bulgarian  Exarchate. 
When  in  1870  the  Oecumenical  Patriarch,  anxious  to 
reverse  the  decision  establishing  the  Bulgarian  Ex- 
archate, convoked  an  QEcumenical  Council,  so  that  the 
question  might  be  solved  by  the  assembled  Metropoli- 
tans of  the  Orthodox  Church,  the  Metropolitan  of 
Serbia  replied  to  the  Patriarch's  invitation  that  the 
Porte  could  only  be  entitled  to  approve  or  confirm  the 
resolution  of  the  Church,  but  could  not  by  herself 
solve  Church  questions  except  in  consultation  with 
the  Church.  "  Consequently  her  decision  possessed  no 
canonical  authority  with  the  Church.  By  the  decision  of 
the  Porte  the  Church  was  greatly  exposed  to  arbitrary 
action,  and  her  continued  existence  would  be  rendered 
impossible  in  a  country  where  thoughts,  actions,  and 
respect  are  subject  to  change,  and  where  the  very 
foundations  of  security  are  undermined."  2 

1  "  Kako  je  postala  Bugarska  Egzarhija  "  ("  How  the  Bulgarian 
Exarchate  Arose  "),  p.  30. 

2  Jovan  Risti6,  "  Spoljni  odnosaji"  ("Serbian  Foreign  Relations"), 
iii.  pp.  294-295. 


SERBIA   AND    MACEDONIA  173 

When  the  Serbian  Government  saw  that  its  protests 
were  useless,  it  set  itself  the  task  of  doing  what  it 
could  to  save  the  Serbian  population  from  the  en- 
croachments of  Bulgarian  influence.  To  this  end  a 
committee  was  formed  in  Belgrade  to  look  after  the 
education  and  intellectual  progress  of  the  Serbs  in 
Turkey  and  to  "lay  before  the  Government  a  proposal 
to  open  schools,  and  to  send  teachers,  books,  and 
other  requirements."  Within  rather  less  than  five 
years  Serbia  succeeded,  not  without  great  difficulty,  in 
opening  schools  in  sixty-one  localities,  over  and  above 
the  schools  which  were  already  founded  and  kept  up 
by  the  local  population.  The  principal  townships  in 
Macedonia  supplied  with  schools  at  that  time  were 
Kicevo  (girls'  and  boys'),  Gostivar,  Sveti  Jovan  Debarski, 
Banajni  (Skoplje  district),  Basino  Selo,  Beloviste,  Bogu- 
mili  (district  of  Veles),  Borovac  (district  of  Ochrida), 
Vencani  (Ochrida),  Veles  (girls'  and  boys'),  Debar 
(girls'  and  boys'),  Egri  Palanka,  Zletovo,  Klisura, 
Kocani  (girls'  and  boys'),  Kratovo,  Krusevo,  Kumanovo 
(girls'  and  boys'),  Kuceviste  (Skoplje),  Lesak  (Tetovo), 
Lesani  (Ochrida),  Organci  (Kicevo),  Porec,  (Skoplje), 
Tetovo  (girls'  and  boys'),  Precista  (Kicevo),  Cucer 
(Skoplje).  Books  were,  moreover,  supplied  to  the 
already  existing  Serbian  schools,  congregations,  and 
churches.  -Bells,  icons,  and  other  church  furniture 
were  sent  to  many  of  the  Macedonian  churches  and 
monasteries.1 

Besides  these  efforts,  the  Serbian  Government  did 
what  it  could  in  Constantinople.  The  Serbian  diplo- 
matic representative  in  Constantinople  let  no  opportunity 

'  J.  Ristic,  "  Spoljni  odnosaji  Srbije"  ("Serbian  Foreign  Rela- 
tions"), iii.  pp.  281-283,  284,  290. 


174  MACEDONIA 

slip  for  "  obtaining  confirmations  of  appointments  in  Old 
Serbia  and  Macedonia,  of  Serbian  bishops  who  would 
be  able  to  resist  the  Bulgarian  tide  and  to  counteract 
the  influence  which  the  Bulgars  hoped  to  exercise  in 
European  Turkey."  x 

Serbia's  war  with  Turkey  in  1876  was  fraught  with 
disastrous  consequences  for  the  Serbian  schools  in  Turkey. 
The  Serbian  name,  already  sufficiently  feared  in  Turkey 
since  the- creation  of  free  Serbia,  was  now  loathed  worse 
than  before.  All  the  Serbian  churches  were  closed,  the 
Serbian  teachers  expelled,  and  the  Serbian  books  burnt. 
All  this  the  Bulgars  contrived  to  turn  to  good  account. 

Serbia  was,  of  course,  unable  to  resume  her  work  in 
Macedonia  directly  after  the  war.  Enlarged  by  the  war 
at  the  expense  of  Turkish  territory,  raised  from  the 
position  of  a  Turkish  vassal  to  that  of  an  independent 
principality  and  subsequently  to  that  of  a  kingdom,  it 
was  natural  that  she  should  become,  more  than  ever, 
Turkey's  bete  noire.  Moreover,  Serbia  was  too  exhausted 
by  two  costly  wars  to  provide  further  resources  for 
the  moment.  Not  until  1885  did  conditions  somewhat 
improve.  In  this  year  the  Bulgars,  in  defiance  of  the 
treaty  of  Berlin,  annexed  Koumelia.  It  was  already 
clear,  moreover,  to  the  whole  world  that  the  Bulgars 
would  not  stop  there.  The  people  of  Macedonia  became 
alarmed  lest  they,  too,  should  become  the  prey  of 
Bulgaria,  and  began  to  petition  the  Turkish  authorities 
for  as  many  more  Serbian  schools  as  possible,  and  to 
ask  Serbia  for  stronger  support.  Turkey,  too,  could 
now  see  through  Bulgaria's  intentions,  and    so   became 

1  Letter  from  the  Serbian  diplomatic  representative  in  Constan- 
tinople, December  6,  1872  ("  Kako  je  postala  Bugarska  Egzarhija  ") 
("  How  the  Bulgarian  Exarchate  Arose,"  p.  68). 


SERBIA    AND    MACEDONIA  175 

somewhat  more  liberally  disposed  towards  the  Serbs  in 
Macedonia.  By  private  initiative  the  Society  of  St.  Sava 
was  founded  in  Belgrade  in  1886  with  the  object  of 
helping  to  preserve  and  educate  the  Serbian  people  in 
Turkish  territory.  The  funds  of  the  Society  multiplied 
rapidly,  chiefly  owing  to  contributions  from  Serbs  in 
the  non-liberated  countries.  In  1887  Serbia  prevailed 
upon  the  Porte  to  permit  her  the  establishment  of 
Serbian  Consulates  in  Salonica  and  Skoplje.  In  this 
way  the  opening  of  national  schools  was  greatly  facili- 
tated for  the  Serbian  inhabitants.  From  that  time  the 
number  of  Serbian  schools  in  Turkey  began  to  increase. 
In  1891  there  were  117  Serbian  schools  with  an  aggre- 
gate staff  of  140  teachers  open  in  the  vilayets  of  Kosovo, 
Bitolj,  and  Salonica;  in  1896  there  were  159  schools  with 
an  aggregate  of  240  teachers ;  in  1901  there  were  226 
elementary  schools,  four  lycees  (boys'  high  schools),  one 
theological  college,  and  three  high  schools  for  girls. 
Subsequently  to  1900  there  were  over  300  Serbian 
schools  in  Turkish  territory. 

In  this  way  the  preservation  of  the  Serbian  nationality 
in  Turkey — which  was  begun  earlier — was  supported  by 
the  Serbian  Government  as  far  as  circumstances  would 
permit.  Moreover,  the  Government  assisted  as  far  as 
possible  the  educational  and  intellectual  labours  of  the 
Serbs  in  Turkey  by  defraying  the  printing  expenses  of 
Serbian  books  in  Constantinople  (which  had  been  done 
since  1886)  and  by  the  publication  of  the  "  Carigradski 
Glasnik"  (since  1893)  and  the  "Vardar"  (in  Skoplje, 
1908). 

The  Serbian  Church  question  in  Turkey  could  not 
be  mooted  for  a  long  time.  The  Greek  Patriarchate 
was  ill  disposed  towards  the  Serbs ;  Kussia  was  helping 


176  MACEDONIA 

Bulgaria  to  the  prejudice  of  Serbia ;  Turkey  feared  the 
Serbian  people.  Finally,  when  the  demands  of  the 
Macedonian  Serbs  for  Serbian  bishops  and  priests  could 
no  longer  be  refused,  the  Serbian  Government  acted  as 
mediator  through  its  diplomatic  representatives.  In 
1896  a  Serb  was  appointed  Bishop  of  Skoplje  and  later 
on,  again  thanks  to  Serbia's  mediation,  a  Serb  was 
appointed  Bishop  of  Veles-Debar. 

Serbia  has  never  ceased  to  do  what  she  could  for 
her  land  of  Macedonia.  If  she  did  not  succeed  in 
finally  breaking  up  the  Bulgarian  propaganda,  it  was 
because  the  circumstances  responsible  for  her  failure 
were  all  the  time  too  strong  for  her. 

Finally,  Serbia  did  for  Macedonia  the  utmost  that 
could  be  required  of  her.  She  wrested  Macedonia  from 
Turkey  at  the  cost  of  torrents  of  blood ;  she  defended 
her  against  Bulgaria,  and  to-day  Serbia  is  sacrificing 
the  best  of  her  sons  for  the  liberation  of  Macedonia. 

No;  Serbia  has  indeed  and  to  the  very  end  fulfilled 
her  duty  towards  Macedonia. 

***** 

The  Macedonians  on  their  part  have  never  ceased  from 
being  good  Serbs  and  from  working  for  union  with 
Serbia. 

We  have  said  already  that  when  the  Macedonians 
fought  for  the  creation  of  free  Serbia  they  did  so  in 
the  hope  that  freedom  would  come  to  them  also  from 
her.  Therefore  they  laboured  for  her  establishment 
either  as  good  citizens  of  Serbia  or  as  champions  of 
her  enlargement.  They  gave  expression  to  their  Serbian 
feeling  in  Macedonia  as  well. 

Before  the  advent  of  the  nineteenth-century  schools 
were  scarce  under  the  Turkish   rule.     Such  schools   as 


SERBIA    AND   MACEDONIA  177 

existed  were  mostly  in  monasteries,  and  in  them  young 
men  were  trained  for  the  priesthood  or  the  cloister.  We 
have  already  mentioned  a  school  of  this  type  as  existing 
in  Macedonia  in  1780.  There  was  a  Serbian  monastic 
school  in  the  Monastery  of  Treskavac  in  existence  until 
1780. *  There  were  similar  schools  in  Lesnovo,  SlepSe, 
and  other  Macedonian  monasteries.  These  schools  were 
the  last  relics  of  Old  Serbian  civilization  and  letters, 
and  they  were  maintained  by  the  people  without  help 
from  abroad.  The  first  urban  schools  in  Macedonia 
were  founded  in  the  nineteenth  century.  The  first  of 
these  were  opened  in  Prilep  and  Kuceviste  (Skoplje) 
as  early  as  1813 ;  in  VaroS,  near  Prilep,  in  1820,  and  in 
Skoplje  in  1830  and  1835.  After  that  date  the  Serbian 
schools  in  Macedonia  increased  in  number.  Towards 
the  middle  of  the  nineteenth  century  there  were  already 
thirty.  But  this  number  was  still  insufficient,  and  the 
people  urgently  demanded  more.  The  latter  half  of  the 
nineteenth  century  brought  the  Bulgarian  propaganda  in 
Macedonia  and  the  opening  of  Bulgarian  schools.  But 
this  did  not  stop  the  progress  of  the  Serbian  schools.2 
They  were  opened  all  over  the  country — in  Kostur, 
Fiorina,  Sveti  Jovan  Melnicki,  Petric,  Razlog,  Banjska, 
Bitolj,  Resan,  Struga,  Smiljevo,  Debar,  Galicnik, 
KadoviSte,  Ochrida,  etc.  All  these  schools  were  opened 
by  the  Serbs  of  Macedonia  on  their  own  initiative  and 
maintained  at  their  own  expense  or  with  the  revenues 
of  church  endowments.  The  curriculum  and  the  books 
used  in  these  schools  were  Serbian.     They   were   never 

'  J.   H.  Vasiljevic,   "Prilep  i  njegova  okolina  "  ("Prilep  and  its 
Environs"),  p.  109. 

2  The  Bulgarian  school  in  Skoplje  was  opened  in   1863 ;    that   in 
Veles  in  1872,  that  in  Tetovo  in  1876,  and  that  in  Kicevo  in  1877. 

13 


178  MACEDONIA 

called  anything  but  Serbian  or  Slavo-Serbian  schools, 
and  their  teachers,  Serbian  teachers.  Some  of  these 
schoolmasters,  although  not  great  scholars,  distinguished 
themselves  by  their  zeal  and  even  by  their  literary 
efforts.  One  of  the  most  distinguished  among  them 
was  Jordan  Hadzi  Konstantinovie,  a  native  of  Veles,  who 
was  accused  of  rebellion  and  banished  to  Asia,  simply 
because  he  openly  resisted  the  abuses  practised  by  the 
Greek  priests.  He  wrote  school  books  and  printed  them 
in  Serbia.  He  used  to  collect  old  Serbian  books  and 
MSS.  and  send  them  to  Serbia.  He  also  tried  his  hand  at 
scientific  research.  The  journal  of  the  Serbian  Scientific 
Society,  the  Serbian  Academy  of  those  days,  published 
several  contributions  from  his  pen  on  the  history  of 
Macedonia.1 

In  1876  the  Turks  closed  all  the  Serbian  schools 
in  Macedonia,  and  expelled  all  the  Serbian  teachers, 
because  of  the  war  between  Serbia  and  Turkey.  But 
as  soon  as  conditions  improved,  the  Macedonians 
appealed  to  the  Turkish  Government  for  greater  freedom 
from  the  Bulgars  and  for  as  many  Serbian  schools  as 
possible.  As,  owing  to  the  Bulgarian  intrigues  with 
the  Turkish  authorities,  it  was  difficult  to  obtain  per- 
mission for  the  opening  of  Serbian  schools,  and  as  the 
latter  were  exposed  to  Bulgarian  raids  and  attacks 
as  soon  as  they  were  open,  the  people  also  took  to 
opening  and  maintaining  schools  without  the  special 
permission  of  the  Turkish  authorities  or  the  knowledge 
of  the  Bulgarian  propagandists.  In  this  way  many  so- 
called  "secret  Serbian  schools"  were  opened  all  over 
the  country. 

1  "Glasnik  Srpskog  Ucenog  Dru&tva,"  vol.  vii.  pp.  170-177,  and 
vol.  viii.  pp.  130-150. 


SERBIA    AND    MACEDONIA  179 

Finally,  when  Serbian  education  had  fairly  taken 
hold  in  Macedonia,  the  Macedonians  began  to  publish 
the  newspapers  already  referred  to,  one  in  Constantinople 
(1893)  and  one  in  Skoplje  (1908).  The  editor  of  the 
former  came  from  Ochrida,  and  the  editor  of  the  latter 
was  a  native  of  Skoplje.  The  Serbian  calendar  "  Golub  '' 
was  published  annually  in  Constantinople  and  enjoyed 
a  wide  circulation. 

So  far  as  the  Turkish  censorship  would  allow  it, 
Serbian  books  were  sold  in  the  bookshops  of  Salonica, 
Skoplje,  Bitolj,  Ochrida,  Prilep,  Seres,  Kostur,  Voden, 
Gevgelija,  Veles,  and  other  Macedonian  towns.  All  the 
booksellers  were  Serbs  of  the  country. 

In  short — in  spite  of  the  Bulgarian  propaganda,  and 
in  spite  of  Turkish  intimidation — the  Macedonian  Serbs 
zealously  guarded  their  national  education. 

It  was  impossible,  as  we  have  seen,  to  broach  the 
Serbian  Church  question.  Until  the  creation  of  the 
Bulgarian  Exarchate,  the  Macedonians  followed  Russia's 
advice  in  supporting  the  Bulgars,  hoping  that  with  the 
solution  of  the  Bulgarian  Church  question  their  own 
question  would  be  solved  also.  But  when  the  newly 
established  Exarchate  opened  its  campaign  of  Bulgarian 
propaganda  in  Macedonia,  the  Macedonians  soon  realized 
whither  all  this  was  leading.  In  1872  the  Bulgars 
received  the  two  bishops  already  referred  to,  in  Skoplje 
and  Ochrida,  who  inaugurated  a  vast  propaganda  and 
fanatical  persecutions  of  the  Serbian  element,  schools, 
and  education.  The  people  were  roused  and  began  to 
retaliate  and  defend  themselves.  Finally,  in  1874, 
the  Serbian  population  throughout  Macedonia,  in  the 
eparchies  of  Samokov,  Custendil,  Veles,  Debar,  Melnik, 
Ochrida,   and  Seres,  addressed  a  petition  to  the  Sultan 


180  MACEDONIA 

and  the  Greek  Patriarchate  to  restore  the  suppressed 
Patriarchate  of  Ipek  and  to  include  them  within  its 
jurisdiction.  "We  are  Serbs,  and  not  Bulgars,"  ran 
these  petitions ;  "  the  Exarchate  would  Bulgarize  us, 
and  this  we  do  not  desire,  and  therefore  appeal  to  you 
to  save  us  from  this  calamity  and  to  restore  to  us  our 
independent  Serbian  Church."  Nobody  knows  what 
the  Sultan  and  the  Patriarch  did  with  these  petitions. 
In  1876  war  broke  out  between  Serbia  and  Turkey,  and 
nothing  came  of  the  wish  of  the  Macedonian  Serbs. 

Handicapped  by  Greek  intrigue,  and  by  the  reinforced 
Bulgarian  propaganda  after  the  creation  of  the  Bul- 
garian State,  the  Serbian  Church  question  in  Macedonia 
could  not  be  reopened  for  a  long  time.  The  people 
forwarded  petitions  and  sent  delegates  to  appeal  to 
the  Sultan  and  the  Patriarch  for  the  restoration  of 
the  Serbian  Church,  but  always  without  success. 
Finally  the  Serbian  Government  intervened  through 
its  Ministers  in  Constantinople  in  this  matter  also. 
The  Patriarchs  had  promised,  one  after  another,  that 
they  would  improve  the  position  of  the  Serbian 
Church  in  Turkey,  but  the  promise  was  never  kept. 
Nor  was  the  other  positive  undertaking  fulfilled  that 
upon  the  death  of  the  Greek  Metropolitan  Metodije, 
a  Serb  was  to  be  appointed  Bishop  of  Skoplje.  The 
populace  became  uneasy  and  sent  a  deputation  to 
Constantinople.  At  last,  after  great  efforts  on  behalf 
of  the  national  cause,  the  Holy  Synod  of  the  Greek 
Patriarchate  in  Constantinople  on  August  30,  1897, 
appointed  the  Serb  Firmilijan  Dra2i6  ecclesiastical 
administrator  of  the  Bishopric  of  Skoplje.  Although 
this  was  but  a  very  small  success,  the  people  saw  that 
they    had    gained    something     by    it.     Firmilijan     was 


SERBIA   AND    MACEDONIA  181 

enthusiastically  welcomed  by  the  populace  of  Skoplje 
and  the  surrounding  country.  Upon  repeated  petitions 
from  the  Macedonians,  Firmilijan  was  in  1899  appointed 
Metropolitan  of  the  Eparchy  of  Skoplje,  but  his  ordina- 
tion was  delayed  by  Bulgarian  intrigue  and  did  not  take 
place  until  St.  Vitus'  Day  (June  15/28),  1902. 

After  surmounting  similar  difficulties  the  Macedonian 
Serbs  finally  procured  the  appointment  of  a  Serb  as 
Metropolitan  of  the  Eparchy  of  Veles-Debar. 

But   the   Serbian  feeling  of   the  Macedonians  in  the 

nineteenth  century  did   not  confine  itself   to  efforts   to 

maintain  and  strengthen  the  Serbian  Church  and  schools 

in  Macedonia.     It  comes  out  even  more  strongly  in  the 

sacrifices   made    by   the    Macedonians   for    the  sake   of 

union   with    Serbia.     When    Serbia    was   at    war   with 

Turkey    in     1876,    the    Serbian    army    included    large 

numbers  of  volunteers  from  Macedonia  who  had  joined 

its   ranks   in   order   to    help    Serbia   in   her   purpose   of 

freeing    Macedonia.     Nor  was  this  all.     No  sooner  had 

the  Serbian  army  begun  to  advance  towards  Macedonia 

in  1877  and  1878,  than  a  vigorous  answering  movement 

in  favour  of  Serbia  made  itself  felt  among  the  populace. 

In  the  regions  where  the  arrival  of   the  Serbian  army 

was  imminently  expected,  real  risings  took  place  in  the 

Serbian    cause.     The    most    serious    of    these    was    the 

rising   in   the   counties    of    Kumanovo,    Kriva   Palanka, 

and  Kratovo.     It  was  headed  by  the  chief  men  of  the 

district.     Leading  citizens  of  Kumanovo  swore  in  church 

upon  the  Gospel   that   they  would  strive  to   the  end  in 

the  cause  of  Serbia.     In  the  appeals  addressed   by   the 

insurgents   to   the  then   Prince  of   Serbia,  Milan  Obre- 

novic,  they  protested  their  devotion  and  loyalty  to  him, 

imploring  him  to  espouse  the  cause  of  the  insurgents 


182  MACEDONIA 

and  to  strive  with  all  his  might  to  obtain  the  union  of 
their  country  with  Serbia.  The  insurgents  also  applied 
to  the  generals  then  in  command  of  the  Serbian  army, 
begging  them  to  supply  them  secretly  with  arms  and 
ammunition. 

This  Macedonian  movement  on  behalf  of  Serbia  the 
Turks  suppressed  with  fire  and  sword.  Several  of  the 
insurgent  leaders  succeeded  in  escaping  to  Serbia.  They 
settled  in  the  depopulated  districts  of  the  counties  of 
Toplica  and  Vranja,  where  large  numbers  of  these 
refugees  live  even  to  this  day.  A  terrible  vengeance 
descended  upon  the  heads  of  the  captured  leaders  and 
the  populace  which  had  remained  behind..  For  a  long 
time  the  appellation  "Serbian"  was  prohibited.  But 
the  memories  of  the  Serbo-Turkish  war  of  1876-1878, 
and  of  the  Macedonian  rising  for  union  with  Serbia, 
lived  on  in  the  hearts  of  the  nation.  To  this  day  the 
war  and  the  insurrection  are  commemorated  by  the 
Macedonians  in  their  poetry.1 

Not  even  these  disasters  deterred  the  Macedonians 
from  thoughts  of  liberation  and  union  with  Serbia.  In 
1880  sixty-five  of  the  most  notable  men  of  the  districts 
of  Kumanovo,  Kriva  Palanka,  Kocane,  Istip,  Veles, 
Prilep,  Bitolj,  Ochrida,  Kicevo,  and  Skoplje  addressed 
an  appeal  to  M.S.  Milojevic,  the  Serbian  commander 
of  the  Macedonian  volunteers  in  the  war  of  1876-1878 

1  The  ballad  of  the  Serbian  Prince  Milan  Obrenovic  and  Sulejman 
Pasha,  which  was  composed  by  the  native  poets  of  Kurnanovo,  was 
subsequently  published  by  the  Bulgarian  professor  P.  Draganov  in 
1894  (P.  Draganov,  "  Makedonsko-slavjanski  sbornik  "  ["  Slavo- 
Macedonian  Collection  "] ,  i.,  Petrograd,  1894,  No.  172),  and  the 
ballad  on  the  Macedonian  insurrection  was  published  by  J.  H. 
Vasiljevic  in  1906  (J.  H.  Vasiljevic,  "  Ustanak  Srba  u  Kumanovskoj 
Palanackoj  Kazi  u  1878  "  ["  Insurrection  of  Serbs  in  the  Kumanovo 
and  Palanka  Districts,  1878"],  Belgrade,  1906,  pp.  57-58). 


SERBIA    AND    MACEDONIA  183 

against  Turkey,  begging  him  to  contrive  somehow  to 
smuggle  arms  through  to  them  and  to  lead  them,  and 
they  would  rise  in  insurrection.  That  same  year  saw 
the  outbreak  of  the  so-called  "  Brsjaeka  buna"  (revolt 
of  the  Brsjaci — an  ancient  tribal  name)  among  the  popu- 
lation of  the  counties  of  Kicevo,  Porec,  Bitolj,  and 
Prilep.  The  revolt  extended  over  six  months,  and  ended 
in  failure. 

All  these  revolts  serve  to  illustrate  the  Serbian  feeling 
of  the  Macedonian  population.  These  revolts  were 
planned  in  the  Serbian  cause,  and  they  bore  a  Serbian 
character.  Unfortunately  the}'  have  not  only  been 
unsuccessful,  but  their  results  were  disastrous  to  the 
Macedonians.  In  consequence  of  these  revolts  the 
Serbian  element  was  increasingly  persecuted,  and  the 
Bulgarian  increasingly  favoured. 

Nor  was  this  all.  When  the  Great  Bulgaria  of  San 
Stefano  was  announced,  all  Macedonia  was  in  terror  lest 
it  should  be  placed  under  Bulgaria.  The  entire  popula- 
tion of  the  counties  of  Kumanovo,  Skoplje,  Palanka, 
Kratovo,  Custendil,  Kocani,  Strumica,  Istip,  Veles, 
Debar,  Kicevo,  and  Prilep  sent  deputations  and  appeals 
to  Milan,  the  then  Prince  of  Serbia,  imploring  him 
not  to  abandon  Macedonia  to  the  Bulgars  but  to 
intervene  so  that  Macedonia  might  be  assigned  to 
Serbia.  When  the  Congress  of  Berlin  met,  petitions 
with  numerous  signatures  appended  to  them  arrived 
from  all  parts  of  Macedonia,  reinforcing  by  cogent 
argument  the  statement  that  the  population  of  Mace- 
donia is  Serbian,  and  that  it  does  not  wish  to  belong 
to  any  country  but  Serbia.  "As  Serbs  of  true  and 
pure  stock,  of  the  purest  and  most  intrinsically  Serbian 
country"— so  these  petitions  are  worded — "we   for  the 


184  MACEDONIA 

last  time  implore  on  our  knees  .  .  .  that  we  may  in 
some  manner  and  by  some  means  be  freed  from  the 
slavery  of  five  centuries,  and  united  with  our  country, 
the  principality  of  Serbia,  and  that  the  tears  of  blood  of 
the  Serbian  martyrs  may  be  stanched  so  that  they,  too, 
may  become  useful  members  of  the  European  community 
of  nations  and  of  the  Christian  world;'  we  do  not 
desire  "  to  exchange  the  harsh  Turkish  slavery  for  the 
vastly  harsher  and  blacker  Bulgarian  slavery,  which 
will  be  worse  and  more  intolerable  than  that  of  the 
Turks  which  we  are  at  present  enduring,  and  will 
compel  us  in  the  end  either  to  slay  all  our  own  people, 
or  to  abandon  our  country,  to  abandon  our  holy  places, 
and  graves,  and  all  that  we  hold  dear.  ..."  (see 
Supplement  No.  IV). 

In  the  end  the  Macedonians  took  up  arms  to  defend 
themselves  against  the  Bulgars.  When  in  the  eighties 
of  last  century  the  Bulgars  realized  that  with  all  their 
propaganda  they  would  never  succeed  in  eradicating  the 
Serbian  feeling  of  the  Macedonians,  they  resorted  to 
violence  of  the  most  outrageous  kind.  This  was  the 
terrible  comitadji  campaign  in  Macedonia,  to  which  we 
have  already  alluded.  Faced  by  this  bloody  terror  of 
the  Bulgars,  the  people  took  up  arms  in  self-defence. 
Although  they  had  neither  arms  nor  ammunition,  they 
formed  bands  to  resist  the  intruders.  The  leading  men 
of  Macedonia  placed  themselves  at  the  head  of  the 
populace.  Men  like  Jovan  Dovezenski  from  the  Dovez- 
ence  Zeglihovo  district  (Kumanovo),  George  Skopljance 
of  Skoplje,  Grigor  Sokolovic  of  Nebregovo  (Prilep),  Jovan 
Babunski  of  Babuna  (Babuna  district),  and  many  others 
were  celebrated  and  commemorated  in  song  as  the 
leaders  and  heroes  of   the  national  defence  against   the 


SERBIA    AND    MACEDONIA  185 

Bulgars  in  Macedonia.  Under  the  most  desperate  con- 
ditions, persecuted  alike  by  Bulgarian  bands  and  the 
Turkish  authorities,  these  defenders  of  the  Serbian 
name  in  Macedonia  kept  up  their  courage  only  by 
their  own  love  and  sympathy  for  the  conscious  national 
attitude  of  the  Serbian  population  of  Macedonia.  The 
labours  of  these  men  were  not  without  success.  They 
helped  to  preserve  at  least  that  third  part  of  the 
people  of  Macedonia  which  had  refused  to  join  the 
Bulgarian  Exarchate,  and  which  has  remained  Serbian 
to  this  day.  Had  they  had  more  resources  at  their 
disposal,  they  might  perhaps  have  cleared  Mace- 
donia of  the  intruders.  A  confidential  report  to  the 
Bulgarian  Government  by  a  Bulgarian  consular  official 
states  that  the  Serbs  had  no  more  than  "  sixteen  bands 
of  one  hundred  and  sixty  to  one  hundred  and  seventy 
men,"  working  against  the  Bulgars,  but  that  never- 
theless "the  successes  of  the  Serbian  element  in  the 
vilayet  of  Bitolj  are  considerable,"  and  that  "  in 
Salonica  their  position  is  fairly  good."  l 

***** 

From  what  we  have  said  it  is  surely  clear  that  Serbia 
did  all  she  could  to  the  limit  of  her  strength  to  save 
Macedonia  from  Bulgarian  intrusion  and  Bulgarization. 
It  is  also  likewise  clear  the  Macedonian  people  made 
every  effort  to  preserve  its  Serbian  character  and  to 
become  united  with  Serbia.  Unfortunately  adverse  cir- 
cumstance was  too  strong  for  both  Serbia  and  the  Serbs 
of  Macedonia.  Serbia  was  not  strong  enough  to  fight 
Turkey  and  the  abuses  of  the  Greek  Church,  to  oppose 
the  will  of  Russia  and  to  repel  the  Bulgarian  propaganda 

1  "Le  Brigandage  en  Macedoine,  un  rappor^  confidentiel  au 
gouvernement  bulgare,"  Berlin,  1908,  p.  41. 


186  MACEDONIA 

and  the  armed  terror  of  the  comitadji.  This,  and  this 
only,  is  the  reason  why  a  large  part  of  the  population 
finally,  after  an  heroic  struggle,  great  trials,  and  enor- 
mous sacrifices,  was  nevertheless  compelled  actually  to 
call  itself  Bulgarian. 

The  Bulgarian  success  is,  however,  only  relative. 
Only  the  population  of  the  larger  towns  in  Macedonia, 
whence  started  the  Bulgarian  agitation  under  the 
protection  of  Russian  diplomacy,  adhered  to  the 
Exarchate.1  The  villages  did  not  all  respond  equally 
to  the  Bulgarian  appeal.  According  to  the  figures 
compiled  after  several  years  of  investigation  by  Ros- 
tovski,  Russian  Consul  in  Botolj,  there  were  in  the 
vilayet  of  Bitolj  186,656  Serbs  who  joined  the  Bulgarian 
Exarchate,  and  93,694  who  remained  faithful  to  the 
Patriarchate.  One-half  of  the  Christians  in  their  region 
did  not  join  the  Bulgars.  In  the  Eparchy  of  Skoplje 
20,000  families  belonged  to  the  Exarchate,  and  10,000 
belonged  to  the  Patriarchate.  Here,  too,  the  numerical 
proportion  is  the  same.  Besides  this  there  were  some 
parts  of  Macedonia  where  the  Exarchate  had  no  success 
at  all.  The  whole  of  Skoplje  Crna  Gora,  with  only  a 
few  exceptions,  and  many  villages  north  of  it  remained 
faithful  to  the  Patriarchate.  The  villages  in  Porec 
between  Tetovo  and  Bitolj  kept  themselves  completely 
outside  the  Bulgarian  influence.  Moreover,  there  is  a 
large  proportion  of  the  Serbian  population  through- 
out Macedonia  which  has  remained  Serbian.  Round 
Strumica,  Drama,  and  Serez  in  Southern  Macedonia 
there  are  many  Serbs  who,  unable  to  call  themselves 
Turks,  and  not  desirous  of  calling  themselves  Bulgars, 

1  St.  Novakovic,  "  Balkanska  Pitanja"  ("The  Balkan  Questions"), 
1906,  p.  118. 


SERBIA    AND    MACEDONIA  187 

call     themselves     Greek,     although     they     speak     only 
Serbian. 

An  example  will  show  how  strong  the  Serbian  feeling 
is  in  Macedonia  despite  the  fierce  trials  through  which 
it  has  passed.     Already  in  the  early  days  of  the  open 
struggle  against   the  Greeks,  the  Serbian   priest   Jovan 
Burkovic  in  Skoplje  distinguished   himself  especially  in 
his  opposition  to  them.     For  this  the  Greek  Metropolitan 
excommunicated  him  and  caused  his  books  to  be  thrown 
out   of   the   church.     In    spite   of   this  ill-usage   neither 
he  nor  his  flock  ever  joined  the  Bulgarian  movement. 
Neither  Bulgarian  intimidation  and  blackmail  nor  Greek 
persecution  could  drive  him  away  from  the  Patriarchate. 
He  hated  it,  but  he  could  not  deny  his  Serbian  feeling 
and  call   himself   a   Bulgar.     To   the   day  of   his  death 
he  and  his  parishioners  adhered  to  the  hated   Patriar- 
chate aud  remained    Serbs.     In  his  old  age,  and  when 
his  health  was  already  failing,  Jovan  Burkovic  prayed 
that   God  might  grant   him   but   one  wish — to    live   to 
conduct    the    service    at    the    opening   of    the    Serbian 
Lycee,  which  was  at  that  time  being  founded  in  Skoplje. 
He  was  spared  to  see  the  fulfilment  of  his  wish.1 

Macedonia  is  full  of  Serbian  individuals  who  have 
survived  all  crises  and  trials  and  remained  Serbs.  And 
there  are  yet  more  who  are  prepared  to  cry  out  as 
soon  as  they  are  delivered  from  the  Bulgarian  danger : 
"  We  were,  and  we  will  be  Serbs." 

1  St.  Novakovic,  "  Balkanska  Pitanja"  ("  The  Balkan  Questions"), 
pp.  89-90. 


XI 


MACEDONIAN  DIALECTS  OF    THE  SEBBIAN 

LANGUAGE 

Language  of  the  Macedonian  Slavs  originally  merely  called  "  Slav  " — 
No  mention  of  Bulgarian  language  in  Macedonia  up  to  the  begin- 
ning of  the  nineteenth  century — Language  of  literary  records  in 
Macedonia  Serbian  throughout  the  Middle  Ages — Serbian  also  in 
the  nineteenth  century  until  the  advent  of  the  Bulgarian  propa- 
ganda— Difference  between  Macedonian  and  Bulgarian  languages 
noticed  at  a  very  early  date — Macedonian  idiom  not  identical 
in  all  districts — Insufficiency  of  linguistic  material  for  thorough 
study  of  Macedonian  idiom — All  Macedonian  dialects  belong 
to  one  type — Macedonian  dialects  are  Serbian — Morphology — 
Etymology — The  article  as  it  appears  in  Macedonian  dialects 
is  not  a  Bulgarian  characteristic 

WE  have  already  mentioned  in  another  connection 
that  Professor  Djeric,  after  a  thorough  study  of 
all  records  referring  to  Macedonia,  established  the  fact 
that  the  language  of  the  Macedonian  Slavs  was  originally 
simply  called  Slav,  even  as  the  people  who  spoke  that 
language  were  called  Slavs.  This  term  is  also  applied 
to  the  Macedonian  tongue  into  which  Cyril  and  Method 
and  their  disciples  translated  the  Holy  Scriptures  in 
the  first  centuries  of  Christendom  among  the  Balkan 
Slavs.  Professor  Djeric,  moreover,  carefully  investigated 
all  historic  sources  in  which  the  language  of  the  Mace- 
donian Slav  of  the  period  is  mentioned,  right  up  to  the 
twelfth  century,  and  nowhere  did  he  find  the  language 

188 


DIALECTS  OF  THE   SERBIAN   LANGUAGE  189 

called  otherwise  than  the  Slav.1  Of  the  Bulgarian 
language  in  Macedonia  there  is  at  that  time  no  trace, 
although  it  was  the  time  of  the  longest  period  of  the 
Bulgarian  rule  in  Macedonia.  Finally,  Professor  Djeri6 
studied  all  records  which  refer  to  Macedonia,  and  upon 
this  evidence  has  established  that  "  from  the  earliest 
times  right  up  to  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century 
there  is  not  one  reliable  instance  to  prove  that  the 
Macedonians  ever  called  themselves  Bulgars  or  their 
language  the  "Bulgarian."2 

All  literary  records  produced  in  Macedonia  during  the 
Middle  Ages  are  composed  solely  in  Serbian.  Already 
in  1844,  V.  Grigorovic,  in  his  travels  through  Macedonia, 
took  note  of  a  host  of  Serbian  literary  records.  The 
MSS.  Catalogue  of  the  National  Library  in  Sofia  (1910) 
contains  twenty-five  MSS.  from  Macedonia.  Twenty- 
two  out  of  the  twenty-five  are  Serbian  (from  Skoplje, 
Veles,  Istip,  Strumica,  Debar,  Prilep,  Ochrida),  as  the 
author  of  the  catalogue,  the  Bulgarian  Professor  Coneff 
himself  admits,  and  only  three  are  non-Serbian.  Of 
these  three,  two  are  Serbo-Bulgarian,  and  only  one  is 
Bulgarian.3  This  last-named  could  only  be  the  work 
of  a  Bulgar  who  had  come  by  chance  to  Macedonia. 
All  marginal  notes,  legends  attached  to  pictures  and 
inscriptions  found  in  churches,  etc.,  in  Macedonia  are 
purely  Serbian.  In  many  of  them  the  language  is 
referred  to  as  Serbian.  In  1466,  Archbishop  Marko  of 
Ochrida  ordered  the  "  Canon  of  the  Great  Church " 
(Zakonik  Velike  Crkve)  in  Ochrida  to  be  translated  into 

'  V.  Djeric,  "O  srpskom  imenu  u  Staroj  Srbiji  i  Makedoniji " 
("  The  term  '  Serbian'  in  Old  Serbia  and  Macedonia"),  Belgrade,  1904. 
pp.  32-38. 

a  Ibid.,   p.  42. 

3  P.  Popovic,  "  Serbian  Macedonia,"  London,  1916,  p.  4. 


190  MACEDONIA 

Serbian.1  In  a  seventeenth-century  Macedonian  MS. 
containing  the  sermons  of  Damaskin  Studita  it  so 
happens  that  a  word  is  denned,  and  in  order  to  make 
its  meaning  clear,  we  are  told  what  it  signifies  "in  the 
Serbian  (i.e.  Macedonian)  language."2 

In  the  nineteenth  century  and  up  to  the  advent  of  the 
Bulgarian  propaganda  the  language  spoken  in  Macedonia 
is  called  "  Serbian."  In  his  "  Srpski  Bjecnik"  (Serbian 
dictionary)  Vuk  S.  Karadzic  speaks  of  the  language  of 
the  Macedonians  as  "  Serbian.'"  As  we  have  already 
stated  elsewhere,  he  mentions  "  that  in  Tetovo  the 
Turks  speak  Turkish  and  Albanian,  and  the  Christians 
Serbian" ;  that  "around  Tetovo  there  are  villages 
whose  inhabitants  profess  the  Turkish  faith,  but  speak 
Serbian;  that  in  Kicevo  (Krcava)  "about  one-third  of 
the  inhabitants  are  Christians,  and  the  rest  profess 
the  Turkish  faith,  but  that  all  of  them  speak  Serbian  "  ; 
that  in  Gostivar  "  the  Turks  speak  Turkish  and  Albanian, 
and  the  Christians  Serbian";  that  in  1836  he  met  two 
men  from  Debar  in  Cetinje  who  spoke  Serbian,  and 
that  "in  that  locality  (around  Debar)  there  are  many 
villages  where  the  inhabitants  have  the  same  speech 
as  these  two  men,  and  that  they  call  themselves 
Serbs." 

The  difference  between  the  Macedonian  and  Bulgarian 
languages  has  been  noticed  long  ago  by  scholars. 
Already  in  1844  V.  Grigorovic  drew  attention  to  the 
striking  difference  between  the  Macedonian  and  Bul- 
garian   languages,3    and    was    only    prevented     by    his 

1  Lj.  Stojanovid,  "  Stari  Srpski  Zapisi  i  Natpisi  "  ("  Old  Serbian 
Inscriptions  and  Notes"),  No.  328. 

2  V.  Djeric,   "  0  srpskom   imenu   u   Staroj    Srbiji  i  Makedoniji " 
("  The  term  '  Serbian'  in  Old  Serbia  and  Macedonia"),  p.  27. 

3  Y.  Grigorovic,  "  Ocerk  putesestvija,"  p.  194. 


DIALECTS  OF  THE  SERBIAN  LANGUAGE   191 

partiality  for  the  Bulgars  from  applying  the  term 
"  Serbian "  to  the  language  spoken  in  Macedonia.  In 
1872  a  Bulgar,  Prvanov  byname,  published  "Alphabet 
Books"  (Bukvars)  for  use  in  the  Bulgarian  schools  in 
Macedonia,  and  specially  stated  in  these  books  that  his 
object  in  so  doing  was,  that  "  our  Macedonian  brothers 
may  lose  the  habit  of  the  Serbian  pronunciation  of  the 
Bulgarian  speech."  '  Djordje  M.  Puljevski,  a  native  of 
Galicnik  in  Macedonia,  wrote  in  1875  that  the  inhabi- 
tants of  those  parts  did  not  understand  Bulgarian.2 
P.  Draganov,  Bulgarian  Professor  in  Salonica,  mentioned 
in  1894  that  the  Macedonians  experienced  great  difficulty 
in  learning  the  modern  Bulgarian  idiom.3  How  great 
is  the  difference  between  the  Bulgarian  language  and 
the  various  Macedonian  dialects  is  best  seen  by  the 
fact  that  Macedonian  children  are  unable  to  study  at 
the  Bulgarian  Lycee  without  having  previously  learnt 
Bulgarian.  The  Bulgarian  Lycee  in  Skoplje  had  a 
preparatory  class  attached,  where  Macedonian  children, 
after  having  attended  the  Bulgarian  elementary  schools, 
still  had  to  study  Bulgarian  for  at  least  six  months  to 
enable  them  to  follow  the  lessons  at  the  Lycee. 4  A 
preliminary  study  of  Serbian  was  not  necessary  for 
students  at  the  Serbian  Lycee  in  Skoplje. 

The  language  spoken  in  Macedonia  is  not  everywhere 
the  same,  but  is  divided  into  several  dialects.  To  estab- 
lish correctly   the  areas   over  which   these   dialects  are 

1  P.    Draganov,    "  Izvestija   S.P.    Slavjanskago   Blagotvoritelnago 
Obstestva,"  1888,  quoted  in  "Macedonia"  by  St.  Protic,  p.  13. 
*  Djordje  M.  Puljevski,  "  Recnik  od  tri  Jezika,"  Belgrade,  1875,  p.  1. 

3  P.  Draganov,  "  Makedonsko-slavjanski  sbornik,''  i.,  Petrograd, 
1894,  p.  iv. 

4  Srpska  Kraljevska  Akademija,  "  Naselja  srpskik  zemalja  "  ("  Settle- 
ments of  the  Serbian  Lands  "),  vol.  iii.  p.  508. 


192  MACEDONIA 

spoken,  and  to  give  a  detailed  definition  of  their  dis- 
tinguishing features  is  quite  impossible  at  the  present 
moment.  The  greatest  difficulty  lies  in  the  fact  that 
not  enough  reliable  linguistic  material  has  been  collected 
so  far.  There  are  districts  in  Macedonia  concerning 
which  there  is  no  philological  material  of  any  kind. 
The  bulk  of  the  collected  linguistic  material  is  to  be 
found  in  the  traditional  lore  of  the  Macedonians,  especi- 
ally in  the  national  ballads.  On  the  other  hand,  this 
material  has  not  always  been  compiled  by  reliable  col- 
lectors. Most  of  the  national  ballads  from  Macedonia 
have  been  collected  by  Bulgars ;  but  the  ballads  so 
collected  do  not  correctly  represent  the  Macedonian 
idiom.  There  are  many  reasons  for  this.  For  one 
thing,  these,  collectors  were  unlettered  Bulgarian  priests, 
teachers,  and  agents,  unacquainted  with  the  Macedonian 
dialects,  and  too  ignorant  to  establish  their  various 
characteristics.  For  another,  it  was  necessary  for  the 
Bulgars  to  publish  the  Macedonian  ballads  as  quickly 
as  possible  and  to  proclaim  them  to  be  Bulgarian,  and 
so  the  collections  were  made  too  hurriedly  and  without 
sufficient  attention  to  linguistic  refinement  of  detail. 
Thirdly,  all  Bulgarian  ballad-collectors  were  merely 
agents  for  Great  Bulgarian  aspirations  whose  chief  aim 
it  was  to  exhibit  as  many  Bulgarian  characteristics  as 
possible  in  the  Macedonian  language,  and  so  they  intro- 
duced these  even  in  cases  where  they  were  obviously 
quite  out  of  place.  Finally,  the  speech  of  the  Mace- 
donians has  been  sadly  corrupted  by  Bulgarian  propa- 
ganda and  Bulgarian  schools.  The  purest  idiom  in 
Macedonia  is  spoken  by  the  Serbs  of  Mahommedan  faith, 
whom — for  religious  reasons — the  Bulgarian  propaganda 
could    not    influence.      In   the    meantime,    however,   no 


DIALECTS  OF  THE   SERBIAN  LANGUAGE  193 

special  attention  was  drawn  to  their  language.  It 
follows  therefore  from  what  we  have  said,  that  all  that 
has  been  written  by  philologists — especially  Bulgarian 
philologists — on  the  language  of  the  Macedonians,  and 
based  upon  the  philological  and  linguistic  material  col- 
lected by  the  Bulgars,  cannot  be  either  correct  or  reliable. 
Scientific  investigation  of  the  language  of  the  Mace- 
donians based  on  other  material  has  been  very  limited 
in  extent  and  embraces  only  an  insignificantly  small 
part  of  Macedonia.  For  these  reasons,  too,  we  find  it 
difficult  to  give  a  detailed  philological  study  of  the  Serbian 
dialects  in  Macedonia,  and  we  must  confine  ourselves  to 
pointing  out  their  principal  features.  They  plainly  exhibit 
only  Serbian,  and  not  Bulgarian  characteristics  as  well. 

All  Macedonian  dialects,  no  matter  how  great  the 
difference  between  them,  belong  to  one  type,  and  all  of 
them  by  their  characteristics  are  branches  of  the  Serbian 
language. 

The  main  features  which  on  the  one  hand  link  the 
Macedonian  dialects  with  the  Serbian  language,  and 
on  the  other  hand  distinguish  them  from  the  Bulgarian, 
are  (a)  the  permutation  of  Old  Slav  individual  sounds 
(Morphology)  and  (b)  the  rules  governing  the  inflection 
of  words  (Etymology). 

1.  Moephology. 

The  Old  Slav  vowel  ^  (jus) ,  pronounced  like  the  nasal 
on,  has  in  Bulgarian  been  replaced  by  the  mute  i>  ("dark," 
jer).  In  Serbian  it  has  been  replaced  by  the  clear  u, 
and  in  the  Macedonian  dialects  likewise  by  the  clear 
sounds  u,  a,  o.1     The  tendency  of  Bulgarian  is  to  darken 

1  Examples:  Old  Slav  pTRt-h,  rTtJta  =  Bulgarian  pi>t,  ri>ka  = 
Serbian  put,  ruka  =  Macedonian  put,  pat,  pot,  ruka,  raka,  roka, 

14 


194  MACEDONIA 

the  vowels,  that  of  the  Serbian  and  Macedonian  dialects 
to  pronounce  them  clearly.  Whether  the  clear  vowels, 
which  moreover  include  u,  of  the  Macedonian  dialects 
approach  more  nearly  to  the  Serbian  clear  u,  or  to 
the  Bulgarian  dark  vowel  t,  is  surely  not  difficult  to 
decide. 

The  Old  Slav  sound  group  Zt>  has  in  Bulgarian  been 
replaced  by  tZ,  and  in  Serbian  and  Macedonian  by  u.1 

The  Old    Slav  sound   group    chr  is  in  Bulgarian    re- 
placed by  cer,  and  in  Serbian  and  Macedonian  by  cr.2 

In  the  opinion  of  philologists  the  most  important 
permutation  of  Old  Slav  sounds  in  the  Serbian  and 
Bulgarian  languages  is  the  permutation  of  the  com- 
posite sounds  zd  and  st.  Some  philologists  have  gone 
so  far  as  to  classify  all  the  Slav  languages  into  groups 
according  to  the  permutation  of  this  Old  Slav  sound 
group.  According  to  this  classification  the  Serbian 
language  and  the  Macedonian  dialects  would  unquestion- 
ably belong  to  the  same  group,  because  in  Bulgarian 
the  zd  and  st  have  remained  the  same  as  in  Old  Slav, 
whereas  in  Macedonian  and  Serbian  they  appear  per- 
muted into  dj  and  c.  Already  in  1835  the  first  Bulgarian 
grammarian,  Neofit  Kilski,  observed  that  the  appearance 
of    the   dj   and    c    in    the    Macedonian   dialects   was  a 

1  Examples :  The  Old  Slav  words  vlTiJcly,  'pllm'h,  Bl'hgarin'b  = 
Bulgarian  vT>lk"b,  p'bln'b,  B'hLgarin'b  =  Serbian  and  Macedonian  liuk 
pun,  Bugarin.  Owing  to  the  permutation  of  the  vowels  l"b  the 
Macedonians,  when  they  happen  to  call  themselves  Bulgars,  always 
employ  the  Serbian  word  Bugari,  and. never  the  Bulgarian  word 
BTzlgari.  This  peculiarity  was  observed  in  1844  by  the  Russian 
scientist  V.  Grigorovic  ("  Ocerk  putesestvija,"  p.  196).  Since  then 
this  observation  has  been  repeated  by  many  authors,  among  them 
several  Bulgars. 

2  Examples:  The  Old  Slav  words  cbrn'h,  cbrvenT*  =  Bulgarian 
Zern,  cerven  =  Serbian  and  Macedonian  cm,  orven. 


DIALECTS  OF  THE  SERBIAN   LANGUAGE   195 

Serbian  feature.1  There  are  many  examples  of  the 
occurrence  of  dj  and  c  in  the  Macedonian  dialects.  In 
his  book  "  Ogledalo "  ("The  Mirror")  which  appeared 
in  1816,  and  is  written  throughout  in  the  Macedonian 
dialect,  Cyril  Pejcinovic  of  Tetovo,  a  monk  of  the 
Serbian  Monastery  of  St.  Dimitrius  near  Skoplje,  true 
to  the  usage  of  his  day,  invariably  for  both  groups  uses 
the  Serbian  c  and  never  the  Bulgarian  zd  and  H.  When 
Vuk  Karadzic  brought  out  the  national  ballads  from 
Macedonia  in  1822,  he  employed  the  dj  and  c  quite 
correctly  in  their  proper  places.  In  1875  Dj.  M. 
Puljevski  of  Galicnik  in  Macedonia  compiled  his 
"  Recnik  od  tri  jezika  "  (Dictionary  of  three  languages, 
viz.  Macedonian,  Albanian,  and  Turkish)  for  his 
countrymen.  Puljevski  was  not  a  great  scholar,  and 
in  writing  was  guided  by  feeling  alone.  But  he,  too, 
regularly  uses  the  dj  and  6  sounds.  The  Bulgarian 
P.  Draganov,  who  held  a  post  as  professor  at  the 
Bulgarian  Lycee  in  Salonica,  asserts  that  the  dj  and 
c  sounds  are  an  intrinsic  feature  of  the  Macedonian 
dialects. 

In  view  of  the  importance  of  the  permutation  of 
the  Old  Slav  composite  sounds  zd  and  st  in  its 
bearing  upon  the  question  of  the  Macedonian 
dialects,  St.  Novakovic,  President  of  the  Royal  Serbian 
Academy,  wrote  an  extensive  monograph  on  the 
subject.2  For  his  linguistic  material  he  drew  upon 
the  earlier  writers  who  wrote  in  Macedonian  dialects ; 
upon  the  collections   of     national    ballads  compiled    in 

1  "  Bolgarska  Gramatoka,"  Kragujevac,  1835,  pp.  180-181. 

T  "  Dj  and  6  in  the  Macedonian  National  Dialects  "  ("  Glas  Srpske 
Kraljevske  Akadeinije,"  xii.,  Belgrade,  1889);  "Ein  Beitrag  zur 
Kunde  der  Macedonischen  Dialekte  "  ("  Archiv  fiir  Slavische  Philo- 
logie,  lxii.,  1890,  p.  78). 


196  MACEDONIA 

Macedonia  by  the  Bulgars  and  their  friends ;  *  the 
collection  by  I.  S.  Jastrebov,2  and  finally  upon  the  folk- 
tales related  to  him  in  the  Macedonian  dialect  of  the 
country  around  Prilep  by  P.  Kondovic,  a  pupil  at 
the  Bulgarian  Lycee  who  had  at  that  time  not  yet 
studied  the  Serbian  literary  language.  In  all  this 
linguistic  material  from  Macedonia,  Novakovic  invari- 
ably found  the  Serbian  dj  and  6  wherever  they  ought 
to  occur  according  to  rule. 3 

2.  Etymology. 

In  Bulgarian  the  nouns  and  adjectives  are  not  inflected 
at  all ;  they  always  retain  the  same  form.  The  cases 
are  expressed  by  prepositions  placed  before  the  nomin- 
ative. In  the  Macedonian  dialects,  as  in  Serbian,  both 
nouns  and  adjectives  have  seven  cases,  which  are  formed 
by  added  terminations.4 

1  St.  I.  Verkovie,  "  Narodne  Pesme  Makedonskih  Bugara,  1860  "  ; 
The  Brothers  Dirnitrije  and  Konstantin  Miladinovci,  "  Bugarske 
narodne  pesme,"  1861 ;  "  Periodiceskoe  Spisanie  "  of  the  Bulgarian 
Literary  Society. 

2  I.  S.  Jastrebov,  "  Obicaj  i  pjesni  Tureckih  Serbov,"  Petrograd,  1886. 

3  Examples:  Bulgarian  words  vezda,  cuzd=  Serbian  and  Mace- 
donian vedja,  tudj ;  Bulgarian  svesta,  sresta,  k'bsta  =  Serbian  and 
Macedonian  sveoa,  sreca,  kuca. 

*  Examples  taken  from  a  Macedonian  MS.  Collection  of  the 
eighteenth  century  ("  Spomenik  Srpske  Kraljevske  Akademije,"  xxxi. 
p.  12):- 

Genitive  :  ot  vraga,  radi  bolesti,  Gospoda,  hriscanske  vere,  pres- 

tola  Bozija. 
Dative :  vragu,  Bogu,  proroku,  duhovniku. 
Accusative  :  veru  hristijansJcu,  Icrasotu,  prevaru,  Boga. 
Vocative  :  vraze  lukavi,  prelastena  leno. 
Ablative  :  Svetim   Jcrstenjem,  s  djavolom,  s  velihim  kanunom, 

dusom  i  telom. 
Locative :  na  strasnom   sudu,    prema   milosti,  prema   velikom 
velru,  na  smrti. 


DIALECTS  OF  THE  SERBIAN   LANGUAGE  197 

There  is  no  infinitive  of  the  verb  in  Bulgarian,  but 
there  is  both  in  Serbian  and  in  the  Macedonian  dialects.1 

There  is  no  present  participle  of  the  verb  in  Bulgarian, 
whereas  it  exists  both  in  Serbian  and  in  the  Macedonian 
dialects.2 

Examples   taken   from    Macedonian  national  poetry  collected  by 
Bulgars  : 

Genitive:  Telal  vice  ot  utra  do  mraka, 
Do  tri  furni  vruca  leba. 
Dative  :  Turcin  Kalinki  dumase 

Devojka  se  Bogu  pomolila 
Sve~kru  bela  kosulja. 
Accusative  :  Mozes  li  konja  da  igras 
Tebe  stara  ce  zagubat. 
Imala  majka,  imala 
Jednoga  sina  Stojana. 
Vocative:  Stojane,  sinko  rodjene. 

Tatko  ce  recem,  cerko  ne  velit.  .  .  . 
Braca  ce  recem,  sestro  ne  velet. 
Naverzi  mi,  Bado,  kiten  bel  testemel. 
Ablative  :  Udari  ga  cizma  i  mamuzom. 
Pod  Beligradom. 

Djul,  devojko,  pod  djulom  zaspalo. 
Locative  :  Na  kuci  slava,  vo  kuci  slava. 
Da  se  sutra  na  divanu  nadje. 

1  Examples  from  the  eighteenth-cenhiry  Macedonian   MSS.   Col- 
lection : — 

biti,  gledati,  izgovoriti,  krstiti  se,  ostati,  oprostiti, pricestiti, 
pokajati,  umoriti,   uzeti,  Uniti,  postignuti,  osuditi,  lagati, 
govoriti,  etc.  ("  Spomenik  Srpske  Kraljevske   Akademije," 
xxxi.  p.  13). 
Examples  from  Macedonian  national  poetry  : — 

"  Navest"  cu  ti,  Pejo,  kako  ces  go  "nosi," 
"  OsvojW"  cu  ravnu  Ax'baniju. 
*  Examples  from  the   eighteenth-century  Macedonian  MSS.  Col- 
lection : — 

cineeci,  gledazci,  znaici,  etc. 

Examples  from  Macedonian  National  poetry  : — 

Mene  bolan,  sestro,  gledceci, 
Hi  dvorje,  sestro,  meteeci, 
Uste  taka  zborueci, 
Ruse  kose  pleteeSi. 


198  MACEDONIA 

Some  of  the  tenses  (present,  imperfect,  aorist,  future) 
of  the  verbs  are  not  formed  in  the  same  way  in  Bulgarian 
as  in  Serbian  and  the  Macedonian  dialects. 

The  accent  is  practically  the  same  in  Serbian  as  in 
the  Macedonian  dialects,  whereas  in  Bulgarian  it  is 
quite  different. 

The  vocabulary  of  the  Serbian  language  and  the 
Macedonian  dialects  is  the  same,  the  Bulgarian 
vocabulary  is  quite  different. 

Finally  we  must  mention  one  linguistic  feature  which 
is,  to  all  outward  appearance,  common  to  the  Bulgarian 
language  and  to  the  Macedonian  dialects  and  which 
does  not  exist  in  Serbian.  This  is  the  article,  which 
is  placed  after  the  noun  both  in  Bulgarian  and  in  the 
Macedonian  dialects  (suffix,  post-position  of  the  article). 
It  is  interesting  from  the  point  of  view  of  Indo- 
European  philology,  that  among  the  Balkan  languages 
the  article  exists  only  in  the  Albanian,  Bulgarian,  and 
Roumanian  languages.  Among  the  Serbian  dialects 
the  Macedonian  alone  possess  it.  For  these  reasons 
the  Bulgars  maintain  that  the  suffix  was  developed 
"  independently  of  the  internal  organism  of  the  Bulgarian 
language  "  ;  T  that  consequently  the  Macedonian  article 
is  a  Bulgarian  feature,  and  the  Macedonian  dialects  are 
branches  .of  the  Bulgarian.  In  the  meantime,  the  most 
distinguished  Slav  philologists  are  not  of  the  opinion 
that  the  Bulgarian  suffix  developed  "independently  of 
the  internal  organism  of  the  Bulgarian  language,"  or 
that  it  is  a  Bulgarian  speciality,  fyut  hold  it  to  be  a  relic 
of  the  old  Thraco-Illyrian  languages  which  is  to  be 
found   throughout   the  whole  of  the  Albanian  zone,  in 

1  Lj.  Milietic,  "  0  clanu  u  bngarskom  jeziku  "  ("  The  Article  in  the 

Bulgarian  Language  "),  Zagreb,  1886,  p.  2. 


DIALECTS  OF  THE  SERBIAN  LANGUAGE  199 

Macedonia,  Bulgaria  and  Roumania;  therefore  not 
only  in  Bulgarian,  but  also  in  the  Albanian,  Serbian, 
and  Roumanian  languages,  which  have  no  connection 
with  the  evolution  of  the  Bulgarian  language.1 

The  Bulgarian  and  Macedonian  suffixes  differ  in  kind. 
In  Bulgarian  the  suffix  is  invariably  ti>  (masculine),  ta 
(feminine),  to  (neuter).  In  Macedonian  we  find,  besides 
the  suffixes  Pb,  ta,  to,  also  ni>,  na,  no,  and  v^,  va,  vo, 
which  are  non-existent  in  Bulgarian. 

Finally,  according  to  rule,  the  article  must  be  in- 
variably employed  in  Bulgarian,  whereas  in  the  Mace- 
donian dialects  it  occurs  but  rarely.  In  the  eighteenth- 
century  Macedonian  MSS.  Collection  the  article  is 
used  but  seldom.  In  the  first  105  pages  of  the  collec- 
tion it  is  employed  only  37  times,  and  that  very 
arbitrarily.  Masculine  nouns  never  appear  with  the 
article.  Feminine  and  neuter  nouns  frequently  appear 
with  the  articles  va  and  vo  instead  of  ta  and  to.2  In  27 
poems  from  Macedonia  published  in  1822  by  Vuk 
Karadzic,  the  article  occurs  only  25  times  in  the  whole 
340  verses,  and  then  not  always  after  the  noun,  but  more 
often  after  the  possessive  pronoun  and  the  conjunction 
kao  (as).  In  121  poems  from  Debar  the  article  tj,,  ta,  to 
occurs  only  47  times  ;  Wh,  na,  no  occurs  12  times,  and  vi,t 
va,  vo  22  times.  In  about  150  ballads  from  Macedonia, 
containing  in  all  2,600  verses,  we  find  the  article  106 
times  all  told ;  and  this  number  includes  34  cases  which 
do  not  belong  to  the  Macedo-Bulgarian  variety  but  to 
the  purely  Macedonian  form  of  the  article. 

1  Fr.  Miklosich,  "  Syntaxis,"  p.  127.  "  Die  Slavischen  Elemente 
im  Rumanischen,"  p.  7. 

2  "  Spomenik  SrpBke  Kraljevske  Akademije,"  vol.  xxxi.  p.  12. 


XII 

NATIONAL    CUSTOMS 

Old  Slav  tribal  system  completely  broken  up  by  Old  Bulgarian 
State  system—  Tribal  system  preserved  in  Macedonia  and  other 
Serbian  lands — Hence  the  identity  of  social  conditions  and 
customs— Typically  Serbian  customs  in  Macedonia— The 
"  Slava  " — Bulgarian  campaign  against  "  Slava  "  in  Macedonia — 
"  Preslava  "—Village  "  Slava  "—Custom  of  Pilgrimage  to  Serbian 
monasteries — Pilgrimages  to  the  Monastery  of  Decani 

WHEN  speaking  of  the  difference  between  the 
Bnlgars  and  the  Macedonians,  we  pointed  out 
that  the  Bnlgars  with  their  State  system,  which  they 
brought  with  thern  and  transplanted  among  the  con- 
quered Slavs  in  Bulgaria,  crushed  for  ever  every  trace 
of  the  old  Slav  tribal  organization  there.  The  Slav 
social  system  and  the  customs  which  are  connected  with 
it  could  never  again  be  revived  among  the  Bulgars,  not 
even  during  the  period  when  all  trace  of  an  independent 
state  was  lost  among   them.1 

The  tribal  social  system  survived  for  a  very  long  time 
in  Macedonia  and  in  other  Serbian  lands.  The  nation, 
which  is  identical  in  Macedonia  and  in  other  Serbian 
lands,  and  has  lived  under  identical  social  conditions, 
has  also  preserved  identical  customs.  Already  before 
1861,  two  Macedonians,  the  brothers  Miladinovci, 
described  some  of  the  Macedonian  customs.2     All   their 

1  See  pp.  19-20. 

2  The  brothers  Miladinovci,  "  Bugarske  Narodne  Pesme  "  ("  Bul- 
garian National  Ballads  "),  Agram,  1861,  pp.  515-524. 

200 


NATIONAL    CUSTOMS  201 

descriptions  tally  throughout  with  the  descriptions  of 
customs  in  other  Serbian  countries.  In  1886  the 
Eussian  savant  and  great  authority  in  Macedonia, 
Iv.  S.  Jastrebov,1  published  an  extensive  volume  on 
the  national  customs  of  Macedonia.  His  description 
of  their  customs  connected  with  the  observance  of 
Christmas,  New  Year,  Epiphany,  the  carnival,  St. 
Lazar,  Great  Sunday,  St.  George's  Day,  the  popular 
prayers  for  rain  ("dodole"),  their  marriage,  birth,  and 
funeral  customs,  the  "  Slava,"  etc.,  tally  absolutely  with 
the  descriptions  of  the  same  customs  as  practised  among 
other  Serbs.  In  1907  the  Koyal  Serbian  Academy 
published  a  great  collectanea  of  customs  from  the 
neighbourhood  of  Skoplje,  compiled  by  At.  Petrovic,2 
to  which  the  foregoing  remarks  likewise  apply.  The 
author  is  himself  the  editor  of  a  series  in  the  "  Zbornik  " 
("  Collectanea  ")  of  Serbian  national  customs,  which  is 
published  by  the  Koyal  Serbian  Academy  in  Belgrade. 
One  of  the  MSS.  he  had  prepared  for  publication  before 
the  war  was  a  lengthy  monograph  on  the  customs  of 
the  neighbourhood  of  Gevgeli,  compiled  prior  to  1912 
by  the  schoolmaster  Mr.  St.  Tanovic,  a  native  of  Gevgeli. 
Here  we  have  descriptions  of  customs  day  by  day 
throughout  the  year ;  then  the  customs  connected  with 
birth,  marriage,  and  funerals,  agriculture,  hunting, 
fishing,  cattle  rearing,  trade,  etc.  All,  absolutely  all, 
these  customs  of  the  neighbourhood  of  Gevgeli,  as  a 
whole  and  in  detail,  are  neither  more  nor  less  than  the 
customs   found   also   among  other  parts  of   the  Serbian 

1  Iv.  S.  Jastrebov,  "  Obicaj  i  pjesni  Tureckih  Serbov  "  ("  Customs 
and  Songs  of  the  Turkish  Serbs  "),  Petrograd,  1886  (in  Russian). 

2  "  Srpski  Etnografski  Zbornik  "    ("  Serbian  Ethnographic  Collec- 
tanea "),  vol.  vii.  pp.  338-528. 


202  MACEDONIA 

nation.  But  not  even  a  superficial  view  of  the 
Macedonian  customs  reveals  any  such  similarity  when 
comparing  them  with  Bulgarian  customs. 

It  is  not  an  unimportant  fact  that  the  customs  of  the 
Macedonians  and  the  rest  of  the  Serbs  should  differ  from 
those  of  the  Bulgars.  There  are  many  customs  which 
are  peculiar  to  the  Macedonian  and  other  Serbs,  and  the 
Bulgars  have  nothing  to  resemble  them.  And  precisely 
because  these  customs  have  been  observed  by  the  Serbs 
from  ancient  times,  and  other  nations  do  not  possess 
them,  the  Serbs  have  come  to  consider  some  of  them 
as  distinctive  Serbian  characteristics.  The  best  example 
of  this  is  provided  by  the  custom  of  the  "  Slava  "  (the 
literal  meaning  of  this  word  is  "  celebration,"  but  it 
also  has  the  meaning  of  "renown"  and  "glory"),  or 
"  krsno  ime"  (Christian  name),  "sveti"  (saint,  holy), 
"  sveti  dan  "  (saint  day  or  holy  day),  or  "  dan  svetoga  " 
(the  day  of  the  saint),  as  this  custom  is  variously 
called  by  the  Serbs.  This  is  a  relic  of  the  old  pagan 
ancestor  worship,  which  with  the  transition  to  the 
Christian  faith  was  transformed  into  the  worship  of 
some  Christian  saint  (most  frequently  St.  Nicholas,  St. 
Michael  the  Archangel,  St.  George,  St.  Demetrius,  or 
St.  John).  Every  Serb  has  a  family  patron  saint.  The 
day  dedicated  to  that  saint  is  the  Serbian  "  slava." 
The  "  slava  "  is  attended  by  many  minor  customs,  which 
are  identical  with  all  Serbs.  According  to  the  unani-- 
mous  opinion  of  all  scientific  authorities,  both  Serbian  and 
foreigQ,  who  have  studied  the  customs  of  the  "  slava," 
it  is  an  exclusively  Serbian  custom.1  The  Serbs  have 
a  proverb  :  "  Gde  je  slava,  tu  je  Srbin  "  ("  Where  there 

1  The  "  slava  "  is  unknown  among  the  neighbouring   Croats  and 
Bulgars  (C.  Jirecek.  "  Geschichte  der  Serben,"  i.  p.  181). 


NATIONAL   CUSTOMS  203 

is  'slava,'  there  is  the  Serb").  The  "  slava  "  is  looked 
upon  as  a  sacred  custom  ;  it  is  handed  down  from  father 
to  son  as  a  precious  inheritance,  and  disappears  only  with 
the  disappearance  of  the  family  itself.  All  Serbs  who 
worship  the  same  saint  are  considered  akin.  The 
"slava"  is  so  distinctly  a  Serbian  custom  that  even 
the  Catholic  Serbs  observe  it.  Even  the  Mohammedan 
Serbs,  who  have  ceased  to  observe  "  slava  "  for  religious 
reasons,  still  know  their  "  slava  "  and  bestow  gifts  upon 
Christian  Churches  on  that  day.  Therefore  it  may  be 
with  good  reason  assumed  that  the  observance  of  "  slava" 
marks  the  frontiers  of  the   Serbian  nation. 

All  Macedonians  keep  "  slava."  The  Bulgars  do  not. 
In  describing  the  national  customs  in  Macedonia,  Iv.  S. 
Jastrebov,  for  many  years  Russian  Consul  in  Macedonia, 
says  :  "  '  Slava '  is  observed  by  the  Serbs  not  only  in 
Serbia,  Austria,  Hungary,  Bosnia,  Hercegovina,  Monte- 
negro, Kosovo,  Morava  and  the  Prizren  district,  but 
also,  in  the  counties  of  Skoplje,  Veles,  Prilep,  Bitolj, 
and  Ochrida  in  exactly  the  same  way  as  it  is  celebrated 
in  the  counties  of  Debar  and  Tetovo."1  Moreover,  the 
"  slava  "  is  designated  by  the  same  names  in  Macedonia 
as  in  other  Serbian  countries  ("  slava,"  "  krsno  hue," 
"sveti,"  "sveti  dan,"  "dan  svetoga,"  "sluzba").2  There, 
too,  it  is  kept  by  everybody.  Many  detailed  descrip- 
tions of  the  "slava"  in  Macedonia  have  appeared  on 
various  occasions.3     All  the  details  attending  the  "slava" 

1  Iv.  S.  Jastrebov,  "Obicaj  i  pjesni  Tureckih  Serbov"  ("Customs 
and  Songs  of  the  Turkish  Serbs"),  p.  2. 

2  Ibid.,  p.  1. 

3  Ibid.,  pp.  1-22.  S.  Tomic,  il  Naselja  Srpskih  Zemalja  "  ("  Settle- 
ments of  the  Serbian  Lands"),  vol.  iii.  pp.  467-469.  At.  Petrovic, 
"  Srpski  Etnografski  Zbornik  "  ("  Serbian  Ethnographic  Collectanea  "), 
vol.  vii.  pp.  436-138.     J.  H.  Vasiljevic,  "  Prilep,"  pp.  160-167. 


204  MACEDONIA 

in  Macedonia  are  the  same  as  the  details  attending  it 
in  other  Serbian  countries.  In  Macedonia,  too,  it  is 
a  sacred  custom,  which  is  not  dropped  under  any 
circumstances.  The  inhabitants  of  Skoplje  Crna  Gora 
believe  that  "whoever  fails  to  keep  'slava'  one  year, 
will  not  live  to  see  next  year's." *  There,  too,  the 
"  slava  "  is  handed  down  as  a  sacred  heritage  from  father 
to  son  until  the  family  becomes  extinct.  But  as  a 
matter  of  fact  the  celebration  of  " 'slava "  outlasts 
even  the  family.  A  man  who  has  no  descendants  will 
see  to  it  that  his  "slava"  does  not  become  extinct 
with  his  death.  A  wealthy  but  childless  peasant  of 
the  village  of  Cucar  in  the  Skoplje  Crna  Gora  left  all 
his  property  to  a  neighbour  on  condition  that  he 
would  keep  his  "slava"  as  well  as  his  own,  and  would 
celebrate  it  every  year.2  Another  important  fact  is 
that  instead  of  worshipping  the  Christian  saints  common 
to  all  the  Churches,  the  Macedonians,  like  the  Serbs 
of  other  countries,  frequently  give  preference  to  Serbs 
who  have  been  canonized,  such  as  St.  Simeon  Mirotocivi 
(Stephan  Nemanja,  Grand  Zupan  of  Serbia,  February 
13th),  St.  Sava  (Sava  Nemanjic,  son  of  Stephan  Nemanja, 
first  Archbishop  of  Serbia,  January  14th),  St.  Stephan 
Decanski  (November  11th),  etc.  Sometimes  an  entire 
village  will  celebrate  the  same  Serbian  patron  saint. 
For  the  sake  of  example  we  will  merely  quote  the 
case  of  the  village  of  Radibuz,  between  Kumanovo  and 
Palanka,  where  everybody  celebrates  St.  Sava's  Day. 

Finally,  I  will  mention  that  the  earliest  record  of  the 
Serbian  "slava"  is  from  Macedonia.  The  Greek 
historian  Skylitzes  has  given  us  a  description  of  the 
"slava"    of    the    Serbian    vojvode    Ivac    by   the    Lake 

1  S.  Tomic,  "  Naselja,  etc.,"  vol.  iii.  p.  469.  2  Ibid.,  p.  469. 


NATIONAL   CUSTOMS  205 

of  Ochrida,  as  early  as  1018.  The  vojvode  Ivac 
worshipped  the  virgin  Mary  on  August  15th.  It  is 
interesting  to  note  that  the  description  of  the  "Slava," 
as  kept  by  the  vojvode  Ivac  and  observed  by  Skylitzes, 
shows  the  same  features  which  still  distinguish  the 
customs  incidental  to  the  "slava."1 

Of  all  Serbian  customs  in  Macedonia  we  have  laid 
special  stress  upon  the  "slava,"  because  it  is  a  typically 
Serbian  custom.  Moreover,  the  Bulgars  have  attached 
special  significance  to  the  "  slava."  No  sooner  had 
they  begun  their  agitation  in  Macedonia  than  they  con- 
sidered it  their  first  duty  to  stamp  out  this  Serbian 
custom.  To  this  end  they  had  recourse  to  various 
expedients.  At  first  their  agents,  priests,  and  school- 
masters told  the  populace  that  the  "  slava "  was  a 
pagan  custom,  that  it  was  not  sanctioned  by  the 
Church,  and  that  it  ought  therefore  to  be  discontinued.2 
Later  on  they  resorted  to  threats,  and  the  malediction 
of  the  Church  upon  those  who  refused  to  give  up 
the  "  slava."  Finally,  when  the  comitadji  action  began, 
recalcitrants  were  at  first  given  strict  warning,  then 
fined,  and  finally  put  to  death.  The  archives  of  the 
Serbian  Ministry  of  the  Interior  contain  official  proofs 
in  every  case  of  persecution  in  connection  with  the 
keeping  of  "  slava  "  in  Macedonia. 

But  all  this  was  of  no  avail.  The  Serbs  have  the 
proverb:  "  Bolje  da  selo  propadne,  nego  n  selu  obi6aj  " 
("  Better  the  ruin  of  the  village,  than  of  the  village 
customs").     The  people  faithfully  continued  to  celebrate 

1  B.  Prokic :  "Vojvoda  Ivac,  najstariji  istorijski  spomen  o  slavi  u 
Makedoniji" — ("Vojvoda  Ivac,  Earliest  Historical  Record  of  the  Slava 
in  Macedonia"),  "  Brastvo,"  vols,  ix.-x.,  Belgrade,  1902,  pp.  5,  etc. 

-  Iv.  S.  Jastrebov,  "  Obicaj,  etc.,"  p.  3,  "  Izvjestija  Slavjanskog 
Blagotvorifeelnog  Obstetva,"  1887,  Nos.  11-12,  p.  556. 


206  MACEDONIA 

their  "  slava  "  in  Macedonia,  and  preserved  it  jealously 
as  a  precious  inheritance. 

Another  typically  Serbian  custom  is  the  keeping  of 
"  Preslava."  The  customs  of  the  "  preslava  "  are  the  same 
as  those  of  the  "  slava,"  only  they  are  fewer  in  number 
and  less  complicated.  Every  Serb  keeps  "preslava "as 
well  as  "  slava."  In  Macedonia,  too,  "preslava"  is  kept 
by  whole  towns  and  villages.1  The  Bulgars  have  nothing 
remotely  like  it. 

In  the  last  place  I  must  also  mention  the  village 
(seoska)  "  slava."  This  festival  is  a  relic  from  the  times 
when  the  entire  settlement  of  kinsfolk  worshipped  the 
common  god  and  eventually  the  patron  saint.  It  consists 
in  the  meeting  in  prayer  of  the  whole  village,  a  common 
banquet,  festivity,  and  dance  at  a  special  spot  in  the 
village.  This  custom  is  by  no  means  to  be  confused 
with  the  village  gatherings  at  church  festivals  and  the 
processions  common  all  over  Europe.  The  "village 
slava "  is  an  exclusively  Serbian  custom,  common  to 
all  Serbs  and  consequently  also  to  the  Macedonians. 
It  is  really  the  "  slava,"  only  extended  to  the  entire 
village.2  The  Bulgars  do  not  possess  this  custom 
either. 

We  could  quote  several  other  customs  which  the 
Macedonians  share  with  all  other  Serbs,  but  I  think 
this  ought  to  suffice.  In  the  meantime  I  will  quote  one 
more  custom,  because  it  affords  convincing  proof  of  the 
national  identity  of  the  Macedonian  Serbs  with  those  of 
other  countries.  All  Serbs,  no  matter  where  they  live, 
pay  great  respect  to  their  monasteries,  more  especially 

'  Iv.  S.  Jastrebov,  "  Obicaj,"  pp.  22-23. 

8  S.  Tomic\  "  Naselja,  etc.,"  vol.   iii.  p.  467.     J.  H.  Vasiljevid, 
••  Prilep,"  p.  167. 


NATIONAL   CUSTOMS  207 

to  those  Serbian  monasteries  which  played  a  prominent 

part  in  the  culture  and  politics  of  Serbia's  past,  or  where 

lie  buried  the  great  and  worthy  men  who  have  since  been 

canonized  by  the  Serbian  Church.     To  these  monasteries 

the  Serbian  people  repair  even  from  very  great  distances. 

Sometimes  it  is  a  pilgrimage  of  ten  days'  journey.     In 

olden  times  these  pilgrimages  to  the  Serbian  monasteries 

took  place  more  frequently  than  now.     Every  one  who 

was  able  considered  it  a  patriotic  duty  to  visit  them  at 

least  once  in  his  life,  to  express  his  respect  and  to  present 

them  with  gifts.     Thus  Serbs  from  all  Serbian  lands  used" 

to  go  on  pilgrimage   to   the   Monastery  of  Hilendar  on 

Mount  Athos,  the  oldest  of  the  Serbian  monasteries  and 

the  earliest  centre  of  Serbian  literature  and  civilization. 

Another  spot,  visited  particularly  by  Serbs  from  Serbia, 

Bosnia,  Hercegovina,  Vidin,  and  the    Sofia  counties   is 

the  Monastery  of  Studenica,  where  St.  Stephan  Nemanja 

and  St.  Stephan  Prvovencani  lie  buried.    The  monasteries 

in  Srem,  where  rest  the  bones  of  Tsar  Uros,  Prince  Lazar, 

Stephan  Stiljanovi6,  and  other  Serbian  saints,  are  favourite 

places  of  pilgrimage  for  the  Serbs  of  all  the  Serbian  lands 

under  Austria.     In  the  same  manner  the  Serbian  people 

used   to   go   on   pilgrimage   to   the   Monastery   of    Bilo, 

where  the   body  of    St.  John   Kilski    is   preserved,   one 

of    the    earliest    preachers    of    Christianity    among    the 

Serbs,  and   to    the   Monastery   of  De'cani,   where   rests 

that  of  Stephan  De6anski.     This  pious  custom  prevails 

also  in    Macedonia.     The   Macedonians,   too,   repair  to 

the   monasteries  to   worship   the   relics   there,  and  that 

in  the  same  monasteries  as  other  Serbs.     And  because 

they  were  the  nearest  at  hand,  the  Macedonians  most 

frequently  went  to  the  Monasteries  of  Decani,  Hilendar, 

Rilo,  and  the  Patriarchal  Monastery  of  Ipek. 


208  MACEDONIA 

The  departure  for  the  monasteries  was  a  very  solemn 
custom  in  Macedonia.  Every  year,  on  appointed  days, 
from  fifty  to  a  hundred  men  from  certain  villages  would 
repair  to  one  or  other  of  the  Serbian  monasteries. 
Besides  their  own  gifts,  they  carried  also  the  gifts  of 
their  kinsfolk,  neighbours,  fellow  townsmen,  and  guild. 
On  the  appointed  day  the  pilgrims,  arrayed  in  their 
Sunday  clothes,  first  went  to  the  church  to  pray.  After 
prayer  they  set  forth,  accompanied  by  the  priests  in  full 
canonicals,  bearing  crosses  and  icons,  and  by  the  populace. 
At  the  gates  or  confines  of  the  town  they  took  leave  and 
went  on  their  way.  Their  reception  at  the  monastery 
was  an  equally  solemn  affair.  The  monks  in  canonicals, 
with  crosses  and  icons,  came  out  to  meet  them.  At  the 
place  of  meeting  a  short  prayer  was  said,  and  then, 
singing  hymns,  the  procession  went  on  to  the  monastery. 
On  the  following  day  a  solemn  service  was  held,  after 
which  the  pilgrims  would  kiss  the  relics  of  the  Serbian 
kings  and  saints  preserved  in  the  monastery  and  present 
their  gifts.  The  departure  from  the  monastery  and  the 
reception  of  the  pilgrims  on  their  return  home  were 
likewise  solemn  occasions.  The  Bulgars,  too,  have  their 
holy  places  and  their  relics,  but  the  Macedonians  know 
nothing  about  them. 

Of  all  monasteries  the  Macedonians  went  most  fre- 
quently to  Decani,  where  is  the  tomb  of  the  Serbian  king 
Stephan  Decanski  (1321-1331).  This  is  the  very  king  of 
Serbia  who  defeated  the  Bulgars  at  VelbUzd  in  1330 
and  so  decided  the  fate  of  Macedonia  in  favour  of  Serbia 
for  the  rest  of  the  Middle  Ages.  Stephan  De6anski  is 
the  most  popular  saint  in  Macedonia.  He  is  never  called 
anything  else  there  but  the  "Holy  King."  Before  the 
Bulgarian  propaganda  made  its  appearance  in  Macedonia, 


NATIONAL   CUSTOMS  209 

every  well-to-do  Macedonian  used  to  consider  it  a  reli- 
gious and  patriotic  duty  to  go  at  least  once  in  his  life  to 
worship  at  the  tomb  of  the  Holy  King  and  to  bear 
gifts  to  his  monastery.  And  in  every  house  in  Macedonia 
could  be  seen  the  icon  of  the  Holy  King,  beside  that  of 
the  patron  saint  of  the  house. 

This  custom  of  going  on  pilgrimage  to  Serbian 
monasteries  shows  the  purely  Serbian  feeling  of  the 
Macedonians.  The  special  respect  for  Stephan  Decanski, 
who  in  1330  defended  Macedonia  from  a  Bulgarian 
invasion,  shows  how  strong  that  feeling  is. 


15 


XIII 

POPULAR   TRADITION 

Beauty  and  wealth  of  Serbian  popular  tradition — Ethnographic 
element  and  historic  memories  enshrined  in  it — Macedonia 
considered  a  Serbian  country  by  non-Macedonian  Serbian 
popular  tradition — National  tradition  of  Macedonia  shows 
a  purely  Serbian  character — Example  from  beginning  of 
eighteenth  century — Examples  from  the  nineteenth  century 
— Folk  poetry  in  Macedonia  purely  Serbian — Bulgarian 
collections  of  Macedonian  national  poetry  reveal  purely 
Serbian  characters  in  spite  of  touching  and  editing — 
Reference  to  none  but  Serbian  historic  events,  places,  and 
characters — No  reference  to  Bulgarian  historic  events,  places, 
and  characters — Serbian  monasteries  famous  in  Macedonian 
folk  poetry — Serbian  names  in  Macedonian  poetry — Language 
in  Macedonian  poetry  pure  Serbian — According  to  national 
tradition  the  liberation  and  unification  of  all  Serbia  is  bound 
up  with  Macedonia 

IT  has  long  Keen  a  matter  of  general  knowledge 
that  Serbian  popular  and  national  tradition  is 
exceptionally  rich  and  beautiful.  It  is  also  generally 
recognized  that  Vuk  St.  Karadzic  (1787-1864),  the  first 
collector  of  Serbian  national  traditions,  was  honest  and 
expert  in  his  work.  This  is  what  earned  for  Serbian 
popular  tradition  such  great  European  renown  at  the 
beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century,  and  won  for 
its  collector  the  respect  and  friendship  of  such  great 
men  as  Goethe,  Grimm,  Charles  Nodier,  Prosper 
Merimee,  John  Bowring,  Walter  Scott,  etc.  "  The 
Serbs    have    a    right    to    be    proud   of    their    nationa 

910 


POPULAR   TRADITION  211 

poems,  but  they  ought  to  be  even  more  proud  of  their 
Vuk  St.  Karadzic,"  says  the  Bulgarian  savant,  Dr. 
Iv.  Sismanov.1 

What  is  less  known  is  that  Serbian  popular  and 
national  tradition  teems  with  Serbian  ethnographic 
elements  and  Serbian  historic  memories.  It  is  a  mine 
of  information  on  the  subject  of  Serbian  national  customs, 
culture,  and  national  self-revelation  ;  it  is  also  full  of 
references  to  historic  events  in  Serbia's  past,  her  historic 
spots  and  personages.  If  any  one  were  to  conceive  the 
idea  of  delimiting  the  frontiers  of  the  Serbian  nation 
on  the  basis  of  the  area  over  which  Serbian  popular 
and  national  tradition  extends,  he  would  be  well  on  the 
side  of  truth. 

Serbian  national  ballads  from  the  Serbian  lands  out- 
side Macedonia  always  refer  to  the  latter  as  a  Serbian 
land.  A  national  ballad  from  Srem,  taken  down  by 
Vuk  St.  Karadzic  at  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth 
century,  sings  of  the  cities,  princes,  and  vojvodes  of  the 
Middle  Ages.  Apart  from  its  exceptional  beauty,  the 
distinguishing  feature  of  this  ballad  is  that  in  it  a  Serb 
from  Srem,  giving  voice  to  the  general  conviction  of 
the  Serbian  nation  as  to  its  extent,  includes  Macedonia 
within  the  Serbian  national  frontiers.  The  ballad 
mentions  the  following  cities,  princes,  and  vojvodes  in 
Macedonia ;  thus  : — 

In  Kratovo  the  white-walled  city 
Had  his  dwelling  Kratovac  Radonja ; 
In  the  shining  town  of  Kumanovo 
Had  his  dwelling  Kostadin  the  Bey ; 


1  "  Sbornik  za  narodni  umotvorenia  nauka  i  kniznina  "  ("  Collection 
of  Folk-lore,  Science  and  Literature"),  i.,  Sofia,  1889,  p.  15  (in 
Bulgarian). 


212  MACEDONIA 

And  in  Solun  (Salonica)  the  white-walled  city 
Had  his  dwelling  the  vojvode  Dojcin  ; 
But  in  Prilcp  the  white-walled  city 
There  had  Marko  Kraljevic  his  dwelling. 

Hearken  thou,  sister  Marghita,  our  vojvodos  were  they; 

All  of  them  were  among  us,  and  all  have  passed  away. 

Some  died  in  then  beds,  sister,  and  some  in  battle  were  slain; 

To-day  doth  Rajko  alone  of  them  in  Srijem  remain 

Like  a  dry  tree  in  the  mountain  grove.  ..." 

Various  other  national  ballads  collected  outside  Mace- 
donia mention  every  Macedonian  city  and  site  of 
importance  as  well  as  all  the  historic  personage^ 
connected  with  Macedonia.  They  are,  in  fact,  full 
of  references  to  Skoplje,  Kratovo,  Kumanovo,  Ochrida, 
Kostur,  Bitolj,  Salonica,  Serez,  the  Kivers  Vardar  and 
Marica,  and  to  Tsar  Stephan  (Du§an),  King  Vukasin, 
Ugljesa,  King  Marko  and  his  brothers,  Mina  of  Kostur, 
Bogdan,  the  Dejanovici,  Momcilo,  etc.  Nay,  more  than 
this,  these  are  the  most  important  spots  and  the  most 
favourite  characters  in  Serbian  national  poetry. 

Serbian  national  ballads  glory  in  the  Serbian  past 
in  Macedonia  and  in  all  the  Serbian  memories  there. 
In  a  ballad  published  for  the  first  time  in  1826  by  Vuk 
S.  Karadzic,2  we  are  told  how  one  day  two  of  the  best- 
known  heroes  in  Serbian  romance,  Marko  Kraljevic  and 
Milos  Obilic,  were  out  riding  on  Mount  Miroc.  Then 
Marko  asked  Milo§  to  sing  to  him  and  Milos  granted 
his  request.  The  national  ballads  lavish  special  praise 
upon  the  singing  of  Milos  and  upon  his  beautiful  voice. 
So  that  the  matter  of  the  song  might  be  worthy  of 
the  singing,  the  ballad-maker  could  think   of  no  better 

1  Vuk  St.  Karadzic,  "  Srpske  narodne  pesme  "  ("  Serbian  National 
Ballads"),  vol.  iii.,  Belgrade,  1894,  pp.  54-55. 

2  "  Danica"  for  1826,  Vienna,  1826,  pp.  207-212. 


POPULAR   TRADITION  213 

subject    than    the    following   "  beautiful    song,"    as    he 
calls  it : — 

Of  our  elders  and  our  betters 
That  held  the  kingdom  long, 
In  famous  Macedonia, 
And  built  the  sacred  shrines. 

The  Serbian  ballads  strictly  differentiate  between  the 
people  of  Serbia  and  Macedonia — who  are  Serbs — and 
the  people  of  Bulgaria — who  are  not.  Speaking  of  the 
Decani  Church  in  the  ballad  of  the  building  of  the 
Monastery  of  Decani  we  find  the  following  verse : — 

In  it  shall  the  liturgy  be  chanted, 
There  the  Serbian  nation  will  be  gathered, 
From  all  Serbia  and  Macedonia, 
And  the  sister  nation  from  Bulgaria.1 

Serbian  national  poetry  shows  us  the  Macedonian 
heroes  with  the  same  customs  as  those  observed  by 
other  Serbs.  We  have  already  said  that  the  most 
distinctive  Serbian  custom  is  the  "  slava."  Even  as 
the  ballads  tell  us  that  Tsar  Dusan  and  Prince  Lazar 
kept  their  "  slavas,"  so  we  are  told  that 

Slava  keepeth  Kraljevic  Marko, 
Kept  his  slava  on  St.  George's  Day ; 
Many  strangers  came  to  feast  with  Marko, 
Priests  two  hundred,  holy  monks  three  hundred, 
And  beside  them  twelve  Serbian  bishops."  ~ 

Constantine  Dejanovic,3  too,  is  shown  celebrating  his 
"  slava,"  and  so  are  other  Macedonian  heroes,  of  the 
national  ballads. 

1  S.  Ristic,  "  Decanski  spomenici  "  ("Decani  Records  "),  Belgrade, 
1864,  p.  71. 

3  V.  S.  Karadzic,  "  Srpske  narodne  pesme "  ("Serbian  National 
Ballads"),  vol.  ii.,  Vienna,  p.  215. 

3  Ibid.,  p.  355. 


214  MACEDONIA 

But  more  than  that  of  other  Serbian  lands,  popular 
tradition  in  Macedonia  itself  reveals  the  Serbian  char- 
acter of  Macedonia.  Popular  tradition  in  Macedonia, 
in  fact,  has  never  known  her  to  be  anything  else  but 
Serbian. 

In  1704,  Jerotije  Racanin,  a  monk  of  Kakovica  near 
Belgrade,  travelled  to  Jerusalem.     On  his  way  through 
Macedonia  he  made  notes  of  what  he  learnt  about  local 
tradition  from  the  inhabitants.     All  he  noted  down  goes 
to  show  that  at  that  time  only  Serbian  memories  survived 
among  the  natives.     A  day's  walk  south  of  Vranja  the 
peasants  showed  him  the  site  where  "in  the  days  of  the 
Serbian  rule  there  was  a  big  town  "  with  forty  churches, 
so  that  the  Turks  still  call  it  Krk-klisa  (forty  churches). 
Not   far   from    there    is    another   spot   called    Satorista 
(the  place  of  the  sator  =  tents),  where  Marko  Kraljevic, 
Milos  Obilic,  Eelja  OmuSevic,  and  Novak  Debelie  pitched 
their  tents.     All   these   heroes   are    Serbian    characters. 
From   there   RaSanin   went   to   Gorobinci   in    the   Ov6e 
Polje,  where  he  spent   the  night.     The   peasants  there 
showed  him  the  ruins  of  old  cities  and  churches  "which 
once  upon  a   time  the   Serbs  had  built,  but  which  are 
now  all  deserted."     They  also  told    him   that  when  the 
Serbs  first   settled   in   these   lands  "  they  came  first  to 
the   Ovce   Polje   and    there   built    a    threshing-floor    of 
copper,  because  they  did   not   know  how   to   thresh   on 
the    ground."     Of    the   Demir   Kapija   on    the   Vardar, 
Racanin  says  that  the  people  called  it  "  Kraljevc  Marko's 
Demir  Kapija."  * 

Popular  traditions  collected  in  Macedonia  during  the 
nineteenth  century  reveal  the  Serbian  character  of   the 
country  still  more  clearly.     Macedonia  is  specially  rich 
1  "  Glasnik  Srpskog  Ucenog  Drustva,"  vol.  xxii.  pp.  228-230. 


POPULAR   TRADITION  215 

in  traditions  of  those  Serbian  historic  characters  who 
at  one  time  lived  in  Macedonia,  such  as  King  Milutin, 
Stephan  Decanski,  Tsar  Dusan,  Kralievic  Marko,1  etc. 
But  there  are  also  many  persons  in  Serbian  history  who 
never  had  any  conneetion  at  all  with  Macedonia  and 
whose  memory  nevertheless  lives  on  in  Macedonian 
tradition,  such  as  St.  Stephan  Nemanja  and  St.  Sava. 
Travelling  through  Macedonia  about  Easter-time,  1914, 
I  was  told  by  the  natives  that  the  village  of  Nemanjica, 
near  Istip,  was  called  after  Stephan  Nemanja.  Con- 
cerning the  villages  of  BreSko  and  Bojilovce  in  the 
Zegligovo  district,  I  made  a  note  of  the  local  tradition 
that  St.  Sava  had  stayed  there  once  and  that  he  cursed 
the  former  and  blessed  the  later. 

Better  still  than  in  the  prose  tradition  is  the  Serbian 
character  of  the  country  shown  in  the  poetic  tradition 
of  Macedonia.  Already  in  1822  Vuk  S.  Karadzic  said  of 
the  ballads  which  he  took  down  from  two  merchants 
of  Kazlog  that  they  were  Serbian  poetry.  The  Russian 
scholar  V.  Grigorovic  also  collected  national  ballads 
during  his  travels  in  Macedonia  in  1844.  Although  an 
enthusiastic  Bulgarophile,  and  accompanied  at  the  time 
by  Bulgars,  he  could  say  nothing  more  of  the  national 
ballads  of  Macedonia  that  could  be  turned  to  Bulgaria's 
advantage  but  that  they  were  translations  or  imitations 
of  Serbian  ballads.2  When  the  Bulgar  P.  Draganov, 
professor  at  the  Bulgarian  Lycee  in  Salonica,  collected 
national  ballads  in  Macedonia,  he  was  charmed  by  their 

1  Brothers  Miladinovci,  "Bugarske  Narodne  Pesnie,"  pp.  527-528. 
S.  Tomic,  "  Naselja,"  vol.  iii.  pp.  430-468.  Iv.  Ivanic,  "  Macedonia  i 
Macedonci,"  vol.  ii.  pp.  166-170.  F.  H.  Vasiljevid,  "  Prilep,"  p.  61.  St. 
Novakovi6,  "  Balkanska  Pitanja  "  ("The  Balkan  Question"),  p.  224. 

'  V.  Jagic,  "  Enciklopaedija  Slavjanskoj  filologiji  "  ("  Encyclopedia 
of  Slav  Philology"),  i.,  Petrograd,  1910,  p.  533  (in  Russian). 


216  MACEDONIA 

Serbian  character  and  could  not  refrain  from  pointing 
out  that  one  cannot  fail  to  be  struck  by  the  presence 
of  many  Serbian  elements' in  the  national  poems  of 
Macedonia.1  Any  collection  of  Macedonian  national 
ballads  reveals  at  a  glance  that  the  subjects  of 
Macedonian  national  poetry  are  the  Serbian  past, 
Serbian  historic  spots  and  characters.  The  Bulgars 
are  never  mentioned  in  it.  Whoever  knows  the 
Serbian  national  ballads  will  have  noticed  that  there 
is  no  difference  at  all  between  the  Macedonian  ballads 
and  those  collected  in  other  Serbian  countries. 

Although  the  Serbian  collectors  of  national  ballads 
were  both  accurate  and  honest  in  their  work,  we  shall 
purposely  abstain  from  making  use  of  their  collection 
in  proving  our  contention  that  the  national  poetry  of 
Macedonia  is  simply  Serbian.  We  shall  also  refrain  from 
using  the  excellent  collection  of  national  ballads  from 
Macedonia  compiled  by  that  great  authority  on  Mace- 
donia, Iv.  S.  Jastrebov,  who  was  for  many  years  Consul 
there  and  is  a  scholar  of  recognized  standing.  The 
Bulgars  have  cast  doubts  upon  the  correctness  and 
authentic  value  of  all  collections  of  Macedonian  ballads 
not  made  by  one  of  themselves.  Nevertheless,  I  shall 
base  my  proof  solely  upon  such  collections  of  Mace- 
donian songs  and  ballads  as  have  been  compiled  by 
Bulgarian  collectors.  My  reasons  for  so  doing  are, 
firstly,  that  I  wish  to  disarm  criticism,  even  if  it  were 
to  come  from  Bulgarian  quarters,  and,  secondly,  that 
evidence  culled  from  Bulgarian  collections  is  alread\r 
sufficient  to  prove  the  purely  Serbian  character  of 
Macedonian  folk-poetry. 

'  P.  Draganov,  "  Makedonsko-Slavjanski  Sbornik  "("  Macedonian 
Slav  Collection"),  i.,  Petrograd,  1894,  p.  viii  (in  Russian). 


POPULAR   TRADITION  217 

Speaking  of  the  Bulgarian  collections  of  national 
ballads  from  Macedonia,  it  is  necessary  to  make  a  few 
important  preliminary  remarks.  In  the  first  place,  the 
collections  of  popular  tradition  in  Macedonia  was 
entrusted  to  half-educated  Bulgarian  teachers,  priests, 
and  agents.  Moreover,  the  Bulgars  were  in  a  desperate 
hurry  to  lay  before  the  world  as  many  Macedonian 
ballads  as  possible  under  the  name  of  Bulgarian  ballads, 
and  the  work  done  was  hurried  and  unequal.  It  has 
already  been  pointed  out  long  ago  that  the  Bulgars  in 
their  zeal  for  Macedonia  actually  collected  more  ballads 
from  Macedonia  than  from  the  whole  of  Bulgaria  and 
all  the  Bulgarian  countries  put  together.1  And  on  this 
scale  the  Bulgars  have  been  working  ever  since.  Finally 
they  deemed  it  necessary  to  press  even  the  national 
tradition  of  Macedonia  into  the  service  of  their  political 
aspirations ;  and  just  as  they  ruthlessly  persecuted  the 
Serbian  element  and  destroyed  all  Serbian  records  in 
Macedonia,  so  they  endeavoured  to  purge  her  tradition 
of  all  that  could  recall  the  Serbs.  But  as  without  this 
element  there  simply  would  have  been  no  tradition,  they 
found  themselves  compelled  either  to  invent  a  new 
tradition  or  touch  up  and  edit  that  one  already  in 
existence  until  it  should  no  longer  too  obviously  betray 
its  Serbian  origin.  We  have  already  had  occasion  to 
mention  to  what  lengths  Stephan  Verkovic  went  in  his 
"  Veda  Slovenska,"  in  fakiug  popular  tradition  and 
folk-lore  in  Macedonia.2  In  his  review  of  Pipin  and 
Spasovic's  "  Bulgarian  Literature,"  Dr.  V.  Jagic,  Pro- 
fessor of  Slavistic  at  the  University  of  Vienna  and  the 

1  St.  Protic,  "0  Makedoniji  "  ("  Concerning  Macedonia  "),  Belgrade, 
1886,  p.  86. 
*  See  pp.  128-129, 


218  MACEDONIA 

greatest  living  Slavist,  gives  the  following  criticism  of 
the  work  done  by  the  Bulgarian  collectors  of  popular 
tradition  :  "  A  record  of  the  new  and  newest  Bulgarian 
literature  is  not  so  much  in  a  position  to  reveal  products 
of  real  literature  as  sundry  patriotic  and  intellectual 
achievements  (establishment  of  schools,  publication  of 
school  books)  and  battles  for  the  emancipation  of  the 
Bulgarian  Church  from  the  Greek  influence.  .  .  .  The 
labour  devoted  to  collection  in  the  field  of  national 
ballad  poetry  approaches  most  nearly  to  the  standard  of 
real  literature.  Unfortunately  precisely  this  branch  of 
literary  activity  includes  a  curious  fraud  ("  ein  rnerk- 
wiirdiger  Schwindel"),  whereby  fantastic  speculations  are 
bolstered  up  with  undeniable  national  treasures.  The 
comment  passed  by  the  authors  (Pipin  and  Spasovic) 
upon  the  conduct  of  Bakovski  and  Verkovic  is  fully 
deserved.  May  their  example  not  only  find  no  imitation, 
but  speedy  correction  in  accordance  with  truth  on  the 
part  of  the  Bulgars  themselves." x  Even  among  the 
Bulgars  there  were  some  sober-minded  scholars  who 
recognized  the  valuelessness  of  such  work  in  the 
collection  of  popular  tradition.  Praising  Vuk  S. 
Karadzic,  the  collector  of  the  Serbian  ballads,  Professor 
Iv.  Sismanov  of  the  University  of  Sofia  says  :  "  Our 
collectors  are  far  from  being  Vuk  Karadzic."2 

But  no  warning  availed  to  prevent  the  Bulgars  from 
pressing  Macedonian  popular  tradition  into  the  service 
of  their  political  aspirations.  How  skilfully  they  went 
to  work  in  this  may  be  seen  from  the  following  example. 

■  V.  Jagic,  "Archiv  fur  Slavische  Philologie,"  vol.  iv.,  1880, 
pp.  471-472. 

1  Dr.  Iv.  D.  Sismanov,  "  Znacenije  i  zadaca  na  nasata  etnografia  " — 
"  Importance  and  Task  of  our  Ethnographic"  ("  Sbornik  za  narodni 
umotvorenia,"  i.,  1889,  p.  15). 


POPULAR   TRADITION  219 

In  1889  the  Bulgarian  Ministry  of  Education  began  the 
publication  in  Sofia  of  the  "  Sbornik  za  narodni 
umotvorenia"  ("Collection  of  Folk-lore").  This  "Sbor- 
nik "  gave  very  much  of  the  national  tradition,  mostly 
from  Macedonia.  At  first  the  editors,  although  very 
cautiously,  yet  allowed  some  features  of  Macedonian 
tradition  which  clearly  betrayed  its  Serbian  origin  to 
be  included  in  the  "  Sbornik." ■  In  1894  a  collection 
of  national  ballads  from  Macedonia,  made  by  P. 
Draganov,  Professor  at  the  Bulgaria  Lycee  in  Salonica, 
was  published  in  Petrograd.2  This  collection  included 
a  large  number  of  ballads  of  Serbian  historic  charac- 
ters not  specifically  Macedonian.  K.  Sapkarov  wrote  a 
scathing  review  of  this  collection,  and  attacked  Draganov 
with  the  whole  fury  of  an  outraged  Bulgarian  patriot 
for  publishing  ballads  of  characters  from  Serbian  history; 
he  also  endeavoured  to  prove  that  Macedonia  possesses 
no  traditions  of  the  Serbian  past.3  From  that  time 
the  "Sbornik"  ceased  to  contain  Macedonian  traditions 
concerning  Serbian  characters  and  events,  excepting 
only  those  characters  who  had  spent  their  lives  in 
Macedonia  and  such  events  as  had  taken  place  on  her 
soil  ! 

In  spite  of  all  precautions,  however,  even  in  these 
Bulgarian  collections  the  Macedonian  ballads  have 
remained  Serbian.  We  shall  use  them  simply  to  show 
the  identity  of  popular  tradition  in  Macedonia  with  that 
of  other  Serbian  lands.     We  have  before  us  three  indis- 

'  One  of  the  first  volumes  of  the  "  Sbornik "  even  included  the 
Serbian  ballad  of  the  "  Battle  of  Kosovo,"  which  was  taken  down  in 
Macedonia  ("  Sbornik,"  iii.  pp.  85-94). 

■  P.  Draganov,  "  Makedonsko-Slavjanki  Sbornik  "  ("Macedonian- 
Slav  Collection  ").  Petrograd,  1894. 

3  "  Sbornik  za  narodni  uruotvorenia,"  vol.  xii.  pp.  51-53. 


220  MACEDONIA 

putably  Bulgarian   collections  of  national   ballads   from 
Macedonia : — 

(1)  The  Brothers  Dimitrije  and  Constantine  Mila- 
dinovci,  "  Bulgarian  National  Ballads,"  Zagreb,  1861. — 
The  brothers  Miladinovci  were  Serbs  from  Struga  on 
Lake  Ochrida,  but  at  an  early  date  they  joined  the 
anti-Greek  movement  in  Macedonia,  eventually  joining 
the  Bulgarian  party  and  remaining  faithful  to  it.  Their 
collection  contained  songs  from  various  parts  of 
Macedonia.  It  is  compiled  in  an  amateurish  manner, 
but  with  a  considerable  bias  in  favour  of  the  Bulgars. 
Thence  the  title  "  Bulgarian  National  Ballads." 

(2)  P.  Draganov,  "  Macedonian-Slav  Collection,"  i., 
Petrograd,  1894. — Draganov  is  a  genuine  Bulgar,  by 
birth  a  native  of  Bessarabia.  He  was  professor  at  the 
Bulgarian  Lycee  (College)  in  Salonica.  Being  an  ardent 
Bulgar  he  worked  zealously  at  the  Bulgarization  of  the 
Serbian  students  attending  the  Bulgarian  Lycee  (see 
Supplement  No.  II).  Through  his  pupils  he  collected 
ballads  and  songs  from  all  parts  of  Macedonia. 

(3)  Sbornik  za  narodni  umotvorenia,  nauha  a  knibiina 
(Collection  of  folk-lore,  science,  and  literature). — The 
publication  of  this  collection  was  begun  by  the  Ministry 
of  Education  in  1889,  and  it  is  really  an  official  publica- 
tion by  the* Bulgarian  Government.  Eighteen  bulky 
volumes  of  it  have  already  appeared.  Among  other 
matter  it  also  contains  many  national  ballads,  mostly 
from  Macedonia. 

If  we  .compare  these  Macedonian  baliads,  which 
were  collected  by  Bulgarians,  with  the  national  ballads 
of  other  Serbian  countries,  we  observe  the  following : — 

(1)  The  motives  of  both  are  identical.  There  is  not 
one  Macedonian  song  or  ballad,  except  those  which  bear 


POPULAR   TRADITION  221 

a  purely   local   character,  variants  of  which    cannot    be 
found  among  the  ballads  of  other  Serbian  regions. 

(2)  The  events  commemorated  in  both  are  absolutely 
identical.  This  fact  is  most  noticeable  in  ballads  which 
sing  of  historic  events.  These  events  are  taken  only 
from  Serbian  history  (the  Battle  of  Kosovo,  the  fall 
of  the  city  of  Stalac,  the  building  of  the  Monastery 
of  DeCani,  the  single  combats  of  Kraljevic  Marko,  the 
fights  of  the  Serbian  people  against  the  Turks,  the 
liberation  of  Serbia,  etc.).  P.  Draganov  was  amazed 
by  this  phenomenon  in  Macedonian  folk-poetry,  and 
felt  constrained  to  remark  upon  it  as  follows  in  the 
introduction  to  his  collection  :  "  In  the  first  place,  one  is 
struck  by  the  fact  that  of  all  the  Tsars,  Kings,  Vojvodas, 
heroes,  and  other  characters  of  these  ballads,  leading 
parts  are  assigned  only  to  favourite  characters  and 
famous  events  of  Serbian  mediceval,  modern,  and  recent 
history."  * 

(3)  The  localities  mentioned  in  both  are  absolutely 
identical.  Whoever  knows  Serbian  folk-poetry  even 
from  translation  knows  that  the  Serbian  countries  most 
frequently  mentioned  in  it  are  Serbia,  Bosnia,  Herce- 
govina,  Montenegro,  Srem,  Macedonia;  and  the  towns 
of  Krusevac,  Stalac,  Belgrade,  Prizren,  Novi  Pazar,  Nis, 
Vranje  (in  Serbia)  ;  Sarajevo,  Mostar,  Trebinje  (in 
Bosnia-Hercegovina) ;  Buda,  Janok,  Temisvar,  Slank- 
amen,  Varadin  (in  the  regions  of  Austria-Hungary 
inhabited  by  Serbs) ;  Prilep,  Bitolj,  Skoplje,  Ochrida, 
Kostur,  Kratovo  (Macedonia) ;  and  the  Rivers  Danube, 
Sava,  Morava,  Vardar,  Sitnica.  Other  famous  spots  in 
Serbian  history  are  Kosovo,  the  Sar  Mountain,  Kacanik, 

1  P.  Draganov,  "  Makedonsko-Slavjanski  Sbornik  "  ("Macedonian- 
Slav-Collection  "),  p.  viii. 


222  MACEDONIA 

Dukadjin;  and  the  Monasteries  of  Hilendar,  Decani, 
Ravanica,  GraSanica,  etc.  These  identical  places  are 
also  those  most  frequently  mentioned  in  Macedonian 
folk-poetry.  The  place-names  we  have  enumerated  here 
we  have  taken  from  collections  of  Macedonian  national 
ballads,  compiled  by  Bulgarian  collectors. 

(4)  The  heroes  celebrated  in  both  are  identical.  In 
the  ballads  which  sing  of  historic  personages,  the 
characters  all  belong  to  Serbian  history,  as  Tsar  Simeon 
(Stephan  Nemanja,  1169-1196),  his  son  St.  Sava,  Stephan 
Decanski  (Serbian  king,  1321-1331),  Tsar  Stephan  Dusan 
(1331-1355),  Tsar  Lazar  (of  Kosovo  fame,  d.  1389)  and 
his  wife  Milica  (d.  1395),  their  son  Lazarevic  (1389-1426), 
Milos  Obilie,  Toplica  Milan,  Kosancic  Ivan,  Jug  Bogdan, 
the  nine  Jugovici,  Vuk  Brankovic  (Kosovo  heroes) ; 
Kraljevic  Marko  (1371-1394),  Dete  Dukadjince,  Relja 
Krilatica,  Todor  of  Stalac,  Vojvode  Momcilo,  Bolani 
Dojcin,  Starina  Novak,  Gruja  Novakovic,  Deli  Tatomir, 
Pavle  Pletikosa,  the  Senkovici,  Ivan  Crnojevi6  (of 
Montenegro),  Krcmarica  (hostess)  Mara,  Kara-George 
(1804-1813),  Hajduk  Veljko  (d.  1813),  Ilija  Strelja  (Ilija 
Delija),  Prince  Milos  Obrenovic  (1815-1839  and  1859- 
1860),  Prince  Milan  Obrenovic  (1868-1888).  This  list 
also  we  have  taken  from  collections  of  ballads  from 
Macedonia,  which  were  compiled  by  Bulgarian  col- 
lectors. 

(5)  Macedonian  folk-poetry  is  quite  ignorant  of  Bul- 
garian historic  sites  and  Bulgarian  historical  character. 
Some  slight  reference  to  Bulgars,  such  as  the  allusions 
to  King  §i§man  and  the  Plain  of  Sofia,  are  quite 
insignificant  even  if  they  are  not  deliberate  inter- 
polations. 
The    Bulgars  do  not    possess    the    word    kralj    for 


POPULAR   TRADITION  223 

"  king." l  It  is  a  term  that  only  a  Serb  would  use. 
The  Sofijsko  Polje  (Sofia  Plain)  is  not  a  Bulgarian,  but 
a  Serbian  county.2  Serbian  folk-poetry  makes  frequent 
mention  of  foreign  lands  such  as  Italy,  Hungary,  Venice, 
Albania,  Eoumania,  Russia,  Turkey,  and  Bulgaria  and 
their  heroes.  It  is  a  very  significant  fact  that  Bulgaria 
and  the  Bulgars  are  mentioned  less  in  Macedonia  folk- 
poetry  than  in  ballads  of  other  Serbian  lands.  Bulgarian 
history,  too,  had  its  great  events,  its  famous  sites  and 
characters  ;  but  the  Macedonians  know  nothing  about 
them.     What  they  know  is  purely  Serbian. 

(6)  The  old  Serbian  monasteries  play  a  great  part  in 
Serbian  folk-poetry.  Special  fame  in  song  is  accorded 
to  the  Monastery  of  Hilendar  on  Mount  Athos,  the  first 
centre  of  Serbian  intellectual  life  and  letters  in  the 
Middle  Ages.  The  Bulgars,  too,  had  their  monastery  on 
Mount  Athos,  the  Zoograf,  which  is  older  than  Hilendar, 
and  a  very  important  focus  of  Bulgarian  civilization  in 
the  Middle  Ages.  Wherever  Macedonian  poetry  men- 
tions the  monasteries  of  Mount  Athos,  it  speaks  only  of 
Hilendar.  The  Zoograf  monastery  is  not  even  men- 
tioned. Other  Serbian  monasteries  are  famous  in 
Macedonian  ballads,  but  not  one  Bulgarian  monastery 
is  mentioned.  It  is  especially  important  that  Decani 
should  provide  a  favourite  theme.  There  is  even  a 
ballad  specially  devoted  to  the  building  of  the  Monastery 

1  The  word  "  kralj  "  ia  unknown  to  the  Bulgars.  That  is  the 
reason  why  the  present  King  of  Bulgaria  is  never  called  "  King  "  in 
Bulgaria  but  "Tsar."  The  words  "kralj"  and  "kraljica"  (king 
and  queen)  are  as  familiar  in  Macedonia  as  in  other  Serbian  countries. 
Both  in  poetry  and  in  ordinary  conversation  Kraljevic  Marko  is 
referred  to  as  "  Kralj  Marko." 

2  Serbian  folk-poetry  never  looks  upon  Sofia  and  its  surroundings 
as  anything  but  Serbian. 


224  MACEDONIA 

of  Decani.  Decani  was  built  by  Stephan  Decanski  and 
dedicated  to  God  in  gratitude  for  tbe  victory  over  the 
Bulgars  in  1330. 

(7)  The  terms  "  Serb,"  1  "  Bosnian,"  2  "  Montene- 
grin," 3  "  Croat,"  4  etc.,  occur  frequently  in  Macedonian 
poetry.  The  term  "Bulgar"  occurs  so  rarely  that  it 
is  practically  non-existent. 

(8)  Finally  the  language  of  the  Macedonian  ballad  is 
Serbian  and  not  Bulgarian.  In  writing  his  book  on 
the  sounds  "  dj  "  and  "c/"  in  the  Macedonian  dialects 
of  Serbian,  St.  Novakovic  drew  upon  the  philological 
material  contained  in  the  collections  of  Macedonian 
ballads  compiled  by  Bulgarian  collectors,  and  he  has 
proved  conclusively  that  the  language  spoken  in 
Macedonia  is  Serbian. 

The  favourite  hero  of  all  Serbian  national  tradition 
in  general,  of  Serbian  folk-poetry  in  particular,  is  the 
Macedonian  king  of  old,  Marko  Kraljevic  (1371-1394). 
"  There  is  no  Serb  who  does  not  know  the  name  of 
Kraljevic  Marko,"  said  the  greatest  authority  on  the 
Serbian  nation,  Vuk  St.  Karadzic  in  the  earlier  half 
of  the  nineteenth  century.  Marko  Kraljevic  is  the 
most  popular  hero  of  Macedonia  national  tradition.  He 
is  famous  in  song  and  story  everywhere  among  the 
Serbian  people.  There  is  no  end  to  the  songs  and 
legends  about  his  childhood,  his  heroism,  his  marriage, 
his  love  of  justice,  his  combats,  and  finally  of  his  dis- 
appearance from  this  world.  According  to  popular 
tradition,  Marko  did  not  die,  but  withdrew  into  a  cave 

1  Brothers  Miladinovci,   p.  355.     P.   Draganov,  pp.  60,  155,  156, 
157,  158.     "  Sbornik,"  iv.  p.  69  ;  xiv.  pp.  92,  etc. 

2  P.  Draganov,  p.  200. 

3  Ibid.,  p.  141. 

*  Ibid.,  pp.  91,  141.     "Sbornik,"  xi.  pp.  35,  etc. 


POPULAR   TRADITION  225 

together  with  his  horse  Sarac.  Before  the  horse  he 
laid  a  little  moss,  he  smote  the  rock  with  his  sword, 
cleaving  it  and  leaving  the  sword  in  the  cliff,  and  then 
lay  down  and  fell  asleep.  Since  that  time  Marko  has 
slept  continuously.  His  horse  is  slowly  eating  the 
moss,  his  sword  is  gradually  working  its  way  out  of 
the  rock.  When  the  moss  is  all  eaten,  and  the  sword 
comes  out  of  the  rock,  then  Marko  will  awake  and  come 
forth  from  his  cave,  and  deliver  and  unite  all  the 
Serbian  people.1  The  cave  where  Marko  sleeps,  and 
whence  the  Serbian  people  according  to  the  popular 
belief  awaits  its  deliverance  and  unity,  is  in  the  Demir 
Kapija  on  the  Vardar  in  Macedonia.2  Already  in  1704 
the  monk  Jervotije  Racanin  made  a  note  of  the  fact 
that  the  Demir  Kapija  on  the  Vardar  is  by  the  people 
called  "Marko  Kraljevic's  Demir  Kapija."  3 

The  tradition  that  Marko  will  awake,  free  and  unite 
the  Serbian  nation  is  familiar  to  every  Serbian  child. 
When  in  1912  the  Serbian  army  flew  as  on  wings  on 
its  campaign  of  liberation  to  deliver  Macedonia  from 
Turkish  slavery,  it  appeared  to  the  soldiers,  under  the 
suggestion  of  the  national  tradition  they  had  known 
from  childhood,  as  though  they  verily  saw  Kraljevic 
Marko  riding  in  front  of  them. 

Serbian  national  tradition  is  the  expression  of  Serbian 
national  opinion.  The  thought  that  is  dearest  to  the 
Serbian  nation  is  the  thought  of  liberation  and  unity. 
This  its  dearest  thought  is  by  the  Serbian  nation  bound  up 
with  the  tradition  of  Kraljevic  Marko  and  with  Macedonia. 

1  Vuk  S.  Karadzic,  "  Srpski  Rjecnik  "  ("  Serbian  Dictionary"), 
see  under  Marko  Kraljevic.  J.  H.  Vasiljevic,  "  Prilep,"  p.  78.  This 
legend  has  been  frequently  published  elsewhere  as  well. 

1  Iv.  Ivanid,  "  Macedonija  i  Maeedonci "  ("  Macedonia  and  the 
Macedonians  "),  L,  1906,  pp.  230,  231 ;  ii.,  1908,  p.  168. 

3  "  Glasnik  Srpakog  Ucenog  DruStva,"  vol.  xxii.  p.  230. 

16 


XIV 

CONCLUSION 

THEKE  remains  but  one  question  to  be  solved  if 
the  subject-matter  of  this  book  is  to  be  made  quite 
clear,  viz.  whether  the  Bulgars  were  conscious  that 
their  agitation  in  Macedonia  was  a  violation  of  the 
rights  of  others  ? 

The  answer  to  this  question  is  not  difficult  to  find. 
Whoever  has  during  this  war  followed  the  attempts 
of  the  Bulgars  to  convince  the  world  of  their  rights 
and  frontiers  has  the  reply  ready  to  hand.  No  sooner 
had  the  Bulgarian  army  entered  Eastern  Serbia  than 
the  Bulgarian  papers  announced,  not  the  conquest  of 
Serbia,  but  the  "  liberation "  of  Bulgarian  lands. 
University  professors  and  other  Bulgarian  savants 
lost  no  time  in  writing  bulky  tomes  in  Bulgarian  and 
other  languages  explaining  that  all  the  land  held  by  the 
Bulgarian  army  was  Bulgarian,  and  that  the  Bulgarian 
national  frontier  passes  through  the  middle  of  Serbia. 
In  these  assertions  the  men  of  science  and  of  the  press, 
Bulgaria's  leading  personalities,  were  followed  by  the 
Bulgarian  masses  like  so  many  apostles,  and  to-day 
there  is  not  one  man  in  Bulgaria  who  would  not  assert 
that  Serbia  is  truly  Bulgarian  land.  After  entering 
Serbia  the  Bulgarian  army  entered  Eoumania.  Now 
the  very  same  assertions  are  being  put  forward  with 
respect    to    Eoumania.      The    Bulgarian    papers    have 

926 


CONCLUSION  227 

immediately  announced  the  "liberation"  of  Bulgarian 
lands  from  Roumanian  servitude,  and  Bulgarian  scien- 
tists have  immediately  begun  to  "  restore  "  the  Bulgarian 
place-names  which  the  Eoumanians  had  "corrupted," 
and  to  write  on  the  "  Bulgarian  past  in  the  villages  round 
Djurdjevo,  Kalafat,  Braila,  Galatz,  Ploesti,  Crajova, 
Alexandria,  Bucharest,  and  other  places  in  Roumania." 

No  matter  how  young,  how  uncritical,  and  uncivilized 
the  Bulgars  are,  it  is  obvious  that  they  cannot  make 
these  assertions  from  conviction,  but  that  they  are  con- 
sciously inculcating  the  robbery  and  violation  of  foreign 
territory. 

As  they  behaved  to  Serbia  and  to  Roumania  in  this 
war  under  our  eyes,  so  they  behaved  formerly  to 
Macedonia.  In  that  case  also  there  is  positive  proof 
to  show  that  the  Bulgars,  in  the  face  of  facts  and  with 
full  consciousness,  did  all  they  could  to  filch  Macedonia 
from  the  Serbs. 

One  of  the  first  and  staunchest  friends  of  Bulgaria 
over  the  Macedonian  Question  was  Stefan  I.  Verkovic. 
Already  in  1860  he  declared  that  the  Macedonians  are 
"without  any  national"  (he  meant  "Bulgarian,"  of 
course)  "  conscience."  "  That  these  Macedonian  Bulgars," 
he  says,  "  were  formerly  called  Slavs,  is  clearly  proved 
by  the  writings  of  the  Holy  Slav  Apostles  Cyril  and 
Method  and  their  disciples,  who  all  say  that  they 
translated  the  Holy  Scriptures  into  the  Slav  language. 
It  was  only  at  a  later  date  that  they  received  the  name 
of  their  conquerors,  the  Bulgars.  This  name  is  therefore 
rather  a  political  and  State  name  than  a  national  designa- 
tion." *     His  better  knowledge,    however,  did  not  deter 

1  St.  I.  Verkovic,  "  Narodne  pesme  Makedonskih  Bugara " 
("  National  Ballads  of  the  Macedonian  Bulgars  "),  I860,  pp.  6  and  13 


228  MACEDONIA 

Verkovic  from  proclaiming  all  the  regions  of  European 
Turkey  to  be  Bulgarian,  and  from  becoming  the  leading 
Bulgarian  champion  in  Kussia. 

A  Bulgarian  patriot,  Prvanov  by  name,  who  had 
been  educated  in  Belgrade,  although  well  aware  of  the 
difference  between  the  Serbian  and  Bulgarian  languages, 
and  realizing  that  the  language  spoken  in  Macedonia  is 
Serbian,  nevertheless  did  not  scruple  to  bring  out  in  1872 
his  "  Alphabets  "  for  the  Bulgarian  schools  in  Macedonia, 
and  to  point  out  in  their  pages  that  his  object  in  doing  so 
was  "  that  our  Macedonian  brothers  may  discard  the 
Serbian  pronunciation  of  the  Bulgarian  idiom."1 

As  early  as  in  1888  the  greatest  of  the  Bulgarian 
chauvinists,  Ofeikoff  (the  pseudonym  of  Sopov,  Secretary 
to  the  Bulgarian  Exarch,  and  afterwards  Bulgarian 
Consul  in  Salonica),  wrote  a  book  in  French  endeavouring 
to  demonstrate  the  Bulgarian  claim  to  Macedonia.  His 
book  is  thoroughly  tendencious  ;  nevertheless  the  author 
is  compelled  to  confess  that  before  the  establishment  of 
the  Exarchate  the  Macedonians  "  were  devoid  of  national " 
(read  "Bulgarian")  "consciousness"  ("  etaient  prives  de 
conscience  nationale").2 

The  well-known  Bulgarian  leader  and  statesman, 
Stambulov,  "  did  not  like  the  Macedonians  on  account 
of  their  treachery  and  on  account  of  their  lack  of  all  real 
sense  of  patriotism"  (Bulgarian  patriotism,  of  course).3 

Of  such  instances  showing  that  the  Bulgars  knew 
that  the  Macedonians  are  not  Bulgars  we  could  quote 

1  From  P.  Draganov's  "  Izvestija  S.P.  Slavjanskago  Blagotvoritel- 
nago  Obscestva,"  1888.    Quoted  in  "  Macedonia  "  by  St.  Protic,  p.  13. 

*  Ofeikoff,  "  La  Mac<5doine,"  Philipopoli,  1888,  p.  45. 

3  "  He  [Stambuloff]  also  grew  to  dislike  tbe  Macedonians  on 
account  of  their  treachery  and  want  of  real  sense  of  patriotism  ..." 
"  M.  Stambuloff,"  by  A.  Hulme  Beaman,  London,  1895,  p.  40. 


CONCLUSION  229 

many  more,  but  we  will  confine  ourselves  to  just  one 
more  quotation  from  a  Bulgarian  book,  in  which  the 
Bulgarian  point  of  view  regarding  Macedonia  and  the 
Bulgarian  programme  there  are  expounded  on  the  basis 
of  the  impression  gained  during  a  long  time  by  the 
Bulgars  in  Macedonia.  The  book  in  question  appeared 
on  the  occasion  of  the  thousand  years'  anniversary  of 
SS.  Cyril  and  Method,  and  is  entitled  "  Macedonia  on 
the  Thousandth  Anniversary  of  SS.  Cyril  and  Method  ; 
or,  The  Present  Condition  of  Bulgarism  in  Macedonia." 
It  is  true  that  in  this  book,  as  everywhere  else,  we  find 
it  asserted  that  Macedonia  is  a  Bulgarian  country ;  but 
it  is  very  clearly  pointed  out  that  the  inhabitants  are  not 
Bulgarian.  "  If  Macedonia  is  not  to  be  Bulgarian," 
says  this  book,  "  then  the  Bulgarian  State  will  not  be 
established.  This  must  be  borne  in  mind  and  never 
lost  sight  of."  But  "  we  must  also  admit  a  sad  and 
disgraceful  thing.  The  greatest  part  of  Macedonia  is 
without  that  national  conscience,  which  is  necessary  for 
a  nation  if  it  is  categorically  to  demand  its  rights. 
Should  Europe  to-day  ask  the  people  of  Macedonia  to 
declare  to  which  nationality  they  belong,  I  am  afraid 
that  the  greater  part  would  declare  themselves  against 
us."  In  the  meantime,  "  ten  or  even  five  years  well 
employed  would  be  sufficient  to  make  it  impossible  for 
any  power  to  prevent  the  Bulgaria  of  San  Stefano 
from  becoming  a  reality."  r 

Finally  I  would  also  mention  an  occurrence  which 
shows  most  clearly  of  all  that  the  Bulgars  fully  realized 
that   Macedonia   contains   no   Bulgars..     Aware   of    the 

1  We  were  unable  to  obtain  this  book  in  the  original,  but  have 
utilized  the  quotations  in  the  book  "  Le  role  et  les  aspirations  de  la 
Grece  dans  la  question  d'Orient,"  by  D.  Bikelas,  Taris,  188u.  pp.  46-47. 


230  MACEDONIA 

Serbian  national  sentiment  of  the  Macedonians  and  of 
their  insurrection  against  the  Turks  and  in  favour  of 
unification  with  Serbia,  the  Bulgars  tried  immediately 
after  the  creation  of  Bulgaria  to  promote  a  rising  in 
Macedonia  which  they  could  claim  before  Europe  as 
an  insurrection  in  favour  of  Bulgaria. 

Eventually  the  difficulty  of  inducing  the  Macedonians 
to  rise  in  Bulgaria's  interest  proved' as  great  as  Bulgaria's 
need  of  the  rising.  This  need  was  imperative,  however, 
and  the  Bulgars  had  recourse  to  stratagem.  In  1879 
they  issued  a  proclamation  to  the  people  of  Macedonia, 
calling  upon  them  to  rise  for  liberation  from  the  Turks, 
but  in  this  proclamation  all  allusions  to  Bulgarian  aspira- 
tions and  Bulgarian  rights  to  Macedonia  were  carefully 
omitted,  nor  did  the  name  of  Bulgaria  appear  in  it 
(see  Supplement  No.  VIII).  This  flagrant  fact  cannot  be 
explained  away.  It  clearly  proves  how  conscious  the 
Bulgars  were  of  the  strength  of  the  Serbian  sentiment 
of  the  Macedonians. 

Nations,  like  individuals,  have  their  qualities.  From 
Bulgaria's  whole  history,  past  and  present,  one  quality, 
I  think,  emerges  most  clearly,  and  that  is  rapacity  re- 
garding foreign  property.  Only  on  the  basis  of  this  is 
it  possible  to  explain  how  the  Bulgars,  though  fully 
conscious  that  they  have  no  right  to  Macedonia,  never- 
theless made  of  their  State  a  comitadji  camp  whence 
they  overran  Macedonia  to  take  it  away  from  its  true 
owners.  And  whilst  from  this  camp  the  bishops, 
priests,  teachers,  agents,  and  banditti  have,  by  Cross, 
book,  money,  and  force  of  arms,  duped,  bought,  and 
terrorized  the  Serbian  people  of  Macedonia,  Bulgarian 
journalists,  scientists,  and  politicians,  on  the  other 
hand,  explained   and   protested   to   the   world   that   the 


CONCLUSION  231 

Macedonians   are   Bulgars   and   dying   to   be   united   to 
Bulgaria  ! 

To  this  comitadji-nature  the  Bulgars  add  yet  another 
quality,  and  that  is  their  positively  indecent  intrusiveness 
with  all  the  world.  This  trait  is  very  well  known  to  all 
who  have  come  in  contact  with  Bulgars.  To  demonstrate 
this  quality,  we  will  borrow  an  illustration  from  Aleko 
Konstadinov,  the  best  Bulgarian  writer  of  short  stories, 
who  has  sketched  this  failing  of  his  countrymen  in  his 
"tale  of  the  contemporary  Bulgar  "  called  " Baya  Gagno," 
after  its  principal  hero.1  In  this  story  the  typical  Bulgar 
of  the  present  day  is  shown  up  from  every  point  of  view : 
as  a  family  man,  as  a  merchant,  as  a  tourist  in  Bulgaria, 
and  as  a  representative  of  his  nation  abroad ;  as  a 
politician  and,  of  course,  as  a  patriot  who  on  his  way 
through  Serbia  does  not  miss  the  opportunity  of  saying 
to  every  porter  and  servant  in  Nis  and  Belgrade  :  "  You 
are  all  of  you  Bulgars,  only  you  call  yourselves  Serbs." 
One  passage  in  the  tale  is  devoted  to  showing  how  great 
is  the  Bulgarian  genius  for  intruding.  Travelling  from 
Sofia  to  Prague  to  some  festival  or  other,  we  find 
Baya  Gagno  esconced  with  several  travelling  companions 
in  a  second-class  compartment  (without  a  second-class 
ticket,  of  course).  After  having  eaten  and  drunk  all 
the  provisions  of  the  company  in  the  compartment  and 
repaid  them  "  with  most  fervent  patriotism,"  he  begins 
to  insinuate  himself  into  a  first-class  compartment  with 
four  other  occupants.  "  At  first  he  came  under  various 
pretexts,  such  as  to  borrow  matches,  or  to  beg  for  a 
mouthful  of  brandy  because  he  was  feeling  ill ;  but 
presently   he   became    more    familiar,  made   himself   at 

'  "  Baya  Gagno,  the  Tale  of  a  Contemporary  Bulgar,"  by 
Al.  Konstadinov,  Sofia,  1895,  pp.  25-28. 


232  MACEDONIA 

home,  and  did  not  leave  our  compartment  any  more. 
He  had  forgotten  all  about  his  former  travelling  com- 
panions. Of  what  further  use  were  they  to  him  ? 
They  had  nothing  left ;  all  their  food  and  drink  were 
consumed,  and  we  had  plenty.  Baya  Gagno,  as  if  out 
of  curiosity,  missed  no  chance  of  sampling  all  the 
provisions  we  had  laid  in  at  the  stations." 

"What's  that?  Grapes?  Capital!  Let's  have  a 
look,  please !  Give  us  a  berry  to  taste.  H'm  !  They're 
quite  good  !     Capital !  " 

His  ostensible  curiosity  urged  him  to  a  closer  acquaint- 
ance with  our  food,  our  brandy,  and  our  tobacco  pouches. 

"Is  that  case  of  Caucasian  silver?"  Baya  Gagno's 
interest  awoke  as  soon  as  he  saw  one  of  us  about 
to  smoke  a  cigarette. 

"  No,  it  was  made  in  Vienna,"  replied  the  owner. 

"Is  that  so?  Let's  have  a  look!  Oh,  oh,  oh.  Do 
let's  have  a  look,  please !  Why,  there's  tobacco  in  it. 
Is  it  Bulgarian  tobacco  ?  Capital !  Wait  till  I  roll 
a  cigarette.  I  have  some  cigarette-papers ;  if  you  want 
them,  here  I  am." 

That  he  was  indeed  there,  we  were  distinctly  aware 
of  by  the  smell  of  his  boots,  by  the  specific  odour  of 
his  perspiring  body,  and  by  his  gradual  manoeuvres  to 
occupy  the  whole  of  one  seat.  At  first  he  sat  at  one 
end  of  the  seat ;  then  he  began  to  seek  greater  comfort, 
and  finally  he  obliged  us  to  sit  three  on  one  side  of 
the  compartment,  and  the  fourth  to  squeeze  into  one 
corner,  so  that  Baya  Gagno  might  stretch  himself 
horizontally.  We  all  secretly  agreed  to  let  him  go  on, 
because  we  were  curious  to  know  how  far  Baya  Gagno's 
requirements  would  go.  And  indeed  he  amply  satisfied 
our   curiosity. 


CONCLUSION  333 

"  Move  a  little  farther  into  your  corner,  so  that  I 
can  put  up  my  other  leg  also.  H'm !  That's  better ! 
Capital !  E-e-eh !  Long  may  his  mother  be  spared ! 
Grand.  .  .  .  Listen  to  the  engine  thumping,  toopa,  toopa, 
toopa,  toopa !  I  do  like  to  stretch  myself  like  this.  In 
the  other  compartment  the  seat  was  too  narrow.  Also 
my  companions  were  rather  a  common  sort.  .  .  .  What's 
that  you're  eating?  Pears,  did  you  say?  Let  me  see 
whether  I  can  eat  a  pear  lying  down  ?  Thanks  !  Where 
did  you  get  them?" 

"We  bought  them." 

"  Splendid !  "  said  Baya  Gagno  with  his  mouth  full. 
"  I  like  pears." 

Hypnotized  by  the  monotonous  thumping  of  the  loco- 
motive Baya  Gagno  fell  asleep.  I  began  to  wonder  how 
we  could  possibly  get  rid  of  him.  Finally  I  was  struck 
with  an  idea.     I  gave  my  companions  a  wink  and  said : 

"  Let's  make  coffee,  gentlemen !  Give  me  spirit  and 
matches." 

"  Coffee,  did  you  say  ?  "  cried  Baya  Gagno,  and  jumped 
from  the  seat  as  if  scalded.     "  I'm  with  you  there." 

"How  shall  we  make  coffee  without  water?"  asked 
one  of  us. 

"  Water,"  cried  Baya  Gagno,  "  I'm  the  man  to  fetch 
it.  Wait  a  moment,"  and  he  dashed  out  of  the  com- 
partment. 

We  were  simply  dying  of  laughter.  Baya  Gagno  came 
back.  He  had  to  tell  us  how  much  work  and  trouble 
he  had  been  put  to  for  us.  In  his  hand  he  carried 
a  jug. 

"Here  you  are.  I  found  it.  I  hunted  through  every 
compartment  for  it.  At  last  I  caught  sight  of  a  jug  and 
bagged  it  at   once.     A   woman   shouted :     '  Oi !     Leave 


234  MACEDONIA 

that  alone,  that  is  water  for  ruy  child.'  I  considered 
what  story  I  should  tell  her,  and  then  I  had  an  idea,  and 
I  said :  '  Excuse  me,  madam,  but  somebody  is  feeling 
faint  over  there.'  'Indeed?'  'Yes.'  'All  right, 
take  it ;  only  mind  you  give  me  back  the  jug.'  Silly 
woman !  Bah  !  .  .  .  I  am  all  perspiration.  And  now 
we  shall  have  first-rate  coffee !  .  .  .  " 

Violently  to  seize  what  belongs  to  others — there 
spoke  the  comitadji.  To  force  oneself  upon  others  and 
to  "  sponge  "  upon  them — that  is  Baya  Gagno.  In  the 
comitadji  and  in  Baya  Gagno  all  Bulgarian  aims  and 
Bulgaria's  programme  are  summed  up.  These  aims  and 
this  programme  have  made  of  Serbian  Macedonia — the 
Macedonian  Question ! 


SUPPLEMENTS 


STORY  OF  THE  PROGRESS  OF  THE  BULGARIAN 
CHURCH  MOVEMENT,  TOLD  BY  T.  HADZI  MISEV, 
OF    VELES.1 

"  The  citizens  of  Veles  did  not  begin  to  take  an  interest  in  the  Church 
struggle  until  1860.  It  is  possible  that  even  then  they  might  not 
have  joined  in  the  Church  struggle  but  for  the  fact  that  at  that 
time  the  Suffragan-Bishop  of  Veles  was  a  Greek.  Antim  by  name, 
known  to  be  an  overbearing  man  and  obsequious  to  the  Turks, 
who  during  his  residence  in  Nis  and  Ruscuk  had  sent  many  persons 
into  slavery  and  to  the  gallows,  Antim  the  Greek  made  himself 
so  unpopular  in  Veles  and  in  the  eparchy  of  Veles-Debar,  that  the 
agents  of  the  Bulgarian  propaganda  won  over  the  whole  of  Veles 
to  the  Church  struggle  for  the  Bulgarian  Exarchate.  At  that  time 
Antim  annually  received  300,000  gros  (1  gros  =  twopence)  from 
the  eparchy.  The  citizens  of  Veles  offered  him  50,000  gros  per 
annum  purposely  to  get  rid  of  him.  This  the  Bishop  did  not  agree 
to,  but  consulted  a  certain  Ismail-Effendi,  a  wealthy  and  well-edu- 
cated Turk  who  possessed  great  influence  not  only  in  Veles  but 
also  in  the  most  important  circles  in  Constantinople.  Ismail-Effendi 
was  the  good  friend  of  the  old  Hadzi-Misevic,  Djordje  Hadzi 
Drndarevic,  and  Janko  Hadzi  Kusevic,  the  wealthiest  merchants  of 
Veles,  who  had  up  to  that  time  provided  the  funds  for  the  Serbian 
school  in  Veles.  But  as  the  authorities  began  to  look  upon  the 
Serbian  school  with  suspicion  and  the  Bulgarian  agitators  were 
working  to  close  it — in  doing  which  they  moreover  succeeded — the 
three   aforesaid    leading   citizens   of    Veles,   believing    the   lies   and 


*  Todor  Hadzi  Mtiev,  born  in  Veles,  was  in  his  youth  a  very 
loyal  Serb  and  a  benefactor  of  the  Serbian  schools  in  his  birthplace. 
He  only  became  pro-Bulgarian  after  the  establishment  of  the  Bul- 
garian Exarchate.  He  eventually  became  a  naturalized  Russian, 
and  lived  as  a  highly  respected  and  wealthy  merchant  in  Salonica, 
where  he  died  in  1911. 

335 


236  MACEDONIA 

promises  of  the  Bulgarian  propagandists,  joined  the  ranks  of  the 
Bulgarian  party  and  hoisted  the  flag  of  Bulgarism  in  Veles  and 
in  the  whole  eparchy  of  Veles-Debar. 

"  Therefore,  when  the  Greek  Bishop  Antim  came  to  Ismail  to 
lodge  a  complaint  against  the  Bulgarian  party  of  Veles,  asserting 
that  they  would  start  a  rising  in  Veles,  Ismail  knew  that  it  was 
simply  a  case  of  denunciation,  and  therefore  did  not  take  up  the 
complaint  of  the  Bishop.  In  the  meantime  the  greater  number  of 
the  inhabitants  of  Veles  had  signified  to  the  authorities  that  they 
refused  in  future  to  recognize  Antim  as  their  Bishop.  Ismail 
summoned  Antim  and  advised  him  to  subscribe  i;T100  (2,000  francs) 
to  the  Greek  school  in  Veles,  which  was  attended  by  Tsintsar 
(Macedo-Rumanian)  children — there  are  no  trae  Greeks  in  Veles — 
and  a  similar  sum  to  the  new  Bulgarian  school,  which  was  attended 
by  the  Serbian  children  of  the  Bulgarian  party  parents.  He,  more- 
over, advised  Antim  to  leave  Veles  and  to  go  to  Constantinople. 
Antim  took  his  advice,  and  repaired  to  Constantinople,  but  the 
Patriarch  sent  him  back  to  Veles.  In  the  meantime  a  telegram 
from  the  Bulgarian  representatives  Comakov  and  Tapsilestov  arrived 
from  Constantinople  saying  that  the  Bulgarian  Church  had  been 
separated  from  the  Greek  Patriarchate.  The  population  definitely 
declared  before  the  authorities  that  it  would  no  longer  recognize 
Antim  as  Bishop.  Antim  telegraphed  to  Constantinople  that  '  a  rising 
had  taken  place  in  Veles,  blood  had  been  shed,'  etc.  In  Constanti- 
nople this  telegram  was  believed,  and  Ahmed  Pasha,  Governor  of 
Bitolj  (Veles  was  at  that  time  under  the  government  of  Bitolj),  was 
ordered  to  proceed  to  Veles  with  his  army  to  '  settle  the  rebels.' 
This  happened  in  January,  during  the  coldest  part  of  the  year. 
Ismail  Effendi  soon  learnt  of  the  impending  arrival  of  the  army,  and 
dispatched  a  bey  as  far  as  six  hours'  walk  from  Veles  towards  Prilep 
to  meet  Ahmed  Pasha,  The  bey  made  as  though  he  did  not  know 
the  reason  of  the  Pasha's  coming,  and  when  the  Pasha  inquired 
of  him  about  the  rising  the  bey  replied  that  there  was  no  rising, 
and  presently  convinced  the  Pasha  that  the  Bulgarian  party  of 
Veles  were  in  the  right  and  that  all  the  Turkish,  citizens  there  were 
living  on  friendly  terms  with  them. 

"On  the  eve  of  Epiphany  (January  5,  1870)  Ahmed  Pasha 
arrived  in  Veles.  He  immediately  sent  for  the  most  prominent 
Turkish  citizens,  who  declared  that  they  could  vouch  for  the  leaders 
of  the  Bulgarian  party  as  being  honest  and  loyal  men  who  were 
justified  in  their  requests  and  that  the  real  rebels  were  the  Serbs 
and  Tsintsars  (Macedo-Roumanians)  of  Veles,  who  were  siding  with 
the  Greek  Bishop  Antim.  Such  recommendation  on  the  part  of 
the  Turks  ensured  the  victory  in  the  struggle  to  the  Bulgarian  party 


SUPPLEMENT    I  237 

in  Veles.  who  on  the  very  same  day  declared  to  Ahmed  Pasha  that 
they  did  not  want  Antim  as  their  Bishop  and  that  they  did  not 
recognize  the  Greek  Patriarchate,  but  recognized  the  Bulgarian 
Exarchate  instead,  etc.  The  Pasha  telegraphed  to  Constantinople 
that  all  was  quiet  in  Veles  and  that  the  Bulgarian  party  was  justified 
in  its  requests.  _ 

"Next  morning,  on  St.  John's  Day  (January  7th),  the  Pasha 
received  a  telegram  from  Constantinople  to  the  effect  that  the  Porte 
had  recognized  the  Bulgarian  Exarchate,  and  there  was  no  end  to 
the  enthusiasm  when  the  Pasha  announced  this  intelligence  to  the 
national  leaders.  The  Pasha  then  sent  for  Antim  and  reprimanded 
him  for  having  sent  a  mendacious  telegram  to  Constantinople. 
Antim  was  so  alarmed  that  he  signed  his  resignation  without  further 
ado  and  left  at  once  for  Constantinople. 

"The  Pasha  was  accompanied  by  his  Mauvim  (Sub-Pasha),  the 
Serbian  Djordje  Berovic  of  Skadar  (the  last  of  the  Berovic  Pashas, 
Prince  of  Samos  and  Governor  of  Crete).  Djordje  Berovic  was  a  man 
of  tact,  who  called  upon  the  Bulgarian  leaders  and  encouraged  them 
in  their  fight  with  the  Greek  Hierarchy. 

"  The  Pasha  was  given  an  enthusiastic  send-off  from  Veles.  The 
crowd  accompanied  him  on  foot  for  a  considerable  distance  beyond 
the  town.  At  parting,  a  speech  was  addressed  to  him  by  the  lady 
teacher  of  Veles,  a  Serbian  born  in  Austria  and  brought  to  Veles  as  a 
Serbian  lady  teacher  from  Prizren  by  Janko  M.  Kusevic.  The  Pasha 
replied  to  the  teacher  by  exhorting  her  to  continue  to  instruct  the 
children  in  learning  and  loyalty.  The  action  of  the  lady  teacher 
greatly  impressed  all  the  inhabitants  of  Veles,  but  this  did  not 
prevent  them  from  very  soon  dismissing  this  Serbian  teacher  from 
Veles  and  replacing  her  by  a  Bulgarian  lady  teacher.  This  was 
demanded  by  the  interests  of  the  Bulgarian  propaganda.  ..."  * 


1  Iv.  Ivanic,  "  Iz  crkvene  istorije  Srba  u  Turskoj  u  XVIII  i  XIX 
veku"  ("Church  History  of  the  Serbs  in  Turkey  in  the  Eighteenth 
and  Nineteenth  Centuries"),  Belgrade,  1902,  pp.  90-93  (in  Serbian). 


II 

THE  STORY  OF  JOVAN  VELJIC,  OF  DEBAR,  TELLING 
HOW  THE  BULGARIAN  TEACHERS  MADE  HIM  A 
BULGAR  BY  FORCE  « 

"  When  in  1886  I  had  passed  the  third  class  of  the  Bulgarian 
Lycee  in  Solun  and  went  home  for  a  rest  during  the  school 
holidays,  I  was  taught  and  prompted  by  my  professors  of  the 
Bulgarian  language  and  of  chemistry,  Messrs.  Popov  and  Kulev, 
and  also  by  the  Archimandrite  Kozma  Pricestanski  to  show  and 
demonstrate  to  my  people  and  others  that  they  ought  not  to  go 
on  pronouncing  dj  and  6,  but  ought  to  pronounce  Id  and  St 
instead,  and  that  instead  of  saying  Kuca,  vedja,  sveca,  Djurd- 
jevdan,  gradjanin,  etc.,  they  ought  to  say  K'sta,  vezda,  svelta, 
Georgiev-dan,  grazdanin,  etc.  And  when,  in  obedience  to  a 
request  from  Mr.  Draganov,  another  of  my  professors,  I  collected 
and  brought  to  him  forty  national  ballads  from  the  neighbour- 
hood of  Debar,  he  told  me  that  these  were  Serbian  ballads,  and, 
in  front  of  me,  he  began  to  correct  and  to  alter  them  according 
to  the  Bulgarian  pronunciation. 

"  I  was  really  grieved  at  the  time  to  hear  from  him  that  the 
ballads  from  my  home  were  Serbian,  and  that  their  language  was 
Serbian,  because  at  the  time  I  was  already  mad  with  Bulgarism 
and  with  the  continual  impressing  of  Bulgarism  upon  me  on  the 
part  of    Bulgarian   teachers.     I    was    even   ashamed    to   speak  as 

1  Mr.  Jovan  Veljic,  born  in  Debar.  His  family  has  been  Serbian 
for  generations.  As  there  was  no  lycee  (secondary  school)  in  Debar, 
his  parents  sent  him  to  study  at  the  Bulgarian  Lycee  in  Salonica, 
where  students  from  Macedonia  were  boarded  and  educated  free 
of  charge.  When  his  parents  realized  that  their  son  would 
become  a  Bulgar  in  the  Bulgarian  school,  they  removed  him  from 
the  latter  and  sent  him  to  a  Serbian  school  instead.  He  graduated 
at  the  Universities  of  Belgrade  and  Geneva.  When  the  Serbian 
Lycee  in  Salonica  was  opened,  he  was  appointed  one  of  the 
professors.  At  present  he  resides  in  Salonica  as  a  retired  Serbian 
professor,  and  he  is  always  mindful  of  his  Serbian  nationality. 

238 


SUPPLEMENT   II  239 

they  speak  at  home,  and  instead  of  saying  ja  and  ce,  I  always 
used  the  Bulgarian  az  and  stc.  Thus  I  was  taught  and  persuaded 
by  my  Bulgarian  teachers,  and  I  hated  my  sweet  mother-tongue  and 
native  speech.  Now  I  can  feel  the  purity  and  sweetness  of  my 
Serbian  mother-tongue.  When  I  go  home  I  will  beg  my  mother 
and  father  to  forgive  me  if  I  have  grieved  them  by  my  attempts 
to  induce  them  to  study  Bulgarian.  Now,  under  the  influence  of 
true  teaching,  I  can  see  why  they  looked  at  me  with  tears  in 
their  eyes  because  I  had  lost  my  native  speech  and  tried  to 
induce  them  to  lose  it  too.  .  .  ." ' 


1  M.  V.  Veselinovic,  "  Srbi  u  Makedonji  i  u  Juznoj  Staroj  Srbiji " 
("The  Serbs  in  Macedonia  and  in  Southern  Old  Serbia"),  Belgrade, 
1888,  pp.  7-3  (in  Serbian).  A  similar  account  is  given  by  Mr. 
Rista  Ognjanovic,  of  Galicnik,  Professor  at  the  Serbian  Lyc£e  in 
Skoplje,  who  also  began  his  studies  at  a  Bulgarian  school. 


Ill 

STOEY  OF  THE  DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  BULGARIAN 
PROPAGANDA  IN  MACEDONIA,  TOLD  BY  A  CITIZEN 
OF  BITOLJ 

"  It  is  only  thirty  years  ago  since  the  Bulgarian  propaganda  first 
began.  Formerly  there  were  none  but  Serb  and  Greek  schools 
in  Old  Serbia  and  in  Macedonia.  We  were  under  the  Greek 
Patriarchate,  and  we  suffered  much  under  the  Greek  clergy.  The 
Bulgars  speculated  upon  this  discontent  with  the  Greek  clergy 
when,  in  commencing  their  struggle  for  the  Exarchate,  they  en- 
deavoured to  stir  up  the  Serbian  inhabitants  of  our  Province  also. 
The  Bulgarian  agents  and  apostles  came  to  us  with  honey  on 
their  lips  and  money  in  their  pockets.  They  fell  on  our  necks 
as  '  brothers  '—although  we  understood  our  '  brother '  but  im- 
perfectly—and promised  us  an  end  to  our  troubles  if  we  would 
join  them  in  their  struggle   for  the  Exarchate. 

"  That  we  listened  to  the  siren  voices  of  the  Bulgars  must  not 
be  laid  to  our  charge;  all  the  world  had  forsaken  us,  and  the 
hand  of  the  Bulgars  was  the  first  to  be  stretched  out  to  help  us. 
Our  kinsmen  in  Belgrade  did  not  trouble  themselves  about  us  at 
all ;  our  Serbian  schools  had  been  for  the  most  part  founded  by 
ourselves,  and  only  a  few  patriotic  Serbs  were  prepared  to  act  as 
teachers  for  us.  Not  until  later,  after  the  establishment  of  the 
Exarchate,  was  a  school  for  Old-Serbian  students  founded  in  Serbia ; 
but  it  was  closed  again  after  a  few  years. 

"  But  there  was  another  circumstance  which  greatly  assisted  the 
Bulgars  in  their  propaganda.  You  know  that  we  have  become 
used  to  calling  ourselves  'Bugari.'  Now  this  is  something 
different  from  Bolgari,  but  as  the  name  signifies  the  same  thing 
as  '  Bulgars,'  it  was  easy  for  the  Bulgarian  agents  to  persuade 
us  that  we  had  been  Bulgars  of  old.  It  is  true  that  our  language, 
our  folk-songs,  and  history  are  directly  opposed  to  this  assump- 
tion; but  necessity  knows  no  law,  and  so  we  threw  ourselves- 
into  the  arms  of  the  Bulgars  because  nobody  took  our  part,  and 
because  they  promised  us  deliverance  from  the  Greek  Church  and 
eventually  even  from  the   Turkish  domination. 

240 


SUPPLEMENT   III  241 

"  At  first  the  Bulgarian  propaganda  operated  within  modest  limits, 
because  it  naturally  did  not  dispose  of  the  means  at  its  disposal 
to-day.  Besides  this,  the  Greek  and  Serbian  schools  hampered 
its  progress  no  less  than  the  Greek  clergy.  The  latter  ceased  to 
be  an  obstacle  after  the  establishment  of  the  Exarchate  in  1870. 
The  Greek  priests  were  replaced  by  Bulgarian,  who  immediately 
inaugurated  a  brisk  agitation.  This  naturally  brought  the  Bul- 
garians a  great  step  forward. 

"  In  the  year  1876  they  made  similar  progress,  and  this  like- 
wise through  the  complaisance  of  the  Turkish  Government,  aa 
the  latter,  immediately  upon  the  Serbian  declaration  of  war, 
suspended  all  Serbian  schools  and  expelled  all  the  Serbian 
teachers.  Obviously  the  Bulgars  at  once  made  the  most  of  then- 
opportunity  and  replaced  the  Serbian  schools  and  teachers  by 
Bulgarian.  The  fugitive  Serbian  teachers  applied  to  Belgrade  for 
help,  but  in  vain.  Otherwise  the  Serbian  Government  would  at 
least  have  gained  this  advantage,  that  the  teachers  (who  were 
all  well  known  and  popular  with  us,  and  whom  we  should  have 
welcomed  back  with  open  arms)  would  have  returned  after  the 
war,  and  continued  their  labours,  or  at  least  would  have  kept 
alive  our  sympathies  for  Serbia. 

"  Also  after  1878  and  until  now  the  Serbs  did  not  trouble  about 
us,  and  left  us  entirely  to  the  Bulgars,  who,  less  indolent  than 
the  Serbs,  lost  no  time  in  establishing  themselves  here  and  in 
Bulgarizing  the  people. 

"  At  the  head  of  the   whole   propaganda   stands  the   Bulgarian 
Exarch    in     Constantinople,    assisted    by     his     Secretary,    Sopov 
(Ofeikoff).     He  devotes  £T30,500  (nearly  700,000  francs)  annually 
solely    to    propaganda    purposes.      Besides    this,    the     Bulgarian 
Sobranje   decided,   immediately  upon   the   foundation   of  the   Bul- 
garian   Principality,    to    provide  in    their    Budget   400,000    francs 
annually   for   the   erection   and   maintenance   of  Bulgarian  schools 
in    our  countries,  and  Eastern  Roumelia  decided  to  devote  60,000 
francs    annually    to    the    same    object.      To-day    united    Bulgaria 
spends  fully   600,000   francs   annually  upon  the  Bulgarian   schools 
in  Macedonia  and  Old  Serbia.     In  addition   to   this   the  Bulgarian 
Government    annually    assigns     over    2,000,000    francs    from    the 
Treasury    for    propaganda    work.      If    this    appears    incredible    to 
you,  consult  the  Bulgarian  Budget.     There  you  will  find  that  the 
Foreign    Ministry   annually   receives  2,800,000   francs,   although   it 
has  neither  Embassies  nor  Consulates  to  maintain.     The  Serbian 
Foreign    Ministry    only    receives    800,000    francs    per    annum    (of 
which  100,000  are  Treasury  funds),  out  of  which  it  has  to  maintain 
ten    Legations    and    four    Consulates-General.     Consequently    the 

1? 


242  MACEDONIA 

Bulgarian  Foreign  Minister  has  at  least  2,400,000  francs  at  his 
disposal  with  which  to  carry  on  the  agitation  here,  and  to  bribe 
the  European  Press  as  well  as  individual  authors.  At  first  Russia 
also  provided  annual  assistance ;  I  believe  that  since  1885  this 
is  no  longer  paid,  but  I  may  be  wrong.  Suffice  it  to  say  that 
the  Bulgarian  Government  and  the  Exarchate  in  all  expend 
3,700,000  £rancs  on  propaganda  work  each  year. 

3|:  :':  '.',:  -v  -,'  -.: 

"  I  have  mentioned  above  that  the  Bulgarian  Church  is  the  main- 
spring of  the  propaganda,  and  its  focus.  For  a  better  understanding 
I  must  add  that  it  is  the  Porte  itself — unintentionally,  of  course 
— that  drove  and  still  compels  the  Exarchate  to  propaganda. 

"When  the  Exarchate  was  instituted  it  embraced,  inter  alia, 
Jive  Bishoprics  in  the  Danubian  Bulgarian  region  and  eight  in 
Old  Serbia !  Of  these  eight,  viz.  Sofija,  Vraca,  Vidin,  Nis,  Pirot, 
Custendil,  Samokov,  and  Veles,  the  five  last  mentioned  had  pre- 
viously belonged  to  the  Serbian  Patriarchate  of  Pec ;  it  therefore 
points  to  a  boundless  stupidity  on  the  part  of  the  Porte,  or  to 
gross  venality  on  the  part  of  the  then  Grand- Vizier,  that  at  the 
very  outset  Serbian  territory  was  to  be  handed  over  to  the  Bulgars. 

"  But  this  was  not  enough  !  Article  10  of  the  firman  in  question 
distinctly  declares  that  those  eparchies  whose  inhabitants  unani- 
mously, or  even  by  a  two-thirds  majority,  demanded  it,  should  be 
incorporated  with   the   Exarchate. 

"  Hereby  the  Porte  itself  naturally  opened  bolt  and  bars  to  the 
Exarchate.  All  of  us  Slavs  were  discontented  with  the  Greek 
clergy ;  the  prospect  of  hearing  divine  service  in  hierarchic  Slav 
did  the  rest ;  and  so  the  Bulgarian  apostles  had  an  easy  task  when 
they  came  to  our  village  and  collected  signatures. 

"  Scarcely  was  the  Exarchate  established  than  the  agitation  was 
begun  in  Ochrida  and  Skoplje.  The  Turkish  Commission,  which 
was  to  ascertain  the  wish  of  the  people,  everywhere  found  a  desire 
for  the  Exarchate,  a  suitable  baksheesh  did  the  rest — in  short, 
already  in  1872  Bulgarian  bishops  were  appointed  for  Ochrida  and 
Skoplje  ! 

"  At  that  time  the  Porte  lived  in  constant  fear  of  the  plots  and 
intrigues  of  Serbia  and  Greece,  while  the  Bulgarians  appeared 
to  them  as  harmless  raja  (slaves).  This  explains  the  benevolence 
with  which  the  Porte  regarded  Bulgarian  intrigues.  The  poor  dear 
little  dreamt  in  its  simplicity  that  the  Bulgars  would  one  day 
become  far  more  dangerous  foes  than  Serbs  and  Greeks  put  together. 
(And  even  to-day,  after  so  many  experiences,  the  Turks  underrate 
the  political  intrigue  of  the  Bulgars,  and  fear  Serbia,  who  has  been 
rendered  quite  harmless.) 


SUPPLEMENT  III  243 

"  The  shameless  Bulgarian  agitation  tempted  not  the  Serbs,  as 
might  have  been  assumed,  but  the  Greeks  to  a  counter-stroke.  The 
Greek  Patriarch  convened  an  Assembly  of  the  Church,  which  pro- 
claimed the  Bulgarian  clergy  and  their  adherents 'heretics.'  The 
Bulgars  of  course  lodged  a  protest  against  this  finding,  and  the 
dispute  is  not  settled  to  this   day. 

"  The  events  of  1876  caused  the  Porte  to  cancel  Article  10  and 
to  depose  the  Bishops  of  Skoplje  and  Ochrida.  Since  then  the 
Bulgars  have  left  no  stone  unturned  to  prevail  upon  the  Porte 
to  restore  Article  10  and  to  re-appoint  the  Bishops  of  Skoplje  and 
Ochrida.  But  it  seems  that  even  the  Sublime  Porte  has  at  last 
begun  to  smell  a  rat,  because  the  berats  (appointments)  of  the 
Bishops  have   not  yet  been  drawn  up. 

"  The  Exarchate  revenged  itself  in  1880  by  declaring  the  Parish 
School  Boards  in  Macedonia  and  Old  Serbia  its  representatives, 
and  establishing  a  special  '  School  Department  '  (skolsko  popeci- 
telJ8tvo)  in  the  Exarchate.  It  is  this  School  Department  which 
maintains  and  governs  the  Bulgarian  schools  in  our  country,  and 
if  you  bear  in  mind  the  incredible  activity  of  the  Bulgars  and  their 
unanimity  when  it  is  a  question  of  the  idea  of  a  Great  Bulgaria, 
you  can  imagine  how  firmly  rooted  the  propaganda  is  to-day. 

"  Side  by  side  with  the  lawful  Greek  Bishops  the  Bulgars  have  set 
up  their  own  ecclesiastic  authorities  which  counteract  the  activity 
of  the  former  and  render  it  illusory.  In  Ochrida,  Skoplje,  Debar, 
Veles,  Bitolj,  and  Salonica  the  Bulgarians  have  appointed  rural 
deans '  (prolojereji)  with  excellent  salaries.  Every  dean  has  hia 
Council,  which  attends  to  Church  and  school  matters,  and  thus 
these  deans  perform  all  the  functions  of  bishops  without  assuming 
the  title.  The  Greek  Bishops,  whom  they  simply  override,  are 
powerless  against  them.  Furthermore,  the  deans  have  all  the 
ecclesiastic  and  disciplinary  power  over  the  clergy  in  their  hands. 
In  Salonika,  for  instance,  this  office  had  been  entrusted  to  the 
Archimandrite  Kozeljev. 

"Each  dean  is  also  provided  with  a  deputy  (namestnik),  who  may 
also  be  a  layman  (lit.  a  member  of  the  bourgeoisie).  He  is  a 
member  of  the  Church  School  Council  and  assistant  of  the  dean, 
especially  in  his  correspondence  with  the  parishes  concerned. 
The  deputies  are  paid  by  the  Church  School  Council  of  the  locality 
in  which  the  dean  resides. 

"  Where  there  are  intermediary  schools,  their  director  and  the 
governors  also  belong  to  the  Church  School  Council. 

"  Only  a  few  of   the  adherents   of   Greece   and    Serbia   offer  any 


Lit.  archpresbyter. 


244  MACEDONIA 

resistance  to  the  Bulgarian  propagandists.  The  former  consist 
first  of  all  of  such  as  know  that  we  are  not  Bulgars  but  Serbs, 
and  who  are  swayed  by  their  national  sentiment;  and  secondly, 
of  such  who  feel  spiritually  bound  to  Serbia  by  our  folk-songs,  or 
in  whom  the  memory  of  the  former  Serbian  rule  here  has  been 
kept  alive  by  tradition,  and  finally  by  such  as  have  been  to  Serbia, 
or  go  there  year  by  year  to  work. 

"  The  adherents  of  Greece  consist  of  Greek  or  Hellenized  persons 
or  enemies  of  Bulgarism.  As  a  rule  they  go  hand  in  hand  with 
the  adherents  of  Serbia." ' 


1  S.    Gopcevic,     "  Makedonien    und    Alt-Serbien,"     Wien,    1889, 
pp.  307-311. 


IV 

PETITIONS  ADDRESSED  BY  MACEDONIANS  TO  MILAN 
PRINCE  OF  SERBIA  AND  TO  THE  CONGRESS  OF 
BERLIN,    PRAYING    TO    BE    UNITED    WITH    SERBIA 

A 

From  the  districts  of  Kicevo,  Prilep,  and  Veles,  with  the  signatures 
of  170  mayors,  priests,  archimandrites,  etc.,  appended  and 
bearing  the  seals  of  44  communes.     The  petition  is  headed : — 

"  The  following  was  resolved  upon  at  the  meeting  on  Mount 
Babuna,  May  10,  1878, "  and  addressed  to  Prince  Milan.  It 
is  worded  as   follows : — 

"  A  short  time  ago  the  Corbadzi  (notables)  of  our  city,  who, 
together  with  the  Turks,  have  fleeced  us  ever  since  Kosovo,  informed 
us  that  we  are  to  fall  under  the  domination  of  a  Bulgarian  realm, 
as  if  we  were  not  true  and  pure  Serbs,  but  some  kind  of  Bulgarsl 

"  All  of  us,  Illustrious  Prince,  in  the  nahijas  (districts)  of  Skoplje, 
Tetovo,  Debar,  Kicevo,  Veles,  Prilep,  Bitolj,  Kostur,  Gorica, 
Solun,  Seres,  Tikves,  Istip,  Radoviste,  Nevrokop,  Melnik,  Kocani, 
Kratovo,  Kumanovo,  Banjska,  Radomir,  Sofija,  Kriva  Palanka, 
Samokov,  Dupnica,  etc,  are  true  Serbs  of  true  Serb  stock.  This  is 
proved  by  the  innumerable  exclusively  purely  Serbian  remains  to  be 
found  in  all  the  said  nahijas  (districts). 

"We  have  but  to  look  around  to  see  in  the  said  districts  our 
Metropolitan  Church  of  St.  Sava  in  Debar ;  the  Church  of  the 
Blessed  Mother  of  God  and  the  Holy  Archangel  (Sv.  Bogorodica,  Sv. 
Arangjel)  in  Prilep,  both  founded  by  Kings  Milutin  and  Marko ; 
St.  Jovan  Slepeevacki  and  St.  Nikolas  in  Prilep,  also  the  Sv.  Bogoro- 
dica (Blessed  Mother  of  God)  and  St.  Nikolas  in  Prilep,  all  founded 
by  King  Decanski ;  St.  Jovan,  St.  Naum,  and  Cista  Precista  in 
Ochrida,  founded  by  the  Kings  Vojislav  and  Vladimir;  St.  Nikola 
Toplicki  in  Bitolj,  founded  by  Milan  Toplica  ;  St.  Dimitrije  in 
Skoplje,  founded  by  King  Vukasin ;  SS.  Andrija  and  Vasilije, 
founded  by  King  Andrejas ;  St.  Jovan's  in  Palanka  (containing 
the  grave  of  Despot  George  of  Smederevo),  founded  by  King  Dragutin  ; 
St.  Nikola's  and  the  Archangel,  Sv.  Bogorodica  and  Spas  in  Istip, 

m 


246  MACEDONIA 

founded  by  King  Decanski ;  the  tomb  of  the  Blessed  Ncmanjici  in 
Kratovo  ;  that  of  Relja  Krilatica  in  Rilo ;  Nemanica,  the  home 
of  the  Nemanjidi ;  St.  Dimitrije  in  Veles,  founded  by  Zupan  Stra- 
cimir,  brother  of  Nemanja ;  St.  Pantelija's  in  Kocani,  founded  by 
St.  Simeon  Nemanja ;  St.  Antana's  in  Tetovo,  founded  by  Car 
Lazar ;  SS.  Jovan  and  Gjorgje  in  Debrica,  founded  by  Kings 
Badoslav  and  Milutin  ;  Sv.  Cista  Precista  and  Presveta  Bogorodica 
in  Kicevo,  founded  by  Kings  Milutin  and  Dragutin;  Sv.  Presveta 
Bogorodica  Devica  (Most  Holy  Virgin  Mother  of  God),  founded  by 
King  TJros  the  Great,  besides  many  others  not  mentioned  in  each 
nahija,  as  well  as  the  ruins  of  hundreds  of  monasteries  and  churches 
built  by  Serbian  Kings  and  Tsars.  Our  assertion  is  further  proved 
by  the  relics  of  our  sainted  kings  and  tsars  and  other  Serbian  saints 
such  as  King  Milutin  in  Sofija;  King  Vladimir  in  Elbasan;  St. 
Naum  in  Ochrida ;  St.  Prohor  in  Kumanovo,  St.  Jakim  in  Palanka, 
St.  Gavril  in  Kratovo,  the  Hoty  King  in  Gjakovica  (follows  a 
further  list  of  saints). 

"  We  therefore  send  to  you,  in  the  names  of  the  entire  districts  of 
Kicevo,   Veles,  and   Prilep,  our  accredited   agents  Hadzi   Trajkovid 

Mincik,  Gj N and  A D ,   and  on  our  knees  implore 

Your  Serene  Highness,  Our  August  King,  that  you  will  unite  us 
together  with  our  native  land  with  Holy  Mother  Serbia,  so  that  we 
may  at  last  emerge  from  our  bondage  and  become  men  and  a  useful 
member  of  the  people  of  Europe ;  but  not  to  let  us  exchange  the 
harsh  Turkish  yoke  for  the  still  harsher  and  blacker  Bulgarian 
servitude,  which  will  be  harder,  more  oppressive,  and  more  unendurable 
to  us  than  the  Turkish  which  we  have  endured  hitherto,  and  would 
leave  us  no  way  of  avenging  ourselves  for  this  wrong,  save  either 
to  slay  our  whole  households  or  to  forsake  our  sacred  soil,  our 
churches  and  graves,  and  ail  that  we  hold  dear,  the  which  will  profit 
neither  Europe  nor  our  own  nation." 

B 

Petition  addressed  to  Prince  Milan,  signed  by  520  Parish  Councils, 
etc.,  from  the  districts  of  Kumanovo,  Kratovo,  Palanka,  Istip, 
Petric,  Strumica,  and  Kocani,  with  the  seals  of  220  communes 
affixed,  drawn  up  on  June  2nd,  1878,  at  Kozjak  : — 

"  Having  heard  that  we,  after  having  so  lavishly  shed  our  blood 
in  concert  with  our  brothers  of  Serbia  in  the  struggle  against  our 
hereditary  enemy  the  Turk,  are  yet  to  remain  under  Turkish  rule, 
unless  we  subscribe  to  a  Russo-Bulgaria,  we  on  our  knees  implore 
Your  Highness,  our  only  lawful,  Gracious  Sovereign,  that  you  will 
unite  us  with  our  mother  country.     For  we  are  Serbs  in  the  districts 


SUPPLEMENT   IV  247 

of  Kurnanovo,  Skoplje,  Banjska,  Radomir,  Melnik,  Nevrokop,  Kra- 
tovo,  Istip,  Kocani,  Strumica,  Veles,  etc.,  and  that  of  the  purest  and 
best  Old  Serbian  stock,  and  our  country  is  the  most  purely  Serbian, 
even  the  very  heart  of  Serbia,  from  which  have  sprung  not  only  our 
sainted  Nemanjiei,  but  also  our  State  and  our  literature,  renown, 
power,  and  greatness,  and  all  that  was  and  still  is  Serbian. 

"This  is  proved  to  this  day  by  hundreds  of  complete  and  thou- 
sands of  ruined  churches  and  monasteries,  more  especially  by  the 
following  ancient  buildings :  In  Matejce,  the  Church  of  the  Blessed 
Mother  (Sv.  Bogorodica),  where  King  Milutin  was  crowned ;  St. 
Gjuragj  Nagoricki,  the  foundation  of  King  Milutin,  built  in  gratitude 
for  the  salvation  of  Serbia  and  Europe  from  the  Tartar  invasion ; 
Sv.  Bogorodica  Zabelska,  founded  by  Stephan  Nemanja ;  Sv.  Bogoro- 
dica Korminska,  founded  by  Kings  Radoslav  and  Dragutin  ;  Sv.  Otae 
Prohor  Pcinjski  (Blessed  Father  Prohor  of  Pcinja),  founded  by  Car 
Lazar  ;  St.  Jacim  Osogovski,  founded  by  King  Dragutin ;  Sv.  Bogo- 
rodica Rilska  (Our  Lady  of  Rilo),  founded  by  King  Decanshi ; 
St.  Gavril  Lesnovski,  founded  by  the  Despot  Jovan  Oliver,  etc.' 

"It  is  further  proved  by  the  many  episcopal  sees  and  Metropoli- 
tanates  founded  by  St.  Sava,  such  as  those  in  Moravica,  Custendil, 
Samokov,  Bregalnica,  Morozvizd,  and  many  other,  of  which  the 
records  are  still  extant. 

"  Lastly,  it  is  proved  by  our  Old  Serbian  speech,  preserved  in  all 
its  purity,  the  tongue  in  which  the  kings  and  tsars  of  Serbia  conversed  ; 
it  is  proved  by  our  ancient  Serbian  customs,  dress,  etc.,  and  by  much 
else  as  well,  that  we  are  Serbs,  and  naught  else. 

"We,  the  undersigned,  being  pure  Serbs  of  true  Serbian  stock  of 
the  most  ancient  and  purest  of  Serbian  territories,  yet  once  more 
implore  Your  Highness  on  our  knees  by  any  means  to  deliver  us  from 
our  bondage  of  five  centuries,  and  to  incorporate  us  with  your 
principality  of  Serbia.  Otherwise  the  inhabitants  of  Kumanovo, 
Palanka,  and  Kratovo,  having  fought  shoulder  to  shoulder  with  their 
brothers  of  Serbia  against  their  mortal  foe  the  Turk,  may  not  dare 
to  thrust  their  heads  again  beneath  the  yoke,  but  would  rather  slay 
themselves  with  all  their  households. 

"  In  the  names  of  all  the  undersigned,  we  authorize  B P , 

merchant;    V C ,  peasant;  V C ,  P D ,  P 

P ,  and  Petar  Mitrovic." z 


1  The  foundations  mentioned  in  the  previous  petition  have  been 
omitted  here. 

'  The  names  of  living  personB,  especially  those  of  any  of  tha 
signatories,  are  obviously  withheld,  for  fear  of  exposing  their  owners 
to  the  vengeance  of  the  Turks  and  Bulgars. 


248  MACEDONIA 


C 

Petition  addressed  to  the  British  Consul  at  Vranje,  as  Envoy  of  the 
Berlin  Congress,  signed  in  Vranje,  on  June  11,  1878,  by  twenty 
natives  of  Gilane  (from  the  towns  and  villages  of  Gilane,  Pasijan, 
Petrovac,  Ranilug,  Ropotovo,  Domorovac,  Kufedze,  Koretiste, 
Stanisor,  Budrig,  Partes,  Grizimi,  Mocar,  Miganovac,  and 
Businac)  : — 

"  The  compassionate  and  humane  disposition  of  Tour  Majesty  gives 
us,  your  obedient  servants,  the  undersigned,  courage  on  our  knees 
to  implore  you  and  your  Government  to  take  pity  upon  us  and  to 
rescue  us  from  the  horrible  position  in  which  we  are  placed,  and 
at  the  same  time  to  unite  us  tvith  our  brothers  in  the  Principality 
of  Serbia,  from  whom  we  have  been  separated  for  five  hundred 
years."  (Here  follow  complaints  that  sympathy  is  extended  to 
the  grievances  of  the  Bulgars  and  other  peoples  enslaved  by  the 
Turks,  while  the  unhappy  Serbs  of  Old  Serbia  are  ignored  in  spite 
of  their  great  sufferings.  Moreover  a  list  is  given  of  all  murders 
and  other  outrages,   excesses  lately  committed  by  the   Turks.) 

The   petition   concludes  : — 

"We  therefore  most  humbly  pray  your  Government  to  free  us 
from  our  fetters  and  bonds  and  to  unite  us  with  our  Serbian  brothers, 
the  end  that  the  sun  of  Justice  and  Freedom  may  arise  for  us  also, 
wherefore  we  should  be  eternally  grateful  to  you.  In  this  joyful 
hope  we   sign   for  the    inhabitants    of   Gilane."  * 

{Here  follow  the  signatures.) 


Petition  of  500  distinguished  citizens,  archimandrites,  priests, 
teachers,  mayors,  etc.,  of  the  districts  of  Kicevo,  Ochrida, 
Debar,  and  Elbasan,  with  the  seals  of  308  communes  affixed, 
dated  from  the  Monastery  of  Cista  Precista  in  Skrzava  at 
the  Sabor  (meeting)  of  June  15,  1878,  and  addressed  to  the 
"King"  of  Serbia:— 

"We  have  heard    that  by   the   treaty   of    San   Stefano  we   are 
to  become  subject  to  a  Bulgarian  realm  and  that  our  native  land 


■  This  petition  is  in  so  far  interesting  as  the  population  of  Gilane 
ia  known  to  be  of  Serbian  Catholic  origin. 


SUPPLEMENT    IV  249 

of  Old  Serbia  is  henceforth  to  be  called  'Bulgaria.'  Since  we 
neither  are  Bulgars,  nor  ever  were  Bulgars,  and  not  a  single 
Bulgar  is  resident  among  us — with  the  exception  of  the  Bulgarian 
bishops  and  teachers  who  have  been  forced  upon  us  by  the 
Turkish  Government — we  as  Serbs  appeal  to  you  our  only  Sovereign 
and  Lord,  and  beg  you  save  us  from  this  calamity  and,  as  purest 
Serbs  of  the  truest  and  best  Serbian  stock,  to  unite  us  with  your 
principality  of  Serbia,  our  only  mother  and  solace. 

"  That  we  of  the  districts  of  Kicevo,  Debar,  Ochrida,  Elbasan, 
etc.,  are  purest  Serbs  of  truest  Serbian  stock  is  proved  not  only 
by  our  purely  Serbian  speech,  but  by  those  whom  you  and  we 
worship,  even  our  Saints  and  holy  relics,  such  as  .  .  ."  (Here  again 
follows  a  list  of  the  relics  of  the  Serbian  Kings  Vladimir  and 
Petroslav.  as  also  of  those  of  the  Serbian  SS.  Clement,  Naum, 
and  Ilarion,  who  are  buried  in  those  parts  of  Old  Serbia.) 

"It  is  further  proved  by  the  former  capitals  of  our  sainted 
kings,  viz.  Prespa,  the  capital  of  our  holy  King  Petroslav ;  Ochrida, 
Beograd  and  Cemernik,  where  King  Vladimir  had  his  residence ; 
Papradnica  (now  Kodzadzik),  the  capital  of  King  Vojislav  ;  the 
ruins  of  the  residence  of  King  Gjuragj  on  the  Gjuragj  Planina  Hills  ; 
the  archiepiscopal  sees  of  our  Serbian  rulers  before  St.  Nemanja  in 
Biskupstica  below  the  Gjuragj  Planina;  the  ruins  of  the  cathedrals 
of  Debrca  and  Budim  (in  Kostur),  founded  by  St.  Sava ;  the 
foundations  of  King  Milutin,  viz.  St.  Gjuragj  Orasacki  and  St. 
George's  (above  Kicevo). 

"It  is  further  proved  by  the  monasteries  which  have  been 
preserved  complete,  such  as  St.  Jo  van  Slepcev  (Bitolj),  founded 
by  King  Deeanski ;  Sv.  Bogorodica  in  Porec  and  on  the  Babuna, 
founded  by  King  Uros  the  Great ;  Sv.  Bogorodica  Zlatovrh 
Treskavacka  and  Sv.  Arangjel  (the  Blessed  Mother  of  God  and 
the  Archangel)  in  Bucim,  founded  by  King  Milutin ;  Sv.  Bogorodica 
near  Bitolj,  St.  Ilija  near  Hlerin,  and  St.  Gjuragj  near  Gjavat, 
founded  by  our  Nemanja  Tsars ;  Sv.  Bogorodica  above  Kostur, 
founded  by  St.  Sava ;  St.  Ilija  above  Kostur,  and  twenty-four  monas- 
teries at  Meteora,  founded  by  the  sainted  Nemanjici ;  St.  Peter's 
above  Beograd,  founded  by  King  Petroslav ;  the  Holy  Archangel's  in 
Prilep,  founded  by  King  Marko ;  Sv.  Bogorodica  of  Zrze,  founded 
by  King  Vukasin ;  the  two  monasteries  of  Cista  Precista  (above 
Struga  and  above  Kicevo)  and  Sv.  Bogorodica  (above  Ochrida), 
all  three  founded  by  King  Vladimir,  etc.,  etc. 

"  Hence  we  pay  our  respects  to  you  in  the  name  of  all  our 
sainted  KingB  and  Tsars,  and  of  the  whole  Serbian  population  of 
to-day  in  the  regions  aforesaid,  begging  you  to  liberate  us  and 
take  us  under  the  wing  of  your  protection  and  unite  us  with  your 


250  MACEDONIA 

principality  of  Serbia  failing  which  we  will  all  perish,  for  we 
never  have  lived  with  the  Bulgars,  and  cannot  so  live.  In 
that  case  we  would  rather  continue  to  remain  under  the  four 
centuries'1  long  domination  of  the  Turks,  under  whom  we  shall 
at  least  be  able  to  preserve  our  nationality,  our  language,  and 
our  faith." 


E 

Petition  addressed  to  the  British  Consul  (Envoy  of  the  Berlin 
Congress),  dated  Gilane,  June  18,  1878,  and  signed  by  375 
distinguished  inhabitants  from  the  districts  of  Gilane,  Skoplje, 
and  Tetovo.  A  footnote  accounts  for  the  absence  of  parish  seals 
by  explaining  that  plundering  Circassians  and  Albanians  had 
taken  them  away.     The  petition  runs  as  follows  : — 

"  Several  weeks  ago  we  presented  a  petition  to  His  Highness 
the  Prince  of  Serbia,  showing  that  we  have  been  Serbs  of  old 
and  always  shall  be  Serbs ;  that  this  is  proved  by  our  customs, 
folk-songs,  habits,  dress,  speech,  and  the  numerous  monasteries 
and  churches  founded  by  Serbian  rulers  and  to  be  met  with  at 
every  step  in  our  country. 

b"  Therefore  we  raised  our  voices  in  protest  against  those  toho 
would  persuade  us  that  we  are  Bulgars,  falsely  declaring  that 
our  land  was  once  Bulgarian,  and  we  begged  His  Highness  that 
we  being  true  Serbs  of  his,  he  would  deliver  us  from  servitude 
and  take  us  under  the  protection  of  the  beneficent  Serbian  laws 
and  receive  us  into  the  bosom  of  our  free  brothers.  We  also 
demonstrated  that  the  Serbian  element  in  the  districts  of  Gilane, 
Pristina,  Skoplje,  and  Tetovo  far  outnumbers  that  of  the  renegade 
Albanians,  and  we  have  enumerated  the  most  recent  outrages 
committed  by  the  Turks." 

(Here  the  native  hope  is  expressed  that  Europe,  having  inscribed 
the  device  "Freedom  and  Progress"  upon  her  banner,  will  take 
pity  also  upon  the  Christians  who  are  being  oppressed  by  the  Turks, 
and  create  decent  conditions,  and  worthy  of  humanity,  which  would 
guarantee  the  peace  of  Europe.  Thence  it  was  expected  of  the 
Congress  of  Berlin  that  it  would  give  the  Serbian  army  the 
mandate  as  soon  as  possible  to  occupy  Gilane,  Skoplje,  Tetovo,  and 
Pristina,  whereby  the  atrocities  of  the  Turks  would  be  brought 
to  an  end. 

A  long  list  of  these  outrages  follows.  The  conclusion  is  formed 
by  the  request  to  submit  the  petition  to  the  Congress.) 


SUPPLEMENT   IV  251 


Petition  to  the  "King"  of  Serbia,  dated  Skoplje,  June  20,  1878, 
with  the  seals  of  more  than  50  communes  affixed.  Nobody 
had  dared  to  sign,  as  of  the  signatories  to  the  Bozince 
petition  250  had  been  arrested  in  Skoplje  alone,  of  whom 
only  50  had  come  out  of  prison  alive.  In  the  face  of  such 
intimidation  it  is  truly  amazing  that  the  mayors  of  50  com- 
munes yet  had  courage  to  affix  their  seals.    The  petition  runs  : — 

"  Having  heard  that  under  the  terms  of  peace  we  are  to  come 
under  a  Bulgarian  State,  as  if  we  were  Bulgars  and  not  pure  Serbs 
of  true  Serbian  stock,  we  on  our  knees  implore  you  not  to  consent 
to  let  us  pure  and  true  Serbs  fall  into  Bulgarian  bondage.  We 
were  never  under  Bulgarian  rule;  we  never  were  nor  ever  can 
be  Bulgars.  We  citizens  of  Skoplje  are  of  the  purest  and  best 
Serbian  stock,  as  also  are  the  inhabitants  of  the  districts  of 
Tetovo,  Debar,  Kicevo,  Prilep,  Istip,  Veles,  Kratovo,  Kocani, 
Kumanovo,  Palanka,  Banjska,  etc.  Our  pure  Old  Serbian  speech, 
the  speech  of  our  Kings  and  Tsars,  our  customs,  usages,  dress, 
songs,  etc.,  bear  this  out.  Equally  it  is  borne  out  by  the  ancient 
Serbian  buildings  in  our  country,  viz.  the  Holy  Archangel  and 
Ilija's  on  the  Karadag,  founded  by  Stephan  Nemanja ;  the 
Holy  Archangel  and  Blessed  Mother  of  God  (Sv.  Arangjel  and 
Bogorodica),  founded  by  Uros  the  Infant;  St.  Nikita's  in  Cuear, 
founded  by  King  Mulutin  ;  Sv.  Bogorodica  (Blessed  Mother  of  God) 
in  Ljubinac,  founded  by  the  sister  of  Tsar  Dusan,  St.  Dimitrije 
in  Susica,  where  the  Kings  Vukasin  and  Marko  are  buried ; 
St.  Vasilje,  founded  by  King  AndrejaS,  and  containing  his  tomb  ; 
St.  Pantelija's  in  Porec,  founded  by  Nemanja;  St.  Andrija's,  founded 
by  and  containing  the  tomb  of  Queen  Simonida ;  St.  Athanasije  in 
Lesav,  founded  by  Tsar  Lazar. 

"  It  is  further  proved  by  our  city  of  Skoplje,  once  the  capital 
of  Serbia ;  by  the  ruins  of  Kacanik,  the  stronghold  of  Starina 
Novak."  (Here  follows  a  list  of  numerous  ruined  castles  famous 
in  connection  with  Serbian  heroes  and  of  sundry  Metropolitan 
sees,  etc.) 

"It  is  further  borne  out  by  many  documentary  monuments  'of 
our  past  and  literary  history,  all  penned  in  this  heart,  centre,  navel, 
and  storehouse  of  true  and  pure   Serbia. 

"We  therefore  beseech  you  on  our  knees  to  save  us  from  other, 
harsher  and  more  cruel  oppressors  and  assassins,  who  are  worse 
than  the  Turks,  and  have  already  under  the  Turkish  rule  oppressed 


252  MACEDONIA 

us  through  their  bishops  and  teachers,  have  threatened  and  de- 
stroyed our  language,  our  Slava,  our  nationality,  and  Serbian 
antiquities.  Unite  us  as  soon  as  possible  with  your  principality 
of  iSerbia,  otherwise  we  shall  be  left  no  choice  but  to  emigrate  or 
to  perish  in  the  conflict  with   the  Bulgars." 


G 

Petition  to  the  Berlin  Congress  dated  "  On  the  Gjerman  Planina, 
July  1,  1878,"  bearing  800  signatures  and  the  seals  of  196 
communes  and  monasteries  from  the  districts  of  Kumanovo, 
Kratovo,  Kocani,  and  Palanka.  (An  almost  identical  but  far 
more  explicit  petition,  bearing  350  signatures  and  145  seals, 
was  presented  to  the  Prince  of  Serbia.) 

"  Several  weeks  ago  we,  in  concert  with  the  inhabitants  of  the 
Stip  district,  petitioned  H.H.  Our  Gracious  Lord  and  King  Milan 
Obrenovic  IV  that,  we  being  pure  Serbs  of  true  Serb  stock,  he  ivould 
take  us  under  his  protection  and  unite  our  true  Serbian  land,  in 
which  the  Serbian  Kings  have  lived  and  laboured  and  made  their 
graves,  with  his  Principality,  and  not  permit  us  to  be  transferred 
to  the  Bulgars,  whose  language  and  customs  are  alien  to  tis.  For 
neither  will  we  live  together  with  the  Bulgars  nor  have  our  fathers 
done  so.  We  could  never  form  one  people  with  the  Bulgars,  for 
we  are  pure  Serbs  of  old,  and  naught  else.  In  our  petition  we 
proved  that  we  are  truly  pure  and  genuine  Serbs,  seeing  that  ..." 
(Here  all  the  ecclesiastic  foundations,  ancient  buildings,  etc.,  are 
all  enumerated  as  in  the  previous  petition.)  "  Our  contention  is 
also  borne  out  by  our  speech,  habits,  and  customs,  which  differ 
greatly  from  those  of  the  Bulgars,  and  furthermore  by  our  ancient 
mints  where  Serbian  money  was  minted,  especially  that  in  the 
village  of  Perperi,  and  by  our  mines  which  are  so  famous  in  Serbian 
history. 

"  But  we  received  no  answer  to  our  petition  ! 

"  The  best  proof  that  it  is  not  possible  for  us  under  any  circum- 
stances to  live  under  either  the  Bulgars  or  the  Turks  is  to  be  found 
in  the  fact  that  the  inhabitants  who  fled  from  forty  villages  in  the 
district  of  Palanka  do  not  dare  to  return  to  their  homes  because 
since  the  retirement  of  the  Serbian  army  these  have  been  occupied 
by  the  Turks  and  Bulgars." 

(Here  follows  the  definition  of  the  conditions  under  which  Mihail 
Abogovic,  the  last  Despot  of  this  region,  surrendered  in  1459  to  the 
Turks,   who,  however,  disregarded  the  terms  of  the  treaty.)     After 


SUPPLEMENT    IV  253 

further  complaints  concerning  the  grievous  plight  of  the  people, 
the  petition  proceeds  : — 

"  If  help  is  not  soon  forthcoming,  no  trace  will  be  left  of  us  ere 
long."  (Here  follow  renewed  requests  for  incorporation  with  Serbia, 
with  urgent  representations  to  Bismarck  personally  and  an  appeal 
for  a  European  Commission  to  investigate  the  true  state  of  affairs 
and  the  atrocities  committed  by  the  Turks.) 

"This  Commission  will  convince  itself  of  the  truth  of  our  state- 
ments, for  we  do  not  dare  to  lie  like  our  step-brothers  the  Bidgars, 
who  have  deceived  our  Russian  and  Serbian  brothers,  maintaining 
that  the  Sandzaks  of  Vidin,  Sofija,  and  Custendil  are  inhabited  by 
Bulgars." 

(Then  follows  a  long  catalogue  of  all  recent  excesses,  outrages 
murders,  etc.,  committed  by  the  Turkish  troops.  The  names  of 
several  hundred  Serbs  who  had  been  ill-used  or  murdered  by  the 
Turks  are  given,  with  the  names  of  the  villages  concerned  and 
occasionally  those  of  the  guilty  Turkish  officers  and  men.  The 
names  of  several  hundred  violated  girls,  women  and  children  are 
also  published,  together  with  the  names  of  many  Turks  who  were 
guilty  of  these  outrages.  It  is  a  heart-rendering  and  revolting 
account,  which,  needless  to  say,  made  no  impression  upon  the  dried- 
up  diplomats  of  the  Berlin  Congress.) 


INCOMPLETE     LIST     OF     BULGARIAN     ATTACKS     UPON 
SERBIAN  SCHOOLS  AND  TEACHERS   IN   MACEDONIA 

1.  On  the  opening  day  of  the  Serbian  school  in  Dobrusevo  (county 
of  Bitolj)  the  Bulgars  of  Bitolj  assaulted  the  peasants  who  had 
assembled  at  the  school  On  that  occasion  the  teacher,  Andjelko 
Trajkovic,  was  twice  fired  at  with  a  rifle. 

2.  In  Kicevo  they  likewise  attacked  the  school  and  assaulted  the 
Serbian  citizens. 

3.  In  Ochrida  they  beat  the  Serbian  teacher  Djordje  Tasic,  and 
L.  Stavric,  a  Serbian  bookseller. 

4.  In  Kumanovo  the  Serbian  church  and  school  were  attacked 
times  without  number.  There  were  frequent  instances  of  bloodshed. 
In  one  assault  upon  the  Serbian  school  five  Serbs  were  wounded. 

5.  In  Gostivar  the  Bulgars  attacked  the  Serbian  church  one 
Christmas  Day  with  the  intention  of  seizing  it  from  the  Serbs. 
The  Bulgars  discharged  their  revolvers  inside  the  church  and  beat 
the  Serbs. 

6.  On  the  occasion  of  the  opening  of  the  Serbian  school  in  Veles, 
the  Bulgars  assaulted  the  Serbs  and  beat  them  in  the  streets. 

7.  In  KukuS  they  wrecked  and  looted  the  Serbian  school,  and 
beat  the  teacher  Jovan  Jovicevic  so  severely  that  he  all  but 
died. 

8.  In  Zubovac  they  attacked  the  Serbian  school  and  wounded 
the  teacher,  Josip  Bradic. 

9.  In  Gornje  Todoracevo  (district  of  Kukus)  they  attacked  and 
looted  the  Serbian  church. 

10.  In  Prilep  the  Bulgars  planned  a  great  attack  upon  the  Serbs 
en  masse,  but  it  was  discovered  and  frustrated   by  the  police. 

11.  On  the  occasion  of  the  opening  of  the  Serbian  school  in 
Bitolj  in  1897  the  Bulgars  attacked  the  school.  The  police  with 
difficulty  succeeded  in  dispersing  the  aggressors  and  in  arresting 
some  of  them.  But  the  attacks  were  repeated,  and  in  one  of  them 
a  Bulgarian  professor  wounded  Gjura  Vojvedic\  student  at  the 
Serbian  Lycee. 

254 


SUPPLEMENT   V  255 

12.  In  Krusevo  the  Bulgars  assaulted  two  Serbian  female  teachers 
in  1899,  Olga  Vukojevic  and  Zlata  Krstidka.  The  latter  fell  ill 
from  shock  and  all  but  died. 

13.  In  Skoplje  the  Serbian  Bchools,  teachers,  and  students  were 
attacked  countless  times.  On  Christmas  Day,  1899,  and  in  April 
and  in  December  1900  the  Bulgars  assaulted  the  teachers  and  pupils 
of  the  Girls'  High  School.  They  beat  them,  pulled  out  their  hair, 
and  otherwise  ill-used  them. 

14.  In  Tetovo  the  Bulgars  attacked  the  Serbian  school  andcitizens 
on  the  Feast  of  St.  Sava,  the  Serbian  patron  saint,  January  14, 
1900. 

15.  In  Celopek  they  set  fire  to  the  Serbian  school  in   1901.' 


'  Iv.  Ivanic,  "  Iz  Crkvene  Istorije  Srba  u  Turskoj "  ("  Church 
History  of  the  Serbs  in  Turkey  in  the  Eighteenth  and  Nineteenth 
Centuries"),  Belgrade,  1902,  pp.  90-93.  Iv.  Ivanic,  "Makedonija" 
("  Macedonia"),  Novi  Sad,  1908,  pp.  470-474. 


256 


MACEDONIA 


fe 

o 

CO 

cs 
© 

H 

OS 

A 

tH 

W 
n 

ft 

<J 

5<s 

<s 

o 

i— i 
on 

00 

CO 

i-4 

« 

<J 

A 

<JJ 

W 

ft 

w 

P 

£ 

PQ 

H 

ft 

ft 

PQ 

W 

H 

<J 

V-l 

PQ 

5Z5 

O 
ft 

ft 

ft 

O 

W 

«aj 

Ph 
ft 
p 
ft 
p 

PQ 
ft 
ft 

OQ 

Eh 

o 

EH 
CO 


ft 

ft 
ft 

PM 

S 
o 


£ 


ft 
ft 
Eh 
H 
i— • 

O 

o 

A 

< 
i— i 

P3 

<J 

C5 

hJ 
P 
PQ 


X 

J5 

J^ 

-k3 

-43 

Ua 

1      E 

* 

«-f 

S 

a 

H 

■49 

o 

_i3 

H 

o 

> 

O 

>» 

S  ON 
RDBR. 

00 

"o 
> 

-B 
m 

1 

1  !  1 

1  1  1  1  1  1-2 

3 

n3' 

M 

^3 

T3 

1 

a  t3 

a 

I- 

o 

> 

C 

J5 

B 
a3 

© 
> 
— ^ 
O 

B 

B 

•♦1  ~ 

H 
8 

o 

•  *1 

■4» 

o 

© 

•4-t 
•  p-l 

> 

T3    eS 

a 

i-< 

J3 

J2 

H 

o~ 

W 

CO 

PQ 

« 

O      . 

as 

A 

"*   OS 
Q   « 

as  & 

o 

"3 

o 

a3 
CO 

CD 

Pm 

-*3 

o 

i'c 

i 

-c 

^M 

© 
CO 

o 

a  &. 

B 

£| 

<  o 

*-H  CO  O 

eo  so  tj<  co  co  «o  t- 

c-^ 

t£ 

3 

t-^ 

t~ 

« 

00  CO  OS 

CS  OS  OS  OS  OS  OS  OS 

OS 

as 

o» 

OS 

>■ 

00  00  GO 

go  oo  co  ao  ao  oo  ao 

00 

00 

00 

00 

i-l  i-H  i-t 

i— I  i— 1  i— I  i— 1  i-H  i-H  i— 1 

rt 

i-i 

»-< 

1—1 

r— « 
O 

O                  ^ 

rH 

K 

-^      S- 

c           >o 

■* 

°   H 

B    c3 
.B    03 

1        £ 

00 

H   «! 

*-<   C 

S            o 

. 

RESIDENC 
BIRTHPL 

ft^ 
^"'  o 

o  g 

Si   B    O 

B          >    >  -B  .2    &i  £3 

s  g  s  °>§  a-2  g> 

^2 

c3 
T3 

Si 

.B 
o 

> 

w 

•a 

« 

o 

CD 

s 

« 

a 

Pmi-hPm 

0Qh!NO  PQOco 

Pm 

O 

PQ 

< 

B 
3 

3 

^  B 

©  £ 

13  •- 

2  5 

M 

2 

CO 

"CO 

o 

CO 

si 
I     w 

•** 

Si 

o 

©  ° 

CM 

1       31 

03 

2                             K 

H 

o 

O 

o 
o 

a 

O  •*» 

o  S 
^3.2 

-5C         BBS 
.S  ^3    c3  .2    a5    cS   O 

©  "B  -13 

J3  o" 

B   O   &1 

%    m    O 

o 
o 

o 

02 

B 

01 

c3 

B 

09 

o  s-< 

s,    o    c    Sj    o    o    --i 

as 

Si 

© 

« 

coPm 

Pq  CO  Pm  Pm  Ph  Ph  Pm 

fi 

Pm 

Pm 

Pm 

s 

*H 

III 

:    :  •«    :    :  ■>    : 

r° 

^ 

i 

H 

>            ° 

© 

$>> 

o 

a 
n 

H 

6. 
O 

m 

a 

< 

•o 

0Pm£ 

COOCO 

Q                     CO 

-B             M  -o 

>§  Pm  q,  o  -g  .2 

^5  "  .S  ^  ft  «,  eg 

•<J  hs  O  PQ  S5  co  S 

a 

P 

Pm" 
*** 

4 

o 

a 

c3 
13 

Si 

o 

© 

■1— * 
■  r-l 

H 

a 
p 

r2 

at 
»^i 

Ph 

B 
oS 
>x 

S 

ft 

© 

$ 

. , — J 

00 

Si 

o 

6 

HNM 

■*10«M»»0 

r-l 

CM 

co 

■* 

55 

SUPPLEMENT  VI  257 


-fl  fl       fl 


1  P 

"8*8  "S     ■§ 

4  -5  «S       •«       -9       -7!  -2 


:-. 


*> 


•"!  "3  (->         •J-1         "TJS         ^> 

ID  05  O  00  OO  o 

> 


9         I     i     l     l     l  fl 


-S      12^^21  I       Ig      Mill 


a  u      _,      a  fc.  a  &4 


cod)  ejaj^ooWoS*-^  .5  •- 

TJ*©  ^"3         £        rC"3'-3'o^        T3  o  _,        'O 

o  *  fl  h     .5      c  *«  a  n  S      fl  3  as,  fl 


j  .2,     fl  a      oa  §<    a  . 

>Q0_  ^oq^qo^i^  Phi, 

O         !>        fl     .         I         «)         OS      .    O  03  O-i 

t-*5  t>  t-  qd      aoad"3o6      ao      ao  aood £  oo  "3  ao  aS  »S?  ao  ao  oo  oo  op  op  a>  of  »5J 

oOojojo      os  o>  oo.  o»      a>      oso>oscOo>rao50>P*,o>050500iOio>05C/2 
oo      oooooo      ao  oo      oo      oo      oo  ao  ao      ao      ao  ao      ao  ao  ao  ao  ao  ao  ao  ao 


fl  ©                 ® 

J  a           » 

-  £     o     g 

«  S  <s  .  -•«     9                       .           -a  «« 


oo      a  fl  S       o-StaSO'iS  bo'S1      fl  B4s  -S.2  S  S-fl*2-E  o 

O     oqOO     PhQ     W     pq  ►JiJoq     W  «>  PhcqSOWPhPhoj 

•s    i  is                   § 

fc.        ■«                                 oflfl  rjs  fl                           oj         CO  Hg  .fl    CD 

I   1   II    !§l   I  a3-s  I           &  J&e! 

J      fl-ggS      Sflfl      a  -g^-e  -g  fl         -g-g^-gflfloi« 

|    llllll-g-i   -2  g.s^^s  g|  i-iin-s-ssj 

o       *<®kSiv'»«<B       ©  tei  J3-J3       5S  a>oj  B  o  «    ,  5  s  «u 

CQ       PhPhB       PhS       OQ       CO  ^ChCQ       Ph  PhOQ  Ph  Ph  P-i  <«J  Ph  CO  02  S 

,j               •                       •               •  ••CQ               *  ••               ••  *£) 

o             «*o             •             •  ••«              •  ••             •      •    2 

.  _                   .  —  ^^                                                                   Pr 


^>  >a§  :-5  S  r^  ST-s  :  «§  :^a*c^| 

t*  ©>S  fl  a  g  OS00  a  a  o^-<fr»c3"i!-'»c 

J  ®c3_g  oj   2  3  B  2   §   °  O  cBj  fl   g    =6    «   g   8   «g 

W  c»M«  «<J  ^  Ph  Wa2oa  Q  «Q  ^EHPQ^tH^rH 

•O  «0  t- 00  0»  O  <-<  C*  CO  TJ<  «5  tO  t-  00  C>  O  r-l  (M  CO  ■*  »0  «D 

»-»  HrtH  i-hct  o>»  o»  c^tNcN  o«  ««  oieoooeocoeoeoeo 

18 


958 


MACEDONIA 


» 

O    S 


a 

a 
P 
5 


a 
o 

a 

a 

o 

S5 

< 

PS 

< 
a 


o 

X 

S  is 

cs   « 
CO    f, 

c  * 
M 


<0 

o 

-*» 

x 


T3 
CO 

a 

•a 


X 
© 

P 
X 
o 


X 
is 

P 

1 


O 

X 
CQ 


T3 

CO 

•  f-4 

a 


©  s 

"3  g 
a  © 

o  *- 

XI 

-IS 

CQ 


P    o 

CO    O 

U 

9  m 

p    & 

«£  X 

°.2 
A"* 

CQ 


O 


H3 

C 

H 

a. a 


X! 

-•a 
O 


u 

P. 

< 

of 
co 


x 

XI  CD 

-u  ■-< 
00 


CQ 
0) 

'© 


od  lO 


a; 

s 


p 


^  g- 


,  o  o  >  ©  c5  © 

_  3      -    " 


P* 
© 


ooioj^affiSaoioios 

CoOCOHHCOCOCQCOCOCOCO 

00         00         0000         00000000 


CO    03 

*■>  P  e 
CO  £  O 

os  55  o 

oo      o> 


55 


a 

©  So 

o.So 


CI 

X 
© 

1  ^ 


OS 


oo 


XI 

"•    i 

XI    ©C* 

3  £  ^ 

«.  co      „ 

o  ±*  o 
oO  o 

CO  CO 


O  H 
O 

*  a 

a  B 

e  b 

h  a 

a  a 


o 

i-H 

-< 

a 
D 

© 

o 


s 

w 


a 

H 

a 
o 

H 

< 


>o 


cS 

a 

p 


o    o 


en   O    r:  i-Q        >o 


o 

O 

XI 
c3 

o 


CO 

c 
a 

55 


o 

O 

OS 


O 

•9 
o 


a 

O 

M 


x» 

cv 


to 
« 

••-1 

a 
a 

x 

(2 


00 

eg 
CD 


3 


a 

X 
hi 

m 


a  a5 


c 

'u   S 
a  cs 


CD 

3 

a 

CQ 


1-1 


1  *.    C    §    S 

c3 .2  r^  o  u 

<v   u  G        o 


CQPh  P-i  h-i 


CQ 


C 

2 

C3 

a- 
X 


X 
hi 

C9 

CQ 


Vl 
CO 

X 

■--> 
cS 


CS 

a 

CO 


a 
1 

CO 

X 

a 
a 

x 

u 

CO 

CQ 


C 
c8 

CO 

ft 


CO 

O 

Ph 

o 
^! 
fl 
c3 
-+^ 
CQ 


> 

o 

a 


CO 

dS 

-O 

a 

CO 

CO 

Ph 

> 

o 

o 

o 

J 

■ 

I  >*s 

CO 

a 

CO  . 

::?  > 

V.    CO 

o  -.s1 


-o 


a    v 


,-s  § 

cu    v, 


o 


CO 


■a 

•  o 

co 

•r- « 

o 

^» 

CQ 


CO 

CQ 


a 

CO 
N 
CO 

"a 


■  »-i 


■e     o 


a 

cs 

K 


•  ~-P   ^     CO 

3    SS 


? >s  ?  a 

CO  CO  M  "^ 
-W  M  •*<  CO 
CQW  1-3 


o 

M 

cs 
-►= 

00 


be 

u 

o 


'> 
<o 
>co 

p 

CO 

Ph 


'> 
O 

09 


o       a  a  a       H 
Ph      O      S      P      ft 


o 


ao 

so 


o> 

eo 


5  XM 


CN  CO  **  >Cl 

^JH    ^   ^   ^ 


CO 


00 


0» 


o 

«3 


o 


SUPPLEMENT   VI  259 


>      ► 
©      © 


*2 


i 


V4  O         O  u 

J  s  s  |5  I 

o  •».       -^       ©  ©  ©  _,  o  © 

g        I     I         I     ISfgS        §                  2  -Q:2-a:2-G-S  0  §  g  2        |  "C 

.2                         3 .2 .2      .2              J3  T3ngror3j3xi  3  >A  ja 

-»=»                              -^^^^           .-O  a  8  =  S  °  °        rf  "E  2  o  o 

C                                     G    ^   G         G              S^j^0^"^-^©011-3^.  ja 

O                        £oo     q         W  gg  JS     S     otc»  W  xn  m 


■X 

© 


IS 


"3 


*  I         §33  i  I  |       I .  as 

§  §  ±»  _£>.£>>>  >  >"  >  >  §  is             ©' "«  o  ^  S  I  § 

g  §-3  3-3-300  o  00  pq            JSPh?*  3  a? 

H9  Hjhj  i-s  I-,  1-5  55  55  55  55                             Q       ©-a*  <J  <Ji-> 

8  00*  00*0 00"  ©  o  d  o  o     £f«2/S*-«  -^  »~7»-r 

00  00000  o  00  o  o      ooflo  o  00 

cs  01  os  '3;  03  c<  J.  o)  c-  os  Os  os  os      osos      os  os  osos 


©  ©  ©        © 

"2  "3  "os     "oi  o 


S    "a  M  Eel    E        I        w  «  «     g        =3         « 

o       o  £       £  £  <£  o  o       o  ,3   ®      :S  — '3       £  -§       o  £       So 

«      Qf>      t>p>§«p5      p5  p>  h5      pq      «      oh?      02  N      «JO 

© 

G  a  o  ™        ►* 

©   o         oS 


-•»  ©  'C      'S 

a 

© 


SfiCGG  ©©Gq         3  S        a  .GloflS 

3  3       3  3  3  •  j*      -n  a  a      _B  -rf-H  b-= 


CO  CD     00  CO     CO     03 

c8o3cgc8e3e3  cScSoS^^0 


9   -»3 

©     M 

s 

A    Oh 

CS 

a 

C  G 

rt   c3 

T3 

-    u 

W 

©  © 
COQQ 

™5  © 

•W  00 

3  G  -*=> 

3  -g  Sj  e 


22      2-2     33  2  §  S3  I  2 

©©©©«©                                                                 <u        CJ                5-1             J                CJ      ©  ^  BVI4 

Ph      CmPm      PmPhPm                             Eh  H      Ph      W      CQCQ  <J  CQ      Pm  Ph 

-»>         •r2v©-c3co      •«*«      •■             •      •  •  -o      •• 

£-©£      >-r;:co-        >-o        r^j^j        ;        •  :  .«        :: 

■        ^      §         IS  ,  I      >  I  o      ^ 

^  *?   Ms^S-hJ'    i  -I         1  B  1 

*  Fliil^llirM  111  :  1  II 

pq      «55      o^Eh^Ph      H           Ph  P      55      02      <  <  Ph  Ph      02« 

• 

cm       e»T»<       otot-ooos       O           h  en       eo       ■*       >o«o  t*  <x>       oso 

to        00        OOiOXJiO        O              «OCO        CO         tO        COCO  O  CO         <©  t- 


•J60 


MACEDONIA 


a 
°§ 

ce  OS 
»  & 

03    S» 

■ 

3 


a 

3 
O 

00 

go 

IS 

8- 

Ph 


H 
O 

E  g 

a  | 

*  E 

•<  o 

e 


o 

oS 
>- 

o 

.M 

m 

a 

C3 


.    j,  5  '3  "5 

•     •    •  >  a»  © 

ooo°fcA 


.a 


og 


o  o  o^^m  a.«Q«a 


J3  .3 

■*»        _  -*» 
eo      ,3  ao 

l-H  +>!-( 

e        •  8      fi 

<joa  sac 


o 


OOOO^OWOOr^OOOOOOHOOMOO 

©  05  Oi  OS         CT>         Oi  OS"         0>0>9>0>  O^O)         Oi  OS         Oi 


05 

o 


3 

Z 

&. 

K 

W 

a 

H 

►H 

05 

w 

t-t 

w 

05 

05 

S3 

cS 

.O 
U 

> 


O 

5> 

O 

CD 
CO 

t-3 


3 

°   n   °   •« 
>   P   f   g 

<3    O    qj  *a3 

OflOfl 


o 

;> 

0> 

3 

u 

M 


1.1 


»^  a ^  a  o       00 .3, 
opooo.-S       «o 


o 
o 

g 


o 

5- 

ft. 
D 

© 

o 


9> 


o 
-= 
08 

a 

a 


a 

c8 

5 
JO 
4a 

a 
-^»  *.  *>  2 
BCC.S 
cs  cs  os  a 
en  00  ao  p 
cfl   cS   SB   O 

O    V    «    M 


IV 
I 

aJ 


§ 

P 

0 

O 

,0,0 

d 

C!i 

#— • 

"— 1 

S3 

c 

>- 

S3 

crt 

P*fe 

flBfl„  fl_5 

CD     CC     Co    j5*  CO  ^J^ 

00   co   co   5  ca   g 

03    c3   OJ  .2  d    g 


a>  <u   a)   >-.   <u  ki 
Ah  Put  Pm  S  (X|  S 


s  i  s 

-«» "3  53  9 

*>    o    >    s-1 


w 


s 

o 


H 

X 

© 

■ 

a 

■< 


03 
CO 

p- 


O  <M 


^5 


c8       :   :   :    :       :       :   :       ::::::       :   : 
> -6 

*•  :o  o  'S      «o 

•o  o  -p    :      -S        :    :        :  « 2   :    :  a      S  .2 

■S'avS       'S  3.S.    go    -g-s 

Is-oca  fe  8  Oa       Aq,      £Ph 


•? 
o 

a 

ctf 
C8 

w 

o 

> 


o 

S5 


e» 


co  tj<  «o  to 
t-  t-  t-  t» 


tr-  t- 


o  1-1  cm  eo  Tf  io 
00  XI  00  00  00  00 


to  c- 

00  00 


00 
00 


SUPPLEMENT   VI 


261 


1 

f 

1 

1      I 

1     1    § 

OB 

© 

© 

| 

1 

| 

1       I 

1  1  ! 

1  1  1 

1     49 

1 

1 

1            1 

1     f    © 

o 

O 

1 

i 

1 

1       1 

i      i      i 

3 

« 

© 

•  — 

© 

a> 

Ou 

~ 

\ 

43 

a, 
o 

o 

o 

o 

-*=> 

•o 

-O 

u 

43 

-*» 

•*» 

ja 

3 

s 

3 

b* 

a 

O 

o 

tie  6th 
one    6th. 

eS 

.3  & 

CO 

„-d 

ja* 

JZ 

J3 

-a 

a 

43 

p 

d 

Ij  i-H 

-»3 

1-1 

-*3 

O 
eo 

m 

© 

45*>H 
3}     33 

© 

►O^J    43   43 

2T    33     03     35 

<g  hi  ih  f-i 

2  © 

S  £3 

©  t-t       . 
^  ^  ^ 

> 

vV43  "*" 

© 

U 

-IS 

o 

09 

s 

o 

3 

«8 

I-H  i-< 

add 

r3  eo  eo  eo 
>    .    .    . 

-,333 

3t-»' 

c  3 

3 

P< 

« 

p  ©O; 

30 

•  -H 

O 

!Ej 

O 

»-s 

3    c8  Hj 

®    cS    c8    S3 

K» 

08  ^*  i 

"T 

Hjt-5 

.3  <;  cc 

■  — 

-3 

Jx  eo  co  co 
W  ©  ©  o 

<N<M~ 

a  oT 

"3 

<N«(N 

a 

oi'ei'of. 

3*    - 

'3*   - 
J5  C5 

_d  c^ 

-t= 

NNNM* 

3  eo  eo  eo 

oom  o«a< 

H 

O  ©  ©O 

© 

< 

O  O  ©  © 

l-H  ©  o  © 

a:  © 

© 

os  ©  © 

©  ©  © 

© 

© 

© 

©  Oi  ©  © 

o  ©  © 

©  ©  © 

43 

© 

t 

as    si 

u 

4» 

33 

o 
> 
© 

3 
>u 

a 

U 

c 

p— * 

<D    © 

o 

'5 

4) 

«o 

*  S 

.2  3 

>  s  s 

53    O  •r-» 

.^4 

-*3    ■  — 

am, 

TS 
^-.               O 

<3    aj 

c  s 

> 
© 

■T. 
B 

> 

o 

h 
JO 

<S   > 

M 

•  — . 

.3 

©  ©  © 

■"3  *3  ''O  .*h 
N    N    N    © 

©               o 

e8    O    O    o8 

cS    cS    tf 

3  3  3 

fcc     U 

O 

it  -2 

■   b  d 

d 

'5* 

O 

O 

O    CS 

— '    c3    c3    u 

3   3   3 

oo 

W 

««>■ 

«pho 

O 

o 

C^PhPhW 

■  PQfflO 

CQ0QCQ 

s? 

If 

3 

3 

3  3 

> 

hi          b 
©          V 

K4 

© 

© 

©   © 

•M 

H         ** 

b 

'© 

©     © 

o 

a 

3         3 

o       o 

3 

o 

^3 

I 

43 

3 

43  43 

3   3 

3   3   3 
c3   co    cC 

43  43 

it  ' 

o 

4> 

■*» 

d  ■*»  efl 

<3 

-^ 

*J 

■*=•  2 

©     ©    ^3 

3  3 

a>   os 

© 

3 

d 

(3 

h    3 

rj 

3 

c.S 

.3 .3  a 

3  3  3 

T3  T3  |^3 

3 
O 

m 

O   as 

tC   31 

3  Is 

a 

e8 

33 

3 

31 

1  3 

3  3  to 

n  m 

S3 

>-,    c3 

E  e8  B 

M 

03 

d 

03 

(S    O 

O    O    * 

i-i      Vj      l-« 

©    ©    © 

<B    © 

P-i  C-t 

a 

©    ©    « 

Ph>Ph 

d  ©  d 

d 

© 

©     Li     ©     U 

Sh    C    © 

.       m 

B 

w 

,      . 

■           •           • 

, 

B 

. 

. 

•   .  i 

*   *   . 

i    : 

• 

I 

•      • 

*           *           • 

_5 

: 

• 

: 

;    i 

•  •  © 

:    :    : 

> 

•© 

> 

o 

*© 

:  « 
:>© 

Gacovic 
e  Trockovic" 
Kulakovic 

-© 
o 

"3 
© 

-3  i 

■a 

o 

. 

. 

•    • 

>N 

S     •© 

r-S      J*      © 

GJOB6V 

rije  Da 

JO 

d 
o 

3 
pq 

o3 

«6 

'o* 

3^ 

hi    cS 

a5  ^. 
3   © 

I— 1     ^j 

O' 

p 

<3 

.3 

>© 

o 

Q 

03 

-© 

3} 

ja  Gjelevic 
lip  Mincev 
mitrije  De 

OS      O  Jrf 

.2.-  3 

J  3 

c8 

3   3 
cS    cS 
>    >• 

c  52c 

>   o   > 

a 
3 

o 

c3 

-»3 
31 

O 

S3 

S 

c3    3 
»a  •— » 
3J    o 

>    5   4j>    M 

t"9 

3 

O    O 

oro 

o 

^ 

-<l 

N 

— ( 

SB 

£S5 

c5    ©  •-< 

PhPhPh 

©  O 

»-4 

oi  eo  ■* 

IO  o  t- 

00 

© 

© 

i-l  <N 

co  -^ 

W(Ot» 

00  ©  © 

X  3* 

© 

35  OS  © 

©  ©  © 

© 

© 

o 

©  ©  C 

©  ©  © 

OOh 

i—4 

262 


MACEDONIA 


B 
H 
H 

ss  « 

o  « 

o 

oo  as 
os  £ 
» 

a. 
« 


P    oo  O 

2?  co  s 

ffl   2  a 

©3  5 

§| 

S  » 

-   «  n 

5-  J  O 


J8 

CD 
© 


bo 

f— < 

3 

w 
gj 

co  a 

ra  g 

u  o 

P  o 


I  f 


a      a 


& 

3 

£.3 

2.1 

co  a 
-  o 

3    © 


« 

J5J3J3 

-QAJ3 

-c                 .d 

i      i 

CO  T3 

CS 

o 

o  P 

© 

o 

3£ 

n  -g  -tJ  -«a  ->j 

tj3  -»»  o  o  o 

-**  ■*»  ;£ 
CO  00  oo 

CO               ^3  CM 

o 

CD 

i 

'> 

if 

t*i  00  -H  CM  <M 

CM  CM  <N 

^3 

OCM    » 

3 

*  S 

JH  ,£ !  _d  J3  A 

^3-d-« 

cj  o   o  s !  •? 

a 
a 

CO 

> 

O  « 

Cj    CO    O    CO    O 

o  o  o 

c 

Ph 

T3 

■r>    CO 

CO 

,0 

*■*  b  M  j  53 

co    CD    CO    CO    CO 

U    M    b 

cS    rf    c3 

^,   fj   m  C   ^ 
co    c3    co    q,CU  CO 

o 

t?  J3 

^3 

a 

<  s 

PH 

sssss 

^S§ 

aaa^ 

-a 

c 

CO 

0 

co 

< 

OS   Bm 

e. 

■a 

r>        »-        w        wt        •* 

■>       •«       n 

■& «.  «k «« «< 

C 
3 

<u 

*•   r* 

■<  o 

eo 

CO 

eo  co  eo  eo  cm 

co  co  co 

eo  co  eo  eo  eo 

is 

cS  ec 

© 

H 

© 

o 

O  o  O  o  O 

o  o  o 

o  O  o  O  o 

•ta 

>N 

ou 

c 

p 

o» 

OS 

OS  0>  OS  0>  <3> 

a>  oi  o> 

C3  OS  OS  C^  05 

a> 

i-i 

rH 

I-H    1-H    1-H    1-1    1-H 

^H  i-H  r-l 

i-H  i-H  i-H  i-H  i-t 

— < 

OS     . 

O   H 

CO 

W 

K    ■< 

U   J 

Z    Ph 

o 

'3      „  _. 

oR            03    C6 

fl 

k  a  , 

© 

■   .   a  es 

d 

a  n 

m  a! 

co^ 
6.2 

>-- 

►o  '3  .2 .2 
3  o  o>  o  o 

o 

(Sufi 

.3 .3  3  o 

.«  >C0  >t)  l*H    O 

•—< 
o 

H 

M 

a  bo  J-  %  >j 

£7  co    °    «    c8 

W&3 

«    O    O     .    u 

co  ^J  J#    >    05 

a 

fc 

f> 

coNOfflft 

ftMpH 

PQcooqcoPh 

PQ 

S3 

c 

cS 

o 

s 

H 

ns 

-< 

o5 

cu 

co 

D 

J3 

M 

« 

a 

c5 
1 

*  «**« 

1= 

43   4>43             49 

-»3 

o 

G   £  S3  C   C 

_  d 

c  ct  c  _„  a 

a 

o 

00 
CO 

•  — * 

CO    ?C    co    CO    co 
oo    y    00    00    CO 

co  -O   co   cS   co 

>-  co  S 
eo  --S   co 

CO    CO    CO  -g    CD 
oo   oo   co   ™  h3 

es  co  es  .2  a 

i 

00 

2 

CO 

S 

CO    CO    CO    CO    CO 

^5     M    CD 

co  co  co  »h  -5 

CO 

CO 

Pi 

Phi-h1  Ph  Ph  Ph 

OPhPh 

Ph  Ph  Ph  Ph  CO 

Ph 

a 

M 

H 
CO 

(-4 

! 

■ 

•      •      •      •    S-* 

•    "  o 

1» 

•     •     •     • 

-•a 
CO 

6 

© 

Ph 

> 

: 

: 

.0  S  >£  ^  ft 

.     CO 

CO    CO 

»«§     8 
«£«   :| 

co   co   o     • 

„    tj    (J    w          cB 

2-s  c  ^  .«  S 

»  +>  •■-.  o  o 

> 

a. 

G 

Eh 

cB 
O 

O 

M 

M  EH  .2,0^ 
Si*    co    g 

i  'I 

o 

© 

O 
H 

.9 

e3 

-aft    :.« 

>  d  «  5? 

JLoi'-    O 

I- 

a-? 

<; 

".r-l       Cj    -r-. 

•—«   ^ 

1          * 

2 

^^ft«PM 

PhEhO 

^i<c!OcoE-i 

ft 

6 

I-l 

CM 

CO  ■*  «5  CO  t- 

00  o  o 

h  tN  eo  i*  »o 

CO 

1        z 

1— < 

i~t 

»H  »-l  i-H  i-H  i-l 

i-H  i-H  CM 

CM  CM  CM  CM  CM 

CM 

SUPPLEMENT  VI 


263 


OB 

V 

<D 


CO 
3 


I    I    I    I    I    I    M    I    I  £:S.  !    I    I    I    I    I    1    1    I    I    I    I    I    II 


£  o 


43 
9 

a 
o 


43  J3  .a  _d   ,h   —  j-< 


•tjTJA 


^  S   "^  QO  30  00    tO    S-i    S-i     l-i   43 

^3^3^3r3   •>.!>.!>■.©  ©  ©  ©  © 

^(-.(-i^-PJP^Caaaa 

aaa  a.*  J5 ,™  S  8  3  3  3 


rca_ara.d.a,a4*T3'"2.xi.ag  gj^j 

3OMfl5fflC618OHM(Ni0l3WJ« 


^S^B^SOCOeOcOCOOCO'— iCOCNiO 

lO00(X)rtHHrt-HHr-O«(M(NN 

©©©©©0)©©©©©©©©© 

aaccaaaaaaaaeaa 

=  23233233:333323 

bhbHjbhii-jHsi-)H}hsHsi-5i-sh, 


03  £ 


eoeoeosoeoeoooeoeoeoaoco 

oooooooooooo 

O".  C  O  CT<  C!  Cl  C:  3)  ~.   ~.  C:  D 


cocococococococococococococococo  2  co 

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOhHO 


<x> 


eo 
0?J         ©   O    °bd    c8    cS    fl    _. 

o               o 

2  «-•  ^  «                  «.  o  >S  >  a  §  >S 

K  o  o       o  o  o  "i  -a  -a  2  > 

>oopNNNK«<D.affl(U.2.sc5 

d  S  S  «  3  oi  S^-°-2  >-^ 

c3Mt-0©©©©1500s-iOc30«-i 

M<j<3««3<!<3f>i-^apH 

pqWMQ^^;jz;^a2«OMWmc5W      f 

3 

co 
Hi 

O 


■0 

CO 

s 

a 
a, 

fl      >»43    4=   43 

O-g   BBS 
©  ;i5    cS    o3    co 

Mcj  2  2  « 

s-    CD    CO    to    co 


"0 

a  2  e  a  a 

CO  "3r  CO  CO  c3 

X'      -i»  X  'Jj  00 

c3    »  eg  e3  a3  .S 


43 

CO 


3t>.©©®©©.a©©aiv< 


43 

CD 


M 

43    <D  43  43  43 

a  23  a  c 

03    ?  CO  03  3 

ai   o  co  co  co 

c3  -^  co  co  co 

©   co  <d  ©  © 


c  C 

eo  T3 
00  JL. 
c3  -Q 
CD    co 


43  ^S 

a  3 

CC  CO 

co  eg 

CD 


© 

a 

eo 


Ph^^PhPhP-iPhPhPhPLhCP-i^PmPS 


eo 


v2-- 

o. 


>  o  o  2  *o 

*0    O  Jrf  Jd  "^  ,H 

-*      j      rft   '^   i ' 


IS  >i 


03 


a  o 
^>o7;n  cs  co  »-  cS  M^a  :e»^3 

CO  4S  ■«  •—  •—    ti    ©  •-<  •■— i  CO  ^S  •  — 

>oq!z;mPhE-i^PiOE>cgA 


— 

> 

o 

a 
•5. 
"5* 

EH 
e3 

4^ 
CO 

E 


>o 


o  > 

'■p2« 

O    3 


^  £  ©  > 
a  co  s?  o  pff- 

CO 


a    : 


"8 


o  ^ 


$  *g.o  o  o^,5  cs^5  §  S  J 
co  a  co^ro  ov  •/>  ~  r-o  to  >^^ 

'i   *    ^1    »22«   ><    O    ci    ei    o    *- 


© 

Ed 

ce 
a 

co 

43 


cs 

43 

co 


rtQ-jj    w 


t-ODOJOHtNCOifiaifflt-OO 

t>J(NcNeococoeoeoeocococo 


264 


MACEDONIA 


B 


55    « 

O   W 
Q 

M  g 

a 

a 
a: 


®  a 

O    O    © 

S  m2 


Li 
© 

"3 

> 

© 


o 


13 
J- 
eo 
Oi 


P 

CO 

o 

OS 


c  eo 

60  60 

P  a 

CO  CO 

o  o 

OS  Cs 


""O  -*=  -» 

cohh 


o 

Li 


V 
03 
P 
O 


00 


5 

eo  co  co  eo  <w  ec  eoeo,~i 
oooo  oooow 

CJ  Oi  OJ  C:        0)0)0 


O       o 


eo  c8  eo  co 

Oh" 

OS 


e 


->j  v.;  -^ 

oo  PQ 

OS  OS 


-si 

OS 


o 

CO 


J3 

s 

CO 


o 


O  oO  o 

-C         X) 
OS  OS 


a 
•5. 
"o  — 

O    CO 

55  « 


eg 

•§  g 

•J  Q  -+3 

15*o>S«g 

-"   «   aj   co 


O    ©    I-i 


eo 
o 

13 
eo 

■a 

t-3 


o  o 
>  > 
o  o 

ss 


S5 

o 

a. 
P 
o 
© 
o 


o_ 


— 

c 

co 
m 

© 
Pm 


=3  fl 


a 

CO 

as 

GO 
<U 


© 

■a 

*  91 

©  S  i 

g  t;  i 

H    © 


PmPm      PhOmPh 


**  p 

9  rf 


a      a  g  p  2 
©       ©  -S  « •f? 

T3        T3   g-T3    g 

£      a  ™  c 

«      ©  a  ©  c 

-g  £.a;s.a;s  a  a 

-t=>  -*» 

a  a 

£-Pfc*-h^coco 

co    e3 

*jMOo)C©aia) 

03    CO 

2   3   ^32   2*02   =8   co 

co   co 

J  3  3        p        ©  « 

©   © 

OfeCQ       02       PmPh 

PwPm 

o 
;* 
o 
M 
p 
>© 

co 


© 

PL, 


S 

© 


H 

a 

H 

© 
S 

•< 
V. 


© 


•r-l 

CO 


d 

S  « 

** 

:  feW>© 

o   • 

0  Ph  o 

3    O 

W   ©  «n 

^g'S'axa 

2  g-© 

6o  6o-a  Ja 

c  a  a  J 

CO    CO  •"    CD 

l^CQ 

>P>QPm 

.-  *o 

•  &  2 
:  o  ;— 

R  cs 

c3    6CJ3J 

*2  s  a 


o 
> 
o 

u 

a 


> 

o 
a 

cS 

a 

u 


-3    60 
O    U 

J4   o 

•1-1  •»— * 

SZJO 


?  : 

•-  2 

c«  g 

cS  O 


si 


o 

2 


eo 
o 


t-00 

»o  o 


OS  O  rH  CM 
«5  CO  CO  CO 


CO  ■**  »o 
eo  eo  eo 


eo 

eo 


t-  90 

eo  eo 


OS  o 


SUPPLEMENT  VI 


265 


u 

is 


I        I        I        I        I 


i    !    i  -a  i 


•a 

•— - 
a 

■s 

o 

-5 
CO 


Si 


T3 
CD 

s 

5  c 

H3.S 

-J    c3 
3  -0 


I    I    I    I       III 


BO 


43 

J 

43 

t3 

T5 

13 

43 

4-1 

a 

-u 

43 

Li 

J-* 

u 

-»3 

-t= 

a 

o 

O 

o 

eo 

eo 

eo 

t- 

(N 

a 

o 

O 

43 

43   <a 

43     . 

OS 

■•a 

O 

O 

© 
oO 

eo 
cj 

M 

oO 

ej  > 

S3 
o£i 

•  »-< 

o 

d 
0J 

6 
eo 

-**  a 

.43 
u  ? 

t*    %l  t—    oo 

eo  eo  c*  rj 
eo 

a  a  a"  a 

3    c3    03    § 

^^)    ^1    ^5    ^_ 

^BP  ^*  ^*  ^^ 

o  o  o  o 

"J    'H'g 

jh      co  co 

o  a-0-0 
a  (-sPh  Em 

43 

.a 

43 

<D 

9 

o 

a> 

■*» 

eo 

O 

5«S 

<  o 

<3  o 

5S 

-4 

CJ 

eo 

Ol 

!§l 

o3  eft" 

3hOI 

s-i  eo 

3h  O 

5  eo  eo  eo  eo  eo  eo 
O  O  O  OO  o o 

OJ       .      -      - 

43  "S  21  2! 

H3  O  O   O 

OS 

OS 

os 

CS 

OS 

cs 

OS 

OJ 

OS  OJ  OS  OS  Oi  05 

Oi  Ci  C<p  Ci 

OS  OS  OS 

'5s 

13 

>ff) 

>C0 

HJ> 

*•"* 

a> 

CJ 

<P 

s\ 

p— i 

eg 

cS 

1 

•a  a  <*  S-«S 

fl     CD     ft     J-»  JZ*  JH 

S^.a45'3    2 
•73  4J  ■*»    4)  -*=    P 

3     5H     0J     £   "H     »H 

1-3 1>  co  co  ffl  W 

o 
s» 
o 
,5 

3 
>o 

o 
o 

a 

>o 

03 

o 

o 
4»! 

a 

>o 

eg 

o 

O 

CJ 

S 

o 
> 

03 
Ph 

i— 1 

O 
> 
09 

eg 
P3 

<s 

f— t 

Ph 

p3 

a  a 

0J        0J       Q 

>  >  S  o 
o  o  g  t> 

o  0,2  a 

eg 

■§12 

.-    J)    o 
-••0     N     N 

&I  3   3 
<ltS5Cs3 

a 

a 

a 

2> 

a 

eg 

a 

3! 

U 

a 
a          ® 

^3  .08                ■  >> 

Li 
<D 

1      l 

a 

o 

a 

o 

•*- 

o 

13 

a 

0J 

.a 

"43           <?* 

.2     iS*                     r-H 

* 

It 

a 

&,C0            »g 

•   o 

43 

*> 

■*» 

-19 

V4 

o 

a 

eg 

■*p 

S-2  a  a  1 

S  _Q    03    oo    to    i~ 

.Shi;   08   o8   b 

(H    0)    O    0J    4>    O 

Ph  CO  55  Ph  fL,  pq 

H3              03   H3 

-W             -k= 

a 
eg 

a 
a 

a 

43 

c 
-i 

a 

(0 

-43 

a 

eg 

a     *-•  a 

oS         a   o3 

oo      a  in 

03         5    03 

i-g  § 

a 

GO 

a 

DO 

05 

a 

cj 

o 

IS) 

eg 

s> 

u 

03 

c3 

00    g     CO 

03  .2    OS 

O) 

Ph 

Ph 

OJ 

Ph 

•  •-1 

Ph 

<0 
CO 

0> 
Ph 

CO          c3    OJ 

Ph       Ph  Ph 

O    ki    CO 

PhPhPh 

• 

• 

• 

0) 

1 

o 

u 

o 

S-l 

03 

K3 

■   — 

> 

o 

~CJ 

■S3'    •    • 

a 

44 

Ph 

V* 

to 

e3 

-a 

-  — 

03 

eg 

•  — 

Ph 
eg 

eg 
43 

PS 

"CJ 

o 

4«J 

*-* 

cS 

44 

o 

"cj 

CJ 

b 

• 

0J 

DO 

03 

a 

Q 

45 

— > 

•  1— ■ 

.       .  -O  ^^  ~«J     S 

•  •  .^h  'r1  •»-<  *-*< 

•  '  >  >  >  '2 

O    OJ    OJ    CO 

^>o>oEh 
§^§.2. 

•2  sj      S 

^P^H.2 

O       .     .H 

•    •    • 

0J       ; 

o  '5*  • 

J-l 

eg 

<B 

Ph 

a 

eg 

•  ■-( 

fa 

44 

>■ 

Eo 

a3 
to 

5 

00 

eg 

a 
o 

3 

33 
•  — * 

a. 

CO 

03' 

a 
a 

EH 

Ha 
> 

Jfoo'o^l 
.2,^3 .2:3*  "^.a 
c5"2  55  S  Ph  Q 

^*   *   oi 

g*  o  a 
H55W<J 

■a  a  cl 

*    cgS 

SEhPh 

fN 

eo 

T* 

if! 

CO 

L~ 

00 

o> 

o  <-h  <N  eo  ^)  no 

CO  C"  00  C3S 

O  i-H  CM 

t- 

t- 

t> 

t- 

t~ 

t~ 

t- 

t- 

CD  00  CD  00  00  00 

CO  00  OO  00 

cs  os  os 

266 


MACEDONIA 


00 

» 

■o 

a 

.3 

c 

a 

as 

s 

» 

o 

►S 

© 

s 

^3 

£    « 

B 

44 

0$ 

o  a 

a 

o 

« 

-,  o 

1 

i   i  p 

1      1      1 

1      1 

1 

I 

1  t* 

■T3 

I 

s  « 
3a 

1 

'  1  2; 

to  5 

1      1      1 

1      1 

1 

1 

1 

CD 

> 

■a 

5-1 

> 

O 

T3 

1 

s 

•-  S 

t 

>> 

•r— 1 

o 
o 

3 

3 
> 

9 

© 

rQ 

-a 

3 

H 

. 

CO 

O 

H 

jd 

,d" 

i 

P 

> 
o 
be 

rd 

H3 

T3 

J 

j 

_fj 

-t=     +=     -*3 

© 

eg  ^  -^  i-H  -d 
—  O  O 

eg 

CM 
CN 

a 

CM 
CM 

C9 

C.J0 

J2 

35  5 

CM   5 

O 

IQ 

O  lO      • 

I-H   r-l 

0 

93 

"3  r- 

CM 

^3 

.rQ 

0  « 

•<  a 

.         .         .   r° 

^5  ,0  _D    ® 

©  ©  ©  Ph 
Ph  Ph  Ph 

> 

© 

-          •    rO 

^2  -O    CD 

5h 

J5 

o 

^••s*s 

-co 

c 

r£3 

CD 

C  -O    03 

> 
© 

H 

3 

rO 

J2    o3 
^Ph 

©  ©  rv, 
PhPhM 

c  do 

0) 

gfe 

g 

Ph 

5 

ph  a 

Phm 

© 

03 
■hT  « 

S55 

PS  &. 

^ 

•*      ^      ^ 

M            H            W 

d 

CD  T3 

n       ~ 

IH 

„ 

t- 

:- 

^     „ 

«. 

*4  O 

-f* 

^*    ^*   TF 

H 

■^    "^^    ^"t* 

^ 

0    "#    Tf 

1- 

rjf 

4S 

■* 

43 

T»t    -* 

a 

■<J< 

w 

OOOOl-lOOO 

0 

-^1 

CSOO03 

r-i 

O 

JX 

OS  OS  OS  OS 

O)  Ci  Oi 

OS  OS 

OS 

OS 

OS  OS 

OS 

OS 

r-( 

rH  rH  rH 

tH   i-H  1-1 

T-l    I-H 

rH 

rH 

rH  r-t 

rH 

rH 

] 

'o' 

o1 

'3* 

PS 

> 

> 

> 

O   H 

o 

o 

o 

->» 

-(J 

-ta 

^m^ 

ra   » 

o3 

03 

03 

c8 

S  •< 

u 

I-i 

U 

CO 

S  3 

w  3 

•  *4 

w 

w 

M 

o  d 

>  ©  o  o 

o    t>    >    > 

3ggo 

£i  'S    ^    o3 
O    O    m  -h 

OrH«<L> 

•F"«      »t»H 

co  •-*    © 
(S   3  « 

•11 

PhCQ 

>03 

o 

O 

a 

S-t 

CO 

CD 

Ph    fl 

^— '  03 

CS     03 

iJO 

00 

o 

© 

>co 

'S 

5-i 
e3 
CO 

S-l 

a> 

© 

. 

eS 

B 

ss 

«1M 

> 

o 

« 

Jh 

•*M 

Si 

© 

ft. 

1 

1 

o 

o 

o 

CQ 

TJ 

73 

r& 

U 

-t= 

■*»  ■*»  b 

5K  -*3  -t3 

-»3 

■*="    m 

O 

-£3 

c3 

© 

C 

d   G-g 

2  a  a 

a 

a  © 

oo   fl 

r- 

d 

rH 

o 

c3 
CO 

03    o3^ 
01     tc     eg 

£i|  03     CD 

■S    03 

Is 

3 
o 

Cj 

a3 

DO 

a 

c« 

cfl    cQ    CD 

®    (8    « 

PhS 

a3 

5-1 

© 

ai  a)  k-. 

,£3     0     0 

fc.    CO 

© 

c3 

PhPh  Ph  P*- 

CCPnCM 

PhPh 

Ph 

Ph 

. 

. 

•         •         * 

.    . 

*— H 

1 

a 

o 

g 

M 

: 

:    :    : 

:    :    : 

:    : 

o 

•9 

:    '• 

" 

E-l 

d 

H 

V^ 

o 

> 

.      .  »o 

02 

c3 

.  .a 

d 

> 
© 
•  — • 

H 

ta 

i 

•             •     •  !-! 

o 

:  o  > 

nS    O 

a  js 

•rH 

s8 

60  O 
03    > 

-as 

•      r— 4 

•  — 

o3 
> 
O 
Ha 

es  a 

O 

H 

o 
o 

oi 

:  ;« 

S-i 

c3    aj  _g 

a 

1S3 

o 

5-1 
> 

- 
c 

•73 

a 

c3 

o 

r* 

03 

i— | 

© 

03    +- 

fa 

9  * 

■A 

is 

•i-i  ■- 1  © 
t— 1 1— i  Ph 

V3    O 
PS  H-, 

o 

CO 

COP 

o 

> 

6 

ec  Tjt  i«  to 

C-  00  Oi 

O  rH 

CM 

CO 

n<  io 

CO 

t~ 

% 

OS  OS  OS  OS 

OS  G>  O 

o  o 

O 

o 

o  o 

o 

O 

rH 

rH  rH'l-H 

rH  tH  i-l 

CN  CM 

CN 

CM 

CN  CM 

CM, 

C 

SUPPLEMENT   VI 


26T 


-43 

<A 
O 
S-) 

H 


.-    © 
0    © 

ill 

a  oCQ 


^M  -*a  "*a  *- - 

OOHH  jjJ2 

■     .    .  o  o 

•-J     ^     U     U     U 

n 


o  o 

S-i    M 
c3    eS 


SS2SS     SS^.2 


• 

o 

— 1 

cfi 

■* 

0 

A 

"s 

C 

p< 

> 

<! 

0 

CO 

^M   ^rj^  ^"J**   ^tf"   ^T^ 

©  o  o  o  o 
05  os  05  cs  05 


o  o 

05   05 


• 

o 

A 

DO 

■*= 

■* 

o 

-a 

p — * 

a 

i* 

> 

Ph 

o 

< 

© 

- 

rfl 

o  g 


«* 


o  a 


a  © 

<  2 

CO 

■^  ■ 


— -.     CO 

"*  o 


o 


j3  ■*°  *-• 

-w  O  s<3         ""C 

ra  ^-«  -73  773    k 
J-,    J*    i*    u    *?> 

&<  &,  Cu  Cu  *  rrj 

«<<}<! -33-3 
»    -    -    -    -ta 

^i    ^91    TJ1    *^1    TJl 

O  O  O  O  O   o3 
C5  05  05  05  05 


05 
08 


o 

05 


if      _e 

'-«         to 
© 

§  A 

oPQ  o 

05  05 


...5  .2 -a  c 
©>£>£  §  E2 

PQcgconPQ 


68 'S 

.S3   a3    s3 

WPQPQ 


a 

oS 

ea- 
rn 


a 
03 

IS* 

03 

m 


a 
ce 

m 


3 


o  -2  o  :3  ® 

>  §-c  a  3 
o  .2,  o  >  .a 

oS    ti    S3    >-,  ^ 


© 

O 


O 

s 


pq 


S3 
O 

•a 

>o 
o 

OS 

<o 


o 

a  si 

M.3 


"W 


oi 

pp 


tc 

OS 


1- 
a> 

•— 

S 

o 
^> 

e3 

a 

OS 


CD        | 

ilia 

05    c3  .S;    q) 

P-iPmPm»* 


g    (J    «, 
w    <0    u  i 

PhO! 


c 

w 
oS 
® 


fl    C 

c3    o3 

SO     EC 

S3    cS 
CD    ©     _ 

p-i  Pl,Pm  Ph  Pw 


-»=• 

-»= 

-k= 

2 

d 

a 

rt 

d 

crt 

« 

T! 

'/I 

c^ 

a 

03 

4' 

0 

o 

a 

eS 

o 

hi 
© 


-»3 

rf 

crt 

CD 

CO 

efl 

S3 

© 

© 

Pj 

P-I 

© 

1 

a 
© 
a 

a 

o 


•o 


:  --> 


© 


••a*  >  a 
a  s  a 

•■§•§£ 

.a  a 

Q    O 

S  o 

©  > 


P      "A 


©      io 

;a*     — , 

00 

eS   a!   O 

a  -S-M 
ej    J   m 


© 

a 

eS 


a 

cS 
s3    _    i* 

2    ©    oS 

«.S  o 


© 

a 

S3 


s! 
s-< 
S3 
02 

•J 

O 
« 


QOOSO'-*cN         CC"*0         © 

OO'-H'-t'-t  rH^Hi-H  rH 


0J 

>© 

a 

03 


S3 

a 

CO 


oS 


© 

a 

cS 

a 

S3 

- 

03 

CO 


o        ^, 


o 
© 


3*o 

I       * 

._   oq 

Hg 

a  d 

© 

cS    oo 

o  c 

CO  •  — 

a-.y 

^    S    ^    >^^m^ 


03 
O 

a 

S3 

> 
o 


O 

O 

•J— * 

S3 

Px 


a 

cS 
M-O    O 

a  •£  bo 
o  "  o 

W      PQ 


© 


43 

CO 
© 

Li 

P-I 


>co 


°   «° 

CO       * 


e» 


OD 
H 
CM 


OS  O  H  Ol  CO 
»-x  CM  <M  <M  fM 
CN  (?»  o»  Ol  o» 


CM 


(M 


CO 


CM 


268 


MACEDONIA 


«3  ." 

3 

. 

3 

>• 

> 

>    OS 

>  a 

>  a 

>      _»tj 

o 

<8   *>■ 

5- 

eS 

o 

O    eg 

O    oS 

a     2  os 

&l       3 

-*= 

■ 
ffl 

'S  ® 
3^ 

•3 

03 

5b 

s 

a 

CO 

11 

CO  ^-^ 

CO  -J-1 

S  3 

co  "J3 

03    H 

CO-^1 

3 

H 

3  o 

3 

<D 

"3 

3  3 

l-  S 

^  s 

o  <B 

Li         -t»  ■  — 

©      CO  ■-* 

O 

s,    K 

PQ- 

pq 

pq 

com 

SM 

©•« 

O    H 

a 

9  a 

s 

8 

©  .g 

•  i"^ 

1 

1    1 

>>  >>s3  >> 
©   ©   >   © 

1^ 

o 

©  "fl 

>  S 

9                     r« 

OB 

Ll 

,  ^a 

60,2 
3^ 
CO   5 

a 

o5 
60 
3 
CO 

eg 
n3 

Li 
CO 

Li    Li 
©    « 

Li    M 

s  © 

co  'O 

Ll    ^ 

3  © 

on  'O 

05        So 
©       5  ° 

1*4           3 

o 

Si 

hi  o 

3   « 

o 

3 

Ll    Li 

3   3 

©    Li 

oS'H* 

s 

a 

S 

Efl 

i 

-is 

O 

OB 

-v» 

.a 

_= 

jg 

.3  J=l 

j? 

-3 

J3-3 

3g 

<N 

CO  •+■* 

»-l  E- 

CD 

-*a 

CO 

i-f  r-t 

s  s 

o 

(M  <M 

<M 

<N 

o 

0)    l. 

© 

o 

3    » 

o 

©   a 

3   3 
3   3 

1-9  l-S 

© 

3 
3 

1-9 

ax? 

3   3 

1-9  1-9 

>>  to 

t;  3 

c8   3   r; 

60 

3 

to 
3 
<3 

be  60 

3   3 

-1   o 
n 

<* 

p 

-*  nT 

■* 

-*•* 

tH 

nT 

SS 

oO 

O 

5 

o  o 

o 

o  O  CO  o  o 

O 

o 

>• 

os 

OS 

OS  OS 

OS 

a*  os 

os  os 

os 

os 

OS  OS 

o 

O 

o 

> 

^ 

> 

« 

©  ~~ 

© 

— 

o 

O   H 

>o   L« 

>o 

u 

•*- 

"H    OS 

-pH 

c3 

X 

NCE 

PLAC 

•5  » 

w 

09 

ia 

3 

6  S 

J   3 

RESIDE 
BIRTH 

ca 

o 
> 
o 

N 
03 

J- 

1 

© 

03  .& 

.s  a 

eS    c3 

"  s 

■•■    O 

03 
© 

© 

Li 
OS 

•n 

3 

© 

Ll 

c3 

3 

©  a 

Li    Li 
c3    03 

3   3 

s 

pq 

MH 

>o 

Wco 

MPS 

« 

P5 

P3P3 

50 
c8 

a 

c 

gj 

is 

o 

a> 

(S3 

■#4 

0> 

05 

a 

5* 

5-» 

M 

-*» 

-*a 

O 

H 

■* 

•  •-« 

o 

«t-i 

o 

1 

i 

Oh 

•*> 

-♦= 

© 

CJ   o 

I 

l 

O 

3 
5 

CI 
9 

-43 

J3 

a 

03 
•v-l 

IH 

31*3 

Ll  -f9 

-o 

-43 

o 

g 

a 

a 

3 
co- 
co 

© 

a 

o's  a 

©   o 

^3   cS 

U     0D 

3 
o3 
no 

07 

o 

o 

03 

Sj 

© 

o    S    h 

os  a 

03 

3 

M 

u 

© 

OO 

a 

©    c3 

©  © 

© 

© 

Ph 

Cm 

PwCO 

C5fe 

EhPh 

Pk 

Ph 

8 

o 

: 

Q 

; 

:  <s 

H 

fi 

•o 

«H 

§ 

VIC 

o 

1 

•    ^ , 

O 
© 

:  ° 

>oT 

• 

• 

• 

•  r-* 

:  31 

-ta   o 

•l-l 

ME   OF   THE 

ojz; 

<D 

•5* 

© 

•  •-« 

«— i 

'33 

03 
> 

•  r-l 

0Q 

o3 
G- 
CO 

O 

a 

03 
3 

c3 

< 

o 

■75 

e3 
u 
e3 

> 

.Is 

o  -*» 

CO  J* 

"S  o 

g  g 

>  .s 

*   3n3 

pO-* 

>b 

2    J-    3 

eo   oj  T3 

< 
55 

Li 

4J    «r- 

Oft 

O 

-J5  © 

COPh 

op 

Li 

&3 

!2 

<!cq 

6       i 

QD 

OS 

o 

1-H 

<N 

co  ^ 

>o  <o 

t^ 

CO 

OS  O 

£ 

CO 

<M 

cc 

CC 

CO 

so  eo 

co  eo 

CO 

co 

co  *# 

~       i 

C* 

(M 

CO  OJ 

ei 

CO  CO 

70  CN 

CO 

d 

CO  CO 

SUPPLEMENT  VI  269 


»  »  ►».«        A        3        «3        fi        SS        S       J,  60  1 


£»  M^8  o      ro  » •«  -"IVG  rS.'O  :S,rO  :;V«  :-  j£j  -3  5 


S    g    *•*    »    S    g-°    «-    8-°    §-°    S^    S         f^coSS  I*         1         J 

co         ^15S,.2    ©          cc          »          W          CO          <»rC    "    Oi~   *    ^  '333 

ss>iiifl.ii*i*i*i*i*syljj  III 

.<                o^S^SSS             mm  PQ     PP     PQ 


CD 


<P 


-d       ,0 


a  ^     ^     ^     ja     ^     j     j  -g*3  cs-So     £     £ 

t-H  r-|rHi-li-li-trH>-t  HO    «H 

3  3    3    3    3    5*33  3B^3<°<°<5 

V  <*      tIT      t)T     ■*      ^T      tjT      ^"  •>*  t)T  *  •*£-&■*  nT-5  *£■*? 

©  OOOOOOO  O  O  P  o  o  <  o  <3  o  < 

CJ>  OS        OS         Ol         C".         Oi         OS         Q5  0>  Oi        Oi  o>        o>        o> 


CO  01 

V  co 

CO  "« 

^  Is    f> 


-Q 

d 

P 

lH 

o 

eg 

H3 

y 

Pnf> 

_H    fa  Sh  j-i 

®  c§  Q       9  3       «       ca 

«  v        p        <u        <»        <o        <o       CD  -~<~       CO  ^>       -Q       rS 

P  P3333SO  o«o2S2 

«  P503PhPhPh«^  Pm?>      ^iO      O      O 


a 

a  n 

05  13 

£  a 

§c              ansae  gflcac 

ej         "tr          ai          a3          «          c5          cfl  "^qoIcjcsob 

cc                          oogcatscQcoca  5?   fj         oo   cc         u2         cc 

03                           cS        .)Sj         c5         c8          c3         d          o3  .z^    c          cS    03          cQ          03 

«                        C0MO>va><uq)  ^   in         cu   a>         <y         <u 

Pm                    Pw      P-i      p.,      Ph      Ph      p^      Ph  PmPm      PhPw      Ph      P-i 


:  o 

a 
a 

f^  "™i4      * ,       •  •  •  •  •  •  i 

c                 S  >  :        :       :        :        :        :              "2  S 

SSc,  :j    '•=*      :       :       :      S             w  « 


•O 


CQ  ijH 

s 

1      ->>u 


pi  j  1 1 1 1     ii  \j  j* j* 


a  > 

9  « 

o 

eo  >o 

ca 

"^!,•,~, 

•« 

O    O 

■r-« 

■f  *» 

CO    > 

03  02 

•S,  <u 

C    O 

«.'« 

ndo 
rajk 

1-8 

<JH 

J5 

C9        C0        ^1*        O        CO        t-        CB  OS  O        >-i  CM        CO        ^l 

■^  -rti  -}i  ^  -0<  -J<  »>•  Tfl  irt  O  <0  O  O 

C^         «         CN         C»         CM         CN»         <N  CN  CM         (MCT         CM         CM 


270 


MACEDONIA 


■    s-   an 

"2   Oj3 

a  «i-  "B 

pa 

W  „ 

<D 

aa 
H 

ID 

.3  or 

m 

-  *■» 

d> 

T 

6- 
S5  « 

pVS 

■3 

4* 

JO- 

43 

-O  -3 

O 

O    K 

'S 
0 

$4 

11     i     1 
O 

s 

MM! 

a 
0 

*4    cS 

43 

8  1 

> 
0 

to 

1     1 

l           l 

1 

* 

4) 

3 

iB  .a 

c 

H 

H3 

*3   ^ 

•  »-< 

# 

(4 

M 

\~   <& 

0 

3 

ofl 
so 

S    MM 

* 

S 

H 

ja 

O 

CO    Jh'S 
0-3 

43n3-S 

*  a 

.3 

00 

J    43  T3  T5  fl  pg  I-)     - 

ao^-iccecoo^«^ 

^3 

43 

43 

O 
O 

pq 

J3  Xi 

_  tH  i-H 

JlXi 

43    43 

§  C3 

a  g 
5§ 

so 

3 
<5 

cb  ti  ei  bo  BC"g."S."g. 
pp3SP©fljar 
-<  <3  <!  <<  <!  02  02  02 

4=> 

33 

P4 

OQ 

0 

*    OhOh 

a  ®  <» 
30200 

43  43 

0  0 
GQCQ 

P5     CC4 

», 

•v       «.        •« 

m       *•       •>       ■»       a* 

,» 

*. 

0    -   - 

••        «f« 

■<  o 

-<*< 

^ji  ^4»  ^r  ^^^  ^j^  ^5ji  ^^p  ^O' 

•««< 

3) 

a 

^  ■>*  ■«*< 

-<*<  -* 

0<4>0 

n 

o 

oooooooo 

O 

O 

^H 

A  0  0 

O  O 

pt 

OS 

00^00)0^0)03 

Oi 

as 

O  OS 

O)  OS 

0 

r-l 

r-t  1-4  f-H 

1— 1  iH  r-<  r-*  »-t 

tH 

!-< 

1-t  I-t 

I-H   r-4 

>-t 

_^ 

^ 

^— ^. 

, 

oo 

m 

O 

p^l 

<D 

> 

O 

a 

cS 

? 

W    «* 

a 

2    £ 

o 

o 

0      5 

•a    mt    0    °^ 

.-  §  S  2  .s 

**^    <*■■'    T:    £3    **. 

O 

>> 
O 

0 

4> 

2_ 

1-1   a: 

02 

O 

t> 

a 

O 

(9 
43 

a3    3 
3   3 

§2 

' — '43 
0 

0   *> 

o 

0  4>  ^3 

-3  r  <u  0  0 

3 

cS 

'-'    u 

^^ 

>-l  ^^ 

fc 

£  £  0  0  <j  0  A  pa 

M 

K 

WW 

m 

0 

• 

0 

to 

R 

-3 

4» 

*? 

o 

M 

a 

a 

as 

5 

O 

P. 

,Q 

a 

a  O 

43    u 

P 

-♦3 

434349 

•4"            4>4>4> 

u 

O 

43   43 

•""4 

§ 

3  a  a 

09   c6    CB 

a      333 
8-g  3  is  3 

a 

a 

CJ 

2 

a  a 

cS    cS 

§*•!■ 

CD 

a 

nan 
c3   43   flB 

oo   ™   oq   m   a! 
c3  .2   c3   a!   <fl 

H 

•f^ 

O 

CD     OS 

eg    d 

4)    P 

ea  a  0 

tC    Cv>    O 

<B 

0  0  a 

9J    h    «    V    9 

43 

<U    V 

CM 

PhPhPhPhPhP^PhP-i 

3 

&H 

PhPh 

PMH 

VICTIM. 

j 

0 

a 

0 
a 

>  a 

-3  2 

a'   * 

1 

>  3  • 

H 

'-3 

•    :J2    :  rf 

•         •  1— <         .      Co 

3        ■'-• 

03 

O  T3 

a  c« 

lb 

>  0 

•^  a 

: 

K 
6* 

m 

2  3 

3    S3 

3       * 
a     ja 

pq 

3a 

"!3    r3i 

0  a 

NAME    OF 

M 

o 
M 

'5* 

S3 <!    :    : :a,M  -O^  m 
«J3       (sSgScsog 
j*  «  0  §  >■  0  m  2  «» 
qqPhOCQEhi-sEhPh       <J 

cS 

H 

a 

eg 
O 

0 

u 
> 

^3 

g  -3        ro  3 
*  §^  0  g 

43   S  ^4   >   cS 

a 
3 

'r4 

'S 

d 

«5 

(OfflOOSOHCdtO 

Tf 

«o 

<o  t- 

CO  o> 

0 

CM 

CO 

S 

CO  CO 

s§ 

SUPPLEMENT   VI  271 

OB         SB         oo         m 


3    11    O  O    *    »  i      tl    00 

S:?^  .a-"^-23  £-3  s  "a      'a      ~s      ~s 

^  <T3  •*»  C  'TJ  *»  -S  *»  *S  .3       -3       .a       -a 

'hi  Isl  3|-  ^:^:^:S^:S1    ill         I         II 

3S  S  3  c  S  s  s  s  »  a  3^  Bro  stj  Bis  a 

«_  _fi ^_      s   a   a   a 

rS^  ^-3  J-3  ,J3    co  .3   <n         © 

<©    3.  ;0    3  CO    B  •«*l^'*r<0 

«.§  «|  §5  3     3     ^     3        |     «.§«.§     £         . 

$.3  r£„5  ,2^5  ©             ©             ©             ©             OOOQOQOOO                 a 

-O  -o  _o  «        „        „        ..        ......    -.a    -„c)    -    -  d     3 


O  <5  T3        O  •<  13        O  <J  ^        OOOO        O  O  O  O   3  O   3  O  O   N       a 

/Ti  (T*  i*T\  /^*  ^\  l*TS  <^N  iT*    C^\    l"Tl    fto    ^      ("7i    ™ 


V^    -s-u  <w»    ^-s  "  W  V^  ^S  ■  W  •w '  >w»  W  ■«—>  w  w  w   w  ,_;   -^  l!    w   w 

OS  OS  OS  03         0SOSCSOSOSCS05"OS"OiOS 


—     ro 

£  £  g  I 


o  o 


,2 


§ 


«~     a~     «~     §    §    §    §     .■?.    •  ■«§ 


•i  «  q> 


L.-— -  Cl^»,  cS  OS  c3  OS  . ^    c    fl>  ©  'T?    « 

^  r^h  2  2  2  2  -goo;3  ^3  3« 

nJ  *^  Jh^1  0)  <»  4)  0)  u    «    O    M  t-i  3° 

PQ             W  PQ  J  hi  hi  ^1  kl5«0  ©  h!« 


- 


w     r    •  -  ^,     r    .  .  v.;     *•  ^c  ^s  ^e  ^c  CO     ^     ^  'W  '^  C-,  ^.  >*. 

»<'— •  i^  vi  "^  «>       o>       <u       a)       h  v  o  h       ^       3  2  ^ 

•+3 

■ _ __ — © 

CO 

to  ,q 


3 


a 
1 


T3 

I  IS 


a3  m  a3eSc3eSc3c8-ga!  ."cj 

3     O  <D  30  03 

3  Ph  Ph       Ph 


-*3 

-0 

*»  ■♦=       -*^ 

s 

B 

B 

3   B    ,  B 

a! 

cS 

3    cS  -g    03 

CO 

CO 

CO     CO     ™     00 

^5 

oS 

(=3 

CO    cS  .2    cS 

ti 

V 

CD 

c    0    -   » 

O 

p-( 

Ph 

PhPhPhPh 

cc 

^3  ...|  ....1 


g  .  „ 


53  b  ^j 

o 


[>.         «o 


fi  "      "^        *o     "I      Z  8     "§ 


•o 


a> 


I    I  I  ~    II  «    ;wi:5- 

^         -b      J*   "o  g  o-na-2    b-sSS 

rt                       O                     r3CQ                 SCO  O  -pSO-p-bS         L",0-d 

o               ■*               tS                ^3        co  ^3  ®-T*®<u.2fe:-B-^ 


CM  00  tJ         lO         (O         h         0031OH         (M         (03 

t-  c-  t-      i>      0      t»      t-t-aooo      00      aoao 

c«  «  f)       (S       w    -w       «cc<«       ^       cin 


272 


MACEDONIA 


fl  J 

^3 

05    ** 

o 

■ 

•2  • 

COT) 

&0  wt 

•a  ■ 

a> 

E 

rl 
O 

a 

f* 

o 

O    K 

n*« 

5 

5-c 

a 

3  * 

i 

>» 

s 

5P  i    i    i 

1      1 

1 

CBlfl       Itilllll 

1 

rQ;-«>0 

fill 

1 

AM   I.I  1  1   1   1   1   II 

2  a 

0)     <§ 

o 

-»3 

eS 

u 

®  a 

EC 

CO 

CO 

co 

W 

a 
o 

H 

A 

5-     O 

rH 

H 

CM 

C 

M 

rd 

O 

•»=> 

■49 

o 

^3  J3  S}M 

"*    OS 

Sg 

MO 

*S    +J    -U    -*3 

1-1 

oo)o>a 

r-l    rH    i—(    — > 

M 

5  a 

O 

o.S 

>     >     >     > 

6  o 

c5 

£ 

*2;  a 

2-2 

o  o  o  o  co  co 
fc  fc  fc  fc  Q  A 

CO 

K    &* 

: 

•*■*».». 

•»   „ 

^ 

<    O 

:&> 

P  ^  -3 

*(fl  "^ji  ^B   ^T^  ^T   ^T 

•^ 

^Qi     *^^     ^P      ^1^     ^4^      ^J^      ^T^       ^ff     *^^     ^4*     ^^P     ^p 

■ 

O>0  O  03 

o  o  o  o  o  o 

o 

oooooooooooo 

>4 

o> 

OS 

03  0)0^0(^0) 

o> 

0>0>OiOiO^O^O^O>OiOiO^O> 

r-l 

r-t 

rH  i-H  i-t  i-( 

r-t  rH 

rH 

i-(THr-4r-»i-4iHiHrHi-fr-.»-*fH 

.<*"-■■.  ^"^ 

^—*v/^~v 

<0 

CO    CO 

"cS" 

c^J    (S3 

•r— k 

-  »■—»■«—% 

•r— » 

o  o 

H 

&, 

■H    ->H 

««- '  .1—1 

o» 

•3 

•  •— »■  r— » 

g  i  « 

-^>  ■♦=  o  a 

CZ2  03r£    CO                     O 

„  o 

M 

■a? 
M 
O 

00  00 

ao 

RESIDENCE 
BIRTHPLA 

DO 

o 

, : : 

co 
>o 

P 

fi5  * 

O 

co  -a 

s  i 

o  g 

03 

.« 3  3  5  **  ** 

fi,  P    >    >  '«  >« 

»s  o  o  o  SL  SL 

■X  o  o  o  o  o 

03  GO  03  03  (-3  H? 

o 

c3 

>o 

CO 

o 

►3 

^^^^  CO  i — '                           ^. 

2  o  o"0^             '  <o 

9  >  >  o^^-S,©  g           o 
co  co  co  —  -5.  a^  a^  s  «■       -  £>■ 

•s  "S  'C  ;s  >  i  a  2  ^  ia«  ®  2 
.5  §  o  el  "C  5»  5"  g  a  'Sb'S  § 
^WpqpqwWWP4MOr>)-l 

si 

o 

M 

r< 
-< 

0, 

p 

1 

1 

.2 

04 

1 

1 

o 

C  v,  S-.  u 

1,     tJ«fl#*JP*l+l41*l«) 

o 

ooaaaaaaaaaaa 

o 

S  a)  co  (0 

•♦= 

2  'S  'C  *C 

"S   E   B   S 

OQ 

OOQCOCQcOQQCOaiCQGDCQCQ 

o 

cdc3cficSoSc0c3c3c8o3cSo3 

CO   CO    c8    co 

'B 

<UOCJf,l>ll'O0-i<U'l)O1l> 

GQOOOPh 

H^PHpHC-l^pHpMPUP-lr^PH 

CD 
<D 

H 

Ah 

a 

H 

o 

4-» 

1 

m 

•           •           «           • 

•    CQ 

•     •!•»•»••••• 

•4W4 

N   2 

C9 

Ph 

-  >^Sa3»,i!       3  oS  co£>  es 

|fl4-5o-^>Saa§.-Sgp 

i?Hslfl?|ll'si 

o  ■S%ri  S«  o  o  0<Ss  o  0 

r^,^  Ot-503pL,r-ir->02ftl-sl-» 

H 
H 

H 

h 

O 

■ 
K 

§ 

s 
5 

o 

p* 

a 

aB 

•  rH 

-O 
VI 
O 

03 

& 

a 

as 

3 

co 

o 

o  M  is  3 
|.  2.A  S 

K    03    V* 

03    O  _M    CO 

:  q,       « 

.5.®  °2 

03r>        O 

© 

IQ 

to 

c-aoosOHffi 

CO 

T)tw5coc-aoo»Oi-HCMeO'<#o 

55 

GO 

ao 

ao  oo  ao  o>  o*  o> 

CB 

ojoioioioaoooooo 

cm 

CM 

CN  CM  C*  CM  CM  C* 

CM 

CMCMCMC^CMCMOOCOeOCOCOCO 

SUPPLEMENT   VI 


273 


oS 

is 

0 
-3 

»o 

— 
c 

rO* 

c 

'S* 

u 

c 

13' 

S-i 

o 

i 

b 

C 

c 

3 

— 

eg 

l-a 

4 

4= 

hs 

3 

4a 

— 

Ho 

a 

3 

to 

§ 

o3    O 
<o   u 

•  — 

o 
o 

13 

1 

c 
o 

13 

a 

£ 

o 

Q 

13 

3 

O 

o 

IT 
d 
3 

'5 

0 

a 

13 

d 

cS 

O 

3 

co 

-kJ 

-3 

> 

ja 

> 

^> 

> 

-Q 

^3 

I     fc 

0 

13 

5 
3 

>j  co 

>>  eS 

o 

>. 

* 

>i  CO 

P 

>i 

eg 

o 

a: 

eg 

I        t 

■ 

-»3 

e 

13 

JO 

13 

-3 
so 

pq 

to 

§  J2 

ec" 

Cv.'P 

pq 

CO  — 

o5 

&n3 

pq 

SB 

co 

&,i3 

pq 

o 

IT. 

- 

,13 

pq 

1  I 

1 

p 

P 

3 

-3 

b 
3 
o 

4) 

S 

ta 

o 

o 

b 

02 

CO 

i-* 

CQ 

c 

b 

«2 

o 

~ 

d 
3 

13 

CD 

>- 

72 

o 

CD 

1 

G 

b 

CD 
13 
b 

3 

— -* 

SO 

3 

b 

ona  g 

•+3  <j>h3 

Si   h 

0) 
13 

d 

eo 

13 

u 

o 

13 

— 

13 

3 

CD 

a 

13 

b 
CO 

13 
b 

P 

CO 

13 

5 

CD 

s 
3 

13 

M 

-3 

Li 

3 

0) 

13 
e8 

o 

b 
CO 

13 
b 

3 

CD 

gg 

0 

d 

e3 

13 

c5 
O 
b 

-J 

d 
o 
b 

Jp 

3 

43 

Xfl 

s 

s 

3 

— ( 

t-** 
H 

— 

-a 

a 

T3 

O  13 

o 

Jp 

| 

s 

C5 

H 

3 

,2  g 

-T3-5 
U  CO 

. 

, 

* 

CO  r-( 

,     S 

.d 

|3 

d 

a 

Ha 

q 

d 

d 

a 

=' 

J5^Q* 

-C-Q 

^ 

I   1-9 

t-a 

43    cS 

3 

a 

£ 

3 

£ 

CD    CD 

CD    CD 

O 

09 

— 

O^ 

— 

Hfl 

-? 

Hj 

Ht 

fcl  t,  Jj.  (i, 

Cu 

fc 

O 

^ 

o 

fc 

«. 

fc 

«■ 

•. 

*> 

■t 

at       », 

^      ^ 

fc 

*o 

V- 

io 

tftH 

i« 

d  io 

'- 

IO 

kO 

L~ 

>.'. 

mifliois 

kO 

§ 

4J 

pq 

O 

pq 

OrH  O 

o 

% 

o 

o 

O 

o  o  o  o 

o 

05 

o» 

O* 

3 

ca 

OS 

09 

a  a  Oi  Oi 

o» 

•H 

r-l 

— 

i-l 

— i 

i-i 

— « 

iH 

— > 

i—l  rH 

t-H  i-H 

I-* 

o 

>■ 
a  o 

"3  3 
WW 


o 

> 

"3 

o 

tn 

d 

o 

o 

oS 

g 

> 

a 

■  — 

■  r 

o 

b 

p 

e3 

CD 

« 

PQ 

K 

CD 

d 

05 


CD 

d 

cS 

-o 


CD 

"3 

b 

P 

H 


CD 

d 


55 


CD 


> 

O    m    CD    CO 

P    S    d-3 


cS 

^3 


CD 


"    d  S 


■g 


xs 


1° 


§ 


IS 

2  jo 

03  l, 
CD  CD 
Ch02 


03 
o 

f*     b 

•4-4  © 

O         Oi 

3 

CD 


43 

d 

eS 
> 
b 

CD 

J/2 


Q 


a 
§ 

d 
O 


CO 
CD 


f| 

cd  e> 


oi 

CO 

CD 

e-i 


35 
(O 

cS 
0D 
P-l 


•is 

a 
a 

CO 

eS 

0D 

P-; 


CO  t- 

oo 

CO  «o 


00 


OS       o 

O  l-H 

co      co 


CO 


CN 
r-l 

CO 


co 

T-t 

CO 


19 


d  d 

*  a  -s 

n  to   ™ 
o3   efi  .2 

CD    CD    b 

—  —  — 


•     ■ 

:  s 

• 

• 

. 

•f4 

o 

. 

• 

• 

. 

:    :    :t3      T3 

.    0            0D 

43 

OD 

U    d 

CD  .3 

4a 
0 

b             b 

CD          O 
^CD    b           b 

•o    -., 

. 

* 

o 

d 
p 

J3   rr 

• 

« 

ea 

.a  g      3 

■w*      OS 

>   eS 

• 

• 

^  5s 

O    b 
b    <S 

• 

• 

>o 

oi 

a 

■os  o9    a 

S  1 

~w 

o 

•^'J^* 

vO 

XZ2 

CD 

0 

43.2   43                         O 

ft 

■  — 

P 

o 

Jh 

0 

t4   flQ         P  43   3 
e3  O  b       43  *S,£ 
S  2  3  «J  ®  3°« 

-^ 

a 

eg 

o3 

CO    OD 

e3    cD 

4=  .— 

eg 

0 

•  •«< 

09 

3 

• 

'SB 

"2     * 

> 

'•£ 

H 

ea 

M 

o 

CO    b 

-  £4 

co 
b 

a 

s 

S3 

0 

03  -d  43  ^3  (U    3  £L 
02tZ2PMp>        P 

«Lri 

< 

V-J 

Eh 

z 

< 

Q 

EH 

O 

■^  IO  (OC>G0Q         © 

i—l  i-4  1-4  i—l  T-t  1-4  C* 

CO  CO  CO  CO  CO  CO         CQ 


274 


MACEDONIA 


m 

H 

V.    X 
O    K 

3  a 

H 
IS 


o 

is 

00 

01  s 

55  8 

i-H 
*-l 

•  •-4 

44 

Pm 

«  a 

«4 

a  u. 

«, 

•<  © 

ms 

a 

o 

JH 

os 

30 
© 
O 

o 


o 

■*» 

0 

o 


-C  OS 
«    © 

oS   p 
2^ 

ms"  ms 

o  o 
oi  os 


- 
o 
o 


H 

CO 

3 

o 
cs 

&0 
0 
«4 

,c 

„ 

-u 

MS 

+= 

o 

<1 

o> 

§ 


a      a      a      a      a  « 

n3  .—  ro  .jh  ^3  rji.'e  :~rO  rp/o  :p,     rS 


^    43^5    43^  -P1 


8>l  >>i  >>o  >>o  ^5 

,o  g,o  gja  g.e  g,o  § 

CO 


ee        jao        _on        j» 

""C  *>  rO  *£►  ""d  *>  'O  "t>  ^  ">  "S  "> 
™  O  •  0 

m    44    — , 


© 

3* 


22Sog62 


o 


CD 


d 


<D 


0 


© 


gM   SCO   J3CQ   3  GO  SCO  J3GG 

a   a   s   s   s   s 


J3 
CO 

M> 
=S 

<1 
MS~ 

o 

OS 


CO 

tib 

MS 

o 


M 
CO 

fcc 

0 
MS 

o 
os 


.0 
■•a 

<o 

t& 

a 

MS 

o 

OS 


co 

(sb 

0 

MS 

o 

OS 


CD 
be 

a 

«i 

MS 

o 

OS 


■  — 

2 


J      00  TO  I 

§  <?§  S  I 

q  qOq  bo 
Dfl  Oi;3 
o  >  q  >. 

-go-go 
o    o 


-a 

MS 


o  o 

OO 


M 

-■■ 

MS 


© 

o 


OS 

© 

© 


MS  MS  MS  MS 

o  o      o      o 

OS  OS         OS         OS 


OS 

O   K 

eS 

H    4J 

hi 

-«3 

.J* 

O 

03 

e8  «» 

o 

O 

0 

O 

«-5    °3 

3  S 

© 

» 

V 

© 

© 

© 

© 

Q 

Q 

pn-a 

a 

d 

a 

a 

-  w 

a 

.3 

s 

> 

I 

> 

o 

m  * 

*  a 

«B 

>05 

«o 

x» 

WJ3 

xc 

>cn 

o  o 

o 

© 

OS  w 

>o 

8*8 

o 

o 

O 

O 

^4 

o 
^4 

o 

^3 

O 

O    c3 

3 

3    rt 

o 

O 

O 

O 

o 

O 

o 

©    U 

u 

| 

3 

WW 

ui 

M 

M 

M 

M 

M 

M 

HO 

O 

cS 
© 


m 
© 

Cm 

-O  Vi    CO 

44  ©  .rt 

©  I— I   fcj 

03  OPm 


•  p4 
© 

e3 
B9 
e3 


•<» 


■O    ?■ 

"5  ° 

©  C~! 

XD     Q> 

-      o  *v * 

O-j    CXI 

•OS  o 
8-  -^.a 

fl-  .-a 


i-i      c»  os 

CO         CO  CO 


a 

eS  fa 

m  cS 

03  o 

©  ■-' 


00 

Z~ '>—    c8 

55      Ph 


a 

cS 

00 

© 

Pm 


■*> 

-*» 

c 

a 

OS 

* 

00 

00 

nJ 

a 

« 

© 

Ph 

Pm 

00     00 

©  © 

44     44 

PmPh 


a 

eg 

00 

oS 

© 

Ph 


o 

O 

02 


O 

a 

eS 


oo 

^4 
© 


a-S  a 
«j  s  « 

o       o 


© 

>50 

a 

44 

© 

Ph 


o 


o 

44 

Ph 


Cm 

44 

o 

O 

05 

>b5 

Ph 

r> 

44 

§ 

© 

a 

U4 
© 

ra 

03 

•  p— 

s 

a 

2 

HC        ^- 


O 

a 
o 


© 

Ph 
W 

?5 


*2 

'> 
o 

.^4 

;  a 


•    CO 

:  d 
•  -s 

5Z5-3 


oo 

a 

c3 
>o 
o 

Ph 

oo 

06 

00 

o3 

a 


i© 

M^    09 

a  *© 

ti  -»^ 

eg    ^ 

H=     O 
03     44 

a  © 

oPh 


CO 


MS 

en 

CO 


co 

CM 

CO 


CO 


00 
CM 

CO 


OS  O 
CM  CO 
CO         CO 


CO  CO 

CO  CO 


CO 
CO 

CO 


CO 

CO 


SUPPLEMENT  VI  275 

5   -;j|-  ^a  ^c  £« 

JSP         ec^3  o  a  5      a  g  a  g 

W^           2    &,§  a3                o3  y3 

1    •§*«  s-s     S^  §^ 

M  IJ'II  I  I   i  I  I   I  I  I  I  I  15       5  3         I   I  I  I 

CDHSaJ  ^   o3               a3  ^   c3 

ofcj                S    co    cB  T3    MCC    MiD'O    bD«) 

™    ■                 M  O                  O  o 

OO              S  CO             CO  CO 


•g£ 

2          *1* 

,fl 

J3 

^3  -fl   S  O 
tf  •*?  <N  (N 

-L3 

49 

MS  irt   _   _ 

fH                            t>-  C*  Oi 

o» 

OS 

^H  rH^J^S 

. 

.    .  o  o 

£    OS    o3    c3    oj    o3  -ffl    » 
J5  Hi  H,  l-s  H,  H5  W  &h 

CD 

^2 
O 

■g-S  3  a 

«o  »o 

K5  lO 

i3U5«5tO(o't^^l>l>t>t-*C» 

t-^ 

C-^ 

>>t^trftr 

o  o 

o  o 

oooooooocooo 

o 

o 

o  o.  o  o 

»  a> 

O  OB 

00>0>0>0030>0)0)0>0)Oi 

OJ 

o> 

Oi  C5  Oi  ^ 

tH  i-H 

i-l  i 

r-t 

t-(T-(.-I^Hl-tt-<1-(l— i    •— t    1—1    T— 1    ^-« 

I-l 

rH 

I— I  i— 1  H  rH 

| 

fl 

to 

'5 

43  49-U4J 

fl 

o  o  o  q 

-  -.      .--      .—      -—J 

o'S 

u  &  &  B 

49    49    49    43 

o 

o 

C  o 

co    03    ce    qo 

■  —    -.-1    ..4    .— < 

o  o 

> 

9 

> 

§1 

a.rt>      HMMM           a> 

« 

Q 

03    o3    o    © 

^  &*■  C  fl 

o  •  --. 
»f— »  fl 

'5* 

d  3 

>0      ?>      fcl      fl    1    rt    ^    -^    — H      CO      CO      Q. 

49 
>CQ 

49 
>03 

2    2    *    03 

"Tl  >co 

MO 

a  ° 

X  ^q  •^•■-« 

3  « 

0) 

'&. 

"q* 

03    oS  J3  J3 

Mo 

J-i    *• 

►OCO^WP-P-iPhP-iPhP-iWcO 

o 

CO 

o 

CO 

oot>t> 

hi 

O 

OD 

.* 

1 

° 

I 

1 

1 

1               9                          n 

1 

49 

49  49              f.^l^^^^'P     & 

CflflSCflflClCfl© 
0S08®.2a3o3o3o3eSo3S 

49   49   49  49 

a 

fl  c  g  a 

•+»   ■*» 

© 

o3    o3    o3    cS 

CO     CO 

^3 

00CON.QCGCOCOCOCOCOrM 

en    co    cq   co 

©    © 

fl 

O3o3'r5hio3o3o5c3o3a3fl 

o3    o3    a3    cS 

*c  *c 

49 

PhPhOCOPhPhPhPhPhP-II-H 

ii     <D     O     i> 

PhPh 

CO 

Oh  Ph  Cl,  Ph 

.      . 

# 

. 

. 

CQ 

•     •     • 

•        ••••••   ""•— '         •         -         -         • 

> 

•  1-4 

«©          ^ 

© 

*•— 
o3 

Ph 

of 
hi 

49 

.r4 

> 

49                         O 

Nikola  Manojlo 
Cvetan 

Novak  Todorov 
Two  peasants 

A  peasant 
Jordan 
Ivan   .fc. 

Kosta  Savkovic' 
Ilija  Pop-Antid 
Gjorgje  Rujano 
Kone  Stefanovi 
Son  of  K.  Stefa 
Atanas  Serebet 
Veljko  Nikolid 
Momir  Cvetkov 
Radid  Zmejkov 

Lenka,     Ra 
daughter 

Angjel  Domaze 
Nikola  Mino  ... 
Tone  Amzid  ... 
Momir  Atanask 

>o«o       t-ao  osOi-icfleo'^iococ-cocBO  v*  cm  eo->*u3to 

COCO         COCO  eOCOCOCOCQCQCQCOCOCOCOCO  CO  CO  cocococo 


276 


MACEDONIA 


2 
O 

<-H 

•< 
P 

o 
o 


•  -* 

t 

5 

U 

1 

la- 

2 

•a  ^  S 

0) 

D 

O 

CD 

cy 

o 

®  ©  a 

■ 

-a 

43 

3 

rfl 

4a 

-fl 

•3 

-£5 

B 

O 

X 

O 

ce 

O               ot 

6* 

3H 

T- 

r* 

m 

2 

3) 

J4 

"3 

CD 

2 

s-sla 

O   H 

«a 

H 

M 

cS 

cfl 

c 

-n 

03 

«  9  b  * 

~  9 

1    1 

1    1    1    1 

1    1    1 

1 

<s-c 

&x 

2  « 

1    1 

1    1    1    1 

J 

I    1    ! 

1 

-*3 

■-^ 

-t= 

« 

-»3            ■*» 

a 

e 

<o 

CD 

V                  CD 

en 

m 

rfl 

CO 

■ 

r«3 

ro  co     -a 

an 

a> 

DO 

-^> 

CO 

<r 

co 

■P 

to  so* 

s 

rH 

CO 

T3 

rj 

go 

TJ 

S-i    co  T3    _ 

■ 

PS 

3 

3 

-h 

0 

a 

3 

i* 

o 

<fi  3  >;  ° 

60  O 

3^ 

•H 

60  O 
3^ 

BC  O    g  "S 

pq 

pq 

pq 

H 

rfl 

o 

o. 

O 

^5 

rfl*fl 

rfl   T}t 

c-  t- 

a  « 

>>  6 

is  p 

c3    * 

03    a> 

3  s 

2£ 

£Q 

OS    En 

PI           M 

..  •. 

5    O 

C~     t> 

t»c-c-t-t*-c»c»t» 

c- 

t- 

t- 

t- 

H 

o  o 

oooooooo 

o 

o 

o 

o 

-M 

OS  OS 

Osososososososos 

os 

OS 

OS 

OS 

rH  rH 

l— 1  r-l  rH  i— 1 

rH 

rH  rH  rH 

rH 

rH 

rH 

rH 

_^ 

O 

Cj 

,»-■■* 

©    W 

3 

"fill 

O 

o 

> 
o 

g^ 

PL, 

CO 

■s 

2  >J 

2           § 

^^ 

*4 

g  s 

4) 

M 

s  s 

g         > 

hJ 

cj 

-4J 

o 

S  S 

3 
cS  ;r? 

U  7Z 

>3         ° 

a? 

<sr2 

cS 

a 

c3 

o 

s  * 

OS  w 

O    ©    od.^ 

o  "C  'C  « 

o 
•  •— i 

c 
3 

o.2  > 
►  3  ® 

<D    O     P 

O 

-P 
CO 
•H 

Q 

"-4 

N 

O 

o 

*CD 

CO 
•  *H 

> 

o 

43 

c3 

>w 

Eh  Ph  Ph  pq  PQ  EH  >  W 

pq 

M 

Ph 

M 
O 

r>> 

03 

a 

d  § 
c3  .2 
co  jo 
OS'S 
CD    CD 

PhOQ 


u 

CD 

Ph  _  K 

CD    fl  CD 

hP    CD    CD  rO 

s -a  5  s 

.s  fl  43  s 

Sh     C--H  CD 


C   G  C 

c6    c3  o3 

CO     CO  CO 

o3    c8  oB 

CD  CD 


Ph  fl  b  EH  Ph  Ph  Ph  Ph 


a 
o 


:o  :::::::cio  cs  ; 

'S1^  K     :2             s!>  ,2 

-a  "9  *  J  J  r§  :  1  :  I  4  i 

S=3  -^"S'S^          2„3  -P  CS 

-HW  ^      i^j^H      l      §S  l  PH 

roiS  r?  rH  EH  EH  Q  Ph  EH  r*  OT  00 

kft»«  JTiCOCOCOCOCOeOcO  CD  CO 

aseo  tccoeoeocoeoeceo  eo  co 


BB 

C8 

4)3 

H>3 

fl 

fl 

ej- 

CS 

us 

ca 

3 

c3 

CD 

CD 

S. 

^ 

-Ml 

<s 

93 

JH 

Sh 

CD 

CD 

> 

r> 

CD 

CD 

CQ 

OQ 

os 

o 

CD 

t- 

eo 

SO 

o 


SUPPLEMENT  VI 


277 


»  S 

O    CO 
<D   go 

•a  £. 

^  •*-(  <jj  _. 
Si  __    CD    ID 

3  5»CQ.2 
•^  /■? 


a) 


CD 

<v 

t—i 
92 

o 


■43  -*3 

o        o 


I  I  I  I  I  I  I  I  I  I 


^1  m!  tt> 
o  u  c  »-i  a 

cefcH 


on 
O 

T3 

O 

E-t 
>> 

-Q 

4)  . 

u  c6" 
cp   ti 

n  -S3. 


cS 


III         I     I     I     I 


> 


O 

S3 
eg 

a 


o 

> 
o 

a 

S3 


I     I 


00 

8 

T-l 

§ 


o 

06 


00    *  00  00 

oPhoo 
OS      a  a 


oo 


o 


a 

| 

« 

•T3 

<D 

•T3 

J- 
P 


eo 

o 

■** 

o 

t- 
eo 

m 
o 

a 

2 


Sh 

eS 

<u 

Q 


cS 

s 

Ph 

> 

•c 


E-itf 


o 

> 
o 


g 
M 


pejpppssjesses 
oooooooooo 

OOOOOOOOOO 

oooooooooo 
>;>>:>>>>(>>> 
oooooooooo 

coc3cSc3c3c8a3cc,c3c3cc 

gaaaaaaaaaa 


■*=> 

B 

o 
O 


S3  C 

3  S3 

O  o  o 

goo 

0    (U  V 

eg    S3  S3 

gco  Co 

>o  >o 

J  o  o 


a  fl 

S3    S3 

o  o 


V32 

Cv> 


W  M M     «WS 


-»3 

to 

2 


cf 


CO 

et? 
O 

Ph 


-♦= 

S3  C 
cS  o> 
co  si 
«6  •  ~ 
<w  ."£ 

PhO 


a 

Cy 


V<i-i;-iSj:_iS*S-;_i 

S3S3S3PS3S3S30 

oooooooo 

ci    ci    ci    Cu    ^    c    cj    .■;    „ , 

liiaiiiia'sl 

^^dcJ3Jdc!cJcS  Jr    c8 


S3 

3 


s- 

CD 

;- 
S3 
O 

ea 

a 

c 

a 


3-1 

CD 

si 


u 

CD 

S5 

o 

O    c8 

§a 
§s 


CJ 

cS 

> 


^ 


TO    •i-H    iJZi  TO    ••-*    *^H    ,_". 


o 

.a 

o 

n 


ca 

S3 


n 


••I      1 


;    co 
•  "08 

T3    CO 

S3   cS 

w  S 


CO 

a 
EH 


cS 

CO 


O  -»3 


o  rt  a) 

a -2  g 

i'C    c8 


S^-o 


s 


> 

S3 

S3 

5 

CO  ^ 

y  -^  _ 

"S    6C  S3 

g    U    c3 

sl-2.5 


•in  -O 

p 


o  "2 

^3   fl 


r^    Q  — 1 1 


o 
l-a 


«  -ft« 


>o 


IB 

a  s  a  | 

."    &.  c3    * 
COCQl-sQ 


CO 


5"  <=8 

73  02 


-^->    CD 
C/2T3 

s  § 

5     CO 


o<^ 

cS  3 


F 

■p  p»  a 
g   O   fl 

o  >  .Z 

aa  * 

O  -3   to 

0)Ph<! 


N     IH     cS 

®   -«   S3 

^o«<> 


tH  tN        eO^»<        10        co  t-CB  0>  Q  H  CM  CO  ■*  W  (O        t»00O5        Oh  CN  CO 

C~  t-         C-C-         t-         C-C-D-t-OOuOOOOOOOOOOO         000000         050503C73 

co  cc       coco       cc       cococococococococococo       cococo       cocococo 


278 


MACEDONIA 


H 

Ed 

Ei 

fc  « 

o  w 

«  £ 

1 

I 

1       1       1       1       1       1       ||       1       1       1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

3  a 

a 

w 

s 

H 

o 

3g 

a,    H 

1 

1 

1       1       II       1       1       1       II       1       1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

<  a 

«  fa 

3° 

w 

eg 

eg 

°  w 

^ 

M 

u 

u 

Og 

3 

U 

eg 

3, 

a 

►>>> 

> 

> 

> 

► 

> 

55  « 

cS 

cj 

-*=  -«3 

-♦= 

-»> 

-*3 

-»3 

-♦3 

el 

Ah 

(9 

>>fa 
■*»    i 

a  a 
■n9p 

>>£         eg   <S   eS              oOO 

■2.2    Q    O    O    O            O    8 

OS 

o 

o 

1 

00 

O 

00 

o 

-♦3    • 

OS 

O 

oq 
O 

43       ■     ^a 

eg 

> 

C    eg 

S^ogi3io>3    *    eg^S    O    O    O 

5^g>ooo>«cN>f>>- 

o 

p- 

o 

> 

S  o 

a  ° 

a  ©  a 

3   >   3 

"E 

p  _i 

-9  S  o^^^  SzSrS  2  ©  o 
s^^^^  "^  o  <»  a>  <u 

o 

-♦3 

s 

O    o 

O   o 

O    o 

O  o   9 

w 

W 

CHOQPQcoOfaEHeHEHEH 

EH 

EH 

E-i 

EH 

EH 

o 

V. 

h 

H 

j-i 

M 

H« 

o 

S 

SJ 

j. 

B 

H 

K4 

c 

Vl 

H 

& 

■< 

n    h    || 

1 

3 

3 

0 

3 

3 

P< 

1 

o 

O 

O 

o 

O 

C3 

£  2  £ 

CgCgeSCgagogOiogaVrg 

J> 

•a 

^3 

-Q 

^2 

O 

-43 

-♦» 

og 

Og 

£ 

^ 

^ 

O 

a 

0 

1—4 

o 

a3 

o3 

r* 

a 

a 

a 

^ 

m 

OS 

to     '/J     ffl     «     ffl     1     (t     »,      I    ^      • 

Q 

Q 

OS 

eg 

cgegcgcgegc3o3o3j5a-a 

I* 

E 

hi 

b 

$4 

V 

0) 

AnCMfltPutdiPHPLiPHE-thHQ 

og 

og 

03 

eg 

3 

fa 

fa 

fa 

fa 

fa 

fa 

fa 

*s 

>o 

•  ** 

a 

O 

so 
O 

d 

og 

. 

•         ■•••••••■• 

1 

# 

B 

. 

B 

■ 

a 

M 

H 

o 

M 
> 

« 

fa 
O 

3. 

'2 

eg 
>o 

c 

o 

Ml 

o 

•o  ►  >  fe 

J  : : : : : ^is 

»o    :    :    :  -  a      *  3  to  < 
w    •    .    •  o  a  o  co  -3 

o 

«— 1 

o 

-*3 
as 

o 

-  eg 

• 

'> 

o 

i—4 

o 
H 

o 
"o 

00 
O 
U* 

O 

a 

a 

« 

a. 

h 
EH 

a/ 

> 
as 

00 

O 

•2. 
y 

H 

a 

N 

3 

M 

a, 

eg    O  -3    *    d    c3  ^-»  d    eg  >o    eg 

as 

eg 

eg 

eg 

It 

ft 

a 

S5 

3 

fa 

hm3   O  -S   08  _H   >«J   eS   O 
S^P5l-sOQCOEHMOt-s^ 

2  »rS 

< 

> 
o 

00 

eg 
> 

-»3 

-»3 

fa 

o 

•<* 

o 

(Dt-aOOlOHOeiJ^iOeJt- 

ao 

O 

o 

»H 

e« 

& 

Oi 

OJ 

OiOJOJOOOOOOOOO 

o 

O 

rH 

rH 

i-i 

CO 

SO 

eQcoeosQ,*'^<^<',^,<e^<^i'# 

•* 

■* 

■»»" 

■* 

■* 

SUPPLEMENT  VI  279 


•a  2  2 -a 


m    **    » 

I      I      I      I  II  I  II  I      II      I      Ml  l-fr-ll* 

g  ..35  ■ 

b  d  e  ©  os 

3  ac.s  -a  +a 


I      I      I  I  !  I  I  I  1      II      I      I  I  I  I  I  I      I 


%•*  *-*  J-»  J—  5-4 

III  *>>>»»>»>>{»■>>»•»>,  *         > 

■g      .5      ■£  ■e-S-2-S"H12i2-e  -5      ••* 

■«a^3^i  ciacacflofl  .+»       -*a 

,2         ,2        ,2  -   ^                             OoSSoooS  OO 

>>  ,   j?»  >>        0   o    o   «    o              w  w        w        w  w  w  w  w                                 f*.         >, 


"  -fi  *  -^  '  "2  as  2  "a  "fl  *a  "a  *n  oo  o  ooooo  '  -a   '  ■£ 

r*g>gr>5;a85555.fi  °°  °  ooooo  >  p  >  fl 

oOoOoO'^s^OAJ^j^s-a  •*»-*>  •*»  **i+i*4j  oOoo 

-SO-^O-^O^SiJb^iS^  «3<3  cS  d   d   d   d   d  J=0-»0 

CjojaioJiSddddd  h   6  u  >hViS-»<s-i  O          CJ 

Eh      E-i      E-i      pqSWWWWtf  WW  W  WWWWW  En      En 

d  d  c8  d 

3  3  3  3 

>  >  >  u    > 

o  o  o  So 

a  a  a  a 2  o  a  2  a  2  a  c  c  —  S_§  c  2 

a3    d    d    ee-^  P    3*2  5*9    3    =3    3    fl  j*  "5   P  -9         « 

W  PM  Ph  fX,  d,  fL,  S  dS  S  p^fe^S  Eh      S 


o 


.2,    -a  o  «  2 

c-o  <    5*5  d  «      d  o  fl  S 

<a       S^  oS^  j  «      aorS.      a       ogoo'O  >  "o 

O        d        H  <*£  is3  *  °        OO       43       -S.  d  .X-54  o  o  5 

W      Eh      N      «3  tf  £  Eh  Jz;  £  «      WW      -<      OQOOEh  ►?  oo 


•0 

0 

'terovid 
ejanovid 

Stojkovj 
Tanasije 
reevski 

•  •  • 

irski 
vkovid 

^5 
0 

"d 

03 
O 

^«S:2.a«c 

«s  «.  3  •=-  »  S 

CO   O   di3   d   d 

d  O 

00 

as 

d 

fc4 

«3 

3-s^  a  0  ■e*g, 
OS'S  2  9.*4  2  s? 

H2  ^>J 

9 

d 

^p5Seh»^PQ 

0  0 

Woq 

< 

o       >      "3      ^Q^«-fcd  »< «      5      A^  Qo 

M     <     J      ^dq:3.§^c      W^      ^       «^*c:?. 


*a      <o  t~  oo  a>  o  i-i  e«      eo  ■>#      «      (Ot>aoao  »-i      oi 

tH         HHrtHISlSCI         CMCN         C<         CNCSCMC^ec  CO         CO 


280 


MACEDONIA 


1 

a 

1 

^ 

* 

,        ■ 

-*» 

* 

■ 

J 

• 

• 

M 

c 

i 

*o 

oJ 
on 

*u 

t» 

1     -o 

. 

-o 

> 

e8 

p* 
o 

W 

K 
H 

fa 

tojcevi 

c 
d 

eB 

•  r-4 

B 

c 

3 

(4 

*-* 
0? 
•  *■« 

ts 

05 

O 

00 

08 

■O 

<0 

• 

o 

J 

« 

• 

a 

< 

;  5 

OB 
■  <■* 

43 

en 

o 

14 

o 

o 

'z.  S 

00 

o 

«3 

53 

a, 

o 
ft 

55 

% 

I     W 

W 

E-t 

53  hI 

E-i 

53 

S3 

53 

H 

53 

o 


CO  T* 

CO         CO 


«5 

CO 


(Ot-        00        o 

co  co      co      co 

^*  ^*       ^*       ^j* 


O         1-4 


co 

5 


SUPPLEMENT  VI  381 

O    ©    O  «)    J 

•m  >  -3'O'a'B         >t3         is  _         ^q  ra 

£  a  «        8  2  2  2        2        2  I        2  |  o 

«    S    »    8  ©    ©    ©    ©  ©  ©  m  >,C 


1*°!  1 1  §§§§  1 1  §  1 1  §  1 1   i  i-i-s i  fji 

•r?  T3  ._  A\     *»\     *-»     iv*  *\  *n  /I)  <11 


_,j  •-  ©©©©  ©  ©  © 

(jj^  ©©©©  ©  ©  © 


o 


232 

■-■ 


5  ©,2ai  a  a  a  a  H  S.  a  a,  >-s 

2  2    g    p    3  p  g  g  3t*c3 


•   c6  c3   eS   cS   «S  e3  i  O© 

~°                     assay's             S°o^>g  § 

^                          >o>o>o>o  ?^3      -^.S     :=-.s->o  2  ©  >S               ^ 

C3  =8  =3  cs  5  §  §"S  g-s  g  a       gg~-2>  §<                ■§ 

>>>>©£?,. 9  ra©o©-Jv2J2<5t2i?  -2                  a 


-<a 


o      o     -^  .*;     ^^>>>^«'-©lSra<»o©^^^r.<g"°     ^  g 

O  *  £      so       a  o  a  ^  a  sehO^Wo^oj^  SSSOJziO      co  * 

a®    oo    ooKa!Ea!        K                 -5  s; 

-©•-1       ~  -      -„ J3 •  2 

Oi  ,-,  fed  CJSOS  050505050iOiO>050J050505Gi05^03050500i  OS  2 

qaC       00        O  O  O  O  O  O  O  O  O  O  O  O  O  O  K*  O  O  O  O  O        O  " 

O  oa        05  c;  0;  O  O)  OS  J:  CI  C  C:  7.  J.  ~  '~         OO)  OIQO)        Oi  g* 

© 
© 

tiM  ooooo^^o^^O1^  2  a  ^2  © 

O  7313  SoOOOOsgOs-O^loS         k2y2cSa>0"^  2 

*         00    ««w«mweho«ohowot^    SSo^fi    a  © 

eo 

CO 

o 

CO 

eo 

09 

o 

aa      ccgcaaca  aaaa      gaa^a      a  ^ 

oocd  aj    x    en    ai    cc    en    03    t/j  to   u    x    N  to    ffl   aj^;    to  en  H 

cSc8  <St3c3e8c3c3cSc3  c8dc8-J3  d    tS   d-n    d  o3  g 

©©  a^qja)©©©©©  ©©©.a  ©©©'Jj©  ©  2 

pL,P4  fL,  (i,  Pn  f^  fM  Ph  CM  PL,  PhPhPhO  Ph  p_  fL,  S  Ph  Ph  jx, 


.,-,  «    »o  r2     :2  -^ 


f-o      ^g2      '2  o^.*2  ojgg^    ••=■      §'g      ^o«       g 

®  30     ©^J*>g£J2:2*£<sJ*c1:a.     ©  a.-g  2  ^     " 


1     §1  il5S»-ljli|3l|.l  lilli  1 


0«0         OOOOJOHNCOTlliOtDt-QOOJp         H  (M  M  1<  m         CD 

■»j<^«       ^ii^ioioioioioioioiaioiotD       cooo  oco       eo 


VII 

INCOMPLETE  LIST  OF  ATTEMPTED  MURDERS  PER- 
PETRATED BY  BULGARS  ON  SERBS  BETWEEN  1897 
AND   1901 

The  number  of  attempted  murders  -perpetrated  by  Bulgars  on 
Macedonian  Serbs  is  far  greater  than  that  of  successful  murders. 
Unfortunately  we  have  no  statistics  available.  We  give  instead  only 
a  few  cases  which  occurred  between  1897  and  1901,  and  this  list, 
though  incomplete,  throws  some  light  upon  the  terror  practised 
by  the  Bulgars  among  the  Serbian  population  of  Macedonia. 
According  to  the  information  at  our  disposal  the  Bulgars  attempted 
to  murder  the  following  persons : — 

1.  Petar    Dimitrijevic,   head   master   of  the    Serbian   school    in 

Prilep.1 

2.  Jovanka  Hmjieek,  teacher    at  the  Serbian    Lyc£e  for  Girls 

in  Skoplje. 

3.  Jevdja  Frtunic,  schoolmaster  in  Skoplje. 

4.  Uija  Spirkovic,  Serbian  booksellor  in  Prilep. 

5.  Veljan,  the  most  prominent   peasant   and    Serbian   headman 

in  Krivogastane  (district  of  Prilep). 

6.  Dr.  Ceda  Djurdjevi<5,   Serbian  physician  in  Skoplje. 

7.  Mihalilo  Hadzi  Popovid,   president  of  the    Serbian  congrega- 

tion in  Bitolj,  who  was  wounded  in  both   hands  with  a 
knife  by  the  Bulgars. 

8.  The  servant  of    Dr.    Ceda  Djurdjevic,    Serbian  physician  in 

Skoplje,  also  wounded  with  a  knife. 

9.  Djordje  Dimitrijevic,   member   of    the    Serbian  congregation, 

received  severe  knife  and  bullet  wounds. 
10.  In  Veles,  after  murdering  the  Serbian  headman  Petar  Tasevic 
and  several  other  Serbs  from  the  neighbourhood,  the  Bul- 
gars  assaulted   numerous    other   Serbs  with    knives  and 
firearms. 


•  Petar  Dimitrijevid's   daughter   was   murdered    by    the  Bulgars 
in  September  1897. 

968 


SUPPLEMENT  VII  283 

11.  Hija  Vucetic,  Serbian  professor  in  Skoplje,  severely  wounded 

on  January  18,  1899. 

12.  Jovan  Jovicevid,  head  master  of  the  Serbian  school  in  KukuS 

shot  by  Bulgarian  comitadjis  on  May   12,  1899. 

13.  Vanca  Ilid,    Serbian  bookseller  in   Bitolj,    shot  and  severely 

wounded  in  July  1899. 

14.  Dimko    Petrusevio,    proprietor    of    the    school    in    Orahovac 

(district  of  Veles),  received  a  bullet  wound  on  September 
19,  1899.     He  was  eventually  murdered. 

15.  Dinko  Pandovic,  of  Veles,  wounded  in  September  1899. 

16.  Naum   Nikolic,   of    Tajmiste,    was  taken    to  the  mountains 

with  the  intention  to  murder  him,  but  was  ransomed  by 
the  village  on  September  21,  1899. 

17.  Dimo  Dapdevid,  Dan  Burcevic    and  Damcevid  received  knife 

wounds  on  September  28,  1899. 

18.  Jovan  Milenkovic,  a  prominent  Serb  of  Veles,  wounded  with 

a  knife  on  September  28,  1899. 

19.  Velimir  Janidijevid,   member  of    the   Serbian    school   parish 

and  his  mother,   assaulted  by  the  Bulgarian  teachers  in 
October  1899. 

20.  Govedarovid,   proprietor    of    the    Serbian    school     in    Seres, 

attacked  one  night  in  October  1899. 

21.  Marko     Stavrid,    Serbian     teacher    in    Jablanica   (district    of 

Debar),  wounded  by  a  revolver  shot  on  October  27,  1899. 

22.  Jovan   Popovid,    of    Bela    (near    Kodani),    assaulted  by  the 

Bulgars  on  Christmas  Day,  1899. 

23.  Teofil  Djordjevid,   of    Gostivar,  wounded    in  December  1899. 

24.  Stojan  Nastovid  and  two  other  Serbs  from  Orahovac  (district 

of  Veles),  who  were  severely  wounded  on  January  4,  1900. 

25.  Laza  Hid,  Serbian  teacher  in  Novo  Selo  (district  of  Skoplje), 

wounded  with  a  knife  in  May  1900. 

26.  Anastas    Milenkovic,   priest,    of    Tehovo   (district    of    Veles), 

four  times  shot  at  with  a  rifle,  finally  with  a  revolver  on 
December  30,  1900,  and  eventually  murdered. 

27.  Todo    Gasevid,   merchant,   of    Tetovo,   wounded   on   Novem- 

ber 1,  1901. 

28.  Samuilo   Stojkovic,  of   Bresna  (district  of  Tetovo),   wounded 

in  December  1901,    and  robbed  of  1,000  dinars. 

29.  Petar  Konstantinovid,  founder  of  the  Serbian  school  in  Zrze 

(district    of    Prilep),    twice    shot    at    with    a    rifle,    and 
eventually  imurdered  in  1901.* 

*  Iv.  Ivanic,  "  Madedonija  i  Madedonci "  ("  Macedonia  and   the 
Macedonians  '*),  Novi  Sad,  1909,  pp.  471-475. 


VIII 

BULGARIAN  PROCLAMATION  IN  1879,  CALLING  UPON 
THE  INHABITANTS  OF  MACEDONIA  TO  RISE  AGAINST 
THE   TURKS 

Up,  brothers  !  (lit.  to  your  feet,  brothers  !)  The  hour  of  deliverance 
has  struck.  Now  the  chains  must  and  will  be  broken  wherewith 
cold  diplomatic  calculation  would  bind  you.  The  sun  of  liberty, 
which  is  already  shedding  its  warmth  upon  part  of  our  nation,  will 
arise  also  upon  the  remainder,  which  is  still  torpid  in  slavery,  and 
awaken  it  to  new  life.  We  have  provided  arms  ;  take  them  and  join 
the  fighting  lines.  There  is  no  other  choice  open  to  you.  If  you  let 
slip  the  present  propitious  moment,  you  will  for  ever  remain  in 
foreign  bondage.  Already  preparations  are  being  made  to  deprive 
you  of  your  faith,  together  with  your  nationality.  If  you  desire  to 
remain  Orthodox  as  your  fathers  have  been,  you  must  no  longer  put 
off  the  great  and  holy  war.  You  will  be  led  by  experienced  soldiers, 
sincere  patriots,  heroic  men,  and  our  cause  will  be  victorious.  Our 
oppressor  is  nearing  his  death.  His  seeming  display  of  strength  is 
only  the  last  spasm  of  a  dying  man,  and  we  have  no  other  enemies  to 
fear.  Any  foreign  intervention  in  favour  of  our  oppressor  will  provoke 
an  intervention  likewise  on  our  behalf.  The  moment  is  propitious, 
as  you  see.  Long  live  the  War  of  Liberty !  Let  us  fight  until  we 
have  won  the  frontiers  which  the  Almighty  has  assigned  to  our 
people.  Up  !  To  battle  1  Our  reward  will  be  the  freedom  of  us  all, 
the  heroic  death  of  individuals — our  pride.' 


'  J.  H.  Vasiljevic,  "  Pokret  Srba  i  Bugara  u  Turskoj"  ("  Insurrec- 
tion of  the  Serbs  and  Bulgars  in  Turkey  "),  Belgrade,  1908,  pp.  13-14. 


Printed  in  Qreat  Britain  by 

TJITWTK  BEOTHHR8,  L1MITBD,  THE  ORESHAU  PPB8S.  WOKING  AND  LONDON 


Japan   at   the   Cross   Roads 

By   A.   M.   POOLEY 

Ltte  Exhibitioner  of  Clare  College,  Cambridge.     Editor  of  "The  Secret 
Memoirs  of  Count  Hayashi,"  etc.,  etc. 

Demy  %v$.  \os.  6d.  net. 

"Extremely  critical  and  of  exceptional  interest." — Daily  News. 
"  Is  arrestingly  candid  and  absorbingly  interesting." — Glasgow  Herald. 

War  and  Revolution  in  Asiatic 

Russia     By  m.  philips  price 

Der/iy  Svo.  About  \os.  6d.  net. 

In  this  book  Mr.  M.  Philips  Price,  who  went  to  the  Near  East  in  1915  as 
the  correspondent  of  the  Manchester  Guardian,  gives  an  account  of  his 
experiences  and  observations  during  his  journeys  through  Northern  Persia, 
Armenia,  and  the  Caucasus.  The  first  two  chapters  tell  the  story  of  the 
War  on  the  Caucasus  Front  down  to  the  Fall  of  Erzerum.  Other  chapters 
consist  of  the  journal  of  his  travels  through  the  territories  occupied  by 
the  Russian  Army,  where  he  spent  many  months  in  organizing  relief 
for  the  destitute  native  population.  The  last  four  chapters  describe  the 
Revolution  in  the  Caucasus,  and  discuss  the  racial  problems  and  the 
political  future  of  the  countries  he  visited. 

Three  Aspects  of  the  Russian 

Revolution    By  emile  vandervelde 

Translated  by  JEAN  E.   H.  FINDLAY 

Crstvn  Svt.  5/.  net. 

M.  Vandervelde's  book  gives  in  broad  outline  a  comprehensive  view 
of  the  Russian  Revolution  in  its  political,  military,  and  industrial  aspects. 
M.  Louis  de  Broukere,  the  well-known  Belgian  Socialist,  and  Lieutenant 
de  Mann,  who  accompanied  M.  Vandervelde  on  his  recent  mission  t» 
Russia,  contribute  valuable  material  on  the  industrial  and  military 
problems.  The  book  is  characterized  by  a  lucidity  and  breadth  of  view 
which  enable  us  to  arrive  at  definite  conclusions  regarding  the  much- 
discussed  question  of  the  future  of  Russia  and  her  share  in  the  recon- 
struction of  Europe. 

A   Dying  Empire 

By   BOGUMIL   VOSNJAK 
With  a  Preface  by  T.   P.  O'CONNOR,  M.P. 
Crown  Svo.  4s.  6d.  net.     Tostage  $d. 

In  this  account  of  the  Dying  Empire  of  Austria  the  author  has  tried 
to  describe  the  sociological  factors  in  the  breakdown  of  the  Hapsburg 
Empire,  and  to  show  that  in  the  fabric  of  a  "  Central  Europe  "  is  closely 
woven  the  idea  of  a  predominating  Pan-Germanism.  Either  Germany 
must  stretch  from  Hamburg  to  Trieste  and  Salonika,  or  Austria-Hungary 
must  be  dismembered.     There  is  no  alternative. 


TheAwakeningoftheGerman 

pi  By  Dr.  OTFRIED  NIPPOLD 

X    CvJIJIC  Professor  of  International  Law  at   Berne   University 

*  Author  of  "  Der  Deutsche  Chauvinismus,"  etc. 

Translated  by  ALEXANDER  GRAY 

Demy  %vo.     Paper.     56  pp.  is.  net. 

Dr.  Nippold  discusses  the  various  influences  which  so  far  have  pre- 
vented the  German  people  from  awakening  to  the  truth  with  regard  to 
the  war,  and  emphasizes  the  necessity  of  such  an  awakening  if  a  secure 
peace  is  to  be  established.  "The  future  Europe  and  the  future  of  the 
German  people  cannot  possibly  be  built  on  a  lie." 


Poland  Past  and  Present 

Crtwn  %vt.  By  J.  H.  HARLEY  4/. 6d.net.  P»sUge%d. 

"  We  can  recommend  the  history  of  this  wonderful  people  .  .  .  setting 
out  clearly  the  chief  points  of  a  romantic  story." — Morning  Post. 


Bohemia's  Case  for  Indepen- 

J  By  EDWARD  BENES,  D.Litt. 

Uvilvv  Lecturer  at  Prague  University,  etc.,  etc. 

Wn-H  an  Introduction  by  HENRY  WICKHAM  STEED 
Crtwn  Svt.  2/.  6d.  net. 

"  A  short  and  telling  volume,  which  ought  to  be  read  and  made  knew* 
widely."— New  Europe. 

The  Future  of  Constantinople 

By   LEONARD   S.   WOOLF 

Crown  Svo.  zs.  6d.  net.     Postage  \d. 

"  A  very  thorough  piece  of  work  and  is  one  of  the  essential  books."— 
Leicester  Pioneer. 
"  An  admirable  little  book." — Common  Spnsf, 


Problems  of  the  Peace 

By   WILLIAM   HARBUTT   DAWSON 

Author  of  "The  Evolution  of  Modern  Germany" 
Demy  8vo.  js.  6d.  net. 

"  Mr.  Dawson's  volume  stands  out  conspicuously  from  a  multitude  of 
recent  publications  respecting  problems  of  the  peace.  '  It  is  not  heat, 
but  light,'  is  the  refrain  of  every  chaper,  and  most  readers  will  admit 
that  he  has  helped  to  clear  up  some  of  the  many  difficulties  involved 
in  the  problems  of  the  peace.'' — Times. 


\. 


After -War    Problems 

By  the   late   EARL    OF   CROMER,   VISCOUNT 

HALDANE,     The      BISHOP     OF     EXETER, 

Prof.  ALFRED  MARSHALL,  and  Others 

Edited  by  William  Harbutt  Dawson 

Demy  %vo.  Third  Impression.      7;.  6d.  net.     Postage  6d. 

"Valuable,  clear,  sober,  and  judicial." — The  Times. 
"Will  be  very  helpful  to  thoughtful  persons."— Morning  Post. 
"  A  book  of  real  national  importance,  and  of  which  the  value  may  very 
well  prove  to  be  incalculable." — Daily  Telegraph. 


The  Choice  Before  Us 

By  G.  LOWES   DICKINSON 

Dtmy  $vo.  Second  Impression.      6s.  net.     Postage  6d. 

There  are  many  pages  in  this  volume  which  express  admirably  the 
opinions  of  calm,  clear-thinking  men." — The  Times. 

"A  noble  book  which  everyone  should  read."— Daily  News. 


America  and  Freedom 

Being  the  Statements  of  PRESIDENT  WILSON  on  the  War 

With  a  Preface  bt  the 

Rt.  Hon.  VISCOUNT  GREY  OF  FALLODON,  K.G. 

Demy  %vo.  Paper  Covers,  is.  net.      Postage  td. 

"  We  would  like  to  see  this  little  book  printed  in  millions  of  copies  at 
the  national  expense  and  carried  into  every  household  in  this  country." — 
Spectator. 


The  Political  History  of  Japan  in  the  Meiji  Era 

By  Prof.  W.  W.  McLAREN.     Demy  Svo,  12s.  6d.  net.     Postage  6d. 
"  A  valuable  and  suggestive  book." — Saturday  Review. 

History  of  Germany  in  the  Nineteenth  Century 

By  HEINRICH  VON  TREITSCHKE.  Translated  by  E.  and  C. 
PAUL.  With  Introductions  by  WILLIAM  HARBUTT  DAWSON. 
Six  Vols.   Price  12s.  6d.  net  per  vol.  (in  sets  only).    Postage  6d.  per  vol. 

Poland  and  the  Polish   Question     Impressions  and 

Afterthoughts     By  NINIAN  HILL. 
Demy  Svo,  with  Illustrations  and  a  Map,  10s.  6d.  net.     Postage  $d. 

Poland's  Case  for  Independence 

Demy  Svo,  ys.  6d.  net.     Postage  $d. 
"A  book  .  .  .  rich   in   instruction   and   in   interest   for  all  classes  of 
readers." — Scotsman.  "  An  admirable  summary  of  the  country's 

distinguished  and  turbulent  past." — Pall  Mall  Gazette. 

History     of    Africa     South     of     the     Zambesi 

From  September  1505  to  September  1795.  In  Three  Volumes. 
With  Maps  and  Plates.  By  Dr.  GEORGE  McCALL  THEAL. 
Vol.  I.,  Third  Edition,  Revised  and  Enlarged.  (Vols.  II.  and 
III.,  Revised  and  Enlarged  Edition,  in  preparation.)  Demy  8vo, 
7s.  6d.  net. 

History   of   South   Africa  from    1795   to   1872 

Five    Volumes.     With    15   Maps  and   Plans.     By   Dr.   GEORGE 
McCALL  THEAL.    Vols.  I.  and  II.,  Fourth  Edition;  Vol.  III., 
Third  Edition,  all  Enlarged  and  Rewritten  ;  Vols.  IV.  and  V.  are  in 
their  Second  Edition.     Demy  8vo,  7s.  6d.  net. 
SUPPLEMENTARY  VOLUME    (1873-1881)  in  preparation. 

History  of  the  Renaissance,  the  Protestant 
Revolution,  and  the  Catholic  Reformation  in 
Continental  Europe     By  edward  m.  hulme. 

Demy  Svo,  589  pages,  with  8  Maps,  10s.  net.     Postage  6d. 

The  French  Renascence      By  dr.  charles  sarolea. 

Large  Crown  Svo,  Cloth,  with  Illustrations,  5.?.  net.     Postage  6d. 
"  This  is  the  work  of  a  philosopher,  a  jurist,  and  a  keen  observer." — Globe. 

A   Brief  History  of  the  French   Revolution 

By  F.  W.  AVELING,  M.A.,  B.Sc.     Illustrated.      Crown  Svo,  2s.  net. 
"A  concise  and  clear  sketch  uf  that  terrible  drama." 

A  Short  History  of  English   Rural  Life 

From    the    Anglo-Saxon     Invasion    to    the     Present    Time.      By 
MONTAGUE    FORDHAM,   M.A.    (Cantab).     With  a  Preface  by 
Sir  CHARLES  BATHURST,  M.A.,  M.P. 
Large  Crown  Svo,  Cloth,  3s.  6d.  net ;  Paper  zs.  6d.  net.     Postage  Ad. 

LONDON  :  GEORGE   ALLEN  &   UNWIN   LIMITED 


PLEASE  DO  NOT  REMOVE 
CARDS  OR  SLIPS  FROM  THIS  POCKET 

UNIVERSITY  OF  TORONTO  LIBRARY 


DR  Do.-devic,   Tihomir  R. 

701  Macedonia 

M2D7