Greek General Demetrios Kallergis on who fought the Turks (1860)

[Droog]

Volche then we do not know what he means with either Albanians, Greeks and Turks in your line of thinking.

Each case is different, don't you think?
The term Macedonian has been linked to many characteristics ranging from birthplace to origin etc. The terms Greek and Turk have been associated with Orthodoxy and Islam in the Balkans, while the term Albanian in Montenegro was associated with Catholicism.

[Droog]

It was not uncommon at all to call Aromanians Macedonians, Macedonovlachs etc like for example in this 1818 work http://books.google.ro/books?id=VfhD...nische&f=false

The ethnonym Macedonian had of course many meanings as in the case of the King of Naples who styled his Albanian guard as the Royal Macedonian

[KingMac]

Volche then we do not know what he means with either Albanians, Greeks and Turks in your line of thinking.

[Droog]

I cited the historian V. Stojchev, I haven't made up such claim.

The name of Marko Bochvarot is evidenced in other sources also, there are still living persons bearing that name in today Macedonia.

There are also other Komiti bearing that name and there are few Macedonian folksongs about it.

Try by searching Bocvarot, Bochvarot, Бочварот.

Also Google books:

http://www.google.pl/search?hl=pl&rlz=1G1GGLQ_ENPL321&q=is+evidenced+in+other+sources+also&wrapid=tlif130332783173610&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbo=u&tbs=bks:1&source=og&sa=N&tab=wp#sclient=psy&hl=pl&rlz=1G1GGLQ_ENPL321&tbm=bks&source=hp&q=%D0%91%D0%BE%D1%87%D0%B2%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%BE%D1%82&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&fp=cffa9a2a3c6bffd0

http://www.google.pl/search?hl=pl&rlz=1G1GGLQ_ENPL321&q=is+evidenced+in+other+sources+also&wrapid=tlif130332783173610&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbo=u&tbs=bks:1&source=og&sa=N&tab=wp#sclient=psy&hl=pl&rlz=1G1GGLQ_ENPL321&tbm=bks&source=hp&q=Bochvarot&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&fp=cffa9a2a3c6bffd0

However, the point of Kallergis stands for it.

a)That's as fringe as Napoleon being Albanian/Greek/Chinese
b)He wasn't even born in Macedonia
c)The "Bochvarot" thing seems to be a Bulgarian myth of the early 20th century, since i)the person or his family never used it ii)it first occurs in Slavic language mistransliterations
d)If you want to research historical subjects use sources like OUP and MUP and not links from unknown works you found on google books.

[Soldier of Macedon]

Ok, when either yourself or Droog are prepared to provide some answers to those 2 simple questions, let me know.

[Voltron]

Id like to give you a clear response to what you asked SOM, but pls note I am referring to the context of this thread. The way I interpreted it was if Kallergis seperated Sicilians from Italians than how can we ensure what way he was referring to Macedonians? In line with Droogs thinking I think the interpretation of Vlachs in this sense is more probable. Only because the impact from Vlachs were significantly higher that Macedonians. I think this we can all agree on. The intention is not to generalise how Macedonians were defined pre 1860, just on what Kallergis as an individual said.

[Soldier of Macedon]

The question you should be asking is why he left them out in the first place ? Isnt it strange that the biggest "foreign" patriots aside from Arvanites were Vlachs yet they get no mention ? I believe this is what Droog meant and it makes sense.
That doesnt discount Macedonian volunteers of course, we are just commenting on what Kallergis said.

Voltron, in response to the above, I would ask you to answer the two questions that I posed to Droog earlier. Can you?

[Voltron]

If he said Macedonians then it is most likely Macedonians he means. Why mean vlatsi?

Because Vlachs were a key component in the creation of Modern Greece.

[KingMac]

If he said Macedonians then it is most likely Macedonians he means. Why mean vlatsi?

[Voltron]

The question you should be asking is why he left them out in the first place ? Isnt it strange that the biggest "foreign" patriots aside from Arvanites were Vlachs yet they get no mention ? I believe this is what Droog meant and it makes sense.
That doesnt discount Macedonian volunteers of course, we are just commenting on what Kallergis said.

[Pelister]

Orfej sums this up pretty well when he said:

The Modern Greeks have identified Macedonians as a distinctive, unique and separate people for as long as there have been Modern Greeks in this world. As I said, the author distinguishes the Greeks, Albanians, Turks and Macedonians, as separate people.

He is not referring to Vlachs, because he doesn't name them.

[Voltron]

You New Greeks have a way of distorting things. I can see the interpretive mischief at work already in your interpretation of the text.

He is referring to the Macedonians, simple.

He is not referring to Greeks, because he is himself a Greek and treats the Greeks separately. He treats the Albanians separately. If he was referring to Aromanians/Vlachs, he would have said so, because they were also a distinctive group with their own name and well known throughout the region and the Greeks had their own words for the Vlachs - never 'Macedonian'.

Based on this information alone, he is treating the Macedonians as separate from the Greeks, Turks and Albanians, or as a distinctive group.

Orfej sums this up pretty well when he said:

It's because he wrote the text in the 1860! You on the other hand look from the prism of today.

[Pelister]

The text also doesn't indicate that the reference is about ethnic Macedonians, but we do know that at that time in Greece the term Macedonians was also used about Aromanians among other groups and that Aromanians played a very important role in Greece during and after the revolution, while in the region of Macedonia the movement was virtually non-existent. If you take into account the relations of Kallergis with Albanian(in fact even his wife was Albanian) and Aromanian leaders the conclusion becomes unavoidable.

You New Greeks have a way of distorting things. I can see the interpretive mischief at work already in your interpretation of the text.

He is referring to the Macedonians, simple.

He is not referring to Greeks, because he is himself a Greek and treats the Greeks separately. He treats the Albanians separately. If he was referring to Aromanians/Vlachs, he would have said so, because they were also a distinctive group with their own name and well known throughout the region and the Greeks had their own words for the Vlachs - never 'Macedonian'.

Based on this information alone, he is treating the Macedonians as separate from the Greeks, Turks and Albanians, or as a distinctive group.

[Soldier of Macedon]

Droog, any answers to the questions I posed?

[Orfej]

but Italians in his opinion are a different nationality from Sicilians.

It's because he wrote the text in the 1860! You on the other hand look from the prism of today.