First statute of the IMRO

Due to the lack of original protocol documentation, and the fact its early organic statutes were not dated, the first statute of the clandestine Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization (IMRO) is uncertain and is a subject to dispute among researchers. The dispute also includes its first name and ethnic character, as well as the authenticity, dating, validity, and authorship of its supposed first statute.[12] Certain contradictions and inconsistencies exist in the testimonies of the founding members of the Organization, which further complicates the solution of the problem. It is not yet clear whether the earliest statutory documents of the Organization have been discovered. In general, it was often called "the Bulgarian Committee" on the eve of the 20th century.[13][14] Its members were designated as Comitadjis, i.e. "committee men".[15] Based on the samples of statutes and regulations of the Organization discovered so far, it appears it was firstly officially called Bulgarian Macedonian-Adrianopolitan Revolutionary Committees (BMARC),[note 1] although this conclusion is still debatable.[16][17][18][19]

Excerpt from the statute of BMARC, (1894 or 1896; in Bulgarian language)[1]
Statute of the Bulgarian Macedonian-Adrianople Revolutionary Committees
Chapter I. – Goal
Art. 1. The goal of BMARC is to secure full political autonomy for the Macedonia and Adrianople regions .
Art. 2. To achieve this goal they [the committees] shall raise the awareness of self-defense in the Bulgarian population in the regions mentioned in Art. 1., disseminate revolutionary ideas – printed or verbal, and prepare and carry on a general uprising.
Chapter II. – Structure and Organization
Art. 3. A member of BMARC can be any Bulgarian, independent of gender, ...
Excerpt from the draft of the statute of the SMARO made by hand on the statute of the BMARC by Gotse Delchev or Petar Poparsov.[2] The Organization changed its name and dropped 'Bulgarian' from it, appealing to all dissatisfied elements, regardless of their nationality, to win through a revolution, political autonomy for Macedonia and Adrianople regions.[3][4] According to Katardžiev, there is an overlapping of the text of the statutes of BMARC and that of SMARO, and it is clear that when drafting one, the other was used.[5]
Excerpt from p. 5 of the article "The Wars and the Macedonian Question", published in 1922 in the magazine "Macedonia" by the IMRO revolutionary Georgi Bazhdarov (1875-1924). Here, the author insists that the first name of the Organization, according its first statute was BMARC. Verbatim are quoted Art. 1 and Art. 2 of the statute. The content of Art. 3 is partially quoted too. It is explained also that only after 1900 the Organization was opened to other nationalities besides Bulgarians.[6]
Excerpt from Art. 15 of the RegulatIons of the BMARC containing the oath of the Organization: I swear by God, my faith and honor that I will fight to the death for the freedom of the Bulgarians in Macedonia and the Adrianople region, that I will submit unconditionally to the leadership and will unprotestingly carry out its orders; that I will betray to no one, neither by word nor by deed the secret to which I wed myself today and all that I shall see, hear and understand concerning the Cause from today on. If I break my oath, let me be killed by one of the comrades with the revolver or the dagger which here I kiss.[7]
Excerpt from page 6 of Spiro Gulabchev's manuscript from 1904 "The causes that gave rise to the revolutionary organization remain unexplored; (Part II "The Organization"). The text discusses the statute and regulations of BMARC. In the excerpt, Art. 19, Art. 14 and Art. 15 of the Regulations are quoted verbatim. Art. 15 describes the oath of the Organization.[8]
Excerpt from page 58 of the book "The Construction of Life" (1927), authored by the IMRO-revolutionary Nikola Zografov (1869 - 1931). Per Zografov as early as 1895, Gotse Delchev was supplied with a power of attorney and sent to Sofia, from the name of the "Bulgarian Central Macedonian-Adrianopolitan Revolutionary Committee".[9] This suggests that at that time the organization already bore the name BMARC and the Adrianopolitan area was in its scope.
Excerpt from p. 14 of Autonomous Macedonia (1919) where Vladislav Kovachev maintains that the first statute of the IMRO allowed the membership only for Bulgarians within a special article. Later this status was changed but only a few Vlachs joined the Organization.
Telegram by the Ottoman authorities to their Embassy in Sofia from 1903, informing that Delchev, one of the leaders of the Bulgarian committees, was killed.[10][11]

Memoirs' controversy

The revolutionary organization set up in 1893 in Ottoman Thessaloniki changed its name several times before adopting in 1919 its last and most common name i.e. Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization (IMRO).[20] The repeated changes of name of the IMRO has led to an ongoing debate between Bulgarian and Macedonian historians, as well as within the Macedonian historiographical community.[21] The crucial question is to which degree the Organization had a Bulgarian ethnic character and when it tried to open itself to the other Balkan nationalities.[22] As a whole, its founders were inspired by the earlier Bulgarian revolutionary traditions.[23] All its basic documents were written in the pre-1945 Bulgarian orthography.[24]

According to the founding member Hristo Tatarchev's Memoirs written in 1928, the IMRO was first called, as far as he remembered, the Macedonian Revolutionary Organization (MRO). According to another founding member Petar Poparsov, its first name was "Committee for acquiring the political rights of Macedonia, given to it by the Treaty of Berlin".[25] Per Tatarchev, the founders of the IMRO had Zahari Stoyanov's memoir about the April Uprising of 1876, in which the statute of the Bulgarian Revolutionary Central Committee (BRCC) was published, which they took as a model for the organization's first statute.[26] According to Tatarchev, the Adrianople region was not included in the organization's program at first, but was added later.[27][28] Per Hristo Kotsev (1869-1933) in 1895 Dame Gruev commissioned him to start the construction of the committee network in Adrianople region, which was already included in the organization's program.[29][30]

According to Poparsov, the first statute's swatch was sent to be printed in Romania, where it burned down in a fire.[31] However, according to the IMRO activist Lazar Gyurov (1872-1931), the first statute and regulations were printed in a very limited quantity in Thessaloniki in 1894. It is known that the first statute was prepared by Petar Poparsov and was adopted at the beginning of 1894, and according to some reports, the first regulations were developed by Ivan Hadzhinikolov in the same year. The data presented by Gyurov has raised the question of whether the foundational documents of the Organization were really printed in Thessaloniki for the first time. It is known also that another early statute and regulations were printed in Sofia in 1897, by Gyorche Petrov and Gotse Delchev.[32]

Bulgarian Macedonian–Adrianopolitan Revolutionary Committees

Discovery of the statute of BMARC

The basic documents of the Оrganization under its earliest names, i.e. Bulgarian Macedonian Adrianople Revolutionary Committees (BMARC) and Secret Macedonian-Adrianopolitan Revolutionary Orgazation (SMARO) were not known until the 1960s to the historical researchers.[33] In 1961, Macedonian historian Ivan Katardžiev published undated statutes and regulations discovered in Skopje naming the organization BMARC and SMARO.[34][35] Copies of these statutes and the regulations were later found also in Bulgaria.[36] According to the statute of the BMARC, membership of the Organization was allowed only for Bulgarians.[37] The fact the first statute restricted the membership on an ethnic basis is confirmed by Tatarchev in his memoirs from 1934,[38][39] as well as in the memoirs of other revolutionaries.[40] although according to Ivan Hadzhinikolov, membership was open to everyone from Macedonia.[41] According to Hristo Matov, although the first statute allowed the membership only to Bulgarians Exarchists, in practice the leaders of the Organization didn't prohibit the membership of Patriarchists, Uniates and Protestants of all local nationalities.[42][43]

According to Tatarchev's recollections, the decision about the change of the statute, so that not only Bulgarians could be members of the organization, was taken in 1896.[44] Per Iliya Doktorov (1876-1947) this nationalist restriction lasted until 1896 too, but per Georgi Bazhdarov, who also confirms the name and statute of BMARC as a first ones, till after 1900.[45][46] Per Bulgarian anarchist Spiro Gulabchev (1856 – 1918), in the mid-1890s, appeared the "Bulgarian Macedonian Adrianopolitan Revolutionary Committee", which, according to its statute and regulations, was a Bulgarian nationalist organization.[47] The name of BMARC, as well as information about its statute, was mentioned in the foreign press of that time, in Bulgarian diplomatic correspondence, and exists in the memories of some revolutionaries and contemporaries.[48] Per Katardžiev the statute of the BMARC was the first statute and that was the first official name of the IMRO. Some international, Bulgarian and Macedonian researchers have adopted his view that this was the first statute, i.e. the first official name of the organization.[49][50][51][52]

BMARC

Katardžiev claimed that this was the first statute of the organization and under this name, it existed from 1894 until 1896 when it was changed to Secret Macedono-Adrianopolitan Revolutionary Organization (SMARO). In 1969, the name BMARC as the first one, was officially promoted as position of the Macedonian historical community in the second volume of the first ever three-volume History of the Macedonian people, as well as in its one-volume edition, in 1970.[53] Per Gane Todorovski from its very name could be concluded this was initially an organization primarily of the Bulgarian population in Macedonia and Adrianople areas.[54] Thus, per historian Krste Bitovski this was not only the first preserved statute but the original statute of IMRO.[55] According to Manol Pandevski the basic program document of the Organization was published in 1894 under the name "Statute of the Bulgarian Macedonian-Adrianopolitan Revolutionary Committees", and so it even was not called an organization.[56] Katardžiev, confirmed there was an overlapping of the texts of the statutes and regulations of BMARC and these of SMARO, and it was clear that when drafting these of SMARO, those of BMARC were used. Later that conclusion was confirmed, while corrected statute and rules of the BMARC were discovered in Bulgaria, which are practically drafts of the basic documents of the SMARO.

Revisionist turn

In 1981, the Macedonian historiography for the first time publicly dissociated itself from the thesis advocated by Katardziev for the name BMARC in the first volume of the two-volume publication Documents for the struggle of the Macedonian people for independence and for a national state.[57] In 1999 this view has been finally revised by Blaže Ristovski in his "History of the Macedonian nation". He practically adopted the position of his Bulgarian colleagues, the first name of the Organization was MRO.[58] Today many historians in North Macedonia question the authenticity of the statute of BMARC or reject its relation to the IMRO. They claim that IMRO-activists had allegedly an ethnic Macedonian identity,[59][60] while the designation Bulgarian is thought to had rather a religious connotation then. Those who accept the existence of the statute claim the term Bulgarian was used ostensibly for tactical reasons because the organization's activity was concentrated primarily on the Bulgarian Exarchist population. Others insist that the founders of the organization were then under the influence of some kind of Bulgarian nationalist propaganda.[61][62] Practically, the acknowledgement of any Bulgarian influence on Macedonian history is very undesirable, because it contradicts the Yugoslav Macedonian nation-building and historical narratives, based on a deeply anti-Bulgarian attitudes, which still continue today.[63][64][65]

IMRO as Bulgarian organization

Bulgarian historians see the statute and the regulations of BMARC as a confirmation of the Bulgarian ethnic character of the organization.[66][67][68] The definition Macedonian then had a regional meaning,[69] while the ideas of separate Macedonian nation were supported only by a handful of intellectuals.[70] They insist also, except the national designation "Bulgarian" in the name, another part of it is related to the then vilayet of Adrianopole, whose Bulgarian population has not being contested in North Macedonia today.[71] Also, apart from the fact the statute allowed the membership only to Bulgarians, the regulations contain an oath which also confirms its Bulgarian character.[72] Such an interpretation stems not only from the fact all documents of the Organization were written in the Bulgarian language, but also from the wide acceptance of Bulgarians, as from the Bulgarian principality (including Eastern Rumelia), as well as from Ottoman Thrace (Vilayet of Adrianople) into the leadership of the Organization. Such an example was the case with the affiliation of the Bulgarian Secret Revolutionary Brotherhood to IMRO in 1899. This corroborates the fact that the Macedonian revolutionaries then did not insist on any own ethnic difference with regard to the rest of the Bulgarians.[73]

MRO

In 1969 the Bulgarian historian Konstantin Pandev promoted the view that the designation BMARC lasted from 1896 until 1902, when it was changed to SMARO, a view adopted by some international and many Bulgarian historians.[74][75][76][77] Until then, Bulgarian historians shared Katardjiev's opinion that the designation BMARC was used between 1894 and 1896. Today many Bulgarian researchers assume the first name of the organization during 1894-1896 was Macedonian Revolutionary Organization or Macedonian Revolutionary Committee.[78] However, despite the name MRO is present in some contemporary sources,[79][80][81][82] neither statutes nor regulations, or other basic documents with such names have not yet been found.[83] Bulgarian researchers suppose that the founding statute of the IMRO still hasn't been discovered or it hasn't survived.[84] Thus, the first preserved statute of the organization is that of the BMARC.[85] Some Bulgarian historians do not accept the view of Pandev and adhere to that of Katardziev, i.e., the first statutory name of the organization was BMARC.[86][87][88] Bulgarian researchers also maintain that Katardžiev himself had some manifestations when he publicly claimed the IMRO revolutionaries had Bulgarian self-awareness.[89][90][91]

Authorship dispute

According to some Bulgarian and Macedonian researchers, the author of BMARC's statute was Petar Poparsov.[92][93] Other Bulgarian historians assume that the authors of the statute were Gotse Delchev and Gyorche Petrov.[94] Per Peyo Yavorov, Gotse Delchev participated in a congress of the Organization, which adopted a statute, almost a copy of the old Bulgarian revolutionary statute. It contained a special article according to which only Bulgarians were accepted as its members. According to Yavorov, Delchev voted in support of this article in question, which he believed was chauvinistic. Later, when the circumstances changed, Gotse was the first to insist that this article be amended, and this is what happened.[95][96] In Ivan Hadjinikolov's memoirs, is written that Petar Poparsov was assigned to draw up the first statute. According to Hristo Tatarchev, founders' demand for autonomy was motivated by concerns that a direct unification with Bulgaria would provoke the rest of the Balkan states and the Great Powers to military actions. In their discussion the Macedonian autonomism was seen as a step for an eventual unification with Bulgaria.[97] In his memoirs, Dame Gruev recounts the founders grouped together and jointly drew up a statute modeled after the statute of the revolutionary organization in Bulgaria before the Liberation.[98] Gyorche Petrov also tells about the writing of the statutes in his memoirs. According to him, initially a short statute drafted by Dame Gruev was in force. It was decided to draw up a new complete statute and regulations. Petrov do it in Sofia, together with Delchev.[99]

Periodization dispute

The periodization of the Internal Organization’s names is a matter of debate while both the BMARC and SMARO statutes were not dated. As mentioned above, it is believed by Bulgarian historians that in 1896 the first and probably unofficial name MRO was changed to "BMARC", and the organization existed under this name until 1902. There are still Macedonian historians who acknowledge the existence of the name "ВMARC" in the very early period of the Organization (1894–1896), but generally today in North Macedonia it is assumed that between 1894 and 1896 it was called MRO, while in 1896–1905 period the name of the organization was "SMARO".[100] On October 10, 1900, the newspaper "Pester Lloyd", published a shortened version of the captured by the Ottoman authorities statutes of the Bulgarian Macedonian Revolutionary Committee, i.e. BMARC. On October 13, the Greek newspaper "Imera" published the same material.[101] On the other hand, the Austro-Hungarian consul in Skopje Gottlieb Para (1861-1915), in his report of 14.11.1902, attached a document in translation, which he designated as the new statute of the revolutionary organization. This document bears the title: "Statute of the Secret Macedonian-Adrianople Revolutionary Organization". It is identical to the document issued in 1902, according to Pandev, as well as with the statute, which according to Katardziev was compiled in 1897.[102] At the same time the Serbian Consul General in Bitola Mihajlo Ristic wrote on January 25, 1903 that until the beginning of 1902, the work of the Committee had a purely Bulgarian character, while the local Serbs and Greeks were feared from its activity. At the end of 1902, however the Committee-members began to turn to all Christians for cooperation, regardless of their nationality.[103]

However, Macedonian historians point to the fact that a copy of the "SMARO" statute was kept in London since 1898.[104] Also, even in 1895, Gotse Delchev was supplied with a power of attorney and sent to Sofia, as a representative of the "Bulgarian Central Macedonian-Adrianopolitan Revolutionary Committee".[105] Based on the early 2000s discovery, that the cover of the BMARC rules were dated 1896, the problem when the BMARC regulations were printed, seems to be solved by Bulgarian historian Tsocho Bilyarski.[106][107] However, the regulations were prepared later than the statute.[108] The next statute of SMARO opened membership in the Organization to every Macedonian or Adrianopolitan, regardless of their ethnic origin. The IMRO members saw then the future of Macedonia as a multinational community, and did not aim a Macedonian separate ethnicity, but understood it as an umbrella term, encompassing the different nationalities in the area.[109] The common political agenda declared in the SMARO's statute was the same: to achieve political autonomy of both regions. While this idea was taken aboard by some Vlachs, as well as by some Patriarchist Slavic-speakers,[note 2] it failed to attract other groups for whom the IMRO remained the Bulgarian Committee, because its leaders and activists had Bulgarian ethnic consciousness.[110][111][112] In 1905 the organization changed its name to Internal Macedonian-Adrianople Revolutionary Organization (IMARO), which is indisputable.[113]

See also
  • Statute of the BRCC used as a model for the IMRO's first statute. This statute was drawn up in Bucharest in 1872. Its authors were Vasil Levski and Lyuben Karavelov.
    Statute of the BRCC used as a model for the IMRO's first statute.[114] This statute was drawn up in Bucharest in 1872. Its authors were Vasil Levski and Lyuben Karavelov.
  • Cover of the statute of the BMARC. Above is an inscription "statute" with the name of the organization below. In the middle is a picture with a seated woman. In her right hand she holds a flag where it is written "Svoboda ili smart".
    Cover of the statute of the BMARC. Above is an inscription "statute" with the name of the organization below. In the middle is a picture with a seated woman. In her right hand she holds a flag where it is written "Svoboda ili smart".[115][106]
  • Regulations of the BMARC
    Cover of the Regulations of the BMARC published firstly in Skopje in 1961. According to Hristo Karamandzhukov (1876-1952), they continued to be used even after 1902 in the Smolyan-Xanthi revolutionary subdistrict.[116]
  • Excerpt of the draft of the regulations of the SMARO made by hand on the regulations of the BMARC by Gotse Delchev or Petar Poparsov. According to Art. 1 the Central BMARC consisted of a chairman, secretary, treasurer and advisers.
    Excerpt of the draft of the regulations of the SMARO made by hand on the regulations of the BMARC by Gotse Delchev or Petar Poparsov.[117] According to Art. 1 the Central BMARC consisted of a chairman, secretary, treasurer and advisers.
  • A book about Gotse Delchev, issued in 1904 by Peyo Yavorov. Per him there was a congress of the IMRO, which adopted a statute, with a special article according to which only Bulgarians were accepted as its members. This issue was changed in the next statute.
    A book about Gotse Delchev, issued in 1904 by Peyo Yavorov. Per him there was a congress of the IMRO, which adopted a statute, with a special article according to which only Bulgarians were accepted as its members. This issue was changed in the next statute.[118]
  • According to the revolutionary Vladislav Kovachev [bg] (1875-1924), the first statute allowed the membership only for Bulgarians within a special article (Autonomous Macedonia (1919), p. 14).
    According to the revolutionary Vladislav Kovachev (1875-1924), the first statute allowed the membership only for Bulgarians within a special article (Autonomous Macedonia (1919), p. 14).[119][120]
  • The magazine "Macedonia" (1922) where Georgi Bazhdarov claims on p. 5, the first name of the organisation in its first statute was BMАRC.
    The magazine "Macedonia" (1922) where Georgi Bazhdarov claims on p. 5, the first name of the organisation in its first statute was BMАRC.[121]
  • "The Struggle of the Macedonian People for Liberation" (1925) where Dimitar Vlahov maintains on p. 10 that initially, the organization worked only among Bulgarians.
    "The Struggle of the Macedonian People for Liberation" (1925) where Dimitar Vlahov maintains on p. 10 that initially, the organization worked only among Bulgarians who belonged to the Bulgarian Exarchate.[122]
  • "The Construction of Life" (1927), authored by Nikola Zografov (1869 - 1931). Per his view espoused on p. 58 in 1895 the Organization already bore the name BMARC and the struggle for autonomy was open to every Bulgarian.
    "The Construction of Life" (1927), authored by Nikola Zografov (1869 - 1931). Per his view espoused on p. 58 in 1895 the Organization already bore the name BMARC and the struggle for autonomy was open to every Bulgarian.[123]
  • Hristo Tatarchev's Memoirs about the creation of the IMRO published in Sofia by Lyubomir Miletich in 1928.
    Hristo Tatarchev's Memoirs about the creation of the IMRO, which according to his opinion espoused on p. 103, was first called MRO. Published in Sofia by Lyubomir Miletich in 1928.[124]
  • The newspaper Yeni Asır, providing info about one of the voivodas of the Bulgarian chetas Yane Sandanski, who was also a leader of the centralist faction of the Bulgarian committee (1908).
    The newspaper Yeni Asır, providing info about one of the voivodas of the Bulgarian chetas Yane Sandanski, who was also a leader of the centralist faction of the Bulgarian committee (1908).[125]

Notes
  1. (Bulgarian: Български македоно-одрински революционни комитети (БМОРК), Macedonian: Бугарски македонско-одрински револуционерни комитети (БМОРК)
  2. Such Patriarchist Slavs who tended to identify themselves as Greeks or Serbs, were called then by the pro-Bulgarian IMRO-revolutionaries (sic) Grecomans and Serbomans, while the Vlachs with Bulgarian self-awareness were designated Bulgaromans.

References
  1. "The Macedonian Revolutionary Organization used the Bulgarian standard language in all its programmatic statements and its correspondence was solely in the Bulgarian language...After 1944 all the literature of Macedonian writers, memoirs of Macedonian leaders, and important documents had to be translated from Bulgarian into the newly invented Macedonian." For more see: Bernard A. Cook ed., Europe Since 1945: An Encyclopedia, Volume 2, Taylor & Francis, 2001, ISBN 0815340583, p. 808.
  2. Bulgarian researcher Tsocho Bilyarski claims that the corrections were made by Delchev, but according to the Bulgarian historian Dino Kyosev, this handwriting is Poparsov's style. For more see: Цочо Билярски, Още един път за първите устави и правилници и за името на ВМОРО преди Илинденско-Преображенското Въстание от 1903 г. В сборник Дойно Дойнов. 75 години наука, мъдрост и достойнство, събрани в един живот. ВСУ ”Черноризец Храбър”; 2004, ISBN 9549800407.
  3. The change was reflected in the revised IO statutes of 1902 which dropped 'Bulgarian' from the title ; this was now TMORO , and appealed to all dissatisfied elements in Macedonia, not merely Bulgarian ones. For more see: Hugh Poulton, Who are the Macedonians? 2000, Hurst,ISBN 9781850655343, p. 55.
  4. Kat Kearey (2015) Oxford AQA History: A Level and AS Component 2: International Relations and Global Conflict C1890-1941. ISBN 9780198363866, p. 54.
  5. Иван Катарџиев, Борба до победа. Студии и статии. Скопjе, Мисла; 1983 г., стр. 65.
  6. сп. "Македония", Том 1, София, 1922, стр. 5. Digitized on 15 April 2013 at Cornell University.
  7. Except from the Rules (the oath) of the Bulgarian Macedonian-Adrianople Revolutionary Committees (in English) in Macedonia Documents and Material, 1978 by Bozhinov, Voin & L. Panayotov. Sofia, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences.
  8. Спиро Гулабчев - "Причините, които зародиха револ. организация остават незачекнати; Организацията (ръкопис - II част)", София, ок. 1904 година. Атанас Струмски, Библиотека и Издателство "Струмски".
  9. Ѓорѓиев, Ванчо, Петар Поп Арсов (1868–1941). Прилог кон проучувањето на македонското националноослободително движење. 1997, Скопjе, стр. 61.
  10. It contains the following text in Ottoman Turkish: "We inform you, that on April, 22 (5 May 1903), in the village of Banitsa one of the leaders of the Bulgarian Committees, with name Delchev, was killed". Tashev, Spas., Some Authentic Turkish Documents About Macedonia, International Institute for Macedonia, Sofia, 1998.
  11. "На дваесет и вториот ден од април (5 маj) во селото Баниса во раце падна мртов еден од челниците на бугарските комитети по име Делчев..." For more: Александар Стоjaновски - "Турски документи за убиството на Гоце Делчев", Скопjе, 1992 година, стр. 38.
  12. Marinov, Tchavdar. We, the Macedonians: The Paths of Macedonian Supra-Nationalism (1878–1912) In: We, the People: Politics of National Peculiarity in Southeastern Europe. Budapest: Central European University Press, 2009, ISBN 9786155211669. pp. 114-115.
  13. Dimitar Bechev, Historical Dictionary of the Republic of Macedonia, Scarecrow Press, 2009, ISBN 0810862956, Introduction, p. Iviii.
  14. Tchavdar Marinov, Famous Macedonia, the Land of Alexander: Macedonian identity at the crossroads of Greek, Bulgarian and Serbian nationalism in Entangled Histories of the Balkans - Volume One: National Ideologies and Language Policies with Roumen Daskalov and Tchavdar Marinov as ed., BRILL, 2013, ISBN 900425076X, p. 300.
  15. The word komitadji is Turkish, meaning literally "committee man". It came to be used for the guerilla bands, which, subsidized by the governments of the Christian Balkan states, especially of Bulgaria. For more see: The Making of a New Europe: R.W. Seton-Watson and the Last Years of Austria-Hungary, Hugh Seton-Watson, Christopher Seton-Watson, Methuen, 1981, ISBN 0416747302, p. 71.
  16. Poulton, Hugh (2000). Who are the Macedonians, Indiana University Press, ISBN 9780253213594 p. 53.
  17. Alexander Maxwell, “Slavic Macedonian Nationalism: From 'Regional' to 'Ethnic'." 2008, Ethnologia Balkanica, vol. 11 pp. 127-154; (135).
  18. Dimitar Bechev, Historical dictionary of North Macedonia, 2019; Rowman & Littlefield, ISBN 9781538119624, p. 11.
  19. Denis Š. Ljuljanović (2023) Imagining Macedonia in the Age of Empire. State Policies, Networks and Violence (1878–1912), LIT Verlag Münster; ISBN 9783643914460, p. 211.
  20. Raymond Detrez, Historical Dictionary of Bulgaria; Historical Dictionaries of Europe; Rowman & Littlefield, 2014, ISBN 1442241802, p. 253-254.
  21. Alexis Heraclides, The Macedonian Question and the Macedonians: A History. Routledge, 2020, ISBN 9780367218263, pp. 40-41.
  22. Vemund Aarbakke (2003) Ethnic rivalry and the quest for Macedonia, 1870-1913, East European Monographs, ISBN 9780880335270, p. 97.
  23. IMRO group modelled itself after the revolutionary organizations of Vasil Levski and other noted Bulgarian revolutionaries like Hristo Botev and Georgi Benkovski, each of whom was a leader during the earlier Bulgarian revolutionary movement. Around this time ca. 1894, a seal was struck for use by the Organization leadership; it was inscribed with the phrase "Freedom or Death" (Svoboda ili smart). For more see: Duncan M. Perry, The Politics of Terror: The Macedonian Liberation Movements, 1893–1903, Duke University Press, 1988, ISBN 0822308134, pp. 39–40.
  24. Bernard A. Cook ed., Europe Since 1945: An Encyclopedia, Volume 2, Taylor & Francis, 2001, ISBN 0815340583, p. 808.
  25. ВМОРО през погледа на нейните основатели. Спомени на Дамян Груев, д-р Христо Татарчев, Иван Хаджиниколов, Антон Димитров, Петър Попарсов. Съст. Т. Петров, Ц. Билярски. Св. Георги Победоносец; София, 2002, ISBN 9545092335; с. 203-207.
  26. Duncan M. Perry, The Politics of Terror: The Macedonian Liberation Movements, 1893–1903, Duke University Press, 1988, ISBN 0822308134, pp. 39–40.
  27. Freedom or Death, The Life of Gotsé Delchev, by Mercia MacDermott, Journeyman Press, London & West Nyack, 1978, p. 230.
  28. Димитър Г. Войников, Българите в най-източната част на Балканския полуостров - Източна Тракия. Първо издание, Гл. 23. Административно деление на Европейска Турция. Конгресът на Българските македоно-одрински революционни комитети (БМОРК) в Солун (1896 г.) Обединение на Македонското и Тракийското революционно движение ИК „Коралов и сие”, София 2002.
  29. MacDermott, Mercia. Freedom or Death: The Life of Gotsé Delchev. London & West Nyack, Journeyman Press, 1978. p. 230.
  30. Коцевъ, Хр. Страници изъ споменитѣ ми. сп. Македония (VII - X). София, 1922, стр. 45-2 Моето кръщение.
  31. ВМОРО през погледа на нейните основатели. Спомени на Дамян Груев, д-р Христо Татарчев, Иван Хаджиниколов, Антон Димитров, Петър Попарсов. Съст. Т. Петров, Ц. Билярски. Св. Георги Победоносец; София, 2002, ISBN 9545092335; с. 203-207.
  32. Тараков, Т., Бисерков, М. „Спомени на един малко известен съратник на Дамян Груев“, Македонски преглед, 2000, кн. 1, стр. 126; 130.
  33. Катарџиев, И. (1965) Два правилника на ВМРО од предилинденскиот период. Историја/Journal of History 1.1, стр. 39-50.
  34. Иван Катарџиев, Некои прашања за уставите и правилниците на ВМОРО до Илинденското востание, ГИНИ V/1, Скопје 1961. стр. 149 – 164.
  35. Константин Пандев (2000) Националноосвободителното движение в Македония и Одринско 1878-1903, Гутенберг, ISBN 9789549943092, стр. 140.
  36. Пандев, Константин. „Устави и правилници на ВМОРО преди Илинденско-Преображенското въстание“, Исторически преглед, 1969, кн. I, стр. 68 – 80
  37. The revolutionary committee dedicated itself to fight for "full political autonomy for Macedonia and Adrianople." Since they sought autonomy only for those areas inhabited by Bulgarians, they denied other nationalities membership in IMRO. According to Article 3 of the statutes, "any Bulgarian could become a member". For more see: Laura Beth Sherman, Fires on the mountain: the Macedonian revolutionary movement and the kidnapping of Ellen Stone, Volume 62, East European Monographs, 1980, ISBN 0914710559, p. 10.
  38. Цочо Билярски (1994) Д-р Христо Татарчев: Първият ръководител на ВМРО: Биогр. очерк. Знание, стр 50-54; ISBN 9546210056.
  39. "Three essential positions were found in the constitution of the Revolutionary Organization: purpose, composition and means. As a goal, as stated above, the autonomy of Macedonia was accepted, and as a member of the Organization it was allowed that every Bulgarian, from any region, could be a member of the organization, after being baptized according to the established formula - a curse before gospel and dagger as a symbol of responsibility before God and the homeland, and that by conviction, but not against one's will. That decision to accept only Bulgarians as members of the Organization was dictated by the essence and character of the conspiracy, which is why at first it was necessary to recruit members from those environments that were the most oppressed, intellectually and morally elevated, firm and durable in character. In that respect, the Bulgarian people were the most suitable and reliable element and at the same time represented the majority in the country so that the Revolutionary Organization could rely on it without great risks. After all, the founders of the conspiracy came from the middle of the Bulgarian people, so that affinity was very natural for them. They did not hesitate to include even their parents, brothers, etc. in the Organization. in the lines of the conspiracy." Виктор Христовски, "Македонската револуционерна организација и д-р Христо Татарчев", "Мислата за слобода кај македонскиот народ; Конституирање на Македонската револуционерна организација", Скопје, 2017 г. ISBN 9786082452197, стр. 427.
  40. Иван Катарџиев, Борба до победа. Студии и статии. Скопjе, Мисла; 1983 г., стр. 61.
  41. Katardziev, Ivan (1968). Создавање и активноста на вмро до илинденското востание. Svetlina na Minatoto. p. 8. From this first conversation about the goals and principles of the revolutionary organization, the opinions of the founders of the Organization, presented in the memories, are all opposite. The most detailed information about this discussion regarding the objectives of the Organization is given by Ivan Hadzhinikolov. According to him, the organization would be: 1. secret and revolutionary; 2. its territory should consist of Macedonia within its geographical and ethnographic borders, which is why it will be called internal; 3. its members should be people who were born and live in Macedonia, regardless of religion and nationality; 4. the political credo of the organized Macedonians becomes the autonomy of Macedonia and 5. to preserve the independence of the organization, so that it does not fall under the influence of the policies of the governments of the neighboring free states.
  42. Ѓорѓиев, В. (1995). Петар Поп Арсов (1868–1941). Прилог кон проучувањето на македонското националноослободително движење, стр. 62.
  43. Христо Матов, "За управлението на Вътрешната Революционна Организация", Македонска революционна библиотека, София, 1926, стр. 29.
  44. Христо Татарчев, "ВМРО като митологична и реална същност (Спомени; Торино 1936 г.)" в "Спомени, документи, материали", Наука и изкуство, София, 1989 година, стр. 57.
  45. In the beginning, the organization was nationalist. Only Bulgarians with proven honesty were accepted into its ranks. This situation existed until 1896, when in the first days of August in the city of Thessaloniki, a kind of congress took place. For more: „Борбите в Македония - Спомени на отец Герасим, Георги Райков, Дельо Марковски, Илия Докторов, Васил Драгомиров“, Борис Йорданов Николов, ИК „Звезди“, 2005 г., стр. 48, ISBN 9549514560.
  46. In his article "The Wars and the Macedonian Question", published in the magazine "Macedonia. Political, scientific and literary magazine, year I, book IV, Sofia, April 1922, Georgi Bazhdarov wrote about the first name of IMRO, in which "oldest, in its first" statute of the "Bulg. Macedon.-Adr. Revolovut. Committees" it was written that its goal was "autonomy of Macedonia and Adrianople", and in order to achieve this goal, the "consciousness of self-defense in the Bulgarian population" had to be awakened in both areas and that "members of the Organization could be only Bulgarians", and this situation lasted until after 1900.
  47. "The revolutionary organization in European Turkey found its beginning in the middle of the 90s. The discontent that was due to the absolutist regime there grew more and more and finally a revolutionary Macedonian committee appeared as a necessity, which set itself the goal of organizing this dissatisfaction, i.e. the famous "Bulgarian Maced. Adrian. Revolut. Committee" appeared. This organization, according to its statute and regulations, was and remains strictly Bulgarian nationalist one. It aimed to organize the Bulgarians in European Turkey, through an armed general uprising, to win their freedom." Спиро Гулабчев, „Причините, които зародиха револ. организация остават незачекнати; Организацията (ръкопис – II част)“ стр. 5.
  48. Цочо Билярски, Още един път за първите устави и правилници и за името на ВМОРО преди Илинденско-Преображенското Въстание от 1903 г. В сборник Дойно Дойнов. 75 години наука, мъдрост и достойнство, събрани в един живот. ВСУ ”Черноризец Храбър”; 2004, ISBN 9549800407.
  49. Hugh Poulton, Who are the Macedonians? Hurst, 2000; ISBN 1850655340, p. 53.
  50. Dimitar Bechev, Historical Dictionary of North Macedonia, 2019; Rowman & Littlefield, ISBN 9781538119624, p. 145.
  51. Carl Cavanagh Hodge as ed., Encyclopedia of the Age of Imperialism, 1800-1914, 2008, Greenwood Press; ISBN 9780313043413, p. 441.
  52. Манол Д Пандевски, Националното прашање во македонското ослободително движење: 1893-1903; Современа општествена мисла, Култура, 1974, стр. 82.
  53. Прилози (1992) Томове 23 – 28, Македонска академија на науките и уметностите, Отделение за општествени науки, стр. 75.
  54. Гане Тодоровски, Формирањето на BMPO според ракописните мемоари на Иван Хаџи-Николов. Разгледи, г. XI, бр. 10, Скопје, 1969, стр. 304.
  55. Крсте Битовски (2003) Историја на македонскиот народ, Институт за национална историја, Скопje, p. 162.
  56. Манол Пандевски, (1987) Македонското ослободително дело во XIX и XX век. Националното прашање во македонското ослободително движење 1893–1903 г. Мисла, стр. 86.
  57. Цениме дека нашата наука во 1981 година јавно се огради од тезата застапувана од д - р Иван Катарџиев за името БМОРК за Македонската револуционерна организација во двотомната публикација: Документи за борбата на македонскиот народ за самостојност и за национална држава“, во издание на Универзитетот „Кирил и Методиј“, Факултет за филозофско-историски науки; Катедрата за историја и Институтот за национална историја. For more see: Manol Pandevki, Dame Gruev vo makedonskoto nacionalnoosloboditelno dviženje: Trkalezna masa po povod 80-godišninata od zaginuvanjeto, noemvri 1986', Makedonska akademija na naukite i umetnostite (1989), str. 76.
  58. Блаже Ристовски, Историја на македонската нација (1999) Македонска академиjа на науките и уметностите, Скопиjе, стр. 197.
  59. James Frusetta "Common Heroes, Divided Claims: IMRO Between Macedonia and Bulgaria". Central European University Press, 2004, ISBN 978-963-9241-82-4, pp. 110–115.
  60. "However, contrary to the impression of researchers who believe that the Internal organization espoused a "Macedonian national consciousness," the local revolutionaries declared their conviction that the "majority" of the Christian population of Macedonia is "Bulgarian." They clearly rejected possible allegations of what they call "national separatism" vis-a-vis the Bulgarians, and even consider it "immoral." Tschavdar Marinov, We the Macedonians, The Paths of Macedonian Supra-Nationalism (1878–1912), in "We, the People: Politics of National Peculiarity in Southeastern Europe" with Mishkova Diana as ed., Central European University Press, 2009, ISBN 9639776289, pp. 107-137.
  61. Pandevska, M. (2012). The term “Macedonian(s)” in Ottoman Macedonia: On the map and in the mind. Nationalities Papers, 40(5), 747-766. doi:10.1080/00905992.2012.705265
  62. Pandevska, Maria; Mitrova, Makedonka. (2020). The Concept of the millet in Turkish dictionaries: Its alteration and the impact on Ottoman Macedonia. Balcanica Posnaniensia. Acta et studia. 26. 171-192. DOI:10.14746/bp.2019.26.10
  63. The acknowledgement of Bulgarian influence on Macedonian history is highly problematic to many Macedonians because it clashes with the Yugo-Macedonian narratives. Especially after the Tito–Stalin split of 1948, the cornerstone of Macedonian national identity and historiography had been the notion of a distinct, non-Bulgarian, Macedonian national consciousness, leading to a profoundly anti-Bulgarian stance in politics and historiography. For more see: Reef, Paul. "Macedonian Monument Culture Beyond ‘Skopje 2014’" Comparative Southeast European Studies, vol. 66, no. 4, 2018, pp. 451-480. https://doi.org/10.1515/soeu-2018-0037
  64. In Macedonia, post-WWII generations grew up "overdosed" with strong anti-Bulgarian sentiment, leading to the creation of mainly negative stereotypes for Bulgaria and its nation. The anti-Bulgariansim (or Bulgarophobia) increased almost to the level of state ideology during the ideological monopoly of the League of Communists of Macedonia, and still continues to do so today, although with less ferocity... However, it is more important to say openly that a great deal of these anti-Bulgarian sentiments result from the need to distinguish between the Bulgarian and the Macedonian nations. Macedonia could confirm itself as a state with its own past, present and future only through differentiating itself from Bulgaria. For more see: Mirjana Maleska. With the eyes of the "other"(about Macedonian-Bulgarian relations and the Macedonian national identity). In New Balkan Politics, Issue 6, pp. 9–11. Peace and Democracy Center: "Ian Collins", Skopje, Macedonia, 2003. ISSN 1409-9454.
  65. Per Atanas Vangeli this extreme nationalist attitude is labeled “Bulgarophobia”, but is also known as “B-complex”. For more see Anastas Vangeli, “Antiquity Musing: Reflections on the Greco-Macedonian Symbolic Contest over the Narratives of the Ancient Past” (MA thesis, Central European University, Budapest, 2009) pp. 87-88.
  66. Bulgarian historians for their part, such as Konstantin Pandev (the first to introduce a periodization based on the names), insist that BMORK lasted longer and this proves the essential Bulgarian character of the movement. For more see: Alexis Heraclides, The Macedonian Question and the Macedonians: A History. Routledge, 2020, ISBN 9780367218263, pp. 40-41.
  67. As a Bulgarian historian, Pandev underlined the fact that, since its foundation the organization chose its Bulgarian identity by selecting the name “Bulgarian revolutionary committees." For more see: Nadine Lange-Akhund, The Macedonian Question, 1893-1908, from Western Sources, 1998 ISBN 9780880333832, p. 39.
  68. Цочо Билярски (1994) Д-р Христо Татарчев: Първият ръководител на ВМРО: Биогр. очерк. Знание, стр 7; ISBN 9546210056.
  69. Иван Н. Николов, ВМРО и Иван Михайлов в защита на българщината, 2008, УИ Св. "Кл. Охридски", ISBN 9789549384116, стр. 65.
  70. Dimitar Bechev, Historical Dictionary of the Republic of Macedonia, Historical Dictionaries of Europe, No. 68, Scarecrow Press, ISBN 0810862956, p. 140.
  71. The "Adrianopolitan" part of the organization's name indicates that its agenda concerned not only Macedonia but also Thrace — a region whose Bulgarian population is by no means claimed by Macedonian nationalists today. Marinov, Tchavdar. We, the Macedonians: The Paths of Macedonian Supra-Nationalism (1878–1912) In: We, the People: Politics of National Peculiarity in Southeastern Europe. Budapest: Central European University Press, 2009, ISBN 9786155211669 p. 115.
  72. The text of the oath begins as follows: I swear by God, my faith and my honor that I will fight to the death for the freedom of the Bulgarians in Macedonia and Adrianople region... For more see: Вениамин Терзиев, Българският характер на славянското население в Македония, Университетско изд-во "Св. Климент Охридски", София, 1995; ISBN 9789540706030, стр. 73.
  73. Marinov, Tchavdar. “We, the Macedonians : The Paths of Macedonian Supra-Nationalism (1878–1912)”. Diana, Mishkova. We, the People : Politics of National Peculiarity in Southeastern Europe. Budapest : Central European University Press, ISBN 9786155211669; 2009. pp. 107-137.
  74. Duncan Perry The Politics of Terror: The Macedonian Liberation Movements, 1893–1903, Durham, Duke University Press, 1988. pp. 40–41.
  75. Fikret Adanir, Die Makedonische Frage: ihre entstehung und etwicklung bis 1908. Wiessbaden 1979, p. 112.
  76. Лабаури Дмитрий Олегович, Болгарское национальное движение в Македонии и Фракии в 1894–1908 гг., Идеология, программа, практика политической борьбы, София, Академическое изд. им. проф. Марина Дринова, 2008, стр.7,
  77. Ivo Banac, "The National Question in Yugoslavia. Origins, History, Politics", Cornell University Press, 1984, pp. 307–328.
  78. Стоян Германов (1992) Руската общественост и революционното движение в Македония и Одринско 1893-1908. Унив. изд-во "Св. Климент Охридски". стр. 14.
  79. Brown, Keith (2013). Loyal Unto Death Trust and Terror in Revolutionary Macedonia. Indiana University Press. p. 191. ISBN 9780253008473.
  80. Perry M., Duncan (1988). The Politics of Terror and The Macedonian Liberation Movements, 1893-1903. Duke University Press. p. 203. ISBN 9780822308133.
  81. Horncastle, James (2019). The Macedonian Slavs in the Greek Civil War, 1944–1949. Lexington Books. p. 43. ISBN 9781498585057.
  82. Maria Todorova (2004). Balkan Identities: Nation and Memory. C. Hurst & Co. Publishers. p. 238. ISBN 1850657157.
  83. Цочо Билярски, Първите програмни документи на ВМОРО до есента на 1902 г., Известия на държавните архиви, София, 2004, кн. 87, с. 200-275.
  84. Alexis Heraclides, The Macedonian Question and the Macedonians: A History. Routledge, 2020, ISBN 9780367218263, pp. 40-41.
  85. Its first preserved statute is from the General Congress held in Thessaloniki in the spring of 1896. There, the organization was named the Bulgarian Macedonian-Adrianople Revolutionary Committees. For more: Ива Бурилкова, Цочо Билярски, БКП, Коминтернът и македонският въпрос (1917-1946) - Том 2; Държавна агенция „ Архиви”, 1998, ISBN 9549800040, стр. 563.
  86. Любомир Панайотов, Христо Христов, Гоце Делчев спомени, документи, материали, Институт за история (Българска академия на науките) Наука и изкуство, 1978, стр. 86.
  87. Стоян Райчевски, Валерия Фол, 1993, Кукерът без маска. УИ "Св. Климент Охридски", София стр. 201.
  88. Божидар Димитров, Български старини в Македония (2000) Анико, София; ISBN 954-90700-2-6 стр. 22.
  89. Чавдар Маринов, Сто години Илинден или сто години Мисирков? История и политика в Република Македония през 2003 г. сп. Култура - Брой 20 (2587), 30 април 2004 г.
  90. Стефан Дечев: Две държава, две истории, много „истини“ и една клета наука - трета част. Marginalia, 15.06.2018.
  91. Проф. д-р Антони Стоилов и д-р Пантелей Спасов, Крайно време е за сътрудничество. За езиковия спор, македонската литературна норма, Мисирков и възможностите за сътрудничество между езиковедите от Република Македония и Република България във В-к Култура - Брой 28 (2908), 21 юли 2017 г.
  92. Манол Пандевски (1987) Македонското ослободително дело во XIX и XX век, Т.1, Националното прашање во македонското ослободително движење: 1893-1903, стр. 86.
  93. Lambi V. Danailov, Stilian Noĭkov, Natsionalno-osvoboditelnoto dvizhenia v Trakija 1878-1903, Tom 2, Trakiĭski nauchen institut, Izd. na otechestvenia front, 1971, str. 81-82.
  94. Христо Христов, Енциклопедия: Пирински край. А-М; Благоевград, том 1, 1994, ISBN 9789549000610, стр. 178.
  95. Пейо Яворов, Гоце Делчев в "Словото"; Гоце в Щип, Банско.
  96. Любомир Панайотов, Константин Пандев, Костадин Палешутски, Гоце Делчев-спомени, документи, материали, 1978, София, Наука и изкуство; стр. 56.
  97. İpek Yosmaoğlu, Blood Ties: Religion, Violence and the Politics of Nationhood in Ottoman Macedonia, 1878–1908, Cornell University Press, 2013, ISBN 0801469791, pp. 15-16.
  98. Даме Груев. Спомени, кореспонденция. София, 1999, Парнас-96; с. 168.
  99. Спомени на Гьорчо Петров. Материали за историята на македонското освободително движение. Кн. VІІІ. Съобщава Л. Милетич, С., 1927, с. 50 – 51.
  100. Ѓорѓиев, Ванчо, Петар Поп Арсов (1868–1941). Прилог кон проучувањето на македонското националноослободително движење. 1997, Скопjе, стр. 167-168.
  101. Цочо Билярски, Още един път за първите устави и правилници и за името на ВМОРО преди Илинденско-Преображенското Въстание от 1903 г. В сборник Дойно Дойнов. 75 години наука, мъдрост и достойнство, събрани в един живот. ВСУ ”Черноризец Храбър”; 2004, ISBN 9549800407.
  102. Die Makedonische Frage: Ihre Entstehung Und Entwicklung Bis 1908. By Fikret Adanir. Frankfurter Historische Abhandlungen, vol. 20. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag GMBH, 1979. xii, 283 pp. DM 64, paper; p. 112.
  103. Коликтив, Освободителната борба на българите в Македония и Одринско 1902/1904 - дипломатически документи, БАН, София 1978. с. 76.
  104. Public Record Office – Foreign Office 78/4951 Turkey (Bulgaria). From Elliot. 1898; Устав на ТМОРО. S. 1. published in Документи за борбата на македонскиот народ за самостојност и за национална држава, Скопје, Универзитет "Кирил и Методиј":Факултет за филозофско-историски науки, 1981, page 331 – 333.
  105. Никола Зографов. "Строежа на живота. Едно обяснение на въпросите: 1. Как се създаде погрома на България. 2. Защо не можа да бъде извоювана автономията на Македония и Одринско (Принос към историята на революционна Македония)", София, 1927 година, стр. 58.
  106. According to Bilyarski, the covers of both documents are equal. Since he did not have the original statute, he carefully studied the cover of the rules. There in the middle is a seated woman. In her right hand the woman holds a flag on which is written "Svoboda ili smart". This hand of hers rests on a plinth, on which is depicted a lion standing enraged and wearing a crown. With her left hand, the woman holds a shield, which rests on her left knee. On it, on the left side, is written "Macedonia", and on the opposite right side, in very small font, is written "1896". This, according to him, confirms Konstantin Pandev's assumption from 1969, which is based on other indirect arguments, that the year in which the statutes and rules of the BMARC were drawn up and printed was 1896. At the woman's feet lies a broken Ottoman flag with the crescent moon and torn rings of iron chain. For more: Вътрешната македоно-одринска революционна организация (1893-1919 г.) Документи на централните ръководни органи (устави, правилници, мемоари, декларации, окръжни, протоколи, наредби, резолюции, писма). Т. І, ч. 1 и 2. Съст. Ц. Билярски, И. Бурилкова. УИ "Св. Климент Охридски", 2007, ISBN 9789549800623, Увод, стр. 7.
  107. Valkov, Martin, The Internal Macedonian-Adrianople Revolutionary Organization and the Idea for Autonomy for Macedonia and Adrianople Thrace, 1893-1912; M.A. dissertation, Central European University (Budapest, 2010), p. 5.
  108. The author of the regulations Ivan Hadzhinikolov points out: finally we decided that we should write a rules and I was instructed in 1895 to prepare them. For more: Д . Димески, Создавањето на Македонската револуционерна организација и нејзината организациона поставеност (1893-1895), Историја XXII/1, Скопје 198Б, стр. 70.
  109. The IMARO activists saw the future autonomous Macedonia as a multinational polity, and did not pursue the self-determination of Macedonian Slavs as a separate ethnicity. Therefore, Macedonian (and also Adrianopolitan) was an umbrella term covering Bulgarians, Turks, Greeks, Vlachs, Albanians, Serbs, Jews, and so on. While this message was taken aboard by many Vlachs as well as some Patriarchist Slavs, it failed to impress other groups for whom the IMARO remained, as the British journalist and relief worker Henry Brailsford and others called it, ‘‘the Bulgarian Committee.’’ For more see: Bechev, Dimitar. Historical Dictionary of the Republic of Macedonia, Historical Dictionaries of Europe, Scarecrow Press, 2009, ISBN 0810862956, Introduction.
  110. "However, contrary to the impression of researchers who believe that the Internal organization espoused a "Macedonian national consciousness," the local revolutionaries declared their conviction that the "majority" of the Christian population of Macedonia is "Bulgarian." They clearly rejected possible allegations of what they call "national separatism" vis-a-vis the Bulgarians, and even consider it "immoral." Though they declared an equal attitude towards all the "Macedonian populations." Tschavdar Marinov, We the Macedonians, The Paths of Macedonian Supra-Nationalism (1878–1912), in "We, the People: Politics of National Peculiarity in Southeastern Europe" with Mishkova Diana as ed., Central European University Press, 2009, ISBN 9639776289, pp. 107-137.
  111. The political and military leaders of the Slavs of Macedonia at the turn of the century seem not to have heard the call for a separate Macedonian national identity; they continued to identify themselves in a national sense as Bulgarians rather than Macedonians.[...] (They) never seem to have doubted "the predominantly Bulgarian character of the population of Macedonia". For more: "The Macedonian conflict: ethnic nationalism in a transnational world", Princeton University Press, Danforth, Loring M. 1997, ISBN 0691043566, p. 64.
  112. The dogma of Macedonian historiography is that it was an 'ethnic Macedonian' organisation and the acronym IMARO has been routinely abbreviated in Macedonian historiography to IMRO to avoid difficult questions about the presence in the same organisations of people nowadays described as 'ethnic Macedonians' from geographic Macedonia – together with 'ethnic Bulgarians' from the Vilajet of Adrianople. In these cases, a present-day reality is projected wholesale into the past. For more see: Kyril Drezov, Macedonian identity: an overview of the major claims in The New Macedonian Question with J. Pettifer as ed., Springer, 1999, ISBN 0230535798, p. 55.
  113. Peter Kardjilov, The Cinematographic Activities of Charles Rider Noble and John Mackenzie in the Balkans (Volume One) Cambridge Scholars Publishing; 2020, ISBN 9781527550735, p. 3.
  114. Захари Стоянов. Текст на устава на БРЦК публикуван в "Записки по българските въстания". София: Виртуалната библиотека „Словото“ из том 1 на Записките. Разкази на очевидци, 1870-1876. 1977..
  115. Устав на Българските македоно-одрински революционни комитети, съставен след Солунския общ конгрес на организацията, [Солун, 1896 г.]. София: Вътрешната Македоно-одринска революционна организация (1893-1919 г.) – документи на централните ръководни органи. Том 1. Част 1. Съст. Ц. Билярски, И. Бурилкова. София: Държавна агенция „Архиви”, стр. 127-128. 2007.
  116. According to a note left by the historian Lyubomir Panayotov, the editor of Hristo Karamandzhukov's memoirs, the BMARC regulations were found in the revolutionary's archive. They were issued in 1898, and were replaced by a new ones in 1902, however in the Smolyan revolutionary subdistrict, they continued to be in use afterwards. Христо Ив. Караманджуков, Родопа през Илинденско-Преображенското въстание. (Изд. на Отечествения Фронт, София, 1986) стр. 107.
  117. Архив Гоце Делчев, Съставители Ива Борилкова и Цочо Билярски, Издателство: Захарий Стоянов, 2020; ISBN 9789540914275, Предговор.
  118. Gotse went to the town "Y" and then to the town "X"; There usual annual assembly of prominent workers of the conspiracy was to be held. That assembly approved a statute of the revolutionary organization, almost a copy of the old Bulgarian one, very original with the provision that only exarchist Bulgarians were accepted as members of the committees. However, such a decision was precisely in accordance with the conditions under which it was worked. At that time, the revolutionary idea had to endure a very painful struggle, first of all, with the exarchy and its numerous organs in the country. It therefore had to become common to the nationally self-conscious Bulgarian majority, so that it could then find its way in the midst of elements on which all kinds of gold and silver propaganda had exerted an extremely corrupting influence. However, the revolutionaries could not avoid occasional clashes with the said propaganda, as a result of which they went to great extremes. And often the struggle took even a dark chauvinistic color. Gotze - a man of too broad views, raises his hand for the article in question in the statute without any reservations. But this should not surprise us, because he was also a practical figure in the strictest sense. Later, as the circumstances changed, Gotze was the first to insist that the statute be amended as well. Then the revolutionary organization noted that in order to achieve the pursued goal, all the oppressed nationalities in the country should be united 6. And now the Bulgarian, the Greek, and anyone who would be able to bring some benefit to the liberation cause could be a co-conspirator.
  119. Ковачовъ, Владиславъ. Автономна Македония (PDF). София: Печатница С. М. Стайковъ. 1919.
  120. Вътрешната македоно-одринска революционна организация (1893-1919 г.) Документи на централните ръководни органи (устави, правилници, мемоари, декларации, окръжни, протоколи, наредби, резолюции, писма). Т. І, ч. 1 и 2. Съст. Ц. Билярски, И. Бурилкова. УИ "Св. Климент Охридски", 2007, ISBN 9789549800623 стр. 142.
  121. Георги Баждаров, "Войните и Македонския въпрос" (PDF). София: сп. "Македония. Политическо, научно и литературно списание", год. I, книга IV, София, печатница „Витоша“. 1922.
  122. Борбите на македонския народ за освобождение. Димитъръ Влаховъ. Виена: Библиотека Балканска Федерация, № 1, ВМРО (Обединена). 1925.
  123. Никола Зографов, "Строежа на живота. Едно обяснение на въпросите: 1. Как се създаде погрома на България. 2. Защо не можа да бъде извоювана автономията на Македония и Одринско", Печатница П. Глушков, София, 1927 година. (Принос към историята на революционна Македония).
  124. Въ Македония и Одринско: Спомени на Михаилъ Герджиковъ. II. Първиятъ Централенъ комитетъ на ВМРО.: Спомени на д-ръ Христо Татарчевъ. Съобщава Л. Милетичъ (PDF). София: Материяли за историята на македонското освободително движение, Издава Македонскиятъ Наученъ Институтъ, Книга IX, Печатница П. Глушковъ. 1928.
  125. Mehmet Hacısalihoğlu, «Yane Sandanski as a political leader in Macedonia in the era of the Young Turks», Cahiers balkaniques, 40 | mis en ligne le 21 mai 2012. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/ceb/1192 ;
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.