I've read all of the posts of the topic and I see that it's talked about the exact place where the
ancient macedonians lived (Macedon). The position is clear for everybody. But who says that the population of Macedon did not migrate? Do you know which territory will be called Macedonia from VI to XVI century? A territory which is 300 (I dont know the exact distance) away from Macedon.A territory which is situated between nowadays Odrin(Edirne) and Istanbul. Here is the article in wikipedia:
Macedonia (theme) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I dont have a map, but if you click on the links in the article you will see the position of the territory. And the logical explanation of that fact is the following:In 167AD Macedonia fell under Roman rule.The destiny of the macedonians is the same as that of other paleo - balkan nations such as thracians and illyrians.Between the III and VII century they were atacked by barbarians (goths,huns,avars,slavs,bulgars),who killed a lot of them and took their terrirtories.The survivors of the macedonians moved to the more secure district near the capital of the East Roman Empire.The population of that district will be called macedonians in the next centuries. It will occupy that territory(together with bulgarians and turks) up to 1922 when it will be forced by the turks to move in nowadays Greece.
A famous emperor of Byzantine Empire from that region is
Basil II the Bulgar-Slayer, who is from the Macedonian dynasty and was born near Odrin(Edirne).So,as you can see, the ancient macedonians have nothing to do with the modern ones.
In 680 AD khan Kuber,brother of the creator of the Danube Bulgaria came with
60 000 (pra)bulgarian families(that is a serious number,isnt it?) to the territories of the nowadays Macedonia(the exact places are :Bitolsko - Prilepsko,Resensko,Ohridko and Korchansko districts) and later they mixed with the slavs who came here.So it's clear that the etnic groups which constitute the macedonian "nation" are exactly the same as the bulgarian.
For our bothers "macedonians" I will recommned to read the book of Bojidar Dimitrov,the director of the National Museum of History in Bulgaria, called "The 10 lies of the macedonism", which is free online and is written in "macedonian" language.The link in wikipedia:
ДеÑ?етте лъжи на македонизма — УикипедиÑ?
In the bottom of the page it is written "Он-лайн версия на книгата".
And one more thing I want to say....In Bulgaria there several regional groups with their own dialects:Shopi,Trakiici,Ruptsi,Balkandjii,Makedontsi,Dobrudjanci.There are even more, but they are smaller.Every one of them has its customs,songs and traditions.Of course,they have a lot in common.These regional groups formed in the XVIII - XIX century.When the Bulgarian state liberated in 1878, the official language must be formulated. The dialect which took the main role in this was the dialect of the Balkandjii, because in the region they live is situated the old Bulgarian capital - Veliko Tarnovo.And, logically, the official language has its influence on the regional dialects and the differencies between them begin to disapper. Macedonia remain under Ottoman rule and later under Serbian so their dialect remained unchanged(or even influenced of the Serbian language). But if you go to small villages in different regions of Bulgaria the differencies of the pronounciation of the words is very sensible. Also the political borders of the Macedonia dont coincide with the region where Makedontsi (or Macedonians in English) live.In south western Bulgaria there are also Makedontsi and ,on the other hand,Shopi live in north-eastern Macedonia.
So is it right to divide Bulgaria in 6-7 or even more different countries? And what about Europe in some hundred states? Everybody knows how many different german and italian countries there ware in the previous centuries...