Macedonian Truth Forum   

Go Back   Macedonian Truth Forum > Macedonian Truth Forum > Macedonian History

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 10-03-2012, 06:09 AM   #61
Epirot
Member
 
Epirot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Epirus or Albania - Albania or Epirus
Posts: 399
Epirot is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by George S. View Post
agreed but there is ample evidence that aristotle was banished from athens for his non greekness.
Just to clear up some confusion. Aristotle was departed from Athens not because of his dubious Greekness. He has long been identified with the Macedonians, who were seen by most of Greeks as foes who gave end to the Greek freedom. That's why he could not stay in Athens because the hostilities broke off at the moment Greeks realized that Macedonian position was weak.
__________________
IF OUR CHRONICLES DO NOT LIE, WE CALL OURSELVES AS EPIROTES!
Epirot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2012, 07:49 AM   #62
George S.
Senior Member
 
George S.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 10,121
George S. is on a distinguished road
Default

Aristotle was born in stategiera was part of macedonia.Aristotle if he wasn't a macedonian he had a non greek"character and he was all pro macedonian.This is what is meant for his non greekness so get that right.The macedonian position was weak because that's when alexander died & things around athens were rapidly changing &aristotle had to flee for his life.
__________________
"Ido not want an uprising of people that would leave me at the first failure, I want revolution with citizens able to bear all the temptations to a prolonged struggle, what, because of the fierce political conditions, will be our guide or cattle to the slaughterhouse"
GOTSE DELCEV
George S. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2012, 06:54 AM   #63
Epirot
Member
 
Epirot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Epirus or Albania - Albania or Epirus
Posts: 399
Epirot is on a distinguished road
Default

As always some feeble-minded Greeks are grasping at straws with their own bizarre logic to hoax the true meaning of an ancient account that goes against their beliefs. If they had not hand-picked selective quotes from various online books, their mistakes would not go beyond the pale. No one is questioning the fact that Aristotle's Politics argues about the "superiority" of Greeks over non-Greeks, the latter deemed as worthy for being slaves. Taking into consideration the frequency of usage of ethnos/ethne, we may justly surmise he was primarily invoking non-Greek peoples. McInerney rightfully assert that Xenophon, Aristotle and Stephanus, all apply the term ethnos to non-Greek peoples. However, this does not preclude that ethnos was employed sometimes even for Greek peoples, who lacked of civil institutions (the case of Arcadians). Therefore its usage seems overly ambiguous. Greeks originally conceived this notion in order to refer to ‘groups and bands’ as Homer employed in similar occasions. Yet an interesting mention of such notion was made by Thucydides while he was referring to skirmishes between Ambrakiots and the non-Greek inhabitants of Amphilochian Argos. McInerney holds that: “The episode is structured around to sets of overlapping oppositions: Greek versus barbarian, and polis versus etnos” (p.23). I firmly feel that Aristotle thought Macedonians as non-Greeks on the ground he surely was aware of the fanatical outrage of most Greeks to not accept Philip's people as genuinely Greek. As Victor Ehrenberg on one occasion stated: "The Macedonians may go back to a 'Greek' origin, but in historical times they were always, even by their own rulers, regarded as barbarians, and only a small section - king and part of the nobility - were 'Hellenized'. (The Greek state, p.137). Being so, Aristotle naturally ranked Macedonians along Scythians, Persians, Thracians and Celts (τοῖς ἔθνεσι πᾶσι). He goes on to mention Καρχηδόνι and Μακεδονίαν by giving some emphasis of their laws. In the next lines, Aristotle gives some additional hints on Scythian and Iberian customs (the latter are clearly referred as Ἴβηρσιν, ἔθνει πολεμικῷ). In short, Aristotle represents faithfully the general knowledge of Greeks about Macedonians, Thracians, Scythians, Celts, Persians, Carthagians and Iberians who were indiscriminately labeled as 'barbarians'. What matters the most is that notion 'ethne' at this case has double meaning: it referred to non-Greeks who lacked from civil institutions, namely Aristotle sets two oppositions: Greek versus barbarian and polis versus ethnos. There is no need for more complicated explanation. In general, Aristotle mentions seldom Macedonians, let alone their ethnic identity. Bur as it is evinced from the context of the paragraph, the great philosopher differentiated Macedonians from Greeks in the same vain as did with the Scythians, Persians, Celts, Thracians, etc.
__________________
IF OUR CHRONICLES DO NOT LIE, WE CALL OURSELVES AS EPIROTES!

Last edited by Epirot; 10-05-2012 at 03:34 PM.
Epirot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-06-2012, 05:08 PM   #64
Carlin
Member
 
Carlin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Canada
Posts: 654
Carlin is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Epirot View Post
As always some feeble-minded Greeks are grasping at straws with their own bizarre logic to hoax the true meaning of an ancient account that goes against their beliefs. If they had not hand-picked selective quotes from various online books, their mistakes would not go beyond the pale. No one is questioning the fact that Aristotle's Politics argues about the "superiority" of Greeks over non-Greeks, the latter deemed as worthy for being slaves. Taking into consideration the frequency of usage of ethnos/ethne, we may justly surmise he was primarily invoking non-Greek peoples. McInerney rightfully assert that Xenophon, Aristotle and Stephanus, all apply the term ethnos to non-Greek peoples. However, this does not preclude that ethnos was employed sometimes even for Greek peoples, who lacked of civil institutions (the case of Arcadians). Therefore its usage seems overly ambiguous. Greeks originally conceived this notion in order to refer to ‘groups and bands’ as Homer employed in similar occasions. Yet an interesting mention of such notion was made by Thucydides while he was referring to skirmishes between Ambrakiots and the non-Greek inhabitants of Amphilochian Argos. McInerney holds that: “The episode is structured around to sets of overlapping oppositions: Greek versus barbarian, and polis versus etnos” (p.23). I firmly feel that Aristotle thought Macedonians as non-Greeks on the ground he surely was aware of the fanatical outrage of most Greeks to not accept Philip's people as genuinely Greek. As Victor Ehrenberg on one occasion stated: "The Macedonians may go back to a 'Greek' origin, but in historical times they were always, even by their own rulers, regarded as barbarians, and only a small section - king and part of the nobility - were 'Hellenized'. (The Greek state, p.137). Being so, Aristotle naturally ranked Macedonians along Scythians, Persians, Thracians and Celts (τοῖς ἔθνεσι πᾶσι). He goes on to mention Καρχηδόνι and Μακεδονίαν by giving some emphasis of their laws. In the next lines, Aristotle gives some additional hints on Scythian and Iberian customs (the latter are clearly referred as Ἴβηρσιν, ἔθνει πολεμικῷ). In short, Aristotle represents faithfully the general knowledge of Greeks about Macedonians, Thracians, Scythians, Celts, Persians, Carthagians and Iberians who were indiscriminately labeled as 'barbarians'. What matters the most is that notion 'ethne' at this case has double meaning: it referred to non-Greeks who lacked from civil institutions, namely Aristotle sets two oppositions: Greek versus barbarian and polis versus ethnos. There is no need for more complicated explanation. In general, Aristotle mentions seldom Macedonians, let alone their ethnic identity. Bur as it is evinced from the context of the paragraph, the great philosopher differentiated Macedonians from Greeks in the same vain as did with the Scythians, Persians, Celts, Thracians, etc.
This is an interesting analysis on "Greek vs. barbarian". I'm not sure if this is related, but take a look at the following essay:
https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/bits...pdf?sequence=2
Carlin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2012, 06:09 AM   #65
Epirot
Member
 
Epirot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Epirus or Albania - Albania or Epirus
Posts: 399
Epirot is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carlin View Post
Hi Carlin,

Is there any alternative way to expose the whole text, because I could not download it so far!?
__________________
IF OUR CHRONICLES DO NOT LIE, WE CALL OURSELVES AS EPIROTES!
Epirot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2012, 12:10 AM   #66
George S.
Senior Member
 
George S.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 10,121
George S. is on a distinguished road
Default

What do we mean by hellenizing of the royalty or nobility.Does it make them philhellenes.Or did they just speak greek for whatever reason.How does hellenizing change the ethnos of a people.?
__________________
"Ido not want an uprising of people that would leave me at the first failure, I want revolution with citizens able to bear all the temptations to a prolonged struggle, what, because of the fierce political conditions, will be our guide or cattle to the slaughterhouse"
GOTSE DELCEV
George S. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2012, 04:46 PM   #67
Carlin
Member
 
Carlin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Canada
Posts: 654
Carlin is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Epirot View Post
Hi Carlin,

Is there any alternative way to expose the whole text, because I could not download it so far!?
Epirot, the title of the article is: "How did the Pelasgians become Hellenes? Herodotus I.56-58", by R. A. McNeal.

The link I posted opens the entire article in PDF (I have no problem accessing it).

Maybe you can find something using the following (or similar) search:

http://www.google.ca/#hl=en&sclient=...w=1920&bih=989
Carlin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2017, 02:49 AM   #68
tchaiku
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 334
tchaiku is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pelister View Post
I can see how you might think he is a Greek, given his name and use of the Greek langauge - Sure, given what we know of the man I can see the logic.

But, given what we know of ancient Macedonia, and the ancient Macedonians, changes the picture.

I think that is the point. The ancient Macedonians were not Greeks, given the weight of contemporary sources - now if we sketch in this context, then questions about Aristotel rightfully have their place.
Was he a Greek or a Macedonian?
Aristotle undoubtedly had Hellenic ancestry.

Last edited by tchaiku; 06-10-2017 at 03:11 AM.
tchaiku is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump