Print Page | Close Window

In an Open Letter to Obama, 233 World Scholars...

Printed From: History Community ~ All Empires
Category: Scholarly Pursuits
Forum Name: The Minefield
Forum Discription: Controversial topics. Only mods can start new topics
URL: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=27296
Printed Date: 01-Jul-2022 at 16:06
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: In an Open Letter to Obama, 233 World Scholars...
Posted By: akritas
Subject: In an Open Letter to Obama, 233 World Scholars...
Date Posted: 27-May-2009 at 17:40
Originally posted by open letter


........ respectfully request  to intervene to clean up some of the historical debris about Macedonian History left in southeast Europe by the  Bush administration.
Source of the letter is the  
 

May 18, 2009

The Honorable Barack Obama
President, United States of America
White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20500

 

Dear President Obama,

            We, the undersigned scholars of Graeco-Roman antiquity, respectfully request that you intervene to clean up some of the historical debris left in southeast Europe by the previous U.S. administration.


http://macedonia-evidence.org/obama-letter.html - http://macedonia-evidence.org/obama-letter.html
 
mailto:ancient-scholars@macedonia-evidence.org -



Replies:
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 27-May-2009 at 19:55
Locked until further notice. Mod discussion.

-------------


Posted By: akritas
Date Posted: 28-May-2009 at 13:58
The meaning of this letter  has  political dimesion  since the receiver is a political person, but also and an academic one since this letter undersigned from top universities professors and writers like Ian Worthington, Malcolm Errington and Paul Cartledge - that involve with ancient Greek history- and the most of the content has historical material.
 
Political dimesion  originated from the ill-conceived decision by Bush administration to recognize FYROM as the Republic of “Macedonia,” clearly became the catalyst of a more aggressive stance by FYROM that can presently be perceived as hostile towards Greece, a NATO ally of the US for many years. Obama administration should reverse  Bush  decision, recognize them again as FYROM, and actually block their NATO integration until a new name is found. In addition the US should condemn in the strongest terms their irredentist and aggressive behavior, as  mentioned in the letter.  It is imperative that a negotiated mutually acceptable solution also includes change of the FYROM constitutional name to the new agreed name, i.e. change in their passports and use of that name erga omnes.
 
The academic dimension is clear because the names that undersigned this letter are so huge and any comment by me will be a  tom-fool thing to do.



-------------


Posted By: Parnell
Date Posted: 28-May-2009 at 14:06
To be perfectly fair, I'm sure Bush only gave one moments thought to calling it the Republic of Macedonia, mainly out of conveniance and the fact that the name looked prettier than FYROM!

-------------


Posted By: Bulldog
Date Posted: 28-May-2009 at 15:50
Why tell Obama?



-------------
      What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine



Posted By: bgturk
Date Posted: 28-May-2009 at 16:44
And since Obama is so concerned about the hurt feelings of Greek nationalists, he will unrecognize Macedonia, and completely undermine the consistencies of US foreign policy on the issue.




-------------
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJHmQvFNydA - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJHmQvFNydA


Posted By: Vorian
Date Posted: 28-May-2009 at 21:28
Obama doesn't give a shit obviously, but Greek nationalists?? Will you check the list of scholars or at least grow some eyeballs?


Posted By: Chilbudios
Date Posted: 28-May-2009 at 22:32

That letter is so from the 19th century ....



Posted By: xristar
Date Posted: 28-May-2009 at 23:15
What's wrong with the 19th century. And please define the 21st century.

-------------

Defeat allows no explanation
Victory needs none.
It insults the dead when you treat life carelessly.


Posted By: Parnell
Date Posted: 28-May-2009 at 23:21
Originally posted by xristar

What's wrong with the 19th century. And please define the 21st century.


Most relevant post of the year!


-------------


Posted By: Anton
Date Posted: 28-May-2009 at 23:29
Originally posted by xristar

What's wrong with the 19th century.
It deals with questions/discussions popular in 19th century. This topic was actual for newly developing nations (Greeks, Bulgarians, Serbs etc.) in 19th century but nowadays it is just wrong.
 
 


-------------
.


Posted By: Chilbudios
Date Posted: 28-May-2009 at 23:46
Originally posted by Anton

It deals with questions/discussions popular in 19th century. This topic was actual for newly developing nations (Greeks, Bulgarians, Serbs etc.) in 19th century but nowadays it is just wrong.
Thank you! Smile


Posted By: Anton
Date Posted: 29-May-2009 at 00:18
Welcome :)
 
 
 
Originally posted by scholars

            The same motivation is to be seen in http://macedonia-evidence.org/documentation.html#schoolmaps - school maps that show the pseudo-greater Macedonia, stretching from Skopje to Mt. Olympus and labeled in Slavic. 

 
This map is used frequently in bulgarian textbooks to describe geographical territory over which there were territorial claims  between Bulgaria, Greece and Serbia. What is so wrong with the map itself?
 
Originally posted by scholars

The same map and its claims are in calendars, bumper stickers, http://macedonia-evidence.org/documentation.html#banknotes - bank notes , etc., that have been circulating in the new state ever since it declared its independence from Yugoslavia in 1991. 
I wonder why didn't these people at least google the story with the banknote before including it to the letter to Obama?  It was never used as a banknote and actually even never officially printed. The fact that some nationalists print some shit and sold it on streets does not speak much about the official state position. I saw many Greek nationalists maps of Greece including half  Turkey, does it mean that this is "unhealthy territorial inspirations" from the side of Greece?
 
This is minor question, of course, but this is how wrong impression is created in people who are not familiar with the question.
 
 


-------------
.


Posted By: Al Jassas
Date Posted: 29-May-2009 at 09:25

Children are more mature than those god damned nationalists.

Al-Jassas


Posted By: akritas
Date Posted: 29-May-2009 at 10:22
Originally posted by Anton

 
Originally posted by scholars

            The same motivation is to be seen in http://macedonia-evidence.org/documentation.html#schoolmaps - that show the pseudo-greater Macedonia, stretching from Skopje to Mt. Olympus and labeled in Slavic. 

 
This map is used frequently in bulgarian textbooks to describe geographical territory over which there were territorial claims  between Bulgaria, Greece and Serbia. What is so wrong with the map itself?
In FYROM textbooks used to describe "ethnotical" and "historical" territory and geographical.
More in
 
  http://modern-macedonian-history.blogspot.com/2008/07/fyrom-denies-ethnic-sovereignty-of.html - http://modern-macedonian-history.blogspot.com/2008/07/fyrom-denies-ethnic-sovereignty-of.html
 
I give you one more example that happen in other continent. Under the title "Anti-Illegal Immigration Group Calls for 'Absolut' Vodka Boycott," Fox News published on Tuesday, April 8, 2008 a report that covered an advertisement of Absolut Vodka, which showed an 1830's map of Mexico and the United States where most of the modern western United States was still part of Mexico. The ad headline was "In an Absolut World".  People got angered and the company issued an apology.!!!
 
 
Could anyone imagine how do the Greeks feel when the map is not an advertisement, but appears in FYROM government sponsored publications, including schoolbooks?
How would an American feel if the Mexican government was responsible for the map shown above? 
Can anyone imagine if the government of Mexico published the above map what would the reaction of the official United States be?
This is exactly what Greece and to a lesser extent, Bulgaria are facing every single day with the government of the FYROM.
 
Finally  in the below picture you can see the present FYROM PM Nichola Gruevski   on  04 February 2008, shown placing a wreath on the monument on the Bulgarian and FYROM's hero Goce Delchev. One can clearly see the map showing FYROM as Macedonia to include also the northern Macedonia province of Greece and part of Bulgaria, thus indicating their intentions to continue their struggle of taking this part away from Greece and Bulgaria and uniting it with their country.
 
 
 
The same map with the same "geographical borders".
 
Originally posted by Anton

 
Originally posted by scholars

The same map and its claims are in calendars, bumper stickers, http://macedonia-evidence.org/documentation.html#banknotes - , etc., that have been circulating in the new state ever since it declared its independence from Yugoslavia in 1991. 
I wonder why didn't these people at least google the story with the banknote before including it to the letter to Obama?  It was never used as a banknote and actually even never officially printed. The fact that some nationalists print some shit and sold it on streets does not speak much about the official state position. I saw many Greek nationalists maps of Greece including half  Turkey, does it mean that this is "unhealthy territorial inspirations" from the side of Greece?
 
This is minor question, of course, but this is how wrong impression is created in people who are not familiar with the question.
 
This banknote was printed  for publish usage from the FYROM administration on 15 January of 1991 but somehow was stoped.The name of the bill was "makedonka"  and  the official money of the FYROM , DENAR, which consist of 100 DENI, has been introduced in circulation 20th of April 1993. All these scholars that undersigned this letter they know the historical background of this FYROM moovement. More informations in http://antikviteti.net/cms/modules/articles/article.php?id=29 - http://antikviteti.net/cms/modules/articles/article.php?id=29
 


-------------


Posted By: akritas
Date Posted: 29-May-2009 at 10:27
Originally posted by bgturk

And since Obama is so concerned about the hurt feelings of Greek nationalists, he will unrecognize Macedonia, and completely undermine the consistencies of US foreign policy on the issue.


Name some Greek nationalists......
Ian Worthington, Malcolm Errington and Paul Cartledge are also Greek nationalists ?


-------------


Posted By: akritas
Date Posted: 29-May-2009 at 10:33
Originally posted by Parnell

To be perfectly fair, I'm sure Bush only gave one moments thought to calling it the Republic of Macedonia, mainly out of conveniance and the fact that the name looked prettier than FYROM!
Bush Foreign Policy is a sea of fails and one of the them is the recognizition of the  FYROM as  "Republic of Macedonia”.

-------------


Posted By: Chilbudios
Date Posted: 29-May-2009 at 11:55
Originally posted by akritas

Name some Greek nationalists......
Ian Worthington, Malcolm Errington and Paul Cartledge are also Greek nationalists ?
I actually find that list of scholars rather irrelevant. This letter is not a simple historical essay about Ancient Macedonia. It is rather about modern politics, identities, about rights and legitimizations, and most of those scholars have no recognized expertise to judge these things, so their titles are red herrings. I don't know if they actually knew what they signed, if they are nationalists or simply buying nationalist propaganda (even when not being Greeks, for having Greek ancestors, spouses, friends, etc.). What I certainly do now is that Ancient/Classical Archaeology, Art, Philology etc. is not about modern FYROM and Greece's issues.
 
On a closer look, it seems this letter was initiated by one American archaeologist and slowly got more and more co-signers. Here's a reply to it:
http://macedoniaonline.eu/content/view/6898/1/ - http://macedoniaonline.eu/content/view/6898/1/
 
From the previous link I found this brief article, somehow related to the question:
http://www.socresonline.org.uk/2/1/7.html - http://www.socresonline.org.uk/2/1/7.html
 
 
 
 


Posted By: Anton
Date Posted: 29-May-2009 at 13:13
Originally posted by akritas

In FYROM textbooks used to describe "ethnotical" and "historical" territory and geographical.
 
Of course it is historical. For more than 150 years it is called as such.
 
 
I give you one more example that happen in other continent. Under the title "Anti-Illegal Immigration Group Calls for 'Absolut' Vodka Boycott," Fox News published on Tuesday, April 8, 2008 a report that covered an advertisement of Absolut Vodka, which showed an 1830's map of Mexico and the United States where most of the modern western United States was still part of Mexico. The ad headline was "In an Absolut World".  People got angered and the company issued an apology.!!!
 
Could anyone imagine how do the Greeks feel when the map is not an advertisement, but appears in FYROM government sponsored publications, including schoolbooks?
How would an American feel if the Mexican government was responsible for the map shown above? 
Can anyone imagine if the government of Mexico published the above map what would the reaction of the official United States be?
This is exactly what Greece and to a lesser extent, Bulgaria are facing every single day with the government of the FYROM.
 
 
This is irrelevant example with different historical background. Most of Californian settlers, if i am not mistaken, were not Mexicans but English speaking and even revolted against Mexican rule.  Whereas most of Macedonia during national revival (apart from lands around and in Thessaloniki) was inhabited by Slavic speaking people, whatever you prefer to call them. Besides, nobody in States opposes the name Mexico just because they have a state with almost the same name.
 
 
  
 
 
This banknote was printed  for publish usage from the FYROM administration on 15 January of 1991 but somehow was stoped.The name of the bill was "makedonka"  and  the official money of the FYROM , DENAR, which consist of 100 DENI, has been introduced in circulation 20th of April 1993. All these scholars that undersigned this letter they know the historical background of this FYROM moovement. More informations in http://antikviteti.net/cms/modules/articles/article.php?id=29 - http://antikviteti.net/cms/modules/articles/article.php?id=29
This is a lie, Macedonian government rejected to publish this banknote which printing was offered by leading opposition party. I guess you know it very well. If your scholars were familiar with the historical background regarding the name of the state and the nation they would know the banknote story well as it was quite scandalous. Thus they are either not experts or simply mislead their readers and the adressee. 


-------------
.


Posted By: Chilbudios
Date Posted: 29-May-2009 at 13:20
Here's an earlier draft of the letter ending with an irredentist suggestion: http://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/public/mgsa-l/2009-February/010451.html - http://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/public/mgsa-l/2009-February/010451.html


Posted By: Zagros
Date Posted: 29-May-2009 at 13:42
The only difference it seems in your analogy is that Mexico did actually exist and exist within that territorial context where as FYRM, even in its current context, is a very recent fabrication.


Originally posted by akritas

Originally posted by Anton

 
Originally posted by scholars

            The same motivation is to be seen in http://macedonia-evidence.org/documentation.html#schoolmaps - that show the pseudo-greater Macedonia, stretching from Skopje to Mt. Olympus and labeled in Slavic. 

 
This map is used frequently in bulgarian textbooks to describe geographical territory over which there were territorial claims  between Bulgaria, Greece and Serbia. What is so wrong with the map itself?
In FYROM textbooks used to describe "ethnotical" and "historical" territory and geographical.
More in
 
  http://modern-macedonian-history.blogspot.com/2008/07/fyrom-denies-ethnic-sovereignty-of.html - http://modern-macedonian-history.blogspot.com/2008/07/fyrom-denies-ethnic-sovereignty-of.html
 
I give you one more example that happen in other continent. Under the title "Anti-Illegal Immigration Group Calls for 'Absolut' Vodka Boycott," Fox News published on Tuesday, April 8, 2008 a report that covered an advertisement of Absolut Vodka, which showed an 1830's map of Mexico and the United States where most of the modern western United States was still part of Mexico. The ad headline was "In an Absolut World".  People got angered and the company issued an apology.!!!
 
 
Could anyone imagine how do the Greeks feel when the map is not an advertisement, but appears in FYROM government sponsored publications, including schoolbooks?
How would an American feel if the Mexican government was responsible for the map shown above? 
Can anyone imagine if the government of Mexico published the above map what would the reaction of the official United States be?
This is exactly what Greece and to a lesser extent, Bulgaria are facing every single day with the government of the FYROM.
 
Finally  in the below picture you can see the present FYROM PM Nichola Gruevski   on  04 February 2008, shown placing a wreath on the monument on the Bulgarian and FYROM's hero Goce Delchev. One can clearly see the map showing FYROM as Macedonia to include also the northern Macedonia province of Greece and part of Bulgaria, thus indicating their intentions to continue their struggle of taking this part away from Greece and Bulgaria and uniting it with their country.
 
 
 
The same map with the same "geographical borders".
 
Originally posted by Anton

 
Originally posted by scholars

The same map and its claims are in calendars, bumper stickers, http://macedonia-evidence.org/documentation.html#banknotes - , etc., that have been circulating in the new state ever since it declared its independence from Yugoslavia in 1991. 
I wonder why didn't these people at least google the story with the banknote before including it to the letter to Obama?  It was never used as a banknote and actually even never officially printed. The fact that some nationalists print some shit and sold it on streets does not speak much about the official state position. I saw many Greek nationalists maps of Greece including half  Turkey, does it mean that this is "unhealthy territorial inspirations" from the side of Greece?
 
This is minor question, of course, but this is how wrong impression is created in people who are not familiar with the question.
 
This banknote was printed  for publish usage from the FYROM administration on 15 January of 1991 but somehow was stoped.The name of the bill was "makedonka"  and  the official money of the FYROM , DENAR, which consist of 100 DENI, has been introduced in circulation 20th of April 1993. All these scholars that undersigned this letter they know the historical background of this FYROM moovement. More informations in http://antikviteti.net/cms/modules/articles/article.php?id=29 - http://antikviteti.net/cms/modules/articles/article.php?id=29
 


-------------


Posted By: Leonidas
Date Posted: 29-May-2009 at 13:42
Originally posted by Parnell

To be perfectly fair, I'm sure Bush only gave one moments thought to calling it the Republic of Macedonia, mainly out of conveniance and the fact that the name looked prettier than FYROM!
actaully he (the USA) was biased, as FYROM played a part of the USA arch in the region, starting from Kosovo inc Albania. When Kosovo was fully prized from Serbia, skopja lost a bit of its importance in the scheme of things. Greece and the USA never have got along at that geopolititcal level. The name issues is just posturing and petty politics for the USA, no importance.

Obama wont heed this letter to be honest, this is way to small time for him and in my opinion rightfully so.

 i dont expect others to think much of this at all. This is between Greece and FYROM with indirect effects going toward regional organistions.


-------------


Posted By: Anton
Date Posted: 29-May-2009 at 13:51
Originally posted by Chilbudios

Here's an earlier draft of the letter ending with an irredentist suggestion: http://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/public/mgsa-l/2009-February/010451.html - http://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/public/mgsa-l/2009-February/010451.html
 
There are quite a few Macedonian scholars around the world. I supposse they should write an open letter to Obama citing this draft  Smile 


-------------
.


Posted By: Anton
Date Posted: 29-May-2009 at 13:53
Originally posted by Leonidas

  i dont expect others to think much of this at all. This is between Greece and FYROM with indirect effects going toward regional organistions.
 
This is not between Greece and Republic of Macedonia only, but Bulgaria, Albania and to lesser extent probably Serbia must be involved in finding solution for this issue.


-------------
.


Posted By: bgturk
Date Posted: 29-May-2009 at 14:17
Originally posted by Leonidas


Obama wont heed this letter to be honest, this is way to small time for him and in my opinion rightfully so.

 i dont expect others to think much of this at all. This is between Greece and FYROM with indirect effects going toward regional organistions.


The mistake that people make is to assume that the Obama policy will be different to that of Bush. On minor matters like this, American foreign policy is generally continuous, and is handled by the same old bureaucrats.

And the circumstances that have lead those bureaucrats to recognize Macedonia under its constitutional name in 2004 are unlikely to have changed now. Tangible political consideration must have lied behind the recognition, rather than some abstract theory about the origins of an extinct people that had lived thousands of years ago. The argumentation in the letter is, therefore, irrelevant to the US decision, and is unlikely to change it.


-------------
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJHmQvFNydA - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJHmQvFNydA


Posted By: akritas
Date Posted: 29-May-2009 at 14:21
Originally posted by Chilbudios

Here's an earlier draft of the letter ending with an irredentist suggestion: http://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/public/mgsa-l/2009-February/010451.html - http://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/public/mgsa-l/2009-February/010451.html
This letter has nothing to do with the posted one in this topic.
Prof Miller in http://macedonia-evidence.org/letter-1-archaeology.html - his website also has publish and this letter that was a response to the accuracies of the "of Archaeology" magazine that promote FYROM as another home of the Great Alexander.
Be more cautious please.


-------------


Posted By: Chilbudios
Date Posted: 29-May-2009 at 14:32
Originally posted by akritas

This letter has nothing to do with the posted one in this topic.
Prof Miller in http://macedonia-evidence.org/letter-1-archaeology.html - his website also has publish and this letter that was a response to the accuracies of the "of Archaeology" magazine that promote FYROM as another home of the Great Alexander.
Be more cautious please.
That's even worse, the site holding also this:
 
Allow me to end this exegesis by making a suggestion to resolve the question of the modern use of the name "Macedonia." Greece should annex Paionia – that is what Philip II did in 359 B.C. And that would appear to be acceptable to the modern residents of that area since they claim to be Greek by appropriating the name Macedonia and its most famous man. Then the modern people of this new Greek province could work on learning to speak and read and write Greek, hopefully even as well as Alexander did.
 
So irredentism is dangerous when comes from FYROM but acceptable when it comes from Greece or its lobbyists?
 
However, the two letters hold obvious signs of a same discourse, the later one polished for an audience which would likely not welcome a violent anti-FYROM rant. For example:
 
Jan 22, 2009:
When Euripides – who died and was buried in Macedonia (Thucydides apud Pal. Anth. 7.45; Pausanias 1.2.2; Diodorus Siculus 13.103) – wrote his play Archelaos in honor of the great-uncle of Alexander, did he write it in Slavic?  When he wrote the Bacchai while at the court of Archelaos did he not write it in Greek even as it has survived to us?  Or should we imagine that Euripides was a “Macedonian” who wrote in Slavic (at a date when that language is not attested) which was translated into Greek?
 
May 18, 2009:
Euripides – who died and was buried in Macedonia [linked refs: Thucydides apud Pal. Anth. 7.45; Pausanias 1.2.2; Diodorus Siculus 13.103.] – wrote his play Archelaos in honor of the great-uncle of Alexander, and in Greek.  While in Macedonia, Euripides also wrote the Bacchai, again in Greek.  Presumably the Macedonian audience could understand what he wrote and what they heard.
 
 
Jan 22, 2009:
What was the language of instruction when Aristotle taught Alexander?  What language was carried by Alexander with him on his expedition to the East?  Why do we have ancient inscriptions in Greek in settlements established by Alexander as far away as Afghanistan, and none in Slavic?  Why did Greek become the lingua franca in Alexander’s empire if he was actually a “Macedonian”?  Why was the New Testament written in Greek rather than Slavic?
 
May 18, 2009:
Alexander carried with him throughout his conquests Aristotle’s edition of Homer’s Iliad.  Alexander also spread Greek language and culture throughout his empire, founding cities and establishing centers of learning.  Hence inscriptions concerning such typical Greek institutions as the gymnasium are found as far away as Afghanistan.  They are all written in Greek.
The questions follow:  Why was Greek the lingua franca all over Alexander’s empire if he was a “Macedonian”?  Why was the New Testament, for example, written in Greek?
 


Posted By: akritas
Date Posted: 29-May-2009 at 14:41
Originally posted by Chilbudios

Originally posted by akritas

This letter has nothing to do with the posted one in this topic.
Prof Miller in http://macedonia-evidence.org/letter-1-archaeology.html - his website also has publish and this letter that was a response to the accuracies of the "of Archaeology" magazine that promote FYROM as another home of the Great Alexander.
Be more cautious please.
That's even worse, the site holding also this:
 
Allow me to end this exegesis by making a suggestion to resolve the question of the modern use of the name "Macedonia." Greece should annex Paionia – that is what Philip II did in 359 B.C. And that would appear to be acceptable to the modern residents of that area since they claim to be Greek by appropriating the name Macedonia and its most famous man. Then the modern people of this new Greek province could work on learning to speak and read and write Greek, hopefully even as well as Alexander did.
 
So irredentism is dangerous when comes from FYROM but acceptable when it comes from Greece or its lobbyists?
 
However, the two letters hold obvious signs of a same discourse, the later one polished for an audience which would likely not welcome a violent anti-FYROM rant. For example
 
Jan 22, 2009:
When Euripides – who died and was buried in Macedonia (Thucydides apud Pal. Anth. 7.45; Pausanias 1.2.2; Diodorus Siculus 13.103) – wrote his play Archelaos in honor of the great-uncle of Alexander, did he write it in Slavic?  When he wrote the Bacchai while at the court of Archelaos did he not write it in Greek even as it has survived to us?  Or should we imagine that Euripides was a “Macedonian” who wrote in Slavic (at a date when that language is not attested) which was translated into Greek?
May 18, 2009:
Euripides – who died and was buried in Macedonia [linked refs: Thucydides apud Pal. Anth. 7.45; Pausanias 1.2.2; Diodorus Siculus 13.103.] – wrote his play Archelaos in honor of the great-uncle of Alexander, and in Greek.  While in Macedonia, Euripides also wrote the Bacchai, again in Greek.  Presumably the Macedonian audience could understand what he wrote and what they heard.
 
 
The letter that sent to Obama written from Professor Miller and undesigned from 247  Classical Scholars.
As regards the phrase ... Greece should annex Paionia – that is what Philip II did in 359 B.C. ... that written and sent it  in an letter to the archaelogy magasine  is an sarcasm  for the Slavmacedonians because want to be descents of the ancient ones.
 
Anyway you can e-mail him and ask him for further details.


-------------


Posted By: Chilbudios
Date Posted: 29-May-2009 at 14:57
Originally posted by akritas

The letter that sent to Obama written from Professor Miller and undesigned from 247  Classical Scholars.
As far as I am concerned they could be 248 engineers arguing they don't agree how FYROM builds its airports.
I'm leaving aside the questions of ancient Macedon, especially those controversial aspects which this letter fails to acknowledge, but since when Classical studies deal with modern identities? With the history of the modern Balkans? 
 
As regards the phrase ... Greece should annex Paionia – that is what Philip II did in 359 B.C. ...is an sarcasm  for the Slavmacedonians because want to be descents of the ancient ones.
Double standards. Any symbol or discourse from FYROM, no matter how unofficial, innocent, or even sarcastic, which relates to Greece is augmented and distorted and turned into an accusation of irredentism.
 
Anyway you can e-mail him and ask him for further details.
I see enough in his letters, I don't need further details.


Posted By: akritas
Date Posted: 29-May-2009 at 15:13
Originally posted by Chilbudios

Originally posted by akritas

The letter that sent to Obama written from Professor Miller and undesigned from 247  Classical Scholars.
As far as I am concerned they could be 248 engineers arguing they don't agree how FYROM builds its airports.
I'm leaving aside the questions of ancient Macedon, especially those controversial aspects which this letter fails to acknowledge, but since when Classical studies deal with modern identities? With the history of the modern Balkans? 
These Scholars aim in the cultural identity and not in the national. Antony D. Smith  remarks that there are two main kinds of ethnic extinction in the full sense: genocide and ethnocide, which is sometimes - at times misleadingly — called «cultural genocide». In one sense genocide is a rare and probably modern phenomenon. It includes those cases where we know that mass death of a cultural group was premeditated and the basis of that targeting was exclusively the existence and membership of that cultural group.
Greeks  from  Macedonia, in no way identified with or related to the newly formed independent state referred to as “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” ; They instead insulted by the fact that I cannot be known as a Macedonian without being identified by others as related to FYROM. This is a rape of theirs identity and a continuing cultural genocide.
This is the point of the letter as regards the connection with the modern identity
and history at the Balkans.
Originally posted by Chilbudios

Originally posted by akritas

As regards the phrase ... Greece should annex Paionia – that is what Philip II did in 359 B.C. ...is an sarcasm  for the Slavmacedonians because want to be descents of the ancient ones.
Double standards. Any symbol or discourse from FYROM, no matter how unofficial, innocent, or even sarcastic, which relates to Greece is augmented and distorted and turned into an accusation of irredentism.
Its your opinion. You can mail him as I said if you want......
 
Originally posted by Chilbudios

Originally posted by akritas

Anyway you can e-mail him and ask him for further details.
I see enough in his letters, I don't need further details.
...but you dont doing.


-------------


Posted By: Chilbudios
Date Posted: 29-May-2009 at 15:22
Originally posted by akritas

These Scholars aim in the cultural identity and not in the national.
First thing is that those scholars have no expertise in judging modern identities, cultural or of whatever nature. Second thing (which proves the  first given they undersigned that monstrosity) is that FYROM-ers do not have a "cultural identity" of "Slavs" (how they are repeatedly called), actually there's no such cultural identity (leaving aside that FYROM is actually a multi-ethnic state).
 
 
Antony D. Smith  remarks that there are two main kinds of ethnic extinction in the full sense: genocide and ethnocide, which is sometimes - at times misleadingly — called «cultural genocide». In one sense genocide is a rare and probably modern phenomenon. It includes those cases where we know that mass death of a cultural group was premeditated and the basis of that targeting was exclusively the existence and membership of that cultural group.
Greeks  from  Macedonia, in no way identified with or related to the newly formed independent state referred to as “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” ; They instead insulted by the fact that I cannot be known as a Macedonian without being identified by others as related to FYROM. This is a rape of theirs identity and a continuing cultural genocide.
This is the point of the letter as regards the connection with the modern identity and history at the Balkans.
There's no evidence whatsoever that the culture of Greeks in Macedonia is any immediate danger, on the contrary, Greece is rather famous in Balkans for its assimilation policies and it was criticized repeatedly for its flawed policy against minorities. The claims of identity rape and cultural genocide are unfounded and rather say something about those holding such claims.
 
The Moldovans from Romania (which has a historical region named in Moldova and its inhabitants are named consequently) generally do not feel insulted by the existence of a Moldovan nation, though the latter includes also ethnic Russians and Ukrainians.
 
 


Posted By: akritas
Date Posted: 29-May-2009 at 15:44
Originally posted by Chilbudios

Originally posted by akritas

These Scholars aim in the cultural identity and not in the national.
First thing is that those scholars have no expertise in judging modern identities, cultural or of whatever nature. Second thing (which proves the  first given they undersigned that monstrosity) is that FYROM-ers do not have a "cultural identity" of "Slavs" (how they are repeatedly called), actually there's no such cultural identity (leaving aside that FYROM is actually a multi-ethnic state).
FYROM's  is a a multi-ethnic state only to the papers. Slavmacedonians have block the Albanians from the UN talks as regards the State name issue because they  know  that Albanians are more ready to accept a compromise on the name  in exchange for a swift NATO and EU accession.
 
Your thesis that one scholar that involve with the ancient history doesnt have the right to deposit  his/hers opinion as regards modern cultural circumstances  is dogmatic. Every scholar-specially with that acedemic range-  is free to express his opinion.
Originally posted by Chilbudios

Originally posted by akritas

Antony D. Smith  remarks that there are two main kinds of ethnic extinction in the full sense: genocide and ethnocide, which is sometimes - at times misleadingly — called «cultural genocide». In one sense genocide is a rare and probably modern phenomenon. It includes those cases where we know that mass death of a cultural group was premeditated and the basis of that targeting was exclusively the existence and membership of that cultural group.
Greeks  from  Macedonia, in no way identified with or related to the newly formed independent state referred to as “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” ; They instead insulted by the fact that I cannot be known as a Macedonian without being identified by others as related to FYROM. This is a rape of theirs identity and a continuing cultural genocide.
This is the point of the letter as regards the connection with the modern identity and history at the Balkans.
There's no evidence whatsoever that the culture of Greeks in Macedonia is any immediate danger, on the contrary, Greece is rather famous in Balkans for its assimilation policies and it was criticized repeatedly for its flawed policy against minorities. The claims of identity rape and cultural genocide are unfounded and rather say something about those holding such claims.
Tell me one Balkan state that not make assimilation policies all these years before accuse Greece  for that ?
 


-------------


Posted By: Leonidas
Date Posted: 29-May-2009 at 16:59
Originally posted by bgturk



And the circumstances that have lead those bureaucrats to recognize Macedonia under its constitutional name in 2004 are unlikely to have changed now. Tangible political consideration must have lied behind the recognition, rather than some abstract theory about the origins of an extinct people that had lived thousands of years ago. The argumentation in the letter is, therefore, irrelevant to the US decision, and is unlikely to change it.
erm the first part of my post alluded to that. The US has plans, FYROM was or is a part of that. Greeks already feel screwed by the US so this wasnt going to lose anything the USA havent already lost. Just aggravates, and anyhow the US has many options in the region.Obama wont be nearly as aggressive as Bush but he has a million other things to change or modify than this little spat.

Off the top of my head;Israel, iran, NK, iraq, afghanistan, Russia, even friggen pirates, not to mention citi group, AIG, general motors, a non-health system, oil, green house gases, 500,000 + getting laid off in any month....yeah this would be problem number 459.

Bad timing akritas put the issue in the bottom drawer for a not so rainy day. Greece needs to think where its going to fund its next budget from, certainly not enough tax payers for it.


-------------


Posted By: Leonidas
Date Posted: 29-May-2009 at 17:11
Originally posted by Anton

Originally posted by Leonidas

  i dont expect others to think much of this at all. This is between Greece and FYROM with indirect effects going toward regional organistions.
 
This is not between Greece and Republic of Macedonia only, but Bulgaria, Albania and to lesser extent probably Serbia must be involved in finding solution for this issue.
since every local nation has a bias i am not sure they can add any value. For that reason FYROM looks up to the big boys from afar not their 'enemy' neighbors for solutions. Either way Greece will simply say no to the EU/NATO door, while Skopje builds a bigger Alexender statue to p*ss off poeple like akritas. Sofia or Tirana can do nothing to stop the impasse. The US struggled for f sake, and even it really really wants them to kiss and make up, makes things easier for everybody especally the USA. Smile



-------------


Posted By: Anton
Date Posted: 29-May-2009 at 20:26
Originally posted by Leonidas

  since every local nation has a bias i am not sure they can add any value. For that reason FYROM looks up to the big boys from afar not their 'enemy' neighbors for solutions. Either way Greece will simply say no to the EU/NATO door, while Skopje builds a bigger Alexender statue to p*ss off poeple like akritas. Sofia or Tirana can do nothing to stop the impasse. The US struggled for f sake, and even it really really wants them to kiss and make up, makes things easier for everybody especally the USA. Smile
 
Albania should be involved as there is huge ethnical Albanian component and Albania can be as a state representing albanian interests. Bulgaria holds part of Macedonia and thus is basically in a similar position as Greece, and also can support Macedonians in their claims as soon as they are not crazy :) I do not know about Tirana but Sofia can certainly help them to develop economically and politically and pursuade other EU states to push on Greece in this stupid EU ban.


-------------
.


Posted By: Akolouthos
Date Posted: 29-May-2009 at 20:33
Not precisely on topic, but I was wondering: Is that you, bg_turk? The same bg_turk that was on the forum years ago? If so, welcome back; I've missed you! If not, know that you had a wonderful namesake. Smile
 
-Akolouthos


Posted By: Anton
Date Posted: 29-May-2009 at 21:17
Originally posted by akritas

Greeks  from  Macedonia, in no way identified with or related to the newly formed independent state referred to as “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” ; They instead insulted by the fact that I cannot be known as a Macedonian without being identified by others as related to FYROM. This is a rape of theirs identity and a continuing cultural genocide.
What makes this position different from a similar position of a Macedonian from FYROM? Can't  they be insulted by the fact that they cannot be known as Macedonians (as they called themselves for more than 150 years) without being confused by others as related to Greece province? What is so insulting to be confused with this state anyway? My grandmom calls herself Macedonian sometimes (which is not contradiction with Bulgarian in her case) --  should she be offended if somebody thinks she is Greek?
 
This is the point of the letter as regards the connection with the modern identity
and history at the Balkans.
No, that wasn't the point of the letter. The point of the letter was that those people (Macedonian) don't have right to call themelves by the name they (or at least many of them) used for quite many years. This point was defended by weak arguments including misleadding and wrongly interpreted stories.
 
Sarcasm that you mentioned cannot be used in such a delicate situation. Those people, Akritas, are scientists, they should think twice or even more before they write. Especially if they write an official letter published in mass media.
 


-------------
.


Posted By: akritas
Date Posted: 29-May-2009 at 22:20
Originally posted by Anton

Originally posted by akritas

Greeks  from  Macedonia, in no way identified with or related to the newly formed independent state referred to as “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” ; They instead insulted by the fact that I cannot be known as a Macedonian without being identified by others as related to FYROM. This is a rape of theirs identity and a continuing cultural genocide.
What makes this position different from a similar position of a Macedonian from FYROM? Can't  they be insulted by the fact that they cannot be known as Macedonians (as they called themselves for more than 150 years) without being confused by others as related to Greece province? What is so insulting to be confused with this state anyway? My grandmom calls herself Macedonian sometimes (which is not contradiction with Bulgarian in her case) --  should she be offended if somebody thinks she is Greek?
Your grandma calls herself Makedontsi or Makedonci in the local Slavic language and not Macedonian

A Greek Macedonian(ancient, medieval and modern) identified as Makedonas 2500 years now.

In the Slavonic languages of FYROM and Bulgaria the adjective Macedonian, both in its ethnic and regional provenance is spelled in an identical form as makedonski. On the other hand, in the Greek language the same adjective Macedonian, in its regional/cultural/historical context, appears as makedonikos (-i or -o for the feminine and neuter endings).

So the problem indicated in the English language and the term "Macedonian".Thus, the term "Macedonian"  to denote such an identity in Greece not only fails to respect Hellenic cultural heritage and the identify of 2.5 million Greek Macedonians living there, but also threatens to create a serious confusion or even a potential clash over identities in the whole region.
 
One solution is the name of the State and the nationality to be for all usages with the Slavic form. FYROM has rejected this in 1994.

Originally posted by Anton

Originally posted by akritas

[QUOTE=Anton][QUOTE=akritas]
[QUOTE=Anton][QUOTE=akritas]
This is the point of the letter as regards the connection with the modern identity
and history at the Balkans.
No, that wasn't the point of the letter. The point of the letter was that those people (Macedonian) don't have right to call themelves by the name they (or at least many of them) used for quite many years. This point was defended by weak arguments including misleadding and wrongly interpreted stories.
 
Sarcasm that you mentioned cannot be used in such a delicate situation. Those people, Akritas, are scientists, they should think twice or even more before they write. Especially if they write an official letter published in mass media.
 
You confuse the letters.


-------------


Posted By: Anton
Date Posted: 29-May-2009 at 22:44
Originally posted by akritas

Your grandma calls herself Makedontsi or Makedonci in the local Slavic language and not Macedonian

A Greek Macedonian(ancient, medieval and modern) identified as Makedonas 2500 years now.

In the Slavonic languages of FYROM and Bulgaria the adjective Macedonian, both in its ethnic and regional provenance is spelled in an identical form as makedonski. On the other hand, in the Greek language the same adjective Macedonian, in its regional/cultural/historical context, appears as makedonikos (-i or -o for the feminine and neuter endings).

I am not sure I understand your point here. So in Bulgarian it will be Makedonec in Greek it will be Makedonikos. Where is the difference? To me it is essentially the same.
 
 
So the problem indicated in the English language and the term "Macedonian".Thus, the term "Macedonian"  to denote such an identity in Greece not only fails to respect Hellenic cultural heritage and the identify of 2.5 million Greek Macedonians living there, but also threatens to create a serious confusion or even a potential clash over identities in the whole region.
But your protests also fail to respect their name, used for at least several generations. What is the difference again?  
 
 
One solution is the name of the State and the nationality to be for all usages with the Slavic form. FYROM has rejected this in 1994.

Variants like Slavomakedonec or Makedonoslav or whatever else sound weird and is not what used to be their name. Why don't you guys call yourself Greekomacedonians or Hellenomakedonikos (or how would it be according to Greek language grammar)? Because it sounds stupid. Similar logic have people in Skopje.

 
You confuse the letters.
No I don't. I read both and they are about the same stuff and one is used as a basis for another. Anyway, the main question is -- who are those people to decide how a particular group of people should call themselves? And how one of them can offer Greece to annex an independent European state?


-------------
.


Posted By: bgturk
Date Posted: 29-May-2009 at 22:57
Originally posted by Akolouthos

Not precisely on topic, but I was wondering: Is that you, bg_turk? The same bg_turk that was on the forum years ago? If so, welcome back; I've missed you! If not, know that you had a wonderful namesake. Smile
 
-Akolouthos

Hi Akolouthos,
Yes its me. I forgot the password to my other account so i am using this new one. Nice to see you all too. ;-)


-------------
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJHmQvFNydA - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJHmQvFNydA


Posted By: Akolouthos
Date Posted: 29-May-2009 at 23:00
Originally posted by bgturk

Originally posted by Akolouthos

Not precisely on topic, but I was wondering: Is that you, bg_turk? The same bg_turk that was on the forum years ago? If so, welcome back; I've missed you! If not, know that you had a wonderful namesake. Smile
 
-Akolouthos

Hi Akolouthos,
Yes its me. I forgot the password to my other account so i am using this new one. Nice to see you all too. ;-)
 
Hooray! I've missed the heack out of you, buddy. Smile
 
-Akolouthos


Posted By: Chilbudios
Date Posted: 30-May-2009 at 08:48

Originally posted by akritas

FYROM's  is a a multi-ethnic state only to the papers. Slavmacedonians have block the Albanians from the UN talks as regards the State name issue because they  know  that Albanians are more ready to accept a compromise on the name  in exchange for a swift NATO and EU accession.

I really don't know so much about FYROM's internals, but few things like FYROM allowing minority languages being used in local administration. FYROM might not be a heaven for minorities, but certainly it is as multi-ethnic state.

Your thesis that one scholar that involve with the ancient history doesnt have the right to deposit  his/hers opinion as regards modern cultural circumstances  is dogmatic. Every scholar-specially with that acedemic range-  is free to express his opinion.
They have any right to such opinions as persons, but not as classicists, as this is obviously outside their expertise.

Tell me one Balkan state that not make assimilation policies all these years before accuse Greece  for that ?
My point was not to accuse Greece, but to show that Greeks have the least endangered identity and culture in northern Greece. Consequently FYROM can't be accused of cultural genocide.

Your grandma calls herself Makedontsi or Makedonci in the local Slavic language and not Macedonian
A Greek Macedonian(ancient, medieval and modern) identified as Makedonas 2500 years now.
So? Is any Greek Macedonian out there having 2500 years old? Both Macedonians of FYROM and Greece know themselves to be Macedonians since they were born. Shouldn't them both be allowed to regard themselves as Macedonians?

 



Posted By: Flipper
Date Posted: 30-May-2009 at 09:16
Guys before labeling this thing as a lobbyist thing, just make an whois on the domain. It is Steven Miller who started this. He has been pretty annoyed in the past on the issue. Whether you like his style or not, it is not a Greek suggestion. Greeks have opened and have opened numerous sites to express their frustration.

-------------


Så nu tar jag fram (k)niven va!


Posted By: Chilbudios
Date Posted: 30-May-2009 at 09:42
Originally posted by Flipper

Guys before labeling this thing as a lobbyist thing, just make an whois on the domain. It is Steven Miller who started this. He has been pretty annoyed in the past on the issue. Whether you like his style or not, it is not a Greek suggestion. Greeks have opened and have opened numerous sites to express their frustration.
Perhaps confusing, but when reading or writing "Greek lobby" I understand primarily lobby for a "Greek" (yes, I know not all Greeks would support it) cause, not that the lobbyists themselves are Greeks.
 
Anyway, there was an exchange of public letters between Stephen Miller and Dan Tompkins:
http://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/public/mgsa-l/2009-March/010453.html - http://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/public/mgsa-l/2009-March/010453.html
http://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/public/mgsa-l/2009-March/010456.html - http://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/public/mgsa-l/2009-March/010456.html
http://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/public/mgsa-l/2009-March/010459.html - http://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/public/mgsa-l/2009-March/010459.html
 
etc. (if you browse the archives you'll find many good points on Ancient Macedon or on the modern FYROM vs Greece issue)
 
Also, it seems Stephen Miller was initially answering to this:
 
http://www.archaeology.org/0901/abstracts/letter.html - http://www.archaeology.org/0901/abstracts/letter.html
 
 
 
 


Posted By: Flipper
Date Posted: 30-May-2009 at 10:15
Yes, i'm aware of Miller's initial letter.

In any case I can agree on some points mentioned on this thread. Miller and the rest of the scholars have the authority to judge from a historical view (ancient history to be precise). In that part they're doing their job very well (it's miller + some other scholars leading this). However, that would normally be enough. The political judgement was unecessary. It would be more than enough if they wrote their scholarly comments and ask for mr Obamma to take those into consideration in understanding why Greeks are annoyed.

The political agenda has no need to be expressed by mr Miller. He could simply include some balanced articles by other people (eg. political analysts, journalists) and make the same point with less "frustration". Besides there are plently of them favouring his cause.

I'm glad some non-Greek scholars made such a move, but i believe if the letter was formed as I described above, it would be no room for criticism or doubt.


-------------


Så nu tar jag fram (k)niven va!


Posted By: Anton
Date Posted: 30-May-2009 at 10:56
Originally posted by Flipper


The political judgement was unecessary. It would be more than enough if they wrote their scholarly comments and ask for mr Obamma to take those into consideration in understanding why Greeks are annoyed.


Mate, I think they shouldn't have written this letter at all. All their comments should be published in professional journals and related only to historical questions -- ethnicity of Alexander, language spoken by Ancient Macedonians etc. Explanation of why Greeks are annoyed is out of their professional expertise.


-------------
.


Posted By: Flipper
Date Posted: 30-May-2009 at 11:03
Originally posted by Anton

Originally posted by Flipper


The political judgement was unecessary. It would be more than enough if they wrote their scholarly comments and ask for mr Obamma to take those into consideration in understanding why Greeks are annoyed.


Mate, I think they shouldn't have written this letter at all. All their comments should be published in professional journals and related only to historical questions -- ethnicity of Alexander, language spoken by Ancient Macedonians etc. Explanation of why Greeks are annoyed is out of their professional expertise.


I can agree that it would be optimal. I guess mr Miller thought it would not have the same public impact though. As for an explanation why Greeks are annoyed is a personal view of Miller who has spend time in Greece digging in Nemea. In some cases, that could be more accurate than an outsider, in some cases not.

In the end we all have our views, whether we're experts on it or not. Look at us here (allempires in general not this thread). How we choose to express ourselves is a matter of taste that can be judged.

About a previous comment of yours.

Originally posted by Anton


Albania should be involved as there is huge ethnical Albanian component and Albania can be as a state representing albanian interests.


They are involved and they intent to give suggestions soon if the issue is frozen. The Albanian minority is strong but still on a low profile which is pretty healthy if you ask me.


-------------


Så nu tar jag fram (k)niven va!


Posted By: Anton
Date Posted: 30-May-2009 at 12:51
Originally posted by Flipper

I can agree that it would be optimal. I guess mr Miller thought it would not have the same public impact though. As for an explanation why Greeks are annoyed is a personal view of Miller who has spend time in Greece digging in Nemea. In some cases, that could be more accurate than an outsider, in some cases not.

In the end we all have our views, whether we're experts on it or not. Look at us here (allempires in general not this thread). How we choose to express ourselves is a matter of taste that can be judged.

I agree with you, but we don't write open letters to leaders of most powerful countries, do we? And even if we were writing nobody would listen to us as we are (most of us) amateur, not professionals. Whereas those people are professionals, their opinion is more influencial although not necessarily more balanced or unbiased. Miller's position didn't look balanced to me at all, by the way.


-------------
.


Posted By: Flipper
Date Posted: 30-May-2009 at 16:13
Originally posted by Anton

I agree with you, but we don't write open letters to leaders of most powerful countries, do we? And even if we were writing nobody would listen to us as we are (most of us) amateur, not professionals. Whereas those people are professionals, their opinion is more influencial although not necessarily more balanced or unbiased. Miller's position didn't look balanced to me at all, by the way.


We might not send letters to Obamma but trust me i'm pretty sure the guy receives all types of letters regarding the most absurd cases.

Obamma however has visited the Panmacedonian (Greek assosiation) association in USA, so it's not that he ignores the matter.

Miller is no authority in social sciences and we already said that. Besides, the rest is his field of study and he has right to possition himself as he thinks it's suitable. It's not about being biased or not.


-------------


Så nu tar jag fram (k)niven va!


Posted By: Anton
Date Posted: 30-May-2009 at 22:42
I think he behaves just exaclty as Arnaiz-Villena with his paper on genetical similarity between Jews and Arabs. He screwed up this work not due to failours in his field of study but because he made a political comment at the end of the paper.

-------------
.


Posted By: akritas
Date Posted: 31-May-2009 at 06:20
Originally posted by Anton

...... as Arnaiz-Villena with his paper on genetical similarity between Jews and Arabs. .......

Even you comparison is weak because your lack of your arguments and the avoid my remark that are TWO letters and your comment stick in the second letter,  I shall remind you Arnaiz-Villena  made  two  other similarities Greeks-Sub-Saharan and Japanese-Africans. Also 3 to 9  scientiets that  undersigned  Arnaiz-Villena  paper are  Slavmacedonians. However, it's no longer referenced by population geneticists in these contemporaries researches, mainly due to the criticism of Cavalli-Sforza that has the same academic range as some of the Classists that undersigned this letter.



-------------


Posted By: akritas
Date Posted: 31-May-2009 at 06:38
Originally posted by Anton

Originally posted by akritas

Your grandma calls herself Makedontsi or Makedonci in the local Slavic language and not Macedonian

A Greek Macedonian(ancient, medieval and modern) identified as Makedonas 2500 years now.

In the Slavonic languages of FYROM and Bulgaria the adjective Macedonian, both in its ethnic and regional provenance is spelled in an identical form as makedonski. On the other hand, in the Greek language the same adjective Macedonian, in its regional/cultural/historical context, appears as makedonikos (-i or -o for the feminine and neuter endings).

I am not sure I understand your point here. So in Bulgarian it will be Makedonec in Greek it will be Makedonikos. Where is the difference? To me it is essentially the same.
 
Dont play with the words. I repeat them -with blue fonts- again since you avoid some of my remarks.  I know that you are Bulgarian and not recognize  diffrent nationality and language -as Greece do- since you consider them as Bulgarian.
Originally posted by Anton

Originally posted by akritas

So the problem indicated in the English language and the term "Macedonian".Thus, the term "Macedonian"  to denote such an identity in Greece not only fails to respect Hellenic cultural heritage and the identify of 2.5 million Greek Macedonians living there, but also threatens to create a serious confusion or even a potential clash over identities in the whole region.
But your protests also fail to respect their name, used for at least several generations. What is the difference again?  
I expalined it in my previous comment.
Originally posted by Anton

Originally posted by akritas

One solution is the name of the State and the nationality to be for all usages with the Slavic form. FYROM has rejected this in 1994.

Variants like Slavomakedonec or Makedonoslav or whatever else sound weird and is not what used to be their name. Why don't you guys call yourself Greekomacedonians or Hellenomakedonikos (or how would it be according to Greek language grammar)? Because it sounds stupid. Similar logic have people in Skopje.

I  spoke for Makedontsi or Makedonci as identified themselves in theirs language and not for the variants that you speak.
 
Originally posted by Anton

Originally posted by akritas

You confuse the letters.
No I don't. I read both and they are about the same stuff and one is used as a basis for another. Anyway, the main question is -- who are those people to decide how a particular group of people should call themselves? And how one of them can offer Greece to annex an independent European state?
No they are not the same staff. That's why 248 World Professors  undersigned this letter because Miller avoid any sarcasm.

-------------


Posted By: akritas
Date Posted: 31-May-2009 at 06:43
Originally posted by Zagros

The only difference it seems in your analogy is that Mexico did actually exist and exist within that territorial context where as FYRM, even in its current context, is a very recent fabrication.
Because the problem discover from some people  with the split of the Yugoslavian federation (1991) that's not mean that was not exist.

-------------


Posted By: akritas
Date Posted: 31-May-2009 at 06:56
Originally posted by Chilbudios

Originally posted by akritas

Your grandma calls herself Makedontsi or Makedonci in the local Slavic language and not Macedonian
A Greek Macedonian(ancient, medieval and modern) identified as Makedonas 2500 years now.

So? Is any Greek Macedonian out there having 2500 years old?
I said  ancient, medieval and modern.
Originally posted by Chilbudios

Both Macedonians of FYROM and Greece know themselves to be Macedonians since they were born. Shouldn't them both be allowed to regard themselves as Macedonians?
And how segregate or identify a Macedonian from Greece  from a  Macedonian from FYROM if both use the same name ?


-------------


Posted By: Flipper
Date Posted: 31-May-2009 at 10:41
Originally posted by akritas

And how segregate or identify a Macedonian from Greece  from a  Macedonian from FYROM if both use the same name ?


That's not actually the problem. The problem is education. An identity is being built with historical falsification. I'm not talking the early slav macedonian years, but what followed. The early book printings and now the cases of the Rosseta stone and the racistic video that was shown on national tv.




-------------


Så nu tar jag fram (k)niven va!


Posted By: Flipper
Date Posted: 31-May-2009 at 10:43
Originally posted by Anton

I think he behaves just exaclty as Arnaiz-Villena with his paper on genetical similarity between Jews and Arabs. He screwed up this work not due to failours in his field of study but because he made a political comment at the end of the paper.


I don't think you really believe what you just wrote. In the one side you have a very inlikely theory with controversial methodology and on the other side you have something that has been said by many scholars before Miller, that are authorities in the subject.


-------------


Så nu tar jag fram (k)niven va!


Posted By: akritas
Date Posted: 31-May-2009 at 10:58
Originally posted by Flipper

Originally posted by akritas

And how segregate or identify a Macedonian from Greece  from a  Macedonian from FYROM if both use the same name ?


That's not actually the problem. The problem is education. An identity is being built with historical falsification. I'm not talking the early slav macedonian years, but what followed. The early book printings and now the cases of the Rosseta stone and the racistic video that was shown on national tv.


Flip I leave out the known historical revensionism of the FYROM educational system  crucial part of the known ideology  slavmacedonism or pseudomacedonism. I am staying only in the self-identification as express in the English language and in the noun "Macedonian".


-------------


Posted By: Styrbiorn
Date Posted: 31-May-2009 at 11:03
How interesting this might be, I do believe Mr Obama has bigger problems, like the collapse of the American economy, to think about :) 


Posted By: Anton
Date Posted: 31-May-2009 at 11:39
Originally posted by akritas

I shall remind you Arnaiz-Villena  made  two  other similarities Greeks-Sub-Saharan and Japanese-Africans. Also 3 to 9  scientiets that  undersigned  Arnaiz-Villena  paper are  Slavmacedonians. However, it's no longer referenced by population geneticists in these contemporaries researches, mainly due to the criticism of Cavalli-Sforza that has the same academic range as some of the Classists that undersigned this letter.

 
Actually you are wrong, most of his works are still being cited very well by other colleagues. Regarding similarities of Japanese amd Africans -- I wouldn't cite this letter of Cavalli-Sforza frequently. It was a typical blackmailing, rather than critical review. Anyway, my comment was about his political comment that he made, something he has no expertise about. Here I see an analogy with the letter you have posted in this thread.


-------------
.


Posted By: Anton
Date Posted: 31-May-2009 at 11:46
Originally posted by Flipper


I don't think you really believe what you just wrote. In the one side you have a very inlikely theory with controversial methodology and on the other side you have something that has been said by many scholars before Miller, that are authorities in the subject.
 
There is nothing controversial in his methodology, Filipp, even though not everybody agrees with his conclusions. Besides, there is no agreement among scholars between ethnicity of Ancient Macedonians and you know it very well.  So, even in this respect both cases are similar. But once again my major point was that both Arnaiz-Villena and Miller made a political comment which is unacceptable for a scientist. With some obvious exceptions of course.


-------------
.


Posted By: Anton
Date Posted: 31-May-2009 at 12:01
Originally posted by akritas

 
Dont play with the words. I repeat them -with blue fonts- again since you avoid some of my remarks.  I know that you are Bulgarian and not recognize  diffrent nationality and language -as Greece do- since you consider them as Bulgarian.
No, actually not. I do not consider them as Bulgarians. Not the modern ones. As for the rest, I still do mot understand your argument. Forgive me my stupidity.
 
 
I  spoke for Makedontsi or Makedonci as identified themselves in theirs language and not for the variants that you speak.
So, official name of the state -- Republic of Makedonia -- would be acceptable for you?
 
No they are not the same staff. That's why 248 World Professors  undersigned this letter because Miller avoid any sarcasm.
I think we agreed already that these 248 professors have no expertise on modern politics.


-------------
.


Posted By: akritas
Date Posted: 31-May-2009 at 14:27
Originally posted by Anton

Originally posted by akritas

I shall remind you Arnaiz-Villena  made  two  other similarities Greeks-Sub-Saharan and Japanese-Africans. Also 3 to 9  scientiets that  undersigned  Arnaiz-Villena  paper are  Slavmacedonians. However, it's no longer referenced by population geneticists in these contemporaries researches, mainly due to the criticism of Cavalli-Sforza that has the same academic range as some of the Classists that undersigned this letter.

 
Actually you are wrong, most of his works are still being cited very well by other colleagues. Regarding similarities of Japanese amd Africans -- I wouldn't cite this letter of Cavalli-Sforza frequently. It was a typical blackmailing, rather than critical review. Anyway, my comment was about his political comment that he made, something he has no expertise about. Here I see an analogy with the letter you have posted in this thread.
You are wrong again as usual.
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonio_Arnaiz-Villena - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonio_Arnaiz-Villena
 
furher details in the references since wiki is a source that anyone can edit but not the original ones.
 
 
 


-------------


Posted By: akritas
Date Posted: 31-May-2009 at 14:42
Originally posted by Anton

Originally posted by akritas

 
Dont play with the words. I repeat them -with blue fonts- again since you avoid some of my remarks.  I know that you are Bulgarian and not recognize  diffrent nationality and language -as Greece do- since you consider them as Bulgarian.
No, actually not. I do not consider them as Bulgarians. Not the modern ones. As for the rest, I still do mot understand your argument. Forgive me my stupidity.
 
The noun "Macedonians"
 
-In FYROM the noun Macedonians (Makedonci – Makedontsi – in the local Slavic language) identifies, (a) in the legal sense, all citizens of the Republic (including Slavs, Albanians, Greeks, Roma etc), and (b) in the ethnic/national sense, a million and a half local Slavs.

-In Greece the noun Macedonians (Μακεδόνες – Makedones – in the Greek language) identifies, in the regional/cultural sense, almost two and a half million ethnic Greeks of the region of Greek Macedonia.

-In Bulgaria the same name Macedonians (Makedonci – Makedontsi – in Bulgarian) identifies, in the regional sense, hundreds of thousands of ethnic Bulgarian.

 
To complicate matters further, there is a fourth, historical dimension of the name Macedonians, which refers to the first "owners" of the name, i.e. the Greek-speaking people who inhabited roughly the region of present-day Greek Macedonia in classical times and identified themselves as Μακεδόνες (Makedones) in their Greek language.
 
The adjective "Macedonian"
 
The adjective Macedonian derives:
(a) from the noun of the geographical region Macedonia, and
(b) from the noun of the name of the people in its regional, ethnic, historical variants as described above. As such, the Macedonian adjective describes identities of persons (Macedonian community, minority, people, personalities), abstract values (Macedonian history, culture, traditions), institutions/associations (Macedonian administrative, scientific, professional, educational, civic, business/commercial, religious), as well as tangible objects and items (products, publications, etc).
 

In the Slavonic languages of FYROM and Bulgaria the adjective Macedonian, both in its ethnic and regional provenance is spelled in an identical form as makedonski. On the other hand, in the Greek language the same adjective Macedonian, in its regional/cultural/historical context, appears as makedonikos (-i or -o for the feminine and neuter endings).

Do you need more details or you still dont understand?

 

Originally posted by Anton

Originally posted by akritas

 
I  spoke for Makedontsi or Makedonci as identified themselves in theirs language and not for the variants that you speak.
So, official name of the state -- Republic of Makedonia -- would be acceptable for you?
No and the reasons are written in the letter.
 
Originally posted by Anton

Originally posted by akritas

 
No they are not the same staff. That's why 248 World Professors  undersigned this letter because Miller avoid any sarcasm.
I think we agreed already that these 248 professors have no expertise on modern politics.
The expertision in one subject doesnt mean no public opinion. These scholars expose the FYROM iredentism. Irredentism is simply to advocate the taking over (‘redeeming’) of a region (or regions) belonging to a (usually) neighbouring country based on some sort of justification that that region rightfully belongs to the irredentist’s country by virtue of one or more of a range of factors (cultural, historic, linguistic etc). It does not necessarily pre-suppose military or political action. The bone-heads masquerading as ancient Macedonians while dreaming of the "Edna Makedonija" of their Kanchevian maps – you know the one – can quite rightly be classed as irredentists. The majority of Slavmacedonians consider the bounds of this imagined homeland as rightfully theirs.

-------------


Posted By: Anton
Date Posted: 31-May-2009 at 15:52
Originally posted by akritas

You are wrong again as usual.
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonio_Arnaiz-Villena - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonio_Arnaiz-Villena
 
furher details in the references since wiki is a source that anyone can edit but not the original ones.
 
 


I may be usually wrong but not in this case. Look in Google Scholar his citation index. It never stopped, this guy is still trusted by others.


-------------
.


Posted By: Anton
Date Posted: 31-May-2009 at 16:00
Originally posted by akritas


No and the reasons are written in the letter.


But these reasons are:
1. Doubtfull, as other scholars disagree with them (look for instance letter exchange posted by Chilbudios)
2. Has nothing to do with the discussed question.  Both groups of people used to call themselves like that for quite a while and there is no difference between 150-200 years and 2500.

 

"The majority of Slavmacedonians consider the bounds of this imagined homeland as rightfully theirs."


The way how democratically elected state acts points out that this is wrong.


-------------
.


Posted By: akritas
Date Posted: 31-May-2009 at 17:56
Originally posted by Anton

Originally posted by akritas


No and the reasons are written in the letter.


But these reasons are:
1. Doubtfull, as other scholars disagree with them (look for instance letter exchange posted by Chilbudios)
2. Has nothing to do with the discussed question.  Both groups of people used to call themselves like that for quite a while and there is no difference between 150-200 years and 2500.

 

"The majority of Slavmacedonians consider the bounds of this imagined homeland as rightfully theirs."


The way how democratically elected state acts points out that this is wrong.

I didn’t see any opposite response of other scholars with the academic range of Ian Worthington, Malcolm Errington , Paul Cartledge  and many others. When I see it (if there is any scholar) then we can compare them. Chilbudios post a diffrent letter with diffrent subject , diffrent receiver and the most important diffrent undersignings.



-------------


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 31-May-2009 at 18:59
I think Greeks and those Europeans who love the ancient Greeks should expand their minds and don't limit themselves to ancient times, many things have been happened in the last 2,000 years, modern country of Macedonia in the north of Greece can be compared with the Republic of Azerbaijan in the north of Iran, this part of ancient Persia was never called Azerbijan, but Arran (Caucasian Albania), the real Azerbaijan was/is located in the south of it in the northwest of Modern Iran, and the people never spoke Turkish Azeri language, there are still some people in Azerbaijan of Iran who speak Iranian Azeri (Tati) language, but the fact is that Turkish peoples migrated to this region, the name of Azerbaijan was applied to a larger region and many other things happened in the last 1,000 years, so no one can already say "Azerbaijan" is a wrong name and the people of this country shouldn't call themselves "Azeri".

-------------


Posted By: Flipper
Date Posted: 31-May-2009 at 19:21
Originally posted by Anton

There is nothing controversial in his methodology, Filipp, even though not everybody agrees with his conclusions. Besides, there is no agreement among scholars between ethnicity of Ancient Macedonians and you know it very well.  So, even in this respect both cases are similar. But once again my major point was that both Arnaiz-Villena and Miller made a political comment which is unacceptable for a scientist. With some obvious exceptions of course.


We've agreed on the political comment.

The controversial methodology is that only one chromosome was used when more are required for a safe conclusion.

No scientist other than Villena have come to such a conclusion, while what Miller suggests represents 1 of the 2 school of thoughts on that matter. There's a big difference in that case.

Originally posted by Anton


1. Doubtfull, as other scholars disagree with them (look for instance letter exchange posted by Chilbudios)


Yes, but look what Miller said about secondary sources. The other guy is not a good example eather.

"If I were a betting man, I would offer a bottle of that wonderful Nemean wine to anyone who can find another Greek satrap (huparchos) in Herodotus, but I'm not, and I may be wrong."

I would gladly drink that wine if i had that discussion with him. But if i were him i would double check and not take a chance in case Miller wouldn't verify my saying. He obviously missed Histaios, Artemisia and Kyberniskos.




-------------


Så nu tar jag fram (k)niven va!


Posted By: Anton
Date Posted: 31-May-2009 at 21:29
Originally posted by Flipper


The controversial methodology is that only one chromosome was used when more are required for a safe conclusion.
He answered in his resopnse to Cavali-Sforza's letter that 1) it is quite a common practice and 2) that they are testing other markers in his lab.
 

No scientist other than Villena have come to such a conclusion, while what Miller suggests represents 1 of the 2 school of thoughts on that matter. There's a big difference in that case.
 
There are some studies on similarities between Palestinian Arabs  and Jews. Look for instance the following ones:
 
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17652848?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17652848?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum
 
or this one: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11153918 - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11153918
 
If you don't have access to this article (they find not only similarities but also differences) here is their conclusion:
 

According to historical records part, or perhaps the majority, of the Moslem Arabs in this country descended from local inhabitants, mainly Christians and Jews, who had converted after the Islamic conquest in the seventh century AD (Shaban http://www.springerlink.com/content/4b9fltx6cnc9l18q/fulltext.html#N2105 - 1971 ; Mc Graw Donner http://www.springerlink.com/content/4b9fltx6cnc9l18q/fulltext.html#N2073 - 1981 ). These local inhabitants, in turn, were descendants of the core population that had lived in the area for several centuries, some even since prehistorical times (Gil http://www.springerlink.com/content/4b9fltx6cnc9l18q/fulltext.html#N2039 - 1992 ). On the other hand, the ancestors of the great majority of present-day Jews lived outside this region for almost two millennia. Thus, our findings are in good agreement with historical evidence and suggest genetic continuity in both populations despite their long separation and the wide geographic dispersal of Jews.

Look also citations therein.
 


-------------
.


Posted By: akritas
Date Posted: 31-May-2009 at 21:38
One more eminent scholar add in the list. Is the Guy MacLean Rogers, writer of the "Alexander:The ambiquity of Greatnes" and  editor of "Black Athena Revisited".
Forthe list of cosigners that has grown to 249 see the   http://%20macedonia-evidence.org/obama-letter.html#addenda - Addenda .


-------------


Posted By: Flipper
Date Posted: 31-May-2009 at 22:12
Anton the point is that not many experts in the field believe that Greeks are related to Ethiopia. Contrary what you should consider is that people in warm countries, with different backgrounds develop similar chromosomes because of the environment and not because of common ancestry. All you need to do is to ask a doctor within your circle.

I do not need to repeat the same things all over again. Millers possition is not some new or controversial. Everyone, does not need to agree with Miller's possition, but a number of scholars do.


-------------


Så nu tar jag fram (k)niven va!


Posted By: Anton
Date Posted: 31-May-2009 at 22:56

Flipper, we misunderstood each other. I meant Villena's work regarding comparison of Jews and Arabs. This one was ooposed by number of scholars like Cavalli-Sforza etc. In this publication he wrote political comment and this one was retracted after some time.



-------------
.


Posted By: Flipper
Date Posted: 31-May-2009 at 23:02
Ok, got it Smile

-------------


Så nu tar jag fram (k)niven va!


Posted By: opuslola
Date Posted: 28-May-2010 at 15:13
Boy oh Boy! What a great collection of posts by persons of great knowlege and with a great burst of nationalism by many of them! It literally blows my small mind!

But one post (quite early however) seems to me to get to the "meat" of the problem(s)!

It is this;

"Children are more mature than those god damned nationalists.

Al-Jassas"

Certainly the Balkan problem(s) is/are mostly a matter of nationalism!

As a great Jewish American radio personality has said for years the only thing any nation should expect their government to do for them is to respect; "Borders, Language, and culture!"

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Michael-Savage-Borders-Language-Culture/123040616847

Perhaps it is a mostly modern invention that seems to want to let the entire world to Balkanize itself into a world of ten thousand individual nations, with there own; "Borders, language, and culture!"

A sad world awaits us if this format is allowed to continue! Assimilation seems to have worked well for the most part, only in the USA!

At least until the present day!

Just how long will it be until Americans are forced to vote, with their feet? Segregation is only now being re-implemented, by various Liberal, Socialist, and Progressive groups! Instead of "out of many, One!", we are now being led down a line, ending in "Out of one, Many!"

Very sad!

But, indeed it seems this is the "World to Come!"


-------------
http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/



Print Page | Close Window

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz - http://www.webwizguide.com