Medieval Macedonia?
Exhibition in Brussels of so-called Macedonian Manuscripts is met with uproar
The republic of Macedonia is on of the odd results of the break-up of former Yugoslavia. Officially it was recognised by UN 1993 under the provisional reference of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, sometimes abbreviated as FYROM. Macedonia is a member of the Council of Europe. Further, since December 2005 it has also been a candidate for joining the European Union and has applied for NATO membership.
However the use of the epithet “Macedonia” has consistently met with opposition from the surrounding countries – as Macedonia is also the name of a wider region, transgressing the current national borders, which were the result of the civil war in Balkan.
One of the thorny issues has to do with the question of whether there exists such a thing as a distinct Macedonian language and culture; a question of paramount importance for Balkan people who insist of their different national identities as respectively Serbians, Albanians, Bulgarians etc. as well as for the Greeks, which in the North encompasses a region simply called Macedonia.
From a scientific perspective there is no doubt that it pays off to regard nationalities as “Imagined Communities” (as famously phrased by Benedict Anderson”).
However, from a popular and political point of perspective such grandiose and sweeping ideas do not seem to have taken hold of the Macedonian imagination. Instead a very conscious effort is constantly being made to develop a specific Macedonian culture and identity in this small landlocked Balkan nation and to market it in a global and European context. All in order to secure a future official recognition in the EU and the “right” to market the nation under the name “Macedonia”.
One of the building blocks in this endeavour is the idea that there exists a special Macedonian alphabet as well as language. Central to this effort was the work of Mirsikov, a linguist and dialectologist, who in the beginning of the 20th century wrote extensively about the Macedonian language, as it was spoken in the valleys of present Macedonia. Misirkov – although a controversial figure – is regarded as a national hero in FYROM. However most agree that this was a very inventive example of what in a scientific context might be classified as “an invention of tradition”.
Nevertheless Macedonia has succeeded in bringing this matter to the public agenda by contributing to an exhibition in Brussels of the so-called “Macedonian Medieval Manuscript Richness”; exactly how this has come about is naturally a well-kept secret in the scientific community studying these manuscripts and whishing to make the public aware of them ( in themselves and apart from the controversy they are of course quite interesting).
Nay says the Bulgarians – such a “thing” as a “medieval Macedonian manuscript” does not exist. The manuscripts, which will be showcased, are in fact nothing but Bulgarian, claims Bulgarian Politicians and historians. According to some Bulgarians this is nothing but a “Cultural Theft”. As opposed to this politicians and historians from Skopje are pushing ahead with the exhibition as a pars pro toto of claiming the existence of a “Medieval Macedonia”, issuing statements from the The Council for Macedonian Language, which vigorously tries to countermand the official opposition of the Bulgarian government voiced through its embassy in Brussels.
The exhibition will be showcased at the Royal Museum Mariemont in Brussels in October. Already the controversy has engendered a change in the exposition, which as of the 30th of August has been entitled a very bland “Traditions d’Ecriture” instead of the original title “Manuscrits macédoniens du XIII au XIXe siècle”. This has been followed up by an even more bland and non-controversial introductory politically cleansed text – so far not translated into English. According to this the exhibition will showcase 31 church manuscripts from Skopje, chosen among the collection of 270 old manuscripts.
Don’t say medieval history and studies has no importance!
Traditions d’Ecriture
Musée royal de Mariemont
Chausée de Mariemont
Brussels
10.10.2012-25.12.2012
Sources:
Focus Information Agency
Mina-Macedonian Intl News Agency
Marcella Pattyn
And why is the author not signed on this text? Arguments aside, the public surely deserves to know who’s behind such work.
As editor of the website I – Karen Schousboe – is responsible. It is always a decision to what extent a piece should be signed by an author. E.g. The Economist publishes its newspaper every week without divulging the different authors.
Who wrote this article? What are their credentials? Just a basic question, because I believe, the poor writing notwithstanding, that the individual may be politically motivated.
As editor of the website I – Karen Schousboe – is responsible. It is always a decision to what extent a piece should be signed by an author. E.g. The Economist publishes its newspaper every week without divulging the separate authors. For my credentials I can guide you to http://www.karenschousboe.com
And nay, the article is not politically motivated. It represents an anthropological side-view of on an ongoing conflict of no minor importance in so far as some people in the Balkans – in spite of a devastating civil war 1991-2001 – still seem to believe that such a “thing” as cultural essential identities exists. A political stance would be to take sides in this conflict. A scientific approach is to look at the feeding of this cultural construction of identities through the use of hapless medieval manuscripts. Rather amusing if it was not for the fact that 21st century politicians seem to have expropriated the manuscripts for their own political ends…
The fact is that each and every one of the medieval manuscripts from the region, which are going to be exhibited are unique in so far as they are exactly that: manuscripts (manuscripts are always as per definition unique). The interesting question from a scientific and medievalist point of view is not whether they are “Bulgarian” or “Macedonian” – as these categories did not exist in the Middle Ages but are cultural constructions of the romantic 19th century. But how and in which way they differ from the medieval manuscripts of the rest of Europe.
I’d just like to note that you have an error in the last paragraph from your 5th of September comment: “Bulgarian” did exist as a category back in the Middle Ages. So did “Macedonian”, to some degree, though not in the same way that is used today (f.e. the Byzantine Emperor Basil I the Macedonian, who is of Armenian origin, but his dynasty is called Macedonian, because Basil I, its founder, was from the region of Adrianople, in the Byzantine thema Macedonia).
Anyway, “Bulgarian” existed then not only as a category, but also as a national identity. For example, Norman Davies, in his “Europe: A History”, p. 574-575, tells how four countries had started developing national identities in the Middle Ages: Portugal, Denmark, Serbia and Bulgaria. And that the latter two had developed them particularly because of their national churches: “This step gave them a powerful instrument for forging a separate identity, for educating a national elite, for political publicity, and for the sanctification of national institutions. It was a step which none of the countries of Latin Christendom could take until the Reformation…”
In addition, I’d note that this process had started earlier than Davies notes (1180s in that paragraph), considering Bulgaria got its patriarchate in 927, its Slavonic church in 893 and its church autocephaly in 870. Thus, it comes as no surprise that we have, for example, the Bitola inscription (ironically, from the lands of the modern Republic of Macedonia), where Tsar Ivan Vladislav (1015-1018) specifically calls himself “Bulgarian by birth”.
P.S. As for the current issue, I personally find it ridiculous – if those manuscripts were made or found in the region of Macedonia, then I don’t see why they can’t be named Macedonian. Our (Bulgarian) historians do it all the time – if we open, for example, “Who’s who in medieval Bulgaria” and find the article about some scribe from the region of Macedonia, it will be noted that he’s from that region and is using stylistics from that region. Of course, that doesn’t mean that he (or those manuscripts) was an *ethnic* Macedonian, but that is simply a problem of the multiple meanings of that name – as a region (in the present and the past), as a state, as a modern ethnicity etc. Using the name “Macedonian manuscripts”, while it is open to different interpretations, doesn’t necessarily suggest an “ethnic Macedonian” or “Macedonist” meaning and, thus, I see no problem with using that name.
Political motivated is only FYROM’s history! Just open the Focus Information Agency’s link under the sources below the article and look at the photo’s highlighted text. It is written in Old Church Slavonian – “Bulgarian foreword”. No Comment!
Sorry for multiple posts, but forgot to say to the author… congratulations, great article!
I really cannot understand the problem! If the manuscrips come from the STATE of Macedonia, then it schould be used the name macedonian! When Bulgaria or Greece present any of their cultural elements abroad, no matter of which period of history or pre-history, they present them, with no problem, as bulgarian or greek!
Not thrue at all. When Bulgaria present something before creation of the medieval Bulgarian state it’s called either Thracian or Bizantine from modern Bulgaria. Same with Greece – Helenic from modern Greece. Do you see the difference?
Wow! To think that any outsider would be so arrogant as to talk of Macedonian Culture as if they can even begin to understand. Go to Macedonia then we can talk when you have at least learned the basics.
Hot issue. History as always been used for nation-building.
Could we please decide if we talks about modern states (in the making or accepted) or the state in medieval times, being kingdoms, city-states or whatever…
Excatly, there wasn’t any medieval Macedonia, but Firs Bulgarian Empire at the time and place. So the manuscripts can’t be “macedonian” but bulgarian found in FYROM.
I do not think so , have you ever heard of Car Samouil , he was settled in Prespa than in Ohrid , he created Macedonian so called Empire , he was fighting against the Byzantium, after that , another Macedonian Middle Age hero is King Marko , he died fighting against the Turks… Do you even know where the first Cyrillic alphabet was written ? Ohrid i guess …. It has many many proves that Macedonian is different than Greece , than Bulgaria , than Serbia and e.t…