Trojans Who are they

[Xen]

How about the strata layer at the modern Troy site? Evidence of a sacking? Or merely a normal fire that swept thru the city? Carbon dating makes is pretty close to the legendary time of the Trojan war.

generally speaking, fires that sweep throuigh cities, and military sacking coincide pretty close together

that said, its rather unrealistic for a "normal fire" to brun the entire city to the ground, even relitivlly small bronze age centers like Troy or Mycenae

 

[Greek Stud]

Well Xen, Im going to trust your word that Troy is a Mycenic colony. From what Ive read, most people's opinion is that Trojans were Indo-European peoples. I have a question regarding who Alexander is? I know of King Priam, Hector, Perris, Cassandra, and so on, Im not familiar with whom you are refering to.

I also want to ask if you knew why Alexander the Great fought for Troy, I believe even with his father??? If you anything about the second time Troy was taken, Im interested in learning about it. I guess thats the time where you would say Troy was Hellenized, but when you look at the Athenian Empire versus the Spartans (Peloponessian League), they are both considered Hellenic, but they also had different cultures. My reference to Hellenize Troy by the Mycenaen invasion is because of my view that the Trojans being Indo-European. The major factor of cultural reference is language, especially when it becomes the folk language of a society it also establishes the cultural tie or relation with other cultures that speak that language.

For you to say that what I write is only my opinion, I can only turn to what you write and find no references to information that you speak about. You dont even say where this map is, because there is not a map in the Illiad of where Troy is. Names like Hellespont, Ilium and others have not been permenant and for sure were disregarded during the Ottoman times when they renamed a majority of Greece Yunanistan, Thrace into Rumania and Asia Minor names completely changed to Ottoman tags. Anyways, I trust that youve read your information but dont ignore the fact that other people have read into these subjects too. And just because I read something or if you do, doesnt make it true. Youll see that in many geopolitical issues. Infact, Im wondering if you can help us Greeks with the Macedonian issue

 

[slip79]

generally speaking, fires that sweep throuigh cities, and military sacking coincide pretty close together

that said, its rather unrealistic for a "normal fire" to brun the entire city to the ground, even relitivlly small bronze age centers like Troy or Mycenae

Exactly. Thought I'd throw it in there and see what people thought. Sackings generally involve fire. Usually a most effective siege tool as well.

 

[slip79]

I also want to ask if you knew why Alexander the Great fought for Troy, I believe even with his father??? If you anything about the second time Troy was taken, Im interested in learning about it.

HUH?!! Alexander the great at Troy during the Trojan war?! Someone has got their wires crossed somewhere. By about 1500 years.

Alexander the great visisted Troy, according to Plutarch, and sacrificed there.

The Alexander refered to in the Iliad is a Trojan hero and Prince. It is another name for Paris, who is also known as Alexandros. Hence Xen's referal to Alexander as someone who could be king.

 

[Greek Stud]

Alexander the Great captured Troy after he captured Thrace on his campaign across Asia Minor. The was long after the Trojan War.

 

[slip79]

No kidding!!!
Kinda goes without saying that he captured Troy. Seeing as he captured most of the known world in his day, and some of it that wasn't so well known.

 

[Greek Stud]

hey slip, the part Im asking about is that I remember hearing the Alexander the Great and his father Philip actually fought together to capture Troy in his campaign. I was just asking if anyone knew anything about it.

 

[slip79]

Hmmmm...... I see what you mean. I'll look it up for you. Or email a friend in the Classics dept at work. If not I've got a book at home on him and I'll find it in there.

 

[Xen]

Well Xen, Im going to trust your word that Troy is a Mycenic colony. From what Ive read, most people's opinion is that Trojans were Indo-European peoples. I have a question regarding who Alexander is? I know of King Priam, Hector, Perris, Cassandra, and so on, Im not familiar with whom you are refering to.

1)in classic literature, Alexander is actually the name of "Paris"
2)Alexander is an old an established greek base name, and the name is mentioned specifically as being the name of the leader of Troy when the alliance between that nation and the hittites was formed; everything realting to Troy dosent have to realte ot the Trojan war, the city had a long and distinguished history well before Mycenae ever threatend its walls.

I also want to ask if you knew why Alexander the Great fought for Troy, I believe even with his father??? If you anything about the second time Troy was taken, Im interested in learning about it. I guess thats the time where you would say Troy was Hellenized, but when you look at the Athenian Empire versus the Spartans (Peloponessian League), they are both considered Hellenic, but they also had different cultures.

same gods, same language, same ethnicty=same culture, the only thing that differed between them was thier politics, and what those politics entailed for thier citizens; thats why they are both Hellenic, because when you get ot he core of it, thier arnt any differences between them; the same reason is why the Romans, despite, at face, it seemign they are culturally akin tot he Greeks, one can find numerous and fairlly profound differences between the two.

My reference to Hellenize Troy by the Mycenaen invasion is because of my view that the Trojans being Indo-European. The major factor of cultural reference is language, especially when it becomes the folk language of a society it also establishes the cultural tie or relation with other cultures that speak that language.

what do the indo-europeans have to do with it? The Mycenaeans were Indo-European as well; they even refer to themselves by the common refernce for "indo-european" spread from Ireland to the greecer, the term "Danaan"

For you to say that what I write is only my opinion, I can only turn to what you write and find no references to information that you speak about. You dont even say where this map is, because there is not a map in the Illiad of where Troy is. Names like Hellespont, Ilium and others have not been permenant and for sure were disregarded during the Ottoman times when they renamed a majority of Greece Yunanistan, Thrace into Rumania and Asia Minor names completely changed to Ottoman tags. Anyways, I trust that youve read your information but dont ignore the fact that other people have read into these subjects too. And just because I read something or if you do, doesnt make it true. Youll see that in many geopolitical issues. Infact, Im wondering if you can help us Greeks with the Macedonian issue

1)the names never changed; greeks contiued calling th eplaces what they wished to call them, and the Ottomans had thier own names for this places; In Russia, the name for Istanbul is still Constantinople for instance.

2)Homer makes numerous refernces to the location of troy (the scaramnde rriver, the plain of Illium, the hellespont and so forth) he dosent give a set location at any oen tiem, but read it through, and you'll find the document quite clear on where Troy will lay.

3)The Macedonians are essentially a mix of everything around them; Greeks, Illyrians, Thracians and pannonians (though evidence suggests that th ePannonians themselves where just another brance of the Illyrians, like most peoples in europe were) Its not a satisfactory answer for many nationalists, but then, the truth rarelly is satisfactory for any nationalists.

 

[slip79]

Okay. So I've managed to found what you want to know. Hopefully....

Phillip and Alexander didn't actually fight together to capture Troy.
Phillip II died in 336 B.C.E. at the hands of a fellow Macedonian. Rumour was that is was one of his wives, and mother of Alex, Olympos. No one knows for sure though who actually killed him. I remember learning in my undergrad classes that Phillip was stabbed in the back whilst in the theater, but I'm not certain about that.

Alexander then took the throne and proceeded to crush all Greek resistance to his unification of the greater Hellenic states. With the destruction of Thebes in 335 B.C.E. he was free to turn his sights on the other major power in the region, Persia. Supposedly his father wished to avenge Greece by attacking the Persians. So Alexander decided to carry on for his father.

He started his campaign against Peria by invading Anatolia (Turkey) and swiftly working his way south and east.
In 334 B.C.E. Alexander's troops (a mix of Macedonians and Greeks) fought and defeated the Persian forces at the river Granicus, a river in the Troas.
After this he went way east to the city of Gordion.

I think it is the battle at Granicus that you mean when you talk about a battle fought by Alexander at Troy. Granicus is a river the in area of Troy. Unfortunately his father, Phillip II, was not around at this battle.
Some of the above is from memory, but I double checked it in Perseus.

Perseus is a very useful Classical reference site, however it can be pretty damn confusing and fairly frustrating at times. The specific place I got the general Alexander stuff from is here.

If you are after any other sources for stuff on Alexander just PM me and I'll send you some links and bibliographies.

I hope this helped some??

 

[Companiero]

3)The Macedonians are essentially a mix of everything around them; Greeks, Illyrians, Thracians and pannonians (though evidence suggests that th ePannonians themselves where just another brance of the Illyrians, like most peoples in europe were) Its not a satisfactory answer for many nationalists, but then, the truth rarelly is satisfactory for any nationalists.

Was it a decision that you made randomly or did you read that somewhere? If u talk about satisfying nationalists agendas already, then its always about determining someone's ethnicity on this forum. No one can really tell what any of those people's ethnicity was, rather we can talk about different cultures, languages and political formations. Still its difficult saying much about Macedonia, considering the scarse evidence about the Macedonians that we have today. What it is certain is that there were much distinct elements in Macedonian culture, but also neighbouring influences, epsecially Greek in the later period.

 

[Xen]

Was it a decision that you made randomly or did you read that somewhere? If u talk about satisfying nationalists agendas already, then its always about determining someone's ethnicity on this forum. No one can really tell what any of those people's ethnicity was,

pure twatockery; you can tell a peoples ethnicty by certian taaits on thier skeletal structure, in particuler, certina patterns that develop with skull growth; you tell what ancient peoples were by looking at thier skeletons.

as for coming to the descision, its well known that that the classical empire of Macedon and beyong was heavilly influneced by Thracians and Illyrians- Pyrrus, the epirot for example, was half Illyrian on his fathers sid, yet considered himself a Greek, via his Macedonian blood.

It only common sense that can tell one that if a particuler nation isnt regarded by anyone around it by being its own, but is regarded as being close to its own, and that it is more or less, equally located between the center fo culture of several major cultures in a region, that the reason it isnt considered to be any one in particuler, is because it has elements of all the cultures around it.

rather we can talk about different cultures, languages and political formations. Still its difficult saying much about Macedonia, considering the scarse evidence about the Macedonians that we have today. What it is certain is that there were much distinct elements in Macedonian culture, but also neighbouring influences, epsecially Greek in the later period.

its only difficult for moder Greeks and macedonians to to do anywith it, because both of you are tip-toeing around nationalist fervor, and dont have the freedom to actually say what you think, let alone say what you know, because it isnt satisfactory to either nations agendas of culture.

 

[Greek Stud]

Its cool to hear what both slip and Xen know about these peoples. Though it hurts when I see Anatolia being marked as being in Turkey, and then of course Companiero chirping about why he's mad that the Macedonians wrote and spoke Greek. Thats right, I brought nationalism in here. I know the Macedonians were strongly influenced by Illyria & Pannona (Latin cultures) and Epiros & Thrace (Greek & Dacian cultures). The fact of the matter is that superior cultures that mix into an Empire always take credit for the Empire. So why did the Macedonians spread Hellenism? It's a simple question, and oddly the Slavic-Bulgarians of Vardar-Banovina don't seem to share any interest in Hellenic culture other than pulling the carpet out from the creation of a Hellenic Empire, that later divided into 4 Kingdoms and all these people were taught to speak Greek, not Slavic-Bulgarian.

 

[Companiero]

pure twatockery; you can tell a peoples ethnicty by certian taaits on thier skeletal structure, in particuler, certina patterns that develop with skull growth; you tell what ancient peoples were by looking at thier skeletons.

LOL. You honestly believe that? Tell me then, whats a distinguishing mark for German skulls and what for French? lol

as for coming to the descision, its well known that that the classical empire of Macedon and beyong was heavilly influneced by Thracians and Illyrians

Well known?! I feel like we're talking maths here and not etno-linguistics referring to a language (Anceint Macedonian tongue) over two millenias dead and of which only some hundreds of words survive (not single original text inscription), culture of scarce artifacts and many uninvestigated archeological sites. And you are most certainly not in the position to determine which culture influenced which in case when only a handful of hints are available about all the three peoples. Different theories abound, one of them even surprised me a while ago, when i read that Vrylakas suspected the very existance of the Illyrians, but since its really not my field, i cant comment. You most certainly also shouldnt give definite judgments as they are fact. The best you can do is forward a theory and support it with historical proofs.
Not to be understood badly, similarities in the material culture between the Macedonains and neighbouring tribes do exist, but that is only naturally expected from civilizations living on such a geographically narrowed area. Reconstruction of the proto-historical etnological and cultural relations and formations is impossible, even if we had tons of more evidence than we have now.

I know the Macedonians were strongly influenced by Illyria & Pannona (Latin cultures) and Epiros & Thrace (Greek & Dacian cultures).

Intriguing these Illyrians.. They were Latin, before the very Latines ever set foot in there. Oh, and they even managed to influence other tribes and latinize them also. Wow, could it be that the very Romans only adopted Latin after they conquered the Balkans?

Though it hurts when I see Anatolia being marked as being in Turkey, and then of course Companiero chirping about why he's mad that the Macedonians wrote and spoke Greek.

I wont say anything. I'll leave you with your deep national wounds, killing you softly with chauvinistic fervor. All the time while you bravely withstand the suffering inflicted by the xenos in a romantic delusional feeling of Greek glory and pride until you finally die for the myth. Amen and may God forgive your sins.

 

[Greek Stud]

Intriguing these Illyrians.. They were Latin, before the very Latines ever set foot in there. Oh, and they even managed to influence other tribes and latinize them also. Wow, could it be that the very Romans only adopted Latin after they conquered the Balkans?

Is it uncomprehensible that the Ionian Greeks lived in Thessaly, the Ionian Sea, Attika, the Aegean and Ionia? You need to look at where the Latin tribes or Italic tribes lived. One side lays Etruria, Sabines, Latium, Samnites, Campania and opposite the Adriatic Sea are the Illyrians. Just like the Macedonian Greeks took Athens, Thebes, Corinth and Sparta, the Romans took Illyria and faced resistance. Romans are from Etrurian descent in the first place Compenero, their Latinization was just as much influenced by other Italic-Latin tribes as theirs influencing the places they conquered. And Romans also when through ages of Hellenization. The mixture of these subgroups are what form the Latin culture and the Hellenic culture. You are of the Slavic culture of Eastern European nations. There is no shame in that. I have no wounds when a child nation inflicted by Communist propoganda looks up to the history of Greece.

I may die for a myth, but it is much better than your position, where you die in a myth.

There is no sin in sustaining the true story of King Philip and Alexander the Great. The bible writes to the Greeks in the Phillipians, Thessalonikians, Corinthians. The bible spoke to these people in Greek. Before you cry of your massacres, I ask you where have the Greek speak audience of these cities gone to? Are you their descendents? It sure would help for you to share a cultural trait by speaking its language.

What is the purpose of your textbooks reciting the language of future campaigns to liberate the suffering Slavic speaking Macedonians. Recapturing Bulgarian land, Serbian land, unmarked Albanian land, and all of Greek Macedonia. The delusion is yours here, that any superpower would support this cause. Your people are not speaking the word of God in the prayers that ask for War. War and conquests that flow with the blood of evil. May God forgive your people for instigating a lie, and encouraging future conquests against your neighboring countries.

 

[Companiero]

You need to look at where the Latin tribes or Italic tribes lived. One side lays Etruria, Sabines, Latium, Samnites, Campania and opposite the Adriatic Sea are the Illyrians…….. Romans are from Etrurian descent in the first place Compenero, their Latinization was just as much influenced by other Italic-Latin tribes as theirs influencing the places they conquered.

However, Illyrians are not an Italic tribe.
Oh, Latinization of the Romans! Lol Congratulations, you just coined yourself a new term that no historian has ever thought of before. Romans arent from Etrurian descent, because they didn’t speak Etruscan but Latin, which were two completely different languages. They however witnessed Etruscan influences later on, especially in their material culture.

You are of the Slavic culture of Eastern European nations. There is no shame in that. I have no wounds when a child nation inflicted by Communist propoganda looks up to the history of Greece.

Hehe. I really didn’t intend to hijack this thread for demasking Greek chauvinist propaganda and i didn’t intend to get any further, but anyway, it seems like i have to. You know, when i first met you, you didn’t have this flaming outbursts of nationalism, although you still maintained a wholly 19th century racist national-romantic understanding of history and cultures. Of course, you weren’t familiar at all back then with the Macedonian question so you didn’t have any problems naming my country Macedonia and being curious to learn more. Then i thought to myself, now here’s an interesting fella, a Greek raised in the American liberal surroundings, but curiously digging to find his roots in the muckheep of the Greek diasporra, which (as every diaspora, as a matter of fact) is a hive of the most extreme nationalists out there. I suspected even then, that as I awaken your interest about the Macedonian problem, you would set on a research among your fellow Greeks to find out how they look upon the issue. Needless to say, the outcome, as expected wasn’t in favour of American democratism and you turned into a typical aggressive Greek nationalist.
Cos only a nationalist can think of other peoples that they are ashamed to be of any culture, speaks of “superior cultures” and looking up to them, and altogether his grasp of the social world is through objective biological personification of nations, cultures and peoples.
I don’t intend to forcably convert you, i will only offer you a different view and i’m not doing this for you really, but for other people who consume nationalist and propagandistic **** daily.
If you want to see a comprehensive, but rather simplistic presentation of the Macedonian issue from my side, go here Macedonians; Who were they? Who are they? and feel free to continue the discussion. Also, you can read the rather recently written book “Greek anti-Macedonian struggle” by the Greek historian Dimitrios Lithoksoous, worked on basis of previously uninvestigated archives in the Greek historical department, in extremely interesting piece of evidence which strays from the course of Greek historiography and political agenda of skipping the parts of their history which arent really in their favor and concealing past crimes and atrocities.
You may have a keen interest to learn as much as you can about your ancestors and i honestly respect that, but unfortunately everything that you read you implement in the afore-mentioned frame, put terribly out of context (or is put for you) and thus, your understanding and unbiased interpretation of historical data (which i dint deny you have lots of) don’t exist. How otherwise can I explain the arguments that you put forward, such as the Greek writings in the Bible to the Thessalonikians (insinuating to their Greek stock), which is simply laughable, since the Bible was written exclusively in Greek for all peoples in the Roman Empire at first. Even if it wasn’t, by that time, Macedonian language had been extinct and replaced by common Greek and also Roman (later).
Macedonia, what u wont understand in a 1000 years, doesn’t derive its sovereign right of existance from the mandate of the Macedonian etno-nation, but the political willingness of all its people for independence as a multicultural country. This has been the core of the political struggle of the Macedonian revolutionaries (in all of Macedonia) in the XIX and XX centuries. This most democratic vision for the time was ruined in 1913 when neighbouring Greece, Bulgaria and Serbia conquered Macedonia, divided it in three, proclaimed each part to be their inseperable part of their own nations and implemented a program of systematicly destroying the national identity of the population living there, colonization and assimilation. Macedonia, all its parts have ever hardly been Greek, or the closest it’s come to was the periods between Alexander’s conquests and the 6th century when the authentic ancient Macedonian culture was supressed in favor of globalizing Hellenistic, Roman and Byzantine cultures, until the coming of the Slavs, but of course one could argue to what extent these influences contained the Hellenic in them. And the other period being since 1913 up till today when the region was practically purged of its ethnic Macedonian heritage and Macedonia was attached its alleged “Hellenic character”.

What is the purpose of your textbooks reciting the language of future campaigns to liberate the suffering Slavic speaking Macedonians. Recapturing Bulgarian land, Serbian land, unmarked Albanian land, and all of Greek Macedonia. The delusion is yours here, that any superpower would support this cause. Your people are not speaking the word of God in the prayers that ask for War. War and conquests that flow with the blood of evil. May God forgive your people for instigating a lie, and encouraging future conquests against your neighboring countries.

Blood of evil.. the word of God.. Ouch, this sounded like a passage from Leviathan. You obviously went past the irony and over-pathetic sarcasam in my remark about God forgiving you.
I find it very funny if you really believe in such a thing about Macedonian text-books. Us (note it doesn’t say US) waging war, haha, that’s funny indeed..

 

[Greek Stud]

It's not really a sarcastic matter for you to curse the Greeks as hijacking the Macedonian identity. I havent checked out your links but I will. I know what happened to the peoples of your country in Greek Macedonia and Thrace. Greek nationalists, of who I am not supporting in claiming the Macedonian identity, brutally massacred your Slavic Macedonian cultural group. I do not deny that your people are culturally and ethnically related to us, but that is through the Greek Macedonian heritage. Macedonians in history may have had a separate identity before choosing the Hellenic, Roman and Byzantine cultural trends. I have this same view of the Trojans, that they had a separate identity before being linked to the Hellenic culture.

My opinion to a solution would be to call your nation New Macedonia (as in the Scandinavian derivative of Zealand to New Zealand). I respect your view completely Companiero, but I do not think that your nation can coin the name Macedonia for a multitude of reasons, and the Massacres our people did to your people still does not lay creedence to the cause of calling your culture Macedonian. I would respect and agree fully if your people negotiated to be called: New Macedonia. People would be the same diversity you share in your nation: Slavic, Albanian, Bulgarian and Greek. And you would be the New Macedonians. Im not as radical as some of my statements may be read as. And I will not deny that the cultural trends we all share in the region of Macedonia could be classified as being Macedonian in nature.

I do believe in the text-book case, because I visited the Macedonian website of your Nation-State that posted the same picture. The State Department of your own nation was broadcasting its intent of the future of Greek land. It's not laughable that these cases exist. A war is a war, and it is also true that Communist leader Joseph Tito armed Communists rebels through your capital, Skopje, in the Greek Civil War. That is why I take Macedonian issues seriously, because it does effect the stability of Greece.

I would also support any intiative that your people have in the Cyrillic Script church of establishing either a New Macedonian Archbishop Diaspora or if new Patriarchs are introduced, that New Macedonia and Serbia, Ukraine, Ethiopia would all be considered as outposts for such a case.

My point to describing dominance of culture is that during the times of the Macedonians, you look at how Etruria owned Rome, they were the dominate force and influenced Roman culture. If you think Roman culture and Latin culture is the same you are incorrect. Latin cultures once again are: Etruria, Sabines, Latium, Samnites, Campania and Illyria. The mix of these cultures create the cultural group of Latin culture. Roman culture too was obviously part Etruscan, Latin and Greek as it borrowed cultural trends from different groups. Your people, Slavic or New Macedonians can claim a cultural definition for themselves but you are obviously not the Ancient Macedonian cultural group, but you can have influences from it.
______________________________

You are also incorrect about the first Rome, as it was a settlement of Etruria. From the text-book: Western Civilization A Brief History Vol I: To 1715 2nd Ed. it states:

(p 85) The intitial development of Rome, however, was influenced most by a people known as the Etruscans, who had settled north of Rome in Etruria. The origins of the Etruscans are not clear, but after 650 BC, they expanded in Italy and became the dominant cultural and economic force in a number of areas. To the north, they moved into north-central Italy, including the Po valley. To the south, according to Roman tradition and archaeological evidence, they controlled Rome and possibly all of Latium. From Latium they moved south and came into direct conflict with Greek colonists in southern Italy.
______________________________

And dont even come in here and push my buttons then label me as a Nationalist pig. I understand you are trying to discredit the Greek view on Macedonian rights for your people; but if you are going to play sarcastic shots in bringing God on your side and labelling the Greek culture as sinners against your people, you better expect that I will respond to that as an offense, just as I expected you to call me a chauvanistic nationalist of which I am not. You didnt bring this conversation onto this thread, it is an obvious comparison to labelling Trojan culture as a Mycenaen culture before the Trojan War. The comparison of your nation today is related to these events.

 

[Companiero]

Ok, i'm going to Berlin in few hours, so i'm not gonna be around for quite some time, so just some quick touches of some issues you raised.
I'm glad you toned down the heat of the discussion. I'm also glad we dont have much of historical problems to argue about, but political.
Just very briefly, every sovereign nation (and individual) has the right of self-identity and the name is one aspect of it. No one can tell anyone how they will be called. In democratic societies it never happens. I dont really see a problem in there existing two Macedonias (its the case with regions between Germany and France - Frankreich in Eastern Germany), with one being a country (comprising almost half of the original territory of Macedonia) where ethnic Macedonians (of Slavic origin) live, who through a long process of national self-determination began to call themselves like that.
The textbook; there are no images in any textbooks demonstrating future war intentions. For Gods sake, do u honestly believe the government would put future war plans in high school textbooks? Those are maps of pre-1913 Macedonia and past ethnical boundries of the Macedonian nation. Nothing but historical facts.

Macedonians in history may have had a separate identity before choosing the Hellenic, Roman and Byzantine cultural trends.

Note that i said Hellenistic, not Hellenic. Much in common, but still not the same.
As to how Maceodnia affects the stability of Greece, i ensure you the only way we could is through tourist influx and no way else.
Also, the issue with the churches is yet another thing, but it is far too complicated to open yet another front.

Your people, Slavic or New Macedonians can claim a cultural definition for themselves but you are obviously not the Ancient Macedonian cultural group, but you can have influences from it.

Of course we're not them. Even cultural influences (my personal opinion) are very weak (ethnical, its impossible to tell), BUT our identity as Macedonians isnt directly connected to that heritage. Its connected to the territory of Macedonia, on which my people lived ever since the 7th century. And calling us "New Macedonians" is derogatory also. Its like telling the British they cant be British, because they arent direct descendant of the Britons, and therefore they have to be called New British or so. Now imagine Ireland doing this. Hardly anyone would take them seriously.
As for Illyrians and Etruscans, you're wrong. Both are not Italic tribes. Read carefully where it says "influenced" and "north of" Rome. Find some other sources and read some more and we'll talk.
Also, i'm sorry for coming across i bit rough. I was really irritated by your statements of denying and offending my national identity. Catch you up in three weeks. Hopefully, by then you will have read my thread and we can talk at length if you want.

 

[Xen]

LOL. You honestly believe that? Tell me then, whats a distinguishing mark for German skulls and what for French? lol

silly elf; thier are no such thing as ehtniclly french or Germans; French men tend to be in the Dinaric catagory, along with Italians, and Britons, and many people in the natiosn that once comprised Illyria; Germans tend to be nording in the west, and psuedo-dinaric in the east

Well known?! I feel like we're talking maths here and not etno-linguistics referring to a language (Anceint Macedonian tongue) over two millenias dead and of which only some hundreds of words survive (not single original text inscription), culture of scarce artifacts and many uninvestigated archeological sites. And you are most certainly not in the position to determine which culture influenced which in case when only a handful of hints are available about all the three peoples. Different theories abound, one of them even surprised me a while ago, when i read that Vrylakas suspected the very existance of the Illyrians, but since its really not my field, i cant comment. You most certainly also shouldnt give definite judgments as they are fact. The best you can do is forward a theory and support it with historical proofs.
Not to be understood badly, similarities in the material culture between the Macedonains and neighbouring tribes do exist, but that is only naturally expected from civilizations living on such a geographically narrowed area. Reconstruction of the proto-historical etnological and cultural relations and formations is impossible, even if we had tons of more evidence than we have now.

it dont take a genious to take one look at Macedon, and conclude that its a composite culture; every facet of of them drips with either Greek, Illyrian, or thracian influence from what we know (which while admitted is little, is about as good as its going to get. the best we can do is unearth more arifacts which wont do squat for giving us more understanding to thier culture beyond what was in stype for the hipster Macedonian at the tiem he/she died)

Language is a shoddy subject to base ethnicty on, and shoudl never be trusted to any extent to point out how uniqu a people are, or how similer they are ot the people around them

Intriguing these Illyrians.. They were Latin, before the very Latines ever set foot in there. Oh, and they even managed to influence other tribes and latinize them also. Wow, could it be that the very Romans only adopted Latin after they conquered the Balkans?

interesting point; your partially right of course; the Roman language entered the full blossom that woudl spread to the provinces (not the proper latin but the "vulger latin" that is the base of all romance languages) after conqoring the Illyrian tribes in the east of Italy not quite the balkans, but quite close of course

As far as them being connected ot the Italians, the Illyrians, Italians, and the Celts are all seeminglyl descended from the Hallstatt culture.

 

[I am the Future]

they were condoms every one knows that

but um isnt troy a fake place?