Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > European History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

European History European History Forum - Western and Eastern Europe including the British Isles, Scandinavia, Russia


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old January 21st, 2018, 10:36 AM   #41

Shtajerc's Avatar
last real Windischer
 
Joined: Jul 2014
From: Lower Styria, Slovenia
Posts: 5,835

Quote:
Originally Posted by Solidaire View Post
Of course Shtajerc, I think I clarified that below the passage you quoted.
Just to play devil's advocate (you know I never mean it personally ), just because is common and habitual doesn't necessarrily make it right. But yeah, I guess I jumped a bit on that sentence ...
Shtajerc is online now  
Remove Ads
Old January 21st, 2018, 10:44 AM   #42

TupSum's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: Jan 2016
From: Collapsed wave
Posts: 930

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shtajerc View Post
I sure don't support anyone claiming the history and culture of others, but what do you mean how can they claim the lands they invaded? Everyone does that. They settled there and live there ever since. Whoever was there before got assimilated. The Greek tribes didn't live in Greece since time immemorial either, they came from somewhere else and dispersed or assimilated someone who lived there before. As did pretty much everyone in Europe and elsewhere (not everywhere in the globe, I'm aware of that). By this logic no nation has the right its land.
The Greeks brought their name with them. Technically they didn't appropriate some older name. If we continue this analogy, then Vardar Banovina is the way to go, at best Vardar Macedonia.
TupSum is offline  
Old January 21st, 2018, 10:46 AM   #43

Shtajerc's Avatar
last real Windischer
 
Joined: Jul 2014
From: Lower Styria, Slovenia
Posts: 5,835

Quote:
Originally Posted by TupSum View Post
The Greeks brought their name with them. Technically they didn't appropriate some older name. If we continue this analogy, then Vardar Banovina is the way to go, at best Vardar Macedonia.
I never said they appropriated an older preexisting name.
Shtajerc is online now  
Old January 21st, 2018, 11:05 AM   #44

TupSum's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: Jan 2016
From: Collapsed wave
Posts: 930

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shtajerc View Post
I never said they appropriated an older preexisting name.
Right, sorry, that is correct. But nobody disputes their right to own or live in these lands. What is disputed is the name. Because they don't really have their own, they have to take over something else. Macedonia has a purely geographical connection to that population, No cultural or historical, depite efforts to generate some.

So it makes sense to me to qualify it with some additional geographical term.
TupSum is offline  
Old January 21st, 2018, 12:00 PM   #45

Perix's Avatar
Golan&Imbarligator
 
Joined: Dec 2009
From: Romania
Posts: 9,991

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucius View Post
The English word "antic" means "grotesque or "bizarre"

Is that the meaning you wanted to convey?
S orry! I meant anicent!
Actually antic is n romanian -I didn't know n english means something

Last edited by Perix; January 21st, 2018 at 12:03 PM.
Perix is offline  
Old January 21st, 2018, 12:38 PM   #46

Shtajerc's Avatar
last real Windischer
 
Joined: Jul 2014
From: Lower Styria, Slovenia
Posts: 5,835

Quote:
Originally Posted by TupSum View Post
Right, sorry, that is correct. But nobody disputes their right to own or live in these lands. What is disputed is the name. Because they don't really have their own, they have to take over something else. Macedonia has a purely geographical connection to that population, No cultural or historical, depite efforts to generate some.

So it makes sense to me to qualify it with some additional geographical term.
AFAIK the name "Macedonia" was associated with FYROM for a long time. Only a small part of ancient Macedonia may have lied in today's FYROM, but the concept changed over time and a bigger region was called by the name of Macedonia. This region was taken from the Ottomans in the First Balkan War and parted between Greece, Serbia and Bulgaria, which then lead to the Second Balkan War in which the region of Macedonia was redistributed between the victors. It is the Serbian part from this second partition that became one of the federative republics of Yugoslavia after ww2 and FYROM after its dissolution. During all this time and god knows how long before it was known as Macedonia, it's not like FYROM started calling itself by that name yesterday. Today the region of Macedonia is part of many countries - Greece, FYROM, Bulgaria, small parts of it also lie in Serbia, Kosovo and Albania. In my opinion FYROM has every right to be called Macedonia, that area was identified by that name for at least a couple centuries, it's part of the identity of the people. If the dispute is merely about the name of the country, I find it silly and support FYROM. Everyone calls them Macedonia anyway. However, the dispute lies deeper as for some reason FYROM has developped this mad fascination and obsession with ancient Macedonia, Alexander the Great and what not. I do not support that and can see why Greece is upset about it, it's a reasonable reaction.
Shtajerc is online now  
Old January 21st, 2018, 01:51 PM   #47
Archivist
 
Joined: Mar 2013
From: Netherlands
Posts: 185

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shtajerc View Post
AFAIK the name "Macedonia" was associated with FYROM for a long time. Only a small part of ancient Macedonia may have lied in today's FYROM, but the concept changed over time and a bigger region was called by the name of Macedonia. This region was taken from the Ottomans in the First Balkan War and parted between Greece, Serbia and Bulgaria, which then lead to the Second Balkan War in which the region of Macedonia was redistributed between the victors. It is the Serbian part from this second partition that became one of the federative republics of Yugoslavia after ww2 and FYROM after its dissolution. During all this time and god knows how long before it was known as Macedonia, it's not like FYROM started calling itself by that name yesterday. Today the region of Macedonia is part of many countries - Greece, FYROM, Bulgaria, small parts of it also lie in Serbia, Kosovo and Albania. In my opinion FYROM has every right to be called Macedonia, that area was identified by that name for at least a couple centuries, it's part of the identity of the people. If the dispute is merely about the name of the country, I find it silly and support FYROM. Everyone calls them Macedonia anyway. However, the dispute lies deeper as for some reason FYROM has developped this mad fascination and obsession with ancient Macedonia, Alexander the Great and what not. I do not support that and can see why Greece is upset about it, it's a reasonable reaction.
Very nice post Shtajerc. A respectable opinion on your part. However, I would add another two cents on the Greek side. We are in the same line regarding the fact that FYROM does not occupy the same space as Ancient Macedonia, but they do occupy a space which at a later time also became part of a geographical region called Macedonia.

However, FYROM could have at least distinguished itself from the Greek part of Macedonia historically and geographically. At the very least, the Greeks have some valid reasons to demand that. I mean to say, it is not merely the imagination of the Greeks that the rhetoric of their northern neighbors has at times been irridentist. The line of thought coming from people in FYROM is: "we are Macedonians, your region is Macedonia, so that region and its history is ours." So sure, we can easily see the claims of Alexander the Great on the part of FYROM as self ridicule. But we should not forget that this claim has an irridentist element hidden into it. I would say that the context in how the name has been used by Greece's Northern neighbors is very important here.
Dianatomia is offline  
Old January 21st, 2018, 02:18 PM   #48

Shtajerc's Avatar
last real Windischer
 
Joined: Jul 2014
From: Lower Styria, Slovenia
Posts: 5,835

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dianatomia View Post
Very nice post Shtajerc. A respectable opinion on your part. However, I would add another two cents on the Greek side. We are in the same line regarding the fact that FYROM does not occupy the same space as Ancient Macedonia, but they do occupy a space which at a later time also became part of a geographical region called Macedonia.

However, FYROM could have at least distinguished itself from the Greek part of Macedonia historically and geographically. At the very least, the Greeks have some valid reasons to demand that. I mean to say, it is not merely the imagination of the Greeks that the rhetoric of their northern neighbors has at times been irridentist. The line of thought coming from people in FYROM is: "we are Macedonians, your region is Macedonia, so that region and its history is ours." So sure, we can easily see the claims of Alexander the Great on the part of FYROM as self ridicule. But we should not forget that this claim has an irridentist element hidden into it. I would say that the context in how the name has been used by Greece's Northern neighbors is very important here.
I agree with you in that it hides potential for irredentist thought. Of course, in theory it is possible. But one has to be realistic too, as I'm sure most Macedonians and Greeks are. How much of a thread is Macedonia actually to its neighbours. They have enough trouble with the growing population of Albanians in the country and the divide between them and the state. I can see it used as a way to gather cheap political points before elections though, a way to gain support in face of an outer enemy. This is common practice in the Balkans and elsewhere in Europe. We Slovenes see this almost every time there are elections in Croatia or Austrian Carinthia and it isn't pleasent. So I can identify with the Greeks on this. I have also never discussed this with Macedonians, so I don't know what their stand on this is. On the other side you have many regions and historic lands that are divided between countries, often they harbour each other's minorities as well, and it mostly works. States/lands/regions like Limburg, Istria, Styria, Carinthia, Silesia, Vs, Zala, Luxembourg, Banat etc come to mind. Macedonia in this case is different than FYROM is an independent country with Macedonia being a region part of several other countries, while the others mentioned are just regions split between countries.

IMO it is of no use to demand of FYROM to denounce the Macedonia part of the name but they could add something to distinguish it, but in a way that pleases both sides, especially Macedonians. In the end it's easy for Greece to say go call yourself something else, but the people will then be stuck with a name they don't identify with, feel no connection to, no pride etc. That's why this matter is to be dealt with delicately. In the end, whether it will be called New Macedonia, Northern Macedonia, Vardar Macedonia or whatever, everyone's going to call it Macedonia anyway. Makes you doubt mankind sanity a bit, doesn't it ... (I've been waiting to use this smiley properly for a long time)

Hopefully they can figure it out soon and in a way that will please all sides.
Shtajerc is online now  
Old January 21st, 2018, 02:22 PM   #49

Shaheen's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: May 2011
From: Sweden
Posts: 2,464

I can understand why a Greek person would not like another country naming itself after a region which it considers an integral part of its history. Still there are countless examples of historical regions spread across modern boundaries, and no body having a major problem with it. Examples include the Tyrols (between Austria and Italy), Punjabs (Pakistan and India), Silesia (Germany, Czechia, Poland) Balochistan (Iran and Pakistan).
As an outsider I feel like the best solution is just to add a North in front of Macedonia.
Shaheen is online now  
Old January 21st, 2018, 02:35 PM   #50

TupSum's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: Jan 2016
From: Collapsed wave
Posts: 930

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shtajerc View Post
AFAIK the name "Macedonia" was associated with FYROM for a long time. Only a small part of ancient Macedonia may have lied in today's FYROM, but the concept changed over time and a bigger region was called by the name of Macedonia. This region was taken from the Ottomans in the First Balkan War and parted between Greece, Serbia and Bulgaria, which then lead to the Second Balkan War in which the region of Macedonia was redistributed between the victors. It is the Serbian part from this second partition that became one of the federative republics of Yugoslavia after ww2 and FYROM after its dissolution. During all this time and god knows how long before it was known as Macedonia, it's not like FYROM started calling itself by that name yesterday. Today the region of Macedonia is part of many countries - Greece, FYROM, Bulgaria, small parts of it also lie in Serbia, Kosovo and Albania. In my opinion FYROM has every right to be called Macedonia, that area was identified by that name for at least a couple centuries, it's part of the identity of the people. If the dispute is merely about the name of the country, I find it silly and support FYROM. Everyone calls them Macedonia anyway. However, the dispute lies deeper as for some reason FYROM has developped this mad fascination and obsession with ancient Macedonia, Alexander the Great and what not. I do not support that and can see why Greece is upset about it, it's a reasonable reaction.
Umm not to be picky or anything, but I disagree that the FYROMians called themselves for centuries macedonians.

During the Ottomans that region was called:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rumelia

Later it was Vardar Banovina. I think the first campaign to make them connect themselves to Alexander was started by the Greek nationalists, who wanted to take that region into Greece after the liberation from the Ottomans. Later Tito actually for the first time officially put the name Macedonia on an administrative entity, in 1944-45 I think and started to "develop" a macedonian nation. Tito's motivation was to take over the entire macedonian region, which is actually what makes greeks so uneasy.

Do you have any links to documents that say that place was administratively called macedonia during ottoman times?
TupSum is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > European History

Tags
ancient, claims, fyr, herritage, macedon, macedonia



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How trustworthy are ancient sources (e.g., claims about invincibility)? Fenestella General History 4 October 16th, 2016 02:03 PM
Macedonia name issue and cultural claims. Aleeacerix the Gaul European History 18 October 25th, 2014 11:00 AM
Gods of ancient Macedonia Salah Ancient History 2 January 31st, 2013 11:57 AM
FYROM and Ancient Macedonia Ari European History 95 October 23rd, 2008 03:33 AM
Ancient Macedonia Ari European History 47 May 16th, 2008 10:46 AM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.