Misellenes

[Xehh II]

How does the Makedon Faction Leader get Misellenes(hates hellenic people)?
Isn't Makedon Hellenic? Does that mean he hates himself?

[LordCurlyton]

From what I gather by reading all the various info you can find in-game, Makedonians were NOT Greeks, but a very Hellenized group of people just to the north (which is geographically correct). They also had strong ties to the Thraikian tribes and other tribes (I would presume the various Getic and Illyrian tribes are also in there to a lesser extent) and could probably best be though of as Greco-Thraikian rather than "true" Hellenes, ie pure Greeks. Thus he can technically have the trait, which just means he hates Greeks, who in their turn probably look down at these "upstart" Makedones who "stole" their ideas and such.

[Teleklos Archelaou]

We aren't trying to make controversial statements here with that. That mak trait is just indicative of a distrust of other "soft" Hellenes. He believes Macedonians (greek or not) are superior to (other) greeks. We obviously don't mean he hates himself. It's just the different side of the Philhellene trait.

[keravnos]

Yep, quite true. We Epirotes and them Makedonians bore the burden of defending the borders from Illyrians/Paeonians/Thracians, paying a very heavy price for it, and the southrons didn't even believe we were Greek. :wall: (Who do you think stood watch while the southrons had their golden age and then fought each other-There is a reason why only Persians and Gauls broke through and reached down south)

(To the delight of our neighbours throughout the millenia who have gone on to claim our name and identity for themselves)

I guess such a trait could very well exist in the sense " You arrogant... (insert favorite swearword, probably one to do with female genitalia). Here we are defending you from outside enemies, we fought our common foe to Indus and back, and you deny us our very own ethnicity? Well (insert ugliest form of "copulate") you right back. From now on, we hate your (another favorite swearword, this one with unspeakable implications on one's mother) guts!"

Still happens you know, but in footy terms. Athenians get some ugly treatment in Thessalonike, like their car's license plates spray painted red or black, or even pink, having a pitta with just tomatoes and a straw in them, rather than meat, (a "south" greek idiom that), etc.

[Watchman]

So basically the southern Greeks regarded their northern cousins as a bunch of savages barely fluent in "proper" Greek, and said rustic cousins returned the sentiment by regarding their more urbane southern kin as decadent wimps - standard neighbourly/brotherly love, in other words. :beam:

Bet you it took a long time before the different Latin tribes stopped looking down on their noses at each other and began to regard themselves as collectively "Roman" as opposed to something else, too.

[meliritos]

Everyone should watch out when one does a mod because what one uses in game may be misinterpeted from someone who isnt Greek and doesnt know the facts of Greek history. Your remark there about "miselenes" indeed could cause confusion to everyone but Greeks.You could have a trait that says for example thet "he doesnt believe in the need of unity among Greek people". That would be more accurate.

[Watchman]

I'm rather under the impression the chronically independent-minded southern Greeks of the poleis were major nonbelievers in "need of unity among Greek people" as well (nevermind now being somewhat leery of counting even Thessalians into that category)... the Maks and Epirotes with their traditions of reasonably central monarchical rule were actually probably way more amiable to that idea in general terms.

[Agiselaos]

keravnos and merilitos are right you should put another term and not missellen even though it's more accurate.Furthermore how people who had greek names,spoke a dialect of greek and wanted to unite not (subdue) the southern Greeks were not Greek i don't understand.Remember the shields which Alexander send to Athenians after his first victories against the Persians what was written upon them (Alexander and The Greeks Except Spartan from The Barbarians(no offense) who dwell on Asia),he didn't write Alexander, Macedonians and Greeks.... this shows us that he and other macedonians considered themselves as Hellenic.As For the relationship with the other Hellenes look how Germans,French and English had many wars and hated it each other even though they all are of Germanic origin

[MarcusAureliusAntoninus]

This is a huge argument that streches from before the Trojan War until present day. Plus, many people have strong emotions and are quite invested in it.

Simply put, Macedonians weren't nessicarily the same exact people as "the Greeks". "The Greeks" would often think that they were inferior and didn't like them due to their dialect (which Philip switched to Attic Greek anyways, so their language differences were not an issue in our time period), culture, and different traditions. Of course, you have to keep in mind that "the Greeks" thought less of everyone: the Persians, the Egyptians, the Etruscans, even other Greek cities when they felt like it.

The Makedonians were probably the same race of people, though not "pure" like the Southern Greeks due to their proximity to other peoples.

Even though, it may be argued now that they are the same people, at the time they didn't nessicarily think so. The southern Greeks didn't like the Makedonian (or the even Thessalians all that much, for that matter) and there was some discrimination. And the Makedonians returned that disdane.

And remember people, names, racial locations, and likes & dislikes of today don't have nessicarily anything to do with people, names, racial locations, and likes & dislikes of the game's time.

[Watchman]

Furthermore how people who had greek names,spoke a dialect of greek and wanted to unite not (subdue) the southern Greeks were not Greek i don't understand.Remember the shields which Alexander send to Athenians after his first victories against the Persians what was written upon them (Alexander and The Greeks Except Spartan from The Barbarians(no offense) who dwell on Asia),he didn't write Alexander, Macedonians and Greeks.... this shows us that he and other macedonians considered themselves as Hellenic.Having just subjugated Hellas the Macedonians obviously had a rather pressing vested interest in the idea of "Greek unity" (their own sense of superiority nonwithstanding; I've read of an interesting duel fought between a Greek athlete and a Macedonian pezhetairos which well illustrated the tensions), which so far as I know the denizens of the peninsula, fiercely proud of their separate communal identities as they were, didn't want anything to do with.

Fat lot of good it did them. The poleis revolted pretty much en masse the second they heard Alex was dead, were again subdued by the Diadochi (who weren't yet at that point at each others' throats; it should incidentally tell something that most if not all of them were of Macedonian origin...), and tried again with more success once said potentates were busy with each other.

One does have to keep in mind that beyond rather local and regional levels and some very vague associations due to (nominally, thanks to innumerable local dialects and patois) shared language and culture people simply did not very much identify with something so abstract as "nationality", save for defining their own general reference group from others in rather general terms. That sort of thing is by and large very much a modern, post 1800s phenomenom.

[Tretii]

Chill out pc people. It is just a game.

[Teleklos Archelaou]

We should "watch out"? If people want to interpret things wrongly, it's not our fault. People can take their modern political views and roll them up into a really tight little wad and... well, I don't think we care too much. Every single one of these people were racially biased against every single other one of these people. That was life. The misellen trait doesn't have to do with 'not believing in a need for unity of greek people', it has to do with having contempt for (use 'other' here if you like or don't, it doesn't matter to me) greeks. Other greeks had contempt for the maks. Achaeans/Ionians had contempt for dorians and they had it for them too. Anyone who thinks that anyone with a drop of greek blood lived in hippie-flowers-in-their-hair harmony with everyone else who had a drop of greek blood is bleeding nutty.

[Tretii]

We should "watch out"? If people want to interpret things wrongly, it's not our fault. People can take their modern political views and roll them up into a really tight little wad and... well, I don't think we care too much. Every single one of these people were racially biased against every single other one of these people. That was life. The misellen trait doesn't have to do with 'not believing in a need for unity of greek people', it has to do with having contempt for (use 'other' here if you like or don't, it doesn't matter to me) greeks. Other greeks had contempt for the maks. Achaeans/Ionians had contempt for dorians and they had it for them too. Anyone who thinks that anyone with a drop of greek blood lived in hippie-flowers-in-their-hair harmony with everyone else who had a drop of greek blood is bleeding nutty.
Well said. Could not agree more.

[Watchman]

:laugh4:
That was pretty succint. Yeah, if there was someone the diverse "Greeks" fought as often, intensely and bitterly as each other the poor guy is entitled to a fair bit of sympathy.

[Tellos Athenaios]

Simply put: Hellen is the general term for Greek, Macedonians, Epeirotes and others are just as Greek as anyone among the "Southerners" (just read Herodotos, he claims that there are quite a few Phoenician/ Egyptian influences, especially in the south...). Next: because of it's general meaning, Hellen is used to either note "we Greeks vs. those barbarians" or "we vs. the other Greeks". The latter, of course is the case with the misellen trait and Greek character combination. The person doesn't like all those others calling themselves Greeks and considering him barbarian. "What?! They would call my kin barbarians, when in fact we did all their dirty work?! And to think they dare to stand against us! Buggers!"

[Lomma]

From what I remember, Alexander refused to call himself Greek because the Hellenes called his father, Phillip a barbarian. :book:

[Watchman]

Wasn't his mother Olympias Illyrian or something along those lines ? You don't need to live on Baker Street to deduce what that made for his standing as far as the peninsular Greeks were concerned...
Although they probably weren't too loud about it for obvious reasons. :sweatdrop:

[keravnos]

Olympias was daughter of Neoptolemus, king of Epirus. Her father claimed descent from Neoptolemus, son of Achilles. When her father died ca. 360 BC, his brother and successor Arymbas (grandfather of Pyrrhus of Epirus) made a treaty with the new king of Macedonia, Philip II of Macedon. The alliance was cemented with a diplomatic marriage: Arymbas' niece Olympias became queen of Macedonia in 359 BC.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympias

She was born in Passarona, an outskirt of present day Ioannina. Pyrrhos, her brothers' grandson married an Illyrian princess, along with many other women. (Quite the polygamist, Pyrrhos was)

[meliritos]

From what I remember, Alexander refused to call himself Greek because the Hellenes called his father, Phillip a barbarian. :book:

Hmmm...right....and exactly where did you read this? And the next thing you are going to tell us is that Homer was a Turk and his real name was Omar? Come on people...Macedonians where originated from the same tribe that the Spartans came. And talking about purity, is there a civ that is pure? You are what you believe in your heart and your mind, period. Even today, people who live, lets say to the US, will say that they are from LA, or Ohio. Does that mean that they are less American? So why does it make it so difficult to understand that people would call themselves macedonian, athenian, or spartan and still feel being a part of the hellenic world at the ancient times?

[MarcusAureliusAntoninus]

The point isn't that people are the same or different or that they are pure or unpure. The point is that other people saw them that way, whether it was the truth or not.

[Watchman]

So why does it make it so difficult to understand that people would call themselves macedonian, athenian, or spartan and still feel being a part of the hellenic world at the ancient times?What I wonder is what makes it so difficult to understand that they also regarded themselves as quite specifically Macedonian, Athenian and Spartan respectively relative to each other, and whatever very vague idea of mutual "hellenic" identity there might have been was purely in relative terms regarding, say, Thracians, Romans or Persians.

And did not particularly mean they preferred each other over said odd foreigners, indeed quite the contrary. One need merely compare the number of bitter wars the "hellens" fought against each other to those they fought against assorted strange foreigners, and their ready willingness to accept the assistance of the latter to gain an edge over the former...

[Redmeth]

Look at the Scots and the Irish (don't know much about Welsh) but they surely don't consider themselves part of the great "English world". If you call a Scotsman an Englishman he'll always correct you and say he's Scotish...
Same with the Macedonians, Athenians, Spartans and probably all the other inhabitants of other major polis.

[Watchman]

Or the Medieval North Italian city-states. The poor Venetian-Genoese relationship was almost legendary, and the rest hardly less quarrelsome...

[Spoofa]

or if you call a Korean Chinese or Japanese he will correct you, I know because im Korean and I've been to Korea and most ppl I've talked to about it take it very seriously. People seem to have the misconception that all asians are the same... :thumbsdown:

[Watchman]

Or as one travel guide I often consulted there drily began, "the Japanese are very proud of their distinctive culture while carefully ignoring their virtually undeniable Korean origins..." :shrug:

[hellenes]

Look at the Scots and the Irish (don't know much about Welsh) but they surely don't consider themselves part of the great "English world". If you call a Scotsman an Englishman he'll always correct you and say he's Scotish...
Same with the Macedonians, Athenians, Spartans and probably all the other inhabitants of other major polis.

Youve got a significant mistake here...The Scots are celtic inhabitants of the British Isles that had a completely different culture language and civilisation than the invading Germanic Angli...
Makedonians, Spartans, Athenians had the same language, art, religion and general civilisation...just read Isocrates and youll understand what Im saying...

[Spoofa]

Youve got a significant mistake here...The Scots are celtic inhabitants of the British Isles that had a completely different culture language and civilisation than the invading Germanic Angli...
Makedonians, Spartans, Athenians had the same language, art, religion and general civilisation...just read Isocrates and youll understand what Im saying...

From my understanding the Makedonians only adopted the "Greek" Language after Philip changed it, somewhere around 350 b.c.ish.. (just a rough guess on the date)

I'm sure they thought about this,

If it walks like a greek, and talks like a greek....

that doesnt mean its a greek.

[Teleklos Archelaou]

Life is complicated. Take a really simplistic view of most stuff in ancient history and EB and you're probably wrong. We sort of think this is so important that we've made it our subtitle.

[hellenes]

From my understanding the Makedonians only adopted the "Greek" Language after Philip changed it, somewhere around 350 b.c.ish.. (just a rough guess on the date)

I'm sure they thought about this,

If it walks like a greek, and talks like a greek....

that doesnt mean its a greek.

You know when there is a 0 evidence of a dinstict (NOT A DIALECT) "Makedonian Language" we cant just make up stuff just for the sake of it...

[meliritos]

From my understanding the Makedonians only adopted the "Greek" Language after Philip changed it, somewhere around 350 b.c.ish.. (just a rough guess on the date)

I'm sure they thought about this,

If it walks like a greek, and talks like a greek....

that doesnt mean its a greek.

Taking guesses is not history. Ill tell you sth that is not a guess. In the ancient times only Greek people were allowed to take part in the Olympic Games, not barbarians (as the Greeks called anyone who was not Greek). Macedonians, Athenians, Korinthians for example took part in the Games and some of their athletes won from time to time some events. That is not a guess, thats a fact. You can fight these evidences with guesses but those who read these lines know better than to trust guesses and not historical facts.
And that thing about the Scotts and such. Yes they live in England and yes they call themselves Scotts and they dont like it otherwise. Thats fine by me. But dont try to compare the situation of the Scotts of the medieval or modern times to the Greeks of 450 B.C. Even the notion of recognising the Greek identity for the city states of that time is an advanced idea for that era. But if you are talking about the modern times and you use the Scotts as an example, then you mix up two things. If you are talking about the modern times then the Macedonians, the Athenians, the Corinthians and the Spartans of our time will answer that they are Greek when you ask them. So what does this tell you? Take a guess...

[Redmeth]

I am not a historian scholar, I'm just an enthusiast and my comparison is not the right one (with the Scots) but people in every country hold on to some beliefs that the part of the country where they come from is better than the other look at SOME americans from the south who probably still don't like people from the north, or the situation in Spain.
And there is a state called Macedonia right?
Why is it so hard to believe that while part of the same state and culture groups of people would dislike each other and think themselves better no matter if it takes place in ancient times, medieval times or right now.

[Tiberius Nero]

And there is a state called Macedonia right?

Yes, and there is a province in Greece called Macedonia, roughly the same place you know in EB and we call northern Greeks "Macedonians". Macedonia is the name of a region, it doesn't say anything per se about the nationality of people living in it. So just to clear things up, the people of the state known nowadays as the Republic of Macedonia are of Slavic descent and have as much to do with the Macedonians of the Classical and Hellenistic times as the Chinese.

[meliritos]

Yes, and there is a province in Greece called Macedonia, roughly the same place you know in EB and we call northern Greeks "Macedonians". Macedonia is the name of a region, it doesn't say anything per se about the nationality of people living in it. So just to clear things up, the people of the state known nowadays as the Republic of Macedonia are of Slavic descent and have as much to do with the Macedonians of the Classical and Hellenistic times as the Chinese.

Exactly, well said. And if only the name says sth, was the Attica prison in the Us part of the Greek territory? (For those who dont know Attica is the name of the perfecture of the city of Athens). So enough guessing people please. History books are available in libraries and the internet. And if some (fortunately a few minority in this community) like guessing, well i can lend you some of my books to help you make at least educated guesses

[Ower]

Thats why oficiali the Slavic Macedonia is FYR (Former Yugoslavic Republic)Macedonia

[Watchman]

If you are talking about the modern times then the Macedonians, the Athenians, the Corinthians and the Spartans of our time will answer that they are Greek when you ask them. So what does this tell you? Take a guess...That they've been put through the standard nation-state identity-building wringer for the past century or two like everyone else ? :dizzy2:


You know when there is a 0 evidence of a dinstict (NOT A DIALECT) "Makedonian Language" we cant just make up stuff just for the sake of it...I don't know about you, but in my experience and to my knowledge regional dialects can right well be so wildly different from one another as to be virtually mutually unintelligible, ie. for most practical purposes separate languages. The European nation-states spent a round century or so just trying to get some sort of standardized national language established over all such local variants, with somewhat limited success...


In the ancient times only Greek people were allowed to take part in the Olympic Games, not barbarians (as the Greeks called anyone who was not Greek). Macedonians, Athenians, Korinthians for example took part in the Games and some of their athletes won from time to time some events. That is not a guess, thats a fact.That's also more likely than not pretty much the extent of their "shared Greekness", and I'd be surprised if there had not been some mutterings on the part of the southern poleis about letting these dagnabbit barely-Greek rustics even take part...

[meliritos]

Oh i see. Except for history you also are familiar with the gossip and the inside politics of the city states in ancient Greece. Please tell me which university hosts you as professor, since you are so familiar with Greek history, so i can come and learn sth from you. Do you also keep tabloids of that time as references of what you are saying?

[Watchman]

Very funny. Watch me laugh. :dozey:

What I'm familiar with is the general principles of the communal identity dynamics involved, and I've seen very little that spoke of the ancient Greeks displaying any meaningful deviations from the standard near-universal pattern. Quite the contrary actually.

But since you seem to be so certain that they did differ from the norm, perhaps you are intimately familiar with the contemporary discourse...?

[Teleklos Archelaou]

What really cooks my carrots is people telling me that their national identity and the beliefs of their people today affects the way I or anyone else should think about an ancient people/custom/event. Anyone who does that gets a big fat middle finger here from me at the very least. I could give a crap about modern Macedonian or Chinese or Greek or Turkish or Lichtensteinian political/social or even traditional views about something that happened 2300 years ago, and can get downright surly when any of those modern views become visible in threads where those ancient matters are being discussed. Take your baggage elsewhere people. Selectively (very selectively in some matters) using ancient evidence to argue an opinion, and totally ignoring the other ancient evidence or writing it off, just to keep your own little worldview intact and to feel good about yourself and your opinion and your country/peoples' opinion, is at the bottom of the intellectual honesty barrell, but if that's what makes you feel all warm and cozy at night, then feel free to keep those blinders on, just don't try slipping them around our head please.

This is definitely not directed at any one person. Seriously. But here's some advice whether you want it or not: if you feel like it might be, then it might be a good idea to think about it a little more, just in case.

[Tiberius Nero]

What really cooks my carrots is people telling me that their national identity and the beliefs of their people today affects the way I or anyone else should think about an ancient people/custom/event.

I couldn't agree more, but how is that relevant to the thread? No one here came arguing from such a position.

[hellenes]

That they've been put through the standard nation-state identity-building wringer for the past century or two like everyone else ? :dizzy2:

I don't know about you, but in my experience and to my knowledge regional dialects can right well be so wildly different from one another as to be virtually mutually unintelligible, ie. for most practical purposes separate languages. The European nation-states spent a round century or so just trying to get some sort of standardized national language established over all such local variants, with somewhat limited success...

So the Spartans that replaced every H with an A werent Greek cause this way their dilaect barely made sense for an Athenian?



That's also more likely than not pretty much the extent of their "shared Greekness", and I'd be surprised if there had not been some mutterings on the part of the southern poleis about letting these dagnabbit barely-Greek rustics even take part...

The Arcadians, Locrians and even Spartans were much more dagnabbit barely-Greek rustics
than Makedonians so I guess we have to call them aliens too... :laugh4:

[Watchman]

So the Spartans that replaced every H with an A werent Greek cause this way their dilaect barely made sense for an Athenian?Unless the Athenian in question happened to be a "Spartophile", most likely, barely, as far as he was concerned.


The Arcadians, Locrians and even Spartans were much more dagnabbit barely-Greek rustics than Makedonians so I guess we have to call them aliens too... :laugh4:What we call them is somewhat irrelevant. What contemporaries thought of them, and vice versa, is the point, and in that regard, more or less. Given the operating logic of intense communal loyalties, I'm willing to bet a neighbour did not have to diverge very much from a citizen of any given community in terms of dialect, lifestyle, details of religious practices etc. to provoke doubts about the properness of his "greekness".

Put this way: the Romans and other Latin tribes certainly understood well enough they used the largely same language, worshipped the largely same gods, more or less shared most social institutions and so on, but did that ever engender much "sibling loyalty" between the lot or any mutual identification ? Same thing.

[LordCurlyton]

About the only thing I find odd about the Misellen trait is that I've gotten several Hellen FM's with the Misellen trait. Leaves me sorta confused. I can see how any of the various Makedon types could, or the Thraikians, but not the Hellens; I always figured that even if they weren't Phihellene they would be neutral in that regard.

[Tiberius Nero]

Unless the Athenian in question happened to be a "Spartophile", most likely, barely, as far as he was concerned.

erm, no this is just factually wrong. There is a word meaning member of the Greek "nation" and of Greek descent, and that is "Hellen". Countless instances of this in texts, e.g. in the Persians of Aeschylus the battle cry of the Greek army "Go children of the Greeks, free the fatherland, free your women, your children, your ancestors' graves", etc (quoting from memory). Even the Greek mainland is called by the name of "Hellas" (after the time of Homer, as Thucydides notes), that is "Greece". The Greeks did have the notion that they belong to a group conected by common descent, religion and language (Herodotos himself says that). The fact that they did not belong together to a unified political entity does not mean that a notion of Greekness was inexistent, quite the contrary.

[Watchman]

Yeah, whatever. The point I've been trying to get through for a while now is that while any Greek with eyes could tell these guys who looked similar, spoke similar languages, lived similarly, worshipped the same gods with similar practices etc. obviously were "Hellens" and not for example "Romans" or "Persians" or "Phoenicians" or whatever, that was pretty much it. The idea of common identity more or less stopped right there, and by far more important were one's communal and tribal affiliations.

And those tended to have a fair bit of friction, with pretty much everyone naturally in the opinion their particular brand of "greekness" was the best, and if nothing else their city/kingdom/whatever was the Big Noise all others should pay their respects to.
With the due result the pecking order was being constantly re-established with spears, and fierce communal partisanism was without doubt the norm.

An idea of vague, abstract "Hellene-ness" of course existed, in the manner of all overarching group-identities, the same way the Celtic peoples made a difference between themselves and the Germans, Iberians, Latins etc. and so on.

It just didn't amount to squat in practice, where much more concrete and local indentities reigned.

[Tiberius Nero]

It just didn't amount to squat in practice, where much more concrete and local indentities reigned.

That is one thing and saying that an Athenian, unless a Spartophile, would view Spartans as non Greeks is another. Chorus songs in Athenian tragedies are in Doric (so probably the dialects weren't mutually incomprehensible), Athenian tragic poets draw from themes and myths concerning a multitude of cities of the Greek world regardless whether Athens comes into the stories or not. Perhaps the cultural overlap was greater than we think it was, but then again it was a feature of Athenian society to be minimally isolationist, it didn't go for every city state.

The political disunity of the Greek world is a fact which no one denies, but overemphasising this to the point of saying that Hellenism as an ancient concept is a construct of philologists and Greek nationalists of the past couple of centuries is just factually wrong and does injustice to any valid points that might be raised about existing cultural differences between city states.

[Watchman]

My wording was "barely", though, not "non". The difference between grudging admittance on a technicality and unsustainable outright denial, basically. :beam:

[Tiberius Nero]

I don't recall seeing evidence of disputes about varying degrees of Greekness between city states, and certainly not between city states that were as major and prominent players as Athens and Sparta. That you might consider some people as hill billies or redneck Greeks, that doesn't mean you brand them as "barbaroi", that is what this word is for.

Anyway, I will stop beating the dead horse, just note please that it is methodologically flawed to use whatever evidence you might have about culture dynamics of group A to draw conclusions that group B must be the same or roughly the same. Our evidence about the Greek world is in the documents that have reached us and in in its surviving art and that's about it. If you cannot draw safe conclusions from those, it wise not to at all.

[Watchman]

It's generally safe to assume that unless proven otherwise a commonly occurring human group-behavioral phenomenom will apply equally to groups A, B and C, however.

And aren't you sort of forgetting what this debate was originally all about ? I never did.

[Tiberius Nero]

It's generally safe to assume that unless proven otherwise a commonly occurring human group-behavioral phenomenom will apply equally to groups A, B and C, however.

And aren't you sort of forgetting what this debate was originally all about ? I never did.

Texts prove it otherwise, by not giving support to such theories concerning the Greeks. Everything else is grand theories with little fact to them.

I was under the impression that this was yet another debate of the type "the Greeks, the Universe and Everything", quite common on these boards; am I missing something?

[Watchman]

Some people had issues with the Macedonian "Misellenes" trait, remember ?

[Tiberius Nero]

I don't need to remember, I can click a page back. What is your point anyway? Threads go off topic all the time. Especially threads like these.

[Watchman]

The point is that given the considerable amount of rivalry and one-upmanship between the poleis alone it's hardly a stretch to presume considerably greater ones in potentia between the Macedonians and the "southern" Greeks, doubly so given their troubled mutual history post Philip II.

[Spoofa]

Taking guesses is not history. Ill tell you sth that is not a guess. In the ancient times only Greek people were allowed to take part in the Olympic Games, not barbarians (as the Greeks called anyone who was not Greek). Macedonians, Athenians, Korinthians for example took part in the Games and some of their athletes won from time to time some events. That is not a guess, thats a fact. You can fight these evidences with guesses but those who read these lines know better than to trust guesses and not historical facts.
And that thing about the Scotts and such. Yes they live in England and yes they call themselves Scotts and they dont like it otherwise. Thats fine by me. But dont try to compare the situation of the Scotts of the medieval or modern times to the Greeks of 450 B.C. Even the notion of recognising the Greek identity for the city states of that time is an advanced idea for that era. But if you are talking about the modern times and you use the Scotts as an example, then you mix up two things. If you are talking about the modern times then the Macedonians, the Athenians, the Corinthians and the Spartans of our time will answer that they are Greek when you ask them. So what does this tell you? Take a guess...

I was only guessing on the date, not the information, why do you assume i guessed about everything?

[meliritos]

Your words let me assume that. Anyway, what is your point tell me. Do you want me to accept that Macedonians werent Greek and they were Slavs, Albanians or Turks? Maybe they were Chinese, Mongols or Huns? Please tell me what you want me to believe and i will believe it. Although you cant provide any evidence i will accept anything you want me to so as to get this argue done with, some things they say are unbeatable

[Pelopidas]

Well, I promised myself to never again go back into such a sterile debat...but I would say that there was plenty of evidence in both sides...sometimes exactly the sames, but for radicaly opposed conclusions. So, I'm back.

Saying that the people of the actual Republic of Macedonia are only of slavic origins is as irrelevant as saying that the people of actual Greece are only of pure blood Greek origins...you really think that there's much genetic difference between the population of Greek Macedonia and the population of Republic of Macedonia ?
There wasn't even ONE Greek people, never in the Antiquity...

For me, if the " blood origins " is the only fact who count, then they have perfectly the right of calling themselves " Republic of Macedonia ", even if the majority of their ancestors weren't there at the time of Alexander, the majority of nowadays Greek Macedonia ancestors weren't also there !
The population of Greece as so much various origins !
With all thoses Romans, Slavic, Bulgarians, Normans, Franks and Turkish invasions, and all the naturals migrations of population.
I'm very angry when I saw such hatred because of such false thinking...

Now, back to the point.
About the idea of a cultural Greek identity in the Antiquity, I'm totally agree.
About the use of various dialects relevant of the Greek language and a lots of cultural proximities, I'm also totally agree.
This in no way mean one people.

But there's no common blood or common religion.

Even Spartans and Athenians haven't the same origins, or claimed to have different origins...
Remember of a Spartan kings who said " I could go on the Akropolis, I'm not a Dorian like the other of my people, I'm an Achean " ?
Remember of the scribe of Eumenes ( I don't remember is name, the best sources on early Diadochi wars... ) who said that there was some antagonism between Eumenes and the others Diadochoi because he was the only Greek appointed at such a task, with all others being Macedonians ?
Remember that in the census of population, in the Diadochoi cities, there was a count of Greeks and a count of Macedonians, in the city ?

On the other side, we have Philippos who present himself as a Greek, when it was time to subdue the southern polis under a single Hegemon.
When Alexandros arrived in Persia, when it was time to negotiate with the Median and Persian nobilities, he claimed some Persian origins in his family, due to the time Macedonia was incorporated into a Satrapy...that's politic.

But it's certain that the Macedonian nobility of Alexandros times think of herself as a member of the Greek world. I'm not arguing about this, but about more nationalistic biased point of views.

I say it again, there was a Greek unity in the cultural traditions, I don't disagree with this.

The ancient Greeks were persuaded that EVERYONE worshipped the same gods, in the world...now, if you go deeper into the religious traditions, there was plenty of difference.
Some exemples:
The Artemis of Ephesos was worshipped in the Greek world, but was an Anatolian goodess, absolutly not close to the Artemis you can found in Athenes. But the influence of Artemis of Ephesos on the Greek world is far more important than the " true " Artemis....
At least one Bythinian/Thracian good was worshipped: Dyonisos, who was far more common into the Macedonians and Thessalian religious practice than it was in Sparta.
The Aphrodite of Corinth was a warrior goodess, very different for the love-goodess you can founds elsewhere, say, in Naxos.
The burial customs of the nobility of the Macedonia of Fifth century was exactly the same as the ones described into Homer's Iliad, at the same time, the great polis of the south practiced very different funerary customs ( due to the practical problems posed in much populated and richest areas... )

I'll stop here, because there's litteraly hundreds of evidences such like this one. It's natural that ancient Greeks think they have common gods, because they think that everyone have the same divinities...it's so absolutly not relevant.

The only " common " share is those large and various cultural traditions who were seen as " Greek ", even when they were absolutly not ( Orpheus, Zeus Dodonaï, Artemisiou Ephesiou, the old gods of Samothrace, Griffins of Cyprus...etc... )
All this evidences are, of course, absolutly not relevant into arguing who are placed in nowadays Greece and borders dispute.
The population of actual Greece doesn't descend from only " Old Greeks " ancestors...far far away...ancient Greece is a collection of a dozen of " cousins " people, with all very different influences on them and between them... not less, not much.

For the mishellenes trait, I personnaly think of it being a good thing.
Such racist hatred is historically attested ( Eumenes ) , and a member of the Macedonian nobility could certainly think of himseld being a Macedonian before being a " hellen ", and look with despised and contempt the members of the southern polis, as the members of the southern polis think of themselves being very different...at least, in propaganda...even long after the beginning of EB, there was such antagonism: Cleomenos of Sparta spoke also of " half barbarians Macedonians " when he tried to shack off their power...in the end of the third century...

[meliritos]

So if what i conclude from what you are saying is correct, then its vanillas RTW fault that has a Greek faction and a Macedonian one. There should be in fact an Athenian faction, a Corinthian one and a myriad more factions for each city state, because each city was a state of each own. And Persia should be devided to Midoi, to Frygians and a zillion more little factions. Ireland should be devided to each of the clans that where there at that time and Scotland the same. Well, about the same goes for the Iberian area. Thats about a trillion of factions. Ok that makes sense to me now, thanks Pelopidas

[Tiberius Nero]

For me, if the " blood origins " is the only fact who count, then they have perfectly the right of calling themselves " Republic of Macedonia ", even if the majority of their ancestors weren't there at the time of Alexander, the majority of nowadays Greek Macedonia ancestors weren't also there !
The population of Greece as so much various origins !
With all thoses Romans, Slavic, Bulgarians, Normans, Franks and Turkish invasions, and all the naturals migrations of population.
I'm very angry when I saw such hatred because of such false thinking...

Where did you see hatred? I was pointing out something to someone who brings as evidence for ancient disputes the fact that there is nowadays a state called Republic of Macedonia, the people of which have no connection to ancient Macedonians. You are fighting strawmen, I never said they have no right to the name of "Macedonians", they live in the region called Macedonia, so why not? I just point out the irrelevance of the existence of a Republic of Macedonia in an ancient context.

Furthermore, what are the standards for the fabled "one people" anyway? I am using ancient definitions myself, I know the Greeks saw themselves as belonging to different ancestral groups, but they still saw themselves as belonging together to a greater group. That doesn't cancel the fact that in their own words they called themselves by a collective name.

Did anyone here argue that the Greeks were a colony of insectoids with one mind and that they were spawned from the Greek soil and that they were the absolute "One People", with no differences existing between their groups and subgroups within the subgroups ad infinitum? Why, is there such a "unified people nowadays? Do all English, all Italians, all Greeks, all Turks, all Chinese, regardless of region where they live in, follow the same lifestyle and define themselves in the same way nowadays? Even today under Christianity people in various parts of Greece honour different saints as patrons of their regions, so much for the "One Religion" as well; did anyone here claim that there was some sort of dogma of Greek religion so that it would be "One"? Before Hellenistic times there wasn't the kind of syncretism which allowed for identifying gods of barbarians with Greek gods either. So who are you arguing against?

Who mentioned the descent of modern Greeks either? I am a Greek and I am the first to say that nationally there is very little, apart from a language obviously descented from Greek (despite its artificial archaisms) we can identify between ourselves and the ancients that has come down directly through the centuries, and that is really folks religion and folks customs, wherever they survive. About blood I wont speak, and neither should anyone unless a leading autority in genetics. Are you inventing nationalist strawmen to fight against?

Now about the juxtaposition of Greeks and Macedonians in ancient texts, like the census or where it is mentioned "Macedonians and the Greeks" why do people choose to view that as portraying a differentiation on national grounds and not on political grounds? Why is this kind of phrase not similar to the "Athenians and the allies"? In both cases you have a dominant political group and a subordinate one.

[Foot]

So if what i conclude from what you are saying is correct, then its vanillas RTW fault that has a Greek faction and a Macedonian one. There should be in fact an Athenian faction, a Corinthian one and a myriad more factions for each city state, because each city was a state of each own. And Persia should be devided to Midoi, to Frygians and a zillion more little factions. Ireland should be devided to each of the clans that where there at that time and Scotland the same. Well, about the same goes for the Iberian area. Thats about a trillion of factions. Ok that makes sense to me now, thanks Pelopidas

Um? That doesn't even follow. Stop being antagonistic just because you don't agree with the poster; it is neither mature, friendly, nor reasonable.

This debate was never how to represent the Greek factions in game, either in vanilla or EB. The debate came from the idea of the Misellenes trait. Pelopidas has raised some interesting and powerful evidence to the defence of the idea that the Macedonian's could see themselves as better than their southern brothers. You, defending the other position, have show none. Get some evidence together and stop being so defensive about the argument here.

I mean it.

Foot

[meliritos]

No, no you get it wrong. I totally agree with Pelopidas. And in fact i extend his perspective and just say it is fair to have more greek factions. I dont know why there should be a Greek factions that includes Athenians, Spartans and Corinthians and a separate Macedonian faction. I believe it should be many little factions or one that covers all, from Sparta to Macedonia.Get it now?

[hellenes]

Where did you see hatred? I was pointing out something to someone who brings as evidence for ancient disputes the fact that there is nowadays a state called Republic of Macedonia, the people of which have no connection to ancient Macedonians. You are fighting strawmen, I never said they have no right to the name of "Macedonians", they live in the region called Macedonia, so why not? I just point out the irrelevance of the existence of a Republic of Macedonia in an ancient context.

Furthermore, what are the standards for the fabled "one people" anyway? I am using ancient definitions myself, I know the Greeks saw themselves as belonging to different ancestral groups, but they still saw themselves as belonging together to a greater group. That doesn't cancel the fact that in their own words they called themselves by a collective name.

Did anyone here argue that the Greeks were a colony of insectoids with one mind and that they were spawned from the Greek soil and that they were the absolute "One People", with no differences existing between their groups and subgroups within the subgroups ad infinitum? Why, is there such a "unified people nowadays? Do all English, all Italians, all Greeks, all Turks, all Chinese, regardless of region where they live in, follow the same lifestyle and define themselves in the same way nowadays? Even today under Christianity people in various parts of Greece honour different saints as patrons of their regions, so much for the "One Religion" as well; did anyone here claim that there was some sort of dogma of Greek religion so that it would be "One"? Before Hellenistic times there wasn't the kind of syncretism which allowed for identifying gods of barbarians with Greek gods either. So who are you arguing against?

Who mentioned the descent of modern Greeks either? I am a Greek and I am the first to say that nationally there is very little, apart from a language obviously descented from Greek (despite its artificial archaisms) we can identify between ourselves and the ancients that has come down directly through the centuries, and that is really folks religion and folks customs, wherever they survive. About blood I wont speak, and neither should anyone unless a leading autority in genetics. Are you inventing nationalist strawmen to fight against?

Now about the juxtaposition of Greeks and Macedonians in ancient texts, like the census or where it is mentioned "Macedonians and the Greeks" why do people choose to view that as portraying a differentiation on national grounds and not on political grounds? Why is this kind of phrase not similar to the "Athenians and the allies"? In both cases you have a dominant political group and a subordinate one.

The genetical analysis of Dr Triandafyllides is quite interesting...

http://kyttariki.biol.uoa.gr/WWWROOT2/XIOS/13%CE%B7%20%CE%A3%CE%A5%CE%9D%CE%95%CE%94%CE%A1%CE%99%CE%91.htm#%C7%20%C3%C5%CD%C5%D4%C9%CA%C7%20%D3 %D5%D3%D4%C1%D3%C7%20%D4%D9%CD%20%C5%CB%CB%C7%CD%D9%CD:%20%C1%CD%C1%CB%D5%D3%C7%20%D4%CF%D5%20%D0%CF %CB%D5%CC%CF%D1%D6%C9%D3%CC%CF%D5%20DNA%20%C4%C5%C9%CA%D4%D9%CD

[Foot]

No, no you get it wrong. I totally agree with Pelopidas. And in fact i extend his perspective and just say it is fair to have more greek factions. I dont know why there should be a Greek factions that includes Athenians, Spartans and Corinthians and a separate Macedonian faction. I believe it should be many little factions or one that covers all, from Sparta to Macedonia.Get it now?

No, that is itself unreasonable. Why one or the other? In fact that doesn't even make any sense. EB and vanilla rtw has never tried to emulate cultural groups, we use political factions. It thus makes sense to use the koinon hellenon group. It could also make sense to have separate city states, but it certainly would not make sense to have one big faction encompassing macedonia and sparta et al. That was never a homogeneous political entity. We have two choices for the Greek faction. Either we choose to represent them by city-states, but then they would be too weak as their power was in making alliances with other city-states which the RTW engine cannot represent. Or we represent a pre-existing alliance and use traits to represent the disparate groups and city-states that make up alliance.

We chose the latter. But your third option, a pan-hellenic faction makes about as much sense as a pan-gallic faction, or pan-germanic faction. These were not political entities. Oh, and don't go making false dilemma fallacies, representing two choices as the only choices, or I will tear your argument apart.

Thanks,

Foot

[keravnos]

I am not the one to doubt a biologist, but if you could find some link that isn't greek...


δεν υπάρχει γενετική ετερογένεια μεταξύ των Ελληνικών πληθυσμιακών δειγμάτων (από τις διάφορες περιοχές της χώρας), αν και κάποιοι δείκτες είναι ικανοί να διακρίνουν μερικά ζευγάρια πληθυσμιακών δειγμάτων. Η σύγκριση των συχνοτήτων των αλληλομόρφων των γενετικών δεικτών που αναλύθηκαν ανάμεσα στον Ελληνικό και σε άλλους Ευρωπαϊκούς πληθυσμούς επιβεβαιώνει τη γενική διαπίστωση ότι στην Ευρώπη παρατηρείται γενετική ομοιογένεια. Μόνο ο δείκτης ΤΗΟ1 φαίνεται να μπορεί να διακρίνει τον Ελληνικό από τους υπόλοιπους Ευρωπαϊκούς πληθυσμούς.

Let me attempt to translate here...


There is no genetic difference between tghe Hellenic population samples (from different areas of the land), even if certain genetic markers are capable of discerning certain couples of population samples. The comparison of the frequencies of transpositonal genetic markers analysed in between the hellenic and other European populations only confirms the general ascertainment that in Europe a genetic homogeny exists. Only the marker THO1 is shown to differentiate Hellenic from other European populaces

The article goes on to explain in detail the very small genetic differential between Greek and other European genetic makeup. I am not a biologist, though, so this is as far as I can translate.

[Ludens]

And in fact i extend his perspective and just say it is fair to have more greek factions. I dont know why there should be a Greek factions that includes Athenians, Spartans and Corinthians and a separate Macedonian faction. I believe it should be many little factions or one that covers all, from Sparta to Macedonia.
I think everybody agrees that it would be desirable to include more factions. Unfortunately, the R:TW engine is limited to 21 factions, including the rebels/eleutheroi. But this was never the issue under discussion.

[Pelopidas]

Hellenes, do you have it in French or English ? :]

Tiberius ( and allothers who could have been harmed ), I must apologized, I was rude.

I have sustained dozens of arguments about the "purity" of an ancient Greek nation, and it has clearly influenced my reaction here, it was not the point, we have a good and healthy conversation there.
I hope this wouldn't throw a shadow on the evidences I advance.

Meliritos, I doesn't fully agree: yes, a " true depiction " of ancient Greece would need more than one faction, but RTW having a limited numbers of factions, it's impossible...in fact the only Greek ancient world would need an entire mod, and would then be far away from the reality of the political relations...the best thing would be to show the political leagues and major polis, as playing some regional powers.
But !
It would not be as accurate for a faction like the Persian empire: Median, Phrygian, Phenicians, Egyptians...they were all under real Persian rule, just as they are in the Diadochoï states. There could be some factions under protectorate and paying tribute, such as Halicarnassos or Phenician and Chypriots client kingdoms, but that's all.

[Watchman]

Under the EB system most of those would just rank as Type III and IV governements though...

[meliritos]

No, that is itself unreasonable. Why one or the other? In fact that doesn't even make any sense. EB and vanilla rtw has never tried to emulate cultural groups, we use political factions. It thus makes sense to use the koinon hellenon group. It could also make sense to have separate city states, but it certainly would not make sense to have one big faction encompassing macedonia and sparta et al. That was never a homogeneous political entity. We have two choices for the Greek faction. Either we choose to represent them by city-states, but then they would be too weak as their power was in making alliances with other city-states which the RTW engine cannot represent. Or we represent a pre-existing alliance and use traits to represent the disparate groups and city-states that make up alliance.

We chose the latter. But your third option, a pan-hellenic faction makes about as much sense as a pan-gallic faction, or pan-germanic faction. These were not political entities. Oh, and don't go making false dilemma fallacies, representing two choices as the only choices, or I will tear your argument apart.

Thanks,

Foot

tearing apart? tearing apart is the fascist way, in Greece we are tought to discuss and exchange arguments, thats the democratic way. Anyway, you are talking about political similarities between the "greek" states that differentiate them from the "macedonian" state. Can you please tell me how the oligarchic system of Sparta is similar to the democratic system of Athens or the aristocratic system of other city states?

[Foot]

tearing apart? tearing apart is the fascist way, in Greece we are tought to discuss and exchange arguments, thats the democratic way. Anyway, you are talking about political similarities between the "greek" states that differentiate them from the "macedonian" state. Can you please tell me how the oligarchic system of Sparta is similar to the democratic system of Athens or the aristocratic system of other city states?

Haha, you comparing me to a fascist? I am fully able to discuss and exchange arguments, but if you are going to put forward fallacious arguments whose only purpose is to further your own agenda I will not continue any discussion.

And to your second bit; WTF?! I never said their systems was similar, not once did I say that. Nor did I imply it. I think what you will find that I said is the following:



Or we represent a pre-existing alliance and use traits to represent the disparate groups and city-states that make up alliance.

We chose the latter.


I even said that the city-states that make up the group are disparate. But the alliance was an historical fact, and that is what our KH faction represents. I never once said that the Athenians had the same political system as the Spartans.

Show me, in what I have posted, where I have said anything to the contrary. Don ascribe absurd positions to me, who in their right mind would claim that an oligarchic and a democratic system are the same (ideally of course, in practice there are marked similarities).

Foot

[Pelopidas]

Before Hellenistic times there wasn't the kind of syncretism which allowed for identifying gods of barbarians with Greek gods either. So who are you arguing against?


I forget to answer:
Herodotos used this kind of syncretism. Xenopho and Thukydides also, they all said that Mithra was Apollo, or that the Persian worshipped Zeus.
In Asia Minor, the Great Mother-goddess became Artemis of Ephesos.

So it was clearly long before the Hellenistic era that the Greek thought like this.

I was arguing about the " same religion " idea :]
Similarities in religious practice, yes...but not every time nevertheless.

[Ludens]

tearing apart? tearing apart is the fascist way, in Greece we are tought to discuss and exchange arguments, thats the democratic way.
It may be that English is not your first language and you misinterpreted "tearing apart" as a physical threat (it isn't, it is an emphatic way to indicate your argument can be dismissed easily), but your fascist-reference was uncalled for.

[Modern Warrior]

Why is it so hard to consider that peoples from different Helenic polis/regions regarded others as inferior when as recently as the American Civil War, most people considered themselves from their state first and country second, and usually looked down on others from different states?

[Watchman]

For the answer to that, my money's on "nationalist sentiment". :wall:

[hellenes]

For the answer to that, my money's on "nationalist sentiment". :wall:

Its kinda trivial to witness the continious "politically correct" cosmopolitan perception being hold on a pedestal of perfect and unfallable opinion...
On the way of the "politically correct" agenda one can sacrifise anything included any historical reality...

[Watchman]

Your brand of historical reality would claim the ancient Greeks invented fire if there was the slightest chance you could get away with it.
:dozey:

[hellenes]

Your brand of historical reality would claim the ancient Greeks invented fire if there was the slightest chance you could get away with it.
:dozey:

My ancestors were saying:
ΜΗΔΕ ΚΡΙΝΕΙΣ ΕΞ ΙΔΙΩΝ ΤΑ ΑΛΛΟΤΡΙΑ
Please dont judge others based on yourself...

[Watchman]

Around here there's an old chestnut that translates roughly as "bull by his horns, man by his words".

I subscribe to that school of thought.

[hellenes]

Around here there's an old chestnut that translates roughly as "bull by his horns, man by his words".

I subscribe to that school of thought.

IMO a man by his actions would be more appropriate... ;)

[Spoofa]

IMO a man by his actions would be more appropriate... ;)

lol what is this an exchange of old sayings? :laugh4:

[Watchman]

IMO a man by his actions would be more appropriate... ;)Hey, I didn't invent the saying. 'Sides "words" and "actions" are about the same when all you really see of the other guy is text, text and more text...

[Pelopidas]

I don't think anyone here say that the various peoples who are considered commonly as the "ancient Greek" were united in any political way.

Well, another things I forget to point: in Seleukid population census, the division about hellenic settlers is between Macedonians and Greeks .
I don't know if the Lagid dynasty used the same division terms.
But what would I say is that in Seleukid cities, at hellenistic times, the descendant of the people of Macedonia, heavily hellenized, style considered themselves as different from the others Greek peoples.
They not say " Macedonian and Ionian / Athenians / Boetians.... " just they, all the others greeks, and then the barbarians.

So I see this as clearly a mark of contempt, not only based on national entities, the Macedonian of that time seeing themselves as superior to everyone else ( well, they have good reasons to tought this :] )

[Tellos Athenaios]

@Pelopidas, this is not directed to you in particular, nor is it intended to laugh at you or offend you in any way. But as Teleklos put it so well: "what really cooks my carrots" and in my case... well, let me explain below.


So I see this as clearly a mark of contempt, not only based on national entities, the Macedonian of that time seeing themselves as superior to everyone else ( well, they have good reasons to tought this :] )

[sarcasm on]Ah, finally. Now we're getting somewhere. And I believe that somewhere is here: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1512705&postcount=4 & https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1513494&postcount=15 (which is me, btw)[/sarcasm off]

:jawdrop: No really, 2 pages (!) to have your own personal little fights about what not leading nowhere else but 2 pages back -> I believe there's a special subforum for this sort of things, and I believe it's called... The Backroom

So, my little contribution to this thread will be this: please get back to this world, and stop spoiling threads with debates which to some extent end up as getting personal and more importantly add nothing whatsoever to either the original topic or to the thread as a separat topic of it's own, and which therefore would better not be here at all. Please just don't spoil it for all those who hope to really add something to the thread, OK? In other words: :focus:

[Pelopidas]

Well, I'm not getting it the wrong way ^^

But my English must be very bad if I wasn't correctly interprated.
All the stuff I brought is about the accuracy of " mishellenes " trait.

When we see that Macedonian overlords of the Hellenistic era make a distinction betwin the "Macedonian" and the "Hellens" ( yes, in original version, it's the term used , perhaps I forget to point it... ) in their very censitary account, then, someone like me could see the " mishellenes " trait as being perfectly good the way it actually exist, no ?