Alexander-an Albanian?

[Moosemanmoo]

http://vidsearch.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=7359639

:jawdrop:
I'm actually stunned by the lack of intelligence in this argument, either this is one patriotic dumbass with false beliefs, or a secret genuis, decide for yourself


I almost brought myself to flame, just couldn't really be bothered to
try and educate these people, would be a waste of time.

[Cyclops]

I think Alexander's mother and father would have called themselves hellenes. Olympias was from the country of Achilles and Hellen from whom the Hellenes get their name, so you can't be more Hellenic than that. Phillip claimed descent from Argive heraclids, and spent time as a youth in Thebes, a hostage among the sacred band, so he was definitely "greek" after that.

As for his DNA, we're all mongrels, and I have no doubt the blood of Macedonian pikemen and companions flows in the veins of people in Tirana, Skopje and Thessalonika. Herodotus mentions every second city in Greece was founded by a Phoenician or an Egyptian or a Lydian etc so many Hellenes admitted their mixed ancestry. The Athenians he described as descended from the Pelsagians, who are often claimed as the pre-Greek autocthones.

Hellenism was a cultural identity and does not serve nationalism well. However claiming Alexander for one narrow modern group is a sad joke.

I think if you revived Alexander today somehow, and found a language he could understand, and you asked him his identity, he'd probably slap you to your knees and say "I am a god, and Great King of Persia".

Funny you never hear the Iranians claim him as one of theirs, but thats what he wanted to be.

[Hax]

Who cares?

"To me every good Barbarian is a Greek, and every bad Greek a barbarian"

[Long lost Caesar]

I think if you revived Alexander today somehow, and found a language he could understand, and you asked him his identity, he'd probably slap you to your knees and say "I am a god, and Great King of Persia".



:laugh4: Definitely what he'd say. Caesar would be right behind him with a back hand ready.

[russia almighty]

They wouldn't be back handing if I introduced there knee caps to my Glock-30 .



Remember kids whether if they come from the past ,future or from another planet ; if there hostile let your gat do the talking .

[Mouzafphaerre]

.
Balkans are the playground of the ultra-nonsensical nationalism Olympiads by Albanian, Slavic and Greek fanatics. In the process, not only knowledge, including historical, but the whole land is wasted. :no:
.

[russia almighty]

Well that kinda happens when everyone and there mother has had at least one successful invasion into the region in the last 200 years .

NATO bombed the shit out of Serbia , the Russian's had there fun , the German's twice pillaged through , hell the Italian's even had one attempt.

[Urnamma]

.
Balkans are the playground of the ultra-nonsensical nationalism Olympiads by Albanian, Slavic and Greek fanatics. In the process, not only knowledge, including historical, but the whole land is wasted. :no:
.

Agreed.

[Sakkura]

This whole pastime of boosting your national ego with some hero from centuries or millennia ago doesn't really make much sense to me. "Yay, my country had a great general 2300+ years ago, now it doesn't matter if we have civil wars and ethnic rioting, or if our kids have to cross mine fields on their way to school!" :inquisitive:

[Moosemanmoo]

Caesar was chinese

I have proof, I just dont want to show you:study:

[M to the A]

Common you guys, you don't believe Alexander was an Albanian? This Albanian 'historicus' will explain what's up: http://nl.youtube.com/watch?v=f60v-nsHfnY I wonder if they teach this in Albanian schools?

[cmacq]

.
Balkans are the playground of the ultra-nonsensical nationalism Olympiads by Albanian, Slavic and Greek fanatics. In the process, not only knowledge, including historical, but the whole land is wasted. :no:
.


I don't judge, cause...
thats just how I am, I just don't judge, but...

Amen Mouzafphaerre.

[Mouzafphaerre]

.
I'm not judging actually, but pitying, sympathizing etc. But I see your point, I think. :bow:
.

[Sarkiss]

reminded me of an effort by nowadays Azerbaijan which claim its decendance from Atropatene, Caucasian Albania...:laugh4:

[Horst Nordfink]

Well, that was some poorly thought out nonsense.

[Maksimus]

This is a political issue - it should not be on this forum, Albania claims pretensions on Greek land's by these kind of nonsenses for years now

[cmacq]

.
I'm not judging actually, but pitying, sympathizing etc. But I see your point, I think. :bow:
.


Actually, this is a sick joke of mine. In truth, I don't think you could find a more judgmental person than me. Please don't get me started. Political issue, please. I see chunks of issues way bigger than these in my loo every morning. And...

Mouzafphaerre, I agree with you 900 %, if of course, its a judgment?

Overwise, I'm far too pragmatic to give a care.

[Thaatu]

The issue in my mind is that you can't backtrace geneology this way. Alexander lived before the Albanians, so it's impossible to say he was one. It could work the other way around, with Albanians claiming to be descendents of Alex, but there's a slight problem with that...

Thank god we Finns have no excuses for our lack of heritage.

[cmacq]

Genealogy...

now there's a fine word for you?

γενεα-λόγος

Family knowledge?

I know all my family, and I can't stand most of them. Holidays are always a hoot. Hell, for the ones I don't know or those that came before my time, there's even a book. I think it was compiled in the 1920's, it’s thicker than the bible, and has all their names and what they did. I think, there was something like... I can’t remember. Something over 50 or 70 generations on the Scot side and I believe more than 60 or 80 on the English? And, by English, no offence, but I use that term somewhat loosely.

At the early end of both, we've several different versions. Just pick whichever you like the most, as I always say. One for the Scots includes an Adam, an Eve, maybe an Egyptian princess, possibly some ancient Iberian royals, several of what the early Irish christians called Lairds and Ladies, several kings of Alba (not Albania), princes and nobles of Del Raida, and by a not so simple twist of fate a Thor, several AS Wessex and Ingland kings and their Kentish princesses, as well as a random Trojan prince tossed in for good measure; but by all means no Albanian-Alexander.

Even still, my very strange sounding surname is Scottish, yet is derived from an early Greek root that means 'to prance like a horse?'

School kids can be so cruel, still It helps to have a dry sense of humor?


Again, I don't judge.

except...
when I think about it?

[tapanojum]

His evidence and conclusions had absolutely NOTHING to do with each other, I was watching the video and laughing/dying on the inside. I ended up leaving this comment since my teenage butt of course has a myspace account.

"This video has "Evidence" and conclusions that have absolutely nothing to do with each other. You are saying things along the lines of...

"Bob only drives Beamers, therefore this can only conclude that Bob is German."



What an entertaining video."

By the way, that second youtube video..the guy sounds like freaking Borat foreal.. I thought it was a joke at first.

[Horst Nordfink]

I sit in my ivory tower, judging all day long. It's fun.

[Geoffrey S]

reminded me of an effort by nowadays Azerbaijan which claim its decendance from Atropatene, Caucasian Albania...:laugh4:
Kinda curious, but are you Armenian?

[tapanojum]

Kinda curious, but are you Armenian?

I believe he is as am I.

[The Internet]

I suppose when thats all you have to hang onto that is good, then you get pretty fanatical about it. Perhaps they should worry more about the mines and rioting than a greek general from a couple milenia ago.

[Sarkiss]

Kinda curious, but are you Armenian?
yes.

[keravnos]

According to quite possibly the greatest historian on Macedonia,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N._G._L._Hammond

and even better,
http://p082.ezboard.com/Obituary-of-NGL-Hammond-Philhellene-Scholar-and-Soldier/fbalkansfrm45.showMessage?topicID=62.topic

Epeirotes were a native people(called by archaeologists "Porodin" group) who were hellenized by the Makedonians( part of "Kurgan" group [called that way because of the tombs they built]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurgan
and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurgan_culture

who migrated to the area from present day Ukraine around 3000 BC), then the "Porodin" group occupied present day Albania, then they expanded into present day Epeiros, under attack by present day Albanians (then Illyrians-another "Kurgan" group) who lived in present day Serbia. Hence the fact that the NW dorian dialect spoken by Epeirotes and Makedonians, especially in the border regions between them, was basically the same.

This people living in close knit family groups expanded from present day western Makedonia (the other entity is FYROM-:book: ) to Epeiros to present South Albania. Pyrrhos was hailed as the first King of Epeiros for being able to unite all the Epeirote tribes under one leader.

And a special "Mewy Cwistmas" note to all who thinks that us Northern Greeks (epeirotes-makedonians) never were...

How would you call someone who wasn't satisfied in their own identity and would desperately need another identity to satisfy his urges, even go so far as to steal/slander another one? Or villify a "classical schollar", a SpecOps soldier (Special Operations Executive (SOE) in occupied Greece during the second world war) who just also happened to be a member of the British Academy. They went one up. They claimed he changed his mind or like any populist took his words out of context and twisted them to make them suit their intentions.

http://www.historyofmacedonia.org/AncientMacedonia/hammond.html

just a question to those people. Why would someone who "wasn't greek" spread the greek civilisation and culture to the whole world basically, reaching as far as India? Why didn't he spoke that slav dialect that FYROMians do today? Would it be possible that this dialect along with the rest of the slav population wouldn't exist in this region for another 1000 years?

If the Makedonian people weren't greek then why were the cities they founded greek, or every kind of monument found in them written in greek?

If I were a FYROMian, I would be proud in my own people's accomplishments, not go out trying to find a neighbours' to steal. I would be ashamed to. If I were an Albanian, the same thing would apply.

[cmacq]

Mouzafphaerre...

remind me again, what was your post?

[tapanojum]

Kervanos, to answer your question

"If the Makedonian people weren't greek then why were the cities they founded greek, or every kind of monument found in them written in greek?"

Philip II envied the Greek culture and did not wish to conquer it, but became part of it. One of the reasons he did not sack Athens like he did to Thebes but allow them to become an ally, unharmed and independent to a degree. Philip absorbed Greek culture

[Vorian]

Kervanos, to answer your question

"If the Makedonian people weren't greek then why were the cities they founded greek, or every kind of monument found in them written in greek?"

Philip II envied the Greek culture and did not wish to conquer it, but became part of it. One of the reasons he did not sack Athens like he did to Thebes but allow them to become an ally, unharmed and independent to a degree. Philip absorbed Greek culture


Philip adhored and loved Attic not Greek culture.

[cmacq]

A question or a rant?

[tapanojum]

Philip adhored and loved Attic not Greek culture.

Isn't "Attic" culture just being more specific (More Athenian). Would saying he loved "Greek" as a general term really be that much of a crime on history?

Serious question btw

[keravnos]

Kervanos, to answer your question

"If the Makedonian people weren't greek then why were the cities they founded greek, or every kind of monument found in them written in greek?"

Philip II envied the Greek culture and did not wish to conquer it, but became part of it. One of the reasons he did not sack Athens like he did to Thebes but allow them to become an ally, unharmed and independent to a degree. Philip absorbed Greek culture

I speak the english language, I communicate in this forum using the english language. If, by any means I conquer the world would I make my subjects speak english? It is a flawed theory in any sense of the word.

Normans who conquered England were french speaking. In a few years, English became the language of anyone but them. Pretty soon they spoke english as well.

Vikings who conquered Russia, spoke Swedish. In two generations they were speaking Russian.

or to make a more subtle example, the greatest Kushana emperor, Kanishka
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kanishka




Kanishka's coins from the beginning of his reign were written in Greek language and script and depict Greek divinities. Later coins are in the Bactrian language (the Iranian language that the Kushans evidently spoke), and Greek divinities were replaced by corresponding Iranic ones.


We know that Kanishka was tutored from an early age by a greek "Paidagogos"=tutor. He was fluent in greek from an early age. Yet, when growing up he dropped that language, in favor of bactrian language (present day Pashto) so that most of his people would understand it, as the big majority of his people spoke it.

Alexandros would too, if the majority of his people didn't speak in greek. Romani emperors spoke in greek and later made it their state language in ERE.

Thus I stand by my word that...

-The greatest conqueror of the world WOULDN'T speak any language which wasn't his own, or the overwhelming majority of his people's. Why would he spread a language throughout the world that wasn't his?

[Tellos Athenaios]

The main problem with 'Greek' as in 'Hellen' lies in the fact that 'Hellas' may or may not refer to the whole of 'Greece'. It also has the far more 'bounded' meaning of 'Southern Greece' i.e. the lands of the main city-states of mainland Greece.

In disjunction with Makedonian, or Dorian or whatever - it is used to denote the difference between the highly urbanized, city-state structured south of the Greek mainland, including (and for the most part restricted to) the Peloponessos. Thereby excluding Makedonia, Epeiros and Thessalia. Furthermore is separates the West from the East - Europe begins with Hellas.
I do not know whether or not it is true, but to me it seems as if this separation is a left-over from the Persian wars -- in which Hellas came to be associated with free peoples; as opposed to the vassal states to the north.

In general sense the word Hellas separates the original (European) mother-states from the colonies - but AFAIK both 'colonists' & 'Hellas-inhabitants' were considered to be equally Greek. (Though this may vary from colony to colony.) It is also a very strong separation from 'Thracians' & 'Illyrians'. (Again, roughly, a north-south devision.)

It's a bit like the Anglo-Saxon adjective today. You can use to describe USA + UK; but you may also want to restrict it to the counties of Essex, Sussex, and [*edit* the former Anglo-Saxon kingdom of] Wessex.

[Mouzafphaerre]

.

Mouzafphaerre...

remind me again, what was your post?

Balkans are the playground of the ultra-nonsensical nationalism Olympiads by Albanian, Slavic and Greek fanatics. In the process, not only knowledge, including historical, but the whole land is wasted. :no:

For sake of caution, how emotional he may appear in his some posts, I don't regard keravnos a nationalist fanatic.
.

[keravnos]

Thank you Μουσαφίρη,

I shouldn't have watched that damn video, that's all.

[Mouzafphaerre]

.
I'm not μουσαφίρης/مسافر, just a poor lonely مظفر/νικεφόρος. ~:mecry:
.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

It's a complicated question, "Who were the Macedonians?" "Were they Greek?" and there are perfectly valid arguements for both camps depending on your perspective.

Hammond was certainly the greatest Scholar of Northern Greece and his History of Macedonia has an extraordinary amount of information in it which is very useful. Unfortunately that information is woven together with a lot od unfounded supposition and weakly supported reasoning. Hammond may have been exactly right about Macedon and Epirus but there is absolutely no way to substantiate many of his claims.

For example, his speculations of the foundation-myth of the Argead kings is only speculation and has no concrete historical or archaeological support. Philip may well have been an Argive Temenid but there is no proof at all. There is also zero proof that Alexander I took part in the Olympic games, from Olympia, and the only source for the story is Herodotus. Herodotus may have been bang-on or it may be yet another case of the great man being fed a line.

Having said that, I don't think anyone actually knows what happened to the Illyrians and whether the Albanians are descended from them. Certainly there is good exidence Alexander would have had Illyrian blood from both parents. The political situation being what it was intermarriage between the various Northern tribes was very common. For much of it's history Macedonia was pathetically weak and fragmented, there is no better example of this than the diplomatic dance forced onto Philip II when he took the throne.

Ancient Macedon lies within the bounds of modern Hellas so I suppose that makes the descendants of the ancient inhabitants Greek. Those that we think of as Greeks certainly didn't see it that way until Philip II turned up with the greatest army their land had ever seen.

[Horst Nordfink]

It's a bit like the Anglo-Saxon adjective today. You can use to describe USA + UK; but you may also want to restrict it to the counties of Essex, Sussex, and Wessex.

I don't want to be a pedant, but there's no such county as Wessex.

[russia almighty]

Isn't that whole term anglo-saxon coming under because so few are actually descended from them ? I remember reading something that a majority of UKer's are still pretty much all celtic .

[Horst Nordfink]

I'd say most of the Welsh, Scottish and Northern Irish are Celtic. Most of England, save for say the counties of Cumbria and Cornwall are Anglo-Saxon.

[keravnos]

.
I'm not μουσαφίρης/مسافر, just a poor lonely مظفر/νικεφόρος. ~:mecry:
.

Νικηφόρε, sorry... :shame:

So far as Epeiros and Makedonia are concerned, I am certain that all ruling class had intermingled illyrian and greek and paionian and thracian blood.

That is a given.

So far as the Southern Greeks, they called the northeners greeks whenever it suited them. There are many steles calling Makedonians greeks (too tired to look them up at Hammond right now), especially when they sought their alliance. Sparta had no problem sending aid to "brother dorians" to aid against their war on Athenians during the Peloponnesian war. Why those are never mentioned and everyone sticks to sore looser Demosthenes and his allusions of grandeur, I will never know. It was just politics, to call the northeners greek or barbarians.

It is truth that certain parts of Hammonds' work (it is immense after all) have been surpassed by certain novel theories and/or facts on the ground. The greatest bulk of his work, however, remains the standard of Makedonian history.

[Tellos Athenaios]

I don't want to be a pedant, but there's no such county as Wessex.

Yeah you're right: what I meant is that kingdom which once existed there.

[russia almighty]

I guess I'm a bit nationalistic too when it comes to sinophile's . I'm about to bare minimum get purged over at gfaq's for some comments . Didn't really mean them but this dude Sorcy I want to take down .


Some of the comments I said weren't nice either .

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I'd say most of the Welsh, Scottish and Northern Irish are Celtic. Most of England, save for say the counties of Cumbria and Cornwall are Anglo-Saxon.

Actually the majoriety of the population are pre-Celtic, there are however people of Celtic decent in Devon and Cornwall, as well as Wales, Scotland and Ireland.

The thing is, it's usually Celtic on the father's side, i.e. they came here and took local women. It's now rockoned that there were only around 200,000 Germanic invadors, vs 2,000,000 Romano-Britons.

[Vorian]

Isn't "Attic" culture just being more specific (More Athenian). Would saying he loved "Greek" as a general term really be that much of a crime on history?

Serious question btw

Not a crime but a general misconception. You see, when most people think of "Ancient Greek civilisation" democracy, science, art, philosophy comes to mind.
And exactly this argument is used by Pan-Salvist, Pan-Albanians or whatever else to detach ancient Macedonia from ancient Greece.


However, apart from science, most art, philosophy and democracy were purely Athenian. For example we all know how different the Spartans were. Aitolians lived in villages, not cities, Thessalians were also uncultured and horse-riders, most cities had some kind of monarhic or oligarchic rule.

All this makes a large part of the arguments used by the "non-Greek Macedonians" side invalid.

Btw, Tellos sums it all up rather nicely.



I'm not μουσαφίρης/مسافر, just a poor lonely مظفر/νικεφόρος.

LOL, I made the same mistake once.

[Mouzafphaerre]

.
:laugh4: Take it easy guys. :yes: Poor lonely νικεφόρος is satirical don't you think?

:medievalcheers:
.

[The General]

Anyone mind explaining what those terms mean? :inquisitive:

[Mouzafphaerre]

.
Greek μουσαφίρης, originally Arabic مسافر, Turkish misâfir: guest; Greek νικεφόρος and Arabic مظفر (seperate words, unlike the prior being a loanword) mean victorious (also Turkish muzaffer) and my forum name is a bastardized spelling of it.

"Poor lonely conqueror" sounds funny to me. ~;p
.

[an_do_89]

This is what I read on a forum in romanian about Alexander the Great and I will translate it to you.
"Alexander went in the spring of 323 BC in Babylon to discuss about the irigation plans for that area using the water from Eufrat and the administrative plans for the ports in the Persian Golf.(at that date Alexanders fleet had more than 1000 battleships and tradeships)
At a party where was remembered the death of Hercules/Heracles , Alexander was drinking wine unmixed with water(so not respecting the tradition from the greek world at that time)
It is known that only the thracians were drinking wine unmixed with water and that this way of drinking the wine was making the difference between "barbarians" and greeks."


"The fact thet Alexander prefers to drink wine unmixed with water doesn't mean he is a thracian but is a clue considered valid by many historyans.
Now:It is known that at the age of 13 Alexander begins his study with one of the most renown philosophers of all time ; Aristotle.
Let's not forget that Aristotle couldn't teach Alexander philosophy , logic , geometry , natural science or history.
Why?
Alexander didn't knew greek.
If only one of his parents would have been greeks, the child Alexander hadn't got in this situation.
So the first lesson he takes are those of greek language.
Even Aristotle was macedonian,born at Stagira in Macedonia.
His father was medic at the court of king Amyntas - grandfather to Alexander
At the age of 17 Aristotle enrolls in the Academy of Platon.
It is known that all his man he trusted and gave them key posts in the army were macedonian officers and not greeks.
This already sais a lot.
Mother of Alexander was Olympia, daughter of the king of Epeirus - king of a thracian nation.
The fighter model for Alexander was the famous warrior Achile, (the trojan war)
Mother of Alexander has a dream in which she sees her own child as the greatest king of the world.
Even from the childhood he lives in the shadow of this dream.
His mother was repeating constantly to him that this dream means that Alexander has the destiny to get further the glory of the most renowned thracian fighter of his family , Achile.
Alexander considers Achile as an ancestor on a matrilineal line."


I hope I made a good translation.

[keravnos]

Thanks for that, an_do_89

It is always nice to know how a person is perceived in the world...I think.

No offense, but now I am waiting for the forum post that says Alexander was an alien, who had lazerbeams and used tentacled monsters to reach to India.

[Sakkura]

Normans who conquered England were french speaking. In a few years, English became the language of anyone but them. Pretty soon they spoke english as well.

Vikings who conquered Russia, spoke Swedish. In two generations they were speaking Russian.

Your argument grows even more convincing when you add the reason they were called Normans in the first place: They were the descendants of viking conquerors (William the Conqueror being a descendant of Rollo, the first viking lord of Normandy), but had largely become French by the time William invaded England.

I daresay the vikings who went east spoke Old Norse, not Swedish, though. The vikings from present-day Denmark and Sweden spoke the same dialect, while those in present-day Norway had their own dialect.

[Sakkura]

I'd say most of the Welsh, Scottish and Northern Irish are Celtic. Most of England, save for say the counties of Cumbria and Cornwall are Anglo-Saxon.
I'd say England is/was a melting pot where it is unreasonable to label the population (or rather, the pre-colonial immigration population) with one common ethnic origin. There's a lot of Scandinavian blood there (England was settled, not just conquered by a few nobles), there's a lot of Anglo-Saxon blood, there's Celtic blood, as well as a few other bits and pieces.

[MiniMe]

No, he wasn't an alien, who had lazerbeams and used tentacled monsters to reach to India =)

But still, my sympathy goes for Pyrrhus. On a par with Hannibal at least. VERY underestimated figure he is. Damn you, Plutarch, for giving him a reputation he did not deserved.

[an_do_89]

Thanks for that, an_do_89

It is always nice to know how a person is perceived in the world...I think.

No offense, but now I am waiting for the forum post that says Alexander was an alien, who had lazerbeams and used tentacled monsters to reach to India.

It didn't seemed right to tipe other ideas as mine so I told it was a translation .

Ah yes and I believe Alexander the Great was thracian-->macedonian and not greek.(enaugh details in the other post )

[Mouzafphaerre]

.

No offense, but now I am waiting for the forum post that says Alexander was an alien, who had lazerbeams and used tentacled monsters to reach to India.

Alexander was an alien, who had lazerbeams and used tentacled monsters to reach to India. :clown:
.

[an_do_89]

Or you could read this.

http://www.dacia.org/history/am-mac-e.html

[Birka Viking]

I daresay the vikings who went east spoke Old Norse, not Swedish, though. The vikings from present-day Denmark and Sweden spoke the same dialect, while those in present-day Norway had their own dialect.

I need to correct you. Most of the vikings (not all) that sailed east was Vikings from Sweden and they diden´t spoke old norse at all. And swedish vikings was called ruser...That´s how Russia got it´s name. Rurik that found russia was a swedish viking chief from uppland in sweden and he founded russia around the year 850..

[The Wicked]

Well i'm tired of this pile of **** :furious3: everyone here in the balkans claims Alexander and Makedonia as their own... Alexander WAS HELLENAS GREEK the Makedones where a Hellenic Tribe (Sorry for my burst but some things make me mad)

[Gaius Valerius]

its fairly simple. the ppl of illyria spoke illyrian, albanian is probably a language derrived from that. the elite however must have been more greek oriented, you can call it hellenised or whatever you want. the greeks at the time didn't see the makedonians as greek, they did saw the royal family as greeks. alexander must have seen himself as a greek as well, that is, before he saw himself as persian, god and whatever he saw himself like :laugh4:


indeed if you revived alexander today and got passed the linguistic problems posed by his archaic language, and say, you are the greatest of albanians, he'd first of all wouldn't know what the hell is an albanians? he would OBVIOUSLY say he's the greatest cuz he's a god, so he's alrdy the greatest of everyone, albanian, greek, persian, whatever. but then the albanian would say: but no your not god, allah is god (albanians are mainly muslim) and then he'd get all furious. how the hell would you go explain to a man that sees himself as the son of zeus that there is only one god and he isn't allowed in the party? he'd get pissed, and thats when we'd need that 0.30 cal in his kneecaps.


oh well, its funny that the albanians believe so, let them have their way if it makes them happy, i mean their economy sucks so let them cling to the thought of alexander being theirs. who knows? its the balkans...

[The Wicked]

The Balkans...... Such a long story.....

[CirdanDharix]

Alexander wasn't "Greek", "Macedonian", "Albanian", "Romanian", or anything like that. He was a 4th century BCE μαϗεδων, and as such, a member of an ethnic group whose rather complex indentity has no continuity with any modern ethnic group. Trying to claim him for any modern nation, is like trying to say that Caesar was Italian, Vercingetorix French or Hannibal Tunisian (or Lebanese, or something).


Oh, and to those who say that Alexander would have indentified himself as king of Persia, that's not true. He would have claimed universal monarchy, and while that concept came from Persia, it certainly doesn't imply Persian kingship. In fact, the primary title of the Achaemenids was "King of Kings", without any geographical limitations.

[Vorian]

Or you could read this.

http://www.dacia.org/history/am-mac-e.html

A joke site.....800,000 "Macedonians" living in Greece with worse conditions than the Ottoman empire...:dizzy2:

Geez, I would have noticed if one tenth of our population spoke a different language and was oppressed by the evil authorities. :laugh4:

[Gaius Valerius]

with alexander being persian we refer to he the common feature he displayed of being greek among greeks, persian among persians etc. when in persia he dressed like the king of kings, so in fact he was 'eastern' at that moment (dressing like them and acting like them - which caused a lot of trouble with his makedonian troops who understood nothing of their leaders ideals). we dont mean anything that he wanted to become one with the ppl like he was born there. in his head he was son of zeus anyway.

yes indeed the tunisians arent carthagians. vandals and arabs (which are related to the phoenicians) swept through the lands. italy got invaded by goths and langobars in the north and normans in the south. gaul got invaded by romans and then by burgundians, then franks, etc etc etc


ppl dont think in a rational way. ppl need to construct history to their own liking. tracing bloodlines is mostly plain lame since so many new ppl settled everywhere, mingled etc etc etc. plus most important cultural/religious differences are to great with the pre-monotheïstic times.

[keravnos]

Alexander wasn't "Greek", "Macedonian", "Albanian", "Romanian", or anything like that. He was a 4th century BCE μαϗεδων, and as such, a member of an ethnic group whose rather complex indentity has no continuity with any modern ethnic group. Trying to claim him for any modern nation, is like trying to say that Caesar was Italian, Vercingetorix French or Hannibal Tunisian (or Lebanese, or something).


Oh, and to those who say that Alexander would have indentified himself as king of Persia, that's not true. He would have claimed universal monarchy, and while that concept came from Persia, it certainly doesn't imply Persian kingship. In fact, the primary title of the Achaemenids was "King of Kings", without any geographical limitations.

You clearly are biased.
Alexander was Makedonian spoke Attic greek. His people spoke Makedonian Greek which was a subset of Dorian Greek, much like Epeirote Greek. To not think so is to not know linguistics, or history.

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


Most of these are confidently identifiable as Greek, but some of them are not easily reconciled with standard Greek phonology

Basically ALL text discovered in Makedonia is greek. Pure and simple. Look at that link and you will see that it isn't a different language as many can pertain.

Those who can speak and read greek go there and read those words of Makedonian now discovered. You will see that they are clearly greek that they are easily understood. There is no reason to be PC here. Just true and liar.

Italians can lay claim to Caesar. They speak his evolved language, and are his direct blood descendants (along with all the blood and gene mix that the migration brought)

Greeks can lay claim to Alexandros. They speak his evolved language, are his direct blood descendants (no matter how much people did come over here as conquerors or what have you)



A recent proponent of this school was Professor Olivier Masson, who in his article on the ancient Macedonian language in the third edition of the Oxford Classical Dictionary tentatively suggested that Macedonian was related to North-Western Greek dialects:[2]
“ In our view the Greek character of most names is obvious and it is difficult to think of a Hellenization due to wholesale borrowing [...] The small minority of names which do not look Greek [...] may be due to a substratum or adstratum influences (as elsewhere in Greece).Macedonian may then be seen as a Greek dialect, characterized by its marginal position and by local pronunciations. Yet in contrast with earlier views which made of it an Aeolic dialect [...] we must by now think of a link with North-West Greek [...] We must wait for new discoveries, but we may tentatively conclude that Macedonian is a dialect related to North-West Greek.

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

The problem begins with some people without ANYONE to consider their great ancestor. Then they either want to make everyone else "parentless" as they are or steal another ones'. :thumbsdown:



μαϗεδων


That is a slavic letter you wrote in there. That says volumes about you. The fact that slavs didn't come in the region for 1000 years after Alexandros died doesn't mean much to you, does it?

Maybe some Ancient Makedonian swear words for you?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pella_curse_tablet



James L. O'Neil's (of the University of Sydney) presentation at the 2005 Conference of the Australasian Society for Classical Studies, entitled "Doric Forms in Macedonian Inscriptions" (abstract): "A fourth‐century BC curse tablet from Pella shows word forms which are clearly Doric, but a different form of Doric from any of the west Greek dialects of areas adjoining Macedon. Three other, very brief, fourth century inscriptions are also indubitably Doric. These show that a Doric dialect was spoken in Macedon, as we would expect from the West Greek forms of Greek names found in Macedon. And yet later Macedonian inscriptions are in Koine avoiding both Doric forms and the Macedonian voicing of consonants. The native Macedonian dialect had become unsuitable for written documents."

[Geoffrey S]

talians can lay claim to Caesar. They speak his evolved language, and are his direct blood descendants (along with all the blood and gene mix that the migration brought)

Greeks can lay claim to Alexandros. They speak his evolved language, are his direct blood descendants (no matter how much people did come over here as conquerors or what have you)
There I disagree. There are millennia between such individuals and those who now wish to appropriate them as some kind of national icon. What's up with the modern nation state Greece finding a link with such a person as Alexander? Despite a geographic affinity and a linguistic link he shares next to no cultural baggage with modern Greeks, no more or less than anyone else in Europe or the Middle East. What's the crucial link which gives Greeks the right to appropriate him as one of their own? Whatever he identified himself as back in the day, Makedonian or Hellene, he would not consider himself a modern Greek.

Celebrate such a person all you like, and I'll gladly join in, but I see no need to link such individuals to modern nationalism, just as little Alexander to Greece as De Ruyter to the modern Netherlands.

The problem begins with some people without ANYONE to consider their great ancestor. Then they either want to make everyone else "parentless" as they are or steal another ones'. :thumbsdown:
A fair point, and I agree that's a problem; but rather than laying the cause with those who believe they don't have a great ancestor and who believe it unfair that others supposedly do, I point the finger at anyone who finds it necessary for modern people who should be proud of their own achievements or look to the future to constantly look to some Golden Age of the past. Nations such as Albania have enough to be proud of, recent achievements or heroes who actually did a lot of good for the current countries; but for some reason they look not at what has been achieved but what should have been, looking to perceived glory days and injustices. Irrelevant to the future, and irreverent to those who sacrificed in modern times I say.

[Intranetusa]

Another case of ridiculous nationalism.

Just search youtube and you can find people clamming Confucious is Japanese or Japan is a colony of Korea.

[Hax]

And yet, these kind of people are the kind of people that will get elected for presidency quicker :P

[Geoffrey S]

Another case of ridiculous nationalism.
Ridiculous? That would imply that it's an issue to be ridiculed, yet it is in many places a very serious matter.

[CirdanDharix]

You clearly are biased.

Your definition of clearly is in need of an overhaul. I really couldn't care less if the entire Balkanic peninsula was swallowed by Cthulhu.




There I disagree. There are millennia between such individuals and those who now wish to appropriate them as some kind of national icon. What's up with the modern nation state Greece finding a link with such a person as Alexander? Despite a geographic affinity and a linguistic link he shares next to no cultural baggage with modern Greeks, no more or less than anyone else in Europe or the Middle East. What's the crucial link which gives Greeks the right to appropriate him as one of their own? Whatever he identified himself as back in the day, Makedonian or Hellene, he would not consider himself a modern Greek.

Celebrate such a person all you like, and I'll gladly join in, but I see no need to link such individuals to modern nationalism, just as little Alexander to Greece as De Ruyter to the modern Netherlands.

Agreed.


The problem begins with some people without ANYONE to consider their great ancestor. Then they either want to make everyone else "parentless" as they are or steal another ones'.

The problem is with people who can't live with themselves without great ancestors. To be well-descended is meaningless, unless you can live up to it.



That is a slavic letter you wrote in there. That says volumes about you. The fact that slavs didn't come in the region for 1000 years after Alexandros died doesn't mean much to you, does it?
It does? It's a kappa with a ligature ϗ which got slipped in instead of the normal cursive kappa ϰ, not an error that was evident when hastily glancing at my post. I'm sure you know what the ligured kappa abbreviates, so I won't patronise you. As to it resembling a Slavic letter, meh :shrug:

[Intranetusa]

Ridiculous? That would imply that it's an issue to be ridiculed, yet it is in many places a very serious matter.

Nationalism ftw?

[Tellos Athenaios]

Nationalism ftw?

Meh, he's just saying that others do 'live by' such ideas; and that to ridicule it would be basically the same as to ridicule the beliefs of [very] religious people: and we all know what happens when an 'convinced' atheist and a fundamentalist start arguing about religion. Not so pretty to look at.

[Gaius Valerius]

nationalism is about the stupidest thing ever invented. its a tool of those with power (or without power) to mobilise the ignorant masses. nationalism has casted all beautiful achievements of 'enlightenment' aside. its a total artificial construction without actual basis (actually dating back to the middle ages, though the 19th century had to give it another swing).

then ppl need to have their glorious past. when they seek that all rational arguments are cast aside. suddenly alexander is all sorts of nations national hero, and their all his descendants. blatant insult of history.

results of nationalism? 1st world war, 2nd world war, every single friggin balkan war, adolf hitler, and many more... nationalism is stupid. you dont believe me? go ask those who died because of it... yeah, true heroes they were alright... blessed be the fools, though shame would be just as proper...

[Intranetusa]

Meh, he's just saying that others do 'live by' such ideas; and that to ridicule it would be basically the same as to ridicule the beliefs of [very] religious people: and we all know what happens when an 'convinced' atheist and a fundamentalist start arguing about religion. Not so pretty to look at.

I know. I said nationalism ftw as a joke/sarcastically. :juggle2:

[Watchman]

Nationalism generally sucks, period. Can't say I've ever even heard of anything good coming out of it, quite the contrary - its main products appear to have been largely limited to gross vanity, group inferiority complexes, intolerance and violence.

QED, the Balkans for the last two hundred or so years. The rest of Europe (plus overseas outliers like the Americas) for some 150, and the rest of the world for some hundred (depending on when exactly they caught the infection from their colonial masters).

As regards Alex, or any other such illustrious ancient personage present-day nationalists like to invoke as their purported "ancestor", I'm cynical enough to agree with my brother's caustic stance on the matter - "I guess it's understandable when you can't claim any more recent achievements. But yours still smells as bad as anyone else's, and you still haven't done anything impressive yourself." :dizzy2:

[keravnos]

http://epigraphy.packhum.org/inscriptions//main?url=oi%3Fikey%3D153368%26bookid%3D172%26region%3D4%26subregion%3D11%26area%3DBottiaia

"εκ Πέλλης
στάδιοι
είκοσι"

meaning
"from Pella
stadia 20"

An ancient Makedonian could read this. So, the common language was probably greek for a common person to be able to read it.

A modern Greek could also read it. That means two things...
-Either we have been here all along but divided among states (Epeiros, Makedonia, all the southron city states etc) and now that we are just a small country are called just Hellenes and our country Hellas. Numbers have changed, religion has changed, a lot of invaders came and went, but we are still here.
-or... insert your own version of non truth.

I can only say this. I speak the same language as my Ancient Greek Ancestors (and that includes Makedonians too), albeit evolved, I do consider it a lie if someone claims my heritage, and am going to try to prove them wrong, and consider this the same as an interlopper who would claim my house.



The slavic country on the Northern borders of my country calling itself "Makedonija" whereas the proper name would be "Paionia" or "Vardarja" (which was its official name prior to Communist Tito changing it to claim what is the Greek Makedonia) is such an interlopper.

So far as Makedonian culture being different now than in the old times, absolutely. 2300 years have passed.

I understand why people consider this either a non issue "what does it matter anyway" or "Million shades of grey", yet there is a quite clear cut case of truth and non truth. Yes there was big influence from Paionians and Illyrians and Thraikians. The Doric greek Makedonia, however, (about 90% of which is in Modern Greek Borders) kept on being Greek.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doric_Greek

So far as people claiming that we need to look at the future not dwell in the past, I say they are right. We absolutely need to. However, all us modern Greeks are standing in the shoulders of Giants, Alexandros is one of them. Any man, any nation needs to feel secure in its past to go forth and create a better future.

If the price to pay for speaking the truth is someone calling me a Nationalist, so be it. If a FYROMian can claim Megas Alexandros as an ancestor, call its land the homeland of Macedonians who conquered the world, etc... then by God someone has to stand up and say that they are calling the sun black.

[Watchman]

European upper classes for a long time conversed and wrote among themselves in French, the international lingua franca of gentlemen. The clergy and educati did the same in Latin - and both used a variation of an alphabet tracing back through the Graeco-Romans to the Phoenicians.

Which as such hardly made them particularly French, Roman, Greek or Phoenician. Arabic had a similar status among Muslims, and obviously most of them weren't Arabs by any stretch of imagination. And so on.


The morale of the story is that the language and alphabet used does not automatically say a damn thing of the "ethnicity" of a population group, doubly so one under the influence of a more sophisticated neighbour. People often forget national "standard languages" are a very new phenomenom, and earlier people tended to be rather poly-lingual (whenever they were actually fluent in more than the local dialect anyway). They would use their local dialect (which often tended to be nigh unintelligible to the speakers of other regional dialects) among their immediate neighbours and community, converse with travelers and itinerant merchants with a "trade language" widespread in the region, and conduct official business in whatever language and script the local rulers employed for adminstration... on top of which the upper and educated layers of the society would usually be taught a whole smattering of languages, particularly "foreign" one regarded as the mark of peerage and prestige and status and whatever - such as the aforementioned French of the aristocracy and the "universal truth-languages" of Latin and Arabic.

And I'm going to make funny faces at anyone who tries to claim the ancient Macedonians were exempt from this universal phenomenom. :clown:


So far as people claiming that we need to look at the future not dwell in the past, I say they are right. We absolutely need to. However, all us modern Greeks are standing in the shoulders of Giants, Alexandros is one of them. Any man, any nation needs to feel secure in its past to go forth and create a better future.This appears rather contradictory... Anyway, while I'm the first one to emphasize the importance of understanding history, I fail to comprehend the importance of "feeling secure in --- past to go forth", especially in the context. Countering national-populist crackpot claims is one thing, but otherwise it is difficult for me to see how ancient history could be so important for what one does today in a world fundamentally different from that of even a hundred years past.

Surely educated and civilised modern people should be capable of forming their identities and getting on with their lives without falling back to the crutch of some guy that sure as heck wasn't me gazillion years ago having done this or that ? The latter rather smacks of trying to cover up one's personal shortages of merit and achievement by invoking the fig leaf of a supposedly illustrious pedigree IMO...

...'course, kinda easy for me to say since I A) come from a land that's basically entirely short of ancient glory B) am personally quite bereft of any national-romantic sentiments... :beam:

[keravnos]

And I'm going to make funny faces at anyone who tries to claim the ancient Macedonians were exempt from this universal phenomenom.



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

:laugh4:

Or the excrept from a Romani writer about a General "translating" to some Makedonian soldiers an "Attic" Greek proclamation.

No need for dem faces.





This appears rather contradictory... Anyway, while I'm the first one to emphasize the importance of understanding history, I fail to comprehend the importance of "feeling secure in --- past to go forth", especially in the context. Countering national-populist crackpot claims is one thing, but otherwise it is difficult for me to see how ancient history could be so important for what one does today in a world fundamentally different from that of even a hundred years past.



Well, after aknowledging that there is a contradiction to my saying, let me try to rephrase what I wrote.

Alexandros lived 2300 years in a world TOTALLY different than what we today can even begin to comprehend. For any man or nation to call him an ancestor would be VERY hard to actually establish. However, if someone were to do so, all evidence, archaeological, linguistic, even historical would point to Modern Greeks as the descendants of Ancient Makedonians. Makedonian enemies' meaning Athenians and Romani are those who have called Makedonians something different for obvious reasons, of course.

-The only reason why ancient history would be so important to us is to establish the aforementioned claim, that if any one nation can claim to be descendant of the Makedonians those would be the modern greeks, inhabitants of Makedonia province of Greece, with Thessaloniki as its capital.




Surely educated and civilised modern people should be capable of forming their identities and getting on with their lives without falling back to the crutch of some guy that sure as heck wasn't me gazillion years ago having done this or that ? The latter rather smacks of trying to cover up one's personal shortages of merit and achievement by invoking the fig leaf of a supposedly illustrious pedigree IMO...

...'course, kinda easy for me to say since I A) come from a land that's basically entirely short of ancient glory B) am personally quite bereft of any national-romantic sentiments



I absolutely agree with you here. Alexandros belongs to history and to children discovering the legend for the first time. This is the reason why I cannot understand why such a fuss about Alexander the Great, "having to be something else other than Greek", when EVERYTHING we know about him point him to that conclusion.

The only justification I can give about Nationalistic involvement on Alexander is that the propaganda against him by his extinguished enemies (Demosthenes the Athenian) feeds nationalistic crackpots of today leading to someone like me trying to explain the situation.

I guess present day geography, and a "notion" that today translates to the past helps that notion.

A) Happy nations don't have history. I envy Switzerland on that regard. B) Sometimes National Romantic sentiments is the only way to present facts in a way someone will actually notice them, especially those who are basically clueless on the whole situation.



...getting on with their lives...


Now that is an advice I am going to follow. I see no reason to continue on with this thread. I don't think I have anything else to add.




Alexander was an alien, who had lazerbeams and used tentacled monsters to reach to India.


Guess I had that coming... :beam:

[Geoffrey S]

Nationalism sucks? Maybe. Some of the worst crimes in the history of humanity were committed in the name of nationalism, certainly. But it's also easy to wonder about a possible link between the rise of nationalism in the last two centuries, initially particularly in Europe, and the many social, economic and technological improvements in those same two centuries...

Alexandros lived 2300 years in a world TOTALLY different than what we today can even begin to comprehend. For any man or nation to call him an ancestor would be VERY hard to actually establish. However, if someone were to do so, all evidence, archaeological, linguistic, even historical would point to Modern Greeks as the descendants of Ancient Makedonians. Makedonian enemies' meaning Athenians and Romani are those who have called Makedonians something different for obvious reasons, of course.
I think there the difference in our opinions can be found. I think the links between Alexander and modern Greece are so tenuous that they have an almost equal lack of weight compared to any other modern nation calling itself his heir.

If the price to pay for speaking the truth is someone calling me a Nationalist, so be it. If a FYROMian can claim Megas Alexandros as an ancestor, call its land the homeland of Macedonians who conquered the world, etc... then by God someone has to stand up and say that they are calling the sun black.
Thoroughly agreed. Lies are lies, and should be treated as such.

[The Persian Cataphract]

...Now, I've heard that Albanians claim descent from the Ancient Illyrians (A claim which should be taken with a large pinch of salt), but this whole discussion about Alexandros' ethnical heritage basically breathes of the same Pan-Slavic tripe since times immemorial.

Not only is Keravnos correct in his assessment, but also in Iranology it is almost universally agreed upon that Alexander basically was a Greek. The Macedonians, though initially less cosmopolitan than their Greek kin to the south and east, can almost be compared to the initially less cosmopolitan Iranians to the north-east. The Parthians too have seen their share of illegitimate claimants. They may range from Judeo-Christian nutcases who wish to ascribe to them Jewish origins, or it may be crazy faux-scholars hired by Pan-Turanists who walk around completely ignoring conclusive evidences in favour of an outdated theory (Coined by George Rawlinson), but all of it simply for a political agenda.

Now I do understand that Queen Olympias was not exactly considered Greek in contemporary sensibilities, but the problem with ascribing Alexander a non-Greek heritage is about as problematic as identifying any of the so-called "half-breed" Seleucid King of Kings with Iranian identity. No man in Iranology, not even Prof. Ehsan Yarshater has ever designated the Seleucids as an Iranian dynasty; That the Seleucids are a part of Iranian history is indisputable, as is Alexander, but none of them pass the requirements for the label. Sometimes these designations are also decided by the force of virtue.

Not only did Alexander speak Greek, and champion Greek culture, he was received a Greek education as fitting for nobility and royalty of the time, and thanks to rather conclusive evidences speaking of the Doric origins of the ancient Macedonians, and previous showcases in history where Macedonian royalty recognizes their unity with their fellow Greeks, amongst these the Persian Wars at the very eve of the battle of Plataea, but I think it is perfectly justifiable to demand evidence propagating for the contrary. It is unfair and insulting to levy anyone with the allegation of nationalism for voicing a correct assessment of the situation. Keravnos is a patriot, and he loves his heritage and is willing to protect his treasure trove of knowledge. Some of you confuse this with ethnocentrism and nationalism, irrational concepts.

Provide evidence and address Keravnos' points if you are up for the challenge. Otherwise hold your breath and leave.

[Obelics]

I think Alexander is sure "culturaly" greek. he spread hellenism etc.
So if he have to fall under some modern nation "label", he have to fall under the label of "Greece".

On the other hand i dont like nationalism from both sides, in another post i was speaking of the famous mosaic of alexander that we have in Naples. So after the post i went to google to see some pic of it, i wanted to be sure if Darius in the mosaic resembled to the actor who made the part of Darius in the movie Alexander, as i wrote in that post. Well i see the wikipedia link, click on it and i found the pic of the mosaic. but just for fun i go to see de "discussion" part of the article and look what i found:

"I changed the part about Darius; ancient sources such as Arrian portray him as cowardly and the first to flee, both at Issus and Gaugamela. Don't get me wrong - I have a lot of sympathy for Darius, and am not trying to blacken his name, but the idea that he would try and face Alexander doesn't really fit with what the ancient sources tell us. Andyana 16:38, 12 February 2007"

try to google "alexander mosaic". I hate this kind of "partisanism".

[Watchman]

Nationalism sucks? Maybe. Some of the worst crimes in the history of humanity were committed in the name of nationalism, certainly. But it's also easy to wonder about a possible link between the rise of nationalism in the last two centuries, initially particularly in Europe, and the many social, economic and technological improvements in those same two centuries...It may be easy, and it's certainly valid enough, to wonder that, but as it happens that's getting the causal relations mixed up. The changes began at the field of technology and economy (ie. the Industrial Revolution); which duly had their rather drastic sociopolitical effects, such as the rise of the middle class and the birth of the industrial proletariat. And these shifts in social structures and, for that matter, worldview, in turn spawned diverse ideological and philosophical currents. (Although militant nationalism was actually pioneered by the French Revolution, which was a sociopolitical shift; but that one was really more of an early form of the "world revolution" line of thinking later characteristic of the Bolsheviks and other ultra-leftists.)

Personally I'm in the opinion that the breakthrough of nationalist thinking and sentiment, also into official policies, which largely happened in the mid-1800s, was largely due to the identity crisis of the newly dominant urban middle classes - which after all could draw on neither aristicratic pedigrees and ancient traditions like the old aristocracy, nor the class conscience of the working class. A rather contagious panacea for the somewhat chronic inferiority complex and anxiety of the bourgeoise, in other words. (It's probably somewhat telling how popular ultranationalist ideas and reactionary movements tended to be among the middle classes.)

[Geoffrey S]

Watchman, that is also basically what I think, although that wasn't really clear enough in the initial post. It's not necessarily a causal link I see; more that the rapid social, economic and technological changes which took place in the nineteenth and twentieth century put such stresses on older systems of ruling a state that nationalism played a crucial part in allowing those states (and in particular, their rulers) to cope with said changes. Whether that is considered good or bad is largely coloured by one's modern political tendencies and views of the later crimes perpetrated in the name of nationalism, but I think nationalism was fundamental to the continuation of older states into the new era without falling apart to to the massive new challenges to the system.

In that sense it may be worth noting that the Russian Tsardom and Austrian Empire most clearly struggled to harness national sentiments, and also struggled most among the established powers to keep pace with rapidly changing systems. In something more of a stretch, but perhaps worth thinking about, I wonder about possible links between rapid modern technological changes and the changing meaning of borders and more recent tendencies towards more extreme forms of nationalism, though now politicians struggle to harness such feelings.

The Persian Cataphract, at least in this topic I don't see anyone disputing that Alexander can be considered an ancient Greek; plainly such claims attempting to paint him as anything else are quite ludicrous. But where the issue presents itself, at least for me and I think also for CirdanDharix and Watchman (please correct me if I'm mistaken!), is in any assertion of special national and cultural ties between modern Greece and anything from ancient Greece. Let alone Albania or the FYROM, which are plainly out of the question.

[Watchman]

Watchman, that is also basically what I think, although that wasn't really clear enough in the initial post. It's not necessarily a causal link I see; more that the rapid social, economic and technological changes which took place in the nineteenth and twentieth century put such stresses on older systems of ruling a state that nationalism played a crucial part in allowing those states (and in particular, their rulers) to cope with said changes. Whether that is considered good or bad is largely coloured by one's modern political tendencies and views of the later crimes perpetrated in the name of nationalism, but I think nationalism was fundamental to the continuation of older states into the new era without falling apart to to the massive new challenges to the system.AFAIK in most cases the rulers were rather gruding in bowing to the inevitable and adopting nationalist ideas under pressure from below. This isn't really that surprising; most states were still monarchies, and both the royal dynasties and the hereditary nobility tended to be rather international types - case in point being the British royal family of German extraction, and the Swedish royal line descended from one of Napoleon's Marshals (the previous dynasties had tended to have a rather German flair). Nationalism was obviously not exactly the first choice of worldview for such people, all the more so if they had multi-national realms to govern (eg. the United Kingdom).

Nationalism wasn't really much of a state-level device for coping with pressures; indeed most regimes were more or less opposed to the idea, and for very good reasons as their borders and constituent populaces tended to have preciously little in common with the somewhat artificial idea of a clearly defineable "nations". Rather such ideological frameworks came to be more or less imposed upon reluctant governements that could not get rid of them, and had to pick one group clamoring its national identity over others - or were simply "infiltrated" by such thinking in the form of elected representatives, advisors, officials etc. adhering to it coming to positions of influence.

In that sense it may be worth noting that the Russian Tsardom and Austrian Empire most clearly struggled to harness national sentiments, and also struggled most among the established powers to keep pace with rapidly changing systems. In something more of a stretch, but perhaps worth thinking about, I wonder about possible links between rapid modern technological changes and the changing meaning of borders and more recent tendencies towards more extreme forms of nationalism, though now politicians struggle to harness such feelings.Austria-Hungary and the Russian and Ottoman Empires were multinational empires of the old school; nationalism was pure poison to the complicated arrangements they had developed to keep their diverse subject peoples reasonably content with their lot. Even more than others, such realms were doubly torn by nationalist currents - minor subject peoples on one side clamoring for their "national rights" and eventually independence, major hegemonic groups such as the Great Russians and Turks proper on the other increasingly calling for the imposition of their specific language and culture as the "national" Imperial one. The rulers, in the case they had not themselves been infected with such sentiments, eventually had to choose a side (and invariably picked the major ethnic groups); this led to diverse attempts at "russifying" the smaller component populaces (a term coined for just such developements towards attempts at imposed cultural homogenisation), which unsurprisingly heavily pissed off said subject peoples (not in the least as it was factually a direct breach of the "contract" between them and the ruler) and only gave their own nationalists that much more of a soap box to agitate from.

The results could get pretty ugly.

The Persian Cataphract, at least in this topic I don't see anyone disputing that Alexander can be considered an ancient Greek; plainly such claims attempting to paint him as anything else are quite ludicrous. But where the issue presents itself, at least for me and I think also for CirdanDharix and Watchman (please correct me if I'm mistaken!), is in any assertion of special national and cultural ties between modern Greece and anything from ancient Greece. Let alone Albania or the FYROM, which are plainly out of the question.Sounds more or less like my position on the issue, yes. (Beady-eyed Greek nationalists annoy me even more than the Alban or FYROM ones, chiefly because I actually talk to the former online from time to time; I've no doubt the latters would honk me off just as bad, and probably even faster, but thankfully I haven't encountered them too often. :sweatdrop: )

[Cyclops]

I constantly tease my FYROM mates by saying "I read somewhere Alexander was Turkish" or "they tested Phillip's DNA and it turns out he was a Celt!":2thumbsup:

My favourite bit of the Alexander myth is where the Keltoi are cheeky to him.


...Austria-Hungary and the Russian and Ottoman Empires were multinational empires of the old school; nationalism was pure poison to the complicated arrangements they had developed to keep their
diverse subject peoples reasonably content with their lot...

Fascinating posts, I'm out of my depth here but enjoying the discussion.

My vague understanding of the HRE/KuK was it was basically a dynastic survival of the medieval period, held together by custom and mental inertia as well as a fairly competent military and not much else.

After Napoleon they attempted a deep brain freeze on their domain (was it Disraeli who called them "China in Europe"?) to prevent the seeds of nationalism germinating. They had a massive secret police, some of the severest censorship Europe has seen, and resorted to extremely cruel repression at times (eg Radetsky) but ultimately power was held by relying on the German minority, and at times compromising with the Hungarian elites (at the expense of many other groups eg south Slavs). A sense of German nationalism did evolve, probably stimulated by the Prussian political adventure, as well as in response to the tide of Revolution pulsing out of Paris every so often.

I think its fair to say nationalism did destroy them, and they hated it in non-Germans and suspected it in Germans as pro-Prussian treason. I know much of the 20th centuriy's most vile racism has its roots in 19th century Vienna.

The Romanov domain was firmly rooted in Great Russian hegemony, but once again it was not an intellectuiually developed position of the empire. However Great Russian chauvanism did develop and this saved the tsar's empire for the soviets, and fortified them against Hitler as well (eg Stalin's infamous toast in 1945 "to the USSR and above all the Great Russian people!").

I believe the Tsars promoted pan-slavism: is that full blown nationalism? It emphasised race over language and culture, and also had a strong Orthodox character, which permitted good relations with Greece at times. Is it fair to say the Tsars fanned the flames on nationalism in order to bake their own cake in the Balkans? like the KuK I think the Tsars were suspicious of Nationalism, especially for Poles and Ukranians.

Obviously under the Soviets there was a theoretical attack on nationalism and racism, but in practice Stalin played the Russian Nationalism card to win WW2 (Nevsky medal, Mother Russia etc). Did he even relax the persecution of the orthodox church at that time?

[MiniMe]

Interesting conclusion. According to you, to win against Hitler, Zee Great Russian chauvinism is required as a must have .

remark: I'm not arguing about existence of so called Zee Great Russian chauvinism or, bettersay, Pan-Slavism, that really had its place in Russia XIX century history.

all I'm saying is that patriotism is sometimes linked with chauvinism and sometimes is not.


on topic: why is it that nobody of Alexandros admirers never mentions that Megas Alexandros success was direct consequence of his father policy, I wonder.


anyway, one half of this tread belongs to Monastery and the other one to Backroom

[Geoffrey S]

AFAIK in most cases the rulers were rather gruding in bowing to the inevitable and adopting nationalist ideas under pressure from below. This isn't really that surprising; most states were still monarchies, and both the royal dynasties and the hereditary nobility tended to be rather international types - case in point being the British royal family of German extraction, and the Swedish royal line descended from one of Napoleon's Marshals (the previous dynasties had tended to have a rather German flair). Nationalism was obviously not exactly the first choice of worldview for such people, all the more so if they had multi-national realms to govern (eg. the United Kingdom).
I think the reluctance of the ruling classes, which admittedly were shifting at the time, to adopt nationalist ideas is somewhat exaggerated. Initially, perhaps, but the states which headed towards a more successful late-nineteenth and early-twentieth century were those which harnessed nationalism as a justification for maintaining the political status quo over such ideas as socialism.

By the mid-nineteenth century, both Britain and France were hard at work at their respective attempts to increase national pride in the state and its leaders through large-scale imperialism, with Britain being particularly successful. German states, while still divided, were experiencing an increasing amount of national sentiment and simultaneously massive technological and social changes, and it took a statesman like Bismarck to make use of these sentiments to create a stable German Empire capable of controlling the excesses of the variety of changes taking place at the time (industrialization, an upsurge of socialism, and an increasing role of the bourgeoisie). The United States were very much in the process of developing common national ideals, with in the late-nineteenth century in particular a definition of 'American' being reached which allowed for calls to put a stop on immigration of those not considered compatible (Asians, Catholics, Eastern and Southern Europeans...).

No, nationalism was not created by the leaders and rulers of nations. But those who harnessed such feelings best found them a very effective control of social changes which led to upheavals elsewhere, such as Russia and the Austrian empire.

Nationalism wasn't really much of a state-level device for coping with pressures; indeed most regimes were more or less opposed to the idea, and for very good reasons as their borders and constituent populaces tended to have preciously little in common with the somewhat artificial idea of a clearly defineable "nations". Rather such ideological frameworks came to be more or less imposed upon reluctant governements that could not get rid of them, and had to pick one group clamoring its national identity over others - or were simply "infiltrated" by such thinking in the form of elected representatives, advisors, officials etc. adhering to it coming to positions of influence.
I disagree. Nationalism was perfectly suited to the needs of the state to control such perceived radical ideas like socialism, and the wish to utilize it effectively is evident from the efforts governments made to bring the border areas closer to the centre in a political and cultural sense. Fast transit in the form of the railways, allowing for more military, political and cultural influence dominated by those who ran the rails (the state and/or rich members of society); education initiatives, aimed at fostering national sentiment and adoption of a common language; use of a new mass media to quickly spread ideals and the view of the government on politics - all these things in my opinion point to a serious effort by most governments at harnessing nationalism, associating it with the state and its leaders, and using it to provide a solid basis on which people could rely while many other things formerly taken for granted changed all around them.

Austria-Hungary and the Russian and Ottoman Empires were multinational empires of the old school; nationalism was pure poison to the complicated arrangements they had developed to keep their diverse subject peoples reasonably content with their lot. Even more than others, such realms were doubly torn by nationalist currents - minor subject peoples on one side clamoring for their "national rights" and eventually independence, major hegemonic groups such as the Great Russians and Turks proper on the other increasingly calling for the imposition of their specific language and culture as the "national" Imperial one. The rulers, in the case they had not themselves been infected with such sentiments, eventually had to choose a side (and invariably picked the major ethnic groups); this led to diverse attempts at "russifying" the smaller component populaces (a term coined for just such developements towards attempts at imposed cultural homogenisation), which unsurprisingly heavily pissed off said subject peoples (not in the least as it was factually a direct breach of the "contract" between them and the ruler) and only gave their own nationalists that much more of a soap box to agitate from.
Agreed. While some states made effective use of nationalism to strengthen the state, in the multi-national empires this plainly wasn't possible. Nationalism couldn't be used as a binding factor, and the governments didn't have anything else to use in its place to replace the changing systems of the day.

[Maksimus]

Obviously under the Soviets there was a theoretical attack on nationalism and racism, but in practice Stalin played the Russian Nationalism card to win WW2 (Nevsky medal, Mother Russia etc). Did he even relax the persecution of the orthodox church at that time?

Yes, yes he did - after the Nazi led 'Barbarosa' invasion (against USSR) it was clear that Russian people will not fight 'very good' in war led with ideals they don't fully (or mostly) belive in - or trust (that means that Soviet people will not fight for Stalin only) - and Stalin was 100% sure of that after one massive KGB research (that data gathering lasted years but was conducted in about 1937-1940) proved that even after (about 20) years of suppression pointed at Russian church - there were still over 70% of USSR citizens that belived in god (and ortodox faith)

And when the invasion started - Nazi gained pace (reaching Moscow when a small army of Chechen fighters saved Russian capital - an army of muslims that died in those fights with calls of god!) then The Party and Stalin needed church and the priests to gather and call for people to fight back all around the vast country, in places where church was long before Socialism..
There was no better motivation for a Slavic-Ortodox country to defend itself than to point out to the people -most cases in its history- when it was in danger and won - Александар Невски is a Saint - he saved Novgorod from Germanic crusaders that came motivated to fight in Russian lands (13c) the same way 'some others' came in WWII - led with catholic priests and 'Rome loving' officers.

https://img233.imageshack.us/img233/5610/sashanevskymo3.jpg (https://imageshack.us)
This is the medal of Alexandar
https://img178.imageshack.us/img178/2104/ussr0454ue1.jpg (https://imageshack.us)
And a WWII poster in USSR

[Vorian]

Sounds more or less like my position on the issue, yes. (Beady-eyed Greek nationalists annoy me even more than the Alban or FYROM ones, chiefly because I actually talk to the former online from time to time; I've no doubt the latters would honk me off just as bad, and probably even faster, but thankfully I haven't encountered them too often. )


Btw, what does "beady-eyed" means??


Anyway, I agree that there are Greek nationalists with exaggerated opinions about many things.:whip:

However you can't just denounce any connection between modern and ancient Greece. These people didn't disappear. Of course their numbers dwindled, Goths, Slavs, Turks and others mixed with them during the middle ages but still some remained.
I am Greek and I certainly don't have any delusions that I am a pure-blood descendant of Socrates and Alexander. I most certainly have some Slavic, Albanian, Turkish and Venetian (the latter is certain, I have checked :book: ) ancestors. However it's also certain that if I go 2000 years back in my ancestry (as if there is a way), I will find some people from ancient Greece there. This coupled by the fact I speak the descendant of their language, live in the same area, eat the same kind of food, with whatever changes have occurred the last 2,000 years and live in a culture where their ideas still exist, I think I have the right to call myself the closest to them as one can get.


PS: Many people mix nationalism and patriotism as well with being proud of your history. I don't see why a person from the Balkans being proud of his history is viewed as an ignorant nationalist and treated with contempt while Western Europeans and others are free to boast about colonial empires, wars and conquests. I would never discourage a Swed to be proud of the Vikings, even though their cultures are nothing alike nowadays.
PS2: And the nationalism doesn't cause wars, greed does. Nationalism is the pretext. If people left the Balkans alone and stopped interfering, the area would find its peace as well.

[MiniMe]

And when the invasion started - Nazi gained pace (reaching Moscow when a small army of Chechen fighters saved Russian capital - an army of muslims that died in those fights with calls of god!) then The Party and Stalin needed church and the priests to gather and call for people to fight back all around the vast country, in places where church was long before Socialism..

:inquisitive: I think you might be confusing this with defense of Brest.

Anyway, it is not quite precise to speak of Chechens as of willing to die with calls for god muslims. They, as well as other dwellers of Caucasus have their mountain "code of honour", so to say, and it means much more than any religion to them. There are christian mountain dwellers and there are muslim mountain dwellers on Caucasus, but this is a second priority. BTW, Chechens had no problems to go to war in Afganistan even though they would encounter their "muslim brethren" there. It was absolutely normal and desired for mountain dwellers to serve in Russian Tsar/Soviet army. And they were good soldiers, willing to fight as heroes due to their somewhat medievistic code of behaviour (that besides its good values has some others).



There was no better motivation for a Slavic-Ortodox country to defend itself than to point out to the people -most cases in its history- when it was in danger and won.

Russian Federation is NOT a Slavic-Ortodox country and never WAS. Russian Federation is one of the few countries (the only other I know for sure is Indonesia) where christians and muslims have learned to peacefully coexist, russians and tatars one fine example.
To make Russian Federation become a Slavic-Ortodox country requires a massive etnick cleansing that would leave it with about half of its population. And we are not that kind of people that do such things or want to do them

Not to mention the fact, that modern day russians descend not only from slavic roots but also have finno-ugor and tatar and polish and jewish and whoeverwasaround blood.

[Maksimus]

I did not want to go 'vast' in the facts - I know that Russian Federation has the best constitution in the World (one that is compared to the Charter Of UN) and that it is Multicultural, multiconfesional and multinational state where all are on the same foot infront of the law.

My remarks came as a 'side point' of Hitlers book - 'My Fight' - he had very clear plans for 'slavic' population in Europe (and 'others')

Anyway's - I think you saw my point... :whip: And, how many ortodox population there is in Russia - as far as I know from the The Russian Ortodox Church sources it is over or about 80% (I would say more) and most of population is in European part of Russia (90%) :shrug: so most are 'mixed' slavic and others (What do I have to say? I am Serb - turks Were here for 500 years - still I fell the way 'others' look at me - as an ancient Serb - evolved anyway :laugh4: )


And you are right about the Chechens - it's just that there are so many things here - I dont want to go any deeper

[MiniMe]

Anyway's - I think you saw my point... :whip:
Please, don't whip me :laugh4:


And, how many ortodox population there is in Russia - as far as I know from the The Russian Ortodox Church sources it is over or about 80% (I would say more) and most of population is in European part of Russia (90%) :shrug:
good question would be: what is to be an average ortodox in Russia? I don't think there are many true christians here. I suppose absolute majority are christened agnostics (just like me) and are going to christen their children in future. But this stuff is more due to the honouring the tradition than due to true faith.

[Gaius Valerius]

... all I'm saying is that patriotism is sometimes linked with chauvinism and sometimes is not... on topic: why is it that nobody of Alexandros admirers never mentions that Megas Alexandros success was direct consequence of his father policy, I wonder.


-patriotism = linked with valiantly defending one's country in times of need and thus linked with war/defense. chauvinism = having the same feelings like patriotism but in peace time. ppl tend to get the patriotic reflex in war to create strong ties between them. chauvinism is doing the same with the absence of war. its stupid (patriotism can still be helpful in times of need) since it exagerrates - in times of peace - the superiority of the idiot boasting it routing (for example republican rednecks) and are bend on seeking conflict rather than avoiding it.

nationalism is something totally different, though patriotism and chauvinism are derrived from it. but their not the same.



- it's true alexander's conquest would have been impossible without the military philip created. but politically he had to start from scratch, first of all securing his power over greece again (which defected from the alliance when philip was murdered). so politically he had to basically start from scratch and without the impressive army of philip he wouldn't be the famous conqueror we now know.

BUT

do remind this: if their had been anyone as philip's successor, the world would have been a different place. only alexander conquered the world cause that was his dream, his goal. philip wouldn't have conquered the persian empire. in fact nobody would have. what did greeks have to look for on the banks of the indus??? or on the oxus -river??? nothing. but alexander did. he was looking for the end of the world... which in my opinion is a pretty crazy idea, typical for his grotesque personality. so the statement that philip was vital for alexander's conquest is only viable if your referring to the set of tools he left his son, basically being the army. only alexander though, was capable of putting it to such use as he did... truly a magnificent person... oopps, am i admiring alexander again :laugh4:

[Cyclops]

...on topic: why is it that nobody of Alexandros admirers never mentions that Megas Alexandros success was direct consequence of his father policy, I wonder...

Is there a tendency to magnify the genius at the expense of all around him? makes the story easier to tell. "...and then Big Al blew a puff of air in Darius Pussypants face, and knocked him halfway across Asia...".

There's a nice short history of Macedonia (by Malcolm Errington IIRC) that puts Alexander's acheivements into context. He praises Phillips solid sensible goundwork, and portrays Alexander as an insane risk taker.

One very good point was the resources taken from Macedonia to conquer the east left the homeland vulnerable for a generation. In fact Macedonia as a polity was diminished after the rise of the Diadochi, losing much of Thrace, scrabbling for control of Hellas, and barely able to fend off the Keltoi and other invaders. It was not until the 2nd Punic war that Macedonia was again punching anywhere near the class Phillip raised them too.

Errington's lovely alternate history excursis "what if Phillip had survived to old age and passed his throne peacefully to a sane heir" (which rarely happened in Macedonia of course) concludes that Macedonia could have consolidated a Hellenized south balkan state far more potent than the dimished kingdom the Romans beat. I reckon this is a crock: there were endless examples of polities rising for a generation or two under competent leadership, only to slump back into mediocrity. Armenia, Lydia, Pontus, Athens and Sparta spring to mind : regional powers with stable administrations are rare: maybe Syracuse, Rome and Carthage? Even Rome's career path seems to have been expand or die.

I reckon Phillip made the war machine. The tradition of decisive cav he inherited, but he assembled the experienced generals, adapted the effective pike, integrated the light troops and developed multiple-mission capable elites.

Of course Alexander added a note of personal courage and some battlefield genius, and ran an extraordinary campaign with it. However Alexander's acheivements weren't built to last as long as his fame.

True his conquests held together for perhaps a generation (at least on paper) and then significant chunks survived longer, but that was more a function of pre-existing political templates (ie the persian Satrapies), a suitable cultural medium (Attic Greek) and the effectiveness of the macedonian military system (based on Phillips model, adapted by the Diadochi as much as Alexander himself). Alexander modelled the kind of cultural synthesis the Seleukids used but the Ptolemy's (Kleopatra aside) were Hellenis supremicists in the extreme, and they outlasted all other principal diadochi.

Alexander was the lightning bolt, but the fire was Greek and the kindling was gathered by Phillip.

[Astibus]

Cyclops...what a 'mate' you must be,calling your 'friends' FYROMIANS and mocking them...youd get your ass beat if you tried that around myself and my mates...including my GREEK mates who would stomp your ass.

You all write that we(MACEDONIANS) have no connection to that land or people but our genetics would say otherwise.....even if i accept the stance of Greeks...my people have been living on that land for at least 1400 years...the majority of the Greeks who live in Macedonia today are decendants of PONTIAN SETTLERS...GRCI,MOZE DA GI LAZETE OVIJA ANGLEZI AMA NEMOZETE DA NE LAZETE NAS.

GET YOUR HEADS OUT OF YOUR ASSES.
GREECE IS THE ONLY NATION IN EUROPE THAT CLAIMS TO BE ETHNICALLY PURE....CHECK THE CIA FACTBOOK....what a joke....you can all get on your knees and worship the myth that is Hellas....not us though.




PS:To those of you who created EB,ive gotten plenty of hours of enjoyment from it and for that id like to thank you.I apologize for the hostile tone in my post,but i am sick and tired of reading this bullshit from arm chair historians.

I wont be posting again so you can all go on and call me a FYROMIAN or a PAN SLAVIST...which is pretty fucked since it was SLAVS(Serbs and Bulgars) who tried to supress(along with the Greeks) a Macedonian identity....you can call myself and the Macedonian people those names on a forum,but i know for a fact that in person,the nervous smiles that cross your lips will not allow your tongue to utter any word but MACEDONIAN...MATER VI EBEM

LATER.

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/gr.html
http://www.westminster.ac.uk/mad/pdf/WPCC-Vol3-No3-Antonis_Sapountzis_et_al.pdf
https://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa260/Piperkata/mapofgreecerefugeesettlements-1926.jpg

[cmacq]

You all write that we(MACEDONIANS) have no connection to that land or people but our genetics would say otherwise.....even if i accept the stance of Greeks...my people have been living on that land for at least 1400 years...


prove it mate...

read me off your line; from lad, to dad, to grand-dad and beyond?

[Astibus]

Fine,i said i wouldnt post but since you need proof.....

However, some southern Slavic populations such as Serbians, Macedonians, Bulgarians, and Bosnians are clearly separated from the tight DNA cluster of the rest of Slavic populations. According to the authors this phenomenon is explained by "...contribution to the Y chromosomes of peoples who settled in the Balkan region before the Slavic expansion to the genetic heritage of Southern Slavs..."[7]

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

AND THIS IS FROM WIKIPEDIA....not exactly a source of Macedonian propaganda.....IS THAT ENOUGH PROOF FOR YOU.....go on living in your fantasy....now you prove to me that GREECE IS ETHNICALLY HOMOGENOUS.

[cmacq]

Fine,i need proof.....

ETHNICALLY HOMOGENOUS.

I think you misunderstand.

I meant you personally...

not the ETHNICA HOMOGENOUM?

A forest is only as full as the sum of its trees?

And...

besides, how do we know you're not some girl from ipanema???

[Astibus]

Me,personally?That is how i self identify and for you that should be good enough....comprende?I dont question Greeks when they tell me thats what they are although many of them are descended from Arvanites,Vlachs,Slavs,Turks etc....self determination is a basic right that all should respect.

[cmacq]

Me,personally?That is how i self identify and for you that should be good enough....comprende?



I must say...

sounds good to me, but thats a little light on the proof side?

I am, what I am...

cause I say I am!!!

I think we're getting the picture?

[Astibus]

How can i give you proof?I dont have family records stretching back 200 years let alone 1500.I know where i come from,i know where my families allegiances were,i know for what and why my ancestors risked their lives.For myself...that is all the proof i need.....maybe you need a piece of paper to tell you what you are....i dont need that.

[cmacq]

How can i give you proof?I dont have family records stretching back 200 years let alone 1500.I know where i come from,i know where my families allegiances were,i know for what and why my ancestors risked their lives.For myself...that is all the proof i need.


Not even two hundred years?

Then by way of your families line, how do you know what you say to be true? How do you and your own family fit into the bigger historical picture?

[Astibus]

Not even two hundred years?

Then by way of your families line, how do you know what you say to be true?

We didnt just appear out of thin air pal...if my ancestors felt like they were Bulgars,Serbs or Greeks they wouldve fought for them,NOT FOR MACEDONIA....like i said,that is all the proof i need.

By the way....who are you that i have to prove myself to you?

"If Greece exists today as a homogeneous ethnos, she owes this to [the Asia Minor Catastrophe]. If the hundreds of thousands of refugees had not come to Greece, Greek Macedonia would not exist today. The refugees created the national homogeneity of our country. (Antonios Kandiotis, Metrpolite of Florina, page 141, Anastasia Karakasidou, Fields of Wheat, Hills of Blood).

Im done....ajde prijatno:)

[cmacq]

Not to me. I tried only to help you authenticate your assertions, yet you only prove you are disinclined to do so.

Still,
in the end...

an interesting,
though not an original,

method of debate.

In fact, I think I hear the beep, beep, beep of a garbage truck backing up behind me?

Please be gentle?

[Cyclops]

Cyclops...what a 'mate' you must be,calling your 'friends' FYROMIANS and mocking them......

Yeah, its that Australian humour. :2thumbsup:


youd get your ass beat if you tried that around myself and my mates...including my GREEK mates who would stomp your ass...

[checks astibus' coffee for caffeine content]

Now I'm certain you mean "in a game of EB" becuase you wouldn't be so stupid and crass to threaten someone you don't even know on a computer games thread.

If by "my GREEK mates" you mean your hoplites and theurophoroi, then maybe yes. Or maybe I'd flank you with my Irish hammers.:smash:

Either way, lighten up.

[hellenes]

...

[cmacq]

gas on fire...

nice touch.

[Astibus]

Cyclops


Yeah, its that Australian humour.

I didnt know insulting people was considered humour.....with friends like you...who needs enemies.


Now I'm certain you mean "in a game of EB" becuase you wouldn't be so stupid and crass to threaten someone you don't even know on a computer games thread.


Im not threatening you,im telling you what would happen.


If by "my GREEK mates" you mean your hoplites and theurophoroi, then maybe yes. Or maybe I'd flank you with my Irish hammers.

Your Irish hammers will have to get passed my Agrianes first:)



Either way, lighten up.

Sorry man,i know this whole argument may seem ridiculous to outsiders but when the very existence of your people and nation are called into question and or denied tell me how you will react.

cmacq


Not to me. I tried only to help you authenticate your assertions, yet you only prove you are disinclined to do so.

Still,
in the end...

an interesting,
though not an original,

method of debate.

In fact, I think I hear the beep, beep, beep of a garbage truck backing up behind me?

Please be gentle?

You think everything ive written is garbarge?Fine,but at least be consistent and tell that to every person in the Balkans who claim to be one thing or another.


Hellene


Sorry to tell you this but every night you go to bed tell yourself: "Im a Bulgarian Kiptchak..."
You are a bulgarian from the river Volga its too sad that Basil II's work was incomplete too sad indeed...

Since youre into tellling others what they are,maybe ill take a stab at it and tell you what you are?Nah,im not that arrogant.

https://img338.imageshack.us/my.php?image=63419482jg5.jpg
https://img246.imageshack.us/my.php?image=32087326sj8.jpg
https://img227.imageshack.us/my.php?image=44123485ci7.jpg
https://img227.imageshack.us/my.php?image=38396164xx9.jpg
https://img227.imageshack.us/my.php?image=91626942wn5.jpg
https://img252.imageshack.us/my.php?image=63448695ms4.jpg
https://img266.imageshack.us/my.php?image=41604638mr8.jpg
https://img266.imageshack.us/my.php?image=10149612fy4.jpg
https://img252.imageshack.us/my.php?image=10dj7.jpg
https://img522.imageshack.us/my.php?image=11by5.jpg
https://img522.imageshack.us/my.php?image=12ad5.jpg
https://img522.imageshack.us/my.php?image=13bt2.jpg

[Maksimus]

Sorry to tell you this but every night you go to bed tell yourself: "Im a Bulgarian Kiptchak..."
You are a bulgarian from the river Volga its too sad that Basil II's work was incomplete too sad indeed...

That is not very nice! Nobody here praised the Pontic Greek Genocide! You should mind your manners!

And he did not say that you are an ortodox Turk (which is an insult I wont claim!) and that todays Greece has very little or almost no ethnic relation to the 'Times of Athens' for example (as you did for his country) !

He just expressed his feelings that Alexander is a part of FYRM historic pride too - there is nothing wrong with that! Many celts fought for Alexander and considered him as their king so they too can claim some pride on behalf of Alexander - it just depends on the way you look at things!:san_angry:

[Maksimus]

ADMIN !

Close this thread !

[cmacq]

please do.

[Cyclops]

...I didnt know insulting people was considered humour.....with friends like you...who needs enemies...

Yep, I agree, who needs enemies? As for insults, they should only hurt if they are true.

I have ancestors who were Jews, Irish (Green, Orange, White, all colours), English, American, Portuguese. My family has married Japanese, Palestinian, Mauritius, in fact half the united nations.

I'd be proud if I had a relative from Skopje, or Pella, or Istanbul: I probably do but I can't prove it.

If I got thin skinned and wanted to fight everyone who talked about "this race" or "that religion" or "the other nationality" I'd be at war with myself.

I don't have time to fight every one that wants to kill my family for being Islamic, Jewish, Catholic, Presbyterian, Buddhist or Athiest (Church of Ireland). I could get upset about Hiroshima, Pearl Harbour, the Armenian genocide, Gallipoli, the 4th Crusade but then I'd have really bad digestion.

I consider all sides my family and it upsets me when they fight.

[hellenes]

...

[Astibus]

Maksimus....FALA.

Cyclops...


As for insults, they should only hurt if they are true.

Calling Macedonia FYROM IS AN INSULT.Calling the people FYROMIANS is an insult....it goes against everything the UN is supposed to stand for....i dont refer to Greece as the Former Ottoman Province Of Morea,.It is true that we were once a part of Yugoslavia,but that nation is gone,Croatia isnt FYROC,Serbia isnt FYROS,Bosnia isnt FYROB etc...If the Greeks had a problem with Macedonia they shouldve brought the issue up when it was a part of Yugoslavia,only when the nation was weak and defenseless did they pounce.




I have ancestors who were Jews, Irish (Green, Orange, White, all colours), English, American, Portuguese. My family has married Japanese, Palestinian, Mauritius, in fact half the united nations.

I have never denied the fact that Macedonia is a multicultural region,i know that it(like every nation in the Balkans and the world for that matter) is a mixture of many peoples and cultures.Im not here to promote a chauvinistic Macedonian agenda...no jingoism from me....im simply here to say that we have the right to self determination like all peoples...and if our claims are baseless then so are everyone elses.


Hellene...

No matter how much support you get from Soros and his kin, no matter how much money the Zionists push behind you...
YOU WILL NEVER SEE THE AEGEAN. KIPCHAKS.

TAKE A LOOK FOR YOURSELVES PEOPLE:)))ITS THE ZIONISTS:)))LE LE....ti da ne si drogiran?You forgot to throw Tito in the mix.

[hellenes]

...

[Astibus]

Hellene...


Its so pathetic how you Kipchaks sing songs how you gonna "liberate" "Egeiska Matsedonja"

We call it MAKEDONIJA....not MATSEDONJA.


Did you see any sea on the Volga plains? Nope? Thats may be why you want to get into the Aegean so much...

The Volga empties into the Caspian Sea...if your theory is correct,we wouldve settled there and not taken our 'Kipchak' asses into the Balkans.:)


And your money with Thessalonikian white tower on it? Are you still dreaming?

Nope,im wide awake....and that money was never printed.How about yourself?Still dreaming of the 'Megale" idea?


And your sad little game with name changing and history forgery..."Alexandar"? "Matsedonje"? "Solun"

Name changing?Tell me who changed names?
http://lazarus.elte.hu/hun/digkonyv/topo/3felmeres.htm


And lastly: Are you getting in NATO? No? EU? No? Still starving?

Damn man,youre hilarious,i hope you have a happy and full life without having anyone kick you while youre down.

[MarcusAureliusAntoninus]

I considered closing this one as soon as it was started.
I wasn't following this thread, but due to it being reported I'm going to close it. Skimming over the last few posts it seems a good idea.

[Teleklos Archelaou]

Further, it's good evidence that any threads such as this should be closed as soon as they are started up. They all end this way.