Թոդոր Ալեքսանդրով

Թոդոր Ալեքսանդրով; Тодор Александров
Ծնվել է	մարտի 4, 1881
Ծննդավայր	Նովո Սելո, Շտիպ, Հյուսիսային Մակեդոնիա
Մահացել է	օգոստոսի 31, 1924 (43 տարեկան)
Մահվան վայր	Սուգարևո, Սանդանսկիի համայնք, Բլագոևգրադի մարզ, Բուլղարիա
Քաղաքացիություն	Օսմանյան կայսրություն և Բուլղարիա
Կրթություն	Skopje Bulgarian Pedagogical School?
Մասնագիտություն	ուսուցիչ, հեղափոխական, սպա և քաղաքական գործիչ
Ամուսին	Vangelia Alexandrova?
Ծնողներ	հայր՝ Q12271554?
Կուսակցություն	Internal Macedonian-Adrianopolitan Revolutionary Organization? և Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization?
Պարգևներ և ; մրցանակներ
Անդամություն	Q11080442? և Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization?
	Ստորագրություն;
	Todor Alexandrov Վիքիպահեստում

Թոդոր Ալեքսանդրով Պոպորուշև (Тодор Александров Попорушев, մարտի 4, 1881(1881-03-04), Նովո Սելո, Շտիպ, Հյուսիսային Մակեդոնիա - օգոստոսի 31, 1924(1924-08-31)^[1], Սուգարևո, Սանդանսկիի համայնք, Բլագոևգրադի մարզ, Բուլղարիա), բուլղար հեղափոխական և քաղաքական գործիչ, բուլղարական հեղափոխական բանակի սպա, մանկավարժ։ Առաջին համաշխարհային պատերազմի տարիներին կռվել է Բուլղարիայի կողմից։ Օսմանյան կայսրության դեմ Մակեդոնիայի Շտիպ և Կոչանի քաղաքներում իրականացրել է ահաբեկչություններ։ Չբացահայտված կերպով նա սպանվել է 1924 թթ-ի օգոստոսի 31-ին Բուլղարիայում։

Թոդոր Ալեքսանդրովը եղել է Մակեդոնական ներքին հեղափոխական կազմակերպության, հետագայում՝ այդ կազմակերպության կենտրոնական կոմիտեի անդամ^[2]^[3]^[4]^[5]։

Հյուսիսային Մակեդոնիայում Ալեքսանդրովը երկար տարիներ մերժվել է տեղի պատմագրության կողմից^[6]^[7], ներկայացվել որպես բուլղարասեր (բուլղարոֆիլ) մատնիչ^[8]^[9]։ Բայց վերջին շրջանում նրա նատմամբ վերաբերմունքը փոխվել է, և նա արդեն ներկայացվում է որպես էթնիկ մակեդոնացի^[10]^[11]՝ ներառվելով մակեդոնական պատմական ժառանգության մեջ։ Սակայն դա լուրջ հակասությունների, բուռն վեճերի տեղիք է տվել^[12]։ Մակեդոնիայի պատմության մեջ բուլղարական հզոր ազդեցության ընդունումը մնում է խիստ խնդրահարույց, քանի որ հակասում է Երկրորդ աշխարհամարտից հետո ազգի կայացման հակաբուլղարական հայեցակարգին^[13]։

Ծանոթագրություններ[խմբագրել | խմբագրել կոդը]

↑ ^1,0 ^1,1 ^1,2 http://uca.edu/politicalscience/dadm-project/europerussiacentral-asia-region/bulgaria-1908-present/
↑ "Уште робуваме на старите поделби", Разговор со д-р Зоран Тодоровски, директор на Државниот архив на Република Македониja (in Macedonian; in English: "We are still in servitude to the old divisions", interview with Dr Zoran Todorovski, PhD, Director of the State Archive of the Republic of Macedonia, published on 27 June 2005 Трибуна: Дел од јавноста и некои Ваши колеги историчари Ве обвинуваат дека промовирате зборник за човек (Тодор Александров) кој се чувствувал како Бугарин. Кој наш револуционерен деец му противречел на Александров по тоа прашање? Тодоровски - Речиси никој. Уште робуваме на поделбата на леви и десни. Во етничка, во национална смисла сите биле со исти сознанија, со иста свест. In English: Tribune: Part of the public and some from your fellow historians accuse you of promoting a collection for man (Todor Alexandrov) who felt himself as Bulgarian. Are there some of our revolutionary activist who opposed him on that issue? Todorovski - Almost none. We are still in servitude to the old divisions of left and right. Ethnically, in a national sense, they were all with the same sentiments, with the same (Bulgarian) consciousness.
↑ Collective Memory, National Identity, and Ethnic Conflict: Greece, Bulgaria, and the Macedonian Question by Victor Roudometof, Greenwood Publishing Group, 2002; 0275976483, pg. 99.
↑ Crown of Thorns: The Reign of King Boris III of Bulgaria, 1918–1943 by Stephane Groueff, Rowman & Littlefield, 1998, 1568331142,p. 118.
↑ Contested Ethnic Identity: The Case of Macedonian Immigrants in Toronto, 1900–1996 (by Chris Kostov), Peter Lang, 2010; 3034301960, pg. 78.
↑ The origins of the official Macedonian national narrative are to be sought in the establishment in 1944 of the Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. This open acknowledgment of the Macedonian national identity led to the creation of a revisionist historiography whose goal has been to affirm the existence of the Macedonian nation through the history. Macedonian historiography is revising a considerable part of ancient, medieval, and modern histories of the Balkans. Its goal is to claim for the Macedonian peoples a considerable part of what the Greeks consider Greek history and the Bulgarians Bulgarian history. The claim is that most of the Slavic population of Macedonia in the 19th and first half of the 20th century was ethnic Macedonian. For more see: Victor Roudometof, Collective Memory, National Identity, and Ethnic Conflict: Greece, Bulgaria, and the Macedonian Question, Greenwood Publishing Group, 2002, 0275976483, p. 58; Victor Roudometof, Nationalism and Identity Politics in the Balkans: Greece and the Macedonian Question in Journal of Modern Greek Studies 14.2 (1996) 253–301.
↑ Yugoslav Communists recognized the existence of a Macedonian nationality during WWII to quiet fears of the Macedonian population that a communist Yugoslavia would continue to follow the former Yugoslav policy of forced Serbianization. Hence, for them to recognize the inhabitants of Macedonia as Bulgarians would be tantamount to admitting that they should be part of the Bulgarian state. For that the Yugoslav Communists were most anxious to mold Macedonian history to fit their conception of Macedonian consciousness. The treatment of Macedonian history in Communist Yugoslavia had the same primary goal as the creation of the Macedonian language: to de-Bulgarize the Macedonian Slavs and to create a separate national consciousness that would inspire identification with Yugoslavia. For more see: Stephen E. Palmer, Robert R. King, Yugoslav communism and the Macedonian question, Archon Books, 1971, 0208008217, Chapter 9: The encouragement of Macedonian culture.
↑ The first name of the IMRO was "Bulgarian Macedonian-Adrianople Revolutionary Committees", which was later changed several times. Initially its membership was restricted only for Bulgarians. It was active not only in Macedonia but also in Thrace (the Vilayet of Adrianople). Since its early name emphasized the Bulgarian nature of the organization by linking the inhabitants of Thrace and Macedonia to Bulgaria, these facts are still difficult to be explained from the Macedonian historiography. They suggest that IMRO revolutionaries in the Ottoman period did not differentiate between ‘Macedonians’ and ‘Bulgarians’. Moreover, as their own writings attest, they often saw themselves and their compatriots as ‘Bulgarians’ and wrote in Bulgarian standard language. For more see: Brunnbauer, Ulf (2004) Historiography, Myths and the Nation in the Republic of Macedonia. In: Brunnbauer, Ulf, (ed.) (Re)Writing History. Historiography in Southeast Europe after Socialism. Studies on South East Europe, vol. 4. LIT, Münster, pp. 165–200 382587365X.
↑ The modern Macedonian historiographic equation of IMRO demands for autonomy with a separate and distinct national identity does not necessarily jibe with the historical record. A rather obvious problem is the very title of the organization, which included Thrace in addition to Macedonia. Thrace whose population was never claimed by modern Macedonian nationalism...There is, moreover, the not less complicated issue of what autonomy meant to the people who espoused it in their writings. According to Hristo Tatarchev, their demand for autonomy was motivated not by an attachment to Macedonian national identity but out of concern that an explicit agenda of unification with Bulgaria would provoke other small Balkan nations and the Great Powers to action. Macedonian autonomy, in other words, can be seen as a tactical diversion, or as “Plan B” of Bulgarian unification. İpek Yosmaoğlu, Blood Ties: Religion, Violence and the Politics of Nationhood in Ottoman Macedonia, 1878–1908, Cornell University Press, 2013, 0801469791, pp. 15–16.
↑ The most controversial revisionist effort concerned the attempt to include the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organisation (VMRO) of the inter-war period within the Macedonian national narrative. Previous scholarship had regarded this organization as a reactionary force of Bulgarian expansionism, pointing to its support for conservative circles in Bulgaria...People who share the view of the perennial existence of the Macedonian nation and deny any relation with the Bulgarian nation accuse critics of this opinion as “Bulgarophile.” The revisionists, however, are not seeking to deconstruct the Macedonian nation or propagate Bulgarian ethnic self-identification in claiming some relation between the Bulgarian and Macedonian nations. Instead, they aim to establish an alternative vision of the national past whose glorious aspects are seen to be embodied in the VMRO-DPMNE party. For more see: Serving the Nation: Ulf Brunnbauer, Historiography in the Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) After Socialism, Historein, Vol 4 (2003).
↑ Historical Dictionary of the Republic of Macedonia, Dimitar Bechev, Scarecrow Press, 2009, 0810862956, p. 140.
↑ In 2021, the name of the Todor Alexandrov Bridge in Skopje, which was given to it in 2012 and provoked protests then, was changed back again. For more see: Зоре Нацева, Град Скопје ги врaќа старите имиња на Ленинова, Железничка, Мексичка, 4 Јули и други. Инфомах, March 25, 2021.
↑ Paul Reef, Macedonian Monument Culture Beyond ‘Skopje 2014’. From the journal Comparative Southeast European Studies https://doi.org/10.1515/soeu-2018-0037

Արտաքին հղումներ[խմբագրել | խմբագրել կոդը]

Վիքիպահեստն ունի նյութեր, որոնք վերաբերում են «Թոդոր Ալեքսանդրով» հոդվածին։

[_65f916e6ed7fcb97-1] 1,0 ^1,1 ^1,2 http://uca.edu/politicalscience/dadm-project/europerussiacentral-asia-region/bulgaria-1908-present/

[zoran-2] "Уште робуваме на старите поделби", Разговор со д-р Зоран Тодоровски, директор на Државниот архив на Република Македониja (in Macedonian; in English: "We are still in servitude to the old divisions", interview with Dr Zoran Todorovski, PhD, Director of the State Archive of the Republic of Macedonia, published on 27 June 2005 Трибуна: Дел од јавноста и некои Ваши колеги историчари Ве обвинуваат дека промовирате зборник за човек (Тодор Александров) кој се чувствувал како Бугарин. Кој наш револуционерен деец му противречел на Александров по тоа прашање? Тодоровски - Речиси никој. Уште робуваме на поделбата на леви и десни. Во етничка, во национална смисла сите биле со исти сознанија, со иста свест. In English: Tribune: Part of the public and some from your fellow historians accuse you of promoting a collection for man (Todor Alexandrov) who felt himself as Bulgarian. Are there some of our revolutionary activist who opposed him on that issue? Todorovski - Almost none. We are still in servitude to the old divisions of left and right. Ethnically, in a national sense, they were all with the same sentiments, with the same (Bulgarian) consciousness.

[3] Collective Memory, National Identity, and Ethnic Conflict: Greece, Bulgaria, and the Macedonian Question by Victor Roudometof, Greenwood Publishing Group, 2002; 0275976483, pg. 99.

[4] Crown of Thorns: The Reign of King Boris III of Bulgaria, 1918–1943 by Stephane Groueff, Rowman & Littlefield, 1998, 1568331142,p. 118.

[5] Contested Ethnic Identity: The Case of Macedonian Immigrants in Toronto, 1900–1996 (by Chris Kostov), Peter Lang, 2010; 3034301960, pg. 78.

[6] The origins of the official Macedonian national narrative are to be sought in the establishment in 1944 of the Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. This open acknowledgment of the Macedonian national identity led to the creation of a revisionist historiography whose goal has been to affirm the existence of the Macedonian nation through the history. Macedonian historiography is revising a considerable part of ancient, medieval, and modern histories of the Balkans. Its goal is to claim for the Macedonian peoples a considerable part of what the Greeks consider Greek history and the Bulgarians Bulgarian history. The claim is that most of the Slavic population of Macedonia in the 19th and first half of the 20th century was ethnic Macedonian. For more see: Victor Roudometof, Collective Memory, National Identity, and Ethnic Conflict: Greece, Bulgaria, and the Macedonian Question, Greenwood Publishing Group, 2002, 0275976483, p. 58; Victor Roudometof, Nationalism and Identity Politics in the Balkans: Greece and the Macedonian Question in Journal of Modern Greek Studies 14.2 (1996) 253–301.

[7] Yugoslav Communists recognized the existence of a Macedonian nationality during WWII to quiet fears of the Macedonian population that a communist Yugoslavia would continue to follow the former Yugoslav policy of forced Serbianization. Hence, for them to recognize the inhabitants of Macedonia as Bulgarians would be tantamount to admitting that they should be part of the Bulgarian state. For that the Yugoslav Communists were most anxious to mold Macedonian history to fit their conception of Macedonian consciousness. The treatment of Macedonian history in Communist Yugoslavia had the same primary goal as the creation of the Macedonian language: to de-Bulgarize the Macedonian Slavs and to create a separate national consciousness that would inspire identification with Yugoslavia. For more see: Stephen E. Palmer, Robert R. King, Yugoslav communism and the Macedonian question, Archon Books, 1971, 0208008217, Chapter 9: The encouragement of Macedonian culture.

[8] The first name of the IMRO was "Bulgarian Macedonian-Adrianople Revolutionary Committees", which was later changed several times. Initially its membership was restricted only for Bulgarians. It was active not only in Macedonia but also in Thrace (the Vilayet of Adrianople). Since its early name emphasized the Bulgarian nature of the organization by linking the inhabitants of Thrace and Macedonia to Bulgaria, these facts are still difficult to be explained from the Macedonian historiography. They suggest that IMRO revolutionaries in the Ottoman period did not differentiate between ‘Macedonians’ and ‘Bulgarians’. Moreover, as their own writings attest, they often saw themselves and their compatriots as ‘Bulgarians’ and wrote in Bulgarian standard language. For more see: Brunnbauer, Ulf (2004) Historiography, Myths and the Nation in the Republic of Macedonia. In: Brunnbauer, Ulf, (ed.) (Re)Writing History. Historiography in Southeast Europe after Socialism. Studies on South East Europe, vol. 4. LIT, Münster, pp. 165–200 382587365X.

[9] The modern Macedonian historiographic equation of IMRO demands for autonomy with a separate and distinct national identity does not necessarily jibe with the historical record. A rather obvious problem is the very title of the organization, which included Thrace in addition to Macedonia. Thrace whose population was never claimed by modern Macedonian nationalism...There is, moreover, the not less complicated issue of what autonomy meant to the people who espoused it in their writings. According to Hristo Tatarchev, their demand for autonomy was motivated not by an attachment to Macedonian national identity but out of concern that an explicit agenda of unification with Bulgaria would provoke other small Balkan nations and the Great Powers to action. Macedonian autonomy, in other words, can be seen as a tactical diversion, or as “Plan B” of Bulgarian unification. İpek Yosmaoğlu, Blood Ties: Religion, Violence and the Politics of Nationhood in Ottoman Macedonia, 1878–1908, Cornell University Press, 2013, 0801469791, pp. 15–16.

[10] The most controversial revisionist effort concerned the attempt to include the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organisation (VMRO) of the inter-war period within the Macedonian national narrative. Previous scholarship had regarded this organization as a reactionary force of Bulgarian expansionism, pointing to its support for conservative circles in Bulgaria...People who share the view of the perennial existence of the Macedonian nation and deny any relation with the Bulgarian nation accuse critics of this opinion as “Bulgarophile.” The revisionists, however, are not seeking to deconstruct the Macedonian nation or propagate Bulgarian ethnic self-identification in claiming some relation between the Bulgarian and Macedonian nations. Instead, they aim to establish an alternative vision of the national past whose glorious aspects are seen to be embodied in the VMRO-DPMNE party. For more see: Serving the Nation: Ulf Brunnbauer, Historiography in the Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) After Socialism, Historein, Vol 4 (2003).

[11] Historical Dictionary of the Republic of Macedonia, Dimitar Bechev, Scarecrow Press, 2009, 0810862956, p. 140.

[12] In 2021, the name of the Todor Alexandrov Bridge in Skopje, which was given to it in 2012 and provoked protests then, was changed back again. For more see: Зоре Нацева, Град Скопје ги врaќа старите имиња на Ленинова, Железничка, Мексичка, 4 Јули и други. Инфомах, March 25, 2021.

[13] Paul Reef, Macedonian Monument Culture Beyond ‘Skopje 2014’. From the journal Comparative Southeast European Studies https://doi.org/10.1515/soeu-2018-0037

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]