From: lolonis@news.weeg.uiowa.edu (Panagiotis Lolonis)
Subject: Re: Info on Macedonia
Organization: University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 00:30:14 GMT

cla04@seq1.keele.ac.uk (A.T. Fear) writes:

>> group of people.  In this case the rights of Greeks who live in Macedonia,
>> Greece, are violated by the request of Skopjeans to gain recognition
>> under the name "Macedonians".

>This is a circular argument resting on the assumption that only
>GraecoMacedonians have the right to the name Macedonian.

First, the term "GraecoMacedonians" is a new one, according to my knowledge.
Up to this point the Greeks who lived in Macedonia were called simply
Macedonians (Alexander the Great and Aristotles were simply Macedonians
-a subset of Greeks,- not GraekoMacedonians. )

Second, it is the Skopjeans who ask for recognition.  Therefore, it is
up to them to prove (with historical, geographical etc) arguments that
they diserve the title "Macedonians".


> But this is what needs to be proved and the burden of proof rests firmly on
> the group who wish to appropriate this name for their exclusive use. As yet
>I have seen no good arguments used in this regard. I fail to see how
>sharing a name violates any one's rights.

It does.  First, you use the term GraecoMacedonians to refer to the Greeks 
living in Macedonia, Greece.  If the Skopjeans have used a name other
than "Macedonians" then the prefix "Greaco" would be unnecessary, as it
was the case in antiquity.  The Greeks of Macedonia have to accept a
different name, "Greacomacedonians", because some other people want to use
the term "Macedonian" to define themselves ethnically.

Second.  Suppose that Macedonia, Greece, decides to become an independent
country (Just for the example folks!!!!).  Can she apply to gain recognition
in the UN, as the "Republic of Macedonia", if the Republic of Skopje has
already been recognized as "Republic of Macedonia"?

The answer is no.  Macedonia, Greece, must apply under a different name!

In this case, the right of Macedonians in Greece to call themselves
Macedonians and name their country "Republic of Macedonia" is taken 
away by the Skopjeans because they have already used it in defining their
identity.

No doubt the example is extreme.  It shows, though, the conflict of rights
between two groups of people for the same "resource" (the name of the 
ethnic identity).  It also shows that the use of a term to define the
identity of one group automatically imposes restrictions on the choice
sets for defining the other groups. 

>I don't think the Republic of Macedonia wants to share the
>Graecomacedonian identity just assert its own different, but equally
>Macedonian identity.

If it is different why do not they use another name and leave us alone?
There are benefits that are associated with that name and that's why 
they stick with it.

>argument for Greek propagandists as it makes the rash assumption that
>the ancient Macedonians were Greeks.  The problem is this isn't at all
>clear.  Plenty of ancient Greeks would have disagreed very strongly and
>that includes not only enemies of Macedonian imperialism such as
>Demosthenes and Aratus but also friends of it such as Isocrates.  It's

Then why were ancient Macedonians eligible to participate in the ancient
Olympic games, where only Greeks could participate ?

Why did they use Greek names such Alexandros (for Alexander), Philipos
(for Philip II) and not names such as Goce, Kiro, or Andrej?

( Although I would aggree with you that in the past there were many
  questions about the ethnicity of ancient Macedonians, recent (1980)
  findings in arcaeological excavations have strengthened the view that
  ancient Macedonians were a Greek tribe.  I would read some recent 
  literature on this subject.)


>Andy

Friendly,
Panos Lolonis
U. of Iowa


Newsgroups: soc.culture.yugoslavia