Macedonia article, its archaeological..nothing to do with politics

[kataphraktoi]

http://adventures.yahoo.com/b/adventures/adventures7228

Nice article presentation on Macedonia

[Basileus]

Of course it has to do with politics when he calls FYROM as Macedonia.

[Red Peasant]

I was put off by the very first claims in the article, which are rubbish. The Macedonians were not excluded from the Olympic Games for so long because the Greeks thought they were too big, scary or strong, but because they were not considered to be Hellenes . The royal family eventually got round this by claiming that they were descended from some people from Argos, which was probably a spurious connection but they used their political and financial clout at the time (i.e. they greased a few palms) to get their entry rubber-stamped.

[rotorgun]

An impressive collection of artifacts all the same. I wish they might have dwelled on them a bit more in the short videos provided. More and more is being discovered each year which sheds light on the History of Macedonia during the 4th century BC. Fascinating!

[Avicenna]

I pity these people who know nothing about history, yet spout rubbish. It only serves to ridicule themselves. :no:

Let's take a look at some rubbish claims by the guy:
- Hellenes didn't allow them because they were too strong, since they were descendants of Zeus.
Read RP's post. Anyway, Alexander's the descendant of Zeus, not all of Macedonia. The Spartans are as well.
- Macedonia was the first world empire
Achaemenid Empire anyone?
- Alexander was a conqueror before Philip's death
Philip did the conquering, Alexander served under, or at most, alongside him.
- He enabled Iran+Iraq+Egypt to live together in abundance
Right, conquering the people and wiping out lots of their young men is sure abundance. I'm pretty certain that they'd be in a better condition under the Persians. Anyhow, they soon split into Selucid+Ptolemaic.

[rotorgun]

I pity these people who know nothing about history, yet spout rubbish. It only serves to ridicule themselves. :no:

Let's take a look at some rubbish claims by the guy:
- Hellenes didn't allow them because they were too strong, since they were descendants of Zeus.
Read RP's post. Anyway, Alexander's the descendant of Zeus, not all of Macedonia. The Spartans are as well.
- Macedonia was the first world empire
Achaemenid Empire anyone?
- Alexander was a conqueror before Philip's death
Philip did the conquering, Alexander served under, or at most, alongside him.
- He enabled Iran+Iraq+Egypt to live together in abundance
Right, conquering the people and wiping out lots of their young men is sure abundance. I'm pretty certain that they'd be in a better condition under the Persians. Anyhow, they soon split into Selucid+Ptolemaic.
Oh I quite agree with you Tiberius. I didn't mean to imply that I took any of this man's claims seriously, but that he did have some impressive artifacts. It is a shame that he is such a poor student of his main object of study. I suspect that he is driven by some political agenda which moves him to draw such absurd conclusions. This is to say nothing of this Richard Bang fellow, who seems to be a sort of sycophant to Mr. Pasko Kuzman. I wonder if there isn't some romantic connection between them?

[Seleukos]

The Macedonians were not excluded from the Olympic Games for so long because the Greeks thought they were too big, scary or strong, but because they were not considered to be Hellenes .

1)So long? The establishment of the Macedonian kingdom doesnt go before 650 BC.Then it was a small area including Emathia-some 1/10 or even less of modern Greek Macedonia (!)
The first Macedon King who took place in the Olypmic games was Alexander I -after 490.-the one who made Macedonia a real kingdom.

2)I wont get into this debate again.

3)The article is funny.
Its headline : Lake Ohrid 360 BC :laugh4: -In fact the Illyrians have captured this region at this time ,as well as upper Macedonia (modern Western Macedonia/Greece) and after a couple of years crushed Macedonian army of Perdikkas II,brother of Philip II.
Only after 356, lake Ohrid was reconquered by Philip II.

[The Blind Samurai]

1)So long? The establishment of the Macedonian kingdom doesnt go before 650 BC.Then it was a small area including Emathia-some 1/10 or even less of modern Greek Macedonia (!)
The first Macedon King who took place in the Olypmic games was Alexander I -after 490.-the one who made Macedonia a real kingdom.

2)I wont get into this debate again.

3)The article is funny.
Its headline : Lake Ohrid 360 BC :laugh4: -In fact the Illyrians have captured this region at this time ,as well as upper Macedonia (modern Western Macedonia/Greece) and after a couple of years crushed Macedonian army of Perdikkas II,brother of Philip II.
Only after 356, lake Ohrid was reconquered by Philip II.
Ahhhhhhh Macedonia is not greece its just macedonia :furious3: ~:angry: ~:mad :argue: why cant you people understand that

[AntiochusIII]

Ahhhhhhh Macedonia is not greece its just macedonia :furious3: ~:angry: ~:mad :argue: why cant you people understand thatWhich Macedonia are you talking about?

Ancient Makedon? Or the modern FYROM?

[The Blind Samurai]

modern

[AntiochusIII]

modernWell, that is obvious enough. They are two seperate countries and, if my impression is correct, hate each other's guts.

But the article in this thread is factually false. Modern FYROM has much less to do with the ancient Macedonian Empire than, say, Islamic Egypt to the Pharaohs. The region went through so many frequent, turbulent, and massive upheavals throughout history that the region is now far more Slavic culturally and ethnically than, say, Doric. That doesn't mean they can't make Alexander their National Hero if they want to, though.

[The Blind Samurai]

:furious3: it is proven the macedonins today are descednt from alexanders macedions

[AntiochusIII]

:furious3: it is proven the macedonins today are descednt from alexanders macedionsSource, please?

[Kraxis]

When making big claims you have to provide sources. Especially when it is such a sensitive subject.

And please, don't come making oneliners here. This is a place of scholarship, not simple disagreement. And lose the :furious3: attitude, people here are more than willing to hear you out.

[The Blind Samurai]

okay i will heres the source
http://www.ancientmacedonia.com/alexander.html
read it plz
and im sorry just being macedion i just like it when are called greeks im not greek just macedion

[AntiochusIII]

http://www.ancientmacedonia.com/alexander.htmlI'm sorry, but those are propaganda stuff (and yes, I did take the time to look through it).

1) The author fixates on the word "Macedonia" and takes both the meaning of ancient Makedon, a Hellenic state, and the modern FYROM, which is a modern Balkans National state. This confusion is fatal. When ancient writers wrote about Makedon, they wrote about it in the same way that they wrote about Athens, Sparta, and Syracuse; each of which are seperate political entities in their times, often with distinct characteristics, but part of a greater Hellenic cultural group that Western studies constitute as "Greek." So it is that when they wrote about the Spartan king's invasion of Asia Minor, it was written with the Spartans in mind, and not Athenian.

Prior to Philip Makedon was a relatively weak border state; his victories mirror, say, Genghis', in uniting different peoples, states and the like, into one powerful force. Do you think the Mongols are made up purely of "pure" Mongols?

2) Why you Balkans countries hate each other is not relevant to the historical study. Period. I'm afraid if it sounds hard then because modern politics have absolutely no bearing upon scholarly discussions on historical issues.

Of course the Athenians like Demosthenes despised Philip. They were deprived from the power they deemed as theirs. The Spartan hegemony was equally as despised by the Athenians (and Thebans, and so on) -- if it's less then it's because their grip was less strong.

Another point: late 1800s rhetoric were driven largely by Nationalist motives, and weren't exactly reliable as second sources pointing out to claims of antiquity.

3) The research is crap. Not only that it is not peer-reviewed, its tone borders that of racism in trying to associate modern Greeks with a "sub-saharan" ethinicity, as if to make out that black -- sub-saharan -- is somehow inferior, and that the Greeks, being made to be such, are inferior.

That and when you take into mind the fact that the region went through so many serious catastrophes, wars, and migrations, the assertion of some sort of majority direct-descendants is implausible. From the "barbarian" migrations and pillaging of the late Roman Empire to the domination of the Ottomans, if there was even a single ancient Macedonian ethnic entity in the first place they would've gone through a great many diasporas already.

4) "Greek Racial Discrimination against the Macedonians in Northern Greece," whether that claim is true or not, does not bear relevance to whether or not a modern FYROM citizen is Alexander's direct great-great-great-great...grandson.

5) Simply a conclusion drawn from other points, of which I've argued against already.

By the way, on a side note: does it matter that much that your country has to be directly descended from Alexander's Empire? Quite frankly, when considering how half the National Epics of the Southeast Asian countries are actually variations of the Indian Ramayana of one form or the other, and that none of them went to war over who could claim direct descent from Rama, I find this a rather ridiculous squabble.

[The Blind Samurai]

hmm never thought of it that way thanks and its just i have been trashed by many greek kids who call me scum i hate it but it was those boys who did it not all greeks i guess plus there are a few greeks that are my friends so i cant hate all greeks

[Kraxis]

Then it is your right to be indignated and angry, but at those that did it. Trouble happens when you export the problem to people who have yet to do anything to you. They might, or they might not have done it, but that is another point. I'm glad that you have calmed a bit down, that is always good.

One point I can't help but wonder at is the Macedonian language.
I do not presume to know if it is there or not, but it seems rather odd that there is mention that Greece supresses it, while there is no mention of it for FYROM. One would expect FYROM to advocate it and try to teach its children the language, yet I haev heard nothing of that. Nor even if it is spoken there.
And that makes me wonder... Maybe someone can clarify it?

Another thing is that the articles don't take into account something that was pretty normal in both the ancient times and later still.
Racial differences between nobility and peasants. I do not presume to know if the research into the genes is valid or not (it coming from Spain one would expect at least some validity, but I will not judge it yet), but it certainly doesn't take into account that the Macedonian nobility perhaps was not the same as the peasants and herders. Just like the Franks in France, Visigoths in Spain, Spanish in the New World etc etc...

And lastly, I can't make iut if this has been taken into account, but a significant portion of FYROM is in fact what would have been called Illyria. And the Illyrians were certainly an old people which was different from the Greeks.
Also, another significant portion of FYROM had only 'just' been conquered by Phillip, from the Illyrians, when Alexander took to the east. So perhaps that too can lead to intersting differences.
The research should haev included Greek Macedonaisn as well. At least I think it should.

[The Blind Samurai]

thanks again its just a bit touchy with my family for we used to live in macediona and many greeks would just do some racil things to us like wright get out of here we dont want you then my dad was assulated by 4 greek boys my dad was beaten but he kicked the butts after that we moved to new york but i miss my conutry i want to go back

[Kraxis]

thanks again its just a bit touchy with my family for we used to live in macediona and many greeks would just do some racil things to us like wright get out of here we dont want you then my dad was assulated by 4 greek boys my dad was beaten but he kicked the butts after that we moved to new york but i miss my conutry i want to go back
I take it that this happened not too long ago?
Was it in FYROM or the province of Macedonia?

[Keba]

There are few Greeks in FYROM, it is mostly, well, Macedonians (in this discussion, this is so confusing), and ethnic Albanians.

FYROM is predominantly Slavic in nature (with a strong Albanian element), so it has about as much claim on the legacy of Macedonian Greeks as the modern Italians have on the Etruscans ... it is there, yes, but everyone else has it, as well.

Only the most isolated communities can claim any sort of descendancy, the kind that did not have contact with outsiders for centuries. The area of today's FYROM is not at all isolated and has certainly not been ignored down the years, so any claims are foolish, at best.

[The Blind Samurai]

I take it that this happened not too long ago?
Was it in FYROM or the province of Macedonia?
it happend 3 years ago it is fyorm

[Kraxis]

I see... I thought it was in the province of Macedonia...
But how can the Greeks have any sort of influence there? They are quite few...

[The Blind Samurai]

they where quite a few greeks where we lived we had 2 nebhiogers who where greeks and those where their kids i wanted to kill the fathers the spat on me beat me up and stole my money

[Papewaio]

New country, new start.

Bring what is good from the old and leave the hatreds behind.

[The Blind Samurai]

yeah i guess your right but i miss my country every single day ~:( ~:(

[Vladimir]

yeah i guess your right but i miss my country every single day ~:( ~:(

Well you're in the right place. You have something valuable to contribute to the Monastery and the exposure to like-minded people from across the world will help a lot. Because of the .org I found that there are French people I actually like! :laugh4:

[The Blind Samurai]

yeah i guess your right

[lars573]

Now this is sincrinous. I just finished reading an article on FYRM. And here you are arguing about it.

Look.
Claimed by Bulgaria and seized by Serbia in the Balkan Wars, Macedonia was nevertheless allowed to leave Yugoslavia in 1991 with a minimum of hassle. Much more hassle came from Greece, which felt threatened by this tiny state using the name "Macedonia" and, apparently, identifying itself with the Macedonia of Alexander the Great. The new flag
featured the "Star of Vergina," from the tomb of Philip II of Macedon. This implied Macedonian designs on northern Greece, also containing part of historic Macedonia; and indeed Macedonians did express some claims there. I even saw stickers on lampposts in New York City proclaiming "Macedonia is Greek!" What this was supposed to mean was not going to be obvious to anyone. It made it sound like Greece itself had designs on the new Republic of Macedonia. Did anyone even in New York City know, or care, what this was all about? Probably not.

As it happened, Greece initially blocked admission of Macedonia to the United Nations. The flag was modified and the country is now usually referred to as the "Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" (FYRM). Bulgaria seems to have given up claims to Macedonia, but I am still not clear whether Macedonian is or is not a dialect of Bulgaria. There are ways to determine this. Otherwise, the region has simply never been anything but "Macedonia."

I have received correspondence from a couple of Greeks disputing this, contending that the territory of the FYRM was never in historic Macedonia. Well, there is going to be considerable uncertainty about all ancient boundaries, and there is no telling how far Philip II's Macedonia extended north. Chances are it was well into FYRM territory (probably the whole valley of the Vardar/Axios River). Nevertheless, for Roman Macedonia the boundaries are better known. The capital of the FYRM, Skopje (Roman Scupi), was definitely in the early Roman province of Moesia Superior (later Dacia Mediterranea). However, the boundary of Moesia was immediately south of Skopje, which itself is quite close to the northern boundary of the FYRM. One map in the Atlas of the Roman World (Tim Cornell & John Matthews, Facts on File Publications, 1982, 1988, p.75) shows the bend of the Axius (Axios/Vardar) River, with Scupi on the north bank, as the actual northern boundary of Macedonia. Other maps (pp.141, 146) show some of the bend itself in Moesia, but this still leaves most of the territory of the FYRM in Roman Macedonia. The Roman cities of Stobi (near modern Stip), Lychnidus (modern Ohrid), and Heraclea Lyncestis (near modern Bitola) were all in Roman Macedonia and in the present FYRM. There is agreement on this in the Atlas of Classical History (Richard J.A. Talbert, Routledge, 1985, 1989, p.143).

For some, Macedonian claims to Greek Macedonia may be based on the territorial integrity of the Macedonia of Philip II and on the presumed ethnic identity of the modern Macedonians with the ancient. This kind of claim cannot now be taken seriously, both because ancient boundaries are going to mean nothing in modern international law and because the modern Macedonians speak a
Slavic language which certainly has nothing to do with the (albeit poorly attested) language of the ancient Macedonians. The other basis of Macedonian claims, however, is more serious, and that concerns Macedonians living in Greece. The Greeks deny that there is any such presence; but then Greece officially denies that there are any ethnic minorities in Greece. Linguistic maps of Greece in the 19th century show areas of speakers of Albanian, Vlach, Macedonian, and even Turkish. The Anchor Atlas of World History, Volume II (Hermann Kinder, Werner Hilgemann, Ernest A. Menze, and Harald and Ruth Bukor, 1978) shows Macedonian speakers extending from south of Skopje (Üsküp in Turkish, in a partially Albanian speaking area, continguous with Kosovo) all the way down to Thessalonica (p.120). If there are no longer Macedonian speakers in the modern Greek part of this area (only acquired in 1913), then there is some explaining to do. If Greece expelled the Macedonians, suppressed their language, or got them to leave through harassment or oppressive policies, none of these are going to be admissions to the credit of Greece, or admissions likely to be made, for just such a reason. At the very least, the FYRM can reasonably ask for an accounting on this issue.

I am informed that Greeks would be happy with the FYRM simply being called "Northern Macedonia."
This is a little silly and is not going to make any difference in any Macedonian claims or possible threat against Greece. A parallel situation in Europe is actually the relationship of Luxembourg to Belgium. When Belgium became independent of the Netherlands in 1830, it took with it a very large part of Luxembourg. This area of Belgium is still called "Luxembourg." I have never heard that Luxembourg, which itself became independent of the Netherlands in 1890, today makes any claims against Belgium. But even if it did, tiny Luxembourg, although with the highest per capita income in the world, would not constitute any kind of real threat. Poor and tiny Macedonia is not going to constitute any more of a threat to Greece. If Macedonian guerrillas were crossing over into Greece, this would be a matter of real concern and complaint, but I do not understand that anything of the sort has happened; and even if it did, Greece would have no difficulty knowing where to direct counter-action.

As it has happened, the problem of guerrillas has troubled the FYRM itself. Albanian refugees inundated northern Macedonia in 1999, where there was already, as noted, an Albanian community. With them came armed Albanians who, having lost in battle with the Serbs, were interested in "liberating" northern Macedonia. They succeeded no better there, but for a while there was considerable danger of a wider conflict. Meanwhile, Macedonia is the poorest of the former Yugoslav Republics, with a lower per capita income even than Albania. This puts it perilously close to being the poorest country in Europe -- though it is probably safe from that, since Moldova has a per capita income of not much over $300, while Macedonia's is more than $1500. "Room for improvement" hardly begins to tell the tale. The dispute over Macedonia's name and claims doesn't even begin to address the real problem economic development in the FYRM and elsewhere in the Balkans.

Source (http://www.friesian.com/turkia.htm), but to find it you will have to scroll towards to the bottom of the page. It's under the section, "Modern Romania, Ottoman successor states in the balkans."