| FORUM | ARCHIVE |                    | TOTAL QUIZ RESULT |


  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Alexander: Macedonian or Greek?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Welcome stranger, click here to read about some of the great benefits of registering for a free account with us and joining us in our global online community.


Alexander: Macedonian or Greek?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>
Author
Harburs View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
Chieftain

Joined: 10 Feb 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3148
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Harburs Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Alexander: Macedonian or Greek?
    Posted: 20 Sep 2013 at 03:33
I grow up believing he was a Macedonian, but some Greeks argue Macedonia was part of Greece, so what is your opinion?
"Turn yourself not away from three best things: Good Thought, Good Word, and Good Deed" Zoroaster.
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
Lao Tse View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel
Avatar
Editorial Staff

Joined: 20 Jun 2012
Location: Louisville, KY
Status: Offline
Points: 678
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Lao Tse Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Sep 2013 at 03:36
I think Alexander was Macedonian, considering that Macedon took over Greece, and Alexander's father was Philip of Macedon. But, I could still be wrong.

Edited by Lao Tse - 21 Sep 2013 at 14:02
在財富的害處,而是一件好事永遠不持續。我在和平中仅居住在新的風下。 Wei Jia Hong No harm in wealth, but a good thing doesn't last forever. I live only among peace under
Back to Top
Goral View Drop Down
Earl
Earl


Joined: 22 Jun 2013
Location: Poland
Status: Offline
Points: 256
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Goral Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Sep 2013 at 04:49
He was a Greek. Macedonia was inhabited by Greek speaking people at his time. 
Only much later, after fall of Roman Empire, large South Slavic tribes migrated into this region changing its ethnicity dramatically.
Back to Top
Eetion View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar

Joined: 18 Feb 2014
Status: Offline
Points: 91
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Eetion Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Feb 2014 at 20:03
Originally posted by Goral Goral wrote:

He was a Greek. Macedonia was inhabited by Greek speaking people at his time. 
Only much later, after fall of Roman Empire, large South Slavic tribes migrated into this region changing its ethnicity dramatically.


Greek? I don't think he was from Epir, if we think the real name of the word Greek. All of us are the Africans Wink






Back to Top
Lao Tse View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel
Avatar
Editorial Staff

Joined: 20 Jun 2012
Location: Louisville, KY
Status: Offline
Points: 678
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Lao Tse Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Feb 2014 at 23:13
I still think Alexander was Macedonian. This is why:
1. Macedonia is now a days considered to be an ancient Greek Kingdom. Therefor it's like saying:" Leonidas, Spartan or Greek?"
2. There technically was no official Greece until Alexander and his Father actually unified it. Before that point Greece as entirely independent city-states like Athens, Sparta, Corinth, Thebes, etc.

Again I could be wrong, but there is evidence to either case.
在財富的害處,而是一件好事永遠不持續。我在和平中仅居住在新的風下。 Wei Jia Hong No harm in wealth, but a good thing doesn't last forever. I live only among peace under
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 4932
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Feb 2014 at 06:53
Originally posted by Lao Tse Lao Tse wrote:


I think Alexander was Macedonian, considering that Macedon took over Greece, and Alexander's father was Philip of Macedon. But, I could still be wrong.


At the time of Alexander, the country was Macedonia.

Alexander was Macedonian.

Whether Macedonia had been Greek at some earlier time, or became Greek at a later time is irrelevant.

There are people in Switzerland who speak German, French or Italian, that doesn't change Switzerland into one of those countries, ergo, the fact that some people in Macedonia spoke Greek is also irrelevant.
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.
Back to Top
beorna View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 03 Dec 2007
Location: Lower Saxony
Status: Offline
Points: 799
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote beorna Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Feb 2014 at 09:29
There are two questions, 1) were Makedonians greek(I use the german writing of makedonians with k for the ancient macedonians, while I use Macedonians or mazedonians for the later slavic ones) and 2) was Alexander a greek.

First of all is the question 1) much more complicated. The history of the ethnogenesis of the makedonians is veiled by history. So it is generally difficult to say something certain. The first historical record about Makedonians is from the 5th century in Herodot. Homer didn't know them in his Illiad. Homer is just speaking about Pieria and Emathia. The first reliable king of Makedonia is Amyntas, in the late 6th century. So the origins of the Makedonians are laying in the early 6th or late 7th century. That would go along with their absence in the Illiad. Makedonia was limited to its origins around Pella. There we find a lot of non-greek ethnicities. Strabon wrote, that Pieria, Emathia and Bottika was inhabited by Thracians, illyrians and Epirotes. So it is more probable, that it was colonised by people from the later Hellas from the 8/th century on. I would  follow here the Argead traditions in so far, that I support a Makedonian origin during the colonisation. Greek colonists came and build a reign over several native tribes. That would go conform with the absence of makedonians at Homer. He wrote perhaps in the first half of the 7th century, so in the beginning in the colonisation.In the discussion about the makedonian origins I had usually refuted a greek presence before the colonisation. I must say i am no longer that sure. I am willing to consider a presence of archaic greek groups as well, but which were seen by the hellenes not as fellow greeks.

That leads me to the next problem, the hellenes. If we look to Homer we can see, that the Hellenes are limited to Phthia. The time of the origin of the Illiad is unknown. Some place it between 850-800, some between 750-650 and others even later, 700-650. I would prefer a date short after 700. So at 700 the Greeks weren't called hellenes. Perhaps the colonisation and the contact with "barbarians" created a common sense. I see the ethnogenesis of the Hellenes therefor in the 7th century. A Hellenic homeland is so difficult to name. But it seems that it reached from southern Thessalia in the North down to the Peloponnes, so originally not very different to the mycenian area. A Greekness is often linked with Olympia. The olympic games shall have start in 776, but the first winner's list is from Hippias of Elis from the 5th century. So we can't say, whether Olympia had the pan-greek meaning of later eras in those days or was not yet a local cultus.

So it becomes obviously, that the makedonians were no hellenes. This is different for the Argeads and already Alexander I shall have participated at the Olympic games. So it seems, that at least the royal dynasty of the Makedonians was seen as Hellenic. That during the times of Alexander the great greek scholars denied a greekness for alexander and the makedonians is probably due to his conquest of greece and therefor pure anti-makedonian propaganda.

So Alexander was king of the makedonians, who were maybe unified by greeks from the south (Argeads) and hellenized in the following centuries. The Argeads themselves were maybe of Hellenic origin (if the myth is true). But even if they were not Greek in the beginning underwend they as well a hellenisation and were accepted as hellenes.
Etiam si omnes, ego non.
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 4932
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Feb 2014 at 06:01
beorna wrote
"So it seems, that at least the royal dynasty of the Makedonians was seen as Hellenic."

At what period.

Alexanders father was Philip of Macedonia.

Alexander was Alexander of Macedonia.

His troops were called "The Macedons" and "The Macedonians"

Macedonia eventually became an independent Slavic state-speaking a Slavic language, not Greek.

I accept without argument that, at one stage, Macedonia was a Greek state.

A very interesting article on the differences between the Greeks and the Macedonians can be found at:
http://www.historyofmacedonia.org/AncientMacedonia/gandeto.html

along with a number of facts about Macedonia
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.
Back to Top
beorna View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 03 Dec 2007
Location: Lower Saxony
Status: Offline
Points: 799
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote beorna Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Feb 2014 at 08:17
Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

beorna wrote
"So it seems, that at least the royal dynasty of the Makedonians was seen as Hellenic."

At what period.

I wrote already that Alexander I was allowed to participate in the olympic games. Alexander ruled ca. 490-450 BCE. he was an olympionike in 504 probably.

Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

Alexanders father was Philip of Macedonia.

Alexander was Alexander of Macedonia.

His troops were called "The Macedons" and "The Macedonians"

And the Athenians were called Athenians and the Spartans Spartans. The dynasty of the Argead claimed to be of old Greek origin from Argos. When Alexander was allowed to join the olympics, this myth of origin was accepted.

Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

Macedonia eventually became an independent Slavic state-speaking a Slavic language, not Greek.

What has this to do with the makedonians? The province of Makedonia (theme) was settled by slavic migrants during the 6th and mainly 7th century. later this region was subjected by the Bulgarians. Till the end of the 19th century the Slavs in the thema makedonia considered themselves as Bulgarians. First then the idea of a mazedonian nation evolved.

Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

I accept without argument that, at one stage, Macedonia was a Greek state.

A very interesting article on the differences between the Greeks and the Macedonians can be found at:
http://www.historyofmacedonia.org/AncientMacedonia/gandeto.html

along with a number of facts about Macedonia

No offense against you, that's FYROM nonsense


Edited by beorna - 21 Feb 2014 at 08:23
Etiam si omnes, ego non.
Back to Top
Northman View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
~ Scylding ~

Joined: 30 Aug 2004
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 10426
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Northman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Feb 2014 at 14:28
We have had this debate before and I have looked through some of the threads...
 
I'm no specialist on the topic at all - but isn't it safe to say that Macedonia was and is a geographic region of what we call Greece today.
In ancient times it was a kingdom ruled by the Argeads - in example Alexander the Great and his father Philip II. If Macedonia was an independent kingdom in these days, it could not be Greece as well. 

So - Alexander came from a region within the borders of modern Greece - but it wasn't Greece at his time - it was a kingdom called Macedon(ia).

Making any sense?
 
~ North
   
   If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.    (Albert Einstein)
Back to Top
beorna View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 03 Dec 2007
Location: Lower Saxony
Status: Offline
Points: 799
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote beorna Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Feb 2014 at 15:08
Originally posted by Northman Northman wrote:

We have had this debate before and I have looked through some of the threads...
 
I'm no specialist on the topic at all - but isn't it safe to say that Macedonia was and is a geographic region of what we call Greece today.
In ancient times it was a kingdom ruled by the Argeads - in example Alexander the Great and his father Philip II. If Macedonia was an independent kingdom in these days, it could not be Greece as well. 

So - Alexander came from a region within the borders of modern Greece - but it wasn't Greece at his time - it was a kingdom called Macedon(ia).

Making any sense?
 
~ North

I said it above, the question is really complicated. The oldest writing which were found in Makedonia are a archaic NW-Greek. So the question is more were the Makedonians Hellenes. And here the answer is, not allways.
Etiam si omnes, ego non.
Back to Top
Northman View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
~ Scylding ~

Joined: 30 Aug 2004
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 10426
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Northman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Feb 2014 at 15:24
Yes I can appreciate that some people like to make it complicated, but you don't relate to my post.

The topic is about nationality not ethnicity, and in my poor understanding, you have the nationality of the country in which you were born. 
The most southern part of Denmark was German between 1864 and 1920 so many ethnic Danes are born German in that period. That doesn't make them danish today.

You can have ancestors from all over the place, but if Alexander was born in a kingdom called Macedonia he was a Macedonian - right?

~ North


   
   If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.    (Albert Einstein)
Back to Top
beorna View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 03 Dec 2007
Location: Lower Saxony
Status: Offline
Points: 799
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote beorna Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Feb 2014 at 16:04
Originally posted by Northman Northman wrote:

Yes I can appreciate that some people like to make it complicated, but you don't relate to my post.

The topic is about nationality not ethnicity, and in my poor understanding, you have the nationality of the country in which you were born. 
The most southern part of Denmark was German between 1864 and 1920 so many ethnic Danes are born German in that period. That doesn't make them danish today.

You can have ancestors from all over the place, but if Alexander was born in a kingdom called Macedonia he was a Macedonian - right?

~ North



But at the times of Alexander there was no Greece at all. There were, as it was before, a lot of poleis. Then we would have no Greeks at all, but just Spartans, Thebaians, Athenians, Thessalians.....
There was no such thing as a nationality in those days. The greeks were hellenes, because they spoke the same language (with all its dialects), because they worshiped the same gods, admired the same heroes and because they shared the same common identity as hellenes. So Alexander was makedonian and greek, as a leonidas was a Spartan and a Greek.
Etiam si omnes, ego non.
Back to Top
Northman View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
~ Scylding ~

Joined: 30 Aug 2004
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 10426
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Northman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Feb 2014 at 16:19
No Greece - exactly, that was actually my understanding too - thank you for clarifying...
But that leaves one question open in my head - and I'm known to be thick sculled so I'm asking...

How can you have Greeks with no Greece ?
I thought a people was named after their country - where did Greeks come from/originate if not in (the nation) Greece and how did they get the name Greeks? 

You say there was no nationality at that time...  in a narrow sense - a kingdom is a nation or... ?


Edited by Northman - 21 Feb 2014 at 16:20
   
   If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.    (Albert Einstein)
Back to Top
Northman View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
~ Scylding ~

Joined: 30 Aug 2004
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 10426
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Northman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Feb 2014 at 16:44
Let me try to get this right Beorna - you know a lot more about this than I do - probably  also more about the region where I live than I do.

So to clear my mind - lets use that as an example...
Denmark as a nation was "born" around 950-1000 - Gorm the Old and his son Harald Bluetooth.
_________________

But before that - people from the Jutland peninsula, Saxons, Angles and Jutes settled in Britain more or less peacefully in 450-550...   were they Danes?

The Vikings raiding Britain were Danes and Norwegians  - 800-1066....

In Normandy, William the Conqueror was a direct descendant of the danish Viking Rollo and William took England in 1066 as we know......

So - Did the Danes raid Britain once or three times...?

~ North


   
   If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.    (Albert Einstein)
Back to Top
beorna View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 03 Dec 2007
Location: Lower Saxony
Status: Offline
Points: 799
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote beorna Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Feb 2014 at 18:12
Originally posted by Northman Northman wrote:

No Greece - exactly, that was actually my understanding too - thank you for clarifying...
But that leaves one question open in my head - and I'm known to be thick sculled so I'm asking...

How can you have Greeks with no Greece ?
I thought a people was named after their country - where did Greeks come from/originate if not in (the nation) Greece and how did they get the name Greeks? 

You say there was no nationality at that time...  in a narrow sense - a kingdom is a nation or... ?

To be exact, no Greece as state or maybe it would be better to speak of no Hellenic state. But the Hellenes had a common identify, which let them become an ethnos in opposite to the barbaroi outside. Epirotes and Makedones were in a transitional zone, neither fish nor fowl. They spoke an archaic Greek, but the Hellenes did not accept them as one of themselves, at least for some periods.

No, there is no such rule. People can give a land the name and a land can give a people the name.

A kingdom is not a nation, allthough there are examples, that a king made a people, a natio. But a kingdom can include different ethnoi. Look at Great Britain e.g. There is no British nation, there is a English nation, a Scottish nation, a Welsh nation, an Irish nation. But they all are british citizens. Poland e.g had for longer periods no state, but were nevertheless a nation or think about Kurds. Don't know if they ever had a state, but nevertheless are they a nation.
Etiam si omnes, ego non.
Back to Top
Northman View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
~ Scylding ~

Joined: 30 Aug 2004
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 10426
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Northman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Feb 2014 at 19:09
Originally posted by beorna beorna wrote:

Originally posted by Northman Northman wrote:

No Greece - exactly, that was actually my understanding too - thank you for clarifying...
But that leaves one question open in my head - and I'm known to be thick sculled so I'm asking...

How can you have Greeks with no Greece ?
I thought a people was named after their country - where did Greeks come from/originate if not in (the nation) Greece and how did they get the name Greeks? 

You say there was no nationality at that time...  in a narrow sense - a kingdom is a nation or... ?


To be exact, no Greece as state or maybe it would be better to speak of no Hellenic state. But the Hellenes had a common identify, which let them become an ethnos in opposite to the barbaroi outside. Epirotes and Makedones were in a transitional zone, neither fish nor fowl. They spoke an archaic Greek, but the Hellenes did not accept them as one of themselves, at least for some periods.

So no Greece, no Hellenic state - but they had an common feeling of belonging together, excluding all others. So the excluded Macedon Alexander got accepted as a Greeks later on? Who accepted him and why.
Quote
No, there is no such rule. People can give a land the name and a land can give a people the name.
Right - but we cannot change name of a country/land as we please every other day - so the predominant rule is - the country of birth gives the people the name. 
Quote
A kingdom is not a nation, allthough there are examples, that a king made a people, a natio. But a kingdom can include different ethnoi. Look at Great Britain e.g. There is no British nation, there is a English nation, a Scottish nation, a Welsh nation, an Irish nation. But they all are british citizens. Poland e.g had for longer periods no state, but were nevertheless a nation or think about Kurds. Don't know if they ever had a state, but nevertheless are they a nation.
Yes - the broad meaning of "nation" changes the perspective - my fault to only think nation like country or kingdom.  
You use the definition of "nation" as an ethnic group.

I'm still puzzled - He was born a Macedon in a sovereign country/kingdom - so is it his ethnicity that makes him Greek as well? 


 


Edited by Northman - 21 Feb 2014 at 19:09
   
   If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.    (Albert Einstein)
Back to Top
beorna View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 03 Dec 2007
Location: Lower Saxony
Status: Offline
Points: 799
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote beorna Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Feb 2014 at 23:09
Originally posted by Northman Northman wrote:

Let me try to get this right Beorna - you know a lot more about this than I do - probably  also more about the region where I live than I do.

Thank you for your kindness.

Originally posted by Northman Northman wrote:

So to clear my mind - lets use that as an example...
Denmark as a nation was "born" around 950-1000 - Gorm the Old and his son Harald Bluetooth.

Danes are older than Danmark. They were mentioned already in the 6th century and Hygelac was the first who is known to raid the south. It seems, that they came from southern Sweden, settled on the islands in the baltic and in the end incorporated the jutish peninsula. A single regnum did not exist as far as we know. maybe Horik was the first, who was able to rule all danes. But I would agree with you, that a Danish kingdom did not exist before gorm and harald. So between the first appearence and the first permanently united reign laid 500 years.

Originally posted by Northman Northman wrote:

But before that - people from the Jutland peninsula, Saxons, Angles and Jutes settled in Britain more or less peacefully in 450-550...   were they Danes?

No, of course not. angles, Jutes and saxons were no danes. At those days the danes were still on the islands east of Jylland.

Originally posted by Northman Northman wrote:

The Vikings raiding Britain were Danes and Norwegians  - 800-1066....

In Normandy, William the Conqueror was a direct descendant of the danish Viking Rollo and William took England in 1066 as we know......

So - Did the Danes raid Britain once or three times...?

~ North

It seems, that Danes did participate in the last two campaigns. Hyglac's raid suggests, that danes as well participated in the anglo-saxon migration. Sutton Hoo as well suggests a Scandinavian relation.
Etiam si omnes, ego non.
Back to Top
Northman View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
~ Scylding ~

Joined: 30 Aug 2004
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 10426
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Northman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Feb 2014 at 23:42
Originally posted by beorna beorna wrote:

No, of course not. angles, Jutes and saxons were no danes. At those days the danes were still on the islands east of Jylland.

Right - and that is exactly my point in respect to Alexander the Great. 
The Angles migrating didn't turn Danish when the Danes took over the area they came from.
Likewise with Alexander. He was Macedon when he lived and even though the area where he came from became Greek, he is still a Macedon and only that.

Things do get complicated if we interchangeably switch the discussion between arguments about nation (ethnic tribe) and which country we live in. (nationality in the modern sense) 

Anyways Beorna - we can agree to disagree but I remain impressed about your knowledge of these things.

~ North


   
   If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.    (Albert Einstein)
Back to Top
Goral View Drop Down
Earl
Earl


Joined: 22 Jun 2013
Location: Poland
Status: Offline
Points: 256
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Goral Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Feb 2014 at 03:29
1. Macedonia was one of the Greek states with Greek language and Greek culture 



2. We can as well ask if Socrates, Archimedes or Tales were Greek or, respectively Athenians, Syracusian or Miletans. IMO they firstly were Greeks (Hellens), secondary the citizen of respective Greek (Hellen) states.
3. Xenophon's 10000 come from all around ancient  Greece (Hellada ) states but they called themselves Hellens first.
Alexander The Great created Hellenistic Empire not Macedonian Empire.

Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 4932
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Feb 2014 at 08:35
beorna wrote:
"No offense against you, that's FYROM nonsense".

Hardly, Jugoslavia, wasn't a country in Alexanders time.

It's like asking "What colour is a Blackberry when it's green?"

I think you're being pedantic about this, but I decline to continue this discussion.



Edited by toyomotor - 22 Feb 2014 at 08:40
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.
Back to Top
beorna View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 03 Dec 2007
Location: Lower Saxony
Status: Offline
Points: 799
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote beorna Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Feb 2014 at 11:56
Originally posted by Northman Northman wrote:

Originally posted by beorna beorna wrote:

No, of course not. angles, Jutes and saxons were no danes. At those days the danes were still on the islands east of Jylland.

Right - and that is exactly my point in respect to Alexander the Great. 
The Angles migrating didn't turn Danish when the Danes took over the area they came from.
Pardon, I am not sure if I understand you correct. Can you explain it for me, what you wanted to say?

Originally posted by Northman Northman wrote:

Likewise with Alexander. He was Macedon when he lived and even though the area where he came from became Greek, he is still a Macedon and only that.

I have changed my view in the last years. I am meanwhile accepting, that greek speakers lived as well in Emathia. That is the original core of makedonia. I still support the view, that there were as well non-speaking groups, like thrakians e.g. What I deny is, that Makedonians were originally Hellenes, just from their start. When Homer mentioned Hellenes for the first time, these Hellenes were limited to the Phthia in Thessaly. It is a bit like Tacitus wrote it about the Germanics, "the Romans gave them these name after a single tribe, and because of the fear the name caused, the others started to use these name for themselves". That is how the name spread over Greece too.
The makedonians were outside the area, where the name Hellenes evolved.
But there is another point. I said it above, the original makedonia was in Emathia and parts of Pieria. later the Makedonians conquered several regions in the south Orestis, Elimeia and Bottia e.g. These regions were Hellenic. So of course the Hellenic influence increased during the centuries by these conquest and not only by a cultural and political influence on makedonia itself.

Originally posted by Northman Northman wrote:

Things do get complicated if we interchangeably switch the discussion between arguments about nation (ethnic tribe) and which country we live in. (nationality in the modern sense)

Indeed, it is complicated and I agree, that we have to be careful with the use of modern terms and definitions.
What we have are several contemporary statements. Unfortunately are they supporting the one and the other side. It seems to me, that the statements that reject a Greekness of the makedonians are politically motivated, due to the makedonian conquest and dominance. What we can say as well is, that it was the makedonian era, that cause the spread of hellenism all over the orient.

Originally posted by Northman Northman wrote:

Anyways Beorna - we can agree to disagree but I remain impressed about your knowledge of these things.
~ North

I hope I can convince you, but of course is everybody free to have his own opinion.
Etiam si omnes, ego non.
Back to Top
beorna View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 03 Dec 2007
Location: Lower Saxony
Status: Offline
Points: 799
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote beorna Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Feb 2014 at 12:00
Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

beorna wrote:
"No offense against you, that's FYROM nonsense".

Hardly, Jugoslavia, wasn't a country in Alexanders time.

It's like asking "What colour is a Blackberry when it's green?"

I think you're being pedantic about this, but I decline to continue this discussion.


I don't know, whether you ever watched a FYROM discussion about Makedonia. The FYROM has not history, the Mazedonians have no history longer than the end of the 19th century. That's why the search for a tradition for their people and they decided to occupy the history of the ancient makedonians. Another problem is of course, that Greece has a Makedonian province. It is not impossible, that one day Mazedonians could lay claim on the Greece Makedonia. So these discussion are often about politics and less about history.
Etiam si omnes, ego non.
Back to Top
Northman View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
~ Scylding ~

Joined: 30 Aug 2004
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 10426
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Northman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Feb 2014 at 14:32
Originally posted by beorna beorna wrote:

Originally posted by Northman Northman wrote:

Originally posted by beorna beorna wrote:

No, of course not. angles, Jutes and saxons were no danes. At those days the danes were still on the islands east of Jylland.

Right - and that is exactly my point in respect to Alexander the Great. 
The Angles migrating didn't turn Danish when the Danes took over the area they came from.
Pardon, I am not sure if I understand you correct. Can you explain it for me, what you wanted to say?

I'm trying to compare the angles with Alexander ... 

1. Alexander was born in modern Greece but was not Greek ( because there was no Greece at that time)   
2. The Angles were born in modern Denmark but were not Danes (because there was no Denmark at that time)

And now the essential question... Greece became a reality later on - so did Denmark.

How/why did Alexander become a Greek if the Angles didn't become Danish?


Quote
I hope I can convince you, but of course is everybody free to have his own opinion.

I have no preference for any opinion or a need to be convinced - but I would like to learn and understand.
And in this case I'm trying to understand, why a rule apply in one case and not in another similar case.

~ North


   
   If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.    (Albert Einstein)
Back to Top
beorna View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 03 Dec 2007
Location: Lower Saxony
Status: Offline
Points: 799
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote beorna Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Feb 2014 at 15:51
Originally posted by Northman Northman wrote:


I'm trying to compare the angles with Alexander ... 

1. Alexander was born in modern Greece but was not Greek ( because there was no Greece at that time)   
2. The Angles were born in modern Denmark but were not Danes (because there was no Denmark at that time)

And now the essential question... Greece became a reality later on - so did Denmark.

How/why did Alexander become a Greek if the Angles didn't become Danish?
...


Ah, thanks, I understand.
Alexander is considered as Greek, because there was a common Greek (Hellenes) identity. And his dynasty was considered even more Greek, cos already around 500 the Argeads were allowed to join the olympic games. An ethnos is nothing fix, it can change, need groups can be added, old groups can split, ethnoi can break into pieces.
So there was no Greek state, but the different Greek poleis were one people, the hellenes.

The Angles were a gens, a people, in nowaday danmark. But that isn't important here. The different to the Greek/Makedonian example is, that the Angles didn't see themselves as Danes. That isn't different for all the other gentes on the Jutish peninsula. But there were indeed some greater entities. The Angles, together with some other gentes were Herminones and they are as well mentioned as Nerthus-worshipers. Those gentes who remained in Jylland were subjected by the Danes in the follwing centuries and they indeed became Danes.

So both examples are different
Etiam si omnes, ego non.
Back to Top
Northman View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
~ Scylding ~

Joined: 30 Aug 2004
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 10426
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Northman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Feb 2014 at 19:33
Thanks.

I'll take your word for the common Greek (Hellenes) identity because no matter what other sources I find, they all specifically differ between Greeks and Macedon's -  of course only until 1830.
Even in the map Goral posted above to prove the opposite.

So to put it simple for me to understand ..
The claim for Alexander to be Greek, is based on a conception of common identity between peoples of two independent kingdoms and has nothing to do with common ethnicity, nationality or other relations in that respect - did I get it right?

~ North


   
   If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.    (Albert Einstein)
Back to Top
beorna View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 03 Dec 2007
Location: Lower Saxony
Status: Offline
Points: 799
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote beorna Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Feb 2014 at 19:48
Originally posted by Northman Northman wrote:

Thanks.

I'll take your word for the common Greek (Hellenes) identity because no matter what other sources I find, they all specifically differ between Greeks and Macedon's -  of course only until 1830.
Even in the map Goral posted above to prove the opposite.
So to put it simple for me to understand ..
The claim for Alexander to be Greek, is based on a conception of common identity between peoples of two independent kingdoms and has nothing to do with common ethnicity, nationality or other relations in that respect - did I get it right?

I'll post some contemporary sources next week. About what two independent kingdoms are you speaking? Greece was not a kingdom, if the map posted by goral may make you think so. The map is from a FYROM site. There was not a greece and a Makedonia, but a lot of states.
That's greece during the Peloponnesian war
File:Karte Peloponnesischer Krieg 431 vC-de.svg
ca. 370/60
File:Griechenland 371-362.jpg
Etiam si omnes, ego non.
Back to Top
Northman View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
~ Scylding ~

Joined: 30 Aug 2004
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 10426
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Northman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Feb 2014 at 20:08
Originally posted by Beorna Beorna wrote:

About what two independent kingdoms are you speaking? Greece was not a kingdom, if the map posted by goral may make you think so.  There was not a greece and a Makedonia, but a lot of states. 

Sorry for not being precise..... and for being a pest.
But this question has been discussed over and over again, so I would like to narrow the answer down as far as possible...

Please let me rephrase my question ...
The claim for Alexander to be Greek, is based on a conception of common identity between peoples of an independent kingdom (Macedonia) and the peoples of a group of city-states (Hellenes) and has nothing to do with common ethnicity, nations, tribes or other relations in that respect - did I get it right?

Please bear in mind - I'm no part of this issue - just a curious bystander Smile

Thanks
North


   
   If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.    (Albert Einstein)
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 4932
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 Feb 2014 at 01:46
Northman

No, you're not a curious bystander, just standing by, you're a bit like me, finding it difficult to compartmentalise beornas contradictory statements.

He says that Alexander can't have been Greek, because at the time there was no single Greek state. So he must have been Macedonian, musn't he.

All of the rest of his post is beorna arguing against what he's already written to try and extricate himself from the mire he created.

Edited by toyomotor - 23 Feb 2014 at 02:06
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.
Back to Top
Panther View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar
Editorial Staff

Joined: 20 Jan 2006
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 4577
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Panther Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 Feb 2014 at 02:04
I always understood that he identified as a Macedonian being heavily influenced by Hellenistic culture? So  i am guessing he was a Macedon schooled in Greek culture.


Edited by Panther - 23 Feb 2014 at 02:05
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.110 seconds.