Politics The case of Macedonia

[julia90]

here's a tourism promotion video for Macedonia (Fyrom).. i associate many of the scene's with greeks (the scene of the tryclinium!!!!:shocked as well as the music (sound greekish..)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWGJuANELm8

i think that if people from fyrom feel greeks than they should annect themselves to greece, and not saying bullshits about alexander the great saying he wasn't greek. everybody who studied know well that part of history, he spoke an hellene language not a slavic one.
So are you slavs or greeks?, first option slav: you aren't macedonian; second option greek: you are macedonian and you should annect yourself to greece.

 

[DejaVu]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macedonia_(region)
Modern Macedonia is divided by the national boundaries of Greece (Greek Macedonia), the Republic of Macedonia, Bulgaria (Blagoevgrad Province), Albania (Mala Prespa and Golo Brdo), Serbia (Prohor Pčinjski and Gora).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macedonians_(ethnic_group)
Macedonia Region before 1913 was inhabited by ethnic Macedonians 80-90%. Called themselfs Macedonians and nothing more. Ethnic Macedonians was expelled from their country and resettled by christian Turks, majority today in the Greek Region of Macedonia who are calling themselfs Macedonians (Fake Macedonians) today when Greece took over the occupied Macedonia in 1913.
End of Story.

 

[julia90]

From the middle of the 4th century BC, the Kingdom of Macedon became the dominant power in Greece and the neighbouring regions; since then Macedonia has had a diverse history.

macedonia was in its origin part of hellas, thus people there spoke a langauage akin to ancient greek

macedonia and greece are two unseparable thing.

therefore you are a Greek in denial, people from fyrom are greek then.

 

[julia90]

In classical times, the region of Macedonia comprised parts of what at the time was known as Macedonia, Illyria and Thrace. Among others, in its lands were located the kingdoms of Paeonia, Dardania, Macedonia and Pelagonia, historical tribes like the Agrianes, and colonies of southern Greek city states. Prior to the Macedonian ascendancy, parts of southern Macedonia were populated by the Bryges,[14] a Thracian people, while western, (i.e., Upper) Macedonia, was inhabited by Macedonian and Illyrian tribes. Whilst numerous wars are later recorded between the Illyrian and Macedonian Kingdoms, the Bryges might have co-existed peacefully with the Macedonians.[15] In the time of Classical Greece, Paionia, whose exact boundaries are obscure, originally included the whole Axius River valley and the surrounding areas, in what is now the northern part of the Greek region of Macedonia, most of the Republic of Macedonia, and a small part of western Bulgaria.[16] By 500 BC, the ancient kingdom of Macedon was centered somewhere between the southern slopes of Lower Olympus and the lowest reach of the Haliakmon River.[17] During the Persian Wars, the kingdom of Macedonia was subject to the Persians but after the battle of Plataia regained its freedom. Under Philip II and Alexander the Great, the kingdom of Macedonia forcefully expanded, placing the whole of the region of Macedonia under their rule.
Alexander's conquests produced a lasting extension of Hellenistic culture and thought across the ancient Near East, but his empire broke up on his death. His generals divided the empire between them, founding their own states and dynasties. The kingdom of Macedon was taken by Cassander, who ruled it until his death in 297 BC. At the time, Macedonian control over the Thracoillyrian states of the region slowly waned, although the kingdom of Macedonia remained the most potent regional power. This period also saw several Celtic invasions into Macedonia. However, the Celts were each time successfully repelled by Cassander, and later Antigonus, leaving little overall influence on the region.

 

[julia90]

if you warship alexander the great ---->then you warship an hellenistic culture---->then you feel hellene---->you feel akin to greeks.

just admit it, also southern italy has greek ancestry and culture, they feel italian but they don't bash greeks from greece either, and they don't get in argument claiming that pitagora was italic, they claim he was greek, and let them recognise him as one of their culture but as well of the culture of magna grecia in italy.

 

[Elias2]

Macedonia Region before 1913 was inhabited by ethnic Macedonians 80-90%. Called themselfs Macedonians and nothing more. Ethnic Macedonians was expelled from their country and resettled by christian Turks, majority today in the Greek Region of Macedonia who are calling themselfs Macedonians (Fake Macedonians) today when Greece took over the occupied Macedonia in 1913.
End of Story.

Is that why so many ethonographical mappers from around that time period when designing theri maps added absolutely NO macedonians? Give it up.

Austian ethnographer Ami Boue, outsider of the balkan presenting his map of the balkans in 1847:


Taking a look at this map it is clear why Bulgaria thought itself cheated after the first balkan war when Greece and Serbia acuired alot of land that contained bulgarians, thus went to war against the former for more, which failed.

 

[Elias2]

Modern greece was founded on two populations of people; Greeks and Arvanites, which are orthodox christian albanians. Arvanites were essential in helping Greece during the war of idependance from the Ottomans.

Arvanites:

Arvanites (Greek: Αρβανίτες, Arvanitika: Arbëreshë or Αρbε̰ρεσ̈ε̰) are a population group in Greece who traditionally speak Arvanitika, a dialect of the Albanian language. They settled in Greece during the late Middle Ages and were the dominant population element of some regions of the Peloponnese and Attica until the 19th century.[1] Arvanites today self-identify as Greeks[2][3][4] as the result of a process of assimilation, and do not consider themselves to belong to Albania or the Albanian nation.[5] They call themselves Arvanites (in Greek) and Arbëror (in their language); the communities in northern Greece also use the term Shqiptar (the same used by Albanians of Albania), a term strongly disliked by all the other Arvanites, who also resent being called Albanians.[3]

The christian "turks" Dejavu is talking about were thracian and anatolian greeks that fled after the pontic genocide. many resettled in northern greece.

During World War I and its aftermath (1914–1923), the government of the Ottoman Empire instigated a violent campaign against the Greek population of the Empire. The campaign included massacres, forced deportations involving death marches, and summary expulsions. According to various sources, several hundred thousand Ottoman Greeks died during this period.[1] Some of the survivors and refugees, especially those in Eastern provinces, took refuge in the neighbouring Russian Empire. After the end of the 1919–22 Greco-Turkish War, most of the Greeks remaining in the Ottoman Empire were transferred to Greece under the terms of the 1923 population exchange between Greece and Turkey.

According to various sources the Greek death toll in the Pontus region of Anatolia ranges from 300,000 to 360,000. Estimates for the death toll of Anatolian Greeks as a whole are significantly higher.
According to the International League for the Rights and Liberation of Peoples, between 1916 and 1923, up to 350,000 Greek Pontians were reportedly killed in massacres, persecution and death marches.[31] Merrill D. Peterson cites the death toll of 360,000 for the Greeks of Pontus.[32] According to George K. Valavanis "The loss of human life among the Pontian Greeks, since the Great War (World War I) until March 1924, can be estimated at 353,000, as a result of murders, hangings, and from punishment, disease, and other hardships."[33]
Constantine G Hatzidimitriou writes that "loss of life among Anatolian Greeks during the WWI period and its aftermath was approximately 735,370."[34] Edward Hale Bierstadt states that "According to official testimony, the Turks since 1914 have slaughtered in cold blood 1,500,000 Armenians, and 500,000 Greeks, men women and children, without the slightest provocation.".[35] At the Lausanne conference in late 1922 the British Foreign Minister Lord Curzon is recorded as saying "a million Greeks have been killed, deported or have died."[36]

 

[Elias2]

Next time you call these poeple christian turks, think before you speak.

 

[iapetoc]

Modern greece was founded on two populations of people; Greeks and Arvanites, which are orthodox christian albanians. Arvanites were essential in helping Greece during the war of idependance from the Ottomans.

Well we are not sure about them,
many lingustic as many genetists, do not put Arbanites in the Albanians,
the only sure is that majority of Arbanites 150 000 in 1981 is simmilar tosk speaking,
in fact modern archaologiacal proves that the city the Albanians call Albanopolis is not the claydius ptolemy Albanopolis, and not the Arbanon of Anna Comneni

We cannot be certain that the Arbanon of Anna Comnena is the same as Albanopolis of the Albani, a place located on the map of Ptolemy
Wilkes, J. J. The Illyrians, 1992

in fact modern Genetic and theories are connecting Albanians with Transylvania (Cumans or Thracians, or south Slavic) ,
and Arbanites with Italy and Illyria proprie dicti

Even Arbanites great scientists are confused about that,
they are only certain in that they speak a language-dialect simmilar to tosk, but with another syntax.
so Arbanites which were in first National gathering and counsils, are not considered minority but founders,
remember that in ottoman occupation allowed languages exept Turk was the Albanian, the Arabic and the Russian in many areas where Greek was forbiden,

 

[DejaVu]

if you warship alexander the great ---->then you warship an hellenistic culture---->then you feel hellene---->you feel akin to greeks.

Just admit it, also southern italy has greek ancestry and culture, they feel italian but they don't bash greeks from greece either, and they don't get in argument claiming that pitagora was italic, they claim he was greek, and let them recognise him as one of their culture but as well of the culture of magna grecia in italy.

You dont know nothing and your statement is empty, why dont you link to the evidence of ancient macedonians are greeks? Greek country never existed and is unvalid do you understand that there is no ancient greeks they are gone forever same is for the romans. There are pretenders only = fake.
Self-determination exist and its free for all people and countries, not exclusive for some only.

This is what happens when the Romans ruled, they used falsification of territory and identity of people.

The "Sklavinias" in the Balkans, 7th–8th centuries

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sclaviniae



Sklavinia(i) (Greek: Σκλαβινίαι, Latin: SCLAVINIAE) was the Greek term for the Slav settlements (area, territory) which were initially out of Byzantine control and independent. The term may be interpreted as "Slav lands" in Byzantium. The term is derived from the name Sclaveni, which was used to describe all Slavic peoples with whom the Byzantine Empire came in contact. The Sclaviniae of the Byzantine Empire eventually became South Slavic nations:

• The Serbs became allies to the Byzantine Emperor (hypekooi) and eventually became independent.
• The Bulgars fought the Byzantine Empire and were through a peace treaty after 680 recognized as an independent state, they subsequently merged with the Slavs in Eastern Balkans into the modern nation of Bulgarians.

Collapse of the Western Empire (395–476)


What was slavic people?
Was all Sclaviniae same people, or was it again a roman way to describe all people outside the borders of Rome as it was before, Barbarians (Germania was not inhabited only of todays Germans)?
Did the Romans ask the people what they were, dont think so, they did not care.
​

 

[DejaVu]

MACEDONIA IS NOT GREEK! MACEDONIA IS MACEDONIA! NEVER WAS GREEK AND NEVER WILL BE!


Map of Homeric Greece


Homer - Greek epic poet.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homer

HERODOTUS

CONCLUSION

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



Herodotus - Greek historian.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herodotus

Thucydides - Greek historian.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thucydides

Eugene Borza - Professor emeritus of ancient history.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_N._Borza

In 351 the great Athenian orator Demosthenes delivered the first of his Philippics, a series of speeches warning the Athenians about the Macedonian menace to Greek liberty. The great Athenian statesman, spoke of Philip II: "... not only no Greek, nor related to the Greeks, but not even a barbarian from any place that can be named with honors, but a pestilent knave from Macedonia, whence it was never yet possible to buy a decent slave."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_N._Borza
Eugene N. Borza was a professor emeritus of ancient history at Pennsylvania State University. He has written many works on the ancient kingdom of Macedonia.



Published works

• 1962 - The Bacaudae: A Study of Rebellion in Late Roman Gaul (University of Chicago, Department of History)
• 1974 - The Impact of Alexander the Great (Dryden Press, ISBN 003090000X)
• 1990 - In the Shadow of Olympus: The Emergence of Macedon (Princeton University Press, ISBN 0691008809)
• 1995 - Makedonika (Regina Books, ISBN 0941690652)

Eugene Borza

Who Were (and Are) the Macedonians?
(Abstract from a paper presented at the 1996 Annual meeting of the American PhilologicalAssociation http://www.apaclassics.org/AnnualMeeting/96program.html)
This paper seeks to illuminate the problems associated with determining the ethnicity of the ancient Macedonians (were
they Greek?), and to discuss the "reverberations" (to use the organizers' term) of that issue in modem times. While the
1971 OED may regard the use of the word "ethnicity" as obsolete, no adequate substitute for the word exists. Indeed,
part of the discussion in my paper will, following the lead of Loring Danforth in his recent The Macedonian Conflict.-
Ethnic Nationalism in a Transnational World (Princeton 1995), attempt to illustrate some principles by which the "ethnicity"
of the ancient Macedonians--and, perhaps, other ancient peoples--can be discussed in a coherent manner.

Among the questions asked as appropriate to a methodological model of determining ethnicity are:

I. What were a people's origins and what language did they speak? From the surviving literary sources
(Hesiod, Herodotus, and Thucydides) there is little information about Macedonian origins, and the
archaeological data from the early period is sparse and inconclusive. On the matter of language, and despite
attempts to make Macedonian a dialect of Greek, one must accept the conclusion of the linguist R. A.
Crossland in the recent CAH, that an insufficient amount of Macedonian has survived to know what language
it was. But it is clear from later sources that Macedonian and Greek were mutually unintelligible in the court
of Alexander the Great. Moreover, the presence in Macedonia of inscriptions written in Greek is no more
proof that the Macedonians were Greek than, e.g., the existence of Greek inscriptions on Thracian vessels
and coins proves that the Thracians were Greeks.

II. Self-identity: what did the Macedonians say or think about themselves? Virtually nothing has survived
from the Macedonians themselves (they are among the silent peoples of antiquity), and very little remains in
the Classical and Hellenistic non-Macedonian sources about Macedonian attitudes.

III. What did others say about the Macedonians? Here there is a relative abundance of information from
Arrian, Plutarch (Alexander, Eumenes), Diodorus 17-20, Justin, Curtius Rufus, and Nepos (Eumenes),
based upon Greek and Greek-derived Latin sources. It is clear that over a five-century span of writing in two
languages representing a variety of historiographical and philosophical positions the ancient writers regarded
the Greeks and Macedonians as two separate and distinct peoples whose relationship was marked by
considerable antipathy, if not outright hostility.

IV. What is the nature of cultural expressions as revealed by archaeology? As above we are blessed with an
increasing amount of physical evidence revealing information about Macedonian tastes in art and decoration,
religion, political and economic institutions, architecture and settlement patterns. Clearly the Macedonians
were in many respects Hellenized, especially on the upper levels of their society, as demonstrated by the
excavations of Greek archaeologists over the past two decades. Yet there is much that is different, e. g., their
political institutions, burial practices, and religious monuments.

I will argue that, whoever the Macedonians were, they emerged as a people distinct from the Greeks who lived to the south and east. In time their royal court--which probably did not have Greek origins (the tradition in Herodotus that the Macedonian kings were descended from Argos is probably a piece of Macedonian royal propaganda)--became Hellenized in many respects, and I shall review the influence of mainstream Greek culture on architecture, art, and literary preferences.
​

 

[DejaVu]

Bible information.

DANIEL 8:20-21
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/calc...html?bcb=right
20. The ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia.
21. And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king.
By the word “Javan” the Hebrews designate not only the Greeks but the: Macedonians, and the whole of that tract which is divided by the Hellespont, from Asia Minor as far as Illyricum. Therefore the meaning is — the king of Greece.


http://www.openbible.info/

Acts 16:9 A vision appeared to Paul in the night. There was a man of Macedonia standing, begging him, and saying, "Come over into Macedonia and help us."

Acts 16:10 When he had seen the vision, immediately we sought to go out to Macedonia, concluding that the Lord had called us to preach the Good News to them.
Acts 16:12 and from there to Philippi, which is a city of Macedonia, the foremost of the district, a Roman colony. We were staying some days in this city.
Acts 18:5 But when Silas and Timothy came down from Macedonia, Paul was compelled by the Spirit, testifying to the Jews that Jesus was the Christ.
Acts 19:21 Now after these things had ended, Paul determined in the spirit, when he had passed through Macedonia and Achaia, to go to Jerusalem, saying, "After I have been there, I must also see Rome."
Acts 19:22 Having sent into Macedonia two of those who served him, Timothy and Erastus, he himself stayed in Asia for a while.
Acts 20:1 After the uproar had ceased, Paul sent for the disciples, took leave of them, and departed to go into Macedonia.
Acts 20:3 When he had spent three months there, and a plot was made against him by Jews as he was about to set sail for Syria, he determined to return through Macedonia.
Romans 15:26 For it has been the good pleasure of Macedonia and Achaia to make a certain contribution for the poor among the saints who are at Jerusalem.
1 Corinthians 16:5 But I will come to you when I have passed through Macedonia, for I am passing through Macedonia.
2 Corinthians 1:16 and by you to pass into Macedonia, and again from Macedonia to come to you, and to be sent forward by you on my journey to Judea.
2 Corinthians 2:13 I had no relief for my spirit, because I didn't find Titus, my brother, but taking my leave of them, I went out into Macedonia.
2 Corinthians 7:5 For even when we had come into Macedonia, our flesh had no relief, but we were afflicted on every side. Fightings were outside. Fear was inside.
2 Corinthians 8:1 Moreover, brothers, we make known to you the grace of God which has been given in the assemblies of Macedonia;
2 Corinthians 9:2 for I know your readiness, of which I boast on your behalf to them of Macedonia, that Achaia has been prepared for a year past. Your zeal has stirred up very many of them.
2 Corinthians 11:9 When I was present with you and was in need, I wasn't a burden on anyone, for the brothers, when they came from Macedonia, supplied the measure of my need. In everything I kept myself from being burdensome to you, and I will continue to do so.
Philippians 4:15 You yourselves also know, you Philippians, that in the beginning of the Good News, when I departed from Macedonia, no assembly shared with me in the matter of giving and receiving but you only.
1 Thessalonians 1:7 so that you became an example to all who believe in Macedonia and in Achaia.
1 Thessalonians 1:8 For from you the word of the Lord has been declared, not only in Macedonia and Achaia, but also in every place your faith toward God has gone out; so that we need not to say anything.
1 Thessalonians 4:10 for indeed you do it toward all the brothers who are in all Macedonia. But we exhort you, brothers, that you abound more and more; 1 Timothy 1:3 As I urged you when I was going into Macedonia, stay at Ephesus that you might command certain men not to teach a different doctrine,

If Greece is same as Macedonia why dont they use the name Greece?



Bible Study Lesson for Acts 20:1-6: Through Macedonia and Greece

Acts chapter 20 can be broken up into two short and one long section. Verses 1-6 briefly describes Paul's travels in Macedonia and Greece. Verses 7-12 describes the story of how a young man named Eutychus was raised from the dead. Verses 13-38 describes Paul's emotional farewell to the elders from Ephesus.

Read Acts 20:1. Paul, remember, is currently on his third missionary journey. { Hand out books with the third missionary journey maps. Ask them to find Ephesus on their maps } My commentary said Paul had four main things he wanted to accomplish: 1) Leave Ephesus; 2) preach in Troas on his way to Macedonia { Ask the group to find Troas on their maps }; 3) meet Titus at Troas with a report from Corinth. This is based on 2 Corinthians 2:12-13; and 4) continue collecting an offer for the church in Judea. This is based on 1 Corinthians 16:1-4, 2 Corinthians 8:1-4. The Jerusalem church, at this time, may have been poverty stricken either because of famine or because of persecution.

Read Acts 20:2-3. Luke does not give us specifics about Paul's travel through Macedonia into Greece, but it is believed that the three months spent in Greece was in Corinth. { Ask group to look at their maps again and trace Paul's estimated path from Ephesus to Corinth } My commentary said that these three months were probably the winter months, when it would not have been safe to sail. It is during his time in Corinth that he would have received the collection for the relief of the Judean Christians. { Put up symbol of money bags on flannel board }

When Paul's three months are up, he wants to sail back to Syria (that is Antioch), but discovers a plot against him. My commentary proved this information: "The Jews were determined to take Paul's life; also, at this time he was carrying the offering for the Christians in Judea, so there would have been a temptation for theft as well. The port at Cenchrea would have provided a convenient place for Paul's enemies to detect him as he entered a ship to embark for Syria." So, at the last minute, it sounds like, he changes his mind and decides to retrace his route through Greece and Macedonia.

Why is Macedonia and Greece mentioned as separate countries/nationalities?
Because they are different nations/nationality since the beginning of existence.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Testament
The New Testament (Greek: Καινὴ Διαθήκη, Kainē Diathēkē) is the second major division of the Christian biblical canon, the first such division being the much longer Old Testament.
The common languages spoken by both Jews and Gentiles in the Holy Land at the time of Jesus were Aramaic, Koine Greek, and to a limited extent a colloquial dialect of Mishnaic Hebrew. All of the books that would eventually form the New Testament were written in Koine Greek, the vernacular dialect in the Roman provinces of the Eastern Mediterranean at the time. These books were later translated into other languages, most notably, Latin, Syriac, and Coptic. However, some of the Church Fathers imply or claim that Matthew was originally written in Hebrew or Aramaic. Nevertheless, the Gospel of Matthew known today was composed in Greek and is neither directly dependent upon nor a translation of a text in a Semitic language, though the citation of texts from the Old Testament demonstrates that the author of the Gospel of Matthew did know Hebrew.

DOES NOT SAY IT WAS WRITTEN BY ANY GREEK (Koine was not exclusive for Greeks only).

Grecians - Greeks (All non-Jews)
http://www.bible-history.com/isbe/G/GRECIANS;+GREEKS/
In the Old Testament the word "Grecians" occurs but once (Joel 3 (4):6). For references to Greece in the Old Testament see JAVAN. In the King James Version of the Old Testament Apocrypha "Grecians" and "Greeks" are used without distinction, e.g. 1 Macc 1:10; 6:2; 8:9; 2 Macc 4:15,36. Thus, in 1 Macc 1:1, Alexander the Great is spoken of as king of Greece, and in 1 Macc 1:10 the Macedonian empire is called "the kingdom of the Greeks" (basileia Hellenon). In 2 Macc 13:2 the army of Antiochus, king of Syria, is called "Grecian" (dunamis Hellenike), and in 2 Macc 6:8 the "Greek cities" (poleis Hellenides) are Macedonian colonies. Reference is made in 2 Macc 6:1 to an aged Athenian who was sent by Antiochus the king charged with the duty of Hellenizing the Jews; in 2 Macc 9:15 Antiochus vows that he will make the Jews equal to the Athenians; in 1 Macc 12 through 14, reference is made to negotiations of Jonathan, the high priest, with the Spartans, whom he calls brethren, seeking the renewal of a treaty of alliance and amity against the Syrians. With the spread of Greek power and influence, everything not specifically Jewish was called Greek; thus in 2 Macc 4:36; 11:2; 3 Macc 3:3,1 the "Greeks" contrasted with the Jews are simply non-Jews, so called because of the prevalence of Greek institutions and culture, and "Greek" even came to be used in the sense of "anti-Jewish" (2 Macc 4:10,15; 6:9; 11:24).
In Isa 9:12 the Septuagint reads tous Hellenas, for Pelishtim, "Philistines"; but we are not therefore justified in assuming a racial connection between the Philistines and the Greeks. Further light on the ethnography of the Mediterranean
basin may in time show that there was actually such a connection; but the rendering in question proves nothing, since "the oppressing sword" of Jer 46:16 and 50:16 is likewise rendered in the Septuagint with "the sword of the Greeks" (machaira Hellenike). In all these cases the translators were influenced by the conditions existing in their own day, and were certainly not disclosing obscure relations long forgotten and newly discovered.
In the New Testament, English Versions of the Bible attempts to distinguish between (Hellenes), which is rendered "Greeks," and (Hellenistai), which is rendered "Grecians" or "Grecian Jews," or in the Revised Version, margin "Hellenists," e.g. Acts 6:1; 9:29. These latter were Jews of the Dispersion, who spoke Greek (see HELLENISM; HELLENIST), as distinguished from Palestinian Jews; but since many of the latter also spoke Greek by preference, the distinction could in no sense be absolute. Indeed in Jn 7:35, "the Dispersion among (the Revised Version, margin, Greek "of") the Greeks," can hardly refer to any but "Grecian Jews" (Hellenistai), although Hellenes is used, and in Jn 12:20 the "Greeks" (Hellenes) who went up to worship at the feast of the Passover were almost certainly "Grecian Jews" (Hellenistai). Thus, while English Versions of the Bible consistently renders Hellenes with "Greeks," we are not by that rendering apprised of the real character of the people so designated. This difficulty is aggravated by the fact, already noted in connection with the Old Testament Apocrypha, that, in consequence of the spread of Hellenism, the term Hellenes was applied not only to such as were of Hellenic descent, but also to all those who had appropriated the language of Greece, as the universal means of communication, and the ideals and customs collectively known as Hellenism. The latter were thus in the strict sense Hellenists, differing from the "Grecians" of English Versions of the Bible only in that they were not of Jewish descent. In other words, Hellenes (except perhaps in Jn 7:35 and 12:20, as noted above) is, in general, equivalent to ta ethne, "Gentiles" (see GENTILES). The various readings of the manuscripts (and hence the difference between the King James Version and the Revised Version (British and American)) in 1 Cor 1:23 well illustrate this. There is consequently much confusion, which it is quite impossible, with our limited knowledge of the facts in particular cases, to clear up. In general, it would seem probable that where "Greeks" are comprehensively contrasted with "Jews," the reference is to "Gentiles," as in Acts 14:1; 17:4; 18:4; 19:10,17; 20:21; Rom 1:16; 10:12; 1 Cor 1:22-24 (the Revised Version (British and American) "Gentiles," representing ethnesin; Gal 3:28; Col 3:11. In Mk 7:26 the woman of Tyre, called "a Greek (the Revised Version, margin "Gentile") a Syrophoenician," was clearly not of Hellenic descent. Whether Titus (Gal 2:3) and the father of Timothy; (Acts 16:1,3) were in the strict sense "Greeks," we have no means of knowing. In Rom 1:14, "I am debtor both to Greeks and to Barbarians," there is an undoubted reference to Greeks strictly so called; possibly, though by no means certainly, the "Greeks" of Acts 21:28, alluding to Trophimus the Ephesian (Acts 21:29), are to be taken in the same sense. References to the Greek language occur in Jn 19:20 (Lk 23:38 is properly omitted in the Revised Version (British and American)); Acts 21:37; Rev 9:11.
In Acts 11:20 the manuscripts vary between Hellenistas, and Hellenas (the King James Version "Grecians," the Revised Version (British and American) "Greeks"), with the preponderance of authority in favor of the former; but even if one adopts the latter, it is not clear whether true Greeks or Gentiles are intended.
William Arthur Heidel


Acts 17 Commentary
http://www.preceptaustin.org/acts_17_commentary.htm

http://www.aboutbibleprophecy.com/p66.htm
Silas was a leading member of the first Christian community in Jerusalem and a colleague of Paul. In the epistles 2 Corinthians and 1 Thessalonians, he is called by a Roman name, Silvanus. He might have been a Roman citizen (Acts 16:37). In Jerusalem he was a prophet who preached (Acts 15:32) and was sent to Antioch, along with Paul and Barnabas, to convey resolutions adopted at the council of Jerusalem (Acts 15:22).

http://www.bible-history.com/isbe/G/GENTILES/
jen'-tilz (goy, plural goyim; ethnos, "people," "nation"): Goy (or Goi) is rendered "Gentiles" in the King James Version in some 30 passages, but much more frequently "heathen," and oftener still, "nation," which latter is the usual rendering in the Revised Version (British and American), but it, is commonly used for a non-Israelitish people, and thus corresponds to the meaning of Gentiles." It occurs, however, in passages referring to the Israelites, as in Gen 12:2; Dt 32:28; Josh 3:17; 4:1; 10:13; 2 Sam 7:23; Isa 1:4; Zeph 2:9, but the word (`am) is the term commonly used for the people of God. In the New Testament ethnos is the word corresponding to goy in the Old Testament and is rendered "Gentiles" by both VSS, while (laos) is the word which corresponds to `am. The King James Version also renders Hellenes, "Gentiles" in six passages (Jn 7:35; Rom 2:9,10; 3:9; 1 Cor 10:32; 12:13), but the Revised Version (British and American) renders "Greeks."
The Gentiles were far less sharply differentiated from the Israelites in Old Testament than in New Testament times. Under Old Testament regulations they were simply non-Israelites, not from the stock of Abraham, but they were not hated or despised for that reason, and were to be treated almost on a plane of equality, except certain tribes in Canaan with regard to whom there were special regulations of non-intercourse. The Gentile stranger enjoyed the hospitality of the Israelite who was commanded to love him (Dt 10:19), to sympathize with him, "For ye know the heart of the stranger, seeing ye were strangers in the land of Egypt" (Ex 23:9 the King James Version). The Kenites were treated almost as brethren, especially the children of Rechab (Jdg 1:16; 5:24; Jer 35). Uriah the Hittite was a trusted warrior of David (2 Sam 11); Ittai the Gittite was captain of David's guard (2 Sam 18:2); Araunah the Jebusite was a respected resident of Jerusalem. The Gentiles had the right of asylum in the cities of refuge, the same as the Israelites (Nu 35:15). They might even possess Israelite slaves (Lev 25:47), and a Gentileservant must not be defrauded of his wage (Dt 24:15). They could inherit in Israel even as late as the exile (Ezek 47:22,23). They were allowed to offer sacrifices in the temple at Jerusalem, as is distinctly affirmed by Josephus (BJ, II, xvii, 2-4; Ant, XI, viii, 5; XIII, viii, 2; XVI, ii, 1; XVIII, v, 3; CAp, II, 5), and it is implied in the Levitical law (Lev 22:25). Prayers and sacrifices were to be offered for Gentilerulers (Jer 29:7; Baruch 1:10,11; Ezr 6:10; 1 Macc 7:33; Josephus, BJ, II, x, 4). Gifts might be received from them (2 Macc 5:16; Josephus, Ant, XIII, iii, 4; XVI, vi, 4; BJ, V, xiii, 6; CAp, II, 5). But as we approach the Christian era the attitude of the Jews toward the Gentiles changes, until we find, in New Testament times, the most extreme aversion, scorn and hatred. They were regarded as unclean, with whom it was unlawful to have any friendly intercourse. They were the enemies of God and His people, to whom the knowledge of God was denied unless they became proselytes, and even then they could not, as in ancient times, be admitted to full fellowship. Jews were forbidden to counsel them, and if they asked about Divine things they were to be cursed. All children born of mixed marriages were bastards. That is what caused the Jews to be so hated by Greeks and Romans, as we have abundant evidence in the writings of Cicero, Seneca and Tacitus. Something of this is reflected in the New Testament (Jn 18:28; Acts 10:28; 11:3).
If we inquire what the reason of this change was we shall find it in the conditions of the exiled Jews, who suffered the bitterest treatment at the hands of their Gentile captors and who, after their return and establishment in Judea, were in constant conflict with neighboring tribes and especially with the Greek rulers of Syria. The fierce persecution of Antiochus IV, who attempted to blot out their religion and Hellenize the Jews, and the desperate struggle for independence, created in them a burning patriotism and zeal for their faith which culminated in the rigid exclusiveness we see in later times.
H. Porter ​

​

 

[DejaVu]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Why the Byzantine Empire was not a "Greek Empire"?[/FONT]

Within the last two centuries, we have seen the western literature label the Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantine Empire) as "Greek Empire". Once again this is largely to the inventions and distortions of the western historians of the 19th century, who also falsely ascribed "Greek" ethnicity to the ancient Macedonians. These people took the fact that Greek was used as the language of the Empire and declared that the Empire was ruled by "Greeks", had "Greek" armies, "Greek" churches, and "Greek" art. In other words they spoke of the Byzantine Empire as a "Greek Empire", a view which had been completely supported and propagated by the modern Greeks as well.
Along with distorting the ethnicity of the ancient Macedonians, the labeling of the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire into "Greek" is one of the greatest fabrications of the western and modern Greek writers. Although it is true that Greek was used as the language of the Empire, that can not be taken as proof that the empire was "Greek". Latin was the original official language, imposed by the Romans who established and ruled the Roman Empire. In 395 AD when the Roman Empire split into western and eastern (Byzantine), Latin continued to be used as the official language but in time it was replaced by Greek as that language was already widely spoken among the Eastern Mediterranean nations as the main trade language. Yet the Emperors, the Church clergy, the army, and the artists, although they spoke Latin and Greek, where not exclusively of Greek ethnicity. The Empire was made up of many nationalities - Thracians, Macedonians, Illyrians, Bythinians, Carians, Phrygians, Armenians, Lydians, Galatians, Paphlagonians, Lycians, Syrians, Cilicians, Misians, Cappadocians, etc. The Greeks composed only a small portion of this multi-ethnic Empire and evidence shows that they did not posses much of the power either, for we know exactly who were the Byzantine Emperors, and we know they were not ethnic Greeks.

The earlier Byzantine Emperors were Romans but in time people of different ethnic backgrounds ruled this multi-ethnic empire. It is known that the empire reached its zenith while it was ruled by the Macedonians while the Macedonian Dynasty was on power for almost two centuries. Other dynasties that ruled were the Syrian, Armenian, Phrygian (Amorian), and other emperors were of various nationalities. Having in mind the ethnic diversity of the empire, the Church clergy, the army, and the artists, also came from the many different nationalities, and were not exclusively ethnic Greeks. The Byzantine historians often speak of "Macedonian army", "Thracian army", "Roman army". The Thracians, Macedonians, Illyrians, Bythinians, Carians, Phrygians, Armenians, Lydians, Galatians, Paphlagonians, Lycians, Syrians, Cilicians, Misians, Cappadocians, had to speak Latin and Greek in order to communicate among themselves, but they must have used their original languages to communicate within their own ethnic boundaries, which of course does not make them "Greeks".

Thus it is inaccurate to call the Byzantine Empire a "Greek Empire" and falsely ascribe its greatness to the Greeks, when in fact it is the non-Greeks who gave the greatest contribution in its progress. The inaccurate 19th century western historiography needs another major revision, just like the one it already went through regarding the ethnicity of the ancient Macedonians. Otherwise it will continue to be unreliable and biased.
​

 

[DejaVu]

Who are the Modern Greeks?

The first constitution of Greece 1827.

The 1st Constitution of the Greek State, in the year 1827.
??? —> 4. Provinces of Greece are all those that were taken and will be taken by weapons against the Ottoman Dynasty.
1) —> 6. Greeks are:
2) —> a. All those indigenous people of the Greek State who believe in Christ.
3) —> b. All those, believers in Christ, who under the Ottoman slavery, came or they will come to the Greek State to struggle or to reside in it.
4) —> e. All those aliens, who come and enrol as citizens.
NOTE: To become a Greek, it was enough to be a Christian!
​

This document proves that Greeks have a very short memory. They do not remember how the Greek State was made and also who the modern Greeks are.
Why should we Macedonians have to prove that we are Macedonians since antiquity when the Greeks do not have to prove anything for being Greeks.
The fact is that about 180 years ago anybody who was a Christian in the Greek State became a Greek automatically, why does that not bother the modern Greeks?
You see, if someone was a Jew or a Muslim or a Catholic, he/she was excluded immediately. Let us now ask ourselves what is Greek racism and were did it come from?
Just read the above document and you will know why, Greek is a manufactured ethnicity.

Rigas the Vlach defines who is a Greek 1797!

Source: “The Movement for Greek Independence, 1770-1821: A Collection of Documents” by Richard Clogg, 1976.

I hope that you readers will understand that anyone could be a Greek, the rules for becoming a Greek was not that harsh, thus Greeks claiming a 4000 year old ancestry become quite ridiculous.
When they do not even have a 200 year old history.
They are a modern fabrication of the thinkers and philhellenes of the day, which was materialized in absurdum when the “pure” Greek king from Bavaria, King Othon the Hellene started to rule his kingdom.
Which prior to his rule had never existed in history.
Greece is a modern myth.​

​

 

[DejaVu]

The Flag Dispute between Greece and the Republic of Macedonia​

Introduction
​

Official Greece accuses its northern neighbour, the Republic of Macedonia for "stealing the Ancient Greek heritage", which according to the Greek side also includes Ancient Macedonia and its symbols, one of them being the so called Sun of Vergina. The symbol was once used as an emblem on the flag of the Republic of Macedonia, which caused a dispute between the two countries (actually it was an unilateral protest from the Greek side).


Greece is so fast in accusing other nations for "stealing history" that she forgets that she is the one that actually stole a symbol of another nation- an old English flag:
http://spartaks.blogspot.com/2008/04...public-of.html​

 

[DejaVu]

Minority Violation

Human Rights Watch Report on Greece.
http://umdiaspora.org/content/view/203/9/

U.S. Department of State's Human Rights Report on Greece.
http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2006/78815.htm

MHRMI 2008 Annual Report on Greece.
http://mhrmi.org/news/2008/january27b_e.asp

European Free Alliance
http://www.e-f-a.org/home.php

21.05.09 Bulgarian authorities confiscate electoral materials RAINBOW party (21/05/2009)
Lack of democracy in Greece and Bulgaria.

The Bulgarian authorities already for several days have confiscated DVD's made in Bulgaria. The DVD's for unclarified reasons cannot cross the border in order to be used by the Party Rainbow in it's campaign for the European elections. Rainbow represents the Macedonian minority in Greece. The DVD contain information on the peacefull political struggle of the Macedonian (ignored and denied) minority in Greece. The Bulgarian authorities already since 2005 refuse to implement a European court of human rights decision to register the party Omo Ilinden Pirin. This party represents the Macedonian minority in Bulgaria. Both members states Bulgaria and Greece deny the existence of such minorities. The evidence of such existence fi the DVD's cannot see the light of day and therefore... are confiscated.

"Greece vigorously denies the existence of any ethnic minorities on its territory and attempts to suppress any voices that advocate human rights. Simply raising the issue of the Macedonian minority in Greece causes Greek citizens and politicians alike to react in outrage. The majority of Greek society supports its government's non-recognition and discrimination of its large Macedonian minority", said MHRMI president Bill Nicholov.​

 

[DejaVu]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Diodorus Siculus[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Ancient Greek Historian[/FONT]

The ancient Greek historian Diodorus wrote much of the history of Macedonia from the times of Philip II and Alexander the Great up to the last Macedonian king Perseus. In his writings, Diodorus is clear that the ancient Macedonians were a distinct nation, not related to any of the Balkan peoples (Greeks, Thracians, and Illyrians). The below 40 quotes from his books XVII, XVIII, XIX, XX, XXII, XXVIII, XXIX, XXXI, and XXXII are indeed an overwhelming proof of that:

[1] For even Greeks – Thespians, Plataeans and Orchomenians, and some other hostile to the Thebans who had joined the king (of the Macedonians) in the campaign. 17.13.5.

[2] For many days the king lay helpless under his treatment, and the Greeks who had been settled in Bactria and Sogdiana, who had long borne unhappily their sojourn among peoples of another race and now received word that the king has died of his wounds, revolted against the Macedonians. They formed a band of 3000 men and underwent great hardship on their homeward route. Later they were massacred by the Macedonians after Alexander’s death. 17.99.5-6.

[3] The Macedonians and Alexander backed Coragus because he was one of them while the Greeks favored Dioxippus. 17.100.4.

[4] Then the Macedonian (Coragus) poised his long lance and charged, but the Greek (Dioxippus), when he came within reach, struck the spear with his club and shuttered it. After these two defeats, Coragus was reduced to continuing the battle with sword, but as he reached for it, the other leaped upon him and seized his swordhand with his left, while with his right hand the Greek upset the Macedonian’s balance and made him lose his footing. 17.100.6-7

[5] He (Alexander the Great) was plainly disappointed at the defeat of the Macedonian. Dioxippus released his fallen opponent, and left the field winner of the resounding victory and bedecked with ribands by his compatriots, as having brought a common glory to all Greeks. 17.101.1-2.

[6] From Europe, the Greek cities AND the Macedonians also sent embassies, as well as the Illyrians and most of those who dwell about the Adriatic Sea, the Thracian peoples and even those of their neighbors the Gauls, whose people became known then first in the Greek world. 17.113.2.

[7] When Perdiccas heard of the revolt of the Greeks, he drew by lot from the Macedonians 3000 infantry and 800 horsemen. 18.7.3

[8] They (the Greeks) had more then 20000 foot soldiers and 3000 horse. 18.7.2. 3000 of these 23000 Greeks were led by a "traitor" who "left his allies without warning and withdrew to e certain hill, taking his 3000 men". 18.7.6.

[9] When oaths to this effect had been sworn and the Greeks were interspersed among the Macedonians, Pithon was greatly pleased, seeing that the affair was progressing according to his intentions; but the Macedonians remembering the orders of Perdiccas and having no regard for the oaths that had been sworn, broke faith with the Greeks. Setting upon them unexpectedly and catching them off their ground, they shot them all down with javelins and seized their possessions as plunder. Pithon then, cheated of his hopes, came back with the Macedonians to Perdiccas. 18.7.8-9

[10] When Alexander died a short time thereafter and left no sons as successors to the kingdom, the Athenians ventured to assert their liberty (from Macedonia) and to claim the leadership of the Greeks. 18.9.1

[11] When the Aetolians listened to him gladly they gave him 7000 soldiers, he sent to the Locrians and the Phocians and the other neighboring peoples and urged them to assist their freedom and rid Greece of the Macedonian despotism. 18.9.5.

[12] The decree of the Assembly of Athens: "people should assume responsibility for the common freedom of the Greeks and liberate the cities that were subject to (Macedonian) garrisons; that they should prepare 40 quadriremes and 200 triremes (ships); that all Athenians up to age of 40 should be enrolled; that three tribes should guard Attica, and that the other seven should be ready for campaign beyond the frontier; that envoys should be sent to visit the Greek cities and tell them that formerly the Athenian people, convinced that all Greece was the common fatherland of the Greeks, had fought by see against those (Macedonian) barbarians who had invaded Greece to enslave her, and that now too Athens believed it necessary to risk lives and money and ships in defense of the common safety of the Greeks." 18.10.1-3.

[13] Of the rest of the Greeks, some were well disposed toward the Macedonians, others remained neutral. 18.11.1

[14] A few of the Illyrians and the Thracians joined the alliance (with the Greeks) because of their hatred of the Macedonians. 18.11.1-2

[15] As soon as, however, as he learned of the movement concerted against him by the Greeks, he left Sippas as general of Macedonia, giving him a significant army and bidding him enlist as many men as possible, while he himself, taking 13000 Macedonians and 600 horsemen, set out from Macedonia to Thessaly (into Greece). 18.12.2

[16] Now that this great force had been added to the Athenians, the Greeks, who far outnumbered the Macedonians, were successful. 18.12.4

[17] As the Macedonians defended themselves stoutly, many of the Greeks who pushed on rashly were killed. 18.12.1-2

[18] Antiphilus, the Greek commander, having defeated the Macedonians in a glorious battle played a waiting game, remaining in Thessaly and watching for the enemy to move. The affairs of the Greeks were thus in thriving condition, but since the Macedonians had command of the sea, the Athenians made ready other ships… 18.15.7-8.

[19] Then after such a combat I have described, the battle was broken off, as the scales of victory swung in favour of the Macedonians. More then 500 of the Greeks were killed in the battle, and 130 of the Macedonians. 18.17.5

[20] The commandant of the garrison of that city, Archelaus, who was a Macedonian by RACE, welcomed Attalus and surrendered the city to him… 18.37.3-4.

[21] Seleucus and Pithon again tried to persuade the Macedonians to remove Eumenes from his command and to cease preferring against their own interests a man who was a foreigner and who had killed very many Macedonians. 19.13.1


[22] Peucestes (Macedonian commander) had 10000 Persian archers and slingers, 3000 men of every origin equipped for service in the Macedonian array, 600 Greek and Thracian cavalry and more then 400 Persian horsemen. 19.14.5.


[23] Although the risk involved in all these circumstances was clear, nonetheless she decided to remain there, hoping that many Greeks AND Macedonians would come to her aid by sea. 19.35.6.


[24] Then, after making a truce with the other Boeotians and leaving Eupolemus as general for Greece, he went into Macedonia, for he was apprehensive of the enemy’s crossings. 19.77.5-6

[25] In this year Antigonus ordered his general Ptolemaeus into Greece to set the Greeks free… 19.77.2


[26] Ptolemaeus, the general of Antigonus, had been placed in charge of affairs thoughout Greece; 19.87.3 (not in Macedonia).

[27] This was the situation in Asia and in Greece AND Macedonia. 19.105.4

[28] And first he planned to establish order in the affairs of Greece … and then go on against Macedonia itself if Cassander did not march against him. 20.102.1

[29] While these held office, Cassander, king of the Macedonians, on seeing that the power of the Greeks was increasing and that the whole war was directed against Macedonia, became much alarmed about the future. 20.106.1-2

[30] Demetrius was followed by 1500 horsemen, not less then 8000 Macedonian foot-soldiers, mercenaries to the number of 15000, 2500 from the cities throughout Greece. 20.110.4

[31] The utmost spirit or rivalry was not lacking on either side, for the Macedonians were bent on saving their ships, while the Siceliotes wished not only to be regarded as victors over the Carthaginians and the barbarians of Italy, but also to show themselves in the Greek arena as more then a match for the Macedonians, whose spears had subjected both Asia and Europe. 21.2.2

[32] Brennus, the king of the Gauls … invaded Macedonia and engaged in battle. Having in this conflict lost many man .. as lacking sufficient strength … when later he advanced into Greece and to the oracle of Delphi which he wished to plunder. 22.9.1-2

[33] A native of Terentum, Heracleides was a man of surprising wickedness, who had transformed Philip from a victorious king into a harsh and godless tyrant, and had thereby incurred the deep hatred of all Macedonians AND Greeks. 28.9.2

[34] Flamininus held that Philip (the Macedonian king) must completely evacuate Greece, which should thereafter be ungarrisoned and autonomous. 28.11.1

[35] To this Flamininus replied that there was no need of arbitration whom he ha wronged; furthermore he himself was under orders from the Senate to liberate Greece (from Macedonia). 28.11.3-4

[36] When the news of settlement reached him, Flamininus summoned the leading men of all Greece, and convoking an assembly repeated to them Rome’s good services to the Greeks. 28.13.2 (Macedonians excluded from the leading men of Greece)

[37] In defense of the settlement made with Nabis he (Flamininus) pointed out that the Romans had done what was in their power, and that in accordance with the declared policy of the Roman people all the inhabitants of Greece were now free (of Macedonia), ungarrisoned, and most important of all, governed by their own laws. 28.13.3

[38] Philip threatens the Greek Thessalians: "They were not aware, he said, that the Macedonian sun had not yet altogether set." 29.16.1-2

[39] He said, namely, that after seeing the sun rise as he was about to begin transporting his army from Italy to Greece… five day later he arrived in Macedonia. 31-11.2-4

[40] Having as his accomplice a certain harpist named Nicolaus, a Macedonian by birth… 32.15.9​

 

[DejaVu]

Victor A Friedman

"Macedonian slavic is the root to all slavic languages"

Victor Friedman received his B.A. in Russian Language and Literature from Reed College in 1970 and his Ph. D. in both Slavic Languages and Literatures and in General Linguistics from the University of Chicago in 1975. This was the first joint degree granted in the Division of the Humanities at Chicago, and his dissertation, “The Grammatical Categories of the Macedonian Indicative” won the Mark Perry Galler prize for the best dissertation in the Humanities Division that year. From 1975 to 1993 he taught in the Department of Slavic Languages at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, where he chaired the Department from 1987 to 1993. In 1993 he moved to the University of Chicago, where he is Andrew W. Mellon Professor in the Humanities with a joint appointment in Linguistics and Slavic Languages and Literatures and an associate appointment in Anthropology. He has over 200 publications, and The Grammatical Categories of the Macedonian Indicative (Slavica, 1977) was the first book on Modern Macedonian published in the United States.

Friedman has done fieldwork in the Balkans for over thirty-five years and has received research grants from Fulbright-Hays, IREX, ACLS, NEH, APS, etc. In 1982 he received the "1300 Years of Bulgaria" jubilee medal for contributions to the field of Bulgarian studies. In 1991 and again in 2003, he was awarded the University of Skopje Gold Plaque for contributions to the field of Macedonian studies, and in 1994 he was elected to the Macedonian Academy of Arts and Sciences. In 1995 he was elected to Matica Srpska, and in 2004 he was elected to the Academy of Arts and Sciences of Kosova. During the Yugoslav Wars of Succession, he worked as a Senior Policy and Political Analyst for the Analysis and Assessment Unit of the United Nations Protection Forces stationed in former Yugoslavia (summer 1994), joined a fact finding mission for the South Balkan Project of the Center for Preventive Action of the Council on Foreign Relations (1995-1997), consulted for the International Crisis Group (1997), and did some work with the United States Institute for Peace (1999-2000). He has been a visiting scholar at Cornell (Balkan linguistics, LSA summer institute 1997), University of Skopje (Balkan Identity, 1999), Central European University-Budapest (Romani linguistics 1999, 2001, 2003), Kyoto University (Balkan linguistics, 1999), National University of Malaysia (Southeast Europe/Southeast Asia: Comparative Perspectives, 2000), University of Helsinki (Balkan linguistics, 2000), University of Prishtina (Balkan and Caucasian linguistics, 2002), and LaTrobe University (Research Center for Linguistic Typology, Balkan linguistics, 2004).

Friedman’s research centers on grammatical categories (particularly the verb), language contact, and sociolinguistics (especially problems of variation and standardization) in the Balkans and the Caucasus. Owing to the intimate connections of language with politics and ethnic identity in these parts of the world, his work has of necessity been interdisciplinary. His publications deal with the following languages: Albanian, Aromanian (Vlah), Azeri, Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian (especially the Torlak dialects), Bulgarian, Georgian, Greek, Judezmo, Lak, Macedonian, Megleno-Romanian, Romani, Romanian, Russian, Tadjik, Turkish.

"We know what Ancient Greek, Latin, and Old Church Slavonic, and Sanskrit look liked, and we have Turkic texts going back to the 8th century. We know what these languages looked like in the early medieval period. For Albanian, our oldest significant texts are from the early modern period. We know these changes, these grammatical influences, were taking place in the late medieval and early Ottoman periods (although some are older in some languages). It was really in the Ottoman period that the Balkan languages as we know them today came to resemble one another."

"The Bulgarians didn’t have a state until the Russo-Turkish War of 1878."

"Arvanatika - Most precisely, it refers to the Albanian dialects of Greece that separated from the main body of Tosk Albanian 600-1000 years ago. The dialects were spoken on many Greek islands, the Peloponnese, and in Attica and Central Greece. Greeks don’st like to admit it, but they have had large Albanian-speaking populations for a very long time, not just post-Communist economic migrants. While these dialects are now moribund owing to hegemonistic Greek language policies, they can still be encountered in places like Livadhia."

"But already in the 19th century, Macedonian speakers were calling themselves Macedonians (Makedontsi), their language, Makedonski. This is documented.
Some Macedonian speakers identified as Bulgarians,Serbs, Greeks or Turks, depending on religious loyalties, but most of the time, speakers called themselves Christians or Turks (Muslims)."

Macedonian is the origin of all slavic languages Webster Dictionary year 1967-1969!

Taken from the Webster Dictionary 1967-1969.​

​

 

[DejaVu]

iGENEA http://www.igenea.com/

Genealogy . What is this?
A DNA genealogical test shows you the haplogroup (going back 60,000 years ago), the ancient tribe your ancestors belonged to and where your ancestors came from 40 generations ago, which takes you back to the 11th / 13th centuries. You receive information about the maternal and paternal lines. DNA genealogy also allows you to locate "genetic cousins," i.e. persons who share a common ancestor with you. When you exchange information, like family trees, with your "genetic cousins",you expand your knowledge of your own family history.

DNA genealogy – how does it work?
Information is encoded into your genes (DNA) that today give indications of your history and your ancestors. By analysing certain parts of your DNA and comparing the results with those of other persons, it is possible to find out whether you and those persons have shared ancestry.

A antic macedonian genetic profile exists and has been discovered through the comparison of archaeological funds and persons with macedonian roots. These studies enable us to determine the macedonian roots of a person. We have 30% of macedonians in Macedonia, 20% in Greece and minorities in Bulgaria and Albania.

I would like to know the specific distinction of how the antic Macedonian gene, is different from the Hellenic gene?

Yes, but the difference is not so big. The Hellenic profile demands specific allelvalues from the Y-DYS in Locus 2-8 and the macedonian profil from locus 2-10. The genetic profile is nearly identical, but the antic macedonian demands two more mutations.



Genetic Differences Between Macedonians in Greece and the Greeks.
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/29.../1155.abstract
http://www.historyofmacedonia.org/Co...Hromosomes.pdf

In the genetic analysis published by the Science Magazine of the American Association for
the Advancement of Science, participated Macedonians from the Macedonian minority of
Northern Greece (Aegean Macedonia) and Greeks, among with other European nations.


HLA genes in Macedonians and the sub-Saharan origin of the Greeks.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1...?dopt=Abstract
http://www.makedonika.org/processpai...id=ti.2001.pdf

Arnaiz-Villena A, Dimitroski K, Pacho A, Moscoso J, Gómez-Casado E, Silvera-Redondo C,
Varela P, Blagoevska M, Zdravkovska V, Martínez-Laso J.

Department of Immunology and Molecular Biology, H. 12 de Octubre, Universidad Complutense,
Madrid, Spain. [email protected]

HLA alleles have been determined in individuals from the Republic of Macedonia
by DNA typing and sequencing. HLA-A, -B, -DR, -DQ allele frequencies and extended
haplotypes have been for the first time determined and the results compared to those of other
Mediterraneans, particularly with their neighbouring Greeks. Genetic distances,
neighbor-joining dendrograms and correspondence analysis have been performed.
The following conclusions have been reached:

1) Macedonians belong to the "older" Mediterranean substratum,
like Iberians (including Basques), North Africans, Italians, French, Cretans, Jews, Lebanese,
Turks (Anatolians), Armenians and Iranians,
2) Macedonians are not related with geographically close Greeks,
who do not belong to the "older" Mediterranenan substratum
3) Greeks are found to have a substantial relatedness to sub-Saharan (Ethiopian) people,
which separate them from other Mediterranean groups.
Both Greeks and Ethiopians share quasi-specific DRB1 alleles.

 

[DejaVu]

There are 131 countries which makes more than 2/3 of the United Nations that recognize Republic of Macedonia under its constitutional name as of 18 January, Bolivia being the last one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macedonia_naming_dispute


List of countries/entities
(dark green) that use "Republic of Macedonia" in bilateral diplomatic relations.
(red) that use "the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" for all official purposes.
(green) whose official position on the issue is unknown.
(grey) that have no diplomatic relations with the country​