In 1985 it was sixty years
since a book of great importance to Macedonian linguistics and historiography
was published in Athens; that was the primer entitled Abecedar (A B C), printed
in the Latin alphabet, and intended for the children of the Macedonian
national minority in Greece — the "Slav speaking minority" as Sir
Austin Chamberlain, British diplomat and delegate to the League of Nations, and
Sir James Erick Drumond, General Secretary to the League of Nations, referred
to the Macedonians in Greece. (Voislav Kushevski, "On the Appearance of
the Abecedar" in Istorija
magazine, 1983, No. 2, p. 184).
There are several reasons
for marking this anniversary: In 1920 Greece signed before the League of Nations
a treaty obliging it to grant certain rights to the minorities of non-Greek
origin in Greece. Four years later, in 1924, at the suggestion of the League of
Nations, Greece and Bulgaria signed the well-known Kalfov-Politis Protocol
under which Bulgaria was obliged to grant the Greek minority in Bulgaria their
minority rights (language, schools and other rights), while Greece, recognizing
the Macedonians from the Aegean part of Macedonia as a "Bulgarian"
minority, was to grant them their minority rights. This agreement was seemingly
very much in favour of Bulgaria, but when in 1925 the Greek government
undertook certain concrete steps towards the publication of the first primer
made for the specific needs of that minority, it made it clear that there were
no grounds on which Bulgaria could be officially interested in any
"Bulgarian minority" or expect the
primer
to be in Bulgarian, for that minority — though speaking a Slav language — was
neither Bulgarian nor Serbian.
The very fact that official
Greece did not, either de jure or do facto, see the Macedonians as a Bulgarian
minority, but rather as a separate Slav group ("Slav speaking
minority"), is of particular significance. The primer, published in the
Latin alphabet, was based on the Lerin — Bilola dialect. After Gianelli's Dictionary dating from the 16th century,
and the Daniloviot Cetirijazicnik
written in the 19th century, this was yet another book written in the
Macedonian vernacular. The primer was mailed to some regions in Western
Aegean-Macedonia (Kostur, Lerin and Voden), and the school authorities prepared
to give Macedonian children, from the first to the fourth grade of the
elementary school, instruction in their own mother tongue (Grigorios Dafnis,
"Greece between the two world wars", "Elefteria" newspaper,
March 15, 1953, Dionisios Romas in "Elefteria" newspaper of October
9 and 12, 1954 and Dimitrios Vazuglis in Racial
and religious minorities in Greece and Bulgaria, 1954).
The Greek governments,
however, have never made a sincere attempt to solve the question of the Macedonians
and their ethnic rights in Greece. Thus, while measures were being undertaken
for the opening of Macedonian schools, a clash between the Greek and the
Bulgarian armies at Petrich was concocted, which was then followed by a
massacre of the innocent Macedonian population in the village of Trlis near
Serres, all this with the aim of creating an attitude of insecurity within the
Macedonians, so that they would themselves give up the recognition of their
minority rights, and eventually seek safety in moving to Bulgaria. The Greek
governments also skillfully used the Yugoslav-Bulgarian disagreements on the
question of the Macedonians in Greece, and with organized pressure on the
Macedonian population, as was the case in the village of Trlis, tried to
dismiss the Macedonian ethnic question from the agenda through forced
resettlement of the Macedonian population outside of Greece.
The
Abeecdor, which actually never reached the Macedonian children, is in itself a
powerful testimony not only of the existence of the large Macedonian ethnic
minority in Greece, but also of the fact that Greece was under an obligation
before the League of Nations to undertake certain measures in order to grant
this particular minority their rights. We should therefore give a brief account
of what preceded the publication of the Abecedar.
In
1920 the League of Nations initiated the signing of treaties relating to the
protection of the minorities in a number of European countries, which specified
the obligations of the states with regard to providing such minorities with
civil and political equality. On August 10, 1920 such a treaty for the
protection of the non-Greek ethnic minorities in Greece was signed between the
Great Powers and Greece; it was named the Treaty of Sevres, after the place in
France where it was signed.
By signing the Treaty of
Sevres, Greece undertook certain obligations towards the minorities and their
life, their property and freedom, as well as their civil and political rights.
The Treaty of Sevres guaranteed the minorities in Greece free use of their
mother tongue in their personal and official relations. The Greek government
undertook the obligation to provide for a special. budget intended for the
undisturbed development of schools for the minorities. Articles 7, 8 and 9 of
the Treaty of Sevres are of particular significance here and shall therefore be
partially quoted:
Article 7: "All Greek citizens will enjoy equal civil
and political rights regardless of their ethnicity, language or religion.
Greece, in particular, is undertaking the obligation to introduce, within three
years from the date as of which this Treaty will come into force, electoral
system which will take into account the ethnic minorities.."
"No legislation will be made on any restrictions on the free use by any Greek citizen of any language, either in their private intercourse, in commerce, in religion, in the Press or in publications of any kind, or at public meetings.. ."
Article 8: "Greek citizens belonging to separate ethnic,
religious or linguistic minorities, will enjoy equality of rights and
treatment, and the same guarantees, as other Greek citizens. They shall, for
instance, have the right to establish, manage and control at their own expense
charitable, religious and social institutions and educational establishments,
as well as the right to use their own language in them and to practice their
particular religion."
Article 9: “As regards education,
in the towns and districts inhabited by a larger number of citizens of
non-Greek language, the Greek government shall make adequate facilities
enabling the children of such Greek citizens to receive instruction in
elementary schools in their mother tongue. . ."
We should also quote the writing of Sotirios Kodjamanis, the Greek politician of Macedonian origin: "The victors of World War I had imposed upon Greece not only the recognition of ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities, but had also forced Greece to realise that the treaties dealing with minorities were of international interest, and came under the guarantee of the League of Nations."
"We
were under obligation — Kodjamanis says further on — not to change those
conventions without prior consent by the majority of members of the League of
Nations." (Sotirios Kodjamanis: "National questions", Athens,
1954, pages 34—35).
Panaiotis Pipinelis, one of
the old Greek diplomats, wrote in his commentary on the Treaty of Sevres that
"the treaty did not specify the existence of a Macedonian minority in
Greece." That, as it were, minorities were mentioned only in general
terms, and that the term minorities in Greece referred "only to Turkish
and Jewish minorities". Such a statement, however, does not correspond
with the truth. Because, in the spirit of the Treaty of Sevres, there was in
1924 another agreement signed at the suggestion of the League of Nations, between
the governments of Greece and Bulgaria; this was known as the Kalfov-Politis
Protocol, with which the Greek government, concealing its true intentions,
recognized the Macedonians of the Aegean part of Macedonia as a
"Bulgarian" minority in Greece. The Greek side made this concession
so that minority rights would be granted to the Greek minority in Bulgaria.
Soon afterwards, however, the Greek government denied the Bulgarian
government the right to be interested in the Macedonian population in Greece,
claiming that it was in no way a Bulgarian minority. To that effect, the Greek
government undertook in 1925 the publication of the Abecedar in the Croatian
Latin alphabet, intended not for the "Bulgarian" minority in Greece,
but for the Slavs in Greece who spoke a Slav language. And that the Slav
speaking minority in Greece were the Macedonians and only the Macedonians is
witnessed in the Diary of David
Hunter Miller, the American diplomat who took part in the Versailles Peace
Conference. On page 292, he explicitly mentions the Macedonian minority (David
Hunter Miller, My Diary at the Conference
of Paris with Documents, New York). Bartello, the principal author of the
Treaty, also spoke of the Macedonian minority. In addition to all this, when
talking about the minorities in Greece and their rights, the Greek authors
Grigorios Dafnis in his historical newspaper-report "Greece between the
two wars" ("Elefteria" newspaper of 15 March 1953), Dionisios
Ramos in "Elefteria" of 9 and 12 October 1954 in the feuilleton
"Minorities", Dimitrios Vazuglis in the booklet "Racial and religious minorities in Greece and Bulgaria", as well as
loannis Sofianopulos, the politician and the leader of the left liberals in
Greece, in his book "How I saw the
Balkans". (Athens, 1927) — all clearly speak of Slav, Macedonian,
Slav-speaking minority in Greece. A more convincing reply, could not be found
to Pipinelis's statement that it was not the Macedonian Slav minority that was
referred to in the Treaty of Sevres.
The concrete steps taken by
the Greek government under pressure from the League of Nations included the
following: a special department was formed within the Ministry of Education,
which was to deal with the ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities, and to
take care of the education of these minorities. In 1925, the government
published the Abecedar, which was
given wide publicity in the Greek press of the time ("Athinaikos
typos", "Elefteron Vima", and other). Nikolas Zarifis, the Greek
publicist and expert in the questions of the Balkans, praised the publication
of this primer as a remarkable event in the life of the minorities in Greece.
In "Elefteron Vima" of 19 October 1925, Zarifis says among other
things: "We already have a complete primer for the Slav speaking,
carefully and conscientiously prepared by our specialists Messrs Papazahariu,
Saiktsis and Lazaru. It is a work which despite all the problems encountered in
its compilation is now a reference book.. ."
"We
have before us, goes on Zarifis,
"the Primer entitled Abecedar,
intended for use in the schools which are yet to open in Greek Macedonia and in
West Thrace, and intended to meet the needs of the Slav speaking minority. This
primer will be used in the instruction of the Slav speakers in Greece. The
primer is made in the Latin alphabet and is based on the Macedonian dialect". (underlined by II. A.)
The
school inspectors of the elementary schools in the Macedonian districts were
put in charge of making teaching programmes for the classes consisting of Macedonian
children. And everything was ready for the opening of schools for the Slav
speakers (the Macedonians — H. A.). The above measures by the Greek government
were intended to convince the League of Nations of Greece's efforts in
implementing of the stipulations of the Treaty regarding the rights of the
Macedonian ethnic minority in Greece, and thus gaining the praise of the
League of Nations.
Since
the Greek government took the view that the Slav speakers in Greece were
neither Bulgarians nor Serbs but a separate ethnic group, the commission
working on the primer decided on the Croatian Latin alphabet which would
contain separate signs for the soft n
when followed by the vowel y (which
was spelled with the German ü: lüge, zaklüci, se lülka) for the vowel p
(spelled with the Romanian sign for dark vowel î: bîrkam, dîrvo, kîrsam, mîrda), (Blazhè Ristovski: "Abecedar - the primer for the Macedonian
children in Aegean Macedonia" "Razgledi" magazine, Skopje, May
1959, p. 1092).
The
Primer, printed in the P. D. Sakclariu's printing-house in Athens on 40 pages 8°,
took as its language the Lerin-Bitola dialect, presented therein as a standard
literary language (the three compilers of the Abecedar originated from the
Bitola region, and were probably of Vlach origin). They rejected both the
Bulgarian and Vuk Karadjich's
Serbian Cyrillic alphabet.
Here are some of the texts in the Abecedar:
Snagata na čoeko.
Site
lüge imat edna glava, dve
race, dve nodze. Glávata ima zgore kosie, i napret ima dve oči, eden nos i
edna usta. Ustata natre ima zabi i eden jazik. Zábite set beli, jaziko je cîrven. So ústata jádime, píeme i zbórvame. So racete
rabótame, so nódzite ódime, tîrcame i rîpame. Jas tîrčam bîrgu i ripam mnogu vísoko.
Je
rano. Maika moldzi kozata. Maro i Lenka tîrčat da vidat kako se moldzi
kózata. Mlékoto ji ušče tóplo. Máikata i dava da piat po edna časa
toplo mieko. Piat, piat so golem kef. Lenka vika: A! ščo blago i slatco
miéko
Petre
i Gjorgia odat ná-pole za da igrat so drugárite. Málata sestra na Petre, Lenka,
sákat i taja da odi sónimi da igra. Petre ja nékeše. Lenka plači, vika i
se fîrii ná-zemnja i fati da klocat. Fústano mu se stori berbat. Bábata ja
sluša kako plácese ot áurot, kai dávaše seno na volóite. Istîrca i ja krena, ja
ístrese i mu dade edno cîrveno jábolko. Lenka papsa da plači i si go jade
jabólkoto
As
stated by Blazhé Ristovski in the study mentioned earlier, the quoted texts
show that the authors of the Primer
stressed the third syllable from the end; the consonants ~ and { were marked with the
separate signs č and š; and the consonant s is spelled as dz, the soft consonants } and | are spelled in two ways: }-kj and |-gj (Gjorgia, etc.). As is known, the Bitola
dialect does not have articles at the end of the word. The commission was
consistent so that the words in the primer do not have the end t:
jaziko, zeto, daskalo, etc.
Had the Abeccdar been really allowed wide use in the schools of the Aegean
part of Macedonia, it would undoubtedly have had a significant role in the
development of the Macedonian
literary language; but even as it is, it is of special importance to the
history of the Macedonian language. The Greek governments have unfortunately
always provided hastened and cheap excuses to avoid granting minority rights
to the Macedonian people in Greece. They welcomed the reactions by the Yugoslav
and Bulgarian governments to the language used in the Primer.
When
criticizing the government's inconsistency, loans Sofianopulos says: ". .
. Our politicians did not only show lack of care and faith, but, also on the
contrary, they systematically avoided any sign of it", and he adds
visionary: "What could tame the spirit and eliminate hate?" To this
he himself replies: "Three things:
a
true protection of the minorities, a question which ought not to be associated
to any forced resettlements out of the country; proper education of the new
generation in schools; and greater communication between different countries
of the Balkans. . . Everybody should understand, — ends Sofianopulos —
"that opulos cannot be endlessly
converted, into opovich, or opovich into opov and vice-versa, and that the conscience and free-will should
be respected and allowed expression." (loannis Sofianopulos :"How I saw the Balkans," p.
204).
Thus, instead of solving the
Macedonian ethnic, or more precisely, minority question, the Greek governments
have in fact contributed with their one-sided actions to the growing lack of
confidence and hatred of the Macedonian people in Greece for the Greek
regimes. Only the true protection, as stated by Sofianopulos, of the Macedonian
ethnic minority in Greece, which were the most numerous of all the minorities
in the country, could help the growth of brotherly relations between the Macedonians
and the Greeks, and that again would create n more favorable atmosphere for the
strengthening of the peace and mutual respect in this part of the Balkan.
We have
gathered here today to mark the publication of the jubilee photoprint edition
of the Abecedar (A B C Primer), on the occasion of the 60th anniversary of its
original publication in Athens at the end of May 1925. The first publication of
this primer was initiated by the Greek government which followed the directions
of the Council of the League of Nations declared at its March session of 1925.
The primer was intended for the Macedonian children in Aegean Macedonia.
If sixty years ago it took the Greek government less than three months
to prepare and publish the Abecedar, then we must ask the question. Why was it
that four years elapsed before the Greek government decided to take measures
for the fulfillment of the obligations it undertook in 1920? That was the year
the Charter of the League of Nations came into force — the League of Nations
being the guarantee for the implementation of the protection of the ethnic
minority rights in the countries which signed the peace treaties after World
War I; those treaties incorporated the conventions under which the signatory
countries undertook obligations of international character to protect the
rights of their ethnic minorities.
The answer to this question is quite a long one. It also requires a
survey of the events leading to this point in history.
First
of all, since these conventions were not universal, the signatory countries
opposed their fulfillment, particularly the Balkan states of which Macedonian
people were a part (The Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes, Bulgaria
and Greece). The Kingdom of the
Serbs, Croats and Slovenes, and Bulgaria, argued that there was no minority
living in the Vardar and Pirin Macedonia regions, for they considered
Macedonians to be a part of their dominant nations.
The
case of Aegean Macedonia in Greece was rather more specific. The Greek
diplomacy could not state the same arguments since it was a Slav minority in
question. Instead, they claimed that the said conventions did not obligate
Greece because the Greek Parliament had not ratified the 1920 Treaty of Sevres,
and besides, Greece was at war with Turkey. The Greek statesman also counted on
moving the Macedonian ethnic minority out of Greece, in accordance with the Convention
signed between Greece and Bulgaria in 1919, for the so-called "voluntary
resettlement". This question was revived after the peace treaty of
Lausanne in 1923, when the Convention for compulsory exchange of the minorities
was signed between Greece and Turkey. Greece, however, could never really avoid
the pressure exerted on its policy with regard to the protection of the Slav
minority. This was not so much due to the conventions mentioned earlier, but
rather to the fact that the movement of the population out of Greece was not
such as they had planned, for a lot of people did not even think of leaving
their homes, particularly the Macedonians from the west part of Macedonia.
(This was also slated by Colonel Corfe, the League of Nations representative in
the Mixed Greek-Bulgarian Commission for the exchange of the minorities).
Besides, it was precisely these conventions that had created problems, in
particular the Convention with Turkey, because the Greek government lacked
finances to realize such a project, nor did it have sufficient land to resettle
the people returning from Turkey. All this intensified the pressure on the
Macedonians, the confiscation of their land and property, and opposition aimed
at their resettlement, ultimately endangering their very existence.
This resulted in an increased number of complaints and appeals for
intervention addressed to the League of Nations. The international community
was informed of this as well. Thus, as Erick Colban, the director of the
Department for Minorities at the Secretariat of the League of Nations so aptly
put it. the "Macedonian tangle" was created.
For its intentional
disregard of the protection of the Slav minority, Greece was singled out as the
only state in the Balkans which still considered itself not bound by an
international agreement to protect the ethnic minorities on its territory! The
Greek diplomats turned down all suggestions (even those given by Erick
Drumonnd, the General Secretary of the League of Nations), that the Greek
government should make a statement on the obligations it had undertaken and deliver
a firm promise to take steps towards their realization in granting cultural
autonomy to the ethnic minorities. However, as complaints about the treatment
of the minorities in Greece in general, not just of the Slavs, became ever more
frequent, and as the League of Nations became certain that the Greek
government and the Greek politicians had no intention of putting the agreed
clauses into effect, diplomatic pressure was exerted and the so-called
"Small Protocols" (Politis — Kalfov) were signed; these were in fact
almost a replica of the clauses already familiar from the peace treaties.
Indeed, the "Small Protocols" were also imposed on Greece, owing
to the unyielding attitude of the allies with regard to the protection of the
minorities by the signatory countries of the peace treaties after the Great
War, and particularly because Greece used various excuses to evade the
fulfillment of its international obligations.
However,
produced in haste and only bilaterally, the "Small Protocols" soon
proved to be a diplomatic failure, not only for the League of Nations headed by
its General Secretary Erick Drumond, but also for the experienced British diplomacy
which appointed this delicate diplomatic responsibility to Gilbert Murray, the
South African Union representative who knew nothing of the situation in the
Balkans and even less of the Macedonian question. The "Small
Protocols" did not take into account the other "interested
party" — the Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes (which was at that
time spreading its propaganda among the Macedonians in an attempt at
persuading them into becoming a "Serbian minority"). It even included
negotiation." with Greece concerning the free customs zone in Salonika
and the future of the Gevgelija-Salonika railroad line which actually belonged
to the Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes. In reply to the "Small
Protocols",
The
Kingdom of the Sorbs, Croats and Slovenes revoked the Pact on friendship with Greece! It soon became evident that the
"Small Protocols" were "unrealistic". Furthermore, the
refusal of the Greek government to ratify the Protocol containing obligations
for Greece, made it clear that the whole project compromised the authority of
the League of Nations and the diplomatic prestige of Great Britain. At this
point the Protocols were placed in the charge of Austin Chamberlain,
distinguished diplomat and Great Britain's Minister of Foreign Affairs, as
well as Chairman of the Council of the League of Nations. It was under his
chairmanship that the Council of the League of Nations — at a time when the
League of Nations and its executive bodies still had a substantial authority —
at its session of March 1925, directed the Greek government to take all
measures necessary to secure protection of the rights of the Macedonians as
an ethnic minority in Aegean Macedonia.
Sir Austin Chamberlain was a political authority and a well informed diplomat familiar with the rivalry between the three Balkan slates over Macedonia and its people. In dealing with the problem he undoubtedly took into consideration the reputation of the League of Nations, the interests of Great Britain in this region, and the opinions of other politicians. What is more, at the March session in 1925, when talking about the national minority in Aegean Macedonia, he did not name them a "Bulgarian", or "Serbian" minority or "Greek-slovophones" — but for the first time and not at all incidentally he used the name "Slav speaking minority". It could have been a diplomatic "compromise" or it could have been something else (it might have been Gladstone's principle — Macedonia to Macedonians! — and it could have been the fact that a republican government was in power in Greece in contrast to the monarchy in Great Britain, or any other reason). This is still to be revealed one day when the documents — particularly the confidential ones — are brought to light. One thing we can be positive about, however, and that is the fact that the experienced British diplomat did this on the grounds of certain reality — that in the given case there was a nationality other than the Bulgarian, Serbian and Greek, with its linguistic individuality — n reality which was to eliminate any further confrontations and failures by the diplomats and the politicians of the League of Nations in this delicate matter.
At the session of March 1925
the Council of the League of Nations directed the Greek government to submit,
within a period of less than three months, the replies to the following
questions:
The
obligations imposed on Greece by the Council of the League of Nations, were
dictated by Sir Austin Chamberlain personally, who explicitly referred to the
Macedonians as a "Slav speaking minority". The Greek government was
to reply in the period from 2 April to 1 June. The fulfillment of a part of the
obligations undertaken by the Greek government resulted in the publication of
the Abecedar in May 1925.
Another
moment of interest with regard to the history of the Abecedar is that in its
correspondence with the League of Nations bodies and in its diplomatic correspondence,
the Greek government adopted the new term, referring to the Macedonians not as
"Greek-slavophones", not as a "Bulgarian" or
"Serbian" minority, but as a Slav speaking minority, or
Slav-Macedonians, while the language of this minority was referred to as
Slav-Macedonian. It even seemed that the Council's attitude in this matter
encouraged the Greek policy not only in adopting it but also in taking
advantage of it in dealing with the Bulgarian propaganda among the Aegean
Macedonians. Thus in the letter dated 29 May 1925, addressed to the Council of
the League of Nations, the Greek government denies the Bulgarian government the
right to be "directly or indirectly interested in the Slav speaking
minority."
The
treatment given to the Macedonians by the Council of the League of Nations made
the Greek government take the course of a more realistic policy which among
other things included instruction in the schools for the Macedonian minority
in' the language they spoke, or, more precisely in "Slav-Macedonian",
as they referred to it. Therefore, that was also the language used in the
Abecedar, the primer for the first grade of elementary school. The primer, made
in the Latin alphabet, was (hen submitted to the League of Nations as a proof
of the fulfillment of one of the obligations undertaken by the Greek
government, with the assurances that .schools with instruction carried out in
Macedonian, intended for the Macedonian children in Aegean Macedonia, were to
be opened in the following 1925/1926 school year.
This
little primer we have now before us raised great interest at the lime of its
publication sixty years ago. On this occasion not only did the Balkan states
but the entire world community paid its attention to the Abecedar, which was
primarily evident in the League of Nations in Geneva.
The Bulgarian government,
however, was unpleasantly surprised to sec that it was published in Macedonian,
and just as surprised were the Vrhovists circles of Macedonian emigrants in
Bulgaria. It was obvious that nobody there expected this to happen — to have
text books and instruction carried out in the Macedonian language. They
protested in every possible way, for the interested circles in Bulgaria, headed
by Alexandar Tsankov's government, realized that the intention of the Greek
government to open schools in Macedonian meant a serious blow to the positions
gained by the Greater Bulgarian propaganda and to the policy of the Bulgarian
state in general towards the Macedonian question after the First World War.
That is why the appearance of the Abecedar was followed by a strong reaction
from the Bulgarian government at the League of Nations. On 15 October 1925,
Mitkov, the Bulgarian diplomatic representative at the League of Nations expressed
before Pablo de Askerate, the functionary of the League of Nations Secretariat,
the disappointment caused by the appearance of the Abecedar, which, according
to him, "made a disagreeable impression" in Bulgaria. Further on he
said that the language of the primer was "a compilation of language
elements of various villages", so that it would be
"incomprehensible" to "a number of people in the area",
(sic! What a glaring lie from a diplomat!) But the reaction in Bulgaria was not
confined merely to diplomatic notes. They also intensified the attacks against
the Macedonian language (or more precisely against the language used in the Abecedar), so that even the Bulgarian
philosophers were engaged in challenging the existence of Macedonian. In the
Bulgarian People's Assembly the loudest exponent of the Greater-Bulgarian
aspirations, Dr Alexandar Sta-nishev, raised his voice against it. The League
of Nations received many petitions (organized by the Vrhovists circles) in
which the Abecedar was criticized and attacked. Today we can take it as one
more example of whose policy it was that was carried out and to what degree the
Greater-Bulgarian policy was followed in its attempts at denationalization and
assimilation of the Macedonian people in Bulgaria between the two world wars.
Dr Alexandar Stanishev even sent a cable to the League of Nations to say that
"a Macedonian language does not exist", etc. These reactions against
the publication of the Abecedar were actually aimed at preventing the
establishment of the Macedonian language, because its further use, helped even
by the Abecedar in Aegean Macedonia, would mean a serious blow to the San
Stefano dreams and to the propaganda spread around that Macedonians were
Bulgarians. Besides, the existence of the Macedonian language and schools in
that language in Aegean Macedonia, would by analogy bring about the question of
Macedonian language and schools and of cultural autonomy in general for the
Macedonians in Bulgaria too, a matter already raised by the Macedonians in the
Pirin part of Macedonia. This aspect of the Bulgarian reactions makes them interesting
to us even today . . .
The Abecedar was met with
great interest by the League of Nations, particularly with its Secretariat and
the Department for minorities. Their experts on the language of the Slav
minority engaged in scholarly discussions on whether it was possible to have
instruction held in that language, and in establishing the differences
between the Serbian, Bulgarian and Greek on the one side, and the Macedonian on
the other. The alphabet was also an issue. But what is of particular
significance to us is that Vasilis Dendramis, representative of the Greek
goverment at the League of Nations, appeared before Erick Colban, the director
of the Department for minorities at the Secretariat of the League of Nations,
to explain and defend the publication of the Abecedar in the Macedonian
language and to elucidate the attitude that the Macedonian language was neither
Bulgarian nor Serbian. In the research concerning this issue we came across a
document kept in the Archives of the League of Nations in Geneva. This was the
letter by Dendramis to Erick Colban, dated November 10, 1925. Here are the most
interesting parts of this letter:
"You
told me that the Bulgarian press had recently started a severe campaign against
the use of this kind of Latin alphabet. . . for the language which in Sofia
they call — Bulgarian language . . . But — there
is a fact which is not less
obvious and winch is known to all the
Slavists: the fact that the Slav-Macedonian
is not identical with the Bulgarian
language". (In support of this claim Dendramis listed some of the
distinguished Slavists such as Shafarik, the Macedonian Shapkarev, Novakovich,
Yagich, Niderle and others, adding "... (even) the majority of notorious
Bulgarophilcs have, after many years
of studying the problem, come to the
conclusion that the Macedono-Slav language is neither Bulgarian, nor Serbian,
but an independent language .. ." (underlined
by V.K.)
Dendramis
also encloses linguistic maps, as additional evidence for the independence of
the Macedonian language, pointing out to Colleen that the creators of the maps located
Macedonian as an independent language — the Slav-Macedonian as a separate
language! He also adds the ethnic map of Eastern Europe, published in the
"Daily Telegraph" series of maps, which has the Macedonians marked as
a separate ethnic unit, as well as the map drawn by Vladimir Leontievich
Komarov, the great Russian and later Soviet botanist, geographer and
researcher (1869—1945), published by the Blagotvritelno Slovensko Druzestvo in Petersburg in which the "Macedonian
Slavophones" are marked in a different way than the Bulgarians.
Dendramis's letter to Colban ends as follows: "As I have already
said, this was done by a commission made of specialists who had decided to use
in this Abecedar the language of the Slav-Macedonians, and a phonetic writing
in the letters of- Latin alphabet analogical to those used by the Croats,
Czechs, Slovenes and the Poles in their respective languages . . ."
(United Nations Library iins Archives Geneva. R. 1975, Doc. N0. 41/47674/ 39349. (Sec V Dondramis's letter of 10 Nov. 1925')).
It
doesn't happen often, but we do have here a Greek diplomat as a representative
of the Greek government appearing in the part of the defender of the existence
of the Macedonian language and supporting with arguments the existence of the
Macedonian Slav ethos.
The answer to the question as to why the Abecedar was published in the
Latin alphabet can be found in the remark of O'Moligni — the authoritative
expert in the Secretariat of the League of Nations who was in favour of the use
of the Slav Cyrillic alphabet — who said that "the Greek government must
have had some special reason in this case when deciding to use the Latin
alphabet", because, "the fact that the Latin alphabet is used by the
Croats, Slovenes and the Poles, as justified by Dendramis, does not explain the
intention". "It would rather seem that the motives were political
and that the Greek government had been anxious to get rid once and for all of
the Slav influence of both the Serbian and the Bulgarian propaganda which would
otherwise have continued in a new manner and would have threatened. .. and
endangered the Greek sovereignty over Salonika." (United Nations Library
and Archives Geneva, R. 1695, Dic. .No. 41/47674/ 39349, under Schools of
Macedonia of the Abecedar .. ., see Commentaries Minutes — O'Moligni, dated. 9
Dec. 1925.)
But,
despite everything, the Abecedar never reached the Macedonian children. There
were many reasons why the Greek government did not act in full accordance with
the decisions of the Council of the League of Nations in view of the use of
the Abecedar. That is, with regard to the opening of schools in the Macedonian
language for the Macedonians in Aegean Macedonia. A part of them have been
listed by Hristo Andonovski in the Foreword to this photoprint edition of the
Abecedar.
Although
obligated by international law to grant cultural autonomy to the Macedonians in
Aegean Macedonia, the Greek government never took essential steps toward it;
behind this was the fear of losing the political positions in the country, so
that the Greek politicians and rulers persisted in trying to solve this
problem through changing the composition of the population to the advantage of
the Greek element. This was helped
by
the work of the two Combined Commissions for the exchange of population — the
Greek-Bulgarian and the Greek-Turkish. Besides, there were the rivalry and the
propagandistic activities of official Sofia and official Belgrade among the
Macedonian population in this part of the country. This was particularly
intensive at this period because of the negotiations between Athens and
Belgrade on the free customs zone in Salonika and the ownership of the
Gevgelija-Salonika railroad line.
The
publication of the Abecedar in the Latin alphabet was a gamble, because, among
other things, it also counted on the Macedonians' disliking such a primer,
which indeed was the case in some circles ("What, are we going to be Catholics now?")
To all this we should add the difficult internal situation in Greece,
with its economic and social problems. In an attempt to help resolve some of
these the Government even invited Erick Colban, the Director of the Department
for the Minorities at the League of Nations, to visit Athens. The invitation
was accepted.In a situation like this, and with the purpose of avoiding the
fulfillment of the obligations imposed on Greece, the Greek government resorted
to its old methods and on 19 October 1925 provoked the well-known armed
incident at Pelrich (on the territory of Macedonia again), in order to avert
the attention of the League of Nations and the international community to other
things. In this manner, the conflict in Petrich came into focus, and the Abecedar and its fate were put aside to
gradually fall into oblivion!
Notwithstanding
the fact that it was not used, the appearance of the Abecedar was never a
common episode in the history of the Macedonian people in Aegean Macedonia
between the two world wars. It attracted the interest of the League of Nations
and its experts and diplomats who found themselves in a situation in which they
had to learn more about the question of the Macedonian language, its
characteristics and the differences between the Macedonian and the Bulgarian or
Serbian languages. The Abecedor also offered theopportunity to give evidence
for the existence of the Macedonian Slav people, which was recognized by the
bodies of the League of Nations as a "Slav speaking minority". In
this respect it is of particular significance that it was a Greek diplomat who
supplied the League of Nations with proof of the independence of not only the
Macedonian language but of the Macedonian people, too. Proving, in other words,
that the Macedonians belong to an independent nation. Vasilis Dendramis was
also not alone in believing the facts revealed.
The Abecedar is also a
testimony of the extent to which the Macedonian language had already developed at
that time — sufficient for a textbook to be compiled and to be applied as a
medium of instruction in schools. It possesses all necessary linguistic
standards and forms for 1st grade primary school education, or more precisely,
the sound method widely used in the primers for most of the languages of the
time. The Abecedar deserves the attribute of a serious textbook of its kind
which could withstand any linguistic and other criteria.
This primer is also a
document for the history of the Macedonian language, its vocabulary and
grammar. A student of Macedonian will find the devised "orthography"
interesting, as well as the other linguistic solutions, the syntax,
pronunciation, etc. In all respects, the Abecedar should be a subject of
serious consideration of Macedonian studies, especially by linguists and
historians. By doing this, more about the Abecedar, and, subsequently, the
history of the Macedonian people can be discovered.
This is why we truly
appreciate the initiative for the publication of the photoprint edition of the
Abecedar. The reappearance of this first Macedonian primer will not only
attract the attention and the interest of the scholarly circles but will also
enable the young generations of Macedonians who were only fought in schools about
the existence of this primer to really see it. The Abecedar was not as
accessible when it existed only as a rare sample in the Library or as a
document in the Archives of Macedonia.
We therefore welcome once
again the reprint of this small book, bearing in mind that such small books
have often raised enormous interest and thus gained particular significance. We
are thankful to the initiators for the re-publication of the Abecedar: the Macedonian Review, the Archives of Macedonia — the institution
which keeps the original edition and which enabled the research into its
history; to Hristo Andonovski and Boris Vishinski who were also directly
involved in the realization of the whole project.
Translated into
English by Liubitsa Arsovska
Translation edited by Tom and Mary Petsinis
(* )Address delivered at the Archives of Macedonia on the occasion of
the launching of the photo print edition of Abecedar on 15 January 1988.
22