THE GREEK MACEDONIAN MIGRATION AND SETTLEMENT
The story of Greek Macedonian migration and settlement in Australia, in broader terms, is similar in many ways to the process of integration experienced by other 500,000 Australian Greeks and Cypriots. The size as well as the nature of the Macedonian Greek immigration to Australia was affected by the Greek Macedonian village background, the past experience of Macedonian immigrants in other Balkan and central European countries since the 15th century and the Australian immigration restrictions imposed after the Great War. Adverse political conditions under the Ottoman rule (until 1913), frequent wars and the Greco-Bulgarian rivalry for the espousal of the Slavophone population in Macedonia caused the migration to Australia.
Tamis (1994:336ff) estimates that the total number of Greek Macedonians who settled in Australia during the periods 1924-1939 and 1953-1975 is approximately 135,000. Large scale male immigration paradoxically commenced when Australian states imposed immigration quotas in an attempt to secure available jobs for the Anglo Australians. Notwithstanding the socioeconomic and political conditions that prevailed in Macedonian early in the 20th century, the main variants which strongly affected pre-War immigration were the particular province, age, gender, marital status and occupation of the prospective Macedonian immigrant. They were mainly illiterate peasants, between twenty and thirty years old, with no particular skills or trade. Some of them had been immigrants to the USA and Canada. Most Slavophones, being in their twenties, had a sound knowledge of the Greek language, having had the opportunity to attend some grades in the local schools and serve in the Greek army. By 1925, the composition of the Macedonian population in Australia had changed drastically with the arrival of hundreds of immigrants from Kozani, which was purely Greek speaking. They were mainly from the large rural centres of Kozani, such as Pentalofos, Vythos, Grevena, Siatistas and Eratyra. In fact, the Greek speaking Macedonian immigrants during the pre-war era constituted the majority of all Macedonians immigrants to Victoria.
Macedonian Greek immigration was influenced immensely by the fact that it was based on kinship, family values and loyalties. Pioneer immigrants had no choice but to follow the settlement and occupational patterns selected by th senior members of the family, to follow professions that had been followed by the pioneering settlers of their family and to safeguard the customs and tradition of their village of origin. Many young Macedonian Greek immigrants remained unmarried out of family obligation toward the single sisters that they left in the old country, while some decided to marry in order to provide a family environment and yo look after their elderly parents. The formation of crowded communes in farm-houses and houses in the inner suburban areas of Melbourne and Perth (1924-1935) and in Melbourne, Sydney, Adelaide and Perth (1954-1970) whereby single young men or families of the same kinship shared common facilities must be seen across these lines. Companionship, security, financial advancement and easy access to accommodation were the advantages of the communal system. The main concerns of the pre-War Macedonian Greek family were their children to maintain loyalty to the village’s customs and values, not to marry outside the ethnic group and to maintain their mother tongue. Post-War immigrants added to these aims the attainment of an excellent education for their children and the acquisition of real estate not only for a more affluent lifestyle and prosperity but also for security.
Macedonian Greek immigration developed in the 1920s through contacts in the hinterland of the Australian continent. Working as gold-miners, sugar and timber-cutters, farm-clearing labourers and market gardeners the immigrants survived the hostile conditions, the anti-foreign restrictive legislation and labour union bans and came in the 1930s with a readiness to be accommodated within the broader Australian community. During the first twenty-five years of their presence in Australia (1924-1929) Macedonian Greek immigrants avoided entering into direct competition and conflict with the Australian public, selecting professions and occupations which were broadly accepted by the ANGLO-Australians. However, they could not avoid the anti-foreign feeling that flared up in the country, following a sharp increase in the numbers of Kastellorizians, Samians, Mytelenian and Macedonian Greek immigrants, as well as Italians, Bulgarians and Maltese migrating to Australia. Although the full effects of the world Depression were not felt until 1929, already in 1924 there were considerable unemployment among Macedonian immigrants in Victoria and Western Australia.
Anglo-Australians viewed the situation with a degree of prejudice which was inflated by the fear that Australia would be flooded with southern European immigrants as a result of the restrictive immigration policies of the US. Available data obtained from the records of the pre-War Macedonian Greek organizations, their membership books and thr National Archives of Australia, indicate that the total number of Macedonian immigrantsm irrespective of their ethnic orientation, who arrived in 1924 amounted to 1,400 as against 4,000 Italians and about 88,000 British subjects. Yet, their arrival generated a fierce press campaign against the “invasion” of non-British immigrants, involving Unions, the Returned Servicemen’s League (RSL), Church groups and the Parliaments of Western Australia (Labor Party), South Australia (Labor Party), New South Wales (Nationalist Party) and Victoria (Liberal/Country Party).
Greek consular reports from 1924 drew attention to the increasing discrimination of the Anglo-Australian community against the Greeks and the Italians whom they regarded at one time as being even worse than the Chinese immigrants. After 1935, assisted by the islander Greeks in the capital cities and with the implementation of more liberal immigration rules by the Joseph Lyons Commonwealth government, many Macedonian Greek immigrants changed their occupational patterns and their style of residence in the bush, forming small groups in tight communes, within one household, and small communities in the inner suburban areas of Melbourne, Perth, Adelaide and Sydney. Some were urbanised partly to survive certain discriminatory laws against them, some partly as a reaction to the unfamiliar British-oriented Australian environment and finally a larger section in order to accommodate more productively their experiences from the old country. A number of Macedonian Greek brotherhoods and associations sprang up in the 1930s not only as a result of the prevailing conditions but also because of the parochialism which characterized the Greek community of the time and the lack of complete acceptance by the islander Greeks. A few associations also emerged to counterbalance the increasing presence of the Bulgarophile Macedoslav groups in Perth, Adelaide, Sydney and Melbourne.
As from 1947, with the arrival of wives and children, the Macedonian Greek immigrants stopped perceiving their stay in Australia as transitional, dispersed their previously male-concentrated communes in the cities and the great rural centres of Banbury, Greenbushes, Bridgetown, Manjimup and Geraldton (WA), Werribee and Shepparton (Victoria) and moved towards settling permanently. This was the period of occupational adjustment and of the decline of prejudice and antagonism with the British majority of the host society. Although the Greeks in general continued to occupy an inferior position until at least the period of the bilateral Greco-Australian immigration agreement (1952) and the eventual government-supported immigration programme, Macedonian Greeks, especially the Slavophones amongst them, were further segregated by intra-group prejudice towards their home language. Macedonian Greeks identified themselves primarily as Orthodox Greeks; thus it was expected that with their progressive assimilation into the broader Greek community via intra-group relationships and common social institutions they would integrate without losing their parochial identity.
The collapse of male-dominated Macedonian Greek immigration since the early 1960s paved the way for an open bridal catchment area for the young, mainly Australia-born, Macedonian gambroi (grooms) drawn from all regions of Greece.  Since 1974 the Macedonian Greek population along with the broader Greek Australian community is declining it the time. However, in 2010 most Greek Macedonian institutions remain viable, partly because of their affiliation with the more established Greek associations and partly because of the fear and prejudice aroused by the differences within the institutional structure of the Macedoslav community. Often immigrants from a given village of the region of Florina, for example Parori or Meliti, operate two separate associations, one Greek and one “Macedonian”, installing as founding administrators two brothers of the same family. One cannot be surprised therefore either by the apparent organizational vitality og the Macedonian Greek immigrants in Australia or by the formation of numerous social groups not only to resist assimilation into the Anglo-Australian society but also to resist the “macedonization process”. Consequently, the existence of over 80 Macedonian Greek associations and brotherhoods in Melbourne alone representing approximately 60,000 settlers must be interpreted in this light.
Macedonia and Macedonian:
Defining the …definitions
The name “Makedonia” [Macedonia] applied originally to a district north-east of Olympus but was gradually used for a wider area, following the extension of the Macedonian State. Ancient sources had a scanty and confused knowledge of the northern boundaries of Macedonia. In ancient times Macedonia included the regions formed by the lower parts of the Strymon River and Aliakmon River valleys, the central and lower parts of the Axios river valley (not including the ancient Scupi, contemporary Skopje, which was the capital of Dardania, situated more than 40 kilometres north of the frontier of ancient Macedonia), including Pieria and the eastward lands up to Nestos River. The military operations of the expansionist policies of Philip also incorporated Chalkidiki in the Ancient Hellenic Kingdom of Macedonia.
During the Byzantine era and, later, in the Ottoman period the term Macedonia had lost its former geographical implications. Byzantine authors often applied the term Macedonia to areas including the greater part of modern Albania, Northern Thrace (Eastern Rumelia) and regions of what is today Greek Thrace. During the Byzantium era the term Macedonian had lost its national and even the geographical meaning which it had in antiquity.
During the Ottoman rule the term Macedonia referred to the geographical area comprising the three administrative regions of European Turkey, namely the vilayets of Thessaloniki, Monastir and Skopje. This area included regions which had never been part of the ancient Greek kingdom of the Macedonians, which only extended up to the large lakes of Prespa and Ochrid. To the north of these lakes – currently comprising the largest portion of FYROM- lived tribes hostile to the Macedonians, namely the Paeones and the Dardans, peoples who were at times subjugated by Macedonian kings but had never been incorporated linguistically or socio-culturally onto the ancient Greek world. This “Greater” Macedonia, which was the outcome of diplomacy, was divided after the Balkan Wars (1912-1913) between Greece, which took her southern regions, namely the largest part of the Vilayet of Thessaloniki and part of the Vilayet of Monastir, whilst Bulgaria, Serbia and Albania on the other, which took the northern parts. This territorial division was determined on the battlefield, first in the war of the Balkan allies against Turley and then, in the war of former allies and adversaries against Bulgaria, and was approved by the Treaty of Bucharest (1913).
The name Makedonski (Macedonians) in the 19th century was used to distinguish the Bulgarians of Macedonia from those of the Bulgarian principality and the Andrianople Vilayet. In a sense, the name acquired a distinct geographical connotation, defining all the inhabitants of Macedonia.The Macedonian Greeks call themselves Makedones, the Bulgarians Makedonski and the Aromunians Makedoneni. The slogan attributed simply to Goce Delcev “Macedonian to the Macedonians”, clearly refers to all inhabitants of Macedonia, irrespective of ethnic origin and not to an imagined “Macedonian” ethnic group.
The ethnic character of the Slav-speaking inhabitants of Macedonia is a subject of ideological disputes fought in three different perspectives. The Bulgarians claim them to be Bulgarians. The Serbs claim them to be south Serbians and the Greeks to be Greeks. The pan-Yugoslav Congress (see relevant segment in “History”) composed of leftist resistance forces under the leadership of Marshal Tito, declared them to be of a separate ethnic group the “Macedonians”. This concept is officially maintained by referendum in FYROM. However, it is not accepted by the Serbs of current Yugoslavia or the Greeks. The Bulgarians recognised their state as Macedonia but not their ethnicity, maintaining the view that they are ethnic Bulgarians.
Over the years, although there has been a clear demarcation line distinguishing the national identity of Yugoslav “Macedonians” from Macedoslavs of Greek Macedonia, on certain issues, they have broken ranks and collaborated. With the completion of the Greek Civil War (1949) certain Slav-speaking Greek citizens identified themselves as Macedoslavs establishing their own networks in Australia. During the 1960s the latter illustrated their separate heritage and different political ideology to the incoming Yugoslav “Macedonian” immigrants. On the other hand, severe national ideological differences characterised the intra-family relations of the Slav-speaking settlers. Some members of given family asserted a Greek heritage, whereas other members were drawn to the “Macedonian” bandwagon. In certain instances, members of the same family resorted to using English in their communication at home, rather than Greek or Slavonic, in order to avoid conflict and tension in their relations. These differences also caused them to attend different churches and to support different soccer teams, to be members of different cultural organizations and to generate debates which often led to serious incidents involving physical intimidation.
Many Slavophones from Greek Macedonia sat on the fence, not wishing to be identified as “Macedonians” or Greeks, whereas a number of them were presented as “Macedonians”, despite their assertion to the contrary. Undoubtedly, many Slavophones who were claimed by both camps felt uneasy about appearing in publications and threatened legal retaliation against offenders. When Peter Hill (1989:68) portrayed a number of Greek Macedonians as “Macedonians” in his monograph their reaction was determined. Hill wrote:
“…It was a Macedonian, Nikolaos Milios from Tiolisca, Lostur, who launched the Pan-Ethnic Progress Party in Australia, later renamed Pan-Ethnic Radical Party of Australia, and stood for election to the Senate in 1983 on a platform of equal rights for all ethnic groups in Australian society…”
Nikolaos Milios in a letter to Greek newspapers, refuted Hill’s assertions and threatened legal action. In his letter Milios argued:
“…Without my knowledge, Mr. Peter Hill in his book The Macedonians in Australia, ignored my Greekness. In this book without knowing it and without my previous consent he represents me as “Macedonian”. I expressed to him my concern for this distortion and I asked him to publicly apologize, reserving my right to have resourse to law. I would like your paper to publish this clarification because as a Greek Orthodox I do not wish ti leave any misunderstanding.”
(Neos Kosmos newspaper, 30 August 1999, p. 2, Dardalis Archives)
The Australian Institute for Macedonian Studies believes that the term “Macedonian” should describe the inhabitant of the region of Macedonia irrespective of his/her ethnic origin (Greek, Slav, Albanian) or perception. Our research does not agree that the term could be used to designate or denote any national content to a traditionally geographic name. The employed campaign by the Macedoslav community in FYROM and in the Diasporas to define a subjective and visionary perception about their identity as “Macedonian” for their own exclusive national identity should be treated as challenging and provocative for the heritage of the indigenous Hellenic tribes residing in Macedonian over 1,000 prior to the arrival of the Macedoslavs in the region.
THE MACEDONIAN ISSUE IN AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND:
MACEDOSLAVS versus HISTORY AND REASON
The demise of Tito’s Yugoslavia in 1991 has given a new dimension to the Macedonian Question in the Balkans. The persistence of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) to call its new independent state with the age-old Greek nomenclature of Makedonia (Macedonia) has generated the massive denunciation of the Greeks all over the world. The objections are not related to any ethnic identity issue, or to object the birth of a new nation and a new ethnicity in the Balkans. The fact that the Macedoslavs of Skopje have abandoned their Bulgarian legacies, identity, heroes and logos adopting a separate one should be viewed within the spectrum of anthropological sciences. Hellenism’s concern is laid on the irrational adoption by the Macedoslavs of the name of a Greek state and thus the espousal of the ancient Greek Macedonian legacies, history and civilization.
The truth of the matter is that in 1943, the Yugoslav government by naming one of the six Republics under her sovereignty, inhabited by Slavs, Albanians, Serbians and Roma, with the Greek geopolitical name of Macedonia challenged the integrity of historical rationalism adulterating the history of Hellas. Prior to Marshall Tito’s initiative to create this autonomous republic, “Macedonia” did not exist in any legal or administrative sense and had no national or ethnic boundaries. Ancient Macedonians were a Greek Doric tribe, they spoke a Greek dialectal variety, sent their kings to the Olympic games, where only Greeks were allowed to participate, worshipped the same gods and founded the greatest of all Hellenic empires. Even the most ardent pro-Slavic academics amongst the Slavic bibliography identify Ancient Macedonians either as Greeks or at least as related to th Greeks.
The usage and appropriation of the nomenclatures “Macedonia” and “Macedonian” in Oceania is a case of identity and is not concerned directly with the issue of nationalism and ethnicity in the Balkans. It presents a problem which warrants the attention of the traditional tools of the cultural front –scholars, educationalists, historians, anthropologists and psychologists and should be canvassed with understanding and tolerance in the institutional setting of Australian multiculturalism. The name for a specific ethnic identity cannot be selected on the basis of notational convenience. It is not scholarly to employ the term “Macedonian” or “Greek” simply because “this is the broadest term that each community finds acceptable and uses to refer itself as an ethnic group”. The issue of the “Macedonian Inquiry” in Australia is unfolded on the perspectives of the terms used to define the Macedoslav community. The very existence of the Macedoslav community and the Macedoslav language are not denied. This is evident. As is the politicisation and the transformation of an ethnic community, which until recently defended its cultural autonomy as “Bulgarian” or “Yugoslav” ethnic group, into a national group striving to adopt and monopolize the sovereignty of the nomenclature “Macedonia” by means of historical piracy. Even the father of the post-independent FYROM, President Cyril Grigoroff clearly stated in his November 2009 interview to Greek television: “…It is irrational and historically illogical to claim that our history is related or connected with the Ancient Macedonian Kingdom. We are Slavs and we settled in the region one thousand years after Alexander the Great…I do not agree with this kind of sere nationalism…”
The Macedonian problem in Australia represents a struggle for hegemony on the part of the Macedoslav community who are using every discourse not only to construct and celebrate their identity as “Macedonians” but also to appropriate for their own exclusive use the terms “Macedonia” and “Macedonian”. It is inconceivable for one ethnic community, namely the Macedoslavs, to monopolize a historically and geographically attested Greek term, that of “Makedonia”, which was the home ground for the Greeks, Slavs, Albanians, and Jews. Anthropologists believe that ethnic groups are categories of ascriptions and identifications by the actors themselves, while their ethnic identity is built and formed over time by historical process. The Macedoslavs qualify the least among other peoples to raise claims on the name of “Macedonia” having not formed a convincing historical process and not being able to associate historically their heritage with the land.
Since the mid 1920s the term Macedonia and Macedonian created confusion, frustration and malice amongst the ethnic groups who claimed it in Australia. Australian demographer and historian of Balkan immigration to Oceania, Charles Price wrote (Hill, 1989: iii):
“Despite the fact that many speak Slav-Macedonian, a Slav language all their own, the ethnic picture is very complex: some identify themselves as Greeks, some as Bulgarians, some as Yugoslavs; many usually those strongly committed to the Slav-Macedonian language, culture and Orthodox religion describe themselves as “Macedonians”. The latest available statistics on language usage show that there are at least 50,000 of these and more likely 75,000 in terms of ancestry…”
Hill (1989:iv) attributes the term “Macedonian” to the “Slavonic inhabitants of Macedonia” but he is in great difficulty to explain how these “Slavonic inhabitants” could be related with Alexander the Great, when his empire appeared more than 1000 years prior to the appearance of these “Slavonic inhabitants” in the region. During the pre-WWII era the ethnicity of the Macedoslavs in Australia was closely identified with Bulgaria. In fact most of their leaders, i.e. Cyril Angelcoff, Risto Avramoff claimed to be Bulgarians, who evaluated their interests in the web of Greco-Bulgarian rivalry of that time. Charles Price (1963:316) assesses that “pro-Bulgarian and pro-independence Macedonians were content to work together with Bulgarians proper”. These Macedoslavs in the late 1920s and early 1930s established branches in Australia of Bulgarian organizations which pledged their allegiance to the Bulgarian Tsar (Tamis, 1994:292ff), attacking the Greek Macedonian community. The Secretary of the Hellenic Community of Western Australia, L. K. Mandalis, in a letter to the first Greek Consul General in Australia, L. Chrysanthopoulos reported in 1932: “Despite the unemployment crisis, the Bulgarizing Macedonians in Perth under the influence of propaganda disseminated by the Bulgarian Central Committee in Washington continued their anti-Greek campaign amongst their members”.
It was within this framework of activities that Risto Avramoff, from Polypotamos, Florina, established a branch of the US-based Macedonian Political [later ‘Patriotic’] Organisation [MPO], a Bulgarian body, in Melbourne. He also imported the MPO newspaper Macedonian Tribune, supporting the Bulgarian national ideology in Australia. Avramoff, a self-confessed royalist, settled in Melbourne and began stirring the national consciousness of Bulgarophile Macedonians by reviving the past historical claims on Macedonia. Furthermore, the Bulgarian educated Cyril Angelcoff coming from a pro-communist perspective, owning allegiance to the Bulgarian state, began establishing pro-Bulgarian societies in Western Australia from 1934. With the establishment of the Greek Macedonian Brotherhood of Alexander the Great in Perth and the expulsion from it of those who tended to associate themselves with Bulgaria, Angelcoff responded with antagonistic and hardened attitude. He was successful in creating a Bulgarian national awareness amongst the majority of the early Slavophone Macedonian settlers in Geraldton, Manjimup and Wanneroo urban centres.
During the 1946-1956 period, unchallenged by the Greeks, who were deeply preoccupied with domestic struggles that culminated in Civil War, the Macedoslavs uninterruptedly espoused the concept of an independent “Macedonia”. Simultaneously, certain leading Greek figures, carriers of the international Communist principles, supported their cause, in concert with the policies of the Communist Parties in Greece, Yugoslavia and Bulgaria. Following Bulgaria’s alliance with Nazi Germany and the eventual occupation of Greece and Yugoslavia, a large segment of leftists Bulgarian and Bulgarophile Macedonians, including their zealous leaders Cyril Angelcoff, Lewis Malcoff, Stoyan Sarbinoff, K. Kapinkoff, Kiose Cosmas Pantou, and Sam Elias Manoff, reacted strongly against the Bulgarian Government distancing themselves from the Bulgarian aspirations. The until then Bulgarophile “Macedonians” now began promoting the creation of an independent “Macedonian” nation, claiming that the Macedoslav dialects, customs and heritage were so different from Bulgarian as to justify the course towards “Macedonianism”. Following the precedent of their Bulgarian predecessors (during the 19th century), the new “Macedonians”, initiated an intensive campaign to appropriate everything that took place in Macedonia, by any ethnic group.
As was indicated above, the Macedoslav leadership was inspired by and/or educated in Bulgarian doctrines at least until 1945 and most of them openly supported the Bulgarian policies of the powerful Bulgarian Communist Party. The emergence of the People’s Republic of Macedonia in Yugoslavia (1944) triggered the new concept of ethnic ideology, thereby creating great confusion, frustration and conflict identity in Australia. The objectives of the new Macedonian State within the Yugoslavian territorial framework would transcend the Greek borders, absorbing the entire ancient Macedonian region. On 25 August 1946, during the Macedonia Conference under the chairmanship of Cyril Angelcoff and the secretariat of Ilo Malcoff, the delegates passed a resolution to forward a telegram to the United Nations Conference in Paris, speaking against the then Greek Prime Minister P. Tsaldaris, demanding “the unification of Macedonia into a single unit and its recognition as a free United State in the Yugoslav or Balkan federation”. At the same Conference, the above leaders also passed a resolution to send another telegram to the Security Council of the United Nations in New York with a different content. In this they demanded the annexation of Greek Macedonia only to Yugoslavia. The ideological confusion as to where an independent “Macedonian” State belonged was apparent:
To the Security Council, UNO, New York
At his mass conference of Aegean Macedonians in Western Australia request [sic] that the persecution Macedonian Slav peoples under Greek Tyranny be put on Security Council agenda and immediately solved by uniting all parts of Macedonia into a free and independent State in Yugoslav Federation and stopping persecution of our peoples.
Chairman: C. Angelcoff; Secretary: Ilo Malcoff 
The search for the ethnogenesis and for a national ideology, which began with the intervention of Marshal Tito, established an identity crisis for many Macedoslavs. The “architect” of the Peoples’ Republic of Macedonia, Tito, was initially received as a “liberator” and his initiative to establish the socialist Macedonia within Yugoslavia as “an act of heroism”. By 1950 Tito was portrayed by the same people as an “oppressor”, a “traitor” and was criticised incessantly in their media. By 1956 Tito was described profusely as a “chauvinist, an oppressor, who with agents continued to propagandise against the Aegean Macedonians…he together with the Greek Government are the servants of the imperialists who aim to divide the Macedoslavs and the Greeks:
…Protiv Totovskio natsionalizam koi go propagandirat agentite na Tito, I koi oshte prodalzhvata da branat zavovateini tseli spriamo Egeiska Makedonia. I ednite I drugite sluzhat na plavovete na imperialistite I na golemite voeno-podpalvachi koi imaa nepremenni interesi ot razdelbata na nashite dva naroda…”
Misappropriation of an identity
During the post-WWII period, the concept of an independent and well-defined ethnic “Macedonian” identity did not emerge from the fragmented and deeply divided ideology prevalent in the Macedoslav community. The strong pre-War affiliation of the Bulgarophile Macedoslavs with Bulgarian agencies in Australia and the USA continued uninterrupted during the post-War period. Prominent Macedoslavs who originated from Greek Macedonia continued to adopt Bulgarian morphology, adding Bulgarian suffixes to their names. The same leaders and/or they descendants converted their names during the 1970s after the Slavic fashion, thus continuing the frustration and insecurity of ethnic identity. More important was the fact that delegates and representatives of Bulgarian associations continued to participate in functions, congresses and seminars organized by the Macedoslav community expressing “common cause and brotherhood”.
Nevertheless, the term Macedonia, being historically a well-attested Greek name, was familiar internationally as well as to its new clientele and therefore convenient for rapid adoption, whilst at the same time it conjured up fabulous world where anything Macedonian was appropriated as “Macedonian” by the Yugoslav propagandists. The confusion arising from the dual meaning of the term Macedonian (geographical- Macedonian and ethnogenetical-“Macedonian”) and the problems that stemmed from its ambivalent and inconsistent use to denote the culture and history of regions adjacent to one another, created tension between the communities involved and in certain cases, led even to physical violence in Australia. The director of the Australian Security Intelligence Organization (ASIO) in Sydney, summing up the situation in October 1949, supported the notion that the issue was complicated in Australia by the fact that there is “no such thing as Macedonian nationality and that persons who consider themselves Macedonians by reasons of their birth or descent, may belong to any one of the three nationalities, i.e. Yugoslav, Greek and Bulgarian”.
Contemporary “Macedonian” leaders and historiographers, with a well-developed ethnogenetic instinct, have taken many high-handed liberties with history, not hesitating to declare not only themselves “Macedonians”, but also the Thracian born Byzantine Emperors Constantine and Vasilios II the Bulgar-Slayer, the Bulgarian G. Delcev, even Alexander the Great and Aristotle. Their perceptions of history can be evaluated in works published in Australia, such as Kratka Istorijia na Makedonija (Short History of Macedonia), in which the author denies that “Macedonians” are or have ever been either Slavs or Greeks from antiquity up to the present. He ‘reveals’ that “Macedonians appeared 124 years after the Cataclysm and spread from Macedonia to Bulgaria and Asia Minor…not only was Alexander’s the Great Empire Macedonian, but so was the Byzantine Empire…thus, Constantinople, not Thessaloniki, should be the capital of the resurrected Macedonian Empire”. In the same publication, the tale goes on that the ancient Macedonians and the present “Macedonians” spoke and continue to speak a Macedonian language which is neither Greek nor Slavonic.
The search for a national identity by the Macedoslavs in Australia in its manifold aspects amongst Macedoslav leaders remained speculative and loosely constructed. In certain cases people were told that their ethnicity may bear a direct link with the ancient Macedonians or may be purely Slavonic or Bulgarians or may be just “Macedonian”. In most cases Macedoslav political theorists paddled through deep waters attempting to appropriate the Macedonian name and heritage. Naturally, they have difficulty in explaining their ethnic origin to the masses. Aristotle, Alexander the Great, the Slavs, the Greeks, the Bulgarian G. Delcev were all intermingled, without clarifying the identity issue. Here is a mild example of confusion as to how the editorial of a Macedoslav newspaper attempted to implant the “Macedonian” identity to its readers:
Whilst we believe that the Macedonians have a Slavonic language we believe it is completely unnecessary to label them “Slav-Macedonians”. We believe that the Macedonians may be Slavs but it is certain that their language is Slavonic. Part of the claim of some Macedonians on Ancient Macedonia is based on ideas such as Aristotle, the great philosopher, being Macedonian. It is true that Aristotle was born in Macedonia, but today all scholars throughout the world believe he used the Greek language. This to all intents and purposes is true. However, being born in Macedonian and using the Ancient Greek language is not what is important about Aristotle. More important is the fact that he was a universal genius…We should all recognize what we are today and we should take pride in it. We should not fall into the trap of chauvinists who use ancient historical arguments to oppress others as the recent Greek Congress at La Trobe University tried to do…
(Australian Macedonian newspaper, Editorial, vol. 42., p. 2, Dardalis Archives)
The writer of the above article, searching for a “Macedonian” identity, did not hesitate to imply that Aristotle, although born in Macedonian and speaking Greek was not necessarily Greek. However, the definition of “Macedonian” used in the Constitution of the Macedonian Orthodox Community of Melbourne and Victoria states that a “Macedonian” is “a person who speaks a Slavonic language coming from an area of Europe known as ‘Macedonia’”. Similar simplistic and contradicting ethnogenetic approaches, which ignore the past and the arguments based on historical and cultural legacies are placed in a vacuum, are voiced in various literary magazines and popular journals by self-appointed speakers for the Macedoslav community from Australia to Canada. The following statement is illustrative of the confusion and the complexity of the issue:
“…it is time to clarify some misunderstandings that exist amongst the Macedonians themselves. It is important to be aware of the dangers of certain confusions such as whether Macedonians are Slavs or not because the quarrels around this issue can impede unity and better organization…”
(Australian Macedonian newspaper, vol. 42., p. 2, Dardalis Archives)
The political theorists of the Macedoslav community in Australia and Canada were searching throughout out the post-war period for ethnographic ideas which would unite their people, ideas and mechanisms that would create the perspective of their ethnogenesis. In December 1948 and January 1949 issues of the Makedonska Ickra newspaper, under the title “The Ethnical Idea of the Macedonian Slavs”, the editors presented an insight into this ethnogenetic process and appealed to their reader to undertake a revitalisation of their ethnographic perceptions:
“…Our difficult area is that some of our people living outside of Macedonia at the present time still do not understand our national problem. We must awaken them to the fact that our country is devastated and impoverished by the fascists. We should extend our national Macedonian literature. Our literature should show to our people the cavalry of the Macedonians. Even up to the present time our literature is written mostly in Bulgarian and we are beginning to forget our one language. We should explain to our emigration here as well as to the Bulgarian people the truth about our people. Our intelligentsia has a duty to help our people to become a great nation capable of great deeds. We should work to bring together our intelligentsia and that of Bulgaria. It is our duty to make the Bulgars, Serbs and all south Slavs understand the idea of our Macedonian Nation and our Macedonian State…The greatest merit of our ethnographic idea is that it awakens national feeling in our less-cultured masses and promotes the union of southern Slavs. To reach it we must create our own literature and our own philosophy…”
(Makedoska Icra, January 1949, p. 4., Dardalis Archives)
Macedoslav aggression and coercion in Australia
The drive for a national identity that sustained the Macedoslavs also triggered a great deal of frustration, diversity and animosity amongst them. This drive also generated hardened and antagonistic attitudes, mainly against the Greek Macedonians. The identity crisis that the Macedoslavs experienced stimulated political tension in Australia, in intra- as well as on inter-group relations. Macedoslav leaders in Australia embarked on a campaign to inflame emotions and to inspire a desire for revenge for all the real and imagined hardships and evils suffered not only during the pre-war period, but often centuries ago. Certain denunciations and criticisms had had a real point of departure. Lack of real and systematic forethought on the part of the Greek State since 1912, certain economic and social injustices committed by totalitarian regimes and the restrictive policy against their Slavonic mother tongue, as practised by successive Greek governments since the liberation of Macedonia (1912), turned many Slavophone peasants against the administrators of the Greek kingdom. However, it became a habit of the editors of Makedonska Ickra in Australia to insert fabricated stories of Greek persecution against the “Macedonians”. A detailed examination of existing records (Tamis, 1994:300 ff) proves, for example, that Macedoslav leader Ilo Malcoff as the editor of the Makedonska Ickra had in numerous cases modified and adulterated for domestic consumption cables arriving from Europe and the Balkans simply to inflame the masses and increase their support towards the Macedoslav cause. For example, Makedonska Ickra published as authentic and accurate a cable addressed to the World Federation of Democratic Youth, by the leftist EPON’s Central Committee spokesman, Stavros Yiannakopoulos, as follows:
“…and again, on July 4 (1946) the World Federation of Democratic Youth received the following message from Greece:
‘We ask you to transmit to all member organizations of the W.F.D.Y. the strongest protest of the Central Committee of EPON against the unleashing of Fascist terror against the democratic youth of Greece and EPON. Macedonian youth leaders are being exiled to deserted islands by the dozen (author’s emphasis). Every day young democrats are being assassinated in the streets and prisons. Dozen of pupils are being thrown out of all Greek schools. The royalists burned the EPON Club in Ioannina. They destroy and close down all remaining clubs. We inform the World Federation of Democratic Youth that Fascism has been resurrected in Greece. We protest against the terrible oppression against Greek democratic youth.
For the Central Committee of EPON, Stavros Yiannakopoulos’”
The sentence Macedonian youth leaders are being exiled to deserted islands by the dozen is not to be found in the original cable of EPON. It was a mere insertion by the editor of the Makedonska Ickra to stir up sentiments of animosity against the Greeks amongst its readers. In addition, the very fact that there is no correlation between this sentence and the rest of the context substantiates this evidence further.
Numerous fabricated stories cultivating hatred against the Greeks were published in the Macedoslav media to inflame the feeling of irredentism and to generate resentment amongst their readers. For example, Stoyan Sarbinoff, the second editor of Makedonska Ickra published in Sydney in June 1948 an alleged interview with Eugenia Kallinis who had supposedly recently arrived in Australia from the Civil War tormented Greece. According to Sarbinoff’s article, Kallinis described supposedly to him the “atrocities that Greeks had inflicted upon the ‘Macedonian’ people” and she also produced an alleged account of the inhuman way that ‘Macedonians’ were treated by the “Monarcho-fascist Government of Athens”. Such was the sensationalism of the article that the director of the Attorney-General Department in Canberra ordered an investigation. The report, compiled by K. Adams, the Deputy Director of the Commonwealth Investigation Service, concluded as follows:
…Miss Eugenia Kallinis is at present with her father, P.P. Kallinis at Wanneroo, Western Australia. She arrived in Australia on 15 April 1948 landing in Darwin. She was born in Macedonia, Greece in 1932. The article appearing in Makedoska Ickra [Macedonian Spark] allegedly written following an interview with Miss Kallinis was in fact written by S.V. Sarbinoff, editor of that paper and now residing in Sydney. Miss Kallinis has never seen nor has she spoken with Sarbinoff since her arrival (author’s emphasis). Her father who visited this office has expressed extreme annoyance at the publication of the article. All that was intended, he says, was the insertion of her photograph with a paragraph indicating her safe arrival in Australia. Mr. Kallinis says his daughter has never informed him of any of the atrocities which the newspaper article alleges. The only statement she did make to her father was that “things were very bad for everyone in Greece”.
From the time of the first publication of the Makedonska Ickra (1936) until the present day, Macedoslav newspapers did not function as community newspapers aiming to inform their Slavophone readership of the world and domestic news. The proportion of the idependent stories was negligible, whereas beyond the cultural and religious reports as well as the editorials on history there was always a clear tendency to promote the restricted political side in a polemical fashion. A great number of incidents of pseudo-reporting and forgery have been recorded. In certain cases the Australian Federal Attorney General and the Australian Federal police intervened to prosecute the people involved. In other cases the Ministry of Immigration and the Deputy Crown Solicitor stepped in and the publication of certain of their newspapers was suspended by the Australian authorities.
The Melbourne weekly newspaper Makedonija published in June 1988 a front-page letter attributed to Senator Ron Edwards, Member for Stirling in Western Australia, addressed to Vic Tadis, President of the Macedonian Friends of Labour Party, 344 Wanneroo Road, Nollamara, WA as follows:
Thank you for your letter dated the 30t May 1986 and the follow up telephone call in which you expressed concern about a recent debate in the Greek Parliament regarding Macedonian nationals. I too share your concern about the treatment of Macedonians in Greece and the constant harassment of Macedonians in Australia by the Greek authorities. This issue, as you are aware, has been discussed in great deal by Cabinet. Let me assure you on behalf of the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Bill Hayden, that the Australian labour Government has and will continue to support the Macedonians in promoting their unique language and culture within multicultural Australia.
The letter proved to be a forgery. Ron Edwards on 16 September 1988, called an urgent Media Conference to deny the authorship of the “letter”, to shed light on the criminal offence and to voice his concern, saying:
“Such is the blatant nature of this forgery that I have referred the matter to the Australian federal Police. The matter is now also with the Director of Public Prosecutions. I consider this to be a very serious offence against my name and my Parliamentary office. I am also very disturbed that this piece of forgery has been used in an attempt to stir up feelings between communities in Australia. We are a fortunate country where the majority of people live together harmoniously. Clearly there are some people who would seek to raise misunderstanding and enmities. I am not one of these people and I deeply resent this attempt”
The Minister of Justice of the Australian Government, Senator Michael Tate, in a letter addressed to Ron Edwards (28 November 1988) advised him that under Western Australian law an offence had been committed and the matter had been referred to the WA Police.
In August 1992 the Macedoslavs distributed widely an Australian Security Information Organization (ASIO) document, which served to illustrate the idea that the Greeks, Serbians and Bulgarians were conspiring against the declaration of independence of a “Macedonian” sate which was endorsed by the majority of the people if FYROM in late 1991. The document headed “ASION STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL” read:
“…Following the declaration of independence in 1991 by the Republic of Macedonia, the Macedonian community in Melbourne has been infiltrated by those parties for whom the sovereignty of an independent Macedonian nation is unacceptable. Monitoring of activities in related Balkan communities, namely Greek, Serbian and Bulgarians substantiate evidence that there has been penetration through local agents within the Macedonian sector in Melbourne…whilst there is no security risk to the Australian nation, there is a possibility of community unrest”.
In 3rd September 1992, J. Ellis from the Attorney General’s Office produced a News Release under the title “Fake ASIO Document”, arguing that the document was prepared with the sole aim of causing dissention amongst sections of the community and concluded: “its is unfortunate that this fake document appeared. The Director of ASIO, Mr. Davis Sadler said he hoped this statement would neutralise any harm it could do”.
On 22 January 1988, the Australian Macedonian Weekly newspaper, in its front page article entitled “Senators Respond Positively to the Macedonians” towards the forthcoming International Congress on Macedonia organized by the AIMS, stated that Senator Jo, Short of Victoria rallied to the side of the “Macedonians” in their bid for “fair treatment in Australia” quoting him:
“I have always been strong supporter of Macedonian people and their culture. I would therefore be concerned at any attempt to rewrite the history of Macedonia…”
More examples of forged statements
On 1st February 1988, in a Media Release statement, Senator Short expressed concern at the way he was treated by the “Macedonian” newspaper. He refuted its content and stated that “my comments were totally misrepresented in the newspaper. My position has always been that Greek-Macedonians, Slav-Macedonians and Bulgarian-Macedonians must be free to pursue and preserve their individual language and culture.
During the period (December 1987 to February 1988) leading to the First International Congress on Macedonian Studies organized by the AIMS, the Macedoslav newspaper Australian Macedonian Weekly sought to inflame its readers and create feeling of solidarity among the Macedoslavs against the AIMS and its International Congress, which it claimed, was campaigning “against the maintenance of their language and culture”. There is no evidence, however, that the AIMS ever campaigned against the “Macedonian” language or against their culture; only against the term “Macedonian” that they were using for their language and culture.
In a more recent incident of forgery and misrepresentation, the Macedoslav community attributed to the Western Australian Premier, Carmen Lawrence, who attended the unveiling of the statue of G. Delcev at the Macedonian Centre in Wanneroo road, Balga (24 March 1990). On 23 April 1990 Radio Skopje broadcasted the following as her comments made during the unveiling:
“This beautiful Macedonian Community Centre in perth is exactly one of the proofs for all those people who dispute the existence of the Macedonians. These Macedonians not only exist, but with their national language, history and culture are considered as an inseparable part of the world community…”
The Western Australian Premier in her letter to the editor of the Greek newspaper Hellenism in Perth, Theo Economou, on 4 September 1990 stated explicitly that “I would like to point out that the remarks attributed to me were never made”.
Given the prevailing socio-political conditions generated by the immigrant influx into Australia, immediate after 1952, it was hardly surprising to see the saga of the ‘irredentist Macedonians’, who ‘were deprived of basic human rights, both in Greece and in Australia (by the Greeks)’ take on a new dimension. Supporters of the “Macedonian” ideology in Australia sought to initiate a process of acceptance and recognition amongst members of the mainstream Australian society, by vigorously projecting the image of being oppressed. A large section of the organized “Macedonians” did not conceal their intention of applying psychological pressure and physical coercion and making public threats not only against the Greek Government, the Greek community and individuals, but also against their own membership. For example, Tanas Krustev was publicly persecuted in Perth for allegedly discussing with an “opponent” the name of those involved in the Macedonian Australian People’s League (MAPL). Their official organ, the Makedonska Ickra, published the following item on its front page under the sub-title “National Traitors”, giving the dimensions of a secret society:
Brother Macedonians, beware of national traitors. Judas sold Christ for thirty pieces of silver, but Tanas Krustev of the village Neret Lerinsko (Polypotamos, Florina) sold his brother Macedonians for nothing. On November 14th at 1.15 p.m. in an Italian barber shop at Perth, situated at 139 James Street, this individual gave a list of names of our nationals to an enemy of ours. What do you get out of this, you national traitor? Can’t you see that you have by this action incurred the odium and hatred of your brother Macedonians?
(Makedonska Ickra, November 1946, p. 1, Dardalis Archives)
On Monday, 21 December 1987 the Federation of Macedonian Associations initiated a public meeting at Chris-Wyn Court reception centre, Thornbury, Melbourne to protest against the 1st International Congress on Macedonian Studies organized by the Australian Institute of Macedonian Studies (AIMS) and held at La Trobe University, Melbourne. Their decision was widely advertised and delivered to all parliamentarians and Australian government agencies. The “Macedonian” associations condemned the Congress which “is part of the world wide campaign organized by the Greek government to deny the existence of the specificity and uniqueness of the Macedonian people…and misappropriate the epithet “Macedonian” to signify “Greek”. It accused the Greek government and the AIMS concluding:
We, the Macedonians, want to peacefully co-exist with all groups who honour the laws of multicultural Australia and are determined to struggle against oppressive groups who insult the dignity and deny their identity of groups because of political conflict in the place of origin. We want the Greek people to see that the propaganda of their government and their extremist representatives are creating needless conflict between our groups in our new homeland, Australia. We want them to realize that the situation is anomalous and works against the interests of all Australian citizens. The Macedonians do not threaten the dignity and identity of any of the 142 groups which make up Australia and would like all Australians to understand that Macedonians are only asking for the basic human rights our government extends to all law-abiding groups.
Theorists and supporters of the “Macedonian” ideology in Australia anticipated that such pious declarations would win community acclaim. In their drive to attract the sympathy, respect and hence the recognition of Australian politicians, the authors of the above resolution clearly intended to portray the “Macedonians” as (a) the sole claimants of the nomenclature Macedonian, (b) apologists of peaceful co-existence with other ethnic groups in a multicultural Australia, (c) agents of appeasement of the political strife surrounding the Macedonian controversy, (d) the prudent who do not resort to threats and physical coercion and (v) protagonists for basic human rights.
Eventually, in reality the organized Macedoslav community resorted to aggressive and oppressive practices as we shall prove below. In practice the Macedoslavs unleased a campaign in Australia against publishers, broadcasters, writers, academics, directors of television stations, parliamentarians and against any source or person who could be seen as contributing to decision making policies. One has only to leaf through the newspaper Makedonija to realize the extent of their ruthless campaign. A few documents will be used here to demonstrate the extent and the strength of the oppression and coercion exercised by the “Macedonian” apologists of “basic human rights”. For example, in a pamphlet Voice of Macedonian,the Macedonian Cultural and Educational Society for Australia published its regular segment repeating the usual polemical views and threats, which did not correspond with the romanticism of the title of this organization:
The Greek community in Sydney is confused. Some blindly support the Greek Government some are frightened to death of Macedonian retaliation (author’s emphasis). The Greek community is here under pressure to help Greece in every way. Macedonians, organised in their societies, clubs, religious communities and intellectual fields, or as individuals, are alert throughout the world and they are closely watching the Greek movements. They are prepared to demonstrate their existence so that the Greek government and those abroad will be able to see them.
Perth-born Dr. Peter Hill, who wrote the segment on “Macedonians” in the Encyclopaedia of the Australian People (1988) and published his own version of the history of migration of the Macedoslavs in Australia, was the subject of consistent attack and harassment for not being “nationalist enough” by the same people and journals. Data in the Dardalis Archives reveal explicitly that prominent Australian academics of Anglo-Celtic origin, have “spend a great deal of time and patience trying to deal with that group, only to be attacked and have their private correspondence and telephone calls distorted and used for political purposes”. In an attempt to undermine the academic status of the organisers of the 1st International Congress on Macedonian Studies, “Macedonian” delegations made deceitful written allegation to the authorities of the various universities and other tertiary institutions as well as other scientific and professional centres at which conference organizers were employed.
On 1st August 1987 the Macedoslavs staged yet another demonstration in front of the Greek Embassy in Canberra. The demonstration was organized ostensibly for “seeking human rights from the Greek political circles” by various “Macedonian” communities of the eastern States with a nominal participation of Western Australian Macedoslavs. In reality it proved to be a repeat of a similar demonstration in 1986, which was characterised by inflammatory and aggressive behaviour of certain demonstrators who urged an armed insurgence into Greece, a stand which caused a great deal of enmity and generated new debates amongst the Macedoslav groups. The editorial board of the Australian Macedonian Weekly condemned the bellicose attitude of the demonstrators and considered them destructive to the cause of the “Macedonian” struggle. That same night the Australian television station SBS viewers witness the highlights of the demonstration, during which participants were threatening to “take Salonica by arms” and to “establish an autonomous State, free of Greek terror” by means of insurrection.
In Sydney, on 27 November 1988, the same “peaceful” demonstrators hurled bricks, stones and timber against the car of the President of the Hellenic Republic, Christos Sartzetakis, who had been officially invited by the Australia Commonwealth government to open the Ancient Macedonian Exhibition during the Bicentenary celebrations. That evening the myth of the oppressed “Macedonians” lost its perspective and television viewers around Australia and the globe had the opportunity to evaluate the degree of fanatism behind an assertive call for human rights.
 Foe a detailed account on Greek Macedonian migration to Australia and New Zealand as well as to the countries of Latin America, particularly in Chile, Peru and Brazil see A. M. Tamis (1994) The Immigration and Settlement of Macedonian Greeks in Australia, La Trobe University Press; also A. M. Tamis (2006), Oi Ellines tis Latinikis Amerikis [Greeks in Latin America], Ellinika Grammata, Athens.
 Regarding the intra-group marriages and exogamies see A. M. Tamis (1994:339ff).
 For a detailed description of Macedonia the reader is referred to the work of D. Dakin (1966) The Greek Struggle in Macedonia (1897-1913), Institute for Balkan Studies, also N.G.K. Hammond (1980), A History of Macedonia, London
 For the heritage and historical links of Macedonian with the other Hellenic states in Ancient Greek see N.G.L. Hammond (1980) A History of Macedonia, London, A.R. Burn (1959), The Greeks, London; also A. R. Burn, Persia and the Greeks (1962), Gerald Duckworth London.
 The very fact that the “Macedonian Dynasty” which reigned in Constantinople for many decades comprised Princes from Thrace, simply attest this. For a detailed account on Byzantine Macedonia see the works A. Laiou (2002) The Economic History of Byzantium, Dumbarton Oaks, Harvard; also P. Magdalino (2002) “Medieval Constantinople: Built environment and urban development” in A. Laiou (2002) The Economic History of Byzantium, Dumbarton Oaks, Harvard; also Davies Norman (1996), The Birth of Europe, Oxford University Press also D. Angeloff (2001) The Making of Byzantinism, London.
 For the Ottoman period in Macedonia, the reader is referred to B. Jelavich (1983), The History of the Balkans: Twentieth Century, volumes 1-2, Cambridge University Press; see also A. Vakalopoulos (1973) History of Macedonia 1354-1833, Thessaloniki; also A. Vacalopoulos (1976) History of Macedonia, Thessaloniki.
 “The Macedonians although they absorbed other ethnic groups into their territory spoke a Greek dialect. The only difference between Macedonia and the city states of the south was that it was ruled by a king and powerful nobility” Read in particular Robert Morkot (1996:72) Historical Atlas of Ancient Greece, The Penguin; see also George Babiniotis (1990), Ancient Macedonian: The Pace of Macedonian among the Greek Dialects” in A. M. Tamis (ed.) Macedonian Hellenism, pp. 202-228, River Seine Press, Melbourne; also A. M. Tamis (1994), The Immigration and Settlement of Macedonian Greeks in Australia, pp. 340ff, La Trobe University Press.
 Stevenson, 1902:9; see also Kofos, 1987:5 and 1990:55)
 Tamis, 1994:290ff
 See in particular Dr. Evangelos Kofos’ paper (1990) “National heritage and national Identity in Macedonia” in A.M. Tamis (ed.) Macedonian Hellenism, pp. 55-86, River Seine Press; see also B. Jelavich (1983), History of the Balkans: Twentieth Century, volumes 1 & 2, CUP.
 See F. Stevenson (1902), The Macedonian Question, London
 For a detailed account on the issue of the ethnic identities in Macedonia see in particular E. Kofos (1985), The Macedonian Question: The Politics of Mutation, Thessaloniki; also E. Kofos (1990), “The Macedonian Question as a Balkan problem in the 1940’s” in A. M. Tamis (ed.) Macedonian Hellenism, pp. 173-180, River Seine Press.
 The Preston Makedonia and Alexander the Great soccer clubs were used as a manifestation of their national ideology by many Macedonians, who identified with an autonomous “Macedonia” or Greece respectively.
 The cases of Nadia Tassopoulou, John Avram, Markos Economidism Vasilios Apostolou, Charlie Yiankos and Nikolaos Millios are amongst them.
 Herodotus, VII 113 and 173; also Thucydides II, 39; also Hesiod, Theogony, frag. 5)
 A. M. Tamis (1994), The Immigration and Settlement of Macedonian Greeks in Australia, La Trobe University Press, pp 1994:ix-x)
 Danforth, L. (1989:5)
 Barth, 1969:10ff); see also Nash, 1989:127)
 Macedoslav historiography often refers their heritage on Macedonia claiming that the oldest Orthodox Church functioned in Ochrid. However, the role of the Orthodox Church and the ecumenical role of the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Constantinople could not be refuted.
 L. Mandalis’ letter to L. Chrysanthopoulos, 1st July 1932, Dardalis Archives.
 For the reasons leading to the creation of the new Yugoslav state see the relevant section entitled “History” in the AIMS website.
 See the Macedoslav newspaper Makedonska Ickra, October 1946, v. 1, p. 2, Dardalis Archives. See also the analysis of A. M. Tamis, 1994: 295ff.
 Makedonska Ickra, October 1946, vol. 1, p.4, Dardalis Archives.
 Makedoska Icra, vol. 1, p. 2, Dardalis Archives.
 Makedoska Icra, February 1956, vol. 8, no: 12, p. 1, Dardalis Archives.
 Australian Archives, Item 172/202, Dardalis Archives.
 Reference in their literature is made to the pre-WWII dictatorial regime of Ioannis Metaxas in Greece (1936-1940), the Greek Civil War (1946-1949) but even the Byzantine Bulgar-slayer Emperors.
 Makedonska Ickra, October 1946, p. 4, Dardalis Archives.
 J. Adams’ Report, Deputy Director, Commonwealth Investigation Service, Australian Archives, ACT A6122/1, Item 172/142, Dardalis Archives.
 For example, the publication of the newspaper Makedoska Ickra was twice suspended by the Australian government as a result of the content of their reporting. See Australian Archives ACT A6122/1, Item 172/87,88; also Australian Archives ACT, Item 172/94 in Dardalis Archives.
 Similar statements condemning misrepresentation and manipulation of their comments by “Macedonian” newspapers were made by many prominent Australian politicians, including Senator Jim Mackiernan of Western Australia and George Cash, liberal parliamentarian from WA.
 For a detailed account on fabricating reporting and numerous examples on misrepresentation of various politicians and Australian personalities see A. M. Tamis (1994), The Immigrations and Settlement of Greek Macedonians in Australia, pp. 290-325.
 August 1986, pp. 6-11, Dardalis Archives.
 Australian Macedonian Weekly newspaper, v. 34-47, Dardalis Archives.
 SBS television station, Tape 60, 1 August 1987, Dardalis Archives.