Ancient quotes on Macedonia

[Agamoi Thytai]

Originally Posted by George S.

Alexander used only Macedonian infrantry men.Not greeks as you claim.

OK George, I take your word for granted. Then can you explain me please, who were those Greeks ,mentioned by Quintus Curtius Rufus in Alexander’s camp?

Alexander informed that the attendant had brought a human head stepped out of the tent and inquiring into the affair heard the narrative of the slave. The king's mind was now the seat of perplexing debate. That a renegade and traitor was taken off whose life would have retarded his august plans he estimated as a momentous benefit. On the other hand a transcend and enormity roused his abhorrence. The female barbarian had perfidiously murdered a husband who from her deserved most highly and with whom she shared parental joys. The foulness of the crime surpassed the gratefulness of the service He caused to be proclaimed to her: Depart from the camp lest the more clement minds and manners of the Greek soldiers should be depraved by entertaining a pattern of savage licentiousness.
http://books.google.gr/books?id=v3II...page&q&f=false

Hmm, let me guess…maybe Quintus Curtius Rufus was referring to the Macedonians As Greeks? Otherwise it doesn’t make any sense at all.

Originally Posted by George S.

Alexander excluded greeks so that they don't get the glory of his campaigns.

That’s impossible. Plutarch wrote this:

He made the longest address that day to the Thessa lians and other Greeks who answered him with loud shouts desiring him to lead them on against the barbarians upon which he shifted his javelin into his left hand and with his right lifted up towards heaven besought the gods as Callisthenes tells us that if he was of a truth the son of Jupiter they would be pleased to assist and strengthen the Grecians.
http://books.google.gr/books?id=kIUCAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA422

And Arrian this:
To Athens also he sent 300 suits of Persian armour to be hung up in the Acropolis as a votive offering to Athena and ordered this inscription to be fixed over them: Alexander, son of Philip and all the Greeks except the Lacedaemonians, present this offering from the spoils taken from the foreigners, inhabiting Asia
http://books.google.gr/books?id=DzIMMLQtbdAC&pg=PR19

Originally Posted by George S.

You know how commanders in alexanders army spoke Macedonian not greek to their men.There was a language they spoke mother tounge was Macedonian NOT GREEK.

Yeah, that’s why Alexander enrolled in his army 30.000 Persian youths and ordered them to learn Greek:
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/...%3Asection%3D3

Originally Posted by George S.

Also before leaving for his campaigns why did alexander heavily fortify Greece with Macedonian garrisons.THe greeks resented being ruled by Macedonians.Just in case they tried to break out.

And? Spartans had also garrisoned all Greek cities that were under their control in th time of their hegemony over the Greek world:
http://books.google.gr/books?id=KX5T...cities&f=false

http://books.google.gr/books?id=mO8f...cities&f=false

And guess what, Athenians did also the same:
http://books.google.gr/books?id=8FHX...cities&f=false

http://books.google.gr/books?id=BWiPAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA277

And then you can read quotes like these below, that speak of the war between Lacedaomonians and Greeks and how Athenians attacked the Hellenes:

After these men had entered office, the Lacedaemonians, who were hard put to it by their double war, that against the Greeks and that against the Persians, dispatched their admiral Antalcidas to Artaxerxes to treat for peace.
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/...%3Asection%3D4 diod.15.19.4

just as afterwards when the Athenians attacked the Hellenes
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin...ut=;loc=3.63.1

[George S.]

What the greeks and macedonians were a distinct people totally different.Just for your information alexander didn't use the greeks to fight for him agains't persia.There were more greeks in the persian forces fighting agains't alexander than he had in his army.He decided that it was going to be a MACEDONIAN glory only thats why he didn't use greeks.Hello surprise mention of greeks as a different race to macedonians.SO Agamoi what are you trying to achieve you have been wrong in your claims.

[Agamoi Thytai]

Originally Posted by George S.

What the greeks and macedonians were a distinct people totally different.J

Whatever you say George, however this ancient author below, Dio Cassius, seems to consider them one in the same, while he describes how the population of the Greek colonies that had been established in Asia after Alexander the Great’s campaign and some centuries later fell under Persian rule, received the Roman governor of Syria Crassus who invaded the Parthian empire:

But Crassus, desiring for his part to accomplish something that involved glory and at the same time profit, and seeing that no such thing was possible in Syria, where the people themselves were quiet, and those who had formerly warred against the Romans were by reason of their powerlessness causing no disturbance, made a campaign against the Parthians. He had no complaint to bring against them nor had the war been assigned to him; but he heard that they were exceedingly wealthy and expected that Orodes would be easy to capture, because he was but newly established. Therefore he crossed the Euphrates and advanced far into Mesopotamia, devastating and ravaging the country. For since his crossing was unexpected by the barbarians no careful guard of the ford had been kept. Consequently Silaces, then satrap of that region, was quickly defeated near Ichnae, a fortress so named, after contending with a few horsemen; and being wounded, he retired to report personally to the king the Romans' invasion. Crassus, on his side, quietly won over the garrisons and especially the Greek cities, among them one named Nicephorium. For colonists, in great numbers descendands of the Macedonians and of the other Greeks who had campaigned in Asia with them, readily transferred their allegiance to the Romans, since they were oppressed by the violence of the barbarians , and placed strong hopes in the invaders, whom they regarded as friends of the Greeks.

Dio Cassius, “Roman history”, book 40, 13.1
http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/...s_Dio/40*.html

[Philosopher]

Originally Posted by Agamoi Thytai

Whatever you say George, however this ancient author below, Dio Cassius, seems to consider them one in the same, while he describes how the population of the Greek colonies that had been established in Asia after Alexander the Great’s campaign and some centuries later fell under Persian rule, received the Roman governor of Syria Crassus who invaded the Parthian empire:

But Crassus, desiring for his part to accomplish something that involved glory and at the same time profit, and seeing that no such thing was possible in Syria, where the people themselves were quiet, and those who had formerly warred against the Romans were by reason of their powerlessness causing no disturbance, made a campaign against the Parthians. He had no complaint to bring against them nor had the war been assigned to him; but he heard that they were exceedingly wealthy and expected that Orodes would be easy to capture, because he was but newly established. Therefore he crossed the Euphrates and advanced far into Mesopotamia, devastating and ravaging the country. For since his crossing was unexpected by the barbarians no careful guard of the ford had been kept. Consequently Silaces, then satrap of that region, was quickly defeated near Ichnae, a fortress so named, after contending with a few horsemen; and being wounded, he retired to report personally to the king the Romans' invasion. Crassus, on his side, quietly won over the garrisons and especially the Greek cities, among them one named Nicephorium. For colonists, in great numbers descendands of the Macedonians and of the other Greeks who had campaigned in Asia with them, readily transferred their allegiance to the Romans, since they were oppressed by the violence of the barbarians , and placed strong hopes in the invaders, whom they regarded as friends of the Greeks.

Dio Cassius, “Roman history”, book 40, 13.1
http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/...s_Dio/40*.html

In my opinion, and I can only speak for himself, there was a growing confusion and divide in the ancient world.

The geographic proximity between Greeks and Macedonians is part of the problem. However, I suspect a larger problem is that the elite in Macedonian society, and especially government officials, matured into "non-ethnic Greeks". They were Hellenized early, and this Hellenization became more pronounced over time.

A written Macedonian language was dearth. Clearly, there is evidence from ancient writings that there was a Macedonian language which was barbarian to Greeks. And it is so-called by Demosthenes. Very early on, neither the Greeks nor the Macedonians saw the Macedonians as Greek.

This cannot possibly be disputed.

However, over time, the growing divide between the common Macedonian and the Macedonian elite, the geographical proximity between the two peoples, and the use of Greek in the Mediterranean have all led to a conflicting and contradictory hodgepodge of literary data. This problem was only compounded largely due to the fact that the Macedonians left no writings of their own, or if they have, they were lost. So we must rely on predominately Greek and Roman writers.

I suspect strongly it is for this reason that ancient writers considered Macedonians to be both Greeks and non-Greeks. Over time, however, they were almost universally regarded as Greeks.

But, as Borza et al, have documented, very early on, neither Greeks nor Macedonians believed Macedonians to be Greeks.

Would you agree with this Agamoi Thytai?

Does anyone agree or disagree with this analysis?

[George S.]

ridicule by greeks is the order of the day.Ok agamoi what ever i say.Which places did paul go to macedonia and greece .Why make a distinction.???Why were the ati macedonian wars????waged by greece and rome.Under rome macedonia was a seperate province to greece.
Also why were people banished from athens for their non greekness.
You got no leg to stand on.If macedonia was is greek WHY THE NEED TO GO IN 1912 UNDER THE GUISE of LIBERATING IT FROM TURKS.????You called the indigenous population ENDOPI.Your a fool and a thief for thinking otherwise.
P{ure and utter bullshit from you.
Thats why yuou got no basis for your claims only that macedonians spoke greek.Pure and utter popycock.Greece tried to change texts proving that macedonians aren't greeks.
Also why did the greeks wait 2000 years to become a country in 1832.After being city states macedonia was never a city state.It was different a kingdom with a king.
Macedonia had nothing in common with the greeks a different RACE of people.
Agamoi you don't know what you are talking about.
Alexander did not use the greeks in their army as he only used macedonians they didn't trust the greeks.There was more greeks used against him in the persian army than he had in his entourage.The greeks were not used but put back in his entourage.The grereks were not used in the macedonian army there is plenty of evidence of that.It was said in the army macedonian was spoken NOT GREEK .
Explain to me if macedonians spoke greek why did they not speak greek in alexanders army.YOu choose to gloss this.THe soldiers and commanders PREFFERED to speak IN THEIR MOTHER TOUNGE which was MACEDONIAN.END OF STORY you got no leg to stand on.YOU merely MISAPPROPRIATE what is not YOURS.I call that STEALING.
IF macedonia was yours why the need to go in 1912 why???why?? THERE WAS AN INDIGENOUS POPULATION THE TURLKS CALLED THEM what ...mACEDONIANS.
aGAMOI YOU ARE JUST a puppet for your greek govt.The truth speaks louder and volumes.Your version
is full of errors and ommissions.Think about it i know i'm right.
Yes agamoi go and refute or claims and above all ridicule our coia as well tools of trade.laims as well and don't forget the paranoia are all tools of trade by the greeks.

[Agamoi Thytai]

Originally Posted by Philosopher

A written Macedonian language was dearth. Clearly, there is evidence from ancient writings that there was a Macedonian language which was barbarian to Greeks.

There is actually not even a single one quote from ancient texts that could be considered as irrefutable proof of the existence of a distinct Macedonian language. Some references to Alexander or other Macedonians "speaking Macedonian" -μακεδονιστί or μακεδονίζων τη φωνή in Greek (literally "speaking in Macedonian speech")-can no way considered as such given that Greek authors often use the same expressions for known Greek dialects too. That is, one can also find phrases like "speaking Boetian, Laconian, Thessalian" e.t.c. with similar adverbs or participles, βοιωτιστί/βοιωτίζων τη φωνή, λακωνιστί/λακωνίζων τη φωνή, θεσσαλιστί/θεσσαλίζων τη φωνή e.t.c. So "speaking Macedonian" could refer both to a certain dialect of Greek or a distinct language, it's very disputable. Even the quote from the famous Philotas affair, where Philotas says to Alexander "I will use the same language with you (Attic Greek) because besides Macedonians there are many other people here who will more readily understand me" is of not great significance, since similar expression were also used by ancient authors for other Greek dialects too. F. i., Pausanias writes of the Boetian poetess Corinna and her native dialect she used in her poems as opposed to the Doric dialect of her rival, the great poet Pindar that "she composed, not in Doric speech like Pindar, but in one Aeolians would understand".
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/...%3Asection%3D3

Originally Posted by Philosopher

And it is so-called by Demosthenes.

As far as I know, Demosthenes didn't write anything on the Macedonian language.

Originally Posted by Philosopher

Very early on, neither the Greeks nor the Macedonians saw the Macedonians as Greek.
This cannot possibly be disputed.

Very early on, we have Herodotus' testimony that Macedonians were Greek. And even earlier, we have this:

"Hesiod certainly thought them to be Greek-speaking; otherwise he would not have made Magnes and Macedon into cousins of Dorus, Xouthus and Aeolus,who were the eponymous ancestors of the three main forms of the Greek language (Dorian, Ionian and Aeolian).Hellanicus, writing late in the fifth century,made Macedon a son of Aeolus; he would not have done so unless he had supposed the Macedones to be speakers of some form of Aeolic Greek.As the twin people,the Magnetes,did speak an Aeolic dialect (this we know from inscriptions),there is no good reason to deny that the Macedones spoke an Aeolic dialect,retarded indeed and broad…”
http://books.google.com/books?id=0qAoqP4g1fEC&pg=PA285

Note that all these mythical figures, Dorus, Aeolus and Xuthus were regarded as the progenitors of the main Greek tribes, the Dorians, the Aeolians and the Ionians respectivelly, so Greek authors wouldn't that easily consider Macedonians as so close relatives of them if they had any doubts of their Greekness.

Originally Posted by Philosopher

Would you agree with this Agamoi Thytai

I respect your personal view however I disagree.

[Agamoi Thytai]

Originally Posted by George S.

ridicule by greeks is the order of the day.Ok agamoi what ever i say.Which places did paul go to macedonia and greece .Why make a distinction.???

The Macedonian places he visited were Philippoi, Amphipolis, Thessaloniki and Verria. All perfect Greek names.

Originally Posted by George S.

Why were the ati macedonian wars????waged by greece and rome.Under rome macedonia was a seperate province to greece.

There also were anti-Athenian and anti-Spartan wars. Greeks didn't like anyone who tried to deprive them of their city-state self government sytem.

Originally Posted by George S.

Also why were people banished from athens for their non greekness.

Who banished whom, I didn't get you.

Originally Posted by George S.

You got no leg to stand on.If macedonia was is greek WHY THE NEED TO GO IN 1912 UNDER THE GUISE of LIBERATING IT FROM TURKS.????

Because the Turks were not that eager to cede Macedonia to Greece or any other Balkan country.

Originally Posted by George S.

You called the indigenous population ENDOPI.

"Endopios" is a term coined by Pontians and other refugees to denote all indigenous Christian population they encountered in the places of Macedonia where they settled, so it was applied to the indigenous Greek-speaking population of Macedonia too. It's not an ethnic term.

Originally Posted by George S.

Also why did the greeks wait 2000 years to become a country in 1832.

Well, for 2000 years there didn't exist either a state called Macedonia.

Originally Posted by George S.

After being city states macedonia was never a city state.It was different a kingdom with a king.

So was Thessaly and Epirus and Cyprus and some other Greek regions too.

Originally Posted by George S.

It was said in the army macedonian was spoken NOT GREEK .
Explain to me if macedonians spoke greek why did they not speak greek in alexanders army.YOu choose to gloss this.THe soldiers and commanders PREFFERED to speak IN THEIR MOTHER TOUNGE which was MACEDONIAN.END OF STORY you got no leg to stand on.

Where did you get this info from? Certainly not from ancient sources. I f Greek was not spoken in the Macedonian army, then with whom would converse in that language those 30000 Persians that Alexander enrolled and ordered to learn Greek?
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/...%3Asection%3D3
And how is it Arrian says this:

"Some of them advanced some distance inland, breaking away from the main force, some in pursuit of this, and some of that. There a man appeared to them, wearing a Greek cloak, and dressed otherwise in the Greek fashion, and speaking Greek also. Those who first sighted him said that they burst into tears, so strange did it seem after all these miseries to see a Greek, and to hear Greek spoken. They asked whence he came, who he was; and he said that he had become separated from Alexander's camp, and that the camp, and Alexander himself, were not very far distant. Shouting aloud and clapping their hands they brought this man to Nearchus; and he told Nearchus everything, and that the camp and the King himself were distant five days' journey from the coast."
http://books.google.gr/books?id=q46_V5A4LNcC&pg=PA40

Originally Posted by George S.

YOU merely MISAPPROPRIATE what is not YOURS.I call that STEALING.
IF macedonia was yours why the need to go in 1912 why???why?? THERE WAS AN INDIGENOUS POPULATION THE TURLKS CALLED THEM what ...mACEDONIANS.

Besides the indigenous population you are talking about, there was also a Greek indigenous population in Macedonia that wished to be liberated from Greece and even assisted the Greek army fighting along it:

“In forming an opinion upon the series of excesses that marked the Bulgarian withdrawal from southeastern Macedonia,it is nessecary to recall the fact that the Bulgarians were ocuppying a country whose population is mainly Greek and Turkish.The Bulgarian garrisons were small,and they found themselves on the outbreak of the second war in a hostile country.The Greek population of these regions is wealthy and intensely patriotic.In several Greek centers insurgent organizations(andartes) existed.
Arms had been collected and some experienced guerrilla chiefs were believed to be in hiding,and ready to lead the local population.All of this in existing conditions was creditable to Greek patriotism;their race was at war with the Bulgarians,and the more enterprising and courageous among them intented to take their share as auxiliaries of the Greek army in driving the Bulgarians from their country.
From a nationalist standpoint,this was morally their right,and some might even say their duty.But it is equally clear that the Bulgarians,wherever they found themselves opposed by the armed civil population,had also a right to take steps to protect themselves.The steps which they elected to take in some places grossly exceeded the limits of legitimate defense or allowable reprisal”.
http://www.archive.org/stream/report...ge/78/mode/1up

[Philosopher]

Originally Posted by Agamoi Thytai

There is actually not even a single one quote from ancient texts that could be considered as irrefutable proof of the existence of a distinct Macedonian language. Some references to Alexander or other Macedonians "speaking Macedonian" -μακεδονιστί or μακεδονίζων τη φωνή in Greek (literally "speaking in Macedonian speech")-can no way considered as such given that Greek authors often use the same expressions for known Greek dialects too. That is, one can also find phrases like "speaking Boetian, Laconian, Thessalian" e.t.c. with similar adverbs or participles, βοιωτιστί/βοιωτίζων τη φωνή, λακωνιστί/λακωνίζων τη φωνή, θεσσαλιστί/θεσσαλίζων τη φωνή e.t.c. So "speaking Macedonian" could refer both to a certain dialect of Greek or a distinct language, it's very disputable. Even the quote from the famous Philotas affair, where Philotas says to Alexander "I will use the same language with you (Attic Greek) because besides Macedonians there are many other people here who will more readily understand me" is of not great significance, since similar expression were also used by ancient authors for other Greek dialects too. F. i., Pausanias writes of the Boetian poetess Corinna and her native dialect she used in her poems as opposed to the Doric dialect of her rival, the great poet Pindar that "she composed, not in Doric speech like Pindar, but in one Aeolians would understand".
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/...%3Asection%3D3

As far as I know, Demosthenes didn't write anything on the Macedonian language.

Here is excerpt that accurately characterizes the language of the ancient Macedonians:

Badian describes some convincing cases in which Macedonian troops could not follow commands in Greek. For instance, during his argument with Clitus, which led to his good friend's death, at the end Alexander is said to have called for his guards in Macedonian when he felt his life threatened. Badian rejects the idea that this was a reversion to a more primitive part of his psyche, under stress. He prefers the simpler explanation that Alexander used the only language in which his guards could be addressed.

To establish his case, Badian quotes a surviving papyrus fragment that seems to be the only good source to reveal the facts of the infantry use of Macedonian. This fragment tells of a battle, early in 321 B.C., in which the Greek commander Ambiance faced the Macedonian Neoptolemus with his Macedonian phalanx. Wanting to have the Macedonians join him rather than fight him, Ambiance needed to convince them of his superior position. The story continues:

When Eumenues saw the close-locked formation of the Macedonian phalanx ... he sent Xennias once more, a man whose speech was Macedonian, bidding him declare that he would not fight them frontally but would follow them with his cavalry and units of light troops and bar them from provisions.

Badian tells us that Xennias' name reveals him to be a Macedonian. Since he was with Ambiance he was probably a Macedonian of superior status who spoke both standard Greek and his native language. Ambiance needed this interpreter to transmit his message. This means that the phalanx had to be addressed in Macedonian if they were going to understand. Ambiance did not address them himself, although this was the common way for leaders of the time, nor did he send a Greek. Badian concludes that Greek was a foreign tongue to the Macedonians. Similarly, Alexander used Macedonian to address his guards because it was their normal language, and he had to be sure he would be understood. It also seems clear that educated Greeks did not speak the Macedonian language unless (presumably) they had grown up with Macedonians and learned it from their childhood friends, as some of Alexander's Greek companions must have.

http://www.historyofmacedonia.org/An...nia/shea2.html

The Macedonian language was barbarian to the Greeks. That is why Demosthenes wrote:

"... 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, whence it was never yet possible to buy a decent slave".

Do you have any evidence that a Greek was called a barbarian, and not only no Greek, nor related to the Greeks?

Very early on, we have Herodotus' testimony that Macedonians were Greek. And even earlier, we have this:

"Hesiod certainly thought them to be Greek-speaking; otherwise he would not have made Magnes and Macedon into cousins of Dorus, Xouthus and Aeolus,who were the eponymous ancestors of the three main forms of the Greek language (Dorian, Ionian and Aeolian).Hellanicus, writing late in the fifth century,made Macedon a son of Aeolus; he would not have done so unless he had supposed the Macedones to be speakers of some form of Aeolic Greek.As the twin people,the Magnetes,did speak an Aeolic dialect (this we know from inscriptions),there is no good reason to deny that the Macedones spoke an Aeolic dialect,retarded indeed and broad…”
http://books.google.com/books?id=0qAoqP4g1fEC&pg=PA285

Note that all these mythical figures, Dorus, Aeolus and Xuthus were regarded as the progenitors of the main Greek tribes, the Dorians, the Aeolians and the Ionians respectivelly, so Greek authors wouldn't that easily consider Macedonians as so close relatives of them if they had any doubts of their Greekness.

I respect your personal view however I disagree.

Herodotus' does not testify that Macedonians were Greek at all.

Both Herodotus and Thucydides describe the Macedonians as foreigners, a distinct people living outside of the frontiers of the Greek city-states,

Eugene Borza - In the Shadow of Olympus p. 96.

In addition, according to Borza:

Moreover, the insistence that Alexander is a Greek, and descendant from Greeks, rubs against the spirit of Herodotus 7.130, who speaks of the Thessalians as the first Greeks to come under Persian submission--a perfect opportunity for Herodotus to point out that the Macedonians were a non Greek race ruled over by Greek kings, something he nowhere mentions.

[Philosopher]

Originally Posted by Agamoi Thytai

The Macedonian places he visited were Philippoi, Amphipolis, Thessaloniki and Verria. All perfect Greek names.

Yes, Agamoi Thytai, this is very true. However, for once, I would like you to be honest and consistent. To be fair, so are the names Iesous Christos (Jesus Christ), Philipos (Philip), Petros (Peter), Andreas (Andrew).

So are the names Romanos (Roman), Aiguptos, (Egypt), and Egeptheis (Egypt).

Sometimes, and in some instances, names and places are Hellenized, and sometimes the origin of a name or place may be Greek, but it does not make the person or location Greek.

From the context of the book of Acts, it clearly distinguishes Macedonia from Greece, as both were separate territories.

[Kalle]

Originally Posted by George S.

ridicule by greeks is the order of the day.Ok agamoi what ever i say.Which places did paul go to macedonia and greece .Why make a distinction.???Why were the ati macedonian wars????waged by greece and rome.Under rome macedonia was a seperate province to greece.
Also why were people banished from athens for their non greekness.
You got no leg to stand on.If macedonia was is greek WHY THE NEED TO GO IN 1912 UNDER THE GUISE of LIBERATING IT FROM TURKS.????You called the indigenous population ENDOPI.Your a fool and a thief for thinking otherwise.
P{ure and utter bullshit from you.
Thats why yuou got no basis for your claims only that macedonians spoke greek.Pure and utter popycock.Greece tried to change texts proving that macedonians aren't greeks.
Also why did the greeks wait 2000 years to become a country in 1832.After being city states macedonia was never a city state.It was different a kingdom with a king.
Macedonia had nothing in common with the greeks a different RACE of people.
Agamoi you don't know what you are talking about.
Alexander did not use the greeks in their army as he only used macedonians they didn't trust the greeks.There was more greeks used against him in the persian army than he had in his entourage.The greeks were not used but put back in his entourage.The grereks were not used in the macedonian army there is plenty of evidence of that.It was said in the army macedonian was spoken NOT GREEK .
Explain to me if macedonians spoke greek why did they not speak greek in alexanders army.YOu choose to gloss this.THe soldiers and commanders PREFFERED to speak IN THEIR MOTHER TOUNGE which was MACEDONIAN.END OF STORY you got no leg to stand on.YOU merely MISAPPROPRIATE what is not YOURS.I call that STEALING.
IF macedonia was yours why the need to go in 1912 why???why?? THERE WAS AN INDIGENOUS POPULATION THE TURLKS CALLED THEM what ...mACEDONIANS.
aGAMOI YOU ARE JUST a puppet for your greek govt.The truth speaks louder and volumes.Your version
is full of errors and ommissions.Think about it i know i'm right.
Yes agamoi go and refute or claims and above all ridicule our coia as well tools of trade.laims as well and don't forget the paranoia are all tools of trade by the greeks.

George you wanted me to declare something in some other posts? What did you mean by that? Do you want my SS# or my memoirs or something else?

Please tell if your feel insecure about yourself for me just referencing what the most recognized museums , universities and historians in the world states (including the ones in Australia). Then I will post no more in this forum.

For me it is kind of odd that you just post here and not in like wikipedia. Not even the part of Australian Macedonians support what you states(look at the history section). There is a discussion page. Maybe you can post your ideas/opinions there? Dont start with Wiki is just propaganda etc. This is what the people of the world knows about you. This is not only what you see in Wiki but also what you can read in the most recognized universities in the world.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macedonian_Australian

It is fascinating that some amateur historians have rewritten 4000 years of history. But those ideas have not even reached the wiki page for their own diaspora.