Aktuelles
Von:
  • Herzlich Willkommen im Balkanforum
    Sind Sie neu hier? Dann werden Sie Mitglied in unserer Community.
    Bitte hier registrieren

Endlosschleife Part 2: Mazedonier vs. Griechen

[359-336 BC] Philip II (359-336 BC) raises Macedonia into the greatest European Power after subduing all of Macedonia's neighbors - Illyrians, Thracians, and Greeks. The Battle of Chaeronea where the Macedonians defeat the Greeks on August 2, 338 BC, marks an end of Greek history and the beginning of the Macedonian Era. The ancient Greek writer Theopompus declares Philip the greatest man that Europe had ever given.
 
You have to understand that there is a debate and argument these days whether Alexander and his people were Macedonian or Greek. Theres a lot of facts out there, some claiming Alexander and the Macedonians were Greek and others saying they weren’t. The actual story and events in history speak for themselves and are greater evidence than most so called “facts”. And you have to admit that the case for Alexander being Macedonian and not Greek is much much stronger than him being Greek. Greece has a few points they argue with, such as; -They spoke Greek -They played in the Olympics - they had Greek religion - Macedon was a city state - he spread Hellenic culture with the Greek language But the Macedonian arguments are things such as; - they didn’t speak Greek that’s why they were actually called “barbarians” a true fact and a title only for non Greeks - based on that our argument must be true that they didn’t participate in the Olympics because only Greeks were allowed and no barbarians. Philip participated because he conquered Greece but he didn’t let any other Macedonians participate because the Greeks would’ve protested. - even if they did have a Greek religion how does that make them Greek?? Before Macedon came to power, the Greeks were more powerful and influential in the area and people learn religion and culture from the people around them. -at that time the whole of Greek land was made up of city states.Meaning a city and the surrounding area. For example thebes was a city, the city state was all around thebes, the same with Sparta and Athens. They were cities. Macedon wasn’t a “city state”. It was a country with cities inside it like pella, where Alexander was born. - Alexander grandfather was called a philhelene which meant friend of Greeks. I assume you speak English well so you would understand that calling someone who is Greek, “a friend of Greeks” wouldn’t make sense. - the Greeks continually resisted and had to be subdued with force. That’s what the battle of chaeronea was about. The conquering of Greece by its northern neighbors the Macedonians. The thracians and Illyrians weren’t Greek and neither were the Macedonians. - the Greeks fought against Alexander and the Macedonians. They joined the Persians and later the Romans. Why would they do that if Alexander was trying to create a Greek empire and why would they fight against their own empire together with the romans??? Alexander destroyed the city of thebes and sold survivors into slavery. Why would he do that if he was Greek??? -Alexander was always known as Alexander the Macedonian king of Macedonia, never as Alexander the Greek! - Alexander chose the “koine” language which wasn’t a Greek language but a language made up of different languages that was spoken for administrative purposes by people of higher status as the language for his empire, because he was interested in uniting the world and bringing everyone together. Thats the language the bible was translated in, not Greek. The original language of the ancient Greeks was Ancient Greek. Koine and Ancient Greek are not the same language. Todays Greek language is closer to koine, not the original Ancient Greek. - if Macedonia was Greek, why was it always a separate country to Greek land throughout the whole of history, for over 2000 years??? Why is it shown as a separate country and nation on maps of every empire and map anywhere in the world?? - if Macedonia and the Macedonians were Greek, why are they mentioned separately in 100’s of historical qoutes and sources by many different ancient historians????? - if Macedonia was Greek why wasn’t it liberated together with the rest of Greece in 1821??? - if Macedonia was Greek, why are the Macedonians and Macedonia mentioned and referred to separately in the bible???? As you can see, the case for Macedonia being just Macedonian and not Greek, is much stronger and makes a lot more sense than the case of Macedonia being Greek. So if Macedonia isn’t Greek, and has always been just Macedonian, then we are not some slavs who decided to walk down to Macedonia and call themselves Macedonians, but we’re the real Macedonians who have been living in the same land with the same name and the same flag of Alexander for well over 2000 years. Also how can ancient Macedonians be Greek when there has been an ancient Macedonian DNA discovered and a separate ancient Greek DNA which are not related and completely different to one another by the analysts in Madrid and by the igenea swiss institute. Look up “the sub saharan origin of Greeks” Also look up “Y DNA haplogroups in Europe” You’ll see that Greeks have mainly the E1b1b (Africa) haplogroup, which makes sense because they’re the mycenaeans who came from the other side of the Mediterranean and settled on Greek land. Macedonians have the i2 haplogroup, which is the oldest haplogroup in the Balkans and has been there for 1000’s of years so its not possible that they’re slavs who came down from north or Central Europe in the 6th century. How many empires were there throughout history !!! If the Macedonian empire wasn’t Greek, but simply Macedonian, like how true history shows, then Greece really never had an empire or ruled anything. After the Macedonians with Philip and Alexander conquered the Greeks.... the Greeks wouldn’t be free again until 1821 until they were liberated from the Ottoman Empire, while Macedonia was still under ottoman rule until 1913. Now that’s the true history!!!
 
Die Altertumszeug betrifft überhaupt nicht den "Namenskonflikt". Dort wird Skopje auch nie im Bezug genommen. Die Frage, die sich stellt, ist, in der art: Wie kam es dazu, dass man sich plötzlich in der neueren Zeit Makedonen nannte, obwohl man doch immer und meistens als Bulgaren identifiziert wurde. Manche sagen, es gab auch ein Teil slawisierter oder bulgarisierter, die sich dann aber abspalteten.



Sie haben keine Berechtigung Anhänge anzusehen. Anhänge sind ausgeblendet.
 

Anhänge

    Sie haben keine Berechtigung Anhänge anzusehen. Anhänge sind ausgeblendet.
Oben solltest du aber für die Nichtwissenden hinzufügen, dass der GLigorov das sagte, als er noch selbst Präsident dort war, wo manche heute das Gegenteil sagen............und er selbst als derfen Präsi wird darum heute als Bulgare usw.usw. tituliert, um halt dieses fette Fettnäpfchen irgendwie zu erklären.Aber es gibt noch viel mehr Prominente von dort, die sich natürlich nicht gegen Historie und Logik wenden.
 
hirndominanz schrieb:
Oben solltest du aber für die Nichtwissenden hinzufügen, dass der GLigorov das sagte, als er noch selbst Präsident dort war, wo manche heute das Gegenteil sagen............und er selbst als derfen Präsi wird darum heute als Bulgare usw.usw. tituliert, um halt dieses fette Fettnäpfchen irgendwie zu erklären.Aber es gibt noch viel mehr Prominente von dort, die sich natürlich nicht gegen Historie und Logik wenden.
Zum Vergrößern anklicken....
Das Ganze bitte noch einmal auf Deutsch.
 
Du musst dich einloggen oder registrieren, um hier zu antworten.
Zurück
Oben