PDA

View Full Version : Macedonians



Pages : 1 2 3 4 [5]

RagnarofMacedon
08-06-19, 17:54
Pausanias
Greek Historian "Leosthenes at the head of the Athenians and the united Greeks defeated the Macedonians in Boeotia and again outside Thermopylae forced them into Lamia" [1.1.3]. "I have already said in my history of Attica that the defeat at Chaeronea was a disaster for all the Greeks" [9.6.5]. "After the death of Alexander, when the Greeks had raised a second war against the Macedonians, the Messenians took part, as I have shown earlier in my account of Attica" [4.28.3]. "When Philip the son of Amyntas would not let Greece alone, the Eleans, weakened by civil strife, joined the Macedonian alliance, but they could not bring themselves to fight against the Greeks at Chaeronea. They joined Philip's attack on the Lacedaemonians because of their old hatred of that people, but on the death of Alexander they fought on the side of the Greeks against Antipater and the Macedonians" [5.4.9]. "When Philip, the son of Demetrius, reached men's estate, and Antigonus without reluctance handed over the sovereignty of the Macedonians, he struck fear into the hearts of all the Greeks. He copied Philip, the son of Amyntas" [7.7.5].

Fatherland
08-06-19, 21:05
Macedonians were non-Greek tribes who became Greek over time. Same deal with the Dorians, Albanians, Scythians and Slavs who came to Greece.

No need to complicate things further by people here posting walls of irrelevant texts.

RagnarofMacedon
08-06-19, 22:43
Macedonians were non-Greek tribes who became Greek over time. Same deal with the Dorians, Albanians, Scythians and Slavs who came to Greece.

No need to complicate things further by people here posting walls of irrelevant texts.

Became Greek ? With what action ? Because some of them accepting Hellenism ? Hellenism was religious thing in that time, in that time there where not GREEKS or GREECE... Hellenes were different kind of ethnicities Assyrians,Egyptianss,Persians,Jews etc... not only nowdays "Greeks"...
Maybe some of them accepted hellenism and maybe they mixed with some marriages...And thats not IRRELEVANT texts ... thats texts from most famouse historians from antique like from modern time...

Macedonians were not Greeks...
marriages

Tutkun Arnaut
08-06-19, 23:23
Became Greek ? With what action ? Because some of them accepting Hellenism ? Hellenism was religious thing in that time, in that time there where not GREEKS or GREECE... Hellenes were different kind of ethnicities Assyrians,Egyptianss,Persians,Jews etc... not only nowdays "Greeks"...
Maybe some of them accepted hellenism and maybe they mixed with some marriages...And thats not IRRELEVANT texts ... thats texts from most famouse historians from antique like from modern time...

Macedonians were not Greeks...
marriages
you are confusing it with Rome. Rome became an ideal, not only the city. beaming with pride Greeks up to 100 years ago were calling themselves Romei,. Then king Otto from Germany told them: we are going to call you Greeks aand Greeks accepted. You are right Greeks are a mixture of ethnicities, not a single ethnicity

RagnarofMacedon
09-06-19, 00:12
That the Macedonian was a distinct vernacular characteristic to the Macedonians confirm the anti-Macedonian speeches given by the great orator from Athens, Demosthenes. In his work "Philippic" Demosthenes gave the following insulting remark about the Macedonian King Philip II of Macedon:
"That man Philip, not only he is not a Greek, but also he does not have anything in common with the Greeks. If only he would have been a barbarian from a decent country - but he is not even that. He is a scabby creature from Macedonia - a land that one can not even bring a slave that is worth something from".15)
The question why Demosthenes named Philip as a barbarian becomes imminent. Majority of the scientists believe that the term "barbarians" in the ancient period was used to refer mainly to people that spoke language that Greeks could not understand, usually accompanied by a dose of disregard towards the culture of the people speaking that language. It is well known that all the people that did not speak Greek were named "barbarians", whereas the Greeks from the city-states used the word "xenoi" when referring to one-another.16)
Demosthenes was not alone in naming the Macedonians "barbarians". Ancient Greek historian Isocrates also called the Macedonians "barbarians".17)

Yetos
09-06-19, 00:31
So at WW2 the Germans attack the Netherlands,
and Netherlands resist,,


So By your Logic Ragnaro,

Deutsch are Germans, Dutsch are Not? :lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao:

WHAT A LOGIC? SMART INDEED :depressed::depressed:

RagnarofMacedon
22-06-19, 10:20
So at WW2 the Germans attack the Netherlands,
and Netherlands resist,,


So By your Logic Ragnaro,

Deutsch are Germans, Dutsch are Not? :lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao:

WHAT A LOGIC? SMART INDEED :depressed::depressed:


"I have already said in my history of Attica that the defeat at Chaeronea was a disaster for all the Greeks" [9.6.5].

Bye :D

Nik
22-06-19, 13:31
Yes, great articles Ragnar but what's your take on this? You are not proving that they were Slavs, and you're not proving that you're Makedonian either.

You're just a modern North Macedonian Slav.

Yetos might be a Greek, but he has way more real Makedonian blood than any of you Slavo-Paeonians.

Aspar
22-06-19, 15:55
Yes, great articles Ragnar but what's your take on this? You are not proving that they were Slavs, and you're not proving that you're Makedonian either.

You're just a modern North Macedonian Slav.

Yetos might be a Greek, but he has way more real Makedonian blood than any of you Slavo-Paeonians.


Most Macedonians today have some ancestry from Makedonia which is now in Greece so I don't get what you mean by having a real Makedonian blood or Paeonian...

These maps represent the real situation in Makedonia before the Greeks changed not only the population living there but the names of cities, villages, mountains, rivers etc., in other words, an ethnic cleansing without precedence, which is still neglected in modern world and not many know about it...

https://i.postimg.cc/06sLGcKr/dr-map-21s.jpg (https://postimg.cc/06sLGcKr)
https://i.postimg.cc/Pvp3nwvB/dr-map-22s.jpg (https://postimg.cc/Pvp3nwvB)
https://i.postimg.cc/gnGX5W9K/dr-map-23s.jpg (https://postimg.cc/gnGX5W9K)
https://i.postimg.cc/56PBS0Hz/dr-map-24s.jpg (https://postimg.cc/56PBS0Hz)
https://i.postimg.cc/bG1SWNv3/dr-map-25s.jpg (https://postimg.cc/bG1SWNv3)
https://i.postimg.cc/cvRsNKQg/dr-map-26s.jpg (https://postimg.cc/cvRsNKQg)
https://i.postimg.cc/680D0Cr0/dr-map-27s.jpg (https://postimg.cc/680D0Cr0)
https://i.postimg.cc/LYMQFX3X/dr-map-28s.jpg (https://postimg.cc/LYMQFX3X)
https://i.postimg.cc/Y4Q8R7Bw/dr-map-29s.jpg (https://postimg.cc/Y4Q8R7Bw)

Now, these maps are not made up by me as you can see but are real maps by ethnographers from around the world regarding the period before the Balkan wars and mainly at the end of 19th century.

The Greeks even made a propaganda about us as having been a recent Macedonians made by Tito, but if we take some accounts of some ethnographers, let's say the Bulgarian ethnographer Vasil Kanchov and his ethnographic book about Macedonia in the 19th century, according to who the local Bulgarians and Vlachs in Macedonia call themselves Macedonians: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macedonia_for_the_Macedonians#cite_note-10

As we see, Kanchov calls these people local Bulgarians but it's not important how he calls them, what is important it's how they call themselves and here goes "Tito made us" down the drain...

At the best, the modern people of North Macedonia can be described as a Macedonian-Slavic mix with additional Albanian, Vlach and Serb mixture here and there or else why should I have only a Paeonian blood when my ancestry mainly comes from the borders of ancient Macedonia which today's south-eastern part of North Macedonia and municipality of Kukus and Gumendza in today's Greece belonged to...

The problem is that the Greeks try to denounce us of anything Macedonian related and to embrace Paeonian, Slavic, Bulgar or anything else but not Macedonian which I've explained before is not something recent but my own ancestors were calling themselves Macedonians at least since the 19th century, long before Tito...

If anything, Macedonia has long ago stopped being solely Greek, if it ever was, but had became also Latin, Illyrian and Slavic at least since the 6th century AD.

By these I mean only a linguistic affiliation as taking it as an ethnic denomination is pure madness since the Latins, Illyrians, Slavs are ancient and early medieval people while modern nations are mixture of those...

Saying you are just a "North Macedonian Slav" has exactly the same idiocy as saying you are just an English German, an Irish or Scottish Celt, a French or Spanish Latin...

It would be interesting seeing the Scots start telling to the English to go back in Germany or that they are just British Germans as some of this stupidity is occurring in modern Balkans...

Nik
22-06-19, 17:15
Most Macedonians today have some ancestry from Makedonia which is now in Greece so I don't get what you mean by having a real Makedonian blood or Paeonian...

These maps represent the real situation in Makedonia before the Greeks changed not only the population living there but the names of cities, villages, mountains, rivers etc., in other words, an ethnic cleansing without precedence, which is still neglected in modern world and not many know about it...

Now, these maps are not made up by me as you can see but are real maps by ethnographers from around the world regarding the period before the Balkan wars and mainly at the end of 19th century.

The Greeks even made a propaganda about us as having been a recent Macedonians made by Tito, but if we take some accounts of some ethnographers, let's say the Bulgarian ethnographer Vasil Kanchov and his ethnographic book about Macedonia in the 19th century, according to who the local Bulgarians and Vlachs in Macedonia call themselves Macedonians: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macedonia_for_the_Macedonians#cite_note-10

As we see, Kanchov calls these people local Bulgarians but it's not important how he calls them, what is important it's how they call themselves and here goes "Tito made us" down the drain...

At the best, the modern people of North Macedonia can be described as a Macedonian-Slavic mix with additional Albanian, Vlach and Serb mixture here and there or else why should I have only a Paeonian blood when my ancestry mainly comes from the borders of ancient Macedonia which today's south-eastern part of North Macedonia and municipality of Kukus and Gumendza in today's Greece belonged to...

The problem is that the Greeks try to denounce us of anything Macedonian related and to embrace Paeonian, Slavic, Bulgar or anything else but not Macedonian which I've explained before is not something recent but my own ancestors were calling themselves Macedonians at least since the 19th century, long before Tito...

If anything, Macedonia has long ago stopped being solely Greek, if it ever was, but had became also Latin, Illyrian and Slavic at least since the 6th century AD.

By these I mean only a linguistic affiliation as taking it as an ethnic denomination is pure madness since the Latins, Illyrians, Slavs are ancient and early medieval people while modern nations are mixture of those...

Saying you are just a "North Macedonian Slav" has exactly the same idiocy as saying you are just an English German, an Irish or Scottish Celt, a French or Spanish Latin...

It would be interesting seeing the Scots start telling to the English to go back in Germany or that they are just British Germans as some of this stupidity is occurring in modern Balkans...
Makedonia started as a separate ethnic group and small kingdom north of Thessaly and dare I say a cultural extension of people of Epirotic and South Illyrian stock.

Eventually it grew slightly bigger into becoming the region of Makedonia located in modern Greece, and eventually an even bigger geographical designation during the Roman Empire.

So when part of your Slavic ancestors came they found in Makedonia (geographically) the ancestors of Vlachs, Albanians, and Greeks, so them taking the name Macedonian means nothing since your compatriot here is talking about the Makedonians during the reign of Philip. Therefore, we need to discuss about the Makedonian ancestry in a stricter sense than the Medieval geographical term.

I'm aware that some of your compatriots were kicked out from Greece and settled in modern North Macedonia, but we're talking about a country where officially 1/4 of the population is Albanian, a large chunk of ex-Albanian orthodox people that are forced to accept the Macedonian identity while striving for equality, an unknown number of Vlachs which is the ethnic group absorbed the most by others (Albanians being second), and the vast majority of fake Turks (being mostly Albanian and Vlachs) which constituted 15-20% of the population until half a century ago.

Cyrus
22-06-19, 17:56
According to the Middle Persian sources, Alexander was an Egyptian.

Yetos
22-06-19, 18:20
"I have already said in my history of Attica that the defeat at Chaeronea was a disaster for all the Greeks" [9.6.5].

Bye :D


Which Greeks?
the central Greeks? the North Greeks? the Greeks in Asia? the Greeks in Italy? the Greeks in Crimaia? the Cretans? the Cypriots? :grin:

:useless: :useless: :useless: :useless: :useless:

STOP BEING PATHETIC AND RIDICULOUS. :innocent:

SLAVS
Poland
Czechia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Serbia
Croatia
Bosnia
Bulgaria (Severi )
Bardarska Bodivina, modern Severnja
etc

GERMANS
Deutsch
Dutsch
Austrians
Flanders
Prussians
etc

GREEKS modern
Cretans
Makedonians
Cyrpiots
Epirotans
peloponese
Roumeliotes
Aegean Central
Aeagean S East
Ionian islands
Crimaia
Pontic Greeks
Kappadokian
Minor Asians (Smyrne Kula Magnissa)
Italo-Greeks
Austrian Greeks
Con/polites
Greco-Thracians.


Just Accept it

Strabo writes
Hellas stops at Thessaly at Pineos river
excluding Epirus and Makedonia
but he also writes,
primitive Greece is Epirus and
Makedonia is Greece.

Demosthenes the biggest enemy of Philipp says
For HE (philipp) is not a Greek
but he is not even a Barbarian
he is just a Makedonian scum

SO Ragna what are you?
SERBS?
BULGARIANS?
BOSNIANS?
CROATS?
or Suddenly you deny your Slavic language?
and decide that you are not Slavs?

I Wonder What DEMOSTHENES WOULD SAY ABOUT YOU GUYS?

BTW

DUSAN OF SERBIA King of Serbians

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7b/Serbian_Emperor_Stefan_Du%C5%A1an%2C_cropped.jpg


CIMEON OF BULGARIA Tsar of Bulgarianshttps://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/53/Skylitzes_-_Sime%C3%B3n_el_Grande.jpg/250px-Skylitzes_-_Sime%C3%B3n_el_Grande.jpg


ALEXANDROS OF MAKEDONIA King OF GREEKS (not Slavs :grin:)

http://ec2-79-125-124-178.eu-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com/imgart/251-macedonia-alex.jpg

Yetos
22-06-19, 18:47
According to the Middle Persian sources, Alexander was an Egyptian.

Yauna Takabara

Aspar
22-06-19, 18:48
Makedonia started as a separate ethnic group and small kingdom north of Thessaly and dare I say a cultural extension of people of Epirotic and South Illyrian stock.

Eventually it grew slightly bigger into becoming the region of Makedonia located in modern Greece, and eventually an even bigger geographical designation during the Roman Empire.

So when part of your Slavic ancestors came they found in Makedonia (geographically) the ancestors of Vlachs, Albanians, and Greeks, so them taking the name Macedonian means nothing since your compatriot here is talking about the Makedonians during the reign of Philip. Therefore, we need to discuss about the Makedonian ancestry in a stricter sense than the Medieval geographical term.

I'm aware that some of your compatriots were kicked out from Greece and settled in modern North Macedonia, but we're talking about a country where officially 1/4 of the population is Albanian, a large chunk of ex-Albanian orthodox people that are forced to accept the Macedonian identity while striving for equality, an unknown number of Vlachs which is the ethnic group absorbed the most by others (Albanians being second), and the vast majority of fake Turks (being mostly Albanian and Vlachs) which constituted 15-20% of the population until half a century ago.

Any sources for the bolded part?

Because from what I have read from ancient writers, the ancient Macedonians were described as descendants of Brygians, Bryges(Thracians) as per Herodotus...

When my Slavic ancestors came, they found my Macedonian or Paeonian ancestors and I don't understand the need to underline my own Slavic ancestors...

As I said earlier, such nebulous as saying my Slavic ancestors came and met your(Albanian, Vlach, Greek) ancestors is a pure idiocy...

Mine own ancestors are from diverse group of people as pretending that all my ancestors come from one ancient or early medieval group of people is equal to lunacy, but I understand your position perfectly...

Now, for historical sake, the first mentioning of Albanians and Vlachs dates much later than the first mentioning of the Slavs in the Balkans...

And they are mentioned in Arbanon(modern Albania) and Thessaly and Epirus(in the case of the Vlachs), so I am not sure what are you trying to apply here but if I guess correctly what it is, than you are trying to suggest who was the first one as it happens in the Balkans more often...

Now, as is the case with the egg and the chicken, you are logic as you've been the First in Macedonia and We are invaders that came later is doomed because there is always someone else who lived there before, and we can go all the way down to the Neolithic farmers or Mesolithic HG but I understand your position again.

You try to underline my own Slavics ancestors while no mentioning of my own Macedonian ancestors which by your logic, can only be ancestors of Vlachs, Albanians and Greeks.

My Slavic ancestors taking the name means nothing for you but means a lot to us, because there is a clear continuation of the word Macedonia, because they lived and mixed with people already present in Macedonia, be it Romans, Greeks or simply Macedonians of Thracian, Illyrian affiliation, something that is nightmare for some people in the Balkans...

Now, once again the account of Kanchov in full:

"The local Bulgarians and Kucovlachs who live in the area of Macedonia call themselves Macedonians, and the surrounding nations also call them so. Turks and Arnauts from Macedonia do not call themselves Macedonians, but when asked where they are from, they respond: from Macedonia. Arnauts from the north and north west limits of the area, who also call their country Arnautluk, and Greeks who live in the southern areas, do not call themselves Macedonians, hence the borders in these areas according to the peoples’ perception are not clearly defined."

Yetos
22-06-19, 19:55
When my Slavic ancestors came, they found my Macedonian or Paeonian ancestors

...

Now, as is the case with the egg and the chicken, you are logic as you've been the First in Macedonia and We are invaders that came later is doomed because there is always someone else who lived there before, and we can go all the way down to the Neolithic farmers or Mesolithic HG but I understand your position again.

You try to underline my own Slavics ancestors while no mentioning of my own Macedonian ancestors which by your logic, can only be ancestors of Vlachs, Albanians and Greeks.

My Slavic ancestors taking the name means nothing for you but means a lot to us, because there is a clear continuation of the word Macedonia, because they lived and mixed with people already present in Macedonia, be it Romans, Greeks or simply Macedonians of Thracian, Illyrian affiliation, something that is nightmare for some people in the Balkans...

Now, once again the account of Kanchov in full:

"The local Bulgarians and Kucovlachs who live in the area of Macedonia call themselves Macedonians, and the surrounding nations also call them so. Turks and Arnauts from Macedonia do not call themselves Macedonians, but when asked where they are from, they respond: from Macedonia. Arnauts from the north and north west limits of the area, who also call their country Arnautluk, and Greeks who live in the southern areas, do not call themselves Macedonians, hence the borders in these areas according to the peoples’ perception are not clearly defined."

I still prefer it as Menelaos Lountemis explains it,

The Krusevo Vlachs Did not want Bulgarians, cause they took their soldiers to Bulgarian Army
They did not want the Serbs cause they treat them as Bulgarians
in the begin they like us the Greeks, due to Patrik (Patriarch) and away from Exarchate
but their local cultural was closer to local S Slavic population, and away from other Greek cultures that came to makedonian struggle,
their billingual was Aromanian and Slavic,
so at the End they decide to reject the Greeks also, just the era that WW1 was expected and balkans wars were about to start
and They made the Iliden and Krusevo demokracy (rebublic)

but they should found a name and an origin,
so they declare them shelves as Makedonian Orthodox, (Notice this, Not Greeks, not Slavs, not Exarchate, not Serbian patriarch, but Con/polis Patriarch)

that idea in the begin was rejected by all by Bulgarians since they believed them as Bulgarians
by Serbs, since Skopjie and Ohrid were somehow important to their history, and their connection with the Thessaloniki port,
by Greeks, cause Historically has no meaning,

the existance of that state that is called offcially Fyrom or today Severnja Makedonia was never a problem for Makedonians (Greeks),
as long this state has no attacking policy, it was just a state or province of Serbia, or could be Bulgaria,
and most Greeks that lived there abandon it, without a treaty, as happened with Bulgaria,

Now At WW2 that idea of Krusevo Vlachs, seems a good tool to communists, and Dimitrov of 3rd international with Tito signed the Blent treaty,
claiming lands of Greece, and providing ancient Makedonians as Slavs, non Greeks etc,
that had already started at a communist congress at Belgrade,

the endoctrination for 2 generation make the problem existance,
the Communism international in order to unify the 2 S Slavic countries of Bulgaria and Serbia and provide peace,
hailed the idea, and make the bad guy the 'Capitalistic' Greece who resist the 5 years civil war among 'capitalists and communists'

so today everybody in Skopjie believes he is true Makedonian with ancient roots from Alexander himshelf,
and everybody in Thessaloniki hates the comittages that forced him to be a communist or Slav,

the denial of exchange population among Serbia and Greece make the problem bigger.
Instead the Politi-Kalfov treaty, and Venizelos-Attaturk solve the problem,

BTW,
As I notice, you consider your shelf a pre-Slavic Makedonian,
So the question to you I guess now its this,
a) you believe you were a Makedonian who got Slavizized?
b) you believe you were a Makedonian who got Hellenized and then Slavizised?
c) you believe you were a Thracian or Illyrian or a Brygian who got Makedonised and then Slavizised?
d)you believe you were A Thracian or Illyrian or Brygian who got Makedonised who got Hellenized, who got Romanised, and finally Slavisized?

Aspar
22-06-19, 20:33
I am not willing replying to everything you wrote because some of it is a pure propaganda and non important things which have nothing to do with what i wrote previously.



the existance of that state that is called offcially Fyrom or today Severnja Makedonia was never a problem for Makedonians (Greeks),
as long this state has no attacking policy, it was just a state or province of Serbia

Well, this is your problem first of all, not ours...

Our country became a threat to you once it declared independence, but as long as it has been under Serb jurisdiction, than it was alright to you...

But NOT to us!

We don't want to be under Serb jurisdiction, nor we would want to be Serbs because we never were...

We never called our land Vardarska or other dumb Serbian names after they occupied our land but ONLY Macedonia!
And I had demonstrated this with the account of Kanchov!

So, it has nothing to do with the local Vlachs as well, because those of local Macedonian Slavic dialect or Bulgarian mother tongue as you call it, also call themselves Macedonians, and this was before any Krusevo uprisings!

And unlike you, the Serbs were unable to assimilate the people, so NOW you got a problem, as there were Macedonians on the other side of the border as well...


Now At WW2 that idea of Krusevo Vlachs, seems a good tool to communists, and Dimitrov of 3rd international with Tito signed the Blent treaty,
claiming lands of Greece, and providing ancient Makedonians as Slavs, non Greeks etc,
that had already started at a communist congress at Belgrade,

the endoctrination for 2 generation make the problem existance,
the Communism international in order to unify the 2 S Slavic countries of Bulgaria and Serbia and provide peace,
hailed the idea, and make the bad guy the 'Capitalistic' Greece who resist the 5 years civil war among 'capitalists and communists'

so today everybody in Skopjie believes he is true Makedonian with ancient roots from Alexander himshelf,
and everybody in Thessaloniki hates the comittages that forced him to be a communist or Slav,

the denial of exchange population among Serbia and Greece make the problem bigger.
Instead the Politi-Kalfov treaty, and Venizelos-Attaturk solve the problem,

BTW,
As I notice, you consider your shelf a pre-Slavic Makedonian,
So the question to you I guess now its this,
a) you believe you were a Makedonian who got Slavizized?
b) you believe you were a Makedonian who got Hellenized and then Slavizised?
c) you believe you were a Thracian or Illyrian or a Brygian who got Makedonised and then Slavizised?
d)you believe you were A Thracian or Illyrian or Brygian who got Makedonised who got Hellenized, who got Romanised, and finally Slavisized?

The brainwashing done by the communists was not good, but the Macedonians never were really communists, they just accepted the offer of those who claimed that they will help them achieving their goals, to unite our lands into one country, a Macedonian country which sadly cost us a lot!

You do ask a lot of questions tho...

I consider myself Macedonian as mine ancestors did, a Macedonian who speaks the local Macedonian Slavic dialect...

Yetos
22-06-19, 21:12
@ Aspar,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Macedonia

on the other hands, the last 20 years in Greece, the above attacking policy, made a wave to Greece simillar which wants to attack Skopjie,
the 'ten minutes till Skopjie' as known is 'slag'

Prespes treaty winner is Severnja, they gained for first time nativity, in areas, that that not even Romans consider Makedonia,
that is why Greeks are against,
soon we will see both strange situations. especially in industrial products, with name origin.

Anyway,
I keep your last,



I consider myself Macedonian as mine ancestors did, a Macedonian who speaks the local Macedonian Slavic dialect...

it is a start, not good, but a start to both realize our modern identities,
As for mine,
Today I say, that possibly originated from Sesklo Neolithic, but the last 150 years as far as I found, I am connected with a mountain in the core of Makedonia, originated from a family which participated in many revolts and struggles in Makedonia, Epirus, even reached Austro-Hungaria.
mentioned even by Kasomoulis the historian of Greek revolt,


BTW
to a propagandist I may repeat with propaganda,
to someone who wants to discuss, I rather discuss,

the above with Ilidan revolt, is written in the books of someone who was present there, and lived all sides, in the years of dispute,
it is not mine, and as far as I know, it corresponds enough the 'weather' of the era.

Yet my only connection is a grand grand .. mother from somewhere there, West of Monasterion, an Aromanian at around 1850,
You know the marriage/contracts, of gain passage, security, and low taxation, among Armatolikia.

Aspar
22-06-19, 23:03
@ Aspar,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Macedonia

on the other hands, the last 20 years in Greece, the above attacking policy, made a wave to Greece simillar which wants to attack Skopjie,
the 'ten minutes till Skopjie' as known is 'slag'

Prespes treaty winner is Severnja, they gained for first time nativity, in areas, that that not even Romans consider Makedonia,
that is why Greeks are against,
soon we will see both strange situations. especially in industrial products, with name origin.

Anyway,
I keep your last,

https://i.postimg.cc/ncjgBhZx/Macedonia-ad400.png (https://postimages.org/)

This is Roman Macedonia 400 AD and by the looks of the map, more than a half of today's North Macedonia belongs to it, mostly in Macedonia Salutaris but small parts of the south-east of the country Doiran-Gevgeli and Heraclea(Bitola/Monastir) in Macedonia I Prima!

You also have to keep in mind that the promoter of separate Macedonian consciousness Krste Misirkov and Goce Delcev who was the promoter of the idea of autonomous Macedonia and "Macedonia for the Macedonians" actually come from the part of Macedonia that is in Greece today, formerly Salonika vilayet, as many other Macedonians who left and today live scattered in different places.

We call them "Egejci" and I am part "Egeec" as well and as I said, they were the main promoters of the idea of Macedonianizm so saying things like "they gained for first time nativity, in areas, that that not even Romans consider Makedonia" doesn't make much sense considering than the most hard core Macedonians actually come from the part which now belongs to Greece!


it is a start, not good, but a start to both realize our modern identities,
As for mine,
Today I say, that possibly originated from Sesklo Neolithic, but the last 150 years as far as I found, I am connected with a mountain in the core of Makedonia, originated from a family which participated in many revolts and struggles in Makedonia, Epirus, even reached Austro-Hungaria.
mentioned even by Kasomoulis the historian of Greek revolt,


BTW
to a propagandist I may repeat with propaganda,
to someone who wants to discuss, I rather discuss,

the above with Ilidan revolt, is written in the books of someone who was present there, and lived all sides, in the years of dispute,
it is not mine, and as far as I know, it corresponds enough the 'weather' of the era.

Yet my only connection is a grand grand .. mother from somewhere there, West of Monasterion, an Aromanian at around 1850,
You know the marriage/contracts, of gain passage, security, and low taxation, among Armatolikia.



That's alright...

My own ancestors come from a very small region around Gevgeli, Doiran, Gumendza, Kukus and from the mountains near Gumendza and Gevgeli which were known as Karadjova or Vlacho-Meglen!
Also one great grandparent comes from a village that doesn't exist today but was located on the Greek - Turkish border but unfortunately I don't know much about the village!

As far as I know, most of them considered themselves Macedonians, some were followers of the Bulgarian Exarchate, others of the Greek Patriachate!

One great great grandparent was a komitadji and probably a follower of the Bulgarian idea as he received medals from the Bulgarian state but most of the others were not!

I also have distant relatives in Greece with who we lost contact since long time ago and who most probably consider themselves Greeks today!

Nik
22-06-19, 23:07
Any sources for the bolded part?

Because from what I have read from ancient writers, the ancient Macedonians were described as descendants of Brygians, Bryges(Thracians) as per Herodotus...
Do some more reading and research. Illyrians, Epirots, Makedonians, Aetolians, Akarnanians, Paoenians, Brygians, Maedi, and other nearby Thracians had almost identical material culture we clearly see in them distinct warlike tribes of mostly mountaineers/shepherds. The more you went South, the shorter, darker, and softer the people got as with the case of the civilized Hellenes. It's enough to see the faces of Alexander's companions to understand what I'm talking about.


When my Slavic ancestors came, they found my Macedonian or Paeonian ancestors and I don't understand the need to underline my own Slavic ancestors...

As I said earlier, such nebulous as saying my Slavic ancestors came and met your(Albanian, Vlach, Greek) ancestors is a pure idiocy...

Mine own ancestors are from diverse group of people as pretending that all my ancestors come from one ancient or early medieval group of people is equal to lunacy, but I understand your position perfectly...
I was actually being nice there, recognizing and differentiating between your several ancestors so instead of saying YOU SLAVS I specifically referred to your Slavic ancestors (i.e. not your Paleo-Balkan ones).


Now, for historical sake, the first mentioning of Albanians and Vlachs dates much later than the first mentioning of the Slavs in the Balkans...

And they are mentioned in Arbanon(modern Albania) and Thessaly and Epirus(in the case of the Vlachs), so I am not sure what are you trying to apply here but if I guess correctly what it is, than you are trying to suggest who was the first one as it happens in the Balkans more often...

Now, as is the case with the egg and the chicken, you are logic as you've been the First in Macedonia and We are invaders that came later is doomed because there is always someone else who lived there before, and we can go all the way down to the Neolithic farmers or Mesolithic HG but I understand your position again.

Don't worry about the origin and mentioning of Albanians bro (half bro), we've got it easy nowadays and it's not like before where we had to fight in order to be recognized as local Balkan people and obviously not from Caucasus. Our ydna, mtdna, and autosomal Dna speaks for itself.

But I understand where you're coming from, you're paranoid on encountering another Albanian that will tell you we were here first. That's far from what I was trying to say. I mean we all know Albanians were there first, its not for discussion.



You try to underline my own Slavics ancestors while no mentioning of my own Macedonian ancestors which by your logic, can only be ancestors of Vlachs, Albanians and Greeks.

My Slavic ancestors taking the name means nothing for you but means a lot to us, because there is a clear continuation of the word Macedonia, because they lived and mixed with people already present in Macedonia, be it Romans, Greeks or simply Macedonians of Thracian, Illyrian affiliation, something that is nightmare for some people in the Balkans...
Again, this is paranoia from your side. I purposely called you half bro because that's what I really feel. If you're from West Macedonia you might be even a '90% bro' to me.

I clearly stated in my previous post that when speaking of the real ancient Makedonians of the time of Philip, you modern Northern Macedonians are mostly a Paeonian-Slav mix, but of course you also have some Makedonian, Dardanian, Thracian, Illyrian, Brygian, etc.

And no, don't worry, ancient Makedonians were not Albanian, but they were still the closest nation to them, while later getting closer to lets say a Hellenic nearby tribe like the Thessalians after the heavy Hellenization of the local Makedonians, Orestians, Epirotes, Illyrians, Pierians, Thracians, etc. I practically mentioned all the tribes that mixed and contributed to what would be called Makedonians later on, mostly a bunch of shepherds brought down to the fields and trained in the phalanx formation and settled in the major towns which were slowly flourishing.

Aspar
22-06-19, 23:27
Do some more reading and research. Illyrians, Epirots, Makedonians, Aetolians, Akarnanians, Paoenians, Brygians, Maedi, and other nearby Thracians had almost identical material culture we clearly see in them distinct warlike tribes of mostly mountaineers/shepherds. The more you went South, the shorter, darker, and softer the people got as with the case of the civilized Hellenes. It's enough to see the faces of Alexander's companions to understand what I'm talking about.


I was actually being nice there, recognizing and differentiating between your several ancestors so instead of saying YOU SLAVS I specifically referred to your Slavic ancestors (i.e. not your Paleo-Balkan ones).


Don't worry about the origin and mentioning of Albanians bro (half bro), we've got it easy nowadays and it's not like before where we had to fight in order to be recognized as local Balkan people and obviously not from Caucasus. Our ydna, mtdna, and autosomal Dna speaks for itself.

But I understand where you're coming from, you're paranoid on encountering another Albanian that will tell you we were here first. That's far from what I was trying to say. I mean we all know Albanians were there first, its not for discussion.



Again, this is paranoia from your side. I purposely called you half bro because that's what I really feel. If you're from West Macedonia you might be even a '90% bro' to me.

I clearly stated in my previous post that when speaking of the real ancient Makedonians of the time of Philip, you modern Northern Macedonians are mostly a Paeonian-Slav mix, but of course you also have some Makedonian, Dardanian, Thracian, Illyrian, Brygian, etc.

And no, don't worry, ancient Makedonians were not Albanian, but they were still the closest nation to them, while later getting closer to lets say a Hellenic nearby tribe like the Thessalians after the heavy Hellenization of the local Makedonians, Orestians, Epirotes, Illyrians, Pierians, Thracians, etc. I practically mentioned all the tribes that mixed and contributed to what would be called Makedonians later on, mostly a bunch of shepherds brought down to the fields and trained in the phalanx formation and settled in the major towns which were slowly flourishing.

I have no problem calling an Albanian bro trust me and I mean it...

I have met many Albanians and most of them are very loyal and trustworthy and can easily make a business with them without having fear of being screwed...

And I was merely discussing, didn't mean nothing wrong, so don't take it personally as we all have different writing styles and sometimes it may looks like I am a bit aggressive but in person you will find me very friendly trust me so I mean nothing wrong...

The thing is, there is no way in the Balkan that we can find that we have more things that connect us but we always look for the things that separate us.

And this might sound naive because a Greek would never say what you and me said now nor he will call me a bro, so in that respect I identify with the Albanians much more than I do with Greeks because that good and naive nature, loyal and trustworthy heart I see in the Albanians more often which I see in me!

A Greek never!

Not to mention that many Kosovar Albanians and proper Albanians in UK where I am living, came asking me thinking I am an Albanian, plus from many classification threads people tend to think I am an Albanian as well, and I am not even from the Western part of the country!

So there is clearly great overlap between Macedonians and Albanians...

Cyrus
23-06-19, 10:31
Yauna Takabara

It is important to know where was Macedonia, as you read here: https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=macedonia the name of Macedonia is from ancient Greek makros "long, large": https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%CE%BC%CE%B1%CE%BA%CF%81%CF%8C%CF%82#Ancient_Greek from Proto-Indo-European *mh₂ḱros, cognate with Indo-Iranian masru "Egypt" (Egyptian Arabic masr, Mycenaean Greek misarajo).

Aspar
23-06-19, 11:21
It is important to know where was Macedonia, as you read here: https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=macedonia the name of Macedonia is from ancient Greek makros "long, large": https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%CE%BC%CE%B1%CE%BA%CF%81%CF%8C%CF%82#Ancient_Greek from Proto-Indo-European *mh₂ḱros, cognate with Indo-Iranian masru "Egypt" (Egyptian Arabic masr, Mycenaean Greek misarajo).
There is no consensus among the historians what does the name Makedon mean although many tend to connect everything to Greek...
Makedon may very well come and be distorted version of the word Mygdon, a tribe of the Bryges which lived in Makedonia and has nothing to with the Greeks.

Leka
23-06-19, 12:00
Makedon actually meant Highlander in Ancient Greek. Equivalent to the Albanian term ‘Malesor’.

LABERIA
23-06-19, 13:00
There is no consensus among the historians what does the name Makedon mean although many tend to connect everything to Greek...
Makedon may very well come and be distorted version of the word Mygdon, a tribe of the Bryges which lived in Makedonia and has nothing to with the Greeks.
If i am not wrong according to Homer Macedonian means tall or something like this.

Cyrus
23-06-19, 13:50
There is no consensus among the historians what does the name Makedon mean although many tend to connect everything to Greek...
Makedon may very well come and be distorted version of the word Mygdon, a tribe of the Bryges which lived in Makedonia and has nothing to with the Greeks.

In ancient Persian and early Islamic sources, Macedonia (Maqaduniya) is just the name of Egypt: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maqaduniya (Paul Casanova connects Maqaduniya to one of the Ancient Egyptian names of Memphis – Makha-to-ui, "the balance of two lands".) Anyway as I said Persian sources say that Alexander was Egyptian, not even Macedonian.

Yetos
23-06-19, 18:01
It is important to know where was Macedonia, as you read here: https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=macedonia the name of Macedonia is from ancient Greek makros "long, large": https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%CE%BC%CE%B1%CE%BA%CF%81%CF%8C%CF%82#Ancient_Greek from Proto-Indo-European *mh₂ḱros, cognate with Indo-Iranian masru "Egypt" (Egyptian Arabic masr, Mycenaean Greek misarajo).

there can be 2 official well stated terminations,
and a third possible via LPIE

Α) tall nation, big body
the primary tested one and certified means Tall,-big people
that is also the explanation of Magnetas the brother of Makedonas
Magnetas live south of Makedonas in East parts of Thessaly,
compare Greek Megas-megalos means both Great-Big
the edos-ednos -edonoi etc means cousins-nation etc, in attic and koine typical of Makedonian d-θ is ethnos εθνος
so the possibility Mak-edon =tall nation

B) long relatives, split clan
the terminology of -ednos can also mean long cousin or split cousin from hive
in that case all three Makednos Magnetas Mygdon means split-clan
infact myg-don is the remnants of Brygians,
Brygians older known homeland was today Dyrrachium,
by the coming of illyrians-proprie, Brygian moved east and, south north of primary Makedonia, south of Paeonians, but from their cities, we see their cities and them living among other clans, like nextby village - but other people
Then moved to Phrygia, the ones who left were called Mygdonεs, Μυγδονες
Μυγ from Αμυς-αμυχη means split from scratch,

C) the Armenian Hypothesis in Thracian (not certified)
that is not attested, but it is possible,
notice the Scotish clans have a Mc a Mac before their clan names,
in Thracian vocabulary Muca ment the male youth, 'the sons' (see Duridanov)
the word exist also in Armenian,
so it is possible that Myssians, Myceneans, Makedonians, Mygdonians etc and other in Balkans and Asia minor mean (the sons of)
it is a possible, but can not explain the secondary synthetic, as also
I heard the above as alternative theory, but rejected from the same who proposed it.
cause it should have a Mus if was Armeno-Tracian, and not -k or -g

Cyrus
23-06-19, 19:24
Culturally ancient Macedonians were certainly a Hellenic people, an ancient Macedonian temple has been found in Masjid Soleyman in the southwest of Iran:

http://uupload.ir/files/oim2_macedon.jpg

http://www.ichodoc.ir/p-a/CHANGED/121/images/121-47-1B.JPG

Fatherland
28-06-19, 21:47
Makedon actually meant Highlander in Ancient Greek. Equivalent to the Albanian term ‘Malesor’.
There is complete truth in your post.

Not sure why someone thumbed it down.

https://imgflip.com/i/34j6bjhttps://i.imgflip.com/34j6bj.jpg

torzio
28-06-19, 22:07
I clearly stated in my previous post that when speaking of the real ancient Makedonians of the time of Philip, you modern Northern Macedonians are mostly a Paeonian-Slav mix, but of course you also have some Makedonian, Dardanian, Thracian, Illyrian, Brygian, etc.



There was no slavs there at the time of Philip

northern macedonians would be a Paeonian-Macedon mix

torzio
28-06-19, 22:15
So there is clearly great overlap between Macedonians and Albanians...

Maybe this overlap started here

Macedonian–Carthaginian Treaty was an anti-Roman treaty (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty) between Philip V of Macedon (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_V_of_Macedon) and Hannibal (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannibal), leader of the Carthaginians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carthage), which was drawn up after the Battle of Cannae (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Cannae) when Hannibal seemed poised to conquer Rome (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Republic). Philip V, who feared Roman expansion, wanted to ride on the coat tails of the victor in the Second Punic War (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Punic_War) (218–201 BC). The discovery of this treaty inevitably led to the outbreak of the First Macedonian War (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Macedonian_War) (214–205 BC) between Rome and its Greek allies against Macedonia

Rome had to stop macedonian supplies reaching Hannibal in Itlay from Macedonia's Albanian ports .................see map in link below


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Macedonian_War

Nik
07-07-19, 22:34
There was no slavs there at the time of Philip

northern macedonians would be a Paeonian-Macedon mix
Really? Mind blown. :O

RagnarofMacedon
05-08-19, 16:35
Really? Mind blown. :O


Why Peonian-Macedon mix? Macedonian territory was like next to Nish (nowdays Serbia),anyways Peonians were Thraco-Illyrian,they were apsorbed in Macedonian Kingdom like many other illyrians and thracians, there were not pure nations, Macedonians had many thraco-macedonians, illyro-macedonians, thraco-illyrians, greco-macedonians, same with Greeks they were mix of many like Assyrians,Jews,Egyptians,Persians,Thracians,Macedo nians,Illyrians with Greeks...
And many of barbarians (thracians,illyrians,macedonians) accepted Hellenism because in that time was like Religion , with already famous gods,laws and language with perspective, coine language in that time(greek nowdays) famous like english nowdays, wind in the back for barbarian traders...So like nowdays Orthodox Christianity , they r not same nation but workship same god and customs have same traditions...

Dianatomia
02-11-19, 00:02
Why Peonian-Macedon mix? Macedonian territory was like next to Nish (nowdays Serbia),anyways Peonians were Thraco-Illyrian,they were apsorbed in Macedonian Kingdom like many other illyrians and thracians, there were not pure nations, Macedonians had many thraco-macedonians, illyro-macedonians, thraco-illyrians, greco-macedonians, same with Greeks they were mix of many like Assyrians,Jews,Egyptians,Persians,Thracians,Macedo nians,Illyrians with Greeks...
And many of barbarians (thracians,illyrians,macedonians) accepted Hellenism because in that time was like Religion , with already famous gods,laws and language with perspective, coine language in that time(greek nowdays) famous like english nowdays, wind in the back for barbarian traders...So like nowdays Orthodox Christianity , they r not same nation but workship same god and customs have same traditions...

When talking about Ancient Macedonia, we talk about the land inhabited by the original tribe which inhabited a small piece of land in Northern Greece near the Aegean. We are not talking about their conquests and/or expansions. In reality, North Macedonia was almost in its entirety not inhabited by Ancient Macedonians, nor was it part of the original Macedonia. It was mostly Paeonian and Dardanian inhabited land. There were also Epirot Greeks in what is now Pelagonia (North Macedonia and Greek Macedonia). But you can rest assured, because Alexanders mother hailed from that tribe.

torzio
02-11-19, 00:54
Why Peonian-Macedon mix? Macedonian territory was like next to Nish (nowdays Serbia),anyways Peonians were Thraco-Illyrian,they were apsorbed in Macedonian Kingdom like many other illyrians and thracians, there were not pure nations, Macedonians had many thraco-macedonians, illyro-macedonians, thraco-illyrians, greco-macedonians, same with Greeks they were mix of many like Assyrians,Jews,Egyptians,Persians,Thracians,Macedo nians,Illyrians with Greeks...
And many of barbarians (thracians,illyrians,macedonians) accepted Hellenism because in that time was like Religion , with already famous gods,laws and language with perspective, coine language in that time(greek nowdays) famous like english nowdays, wind in the back for barbarian traders...So like nowdays Orthodox Christianity , they r not same nation but workship same god and customs have same traditions...

Paeonians are a mix of macedonians and dardanians there is no thracian or illyrian on there mix

bigsnake49
22-11-19, 16:15
When talking about Ancient Macedonia, we talk about the land inhabited by the original tribe which inhabited a small piece of land in Northern Greece near the Aegean. We are not talking about their conquests and/or expansions. In reality, North Macedonia was almost in its entirety not inhabited by Ancient Macedonians, nor was it part of the original Macedonia. It was mostly Paeonian and Dardanian inhabited land. There were also Epirot Greeks in what is now Pelagonia (North Macedonia and Greek Macedonia). But you can rest assured, because Alexanders mother hailed from that tribe.

That's what people don't understand. Ancient Macedonia was a very small area/kingdom/tribe who then expanded tremendously through conquest, alliances and marriages of convenience. It was surrounded by other much larger Illyrian and Thracian tribes. Current province of Greece, Macedonia is too big for what the land of Macedons originally included. So is Northern Macedonia. Only very small number of people around what is now Pella can call themselves descendants of Macedonians. The rest, Greek Macedonia and North Macedonia are just appropriating the name.

Aspar
25-11-19, 12:19
That's what people don't understand. Ancient Macedonia was a very small area/kingdom/tribe who then expanded tremendously through conquest, alliances and marriages of convenience. It was surrounded by other much larger Illyrian and Thracian tribes. Current province of Greece, Macedonia is too big for what the land of Macedons originally included. So is Northern Macedonia. Only very small number of people around what is now Pella can call themselves descendants of Macedonians. The rest, Greek Macedonia and North Macedonia are just appropriating the name.
Yeah, many fanatics don't understand, however the term Macedonia was first applied in the 19th century by the Greek priests and clerics after the abolishment of the Ohrid archbishopric in order to attract and hellenize the Bulgarian population in Macedonia(the historical one of course). Prior to that of course every Slavic speaking men in Macedonia was calling his language Bulgarian and his people Bulgarians.
Let's not forget how Germanos Karavangelis attracted Kote or Kottas to the Greek cause. Basically telling him how the Slavic speaking people in Macedonia aren't Bulgarians but Bulgarised Macedonians, descendants of Alexander the Great and the Ancient Macedonians.
Basically in those times there were no borders like today and people living in Macedonia and beyond, in what is today Northern Macedonia were basically the same people, speaking the same language and intermarrying.
After the Greeks achieved the goal and got Macedonia from the Ottomans, there was no more need to spread propaganda in order to attract local Bulgarians.
However, the idea itself spread across the border and the rest is a history. So the Greeks have no one to blame but themselves when the people across the border appropriate the Ancient Macedonians.

Dianatomia
25-11-19, 13:57
Yeah, many fanatics don't understand, however the term Macedonia was first applied in the 19th century by the Greek priests and clerics after the abolishment of the Ohrid archbishopric in order to attract and hellenize the Bulgarian population in Macedonia(the historical one of course). Prior to that of course every Slavic speaking men in Macedonia was calling his language Bulgarian and his people Bulgarians.
Let's not forget how Germanos Karavangelis attracted Kote or Kottas to the Greek cause. Basically telling him how the Slavic speaking people in Macedonia aren't Bulgarians but Bulgarised Macedonians, descendants of Alexander the Great and the Ancient Macedonians.
Basically in those times there were no borders like today and people living in Macedonia and beyond, in what is today Northern Macedonia were basically the same people, speaking the same language and intermarrying.
After the Greeks achieved the goal and got Macedonia from the Ottomans, there was no more need to spread propaganda in order to attract local Bulgarians.
However, the idea itself spread across the border and the rest is a history. So the Greeks have no one to blame but themselves when the people across the border appropriate the Ancient Macedonians.

Greeks used and emphasized the term Macedonia to safeguard their Hellenic influence in the region. The Bulgarization of the area was the only serious threat from Greece's perspective at the time. In fact, I would argue that there was no other serious threat ever since. The Bulgarians had a solid narrative. There were Slavic speakers in the region, and the medieval Bulgarian empires were a fact in history. The Greeks would counter this narrative with emphasis of Byzantine and Ancient Greek history of the region. And hence the term Macedonian Slavs was born, with the help of the Greeks among others.

The Yugoslavs brought this to another level a few decades later, arguing that Macedonian Slavs are not Bulgarians indeed, but they also have nothing to do with the Ancient Greeks. Because they are a totally unrelated people. This went against Athens bidding ofcourse. But compared to the Bulgarian threat, it was not a major setback. The historical claims and the connection of the Ancient Macedonians to the Macedonian Slavs were quite un-academic. And no one took these claims seriously. So Greece looked the other way. It was more of a nuisance rather than anything else. One could argue that it did the Macedonian Slavs more harm than it did the Greeks. Given the above, the Prespa agreement will do more good than harm for both nations.

Dianatomia
25-11-19, 14:08
That's what people don't understand. Ancient Macedonia was a very small area/kingdom/tribe who then expanded tremendously through conquest, alliances and marriages of convenience. It was surrounded by other much larger Illyrian and Thracian tribes. Current province of Greece, Macedonia is too big for what the land of Macedons originally included. So is Northern Macedonia. Only very small number of people around what is now Pella can call themselves descendants of Macedonians. The rest, Greek Macedonia and North Macedonia are just appropriating the name.

Well, it became Macedonia in due time. I wouldn't say anyone is appropriating the name. Especially the Greek region became Macedonia as early as under the reign of Philip. But the name stuck in the greater region for centuries after that and it changed its geographic connotation many times. This has been a natural process. We simply have to understand that Macedonia became a name which was exclusively geographic and not ethnic. The problem occurs when people within this region, at any given time, start to think that this region belongs to their ethnic cultural heritage. This is quite dubious and a-historical.

Pericles
30-11-19, 04:30
You are all forgetting that the North was only Macedonia when the Romans had the area...it was a large geographic area that the Romans called Macedonia...it had nothing to do with the Real Macedonia in northern Greece. "North Macedonia" is literally the geographic area of Roman North Macedonia....again nothing to do with the real Macedonia.

Aspar
07-08-20, 12:25
You are all forgetting that the North was only Macedonia when the Romans had the area...it was a large geographic area that the Romans called Macedonia...it had nothing to do with the Real Macedonia in northern Greece. "North Macedonia" is literally the geographic area of Roman North Macedonia....again nothing to do with the real Macedonia.

Actually it became Macedonia with the conquest of the Philip north in the territory of the Paeonians. Since then the territory was effectively Macedonia and that's why when the Romans came they didn't even have doubts how to call the territory of current N.Macedonia. So it remained as such for centuries thereafter, with some minor distinctions such as Macedonia Prima and Macedonia Secunda. Of course, the original Macedonians lived to south of this territory however as I explained already it became effectively Macedonia during their time not during the Romans.

Aspar
07-08-20, 14:13
Although N.Macedonia is a small country, there are some big differences among the people who call themselves Macedonians nowadays, mainly differences in the language they speak. Modern Macedonian language is the standardized form which doesn't reflect big part of the current spoken dialects but only those of the Western-Central part of the country, the white part in the image:
https://i.postimg.cc/VL98x2Xm/Macedonian-Slavic-dialects.png (https://postimages.org/)

The Macedonian dialects form a continuity with the Bulgarian dialects over the border and there is no sharp border between them as there is with the Serb dialects which of course are part of a different language. The only exception to this rule might be the Torlakian dialects of the north-east which show increased Serb influence in it's vocabulary and which are phenomenon of it's own, although clearly grammatically wise still closer to Bulgaro-Macedonian continuum and part of the Balkan Sprachbund which the Serb language is not part of.

Originally the Old Church Slavonic didn't have the features of the Balkan Sparchbund, among which the most important are: the loss of infinitive, the loss of case declension, and the use of enclitic definite articles. In this situation, the most similar to the Bulgaro-Macedonian language continuum is the Farsheroti Aromanian (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281801336_The_Aromanian_Farsheroti_Dialect_-_Balkan_Perspective) language spoken around the Ohrid-Prespa area which shares the most futures with Macedonian unlike other Aromanian dialects. This is very interesting because Ohrid-Prespa was the contact area between the two groups and here the famous literary school of Ohrid operated opened by St.Clement and St.Naum under the permission of Tsar Boris of Bulgaria. It was most likely here that the two groups intermingled between each other because modern Macedonian sounds as if an Aromanian person tries to speak Old Church Slavonic. And it's not only the grammar that has been effected but the lexicon as well as in many Bulgaro-Macedonian dialects there are plenty of words that have been transmitted both ways. I was happy to confirm even a genetic link of my own to this area and therefore I am quite sure that the intermingling of the languages was followed with genetic flows as well. As for why this conversion of Aromanian speakers to Bulgaro-Macedonian happened happened the most likely explanation is the Church as institution and the Old Church Slavonic as the religious language of diocese of Prespa under which the Aromanian speakers of that region belonged.

A small brief of the population history and migrations on the territory of North Macedonia from the late antiquity to modern days.

The pre-Slavic people did survive on the territory of modern N.Macedonia. The famous Macedonian-Croatian archaeologist Ivan Mikulcic is one of the best researchers of Ancient and Medieval Macedonia. In his book "Medieval towns and castles in Macedonia" (http://macedonia.kroraina.com/im3/im_3.htm) Mikulcic writes that the civilized city life in N.Macedonia ends in the year 584/85 when a large raiding party of Avars and Slavs started systematically to pillage and destroy the Roman towns in N.Macedonia. Mikulcic writes that the Roman people found salvation either fleeing south towards Constantinople, Thessaloniki, the Aegean isles and Anatolia or fleeing to the fortified places in the mountains. In more than twenty fortified places up in the mountains are found traces of continuous life: coins from the end of the sixth and the first half of the seventh century AD as well as Roman fibulae.


One such fortified place is the Castle of Vinica where terracotta (http://photovolan.blogspot.com/2009/11/vinica-kale-vinica-terracotta-icons.html) tiles are found (https://macedonia-mk.blogspot.com/2016/10/nine-vinica-fortress-terracotta-icons.html) in connection (https://www.academia.edu/10550296/The_Vinica_Mystery._The_Ceramic_Treasuries_of_a_La te_Antique_Fortress_Museum_Terakota_Publishers_Vin ica_2012) with early Christianity which are dated to the V-VII century.
This terracotta tiles are engraved with liturgical texts written in Latin. Such kind of terracotta tiles to date are found in Spain and North Africa only. These tiles are very important and from them we now know that there was a non-Greek people or Latin speakers inhabiting the region of Vinitza in N.Macedonia during the late antiquity and early Medieval period. This find by itself casts doubts about whether the Jirecek line should be taken literally and gives precious material about a non-Greek speaking population living south of the line because Vinitza is located to south of that hypothetical line and was located on the border between the provinces of Macedonia Secunda and Dacia Mediterranea.
The tiles are somewhat bizarre because they depict details from the early Christianity mixed with pagan figures.
For example on one terracotta tile there is the Thracian horseman with his right hand raised depicted on it and a Latin inscription:
EMANUEL (QUOD EST INTERPRETATUM)
NOBISCUM DEUS SALVU(M ME FAC ET SALVUS ER)O HR(ISTOF)ORO
https://i.postimg.cc/CK87ZHvx/Hristos-Emanuel.png (https://postimages.org/)


The terracotta tile actually represents Christ Emanuel as the coming Christ from the book of the prophet Isaiah but depicts him as the Thracian horseman with his right hand raised which brings him closer to the 'Scythian' type of the Thracian horseman plus it depicts the solar symbols, the moon and the sun.


Then we have another terracotta tile showing Achilles with a Centaur and a crescent with a clear Latin inscription that writes Achilles:
https://i.postimg.cc/QMQb1Wbw/Achilles-Terracotta-Vinica.png (https://postimages.org/)
The archaeologist Kosta Balabanov thinks that there was some cult of Achilles among the local Thraco-Roman people. We also have the Medieval accounts (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myrmidons) of some Byzantine authors and chroniclers who wrote in a time when the territory of N.Macedonia was part of the First Bulgarian Empire and later part of the Byzantine theme 'Bulgaria':
Achilles was described by Leo the Deacon (born ca. 950) not as Hellene, but as Scythian, while according to the Byzantine author John Malalas (c. 491–578), his army was made up of a tribe previously known as Myrmidons and "known now as Bulgars".[2][3] The 12th-century Byzantine poet John Tzetzes also identified the Myrmidons with the Bulgars, whom he also identified with the Paeonians, although the latter may be intended in a purely geographical sense.[4][5] The family of Tzar Samuel honored the cult of St.Achilles. St.Achilles was well respected and honored by Tzar Samuel and his family who even transferred his relics from Thessaly to Prespa.


These accounts of the Byzantine chroniclers and the cult of Achilles among the local Thraco-Roman people tells us that Achilles was well respected and honored as their own hero. In the Greek mythology Achilles's home was Phthia in Thessaly and Phthia was the home of the Myrmidones who as witnessed by the Byzantine accounts were considered of Thracian stock(now called Bulgars) because they were associated with the Bulgars who mixed with and gave the new name to the previous inhabitants of the area.


Therefore we can be sure that the inhabitants we are dealing with in Medieval Vinitza were Romanized Thracian people.


This mixing of Christian symbols with Pagan figures and symbols probably means that the preaching of the early Christianity in Macedonia was done with the help of the well known Pagan figures and symbols among the local people helping them to accept Christianity through these earlier Pagan symbols.


Other interesting terracotta is the one where are written the words 'Bolgar' and 'Sclav' and which depicts a fight between Bulgars and Sclavs:
https://i.postimg.cc/rm9HwZw7/Bolgar-Sclav-Terracotta-Vinica.jpg (https://postimages.org/)
https://i.postimg.cc/Jzc2144P/BOLGAR-icon-Vinitza.jpg (https://postimages.org/)


According to this terracotta the local Latinophone Thraco-Roman population already knew about the Bolgars and the Sclavs which shouldn't be surprise since these people started raiding and settling in the Balkans since the 6th century AD. What's interesting here is that the terracotta depicts a fight between the Bolgars and the Sclavs. During the time the terracotta was made 7th century AD, the Bolgars of Kuber moved in the western part of N.Macedonia from Pannonia away from Avar rule as per historical accounts together with the Roman population captured by the Avars from earlier raids. Probably this terracotta depicts a conflict between the Bolgars of Kuber and some of the Slavic tribes present in the region of Macedonia to which led Kuber's intention to attack Thessaloniki and after the Byzantine found out probably hired some of the allied Sclavivnia to attack the Bulgars and to expel them. Such Sclavinia might be that of the Dragouvites who were earlier on hired by the Byzantines to help the Bulgars and provid them food as they were the closest neighbors to the Bulgars who settled in the Keramisian plain(Prilep).


What's interesting is that Mikulcic writes that no archaeological traces of early Slavs in eastern N.Macedonia where Vinica is located are discovered during that period unlike in Greece where many artifacts belonging to the early Slavs are found during the end of the sixth and throughout the seventh century AD. The first traces of Slavic presence on the territory of eastern N.Macedonia start to show up in the 9th century and that coincides with the Bulgar invasion of Macedonia. According to that we can conclude that most of the Slavic people on the territory of N.Macedonia came together with the Bulgar expansion in the 9th century probably as a part of a Bulgar-Slavic alliance. Although there might have been some earlier Slavic tribes already present in the western part of N.Macedonia namely the Berzitae. The region of Central-West N.Macedonia is considered as 'Брсјачки етнографски регион' and is assumed to be in correlation with Berzitia known from Medieval historical accounts, a region that was located in Thessaly and whose archont Akamir made a bunt with the local Hellens against the Byzantine empress Irina in 799 AD. We also hear about Berzitia when the Bulgar ruler Telerig decides to attack this Sclavinia and to transfer it's population in Bulgaria around 774 AD. The problem here is that Mikulcic don't find any Slavic artifacts in the western part of N.Macedonia either and this 'Berzitia' according to the historical accounts was located in Thessaly. As already mentioned, the first Slavic artifacts on the territory of modern N.Macedonia start showing up in the 9th century when the Bulgars conquered the area. Before that period the only artifacts found on the territory of modern N.Macedonia that do not belong to the local Thraco-Roman population are artifacts belonging to tribes such as the Kutrigurs(Bulgars) and are found in the close vicinity of the town Prilep(ancient city of Kerameiai was located in it's vicinity) in the Pelagonian plain. Mikulcic connects these artifacts to the Bulgars of Kuber and the Sermesians who settled in the Pelagonian plain or Keremisia(Campus Kerameensis) as was written in the historical records. Tzar Samuel after conquering Thessaly transferred it's population somewhere in utter Bulgaria according to historical records therefore the population of Berzetia in Thessaly might very well have been transferred in Western N.Macedonia during the reign of Samuel. Coupled that with the historical account that after the migration of the Kuber's Bulgars and Sermesians to North Macedonia and the order of the Byzantines to the Dragouvites who lived in today's Greek Macedonia as a closest Sclavinia to the Bulgars and the Sermesians to provide them with food, we have a clear proves that no Berzitae/Брсјаци lived on the territory of N.Macedonia during that time but the mountainous territory was manly left unsettled by Slavic tribes up to the 9th century and most probably was settled by Eastern Romance speakers leftovers such as those found in Vinitza. These Romance speakers might be the ancestors of later Vlachs recorded on the territory of N.Macedonia such as Dobromir Hrysos who ruled from the fortress of Prosek. That in the same area there were a lot of Romance speakers up to the 16th century we find Turkish accounts such as those of Hadzi Kalfa or Evliya Celebi who wrote that the whole area around Doiran was inhabited by Vlachs(see A.Vacalopoulos, History of Macedonia). These Romance speakers were undoubtedly assimilated into the Bulgarian people among which today's Macedonians of South-East Macedonia trace their ancestry from. Only very few Romance speaking villages up in the mountains preserved the original language and are knows as Meglen Vlachs.


Meanwhile Professor Mikulcic writes that there is not much attention given to the 9th century wave of Slavic migrants whose migration to Macedonia coincides with the Bulgar invasion of Macedonia during the reign of Presian/Boris. These Slavs that migrated during that period used the Central Balkan Morava-Vardar valley as their path. They also left many toponyms related to Morava and Bohemia which might ultimately mean that these Slavs came from those places. Such toponyms are Morava river in Serbia, Morava mountain west of Korca in Albania but also the area north of Kastoria which was known as Morava or the area north of Thessaloniki which was known as Boimia/Bohemia and there is a town even with the name Boemitza which name was changed in 1928 to Axioupoli. These Slavs used the opening provided with the destruction of the Avar Khaganate at the end of the 8th century to migrate into south-eastern direction. One characteristic for the Central Balkans is the increased ratio of haplogroup I-Y3120 against the R1a unlike the other regions in the Balkans such as in Bulgaria and Greece and thismight have connection with this later wave of Slavs that came in the Balkans during the 8th and the 9th century. The language of these later Slavs might very well be the language taken as a base by St.Cyril and St.Methodius who as we know spread the Old Church Slavonic that was spoken by the Slavs around Thessaloniki. If we know by historical accounts that the Byzantine Emperors before the 8th century largely submitted the Sclavines around Thessaloniki and destroyed them or transferred them in other parts of the Empire then it's not far fetched to think that the Old Church Slavonic was based on the dialect of these later migrating Slavs that came from Bohemia and Moravia.

In short, the building blocks of the modern Macedonian people are these Romance speakers that lived on the territory of N.Macedonia during the medieval period and the Slavs from the first wave such as V/Berzitae(V/Belegeziti) who might well be the same tribe which name transformed under the phonetic rule of the Slavic liquid metathesis and Slavs from later waves such as those who migrated in the 9th century.

Yetos
08-08-20, 12:25
Actually it became Macedonia with the conquest of the Philip north in the territory of the Paeonians. Since then the territory was effectively Macedonia and that's why when the Romans came they didn't even have doubts how to call the territory of current N.Macedonia. So it remained as such for centuries thereafter, with some minor distinctions such as Macedonia Prima and Macedonia Secunda. Of course, the original Macedonians lived to south of this territory however as I explained already it became effectively Macedonia during their time not during the Romans.

It became Makedonia after Roman province,

Pericles
20-09-20, 04:37
Actually it became Macedonia with the conquest of the Philip north in the territory of the Paeonians. Since then the territory was effectively Macedonia and that's why when the Romans came they didn't even have doubts how to call the territory of current N.Macedonia. So it remained as such for centuries thereafter, with some minor distinctions such as Macedonia Prima and Macedonia Secunda. Of course, the original Macedonians lived to south of this territory however as I explained already it became effectively Macedonia during their time not during the Romans.

That is completely not correct. The Paeonian area was never named Macedonia under Philip. The Illyrians remained in control in Lychnidos and Paeonians remained where they were. Paeonia did not become Macedonia.

Aspar
24-09-20, 14:03
That is completely not correct. The Paeonian area was never named Macedonia under Philip. The Illyrians remained in control in Lychnidos and Paeonians remained where they were. Paeonia did not become Macedonia.

So why the Romans named the territory as 'Macedonia' in the first place?

Dushman
24-09-20, 17:15
So why the Romans named the territory as 'Macedonia' in the first place?
Does it really matter? They included a big part of modern Albania in the region of Macedonia too, as well as a very larg part of the Adriatic coast as Dalmatia.

it doesn’t mean that the Paeonians were Macedonians, nor that the modern Macedonians share some ancestry with the true Ancient Macedonians.

Aspar
25-09-20, 16:20
Does it really matter? They included a big part of modern Albania in the region of Macedonia too, as well as a very larg part of the Adriatic coast as Dalmatia.
it doesn’t mean that the Paeonians were Macedonians, nor that the modern Macedonians share some ancestry with the true Ancient Macedonians.
My post has nothing to do with the ancient Macedonians. That has been sorted out also on a state level with the new Prespa agreement.
All we discuss is the name. And the name Macedonia has been applied to the territory of North Macedonia since long time ago, and this territory has been known as Macedonia for the most of the history than say Paeonia.
Yes, the Albanian territories were also part of the province of Macedonia during the Roman rule but they were also part of the province of Epirus which was administrative division inside the province of Macedonia, Epirus Vetus and Nova. While most of the territory of North Macedonia was part of Macedonia Salutaris division of the province of Macedonia.
The ancient Macedonians were a Troyan horse and some dumb idiots in North Macedonia took the bait, making clowns of themselves and doing bad favour to the country.
I won't discuss whether we have or not ancient Macedonian genes, that's not even that important. What's important is that our identity is strictly regional and connected to the region of Macedonia. Yes, the Bulgarian origin is reality and many of North Macedonia's past revolutionaries and educated people declared themselves ethnic Bulgarians, but also many didn't have Bulgarian ethnic consciousness although speaking Bulgarian related language. These people were mostly divided, with some being pro-Greek, studying in Greek schools, attending Greek churches and even leading Greek guerilla squads against Bulgarian guerilla. So, the ethnic division has been blurry since long time ago and it's not something recent although some uneducated people trying to present it as a recent phenomenon, from the time of Tito.

Dushman
25-09-20, 16:31
My post has nothing to do with the ancient Macedonians. That has been sorted out also on a state level with the new Prespa agreement.
All we discuss is the name. And the name Macedonia has been applied to the territory of North Macedonia since long time ago, and this territory has been known as Macedonia for the most of the history than say Paeonia.
Yes, the Albanian territories were also part of the province of Macedonia during the Roman rule but they were also part of the province of Epirus which was administrative division inside the province of Macedonia, Epirus Vetus and Nova. While most of the territory of North Macedonia was part of Macedonia Salutaris division of the province of Macedonia.
The ancient Macedonians were a Troyan horse and some dumb idiots in North Macedonia took the bait, making clowns of themselves and doing bad favour to the country.
I won't discuss whether we have or not ancient Macedonian genes, that's not even that important. What's important is that our identity is strictly regional and connected to the region of Macedonia. Yes, the Bulgarian origin is reality and many of North Macedonia's past revolutionaries and educated people declared themselves ethnic Bulgarians, but also many didn't have Bulgarian ethnic consciousness although speaking Bulgarian related language. These people were mostly divided, with some being pro-Greek, studying in Greek schools, attending Greek churches and even leading Greek guerilla squads against Bulgarian guerilla. So, the ethnic division has been blurry since long time ago and it's not something recent although some uneducated people trying to present it as a recent phenomenon, from the time of Tito.
In that case, yes, I agree with you. I misunderstood what is being discussed.

In my opinion Macedonian is a regional name too, and you can be Albano-Macedonian, Bulgaro-Macedonian, Greek-Macedonian, Vlacho-Macedonian, Ponto-Macedonian, Serbo-Macedonian, Turko-Macedonian, gypsies, etc.

Im not sure how the Slavic Macedonians should be called though, but then again if you like to be simply called Macedonian I for one have no problem nor interest in interfering with someone else’s self-identification.

That area including part of Macedonia that belongs to Greece now had an extensive presence of Vlachs and later Bulgarians which in my opinion are for the most part assimilated Vlachs and Albanians.

Logically it should be a second Romance speaking country in the Balkans but today’s reality is different as it’s mostly Slavic speaking, but you cannot be called Bulgaria and I suppose many don’t like to be called such anymore, so I guess Macedonian or North-Macedonian it is. Lol

Yetos
26-09-20, 11:25
My post has nothing to do with the ancient Macedonians. That has been sorted out also on a state level with the new Prespa agreement.
All we discuss is the name. And the name Macedonia has been applied to the territory of North Macedonia since long time ago, and this territory has been known as Macedonia for the most of the history than say Paeonia.
Yes, the Albanian territories were also part of the province of Macedonia during the Roman rule but they were also part of the province of Epirus which was administrative division inside the province of Macedonia, Epirus Vetus and Nova. While most of the territory of North Macedonia was part of Macedonia Salutaris division of the province of Macedonia.
The ancient Macedonians were a Troyan horse and some dumb idiots in North Macedonia took the bait, making clowns of themselves and doing bad favour to the country.
I won't discuss whether we have or not ancient Macedonian genes, that's not even that important. What's important is that our identity is strictly regional and connected to the region of Macedonia. Yes, the Bulgarian origin is reality and many of North Macedonia's past revolutionaries and educated people declared themselves ethnic Bulgarians, but also many didn't have Bulgarian ethnic consciousness although speaking Bulgarian related language. These people were mostly divided, with some being pro-Greek, studying in Greek schools, attending Greek churches and even leading Greek guerilla squads against Bulgarian guerilla. So, the ethnic division has been blurry since long time ago and it's not something recent although some uneducated people trying to present it as a recent phenomenon, from the time of Tito.


Be Honest to your shelf,
The term Makedonia once was given to Phillipoupolis also, even in Serbia once

the term Makedonia by S Slavs is used after Yugoslav era.

the creation of S Slavic population as Makedonia started after St Stefan treaty, and the term suggested by Russian ambassadeur of Con/polis, and then by G Dimitrof and 3rd Communis International
The modern Ethnicity that occured at Krussevo and Skopjia is clear after St Stefan treaty.
The Bulgarians went and tell them 'You are Bulgarians and Exarchate, you must obey and serve us
then Serbs went there and told them you are Bulgarians
then Greeks went and were welcomed at the Begin due to Patrik. but at the end did not manage to unite them
then Romanians went and tell Vlachs you are Romanians and build Romanian schools
and Turks as always happy for division.

and at Krussevo Vlachs started the idea, we are Orthodox and with Patrik, but not Greeks
at stromnitsa we are Exarchate and Bulgarians
at Kumanovo we are with Serbian patriarch etc etc
at Monastetion we are Greeks
and the Russian ambassadeur at Con/polis suggested the term 'Makedonian -Orthodox'

and even very late the area was Bardarska Bodovina.
and after suggestion of Communists and G Dimitrof they organise them to an ethnicity,
proposing them the lands of Yugoslavia, Greece, and Bulgaria.

and that Communist manifesto made this modern ethnicity, to claim maximalistic dreams, and act alazonic.

be honest to your shelves.
the today N Makedonia, as most Balkan countries, is mosaic of Nationalities,
and fits all, Serbs, Bulgarians,Greeks, Albanians, Turks, USA, Russia.
the independent existance of this country, is based on the the keep in balance Balkans.
and slowly become a nationality the last century, to avoid inner struggle and possible civil disorder.

It is a modern unification movement, that creates a new nationality.

drsibel
14-10-20, 07:52
I think the ancient Macedonians assimilated after the Slavic migrations. I believe that there were ancient Macedonians among the people who said they were Macedonians.

Boreas
17-10-20, 05:38
I think the ancient Macedonians assimilated after the Slavic migrations. I believe that there were ancient Macedonians among the people who said they were Macedonians.

In my opinion, even People of Greece assimilted with Indo-Europeans. They have very high haplogroup E and ıf the origion of Europeans is pontic steppes, it is not common

Same as Bulgarian and Macedonia who have pre European haplogroup I

Pericles
17-10-20, 08:39
If they were Macedonian, they were Greek! This has been proven time and again.

Boreas
17-10-20, 09:45
If they were Macedonian, they were Greek! This has been proven time and again.

No it is not. I guess it is about your defination of Greeks. I am also don't call the Cypriots as Greek, I don't care that is their language or religion or what is their origin mtyh.

This is a genetic distance issue for me.

12366

Also Sardinians are not Italian because of genetic distance. See how Iranian and Georgian or Turkish and Kurdish areas are intertwined.

Do you call the Georgian, North Iranian? Do you call the Kurds, Eastern Turks? I don't think so.

Why do you think a population like Greeks size has this much large area in the figure??? Because they are not pure, they are mixing with other races, nations since their colony age.

Yetos
17-10-20, 11:22
No it is not. I guess it is about your defination of Greeks. I am also don't call the Cypriots as Greek, I don't care that is their language or religion or what is their origin mtyh.

This is a genetic distance issue for me.

12366

Also Sardinians are not Italian because of genetic distance. See how Iranian and Georgian or Turkish and Kurdish areas are intertwined.

Do you call the Georgian, North Iranian? Do you call the Kurds, Eastern Turks? I don't think so.

Why do you think a population like Greeks size has this much large area in the figure??? Because they are not pure, they are mixing with other races, nations since their colony age.


offcourse, that is why every body, in Central and East Meditterrean is proud, or claims or wants to have Greek ancestry, :grin:

as you see there in this forum, there are people who think even that they are more Greeks than Greeks

Boreas
18-10-20, 17:20
offcourse, that is why every body, in Central and East Meditterrean is proud, or claims or wants to have Greek ancestry, :grin:

as you see there in this forum, there are people who think even that they are more Greeks than Greeks

Yes, I totally agree. Being a Greek as much higher market value then, being an Albanian, Bulgarian or Turk in the Western World

TaktikatEMalet
22-10-20, 15:01
offcourse, that is why every body, in Central and East Meditterrean is proud, or claims or wants to have Greek ancestry, :grin:

as you see there in this forum, there are people who think even that they are more Greeks than Greeks

I can't speak for other countries but albanians only have pride in being albanian

Boreas
24-10-20, 06:10
I can't speak for other countries but albanians only have pride in being albanian

Of course most of people are happy what they are.

My point was other nations opinion on you. Many of people doesn't know where is Albania. But if you were Greek, most of people would have position opinion on you

TaktikatEMalet
24-10-20, 12:41
Of course most of people are happy what they are.
My point was other nations opinion on you. Many of people doesn't know where is Albania. But if you were Greek, most of people would have position opinion on you

That is true, Greek mythology is well known around the world. They even make video games based on it

Israel is famous for similar reason, mostly Jesus

Dibran
03-11-20, 00:09
Of course most of people are happy what they are.

My point was other nations opinion on you. Many of people doesn't know where is Albania. But if you were Greek, most of people would have position opinion on you

We really don't care what other nations opinions are. Opinion are like...well you know. Everyone has one.

Yetos just likes to assume everyone want's to be Greek. First time I'm hearing this. That would be the last identity I would petition for.

Dibran
03-11-20, 00:12
In my opinion, even People of Greece assimilted with Indo-Europeans. They have very high haplogroup E and ıf the origion of Europeans is pontic steppes, it is not common

Same as Bulgarian and Macedonia who have pre European haplogroup I

E-V13 has already been found in numerous Bronze Age elite at this point. It also seems to appear after the Iron Age in Greece not before. It is without a doubt associated with Indo-European migrations. Now, its parent branch may perhaps tell a different story.

Yetos
12-11-20, 20:33
nothing just nothing

Yetos
12-11-20, 20:49
We are not talking about E, but E-V13. We already have plenty of Indo-European samples that are E-V13. Additionally, E-V13's parent clade E-L618 was also already found in the West Balkans at the close of the Neolithic. Also, E* has a distance of 50 thousand + or so years from E-V13. So, I am not sure what you're trying to imply by your comment.

The only people who claim E-V13 is North African are either people who know very little about Y-DNA evolution or have an agenda.

Using your logic, R1a and R1b are just Siberians because they come from R1 Mal'ta boy. It is important to understand the difference between subclades and parent clades. E-V13's connection to North Africa is ancient, and before any culture of relevance.

correct, minus is not IE marker, but rather Balkan primary, Anatolian/ Near East secondary.
It is Neolithic, Not IE.

Yetos
12-11-20, 20:52
""The only people who claim E-V13 is North African are either people who know very little about Y-DNA evolution or have an agenda.""

Of course he has an agenda.

""halplogroup I is derived from middle eastern haplogroup J. so not european."" Haplogroup IJ would have arrived from the Middle East to Europe some 35,000 years ago, then developed into haplogroup I soon afterwards. In Europe for 35,000 years, yep that makes it European. Just Like the Chinese Haplogroup O at one time came from the Middle East if you go back far enough because it came from F to K, the ancestor of most of the Eurasian haplogroups (L, N, O, P, Q, R and T), some time between 45,000 and 35,000 years ago. So what.

IJ and ED show strange spread,

both E and D comes from ED but in Far East we see D, and E at horn of Africa,
same I and J comes from IJ but at Asia mainly we see J and at Europe mainly I.

how that is done? :confused2:

Dorquest
12-11-20, 21:22
IJ and ED show strange spread,

both E and D comes from ED but in Far East we see D, and E at horn of Africa,
same I and J comes from IJ but at Asia mainly we see J and at Europe mainly I.

how that is done? :confused2:

I would guess...Time, movement of people – death of lineages :confused2:

Yetos
12-11-20, 21:33
I would guess...Time, movement of people – death of lineages :confused2:

I do not know

Dibran
13-11-20, 02:01
correct, minus is not IE marker, but rather Balkan primary, Anatolian/ Near East secondary.
It is Neolithic, Not IE.

Wrong. E-V13 exploded with Indo-European migrations. People have this weird idea that if it is not R1a or R1b that it cannot be Indo-European. That is incorrect. It for sure is not Proto-Indo-European. However, E-V13 expanded with Indo-Europeans.

Jovialis
13-11-20, 03:59
israel is derived from ancient kemetic gods ISIS RA EL
jesus is another name for HORUS and SHAITAN aka SATAN is derived from SET

basically astrotheological sun and moon worship. sunRAise (light) and sunSET (darkness)
horus and set battle every day, day vs night, dark vs light, summer vs winter

bible is derived from sun worship, helios byblos, egyptian sun papers and book of dead
the middle east was once part of africa but it split away. the kemetic/egyptian mythologies and middle eastern overlap since the ancient hebrews came from egypt to middle east not vice versa. jesus and mary story is based on isis and horus

christianity is from egypt, so is judaism and islam. jew is derived from egyptian tehuti = yehudi and kaballah is derived from egyptian KA(life force) and BA (soul).

we say AMEN from egyptian AMUN RA

123931239612395

I am not going to allow you to fill this forum up with trash.

Jovialis
13-11-20, 04:10
Let's get back on topic, everyone. I will re-open the thread.

Yetos
13-11-20, 05:00
Wrong. E-V13 exploded with Indo-European migrations. People have this weird idea that if it is not R1a or R1b that it cannot be Indo-European. That is incorrect. It for sure is not Proto-Indo-European. However, E-V13 expanded with Indo-Europeans.


It is Neolithic, Not Eurasian steppe. and most possible Balkan mark, It is impossible to be IE.
It did not enter Balkans at Bronzeage ...

Dibran
13-11-20, 07:06
It is Neolithic, Not Eurasian steppe. and most possible Balkan mark, It is impossible to be IE.
It did not enter Balkans at Bronzeage ...


E-V13 exploded and expanded in the Bronze Age. This is common knowledge at this point. It formed in the Neolthic. However, the most recent ancestor who is the forefather of all living E-V13 men lived in the Bronze Age(4800ybp) and can be found in numerous Indo-European graves and is linked with the expansion of Indo-Europeans alongside R1a and R1b. This is why I said only R1a/R1b are Proto-Indo-European and the rest can be classified as Indo-European through the course of cross assimilation. Because in the case of Europeans, most of them certainly are. There are even branches of G that spread with Celts. There is such a thing as branches and sub-branches. Context is important.

E-V13 was linked to the elite dominance of Bronze Age society. The geographic distribution of E-V13 quickly spread to all parts of Europe, but was especially common in Central Europe. The only Bronze Age migration that could account for such a fast and far-reaching dispersal is that of the Proto-Indo-Europeans. At present the most consistent explanation is that E-V13 developed from E-M78 in Central or Eastern Europe during the Neolithic period, and was assimilated by the R1a and R1b Proto-Indo-Europeans.

kingjohn
13-11-20, 19:20
Let's get back on topic, everyone. I will re-open the thread.


thanks :good_job:
kudos for you an angella for cleaning the mess it is not an easy job :good_job:
he was an austrian troll :thinking:

Yetos
13-11-20, 20:39
E-V13 exploded and expanded in the Bronze Age. This is common knowledge at this point. It formed in the Neolthic. However, the most recent ancestor who is the forefather of all living E-V13 men lived in the Bronze Age(4800ybp) and can be found in numerous Indo-European graves and is linked with the expansion of Indo-Europeans alongside R1a and R1b. This is why I said only R1a/R1b are Proto-Indo-European and the rest can be classified as Indo-European through the course of cross assimilation. Because in the case of Europeans, most of them certainly are. There are even branches of G that spread with Celts. There is such a thing as branches and sub-branches. Context is important.

E-V13 was linked to the elite dominance of Bronze Age society. The geographic distribution of E-V13 quickly spread to all parts of Europe, but was especially common in Central Europe. The only Bronze Age migration that could account for such a fast and far-reaching dispersal is that of the Proto-Indo-Europeans. At present the most consistent explanation is that E-V13 developed from E-M78 in Central or Eastern Europe during the Neolithic period, and was assimilated by the R1a and R1b Proto-Indo-Europeans.


Your post is clear the answer.

you have answer your shelf.
no need for me,

you already wrote Neolithic,

Bronze age at Balkans is the most far 3500 BC.

How much old is the sample found at Adriatic/Dinaric area?
is there any hg E Eurasian steppe?

Dibran
14-11-20, 06:34
Your post is clear the answer.

you have answer your shelf.
no need for me,

you already wrote Neolithic,

Bronze age at Balkans is the most far 3500 BC.

How much old is the sample found at Adriatic/Dinaric area?
is there any hg E Eurasian steppe?

You're missing the entire point. But, then again; you always miss the point.

DuPidh
20-11-20, 21:26
We really don't care what other nations opinions are. Opinion are like...well you know. Everyone has one.

Yetos just likes to assume everyone want's to be Greek. First time I'm hearing this. That would be the last identity I would petition for.

OMG! Greeks have that attitude even in in English speaking world. They think being Greek carries extra social points. Only to find that for the Northern people Greeks are Wogs. ( I am not sure if i wrote it correct).I guess they call Albanians wogs as well, but Albanians keep a low profile in general so are mostly invisible ethnic groups, but Greeks are really offended by the epithet.

Yetos
21-11-20, 00:53
You're missing the entire point. But, then again; you always miss the point.


I don't think I am missing something,
Simply place place things to their positions,
Removing 'extras' it is nother thing Neolithic, another European and another IE.

Yetos
21-11-20, 00:56
OMG! Greeks have that attitude even in in English speaking world. They think being Greek carries extra social points. Only to find that for the Northern people Greeks are Wogs. ( I am not sure if i wrote it correct).I guess they call Albanians wogs as well, but Albanians keep a low profile in general so are mostly invisible ethnic groups, but Greeks are really offended by the epithet.


hahaha,

Do tell this to me, Tell it to some other who think they are Myceneans, Homeric people etc etc.

TaktikatEMalet
21-11-20, 12:01
OMG! Greeks have that attitude even in in English speaking world. They think being Greek carries extra social points. Only to find that for the Northern people Greeks are Wogs. ( I am not sure if i wrote it correct).I guess they call Albanians wogs as well, but Albanians keep a low profile in general so are mostly invisible ethnic groups, but Greeks are really offended by the epithet.

Well, most albanians aren't "wogs" and I'm sure there are plenty greeks too. Do they also call Italians, Spanish, Portuguese and Serbs wogs for being darker tone?

A lot of northern people look like wogs when they go on holiday btw. If you look at haplogroups, it tends to be only regions with significant amount of i1 that have a lot of blondes and there aren't many of these regions left

Jovialis
21-11-20, 12:49
The saying goes, "The wogs begin at Calais". Also stop using that word, guys, because it is inappropriate for the forum.


Funny anecdote, I was in an Irish bar, one New Year's eve with a friend, and we became acquainted with a British guy there. He had an accent, so he was from England. He asked about us, where we came from. I told him I was Italian, but later he referred to me as Albanian. I corrected him, and he sharply, yet jokingly replied, "Whatever, you all look the same" :)


Also, I know quite a few Albanians. My friend married an Albanian, and I went to their wedding. Some of them seemed pretty dark to me, they could easily pass for Sicilian. But like in all southern European groups, there is a lot of phenotypic-diversity. My friend's wife has blonde hair and blue eyes.

Jovialis
21-11-20, 13:23
Well, most albanians aren't "wogs" and I'm sure there are plenty greeks too. Do they also call Italians, Spanish, Portuguese and Serbs wogs for being darker tone?
A lot of northern people look like wogs when they go on holiday btw. If you look at haplogroups, it tends to be only regions with significant amount of i1 that have a lot of blondes and there aren't many of these regions left

Haplogroups do not dictate phenotype. Autosomal DNA is responsible for this.

Albanian autosomal DNA is predominately Anatolian_N + CHG/IN. Steppe and WHG are minority components. The same can be said for many Italians.

DuPidh
21-11-20, 17:40
This Wog thing I mentioned this is especially pronounced in Australia. Its no longer active in USA. But I brought the topic because I saw Australian Greeks protest about it. Who cares if someone calls you Wog, let alone protest. What you have to do is make the other work for you, through going to school, excelling in school, building a prosperous life for yourself, being socially fair and helpful

torzio
21-11-20, 18:34
This Wog thing I mentioned this is especially pronounced in Australia. Its no longer active in USA. But I brought the topic because I saw Australian Greeks protest about it. Who cares if someone calls you Wog, let alone protest. What you have to do is make the other work for you, through going to school, excelling in school, building a prosperous life for yourself, being socially fair and helpful


The Wog thing from Australia was originally meant to be on for the early chinese in Australia...it means Western Oriental Gentleman

the other is Dago ............which was meant for Italians and spanish as it came from the spanish christian name Diego ............Diego is spanish for James ............James is associated with Jimmy .............a jimmy is slang in australia for a foreigner

TaktikatEMalet
21-11-20, 19:23
Haplogroups do not dictate phenotype. Autosomal DNA is responsible for this.
Albanian autosomal DNA is predominately Anatolian_N + CHG/IN. Steppe and WHG are minority components. The same can be said for many Italians.

Haplogroups play big role in autosomal dna, not sure what your point is.

A country or even better a city/town is made up from all the different y dna that has remained there giving them the skin tone and features

My point is regions with a lot of i1 are usually more "white" or more blonde, most r1b-strong regions that lack i1 don't look more "white" than south europeans

Jovialis
22-11-20, 02:05
You clearly do not know what you are talking about.

DuPidh
22-11-20, 12:26
OMG! This person is out of control. Don't think has a passing grade in any school subject!

TaktikatEMalet
23-11-20, 11:50
You clearly do not know what you are talking about.

Look at r1b some strong regions in Spain, Portugal or even France/Switzerland. Most people there look like South Europeans or darker toned

It is only regions with bigger amounts of i1 in Germany, Sweden, Norway and England that look more "pale" or more "blonde". This is common knowledge

Jovialis
23-11-20, 15:39
Look at r1b some strong regions in Spain, Portugal or even France/Switzerland. Most people there look like South Europeans or darker toned
It is only regions with bigger amounts of i1 in Germany, Sweden, Norway and England that look more "pale" or more "blonde". This is common knowledge

Phenotype is determined by a combination of different alleles. People who seemingly have the same phenotype may actually have a different combination. Again, haplogroups do not determine your phenotype.


Hair color ranges across a wide spectrum of hues, from flaxen blond to coal black. Many genes other than MC1R play a role in determining shades of hair color by controlling levels of eumelanin and pheomelanin. Some of these genes, including ASIP, DTNBP1, GPR143 (https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/gene/gpr143/), HPS3 (https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/gene/hps3/), KITLG, MLPH (https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/gene/mlph/),MYO5A (https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/gene/myo5a/), MYO7A (https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/gene/myo7a/), OCA2 (https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/gene/oca2/), SLC45A2 (https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/gene/slc45a2/), SLC24A5, TYRP1 (https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/gene/tyrp1/), TYR (https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/gene/tyr/), ERCC6 (https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/gene/ercc6/), GNAS (https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/gene/gnas/), HERC2, IRF4, OBSCN, SLC24A4, TPCN2, and MITF (https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/gene/mitf/), are involved in the production of melanin in hair. Some of these genes are associated with gene transcription (which is the first step in protein production), DNA repair, the transport of substances (such as calcium) across cell membranes, or the structure of hair follicles. Several of these genes contribute to eye and skin color, but the exact role they play in determining hair color is unknown.

https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/understanding/traits/haircolor/#:~:text=The%20type%20and%20amount%20of%20melanin% 20in%20hair%20is%20determined,the%20pathway%20that %20produces%20melanin.

Eye color:



Although eye color is usually modeled as a simple, Mendelian trait, further research and observation has indicated that eye color does not follow the classical paths of inheritance. Eye color phenotypes demonstrate both epistasis and incomplete dominance. Although there are about 16 different genes responsible for eye color, it is mostly attributed to two adjacent genes on chromosome 15, hect domain and RCC1-like domain-containing protein 2 (HERC2) and ocular albinism (that is, oculocutaneous albinism II (OCA2)). An intron in HERC2 contains the promoter region for OCA2, affecting its expression. Therefore, single-nucleotide polymorphisms in either of these two genes have a large role in the eye color of an individual. Furthermore, with all genetic expression, aberration also occurs. Some individuals may express two phenotypes—one in each eye—or a complete lack of pigmentation, ocular albinism. In addition, the evolutionary and population roles of the different expressions are significant.

https://www.nature.com/articles/jhg2010126#:~:text=In%20the%20most%20elementary%20 form,classified%20as%20a%20Mendelian%20trait.&text =On%20the%20basis%20of%20the,rare%20cases%2C%20vio let%20and%20red.


Skin color:



Human skin colour is highly heritable and externally visible with relevance in medical, forensic, and anthropological genetics. Although eye and hair colour can already be predicted with high accuracies from small sets of carefully selected DNA markers, knowledge about the genetic predictability of skin colour is limited. Here, we investigate the skin colour predictive value of 77 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) from 37 genetic loci previously associated with human pigmentation using 2025 individuals from 31 global populations. We identified a minimal set of 36 highly informative skin colour predictive SNPs and developed a statistical prediction model capable of skin colour prediction on a global scale. Average cross-validated prediction accuracies expressed as area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) ± standard deviation were 0.97 ± 0.02 for Light, 0.83 ± 0.11 for Dark, and 0.96 ± 0.03 for Dark-Black. When using a 5-category, this resulted in 0.74 ± 0.05 for Very Pale, 0.72 ± 0.03 for Pale, 0.73 ± 0.03 for Intermediate, 0.87±0.1 for Dark, and 0.97 ± 0.03 for Dark-Black. A comparative analysis in 194 independent samples from 17 populations demonstrated that our model outperformed a previously proposed 10-SNP-classifier approach with AUCs rising from 0.79 to 0.82 for White, comparable at the intermediate level of 0.63 and 0.62, respectively, and a large increase from 0.64 to 0.92 for Black. Overall, this study demonstrates that the chosen DNA markers and prediction model, particularly the 5-category level; allow skin colour predictions within and between continental regions for the first time, which will serve as a valuable resource for future applications in forensic and anthropologic genetics.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00439-017-1808-5

kingjohn
23-11-20, 15:46
Look at r1b some strong regions in Spain, Portugal or even France/Switzerland. Most people there look like South Europeans or darker toned
It is only regions with bigger amounts of i1 in Germany, Sweden, Norway and England that look more "pale" or more "blonde". This is common knowledge



don't know
than why ireland whch is like 90% r1b
are very pale skin ( maybe not blond but they don't look south european )

Yetos
23-11-20, 18:05
hm

and what mothers?

don't they inherit some phenotype genes to their descendans?

Anfänger
23-11-20, 21:46
"Yeyy Haplogroups are everything and determine phenotype", these kind of people you should definitely avoid if you are interested in genetics.

TaktikatEMalet
25-11-20, 15:47
don't know
than why ireland whch is like 90% r1b
are very pale skin ( maybe not blond but they don't look south european )

I don't think Ireland is 90% r1b and they are in a cold region which also helps them look pale at all times. I'm sure Ireland has some North/German ancestry too

We must also remember that not all r1b came from the same regions, subclades are important in determining phenotypes, some r1b groups had different mtdna to mix with

TaktikatEMalet
25-11-20, 15:55
Phenotype is determined by a combination of different alleles. People who seemingly have the same phenotype may actually have a different combination. Again, haplogroups do not determine your phenotype.



Eye color:



Skin color:



Yes phenotypes can be different but they are bound to vary more across different y dna than they do with same y dna, I am not just talking about general y dna it would have to be same subclades

If you set up a region where all the males have the same y dna subclades eventually the people will look alike

Jovialis
25-11-20, 22:53
Yes phenotypes can be different but they are bound to vary more across different y dna than they do with same y dna, I am not just talking about general y dna it would have to be same subclades
If you set up a region where all the males have the same y dna subclades eventually the people will look alike

There are no legitimate studies that support these claims that I know of.

kingjohn
25-11-20, 23:49
I don't think Ireland is 90% r1b and they are in a cold region which also helps them look pale at all times. I'm sure Ireland has some North/German ancestry too
We must also remember that not all r1b came from the same regions, subclades are important in determining phenotypes, some r1b groups had different mtdna to mix with
Ok i was wrong but not by much ( not 90%)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1b
Ireland is 82% r1b thats huge beyond words:shocked::smile:
It means every 8 people out of 10 you will pick randomly will be r1b ....
Dont know what is your point is ...
To say that i1 dominant areas will look more like dolph lundgren (nordic)than r1b dominant areas?

P.s
If an r1b person have the genes for blond hair
And blue eyes and they are dominant in his case
He might end up with those features
There is no connection to his y haplogroup:thinking:
More to his total autosomal profile:thinking:

Yetos
26-11-20, 05:27
Yes phenotypes can be different but they are bound to vary more across different y dna than they do with same y dna, I am not just talking about general y dna it would have to be same subclades
If you set up a region where all the males have the same y dna subclades eventually the people will look alike

so according what you write, if a region has same Ydna all peoplelook alike?

even if the mothers are blonde? brown? red? black?

hmm, very advanced theory,

so genes of phenotype are only at 23 pair and only at Y,

so women who have no Y dna, WHAT? have no phenotype? and are all same or painted?



If you set up a region where all the males have the same y dna subclades eventually the people will look alike

So in a region n that has all males the same YDna, (although women from Africa, India, Balts, China, New Guinnea (Papoua) etc) subclades eventually the people will look alike.
Is that you want to say to us?

I suggest primary look at you family, where all males have same Y-DNA, then Neghbours family, etc etc.
cause that you say to us is not even at close family.

TaktikatEMalet
26-11-20, 14:20
so according what you write, if a region has same Ydna all peoplelook alike?
even if the mothers are blonde? brown? red? black?
hmm, very advanced theory,
so genes of phenotype are only at 23 pair and only at Y,
so women who have no Y dna, WHAT? have no phenotype? and are all same or painted?

So in a region n that has all males the same YDna, (although women from Africa, India, Balts, China, New Guinnea (Papoua) etc) subclades eventually the people will look alike.
Is that you want to say to us?
I suggest primary look at you family, where all males have same Y-DNA, then Neghbours family, etc etc.
cause that you say to us is not even at close family.

You don't understand

The mothers can have an affect if they had a father with a much different y dna. If you have a region where everyone has the same y dna that must mean the women also had fathers with the same y dna or at least this will be the case over time (at least the males)

But if you have a region with everyone same y dna and you want women with all different father y dna then it would take a long time to achieve the same result but eventually all the men a few hundred years later will still look similar if the y dna remains constant

As for my family, using the same logic I applied above the y dna in my family will be the same BUT the women will have come from fathers with likely different y dna - the less of this the more chance we all look alike

TaktikatEMalet
26-11-20, 14:27
Ok i was wrong but not by much ( not 90%)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1b
Ireland is 82% r1b thats huge beyond words:shocked::smile:
It means every 8 people out of 10 you will pick randomly will be r1b ....
Dont know what is your point is ...
To say that i1 dominant areas will look more like dolph lundgren (nordic)than r1b dominant areas?
P.s
If an r1b person have the genes for blond hair
And blue eyes and they are dominant in his case
He might end up with those features
There is no connection to his y haplogroup:thinking:
More to his total autosomal profile:thinking:

I think Ireland was one of the regions who had some early North european i2a prior to r1b, in fact they still carry some now? This could mean the r1b killed off most of them and took their women therefore receiving some their genes - blue eyes etc - additionally there was English and viking influence in Ireland later on which brought some more "northern" characteristics - this wouldn't just be i1 but it would also be r1b people from Germany/England etc who had mixed with i1 daughters therefore receiving some of the genes

I am certain that not all 80% of Ireland belongs to the same subclade of r1b

kingjohn
26-11-20, 15:38
I think Ireland was one of the regions who had some early North european i2a prior to r1b, in fact they still carry some now? This could mean the r1b killed off most of them and took their women therefore receiving some their genes - blue eyes etc - additionally there was English and viking influence in Ireland later on which brought some more "northern" characteristics - this wouldn't just be i1 but it would also be r1b people from Germany/England etc who had mixed with i1 daughters therefore receiving some of the genes
I am certain that not all 80% of Ireland belongs to the same subclade of r1b

i agree on that though
to reach this kind of frequency %
is beyond words and very likely involved killing :thinking:
or systematic genocide of the first people who settled in ireland :thinking:
maybe r1b people had some technological advantage or very advanced attack tools


p.s
small question how is all this related to macedonians ?
they don't have a huge y haplogroup dominant like in ireland
they are a mixture of: r1a , e-v13, I2 , j2b and r1b

TaktikatEMalet
26-11-20, 17:54
i agree on that though
to reach this kind of frequency %
is beyond words and very likely involved killing :thinking:
or systematic genocide of the first people who settled in ireland :thinking:
maybe r1b people had some technological advantage or very advanced attack tools
p.s
small question how is all this related to macedonians ?
they don't have a huge y haplogroup dominant like in ireland
they are a mixture of: r1a , e-v13, I2 , j2b and r1b

Someone above brought up Irish people. In terms of what 80% r1b means is first of all not too much because the sub clades weren't mentioned. The r1b may have come from different periods from different groups such as the angles, the french, vikings etc in addition to the i1 they carried. If you look at the English they have a lot of r1b too accompanied by i1, so if we say 60/25 then Ireland having 10% i1 would make it likely to have received 15%+ foreign r1b at the same time because it wouldn't have just been pure i1 who would have had an impact in Ireland, they would have been integrated with the people they encountered previously. So English r1b and French r1b, some of which may be similar or the same to that the Irish had in the first place but would have extra northern i1 features from mixing with their women

For Macedonia we know that i2 is mostly south slavic post 600AD. R1a if Z93 could be Thracian? Otherwise most of it is likely south slavic 600AD+
V13 is mostly south/central european BC, j2b l283 is mostly balkan BC, R1b is varied depends on what subclade Macedonians have.

Looking at all these you would have to say Macedonians are more mixed than Irish but difficult to say for sure without subclade percentages. If the Irish have various subclade of R1b and the highest one group goes is 10% then it is possible that Macedonians are less mixed

In any case this is too complex to answer because we don't have much ancient dna or ancient written history. What we do know is that Ireland is a remote region and also a cold region so less groups of people would have passed through

Pericles
06-12-20, 08:17
Are you talking about North Macedonians? Actual Macedonians are Greek, right?

DuPidh
06-12-20, 12:00
Are you talking about North Macedonians? Actual Macedonians are Greek, right?
Enough lies! The world is not stupid. Macedonians were Macedonians, spoke different language until 4 century ad. The rest are lies cooked in Greek government kitchens1!

Angela
06-12-20, 15:25
Enough lies! The world is not stupid. Macedonians were Macedonians, spoke different language until 4 century ad. The rest are lies cooked in Greek government kitchens1!

More posts like this and you're going to go silent for a good, long while.

Yetos
06-12-20, 17:59
You don't understand
The mothers can have an affect if they had a father with a much different y dna. If you have a region where everyone has the same y dna that must mean the women also had fathers with the same y dna or at least this will be the case over time (at least the males)
But if you have a region with everyone same y dna and you want women with all different father y dna then it would take a long time to achieve the same result but eventually all the men a few hundred years later will still look similar if the y dna remains constant
As for my family, using the same logic I applied above the y dna in my family will be the same BUT the women will have come from fathers with likely different y dna - the less of this the more chance we all look alike



:banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

And I am suposed to take you serious right?

drsibel
30-12-20, 14:49
My mother's parents were immigrants from Thessaloniki in 1924. My grandfather always said we were Macedonians. Neither Greek nor Bulgarian. Our ancestral land is in Vodina(edesse), and we are Macedonians. There were no Greeks where they lived, but there were Bulgarians.Most tormented by Bulgarian gangs. In the end, they were subject to forced migration.As someone who came from there, I wanted to write something.