Slavopaionian propaganda video

[Bozur]

March 25, 2009
Slavopaionian propaganda video + Stephen Miller's excellent letter to Archaeology magazine

Last year, when the "Macedonian issue" was in the news, due to FYROM's NATO candidacy I proposed that the issue could be resolved if FYROM accepted a compromise in the "name issue" that would qualify "Macedonia" with an appropriate geographical disambiguating adjective.

Events since that time have further strengthened my belief that no compromise is possible any more with our neighbors to the north, who refuse to budge even to the slightest degree in their stubborn adherence to their invented identity.

If you are in doubt of the degree of irrationality present in FYROM, this official video in state TV will change your mind:



The part at 04:25 is especially strange, where the narrator announces that one of the three races of mankind are the "Whites-Macedonoids" who spread to the "Sea of Japan", but the whole thing has a lunatic vibe to it.

On a more positive note, Prof. Stephen G. Miller's letter to Archaeology magazine is a welcome scholarly demolition of the Slavomacedonians' invented history.

I opened the January/February issue of Archaeology today and eagerly turned to “A Letter from Macedonia” only to discover that it was actually a letter from ancient Paionia – the land north of Mt. Barmous and Mt. Orbelos. Livy’s account of the creation of the Roman province of Macedonia (45.29.7 and 12) makes clear that the Paionians lived north of those mountains (which form today the geographically natural northern limits of Greece) and south of the Dardanians who were in today’s Kosovo. Strabo (7. frag 4) is even more succinct in saying that Paionia was north of Macedonia and the only connection from one to the other was (and is today) through the narrow gorge of the Axios (or Vardar) River. In other words, the land which is described by Matthew Brunwasser in his “Owning Alexander” was Paionia in antiquity.


While it is true that those people were subdued by Philip II, father of Alexander, in 359 B.C. (Diodorus Siculus 16.4.2), they were never Macedonians and never lived in Macedonia. Indeed, Demosthenes (Olynthian 1.23) tells us that they were “enslaved” by the Macedonian Philip and clearly, therefore, not Macedonians. Isokrates (5.23) makes the same point. Likewise, for example, the Egyptians who were subdued by Alexander may have been ruled by Macedonians, including the famous Cleopatra, but they were never Macedonians themselves, and Egypt was never called Macedonia (and so far as I can tell does not seek that name today).

Certainly, as Thucydides (2.99) tells us, the Macedonians had taken over “a narrow strip of Paionia extending along the Axios river from the interior to Pella and the sea”. One might therefore understand if the people in the modern republic centered at Skopje called themselves Paionians and claimed as theirs the land described by Thucydides.

But why, instead, would the modern people of ancient Paionia try to call themselves Macedonians and their land Macedonia? Mr. Brunwasser (p. 55) touches on the Greek claims “that it implies ambitions over Greek territory” and he notes that “the northern province of Greece is also called Macedonia.” Leaving aside the fact that the area of that northern province of modern Greece has been called Macedonia for more than 2,500 years (see, inter alios, Herodotus 5.17; 7.128, et alibi), more recent history shows that the Greek concerns are legitimate. For example, a map produced in Skopje in 1992 (Figure 1) shows clearly the claim that Macedonia extends from there to Mt. Olympus in the south; that is, combining the ancient regions of Paionia and Macedonia into a single entity. The same claim is explicit on a pseudo-bank note of the Republic of Macedonia which shows, as one of its monuments, the White Tower of Thessalonike, in Greece (Figure 2). There are many more examples of calendars, Christmas cards, bumper-stickers, etc., that all make the same claim.

Further, Mr. Brunwasser has reported with approval (International Herald Tribune 10/1/08) the work of the “Macedonian Institute for Strategic Research 16:9”, the name of which refers “to Acts 16:9, a verse in the New Testament in which a Macedonian man appears to the Apostle Paul begging him: ‘Come over into Macedonia, and help us.’” But where did Paul go in Macedonia? Neapolis (Kavala), Philippi, Amphipolis, Apollonia, Thessaloniki, and Veroia (Acts 16:11-17:10) all of which are in the historic Macedonia, none in Paionia. What claim is being made by an Institute based in Skopje that names itself for a trip through what was Macedonia in antiquity and what is the northern province of Greece today?

I wonder what we would conclude if a certain large island off the southeast coast of the United States started to call itself Florida, and emblazoned its currency with images of Disney World and distributed maps showing the Greater Florida.
Certainly there was no doubt of the underlying point of “Macedonia” in the mind of U.S. Secretary of State Edward Stettinius on December 26, 1944, when he wrote:

..

“The Department [of State] has noted with considerable apprehension increasing propaganda rumors and semi-official statements in favor of an autonomous Macedonia, emanating principally from Bulgaria, but also from Yugoslav Partisan and other sources, with the implication that Greek territory would be included in the projected state. This government considers talk of Macedonian ”nation”, Macedonian “Fatherland”, or Macedonian “national consciousness” to be unjustified demagoguery representing no ethnic nor political reality, and sees in its present revival a possible cloak for aggressive intentions against Greece.”
[Source: U.S. State Department, Foreign Relations vol viii, Washington, D.C., Circular Airgram (868.014/26Dec1944)]

Mr. Brunwasser (a resident of Bulgaria), however, goes on to state, with apparent distain, that Greece claims “Alexander III of Macedon (Alexander the Great) . . . as Greek.”

This attitude mystifies me. What is there to “claim”? Alexander’s great-great-great grandfather, Alexander I, was certified as Greek at Olympia and, in the words of the father of history “I happen to know that [the forefathers of Alexander] are Greek” (Herodotus 5.22). Alexander’s father, Philip, won several equestrian victories at Olympia and Delphi (Plutarch, Alexander 4.9; Moralia 105A), the two most Hellenic of all the sanctuaries in ancient Greece where non-Greeks were not allowed to compete. If Philip was Greek, wasn’t his son also Greek?

When Euripides – who died and was buried in Macedonia (Thucydides apud Pal. Anth. 7.45; Pausanias 1.2.2; Diodorus Siculus 13.103) – wrote his play Archelaos in honor of the great-uncle of Alexander, did he write it in Slavic? When he wrote the Bacchai while at the court of Archelaos did he not write it in Greek even as it has survived to us? Or should we imagine that Euripides was a “Macedonian” who wrote in Slavic (at a date when that language is not attested) which was translated into Greek?

What was the language of instruction when Aristotle taught Alexander? What language was carried by Alexander with him on his expedition to the East? Why do we have ancient inscriptions in Greek in settlements established by Alexander as far away as Afghanistan, and none in Slavic? Why did Greek become the lingua franca in Alexander’s empire if he was actually a “Macedonian”? Why was the New Testament written in Greek rather than Slavic?

On page 57 of the so-called “Letter from Macedonia” there is a photograph of the author standing “before a bronze statue of Alexander the Great in the city of Prilep.” The statue is patently modern, but the question is whether the real historic Alexander could have read the Slavic inscription beneath his feet. Given the known historic posterity of Slavic to Greek, the answer is obvious.

While Mr. Brunwasser’s reporting of the archaeological work in Paionia is welcome, his adoption and promotion of the modern political stance of its people about the use of the name Macedonia is not only unwelcome, it is a disservice to the readers of Archaeology who are, I imagine, interested in historic fact. But then, the decision to propagate this historical nonsense by Archaeology – a publication of the Archaeological Institute of America - is a disservice to its own reputation.

Let it be said once more: the region of ancient Paionia was a part of the Macedonian empire. So were Ephesos and Tyre and Palestine and Memphis and Babylon and Taxila and dozens more. They may thus have become “Macedonian” temporarily, but none was ever “Macedonia”.

Allow me to end this exegesis by making a suggestion to resolve the question of the modern use of the name “Macedonia.” Greece should annex Paionia – that is what Philip II did in 359 B.C. And that would appear to be acceptable to the modern residents of that area since they claim to be Greek by appropriating the name Macedonia and its most famous man. Then the modern people of this new Greek province could work on learning to speak and read and write Greek, hopefully even as well as Alexander did.


Sincerely,

Stephen G. Miller

Professor Emeritus,
University of California, Berkeley

PS: For a more complete examination of the ancient evidence regarding Paionia, see I. L. Merker,“The Ancient Kingdom of Paionia,” Balkan Studies 6 (1965) 35-54

My only disagreement with the good professor, is that the Slavs of FYROM do not merit either the name of Macedonians or of Paionians, since they have no ethnic link to either ancient people. They are in fact, largely Bulgarians, but since some of them don't like (or are afraid) to be called such, they should be called Slavopaionians, as is appropriate for Slavs inhabiting the ancient region of Paionia.

dienekes.blogspot.com/2009/03/slavopaionian-propaganda-video-stephen.html

[Shqipni13]

I wonder what Alex has to say about this? White Macedonoids, yellow mongoloids and black negroids everyone else are mulattos.....roflllll.

[Sokol]

Macedonia became a majority Slavic region from the 6th century onwards up until 1913, when it was divided and 51% of it was taken by the Greek state. Since that time Greece has embarked on a major Hellenisation project and sought to de-Slavicize the Macedonian territory it acquired in 1913. It has used a number of techniques - population swaps with neighbouring states, forced expulsion, forced assimilation, state discrimination against it's Slavic speakers etc etc. As a result of these policies, Greece's portion of Macedonia has largely been Hellenised, however a Slavic Macedonian minority still exists. They are mainly concentrated in cities such as Florina/Lerin, Voden/Edessa, and Kostur/Kastoria. This minority problem for Greece will not go away with the resolution of the name dispute....

[Sokol]

In the words of then Prime Minister Constantine Mitsotakis, in an interview to Economicos Tachydromos (19/8/1993):

“I understood the Skopje issue from the very beginning in its real dimension. What had concerned me from the very beginning was not the country’s name, which is related with the historical dimension of the problem and has mostly psychological and sentimental value. The problem for me was to avoid the emergence of a second minority problem in Western Macedonia. (...) For me, the aim had always been that that Republic should clearly state that there is no Slavomacedonian minority in Greece and to commit itself through international treaties to stop all irredentist propaganda against Greece. That was the key in the Greek-Skopjan dispute.”

[rex362]

Dec 18, 2011 23:55:29 GMT -5 Sokol said:

Macedonia became a majority Slavic region from the 6th century onwards up until 1913, when it was divided and 51% of it was taken by the Greek state. Since that time Greece has embarked on a major Hellenisation project and sought to de-Slavicize the Macedonian territory it acquired in 1913. It has used a number of techniques - population swaps with neighbouring states, forced expulsion, forced assimilation, state discrimination against it's Slavic speakers etc etc. As a result of these policies, Greece's portion of Macedonia has largely been Hellenised, however a Slavic Macedonian minority still exists. They are mainly concentrated in cities such as Florina/Lerin, Voden/Edessa, and Kostur/Kastoria. This minority problem for Greece will not go away with the resolution of the name dispute....

chento ....this same problem/dilemma we Albanians have as well with the greks ...but your map does not do the Albanian any justice up in todays northern greec and old deep southern Albania which is now in greece (Chameria )

[Sokol]

yes rex i know. the macedonians of greece currently have good co-operation with the vlachs, turks and pomaks. i'm not to sure about the albanians/arvanites though.

[Hellenas]

Dec 19, 2011 17:20:39 GMT -5 Sokol said:

i'm not to sure about the albanians/arvanites though.

Arvanites=Hellenes.

In anthropological studies of Theodoros K. Pizziou, the Aegean population Arvanites are different morphologically and to their characters compared with the Albanians. It states: "The examination of these groups (Arvanitofonon), one in Messenia, one and two in Argolis Korinthia showed that in no way stand out from the total population of the Peloponnese or from neighboring groups. In any of the ninety maps features designed not resemble each other more than with their neighboring geographical groups. Also, the statistical dendrogrammata, simultaneous comparison of several features not arvanitofones groups separated from the rest of the Peloponnese. This research shows that the Arvanites were only Hellenes.

Dr. Theodoros Pitsios received his graduate degree in Physical Anthropology, with a minor in Genetics and Paleontology, from the Johannes Gutenberg Universität of Mainz, in Germany, from which institution he was later awarded his PhD in Natural Sciences.

anthropology-museum.med.uoa.gr/1ceng.htm

The Arvanites have nothing to do with Albanians, the Arvanites came from Arvanon or Arvana of centeral/southern modern Albania. This area always called New Epiros and inhabited by Hellenic populations. The Albanian state is a construction of the big powers of that time(1912) and never before in history existed any country or any people in the Balkans called "Abania" or "Albanians"(only in Caucasos there is a country called Albania). Even the name "Albania" cames from the word "Albani" which means CHEAT.

Said the Arvanite Dr. of Literature Petros Fourikes.



The authors did not identify a sense of 'belonging to Albania or to the Albanian nation'.[5] Many Arvanites find the designation "Albanians" offensive as they identify nationally and ethnically as Greeks and not Albanians.[25]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arvanites

Arvanites in Greece nowadays=150.000 of whom 50.000 are bilinguals, Arvanite-speakers and Greek-speakers, the rest are only Greek-speakers.

Arvanites wikipedia(In Greek)

[rex362]

there is a awakening or Arvanitis in Greece at the moment

[darkernative]

This Hellenas dude must be retarded. I can swear that he has that article on ctrl+v... Stop posting shitty lies loser. Arvanites are 100% albanian. And you are afraid because they are slowly turning back to their roots.

Let me tell you near future.

Ilirida becomes are reality.
Southern Montenegro joins Albania
Chameria gains independence
Union between Kosova, Albania, Chameria and Ilirida.
Seperate Arvania in Peloponnesus (Athens, Attica, Mani, Psara, Hydra and other arvanite islands.
Greater Albania is accomplished.

[Hellenas]

Dec 20, 2011 14:20:21 GMT -5 @darkernative said:

Arvanites are 100% albanian.

ALBANO-VLAH FROM JANINA.

Like you are? LOL.

Don't forget PELASGIANILLYROALBANIAN...very Albanian too.

[darkernative]

Pelasgians are the original and the oldest inhabitants of the balkans. We are descended from them. If you "greeks" hadn't destroyed the oldest civilisation in Europe, all the balkans would still be speaking pelasgian.

[punisher]

Dec 20, 2011 15:55:45 GMT -5 @darkernative said:

Pelasgians are the original and the oldest inhabitants of the balkans. We are descended from them. If you "greeks" hadn't destroyed the oldest civilisation in Europe, all the balkans would still be speaking pelasgian.

brother welcome and may your stay enlighten us all.

[uz]

^ cause you need the most enlightening right...

[punisher]

Dec 20, 2011 16:33:09 GMT -5 @uz said:

^ cause you need the most enlightening right...

uzi,have you seen what for childish crap you're writing lately,it's embarassing for a 'man' of your age LOL

[Hellenas]

Dec 20, 2011 15:55:45 GMT -5 @darkernative said:

Pelasgians are the original and the oldest inhabitants of the balkans. We are descended from them. If you "greeks" hadn't destroyed the oldest civilisation in Europe, all the balkans would still be speaking pelasgian.

THE PELASGIANS-DIRECT ANCESTORS OF THE HELLENES.

Christos Mergoupis

Based on a number of classical quotes, that the Pelasgians were Hellenes (Greeks), and the direct ancestors of later Greek tribes. Some of the components of these theories are as follows:

That the term "barbarian" had a dual meaning. Aside from meaning "non-Hellenic," the term "barbarian" has been used by Greek tribes/city-states to deride other Greek tribes/city-states that were deemed unsophisticated in their use of the Hellenic language/culture (Foreigners and Barbarians). When Demosthenes of Athens attacked Philip II of Macedon, in the Third Philippic, Demosthenes deemed the Macedonians as non-Hellenic, unrelated to the Hellenes, and not even worthy of being deemed as "barbarians." The utilization of the term in many ancient Greek accounts is representative of the competition that existed among various Greek city-states, tribes, and civilizations.

From the dual meaning of the term "barbarian", some propose that when Herodotus deemed the Pelasgians as "barbaric", he did not imply that they were non-Hellenes. In support of this interpretation, these theorists point to the passage where Herodotus deems the Hellenes a branch of the Pelasgians (Herodotus on the Pelasgians and the Early Hellenes). Herodotus 1.57 concludes that the Athenians "changed language" when they "joined the Hellenic body"; but this may be open to different interpretations. Herodotus also tells of a war in which the Athenians expelled the Pelasgians from Attica to Lemnos. Yet, Herodotus is known for not distinguishing the difference between dialects and languages that are completely separate (Herodotus' Conception of Foreign Languages). As a result of the ambiguity of Herodotus in distinguishing languages from dialects, one can propose that the language of the Pelasgians was a "barbaric" (or unsophisticated) form of Hellenic as opposed to it being non-Hellenic.

That the autochthonous nature of the Athenians — an ancient belief to which Herodotus, Isocrates, Plutarch and others attest — implies they are descended from the autochthonous Pelasgians. The Athenians deemed themselves "true Hellenes" due to their well-developed society.

---

Contrary to modern understanding, Herodotus was convinced that the Hellenes were not invaders, but descendents of Pelasgians:

"The Hellenic race has never, since its first origin, changed its speech. This at least seems evident to me. It was a branch of the Pelasgic, which separated from the main body, and at first was scanty in numbers and of little power; but it gradually spread and increased to a multitude of nations, chiefly by the voluntary entrance into its ranks of numerous tribes of barbarians. The Pelasgi, on the other hand, were, as I think, a barbarian race which never greatly multiplied."

That the Athenians were autochthonous was expressed mythically in the stories of Erechtheus and Erichthonius and was emphatically stated by Isocrates in Panegyric 23-5:

"For we did not win the country we dwell in by expelling others from it, or by seizing it when uninhabited, nor are we a mixed race collected together from many nations, but so noble and genuine is our descent, that we have continued for all time in possession of the land from which we sprang, being children of our native soil, and able to address our city by the same titles that we give to our nearest relations, for we alone of all the Hellenes have the right to call our city at once nurse and fatherland and mother."



Albanians steal our rich history just like Fyromians and Nordicists.

[uz]

Dec 20, 2011 16:40:58 GMT -5 punisher said:

Dec 20, 2011 16:33:09 GMT -5 @uz said:

^ cause you need the most enlightening right...

uzi,have you seen what for childish crap you're writing lately,it's embarassing for a 'man' of your age LOL

so you are an 11-teen year old....

[darkernative]

Dec 20, 2011 17:40:54 GMT -5 @uz said:

Dec 20, 2011 16:40:58 GMT -5 punisher said:

uzi,have you seen what for childish crap you're writing lately,it's embarassing for a 'man' of your age LOL

so you are an 11-teen year old....

most pathetic comeback. Ever.

[uz]

that wasn't a comeback, it was an assessment I previously had that he confirmed. You aint so bright kid which boat dropped you off again ?

[darkernative]

Dec 20, 2011 18:24:50 GMT -5 @uz said:

that wasn't a comeback, it was an assessment I previously had that he confirmed. You aint so bright kid which boat dropped you off again ?

Yes, I am not a very "bright" guy. But at least I make sense when writing, unlike you who writes irrelevant stuff all the time. At least for the time I have been active.

[valmir]

THE PELASGIANS-DIRECT ANCESTORS OF THE HELLENES.

My as*,You do not have any connection with the Old pelasgians, You are Ethopians or meybe Egyptians that moved from Africa in Europe for better life.
The only PURE PELASGIANS in Greece are those living in Athena, and they are the Arvanites!