Largest ancient tomb found of a prominent Macedonian

[SoutherNeighbour]

Νταρνάκα ακανέ,όπου γάμος και χαρά η Βασίλω πρώτη βλέπω

So the Greek propaganda will try its best once again to verify the Greek narrative of Macedonia's non existent ''Greekness''.

The media in Greece are all over this discovery.Obviously the Greek archaeologists are in close contact with the Samaras government and are turning this discovery into a huge show that somehow is supposed to help Samaras show something positive to the Greeks after the imposing of relentless austerity policies on the people of Greece.

BS 101 module taught by Samaras and his team.Needless to say that there are no international archaeologists participating in the excavation and this only goes to show how Greece is planning to manipulate the whole discovery.

Now something interesting in terms of how Greece is taking advantage of the issue is NERIT's (the new national TV broadcasting service) which hints constantly that this might be Alexander's tomb.Especially the past week or so they constantly air the opinion of a marginal Greek historian who said on ANT1 channel that this is Alexander's tomb.

If you could watch how the Greek media behave on this you would freak out.Each day you have panels of experts discussing the discovery.This goes on all day from all major Greek channels.Its truly unsettling to see how the media are manipulating the public opinion in Greece.


Btw Agamoi,why dont you explain to our Macedonian friends what your Greek nick means?While you are at it explain to us your reference to the Macedonian Truth Forum here

http://www.phorum.gr/viewtopic.php?f=51&t=272952&start=300#p6132336

http://www.phorum.gr/viewtopic.php?f=51&t=272952&start=315#p6132392

Oh and this last one please.Do explain to us what you are saying for the Macedonian users here (before I translate for them that is )

http://www.phorum.gr/viewtopic.php?f=51&t=272952&sid=a64e869d5ec503ca67b3195c83b6b1e9&start=345#p6133181

[Phoenix]

I'm very impressed with the way you cut through the bullshit and get to the heart of the point in a very efficient manner and some of your colloquialisms are absolute gems!!

Thanks mate

Taking a step back and having a closer look, I reckon a couple of "farkin dickheads" or "arseholes" somewhere in the statement would've painted an even clearer picture, something closer to photorealism to make the point absolute instead of an abstract offering of open ambiguity...

Nice to see you here more often mate

[makedonche]

Yes, you're right Gocka.

There has been an obsessive western fascination with ancient Greece as early as the 18th and 19th centuries and todays plate smashing folk have been riding that gravy train ever since...

Further to your point, the Greeks of the 19th and early 20th centuries didn't even have a strong belief that they were 'European' even though there was this new romantic movement underway, lead by outsiders like Lord Byron and similarly deluded Western dreamers...

I'm very impressed with the way you cut through the bullshit and get to the heart of the point in a very efficient manner and some of your colloquialisms are absolute gems!!

[George S.]

romantic is right they considered themselves as romans romaoi.Also they believe in myths and legends made up bs stories.One was how we are related to them etc
the germans spin doctored heaps of things like legends etc they made them sound like modern day heroes.The reality is they are nothing but wimps ,thieves and everything very low in human societythey couldn't have been anything else.I'm so.Modern Greece is based on lies etc people think vey highly of them that's why we seem to be behind the eight ball before we start.

[Phoenix]

I was referring to the Greeks themselves. During the Roman period there is a huge lapse in Greeks calling themselves Greeks. It all but died, and was again resurrected during the renaissance period because of a mass revisiting of political and social concepts of antiquity. Had it not been for the renaissance period we would not have this ingrained Greekness in western academia. The Romans took aspect of Greek culture but then claimed it as there own. It was those damn Germans who were obsessed with the ancient Greeks and started what we now see today. I do get what you are saying though, and a big reason that the Greeks got it easy from the Romans is because they didn't resist occupation too much. They actually back stabbed the Macedonians and sided with the Romans against us.

Yes, you're right Gocka.

There has been an obsessive western fascination with ancient Greece as early as the 18th and 19th centuries and todays plate smashing folk have been riding that gravy train ever since...

Further to your point, the Greeks of the 19th and early 20th centuries didn't even have a strong belief that they were 'European' even though there was this new romantic movement underway, lead by outsiders like Lord Byron and similarly deluded Western dreamers...

[Gocka]

I was referring to the Greeks themselves. During the Roman period there is a huge lapse in Greeks calling themselves Greeks. It all but died, and was again resurrected during the renaissance period because of a mass revisiting of political and social concepts of antiquity. Had it not been for the renaissance period we would not have this ingrained Greekness in western academia. The Romans took aspect of Greek culture but then claimed it as there own. It was those damn Germans who were obsessed with the ancient Greeks and started what we now see today. I do get what you are saying though, and a big reason that the Greeks got it easy from the Romans is because they didn't resist occupation too much. They actually back stabbed the Macedonians and sided with the Romans against us.

QUOTE=Phoenix;152337]Gocka,

I think the Romans actually contributed greatly to preserving the legacy of the Ancient Greek world.
If you consider what the Romans did to another ancient civilization on the Mediterranean when they conquered it, the Greeks got a pretty good deal in the end.

The other civilization that I speak of was Carthage.
The Romans almost wiped it off the face of the Earth.

There was a respect for the Ancient Greek world, it's architecture and art that the Romans used to further advance their own.

Another less known contribution to the legacy of Ancient Greek culture is it's physical qualities, it's records and artifacts have been preserved across millennia because of the quality of stone in the region.
The marble and stone that made up their art, architecture and historical records has endured the weathering of time and it's existence wasn't feared or disrespected as in the case of Carthage.[/QUOTE]

[George S.]

Agamoi phytae how do you explain that todays macedonians if they were a greek race speaks macedonian rather than greek.We don't feel any greekness at all.If we were greek we would have accepted it a long time ago.But were not.Just for your info yes we are macedonians neither greek,bulgarian or serbian.Also we aren't slav too as we know we are macedonians.How do you explain macedonia was a whole country prior to 1912 then suddenly the greeks with their greek army occupied it on justification they were liberating it from the ottomans.So how do you explain the justification and the propaganda created to say that greeks and macedonians are the same which is not true.
Think of the genocide and destruction of so many people and their homes.something to the order of 200k homes burned to the ground,people killed and expelled why so that it could satisfy the greek demand for more land.So you hjave indigenous people the macedonians being replaced by asia minor greek turkish settlers.THe real people of the land being destryed through ethnic cleansing and genocide.So Agamoi you are just covering up the tracks of your greek govt of what attrocities it committed in 1912 and since then.

[Phoenix]

Gocka,

I think the Romans actually contributed greatly to preserving the legacy of the Ancient Greek world.
If you consider what the Romans did to another ancient civilization on the Mediterranean when they conquered it, the Greeks got a pretty good deal in the end.

The other civilization that I speak of was Carthage.
The Romans almost wiped it off the face of the Earth.

There was a respect for the Ancient Greek world, it's architecture and art that the Romans used to further advance their own.

Another less known contribution to the legacy of Ancient Greek culture is it's physical qualities, it's records and artifacts have been preserved across millennia because of the quality of stone in the region.
The marble and stone that made up their art, architecture and historical records has endured the weathering of time and it's existence wasn't feared or disrespected as in the case of Carthage.

[Philosopher]

Agamoi Thytai,

I would like to ask you a few direct questions. I expect direct answers.

You have been on this forum for some time. Based upon all the available evidence presented on this forum, including:

1. Historic documents attesting to a Macedonian ethnicity in the 1500s and 1600s, per the writings of Pribojevic and Orbini.

2. Macedonian lexicon of the 16th century.

3. iGENEA's database of the Macedonian profile.

4. The Pathan population study.

Do you believe:

1. Today's Macedonians are indigenous to the Balkans?

2. Today's Macedonians are genetically close to Greeks?

3. Macedonians have ethnically defined as "Macedonian" long before the 1800s?

4. The historicity of the Macedonian language was established before the 1800s?

Please answer these questions.

[Gocka]

Byzantine scholars already from 12th century started to self-identify as Hellenes, like Ioannis Tzetzes:

http://books.google.gr/books?id=0cWZvqp7q18C&pg=PA322&dq=tzetzes++greek+ancestry&hl=el&sa=X&ei=orrwU8GyHeWhyAP12YLQDA&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=tzetzes%20%20greek%20ancestry&f=false

This tendency grew more in 14th century, especially in Salonica:

http://books.google.gr/books?hl=el&id=8jA9AAAAIAAJ&q=the+home+of+the+hellenes+of+his+day#v=snippet&q=the%20home%20of%20the%20hellenes%20of%20his%20day&f=false

And in Ottoman time, many Greek scholars and other educated people of 17th century and earlier used the name "Hellenes" for self-identification. This one below signed his works as "Πόνησις Χριστοφόρου Αγγέλλου, Έλληνος"=Work of Christopher Angellos, a Hellene

http://i388.photobucket.com/albums/oo321/zratak/christang1-1.gif

http://i388.photobucket.com/albums/oo321/zratak/christang2-1.gif

http://i388.photobucket.com/albums/oo321/zratak/christang3-1.gif

Exactly, thank you for agreeing with me. There is 1500 years between the time of Alexander and the 12th century. There is almost 2000 years to the Ottoman period. Why don't you go a little earlier ? It isn't because they all but stop considering themselves Greeks is it?

I was actually just discussing this with a colleague. The one thing that the Greeks have benefited from through out history is the fact that other Non Greeks have helped perpetuate and keep Greek culture and the idea of Hellenism alive even with the Hellenes themselves stopped being Greek. If it wasn't for the obsession during the renaissance period with ancient Greek philosophy, today who knows what Greece would look like and what the people would consider themselves. During almost every era except the Roman one, foreigners perpetuated some Greek. That is why during the roman era Greeks were all but dead. Then they had a rebirth in 12th century.Obviously the Byzantine empire to differentiate from the west Roman empire took Greek as the official language instead of Latin, Orthodoxy as the official religion over Catholic linked to Greek, and there by restarted the Greek pulse. None of this was the doing of the "Greeks" and had it been up to the people who inhabit today's Greece, Greeks wouldn't exist. It was always an external idea, that finally in the 1850 caught on.

I love how Greeks always rely on 2nd, 3rd and even 10th degree accounts and accounts by historians who lived 1500-2000 yeas after Alexander to prove a point, when all the have to do is go straight to original sources of that time, oh that's right the sources form that time period are actually not as favorable.


Alexander the Great "The Macedonians are about to pass judgment upon you, I wish to know if you will address them in their native tongue?"

Philotas "Besides the Macedonians there are many present who would more easily understand what I shall say if I use the language that you have employed, for no other reason than I suppose that your speech may be understood by the greater number"

Alexander " Do you not see how Philotas loathes even the language of his Fatherland. For he alone disdains to learn it. But let him by all means speak in which ever language he desires, provided that you remember that he holds our customs in as much abhorrence as our language."

Philotas admits Alexanders speaks in Greek so that more people can understand him, he also admits that he shall do the same. Alexander admits that the Macedonians speak in a manner that is unintelligible to people who speak Greek.

Just read what ancient Greek writers have to say they know more than your famous German and Italian Cheer leaders of later centuries.

[George S.]

greeks and macedonians are not related the sooner you realize the better,
They are both different races.Think about it.THe greeks called macedonians a barbarian race not a greek one.Also why didn't macedonia fight for the greeks if they were greek.They were expressly denied,Why were certain people of macedonian descent denied in athens as they were banished for non greekness,Also macedonians were denied playing in the olympic games we know why.Also if greeks and macedonians were the same why were the greeks conquered,.THey aren't the same merely saying so will not make them the same.AS far as speaking languages i have allready said greek was widely spoken not that they were greek but for different purposes.Also the greeks couldn't understand the ancient macedonian language thats because it was different.SO agamoi and the rest of you the truth speaks louder than words,Before alexander left for persia he didn't get the cooperation he was hoping to get.Alexander DID NOT use the greeks in his entourage for his campaigns.It was said there were more greeks in the persian army fighting against alexander than what he had in his entourage.THe army SPOKE Macedonian by preference and NOT GREEK.What proof is needed.Also it is written that alexander garrisone the whole of greece with macedonian soldiers before he left on his campaigns.But stop there the macedonians and greeks were the same why woulf alexander do that.?
As i said facts speak louder than words macedonians were not greeks thats why they were subjugated.

[Philosopher]

This paper does not propose to bring up the much-debated old question of whether the ancient question of whether the ancient Macedonians "were Greeks." From the anthropological point of view, if suitably reworded, it could no doubt be answered; I suspect that, to the anthropologist, remains found in the areas of ancient Greece, Macedonia, and surrounding parts would not show significant differences. However, this is of no historical importance: no more so than it would have been to point out in the 1930s (as I am told is the fact) that there is little anthropological difference between Jewish communities and the non-Jewish populations among whom they happen to live. From the linguistic point of view, again, if suitably reworded (i.e, "Did the ancient Macedonians speak a form of Ancient Greek?"), the question seems to me at present unanswerable for the period down to Alexander the Great. We so far have no real evidence on the structure of the ancient Macedonian language; only on proper names and (to small extent) on general vocabulary, chiefly nouns. This is not a basis on which to judge linguistic affinities, especially in the context of the ancient Balkan area and its populations. (1)

Let us again look at the Jews-those who in the 1930s were living in Eastern Europe. Their names were Hebrew with a slight admixture of German and Slav elements; their alphabet and their sacred writings were Hebrew. Yet their vocabulary was largely, and the structure of their vernacular language almost entirely, that of a German dialect. As a precious survival of a pronationalist world, they are of special interest in such comparisons. One wonders what scholars would have made of them, if they had been known only through tombstones and sacred objects.

In any case, interesting though the precise affinities of ancient Macedonian must be to the linguistic specialist, they are again of very limited interest to the historian. Linguistic facts as such, just like archaeological finds as such, are only some of the pieces in the puzzle that the historian tries to fit together, In this case, unfortunately, as every treatment of the problem nowadays seems to show, discussion has become bedeviled by politics and modern linguistic nationalism2) the idea that a nation is essentially defined by a language and that, conversely, a common language mean s a common nationhood--which is patently untrue for the greater part of human history and to a large extent even today. The Kultursprache of ancient Macedonians, as soon as they felt the need for one, was inevitably Greek, as it was in the case of various other ancient peoples. There was no feasible alternative. But as N.G.L. Hammond remarked, in the memorable closing words of volume I of his History of Macedonia, "a means of communications is very far from assuring peaceful relations between two peoples, as we know from our experience of the modern world."(3) It is equally far (we might add) from betokening any consciousness of a common interest.

What is of greater historical interest is the question of how Greeks and Macedonians were perceived by each other.

Emphasis added.

http://www.historyofmacedonia.org/AncientMacedonia/badian.html

[Philosopher]

Ancient Macedonians didn't just use the Greek Alphabet but the Greek language itself. Modern people use only the Latin Alphabet, not the Latin language. Ancient Greeks used only the Phoenician Alphabet, not the Phoenician language. I believe you can understand the difference.

For the record, there is no consensus among scholars concerning the language of the ancient Macedonians. Some of the words that have survived appear to be loan words from Greek. Others appear to be unrelated to Greek. The ancient Macedonians did not use the Greek language itself. Only the elite, including government officials, used Greek and only for particular purposes. We have no evidence that the common Macedonian population knew Greek at all or spoke Greek. To suggest anything else, is dishonest.

It's not exactly that way. How many Greek inscriptions of 4th BC century have been found in the norhternmost regions of ROM or even in the central ones? How many in central and northern Albania, central and northern Bulgaria? Greek inscriptions of that time are found only in the southernmost regions and in places that were settled by Macedonian colonists.

I cannot answer all of these statements. What I can say is that evidence of the Greek language (Koine) may be found in the Middle East centuries before Christ, and before Alexander the Great's alleged Hellenization program.

You cannot seriously make the statement that everyone who used Greek in the Mediterranean was Greek. Nor can you make the argument that everywhere Greek inscriptions are found, that this implies the people must have been ethnic Greeks.

Greek was definitely not spread in the eastern mediterranean before Alexander's conquests, apart from the Greek colonies in the coastal region of Asia Minor. Aramaic was the lingua franca of the vast Persian empire and its official language too

It has already been established by modern research that Greek culture and language existed long before Alexander the Great. How you can deny this is staggering.

The conclusion is inescapable: there was a largely ethnic Macedonian imperial administration from beginning to end. Alexander used Greeks at court for cultural reasons, Greek troops (often under Macedonian commanders) for limited tasks and with some discomfort, and Greek commanders and officials for limited duties. Typically, a Greek would enter Alexander's service from an Aegean or Asian city through the practice of some special activity: he could read and write, keep figures or sail, all of which skills the Macedonians required. Some Greeks may have moved on to military service as well. In other words, the role of Greeks in Alexander's service was not much different from what their role had been in the service of Xerxes and the third Darius. If one wishes to believe that Alexander had a policy of hellenization-as opposed to the incidental and informal spread of Greek culture-the evidence must come from sources other than those presented here. One wonders-archaeology aside-where this evidence would be. We have seen that not only has the idea of World Brotherhood been put to rest and the idea of a Fusion of Persian and Macedonian ruling classes made doubtful, but that the value of Greeks to Alexander for policy reasons cannot be sustained by evidence. In short, there is no World Brotherhood, no Fusion, and no evidence of a policy of hellenization, if that hellenization were intended to be accomplished through the medium of ethnic Greeks.

How can you call it a by-product when Alexander himself ordered Persian youths to learn Greek? http://www.essay.uk.com/coursework/a...-the-great.php
Just think this: Romans conquered half of Europe and spread their language and that's why today millions of people in those regions speak languages descending from Latin. Spaniards conquered all central America and the greatest part of South America and spread their language too in those regions. Macedonians conquered the Persian empire and spread a foreign language?

I would not consider your citation to be serious. A website writing “custom essays & dissertations for students”. Are you serious? I would add that most scholarship, especially older scholarship, was heavly biased and based on ignorant assumptions. However, even if Alexander ordered the Persians to learn Greek, what does this prove? It has already been established that the Greeks' role in Alexander's government was no different than the Greeks in the service of Xerxes and the third Darius. Now this is kind of odd, don't you think? Why would Alexander limit the role of ethnic Greeks to the same elementary functions as ethnic Greeks had in the service of Xerxes and the third Darius? If Alexander had a policy of Hellenization, one would find this inconsistent with his objectives.

What is certain is that Alexander's mother tongue was not Greek. Alexander enjoyed a Greek education and adopted Greek as the language of his empire but to claim that that made him Greek is to suggest that the Irish and the Indians are really British because they have adopted English for administrative purposes.

[Philosopher]

It's not only me, all linguists of the world say Koine is Greek, the ancestor of modern Greek, since it's closer to it than to Attic Greek or any other ancient Greek dialect of classic time.

It's the language in which the New Testament is written. Show me any passage of the New Testament and I can easily understand and translate at least 90% of it, while you (or any other non-Greek who doesn't speak Greek at all) won't be able to understand not even a single sentence.

Yes, Koine is Greek. However, Koine was also the language of the Mediterranean. So in this sense, it was used by Greeks and non-Greeks alike.

The New Testament is a perfect example.

The New Testament was written in Koine. And yes, people who do not understand Greek cannot read the Greek New Testament unless it is translated in the vernacular first.

The New Testament was not written by Greeks. All of the Gospels, with the exception of Luke's, and all of the epistles, were written by Hebrews. The Hebrews had their own language, considerably older than Greek, but they chose instead to write a collection of writings now called the New Testament in Koine.

Some of the apostles of Jesus Christ had Greek names. Andreas (Andrew), Petros (Peter), Philipos (Philip), et al. The name "Jesus Christ" is itself a Hellenized name of the Hebrew name Yeshua Mashia. But we know they were not Greek.

Virtually all of Europe venerates Jesus Christ as God. And venerate his apostles as saints.

If one were to examine the New Testament at face value, there is little reason to believe it is anything but Greek. However, when one explores the books therein, and the context of the Old Testament, it is very obvious to the lettered that the apostles used Koine, the lingua franca of the time, to reach the most amount of people with the message of Christ (Christos), not because they and their Lord were Greek.

There are many Jews, till this today, who reject Christianity as a pagan Greek religion because it is so "Greek", even though it is not Greek at all.

If anything, when one considers it with more scrutiny, it is evident that Greeks and most Europeans are Israelites.

We worship the God of Israel, have Hebrew sounding names (Michael, Gabriel, et al.), practice Christian morality, and study the Hebrew Old Testament, This must make us Hebrews or so-called "Jews".

We all know from history if a people had Greek names, used Greek in writing, worshiped "Greek" gods, they could not be anything other than pure Greek. So if we apply this rule blindly, we must conclude most of Europe is so-called "Jewish".

I am being sarcastic, of course.

[Agamoi Thytai]

AT, we should stop poluting this thread. I see you already started posting at "The Ancient Macedonian Language" thread, so it's best if we continue there.

Link: http://www.macedoniantruth.org/forum...p?t=264&page=8

Yep, you are right Aleko. If you want to continue this discussion on the Koine language please write on that thread and I' ll answer you.