Tsar Samoil - Самоил седна на тронот на Плоштад Макед

[makedonche]

Abe sho znam jas, cel den se vosam so karot

HaHaHa!!!!!!!!
Now that's funny!

[indigen]

http://www.build.mk/docs/users/1/Razno/Spomenici%20i%20skulpturi/Samoil%200103.jpg

Is this a genuine reproduction of the crown of a Christian Emperor (Christian Tsar)? Shouldn't there be a cross on top of this crown?

Secondly, will they build a SPOMENIK/statute of Vasil II Makedonski, after all he was Macedonian whilst Samoil is more likely not? There is a historical record by one of the medieval chroniclers (not sure of the exact source) which says that when Vasil II Makedonski entered Skopje and a number of other towns and fortresses, and finally the capitol of Ohrid, he was warmly greeted everywhere, i.e. all the places that had submitted to his rule. The following excerpt from a Pribicevic paraphrased passage will endorse the above claim:
[1015 AD] "...Vasil II [Makedonski], now again started with his army for Macedonia...'He proceeded to Skopje, then turned south, everywhere meeting with cheers and congratulations. Finally he ceremoniously entered the capitol of Ohrid, where the entire population came out to meet him, 'singing and cheering and hailing him'..." [Pribicevic (Macedonia: its People and History, 1982) page 84]

[Soldier of Macedon]

Your kidding right? There is destructive criticism and there is constructive criticism, I really fail to see your point...

No, I am not kidding, and yes, you do fail the see the point. But neither is really a new phenomena.

Do you suggest all statues should be build in every town / village?

Where have I suggested that which you wrote above? Nowhere. I am not sure why the level of excitment which leads to such gross misinterpretations, but try and get a grip and stick to the facts.

Like I said before the capital is Skopje, the central square of the capital is "Makedonija", surely you see the symbolism behind placing such prominent figures of our history there? Both domestically and internationally.

Yes, I do. What bothers me more is not so much the fact that there is a statue of Samoil in Skopje, but that there is no such statue of Samoil in either Ohrid or Prespa (none that I have heard of, happy to be proven wrong), which leads me to address the below example of ignorance:

Phillip was the founder of Heraclea, which Bitola has its roots from. Ohrid, Prilep and Struga have their own statues, Sv. Naum, Kiril & Metodija, Alexander the Great, ect ect....

The symbolism of Samoil for Ohrid and Prespa significantly outweighs that for Skopje. If you still don't know what I am talking about, do some research.

..............after all he was Macedonian whilst Samoil is more likely not?

How did you come to that conclusion? Because there is no record of him explicitly stating his Macedonian ethnicity? The same holds true for many other Macedonian historical figures from the middle ages. Does that make Cyril and Methodius unlikely Macedonians?

[Volk]

Yes, I do.

If you did it would not bother you as much...

Like it or not, Skopje is that capital city of Macedonia and has 600000 thousand people living in it.

The exposure of any statue raised in its center is far greater than placing it in Ohrid or places like Prespa, which are virtually unknown to the outside world.

Are you also suggesting the rest of the statues should not be there also, because they would be more significant if they where placed at their town of birth or center of rule?

Seems like a pretty mundane argument..

[vojnik]

On the note about Samoil's ethnicity from what I have read and understood through my own research done a while ago so I can't come up and post resources He was a man with a mix of races Bulgarian, Macedonian, Armenian and perhaps even a bit of Slavic in him. Now the confusing thing about the time of Samoil is that as mentioned above Vasil II Makedonski ruled the Byzantine and fought with Samoil now many say hey if Samoil were to be Macedonian then why did he try and destroy the Macedonian Byzantine Emporer. Now to the extent of my knowledge Samoil was more of a "people's king" he worked for the lower class society hence why he gained such control he fought for the poor etc. Both were Macedonian rulers Vasil just belonged to a more "pure" Macedonian stock.

We can not escape the fact that there was mixes of races in the medievil period there was so much mixture around Europe that one would be foolish to deny it. The fact is that Slavs did exist but not to the extent at which Greeks and other modern historians describe it. The Slavs were small nomadic tribes that blended into local populations around Europe they were wonderers probably escaping from wars some are even though to have originated from the Balkan and escaped when the Romans invaded and returned around the 1st Millenium. It's just stupid when Greeks and others proclaim that they are pure and that a great wave of Slavs came and killed everyone in the Balkan except the Greeks making everyone but Greeks around the Balkan Slav. They were never a fighting force nor did they ever exist in such numbers to even try to start conflict.

[Soldier of Macedon]

If you did it would not bother you as much...

Volk, stop wasting my time with your clueless insinuations.

Like it or not, Skopje is that capital city of Macedonia and has 600000 thousand people living in it.

Thanks, but irrelevant, let me know when you have some information that is relevant and isn't common knowledge.

The exposure of any statue raised in its center is far greater than placing it in Ohrid or places like Prespa, which are virtually unknown to the outside world.

I agree - in terms of exposure. Do you think the statues are more important for the outside world or for the people in Macedonia?

Are you also suggesting the rest of the statues should not be there also, because they would be more significant if they where placed at their town of birth or center of rule?

No, I am not. I already addressed that point in the previous post. Read it again.

Seems like a pretty mundane argument..

You mean the argument that you just conjured? It is mundane, but then again, I am not the one who suggested it.

On the note about Samoil's ethnicity from what I have read and understood through my own research done a while ago so I can't come up and post resources He was a man with a mix of races Bulgarian, Macedonian, Armenian and perhaps even a bit of Slavic in him.

Unless you can come up with sources that corroborate the above, it remains an opinion only, with no credibility.

............why did he try and destroy the Macedonian Byzantine Emporer.

It is actually the other way around (at least for the most part), and the reason for warfare had more to do with their seperate political ambitions rather than any differences concerning ethnicity.

[vojnik]

Unless you can come up with sources that corroborate the above, it remains an opinion only, with no credibility.

It is actually the other way around (at least for the most part), and the reason for warfare had more to do with their seperate political ambitions rather than any differences concerning ethnicity.

Well I done my reading a long time ago. What is your opinion on the ethnicities of both rulers?

[BigMak]

Wow didnt know slav was a ethnicity, spose u learn some new bs every day

[Volk]

Volk, stop wasting my time with your clueless insinuations.

Thanks, but irrelevant, let me know when you have some information that is relevant and isn't common knowledge.

I agree - in terms of exposure. Do you think the statues are more important for the outside world or for the people in Macedonia?

No, I am not. I already addressed that point in the previous post. Read it again.

You mean the argument that you just conjured? It is mundane, but then again, I am not the one who suggested it.

Unless you can come up with sources that corroborate the above, it remains an opinion only, with no credibility.

It is actually the other way around (at least for the most part), and the reason for warfare had more to do with their seperate political ambitions rather than any differences concerning ethnicity.

You think the fact that Skopje is the capital and its population as irrelevant to the argument... Think again. I am not going to explain to you the roles of capital cities, as you so eloquently put it "do some research"...

Then you can explain why you think its more symbolic to have him where he receives much less exposure.

[Vangelovski]

You think the fact that Skopje is the capital and its population as irrelevant to the argument... Think again. I am not going to explain to you the roles of capital cities, as you so eloquently put it "do some research"...

Then you can explain why you think its more symbolic to have him where he receives much less exposure.

You like to use symbolism when it makes little difference, but when its key to the matter at hand, you dismiss it outright. What about the symbolism of "warrior on a horse"? That's right, at least YOU know who it is!

[Volk]

You like to use symbolism when it makes little difference, but when its key to the matter at hand, you dismiss it outright. What about the symbolism of "warrior on a horse"? That's right, at least YOU know who it is!

exactly what have I dismissed? and please think this time...

If you are referring to 'warrior on a horse' I suggest you visit the thread and re-reading what I have wrote first. Perhaps even read some of the articles posted regarding peoples thoughts on Alexander the Great.

[vojnik]

Wow didnt know slav was a ethnicity, spose u learn some new bs every day

Really your going to deny the existance of Slavs???

[indigen]

Really your going to deny the existence of Slavs???

As an ethnicity, I would say yes! Are you saying they were of different stock to the local indigenous population of the Macedonian Peninsula (aka Balkans)?

[vojnik]

As an ethnicity, I would say yes! Are you saying they were of different stock to the local indigenous population of the Macedonian Peninsula (aka Balkans)?

So you would deny that a Slavic people ever existed? That is just being ignorant to historical fact although they did not exist as the Greeks make them out to be but you can (a large aggressive fighting force which wiped all indigenous people) they did exist historian's have theories that the origin of these nomadic people is probably from the balkans originally who returned centuries later after their excile. Now there is evidence of their settlement in the Balkans whether they resettled or came from a far away land as they travelled evading wars is irrelevant either way they would have developed their own ways of doing things being Nomadic they would have been able to adopt to the indigenous customs. They would have developed their own distinct ways of doing things own dialects etc enough to make them a seperate ethnic group I mean one day we all would have been one ehtnic group which would have seperated into various other groups creating distinct cultures and races. One might argue what makes people ethnically different from my knowledge I can conclude that teh Slavs were culturally distinctive people that were able to assimilate well in different environments these small groups of people settled all the way through the Balkan even through to the bottom of the Greek peninsula but did not change the way things functioned or the cultures of the indigenous rather they changed them. As is evident with Kiril i Metodij who created a new alaphabet which was simplified by Naum and Kliment in order to assist these small groups of settlers to easily assimilate into the indigenous peoples cultures etc

[Vangelovski]

exactly what have I dismissed? and please think this time...

If you are referring to 'warrior on a horse' I suggest you visit the thread and re-reading what I have wrote first. Perhaps even read some of the articles posted regarding peoples thoughts on Alexander the Great.

Come on Volk, you claimed that it did not matter that "warrior on a horse" is in Skopje because you still know who it "really" is.