Ancient quotes on Macedonia

[I of Macedon]

The following quotes are collected from History of Macedonia website

http://www.historyofmacedonia.org/

Warning - there are many quotes

Diodorus Siculus
Ancient Greek Historian

The ancient Greek historian Diodorus wrote much of the history of Macedonia from the times of Philip II and Alexander the Great up to the last Macedonian king Perseus. In his writings, Diodorus is clear that the ancient Macedonians were a distinct nation, not related to any of the Balkan peoples (Greeks, Thracians, and Illyrians). The below 40 quotes from his books XVII, XVIII, XIX, XX, XXII, XXVIII, XXIX, XXXI, and XXXII are indeed an overwhelming proof of that:

[1] For even Greeks – Thespians, Plataeans and Orchomenians, and some other hostile to the Thebans who had joined the king (of the Macedonians) in the campaign. 17.13.5.

[2] For many days the king lay helpless under his treatment, and the Greeks who had been settled in Bactria and Sogdiana, who had long borne unhappily their sojourn among peoples of another race and now received word that the king has died of his wounds, revolted against the Macedonians. They formed a band of 3000 men and underwent great hardship on their homeward route. Later they were massacred by the Macedonians after Alexander’s death. 17.99.5-6.

[3] The Macedonians and Alexander backed Coragus because he was one of them while the Greeks favored Dioxippus. 17.100.4.

[4] Then the Macedonian (Coragus) poised his long lance and charged, but the Greek (Dioxippus), when he came within reach, struck the spear with his club and shuttered it. After these two defeats, Coragus was reduced to continuing the battle with sword, but as he reached for it, the other leaped upon him and seized his swordhand with his left, while with his right hand the Greek upset the Macedonian’s balance and made him lose his footing. 17.100.6-7

[5] He (Alexander the Great) was plainly disappointed at the defeat of the Macedonian. Dioxippus released his fallen opponent, and left the field winner of the resounding victory and bedecked with ribands by his compatriots, as having brought a common glory to all Greeks. 17.101.1-2.

[6] From Europe, the Greek cities AND the Macedonians also sent embassies, as well as the Illyrians and most of those who dwell about the Adriatic Sea, the Thracian peoples and even those of their neighbors the Gauls, whose people became known then first in the Greek world. 17.113.2.

[7] When Perdiccas heard of the revolt of the Greeks, he drew by lot from the Macedonians 3000 infantry and 800 horsemen. 18.7.3

[8] They (the Greeks) had more then 20000 foot soldiers and 3000 horse. 18.7.2. 3000 of these 23000 Greeks were led by a "traitor" who "left his allies without warning and withdrew to e certain hill, taking his 3000 men". 18.7.6.

[9] When oaths to this effect had been sworn and the Greeks were interspersed among the Macedonians, Pithon was greatly pleased, seeing that the affair was progressing according to his intentions; but the Macedonians remembering the orders of Perdiccas and having no regard for the oaths that had been sworn, broke faith with the Greeks. Setting upon them unexpectedly and catching them off their ground, they shot them all down with javelins and seized their possessions as plunder. Pithon then, cheated of his hopes, came back with the Macedonians to Perdiccas. 18.7.8-9

[10] When Alexander died a short time thereafter and left no sons as successors to the kingdom, the Athenians ventured to assert their liberty (from Macedonia) and to claim the leadership of the Greeks. 18.9.1

[11] When the Aetolians listened to him gladly they gave him 7000 soldiers, he sent to the Locrians and the Phocians and the other neighboring peoples and urged them to assist their freedom and rid Greece of the Macedonian despotism. 18.9.5.

[12] The decree of the Assembly of Athens: "people should assume responsibility for the common freedom of the Greeks and liberate the cities that were subject to (Macedonian) garrisons; that they should prepare 40 quadriremes and 200 triremes (ships); that all Athenians up to age of 40 should be enrolled; that three tribes should guard Attica, and that the other seven should be ready for campaign beyond the frontier; that envoys should be sent to visit the Greek cities and tell them that formerly the Athenian people, convinced that all Greece was the common fatherland of the Greeks, had fought by see against those (Macedonian) barbarians who had invaded Greece to enslave her, and that now too Athens believed it necessary to risk lives and money and ships in defense of the common safety of the Greeks." 18.10.1-3.

[13] Of the rest of the Greeks, some were well disposed toward the Macedonians, others remained neutral. 18.11.1

[14] A few of the Illyrians and the Thracians joined the alliance (with the Greeks) because of their hatred of the Macedonians. 18.11.1-2

[15] As soon as, however, as he learned of the movement concerted against him by the Greeks, he left Sippas as general of Macedonia, giving him a significant army and bidding him enlist as many men as possible, while he himself, taking 13000 Macedonians and 600 horsemen, set out from Macedonia to Thessaly (into Greece). 18.12.2

[16] Now that this great force had been added to the Athenians, the Greeks, who far outnumbered the Macedonians, were successful. 18.12.4

[17] As the Macedonians defended themselves stoutly, many of the Greeks who pushed on rashly were killed. 18.12.1-2

[18] Antiphilus, the Greek commander, having defeated the Macedonians in a glorious battle played a waiting game, remaining in Thessaly and watching for the enemy to move. The affairs of the Greeks were thus in thriving condition, but since the Macedonians had command of the sea, the Athenians made ready other ships… 18.15.7-8.

[19] Then after such a combat I have described, the battle was broken off, as the scales of victory swung in favour of the Macedonians. More then 500 of the Greeks were killed in the battle, and 130 of the Macedonians. 18.17.5

[20] The commandant of the garrison of that city, Archelaus, who was a Macedonian by RACE, welcomed Attalus and surrendered the city to him… 18.37.3-4.

[21] Seleucus and Pithon again tried to persuade the Macedonians to remove Eumenes from his command and to cease preferring against their own interests a man who was a foreigner and who had killed very many Macedonians. 19.13.1

[22] Peucestes (Macedonian commander) had 10000 Persian archers and slingers, 3000 men of every origin equipped for service in the Macedonian array, 600 Greek and Thracian cavalry and more then 400 Persian horsemen. 19.14.5.

[23] Although the risk involved in all these circumstances was clear, nonetheless she decided to remain there, hoping that many Greeks AND Macedonians would come to her aid by sea. 19.35.6.

[24] Then, after making a truce with the other Boeotians and leaving Eupolemus as general for Greece, he went into Macedonia, for he was apprehensive of the enemy’s crossings. 19.77.5-6

[25] In this year Antigonus ordered his general Ptolemaeus into Greece to set the Greeks free… 19.77.2

[26] Ptolemaeus, the general of Antigonus, had been placed in charge of affairs thoughout Greece; 19.87.3 (not in Macedonia).

[27] This was the situation in Asia and in Greece AND Macedonia. 19.105.4

[28] And first he planned to establish order in the affairs of Greece … and then go on against Macedonia itself if Cassander did not march against him. 20.102.1

[29] While these held office, Cassander, king of the Macedonians, on seeing that the power of the Greeks was increasing and that the whole war was directed against Macedonia, became much alarmed about the future. 20.106.1-2

[30] Demetrius was followed by 1500 horsemen, not less then 8000 Macedonian foot-soldiers, mercenaries to the number of 15000, 2500 from the cities throughout Greece. 20.110.4

[30] The utmost spirit or rivalry was not lacking on either side, for the Macedonians were bent on saving their ships, while the Siceliotes wished not only to be regarded as victors over the Carthaginians and the barbarians of Italy, but also to show themselves in the Greek arena as more then a match for the Macedonians, whose spears had subjected both Asia and Europe. 21.2.2

[31] Brennus, the king of the Gauls … invaded Macedonia and engaged in battle. Having in this conflict lost many man .. as lacking sufficient strength … when later he advanced into Greece and to the oracle of Delphi which he wished to plunder. 22.9.1-2

[33] A native of Terentum, Heracleides was a man of surprising wickedness, who had transformed Philip from a victorious king into a harsh and godless tyrant, and had thereby incurred the deep hatred of all Macedonians AND Greeks. 28.9.2

[34] Flamininus held that Philip (the Macedonian king) must completely evacuate Greece, which should thereafter be ungarrisoned and autonomous. 28.11.1

[35] To this Flamininus replied that there was no need of arbitration whom he ha wronged; furthermore he himself was under orders from the Senate to liberate Greece (from Macedonia). 28.11.3-4

[36] When the news of settlement reached him, Flamininus summoned the leading men of all Greece, and convoking an assembly repeated to them Rome’s good services to the Greeks. 28.13.2 (Macedonians excluded from the leading men of Greece)

[37] In defense of the settlement made with Nabis he (Flamininus) pointed out that the Romans had done what was in their power, and that in accordance with the declared policy of the Roman people all the inhabitants of Greece were now free (of Macedonia), ungarrisoned, and most important of all, governed by their own laws. 28.13.3

[38] Philip threatens the Greek Thessalians: "They were not aware, he said, that the Macedonian sun had not yet altogether set." 29.16.1-2

[39] He said, namely, that after seeing the sun rise as he was about to begin transporting his army from Italy to Greece… five day later he arrived in Macedonia. 31-11.2-4

[40] Having as his accomplice a certain harpist named Nicolaus, a Macedonian by birth… 32.15.9


Justin
Roman Historian

"It came to pass, that during the absence of exertion on the part of the Greeks, the name of the Macedonians, previously mean and obscure, rose into notice; and Philip, who bad been kept three years as a hostage at Thebes, and had been imbued with the virtues of Epaminondas and Pelopidas, imposed power of Macedonia, like a yoke of bondage, upon the necks of Greece and Asia" [6.9].

"Philip assigned the number of troops to be furnished by each state and only the King of Macedonia will be the commander of their forces. Weather Macedonia was attacked or was in a war with any other power, the Greek troops assigned by Philip had to support the Macedonian army and serve under him as their general. It's obvious that Philip had Persia in mind and knew that this is the point that obligated the Greeks to serve his dream of conquering that empire. The Macedonian army, which will have the exclusive status, was to be supported by the Greek army and by the armies of the adjacent conquered nations" [9.5.5-8].

"Antipater was appointed governor of Macedonia and Greece" [13.4.5]

"After the death of Pyrrhus there were great warlike commotions not only in Macedonia, but in Asia and Greece" [26.1.1]


Arrian
Ancient Greek Historian
The Campaigns of Alexander

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

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

[3] "When received the report that Alexander was moving forward to the attack, he sent some 30,000 mounted troops and 20,000 light infantry across the river Pinarus, to give himself a chance of getting the main body of his army into position without molestation. His dispositions were as follows:
in the van of his heavy infantry were his 30,000 Greek mercenaries, facing the Macedonian infantry, with some 60,000 Persian heavy infantry- known as Kardakes." [p.114]

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

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

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

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

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

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

"Alexander, son of Philip, and the Greeks (except the Lacedaemonians) dedicate these spoils, taken from the Persians who dwell in Asia." [p.76]
J.R. Hamilton, Associate professor of Classics and Ancient History from the University of Auckland, New Zealand, writes: 'In view of the small part that the Greeks had played in the battle the inscription (with its omission of any mention of the Macedonians) must be regarded as propaganda designed for his Greek allies. Alexander does not fail to stress the absence of the Spartans.'

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

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

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

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

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

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

[I of Macedon]

Quintus Curtius Rufus
Roman Historian
The History of Alexander - Penguin Classics
Translation by John Yardley

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

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

[2] "It was decided to raze the city to the ground as a lesson to all Greek states which contemplated rebellion." [p.21]

[Point of interest: "as a lesson to all Greek states". This statement indicates that Macedonia was not, and could not be included in Greece, for Macedonia was the one "giving" the lesson.]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[50,000 strong Greeks were with Darius fighting the Macedonians, while Alexander took only 7,000 Greeks next to his Macedonians which served as "hostages" and "were potential trouble makers", (Green) which he got rid of only when he learned that the rebellion in Greece against the Macedonian occupation forces there was suppressed (Badian, Borza). The fact that 50,000 Greeks were fighting Alexander’s Macedonians shows clearly that their loyalty and their numerical superiority lies with Darius and his Persians, not with Alexander and his Macedonians. As Peter Green puts it: "if this was a Greek conquest where were the Greek troops?" Alexander’s conquest can not therefore be at all a Greek conquest, but simply a Macedonian conquest.]
[10] "Men! If you consider the scale of our achievements, your longing for peace and your weariness of brilliant campaigns are not at all surprising. Let me pass over the Illyrians, the Triballians, Boeotia, Thrace, Sparta, the Aecheans, the Peloponnese - all of them subdued under my direct leadership or by campaigns conducted under my orders of instructions." [p.121-22]

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

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

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

Philotas: "Besides the Macedonians, there are many present who, I think, will find what I am going to say easier to understand if I use the language you yourself have been using, your purpose, I believe, being only to enable more people to understand you."
Then the king said: "Do you see how offensive Philotas find even his native language? He alone feels an aversion to learning it. But let him speak as he pleases - only remember he as contemptuous of our way of life as he is of our language." [p.138]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[24] "The customary purification of the soldiers by the Macedonian kings involved cutting a bitch in two and throwing down her entrails on the left and right at the far end of the plain into which the army was to be led. Then all the soldiers would stand within that area, cavalry in one spot, phalanx in another." [p.255] [Another Macedonian custom]
The difference between ancient Macedonians and the ancient Greeks is obvious. It is not a matter for debate. Language, customs, traditions and the every-day soldier’s behavior, all point to two distinct and separate ethnic groups. In short, the ancient Macedonians were simply that – Macedonians, and the Greeks were foreign people next to them.


Thucydides
Greek Commander and Historian

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

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

That this myth does not prove that the Macedonians were Greek I offer the extensive study conducted by the Macedonian specialist, Professor Eugene Borza. Analyzing the Temenidae myth transmitted by Herodotus and Thucydides, in details in two Chapters, Eugene Borza - In the Shadow of Olympus p.82-83 gives the following conclusion:
a) "It is clear that the analysis of our earliest-and sole-source cannot produce a consistent and satisfactory sequence of events. My own view is that there is some underlying veracity to the Mt. Vermion reference (as evidenced by the Phrygian connections), that among the Makedones a family of Vermion background emerged as pre-eminent, but that the Argive context is mythic, perhaps a bit of fifth-century B.C. propaganda (as I argue in the next chapter). To deny such fables and attribute them to contemporary Macedonian propaganda may appear minimalistic. But given the historical milieu in which such stories were spawned and then adorned, the denial of myth seems prudent.
b) The Temenidae in Macedon are an invention of the Macedonians themselves, intended in part to give credence to Alexander I's claims of Hellenic ancestry, attached to and modifying some half-buried progenitor stories that had for a long time existed among the Macedonians concerning their own origins. The revised version was transmitted without criticism or comment by Herodotus. Thucydides (2-99.3; 5.80.2) acquired the Argive lineage tale from Herodotus, or from Macedonian-influenced sources, and transmitted it. His is not an independent version. [There is no hard evidence (pace Hammond, HM i: 4) that Thucydides ever visited Macedonia, but it makes no difference; Thucydides is reflecting the official version of things.] What emerged in the fifth century is a Macedonian-inspired tale of Argive origins for the Argead house, an account that can probably be traced to its source, Alexander I (for which see Chapter 5 below). The Temenidae must disappear from history, making superfluous all discussion of them as historical figures.
c) There were further embellishments to the myth of the early royal family. In the last decade of the fifth century B.C. Euripides came to reside in Macedon at the court of King Archelaus, thereby contributing a new stage to the evolution of the Macedonian creation-myth. Euripides' play honoring his patron, Archelaus, probably adorned the basic story, replacing Perdiccas with an Archelaus as the descendant of Temenus-no doubt to the delight of his royal host. Delphic oracles were introduced, and the founder's tale was extended by the introduction of Caranus (Doric for "head" or "ruler"). In the early fourth century, new early kings were added during the political rivalry among three branches of the Argeadae following the death of King Archelaus in 399, another example of the Macedonian predilection to rewrite history to support a contemporary political necessity. The story continued to be passed through the hands of local Macedonian historians in the fourth century B. C., and by Roman times it was widely known in a number of versions. Nothing in this later period can be traced back earlier than Euripides' revision of the Herodotean tradition. The notion that Alexander I or one of his predecessors obtained a Delphic oracle to confirm the Macedonian tie with Argos has no evidence to support it. Had such an oracle existed we can be confident that Alexander, eager to confirm his Hellenic heritage, would have exploited it, and that Herodotus, who delighted in oracles, would have mentioned it. In the end what is important is not whether Argive Greeks founded the Macedonian royal house but that at least some Macedonian kings wanted it so".
d) Borza also mentiones that the "two advocates of the Argos-Macedon link are Hammond, HM, vol. 2, ch. I, and Daskalakis, Hellenism, Pt. 3, both of whom support the notion of a Temenid origin for the Macedonian royal house", however, we have seen above that both of them were corrected with the extensive evidence that Borza carefully reviewed. We have already seen that both Daskalakis and Hammond were incorrect on many matters on the ethnicity of the Ancient Macedonians, therefore it should come to no surprise that their now outdated and poor in evidence material can not be used to claim a Greek identity to the ancient Macedonians. Click here for Daskalakis and Hammond.

[2]Thucydides however, did not consider the Macedonians to be Greek, despite the above myth which wasn’t his original work but it as we saw was only transmitted by him.Here Thucydides clearly separates the Macedonians from the Greeks (Hellenes):
"In all there were about three thousand Hellenic heavy infantry, accompanied by all the Macedonian cavalry with the Chalcidians, near one thousand strong, besides an immense crowd of barbarians." (Thucydides 4.124)

Borza comments: "The use of barbaros [barbarians] is problematic, although it would appear that he normally includes at least some of the Macedonians in this category. See 4.125.3 and Gomme, Comm. Thuc.,3:613,615 and 616 on Thuc. 4.124.1, 126.3 and 126.5 respectively. In the Shadow of Olympus p 152.
"Both Herodotus and Thucydides describe the Macedonians as foreigners, a distinct people living outside of the frontiers of the Greek city-states" – Eugene Borza, In the Shadow of Olympus p. 96


Isocrates
Ancient Greek Writer
To Philip

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Note: The speech On the Chersonese was, to be sure, delivered in a specifically Athenian emergency; but the interest of the Greeks as a whole is never left out of sight. The Third Philippic is entirely dedicated to the danger that threatens all Greece. Similarly, when the past and future are compared, it is the whole of Hellas that is considered, not Athens alone.


Ephoros

The ancient Greek historians and geographers from the classical and the post-classical period, Ephoros, Pseudo-Skylax, Dionysius son of Kalliphon, and Dionysius Periegetes, all put the northern borders of Greece at the line from the Ambracian Gulf in the west to the Peneios River to the east, thus excluding Macedonia from Greece.

Michael Sakellariou, Macedonia: 4000 years of Greek History. p.50.

Ptolemy of Alexandria
Ancient Geographer

Ptolemy of Alexandria is an author of a great geographical work in which he produced maps of various ancient countries in Europe, Asia, and Africa. His map of Macedonia is clearly separated from Greece, Illyria, and Thrace. He also produced a map of Albania which in ancient times was in Asia, parallel to the map of Illyria in Europe, which makes it clear that the Albanians and the Illyrians had always been two separate nations.

Pausanias
Greek Historian

"Leosthenes at the head of the Athenians and the united Greeks defeated the Macedonians in Boeotia and again outside Thermopylae forced them into Lamia" [1.1.3].

"I have already said in my history of Attica that the defeat at Chaeronea was a disaster for all the Greeks" [9.6.5].

"After the death of Alexander, when the Greeks had raised a second war against the Macedonians, the Messenians took part, as I have shown earlier in my account of Attica" [4.28.3].

"When Philip the son of Amyntas would not let Greece alone, the Eleans, weakened by civil strife, joined the Macedonian alliance, but they could not bring themselves to fight against the Greeks at Chaeronea. They joined Philip's attack on the Lacedaemonians because of their old hatred of that people, but on the death of Alexander they fought on the side of the Greeks against Antipater and the Macedonians" [5.4.9].

"When Philip, the son of Demetrius, reached men's estate, and Antigonus without reluctance handed over the sovereignty of the Macedonians, he struck fear into the hearts of all the Greeks. He copied Philip, the son of Amyntas" [7.7.5].


Medeius of Larisa
Greek Companion in the Macedonian Army

Medeius of Larisa was one of the Greeks accompanying Alexander the Great in Asia. According to him the Thessalians are ‘the most northerly of the Greeks’, thus excluding the Macedonians as non-Greeks since they live north of Thessaly.


Pseudo-Herodotus
Greek Historian

Pseudo-Herodotus in Peri Politeias (34-37) calls the Macedonians barbarians and distinguishes them from the Greeks.

[I of Macedon]

Plutarch
Ancient Greek Historian
The Age of Alexander

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


Livy
Roman Historian

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

There was appended to this decree a provision that if anyone afterwards should bring forward a proposal tending to bring on Philip disgrace or dishonour then the Athenian people would pass it in its entirety; whereas if anyone should by word or deed seek to counter his disgrace, or to enhance his honour, the killing of such a person would be lawful homicide. A final clause provided that all the decrees formerly passed against the Pisistratidae should be observed in regard to Philip. This was the Athenians' war against Philip, a war of words, written or spoken, for that is where their only strength lies." [Livy's book XXXI.44]
The most pressing point, the one that screams for recognition, is the call for the Athenian people to (a) "heap curses and execrations on Philip, his family and his realm, his forces on land and sea, and the whole race and name of the Macedonians, and (b) whereas if anyone should by word or deed seek to counter his disgrace, or to enhance his honour, the killing of such a person would be lawful homicide.

In conclusion one must remember the following:
(a) The ancient Greeks regarded the ancient Macedonians as foreigners.
(b) They regarded the ancient Macedonians as people of different race.
(c) They regarded the ancient Macedonians as barbarians, as people who enslaved the Greeks.
(d) This episode describes the situation in Athens around 200 B.C.
(e) It should constantly be born in mind the intensity of the hate expressed towards the conqueror from the north - the Macedonians. If anyone in as much as utter a one positive word for Philip, then this person should be killed, and the killing of that person would be taken as lawful homicide. These feelings were mutual by the way.
(f) The suggestion by some authors (marginal lot, anyway) that these two dissimilar people "blended together" in some aspects of their culture becomes much harder to accept, and therefore, is rejected based such credible evidence.

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


Polybius
Greek Statesman and Historian. [c 200-118 B.C.]
The Rise of the Roman Empire

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

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

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

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

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

[2] [Book XVIII, 1] Philip V from Macedon invites Flamininus (Roman commander) to explain what he, Philip, should do to have peace:
"The Roman general replied that his duty dictated an answer which was both simple and clear. He demanded that Philip should withdraw from the whole of Greece, restore to each of the states the prisoners and deserters he was holding, hand over to the Romans the region of Illyria which he had seized after the treaty that had been made in Epirus, and so on...."

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

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

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

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

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

"But what is most outrageous of all is that they should attempt to put themselves on the same footing as the Romans and demand that the Macedonians should withdraw from the whole of Greece. To use such language is arrogant enough in the first place, but while we may endure this from the Romans, it is quite intolerable coming from the Aetolians. In any case,' he continued, 'what is this Greece which you demand that I should evacuate, and how do you define Greece? Certainly most of the Aetolians themselves are not Greeks! The countries of the Agraae, the Apodotea, and the Aphilochians cannot be regarded as Greek. So do you allow me to remain in those territories."
From the above encounters we infer: They, the Greeks, would like to see him, King Philip V from Macedon, leave Greece and go to his own kingdom in Macedonia, and by the strongest implication, we concur that:

(a) Ancient Greeks did not regard the ancient Macedonians as their kinsmen.
(b) Ancient Macedonians did not regard the Greeks as their own people.
(c) Ancient Macedonians had conquered the Greek states.
(d) Ancient Macedonians had enslaved the Greeks and sold them as slaves.
(e) Macedonia was not a Greek land.
[5] …"For there can be no doubt that by their indefatigable energy and daring they raised Macedonia from the status of a petty kingdom to that of the greatest and most glorious monarchy in the world. And apart what was accomplished during Philip's lifetime, the successes that were achieved by Alexander after his father's death won for them a reputation for valour which has been universally recognized by posterity.".... [Polybius: The Rise of the Roman Empire, published by Penguin Classics, Book VIII.9 page 371.]

As with his predecessors, other ancient authors, Polybius clearly separates the ancient Macedonians from the ancient Greeks. As a matter of fact, the ethnic difference between these two people was not a matter for discussion - it was an accomplished fact.


Thrasymachus
On Behalf of the Lariasaeans

"Shell we being Greeks, be slaves to Archelaus, a barbarian?"
This line the Greek Thrasymachus attributed to the Macedonian king Archelaus who occupied Greek land with his Macedonian army. Since the ancient Greeks stereotyped and called all non-Greeks barbarian, it is clear that Thrasymachus does not consider neither the Macedonian king nor his nation to be Greek, but foreigners to the ancient Greek world. The modern Greeks, however, would like to claim the ancient Macedonians as Greek. Here is what Professor Borza (a Macedonian specialist and expert on the ethnicity of the Macedonians) had written on that matter:

The modern Greek writer Daskalakis (Hellenism, 234) contended that Thrasymachus was not referring to barbarians in a usual sense. The passage, he argued, should be taken "in its rhetorical slant of a difference between advanced and backwards Greeks in an intellectual sense." This is strained and unconvincing. [Eugene Borza. In the Shadow of Olympus. p.165]

Borza can not be more right. The Greeks clearly called all non-Greeks barbarians. Based on the Daskalakis's logic, are we now supposed to think that the Persians (which the Greeks also called barbarians) are some kind of backward Greeks in an intellectual sense? The Thracians too? However, we do not see the modern Greek authors claim that. The lesson is clear: Daskalakis's argument can not be true and it only proves to what extend the modern Greek writers would go to make the Macedonians Greek and even rewrite the feelings of the ancient Greeks during that process.


Herodotus
Ancient Greek Writer

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

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

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

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

[1] Eugene Borza In The Shadow of Olympus p. 112 writes:
"Herodotus' story is fraught with too many difficulties to make sense of it. For example, either (1) Alexander lost the run-off for his dead heat, which is why his name doez not appear in the victor lists; or (2) he won the run-off, although Herodotus does not tell us this; or (3) it remained a dead heat, which is impossible in light Olympic practice; or (4) it was a special race, in which case it is unlikely that his fellow competitors would have protested Alexander's presence; or (5) Alexander never competed at Olympia. It is best to abandon this story, which belongs in the category of the tale of Alexander at Plataea. In their commentaries on these passages Macan and How and Wells long ago recognized that the Olympic Games story was based on family legend (Hdt. 5.22: "as the descendants of Perdiccas themselves say [autoi legousi]"), weak proofs of their Hellenic descent. Moreover, the Olympic Games tale is twice removed: Herodotus heard from the Argeadea (perhaps from Alexander himself) that the king had told something to the judges, but we do not know what those proofs were."
"The theme of the Olympic and Plataea incidents are the same: "I am Alexander, a Greek" which seems to be the main point. The more credible accounts of Alexander at Tempe and at Athens do not pursue this theme; they state Alexander's activities without embellishment or appeal to prohellenism. Moreover, the insistence that Alexander is a Greek, and descendant from Greeks, rubs against the spirit of Herodotus 7.130, who speaks of the Thessalians as the first Greeks to come under Persian submission--a perfect opportunity for Herodotus to point out that the Macedonians were a non Greek race ruled over by Greek kings, something he nowhere mentions."

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

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

[2] Peter Green - Classical Bearings p.157

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

[3] Ernst Badian - Studies in the History of Art Vol 10: Macedonia and Greece in Late Classical Early Hellenistic Times:
"We have no way of judging the authenticity of either the claim or the evidence that went with it, but it is clear that at the time the decision was not easy. There were outraged protests from the other competitors, who rejected Alexander I as a barbarian--which proves, at least, that the Temenid descent and the royal genealogy had hitherto been an isoteric item of knowledge. However, the Hellanodikai decided to accept it--whether moved by the evidence or by political considerations, we again cannot tell. In view of the time and circumstances in which the claim first appears and the objections it encountered, modern scholars have often suspected that it was largely spun out of fortuitous resemblance of the name of the Argead clan to city of Argos; with this given, the descent (of course) could not be less than royal, i.e., Temenid."

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

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

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

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

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

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

Among the Greeks there exist a common bond, a community of blood and language, temples and rituals and common customs. This expressed kinship between the Greek allies is evident and it stands in stark contrast against the references used towards the Macedonians who were addressed as foreigners. We have seen that Herodotus (7.130) speaks of the Thessalians as the first Greeks to come under Persian submission (although the Persians entered Macedonia first), and here using his own words, he clearly exclude the Macedonians from the Greeks. We are therefore, left with the conclusion that Herodotus did not consider the Macedonians as Greeks. "Both Herodotus and Thucydides describe the Macedonians as foreigners, a distinct people living outside of the frontiers of the Greek city-states" – Eugene Borza, In the Shadow of Olympus p. 96.

[I of Macedon]

Demosthenes
Greek Orator

"... not only no Greek, nor related to the Greeks, but not even a barbarian from any place that can be named with honors, but a pestilent knave from Macedonia, whence it was never yet possible to buy a decent slave" - Demosthenes, Third Philippic, 31. The famous words that this Greek orator from Athens used to describe the Macedonian king Philip II, the father of Alexander the Great, prior to Philip’s conquest of Greece.

We know for a fact that the ancient Greeks stereotyped and called all non-Greeks barbarians. These included the Persians, the Thracians, Illyrians, Macedonians, etc. The modern Greeks however, claim that Philip was Greek, and that Demosthenes called him "not only no Greek, nor related to the Greeks" and "barbarian", onlyin "rhetorical context", which was aroused by the political anger that existed between Macedonia and the Greeks states on the south, although it is very clear from Demosthenes’s words that he regards the Macedonians and their king Philip II as non-Greeks. This modern Greek position is easily debunked, however, when we consider the following two points:

a. If the Macedonians were Greeks but still called barbarians and nor related to the Greeks, why is then no other Greek tribe called barbarians and nor related to the Greeks in "rhetorical context"? There were many examples when that could have happened, it’s enough to point to the long Peloponesian War, or any of the many constant wars between the Greek states. Yet no Spartan, Athenian, Theban, Epirote, was ever called non-Greek or barbarian during any of these political and war conflicts! Not ONCE!

b. We know for a fact that the ancient Greeks also called the Persians barbarians. Are we suppose to say now, based on the modern Greek "logic", that the Persians were too a Greek tribe, but they were called non-Greeks only in "rhetorical context"?
The lesson is clear. The ancient Greeks called all non-Greeks barbarians, and the modern Greek argument can simply not be true, and is quite frankly ridiculous. It does however, prove to what extend the modern Greek writers would go to make the Macedonians forcefully Greek, steel the Macedonian history, and even rewrite the feelings of the ancient Greeks during that process.
Now lets see some credible evidence:

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

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

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

[4] The news of Philip's death reached Athens. Demosthenes appeared in public dressed in magnificent attire and wearing a garland on his head, although his daughter had died only six days before. Aeshines states:

"For my part I cannot say that the Athenians did themselves any credit in puting on garlands and offering sucrifices to celebrate the death of a king who, when he was the conqueror and they the conquered had treated them with such tolerance and humanity. Far apart from provoking the anger of the gods, it was a contemptible action to make Philip a citizen of Athens and pay him honours while he was alive, and then, as soon as he has fallen by another's hand, to be besides themselves with joy, tremple on his body, and sing paeans of victory, as though they themselves have accomplished some great feat of arms." [p.207] Plutarch

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

[6] On Demosthenes' tirades about Macedonians: "... we are concerned only with sentiment, which is itself historical fact and must be taken seriously as such. In these tirades we find not only the Hellenic descent of Macedonian people (which few seriously accepted) totally denied, but even that of the king." Ernst Badian

All quotes below taken from WERNER JAEGER’s Demosthenes
Here, in these excerpts from Jeager's book, you will find Demosthenes' hatred for Macedon not only readily displayed and exercised, but its Hellenic descent categorically excluded and implicitly denied. The fact that some modern authors ascribe Hellenic affinity to the ancient Macedonians should come to no great surprise because of the impact left by Johan Gustav Droysen on early nineteenth-century historian where Macedon is depicted as a natural "unifier" of the Greek city-states, the same role played by Prussia and Savoy in German and Italian unification in the nineteenth century. "On this false analogy the whole of Greek history was now boldly reconstructed as a necessary process of development leading quite naturally to a single goal: unification of the Greek nation under Macedonian leadership".
Demosthenes and most of his contemporaries did not see it that way; to them the leadership of Macedon was seen as the 'death of Greek political liberty' Some people dismiss Demosthenes' outbursts as a political rhetoric, others hold his political abuse of Philip from Macedon as historical facts, undeniably blunt and truthful. His sentiments are, in this case, fundamental historical documents, which testify to the simmering hate and contempt for the Macedonian conqueror. The hands of the sculptor are being replaced by his sharply cutting tongue. At the end the features emerge to the surface unpretentiously clear and aggressive. Demosthenes unlike Isocrates does not mask his national ideals with "Panhellenistic union" against the Persians, but boldly and aggressively calls his Hellenic nation to an uprising against the barbarian from the north -the Kingdom of Macedon and its king Philip.

Demosthenes' cries and pleas are not intended for his beloved Athens only, but to every liberty loving Hellene, and even the Persians, Greece’s centuries-old enemy. He calls on the Persians to join the Hellenes in the war against Macedon, and at the same time he warns them that if they leave the Greeks in the lurch, they would be next Philip's victim. As destiny would have it, Demosthenes was right. Here is the proof:

[7] "On the Symmories, namely, that Demosthenes originally stood close to a group of politicians who were vigorously combating the radical democratic influence; indeed, it is only to this degree that he can be said to have come from any one party at all. It is true that in later years, when he is coming to grips with the danger of Macedonia's foreign yoke, he naturally appeals to the lofty ideal of Greek liberty." [p.93]

[8] "It is not until Demosthenes is fighting the "tyranny" of the Macedonian conqueror that the idea of liberty takes on its true color for him and becomes significant as a great national good." [p.93]

[9] "Even then this watchword of "liberty" serves solely to promote his (Demosthenes' foreign policy; but by that time it has really become an essential factor in his envisagement of the world about him, in which Greece and Macedonia are polar opposites, irreconcilable morally, spiritually, intellectually." [p.93-4]

[10] "Thereupon all Thessaly submitted to him of its own accord. He was acclaimed as a deliverer and named commander-in-chief of the Thessalian confederacy. He would have marched at once into central Greece as a conquering hero and would probably have brought the war to an end there with a single blow, had not the Athenians and Spartans bestirred themselves to send auxiliary troops to Thermopylae, thus shutting against him this gateway to Hellas." [p.114]

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

[12] "If Philip was not to remain a permanent menace to the Greek world from outside, it was necessary to get him positively involved in the fate of Hellas; for he could not be eluded. Of course in the view of any of the Greek states of the period, this problem was comparable to that of squaring the circle." [p.152]

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

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

[15] "Philip now had the problem of compelling the Athenians to
recognize the Delphic resolutions aimed against Phocis; and he sent ambassadors to Athens, where strong opposition prevailed. However, with the Macedonian army only a few day's march from the Attic border and in good fighting trim, Athens was quite defenseless, and even Demosthenes advised submission." [p.157]

[16] "When Demosthenes draws up his list of Philip's transgressions, it includes his offense against the whole of Greece, not merely those against Athens; and Demosthenes' charge of unbecoming remissness is aimed at all the Greeks equally- their irresolution, and their failure to perceive their common cause." [p.171]

[17] "Therefore he (Demosthenes) urges them to send embassies everywhere to call the Greeks together--to assemble them, teach them, and exhort them; but the paramount need is to take the necessary steps themselves and thus perform their duty." [p.171]

[18] "In this appeal to the whole Greek world Demosthenes reached a decisive turning point in his political thought................He was still thoroughly rooted in Athens's governmental traditions, never overstepping the bounds of her classical balance-of-power policy for the interior of Greece. But the appearance of the mighty new enemy from beyond the Greek frontier now forced him to take a different track." [p.171-2]

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

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

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

[22] "As the success of his appeal was to show, he was correct in his estimate of the actual political prospects of a really national uprising now that direct hostile pressure was felt. Since the days of the Persian wars Hellas had at no time been seriously endangered from without." [p.173]

[23] "The foe and the emergency [Macedon and its king Philip] had now appeared; and if the Greeks still had a spark of their fathers' sense of independence, the fate that was now overtaking them could not but bring them together. The Third Philippic is one mighty avowal of this brand of Panhellenism; and this is entirely Demosthenes' achievement." [p.173]

[24] "The task that confronted Demosthenes demanded utterly gigantic powers of improvisation; for the Greek people had not been making preparedness an end in itself for years as the enemy had done, and they also found it hard to adjust themselves spiritually to their new situation. In the Third Philippic Demosthenes' prime effort was to break down this spiritual resistance, and everything hinged on his success." [p.174]

[Greek people on one side, and the enemy on the other. Were Macedonians seen as Greeks by the ancient Greeks? Did the Greeks have the enemy from within their own kin? Were there some Greeks who were making preparations for a war, and other Greeks who were not? It is a clear no, since the Macedonians were not Greek]

[25] "Demosthenes speaks of embassies to be sent to the Peloponnesus, to Rhodes and Chios, and even to the king of Persia, to call for resistance against the conqueror." [p.177]

[Point of Interest] Greeks were sending embassies to the king of Persia to ally with them against the conqueror from the north - Macedonia and its king Philip. One needs not be a scholar to see through the lies propagated by today's Greeks when they claim that Macedonia was a part of Greece and Philip was their king. "It is an illusion to think that ancient Macedonians were Greeks". [Karagatsis - a Greek writer]

[26] Demosthenes' call for a national uprising was slowly gaining strength; Corinth and Achaea went over to the Athenian side, Messenia, Arcadia and Argos were won over and lined themselves behind the program. In March of the year 340 the treaty was formerly concluded at Athens. Even Athens and Thebes reconciled and joined his national program. "The true greatness of these achievements -- achievements for which the citizens of Athens honored Demosthenes with a golden crown at the Dionysia of 340 - was rightly appreciated by the ancient historians." [p.178]

[27] "If the Persian leaves us in the lurch and anything should happen to us, nothing will hinder Philip from attacking the Persian king." [Fourth Philippic] [p.181]

[28] "For historians of the old school, Greek history ended when the Greek states lost their political liberty; they looked upon it as a closed story, mounting to a heroic finish at Chaeronea." [p.188]

[29] "For if any non-Greek power, whether Persian or Macedonian, were to achieve world dominion, the typical form of the Greek state would suffer death and destruction." [p.188]

[30] "Anyone who had assured himself that Macedonian hegemony would lead to the inner unification of the Greeks, was bound to be disappointed. Philip surrounded Athens with four Macedonian garrisons placed at respectful distances, and left everything else to his supporters and agents in the cities." [p.191]

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

[32] "But although the Greek people thus came to play a uniquely influential role as pioneers of culture and, to that degree, as inheritors of the Macedonian empire, politically they had simply dropped out of the ranks of free peoples, even if Philip abstained from formally making Hellas a Macedonian province. The Greeks were themselves aware of this." [p.192]

[35] "Outwardly, the "autonomous" city-states kept their relations with Macedonia on a fairly strict level of rectitude. Inwardly, the time was one of dull pressure and smoldering distrust, flaring up to a bright flame at the least sign of any tremor or weakness in Macedonia's alien rule - for that is how her surveillance was generally regarded. This excruciating state of affairs continued as long as any hope remained. Only when the last ray of hope was exctinguished and the last uprising had met disaster, did quiet finally settle down upon Greece -- the quiet of the graveyard." [p.192]

[36] (Aeschines attempt to triumph over Demosthenes for the last and final round backfires with Demosthenes' heroics in "The Crown". Demosthenes at the end received the crown.) "But though Athens was powerless against the might of her Macedonian conqueror, she retained her independence of judgment and declared that no history could confute Demosthenes." [p.196]

[37] "Then when Alexander suddenly died in the flower of his age, and Greece rose again for the last time, Demosthenes offered his services and returned to Athens. But after winning a few brilliant successes, the Greeks lost their admirable commander Leosthenes on the field of battle; and his successors was slain at Crannon on the anniversary of Chaeronea; the Athenians then capitulated, and, under pressure of threats from Macedonia, suffered themselves to condemn to death the leader of the "revolt"." [p.196]

Demosthenes died from a dose of poison on the island of Calauria, in the altar of Poseidon. Forty years later Athens honored him for eternity. Such was the destiny of a man whose ideals were his people, his country and their liberty. When modern Greeks dismiss him (in order to divert the stinging truth of his oratory) as a mere politician and his arousing oratory against Macedonia and the Macedonian conqueror as a political rhetoric, they, the modern Greeks, denounce the true Greek spirit, devoid of which, they, themselves, are.

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

[Point of Interest]
(a) Macedonians cannot be considered as Greeks even if they had some Greek blood in their veins.
(b) Macedonia's conquest of the Orient should not be contingent upon Greek culture.
(c) Isocrates places the Macedonians with alien races and hitherto, outside the Hellenic world.
(d) Isocrates takes care of this "alien race" not to be seen as leaders of Greece. He isolates their king Philip as not of the same race as the people over which he governs.
Note: The speech On the Chersonese was, to be sure, delivered in a specifically Athenian emergency; but the interest of the Greeks as a whole is never left out of sight. The Third Philippic is entirely dedicated to the danger that threatens all of Greece. Similarly, when the past and future are compared, it is the whole of Hellas that is considered, not Athens alone.

Once again, it is not surprising that Jeager places the ancient Macedonians outside the Greek ethnic world. Fact is that when an author follows the writings of the ancient biographers it is almost impossible for anybody to come to a different conclusion.


Josephus
Jewish Historian

"Greeks and Macedonians that dwelt there" [Antiquities,13.5.11]

"…and gave them privileges equal to those of the Macedonians and Greeks, who were the inhabitants… [Antiquities, 12.3.1]

"…how much harder is to the Greeks, who were esteemed the noblest of all people under sun? These, although they inhabit a large country, are in subjection to six bundles of Roman rods. It is the same case with the Macedonians, who have juster reason to claim their liberty then you have." [Wars, 2.16.4]

"These Egyptians, therefore, were the authors of these troubles, who not having the constancy of Macedonians, nor the prudence of Greeks, indulged all of them the evil manners of the Egyptians" [Against Apion, 2.6.]


Strabo
Roman Historian

"The Thessalians in particular wore long robes, probably because they of all the Greeks lived in the most northerly and coldest region" [11.14.12].

As Macedonia is located north of Thessaly it is obviously not a part of Greece, nor the Macedonians were Greeks, for the most northerly Greeks were already the Thessalians.

[Soldier of Macedon]

Good initiative I of Macedon.

Here is one to add to the collection, from Plutarch in his text referring to the Roman Flaminius in Greece:

.........the Romans came not to fight against the Greeks, but for the Greeks, against the Macedonians.....

[Pelister]

Nice thread. I'm looking foward to posting more on this.

[I of Macedon]

The following quotes are not ancient but are related.

It was not recognition as a Hellene that Archelaus wanted, but respect. Greek culture was perceived in the west as a standard by which civilised people measured their accomplishments. The adoption of that culture was one means of achieving respect. The other was force.

Borza, shadow of olympus p.177

[its strange that given the adoption of Greek culture, especially by the Macedonian kings and well before the times of philip and Alexander, they were still perceived as foreigners, and the Greeks didn't want anything to do with Macedonia or the Macedonians, even after Alexander the Greats death]

The dynastic struggle of the 390s illustrates that primogeniture could play little role in the selection of Macedonian kings when strong natural heirs were lacking. One of the interesting aspects of the competition was its effect on the further embellishment of the Argead foundation legend. We have seen that Euripides had replaced the founder Perdiccas with Archelaus as the royal progenitor. Now, in the new struggle for the throne, Archelaus was replaced by a neutral Caranus (a Doric word for "lord" or "ruler"), thereby reducing the importance of Perdiccas and Archelaus. Although there is no direct evidence, its is tempting to argue that the change to Caranus occured under Amyntass II or Amyntas III, descendants of Menelaus and Amyntas. In either case, the struggle was won by Amyntas III, whose succession insured the adoption of the new king list, whether or not he invented it. The revised king list provides yet another example of the Argeads rewriting their own history as political propaganda.

Borza, shadow of olympus P. 179 and Greenwalt, "The introduction of Caranus," with evidence cited. Additional early kings are added by later fourth-century writers.

The notion that Alexander the I or one of his predecessors obtained a Delphic oracle to confirm the Macedonian tie with Argos has no evidence to support it. Had such an oracle existed we can be confident that Alexander, eager to confirm his Hellenic heritage, would have exploited it, and Herodotus, who delighted in oracles, would have mentioned it.

Borza, shadow of olympus P. 83

Makednon, meaning “tall” or “high” people, a reference to the Pindus uplands where these early tribes resided…Like other ethnic groups, the later Macedonians created mythical ancestors. Prominent among these was Makedon, who is variously described as the son of Zeus and Thyia (Daughter of Deucalian), son of Aeolus, son of Hellen brother of Dorus, son of Aeacus, and son of Lycaon, father of Pindus. There is no way to sort out the varying traditions – indeed, there is probably no historical basis for there ancestors. The aetiologizing process was widespread; for example, Emathia was said to have come from Emathion, son of Zeus and Electra, and Orestis from Orestes, son of agamemnon. The names of these regions and their inhabitants have geographical meaning. Macedonia and Orestis mean respectively “upland” and “mountainous,” and Emathia is “sandy.” Thus the Macedonians could be “uplanders” or “highlanders,” not “descendants of Makedon.”

Borza, shadow of Olympus P.69

[Sweet Sixteen]

This is a list of quotes, similar to post#1. It's not compiled by me but by some Greek, (couldn't exactly find who).


Polybios
"In the past you rivaled the Achaians and the kinsmen Macedonians and their ruler, Philip, about the hegemony and glory, but now that the freedom of the Hellenes is at stake at a war against an alien people (Romans), ...but now if you invite them do not you see that you invite them against your own self and the whole of Hellas. ...And does it worth to ally with the barbarians against the Epeirotans, the Achaians, the Akarnanians, the Boiotians, the Thessalians, almost all the Hellenes with the exception of the Aitolians who are a wicked nation... So Lakedaimonians it is good to remember your ancestors, be afraid of the Romans... and do ally yourselves with the Achaians and Macedonians.
And if the most influential amongst you oppose that then stay neutral and do not side with the unjust.
(Polybios 9.37.7-39.7; Speech of Lykiskos, the representative of Akarnania)

"How highly should we honor the Macedonians, who for the greater part of their lives never cease from fighting with the barbarians for the sake of the security of Hellas? For who is not aware that Hellas would have constantly stood in the greater danger, had we not been fenced by the Macedonians and the honorable ambition of their kings?"
(The Histories of Polybios, IX, 35, 2)


Herodotos
"Now that the men of this family are Hellenes, sprung from Perdiccas, as they themselves affirm is a thing which I can declare on my own knowledge, and which I will hereafter make plainly evident. That they are so has been already adjudged by those who manage the Pan-Hellenic contest at Olympia"
(Herodotus, The Histories 8.43)

"Tell your king who sent you how his Hellenic viceroy of Macedonia has received you hospitably... "
(Herodotus V, 20, 4)

"Now that these descendants of Perdiccas are Hellenes, as they themselves say, I my-self chance to know"
(Herodotus V, 22, 1)


Thoukididis
"The country by the sea which is now called Macedonia... Alexander, the father of Perdiccas, and his forefathers, who were originally Temenidae from Argos"
(Thucididis 99,3)

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


Arrian
"He sent to Athens three hundred Persian panoplies to be set up to Athena in the acropolis; he ordered this inscription to be attached:
Alexander son of Philip and the Hellenes, except the Lacedaemonians, set up these spoils from the barbarians dwelling in Asia",
(Arrian I, 16, 7)

"Your ancestors invaded Macedonia and the rest of Hellas and did us great harm, though we had done them no prior injury;... I have been appointed hegemon of the Greeks... "
(Arrian, Anabasis of Alexander II, 14, 4)


Aeschines
....at the congress of the Lakedaimonian allies and the rest of the Hellenes, in which Amyntas, the father of Philip, being entitled to a seat, was represented by a delegate whose vote was absolutely under his control, he joined the rest of the Hellenes in voting..."
(Aeschines, On the Embassy 32)


Plutarchos
"But he said, `If I were not Alexandros, I should be Diogenes'; that is to say: `If it were not my purpose to combine barbarian things with things Hellenic, to traverse and civilize every every continent, to search out the uttermost parts of land and sea, to push the bounds of Macedonia to the farthest Ocean, and to disseminate and shower the blessings of the Hellenic justice and peace over every nation, I should not be content to sit quietly in the luxury of idle power, but I should emulate the frugality of Diogenes. But as things are, forgive me Diogenes, that I imitate Heracles, and emulate Perseus, and follow in the footsteps of Dionysus, the divine author and progenitor of my family, and desire that victorious Hellenes should dance again in India and revive the memory of the Bacchic revels among the savage mountain tribes beyond the Kaukasos...' "
(Plutarchos, On the Fortune of Alexander, 332 a-b)"

Yet through Alexander, Bactria and the Caucasus learned to revere the gods of the Hellenes... Alexander established more than seventy cities among savage tribes, and sowed all Asia with Hellenic magistracies ... Egypt would not have its Alexandria, nor Mesopotamia its Seleucia, nor Sogdiana its Prophthasia, nor India its Bucephalia, nor the Caucasus a Hellenic city , for by the founding of cities in these places savagery was extinguished and the worse element, gaining familiarity with the better, changed under its influence.'
(Plutarchos Moralia. On the Fortune of Alexander, I, 328D, 329A)
"When he (Alexander the Great) arrived at Ilion he sacrificed to Athena and offered libations to the Heroes."
(Plutarchos, Alexander 15)


Isokratis
"It is your privilege, as one who has been blessed with untrammeled freedom, to consider all Hellas your fatherland, as did the founder of your race."
(Isokratis, To Philip 127)


Pausanias
"They say that these were the tribes collected by Amphiktyon himself in the Hellenic Assembly: ... the Macedonians joined and the entire Phocian race ... In my day there were thirty members: six each from Nikopolis, Macedonia and Thessaly ... "
(Pausanias Phokis 8,2 & 4)

The Phocians were deprived of their share in the Delphic sanctuary and in the Hellenic assembly, and their votes were given by the Amphictyons to the Macedonians.
(Pausanias Description of Greece 10.3.3)


Diodoros of Sicily
"Such was the end of Philip ... He had ruled 24 years. He is known to fame as one who with but the slenderest resources to support his claim to a throne won for himself the greatest empire among the Hellenes, while the growth of his position was not due so much to his prowess in arms as to his adroitness and cordiality in diplomacy."
(Diodoros of Sicily 16.95.1-2)

"Along with lavish display of every sort, Philip included in the procession statues of the twelve Gods wrought with great artistry and adorned with a dazzling show of wealth to strike awe to the beholder, and along with these was conducted a thirteenth statue, suitable for a god, that of Philip himself, so that the king exhibited himself enthroned among the twelve Gods.
(Diodoros of Sicily 16.92.5)

Every seat in the theater was taken when Philip appeared wearing a white cloak and by his express orders his bodyguard held away from him and followed only at a distance, since he wanted to show publicly that he was protected by the good will of all the Hellenes, and had no need of a guard of spearmen."
(Diodoros of Sicily 16.93.1)

"After this Alexandros left Dareios's mother, his daughters, and his son in Susa, providing them with persons to teach them the hellenic dialect,..."
(Diodoros of Sicily 17.67.1)

"Alexandros observed that his soldiers were exhausted with their constant campaigns. ...The hooves of the horses had been worn thin by steady marching. The arms and armour were wearing out, and the Hellenic clothing was quite gone.
They had to clothe themselves in materials of the barbarians,..."
(Diodoros of Sicily 17.94.1-2)


Flavious Josephus
" And when the book of Daniel was showed to him (Alexander the Great) wherein Daniel declared that one of the Greeks should destroy the empire of the Persians, he supposed that himself was the person intended"
(Flavious Josephus 11.8.5)


Titus Livius
"The Aitolians, the Akarnanians, the Macedonians, men of the same language, are united or disunited by trivial causes that arise from time to time; with aliens, with barbarians, all Greeks wage and will wage eternal war; for they are enemies by the will of nature, which is eternal, and not from reasons that change from day to day."
(Titus Livius, From the Foundation of the City 31)

[George S.]

Alexander used only Macedonian infrantry men.Not greeks as you claim.Alexander excluded greeks so that they don't get the glory of his campaigns.As a matter of fact there were more greeks fighting with the Persians agains't alexander.I don't believe a word of what your writers are saying.Oh alexander was a hellene.No he has never said that.You know how commanders in alexanders army spoke Macedonian not greek to their men.There was a language they spoke mother tounge was Macedonian NOT GREEK.It's like speaking the language of commerce today English by greek standards that makes you English.Also before leaving for his campaigns why did alexander heavily fortify Greece with Macedonian garrisons.THe greeks resented being ruled by Macedonians.Just in case they tried to break out.Today the greeks like to think that greek & Macedonian is the same But why did they fight one another .THey the greeks weren't trusted.Barbarians were not to be trusted.THe greeks regarded Macedonians as non kindred .Their language was a babble to them SS you are wrong,Your writers are Wrong as well.

[Agamoi Thytai]

Look how the ancient Greek historian Dionysius of Hallicarnassus describes in his book "The Roman antiquities" the way King Pyrrhus of Epirus arrayed his troops before the battle of Heracleia against the Roman army:

“Of the horse, he stationed the Samnite, Thessalian and Bruttian squadrons and the Tarentine mercenary force upon the right wing, and the Ambraciot, Lucanian and Tarentine squadrons and the Greek mercenaries, consisting of Acarnanians, Aetolians, Macedonians and Athamanians on the left”.

https://archive.org/stream/romanantiquities07dionuoft#page/387/mode/1up

In page 391 it reads: "The forces on the king's side numbered 70,000 foot, of whom the Greeks that had crossed the Ionian Gulf amounted to 16,000".

https://archive.org/stream/romanantiquities07dionuoft#page/391/mode/1up

Hmm, no separate mention to Macedonians as a distinct people.

[Agamoi Thytai]

Alexander used only Macedonian infrantry men.Not greeks as you claim.

OK George, I take your word for granted. Then can you explain me please, who were those Greeks ,mentioned by Quintus Curtius Rufus in Alexander’s camp?

Alexander informed that the attendant had brought a human head stepped out of the tent and inquiring into the affair heard the narrative of the slave. The king's mind was now the seat of perplexing debate. That a renegade and traitor was taken off whose life would have retarded his august plans he estimated as a momentous benefit. On the other hand a transcend and enormity roused his abhorrence. The female barbarian had perfidiously murdered a husband who from her deserved most highly and with whom she shared parental joys. The foulness of the crime surpassed the gratefulness of the service He caused to be proclaimed to her: Depart from the camp lest the more clement minds and manners of the Greek soldiers should be depraved by entertaining a pattern of savage licentiousness.

http://books.google.gr/books?id=v3IIAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA231#v=onepage&q&f=false

Hmm, let me guess…maybe Quintus Curtius Rufus was referring to the Macedonians As Greeks? Otherwise it doesn’t make any sense at all.

Alexander excluded greeks so that they don't get the glory of his campaigns.

That’s impossible. Plutarch wrote this:

He made the longest address that day to the Thessa lians and other Greeks who answered him with loud shouts desiring him to lead them on against the barbarians upon which he shifted his javelin into his left hand and with his right lifted up towards heaven besought the gods as Callisthenes tells us that if he was of a truth the son of Jupiter they would be pleased to assist and strengthen the Grecians.

http://books.google.gr/books?id=kIUCAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA422

And Arrian this:
To Athens also he sent 300 suits of Persian armour to be hung up in the Acropolis as a votive offering to Athena and ordered this inscription to be fixed over them: Alexander, son of Philip and all the Greeks except the Lacedaemonians, present this offering from the spoils taken from the foreigners, inhabiting Asia

http://books.google.gr/books?id=DzIMMLQtbdAC&pg=PR19

You know how commanders in alexanders army spoke Macedonian not greek to their men.There was a language they spoke mother tounge was Macedonian NOT GREEK.

Yeah, that’s why Alexander enrolled in his army 30.000 Persian youths and ordered them to learn Greek:

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0243%3Achapter%3D47%3Asection%3D3

Also before leaving for his campaigns why did alexander heavily fortify Greece with Macedonian garrisons.THe greeks resented being ruled by Macedonians.Just in case they tried to break out.

And? Spartans had also garrisoned all Greek cities that were under their control in th time of their hegemony over the Greek world:

http://books.google.gr/books?id=KX5TAQAAQBAJ&pg=PA113&dq=spartan+garrisons+greek+cities&hl=el&sa=X&ei=WhXxU4rSHaKfygPLtoGIDw&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=spartan%20garrisons%20greek%20cities&f=false

http://books.google.gr/books?id=mO8f901Vt7gC&pg=PT145&dq=spartan+garrisons+greek+cities&hl=el&sa=X&ei=WhXxU4rSHaKfygPLtoGIDw&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=spartan%20garrisons%20greek%20cities&f=false

And guess what, Athenians did also the same:

http://books.google.gr/books?id=8FHXAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA176&dq=athenian+garrisons+greek+cities&hl=el&sa=X&ei=ExbxU6vjJuHXyQOdo4K4DQ&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=athenian%20garrisons%20greek%20cities&f=false

http://books.google.gr/books?id=BWiPAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA277

And then you can read quotes like these below, that speak of the war between Lacedaomonians and Greeks and how Athenians attacked the Hellenes:

After these men had entered office, the Lacedaemonians, who were hard put to it by their double war, that against the Greeks and that against the Persians, dispatched their admiral Antalcidas to Artaxerxes to treat for peace.
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/...%3Asection%3D4 diod.15.19.4

just as afterwards when the Athenians attacked the Hellenes

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0200;query=chapter%3D%23311;layout=;loc=3.63.1

[George S.]

What the greeks and macedonians were a distinct people totally different.Just for your information alexander didn't use the greeks to fight for him agains't persia.There were more greeks in the persian forces fighting agains't alexander than he had in his army.He decided that it was going to be a MACEDONIAN glory only thats why he didn't use greeks.Hello surprise mention of greeks as a different race to macedonians.SO Agamoi what are you trying to achieve you have been wrong in your claims.

[Agamoi Thytai]

What the greeks and macedonians were a distinct people totally different.J

Whatever you say George, however this ancient author below, Dio Cassius, seems to consider them one in the same, while he describes how the population of the Greek colonies that had been established in Asia after Alexander the Great’s campaign and some centuries later fell under Persian rule, received the Roman governor of Syria Crassus who invaded the Parthian empire:

But Crassus, desiring for his part to accomplish something that involved glory and at the same time profit, and seeing that no such thing was possible in Syria, where the people themselves were quiet, and those who had formerly warred against the Romans were by reason of their powerlessness causing no disturbance, made a campaign against the Parthians. He had no complaint to bring against them nor had the war been assigned to him; but he heard that they were exceedingly wealthy and expected that Orodes would be easy to capture, because he was but newly established. Therefore he crossed the Euphrates and advanced far into Mesopotamia, devastating and ravaging the country. For since his crossing was unexpected by the barbarians no careful guard of the ford had been kept. Consequently Silaces, then satrap of that region, was quickly defeated near Ichnae, a fortress so named, after contending with a few horsemen; and being wounded, he retired to report personally to the king the Romans' invasion. Crassus, on his side, quietly won over the garrisons and especially the Greek cities, among them one named Nicephorium. For colonists, in great numbers descendands of the Macedonians and of the other Greeks who had campaigned in Asia with them, readily transferred their allegiance to the Romans, since they were oppressed by the violence of the barbarians , and placed strong hopes in the invaders, whom they regarded as friends of the Greeks.

Dio Cassius, “Roman history”, book 40, 13.1

http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Cassius_Dio/40*.html

[Philosopher]

Whatever you say George, however this ancient author below, Dio Cassius, seems to consider them one in the same, while he describes how the population of the Greek colonies that had been established in Asia after Alexander the Great’s campaign and some centuries later fell under Persian rule, received the Roman governor of Syria Crassus who invaded the Parthian empire:

But Crassus, desiring for his part to accomplish something that involved glory and at the same time profit, and seeing that no such thing was possible in Syria, where the people themselves were quiet, and those who had formerly warred against the Romans were by reason of their powerlessness causing no disturbance, made a campaign against the Parthians. He had no complaint to bring against them nor had the war been assigned to him; but he heard that they were exceedingly wealthy and expected that Orodes would be easy to capture, because he was but newly established. Therefore he crossed the Euphrates and advanced far into Mesopotamia, devastating and ravaging the country. For since his crossing was unexpected by the barbarians no careful guard of the ford had been kept. Consequently Silaces, then satrap of that region, was quickly defeated near Ichnae, a fortress so named, after contending with a few horsemen; and being wounded, he retired to report personally to the king the Romans' invasion. Crassus, on his side, quietly won over the garrisons and especially the Greek cities, among them one named Nicephorium. For colonists, in great numbers descendands of the Macedonians and of the other Greeks who had campaigned in Asia with them, readily transferred their allegiance to the Romans, since they were oppressed by the violence of the barbarians , and placed strong hopes in the invaders, whom they regarded as friends of the Greeks.

Dio Cassius, “Roman history”, book 40, 13.1
http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/...s_Dio/40*.html

In my opinion, and I can only speak for himself, there was a growing confusion and divide in the ancient world.

The geographic proximity between Greeks and Macedonians is part of the problem. However, I suspect a larger problem is that the elite in Macedonian society, and especially government officials, matured into "non-ethnic Greeks". They were Hellenized early, and this Hellenization became more pronounced over time.

A written Macedonian language was dearth. Clearly, there is evidence from ancient writings that there was a Macedonian language which was barbarian to Greeks. And it is so-called by Demosthenes. Very early on, neither the Greeks nor the Macedonians saw the Macedonians as Greek.

This cannot possibly be disputed.

However, over time, the growing divide between the common Macedonian and the Macedonian elite, the geographical proximity between the two peoples, and the use of Greek in the Mediterranean have all led to a conflicting and contradictory hodgepodge of literary data. This problem was only compounded largely due to the fact that the Macedonians left no writings of their own, or if they have, they were lost. So we must rely on predominately Greek and Roman writers.

I suspect strongly it is for this reason that ancient writers considered Macedonians to be both Greeks and non-Greeks. Over time, however, they were almost universally regarded as Greeks.

But, as Borza et al, have documented, very early on, neither Greeks nor Macedonians believed Macedonians to be Greeks.

Would you agree with this Agamoi Thytai?

Does anyone agree or disagree with this analysis?

[George S.]

ridicule by greeks is the order of the day.Ok agamoi what ever i say.Which places did paul go to macedonia and greece .Why make a distinction.???Why were the ati macedonian wars????waged by greece and rome.Under rome macedonia was a seperate province to greece.
Also why were people banished from athens for their non greekness.
You got no leg to stand on.If macedonia was is greek WHY THE NEED TO GO IN 1912 UNDER THE GUISE of LIBERATING IT FROM TURKS.????You called the indigenous population ENDOPI.Your a fool and a thief for thinking otherwise.
P{ure and utter bullshit from you.
Thats why yuou got no basis for your claims only that macedonians spoke greek.Pure and utter popycock.Greece tried to change texts proving that macedonians aren't greeks.
Also why did the greeks wait 2000 years to become a country in 1832.After being city states macedonia was never a city state.It was different a kingdom with a king.
Macedonia had nothing in common with the greeks a different RACE of people.
Agamoi you don't know what you are talking about.
Alexander did not use the greeks in their army as he only used macedonians they didn't trust the greeks.There was more greeks used against him in the persian army than he had in his entourage.The greeks were not used but put back in his entourage.The grereks were not used in the macedonian army there is plenty of evidence of that.It was said in the army macedonian was spoken NOT GREEK .
Explain to me if macedonians spoke greek why did they not speak greek in alexanders army.YOu choose to gloss this.THe soldiers and commanders PREFFERED to speak IN THEIR MOTHER TOUNGE which was MACEDONIAN.END OF STORY you got no leg to stand on.YOU merely MISAPPROPRIATE what is not YOURS.I call that STEALING.
IF macedonia was yours why the need to go in 1912 why???why?? THERE WAS AN INDIGENOUS POPULATION THE TURLKS CALLED THEM what ...mACEDONIANS.
aGAMOI YOU ARE JUST a puppet for your greek govt.The truth speaks louder and volumes.Your version
is full of errors and ommissions.Think about it i know i'm right.
Yes agamoi go and refute or claims and above all ridicule our coia as well tools of trade.laims as well and don't forget the paranoia are all tools of trade by the greeks.