Macedonians and Greeks, the unfinished saga
Gandeto
February 22, 2009
This article is in response to our Greek adversaries whose purpose is to (1) blur the line of distinction between the ancient Macedonians and the ancient Greeks, (2) divert attention from the real issues in Greece, namely the recognition of the ethnic Macedonians who today live in Greece and (3) to portray the Republic of Macedonia and the Macedonian people as some kind of "invention" and as an aggressor in the Balkans.
As a matter of fact, they go so far as to claim that the ethnic Macedonians do not exist, that the language they speak is not Macedonian but some concoction of Balkan´s admixture and their Macedonian Church is not a "viable" entity. In other words, these Greeks have a huge problem with anything Macedonian.
The name "Republic of Macedonia", recognized by more than 124 countries in the world, among which are USA, Canada, China, Russia and India, is a painful thorn in their posterior because it reminds them of some "unfinished business" started almost one hundred years ago. The name of the Republic of Macedonia and the ethnic Macedonians are the surviving eyewitnesses to their genocidal crimes committed against the Macedonian people.
Since 1912-13, after the Balkan Wars, Greece has been preoccupied with the Macedonian issues; her main objectives were and still are: (a) to ethnically cleans Aegean Macedonia from the ethnic Macedonians, (b) to eradicate their language from existence and (c) to Hellenize any remaining ethnic Macedonians, who in spite of all the cruelty unleashed against them to force them out, have remained on their ancestral lands. These were the Greek policies in 1913 and these are the same Greek racist policies in effect today. The only difference now is the existence of the Republic of Macedonia.
The Republic of Macedonia is that forgotten eyewitness, who was supposed to be silenced and "finished", but managed somehow to survive Serbia´s claws—Greece´s partner in crime—and is now asserting its presence. In the court of law this is called the "smoking gun". Therein lays Greece´s dilemma: how to deprive the ethnic Macedonians from using that "gun" as a piece of evidence; if not by blackmail and political backstabbing and wrangling, then, by an outright personal aggression on the eyewitness himself.
By wrestling the name "Macedonians" away from the ethnic Macedonians, Greece hopes to bury the last remaining vestige of hope for the Macedonian people and with it to complete the cycle of ethnic genocide. They have almost succeeded in eradicating the Macedonian language in Greece, have almost expelled all the ethnic Macedonians from Aegean Macedonia and now have thrown all the efforts and energies in taking the name from the Macedonians themselves.
Anyone who in any way corroborates with the Greeks, supports them in these gruesome crimes or remains silent in the face of these blatant atrocities against humanity, is a hypocrite and in my opinion, equally guilty by association of the said crimes. All good and decent human beings, who populate this planet, have a moral obligation to raise their voice and stop this repugnant blight, this menacing locust from going any further.]
Having said that let me go to the business at hand—to expose the Greek fabricators.
In the article "Excerpt from "The Former Yugoslav Republic Macedonia - A Challenge to the Macedonism of the Slavs", written by propagandists from the so-called Australian Greek Advisory Council (who masquerade as Macedonians) on February 12, 2009, we find the following passage:
"In 371 BC, a power struggle had been raised between the Boeotians, Athenians, and Spartans regarding the hegemony of the Greek world [1]. The Spartans, as the guarantor state of all Greeks (except those on the Asian Minor coast since they were under Persian rule) called a conference in order to solve the differences among the states of Athens, Sparta, and Boeotia. As a result, the Spartan invited the Macedonians who were under the hegemony of Amyntas III, the father of Philip II, to represent his state. Amyntas did not go, but he sent a plenipotentiary delegate to vote for him.
In the above argument Aeschines excludes the Spartans and their allies and then he includes Amyntas among the other Greeks as "entitled a seat" in that Congress. That Congress was open only to Greeks and Amyntas was "entitled a seat" of course as a Greek, representing a Greek state. Aeschines makes the statement clearer when he says that Amyntas "joined the other Greeks." There is no record that anyone including Demosthenes objected to Aeschines´ statement, which means even Demosthenes accepted the fact that Aeschines was speaking the truth regarding the Greekness of Amyntas and his Macedonians. Not one of the most powerful states at that time Sparta, Thebes, and Athens considered Macedonia as a formidable force like they did when Amyntas' son Philip was in power. At that time under Amyntas Macedonia was a backward state inhabited by people that Alexander III described as follows:"
The aim of this passage is to show that Amyntas, the Macedonian King, was invited to the congress among, as he says, "the other Greeks". This is being emphasized several times and even "proof" of Demosthenes´ silence, the critic of Macedonian King Phillip, is brought forth to attest to the validity of the case.
" There is no record that anyone including Demosthenes objected to Aeschines´ statement, which means even Demosthenes accepted the fact that Aeschines was speaking the truth regarding the Greekness of Amyntas and his Macedonians."
Well, this might be taken as a valid reason for any Greeks whom are willing to sink their fangs into it but I am a bit skeptical to take a "bite" for a simple reason that Demosthenes at the time of the congress (371 BC) was only 14 years old. Second, as is your habit, in lieu of nothing more substantive to use, your adherence to nebulous phrases is indicative of the paucity of arguments to make the ancient Macedonians Greeks. While we bring to the forefront actual statements from the Macedonian kings, you bring us mere crumbs left under the table. While we bring statements from prominent Greek contemporaries to illustrate our position that ancient Greeks did not regard the ancient Macedonians as brethren, you on the other hand, attempt to slide and twist your way into the argument with highly dubious and inadmissible assertions.
You brought forward Alexander´s speech where he describes the Macedonians from before Phillip´s time and you said:
"Alexander the Great especially mentioned the matter of the Illyrians because he was aware that during his grandfather's, Amyntas, reign, the Illyrians had overrun Macedonia and Amyntas was seeking alliances with anyone that could conceivably help Macedonia. There was no prestige involved, but a weak state with a desperate king. Yet Amyntas was invited to take his seat in the Pan-Hellenic Conference because the conferees all Greeks and only Greeks, considered him and his kingdom of Macedonia, Greek!"
I am afraid; your eagerness to paint the ancient Macedonians with a Hellenic brush has clouded your perceptions. Perusing the ancient literature we find Persians taking a seat among the Greeks at many Hellenic congresses. The fact that ancient Macedonians were never a member of any Hellenic League is lost on you. Why were they excluded from these Hellenic Leagues? Perhaps for the same reason that Alexander I was excluded from the family of the Hellenes in Athens on the account that he did not share in the attributes of all Hellenes: blood, language and culture. You continue to disregard what Alexander III, Phillip II, Phillip V or other Macedonian kings have said and done to the Greeks. I´m not going to re-visit those pages, but what I´m going to do is respond to your last assertion, or conclusion if you will, of the last passage. You wrote:
"But there is another point presented in this speech. Although Alexander mentions Illyrians, Triballians, and Thracians as their enemy states, he never mentioned any of the neighboring Greek states as being inimical even though Macedonians had fought against Thessalians and Athenians alike."
For this I will bring in another one of Alexander´s speeches which was not too far from where your quote was found. You must have seen it, I´m sure. Here it is, Alexander speaking to his Macedonians on the same subject:
14] 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] Arrian, Book 5.
Contrast and compare sentence (1) and (2)
(1) "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] Arrian, Book 5.
Do you suppose this testimony will persuade the jury that Alexander did not regard himself Greek?]
(2) yours:
"includes Amyntas among the other Greeks."
This evidence can be equated with bringing a blind eyewitness to the witness stand to testify what he has seen.
Since you evoked Arrian, here´s a piece of fat to chew on:
11] Alexander speaking to his officers: "...But let me remind you: Through your courage and endurance you have gained possession of Ionia, the Hellespont, both Phrygias, Cappadocia, Paphlagonia, Lydia, Caria, Lycia, Pamphylia, Phoenicia and Egypt; the Greek part of Libya is now yours, together with much of Arabia, lowland Syria, Mesopotamia, Babylon, and Susia;........." [p.292]
"the Greek part of Libya is now yours"
It does not get any clearer than this, does it?
Should you experience difficulties digesting the above, I have a condensed version for your Greek appetite.
4] (Book II - Battle of Issus)
"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]
There is no need for further elaboration. The case is clear cut; there are no ambiguities anywhere, for there are no misconceptions to be found. Ancient Macedonians were simply a different race from the Greeks. You Greeks should look for sameness among the Medes with whom you shared many comforts in the past. Macedonians are an esoteric notion for you Greeks. Only through corruption and fabrication can you make some inroads for now, but eventually, the ultimate victory is reserved for the true inheritors of the ancient Macedonians. You Greeks are temporary impostors. Even if you win the battle with the Republic of Macedonia, rest assured that the world at large will expunge your poisonous Hellenic racist tentacles from the realm of the Macedonians.
Until next time…
As a matter of fact, they go so far as to claim that the ethnic Macedonians do not exist, that the language they speak is not Macedonian but some concoction of Balkan´s admixture and their Macedonian Church is not a "viable" entity. In other words, these Greeks have a huge problem with anything Macedonian.
The name "Republic of Macedonia", recognized by more than 124 countries in the world, among which are USA, Canada, China, Russia and India, is a painful thorn in their posterior because it reminds them of some "unfinished business" started almost one hundred years ago. The name of the Republic of Macedonia and the ethnic Macedonians are the surviving eyewitnesses to their genocidal crimes committed against the Macedonian people.
Since 1912-13, after the Balkan Wars, Greece has been preoccupied with the Macedonian issues; her main objectives were and still are: (a) to ethnically cleans Aegean Macedonia from the ethnic Macedonians, (b) to eradicate their language from existence and (c) to Hellenize any remaining ethnic Macedonians, who in spite of all the cruelty unleashed against them to force them out, have remained on their ancestral lands. These were the Greek policies in 1913 and these are the same Greek racist policies in effect today. The only difference now is the existence of the Republic of Macedonia.
The Republic of Macedonia is that forgotten eyewitness, who was supposed to be silenced and "finished", but managed somehow to survive Serbia´s claws—Greece´s partner in crime—and is now asserting its presence. In the court of law this is called the "smoking gun". Therein lays Greece´s dilemma: how to deprive the ethnic Macedonians from using that "gun" as a piece of evidence; if not by blackmail and political backstabbing and wrangling, then, by an outright personal aggression on the eyewitness himself.
By wrestling the name "Macedonians" away from the ethnic Macedonians, Greece hopes to bury the last remaining vestige of hope for the Macedonian people and with it to complete the cycle of ethnic genocide. They have almost succeeded in eradicating the Macedonian language in Greece, have almost expelled all the ethnic Macedonians from Aegean Macedonia and now have thrown all the efforts and energies in taking the name from the Macedonians themselves.
Anyone who in any way corroborates with the Greeks, supports them in these gruesome crimes or remains silent in the face of these blatant atrocities against humanity, is a hypocrite and in my opinion, equally guilty by association of the said crimes. All good and decent human beings, who populate this planet, have a moral obligation to raise their voice and stop this repugnant blight, this menacing locust from going any further.]
Having said that let me go to the business at hand—to expose the Greek fabricators.
In the article "Excerpt from "The Former Yugoslav Republic Macedonia - A Challenge to the Macedonism of the Slavs", written by propagandists from the so-called Australian Greek Advisory Council (who masquerade as Macedonians) on February 12, 2009, we find the following passage:
"In 371 BC, a power struggle had been raised between the Boeotians, Athenians, and Spartans regarding the hegemony of the Greek world [1]. The Spartans, as the guarantor state of all Greeks (except those on the Asian Minor coast since they were under Persian rule) called a conference in order to solve the differences among the states of Athens, Sparta, and Boeotia. As a result, the Spartan invited the Macedonians who were under the hegemony of Amyntas III, the father of Philip II, to represent his state. Amyntas did not go, but he sent a plenipotentiary delegate to vote for him.
In the above argument Aeschines excludes the Spartans and their allies and then he includes Amyntas among the other Greeks as "entitled a seat" in that Congress. That Congress was open only to Greeks and Amyntas was "entitled a seat" of course as a Greek, representing a Greek state. Aeschines makes the statement clearer when he says that Amyntas "joined the other Greeks." There is no record that anyone including Demosthenes objected to Aeschines´ statement, which means even Demosthenes accepted the fact that Aeschines was speaking the truth regarding the Greekness of Amyntas and his Macedonians. Not one of the most powerful states at that time Sparta, Thebes, and Athens considered Macedonia as a formidable force like they did when Amyntas' son Philip was in power. At that time under Amyntas Macedonia was a backward state inhabited by people that Alexander III described as follows:"
The aim of this passage is to show that Amyntas, the Macedonian King, was invited to the congress among, as he says, "the other Greeks". This is being emphasized several times and even "proof" of Demosthenes´ silence, the critic of Macedonian King Phillip, is brought forth to attest to the validity of the case.
" There is no record that anyone including Demosthenes objected to Aeschines´ statement, which means even Demosthenes accepted the fact that Aeschines was speaking the truth regarding the Greekness of Amyntas and his Macedonians."
Well, this might be taken as a valid reason for any Greeks whom are willing to sink their fangs into it but I am a bit skeptical to take a "bite" for a simple reason that Demosthenes at the time of the congress (371 BC) was only 14 years old. Second, as is your habit, in lieu of nothing more substantive to use, your adherence to nebulous phrases is indicative of the paucity of arguments to make the ancient Macedonians Greeks. While we bring to the forefront actual statements from the Macedonian kings, you bring us mere crumbs left under the table. While we bring statements from prominent Greek contemporaries to illustrate our position that ancient Greeks did not regard the ancient Macedonians as brethren, you on the other hand, attempt to slide and twist your way into the argument with highly dubious and inadmissible assertions.
You brought forward Alexander´s speech where he describes the Macedonians from before Phillip´s time and you said:
"Alexander the Great especially mentioned the matter of the Illyrians because he was aware that during his grandfather's, Amyntas, reign, the Illyrians had overrun Macedonia and Amyntas was seeking alliances with anyone that could conceivably help Macedonia. There was no prestige involved, but a weak state with a desperate king. Yet Amyntas was invited to take his seat in the Pan-Hellenic Conference because the conferees all Greeks and only Greeks, considered him and his kingdom of Macedonia, Greek!"
I am afraid; your eagerness to paint the ancient Macedonians with a Hellenic brush has clouded your perceptions. Perusing the ancient literature we find Persians taking a seat among the Greeks at many Hellenic congresses. The fact that ancient Macedonians were never a member of any Hellenic League is lost on you. Why were they excluded from these Hellenic Leagues? Perhaps for the same reason that Alexander I was excluded from the family of the Hellenes in Athens on the account that he did not share in the attributes of all Hellenes: blood, language and culture. You continue to disregard what Alexander III, Phillip II, Phillip V or other Macedonian kings have said and done to the Greeks. I´m not going to re-visit those pages, but what I´m going to do is respond to your last assertion, or conclusion if you will, of the last passage. You wrote:
"But there is another point presented in this speech. Although Alexander mentions Illyrians, Triballians, and Thracians as their enemy states, he never mentioned any of the neighboring Greek states as being inimical even though Macedonians had fought against Thessalians and Athenians alike."
For this I will bring in another one of Alexander´s speeches which was not too far from where your quote was found. You must have seen it, I´m sure. Here it is, Alexander speaking to his Macedonians on the same subject:
14] 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] Arrian, Book 5.
Contrast and compare sentence (1) and (2)
(1) "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] Arrian, Book 5.
Do you suppose this testimony will persuade the jury that Alexander did not regard himself Greek?]
(2) yours:
"includes Amyntas among the other Greeks."
This evidence can be equated with bringing a blind eyewitness to the witness stand to testify what he has seen.
Since you evoked Arrian, here´s a piece of fat to chew on:
11] Alexander speaking to his officers: "...But let me remind you: Through your courage and endurance you have gained possession of Ionia, the Hellespont, both Phrygias, Cappadocia, Paphlagonia, Lydia, Caria, Lycia, Pamphylia, Phoenicia and Egypt; the Greek part of Libya is now yours, together with much of Arabia, lowland Syria, Mesopotamia, Babylon, and Susia;........." [p.292]
"the Greek part of Libya is now yours"
It does not get any clearer than this, does it?
Should you experience difficulties digesting the above, I have a condensed version for your Greek appetite.
4] (Book II - Battle of Issus)
"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]
There is no need for further elaboration. The case is clear cut; there are no ambiguities anywhere, for there are no misconceptions to be found. Ancient Macedonians were simply a different race from the Greeks. You Greeks should look for sameness among the Medes with whom you shared many comforts in the past. Macedonians are an esoteric notion for you Greeks. Only through corruption and fabrication can you make some inroads for now, but eventually, the ultimate victory is reserved for the true inheritors of the ancient Macedonians. You Greeks are temporary impostors. Even if you win the battle with the Republic of Macedonia, rest assured that the world at large will expunge your poisonous Hellenic racist tentacles from the realm of the Macedonians.
Until next time…
Print
Email
