Historians on the Ancient Macedonians

[sydney]

From the renowned Greek historian and linguist, Gus Portokalos, "Give me a word, any word, and I show you that the root of that word is Greek."

[Leo255]

Dragan - I am a troll for having a historical debate? Just because I am presenting a viewpoint that is contrary to your own, it does not mean that I'm trolling.

Tomeche - Why have you deliberately cut me off there? You've taken my post completely out of contest. To think that I'm the one being labelled a troll. I'm not sure what was worse, this or the other guy saying that not a single "eminent" historian says that the Macedonians spoke Greek.

I've said that it was meaningless because we know that Koine Greek was referred to as Macedonian. Just because something is labelled as "Macedonian" it does not mean that it was not a form of the Greek language. Koine was certainly Greek, so too was the "Macedonian" that Alexander shouted in.

No I do not think there is even a remote possibility that the Ancient Macedonians were not Greek. I was just making a point.

You ask accepted by who exactly? Well let's take a look. Here's some quotes about Macedonia from Ancient Historians:

Strabo -

“There remain of Europe, first, Macedonia and the parts of Thrace that are contiguous to it and extend as far as Byzantium; secondly, Greece; and thirdly, the islands that are close by. Macedonia, of course, is a part of Greece

"The Ætolians however, in conjunction with the Acarnanians, during a long period withstood the Macedonians and the other Greeks “

Quintus Curtius Rufus -

"they declared that the sun represented the Greeks and the moon the Persians, and that an eclipse of the moon predicted disaster and slaughter for those nations.”


The Branchidae, who were unarmed, were butchered throughout the city, and neither community of language nor the olive-branches and entreaties of the suppliants could curb the savagery. Finally the Macedonians dug down to the foundations of the city walls in order to demolish them and leave not a single trace of the city.

(Branchidae were Greek speakers)

"He did not want her tainting the character and civilized temperament of the Greeks with this example of barbarian lawlessness“

Plutarch:

“Alexander lived many hundred years ago. He was king of Macedon, one of the states of Greece. His life was spent in war. He first conquered the other Grecian states

Isocrates:

“It is your privilege, as one who has been blessed with untrammeled freedom, to consider all Hellas your fatherland, as did the founder of your race.”

Writing to Phillip

Polybius:

"That King Philip and the Macedonians and the rest of the Hellenes"

Phillip V speaking: "For on many occasions when I and the other Greeks sent embassies to you begging you to remove from your statutes the law empowering you to get booty from booty, you replied that you would rather remove Aetolia from Aetolia than that law.


Diodorus:

“Such was the end of Philip … He had ruled 24 years. He is known to fame as one who with but the slenderest resources to support his claim to a throne won for himself the greatest empire among the Hellenes, while the growth of his position was not due so much to his prowess in arms as to his adroitness and cordiality in diplomacy.”

“and the Athenians were not ready to concede the leading position among the Greeks to Macedon.”

Livy:

"General Paulus of Rome surrounded by the ten Commissioners took his official seat surrounded by the whole crowds of Macedonians Paulus announced in Latin the decisions of the Senate, as well as his own, made by the advice of his council. This announcement was translated into Greek and repeated by Gnaeus Octavius the Praetor-for he too was present"

Caesar:

"An edict had been published in Pompey’s name that all the younger men in the province [Macedonia], both Greeks and Roman citizens, should assemble to take an oath"

Pliny:

"Such, at all events, were the opinions generally entertained in the reign of Alexander the Great, at a time when Greece was at the height of her glory, and the most powerful country in the world"

Plenty more where that came from too.

[Leo255]

From the renowned Greek historian and linguist, Gus Portokalos, "Give me a word, any word, and I show you that the root of that word is Greek."

Are there any English words that come from your language? Surely there should be at least some biblical words seeing as Christ was born at the time of Alexander's successor kingdoms?

No? That's because Alexander was a Greek speaker and left Greek speaking kingdoms behind. That's why the New-Testament was written in Greek.

Any of you want to attempt this quiz?

1. A Non-Greek people identifying themselves as Greeks.

2. A Non-Greek people considered by others as Greeks.

3. A Non-Greek people having Greek Names.

4. A Non-Greek people speaking Greek language.

5. A Non-Greek people sharing the same religion as Greeks

6. A Non-Greek people having the same heroes as Greeks

7. A Non-Greek people having the same myths as Greeks

8. A Non-Greek people spreading everywhere Greek Language and Culture,

9. A Non-Greek people building Greek cities,

10. A Non-Greek people participating in Pan-Hellenic Games,

11. A Non-Greek people participating in Amphictionies.

12. A Non-Greek peope using the same architecture as Greeks

[Gocka]

Macedonians have been going about this the wrong way.

Lets for a second say Ancient Macedonians spoke ancient "Greek" or some form of it, what does this prove? What does that have to do with the modern day nation of Greece.

France, Portugal, Spain, Italy, and even Romania share a common language. The difference between the first four languages is negligible, obviously all coming from Latin. would anyone argue that the Portuguese are the same as Italians, or the French? All of Eastern Europe speaks some form of Slavic, but are Russians and Ukrainians anything like Serbs, Bulgars and Macedonians? If Spaniards and Italians try hard enough they can understand each other. What are we to infer from that other than that their languages come from a common root.

So if ancient Macedonians and Greeks spoke a similar or even the same language this proves nothing. Spartans, Athenians, and Macedonians, were all just that, the idea of Greekness is a relatively new concept, certainly in that era it would have been a totally foreign concept.

To say ancient Macedonians were "Greek" frankly has no value or meaning. It is just an attempt to mix modern day politics and nationalism with a time that wouldn't have understood any of it.

In my opinion there is one defining point in ancient history that tells the whole story about the identity of the ancient Macedonians. The "Greeks" sided with the Romans while the Macedonians went with Carthage. When push came to shove the other city states had no problem banding together against Macedonia. Even Sparta eventually went the way of the other city state but Macedonia was always treated as an outcast, regardless of what language they spoke or what you think they were ethnically. When outsiders threatened the Balkans peninsula Macedonia was always on the opposite side of the rest of them, that means more than any identity you want to impose 2500 years later.

The Balkans peninsula is small, genetically everyone from that time period was probably the same or very close to it. So all that is left is that the people who eventually became "Greeks" never wanted Macedonians to be a part of that club up until very recently. So as far as I'm concerned this whole argument ends right there.

One day Historians will overcome the heavy Greek slant on history and this will be more clear, until that you plate smashers mojte dzenem da fatite.

[Risto the Great]

Are there any English words that come from your language? Surely there should be at least some biblical words seeing as Christ was born at the time of Alexander's successor kingdoms?

No? That's because Alexander was a Greek speaker and left Greek speaking kingdoms behind. That's why the New-Testament was written in Greek.

Leo the Liar, why haven't you disputed what the head of Ancient History (Prof Cartledge) at Cambridge said? You never replied to my comments, so perhaps you missed it.Perhaps after you read it you will develop a sense of perspective on the matter instead of sounding like a pathetic 1980's Greek peasant.

Any of you want to attempt this quiz?

1. A Non-Greek people identifying themselves as Greeks.
Ummm, Greece is full of them right now. Albanians, Macedonians, Turks .... heaps of them.


2. A Non-Greek people considered by others as Greeks.
Sure. Anyone who was Orthodox once upon a time. This is so easy.

3. A Non-Greek people having Greek Names.
Yep, me. But I changed it back to my Macedonian surname. Oh, there is also proof of Thracians with the men having Greek sounding names but wives leaving their uniquely Thracian names intact. It's crazy isn't it! A bit like someone called Klitos calling himself Chris or Panagioti calling himself Peter nowadays. OMG, what have they become! Kill them all! How dare they!

4. A Non-Greek people speaking Greek language.
Macedonians, Thracians, Romans ... the shifty Albanian down the road. Even some fancy scholars from Cambridge.

5. A Non-Greek people sharing the same religion as Greeks
Well, talk to Putin about that. Mind you, Greek Orthodoxy is schismatic, but I will let you hate yourself for that.

6. A Non-Greek people having the same heroes as Greeks
You got me here. My hero is definitely not that sprinter from those Olympics in Greece a few year back. But a few people seem to like a few of those ancient Hellenes to this day.

7. A Non-Greek people having the same myths as Greeks
Aren't you doubling up here? Refer point 5

8. A Non-Greek people spreading everywhere Greek Language and Culture,
Depends what you mean by Hellenistic and whether you have seen anything about already established trade routes and languages already spoken.

9. A Non-Greek people building Greek cities,
All of northern Greece. Take a look at the noses on the quasi Arabs in Ptolemaida.

10. A Non-Greek people participating in Pan-Hellenic Games,
Wow. Are you referring to one person or a race here?

11. A Non-Greek people participating in Amphictionies.
I have never played Pictionary

12. A Non-Greek peope using the same architecture as Greeks[/QUOTE]I've seen people copy their neighbour's architecture often. Though some Greek houses look uniquely shit.

Anyway, I suspect you will be deleted soon. You didn't put your dissertation here. Have a great Greek day you miserable racist and uninformed idiot.

[tchaiku]

Ummm, Greece is full of them right now. Albanians, Macedonians, Turks .... heaps of them.

Aromanians are by far more numerous than Albanians in Greece. You didn't mention them.

[Soldier of Macedon]

Leo, if you don't put up your alleged dissertation in your next post within 24 hours, you will be banned.

[Gocka]

Don't hold your breath

Leo, if you don't put up your alleged dissertation in your next post within 24 hours, you will be banned.

[Tomche Makedonche]

Tomeche - Why have you deliberately cut me off there?

Its Tomche, I didn't bother repeating the dribble that followed because the basis of your argument to discard such evidence was void of any objective reasoning and clearly indicative of a bias agenda.

You've taken my post completely out of contest.

The word is context, science is not a sport, although it is clear this is the approach you take to it. Another lesson of wisdom taught to you by KCL I imagine?.

To think that I'm the one being labelled a troll.

I did not label you a troll, I inferred that your arguments are indicative of a Greek Drone (devoid of any rational and objective thought or desire for intellectual dialogue), which is hard to dispute at all now.

I'm not sure what was worse, this or the other guy saying that not a single "eminent" historian says that the Macedonians spoke Greek.

The other guy was Risto the Great, and what he said was that no eminent historian would infer as a conclusive judgement that a nation of people are the same ethnicity as another nation of people based solely on evidence that one of them were able to speak a dialect of a common language which was native amongst the other group, particularly when such a language was coincidentally spoken amongst a number of ethnically diverse nations as a lingua franca at the time in question. Such a premature judgement would be highly presumptuous and objectively flawed and by no means represents the only analytic property of "today’s judgments of ethnicity" as you so claimed.

He also gave you a quote from Prof. Cartledge, who was the A. G. Leventis Professor of Greek Culture at the University of Cambridge, which directly refutes your claim.

The fact that you actually struggle with your deliberation on what is worse highlights the gravity of your comprehension deficit.

I've said that it was meaningless because we know that Koine Greek was referred to as Macedonian.
Just because something is labelled as "Macedonian" it does not mean that it was not a form of the Greek language. Koine was certainly Greek, so too was the "Macedonian" that Alexander shouted in.

Refer to my first point of discussion, this is nothing but agenda driven by conjecture as clearly references that make a distinction in language between Macedonian and Greek mean precisely that they are not the same, otherwise there would be no need to make a distinction in the first place.

No I do not think there is even a remote possibility that the Ancient Macedonians were not Greek. I was just making a point.

Yes, and the point you were trying to make (which no one missed except you) was that ethnicities are able to change simply based on the adoption (even if partial) of another dominant language, thus giving credibility to (and indirectly personally supporting) the proposition that the ethnic Macedonians of today who speak a Slavonic language can be, or are in fact, the direct descendants of the ancient Macedonians irrespective of whether any evolutionary links can ever be established with the original archaic form of language spoken by the ancients and that of the Slavonic Macedonian language spoken today.

Don’t worry though, I’m sure you will still not comprehend how you completely and utterly jammed your foot down your throat with this one even after it being explained to you (twice).

You ask accepted by who exactly? Well let's take a look. Here's some quotes about Macedonia from Ancient Historians:

Yep, and we can equally post quotes from the majority of those same authors which supports arguments that the Macedonians were considered separate to the Greeks. I’m not going to bother reposting them here because I highly doubt you haven’t seen them before, and it’s clear you will just ignore them anyway and continue pursuing your own tangent of self fulfilment.

SoM: This guy is just another juvenile Greek Drone. I highly doubt he has written any dissertation on Alexander or that the transcript he posted previously is even his own. Make sure the door hits his arse on the way out.

[Karposh]

Strabo -

“There remain of Europe, first, Macedonia and the parts of Thrace that are contiguous to it and extend as far as Byzantium; secondly, Greece; and thirdly, the islands that are close by. Macedonia, of course, is a part of Greece

When Strabo lists the countries of the Greek peninsula he lists "all Greece", Illyria and parts of Thrace. By not mentioning Macedonia by name, Greeks believe that Strabo must have thought that Macedonia was Greece. Secondly, when he describes 'territories indisputably Greek' which have fallen under barbarian rule, he includes Macedonia as being sometimes occupied by Thracians. Strabo's understanding of where Greece and Greeks are located is given below.
Strabo:
1. The tribes extending beyond the Ambracian Gulf to the eastward, and contiguous with the Peloponnesus, are Greek.
2. The tribes from the Strymon to the Pontic passes and Haemus are all Thracian, except on the coast which is inhabited by Greeks.
3. On the right of the entrance (of the Ambracian Gulf) dwell the Arcananians, a Greek tribe. On the left is Nicopolis and the Kassopaeans, an Epirote tribe.
4. The Peneus divides Lower and Maritime Macedonia from Thessaly and Magnesia, and Haliacmon Upper Macedonia.
5. But the Peneus bounds Macedonia towards the north and Thessaly towards the south.

As you can see, Strabo places Macedonia's southern boundary at the river Peneus. But Strabo was not perfect, and apparent contradictions and geographic blunders have prompted Eugene Borza to question his credibility. This is what Borza has to say with regards to Strabo: "The fragments of Strabo's seventh book are quite uneven in value, and to cite Strabo for anything Macedonian is risky. For example what are we to make of an author (or his source) who puts the western boundaries of Macedonia at the coast of the Adriatic (freg.10), places its southern boundary at the Via Egnatia (freg.10), and has the mouth of the Haliacmon separating Dion from Pydna and Methone (fregs.20 and 22)?" (Borza 1990: 293).

Most of the ancient geographers (including Strabo himself) unanimously placed the northern border of Greece at the Peneus River in the Vale Tempe, south of Mount Olympus. "Beyond the river Peneus is the nation of the Macedonians", writes the ancient geographer Skylax in his work Periplous. Besides Strabo and Skylax, other ancient geographers that place Greece's northern boundary at the Peneus river include Dionysius, Diionisius of Calliphon. And a couple more: "I therefore draw limits of Hellas at the country of the Magnesiians, i.e., to the Vale of Tempe" (Dicaearchus). "Above Tempe towards Olympus is the region of the Macedonians" (Scymnus).

At this point, I should mention Sir J.C. Ardagh's "Memorandum on the Ancient Boundaries of Greece" which was received at the British Foreign Office before the Conference at Constantinople 24th February, 1881. The information which Major Ardagh presented in his memorandum (quoting sources from antiquity) basically reaffirms all of the above that, Macedonia was never part of Greece during ancient times. Here is some of what the memo has to say:
"As the claims of the Greeks to an extension of territories are in some degree based upon the limits of the ancient Greece (note: Greece's claim on Macedonia was the weakest of the three vested Balkan states on the argument of population alone), I conceived that an examination of the early Greek geographers would throw some light upon them, and I have been able to procure, and annex extracts from them in Greek translations. Strabo, Scylax, Dichaerchus, Scymnus, and Dionysius all concur in making Greece commence at the Ambracian Gulf, and terminate at the river Peneus..."

I'll touch on the ancient Macedonian language a bit now. But before I do, I just want to put it out there that, unlike our esteemed Greek friend from England, I can't claim to have studied Ancient History at university level. However, I did do alright in Modern & Ancient History in my Higher School Certificate. In fact, truth be told, I even got a "Merit of Outstanding Achievement" in Ancient History, which I'm still pretty chuffed about. Thankfully, all the hard work has been done for me by other eminent historians who have studied Ancient History at university level (just like our own Leo) and I can call up information from them without doubting their judgement too much. Authors and Professors of Ancient History such as A.B. Bosworth, Ernst Badian, Eugene Borza, Peter Green and others who have given their opinions on the ethnicity and language of the Ancient Macedonians.

Unearthing Greek inscriptions on ancient Macedonian artifacts such as coins, the Pella curse tablet, etc, proves that ancient Macedonians were Greeks as much as the usage of the French language by the Russians and German nobility of the late eighteen century proves they were in fact French. Thracian silver coins and vessels from the fifth century B.C. bear Greek inscriptions, and yet, the Greek archaeologists have never claimed this people as Greek. The Macedonians, just like the Thracians, Illyrians and others were, what historians call, a silent people. This doesn't mean they were mutes and couldn't communicate with each other. It simply means they didn't have a native script of their own. Eugene Borza correctly concludes: "The lesson is clear: the use of the Greek language as a form of written expression does not by itself identify the ethnicity of a culture." (In the Shadow of Olympus - The Emergence of Macedon, p.94.) In the same book, Borza also states that "...the main evidence for Macedonian existing as a separate language comes from a handful of late sources describing events in the train of Alexander the Great where the Macedonian language is specifically mentioned" (p.92). Here is my Top 5 list where the Macedonian language is specifically mentioned, and Plutarch's "He shouted in Macedonian" isn't even my number 1.

5. A passage from Pausanius (Paus. IV, 29) describes a Macedonian attack on Messene in 214-213 B.C.. The people of Messene thought it was the attack by the Spartans, but from their "weapons and voice" understood them to be Macedonian.
4. In Plutarch's Life of Anthony we find the Macedonian dialect specifically mentioned. (The word "dialect" is also applied to Egyptian, Hebrew, Syrian, Medes and other languages).
3. The episode with Eumenes, a Greek who was in command of Macedonian soldiers. Eumenes is said to have been in need of a Macedonian translator when wanting to relay a message to an opposing army of Macedonians.
2. Putarch's famous episode where he has Alexander the Great "shouting in Macedonian" to his bodyguard.
1. And, my favourite of all, Quintus Curtius Rufus' Trial of Philotas. If you don't know it (doubtful), then I encourage you to read through Rufus' whole description of this event. Pay particular attention to the following themes: i) Alexander asking Philotas whether he is going to address the Macedonians in their native language. 2.) Philotas giving his reasons for Macedonians having to use the Greek (Koine) language, i.e. "Besides the Macedonians, there are many present who, I think, will find what I am going to say easier to understand if I use the language you yourself have been using (Koine Greek), your purpose, I believe, being only to enable more people to understand you" and; "That native language of ours (Macedonian) has long been rendered obsolete through our dealings with other nations, and conquerors (Macedonians) and conquered (Asian barbarians) must learn a foreign tongue (Koine Greek)."

[Philosopher]

Astute analysis Karposh.

There is a great deal of disinformation stemming from Greek (and even Western) academia.

You can even highlight Herodotus' writings, in which, very early in Balkan history, Macedonia and Macedonians are a land and a people very separate from Hellas and Hellenic denizens. Eugene Borza has noted this, and the reading is quite clear.

[Soldier of Macedon]

Although this clown is no longer present, I will address some of his points anyway.

I would say that the Romans and Ottomans were imperial rulers and not colonisers.

Places like Corinth were completely colonised by the Romans. In fact, Pausanias states that none of the original Corinthians remained there. As for the Turks, several thousand of them settled in the Balkans during the Ottoman Empire. Trying to argue otherwise is simply delusional.

No I did not as it was not on the reading list recommended by my lecturer. I read what was suggested to me, my aim with the module was to get a good grade....

That's a shame, Peter Green is an esteemed classical historian. Reading his works would have helped you develop a more balanced view. But I see that your lecturer recommended his own book for you to use as a reference, interesting.....I'm sure you achieved a good grade.

The issue of Macedonian ethnicity was obviously not an essay question but was relevant when it came to studying certain actions by Alexander E.G The desire to emulate Achilles

Romans desired to emulate Macedonians and Greeks. All three of them desired to emulate or claim descent from gods or mythical figures. I wouldn't read too much into that if your intent is to separate fact from fiction.

It was also important when analysing as to why Arrian and Plutarch's accounts of Alexander are rather more hyperbolic than Curtius'. As Greeks under Roman rule, they would want to glorify his achievements to show cultural superiority.

The hyperbole was also accompanied by ambiguity. Perhaps their intent was self-serving, to have the Romans associate Greeks with the glory of the Macedonians. It may have worked in some cases, but there are still many personalities from antiquity who distinguished Macedonians from Greeks.

......and there is also the inscription in Asia Minor of "Alexander and the Greeks except the Spartans".

You’re making a rather amateurish mistake by reading the text of that inscription in isolation and absent context. For the sake of clarification, here is the actual background to it. The Macedonians had just defeated the Persians at the Battle of Granicus. Several thousand Greeks fought for the Persians, far outnumbering the token contingent of Greeks on the Macedonian side. The Greeks who weren't cut down by the Macedonian army were taken as prisoners and sent in chains to Macedonia. This was their punishment for contravening the resolution of the League of Corinth by fighting against their own countrymen – the Macedonians were not members of the League of Corinth. As for those Greeks who were coerced into supporting the Macedonian campaign, Alexander wanted them to feel vindicated (and remain peaceful back in Europe) by presenting them as partners in the victory, even though their contribution in the battle was of little note. That is why he sent spoils of war and that inscription to Athens. It was directed at the League of Corinth – again, the Macedonians were not members. It is simply inconceivable that Alexander would go out of his way to mention the Spartans (because they refused to join the League of Corinth, which is another indication of who this inscription was directed to), and not the Macedonians, who by that time had a clearly defined national identity. The inscription was nothing more than a piece of propaganda, and the message was simple – those who follow the Macedonians will be rewarded, those don’t will not.

- 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?

None of us are in a position to know all of the Macedonian names from antiquity. Of those that were recorded, most appear to be etymologically Greek. However, the earliest sources were in Greek, so some names may have been given a Greek form and meaning due to superficial similarities or some may have been Greek translations of indigenous names. As for interactions, all Balkan peoples had contact with each other, be it for trade, religion, politics or education. And as Macedonia was geographically closer to Greece than most other Balkan nations, interaction was more frequent. Cultural appropriation isn't a unique phenomenon, even between traditional enemies. Take a look at how many Persians have Arabic names or how many Irishmen have English names. Traditional enemies - yet still, in both cases the former adopted names from the latter.

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.

That doesn't prove anything other than some Macedonian nobles having learned the Greek language. I would have been interested to see the sources which mention the need for translators when Thracians and Illyrians attended the Athenian court. Not impossible, but kind of hard to imagine that this was a common occurrence given that Thracian and Illyrian leaders used Greek inscriptions on their currency.

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

Is that like how opera performances are held around the world in Italian, even though most of the crowd don't speak or understand the language? Perhaps the crowd just appreciates art and culture.

There is very clear evidence that the Trojans did not speak Greek.

Many of the Trojan names appear to be Greek, do they not? The Trojans communicated with the Achaeans without translators, did they not? The fact is, some writers had a habit of applying a level of 'interpretatio graeca' to make foreign elements more palatable for readers of Greek. Hardly a smoking gun.

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.

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.

I will address these two quotes together because it demonstrates both your ignorance and the contradictory nature of your argument. The Pella Curse Tablet is indeed written in (Doric) Greek. It was apparently unearthed in Macedonia. That is where the connection ends. The Macedonian language had voiced consonants, a feature shared with Thracian and Illyrian. The language of the Pella Curse Table does not. That is a clear indication that it was not written in the Macedonian language.

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?

What does one thing have to do with another? The Macedonians adopted Greek for formal purposes (just like many other Balkan peoples) before they even started their campaign in Asia. It was a trading language which already had a presence in both Europe and Asia. It was appropriated for a specific purpose. With conquest on their mind, the development of their own literature and letters was hardly considered a priority, especially for such a martial society. Take a look at the Mongols. They had a literary language yet they adopted Persian when they expanded into Central Asia and the Subcontinent. The Irish have a rich literary tradition yet most speak and write (officially and unofficially) in English today. There are various reasons for people adopting foreign cultural elements and it is almost never black and white. I find it laughable when you modern Greeks look at certain ancient sources concerning the Macedonians through a funnel yet fail to apply the same criteria when other sources from antiquity speak about the significant Afro-Asiatic element in Greece.

Macedonia is a Greek word.

There is no consensus on that. The name itself looks more akin to those of Thracian tribes like Mygdones and Edones.

All of the locations in Ancient Macedonia had Greek names.

That's a blatant lie. There are many toponyms, hydronyms, etc in Macedonia which are of indigenous origin.

The Macedonians were angered by Alexander's adoption of Persian customs.......They would not have such a complex if they themselves had merely copied their culture from the Greeks.

Not all of them were angered. But those that were obviously viewed the eastern cultures as significantly more foreign than the cultures of their European neighbours.

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

That quote from Livy refers to a speech by a Macedonian envoy aimed at the Aetolian League (in the works of Polybius, Phillip V of Macedon didn't even consider the Aetolians as Greeks, which further demonstrates the inconsistency of some ancient sources). He was trying to convince them that they were better off having Macedonians rather than Romans as their allies, which is why he used superficial commonalities as a means of appeal. In similar circumstances, it would be equivalent to a Frenchman saying "Congolese, Rwandans and Frenchmen, people of the same language", just because they all use French as a formal language in their countries. Anyway, facts speak the loudest and the efforts by the Macedonian envoy were ultimately to no avail. The Romans did conquer the Balkans and destroy the Macedonian kingdom, and most Greeks welcomed that. As Plutarch states, the universal belief in the region was that "the Romans came not to fight against the Greeks, but for the Greeks, against the Macedonians."

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

Saint Paul's letter to Rome was in Greek. All the Romans must have been Greeks.

Why was the period following Alexander called the "Hellenistic Period"?

The question you should be asking is who coined the term "Hellenistic". And the answer is some German in the 19th century. Now that you know that, do some research on how Germans from that period influenced the cultivation of a modern "Hellenic" identity.

If we look at a map of Ancient Macedonia, we see that around 75% of it is located in Greece while the rest in Republic of Macedonia.

Which map are you looking at and from what time? The borders of the Macedonian kingdom changed many times from its establishment.

Why would the people of Skopje, which was not even located in the Ancient Kingdom have a better claim to be ancestors of the Macedonians then the Greeks who today live in Pella?

The people of Skopje are Macedonians just as those who were from Pella (or Postol as it was also known in Macedonian during Ottoman times). They have more to do with the heritage of Macedonia than the descendants of Anatolian immigrants who have been inhabiting Pella for less than a 100 years.

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 English erected a statue of Queen Boudica in London - a city that she razed to the ground. Boudica was a Celt who lived centuries before the Germanic tribes (of whom the English are descended) invaded Britain. The Serbs have named the airport in Nish as "Constantine the Great" - even though he was a Thracian (or Illyrian) that lived centuries prior to the original Serb tribe appearing in the Balkans. The Bulgars erected a statue of Spartacus in the town of Sandanski even though he was a Thracian gladiator who lived centuries before the Bulgars appeared in the Balkans. In another thread I mentioned France, where they have statues dedicated to Celtic, Latin and Germanic figures. In Bitola, Macedonia, there has been a statue of Phillip II for years yet one hardly hears a complaint from the outside. A statue of his son is erected in the capital of a Macedonian state and some morons automatically go bananas. All nations have the right to celebrate iconic personalities they consider part of their history, particularly when they've had some sort of positive impact. Meanwhile, in Greece there were discussions about erecting a statue of Alexander in Athens, a man who referred to his father, Phillip, as the "conqueror of Athenians" - the irony! You know what actual Greeks in Athens did back in ancient times? When Phillip and Alexander died, they mocked them and planned rebellions. When Demosthenes died, they erected a statue of him. But modern Greeks, in their rabid desire to falsely claim Alexander for themselves, look upon this famous Athenian with disdain, even though most ancient Greeks held him in the highest regard and considered him a leader in their struggle against the Macedonians. Ironic doesn't even begin to sum it up.

[Amphipolis]

None of us are in a position to know all of the Macedonian names from antiquity. Of those that were recorded, most appear to be etymologically Greek. However, the earliest sources were in Greek, so some names may have been given a Greek form and meaning due to superficial similarities or some may have been Greek translations of indigenous names.

"Most"? Is it most as 50,1%? 90%? 99%? How many names are we talking about? 30? 200? 500? More?

Are they etymologically Greek (in the sense of a hidden unclear root) or just Greek? And how does one know the difference, if he doesn't speak Macedonian, uh... I mean Greek? This could be a Greek lie. [reference to Borza, no he doesn't say anything about the names]

Are the earliest sources Greek indeed? What about the later ones? Do Macedonian inscriptions count as Greek sources?

[Soldier of Macedon]

"Most"? Is it most as 50,1%? 90%? 99%? How many names are we talking about? 30? 200? 500? More?

Most, from what I have seen. I haven't counted every single Macedonian recorded in ancient sources, have you? If so, then run the same exercise with prominent Ottoman Muslim Albanians and let us know how many of them were Arabs.

Are they etymologically Greek (in the sense of a hidden unclear root) or just Greek?

If a name, in its recorded form, has an etymology in Greek, then its component words can't be from an unclear root. If by "root" you mean the origin of the name, then that may be a different story. Native Americans were known by names such as Black Hawk, Lone Horn, Crazy Horse, etc. - in their recorded forms, the component words of these names all have clear English meanings. However, these are translations of the original native names. The English language had a literary tradition, the native languages did not. So, the sources from the time and later on continued to record their names in the English form - in fact, even today's Native Americans often use the English forms of such names. English and the Native American languages come from two completely different language families. They don't share the many similarities that Indo-European languages share either by common origin or through extensive language contact. In some cases, this could have easily facilitated a transition from Macedonian names to Greek sounding names, at least in the formal sense.

And how does one know the difference, if he doesn't speak Macedonian, uh... I mean Greek?

Perhaps after a period of time, one wouldn't know or care to discover. Is Corinth "just Greek"?

Are the earliest sources Greek indeed? What about the later ones?

Simple questions with obvious answers. Don't waste my time or test my patience.

Do Macedonian inscriptions count as Greek sources?

What inscriptions? Coins?

[Amphipolis]

At pages 235-249 there's a full list of names from inscriptions. This is ONLY for Upper Macedonia.

http://www.macedoniantruth.org/forum/showpost.php?p=161765&postcount=35

Edit: A full list of names per city and also in English language can be found as follows.
Google "a contribution to the prosopography of ancient Macedonia - Helios" and download the pdf file in the second link.



===