Macedonians

Omino, its crazy how little you read on this board. It's not me that is saying it:

Greece became part of the Macedonian Empire after losing the Battle of Chaeronea, one of the most renowned of all battles. The Macedonian victory at Chaeronea would put Greece into what historian G. Maclean Rogers describes as "a 'deep sleep', both politically and militarily. It would never again regain its supremacy in the Mediterranean."

That’s no secret that it was Alexander the Great united all the Greek city states into one. All that meant was that Macedonia was the most powerful of all the Greek city states and were able to conquer the rest and bring them into one. Rogers’ statement implies that after this loss, Greece would never again rise to the dominant role it once played in Mediterranean politics and warfare. That’s a no brainer. Anyone who knows basic history knows that. After Alexander’s death the Greeks were then later conquered by Rome and become the leading power in the region. Once Rome defeated that last Greek city state which were the Macedonians the Greeks remained culturally influential but politically and militarily their glory days had ended.
 
You're right... in fact, man was created by Greeks and Greeks created the heavens and earth.
I'll take that as an admission of being unable to refute my post.

I find it astonishing that you have to go to the cellular/genetic level to try to prove a fallacy that Macedonians are Greek. None of the "big picture" items align with your hypothetical, not language, not culture, not being a city-state, having a polygamous king, the way males are socialized in the culture... nothing. So when all else fails you go to genetics. :ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO: That in and of itself should prove to you that Macedonians are not Greek.

Macedonia is to Greece as Sicily is to Italy. Would a Sicilian call himself an Italian??? Please... Just give it up, man.

There are several Sicilians on this board who are very proud to be Italian. And non Sicilian Italians are quite proud to have them as part of our ethnos and nationality. @Palermo Trapani

Anyways you are just a troll. I'm amazed the moderators continue to let you post this nonsensical drivel about Greeks and Italians.
 
I'll take that as an admission of being unable to refute my post.



There are several Sicilians on this board who are very proud to be Italian. And non Sicilian Italians are quite proud to have them as part of our ethnos and nationality. @Palermo Trapani

Anyways you are just a troll. I'm amazed the moderators continue to let you post this nonsensical drivel about Greeks and Italians.
"Refute my post." A first grader can refute your silly posts.

I would venture to say that the vast majority of Sicilians don't refer to themselves as Italians.

My positions are substantiated by historians and I've quoted them accurately, so why would you consider that trolling? Your inability to grasp reality is not my concern.
 
That’s no secret that it was Alexander the Great united all the Greek city states into one. All that meant was that Macedonia was the most powerful of all the Greek city states and were able to conquer the rest and bring them into one. Rogers’ statement implies that after this loss, Greece would never again rise to the dominant role it once played in Mediterranean politics and warfare. That’s a no brainer. Anyone who knows basic history knows that. After Alexander’s death the Greeks were then later conquered by Rome and become the leading power in the region. Once Rome defeated that last Greek city state which were the Macedonians the Greeks remained culturally influential but politically and militarily their glory days had ended.
Uhhh, ProtosP, Macedonia was never a city state. In fact, it's the accepted positions by an overwhelming majority of historians.
 
My final thought. Unless or until archaeologists one day discover the tomb of Alexander, Philip, or another definitively known ancient Macedonian, and they’re able to analyze their DNA to prove they weren’t Greek, I’ll consider the matter settled. Until that moment comes the historical evidence strongly indicates that the ancient Macedonians were Greek. It’s in the Greeks favor. Have a great day.
DNA does not prove cultural identity and assimilation. If your DNA proves that your forefathers 2000 years ago were Aboriginal Australians, would you now identify as an Aborigine rather than a Greek?

I find it ironic you said "...language that was more familiar or emotional for them." You identified Macedonians as "them" not "us" (Greek). You clearly know there was a difference between the two cultures, you just can't admit it.
 
DNA does not prove cultural identity and assimilation. If your DNA proves that your forefathers 2000 years ago were Aboriginal Australians, would you now identify as an Aborigine rather than a Greek?

I find it ironic you said "...language that was more familiar or emotional for them." You identified Macedonians as "them" not "us" (Greek). You clearly know there was a difference between the two cultures, you just can't admit it.

You raise an important point and I agree that DNA alone doesn’t determine cultural identity. Culture is shaped by many factors including language, traditions and shared experiences. It can also evolve over time but when it comes to ancient Macedonians, the evidence suggests that they were part of the broader Hellenic world, even if their regional customs or dialect might have set them apart in some ways. Just like how Spartans, Athenians, and other city states had their own distinctions. Common sense.

Regarding the use of “them,” it was not intended to imply a stark division, but rather to acknowledge that Macedonians had their own regional identity within the Greek world just as other Greek city states did. You knew that but you obviously wanted to troll. They shared key elements of Greek or better yet Hellenic culture, religion, and language and it was through leaders like Alexander the Great that Greek culture was spread far and wide. The cultural differences you refer to were similar to what you’d see between different regions in any civilization and yet ancient Macedonians still identified with the larger Greek heritage. The fact that they used Greek in official contexts participated in the Olympic Games and worshipped the same gods reinforces that connection.
 
Last edited:
Uhhh, ProtosP, Macedonia was never a city state. In fact, it's the accepted positions by an overwhelming majority of historians.

Technically you are correct. Macedonia was never a city state in the way Athens or Sparta were. It was an actual kingdom. My point wasn’t to suggest that Macedonia was a city state, but rather to emphasize its place within the wider Hellenic world. Again you knew that but wanted an aha moment. A pat yourself in the back opportunity. They had a different political structure as a kingdom. The Macedonian rulers especially during and after Philip II’s reign played a significant role in uniting the Greek city states and spreading Greek culture not Macedonian culture. So while it wasn’t structured like the southern city states they still contributed greatly to Greek history and culture, especially through Alexander the Great’s conquests. Anyway I can see from how this conversation is going that we’re not going to reach common ground. Instead of engaging with the actual argument about whether the Macedonians were Greek you’ve shifted the focus by accusing me of saying things I didn’t intend. Unless you’re going to provide evidence to prove me wrong, I have nothing else to say to you. If you’re interested in debating the historical evidence I’m happy to continue but if not this discussion isn’t going anywhere.
 
Last edited:
I'll take that as an admission of being unable to refute my post.



There are several Sicilians on this board who are very proud to be Italian. And non Sicilian Italians are quite proud to have them as part of our ethnos and nationality. @Palermo Trapani

Anyways you are just a troll. I'm amazed the moderators continue to let you post this nonsensical drivel about Greeks and Italians
He's propably a fakedonian slav with the typical nationalistic complex,just ignore his nonsensical delerium until mods take care of him.
 
Last edited:
He's propably a fakedonian slav with the typical nationalistic complex,just ignore his nonsensical delerium until mods take care of him.
And, Omino, you are a South Macedonian with typical insecurity issues void of any reality. So this is a group think platform where only your opinions are allowed, I did not know. I suggest you change your name to ostrich and keep your head buried in the sand.
 
And, Omino, you are a South Macedonian with typical insecurity issues void of any reality. So this is a group think platform where only your opinions are allowed, I did not know. I suggest you change your name to ostrich and keep your head buried in the sand.
I'm actually an Aetolian greek,not a Macedonian one my dear Slavic neighbor.
You can anytime take your pseudohistoric nonsense and go cry to tiktok or YouTube ,this is an actual scientific forum.
PS your nonsense about Sicilians confirmed that answering you is a waste of time
 
Technically you are correct. Macedonia was never a city state in the way Athens or Sparta were. It was an actual kingdom. My point wasn’t to suggest that Macedonia was a city state, but rather to emphasize its place within the wider Hellenic world. Again you knew that but wanted an aha moment. A pat yourself in the back opportunity. They had a different political structure as a kingdom. The Macedonian rulers especially during and after Philip II’s reign played a significant role in uniting the Greek city states and spreading Greek culture not Macedonian culture. So while it wasn’t structured like the southern city states they still contributed greatly to Greek history and culture, especially through Alexander the Great’s conquests. Anyway I can see from how this conversation is going that we’re not going to reach common ground. Instead of engaging with the actual argument about whether the Macedonians were Greek you’ve shifted the focus by accusing me of saying things I didn’t intend. Unless you’re going to provide evidence to prove me wrong, I have nothing else to say to you. If you’re interested in debating the historical evidence I’m happy to continue but if not this discussion isn’t going anywhere.
"… Ay, and you know this also, that the wrongs which the Greeks suffered from the Lacedaemonians or from us, they suffered at all events at the hands of true-born sons of Greece, and they might have been regarded as the acts of a legitimate son, born to great possessions, who should be guilty of some fault or error in the management of his estate: so far he would deserve blame and reproach, yet it could not be said that it was not one of the blood, not the lawful heir who was acting thus. But if some slave or superstitious bastard had squandered what he had no right to! they have no such qualms about Philip and his present conduct, though he is not only no Greek, nor related to the Greeks, but not even a barbarian from any place that can be named with honor, but a pestilent knave from Macedonia, whence it was never yet possible to buy a decent slave..." (Demosthene Crationes, IX, p.26, and Istorija diplomatije, vol.1, p.49).

Further evidence that the Macedonians were not Hellenes can be from the Manifesto of Polyperchon, regent to the Macedonian throne and envoy to the Greek city-states in the year 319 BC, where we read: "Our ancestors [meaning the Macedonians - author's note] were always kind to the Hellenes and intend to continue their good ways and give proof of our goodwill towards the Greek people." (Istorija diplomatije, p. 53, reference taken from Diodorus Siculus Bibliotheka historika, XVIII, p. 55).

The modern Greek scholar, Karagatsis, makes his contribution to the clarification of the question whether the ancient Macedonians were Greek or not. The master work of this respected author, History of the Greek People, 1952, raised a great commotion in the camp of the nationalistically oriented intellectuals of Greece. Karagatsis, however, disregarded the burden of tradition and mythology and claimed that reality was different (p. 314). "It is the King of the Macedonians," he says, "that is the hegemon of the Greeks. The Congress is summoned by the hegemon, but is never chaired by him, because the hegemon is not Greek." (p. 340).

Ana Panaiotou, for example, in the article 'The Language of Captions in Macedonia', says that "the Macedonians communicated among themselves in the Koine (common) language; the use of the Macedonian dialect was shrinking and became limited to conversations within a family or within small tribal circles. The last extant records on the Macedonian dialect," Panaiotou continues, "date from the first century BC" This author also informs us that the oldest facts on the Macedonian language date from the fifth century BC Alexander the Great that language stopped being the means of communication. "People used this language," Panaiotou says, "at moments of anger or great excitement and when only Macedonians were present" (p. 187). To support her statement, Ana Panaiotou turns to Plutarch, who claims that while killing Cleitus, at a moment of great distress, Alexander the Great "cried out in the Macedonian language" (Plutarch, Vii parallili, chapter 'Alexander the Great' - eighth installment in the periodical Ilios, 20th March 1954).

Ana Panaiotou also draws attention to the example of Eumenes, an officer in Alexander's army. He himself was not Macedonian, but once, after an illness, when walking among his Macedonian soldiers, he greeted them in the Macedonian language. She also mentions that Queen Cleopatra had lessons in Macedonian. In the same collected edition, Pro£ J. Kaleris says that "the Macedonian language was often used with the purpose of winning the trust of the Macedonian people." In the periodical Mesiniaka, J. Kordatos, a historian and sociologist, undeniably declares that the ancient Macedonians spoke a language different from Greek.

The ancient Greek man of letters, Isocrates, claims that there were no grounds for the identification of Ancient Macedonia with Ancient Greece, nor the Ancient Macedonians with the Ancient Greeks. In his book Philip (pp l07-108), Isocrates places Macedonia outside the boundaries of Greece and considers the Macedonians non-Greek tribesmen.
 
"… Ay, and you know this also, that the wrongs which the Greeks suffered from the Lacedaemonians or from us, they suffered at all events at the hands of true-born sons of Greece, and they might have been regarded as the acts of a legitimate son, born to great possessions, who should be guilty of some fault or error in the management of his estate: so far he would deserve blame and reproach, yet it could not be said that it was not one of the blood, not the lawful heir who was acting thus. But if some slave or superstitious bastard had squandered what he had no right to! they have no such qualms about Philip and his present conduct, though he is not only no Greek, nor related to the Greeks, but not even a barbarian from any place that can be named with honor, but a pestilent knave from Macedonia, whence it was never yet possible to buy a decent slave..." (Demosthene Crationes, IX, p.26, and Istorija diplomatije, vol.1, p.49).

Demosthenes’ claim that Macedonians were not Greek was largely political rhetoric, aimed at uniting southern Greek city-states against Philip II’s growing power. He portrayed Philip as an outsider to rally opposition, but this wasn’t an objective statement about ethnicity. The Macedonian royal family, the Argeads, traced their ancestry to Greek heroes like Heracles and participated in events like the Olympic Games, which were only open to Greeks. By the time of Philip II, Macedonians had embraced Greek culture, language, and customs, making them part of the broader Greek world. The term barbarian in Demosthenes’ speeches was more a reflection of political differences Athens’ democracy versus Macedon’s monarchy rather than a true indicator of whether Macedonians were Greek. In reality, they were widely accepted as Greek

Further evidence that the Macedonians were not Hellenes can be from the Manifesto of Polyperchon, regent to the Macedonian throne and envoy to the Greek city-states in the year 319 BC, where we read: "Our ancestors [meaning the Macedonians - author's note] were always kind to the Hellenes and intend to continue their good ways and give proof of our goodwill towards the Greek people." (Istorija diplomatije, p. 53, reference taken from Diodorus Siculus Bibliotheka historika, XVIII, p. 55).

Polyperchon’s statement reflects the political and diplomatic context of the time rather than definitive proof that Macedonians weren’t Greek. His words were likely a way of distinguishing Macedon’s role from the Greek city states, which were often seen as separate entities due to regional differences and political autonomy. This doesn’t mean Macedonians didn’t view themselves as Greek. It was a way to position themselves as leaders or protectors of the Greek world. Macedonians often used such language to emphasize their political authority over the southern city states, not to imply they were a different ethnicity.

The modern Greek scholar, Karagatsis, makes his contribution to the clarification of the question whether the ancient Macedonians were Greek or not. The master work of this respected author, History of the Greek People, 1952, raised a great commotion in the camp of the nationalistically oriented intellectuals of Greece. Karagatsis, however, disregarded the burden of tradition and mythology and claimed that reality was different (p. 314). "It is the King of the Macedonians," he says, "that is the hegemon of the Greeks. The Congress is summoned by the hegemon, but is never chaired by him, because the hegemon is not Greek." (p. 340).

I have to tell you I never heard and couldn’t find any reference to this. Can you provide me the actually source of that? I know Karagatsis as a novelist and I couldn’t find any books or resources that he wrote. Anyway let’s just say he did say that. His interpretation reflects just one scholar’s view, and like many historical debates it is subject to different perspectives. His statement that the Macedonian king was “hegemon of the Greeks but not Greek” could be interpreted as a reflection of the political structure of the time, where Macedonia had a distinct political identity from the southern Greek city states. However, this doesn’t necessarily mean Macedonians weren’t Greek in terms of culture or ethnicity. Many ancient sources as well as the Macedonian elite themselves, claimed Greek ancestry and participated in Greek traditions like the Olympic Games. Karagatsis’ view, while notable, is part of an ongoing debate rather than conclusive proof that Macedonians weren’t Greek.

Ana Panaiotou, for example, in the article 'The Language of Captions in Macedonia', says that "the Macedonians communicated among themselves in the Koine (common) language; the use of the Macedonian dialect was shrinking and became limited to conversations within a family or within small tribal circles. The last extant records on the Macedonian dialect," Panaiotou continues, "date from the first century BC" This author also informs us that the oldest facts on the Macedonian language date from the fifth century BC Alexander the Great that language stopped being the means of communication. "People used this language," Panaiotou says, "at moments of anger or great excitement and when only Macedonians were present" (p. 187). To support her statement, Ana Panaiotou turns to Plutarch, who claims that while killing Cleitus, at a moment of great distress, Alexander the Great "cried out in the Macedonian language" (Plutarch, Vii parallili, chapter 'Alexander the Great' - eighth installment in the periodical Ilios, 20th March 1954).

Ok so I have no idea who this Ana Panaiotou is either and I couldn’t find that so call article that you’re referencing anywhere. Do provide me the full article and source so I know that you’re not copying and pasting some Vardaskan made up stories. Anyway again let’s just say she exists and wrote that
So just because she supposedly stated that the use of the Macedonian dialect was shrinking, particularly after the rise of Koine Greek during Alexander the Great’s time doesn’t prove that Macedonians were ethnically, linguistically or culturally separate from the Greeks. The shift to Koine Greek became the common language across Alexander’s empire was part of a larger unification process making it easier to communicate among the populations. The fact that Koine Greek replaced local dialects including in Macedonia reflects a broader trend across the Greek speaking world. It was not a unique situation for Macedonians. The claim that Macedonians still spoke their native dialect in personal or emotional contexts, such as when Alexander the Great cried out in Macedonian while killing Cleitus (as noted by Plutarch), shows that a distinct dialect did exist, but this was increasingly used in more intimate settings. This aligns with how languages or dialects shift over time, especially when a more widely used lingua franca (like Koine) takes hold for public and official communication. It’s also worth noting that the presence of a distinct Macedonian dialect does not imply that Macedonians were not Greek. Dialects existed throughout the Greek world including in regions like Thessaly, Laconia, and Boeotia, all of which were considered Greek so not a good argument. The use of a regional dialect alongside Koine was common across Greek speaking regions and Koine itself was a unifying Greek language. Because of that while Macedonian dialect may have diminished over time, this was part of the broader linguistic evolution within the Hellenic world. It wasn’t evidence of a non Greek identity.

Ana Panaiotou also draws attention to the example of Eumenes, an officer in Alexander's army. He himself was not Macedonian, but once, after an illness, when walking among his Macedonian soldiers, he greeted them in the Macedonian language. She also mentions that Queen Cleopatra had lessons in Macedonian. In the same collected edition, Pro£ J. Kaleris says that "the Macedonian language was often used with the purpose of winning the trust of the Macedonian people." In the periodical Mesiniaka, J. Kordatos, a historian and sociologist, undeniably declares that the ancient Macedonians spoke a language different from Greek.

While the mysterious Ana Panaiotou and others mention examples like Eumenes greeting soldiers in Macedonian and Queen Cleopatra learning the Macedonian language it doesn’t necessarily prove that the language was entirely distinct from Greek. Macedonia like other Greek regions had its own dialect which was likely used in more personal or familiar settings. The fact that it was used to win the trust of Macedonian soldiers shows the significance of regional identity but it doesn’t negate the broader cultural and linguistic ties with the Greek world.
Regarding the marxist J. Kordatos’ claim that ancient Macedonians spoke a language different from Greek is debated among scholars. Many argue that while the Macedonian dialect had unique features it was still closely related to Greek. The adoption of Koine Greek as the common language throughout Alexander’s empire further demonstrates that Macedonians were part of the Hellenic cultural sphere. In the end yhe use of a regional dialect does not automatically mean that Macedonians were not Greek. Regional dialects existed throughout the Greek world.

The ancient Greek man of letters, Isocrates, claims that there were no grounds for the identification of Ancient Macedonia with Ancient Greece, nor the Ancient Macedonians with the Ancient Greeks. In his book Philip (pp l07-108), Isocrates places Macedonia outside the boundaries of Greece and considers the Macedonians non-Greek tribesmen.

Isocrates may have made statements that distinguish Macedonia from Greece politically or geographically but his argument was largely rhetorical and driven by the political dynamics of the time. He was advocating for a united Greek front and was wary of Macedon’s rising influence. His views reflect concerns over Macedonian political power not necessarily a denial of their Greek identity in terms of culture or heritage. Isocrates aim in his speech Philip was to persuade Philip II to lead the Greeks against Persia. That shows that despite any distinctions he made he still recognized Philip’s potential as a leader of the broader Greek world. This suggests that while Macedonians may have been seen as separate in a political or regional sense they were still part of the wider Hellenic sphere. Ancient Greek attitudes toward regional identities were complex. City states often viewed themselves as distinct from one another Athenians, Spartans etc yet they were all still considered Greek. So just because Isocrates placed Macedonia outside the boundaries of Greece in a political sense doesn’t mean he believed Macedonians were non Greek.

My friend these aren’t good arguments. They prove absolutely nothing.
 
Last edited:
Why split hairs of the Greekness of the Ancient Macedonians? So people from North Macedonia or others can act if they have a beef in this? They are not even in the ball game. Not historically, geographically, linguistically, culturally, genetically. No litterary tradition. Nothing. There simply is no direct link between the Greekness of Ancient Macedonians and the formation of the modern Macedonian identity.

As outlined before. When the first Slavs entered the region of Macedonia, the people there identified as Greek Orthodox Christian , Greek speaking Romans who had their allegiance to the emperor of Constantinople.

The people North of these Greek speaking Romans are Slavic speakers, who use a Cyrillic alphabet, created by Greek monks to Christianize pagan Slavic newcomers in the former areas of Paeonia and Dardania, among others.

With all respect to the Slavs, knowing that Greeks have some Slavic ancestry as well. But, it’s just a kitch debate nowadays.
 
Back
Top