Make like the Greeks and worship Zeus

This is getting extremely off-topic, but anyway...

Greeks have no rights over Macedonia.

Agreed. We have no need for the land known as FYROM today.

They claim that the ancient Macedonia was Greek.
...
The Ancient Macedonian ruler Philip (there is a monument of him in my home city), and his son Alexander even conquered the Greek tribes.
...
So - the Greeks claim that the people, who conquered and propably terrorised them, were Greeks.But in fact Macedonia has never been Greek.

Heh, Greek "tribes". Phillip probably also killed our mage-doctors and witch-shamans, too :D

Anyway. "Phillip" (he who loves horses; in an exclusively non sexual way, of course :P), "Alexander" (he who defends men)...could they possibly be Greek names used even today? Could they? If not, then they were non-Greeks that had exclusively Greek names.

Hmm. It's odd then, because their names also appear in Greek written inside tombs and on tombstones, road signs, coinage, dedications to temples (Alexander sent the first spoils of war from the campaign against Persia as gifts to the Parthenon. Kind of an odd thing for a "non-Greek" to do), and in all historical documents of the time.

Phillip was not a foreign invader trying to occupy Greek lands just for the heck of it, or for the phat lewt of war. He conquered the Greek cities because it was the only way to unite all the Greeks in a pan-Hellenic war against the Persians.

As for the "terrorized" part...let me laugh for a moment.
...
OK. The only Greek city Alexander and Phillip "terrorized" was Thebes (except for the house of the lyric poet Pindarus, because Alexander admired him), and that was because he wanted to punish Thebes because they had allied with Persia, not to "terrorise" the Greeks. After they conquered the Greek cities, they proceeded to sent rich gifts to all major Temples, and made other gestures of good will towards Athens in order to gain their full support in the coming war. "Terrorism" indeed.
 
There is also a theory on "America" tracing back from "Ommerike" wich would be norwegian...just sayin'....

I think it's good that people throw away christianity/jewishy/islam/etc and go back to the good old heathen relegions.
(Yes, I know jewdom or whatever it is called is among the oldest relegions)
 
Hellion said:
Anyway. "Phillip" (he who loves horses; in an exclusively non sexual way, of course ), "Alexander" (he who defends men)...could they possibly be Greek names used even today? Could they? If not, then they were non-Greeks that had exclusively Greek names.

Hmm. It's odd then, because their names also appear in Greek written inside tombs and on tombstones, road signs, coinage, dedications to temples (Alexander sent the first spoils of war from the campaign against Persia as gifts to the Parthenon. Kind of an odd thing for a "non-Greek" to do), and in all historical documents of the time.

So - the ancient Macedonians were Greeks, because they had Greek names, you say.Personally I think that the name Alexander has a deep and strong Persian origin and it can be explained using the today's Arabic languages.We all know that there was a process of acceptance and assimilation of Persian words in the Arabic (and later, via it - the Turkish) languages.So - the name Al-exander, in Turkish - Işkender (skender I think means "Great") has these Persian roots.
"Al" is an Arabic /Persian/ prefix (for example Al-Qaeda, Al-Jazira and even Allah).So Arabs put that "Al" before "exander" and make the name Alexander.One of the largest cities in Egypt is written "Al Exandria" in Arabic....Al-exander > Exander (without the prefix Al) > Iskender.

Ancient Macedonians, Greeks and Thracians brought the name "Al-exander" from Persia and used it.They weren't Persians, but used Persian names, as I am not a Greek, but have the Hellenic name Dimitar :wink:

Also - Alexander sent the first spoils of war from the campaign against Persia as gifts to the Parthenon, because the Parthenon was under a Macedonian rule.He made it a capitol of Macedonia, no?Turks made the Byzantine city Konstantinople their capitol too....

The Pan-Hellenic theory looks not serious to me.For example, what will happen if Russia conquers all the Slavic countries today, to unite them.Will the Polish or Czech people like it?Philip, the Macedonian and his son may have done it, but the Greek polices separated soon after the death of Alexander.

Just see the soonest examples - the Pan-Slavic formations Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia - they united in a peaceful way (without the Macedonian part :) ) , but separated and now Serbs and Croats hate one another!!If we accept that Pan-Hellenic theory, we must accept the realistic end of it.You can say that Thracians and Illyrians (peoples, who were genetically simular to Hellens) were Greeks too, the same way you say that Macedonia was Greek!

Why we don't change the name of the toppic, or make a new one about Macedonia??? :shock:
 
Listening to something as horrendous as gabber is an irrefutable proof of deep-rooted self-hatred.
 
Oh boy...Here we go again.

Ст&am said:
Hellion said:
Anyway. "Phillip" (he who loves horses; in an exclusively non sexual way, of course ), "Alexander" (he who defends men)...could they possibly be Greek names used even today? Could they? If not, then they were non-Greeks that had exclusively Greek names.

Hmm. It's odd then, because their names also appear in Greek written inside tombs and on tombstones, road signs, coinage, dedications to temples (Alexander sent the first spoils of war from the campaign against Persia as gifts to the Parthenon. Kind of an odd thing for a "non-Greek" to do), and in all historical documents of the time.

So - the ancient Macedonians were Greeks, because they had Greek names, you say

Apart from their name, EVERYTHING regarding their life was Greek. They were Greek-educated (Alexander's tutor was the famous Aristotle), worshiped the GREEK gods, participated in the Olympic Games (originally, only GREEKS could participate in them. Phillip participated and won the Chariot racing for the Olympics WAY before he conquered the Greek cities. After his victory, he cut coinage representing his victory, and guess what language is inscribed on the coins - that's right, GREEK). Alexander also participated later on.

Alexander also spoke to his troops in Greek. In his war monuments, he refered to his army as "All the Greeks, minus Sparta" (because Sparta refused to participate in the war). After the battle of Chaeronia he made a speech in which he refered to the dead of BOTH sides as "brothers" and expressed his sorrow that fellow Greeks had to die by each other's hand.

The full text is:

"Holy shadows of the dead, I`m not to blame for your cruel and bitter fate, but the accursed rivalry which brought sister nations and brother people, to fight one another. I do not feel happy for this victory of mine. On the contrary,I would be glad brothers, if I had all of you standing here next to me, since we are united by the same language, the same blood and the same visions..."

Personally I think that the name Alexander has a deep and strong Persian origin and it can be explained using the today's Arabic languages.We all know that there was a process of acceptance and assimilation of Persian words in the Arabic (and later, via it - the Turkish) languages.So - the name Al-exander, in Turkish - Işkender (skender I think means "Great") has these Persian roots.
"Al" is an Arabic /Persian/ prefix (for example Al-Qaeda, Al-Jazira and even Allah).So Arabs put that "Al" before "exander" and make the name Alexander.One of the largest cities in Egypt is written "Al Exandria" in Arabic....Al-exander > Exander (without the prefix Al) > Iskender.

You begin with "personally, I think...". This whole "Al-Exander" theory is completely unknown to me, and not quite "stable" IMHO. "Iskender" has no relationship of origin whatsoever to "Alexander - Alexandros", as it was used in the years AFTER Alexander. The name comes from the Greek verb "alexo" (Αλέξω) which means "resist/repel", and the word "andras" (άνδρας) which means "man". Words used even today, and are definitely NOT Persian, as they are seen even in Homer's Odyssey and Iliad and were used by the Greeks WAY before the Persians.

If you check out the late Persian book of "ARDA VIRAF", it refers to Alexander as a "Roman" ("N'Roma" I believe is the exact word). At the time of its writing, the western Empire had fallen and "Roman" meant "Byzantine". The Byzantines were the successors of the Greek cities and the Eastern Empire was fully hellenized at the time. Therefore, the N'Roma [or whatever the form may be in the original of Arda Viraf] still recognizes Alexander as a Hellen [Greek]. (The name "Romios" [Ρωμιός] was used widely in the times of Byzantium and is still today another commonly used synonym for "Greek").

Ancient Macedonians, Greeks and Thracians brought the name "Al-exander" from Persia and used it.They weren't Persians, but used Persian names, as I am not a Greek, but have the Hellenic name Dimitar :wink:

See the above.

Also - Alexander sent the first spoils of war from the campaign against Persia as gifts to the Parthenon, because the Parthenon was under a Macedonian rule.He made it a capitol of Macedonia, no?Turks made the Byzantine city Konstantinople their capitol too....

The capital of Alexander's Macedonia was Pella, which was founded by King Archelaos (oh look, another Greek name meaning "leader of the people" and used even today) in 400 BC (it was founded specifically to become the capital, taking the place of the former capital, the city of Aiges), not Athens. He sent the spoils (100 persian shields, to be exact) to Parthenon as a tribute to the goddess Athena.

I direct you to this excellent site for the rest: http://www.thegreatalexander.com/. Read it, I have a date in a few hours and can't be late with the excuse "I had to post on an online forum" :shock:

(By the way, it is obvious that no matter how much evidence I present, your views on the matter won't change, and certainly neither will mine. Why do we STILL keep debating this issue over and over again?)
 
Hellion said:
I have a date in a few hours and can't be late with the excuse "I had to post on an online forum" :shock:

Pffff, fine, don't bother making a 1337 impression.

...

Wait, hold on a sec...*searches teh fora*...

In his previous Fas Ist debate said:
I've eventually got tired of people debating this issue over and over and over again with the same arguements being toppled by other arguments yet still going on and on... (and because it is 3 AM here and I've got a pretty important date tomorrow morning, yay for having a life)

Ha! Nice try lover boy, but i'm afraid the "I have a date" get-out-of-forum-debate-free card can only be used once.
 
...
The fact that some of us have both the looks and the wide social agenda required in order to date often (let alone on a FRIDAY NIGHT) and have a frequent substitute to pr0n should be encouraged, not frowned upon :lol:
 
Hellion said:
...
The fact that some of us have both the looks and the wide social agenda required in order to date often (let alone on a FRIDAY NIGHT) and have a frequent substitute to pr0n should be encouraged, not frowned upon :lol:

Since when are women an adequate substitute for pr0n?
 
Well... Going back to the topic... I think we should resurrect the old egyptian religion. The main idea of mummification was interesting. Instead of preserving people in the traditional way removing their internal organs we could freeze them. Later in the future we could open the cryogenic chambers and revive them. RA and Amon stories are also very creative. The new trend in religions well be the ones which accept the end of death and prepare man for immortality.... on earth... Abre los ojos.
 
Back
Top