Greek Australian Advisory Council and the falsification of Ancient Macedonian history Part 17
Risto Stefov
December 04, 2008
This is a response to the Australian Macedonian Advisory Council (which in fact is Greek masquerading as Macedonian) in regards to the article entitled "Risto Stefov and the falsification of Ancient Macedonian history" published on October 29, 2008 at this link: http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/79306
My reply to you is "Two can play that game!" I too can provide you with just as many arguments that the Ancient Macedonians WERE NOT Greek. BUT!
It is irrelevant, at least to me, if Modern Greeks claim that the Ancient Macedonians were Greeks or not, what is relevant here is that the Modern Greeks are not related to the Ancient Greeks or to the Ancient Macedonians. They call themselves "Greeks" but have nothing to do with the ancient Greeks or Ancient Macedonians because underneath their modern artificial Greek veneer is nothing more than Albanians, Vlachs, Turks and Macedonians, the same variety of Balkanites that exists throughout the entire southern Balkans. But, if they insist on accusing me of falsifying Ancient Macedonian history, then here is my rebuttal:
UNTRUTHS HAVE SHORT LEGS (Continued)
Untruth #3: Philip "united" the Greek city-states
Response:
(a) Alexander asks a woman, who was being taken captive, who she was, she replied: 'I am the sister of Theogenes who commanded our army against your father, Philip, and fell at Chaeronea fighting for the liberty of Greece.' (If Philip and Alexander were "uniting" the Greek states, then, why were the Greeks fighting for the liberty of Greece?)
(b) The epitaph at CHAERONEA. I do recall reading that the Thebans and the Athenians were fighting together, for the holy soil of Hellas on August the 4th, 338 BC at the sleepy village of Chaeronea. Fellow Hellenes, Athenians and Thebans, against the barbarians from the north- the Macedonians.
Let us examine the following epitaph composed for the common grave of the fallen Hellenes: "Time, whose overseeing eye records all human actions, bear word to mankind what fate was suffered, how striving to safeguard the holy soil of Hellas upon Boeotia's plain we died." I wonder why these Macedonians, allegedly "Hellenes" as some modern-day Greeks would claim, were not fighting to safeguard the holy soil of Hellas?
(c) "When Archelaus attacked Thessalian Larissa, Thrasymachus wrote what was to become a model oration On Behalf of the Larisians. Only one sentence happens to survive: 'Shall we be slaves to Archelaus, we, being Greeks, to a barbarian?'". Archelaus was a Macedonian king.
(d) Plutarch "The Age of Alexander". Modern day Greeks would like to dispatch off Demosthenes castigations of Philip II as political rhetoric, and yet Demosthenes was twice appointed to lead the war effort of Athens against Macedonia. He, Demosthenes, said of Philip that Philip was not Greek, nor related to Greeks but comes from Macedonia where a person could not even buy a decent slave.
"Soon after his death the people of Athens paid him fitting honours by errecting his statue in bronze, and by decreeing that the eldest member of his family should be maintained in the prytaneum at the public expense. On the base of his statue was carved his famous inscription: 'If only your strength had been equal, Demosthenes, to your wisdom, never would Greece have been ruled by a Macedonian Ares'". [p.216]
(e) Plutarch "The Age of Alexander". The news of Philip's death reached Athens. Demosthenes appeared in public dressed in magnificent attire and wearing a garland on his head, although his daughter had died only six days before. Aeschines states: "For my part I cannot say that the Athenians did themselves any credit in putting on garlands and offering sacrifices to celebrate the death of a king who, when he was the conqueror and they the conquered had treated them with such tolerance and humanity. Far apart from provoking the anger of the gods, it was a contemptible action to make Philip a citizen of Athens and pay him honours while he was alive, and then, as soon as he has fallen by another's hand, to be besides themselves with joy, trample on his body, and sing paeans of victory, as though they themselves have accomplished some great feat of arms." [p.207]
(f) Book II - Battle of Issus, in Arrian's "The Campaigns of Alexander". "Darius' Greeks fought to thrust the Macedonians back into the water and save the day for their left wing, already in retreat, while the Macedonians, in their turn, with Alexander's triumph plain before their eyes, were determined to equal his success and not forfeit the proud title of invincible, hitherto universally bestowed upon them. The fight was further embittered by the old racial rivalry of Greek and Macedonian." [p.119]
(g) Quintus Rufus "The History of Alexander". "Alexander meanwhile dealt swiftly with the unrest in Greece - not only did the Athenians rejoice at Philip's death, but the Aetolians, the Thebans, as well as Spartans and the Peloponnesians, were ready to throw off the Macedonian yoke. (Diod. 17.3.3-5) - and he marched south into Thessaly, demanding the loyalty of its people in the name of their common ancestors, Achilles (Justin 11.3.1-2; cf. Diod. 17.4.1). And with speed and diplomacy Alexander brought the Thebans and Athenians into submission (Diod. 17.4.4-6)" [When one unifies, there is no "yoke" to be thrown off.]
(h) Quintus Rufus "The History of Alexander". "Alexander also referred to his father, Philip, conqueror of Athenians, and recalled to their minds the recent conquest of Boeotia and the annihilation of its best known city." [p.41]
There was a conquest and not a "unification" of the Greek city-states by Philip of Macedon.
(i) Quintus Rufus "The History of Alexander". "Men! If you consider the scale of our achievements, your longing for peace and your weariness of brilliant campaigns are not at all surprising. Let me pass over the Illyrians, the Triballians, Boeotia, Thrace, Sparta, the Aecheans, the Peloponnese - all of them subdued under my direct leadership or by campaigns conducteded under my orders of instructions". When one unites, one does not force submission of the conquered people.
(j) Quintus Rufus "The History of Alexander". "Starting with Macedonia, I now have power over Greece; I have brought Thrace and the Illyrians under my control; rule the Triballi and the Maedi. I have Asia in my possession from the Hellespont to the Red Sea." [p.277]
(k) Arrian "The Compaigns of Alexander". Alexander continues to speak to his Macedonians and allies: "Come, then; add the rest of Asia to what you already possess - a small addition to the great sum of your conquests. What great or noble work could we ourselves have achieved had we thought it enough living at ease in Macedon, merely to guard our homes, excepting no burden beyond checking the encroachment of the Thracians on our borders, or the Illyrians and Triballians, or perhaps such Greeks as might prove a menace to our comfort." [p.294]
Untruth #4: "Macedonians were Hellenes"
(a) Homer's Greeks are variously described as Danaoi, Argives, and Achaians, but never Hellene. Jonathan M. Hall Ethnic Identity in Greek Antiquity.
(b) In the Catalogue of Women, the eponymous founder of Makedonia, Makedon, was the son of Zeus and Deukalion's daughter Thuia. This line of descent excludes him from the Hellenic genealogy - and hence, by implication, the Makedonians from the ranks of Hellenism." [p.64]
(c) "But by the fourth century, certainly, the rulers of Macedonian Lyncestis prided themselves on descent from the Corinthian Bacchiads - a royal dynasty fully comparable with the Temenid claims of their rivals at Aegae." Ernst Badian "Studies in the History of Art vol. 10: Macedonia and Greece In Late Classical and Early hellenistic Times"
NOTE: The Temenid claim of the Macedonian Royal house was considered both in ancient times and the present day to be a clever piece of propaganda.
(d) Furthermore, the fact that Zeus is Makedon's father does not necessarily testify to his credentials as a "bona fide Hellene: after all, Sarpedon is the son of Zeus but he is Lykian not a Hellene." Jonathan Hall "Ethnic Identity in Greek Antiquity". p.64
(e) Lamian War 323-322 is also known as the "Hellenic War" by its protagonists. Here, the Greeks, the Hellenes, were fighting against the Macedonians led by Antipater at Lamia.
(f) (Referring to Arrian's separation of Macedonians and Greeks). "The same painstaking attention to details is evident in administrative matters. Appointments of governors are duly mentioned, and throughout his book Arrian is careful to give the father's name in the case of Macedonians, e.g. Ptolemy son of Lagus, and in the case of Greeks their city of origin." [p.25]
(g) Arrian "The Campaigns of Alexander". "The backbone of the infantry was the Macedonian heavy infantry, the 'Foot Companions', organized on territorial basis in six battalions (taxeis) of about 1,500 men each. In place of the nine-foot spear carried by the Greek hoplite, the Macedonian infantryman was armed with a pike or sarissa about 13 or 14 feet long, which required both hands to wield it. The light circular shield was slung on the left shoulder, and was smaller than that carried by the Greek hoplite which demanded the use of the left arm. Both, Greek and Macedonian infantry wore greaves and a helmet, but it is possible that the Macedonians did not wear a breastplate. The phalanx (a heavy infantry), like all the Macedonian troops had been brought by Philip to a remarkable standard of training and discipline." [p.35]
(h) Quintus Rufus "The History of Alexander". At a banquet prepared by Alexander for the ambassadors of certain tribes from India, among the invited guest present was the Macedonian Horratas and the Greek boxer named Dioxippus. Now at the feast the Macedonian Horratas who was already drunk, began to make insulting comments to Dioxippus and to challenge him, if he were a man, to fight a duel. Dioxippus agreed and the two men fought rather a short fight with Dioxippus emerging a victor. A huge crowd of soldiers, including the Greeks, supported Dioxippus. "The outcome of the show dismayed Alexander, as well as the Macedonian soldiers, especially since the barbarians had been present, for he feared that a mockery had been made of the celebrated Macedonian valour." [p.229]
Point of interest: Two fighters, one Macedonian, one Greek. Macedonian lost the fight. Alexander is dismayed. Why? How can a mockery be made of the Macedonian valour if in this fight the Greek won?
Untruth #5: "Alexander's conquest was a Greek conquest"
(a) Arrian "The Campaigns of Alexander". "The cavalry action which ensued was desperate enough, and the Persians broke only when they knew that the Greek mercenaries were being cut and destroyed by the Macedonian infantry." [p.119-20]
(b) Arrian "The Compaigns of Alexander". "When received the report that Alexander was moving forward to the attack, he sent some 30,000 mounted troops and 20,000 light infantry across the river Pinarus, to give himself a chance of getting the main body of his army into position without molestation. His dispositions were as follows: in the van of his heavy infantry were his 30,000 Greek mercenaries, facing the Macedonian infantry, with some 60,000 Persian heavy infantry- known as Kardakes." [p.114]
(c) Quintus Rufus "The History of Alexander". Patron, the Greek commander, speaks with Darius: "Your Majesty", said Patron, "we few are all that remain of 50,000 Greeks. We were all with you in your more fortunate days, and in your present situation we remain as we were when you were prospering, ready to make for and to accept as our country and our home any lands you choose. We and you have been drawn together both by your prosperity and your adversity. By this inviolable loyalty of ours I beg and beseech you: pitch your tent in our area of the camp and let us be your bodyguards. We have left Greece behind; for us there is no Bactria; our hopes rest entirely in you - I wish that were true of the others also! Further talk serves no purpose. As a foreigner born of another race I should not be asking for the responsibility of guarding your person if I thought anyone else could do it." [p.112-13] [50,000 Greeks serving with Darius' army and fighting Alexander's Macedonians]
A legitimate and a very obvious question: If Alexander´s army was in fact a "Greek army" then how is it possible for a "Greek king" -- Alexander -- to hire mercenaries - Greeks, from his 'own' country?
Untruth #6: "Alexander's Army was a Greek Army"
(a) Eugene Borza "Makedonika". "Of the nearly 850 persons listed by Berve, 275 are either certainly or probably ethnic Greeks. Of this number, 126 persons are not associated with Alexander's train, and thus outside present concerns. Of the 149 which remain, 69-- nearly half-- are court figures not associated with administration. They include sophists, physicians, actors, athletes, musicians, jugglers, and other entertainers, and a variety of hangers-on. 89 names remain. Of these three are of uncertain ethnic origin. 24 Greeks serve the king in variety of administrative tasks: some are envoys, some are clerks, some financial officers, some act as king's agents in local places. They pop in and out of the historical record as Alexander sees the need to employ them. The remaining 53 Greeks serve specific military functions.
Out of these 53 persons, 22 names are attached to a single unit (the allies from Orchomenos), who, by the way, are dismissed along with the other Greek allies in 330 B.C. (Only a few short years into the expedition). Fourteen other Greeks hold naval appointments, either as ship commanders in the Hydaspes fleet, or in conjunction with Nearchus' ocean voyage. Four Greeks are in charge of mercenary units, and 9 others have unspecified, low- level military assignments. Seven have duties that did not take them beyond Egypt.
In summary, of the 149 known Greeks with official connections to the king, only 35 to 40 held positions of rank- some as officers, some as administrators, but only a handful in top positions." [One is seriously pressed to provide the needed evidence for the assertion held by this modern Greek propaganda that Alexander's crusade and Alexander's army were Greek. The evidence presented will not support such an act. An army of over 40,000 soldiers cannot possibly be called Greek army where the Greeks representation is so minuscule and largely insignificant. If Greeks like to claim somebody's army, then their rightful claim should be the Persian army of Darius the III, where the number of Greeks exceeded 50,000 paid mercenaries. These Greeks, by the way, were fighting against the Macedonians.]
(b) "Of the sixty-five or so men named as hetairoi, 9 are Greek, including 3 mainlanders. Of the nine, four owed their position to life-long connections with Macedon: Nearchus (#544) and the brothers Erygius (#302) and Laomedon (#464) were in fact raised as Macedonians, and Demaratus (#253) of Corinth had been associated with the court since the time of Philip II."
(c) Eugene Borza "Makedonika". A look at Alexander's satrapal appointments reveals that only 2.6% of all assigned positions was held by Greeks.
There were 52 different persons who held satrapies in Alexander's empire. 24 were Persians and Asians 23 were Macedonians 05 were given to Greeks Of these (5) satrapal appointments given, Nearchus and Sybirtius were from Crete. Stasenor was Cypriote. Cleomenes was from Naucratis in Egypt, and Thoas was from Magnesia on the Meander.
No mainland Greek ever held a satrapy in Alexander's empire.
Untruth #7: "There is no ancient Macedonian language"
(a) Quintus Curtius Rufus "The History of Alexander". Alexander the Great speaks in front of the Macedones of his army: "The Macedonians are going to judge your case," he said. "Please state whether you will use your native language before them."
Philotas: "Besides the Macedonians, there are many present who, I think, will find what I am going to say easier to understand if I use the language you yourself have been using, your purpose, I believe, being only to enable more people to understand you."
Then the king said: "Do you see how offensive Philotas finds even his native language? He alone feels an aversion to learning it. But let him speak as he pleases - only remember he is as contemptuous of our way of life as he is of our language". [p.138]
(b) Eugene Borza. "The lesson is clear: the use of the Greek language as a form of written expression does not by itself identify the ethnicity of a culture". ("In the Shadow of Olympus -The Emergence of Macedon", p. 94.)
"As the Macedonians settled the region following the expulsion of existing peoples, they probably introduced their own customs and language(s); there is no evidence that they adapted any existing language, even though they were now in contact with neighboring populations who spoke a variety of Greek and non-Greek tongues."
"Hammond's firm conclusion that the Macedonians spoke a distinctive dialect of Aeolic Greek is unconvincing to me, resting as it does on an interpretation of a bit of myth quoted by Hellanicus, who made Aeolus the father of the legendary progenitor Macedon". ("In the Shadow of Olympus" p.92.)
"The handful of surviving genuine Macedonian words - not loan words from a Greek - do not show the changes expected from a Greek dialect. And even had they changed at some point it is unlikely that they would have reverted to their original form". ("In the Shadow of Olympus" p.93.)
As a question of method: why would an area three hundred miles north of Athens - not colonized by Athens - used an Attic dialect, unless it were imported? That is, the Attic dialect could hardly be native, and its use is likely part of the process of Hellenization. To put the question differently: if the native language of the Macedonians is Greek, what is its Macedonian dialect?"
"On the matter of language, and despite attempts to make Macedonian a dialect of Greek, one must accept the conclusion of linguist R.A.Crossland in the recent CAH, that an insufficient amount of Macedonian has survived to know what language it was".
(c) Earnst Badian. "Studies in the History of Art vol. 10: Macedonia and Greece In Late Classical and Early Hellenistic Times." Regarding the Cleitus' episode, Ernst Badian writes: "He used the only language in which his guards could be addressed".. [Note: The guards could be addressed in the Macedonian language.]
Episode #2. Eumenes of Cardia. In 321 B.C., Greek commander Ambiance, with cavalry and light arms only, faced the Macedonian noble, Neoptholemus, with the Macedonian phalanx. To avoid battle Xennias, a man whose speech was Macedonian, was sent by Eumenes to negotiate with the commander of the phalanx. Badian analyzes: "Now, Xennias' name at once shows him to be a Macedonian. Since he was in Ambiance entourage he was presumably a Macedonian of superior status, who spoke both standard Greek and his native language. He was the man who could be trusted to transmit Ambiance' message. This clearly shows that the phalanx had to be addressed in Macedonian, if one wanted to be sure (as Ambiance certainly did) that they would understand. And almost equally interesting - he did not address them himself, as he and other commanders normally address soldiers who understood them, nor did he sent a Greek. The suggestion is surely that Macedonian was the language of the infantry and that Greek was a difficult, indeed a foreign language to them. We may thus take it as certain that, when Alexander used Macedonian in addressing his guards, that too was because it was their normal language, and because (like Ambiance) he had to be sure he would be understood".
"The phalanx had to be addressed in Macedonian." "Macedonian was the language of the infantry and that Greek was difficult, indeed a foreign tongue to them."
(d) Ulrich Wilcken in his book 'Alexander the Great' on p.22 notes that "linguistic science has at its disposal a very limited quantity of Macedonian words"
(e) "The Tumult and the Shouting: Two Interpretations of the Cleitus Episode", (published by APA in The Ancient History Bulletin, Vol. 10, number 1, 1996) [I will not endeavor myself with "their" Hammond-Bosworth fight, for obvious reasons. What I will do, however, is lift certain references where these giants, specifically, deal/address the ancient Macedonian language in question.] p. 20 line 23. "Alexander shouted out in Macedonian, and called the hypaspists in Macedonian". p. 25, line 4. "In my view", writes Bosworth, "there is nothing at all surprising in the use of Macedonian. Alexander was calling his hypaspists, who were Macedonians, and he addressed them in their native language/dialect. In Hammond's view, however, the hypaspists would normally have been addressed in standard Greek. Macedonian proper he restricts to the people of the old kingdom, Lower Macedonian, while the tribes of the mountain districts of Pindus (Upper Macedonia) spoke a dialect of West Greek. The evidence for this hypothesis is decidedly tenuous." p. 25 elaborations: Bosworth continues: "I deliberately refrain from adopting any position on the linguistic status of ancient Macedonians. It has little significance outside the nationalistic propaganda of the contemporary Balkan states, in which prejudice and dogma do duty for rational thought. What matters for the present argument is the fact, explicit in Curtius, that Macedonian was largely unintelligible to non-Macedonians. Macedonians might understand Greek, and some Greeks (like Eumenes) with experience of Macedon might speak Macedonian. However, even Eumenes took care that a vital message was conveyed to the phalangites of Neoptholemus by a man fluent in Macedonian." p. 30, line 28, we find the final statement by Bosworth: "He used Macedonian because the troops would instantly understand and (he expected) would react immediately. There is no need for more complicated explanation."
No matter how hard Modern Greeks try to prove otherwise, there is always more than one side to their story!
To be continued.
Many thanks to J.S.G. Gandeto for his contribution to this article.
You can contact the author at rstefov@hotmail.com
My reply to you is "Two can play that game!" I too can provide you with just as many arguments that the Ancient Macedonians WERE NOT Greek. BUT!
It is irrelevant, at least to me, if Modern Greeks claim that the Ancient Macedonians were Greeks or not, what is relevant here is that the Modern Greeks are not related to the Ancient Greeks or to the Ancient Macedonians. They call themselves "Greeks" but have nothing to do with the ancient Greeks or Ancient Macedonians because underneath their modern artificial Greek veneer is nothing more than Albanians, Vlachs, Turks and Macedonians, the same variety of Balkanites that exists throughout the entire southern Balkans. But, if they insist on accusing me of falsifying Ancient Macedonian history, then here is my rebuttal:
UNTRUTHS HAVE SHORT LEGS (Continued)
Untruth #3: Philip "united" the Greek city-states
Response:
(a) Alexander asks a woman, who was being taken captive, who she was, she replied: 'I am the sister of Theogenes who commanded our army against your father, Philip, and fell at Chaeronea fighting for the liberty of Greece.' (If Philip and Alexander were "uniting" the Greek states, then, why were the Greeks fighting for the liberty of Greece?)
(b) The epitaph at CHAERONEA. I do recall reading that the Thebans and the Athenians were fighting together, for the holy soil of Hellas on August the 4th, 338 BC at the sleepy village of Chaeronea. Fellow Hellenes, Athenians and Thebans, against the barbarians from the north- the Macedonians.
Let us examine the following epitaph composed for the common grave of the fallen Hellenes: "Time, whose overseeing eye records all human actions, bear word to mankind what fate was suffered, how striving to safeguard the holy soil of Hellas upon Boeotia's plain we died." I wonder why these Macedonians, allegedly "Hellenes" as some modern-day Greeks would claim, were not fighting to safeguard the holy soil of Hellas?
(c) "When Archelaus attacked Thessalian Larissa, Thrasymachus wrote what was to become a model oration On Behalf of the Larisians. Only one sentence happens to survive: 'Shall we be slaves to Archelaus, we, being Greeks, to a barbarian?'". Archelaus was a Macedonian king.
(d) Plutarch "The Age of Alexander". Modern day Greeks would like to dispatch off Demosthenes castigations of Philip II as political rhetoric, and yet Demosthenes was twice appointed to lead the war effort of Athens against Macedonia. He, Demosthenes, said of Philip that Philip was not Greek, nor related to Greeks but comes from Macedonia where a person could not even buy a decent slave.
"Soon after his death the people of Athens paid him fitting honours by errecting his statue in bronze, and by decreeing that the eldest member of his family should be maintained in the prytaneum at the public expense. On the base of his statue was carved his famous inscription: 'If only your strength had been equal, Demosthenes, to your wisdom, never would Greece have been ruled by a Macedonian Ares'". [p.216]
(e) Plutarch "The Age of Alexander". The news of Philip's death reached Athens. Demosthenes appeared in public dressed in magnificent attire and wearing a garland on his head, although his daughter had died only six days before. Aeschines states: "For my part I cannot say that the Athenians did themselves any credit in putting on garlands and offering sacrifices to celebrate the death of a king who, when he was the conqueror and they the conquered had treated them with such tolerance and humanity. Far apart from provoking the anger of the gods, it was a contemptible action to make Philip a citizen of Athens and pay him honours while he was alive, and then, as soon as he has fallen by another's hand, to be besides themselves with joy, trample on his body, and sing paeans of victory, as though they themselves have accomplished some great feat of arms." [p.207]
(f) Book II - Battle of Issus, in Arrian's "The Campaigns of Alexander". "Darius' Greeks fought to thrust the Macedonians back into the water and save the day for their left wing, already in retreat, while the Macedonians, in their turn, with Alexander's triumph plain before their eyes, were determined to equal his success and not forfeit the proud title of invincible, hitherto universally bestowed upon them. The fight was further embittered by the old racial rivalry of Greek and Macedonian." [p.119]
(g) Quintus Rufus "The History of Alexander". "Alexander meanwhile dealt swiftly with the unrest in Greece - not only did the Athenians rejoice at Philip's death, but the Aetolians, the Thebans, as well as Spartans and the Peloponnesians, were ready to throw off the Macedonian yoke. (Diod. 17.3.3-5) - and he marched south into Thessaly, demanding the loyalty of its people in the name of their common ancestors, Achilles (Justin 11.3.1-2; cf. Diod. 17.4.1). And with speed and diplomacy Alexander brought the Thebans and Athenians into submission (Diod. 17.4.4-6)" [When one unifies, there is no "yoke" to be thrown off.]
(h) Quintus Rufus "The History of Alexander". "Alexander also referred to his father, Philip, conqueror of Athenians, and recalled to their minds the recent conquest of Boeotia and the annihilation of its best known city." [p.41]
There was a conquest and not a "unification" of the Greek city-states by Philip of Macedon.
(i) Quintus Rufus "The History of Alexander". "Men! If you consider the scale of our achievements, your longing for peace and your weariness of brilliant campaigns are not at all surprising. Let me pass over the Illyrians, the Triballians, Boeotia, Thrace, Sparta, the Aecheans, the Peloponnese - all of them subdued under my direct leadership or by campaigns conducteded under my orders of instructions". When one unites, one does not force submission of the conquered people.
(j) Quintus Rufus "The History of Alexander". "Starting with Macedonia, I now have power over Greece; I have brought Thrace and the Illyrians under my control; rule the Triballi and the Maedi. I have Asia in my possession from the Hellespont to the Red Sea." [p.277]
(k) Arrian "The Compaigns of Alexander". Alexander continues to speak to his Macedonians and allies: "Come, then; add the rest of Asia to what you already possess - a small addition to the great sum of your conquests. What great or noble work could we ourselves have achieved had we thought it enough living at ease in Macedon, merely to guard our homes, excepting no burden beyond checking the encroachment of the Thracians on our borders, or the Illyrians and Triballians, or perhaps such Greeks as might prove a menace to our comfort." [p.294]
Untruth #4: "Macedonians were Hellenes"
(a) Homer's Greeks are variously described as Danaoi, Argives, and Achaians, but never Hellene. Jonathan M. Hall Ethnic Identity in Greek Antiquity.
(b) In the Catalogue of Women, the eponymous founder of Makedonia, Makedon, was the son of Zeus and Deukalion's daughter Thuia. This line of descent excludes him from the Hellenic genealogy - and hence, by implication, the Makedonians from the ranks of Hellenism." [p.64]
(c) "But by the fourth century, certainly, the rulers of Macedonian Lyncestis prided themselves on descent from the Corinthian Bacchiads - a royal dynasty fully comparable with the Temenid claims of their rivals at Aegae." Ernst Badian "Studies in the History of Art vol. 10: Macedonia and Greece In Late Classical and Early hellenistic Times"
NOTE: The Temenid claim of the Macedonian Royal house was considered both in ancient times and the present day to be a clever piece of propaganda.
(d) Furthermore, the fact that Zeus is Makedon's father does not necessarily testify to his credentials as a "bona fide Hellene: after all, Sarpedon is the son of Zeus but he is Lykian not a Hellene." Jonathan Hall "Ethnic Identity in Greek Antiquity". p.64
(e) Lamian War 323-322 is also known as the "Hellenic War" by its protagonists. Here, the Greeks, the Hellenes, were fighting against the Macedonians led by Antipater at Lamia.
(f) (Referring to Arrian's separation of Macedonians and Greeks). "The same painstaking attention to details is evident in administrative matters. Appointments of governors are duly mentioned, and throughout his book Arrian is careful to give the father's name in the case of Macedonians, e.g. Ptolemy son of Lagus, and in the case of Greeks their city of origin." [p.25]
(g) Arrian "The Campaigns of Alexander". "The backbone of the infantry was the Macedonian heavy infantry, the 'Foot Companions', organized on territorial basis in six battalions (taxeis) of about 1,500 men each. In place of the nine-foot spear carried by the Greek hoplite, the Macedonian infantryman was armed with a pike or sarissa about 13 or 14 feet long, which required both hands to wield it. The light circular shield was slung on the left shoulder, and was smaller than that carried by the Greek hoplite which demanded the use of the left arm. Both, Greek and Macedonian infantry wore greaves and a helmet, but it is possible that the Macedonians did not wear a breastplate. The phalanx (a heavy infantry), like all the Macedonian troops had been brought by Philip to a remarkable standard of training and discipline." [p.35]
(h) Quintus Rufus "The History of Alexander". At a banquet prepared by Alexander for the ambassadors of certain tribes from India, among the invited guest present was the Macedonian Horratas and the Greek boxer named Dioxippus. Now at the feast the Macedonian Horratas who was already drunk, began to make insulting comments to Dioxippus and to challenge him, if he were a man, to fight a duel. Dioxippus agreed and the two men fought rather a short fight with Dioxippus emerging a victor. A huge crowd of soldiers, including the Greeks, supported Dioxippus. "The outcome of the show dismayed Alexander, as well as the Macedonian soldiers, especially since the barbarians had been present, for he feared that a mockery had been made of the celebrated Macedonian valour." [p.229]
Point of interest: Two fighters, one Macedonian, one Greek. Macedonian lost the fight. Alexander is dismayed. Why? How can a mockery be made of the Macedonian valour if in this fight the Greek won?
Untruth #5: "Alexander's conquest was a Greek conquest"
(a) Arrian "The Campaigns of Alexander". "The cavalry action which ensued was desperate enough, and the Persians broke only when they knew that the Greek mercenaries were being cut and destroyed by the Macedonian infantry." [p.119-20]
(b) Arrian "The Compaigns of Alexander". "When received the report that Alexander was moving forward to the attack, he sent some 30,000 mounted troops and 20,000 light infantry across the river Pinarus, to give himself a chance of getting the main body of his army into position without molestation. His dispositions were as follows: in the van of his heavy infantry were his 30,000 Greek mercenaries, facing the Macedonian infantry, with some 60,000 Persian heavy infantry- known as Kardakes." [p.114]
(c) Quintus Rufus "The History of Alexander". Patron, the Greek commander, speaks with Darius: "Your Majesty", said Patron, "we few are all that remain of 50,000 Greeks. We were all with you in your more fortunate days, and in your present situation we remain as we were when you were prospering, ready to make for and to accept as our country and our home any lands you choose. We and you have been drawn together both by your prosperity and your adversity. By this inviolable loyalty of ours I beg and beseech you: pitch your tent in our area of the camp and let us be your bodyguards. We have left Greece behind; for us there is no Bactria; our hopes rest entirely in you - I wish that were true of the others also! Further talk serves no purpose. As a foreigner born of another race I should not be asking for the responsibility of guarding your person if I thought anyone else could do it." [p.112-13] [50,000 Greeks serving with Darius' army and fighting Alexander's Macedonians]
A legitimate and a very obvious question: If Alexander´s army was in fact a "Greek army" then how is it possible for a "Greek king" -- Alexander -- to hire mercenaries - Greeks, from his 'own' country?
Untruth #6: "Alexander's Army was a Greek Army"
(a) Eugene Borza "Makedonika". "Of the nearly 850 persons listed by Berve, 275 are either certainly or probably ethnic Greeks. Of this number, 126 persons are not associated with Alexander's train, and thus outside present concerns. Of the 149 which remain, 69-- nearly half-- are court figures not associated with administration. They include sophists, physicians, actors, athletes, musicians, jugglers, and other entertainers, and a variety of hangers-on. 89 names remain. Of these three are of uncertain ethnic origin. 24 Greeks serve the king in variety of administrative tasks: some are envoys, some are clerks, some financial officers, some act as king's agents in local places. They pop in and out of the historical record as Alexander sees the need to employ them. The remaining 53 Greeks serve specific military functions.
Out of these 53 persons, 22 names are attached to a single unit (the allies from Orchomenos), who, by the way, are dismissed along with the other Greek allies in 330 B.C. (Only a few short years into the expedition). Fourteen other Greeks hold naval appointments, either as ship commanders in the Hydaspes fleet, or in conjunction with Nearchus' ocean voyage. Four Greeks are in charge of mercenary units, and 9 others have unspecified, low- level military assignments. Seven have duties that did not take them beyond Egypt.
In summary, of the 149 known Greeks with official connections to the king, only 35 to 40 held positions of rank- some as officers, some as administrators, but only a handful in top positions." [One is seriously pressed to provide the needed evidence for the assertion held by this modern Greek propaganda that Alexander's crusade and Alexander's army were Greek. The evidence presented will not support such an act. An army of over 40,000 soldiers cannot possibly be called Greek army where the Greeks representation is so minuscule and largely insignificant. If Greeks like to claim somebody's army, then their rightful claim should be the Persian army of Darius the III, where the number of Greeks exceeded 50,000 paid mercenaries. These Greeks, by the way, were fighting against the Macedonians.]
(b) "Of the sixty-five or so men named as hetairoi, 9 are Greek, including 3 mainlanders. Of the nine, four owed their position to life-long connections with Macedon: Nearchus (#544) and the brothers Erygius (#302) and Laomedon (#464) were in fact raised as Macedonians, and Demaratus (#253) of Corinth had been associated with the court since the time of Philip II."
(c) Eugene Borza "Makedonika". A look at Alexander's satrapal appointments reveals that only 2.6% of all assigned positions was held by Greeks.
There were 52 different persons who held satrapies in Alexander's empire. 24 were Persians and Asians 23 were Macedonians 05 were given to Greeks Of these (5) satrapal appointments given, Nearchus and Sybirtius were from Crete. Stasenor was Cypriote. Cleomenes was from Naucratis in Egypt, and Thoas was from Magnesia on the Meander.
No mainland Greek ever held a satrapy in Alexander's empire.
Untruth #7: "There is no ancient Macedonian language"
(a) Quintus Curtius Rufus "The History of Alexander". Alexander the Great speaks in front of the Macedones of his army: "The Macedonians are going to judge your case," he said. "Please state whether you will use your native language before them."
Philotas: "Besides the Macedonians, there are many present who, I think, will find what I am going to say easier to understand if I use the language you yourself have been using, your purpose, I believe, being only to enable more people to understand you."
Then the king said: "Do you see how offensive Philotas finds even his native language? He alone feels an aversion to learning it. But let him speak as he pleases - only remember he is as contemptuous of our way of life as he is of our language". [p.138]
(b) Eugene Borza. "The lesson is clear: the use of the Greek language as a form of written expression does not by itself identify the ethnicity of a culture". ("In the Shadow of Olympus -The Emergence of Macedon", p. 94.)
"As the Macedonians settled the region following the expulsion of existing peoples, they probably introduced their own customs and language(s); there is no evidence that they adapted any existing language, even though they were now in contact with neighboring populations who spoke a variety of Greek and non-Greek tongues."
"Hammond's firm conclusion that the Macedonians spoke a distinctive dialect of Aeolic Greek is unconvincing to me, resting as it does on an interpretation of a bit of myth quoted by Hellanicus, who made Aeolus the father of the legendary progenitor Macedon". ("In the Shadow of Olympus" p.92.)
"The handful of surviving genuine Macedonian words - not loan words from a Greek - do not show the changes expected from a Greek dialect. And even had they changed at some point it is unlikely that they would have reverted to their original form". ("In the Shadow of Olympus" p.93.)
As a question of method: why would an area three hundred miles north of Athens - not colonized by Athens - used an Attic dialect, unless it were imported? That is, the Attic dialect could hardly be native, and its use is likely part of the process of Hellenization. To put the question differently: if the native language of the Macedonians is Greek, what is its Macedonian dialect?"
"On the matter of language, and despite attempts to make Macedonian a dialect of Greek, one must accept the conclusion of linguist R.A.Crossland in the recent CAH, that an insufficient amount of Macedonian has survived to know what language it was".
(c) Earnst Badian. "Studies in the History of Art vol. 10: Macedonia and Greece In Late Classical and Early Hellenistic Times." Regarding the Cleitus' episode, Ernst Badian writes: "He used the only language in which his guards could be addressed".. [Note: The guards could be addressed in the Macedonian language.]
Episode #2. Eumenes of Cardia. In 321 B.C., Greek commander Ambiance, with cavalry and light arms only, faced the Macedonian noble, Neoptholemus, with the Macedonian phalanx. To avoid battle Xennias, a man whose speech was Macedonian, was sent by Eumenes to negotiate with the commander of the phalanx. Badian analyzes: "Now, Xennias' name at once shows him to be a Macedonian. Since he was in Ambiance entourage he was presumably a Macedonian of superior status, who spoke both standard Greek and his native language. He was the man who could be trusted to transmit Ambiance' message. This clearly shows that the phalanx had to be addressed in Macedonian, if one wanted to be sure (as Ambiance certainly did) that they would understand. And almost equally interesting - he did not address them himself, as he and other commanders normally address soldiers who understood them, nor did he sent a Greek. The suggestion is surely that Macedonian was the language of the infantry and that Greek was a difficult, indeed a foreign language to them. We may thus take it as certain that, when Alexander used Macedonian in addressing his guards, that too was because it was their normal language, and because (like Ambiance) he had to be sure he would be understood".
"The phalanx had to be addressed in Macedonian." "Macedonian was the language of the infantry and that Greek was difficult, indeed a foreign tongue to them."
(d) Ulrich Wilcken in his book 'Alexander the Great' on p.22 notes that "linguistic science has at its disposal a very limited quantity of Macedonian words"
(e) "The Tumult and the Shouting: Two Interpretations of the Cleitus Episode", (published by APA in The Ancient History Bulletin, Vol. 10, number 1, 1996) [I will not endeavor myself with "their" Hammond-Bosworth fight, for obvious reasons. What I will do, however, is lift certain references where these giants, specifically, deal/address the ancient Macedonian language in question.] p. 20 line 23. "Alexander shouted out in Macedonian, and called the hypaspists in Macedonian". p. 25, line 4. "In my view", writes Bosworth, "there is nothing at all surprising in the use of Macedonian. Alexander was calling his hypaspists, who were Macedonians, and he addressed them in their native language/dialect. In Hammond's view, however, the hypaspists would normally have been addressed in standard Greek. Macedonian proper he restricts to the people of the old kingdom, Lower Macedonian, while the tribes of the mountain districts of Pindus (Upper Macedonia) spoke a dialect of West Greek. The evidence for this hypothesis is decidedly tenuous." p. 25 elaborations: Bosworth continues: "I deliberately refrain from adopting any position on the linguistic status of ancient Macedonians. It has little significance outside the nationalistic propaganda of the contemporary Balkan states, in which prejudice and dogma do duty for rational thought. What matters for the present argument is the fact, explicit in Curtius, that Macedonian was largely unintelligible to non-Macedonians. Macedonians might understand Greek, and some Greeks (like Eumenes) with experience of Macedon might speak Macedonian. However, even Eumenes took care that a vital message was conveyed to the phalangites of Neoptholemus by a man fluent in Macedonian." p. 30, line 28, we find the final statement by Bosworth: "He used Macedonian because the troops would instantly understand and (he expected) would react immediately. There is no need for more complicated explanation."
No matter how hard Modern Greeks try to prove otherwise, there is always more than one side to their story!
To be continued.
Many thanks to J.S.G. Gandeto for his contribution to this article.
You can contact the author at rstefov@hotmail.com
Print
Email
