Saturday, February 26, 2011

Владетели од Македонија



Династија Аргеади

Каран 808-778 п.н.е

Кoeн
Тирима
Пердика ПРВИ 700-678 п.н.е
Аргoј ПРВИ 678-640 п.н.е
Филип ПРВИ 640-602 п.н.е
Аероп ПРВИ 602-576 п.н.е
Алкет ПРВИ 576-547 п.н.е
Аминта ПРВИ 547-498 п.н.е
Александар ПРВИ 498-454 п.н.е
Алкет ВТОРИ 454-448 п.н.е
Пердика ВТОРИ 448-413 п.н.е
Архелaј 413-399 п.н.е
Кратер 399 п.н.е
Орест 399-396 п.н.е
Архелај ВТОРИ 3 96-393 п.н.е
Аминта ВТОРИ 393 п.н.е
Павзаниј 393 п.н.е
Аминта ТРЕТИ 393 п.н.е
Аргoј ВТОРИ 393-392 п.н.е
Аминта ТРЕТИ (повторно назначен) 392-370 п.н.е
Александар ВТОРИ 370-368 п.н.е
Птоломеј ПРВИ 368-365 п.н.е
Пердика ТРЕТИ 365-359 п.н.е
Аминта ЧЕТВРТИ 359-356 п.н.е
Филип ВТОРИ Македонски 359-336 п.н.е
Александар ТРЕТИ Македонски 336-323 п.н.е
Антипатар, Регент на Македонија 334-319 п.н.е
Филип ТРЕТИ Аридеј 323-317 п.н.е
Александар ЧЕТВРТИ 323-310 п.н.е
Пердика, Регент на Македонија 323-321 п.н.е
Антипатар, Регент на Македонија 321-319 п.н.е
Полиперхон, Регент на Македонија 319-317 п.н.е
Касандар, Регент на Македонија 317-306 п.н.е



Династија Антипатриди

Касандар 306-297 п.н.е
Филип ЧЕТВРТИ 297-296 п.н.е
Александар ПЕТTИ 296-294 п.н.е

Антипатар ВТОРИ 296-294 п.н.е


Династија Антигониди

Деметриј ПРВИ ОПСАДНИКОТ - Полиоркет 294-288 п.н.е
Лизимах (делел со Пир Епирски) 288-281 п.н.е
Пир Епирски (делел со Лизимах) 288-285 п.н.е

Птоломеј ВТОРИ ГРОМ - Керавн 281-279 п.н.е
Мелегар 279 п.н.е
Антипатар ВТОРИ 279 п.н.е
Состен (Командант на војската) 279-277 п.н.е
Антигон ВТОРИ Гонат- ЖЕЛЕЗНА ГЛАВА 277-274 п.н.е
Пир Епирски (повторно назначен) 274-272 п.н.е
Антигон ВТОРИ Гонат - ЖЕЛЕЗНАГЛАВА (повторно назначен) 272-239 п.н.е
Деметриј ВТОРИ 239-229 п.н.е
Антигон ТРЕТИ Досон 229-221 п.н.е
Филип ПЕТTИ 221-179 п.н.е
Персеј 179-168 п.н.е




Егеја и Пела






Егеjа бил еден од знчајните и поголеми градови во времето на ДРЕВНА Македонија.Долг пероиод овој град бил престолнина на македонската држава , уште од ПРЕД времето на Каран и Пердика ПРВИ од македонската династија Аргеади .





Каменот-темелник на градот го удрил македнскиот владетел Аминта ТРЕТИ 547-498 п.н.е. со намена да биде главен град на Македонија, да ја замени старата престолнина Егеjа.
Пела се спомнува и од јонскиот историчар Херодот (VII, 123) во врска... со походот на Ксеркс , како и од историчарот Тукидид (II, 99,4 и 100,4) во врска со македонската експанзија и војната против Ситакле, кралот на траки-трибалите. Според Ксенофон, на почетокот на 4 век п.н.е. Пела бил најголемиот македонски град.
Градот Пела вистински го претворил во една прстолнина македнскиот владетел Архелај ПРВИ . Градот привлекувал уметници како Зевск, поетот Тимотеј од Милет и трагичарот Еврипид кој живеел таму сè до неговата смрт пишувајќи и работејќи на продукцијата на неговата драма Архелај.
Пела била седиште на Филип BТОРИ Македонски и Александар Македонски, неговиот син. Во 168 п.н.е.
Пела била ограбена од Римјаните, а нејзиното богатство било пренесено во Рим. Подоцна градот го рушил земјотрес и одново почнува да се гради врз рушевините. Веќе во 180 Луцијан поминувајќи го опишал местото како ''денес незначајно'', со многу малку жители.

Уредувањето во Македонија




Институции :

Политичката огранизација на Македонскота држава наликувало на пирамида со три нивоа: на врвот биле владетелот - ВАСИЛЕОС - ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ и народот, при основата биле државните служби, а по средината биле покраините , над чие заедништво владеел владетелот.
Македонците се до падот под римско робство имаат како уредување монархија. Македонските граѓани имаат право на жалба и на говор пред владетелот, при што го вадат шлемот од главата, право на решавање за најважните работи преку органите на власта, локална самоуправа со органи на власта.
Владетелот немал право да казни Македонец со смртна казна без судење.
Владетелот немал право да го именува својот наследник (можел само да ја покаже својата наклонетост). Според правилото на првородениот владетелски син за наследување на престолот, наследникот, се подразбира, ако одговарал во психофизичка смисла, бил прогласуван од македонското собрание. Во случај на малолетност на наследникот се одредувал регент = старател најчесто од членовите на владетелската куќа, а во тешхи ситуации власта можела да му припадне на член од најтесното семејсгво (брат или чичко). Таков е случајот со доаѓањето на власт на ФИЛП ВТОРИ а веројатно за тоа решиле македонските првенци.



ВЛАДЕТЕЛОТ бил глава на централната администрација: тој ја водел државата од престолнината прво Егеа а потоа Пела и државната ризница се наоѓала во неговиот дворец. ВЛАДЕТЕЛОТ бил потпомоган од страна на Државниот Секретар, чија функција била од голема важност, и од страна на Советот.
ВЛАДЕТЕЛОТ бил врховен водач на војската, глава на македонската религија, управувал со дипломатијата (само тој можел да склучува меѓународни договори) и само тој го имал правото на издавање на пари.
Бројот на државните службеници бил ограничен: владетелот управувал на индиректен начин, главно преку локалните управители, епистатите со кои одржувал редовни контакти.




Наследување :

Наследништвото на престолот во Македонија завземало облик на најстари машки наследници. Исто така постоел и изборен елемент: кога Владетелот умирал, назначениот престолонаследник, генерално, но не секогаш неговиот насјтар син, морал најпрвин да биде прифатен од страна на Советот и потоа представен пред генералното Собрание за да биде прогласен за Владетел и да се заколне на верност.
Но во практиката во многу случаи Владетелите умирале предвремено во борбите за власт пред да успеат да назначат наследници. Ова е случај со Пердика ТРЕТИ кој бил убиен од илирите, Филип ВТОРИ Македонски, кој бил убиен од атентаторот Павзаниј, Александар Македонски и тн. Ваквите кризи за наследноста биле чести до 4 век п.н.е., кога магнатите од Горна Македонија сеуште култивирале амбиции за елиминација на Аргеадите и преземање на престолот.
Дека Македонците го избирале владетелот се гледа и од молитвата - желба на Александар Македонски:
''' Македонците нека изберат владетелот, владетелот нека ја зачува државата на
Аргеадите и Македонците со владетелот
нека ги прават вообичаените обреди за Аргеадите"
По смртта пак на владетелот неговите инсигнии: дијадемата, облеката за крунисување, печатот и оружјето биле ставани на престолот од каде ги земал новоизбраниот владетел.




Финансии :

Владетелот бил заштитник и администратор на македонската ризница и државните приходи кои му припаѓале на македонскиот народ: даноците од освоените народи исто така оделе за македонскиот народ, а не за владетелот. Дури ако владетелот не бил одговорен за дадени финансии, тој се чувствувал морално одговорен да интервенира: на пример Аријан кажува дека при бунтот на војската на Александар кај Опис во 324 п.н.е., Александар морал да ги прикаже сметките од неговото наследство при смртта на неговиот татко за да покаже дека нема направено никаква финансиска злоупотреба.
Од Ливиј и Полибиј знаеме дека државата се снабдувала со финансии од следниве извори:
- Рудниците за злато и сребро (како Пангај - Пајак планина), на пример, кои биле во сопственост на Владетелот и од чија руда се правеле парите.
- Правата за ковање на поситни пари од бронза и сл. потоа се предавале на регионалните власти. 

Шумите,чие дрво било високо ценето од страна на атињаните за бродоградба: Атина склучувала трговски договори со Македонија во 5 век п.н.е. за увоз на дрво за бродоградба.
Владетелските поседи кои биле земја здобиена по пат на освојување и била исползувана директно или со помош на работната сила на воeни затвореници, како и индиректно преку даночен систем. 

- Царина на пристаништата која се однесувала на трговијата (давачки за увоз и извоз).
Најчестиот извор на приход било давањето под наем: Аминта ТРЕТИ (или можеби Филип ВТОРИ) ги удвоил пригодите на пристаништата со помош на Калистрат, кој избегал во Македонија и донел 20 до 40 теленти за една година. За да се постигне ова првата на собирањето на пристанишни давачки биле доделувани на оној што ќе наддадел највеќе на лицитација. Ливиј кажува дека рудниците и шумите исто така се давале под наем.
Со исклучок на поседите на Владетелот, земјата во Македонија била бесплатна: сите македонци биле слободни граѓани и никој не плаќал давачки никому за користење на туѓа земја. Дури и даноците во кризни ситуации кои биле нормални насекаде не постоеле во Македонија. На пример економските кризи на Александар Македонски во 334 п.н.е. и Персеј во 168 п.н.е. не резултирале со воведување на данок, туку кризите се решавале по пат на заеми или покачување на наемнини.
Владетелот исто така повремено ослободувал некои луѓе од било какви давачки како на пример во случајот на семејствата на загинатите борци во битката кај Граник во Мај 334 год. п.н.е. кои биле ослободени од плаќање наемнина за користење на имотот на владетелот, како и други стопански давачки.





Mакедонското собрание.

Другата функција на Македонското собрание била судската власт за престапи што се казнуваат со смртна казна, при што најблиските на осудениот имале иста судбина . Притоа владетелот имал улога на јавен обвинител и го водел судењето, а обвинетиот сам се бранел. Казната најчесто се состоела во каменување.Mакедонското собрание не ја ограничувало власта на владетелот.

Mакедонија (ПЕЛАЗГИ)


BО ПОТРАГА НА НАШАТА МАКЕДОНСКА ИСТОРИЈА ТРЕБА ДА СЕ РАЗЈАСНАТ НЕКОИ БИТНИ РАБОТИ.
Да  разбереме една многу важна работа,АНТИЧКИ ХЕЛЛЕНИ ИЛИ ГРЦИ или држава НЕМА .
ИМЕТО ''Грци'' - GRECI - на народите или ЕКС ГРАДОВИТЕ ДРЖАВИ под преминот Термобили им го даваат римјаните ПОСЛЕ БИТКАТА НА МЕСТОТО ГРЕКО . ЗНАЧИ НИВНОТО ИМЕ И БИЛО НАМЕТНАТО ОД СТРАНА НА РИМЈАНИТЕ.
Греко било едно мало место населено со крадци и измамници . Греко на нивниот јазик значи крадец и измамник.
КОГА СЕ ФОРМИРАЛО ПРВОТО ГРЧКО КРАЛСТВО ЗА ПРВ ПАТ ВО ИСТОРИЈАТА 1829 НА ЧЕЛО СО ЕДЕН АВСТРИСКИ КРАЛ , ГРЦИТЕ ПАК СИ ГО МЕНАТ ИМЕТО ВО ХЕЛЛАС ИЛИ ЕЛЛАС  кога сватиле што значи нивното име.
НИКОГАШ ПРЕД 1829 НЕМАЛО ХЕЛЛЕНИ ИЛИ ГРЦИ ИЛИ ХЕЛЛЕНСКА ИЛИ ГРЧКА ДРЖАВА.

Попознати градови држава од времето на 4 век п.н.е кои биле во контакт со Македонците се :
- Теба кој основачи биле феникијците
- Атина кој прво бил пелазгиски град но потоа бил освоен од пирати од Јонија, земја во Мало Азија (СОНАРОДНИЦИ НА АТИЊАНИТЕ) и нормално тие зборувале различен јазик од пелазгите,потоа пелазгите од таа зона биле претопени .

- Спарта кој бил оформен од воени ветерани и вечен ривал на Атина и како робови имале пелазги што работеле на полињата за нив.
Другите биле Пелазги како што се Коринт. ДОДЕКА Етолија, Акаранија Епир И Тесалија биле монархии и не биле градови држави . Hивните корени се од пелазгиско потекло.

ПЕЛАЗГИ НЕ СЕ НИШТО ДРУГО ОСВЕН БЕЛЦИ - БЕЛИ  белиот народ .. ПЕЛА - БЕЛА - ПЕЛАСКИ - ПEЛАЗГИ ЗНАЧИ : ПЕЛАЗГИ ИЛИ ПЕЛАСКИ (PELAZGIANS) БИЛО БЕЛОТО ДОМОРОДНО НАСЕЛЕНИЕ ОД ЈУЖНИОТ ДЕЛ НА МАКЕДОНСКИОТ ПОЛУОСТРОВ КОЈ ПОДОЦНА Е ПРЕИМЕНУВАН КАКО ''БАЛКАНСКИ ПОЛУОСТРОВ'' КАКО И НЕГОВОТО ДОМОРОДНО НАСЕЛЕНИЕ ШТО ПОВЕЌЕ ПАТИ БИЛО ПРОБАНО ДА СЕ ПРЕИМЕНУВА И АСИМИЛИРА НИЗ ВЕКОВИТЕ ПA И CE ДО ДЕН ДЕНЕШЕН.

Светите местa на македонците

Нај важни богови за македонците пред да ја земат Христијанската Вера па и други вери биле вератa во БОЖИЦАТА МАЈКА - МА (ЗЕМЈАТА) и ИЛE БОГОТ НА СОНЦЕТО (СОНЦЕТО) .


ГЛАВНО КУЛТНО МЕСТО НА БОГОТ ИЛЕ БИЛO ВО ХРАМOT НА ПЛАНИНАТА ОЛИМП - храм кој се наоѓал на северната страна на планината Олимп и, каде македонските владетели и ги приредувале Олимписките игри на Богот на сонцето Иле и бил обожаван и од другите народи во форма на друго име.
ДОДЕКА ГЛАВНО КУЛТНО МЕСТО СО ХРАМ - храм кој се наоѓал на источната страна на Родопските Планини , КАДЕ СЕ ОБОЖАВАЛА ГОЛЕМАТА МАЈКА МА БИЛО НА МЕСТОТО ХИПЕР - ИКОН - НАЈ-СВЕТОТО МЕСТО ЗА МАКЕДОНЦИТЕ кое место било спомнато и во книгата на Хомер : Илиада и Одисеjа за време на војната во Илион (Тројанската војна) .Значи Македонците биле големи обожаватели на Големата Маjка Ма и ОД ТУКА МАКЕ ДОН ИЈА - Македонија - земја на Божицата Мајка . На тоа место дошол и младиот македонски владетел Александар каде свештениците му прескажале дека ќе го освои светот a походот против Персија ќе биде успешен.

Македонците се едни од првите народи што воведуваат пари и монетарен систем во светот






















Македонија во картата на светот според Клавдиј Птоломеј (ок.100-178 г.н.е.)



Wednesday, February 23, 2011

Ethnicity of the Ancient Macedonians (part 3)

LIVY

Roman Historian

"Such were the activities of the Romans and of Philip on land during that summer. At the beginning of the same summer, the fleet, commanded by the legate Lucius Apustius, left Corcyra, rounded Cape Malea, and joined King Attalus of Scyllaeum, in the region of Hermoine. Hitherto the resentment of the Athenian community against Philip had been kept in check by fear; but now, with the hope of assistance ready at hand, they gave free rein to their anger. There is never any lack at Athenian tongues ready and willing to stir up the passion of the common people; this kind of oratory is nurtured by the applause of the mob in all free communities; but this is especially true of Athens, where eloquence has the greatest influence. The popular assembly immediately carried a proposal that all statues of Philip and all portraits of him, with their inscriptions, and also those of his ancestors of either sex, should be removed and destroyed; that all feast-days, rites, and priesthoods instituted in honour of Philip or his ancestors should be deprived of sanctity; that even the sites of any memorials or inscriptions in his honour should be held accursed, and that it should not be lawful thereafter to decide to set up or dedicate on those sites any of those things which might lawfully be set up or dedicated on an undefiled site; that whenever the priests of the people offered prayer on behalf of the Athenian people and their allies, their armies and navies, they should on every occasion HEAP CURSES and execrations on Philip, his family and his realm, his forces on land and sea, AND THE WHOLE RACE AND NAME OF THE MACEDONIANS."

There was appended to this decree a provision that if anyone afterwards should bring forward a proposal tending to bring on Philip disgrace or dishonour then the Athenian people would pass it in its entirety; whereas if anyone should by word or deed seek to counter his disgrace, or to enhance his honour, the killing of such a person would be lawful homicide. A final clause provided that all the decrees formerly passed against the Pisistratidae should be observed in regard to Philip. This was the Athenians' war against Philip, a war of words, written or spoken, for that is where their only strength lies." [Livy's book XXXI.44]

The most pressing point, the one that screams for recognition, is the call for the Athenian people to (a) "heap curses and execrations on Philip, his family and his realm, his forces on land and sea, and the whole race and name of the Macedonians, and (b) whereas if anyone should by word or deed seek to counter his disgrace, or to enhance his honour, the killing of such a person would be lawful homicide.

In conclusion one must remember the following:

(a) The ancient Greeks regarded the ancient Macedonians as foreigners.

(b) They regarded the ancient Macedonians as people of different race.

(c) They regarded the ancient Macedonians as barbarians, as people who enslaved the Greeks.

(d) This episode describes the situation in Athens around 200 B.C.

(e) It should constantly be born in mind the intensity of the hate expressed towards the conqueror from the north - the Macedonians. If anyone in as much as utter a one positive word for Philip, then this person should be killed, and the killing of that person would be taken as lawful homicide. These feelings were mutual by the way.

(f) The suggestion by some authors (marginal lot, anyway) that these two dissimilar people "blended together" in some aspects of their culture becomes much harder to accept, and therefore, is rejected based such credible evidence.

It is apparent that ancient Greeks did not consider the ancient Macedonians as Greeks. Modern Greeks' assertion that ancient Macedonians were Greeks is constantly undermined by the view of the ancients. The fact remains that ancient Macedonians were just that - Macedonians. 
 
POLYBIUS

Greek Statesman and Historian. [c 200-118 B.C.]

The Rise of the Roman Empire

"The fact is that we can obtain no more than an impression of a whole from a part, but certainly neither a thorough knowledge nor an accurate understanding. We must conclude then that specialized studies or monographs contribute very little to our grasp of the whole and our conviction of its truth. On the contrary, it is only by combining and comparing the various parts of the whole with one another and noting their resemblances and their differences that we shall arrive at a comprehensive view, and thus encompass both the practical benefits and the pleasure that the reading of history affords." [p 45]

[How true, indeed. By combining and comparing various statements from the ancient authors can we arrive to the truest picture of the ancients themselves. Let them speak of themselves, and let their true sentiments flood the pages uncorrupted and free of any biased and preconceived prejudices. Only then, can we assess the magnitude of their purity of soul, and the passion for their national aspirations.]

[1] Polibius reports on the speech made by Agelaus of Naupactus at the first conference in the presence of the King and the allies. He spoke as follows:

"I therefore beg you all to be on your guard against this danger, and I appeal especially to King Philip. [Macedonian king Philip V] For you the safest policy, instead of wearing down the Greeks and making them an easy prey for the invader, is to take care of them as you would of your own body, and to protect every province of Greece as you would if it were a part of your own dominions. If you follow this policy, the Greeks will be your friends and your faithful allies in case of attack, and foreigners will be the less inclined to plot against your throne, because they will be discouraged by the loyalty of the Greeks towards you." [p .300] book 5.104

Points of Interest: Clear distinction between Greece (to protect every province of Greece) and Macedonia (as you would if it were a part of your own dominions). Furthermore, the Macedonians were still wearing down the Greeks even into the times of Philip V.

[2] [Book XVIII, 1] Philip V from Macedon invites Flamininus (Roman commander) to explain what he, Philip, should do to have peace:

"The Roman general replied that his duty dictated an answer which was both simple and clear. He demanded that Philip should withdraw from the whole of Greece, restore to each of the states the prisoners and deserters he was holding, hand over to the Romans the region of Illyria which he had seized after the treaty that had been made in Epirus, and so on...."

[Point of interest: "Philip should withdraw from the whole of Greece," Flamininus, the Roman general, clearly separates Macedonia from Greece, and demands from the Macedonin king to withdraw from Greece into his own Macedonia.]

[3] (Book XVIII. 3) A man named Alexander of Isus, who had the reputation of being both an experienced statesman and an able orator, rose to speak:

'Why,' he asked Philip V, 'had he sold into slavery the people of Cius, which was also a member of the Aetolian League, when he himself was on friendly terms with the Aetolians?'

[Philip sells the people of Cius into slavery. Cuis' population was not a Macedonian population. Philip's action underlines one fundamental fact: Greece was a conquered territory, and Greek cities were dispensable.]

[4] (Book XVIII. 5) Philip V from Macedon responds to the Greek and Roman demands:

"But what is most outrageous of all is that they should attempt to put themselves on the same footing as the Romans and demand that the Macedonians should withdraw from the whole of Greece. To use such language is arrogant enough in the first place, but while we may endure this from the Romans, it is quite intolerable coming from the Aetolians. In any case,' he continued, 'what is this Greece which you demand that I should evacuate, and how do you define Greece? Certainly most of the Aetolians themselves are not Greeks! The countries of the Agraae, the Apodotea, and the Aphilochians cannot be regarded as Greek. So do you allow me to remain in those territories."

From the above encounters we infer: They, the Greeks, would like to see him, King Philip V from Macedon, leave Greece and go to his own kingdom in Macedonia, and by the strongest implication, we concur that:

(a) Ancient Greeks did not regard the ancient Macedonians as their kinsmen.

(b) Ancient Macedonians did not regard the Greeks as their own people.

(c) Ancient Macedonians had conquered the Greek states.

(d) Ancient Macedonians had enslaved the Greeks and sold them as slaves.

(e) Macedonia was not a Greek land.

[5] …"For there can be no doubt that by their indefatigable energy and daring they raised Macedonia from the status of a petty kingdom to that of the greatest and most glorious monarchy in the world. And apart what was accomplished during Philip's lifetime, the successes that were achieved by Alexander after his father's death won for them a reputation for valour which has been universally recognized by posterity.".... [Polybius: The Rise of the Roman Empire, published by Penguin Classics, Book VIII.9 page 371.] 
ARRIAN

Greek Historian

The Campaigns of Alexander

[1] "Destiny had decreed that Macedon should wrest the sovereignty of Asia from Persia, as Persia once had wrested it from the Medes, and the Medes, in turn, from the Assyrians." [p. 111]

[2] "Our enemies are Medes and Persians, men who for centuries have lived soft and luxurious lives; we of Macedon for generations past have been trained in the hard school of danger and war. Above all, we are free men, and they are slaves." [p.112]

[3] "When received the report that Alexander was moving forward to the attack, he sent some 30,000 mounted troops and 20,000 light infantry across the river Pinarus, to give himself a chance of getting the main body of his army into position without molestation. His dispositions were as follows:

in the van of his heavy infantry were his 30,000 Greek mercenaries, facing the Macedonian infantry, with some 60,000 Persian heavy infantry- known as Kardakes." [p.114]

[4] [Book II - Battle of Issus] "Darius' Greeks fought to thrust the Macedonians back into the water and save the day for their left wing, already in retreat, while the Macedonians, in their turn, with Alexander's triumph plain before their eyes, were determined to equal his success and not forfeit the proud title of invincible, hitherto universally bestowed upon them. The fight was further embittered by the old racial rivalry of Greek and Macedonian." [p.119]

[5] "The cavalry action which ensued was desperate enough, and the Persians broke only when they knew that the Greek mercenaries were being cut and destroyed by the Macedonian infantry." [p.119-20]

[6] "The same painstaking attention to details is evident in administrative matters. Appointments of governors are duly mentioned, and throughout his book Arrian is careful to give the father's name in the case of Macedonians, e.g. Ptolemy son of Lagus, and in the case of Greeks their city of origin." [p.25]

[7] "In the spring of 334 Alexander set out from Macedonia, leaving Antipater with 12,000 infantry and 1,500 cavalry to defend the homeland and to keep watch on the Greek states." [p.34]

[8] "The backbone of the infantry was the Macedonian heavy infantry, the 'Foot Companions', organized on territorial basis in six battalions (taxeis) of about 1,500 men each. In place of the nine-foot spear carried by the Greek hoplite, the Macedonian infantryman was armed with a pike or sarissa about 13 or 14 feet long, which required both hands to wield it. The light circular shield was slung on the left shoulder, and was smaller than that carried by the Greek hoplite which demanded the use of the left arm. Both, Greek and Macedonian infantry wore greaves and a helmet, but it is possible that the Macedonians did not wear a breastplate. The phalanx (a heavy infantry), like all the Macedonian troops had been brought by Philip to a remarkable standard of training and discipline." [p.35]

[9] Modern Greeks, have used this particular passage as evidence of Alexander's greekness. Alexander sent to Athens, as an offering to the goddess Athena, 300 full suits of Persian armor, with the following inscription:

"Alexander, son of Philip, and the Greeks (except the Lacedaemonians) dedicate these spoils, taken from the Persians who dwell in Asia." [p.76]

J.R. Hamilton, Associate professor of Classics and Ancient History from the University of Auckland, New Zealand, writes: 'In view of the small part that the Greeks had played in the battle the inscription (with its omission of any mention of the Macedonians) must be regarded as propaganda designed for his Greek allies. Alexander does not fail to stress the absence of the Spartans.'

[10] Alexander's rationale as to why he would not like to engage the Persian fleet in a battle:

"In the first place, it was to rush blindly into a naval engagement against greatly superior forces, and with an untrained fleet against highly trained Cyprian and Phoenician crews; the sea, morever, was a tricky thing - one could not trust it, and he was not going to risk making a present to the Persians of all the skill and courage of his men; as to defeat, it would be very serious indeed and would affect profoundly the general attitude to the war in its early stages, above all by encouraging the Greeks to revolt the moment they got news of a Persian success at sea." [p.80]

[11] Alexander speaking to his officers: ".......But let me remind you: Through your courage and endurance you have gained possession of Ionia, the Hellespont, both Phrygias, Cappadocia, Paphlagonia, Lydia, Caria, Lycia, Pamphylia, Phoenicia and Egypt; the Greek part of Libya is now yours, together with much of Arabia, lowland Syria, Mesopotamia, Babylon, and Susia;........." [p.292]

[12] Alexander addressing his troops: With all that accomplished, why do you hesitate to extend the power of Macedon - your power - to the Hyphasis and the tribes on the other side? [p.293] Arrian, book 5.

[13] Alexander continues to address his troops: "Gentlemen of Macedon, and you my friends and allies, this must not be. Stand firm; for well you know that hardship and danger are the price of glory, and that sweet is the savour of a life of courage and of deathless renown beyond the grave." [p.294]

[14] Alexander continues to speak to his Macedonians and allies: "Come, then; add the rest of Asia to what you already possess - a small addition to the great sum of your conquests. What great or noble work could we ourselves have achieved had we thought it enough, living at ease in Macedon, merely to guard our homes, excepting no burden beyond checking the encroachment of the Thracians on our borders, or the Illyrians and Triballians, or perhaps such Greeks as might prove a menace to our comfort." [p.294] Arrian, Book 5.
 
PLUTARCH

The Age of Alexander

[1] "Alexander was born on the sixth day of the month Hecatombaeon, which the Macedonians call Lous, the same day on which the temple of Artemis at Ephesus was burned down." [p.254] [Macedonians had a their own distinct calendar]

[2] Alexander was only twenty years old when he inherited his kingdom, which at the moment was beset by formidable jealousies and feuds, and external dangers on every side. The neighboring barbarian tribes were eager to throw off the Macedonian yoke and longed for the rule of their native kings: As for the Greek states, although Philip had defeated them in battle, he had not had time to subdue them or accustomed them to his authority. Alexander's Macedonian advisers feared that a crisis was at hand and urged the young king to leave the Greek states to their own devices and refrain from using any force against them. [p.263] [Alexander chose the opposite course] Plutarch never said that Philip "united" the Greeks, but he states that Philip "defeated" them in battle.

[3] Alexander returns from the campaigns at the Danube, north of Macedon. When the news reached him that the Thebans had revolted and were being supported by the Athenians, he immediately marched south through the pass of Thermopylae. 'Demosthenes', he said, 'call me a boy while I was in Illyria and among the Triballi, and a youth when I was marching through Thessaly; I will show him I am a man by the time I reach the walls of Athens.' [p.264]

[4] "Thebans countered by demanding the surrender of Philotas and Antipater and appealing to all who wished to liberate Greece to range themselves on their side, and at this Alexander ordered his troops to prepare for battle." [p.264] [The ones who want to liberate Greece against the Macedonian troops]

[5] Alexander asks a women, who was being taken captive, who she was, she replied: 'I am the sister of Theogenes who commanded our army against your father, Philip, and fell at Chaeronea fighting for the liberty of Greece.' [p.265]

[6] There is a story that on one occasion when a large company had been invited to dine with the king, Callisthenes (Alexander's biographer) was called upon, as the cup passed to him, to speak in praise of the Macedonians. This theme he handled so eloquently that the guests rose to applaud and threw their garlands at him. At this Alexander quoted Euripides' line from the Bacchae On noble subjects all men can speak well. 'But now', he went on, 'show us the power of your eloquency by criticizing the Macedonians so that they can recognize their shortcomings and improve themselves.' Callisthenes then turned to the other side of the picture and delivered a long list of home truths about the Macedonians, pointing out that the rise of Philip's power had been brought about by the division among the rest of the Greeks, and quoting the verse Once civil strife has begun, even scoundrels may find themselves honoured. The speech earned him the implacable hatred of the Macedonians, and Alexander that it was not his eloquence that Callisthenes had demonstrated, but his ill will towards them. [p.311]

[7] Alexander's letter to Antipater in which he includes Callisthenes in the general accusation, he writes: 'The youths were stoned to death by the Macedonians, but as far as the sophist I shall punish him myself, and I shall not forget those who sent him to me, or the others who give shelter in their cities to those who plot against my life.' In those words, at least, he plainly reveals his hostility to Aristotle in whose house Callisthenes had been brought up, since he was a son of Hero, who was Aristotle's niece.' [p.133]

[8] Cassander's fear of Alexander 'In general, we are told, this fear was implanted so deeply and took such hold of Cassander's mind that even many years later, when he had become king of Macedonia and master of Greece, and was walking about one day looking at the sculpture at Delphi, the mere sight of a statue of Alexander struck him with horror, so that he sguddered and trembled in every limb, his head swam, and he could scarcely regain control of himself.' [p.331]

[9] 'It was Asclepiades, the son of Hipparchus, who first brought the news of Alexander's death to Athens. When it was made public, Demades urged the people not to believe it: If Alexander were really dead, he declared, the stench of the corpse would have filled the whole world long before.' [p.237] [This is how much the ancient Greeks hated Alexander]

[10] Lamian War 323-322 is also known as the "Hellenic War" by its protagonists. The Greeks, the Hellenes, were fighting the Macedonians led by Antipater at Lamia.

[11] [Modern day Greeks would like to dispatch off Demosthenes castigations of Philip II as political rhetoric, and yet Demosthenes was twice appointed to lead the war effort of Athens against Macedonia. He, Demosthenes, said of Philip that Philip was not Greek, nor related to Greeks but comes from Macedonia where a person could not even buy a decent slave. 'Soon after his death the people of Athens paid him fitting honours by erecting his statue in bronze, and by decreeing that the eldest member of his family should be maintained in the prytaneum at the public expense. On the base of his statue was carved his famous inscription: 'If only your strength had been equal, Demosthenes, to your wisdom Never would Greece have been ruled by a Macedonian Ares' [p.216]

[12] "While Demosthenes was still in exile, Alexander died in Babylon, and the Greek states combined yet again to form a league against Macedon. Demosthenes attached himself to the Athenian convoys, and threw all his energies into helping them incite the various states to attack the Macedonians and drive them out of Greece." [p.212]

[13] The news of Philip's death reached Athens. Demosthenes appeared in public dressed in magnificent attire and wearing a garland on his head, although his daughter had died only six days before. Aeshines states: "For my part I cannot say that the Athenians did themselves any credit in putting on garlands and offering sacrifices to celebrate the death of a king who, when he was the conqueror and they the conquered had treated them with such tolerance and humanity. Far apart from provoking the anger of the gods, it was a contemptible action to make Philip a citizen of Athens and pay him honours while he was alive, and then, as soon as he has fallen by another's hand, to be besides themselves with joy, tremple on his body, and sing paeans of victory, as though they themselves have accomplished some great feat of arms." [p.207]

[14] "Next when Macedonia was at war with the citizens of Byzantium and Perinthus, Demosthenes persuaded the Athenians to lay aside their grievances and forget the wrongs they had suffered from these peoples in the Social War and to dispatch a force which succeeded in relieving both cities. After this he set off on a diplomatic mission, which was designed to kindle the spirit of resistance to Philip and which took him all over Greece. Finally he succeeded in uniting almost all the states into a confederation against Philip." [p.202]

[15] "The maladies and defects in the Greek scene of the fourth century were not hard to find. But its great and overriding merit is summed up in the word 'freedom.' With allowance made for the infinite variety promoted by so many independent governments, Greece was still broadly speaking a free country. This freedom was threatened and in the end extinguished by the coming of the great Macedonians." [p.8] [In Plutarch The Age of Alexander, noted by J.T.Griffith]

[16] "What better can we say about jealousies, and that league and conspiracy of the Greeks for their own mischief, which arrested fortune in full career, and turned back arms that were already uplifted against the barbarians to be used against themselves, and recall into Greece the war which had been banished out of her? I by no means assent to Demaratus of Corinth, who said that those Greeks lost a great satisfaction that did not live to see Alexander sit on the throne of Darius. That sight should rather have drawn tears from them, when they considered that they have left the glory to Alexander and the Macedonians, whilst they spent all their own great commanders in playing them against each other in the fields of Leuctra, Coronea, Corinth, and Arcadia." [Plutarch "Lives" vol.2 The Dryden Translation. Edited and Revised by Arthur Hugh Clough p.50] 
QUINTUS CURTIUS RUFUS

Roman Historian

The History of Alexander

[1] "Alexander meanwhile dealt swiftly with the unrest in Greece - not only did the Athenians rejoice at Philip’s death, but the Aetolians, the Thebans, as well as Spartans and the Peloponnesians, were ready to throw off the Macedonian yoke. (Diod. 17.3.3-5) - and he marched south into Thessaly, demanding the loyalty of its people in the name of their common ancestors, Achilles (Justin 11.3.1-2; cf. Diod. 17.4.1). And with speed and diplomacy Alexander brought the Thebans and Athenians into submission (Diod. 17.4.4-6) [p.20]

[The "unrest in Greece" encompasses all the city-states in Greece. These city-states were ready to throw off the Macedonian yoke. Here we have a clear delineation between Greek city-states, who were the conquered party, and Macedonia, the conqueror. This quote in a very unambiguous way illustrates how pitiful and ridiculous is the modern Greeks’ position when they claim, or equate, Macedonia as being one of, or the same as, the Greek city states. "Thebans and Athenians into submission" means one thing: Greece was won by the spear; it was a war of conquest. Therefore, modern Greeks’ position that Alexander "united" the Greek city-states, rests on euphemistic foundation, and as such, has no validity with historical justice. Bottom line is, that there was no "unification" of the Greek states by Alexander or his father Philip II. When one "unifies" one does not force submission of the subjects. When one unifies, there is no "yoke" to be thrown off.]

[2] "It was decided to raze the city to the ground as a lesson to all Greek states which contemplated rebellion." [p.21] [Point of interest: "as a lesson to all Greek states". This statement indicates that Macedonia was not, and could not be included in Greece, for Macedonia was the one "giving" the lesson.]

[3] "Alexander also referred to his father, Philip, conqueror of Athenians, and recalled to their minds the recent conquest of Boeotia and the annihilation of its best known city." [p.41]

[4] Alexander, in a letter, responds to Darius: "His Majesty Alexander to Darius: Greetings. The Darius whose name you have assumed wrought utter destruction upon the Greek inhabitants of the Hellespontine coast and upon the Greek colonies of Ionia, and then crossed the sea with a mighty army, bringing the war to Macedonia and Greece." [p.50-1] [Alexander here himself clearly separates Greece from Macedonia]

[5] "From here the Macedonians crossed to Mitylene which had been recently seized by the Athenian Chares, and was now held by him with a garrison of Persians, 2,000 strong. Unable to withstand the siege, Chares surrendered the city on condition that he be allowed to leave in safety, after which he made for Imbros. The Macedonians spared those who surrender." [p.63]

["Athenian" Chares with 2,000 of Persian soldiers fighting against Alexander’s Macedonians. Another example of Greeks fighting against Macedonia. If this was a war to revenge Greece from Persia, Greeks would have not have fighting on the side of the Persians against the Macedonians. The truth is that they hated the Macedonians more for conquering Greece, then they did the Persians.]

[6] "There is a report that, after the king had completed the Macedonian custom of marking out the circular boundary for the future city-walls with barley-meal, flocks of birds flew down and fed on the barley. Many regarded this as unfavorable omen, but the verdict of the seers was that the city would have a large immigrant population and would provide the means of livelihood to many countries." [p.69] [The Macedonians had their own distinct customs]

[7] "As it happened, Alexander had been sent from Macedonia a present of Macedonian clothes and a large quantity of purple material." [p.97] [Macedonian clothes, and purple material. (Macedonian customs 2) Macedonians dressed differently than the Greeks. One very peculiar feature being the kautsia, the well known Macedonian hat.]

[8] "...but the king’s conscience would not permit him to leave his men unburied, for by Macedonian convention there is hardly any duty in military life as binding as burial of one’s dead." [p.100]

[9] Inflamed with greed for kingship, Bessus and Nabarzanes now decided to carry out the plan they had long been hatching. [The plot to kill Darius the III.] "If, as they feared, Alexander rejected their treacherous overtures, they would murder Darius and head for Bactria with the troops of their own people. However, open arrest of Darius was impossible because the Persians, many thousands strong would come to the aid of their king, and the loyalty of the Greeks also caused apprehension." [p.111] [The Greeks remained loyal to Persia and against Alexander and his Macedonians to the end]

[9] Patron, the Greek commander, speaks with Darius: "Your Majesty", said Patron, "we few are all that remain of 50,000 Greeks. We were all with you in your more fortunate days, and in your present situation we remain as we were when you were prospering, ready to make for and to accept as our country and our home any lands you choose. We and you have been drawn together both by your prosperity and your adversity. By this inviolable loyalty of ours I beg and beseech you: pitch your tent in our area of the camp and let us be your bodyguards. We have left Greece behind; for us there is no Bactria; our hopes rest entirely in you - I wish that were true of the others also! Further talk serves no purpose. As a foreigner born of another race I should not be asking for the responsibility of guarding your person if I thought anyone else could do it." [p.112-13]

[50,000 strong Greeks were with Darius fighting the Macedonians, while Alexander took only 7,000 Greeks next to his Macedonians which served as "hostages" and "were potential trouble makers", (Green) which he got rid of only when he learned that the rebellion in Greece against the Macedonian occupation forces there was suppressed (Badian, Borza). The fact that 50,000 Greeks were fighting Alexander’s Macedonians shows clearly that their loyalty and their numerical superiority lies with Darius and his Persians, not with Alexander and his Macedonians. As Peter Green puts it: "if this was a Greek conquest where were the Greek troops?" Alexander’s conquest can not therefore be at all a Greek conquest, but simply a Macedonian conquest.]

[10] "Men! If you consider the scale of our achievements, your longing for peace and your weariness of brilliant campaigns are not at all surprising. Let me pass over the Illyrians, the Triballians, Boeotia, Thrace, Sparta, the Aecheans, the Peloponnese - all of them subdued under my direct leadership or by campaigns conducted under my orders of instructions." [p.121-22]

[The Greeks of Boeotia, Sparta, Aechea, Peloponnese - "all of them subdued"; Alexander himself cleraly considers Greece subdued, not united]

[11] "In capital cases it was a long-established Macedonian practice for the king to conduct the trial while the army (or the commons in peace-time) acted as jury, and the position of the king counted for nothing unless his influence had been substantial prior to the trial." [p.135] [Another Macedonian custom]

[12] Alexander speaks: "The Macedonians are going to judge your case," he said. "Please state whether you will use your native language before them."

Philotas: "Besides the Macedonians, there are many present who, I think, will find what I am going to say easier to understand if I use the language you yourself have been using, your purpose, I believe, being only to enable more people to understand you."

Then the king said: "Do you see how offensive Philotas find even his native language? He alone feels an aversion to learning it. But let him speak as he pleases - only remember he as contemptuous of our way of life as he is of our language." [p.138]

[This is again Alexander himself clearly separates the Macedonian as an independent language and the Macedonian way of life, from the Greek language and the Greek way of life which Philotas had referred to be the diplomatic language in the Macedonian court]

[13] "The general feeling was that Philotas should be stoned to death according to Macedonian customs, but Hephaestion, Craterus, and Coenus declared that torture should be employed to force the truth out of him, and those who had advocated other punishment went over to their view." [p.142] [Another Macedonian custom]

[14] "What they feared was the Macedonian law which provided the death penalty also for relatives of people who had plotted against the king." [p.143]

[15] "While Alexander was in stationary camp here, reports arrived from Greece of the insurrection of the Peloponnesians and the Laconians." [Alexander learns about the revolt of the Greeks against the Macedonians]

[16] "Roxane’s father was transported with unexpected delight when he heard Alexander’s words, and the king, in the heat of passion, ordered bread to be brought, in accordance with their traditions, for this was the most sacred symbol of betrothal among the Macedonians." [p.187] [Another Macedonian custom]

[17] [Alexander attempts to appropriate divine honours to himself] "He wished to be believed, not just called, the son of Jupiter, as if it were possible for him to have as much control over men’s minds as their tongues, and to give orders for the Macedonians to follow the Persian customs in doing homage to him by prostrating themselves on the ground. To feed this desire of his there was no lack of pernicious flattery - over the course of royalty, whose power is often subverted by adulation than by an enemy. Nor were the Macedonians to blame for this, for none of them could bear the slightest deviation from tradition; rather it was the Greeks, whose corrupt ways had also debased the profession of the liberal arts." [p.187-8] [Macedonian traditions, this passage above, without any ambiguity, strongly implies that the ancient Macedonians were distinct ethnic group of people markedly differed from the Greeks.]

[18] "Accordingly, one festive day, Alexander had a sumptuous banquet organized so that he could invite not only his principle friends among the Macedonians and Greeks but also the enemy nobility." [p.188] [Greeks and Macedonians clearly separated]

[19] [The trial of Hermolaus] "As for you Callisthenes, the only person to think you a man (because you are an assassin), I know why you want him brought forward. It is so that the insult which sometimes uttered against me and sometimes heard from him can be repeated by his lips before this gathering. Were he a Macedonian I would have introduced him here along with you - a teacher truly worth of his pupil. As it is, he is an Olynthian and does not enjoy the same rights." [p.195]

[Calisthenes could not be brought in front of the army (the jury), because he was a Greek and not a Macedonian. Callisthenes’ ethnicity is of primary significance here. Similarly, Eumenes’ ethnicity was the primary determining factor in the final outcome. It is also suggested in Plutarch Eum. 3.1, where Eumenes expresses his belief that, being a foreigner, he had no right to take sides in the dispute which broke out among the Macedonians over the succession to Alexander after the latter’s death. Furthermore, in Diodoros’ narrative 19.13.1 Seleucos urges Eumenes’ officers and men to desert him because he is a foreigner, who, furthermore, has killed many Macedonians. The wealth of evidence supporting the fact that ancient Macedonians were a separate ethnos from the Greeks is overwhelming. Eumenes and Callisthenes, being foreigners, foreign born individuals - Greeks, did not stand a chance among the Macedonians. At the end, their Greek ethnicity cost them their lives.]

[20] [Alexander speaks to his Macedonians] "Where is that shout of yours that shows your enthusiasm? Where that characteristic look of my Macedonians?" [p.217]

[21] "Starting with Macedonia, I now have power over Greece; I have brought Thrace and the Illyrians under my control; rule the Triballi and the Maedi. I have Asia in my possession from the Hellespont to the Red Sea." [p.227]

[22] At a banquet prepared by Alexander for the ambassadors of certain tribes from India, among the invited guest present was the Macedonian Horratas and the Greek boxer named Dioxippus. Now at the feast the Macedonian Horratas who was already drunk, began to make insulting comments to Dioxippus and to challenge him, if he were a man, to fight a duel. Dioxippus agreed and the two men fought rather short fight with Dioxippus emerging a victor. A huge crowd of soldiers, including the Greeks, supported Dioxippus. "The outcome of the show dismayed Alexander, as well as the Macedonian soldiers, especially since the barbarians had been present, for he feared that a mockery had been made of the celebrated Macedonian valour." [p.229]

[23] "But destiny was already bringing civil war upon the Macedonian nation." [p.254]

[24] "The customary purification of the soldiers by the Macedonian kings involved cutting a bitch in two and throwing down her entrails on the left and right at the far end of the plain into which the army was to be led. Then all the soldiers would stand within that area, cavalry in one spot, phalanx in another." [p.255] [Another Macedonian custom]

The difference between ancient Macedonians and the ancient Greeks is obvious. It is not a matter for debate. Language, customs, traditions and the every-day soldier’s behavior, all point to two distinct and separate ethnic groups. In short, the ancient Macedonians were simply that – Macedonians, and the Greeks were foreign people next to them.

Ethnicity of the Ancient Macedonians (part 2)

ISOCRATES

Greek Writer

To Philip

[1] "The feeling of being peoples of nonkindred race existed on both side" referring to Isocrates' statement. Earnst Badian

[2] Isocrates’ letter to Philip II where he, Isocrates refers to Philip "as one who has been blessed with untrammeled freedom to consider Hellas your fatherland" Green calls this a "rhetorical hyperbole". "Indeed, taken as a whole the Address to Philip must have caused its recipient considerable sardonic amusement". [p. 49] "Its ethnic conceit was only equaled by its naivety" [p.49] Peter Green

[3] "And though Philip did not give a fig for Panhellenism as an idea, he at once saw how it could be turned into highly effective camouflage (a notion which his son subsequently took over ready-made). Isocrates had, unwittingly, supplied him with the propaganda-line he needed. From now on he merely had to clothe his Macedonian ambitions in a suitable Panhellenic dress." [p.50] Peter Green

[4] "This was the Panhellenic crusade preached by Isocrates, and as such the king’s propaganda section continued - for the time being - to present it. No one, so far as we know, was tactless enough to ask the obvious question: if this was a Panhellenic crusade, where were the Greek troops? [p. 157] Green

[5] "Isocrates never for an instant thought of a politically unified state under Philip's leadership. It is simply the internal unification of Hellas which he calls on Philip to bring about." [p.37] [Macedonia specifically excluded from Greece] Wilken

Note: Macedonians were not Hellene, and Macedonia was never a member of the Hellenic League, a league that encompassed and "united" all the Greek city-states. Isocrates expanded the term Hellene to include, no racial descent, but mode of thought, and those who partook of Attic culture, rather than those who had a common descent were called Hellene. He saw the true Hellene only in the Greek educated in the Attic model. He did not regard the barbarians of Attic education as Hellenes.

[6] "When Philip read the book, the insistence of his descent from Heracles must have been welcome to him; for in his policy he had to stress this mythical derivation, as the types of Heracles on his coins show. But on the other hand he must have smiled at the naivete shown by Isocrates." [p.36] Wilken

[7] Isocrates must have taken this strong realist for an idealist, such as he was himself, if he believed that Philip would draw his sword for the beaux yeux of the Greeks." [p.36] Wilken

[8] "When Isocrates in this treatise makes so much of Heracles as Philip's ancestor, this was meant not merely for Philip, but for the Greek public as well." [p.35] Wilken

[9] "At the end of his speech, Isocrates, summarizing the programme which he was proposing to Philip, advised him to be a benefector to the Greeks, a king to the Macedonians, and to the barbarians not a master, but a chief." [p.106] PIERRE JOUGUET Alexander the Great and the Hellenistic World

[10] [On Macedonian ethnicity] So little do the Macedonians seem to have belonged to the Hellenic community at the beginning, that they did not take part in the great Games of Greece, and when the Kings of Macedon were admitted to them, it was not as Macedonians, but as Heraclids. Isocrates, in the 'Philip' praises them for not having imposed their kingship on the Hellenes, to whom the kingship is always oppressive, and for having gone among foreigners to establish it. He, therefore, did not regard the Macedonians as Greeks." [p.68] PIERRE JOUGUET Alexander the Great and the Hellenistic World

[11] "In the Panegyricus he [Isocrates] had urged an understanding between Sparta and Athens, so that the Greeks might unite in a common expedition against the Persian empire. Nothing of that sort was any longer thinkable. But the policy of which he now had such high hopes offered a surprisingly simple solution for the distressing problem that lay heavily on all minds the problem of what was to be the ultimate relationship between Greece and the new power in the north (Macedonia)." [p.152] WERNER JAEGER Demosthenes

[12] "But for Isocrates that was no obstacle. He had long since come to recognize the impossibility of resisting Macedonia, and he was only trying to find the least humiliating way to express the unavoidable submission of all the Greeks to the will of Philip. Here again he found the solution in a scheme for Macedonian hegemony over Greece. For it seems as if Philip's appearance in this role would be most effective way to mitigate his becoming so dominant a factor in Greek history; moreover, it ought to silence all Greek prejudices against the culturally and ethnically alien character of the Macedonians." [p.153] WERNER JAEGER

[13] "With the help of the role that Isocrates had assigned to him, he had the astuteness to let his cold-blooded policy for the extension of Macedonian power take on the eyes of the Greeks the appearance of a work of liberation for Hellas. What he most needed at this moment was not force but shrewd propaganda; and nobody lent himself to this purpose so effectively as the old Isocrates, venerable and disinterested, who offered his services of his own free will." [p.155] WERNER JAEGER

[14] "Looking far beyond the actualities of the Greek world, hopelessly split asunder as it was, he (Isocrates) had envisaged a united nation led by the Macedonian king." [p.172] WERNER JAEGER

[15] "Quite apart, however, from any theoretical doubts whether the nationalistic movement of modern times, which seeks to combine in a single state all the individuals of a single folk, can properly be compared with the Greek idea of Panhellenism, scholars have failed to notice that after the unfortunate Peace of Philocrates Demosthenes' whole policy was an unparalleled fight for national unification. In this period he deliberately threw off the constrains of the politician concerned exclusively with Athenian interests, and devoted himself to a task more lofty than any Greek statesman before him had ever projected or indeed could have projected. In this respect he is quite comparable to Isocrates; but an important point of contrast still remains. The difference is simply that Demosthenes did not think of this "unification" as a more or less voluntary submission to the will of the conqueror; on the contrary, he demanded a unanimous uprising of all the Greeks against the Macedonian foe." [p.172] WERNER JAEGER

[16] "His Panhellenism was the outgrowth of a resolute will for national self-assertiveness, deliberately opposed to the national self-surrender called for by Isocrates - for that was what Isocrates' program had really meant, despite its being expressed romantically as a plan for a Persian war under Macedonian leadership." [p.172-3] WERNER JAEGER

[17] The first resolution passed by Synedrion at Corinth was the declaration of war against Persia. "The difference was that this war of conquest, which was passionately described as a war of vengeance, was not looked upon as a means of uniting the Greeks, as Isocrates would have had it, but was merely an instrument of Macedonian imperialism." [p.192] WERNER JAEGER

[18] "For the six years or more that follow, Philip's life, alas! is withdrawn, except at rare intervals, from our knowledge. Alas, indeed! for these are the years in which his men at arms marched, the first foreigners since history has begun, into the Peloponnese, and he himself besieged and took cities on the Adriatic, and led his spearmen up to, or even beyond, the Danube; years, too, in which his final ambition took shape, 'for it was coming to be his desire to be designated Captain- General of Hellas, and to wage the War against the Persians'." (p.97) David Hogarth

[Please visit "Green" and "Isocrates' Letter to Philip" (345), for further enlightenment] Notice also the usage of quotes by David Hogarth, regarding Philip's desire to be Captain-General of Hellas.]

[19] "The dispute of modern scholars over the racial stock of the Macedonians have led to many interesting suggestions. This is especially true of the philological analysis of the remains of the Macedonian language by O. Hoffmann in his Makedonen etc. Cf. the latest general survey of the controversy in F. Geyer and his chapter on prehistory. But even if the Macedonians did have some Greek blood- as well as Illyrian- in their veins, whether originally or by later admixture, this would not justify us in considering them on a par with the Greeks in point of race or in using this as historical excuse for legitimizing the claims of this bellicose peasant folk to lord it over cousins in the south of the Balkan peninsula so far ahead of them in culture. It is likewise incorrect to assert that this is the only way in which we can understand the role of the Macedonian conquest in Hellenizing the Orient. But we can neglect this problem here, as our chief interest lies in discovering what the Greeks themselves felt and thought. And here we need not cite Demosthenes' well-known statements; for Isocrates himself, the very man who heralds the idea of Macedonian leadership in Hellas, designates the people of Macedonia as members of an alien race in Phil.108. He purposely avoids the word barbaroi but this word is one that inevitably finds a place for itself in the Greek struggle for national independence and expresses the views of every true Hellene. Even Isocrates would not care to have the Greeks ruled by the Macedonian people: it is only the king of Macedonia, Philip, who is to be the new leader; and the orator tries to give ethnological proof of Philip's qualifications for this task by the device of showing that he is no son of his people but, like the rest of his dynasty, a scion of Heracles, and therefore of Greek blood." [p.249] WERNER JAEGER.
THUCYDIDES

Greek Commander and Historian

[1] The modern Greeks claim that the ancient Macedonians were Greek based on the below passage of Thucydides:

"The country by the sea which is now called Macedonia... Alexander, the father of Perdiccas, and his forefathers, who were originally Temenidae from Argos" (Thucydides 2.99,3)

That this myth does not prove that the Macedonians were Greek I offer the extensive study conducted by the Macedonian specialist, Professor Eugene Borza. Analyzing the Temenidae myth transmitted by Herodotus and Thucydides, in details in two Chapters, Eugene Borza - In the Shadow of Olympus p.82-83 gives the following conclusion:

a) "It is clear that the analysis of our earliest-and sole-source cannot produce a consistent and satisfactory sequence of events. My own view is that there is some underlying veracity to the Mt. Vermion reference (as evidenced by the Phrygian connections), that among the Makedones a family of Vermion background emerged as pre-eminent, but that the Argive context is mythic, perhaps a bit of fifth-century B.C. propaganda (as I argue in the next chapter). To deny such fables and attribute them to contemporary Macedonian propaganda may appear minimalistic. But given the historical milieu in which such stories were spawned and then adorned, the denial of myth seems prudent.

b) The Temenidae in Macedon are an invention of the Macedonians themselves, intended in part to give credence to Alexander I's claims of Hellenic ancestry, attached to and modifying some half-buried progenitor stories that had for a long time existed among the Macedonians concerning their own origins. The revised version was transmitted without criticism or comment by Herodotus. Thucydides (2-99.3; 5.80.2) acquired the Argive lineage tale from Herodotus, or from Macedonian-influenced sources, and transmitted it. His is not an independent version. [There is no hard evidence (pace Hammond, HM i: 4) that Thucydides ever visited Macedonia, but it makes no difference; Thucydides is reflecting the official version of things.] What emerged in the fifth century is a Macedonian-inspired tale of Argive origins for the Argead house, an account that can probably be traced to its source, Alexander I (for which see Chapter 5 below). The Temenidae must disappear from history, making superfluous all discussion of them as historical figures.

c) There were further embellishments to the myth of the early royal family. In the last decade of the fifth century B.C. Euripides came to reside in Macedon at the court of King Archelaus, thereby contributing a new stage to the evolution of the Macedonian creation-myth. Euripides' play honoring his patron, Archelaus, probably adorned the basic story, replacing Perdiccas with an Archelaus as the descendant of Temenus-no doubt to the delight of his royal host. Delphic oracles were introduced, and the founder's tale was extended by the introduction of Caranus (Doric for "head" or "ruler"). In the early fourth century, new early kings were added during the political rivalry among three branches of the Argeadae following the death of King Archelaus in 399, another example of the Macedonian predilection to rewrite history to support a contemporary political necessity. The story continued to be passed through the hands of local Macedonian historians in the fourth century B. C., and by Roman times it was widely known in a number of versions. Nothing in this later period can be traced back earlier than Euripides' revision of the Herodotean tradition. The notion that Alexander I or one of his predecessors obtained a Delphic oracle to confirm the Macedonian tie with Argos has no evidence to support it. Had such an oracle existed we can be confident that Alexander, eager to confirm his Hellenic heritage, would have exploited it, and that Herodotus, who delighted in oracles, would have mentioned it. In the end what is important is not whether Argive Greeks founded the Macedonian royal house but that at least some Macedonian kings wanted it so".

d) Borza also mentiones that the "two advocates of the Argos-Macedon link are Hammond, HM, vol. 2, ch. I, and Daskalakis, Hellenism, Pt. 3, both of whom support the notion of a Temenid origin for the Macedonian royal house", however, we have seen above that both of them were corrected with the extensive evidence that Borza carefully reviewed. We have already seen that both Daskalakis and Hammond were incorrect on many matters on the ethnicity of the Ancient Macedonians, therefore it should come to no surprise that their now outdated and poor in evidence material can not be used to claim a Greek identity to the ancient Macedonians.
[2] Thucydides however, did not consider the Macedonians to be Greek, despite the above myth which wasn’t his original work but it as we saw was only transmitted by him. Here Thucydides clearly separates the Macedonians from the Greeks (Hellenes):

"In all there were about three thousand Hellenic heavy infantry, accompanied by all the Macedonian cavalry with the Chalcidians, near one thousand strong, besides an immense crowd of barbarians." (Thucydides 4.124)

Borza comments: "The use of barbaros [barbarians] is problematic, although it would appear that he normally includes at least some of the Macedonians in this category. See 4.125.3 and Gomme, Comm. Thuc.,3:613,615 and 616 on Thuc. 4.124.1, 126.3 and 126.5 respectively. In the Shadow of Olympus p 152.
HERODOTUS

"The Father of History" Greek Writer

The Histories

The modern Greek position relies on Herodotus' support for their quest to make the ancient Macedonians Greek. Herodotus, being one of the foremost biographer in antiquity who lived in Greece at the time when the Macedonian king Alexander I was in power, is said to have visited the Macedonian Kingdom and supposedly, profited from this excursion, wrote several short passages about the Macedonians. What did he say, and to what extent can these passages be taken as evidence for the alleged 'greekness' of the ancient Macedonians, will be briefly presented for your adjudication.

Herodotus describes the episode with the Persian envoys, who apparently visited Macedon when Alexander I's father Amyntas was in power, and how Alexander I succeeded in 'taking care of the Persians' by murdering all of them and removing their luggage and carriages. When the Persians attempted to trace the lost envoys, Alexander I cleverly succeeded in manipulating the Persians by giving his own sister Gygaea as a wife to the Persian commander Bubares. Here Herodotus writes:

"I happen to know, and I will demonstrate in a subsequent chapter of this history, that these descendants of Perdiccas are, as they themselves claim, of Greek nationality. This was, moreover, recognized by the managers of the Olympic games, on the occasion when Alexander wished to compete and his Greek competitors tried to exclude him on the ground that foreigners were not allowed to take part. Alexander, however, proved his Argive descent, and so was accepted as a Greek and allowed to enter for the foot-race. He came in equal first." book 5. 22.

First, notice that it is not Herodotus that says that the Macedonian kings were of Greek nationality, but the Macedonian kings as they themselves claim. Now, let us peruse the modern literature and see if we can shed some light on this particular passage from Herodotus which is so 'dear' to all Greek presenters, and one that occupies the central position of their otherwise feeble defense.

[1] Eugene Borza In The Shadow of Olympus p. 112 writes:

"Herodotus' story is fraught with too many difficulties to make sense of it. For example, either (1) Alexander lost the run-off for his dead heat, which is why his name doez not appear in the victor lists; or (2) he won the run-off, although Herodotus does not tell us this; or (3) it remained a dead heat, which is impossible in light Olympic practice; or (4) it was a special race, in which case it is unlikely that his fellow competitors would have protested Alexander's presence; or (5) Alexander never competed at Olympia. It is best to abandon this story, which belongs in the category of the tale of Alexander at Plataea. In their commentaries on these passages Macan and How and Wells long ago recognized that the Olympic Games story was based on family legend (Hdt. 5.22: "as the descendants of Perdiccas themselves say [autoi legousi]"), weak proofs of their Hellenic descent. Moreover, the Olympic Games tale is twice removed: Herodotus heard from the Argeadea (perhaps from Alexander himself) that the king had told something to the judges, but we do not know what those proofs were."

"The theme of the Olympic and Plataea incidents are the same: "I am Alexander, a Greek" which seems to be the main point. The more credible accounts of Alexander at Tempe and at Athens do not pursue this theme; they state Alexander's activities without embellishment or appeal to prohellenism. Moreover, the insistence that Alexander is a Greek, and descendant from Greeks, rubs against the spirit of Herodotus 7.130, who speaks of the Thessalians as the first Greeks to come under Persian submission--a perfect opportunity for Herodotus to point out that the Macedonians were a non Greek race ruled over by Greek kings, something he nowhere mentions."

"In sum, it would appear that Olympia and Plataea incidents---when taken together with the tale of the ill--fated Persian embassy to Amyntas' court in which Alexander proclaims the Greek descent of the royal house--are part of Alexander's own attempts to integrate himself into the Greek community during the postwar period. They should be discarded both because they are propaganda and because they invite suspicion on the general grounds outlined above."

In support of his position Borza brings forward many interesting questions. He asks:

"Why is it that no Spartan or Athenian or Argive felt constrained to prove to the others that he and his family were Helenes? But Macedonian kings seem hard put to argue in behalf of their Hellenic ancestry in the fifth century B.C., and that circumstance is telling. Even if one were to accept that all the Herodotian stories about Alexander were true, why did the Greeks, who normally were knowledgeable about matters of ethnic kinship, not already know that the Macedonian monarchy was Greek? But--following Herodotus--the stade- race competitors at Olympia thought the Macedonian was a foreigner (Hdt. 5.22: barbaros) Second, for his effort on behalf of the Greek cause against the Persians Alexander is known as "Philhellene". Now this is kind of odd to call a Greek a "friend of the Greeks". "This title", writes Borza, "is normally reserved for non-Greeks".

Borza concludes: "It is prudent to reject the stories of the ill--fated Persian embassy to Amyntas's court, Alexander's midnight ride at Plataea, and his participation in the Olympic Games as tales derived from Alexander himself (or from some official court version of things)."

[2] Peter Green - Classical Bearings p.157

"All Herodotus in fact says is that Alexander himself demonstrated his Argive ancestry (in itself a highly dubious genealogical claim), and was thus adjudged a Greek---against angry opposition, be it noted, from the stewards of the Games Even if, with professor N.G.L. Hammond, we accept this ethnic certification at face value, it tells us, as he makes plain, nothing whatsoever about Macedonians generally. Alexander's dynasty, if Greek, he writes, regarded itself as Macedonian only by right of rule, as a branch of the Hanoverian house has come to 'regard itself as English'. On top of which, Philip II's son Alexander had an Epirote mother, which compounds the problem from yet another ethnic angle."

[3] Ernst Badian - Studies in the History of Art Vol 10: Macedonia and Greece in Late Classical Early Hellenistic Times:

"We have no way of judging the authenticity of either the claim or the evidence that went with it, but it is clear that at the time the decision was not easy. There were outraged protests from the other competitors, who rejected Alexander I as a barbarian--which proves, at least, that the Temenid descent and the royal genealogy had hitherto been an isoteric item of knowledge. However, the Hellanodikai decided to accept it--whether moved by the evidence or by political considerations, we again cannot tell. In view of the time and circumstances in which the claim first appears and the objections it encountered, modern scholars have often suspected that it was largely spun out of fortuitous resemblance of the name of the Argead clan to city of Argos; with this given, the descent (of course) could not be less than royal, i.e., Temenid."

Badian, like Borza, believes that Alexander I "invented the story (in its details a common type of myth) of how he had fought against his father's Persian connection by having the Persian ambassadors murdered, and that it was only in order to hush this up and save the royal family's lives that the marriage of his sister to a Persian had been arranged."

Badian sums it up: "As a matter of fact, there is reason to think that at least some even among Alexander I's friends and supporters had regarded the Olympic decision as political rather than factual--as a reward for services to the Hellenic cause rather than as prompted by genuine belief in the evidence he had adduced. We find him described in the lexicographers, who go back to fourth-century sources, as "Philhellene",--surely not an appellation that could be given to an actual Greek."

I would like to offer another episode, reported by Herodotus, which clearly indicates that ancient Greeks did not regard the ancient Macedonians as brethren. Episodes like this stand in sharp contrast to today's claims propagated by modern Greeks. The Persian armies were ready and poised to strike Greece. Greek allies were assembled and prepared to defend their nation. Mardonius, the Persian commander, sends Alexander I to Athens with a message. On his arrival to Athens as Mardonius' ambassador Alexander spoke to the Athenians urging them to accept the terms offered by Mardonius. In Sparta, the news that Alexander brought message from the Great King, caused great consternation. Sparta feared that an alliance between Athens and Persia was in the making. She, then, quickly rushed an envoy to Athens herself. As it happened, Alexander I and the Spartan envoy had their audience at the same time.When Alexander I was done the Spartan envoy s spoke in their turn: "Do not let Alexander's smooth-sounding version of Mardonius' proposals seduce you; he does only what one might expect of him--a despot himself, of course he collaborates with a despot. But such conduct is not for you - at least, not if you are wise; for surely you know that in foreigners there is neither truth nor trust." (Hdt. 8.142) [Please note the reference to Alexander I as a foreigner who is neither truthful nor trustworthy.]

Then, the Athenians gave answer to Alexander I. Among the other things, they told Alexander that they, the Athenians, will never make peace with Mardonius, and will oppose him 'unremittingly'. As to Alexander I' advice and urgings that they accept the terms offered by Mardonius they said:

"Never come to us again with a proposal like this, and never think you are doing us good service when you urge us to a course which is outrageous - for it would be a pity if you were to suffer some hurt at the hands of the Athenians, when you are our friend and benefector." (Hdt. 8.143)

To the Spartan envoys they said the following: "No doubt it was natural that the Lacedaemonians should dread the of our making terms with Persia; none the less it shows a poor estimate of the spirit of Athens. There is not so much gold nor land so fair that we would take for pay to join the common enemy and bring Greece into subjection. There are many compelling reasons against our doing so, even if we wished: the first and greatest is the burning of the temples and images of our gods - now ashes and rubble. It is our bounded duty to avenge this desecration with all our might - not to clasp the hand that wrought it. Again there is the Greek nation - the community of blood and language, temples and rituals, and our common customs; if Athens were to betray all this, it would not be well done. We, would have you know, if you did not know it already, that so long as a single Athenians remains alive we will make no peace with Xerxes." (Hdt. 8.144)