Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Greece is largely based on a narrative of a homogeneous nation. When it comes to heritage, the application of an Authorized Heritage Discourse leaves little space for subaltern identity expression. Such is the cultural and linguistic heritage of the local Macedonians (dopii), ethnic Macedonians and other people that identify with non-dominant Slav cultural expressions which have been hierarchized in the process of Greek nation-building and deemed dissonant and unwanted, under the fear of irredentism. The 2018 Prespa Agreement, which resolved the name dispute between Greece and North Macedonia, did not fully address the issue of the heritage of these people. This paper is based on critical heritage studies and Conflict Transformation and attempts to shape a heritage framework for the subaltern, local, Macedonian people of Northern Greece that would be beneficial on the domestic level and also contribute to sustainable peace between Greece and North Macedonia. For that purpose, it deconstructs authorized uses of heritage and utilizes Kisić’s Inclusive Heritage Discourse to propose a pluralist heritage paradigm by examining four domains: Greek school textbooks, the National Struggle Museum of Thessaloniki, judicial cases at the European Court of Human Rights, and prohibition of non-dominant Macedonian music and dance heritage. The paper argues that although dopia and ethnic Macedonian heritage has rarely been a means to express non-Greek or anti-Greek identities, the dominant discourse has often produced and perpetuated “othering” due to its exclusivist nature, thus preserving conflict and dissonance.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nikos Pasamitros (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: