Macedonian Truth Forum   

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-29-2018, 07:26 PM   #301
Liberator of Makedonija
Senior Member
 
Liberator of Makedonija's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,149
Liberator of Makedonija is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tchaiku View Post
Alexander and Philip comes from Greek.

"Ἀλέξανδρος" (Aléxandroş), meaning "defender of men" from "αλεξω" (alexo), meaning "to defend, help" and "ανηρ" (aner), meaning "man" (genitive "ανδρος").

Philip is a given name, derived from the Greek Φίλιππος (Philippos, lit. "horse-loving" or "fond of horses"), from a compound of φίλος (phílos, "dear", "loved", "loving") and ἵππος (hippos, "horse").


Now I pose to you the question, is that language Greek? I am not aware of a Greek language existing during the time you're referring to so what language are those words really from?
__________________
I know of two tragic histories in the world- that of Ireland, and that of Macedonia. Both of them have been deprived and tormented.
Liberator of Makedonija is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2018, 10:33 PM   #302
Albo
Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 304
Albo is on a distinguished road
Default

I've read an Albanian theory on the name Alexander..
I'm not a linguist.. but many linguists and etymologists say many Albanian words pre date Greek and Latin some go as far as to say that indo-european languages originally were one language that split and developed separately over the centuries and that Albanian has many elements that give many indo european words a meaning.. but thats all another topic which I really don't know enough about..
As for the word Alexander.. its in known that Alexanders mother was said to have seen a dream of Alexander before he was born.. how true this is I dunno.. but anyway for entertainment purposes..

Breaking down Alexander into (Northern Geg Albanian)

A = LE = KE = ANDER

A= Is/was
LE= Born
KE= In/at
ANDER = Dream

Basiclly translates to..
Was born in a Dream
Albo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2018, 10:47 PM   #303
VMRO
Senior Member
 
VMRO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,290
VMRO has much to be proud ofVMRO has much to be proud ofVMRO has much to be proud ofVMRO has much to be proud ofVMRO has much to be proud ofVMRO has much to be proud ofVMRO has much to be proud ofVMRO has much to be proud ofVMRO has much to be proud of
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Albo View Post
I've read an Albanian theory on the name Alexander..
I'm not a linguist.. but many linguists and etymologists say many Albanian words pre date Greek and Latin some go as far as to say that indo-european languages originally were one language that split and developed separately over the centuries and that Albanian has many elements that give many indo european words a meaning.. but thats all another topic which I really don't know enough about..
As for the word Alexander.. its in known that Alexanders mother was said to have seen a dream of Alexander before he was born.. how true this is I dunno.. but anyway for entertainment purposes..

Breaking down Alexander into (Northern Geg Albanian)

A = LE = KE = ANDER

A= Is/was
LE= Born
KE= In/at
ANDER = Dream

Basiclly translates to..
Was born in a Dream
LoL, Thanks for the laugh
__________________
Verata vo Mislite, VMRO vo dushata, Makedonia vo Srceto.

Vnatreshna Makedonska Revolucionerna Organizacija.
VMRO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2018, 03:19 AM   #304
Albo
Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 304
Albo is on a distinguished road
Default

Here have a little read.. some interesting stuff here I didn't even know..

1774
Johann Thunmann:
On the History and Language
of the Albanians and Vlachs


The Swedish theologian and historian Johann Erich Thunmann (1746-1778) was born in Thoresund (Södermanland, Sweden) and studied in Uppsala (Sweden) and Greifswald (Germany). In 1772, he was appointed Professor of Rhetoric and Philosophy at the University of Halle (Germany), where he wrote his treatise “Über die Geschichte und Sprache der Albaner und der Wlachen” (On the History and Language of the Albanians and Vlachs), Leipzig 1774. This is one of the earliest scholarly studies on the Albanians, who were little known in Europe at the time. After a short introduction, Thunmann reproduces the Latin-Vlach-Albanian dictionary of Theodor Kavalliotis of Voskopoja (Moschopolis) with some notes on the Albanian and Vlach (Aromanian) languages, and then offers a history of the Albanians that is surprisingly detailed for the period. The section on Albanian history is given here in full, though without the footnotes. Modern place names have been added in square brackets for the translation.




....But who are these Skipatars, these Albanians? No one has claimed to know anything reliable or proven about them, or anything beyond the realm of speculation. The similarity of the name caused some observers to see their ancestors in the Caucasus and on the Caspian Sea. Others derived them from Calabria. Some thought they were Slavs and that they stemmed from the Croats, Serbs or Bulgarians. Some even went so far as to claim that they arrived in the region in the 7th century. At the time of*Chalcocondylas, many regarded them as the real Illyrians, but he did not agree with them because he preferred to see the Slavs on the Ionian Sea as such.*He later believed that they were the remnants of the ancient Macedonians.*It would be superfluous to add other views here. They were always a question of speculation. The history of this people and their language were never properly investigated and, as such, no certainty was to be had.

I have done what the others have failed to do. I have found no trace of immigration in their history.*Their language has, however, left such traces of the fate of this people that I can do no other than see in them the neighbours of the Greeks and the subjects of ancient Rome. These two facts together point to the ancient Illyrians as their origin. They are just as non-Slavic as the Finns, and like the latter, the Albanians have borrowed a few Slavic words into their language, which, however, can only derive from their being neighbours of the Slavs, beginning in the 7th century. Apart from this, they are a people on their own, who, on the one hand have been European for a long time, but who seem to have less connection with the other peoples of Europe than the latter do among themselves. I would make one exception here for the Vlachs who are probably of the same origin as the Albanians, but with time and by mixing substantially with other peoples, evolved differently from the latter. Both their history and their language give proof of this.*

I regard it as essential to present the main events that have marked the Albanian people in order to cast sufficient light upon their history. This is the best way of solving the problem. Who are the Albanians? How did they arise? How did their language come about?
The first people that history recognises in this region are the Illyrians, a large and mighty nation living on the Adriatic Sea, from the Po to the Ambracian Gulf, and northwards to the Danube.*Strabo believes that this people spread westwards to Lake Constance, through Noricum and Vindelicia. He also asserts that the Pannonians stemmed from this people. Appian notes clearly that the Pannonians were Illyrians. The Istrians, Japodes, Dalmatae, Liburnians, Dardanians, Ardiaei, Autariates, in short, all the peoples down to the Ceraunian mountains are generally regarded as Illyrians. But they also inhabited wide reaches of Macedonia, Epirus and Thessaly.
Only a small portion of Macedonia was inhabited by the Greeks. The mass of the population was Illyrian and Thracian. The Dassaretae, the Lyncestae, the Bryges or Phrygians, the Pelagones, The Eordi, the Elimiotes, the Atintanes, the inhabitants of the region around Candavia, Pella, Edessa and Verva have all been expressly referred to as Illyrian. To a great extent, it was almost only the towns on the coast that had Greek inhabitants. The Macedonians had a language of their own that was also spoken in the regions along the Ionian Sea across from Corfu and, thus in Greek Illyria and Epirus.
There were also many non-Greek peoples in Epirus who, as noted above, spoke the Macedonian language, or the Illyrian language,*which was probably the same thing.*But the Greek colonies here and the dynasty of Aeacides introduced the Greek language such that the various peoples spoke two languages. The Amphilochans further to the south also belonged to this group, and for this reason are also referred to as barbarians by Thucydides. In Thessaly there were also other peoples of foreign origin, such as the Perrhaedans, referred to by Appian as Illyrians, the Athamanes, the Aethices, the Tymphaei and the Penestae, the Helots of the Thessalians, who had probably been the same people as the Illyrian Penestae.*Scylax notes that only beyond Ambracia, the Peneus and the town or mountain of Homotion in Magnesia, had the Greeks begun to inhabit the region in a compact manner.*In Strabo’s time, the barbarians owned large parts of Greece, and he reports that the Thracians inhabited Macedonia and parts of Thessaly at that time.
The Illyrians and Thracians had always been major peoples in Europe. But did they have the same origin or did they stem from different peoples? None of the ancient writers ever asserted that the two peoples had the same origin or that the Illyrians and Thracians were as close to one another as the Illyrians and Dalmatae, or the Thracians and the Getae. But often, the ancient writers regarded smaller peoples attributed to the Thracians as Illyrians, and vice versa. The Dardanians, who are said by Nicholas Damascenus, Strabo, Appian and others to be Illyrians, were regarded by Dio Cassius as being Moesians. And Stephanus says that their towns of Naissus [Nish] and Skupi [Skopje] were Thracian. The Triballi who are almost always called Thracians, are regarded as Illyrians by Aristophanes, Livy and Stephanus. The Istrians and the Daorsi, who were most likely Illyrians, are called Thracians by others. The Tralli for their part, who were Thracians are referred to by other authors as Illyrians. Peoples who once lived in Asia Minor and who belonged to the Phrygian race, such as the Phrygians or Bryges among the Taulanti, the Paeones who called themselves Teucrian colonies, and the Paphlagonian Henetae on the Adriatic are regarded as Illyrians, whereas the Moesians who were regarded as being Teucri, the Thyni, the aforementioned Bryges etc. are counted as Thracians. I have come across settlements in Illyria that have the same names as some in Thrace. The Thracians and the Illyrians are presented as having the same customs. Yet, despite all this, I can find no reason to conclude that the two peoples had a common origin. It is now regarded as likely that the two peoples were related to one another, that they had mixed with one another and where the ancient Greek writers regarded them as two distinct peoples, this is repeated more out of habit than due to any substantial difference in origin.
The country now called Albania was inhabited by different peoples who were all part of the Illyrian race. The Encheleans near Rhizano, the Labeates on Lake Zenta, the Phrygians and Parthini around Kruja, the Taulanti around Durrës, not to mention the Bylliones, dhe Amantes, and the Atintanes along the coast. In the interior lived the Almopes, a Paeonian tribe, the Albanians, the Penestae, the Dassaretae who lived on Lake Lychnitis [Ohrid], and the Mela who stretched to the coast, not to mention the Elimiotes and Eordi. Some of these peoples became famous, others remained quite obscure, legendry playing more of a role in their history. Cadmus is said to have reigned over the Encheleans. The Colchians who pursued the Argonauts are said to have settled in Orikum […], Olchinium [Ulqin] and in the region of the Amantes. These Amantes are said to be Euboean Abantes and Locri Epicnemides who ended up here after storms on their way back from Troy, and who forgot their Greek language and customs, and became barbarians. But such information belongs to the fantasies of Greek poets and etymologists.*



With time, the Greeks also settled here and set up colonies on the coast.*Epidamnus or Dyrrhachium [Durrës], and Apollonia,*originally Illyrian towns,*taken over by colonists from Corinth and Corfu, were the most famous settlements.*Oricum, Byllis and Aulon [Vlora] were also settled by the Greeks.*But the Illyrians remained the ruling nation. They often attack the Greek colonists and brought them under their sway.*The most powerful and famous of all these Illyrian tribes were the Taulanti. Around 650 B.C. they made war under their King Gelaurus on Argeus, the son of the founder of the Macedonian monarchy. In 435 B.C. they came to the assistance of the nobles who had been expelled by the people of Durrës and helped lay siege to the town. About fifty years later, Bardylis, a highway robber, set up a mighty kingdom among the eastern Illyrian tribes, in particular the Dassaretae and Eordi, to which even Macedonia paid tribute. After the terrible defeat and the death of Perdiccas in 360 B.C. the whole kingdom was in jeopardy of becoming an Illyrian province, set up by Philip. He defeated the ninety-year-old Bardylis at a bloody battle and forced him to agree to cede all territory beyond Lake Ohrid. Subsequently, Clitus, Bardylis’ son, became a vassal of Macedonia. He rose in 355 B.C. with the support of Glaucias, king of the Taulanti and of the Autariates. But Alexander defeated him, seized his land and extended Macedonia right to the Taulantian border. This latter people could not be subjected by the Macedonians. Their king Glaucias sheltered the famed Pyrrhus in 316 B.C., protected him nobly from Cassander and placed him back on his father’s throne. He was defeated by Cassander in 314 and had to render Durrës and Apollonia to him, that the Macedonians had conquered. But Durrës was liberated two years later and Apollonia came under the rule of Glaucias. Cassander endeavoured to reconquer the latter settlement, but failed. In 294, in a treaty with Alexander, son of Cassander, Pyrrhus, received all the territory the Macedonians possessed along the Illyrian coast. Ptolomy Ceraunus made war on the Illyrian King Monius, but I do not know what success he had. The Celts then laid waste to the country. At this time there were certainly many uprisings we do not know of. The Greek settlements on the coast maintained their independence. Apollonia entered into an alliance with the Romans in 266. In 231, Agron, son of Pleuratus, founded a state in southeastern Illyria, that all his neighbours came to fear. All were subjected to his rule, from the Ardiaei to the Atintanes. He humbled the pride of the Aetolians and his ships had free rein on all the seas. He was more powerful than all the other kings before him. But their sway collapsed under Teuta, his wife, who succeeded him. In 228, the Romans, who took vengeance on the Illyrians because of their piracy, forced Teuta to abandon her reign, forced Pinnes, son of Agron, to pay an annual tribute, and took away the regions inhabited by the Atintanes and Parthini, the island of Corfu, that the Illyrians had just conquered, Issa and Pharos, and gave the people of Durrës and Apollonia their freedom. Demetrius, who had supported the Romans, received Pharos, but he soon married Triteuta, the mother of Pinnes, took over the reins of government, persuaded the Atintanes to defect, concluded an alliance with Philip of Macedon and tore the Romans to pieces. In the following war, Demetrius lost everything and was put to flight. The Romans retained not only the above-mentioned countries, but also Pharos and Dimallum, and gave the rest to Pinnes. Scerdilaidas, who ruled over this part of Illyria after him, was initially an ally of the Macedonian king and then of the Romans. In 217, he seized from the Macedonians several towns in the territory of the Pelagones and Dassaretae. But Philip conquered them and all of Scerdilaidas’ possessions on Lake Ohrid back. In 214, Philip also made a surprise attack on Oricum and besieged Apollonia, but the Romans save both towns. In the following year, using a ruse, he took the town of Lissus (Lezha), and several other settlements in Illyria surrendered voluntarily. In 210, Illyria was often subjected to Macedonian rampages since Scerdilaidas and his son Pleuratus had obviously allied themselves with the Romans. A treaty concluded these hostilities in 204. The Atintanes were given to the Macedonian. The Romans received Dimallum, Bargulum, Eugenium, and the territory of the Parthini. War broke out again in 200 and Pleuratus allied himself once more with the Romans. Of the peoples of Illyria, the Dassaretae, Eordi, Elimiotes, Orestae, Penestae, Atintanes, Lyncestae and Parthini were under the sway of Philip at that time. In the treaty of 196, Pleuratus received the latter two peoples. He also ruled over the Dalmatae, but when his son Gentius took the throne, they revolted and could no longer be subjected. The Kingdom of Illyria disintegrated entirely under his rule. He had become an ally of Persius. The Romans made war on him and conquered the whole kingdom in thirty days, forcing him to surrender. This happened in 168 B.C. Illyria’s destiny was sealed the following year. The Taulanti, the Daorsi, the Issani, the Rhizoni, the Olciniati, and the Pirusti under the Dassaretae were declared free. The other Dassaretae, the Scodrani (Labeates), the Selepitani and all other subjected Illyrians were now to give to the Romans half of the taxes they paid to their king, and Illyria was divided into three districts. The regions of the country that had belonged to Perseus, such as the territories of the Eordi, the Lyncestae, the Elimiotes and the Atintanes, remained part of Macedonia even after the conquest. One of the four districts into which the country was divided was inhabited only by Illyrian tribes. These tribes enjoyed some freedom, too. They only had to pay half of normal taxes. Pelagonia was their capital, the place where their assemblies were held, where tribute was sent and where their authorities were elected. They were allowed to keep their frontier lands in order to protect themselves from barbarian invasions. But they were not allowed to maintain contacts with the tribes living in one of the other districts. This part of Macedonia maintained its privileges for a long time and, for this reason, was known as free Macedonia.


[from: Johann Thunmann,*Über die Geschichte und Sprache der Albaner und der Wlachen*(Leipzig 1774). Translated from the German by Robert Elsie.]
Albo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2018, 08:13 AM   #305
Karposh
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 578
Karposh is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tchaiku View Post
Why did all Macedonians bear Greek names?
Tchaiku, I couldn't be bothered elaborating the other day but you can't just blurt out, what on the surface may look like a great argument for the Greek position of the Ancient Macedonians, based on their Greek-sounding personal names but, in reality, fails to prove much at all.

Following is some Wikipedia info (shown in blue) about the so-called Macedonian participation in the Olympic Games:

When Alexander I of Macedon petitioned to compete in the foot race of the ancient Olympic Games, the event organizers at first denied his request, explaining that only Greeks were allowed to compete.

As long as they met the entrance criteria, which was that only freeborn Greek men were allowed to participate, athletes from any Greek city-state and kingdom were allowed to participate. This means that Greek athletes from across the known Greek world were allowed to compete. That is, Greeks from far-flung Greek colonies as far northeast as present day Ukraine and Russia to the west, along the coasts of Illyria, Sicilly and Southern Italy, Sothern France, Corsica and even northeastern Spain were allowed to compete. Even Greek colonies from Egypt and Lybia. And yet, here is King Alexander I (The Philhellene or “Friend of the Greeks”) of Macedon, on the front doorstep of Greece proper, and he fails to meet the entance criteria. The Olympic judges i.e. the Hellanodikai simply refused to allow him entrance because he wasn't a Greek. I think it's fair to say they knew who was Greek and was not back then.

However, Alexander I produced proof of an Argead royal genealogy showing ancient Argive Temenid lineage, a move that ultimately convinced the Olympic Hellanodikai authorities of his Greek descent and ability to compete, although this did not necessarily apply to common Macedonians outside of his royal dynasty.

Little is known of the following fact but I actually have it on good authority that the Macedonian Royal Court at the time employed some highly skilled and professional Genealogists to research and store valuable genealogical information on the Macedonian Royals, focusing in particular on kinship and decent. These Royal Genealogists used a wide variety of records in their research. They included vital records such as Birth, Death and Marriage Certificates; Biographies; Oral histories; Military records; Passports; Photographs; School records; Tax records; etc. However, the most important method of proving the ancient Argive Temenid lineage,and some may understandably say, “impossible”, was through Genetic Analysis. It just so happens that the Royal Genealogists were gifted when it came to this sort of thing. Hard to believe, I know, but they dabbled in Genetics long before the modern era even thought it possible. So, knowing just how anal those pesky Hellanodikai can be, a genealogical DNA test, as well as other supporting evidence, was provided by these amazing Macedonian scientists to King Alexander I of Macedonia so that he could prove his Greek credentials. I'm afraid it's not enough to merely state that Alexander somehow managed to convince the Olympic Hellanodikai authorities of his Greek descent and was subsequently able to compete in the Olympic Games. It sits on rather shaky ground and one would be tempted to cynically presume that he merely bribed the Olympic judges with a pouch full of gloden Macedonian Staters. This is made worse by the account that, even after Alexander was allowed to compete, there were outraged protests from the other competitors, who rejected Alexander I as a barbarian and saying they would not run with a barbarian. I'm pleased to say that I have removed all doubt with this little known information, which I've been able to provide for posterity. Unfortunately, it didn't do much good for the common Macedonians outside of the royal dynasty. DNA tests are a costly business and the average Macedonian didn't have the means to pay for such a test if he wanted to compete in the Olympics. That privilege was reserved for the Macedonian Kings only.

By the end of the 5th century BC, the Macedonian king Archelaus I was crowned with the olive wreath at both Olympia and Delphi (in the Pythian Games) for winning chariot racing contests. Philip II allegedly heard of the Olympic victory of his horse (in either an individual horse race or chariot race) on the same day his son Alexander the Great was born, on either 19 or 20 July 356 BC. In addition to literary contests, Alexander the Great also staged competitions for music and athletics across his empire. The Macedonians created their own athletic games and, after the late 4th century BC, non-royal Macedonians competed and became victors in the Olympic Games.


Well it doesn't come as much of a surprise that non-royal Macedonians managed to finally compete after the late 4th century BC. Macedonia had conquered the world and Greece was, to put it bluntly, Macedonia's bitch. Greeks could protest all they wanted but Macedonians would not only compete but make sure they won too in these games. Do I need to even comment on the Macedonians having to create their own Olympic Games. Can it get any clearer than this fact alone – The Greek's entrance criteria was so strict that the Macedonians had to create their own Olympic Games.

There's more to the Ancient Macedonians Tchaiku than the obvious argument about their Greek-sounding names. The ancient peoples knew who was who. As you can see from the above, the Macedonians were not Greeks and they were never accepted as such. Whatever it was that determined someone was a Greek in the Ancient Greek's eyes, it obviously wasn't personal names. So it must have been something else don't you think? They wouldn't have referred to them as barbarians (i.e. non Greek speakers) if they weren't exactly that. The DNA test results and certificates that Alexander I produced must have been top-notch because even the Ancient Greek writer, Herodotus makes the following observation:

“I happen to know, and I will demonstrate in a subsequent chapter of this history, that these descendants of Perdiccas are, as they themselves claim, of Greek nationality. This was, moreover, recognized by the managers of the Olympic games, on the occasion when Alexander wished to compete and his Greek competitors tried to exclude him on the ground that foreigners were not allowed to take part. Alexander, however, proved his Argive descent, and so was accepted as a Greek and allowed to enter for the foot-race. He came in equal first."


Notice that it is not Herodotus that says that the Macedonian kings were of Greek nationality, but the Macedonian kings as they themselves claim.
Karposh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2018, 04:43 PM   #306
Risto the Great
Senior Member
 
Risto the Great's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Macedonian Colony of Australia
Posts: 14,711
Risto the Great has a reputation beyond reputeRisto the Great has a reputation beyond reputeRisto the Great has a reputation beyond reputeRisto the Great has a reputation beyond reputeRisto the Great has a reputation beyond reputeRisto the Great has a reputation beyond reputeRisto the Great has a reputation beyond reputeRisto the Great has a reputation beyond reputeRisto the Great has a reputation beyond reputeRisto the Great has a reputation beyond reputeRisto the Great has a reputation beyond repute
Default

So Macedonians had to decimate the Hellenic city states BEFORE they "qualified" as Hellenes???

A bit like how welcome USA was in Japan after WW2 I imagine. Hey, they even play baseball in Japan now.

Filipos is "Lipe" in Macedonian. Hands up anyone who thinks a Greek priest would write "Lipe" in any birth records, ever. Wouldn't it be logical to assume the scribes of the day (who only entertained ONE written language at the time) used the language in its most traditional and accurate way? Only a spirited and ignorant modern Greek remains attached to the arguments about choice of written languages in ancient times. There was only ONE to choose from.

I am not believing the "Greek names" bit. Further, I am not even sure how relevant it would be anyway. I happen to have a name that might be written by Greeks as "Hristos" and I am probably more of a Jew than a Greek based on my business model.
__________________
Risto the Great
MACEDONIA:ANHEDONIA

"Holding my breath for the revolution."
Risto the Great is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2018, 12:47 AM   #307
Amphipolis
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,152
Amphipolis is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karposh View Post
“I happen to know, and I will demonstrate in a subsequent chapter of this history, that these descendants of Perdiccas are, as they themselves claim, of Greek nationality. This was, moreover, recognized by the managers of the Olympic games, on the occasion when Alexander wished to compete and his Greek competitors tried to exclude him on the ground that foreigners were not allowed to take part. Alexander, however, proved his Argive descent, and so was accepted as a Greek and allowed to enter for the foot-race. He came in equal first." [/i][/color]

Notice that it is not Herodotus that says that the Macedonian kings were of Greek nationality, but the Macedonian kings as they themselves claim.
This is the original text and an accurate translation.

Éllinas dé eínai toútous toús apó Perdíkkeo gegonótas, katá per aftoí légousi, aftós te oúto tyncháno epistámenos kaí dí kaí en toísi ópisthe lógoisi apodéxo os eisí Éllines, prós dé kaí oi tón en Olympíi diépontes agóna Ellínon oúto égnosan eínai.

Ἕλληνας δὲ εἶναι τούτους τοὺς ἀπὸ Περδίκκεω γεγονότας, κατά περ αὐτοὶ λέγουσι, αὐτός τε οὕτω τυγχάνω ἐπιστάμενος καὶ δὴ καὶ ἐν τοῖσι ὄπισθε λόγοισι ἀποδέξω ὡς εἰσὶ Ἕλληνες, πρὸς δὲ καὶ οἱ τὸν ἐν Ὀλυμπίῃ διέποντες ἀγῶνα Ἑλλήνων οὕτω ἔγνωσαν εἶναι.

So they are Greeks, the descendants of Perdiccas, as they claim themselves, and that I myself happen to know and I'm going to prove later that they are Greeks, as also the organizers of The Games of Greeks in Olympia acknowledged they are so.


==

Last edited by Amphipolis; 05-04-2018 at 01:21 AM.
Amphipolis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2018, 08:05 PM   #308
Karposh
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 578
Karposh is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amphipolis View Post
This is the original text and an accurate translation.

So they are Greeks, the descendants of Perdiccas, as they claim themselves, and that I myself happen to know and I'm going to prove later that they are Greeks, as also the organizers of The Games of Greeks in Olympia acknowledged they are so.
==
The British Royal Family - The House of Windsor
So they are Germans, the descendants of Prince Albert, the Duke of Saxe-Coburg & Gotha, as they claim themselves, and that I myself happen to know and I'm going to prove later that they are Germans, as also the Royal House acknowledged they are so.

My proof:The name Saxe-Coburg-Gotha came to the British Royal Family in 1840 with the marriage of Queen Victoria to Prince Albert, son of Ernst, Duke of Saxe-Coburg & Gotha which makes all descendants of Queen Victoria automatic holders of hereditary German Titles and Dignities as a result of their German bloodline.

These are actual facts and they are not in dispute. They are part of the Genealogical history of the British Royal Family. However, the same cannot be said of Alexander I of Macedon and the story he concocted for reasons only known to himself. Although, the most logical and obvious reason, it would seem, would have been political i.e. a way of getting Macedon to have some kind of say and influence in the Greek world by claiming Greek descent for the Macedonian Royal Family. Can't say for sure what it was like in ancient times but in the modern world, hearsay and third-person accounts is not proof of anything. Herodotus would have heard Alexander's story and, in an obvious effort to legitimise the same, decided to include it in his histories. What we don't know, however, is why Herodotus would do that at all. Did he have anything to gain from that, for example? If the Macedonian Royal Family could indeed trace its roots back to the Greek city of Argos, then that seemed to have been lost on all except Alexander I - no one else was buying it. Oh, and by the way, Herodotus never did manage to prove the story as far as I am aware. The sly Greek old bastard lied.

More importantly, however, why should there be any conjecture at all to begin with? If he was a Greek then surely the Greeks were astute enough to know that this was so. Why was he rejected to begin with and his Greekness questioned at all?

Herodotus lived between 485-425 B.C. and he recorded this story on behalf of Alexander I to vouch for his Greek credentials. One hundred years later, Isocrates, another Greek writer/historian who lived between 436-338 B.C. picked up where Herodotus left off. Isocrates too, carries on with the same story. This time on behalf of Alexander the Great's father, King Phillip II of Macedonia:

"Philip's ancestors did not create the kingdom in their native city (i.e. Argos), but left the area of Greece entirely, and went to Macedonia to establish their kingdom among a people of non-kindred race." (Isocrates 5 Philip 106-108).

Could this perhaps be more a case of Isocrates saying what Philip wanted to hear? Or perhaps he was encouraged to write all that stuff? In any case, it should be plain to see that a big question mark hung over the heads of the Macedonian Royal Family in ancient times with regards to their claims of Greek ancestry since the issue kept coming up time after time and generations of Greek writers had to keep peddling the same bullshit story in order to legitimise their Greeekness to their Greek audiences.

What's particular interesting about this Isocrates quote is that, although he can stomach the thought of Philip having Greek ancestry, this is not afforded to the general Macedonian people. Isocrates is explicit here - The Macedonians were of non-kindred race.
Karposh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2018, 05:09 AM   #309
Amphipolis
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,152
Amphipolis is on a distinguished road
Default

Isocrates letters are discussed here. (It's not the only, but I hope it's the main thread and we should keep it this way)

http://www.macedoniantruth.org/forum...ight=isocrates
Amphipolis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2018, 06:18 AM   #310
Karposh
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 578
Karposh is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amphipolis View Post
Isocrates letters are discussed here. (It's not the only, but I hope it's the main thread and we should keep it this way)

http://www.macedoniantruth.org/forum...ight=isocrates
Who made you the forum moderator? My input on Herodotus and Isocrates on this thread is relevant as I was responding to the question of Greek-sounding names from another poster who used this argument as proof for the Greekness of the Ancient Macedonians. The point with including these two ancient Greek writers is to show that poster that the Greeks themselves did not consider the Macedonians to be Greeks despite their Greek-sounding names. Herodotus and Isocrates didn't give a toss if their names could be translated to "The Protector of Men" or "Lover of Horses". They still considered the Macedonians foreigners.
Karposh is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 2 (0 members and 2 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