June 25, 2009

More on the insanity that has dominated historical discourse in FYROM

I recently became aware of how insane some of the claims of the present-day FYROM government have become. It is hard to appreciate this for the Slav-less spectator who doesn't really have access to what is discussed in that country.

Thankfully, there are still rational voices in FYROM, and thanks to the efforts of brave citizens of that country such as Vasko Gligorjevic, we get to hear some of them.

Here are a couple of YouTube videos where the former Prime Minsiter of the country Ljubčo Georgievski describes the program of "antiquization" in the country, the adoption of fringe revisionist history as official, the denial of the Slavic element in modern Slavo-Paionians, and the extremely negative sentiments of proponents of "Ancient Macedonians" against those who emphasize the Slavic element in the country's history.



In the second clip, Mr. Georgievski asks why the proponents of "Ancient Macedonians" in FYROM seem so unconcerned with determining the Thracian, Illyrian, Dardanian, and Paeonian element in their ancestry, and are so hell-bent on discovering Macedonian ancestors. He also states -correctly- that Ancient Macedonia, including most of Upper Macedonia was in today's Greece, and all the rest (including FYROM) were conquered by the Macedonians, and not part of Macedonia itself.

39 comments:

  1. Well, Mr. Georgievski is not an archaeologist at all. And at the end, he was asked what should be the name of my country, then, and he answered "Macedonia". You are missing these parts of the show...

    ReplyDelete
  2. It doesn't take an archaeologist to know that FYROM and the Slavs inhabiting have no relationship (geographical or ethnic) with ancient Macedonia. Thankfully, there are plenty of experts who make the case, if one is inclined to appeal to authority.

    ReplyDelete
  3. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  5. This is just like the Azerbaijan name dispute between Iran and the Republic of Azerbaijan. Iranians claim that the historical Azerbaijan was south of the Aras River (today's Iranian Azerbaijan), and it never included the one north of it (the RoA) until the name was usurped in the early 20th century by the Turkic speaking nationalists who would subsequently be known as the Azeris of the RoA. Iranians also say that the historical name of the area of today's RoA was Aran and that the historical Azerbaijan excluded Aran. The Azeris of the RoA deny these claims and assert that their land was part of the historical Azerbaijan.

    ReplyDelete
  6. That is an interesting parallel. Is the name used as an argument by Turkic nationalists for the creation of a Greater Azerbaijan that would include both RoA and Iranian Azerbaijan?

    ReplyDelete
  7. According to some Iranians I encountered on the Net, it was the main reason for choosing the name of Azerbaijan for the founders of the RoA.

    ReplyDelete
  8. If the Iranian claims are true, the only difference between the Azerbaijani and Macedonian cases is that Iranian Azerbaijan has a majority Azeri Turkic population, while Greek Macedonia is far from being majority Slavic.

    ReplyDelete
  9. If the modern Macedonians are Slavs, as you claim, who have no relation to the ancients then what are the modern Greeks? A melange of Turks, Albanians, Vlachs, Macedonians, Bulgars and what not. How does that change the picture?

    ReplyDelete
  10. So the Cretans, Pontians, Cypriots, coastal mainland Greeks and Ionian islanders are a melange of Bulgars, Turks, Albanians, Vlachs, etc.? How interesting.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Very interesting. So these are the true Greeks, aren't they? So we agree that MOST of the modern Greeks, besides those you list, have no connection to the ancients. Now if we look at those you list their identity was Roman (Rhomaic), not Greek.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Did you post the complete interview? No? Well... So, all the neighbors came here from behind the mountains and across Danube, only the so-called Greeks didn't move, nor they allowed anyone to come?

    ReplyDelete
  13. If the modern Macedonians are Slavs, as you claim, who have no relation to the ancients then what are the modern Greeks? A melange of Turks, Albanians, Vlachs, Macedonians, Bulgars and what not. How does that change the picture?

    Even if that were true -which it is not- modern Greeks at least live in ancient Greece and speak Greek.

    On the other hand, modern "Macedonians" of the FYROM variety live in ancient Paionia and speak Bulgarian.

    So, Greece-FYROM 2-0 when it comes to elements of continuity.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Now if we look at those you list their identity was Roman (Rhomaic), not Greek.

    These were Greek speakers who lived on Greek lands.

    I understand, however, your over-emphasis on "identity", as "identity" (irrational exclamations of "I am Macedonian", "I feel Macedonian") is the only thing modern "Macedonians" of the FYROM variety have to link them to the actual Macedonians.

    ReplyDelete
  15. So, all the neighbors came here from behind the mountains and across Danube

    It doesn't really matter what your genetic origins are. Ancient Macedonians didn't speak Slavic, you do. End of story.

    But, even on the genetic front, it's much more likely that the indigenous (pre-Slavic) genetic component in FYROMians consists of the indigenous people of FYROM (mainly Paionians), rather than the Macedonians.

    But if you were 100% Macedonian genetically, the sad fact remains that you speak Slavic not Macedonian.

    If you really want to be reckoned as Macedonians, step #1 is to learn Greek.

    ReplyDelete
  16. History would suggest that the situation was far more complex than the modern nationalists on both sides would care to admit. The Ancient Macedonians are gone, as gone as the Romans of Cicero. This just leaves the geographical term, anyone living within the limits of the ancient Macedonian kingdom has a call on that name and identity.

    That coastal Macedonia is now Greek speaking and inland Macedonia is Slavic is just an accident of history as for many centuries all the inhabitants of Macedonia, excepting the inhabitants of Thessalonica and the peoples of the Chalkidike peninsulas, spoke Slavic dialects.

    ReplyDelete
  17. The Ancient Macedonians are gone, as gone as the Romans of Cicero. This just leaves the geographical term, anyone living within the limits of the ancient Macedonian kingdom has a call on that name and identity.

    We know very well what happened to the ancient Macedonians. Like other Greeks, their Macedonian dialect gave way to common Greek, and they continued to exist, to this very day in fact.

    That coastal Macedonia is now Greek speaking and inland Macedonia is Slavic is just an accident of history as for many centuries all the inhabitants of Macedonia, excepting the inhabitants of Thessalonica and the peoples of the Chalkidike peninsulas, spoke Slavic dialects.

    Greek has always been spoken throughout Macedonia, inland or otherwise. Also, "inland Macedonia" is Greek speaking, it is beyond the borders of Macedonia, in FYROM, that Slavs make the majority of the population.

    But, even if Greek had become extinct in all of Macedonia, that wouldn't really legitimize the Slavic claim to the name of Macedonians. By that "reasoning", Central Anatolians could fashion themselves "Phrygians" or "Hittites", which is obviously ridiculous.

    ReplyDelete
  18. >>anyone living within the limits of the ancient Macedonian kingdom has a call on that name and identity

    The limits of the ancient Macedonian Kindkom are situated in Northern Greece. The conquests of the Ancient Macedonians does not make other people genetically Ancient Macedonians.
    Likewise Thessaly, Thrace, parts of Boetia, Epirus have also been part of the Macedonian administraive region in Roman times. That doesn't make them Macedonians. In medieval times Macedonia was situated only in Thrace. Doesn't make them Macedonians, does it? The current geographical region of Macedonia is Ottoman Macedonia. Not Ancient, Roman nor medieval. It would be absurd to claim Ancient Macedonian heritage simply because you live in a geographical region which almost two millenia later was baptised 'Macedonia'.

    Moreover, the legacy of the Ancient Macedonians was the spread of Hellenism. On the contrary the Macedonian Slavs take a millitant aditude towards Hellenism. What is also clear is that Macedonian Slavs try to dehellenize the ancient Macedonians. They are against the true culture the ancient Macedonians fought for.

    So not only do the Macedonian Slavs have no geographical, cultural, linguistical, genetical connection to Ancient Macedonians, but they dislike the culture they stood for.

    Historically speaking, the case of FYROM is a joke. That's why -instead of making their point - they result in aggresive attitude towards the Greeks. Making overstatements and creating myths.

    But that still doesn't make the Macedonians does it?

    ReplyDelete
  19. Just curious: Does a greek pronounce the "c" in Macedonia as a "k" or "ss"?

    ReplyDelete
  20. The Greeks pronounce Macedonia with a "k," Makedonia. I think the Slavs pronounce Macedonia with "ch."

    What's wrong with Macedonian Slavs identifying with the Paoinians, who were some of their ancestors? Don't we all have the same basic value as human beings? Maybe it's hard to identify with people of whom not much is known. Is much known about the Paionians?

    ReplyDelete
  21. So Irish are English? They are speaking English. Or Scots?
    Macedonians pronounce Makedonia with k. Well, Paionians I suppose were assimilated into Macedonians, or something. And who gives YOU the right to choose the name of the neighboring nation?
    I am Macedonian. Self-declared as such on every census. Are you?
    Or you can be Greek AND Macedonian, but I cannot be Macedonian only (of whatever descent, Slav, Teutonic, Ancient Macedonian).
    Please choose YOUR nationality only. On the next census. I am choosing mine (same as my grandfather's) - Macedonian.

    ReplyDelete
  22. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  23. I don't care what you call yourself. I'm not a fascist. If you want to claim some connection to Alexander the Great, Phillip II and the other Greek Macedonians, you apparently don't care about facts or any science that refutes your claim.

    Why do you think you have a connection to ancient Macedonia, by the way?

    ReplyDelete
  24. Excavations, findings, genetics, my grandfather. What about you? Why do you think that you are pure Hellene?

    ReplyDelete
  25. So Irish are English? They are speaking English.

    Right, the Irish have a greater claim of being English (they at least speak the language), than you do of being Macedonian (since you don't speak Macedonian, only a Slavic dialect)

    I am Macedonian. Self-declared as such on every census. Are you?

    "Self-declarations" would allow you to claim you are Chinese or Navajo Indian. People are free to claim whatever identity they want, but other people are also free to judge such claims.

    ReplyDelete
  26. >> Why do you think that you are pure Hellene?

    We Greeks are a proud people, but we are no fascists. Intermarriage has always been allowed in our society, so we take it for granted that we absorbed other peoples into our culture. I guess we get more cocky when it comes to preserving our culture and language.

    How about you guys? What extent of paleo-balkanic tribes do you think the advancing Slavs have absorbed when they setteled in the region which is now FYROM ?

    ReplyDelete
  27. Here is another analogue.

    If the Czechs wanted to call themselves Bohemians, others would say how cute and would go along with their lives. But if they decided to call themselves the former Czechoslovakian Republic of Bavaria (or: of Austria), few would condone that:

    just because they were formerly occupied by those neighbors, there is really no direct connection. They have a different culture and no continuity with the Marcomanni, Norici, and those before, nor with the Austrians or Bavarians, speak a different language, and largely genetically displaced (and only very partially absorbed) the original inhabitants when they moved in with that same Slavic expansion.

    It would be at best a bad joke to any reasonable human being. Now if they also made advances towards dominating a new greater Austro-Bavarian empire, it would simply be criminal - in the Völkerrecht sense.

    ReplyDelete
  28. And if you buy in now, you get these for free:

    ALASKA: The Former United States Republic of Siberia, center of the newly proposed Greater Siberia, covering most of Russia.

    TIBET: The Former Chinese Republic of England, center of the newly devised Greater United Kingdom, covering the entire Indian subcontinent and much of the former and present Anglo-Saxia.

    ALSACE: The former French Republic of Southwest Rhineland, center of the newly conceived Greater Unified Frankenland, covering all of France, Belgium, Southern Netherlands, and Western Germany.

    TYROL: The former Italian Republic of Oetzi Alps, center of the newly envisioned Austrian-Hungarian Empire.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Nobody is allowed to judge my claim according to UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/. Or, it is good for 7 billion people, but it is not good for 2 million Macedonians?
    BTW, language is not connected to ethnogenesis as you claim.

    Ancient peoples and modern peoples are not connected as you try to prove. These two things are different. And I believe that my people absorbed and mixed and assimilated and got assimilated. And as a result of many centuries, I self-declare as Macedonian.

    ReplyDelete
  30. And I will invoke Article 19 of said declaration and will state that, in my opinion, it is an abomination to humanity that an uneducated and misguided political force would even try to sell such a wrong, controversial, offensive, and in the end militant name to its unsuspecting people.

    ReplyDelete
  31. I concur. Such disputes between countries make simple folks in those countries militant both towards each other and among themselves.

    ReplyDelete
  32. What a ridiculous interpretation of Article 19.
    It's not between countries... It's basic self-determination. You are trying to make it sound as some bilateral dispute. It is not. It is simple case of denial of my human rights...

    ReplyDelete
  33. We can talk about political forces which created abominations all we want and make up conspiracy theories. The fact of this matter is that 2mil people (which you call abomination) have the right to be called whatever they want to be called. Do you disagree?

    ReplyDelete
  34. I disagree. Nobody should be allowed to assume another persons' identity especially if they aim to defraud him. This is his human right and there are two and a half million owners of this right in the real Macedonia.
    Skops you will get nothing. Not the land, not the history, not the name. Nothing is all you own and all you deserve.

    ReplyDelete
  35. So in your opinion everyone else has the right to name the Macedonians and Macedonia except the Macedonians.

    What and who gave the Greeks and the international community the right to freely decide on choices of free people? Do I have the right to change the name of Greece? I mean, I believe that your county inhibits my being and you should change your name.

    Please chose another name to call your country, people and language and let me know what you are comfortable with.

    Please bare with me and this exercise.

    ReplyDelete
  36. I will call them Republic of Atens... If you check the historic boundaries, they made it to Macedonia back in 1913. Then they started to change names of inhabited places (3.500 in Macedonia alone) so they can claim Greekness. Then in 1926 the exchange with Ataturk happened, and the ethnic composition of Macedonia went mad.
    So, now you have settlers (Christian orthodox from Izmir and other parts of Turkey) and you have locals, bilingual, slavophones, i.e. real Macedonians.
    I suggest the nationality to be Athenians. And the language to be New Athenian.
    I recommend not using Hellene because it was invented in 19 century. Or 18? Before they all were Romaoi (as we were in Roman Empires).
    Do yoy agree with you new name? It is not even close to Macedonian (the invaders of Athens) so we will have no problems.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Macedonia and the Macedonians do not need naming, they have a name, you are in search for one. Nobody needs fake duplicates and pirate copies. Nobody is telling you what to call yourselves, as long as it's a name from your land and history. Not from ours. Stop acting as if you have a say in what happened in Greece's history, what happens in Greek land now or what will happen in the future. You don't have a say and you will never have. Like I said, NOTHING. Not the land, not the history, not the symbols, not the name. They are not ours only to give them to you. They belong to our dead and to our unborn,Greek speakers all of us who greeted/greet/will greet the sun with the same name Alexander did.

    ReplyDelete
  38. You still haven't answer my question, if you have to chose a name for your people, language and country which will it be? You cant be Greek, chose something else.

    As for the "Greek" history recent and ancient its as clear as the demographic map of today's territory your country occupies. You know it, i know it so lets not dig somewhere where you will find something which you will not like.

    C'mon i have nothing against any people but can you repeat what you are saying with a strait face? You are telling me that Greece has been the most important factor for economic and political instability in the Balkans because you are insecure in your own identity? The Greek people are proud people and they have nothing to prove to anyone.

    We haven't lived in ancient history for 2000 years and we don't need to fight wars anymore. My happiness directly affects yours and vice versa so don't you think its time to live a little?

    ReplyDelete
  39. You obviously don't understand me and it does not surprise me. Do you think I would have a problem to choose? Do you think if I said call me Athenian, Spartan, Macedonian, Epirot, Thessalian, Corinthian, Argive, Theban or Syracusan would change anything? In Homer's time we were called Dannans, so? If I accepted to be called Yunan, Yavan, Rum, Roman, Romanian, Byzantine would create any confusion or crisis? In whose mind?
    Do you think I claim any kind of racial purity? Learn and think again. I come from a nation that has kept the half divine Heracles in its legends and has added the half Arab Digenis Akritas in the last 1200 years. I am as proud of the last foreign slave who cut marble slabs for the Parthenon as I am of Pericles and Phidias. It is your nation that pins its hopes for survival on a borrowed name and history. You can call us anything you like and everyone will still know who we are. But you can not be called Macedonian. It is you who has to choose another name. Maybe then you can get a life as a nation and stop building giant statues to an adopted hero.

    ReplyDelete

Stay on topic. Be polite. Use facts and arguments. Be Brief. Do not post back to back comments in the same thread, unless you absolutely have to. Don't quote excessively. Google before you ask.