Historians on the Ancient Macedonians

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Karposh
    Member
    • Aug 2015
    • 863

    #16
    Another name that was mentioned is Ian Worthington (Professor of Greek History at University of Missouri-Columbia). The following is from The Ancient History Bulletin 13.2 (1999) 39 - 55. I won't quote the whole article, only the really good bits (Stuff your "out of context" cop-out crap).

    Quote 1: We have a fair amount of information for events in mainland Greece, especially Athens, during the reign of Alexander, however events in Macedon in this period are undocumented and largely unknown. Our concern is whether scholars, ancient or modern, refer to Macedonia as "Macedonia" and Greece as "Greece", or do they refer to them as one country. The references above indicate that there were two countries in question. One cannot sidestep the issue of separateness and blur-out the distinction between Macedon and Greece without corrupting the text altogether.

    Quote 2: Points of interest to our objectives: Macedonians and Greeks were one and the same people, Arrian would have not used two separate designations. The separation of ethnicity is not only amply evident in the next passage, but it is explicitly underlined by injection of the "race" card: "Darius' Greeks fought to thrust the Macedonians back into the water and save the day for their left wing, and the fight was further embittered by the old racial rivalry of Greek and Macedonian (Arr.2.11)".
    Obviously there is nothing in this passage to suggest that Arrian did not see the ancient Macedonians as separate people from the ancient Greeks. The core, the crux of the matter, is illustrated by the racial rivalry between Macedonians and Greeks.



    Quote 3: Diodorus 18.12.2 says that Antipater was short on 'citizen soldiers', a clear reference to the Macedonians. Agis' threat to Macedon and subsequently to Alexander was not taken lightly; Alexander had to postpone important decisions before he knew the fate of Agis. Whence, we are left to ponder the question of "Greekness" for the ancient Macedonians anew: Would ancient Greeks, led by Agis III rebel against Macedon in the middle of "their" Persian crusade undertaken to avenge Greece for the desecration of Greek temples and religious monuments of a century ago, if the ancient Macedonians were Greeks? Second, if Macedonia was a Greek land, isn't it natural for the Greeks to have taken part in Antipater's home defensive force instead of fighting against him?

    Quote 4: The following conclusions are in order: (a) There is a clear separation between Greeks and Macedonians, (b) Greeks revolted against Alexander and his Macedonians, meaning that there was no such thing as "unification of the Greek states". "Armed conquest" is the term that describes, I might add, adequately, the Macedonian war over Greece. And, last, (c) the Macedonian conquest of Asia and the Macedonian Empires have very little to share with the Greeks. Greeks were used for jobs like any other ethnic group within the empire. Borza says that Alexander, near the end of his reign, replaced all the Greeks and Persians with Macedonians. (Borza, 1990).


    My question to you Leo is did you also include the above views by Worthington or was that not important or worthy of a mention in your dissertation?

    Comment

    • Karposh
      Member
      • Aug 2015
      • 863

      #17
      Quote 2: Points of interest to our objectives: Macedonians and Greeks were one and the same people....

      Apologies everyone for the typo. I didn't simply copy and paste the above but typed it out manually. I should really get into the habit of proof reading my contributions before I hit submit. The above quote should read: "IF Macedonians and Greeks were one and the same people..."

      Comment

      • Karposh
        Member
        • Aug 2015
        • 863

        #18
        Another source that was used in Leo's dissertation was W. Heckel (along with co-author J. Yardley). I couldn't find anything with the Heckel-Yardley combination (yet) but I was able to dig up some interesting views from Heckel regarding the usage of the ancient Macedonian language:

        "The phalangites were simple men, hardened by a life that promised them little more than self-sufficiency, and bound to their taxeis by kinship or shared geographical background. Their commanders were members of the local aristocracies, and they served them just as their own fathers had served theirs. Hence, they were proud to declare their regional origins, as Lyncestians, Orestians, Elimiotes, or Tympheans...Amongst themselves they spoke the Macedonian language, and probably even a local dialect of it. It is doubtful that many of them had a good understanding of Greek. It is highly likely that they prided themselves on being distinct even from the Macedonians of the plain (Lower Macedonia), just as American southerners regarded Yankees with distrust if not loathing."

        Walderman Heckel & Ryan Jones, 2006 - "Macedonian Warrior" Page 51.

        Comment

        • Karposh
          Member
          • Aug 2015
          • 863

          #19
          "It is clear from the extant historians that the lost sources made a clear distinction between Macedonians and Greeks - ethnically, culturally and linguistically - and this must be an accurate reflection of contemporary attitudes..."

          Alexander the Great Historical Sources Translation, By: Waldermar Heckel (University of Calgary) & JC Yardley (University of Ottawa).

          Comment

          • Karposh
            Member
            • Aug 2015
            • 863

            #20
            Originally posted by Leo255 View Post
            - The Persians called the Macedonians the "Yaunã Takabara", "Greeks with hats that look like shields". They would not have done so unless the Macedonians were actually Greek.
            Who told you Persians called the Macedonians: "Greeks with hats that look like shields". That has to be the biggest load of shit going around and it drives me insane every time I see it being repeated. It is clutching at straws at best. And, as an argument it's pathetic! Just another hollow Greek slogan. The only truth to any part of that ridiculous claim is that the term "Yauna Takabara" is indeed an Old Persian term that means Greeks (i.e. Ionians) with round shields. And that's as far as it goes. It does not mean "Greeks with hats that look like shields". I have no idea who first made the connection that this phrase is alluding to the ancient Macedonian sun hats, the Kausia, but whoever he was, he was an idiot. No part of the phrase "Yauna Takabara" refers to a head, a hat or head covering. The phrase itself is inscribed on one of the facades attributed to Darius I at the ruins of the ancient Persian capital of Persepolis. The inscription apparently lists 28 subject peoples, one of which was the Yauna Takabara. The fact that the word "Yauna" is recorded twice on this list, once by itself and once with the inclusion of the word "takabara" has prompted some numbskull to make the connection with the ancient Macedonians. According to this argument, the Persians didn't know the name of the people they were trying to describe (???) but knew that they spoke Greek so they coined the term "Yauna Takabara" (i.e. Greeks with round shields) - an apparent allusion to Macedonian headwear. I put together an extensive argument on this subject on another thread but, just repeating briefly, in ancient Persian, the "takabara" simply referred to Persian infantry units. So called because of the "taka", a round shield with a segment cut out of the top to give soldiers holding them good vision. Before the takabara units came into existence, there were the "sparabara". So called because of the "spara" which was a large rectangular shield. I have no doubt whatsoever that the Persians came into contact with the Yauna (i.e. Ionians) with round shields. They did indeed carry round shields and lived in the Persian's backyard (i.e. modern Turkey). So naturally, they made reference to the "Yauna Takabara."

            Comment

            • Karposh
              Member
              • Aug 2015
              • 863

              #21
              Originally posted by Leo255 View Post
              - All of the Macedonians' names are Greek. If only Phillip and Alexander had Greek names then I would consider that they spoke the language for administrative purposes. This is not the case and all the Macedonian soldiers referred to have Greek names.

              Why would the illiterate and most likely peasant Macedonian populace who had no day to day interactions with the Greeks give their children Greek names unless it was their indigenous language?
              "Many historical sources are written in Greek, and it was a common practice among Greek historians to hellenize foreign sounding names. For example, the name of the powerful first king of the Persian empire, Kurush, ought to be trancribed as Kourous or Kouroux in Greek, but became Kyros, because this looks like a Greek word )"Mr. Amighty"). The name that is rendered as Alexandros, which has a perfect Greek etymology, may in fact represent something like Alaxandus (not my personal view since 'Aleksandar', as a name, is one of the most popular names stretching from R. Macedonia, in the south, all the way to Russia, in the north), which is not Greek. A related argument that forces us to hesitate is that the Greeks nearly always converted the names of foreign deities. Supreme gods like Jupiter and Marduk are called 'Zeus". So, the fact that Greek authors use Greek names for Macedonian people and deities does not prove very much about the Macedonian language." (Jona Lindering, 2005).

              The author from whom I sourced this quote adds some of his own examples of this well known Greek practice such as: "Rushanak" became Roxana; "Ahasuerus" became Xerxes; "Kshattra" became satrap; "Takscacila" became Taxila; "Paurava" became Porus and so on. I'll just add my own perspective to this argument and suggest that the adoption of a foreign sounding name is hardly an argument for belonging to a certain ethnicity.

              Comment

              • Karposh
                Member
                • Aug 2015
                • 863

                #22
                More on the Macedonian personal names issue...The following are quotes from a Macedonian author:

                And perhaps the shakiest construct of the "Greek position" is the Macedonian names. What is of importance here and must be addressed is the following: Did Macedonians use Greek names because they were Greeks or because the Greeks saw meanings in the Macedonian names?...As a matter of fact, one is hard pressed to find any Greek from Classical or from Hellenistic times to bear the name 'Philip'. With the exception of Alexander from Epirus, a contentious point to begin with (I'm guessing because he feels the Molossians were most likely a Macedonian tribe anyway - they even fought shoulder to shoulder with the Macedonians against the Romans during the Third Macedonian War), we rarely, if at all, find another 'Alexander' among the Greeks. Thus, the argument that Philip in Greek means lover of horses cannot by itself carry the load of justification for ascribed Greekness for the ancient Macedonians. We must look elsewhere for comparable evidence in order to make such an inclusion. Since Philip and Alexander have Greek etymology - "Philipos" lover of horses and "Alexander" the protector of men - the assigned Greek meanings must be seen as Greek viewpoints of foreign names...The author also gives examples of Persian names that are given Greek equivalents to reinforce his point.

                Comment

                • Karposh
                  Member
                  • Aug 2015
                  • 863

                  #23
                  Originally posted by Leo255 View Post
                  - The primary sources indicate that Alexander himself considered the Macedonians to be Greek. He speaks of "Macedonia and the rest of Greece" in a letter to Darius and there is also the inscription in Asia Minor of "Alexander and the Greeks except the Spartans".
                  About that letter to Darius. This is what Professor Edmund F.Bloedow has to say in The Ancient History Bulletin 9.3-4 (1995, p.93-110) with regards to that letter:

                  "The designation of Macedonia as part of Greece has intrigued modern critics. This, according to Schachermeyr, is enough to take one's breath away. He went so far as to suggest that, however brief, it encapsulates a whole and bold strategy: to counter the Great King's strategy of attempting to exploit the age-old distinction between Macedonians and the Hellenes. The reason for including Macedonia as part of a larger Hellas was designed to justify Macedonian participation in the so called war of revenge. Of course Macedonians never regarded their territory as forming part of Greece, and certainly the Greek poleis did not regard Macedonia as being another Greek polis."

                  As for the gift Alexander sent, of 300 Persian armours, to the Parthenon of Athens as an oblation to Athena, with the epigram: "Alexander, son of Philip, and the Greeks, except of Lacedaemonians, from the barbarians who live in Asia", this has to be seen in the dark humour with which it was intended on Alexander's part. This was early on in the campaign and Alexander was still playing his "avenging Greece" card as propaganda for Greek audiences. The Macedonians had just defeated the Persians at the Granicus River and slaughtered 18,000 Greeks out of a total of 20,000, fighting in the Persian ranks against the Macedonians, their supposed avengers for past Persian atrocities. Don't you find that just a little bit ironic? There was no need to slaughter the Greeks that day. The battle had already been won and the Persians had tucked tail and run off. Do you think this was Alexander expressing his love for the Greeks when he unleashed his Macedonians on them and slaughtered them on the spot without mercy? And what of "his" own Greeks within his own army? That is, all 7,000 of them compared to Darius' grand total of 50,000 Persian-paid Greek mercenaries? The 7,000 reluctant Greek conscripts from the deal that was made in Corinth after Chaeronea? Why do you think Alexander left them behind before he set out to meet the Persians on their first pitched battle? It was because he knew he couldn't trust their loyalties when they came face to face with 20,000 of their Greek compatriots that were fighting for Darius.

                  Comment

                  • Amphipolis
                    Banned
                    • Aug 2014
                    • 1328

                    #24
                    Originally posted by Karposh View Post
                    "Many historical sources are written in Greek, and it was a common practice among Greek historians to hellenize foreign sounding names. For example, the name of the powerful first king of the Persian empire, Kurush, ought to be trancribed as Kourous or Kouroux in Greek, but became Kyros, because this looks like a Greek word )"Mr. Amighty"). The name that is rendered as Alexandros, which has a perfect Greek etymology, may in fact represent something like Alaxandus (not my personal view since 'Aleksandar', as a name, is one of the most popular names stretching from R. Macedonia, in the south, all the way to Russia, in the north), which is not Greek. A related argument that forces us to hesitate is that the Greeks nearly always converted the names of foreign deities. Supreme gods like Jupiter and Marduk are called 'Zeus". So, the fact that Greek authors use Greek names for Macedonian people and deities does not prove very much about the Macedonian language." (Jona Lindering, 2005).

                    The author from whom I sourced this quote adds some of his own examples of this well known Greek practice such as: "Rushanak" became Roxana; "Ahasuerus" became Xerxes; "Kshattra" became satrap; "Takscacila" became Taxila; "Paurava" became Porus and so on. I'll just add my own perspective to this argument and suggest that the adoption of a foreign sounding name is hardly an argument for belonging to a certain ethnicity.
                    Originally posted by Karposh View Post
                    More on the Macedonian personal names issue...The following are quotes from a Macedonian author:

                    And perhaps the shakiest construct of the "Greek position" is the Macedonian names. What is of importance here and must be addressed is the following: Did Macedonians use Greek names because they were Greeks or because the Greeks saw meanings in the Macedonian names?...As a matter of fact, one is hard pressed to find any Greek from Classical or from Hellenistic times to bear the name 'Philip'. With the exception of Alexander from Epirus, a contentious point to begin with (I'm guessing because he feels the Molossians were most likely a Macedonian tribe anyway - they even fought shoulder to shoulder with the Macedonians against the Romans during the Third Macedonian War), we rarely, if at all, find another 'Alexander' among the Greeks. Thus, the argument that Philip in Greek means lover of horses cannot by itself carry the load of justification for ascribed Greekness for the ancient Macedonians. We must look elsewhere for comparable evidence in order to make such an inclusion. Since Philip and Alexander have Greek etymology - "Philipos" lover of horses and "Alexander" the protector of men - the assigned Greek meanings must be seen as Greek viewpoints of foreign names...The author also gives examples of Persian names that are given Greek equivalents to reinforce his point.
                    This is the famous lexicon of ancient (mostly Greek-Roman) biographies by William Smith. It is in three long volumes (3 pdf files, about 1200 pages each). It is a classic, useful in many occasions.

                    In pages 110-128 (of Volume 1) you can find many people by the name Alexander (Alexandros) (the first one, mostly known as Pares, appears in Homer).



                    In Volume 3, at pages 270-293 you can find people by the name Philip (Philippos).



                    The two most famous of them who are not Macedonian can also be found in Wikipedia (search Philip).

                    Comment

                    • Amphipolis
                      Banned
                      • Aug 2014
                      • 1328

                      #25
                      Originally posted by Karposh View Post
                      "Many historical sources are written in Greek, and it was a common practice among Greek historians to hellenize foreign sounding names. For example, the name of the powerful first king of the Persian empire, Kurush, ought to be trancribed as Kourous or Kouroux in Greek, but became Kyros, because this looks like a Greek word )"Mr. Amighty"). The name that is rendered as Alexandros, which has a perfect Greek etymology, may in fact represent something like Alaxandus (not my personal view since 'Aleksandar', as a name, is one of the most popular names stretching from R. Macedonia, in the south, all the way to Russia, in the north), which is not Greek. A related argument that forces us to hesitate is that the Greeks nearly always converted the names of foreign deities. Supreme gods like Jupiter and Marduk are called 'Zeus". So, the fact that Greek authors use Greek names for Macedonian people and deities does not prove very much about the Macedonian language." (Jona Lindering, 2005).

                      The author from whom I sourced this quote adds some of his own examples of this well known Greek practice such as: "Rushanak" became Roxana; "Ahasuerus" became Xerxes; "Kshattra" became satrap; "Takscacila" became Taxila; "Paurava" became Porus and so on. I'll just add my own perspective to this argument and suggest that the adoption of a foreign sounding name is hardly an argument for belonging to a certain ethnicity.
                      Originally posted by Karposh View Post
                      More on the Macedonian personal names issue...The following are quotes from a Macedonian author:

                      And perhaps the shakiest construct of the "Greek position" is the Macedonian names. What is of importance here and must be addressed is the following: Did Macedonians use Greek names because they were Greeks or because the Greeks saw meanings in the Macedonian names?...As a matter of fact, one is hard pressed to find any Greek from Classical or from Hellenistic times to bear the name 'Philip'. With the exception of Alexander from Epirus, a contentious point to begin with (I'm guessing because he feels the Molossians were most likely a Macedonian tribe anyway - they even fought shoulder to shoulder with the Macedonians against the Romans during the Third Macedonian War), we rarely, if at all, find another 'Alexander' among the Greeks. Thus, the argument that Philip in Greek means lover of horses cannot by itself carry the load of justification for ascribed Greekness for the ancient Macedonians. We must look elsewhere for comparable evidence in order to make such an inclusion. Since Philip and Alexander have Greek etymology - "Philipos" lover of horses and "Alexander" the protector of men - the assigned Greek meanings must be seen as Greek viewpoints of foreign names...The author also gives examples of Persian names that are given Greek equivalents to reinforce his point.
                      Alexandros and Philippos were not called/written so by others (as you imply) but by themselves, in the inscriptions and coins of their time.

                      Comment

                      • Karposh
                        Member
                        • Aug 2015
                        • 863

                        #26
                        Originally posted by Amphipolis View Post
                        Alexandros and Philippos were not called/written so by others (as you imply) but by themselves, in the inscriptions and coins of their time.
                        I gave my personal view with regards to Alexander's name in my first quote that you included that I don't believe Alexander's name was a case of "interpretatio graeca." The only thing that I'm implying is that reaching the conclusion that the ancient Macedonians were Greeks based on names is very speculative at best. Names transcend borders very easily.

                        Comment

                        • Leo255
                          Banned
                          • Jan 2017
                          • 6

                          #27
                          Risto - My dissertation has absolutely nothing to do with the issue of Macedonian ethnicity. If you doubt that I actually went to KCL and studied Alexander then see the attached transcript.

                          Notice that I did a module called War? This was a thematic module on how aspects of war have changed over the course of history. One of the areas we looked at was monuments of war.

                          An English guy in my class used your capital Skopje as an example. He stated that the Republic of Macedonia had no claim to the Ancient Macedonians yet had spent millions on statues of a man brilliant of war in order to inspire patriotism.

                          The lecturer said that it was a great point and that particular fabrication a sign of how powerful monuments of war could still be in the modern day.



                          A laughable comment? Not supported by any eminent historians?

                          How can you say that with a straight face unless you are deliberately trolling me? I've posted quotes from historians from the best universities in the world. 75 authors who are of publishable quality and I'm sure there are a tonne more.

                          If these were quotes from Greek historians then fair enough but it's your comment that is absolutely laughable and plain ignorant.

                          Robin Lane Fox not prominent enough? A lecturer at the best university in the world?

                          Never mind what historians think, the fact that they spoke Greek is reflected in every first hand piece of evidence. Their names, inscriptions, their months of the year, their location names and accounts from Livy and Curtius.

                          Tomche - You think it's wrong to cite historians as evidence? Why do you think that? These are people who have examined all of the primary evidence. I do not mean to be rude but why would you or anyone on this forum know any better?

                          Let's ignore the historians then and turn to evidence. Do you have any evidence that the Macedonians did not speak Greek? From what I understand the only reference to a Macedonian language is when Alexander "shouted in Macedonian".

                          That's meaningless though, Koine Greek was also referred to as Macedonian. It does not mean that by speaking Macedonian he was not speaking a form of Greek. I'm sure Alexander spoke Macedonian all the time just as Leonidas spoke Spartan.

                          I am not claiming that Modern Greeks are 100% the same as Ethnic Greeks. I was told by vicsinad that Modern Greeks have nothing to do with Ancient. I am simply telling him that genocide would have had to occurred for that to happen.

                          You claim to be the descendants of the Ancient Macedonians yet likewise state that Modern Greeks are completely unrelated to the Ancient? That's completely illogical considering you were ruled by the same empire.

                          I have been to Pella and spoke Greek to the locals. Care to tell me why my statement is a cracker?

                          Even if the Ancient Macedonians were not Greek, we know that they eventually spoke Koine Greek and were accepted as Greek by the time of Strabo. Regardless of their original ethnicity, Macedonia was eventually accepted to be part of Greece and their descendants have been part of the Greek world ever since and live in modern-day Macedonia, in Greece.

                          Are we expected to believe that they suddenly lost this Hellenic identity and became Slavic speaking? What is your story? You guys are so intent on proving that the Macedonians were not Greek, but what claim do you have to them? We know for a fact that they did not speak Slavic.

                          Simply calling yourselves Macedonians does not make you their descendants. I can call myself Spider-Man, it does not mean I suddenly become him. You have no cultural or linguistic ties to them, only a fraction of your country is actually located in the region of Macedonia.

                          Why did Alexander insist that the Persians learn Greek and not Macedonian?

                          Carlin -Well there's a lot of strong assertions made without any supporting evidence.

                          It's interesting that he mentions the Thracians. We have four surviving inscriptions of their language and all of our sources clearly indicate that they were not Greek speakers?

                          Why is this not also the case for the Macedonians? Especially as they were an infinitely more prosperous civilization than the Thracians.

                          It's wishful thinking to assume that the Macedonians never wrote in their own language.

                          It's funny that 100s of Greek inscriptions have been excavated from Macedon yet not even one has been found in the supposedly distinct Macedonian language.

                          The Macedonians did write in their own language and it was a unique form of Doric-Greek, see the Pella Curse Tablet. That's your Macedonian language right there.

                          Karposh - Read Ian Worthington's "The Question of Macedonian Identity". It's actually one of the most convincing pieces I've seen on their Greek identity.

                          Greeks with the Sun Hats comes from an inscription on Darius I's grave. He conquered Macedonia. I'm sure he knew what language they spoke.

                          As Amphipolis says, Alexander and Phillip themselves clearly went by Alexandros and Phillipos. Do we know of any Persians called Antipatros, Kassandros and Ptolemaios? Persian names weren't made into actual Greek names as the Macedonian names clearly are. There weren't any Greeks called Xerxes.

                          Better yet, the Macedonian names reflect an East-Doric dialect and this is the same dialect found in Macedonian inscriptions. Let me guess, coincidence?

                          Good job on finding historians who state that the Macedonians were not Greek, I concede that some may have this view. It's certainly a minority opinion however.
                          Last edited by Leo255; 02-07-2017, 05:11 PM.

                          Comment

                          • Leo255
                            Banned
                            • Jan 2017
                            • 6

                            #28
                            - There is no reference to translators being needed when the Macedonians attended the Athenian court. We have references to them being needed when the Thracians and Illyrians attended.

                            - Greek plays were performed in Macedonia. These would be pointless unless the people spoke Greek.

                            - There is very clear evidence that the Trojans did not speak Greek. This was hundreds of years before Alexander. Why would their different language not be documented if it existed?

                            - On the contrary, every excavation from Macedonia is in Greek. The Pella Curse Tablet is the most important of these as it demonstrates that Macedonian was a peculiar dialect of Greek - Hence why it may have been considered a barbarian tongue by the Athenians.

                            The Macedonians conquered all the way to India yet we are expected to believe that this great and powerful civilisation did not produce a single written document in its own language?

                            - Macedonia is a Greek word. All of the locations in Ancient Macedonia had Greek names. Presumably these would have been named long before the Macedonian aristocracy supposedly decided to start imitating the Greeks. They would have been named as soon as the people settled in the area, with the indigenous language.

                            - The Macedonians were angered by Alexander's adoption of Persian customs. They believed that the Macedonian way was best. They would not have such a complex if they themselves had merely copied their culture from the Greeks. They certainly did not believe in cultural assimilation. Their would suggest their Greek culture was indigenous.

                            - We are told that the Macedonians pronounced P as B. Why would we not have been told that they spoke a different language altogether? Instead we just have a comment about their pronunciation of Greek.

                            - Livy speaks of the Aetolians, Acarnanians and Macedonians as "Men of the same language"

                            -Livy speaks of a Roman proclamation being translated from Latin to Greek for the Macedonians to understand.

                            - Rufus says that the Branchidae spoke the same language as the Macedonians.

                            - Why was the period following Alexander called the "Hellenistic Period"? If the Macedonians had their own language, it is inconceivable that at least one of the successor kingdoms would have spoken Macedonian and not adopted Greek.

                            -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                            Still waiting for responses to these.

                            Not to say that the responses to the other points have been any good but at least you tried.

                            You know what else I just thought of? Arrian etc refer to the people of Cyprus as Cypriots and not Greeks. We all know what language they spoke though.

                            Just because the sources refer to the "Macedonians and Greeks", it does not mean that the former did not speak Greek.

                            Comment

                            • Risto the Great
                              Senior Member
                              • Sep 2008
                              • 15658

                              #29
                              Leo, you wrote a dissertation on Alexander. We like the guy. Put it here for review.
                              Even if the Ancient Macedonians were not Greek, we know that they eventually spoke Koine Greek and were accepted as Greek by the time of Strabo. Regardless of their original ethnicity, Macedonia was eventually accepted to be part of Greece and their descendants have been part of the Greek world ever since and live in modern-day Macedonia, in Greece.

                              Are we expected to believe that they suddenly lost this Hellenic identity and became Slavic speaking? What is your story? You guys are so intent on proving that the Macedonians were not Greek, but what claim do you have to them? We know for a fact that they did not speak Slavic.
                              We know that modern Macedonians who come from what is now Greece were the absolute dominant culture in what is now Northern Greece. We also know the region became more "Greek" after the million odd former Turkish nationals found their way there about 100 years ago.

                              They (we) didn't speak Greek. Perhaps they (we) did speak it as bi-linguals 2000 years ago. But just because some imports speak it there now should not confuse you about 2000 years ago.

                              We don't know the language of the ancient Macedonians and I dare any historian to say what it was because proof will be essential.

                              I'll have more to say but really must insist on your dissertation regarding Alexander. It is entirely relevant on a Macedonian forum.
                              Risto the Great
                              MACEDONIA:ANHEDONIA
                              "Holding my breath for the revolution."

                              Hey, I wrote a bestseller. Check it out: www.ren-shen.com

                              Comment

                              • Risto the Great
                                Senior Member
                                • Sep 2008
                                • 15658

                                #30
                                Why was the period following Alexander called the "Hellenistic Period"?
                                Why wasn't it called the HELLENIC period?

                                smiley face
                                Risto the Great
                                MACEDONIA:ANHEDONIA
                                "Holding my breath for the revolution."

                                Hey, I wrote a bestseller. Check it out: www.ren-shen.com

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X