The debate between Goce Delcev and Dame Gruev which preceded the Ilinden Uprising

-

Macedonia prepares to celebrate August 2nd or Ilinden - the feast of St. Elijah - which marks two major historic events of national liberation - the 1903 Ilinden Uprising against the Ottoman Empire and the 1944 ASNOM assembly which set the foundation for Macedonian statehood. And 114 years after the first event, the debate continues on the decision to order the uprising, and whether it was ordered too soon, before the national forces were ready to mobilize. The uprising was smothered by Turkish forces, who captured the free city of Krusevo after 10 days.

Historian Vanco Gjorgjiev says that the leaders of the VMRO organization were divided over the proposal. Dame Gruev believed it is time for a large scale confrontation with the Ottoman Empire, in a set piece battle, while Goce Delcev favored continued guerrilla warfare, away from the civilian centers, knowing that a failed uprising will lead to massacres of civilians. In Gjorgjiev's opinion, the order was simply inevitable.

"The Organization prepared for a long time for such a confrontation. A large portion of the population were growing restless and it was difficult to control the situation. No person of authority, be it Goce Delcev od Dame Gruev, could control the flow by himself", says Gjorgjiev.


Gjorgjiev points out that both Delcev and Gruev were absent from the Solun Congress, when VMRO made the decision to order the uprising. "Gruev was still imprisoned in Asia Minor and Delcev was in Sofia. The decision was made by the Central Committee led by Ivan Gavranov. That Central Committee is seen as lacking moral credibility, but its decisions had to be respected. It called for a mass uprising in the Spring of 1903, but did not set the exact date, and did not determine whether all of Macedonia should be covered, or just a portion of it", adds Gjorgjiev.

Meanwhile, Delcev, Gjorce Petrov and Jane Sandanski were in Sofia and held a council which included a lot of analysis and criticism of the planned uprising. "This led to the theory that some of the VMRO leaders were in favor of the uprising, while others were against it. This is a very clear cut way of looking at things. In fact, based on all available material from the meeting, the main difference was over whether to have a wholesale uprising, or to have a localized, guerrilla operation", adds Gjorgjiev, who notes that Delcev himself supported the Ilinden Uprising, delivering a unit of fighters and explosives to eastern Macedonia who blew up a tunnel and bridge on Struma river.

A major piece of the puzzle over the Ilinden Uprising is the meeting Delcev and Gruev in Solun (Thessaloniki), on Easter of 1903 where they debated the decision to organize an uprising. In his book "100 Years of VMRO" historian Mihajlo Minovski says that Delcev and Gruev had a disagreement on the character of the uprising. "After his falling out with Gruev, Delcev felt he can do nothing more with the current members of the Central Committee. He decided to push forward with regional commanders and dukes. He left Solun and went to the Serres revolutionary region, which was due to make a decision against joining the uprising", says Minovski.


In the memoirs of Vojvoda (duke) Lazar Dimitrov, published in 1930, he remembers meeting Delcev and discussing the upcoming fight against the Ottomans. "He told me that he met Gruev and discussed the proposal. The end result was that he, Goce, agreed to have an uprising at the end of the Summer, but in a guerrilla style, without mass recruitment and a standing army battle. This put an end to the disputes over the character of the uprising and we decided to focus on its preparations. We departed wishing well to each other. It was the last time I met Goce", wrote Dimitrov.

Vojvoda Dimitar Kromidarev spoke about his own discussion with Dame Gruev, who also reflected on his meeting with Goce Delcev. "We are not fully prepared, but it is impossible to be fully ready. Any further delay will cost us even more and we stand to lose all we now have, without even trying to engage in open battle. All such rebellions are held in order to push global forces to get involved and handle the consequences of the uprising. We expect our liberation in a similar way. We will not break the Turkish power no matter how well prepared we are, but we will accomplish what all other uprisings accomplished - to get the great powers involved in Turkish affairs", was Gruev's thinking, passed on by Kromidarev.

In the end, it is clear that both great leaders of VMRO had the same goal - liberation of Macedonia. What remains uncertain is the degree to which they eventually agreed over the nature of the planned uprising.

By Irena Radovanovic

Popular posts from this blog

History: Macedonia was never a part of the ancient Hellenic city-states

-
Image
One of the steps in the Scientific Method of Investigation is the publication of your obtained results. This is done, so that others by repeating the same experiment using same methodology may independently arrive to the same conclusion and verify whether it is true what you have accomplished with your own hypothesis. Once many independent laboratories—through their scientific research—confirm your results, then, the hypothesis that you have proposed becomes accepted and your findings acknowledged.  I have said before, and I stand by my assertions that: (a) Macedonia was never a part of any ancient Greek city-state, nor were the ancient Macedonians ever considered by the ancient Greeks or by themselves, to be Greek. (b) Macedonia was never a member of any Hellenic League. Macedonia was not a member of the Greek Amphictyonic League either. Fact is that membership into these leagues was reserved for Hellenes only. And since Macedonians were not considered Hellenes, they were n
Read more

Jewish Encyclopedia - Kittim and Javan was associated with Macedonia

-
Image
MACEDONIA By: Richard Gottheil, Samuel Krauss Country of southeastern Europe; now a part of the Turkish empire. It is the native country of Alexander the Great, who is, therefore, called "Alexander the Macedonian" in rabbinical writings . In Dan. xi. 30 the Macedonians are mentioned under the name "Kittim" (R. V.), and Eusebius and the Hebrew Josephus or Gorionides (Knobel, "Völkertafel, " p. 103) use the same designation .  In the apocalyptic literature this kingdom is known as the "fourth beast" (Dan. vii. 7). The First Book of the Maccabees, which originally was written in Hebrew, also uses the word "Kittim" for Macedonians , and mentions Philip and Alexander (i. 1), as well as Philip III. and his illegitimate son Perseus (viii. 5), as kings of the Macedonians. Since the Greek Syrians style themselves "successors of Alexander," these Syrians also are called "Macedonians" (II Macc. viii. 20). The
Read more

Letters by Greek soldiers about the massacres in Aegean Macedonia - 1913

-
Image
The Hellenic army is burning all slavophonic villages and kills all slavophones it captures! It can be seen from the letters by Greek soldiers sent from the front the horror that the Macedonian population in the towns and villages under Greek occupation faced. The bloody collection of about hundred letters should have been delivered to the addresses through the Greek Army’s military post office, but after it was captured by the Bulgarian Army in Razlog on 14 July 1913, the letters were made public. It is a fearsome collection of authentic testimonies that were taken to the State Archives in Sofia in 1913, as Ljubomir Miletic PhD claims. In those letters, the Greek soldiers bragged to their relatives and friends that they hadn’t left a single Slavophone alive wherever they went, that they had raped all the Slavic Macedonian women and that they had burned all the Slavophonic villages. One hundred years ago After the Ottoman army left Macedonia, Serbs, Bulgarians and Greeks wante
Read more