Macedonians

[how yes no 2]

There is obviously need for separate discussion about Macedonians.... who were ancient Macedonians...who are Macedonians of today?

Proof? because I can prove that they were bulgarians before WW2. There were macedonian dynasties during the eastern roman empire (Byzantine), like Basil the second, which fought and won against who they call their ansestors, czar samuel ect.

In all reality, this dispute isn't about what they call themselves, it's the territorial claims they make based on their imagined community. This is why Greece doesn't mind they use the term 'macedonia', as long as the is a prefix, like northern, Upper, New Macedonia ect, which distinuishes itself from the greek Macedonia. Bulgaria feels the same way and back greece on this.

stage is yours Elias...let's see your proof that Macedonians were Bulgarians before WW2... try to base your "proof" on credible historical sources....if any...

 

[Elias2]

Go to your local library and take out the book The Macedonian Conflict Ethnic nationalism in a Transnational World by Loring M. Danforth. This book explains well about this certain situation. Again, this naming dispute isn't about the ancient Macedonians, who were greeks, its about land claims during the balkan wars. Some quotes;

"Competing claims to Macedonia put foward by Serbia, Bulgaria, and Greece, led to the outbreak of the balkan wars in 1912. Wach state attempted to legitimate its territorial claims with arguments concerning the naitonal consciousness, ethnic identity, linguistic affiliation, and religious loyalty of the inhabitants of the area."

"With the establishment of an independant Bulagrian church knows as the Exarchate in 1870, Greece and Bulgaria began to compete openly for the loyalties of the slavic-speaking population of Macedonia, who had either a greek or a bulgarian national consciousness."

"The interwar Serbian (and later Yugoslav) government attempted quite unseccessfully to "serbianize" the slavs of Yugoslav Macedonia, who generally defined themselves as bulgarian."

"During World War two, Tito and the leaders of the Yugoslav communist Party adopted a new policy toward teh slavs of Macedonia. They decided to create a new nationality, the 'macedonian' nationality and they established the ;Peoples republic of Macedonia" in what had previously been known as 'southern serbia' or 'the vardar Banovina'. It was at this time that the name "macedonian" first began to be used to denote a specific ethnic or national group"

If you don't trust this source for whatever reason there is teh Turkish Millet system of governance you could take a look at.

"The basis of the Ottoman censuses was the millet system. People were assigned to ethnic categories according to religious affiliation. So all Sunni Muslims were categorised as Turks, all members of Greek Orthodox church as Greeks, while rest being divided between Bulgarian and Serb Orthodox churches.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_Macedonia#cite_note-Ortayli_2006_89-8-19" (wikipedia)

Ottoman census of Hilmi Pasha for the region of Macedonia (1906)

Muslims (Turks and Albanians) 423,000 (41.71%)
Greeks 259,000 (27.30%)
Bulgarians 178,000 (18.81%)
Serbs 13,150 (1.39%)
Others 73,000 (7.72%)


Encyclopaedia Britannica

The 1911 edition of the Encyclopædia Britannica gave the following statistical estimates about the population of Macedonia:

• Bulgarians (described in encyclopaedia as "Slavs, the bulk of which is regarded by almost all independent sources as Bulgarians", a statement referring to the controversy between Bulgaria and Serbia as to the national affinities of the Slavs of Macedonia): ca. 1,150,000, whereof, 1,000,000 Orthodox and 150,000 Muslims (called Pomaks)
• Turks: ca. 500,000 (Muslims)
• Greeks: ca. 250,000, whereof ca. 240,000 Orthodox and 14,000 Muslims
• Albanians: ca. 120,000, whereof 10,000 Orthodox and 110,000 Muslims
• Vlachs: ca. 90,000 Orthodox and 3,000 Muslims
• Jews: ca. 75,000
• Roma: ca. 50,000, whereof 35,000 Orthodox and 15,000 Muslims

In total 1,300,000 Christians (almost exclusively Orthodox), 800,000 Muslims, 75,000 Jews, a total population of ca. 2,200,000 for the whole of Macedonia.




My conclusion, to think this "name dispute" is about the ancient macedonians is partly false. This is about the events that happened form teh balkan war until today. The anceint macedonians were draged into this dispute because they were the originators of the name macedonian.


Alexander Quote:
If it were not my purpose to combine barbarian things with things Hellenic, to traverse and civilize every continent, to search out the uttermost parts of land and sea, to push the bounds of Macedonia to the farthest Ocean, and to disseminate and shower the blessings of the Hellenic justice and peace over every nation, I should not be content to sit quietly in the luxury of idle power, but I should emulate the frugality of Diogenes. But as things are, forgive me Diogenes, that I imitate Herakles, and emulate Perseus, and follow in the footsteps of Dionysos, the divine author and progenitor of my family, and desire that victorious Hellenes should dance again in India and revive the memory of the Bacchic revels among the savage mountain tribes beyond the Kaukasos…

• As quoted in "On the Fortune of Alexander" by Plutarch, 332 a-b

 

[Elias2]

Independent sources in Europe between 1878 and 1918 generally tended to view the Slavic population of Macedonia in two ways: as Bulgarians and as Macedonian Slavs. German scholar Gustav Weigand was one of the most prominent representatives of the first trend with the books Ethnography of Macedonia (1924, written 1919) and partially with The Aromanians (1905). The author described all ethnic groups living in Macedonia, showed empirically the close connection between the western Bulgarian dialects and the Macedonian dialects and defined the latter as Bulgarian. The International Commission constituted by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in 1913 to inquire into causes and conduct of the Balkan Wars also talked about the Slavs of Macedonia as about Bulgarians in its report published in 1914. The Commission had eight members from Great Britain, France, Austria-Hungary, Germany, Russia and the United States.

Ethnic groups in the Balkans and Asia Minor as of the early 20th Century (William R. Shepherd, Historical Atlas, 1911).



Distribution of races in the Balkan Peninsula and Asia Minor in 1918 (National Geographic)



Distribution of races in the Balkan Peninsula and Asia Minor in 1922, Racial Map Of Europe by Hammond & Co.



Ethnographical Map of Central and Southeastern Europe - The War Office, 1916, London.


The term "Macedonian Slavs" was used by scholars and publicists in three general meanings:

• as a politically convenient term to define the Slavs of Macedonia without offending Serbian and Bulgarian nationalism;
• as a distinct group of Slavs different from both Serbs and Bulgarians, yet closer to the Bulgarians and having predominantly Bulgarian ethnical and political affinities;
• as a distinct group of Slavs different from both Serbs and Bulgarians having no developed national consciousness and no fast ethnical and political affinities (the definition of Cvijic).

An instance of the use of the first meaning of the term was, for example, the ethnographic map of the Slavic peoples published in (1890) by Russian scholar Zarjanko, which identified the Slavs of Macedonia as Bulgarians. Following an official protest from Serbia the map was later reprinted identifying them under the politically correct name "Macedonian Slavs".
The term was used in a completely different sense by British journalist Henry Brailsford in Macedonia, its races and their future (1906). The book contains Brailford's impressions from a five-month stay in Macedonia shortly after the suppression of the Ilinden Uprising and represents an ethnographic report. Brailford defines the dialect of Macedonia as neither Serbian, nor Bulgarian, yet closer to the second one. An opinion is delivered that any Slavic nation could "win" Macedonia if it is to use the needed tact and resources, yet it is claimed that the Bulgarians have already done that. Brailsford uses synonymously the terms "Macedonian Slavs" and "Bulgarians", the "Slavic language" and the "Bulgarian language". The chapter on the Macedonians Slavs/the Bulgarians is titled the "Bulgarian movement", the IMRO activists are called "Bulgarophile Macedonians".


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

 

[how yes no 2]

I cannot verify all this data, but I believe you that quotations are correctly transferred from those sources to this thread... however, it is questionable whether it can be the case that sources whom you quote were assuming Bulgarian identity of Macedonians where there was none...

I will focus just on this part of the citation

[*]Bulgarians (described in encyclopaedia as "Slavs, the bulk of which is regarded by almost all independent sources as Bulgarians", a statement referring to the controversy between Bulgaria and Serbia as to the national affinities of the Slavs of Macedonia): ca. 1,150,000, whereof, 1,000,000 Orthodox and 150,000 Muslims (called Pomaks)

if they are not directly named Bulgarians there was clear reason for that... in my opinion reason was that their self identity was mostly not Bulgarian, and that is what matters in issues of nationality - identity...

analysts tend to see them as Bulgarians because their language is similar to Bulgarian...however, language is not crucial part of self-identity... look at Serbs and Croats...practically same language (while Macedonian and Bulgarian are really different languages although similar), but two nations... try saying to Croat that he is Serb...or to Serb that he is Croat...

imagine that you are Greek who lives in Turkey and your Greek sounds Turkish... in my viewpoint that does not stop you to see yourself as Greek... I can listen to your good Turkish and bad Greek and claim you are Turk, but if you see yourself as Greek, than you are Greek no matter what anyone else thinks..right?

same is here... Macedonia was occupied by Bulgarians in big part of early medieval period.. naturally their language is somewhat closer to Bulgarian than to Serbian...but language does not make self-identity..

My conclusion, to think this "name dispute" is about the ancient macedonians is partly false. This is about the events that happened form teh balkan war until today. The anceint macedonians were draged into this dispute because they were the originators of the name macedonian.

sure, but issue is that it is not really clear whether ancient Macedonians are really Greeks, as there are clues that they were not... and if they were not Greeks, than there is no reason for Greece to claim name Macedonia, is there?

 

[Elias2]

By all means if there are clues please post them! because all historical written and archeaological evidence points to them being Hellenic peoples. Hellenic people, or the contemporary termenology greeks, are a cultrual grouping, an ethos, rather than a ethnic identity.

On your point what they thought of themselves, more quotes form the book The Macedonian Conflict Ethnic Nationalism in a Transnational World; pgs. 63-64

"Finally, Krste Misirkov, who had clearly developed a strong sense of his own personal national identity as a macedonian and who outspekenly and umambiguously called for macedonian linguistic and national separatism, achnowledged that a macedonian national identity was a relatively recent historical developemtn. In On Macedonian Matters, published in 1903, Misirkov, referring to himself and other slavs of macedonia in the first person plural, admits repeatedly that "our fathers, grandfathers, and great-grandfathers have always been called bulgarian" and that "in the past we have even called ouselves bulgarians" He describes "the emergence of the macedonians as a seperate slav people as a "perfectly normal historical process which is quite in keeping with the process by which the bulgarian, croatian and serbian peoples emerged from the south slav group"

"The political and military leaders of the slavs of macedonia at teh turn of the century seem not to have heard Misirkov's call for a separate macedonian national identity; they continued to identify themselves in a national sense as bulgarians rather than macedonians. The political goals of the internal macedonian Revolutionary organization (VMRO) were the liberation of macedonia from the Ottoman Empire, and the establishment of an autonomous Macedonia, but VMRO's leadership was challenged by the formation of the supreme macedonian comittee in Sofia, whose ultimate foal was the annexation of macedonian by Bulgaria. Inspite of these political differences, both groups, including those who advocated an independent macedonian state and opposed the idea of a greater bulgaria, never seem to have doubted "the predominantly bulgarian character of the population of Macedonia". Even Gotse Delchev, the famous Macedonian revolutionary leader, whose nom de guerre was Ahil (achilles), refers to "the slavs of macadonia as 'Bulgarians' in an offhanded manner without seeming to indicate that such a designation was a point of contention". In his correspondence Gotse Delchev often states clearly and simply "we are bulgarians".

 

[Elias2]

I kept to the point when references sources to use authors that are not Greeks or slav-macedonians, for we know they are usually filled with propaganda in one way or another. Now I couldn't care less what they called themselves, but they cannot monopolize the macedonian name and try to tear it apart from its hellenic past. Greeks in the province of greece often call themselves macedonian, I have relatives from that area that moved 40 years ago to canada I talk to tell me they never heard anyone call themselves macedonian as a separate national identity from Greeks.

 

[how yes no 2]

By all means if there are clues please post them! because all historical written and archeaological evidence points to them being Hellenic peoples. Hellenic people, or the contemporary termenology greeks, are a cultrual grouping, an ethos, rather than a ethnic identity.

culturally, I remember reading about Macedonian king who was not allowed to participate in Olympic Games as he was classified as non-Greek...I can search for more data about that...

genetically, area of ancient Macedonia is quite different from the rest of Greece... most of all because ancient Macedonia is much reacher in R1a than all nearby Slavic countries..R1a in Macedonia, Serbia and Bosnia is according to Klyosov ancient old, much older R1a than in east Europe and Asia, all this points out that R1a hotspot found there was not made by recent Slavic settlement, but was there for long time in history... I2a2 and G are also significantly increased in areas of ancient Macedonia... but it is not provable that they were there before Slavic settlements... in fact, I believe that early Slavs were I2a2 people....while east Europe R1a are assimilated remains of Scythians...

I can accept that ancient Macedonians (and other Dorians?) were hellenized, but I do not believe they were really Greeks when they appeared in history...

I kept to the point when references sources to use authors that are not Greeks or slav-macedonians, for we know they are usually filled with propaganda in one way or another. Now I couldn't care less what they called themselves, but they cannot monopolize the macedonian name and try to tear it apart from its hellenic past. Greeks in the province of greece often call themselves macedonian, I have relatives from that area that moved 40 years ago to canada I talk to tell me they never heard anyone call themselves macedonian as a separate national identity from Greeks.

thing is they never really had another name... some Slav tribes settled in Macedonia, mixed with previous inhabitants...I guess language shift happened...and they were called Macedonians due to living in Macedonia... it is not true that they are called Macedonians since WW2...in Serbia we have always called them Macedonians... issue is that we saw that as geographical origin, same as we have Hercegovci (from Hercegovina), Dalmatinci (as being from Dalmatia and not as being same as Illyrian Dalmatea), Crnogorci (from Montenegro), Bosanci (as being from Bosnia and not as national identity...Bosniak as national identity is introduced only during media war in 90s to create illusion of being autochtonous to Bosnia muslims, same as name Kosovar is invented).... those were seen as geographical identities inside same people....but in 90s it turned out that some of those people developed national identity out of geographical identity

 

[Elias2]

Ancient greek politics were as confusing as politics are today The macedons did end up participating in the olympics later on. I understand the idea that before they were hellenized they might of been something else, and probably were, but the macedonian character was born out of them being hellenized, a baptism as you will. As soon as you try to take away the greek character they stop being macedonian, and revert to that 'something else'.

I don't mind debating this, but you have to understand that the current political "name dispute" between Greece adn FYROM started from the balkan wars and not from classical greece.

 

[how yes no 2]

Ancient greek politics were as confusing as politics are today The macedons did end up participating in the olympics later on. I understand the idea that before they were hellenized they might of been something else, and probably were, but the macedonian character was born out of them being hellenized, a baptism as you will. As soon as you try to take away the greek character they stop being macedonian.

I don't mind debating this, but you have to understand that the current political "name dispute" between Greece adn FYROM started from the balkan wars and not from classical greece.

I understand it is sensible political issue....
as if you give them right to use name Macedonians, they might claim north Greece one day...

on other hand, it is hard for them to change name they used for themselves for centuries... some of them will rather believe that they do origin from ancient Macedonians, while just small group of Slavs migrated and settled among them... and it is not easy to know what was ratio between newcomers and old people... maybe genetics can help there, but its not easy...
e.g. suppose that they origin 80% from previous inhabitans and 20% from Slavic settlers... would they in that case, in your opinion, have right to call themselves Macedonians? where is the limit? 50%? or is it about language and culture not about origin? but if it is about language and culture, do we really know what was the language of ordinary middle and low class ancient Macedonians...

 

[Elias2]

e.g. suppose that they origin 80% from previous inhabitans and 20% from Slavic settlers... would they in that case, in your opinion, have right to call themselves Macedonians? where is the limit? 50%? or is it about language and culture not about origin? but if it is about language and culture, do we really know what was the language of ordinary middle and low class ancient Macedonians...

In my humble opinion, I don't care if they call themselves macedonians, it just bothers me when I hear things like macedonians have nothing to do with greeks, they were never hellenic, just these nationalistic rhetoric. Sometimes people just have to face the facts of history, no matter how uncomforting they are. I think for most greeks, to answer your question, its the latter of the two. I want to see this stupid conflict over with, I think relations between greece and FYROM will improve greatly when they come to a compromise. This whole thing is rather embarassing to have gotten this far.

 

[how yes no 2]

In my humble opinion, I don't care if they call themselves macedonians, it just bothers me when I hear things like macedonians have nothing to do with greeks, they were never hellenic, just these nationalistic rhetoric. Sometimes people just have to face the facts of history, no matter how uncomforting they are. I think for most greeks, to answer your question, its the latter of the two. I want to see this stupid conflict over with, I think relations between greece and FYROM will improve greatly when they come to a compromise. This whole thing is rather embarassing to have gotten this far.

yes, it is definitely stupid conflict.....

things are never black and white... and in this case it is clear that both sides have strong arguments regarding the name....

perhaps people in Balkan should try to learn to find what connects them and not what sets them apart....

e.g. why not seeing ancient Macedonians as somewhat shared legacy...

as ancient Macedonians have been hellenic, at least their elite, and likely also the people in last stage...

while Macedonians of today are likely to somewhat origin from previous inhabitants and thus also from ancient Macedonians....

it is up to politicians to try to find some compromise...

 

[Regulus]

There is obviously need for separate discussion about Macedonians.... who were ancient Macedonians...who are Macedonians of today?




stage is yours Elias...let's see your proof that Macedonians were Bulgarians before WW2... try to base your "proof" on credible historical sources....if any...

That was a good idea. Well done.

 

[Regulus]

I don't want this to cause the thread to go off-topic, but in light of the Bulgarians being discussed in this picture, I thought that some information on the origins of that group should be added.

The region in which Bulgaria sits has been inhabited by many peoples.
The ones that were there prior to the arrival of the Huns I will leave for discussion.

After the German uprising, in which the Gepids assumed leadership, inflicted a crushing defeat on the Huns, the remnants of these people left most of their possessions and settled in modern-day Bulgaria. The empire had fallen apart both by this battle and the earlier death of Attila. He had too many sons who fought against each other. These groups, one of which I can remember was the Sabrians, along with two others eventually came to be called Bulgars and ruled this area. This nation became slavicized following the Slavic migrations and lost its connection with the Hunnish language etc. It is today rightly considered a Slavic country.

The history of Bulgaria and its Empire is well known. One thing that must be remembered is that, if the Bulgarians are to be included in a discussion on whom the Macedonians of old were, the Bulgarians themselves have a very complex origin. Consequently, there can be no simple answer in drawing a connection between Bulgarians and Macedonians unless we specify Modern day Macedonians.

 

[Garrick]

I don't want this to cause the thread to go off-topic, but in light of the Bulgarians being discussed in this picture, I thought that some information on the origins of that group should be added.

The region in which Bulgaria sits has been inhabited by many peoples.
The ones that were there prior to the arrival of the Huns I will leave for discussion.

After the German uprising, in which the Gepids assumed leadership, inflicted a crushing defeat on the Huns, the remnants of these people left most of their possessions and settled in modern-day Bulgaria. The empire had fallen apart both by this battle and the earlier death of Attila. He had too many sons who fought against each other. These groups, one of which I can remember was the Sabrians, along with two others eventually came to be called Bulgars and ruled this area. This nation became slavicized following the Slavic migrations and lost its connection with the Hunnish language etc. It is today rightly considered a Slavic country.

The history of Bulgaria and its Empire is well known. One thing that must be remembered is that, if the Bulgarians are to be included in a discussion on whom the Macedonians of old were, the Bulgarians themselves have a very complex origin. Consequently, there can be no simple answer in drawing a connection between Bulgarians and Macedonians unless we specify Modern day Macedonians.

Regulus
Haplogroups of todays Macedonians are similar Serbian.

Ok in Serbia is more strongly expressed I (nearly 48%) while in Macedonia E (over 24%) is a stronger than in Serbia but this is probably because of the large Albanian minority, which accounts for 25% of the population in that country.

Nearly many Serbs once spoke the language very similar to today's standard Macedonian, and many Macedonians spoke language very similar todays Serbian, just standardization two languages has made to similar forms slowly forget.

If someone really studied non-political background is likely to determine the current population of the country whose official name of FYROM is actually originating from Serbs, not Bulgarian, but in my opinion, people can identify themselves as they wish, only Bulgarians have no right to be claim to.

Personally I regret that there is a conflict with Greece, and I think it's partly political, and that the Macedonian leadership to be more flexible, but it is my individual opinion, I like Skoplje and other places and often I was there.

 

[Regulus]

Regulus

but in my opinion, people can identify themselves as they wish, only Bulgarians have no right to be claim to.

I would agree with this. I had noted a number of references about Bulgarians in this case and thought that some of it should be addressed.

 

[iapetoc]

The history of Bulgaria and its Empire is well known. One thing that must be remembered is that, if the Bulgarians are to be included in a discussion on whom the Macedonians of old were, the Bulgarians themselves have a very complex origin. Consequently, there can be no simple answer in drawing a connection between Bulgarians and Macedonians unless we specify Modern day Macedonians.

THAT IS CORRECT REGULUS

the Makedonians as we all know from ancient is Sub-Greek nation as Iones lakedaimonioi, magna grecani, Pontioi (euxeinus pontus), Cretans etc

that is the central Argead Makedonia started from Holy Dion (where Hercules climb olymp)
Makednos, son of Hercules, and his sons, with help botieans push Pieri a thracian tribe to east and took their lands and establish a kingom, in AIGES (goats), later unite with Aeolians of West Makedonia, to a consultant Kingdom alliance (kings and 1 king to rule the kings) simmilar to mycenae system, Alexander was stoped but he's father Phillip took place in Olympic games as also Amyntas,
and Amyntas unite all, makedonians always expand until Phillip II took almost Greece and half Thrace,
as I say that has to do With Greek Makedonia as a region and also A NATION

later when Romans came they name Makedonia the area even to illyria and dardania,
but does that state makes Dardanians Makedonians?????????
NO WAY, Before kossyfo war, Kossyfo was in Yugoslavia, But WAS YUGOSLAVIA A NATION??????
today Basques are in Spain BUT ARE THEY CASTIGLIANNI????
WHEN INDIA WAS UNDER BRITISH EMPIRE WHERE INDIANS BRITISH?
NO WAY
so today Bulgarian people living in Skopje are they makedonians cause a Roman officer named a territory Makedonia????
NO WAY
ANOTHER NATION,
THE ROMAN PROVINCE OF MAKEDONIA WAS NOT AN ETHNICAL STATE,
SO DONT TELL ME A MAKEDONIAN THAT YOU ARE BROTHER TO ME CAUSE WE LIVE IN A AREA WHERE A THIRD NAMED AFTER THE NAME I GIVE TO MY NATION,

GERMANY IS GERMANY CAUSE GERMANS LIVE THERE
POLLAND IS NAMED CAUSE POLLANDS LIVE THERE
MAKEDONIA IS WHERE MAKEDONIANS LIVE AND NOT BULGARIANS,
WE DONT WANT TO UNITE TO STATE THAT A ROMAN BAPTISE BECAUSE IT WAS EASY HIM
WE HAVE OUR ANCIENT BROTHERS

Go FIND YOUR BROTHERS THE BULGARIANS,
AND UNITE WITH THEM TO A BIG BULGARIA


TRUE MAKEDONIAN NATIONAL ANTHEM
sais that kick away the none Greeks (barbarians with the original meaning, not the english version)

so inhabiting in russia does not make you a russian
how much inhabiting in Paeonia and name your self a makedonian

out of mind,

i am a mogol invader to korea, and i claim i am chinese, !!!!!!!!!

ALL THE MAPS YOU ARE SHOWING ARE ROMAN TIMES, NOT MAKEDONIAN TIMES,
CAUSE IF THE ROMANS BAPTISE YOU MAKEDONIAN< I DONT ACCEPT IT
OK PAEONIAN OR BULGARIAN OR SLAVIAN

MAKEDONIA IS ONE AND CREATED AND WAS AND IS AND WILL BE GREEK,

Now i dont care about joseph Bross Tito bullshit,
you are an indipendent nation, we dont claim nothing from you, we treat very nice,
for your thievery, BUT IT IS TIME TO GIVE US OUR NAME BACK,
WE DONT WANT YOUR LANDS, YOU WANT OURS, SO GET LOST WE NEVER SHOW AND NEVER WANTED TO GO TO SKOPJE YOU WANT TO TAKE OUR LANDS
MOLON LAVE
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

it is you that say Thessaloniki Alexanders sister solunu and want to conquer
we never said skopjie is greek
so get lost nazi
even Yane Sandanski was a bulgarian, Friend of the Turks you have same heroes,
Alexander is ours,

We have suffer enough of you, but we don't give in,

we revolt many times and got free from turks before you
so bye bye

THAT HORSE HAD A NAME ΒΟΥΚΕΦΑΛΑΣ

Not Bolglavata

 

[Regulus]

My opinion is the following, with slight editing from first post on other thread:

Ancient Macedonians were in fact Greeks. They spoke it, lived it, and we can find no ethnic difference between them and other Greeks. I believe that they were a branch of Dorians, a people who also were viewed in a not-so-great light when they threw out the Achaeans long before. There possibly may have been some admixture from some others peoples but I think that Dorian Greeks were the majority.
It was not uncommon for some elitist Athenians to pretend to have difficulty distinguishing Macedonians from other Greeks, but it is more than safe so say that they knew better and did this to try to minimize Macedonian influence in Greece, which rapidly gained speed.

Slavs moved into the Balkans after the East and West Goths migrated to their respective destinations. After the depopulation of certain areas in the Balkans from those conflicts (and subsequent Avar destruction later) the time was ripe for a new and vigorous people to move in. We call these southern Slavs. The Slavs reach the Balkans in their migration by late fifth to sixth century CE. I hold that is acceptable for some of these people to refer to themselves as Macedonians. The problem occurs if they lay claim to the achievements of ancient Macedonians.

It is common to refer to those who now live in Rome as Romans, even though few can say with certainty that their families go back in that city to the days of the Roman republic. We would make no effort to sort out those who moved in last year or in 1850 and tell them that they cannot be called Romans. We just know that the terms mean different things for different time periods.

 

[iapetoc]

yes but romans name and built roma,
but GREEK MAKEDONIA AND ANCIENT MAKEDONIA IS DIFFERENT THAN ROMAN,

hmmm let say it else,

since you are from the big one country,

Apache lived in texas, IS ANYBODY WHITE AN APACHE?
since you live in colorado? ARE YOU A NAVAHO?
no way
NEW MEXICO RESIDENTS ARE THEY MEXICANS?

the place they live was never Makedonian lands, the qonceuror name the area 3 times bigger than the origin

why usa say NEW MEXICO and not mexico
why canadians say Nova scotia

DOES AN APACHE ALLOW YOU TO CLAIM THAT YOU ARE THE APACHE? AND JERONYMO WAS YOUR FATHER???

or if you migrate from spain to USA AND THEN Nevada you became a Navaho????
the new Mexico people via wars via agreements i dont know american history
is like to tell that conqistadores when lived in Santa Elisabeta became Indians,

or if i live among ammies - quakers i am a quaker,

THIS IS NOT ABOUT A PASSPORT OR AN ID,

THIS IS PAEONIANS OR BULGARIANS CHANGE NAME TO MAKEDONIANS WHEN MAKEDONIANS EXIST. AND CLAIM TO LIBERTY ME THE MAKEDONIAN FROM MY SHELF

THEY WILL COME TO RESCUE ME FROM MY SELF,

I TOLD IS UNTHINKABLE
A BULGARIAN WHO LIVES IN PAEONIA TO SAY I M MAKEDON AND I WILL LIBERATED MAKEDONIANS FROM THE MAKEDONIANS,

does this make sence?

besides who among them is makedonian

25 % albanians 15 % serbs 10 turks and 45% bulgarians and 5 % others
and US army i forgot,

let them changes their names
cause its a casus beli,
simply we dont raise the glove
we dont want to have the borders that roman suggest we have our own via centuries
AND BLOOD GREEK BLOOD,

the fact that you immigrate to america does make you an navaho, but an american citizen

besides colombus named it WEST INDIES by mistake and ignorant,

the one lives in AmERIcA is HE AN INDIAN (from india) BECAUSE COLOMBUS NAME IT LIKE THIS??????

how do you like that
Columbus found west Indies So according to colombus YOU ARE AN INDIAN (from india) AND NOT AN AMERICAN
is that fair to you?
besides
according the map of alexander syria is Greek
because greek occupied it for hundrends of years Syria is Greek,
if i put a map of Big MAKEDONIA-GREECE that proves that syria was greek ones does that make syria greek?
before 1948 israel did not exist,
what does that mean? israelis are palestinians?
pakistan was also india when british empire
is it ???
the subject is not political,
it is like unite 2 different nations or 3 if we also put albanians that live in Fyrom
just to make a state according the area that roman baptise,
IS THERE MORE STUPIDITY??????
like bosna and bagna luka, do you believe in the future they dont fight?
even belgium today is to be in thinking of cut to 2 vallon and flamand
which is a many years kingdom
no way man,
unthinkable
besides here in greece we all know that war is upon us now,
after yugoslavia its our turn,
but still have the hope and the honor to fight,
soon the big war will start in balcans bigger than yugoslavia i suppose although i m not sure,

 

[Regulus]

Iapetoc, I think that you may have misunderstood my position.

To summarize it as briefly as possible, I differentiate between ancient/classical Macedonians and Modern-day Macedonians.

I believe that ancient Macedonians were mostly Dorian Greeks.

I would say that modern-day Macedonians are primarily of Slavic descent.

Both groups had languages and culture corresponding to their respective group.

My point was that it does not have to be a problem if people from Macedonia today using that name as long as they do not also claim to be the same as ancient Macedonians. The region called Calabria in Italy has been in two different locations in that country in ancient and modern day. The region referred to as Macedonia today is much closer to that of ancient Macedonia, if not overlapping it.

 

[iapetoc]

I would say that modern-day Macedonians are primarily of Slavic descent.

thank you regulus,
YOU HAVE JUST MAKE ME A SLAV.
WOW THANK YOU,

YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND, HOW YOU NAME MAKEDONIAN WHEN ANOTHER MAKEDONIAN EXISTS?

IT IS LIKE ME TELLING YOU INDIAN
OR CALL YOU A MEXICAN
IS IT OK WITH YOU????

THESE PEOPLES ARE SLAVS, THEY KILL AND BURN MAKEDONIAN VILLAGES EVEN AT WW2,
THEY HAVE A LAND AND CLAIM MAKEDONIAN BECAUSE A TURK OR ROMAN IMBECILE draw borders as he like,

that area has a war from 600AD,
the balkan wars lasted from 1904-1916.
in WW2 also same happened,

I BELIEVE THAT THE BEST IS TO CUT TO 3
1 tettovo to albania
2 strumnitsa to bulgaria
3 kumanovo to serbia

or if they want to stay as a state better change their name,
I DONT GIVE MY NATIONAL IDENTITY TO ANYONE,

IT IS LIKE USA And manhattan
IS THE ONE WHO LIVED IN MANHATTAN A LEPANE INDIAN????

you live in New jersey,
DOES THAT MAKE YOU A MANTAES or a NARATICONCK?????
european colonists or conquerors make bordes as they like,
But did they took the nationality of locals?
dont think so,

THEN WHY I WILL GIVE MY NATIONALITY TO ANOTHER NATION???

the fact you live in america does not make you a american native,