free download in pdf format - Culturelink Network

Cultural Identity Politics in the (Post-)Transitional Societies
following an encounter between ancient Macedonians and Slavic people who settled on this
territory. Th at empowered them to use the ancient Macedonian heritage, incorporating it in
the collective consciousness.
It started with a fl ag, whose main symbol was taken from the Vergina archaeological
site in northern Greece, and is continued today through numerous monuments to
Philip and Alexander the Great throughout Macedonia (to Philip II in Bitola in 2008,
and also in Prilep, and to Alexander the Great in Skopje). Making these monuments
of Alexander and Philip Macedonian is part of a policy of memory, but also a policy
of provocation of the neighbouring country (Greece). It has chosen a far away past to
challenge Greece in a diplomatic battle (Alagjozovski, 2010) creating cultural wars both
inside and outside the country.
Before that, two things in Skopje’s monument policy had been important. Th ese were
the creation of the huge cross on the top of the hill rising above Skopje (to celebrate
2,000 years of Christianity), and the monument to Skenderbeg on horseback in Stara
Čaršija (2006, Toma Damo), the Albanian part of the city, with his back turned to the
Albanians, but facing the Macedonian part of the city and the Christian cross. In a
certain sense both monuments are “facing the other” – applying the provocation of “the
other” strategy.
Th e creation of monuments by the Macedonian community that were intended to irritate
Greece and the Albanian community, and similar actions from the Albanian side, is an
example of a monument policy as a model of anti-culture. Th e Ministry of Culture answered
that they have no statement to make, as did the Agency for the Protection of Cultural
Monuments: “Regarding Skenderbeg, I will not give any statement”, said Pasko Kuzman, 9
director, while city mayor Trifun Kostovski said that for him this object is just illegitimate
construction (Australian Macedonian Weekly, 2006).
Th is policy demands an exploration of a diachronical side to national identity, which
all the countries of Southeastern Europe are developing in diff erent ways. In monument
policy, Macedonians turned to ancient Macedonia, Serbs and Croats looked to medieval
history (though they also emphasized the fi rst half of the 19th century as the birth of a
modern state), Croats explored taboos and “heroes” of the Second World War, while
Montenegrins have seen in the 19th century rule of King Nikola the real roots of their
independence, autonomy and national specifi city. Th us, cultural policies found new
“heroes” and new memory sites, contributing to the renationalization of cultural policies
through monumentalization of oft en invented memories. Th e territories and cultures
in the post-confl ict situation are continuing to fi ght with monuments and religious
symbols which now cover the hills above multicultural cities.
9 Paško Kuzman the ideologist of antiquitization in Macedonia claims that if Macedonians fail
to prove their direct links with ancient Macedonians, they will lose the diplomatic battle with
Greece, and lose their right to Macedonian identity.
40