Was Alexander an ethnic greek?

@bg_turk  Thanks man, I had a bad day today, but after I read your posts I feel better. At least I laughed a bit

Originally posted by St. Francis of Assisi I think a distinction should be made between Hellenic in culture and Hellenic in ethnicity. The Ancient Macedonians were Hellenic in culture but not ethnicity, same with the Epirotes.

What makes you so sure that ancient Macedonians and Eprotes weren't Hellenic in ethnicity? I agree that there were times that some of the people who were living in the area of Macedonia and Epirus were not Hellens. Some of them were assimilated and became Hellenic in culture, and others were forced out of the area. But to generalise and say that Macedonians and Epirotes were non-Hellens is not right, especially when there are evidence that suggest otherwise. I am willing to accept that what you say is true if you present some proofs. And when I say proofs I don't mean the statement of an anti-Macedonian politician, I mean sth like what language they were speaking etc.

Alexander was not then, I don't think, an ethnic Greek, but a Macedonian-Epirote.

Did you read Perseas' post (page 1)?  This post presents facts. Here it is:

Fact is that Alexander was half Macedonian half Molossian. His mother Olympias, was daughter of Neoptolemus, king of Epirus. The members of the Molossian royal house were called Aeacidae and claimed descent from Achilles. They considered themselves Greeks and were seen as Greeks by others. Due to this mother's ancestry, Alexander faced accusations of non-macedonian purity from his enemies as the biggest deterring for not getting Macedonian Throne. His father's Philip lineage was called Argeadae or Temenidae and claimed descent from Hercules. On the pretty convincing weight of evidence both Molossian and Macedonian royal houses were viewed as Greeks and claimed themselves to be so.

His parents (and more general his ancestors) considered themselves Greeks and were seen by others as Greeks. So what makes Alexander non-Greek?

Originally posted by Paul Originally posted by akritas Originally posted by Paul Originally posted by akritas Originally posted by Paul Was Alexander the Great an ethnic Greek. No. Because the Greeks, just like the Turks, are not ethnic groups. What is a ethnic group  for you editorial Paul ? Maybe you should ask someone who uses the term? How about you?  I don't use it myself, I prefer the term multi-cultural.   Of course you kidding You are the one that said Greeks are not ethnic group and not me. That's i am asking you again what is for you a ethnic group ? When you answer I shall  deposit and my opinion as about the etymological term. and I add one more question in my un-answered first one. What are the Greek people for you. A multi-cultural  people or something else ? You are the one who seems to believe the term ethnic greek has any meaning at all, not me, you define it. In case you are unaware of logic, it's impossible to define something that doesn't exist. To answer your second question, I just did, didn't I? Are you implying a person born in Greece who's parents migrated to Greece from another part of the world is less Greek than anyone else. To ask you a question, is you belief in ethnic Greeks a kind of 1930's quasi-nazi theory based on racial, blood, genetics and descent style nonsense?

That you avoid to answer a question in a term that you first bring here in this thread is obvious. The same goes and in the second question.

An ethnic group according Ben Rafael  defined as a collective entity, the members of which share in common: (1) some primordial attributes such as religion, origin or history, language or "race"; (2) particular sociocultural features; and (3) a consciousness of constituting a group different from others belonging to the same setting.

Greek and Turkish nations have  all the mentioned critirias. In a general manner, four aspects, that is, primordial identity, practical meanings endowed to the ethnic cleavage, self-perceived cultural uniqueness, and the overall interpretation of a "collective plight" in society, specify the group's awareness of kind.

In your un-answered question if the Greek people is a multi-culture people  the same question can you said in a British, a French if are a multi-culture people. Are they ?

 

Originally posted by bg_turk Most of what was the Bulgarian Kingdom was called Makedonia at the time, could you explain why? Could it because Makedonia was associated with the Slavs? For the last thousand years Macedonia has been overwhelmingly slavic until Greeks ethnically cleansed the region from all slavs in 1911. This is why you are so desperate to prove Alexander as a Greek, to justify your claims over Macedonia, in which in the beginning of the century greeks were a minority, and the greek army partitioned the region and occupied 51% of it. 2.WHEN Greeks settled in Macedonia?? WHEN?Southern Greeks never conquered or colonised after 400 BC Macedonia.Or not? Can u answer?

In you second question let's read what Borza said  (favourite FYROM historical  intellectual)

"Our understanding of the Macedonians' emergence into history is confounded by two events: the establishment of the Macedonians as an identifiable ethnic group, and the foundation of their ruling house.

THE "HIGHLANDERS" OR "MAKEDONES" OF THE MOUNTAINOUS REGIONS OF WESTERN MACEDONIA ARE DERIVED FROM NORTHWEST GREEK STOCK; THEY WERE AKIN BOTH TO THOSE WHO AT AN EARLIER TIME MAY HAVE MIGRATED SOUTH TO BECOME THE HISTORICAL "DORIANS", and to other Pindus tribes who were the ancestors of the Epirotes or Molossians.

THAT IS, WE MAY SUGGEST THAT NORTHWEST GREECE PROVIDED A POOL OF INDO- EUROPEAN SPEAKERS OF PROTO-GREEK from which were drawn the tribes who later were known by different names as they established their regional identities in separate parts of the country "
[ Hesperia Supplements, Vol. 19, Studies in Attic Epigraphy, History
and Topography. Presented to Eugene Vanderpool. (1982), pp. 7-13.]

In your first comment if we had Slavic overwhelmingly in Macedonia  I suggest you must read and other sources (except the Propagandistiscs) such as Ostogorski, Haldon, Turnbull Weittman  or

http://www.rastko.org.yu/arheologija/tstefanovicova-greece_e .html

that clearly said that the Grek  precense was strong.

 

Edited by akritas

Poor turk. I pity people like u who attribute their own feeling of inferiority complex to others.

This poor sample of propagandist selectively replies to posters *klaps no reply 2 me yet 4 exposing his bull* but also when he's with his back on the wall he selectively brings stuff of propagandistic nationalist sites of FYROM.

But apart of his propaganda anti-greek campaign there is a great explanation behind it. The deplorable propagandist is the definition of IGNORAMUS about ancient history.

He was not beware of ancient Maks going on Olympics but he underpined the opposite rested on....a quiz.

The list of... propaganda nationalist sites from FYROM the poor turk brought as independent and unbiased sources. If this is not called propaganda i do not know what it is.

http://faq.macedonia.org/history/mk.dynasty.byzantium.html
http://www.ancientmacedonia.com/gandeto.html 
http://www.ancientmacedonia.com/GreeceStealingMacedonianHist ory.htmlhttp://www.macedon.org/anmacs/frame.htm
http://www.makedonija.info/ancient.html
http://www.mymacedonia.net/ancient/ancient.htm
http://www.ancientmacedonia.com/ancientevidence.html
http://www.historyofmacedonia.org/RomanMacedonia/ByzantineEm pire.html

Demosthenes: "not only no Greek, nor related to the Greeks, but not even a barbarian from any place that can be named with honors, but a pestilent knave from Macedonia, whence it was never yet possible to buy a decent slave" (Demosthenes, Third Philippic, 31).

the desperate turkish boy if he was not ignoramus he mig't knew Demosthenes was paid from PERsians with 300 talents to spout his anti-macedonian propaganda. As u do rite now with the difference u r a failed propagandist.

Martin Sicker on 'The Pre-Islamic Middle East' strips  off the joker.

"A Persian offer of 300 talents was privately accepted by Demosthenes, who employed it for purposes compatible with mutual Athenian-Persian interests in thwarting Macedonian ascendancy"

 

Arrian: "Greek mercenaries attacked the Macedonian phalanx� the Macedonian centre did not set to with equal impetus� and the Greeks attacked where they saw that the phalanx had been particularly torn apart. There the action was severe, the Greeks tried to push off the Macedonians into the river and to reserve victory to their own side� There was also some emulation between antagonists of the Greek and Macedonian races" (Arrian 2.10.4-7).

Joker the greeks were MERCENARIES. have i 2 spell to u what a mercenary is?  webster is open.

Plutarch: �When you see the Greeks walking about among the Macedonians, do they not look to you like demi-gods among so many wild beasts?� (Alex.51.2)

and? was it a secret that northern greek tribes were uncivilized on correlation with the rest?? let me guess...u had no clue about it either.

Ulrich Wilcken, �Alexander the Great�

"It seems more and more certain that the Macedonians were a Greek tribe related to the Dorians. However, as they stayed high up in the distant north, they could not participate in the progress of civilization of the Greek people that migrated southward.

A strong Illyrian and Thracian influence can thus be recognized in Macedonian speech and manners. These however are only trifles compared with the Greek character of the Macedonian nationality; for example the names of the true full blooded Macedonians, especially of the princes and nobles, are purely Greek in their formation and sounds."

"And yet when we take into account the political conditions, religion and morals of the Macedonians, our conviction is strengthened that they were a Greek race akin to the Dorians."

This would be a ridiculous claim. Only nationalists from the Republic of Macedonia would make such claims. Alexander of Macedon was certainly not a slav, and certainly he was not a greek either. The macedons were a distinct people that have been gradually assimilated by the greeks and the slavs that later came to the region.

R u sure joker? Majority of Historians prove u to be lieing.

"The Macedonians spoke the Greek language, using a peculiar dialect, but that dialect disappears with their other provincialisms when they suddenly become dominant.[/bWe find no trace in Asia of any specially Macedonian deities;it is the gods of Hellas that the army of Alexander bears into the East. Even in manners and customs there seems to have been small difference between Greek and Macedonian; in our own day many primitive Greek customs, which have died out elsewhere, survive in remote districts of Macedonia. No doubt there was a great deal of Thracian blood among the hardy shepherds who followed the standards of Philip and Alexander; but if not only the nobility but even the common people had no language, religion, or customs different from those of the Greeks, how was it possible to prevent the races from becoming mingled? The more wealthy and educated classes in Macedonia were mostly Greek by blood, and entirely Greek in everything else except the practice of self-government. Wherever Alexander went, Homer and Aristotle went too. In the wake of his army came the Greek philosopher and man of science, the Greek architect and artist, the Greek merchant and artisan. And Alexander must have known this. When he tried to fuse Greeks, Macedonians, and Persians, into one race, he must have known that whose blood soever ruled the mixture, Greek letters, science, and law must needs gain the upper hand. He must have known that the Greek schoolmasters would make Homer and Hesiod familiar to the children; that the strolling companies of Dionysiac artists would repeat in every city the masterpieces of the Greek drama; and that the Odes of Simonides and Pindar would be sung wherever there was a Greek lyre.

New Chapters in Greek History, Historical Results of Recent Excavations in Greece and Asia Minor: Historical Results of Recent Excavations in Greece and Asia Minor " by Percy Gardner

The Macedonians, though the language they spoke was undoubtedly a Greek dialect, and though they were probably Greeks by blood, were none the less reckoned barbarians by the Greeks of the classic culture. The Macedonian conquest of the East was therefore, from its beginning, a victory for a "Grecianism" that had never been purely classical, for a culture almost entirely Greek but a culture already mixed, and ready therefore to adapt itself to other cultures. The opportunity came with Alexander's conquest of the Persian Empire

Philip Hughes 'A History of the Church Volume 1'

In favour of the Greek identity of the Macedonians is what we know of their language: the place-names, names of the months and many of the personal names, especially royal names, which are Greek in roots and form. [SIZE="4"]This suggests that they did not merely use Greek as a lingua franca, but spoke it as natives (though with a local accent which turned Philip into Bilip, for example). The Macedonians' own traditions derived their royal house from one Argeas, son of Macedon, son of Zeus, and asserted that a new dynasty, the Temenids, had its origin in the sixth century from emigrants from Argos in Greece, the first of these kings being Perdiccas. This tradition became a most important part of the cultural identity of Macedon. It enabled Alexander I (d.452) to compete at the Olympic Games (which only true Hellenes were allowed to do); and it was embedded in the policy of Archelaus (d.399) who invited Euripides from Athens to his court, where Euripides wrote not only the Bacchae but also a lost play called Archelaus. (Socrates was also invited, but declined.)

"Alexander the Great" by Richard Stoneman

[SIZE="4"]Macedonian kings were proud of their Greek blood, and it was [SIZE="3"]only jaundiced opponents like Demosthenes the Athenian who ventured to call them "barbarians." They claimed descent from H�rakles through the Dorian Kings of Argos, and they learned the tales of Troy and of Odysseus, and the songs of the Greek lyric poets, as they learned their letters. Fifty years before Alexander was born, a King of Macedon had been proud to give a home to the aged "modernist" playwright, Euripides, eighty years old and sick and tired of a democracy which had led Athens into defeat and revolution, and whose philistines accused Euripides of preaching atheism and immorality..

"Alexander the Great and the Hellenistic Empire" by A. R. Burn;

about the language :

The evidence for the language of the Macedonians has been reviewed and discussed by Kalleris and Hammond, Griffith, and many others, all contending that it was a dialect of Greek. The increasing volume of surviving public and private inscriptions makes it quite clear that there was no written language but Greek. There may be room for argument over spoken forms, or at least over local survivals of earlier occupancy, but it is hard to imagine what kind of authority might sustain that. There is no evidence for a different "Macedonian" language that cannot be as easily explained in terms of dialect or accent.

M.Justinus' epitome of Pompeius Trogus' Universal History:

about the coming of Temenides :

Macedonia was formerly called Emathia,... Caranus also came to Emathia with a large band of Greeks, being instructed by an oracle to seek a home in Macedonia

As the famous historian Robin Lane fox says :

"Macedonians and Molossians were Greeks....whether some people like it or not"

Robin Lane Fox "Historian-Author" In Interview with newspaper 'TO BHMA'

In my belief the desperate failed turkish propagandist should be promoted to the topic joker. He fits better on that role.

as they say " LIAR LIAR UR PANTS R ON FIRE "

P.S neoptolemos vazelos eisai?

bg_turk,answer the quiz.I am still waiting!!!!!!!

Well what else can i say after that barage of posts.

 

 My fellow greeks have you ever understant they danger that those site have? Has Europe understant it? The FYROMians "scientists" uses DNA to "prove" that they are MAcedonias. And i ask you which else in morden history uses same tactics to "prove" that they was genetic better that other people?

 SAY IT!! IT WAS THE NAZIS. Yes morden FYROMnians use nazi's tactic on their research AND NONE SAYS NOTHING. And europe still discuss with them. That propaganda Bg_turks are posting here. Nations are not based on Blood (DNA).

 NAtions are base in languadge, and the feeling that some population have somethink common (and sometimes in religion - in other times).

 Alexander and the ascient maccedionians speak the same langudge with the southern greeks have the same gods they partisipate in Olumpic games and that make them the same with the southern greeks.

 Also Bg_Turk in your first post you wonder what Byzantium and Alexander (or ascient greeks) have in common? I will list you a few things

-Same alphabet and languadge

-Same enducation (The enducation Byzantines tooks have a lot in common with the enducation system of ascient Hellas and romans)

- A common feeling that they was something differend from slavs bulgars and Arabs.

 

 Also take a lot at this- In byzantine empire the theme of macedonia was the morden thrace (west and east, including contantinouple)? But why is that? Maybe they try to show that their empire was the continue of alexanders empire???? Think of it a bit.

Originally posted by Digenis No,akrita  That was MY question. I am asking how the modern native  greek-speaking orthodox population of Macedonia is found in this place. I mean hence nowhere is mentioned  any movement upwards ,from southern Greeks to Northern. We know about the coming down of the Slavs. But the Greeks ? Are they planted there ? The starter of the topic must find an answer.

well the original greeks from Macedonia are likely to be the  greek decendants of the Ancient Macedonians or settlers from an earlier period. But the rest are settlers from Asia Minor or hellenized slavs from the Balkan Wars.
In the Balkan Wars Greeks formed only 20% of the population of Macedonia but they took 51% of the territory.

Originally posted by VaZeLoS Poor turk. I pity people like u who attribute their own feeling of inferiority complex to others.

I do not have an inferiority complex, it is you have a superiority complex.

This poor sample of propagandist selectively replies to posters *klaps no reply 2 me yet 4 exposing his bull* but also when he's with his back on the wall he selectively brings stuff of propagandistic nationalist sites of FYROM.

I suppose Harvard University, Princeton University, the Universiy of California and most significantly BBC are all publishing "FYROM" propaganda.

Even those sites that I have quoted that clearly support the Repubnlic of Macedonia's side are not afraid to give references to your greek propaganda websites such as here:

http://www.ancientmacedonia.com/GreekPropagandistWebsites.ht ml

bg_turk,if you have counter arguments for anything that has been written until now,write them.Else quit because by avoiding to answer you are showing your total ignorance!
You have already claimed that Macedonians could not participate in the ancient Olympic games,yet the Macedonians did participate.

Let's see what Hammond says about the origins and the language of Macedonians:

N. G. L. Hammond states:

What language did these `Macedones' speak? The name itself is Greek in root and in ethnic termination. It probably means `highlanders', and it is comparable to Greek tribal names such as `Orestai' and `Oreitai', mean�ing 'mountain-men'. A reputedly earlier variant, `Maketai', has the same root, which means `high', as in the Greek adjective makednos or the noun mekos. The genealogy of eponymous ancestors which Hesiod recorded [�] has a bearing on the question of Greek speech. First, Hesiod made Macedon a brother of Magnes; as we know from inscrip�tions that the Magnetes spoke the Aeolic dialect of the Greek language, we have a predisposition to suppose that the Macedones spoke the Aeolic dialect. Secondly, Hesiod made Macedon and Magnes first cousins of Hellen's three sons - Dorus, Xouthus, and Aeolus-who were the found�ers of three dialects of Greek speech, namely Doric, Ionic, and Aeolic. Hesiod would not have recorded this relationship, unless he had believed, probably in the seventh century, that the Macedones were a Greek� speaking people. The next evidence comes from Persia. At the turn of the sixth century the Persians described the tribute-paying peoples of their province in Europe, and one of them was the `yauna takabara', which meant `Greeks wearing the hat'. There were Greeks in Greek city-states here and there in the province, but they were of various origins and not distinguished by a common hat. However, the Macedonians wore a dis�tinctive hat, the kausia. We conclude that the Persians believed the Macedonians to be speakers of Greek. Finally, in the latter part of the fifth century a Greek historian, Hellanicus, visited Macedonia and modi�fied Hesiod's genealogy by making Macedon not a cousin, but a son of Aeolus, thus bringing Macedon and his descendants firmly into the Aeolic branch of the Greek-speaking family. Hesiod, Persia, and Hellanicus had no motive for making a false statement about the language of the Macedonians, who were then an obscure and not a powerful people. Their independent testimonies should be accepted as conclusive (N.G.L. Hammond, The Macedonian State, p.12-13).

  http://www.macedonia.info/FALLACIESANDFACTS.htm