BalkanForum - das Forum für alle Balkanesen
Erweiterte Suche
BalkanForum - das Forum für alle Balkanesen

Willkommen bei BalkanForum - das Forum für alle Balkanesen.
Seite 9 von 42 ErsteErste ... 567891011121319 ... LetzteLetzte
Ergebnis 81 bis 90 von 417

Mazedonien zu NATO-Beitritt unter Namen FYROM bereit

Erstellt von tetovë1, 19.02.2012, 10:32 Uhr · 416 Antworten · 25.189 Aufrufe

  1. #81
    Avatar von De_La_GreCo

    Registriert seit
    Zitat Zitat von Zoran Beitrag anzeigen
    Nö, es ist einer der vielen Beweise.
    Strabo erwähnt zB auch das ein Thessalier Namens Meredius sagte "Thessalier seien die nördlichsten Griechen"
    Auch berichtete Strabo von den Ähnlichkeiten der Makedonen mit seinen Nachbarn wie zB die Tonsur, SPRACHE, Bekleidung,...

    Verzweifelt musst du sein, wenn du nicht mal Äpfel und Birnen unterscheiden kannst.

    Er sagt aber, dass für ihn JETZT Makedonien Griechenland gewesen ist.

    Was war/ist mit davor?
    Warum beschreibt weder Strabo noch Pausanias Makedonien in den Bändern über Hellas?

    Richtig - weil Makedonien aus Sicht der Griechen selbst außerhalb Hellas lag.

    Isocrates, Speeches and Letters, “To Philip”“It is your privilege, as one who has been blessed with untrammeled freedom,
    to consider allHellas your fatherland, as did the founder of your race
    .”(Isokratis, Speeches and Letters, “To Philip” 127)“
    Argos is the land of your fathers, and is entitled to as much consideration at your handsas are your own ancestors…
    ”(Isocrates, Speeches and Letters, “To Philip”, 32)“Now I am not unaware that many of the Hellenes look upon the King’s power as invincible. Yetone may well marvel at them if they really believe that the power which was subdued to the will of a mere barbarian–an ill-bred barbarian at that–and collected in the cause of slavery, could not bescattered by
    , of ripe experience in warfare, in the cause of freedom–and that too although they know that while it is in all cases difficult to construct a thing, todestroy it is, comparatively, an easy task.Bear in mind that the men whom the world most admiresand honors are those who unite in themselves the abilities of the statesman and the general.When, therefore, you see the renown which even in a single city is bestowed on men whopossess these gifts, what manner of eulogies must you expect to hear spoken of you, when
    AMONG ALL THE HELLENES you shall stand forth as a statesman who has worked for thegood of Hellas, and AS A GENERAL WHO HAS OVERTHROWN THE BARBARIANS?”
    [Isocrates, Speeches and Letters, “To Philip”, 5.139, 5.140]“Well, if I were trying to present this matter to any others before having broached it to my owncountry,
    –I should confess my error. In truth, however, it will be found that Iturned to Athens first of all and endeavored to win her over to this cause with all the earnestnessof which my nature is capable,2 but when I perceived that she cared less for what I said than for the ravings of the platform orators,3 I gave her up, although I did not abandon my efforts.”[Isocrates, Speeches and Letters, “To Philip”, 5.129]“The Lacedaemonians were the leaders of the Hellenes, not long ago, on both land and sea, andyet they suffered so great a reversal of fortune when they met defeat at Leuctra that they weredeprived of their power over the Hellenes, and lost such of their warriors as chose to die rather than survive defeat at the hands of those over whom they had once been masters.”[Isocrates, Speeches and Letters, “To Philip”, 5.47]“As I continued to say many things of this tenor, those who heard me were inspired with the hopethat when my discourse should be published you and the Athenians would bring the war to anend, and, having conquered your pride, would adopt some policy for your mutual good. Whether indeed they were foolish or sensible in taking this view is a question for which they, and not I, mayfairly be held to account; but in any case, while I was still occupied with this endeavour, you andAthens anticipated me by making peace before I had completed my discourse; and you were wisein doing so, for to conclude the peace, no matter how, was better than to continue to beoppressed by the evils engendered by the war. [8] But although I was in joyful accord with theresolutions which were adopted regarding the peace, and was convinced that they would be

    beneficial, not only to us,
    I could notdivorce my thought from the possibilities connected with this step, but found myself in a state of mind where I began at once to consider how the results which had been achieved might be madepermanent for us, and how our city could be prevented from setting her heart upon further wars,after a short interval of peace.”[Isocrates, Speeches and Letters, “To Philip”, 5.8]Isocrates, “Panigirikos”“*…How could they (the Macedonians) prove themselves more philhellines with what they did soas the rest (the other Greeks) would not be occupied…”(Isocrates, Panigirikos, 96)


    The country by the sea which is now called Macedonia…
    Alexander, the father of Perdiccas,and his forefathers, who were originally Temenidae from Argos
    ”(Thucydides 99,3)“In all there were about
    three thousand Hellenic heavy infantry, accompanied by all theMacedonian cavalry with the Chalcidians, near one thousand strong, besides an immensecrowd of barbarians
    .”(Thukydides 4.124)“
    The Hellenic troops with him consisted
    of the Ambraciots, Leucadians, and Anactorians, andthe thousand Peloponnesians with whom he came; the barbarian of a thousand Chaonians, who,belonging to a nation that has no king, were led by Photys and Nicanor, the two members of theroyal family to whom the chieftainship for that year had been confided. With the Chaonians camealso some Thesprotians, like them without a king, some Molossians and Atintanians led bySabylinthus, the guardian of King Tharyps who was still a minor, and some Paravæans, under their king Oroedus, accompanied by a thousand Orestians, subjects of King Antichus and placedby him under the command of Oroedus.
    There were also a thousand Macedonians sent byPerdiccas without the knowledge of the Athenians
    , but they arrived too late. With this forceCnemus set out, without waiting for the fleet from Corinth. Passing through the territory of Amphilochian Argos, and sacking the open village of Limnæa, they advanced to Stratus theAcarnanian capital; this once taken, the rest of the country, they felt convinced, would speedilyfollow”(Thucydides Chapter VIII)


    Now that the men of this family are Hellenes
    , sprung from Perdiccas, as they themselvesaffirm, is a thing which I can declare on my own knowledge, and which I will hereafter make plainlyevident.
    That they are so has been already adjudged by those who manage the Pan-Helleniccontest at Olympia
    ”(Herodotus, The Histories 8.43)“Tell your king who sent you how
    his Hellenic viceroy of Macedonia
    has received youhospitably… ”(Herodotus V, 20, 4)“
    Now that these descendants of Perdiccas are Hellenes
    , as they themselves say, I myself chance to know”(Herodotus V, 22, 1)“Xerxes, having so spoken, held his peace. (SS 1.) Whereupon Mardonius took the word, andsaid: ….I myself have had experience of these men when I marched against them by the orders of thy father; and though I went as far as Macedonia, and came but a little short of reaching Athensitself, yet not a soul ventured to come out against me to battle. ……But, notwithstanding that theyhave so foolish a manner of warfare,
    yet these Greeks, when I led my army against them tothe very borders of Macedonia, did not so much as think of offering me battle
    .”(Herodotus Book VII)“…but the Dorians on the contrary have been constantly on the move; their home in Deucalion’sreign was Phthiotis and in the reign of Dorus son of Hellen the country known as Histiaeotis in theneighbourhood of Ossa and Olympus;
    driven from there by the Cadmeians they settled inPindus and were known as Macedons
    ; thence they migrated to Dryopis, and finally to thePeloponnese, where they got their present name of Dorians.”Herodotus, Book I, 56“…
    Three brothers of the lineage of Temenos came as banished men from Argos
    to Illyria,Gavganis and Aeropos and Perdikkas, and worked for the king that was there.When the king learned that when the queen baked the bread of Perdikkas, it doubled its size, thanof the the other breads, he considered that as a miracle and ordered the 3 brothers to leave hiskingdom. The brothers required their payment. Then the king told them to take the sun as apayment. Gavganis and Aeropos where taken by surprise and the youngest brother, Perdikkas,accepted the offer. He took out his sword, circled it 3 times and took the sun, which he placed inhis underarm and left with his brothers…”Herodotus VIII,137“…and that you may tell your king, who sent you,
    that a Greek, the lord of Macedonia,
    entertained you royally both with bed and board.”Herodotus, Book V, 20


    “Let it, however, be granted that what I have now said may in the eyes of severe critics beregarded as beside the subject. I will now return to the main point at issue, as they state it. It wasthis: ‘If the circumstances are the same now as at the time when you made alliance with theAetolians, then your policy ought to remain on the same lines.’ That was their first proposition. ‘Butif they have been entirely changed, then it is fair that you should now deliberate on the demandsmade to you as on a matter entirely new and unprejudiced.’ I ask you therefore, Cleonicus andChlaeneas, who were your allies on the former occasion when you invited this people to join you?Were they not all the Greeks? But with whom are you now united, or to what kind of federation areyou now inviting this people? Is it not to one with the foreigner? A mighty similarity exists, nodoubt, in your minds, and no diversity at all!
    Then you were contending for glory andsupremacy with Achaeans and Macedonians, men of kindred blood with yourselves, andwith Philip their leader; now a war of slavery is threatening Greece against men of another race, whom you think to bring against Philip, but have really unconsciously broughtagainst yourselves and all Greece.
    For just as men in the stress of war, by introducing into their cities garrisons superior in strength to their own forces, while successfully repelling all danger fromthe enemy, put themselves at the mercy of their friends,–just so are the Aetolians acting in thepresent case. For in their desire to conquer Philip and humble Macedonia, they haveunconsciously brought such a mighty cloud from the west, as for the present perhaps willovershadow Macedonia first, but which in the sequel will be the origin of heavy evils to all Greece.“But if thanks are due to the Aetolians for this single service,
    how highly should we honour theMacedonians, who for the greater part of their lives never cease from fighting with thebarbarians for the sake of the security of Greece?
    For who is not aware that Greece wouldhave constantly stood in the greatest danger, had we not been fenced by the Macedonians andthe honourable ambition of their kings?”(Polybius, Book IX, 35, 2)“…I assert is that not only the Thessalians, but
    the rest of the Greeks owed their safety toPhilip
    .”(Polybius, Book IX, 33, 3)“…because
    he (Philip) was the benefactor of Greece, that they all chose him commander-in-chief both on sea and land, an honour previously conferred on no one
    .”(Polybius, Book IX, 33, 7)“…
    he (Alexander) inflicted punishment on the Persians for their outrages on all the Greeks,and how he delivered us all from the greatest evils by enslaving the barbarians anddepriving them of the resources they used for the destruction of the Greeks,
    pitting now theAthenians and now the Thebans against the ancestors of these Spartans,
    how in a word hemade Asia subject to Greece
    .”(Polybius, Book IX, 34, 3)“The 38th book contains the completion of the disaster of the Hellenes. For though both the wholeof Hellas and her several parts had often met with mischance, yet to none of her former defeatscan we more fittingly apply, the name of disaster with all it signifies than to the events of my owntime.
    In the time I am speaking of a common misfortune befell the Peloponnesians, theBoiotians, the Phokians, the Euboians, the Lokrians, some of the cities on the Ionians Gulf,and finally the Macedonians
    ”(Polybius, Book IX, 38,

    Wie die akademische Welt seine Aussagen sieht:

    gut das du die akademische welt erwähnst

    Bury & Meiggs (1985) “A History of Greece”
    page 415

    “The Macedonian people and their kings were of Greek stock,
    as their traditions and the scanty remains of their language combine
    to testify.”

    * H. Bengston (1988) “A History of Greece: from the beginnings to the Byzantine era”
    page 186.
    Bengston makes the following statement pertaining to the origins of the Macedonians:
    “They should be included in the group of North-West Greek tribes”
    On the same page he also states that :
    the majority of modern historians have correctly argued for
    the Hellenic origin of the Macedonians.

    * N.G.L Hammond (1986) “A History of Greece to 332 B.C.”
    page 651.
    “Greece and Macedon were akin in blood and culture.”

    * N.G.L Hammond (1992) “The Miracle that was Macedonia”
    page 206.
    Hammond states:
    “As members of the Greek race and speakers of the Greek language,
    the Macedonians shared in the ability to initiate
    ideas and create political forms.”

    * M. Opperman (1996) “The Oxford Classical Dictionary 3rd ed.- Macedonia,Cults”
    page 905.
    In this prestigious source Opperman states:
    “Nowadays historians generally agree that the Macedonians ethnos
    form part of the Greek ethnos; hence they also shared in the common religious
    and cultural features of the Hellenic world“

    * U. Wilcken (1967) “Alexander the Great”
    page 22
    Wilcken states:
    “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 and akin to the Dorians“

    * R. Malcolm Errington, (1993) ‘A History of Macedonia’,University of California Press, February ,
    page 7
    Prof. Errington states:
    “Macedonian horsemen together with those of their Thessalian neighbours were later regarded
    as the best in GREECE”

    * Robin Lane Fox, ‘Alexander the Great’,
    page 104
    Robin Lane Fox explains how ancient Macedonians were viewed:
    “To his ancestors (to a Persian’s ancestors) Macedonians were only known
    as ‘yona takabara’, the ‘Greeks who wear shields on their heads’, an allusion to their broad-brimmed hats”

    * Richard Stoneman, ‘Alexander the Great’,
    page 14
    Richard Stoneman writes:
    “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.
    ’ 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).

    * Eugene.N.Borza (1990) “On the Shadows of Olympus”, Princeton: Princeton University Press,
    page 84
    Eugene Borza states:
    “The macedonians themselves may have originated from the
    same population pool that produced other Greek peoples.

    * Ernst Badian (1982) “Studies in the history of art Vol 10: Macedonia and Greece in Late Classical and Early Hellenistic Times”
    “We have now become accustomed to regarding Macedonians
    as northern Greeks’ and, in extreme cases, to hearing
    conquests described as in essence Greek Conquests. The former
    CERTAINLY became TRUE, in Greek consciousness in the course of the Hellenistic age.

    * Charles Edson, ‘Ancient Macedonian Studies in honor of Charles F. Edson’
    “Important West Greek elements remained in the Pindos. These are
    those whom Herodotus called ‘Makednon ethnos”

    * Richard Billows ‘Antigonus the One-Eyed’
    pages 18-20
    “The Macedonians, then, were probably a Greek people (though certainly
    with an admixture of Illyrians and Thracians) akin in language and culture
    to their neighbors to the south and west, the Thessalians and Epeirots”

    * Jonathan M. Hall (1998) “Ethnic identity in Greek antiquity” Cambridge University Press
    That the origin of this new population should be the supposed
    Dorian of northwest Greece seemed to be
    confirmed by the early appearance of cist graves
    at Kalbaki in Epeiros, Kozani, Vergina and Khaukhitsa in Makedonia.“

    * Robin Osborne (2004) Greek History Book, Routledge,
    page 127
    ”Although Macedonians were accepted as Greek, after some discussion, <
    for the purposes of competing at the Olympic games, and although the
    language of the Macedonians appears most probably to have been a dialect of Greek related to
    the dialects of north-west Greek, some Macedonian customs were distinct”

    * M. C. Howatson (1989) The Oxford Companion to Classical Literature Book by Oxford University Press,
    page 339

    ”Thus the kings were of largely Dorian Greek stock, they presumably spoke a form of Dorian Greek and their cultural tradition had Greek features. Whether or not the Macedonian people spoke a Greek dialect or a foreign tongue is still a matter of debate, but such evidence as exists suggests that they spoke a distinctive dialect of Greek, perhaps related to Aeolic”

    *Anthony E. David ‘A Biographical Dictionary of Ancient Egypt’

    After Alexander the Great conquered Egypt in 332 BC, the country was ruled by a line of Macedonian Greeks who descended from *Alexander’s general, Ptolemy

    * George Cawkwell (1978) “Philip of Macedon,” Fellow of the University College, Oxford,
    pp. 22-3,

    The Macedonians were Greeks. Their language was Greek, to judge by their personal names and by the names of the months of the calendar;

    * David G. Hogarth, “Philip and Alexander of Macedon”

    Page 8

    The king [of macedon] was chief in the first instance of a race of plain-dwellers, who held themselves to be, like him, of Hellenic stock

    Page 80

    It [Macedonia] was inhabited by sturdy gentry and peasantry and by agile highlanders, all composed of the same racial elements as the Greeks

    * Walter M. Ellis (1994) Ptolemy of Egypt

    Page X

    I fear that I have not been wholly consistent in my use of the term “Macedonian.” For the record, let me state that I believe Macedonians, ancient and modern, are Greeks

    * Eric Carlton (1992) Occupation: The Policies and Practices of Military Conquerors

    Page 55

    Scholars are now more or less agreed that they were one group of many Dorian tribes that had made their way into Greece from the Balkans in successive waves probably from as early as the eleventh century BC

    * Alan Fildes , Alexander the Great, son of the gods,

    page 12

    Although the Macedonians spoke a Greek dialect, worshipped Greek gods and traced their nation’s origins from Olympian gods, their customes and northern Doric accent were markedly different from those of the people of the rest of Greece, who saw the Macedonia as a largely insignificant, backward monarchy

    * Theodor Mommsen, (1909) The Provinces of the Roman Empire, vol.1, translated by W. P. Dickson, from the 1909 edition (Chicago, Ares Publishers , 1974),


    While the Macedonians proper on the lower course of the Haliacmon (Vistritza) and the Axius (Vardar), as far as the Strymon, were an ORIGINALLY Greek stock,

    * David Sacks (1995) “A Dictionary of the Ancient Greek World”, Oxford University

    “Historians refer to this enlarged Greek society as the Hellenistic world. At the start of his reign, the 20 year old Alexander was the crowned king only of Macedon- a crude Greek nation northeast of mainland Greece-…. His mother Olympias, came from the ruling clan of the northwestern Greek region called Epirus…“

    * Martin Sicker (2000) ‘The Pre-Islamic Middle East’

    page 102,

    Moreover, he was a Macedonian, from the backwater of the Greek world

    * L.S. Stavrianos “The Balkans since 1453″,

    page 19,

    Recent philological and archaeological research indicates that the ancient Macedonians were in fact Greeks

    * Peter G Tsouras ,“Alexander: Invincible King of Macedonia” ,

    page 3,

    The macedonians were Greek in language and blood

    * Philip Hughes ‘A History of the Church Volume 1′

    page 4

    The Macedonians, though the language they spoke was undoubtedly a Greek dialect, and though they were probably Greeks by blood

    * R. M. Cook (1962), “The Greeks until Alexander”,

    page. 23

    Macedonia and Epirus were the buffers of Greece in Europe..

    * Hermann Bengtson, ‘History of Greece’University of Ottawa Press, 1988.

    pgs 185-186.

    So the majority of modern historians, admittedly with the noteworthy exception of Julius Kaerst , have argued CORRECTLY for the Hellenic origin of the Macedonians. They should be included in the group of the North-West Greek tribes .

    * Mortimer Chambers (1997) “The Western Experience”,

    page 79,

    Macedonia (or Macedon) was an ancient, somewhat backward kingdom in northern Greece. Its emergence as a Hellenic (Greek) power was due to a resourceful king, Philip II (359-336)

    * Jacob Abbott , Alexander the Great

    Now Alexander was born the heir to the throne of one of the Grecian kingdoms. He possessed, in a very remarkable degree, the energy, and enterprise, and military skill so characteristic of the Greeks and Romans.

    * John V.A. Fine (1983) ‘The Ancient Greeks: A Critical History’ Harvard University Press,

    pgs 605-608

    Modern scholarship, after many generations of argument, now almost unanimously recognises them as Greeks, a branch of the Dorians and ‘NorthWest Greeks’ who, after long residence in the north Pindus region, migrated eastwards

    * Rene Guerdan (1969), French Historian

    The Macedonians are and have always been Greeks, and the creation of a “Socialist Republic of Macedonia” with Skopje as capital is only a sad farce.

    * David H. Levinson, Encyclopaedia of World Cultures

    Page 239

    It should be noted that there is no connection between the Macedonians of the time of Alexander the great who were related to other Hellenic tribes and the Macedonians of today, who are of Slavic Origin and related to the Bulgarians.

    * Bim Sherman (1930)’The Century’

    Page 527

    “And yet the Hindus of the Punjab were simply old-fashioned Hindus, as the
    Macedonians were old-fashioned Greeks. ”

    * Ernest Barker “The European Inheritance”

    The Macedonians were backward Greeks, with a good deal of Illyrian and other
    admixture, a rustic dialect, and a native pantheon

    * Archaeological Institute of America (1948)

    The Macedonians were Greeks in contradistinction to Barbarians, but they lived
    on the periphery of the Greek world, far removed in space and spirit from the rest of Greeks.

    * Benjamin I. Wheeler, Alexander the Great: The Merging of East and West in Universal History –

    That the Macedonians were Greek by race there can be no longer any doubt.
    They were the northernmost fragments of the race left stranded behind the barriers..”

    * Norman Karol Gottwald “The Politics of Ancient Israel”

    Although the Macedonians were Greek in language and culture, they were not primary carriers of Greek political democracy.

    * Nigel Guy Wilson (2006) Encyclopedia of Ancient Greece

    “The latest archaeological findings have confirmed that Macedonia took it’s name from a tribe of tall , Greek-speaking people , the Makednoi ...”

    * Mark Grossman “Biographical Dictionary of World Military Leaders”

    “When Alexander was just a child, his father was making Macedon (Now Macedonia in northern Greece) into one of the Greatest Greek city-states, as well as the dominant power in the Balkans.”

    * Rober Morkot, The Penguin Historical Atlas of ancient Greece.

    Page 70

    in the northwest, the peoples of Molossis, Orestis and Lynkestis spoke west Greek and although they absorbed other groups into their territory, they were essentially “Greeks”. The main difference between Macedonia and the city states of the south was that it was ruled by a king and powerful nobility.

    * J.J. Pollitt Art and Experience in Classical Greece

    The Macedonians were ethnically related to the Greeks and spoke a dialect of Greek, but their loose feudal kingdom the northern border of the Greek world had always been regarded as culturally backward.

    * Eric Carlton “Occupation – The policies and practices of Military Conquerors”

    Page 55

    Scholars are now more or less agreed that they were one group of many Dorian tribes that had made their way into Greece from the Balkans in successive waves probably from as early as the eleventh century BC.

    * J.R. Hamilton “Alexander the Great”

    That the Macedonians were of Greek stock seems certain.

    * Joseph M. Bryant, Moral codes and social structure in ancient Greece,

    The Macedonians were of Greek stock, though for centuries they had remained outside the mainstream of Hellenic civilization.

    * N. Jayapalan “comprehensive study of Aristotle”,

    This was Macedonia in the strict sense the land where settled those immigrants of Greek stock afterwards called Macedonians.

    * Katheryn A. Bard, Encyclopaedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt,

    Page 460,

    “The Macedonians were originally one of several Greek tribes living on the northern frontier of the Hellenic world

    Zitat Zitat von Zoran Beitrag anzeigen
    Das Thema hat sich für dich erledigt, weil du vermutlich gar nicht wusstest was Strabo der alte römische Geograph so alles schrieb )))))))))

    pass auf kollege ich muss dir eigentlich reingarnichts beweisen du stellst hier irgendwelche theorien auf die nicht der wirklichkeit entsprechen nicht umgekehrt

  2. #82
    Avatar von De_La_GreCo

    Registriert seit
    Zitat Zitat von Zoran Beitrag anzeigen
    Ich hatte mich schon mal zu Hajnal geäußert.
    du volldepp es wurde erst 2006 veröffentlicht weil es bis dato gedauert hat die rolle zu entziffern

    Archäologen entschlüsseln "Derveni-Papyrus"
    Eine der ältesten literarischen Schriften Europas, der mindestens 2.500 Jahre alte "Derveni-Papyrus", ist größtenteils entschlüsselt worden: Der Text handelt unter anderem von Orpheus und dem Reich der Toten.

    Dies gab am Mittwoch der griechische Archäologieprofessor Kyriakos Tsantsanoglou von der Universität Thessaloniki bekannt. "Jahrzehnte lang haben wir gearbeitet, um dieses gigantische "Puzzle" zu rekonstruieren", sagte er der Athener Zeitung "Kathimerini" am Mittwoch.

    Antike Jenseitsvorstellungen

    Die Entschlüsselung des 1962 in einem antiken Grab nahe Thessaloniki entdeckten Papyrus könne neue Erkenntnisse über die Welt der Antike bringen. Ein Buch über die neuen Forschungsergebnisse erscheint am Donnerstag in Griechenland in englischer Sprache.

    Der Text ist nach Ansicht von Philologen und Archäologen sehr wichtig für die Jenseitsvorstellungen in der Antike. "Darin kann man erkennen, welche Ansichten die Menschen damals hatten, was nach dem Tod folgt", sagte Giorgos Karamanolis, Professor für antike Philosophie an der Universität Kreta, der Zeitung.

    Text über Orpheus und die Unterwelt

    Der Papyrus des unbekannten Verfassers enthalte "mystische" und technische Informationen über Zeremonien der damaligen Zeit, hieß es. Der Text stamme mindestens aus dem fünften vorchristlichen Jahrhundert, er könne aber auch noch älter sein.

    Darin setze sich der Verfasser mit den in der griechischen Mythologie überlieferten Erfahrungen des Orpheus in der Unterwelt auseinander und entwerfe ein komplexes System über das Reich der Toten.

    Dem König Orpheus, eine Figur aus der Sagenwelt, soll es gelungen sein, in den Hades (Unterwelt) abzusteigen. Aus den neuen Hades-Erkenntnissen war damals ein sektenartiger mystischer Kult unter anderem zur Seelenwanderung entstanden, der unter dem Namen Orphismus bekannt ist.

    Der Papyrus sei offenbar nach dem Tode seines Besitzers zusammen mit ihm verbrannt und anschließend dem Grab beigefügt worden. Für mehr als 40 Jahre galt der Text als nicht entschlüsselbar. Um die kleinen Papyrus-Teile lesbar zu machen, seien moderne Methoden in Zusammenarbeit mit der englischen Universität Oxford angewendet worden, hieß es.

    [, 18.10.06]

    guck dir das datum an du hampel

  3. #83
    Avatar von Paokaras

    Registriert seit
    Vergiss Greco,ich hab damals auch 100 von Akademiker zitiert.Hat nix gebracht.

    Net mal Arrians Biographie über Alexander den Grossen hat was gebracht.Obwohl sie als die ,,beste,, zählt.

    Solange es ein paar Historiker die andere Thesen unterstützten wird Zoran diese schlupflöcher nutzen und uns hier Todlabbern.

  4. #84
    Avatar von Zoran

    Registriert seit
    Zitat Zitat von De_La_GreCo Beitrag anzeigen
    du volldepp es wurde erst 2006 veröffentlicht weil es bis dato gedauert hat die rolle zu entziffern

    Archäologen entschlüsseln "Derveni-Papyrus"
    Eine der ältesten literarischen Schriften Europas, der mindestens 2.500 Jahre alte "Derveni-Papyrus", ist größtenteils entschlüsselt worden: Der Text handelt unter anderem von Orpheus und dem Reich der Toten.

    Dies gab am Mittwoch der griechische Archäologieprofessor Kyriakos Tsantsanoglou von der Universität Thessaloniki bekannt. "Jahrzehnte lang haben wir gearbeitet, um dieses gigantische "Puzzle" zu rekonstruieren", sagte er der Athener Zeitung "Kathimerini" am Mittwoch.

    Antike Jenseitsvorstellungen

    Die Entschlüsselung des 1962 in einem antiken Grab nahe Thessaloniki entdeckten Papyrus könne neue Erkenntnisse über die Welt der Antike bringen. Ein Buch über die neuen Forschungsergebnisse erscheint am Donnerstag in Griechenland in englischer Sprache.

    Der Text ist nach Ansicht von Philologen und Archäologen sehr wichtig für die Jenseitsvorstellungen in der Antike. "Darin kann man erkennen, welche Ansichten die Menschen damals hatten, was nach dem Tod folgt", sagte Giorgos Karamanolis, Professor für antike Philosophie an der Universität Kreta, der Zeitung.

    Text über Orpheus und die Unterwelt

    Der Papyrus des unbekannten Verfassers enthalte "mystische" und technische Informationen über Zeremonien der damaligen Zeit, hieß es. Der Text stamme mindestens aus dem fünften vorchristlichen Jahrhundert, er könne aber auch noch älter sein.

    Darin setze sich der Verfasser mit den in der griechischen Mythologie überlieferten Erfahrungen des Orpheus in der Unterwelt auseinander und entwerfe ein komplexes System über das Reich der Toten.

    Dem König Orpheus, eine Figur aus der Sagenwelt, soll es gelungen sein, in den Hades (Unterwelt) abzusteigen. Aus den neuen Hades-Erkenntnissen war damals ein sektenartiger mystischer Kult unter anderem zur Seelenwanderung entstanden, der unter dem Namen Orphismus bekannt ist.

    Der Papyrus sei offenbar nach dem Tode seines Besitzers zusammen mit ihm verbrannt und anschließend dem Grab beigefügt worden. Für mehr als 40 Jahre galt der Text als nicht entschlüsselbar. Um die kleinen Papyrus-Teile lesbar zu machen, seien moderne Methoden in Zusammenarbeit mit der englischen Universität Oxford angewendet worden, hieß es.

    [, 18.10.06]

    guck dir das datum an du hampel

    Das Derveni papyrus ist nur ein Beispiel von vielen, es existieren noch andere Funde die Hajnal nicht berücksichtigt hat. Bzw. Hajnal baut seine These auf nur ein Fundstück auf.

  5. #85
    Avatar von Zoran

    Registriert seit
    Zitat Zitat von De_La_GreCo Beitrag anzeigen
    lies es dir einfach durch biste schlauer


    Ancient Quotes on the Macedonians as Distinct Nation

    The ancient Greek, Roman, and Jewish historians, geographers, and orators, speak of the Macedonians as distinct nation, separate from their Greek, Thracian, and Illyrian neighbors. They are clear that Macedonia was never part of Greece and that the Macedonians conquered Greece, Thrace, and Illyria, and kept the Greeks, Thracians, and Illyrians enslaved, until Rome defeated the Macedonian armies and turned the country into its first province in 168 BC. The assertion of those modern historians that propagate that the Macedonians "were Greeks" which have "united" Greece, is absurd and is completely unsupported by the words of the ancients who clearly considered Greece subjected by the Macedonian foreigners. The Macedonians garrisoned the Greek cities (like the Thracian and Illyrian cities) to enforce their occupation, and later used the Greeks (along with equal numbers of the Thracians and Illyrians) for their conquest of Persia.

    1) Diodorus
    12) Plutarch
    2) Justin
    13) Livy
    3) Arrian
    14) Polybius
    4) Curtius Rufus
    15) Thracymachus
    5) Thucydides
    16) Herodotus
    6) Isocrates
    17) Demosthenes
    7) Ephoros
    18) Josephus
    8) Ptolemy
    19) Strabo
    9) Pausanias
    20) Dionysius Periegetes
    10) Medius of Larisa
    21) Pseudo-Scylax
    11) Pseudo-Herodotus
    22) Dionysius son of Kalliphon

    The ancient Greeks did not regard the Macedonians as Greeks, nor the Macedonians regarded themselves to be Greek. They were proud of their Macedonian nationality and way of life, and looked down upon the Greeks and with contempt. The Greeks called them barbarians, along with the Persians, Illyrians, and Thracians, a label that they attributed to all non-Greeks who neither spoke nor understood the Greek language. Alexander's Macedonian Army was not a "Greek army" as some modern writers have erroneously claimed, nor the Macedonian conquest of Asia was a "Greek conquest". The fact is that not one ancient writer has called the Macedonian empire "Greek" or the Macedonian army and conquest "Greek", but specifically Macedonian. When Rome clashed with Macedonia, the Macedonians were ordered by the Romans to evacuate from the whole of Greece and withdraw to Macedonia. They were hated by the Greeks ever since Philip II defeated the Greeks at Chaeronea in 338 BC and brought Greece to its kneel, and the Greeks fought fiercely, first on the side of the Persians and later on the side of the Romans to expel the Macedonians from their country. Too late would they realize that the Macedonian occupation would only be replaced by the Roman. In between the Greeks fought many unsuccessful wars against the Macedonians to drive them out of Greece, among which the Lamian War is the most famous. It should be noted that the Lamian War was triggered by the death of Alexander the Great, which encouraged the Greeks to rebel.

    The purpose of this page is to provide the reader with the actual quotes of the ancient Greek, Roman, and Jewish historians, geographers, and orators that speak of the above assertions, and show that the ancient Macedonians were not Greeks (as the modern Greeks claim today) but a distinct nation. The reader is cautioned that these ancient quotes are not found at the Greek Internet pages which propagate that the Macedonians "were Greek". Since these overwhelming quotes confirm the fact that the ancient Macedonians were not Greek, the Greek Internet pages purposely avoid them, as they have no way of explaining them. But to the ancient peoples and to the ancient authors the distinctive ethnicity of the Macedonians was not a matter for debate - it was simply a fact.

    Die von dir in deinem Zitat erwähnten, Isokrates, Thucydides, Herodot, Polybius:

    Ancient Greek Writer
    To Philip

    [1] "The feeling of being peoples of nonkindred race existed on both side" referring to Isocrates' statement. Earnst Badian
    [2] Isocrates’ letter to Philip II where he, Isocrates refers to Philip "as one who has been blessed with untrammeled freedom to consider Hellas your fatherland" Green calls this a "rhetorical hyperbole". "Indeed, taken as a whole the Address to Philip must have caused its recipient considerable sardonic amusement". [p. 49] "Its ethnic conceit was only equaled by its naivety" [p.49] Peter Green

    [3] "And though Philip did not give a fig for Panhellenism as an idea, he at once saw how it could be turned into highly effective camouflage (a notion which his son subsequently took over ready-made). Isocrates had, unwittingly, supplied him with the propaganda-line he needed. From now on he merely had to clothe his Macedonian ambitions in a suitable Panhellenic dress." [p.50] Peter Green

    [4] "This was the Panhellenic crusade preached by Isocrates, and as such the king’s propaganda section continued - for the time being - to present it. No one, so far as we know, was tactless enough to ask the obvious question: if this was a Panhellenic crusade, where were the Greek troops? [p. 157] Green

    [5] "Isocrates never for an instant thought of a politically unified state under Philip's leadership. It is simply the internal unification of Hellas which he calls on Philip to bring about." [p.37] [Macedonia specifically excluded from Greece] Wilken

    Note: Macedonians were not Hellene, and Macedonia was never a member of the Hellenic League, a league that encompassed and "united" all the Greek city-states. Isocrates expanded the term Hellene to include, no racial descent, but mode of thought, and those who partook of Attic culture, rather than those who had a common descent were called Hellene. He saw the true Hellene only in the Greek educated in the Attic model. He did not regard the barbarians of Attic education as Hellenes.

    [6] "When Philip read the book, the insistence of his descent from Heracles must have been welcome to him; for in his policy he had to stress this mythical derivation, as the types of Heracles on his coins show. But on the other hand he must have smiled at the naivete shown by Isocrates." [p.36] Wilken

    [7] Isocrates must have taken this strong realist for an idealist, such as he was himself, if he believed that Philip would draw his sword for the beaux yeux of the Greeks." [p.36] Wilken

    [8] "When Isocrates in this treatise makes so much of Heracles as Philip's ancestor, this was meant not merely for Philip, but for the Greek public as well." [p.35] Wilken

    [9] "At the end of his speech, Isocrates, summarizing the programme which he was proposing to Philip, advised him to be a benefector to the Greeks, a king to the Macedonians, and to the barbarians not a master, but a chief." [p.106] PIERRE JOUGUET Alexander the Great and the Hellenistic World

    [10] [On Macedonian ethnicity] So little do the Macedonians seem to have belonged to the Hellenic community at the beginning, that they did not take part in the great Games of Greece, and when the Kings of Macedon were admitted to them, it was not as Macedonians, but as Heraclids. Isocrates, in the 'Philip' praises them for not having imposed their kingship on the Hellenes, to whom the kingship is always oppressive, and for having gone among foreigners to establish it. He, therefore, did not regard the Macedonians as Greeks." [p.68] PIERRE JOUGUET Alexander the Great and the Hellenistic World

    [11] "In the Panegyricus he [Isocrates] had urged an understanding between Sparta and Athens, so that the Greeks might unite in a common expedition against the Persian empire. Nothing of that sort was any longer thinkable. But the policy of which he now had such high hopes offered a surprisingly simple solution for the distressing problem that lay heavily on all minds the problem of what was to be the ultimate relationship between Greece and the new power in the north (Macedonia)." [p.152] WERNER JAEGER Demosthenes

    [12] "But for Isocrates that was no obstacle. He had long since come to recognize the impossibility of resisting Macedonia, and he was only trying to find the least humiliating way to express the unavoidable submission of all the Greeks to the will of Philip. Here again he found the solution in a scheme for Macedonian hegemony over Greece. For it seems as if Philip's appearance in this role would be most effective way to mitigate his becoming so dominant a factor in Greek history; moreover, it ought to silence all Greek prejudices against the culturally and ethnically alien character of the Macedonians." [p.153] WERNER JAEGER

    [13] "With the help of the role that Isocrates had assigned to him, he had the astuteness to let his cold-blooded policy for the extension of Macedonian power take on the eyes of the Greeks the appearance of a work of liberation for Hellas. What he most needed at this moment was not force but shrewd propaganda; and nobody lent himself to this purpose so effectively as the old Isocrates, venerable and disinterested, who offered his services of his own free will." [p.155] WERNER JAEGER

    [14] "Looking far beyond the actualities of the Greek world, hopelessly split asunder as it was, he (Isocrates) had envisaged a united nation led by the Macedonian king." [p.172] WERNER JAEGER

    [15] "Quite apart, however, from any theoretical doubts whether the nationalistic movement of modern times, which seeks to combine in a single state all the individuals of a single folk, can properly be compared with the Greek idea of Panhellenism, scholars have failed to notice that after the unfortunate Peace of Philocrates Demosthenes' whole policy was an unparalleled fight for national unification. In this period he deliberately threw off the constrains of the politician concerned exclusively with Athenian interests, and devoted himself to a task more lofty than any Greek statesman before him had ever projected or indeed could have projected. In this respect he is quite comparable to Isocrates; but an important point of contrast still remains. The difference is simply that Demosthenes did not think of this "unification" as a more or less voluntary submission to the will of the conqueror; on the contrary, he demanded a unanimous uprising of all the Greeks against the Macedonian foe." [p.172] WERNER JAEGER

    [16] "His Panhellenism was the outgrowth of a resolute will for national self-assertiveness, deliberately opposed to the national self-surrender called for by Isocrates - for that was what Isocrates' program had really meant, despite its being expressed romantically as a plan for a Persian war under Macedonian leadership." [p.172-3] WERNER JAEGER

    [17] The first resolution passed by Synedrion at Corinth was the declaration of war against Persia. "The difference was that this war of conquest, which was passionately described as a war of vengeance, was not looked upon as a means of uniting the Greeks, as Isocrates would have had it, but was merely an instrument of Macedonian imperialism." [p.192] WERNER JAEGER

    [18] "For the six years or more that follow, Philip's life, alas! is withdrawn, except at rare intervals, from our knowledge. Alas, indeed! for these are the years in which his men at arms marched, the first foreigners since history has begun, into the Peloponnese, and he himself besieged and took cities on the Adriatic, and led his spearmen up to, or even beyond, the Danube; years, too, in which his final ambition took shape, 'for it was coming to be his desire to be designated Captain- General of Hellas, and to wage the War against the Persians'." (p.97) David Hogarth

    [Please visit "Green" and "Isocrates' Letter to Philip" (345), for further enlightenment] Notice also the usage of quotes by David Hogarth, regarding Philip's desire to be Captain-General of Hellas.]

    [19] "The dispute of modern scholars over the racial stock of the Macedonians have led to many interesting suggestions. This is especially true of the philological analysis of the remains of the Macedonian language by O. Hoffmann in his Makedonen etc. Cf. the latest general survey of the controversy in F. Geyer and his chapter on prehistory. But even if the Macedonians did have some Greek blood- as well as Illyrian- in their veins, whether originally or by later admixture, this would not justify us in considering them on a par with the Greeks in point of race or in using this as historical excuse for legitimizing the claims of this bellicose peasant folk to lord it over cousins in the south of the Balkan peninsula so far ahead of them in culture. It is likewise incorrect to assertthat this is the only way in which we can understand the role of the Macedonian conquest in Hellenizing the Orient. But we can neglect this problem here, as our chief interest lies in discovering what the Greeks themselves felt and thought. And here we need not cite Demosthenes' well-known statements; for Isocrates himself, the very man who heralds the idea of Macedonian leadership in Hellas, designates the people of Macedonia as members of an alien race in Phil.108. He purposely avoids the word barbaroibut this word is one that inevitably finds a place for itself in the Greek struggle for national independence and expresses the views of every true Hellene. Even Isocrates would not care to have the Greeks ruled by the Macedonian people: it is only the king of Macedonia, Philip, who is to be the new leader; and the orator tries to give ethnological proof of Philip's qualifications for this task by the device of showing that he is no son of his people but, like the rest of his dynasty, a scion of Heracles, and therefore of Greek blood." [p.249] WERNER JAEGER

    [Point of Interest]

    (a) Macedonians cannot be considered as Greeks even if they had some Greek blood in their veins.

    (b) Macedonia's conquest of the Orient should not be contingent upon Greek culture.

    (c) Isocrates places the Macedonians with alien races and hitherto, outside the Hellenic world.

    (d) Isocrates takes care of this "alien race" not to be seen as leaders of Greece. He isolates their king Philip as not of the same race as the people over which he governs.

    Note: The speech On the Chersonese was, to be sure, delivered in a specifically Athenian emergency; but the interest of the Greeks as a whole is never left out of sight. The Third Philippic is entirely dedicated to the danger that threatens all Greece. Similarly, when the past and future are compared, it is the whole of Hellas that is considered, not Athens alone.

    Greek Commander and Historian

    [1] The modern Greeks claim that the ancient Macedonians were Greek based on the below passage of Thucydides:
    "The country by the sea which is now called Macedonia... Alexander, the father of Perdiccas, and his forefathers, who were originally Temenidae from Argos" (Thucydides 2.99,3)

    That this myth does not prove that the Macedonians were Greek I offer the extensive study conducted by the Macedonian specialist, Professor Eugene Borza. Analyzing the Temenidae myth transmitted by Herodotus and Thucydides, in details in two Chapters, Eugene Borza - In the Shadow of Olympus p.82-83 gives the following conclusion:

    a) "It is clear that the analysis of our earliest-and sole-source cannot produce a consistent and satisfactory sequence of events. My own view is that there is some underlying veracity to the Mt. Vermion reference (as evidenced by the Phrygian connections), that among the Makedones a family of Vermion background emerged as pre-eminent, but that the Argive context is mythic, perhaps a bit of fifth-century B.C. propaganda (as I argue in the next chapter). To deny such fables and attribute them to contemporary Macedonian propaganda may appear minimalistic. But given the historical milieu in which such stories were spawned and then adorned, the denial of myth seems prudent.

    b) The Temenidae in Macedon are an invention of the Macedonians themselves, intended in part to give credence to Alexander I's claims of Hellenic ancestry, attached to and modifying some half-buried progenitor stories that had for a long time existed among the Macedonians concerning their own origins. The revised version was transmitted without criticism or comment by Herodotus. Thucydides (2-99.3; 5.80.2) acquired the Argive lineage tale from Herodotus, or from Macedonian-influenced sources, and transmitted it. His is not an independent version. [There is no hard evidence (pace Hammond, HM i: 4) that Thucydides ever visited Macedonia, but it makes no difference; Thucydides is reflecting the official version of things.] What emerged in the fifth century is a Macedonian-inspired tale of Argive origins for the Argead house, an account that can probably be traced to its source, Alexander I (for which see Chapter 5 below). The Temenidae must disappear from history, making superfluous all discussion of them as historical figures.

    c) There were further embellishments to the myth of the early royal family. In the last decade of the fifth century B.C. Euripides came to reside in Macedon at the court of King Archelaus, thereby contributing a new stage to the evolution of the Macedonian creation-myth. Euripides' play honoring his patron, Archelaus, probably adorned the basic story, replacing Perdiccas with an Archelaus as the descendant of Temenus-no doubt to the delight of his royal host. Delphic oracles were introduced, and the founder's tale was extended by the introduction of Caranus (Doric for "head" or "ruler"). In the early fourth century, new early kings were added during the political rivalry among three branches of the Argeadae following the death of King Archelaus in 399, another example of the Macedonian predilection to rewrite history to support a contemporary political necessity. The story continued to be passed through the hands of local Macedonian historians in the fourth century B. C., and by Roman times it was widely known in a number of versions. Nothing in this later period can be traced back earlier than Euripides' revision of the Herodotean tradition. The notion that Alexander I or one of his predecessors obtained a Delphic oracle to confirm the Macedonian tie with Argos has no evidence to support it. Had such an oracle existed we can be confident that Alexander, eager to confirm his Hellenic heritage, would have exploited it, and that Herodotus, who delighted in oracles, would have mentioned it. In the end what is important is not whether Argive Greeks founded the Macedonian royal house but that at least some Macedonian kings wanted it so".

    d) Borza also mentiones that the "two advocates of the Argos-Macedon link are Hammond, HM, vol. 2, ch. I, and Daskalakis, Hellenism, Pt. 3, both of whom support the notion of a Temenid origin for the Macedonian royal house", however, we have seen above that both of them were corrected with the extensive evidence that Borza carefully reviewed. We have already seen that both Daskalakis and Hammond were incorrect on many matters on the ethnicity of the Ancient Macedonians, therefore it should come to no surprise that their now outdated and poor in evidence material can not be used to claim a Greek identity to the ancient Macedonians. Click here for Daskalakis and Hammond.

    [2]Thucydides however, did not consider the Macedonians to be Greek, despite the above myth which wasn’t his original work but it as we saw was only transmitted by him.Here Thucydides clearly separates the Macedonians from the Greeks (Hellenes):

    "In all there were about three thousand Hellenic heavy infantry, accompanied by all the Macedonian cavalry with the Chalcidians, near one thousand strong, besides an immense crowd of barbarians." (Thucydides 4.124)

    Borza comments: "The use of barbaros [barbarians] is problematic, although it would appear that he normally includes at least some of the Macedonians in this category. See 4.125.3 and Gomme, Comm. Thuc.,3:613,615 and 616 on Thuc. 4.124.1, 126.3 and 126.5 respectively. In the Shadow of Olympus p 152.

    "Both Herodotus and Thucydides describe the Macedonians as foreigners, a distinct people living outside of the frontiers of the Greek city-states" – Eugene Borza, In the Shadow of Olympus p. 96
    Ancient Greek Writer

    The modern Greek position relies on Herodotus' support for their quest to make the ancient Macedonians Greek. Herodotus, being one of the foremost biographer in antiquity who lived in Greece at the time when the Macedonian king Alexander I was in power, is said to have visited the Macedonian Kingdom and supposedly, profited from this excursion, wrote several short passages about the Macedonians. What did he say, and to what extent can these passages be taken as evidence for the alleged 'greekness' of the ancient Macedonians, will be briefly presented for your adjudication.
    Herodotus describes the episode with the Persian envoys, who apparently visited Macedon when Alexander I's father Amyntas was in power, and how Alexander I succeeded in 'taking care of the Persians' by murdering all of them and removing their luggage and carriages. When the Persians attempted to trace the lost envoys, Alexander I cleverly succeeded in manipulating the Persians by giving his own sister Gygaea as a wife to the Persian commander Bubares. Here Herodotus writes:

    "I happen to know, and I will demonstrate in a subsequent chapter of this history, that these descendants of Perdiccas are, as they themselves claim, of Greek nationality. This was, moreover, recognized by the managers of the Olympic games, on the occasion when Alexander wished to compete and his Greek competitors tried to exclude him on the ground that foreigners were not allowed to take part. Alexander, however, proved his Argive descent, and so was accepted as a Greek and allowed to enter for the foot-race. He came in equal first." book 5. 22.

    First, notice that it is not Herodotus that says that the Macedonian kings were of Greek nationality, but the Macedonian kings as they themselves claim. Now, let us peruse the modern literature and see if we can shed some light on this particular passage from Herodotus which is so 'dear' to all Greek presenters, and one that occupies the central position of their otherwise feeble defense.

    [1] Eugene Borza In The Shadow of Olympus p. 112 writes:

    "Herodotus' story is fraught with too many difficulties to make sense of it. For example, either (1) Alexander lost the run-off for his dead heat, which is why his name doez not appear in the victor lists; or (2) he won the run-off, although Herodotus does not tell us this; or (3) it remained a dead heat, which is impossible in light Olympic practice; or (4) it was a special race, in which case it is unlikely that his fellow competitors would have protested Alexander's presence; or (5) Alexander never competed at Olympia. It is best to abandon this story, which belongs in the category of the tale of Alexander at Plataea. In their commentaries on these passages Macan and How and Wells long ago recognized that the Olympic Games story was based on family legend (Hdt. 5.22: "as the descendants of Perdiccas themselves say [autoi legousi]"), weak proofs of their Hellenic descent. Moreover, the Olympic Games tale is twice removed: Herodotus heard from the Argeadea (perhaps from Alexander himself) that the king had told something to the judges, but we do not know what those proofs were."

    "The theme of the Olympic and Plataea incidents are the same: "I am Alexander, a Greek" which seems to be the main point. The more credible accounts of Alexander at Tempe and at Athens do not pursue this theme; they state Alexander's activities without embellishment or appeal to prohellenism. Moreover, the insistence that Alexander is a Greek, and descendant from Greeks, rubs against the spirit of Herodotus 7.130, who speaks of the Thessalians as the first Greeks to come under Persian submission--a perfect opportunity for Herodotus to point out that the Macedonians were a non Greek race ruled over by Greek kings, something he nowhere mentions."

    "In sum, it would appear that Olympia and Plataea incidents---when taken together with the tale of the ill--fated Persian embassy to Amyntas' court in which Alexander proclaims the Greek descent of the royal house--are part of Alexander's own attempts to integrate himself into the Greek community during the postwar period. They should be discarded both because they are propaganda and because they invite suspicion on the general grounds outlined above."

    In support of his position Borza brings forward many interesting questions. He asks:

    "Why is it that no Spartan or Athenian or Argive felt constrained to prove to the others that he and his family were Helenes? But Macedonian kings seem hard put to argue in behalf of their Hellenic ancestry in the fifth century B.C., and that circumstance is telling. Even if one were to accept that all the Herodotian stories about Alexander were true, why did the Greeks, who normally were knowledgeable about matters of ethnic kinship, not already know that the Macedonian monarchy was Greek? But--following Herodotus--the stade- race competitors at Olympia thought the Macedonian was a foreigner (Hdt. 5.22: barbaros) Second, for his effort on behalf of the Greek cause against the Persians Alexander is known as "Philhellene". Now this is kind of odd to call a Greek a "friend of the Greeks". "This title", writes Borza, "is normally reserved for non-Greeks".

    Borza concludes: "It is prudent to reject the stories of the ill--fated Persian embassy to Amyntas's court, Alexander's midnight ride at Plataea, and his participation in the Olympic Games as tales derived from Alexander himself (or from some official court version of things)."

    [2] Peter Green - Classical Bearings p.157

    "All Herodotus in fact says is that Alexander himself demonstrated his Argive ancestry (in itself a highly dubious genealogical claim), and was thus adjudged a Greek---against angry opposition, be it noted, from the stewards of the Games Even if, with professor N.G.L. Hammond, we accept this ethnic certification at face value, it tells us, as he makes plain, nothing whatsoever about Macedonians generally. Alexander's dynasty, if Greek, he writes, regarded itself as Macedonian only by right of rule, as a branch of the Hanoverian house has come to 'regard itself as English'. On top of which, Philip II's son Alexander had an Epirote mother, which compounds the problem from yet another ethnic angle."

    [3] Ernst Badian - Studies in the History of Art Vol 10: Macedonia and Greece in Late Classical Early Hellenistic Times:

    "We have no way of judging the authenticity of either the claim or the evidence that went with it, but it is clear that at the time the decision was not easy. There were outraged protests from the other competitors, who rejected Alexander I as a barbarian--which proves, at least, that the Temenid descent and the royal genealogy had hitherto been an isoteric item of knowledge. However, the Hellanodikai decided to accept it--whether moved by the evidence or by political considerations, we again cannot tell. In view of the time and circumstances in which the claim first appears and the objections it encountered, modern scholars have often suspected that it was largely spun out of fortuitous resemblance of the name of the Argead clan to city of Argos; with this given, the descent (of course) could not be less than royal, i.e., Temenid."

    Badian, like Borza, believes that Alexander I "invented the story (in its details a common type of myth) of how he had fought against his father's Persian connection by having the Persian ambassadors murdered, and that it was only in order to hush this up and save the royal family's lives that the marriage of his sister to a Persian had been arranged."

    Badian sums it up:"As a matter of fact, there is reason to think that at least some even among Alexander I's friends and supporters had regarded the Olympic decision as political rather than factual--as a reward for services to the Hellenic cause rather than as prompted by genuine belief in the evidence he had adduced. We find him described in the lexicographers, who go back to fourth-century sources, as "Philhellene",--surely not an appellation that could be given to an actual Greek."

    I would like to offer another episode, reported by Herodotus, which clearly indicates that ancient Greeks did not regard the ancient Macedonians as brethren. Episodes like this stand in sharp contrast to today's claims propagated by modern Greeks. The Persian armies were ready and poised to strike Greece. Greek allies were assembled and prepared to defend their nation. Mardonius, the Persian commander, sends Alexander I to Athens with a message. On his arrival to Athens as Mardonius' ambassador Alexander spoke to the Athenians urging them to accept the terms offered by Mardonius. In Sparta, the news that Alexander brought message from the Great King, caused great consternation. Sparta feared that an alliance between Athens and Persia was in the making. She, then, quickly rushed an envoy to Athens herself. As it happened, Alexander I and the Spartan envoy had their audience at the same time.When Alexander I was done the Spartan envoy s spoke in their turn: "Do not let Alexander's smooth-sounding version of Mardonius' proposals seduce you; he does only what one might expect of him--a despot himself, of course he collaborates with a despot. But such conduct is not for you - at least, not if you are wise; for surely you know that in foreigners there is neither truth nor trust." (Hdt. 8.142) [Please note the reference to Alexander I as a foreigner who is neither truthful nor trustworthy.]

    Then, the Athenians gave answer to Alexander I. Among the other things, they told Alexander that they, the Athenians, will never make peace with Mardonius, and will oppose him 'unremittingly'. As to Alexander I' advice and urgings that they accept the terms offered by Mardonius they said:

    "Never come to us again with a proposal like this, and never think you are doing us good service when you urge us to a course which is outrageous - for it would be a pity if you were to suffer some hurt at the hands of the Athenians, when you are our friend and benefector." (Hdt. 8.143)

    To the Spartan envoys they said the following: "No doubt it was natural that the Lacedaemonians should dread the of our making terms with Persia; none the less it shows a poor estimate of the spirit of Athens. There is not so much gold nor land so fair that we would take for pay to join the common enemy and bring Greece into subjection. There are many compelling reasons against our doing so, even if we wished: the first and greatest is the burning of the temples and images of our gods - now ashes and rubble. It is our bounded duty to avenge this desecration with all our might - not to clasp the hand that wrought it. Again there is the Greek nation - the community of blood and language, temples and rituals, and our common customs; if Athens were to betray all this, it would not be well done. We, would have you know, if you did not know it already, that so long as a single Athenians remains alive we will make no peace with Xerxes." (Hdt. 8.144)


    Among the Greeks there exist a common bond, a community of blood and language, temples and rituals and common customs. This expressed kinship between the Greek allies is evident and it stands in stark contrast against the references used towards the Macedonians who were addressed as foreigners. We have seen that Herodotus (7.130) speaks of the Thessalians as the first Greeks to come under Persian submission (although the Persians entered Macedonia first), and here using his own words, he clearly exclude the Macedonians from the Greeks. We are therefore, left with the conclusion that Herodotus did not consider the Macedonians as Greeks. "Both Herodotus and Thucydides describe the Macedonians as foreigners, a distinct people living outside of the frontiers of the Greek city-states" – Eugene Borza, In the Shadow of Olympus p. 96.

    Greek Statesman and Historian. [c 200-118 B.C.]
    The Rise of the Roman Empire

    "The fact is that we can obtain no more than an impression of a whole from a part, but certainly neither a thorough knowledge nor an accurate understanding. We must conclude then that specialized studies or monographs contribute very little to our grasp of the whole and our conviction of its truth. On the contrary, it is only by combining and comparing the various parts of the whole with one another and noting their resemblances and their differences that we shall arrive at a comprehensive view, and thus encompass both the practical benefits and the pleasure that the reading of history affords." [p 45]

    [How true, indeed. By combining and comparing various statements from the ancient authors can we arrive to the truest picture of the ancients themselves. Let them speak of themselves, and let their true sentiments flood the pages uncorrupted and free of any biased and preconceived prejudices. Only then, can we assess the magnitude of their purity of soul, and the passion for their national aspirations.]

    [1] Polibius reports on the speech made by Agelaus of Naupactus at the first conference in the presence of the King and the allies. He spoke as follows:

    "I therefore beg you all to be on your guard against this danger, and I appeal especially to King Philip. [Macedonian king Philip V] For you the safest policy, instead of wearing down the Greeks and making them an easy prey for the invader, is to take care of them as you would of your own body, and to protect every province of Greece as you would if it were a part of your own dominions. If you follow this policy, the Greeks will be your friends and your faithful allies in case of attack, and foreigners will be the less inclined to plot against your throne, because they will be discouraged by the loyalty of the Greeks towards you." [p .300] book 5.104

    Points of Interest: Clear distinction between Greece (to protect every province of Greece) and Macedonia (as you would if it were a part of your own dominions). Furthermore, the Macedonians were still wearing down the Greeks even into the times of Philip V.

    [2] [Book XVIII, 1] Philip V from Macedon invites Flamininus (Roman commander) to explain what he, Philip, should do to have peace:

    "The Roman general replied that his duty dictated an answer which was both simple and clear. He demanded that Philip should withdraw from the whole of Greece, restore to each of the states the prisoners and deserters he was holding, hand over to the Romans the region of Illyria which he had seized after the treaty that had been made in Epirus, and so on...."

    [Point of interest: "Philip should withdraw from the whole of Greece," Flamininus, the Roman general, clearly separates Macedonia from Greece, and demands from the Macedonin king to withdraw from Greece into his own Macedonia.]

    [3] (Book XVIII. 3) A man named Alexander of Isus, who had the reputation of being both an experienced statesman and an able orator, rose to speak:

    'Why,' he asked Philip V, 'had he sold into slavery the people of Cius, which was also a member of the Aetolian League, when he himself was on friendly terms with the Aetolians?'

    [Philip sells the people of Cius into slavery. Cuis' population was not a Macedonian population. Philip's action underlines one fundamental fact: Greece was a conquered territory, and Greek cities were dispensable.]

    [4] (Book XVIII. 5) Philip V from Macedon responds to the Greek and Roman demands:

    "But what is most outrageous of all is that they should attempt to put themselves on the same footing as the Romans and demand that the Macedonians should withdraw from the whole of Greece. To use such language is arrogant enough in the first place, but while we may endure this from the Romans, it is quite intolerable coming from the Aetolians. In any case,' he continued, 'what is this Greece which you demand that I should evacuate, and how do you define Greece? Certainly most of the Aetolians themselves are not Greeks! The countries of the Agraae, the Apodotea, and the Aphilochians cannot be regarded as Greek. So do you allow me to remain in those territories."

    From the above encounters we infer: They, the Greeks, would like to see him, King Philip V from Macedon, leave Greece and go to his own kingdom in Macedonia, and by the strongest implication, we concur that:

    (a) Ancient Greeks did not regard the ancient Macedonians as their kinsmen.

    (b) Ancient Macedonians did not regard the Greeks as their own people.

    (c) Ancient Macedonians had conquered the Greek states.

    (d) Ancient Macedonians had enslaved the Greeks and sold them as slaves.

    (e) Macedonia was not a Greek land.

    [5] …"For there can be no doubt that by their indefatigable energy and daring they raised Macedonia from the status of a petty kingdom to that of the greatest and most glorious monarchy in the world. And apart what was accomplished during Philip's lifetime, the successes that were achieved by Alexander after his father's death won for them a reputation for valour which has been universally recognized by posterity.".... [Polybius: The Rise of the Roman Empire, published by Penguin Classics, Book VIII.9 page 371.]

    As with his predecessors, other ancient authors, Polybius clearly separates the ancient Macedonians from the ancient Greeks. As a matter of fact, the ethnic difference between these two people was not a matter for discussion - it was an accomplished fact.
    Quelle: Ancient Quotes on the Macedonians as Distinct Nation

  6. #86
    Avatar von De_La_GreCo

    Registriert seit
    nato paokara arxise to panigiri pali

  7. #87

    Registriert seit

    Putin kennt sich aus.

  8. #88
    Avatar von Zoran

    Registriert seit
    Zitat Zitat von De_La_GreCo Beitrag anzeigen
    war klar das du wieder was auszusetzen hast

    ich habe dir einen beleg gezeigt

    zeig du mir ma ein fundstück wo die makedonische sprache abgebildet sein soll die so anders war als die griechische

    Du hast eine These gezeigt in dem Hajnal zur Revision auf Grundlage eines Fundstückes forderte.

    Mann sollte auch beachten das Hajnal seine These auf die vorgehende Arbeit von Anna Panayotou (eine ) stützt.

    Das das antike makedonische Volk angeblich dorisch gesprochen haben soll ist eine Theorie, da wird auch der Katadesmos nichts ändern.

    Die Sprache auf der Tafel kann gar nicht das alte makedonische sein, da jeder Linguist sich im klaren ist das die alte makedonische Sprache nicht geschrieben wurde.
    Sie könnte aber das "griechisch" darstellen welches die Makedonen verwendeten um mit den Griechen zu kommunizieren, bevor das attische als s.g. Hofsprache Einzug hielt. Dubois, auf dessen Studie sich Hajnal auch beruft, spricht von eindeutigen Makedonismen auf der Tafel.

  9. #89
    Avatar von Heraclius

    Registriert seit
    Zitat Zitat von Zoran Beitrag anzeigen

    Ancient Quotes on the Macedonians as Distinct Nation

    Ok danke Lou/Zoran, soviel mal zur Antike. Jetzt präsentierst du noch den Nachweis dafür, dass ihr Slawen aus dem 6. Jh.n.Chr. geschichtlich, sprachlich und kulturell mit der Antike des 4. Jh. v.Chr. tatsächlich in Kontinuität steht, und dann ist gut. Ansonsten sieht hier kein Mensch ein, weshalb das moderne Volk der Slawen Mazedoniens mit der griechischen Antike, resp. mit dem ausgestorbenen Volk der antiken hellenistischen Makedonen, in irgendeiner Verbindung stehen sollte.


  10. #90
    Avatar von Zoran

    Registriert seit
    UMD releases signature petition for Macedonia's NATO accession
    Washington, 23 February 2012 (MIA) - The United Macedonian Diaspora (UMD) has released a petition to U.S. President Barack Obama and all NATO Heads of State, urging Alliance leaders to grant NATO membership to Macedonia at the upcoming Chicago summit, held May 20-21.

    UMD urges Macedonians and friends of Macedonia to sign the petition today, and to spread the link as widely as possible, with the goal of attracting 100,000 signatures before the Chicago Summit.

    "An invitation for Macedonia to join NATO in Chicago supports NATO's ultimate mission: a Europe that is democratic, strong, and free. The country has satisfied all the complex technical criteria for NATO membership, and yet, it remains outside the Alliance due only to Greece's willful violation of international law", says UMD.

Seite 9 von 42 ErsteErste ... 567891011121319 ... LetzteLetzte

Ähnliche Themen

  1. Antworten: 20
    Letzter Beitrag: 01.07.2011, 12:32
  2. Antworten: 16
    Letzter Beitrag: 24.08.2009, 21:20