From: gd8f@kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU (Gregory  Dandulakis)
Subject: Re: Scopjian Flag
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 19:03:22 GMT


A VooDoo schizoid pseudo-historian claims in the net:


>I'm sorry you think there are dead certainties in ancient history. This
>shows a very naive attitude towards historiography in general. All I am
>saying is that if our ancient sources are read without any modern
                                                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>political preconceptions as to the origins of the ancient Macedonians,
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>they most naturally suggest that Macedonian was a distinct language to
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Greek not a dialect of Greek. Moreover modern research supports this
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>reading. Of course when you start with the prejudice that the
>Macedonians were Greeks your perception may alter rapidly...


Lets see how prejudice are the following scholars, so we can
appreciate the "objectivity" of the VooDoo pseudo-historian.

========================================================================
1.

From the probably most respected internationally German 
historian of classic times, Malcolm Errington professor at 
the University of Marburg, and his english translation 
book: "A History of Macedonia", University of California 
Press, Los Angeles, 1990, pp. 3-4:

... That the Macedonians and their kings did in fact speak 
a dialect of Greek and bore Greek names may be regarded 
nowdays as certain. The Macedonian dialect made use of 
many loan words from the languages of their Illyrian and 
Thracian neighbours, a circumstance that does not surprise 
modern philologists ...


=========================================================================
2.

And from the most reputable worldwide British historian of 
the ancient Greek period, N. G. L. Hammond, professor in 
the University of Bristol, and from his book: "The 
Macedonian State", Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1989, pp. 12-
15:

The language of the Macedonians

What language did these "Macedones" speak? The name it-
self is Greek in root and in ethnic termination. It proba-
bly means "highlanders", and it is comparable to Greek 
tribal names such as "Orestai" and "Oreitai", meaning 
"mountain-men". A reputedly earlier variant, 
"Maketai", has the same root, which means "high", as 
in the Greek adjective makednos or the noun mekos. The 
genealogy of eponymous ancestors which Hesiod recorded has 
a bearing on the question of Greek speech. First Hesiod 
made Macedon a brother of Magnes; as we know from in-
scriptions that the Magnetes spoke the Aeolic dialect of 
the Greek language, we have a predisposition to suppose 
that the Macedones spoke the Aeolic dialect. Second, 
Hesiod made Macedon and Magnes first cousins of Hellens 
three sons - Dorus, Xouthus, and Aeolus - who were the 
founders of three dialects of Greek speech, namely Doric, 
Ionic, and Aeolic. Hesiod would not have recorded this 
relationship, unless he had believed, probably in the 
seventh century, that the Macedones were a Greek-speaking 
people. The next evidence comes from Persia. At the turn 
of the sixth century the Persians described the tribute-
paying peoples of their province in Europe, and one of 
them was the "yauna takabara", which meant "Greeks 
wearing the hat". There were Greeks in Greek city-states 
here and there in the province, but they were of various 
origins and not distinguished by a common hat. However, 
the Macedonians wore a distinctive hat, the kausia. We 
conclude that the Persians believed the Macedonians to be 
speakers of Greek. Finally, in the latter part of the 
fifth century a Greek historian, Hellanicus, visited 
Macedonia and modified Hesiods genealogy by making 
Macedon not a cousin, but a son of Aeolus, thus bringing 
Macedon and his descendants firmly into the Aeolic branch 
of the Greek-speaking family. Hesiod, Persia, and 
Hellanicus had no motive for making a false statement 
about the language of the Macedonians, who were then an 
obscure and not a powerful people. Their independent tes-
timonies should be accepted as conclusive.

[Most recently Badian in Barr-Sharrar and Borza 
(1982) disregards the evidence as set out, when it goes 
against his view that the Macedonians (whom he does not 
define) spoke a language other than Greek], and they turn 
instead to "Macedonian" words and names, or/and to lit-
erary references. Philologists have studied words which 
have been cited as "Macedonian" in ancient lexica and 
glossaries, and they have come to no certain conclusion; 
for some of the words are clearly Greek, and some are 
clearly not Greek. That is not surprising; for as the 
territory of the Macedonians expanded, they overlaid and 
lived with peoples who spoke Illyrian, Paeonian, Thracian, 
and Phrygian, and they certainly borrowed words from them 
which excited the authors of lexica and glossaries. The 
philological studies result in a verdict, in my opinion, 
of "non liquet".

The toponyms of the Macedonian homeland are the most sig-
nificant. Nearly all of them are Greek: Pieria, Lebaea, 
Heracleum, Dium, Petra, Leibethra, Aegeae, Aegydium, 
Acesae, Acesamenae; the rivers Helicon, Aeson, Leucus, 
Baphyras Sardon, Elpeus, Mitys; lake Ascuris and the re-
gion Lapathus. The mountain names Olympus and Titarium may 
be pre-Greek; Edessa, the earlier name of the place where 
Aegeae was founded, and its river Ascordus were Phrygian. 
The deities worshipped by the Macedones and the names 
which they gave the months were predominantly Greek, and 
there is no doubt that these were not late borrowings.

==========================================================================


After we saw how the modern objective research "supports" 
the VooDoo pseudo-historian claims, lets continue on some more 
of his assertions:


>And you are not? The data from antiquity we have is that Demosthenes
>dislikes Philip, was a skilled orator, and said Philip was a barbarian.
>I have suggested that he wouldn't use an argument that would make him
>look foolish (after all he did want to win), you I assume that he used
>what to you is a patently nonsensical argument. Which of those
>interpretations seems more affected by modern prejudice?
>
>> Polybios was
>> saying the same about Aetoleans (half-barbaric, their dialect
>> was not easy - if at all - for the rest of Greeks to
>> understand).
>
>Any chance of a reference, I'd like to read this.
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

The VooDoo pseudo-historian waits from amateurs to
find references for him. OK, since you haven't read
the basics yet, get the following reference from
Hammond's previousely cited book:

==========================================================================

To Greek literary writers before the Hellenistic period 
the Macedonians were "barbarians". The term referred to 
their way of life and their institutions, which were those 
of the ethne and not of the city-state, and it did not 
refer to their speech. We can see this in the case of 
                       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Epirus. There Thucydides called the tribes "barbarians". 
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
But inscriptions found in Epirus have shown conclusively 
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
that the Epirote tribes in Thucydides' lifetime were 
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
speaking Greek and used names which were Greek. In the 
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
following century "barbarian" was only one of the abu-
sive terms applied by Demosthenes to Philip of Macedon and 
his people.

=========================================================================


After this exposure of "objectivity" and "knowledge" from
the VooDoo pseudo-historian, I can finally rest my case!


Gr