On May 18th, 201 Classical Scholars from around the world, sent a letter to the President of the United States of America, Barak Obama.
Since then, the list of cosigners has grown to 254, see Addenda
Here is the Documentation that accompanies the letter.
===============================================================
ancient-scholars@macedonia-evidence.org
May 18, 2009
The Honorable Barack Obama
President, United States of America
White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20500
Dear President Obama,
We, the undersigned scholars of Graeco-Roman antiquity, respectfully request that you intervene to clean up some of the historical debris left in southeast Europe by the previous U.S. administration.
On November 4, 2004, two days after the re-election of President George W. Bush, his administration unilaterally recognized the “Republic of Macedonia.” This action not only abrogated geographic and historic fact, but it also has unleashed a dangerous epidemic of historical revisionism, of which the most obvious symptom is the misappropriation by the government in Skopje of the most famous of Macedonians, Alexander the Great.
We believe that this silliness has gone too far, and that the U.S.A. has no business in supporting the subversion of history. Let us review facts. (The documentation for these facts [here in boldface] can be found attached and at: http://macedonia-evidence.org/documentation.html)
The land in question, with its modern capital at Skopje, was called Paionia in antiquity. Mts. Barnous and Orbelos (which form today the northern limits of Greece) provide a natural barrier that separated, and separates, Macedonia from its northern neighbor. The only real connection is along the Axios/Vardar River and even this valley “does not form a line of communication because it is divided by gorges.”
While it is true that the Paionians were subdued by Philip II, father of Alexander, in 358 B.C. they were not Macedonians and did not live in Macedonia. Likewise, for example, the Egyptians, who were subdued by Alexander, may have been ruled by Macedonians, including the famous Cleopatra, but they were never Macedonians themselves, and Egypt was never called Macedonia.
Rather, Macedonia and Macedonian Greeks have been located for at least 2,500 years just where the modern Greek province of Macedonia is. Exactly this same relationship is true for Attica and Athenian Greeks, Argos and Argive Greeks, Corinth and Corinthian Greeks, etc.
We do not understand how the modern inhabitants of ancient Paionia, who speak Slavic – a language introduced into the Balkans about a millennium after the death of Alexander – can claim him as their national hero. Alexander the Great was thoroughly and indisputably Greek. His great-great-great grandfather, Alexander I, competed in the Olympic Games where participation was limited to Greeks.
Even before Alexander I, the Macedonians traced their ancestry to Argos, and many of their kings used the head of Herakles - the quintessential Greek hero - on their coins.
Euripides – who died and was buried in Macedonia– wrote his play Archelaos in honor of the great-uncle of Alexander, and in Greek. While in Macedonia, Euripides also wrote the Bacchai, again in Greek. Presumably the Macedonian audience could understand what he wrote and what they heard.
Alexander’s father, Philip, won several equestrian victories at Olympia and Delphi, the two most Hellenic of all the sanctuaries in ancient Greece where non-Greeks were not allowed to compete. Even more significantly, Philip was appointed to conduct the Pythian Games at Delphi in 346 B.C. In other words, Alexander the Great’s father and his ancestors were thoroughly Greek. Greek was the language used by Demosthenes and his delegation from Athens when they paid visits to Philip, also in 346 B.C. Another northern Greek, Aristotle, went off to study for nearly 20 years in the Academy of Plato. Aristotle subsequently returned to Macedonia and became the tutor of Alexander III. They used Greek in their classroom which can still be seen near Naoussa in Macedonia.
Alexander carried with him throughout his conquests Aristotle’s edition of Homer’s Iliad. Alexander also spread Greek language and culture throughout his empire, founding cities and establishing centers of learning. Hence inscriptions concerning such typical Greek institutions as the gymnasium are found as far away as Afghanistan. They are all written in Greek.
The questions follow: Why was Greek the lingua franca all over Alexander’s empire if he was a “Macedonian”? Why was the New Testament, for example, written in Greek?
The answers are clear: Alexander the Great was Greek, not Slavic, and Slavs and their language were nowhere near Alexander or his homeland until 1000 years later. This brings us back to the geographic area known in antiquity as Paionia. Why would the people who live there now call themselves Macedonians and their land Macedonia? Why would they abduct a completely Greek figure and make him their national hero?
The ancient Paionians may or may not have been Greek, but they certainly became Greekish, and they were never Slavs. They were also not Macedonians. Ancient Paionia was a part of the Macedonian Empire. So were Ionia and Syria and Palestine and Egypt and Mesopotamia and Babylonia and Bactria and many more. They may thus have become “Macedonian” temporarily, but none was ever “Macedonia”. The theft of Philip and Alexander by a land that was never Macedonia cannot be justified.
The traditions of ancient Paionia could be adopted by the current residents of that geographical area with considerable justification. But the extension of the geographic term “Macedonia” to cover southern Yugoslavia cannot. Even in the late 19th century, this misuse implied unhealthy territorial aspirations.
The same motivation is to be seen in school maps that show the pseudo-greater Macedonia, stretching from Skopje to Mt. Olympus and labeled in Slavic. The same map and its claims are in calendars, bumper stickers, bank notes, etc., that have been circulating in the new state ever since it declared its independence from Yugoslavia in 1991. Why would a poor land-locked new state attempt such historical nonsense? Why would it brazenly mock and provoke its neighbor?
However one might like to characterize such behavior, it is clearly not a force for historical accuracy, nor for stability in the Balkans. It is sad that the United States of America has abetted and encouraged such behavior.
We call upon you, Mr. President, to help - in whatever ways you deem appropriate - the government in Skopje to understand that it cannot build a national identity at the expense of historic truth. Our common international society cannot survive when history is ignored, much less when history is fabricated.
Sincerely,
| NAME | TITLE | INSTITUTION |
Harry C. Avery, Professor of Classics, University of Pittsburgh (USA)
Dr. Dirk Backendorf. Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur Mainz (Germany)
Elizabeth C. Banks, Associate Professor of Classics (ret.), University of Kansas (USA)
Luigi Beschi, professore emerito di Archeologia Classica, Università di Firenze (Italy)
Josine H. Blok, professor of Ancient History and Classical Civilization, Utrecht University (The Netherlands)
Alan Boegehold, Emeritus Professor of Classics, Brown University (USA)
Efrosyni Boutsikas, Lecturer of Classical Archaeology, University of Kent (UK)
Keith Bradley, Eli J. and Helen Shaheen Professor of Classics, Concurrent Professor of History, University of Notre Dame (USA)
Stanley M. Burstein, Professor Emeritus, California State University, Los Angeles (USA)
Francis Cairns, Professor of Classical Languages, The Florida State University (USA)
John McK. Camp II, Agora Excavations and Professor of Archaeology, ASCSA, Athens (Greece)
Paul Cartledge, A.G. Leventis Professor of Greek Culture, University of Cambridge (UK)
Paavo Castrén, Professor of Classical Philology Emeritus, University of Helsinki (Finland)
William Cavanagh, Professor of Aegean Prehistory, University of Nottingham (UK)
Angelos Chaniotis, Professor, Senior Research Fellow, All Souls College, Oxford (UK)
Paul Christesen, Professor of Ancient Greek History, Dartmouth College (USA)
Ada Cohen, Associate Professor of Art History, Dartmouth College (USA)
Randall M. Colaizzi, Lecturer in Classical Studies, University of Massachusetts-Boston (USA)
Kathleen M. Coleman, Professor of Latin, Harvard University (USA)
Michael B. Cosmopoulos, Ph.D., Professor and Endowed Chair in Greek Archaeology, University of Missouri-St. Louis (USA)
Kevin F. Daly, Assistant Professor of Classics, Bucknell University (USA)
Wolfgang Decker, Professor emeritus of sport history, Deutsche Sporthochschule, Köln (Germany)
Luc Deitz, Ausserplanmässiger Professor of Mediaeval and Renaissance Latin, University of Trier (Germany), and Curator of manuscripts and rare books, National Library of Luxembourg (Luxembourg)
Michael Dewar, Professor of Classics, University of Toronto (Canada)
John D. Dillery, Associate Professor of Classics, University of Virginia (USA)
Sheila Dillon, Associate Professor, Depts. of Art, Art History & Visual Studies and Classical Studies, Duke University (USA)
Douglas Domingo-Forasté, Professor of Classics, California State University, Long Beach (USA)
Pierre Ducrey, professeur honoraire, Université de Lausanne (Switzerland)
Roger Dunkle, Professor of Classics Emeritus, Brooklyn College, City University of New York (USA)
Michael M. Eisman, Associate Professor Ancient History and Classical Archaeology, Department of History, Temple University (USA)
Mostafa El-Abbadi, Professor Emeritus, University of Alexandria (Egypt)
R. Malcolm Errington, Professor für Alte Geschichte (Emeritus) Philipps-Universität, Marburg (Germany)
Panagiotis Faklaris, Assistant Professor of Classical Archaeology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (Greece)
Denis Feeney, Giger Professor of Latin, Princeton University (USA)
Elizabeth A. Fisher, Professor of Classics and Art History, Randolph-Macon College (USA)
Nick Fisher, Professor of Ancient History, Cardiff University (UK)
R. Leon Fitts, Asbury J Clarke Professor of Classical Studies, Emeritus, FSA, Scot., Dickinson Colllege (USA)
John M. Fossey FRSC, FSA, Emeritus Professor of Art History (and Archaeology), McGill Univertsity, Montreal, and Curator of Archaeology, Montreal Museum of Fine Arts (Canada)
Robin Lane Fox, University Reader in Ancient History, New College, Oxford (UK)
Rainer Friedrich, Professor of Classics Emeritus, Dalhousie University, Halifax, N.S. (Canada)
Heide Froning, Professor of Classical Archaeology, University of Marburg (Germany)
Peter Funke, Professor of Ancient History, University of Muenster (Germany)
Traianos Gagos, Professor of Greek and Papyrology, University of Michigan (USA)
Robert Garland, Roy D. and Margaret B. Wooster Professor of the Classics, Colgate University, Hamilton NY (USA)
Douglas E. Gerber, Professor Emeritus of Classical Studies, University of Western Ontario (Canada)
Hans R. Goette, Professor of Classical Archaeology, University of Giessen (Germany); German Archaeological Institute, Berlin (Germany)
Sander M. Goldberg, Professor of Classics, UCLA (USA)
Erich S. Gruen, Gladys Rehard Wood Professor of History and Classics, Emeritus, University of California, Berkeley (USA)
Christian Habicht, Professor of Ancient History, Emeritus, Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton (USA)
Donald C. Haggis, Nicholas A. Cassas Term Professor of Greek Studies, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (USA)
Judith P. Hallett, Professor of Classics, University of Maryland, College Park, MD (USA)
Prof. Paul B. Harvey, Jr. Head, Department of Classics and Ancient Mediterranean Studies, The Pennsylvania State University (USA)
Eleni Hasaki, Associate Professor of Classical Archaeology, University of Arizona (USA)
Miltiades B. Hatzopoulos, Director, Research Centre for Greek and Roman Antiquity, National Research Foundation, Athens (Greece)
Wolf-Dieter Heilmeyer, Prof. Dr., Freie Universität Berlin und Antikensammlung der Staatlichen Museen zu Berlin (Germany)
Steven W. Hirsch, Associate Professor of Classics and History, Tufts University (USA)
Karl-J. Hölkeskamp, Professor of Ancient History, University of Cologne (Germany)
Frank L. Holt, Professor of Ancient History, University of Houston (USA)
Dan Hooley, Professor of Classics, University of Missouri (USA)
Meredith C. Hoppin, Gagliardi Professor of Classical Languages, Williams College, Williamstown, MA (USA)
Caroline M. Houser, Professor of Art History Emerita, Smith College (USA) and Affiliated Professor, University of Washington (USA)
Georgia Kafka, Visiting Professor of Modern Greek Language, Literature and History, University of New Brunswick (Canada)
Anthony Kaldellis, Professor of Greek and Latin, The Ohio State University (USA)
Andromache Karanika, Assistant Professor of Classics, University of California, Irvine (USA)
Robert A. Kaster, Professor of Classics and Kennedy Foundation Professor of Latin, Princeton University (USA)
Vassiliki Kekela, Adjunct Professor of Greek Studies, Classics Department, Hunter College, City University of New York (USA)
Dietmar Kienast, Professor Emeritus of Ancient History, University of Duesseldorf (Germany)
Karl Kilinski II, University Distinguished Teaching Professor, Southern Methodist University (USA)
Dr. Florian Knauss, associate director, Staatliche Antikensammlungen und Glyptothek Muenchen (Germany)
Denis Knoepfler, Professor of Greek Epigraphy and History, Collège de France (Paris)
Ortwin Knorr, Associate Professor of Classics, Willamette University (USA)
Robert B. Koehl, Professor of Archaeology, Department of Classical and Oriental Studies Hunter College, City University of New York (USA)
Georgia Kokkorou-Alevras, Professor of Classical Archaeology, University of Athens (Greece)
Ann Olga Koloski-Ostrow, Associate Professor and Chair, Department of Classical Studies, Brandeis University (USA)
Eric J. Kondratieff, Assistant Professor of Classics and Ancient History, Department of Greek & Roman Classics, Temple University
Haritini Kotsidu, Apl. Prof. Dr. für Klassische Archäologie, Goethe-Universität, Frankfurt/M. (Germany)
Lambrini Koutoussaki, Dr., Lecturer of Classical Archaeology, University of Zürich (Switzerland)
David Kovacs, Hugh H. Obear Professor of Classics, University of Virginia (USA)
Peter Krentz, W. R. Grey Professor of Classics and History, Davidson College (USA)
Friedrich Krinzinger, Professor of Classical Archaeology Emeritus, University of Vienna (Austria)
Michael Kumpf, Professor of Classics, Valparaiso University (USA)
Donald G. Kyle, Professor of History, University of Texas at Arlington (USA)
Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Helmut Kyrieleis, former president of the German Archaeological Institute, Berlin (Germany)
Gerald V. Lalonde, Benedict Professor of Classics, Grinnell College (USA)
Steven Lattimore, Professor Emeritus of Classics, University of California, Los Angeles (USA)
Francis M. Lazarus, President, University of Dallas (USA)
Mary R. Lefkowitz, Andrew W. Mellon Professor in the Humanities, Emerita, Wellesley College (USA)
Iphigeneia Leventi, Assistant Professor of Classical Archaeology, University of Thessaly (Greece)
Daniel B. Levine, Professor of Classical Studies, University of Arkansas (USA)
Christina Leypold, Dr. phil., Archaeological Institute, University of Zurich (Switzerland)
Vayos Liapis, Associate Professor of Greek, Centre d’Études Classiques & Département de Philosophie, Université de Montréal (Canada)
Hugh Lloyd-Jones, Professor of Greek Emeritus, University of Oxford (UK)
Yannis Lolos, Assistant Professor, History, Archaeology, and Anthropology, University of Thessaly (Greece)
Stanley Lombardo, Professor of Classics, University of Kansas, USA
Anthony Long, Professor of Classics and Irving G. Stone Professor of Literature, University of California, Berkeley (USA)
Julia Lougovaya, Assistant Professor, Department of Classics, Columbia University (USA)
A.D. Macro, Hobart Professor of Classical Languages emeritus, Trinity College (USA)
John Magee, Professor, Department of Classics, Director, Centre for Medieval Studies, University of Toronto (Canada)
Dr. Christofilis Maggidis, Associate Professor of Archaeology, Dickinson College (USA)
Jeannette Marchand, Assistant Professor of Classics, Wright State University, Dayton, Ohio (USA)
Richard P. Martin, Antony and Isabelle Raubitschek Professor in Classics, Stanford University
Maria Mavroudi, Professor of Byzantine History, University of California, Berkeley (USA)
Alexander Mazarakis Ainian, Professor of Classical Archaeology, University of Thessaly (Greece)
James R. McCredie, Sherman Fairchild Professor emeritus; Director, Excavations in Samothrace Institute of Fine Arts, New York University (USA)
James C. McKeown, Professor of Classics, University of Wisconsin-Madison (USA)
Robert A. Mechikoff, Professor and Life Member of the International Society of Olympic Historians, San Diego State University (USA)
Andreas Mehl, Professor of Ancient History, Universitaet Halle-Wittenberg (Germany)
Harald Mielsch, Professor of Classical Archeology, University of Bonn (Germany)
Stephen G. Miller, Professor of Classical Archaeology Emeritus, University of California, Berkeley (USA)
Phillip Mitsis, A.S. Onassis Professor of Classics and Philosophy, New York University (USA)
Peter Franz Mittag, Professor für Alte Geschichte, Universität zu Köln (Germany)
David Gordon Mitten, James Loeb Professor of Classical Art and Archaeology, Harvard University (USA)
Margaret S. Mook, Associate Professor of Classical Studies, Iowa State University (USA)
Anatole Mori, Associate Professor of Classical Studies, University of Missouri- Columbia (USA)
Jennifer Sheridan Moss, Associate Professor, Wayne State University (USA)
Ioannis Mylonopoulos, Assistant Professor of Greek Art History and Archaeology, Columbia University, New York (USA).
Richard Neudecker, PD of Classical Archaeology, Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Rom (Italy)
James M.L. Newhard, Associate Professor of Classics, College of Charleston (USA)
Carole E. Newlands, Professor of Classics, University of Wisconsin, Madison (USA)
John Maxwell O'Brien, Professor of History, Queens College, City University of New York (USA)
James J. O'Hara, Paddison Professor of Latin, The University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill (USA)
Martin Ostwald, Professor of Classics (ret.), Swarthmore College and Professor of Classical Studies (ret.), University of Pennsylvania (USA)
Olga Palagia, Professor of Classical Archaeology, University of Athens (Greece)
Vassiliki Panoussi, Associate Professor of Classical Studies, The College of William and Mary (USA)
Maria C. Pantelia, Professor of Classics, University of California, Irvine (USA)
Pantos A.Pantos, Adjunct Faculty, Department of History, Archaeology and Social Anthropology, University of Thessaly (Greece)
Anthony J. Papalas, Professor of Ancient History, East Carolina University (USA)
Nassos Papalexandrou, Associate Professor, The University of Texas at Austin (USA)
Polyvia Parara, Visiting Assistant Professor of Greek Language and Civilization, Department of Classics, Georgetown University (USA)
Richard W. Parker, Associate Professor of Classics, Brock University (Canada)
Robert Parker, Wykeham Professor of Ancient History, New College, Oxford (UK)
Anastasia-Erasmia Peponi, Associate Professor of Classics, Stanford University (USA)
Jacques Perreault, Professor of Greek archaeology, Université de Montréal, Québec (Canada)
Yanis Pikoulas, Associate Professor of Ancient Greek History, University of Thessaly (Greece)
John Pollini, Professor of Classical Art & Archaeology, University of Southern California (USA)
David Potter, Arthur F. Thurnau Professor of Greek and Latin. The University of Michigan (USA)
Robert L. Pounder, Professor Emeritus of Classics, Vassar College (USA)
Nikolaos Poulopoulos, Assistant Professor in History and Chair in Modern Greek Studies, McGill University (Canada)
William H. Race, George L. Paddison Professor of Classics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (USA)
John T. Ramsey, Professor of Classics, University of Illinois at Chicago (USA)
Karl Reber, Professor of Classical Archaeology, University of Lausanne (Switzerland)
Rush Rehm, Professor of Classics and Drama, Stanford University (USA)
Werner Riess, Associate Professor of Classics, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (USA)
Robert H. Rivkin, Ancient Studies Department, University of Maryland Baltimore County (USA)
Barbara Saylor Rodgers, Professor of Classics, The University of Vermont (USA)
Robert H. Rodgers. Lyman-Roberts Professor of Classical Languages and Literature, University of Vermont (USA)
Nathan Rosenstein, Professor of Ancient History, The Ohio State University (USA)
John C. Rouman, Professor Emeritus of Classics, University of New Hampshire, (USA)
Dr. James Roy, Reader in Greek History (retired), University of Nottingham (UK)
Steven H. Rutledge, Associate Professor of Classics, Department of Classics, University of Maryland, College Park (USA)
Christina A. Salowey, Associate Professor of Classics, Hollins University (USA)
Guy D. R. Sanders, Resident Director of Corinth Excavations, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens (Greece)
Theodore Scaltsas, Professor of Ancient Greek Philosophy, University of Edinburgh (UK)
Thomas F. Scanlon, Professor of Classics, University of California, Riverside (USA)
Bernhard Schmaltz, Prof. Dr. Archäologisches Institut der CAU, Kiel (Germany)
Rolf M. Schneider, Professor of Classical Archaeology, Ludwig-Maximilians- Universität München (Germany)
Peter Scholz, Professor of Ancient History and Culture, University of Stuttgart (Germany)
Christof Schuler, director, Commission for Ancient History and Epigraphy of the German Archaeological Institute, Munich (Germany)
Paul D. Scotton, Assoociate Professor Classical Archaeology and Classics, California State University Long Beach (USA)
Danuta Shanzer, Professor of Classics and Medieval Studies, The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and Fellow of the Medieval Academy of America (USA)
James P. Sickinger, Associate Professor of Classics, Florida State University (USA)
Marilyn B. Skinner
Professor of Classics,
University of Arizona (USA)
Niall W. Slater, Samuel Candler Dobbs Professor of Latin and Greek, Emory University (USA)
Peter M. Smith, Associate Professor of Classics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (USA)
Dr. Philip J. Smith, Research Associate in Classical Studies, McGill University (Canada)
Susan Kirkpatrick Smith Assistant Professor of Anthropology Kennesaw State University (USA)
Antony Snodgrass, Professor Emeritus of Classical Archaeology, University of Cambridge (UK)
Theodosia Stefanidou-Tiveriou, Professor of Classical Archaeology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (Greece).
Andrew Stewart, Nicholas C. Petris Professor of Greek Studies, University of California, Berkeley (USA)
Oliver Stoll, Univ.-Prof. Dr., Alte Geschichte/ Ancient History,Universität Passau (Germany)
Richard Stoneman, Honorary Fellow, University of Exeter (England)
Ronald Stroud, Klio Distinguished Professor of Classical Languages and Literature Emeritus, University of California, Berkeley (USA)
Sarah Culpepper Stroup, Associate Professor of Classics, University of Washington (USA)
Nancy Sultan, Professor and Director, Greek & Roman Studies, Illinois Wesleyan University (USA)
David W. Tandy, Professor of Classics, University of Tennessee (USA)
James Tatum, Aaron Lawrence Professor of Classics, Dartmouth College
Martha C. Taylor, Associate Professor of Classics, Loyola College in Maryland
Petros Themelis, Professor Emeritus of Classical Archaeology, Athens (Greece)
Eberhard Thomas, Priv.-Doz. Dr.,Archäologisches Institut der Universität zu Köln (Germany)
Michalis Tiverios, Professor of Classical Archaeology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (Greece)
Michael K. Toumazou, Professor of Classics, Davidson College (USA)
Stephen V. Tracy, Professor of Greek and Latin Emeritus, Ohio State University (USA)
Prof. Dr. Erich Trapp, Austrian Academy of Sciences/Vienna resp. University of Bonn (Germany)
Stephen M. Trzaskoma, Associate Professor of Classics, University of New Hampshire (USA)
Vasiliki Tsamakda, Professor of Christian Archaeology and Byzantine History of Art, University of Mainz (Germany)
Christopher Tuplin, Professor of Ancient History, University of Liverpool (UK)
Gretchen Umholtz, Lecturer, Classics and Art History, University of Massachusetts, Boston (USA)
Panos Valavanis, Professor of Classical Archaeology, University of Athens (Greece)
Athanassios Vergados, Visiting Assistant Professor of Classics, Franklin & Marshall College, Lancaster, PA
Christina Vester, Assistant Professor of Classics, University of Waterloo (Canada)
Emmanuel Voutiras, Professor of Classical Archaeology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (Greece)
Speros Vryonis, Jr., Alexander S. Onassis Professor (Emeritus) of Hellenic Civilization and Culture, New York University (USA)
Michael B. Walbank, Professor Emeritus of Greek, Latin & Ancient History, The University of Calgary (Canada)
Bonna D. Wescoat, Associate Professor, Art History and Ancient Mediterranean Studies, Emory University (USA)
E. Hector Williams, Professor of Classical Archaeology, University of British Columbia (Canada)
Roger J. A. Wilson, Professor of the Archaeology of the Roman Empire, and Director, Centre for the Study of Ancient Sicily, University of British Columbia, Vancouver (Canada)
Engelbert Winter, Professor for Ancient History, University of Münster (Germany)
Timothy F. Winters, Ph.D. Alumni Assn. Distinguished Professor of Classics, Austin Peay State University (USA)
Ian Worthington, Frederick A. Middlebush Professor of History, University of Missouri-Columbia (USA)
Michael Zahrnt, Professor für Alte Geschichte, Universität zu Köln (Germany)
Paul Zanker, Professor Emeritus of Classical Studies, University of Munich (Germany)
201 signatures as of May 18th 2009.
For the growing list of scholars, please go to the Addenda.
cc: J. Biden, Vice President, USA
H. Clinton, Secretary of State USA
P. Gordon, Asst. Secretary-designate, European and Eurasian Affairs
H.L Berman, Chair, House Committee on Foreign Affairs
I. Ros-Lehtinen, Ranking Member, House Committee on Foreign Affairs
J. Kerry, Chair, Senate Committee on Foreign Relations
R.G. Lugar, Ranking Member, Senate Committee on Foreign Relations
R. Mendenez, United States Senator from New Jersey.
Addenda
12 Scholars added on May 19th 2009:
Mariana Anagnostopoulos, Assistant Professor of Philosophy, California State University, Fresno (USA)
John P. Anton, Distinguished Professor of Greek Philosophy and Culture University of South Florida (USA)
Effie F. Athanassopoulos, Associate Professor
Anthropology and Classics, University of Nebraska-Lincoln (USA)
Leonidas Bargeliotes, Emeritus Professor of Philosophy, University of Athens, President of the Olympic Center for Philosophy and Culture (Greece)
Joseph W. Day, Professor of Classics, Wabash College (USA)
Christos C. Evangeliou, Professor of Ancient Hellenic Philosophy, Towson University, Maryland, Honorary President of International Association for Greek Philosophy (USA)
Eleni Kalokairinou, Assistant Professor of Philosophy, Secretary of the Olympic Center of Philosophy and Culture (Cyprus)
Lilian Karali, Professor of Prehistoric and Environmental Archaeology, University of Athens (Greece)
Anna Marmodoro, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Oxford (UK)
Marion Meyer, Professor of Classical Archaeology, University of Vienna (Austria)
Jessica L. Nitschke, Assistant Professor of Classics, Georgetown University (USA)
David C.Young, Professor of Classics Emeritus, University of Florida (USA)
10 Scholars added on May 20th 2009:
Maria Ypsilanti, Assistant Professor of Ancient Greek Literature, University of Cyprus
Christos Panayides, Associate Professor of Philosophy, University of Nicosia (Cyprus)
Anagnostis P. Agelarakis, Professor of Anthropology, Adelphi University (USA)
Dr. Irma Wehgartner, Curator of the Martin von Wagner Museum der Universität Würzburg (Germany)
Dr. Ioannis Georganas, Researcher, Department of History and Archaeology, Foundation of the Hellenic World (Greece)
Maria Papaioannou, Assistant Professor in Classical Archaeology, University of New Brunswick (Canada)
Chryssa Maltezou, Professor emeritus, University of Athens, Director of the Hellenic Institute of Byzantine and Postbyzantine Studies in Venice (Italy)
Myrto Dragona-Monachou, Professor emerita of Philosophy, University of Athens (Greece)
David L. Berkey, Assistant Professor of History, California State University, Fresno (USA)
Stephan Heilen, Associate Professor of Classics, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (USA)
3 Scholars added on May 21st 2009:
Rosalia Hatzilambrou, Researcher, Academy of Athens (Greece)
Athanasios Sideris, Ph.D., Head of the History and Archaeology Department, Foundation of the Hellenic World, Athens (Greece)
Rev. Dr. Demetrios J Constantelos, Charles Cooper Townsend Professor of Ancient and Byzantine history, Emeritus; Distinguished Research Scholar in Residence at the Richard Stockton College of New Jersey (USA)
3 Scholars added on May 22nd 2009:
Ioannis M. Akamatis, Professor of Classical Archaeology, University of Thessaloniki (Greece)
Lefteris Platon, Assistant Professor of Archaeology, University of Athens (Greece)
Lucia Athanassaki, Associate Professor of Classical Philology, University of Crete (Greece)
5 Scholars added on May 23rd 2009:
Georgios Anagnostopoulos, Professor of Philosophy, University of California-San Diego (USA)
Ioannes G. Leontiades, Assistant Professor of Byzantine History, Aristotle University of Thessalonike (Greece)
Ewen Bowie, Emeritus Fellow, Corpus Christi College, Oxford (UK)
Mika Kajava, Professor of Greek Language and Literature; Head of the Department of Classical Studies, University of Helsinki (Finland)
Christian R. Raschle, Assistant Professor of Roman History, Centre d’Études Classiques & Département d'Histoire, Université de Montréal (Canada)
4 Scholars added on May 25th 2009:
Selene Psoma, Senior Lecturer of Ancient History, University of Athens (Greece)
G. M. Sifakis, Professor Emeritus of Classics, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki & New York University (Greece & USA)
Kostas Buraselis, Professor of Ancient History, University of Athens (Greece)
Michael Ferejohn, Associate Professor of Ancient Philosophy, Duke University (USA)
5 Scholars added on May 26th 2009:
Ioannis Xydopoulos, Assistant Professor in Ancient History, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (Greece)
Stella Drougou, Professor of Classical Archaeology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (Greece)
Heather L. Reid, Professor of Philosophy, Morningside College (USA)
Thomas A. Suits, Emeritus Professor of Classical Languages, University of Connecticut (USA)
Dr Thomas Johansen, Reader in Ancient Philosophy, University of Oxford (UK)
6 Scholars added on May 27th 2009:
Frösén Jaakko, Professor of Greek philology, University of Helsinki (Finland)
John F. Kenfield, Associate Professor, Department of Art History, Rutgers University (USA)
Dr. Aristotle Michopoulos, Professor & Chair, Greek Studies Dept., Hellenic College (Brookline, MA, USA)
Guy MacLean Rogers, Kemper Professor of Classics and History, Wellesley College (USA)
Stavros Frangoulidis, Associate Professor of Latin. Aristotelian University of Thessaloniki (Greece)
Yannis Tzifopoulos, Associate Professor of Ancient Greek and Epigraphy, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (Greece)
1 Scholar added on May 29th 2009:
Christos Simelidis, British Academy Postdoctoral Fellow, Lincoln College, University of Oxford (UK)
3 Scholars added on June 2nd 2009:
Dr. Peter Grossmann, Member emeritus, German Archaeological Institute, Cairo (Egypt)
Eleni Papaefthymiou, Curator of the Numismatic Collection of the Foundation of the Hellenic World (Greece)
Evangeline Markou, Adjunct Lecturer in Greek History, Open University of Cyprus (Cyprus)
2 Scholars added on June 3rd 2009:
Aliki Moustaka, Professor of Classical Archaeology, Aristotelian University of Thessaloniki (Greece)
François de Callataÿ, Professor of Monetary and Financial history of the Greek world, Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes (Paris/Sorbonne) and Professor of Financial history of the Greco-Roman world, Université libre de Bruxelles (France and Brussels)
Who shall I believe?
ReplyDelete216 PhD holders of Ancient History and Classics from all over the World
or
Risto Stefov + Gandeto ?
It's really nice to see there are non Greek people of such a caliber that raise their voice.
ReplyDeleteIt is essential that global academia raises its voice to the historical injustice that we are wittnesing today from Skopje.
ReplyDeleteAs an academic, I feel a bit more empowered to see that history, which has become so revised and the toy for the taker, is considered important enough for fellow academics to reclaim. Thank you, from a non-historian academic who nevertheless considers history important enough to preserve with all its lessons.
ReplyDeleteThe text claims that a map of larger Macedonia is shown on bank notes that have been circulating in the republic of Macedonia since 1991.
ReplyDeleteActually, this is not true. Not one bank note with a map on it has circulated in Macedonia.
This is a very unfortunate letter, inaccurate in important ways and staking out a position to the right of the Greek government's. Here is one response:
ReplyDeletehttp://astro.temple.edu/~pericles/Letter.htm
Dan Tompkins
Its very unfortunate to witness such pitiful attempts to discredit prof. Miller and all the 237 undersigned Professors of that letter.
ReplyDeleteSo if Prof. Miller is "taking out a position to the right of the Greek governments" or "spends considerable space reciting literalist claims about early Macedonia that can be found on many Greek diaspora websites", then by applying your own logic Prof. Tompkins, your own literalist claims about Early Macedonia, found on many FYRoMacedonian Diaspora websites or your overall persistence to defend SlavoMacedonians in your "reply" speaks volumes about yourself!!!!
Prof. Tompkins the meaning of this letter has political dimesion since the receiver is a political person, but also and an academic one since this letter undersigned from top universities professors and writers like Ian Worthington, Malcolm Errington and Paul Cartledge - that involve with ancient Greek history- and the most of the content has historical material.
ReplyDeletePolitical dimesion originated from the ill-conceived decision by Bush administration to recognize FYROM as the Republic of “Macedonia,” clearly became the catalyst of a more aggressive stance by FYROM that can presently be perceived as hostile towards Greece, a NATO ally of the US for many years. Obama administration should reverse Bush decision, recognize them again as FYROM, and actually block their NATO integration until a new name is found. In addition the US should condemn in the strongest terms their irredentist and aggressive behavior, as mentioned in the letter. It is imperative that a negotiated mutually acceptable solution also includes change of the FYROM constitutional name to the new agreed name, i.e. change in their passports and use of that name erga omnes.
The academic dimension is clear because the names that undersigned this letter are so huge and any comment by me will be a tom-fool thing to do.
Thanks for the sharing.
The title of Prof. Tompkins article and usual bibiliography points out its origin. Prof. Tompkins is not a Greek lobbyist. Prof. Tompkins reply has nothing to do with antiquity which is Miller's issue. Prof. Tompkins whether you had rights refused or not does not give access in lieu to cannibilise Alexander and Philippe.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand we have a letter signed by almost 250 academics which you disregard and suddenly one appear not to prove your connection with Alexander but to talk about your rights and you all get the shampagnes and flags out.
When you see Professor Speros Vryonis' name on the list that makes it very significant. He is one of the eminent Greek-American scholars in his field of Byzantine and Ottoman history.
ReplyDeleteTompkins is a novice compared to Vryonis
Maybe this is precisely the problem:
ReplyDeleteHe is one of the eminent GREEK-American scholars.
So he is a player, not a neutral judge.
Tompkins contents himself with the usual social-anthropological stuff about nation-forming etc which is all good and well and in truth it would benefit Greeks greatly to learn some of the vocabulary and methodology relevant to such arguments. What irks is the paternalism that usually comes from social anthropologists (or whatever the correct term is for the likes of Danforth, Just et al): “now little kiddies, you are both right and both wrong … just learn to share and get along”…
ReplyDeleteAs if the two groups, Greeks and Slav-Macedonians, are exactly on the same level as the social-anthropological ethno-genetic narrative would hold. I cannot fully grasp the logic of why a people such as the Greeks – inhabiting the same land and speaking the same language as the ancient Greeks, perceiving themselves and being perceived by others as a unique people throughout almost all stages of history and significantly before the advent of Nationalism – should be regarded as being on an identical level as the Slav-Macedonians – a group speaking a different language to the ancient Macedonians, inhabiting a largely different area to them, having a clear record of a subsequent arrival initially as invaders and despoilers of that land (as well as much of Greece as a whole) and being perceived until very recently by both outsiders and themselves, as identical to the Bulgarians.
In essence Tompkins, as a classicists, is not saying much at all from the point of view that would interest us here – namely the linguistic affinities of the ancient Macedonians – in case our blockheaded friends get excited at this point. Despite some allusions to Alexander I – the single ‘Greek’ satrap in Herodotus (the paradoxical nature of which I think he overstates) to illustrate what he sees as the absence in Miller’s arguments of ‘anthropologically sophisticated’ treatment of ancient ethnicity. This is probably a valid point as ‘ethnicity’ is a shifting, often ambiguous and ‘trans-historically’ non-static phenomenon that is quite separate from the fairly empirical question of what language a people speak. What Tompkins doesn’t say, and in fact cannot say, is that the ancient Makedones were non-Greek-speakers. Indeed, I suspect he probably holds the view held by the overwhelming majority of scholars in this field that the available evidence points strongly to them being speakers of a Greek patois … although their course in history separated them from their southern linguistic brethren. I don’t think he can really venture far beyond this. Recall how Ernst Badian stated, in formulating his well-known stance about how Macedonians (one can also include the various Epirote tribes) and the Greeks of the city-states viewed each other as ‘other’, that he was “not concerned with the argument as to whether Macedonian was a ’dialect’ or ‘a language’”. This was a point that the historian Ian Worthington took issue with, pointing out that “such an argument seems to be at the heart of the matter” [of their ethnic affinity]. In other words various Greek-speaking groups – at different times in history and for different reasons – may have seen themselves as separate people although being native speakers of the same language.
Some further remarks about Tompkins response:
ReplyDeleteSure, the region of the FYROM has been included as part of Macedonia ‘in maps for many years’ as Tompkins states … but this usually on antiquarian maps produced in relation to the area of ancient ‘Graecia’ and its environs. These maps certainly did not reflect the situation in the Ottoman Empire at the time they were produced. Likewise the conception of Macedonia comprising the three Ottoman vilayets – an area far larger than even the modern conventional definition of geographic Macedonia – shows how vague the thing actually was in the early modern period and that much of the impetus for ‘finding’ the region of Macedonia came from outside. The fact of the matter though, is that the lands of the ancient Makedones themselves were restricted to Greek Macedonia. The Pelagonian region of the FYROM can be counted as Macedonian land as it was inhabited in antiquity by the Pelagones … Epirote cousins of the Makedones who, together with the other neighbouring Epirotes (Lynkestians, Orestians, Elimiotae, Tymphaei) later became politically ‘Upper Makedones’. Although incorporated into the Macedonian kingdom (like so many other areas), the region of the FYROM was overwhelmingly non-Macedonian being largely Paeonian territory in its centre and east and Illyrian in its western and north-western peripheries.
Tomkins has rather a conveniently narrow view of irredentism. Irredentism is simply to advocate the taking over (‘redeeming’) of a region (or regions) belonging to a (usually) neighbouring country based on some sort of justification that that region rightfully belongs to the irredentist’s country by virtue of one or more of a range of factors (cultural, historic, linguistic etc). It does not necessarily pre-suppose military or political action. The bone-heads masquerading as ancient Macedonians while dreaming of the ‘Edna Makedonija’ of their Kanchevian maps – you know the one – can quite rightly be classed as irredentists. I suspect the majority of Slav-Macedonians consider the bounds of this imagined homeland as rightfully theirs. Tompkins doesn’t know what he’s talking about here.
Although he accepts that Michas has no real documentary proof – apart, apparently, from ‘some testimony’ – of Greece’s initial willingness to invade, Tompkins seems to nevertheless accept it as fact stating in the very next sentence that ‘annexation was seriously considered’ by Greece. Really? Can you imagine this? He must have been at the meetings discussing the invasion plans! This guy is truly using whatever he can to make his points…
So, you "suspect" that "the majority of Slav-Macedonians consider the bounds of this imagined homeland as rightfully theirs"? OK, great; but do you have anything more than a "suspicion" (say, an opinion poll, a declaration, a public rally by anybody in the republic of Macedonia) demonstrating that belief?
ReplyDeleteThe desire and the idea of a Greek invasion against the rep. of Macedonia was very much present and discussed seriously in Greece throughout the 90s, as was obvious to anybody living in that country then (now not any more, admittedly -and fortunately). Football fans, including a referee (!), had chanted repeatedly "I lysi einai mia-synora me ti Servia", and very clear allusions to a military intervention were made orally by the late archbishop of Athens Paraskevaidis and in writing by the then minister Mr. Papathemelis.
Daniel,
ReplyDeleteyou assert:
"This is a very unfortunate letter, inaccurate in important ways and staking out a position to the right of the Greek government's."
I suggest,if you wish to assert that this letter is inaccurate in some way, give those that are concerned with the falsification of history their due respect, and specify precisely what these supposed inaccuracies, which you have identified, are.
Linking to the fallacious retort put forward by Tompkins does not cut it.
Tompkins specious and nugatory retort does not even address one, not even one, single point raised by this letter with any intellectual rigor that would be worthy of a supposed scholar of the Greco-Roman Classical period.
Rather, he attempts to use all manner of rhetorical devices, as an attempt to derail this worthy action that has been taken by the community of classical scholars, who, in fact, play a very important and defining role in this unfortunate dispute between Greece and it's northern neighbour.
Moreover, Tompkins arguments contain all manner of fallacies, it is hard to know where to begin. I shall have more to say about this, although it is suffice to say, for now, that his arguments exhibit the fallacy of relevance, of weak induction, of presumption, and of ambiguity.
One can only conclude, inter alia, that Tompkins has only discredited himself with his attempt to deride this letter, when he has clearly stepped out side his area of expertise.
The below posting was posted with reference to Professor Miller's letter on the following site http://archaeoastronomy.wordpress.com/2009/05/29/macedonia-from-bad-to-worse/comment-page-1/.
ReplyDeleteI believe it would be worthwhile being posted here as well.
Alun, you make some valid points. Although, I must correct you on parts of your analysis, before I begin in earnest.
You say:
"As far as I know, no-one is suggesting that the southern part of Italy should be in the modern state of Greece. No-one contests that the region was Greek."
As far as I know, no one is suggesting that the FYROM, or any of its constituent parts, should be in the modern state of Greece either! You, infact, have it the wrong way around. Greece has no modern territorial claim over the FYROM. Rather, the irrdentist activity by the Government of the FYROM, and its denizens, have openly displayed their territorial claims over Greek sovereign territory, and these territorial claims are, but one, of a number of concerns, to us Greeks.
You say:
"It’s simply that the ancient history isn’t relevant to modern territorial claims. Why is it therefore important in Macedonia?"
Alun, relevance is a two place predicate. That is, relevance is relvant to something. Relevance is a symmetrical and reciprocal relationship. If A is relevant to B, then B is relevant to A.
Your statement of relevance must, therefore, also equally apply to the case of the Slavs, of the FYROM. It is the Slavs that are the protagonist who are attempting to use ancient history to establish modern day territorial claims, not the Greeks!
Let me by way of analogy, posit the following as an attempt to, possibly, lift the fog of uncertainty that has mired this polemic controversy, and bring some clarity to this discussion. My reasoned analogy is founded on the meme.
A meme can be defined as cultural characteristics or artifacts that are passed down throughout generations. Moreover, a meme can be defined as any characteristic of a culture, be it, for example, memories, language, ideas, toponyms, inscriptions, peoples names, norms, customs, sensibilities, religion, festivals, dance, rituals, codes of behaviour, history, myths and story telling, and social gestures. These characteristics can be considered as mimetic markers of a society/civilization. These markers can be transmitted from one generation to the next in a way, analogous to the transmission of genetic information. A corpus of mimetic markers together form a mimetic strand, or thread, which, as a single unit, identifies a society/civilization.
A mimetic strand, carries with it, both the social structure and culture of a society/civilization. The social structure can be thought to be comprised of relationships among groups, institutions, and individuals within a given society/civilization. Whilst, the culture, composed of memories, language, ideas, toponyms, inscriptions, peoples names, norms, et cetera, provides a sense of meaning to individuals within a given society/civilization.
By way of example, in many societies the family unit is a core institutional building block of social structure. Whilst, for example, marital monogamy or polygamy, expectations of a certain number of children, manner of child upbringing, and willingness to live with in-laws are highly variable in different societies. These latter characteristics can be said to be of a cultural nature. Social structure can be thought of as a skeleton, with culture being the muscle on the bones. The two are inextricably connected, mutually dependent and reinforcing. A change in one results in a change in the other. The mimetic strand represents this unity, which is simply referred to as society/civilization.
I shall refer to the term mimetic strand, or thread, from this point on, simply as a strand, and equally, the term marker to mean mimetic marker.
...cont...
ReplyDeleteLet us first take the case of Sicily, in Italy.
The contemporary Sicilian strand is one that is composed of many markers, spanning, chronologically, back through to the Sicilian primordial past. The contemporary Sicilian strand contains a marker of the classical epoch, to which you have alluded to, and this same marker, is also found in the contemporary Greek strand. However, the contemporary Sicilian strand also contains a large number of markers that are not shared with the contemporary Greek strand. The Sicilian strand has, of course, evolved over time, and continues to do so, in a manner that has never, in any way, impinged on the soma, or being, of the contemporary Greek society, such that it be considered a threat to the Greek strand. The Sicilian strand does not exhibit a desire to over-emphasize one marker in their strand, whilst de-emphasizing, ignoring, or synthesizing their remaining markers. The Sicilian strand exhibits a mature and stable state. Thus, both strands can, and do, coexist side-by-side in harmony. The Greeks would not even batter an eye-lid towards the Sicilians, if the Sicilians were to show a desire to erect an eight storey statue of Pythagoras in Siracusa, since the Sicilians acknowledge that historically, Pythagoras was part of the Greek cultural sphere and history, as you also readily acknowledge, and in *equal* measure, Pythagoras is also a part of Sicilian history.
Let us take the case of Greece.
The contemporary Greek strand, like all strands, is by definition, centered on mimetic markers, which in essence, defines, in the Greek case, Hellenicos Politismos (Greek Civilization). To the Greeks, the strand composed of the markers identifying the strand as Greek are taken to be far, far, more important than their analogous biological equivalent. This mimetic strand is what is cherished by the Greeks. That is, the social structure and culture, known simply to the Greeks as, Hellinicos Politismos, is what defines someone to be Greek, rather than their genetic make up, and consequently, gives them their right to lay claim to Greek culture, which consists of their memories, language, ideas, toponyms, inscriptions, peoples names, norms, customs, sensibilities, religion, festivals, dance, rituals, codes of behaviour, history, myths and story telling, and social gestures, et cetera.
...cont...
ReplyDeleteLet us take the case of the FYROM.
The Slavic strand of Greece's immediate northern neigbour, the FYROM, on the other hand, has unfortunately attempted to impinge itself on the soma of Greek society, in a manner that is considered threatening to the Greek strand. This threat, is not something new, it is something that has been been present throughout Greece's recent bloodied history, although, this Slavic strand has metamorphosed itself overtime.
The Greeks see this Slavic strand, of the FYROM, as one that has *not* evolved naturally over the course of time, in a manner born out by the Sicilian case, but rather, it has mutated itself through a process of artificial synthesis. One can attest to this synthesis by observing all manner of propaganda, Government sponsored or otherwise, against the Greek strand over a extended period of time. The Greeks look at that this Slavic strand, of the FYROM, and see it as a recent artificial mutation, synthesized via the Bulgarian strand. Moreover, this mutant strand is attempting to enter the Greek soma, and use certain specific markers of the Greek strand, whilst, in equal time, discard other mimetic material that is also part of the Greek strand, resulting in a mutant strand that represents the society of modern day FYROM.
This attempted mimetic engineering, to create this mutant strand, using Greek mimetic material, in a selective manner, without the consent of the Greeks, is seen by the Greeks as immoral and in no way acceptable, period!
The attempted mimetic engineering, has focused on specific markers, in this case, markers that are of the Classical Macedonian epoch, and this is why the Greeks show their concern and specific focus on those mimetic markers of the Greek strand. Although, if they attempted to target and mimetically engineer other mimetic markers of the Greek strand, the Greeks would have equally been in uproar, and they would have focused on those particular markers.
...cont...
ReplyDeleteThe FYROM, if they so desire, to be irrational, can call themselves Macedonian, but it will have a hollow ring to it.
The legitimate Macedonians, who can attest to this assertion, through their mimetic strand, and consequently, their mimetic markers can only be Hellenes (Greeks) and never Slavs. The Slavs of the FYROM, can never assert this, for their strand does not have the necessary, or sufficient, mimetic markers to allow them to do so.
The Greeks look at the mimetic variation between the Slavic strand, of the FYROM, and the Greek strand and see a discernable difference. Equally, the Slavs, of the FYROM, also look at the mimetic variation between the Slavic strand, which is attempting to mutate, and the Greek strand and see a discernable difference. Whilst, by means of comparison, the mimetic variation between the Greek-Cypriot strand, and the Greek strand, is seen by both the Greek-Cypriots and the Greeks, to not be discernably different.
The Slavic strand, of the FYROM, is analogous to a Frankenstein creation, it may exist, but like Frankenstein was not human, they equally are not Macedonian; they are not the real thing!
The Slavs, of the FYROM, continually ramble on about their right to self declare themselves as Macadonians, but equally, the Greeks have the right to self declare themselves as the Real Macedonians!
Interested parties must recognize, that the Slavs, of the FYROM, use various tools of propaganda, although, one particular tool is one that attempts to impose "concision" as a means of silencing debate. They attempt to assert their "right" to all that is Macedonian, in an a priori manner, without debate.
Well, sorry, they do not have the right to appropriate all that is Macedonian by using fallacious arguments that skip the vital step of the *burden of proof*, and simply ask everyone to jump to their a priori conclusion.
These specious arguments that they shove down peoples throats must be vehemently rejected.
This is their dilemma, and this is the reason why they are attempting to manufacture a mimetic strand that contains markers that are, to all intense and purposes, and knowingly, synthetic and foreign to them. However, their conceited Government, blindingly continues with this unnatural social experiment, to create a Frankenstein monster, as this is the only way that they can attempt to lay claim on the mimetic markers of the Classical Macedonian epoch, and as such, lay claim to characteristics, such as the name, Macedonia, and to justify their territorial claims to the Macedonian province of Northern Greece.
Alun, this is what irks us Greeks and in a similar way, what also irks the Bulgarians. (note: The FYROM has impinged on the Bulgarian strand, as it has done on the Greek strand).
ReplyDeleteGreece and Bulgaria are attempting to protect their mimetic material against a mutated and metastasized strand, which is the FYROM strand.
This reaction to protect ones mimetic strand is not, in fact, isolated to Greek society. Similar dynamics were readily seen in contemporary US society. By way of example, I put forward the case of the Absolut Vodka launched an advertisment in Mexico, showing a map of Mexico from the 1830's; the map can be seen here http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/laplaza/2008/04/mexico-reconque.html, and here http://www.absolut.com/iaaw/blog/we-apologize?page=329. There was such an uproar in the US, because of this map that the company was forced to withdraw the commercial and apologize to the US. Now just imagine it being the sovereign Government of Mexico, and not an alcoholic beverage company making such claims towards the US. How would have the US reacted?
The Tompkins rebuttal ignores a similar social dynamic within his own society, whilst he attempts to deride Greece's sovereign right to protect herself. This guy is not to be trusted, he is an amateur.
To end this post, Tompkins chastises Greece's sovereign right to close their borders towards the FYROM during the 1990's (cf. the US embargo imposed on Cuba, since 1961, and it is still in place), and talks about its economic impact on them, whilst in equal time, he simply ignores the FYROM's recent ridicules spendthrift eight storey statue of Alexander the Great in Skopje, amongst many other delusional activities.
Further, Tompkins, in his opening address of his rebuttal letter, found here http://astro.temple.edu/~pericles/Letter.htm, puts forward the UN as an authority, in a poor attempt to legitimize his argument. However, this rhetoric, is simply absurd, since the UN is an organ created and established through a hegemonic power, that is, the US, being the victor of WWII. This political organ is neither democratic, nor is it scientific. This authority of the UN, can neither lend credibility to the FYROM's claims, nor can it say anything about this matter that is of any scientific importance, and as the Philosopher Spinoza says, numbers by themselves can not produce wisdom.
So, Tompkins argument is, simply, a fallacy of both relevance and of weak induction, specifically it is, in this case, an appeal to force and to an unqualified higher authority, respectively. So once again, Tompkins demonstrates that he can not think! An automaton could do better.
The word Macedonian as used by the Slavs, of the FYROM, does not have a sense, that is, it has no convention or meaning, and is thus, cognitively empty and can not refer, and therefore, can be ignored. [1]
I'm done, for now.
Reference:
[1] Valid deductive argument form:
A word that does not have a sense, that is, it has no convention or meaning, and is thus, cognitively empty and can not refer, and therefore, can be ignored.
P.S.
Telemachus, now is the time to be angry.
— Odysseus, when the time came to deal with the Suitors.
and
The man who gets angry at the right things and with the right people, and in the right way and at the right time and for the right length of time, is commended.
— Aristotle
The Greeks are fully in their right to be angry at the misinformation and propaganda that has been perpetrated on them by the Slavic denizens of the FYROM.
Two remarks about "Greeks being in their right to be angry":
ReplyDelete- I am Greek, and I am not at all angry with Macedonians. On the other hand, I am angry with Greeks who take me for granted and feel entitled to speak in my name and express my supposed feelings.
- Anyway, I fully recognize the right of those Greeks who are angry to be angry, but equally fully recognize the right of the inhabitants of the republic of Macedonia to call themselves Macedonians. I think it's a fair deal.
I have posted my complete rebuttal to Daniel Tompkins post here http://archaeoastronomy.wordpress.com/2009/05/29/macedonia-from-bad-to-worse/#comment-39246.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, Alun did not post the last part of it.
Dan Tompkins, you say:
"Responding to Prof. Miller’s presentation on “Paeonia,” a name that the Greek government itself is not, I noted, putting forward, I commented on the growth of modern Macedonian ethnicity"
Dan, the current political position of the Sovereign Government of the Hellenic Republic is neither permanent, nor binding. There is no binding treatyin place between the two sovereign nations, in this respect. So, you can assert that the name "Paeonia" is not the present position of the Hellenic Republic. However, you can not say anything about what the current or future democratically elected Sovereign Government of the Hellenic Republic may or may not do. The current stance does not procludes the Sovereign Government of the Hellenic Republic from altering it in the near future. The Greek Government, unlike the Government of the FYROM is not playing games, such as holding Referendums to deal with this matter, in which a number of EU member states have already critisized the Government of the FYROM for using such chutzpah tactics. Please note, what is being discussed here is completely hypothetical, and should not be construed or misconstrued, in any way, shape or form, to represent positions or opinions of the Sovereign Government of the Hellenic Republic. These are completely my own pesonal opinions.
"The best recent historians of this topic seem to agree that the term “Macedonia” has been legitimate since around 1900 for the region now including the Republic of Macedonia, applying to the combined vilayets of Kosovo, Salonica and Monastir. The historians also record the vigilance of the neighboring states and of the Great Powers in suppressing Macedonian aspirations."
ReplyDeleteDan, I would assert that historians have a very different slant on the historical ethnogenisis of the Slavic people of the FYROM, than what you are putting forward. If you intend making references to higher authorities, if you are to be taken seriously, you need to cite the references. You have not done, so in this instance, so once again very little weight, if any can be given to your assertion. A note, to those who are genuinely interested in learning about this phenomenon of ethnogenisis I suggest they go to their nearest major library and seek out and read as many books from as many authors, and then make up their mind. Just as a primer, see the following two excerpts:
"The political and military leaders of the Slavs of Macedonia at the turn of the century seem not to have heard Misirkov's call for a separate Macedonian national identity; they continued to identify themselves in a national sense as Bulgarians rather than Macedonians. (“The Macedonian Conflict: Ethnic Nationalism in a Transnational World", Princeton Univ. Press, December 1995, p.64)
Ferdinand Schevill, American professor of history:
"Although in some areas (of geographical Macedonia) the various groups were all inextricably intermingled, it is pertinent to point out that in other sections a given race decidedly predominated. In the southern districts, for instance, and more particularly along the coast, the Greeks, a city people given to trade, had the upper hand, while to the north of them the Slavs, peasants for the most part working the soil, held sway. These Slavs may properly be considered as a special “Macedonian” group, but since they were closely related to both Bulgars and Serbs and had, moreover, in the past been usually incorporated in either the Bulgar or Serb state, they inevitably became the object of both Bulgar and Serb aspirations and an apple of discord between these rival nationalities. As an oppressed people on an exceedingly primitive level, the Macedonian Slavs had as late as the congress of Berlin exhibited no perceptible national consciousness of their own. It was therefore impossible to foretell in what direction they would lean when their awakening came; in fact, so indeterminate was the situation that under favourable circumstances they might even develop their own particular Macedonian consciousness. ("History of the Balkans": From the Earliest Times to the Present Day, 1922, reprint 1991)
Dan Tompkins, you say:
ReplyDelete"The historians also record the vigilance of the neighboring states and of the Great Powers in suppressing Macedonian aspirations. So Iconoclast’s argument is really with contemporary historians, some of whom are Greek."
Dan, stop creating sophistry these people that you call "Macedonian", considered themselves Bulgarians at the turn of the previous century. To attempt to say other wise is deliberately conflating the facts.
Dan, I don't think that anyone is arguing that the Slavs, of the FYROM, don't exist and should not be allowed equal rights of self-detemination, for this, self-evidently, be an oxymoron argument. However, when the citizens of the nation state, whose capital city is Skopje, in their act of asserting their equal rights of self-determination to call themselves by the appellation of simply, Macedonian, have instantaneously, inextricably, and demonstrably diminished the equal rights of self-determination of ethnic Greek citizens of the Hellenic Repbulic who assert their equal rights to self-determination and to call themselves by the appellation of simply, Macedonian, but simply, Macedonian of Greek heritage, having no ethnic or cultral affinity or ties whatsoever with the nation state, whose capital city is Skopje then we have a problem.
The Greeks do not want to impinge on the self-determination of another people, in any way, shape or form. However, there is one undeniable caveat that must apply, vis-a-vis, to both parties when the act of self-determination is asserted by any one party. The caveat being, that the party who asserts their equal right of self-determination can not in any way, shape, or form, diminish or make diminutive the equal right of self-determination of any other party. That is, each party, vis-a-vis, must have *equal rights*, which is exactly the wording used in the UN Charter [1]. So, any decision made, vis-a-vis, by one party that is inextricably connected, mutually dependent on, and affected by, the counter-party can *not* be made in a uni-lateral manner. Each party, vis-a-vis, must appreciate the sensibilities of their counter-party. It needs to understood that the Slavs, of the FYROM, are not the only ones who have equal rights to self-determination. The Greeks also have that equal right.
By the way Dan, one of your own ambassadors Henry Morgenthau so the region of Macedonia a lot different than what your making it out to be:
Henry Morgenthau, American politician, ambassador to the Ottoman Empire during the First World War:
"The Greek War of Independence, which came to a successful conclusion in 1832, affected less than one half of the Greeks in the Turkish Empire. It did not bring freedom to the Greeks of Macedonia and Thrace, of Crete and the Aegean Islands, nor to the more than two million Greeks in Asia Minor and Constantinople […] When the Turks and the Bulgarians left, Macedonia remained a purely Greek region." ("I was sent to Athens", Doubleday, Doran & Company, 1929)
and
"Finally, Krste Misirkov, who had clearly developed a strong sense of his own personal national identity as a Macedonian and who outspokenly and unambiguously called for Macedonian linguistic and national separatism, acknowledged that a ‘Macedonian’ national identity was a relatively recent historical development. ("The Macedonian Conflict: Ethnic Nationalism in a Transnational World”, Princeton Univ. Press, December 1995, p.63)
Dan Tompkins, you say:
ReplyDelete" So Iconoclast’s argument is really with contemporary historians..."
Speaking for myself, Dan, if I may, so as to set the record straight. That is not what I would conclude, using my own analysis. So, Dan, since you have come to such a conclusion, please, go ahead, and share your reasoning with the rest of us. I'm sure we would all be quite interested.
"(For an analogous case of recent ethnic development, consider the Palestinians, who like Macedonians emerged from the Ottoman Empire and progressively established their identity. Rashid Khalidi is worth reading.)"
I shall do so. No doubt the the above reference will be a worthwhile read, and I do not wish to question its relevance to this matter, before having read it, however, I am somewhat skeptical of its analogical strength, save that, I shall keep an open mind.
"The recent development of Macedonian ethnicity is dismissed by some Greeks, who are justly proud of using the oldest, or perhaps second oldest (Chinese writing is debated) continuously used written language in the world. But it’s hard to see a strong historical argument for denying that the inhabitants of a region called Macedonia are Macedonian."
Dan, your argument is entirely fallaceous and inparticular your arguments exhibits the following fallacies:
1. The fallacy of ambiguity, specifically, the fallacy of equivication.
Your argument cunningly asserts the word "region", rather than the word "country" as a means of asserting claim on the entire region of Macedonia, rather than just the FYROM. This is completely unforgivable, if this was intentional. I am sorry, Dan, but you are loosing your credibility with me.
2. The fallacy of relevance, specifically, an appeal to the people.
You are attempting to arouse emotions, by making a sweeping fallaceous statement in an attemot to portray the Greek character in a "bad light". Your assertion is offensive to me, and most certainly, to the majority of Greeks.
" So Iconoclast’s argument is really with contemporary historians..."
ReplyDeleteSpeaking for myself, Dan, if I may, so as to set the record straight. That is not what I would conclude, using my own analysis. So, Dan, since you have come to such a conclusion, please, go ahead, and share your reasoning with the rest of us. I'm sure we would all be quite interested.
"(For an analogous case of recent ethnic development, consider the Palestinians, who like Macedonians emerged from the Ottoman Empire and progressively established their identity. Rashid Khalidi is worth reading.)"
I shall do so. No doubt the the above reference will be a worthwhile read, and I do not wish to question its relevance to this matter, before having read it, however, I am somewhat skeptical of its analogical strength, save that, I shall keep an open mind.
"The recent development of Macedonian ethnicity is dismissed by some Greeks, who are justly proud of using the oldest, or perhaps second oldest (Chinese writing is debated) continuously used written language in the world. But it’s hard to see a strong historical argument for denying that the inhabitants of a region called Macedonia are Macedonian."
Dan, your argument is entirely fallaceous and inparticular your arguments exhibits the following fallacies:
1. The fallacy of ambiguity, specifically, the fallacy of equivication.
Your argument cunningly asserts the word "region", rather than the word "country" as a means of asserting claim on the entire region of Macedonia, rather than just the FYROM. This is completely unforgivable, if this was intentional. I am sorry, Dan, but you are loosing your credibility with me.
2. The fallacy of relevance, specifically, an appeal to the people.
You are attempting to arouse emotions, by making a sweeping fallaceous statement in an attemot to portray the Greek character in a "bad light". Your assertion is offensive to me, and most certainly, to the majority of Greeks.
3. The fallacy of relevance, specifically, a straw man fallacy
In particular, you have attempted to distort the argument and then attacks the distorted argument. Sorry, but that is *not* what the Greeks are arguing about, but rather we are arguing on the points as outlined in the above post http://archaeoastronomy.wordpress.com/2009/05/29/macedonia-from-bad-to-worse/#comment-39253, dated 2009 June 15, and certainly not the above ludicrous and fallaceous assertion. I suggest interested parties read that post, although for convenience I have duplicated the argument below:
1. Present day inhabitants of a nation state are citizens of that nation state.
2. Citizens of a nation state have sovereign rights.
3. Citizens of a nation state have equal rights to self-determination.
4. Citizens of one nation state must not diminish in any way, shape, or form, the equal rights of self-determination of citizens of another nation state.
...cont...
ReplyDelete5. The Government and its citizens of a nation state must in no way support, particiapate in, and/or assist in any activities or propaganda that are deemed irridentist in nature to another nation state, and the Government of the nation state where such irredentist activity is taking place, must take all immediate steps to ensure that any such irredentist activity immediately ceases and desists against another nation state.
5. The citizens of the nation state of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia have asserted their equal rights of self-determination and called themselves by the appellation of simply, Macedonian, but equally, a cohort of ethnic Greek citizens of the Hellenic Repbulic have the equal rights of self-determination and to assert their rights to call themselves by the appellation of simply, Macedonian, but simply, Macedonian of Greek heritage, having no ethnic or cultral affinity or ties whatsoever with the nation state, whose capital city is Skopje.
7. Therefore, in conclusion:
WHEREAS, the citizens of the nation state, whose capital city is Skopje, in their act of asserting their equal rights of self-determination to call themselves by the appellation of simply, Macedonian, have instantaneously, inextricably, and demonstrably diminished the equal rights of self-determination of ethnic Greek citizens of the Hellenic Repbulic who assert their equal rights to self-determination and to call themselves by the appellation of simply, Macedonian, but simply, Macedonian of Greek heritage, having no ethnic or cultral affinity or ties whatsoever with the nation state, whose capital city is Skopje;
WHEREAS, the nation state, whose capital city is Skopje, by asserting their equal rights of self-determination to call their nation state by the appellation, the Republic of Macedonia, or simply, Macedonia, has instantaneously, inextricably, and demonstrably diminished the equal rights of self-determination of the ethnic Greek citizens of the Hellenic Repbulic to call themselves by the appellation of simply, Macedonian, but simply, Macedonian of Greek heritage, having no ethnic or cultral affinity or ties whatsoever with the nation state, whose capital city is Skopje;
WHEREAS, the ethnic Greek citizens of the Hellenic Repbulic, who through their domicile and/or place of birth in the Province of Macedonia of Northern Greece assert their equal rights to self-dertermination and call themselves by the appellation of simply, Macedonian, but simply, Macedonian of Greek heritage, having no ethnic or cultral affinity or ties whatsoever with the nation state, whose capital city is Skopje;
WHEREAS, the ethnic Greek citizens of the Hellenic Repbulic, who assert their equal rights of self-determination to call themselves by the appellation of simply, Macedonian, but simply, Macedonian of Greek heritage having no ethnic or cultral affinity or ties whatsoever with the nation state, whose capital city is Skopje, also assert their equal rights and that they must not be disadvantaged in the international community, or international fora, by having their Hellenic character in any way, shape, or form, diminished or made diminutive by the act of another nation state.
WHEREAS, the nation state, whose capital city is Skopje, by monopolising the name Macedonia, in all the ways that they have done so, have diminshed the equal rights of self-determination of the Government and citizens of the nation state of the Hellenic Republic.
WHEREAS, the Government of the the nation state, whose capital city is Skopje, must cease and disist in the use of pedagogic material that exhibts psuedo-history that has been developed by the Government of the nation state, whose capital is Skopje, and in which this material is neither supported, nor recognised, by the leading international scientific and pedagogic communities.
...cont...
ReplyDeleteWHEREAS, the Government and the citizens of the nation state, whose capital city is Skopje, have shown by way of support, particiapation in, and/or assistance in activities or propaganda that are deemed irridentist in nature to the Government and the citizens of the nation state of the Hellenic Republic, and the Government of the nation state, whose capital is Skopje, where such irredentist activity is taking place, has not taken all immediate steps to ensure that any such irredentist activity immediately ceases and desists against the nation state of the Hellenic Republic.
The Greeks do not want to impinge on the self-determination of another people, in any way, shape or form. However, there is one undeniable caveat that must apply, vis-a-vis, to both parties when the act of self-determination is asserted by any one party. The caveat being, that the party who asserts their equal right of self-determination can not in any way, shape, or form, diminish or make diminutive the equal right of self-determination of any other party. That is, each party, vis-a-vis, must have *equal rights*, which is exactly the wording used in the UN Charter [1]. So, any decision made, vis-a-vis, by one party that is inextricably connected, mutually dependent on, and affected by, the counter-party can *not* be made in a uni-lateral manner. Each party, vis-a-vis, must appreciate the sensibilities of their counter-party. It needs to understood that the Slavs, of the FYROM, are not the only ones who have equal rights to self-determination. The Greeks also have the same equal rights.
Just like a Texan, is both a pround Texan and a proud American, equally I am a proud Macedonian and a proud Hellene (Greek). And no one, has the right to deny me of my God given right to self-determine myself as a Hellene (Greek) and a Macedonian, not you Dan Tompkins, not the Slavs, of the newly established nation of the FYROM, nor anybody else. I will not let it happen.
Dan Tompkins, you say:
ReplyDelete"And it is not a zero sum game. What Iconoclast calls the “soma of Greek society” is far more stable and resilient than he portrays it. It is not “impinged on” in any serious way."
Dan, I disagree with your conclusion. I have no idea on what grounds you have arrived at your above conclusion. Your conclusion is based on purely supposition. Have you lived in Greece, especially Northern Greece for any considerable length of time, to put yourself up as an authority, and to assert your above claims? What do you mean by "far more stable and resilient than he portrays it", how are you measuring this?
I assert that your argument is exhibiting the fallacy of weak induction, specifically the fallacy of appealing to unqualified authority (Argumentum ad Verecundiam), in this case yourself, and you have not demonstrated that you are qualified to reach such a conclusion. Furthermore, your argument is exhibiting the fallacy of relevance, specifically, the fallacy of appealing to pity, and the fallacy of presumption, specifically, the fallacy of begging the question. Dan, I am therefore begging the question to you?
"As to the Absolut Vodka advertisement: it ran in Mexico for about two months, February – early April 2008, when American anti-immigration media (Fox News, Lou Dobbs) picked it up ...... scourge of reckless advertising copywriters."
Dan, you know better than me about the feelings of your country men and women. I do not live in the U.S., and the information I have received on the Absolut Vodka contraversey was through my local main-stream-media and via the Internet, as opposed to your good self living in the country, and thus you have a view of "the facts on the ground", to borrow a terminology coined by the Israeli Military, that I and others do not.
As someone from the outside, looking in, it was presented to us in the main-stream-media as quite broad demographic of U.S. citizens who felt sufficiently offended by such an advertisment to react in the manner that they did. I am not in a position to judge, nor do I believe I have any right to even suggest making such a judgement, since I am not a citizen of your country. Whether it was right or wrong, that is for the citizens of the U.S. to decide, and only for them to decide and no one else.
Dan, I would hope that you are not suggesting that your fellow U.S. citizens, who show their patrotism towards their country should be denied their right to voice their concerns about something that they consider passionate enough to raise in their own country. I am by no means an expert on the U.S., but from my limited knowledge of your country, I understand that you Americans cherish your freedom of speech, and that it is also engrained into your constitution, so that all U.S. citizens have their, God given right, to freedom of expression. I would hope, Dan, that you are not suggesting that this be in some way diminished or made diminuative any way, I don't think you would have a great deal of support in your own country to reduce peoples freedom of expression. Dan, your not really suggesting that are you?
...cont...
ReplyDelete"Iconoclast performs a service by pointing to the irrationality of anti-Hispanic feeling in the US, and to the Miami-based rage against Castro of which Cuban-Americans are major victims. These are lousy models for productive interstate relations, but the Cuba parallel is instructive. It has prevented Cuban refugees here from communicating with their relatives, and has allowed corporations from other countries to steal a march on the USA in Cuba, while bringing no discernible benefit — prompting us to ask, what gain has accrued to Greece from its own economic blockades of a neighbor?"
Dan, it is not for me to say, whether such an act is right or wrong in your country. I do not have the right to judge, since I am not a citizen of your country. My interest in raising these two examples is simply to demonstrate that a Sovereign Government has the right and responsibility towards the protection of its interests and that of its citizens. The U.S. may be fully justified in taking the position it has taken against Cuba. As I have already said, I can not say, nor do I believe I have the right to say, or assert my opinion in the affairs of another freedom loving country, such as the U.S.
"Finally, American readers may want to ponder Iconoclast’s claim that the UN (only one of several groups that have criticized human rights violations in Greece) “is an organ created and established through a hegemonic power, that is, the US.” If he’s going to align himself with the critics of Absolut Vodka, he’ll find many of these believe the UN is run by foreigners and is completely opposed to US interests."
Dan, I'm really perplexed at your line of reasoning, it is by no way rational to reach such a conclusion about my thinking, it simply is not true! It is a fact that the UN is a political organ and that it was put in place, under the leadership of the hegemonic power, being the U.S. to replace the League of Nations. There is nothing ominus about that fact. Any interested party, can open a history book to realise this is a truism.
The remainder of your argument is fabricated rhetoric. As I have already said I do not think I have the right to take any position in your countries domestic affairs. This is for the citizens of the U.S. to decide, and not for any foreigner to give their opinon. A foreigner that does so, I suggest is overstepping their mark. So, I can't see how I could be taking sides, if I do not consider that it is in my place to interfere within U.S. domestic affairs. Dan, as I respectfully do not interfere or pass judgements on your countries domestic affairs, I would appreciate that you reciprocate that courtesy.
...cont...
ReplyDeleteDan, it appears that you are deliberately suppressing and omitting evidence. Rather than the Greece having been criticized for human rights violations, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) has been heavily criticized for human rights violations towards its Albanian, Turkish, Serbs and Roma ethnic minorities. Relations between the FYROM government and the country’s large Albanian minority have been a persistent internal problem. Concentrated on the FYROM’s borders with Albania and the Serbian province of Kosovo (administered by UN), where 90 percent of the population is ethnic Albanian, the FYROM’s Albanians resent and resist what they regard as inferior status and discrimination. A law enacted in 1992 requires 15 years of residency for citizenship, disqualifying many ethnic Albanians who moved between Kosovo (administered by UN) and the FYROM, and the government has tried to suppress an Albanian-language university in Tetovo. However, the ethnic Albanian parties have had a high profile in the Sobranje, and at least one of these parties has participated in most of the governments formed since the FYROM’s independence, moderating unrest in the Albanian community. [2]
Lest we forget 2004, when the sizable Albanian minority (25%+) were on the verge of revolt due to fear of ethnic cleansing by the Slav majority, of the FYROM, please see here http://socialistworld.net/eng/2004/10/20balk.html
Finally, I invite all readers from all countries around the World to stop for a moment, and really, critically think about the absurd assertions that Dan Tompkins is putting forward, and see it it what it is, simply propaganda. Dan Tompkins may have a PhD. in the Classics, but lets not forget that 250+ other scholars, and growing, right around the World, also have PhDs' in the Classics who have all chosen to sign Professor Millers legitimate letter to the POTUS Obama, and disagree with Dan Tompkins "view" of the World.
As Dan Tompkins is neither a Slav, nor a Greek from the Balkan region, nor a Scholar of Modern Balkan History, he can neither claim to have any Scholarly authority, with respect to the modern history of the Balkan region. In fact, given the evidence presented, he has very little, infact, to say about this controversy. So, Dan, I appreciate that you have your opinion on this matter, but the arguments and the conclusion that you posit, are your own personal layman controversialists opinions, and really nothing more.
...cont...
ReplyDeleteSo, all interested parties should not see Dan Tompkins talking with his "PhD hat on", but rather his "layman hat on." We can, therefore, only conclude that Dan Tompkins can also be placed within the cohort of foreign amateurs when he steps outside his area of expertise and talks about this dispute. The following quote, sums up, what a controversialists really knows about a subject, when they don't have a good handle on the facts.
"Something’s happening here and what it is ain’t exactly clear"
— Quoth the Buffalo Springfield circa 1966
Dan, and other interested parties, I recommend you visit the following web site here http://modern-macedonian-history.blogspot.com/, and here http://maktruth.blogspot.com to learn about modern macedonian history. This article is also worth a read http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Time%27s+up+for+%22Macedonian%22+Perverse+Nationalism-a01073904920
Regading the use of the word denizen. I have clearly stated the context I used it in. I provided this clarification due to the ambiguious manner it was interpreted. I don't think there is much value in others attempting to second guess, what I meant. I have stated what I meant, and it was not intended to be used in a manner that could be misinterpreted as condescending. Greek is my mother tounge, English is a second language for me. For those, who wish to make an issue of this are really only discrediting their credibility. Clearly, the medium of a blog does not deliver the same complete sensual experiences that would be available to the interlocutos in a face-to-face discussion, so word meaning can be misinterpreted. We just need to be a little bit more cautious when we use words that are vague. This harping has gone past its use-by-date.
Henry Kissinger, American diplomat:
Journalist: What is your opinion for the problem which Greece has to accept the name Macedonia which the Scopje Government is trying to implement? Henry Kissinger: Look, I believe that Greece is right to object and I agree with Athens. The reason is that I know history which is not the case with most of the others including most of the Government and Administration in Washington. The strength of the Greek case is that of the history which I must say that Athens have not used so far with success. (Management Centre Europe, Paris, 19 June 1992)
[1] Chapter 1, Article 1 of the UN Charter states
2. To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;
[2] Rusinow, Dennison, Hayden, Robert M., and Dyker, David. "Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia." Microsoft® Encarta® 2008 [DVD].
Dan Tompkins says:
ReplyDelete"Iconoclast provides 4400+ words responding to me. mega biblion is not always mega kakon (“a big book … a big evil”) but wordiness does reduce readership. I’ll respond as briefly as I can. Unless some truly novel point comes up, this will be my last post on the topic."
Yes Mr. Tompkins, if you had bothered to read the post http://archaeoastronomy.wordpress.com/2009/05/29/macedonia-from-bad-to-worse/#comment-39254, where Noam Chomsky explains information asymmetry that exists.
As Noam Chomsky said that goes to the core of your propaganda is
"The kinds of things that I would say on Nightline, you can’t say in one sentence because they depart from standard religion. "
So, Mr. Tompkins if you want to not be flippant then yes such detail is regard.
Alun, you have misinterpreted what I meant when I said "Greek speaking people of Ancient Macedonia". I stated a truism, this can not be denied.
In a face-to-face discussion Alun, We would have the ability to enunciate ourselves. You have made numerous cogitative leaps in your process of thinking, which I respectfully see as neither strong or cogent.
From my Slave neigbours to my North, I also respectfully agree to disagree with you, and Aleksandar, you have made your extraordinary assertions, now show us your extraordinary proof. Show us the money, as the Americans would say!
Aleksandar, I am still waiting for the money!
I'm done.
correction to the above post:
ReplyDelete"So, Mr. Tompkins if you want to not be flippant then yes such detail is regard."
should say:
"So, Mr. Tompkins if you want to not be flippant then yes such detail is required."
Dan, I have taken the liberty to respond to your last post here http://archaeoastronomy.wordpress.com/2009/05/29/macedonia-from-bad-to-worse/#comment-39281
ReplyDeleteDan you say:
"Dan: no. I just gave my arguments to a group of professionals. So far, they’ve responded positively."
Gosh, really, truly. Is that all you can say.
"Wow. A mini-lecture on scientific method and static apriorism. Iconoclast might have done better to write less and read more, for instance in the sources and arguments that I provided and he ignores about ethnic formation, and to have noted that I warned Prof. Miller he was on a bad scholarly track three months ago."
Yes, Dan, I thought it would have been a wow event for you and your acolytes, from the FYROM.
Dan, you shouldn't dismiss this so flippantly, especially when it is clearly obvious that your good self and your acolyte Slavs, of the FYROM, clearly are exhibiting agnotological tendencies. So a bout of reality of back to the basics, I would "hope" set you on the right path.
"In some ways that is very true and commendable. But important issues remain. The Greek foreign ministry continues to assert as a matter of faith that there are no ethnic minorities in Greece, for instance; and there is the NATO veto, etc"
Dan, what minority are your referring too?
Dan, you obviously don't know how things work. Greece did not veto the FYROM, rather, she convinced *her* NATO allies to withhold an invitation to the FYROM to join the NATO, for very legitimate reasons, in which the NATO thoughtfully considered, and agreed with Greece's position. Save what I have just said, Greece would also be fully in her rights to use her veto if she deemed so necessary.
Dan, it takes two to tango, Greece is on the dance floor, but her partner has stood her up!
"True enough but exactly how this might work remains very vague. It was that vagueness that crippled many arguments of the Greek govt in the 1990s (see Zahariadis’, JMGS, 1996: “these claims were tenuous and implicit and … depended on a chain reaction of events that was neither clear nor probable”"
Dan, I suggest you might want to read the book titled the Black Swan, by the author and philosopher Nassim Nicholas Taleb to see why Greece is very well in her right to take such a stance. Some excerpts from Dr. Tableb's book are below.
"A BLACK SWAN is a highly improbable event with three principal characteristics: It is unpredictable, it carries a massive impact, and after the fact, we concoct an explanation that makes it appear less random, and more predictable, than it was. The astonishing success of Google was a black swan; so was 9/11."
"Just imagine how little your understanding of the world on the eve of the events of 1914 would have helped you guess what was to happen next. (Don't cheat by using the explanations drilled into your cranium by your dull high school teacher.) How about the rise of Hitler and the subsequent war? How about the precipitous demise of the Soviet bloc? How about the rise of Islamic fundamentalism? How about the spread of the Internet? How about the market crash of 1987 (and the more unexpected recovery)? Fads, epidemics, fashion, ideas, the emergence of art genres and schools. All follow these Black Swan dynamics. Literally, just about everything of significance around you might qualify."
So Dan, just because some so called "experts" can't seem to come up with a scenario, does not mean that one (a Black Swan event) does not exist. Just imagine how little your understanding of the world in 2009 would help you guess what may happen next, not much! So, Dan, sorry to say, but your way of thinking is very naive. I suggest you read the book to understand how the real world actually works, as opposed to how you may think it works.
...cont...
ReplyDelete"In the meantime, Athenian anarchists are reportedly getting arms from Albanian sources, not the Macedonians who are regularly put forward as Mormo figures."
Dan, I don't know what your on about, but the anti-capitalist cohort, of mainly, students had been lobbying home-made Molotovs and damaged shop-front windows. So Dan, what you have insinuated is once again outright disinformation.
"My point was that many in the Republic of Macedonia had ancestors who lived in what is now Greek Macedonia. They did not leave for tourism."
Yes Dan, but my point equally is that many in Greece had ancestors who lived in what is now the Southern geographical region of the FYROM, around the town of what was then called Monastiri, now Bitola. These Greek Macedonians also did not leave for tourism either! Moreover, Dan, you might want to spend more time reading than writing, so as to realize that after the Balkan Wars 1912-13 there was a massive population exchange throughout this entire region, between Serbia-Greece (note: the now FYROM was part of Serbia at that time), Bulgaria-Greece, and later a forced exchage between Turkey-Greece under the treaty of Laussane in 1923. The Greek state gave all those who did not feel they had a Greek conscience, or affinity, the opportunity to leave for countries to which they felt that they had the closest ethnic affinity, that is, either Bulgaria or Serbia. Those that did remain were to be recognized by the Greek state as Greek citizens. Period. Likewise, Serbia and Bulgaria initiated reciprocal population exchange policies within their own states. So, now, that I have said that, Dan, your point is somewhat moot, wouldn't you say?
...cont...
ReplyDelete"All census reports are done by governments and often – since the time of Maccabees – serve the interests of governments. That is one reason the numbers in censuses of Macedonia seem unreliable to historians like Livanios (pp. 6 on the Ottoman census of 1904, and 25 on the unreliable Greek census of 1928)."
Truly unbelievable, where do you get this manufactured sophistry from Dan? Now we're meant to believe in some trumped up conspiracy theories, what next? Dan, this is a fairly desperate move on your part, you do realize this! Even if we were to take your argument on its face value, and believe that the Ottoman census and all the combined foreign (U.S., Germany, Austria, U.K., France) diplomatic communications were completely unreliable, it is one thing to be unreliable, and entirely another, for a census and all communication to completely and entirely ignore an ethnic Slavic cohort. Furthermore, you give no rational reason why the Ottoman Empire would have singled out and targeted only this Slavic cohort, why Dan, give us a reason why? Let alone, a strong and cogent reason why all the foreign powers would have also ignored them? What interest did they have in pursuing such a highly co-ordinated tactic, why Dan? In fact, the Ottomans were more interested in maintaining as much of a heterogeneous ethnic mix in each Vilayet as possible. This tactic aided the Ottomans, in so far as, it made it easier for them to maintain control and power. So, it makes more sense for them to add as many ethnicities as possible, not the opposite! On this basis your argument is not at all cogent. Even if we assume your argument is sound and cogent, then if the census information is irrelevant for the Greek argument, it then equally implies that the Slavs can not assert anything either. That is, the Slavs, of the FYROM, can neither provide evidence demonstrating that they were a majority in this region, since we have no way of knowing either way. Save what has already been said, and applying Occam's razor, the simplest reason why they were not listed on the census is that the ancestors of the present day Slavs, of the FYROM, during this epoch, had not even established their own ethnic conscience, but rather they had a stronger affinity towards their Bulgarian brethren, and considered themselves Bulgarians. I note, you have also agreed with this conclusion. So, you can't blame the Greeks for that.
Furthermore, Dan, answer me this question, where was this cohort of Slavs, who so strongly believed in their ethnic conscience during the 1912-13 Balkan wars? Why did they not stand up and be counted, and fight for what they believed in? The reason is, that the Slavs, during the Soviet era established their ethnic awakening for reasons more to do with Soviet propaganda, long after the Balkan Wars, and now, ex post facto, they want to make claims on a geographical region from the victors of the 1912-13 Balkan wars. This is bizarre, to say the least. Even if we take the hypothetical case that they did have an ethnic conscience at that time and they did fight, they obviously were not victorious. Well, sorry to say it, but tough luck! That's life. That's what wars are like. There are winners and there losers. This is a truism that has been, is, and will always be the case through out the ages. These people are crying over spilt milk. But what is even worse still, is that the spilt milk that they are crying over, they didn't even participate in its spilling! How undignified of them.
...cont...
ReplyDelete"It is unclear what Iconoclast disputes here: I mentioned the “forceful suppression” of Slavic Macedonians in Greece, mentioning a Greek source."
Dan, this was during a state of war (WWII), our country, Greece, was attacked. These people who you support, took up arms, aligned themselves with the Bulgarian Military, who were allied with the German axis and started fighting against Greece. These people were traitors in the eyes of the Greek state. They were citizens of Greece who fought with the invaders against the Greek state, and then directly after WWII, during the Greek civil war, they also fought on the side of the communists, once again against the Greek state. They fled Greece, on their own volition, because they knew, that if they were to have stayed, they would have been charged as enemy combatants and put up against a firing squad for treason. In fact, nowadays, these individuals and their sympathizers would be categorized as terrorists!
"“there is no logical or rational justification to take a cognitive leap towards a proposition that the Ancient Macedonians have any relationship, whatsoever with the Slavs,”
which is one reason I did not."
Dan, please explain that to your Slav acolytes, of the FYROM, so they can understand it as well. That way they can stop making bizarre assertions that have no scientific foundation, ego, my min-lecture on science, so that they understand how science works.
"I provided references, and Iconoclast ignored them. See the “Letter.” "
Yes, Dan, but you did not list the references you were referring to in that posting, I wanted to know who specifically you were referring to.
"I have no dispute with the quotation he provides from Danforth"
I'm really glad, now explain this to your Slavic acolytes, from the FYROM.
"I repeat, that great powers and neighbors had every reason to deny Macedonian identity, and that the evidence appears to be that the sense of identity expanded in the 20th century, largely, as Mazower says, due to the “combined idiocies” of Greece, Serbia and Bulgaria."
Yes, yes Dan, your back to your conspiracy theory again, are you? You seriously want us to accept this on face value, where you have no evidence, but just want us to accept what you say as gospel. Moreover, Dan, when did these Slavs have a sense of identity? It was not during the 1912-13 Balkan war, it came much later than this period, so what! That does not mean, ex post facto, they can attempt to claim an entire geographical region of Macedonia, in which they were only one (and one that did not even have a strong sense of their own of ethnic consciences at the time) out of a number of ethnic cohorts of "La Salade Macedoineis" is an absolute and laughable joke.
"Noone holds a franchise on the name “Macedonian.“ Some people on both sides claim it is “holy.” So they don’t like it when others use it."
Precisely, Dan, and so why do the Slavs, of the FYROM, think they believe they have a franchise, you only have to open your eyes and see the actions they have taken and are taking, and read what is written by them in Alun Salt's blog (http://archaeoastronomy.wordpress.com/2009/05/29/macedonia-from-bad-to-worse/
).
"I have no dispute with Loring Danforth’s finding that “Krste Misirkov, who had clearly developed a strong sense of his own personal national identity as a Macedonian and who outspokenly and unambiguously called for Macedonian linguistic and national separatism, acknowledged that a ‘Macedonian’ national identity was a relatively recent historical development.”"
Yes, Dan, but one individual doesn't create a national ethnic conscience either, so let's get serious here!
"But there is no evidence that the inhabitants of the Republic of Macedonia aim to prevent any use of the term “Macedonian” in Greece, which is what the extremist language (“diminished… rights of self-determination”) claims.""
ReplyDeleteDan, you just have to take a look at what is being written by the citizens of the FYROM on Alun Salt's blog (http://archaeoastronomy.wordpress.com/2009/05/29/macedonia-from-bad-to-worse/
) to see what their attitude is. The language "diminished… rights of self-determination" is not extremist language at all. I noticed you said "diminished… rights of self-determination", rather than "diminished… *equal*-rights of self-determination", the equal part seems to have been conveniently excised. I ask what gives you the right to assert that the Greeks are forbidden to be passionate about this matter, and how they feel?
"The three vilayets – Salonika, Monastir and Kosovo – made up the region “Macedonia” from the early 1900s onward (see Livanios); the Republic of Macedonia, formed parts of these vilayets, was not a country until 1991."
Yes, Dan, and in this region there lived also a number of other ethnicities that were not Slavs, that also consider themselves Macedonian, and wish to use this appellation, without being immediately associated with the Slavic cohort. Dan, stop conflating the facts, the way you present it, is as if no one else existed, that "La Salade Macedoineis" of ethnicities did not exist.
"Iconoclast presents a numbered list of claims the point of which is that people who think of themselves as Macedonians and live in a region long called Macedonia may not call their state by the name, Macedonia, because this some how damages citizens of the Greek province of Macedonia. "
Wrong, Dan, that is what you said, now if you see what I said it was:
"All they need to do is share the name, in a way which distinguishes themselves from all others who also consider themselves Macedonians, but do not want to be identified by others as being related to the Slavs, of the FYROM, in any way, shape, or form. The Greeks will not, in no way, back down on this matter, period!" (see http://archaeoastronomy.wordpress.com/2009/05/29/macedonia-from-bad-to-worse/#comment-39253)
"Iconoclast throws in the dread term, “irredentism,” without a word about the form irredentism might take, and without considering that continued condescension and hostility will spur, not reduce, irredentist fervor in the state to the north."
Dan, please see my above ripostes regarding the irredentism question you keep on raising.
"Iconoclast claims that the Republic of Macedonia is “monopolising the name.” That would require denying the right of others to use the word – which is the opposite of what’s happened. Noone I know in the Republic of Macedonia “denies” any Greek of his or her “God given right to self-determine myself as a Hellene (Greek) and a Macedonian.”"
I don't know about you Dan, but I posit that you don't need to be a rocket scientist, to conclude that when the FYROM call themselves, in the international community, by the appellation "Republic of Macedonia" or "Macedonia", it's a monopoly, no ifs or buts! I don't think a smart-alecky approach serves your purposes very well.
"Indeed, I shall say right now that I believe Iconoclast is probably a Macedonian (since we don’t know who he or she is, we cannot be sure). That’s a good thing. But it has never been at issue"
Well, thank you very much indeed Dan, I really do appreciate that you have gone out of your way to recognize my equal-rights of self-determination to call myself a Macedonian, and a Greek. I agree, that it is a good thing. Now explain this to your acolytes, of the FYROM, so they can understand.
The Macedonians were a motley alliance of Pannonians and Illyrian and Dacian tribes mixed up with Greeks. Inhabitants of modern Macedonia are Slavic-speaking but descended from these same people. Alexander the Great's mother was an Illyrian/Albanian. The people of the modern FYROM have a right to use this name to describe themselves.
ReplyDeleteGreece protests usurpation of its heritage and territorial aspiration of the FYRO Macedonia. Lisbon declaration of EU12 called for non-recognition of any country with Macedonia in its name, Athens gathered 1 million protesters in Thessaloniki and swore to death that they will not economically support irredentist Macedonia.
ReplyDelete