18th-19th century 'greek' intellectuals saw Anc. Maks as conquerors

[mango]

His lineage was only contested subsequently after complaints from participants not from officials.
The motive of putting Alexanders lineage in question was simply to prevent a strong athlete from securing a lead in the event.
If im not mistaken he tied for first.

You can spin history all you want but the bottom line remains the same. The participants complained (they knew he was not Greek) so the officials decided to examine the accusations (they also knew he was not Greek up to that point). According to Borza the whole incident was just a piece of propaganda transmitted by Herodotus. Borza claims the list of the competitors of that particular Olympic games does not contain Alex's name.

[Voltron]

His lineage was contested more than once. You just don't have the capacity to accept logic over myth. That fluff about preventing a strong athlete is a new one, it seems like every few months there is a new theory coined as to why the Hellenes did not accept Alexander as a Hellene. As for him being tied for first place, aside from the citation from Herodotus, there appears to be no evidence of this, nor was it recorded as such in the Olympics.

Every few months ? What is amazing to me is how Alexanders response is completely disregarded and the focus is on the objection of other athletes. As if today we dont have similar Olympic stories of ppl trying to obstruct even their own teammates for personal gain. Nancy Kerrigan anyone ? Macedonians not being Greek is the myth SOM, not logic.

http://figureskating.about.com/od/profilesoffamousskaters/p/kerrigan.htm

[George S.]

Alexander was a macedonian & he wasn't a greek voltron get it right.Unlike the greeks who copy other people & colonise other countries & practised slavery.THe macedonians gave their subjects freedom from slavery & let them practice their religion.Alexander beleived in freedom not greek slavery.

[makedonche]

Bill77
Well responded Bill, what astounds me is the lack of ability to think critically or laterally, or to accept facts that are presented - yet we are expected to accept everything the Greeks say without questioning it? WTF?
Voltrons quote sums it up well,however he fails to see that what he expects he's not prepared to give!

Originally Posted by Voltron
Christ what else does it take ppl ?

So Voltron, for christs sake! what else does it take?

[makedonche]

You didn't claimed this earlier! To the contrary, you stated:



How can a scholar influence other Greek scholars(as you say) to believe that the Macedonians were not Greeks if he himself is uncertain about the matter?

It seems that the one who's uncertain is you. Maybe you need to clear your thoughts. To help you i will give you a hint.
The reason why Korais and the rest of the Greek intellectuals at the time didn't considered the Ancient Macedonians as Greeks was not because of their origin, religious or linguistic differences, but because they saw them as not being part of the Greek nation, they were outside of the Greek world. If you've read carefully the first pages on this thread you would have realized this.



Only after the German Droysen offered his theories to your historians did they accepted to include the Macedonians into the Greek nation.




And what happened? The Greek state and scholars, the ones who quite recently omitted the Ancient Macedonians from the Greek nation now went on a mission to 'prove' how Hellenic they in fact were.






Well lets for the 'sake of the argument' assume that you didn't took this sentence out of context. In this sentence Korais:

1. Speaks about the successors of Alexander, not about the Ancient Macedonians nor about Alexander nor about his predecessors! Only about his successors who certainly can't be equalized with the Ancient Macedonians themselves.
2. Tells us that the Hellenes were subjugated to the Macedonians.
Do you know what subjugated means?

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/subjugate

3. States that the situation after the enslavement/subjegation of the Hellenes by the Macedonians was 'not that bad'. Which means the situation was bad(the Hellenes were enslaved after all) but not extremely bad.

4. States a possibility, that maybe this enslavement was not that bad because the successors were 'Hellenes themselves'. That's why he uses the word 'perhaps'

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/perhaps

So this sentence alone tells us what i have already stated, that Korais considered the Macedonians as conquerors of Greece, a people not taking part in the Greek nation. You simply lack the mental capacity to figure it out.

PS: You didn't answered my question! What have these 18th century scholars(predecessors of Korais) which you threw around wrote about the Ancient Macedonians apart from the one liners you are quoting and which is nothing more then propaganda for the ignorant. Weren't the Ancient Macedonians such an important part of your nation? Weren't they the ones who spread Hellenic culture all around the world? Isn't it shameful that one liners is everything that the Greek intelligentsia(including the ones that allegedly considered Macedonians as Greeks) wrote about them before Droysen come up in the 1850es and told them '' hey guys, these Macedonians are very important for your new identity, you need to include them in your history'' ?

Orfej
Well analysed and well constructed response, putting an end to the pretenders false aspirations. Lets see what response we get from the make believe Hellenes!

[Soldier of Macedon]

His lineage was only contested subsequently after complaints from participants not from officials.
The motive of putting Alexanders lineage in question was simply to prevent a strong athlete from securing a lead in the event.
If im not mistaken he tied for first.

His lineage was contested more than once. You just don't have the capacity to accept logic over myth. That fluff about preventing a strong athlete is a new one, it seems like every few months there is a new theory coined as to why the Hellenes did not accept Alexander as a Hellene. As for him being tied for first place, aside from the citation from Herodotus, there appears to be no evidence of this, nor was it recorded as such in the Olympics.

[Bill77]

The motive of putting Alexanders lineage in question was simply to prevent a strong athlete from securing a lead in the event.
If im not mistaken he tied for first.

Thats crazy. He was indisputably Macedonian. Therfor, They could have looked for other reasons to block him entering, than questioning a Macedonians lineage if Macedonians were truely Greeks.

Besides, Isn't this response a bit hypercritical after your comments to stojacanec.

Stojacanec, your going on pure speculation.

And,

Dont rush to conclusions Bill.

Read what I posted and the subsequent dialogue I had before with Stojanec.
I know the difference bro.

I did read the subsequent dialogue. Which is what lead me to believe you did not know the difference. You did not correct stojanec on which Alexander you were referring to and went along with the ATG Greekness dialogue as if it was he, you were talking about.

Its ok bro, we all make mistakes.

If im not mistaken he tied for first.

He probably won. But to give the victory to a Macedonian over a Greek in their own games would have been Insulting and demoralising.
Could you imagine, a Barbarian "... not only no Greek, nor related to the Greeks, but not even a barbarian from any place that can be named with honors, but a pestilent knave from Macedonia".
(which was said about Philip and would have had the same thoughts about the Macedonians before him).

Its not speculation but clear Macedonians were not Greeks. so to end this post, i will finish it with your quote.

Christ what else does it take ppl ?

[Voltron]

That was Alexander I and not Alexander III the Great. Then why would a king of a neighboring country suddenly proclaim he's Greek to the Greeks? Wouldn't they know that already? Or it is just a piece of state propaganda transmitted by Herodotus.

His lineage was only contested subsequently after complaints from participants not from officials.
The motive of putting Alexanders lineage in question was simply to prevent a strong athlete from securing a lead in the event.
If im not mistaken he tied for first.

[Orfej]

Well,Korais was actually not certain whether ancient Macedonians were Greeks or not.

You didn't claimed this earlier! To the contrary, you stated:

[B]SoM and TrueMacedonian have posted so far some interesting quotes that show certain Greek scholars considered Macedonians as a non-Greek people.It's true,I don't deny it,there were indeed in 19th century some Greek scholars who held that view.They were mainly influenced by the leading Greek scholar of that time,Adamantios Korais[/B],who lived in Paris and was an admirer of French enlightenment

How can a scholar influence other Greek scholars(as you say) to believe that the Macedonians were not Greeks if he himself is uncertain about the matter?

It seems that the one who's uncertain is you. Maybe you need to clear your thoughts. To help you i will give you a hint.
The reason why Korais and the rest of the Greek intellectuals at the time didn't considered the Ancient Macedonians as Greeks was not because of their origin, religious or linguistic differences, but because they saw them as not being part of the Greek nation, they were outside of the Greek world. If you've read carefully the first pages on this thread you would have realized this.



Only after the German Droysen offered his theories to your historians did they accepted to include the Macedonians into the Greek nation.




And what happened? The Greek state and scholars, the ones who quite recently omitted the Ancient Macedonians from the Greek nation now went on a mission to 'prove' how Hellenic they in fact were.

Besides these two pages you've posted,there is another one you've omited,which reads:

http://i300.photobucket.com/albums/nn17/kostas68/salppolem7.png

"Hellenes were subjugated first to the succesors of Alexander.But this wasn't still that bad,because Alexander's succesors were perhaps Hellenes themselves."

Well lets for the 'sake of the argument' assume that you didn't took this sentence out of context. In this sentence Korais:

1. Speaks about the successors of Alexander, not about the Ancient Macedonians nor about Alexander nor about his predecessors! Only about his successors who certainly can't be equalized with the Ancient Macedonians themselves.
2. Tells us that the Hellenes were subjugated to the Macedonians.
Do you know what subjugated means?

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/subjugate

subjugate:
-to bring under complete control or subjection; conquer; master.
-to make submissive or subservient; enslave.

3. States that the situation after the enslavement/subjegation of the Hellenes by the Macedonians was 'not that bad'. Which means the situation was bad(the Hellenes were enslaved after all) but not extremely bad.

4. States a possibility, that maybe this enslavement was not that bad because the successors were 'Hellenes themselves'. That's why he uses the word 'perhaps'

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/perhaps

So this sentence alone tells us what i have already stated, that Korais considered the Macedonians as conquerors of Greece, a people not taking part in the Greek nation. You simply lack the mental capacity to figure it out.

PS: You didn't answered my question! What have these 18th century scholars(predecessors of Korais) which you threw around wrote about the Ancient Macedonians apart from the one liners you are quoting and which is nothing more then propaganda for the ignorant. Weren't the Ancient Macedonians such an important part of your nation? Weren't they the ones who spread Hellenic culture all around the world? Isn't it shameful that one liners is everything that the Greek intelligentsia(including the ones that allegedly considered Macedonians as Greeks) wrote about them before Droysen come up in the 1850es and told them '' hey guys, these Macedonians are very important for your new identity, you need to include them in your history'' ?

[Voltron]

Dont rush to conclusions Bill.

Read what I posted and the subsequent dialogue I had before with Stojanec.
I know the difference bro.

[Bill77]

That was Alexander I and not Alexander III the Great. Then why would a king of a neighboring country suddenly proclaim he's Greek to the Greeks? Wouldn't they know that already? Or it is just a piece of state propaganda transmitted by Herodotus.

Spot on Mango. I don't think he knew the difference.

[mango]

Alexander has said himself he is a Greek by descent, Christ what else does it take ppl ?

That was Alexander I and not Alexander III the Great. Then why would a king of a neighboring country suddenly proclaim he's Greek to the Greeks? Wouldn't they know that already? Or it is just a piece of state propaganda transmitted by Herodotus.

[Bill77]

Im aware of your sides position in regards to your reference Bill.
I just dont agree with it.

Then what is your position on this issue. I did ask please explain.

[Voltron]

Im aware of your sides position in regards to your reference Bill.
I just dont agree with it.

[Bill77]

Alexander has said himself he is a Greek by descent, Christ what else does it take ppl ?

That was after he was refused to enter the Olympics (Thats if i have the Alexander you are referring to correct). Can you explain why Alexander being a Macedonian was not enough before he had to concocter a story?