Contents

Testimonial……………..……….……………………………………………………………..pg. 2

Event - The Independence Day of the Republic of Macedonia………...pg. 3

Special Guest…………..……………………………………………………….…………pg. 4 - 6

Interview with H.E. Dr. Pande Lazarevski, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the Republic of Macedonia in Romania

Romania – Macedonia bilateral relations…………………………….……pg. 7 – 11

Economic Highlights – Business Environment.……….…………..………….pg. 12

Focus on Legal Issues…………………………………….………………….……...... pg. 13

Trade Shows in Macedonia…………………………………………...... pg. 14

Focus on Tourist Attractions - ……………………………………..pg. 15 – 17

Cultural Landmarks – Strumica Carnival.……………………...... pg. 18 - 19

Info Macedonia - Studies…..……………..……………………………..………pg. 20 - 28 TESTIMONIAL

The first edition of this Bulletin was like a warm and friendly “Welcome” … The second – was like: we’re here, in this pattern ready to provide useful and updated information regarding the bilateral relationship… The third, the current one is meant to strengthen the customary meeting with news about the Republic of Macedonia … and there are many news ready to be read and yet, ready to be materialized into business opportunities.

Our constant approach in view to improve the mutual acknowledge is sustained with the professional support of H.E. Mr. Pande Lazarevski – Ambassador of The Republic of Macedonia in Romania, of the Macedonian business community representatives in Romania, of the Romanian companies willing to develop their business in a friendly investment environment as the Macedonia’s one. And yet, I’m certain that the Romanian and Macedonian people, no matter if there is economic involvment, or not, are open to know eachother as part of the great Balkan region community and as part of the European community.

We aim to gain even more new readers with every new edition of the Macedonian Bulletin, as there is interesting and diverse information in it, that is why we do believe that every new material or article has to comprise a little bit of “catchy” in terms of information for everyone. In order to accomplish this editing goal, we’ll do our best to capture the interest of our readers weather their interest lies in the economy sector or in any other activity field. We’re here, in this pattern ready to inform, to arise interest, to answer your questions about Macedonia, to make you ask yourself new questions about it.

As we are about to celebrate the National Day of the Republic of Macedonia, on September 8th, I have the pleasure to congratulate the brave and proud Macedonian people, as well as all those being linked to the Macedonian spirit – the numerous friends of Macedonia all around the world and here, in Romania ! Happy Anniversary on the National Day !

Aurelian GOGULESCU Honorary Consul of the Republic of Macedonia in Romania President of Prahova County Chamber of Commerce and Industry

2

THE INDEPENDENCE DAY

OF THE REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA

The Independence Day in the Republic of Macedonia is celebrated on September 8th. It has been a national holiday since 1991, when a Referendum for Independence took place. The Republic of Macedonia gained its independence from Yugoslavia, where it was a federal state, and became a sovereign parliamentary democracy.

On September 8th, 1991, over 95.5% of the 75.8% turnout voters on the Referendum voted for the independence of the Republic Macedonia.

“Dear citizens of Macedonia, allow me tonight to you and to all citizens of Macedonia to congratulate the free, sovereign and independent Macedonia! “ …. said the then - President of the Republic of Macedonia Kiro Gligorov on the evening of September 8, addressing the citizens who spontaneously gathered at Macedonia Square in the capital Skopje, to celebrate the successful referendum.

The people's will for an independent state was confirmed with the Declaration of the referendum results on September 18, 1991, by the first multi-party Macedonian Parliament. Finally, on 25 September 1991, the Declaration of Independence was adopted by the Macedonian Parliament. Next, the new Constitution of the Republic of Macedonia was adopted on 17 November 1991.

On April 8, 1993, with an acclamation of the UN General Assembly, the Republic of Macedonia was admitted as 181st full-fledged member in the world organization.

HAPPY ANNIVERSARY !

3

INTERVIEW, Q & A

H.E. Dr. Pande Lazarevski, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary

EMBASSY OF THE REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA TO BUCHAREST

Your Excellency, this year we marked 18 years since the establishment of diplomatic relations between Romania and the Republic of Macedonia. How do you assess the cooperation between our two friendly countries and future prospects?

The bilateral relations between the Republic of Macedonia and Romania are excellent, as proven by the high level official visits between our countries in the past 3 years. The most recent, last July, was the visit of the Minister Corlăţean to Macedonia, when the Agreement on cooperation in the fields of education, science, culture, mass-media, youth and sport between two countries was signed. The good bilateral relations derive from the strong traditional, historical and cultural bonds between the friendly peoples of the two countries. I want to emphasize the importance of the very significant work of the honorary consuls of the Republic of Macedonia to Romania, Mr. Aurelian Gogulescu of Ploiesti and Mr. Radu Mihaescu of Timisoara. In Timisoara, on behalf of the Macedonian Minister of Foreign Relations, recently I officially opened the Honorary Consulate. Diplomacy nowadays is less political, and more economic and cultural. Having this in mind, I consider almost equally important paying attention to political as well as to economical and cultural affairs, not only to the national but also to the local levels, having appreciation both for secular and religious dimension. For this purpose, in addition to having regular communication with the authorities on national level, I also paid visit to all 41 counties across Romania, having meetings with prefects as state authorities on local level, with presidents of the county councils and mayors of the administrative seats of the counties, as local authorities, but also I paid visits and presented respect to the metropolitans and archbishops of the Romanian Orthodox Church. It is important for me to emphasize that Macedonian community in Romania is fully appreciated, that Association of Macedonians in Romania is represented in the Romanian Parliament and that Romanian citizens of Macedonian origin are a real bridge between two countries. However, there is a room for greater enhancement in the bilateral cooperation, particularly in the field of economy, in addition to the fields of cultural and academic cooperation that are permanently growing.

The economic cooperation between the two countries has not reached yet its true potential. How can the interest for mutual investments be enhanced?

The level of economic relations does not yet correspond the high level of cooperation in other areas that we already have. In the past months, for that reason, I had meetings with the authorities of the chambers of commerce on both national and county levels around Romania, as well as with the director of ROMEXPO. The key issue in these talks was deepening and expanding the economic relations. Expectations are that extensive exchange of business information and meetings of businessmen from both countries, including organization of Macedonian-Romanian Business Forums (first will be held in Ploiesti next October), will expand business possibilities and improve economic exchange and mutual investments in two directions and joint, Macedonian-Romanian, approach to third markets.

4 Also, I`m impressed with the economic potential of Romanian economy, with successful companies such as POPECI, DACIA, ASTRA… to mention just few of the companies I have visited so far.

What do you consider supportive to stronger economic cooperation between Macedonia and Romania?

As step in that direction might be considered a direct communication links between the two countries, as we discussed with the state secretary in the Ministry of Economy, Mr. Manuel Donescu. More precisely, starting low budget direct flight Skopje – Bucharest and charter flight Iasi – Ohrid, as well as bus lines Skopje – Bucharest, Skopje – Craiova and Skopje – Timisoara. In this context, I want to emphasize the importance of the flight connection between Iasi and Ohrid for ecumenical tourism and making easily accessible these two holly places for pilgrims from both countries. Twining town initiatives might bust economic cooperation on local level, too. For that reason, in addition to 5 already established twining town relations between cities from both countries, there are 8 twining procedures in pre-signing stage, and 5 more twining initiatives. I expect the twining town approach to be very supportive for increasing of business contacts and tourist exchange between two countries. I also discussed the perspectives in the field of tourism with the heads of the Romanian National Authority for Tourism and National Association of Tourist Agencies in Romania. Last but not least, for better prospects in economic cooperation, it is important to have information related to tradition, to history and culture, information about economic possibilities and business environment in both countries. For this reason I met the authorities of the Romanian TV and Romanian Radio and I had talks with their Macedonian counterpart. They all expressed interest for more intensive cooperation between Romanian and Macedonian national TV and radio broadcasters, as a way to much stronger mutual visibility of both countries, visibility that will enhance tourism and business opportunities, respectively.

You mentioned cooperation in the field of culture and education. Could you elaborate?

There is a saying that knowledge is power. Combined knowledge and awareness about cultural values, empowers the people, the society, the young generations. Preservation of cultural heritage and cherishing national cultural values with the rest of the world makes bridges among people across the borders. These were the points in the talks I had with the minister of culture, Mr. Daniel Barbu and with the director of the National Center for Conservation and Promotion of the Traditional Culture. Inthe field of education and research, I strongly support greater cooperation between the universities. For this purpose, I visited 25 most prominent Romanian universities, in Bucharest and across the country, in Iasi, Cluj-Napoca, Timisoara, Craiova, Sibiu, Brasov, Pitesti, Ploiesti and Constanta.

What is the current status in the field of academic and cultural cooperation between two countries?

Exploring possibilities for more intensive cooperation with homologue institutions in the Republic of Macedonia, I had meetings with the heads of the Academia Romana, the Romanian National Library and the Romanian National Archives, with the most important national museums as National Museum of Romanian History, National Art Museum of Romania, National Museum of the Romanian Peasant, National Village Museum and National Museum of Natural History, as well as with the key national institutions in the field of culture, like National Philharmonic Orchestra, National Theatre, National Operetta Theatre, National Center of Cinematography, MediaPro Studios and Castel Film Studios. Possibilities for cooperation are immense.

5 Regarding the current status in the field of academic cooperation, it is important to point signing the agreements for academic cooperation between universities in Bucharest and Skopje and between universities in Ploiesti and Shtip. In same spirit was the visit of the Rector of the St. Paul University from Macedonia (university that is specialized in IT and computer sciences), to the most important academic institutions in Romania in IT field, including 7 universities, the National Institute for Research and Development in Informatics and the National Institute of Physics and Nuclear Engineering. Another dimension of the academic cooperation was the visit of the Dean of the Orthodox Theological Faculty form Saints Cyril and Methodius University from Skopje, to the orthodox theological faculties in Bucharest, Craiova, Pitesti and Constanta. The very special moment during this visit was participation of the Dean, as a priest, in the Holy Liturgy on Ascension of Jesus, headed by the Archbishop of Tomis, His Eminence Teodosie, in the cathedral St. Peter and Paul in Constanta.

On September 8th, the Republic of Macedonia will celebrate 22 years since its independence in 1991. Having in mind the significance of this day for the Macedonian citizens, and what are the main positive experiences in these years?

First of all, we have successfully overcome various challenges that loomed Macedonia since its independence. Of course, one of the greatest achievements was the building of friendly relations with countries from all corners of the world. On the other hand, it is true that Macedonia is still blocked to become full-fledged EU and NATO member. It provokes historical parallels and bitter memories. But it is also true that we could not live with history only. We cannot change the historical past, even history cannot be forgotten and erased. We are living now and we are planning for the future. The greatest treasure of a country is its people. The greatest potential for an independent country are the generations born into freedom. For the wellbeing of this generation and perspective for the generations to come, it is necessary reality of today to be accepted and challenges of tomorrow to be embraced, sincerely, with open mind and heart. And reality is that Macedonia is fully responsible for the choices of today and consequences of tomorrow.

Your Excellency, how do you see the future of the Macedonian-Romanian relations?

There are three dimensions: the bilateral, the regional and multilateral. In the bilateral relations, I see prospects for greater visibility of Romania in Macedonia and of Macedonia in Romania, enhancing cooperation between the countries in all fields. In the regional context, we need greater cooperation and involvement in the regional initiatives. In the multilateral context, as we strive to full-fledged NATO and EU membership, we see Romania as a strong supporter of Macedonian aspirations, which will reflect on the overall regional stability.

6 Visit of Mr. Aurelian Gogulescu, Honorary Consul of the Republic of Macedonia at the headquarters of The Embassy of The Republic of Macedonia in Romania (March 14th 2013). accompaning the representatives of the company IMPREGILO. The discussions with H.E. Mr. Pande Lazarevski – Ambassador of The Republic of Macedonia in Romania were about further possibilities of co-operation with Macedonia in the sector of construction of roads and motorways, civil and industrial buildings, participation to tenders or subcontractors for construction works in Macedonia

Visit to Prahova County of H.E. Mr. Pande Lazarevski – Ambassador of The Republic of Macedonia in Romania (April 4th, 2013)

The program was opened with a meeting at the headquarters of Prahova Chamber of Commerce and Industry and of the Honorary Consulate of The Republic of Macedonia , where His Excellency discussed with Mr. Aurelian Gogulescu.

H.E. Mr. Ambassador presented several bilateral cooperation business opportunities proposed by the Macedonian side. Thus, Stip City Hall expressed its interest in signing a Twining Agreement with Ploiesti City Hall. Moreover, The University of Stip and The Regional Chamber of Stip would also like to conclude partnership agrrements with Ploiesti University of Oil and Gas , respectively

with Prahova Chamber of Commerce and Industry.

During the meeting, both parties expressed their willingness to cooperate in view of intensifying and strengthening the bilateral cooperation between Macedonia and Romania.

7 Further on, H.E. Mr. Ambassador and Mr. Aurelian Gogulescu had a meeting with Mr. Mircea Cosma – President of Prahova County Council, Mr. Marius Sersea – Governor of Prahova County, Mrs. Rodica Paraschiv – Vice Governor of Prahova County and Mr. Raul Petrescu – Vice Mayor of Ploiesti Municipality, with whom they discussed in order to materialize some of the institutional

cooperation opportunities.

In the second part of the day, H.E.Mr. Pande Lazarevski , together with Mr. Aurelian Gogulescu participated at the headquarters of Campina City Hall at a meeting with Mr. Horia Tiseanu – Mayor of Campina Municipality , Mr. Virgil Guran – Deputy and Mr. Mihai Grecu – Export Manager of Neptun Campina Ltd.

The professional program ended in Ploiesti, with a meeting with Mr. Pascu Mihai Coloja – the Rector of Ploiesti Oil and Gas

University .

On the occasion of his visit to Prahova County, H.E. Mr. Ambassador visited two of the most important museums of the county – The Clock Museum - in Ploiesti - and Iulia Hasdeu Museum - in Campina.

Visit of H.E. Mr. Pande Lazarevski – Ambassador and Mrs. Jadranka Denkova – Law Professor at the Law University of Stip to Ploiesti University of Oil and Gas (May 9th, 2013)

The visit, organized by Mr. Aurelian Gogulescu, Honorary Consul of the Republic of Macedonia, focussed on the signature of a Cooperation Agreement between the two universities, as Mr. Pascu Mihai Coloja – Rector established with the two

Macedonian guests.

8

On this occassion, the two Macedonian guests participated at the event „ Europe of its own citizens”, organized by Europe Direct Ploiesti Center and Ploiesti Students’Culture House, at the headquartesrs of Ploiesti University of Oil and Gas.

Visit of Mr. Aurelian Gogulescu, Honorary Consul of the Republic of Macedonia at the headquarters of The Embassy of The Republic of Macedonia in Romania (June 4th, , 2013).

On this occasion, Mr. Aurelian Gogulescu, Honorary Consul had a meeting with H.E. Mr. Pande Lazarevski – Ambassador and Mr. Borco Damjanov, Minister Counselor, in order to discuss further measures for organizing a Business Forum Romania – Macedonia in the second part of the year (most probably in September or October) as well as to prepare a visit to Dacia Renault Factory in Pitesti.

Visit of Mr. Aurelian Gogulescu, Honorary Consul of the Republic of Macedonia and H.E. Mr. Pande Lazarevski – Ambassador of Macedonia in Romania at the headquarters of th

Dacia Renault Factory in Pitesti (June 7 , 2013).

Mr. Aurelian Gogulescu and H.E. Mr. Ambassador discussed with the representatives of the company’s management – Mrs. Anca Oreviceanu – PR&C Manager and Mr. Silviu Dan Balta – Public Affairs Manager , with Mr. Cristian Soare – Governor of Arges County and Mr. Ion Branescu, President of the CCI Arges. They outlined the interest of expanding the selling area of the company because , even though massive investments were made in the last period of time, the sales on the Romanian market decreased significantly. As a concrete result of this meeting, H.E. Mr. Ambassador anounced the intention of the Macedonian Foreign Affairs Ministry for the near future to buy Dacia automobiles for the use of Macedonian Embassies . The visit was very professionally organized, with the support of the French Embassy in Romania.

9 Promotion of the interests of The Republic of Macedonia on the Chinese market (June 2013)

During the trade mission organized to China amongst June 14th – 21st 2013, Mr. Aurelian Gogulescu, Honorary Consul of the Republic of Macedonia sustained, promoted and supported the interests of The Republic of Macedonia on the Chinese market, discussed with the highest level officials of The Provinces of Heilongjiang and Guangdong and presented the offer of Macedonia for the potential Chinese investors.

Visit of Mr. Aurelian Gogulescu, Honorary Consul of the Republic of Macedonia at the headquarters of The Embassy of The Republic of Macedonia in Romania (June 25th , 2013)

Mr. Aurelian Gogulescu had a meeting with H.E. Mr. Pande Lazarevski – Ambassador, Mr. Borco Damjanov, Minister Counselor and Mr. Ninoslav Marina – Rector of St. Apostol Paul University in Ohrid, in order to discuss the offer of The Macedonian University for the Romanian students and the possibilities of bilateral co-operation in education sector.

Meeting of Mr. Aurelian Gogulescu, Honorary Consul of the Republic of Macedonia and H.E. Mr. Pande Lazarevski – Ambassador of Macedonia in Romania with officialties of the Ministry of Economy of Romania (July 9th, 2013)

Mr. Aurelian Gogulescu, Honorary Consul and H.E. Mr. Pande Lazarevski – Ambassador, had a meeting at the Headquarters of the Ministry of Economy with Mr. Manuel Donescu, State Secretary, Mr. Radu Zaharia, General Director and Mr. Mircea Toader, Director within the Ministry.

The discussions were focused on :

 the future bilateral projects to be developed, as results, after the visit to The Republic of Macedonia of Mr. Titus Corlatean, the Romanian Minister for Foreign Affairs;  the possibility of opening a direct flight and direct line bus Bucharest – Skopje as well as a direct charter flight Iasi – Ohrid;  organization of the visit to Romania of Mr. Branko Azevski, President of The Chamber of Commerce of Macedonia in September or October this year. On this occasion, a Business Forum Romania – Macedonia will take place as well;

10  organization of a future trade mission and Economic Forum to Macedonia;  re-starting the organization of The Romanian – Macedonian Joint Commission , in the first half of 2014;  other comments and proposals concerning the strengthening of the economic relations between Romania and Republic of Macedonia.

After the meeting, Mr. Aurelian Gogulescu, Honorary Consul and H.E. Mr. Ambassador participated to the 10-years Celebration of the most important Chinese company located in Romania – HUAWEI and met on this occasion The Prime Minister of Romania – Mr. Victor Ponta.

Afterwards, Mr. Gogulescu, Honorary Consul and H.E. Mr. Lazarevski met Mr. Antoine Aoun, Manager of Dacia Renault Factory, at the headquarters of The Macedonian Embassy and discussed the possibility of acquiring Dacia Duster and Dacia Lodgy cars for the use of The Macedonian Foreign Affairs Ministry and The Macedonian Embassy in Romania.

Visit to the Republic of Macedonia. Meeting of Mr. Aurelian Gogulescu, CCI Prahova President with Mr. Branko Azevski – President of The Economic Chamber of Macedonia (July, 24 th 2013, Ohrid)

On July, 24 th – Mr. Aurelian Gogulescu, in his double capacity of President of Prahova Chamber of Commerce and Industry and Honorary Consul of The Republic of Macedonia in Romania, visited the Republic of Macedonia, where he had a meeting in Ohrid with Mr. Branko Azevski - President of The Economic Chamber of Macedonia.

The discussions held referred to the Economic Forum which will take place in Ploiesti in the second half of October 2013, on the occasion of the visit in Romania of a Macedonian business delegation. Mr. President Gogulescu invited Mr. President Azevski to attend, on the same occasion, the Prahova Companies Top Gala, edition 2013.

11

12

13

14

Getting around Macedonia Skopje

Landmarks of Skopje

Skopje is the capital of the Republic of Macedonia; it is in the Povardarie region and is the largest and most diverse city in the country. Skopje has been occupied by many different peoples since its foundation. This is evidenced by the several Byzantine churches and monasteries around the city, also by a few Roman sites, such as and Skopje's Aqueduct. However, the group that left the greatest mark on Skopje were the Ottomans. The Ottomans ruled Macedonia for hundreds of years and built a large number of mosques and other different buildings.

Today, Skopje is becoming a modern city. Home to about quarter of the entire population of the country, it is also home to many different types of people. Besides the majority Macedonians, many Albanians, Turks, Roma, Serbs, Bosniaks and others call Skopje home.

Skopje is the financial and political center of Macedonia and by far its biggest city. The city population is around 660,000, however unofficially during working-days it can almost reach 1 million, which is half of the population of the county.

History

Apart from being the capital of the Republic of Macedonia, Skopje has always been a center of power long coveted by various empires.The city founded by the Paeonians in the 3rd century B.C.E. under the name of ‘Skupi’ was prized for its strategic location, in a long valley between two hills, situated on the banks of the River, a vital trade route. Under the Romans, Skopje was made administrative center of the Dardanian Province. The city’s prestige grew when the Orthodox Church made it an episcopal seat during the early Byzantine Empire. The arrival of migrating Slavic tribes from the Carpathians in the 6th century C.E. changed both the city’s name and the composition of its people were assimilated by the Slavic newcomers. Throughout the remaining Byzantine centuries, Skopje continued to be an important mercantile center,

situated as it was at the crossroads of Balkan trade and communications routes. It was celebrated for its urban15 life and fortress, and renowned for having the most beautiful church in the region. In 14th century, Skopje became the capital of the Empire of Serbia, which was one of the largest and strongest countries in Europe during that period. At the very end of the 14th century, Skopje and all of Macedonia fell under the rule of the Ottoman Turks. In the ensuing centuries, the look of the town changed with the construction of many mosques, Turkish baths, bridges, and other buildings attesting to the new Oriental influence. Today, the Ottoman legacy remains extremely visible in Skopje’s architecture and small Islamic minority. After Macedonia was liberated from the Turks in the early 20th century, became a part of Kingdom of Serbia, then it became a republic of the Yugoslav Federation, with Skopje as the capital. At that time, the prosperous city boasted many ornate, Neoclassical buildings laid out harmoniously in a more or less Central European style. However, in 1963 a disastrous earthquake leveled much of the regal old city, and Skopje was reborn in the imaginative, futuristic style in vogue at the time. The rebuilding plan was drawn by the Japanese architect Kenzo Tange, who also designed the new railway station. The plan was never fully carried out. Some towers of Kale Fortress and the old cathedral are being reconstructed, and the old theater is also under reconstruction. Skopje is an eclectic mix of Christian and Islamic culture. However, this cultural mix has also spawned a lively and varied society, you can see people playing chess in the morning in the numerous cafés and green spaces in the summer. In the evening, Skopje comes to life as the locals dine in the cafés before heading to the bars and live music clubs.

Today, Skopje is a modern city and Macedonia’s major political, economical, educational, and cultural center.

Places to visit in Skopje

• Warrior on a Horse - perhaps the main symbol of Skopje is the statue and fountain in the centre of Macedonia Square. It is typically thought to depict Alexander the Great, though it is not officially named for him. The monument, made up in bronze was built in Florence and was officially completed on September 8, 2011 to commemorate 20 years of the independence of the Republic of Macedonia.

• The Kale Fortress stands on the highest hill in the Skopje valley and offers great views over the city. The oldest section of the fortress is within the present day fortifications. It is 121m long and is built in opus qvadrum style (huge stone blocks on the outside and small stones inside) by the Byzantine Emperor Justinian who was born in the village of Taorion near Skopje. After the great earthquake of 518 when ancient Skupi was destroyed, Justinian decided to do something for his birth town and built Justinijana Prima on the site of present day Skopje. Most of the present day fortifications originate from the 10th century (the square tower) and 13th century (the round tower). It was reinforced during the Turkish rule when the number of towers was up to 70 (today there are just 3 standing) and the fortress went down to river Vardar and up on the hill where today the Museum of Conteporary Art stands.

• The was built in the 6th century by the Byzantine emperor Justinian. Since then it has been the symbol of the city and every ruler tried to leave a mark on it, even Skopje's last major who has been restoring it for 10 years now. While walking over it try to notice the 6th century big stone bloks. The bridge has 13 arches and is 214m long.

• Porta Macedonia is a triumphal arch located on Square. The arch is dedicated to 20 years of Macedonian independence and its outer surface is covered in 193 m2 of reliefs carved in marble, depicting scenes from the history of Macedonia. It also contains interior rooms, one of which has a function of state-owned souvenir shop, as well as elevators and stairs providing public access to the roof, allegedly intended as space for weddings.

• Macedonia Square. Even though most of the interesting sights are on the other side of the Stone Bridge, there are couple of interesting sights around Macedonia Square. The square has changed a lot after the earthquake, most of the neoclassical buildings are gone except for a small section of houses in the center. From the main square when you turn to enter the shopping mall look for a marked place. This is the place where the house of Mother Theresa used to stand. She was born in this house and lived here until she turned 18 when she left first for Ireland and then for India.

• Parliament Building - built in 1933 by Viktor Hudak in modernistic style.

• Feudal Tower - it is not known when was it built or what its purpose was. It probably served as a defence 16 tower on a property of a Turkish aristocrat. Today it serves as a souvenir shop and you can enter and see it from the inside.

• Double Hamammwas built in the middle of the 15th century. Today is used as a gallery for temporary exhibits.

• Bedesten. The most precious goods, like silk, spices, jewelry and perfumes, were sold in the bedesten, a place within the old bazaar. Evlija Celebija who visited Skopje during the 17th century wrote that the only bigger and more beautiful bedesten from the one in Skopje was the one in Damascus. After the fire Skopje became much smaller and lost its importance as a trading center, so somewhere in the beginning of the 17th century the present bedesten was built. It is small and it is not even covered, but it still has a lot of atmosphere in it. It has just 5 short streets, small shops and four gates.

• Bey's Tower. A 14m high residential tower from the 17th century, this is the oldest building in the central Skopje. Built for defense, with 1.5m thick walls, a high door and small windows on the lower floors, the tower would protect the family living here against all attackers.

• City Park. a large green area in the center of Skopje. A part of it is a museum, with several monuments within. It is a nice place to go for recreation, as there are pathways around the small lakes, tennis courts, the children’s amusement park, cafes, restaurants, etc. The city Zoo and stadium are also within the park. • Skopje's Aqueduct is situated on the exit of Skopje towards Kosovo, right before the village of Vizbegovo. It is still not known when it was built. Many people claim it is from Roman times but it goes opposite of Skupi so that theory doesn’t make much sense. It was probably built during Byzantine times and it is sure that it was still used during Turkish times when it provided water for the public baths. 55 stone arches of the Aqueduct are still standing.

• . One of the three remaining Ottoman caravanserais still standing in the old bazaar. The ground floor used to house the horses and the goods of the merchants that visited the bazaar and the city, while on the first floor were the rooms where the people slept. The han was built in the 15th century. Today it houses a nice restaurant. e

• Kurshumli Han. The "Lead Inn" is the largest and the most beautiful of the three remaining Ottoman caravanserais. It was built in 1550. Both the ground and the first floor are made of stone and beautiful arches line the courtyard. The han has two courtyards, the second one was used to house the horses and the goods of the merchants and the guests, while the rooms around the first courtyard both on the ground and the first floor housed the guests. Today the Kurshumli Han is on the grounds of the Macedonian National Museum and houses the lapydarium. edit

Museums

• Museum of Archaeology • Old Railway Station – Skopje City Museum. • Museum of Contemporary Art • Museum of the Macedonian Struggle • Natural Science Museum • Macedonian National Museum & Icon Gallery • Mother Teresa House is situated not far from the City Museum. Mother Teresa was born and lived in Skopje until she was 18. The original house is no longer present, but there is a beautiful and tranquil modern chapel and interpretive centre on the site.

17

Strumica Carnival, Macedonia

The famous Strumica Carnival is one of the most impressive cultural events in Macedonia, which combines the centuries old cultural heritage with the modern lifestyle. It takes every year during the holiday of Trimeri, that is, the first three days of the Lenten fast. The fast begins on Shrovetide, which is always on Sunday evening. The first three days of the Lent are called Trimeri and they finish on Wednesday.

There is a Children carnival on Sunday morning, while Tuesday is reserved for the traditional carnival night when disguised groups of youngsters roam around the city and visit the homes of the engaged girls, where they stay until dawn.

It is an event with great tradition. The Ottoman Turkish traveler Evliya Çelebi (1611 – 1682) mentioned Strumica Carnival as early as 1670. When passing through Strumica , he wrote “I have come to a city, stretched in a field at the foot of a high hill and saw disguised people who ran from house to house laughing, screaming and singing.”

It is an old tradition, indeed! It is evident by the presence of all kinds of masks, such as the skins and horns of different animals and the tinkling bells typical for the original pagan form of the carnival.

As time passes the pagan masks have been transformed into traditional. Disguising is supposed to bring luck, fertility and happiness to the future spouses. The carnival coincides with the holiday of engaged couples. Thus, the fertility m otifs reoccur through centuries, for instance the disguised as a bride and groom, or a gipsy couple carrying a baby. Very often people disguise as priests and give blessing to the bride and groom .

A very frequent carnival motif is the disguised men into woman and vice verse.

Another distinctive feature of the traditional form of the carnival, which also coincides with the fertility motif, is the presence of erotic elements. Chants and songs are sung with erotic motifs and content in the homes of the fiancée, who is supposed to recognize her disguised fiancé. The purpose is didactic, namely to give instructions to the bride and

18 to prepare her for the forthcoming marital and sexual life. Today the carnival gained a modern dimension by following the world carnival tendencies.

Before the Children carnival on Saturday there is another event - traditional Mask ball. Groups of young and old people choose common motif and mask the whole group and all together party on the music of famous Strumica bands. On this Mask ball Prince and Princess of the Carnival are chosen and they open the Main carnival night and lead the masked groups.

Strumica carnival is main destination for the tourists from the country and internationally that enjoy and party until the dawn hours at the coffeehouse, bars, discothèques, and restaurants and on the square with the music of famous national and international DJ’s.

During these days the city lives for and with the carnival. It a spectacle that involves hundreds of masked people on the streets of the city and more than thousand visitors and tourists form the country and the neighboring region. The carnival became an international event after representatives form the Bulgaria, , Serbia, Montenegro, Netherlands, Belgium, Slovenia etc started participating.

In 1994 Strumica has become part of the big family of carnival cities in the world by receiving membership in the FECC (Foundation of the European Carnival Cities).

Four years later Strumica hosted The 18-th International Congress of FECC.

For More Information, Contact: Exploring Macedonia

contact@exploringma cedonia.com www.exploringmaced onia.com

Source: http://www.b alkansgeotourism.trav el/content/strumica- carnival- macedonia/see0A7FA 78D884900DBA

19

The Issue of Defining and Misinterpreting the Macedonian Identity

in late XIX Century – Rum – Millet, the Ecclesiastic Struggles and Propagandas

Aleksandar Spirkovski,

PhD Student at the Faculty of Political Sciences in Bucharest and Diplomat,

October 2012

Some political issues today, especially in the Balkans region, tend to discuss or even alternate and deny the very existence of the Macedonian ethnic identity, and to determinably affiliate it to the ethnicities of the neighbouring countries. In order to understand these tendencies, and to perceive the origin of the different ecclesiastic claims, we should return to the mid XIX century and the time when the Balkan region was still under dominant Ottoman influence, although the very few independent states were making their first steps in outlining their political significance, in the terms of the overwhelming European imperialism.

In order to understand this issue and to interpret the confessional dimension of the identity – in this specific historic period, first we must take into consideration the domestic Ottoman system of determination of national affiliation must. The Ottomans implemented the millet system, established back in the XVII century – as a distinction of the two confessional communities of their subjects, separating the Muslims and non- Muslims in communities, headed by a religious figure1. According to the millet system, the Porte didn’t give any significance to the ethnic affiliation of the subjects, hence the religious confession was the only important base for distinction of the subjects. The Porte recognised certain elements of self-government to the Slavic people within, however under exclusive jurisdiction of the Christian Orthodox Church, meaning that the church was the only institution being granted a quasi – political autonomy, allowing certain educational and judiciary prerogatives, and raising their separate confessional identity on a slightly higher level. The millet system had a pragmatic value for the Porte – by granting certain rights on the ground of religious confession, positioned the religious leaders of the Ottoman subjects as responsible for the conduct

1 “The millet system was the way whereby the Ottoman Empire organized its Muslim and non-Muslim subjects into separate communities, all headed by a religious figure. These communities were quasi-autonomous in that they administered their own educational and judicial systems. In return for this status as quasi-autonomy, the millets collected taxes for the Ottoman government and helped to enforce social discipline...” Goodwin, Kevin, "The Tanzimat and the Problem of Political Authority in the Ottoman Empire: 1839-1876", Honors Projects Overview. Paper 5, 2006, pg. 12-13

20 of the subjects themselves2. In practice, all the Orthodox subjects were united by the decree of the Sultan in single Rum millet, defined under the dioceses of the Supreme Patriarch of the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Constantinople. Under the auspices of the millet system, the churches became the unique national institutions fostering the ethnic identity and culture of the people, through the services and the education in the official language of the church. In this respect, the Ohrid Archiepiscopate, which had existed since X century, played a significant role in the preservation of the Macedonian identity until the Archiepiscopate was abolished by the Porte in 1767 – as an intrigue carried on the Patriarchy. Afterwards, all the Orthodox subjects of the Ottoman Empire became part of the dioceses of the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Constantinople and, respectively, under enhanced Greek lingual and cultural influence – as the Rum Millet entity was serving a purpose of enhancing the Greek nationalism and the Greek romantic ideal of a grate nation as , also emerged in XIX century or “During the nineteenth-century contest among Greeks, Serbs, and Bulgarians over Ottoman Macedonia, the Greeks employed this national narrative as an effective weapon to counteract Bulgarian claims to the region… The Greeks utilized the continuity between ancients and moderns to strengthen their “historical” claims to Macedonian territory. In this interpretation, “Macedonia” means the territory of the ancient kingdom in the era of Philip II…”3.

In order to understand this political prospect, the concept of the provisional right of confession of the subjects guaranteed by the Hati-i - Humajun Constitution of 18564 must be foreseen, as a continuation of the transformation period of the Empire marked as Tanzimat era, which began in 1839 with the promulgation of the Hatti- i Sherif of Gulhane5. Hatii-i – Humajun, promulgated by the new sultan Abdul Mecid in 1856, granted new rights to the non- Muslim population in the Empire, specifically enhancing the right of undisputed confession, protection of the Christians and legal equality, regardless of the religious affiliation “... All religious privileges, granted in ancient time by my ancestors or to later date, to all Christian communities (eparchies) or the rest of the non-Muslim confessions, established in my Empire, under my patron hand, will be confirmed and implemented...Every Christian eparchy or other non-Muslim confession will be obliged...to reconsider and present to my Sublime Porte the reforms imposed by the progress and in the light of the new times... Church taxes, in all forms and character, will be abolished and replaced with certain incomes of the patriarchs and the heads of the communities... Nothing ever will concern the regular or real-estate property of the different Christian clerics... My Sublime Porte will undertake vigorous

2 Caldarola, Carlo, “Religion and Societies – Asia and the Middle East”, Walter de Gruyter & Co, Berlin, 1982 3 Roudometof, Victor, “Collective Memory, National Identity, and Ethnic Conflict: Greece, Bulgaria, and the Macedonian Question”, Praeger, 2002, pg. 73 4 “…this document abolished the tax farming system and bribery of government officials. In addition, there was an attempt to create equality for all subjects. For example, the Hatt-i Humayun wanted to reform the court system in which the courts would be mixed ethnically in order to take care of a greater proportion of cases involving Muslims and non-Muslims. There were other statements regarding equality such as, equality of taxation, all subjects were allowed to enter military schools regardless of religion and race and they were to be equal in regard to military service and administration of justice.” Goodwin, Kevin, "The Tanzimat and the Problem of Political Authority in the Ottoman Empire: 1839-1876", Honors Projects Overview. Paper 5, 2006, pg. 25 5Ibidem, pg. 15

21 measures to ensure that every confession, regardless of the numbers of followers, will have full liberty in the exercise of their own cult...”6

As far as Macedonians were concerned, elements of opposition, repulsion and animosity towards the Greek Patriarchate were always present, mostly because of the imposition of the Greek language in the services and the education enforced by the church schools, as an unknown and alien in the everyday communication and usage. The foundation of the Bulgarian Exarchate of Veliko Tarnovo in 1870 – by the Sultan’s firman from 1870, was coinciding with the culmination of the Bulgarian liberation movement at the time and with the historical moment that the Bulgarian political forces took advantage of to separate themselves from the jurisdiction of the Patriarchy and to found their own national church, a move widely supported by the Russians and the Ottomans7. From this point of view, a form of progressive autonomy was implemented, envisaging that the new Exarchate can be expanded form the primary eighteen dioceses, if two-thirds of the population would demand it. The new Exarchate was praised by some communities, as a possibility of exercising the religious customs and services in a more understandable, Slavic language. Therefore, a lot of Macedonian communities voluntarily joined and accepted the dioceses of the Exarchate. However, with the utilization of the existing millet system, later they would be characterized and identified as Bulgarians by the Ottoman authorities, regardless of the objective ethnic self-identification of the people. So, the millet system created a certain precedent, wisely utilized by the neighbouring countries, using the church related antagonisms to impose their influence in Macedonia, even through coercive means, attempting to present the population in Macedonia as their “own brethren under Ottoman rule8”, especially as the newly founded Bulgarian state would further implicate the Exarchate as a political instrument of national assimilation9. The church propagandas caused objective historical internal division among the Macedonian people because of the scrupulousness in the conduct in that respect. Soon the armed propagandas were initiated as means of forcing the Macedonian communities to join the national churches.

6 Faculty of Philosophical and Historical Sciences, “Bulletin of Documents of the Struggle of Macedonian People for Independence and National State”, University “Sts. Cyril and Methodius,,, Skopje, 1981, doc. No. 126, pg.179 - 180 7 “…the ecclesiastical conflict between Greeks and Bulgarians intensified and the Ottoman government became an important player. The Ottomans manipulated the situation in order to divide the Balkan Christians and negate any future plans of Balkan cooperation (Markova, 1983:163). The plan worked, and until 1912 the Balkan states were unable to create a coalition to fight the Empire. The “apple of discord” was Macedonia: Bulgarians claimed most of it (and most of Thrace) for themselves on the basis that the population was Bulgarian; whereas the Greeks viewed these claims as assaults on territories they considered to be rightfully theirs. When the Ottoman decree (firman) of 12 March 1870 officially established a Bulgarian Exarchate, it further complicated this situation. The firman limited the Exarchate's jurisdiction to the Danubian Bulgaria (the area between Danube and Stara Planina mountain); however, it provided (Article 10) that the Exarchate could add additional dioceses if in a plebiscite two- thirds or more of the population voted to join it…. By 1878 the Bulgarian Exarchate included eighteen dioceses with approximately 2,000,000 to 2,400,0000 people as its subjects…” Roudometof, Victor, “Collective Memory, National Identity, and Ethnic Conflict: Greece, Bulgaria, and the Macedonian Question”, Praeger, 2002, pg. 88 8 “Donev, Jovan, Macedonia in the British – Russian relations 1907-1908, Tactics or Strategy”, Archive of Macedonia & Matica Makedonska, Skopje, 1994, pg.61

9 “…During the semi-personal regime of Stephan Stambolov (1887-94), Bulgaria's first prime minister, the Bulgarian state used the Bulgarian Exarchate to foster the development of Bulgarian national identity in Macedonia and Thrace…” Roudometof, Victor, “Collective Memory, National Identity, and Ethnic Conflict: Greece, Bulgaria, and the Macedonian Question”, Praeger, 2002, pg. 89

22 The church propagandas attracted the attention of the Great Powers, as well as the international perception especially through the popular reaction of the peoples in Macedonia, mostly against any sort of forced imposition of confession. For example, regarding the British perception, most attention was focused on the discontent and revolt against the Greek patriarchy, vis-a-vis the orientation towards the Exarchate. In a telegram of the Sir William White, the British ambassador in Constantinople to the State Secretary, the Marquee of Salisbury, dated 19th of April 1890, describing the aspirations of the Exarchate towards the Macedonian eparchies, particularly those situated in Skopje and Ohrid: “...Your Lordship would probably remember that the Bulgarian Exarch constantly demands, without further success, reestablishment of the Bulgarian eparchies in that province. His Eminence is claiming such rights on the basis of the royal decree constituting the Bulgarian church and the Exarch as its spiritual leader in Turkey...Few weeks ago I have understood that the Grand Vizier, encouraged by the constant demands of the Exarch, has granted his approval of allowing His Eminence for one episcope to be visiting Skopje, in Macedonia, as well to be sanctifying different churches… and the accordance with the written provisions of the Berlin Treaty, whereas the Article 62 defines that there will be no impediment, either in the hierarchy of the various communities, either in the relations with their spiritual leaders...”10 In this last excerpt, we find reference to the Berlin Treaty, hence, the provisions of the Treaty itself were utilized by the policies of the neighbouring countries, and the same was contemplated in function of the millet system to create their own “ethnic minorities” in Macedonia.

There is more evidence of the imposed influence of the churches over the local population, on various terms, and the forced affiliation of certain local communities with one dioceses or another, as a result of the undertaken measures. Still, even the imposed influence could have not erased the artificial result of the propagandas. And in that regard, various examples manifested the resistance among the local population against the different impositions. In such manner, a telegram of the British ambassador in Constantinople, Henry Austin Layard to the State Secretary, the Marquee of Salisbury, dated 17th of May 1878, reports of a petition of the local pro-Hellenic cultural societies in the Macedonian town of Strumica, addressed to him, protesting the annexation of Strumica to Bulgaria, according to the provisions of the Berlin Treaty. The petition described the revolt of the local population against the unification with Bulgaria, because they describe themselves as Macedonians and Helens in the same time, however “...We are Macedonians and we want to remain what we are, members of the Hellenic family. We do not recognize, we hate the Slavic mastery, even more than the Turkish one...Our education, our traditions, customs, habits, connections are Greek. In our churches we celebrate our services in Greek. In our schools the Greek language is learnt...We don’t want to remember our suffering and our struggle against the Slavism. We’ll mention that we have just expelled a Bulgarian priest who tried to settle himself in our town by

10 Gjorgiev, Dragi, “British Consuls in Macedonia” 1797-1915, Documents, State Archives of Republic of Macedonia, Skopje, 2002, doc. 104, pg. 240-241

23 force...However we admit that we use a certain Slavic language. Still, largest part of the men and above all, young boys as well as one quarter of the women, speak Greek...”11. The aforementioned text, in the form of a transcript, states that even the most orchestrated attempt to manifest the different identity of the local population, cannot change, abolish or significantly alternate the predominant identity of the people.

The writer and journalist Henry Noel Brailsford describes a part of the events depicting the diocese turmoil, some of which are related to Greek and even Romanian churches, and their influence on the Macedonians and Vlachs in Macedonia “...When the Bulgarian (Macedonian) villages round Klissoura had been burned by the Turks with the blessing of the Greek Archbishop of Castoria (Kostur), and the assistance of a Greek band, the Vlachs gave the homeless refugees a welcome and a shelter, and housed nearly two thousand of them for the winter. In significant contrast was the attitude of the genuine Greek town of Castoria, which received barely a score of Bulgarian fugitives...”12. Brailsford also mentions the activities of the Romanian church propaganda, initially related to the Greek one, as the Vlach population didn’t feel any affiliation to the Greek church, thereby addressing the Romanian state and church, which was process, confirmed by Brailsford, initiated by the Vlach teacher Apostol Margariti and immediately prevented by the Patriarch, as Brailsford confirms that the Vlachs gave a dominant overweight to the Greek presence in Macedonia, and their separation from the Patriarchy would diminish it, therefore the movement was intercepted by a fierce response: “... the Greeks fought the new movement with familiar weapons...As usual the Patriarch proved more Greek than Christian. The idea of nominating a Vlach Bishop was scouted. And the few priests who dared to say Mass in Roumanian were promptly excommunicated. For a generation the movement made a little progress...”13

The Serbian church influence was very aware of this established mechanism of ethnic assimilation, and in this reference, it was trying to establish its own – Serb- millet, although its imposition comes forth later – in the beginning of the XX century. Primarily, the Serbian propaganda in Macedonia, being in conception, in comparison with the Bulgarian and the Greek one, basically consisted of the activities of the aforementioned as main pillars of agitation, proclaiming the Serbian aspirations in Macedonia, named in these documents “Turkish Serbia”. In this regard, the efforts of the Serbian Metropolitan of Skopje, Firmilian, officially in the service of the Patriarchy, were aimed at differentiating the Eparchy from the Greek clerical influence, by substituting the Greek with Serbian as a language of the masses14, and also at separating all the eparchies of Serbian interest as a separate Serbian Archiepiscopacy and the “Serbian

11 (Translation) Gjorgiev, Dragi, “British Documents for the History of Macedonia”, Vol. IV, 1857 – 1885, State Archives of Republic of Macedonia, Skopje, 2003, doc. 70, pg. 322- 325 12 Brailsford, H.N., “Macedonia, Its Races and Their Future”, Methuen & Co, London, first published 1906, republished 1971, pg.186 13 Ibidem, pg. 188 14 “Reports of 1903 – of the Serbian Consuls, Metropolitans and School Inspectors in Macedonia”, editor Lape, Ljuben, Institute of National History, Skopje, 1954, letter from the Metropolitan of Skopje, Firmilian to the Minister of Foreign Affairs in Belgrade, Mr. Lozanich, No.43, Skopje, 6th of January 1903, pg.11-18

24 community” in Macedonia, utilizing the prerogatives of the Turkish rule, in a new ”Serb-millet”, as a distinctive Christian community in Macedonia15.

Attempts of establishing a confessional independence in Macedonia and restoration of the Ohrid Archiepiscopate, rise of IMRO

Such a course of events would soon motivate the progressive Macedonian individuals to separate themselves completely from the dioceses of the neighbouring churches and to orient towards Catholic Rome, initiating the Unitarian movement in Macedonia, reaching its culmination with the foundation of a Union in the town of Kukush in 185916. The Unitarian Movement and the rapprochement to the Catholic Church represented a clear tendency, motivated as a response of the reluctance against the violent policy of the neighbours, conducted through their national orthodox churches. The more the armed propagandas were culminating during the decades, the more strong confessional opposition would appear among the people. Such orientation towards Catholic Rome was supported even by some priests – officially members of the Bulgarian, Serb or the Greek church, who were originally Macedonians, finding the Pope as the arbitrary instance capable of uniting the people and end the divisions and suffering that the neighbouring churches had caused, influencing, at least in nominal terms, the demographic structure and cultural unity, thus inflicting imputable damage.

In such a context, worthy of mentioning is the letter of, none other than the Exarchate Bishop of Skopje, Theodosius (born Ivan Gologanov, Aegean Macedonia), addressing the Pope Lev XIII, with a plea of accepting all the orthodox Macedonian eparchies in the patronage of the Roman-Catholic Church. The letter is dated 4th of December 1891 and states the following “.. I, the undersigned Bishop of Skopje, Theodosius, a chiriarch of the Skopje eparchy by the Mercy of God, submit this personal request in my own name and in the name of all orthodox community in Macedonia, to ask Your Holiness to accepts us in the auspices of the Roman-Catholic church, after you restore the ancient Ohrid Archiepiscopacy illegally abolished by the sultan Mustafa III in 1767 and place it within canonical unity with the Roman- Catholic Church. Our aspiration derives from the historical right of the Macedonian orthodox people to liberate themselves from the jurisdiction of the alienated churches – the Bulgarian Exarchate and the Carigrad (Greek) Patriarchy, to unite in our own genuine orthodox church and to receive all the features of people entitled to independent spiritual cultural and educational life....” 17. The direct address and the request for restoration of the Ohrid Archiepiscopacy as a historically affirmed Macedonian church, presents a clear

15 Ibidem, letter from the Metropolitan of Skopje, Firmilian to the Consul General in Skopje, Mr. Kurtovich, No.52, Skopje, 8th of January 1903, pg.18-21 16 Terzioski, Rastislav, “The Conduct of the Russian Diplomacy to the Unitarian Movement and the Catholicism in Macedonia, XIX and XX Century”, Article, Bulletin 48 1-2, Skopje, 2004 17 (Translation) Faculty of Philosophical and Historical Sciences, “Bulletin of Documents of the Struggle of Macedonian People for Independence and National State”, University “Sts. Cyril and Methodius,,, Skopje, 1981, doc. No. 205, pg. 291 - 292

25 tendency towards a distinction form the neighbouring countries and restoration of a church as a national institution, however still preserving the genuine orthodox features. With proof like this one, the Unitarian movements confirmed its solely Macedonian character, adverting to Rome as a last resort of unity and salvation from the then present church propagandas. The Bishop of Skopje, Theodosius, initiated the most serious attempt to separate the Macedonian eparchies and to restore the autocephaly of the once existing Ohrid Archiepiscopacy and for that, matter, he will held few substantive meetings with the priest Augusto Bonetti, a special emissary of Rome, in order to prearrange any potential unity and to establish the conditions of unification, proposing himself as a future Archbishop of the restored church and claiming autonomy after the restoration. Bonetti acted very benevolently to the proposals, suggesting a serious consideration by the Pope. Nevertheless, such courageous attempt resulted in a decisive countermeasures form the Patriarch of Constantinople, aided by the Bulgarian Exarchate. In such manner, in January 1892, Theodosius, the Bishop of Skopje, was dismissed from his position following the decision of the Exarchate Court of Honour and exiled in some remote monastery. After his exile, the Holy Seat decided to postpone any foreseeable future means of involvement, regarding the unification with the Macedonian eparchies and to leave the matter to the already existing Unitarian eparchy in Macedonia, maintaining the status quo on this issue.18 Paradoxically, this attempt to separate the Macedonian dioceses as an autonomous Macedonian church united the vehement opponents – the Patriarchy and the Exarchate, in the opposition to such an undertaking. However, this is a clear historical example of the forcedly imposed divisions of the Macedonian people, always serving in the benefit of the foreign national interest.

Obviously, the absence of adequate national institutions to play the role of a significant framework for developing the Macedonian national identity, hence the church emerged as the only existing national institution – defined under Ottoman reign, and therefore no Church on the Macedonian ground could have been defined as Macedonian in any aspect, since the affiliation was tendentiously presented, and furthermore, perceived as nationalistic. However, each church activity had its national state power as a primary basis for their presence, and in this respect, served as assimilatory instruments. No identity could possibly be developed outside a politically defined national institution.

In the continuation of the political context, the misinterpretation that all Slavic people belonging to the dioceses of the Bulgarian Exarchate are Bulgarians caused a consistent misperception among the great powers, as a premise to perceive the revolutionary movements in Macedonia as of “Bulgarian origin”. This premise would have an essential role in most of the decision and policy formulations undertaken by the Great powers in the period to come. This was the reason every future proposition of the idea of establishment of “autonomous Macedonia” would be decisively rejected by the great powers – interested in preservation of the status-quo, strongly believing that “it is a matter of time when autonomous Macedonia

18 Ibidem, doc. No.206, pg.293-295, doc. No.210- 213. Pg.300-302

26 will unite with Bulgaria”19. Hence, such courses of policies were acknowledged by the Macedonian intelligence. Even despite the fact that most of its members were educated in Sofia, it started the original political agitation in the direction of formulation of a separate Macedonian state. And this was one of the reasons for the rise of the first national institution in the modern Macedonian history – the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organisation – with the sole core of the Organisation established in Kukush in 1893, in direction of overthrowing the foreign church propagandas and the interference of the neighbouring countries overcoming the existing inter-ecclesiastic division of the people, and without further internal distinctions, striving for a political autonomy under the auspices of the Article XXIII of the Berlin Treaty20. In this very specific aspect, the emergence and significance of the Macedonian Revolutionary Organisation for the benefit of the Macedonian political presence and identity was recognised by the foreign exponents, even in the conditions of equalising the ethnic and ecumenical identity. In this respect, even the aforementioned N. Brailsford, affirms the existence of the national distinction of the Organisation in the following sense: “ Important as the activities of the Macedonian Committee have been and may again be in Bulgaria, they have never gone so far as to compromise the genuine Macedonian character of the movement.... It is led not by Bulgarians, but by Macedonians. ...It has never, I think, surrendered its independence to any external pressure. Indeed, there is a strong current of opinion among the leaders of the Macedonian movement which tends to be critical of, and occasionally almost hostile to, Bulgaria...”21

The issue of defining the Macedonian identity in national terms – as a distinct people or ethnic group which aspires to some form of statehood of its own22, as here explained, was substantially aggravated in the given political preconditions of the late XIX century, in clear absence of national institutions which would cultivate it in a material manner, and distinguish its identity from the surrounding influences. This would be the outcome of the perplexed existence of the ethical and confessional dimensions of Balkan people living under the legacy of the descending Ottoman Empire, while the already nationally conceived Balkan states would find Macedonia and its people a fertile ground for the growth of their own nationalistic expansionism in the terms of the same reality. The ecumenical concessions granted from the Sublime Porte would provide the ground for such a political course, parallel with the non-existence of an ecumenically autocephalous Macedonian church, which, in the presented framework, would be an institutional pillar of national self-

19 Donev, Jovan, “Macedonia in the British – Russian relations 1907-1908, Tactics or Strategy”, Archive of Macedonia & Matica Makedonska, Skopje, 1994, pg.62 20 Pandevski, Manol “The Macedonian Revolutionary Organisation Between 1893 and 1918: Its Formation and Development”, article, Skopje, 1993 21 Brailsford, H.N., “Macedonia, Its Races and Their Future”, Methuen & Co, London, first published 1906, republished 1971, pg. 120

22 Bostock, William W., and Smith, Gregg W., Ph.D, “On Measuring National Identity”, First published Social Science Paper Publisher, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp 1-6, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia, September 2001

27 identification. In such conditions, the rise of the Revolutionary Organisation would come forth in the sense of fulfilling the institutional vacuum and creating the primary form of declared ideal of separate statehood, as a feature of the identity quoted above, marking its own, in this sense, conception as a Macedonian identity. Now, such a historical reality belongs, as the title underlines, to the late XIX century, and not to the modern XX and XXI century, as well as to the recognisability of the modern Macedonian national identity since its conception onwards. Unfortunately, even nowadays, we witness that certain political forces of the present times, in some very modern Balkan states, are still pursuing such anachronous courses of policy, denying the historical gains of the Macedonian national heritage achieved in the previous two centuries, all for the purpose of their own political existence and enhanced political power.

Sources:

• Brailsford, H.N., “Macedonia, Its Races and Their Future”, Methuen & Co, London, first published 1906, republished 1971

• Bostock, William W., and Smith, Gregg W., Ph.D, “On Measuring National Identity”, First published Social Science Paper Publisher, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp 1-6, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia, September 2001

• Caldarola, Carlo, “Religion and Societies – Asia and the Middle East”, Walter de Gruyter & Co, Berlin, 1982

• Donev, Jovan, “Macedonia in the British – Russian relations 1907-1908, Tactics or Strategy”, Archive of Macedonia & Matica Makedonska, Skopje, 1994

• Faculty of Philosophical and Historical Sciences, “Bulletin of Documents of the Struggle of Macedonian People for Independence and National State”, University “Sts. Cyril and Methodius,, , Skopje, 1981

• Goodwin, Kevin, "The Tanzimat and the Problem of Political Authority in the Ottoman Empire: 1839-1876", Honors Projects Overview. Paper 5, 2006

• Gjorgiev, Dragi, “British Consuls in Macedonia” 1797-1915, Documents, State Archives of Republic of Macedonia, Skopje, 2002

• Gjorgiev, Dragi, “British Documents for the History of Macedonia”, Vol. IV, 1857 – 1885, State Archives of Republic of Macedonia, Skopje, 2003

• Pandevski, Manol “The Macedonian Revolutionary Organisation Between 1893 and 1918: Its Formation and Development”, article, Skopje, 1993

• Reports of 1903 – of the Serbian Consuls, Metropolitans and School Inspectors in Macedonia”, editor Lape, Ljuben, Institute of National History, Skopje, 1954

• Roudometof, Victor, “Collective Memory, National Identity, and Ethnic Conflict: Greece, Bulgaria, and the Macedonian Question”, Praeger

28