1. ^"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.
2. ^The political and military leaders of the Slavs of Macedonia at the turn of the [20th.] 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". "The Macedonian conflict: ethnic nationalism in a transnational world", Princeton University Press, Danforth, Loring M. 1997, {{ISBN|0691043566}}, p. 64.
3. ^During the 20th century, Slavo-Macedonian national feeling has shifted. At the beginning of the 20th century, Slavic patriots in Macedonia felt a strong attachment to Macedonia as a multi-ethnic homeland. They imagined a Macedonian community uniting themselves with non-Slavic Macedonians... Most of these Macedonian Slavs also saw themselves as Bulgarians. By the middle of the 20th. century, however Macedonian patriots began to see Macedonian and Bulgarian loyalties as mutually exclusive. Regional Macedonian nationalism had become ethnic Macedonian nationalism... This transformation shows that the content of collective loyalties can shift. Region, Regional Identity and Regionalism in Southeastern Europe, Ethnologia Balkanica Series, Klaus Roth, Ulf Brunnbauer, LIT Verlag Münster, 2010, p. 127., {{ISBN|3825813878}}
4. ^From 1900 to 1903, Karev was a teacher at the Bulgarian schools in the village of Gorno Divjaci and in his native Krusevo. Билярски, Цочо. „Никола Карев, Председателят на Крушовската република“, Сите Българи заедно. Jan 31, 2012.
5. ^Bulgarians, inspired by the rise of nationalism, began to set up their own national churches and schools independently of the Patriarchate of Constantinople. In 1870 they were also allowed to establish an Exarchate, which, within the framework of the millet system, became more than a mere religious institution, coming to represent the Orthodox Bulgarians as a separate nation in the Ottoman Empire. As such, the Bulgarian Exarchate established a network of national schools where it took care of both religious and secular education of the Orthodox Bulgarians under its jurisdiction. For more see: Maria Schnitter, Daniela Kalkandjieva, Teaching Religion in Bulgarian Schools in Adam Seligman (ed.) Religious Education and the Challenge of Pluralism. New York: Oxford University Press, 2014, pp. 70-95.
6. ^In Macedonia, the education race produced the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization (IMRO), which organized and carried out the Ilinden Uprising of 1903. Most of IMRO’s founders and principal organizers were graduates of the Bulgarian Exarchate schools in Macedonia, who had become teachers and inspectors in the same system that had educated them. Frustrated with the pace of change, they organized and networked to develop their movement throughout the Bulgarian school system that employed them. The Exarchate schools were an ideal forum in which to propagate their cause, and the leading members were able to circulate to different posts, to spread the word, and to build up supplies and stores for the anticipated uprising. As it became more powerful, IMRO was able to impress upon the Exarchate its wishes for teacher and inspector appointments in Macedonia. For more see: Julian Brooks, The Education Race for Macedonia, 1878—1903 in The Journal of Modern Hellenism, Vol 31 (2015) pp. 23-58.
7. ^Two Krusevo natives were centrally involved in the action (the insurrection organized by the IMARO in Krushevo). Nikola Karev, from the community known as Bulgarians, was the local representative to the central committee of the organization and was the military commander of the insurgent forces... Fieldwork Dilemmas: Anthropologists in Postsocialist States, Hermine G. De Soto, Nora Dudwick, Univ of Wisconsin Press, 2000, {{ISBN|978-0-299-16374-7}}, [https://books.google.bg/books?id=xLhTxdx7VaQC&pg=PA37&dq=two+krusevo+natives+karev&hl=bg&sa=X&ei=IAROVNOHCqa_ygOmooLwBQ&ved=0CB0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false p. 37.]
8. ^Yet the identity problem was glaring, Karev reportedly addressed an assembly of 60 Bulgarian, Greek and Vlach inhabitants, to establish his “temporary government” but he referred to those assembled “brother Bulgarians”. The revolutionaries flew Bulgarian flags, killed five Greek Patriarchists, accused to be Ottoman spies, and subsequently attacked the local Muslims (Turks and Albanians). Michael Palairet, Macedonia: A Voyage through History (Vol. 2), Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2016, {{ISBN|1443888494}}, p. 149.
9. ^An excerpt from an article from a Macedonian newspaper "Utrinski vesnik", published on 22. 07. 2000, Archive number 329. Утрински Весник, сите права задржани, Сабота, July 22, 2000 Архивски Број 329. * Интервјуто на Никола Карев за грчкиот весник Акрополис, објавено на 8 мај 1903 година, е првото, досега познато интервју на член на најтесното раководство на ВМРО пред Илинденското востание. Овој исклучителен, слободно ќе може да се нарече, историски документ го откри и го преведе на македонски јазик г-ѓа Елефтерија Вамбаковска, вработена во Институт за национална историја. При вчерашната средба со г-ѓа Вамбаковска во редакцијата на "Утрински весник" најнапред не интересираше начинот на кој таа дошла до интервјуто. (in English) Nikola Karev's interview to the Greek newspaper "Acropolis", published on May 8, 1903, is the first, so far known interview by a member of the top leadership of the IMRO before the Ilinden Uprising. This is an exclusive, we can call it even a historical document discovered and translated into Macedonian by Mrs. Eleftheria Vambakovska working in the Institute of National History. At yesterday's meeting with Mrs. Vambakovska in the "Utrinski vesnik" we were interested in the way, she came to that interview.* – Утрински: Како ја коментирате содржината на интервјуто. Што значи терминот бугарофрон? (in English) Utrinski: How do you interpret the content of the interview. What does the term Bulgarophronos mean?* – Елефтерија Вамбаковска: Што се однесува до содржината на интервјуто оставам да суди науката и читателите. Мое мислење е дека тоа содржи контрадикторности и нелогичности. Интервјуто всушност и започнува со една нелогичност. Карев изјавува дека е Бугарин по убедување, а на првото прашање на новинарот: "Дали е Македонец", одговара со "да"! Самиот новинар го прогласува Карев за Македонец, но бугаризиран, а го започнува интервјуто со прашањето што е (по националност)? Се гледа дека за него поважно било етничкото потекло – дали бил Македонец, што за Грците било синоним за Грк. Инаку, тоа "по убедување" за нив не било важно – убедувањето се стекнувало и било менливо. Бугарофрон, во буквален превод би значело – човек што мисли на бугарски начин, којшто мисли како што мислат сите Бугари. Денес Грците имаат сличен термин – етникрофрон кој има слично значење, имено – човек што мисли на својата нација, односно Грк кој мисли на Грција. Денес Македонците во Егејска Македонија своите сонародници кои се погрчиле ги нарекуваат – етникофрони... (in English) Eleftheria Vambakovska: As to the content of the interview, I leave it free for interpretations by scientists and readers. My opinion is that it contains contradictory and illogical claims. The interview actually begins with an illogical claim. Karev asserts he is a Bulgarian by conviction ("Bulgarophronos"), and on the first question of the reporter: "Are you a Macedonian", he answers with "yes"! The reporter declared Karev was a Macedonian, but bulgarized one. The interview begins with a question "are you a Macedonian"? that means Karev's ethnic origin was more important for the interviewer – whether he is a "Macedonian", which to the Greeks was a synonymous of a "Greek". Otherwise, to the Greeks "(Bulgarian) by conviction" was not so important – the conviction is acquirable and it can by changed. "Bulgarophronos", literally translated would mean – a man who thinks like a Bulgarian, a man who thinks like all other Bulgarians. Today the Greeks have a similar term – ethnicophronos, which has similar meaning, namely – a man who thinks on his own nation – nationalist, a Greek who thinks about Greece. Today the Macedonians in Aegean Macedonia (Greece) call their countrymen who became hellenized, i.e. Greeks – ethnicophronos.
10. ^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, {{ISBN|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.
11. ^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, {{ISBN|0208008217}}, Chapter 9: The encouragement of Macedonian culture.
12. ^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 standard Bulgarian 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 {{ISBN|382587365X}}.
13. ^Nikola Kirov, Karev’s cousin from Krusevo, and participant at the events, published in 1923 a book about the Ilinden Uprising in the town. The account of Kirov is very popular in the RoM and it is one of the primary sources on the rebellion, even though, similar to the two Greek primary accounts, Kirov mentions Bulgarians, Vlachs and Greeks, but no ethnic Macedonians who participated in the Rebellion. However Yugoslav-era historians and those in North Macedonia objected to Kirov's classification of Macedonia's Slavic population as Bulgarian. When the anthropologist Keith Brown visited Kruševo at the eve of the 21th century, he discovered that the local Aromanian dialect still has no way to distinguish "Macedonian" and "Bulgarian", and uses the designation Vurgari, i.e "Bulgarians", about both ethnic groups. For more see: Chris Kostov, Contested Ethnic Identity: The Case of Macedonian Immigrants in Toronto, 1900-1996, Peter Lang, 2010, {{ISBN|3034301960}}, p. 71.
14. ^"Macedonian revolutionary heroes are carefully treated. In addition to appropriating the historical legacies of the key founders of the original IMRO-Goce Delcev, Damian Gruev and Pere Tosev-Macedonian historians play up lesser figures, who might have given the slightest indication of "socialist" inclination or who were not openly Bulgarophiles. Thus there is glorification of men like Jane Sandanski, Dimo Hadji-Dimov, Petar Poparsov and Nikola Karev, who, because they defected from the IMRO or lost out in internecine organizational fights, have long been forgotten by chroniclers of the IMRO" For more see: Stephen E. Palmer, Robert R. King, Yugoslav communism and the Macedonian question, Archon Books, 1971, {{ISBN|0208008217}}, Chapter 9: The encouragement of Macedonian culture.
15. ^According to the Macedonian historian Academician Ivan Katardzhiev all left-wing Macedonian revolutionaries from the period until the early 1930s declared themselves as "Bulgarians" and he asserts that the political separatism of some Macedonian revolutionaties toward official Bulgarian policy was yet only political phenomenon without ethnic character. Katardzhiev claims all those veterans from IMRO (United) and Bulgarian communist party remained only at the level of political, not of national separatism. Thus, they practically continued to feel themselves as Bulgarians, i.e. they didn't developed clear national separatist position even in Communist Yugoslavia. This will bring even one of them - Dimitar Vlahov on the session of the Politburo of the Macedonian communist party in 1948, to say that in 1932 (when left wing of IMRO issued for the first time the idea of separate Macedonian nation) a mistake was made. Академик Катарџиев, Иван. Верувам во националниот имунитет на македонецот, интервjу за списание „Форум“, 22 jули 2000, броj 329. For more see 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, BRILL, 2013, {{ISBN|9789004250765}}, pp 273-330.
16. ^After 1945, in ex-Serbian Macedonia, the authorities rehabilitated the idea of a separate Macedonian language, identity and consciousness, sponsoring the creation of a separate Macedonian Church. At the same time, official history rehabilitated only certain VMRO-era revolutionaries, like Goce Delcev, Nikola Karev and Dame Gruev, who they deemed deserving because they were not associated with the idea of union of Macedonia with Bulgaria. Meanwhile, most emphasis was placed on celebrating the joint Yugoslav history of the World War II Communist struggle. Other VMRO figures, like Todor Aleksandrov or Ivan Mihajlov remained blacklisted owing to their strong pro-Bulgarian stands. Historians today agree that the truth was not so black-and-white. Per Prof. Todor Cepreganov: Almost all Macedonian revolutionaries from that era at some point of their life took pro-Bulgarian stands or pronounced themselves as Bulgarians – this is not disputed. See: Sinisa Jakov Marusic, New Statue Awakens Past Quarrels in Macedonia, in [https://balkaninsight.com/2012/07/13/new-statue-awakens-past-quarrels-in-macedonia/ Balkan Transitional Justice - BIRN, July 13, 2012.]
17. ^Zoran Todorovski, a specialist in the history of the Macedonian revolutionary movement and former director of the National Archive in RoM, published a monograph praising the right-wing IMRO under the anticommunist leadership of Ivan Mihajlov. Todorovski, by that point established as revisionist historian, released an edited collection of writings of Mihajlov’s precursor – Todor Aleksandrov. On that occasion, he referred positively to Bulgarian academic studies. He has confirmed also that in post-Ottoman times all right-wing IMRO revolutionaries undoubtedly considered themselves as Bulgarians. Todorovski claims inter-war VMRO had been a champion of independent Macedonian statehood and should, therefore, be considered part of the national tradition, despite the Bulgarian nationalist contradictions of its leaders. He asserts that the ethnic Macedonian - Bulgarian division between left and right-wing Macedonian revolutionaries is unacceptable and in national sense, they all were with Bulgarian consciousness. Интервю со д-р Зоран Тодоровски, "Уште робуваме на старите поделби", Разговор со приредувачот на Зборникот документи за Тодор Александров, сп.Трибуна, брой 5, 2005 г. For more see: Tchavdar Marinov and Alexander Vezenkov, Communism and Nationalism in the Balkans: Marriage of Convenience or Mutual Attraction? in Entangled Histories of the Balkans - Volume Two, BRILL, 2013, {{ISBN|9004261915}}, pp 469-555.
18. ^The politics of terror: the Macedonian liberation movements, 1893–1903, Duncan M. Perry, Duke University Press, 1988, {{ISBN|0-8223-0813-4}}, p. 172.
19. ^Николов, Борис Й. Вътрешна Македоно-одринска революционна организация. Войводи и ръководители (1893–1934). Биографично-библиографски справочник, София 2001, с. 74
20. ^We, the people: politics of national peculiarity in Southeastern Europe, Diana Mishkova, Central European University Press, 2009, {{ISBN|963-9776-28-9}}, p. 122.
21. ^Terrible Fate: Ethnic Cleansing in the Making of Modern Europe, Benjamin Lieberman, Rowman & Littlefield, 2013, {{ISBN|144223038X}}, p. 56.
22. ^Historical Dictionary of Macedonia, Historical Dictionaries of Europe, Dimitar Bechev, Scarecrow Press, 2009, {{ISBN|0810862956}}, Introduction.
23. ^G.G. Stam, „Interview with a member of the Committee‟, Athina, 8/21 May 1903.
24. ^Georgios Michalopoulos, Political parties, irredentism and the Foreign Ministry. Greece and Macedonia: 1878-1910. University of Oxford, 2013, pp. 163-164.
25. ^"Беше наполно прав и Мисирков во своjата фундаментална критика за Востанието и неговите раководители. Неговите укажуваньа се покажаа наполно точни во послешната практика. На пр., во ослободеното Крушево се формира градска управа составена од "Бугари", Власи и Гркомани, па во зачуваните писмени акти не фигурираат токму Македонци(!)..." Блаже Ристовски, "Столетиjа на македонската свест", Скопје, Култура, 2001, стр. 458.
26. ^The past in question: modern Macedonia and the uncertainties of nation, Keith Brown, Publisher Princeton University Press, 2003, {{ISBN|0-691-09995-2}}, pp. 81–82.
27. ^Цочо Билярски, Никола Карев — председателят на Крушевската република, публикувано в Сите българи заедно на 31.01.2012.
28. ^Македонска енциклопедија, МАНУ, Скопје, 2009, стр. 677
29. ^Илюстрация Илинден, ноември 1941, година 13, книга 9 (129), стр. 13.
30. ^Ристески, Стојан. Судени за Македонија (1945–1985), Полар, Охрид, 1995, стр.311–324. {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140407083151/http://it.scribd.com/doc/37255531/Sudeni-za-Makedonija-1945-1985 |date=April 7, 2014 }}
31. ^Блаже Ристовски (уредник) „Рациновите македонски народно-ослободителни песни“, „Матица македонска“, Скопје, 1993, 40 стр.
32. ^Последното интервjу на Мише Карев: Колишевски и Страхил Гигов сакале да ги прогласат Гоце, Даме и Никола за Бугари! [https://denesen.mk/poslednoto-intervju-na-mishe-karev-kolishevski-i-strahil-gigov-sakale-da-gi-proglasat-goce-dame-i-nikola-za-bugari/ 02.08.2018 Денешен весник.]
33. ^Коста Църнушанов, Македонизмът и съпротивата на Македония срещу него Унив. изд. "Св. Климент Охридски", София, 1992, стр. 478.
34. ^The phenomenon noted by Mise Karev, that Nikola carried Bulgarian baggage at some points in Yugoslav history, is confirmed by others in the town. They do not, however, necessarily link the origin of this version of Nikola Karev's career to a policy of disinformation by Kolisevski and his associates. Some people recall their grandparents’ unshakable conviction that in 1903 Karev addressed himself to his "brother Bulgarians" as recorded in the account given by Nicolaos Ballas... Karev's own close links to Sofia — he spent extended periods there before and after the Uprising — gave further grist to the rumor mill that associated him closely with pro-Bulgarian forces.. For more see: Keith Brown, The Past in Question: Modern Macedonia and the Uncertainties of Nation, Princeton University Press, 2018, {{ISBN|0691188432}}, p. 152.