From: cla04@seq1.keele.ac.uk (A.T. Fear)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.greek
Subject: Re: MIRacles No. 13
Date: 7 Oct 92 14:11:01 GMT
Organization: Keele University, England

From article <BvpznF.K6L@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, by ptg2351@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Panos Tamamidis ):
> 
>>"What's the problem?" Macedonian peace activist Vladimir Milcin 
>>asks.  He answers himself:  "Macedonia as a geographical term is 
>>much wider than this place, Republic of Macedonia.  It is 
>>absolutely true that in Greece is also Macedonia.  And in Bulgaria 
>>there is also a part of the ancient earth that was Macedonia." 
> 
>  I heard such things before.  The area of the so called "Republic
>  of Macedonia" was given the name Macedonia after WWII.  This is
>  a creation of Communist Tito.  Before WWII this area was called
>  south Serbia, or banovina (=province) of Vardar.

A few days away but things alas don't change much. It would be nice to think that the above reply to what seems an
eminently reasonable comment by Milcin (who he BTW?) were meant to be
humorous. Unfortunately I suspect they aren't. It's hard to know how to
suggest that this ostrich-like mentality could be cured. Reading some
literature about this area might help, it will call it Macedonia. Not surprising
really as that's its name.


>> Most of the Macedonian 
>>people are puzzled that Greek newspapers should claim that they 
>>want to steal this [ancient Macedonian? ATF] heritage.  Guides to the history of Skopje 
>>clearly describe many successive occupiers of the area.  The Slavs 
>>who came after the Greeks and the Romans, these guides explain, 
>>produced the modern people who call themselves Macedonians.  No 
>>claim of relationship to the ancient Macedonians is made by these 
>>guides or by anyone I meet. 
> 
>  First of all, the Slavs started settling on the sixth century AD, not
>  the fifth.  Second, why are they puzzled by the Greek claims?  Since
>  they are admitting that they don't have anything to do with the ancient
>  Macedonians, why are they using his symbol in their flag? 

Perhaps the puzzle stems from the fact that Greek propagandists tend to
imply that the Republic of Macedonia does try to establish a claim to
ancient Macedon. As for the use of the 'star' on the Macedonia flag.
Since the modern Greeks in Macedonia have a highly tenuous connection,
to say the least, to ancient Macedon and use the symbol too, I think it's a case of what's
sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. As both groups live in the
area and neither has a direct link to the ancient Macedonians the symbol, if such it
is, belongs to both of them. I have still to see any
proof that this 'star' was a symbol of the Macedonian state or the
Argead dynasty (the two are not the same of course). It does not appear
with frequency on ancient Macedonian coins as you might expect if this
were the case - think for example of the owls of Athens or Pegasus motif
of Corinthian coins. Can anyone provide a literary reference to substantiate this claim? The design seems to
vary in the number of points on the examples I've seen from Macedonian
sites. It is certainly the case that this design was found elsewhere, for example on the coins of
Corcyra. I think I've suggested as a compromise on this issue that if
the Macedonians were to drop the emblem, the Greeks could drop their
insistance on the 'Slavic' tag for the Republic of Macedonia. This still
seems a good idea to me.


> Third, other
>  things admit officially, and other things do unofficially.  This is a
>  dirty propaganda.

So is saying the above without offering any evidence that this is the case.
 
>  Fourth, the fact that they are claiming that they constitute a distinct
>  nation, called Macedonian, is an outrageous claim, and obvious part
>  of their propaganda.  No Macedonian nation exists, and none of its
>  neighbors admits it exists.  Period.

If you define nation in terms of an exclusive racial group this is true
and it also follows there is no Greek nation. If we define nation in
terms of a feeling of nationhood then, whatever the past and I don't
concede what was said above is true, there is clearly a national identity established in the Republic of Macedonia
today. Live in the present. 


>>By its very existence, the Greeks believe, 
			 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>the Republic of Macedonia resurrects the intention to wrest 
>>control of Greek Macedonia and its valuable port of Thessaloniki 
>>from their rightful owners. 
> 
>  So, are they admiting that the creation of this republic by Tito was
>  made in order to annex the northern part of Greece, which rightyfully
>  bears the name macedonia for 2,000 yeras?

Of course the first posting says no such thing, it reports not a fact
but a Greek belief
which was probably false in the first place. Moreover to project Tito's
plans whatever they were unthinkingly on the present day governemnt of the Republic of
Macedonia which has altered its constitution explicitly to deny territorial
claims is a non sequitur any way. Interesting that Macedonia seems to
have lost 2,000 years of Greekness since earlier postings - in fact
2,000 years would exclude Philip II and Alexander III. 2,000 years ago
Macedonia was a Roman province which was huge compared to the Greek
Macedonia or Republic of Macedonia of today.


> 
>  So stop repeating this bullshit about the position of Greece.
>  Greeks are peacefull people.  Stop provoking them.
> 
>  Panos Tamamidis

Now let's see who are the provocateurs. A small nation with tiny armed
forces which has a constitution explicitly stating it has no territorial
ambitions or a much larger nation which tells it to change its name,
continually insults its people by telling them they don't exist and are
all stupid enough to have been brainwashed. Res ipsa loquitur

Andy
Newsgroups: soc.culture.greek