|
Post by Niklianos on Jan 12, 2008 1:10:56 GMT -5
I would really like the debate over weather or not the Ancient Macedonians were something other than Greek!? So what I want to know from our Albanian friends and our Slav friends who call themselves Macedonian is what HARD FACTS can you present that supports your claims? 1)Can you provide a single inscription other than Greek from Ancient Macedonia? 2)Can you show a single ancient source that pronounces or spells Alexanders name different from Alexandros? I don't want to see anything stemming from the translation of "Makedonisti" as meaning ONLY language or from Demosthenes calling Philip a barbarian, which can easily be dismissed as purely political. I want to see archaeological and epigraphical evidence to support your claims, not theories, interpretations of opinions. So please let's settle this once and for all and provide your proof that cannot be interpreted differently.
|
|
rex362
Senior Moderator
Pellazg
PELASGIANILLYROALBANIAN
Posts: 19,058
|
Post by rex362 on Jan 12, 2008 13:04:15 GMT -5
I'm a simple villager and I will just ask you your 2 items ...a questions for your question
1)Can you provide a single inscription other than Greek from Ancient Macedonia?
Can you read and understand any of it ?
2)Can you show a single ancient source that pronounces or spells Alexanders name different from Alexandros?
Do any Ancient Macedonian peoples names exist anywhere else at that time ??
|
|
|
Post by Teuta1975 on Jan 12, 2008 13:42:09 GMT -5
Before starting a debate weather or not the acnient Macedonians were something other then Greek, we'd have to first estabilish: 1. Clarify the term barbar 2. Which period are you referring? 3. How do you prove something only by one aspect? (I mean, are we going to use only Greek archeological inscriptions found in Macedonia or other elements such historians' speeches etc, ethnos etc) 4. Clarify if in one place some Greek Dorian stone marbles are found, does it means this place is (was) Greek? Or was Hellenised due to the intermixture of cultures? Or conquered and Hellenized? And what I want is a fair debate, without political or territory stupidities (as if we were to divide Balkan...who listen to us anyway?) but an historical and impartial debate, with historical prooves and after the proves, we can have analysis. In the end, that's why proves are for! Again refer to my questions: which historical period are we referring about? That's how this article should be started: ALEXANDER or MACEDONIANS? Decide who shall we start discussing: Macedonians first and then Alex (at least that would be my preference) Here you are doing what should be done in the end: analysis! Can you provide some more proves that he (and his friend) had political reasons and why? (No that I don't know for we have discussed in Network54 together these issues and more, but as to refresh the memory ;D) Oh, if there is no archeological evidence but there is historical evidence, then you must decide if you accept ONLY archeological and nothing else?! And if yes, I can give you some Greek temples in places where Alex. went. Some Greek inscriptions in those places and you can claim them as Greeks. So, chose what are you going to accept: archeological Poves ONLY? I love your optimism... But we can't settle it once and for all...and that's the beauty of it...
|
|
|
Post by leandros nikon on Jan 12, 2008 13:45:09 GMT -5
come on Rex,of course we can...many words...but you cant...
yes,of course...elsewhere in Greece...some variations though,because of the local dialect...fereniki becomes vereniki and phillipos villipos...
|
|
|
Post by leandros nikon on Jan 12, 2008 13:51:48 GMT -5
some people say that macedonia was greek since the beggining...others that it was foreign and became hellenised...others that it was partly hellenic with some thracoillyrian minority which was assimilated during the period of Alexander and Phillip...i dont really care allthough i do believe that basically it was a doric greek region...the basic fact that really matters is that ancient macedonia was a part of the Hellenic world whether you like it or not...
|
|
rex362
Senior Moderator
Pellazg
PELASGIANILLYROALBANIAN
Posts: 19,058
|
Post by rex362 on Jan 12, 2008 14:08:02 GMT -5
"come on Rex,of course we can...many words...but you cant..."
and you make history with the 15 words you think you make sense of ...
"yes,of course...elsewhere in Greece...some variations though,because of the local dialect...fereniki becomes vereniki and phillipos villipos..."
but after their greatness
|
|
|
Post by leandros nikon on Jan 12, 2008 15:17:05 GMT -5
;D
|
|
|
Post by albanesehoney on Jan 12, 2008 18:35:07 GMT -5
|
|
Kanaris
Amicus
This just in>>>> Nobody gives a crap!
Posts: 9,589
|
Post by Kanaris on Jan 12, 2008 19:11:11 GMT -5
New Albania Inc.
|
|
Kanaris
Amicus
This just in>>>> Nobody gives a crap!
Posts: 9,589
|
Post by Kanaris on Jan 12, 2008 21:40:35 GMT -5
What the hell are you mumbling about....? That supposed to be me laughing.....
Gee...don't be so dense...
|
|
|
Post by Teuta1975 on Jan 12, 2008 23:12:55 GMT -5
Canaris...you look gorgious in that picture...
|
|
Kanaris
Amicus
This just in>>>> Nobody gives a crap!
Posts: 9,589
|
Post by Kanaris on Jan 13, 2008 0:36:38 GMT -5
Canaris...you look gorgious in that picture... You like my tinnny pony tail...?
|
|
|
Post by Teuta1975 on Jan 13, 2008 1:09:06 GMT -5
Actually I am wondering what are you eating?
PS: little make up, and I will propose you to be Mister Forum!!!
|
|
|
Post by Niklianos on Jan 13, 2008 18:14:38 GMT -5
This is my thread and I am not going to discuss the "Questionable" evidence! We have gone around and around in circles on all the questionable evidence, so now I want to focus SOLELY on the Archaeology of the subject.
|
|
|
Post by Niklianos on Jan 13, 2008 18:46:43 GMT -5
Before starting a debate weather or not the acnient Macedonians were something other then Greek, we'd have to first estabilish: 1. Clarify the term barbar 2. Which period are you referring? 3. How do you prove something only by one aspect? (I mean, are we going to use only Greek archeological inscriptions found in Macedonia or other elements such historians' speeches etc, ethnos etc) 4. Clarify if in one place some Greek Dorian stone marbles are found, does it means this place is (was) Greek? Or was Hellenised due to the intermixture of cultures? Or conquered and Hellenized? And what I want is a fair debate, without political or territory stupidities (as if we were to divide Balkan...who listen to us anyway?) but an historical and impartial debate, with historical prooves and after the proves, we can have analysis. In the end, that's why proves are for! Again refer to my questions: which historical period are we referring about? That's how this article should be started: ALEXANDER or MACEDONIANS? Decide who shall we start discussing: Macedonians first and then Alex (at least that would be my preference) Here you are doing what should be done in the end: analysis! Can you provide some more proves that he (and his friend) had political reasons and why? (No that I don't know for we have discussed in Network54 together these issues and more, but as to refresh the memory ;D) Oh, if there is no archeological evidence but there is historical evidence, then you must decide if you accept ONLY archeological and nothing else?! And if yes, I can give you some Greek temples in places where Alex. went. Some Greek inscriptions in those places and you can claim them as Greeks. So, chose what are you going to accept: archeological Poves ONLY? I love your optimism... But we can't settle it once and for all...and that's the beauty of it... Historical evidence can only be supported by the Archaeology! So what Archaeology does is CONFIRM the historical evidence. Without the Archaeology the historical evidence cannot be tested as is the requirement in any scientific field! So I want to know what Archaeological evidence do you have to support what you claim? We are discussing the Macedonians in general. Alexander is a Macedonian(at least 1/2) and so he is included. I am talking about the times of 1400 B.C.E. - the period of Macedonian Expansion under Alexander I and even Philip II. As for your question #4. In the case of the Macedonians the Dorian evidence(linguistical/epigraphical) does prove the Greek side considering there are NO DORIANS who neighbor the Macedonians and no Dorian colonies. So there could only be one logical conclusion; that the Dorians must have always been there and that the Macedonians may be a branch of the Dorians. Language is not something that is normally borrowed culturally(except for a handfull of words), unlike architecture or art forms. For question #3. We are only going to discuss and provide the archaeological evidence that SUPPORTS the evidence from all sides. This also includes the Archaeological evidence uncovered in FYROM and Bulgaria not just Greece, this way there can be no claim that there is a big Greek conspiracy that hides the supposed "real" evidence. The term 'barbarian' has no relevance considering Demosthenes can easily be dismissed as political banter. So, one FINAL time this thread is to only be on the Archaeological evidence which supports your claims. Without it your claims are only 'theory' poor at that considering that your claims can not be tested scientifically! No discussion of the following. 1)Barbarian 2)Makedonisti UNLESS and I say UNLESS you have archaeological evidence that supports your interpretation of the historical evidence! Please don't dilute this thread with all the b.s. 1) I want everyone to bring forth any epigraphical(inscriptions) evidence which is written on stone, lead, wood, papyrus and so on that supports another language other than Greek as the 'mother-tongue' of the Ancient Macedonians.2) I want archaeological evidence such as burial customs, architecture, art, Gods, etc brought forth that supports your interpretation of the Historical(written) evidence.Remember Historical means 'Written History' otherwise it is called 'prehistory'. This is the great thing about Archaeology. It brings forth evidence other than historical text and can support those historical text.
|
|
|
Post by Niklianos on Jan 13, 2008 18:48:45 GMT -5
Albhoney,
please don't bring that stuff to this thread. This thread is for Archaeological evidence that supports your interpretation of the historical evidence.
This goes for everyone!
And Rex, yes I can understand the vast majority of what is written on Ancient Macedonian inscriptions!
|
|
|
Post by albanesehoney on Jan 13, 2008 22:27:20 GMT -5
The Pella curse tablet is a curse or magic spell inscribed on a lead scroll, dating to the 4th or 3rd century BC. It was found in Pella (at the time capital of Macedon) in 1986 and published in the Hellenic Dialectology Journal in 1993. It is possibly the only attested text in the ancient Macedonian language (O. Masson). Text.. 1. On the formal wedding of Thetima and Dionysophon I write a curse, and of all other 2. wo[men], widows and virgins, but of Thetima in particular, and I entrust upon Makron and 3. [the] demons that only whenever I dig out and unroll and re-read this, 4. [then] may they wed Dionysophon, but not before; and may he never wed any woman but me; 5. and may grow old with Dionysophon, and no one else. I [am] your supplicant: 6. Have mercy on [your dear one], dear demons, Dagina(?), for I am abandoned of all my dear ones. 7. But please keep this for my sake so that these events do not happen and wretched Thetima perishes miserably 8. and to me grant happiness and bliss.
link
This is why linguists take several remarks by the authors of ancient dictionaries, which otherwise might have been interpreted as indications for a mere difference in dialect, very seriously.
For example, there is evidence that Greeks were unable to understand people who were makedonizein, "speaking Macedonian". The Macedonian king Alexander the Great was not understood by the Greeks when he shouted an order in his native tongue and the Greek commander Eumenes needed a translator to address the soldiers of the Macedonian phalanx. The Greek orators Thrasymachus of Chalcedon and Demosthenes of Athens called Macedonian kings like Archelaus and Philip II barbarians, which prima facie means that they did not speak Greek. Now this happens in polemical contexts and is certainly exaggerated, but the statements need to refer to some kind of linguistic reality.
We know frustratingly little about the Macedonian language/dialect. For instance, we don't know anything about its grammar or syntaxis. We do not even know whether the Macedonians spoke one language at all; many societies, now and then, have more than one language. All we have is a set of about 150 words that were recognized as Macedonian in Antiquity, many of which are derived from a Macedonian-to-Greek dictionary by a man named Amerias. These 150 words can be divided into two groups:
Words that have a counterpart in Greek. For example,
the Macedonian title Nikatôr ("victor") is obviously the equivalent of Greek Nikêtêr. Usually, the Macedonian words are voiced and lack aspiration whereas Greek words are voiceless and aspirated: for example, Greek aithêr is the equivalent of Macedonian adê ("sky"). Words that do not resemble a Greek word: sarissa ("lance"), abagna ("rose"), peliganes ("senate").
It is certain that these words are Indo-European. link
MACEDONIAN NOBLES RESISTANCE AND THE MACEDONIAN LANGUAGE During the reign of Alexander the Great, the Macedonians spoke their own native language, as the native language language of Alexander the Great was not understood by the ancient Greeks (Quintus Curtius Rufus, VI, 9, 37 ). Similarly, Plutarch points out that Alexander spoke to his fellow countrymen in Macedonian: "he [Alexander] called out aloud to his guards in the Macedonian language, which was a certain sign of some great disturbance in him" (Plutarch, Alexander, 51). Still, Alexander spoke also Greek, loved Homer, and respected his tutor Aristotle. At the same time though, there is much evidence that generally he was not fond of the Greeks of his day. The chronicler Curtius, describing the atmosphere before a battle, gave a notion of the different attitudes of the great commander, who psychognostically applied the principle of identity to every ethnic group in his army. In respect to the various motives for taking part in that war, Curtius wrote:
"Riding to the front line he [Alexander the Great] named the soldiers and they responded from spot to spot where they were lined up. The Macedonians, who had won so many battles in Europe and set off to invade Asia ... got encouragement from him - he reminded them of their permanent values. They were the world's liberators and one day they would pass the frontiers set by Hercules and Patter Liber. They would subdue all races on Earth. Bactrius and India would become Macedonian provinces. Getting closer to the Greeks, he reminded them that those were the people who provoked war with Greece, ... those were the people that burned their temples and cities ... As the Illirians and Trakians lived mainly from plunder, he told them to look at the enemy line glittering in gold ..."
Q. C. Rufus, Alexander III, 10, 4-10 After all, he thoroughly destroyed Thebes. Therefore, his empire is correctly called Macedonian, not Greek, for he won it with an army of 35,000 Macedonians and only 7,600 Greeks.
Alexander's increasingly Oriental behavior led to trouble with Macedonian nobles and some Greeks. In 330 BC a series of allegations was brought against some of Alexander's officers concerning a plot to murder him. Alexander tortured and executed his friend, Philotas (commander of the cavalry) the accused leader of the conspiracy, and several other high-ranking officials in order to eliminate the possibility of an attempt on his life. The question of the use of the ancient Macedonian language was raised by Alexander himself during the trial of Philotas. Alexander has said to Philotas:
"'The Macedonians are about to pass judgment upon you; I wish to know whether you will use their native tongue in addressing them.' Philotas replied: 'Besides the Macedonians there are many present who, I think, will more easily understand what I shall say if I use the same language which you have employed.' Than said the king: '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 whatever way he desires, provided that you remember that he holds out customs in as much abhorrence as our language.'"
Quintus Curtius Rufus, Alexander, VI. ix. 34-36 The trial of Philotas took place in Asia before a multiethnic public, which has accepted Greek as their common language. Alexander spoke Macedonian with his conationals, but used Greek in addressing West Asians. Like Illirian and Tracian, ancient Macedonian was not recorded in writing. However, on the bases of about a hundred glosses, Macedonian words noted and explained by Greek writers, some place names from Macedonia, and a few names of individuals, most scholars believe that ancient Macedonian was a separate Indo-European language. Evidence from phonology indicates that the ancient Macedonian language was distinct from ancient Greek and closer to the Tracian and Illirian languages.
Another old-fashioned noble, Cleitus, was killed by Alexander himself in a drunken brawl. Heavy drinking was a cherished tradition at the Macedonian court when Alexander ran him through with a spear. Although he mourned his friend excessively and nearly committed suicide when he realized what he had done, all of Alexander's associates thereafter feared his paranoia and dangerous temper. Alexander next demanded that Europeans follow the Oriental etiquette of prostrating themselves before the king - which he knew was regarded as an act of worship by Greeks. But resistance by Macedonian officers and by the Greek Callisthenes (a nephew of Aristotle who had joined the expedition as the official historian of the crusade) defeated the attempt. The Greek Callisthenes was soon executed on a charge of conspiracy.
As the Macedonians marched into Parthia, the tone of the journey changed. Alexander had adopted the Persian style of dress, rather than his traditional Macedonian clothing, and his troops were unhappy with him. After all, up until that point, the Macedonian soldiers respected him immensly, as they saw him as a partner working for the common good of all Macedonians, the nobles and the masses. He was well known for calling on his fellow countrymen to join him in battle by their own will:
"However he told them he would keep none of them with him against their will, they might go if they pleased; he should merely enter his protest, that when on his way to make the Macedonians the masters of the world, he was left alone with a few friends and volunteers. This is almost word for word as he wrote in a letter to Antipater, where he adds, that when he had thus spoken to them, they all cried out, they would go along with him whithersoever it was his pleasure to lead them."
Not Greek...
|
|
|
Post by Arxileas on Jan 13, 2008 22:31:57 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Arxileas on Jan 13, 2008 22:32:48 GMT -5
Too bad the FYROMians wern't there till the 600 AD.........Thousand plus odd years after Alexandros the man himself....
|
|
|
Post by Teuta1975 on Jan 14, 2008 13:37:53 GMT -5
Do we have any archeologic ruins left for Dorians as to know if they were Greeks? I really don't know. The Dorians -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Legends which survived among the Dorians and which have come down to us through Pindar, Herodotus and other ancient writers, say that the earliest ancestors of the Dorians were Makednoi (that is, Macedonians), who migrated to Doris from Pindos, more precisely from the Lakmos region. Since it has already been seen that the Dorians took their name from Doris, where they formed themselves into one ethnic group by the union of the local inhabitants and the newcomers, it can readily be inferred that the name Makednoi and the mention of Pindos as their original homeland do not refer to the whole of the Dorian tribe but just to one of its component groups - not the Hylleis, however, because these had settled in present-day Sterea Hellas earlier. Ancient texts containing echoes of fragments of a very old lost epic about Aigimios say that the Dorians stood in danger of attack by the Lapiths, that the king of the Dorians, Aigimios, sought the help of Herakles in return for the reward mentioned above, and that Herakles repulsed the Lapiths and established the Dorians in a region from which he had driven out the Dryopians. It follows that the race which was led by Aigimios and helped by Herakles was not yet the Dorians but the Makednians. Herakles here is no more than the representative of a people in central Sterea Hellas. One of the texts mentioned above says that Aigimios people at the time of the Lapith attacks were in Histiaiotis; others imply that they had already reached the northern part of present-day Sterea Hellas. The second version must be the earlier one, because it tallies with the mention of the alliance of the people who are represented by Herakles. The mention of the Lapiths as enemies of the Dorians, i.e. the Makednians, does not conflict with this version since, as we have seen, there are traces of Lapith settlements in the Spercheios Valley. The Dorians of the historical period were divided into three tribes: Hylleis, Dymanes, and Pamphyloi. The eponymous heroes of the Dymanes and the Pamphyloi were believed to be the sons of Aigimios who had led the Dorians to Doris. The eponymous hero of the Hylleis was said to be the son of Herakles who had acquired one third of Aigimios kingdom for helping him against the Lapiths. Macedonia 's archeological map - three volumes of which have been published by the Macedonian Academy of Sciences and Arts - has recorded over 5,000 archeological sites in Macedonia. Very few of these are open to visitors, while the others have only been identified. The law does not allow unauthorized individuals to conduct archeological research without the approval and consent of the relevant institutions, which is the Republic Bureau for Cultural Monuments' Protection and local municipal bureaus for monuments' protection. Individual research, which is an adventure for anyone, is possible in coordination with these institutions and with their consent. CHRONOLOGY Late Paleolithic period , 30,000 years BC. No sites have been registered so far, but numerous objects from this period have been discovered. Old Neolithic period , 6,000 years BC. The most famous sites that have been recorded and partly explored are Govrlevo and Madzari Tumba near Skopje and Amzabegovo in the Sveti Nikole and Stip area. Hellenic period : Trebeniste, Prentov Most (Ohrid area) Roman period : Heraklea and Stibera ( Bitola area), Stobi (Veles area), Astibo (Stip), Skupi ( Skopje ) Roman roads : Via Egnacia (linked the Adriatic and the Aegean Seas ) -- Dirahion-Struga-Ohrid- Bitola -Gradsko-Demir Kapija-Idomene Via Aksija (Via Militaris) – a military road that connected the Kumanovo-Pcinja area with Gevgelija and linked on to Via Egnacia. Via Dijagonalis – a diagonal road between Kicevo and Skupi There are mostly Greek ruins in FYrom BECAUSE OF Hellenization in a later period................That's why we need other approaches...(also we know pelazgians existed, but what archeological proves do we have from them?) And UNLESS you give me some archeological evidence that suport the interpretation of Dorians as Greeks (I am really ignorant in here... ) Again: how can a NON-written language be found written??? We are discussing about the spoken language of MAcedonians because the written language was obviously Greek when they started to write and adopt it. Let's try together... Historical means what describes the events of a certain period without any passion or literary style (ex: Illiad is not History but Herodotus and Ptolemy are). Prehistory, the Contemporary history and all PERIODS of histories are included in History. Archeology are RUINS. Not the scripts. Because what we have left from Troy as archeological evidence is not any Troyan script for sure. And yet...still today people debate what language they spoke!!!
|
|