Population of Macedonia and Adjacent Areas

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Carlin
    Senior Member
    • Dec 2011
    • 3332

    Quintus Curtius Rufus mentioned an interesting piece of information.

    He wrote that Philotas, a Macedonian who was a naturalised Hellene, teased his fellow Macedonians by calling them "Phrygians or Paphlagonians".

    Even earlier than this, Herodotus wrote that Phrygians and Paphlagonians wore very similar clothes. The similarity between the apparel of the Phrygians and Paphlagonians was recorded by Herodotus as follows: "The dress of the Phrygians closely resembled the Paphlagonian, only in a very few points differing from it".

    The "Byzantine" historian and writer Nicephorus Gregoras during his visit to the town of Strumica in 1326, recorded that there he heard a large number of Macedonian folk songs. He affirms that, although he did not understand the language of the local population, the folk songs from Strumica definitely resembled - the Phrygian folk songs ("Correspondance" Paris, 1927, p. 30).
    Last edited by Carlin; 05-12-2018, 07:26 PM.

    Comment

    • Karposh
      Member
      • Aug 2015
      • 863

      Originally posted by Carlin15 View Post
      Quintus Curtius Rufus mentioned an interesting piece of information.

      He wrote that Philotas, a Macedonian who was a naturalised Hellene, teased his fellow Macedonians by calling them "Phrygians or Paphlagonians".

      Even earlier than this, Herodotus wrote that Phrygians and Paphlagonians wore very similar clothes. The similarity between the apparel of the Phrygians and Paphlagonians was recorded by Herodotus as follows: "The dress of the Phrygians closely resembled the Paphlagonian, only in a very few points differing from it".

      The "Byzantine" historian and writer Nicephorus Gregoras during his visit to the town of Strumica in 1326, recorded that there he heard a large number of Macedonian folk songs. He affirms that, although he did not understand the language of the local population, the folk songs from Strumica definitely resembled - the Phrygian folk songs ("Correspondance" Paris, 1927, p. 30).
      That's much better Carlin. Keep them coming.
      Enough with the Bulgarian and Vlach shit already.
      Macedonia first, everything else second.

      Comment

      • tchaiku
        Member
        • Nov 2016
        • 786

        Originally posted by Liberator of Makedonija View Post
        A highly reliable source.
        Wasn't this supposed to be a good thing?
        You guys usually use Bulgarian statistics here.

        Comment

        • Karposh
          Member
          • Aug 2015
          • 863

          Originally posted by tchaiku View Post
          Wasn't this supposed to be a good thing?
          You guys usually use Bulgarian statistics here.
          What the fuck are you even talking about dip shit? Do you even know yourself? You drop one liners here and there and expect everyone to know what you're fucking on about.
          BTW aren't you the same shit for brains that once asked “What makes you believe that you are the decadents of the Ancient Macedonians?” A not-so-hidden pattern has emerged with you where you just lob in a grenade, duck for cover, wait for things to settle down, and then you lob another one in. I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt at first, thinking that perhaps you're too stupid to realise that your line of questioning comes off really blunt and insulting. Either that or you're just out to test everyone's patience here. Well my patience has just about run out and from now on I'll treat you with the contempt you deserve. You fool.

          Comment

          • tchaiku
            Member
            • Nov 2016
            • 786

            Well I was just trolling back then. Not this time.The grammar mistake wasn't done in purpose.

            You guys really use Bulgarians statistics here in many cases.
            Last edited by tchaiku; 05-12-2018, 10:15 PM.

            Comment

            • Liberator of Makedonija
              Senior Member
              • Apr 2014
              • 1595

              Originally posted by tchaiku View Post
              Well I was just trolling back then. Not this time.The grammar mistake wasn't done in purpose.

              You guys really use Bulgarians statistics here in many cases.

              If we use Bulgarian statistics, it's unlikely we've used them to prove ourselves considering how Bulgarian statistists don't recognise us. So why would we be using them?
              I know of two tragic histories in the world- that of Ireland, and that of Macedonia. Both of them have been deprived and tormented.

              Comment

              • tchaiku
                Member
                • Nov 2016
                • 786

                Originally posted by Liberator of Makedonija View Post
                If we use Bulgarian statistics, it's unlikely we've used them to prove ourselves considering how Bulgarian statistists don't recognise us. So why would we be using them?
                I am taking about the maps and numbers representing Macedonians as Bulgarians. Not that you agree with those claims but you use them in that sense to prove a Slavic majority in Macedonia. You get my point.
                Last edited by tchaiku; 05-14-2018, 06:33 AM.

                Comment

                • Liberator of Makedonija
                  Senior Member
                  • Apr 2014
                  • 1595

                  Originally posted by tchaiku View Post
                  I am taking about the maps and numbers represting Macedonians as Bulgarians. Not that you agree with those claims but you use them in that sense to prove a Slavic majority in Macedonia. You get my point.
                  Bulgarian, Serbian, Austrian, French, German, Russian, etc.

                  Doesn't matter who made the maps, all maps showed Macedonia as possesing a clear Slavophone majority, we don't use Bulgarian exlusively to back that up.
                  I know of two tragic histories in the world- that of Ireland, and that of Macedonia. Both of them have been deprived and tormented.

                  Comment

                  • tchaiku
                    Member
                    • Nov 2016
                    • 786

                    Originally posted by Carlin View Post
                    1) LIVY, ROME AND THE MEDITERRANEAN.

                    Books XXXI-XLV of The History of Rome from its Foundation.

                    Translated by Henry Bettenson, Penguin Books. [This translation first published 1976]

                    Book XLIV.45 - Flight of Perseus, 168 B.C.

                    "First Beroea surrendered, then Thessalonica and Pella, and within two days almost all Macedonia had submitted. The people of Pydna, who were the nearest, had not yet sent envoys; a mixed and unassimilated population of many different nationalities; and the mob which had herded together as a result of the flight from the battlefield, hindered any decision or agreement among the citizens."

                    Book XLV.30 - Partition of Macedonia, 167 B.C.

                    "The third region has the notable cities of Edessa, Beroea, and Pella; it includes the warlike people of the Vettii, besides a large settlement of Gauls and Illyrians, who are energetic farmers."


                    2) CHAP. 17. (10.)—MACEDONIA. from the link:



                    Macedonia comes next, including 150 nations, and renowned for its two kings and its former empire over the world; it was formerly known by the name of Emathia. Stretching away towards the nations of Epirus on the west it lies at the back of Magnesia and Thessaly, being itself exposed to the attacks of the Dardani. Pæonia and Pelagonia protect its northern parts from the Triballi. Its towns are Ægiæ, at which place its kings were usually buried, Beræa, and, in the country called Pieria from the grove of that name, Æginium. Upon the coast are Heraclea, the river Apilas, the towns of Pydna and Aloros, and the river Haliacmon. In the interior are the Aloritæ, the Vallæi, the Phlylacæi, the Cyrrhestæ, the Tyrissæi, the colony of Pella, and Stobi, a town with the rights of Roman citizens. Next comes Antigonea, Europus upon the river Axius, and another place of the same name by which the Rhœmdias flows, Scydra, Eordæa, Mieza, and Gordyniæ. Then, upon the coast, Ichne, and the river Axius: along this frontier the Dardani, the Treres, and the Pieres, border on Macedonia. Leaving this river, there are the nations of Pæonia, the Paroræi, the Eordenses, the Almopii, the Pelagones, and the Mygdones.
                    Great find.

                    Comment

                    • Carlin
                      Senior Member
                      • Dec 2011
                      • 3332

                      The "Byzantine" (Roman) army that went to Sicily in 1024 to open up an offensive against Muslim Sicily included Bulgarians, Vlachs, and Macedonians as well as Turks and Russians according to local Italian sources (Annals of Bari):

                      Hoc anno descendit Ispo chitoniti in Italiam cum exercitu magno, id est Russorum, Guandalorum, Turcorum, Burgarorum, Vlachorum, Macedonum aliorumque ut caperet Siciliam.

                      "Catherine Holmes considers the problems inherent in governing such a large, multi-ethnic empire, and the solutions that Basil adopted. She explains how the extant sources make unmasking the political realities of this period so difficult, and demonstrates that a convincing picture of Basil's reign only emerges when these sources are understood in their original contexts. Particular attention is paid to the impact that the Synopsis Historian of John Skylitzes, a little-studied text from the reign of Alexios Komnenos (1081-1118), has on our understanding of Basil. As the late eleventh-century context in which Skylitzes operated is exposed, so the political, military, and administrative history of Basil's reign is reconstructed. Basil's Byzantium is revealed as a state where the rhetoric of imperial authority became reality through the astute manipulation of force and persuasion."--page 4 of cover.




                      Let's forget about all other writers/texts/opinions for a second and take a long hard look at this specific PRIMARY quote.

                      One would assume that these Macedonians came from .... Macedonia.

                      Comment

                      • Karposh
                        Member
                        • Aug 2015
                        • 863

                        Originally posted by Carlin15 View Post
                        The "Byzantine" (Roman) army that went to Sicily in 1024 to open up an offensive against Muslim Sicily included Bulgarians, Vlachs, and Macedonians as well as Turks and Russians according to local Italian sources (Annals of Bari):

                        Hoc anno descendit Ispo chitoniti in Italiam cum exercitu magno, id est Russorum, Guandalorum, Turcorum, Burgarorum, Vlachorum, Macedonum aliorumque ut caperet Siciliam.

                        "Catherine Holmes considers the problems inherent in governing such a large, multi-ethnic empire, and the solutions that Basil adopted. She explains how the extant sources make unmasking the political realities of this period so difficult, and demonstrates that a convincing picture of Basil's reign only emerges when these sources are understood in their original contexts. Particular attention is paid to the impact that the Synopsis Historian of John Skylitzes, a little-studied text from the reign of Alexios Komnenos (1081-1118), has on our understanding of Basil. As the late eleventh-century context in which Skylitzes operated is exposed, so the political, military, and administrative history of Basil's reign is reconstructed. Basil's Byzantium is revealed as a state where the rhetoric of imperial authority became reality through the astute manipulation of force and persuasion."--page 4 of cover.




                        Let's forget about all other writers/texts/opinions for a second and take a long hard look at this specific PRIMARY quote.

                        One would assume that these Macedonians came from .... Macedonia.
                        Without question, this has to be one of the earliest, if not the earliest, mentions of the existence of the Macedonians as a separate nation. I always thought the three letters that Emperor Leopold penned back in 1690 to the nations of the Balkans, (the first being a call to arms; the second addressed specifically to the “Macedonian people”; and the third to the various Balkan nations where he promises them protection from the Ottomans), were the earliest known documents where the Macedonian nation is confirmed. But this beats those documents by at least six centuries.

                        On April 6, 1690, the Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire Leopold I (1657-1705) issued a manifesto, calling on "all nations that live throughout the whole of Albania, Serbia, Mysia, Bulgaria, Silistria, Illyria, Macedonia to arms and join the Austrians against Turkey. " Almost simultaneously, on April 26, 1690, Leopold issued another letter with which he took the Macedonian people under his protection. The initiators of his publication were Marko Kreida, a native of Kozani and Dimitri Georgi Popovic, a native of Thessaloniki. In the letter, among other things, he declares: "... the Macedonian people are fully accepted in every respect, kindly under our imperial and royal protection." On May 31, 1690, the emperor issued another letter, extending his protection to the population in Bulgaria, Serbia, Macedonia and Albania.

                        Add to this, the 1759–60, Russian-army formation of the Macedonian (Makedonskiy) Hussar (cavalry) regiment and it's clear to see the Macedonians did indeed exist in their own right prior to the emergence of Bulgaria as a modern nation state. The proof of this can be seen in the fact that, at the same time the Macedonian regiment was being formed, a separate Bulgarian (Bolgarskiy) cavalry regiment was formed. Regional identity is out of the question here as Wikipedia explains: "They were on a level between regular and irregular cavalry. Hussars were recruited only from the nation indicated by the regiment's name, i.e., these regiments were national units in Russian service; all troops (including officers) were national, and commands were given in the respective languages.”

                        Now back to this truly awesome find. I'm really curious to know if anyone else has come across this information before? This is brilliant Carlin. I take back any doubts I ever had about you. You absolutely nailed it with this one. Who else could it be referring to if not the so-called “Slavic” Macedonians. Again, the Macedonians have been clearly separated from the Bulgarians in this example.

                        I think, if anything, Bulgaria's institutions (religious, educational, military and political) helped to foster the Bulgarian sentiments among many Macedonians of the mid to late 19th Century. Prior to the emergence of Bulgaria as a modern nation state, the evidence is that Macedonians living in Macedonia (and beyond, apparently) knew exactly what they were.

                        Comment

                        • Liberator of Makedonija
                          Senior Member
                          • Apr 2014
                          • 1595

                          Originally posted by Karposh View Post
                          Add to this, the 1759–60, Russian-army formation of the Macedonian (Makedonskiy) Hussar (cavalry) regiment and it's clear to see the Macedonians did indeed exist in their own right prior to the emergence of Bulgaria as a modern nation state. The proof of this can be seen in the fact that, at the same time the Macedonian regiment was being formed, a separate Bulgarian (Bolgarskiy) cavalry regiment was formed. Regional identity is out of the question here as Wikipedia explains: "They were on a level between regular and irregular cavalry. Hussars were recruited only from the nation indicated by the regiment's name, i.e., these regiments were national units in Russian service; all troops (including officers) were national, and commands were given in the respective languages.”

                          Modern nationalism is a product of the late 18th century and something that did not fully develop until the long 19th, especially in the Balkans. I seriously doubt anyone from Macedonia in that regiment had the same sort of ethnic/national identity we posses today.
                          I know of two tragic histories in the world- that of Ireland, and that of Macedonia. Both of them have been deprived and tormented.

                          Comment

                          • Karposh
                            Member
                            • Aug 2015
                            • 863

                            Originally posted by Liberator of Makedonija View Post
                            Modern nationalism is a product of the late 18th century and something that did not fully develop until the long 19th, especially in the Balkans. I seriously doubt anyone from Macedonia in that regiment had the same sort of ethnic/national identity we posses today.
                            Thank you for the textbook definition of what modern nationalism is. "Modern nationalism is a product of the...blah, blah blah." Yeah, I've read that somewhere too but the fact remains that the regiments were named after their respective nations which they belonged to. I guess someone forgot to properly explain to the Russians the concept of modern nationalism before they decided to hand out national names to the Serbian, Hungarian, Moldavian, Bulgarian and Macedonian Hussar regiments. These nations were not supposed to have fully developed until long into the 19th century according to your textbook definition. The Serbian and Hungarian regiments had regional identity only and in no way could they have been national regiments. Is that what your seriously suggesting? And the Russians too? They had no idea they were Russians in the ethnic sense until the 18th/19th centuries?

                            And herein lies the problem with your logic. If you turn around and tell me that "Oh it was different for the Serbians, Hungarians and Russians because they already had a well developed sense of national identity well before the 18th century, then why couldn't the same argument apply to the Macedonians. Were they any less proud of their identity. The inhabitants of the most famous land in history? Oh ye of little faith!

                            Comment

                            • Liberator of Makedonija
                              Senior Member
                              • Apr 2014
                              • 1595

                              Originally posted by Karposh View Post
                              Thank you for the textbook definition of what modern nationalism is. "Modern nationalism is a product of the...blah, blah blah." Yeah, I've read that somewhere too but the fact remains that the regiments were named after their respective nations which they belonged to. I guess someone forgot to properly explain to the Russians the concept of modern nationalism before they decided to hand out national names to the Serbian, Hungarian, Moldavian, Bulgarian and Macedonian Hussar regiments. These nations were not supposed to have fully developed until long into the 19th century according to your textbook definition. The Serbian and Hungarian regiments had regional identity only and in no way could they have been national regiments. Is that what your seriously suggesting? And the Russians too? They had no idea they were Russians in the ethnic sense until the 18th/19th centuries?

                              And herein lies the problem with your logic. If you turn around and tell me that "Oh it was different for the Serbians, Hungarians and Russians because they already had a well developed sense of national identity well before the 18th century, then why couldn't the same argument apply to the Macedonians. Were they any less proud of their identity. The inhabitants of the most famous land in history? Oh ye of little faith!

                              I'm just saying it be naive to think anyone is Macedonia at the time had a strong identity, considering Krste Misirko was saying in 1903 that the majority of the Macedonian peasantry still had not developed an identity, I think 18th century is out of the question.
                              I know of two tragic histories in the world- that of Ireland, and that of Macedonia. Both of them have been deprived and tormented.

                              Comment

                              • maco2envy
                                Member
                                • Jan 2015
                                • 288

                                Originally posted by Liberator of Makedonija View Post
                                I'm just saying it be naive to think anyone is Macedonia at the time had a strong identity, considering Krste Misirko was saying in 1903 that the majority of the Macedonian peasantry still had not developed an identity, I think 18th century is out of the question.
                                Likewise with the Bulgarian, Serbian and Greek peasantry around the region.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X