Printable View
http://vidsearch.myspace.com/index.c...ideoid=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.
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.
Who cares?
"To me every good Barbarian is a Greek, and every bad Greek a barbarian"
:laugh4: Definitely what he'd say. Caesar would be right behind him with a back hand ready.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclops
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 .
.
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:
.
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.
Agreed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mouzafphaerre
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:
Caesar was chinese
I have proof, I just dont want to show you:study:
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?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mouzafphaerre
I don't judge, cause...
thats just how I am, I just don't judge, but...
Amen Mouzafphaerre.
.
I'm not judging actually, but pitying, sympathizing etc. But I see your point, I think. :bow:
.
reminded me of an effort by nowadays Azerbaijan which claim its decendance from Atropatene, Caucasian Albania...:laugh4:
Well, that was some poorly thought out nonsense.
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
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mouzafphaerre
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.
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.
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?
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.
I sit in my ivory tower, judging all day long. It's fun.
Kinda curious, but are you Armenian?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarkiss
I believe he is as am I.Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoffrey S
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.
yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoffrey S
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-...picID=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/An...a/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.
Mouzafphaerre...
remind me again, what was your post?
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
Quote:
Originally Posted by tapanojum
Philip adhored and loved Attic not Greek culture.
A question or a rant?
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?Quote:
Originally Posted by Vorian
Serious question btw
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by tapanojum
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
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by wiki
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?
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.
.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmacq
For sake of caution, how emotional he may appear in his some posts, I don't regard keravnos a nationalist fanatic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mouzafphaerre
.
Thank you Μουσαφίρη,
I shouldn't have watched that damn video, that's all.
.
I'm not μουσαφίρης/مسافر, just a poor lonely مظفر/νικεφόρος. ~:mecry:
.
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.
I don't want to be a pedant, but there's no such county as Wessex.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tellos Athenaios
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 .
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.
Νικηφόρε, sorry... :shame:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mouzafphaerre
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.
Yeah you're right: what I meant is that kingdom which once existed there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Horst Nordfink
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 .
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Horst Nordfink
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.
Not a crime but a general misconception. You see, when most people think of "Ancient Greek civilisation" democracy, science, art, philosophy comes to mind.Quote:
Originally Posted by tapanojum
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.
LOL, I made the same mistake once.Quote:
I'm not μουσαφίρης/مسافر, just a poor lonely مظفر/νικεφόρος.
.
:laugh4: Take it easy guys. :yes: Poor lonely νικεφόρος is satirical don't you think?
:medievalcheers:
.
Anyone mind explaining what those terms mean? :inquisitive:
.
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
.
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.
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.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by keravnos
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'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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Horst Nordfink
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.
It didn't seemed right to tipe other ideas as mine so I told it was a translation .Quote:
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.
Ah yes and I believe Alexander the Great was thracian-->macedonian and not greek.(enaugh details in the other post )
.
Alexander was an alien, who had lazerbeams and used tentacled monsters to reach to India. :clown:Quote:
Originally Posted by keravnos
.
Or you could read this.
http://www.dacia.org/history/am-mac-e.html
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..Quote:
Originally Posted by Sakkura
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)
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 Balkans...... Such a long story.....
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.
A joke site.....800,000 "Macedonians" living in Greece with worse conditions than the Ottoman empire...:dizzy2:Quote:
Originally Posted by an_do_89
Geez, I would have noticed if one tenth of our population spoke a different language and was oppressed by the evil authorities. :laugh4:
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.
You clearly are biased.Quote:
Originally Posted by CirdanDharix
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...onian_language
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.Quote:
Most of these are confidently identifiable as Greek, but some of them are not easily reconciled with standard Greek phonology
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)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doric_GreekQuote:
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.
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:
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?Quote:
μαϗεδων
Maybe some Ancient Makedonian swear words for you?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pella_curse_tablet
Quote:
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."
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by keravnos
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.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by keravnos
Another case of ridiculous nationalism.
Just search youtube and you can find people clamming Confucious is Japanese or Japan is a colony of Korea.
And yet, these kind of people are the kind of people that will get elected for presidency quicker :P
Ridiculous? That would imply that it's an issue to be ridiculed, yet it is in many places a very serious matter.Quote:
Originally Posted by Intranetusa
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by keravnos
Agreed.Quote:
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 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.Quote:
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'.
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:Quote:
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?
Nationalism ftw?Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoffrey S
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Intranetusa
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...
I know. I said nationalism ftw as a joke/sarcastically. :juggle2:Quote:
Originally Posted by Tellos Athenaios
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:
http://epigraphy.packhum.org/inscrip...rea%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.
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:
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by keravnos
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:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pella_curse_tabletQuote:
And I'm going to make funny faces at anyone who tries to claim the ancient Macedonians were exempt from this universal phenomenom.
: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.
Well, after aknowledging that there is a contradiction to my saying, let me try to rephrase what I wrote.Quote:
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.
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.
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.Quote:
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
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.
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.Quote:
...getting on with their lives...
Guess I had that coming... :beam:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mouzzaphaerre
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...
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Keravnos
Thoroughly agreed. Lies are lies, and should be treated as such.Quote:
Originally Posted by Keravnos
...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.
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".