Conference Myths in south-eastern European textbooks 22-24 October 2014, Tirana Myths in south-eastern European textbooks

Significance and work on myth: functionalist approach

In the contemporary literature on political myth there are many views on what defines a myth. Although often there are certain differences between them, still in general they share the opinion that political myths mainly serve to legitimize a given political order or community. E.g., Ifversen claims that modern myths are political, that their task is to legitimize foundational political acts, and that they express trans-historical values that provide orientation to a given community.²³⁶ He proposes to regard a mythical narrative as a particular discourse whose purpose is to justify order and authority in a community.²³⁷ For Boskovic, Gavrilovic and Perica political myths are in general connected to the state and they classify them as myths of the polis, founding myths of the state and myths of the nation.²³⁸

A much larger view then those mentioned above is offered by Bottici in a study which aimed to be the first refined theoretical framework for the use of political myths, and which centers around the universal need for significance. She defined political myth “as the work on a common narrative by which the members of a social group (or society) make significance of their political experiences and deeds. Thus, what makes a political myth out of a simple narrative is not its content or claim to truth, but first, the fact that this narrative coagulates and produces significance, second, that it is shared by a group, and third, that it can come to address the specifically political conditions in which the group operates”.²³⁹ The core of her theory is the notion of significance or Bedeutsamkeit, an older concept that she borrowed from the German philosopher Hans Blumenberg.²⁴⁰ It is argued that people need significance in order to live in a world less indifferent to them.²⁴¹ The second pillar in her philosophy, also stemming from Blumenberg, is the concept of “work on myth”, which is actually the main focus of the inter-relational approach to myth. A myth is not only a story, or a narrative. Bottici argues that a myth is not “a product that is given once and for all, but is instead a process of the continual reworking of a basic narrative core or mythologem”.²⁴²

An important aspect of the political myth is its use in the politics of identity, especially in ethno-national context. The place of the myth in that process is not fixed, but rather dynamic. As Bottici argued, political myths “... can be seen as both the symptom of an already existing identity, but also as a means for creating an identity yet to come”.²⁴³ Kolsto's idea of myths as ethnic boundaries equally stresses the link between historical narratives and traditions as legitimization and celebration of identity. One of the specific traits of this aspect of myth is the tendency to move to action. Political myths represent a determination to act, i.e. they have the potential to prompt people to action, especially when their group identity is based on a myth.²⁴⁴

A political myth can have at the same time a cognitive, practical and an aesthetical dimension, without it being possible to distinguish clearly between them. Drawing on previous ideas from Flood, Sorel and Tudor, Bottici has pointed to three particular dimensions of a political myth: cognitive, practical and aesthetical.²⁴⁵ The cognitive dimension refers to the importance of myths in providing fundamental cognitive schemata in order to map the social world by reducing the complexity of social life to the relative simplicity of its narrative plot; the practical dimension implies that people involved in social action need to represent their planned activity in the form of a narrative that will assure their success; the aesthetical dimension suggests that a myth is manifested through dramatic or even poetic forms of narration.²⁴⁶

Finally, in this small discussion on political myth, it is worth stressing that a political myth is not limited exclusively to a narrative with political content. Actually, the myth can speak of a non-political message, but when this is inserted into a political context or it receives a political function, then it becomes a political myth. It is this last point which makes the myth of antiquitas in Macedonia a political myth. The story of the ancient Macedonia and the story of the longevity of the ancient Macedonian ethnos and its subsequent mix with Slavic tribes is not necessarily a political story. They are much more socio-cultural stories. Yet, in the current political context (especially in relation to the 'name dispute'), this narrative does have a political function, which is to mobilize public emotion, opinion, and action. In fact, bearing in mind the theoretical explanations mentioned above, the functioning and the purpose of the ethno-centric myths of ancient origin and continuity in Macedonia become much more understandable. As we shall see, it is in the context of a number of political situations today that the narrative of the ancient past becomes “relevant”.

In the following part we will focus on two inter-related characteristics of the supposed function of the antiquitas myth in contemporary Republic of Macedonia. We will try to connect more novel sociopolitical developments with the “turn” towards antiquity in primary and secondary school history textbooks. In the previous section we presented the main narratives found in textbooks which give information to students in regard to the alleged link between ancient and contemporary Macedonians and ancient Illyrians with contemporary Albanians. In this section we will focus more on the functions that these two myths provide for their “followers”. Particularly, we will attempt to show the function of the antiquitas myth in it's double significance. Primarily, we will discuss the function of the antiquitas myth in relation to the self-perceived position of the Macedonian nation (understood in purely ethnic terms) in the overall “order of nations”, and especially in the relations with the neighboring countries and the “name dispute” with Greece. Secondary, we will discuss the use of the antiquitas myth in the inter-ethnic dispute between ethnic Macedonians and ethnic Albanians over the character of the state and the political nation, which has marked contemporary history of Macedonia from the independence of the state to present days. It is important to emphasize that the following characteristics are complexly interrelated to the point where various theoretically distinguishable functions interplay to provide understandings of reality valid for a particular point in time and specific sociopolitical context.

Justification function: making use of the “ancient origin” of the nation in the great “order of nations”

Previously presented citations from the history textbooks that direct towards an ancient origin of the nation have had the function to show greater worth of the nation in the “order of nations”. It is important to emphasize that in the Macedonian case the nation is understood in ethnic terms – as first and foremost (exclusively) a nation of ethnic Macedonians. In a particular socio-political context (post-1991) in which the markers of Macedonian identity have been contested from politicians and intellectuals in the neighboring countries (i.e. the name of the state in the context of the relations with Greece; the distinctiveness of the Macedonian language and ethnicity in the context of the relations with Bulgaria; and the independence of the Macedonian Orthodox Church in the context of the relations with Serbia), the idea of a “glorious“ antique origin of the nation functions as a buffer against these allegations of non-auchtochtonity. Through this narrative the Macedonian nation is seen as more morally superior to the neighboring nations which “falsely” attack the markers of Macedonian identity. In this understanding, the Macedonian nation is older, more glorious and thus, bears complete right over its present territory. The contemporary experience of a “small” and “weak” state is seen as a direct consequence of the attempt of the neighboring states to “hijack” the glorious antique historical heritage of Macedonians.

This argument is especially valid when examining the contemporary relations between Macedonia and Greece. Ever since 1991 the governments of Greece and Macedonia lead a political and diplomatic conflict centered around the right for the use of the name “Macedonia”, although it has much wider implications. Both sides venture back in ancient times to the age of Alexander the Great in order to show their legitimacy and “rightful” ownership of a name. Or, more likely, in terms of elections and legitimacy of political power, political parties attempt to obtain votes by presenting themselves as protectors of the Greek or Macedonian nation, respectively. In this context, if we follow Bottici's ideas which were presented above, the myth of ancient origin provides the ethnic Macedonians with a meaning for the conflict, a significance for their situation and values, and a call to action for defending a name/identity. Kolsto argued that: “No magician's trick can turn the South Slav into the autochthonous population of the area they now live in, unless they accept that they fused with the older groups. By seeing their nations as a mixture of old and new population segments they can extend their local roots by many centuries, if not millenia”.²⁴⁷ Thus, through the myth of antiquitas, which projects modern Macedonians in classical times through the fusion between ancient Macedonians and Slavs, many ethnic Macedonians feel confident and morally stronger in their current just fight for identity. The major economic and diplomatic blockades²⁴⁸ which they live(d) through since the independence of the country in this way make sense to them.

The myth of the “obvious” linear historical continuity between ancient and contemporary Macedonians, coupled with the myth of historical right over the territory represent two prime arguments in the ongoing name dispute with Greece.²⁴⁹ In this narrative, Macedonians have complete right to use the name “Macedonia”, firstly because they are descendants of ancient Macedonians and second, because they resided on the given territory for many centuries. Even though none of the two arguments can be valid in the context of international relations, these justifications in the ongoing name dispute serve well for Macedonians to explain just what is exactly wrong with Greece's position.

An important part of the Interim Accord signed between Macedonia and Greece in 1995 is Macedonia's obligation not to use symbols which associate to what is known as ancient Macedonia (primarily the kingdom of Fillip II and Alexander III the Great).²⁵⁰ From 2006 the Macedonian Government started to change it's position over the issue and from the previous policy of non-use of ancient Macedonian symbols it moved towards a policy of sometimes opened and in other times “disguised” use. Firstly, the Government re-named one of the highways in the country as well as the airport in Skopje with the name “Alexander the Great”. This raised instant objections in Greece and accusations of non-compliance with the Interim Accord. Further on, starting from 2010, the Government initiated a large-scale project of re-building of Skopje, the capital of the country in which antique symbols and references were even more openly used. The main feature of the project is a 14.5 meter statue of Alexander the Great in the main square in Skopje titled cautiously as “The Warrior on Horse” . Statues of Philip II and Alexander's mother Olympia also feature in the city center area, while new buildings used as administrative facilities and museums are build to resemble classical architecture, via neo-classical and baroque styles. Statues of other Macedonian national figures from the antique to contemporary times are also present as a part of the project titled “Skopje 2014”.

The project itself has been very controversial in the Macedonia's public sphere since it's revelation to the public. However, it can be argued that the more open use of ancient symbols and references has fueled national pride of ethnic Macedonians, since it is widely perceived that this was not allowed in the previous period due to Greek objections. The myth of ancient origin of the nation is particularly important in this regard, and provides a “rationale” to use those symbols in the first place. It gives understanding why the use of those symbols is a right of ethnic Macedonians, towards which no one may object.

Competition over historical precedence? Contemporary yet ancient Macedonians vs. contemporary yet ancient Illyrians

The “Skopje 2014” project also touched upon another very sensitive issue in the Macedonian public sphere, important from the very first days of the independence of the state. The two largest ethnic groups have disputed over the principles in which the state and nation are build. This was best manifested in demands placed forward by ethnic Albanian politicians and intellectuals in the 1990s for a revision of the Preamble of the Macedonian Constitution to include ethnic Albanians as a “constitutive element” of the state. This issue was seemingly resolved after the conflict of 2001 when the Preamble was changed towards a version of “shared constituency” of all communities residing in the Republic of Macedonia (Macedonians, Albanians, Turks, Romas, Serbs, Bosniaks and Vlachs). Previously, the Constitution identified the Macedonian ethnic group as a “constitutive element”, while “full equality and co-existence” was guaranteed for the members of minority groups.²⁵¹

“Skopje 2014”, as first and foremost a project aimed to promote the ancient origin and continuity of ethnic Macedonians, fueled ethnic Albanian resentments for at least two reasons. First, the project obviously lacked presentation of Albanian national figures. This yet again introduced the question of where is the place of ethnic Albanians in the political Macedonian nation. Secondly (and more important for our discussion here), the issue of historical right over the city (territory) was also re-fueled. Irritated by the ethnic marking of a shared territory, some ethnic Albanian groups and organizations from Skopje have challenged this activity by employing their own belief in ancient, Illyrian, origin and subsequently, their historical right over the city. This phenomenon has been most clearly seen during and after the archaeological excavations at the medieval/Ottoman fortress sector (“Kale”) in the city center. Many local Albanians suspected that the archaeologists, i.e. the state, is doing that in order to hide or destroy any evidence of Illyrian/Albanian character of the site, and thus their autochtonism in the Skopje area. Aspects of the activities from the both sides seem absurd: the government's efforts to interpret new artifacts as Macedonian or as a sign of continuity at any cost (in the context of the “name dispute”), as well as the Albanian “paranoia” that someone will negate their “historical precedence” in Skopje. But, this situation only shows the interdependence and interrelation between historical myths in the region. What is more important is that these events have led to inter-ethnic violence. Consistent with the program for national “renaissance”, the government decided to build a church at the archaeological site mentioned above, located in a zone considered as their own by both Macedonians and Albanians. The result was a massive fight (Februari 2011) at that contested location between groups of young men who felt “historical truths” should be settled through physical violence.²⁵² Two myths of antiquitas had confronted. The aftermath of the event saw many minor ethnically motivated acts of violence throughout the city, which was but a segment of a wider picture of ethnic urban violence that the city has seen in the last several years. Younger generations live the myths fabricated by the generation of their parents. Through nationalist and pseudo-historical ideas, a space can be created for politics, public discourse and education to lead to violence.

In this way, it can be argued that some recent manifestations of the myth of Illyrian origin of ethnic Albanians in the Macedonia has been provoked by the resurgence of the myth of ancient Macedonian origin of ethnic Macedonians. Or, maybe it is more precise to say that both myths influence themselves towards a more extensive appearance, i.e. both myths feed from their counterpart with the effect of gaining much broader ground then before. In the heart of this process stands a quite common feature of nationalisms – to confront among themselves over the discussion of which group has historical precedence over a given territory.

Recent European Analogies

The myths of antiquitas seen in Macedonian history textbooks had/has several analogies in contemporary Europe. In Romania, until recently, in a similar fashion history textbooks emphasized the ancient origin of the contemporary Romanians, by linking them with the Romans and the Dacians.²⁵³ One 1998 textbook teaches that “the Romanian people formed via the living together of the Dacians with the Roman colonists and the assimilation of the Latin language by the Dacians”, while others from 1999 and 2003 event tried to establish similarities in the national costume between the Dacians and Romanians. This situation changed in the last years prior to the country's EU accession in 2007, although similar ideas were suggested in a subtle manner even in 2006.²⁵⁴ In the region of Galicia, in north-western Spain, a “Galician nation” was legitimized with a theory of Celtic roots as opposed to Spahish iberism, or of germanic Suebian roots as opposed to the myth of Wisigothic reign. These narratives were challenged and deconstructed by a new generation of local Galician historians, influenced mainly by the “Annales school”, at the very end of Franco's dictatorship.²⁵⁵ A peculiar case in this context is Greece, and the idea of direct descendance from the ancient Greek city-states. It is probably the only myth of antiquitas in the EU which is left unchallenged, perhaps partly because the western European civilization itself traces its origins back to the rise of culture and philosophy in ancient Greece.

Whatever the varieties and similarities between these myths, researchers have repeatedly accentuated their potentially dangerous role for any society. In a brief discussion on the myths in Kosovo, the historian Geary emphasized the Serbian myth of the Battle for Kosovo (1389), and the Albanian myth of Illyrian descent. In both myths he recognized the working of a “deadly logic” related to the idea of a historical right over a territory.²⁵⁶ The same point was also accentuated by Kolsto in his reflexion on antiquitas myths in general, warning us that they can be “pernicious and politically destabilizing”.²⁵⁷

In that context, mixed teams of ethnic Macedonians and ethnic Albanians propose to their students myths of antiquitas in history textbooks and introduce them into the world view of “we were here first”, meaning this is ours, and the “Other” is an unwanted visitor. History knowledge often is forgotten, but values transmitted through history education remain.

Conclusion

1. The myth of antiquitas is explicitly present in Macedonian history textbooks for almost a decade. The mythical narrative is constructed with the use of hypotheses and presumptions which are not supported in the academic fields of late ancient and early medieval history and archaeology, as well as identity theory. It has received relatively small space in textbooks – one unit – but it's message is quite clear. The narration and the didactic section play an important part in the presentation of the mythical narrative. How did the mythical narrative first enter the textbooks is another line of inquiry, which is quite complex because writing textbooks in the region was/is conditioned not only by political context, but also by personal interests and connections, as well as by different personal interpretations of history. Which of these, if any, was crucial for the entry of the myth of antiquitas in Macedonian history textbooks some ten years ago is still a question to be posed.

2. The particular form in which the myth of antiquitas has been presented in the last decade is considerably more explicit and direct in comparison with the treatment of ancient history in textbooks from the 1990's. We consider it as a new stage in its functioning, and as an illustration of the “myth at work” concept. Therefore, it is important to receive new academic attention.

3. Current theories and concepts on the functioning of political/historical myths provide a relevant framework for general understanding of the myths of antiquitas among the ethnic Macedonians and the ethnic Albanians in the Republic of Macedonia. Following mostly Bottici and Kolsto, we see this myth as a political/historical myth of antiquitas (ancient origins and continuity).

4. The myth present in the textbooks is in correlation with a large set of ethnocentric policies focused on antiquity, identity and “historical rights”, visible especially in the Skopje 2014 project, the large scale archaeological excavations not free (at least in one part) from political (mis)interpretation, the campaign of renaming places, streets and objects in an “ancient” style – briefly, a variety of forms of nation re-branding and invention of tradition.

5. The main purpose of the antiquitas myth in Macedonia, we believe, is twofold – to provide significance and to mobilize for action. In the context of the ongoing “name dispute” with neighboring Greece, the myth makes understandable and bearable the hard and complex problem of having to defend one's own identity in democratic Europe of the 21^st century. It provides significance and even a feeling of moral superiority to those ethnic Macedonians who feel endangered by that specific political activity. At the same time, for both ethnic Macedonians and ethnic Albanians in Macedonia it renders justifiable their “need” to separate themselves from the relevant other, and to mark (even through aggression) as an exclusive historical territory, something which in reality is a shared space. Through the idea of “historical right” over a territory, the belief in the antiquitas myths had played a role in a number of violent events in Skopje. This does not mean that one or two lessons on ancient origin and continuity has led directly or indirectly to any particular violent event in the last few years. However, it does mean that it participates in the same symbolic “mythologized” discourse and mindset manifested in the ethnocentric “anticomania” and the struggle for 'historical' territory.

Bibliography
Textbooks

Adzievski, K., Petreska, D., Ackoska, V., Dimoski, N., Gjorgiev, V., Istorija za petto oddelenie, Skopje: Tabernakul, 2005.

Boskoski, M., Dervisi, N., Nedziri, S., Madzovski, D., Nikolovski, S., Istorija za prva godina gimnazisko obrazovanie, Skopje: Prosvetno Delo, 2009.

Boskoski, M., Ilioski, J., Dervisi, N., Istorija za sesto oddelenie, Skopje: Prosvetno Delo, 2010.

Naneski, N., Memeti, B., Istorija za VI oddelenie, Zvezda: Skopje, 2006.

Ristovski, B., Rahimi, S., Mladenovski, S., Chepreganov, T., Panov, M. B., Istorija za prva godina gimnazisko obrazovanie, Skopje: Albi, 2006.

Literature

Bliznakovski, J., Symbolic Aspects of Nation-Building: The Story of Three Versions of the Preamble of the Macedonian Constitution, Political Thought 44 (2013): Ethnic Conflict. New Perspectives of the Old Reality, 115-122.

Blumenberg, H., Arbeit am Mythos, Suhrkamp Verlag: Frankfurt am Main, 1979.

Blumenberg, H., Work on Myth, MIT Press: Cambridge, 1985.

Boskovic, A., Gavrilovic, D., Perica, V., Myths, Political Mythologies and Nationalism, in: D. Gavrilovic and V. Perica (eds), Political Myths in the Former Yugoslavia and Successor States. A Shared Narrative, Dordrecht, 2011, 13-20.

Bottici, C., A Philosophy of Political Myth, Cambridge University Press, 2007.

Bowden, W., The Construction of Identities in Post-Roman Albania, in : L. Lavan and W. Bowden (eds), Theory and Practice in Late Antique Archaeology, Leiden-Boston: Brill, 2003, 57-77.

Brubaker, R., Ethnicity without Groups, Archives Européenes de Sociologie 43/2 (2002), 163-189.

Brunnbauer, U., Historiography, Myths and the Nation in the Republic of Macedonia, in: U. Brunnbauer (ed.), (Re)Writing History. Historiography in Southeast Europe after Socialism, Munster, 2004, 165-200.

Facal, R. L., Teaching history in Galicia, in: P. Carrier (ed.), School and Nation. Identity Politics and Educational Media in an Age of Diversity, Peter Lang: Frankfurt, 2013, 70-79.

Geary, P. J., The Myth of Nations. The Medieval Origins of Europe, Princeton University Press, 2002.

Gruen, E., Did Ancient Identity Depend on Ethnicity? A Preliminary Probe, Phoenix 67/1-2 (2013), 1-22.

Hasimbegovic, E., Gavrilovic, D., Ethnogenesis Myths, in: D. Gavrilovic and V. Perica (eds), Political Myths in the Former Yugoslavia and Successor States. A Shared Narrative, Dordrecht, 2011, 21-34.

Ifversen, J., Myth in the Writing of European History, in: S. Berger and C. Lorenz (eds), Nationalizing the Past. Historians as Nation Builders in Modern Europe, Palgrave MacMillan, 2010, 452- 479.

Karlsson, K.-G., Public uses of history in contemporary Europe, in: H. Jones et alii (eds), Contemporary History on Trial: Europe since 1989 and the Role of the Expert Historian, Manchester University Press, 2007, 27-45.

Kolsto, P., Assesssing the Role of Historical Myths in Modern Society, in: P. Kolsto (ed.), Myths and Boundaries in Southeastern Europe, London, 2005, 1-34.

Lomonosov, M., National Myths in Interdependence: The Narratives of Ancient Past among Macedonians and Albanians in the Republic of Macedonia after 1991, MA Thesis in manuscript at the Central European University in Budapest, 2012 (consulted at www.etd.ceu.hu/2012/lomonosov_matvey.pdf).

Pichler, R., Historiography and the Politics of Education in the Republic of Macedonia (1991-2008), in: Dimou, A. (ed.), “Transition” and the Politics of History Education in Southeast Europe, Eckert. Die Schriftenreihe Band 124, V& R Press, 2009, 217-249.

Proeva, N., Savremeni makedonski mit kao odgovor na nacionalne mitove suseda: albanski panilirizam, bugarski pantrakizam i grcki panhelenizam, Zgodovinski Časopis 64/1-2 (2010), 176-219.

Schmitt, O. J., 'Mysians, Macedonians, Dardanians': Some Remarks on Late Medieval Ethnonyms in the Central Balkans, in: Makedonskiot identitet niz istorijata, Skopje, 2010, 73-78.

Scott, R., The Classical Tradition in Byzantine Historiography, in: M. Mullet and R. Scott (eds), Byzantium and the Classical Tradition, University of Birmingham Thirteenth Spring Symposium of Byzantine Studies 1979, Birmigham, 1981, 61-74.

Segestan, A. D., Myth, Identity and Conflict: A Comparative Analysis of Romanian and Serbian Textbooks, PhD Dissertation: University of Maryland, College Park, 2009 (consulted at the library of the Georg Eckert Institute in Braunschweig).

Stojanov, D., In Search of Autochthony: A Case Study of the Great Migration Period in History Textbooks in Macedonia, in: Der Donauraum 50/3-4 (2010) : Cultural Changes in Central and South East Europe after 1989, 225-234.

Vouri, S., Antiquity as a Source of National Documentation in Balkan History Textbooks (1991-1996), in: Xochellis, P. D. and Toloudi, F. L. (eds.), The Image of the “Other”/Neighbour in the School Textbooks of the Balkan Countries (Proceedings of the International Conference, Thessaloniki, 16-18 October 1998), Thessaloniki-Athens, 2001, 75-90.