Misplaced Pages

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. Certain contradictions and even mutually exclusive statements, along with inconsistencies exist in the testimonies of the founding and other early 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. Its earliest basic documents discovered for now, became known to the historical community during the early 1960s.

The revolutionary organization set up in November 1893 in Ottoman Thessaloniki changed its name several times before adopting in 1919 in Sofia its last and most common name i.e. Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization (IMRO). 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. 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. As a whole, its founders were inspired by the earlier Bulgarian revolutionary traditions. All its basic documents were written in the pre-1945 Bulgarian orthography. The first statute of the IMRO was modelled after the statute of the earlier Bulgarian Revolutionary Central Committee (BRCC). IMRO adopted from BRCC also its symbol: the lion, and its motto: Svoboda ili smart. All its six founders were closely related to the Bulgarian Men's High School of Thessaloniki. They were native to the region of Macedonia, and some of them were influenced from anarcho-socialist ideas, which gave to organisation's basic documents slightly leftist leaning.

The first statute was drawn up in the winter of 1894. In the summer of the same year, the first congress of the organization took place in Resen. At this meeting, Ivan Tatarchev was elected as its first head. The draft of the first statute was approved there, while the drafting of its first regulations was commissioned. The occasion for convening this meeting was the celebration on the consecration of the newly built Bulgarian Exarchate church in the town in August 1894. It was decided at the meeting to preferably recruit teachers from the Bulgarian schools as committee members. Of the sixteen members who attended the group’s first congress, fourteen were Bulgarian schoolteachers. Schoolteachers were en masse involved in the committee's activity, and the Ottoman authorities considered the Bulgarian schools then "nests of bandits". On the eve of the 20th century IMRO was often called "the Bulgarian Committee", while its members were designated as Comitadjis, i.e. "committee men".

In the earliest dated samples of statutes and regulations of the Organization discovered so far, it is called Bulgarian Macedonian-Adrianopolitan Revolutionary Committees (BMARC). These documents refer to the then Bulgarian population in the Ottoman Empire, which was to be prepared for a general uprising in Macedonia and Adrianople regions, aiming to achieve political autonomy for them. In thе statute of BMARC, that itself is most probably the first one, the membership was reserved exclusively for Bulgarians. This ethnic restriction matches with the memoirs of some founding and ordinary members, where is mentioned such a requirement, set only in the Organization's first statute. 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.

Memoirs' controversy

Contradictions, inconsistencies and even mutually exclusive statements exist in the testimonies of the founding and other early members of the Organization on the issue. According to the founding member Hristo Tatarchev's пemoirs, there were created two structures with the first statute from 1894: an organization and its central committee. He mentions as their names "Macedonian Revolutionary Organization" (MRO) and a "Central Macedonian Revolutionary Committee" (CMRC) and clarifies that the word "Bulgarian" was subsequently dropped from their names. It is not clear, if its first name was simply MRO, how the definition "Bulgarian" was dropped from it subsequently. However, Tatarchev notes that he doesn't remember the first name very clearly. On the other hand, according to the founding member Gyorche Petrov, initially the IMRO was not called an "Organization", and this term was introduced after 1895. According to another founding member, Petar Poparsov, the Organization was designated initially a "Committee", and its first name was "Committee for acquiring the political rights of Macedonia, given to it by the Treaty of Berlin". 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. According to Tatarchev, the Adrianople region was included in the organization's program in 1895, while this decision was implemented practically in 1896. However, per Hristo Kotsev [bg] (1869-1933) Dame Gruev commissioned him to start the construction of the committee network in Adrianople region in 1895. Thus, in September 1895, the first revolutionary committee was founded in Bulgarian Men's High School of Adrianople.

According to Poparsov, the first statute's swatch was sent to be printed in Romania, where it burned down in a fire and its publication failed. However, according to the IMRO activist Lazar Gyurov [bg] (1872-1931), the first statute and regulations were printed in a very limited quantity in Thessaloniki after 1894. According to Gyurov's claims, he had hidden one copy each of the statutes and regulations, but he did not manage to keep them because they fell apart due to poor storage conditions. 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 either in the same year or in 1895. 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 adopted in 1896, were printed in Sofia in 1897, by Gyorche Petrov and Gotse Delchev. According to Gyorche Petrov, before the drafting of the second statute and regulations in 1896, there were available others, which were still in use, that suggests there were earlier printed statutes and regulations after all.

The first statute allowed the membership only for Bulgarians and this is confirmed by Tatarchev in his memoirs from 1936 as follows: "it was allowed that every Bulgarian, from any region, could be a member", as well as in the memoirs of other revolutionaries. 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, According to Ivan Hadzhinikolov, membership was open to everyone from Macedonia. 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. Per the SMAC activist Vladislav Kovachev the first statute of the IMRO allowed the membership only for Bulgarians within a special article. According to the revolutionary Nikola Altaparmakov [bg] (1873-1953), a revolutionary committee was founded in Thessaloniki in 1893, and per its first statute, any Bulgarian could be its member. Dimitar Vlahov maintained that initially, the organization worked only among Bulgarians who belonged to the Bulgarian Exarchate.

Per Iliya Doktorov [bg] (1876-1947) initially the organization had a nationalist character and only Bulgarians had the right to be members of it, but this ethnic restriction lasted until 1896. According to Georgi Bazhdarov, who also confirmed the statute of BMARC as a first one, the Organization was opened to other nationalities besides Bulgarians after 1900. In the memoirs of Alekso Martulkov, it is claimed that the original statute of the organization allowed only Bulgarians as members. This situation was changed in a new statute in 1896. Per Bulgarian anarchist Spiro Gulabchev (1856 – 1918), in the mid-1890s, arose the "Bulgarian Macedonian Adrianopolitan Revolutionary Committee", which, according to its statute and regulations, was a Bulgarian nationalist organization. According to Dimitar Popevtimov [bg] (1890-1961), the organization was initially called the BMARC, and only Bulgarians were accepted as its members, per its first statute from 1894. Per Peyo Yavorov, the first IMRO statute was almost a copy of the old Bulgarian revolutionary statute and contained a special article according to which only Bulgarians were its members. According to Nikola Zografov in 1895 Gotse Delchev was supplied with a power of attorney from the name of the BMARC and sent to Sofia to propagate the struggle for autonomy that was open to every Bulgarian. Per Hristo Silyanov in the minds of the founders of the organization, it was Bulgarian in its ethnic composition, and its member, according to the first statue, could be "any Bulgarian". Krste Misirkov states in his brochure On the Macedonian Matters (1903) that the “Bulgarian committees” were led by "Bulgarian clerks", aiming the creation of “Bulgarian Macedonia".

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 nearly unknown until the 1960s to the historical researchers. In 1955, the historian Ivan Ormandzhiev published in Sofia the undated statute of the SMARO, which he dated from 1896. In 1961, Macedonian historian Ivan Katardžiev published undated statute and regulations discovered by him, naming the organization BMARC, which he dated from 1894. The discovered documents are kept since then at the Institute of National History in Skopje. Originals of the statute and the regulations of BMARC were found in 1967 also in Bulgaria. According to the statute of the BMARC, membership of the Organization was allowed only for Bulgarians. Per Katardžiev the statute of the BMARC was the first statute and that was the first official name of the IMRO. According to him, the organization never bore as an official name the designation "Macedonian Revolutionary Organization" (MRO). 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.

Macedonian views

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. 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. Thus, per historian Krste Bitovski this was not only the first preserved statute but the original statute of IMRO. 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. 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. In 1999 this view has been finally revised by Blaže Ristovski in his "History of the Macedonian nation". He practically adopted the position of some from his Bulgarian colleagues, the first name of the Organization was MRO. 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, 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. Or, as the historian Dimitar Dimeski claimed, even without to mention the name "BMARC", per its first statute, the organization had a nationalist character. It was the result of intolerance, external influence and lack of experience. On the other hand, the existence of the Adrianoplolitan part in the name of the Organization, which is undoubtedly Bulgarian, points per Macedonian scholars, to the existence of some kind of supra-ethnic organizational system.

An example for this revisionist turn is the historian Vančo Gjorgiev. In 1997 Gjorgiev himself confirmed the authenticity and the dating from 1894 of the statute of BMARC. Gjorgiev also published the Statutes and the Regulations of BMARC translated from Bulgarian into Macedonian language in 2013. However in 2021, he has rejected all this, claiming that allegedly not a single document written from any activist of the Organization has been found so far, containing the name of BMARC.

Bulgarian views

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. The aim of the Committees per Art. 2 of their statute was to raise the consciousness for self-defense among the Bulgarian population in both regions in order that there be one single uprising in them. The definition Macedonian then had a regional meaning, while the ideas of separate Macedonian nation were supported only by a handful of intellectuals. 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. Also, apart from the fact the statute allowed the membership only to Bulgarians, the regulations contain an oath which also confirms its Bulgarian character. 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. Its leader Ivan Garvanov, who was from Bulgaria proper, became the head of the IMRO in 1902, and architect of the Ilinden-Preobrazhenie Uprising. 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.

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 Bulgarian historians. Until then, Bulgarian historians shared Katardžiiev's opinion that the designation BMARC was used between 1894 and 1896. Today some Bulgarian researchers assume the first unofficial name of the organization during 1894-1896 was Macedonian Revolutionary Organization or Macedonian Revolutionary Committee. However, despite the name MRO is present in some contemporary sources, neither statutes nor regulations, or other basic documents with such names have not yet been found. Other Bulgarian researchers suppose that the founding statute of the IMRO still hasn't been discovered or it hasn't survived. Thus, the first preserved statute of the organization is that of the BMARC. Other Bulgarian historians do not accept the view of Pandev and continue to adhere to that of Katardziev, i.e., the first statutory name of the organization from 1894 was BMARC. Bulgarian researchers also maintain that Katardžiev himself had some manifestations when he publicly claimed the IMRO revolutionaries had Bulgarian self-awareness.

Authorship dispute

According to some Bulgarian and Macedonian researchers, the author of BMARC's statute was Petar Poparsov. Other Bulgarian historians assume that the authors of the statute were Gotse Delchev and Gyorche Petrov. 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. In Ivan Hadzhinikolov's memoirs, is written that Petar Poparsov was assigned to draw up the first statute. 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. 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.

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 some 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. It is believed by them too, the first statute's swatch burned down in a fire in Bucharest, and was irrevocably lost. However, when Pandev promoted this view in 1969, the memoirs of Lazar Gyurov, where he confirmed the publication of the first statute in 1894 in Thessaloniki, were still unknown. 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". On October 10, 1900, the newspaper "Pester Lloyd", published in retelling form excerpts from 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.

On the other hand, the Austro-Hungarian consul in Skopje Gottlieb Para [bg] (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. 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. 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". Based on the early 2000s discovery, that the cover of the BMARC rules were dated 1896, the problem when the BMARC regulations were printed, is claimed to be solved by the Bulgarian historian Tsocho Bilyarski. However, Hadzhinikolov points out that he prepared it in 1895. According to Tatarchev, in 1894 arose the need to develop an internal rulebook and this was done by Hadzhinikolov at the end of the same year.

In this way, the question of the time of creation and adoption of the rules remains open. According to the memoires of Dimitar Voynikov (1896-1990), when Delchev visited Strandzha Mountain in 1900, the changes in the statute of SMARO were already fact and were discussed at a meetings with the local IMRO-activists, where his father was present. Also, Macedonian historians point to the fact that a copy of the "SMARO" statute was kept in London since 1898. In 1905 the organization changed its name to Internal Macedonian-Adrianople Revolutionary Organization (IMARO), which is indisputable.

Membership and ideology

Per Article 3 of the statute of BMARC: "Membership is open to any Bulgarian, irrespective of sex, who has not compromised himself in the eyes of the community by dishonest and immoral actions, and who promises to be of service in some way to the revolutionary cause of liberation." 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 at a separate Macedonian ethnicity, but understood "Macedonian" as an umbrella term, encompassing the different nationalities in the area. The common political agenda declared in the BMARC and SMARO statutes 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, it failed to attract other groups for whom the IMRO remained the Bulgarian Committee. 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. According to the revolutionary Dimo Hadzhidimov this idea remained a Bulgarian, until it disappeared even among the Bulgarians, while any other nationality didn't accept it. In 1911, it passed a new decision according to which again only members of Bulgarian nationality would be admitted to the organization. Although this change was not included in the next basic documents of the Organization, it became an informal principle.

Legacy

In 2015, a civil association "BMARC Ilinden-Preobrazhenie" was registered in Bulgaria. Among its founders were scientists, historians, journalists and descendants of Bulgarian historical figures from the regions of Macedonia and Southern Thrace. In 2016, a monument to the fallen revolutionaries from Macedonia and Thrace was uncovered in Sofia. On the left side of the monument is written the abbreviation BMARC (БМОРК), denoting the first name of the revolutionary organization.

In 2018, in relation with the campaign for the change of the constitutional name of the then Republic of Macedonia, the Bulgarian Cultural Club in Skopje initiated the idea to include the name of BMARC in the preamble of the Macedonian constitution. On the other hand, in 2023 the founder of VMRO-DPMNE, Lyubcho Georgievski, proposed to include the Bulgarians in North Macedonia as a separate ethnic minority in the preamble of its constitution, based on fact that such people were members and founders of the historical BMARC. Moreover, this was actually a mandatory condition of the EU to the accession of the country into the Union.

However, these ideas were rejected. In North Macedonia, the acknowledgement of any Bulgarian influence on its history and politics is very undesirable, because it contradicts the post-WWII Yugoslav Macedonian nation-building and historical narratives, based on a deeply anti-Bulgarian attitudes, which still continue today. On that occasion, the Macedonian film director Darko Mitrevski has concluded that there is no more mythologized term in Macedonian history than the name of IMRO, but behind this historical myth is hidden actually the original designation of BMARC, an organization founded by people with Bulgarian consciousness.

See also

• Internal Revolutionary Organization
• Unity Committee
• Bulgarian Secret Central Revolutionary Committee
• Supreme Macedonian-Adrianople Committee
• Bulgarian People's Macedonian-Adrianople Revolutionary Organization
• Internal Thracian Revolutionary Organisation
• Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization (United)
• Bulgarian Action Committees

External videos with opinions of Macedonian public figures, historians, etc., on the issue

• Excerpt from an interview of the journalist Vasko Eftov with Prof. Katardžiev in the program Vo Centar called "Kade odi Macedonija?"
• Vo centar with Vasko Eftov about the issue with the foundation of the IMRO Kako Blaze Koneski stana Falsifikatorot od Nebregovo!?
• Vo centar with Vasko Eftov about the issue with he foundation of the IMRO Васко Ефтов: ВМРО е создадено од декларирани Бугари.

Gallery

• 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. In the middle is depicted a lion, standing enraged over a broken Ottoman flag and torn rings of iron chain.
• 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". Below is depicted a lion wearing a crown.
• Cover of the Regulations of the BMARC published firstly in Skopje in 1961. According to Hristo Karamandzhukov [bg] (1876-1952), they continued to be used even after 1902 in the Smolyan-Xanthi revolutionary subdistrict.
• 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 Katardziev, out of 50 articles in both regulations, 39 are identical or similar.
• 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.
• 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).
• The magazine "Macedonia" (1922) where Georgi Bazhdarov claims on p. 5, the first name of the organisation in its first statute was BMАRC.
• "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.
• "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.
• Hristo Tatarchev's Memoirs about the creation of the IMRO, which according to his opinion espoused on p. 103, was first called MRO and CMRC. Published in Sofia by Lyubomir Miletich in 1928.
• 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 cover of the first volume of the book The Liberation Struggles of Macedonia by Hristo Silyanov, per whom in the minds of the founders of the organization, it was Bulgarian, and its member, according to the first statue, could be "any Bulgarian".
• The initial page from the manuscript of Spiro Gulabchev, dedicated on the IMRO, where he criticizes the organization as a Bulgarian nationalist society that was named in its first statute and regulations as BMARC.
• Cover of the unpublished book "Notes and Reflections on the Macedonian Nation" where Dimitar Popevtimov cited in 1959 art. 3 from the statute of the BMARC, claiming this was the initial name of IMRO.
• 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.
• On October 10, 1900, the newspaper "Pester Lloyd", published in retelling form excerpts from the statutes of the BMARC.
• Cover of the book "My Participation in the Revolutionary Struggles" from 1954. The author Alekso Martulkov claims the first statute from 1894 contained a special Article, which permitted the membership in the Organization only to Bulgarians.
• Monument of the fallen for the freedom of Macedonia and Thrace in Sofia. On the first line at the top left is the abbreviation BMARC (БМОРК), denoting the first name of the revolutionary organization.

Notes

1. Bulgarian: Български македоно-одрински революционни комитети (БМОРК), Macedonian: Бугарски македонско-одрински револуционерни комитети (БМОРК)
2. In his memoirs from 1928 Tatarchev, when mentioning Organization's first name and structure, noted that he does not remember them very clearly, making the remark: "as far as I can remember." So far, no statutes or other basic documents with a similar name have been discovered from this period. According to Macedonian specialist Ivan Katardziev, the Organization never bore an official name MRO. In Tatarchev's own recollections from 1936 he maintains that in the first statute, the membership was allowed for every Bulgarian, and that the possibility for membership of other nationalities was open in 1896 in a new statute. Tatarchev also clarified that the word "Bulgarian" was subsequently dropped from the name of the Organization, because the autonomous principle, required the founders to avoid everything that aroused suspicion of nationalism among the other nationalities. It seems he had mix up in his different memoires the circumstances from the first and from the second congresses of IMRO, hold in 1894 and 1896 respectively, when a different statutes were adopted.
3. 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.

External links

• The Regulations of the Bulgarian Macedonian-Adrianople Revolutionary Committees (scanned original);
• The Statute of the Bulgarian Macedonian-Adrianople Revolutionary Committees (in English);
• The Statute of the Bulgarian Macedonian-Adrianople Revolutionary Committees (in Bulgarian);
• The Regulations of the Bulgarian Macedonian-Adrianople Revolutionary Committees (in Bulgarian);
• The Statute and the Regulations of the Bulgarian Macedonian-Adrianople Revolutionary Committees (in Macedonian);

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. Книги и Материјали за Македонија, Алексо Мартулков, Моето учество во револуционерните борби на Македонија.
11. 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.
12. Raymond Detrez, Historical Dictionary of Bulgaria; Historical Dictionaries of Europe; Rowman & Littlefield, 2014, ISBN 1442241802, p. 253-254.
13. ^ Alexis Heraclides, The Macedonian Question and the Macedonians: A History. Routledge, 2020, ISBN 9780367218263, pp. 40-41.
14. Vemund Aarbakke (2003) Ethnic rivalry and the quest for Macedonia, 1870-1913, East European Monographs, ISBN 9780880335270, p. 97.
15. 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.
16. Bernard A. Cook ed., Europe Since 1945: An Encyclopedia, Volume 2, Taylor & Francis, 2001, ISBN 0815340583, p. 808.
17. As a corollary, the first charter of the organization was a rough copy of the "Bulgarian revolutionary central committee's" charter which they found in the work of Zahari Stoyanov, Zapiski po bûlgarskite vûstania . For more see: Tetsuya Sahara, The Macedonian Origin of Black Hand. (International Conference "Great War, Serbia, Balkans and Great Powers") Strategic Research Institute & The Institute of History Belgrade, 2015, pp. 401–425 (408).
18. J. Pettifer as ed., The New Macedonian Question, Springer, 1999 ISBN 0230535798, p. 236.
19. Parvanova, Zorka. "6 Revolutionary and Paramilitary Networks in European Turkey: Ideological and Political Counteractions and Interactions (1878–1908)". Christian Networks in the Ottoman Empire: A Transnational History, edited by Eleonora Naxidou and Yura Konstantinova, Budapest, Hungary: Central European University Press, 2024, pp. 107-136. https://doi.org/10.1515/9789633867761-009
20. Frusetta, James. “Bulgaria's Macedonia: Nation-Building and State Building, Centralization and Autonomy in Pirin Macedonia, 1903-1952.” PhD Thesis. University of Maryland, College Park, (2006), p. 113.
21. Симеон Радев, Ранни спомени, редактор Траян Радев, Изд. къща Стрелец, София, 1994, ISBN 9789548152099, стр. 199.
22. Aarbakke, Vemund. Ethnic rivalry and the quest for Macedonia, 1870–1913, East European Monographs, 2003, ISBN 0880335270, p. 92.
23. Dimitar Bechev, Historical Dictionary of the Republic of Macedonia, Scarecrow Press, 2009, ISBN 0810862956, Introduction, p. Iviii.
24. 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.
25. 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.
26. Poulton, Hugh (2000). Who are the Macedonians, Indiana University Press, ISBN 9780253213594 p. 53.
27. Dimitar Bechev, Historical dictionary of North Macedonia, 2019; Rowman & Littlefield, ISBN 9781538119624, p. 11.
28. 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.
29. Tunçay, Mete, and Erik J. Zürcher, eds. (1994) Socialism and Nationalism in the Ottoman Empire and Modern Turkey. Bloomsbury Academic, ISBN 1850437874, p. 33.
30. MacDermott, Mercia (1978) Freedom or Death: The Life of Gotsé Delchev. West Nyack, N.Y.: Journeyman Press, pp. 144-149.
31. Vladimir Cretulescu (2016) "The Memoirs of Cola Nicea: A Case-Study on the Discursive Identity Construction of the Aromanian Armatoles in Early 20th Century Macedonia." Res Historica 41, p. 128.
32. Alexander Maxwell, "Slavic Macedonian Nationalism: From 'Regional' to 'Ethnic'", In Klaus Roth and Ulf Brunnbauer (eds.), Region, Regional Identity and Regionalism in Southeastern Europe, Volume 1 (Münster: LIT Verlag, 2008), ISBN 9783825813871, p. 135.
33. Victor Roudometof (2002) Collective Memory, National Identity, and Ethnic Conflict. Greece, Bulgaria, and the Macedonian Question. Bloomsbury Academic, ISBN 9780275976484, p. 112.
34. Alexis Heraclides, The Macedonian Question and the Macedonians: A History. Routledge, 2020, ISBN 9780367218263, p. 240.
35. ^ 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.
36. Димески, Д. (1986). Создавањето на Македонската револуционерна организација и нејзината организациска поставеност (1893–1895). Историја / Journal of History 22.1, 61-73; (63).
37. Спомени на Гьорчо Петровъ. Съобщава Любомиръ Милетичъ (Издава „Македонскиятъ Наученъ Институтъ”, София. 1927), книга VIII, стр. 26.
38. ^ 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.
39. Duncan M. Perry, The Politics of Terror: The Macedonian Liberation Movements, 1893–1903, Duke University Press, 1988, ISBN 0822308134, pp. 39–40.
40. Freedom or Death, The Life of Gotsé Delchev, by Mercia MacDermott, Journeyman Press, London & West Nyack, 1978, p. 230.
41. 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.
42. MacDermott, Mercia. Freedom or Death: The Life of Gotsé Delchev. London & West Nyack, Journeyman Press, 1978. p. 230.
43. Коцевъ, Хр. Страници изъ споменитѣ ми. сп. Македония (VII - X). София, 1922, стр. 45-2 Моето кръщение.
44. Тараков, Т., Бисерков, М. "Спомени на един малко известен съратник на Дамян Груев", Македонски преглед, 2000, кн. 1, стр. 126; 130.
45. Цочо Билярски (1994) Д-р Христо Татарчев: Първият ръководител на ВМРО: Биогр. очерк. Знание, стр 50-54; ISBN 9546210056.
46. "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.
47. Иван Катарџиев, Борба до победа. Студии и статии. Скопjе, Мисла; 1983 г., стр. 61.
48. Ѓорѓиев, В. (1995). Петар Поп Арсов (1868–1941). Прилог кон проучувањето на македонското националноослободително движење, стр. 62.
49. Христо Матов, "За управлението на Вътрешната Революционна Организация", Македонска революционна библиотека, София, 1926, стр. 29.
50. 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.
51. Христо Татарчев, "ВМРО като митологична и реална същност (Спомени; Торино 1936 г.)" в "Спомени, документи, материали", Наука и изкуство, София, 1989 година, стр. 57.
52. Георги Попхристов, "Пишат ни от Битоля", сп. "Илюстрация Илинден", год. XV, книга 8 (148), София, октомври 1943 година.
53. 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.
54. 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.
55. Алексо Мартулков , Моето учество во револуционерните борби на Македонија , Институт за национална историја, Скопие, 1952 г. стр. 55-56.
56. "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.
57. Димитър Попевтимов, "Бележки и размишления върху Македонската нация",Варна, 1950-1959 г., стр. 63-64.
58. Хр. Силянов, Освободителнитѣ борби на Македония, томъ I, зд. на Илинденската Орг., София, 1933; II фототипно изд. "Наука и Изкуство", София, 1983) стр. 40.
59. 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, pp. 273–330. (p. 320).
60. Катарџиев, И. (1965) Два правилника на ВМРО од предилинденскиот период. Историја/Journal of History 1.1, стр. 39-50.
61. Документи за македоно-одринското революционно движение и за Преображенското въстание в Тракия. Подредил и снабдил с обяснителни бележки от Ив. П. Горов в сб. Преображенско въстание 1903. София, 1955, стр. 51-78.
62. Љубен Лапе, Одбрани текстови за историјата на македонскиот народ,Том 2, 1965, стр. 185.
63. Иван Катарџиев, Некои прашања за уставите и правилниците на ВМОРО до Илинденското востание, ГИНИ V/1, Скопје 1961. стр. 149 – 164.
64. Константин Пандев (2000) Националноосвободителното движение в Македония и Одринско 1878-1903, Гутенберг, ISBN 9789549943092, стр. 140.
65. Пандев, Константин. "Устави и правилници на ВМОРО преди Илинденско-Преображенското въстание", Исторически преглед, 1969, кн. I, стр. 68 – 80
66. Миноски, М. (2022). “Македонската историска наука и политиката во трите децении државна независност на Република Македонија“, In Дуев, Р. (ур.), Историјата и предизвиците на промените: материјали од тркалезната маса одржана на 23.02.2022 година по повод 75 години Институт за историја. Скопје: Универзитет „Св. Кирил и Методиј“ во Скопје - Филозофски факултет, pp. 89-117.
67. Hugh Poulton, Who are the Macedonians? Hurst, 2000; ISBN 1850655340, p. 53.
68. Dimitar Bechev, Historical Dictionary of North Macedonia, 2019; Rowman & Littlefield, ISBN 9781538119624, p. 145.
69. Carl Cavanagh Hodge as ed., Encyclopedia of the Age of Imperialism, 1800-1914, 2008, Greenwood Press; ISBN 9780313043413, p. 441.
70. Манол Д Пандевски, Националното прашање во македонското ослободително движење: 1893-1903; Современа општествена мисла, Култура, 1974, стр. 82.
71. Прилози (1992) Томове 23 – 28, Македонска академија на науките и уметностите, Отделение за општествени науки, стр. 75.
72. Гане Тодоровски, Формирањето на BMPO според ракописните мемоари на Иван Хаџи-Николов. Разгледи, г. XI, бр. 10, Скопје, 1969, стр. 304.
73. Крсте Битовски (2003) Историја на македонскиот народ, Институт за национална историја, Скопje, p. 162.
74. Манол Пандевски, (1987) Македонското ослободително дело во XIX и XX век. Националното прашање во македонското ослободително движење 1893–1903 г. Мисла, стр. 86.
75. Печатни оригинали на устава и правилника на БМОРК с ръкописни корекции и чернови на устава и правилника на ТМОРО; ЦДА, ф. 1932 к, оп. 3, а. е. 3, л. 1 – 34.
76. 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.
77. Блаже Ристовски, Историја на македонската нација (1999) Македонска академиjа на науките и уметностите, Скопиjе, стр. 197.
78. 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.
79. "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.
80. 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
81. 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
82. Dimitar Dimeski, Goce Delčev, Macedonian Review, Skopje 1997, p. 38.
83. Ванчо Ѓорѓиев, Петар Поп Арсов. Прилог кон проучувањето на македонското националноослободително движење, Скопје, 1997, стр. 60-61.
84. Ванчо Ѓорѓиев, ВМРО 1893-1903, Поглед низ документи, Матица Македонска, Скопје, 2013.
85. Нашиот став во контекст на првото име на Организацијата го апсолвираме во следниве точки: 1) Досега не е пронајден ниту еден документ од која било институција на Организацијата (Централен комитет, Задгранично претставништво, окружни и околиски комитети) ниту, пак, од нејзин активист со името БМОРК; 2) Доколку постоеше каков било документ што ќе го демантира нашето тврдење, тој не само што повеќепати ќе беше објавен туку ќе го завладееше и електронскиот простор... For more see: Ѓорѓиев, В. (2021). Постулатите на македонското револуционерно движење, 1893-1908. In Ќулавкова, К. (ур.). Прилози за историјата на Македонија и македонската култура. Скопје: Македонска академија на науките и уметноститe, 167-192.
86. 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.
87. 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.
88. Цочо Билярски (1994) Д-р Христо Татарчев: Първият ръководител на ВМРО: Биогр. очерк. Знание, стр 7; ISBN 9546210056.
89. Rohdewald, Stefan. "Citizenship, Ethnicity, History, Nation, Region, and the Prespa Agreement of June 2018 between Macedonia and Greece" Comparative Southeast European Studies, vol. 66, no. 4, 2018, pp. 577-593. https://doi.org/10.1515/soeu-2018-0042
90. Иван Н. Николов, ВМРО и Иван Михайлов в защита на българщината, 2008, УИ Св. "Кл. Охридски", ISBN 9789549384116, стр. 65.
91. Dimitar Bechev, Historical Dictionary of the Republic of Macedonia, Historical Dictionaries of Europe, No. 68, Scarecrow Press, ISBN 0810862956, p. 140.
92. 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.
93. 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.
94. Historical Dictionary of the Republic of Macedonia, Dimitar Bechev, Scarecrow Press, 2009, ISBN 978-0-8108-6295-1, p. 82.
95. 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.
96. Duncan Perry The Politics of Terror: The Macedonian Liberation Movements, 1893–1903, Durham, Duke University Press, 1988. pp. 40–41.
97. Fikret Adanir, Die Makedonische Frage: ihre entstehung und etwicklung bis 1908. Wiessbaden 1979, p. 112.
98. 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,
99. Ivo Banac, "The National Question in Yugoslavia. Origins, History, Politics", Cornell University Press, 1984, pp. 307–328.
100. Стоян Германов (1992) Руската общественост и революционното движение в Македония и Одринско 1893-1908. Унив. изд-во "Св. Климент Охридски". стр. 14.
101. Brown, Keith (2013). Loyal Unto Death Trust and Terror in Revolutionary Macedonia. Indiana University Press. p. 191. ISBN 9780253008473.
102. Perry M., Duncan (1988). The Politics of Terror and The Macedonian Liberation Movements, 1893-1903. Duke University Press. p. 203. ISBN 9780822308133.
103. Horncastle, James (2019). The Macedonian Slavs in the Greek Civil War, 1944–1949. Lexington Books. p. 43. ISBN 9781498585057.
104. Maria Todorova (2004). Balkan Identities: Nation and Memory. C. Hurst & Co. Publishers. p. 238. ISBN 1850657157.
105. Цочо Билярски, Първите програмни документи на ВМОРО до есента на 1902 г., Известия на държавните архиви, София, 2004, кн. 87, с. 200-275.
106. 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.
107. Любомир Панайотов, Христо Христов, Гоце Делчев спомени, документи, материали, Институт за история (Българска академия на науките) Наука и изкуство, 1978, стр. 86.
108. Стоян Райчевски, Валерия Фол, 1993, Кукерът без маска. УИ "Св. Климент Охридски", София стр. 201.
109. Божидар Димитров, Български старини в Македония (2000) Анико, София; ISBN 954-90700-2-6 стр. 22.
110. 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.
111. Стефан Дечев: Две държава, две истории, много "истини" и една клета наука - трета част. Marginalia, 15.06.2018.
112. 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.
113. Манол Пандевски (1987) Македонското ослободително дело во XIX и XX век, Т.1, Националното прашање во македонското ослободително движење: 1893-1903, стр. 86.
114. 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.
115. Христо Христов, Енциклопедия: Пирински край. А-М; Благоевград, том 1, 1994, ISBN 9789549000610, стр. 178.
116. Пейо Яворов, Гоце Делчев в "Словото"; Гоце в Щип, Банско.
117. Любомир Панайотов, Константин Пандев, Костадин Палешутски, Гоце Делчев-спомени, документи, материали, 1978, София, Наука и изкуство; стр. 56.
118. Даме Груев. Спомени, кореспонденция. София, 1999, Парнас-96; с. 168.
119. Спомени на Гьорчо Петров. Материали за историята на македонското освободително движение. Кн. VІІІ. Съобщава Л. Милетич, С., 1927, с. 50 – 51.
120. Спомените на Лазар Гюров са заведени под инв. No 116 В., Л. Гюров. Първоначално в Историческия музей в гр. Петрич в началото на 1980-те постъпва машинописен препис от спомените, а през 1985 г. е дарен и оригиналът. Документите са дарени от Анастас Гюров, син на Лазар Гюров и са заведени в инвентарната книга на отдел “Възраждане” под инв. No 116, и от 212 до 239.
121. Ѓорѓиев, Ванчо, Петар Поп Арсов (1868–1941). Прилог кон проучувањето на македонското националноослободително движење. 1997, Скопjе, стр. 167-168.
122. 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.
123. Коликтив, Освободителната борба на българите в Македония и Одринско 1902/1904 - дипломатически документи, БАН, София 1978. с. 76.
124. 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.
125. ^ 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.
126. 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.
127. 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.
128. Димитър Войников, Българите в най-източната част на Балканския полуостров - Източна Тракия. "Коралов и сие", 2009 г. 24. Идването на Гоце Делчев в Тракия и някои уточнения по този повод.
129. 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.
130. 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.
131. MacDermott, Mercia (1978) Freedom or Death: The Life of Gotsé Delchev. West Nyack, N.Y.: Journeyman Press, pp. 145.
132. 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.
133. 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.
134. "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.
135. 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.
136. 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.
137. 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.
138. Marinov, Tchavdar (June 13, 2013). "Famous Macedonia, the Land of Alexander". In Daskalov, Roumen; et al. (eds.). National Ideologies and Language Policies. Vol. 1. Leiden, Netherlands: Brill. p. 305. ISBN 9789004250765. {{cite book}}: |work= ignored (help)
139. Милан Ж. Трајковић, Вардарска долина - „јабука раздора између Срба и Бугара“ 1885 – 1903., Лесковачки зборник LVIII, Лесковац, 2018, 99 – 110. (102).
140. Пандев, К. Политически искания И програми на българското националноосвободително движение в Македония и Одринско 1878 - 1912. Исторически преглед, 1980, No 6, стр. 21 - 48.
141. "До свикване конгреса, който ще се занимае с измененията в уставите и правилниците на Организацията, които времето и нуждите са наложили да се изработи и одобри от общо събрание една временна инструкция, като за в бъдеще се приемат членове в Организацията само българи-националисти." Из Протокол № 1 за обединението на дейците на Българската народна македоно–одринска организация и ВМОРО в една организация и принципите, на който тя трябва да стои. София, 26 февруари 1911 г.
142. Съдът регистрира БМОРК Илинден-Преображение. ФАКТ.БГ, 29 Януари, 2015.
143. Паметник за революционерите от Македония, Беломорието и Одринско в София. Медиапул, 19 април 2016.
144. Бугарски културен клуб: И БМОРК да стои во преамбулата. MakPress.mk, 10/11/2018.
145. ЉУБЧО ГЕОРГИЕВСКИ ПРЕДЛАГА ПРОМЕНАТА НА УСТАВОТ ДА БИДЕ СПОРЕД УСТАВОТ НА ИСТОРИСКОТО ВМРО. MakPress, 03/04/2023.
146. 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
147. 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.
148. 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.
149. Митревски, Дарко. Нашиот голем фалшификат (прв дел). Превземено од Нова Македониja, недела, 8.11.2015 г.
150. Митревски, Дарко. Нашиот голем фалшификат (втор дел). Превземено од Нова Македониja, четврток, 17.03.2016.
151. 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..
152. 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.
153. 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.
154. Архив Гоце Делчев, Съставители Ива Борилкова и Цочо Билярски, Издателство: Захарий Стоянов, 2020; ISBN 9789540914275, Предговор.
155. Катарџиев, И. (1965). Два правилника на ВМРО од предилинденскиот период. стр. 40; сп. Историја, 1.1, стр. 39-50.
156. 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.
157. Ковачовъ, Владиславъ. Автономна Македония (PDF). София: Печатница С. М. Стайковъ. 1919.
158. 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.
159. Георги Баждаров, "Войните и Македонския въпрос" (PDF). София: сп. "Македония. Политическо, научно и литературно списание", год. I, книга IV, София, печатница "Витоша". 1922.
160. Борбите на македонския народ за освобождение. Димитъръ Влаховъ. Виена: Библиотека Балканска Федерация, № 1, ВМРО (Обединена). 1925.
161. 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).
162. 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.
163. 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 ;
164. Освободителнитѣ борби на Македония, том I, Илинденското възстание, Хр. Силянов (изд. на Илинденската Орг., София, 1933;. София: издание на Илинденската Организация. 1933.
165. 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.
166. "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.

• Bulgarian revolutionary organisations
• Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization