Does anyone who isn't a right-wing Greek nationalist think it isn't?I agree. But in such case, neither is "Macedonian" a static category!
And if "Macedonian" is not a static category - then why this entire silly affair with forbidding the "whoever lives there" to call themselves as they want, and instead applying to them a silly name with "Former..." at the beginning? Do Greeks mind if I call their state - Former Ottoman Eyalets of Rumelia and Morea?
Even if Ancient Macedonians were Greeks, there is not a single reason to claim this name as "property" of modern state of Greece. Especially, that - which is so ironic in this entire affair - most of Ancient Greeks actually did not want Ancient Macedonians to be considered as part of their community!
Which is why forbidding Macedonians to call themselves Macedonians and instead calling them "FYROM" is silly.
First, it seems likely that Appian would anyway not have looked directly to a Greek background as his source of identity, but rather to a Graeco-Macedonian one. The status of the Macedonians as Greeks had long been open to dispute. Alexander the Great was protected from scrutiny by his own merits. The Successors, the founders of the Hellenistic kingdoms and their heirs, were more exposed… It is clear from Appian’s Syrian Wars that Appian himself had discussed the question of the relationship between Macedonians and Greeks. ‘The affairs of the Macedonians and the Greeks were closely associated (epimikta) at various times and places, as I have demonstrated in my Hellenic History’ (Syrian Wars 2.5). In other words, being Macedonians was different (cf. ibid. 57. 297, Mithridatic War 41. 159), and very definitely a source of pride (cf. Preface 9.33, 10.37-42, 12.45; Civil Wars ii. 149. 619-152. 649 for the digressive comparison between Caesar and Alexander), but not too different. Appian as an Alexandrian could legitimately claim the authority of Macedonian arms, as well as the intellectual inheritance of Greece.
Swain, Hellenism and Empire
For centuries Europeans called the indigenous populations of Americas Indians. Leaving aside the fact these people were not really Indians, did they at least have a single ethnic identity? A single language? Calling the Cherokee Indians (Amerindians and American Indians are not really some improvements in terminology) does it mean the Cherokee have some sort of Indian idenity or speak some Indian language?
The FYROMians are not Macedonians.
Does anyone who isn't a right-wing Greek nationalist think it isn't?
or maybe the term "barbarian" was deployed inconsistently by greeks because it reflected not objective reality but a wide variety of personal prejudices
The FYROMians are not Macedonians.
Old Church Slavonic, also known as Old Church Slavic (often abbreviated to OCS; self-name словѣ́ньскъ ѩзꙑ́къ, slověnĭskŭ językŭ was the first Slavic literary language. The 9th century Byzantine Greek missionaries Saints Cyril and Methodius are credited with standardizing the language and using it in translating the Bible and other Ancient Greek ecclesiastical texts as part of the Christianisation of the Slavic peoples.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10] It is thought to have been based primarily on the dialect of the 9th century Byzantine Slavs living in the Province of Thessalonica (now in Greek Macedonia). It played an important role in the history of the Slavic languages and served as a basis and model for later Church Slavonic traditions, and some Eastern Orthodox and Eastern Catholic churches use Church Slavonic as a liturgical language to this day. As the oldest attested Slavic language, OCS provides important evidence for the features of Proto-Slavic, the unattested common ancestor of all Slavic languages.
Not only FYROM is our child, but all of the South Slavs, the Russians and the Europeans (Ancient Romans included).
Which is why they now have to pay us support in return
+1000000 pointsYou created the monster, guys:
There is too little of Ancient Macedonian surviving for linguists to make a thorough analysis of and therefore come to a definitive classification. There are two main recent theories, that Macedonian was an archaic dialect of Greek, incorporating many influences from Illyrian and Thracian, or that Macedonian and Paeonian formed a sister group to the Greek dialects within a larger linguistic family, which had a common ancestry.
"Macedonia, a country considered by Greeks as a kingdom of barbarians, was inhabited by Illyrians, Thracians and greek Dorians".
Only later, when he invented a story that his dynasty originated from kings of the Greek city of Argos, they allowed him to participate.
or maybe the term "barbarian" was deployed inconsistently by greeks because it reflected not objective reality but a wide variety of personal prejudices
Genius.For example, why should I call modern Greek state "Greece" and not FOERM - Former Ottoman Eyalets of Rumelia and Morea ???
Yeah, and we should also refer to Poland as the Erstwhile General Government of the Polish Territories.Genius.